19940502 Ver 1_Complete File_19940525

\ti
?S
nJ?\,

L
his

B-14

SR 1905, BRIDGE #199,
REPLACE BRIDGE OV
'r.
d
C,
GREENE ,
COUNTY i
NC 903, BRIDGE #50,
COUNTIES
REPLACE BRIDGE O'
CREEK.
`J d STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TMNSPOR.
IAMEs B. HUNT. )R. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
May 6, 1993
MAY 1 01993 ? !''
WETLANDS GROUP
WATER UALITY SECTION 4.
FATION
SAM HUNT
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager ?Planning and Environmental SUBJECT: Bridge Replacement Project for Bridge #66 on NC 27 Over
the Catawba River, Gaston-Mecklenburg Counties, TIP
#B-1193, N. C. Project #8.1810201, F. A. Project
#BRM-5425(3)
The Planning and Environmental Branch of the Division of Highways has
begun studying the proposed improvements to Bridge #66 on NC 27 over the
Catawba River near Mt. Holly. The project is included in the 1993-1999 North
Carolina Department of Transportation Improvement Program and is scheduled
for right-of-way in fiscal year 1994 and construction in fiscal year 1995. A
location map is attached for your convenience.
Project B-1193 proposes to replace the existing two-lane bridge #66 on
NC 27 over the Catawba River with a new multi-lane structure. Bridge #66 was
originally built in 1939 with reinforced concrete post and beam, pile
footings and reinforced concrete deck on steel plate girders and I-beams.
The bridge currently has a sufficiency rating of 41.5% and is listed in poor
condition.
Alternatives to the existing bridge involve studying the No Build,
Rehabilitation and three (3) Replacement Options: (1) new bridge built to the
north of existing structure, (2) new bridge built to the north of existing
structure with 2-stage construction and, (3) new bridge built to the south of
existing structure with 2-stage construction.
In addition to the bridge alternatives, the Department is also studying
widening the existing two lane approaches to a 5 lane section. The widening
will be studied west to the intersection of NC 273 (a distance of 0.51 miles)
and east to the entrance of the Sandoz Plant (a distance of 0.33 miles).

May 6, 1993
Page 2
This project will also involve the replacement of a steel CSX railroad
bridge over NC 27 in Gaston County. The CSX rail structure will be replaced
with a new rail bridge crossing the multilane facility proposed for NC 27.
Estimated cost in the TIP is $3,158,000 for the B-1193 work proposed.
We would appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful
in evaluating potential environmental impacts of the project. If applicable,
please identify any permits or approvals which may be required by your
agency. Your comments will be used in the preparation of a document
evaluating environmental impacts of the project. It is desirable that your
agency respond by June 15, 1993 so that your comments can be used in the
preparation of this document.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact
Ms. Michelle Wagoner, Project Planning Engineer, of this Branch at
(919-733-7842.
MW/plr
Attachment
a
Ma
Ms-$
i
1960 1973
roae \!9?
147a .? ??
OS .IJ 1p30
19
19]9 ? y ?

_ ?rorerlcc
ISLAND
/ OAm )

J? '
O

,?. 3?.. II
MOUNT HOLLY
ti' C ?1? a' o
r° ry ?9gr A xu 0 29!e y.:a h "'! + Sx __ , ''
205
2 .09 2048
RAILROAD
2189
277 ?: ,?•1? ?I 1
1? .::rcc >
,o,o ?79' 2140 BEGIN
4r ?
PROJECT::.;
h
o r?n 'l?C iuo y.
.j9_
TO]b IL-46 I Se?s
2044
ti e7 i /'
^ '?? ! U I era ?

`
7oy'
_ I
1- ...e. ?cZ
T
a] !

u r
]09] i
Q -
22 eo1 ?
FCA
85
077
??- .: \ .2 x078 ?<
M1 xU : N .58 xo>9
f N7o ., ?2 \? ?.
.09
9 7081':::?:.::::\\ c7083
I 'I
% u? ors oB
277
35
a1a..b FEU
i
B-1193
PROJECT STUDY AREA
Replace NC 27 Bridge (#66)
Over Catawba River
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties
_ Mile 1 March 1993

N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
?t) ?3 0 , I
O:
pa?wj REF. NO. OR RO M, BLDG.
- ME ag- )
?-
FROM: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.

ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
?. RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
1
M Ay

1?ATER U UT s a i d

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
May 13, 1994
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
Subject: Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties,
Replacement of Bridge ilro. 66 over
Federal-Aid Project BRM-5425(3),
No. 8.1810201, T.I.P. B-1193.
SAM HUNT
SECRETARY
NC 27,
Catawba River,
State Project
Attached for your information are three copies,-of -the project
planning report for the subject project. MAdministration subject project
is being processed by the Federal Highwa as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance w't' 23 CFR1.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate reques ig an i ividual
permit but propose to proceed under a ration e Permit in
accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B-tT) issued November
22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers. The'p,r,ovisions of .
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be
followed in the construction of the project. If a Nationwide
No. 23 will not suffice, minor impacts associated with
bridging and approach improvements should be allowable under
General Bridge Permit 031, issued by the Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District.
We anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2745
(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 Robin Little at 733-3141.
Sincerely,
J O`Qu n
A Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
gy5oa
401 ISSUED
1

BJO/rml
cc: w/attachment
Mr. Steve Lund, COE-Asheville
Mr. John Dorney, NC DEHNR, DEM
Mr. John Parker, NC DEHNR; DCM/Permit Coord.
w/out attachment
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., PE, Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, PE, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. B. G.'Payne, Division 10 Engineer
Mr. R. W. Spangler, Division 12 Engineer
Ms. Michelle W. Fishburne, Project Planning Engineer
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and.Environmental Branch
GASTON AND MECKLENBURG COUNTIES
NC 27
Bridge No. 66 over Catawba River
Federal-Aid Project BRM - 5425(3)
State Project No. 8.1810201
T.I.P. No. B-1193
a

