20080504 Ver 1_Information Letter_20041025

tl~ W[ry
~M
~~~~~~
•R QMM ~~ D
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ~ ~ T 2 5 2004
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~wuo"s~ Tr~R QuAUiy
°~'~~Re
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
October 17, 2004
MEMORANDUM TO: Angie Pennock, US Army Corps of Engineers
Marella Buncick, NC Fish and Wildlife Services
Marla Chambers, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Brian Wrenn, NC Division of Water Quality
FROM: Robin Y. Hancock, PE, Project Development Engineer ~yN
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
SUBJECT: Natural Resources Technical Report -Executive Summary
Bridge No. 526 over West Branch Creek on SR 1347 in
Rutherford County, B-4631
Attached is a copy of the Executive Summary for the Natural Resources Technical Report
for the project stated above. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me by email
or phone at ryhancockndot.state.nc.us or [phone] ext. 239.
attachment
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT ANO ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
°A' E ~~~ .~^ -aoG iGgB
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE. UVWW.NCDOTORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

~~~~~~~
.~~.
Environmental
Services, Inc.
G~ \,~y
~- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
`~ ~ °J~I
0 ' ~P~~ orth Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is evaluating the proposed
o~~~~ps~'eplacement of Bridge No. 526 on SR 1347 over West Branch Mountain Creek in Rutherford
~~ County, North Carolina (TIP # B-4631). Amore detailed discussion of the natural resources
within the project study area can be found in the Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR).
INTRODUCTION
Bridge No. 526 is approximately 60 feet (ft) in length and 18 ft in width. It consists of a timber
floor on I-beams supported by timber piles on 7-foot centers. The project study area consists of a
bubble that extends approximately 0.5 mile along SR 1347 centered on the existing bridge
(Figure 1). For the purposes of this study, the project study area width is approximately 700 ft.
The project study area is dominated by residential and agricultural land uses. The majority of the
project vicinity is rural in nature. The project study area is located in the Mountain physiographic
province near the Piedmont boundary of North Carolina. Topography in the project study area is
generally characterized as gently sloping to moderately steep. Elevations within the project study
area range from 960 ft above mean sea level along the West Branch Mountain Creek to 1,000 ft
above mean sea level.
There are no hydric soil mapping units within the project study area. The project study area
contains two non-hydric soil mapping units that may contain hydric inclusions, Chewacla loam 0
to 2 percent slopes and Dogue loam 1 to 6 percent slopes, and three other non-hydric soil
mapping units, Pacolet sandy clay loam 8 to I S percent slopes eroded, Pacolet sandy clay loam 15
to 25 percent slopes eroded, and Skyuka loam 2 to 8 percent slopes (Figure 2).
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Water Resources
The project study area is located within sub-basin 030802 of the Broad River Basin and is part of
the USGS hydrologic unit 03050105. Drainages within the project study area are all part of the
Mountain Creek watershed.
Best Usage Classifications (BUC) and Stream Index Numbers (SIN) follow Class cations and
Water Quality Standards published for each river basin, as updated through 25 March 2004.
There are two streams within the project study area; West Branch Mountain Creek and an
unnamed tributary to West Branch Mountain Creek (UTWBMC) (Figure 3). West Branch
Mountain Creek has been assigned SIN 9-25-3 and a BUC of C from its source to Mountain
Creek. UTWBMC originates west of the project study area and flows east through the project
study area to its confluence with West Branch Mountain Creek. The UTWBMC within the
project study area has not been assigned a SIN, but carries the same BUC as West Branch
Mountain Creek.
8-4631 ] Aazgust 2004

1
. !`"f ~
Environmental
Services, inc.
Class C waters are freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life (including
propagation and survival), and wildlife. Secondary recreation is any activity involving human
body contact with water on an infrequent or incidental basis.
There are no Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HQW), Water
Supplies in natural and undeveloped watersheds (WS->), or Water Supplies in predominantly
undeveloped watersheds (WS-II) within 3.0 miles upstream or downstream of the project study
area. No stream that flows through the project study area is designated as a National Wild and
Scenic River or a state Natural and Scenic River.
No streams in the project study area or within 3.0 miles of the project study area have been listed
as impaired waters according to the 303(d) list.
Biotic Resources
Three natural forested communities (Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest, Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest, and Pine Woodland) occur within the project study area and two additional
communities (maintained/disturbed land and agricultural land) are the result of human activities.
A summary of plant community areas is presented in the following table.
Table 1. Summary of Plant Communities.
Plant Community Area (ac) % of Project Study
Areaa
Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest 1.5 3.7
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 4.5 11.2
Pine Woodland 2.9 7.2
Maintained/Disturbed Land 8.3 20.6
Agricultural Land 21.6 53.6
Totalsb: 3 8.8 96.3
a Project Study Area includes open area attributed to road surface (1.~ ac) (3.7 percent) not included in this plant
community assessment.
n Plant community areas and percentages are calculated for the entire project study area (40.3 ac).
NRISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Based on field investigations, the project study area contains one jurisdictional wetland and two
jurisdictional streams. There is approximately 1,565 linear ft of perennial stream channel within
the project study area. The jurisdictional delineation information has been submitted to the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE). However, at the time of this report no jurisdictional
determination has been received. Environmental Services Inc., (ESI) has included
recommendations as to the important or unimportant stream designation based on the field
investigation, however the final decision lies with the USAGE. All of the project study area
streams have been designated as important and mitigation will be required for impacts. The
B-4631 2 August 2004

