19930146 Ver 1_Complete File_19930223

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO March 22, 1993
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199301392 and Nationwide Permit No. 23 (Approved Categorical
Exclusions) n
Mr. Jack Ward
State of North Carolina
? O t3 ?, t( (((?
Department of Transportation J ?-[ll?C?
Planning and Environmental Branch j
Post Office Box 25201 VVETLAI DS GROUP !
WATER OLIALl SECTION
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
Reference your February 17, 1993 application for Department of the Army
authorization to replace Bridge Number 298 on SR 1580, over the Watauga River,
near Foscoe, in Watauga County, North Carolina (State Project 8.2750301). The
bridge will be replaced with a new structure located immediately east of the
existing structures and will include 450 feet of new roadway approaches. No
wetlands will be impacted by the project. As stated in your application,
possible stream impacts will be restricted to some limited sediment debris
during construction and after project complPtton. These impacts will be
minimized through the installation of silt basins, berms, silt curtains, and
other erosion control measures. This project has been coordinated with the NC
Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC).
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.
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 nationwide permit provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions. In addition,
please review WRC concerns as outlined in their June 24, 1992 letter on this
project, which you have already received. This nationwide permit does not
relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any required State or local
approval.
1 y
-2-
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also,
this verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period,
the nationwide permit authorization is reissued without modification or the
activity complies with any subsequent modification of the nationwide permit
authorization. If during the 2 years, the nationwide permit 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 nationwide permit,
activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or are under
contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit will remain
authorized provided the activity is completed within 12 months of the date of
the nationwide permit'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. tIayne 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
V?r. 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
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Mr. Joe Mickey
Route 2, Box 278
State Road, North Carolina 28676
arm/'. ??
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES Q. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS SAM HUNT
GOVERNOR P.O. 40X 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
February 17, 1993
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P, 0. Box 1890 2 3 i?-,93
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402 [ j
I'JEILA DI GRQUp
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch t'?ATEROUA(lr 0r,-
Dear Sir:
Subject: Watauga County, Bridge No. 298 on SR 1580 over
Watauga River, State Project No. 8.2750301, Federal
Aid No. BRZ-1580(1), T.I.P. Number B-2076.
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.
We anticipate that comments from the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) will be required prior
to authorization by the Corps of Engineers. By copy of this
letter and attachment, NCDOT hereby requests NCWRC review.
NCDOT requests that NCWRC forward their comments to the Corps
of Engineers.
If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call Gordon Cashin at 733-9770.

4 r
.w,
S' epety
B. rQ? uinn
Assistant Manage--
Planning and Environmental Branch
BJO/gec
Attachment
cc: Mr. Steve Chapin, COE, Asheville
-Ar. John Dorney, P.E., DEHNR, DEM
Mr. Kelly Barger, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, P.E., State Highway Engineer-Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. W. E. Hoke, Division 11 Engineer
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and Environmental Branch
Ms. Leigh Cobb, Project Planning Engineer

r?

Watauga County
SR 1580
Bridge No. 298 over Watauga River
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1580(1)
State Project 8.2750301
T.I.P. I.D. NO. B-2076
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
l ? I ? r
ATE ard, P.E., Ma ager
"Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
% 1kTE D rt(Nich as
Division
,r "?. U l2
Vfnistrator, , P.E.
FHWA
A
Watauga County
SR 1580
Bridge No. 298 over Watauga River
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1580(1)
State Project 8.2750301
T.I.P. I.D. NO. B-2076
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
October, 1992
Documentation Pre red by Wang Engineering Company:
CARO?
?; ??FESSIpv;9
dames Gree hil , P.E. SEAL 9r?;
Projec Manage _
12919 '
G1 N??
••.,??5 M 'E %%'%4
For North Carolina Department of Transportation

ei h C b
Project Manager
Consultant Engineering Unit
Watauga County
SR 1580
Bridge No. 298 over Watauga River
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1580(1)
State Project 8.2750301
T.I.P. I.D. No. B-2076
Bridge No. 298 has been included in the Federal-Aid Bridge
Replacement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. The
project is not expected to have a significant impact on the human
environment and has been classified by the Federal Highway
Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion".
I. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 298 should be replaced downstream (east) of its
existing location as shown by Alternate 2 in Figure 2.
The recommended width of the new bridge is 28 feet. The
cross section on the structure will consist of a 22-foot traveled
way with 3-foot shoulders. The 3-foot shoulders will accomodate
for adequate sight distance on the bridge.
Approximately 450 feet of rebuilt roadway approaches will
be required. The approach roadway should consist of a 22-foot
pavement with 4-foot graded shoulders.
Preliminary hydraulic studies indicate that a bridge 110
feet in length should be provided. The elevation of the new
structure should be approximately 1-foot higher than the floor
elevation of the existing bridge.
During construction of the replacement bridge, traffic will
be maintained on-site using the existing bridge.
The estimated cost of construction, based on current prices,
is $311,000 including right of way and utility relocation costs.
The previously estimated cost of the project, as shown in
the 1993-1999 Transportation Improvement Program, was $393,000.
II. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to
avoid or minimize environmental impacts. No special or unique
environmental commitments are necessary. "Best Management
Practices" (33 CFR 330.6) will be utilized to minimize any
possible impacts.
Since the project is located in a designated "trout" county
and crosses a known trout stream, coordination with the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission will be completed during

W
the permit application phase and their comments will be addressed
prior to construction.
The State Historic Preservation Officer has determined that
a comprehensive archaeological survey is needed for this project.
The survey will be completed prior to construction.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1580 (Calloway Road) is classified as a rural local route
in the Statewide Functional Classification System.
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1580 has a 18-foot
pavement with 2-foot shoulders (see Figure 3). Vertical
alignment is generally flat. Horizontal alignment of the
structure is tangent with an approximate 24 degree curve on the
north approach and a short 56 degree curve on the south approach.
The structure surface is located 8 feet above the stream bed.
The posted speed limit is 25 mph.
Land use in the immediate vicinity of the bridge is
primarily residential and agricultural.
No known utilities exist in the vicinity of the bridge.
The projected traffic volume of 400 vehicles per day (VPD)
for the 1995 anticipated year of construction is expected to
increase to approximately 600 VPD by the year 2015. The
projected volumes include 1% truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST)
and 2% dual-tired vehicles (DTT).
The existing "low water" bridge, as shown in Figure 3, was
constructed in 1962. The 3-span superstructure consists of a
paved timber deck on I-beams. The substructure is composed of
reinforced concrete abutments and piers. The bridge and
approaches have an approximate 10-year flood frequency.
Overall length of the bridge is 75 feet. Clear roadway
width is 11.2 feet. The posted weight limit is 15 tons for
single vehicles and 21 tons for trucks with trailers.
Bridge No. 298 has a sufficiency rating of 3.3 compared to a
rating of 100 for a new structure.
No accidents were reported on or near Bridge No. 298 during
the three year period from January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1991.
Two school buses cross the studied bridge daily.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Two alternative methods of replacing Bridge No. 298 were
studied. In each alternative, a bridge 110 feet long with a deck
2
width of 28 feet would be provided. This structure will
accommodate two 11-foot lanes with 3-foot shoulders. The
approach should consist of a 22-foot paved roadway with 4-foot
graded shoulders. On both alternatives, the proposed bridge and
roadway would be raised approximately 1-foot to provide for a
facility that would be above the 10-year design frequency storm.
The proposed design speed for both alternatives is 30 MPH.
The alternatives studied are shown in Figure 2 and are as
follows:
Alternative 1 - involves replacement of the structure along the
existing roadway alignment. Improvements to alignment of the
bridge approaches includes approximately 325 feet of new
pavement. The new bridge would be on a 22 degree horizontal
curve.
A temporary on-site detour
construction for maintenance of
detour would consist of a bridge
located about 45 feet west of t:
detour roadway would consist of a
2-foot shoulders.
would be provided during
traffic. The temporary
50 feet long and would be
he existing structure. The
20-foot wide pavement with
Alternative 2 (Recommended) - involves replacement of the bridge
on new location immediately east (downstream) of the
existing structure. Improvements to the alignment of the
bridge approaches include approximately 450 feet of new
pavement. The existing structure would be used for
maintenance of traffic during the construction period. The
new bridge would be on a 12 degree horizontal curve.
An upstream alternate was not considered feasible due to
poor alignment.
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate
closure of the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic
service provided by SR 1580.
"Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due to
its age and deteriorated condition.
Alternatives discussed in this section and shown on Figure 2
are based on functional plans prepared on an uncontrolled photo
map. All distances and directions are approximate. Final
construction plans will be based on detailed survey information
and may slightly vary from the alternatives presented here.
V. TRAFFIC DETOUR
During the construction period, maintenance of traffic at
the studied bridge site is necessary. The studied bridge is the
only route that exists to serve the residential community on the
south side of the river. In view of this, it is clear that
3

