19920500 Ver al_Complete File_19920903

?. STATE,.
SOU
0

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ((?? ((?? fy
' DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION D L5 UU ?? ?tj?
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201 F?, - 31992
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
HIGHWAYS
L WATER QUALITY SECTIi r
August 6, 1992 WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
Subject: Replacement of Bridge No. 34 on NC 88 over Rich Hill Creek in
Ashe County, B-1035, State Project 8.1710401, Federal-Aid Project
BRS-1361(6)
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning report for the
subject project. The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Adminis-
tration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose to
proceed under a Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A
(B=23) issued November 22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers. The provisions of
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be followed in the
construction of the project.
We do not anticipate that a permit will be required from the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources for this project.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at
733-3141.

Sincerely,
XAt • - DM
L. ?ard, P. E., Manager
LJW/plr Planning and Environmental Branch
Attachment
cc: Mr. John Parker, Permit Coordinator, w/report
Mr. John Dorney, Environmental Management, w/report
Mr. C. W. Leggett, P. E.
Mr. J. T. Peacock, Jr., P. E.
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Jr., P. E.
Mr. W. E. Hoke, P. E.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
11
NC 88, Ashe County
Bridge No. 34 Over Rich Hill Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRS-1361(6)
State Project 8.1710401
T.I.P. I.D. NO. B-1035
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
OT L. J. rar , P. ., Manage
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
??Z z
ATE Nic o Graf . E.
f-0x Divis on Administrator, FHWA
11
NC 88, Ashe County
Bridge No. 34 Over Rich Hill Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRS-1361(6)
State Project 8.1710401
T.I.P. I.D. NO. B-1035
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
July, 1992
Documentation Prepared in
Planning and Environmental Branch By:
A
JJul?A A. Hun ins, P. E.
Pr ect Planning Engineer
W4c X Al Q_ A ?/ • 07+_
Wayne El'I i ott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Un' Head
H. Fran in Vick, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
LHR0
18496
7 zr ?z
NC 88, Ashe County
Bridge No. 34 Over Rich Hill Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRS-1361(6)
State Project 8.1710401
T.I.P. I.D. NO. B-1035
Bridge No. 34 has been included in the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement
Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental
impacts are anticipated. The project has been classified as a Federal
"categorical exclusion" due to its limited scope and insignificant
environmental consequences.
1. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 34 should be replaced on new location approximately 65
feet south (downstream) of its present location as shown by Alternate 3 in
Figure 2. A replacement structure consisting of a four-barrel 11' x 8'
reinforced concrete box culvert is recommended.
Approximately 800-feet of new roadway will be needed to accommodate
replacement of the bridge on new location. The new alignment will reduce
the sharp curvature of the existing roadway. The approach roadway should
consist of a 24-foot pavement with 8-foot graded shoulders.
Traffic should be maintained on the existing bridge during the
construction period.
Estimated cost, based on current prices, is $ 372,000. The estimated
cost of the Project, as shown in the 1992-1998 Transportation Improvement
Program, is b 417,000.
II. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts. No wetlands will be disrupted by this
project. Best Management Practices will be utilized to minimize impacts
of construction activities.
Since this project is located in a designated "trout" county, a
letter of approval must be obtained from the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission. This letter will be obtained prior to construction.
The project will be reevaluated prior to right of way acquisition to
determine the status of the Riverview Elementary School ball field, which
is currently considered a public recreation facility. It is anticipated
that the Riverview Elementary School will be consolidated at another
location and the property sold following the consolidation. Should the
property and recreational area be retained by a public entity and
considered significant by the officials having jurisdiction over the
recreation area at the time of reevaluation, the Federal Highway
2
Administration will be consulted to determine if Section 4(f)
documentation should be prepared in conjunction with this bridge
replacement project. If so, all appropriate coordination and
documentation will be completed prior to right of way acquisition.
