19920008 Ver al_Complete File_19920221

IIe i !
C ! it°'1
.w STATg o
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
January 30, 1992
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
?k 1
DEB 20 1992
.?•,?1,1YAt t?CC?Cil1.
13
1V. Op?RE TpS OFFIC
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
FE 2 1992
S 1_?.? I 1 ij i
Subject: I-26, Henderson County, Rehabilitation of Bridges No. 108 & 112
over Green River, B-2700
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 Section 330.5(a)(23) of the
Interim Final Rule for Regulatory Programs issued July 22, 1982, by the Corps of
Engineers. The provisions of Section 330.5(b) and 330.6 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,
C? DM
L. J. ard, P. E., Manager
LJW/plr Planning and Environmental Branch
Attachment
cc: Mr. John Parker, Permit Coordinator, w/report
Mr. Charles Wakild, 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. V. A. Edwards, P. E.
An Equal Opportunity/AfIirmativeAction Employer
ti

I-26
Henderson County
Rehabilitation of Bridges No. 108 and 112
over
Green River
State Project 8.1950901
Federal-Aid Project BHI-26-1(45)25
B-2700
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Admin.istration
and
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
APPROVED:
Date L. J. qa d, P.E., Manager
lanning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
/ Z3 J"Z
Dat Nic olas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
4 - . i
I-26
Henderson County
Rehabilitation of Bridges No. 108 and 112
over
Green River
State Project 8.1950901
Federal-Aid Project BHI-26-1(45)25
B-2700
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
January 1992
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
rmond Bli s
Project Planning Engineer
!/VCS y? 6 J
y
Wayne Elliot
t
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
XF-rahnklin Vick, P.E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
?,•????H CAR04
?, ••?E ASS10
?9•°?
•4
' SEAL
• i
'. 77 54
/Po
ti'•
fill
7 Ll ?Y
D
. 'J
Rehabilitation of Bridges No. 108 and 112 are included in the current
Transportation Improvement Program. This environmental documentation
includes recommendations for the proposed work by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and resulting environmental impacts.
Location of the intended activity is shown on the attached Figure 1. The
project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" (CE).
I. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
The North Carolina Board of Transportation is proposing rehabili-
tation of the two parallel reinforced concrete and steel plate girder
structures on I-26 over Green River in southeastern Henderson County.
This scheduled work will assist in maintaining long-term safety along this
divided four-lane interstate highway corridor. It is estimated to
increase remaining life of each structure by 10 years from the present 15
years to 25.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Proposed is rehabilitation of Bridges No. 108 and 112 which carry
westbound and eastbound directions of travel, respectively, along I-26
over the river. The project will require maintaining two-way traffic on
one of the bridges during rehab work on the other. Details are described
in-Section VI., page 4 of this document.
Preliminary estimated cost of the above proposals totals $2,300,000
compared with $2,200,000 assessed in the 1992-1998 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP).
III. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
Mitigation of impacts on the environment will not be required due to
limited scope of the project plus implementation of standard procedures
and measures which will render special and/or unique environmental
commitments unnecessary. Utilization of applicable best management
practices will be incorporated as part of design in accordance with
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) criteria for projects which qualify
as CE's.
Although not likely to be required for project construction purposes,
use of any off-site borrow areas by the project contractor will need prior
approval from the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources (DCR),
and Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR).
These actions will serve to diminish the potential for adverse effects on
the cultural, natural, and human environments in the project vicinity.

IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Roadway
Numbering of I-26 indicates an east-west direction on the nationwide
interstate system. But the route extends generally in a southeast-
northwest direction between Charleston on the South Carolina coast and
I-40 at Asheville in the North Carolina mountains. It is a freeway with
full control of access, designated a Rural Principal Arterial route in the
Functional Classification of Highways within North Carolina, and numbered
26-1 on the Federal Aid Interstate (FAI) system within Henderson County.
The road was constructed to a four-lane divided width along new
location in Polk, Henderson, and Buncombe counties during the mid to late
1960's. In the area of the project, asphalt travelway width is 24 feet in
each direction divided by a 30-foot wide median. Paved shoulders have a
four-foot width on the left and a 10-foot width on the right in each
direction of travel. Posted speed limit is 55 miles per hour.
A concrete Jersey barrier is located within the median for a length
of about 4500 feet northwestward from the northwestern end of the bridges.
Constructed to enhance safety, this median centerpiece is about 48 inches
in height along a length of approximately 1500 feet immediately adjoining
the bridges and the regulation 32 inches along the remainder of its
stretch. Grade of the roadway is about minus six percent proceeding
eastbound along almost the entire length of this median barrier.
Existing right of way is a minimum of 320 feet wide along the road in
the general project vicinity.
Bridges
Built during 1968, both five-span bridges have a 28-foot, 1-inch
clear roadway width and a total 1050-foot length along tangent horizontal
alignment. Each has a 7.75-inch thick reinforced concrete deck supported
by three spans of continuous plate girders and two spans of simple plate
girders. Both girder classes consist of corrosive steel design and are of
considerable structural depth. This superstructure is supported by four
reinforced concrete hammerhead interior piers and a reinforced concrete
abutment at either end of each structure. The deck of each bridge is
about 225 feet above the stream. A design award was given for the
structures shortly following their completion.
Parts of the 23-year old bridges are in somewhat deteriorated
condition due to cracking and spalling of deck concrete plus partial
degeneration of structural steel components. Of special concern is
advanced corrosion of some of the girder splice bolts and the fatigue
cracking of some of the structural steel. Bridge No. 108 had a 61.8
sufficiency rating and Bridge No. 112 a 66.0 rating during August 1991.
This compares to a maximum rating of 100 for a new structure having
present design standards. Weight restrictions are not posted along
roadway approaches to each bridge.
14-
Roadside development and utilities
There presently are no developments in the general vicinity of the
proposed project because of general remoteness and mountainous topography
of the area. Due to this absence plus the fact that the intended work
will be done entirely within the existing right of way, development will
not be affected directly.
There are no overhead utilities crossing over I-26 in the immediate
vicinity. However, there is an above ground utility line which encroaches
on the right of way parallel to the structures largely below the elevation
of the bridge decks due to their altitude above Green River. Utilities
are not attached underneath the deck of either bridge but an electric line
contained within a small polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe is attached to the
outside of the northeast (median side) rail of eastbound Bridge No. 112.
This-line will not be affected by proposed rehabilitation measures.
V. TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND ACCIDENT DATA
Annual average daily traffic (AADT) along I-26 of 14,500 vehicles
during 1991 is estimated to increase to 15,500 vehicles during 1993 which
is the presently scheduled year of project implementation. Traffic is
expected to average about 30,000 vehicles per day at the end of the
subsequent 20-year planning period during the year 2013. These estimates
include 22% truck tractor, semi-trailers (TTST). During each daily
peak-hour period, about six percent.of the AADT is estimated to occur in
the heavier direction of travel.
During a recent 30-month period beginning 01 January 1989, there were
a total of 44 traffic accidents reported along a 2.2-mile length of I-26
extending about one mile either direction of the respective ends of the
0.2-mile long bridges. The resulting 129.1 accidents per 100 million
vehicle miles (acc/100mvm) during the period does not favorably compare
with an average of 50.6 acc/100mvm during the three-year 1988-1990 period
along 103 miles of rural interstate routes in North Carolina.
The 31 accidents which occurred along the one-mile length extending
across the bridges from their southeastern ends to a point on the roadway
0.8 mile to their northwest resulted in an accident rate of about 183
acc/100mvm during the period. This high rate approaches four times the
average statewide mark and may have resulted to some degree from inclement
weather conditions plus the following design limitations necessitated by
the mountainous terrain of the general area:
* The narrow 30-foot wide median
* A six percent downgrade in the eastbound direction (6% upgrade
westbound) along a 0.1-mile length immediately northwest of the
bridges