traffic should be maintained at the existing bridge site during
construction.
VI. ESTIMATED COST
Estimated costs of the studied alternatives are as follows:
(Recommended)
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Structure $147,840 147,840
Roadway Approaches 91,160 112,160
Detour Bridge &
Pavement 75,000 - 0 -
Engineering &
Contingencies 36,000 40,000
Right of Way & 16,750 11,000
Utilities
Total
$366,750
$311,000
VII. DISCUSSION OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 298 should be replaced downstream (east) of its
existing location as shown by Alternate No. 2 in Figure 2.
The recommended improvements will include about 450 feet of
new raised roadway approaches. This includes 300 feet on the
north approach and 150 on the south. A 22-foot pavement with 4-
foot graded shoulders should be provided on the approaches. A
28-foot clear roadway width is recommended on the replacement
structure. The cross section on the structure will consist of a
22-foot travelway with 3-foot shoulders. Since the replacement
structure is on a 12 degree horizontal curve, widening to the
inside of the curve structure may be requried unless a design
exception is approved.
The design speed for the new alignment is 30 mph.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during the
construction period.
Based on preliminary hydraulic studies, the new structure
should be a bridge approximately 110 feet long. It is
anticipated the elevation of the new bridge and roadway will be
approximately 1-foot higher than the elevation of the existing in
order to provide a bridge and roadway above the 10-year frequency
storm. The length and height may be increased or decreased as
necessary to accommodate peak flows as determined by future
hydraulic studies.
4
The Division Engineer concurs with the recommendation that
Bridge No. 298 be replaced downstream of its existing location.
(See letter in Appendix.)
Alternate No. 1 was not favored due to its higher estimated
costs.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
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 an adverse effect on
the quality of the human or natural environment with use of
current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any existing or planned
land use and/or zoning regulations. No change in land use is
expected to result from construction of this project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated
and no families or businesses will require relocation. Right of
way acquisition will be limited.
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.
This project does not involve any Section 4(f) properties.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or
wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local
significance in the vicinity of the project.
The project is located at Foscoe in Watauga County in the
southern section of the Blue Ridge physiographic province in the
Appalachian Highlands. The study area is located in a rural
community setting of farm fields and residential sites. Farming
is the major industry in this predominantly rural county.
NOISE & AIR QUALITY
The project is located within the Eastern Mountain Air
Quality Control Region. The ambient air quality for Watauga
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 Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part
770 do not apply to this project.
5
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 Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), Part 770 and 772 and no additional reports are required.
NATURAL RESOURCES
Plant Life
Land west (upstream) of the existing bridge contains both
cleared and wooded landscapes. The northwest quadrant contains
an old gravel pit that has created a low wet area dominated by
cattails (Typha latifolia). A weedy raised bank separates this
wet area from the roadway. Southwest of the bridge, the
topography includes a small floodplain at the base of hilly
upland, and wooded canopy vegetation prevails.
Land east (downstream) of the existing bridge is primarily
wooded. The topography includes a periodically overwashed
floodplain in the northeast quadrant, while southeast only a
narrow gravely beach exists at the base of upland.
Plants found on the floodplains here form a mixed alluvial
hardwood/Ironwood/mixed herb community. Canopy hardwoods include
buckeye and yellow birch. Herbs include fringed phacslia,
Canadian violets, and sweet cicely. A mixed cove hardwoods and
conifers/mixed cove hardwoods/Rosebay rhododendron/mixed herb
community occupies the upland areas. Canopy trees include yellow
poplar, white pine, sycamore, and eastern hemlock. A complete
list of observed floodplain and upland plants, along with
scientific nomenclature, is included in the Appendix.
Animal Life
Wildlife habitats have been disturbed and fragmented in this
area by residential, commercial, and agricultural activities.
Amphibians that may be found in the drainage from the cat-
tail marsh would include Desmoanathus spp. and Plethodon spp.
The Watauga River contains hellbenders (Cryptobranchus
alleganiensis). The red eft of the Eastern newt (Notophthalmus
viridescens) would inhabit moist woods. Pickerel frogs (Rana
palustris), green frogs (Rana clamitans), spring peepers (Hula
crucifer) probably all live in the area. Eastern garter snakes
(Thamnophis sirtalis) probably hunt along the stream and in the
marsh. Mammals likely to be in the area include: hairy-tailed
moles, eastern chipmunk, meadow voles and woodchucks.
6
Various songbirds would feed and nest in the area, however,
few birds were seen during the field work due to cool, rainy
weather. Redwing blackbirds nest in the cat-tail marsh. Other
birds in the area may include tufted titmouse, white-breasted
nuthatch, robin. mockingbird, eastern bluebird, and cerulean
warbler (Federal Candidate species).
Most of these animals are mobile enough that the disturbance
associated with constructing the new bridge will have minimum
impact. The area of greatest concern would be the aquatic
species.
Three recent NCWRC sampling reports from this general area
of the Watauga River are included in the Appendix and list fish
species collected. Fish food organisms such as Ephemeroptera,
Trichoptera, Diptera, Gastropoda, Plecoptera, Coleoptera, and
Megaloptera were also collected and ranged from 32 per square
foot above SR 1580 to 85 per square foot below 1580.
Added siltation or contact with wet cement would have a
detrimental effect on the fishes and their food supply in this
stream.
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soils
According to the soil maps and information supplied by the
Watauga Soil Conservation Service Soil Scientist, the soil types
found east of SR 1580 include Cs-Congaree cobbly fine sand and
Ct-Congaree fine sandy loam in long narrow strips in higher areas
of the flood plain. The lower areas immediately adjacent to the
river are classified Rd-Riverwash.
Congaree cobbly fine sand and Congaree fine sandy loam are
well-drained to moderately well-drained soils that formed in
recent alluvium on flood plains. Slope is generally less than
two percent. This soil is subject to occasional brief flooding.
Riverwash indicates gravely, cobbly sandy areas subject to
periodic scouring by the river.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal
agencies or their representatives to consider the potential
impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land
acquisition and construction projects. Prime and important
farmland soils are defined by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service
(SCS). The SCS was asked to determine whether the proposed
project will impact farmland soils and to complete Form AD-1006,
Farmland Conversion Impact Rating. The completed form is
included in the Appendix.
According to the SCS, Alternate 1 will impact 0.37 acres of
prime farmland soil. Alternate 2 will impact 0.17 acres of prime
farmland soil and 0.36 acres of statewide and local important
7
farmland soil. This represents very little of the total 16,934
acres of prime or important farmland soils found in Watauga
County. The impact rating determined through completion of Form
AD-1006 indicates that the site's assessment and relative score
is 119 for Alternate 1 and 37.7 for Alternate 2 out of a possible
260. A score of 160 or more would indicate that mitigation
should be considered.
It can be concluded that the project's impact on farmland
soil, as defined by the SCS, is not critical; therefore, no
mitigation is proposed.
Water Resources
The Watauga River is a tributary to the South Holston River,
a major stream in Tennessee. The river at the SR 1580 crossing
is about 25' wide; average flow is 30 cfs; bottom type is
boulder, rubble, gravel, sand, silt; sand light and silt is
