19930143 Ver 1_Complete File_20100726

1 ql nyP"v {*1 ?
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO March 16, 1993
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199301388 and Nationwide Permit No. 23 (Approved Categorical
Exclusions)
Mr. Jack Ward
State of North Carolina
_ Department of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:

1
Reference your February 16, 1993 application for Department of the Army
authorization to replace Bridge Number 241 over Irish Buffalo Creek, on S.R.
1197, near Landis, in Rowan County, North Carolina. The bridge will be
replaced at the existing location with a cast in place reinforced 3 barrel,
11 foot by 10 foot concrete box culvert. No wetlands will be impacted by the
project.
For the purposes of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program,
Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the
Federal Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits (NWP).
Authorization, pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, was provided for activities
undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or
in part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or
department has determined, pursuant to the CEQ Regulation for the Implementing
the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, that the
activity, work or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which
neither individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment, and the Office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished
notice of the agency's or department's application for the categorical
exclusion and concurs with that determination.
Your work is authorized by this NWP provided it is accomplished in strict
accordance with the enclosed conditions. This NWP does not relieve you of the
responsibility to obtain any required State or local approval. You should
You should contact Mr. John Dorney, North Carolina Division of Environmental
Management, [phone], to obtain the necessary Section 401, Water Quality
Certification prior to starting work.
'17?i /9" W,:,XfGrJ n'y 5,1
-2-
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the NWP authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also, this
verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period, the NWP
authorization is reissued without modification or the activity complies with
any subsequent modification of the NWP authorization. If during the 2 years,
the NWP authorization expires or is suspended or revoked, or is modified, such
that the activity would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the
NWP, activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or are
under contract to commence in reliance upon the NWP will remain authorized
provided the activity is completed within 12 months of the date of the NWP's
expiration, modification or revocation, unless discretionary authority has
been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend, or revoke the
authorization.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Steve Chapin, Asheville
Field office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535

IAML:S B. HUNT. IR.
GOVERNOR
.5TA??
?31V3
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RO. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
February 16, 1993
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
Subject: Rowan County, Proposed replacement of Bridge No.
241 on SR 1197 over Irish Buffalo Creek, State
Project No. 8.2632001, Federal Aid Number BRM-
5254(1), T.I.P. Number B-2613.
SAM HUNT
SECRETARY
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 Administration 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 anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2734
(Categorical Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are
providing one copy of the CE document to the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, for their review.
If-you have any questions or need additional
information, please call Gordon Cashin at 733-9770.
6(0
Sincerely,
L
J. Quinn
Ass t?ant Manag r
Planning and Entironmental Branch
BJO/gec
Attachment
cc: Mr. Steve Chapin, COE, Asheville
bAr. John Dorney, NCEHNR, DEM
Mr. Kelly Barger, PE, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, PE, State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, PE, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, PE, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. B. Waters, PE, Division 9 Engineer
Mr. Joe Foutz, PE, Project Planning Engineer
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and Environmental Branch

Rowan County, SR 1197
Bridge No. 241
over Irish Buffalo Creek
State Project No. 8.2632001
Federal-Aid Project BRM-5254(1)
I. D. No. B-2613
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
Da e . J. War C, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
J
/Date (= Nic o as . Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Rowan County, SR 1197
Bridge No. 241
over Irish Buffalo Creek
State Project No. 8.2632001
Federal-Aid Project BRM-5254(1)
I. D. No. B-2613
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
September, 1992
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Jo p E. Foutz, P.
Project Planning Engineer

Rime-EI 1 iott
Bridge Project Planning Engin er, Unit Head
H. Fran in Vick, P.E.
Assistant Manager of Planning and Environmental
N CAR
pEE 'S1
SE
.• N
GIpE
SIN
*too m!
l°/?
Rowan County, SR 1197
Bridge No. 241
over Irish Buffalo Creek
State Project No. 8.2632001
Federal-Aid Project BRM-5254(1)
I. D. No. B-2613
Bridge No. 241 has been included in the Federal-Aid
Replacement Program. The location is shown in Figure I. No
environmental impacts are anticipated. The project has been
a Federal "categorical exclusion."
1. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT
Bridge
substantial
classified as
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts. No special or unique environmental
commitments are necessary.
An individual permit may not be required from the Corps of Engineers
since the Nationwide Section 404 permit provisions are applicable, and the
provisions of 330.5(b) and 330.6 will be followed.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 241 should be replaced at the existing location with a
cast in place reinforced concrete box culvert as shown by Alternate 2 in
Figure 2.
Preliminary hydrographic studies indicate that a three barrel
11' x 10' box culvert should be provided. The length of the culvert
should be adequate to accommodate a 24-foot pavement with 8-foot graded
shoulders.
Traffic will be detoured on-site with a temporary detour structure
located immediately north of the existing bridge.
Estimated cost, based on current prices, is $ 432,000.
The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 1993-1999
Transportation Improvement Program, is $ 662,000.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1197 is classified as an urban collector route in the Statewide
Functional Classification System and is not part of the Federal Aid
System.
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1197 has an 18-foot pavement with
8-foot shoulders (see Figure 2). Vertical alignment is generally flat.
Horizontal alignment is generally tangent except for a 4-degree curve on
2
the east approach. The structure is situated 18 feet above the creek bed.
The approaches are on embankments ranging up to +5 feet above natural
ground. Land use in the immediate vicinity of the bridge is primarily
woodland and farmland. Development in the surrounding area is-scattered
residential. Speed limit is 55 mph.
The current traffic volume of 2200 VPD is expected to increase to
approximately 4000 VPD by the year 2015. The projected volume includes 2
truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) and 3 % dual-tired vehicles (DT).
The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was constructed in 1951. The
superstructure consists of a reinforced concrete deck on I-beams. The
substructure is composed of reinforced concrete caps on timber piles.
Overall length is 90 feet. Clear roadway width is 22 feet. The
posted weight limit is 16 tons for single vehicles and 21 tons for trucks
with trailers.
Bridge No. 241 has a sufficiency rating of 17.2 compared to a rating
of 100 for a new structure.
Three accidents were reported near Bridge No. 241 during the period
from December, 1988 to November, 1991.
Six school bus trips are made across the studied bridge daily.
IV. ALTERNATES
Four alternate methods of replacing Bridge No. 241 were studied as
follows:
Alternate 1 would involve replacement of the bridge along the
oa way alignment with a three barrel cast in place reinforced
existing roadway-
concrete box culvert (11'x 10'). Traffic would be detoured on existing
roads as shown in Figure 1A. The road would be closed for approximately 5
months. This alternate would retain the present roadway alignment which
has a speed limit of 55 mph.
Alternate 1A is identical to Alternate 1 except the proposed
structure would-be a three barrel precast reinforced concrete box culvert
(11'x 10'). The road would be closed for approximately 6 weeks.
Alternate 2 (recommended) consists of replacing the bridge at
existing location with a three barrel cast in place reinforced concrete
box culvert (11'x 10'). Traffic will be maintained on-site with a
temporary detour structure immediately north of the existing bridge. The
temporary detour structure will consist of three 84-inch corragated
metal pipes.
Alternate 3 would involve replacing Bridge No. 241 on new location
approximately 100 feet south of the existing bridge. The new structure
would be a three barrel 11' x 10' cast in place reinforced concrete box
3
culvert. Approximately 2200 feet of new roadway approaches would be
needed. Traffic would be maintained on the existing structure during
construction. Speed limit for the new roadway would be 55 mph.
The "do-nothing" alternate would eventually necessitate closure of
the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic service provided by
SR 1197.
"Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and
deteriorated condition.
V. ESTIMATED COST
Estimated costs of the studied alternates are as follows:
(recommended)
Alt. 1 Alt. 1A Alt. 2 Alt. 3
Structure $ 126,000 $ 172,500 $ 126,000 $ 126,000
Roadway Approaches 51,500 51,500 51,500 250,500
Detour Structure & - - 155,000 -
Approaches
Structure Removal 169000 169000 16,000 16,000
Engineering & ' 28,500 35,000 51,500 57,500
Contingencies
Right-of-Way, 21,000 21,000 32,000 86,000
Utilities
Total $ 243,000 $ 296,000 $ 432,000 $ 536,000
Design Speed 60 mph 60 mph 60 mph 60 mph
VI. TRAFFIC DETOUR
The Division Engineer feels that traffic should be maintained on-site
because of concerns expressed by the Rowan County Emergency Services
director. SR 1197 is a major connector for emergency vehicles traveling
from their base in Landis to the southwest part of the county. Closing SR
1197 would result in substantial delays in providing emergency medical
response to this area. Approximately 3.5 miles of additional travel will
be necessary if the road is closed.