J
4
* Two horizontal curves of four degrees each at separate locations
along the above noted length
Eleven of the 31 occurred on the bridges. Six of these happened during
icy conditions and two when wet. But none resulted in a vehicle either
penetrating or vaulting over the bridge rail which has been retrofitted
with tubular guard rail for several years.
VI. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND ESTIMATED COSTS
Proposed improvements
Rehabilitation of each bridge is proposed at its present site as
generally detailed below:
* Temporary closure of the existing westbound lanes of the divided
four-lane highway in the area is planned. Subsequent shifting
of westbound traffic to the eastbound side via temporary median
crossovers (connectors) within the existing 30-foot wide median
is proposed. Location of each crossover at a predetermined
point along I-26 on either side of the bridges is to be
established during the design process. Bridge No. 112 and those
sections of its roadway approaches between the bridge and the
temporary connectors are proposed to handle both directions of
travel along I-26 during rehabilitation of the present westbound
Bridge No. 108. Once proposed work on this bridge is completed,
adjustment of the connectors is proposed so that both directions
of travel can be carried on No. 108 and its approaches during
rehabilitation of eastbound No. 112.
* Rehabilitation measures presently proposed by the NCDOT Bridge
Maintenance Department for each structure are as follows:
- Replacement of splice bolts and repair of structural steel
cracks
Stabilization of wind bracing
Repair all existing expansion joints
Addition of concrete approach slab adjacent to each bridge
end (painting of existing girder ends is not proposed due
to their corrosive design)
Rehabilitation of the concrete deck and over-laying it with
latex modified concrete
5
The above measures are the only reasonably workable proposal for
maintaining structural integrity and safety on a long-term basis. These
actions will result in a sufficiency rating of 78.0 for each bridge which
is two points short of the current American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines of 80.0 for rehabilitated
structures. The Federal Highway Administration granted an exception to
the AASHTO guidelines for this project during December of 1990.
Staging of work for each structure is proposed so that both
directions of traffic can be maintained along one of the bridges during
rehabilitation work on the other. It has been generally established that
such staging will be the most efficiently practical means of handling
traffic during the rehabilitation period. Estimated time of closure of
each bridge to traffic is two months resulting in a total of four months
closure time for the entire project. During most hourly periods along the
proposed detour arrangement, traffic flow will operate at Level of
Service D.
The most expeditious locations and design of temporary connectors
within the median plus any necessary associated temporary traffic
separation devices along the resulting two-lane, two-way section will be
required during the detailed design phase for the project. This is
especially applicable in the affected area northwest of the bridges where
the Jersey median barrier was constructed within the median to enhance
safety. Such applicability is accentuated by grades, curves, and recent
high accident experience in this area during normal four-lane divided
highway operation. Barriers with reflectors to safely separate directional
traffic, appropriate pavement markings, flashing traffic signals, and
posting plus enforcement of speed reductions along the detour sections are
some of the actions which may be required during the rehabilitation
period.
Estimated costs
Estimated total cost of the recommended project is $2,300,000,
including $1,900,000 for the rehabilitation measures detailed above plus
$400,000 for maintaining both directions of traffic thru the site during
most of the required rehabilitation period. This compares with $2.2
million estimated in the 1992-1998 TIP.
VII. ALTERNATIVES
Temporary on-site detour bridges and associated approaches in
conjunction with the proposed rehabilitations are totally out of the
question from a reasonable financial standpoint in view of very steep
terrain in the Green River area. And detouring I-26 traffic off-site via
other routes during the rehabilitation period is not practical in view of
the absence of suitable existing facilities located in the general area.
6
41
The clear roadway width of the bridges is less than present
standards. But because widening of each structure is estimated to cost
$350,000 for.each added foot of width, such expansion is not proposed due
to the evident absence of justification from both cost and safety
standpoints. This is especially true in view of very limited funds
available for bridge replacements and rehabilitations. And, based on
recent accident records, widening the Interstate would not benefit traffic
safety substantially.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
In view of locale and scope of the recommended action, substantial
adverse impacts on the existing environment of the area are very unlikely
to occur.
Significant traffic and construction noise impacts are unlikely to
occur since existing traffic will be moved no closer to any existing
receptors in the project area. Construction noise impacts on adjacent
properties will not be major in view of existing ambient noise levels
precipitated by I-26 traffic and the absence of developments in the
project area. Also, construction activities are usually conducted only
during daylight hours along projects of the nature of this one.
Therefore, traffic noise reports are considered unnecessary and noise
assessment requirements of the Federal Highway Program Manual 7-7-3 (FHPM
7-7-3) should not apply to this proposed action. Additional highway
traffic noise reports are therefore unnecessary.
The project is located in the Western Mountain Air Quality Control
Region. The ambient air quality for Henderson County has been determined
to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Federal conformity procedures of 23 CFR 770 do not apply since this
project is located in an area where the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
does not contain transportation control measures. This evaluation
completes the assessment requirements of FHPM 7-7-9. No additional
reports are required.
Structures of historical and/or architectural significance and
archaeological sites will not be impacted directly-by the proposed action.
Although unlikely to be required for the project, use of any off-site
borrow area(s) will need prior approval from the NC Department of Cultural
Resources (DCR) to minimize the potential for affecting these cultural
resources. Additional approval of the use of such site(s) also will be
required from the NC Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (DEHNR). Such authorization will assist in protecting the
natural environment of such areas.
On 10 December 1991, the US Fish and Wildlife Service listed five
federally protected species within Henderson County which are as follows:
Small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides) - Endangered
Mountain sweet pitcher plant (Sarracenia rubra var. Jonesii) -Endangered
Bunched arrowhead (Sagittaria fasciculata) - Endangered
White irisette (Sisyrinchium dichotomum) - Endangered
Swamp-pink (Helonias bullata) - Threatened
No impacts to these species will occur from the previously described
proposed project activities because habitat zones likely to be impacted
are not suitable for the occurrence of any of the families.
The.stretch of Green River in the vicinity of these bridges is
currently designated by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission as hatchery
supported trout water. As such it is classified as a Designated Public
Mountain Trout Water. In order to sustain fishing, the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission stocks such earmarked streams periodically
during the fishing season with catchable size trout. Presently, there are
no size limits nor bait restrictions and anglers may keep seven trout per
day from these waters.
Wetlands and floodplains will not be impacted.
The project will intensify short-term siltation and sedimentation
during wet weather periods in the immediate area of proposed construction
of temporary connectors and permanent bridge approach slabs. Potential
adverse effects on affected resources will be minimized by the
contractor's use of applicable measures of the FHPM 6-7-3-1 and/or Article
107-13 ("Control of Erosion, Siltation, and Pollution") of NCDOT's
Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures. These regulations
include an erosion and sedimentation control program developed by the
North Carolina Division of Highways, adopted by the NC Board of
T.ransportation, and approved by the NC Sedimentation Control Commission.
In view of these measures and project scope, accidental discharge of
dredged or fill materials into the river is not likely.
Regional ground water elevations will not be affected adversely due
to the very limited scope of this proposed action. Effects on water
quality in the project area will be minor with implementation of
previously described applicable preventive construction measures.
The project will have no direct impacts on farmlands.
XI. PERMITS AND APPROVALS
Federal and State permits will not be required in view of limited
extent of the proposed action.
As presented earlier, any use of off-site borrow areas by the project
contractor will require prior approval from DCR and DEHNR to minimize the
potential for adverse effects on the cultural, natural, and human
environments.
LJW/ONB/plr
6