moderate. Fishing pressure is heavy as this stream provides
excellent brown trout fishing.
The Watauga River's current stream classification is B Tr
HQW. Class B indicates a stream suitable for primary recreation
and all uses classified by the "C" classification. The Tr
designation indicates these waters will sustain trout propagation
and survival of stocked fish on a year-round basis. The HQW
classification identifies High Quality Waters which are rated
excellent based on biological and physical/ chemical character-
istics through monitoring or special studies, native and special
native trout waters (and their tributaries) designated by the
Wildlife Resources Commission.
The Watauga River from the Avery County line to SR 1114 near
Valle Crucis downstream from SR 1580 is designated "Public
Mountain Trout Water". Although these streams may contain wild
trout, they must be stocked periodically during the fishing
season with catchable size trout in order to sustain fishing.
There is no size limit or bait restriction and fishermen may keep
seven trout per day.
The Benthic Macro invertebrate Data Base (BMDB) lists two
samplings at SR 1580 on the Watauga River. In August 1985, the
bioclass rating was "good" and by July of 1988, the bioclass
rating had improved to "excellent". Downstream at Shull's Mill,
the stream was rated "good" in 1985, but each of the four
subsequent samples from 1987 to 1990 the bioclass rating was
"excellent".
Care should be taken to stop any fill necessary for the new
bridge well away from the stream. Sedimentation, contact with
wet cement, or hazardous materials spills must be strictly
controlled using best management practices at this site.
Possible stream impacts will be restricted to some limited
sediment debris during construction and after project completion.
Likely adverse impacts can be minimized through the employment of
8
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. To avoid
adding to the silt load and degradation of this stream, "Best
Management Practices" (33 CFR 330.6) will also be implemented.
No channel changes, channel fills, or alteration of drainage
patterns are foreseen. Care should be taken to assure that any
fill used does not interfere with the normal stream flow and is
kept well away from the bed of this flood-prone stream.
With proper implementation of the Department's sediment and
erosion control measures and "Best Management Practices", overall
environmental stream impacts are expected to be negligible as a
result of this project.
Watauga 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.
There are no practical alternatives to crossing the flood-
plain area. Any shift in alignment would result in a crossing of
about the same magnitude. The floodplain in the adjacent area of
the crossing is rural/wooded and agricultural. The amount of
floodplain and floodway to be affected is not considered to be
significant and no modification of the floodway is anticipated.
All reasonable measures will be taken to minimize any possible
harm.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Wetlands
While the low gravel-pit area that exists to the northwest
of this bridge does have wetland plants and hydrology, Al
Childers of the Watauga Soil Conservation Service personally
investigated this area and stated that this area contains only
sand and gravel and does not contain a wetland soil. Therefore,
it does not qualify as a jurisdictional wetland. Because of the
low elevation of the old gravel pit, and its proximity to the
river, much of the water draining through the area is probably
trickling from the river. The recommended alternate will run
northeast of the bridge and will not impact on this wet area.
Protected Species
The N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP), the N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC), and the United States Department of
the Interior-Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) were contacted to
obtain current lists of protected species known to inhabit
Watauga County. Due to the relatively small area to be sampled,
an on-site survey was conducted by carefully walking through the
entire project area to search for suitable habitat or species of
concern.
9
Federally Protected Species:
Plants and animals with federal classification of Endangered
(E) and Threatened (T) are protected under provisions of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Federal Candidate (C)
species have also been listed, but are not provided protection
under this Act. No survey was conducted to determine the presence
of candidate species.
Virginia big-eared bat (Plecotus townsendii virainianus) - (E)
A bat with extremely large ears (over 1 in. high) joined
across forehead. On nose, in front of eyes, are 2 prominent
lumps. Color pale brown, bases of ventral hairs brown, tips
buff. Skull has 36 teeth. Usually colonial. Young born May or
June.
Range: A subspecies of the Western big-eared bat, this bat
is found in the mountains along the western border of Virginia
and extends along the mountains into the upper northwest corner
of North Carolina.
Habitat: Caves, mine tunnels, and buildings for roosts.
This project area does not contain caves, mine tunnels, or
abandoned buildings that could serve as roosts for this bat. The
Virginia big-eared bat will not be impacted by this project.
Carolina northern flying squirrel (Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus)-
(E)
Head and body 5.5-6.4 in; tail 4.33-5.5 in; weight 4-6.5 oz.
Nocturnal. Thick soft fur is glossy olive-brown above, white
only on tips ventrally. A folded layer of loose skin along each
side of body, from front leg to hind leg, is stretched out to
allow the animal to glide from tree to tree. Eyeshine is
reddish-orange. Skull has 22 teeth. There are 8 mammae. Two to
five young are born May-June. Nests in tree cavities, attics, or
outside nests of leaves, twigs, and bark.
Range: A southern Appalachian subspecies, known from a few
isolated localities in the mountains of North Carolina, eastern
Tennessee, and southwestern Virginia.
Habitat: Usually associated with spruce-fir forests, this
species is more often found adjacent stands of mature hardwoods
(beech, yellow birch, maple, hemlock, red oak, and buckeye)
between 4000 feet and 6000 feet in elevation.
This project site is only about 3000 foot elevation which is
well below the usual habitat for this flying squirrel and none
were found. Therefore, this species will not be impacted by this
project.
Spreading avens (Geum radiatum)* - (E)
An erect (1 to 5 dm tall) hirsute perennial herb with a
basal rosette of odd-pinnately compound leaves arising from a
horizontal rhizome. Inflorensence terminal, a few - flowered,
indefinite cymc. Flowers actinomorphic with 5 hersute green
sepals, fused a the base, and 5 separate bright yellow petals.
Stamens and pistils numerous, distinct; pistils simple, ovaries
superior and hirsute, persistent as a beak in fruit. Receptacle
ringed with dense, tan, stiff hairs. Fruit a hemispheric
aggregate of hirsute, beaked achenes. Flowers, June to October;
Vegetative, May to October.
10
Range: Distribution includes the northwestern mountains of
North Carolina and eastern Tennessee.
Habitat: Endemic to balds on high mountains over 3800' in
elevation. This plant often occurs on steep rock faces and narrow
ledges.
No rock outcrops with steep faces or ledges exist at this
site and elevation is lower than usual elevation for this plant.
Therefore, spreading avens is not likely to be impacted by this
project. According to the USFWS, no specimen of spreading avens
has been found anywhere in Watauga County in at least 20 years.
Heller's blazing star (Liatris helleri) - (T)
A small, erect ( 1 - 5 dm tall), glabrous perennial herb
with a thickened, rounded, cornlike rootstalk. Narrow, linear,
entire, simple, alternate leaves are numerous and spirally
arranged. Flowers (florets) are small and sessile in a compact
head on a common enlarged receptacles, surrounded by an
involucre. The heads are arranged in an elongate, racemiform
inflorescence, flowering from top to bottom. Distinguishing
characteristics are its short stature and its very short pappus.
Fruit a cypsela (achene or nutlet by some authors), 2.5 to 5 mm
long, tan to blackish, somewhat cylindrical but tapered at the
base into a blunt point, ribbed, hairy, particularly along the
ribs; pappus of rather stout, capillary, barbellate bristles,
tan, 1/2 or less the length of the corolla tube. Flowers, July
to September; Fruits, August to October; Vegetative, July to
October.
Range: Northwestern Mountains of North Carolina.
Habitat: Open, rocky outcrops, ledges, cliff faces and woods
at elevations above 2800 feet.
Although this project site is within the elevation range for