If the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) determines that an
+ intensive archaeological survey be conducted for this project, the survey
will be completed prior to construction.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NC 88 is classified as a rural major collector in the Statewide
Functional Classification System and is part of the Federal Aid Secondary
System (FAS-1361).
The project is located in a predominantly rural part of Ashe County,
although development in the immediate project area consists of two homes,
three commercial establishments, a church, and Riverview Elementary
School. The majority of this development is located southwest of Bridge
No. 34.
In the vicinity of the bridge, NC 88 has an 18-foot pavement with
3-foot to 5-foot shoulders (see Figure 3). Vertical alignment is fair in
the project area, although grades of five percent or more are typical
along this mountainous stretch of NC 88.
Horizontal alignment is poor in the immediate vicinity of the bridge.
The approach roadway from the east is tangent, while a sharp curve of
about 40 degrees begins immediately west of Bridge No. 34 and continues
for a distance of approximately 300 feet. This poor horizontal alignment
is typical of NC 88 for several miles on both sides of the project area.
The current traffic volume is 1600 VPD and is expected to increase to
2800 VPD by the year 2015. The projected volume includes 1% truck-trailer
semi-trailer (TTST) and P. dual-tired vehicles (DTT). The speed limit on
NC 88 is 55 MPH; however, an advisory school zone speed limit of 35 MPH is
posted in the immediate vicinity of the bridge. Several advisory speed
limits are posted on this section of NC 88 due to the sharp curves and
variable terrain.
The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was originally constructed in 1949
' and was rehabilitated in 1960. The structure consists of a timber floor
on I-beams and channels with reinforced concrete abutments.
* Overall length is 33 feet. Clear roadway width is 18.7 feet.
Currently, Bridge No. 34 is not posted for restricted weight limits.
Bridge No. 34 has a sufficiency rating of 42.3 compared to a rating
of 100 for a new structure.
Six accidents have been reported in the vicinity of Bridge No. 34
during the period from July, 1987 to June, 1990.
3
Twenty-two school buses cross the studied bridge daily. Riverview
Elementary School is located adjacent to the project site and all buses
traveling east on NC 88 from the school must cross over this bridge.
4
IV. ALTERNATIVES
f
Three methods of replacing Bridge No. 34 were studied. Each alternate
involves a new replacement structure which consists of a four-barrel
11' x 8' reinforced concrete box culvert. In each alternate studied, it
was assumed traffic must be maintained on-site during the construction
period due to the high traffic volume and the lack of a suitable detour
route. The three alternates studied are as follows:
Alternate 1 -- This alternate involves replacement of the bridge along the
existing roadway alignment. A design speed of 20 MPH will be
provided due to the retention of the sharp curvature of the roadway
west of Bridge No. 34. An on-site detour consisting of two 137" x 87"
corrugated steel pipe arches would be provided north of thb existing
structure during the construction period.
Alternate 2 -- This alternate replaces the old bridge on new location
approximately 50 feet north (upstream) of its present location.
Construction of approximately 1100 feet of new approach roadway would
be required in addition to extensive excavation of the mountain
located in the northeast quadrant of the project. A design speed of
30 MPH would be provided. Under this replacement scheme, the
existing structure would be used to maintain traffic during the
construction period.
Alternate 3 Recommended -- This alternate replaces the bridge
approximately 65 feet south (downstream) of its present location.
About 800 feet of new approach roadway will reduce the sharp
curvature on the west approach to the bridge and provide a minimum
design speed of 30 MPH. Traffic is to be maintained on the existing
structure during construction.
The "do nothing" and "rehabilitation" alternatives were also
evaluated. The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate
closure of the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic service
provided by NC 88. "Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due
to its age and deteriorated condition.