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
H. Franklin Vick, P. E.
Manager of Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
to
FoR Nicholas L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
03 Z6 '4
Date
GASTON AND MECKLENBURG COUNTIES
NC 27
Bridge No. 66 over Catawba River
Federal-Aid Project BRM - 5425(3)
State Project No. 8.1810201
T.I.P. No. B-1193
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared by RUST Environment & Infrastructure
for Ralph Whitehead & Associates
'+'Z ,L ?.
Ronald G. Hairr
Project Manager-Rust E & I
Stuart Matthis, P.E. i j d 1
Project Manager-Ralph Whitehead & Associates'
7Fr ?®4c
For North Carolina Department of Transportation
19'a 11
L. G Grimes, .E., Unit Head
Consultant Engineering Unit
4&0 kt,
Michelle Wago r Fishburne
Project Planning Engineer
GASTON AND MECKLENBURG COUNTIES
NC 27
Bridge No. 66 over Catawba River
Federal-Aid Project BRM - 5425(3)
State Project No. 8.1810201
T.I.P. No. B-1193
Bridge No. 66 is included in the 1994-2000 Transportation Improvement Program. The
location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The
project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion".
I. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures including NCDOT's Best Management Practices For
Protection of Surface Waters will be implemented, as applicable, to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. A Nationwide Permit (NWT) No. 23 and/or General Bridge Permit
No. 031 for minimal wetlands impacts will be required for this project.
Railroad traffic on the CSX spur line will be maintained during both highway and railroad
bridge construction periods.
The proposed Catawba River structure will be designed to eliminate direct discharge of flow
from the bridge deck into the receiving water.
Encroachment within open waters of the Catawba River will not occur since this system will
be bridged.
Consideration will be given during final design to provide sufficient containment areas for
hazardous spills.
A survey for the Schweinitz' sunflower will be conducted during September-October 1994
to verify the presence/absence of the species. If 'the sunflower is found, an acceptable
avoidance or mitigation plan will be developed to minimize harm.
Prior to right of way acquisition, NCDOT will prepare an assessment for the properties with
underground storage tanks and report the findings to Division of Environmental
Management (DEM), Ground Water Section.
To avoid impacts to the reproductive success of the white bass, no instream or riparian area
disturbance from construction will occur during the period from March 1 through May 15.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 66 crosses over the Catawba River connecting Gaston and Mecklenl
Counties. This bridge will be replaced with a new multi-lane structure at the exi;
location using the North Alternate as shown in Figures 2a and 2b. The new structure
be approximately 650 feet in length. The clear roadway width will be 56 feet to pro
four-lanes of travel across the Catawba River. A sidewalk along the north side of the br
is also proposed.
NC 27 will be widened and improved from a two-lane road to a five-lane, curb and gutt
facility beginning at NC 273 (Highland Avenue) in Mount Holly, Gaston County. As IS
27 approaches the Catawba River from the west, it will be tapered to the proposed four-lai
bridge section with a four-foot painted median. On the Mecklenburg County side of tl
river, NC 27 will return to a five-lane section up to the Sandoz entrance. At the Sand,
entrance two lanes will be dropped, one at the Sandoz entrance and one at the picr
shelter. A three-lane highway providing a westbound left turn lane into the Sandoz plant
proposed on the east approach of the intersection. The three-lane section will taper ba
to the existing two-lane pavement approximately 900 feet east of the Sandoz entrance.
A new, three-span CSX Railroad structure extending 190 feet in length over NC 27
Gaston County will be required to accommodate the widening of NC 27. The propos
vertical clearance over NC 27 will be 16 feet 0 inches to 16 feet 6 inches as determined
final design.
Approximately 1,800 feet of new railroad track will be required to conform to the
railroad bridge location.
Two-way traffic will be maintained along NC 27 and across the Catawba River bridge di:
construction. Railroad traffic on the spur line will also be maintained during highway
railroad bridge construction periods.
A driveway providing access to a private boatlanding/ramp facility is located just west
1
the existing Catawba River bridge and north of NC 27 in Gaston County. This driveway v
be closed due to safety concerns relative to inadequate sight distance.
The estimated cost, based on current prices, 8 37,045,000. Right of way is expected to c
$300,000 with construction estimated at $6,745,000. The estimated cost of the project,
shown in the 1994-2000 Transportation Improvement Program, is $5,550,000. This cost v
based on an estimated right of way of $600,000 and a construction cost of $4,950,000.
2
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Bridge No. 66 is a two-lane structure, built in 1939, with reinforced concrete post and beam
bents on pile footings, supporting a reinforced concrete deck on steel plate girders and I-
beams. The bridge consists of eight spans totaling 663 feet 4 inches in length. The current
sufficiency rating is 41.5% and the structure is listed in poor condition.
NC 27 is classified on the Statewide Functional Classification System as a rural minor
arterial route in Mecklenburg County and as an urban principal arterial route in Gaston
County.
Along most of the project limits, NC 27 is a two-lane roadway with 22-foot pavement and
grass shoulders ranging in width from four to eight feet. Near the intersection with NC 273
(Highland Ave.), NC 27 widens to a five-lane section to provide for exclusive left and right
turn lanes. Curb and gutter with sidewalk is provided along the north side of NC 27 from
west of Alexander Street to NC 273.
NC 27 crosses slightly rolling terrain in Gaston County with poor vertical alignment. Sight
distance is minimal for the section from River Street to Alexander Street due to a crest
vertical curve. Vertical alignment along NC 27 in Mecklenburg County is adequate.
NC 27 serves as the only eastern access into Mount Holly across the Catawba River from
Mecklenburg County (see Figure 1). Land use along NC 27 in Gaston County is a
combination of urban residential and commercial/industrial. In Mecklenburg County, land
use is primarily large industrial and commercial facilities with interspersed undeveloped
wooded tracts.
The eastern approach to the bridge is on a slight downgrade (2%) with a generally tangent
horizontal alignment (see Figure 3). The western approach to the bridge drops along a
2.6% downgrade in a 2.5 degree horizontal curve. This section of NC 27 as it approaches
the Catawba River also passes under a CSX Railroad bridge with a current substandard
vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches.
The posted speed limit on NC 27 is 35 mph in Gaston County and 45 mph in Mecklenburg
County.
The "1992 traffic volumes range from "10,200 vehicles per' day (VPD) near N. Alexander
Street in Gaston County to 11,000 VPD at the Sandoz entrance in Mecklenburg County.
Projected traffic volumes at the same locations in the design year 2015 range from 22,200
VPD to 24,200 VPD. The projected volumes include 5% truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST)
vehicles and 4% dual-tired (Dual) vehicles. The NC 27 and NC 273 intersection will
continue to operate at an acceptable level of service (LOS) for an extended period of time.
A future project providing additional geometric improvements will be necessary by the
3
design year of 2015 in order to maintain a minimum LOS "D" on each of the
approaches.
No school buses from either the Gaston County or Mecklenburg County School
cross Bridge No. 66.
A total of 99 accidents were reported along this section of NC 27 during the period
January 1, 1990 to April 30, 1992. The most frequent accident type, rear-end colli
occurred 48 times. The second most common accident involved 24 left-turn and
collisions. No fatalities were recorded during this period.
The total accident rate for the section of NC 27 in Gaston County was 1,288.24 Accid(
per 100 million vehicle miles (ACC/100MVM). The rate on NC 27 in Mecklenburg Cot
was 698.53 ACC/100MVM. These rates were substantially higher than the latest 1
Statewide average rate for similar NC routes (266.5 ACC/100MVM).
Multiple utility lines, both aerial and underground, parallel this section of NC 7.
Underground utilities include a 12-inch water, 12-inch gravity and 14-inch force main sewr
lines, and an 8-inch gas main along the north side of NC 27. The 8-inch gas main is
attached to the existing bridge over the Catawba River. Aerial cables include telephone,
cable TV, and power lines. Southern Bell also has a submarine fiber optic cable on the
north side of the existing river bridge. Duke Power has a major transmission line parallel
to the river in Gaston County that crosses NC 27 between the CSX Railroad bridge and the
river. The utility conflicts along this section of NC 27 are considered to be high in severi .
Close coordination with utility companies will be required with this project.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
The development of feasible alternatives for the replacement of Bridge No. 66 on or n
its existing location involved careful consideration of several factors. These factors incluc
(1) allowing for the proximity of the CSX railroad bridge over NC 27 to the proposed bric
within 170 feet, (2) lowering the grade of NC 27 on the west approach to the new bric
to provide adequate vertical clearance under the CSX bridge, (3) maintaining vehicu
traffic on the existing bridge during construction, (4) providing for uninterrupted tr
service on the CSX tracks during construction, (5) replacing the existing CSX bridge
accommodate the widening of NC 27, and (6) providing appropriate horizontal alignm
and-geometric design criteria in accordance witli"AASHTO design standards.
Two highway alignments were developed to widen NC 27 to the proposed five-lane, 64 f
face-to-face, curb and gutter facility; one north of the existing bridge and one south (
Figures 2a and 2b). Two designs were investigated for the new CSX railroad bridge o
NC 27: a four span structure and a three span structure (refer to Figure 5).
4
A 40 mph design speed was used for the Gaston County section of NC 27 while a 50 mph
design speed was utilized on the Mecklenburg County portion of NC 27. The highway
bridge -alternates use a 50 MPH design speed and HS-20 or (Alternate Military) design
loading. In addition, a four-foot sidewalk is included on the north side of each of the
highway bridge alternates. Four alternates including these parameters were developed and
are described as follows:
ALTERNATE N-4 (North, four-span): This alternate would involve replacing the Catawba
River bridge north of the existing bridge using staged construction (See Figure 6). Using
a 20 foot centerline shift to the north, a 26 foot clear roadway portion of the new bridge
would be constructed while traffic continues to use the existing bridge. Once completed,
traffic would be shifted to the new section of bridge and the old structure removed. The
remaining part of the new structure would then be constructed and opened to traffic.
A new 190 foot, four-span CSX Railroad bridge would be built over the proposed five-lane
NC 27 section just west of the existing railroad bridge. The four-span option would require
a concrete median pier on NC 27.
ALTERNATE N-3 --PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE-- (North, three-span): This alternate
is identical to Alternate N-4 except that a three-span CSX Railroad bridge would be
constructed over NC 27. No median pier would be required with this option and the
railroad bridge would remain 190 feet. NC 27 would utilize a five-lane section with a total
width of 64 feet face to face.
ALTERNATE S-4 (South, four-span): Alternate S-4 involves replacing the Catawba River
bridge south of the existing bridge using staged construction. Using a 20 foot centerline shift
to the south, a 26 foot clear roadway portion of the new bridge would be constructed while
traffic continues to use the existing bridge. Once completed, traffic would be shifted to the
new section of bridge and the old structure removed. The remaining part of the new
structure would then be constructed and opened to traffic.
A new 216 foot, four-span CSX Railroad bridge would be built over the proposed five-lane
NC 27 section just west of the existing railroad bridge. The four-span option would require
a concrete median pier on NC 27. The longer length is due to the increased skew required
with a south alignment.
ALTERNATE S-3 (South, three-span): This alternate is identical to Alternate S-4 except
that a three-span4CSX Railroad bridge would be constructed over NC 27. No median pier
would be required with this option and the railroad bridge would remain 216 feet. NC 27
would be a five-lane section with a total width of 64 feet face to face.
A "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge due to its poor
condition. Additionally, projected traffic volumes indicate a doubling of vehicles per day
within 20 years making this bridge functionally obsolete. The "do-nothing" alternative is not
5
prudent due to the traffic service provided by NC 27.
"Rehabilitation" of the existing bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriora
condition. The bridge is 54 years old and has a sufficiency rating of 41.5. The substructu
do not satisfy FHWA's Technical Advisory, T5140.23 Evaluating Scour at Bridg
Retrofitting would be difficult if the footings, when uncovered, are found to be in disrep;
In addition, the existing grade across the bridge is 0.0 percent. To match the minimum
percent grade requirement, extensive retrofitting of the bridge seats would be necessE
The NC 27 roadway profile is also being lowered to increase the vertical clearance bene;
the CSX Railroad underpass. This indicates the existing substructures are too tall to fit
new superstructure. The only solution would be to remove the existing caps and constr
new ones at a lower elevation, which again would be very difficult due to the substructw
poor condition. Given these considerations, rehabilitation is not a feasible alternative.
Evaluation of the feasible alternates for the project revealed the four-span option for t.
CSX Railroad bridge with its required median pier presents a potential obstacle and safe
hazard for vehicular traffic on NC 27. An Obstacle Cost Effective Analysis was perform
to compare the four-span bridge versus the three-span bridge (without a pier). This analy,
found the three-span option provided a 20 year accident cost savings of $61,000(+). T
alternates using the four-span railroad structure also have slightly higher initial constructi
costs as noted in Section V, ESTIMATED COST. Due to the safety evaluation and high
costs associated with the four-span option, the alternates (ALTERNATES N-4 and S-
which use the four-span railroad bridge were eliminated from further consideration.
A comparison of the two remaining alternates, N-3 and S-3, indicates that the railro
bridge design with the S-3 alignment would come within 13 feet of the CSX mainline trai
This design would require extensive temporary sheeting during construction to protect t
mainline as well as a permanent retaining wall to support the mainline after constructic
The N-3 alternate would be 55 feet from the CSX mainline track and would not requi
additional walls. Early coordination with CSX Transportation's local representative, N
James Mashburn, revealed that CSX would clearly favor the north alternate for wideni
NC 27. Based upon this comparison, ALTERNATE N-3 was selected as the Preferr
Alternative for this project.
Coordination with both Division 10 and Division 12 offices indicated that two-way traffic
NC 27 should be maintained at all times during construction to maintain traffic service a
access to Mount Holly and the surrounding areas.
No residential, institutional, nor business relocations are required with any of the alternat,
Land acquisition for additional highway right-of-way will be necessary. Access control
recommended on both approaches to the Catawba River bridge from the end of the brid
to the fully developed five-lane section.
6'
V. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs of the feasible alternatives, based on current prices, are as follows:
U
19
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT ITEMS
Structure (Catawba River)
Structure (Railroad)
Trackwork (Railroad)
Roadway (Bridge Approaches)
Detour Structures
Structure Removal (C. River)
Structure Removal (Railroad)
Eng. & Contig.
Right of Way & Utilities
SUB-TOTAL
HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT ITEMS