this species, no rocky outcrops, ledges, or woods are found on
this site. None of these plants were found during the investiga-
tion. Therefore, this project will not impact on Heller's blazing
star.
Roan mountain bluet (Hedyotis purpurea var. montana) - (E)
An erect perennial, the stems 4-angled and narrowly winged,
often pubescent, usually 0.5 to 2 dm tall. Blades of the stem-
leaves ovate, 0.5-1.5 cm long. Flowers borne in terminal, more
or less effuse cymes. Sepals lanceolate to elliptic-lanceolate
at maturity, about 2 mm long, about as long as the hypanthium.
Corolla puple, tube 9-11 mm long, capsule 3-3.5 mm thick.
Range: Blue Ridge of North Carolina and Tennessee in the
vicinity of Roan mountain.
Habitat: Moist crevices of rocky cliffs over 3800 foot
elevation.
The elevation of this is only 3000 feet and no rocky cliffs
are present. Therefore, suitable habitat does not occur at this
site for the Roan mountain bluet and none was found. This project
will not impact on this bluet.
Blue Ridge goldenrod (Solidago spithamea) - (T)
An erect, caulescent, somewhat foul-smelling perennial herb
arising from short, stout rhizomes. Stems angled above, 1 - 4 dm
tall, sparsely to densely pubescent or glabrate below. Leaves
11
basal and cauline, simple, alternate, serrate, smooth to slightly
scabrous above, glabrous beneath, ciliate. Lower leaves 3 - 10 cm
long and 1.5 - 4 cm wide with winged petioles; upper leaves
becoming smaller and sessile. Flowers are in compact heads sur-
rounded by involucral bracts in several series, firm, glabrous,
green-tipped, and rather narrow. Secondary inflorescence densely
corymbiform. Ray flowers 2 - 3 mm long, yellowish, pistillate,
and fertile; disc flowers numerous (20 -60), yellow, perfect and
fertile. Calyx represented by a pappus of white capillary
bristles. Fruit a cypsela (achene or nutlet by some authors),
2.5 - 3.0 mm long, subterete, several nerved, pubescent. Flowers,
July to October; Vegetative, July to October.
Range: Tennessee (Carter County) and North Carolina
mountains (Avery, Caldwell, Watauga, and Mitchell Counties).
Reports from Alabama and Georgia have been recently documented.
Habitat: Rock crevices and balds above 3800 feet in the
mountains.
Proper habitat does not exist in this project area to
support Blue Ridge goldenrod and none was found. This project
will not impact this species.
The following is a list of the Federal Candidate Species:
New England cottontail (Sylvilagus transitionalis)*
Cerulean warbler (Dendroica cerulea)
Bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii)
Green salamander (Aneides aeneus)*
Hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis)
Kanawha minnow (Phenacobius teretulus)
Tennessee heel splitter (Lasmigona holstonia)
Diana fritillary butterfly (Speyeria diana)
Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula)*
A Liverwort (Bazzania nudicaulis)*
Mountain bittercress (Cardamine clematitis)
Bent avens (Geum geniculatum)
A Liverwort (Plagiochila sullivantii var. sullivantii)*
Tall larkspur (Delphinium exaltatum)
Butternut (Juglans cinerea)
Gray's lily (Lilium ra i)
Bog bluegrass (Poa paludigena)*
* Indicates no specimen from Watauga County in at least 20 years.
The NCNHP records show that none of these federally
endangered, threatened, or candidate species have ever been
reported from the vicinity of this project site. No federally
endangered, threatened, or candidate species were found, and this
project is not expected to impact on any protected species listed
in this report.
State Protected Species:
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 NC Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979, administered and enforced by the North
12
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the NC Department of
Agriculture.
The only endangered or threatened North Carolina listed
species reported to be in the Watauga River is the Green Floater
mussel (N.C. endangered).
Green Floater mussel (Lasmigona subviridus) - (E)
The thin shell of the green floater is an ovate trapezoid.
It can be up to 62 mm long 33 mm high, and 20 mm wide. The shell
is unsculptured. The beaks are depressed and project a little
above the hinge line. The posterior ridge is usually rounded,
but frequently ends to to form a biangulate margin on the lower
posterior end. The posterior slope is compressed and concave and
may expand dorsally to form a small wing. The periostracum is
yellowish or brownish, usually with many greenish rays. The hinge
teeth are well developed but small and delicate. The pseudocard-
inal teeth are usually small, elevated, serrated angular,
directed anterior-ventrally and parallel to the dorsal margin.
The interdental projection is present, but poorly developed, in
the left valve. The nacre is shiny, whitish anterior-ventrally,
bluish and iridescent posteriorly. There may be yellowish or pale
salmon colors in the beak cavity.
Range: The green floater is found along the east coast of
the United States from the Hudson River system in New York to the
Cape Fear River system in North Carolina. The green floater has
also been found in the Erie Barge Canal, Champlain Canal in New
York and some small streams in the St. Lawrence River system. It
has also been collected in the Watauga River, Greenbrier River
and New River of the Kanawha River System in North Carolina,
Virginia, and West Virginia. The green floater has been recorded
from the Tar River, Neuse River system, and the Cape Fear River.
Habitat: L. subviridis is usually found in one to four feet
of water, with a slow to moderate current, in small to medium
streams with sand and gravel substrates.
This section of the Watauga River has a relatively rapid
water flow and a substrate largely consisting of rock with only
limited areas of sand or gravel. Therefore, even though the
green floater has been reported from the Watauga River system,
suitable habitat does not exist at this site and none were found.
With proper implementation of sediment controls, this project is
not likely to impact this species. The NCNHP has no records of
this mussel being reported from the project site.
The Federal Candidate species, Kanawha minnow and Hellbender
salamander, are also listed as North Carolina Special Concern
(SC) species. Both of these species have been reported from the
Watauga River, but no reports exist of collections at the site of
this project. NCNHP records do list a collection of the
Hellbender salamander downstream of this site. Even though there
is no evidence that these species exist at the project site, they
are species that are impacted by sedimentation and changes in
water chemistry. Therefore, for this reason and because of the
trout supported by this stream, it is essential that strict
attention be paid to controlling erosion and cement contact with
the water at this project site to prevent damage downstream.
13
PERMITS
It is anticipated that an individual permit will 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.
Since the project is located in a designated "trout" county
and crosses a known trout stream, the North Carolina Department
of Transportation is required to obtain approval from the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and to fulfill its section
404 permit obligations. A Section 401 Water Quality
Certification, administered through the North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, will be required.
This certificate is issued for any activity which may result in a
discharge of dredged or fill materials into waters for which a
federal permit is required.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
The "Area of Potential Effect" of this project on cultural
resources has been delineated and is shown on Figure 2.
There are no historic architectural resources in the
vicinity of the project that are eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places. The State Historic
Preservation officer was consulted and concurred with the above
statement. (See letter in Appendix.)
There are no known recorded archaeological sites within the
project boundaries. However, since the project area has never
been systematically surveyed, the State Historic Preservation
officer has recommended that a comprehensive archaeological
survey be conducted to identify the presence and significance of
archaeological remains that may be damaged or destroyed by the
proposed project. This survey will be accomplished prior to
construction.
IX. CONCLUSION
on the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that
with proper implementation of the Department's erosion and
sediment control measures and "Best Management Practices" no
serious adverse environmental effects will result from the
implementation of this project.
14