Traffic should be maintained on-site due to the services provided by
SR 1197. The design speed for the temporary detour will be 50 MPH and
posted speed limit of 45 MPH.
The Rowan County School Transportation Director indicated there is no
objection if Bridge No. 241 is to be closed to traffic for construction.
4
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 241 should be replaced at existing location with a ,cast in
place reinforced concrete box culvert as shown by Alternate 2 in Figure 2.
According to a preliminary hydrographic study, a three barrel
11' x 10' reinforced concrete box culvert will accommodate the flow of
Irish Buffalo Creek at this point. The elevation of the new crossing is
expected to be approximately the same as the elevation to the existing
bridge. The structure dimensions may be increased or decreased as
necessary to accommodate peak flows as determined by further hydrologic
studies.
The recommended improvement will include about 400 feet of improved
roadway approaches. A 24-foot pavement with 8-foot graded shoulders
should be provided on the approaches.
Traffic will be maintained on-site with a temporary detour structure
(3 @ 84" CMP) located immediately north of the existing bridge.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
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
of the human or natural environment
standards and specifications.
have a adverse effect on the quality
with the use of current NCDOT
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 to minimum amount needed.
No 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.
The project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section
106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires that if a
federally-funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect on a
property listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be given an
opportunity to comment.
5
Photographs, maps, and information about the area of potential effect
were provided by DOT and reviewed with the State Historic Preservation
Office (SHPO). DOT and SHPO are aware of no historic structures in the
area of potential effect and SHPO recommended no historic architectural
survey (Appendix, A-1).
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project
area. The State Historic Preservation Office indicates that it is
unlikely that any archaeological resources which may be eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places will be affected by
the project construction. It is recommended that no archeological
investigation be conducted (Appendix, A-1).
Since there are no properties either listed in or eligible for the
National Register in the area of potential effect, no further compliance
with Section 106 is required.
The project does not involve any Section 4(f) properties. There are
no publicly-owned parks, historic sites, recreational facilities, or
wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance
in the vicinity of the project.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or
their representatives to consider the impact of construction and land
acquisition projects on prime and important farmland soils. These soils,
as defined by the US Soil Conservation Service (SCS), are generally those
best suited for the production of food, fiber, and other crops with a
minimum input of energy and economic resources.
The Form AD-1006, Farmland Conversion Impact Rating, was completed
for the project (Appendix, A-3). The Soil Conservation Service indicates
no mitigation will be considered for the recommended alternative.
The roadside/pasture community in the project area is composed of
tall fescue (Festuca sp.), pokeweed (Phytolacca americana), nightshade
(Solanum sp.), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera 'a? pon=ica , trumpet vine
(Cam s s radicans), poison ivy (Toxicod?ron radicans), plaintain
(P ana o anceo ata), wild geranium Geranium sp.). broomstraw
(A on sp. 6e-eyed grass (Sis rincFi m sp.), sourweed (Rumex
sp. , rush (Juncus effusus), clover (Trifo ium sp.), wild onion (A1T1'-um
sp.), members oT_t e family Cyperaceae and members of the fami'Fy
Asteraceae including dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium) and thistle
(Carduus sp.).
The mixed pine-hardwood forest community canopy is composed of
loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), shortleaf pine (P. echinata) longleaf pine
(P. alustris),wllow oak ( uercus hp ellos), oaks ( uercus spp.),
hickories Carya spp.), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), river birch
6
41elula nigratulip tree (Liriodendron tuli ifera), red maple (Acer
rum , sweet gum (Li uidambar st raciflua owering dogwood (Cornus
or1 a), winged elm (U ml us alata green ash (Fraxinus caroliniana),
saws (Sassafras al b1 um and wild cherry (Prunus serotina).