4
V. ESTIMATED COST
a
n
Estimated cost of the alternatives studied are as follows:
Recommended
Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3
Structure $ 154,000 $ 154,000 $ 154,000
Roadway Approaches 40,000 405,000 118,000
Detour Structure & 190,000 -- --
Approaches
Structure Removal 5,000 5,000 5,000
Engineering & 57,000 84,500 41,000
Contingencies
Right-of-Way, 112,000 125,000 54,000
Utilities
Total $ 558,000 $ 773,000 $ 372,000
VI. DISCUSSION OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
•

Bridge No. 34 should be replaced approximately 65 feet south
(downstream) of its present location (see Figure 2). Traffic is to be
maintained on the existing bridge during the construction period.
The relocation of the bridge will require construction of about 800
feet of new roadway. The recommended typical section consists of a
24-foot travelway with 8-foot graded shoulders. A minimum design speed of
30 MPH will be provided, and it is anticipated that a design exception
will be required.
The replacement structure, as recommended by the Hydraulics Unit, is
a four-barrel 11' x 8' reinforced concrete box culvert. The structure
dimensions may be increased or decreased as necessary to accommodate peak
flows as determined by further hydrologic studies. The grade of the
roadway should be approximately the same as the existing roadway.
Consideration should be given to an alternative structure type during the
design phase (three-sided box culvert on concrete footings or other
spanning structure type), by request of the North Carolina Wildlife
Resource Commission through early project coordination. Rich Hill Creek
has been identified as a trout stream, and as such, a spanning structure
which maintains the natural channel bottom is preferred.
The replacement structure should be of sufficient size to accommodate
the recommended 24-foot pavement and 8-foot minimum shoulders, curve
widening, and the turning radius from SR 1317 onto NC 88. The
5
turning radius must be located over the structure to avoid relocation of
SR 1317. Relocation of SR 1317 would necessitate extensive excavation into
the mountain located northeast of the NC 88/SR 1317 intersection; this
would result in a substantial increase in project cost.
The recommended alternate provides a replacement structure at the
• lowest cost. Excavation into the mountainside located on the northeast
quadrant of the project is avoided with the selection of the recommended
alternate. Alternate 3 is preferred over Alternate 1 because Alternate 3
will provide an improvement in the alignment of the roadway and,
therefore, provide a safer travelway. Recommended Alternate 3 also costs
$ 186,000 less than Alternate 1, which does not provide an improvement in
the poor existing curvature of the roadway. The division engineer concurs
with the recommended alternate.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
It
A
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact.
Replacement of an inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic
operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "categorical exclusion" due
to its limited scope and insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have a significant adverse effect on
the quality of the human or natural environment with the use of current
NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or
zoning regulation. No significant change in land use is expected to
result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated.
Right-of-way acquisition will be limited.
No significant adverse effect on public facilities or services is
expected. The project is not expected to adversely affect social,
economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
Coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) is
included as Attachment 3. The SHPO concurs that there are no properties
within the Area of Potential Effect (APE) which are eligible for inclusion
or listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Southerland
House, located in the southeast quadrant of the project, is the only
structure in the APE over 50 years old; however, this structure has
undergone numerous character-altering changes.
The SHPO will be given the opportunity to review the archaeological
aspects of the project to determine whether an intensive survey should be
undertaken. Early coordination with the State Historic Preservation
Office indicates there is a medium to high probability for the presence of
6
archaeological resources since the project is located on a terrace above
the floodplain near a branch of the North Fork River. If an intensive
survey is recommended for this area, the survey will be accomplished prior
to construction.
Recommended Alternate 3 traverses a ball field which is located on
the property of the Riverview Elementary School. Coordination with the
superintendent of the Ashe County School System indicates this ball field
is used for school activities as well as public recreational activities
(see Attachments 1 and 2). It should be pointed out that the primary use
of this ball field is for physical education activities during normal
school hours. Riverview Elementary School has plans to consolidate to
another location in 1994. At that time, the Ashe County Board of
Education intends to sell the property; as such, the future use of the
Riverview Elementary School property, including the ball field, is not
known. Therefore, it cannot be determined at this time whether the land
will be publicly owned and whether the owners would maintain the ball
field and permit its usage by the public for organized recreational
activities. This property will be reevaluated prior to right of way
acquisition to determine the status of the Riverview Elementary School
ball field. Should the property and recreational area be retained by a
public entity and considered significant by the officials having
jurisdiction over the recreation area at the time of reevaluation, the
Federal Highway Administration will be consulted to determine if Section
4(f) documentation should be prepared in conjunction with this bridge
replacement project. If so, all appropriate coordination and
documentation will be completed prior to right of way acquisition.