1136 "„
!? GAO FAS
131 ?t`? 1 134 11 12 ,
?
dtnoy 1133' - ?
NATIONAL
1131
ti
WERS 1!J! .a
GAP
1137
1126

1
y :.
1148 _-
158

`
-^^•` i . tC IF oa
1` 359

:

.
.••
?
? ? AP
L ? Y / 1559

105 15Q8
y - ?

??y
1 SEVEN DEVILS
POP. 61
ATAUGA 54 I Sd
W '
?
VERY

LIl? vim` Y .9 ? `??4 '7 :3 •'
•• 4
105 5 •? ,~,
1S
155-•? 1350
ti
'v Shulls?
ti:. .. •• ::fit ]552
4-1
1668 167 b ,
? , ? ,,,,y, , 0 F '
1447 t:•
?W<
r?
n
?u
8
vn tain eeU,m
?
,. ''
000
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL,
BRANCH
SR 1580, BRIDGE NO. 298
OVER WATAUGA RIVER
WATAUGA COUNTY
B-2076
7 9 2 0 mil 11 FIG. 1
L
' tc,? :`.
FOREST
A.o QP 21
e
?OV ? ryti ,.t
BLOWING RO
POP. 1,33\7
`--`
1562 ` _ WATAUGA CO.2;
.r .
r , 9 CAIDWELL CO.
??? 1563

?
r
r

x
U
d
0

a
d
r'
x
Er LL

0
x

F
c
d
W
E•
rn
a
a
c?
x
H
D4
O
O
a
E•
x
c
6
C,7
O
6
E?
d
3
?O
n
N
A
x
U
d
O
a
a^14
d
x
E?
x
O
3
W
H
W
A
H
d
w
a
Ey
cn
x
3
O
A

M
W
?i F I W
y? 3
f y? '
S?/r ZONE
ZONE C rh B,
r
ZONE B 932, v?
t {
APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET Oh f1e^?;?'`?.. r .: Zr? , ', `?;e •:°
1000 0 1000 ?G t
r ,
RM Go ??'' ?k •?'. ?r /i
???
?,p RM50 ''?'? ij r a =o rr
UNNAMED r'
ROAD 1 1!
r? r
2970 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
i
f\ `?
?0
RM51
fi???' e
ZONEA7
2°77j,,.
' +'•2974
f i9d
ZONE B
PROJECT SITE
i` 2994 t9 car- B-2076
ZONE B
S,p IS
\s9
L?
B-2076
BRIDGE NO. 298
WATAUGA COUNTY
FIGURE 41
APPENDIX
.. STA7r °
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. 0. Box 250 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
North Wilkesboro, NC 28659
August 26, 1992
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
SUBJECT: B-2076, B-1013, B-2169, B-2116, a B-252-
Request for Concurrence in Preliminary Draft
Categorical Exclusion Documents
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. L. J. Ward, PE
Manager of Planning and Environmental
Branch
ATTN: Leigh Cobb
FROM: W. E. Hoke, PE
Division Engineer - Division 11
As requested by letter to me from Mr. Jeff Williams of Wang
Engineering (the firm), we have the following comments
relative to design concepts selected by the-firm:
B-2076
Division concurs with the firm in Alternate 2, which improves
the alignment of SR 1580 in the vicinity of the bridge.
B-1013 It is agreed that construction of the proposed
structure must be in existing location. There appears to be
no feasible alternative.
Relative to handling of through traffic, no final
conclusion has been previously been reached by this office,
pending further research by the firm. There are negatives
associated with every alternative.
Although SR 1155 has been paved since project scoping
recommendation was made by this office for an on-site detour,
alignment and profile of SR 1155 are poor. A poor sight
distance exists at the intersection of SR 1155 with NC 113.
Therefore, preliminary conclusions are to avoid the use of
SR 1155 for a temporary detour during construction. It has
not been determined by this office if school buses would have
to utilize SR 1155 or how fire protection and emergency
services might be affected.
Comprehensive Plant List
Floodplains community =
mixed alluvial hardwoods/ironwood/mixed herbs
Canopy trees: Yellow birch (Betula allegheinensis)
Buckeye (Aesculus flara)
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
Basswood (Tilia heterophylla)
Subcanopy trees: Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana)
Buckeye saplings
Shrubs: Silky willow (Salix sericea)
Alternate-leaved dogwood (Cornus alternifolia)
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis)
Spicebush (Lindera benzoin)
Flowering raspberry (Rubus occidentalis)
Hydrangea (Hydrangea arborescens)
Herbs: Fringed phacelia (Phacelia fimbriata)
Honewort (Cryptotaenia canadensis)
White avens (Geum canadense)
Sweet cicely (osmorhiza claytonii)
Golden ragwort (Senecio aureus)
Water leaf (Hydrophyllum canadense)
Jewel weed (Impatiens pallida)
Green coneflower (Rudbeckia laciniata)
Jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum)
Blue-stem goldenrod (Solidago caesia)
Bee-balm (Monarda didyma)
Wake robin (Trillium erectum)
Forget-me-not (Myosotis scorpioides)
Toothwort (Cardamine dyphylla)
Solomon's seal (Polygonatum biflorum)
Meadow parsnip (Thaspium barbinode)
Violets (Viola spp.)
Carex spp.
Aster (Aster sp.)
Wild onion (Allium sp.)
Meadow rue (Thalictrum sp.)
Canadian violet (Viola canadensis)
Wingstem (Verbesina alternifolia)
Vines: Virgin's bower (Clematis virginiana)
Green briar (Smilax spp.)
Uplands Community -
mixed cove hardwoods and conifers/mixed cove hardwoods
JRosebay rhododendron/mixed herbs
Canopy trees: Yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
White pine (Pinus strobus)
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
Eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis)
Sugar maple (Acer saccharum)
Black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia)
Black cherry (Prunus serotina)
Subcanopy trees: Sassafras (Sassafras albidum)
Serviceberry (Amelanchier arborea)
Witch hazel (Hamamelis virginiana)
Sugar maple
Shrubs: Rosebay rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum)
Multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora)
Vines: Greenbriar (Smilax sp.)
Herbs: Galax (Galax aphylla)
Aster (Aster sp.)
Indian cucumber root (Medeola virginiana)
False lily-of-the-valley (Maianthemum canadense)
Chick weed (Stellaria pubera)
Violet (Viola sp.)
Downy orchid (Goodyera pubescens)
Jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum)
U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
Date Of Land Ev luau n Request
PART 1 (To be completed by Federal Agency) - :5
Name Of rgje _ Federal Agency In olved
?t/ d 7 ?'
Proposed Use County d¢tat
t1x?11Ptj/L?IQL"?
'.?".?r :??"'.' :.°'I'ri-r??d^_T..7`. Yh .C:?h?tir.:, Cf?C[E; ?i?5:-eri_tr'??i2rt'i'?i?i'??.?_?^+?^??.????W t.. ??.*_C. ?. .-C?k'i?"4`..J 6}; ."r'f ?-•:- _?',.i,ur:,,a ..?i . _<??',a i :,-
^'tt
??.. ,.v. ,?J ?/r? +?.,.?-Qy....i..r ^.? r. m. {.?,(..??????' [,,]I'?,,1YCyC..?w ?l T (? y1
?'. ??i11 Y{.Ur''K1411[1Y111?W ??•'- awa:. a.r ttlel 4 ri}jlt fPo1A ? Y { X
?r nb#Ti?s r
d
?
v f
- ...4
t:CC"tliCl.t1?" allQra?g?r '1 iS
F}dS A 1 ." ?-`?J I? ?.
c
t
i
D da rrOt cv P ?r
FpP,R noFtaD tFF?RL1
f
tCd
D
r ti? ,.r
tmbls;}?tnb7 6o4C;JLnsdedwn• c
r?, s cr t ?•.irr ?rail
-at{Aa?Or i°t ,. "Sf s 'Z?r r - Fw,4
pw,
+?t3 ? r'L2 ? ' :Fi
?
a
nr
?
tr• 'r j
??
r i ? EZ r
K
s
.
'
r ? S u
1
o
Amaurtt0l Ea attd As
s ?s
?.-»t t+e . a , < ,'Yt v? ;
+ a` ?^ .C?•!? ,, ,fir
?
1??
?
/?
r
?
ki
' ... ?
r
?r
_.
T
:. .c
?':'
?
'iw
?
'?F
'
•JI'•+?=i
'`?:C
?? CS;'
_ ? .
.
,
?
,-
..
.,
v
?
.r
:
4
3lststtllFtaf ?. tr w lSaarnc}Dfac5nls??E?ts r«? ??
Ev_alliattatf
;? 1SiYtna Q?Ysrtcir
5R
M' •?K l" !:-?
f fir
Y
f
?(
}? A
?
k tt: E}r?lustttuti Fle2.urpcd $yfS
;???KSw it .:1tc_?
`
'
? ?
?
.
„ P
.
t
,
?f
y
..
.
Y
w? ? 4'y?
$?-#t: M _L"4'Y` 'Y% }a ?fl; .'`w'
?..f J?
'-.?=7?mCi.s.?:-?i.-.., 1,-:> r-?i,. ?-?..
a .F "
?'?-
? ?x
?.?t'!+.-.
}
t
?
? r
r? /s"
r
?" • ?-
i _
.:t.t 'r _
`
-
.
?
w
t_
.Va. ?
..ti
.b.+. Alternative Site Hating
A
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site Site B site C Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly _
A f 1
G
Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
B F
. ` O
, Zz
?,
C. Total Acres In Site
C 31-iJ`t+2?-- ?. CaAt??tf.3?
ITlffrtTtaZtIC?(tr-\
R UOr1'
T 3
7'Y ? {'
SCS}s
fed ?
r
er
T
a
? ? r ?
. w' i.
r