Roadway (Additional)
Eng. & Cont.
Right of Way & Utilities
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST
ALT. N4 ALT. N-3 ALT. S4 ALT. S-3
(Recommended)
$2,300,000 $2,300,000 $2,300,000 $2,300,000
$992,300 $941,400 $1,075,800 $1,057,700
$455,400 $455,400 $455,400 $455,400
$1,525,300 $1,513,200 $1,509,800 $1,486,900
N/A N/A N/A N/A
$100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
$35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000
$836,200 $786,300 $857,600 $803,200
$148,500 $136,600 $148,500 $136,600
$6,392,700 $6,267,900 $6,482,100 $6,374,800
$529,000 $535,000 $520,000 $520,000
$81,800 $78,700 $81,400 $76,800
$177,500 $163,400 $177,500 $163,400
$788,300 $777,100 $778,900 $760,200
$7,181,000 $7,045,000 $7,261,000 $7,135,000
7
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 66 will be replaced at its existing location using ALTERNATE N-3 (North,:
span) as shown in Figures 2a and 2b. The new structure will have a clear roadway widt
of 56 feet and length of 650 feet. The new bridge will provide a four-lane, 48-foot travelwa
with a four- foot wide painted center median. A sidewalk width of four feet along the nort
side of the bridge will be included.
NC 27 will be widened and improved from a two-lane road to a five-lane, curb and gutte
facility beginning at NC 273 (Highland Avenue) in Mount Holly, Gaston County. As N
27 approaches the Catawba River from the west, it will be tapered to the proposed four-lar
bridge section with a four-foot painted median. On the Mecklenburg County side of tr
river, NC 27 will return to a five-lane section up to the Sandoz entrance. At the Sand(
entrance two lanes will be dropped, one at the Sandoz entrance and one at the picn
shelter. A three-lane highway providing a westbound left turn lane into the Sandoz plant
proposed on the east approach of the intersection. The three-lane section will taper ba(
to the existing two-lane pavement approximately 900 feet east of the Sandoz entrance.
The roadway grade on the proposed highway bridge will be a minimum of 0.3 percent I
facilitate drainage. The proposed grade will tie into the existing vertical alignment of N
27 in Mecklenburg County. The existing NC 27 grade in Gaston County will be lowered
order to provide an acceptable vertical clearance of 16 feet 0 inches or 16 feet 6 inches
determined in final design under the proposed CSX spur line railroad bridge on the Gast(
County- side. The railroad bridge will be located 225 feet west of the existing Catawba Riv
bridge.
Due to the inability to store left turning vehicles out of the through lane on the propose
four-lane structure, left turn access to the adjacent properties on either side of the Catawl
River bridge is recommended to be restricted. Control of access from each end of tl
proposed bridge to the point where the five-lane section is fully developed will 1
considered during right-of-way acquisition.
This section of the Catawba River is classified as a Water Supply Critical Area, therefo
the bridge will be designed such that no direct discharge of stormwater runoff will occur
the deck into the receiving water.
A new-CSX Railroad structure over-NC 27 is proposed just west of the existing railro.,
bridge. This new railroad bridge will accommodate the widening of NC 27 to a five-lai
curb and gutter facility. The new CSX bridge (190'x 29') will be a steel through gird
structure. Final vertical clearance over NC 27 will be 16 feet 0 inches or 16 feet 6 inch
as determined in final design. Approximately 1,800 feet of new CSX spur track will 1
required to conform to the new railroad bridge alignment.
8
Two-way traffic will be maintained along NC 27 and across the Catawba River bridge at all
times during construction. Railroad traffic on the spur line will also be maintained during
both highway and railroad bridge construction periods. During construction of the new
railroad bridge a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches will be maintained over the
existing NC 27 roadway.
Access from NC 27 to a private boat landing/ramp facility, shown in Figure 4, will be
impacted by this project. The driveway is currently located between the existing CSX bridge
and the Catawba River bridge. A sight distance review of the driveway revealed that it does
not meet the minimum requirements necessary for safe operation as per the NCDOT
Roadway Design Manual and the 1990 AASHTO standards. Based upon the sight distance
criteria, the driveway will be closed.
The proposed project is sited partially within the jurisdiction of Mount Holly in Gaston
County and in Mecklenburg County, both of which participate in the National Flood
Insurance Program. The Catawba River is shown as an approximate study stream on both
Mount Holly and Mecklenburg County Flood Insurance Study Rate Maps. This means that
there are no regulatory flood elevations nor floodway limits defined, although the
approximate 100-year flood plain is identified as a flood-hazard area. The new structure will
be designed so as not to increase flood elevations more than one foot above the existing
conditions. The project will not encroach into the approximate 100 year floodplain.
No regulatory floodplain has been established by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) for this section of the Catawba River. A review of the hydrology of this
portion of the Catawba River reveals that the 100-year flood elevations at the bridge site
are controlled by the backwater effects of the Lake Wylie Dam approximately 20 miles
downstream from this location. The Lake Wylie Reservoir is controlled by Duke Power
which has established a flood easement for the reservoir and this section of the Catawba
River of 579.4 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL).
The established flood elevation of 579.4 feet MSL is shown on Figure 2a. Based upon this
elevation the replacement structure over the Catawba River was recommended to have a
length of 650 feet. The 0.3% grade proposed for the new bridge will cause the final
elevations of the new structure to vary from the Gaston to the Mecklenburg County side.
It is expected the new bridge will be approximately 1.5 to 2.0 feet lower than the existing
structure; however, the final bottom-of-girder elevation of the proposed bridge will be
established above the 100-year flood elevation in accordance with NCDOT policy. The
length and height may 'be increased or decreased 'as necessary to accommodate flood
elevations as determined by further hydrologic studies.
The Division Engineers for Divisions 10 and 12 have been consulted and concur with the
recommendations for this project.
9
The Gaston and Mecklenburg County School systems were contacted and advised of
project. They expressed no objections to the proposed construction since current bus ro
do not-use this bridge.
The recommendations for this project have been evaluated with the adopted Gaston U:
Area Thoroughfare Plan dated February 7, 1992 and are in compliance with the
proposals.
VII. NATURAL RESOURCES
An evaluation of biological resources in the immediate area of potential project impact
performed for this study and included: 1) an assessment of biological features along
alignment including descriptions of vegetation, wildlife, protected species, wetlands,
water quality issues; 2) an evaluation of probable impacts resulting from construction;
3) a preliminary determination of permit needs and conceptual mitigation options.
METHODOLOGY
Materials and research data in support of this investigation have been derived
number of sources including U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute quay
(Mountain Island Lake and Mount Holly series), Soil Conservation Service soils infc
(USDA 1980, USDA 1989), and 1993 aerial photography (scale: 1" = 100').
Field investigations were made on March 18-19, 1993. Communities likely to be crossed
the expanded alignment were walked and visually surveyed for significant features. Spec
concerns were evaluated with emphasis on potential water quality impacts on the Catav
River and adjacent riparian areas. For the purposes of this study, a symmetrical rc
widening was assumed on bridge approach segments with the potential impact corrid
extending 60 feet each side of the existing roadway.
Water quality information for streams and tributaries in or near the study area was deriN
from available sources (DEM 1989, 1993). Quantitative sampling was not undertaken
support existing data. Ecological classifications based on recreational fishing potential wE
determined using Fish (1968).
Plant community descriptions were based on a classification scheme recommended
utilized by the N.C. Natural Heritage Program (Schafale and Weakley 1990). V
appropriate, community classifications were modified to better reflect field observat
Vascular plant names follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968).
Wildlife and aquatic life distribution and habitat use was determined through
observations, evaluation of habitat type distributions, and available supp
a
10
documentation (Martof et al. 1980; Potter et al. 1980; Hamel et al. 1982; Webster et al.
1985).
Jurisdictional wetlands were identified using the three parameter approach (hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, hydrology) following the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers delineation
guidelines (DOA 1987).
Listings of federally protected species with ranges which extend into Mecklenburg and
Gaston Counties were requested and received from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) prior to the initiation of field studies. In addition, records maintained by the N.C.
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) and the NC Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources (NCDEHNR) were consulted for documented presence of federal and
state listed species before initiating this investigation. A literature review provided
information on the distribution and ecological requirements of various taxa (Radford et al.
1968; Cooper et al. 1977; Kral 1983; Weakley 1990; LeGrand 1990).
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Physiography, Topography, and Land Use
This portion of Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties is situated within the Charlotte Belt
region of the Piedmont physiographic province of North Carolina. The Charlotte Belt,
which consists of a diverse mosaic of metamorphic and igneous rock, supports a wide variety
of parent materials, soils and soil types. The Charlotte Belt contains notably hilly terrain
with numerous, narrow interstream divides exhibiting dense, dendritic drainage patterns
(Myers et al. 1986). The project area is considered susceptible to heavy erosion when
disturbed due to the diverse geomorphology, frequent dissection, and rugged topography
characteristic of this portion of the Charlotte Belt. Elevations in the project vicinity range
from 625 feet(190 meters) above mean sea level (MSL) at the project terminals to 575 feet
(175 meters) above MSL at the Catawba River.
The project area is located within one of the more urbanized regions of North Carolina.
Development associated with Charlotte's expansion has obscured most of the natural
features in the general vicinity of the project. A mixture of industrial, commercial, and
residential development is interspersed with pockets of successional vegetation and limited
riparian forests along the Catawba River. Industrial and large commercial facilities occupy
most of the land area in the project vicinity.
Soils
Soil patterns are the result of a number of biotic and abiotic influences including past
geologic activities, parent material, environmental and human influences, age of sediments,
and topographic position. The study corridor extends through five soil series identified by
the Soil Conservation Service (USDA 1980, USDA 1989). Soil map units include the Cecil-
11
Urban Land Complex, Urban Land, Enon, and Pacolet series which are comm
associated with well drained uplands supporting clayey subsoils.. Characteristics of each
phase are summarized in Table 1. However, man induced changes to the landscape 1
obliterated or modified most typical soil patterns and profiles in the project area.
There are no soil series present in the project study area which are hydric or have by
characteristics as a major component. Hydric soils are defined as "soils that are satura
flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditi
in the upper part (USDA 1987). One soil map unit that may contain hydric inclusions,
Chewacla series, is located within the study area along the western edge of the Cata
River. However, fill material utilized for maintenance of a recreational boat landing
parking area has obliterated soil characteristics commonly associated with the Chew,
series.
Water Resources
Watercourses in the vicinity of the proposed highway improvements are part of the U
Catawba River Drainage Area within the Catawba River Drainage Basin. The Cati
River is comprised primarily of a series of seven reservoirs including Lake James, Rhos
Lake, Lake Hickory, Lookout Shoals Lake, Lake Norman, Mountain Island Lake and
Wylie (DEM 1988). The Mountain Island Lake Dam and reservoir are located 5 r
north of the bridge project while the Lake Wylie dam and main reservoir is situ
approximately 20 miles south. Because of the relative location between lake impoundm
the Catawba River segment crossed by the project exhibits flow rates and ecolo
characteristics more commonly associated with slow-moving riverine systems than
lacustrine (lake) systems. However, the subject segment is considered part of Lake N
for best usage classifications and water quality standards (DEM 1993). Table 2 depicts
usage, ecological classifications, and general characteristics of the subject Catawba I
segment.
Two point source dischargers with a permitted flow over 0.5 mgd are located within t
project area (DEM 1989). The Mount Holly Waste Water Treatment Facility, local
approximately 1000 feet upstream of the project alignment carries a permitted discharge
4.0 mgd into Dutchman Creek. Also, Sandoz Chemical Company, located approximate
700 feet downstream of the alignment, maintain a permitted discharge of 3.9 mgd into t
Catawba River. Point source dischargers will not be affected by the propos
improvements.
-Three Benthic Macroinvertebrate Network (BMAN) sampling stations on the Catawba Riv
are located south of the project (DEM 1989). The NC-27, I-85, and US-74 BMAN statio
were established to measure the effects on benthic organisms of discharge from the Mou
Holly Waste Water Treatment Plant and Sandoz Chemical Company. No measurat
effects on benthos composition and diversity was discerned from waste water discharges
the project area. However, these limited qualitative samples did not provide enough da
to classify water quality in this segment of the Catawba River. BMAN station in tributari
to the Catawba River in and around Charlotte indicate primarily fair to poor water qual
12
throughout the metropolitan area (DEM 1989). Point source pollution from local waste
water discharges and nonpoint source pollution from urban and agricultural runoff appear
to contribute equally to water quality degradation in the Catawba River segment crossed by
the project corridor. The Catawba River/Lake Wylie system is rated as support-threatened
for intended uses due primarily to sediment loading and eutrophication (DEM 1988).
TABLE 1
SOILS SUMMARY
for
NC 27 Improvements over the Catawba River
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties, N.C.
Map
Code Soil Series %Slope General Characteristics
Non-hydric
CuB Cecil Urban 2-8% Well drained, upland ridges to moderate side
slopes; Cecil map unit in which the natural soil has
predominantly been covered by fill material or
removed by cutting and grading; moderate
permeability and medium surface runoff; moderate
to severe erosion hazard if ground cover is not well
established; primarily urban areas.
EnB Enon sandy loam 2-8% Well drained, broad ridges and upland side slopes;
EnD 2-15% high shrink-swell potential, slow permeability and
rapid surface runoff, low potential for most urban
uses; primarily, recreational, successional and
forested areas.
PaE Pacolet sandy loam 15-25% Well drained, narrow bands along steep side slopes
adjacent to the Catawba River; moderate
permeability and rapid surface runoff; low potential
for urban/agricultural uses which may accelerate
erosion; severe erosion hazard and formation of
gullies when exposed; primarily forest.
Ur Urban land Areas where more than 85% of the surface area is
covered with asphalt, concrete, buildings or other
impervious cover; high volumes of surface runoff
can cause flooding in low-lying areas downstream.
Hydric
Inclusions
Ch Chewacla sandy 0-2% Somewhat poorly drained, nearly level soils along
loam the western edge of the Catawba River. Frequent
flooding for short periods; primarily a boat landing
with evidence of fill material above the natural soil.
13
N
a
z
O
rr?
F?1
U
O
O
W
A
E
w?
F
U