Coordination with the U. S. Soil Conservation Service indicates no
prime, important, or unique farmlands will be impacted by the proposed
project. Therefore, this project is exempt from the Farmland Protection
Policy Act, and no further coordination is necessary.
Bridge No. 34 is located in Ashe County north of the town of Creston
in the Mountain Physiographic Province. The county is primarily rural in
nature, but a number of developments are located in the immediate vicinity
of the project including homesites, commercial establishments, a church
and an elementary school. Topography in the area ranges from nearly level
to strongly sloping (65 percent slopes). The elevation is approximately
2800 feet at the bridge.
No natural wetland communities exist in the project impact area.
Rich Hill Creek is a disturbed area cleared of vegetation. Creek
banks support primarily grasses; a few composites and shrubs remain.
Fescue (Festuca sp.) and blackberry shrubs (Rubus sp.) were prominent.
One rush p- ant (Juncus sp.) was observed. At the project site, the banks
of Rich Hill Creek support a few scattered trees, such as sugar maple
Acer saccharum and cottonwood Po ulus deltoides). The residential area
on t e -southeast quadrant of the proJect supports several black walnut
Ju lans ni ra and white pine Pinus strobus trees. Several beargrass
Yucca fi amentosa plants, un er cu tivation, are located in the
rest entia area.
An upland hardwood forest community, located in the northeast
quadrant of the project, is the most prominent upland community in the
project area. This community provides habitat for various animal species.
Mammalian fauna anticipated in this community include opossum (Didelphis
0
i
•
vir iniana), short-tailed shrew (Blaring brevicauda), eastern mole
Sca opus a uaticus), eastern cottontail S vita us floridanus), eastern
ch` ipmunk (Tamias striatus), gray squirrel Sciurus caro inensis , southern
flying squirrel a?ucom ss volans), whited mouse Perom scus
le?uco ups), striped skunk (MeKis mephitis), bobcat (Lynx ru us and
w te-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus).
Avian fauna in the project area may be migratory, while others remain
and nest. Anticipated species in this habitat include turkey (Meleagris
allo avo), pileated woodpecker (Dr oco us pi1eatus), Carolina chickadee
Parus carolinensis), brown thrasher Toxostoma rufum), wood thrush
(H l9cic a muute ina), solitary vireo Vireo so ita iur s), black-throated
blue war er Den roica caerulescens), scarlet tanager Piranga olivacea),
and cardinal (ar ina is car ina is .
Amphibians and reptiles inhabit both terrestrial and aquatic
habitats. The lizards, snakes and salamanders likely to be found in the
area prefer drier terrestrial woods. These species include the following
salamanders: redback salamander (Plethodon cinereus), slimy salamander
(Plethodon glutinosus), and Yonaa oossee salamander (Plethodon
ona ossee). Frog and toads that may occur in the area inc-rude American
tog Bu o americanus), Fowler's toad (Bufo woodhousei), and spring peeper
(Hylaa crucifer). The eastern box turtle CTerrepene carolina) is the only
turtle wwiose mange extends into the project area and for which suitable
habitat exists. The eastern fence lizard (Scelo orus undulatus),
five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus), broadhea skint Eumece-mi ticeps),
worm snake (Carphop i's -amoenus,black racer (Coluber constrictor),
ringneck snake (Diado his unctatus), corn snake (E??e utg tata), rat
snake (Elb?a h?ee obso eta , eastern milk snake (Lam ro eltis trian ulum),
timber rattlesna a Crotalus horridus), brown snake Storeria ea!i and
redbelly snake (Storeria occi iitomaculata) are common 1 ads and snakes
that inhabit forest up ands.
Aquatic habitat includes Rich Hill Creek and the surrounding stream
banks. Animal species utilize moist habitats such as stream margins or
beneath rocks and logs. The following salamanders, which may inhabit the
creek area, include: marbled salamander (Amb stoma o acum), northern dusky
salamander (Desmo nathus fuscus), seal sa aman er Desmo nathus
monticola), mountain dusky salamander (Desmo nathus ochro haeus ,
ac e y salamander (Desmo nathus uadramacu atus , two- ine sa amander
(Eur cea bislineata), spring sa aman er G rino ilus or h riticus),
s ove nose saTamaan er (Leuro nathus marmoratus , an re salamander
(Pseudotriton ruber). Frogs an turtles that may inhabit the project area
include green Trog (Rana clamitans), pickerel frog (Rana alustris), and
snapping turtle (CheT_ydra ser entina). The only snake that may inhabit
the project area in moist areas under rocks or stones is the eastern
garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis).
Fish may be affected by proposed construction. Rich Hill Creek is
reported to contain a small population of brook trout (Salvelinus
fontinalis) (Fish, 1968). Other fish species reported in Ric Hill Creek
8
include dace. Efforts should be made to keep the stream open to fish
migrations during the trout spawning season. This period runs from
November 1 to April 1.
Replacement of an existing bridge with a spanning structure is
preferred, in lieu of a four-barrel culvert. Culverts are undesirable
• because they limit light incidence and, in the case of a multi-barrel
culvert, divide the water flow. Changes in the stream bottom are
anticipated due to the artificial bottom created by placement of the
culvert. As a consequence, possible changes in stream flow and depth are
also anticipated from culvert placement. These factors affect stream
dynamics and ultimately impact the associated plant and animal
communities. As previously stated, consideration should be given during
the design of this project to include a spanning structure.
Two soil series are mapped in the project area - Ashe gravelly fine
sandy loam and Colvard fine sandy loam. The Ashe soil unit is excessively
drained and is found on sideslopes below 3500 feet in elevation. It is
strongly acidic and has rapid runoff and erosion potentials. Colvard soil
is well drained and is mapped on nearly level sites along major streams in
the county. Colvard soil unit is classified as having hydric inclusions.
It is mapped on the south side of NC 88.
Rich Hill Creek is a tributary of the North Fork of the New River.
It is reported to be approximately two miles long with an average width of
five feet (Fish, 1968). It is shallow and contains pools. The substrate
may range from sand to boulders.
A classification of "C Tr" is given by the Division of Environmental
Management (1990). Class C indicates a water supply that is suitable for
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary
recreation and agriculture. "Tr" indicates waters suitable for natural
trout propagation and maintenance of stocked trout. Rich Hill Creek is a
tributary of the North Fork of the New River, which is a Designated Public
Mountain Trout Water. Since this project is located in a designated
"trout" county, a letter of approval must be obtained from the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. This letter will be obtained
prior to construction.
Both federal and state protected species are listed for Ashe County.
Federally listed species with a status of Endangered, Threatened or
+ Proposed are protected under federal law. State listed mammals,
amphibians, reptiles and bird species with a status of Threatened,
Endangered or Special Concern are protected under state laws.
The Endangered Species Act of 1973, by the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), is a document that defines the means by which
endangered and threatened species may be protected. Whenever any species
is listed as Threatened, Endangered, or Proposed Threatened or Endangered,
steps are taken to protect them. The following plants are federally
listed for Ashe County by the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service as of March
16, 1992: Heller's Blazing star (Liatris helleri), spreading avens (Geum
radiatum), mountain
9
bluet (Hed otis purpurea var. montana), and Virginia spiraea (Spiraea
virginiana . The study area supports suitable habitat for only one of
these species - Virginia spiraea. A plant by plant survey was conducted
' in the study area along both banks of Rich Hill Creek and no Virginia
spiraea plants were found. Therefore, no impact to this species is
anticipated with the construction of the project.