? ' "
,
.
comp
e
b
,tyL
M
Y
u ?`?. `Totat?<[ergs'Pru'je:Knd?Unique ?.izniitand? K`1.° .= . cL "'?..? z `_:,,"`? .
_ .?•C3 _? -'fir` , ?.; ,?'??T 'r ? w ''"-''
Tg- }:TLota?Acros:S..t ,reside-Aii6L•ocalt 06rtantra' land`
..Lr' PercentageOfEarmlandln.'CaG Gi flora Oaiit:UnlfTaBcConvected
r?''D;,"?PercentageOf:Farrtiland:Iri.l;ovi:?lurisdFciionlNitRSame•O'r.Nighmf3ciative.?latuc' : - ? ?'?f D?
,
F.?iFI<T:S! (F" 6e;comp[ered;b}c'SCS)?'Land Evafua?wQ;Crticriorr '-> ? ? ' t

mreGtedlSca/evtbtalOaP,oinis/
f-Ea mla1 r.-6.6
Cue
'
l
0
S
;Relativ8-

PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency) Maximum
Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658.5(b) Points I
1. Area In Nonurban Use / S 3
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use /
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed Zt) D O
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government 2 O O
5. Distance From Urban Builtup Area -
6. Distance To Urban Support Services -
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average /O
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland LS O
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services S
10. On-Farm Investments ZD O O
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services z - O O
12. Com atibili With Existing Agricultural Use /0 O 0
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100 /00
Total Site Assessment (From Part Vl above ora local 160 ! /9
site assessment)
TOTAL POI NTS (Total of above 2 lines) 260 37, 7
Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Site Selected: Date Of Selection Yes ? No ?
Reason For Selection:
(See instructions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 t Iu-d::)
E North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
June 24, 1992
Ms. 'Ruby D. Pharr
Environmental Consultant
111 York. Street
Morganton, NC 28655 -.j
SUBJECT: Request for special concerns regarding fish and
wildlife resources in the vicinity of 11 bridges to be
replaced by the NCDOT r:`•
Dear Ms. Pharr:
This correspondence responds to a request by you for any
special concerns the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) has regarding fish and wildlife resources in the vicinity
of each of 11 bridges. The North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace these bridges with new
structures.
We have the following comments on these projects:
ALLEGHANY COUNTY V w,.t L•¢wuf
Bridge #11 on NC 113 over PinevBranch: This stream is a
tributary to Piney Fork,) which is Designated Public Mountain
Trout Water. PinelBranch may support wild brown trout. A
state listed snail may also occur within a wa ers ed.
ANSON COUNTY
1) -Bridge #199 on SR 1600 over Richardson Creek: This is a
large stream with significant warmwater fish habitat. --
Species of particular concern include a listed fish
(Carolina darter, Special concern) and several listed-or
proposed freshwater mussels, all of which have been reported
from nearby Rocky River tributaries. Many of these aquatic
species would be adversely affected by sedimentation of the
stream bed at or below the construction site.
2) Bridge 9207 on SR 1610 over Cribs Creek: Although this is a
smaller tributary than the previous site, similar concerns
Memo Page 2 June 24, 1992
exist regarding fish and mussel habitat. The Carolina
darter has been collected from Cribs Creek.
NOTE: Both of these bridge sites presently involve sharp
road curves in the immediate vicinity of the existing
structures. For purposes of improving safety, NCDOT may
propose relocation of these bridges up- or downstream, using
existing bridges as on-site detours. Additional aquatic and
riparian habitat affected by such operations should be
included in the study area.
BURKE COUNTY
1) Bridge #210 on SR 1647 over Drowning Creek:_ No special
concerns.
2) Bridge #102 on SR 1438 over Johns River: This stream
supports an excellent smallmouth bass fishery in the
vicinity of the bridge replacement. A federal candidate
mussel species is also known from the Johns River system.
CALDWELL COUNTY
1) Bridge #5 on SR 1178 over Lower Creek: No special concerns.
2) Bridge #106 on SR 1142 over Lower Creek: No special
concerns.
CLEVELAND COUNTY
Bridge #213 on SR 1512 over First Broad River: No special
concerns regarding fishery resources. A state threatened
mussel has been reported from the First Broad River
watershed.
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
Bridge #126 on US 64 over Clinchfield Railroad: No special
concerns.
SURRY COUNTY
Bridge 164 on SR 2233 over Fisher River: No special
concerns.
WATAUGA COUNTY
Bridge 298 on SR 1580 over Watauga River: The stream is
Designated Public Mountain Trout Water in the vicinity of
the bridge and provides excellent fishing for brown trout.
Fishing pressure is heavy in this area. A state listed
endangered mussel occurs in the Watauga River system.
Memo Page 3 June 24, 1992
Although we have no special concerns in the vicinity of
several__of-tbdse projects---the--NCWRC-expects EHe NCDOT-to
routinely minimize ad-verse impacts to f -s an wildlife resources
inie vicirity o£-fridge replacements The NCDOT should install
-fem. ---?
an`c?maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life
of each_proj ect aii- prevent wet concrete -from contact-i-ng water
flowing in or in o h se streams.
While no special wildlife concerns exist for any of these
bridge sites, replacement of bridges with spanning structures of
some ty-pe-, as opposed to pipe culverts, is recommended in all
cases.. Span in ng structures allow wildlife passage along
_opulati3n fragmentation an ve icle-
strea-mbanks-,-reducing p
related_mortality at highway crossings.
For additional information regarding endangered or
threatened species in the vicinity of these construction sites,
please contact Randy Wilson, Nongame and Endangered Wildlife
Section Manager, at [phone]. If you need further
assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding bridge
replacements, please contact David Yow, Highway Project
Coordinator, at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity to
review and comment on this project.
Sin erely,
Dennis L. Stewart, Manager
Habitat Conservation Program
DLS/lp
cc: Stephanie Goudreau, Mt. Region Habitat Biologist
Chris Goudreau, District 8 Fisheries Biologist
Joe Mickey, District 7 Fisheries Biologist
Wayne Chapman, District 6 Fisheries Biologist
David Yow, NCWRC Highway Coordinator
Randy Wilson, Nongame Section Manager
John Alderman, Piedmont Region Nongame Project Leader
r`?e?
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
June 15, 1992
George T. Everett, Ph.D.
Director
Jeff Williams, P.E.
Wang Engineering Company, Inc
119 West Maynard Road
Cary, North Carolina 27511
Dear Mr. Williams:
John Morris of the Division of Water Resources has forwarded
your request to him dated May 26, 1992 to the Division of
Environmental Management's Water Quality Section for response. I
hope that the following information that is being provided
regarding current water quality standards and stream
classifications is useful to your bridge replacement assessments
for the Department of Transportation.
TIP# COUNTY CROSSING STREAM CLASS
B-2076 Watauga SR 1580 Watauga R. B Tr HQW
B-1013 Alleghany NC 113 Pine Br. B Tr
B-2169 Surry SR 2233 Fisher R. C
B-2113 Burke SR 1438 Johns R. @WS-IVHQW
B-2114 Burke SR 1647 Drowning Cr. @WS-IV
B-2116 Caldwell SR 1142 Lower Cr. @WS-IV
B-2524 Caldwell SR 1178 Lower Cr. C
B-2017 Cleveland SR 1512 First Broad R. @WS-IV
B-2001 Anson SR 1610 Cribs Cr. C
B-2106 Anson SR 1600 Richardson Cr. C
@ Scheduled effective date for these stream classifications is
August 3, 1992.
REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 7041663-1699 919/571.4700 919/946.6481 919/395-3900 919/89&7/007
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 276260535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opporturmv Affimunc Amon Employer
Page Two
June 15, 1992
Enclosed is a copy of the current water quality standards
for surface waters in North Carolina (15A NCAC 2B .0100 and
.0200). Also enclosed is a copy of the most recent water supply
watershed protection rules revisions scheduled to become
effective on August 3, 1992. Of particular note would be 15A
NCAC .0104(m) on page 4.
If you have any questions concerning the stream
classifications or standards, please do not hesitate to call me
at [phone].
Sincerely,
Suzanne Keen
Classifications and Standards Group
cc: Steve Mauney
Forrest Westall
Rex Gleason
Tommy Stevens
M2:williams.ltr
Name of Stream:
Sample Site Location:
Sampling Date:
Collecting Method:
Watauga River (WGA 11
Schulls Mill Church on SR 1557
July 27, 1981 l?t?/LCC
Electrofishing
Physical Rod Chemical Data
Sample Length: 510 ft Cover: boulder, bank-good
Average Width: 23 ft Elevation: 2920 ft
Average Flow: 30 cfs Water Temperature: 81° F
Bottom Type: boulder, rubble, gravel, pH: 8.0
sand M. O. Alkalinity: G 17.1 ppm
Silt and Sand: moderate-riffle; heavy- Total Hardness: < 17.1 ppm
pool
Gradient: moderate
Checklist and Numbers of Fish Species
Brown trout (20) Stoneroller (09)
(14)
Brook trout (i) Warpaint shiner (5)
Smallmouth base (3) White sucker
b (45)
Bluegill
Creenfin darter (2)
(3) River chu
Redhorse sucker (3)
Longnose dace (3) Rosyside dace (23)
(15)
Blacknose dace (3) Hogsucker
Standing Crop of Fishes
Type of Fish No./A lbs/A YOY/A
Wild trout 09 0.13 40
Stocked trout 28 4.02 - -
Nontroul 094 20.75 -
Fish Food Organisms - Numbers and Density
Ephemeroptera (70) Mogaloptera (21 ,
(3)
I'lecoptera (9) Colooptera (3)
Trichoptera (73) Gastropods
Diptera (10)
Average Volum e/ft 2 0.4 ml
Average Number/ft2 85
Recommended Classificati on: B
Recommended Regulation: General
Remarks
Watauga River is nongame land DPMTW from SR 1559 to SR 1114 bridge- This sample covers the area
from SR 1550 to NC 105 bridge. Although the water temperature would appear to be limited in this stream,
the trout apparently are able to survive anyway. This section is noted for producing soma large brown
trout. In fact. one 20-inch fish thought to be a brown trout was seen but missed during the electrofishing
pass. Access Is by SR 1559. SR 1580, SR 1557, and NC 105. Fishing pressure is heavy due to the put-
and-take stocking program.