A?
W?
i
UI
I
? I
W I
Qty I
I
a'
Ei !
O
H I
I
VUI
C7 ? I
I
C) i
I
WU!
FWI
I
? II
x ? n
u
WOUu
pq u
n
u
u
W u
O
W ? u
> u
Q II
II
u
W ? II
C7 `. II
II
II
W II
? A II
II
II
u
? u
rx E? u
A
wj ? u
u
u
?r II
A II
II
m u
a II
W n
E-? u
Q u
3 II
-4
N
a
? U
0
? .a
a?
a 3
U
3
I
0
N
M
a
cd
3
U
0
.N
0
a
a?
b
y
3
0
U
ti
h
.? 3 a
y o
H
p h a`?i
w
y O
h •? a
a
3 ? _b
o on
? a
0 3 ??++
O N
N cd
O y, • ?
? a
?o
h
30 ??
a?
? U U
W
A N
?r2
U r.+
w
o O
ao
? h
yy
U
i
3
3 ?
h
U
N W
°x
A
a
q
o ?=
a p
7. Cd
A
R
14
A .best usage classification of WS-IV CA has been assigned to this stretch of the Catawba
River signifying a water supply segment in a moderately to highly developed watershed
(DEM 1993). The designation "CA' denotes a critical area where the prevalence of
impervious surfaces warrants more aggressive stormwater, sediment and erosion control
measures. Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be followed to the extent practicable
in such areas. Local programs controlling non-point sources and stormwater discharges may
be applied. WS-IV waters are suitable for all class C uses including aquatic life propagation
and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
DEM classifications are based upon existing or contemplated best uses for various stream
segments. Water quality standards applicable to these classifications are set forth in 15
NCAC 2B.0200.
One minor drainageway to the Catawba River is crossed by the project alignment. This 3-
foot wide channel. has been previously ditched and culverted on the south side of NC 27 to
accommodate the Sandoz Chemical Company and the existing roadway.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Plant Community Patterns
Natural plant community patterns have long since been modified or eliminated by
urbanization and resultant land use practices. Remaining plant communities are largely
successional or urban (landscaped) in nature. Disjunct, narrow "strips" of riparian forest
cover are found along the eastern side of the Catawba River. Four primary community
types were identified within the study area as described below:
Urban/Disturbed (U/D)
Urban/Disturbed areas dominate the landscape surrounding the project and consist
primarily of paved lots, commercial and industrial establishments, railway corridors, and
residential dwellings. Vegetation in these areas is restricted to landscape trees interspersed
among maintained grasses.
Successional (SUC.)
Successional communities occur primarily within CSX Railroad easements. Typical species
include honeysuckle (Lonicera 'al nonica), dogfennel (Eunat orium capillifolium), blackberry
(Rubus argutus), pokeberry (Phytolacca americana), goldenrod (Solidago V-.), Queen
Anne's lace (Daucus carota), winged elm (Ulmus alata), smooth sumac (Rhus lg abra),
winged sumac (Rhus copallina), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans), and muscadine (Vitis
rotundifolia). Systematic maintenance along rights-of-way is expected to keep further
successional development in check.
15
Pine Mixed Hardwood Forest (PHM)
Pine mixed hardwood forest occurs in areas adjacent to the Catawba River, north of
bridge project. Generally, these forested tracts are outside of the proposed wide]
corridor. The primary characteristic of pine mixed hardwood forest is the mix of
dominant pines and hardwoods in the canopy. Loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) and Virginia 1
(Pinus virginiana) share canopy dominance with sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
maple (Acer rubrum), hickory species (Carya spp.), scarlet oak ( uercus coccinea), soutr
red oak ( uercus falcata), and white oak ( uercus alba). Mid story and shrub spe
include dogwood (Cornus florida), black cherry (Prunus serotina), winged elm, and red cc
(Juniperus virniana). Herbaceous species are predominantly vines which dominate can
gaps such as greenbrier (Smilax lauca), honeysuckle, black berry, and poison
(Toxicodendron radicans). This vegetation profile represents a seral precursor of NCNI
Dry Oak-Hickory Forest classification type.
Mesic Forest (MF)
Mesic forest communities are isolated as a narrow strip along the eastern riparian fring
of the Catawba River. This cover type is dominated by sweet gum, cottonwood (Popul
deltoides), American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), American beech (Fagus grandifoli?
and occasional green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica). The understory is sparse, with dogwoi
and sassafras (Sassafras albidum) commonly occupying canopy gaps. Ground cover
generally restricted to liverleaf (Hepatica americana), wild ginger (Hexas lis infolia), a
pipsissewa (Chimaphila maculata). This vegetation profile corresponds to NCNHP's Me:
Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype).
Wildlife
Terrestrial Wildlife
Although the project alignment occurs in a highly urbanized area, successional areas
landscape trees within residential areas potentially provide some of the nece;
components (food, water, cover) to support various forms of wildlife. A number of s
mammals were noted or can be expected including gray squirrel (Sciurus caroling
eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus), shrew (Sorex 5M.), and opossum (Didelphis vir 'nip
Many of these species are considered cosmopolitan in nature, easily adapting to hu
disturbances.
Avifaunal abundance is typical of urban communities in the piedmont region of No
Carolina where a patchwork of habitat types provide necessary components for survival.
diverse abundance of birds not unduly affected by urbanization and human interaction ,
common in the area. Avian species noted include cardinals (Cardinalis cardinal
mockingbirds (Mimus pol 1ottos), bluejays ( anocitta cristata), Carolina wri
(Thryothorus ludovicianus), Carolina chickadees (Parus carolinensis), common cr(
(Corvus brach)rhynchos), American robins (Turdus migratorius), ruby-throa
hummingbirds (Archilochus colubris), and common grackles ( uiscalus uiscula).
16
Aquatic Wildlife
Larger rivers in the Piedmont of North Carolina, including the Catawba River, generally
support a more diverse fishery than smaller tributaries. Crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus,
L. annularis), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), catfish (Ictalurus sp.), largemouth bass
(Micropterus salmoides), and white bass (Moron chrysops) are common gamefish typically
found in Piedmont rivers and large streams. Portions of the Catawba River also provide
suitable riparian and floodplain habitat for a variety of amphibians and aquatic reptiles.
However, the river segment crossed by the project alignment is a well defined, bank-to-bank
system which contains negligible riparian habitat for various aquatic organisms.
The Catawba River and Dutchman's Creek support a spawning run of white bass which
occurs from mid-March to early May. Instream construction work or increased turbidity
from soil disturbance adjacent to these waters may inhibit fish movements, directly
impacting reproductive success. Sedimentation of stream channels may also degrade
spawning habitat. To avoid these impacts, no instream or riparian area disturbance will
occur during the period from March 1 through May 15.
The small drainage channel crossed by the alignment is ditched and culverted to the extent
that this system most likely does not provide suitable habitat for most aquatic organisms.
Rare/Unique Natural Areas
There are no designated rare or unique natural areas identified within the project vicinity.
There are no water bodies deserving of special attention as denoted under the federal Wild
and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (Pub. L. No. 90-542, 82 Stat. 906; codified and amended at
16 U.S.C. 1217-1287 (1982)) or under the N.C. Natural and Scenic Rivers Act of 1971(G.S.
113A-30). Because rare or unique resources were not identified within the study area, no
adverse impacts are anticipated.
SPECIAL TOPICS
Wetlands
Wetlands subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 CFR 320-330) are defined by
the presence of three primary criteria: hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and evidence of
hydrology at or near the soil surface for a portion of the growing season. Based on the
three parameter approach to jurisdictional wetland determination (COE, 1987), there are
no jurisdictional wetlands in the project vicinity.
However, the Catawba River and one small tributary (above headwater) is subject to
jurisdictional consideration. The 3-foot wide tributary has been previously ditched and
culverted on the south side of NC 27 to accommodate the Sandoz Chemical Company and
17
the existing NC 27 roadway. Approximately 60 linear feet of stream channel
width) is situated in the project corridor, north of NC 27. The Catawba River,
warrants jurisdictional consideration, will be bridged.
Permitting
(3 feet in
which also
This project is being processed as a Categorical Exclusion under Federal High
Administration (FHWA) guidelines. Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 23 (33 (
330.5(a)(23)) has been issued by the COE for federal agency projects which are assu
to have minimal impact. The N.C. Division of Environmental Management (DEM)
issued a General 401 Water Quality Certification for NWP No. 23. However, use of
permit will require written notice to the DEM. In the event that NWP No. 23 will
suffice, minor impacts attributed to bridging and associated approach improvements
allowable under General Bridge Permit 031 issued by the COE, Wilmington Dist
Notification to the COE, Wilmington District is required if this General Permit is utili
Mitigation
Due to the limited impacts associated with proposed activities, no mitigation is propos(
However, NCDOT's Best Management Practices Fof Protection of Surface Waters (BMP
will be implemented, as applicable, in an effort to minimize adverse impacts. BMP's m
include strict erosion and sedimentation control measures, careful containment of (
gasoline, and other hazardous materials, and reduced canopy removal within riparian frinE
along the Catawba River. Design criteria may include 1) bridge crossing designed
eliminate direct discharge of flow from the bridge deck into the receiving water, 2) stora
where deemed necessary and practicable to reduce discharge of roadway runoff it
sensitive receiving waters, and 3) sufficient containment areas for hazardous spills, such
special holding basins, to accommodate the flow from roadway sections within water supl
watershed critical areas.
Protected Species
Federal Species
The USFWS has identified two species listed as endangered or proposed endangered,
four candidate species currently under status review which may occur in Gaston
Mecklenburg Counties. Species ' listed as Endangered (E) or Threatened (T) re(
protection under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq.). These sp(
include:
18
Endangered or Proposed Endangered (E or PE) Gaston Mecklenburg
Schweinitz' sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii) (E) X
Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata) (PE) X
Status Review
Georgia aster (Aster georgianus) (C2)4 X X
Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula) (C2) X X
Heller's trefoil (Lotus helleri) (C2)5 X
Bog turtle (Cl? muhlenberQii) (C2) X
Schweinitz' sunflower is an erect herb that thrives in full sun characteristic of relic piedmont
prairies, successional fields, forest ecotonal margins, and forest openings. This species is
known to exist on 15 sites, all within 90 miles of Charlotte. There are no documented
sightings of Schweinitz's sunflower in the project area (NCNHP Records 3/16/93). Marginal
habitat for the sunflower may occur within isolated successional pockets which border the
highway and in highly disturbed areas along the CSX railway alignment. Field surveys will
be conducted in these areas during appropriate blooming seasons (September) to verify the
presence/absence of Helianthus schweinitzii in the project corridor.
The Carolina heelsplitter is a freshwater mussel found only in restricted areas of the
Carolinas. At present, known occurrences are limited to small streams in Union County.
Historically, the mussel was found in streams and tributaries around Charlotte. However,
rapid urban expansion, with resultant adverse impacts on stream water quality, may have
resulted in extirpation of the heelsplitter from Mecklenburg County (SCFTM 1990). No
existing populations of the mussel have been documented in the county in recent years
(NCNHP records 3/16/93; Eugene Keferl, Brunswick College, 8/14/92). The Carolina
heelsplitter is not expected in the project area due to the lack of suitable habitat within the
project segment of the Catawba River and the secondary drainage channel (pers. comm.
John Alderman, N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission, 3/16/93). Therefore, this project is
not expected to impact populations of Lasmigona decorata.
State Species
Species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and plants included on the North Carolina
State List of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) receive limited
protection under the North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S.113-331 et seq.) and the
North Carolina Plant Protection Act of 1979 (G.S. 106-202.12 et seq.). NCNHP records
indicate that no known populations of state' listed species occur within the project area.
°C2 designation indicates candidate species under status review, adequate information on biological
vulnerability and threat(s) on biological vulnerability is insufficient to support listing.
'Indicates no specimen in at least 20 years from this county.
19
IMPACTS
Physical Resource Impacts
No long term adverse impacts to physical resources are anticipated as a result of b
construction and roadway improvements. Temporary construction impacts due to er
and sedimentation should be minimized through implementation of a stringent er
control plan and the use of best management practices. The contractor will be req
to follow contract specifications pertaining to State approved erosion and sediment
control programs. Dikes, berms, silt basins, and other containment measures can be
as justified to control runoff. Rapid re-seeding of disturbed sites will also help all(
sediment loading within the Catawba River and the adjacent drainage channel. Inca
runoff from new highway surfaces will be partially mitigated by providing for grassed
shoulders and limited use of ditching, where feasible. Utilization of best manage
practices is proposed during all phases of construction to reduce any risk of
degradation.
Plant Community Impacts
Impacts on plant communities are reflective of the relative abundance of each E
present in the study area. Table 3 summarizes potential plant community losses which
result from roadway development.
Proposed construction is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to the p
communities in the project vicinity. Most roadway improvements will be undertaken wi
disturbed right-of-way limits and urban fringe areas which currently do not sup]
significant natural plant community characteristics. Infringement on undisturbed adjal
areas is expected to be minimal.
Wildlife Impacts
Infringement on urban/disturbed systems within the project area will not result in sign
loss or displacement of known terrestrial plant or animal populations. Resident sl
such as passerine birds and squirrels, are cosmopolitan in nature, easily adapting to
urbanization.
The Catawba River serves as habitat for a variety of aquatic organisms. However, beca
of the large size of this system, and -the" fact that total bridging will be employed,
significant impacts on aquatic wildlife are expected since Best Management Practices
be utilized for erosion and sedimentation control (pers. comm., John Alderman, NCW
4/8/93).
20
Wetland Impacts
No wetlands will be impacted by proposed improvements. However, approximately 60 linear
feet of stream channel (.004 acres) on the north side of the bridge approach segment may
be affected. Encroachment within open waters of the Catawba River will not occur since
this system will be bridged.
TABLE 3
COMMUNITY IMPACTS (IN ACRES)'
NC 27 Over the Catawba River
LENGTH TOTAL
(Miles)2 U/D SUC PHW MF ACREAGE
0.69 8.1 2.4 0.1 0.2 10.8
Le emend
U/D: Urban/Disturbed
PHW: Pine-mixed hardwood forest
SUC: Successional land
MR Mesic hardwood forest
'Impact acreages estimated from a 120-foot widening corridor (60 feet each side of the existing roadway).
'Approximate distance and acreage measurements obtained from aerial mosaic photography (1" = 100').
f
Impacts on Listed Species
Based on contact with resource agency personnel, review of available records, and lack of