•
The following species are under status review by the USFWS: the bog
turtle (Clemm ss muhlenber i), Kanawha minnow (Phenacobius teretulus),
Gammon's stenelmis yre beetle (Stenelmis ammoni , WoTrs milk spurge
(Eur horbia ur urea), Gray's lily L1 ium ra i , ong-stalked holly
(Ilex co ina arey's saxifrage Saxifraga car= eyana), and Gray's
saxifrage (Saxifraga caroliniana). Status review species have the
potential of becoming fe era y- isted in the future.
State protected plant species are protected in North Carolina under
the provisions of the Plant Protection and Conservation Act (General
Statutes of North Carolina Chapter 106, Article 196;202.12-202.22., North
Carolina Department of Agriculture, 1990). Animal species are afforded
protection under General Statutes which address Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife Species of Special Concern. Only one state protected species,
the hellbender (Cryptobrabchus alleganiensis), could be expected to be
found in the project area. This species was not surveyed for in the
field. No other state protected species were listed in the project area
by the Natural Heritage Program or stated by J. Mickey (1991).
The following species are not protected under state laws but are
listed by the state because of special concerns to the species: Kanawha
minnow and Gray's Saxifrage. The Kanawha minnow is found in the New River
drainage system in many tributaries and smaller streams like Rich Hill
Creek (J. Mickey, 1991). This fish is not protected under state laws, but
efforts should be made to minimize impacts to this species. Gray's
saxifrage is a small herbaceous perennial found on rocky outcrops south of
the project near Creston on another New River tributary. The plant is not
listed in the project area, but small rock outcrops exist in the hardwood
forest, especially where the elevation changes dramatically. Efforts
should be made to minimize impacts to this habitat.
It is anticipated that a Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a)(23) will
be applicable for proposed project construction. Other Nationwide Section
404 permit provisions are applicable, and the provisions of 330.5(b) and
330.6 will be followed.
Possible impacts will be restricted to some limited sediment debris
after project completion. Likely adverse impacts will be minimized
through the employment of silt basins, berms, silt curtains, and other
erosion control measures required of the contractor and specified in the
State approved Erosion and Sedimentation Control Program.
The project is located within the Eastern Mountain II Air Quality
Region. The ambient air quality for Ashe County has been determined to be
in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Since this
10
project is located in an area where the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
does not contain any transportation control measures, the conformity
procedures of 23 CFR 770 do not apply to this project.
This project will not substantially increase traffic volumes.
Therefore, the impact on noise levels and air quality will be
insignificant. Noise levels could increase during construction but will
be temporary. If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall
be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina State Implementation Plans for air quality in compliance
with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation completes the noise and air quality
assessment requirements of 23 CFR 770 and 772, and no additional reports
are required.
Ashe County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance
Emergency Program. The approximate 100-year floodplain in the project
area is shown in Figure 4. The amount of floodplain area to be affected
is not considered to be significant.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious
adverse environmental effects will result from implementation of the
project.
JH/jh
r
0
•
r
g ( Z" v'? 1 3 5
c
1316 1394
+ Roten 1340 \,
13.15 1341 1342
_1_317_ 1383 5 h
1 1310 .61 1342 1343
1344
l6 ? 1345 '4 FA$?
O
?\ X?• B 1,1399 A in
1315 112
? ,_. •S b .4 r 10 \ 1?
1.1 28
ti . 01 1382 Fig 4 .5 •3 '3 Clifton
P 1191 ?'D
1387 88 1126 1205 1267
a, 4S c ` co 1.127
t
1122 1231 110eston
0 Mt
1 121 $ to 1264 1 194
- ? ?
Tree 122
1100 1123_ 60'.?.:. Top .5.1
1121
/ Helton ras?
000 / Sturgdls rese 7
/ 14 Lansing Cr
000 Shatley Sco
/ 000 rrensv le 4 Springs
1
/ shland ? 6 11
/ Clifton 1 IJet on?
00, / / 9 Creston Smethport IM, Lau 98 West Jefferson
/ / 221 ?rrsr w.4 Inds
Baldwin G end `('j(
/ / - So not

," w ,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
NC 88
BRIDGE NO. 34 OVER
RICH MILL CREEK
ASHE COUNTY
B-1035
0 mile 1 FIG.1
WIT

-1035
Ii, 1
LOOKING WEST ON
NC 88 TOWARD
BRIDGE NO. 34

i r
SIDE VIEW OF
BRIDGE NO. 34
" LOOKING NORTH (UP STREAM) oti
TOWARD SR 1317 ;. O."t,
FIGURE 31

ZONE A' '''`
PROJECT SITE
797 2
BRIDGE
1
0
!ONE X
2
ZONE X------ Nq
ZONE X
ZONE AE-
North Fork New
ZONE
AA
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
c?
s
CP
CA
X
?t
c
Fink New River ol
ZONE X
AE
FIGUR? 4
ASHE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
PO Box 604, Ivy Street Richard Shepherd, Chairman
Jefferson, North Carolina 29640 Rick Ashley, Vice Chairman
[phone] Courier No. 12-15-01 Jessie Davis
Clint Gilley
16 Morris H. Walker, Superintendent Russell F. Vannoy
•
u
February 13, 1992
Ms. Julie A. Hunkins
Project Planning Engineer
Department of Transportation
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Ms. Hunkins:
I received your letter concerning the replacement of Bridge No. 34 on NC 88
which is located in proximity to Riverview Elementary School. Riverview
Elementary School is undergoing consolidation which hopefully will be
completed in 1994 at its new site.
The ball field at Riverview's current site is used for school activities as well as
public recreational activities. The entire community benefits from the use of this
field.
Please contact my office if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
- p? - ) d I ,
Morris H. Walker
py
C
EATTACHMENT 1
•
•
ASHE BOUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
PO Box 604, Ivy Street, Courier No. 12-15-01 Richard Shepherd, Chairman
Jefferson, North Carolina 28640 Russell Vannoy, Vice Chairman
[phone], Fax No. [phone] Rick Ashley
Jessie Davis
Morris H. Walker, Superintendent Clint Gilley
March 9, 1992
Ms. Julie A. Hunkins
Project Planning Engineer
Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Ms. Hunkins:
e. ? "a v
ti
a

Upon completion of a new K-6 facility, Riverview Elementary School
will be sold following consolidation of the school at another
location. We have tentatively scheduled June 1994 as a target
date to sell Riverview Elementary School. .
Please contact my office if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Morris H. Walker
Py

ATTACHMENT 2
pa STATE 4
•
North Carolina Depa
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
October 24, 1991
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 26806
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
fit of C-uIt& a . sources
zQ
•-4 O ` -'Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
z
Re: Section 106 Consultation
Replace Bridge No. 34 on NC 88 over Rich
Mill Creek, Ashe County, B-1035, 8.1710401,
ER 92-7374
Dear Mr. Graf:
Thank you for your letter of October 5, 1991, concerning the above
project.
We have reviewed the information and photographs provided concerning
historic structures within the area of potential effect for this project.
No National Register-listed properties are located in the area of
potential effect. We concur with the North Carolina Department of
Transportation's determination that no National Register-eligible
structures are located in the yea of potential effect since the one
structure over fifty years of age in the area, the Southerland House,
has undergone numerous character-altering changes.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at
36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Dav Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Sincerely,
DB:slw
cc: U L. J. Ward
Brenda Cro899 East Jones Street e Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ATTACHMENT 3