Name of Stream: Watauga River (WGA 1)
Sample Site Location: Watauga Co., .SR J594_bri_dge.
Sampling Date: 18 September, 198,E
Collecting Method: 440 v electrofishing
PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL DATA
Sample Length: 162 ft Cy1.3 M) Cover: overhanging grass, boulders,
Average Width: 17 ft C S, /J? islands - good
Average Flow: Elevation: 3,200 ft
Bottom Type: boulder, rubble, Water Temperature: 57 F
gravel, sand, silt pH: 6.5
Silt and Sand: sand light, silt M.O. Alkalinity: <17.1 ppm
moderate Total Hardness: <17.1 ppm
Gradient: moderate
CHECKLIST AND NUMBERS OF FISH SPECIES
Brown trout: (2) Blacknose da ce: (36)
Rainbow trout: (80) Stoneroller: (18)
Rosyside dace: (1) Creek chub: (1)
Longnose dace: (3) Hogsucker: (2)
STANDING CROP OF FISHES
Type of Fish No./A Lb/A
Wild trout 1,296 40.0
Stocked trout 0 0.0
Nontrout 964 32.0
FISH FOOD ORGANISMS - NUMBERS AND DENSITY
Ephemeroptera (35) Diptera (14)
Trichoptera (10) Gastropoda (5)
Average Volume/ft 2 0.5 ml
Average Number/f t 32
Recommended Classification: A
Recommended Regulation: General
YOY/A
1,074
Management Upon designation as DPMTW, stock.brown trout at the rate
Recommendations: of 500 fish per season in this upper section (Foscoe to
Avery Co. line).
REMARKS
As of this writing, Watauga River i-s nongame land DPMTW from SR 1559 to
SR 1114 in Watauga County. This sample was taken from a section of stream
between current trout water and the Avery County line (upper river) which is
proposed to be added to DPMTW in 1986 under General regulations. Access is
by NC 105, SR 1594 and SR 1598.

S-
C)
Li
rO
3
N C

• a N v1 L ?
C! O 'fl
r- L. a) 1
co
.C 3 O v
1
1 O N aJ 4J a, a C
4J 41 t
• (o a) N U •.-
.rJ >) > 4J C
.1.
s.. +J 4
L (L) to C r
N
N 4--r- -r O L7
' c r- •r U 10 •r
L a 3 3 O G
C? CO a) r U 4J L C) t +-?
p>
V- O^ 4 1 S- N O '17 O 'C N N O O N O r-
a c 7 +j O C o •r r0 N •r C O •r-
C C) CJ 4- O O
U ., o o z ?••r r- N ro -C 3 o f .C a) . 4-
r. C O 'fl a) a 4- a) 4- 4-)
i +?
rO E •r L CJ r N> L N •r L 41 Q) •r O r- N
r0 +1 a .O E •r CJ CJ C) > U 4- f0 C) ra
CJ t? O to w O 3 Q1 i C O C Ol i O •r C O •r- +? ••-
O L 4- r- L +j to i L CJ •r C) L o) O 4-> p N U ra u
C 41 O d C) •r r b 4J r0 45 Y O N r0 4.1 s- N •r 4J •r L •r
N > 'fl CJ r- (a r- ro u 41 C) ?- ro + •r 4J C 4- to 4-
C) C C aJ •r 'C L t 3 0 L O X N C) M. •r
i •--r U 'C N O >> 41 C) +? L n 4- i C C) C W E C a) 4.1
C) oo 4J C O^ C N¢ N C) O Q1 -1
•r C C) N L
3 r\ a >) 0 4- r+ b a) v of o v b •.., U to
. r- i r- U +? E C L N L C) C L .C O) 'r- C
N ?4-) d 4-4-- •r 43 N a) O C O .C 4J (0 CJ L O 4_
N C N>
rp • C) o .C to > N •r N
C L L N 4- r O C •r 4-1 •r 4- a) Q) C C 4J O
'C (Q W .r 4-
r
C)
C X .C a1 N •r- N CJ C) 'r O U r- •r 4- M 4- O b S- 0. > ci
o