suitable habitat, this project is not expected to affect federally protected species with ranges
that extend into Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
21
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequa
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human
natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any county or city existing land use, or zoning regulatic
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 %
be limited. No relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternate.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated.
Access to a private boat landing/ramp may be affected by closure of its current drivew
on NC 27. Replacement access will be investigated during final design.
The project is not expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportuniti
in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl refug
of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project. No Section 4
properties are involved by this project.
The proposed project limits are contained within the Town of Mount Holly or Mecklenbr
County zoning jurisdiction. The areas affected by the project are committed to urbaniz
land use such as urban residential, commercial and industrial uses. As a result of the
zoned and planned uses in an urbanized area, the project is exempt from the Farmla
Protection Policy Act of 1984.
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservati
Act of 1966, as amended; implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservatioi
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 1
requires that if a federally funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect on a prope:
listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council
Historic Preservation be given an opportunity to comment.
There are no properties in the vicinity of the project that are in or eligible for inclusion
the National Register of Historic Places. The structure itself is not historically significa
The State Historic Preservation Officer has reviewed the architecture of four structures oN
fifty years old within the area of potential effect (APE) for the subject project. In a lets
dated October 5, 1993 the SHPO concurred that none of the structures are eligible for t
National Register. No further compliance with Section 106 of the National Histo
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, is required for this project with respect to histo
22
properties.
The Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, in a letter dated December 5, 1993,
concurred in the States' assessment that it is unlikely that archaeological resources eligible
for the National Register will be affected by construction of this project. The Deputy SHPO
also concurred that no further archaeological investigations are required in connection with
this project. No further compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, is required for this project with respect to archaeological
resources.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section and the
North Carolina Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section
revealed no underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area. A field
survey of this section of NC 27 from NC 273(Highland Ave.) to the eastern project termini
discovered one business(convenience store) in Mecklenburg County that currently has
underground petroleum storage tanks on site. A second business, formerly a gas station,
located near this same point reportedly has removed the old underground storage tanks
several years ago. Both properties may be potentially impacted with this project. Prior to
right-of-way acquisition, NCDOT will prepare an assessment of these properties to
determine if there is any contamination. The findings of this assessment will be forwarded
to DEM groundwater section.
The project is located within the Metropolitan-Charlotte Interstate Air Quality Control
Region. Mecklenburg County has been designated as a moderate nonattainment area for
carbon monoxide (CO) and Ozone (O). The attainment dates are December 31, 1995 for
CO and November 15, 1996 for O . All appropriate Transportation Control Measures
(TCM) included in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) which was approved by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on March 19, 1981 have been completed. The
Charlotte/Mecklenburg 2010 Thoroughfare Plan (TP) and FY 1993 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) have been determined to be in conformity to the 1990 Clean
Air Act Amendments and the Interim Conformity Guidance dated 6/7/91 on Nov. 15, 1991
and Sept. 30, 1992, respectively. This project is included in the fiscal year 1994 TIP for the
Charlotte-Mecklenburg planning area; therefore, this project conforms to the SIP. There
has been no significant changes in the project's design concept and scope, as used in the TIP
conformity analysis.
The proposed project will encourage development and accommodate more traffic along NC
27. Due to the additional traffic, existing development in the project vicinity is predicted
to experience noise levels which approach or exceed Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) noise abatement criteria.
The FHWA noise abatement criteria (from Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772)
is shown in the following table:
23
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
Activity
Category Leq (hr) Description of Activity Category
A 57 (Exterior) Lands on which serenity and quiet are of
extraordinary significance and serve an
important public need and where the
preservation of those qualities is essential if the
area is to continue to serve its intended purpos4
B 67 (Exterior) Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds,
active sports areas, parks, residences, motels,
hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospital.,
C 72 (Exterior) Developed lands, properties, or activities not
included in Categories A or B above.
D ------ Undeveloped lands.
E 52 (Interior) Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting
rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, an
auditoriums.
The noise level criteria used to identify the impacts are expressed in hourly Leq values.
is measured in A-weighted decibels, or dBA. The "A-weighted" scale closely approxir
human hearing frequency response.
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise levels either: 1) approach
exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria (with "approach" meaning within 1 dBA of t
values shown in the above table), or 2) substantially exceed the existing noise levels. T
NCDOT definition of substantial increase is either a 15 dBA increase for receivers with
existing noise level of 50 dBA, or a 10 dBA increase for receivers with an existing no
level of > 50 dBA. Consideration for noise abatement measures must be given to recepti
which fall in either category.
The predicted 2015 design year noise levels for this project were compared to the ea
noise levels and the `FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria. The 67 dBA and 72 dBA
contours were developed for the project.
The 67 dBA contour, as measured from the centerline of near lane, varies from 75 feet
the beginning of the project to 115 feet at the end of the project. The 72 dBA contour,
measured from the centerline of near lane, varies from less than 25 feet at the begin
of the project to 50 feet at the end of the project.
24
IL
A total of ten (10) receptors will likely be impacted as a result of Alternate N-3 or N-4
Five (5) receptors are residential dwellings, four (4) receptors are businesses and one (1;
receptor is a private picnic shelter. A total of eleven (11) receptors will likely be impactec
as a result of Alternate S-3 or S-4. Five (5) receptors are residential dwellings, five (5;
receptors are businesses and one (1) receptor is a private picnic shelter.
Noise abatement measures were considered but determined unfeasible. Traffic management
measures which limit vehicle type, speed, volume and time of operations are often effective
noise abatement measures. Traffic management measures are not considered appropriate
for noise abatement on this project due to their effect on the capacity and level of service
of the proposed roadway. Highway alignment selection involves the horizontal and vertical
orientation of the proposed improvements in such a way as to minimize impacts and costs.
The engineering and environmental parameters of this project, specifically the replacement
of the Catawba River bridge at or near its existing location precluded a shift in highway
alignment that would possibly reduce noise impacts. The proposed widening contains
limited or no control of access along NC 27; therefore, existing and future development will
continue to have direct driveway access. Such access prohibits noise barriers from effective
noise abatement since barrier continuity is the key to effectively reducing noise. The above
evaluations complete the assessment requirements of 23 CFR 772 for this project. No
additional reports are required.
No species, listed as threatened and/or endangered by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
were observed during field investigations conducted in March 1993. One Endangered
species found in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties, Schweinitz' sunflower, has a blooming
season during the month of September. Marginal habitat for the sunflower may occur
within isolated successional pockets which border the highway and in highly disturbed areas
along the CSX railway alignment. Field surveys will be conducted in these areas during
appropriate blooming seasons (September) to verify the presence/absence of Helianthus
schweinitzii in the project corridor. If the Schweinitz' sunflower is found, an acceptable
avoidance or mitigation plan will be developed to minimize impacts to the species.
To avoid impacting the spawning habitat of the white bass located in these waters, no
instream construction work or riparian area disturbances will occur during the period from
March 1 through May 15.
No regulatory floodplain has been established by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) for this section of the Catawba River. A flood easement elevation of 579.4
feet above MSL has been established by Duke Power for the Lake Wylie Reservoir which
controls this section of the river. There are no practical alternatives to crossing the flood
easement area in the project area. Any shift in alignment would result in a crossing of
about the same magnitude. The alignment of the project is perpendicular to the Catawba
River and its flood easement area. All reasonable measures will be taken to minimise any
possible harm. Since construction activity on the bridge might take place within the project
boundary of a federally licensed project (Project No. 2232), Duke Power will be coordinated
25
with prior to construction.
The United States Coast Guard, in a letter dated October 6, 1993, states that the Cat
River at this location falls under the provisions of Section 107 of the Coast C
Authorization Act of 1982. This legislation excludes non-tidal waterways which are not
or susceptible for use by interstate or foreign commerce from bridge permit required:
Therefore, construction of this bridge will not require a Coast Guard Bridge Permit.
This project is expected to have minimal to no impact to wetlands or other waters of th'
United States. Therefore, an individual Section 404 permit will not be required from th
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). A Nationwide Permit(NWT) No. 23 (33 CF
330.5(a)(23)) has been issued by the COE for Federal agency projects which are assumed
to have minimal impact. The N.C. Division of Environmental Management (DEM) h
'
issued a General 401 Water Quality Certification for NWP No. 23. In the event that NW 3
No. 23 will not suffice, minor impacts attributed to bridging and associated approac
improvements are allowable under General Bridge Permit 031 issued by the CO
Wilmington District. Notification to the COE, Wilmington District Office is required if thi
General Permit 031 is utilized.
Mitigation of construction impacts associated with this project will include implemental
of NCDOT's Best Management Practices For Protection of Surface Waters (BMP's)
minimise adverse impacts of construction activities, and the implementation of the Eros:
and Sedimentation Control Plan established by NCDOT in co-operation with NCDEHr
This project will impact three geodetic survey markers. The N.C. Geodetic Survey will
contacted prior to construction.
If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance
applicable local laws and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in comp]
with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation completes the assessment requirements of 23
770. No additional reports are required.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no significant
environmental impacts will result from implementation of the project.
26
REFERENCES CITED
Cooper, J. E., Robinson, S. S. and Funderburg, J. B. (1977) Endangered and Threatened
Plants and Animals of North Carolina., Report to the North Carolina State Museum of
Natural History, Raleigh N.C.
Department of the Army (DOA) (1987) Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual.Tech.Rpt.Y-87-1, Waterways Experiment Station, COE, Vicksburg Mississippi
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) (1989) Benthic Macroinvertebrate
AmbientNetwork (BMAN) Water Quality Review 1983-1987. Rpt. 89-08, N.C. Department
of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh, N.C.
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) (1993) Classifications and Water Quality
Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Catawba River Basin, N.C. Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh, N.C.
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) (1988) Water Quality Progress in North
Carolina, Report no. 88-02 (305B). Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources, Raleigh, N.C.
Fish, F. F. (1968) A Catalog of the Inland Fishing Waters of North Carolina, North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission, Division of Inland Fisheries, Raleigh, N.C.
Hamel, P. B., LeGrand Jr., M. R., Lannartz, M. R. and Gauthreaux Jr., S. A. (1982) Bird
Habitat Relationships on Southeastern Forest Lands, USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep.
5E-22.
Kral, R. A Report on Some Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Forest-related Vascular
Plants of the South. Technical Publication R8-TP 2, USDA Forest Service.
LeGrand, H. E. Jr. (1990) Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species of
North Carolina, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Raleigh N.C.
Martof, B. S., Palmer, W. M., Bailey, J. R. and Harrison III, J.R. (1980) Amphibians and
Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia, UNC Press, Chapel Hill N.C.
Myers, R. K., Zahner, R. and Jones, S. M. (1986) Forest Habitat Regions of South Carolina:
Series No. 42, Clemson University Department of Forest Resources, Clemson S.C.
27
Potter, E. F., Parnell, J. F. and Teulings, R. P. (1980) Birds of the Carolinas, The University
of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, N.C.
Radford, A. E., Ahles, H. E. and Bell, C. R. (1968) Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas, The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill N.C.
Schafale, M. P. and Weakley, A. S. (1990) Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina: Third Approximation, N.C. Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks
and Recreation, N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, P.O. Box
27687, Raleigh N.C. 27611
The Scientific Council on Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks (SCFTM) (1990) A report
on the conservation status of North Carolina's freshwater and terrestrial molluscan fauna.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1987) Hydric Soils of the United States. In
cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils, USDA Soil
Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1980) Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North
Carolina, USDA Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1989) Soil Survey of Gaston County, North
Carolina, USDA Soil Conservation Service.
Weakley, A. S. (1990) Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North
Carolina, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
Division of Parks and Recreation, Raleigh N.C.
Webster, W. D., Parnell, J. F. and Biggs, W. C. Jr. (1985) Mammals of the Carolinas,
Virginia, and Maryland, UNC Press, Chapel Hill N.C.