Subcanopy (sapling, shr-errata) is composed of smaF er specimens s of
canopy species. The vine layer includes Japanese honeysuckle, poison ivy,
trumpet vine and grape (Vitis sp.).
The stream bank community includes red maple, black willow (Salix
nigra), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), poison ivy, rose (Rosa sp.), grape,
Japanese honeysuckle, elderry (Sambucus canadensis), blackberry,
broomstraw, needlerush, sedges and members of the family Asteraceae
including goldenrod (Solidago sp.).
Construction of the subject project will result in loss of existing
roadside/pasture habitat along SR 1197 and creation of new roadside
habitat along the new road shoulders. A portion of mixed pine-hardwood
forest will be eliminated by construction of this project.
ROADSIDE/ MIXED PINE/ STREAM
PASTURE HARDWOOD FOREST BANK TOTALS
Alternate 1 0.9 -0- 0.1 1.0
Alternate lA 0.9 -0- 0.1 1.0
Alternate 2 1.9 -0- 0.2 2.1
(Recommended)
Alternate 3 2.5 0.5 0.1 3.1
Note: Values shown are based upon 100 feet of right-of-way.
Actual impacts may be less.
Amphibian species likely to be found in the area include spotted
salamander (AAmby_stoma maculatum), northern dusky salamander (Desmo nathus
fuscus), two-lined salamander (Eurycea bislineata), slimy salamander
(PTethodon lutinosus), red salamander (Pseudotriton ruber), American toad
(Bum americanus , Fowler's toad (Bufo woo ousel , nort Fern cricket frog
(Acres cry ), spring peeper ?r a crucifer upland chorus frog
(Pseu acres triseriata), bullfrog (Rana cates6eiana) and pickerel frog
(Ranustris).
Characteristic reptiles likely to occur in the area include snapping
turtle (Chel dra serpentina), painted turtle (Chrsems icta), eastern
box turtle (Terra erne carolina), eastern fence lizard Sceloporus
undulatus), fiv' a-lined skink Eumeces fasciatus), broadhead skink (Eumeces
aticeps , worm snake (Carphois amoenus ringneck snake (Diado his
unctatus), rat snake (Ela he obsoleta), eastern hognose snake Heterodon
lat r inos), northern water snake (Nerodia si edon), rough green snake
(0eo ryss aestiivus), eastern garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis) and
copperheea (Agkistrodon contortrix).
7
Birds common in the vicinity of the project include great blue heron
(Ardea herodias), mallard (Anus lat rh nchos), wood duck (Aix s onsa),
O Tcdeer C aradrius vocif?eru?s), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura),
red-tailed hawk Buteo amaicensis), northern bo w ite (Co inus
vir inianus), belteuUng is er C?eryle alc on), red-bellied woodpecker
Me aner es carolinus), downy woo pd ecker Picoides ubescens), eastern
kingbird TTyrannus t rannus), eastern phoebe Sayornis (Wbe), barn
swallow (Hiru` ndo rustics), blue jay (C anocitta cristata , Carolina
chickadee Parus carolinensis), Carolina wren T ryothorus ludovicianus),
ruby-crowneTTing-Tet Re u us calendula), American robin Tur us
mi ratorius), loggerhead s ri a Lan1uS ludovicianus), red-eye verio
Verso o ivaceu*s), yellow- rumped wa_5Ter Den roica coronata), summer
tanager Piran a rubra), northern cardinal Car inalis ca7-cTinalis),
eastern mea ow ark Sternella magna) and red-winged 6Tack it Age aius
phoeniceus).
Mammals such as Virginia opossum (Didel his vir iniana), southeastern
shrew (Sorex lon irostris), eastern mo a Sca opus, a uaticus),
silver-ha ea bat Lasion cteris noctiva ans), big brown at E tesicus
fuscus), woodchuck Marmota monax , eastern cottontail (S lvi a us
orl anus), eastern c ipmonk Tamias striatus), gray squirrel ciurus
taro inensis), beaver (Castor canacensis , eastern harvest mouse
Refit ro ontom s humulis w ite otedmouse (Perom sc?us leuco us),
hispi cotton mouse i modon hispidus), meadow vole (Microtus
enns lvanicus), Norway rat Rattua norve icus), red fox (Vines vu es),
raccoon Procyon lotor), and w ite-tai a deer (Odocoileus virginianus)
are likely common in?6itants of the area.