Environmental
Services. Inc.
stream reaches within the project study area are quantified in linear ft and are presented in the
table below. Actual impacts cannot be quantified until an alignment has been selected and a
functional design completed.
Table 2. Summary of .Iurisdictinnal Areac
WETLANDS
Area
ac) Percentage of Project
Stud Areab
PFOa, Non-ri arian 0.3 0 ~
TOTAL: 0.3 0.'7

SURFACE WATERS
Streams
Flow Characteristics Im ortance`
Perennial
R3 linear ft Intermittent
R4 linear ft Important
linear ft Unimportant
linear ft
1,565 0 1,565 0
TOTAL: 1,565 1,565
., r ............... ......~..,...
n Percentage of the Project Study Area (40.3 ac) that contains jurisdictional wetlands.
` Refers to the USAGE designation of Important or Unimportant.
Permits
A final permitting strategy cannot be developed until an alignment is selected and construction
impacts firmly established. Assuming avoidance and minimization of impacts to the greatest
practicable extent, potential impacts may be authorized under Nationwide Permit 23: Approved
Categorical Exclusions (CE). However, final decisions concerning applicable permits for the
proposed project rest with the USAGE. Depending upon the applicable Nationwide Permit, the
use of a Section 404 permit will require the prior issuance of the 401 certification under General
Certification No. 3403 (NWP 23). However, mitigation may be required for impacts to wetlands
greater than 0.10 ac and impacts to streams greater than 150 linear ft.
Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or officially Proposed
(P) for such listing, are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 USC
1531 et seq.) as amended. Descriptions of these federally protected species along with habitat
requirements and biological conclusions for this project are presented in the NRTR.
l3-4631 3 Aztgtrst 200

Environmental
Services, Inc.
Table 3. Federally Listed Species (29 January 2003 USFWS list).
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Potential Biological
Statusa Habitat Conclusion
Present
Indiana bat Myotis sodalis E No No Effect
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf Hexasrylis naniflora T Yes No Effect
Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides T Yes Unresolved-
No Effect`
White irisette Sisyrinchium dichotomum E No No Effect
Rock gnome lichen Gymnoderma lineare E No No Effect
a E-Endangered: "taxon in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range", T-Threatened:
"taxon likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range" (USFWS 2003).
b Winter records.
The project study area contains potentially suitable habitat for this species, however if all impacts to the potential
habitat areas are avoided or surveys are conducted within the appropriate flowering period (mid-May to mid-
June), this species may receive a Biological Conclusion of No Effect.
Occurrences of federally listed species have not been documented in the project study area or
within 3.0 miles of the project study area. The proposed project will have No Effect on
populations of Indiana bat, white irisette, and rock gnome lichen due to the lack of potential
habitat. No caves or steep cliffs exist within the project study area to support the Indiana bat.
Elevations within the project study area are below the reported elevational distribution of the
white irisette and rock gnome lichen. The project study area does contain potentially suitable
habitat for dwarf-flowered heartleaf and small whorled pogonia. The proposed project will have
No Effect on populations of dwarf-flowered heartleaf due to the absence of any species of
Hexastylis within the project study area. If all impacts to the Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest are
avoided, the Biological Conclusion of No Effect can be reached for small whorled pogonia. Due
to the nature of the project and the location of the potentially suitable habitat, impacts to these
areas can likely be avoided. However, if impacts to this community is unavoidable, surveys will
need to be conducted during the appropriate season (mid-May to mid-June) to determine the
presence or absence of small whorled pogonia.
CONCLUSIONS
The project study area contains two streams with 1,565 linear ft of stream channel and one
wetland (0.3 acre) that could potentially be impacted by the proposed project. Avoidance of
impacts to jurisdictional areas should be considered during project design. Due to their locations,
all impacts to the UTWBMC and the jurisdictional wetland can be avoided. West Branch
Mountain Creek is relatively narrow, therefore construction activities and bridge beam placement
within the channels may not be necessary and could avoid and/or minimize impacts. Careful
placement of drainage structures will minimize further degradation of water quality and reduce
adverse impacts on aquatic habitat viability in the project study area streams. Permits likely to be
required for this project are a Section 404 NWP No. 23 along with corresponding Section 401
Water Quality Certification No. 3403 due to the limited amount of impacts to jurisdictional areas.
B-4631 4 August ?004

Environmental
Services, Inc.
There are five Federally Listed Species that have recorded ranges that extend into Rutherford
County. The replacement of Bridge No. 526 will have No Effect on the Indiana bat, white
irisette, and rock gnome lichen due to the lack of potentially suitable habitat. However, the
project study azea does contain potentially suitable habitat for dwarf-flowered heartleaf and small
whorled pogonia. No impacts to dwarf-flowered heartleaf populations are expected as a result of
this project due to the absence of any species of Hexastylis documented during surveys. If all
impacts to the Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest are avoided, the Biological Conclusion of No
Effect can be reached for small whorled pogonia. Due to the nature of the project and the
location of the potentially suitable habitat for small whorled pogonia, impacts to these areas can
likely be avoided. However, if impacts to this community is unavoidable, surveys will need to be
conducted during the appropriate season to determine the presence or absence of small whorled
pogonia.
Impacts to natural communities, jurisdictional azeas, and potential Threatened and Endangered
Species habitat can be avoided or greatly minimized by aligning construction. east of the
UTWBMC and placing staging areas downstream of the existing bridge on the south side of SR
1347.
B--~b31
5
August 2004