28
lw
2110
-ly
20530 o 211]
0 hr
N 1 F/
I;
2°sz 09 a`
2,89
2040

1958
1923
1939
2•
W
e, o
;a
?' O
0j
271
05. 7 '
03,4.
xto F•IU .i:`:?? rtp
1918
1931
J MOUNTAIN l\ \
fSf.,1ND VVV
DAM
®
f
1933 3
A,
J J?
?.,
ift V
\-'-
16
' PROJECT ,. o
1923
:l
' ao
Ar u ,;?? i es e ° °C v .07
27-?
t???eoe°. E .l rblfa Ava i ca
2040 Ave ' . ,
C 2180' L.
AU f S .I„ A 1? ma
HOLLY'
N +
j RAILROAD
3
273
BEGIN
PROJECT..,.' 2044
.87
i im
I"
.,:
f 1 ?. ? ?' T as '?.::;t;t:
/ ° .w ee 3 os i? r
1x o
!!1 uu
1!8! VfL .ox ?? --.
f 25
T
NORM GAEWUNA DEPABTNIM OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF 13IGHWAYS
PLANNMG AND
BRAN(
B-1193
LOCATION MAP
BRIDGE NO. 66
NC 27 OVER CATAWBA RIVER
GASTON & MECKLENBURG COUNTIES
09/93 9 MI. ; FIG.1