0I
II
0l
I
I I
1 I
I
I
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGI-IVVAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
1-26
HENDERSON COUNTY
REHABILITATE BRIDGES NO. 10I3.AND 112
OVER GREEN RIVER
&2700
0 Milos 2
1 1 1 FIG. 1
ICI
23
pvjn 4 1742 1.1 Bale ? 1771
171 9
? RIdg. MN" 0
a,} rAM 1
Lni s y l

1e 6
Sll `
1z1L y
173
I Lm? I
c:i 6 EL
7. I
.W

13 -b4:1323
:
17VI
r
1722

/. c 17
I"6 C7 .3r 2.3 / r•
?• Lug
<n O
1LLl InQ"
_ 2• 1
p I
1102 2
\

. ' 3, 0.27
2 6 '
j
Imo 1 ??
:r
?
/
YxllE'/MRI 41y •? 1 ?? ?H
iuwKl 23
POP. 2.396 r

.t
% ? Flm Rost , loo I I

?-

141'>? ! ?V I
Rack/ PA,
76
115, ul? 26

w
I
EAST ep
rA CK
Iu"w-) `n
.3 Ilia
'
F' 1tL V
?
_ POP, 3.363' 1,
I GQ
1
KING w TN.
t >y.
A h ..NF=' 'o TO S9AXT
?` 1111 11 t 26 AN6N0 SC .
23

1124
? d
35'13'
7.1
111. ?
4.2 I ? ?
7JIIDI?O
e
E
SSLLUDA
: ror.5A6
I 'o (1 111 L l r,3 .3 7e
23
tuxedo 1112
t A'i6 `-°"?+?'? Y

G a 1
2
1.3 LT
4
h