Irish Buffalo Creek is the only aquatic community found in the study
area. It is a piedmont creek which flows from the northwest through the
project area into Kannapolis Lake just south of the study area. This
community supports populations of invertebrates, fish, amphibians and
reptiles.
Fish likely to occur in the Irish Buffalo Creek include largemouth
bass (Micro terus salmoides), black crappie (Pomoxis ni romaculatus),
white crappie Pomoxc s ularis), bluegill (Leo smi macroc irus , redear
sunfish (Le omi m c o o Fuji green sunfis Le orris cane lus),
pumpkinsee Le orris ib osus), warmouth (Le omi'g osus , c annel
catfish (Icta urus unctatus , yellow bullhead Ame_iiurus natalis), black
bullhead Ameiurus me as , chain pickerel (Esox ni er), ow in (Amia
calva) and giczar s1F-aal Dorosoma cepedianum).
Destruction of terrestrial communities along the project corridor
can result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for many of the
terrestrial species which utilize this area. Loss of these habitats can
result in a reduction and displacement of species found in the subject
project study zone. Roads can also increase mortality among migratory
species and species which are opportunistic foragers along road shoulders.
The proposed action could have substantial affects on the aquatic
environment found in the project boundaries. Strict enforcement of
Sedimentation Control Measures and Best Management Practices (BMPs) should
be observed.
8
Sedimentation of Irish Buffalo Creek can be harmful to local
populations of invertebrates which are important parts of the aquatic food
chain. This creek's fish populations can also be harmed by sedimentation.
Irish Buffalo Creek is the only water resource located in the subject
project area and is part of the Yadkin-Peedee River Basin. Channel width
in the study area averages approximately 60 feet and depth ranges from 6
inches to over 3 feet. This creek flows from northwest of Kannapolis
through the project study area southward into the Rocky River. The
substrate is formed from sedimentation by eroding silt and clay. Creek
banks at the project study site are somewhat steeply sloped.
Irish Buffalo Creek has a best usage classification of WS-III.
WS-III classification describes those water supply segments with no
categorical restrictions on watershed development or discharges and which
are suitable for all Class C uses. Class C waters are suitable for
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary
recreation and agriculture.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW) or waters designated as WS-1 or WS-11 will be
impacted by the proposed project, nor are these resources located within 1
mile of the subject area.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) addresses long
term trends in water quality at fixed monitoring sites by the sampling for
selected benthic macroinvertebrates. These organisms are sensitive to
very subtle changes in water quality. Good water quality is associated
with high taxa richness (the number of different types of organisms) and
the presence of many intolerant species. Water quality degradation
gradually eliminates the more sensitive species and leads to a community
structure quite different from that in an unstressed stream. Information
about water quality is not available for the immediate project area.
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) lists no
upstream dischargers for the Irish Buffalo Creek study area.
Potential impacts to Irish Buffalo Creek include increased
sedimentation from construction-related erosion. This impact is viewed as
temporary, however, poorly managed application of sedimentation control
policies can result in serious long-term damage to the aquatic
environment. Sedimentation and erosion control measures should be strictly
enforced during the construction stage of this project.
The soil found in the study area is classified as Chewacla, Pacolet
and Wedowee series.
The Chewacla series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained
soils on nearly level flood plains. They formed in recent alluvium washed
largely from soils formed in residuum from schist, gneiss, granite,
phyllite and other metamorphic and igneous rocks. Slopes range from 0 to
2 percent. Chewacla loam is listed as a map unit with inclusions of
hydric soils and or has wet spots.
9
The Pacolet series consists of very deep, well drained, moderately
permeable soils that formed in material weathered mostly from acid
crystalline rocks of the Piedmont uplands. Slopes commonly are 15 to 25
percent but range from 2 to 80 percent.
The Wedowee series consists of very deep, well drained, moderately
permeable soils that formed in residuum from weathered crystalline rock of
the Piedmont Plateau. These soils are on narrow, gently sloping to very
steep uplands. Slope is dominantly less than 25 percent but ranges from 0
to 60 percent.
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters
of the United States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with
provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C 1344).
Less than a tenth of an acre of wetlands will be impacted by the
proposed project. Anticipated impacts are categorized as bank-to-bank
waters of the United States and fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and are likely to be authorized by
provisions of Nationwide permit 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 23. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded,
or financed, in whole or in part, by another federal agency or department
where that agency or department has determined pursuant to the council on
environmental quality regulation for implementing the procedural
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, that the activity,
work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which
neither individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment and the office of the chief of engineers has been
furnished notice of the agency's or department's application for the
categorical exclusion and concurs with that determination.
Federal law states that any action, which has the potential to result
in a negative impact to federally-protected plants or animals, is subject
to review by the USFWS (and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service),
under one or more provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973,
as amended. The USFWS and other wildlife resource agencies also exercise
jurisdiction over protected species in accordance with the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act of 1979. Certain plants and animals, which are
endemic to North Carolina and/or whose populations are in severe decline,
are also protected by North Carolina laws.
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are
protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists one federally
protected species, Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) for
Rowan County as of June 17, 1992.
CZ
Habitat for this species exists primarily along the road shoulders of
SR 1197. A field visit was conducted to verify the presence of sunflower
species on June 3, 1992. Verification of the presence of
10
Schweinitz's sunflower is possible only between September and October when
flowering takes place. However, the presence of sunflower species is
possible as early as May or June. Road shoulders along the entire project
were surveyed on a plant-by-plant basis and no sunflower species were
found. It can be concluded that the subject project will not impact
Schweinitz's sunflower.
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) are granted protection by the
State Endangered Species Act and the N.C. Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979, administered and enforced by the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission and the N.C. Department of Agriculture.
A search of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Programs data failed
to turn up any records of state-protected species in Rowan County.
No impacts to federally protected species will occur. Although
suitable habitat exists in the study area for two federal candidate
species, no surveys were conducted for these species.
The project is located within the Metropolitan-Charlotte Interstate
Air Quality Control Region. The ambient air quality for Rowan County has
been determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Since this 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.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes.
Therefore, its 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 SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
This evaluation completes the assessment requirements of FHPM 7-7-3
(highway traffic noise) and FHPM 7-7-9 (air quality) and no additional
reports are required.
Rowan County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular
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.
There are no practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area.
Any shift in alignment would result in a crossing of about the same
magnitude. The alignment of the project is perpendicular to the
floodplain area. All reasonable measures will be taken to minimize any
possible harm.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious
adverse environmental effects will result from implementation of the
project.
Coolee?
Wile Wwdle,t

?
? 1 h
? Mlle
Orville ,
I '
I•
•
•
I i

???i \\`OoldMill LoA
]Lt ce + ?
/ D Q ?O LI! '
o fr
• 40
M
? u!t % ,,a ? tea
? • ,ifa''?'Y; 4
,z
H:i
lHii.
•
1 c`.•
? 9 f`.,i
-lM
x ei: q?
' •`: ,,:
BRIDGE NO. 2411,,'
`i
121.
ANDIS
ProO
P. 2,09
i
` s
0
0]
!1L o117!
CHINA GROVE
COTTEN VALLEY
IUNINC.)
POP. 1,168

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISIONOF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVMONMENTAL
BRANCH
BR I DGE NO. 24 1
ROWAN COUNTY
8-2613
12/91 0 mile I FIG. I
,Ba,' Popl
I J
nt 1
R
Pi PI rf f
?• ...::: `0.7 MILES
?::::•. :'•:<: :;:>:;:; FAIRWAY DRIVE KLUTTZ AVE.
• -
t•?i ?
BRIDGE NO. 241 ?'
b ?
al ; o n h ?I Z c.
^ 0 n f•I .S I
.I 12 02
ni ^ SZ'
fl
m. Y fl .10 .IO_
•I ? P' b
.07 O? \ I? nl ^I O 0? O
f
Y N - rvl O
a^ O m ? -
9a' of
0 80 LO• P ?O. m R
0."o. 10
- B I' h h m ^I 90' o .06 08
o ^
Zo 20'
4k O'f o' g .2'
\ 16 s(' \P' - 90' Q0 o ni^I- I I r 90-!90 0 _
/ ?? O? ,o-I o 0. ? CO' •' o w d 0". n
? I I Bt' til 11'- ?<
• ? m ,. ml
LEGEND
STUDIED DETOUR ROUTE
//?? NON - SYSTEM ROAD
P
•O
f
^ V1
o BO' n - ? o ?" :I n
9t' o~-°I
v
FIGURE 1A

?., ........`, .ice _
ww
;.t
BRIDGE NO. 241
ROWAN COUNTY
B-2613
EAST APPROACH
WEST APPROACH
SIDE VIEW
FIGURE 3
ii. , i
O
/ •.°1197
II
100 - YEAR FLOODPLAIN
846 X • `•??
/ q 1
BRIDGE NO. 241
802
r ----- ?? olf ji
Course
/•f ?' Lai
?- 1
o°. _ ? ' 92otan ?? . o
N ` II • •
"Ni Ise /I
o •
• •' 60 0
N GO 1101 u
789 ` • o .. ..
NIP x
• ,. .
,•• ` ' •. • ' 7 •JFIGURE4 •
` / IL L
STATE u
v
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
June 18, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge No. 341 on SR 1197 over
Irish Buffalo Creek, Rowan County, B-2613,
8.2632001, BRM-5254(1), GS 92-0061
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
On February 5, 1992, Robin Stancil of our staff met with North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds
concerning the above project. We reported our available information on
historic architectural and archaeological surveys and resources along with
our recommendations. NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial
photographs at the meeting and for our use afterwards. We received
additional project area photographs on June 11, 1992.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at
the meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic
structures located within the area of potential effect. We recommend that
no historic architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area.
Based on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any
archaeological resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places will be affected by the project construction. We,
therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a
Categorical Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how
NCDOT addressed our concerns.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
109 EastJones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
A-1

Nicholas L. Graf
June 18, 1992, Page 2
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.
iSiric ly,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: '-?J. Ward
T. Padgett
K. Houston
A-2
w ? ? F
U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
08a at Land Evacuation Roau+st
PART I (To be correolered by Federal Agency) Feoent Agency Involved
Name Of Project
runty Ana state. ,._ ,. _ t\1 G
PART 11 (To be completed by SCSJ Yes No Acres Irrigate
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? um e.
(/f no, the FPPA does not apply - do not complete additional Parts of this form). Ig' Q Amount
arncaWe Land In t. JurisdiRion ?•
Major Crock/ Acres: cl g 5 % 8 ?. Z •14
g (Date Land
?m Of I,,ptal Sue Awument -,stem
Neese Of Land vat tion Sritern Used
? Alternative
Site A Site 8
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) 0
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directiy
e. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirect) O
C. Total Acres in Site
PART IV (To be completed by SCSJ Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
80 Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland
C. Percents a Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted
D, Perceraaye Of Farmland In Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value
PART V (To be completed by SCSI Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland Togs Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points)
Federal Agency) Maximum
PART VI (To be completed by Points
Site Assessment Criteria (These criitevee an a?rp/ainad In 7 CFR 668s(bl \
?• P-rimater In Nonurban Use
3. Percent Of Site Bain Farmed
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government
9 nierance From Urban Builtup Area
8. Distance I o uroan ,upvw- • --
7. Size Of Present Fame Unit Compared To
IL Creation Of Nonfsrmabie Farmland
?, g 3 c,, ? SZ. 4
?qon taaurned sv SCS
------------
e aan
site C EN.'IN C.;) 10. O
n-Farm Invesunen>s
Effects of Conversion on Farm Su rt Services
11
.
12 Com atibili With Existin Agricultural Use 160 ?p
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency) S a
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100
-7 b
oral Site Assessment ( tom Part VI above ora local 160
\?$
sit. assessment/ 260
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above ? lines) Was A Local site Assessment Used?
?
Yes ? No
Date of Selection
Site Selected:
Fteason For Selection:

<rvb
3.2. 4 ? X 5 z _ ? bco. 4-

A-3