..i ? .:
BRIDGE NO. 66
GASTON AND
MECKLENBURG COUNTIES
8-1193
LOOKING EAST ON NC 27
AT BRIDGE NO. 66

LOOKING WEST ON NC 27
AT BRIDGE NO. 66
LOOKING EAST ON NC 27
AT CSX RAILROAD BRIDGE
(BRIDGE NO. 66 IN DISTANCE)
FIGURE 3
BRIDGE NO. 66
GASTON AND
MECKLENBURG COUNTIES
8-1193
BOAT RAMP ACCESS DRIVE
ONTO NC 27 (NORTHSIDE OF
NC 27 BETWEEN CSX RAILROAD
BRIDGE AND BRIDGE NO. 66)
OL
-a
LOOKING WEST TOWARDS
NC 273 (HIGHLAND AVE.)
FROM ALEXANDER ST.
I?
i
LOOKING WEST ON NC 27
AT SANDOZ CHEMICALS DRIVEWAY
FIGURE 4
TYPICAL SECTIONS ON NC 27
(UNDER CSX RAILROAD STRUCTURE)
4-SPAN ALTERNATE (NORTH OR SOUTH)

Jol
4-
3-SPAN ALTERNATE (NORTH OR SOUTH)
Ge• C-F

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVffiION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
B-1193
TYPICAL SECTIONS
BRIDGE NO. 66
NC 27 OVER CATAWBA RIVER
GASTON & MECKLENBURG COUNTIES
09/93 NO SCALE FIG. 5
rJ I J ?J I J ?J J
I
11J L rJ L
r .a k.
'y z N
•I' to 'I I N
•I' ?? r-itoz-
0 = y N C
m =
q?0 r m _o r m
> rn NT 0
4 < co ca
4 v C r A
+ P O
` CQ
N I ?_
' I N
w 4 ' I C V?
1' mm
' 1 N ? ? /
1 1 V t? ?
+ 1 I ? O
I ' /A
i ' rn V
11 x
+7 Q
N ' I
?o 40
, I n
w w II
-? I
1? ? V
' _• O 1=1'1
W C W 1I
OD OD -
_ 1 v
N `
' w
1 '
as
o .
o? ?(n
z N ? to H 25
O co j*?t MO rn
N W ~
(A I td r- CA
ZDZC) (? Q*4n rr, VJ N
C11 ?..,
(A C: a z
? CO 0 -j v
_ o
>
c?
o 0z
- N
'n Z rn N N
G7 -4 ;
RECD
JUL. 1 5 1993
?C vE0
+J.
. a 4
RUST E& 1 State of North Carolina MAY '"'
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural RHr.
Division of Land Resources ?? SECTIOi?
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT RRWEw ooNMNTS Charles H. Gardner
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Project Number: 7 3 O? ?6 County:
Project Name: ee( , _--
Geodetic Survey
t
1/ ---This project will impact geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
Survey should be contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box* 27687,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
Other (comments attached) (??733-3896
For mo
re information contact the Geodetic Surve office at 91 Y ( 7
Review
Date ? •?'? •
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
No comment
This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if more
than one (1) acre will be disturbed.
If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
4 Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of the erosion and sedimentation control plan.
If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water
Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
increased design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Land Quality Section at (919.) 733-4574.
A c=-
Reviewer Date
P.O. Box 27687 • Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]

An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Emolover

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
RECD
J U L 1 5 1993
RUST E& I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
A If
4*
r. ?
F= F1
May 24, 1993
FROM: David Harrison

v?
SUBJECT: Bridge Replacement on NC 27 at the Catawba River.
Project # 93-0906.
The proposed project involves replacing an existing two lane
bridge with a new multi-lane structure. Some widening of NC 27
will also be involved. The Environmental Assessment should
identify any unique, prime, or important farmlands that would be
impacted by the project. A wetlands evaluation should be
included.
a
A
F
DH/tl
Attachment
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
ate; -31993 1jV
Gaston County Schools
shaping our future
May 27, 1993
REVD
Dr. Charles H. Weaver
JUL 1 5 1993
RUST E& t
Auxiliary Services
k Dept. of Public Instruction
_-.301 N. Wilmington Street,-Education Bldg.
Raleigh, NC 27601-2825
Subject: Bridge Replacement Project for Bridge #66 on
NC 27 Over the Catawba River, Gaston-Mecklenberg
Counties, TIP #B-1193, N.C. Project #8.1810201, F.A.
Project #BRM-5425(3)
Dear XAfter reviewing the above stated project, this
school system has no information that can be helpful in
the evaluation process. Considering that this bridge
is not used in the routing of school transportation
vehicles, we have no preference as to the location of
the new bridge. We do however, agree that both bridge
#66 and the railroad bridge need to be replaced.
If we can be of further assistance please contact
us !
Sincerely yours,
Edwin L. West
Superintendent
Gaston County
Edwin L. West, Jr.
Superintendent
943 Osceola Street
P.0. Box 1397
Gastonia, NC 28053
704-866-6100
FAX [phone]
SCE/Lc?
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
ATLANTA REGIONAL OFFICE JUN 0 ,
3125 Presidential Parkway - Suite 300 1 1"3
Atlanta, Georgia 30340 Z
y DIVISIdN OF
c? HtGHWAYS v?r
RECD
May 26, 1993 JUL 1 5 M .
Mr. L-.----J. _ Ward, P. E. RUST E& I
State of North Carolina
Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
This acknowledges receipt of your letter dated May 6, 1993,
soliciting comments on the proposed bridge replacement project for
Bridge No. 66 on North Carolina 27 over the Catawba River, Gaston
and Mecklenburg Counties, North Carolina. It appears that the
improvements will not impact hydroelectric developments under the
jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Therefore, we have no comment.
/VVIV t1r?uly yours,
Robert W. Crisp, P.E.
Director
State of North Carolina
Department -of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Environmental Management
AM
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor p E H N R
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director REOD
JUL 1 5 1993
June 3, 1993
RUST Ed 6
MEMORANDUM
--TO-.- -_Melba McGee, Division of Planning and Assessment
FROM: Monica Swihar4 Water Quality Planning Branch
SUBJECT: Project No. 93-0906; Scoping - NC DOT Proposed
Bridge Replacement Project for Bridge #66 on NC 27 Over
the Catawba River (TIP #B-1193)
The Division's Water Quality Section has reviewed the subject
scoping letter. The proposed bridge improvements would occur over
a section of the Catawba River which is classified as WS-IV CA
(critical area of the Lake Wylie Water Supply Watershed). The
environmental document should discuss the measures the NCDOT would
utilize to minimize the potential water quality impacts associated
with construction and the long-term use of the improved bridge.
DEM recommends that catch basins be placed at all water supply
stream crossings. DOT's manual on Best Management Practices for
Protection of Surface Waters (June 1991) specifies that "bridge
crossings within the critical area of water supply reservoirs or
rivers will be designed to eliminate direct discharge of flow from
the bridge deck into the receiving water."
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Certification 31 (with
W wetland impacts) would require written concurrence. Please be
aware that 401 Certification may be denied if wetland impacts have
not been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding wetland impacts and the 401 Certification
process should be directed to Eric Galamb of this office.
We appreciate having the opportunity to provide comments on
this project.
9295er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
?
P.O. Box 29535, Rdeigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
RECD "'01
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
JUL 1 5 1993 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIQNAL MAR1NEFl$HERIE$ SEp?[JCE
g
°rr„is of? Southeast a tonal O rice
RUST E& 1 X9450 Koger Boulevard
St. Petersburg, Florida 33702
June 7, 1993
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E.!
Planning and Environmental Branch 'JUN 0 8
N. C. Department of Transportation 1993
P. O. Box 25201 y
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201 Zy DIVISION OF ,bra.
Attention Michelle Wagoner HIGHWFi IGHWAYS
E
Dear Mr. Ward:
This responds to your May 6, 1993, letter requesting our input in
the environmental assessment process for the Bridge Replacement
Project for Bridge #66 on NC 27 Over the Catawba River, Gaston-
Mecklenburg Counties, North Carolina, TIP #B-1193, N. C. Project
#8.1810201, F. A. Project #BRM-5425(3).
We have reviewed the information provided in your letter and have
determined that no resources for which we are responsible are found
in the project area. Therefore, we have no comment.
If we can be of further assistance, please advise.
Sincerely;,
TA dr as Mager .
Ass Ystant Regional Director
Habitat Conservation Division
cc: FWS, ATLA, GA
FWS, Raleigh, NC
EPA, ATLA, GA
NCDEHNR, Raleigh, NC
NCDEHNR, Morehead City, NC
COE, Wilmington, NC
F/SE02
L'W'D

i
JUL 1 5 1993
RUST E&
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
FROM: David Yow, Highway Project Coordinator 4?700_1?
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: June 9, 1993
SUBJECT: Request for information from the N. C. Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) regarding fish and wildlife
concerns for Bridge No. 66 on NC 27 over the Catawba
River, Gaston-Mecklenburg Counties, North Carolina, TIP
No. B-1193, SCH Project No. 93-0906.
This memorandum responds to a request from Mr. L. J. Ward of
the NCDOT for our concerns regarding impacts on fish and wildlife
resources resulting from the subject project. The N. C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC) has reviewed the proposed
improvements, and our comments are provided in accordance with
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat.
401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The proposed work involves replacement of highway and
railroad bridges with associated widening of roadway aproaches.
Potential threats to fish and wildlife habitat include
introduction of sediments and toxicants to aquatic systems and
interference with fish and wildlife movements along the Catawba
River corridor.
The Catawba River and Dutchman's Creek support a spawning
run of white bass which occurs from mid-March to early May.
Instream construction work or increased turbidity from soil
disturbance adjacent to these waters may inhibit fish movements,
directly impacting reproductive success. Sedimentation of stream
channels may also degrade spawning habitat. To avoid these
impacts, no instream or riparian area disturbance should occur
Memo
Page 2
during the period from March 1 through May
leads to encroachment on Dutchman's Creek
moratorium should be employed there.
June 9, 1993
15. If road widening
near SR 2180, a similar
If off-site bridge replacement is selected, the new
structure should be placed immediately to the north of the
existing bridge or between the highway bridge and the
southernmost railroad bridge. Construction north of this area
will adversely impact Dutchman's Creek, and old industrial
property to the south may involve handling of toxic materials
which may be spilled into aquatic habitat.
The replacement structures should have equal or greater
spans than the existing bridges, and vegetated river bank areas
should-be retained under the bridges-f-r wildlife movement.
In addition to the specific concerns mentioned above, our
general informational needs are listed below:
1. Description of fishery and wildlife resources within
the project area, including a listing of federally or
state designated threatened, endangered, or special
concern species. When practicable, potential borrow
areas to be used for project construction should be
included in the inventories. A listing of designated
plant species can be developed through consultation
with:
The Natural Heritage Program
N. C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
and,
Cecil C. Frost, Coordinator
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. O. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
In addition, the NCWRC's Nongame and Endangered Species
Program maintains databases for locations of vertebrate
wildlife species. While there is no charge for the
list, a service charge for computer time is involved.
i
Additional information may be obtained from:
Memo Page 3 June 9, 1993
Randy Wilson, Manager
Nongame and Endangered Species Program
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, N. C. 27604-1188
[phone].
2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by the
project. The need for channelizing or relocating
portions of streams crossed and the extent of such
activities.