•r 4J > C

+? O a > 4-E
w ro
m
a

L 10 •r• aJ
•r C) O a .C 3 4J a) >> N E
O CJ • .C C)
>I
b r- N 4J
U > 4.1 ?? L U Ol p O O O 4J Q) •r
CL-- E 41 C O r0 4- •r C U Q) N^ C +-)
L CJ •r
.C (1) N
C
p
C) M •r N r. U a) 0 i L r-- •r Q) O E aJ r- N
.
C LO C) -0 S E 4•) O aJ ra -le 41
a) •r
'
to ¢ CJ .r d. r a 4- s O U
" O >> C) s
4J
4, v i N CJ 'fl O • a u r L C ? Q 0
o 07 N a) rn a 4J
O 41 a Y ^ C¢ 4- 3 4- 4J r C >) F-- E •r
41 4..1 p 9 •r- 3 L aJ C) •r 00 C a) N O •r N 4- O
7
r- 00 i r- 41 L •r E O L o 4- 4.
'O Q) L r- Cl) r U -r .C ."-.0 N O r- U O U > 4- r0
'
C •r 4J C .C
b O 41 N H R L Q) 4J 4- S-. 4J N r
•r a) E 3 •r O C) 4- C) r to L C
Y •r C) O
•r 4J 4J C .C O
3 L L s O C O-0 O CJ E U C aN O ?4J
4- N 4J L CJ '0 L O E N 4j N •r- Q O s- O U
4 .0 o 0 C) CJ a a) C) 4J .a ^ O CJ M L N O C)
•r CJ C U t rn a > .C N C L-Q ^ 3 C) .C •r7
-
C > •r C C) N C .a L F- C) C •r- O C E
N 4J .f]
4.1
•r •r rp O C •r -r r r- o mr- O -C'C L V)
J C C i t p
E
r- 41 L o 4- C E N L O •r Q1 r- r 4 aJ ra O O to N
•r O.0 ro 0 4J•r O c¢ i O U O
-14 -O b C 4- 10 -c O Cl) r- 3 ro -C O O O Q C U •• N
r- 4J r •r p r- . N r- r C U 4- O O • >f C)
rO i •r N a Ln ^ a) a w L O N • 4- L •r N 4- 4.J r
3:.,- .• a X L E O a m r- r r- O 4-4.) i r- •r L
L N >1 O o 4- L aJ CO > C) r0 N r- O to cu O > CJ
aJ to N r- L O o 3 N (V •r L •r •r CJ M N 4J CL M-P- .C
+? 3 r- -r r- U >> U= N L 3 L. c c a) C J
rn
,
rO rO s to r CJ to ^ i a r- E h- U •r O .
o U
> CJ .
3 c E ?- U M.0 E L N C) C) ro R3 C) .C .C •r- L E E c 4-
O N •r C •r O i .a N Ol i 4J U C) N 4J C) •r ra It
4- •r C •*- or-. L CJ )- .0 > a )-r- .•r- =r b N 'O O p 4J
O 4J'o o 'O N O a) -o O r0 p a ^.C 4J V- r- CJ U L O L O
r0 C -W L C O> a C N 4J CU '0 0 3 O 'o N 4J rn a 0
N 4J (0 C •r r6 a r6 C) to C7 O L O C) a N ra L
4J c A 4J t E aJ = 3 o U 4J 4J > o E E a N 4J
C CJ >1-0 N W Y to .C 4J >) 4- r0 O •r a to O N CJ -
Q) E 41 C t\ N •r r- 4J a) .Q O ^ N aJ i •r C7 rO =
'
E .r •r O r o 3%D ro O L U L L N 4j i 4- a. N M
D
a) 'fl r 4J O).= • N 45 41 L -r CJ 4J C C) O 4J 4J > aJ
i C) to ra U- -r 4J N o .0 O.C a '-r- U O N c U ro 'v
O N O •r N L C r CO CL) 4- 4- 4J 4- X L o M .r- 4J r0
N Q >) L 'D CJ b ?r a O O C et O^ C! 4-1 N •r C 4J CO S
ra -0 r- 4J Cl) CJ .0 M N :3 'a M a) %D •r 4-1 .r.- a
aJ C 'C CJ N .C s 'O N •r a aJ jo m N 4J 3 t ro i C) CJ
to O E •r N F-- aJ •r N 4-'0 C) O*V w u O I- -o o o CJ' C
O v m L s > rt3 >0 aJ .0 -r- .r a L. N N .a r0 4J .C . O
to m L a) 45 •r E r6 Y N> O') O N i a L •r E 4J •r
d 4J L 4J -fl p i U >1 U O L tti O 4-) •r 07 C O 'fl 4J
L. 4- X O 10 C C •r U •r rO C) L rd r0 r- ^ 4J r0 O O L. C C O
r4 0 a) 4- 3 0 •r .O , a E N a P--- .C U? 10 i -0 E 4- O M N

u
NIV
a
S

0

w
FIELD SM11.1._ I N 3 SUMMnny SHEET
511:r rr?;ern: Lk) O -?•?•? •i R; L2#., •-Av?" l)At.•e (s)
- /
Tr,tlFtr( No. IA -3r.2
1)51(1^ Gli_(adrancl l e : if &11.0
FiiPnarne: IL)TL A R40 _111crofish runs
Fntrred: /J-/ 3 -Ft:) Data set copied:
Proofed: Output file createdt
Plotted/Corrected: Areas calculated:
Data Set printed: L/F plotted:
5il;e Uesc:r•iptic,n(s)
( irrclr_(de sdrnr_(ate cif-script ion to rhloc.kte sample: kite: r_rppc?r srrcf
]c?wrr• h!?r_mdarir!s, marker- locnt ion, rhanndl type, etr_. , irrclr.%cle
,my cjtml i tying recstvs on sampl my after site descript ions)
S; CCs loc-C- -r`d ov". mpreg, t'ioev 1?•2ct?wa v i iti l1>a u?y 4.
AueeX 6o(uw6rs : Srle l - lo?a??? ??s was ?,,? o•?- srZ /s9y br,?se
4 Lowe F'oscotoa-'-o.ur;5 o-CO; s,?0- .7- /o?af?xd (?bcu? v- bQlow
60- l S y8? LOCLE-t LL- Go (Just- 6,,mlow Aue,•y Co . /%?+•?J? S?? 3 -
.5 CL
/o
fv'cci? pa.•?i(tiJ /oft Av?evy CmmLL.4y. 7-l«'a s4,2a-U4 ?o,cl/?.ilcus aw
alevre(olo.kew? o? ?tl?ls?(ed? s/'la?..?r'cA? ? tL1??akisE_?`o?l/?c??v ,
?o
a}'
Nw /?
LL3

`?A SIA1?v"
~ ate1P ?. z s
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
July 16, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Section 106 Consultation on Consultant
Bridge Projects
Dear Mr. Graf:
v `
JUL 201992
?L Div/s/0"
1IGHwA OF
?F
RFSEAPG? ?
Division of Archives and History
`Villiam S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of June 15, 1992, concerning twenty-two bridge replacement
projects.
On June 8, 1992, Robin Stancil of our staff met with North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) staff and project consultants for a meeting concerning the bridge
replacements. NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the
meeting and for our use afterwards. Based upon our review of the photographs and the
information discussed at the meeting, our preliminary comments regarding these bridge
replacements are attached for each project.
Having provided thniormation, we look ental Assessment which forward
how NCDOT addressed our
Exclusion or Environm
concerns.
Our comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
f codified Coat 36 CFR uncil on Part Historic reservation's Regulations for Compliance
of 1966 and the Advisory
with Section 106, 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning !ne
above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordii1,3t31
at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
L "fit
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
Attachments
cc: L. J• Ward 109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 2807
B. Church
T. Padgett
,,
4
+1
V.
Replace Bridge No. 298 on SR 1580 over Watauga River,
Watauga County, B-2076, 8.2750301, ER 92-8533
In terms of historic architectural resources, we feel that the farm located northeast
of the bridge is within the area of potential effect for this project considering the
location of Alternative No. 2. However, we feel that the property does not
possess the necessary historical or architectural significance for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places.
There are no known recorded archaeological sites within the project boundaries.
However, the project area has never been systematically surveyed to determine
the location of significance of archaeological resources.
We recommend that a comprehensive survey be conducted by an experienced
archaeologist to identify the presence and significance of archaeological remains
that may be damaged or destroyed by the proposed project. Potential effects on
unknown resources should be assessed prior to the initiation of construction
activities.
July 16, 1992