3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreages impacted by
the project. Wetland acreages should include all
-project-related areas that may undergo hydrologic
change as a result of ditching, other drainage, or
filling for project construction. Wetland
identification may be accomplished through coordination
with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). If the
COE is not consulted, the person delineating wetlands
should be identified and criteria listed.
4. Cover type maps showing acreages of upland wildlife
habitat impacted by the proposed project. Potential
borrow sites should be included.
5. The extent to which the project will result in loss,
degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife habitat
(wetlands or uplands).
6. Mitigation for avoiding, minimizing or compensating for
direct and indirect degradation in habitat quality as
well as quantitative losses.
7. A cumulative impact assessment section which analyzes
the environmental effects of highway construction and
quantifies the contribution of this individual project'
to environmental degradation.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early
planning stages for this project. If I can further assist your
office, please contact me at [phone].
cc Ken Knight, District 6 Wildlife Biologist
Wayne Chapman, District 6 Fisheries Biologist
Randy Wilson, Nongame/Endangered Species Program Mgr.
Janice Nicholls, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
June 17, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
David Brook
Deputy State 'Historic Preservation Officer
RECD
JUL 1 5 1993
RUST IE & d
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
CE!
JUN 2 1 1993
DIVISIGV Or ,T
?I HIGHWAYS
yM???? r'
Replace Bridge No. 66 on NC 27 over Catawba River,
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties, B-1193, 8.1810201,
BRM-5425(3), CH 93-E-4220-0906
We have received information concerning the above project from the State Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures of historical or
architectural importance located within the planning area. However, we understand that an
architectural historian for the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has
surveyed the area of potential effect for the project and located several structures over fifty
years of age. We look forward to reviewing NCDOT's documentation and determinations of
eligibility for structures over fifty years of age in the area of potential effect.
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.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for. Compliance with Section .10.6, codified at 36 C.FR 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.
DB:slw
cc: B. Church
T. Padgett
State Clearinghouse
T
nqn

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
July 9, 1993
Planning Division
C S
iln? 131993
SIGN Or ?Or
2G? N'V I GHW4Vl
??RGNMEtdt PLC
RECD
J
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
---Planning and. Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
AUG 2 4 1993
MUST E &I
This is in response to your letter of May 6, 1993, requesting
our comments on the initiation of a study of the "Bridge Replacement
Project for Bridge #66 on NC 27 Over the Catawba River, Gaston-
Mecklenburg Counties, TIP #B-1193, N. C. Project #8.1810201, F. A.
Project #BRM-5425(3)" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199302711).
From the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) perspective, our
review and comments focus on impacts to COE projects, flood plains,
and other environmental aspects, primarily waters and wetlands. The
proposed project would not impact any constructed COE navigation or
flood control project.
The proposed project is sited partially within the jurisdiction
of the city of Mount Holly in Gaston County and in Mecklenburg
County, both of which participate in the National Flood Insurance
Program. The Catawba River is shown as an approximate study
stream on both Mount Holly and Mecklenburg County Flood Insurance
Study Rate Maps. This means that there are no regulatory flood
elevations nor floodway limits defined, although the approximate
100-year flood plain is identified- as a flood-hazard area. The new
structure should be..des.i.gn.ed.s.o .as _not.-to increase flood elevations
more than 1 foot above the existing conditions. We suggest that you
coordinate with the city of Mount Holly and Mecklenburg County for
compliance with their flood plain ordinances and any resultant
changes in their flood insurance maps and reports.

Our Regulatory Branch has also reviewed your letter and has the
following comments.
-2-

This portion of the Catawba River is subject to Department of
the Army permit requirements under both Section 10 of the River and
Harbor Act of 1899 and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977,
as amended. These requirements apply equally to design elements
of the project as well as construction activities. While we are
not aware of any substantial wetland resources in the vicinity
of the existing bridge and approaches, we recommend that a field
reconnaissance for wetlands be conducted and reported to this
office. Minimum navigational clearances for the new structure
should be the same as the existing br_rdge. Construction should
not obstruct more than one-half of the river channel at any given
time. Any obstructions should be well marked for safety purposes.
If you have any questions or comments related to permits, please
contact Mr. Steve Lund of the Asheville Regulatory Field Office at
[phone].
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If
we can be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to
contact us.
Ye rely,
Lawrence ?aunders
Chief, PlaW ng Division

f ? ?E o? O
V r`? OCT 1 1 1993
DIVISION OF
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resour HIGHWAYS e?
ONNtE??
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Division of and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
October 5, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf 1??C??
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation OCT 1 4 1993
+ 31 New- Bern Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1442 RUST F.
RE: Replace Bridge No. 66 on NC 27 over Catawba
River, Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties, B-1193,
BRM-5425(3), ER 94-7393.
Thank you for your letter of September 3, 1993, concerning the above project
We have reviewed the phase I historic architectural resources survey report
prepared by Kitty Houston for the North Carolina Department of Transportation
concerning the project. We understand that four structures over fifty years of
age--a garage, two houses and the bridge itself--are located in the area of potential
effect (APE).
Based upon the information in the report, we concur with the Federal Highway
Administration's determination that none of the structures are eligible for listing in
the National Register since they possess little historical or architectural
significance. Thus, no National Register listed or eligible properties are located in
the APE for the project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
cTomo
David Brook, Deputy State
Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
vV
cc: LR: Vick, NCDOT
B. Church, NCDOT
U.S.Department Command Federal Building
:Y of Transportation Fift s>5ufr ct 431 Crawford Street
3'® Staff Sy u bsl' 23(188T 4
' United States ?. Phone: ? 904) 398-6227
Coast Guard
-? OCI111993
16590
Z2 DIVISION OFT 06 Oct 93
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager 2G' HIGHWAYS RECD
Planning and Environmental Branch ?FNWRON ?P
North Carolina Department of Transpor n
P. 0. Box 25201 OCT 1 4 1993
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
RUST E& 1 ?
Dear Mr. Ward:
This is in response to a telephone conversation on October 1,
1993, between Ms. Linda Gilliam of my Bridge Staff and MS.
Michelle Wagoner of your staff who provided the additional
information requested in our letter dated May 27, 1993, for the
proposed replacement of the NC 27 bridge across the Catawba
River, in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties, North Carolina.
The Catawba River at this location falls under the provisions of
Section 107 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1982. This
legislation excludes non-tidal waterways which are not used or
susceptible for use by interstate or foreign commerce from bridge
permit requirements. Therefore, construction of this bridge will
not require a Coast Guard Bridge Permit.
The fact that a Coast Guard permit is not required for this
project does not relieve you of the responsibility for compliance
with any other Federal, State or local agency who may have
jurisdiction over any aspect of the project.
Sincerely,
ANN B. DEATON
Chief, Bridge Section
By direction of the Commander
Fifth Coast Guard District
dY°rew.
North Carolina Department of Cultural
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
December 2, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
-Department-of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge 66 on NC 27 over Catawba River,
B-1193, Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties, ER
94-7773
Dear Mr. Graf:
T DEC 0 6 1993
tit, ! ')iVISICN OF
Durc HIGHWAYS.
Division of Arc History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of November 1, 1993, transmitting the archaeological
survey report by Gray, Jurgelski, and Robinson concerning the above project.
Although we have reservations about the adequacy of an "intensive visual"
investigation, the nature and extent of previous land disturbances in the project
area lead us to agree with the assessment of the report. Specifically, that it is
unlikely that archaeological resources which might be eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places will be affected by project construction. We concur
with the recommendation for no further archaeological investigation to be
conducted in connection with this project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
ZD1 Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw?
cc: ` H. F. Vick
T. Padgett
e
D
June 3, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Division
FROM: Monica Swihart, Water
M - 31993
of Planning and Assessment
Quality Planning Branch

SUBJECT: Project No. 93-0906; Scoping - NC DOT Proposed
Bridge Replacement Project for Bridge #66 on NC 27 Over
the Catawba River (TIP #B-1193)
The Division's Water Quality Section has reviewed the subject
scoping letter. The proposed bridge improvements would occur over
a section of the Catawba River which is classified as WS-IV CA
(critical area of the Lake Wylie Water Supply Watershed). The
environmental document should discuss the measures the NCDOT would
utilize to minimize the potential water quality impacts associated
with construction and the long-term use of the improved bridge.
DEM recommends that catch basins be placed at all water supply
stream crossings. DOT's manual on Best Management Practices for
Protection of Surface Waters (June 1991) specifies that "bridge
crossings within the critical area of water supply reservoirs or
rivers will be designed to eliminate direct discharge of flow from
the bridge deck into the receiving water."
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Certification 31 (with
wetland impacts) would require written concurrence. Please be
aware that 401 Certification may be denied if wetland impacts have
not been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding wetland impacts and the 4.01 Certification
process should be directed to Eric Galamb of this office.
We appreciate having the opportunity to provide comments on
this project.
9295er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb