19950597 Ver 1_Complete File_19950608

D D
October 12, 1998
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Environmental Management
NC Dept. of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, NC 27606
Re: NC Dept. of Transportation #8.1631701
Stanly - Rowan - Davidson Counties
Subject: Action ID No. 199503833
Dear Mr. Dorney:
This letter is written as a follow-up to my phone conversation with the
Resident Engineer, Mr. Keith Raulston PE. Mr. Raulston advised Jones Bros.,
that the Department would allow our drilled shaft subcontractor to complete the
balance of their drilling without the use of temporary casing pipe. This
permission was conditional on two issues. The first one will not be discussed in
this letter because it involves an administration matter unrelated to the Division of
Environmental Management.
The second condition involves water quality as a result of this change. On
September 19, 1998, our subcontractor, A.H. Beck, employed an environmental
Engineer, Inenco Inc., to assess compliance with the permit, the existing control
procedures, and to test the levels of turbidity during the drilling process without
the use of temporary casing. Based on the results of the testing, we feel that the
NC Dept. of Transportation and our subcontractor can work within the
requirements of the permit.
5120 HWY. 49 N
MT. PLEASANT, NORTH CAROLINA 28124
704-723-9870 ¦ FAX: [phone]
Division of Environment Management
October 12, 1998
Page 2
I am sending you a copy of the test results, which has established a NTU
basis prior to the drilling without the temporary casing. With a maximum of 3.4
NTU tested during the drilling process, our subcontractor is working within the
permit. It will be necessary for the Division of Environmental Management to
instruct the Resident Engineer that the requirement of the permit has been met.
Within the next few days, our subcontractor could be drilling without the
temporary casing. If an on site meeting is necessary, please advise us as soon
as possible in order for me to contact all interest parties.
Thank you in advance for the courtesy of your reply.
Sincerely,
Jones Bros. Inc.
-57
Phillip Brown
Group Manager
Enclosure
Cc: AH Beck
Jerry Britten
Keith Raulston
Sep-30-98 03:56P A_ H_ Beck Foundation Ca- 713 413t3B11 _ P.02
132 W. Swcsvnlle Ave.
Mmtesviue, NC 28115
INENCO_.INC [phone]
F?. ???> 662-8144
September 30, 1998
Mr. Keith Anderson, operations Manager
A. H. Fleck Foundation Co., Inc.
13650 Hycohen Road
Houston, TX 77047
Re: Assessment of 'turbidity Compliance issues in Regard to Bridge Support Construction.
Dear Mr. Anderson,
In 1995, The State of North Carolina r)epartment of Transportation (NC DOT) obtained permits
from the US Corps of Engineers and the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NC DENR) to construct a new bridge across the Tuekertown Reservoir to service
North Carolina State Highway 49. Within the issued perrnits are stated conditions in regard to
maximum allowable turbidity associated with the bridge support and caisson placement activities.
Specifically, the contractor shall not allow turbidity to exceed 25 NTU's in a reservoir. You have
expressod concern that the turbidity levels may rise and that there is a slight chance of exceeding
the turbidity limit during the construction of the bridge supports.
You have addressed these concerns by implementing a procedure which will (a) control the
spread of any generated turbidity, and (b) will enhance the settlement of any generated turbidity
within the area of generation. This procedure includes the installation of two turbidity curtains in
the water, one about fifty feet in diameter which functions as the primary screen; and one about
ninety feet in diameter which serves a dual role: a secondary turbidity screen and a gross stream
diversion screen which aids in diverting stream flow around the drilling area. Both of these
turbidity screens extend about five feet into the water. You have further addressed these concerns
by securing the services of (a) a North Carolina-licensed laboratory to conduct water sampling
and turbidity measurement activities, and (b) a North Carolina-licensed professional engineer to
review your practices and procedures as well as the analytical results.
My observation of the operation of the turbidity screens is that they work well in serving their
intended fivtction: They prevent the spread of any generated turbidity, and allow for the settling of
the particles within the general area of the bridge support. This observation was made on
September 22, 1998, when concrete core drilling was being performed.
Providing Environmental Engineering, Technology and Service
,Sep-30-98 03:58P A. H. Beck Foundation Co_ 713 413+3811 P.11
Sent By: INENCO, Inc.;
1;2 W Statesville Ave.
JfO) INENC01,14C.
MMrmville, NC 28115
(700662-9197
Fex. (7134) 662-9194 tream Of
Analytical results include turbidity background kmpl and results ranged feromal 6 dto2. NTU's.
tlie: bridge consteuetton activity. These imtlal bee 9M with no work casing in piece. an additional
done
on September 30, 1999, when drilling was toeing set orwater samples was collected and analyzed. Their turbidity ranged from 1.6 to 3.4 NT11's.
teal results,! believe that A. H. Beck 1.oundation
Bused on these visual obsctvations and analyt
Co., Inc. has property addressed concerns as to turbidity generated and has controlled atty
probable impact due to turbidity.
Sincerely,
James W. Gilpin, PE
principal consultant
providing Environmental Engineering, Technology and Service
,Sep-30-98 03:56P A- H- Beck Foundation Co_ 713 413+3811 P.03
9-113-1 ?J13 ? : 5??'?? r n?n, ...... ? ....-.... ?. ----
PAR Laborerories, InC_
P.O. Sax 411483
LAR AVC- Charlotte, NC 28241.1483
Phone: [phone] -
Fax: [phone]
TO: Keith Anderson From: Russ Everett
Company: A.H- Beck ]Foundation Date: September 28. 1998
Fax: [phone] Pages: 5 (including cover sheet)
Phone: CC:
Re: Lab Results
Comments:
Attached are the results for the first batch of samples we collected on September
18. The results look pretty good. Jim Gilpin was expecting them to be around
3.0.
Please call john Rice or myself if you have any questions.
Russ
Sep-.30-98 03:56P A. H- Beck Foundation Ca- 713 413+3811
9-28-1 W8 1 :5Owm rrcur rhn ?..uvr......... - ----
PAR Leborvfoi;*%, Inc.
2217 c,o6ann Park Drive
Sox 411483
FQ
C6or6ft, NC 28241-1483
No carts m. SC 02m o 9900m,
Pffl!?!j
REPORT OF ANALYSES
Attn: KEITH ANDERSON
A-H. HECK FOUNDATION CO., INC.
13650 HYCOHEN ROAD
HOUSTON, TX 77047-
FIWY 49 BRIDGE PROJECT (Page 1 of 2)
SAMPLE
LAB No. DATE TIME SAMPLER
7965 09/18/98 1030 RUSSELL EVERETT
7966 09/18/98 1035 RUSSELL WERETT
7967 09/18/98 1040 RUSSELL EVERETT
7968 09118198 1045 RUSSELL EVERETT
7969 09118198 1050 RUSSELL EVERETT
7970 09/18/98 3055 RUSSELL EVERETT
7971 09/18/98 1100 RUSSELL EVERETT
7972 09/18/99 1105 RUSSELL EVEEETT
CLIENT LAS TURBIDITY
STATION ID NUMBER NW
SAMPLE #1 7965 2.1
SQMFX4r 92 7966 1.9
SAMPLE 03 79,67 1.7
SAMPLE #4 7969 2.3
SAMPLE 05 7969 2.4
SAMPLE " 7970 1-9
SAMPLE 117 7971 1.6
SAMPLE 118 7972 1-7
PROJECT NAME: SEP 98
DATE: 09/28/98
DELIVERY TO LAB
DATR TIMR MATRIX
09/18/98 1230 WA
09/18/98 1230 WA
09/18/98 1230 WA
09/18/98 1230 WA
09/18/96 1230 WA
09118198 1230 WA
09/18/98 1230 WA
09/18/98 1230 WA L8
LaaoAkTORY DIRECTOR
P-04
Sep-30-98 03:57P A_ H. Beck Foundation Co- 713 413+3811
PAR Labcraforiaa. Ine-
aLANOMil sac Graham Pork Drive
REPORT OF ANALYSES
221
PO Sex 411493
Chorlo?N, NC 282di•1d83
+
c can r sv: SC Cur ffl 990ota0+
Attn: KITH ANDERSON
A.H. BECK FOUNDATION CO., INC-
13650 HYCOHEN ROAD
HOUSTON, TX 77047-
HWY 49 BRIDGE PROJECT (Page 2 of 2)
SAMPLE
LAS NO- DATE TIME SAMPLER
7973 09/18/98 1110 AUSSELL, MRETT
7974 09/18198 1119 RVSSELL EVERETT
CLIENT LAS TURBIDITY
STATION ID NUMBER NTU
SAMPLE 09 7973 2.6
SAMPLE 810 '7974 2.7
PROJECT NAME: SEP 98
DATE: 09/28198
DELIVERY TO LAB
DATE TIME MATRIX
09/18/98 1230 WA
09/18/98 1230 WA
X-V
LABORATORY DIRECTOR
P . 05
Sep730-98 03:57P A. H. Beck Foundation Co. 713 41313811
PAR
ue?ro?s. u?c.
Shipping.
2217 Grahem Park Orive
Charlotte, NC 28273
CHAIN OF CUSTOD Y
PAR Laboratories, inc
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
u ?s esseet:al that an odwMatbh retordad on trli9 CDain of Custody dotty fAM for scceptv+a bV PAR I.aberatorieA, me and tap Nonh
Cwouha Oedeneham of lipAron.-.enum she NawrN Assources.
Company Name (Niiinq)
Address
/OloSo ,cl&c A&4p
Ciry. Ststa a zip Coae
Point of Contact a Telephone Nva4vr
Semple taken by.
Mailing:
PO Box 411483
Charlotte, NC 28241-1483
Contfnenw9twelal Instfuetlens
=iv c.Etr
? 1 4
2 g y S
oc.
IS THIS FOR STATE or EPA REPORTING? YES Y NO
-Sample type: OW WW GWMW MW _ gob Other
Sample Tento upon receipt. 7.-, °C
•* Preserved: Yes A- No Teflon urlerJ Zero Nesdspace: Yes_ No NIA _
P.00
i•eht Ssmpb I.D.
4Se4%oie LoCS60h I Numbed Como
Grab
Preaery. Set up
Oate/Tinw Goaection
patelrirna na"as
epuested
'I
iZC r
V I
I

i
l
.?t 1
?
?`j I 1
'
r 145E ..-1
•

I Jv• I 1 r.

je9
,ItO .r
_? ..... ? e¦t¦r :n,e ? Retched by ;% I I tS OatelTi

by'

OsteMroe / , Received by:
Oato/Time
c =- 00-powite G • Glee OW = Drink:rto Water WW = Westewataf GWMW a Groundwater Monitoring Went MW s Matardout Watts
• • 606 other Sloe
A/

.Sep-.30-98 03:57P A. H. Beck Foundation Co. 713 413+3811

v 9
o c?
r r v Y ?...?
N . (J /
x ? oy??
4ad
Gxc?-r?-D ? s?,?.?? ?..,,?srrc?... ?d i? .?,?/?. Zo ?/a?S ?r '
Sep-,30-98 03:57P A. H. Beck Foundat ion Co- 713 413-3811
`.J-.3{?- i vJ?C J : e/ / rrr nvr•. ....-. i..u...• ..-...r.. ._... ... ?Ta To:

Company:
Tax:
Keith Anderson
PAR Laboratories, /17c-
13,0. Box 411483
Charlotte, NC 28241.1483
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
A.H. Beck Foundation
713-413-3811
From., Russ Everett
Date: September 34, 1998
Pages: (including cover sheet)
CC
Phone: :
Re: Lab Results
Comments:
Attached are the results for the hatch of samples we collected today. The results
still look pretty good.
1 took 10 samples from approximately the same locations as last time. In
addition, I took samples on each side of the construction in the middle of the river
about half way between the no wake buoys and the construction; samples inside
and outside the Turbidity Screen; and one sample down river in a cove at a
public boat launch.
This should give you a pretty accurate picture of the turbidity levels of the river.
please call john Rice or myself if you have any questions.
Puri
Russ
Sep73?0-98 03158P A. H. Bock Foundation Co_ 713 413+3811
PAR La6arofvriO3, Ir+e.
PAR 2217 Graham Park Dri-
LADVANI&V" a,e PO Sax d11483
ChorbMe, NC 28241-1483
No CWT s 2& sc Cva s aeoamv
REPORT OF ANALYSES
Aten! XE%rA ANDERSON pROjECT NAME: SEP 98
A.H. BECK FOUNDATION CO., INC. W%TE: 09/30/98
13630 HYCOMN ROAD
HOUSTON, TX 77047-
1iWY 49 BRIDGE PROJECT- SECOND SAMPLING (Page 1 of 2)
DELIVERY TO LAB
SAMPLE
DATE TIME SAMPLER
DATE
TIME
MATRIX
LAB No.
8032 09/30/98 0850 RVSS EVERETT 09/30/98 1200 WA

8033
09/30/98
0855
RVSS
MRETT 9/30/98
0 1200 WA

8034
09/30/98
0900
RIISS
EVERETT 09f30/98 1200 WA

8035
09/30/98
0905
RIISS
EVERETT 09/30/98 1200 WA

8036
09/30/98
0910
RUSS
EVERETT 09/30/98 1200 WA

8037
09/30/98
0915
RUSS
EVERETT 09/30/98 1200 WA
8038 09/30/98 0920 RIISS E'VERETT 0/98
09/3 1200 WA
W

8039
09/30/96
0925
RUSS
EVERETT 0/98
09/3 1200 A
CLIENT LAS TURBIDITY
STATION 2D NUMBER N'?J
SAMPLE $1 8032 1.9
SAMPLE 62 8033 3.2
SAMPLE #3 8034 3.4
SAMPLE #4 8035 1.7
SAMPLE is 8036 2.0
SAMPLE #6 8037 2.0
SAMPLE #i7 8038 2-4
SAMPLE #6 8039 2.3
LABORATORY DIRECTOR
p . U'J
Sap-.30-98 03=58P A. H. BackFoundation Co. 713 41313811
PAR laboratories, lr+c-
2217 Graham Park Dr+va
s e PO Box Al 1483
C6arkwe, NC 282AI-1483
+vC Girt ? 2D; 90 Carr ? pppoio0r
REPORT OF ANALYSES
Attn! KEITH ANDERSON SEP 9B
A.H. BECK FOUNDATION CO_, INC. PROJECT DATE: 09 NAME:
13650 HYCOHEN ROAD
HOUSTON. TX 77047-
HWY 49 BRIDGE PROJECT- SECOND SAMPLING (Page 2 of 2)
SAMPLE
LAB No. DATE TIME
8040 09/30/98 0930
8041 09/30/98 0935
8042 09/30/98 0940
8043 09/30/98 0945
8044 09/30/98 0950
8045 09/30/98 0955
8046 09/30/98 1000
CLILNT LAB
STATION ID NUMBER
SAMPLER
RUSS F.VERSTT
RUSS EVERETT
RUSS EVERETT
puss svERXTT
RUSS EVERETT
RUSS EVERETT
RUSS EVERETT
TURBIDITY
NTV
DELIVERY TO LAB
DATE TIME MATRIX
09/20/98 1200 WA
09/30/98 1200 WA
09/30/98 1200 WA
09/30/98 1200 WA
09/30/98 1200 WA
09/30/98 1200 WA
09/30/98 1200 WA
SAMPLE #19 8040 2.2
SAMPLE #110 8 041 2.1
SAMPLE #11 8042 1.8
SAMPLE #12 9043 1.6
INSIDE TURD.
RING 8044 Z
OUTSIDE TURB-
RING 8045 2.4
BOAT LAUNCH 8046 2.2
*-is •
LABORATORY DIRECTOR a -3
P.10

G?

ov /wIl
33? -76 /- ?? c?
r
r
611"s - se j ?- il--L? ??

MEMO??,?„ DATE:
TO:
L-cl
?a?e9G ?M,a t7
/-) q (( 0-?
67- ?
allll-ie-?e

From:
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources re
Y? N?Y V Printed on Recycled Paper
Qunm
K.E. RAULSTON LexConst Fax=336-249-7726 Sep 3 '98 8:54 P.02
[)i211u1V6

V,
E
w?,
Y
vi
V/ -
K.E. RAULSTON LexConst Fax:[phone]
02
A rir?n
Sep 3 '98 8:55 P.03
I-A

- qw ,%O ow- . .;IF .-.1"rso

l
C
Aft- 1,
Tu/Z C1 r UITr
G?2r?f?
FOI-WICOCD
K.E. RAULSTON LexConst Fax.[phone] Se 3 '98 8 55 P.OA
F
I?
- .. - --

1

FIx o
5#9ri
?rc ?
K.E. P.AULSTON LexConst Fax *33G-249-7726
4

Sek G
U

Sep 3 '98 8,56 P.05
r4 PI T"
?-A `fff6
_ .? rvc
i
i
5 /7o,,4 %/e^)
MEMO
DATE:
TO: SUBJECT:
Lcld?N'? J I/C j UlJ/7?-e-?
C/
/4Q-
From:
5Tr'YC 4
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Y ?g Health, and Natural Resources
N (? Printed on Recycled Paper
Qu-
A S + s ???
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 401 ISSUED
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
May 29, 1995
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
a 55`??
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
41211 -2-
, 9
f
Subject: Rowan and Davidson Counties, Replacement of Bridge No. 8 over the
Yadkin River on NC 49, Federal Aid Project BR2,41IF-49(3), State Project
No. 8.1631701, TIP No. $-2612.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above
referenced project. Bridge number 8 over the Yadkin River on southbound NC 49 will be
replaced south of the existing alignment. Traffic during construction will be detoured
onto the northbound lanes of NC 49 and adjacent bridge number 3. The project will not
result in any wetland impacts, however incidental fill of surface waters is anticipated.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not
anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose to proceed under a Nationwide
Permit in-accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B-23). The provisions of Section
330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be followed in the construction of the
project.
We anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 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.

2
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call Mr. Scott P.
Gottfried at 733-3141.
Sincere Y'
ranklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/spg
cc: w/attachment
Mr. Ken Jolly, COE Raleigh Field Office
Mr. John Dorney, NCDEHNR, DEM
Mr. Kelly Barger, PE, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, PE, Highway Design Branch
Mr. A. L. Hankins, PE, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith Jr., PE, Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, PE, Roadway Design Unit
Mr. D. B. Waters, PE, Division 9 Engineer
Ms. Jay Bissett, PE, Planning and Environmental Branch
Y
ROWAN AND DAVIDSON COUNTIES
NC 49 (SBL)
Bridge No. 8 over Yadkin River (Tuckertown Lake)
Federal-Aid Project BRNHF - 49(3)
State Project No. 8.1631701
T.I.P. No. B-2612
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
AND
PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
1 /l 9?
D& E
1 2 9S
AT
Z-I,--\x7- -
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environ ental Bran h, NCDOT
elt icholas raf, P. E.
r Division Administrator, FHWA
i . ..r
ROWAN AND DAVIDSON COUNTIES
NC 49 (SBL)
Bridge No. 8 over Yadkin River (Tuckertown Lake)
Federal-Aid Project BRNHF - 49(3)
State Project No. 8.1631701
T.I.P. No. B-2612
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
AND
PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
December 1994
Documentation Prepared by RUST Environment & Infrastructure
Ronald G Hairr ?,•`O?'(N CARO(
P Manager ,?•? ??.•UESSIaN•°,.?
9
SEAL r
Roger D. Lewis, P.E. Sw '160 14666
Transportation Department Manager
P1
For North Carolina Department of Transportation
Z.-,v z5?
,4ames A. Bissett, P.E., Unit Head
Consultant Engineering Unit
991-k Avdwev?
Stacy B win
Project Manager
ROWAN AND DAVIDSON COUNTIES
NC 49 (SBL)
Bridge No. 8 over Yadkin River (Tuckertown Lake)
Federal-Aid Project BRNHF - 49(3)
State Project No. 8.1631701
T.I.P. No. B-2612
Bridge No. 8 is included in the 1995-2001 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".
All measurements contained in this report are noted in System International Metric units. The approximate
English System equivalent units are indicated in parentheses beside each measurement.
1. 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 (NWP) No. 23 and/or General Bridge Permit No. 031 for minimal wetlands impacts will
be required for this project.
Railroad traffic on the Winston-Salem South Bound Railroad line will be maintained during highway and
bridge construction periods.
The proposed Yadkin River structure will be designed to eliminate direct discharge of flow from the bridge
/
deck into the receiving water. ?Vb k- "/?s
Fill encroachment within open waters of the Yadkin River will not occur since this system will be bridged.
? ? q Y ` ..,-W 40 r_C 611dC'_, v1 I Z IC ?_, ff 'Cl --?; -6?6-- ce -'n d1,/
Consideration will be given during final design to provide sufficient containment areas for hazardous spills.
A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) has been completed between the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) and the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) with acceptance by the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation (ACHP) which stipulates the measures that shall be implemented to mitigate the
adverse effect of this project to Bridge No. 8. The following commitments have been made to the SHPO
because of the eligibility of Bridge No. 8 for the National Register of Historic Places.
Measures to mitigate the adverse effect to Bridge No. 8 shall include:
1. Photographic recordation which thoroughly document the bridge and provide details of
construction. Specific photographic requirements are included in the MOA (copy in the
Appendix of this report).
2. Graphic documentation to include the reproduction of the construction blueprints on vellum.
3. Description of the current conditions and engineering of the bridge.
4. Copy and Curation of one set of all photographic and graphic documentation deposited with
the North Carolina Division of Archives and State History/State Historic Preservation Office.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 8 over the Yadkin River (Tuckertown Lake) connecting Rowan and Davidson Counties will be
replaced just south of its existing location by Alternate 2 as shown in Figure 2. A new bridge with a length
of 343 meters (1,125 feet) is recommended. The clear roadway width on the structure will be 9.6 meters
(32 feet) to provide two-lanes of travel for the southbound movement of NC 49 over the Yadkin River. This
bridge width will accommodate a 7.2-meter (24-foot) roadway with 1.2-meter (4-foot) shoulders. The
proposed structure features standard concrete barrier rails and a 2 percent normal cross slope. The
centerline of the new structure will be located approximately 6.5 meters (21 feet) south of the centerline of
the existing bridge.
Approximately 545 meters (1,788 feet) of approach work on NC 49 will be required on the west approach
and 756 meters (2,480 feet) on the east approach of Bridge No. 8. This construction will lower and shift the
roadway alignment of the southbound lanes. In addition, 720 meters (2,362 feet) of approach work will be
required on the east approach of Bridge No. 3. This section of NC 49, for the northbound lanes, will be
graded lower to adjust the existing vertical alignment and tie into the new construction of the southbound
lanes. A 14-meter (46-foot) median will be provided with the improvements. The new approach roadways
will consist of a 7.2-meter (24-foot) pavement width with 1.2-meter (4-foot) paved outside and 0.6-meter (2-
foot) paved inside shoulders.
The dual southbound lanes of NC 49 approaching existing Bridge No. 8, will be closed with traffic detoured
onto the adjacent Bridge No. 3 during construction of the new bridge and respective approaches. Bridge
No. 3, built in 1961, currently accommodates the dual northbound lanes of NC 49 over the Yadkin River.
The existing northbound two-lanes of NC 49 along the project length will be restriped to accommodate the
two-lane, two-way detour traffic flow during the first phase of construction. Upon completion of the first
phase, vehicular traffic will be detoured onto the new bridge and roadway using a two-lane, two-way flow.
The northbound lanes on NC 49 over existing Bridge No. 3 will then be closed and the second phase of
construction will lower the grade of the east approach (to Bridge No. 3) to complete the project.
Railroad traffic on the Winston-Salem Southbound Railway which crosses under the NC 49 facility at the
Yadkin River will be maintained during highway and bridge construction periods.
The estimated cost, based on current prices, is $6,317,700. Right of way is expected to cost $17,700 with
construction estimated at $6,300,000. The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 1995-2001
Transportation Improvement Program, is $6,338,000. This cost was based on an estimated right of way of
$18,000 and a construction cost of $6,320,000.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NC 49 is designated as a north-south route across North Carolina, however, at the project site it generally
runs east-west. Consequently, this report will use the terms southbound and northbound lanes to accurately
refer to the travel direction on NC 49. The terms east and west will be used to describe the approaches to
or the direction of approach to the bridges at this site.
2
Bridge No. 8 was constructed over the Yadkin River and the Winston-Salem South Bound Railroad in 1932
under State Project No. 517. The twelve-span structure, commonly known as the Stokes Ferry Bridge,
measures 347.8 meters (1,141 feet) in length and has a deck width of 7 meters (23.2 feet). This bridge now
handles only southbound vehicular traffic on NC 49 utilizing a two-lane, 6-meter (20-foot) clear roadway
width. The existing bridge deck rises 13.7 meters (45 feet) above the high water mark of the Yadkin River.
A vertical underclearance of 7 meters (23 feet) is provided over its crossing of the railroad. The main spans
of the Stokes Ferry Bridge are supported by a steel, Warren, deck truss resting on reinforced concrete piers
and supporting a reinforced concrete roadbed. The truss members are steel I-beams connected by gusset
plates, and the truss is bolted to the piers. The bottom lateral members are lattice I-beams. The Warren
truss has vertical bracing members. The approach spans are constructed of a reinforced concrete and steel
I-beam deck mounted on reinforced concrete piers. The roadway is flanked by a concrete, balustrade
railing.
The current sufficiency rating is 16.3 out of a possible rating of 100.0. The structure is listed as structurally
deficient, however, there are no restrictions on this bridge other than the legal limits.
NC 49 is classified on the Statewide Functional Classification System as a rural principal arterial route in
Rowan and Davidson Counties. NC 49 is part of the Federal Aid System.
Crossing central North Carolina from the Charlotte area northeastward to the Virginia line, NC 49 serves as
a major arterial route connecting Charlotte, Concord, Asheboro and Burlington as well as other smaller
communities. It is a convenient alternative to Interstate 85 and provides a much traveled truck route for this
section of the state.
In the vicinity of the bridge, NC 49 is a four-lane divided roadway with 6.7-meter (22-foot) pavement and
variable width grass shoulders ranging from 1.2 to 2.4 meters (4 to 8 feet). This section of NC 49 is posted
for 90 kilometers per hour (km/h) (55 miles per hour (mph)).
NC 49 crosses rolling terrain with poor vertical alignment within the project limits. Sight distance is
substandard along this section of NC 49 due to the existing grades on the approaches and the horizontal
curvature of 590 meters to 455 meters (approximately 3 to 4 degrees).
The western approach to Bridge No. 8 is generally on 6 percent downgrade. The eastern approach to
Bridge No. 8 rises along a 4 percent upgrade with a 590 meter (3 degree) horizontal curve.
The 1992 traffic volume on NC 49 at Bridge No. 8 was 6,800 vehicles per day (VPD). Projected traffic
volumes at the same location in the design year 2018 totals 17,600 VPD. The projected volume includes
13% truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) vehicles and 8% dual-tired (Dual) vehicles. NC 49 currently operates
at a level of service (LOS) "A". The 2018 design year traffic will experience a LOS "B" with the bridge and
highway improvements.
No school buses from either the Rowan County or Davidson County School systems cross Bridge No. 8.
A total of 9 accidents were reported along this section of NC 49 during the period from February 1, 1991
to January 31, 1994. The most frequent accident type, colliding with fixed objects (face of bridge rail),
occurred 5 times. No fatalities were recorded during this period.
The total combined accident rate for this section of NC 49 in Rowan and Davidson Counties was 381.36
Accidents per 100 million vehicle miles (ACC/100MVM). This rate was substantially higher than the latest
1991-1993 Statewide average rate for similar NC routes (120.6 ACC/100MVM).
No utility lines use Bridge No. 8 for support in crossing the Yadkin River. Yadkin, Inc./Alcoa controls a
3
nearby hydroelectic dam on the Yadkin River and a major electrical transmission line crosses NC 49 near
the beginning of the project.
Land use within the project area consist of primarily undeveloped woodlands owned by Yadkin, Inc./Alcoa
on all four quadrants surrounding the project. A public boat ramp is located on Tuckertown Lake off the
northbound lanes of NC 49 in Stanly County. A scenic overlook is located just east of the boat ramp in
Rowan County. The Uwharrie National Forest is situated just southeast of the project vicinity.
Tuckertown Lake serves as a drinking water supply for Albemarle as well as providing water for the industrial
processes at the Alcoa Plant located nearby. This section of the Yadkin River (Tuckertown Lake) is classified
as a Water Supply Critical Area.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Three alternative alignments were studied for replacing Bridge No. 8. Each alternative replacement structure
provides a clear roadway width of 9.6 meters (32 feet) but differs in total structure length. The bridge
alternates use a 100 km/h (60 mph) design speed and AASHTO HS20-44 (Alternate Military) design loading.
A 100 km/h (60 mph) design speed was used for the approach sections of NC 49 that will be constructed
with this project.
Due to the relative lack of environmental and social impacts with any of the build alternates studied and the
insignificant difference in the cost estimates of each, the selection of a preferred alternative was based
primarily on design preference.
The build alternates studied are shown in Figure 2 and are as follows:
ALTERNATE 1 (7-meter median): This alternate would involve replacing Bridge No. 8 south of its existing
location using a 340.5-meter (1,117-foot) long structure. A 7-meter (23-foot) wide median would be provided
with the relocation of the southbound lanes of NC 49. The existing southbound lanes of the divided four-
lane section of NC 49 would be closed and traffic detoured to the northbound lanes of NC 49 during the
first phase of construction which includes the new bridge and related highway approaches. Upon
completion of this phase of construction, traffic would be shifted to the new bridge and new southbound
lanes. The east approach of Bridge No. 3 would then be graded lower to adjust the existing vertical
alignment and tie into the new construction of the southbound lanes.
Alternate 1 was not selected because of substantial traffic maintenance difficulties during construction.
These problems result from a 3 to 4 meter (10 to 13 foot) grade difference between the southbound lanes
and the northbound lanes on the east approach generated by improving the grade neccessary to meet
current design criteria. The narrow median section also requires extensive use of guardrail in the transition
of the approaches from the standard median to the narrow median.
ALTERNATE 2 --RECOMMENDED-:_(14-meter median): This alternate would involve replacing Bridge No.
8 south of its existing location using a 343-meter (1,125-foot) long structure. A 14-meter (46-foot) wide
median would be provided with the relocation of the southbound lanes of NC 49. The southbound lanes
of the divided four-lane section of NC 49 would be closed and traffic detoured to the northbound lanes of
NC 49 during the first phase of construction which includes the new bridge and related highway approaches.
Upon completion of this phase of construction, traffic would be shifted to the new bridge and new
4
southbound lanes. The east approach of Bridge No. 3 would then be graded lower to adjust the existing,
vertical alignment and tie into the new construction of the southbound lanes. The selection of Alternate 2
requires that the old structure be removed due to the overlap of the new superstructure with the existing
location of the old superstructure and substructure elements.
Alternate 2 is recommended as the preferred alignment for this project based on the wider median reducing
the difficulty in maintaining traffic during construction, minimal impact to the existing side hill cut at the west
approach and consistency with the standard 14 meter (46-foot) median width proposed on the adjacent
project (R-2533).
ALTERNATE 3 (North, spread median): This alternate involves replacing Bridge No. 8 using a 362-meter
(1,188-foot) long structure. The new bridge would be located 6 meters (20 feet) north of the existing bridge.
The southbound lanes of the divided four-lane section of NC 49 would be closed and traffic detoured to the
northbound lanes of NC 49 during the first phase of construction which includes the new bridge and related
highway approaches. Upon completion of this phase of construction, traffic would be shifted to the new
bridge and new southbound lanes. The east approach of Bridge No. 3 would then be graded lower to
adjust the existing vertical alignment and tie into the new construction of the southbound lanes.
Alternate 3 was not selected because of the longer grade, increased bridge length and the need for
additional right of way. This alternate was also the most expensive in total cost. The proposed bridge will
be on roughly a 2 percent downgrade from east to west similar to the existing northbound lanes structure
(Bridge No. 3). This grade will eliminate the 6-meter(±) (20-foot) difference between the northbound lanes
and the southbound lanes existing profiles at the west end of the bridges (due to the level profile of the old
Bridge No. 8).
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge due to safety considerations
as noted by its classification as "structurally deficient". The "do-nothing" alternative is not acceptable due
to the traffic service provided by NC 49.
"Rehabilitation" of the existing bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated condition. The bridge
is 62 years old and has a sufficiency rating of 16.3 out of a possible rating of 100.0. In particular, the steel
deck truss superstructure and steel beam approach spans are critically deficient in live load capacity at
design level stresses. Because of this load deficiency and the deterioration in the structure, major
rehabilitation and strengthening would be required in order to utilize the old superstructure. The process
of rebuilding the riveted structure, widening with similiar trusses, or reconstructing the trusses with
overhangs for widening is prohibitively difficult and expensive compared to alternative modern structural
systems such as high strength steel plate girders. Maintenance of the lead-based paint system on the old
structure is also a large and continuing expense. Widening the superstructure would also necessitate
obscuring the architectural features which make preservation of the old structure desirable.
The existing grade across the bridge is 0.0 percent. To match the minimum 0.3 percent grade requirements
for adequate drainage, extensive retrofitting of the bridge seats and reconstruction of the bearings over the
348 meter (1,139 feet) length of the bridge would be necessary. Given these considerations, rehabilitation
is not a feasible alternative.
The Division Engineer for Division 9 has been consulted and concurs with the recommendations for this
project. The Division requests that two-way vehicular traffic be maintained across the Yadkin River at all
times during the construction period and further recommends Bridge No. 8 be removed rior to any new
bridge construction due to safety considerations.
No residential, institutional, nor business relocations are required with any of the alternates. Land acquisition
for additional highway right-of-way will be necessary. Access control is not recommended for this project.
5
V. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs for the alternatives, based on current prices, are as follows:
RECOMMENDED
ALTERNATE 1 ALTERNATE 2 X_1ERNATE 3
STRUCTURE $3,358,700 $3,358,700 $3,641,800
ROADWAY APPROACHES $1,930,200 $1,930,200 $1,648,100
STRUCTURE REMOVAL $ 190,100 $ 190,100 $ 190,100
ENGINEERING & $ 821,000 $ 821,000 $ 820,000
CONTINGENCIES
RIGHT OF WAY & $ 16,600 $ 17,700 $ 25,800
UTILITIES
TOTAL $6,316,600 $6,317,700 $6,325,800
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 8 over the Yadkin River (Tuckertown Lake) connecting Rowan and Davidson Counties is
recommended to be replaced just south of its existing location as shown by Alternate 2 in Figure 2. A new
bridge with a length of 343 meters (1,125 feet) is proposed. The clear, roadway width on the structure will
be 9.6 meters (32 feet) to provide two-lanes of travel for the southbound movement of NC 49 over the
Yadkin River. This bridge width will accommodate a 7.2-meter (24-foot) roadway with 1.2-meter (4-foot)
shoulders. The proposed structure features standard concrete barrier rails and a 2 percent normal cross
slope. The centerline of the new structure will be located approximately 6.5 meters (21 feet) south of the
centerline of the existing bridge.
Approximately 545 meters (1,788 feet) of approach work on NC 49 is recommended on the west approach
and 756 meters (2,480 feet) on the east approach of Bridge No. 8. This construction will lower and shift the
roadway alignment of the southbound lanes. In addition, 720 meters (2,362 feet) of approach work will be
required on the east approach of Bridge No. 3. This section of NC 49, for the northbound lanes, will be
graded lower to adjust the existing vertical alignment and tie into the new construction of the southbound
lanes. A 14-meter (46-foot) median will be provided with the improvements. The 14-meter (46-foot) median
is consistent with the median width recommended with the immediately adjacent NC 49 widening project,
R-2533, to the west of B-2612. The new approach roadways will consist of a 7.2-meter (24-foot) pavement
width with 1.2-meter (4-foot) paved outside and 0.6-meter (2-foot) paved inside shoulders.
The dual southbound lanes of NC 49 approaching existing Bridge No. 8 will be closed with traffic detoured
onto the adjacent Bridge No. 3 during construction of the new bridge and respective approaches. Bridge
No. 3, built in 1961, currently acommodates the dual northbound lanes of NC 49 over the Yadkin River. The
6
existing northbound two-lanes of NC 49 along the project length will be restriped to accomodate the two-
lane, two-way detour traffic flow during the first phase of construction. Upon completion of the first phase,
vehicular traffic will be detoured onto the new bridge and roadway using a two-lane, two-way flow. The
northbound lanes on NC 49 over existing Bridge No. 3 will then be closed and thesecond phase of
construction will lower the grade of the east approach (to Bridge No. 3) to complete the project.
Railroad traffic on the Winston-Salem South Bound Railroad which crosses under the NC 49 facility at the
Yadkin River will be maintained during highway and bridge construction periods.
The east end of the proposed bridge has been set to match the existing horizontal clearances to the bents
and to the railroad ditch on the east side of the track. The present vertical clearance over the railroad, 7.14
meters (23 feet 5 inches), will be maintained with the new structure.
Alternate 2 requires the closing and removal of existing Bridge No. 8 due to an overlap conflict in the
location of the new superstructure with the old superstructure and substructure elements.
The proposed bridge will be on roughly a 2 percent downgrade from east to west similar to the existing
northbound lanes structure (Bridge No. 3). This grade will eliminate the 6-meter(±) (20-foot) difference
between the northbound lanes and the southbound lanes existing profiles at the west end of the bridges
(due to the level profile of the old Bridge No. 8).
Two-lane, two-way traffic will be maintained along NC 49 and across Bridge No. 3 over the Yadkin River
during construction of the replacement bridge for Bridge No. 8. During construction of the new Yadkin River
bridge a minimum vertical clearance of 7.1 meters (23 feet 5 inches) will be maintained over the existing
railroad track.
Access from NC 49 to SR 2543 as shown in Figure 2 will be maintained. Reconstruction of the left turn
lanes on both the east and west bound approaches to the existing median crossover opposite SR 2543 as
well as improvements to the turning radii are proposed with this project. The access to the boat ramp and
the scenic overlook will not be impacted by this project.
Based upon the established normal pool elevation of 172.1 meters (564.6 feet) the replacement structure
over the Yadkin River was recommended to have a length of 343 meters (1,125 feet). The 0.3% grade
proposed for the new bridge will cause the final elevations of the new structure to vary from the Rowan
County to the Davidson County side. The proposed minimum vertical clearance over normal pool elevation
is approximately 3.5 meters (11.5 feet) near the west bank in Rowan County. In accordance with NCDOT
policy, the length and height may be increased or decreased as necessary to accommodate peak flows as
determined by further hydrologic studies.
VII. NATURAL RESOURCES
An evaluation of biological resources in the immediate area of potential project impact was performed for
this study and included: 1) an assessment of biological features along the alignment including descriptions
of vegetation, wildlife, protected species, wetlands, and water quality issues; 2) an evaluation of probable
impacts resulting from construction; and 3) a preliminary determination of permit needs and conceptual
mitigation options.
7
METHODOLOGY
The majority of the information provided in this report is drawn from the Natural Systems Report. Proposed
Improvements to NC 49. Harrisburg to the Yadkin River Cabarrus Stanley Rowan Davidson Counties N.C.,
by Environmental Services, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina, 1992.
A biologist visited the project site on September 23, 1993 to conduct a visual reconnaissance for Schweinitz'
sunflower habitat and specimens. Approximately 60 meters (200 feet) on each side of the roadway were
evaluated. The plant community descriptions presented in this report is a compilation of the ESI report and
information obtained during the site visit. All plant names follow nomenclature provided in Radford et al.
(1968).
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Phvsiooraohy. Toaooraphv, and Land Use
This portion of Rowan and Davidson Counties is situated in the Carolina Slate Belt in the midland plateau
region of the Piedmont Physiographic Province. The Carolina Slate Belt is characterized by broad, gently
rolling interstream areas intermixed with steeper slopes along well defined drainageways. Elevations in the
project vicinity range from 200 meters (656 feet) above mean sea level along the approach ramps to 175
meters (574) feet at the rivers edge (ESI, 1992).
Land use in the project vicinity is primarily recreational, including riverside trails, a picnic area, parking area,
and boat ramp surrounded by riparian forests and successional wooded areas. The Uwharrie National
Forest is situated just southeast of the project vicinity. The project does not encroach or impact the Forest.
Soils
Soil patterns are the result of a number of biotic and abiotic influences including past geologic activity,
parent material, environmental and human influences, age of sediments, and topographic position. Soils
in the project vicinity are predominantly Badin channery silt loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes (BaD) (ESI, 1992).
These soils are well drained, and situated on slate formations adjacent to the Yadkin River. Permeability and
shrink-swell potential are moderate while surface runoff is rapid. Depth to weathered, highly fractured
bedrock varies from 500 millimeters to 1 meter (20 to 40 inches) with unweathered slate fragments at depths
of greater than 1 meter (40 inches).
There are no soil series in the project area which are hydric or have hydric characteristics as a major
component (ESI, 1992).
Water Resources
The segment of the Yadkin River in the project vicinity is situated in the lower Yadkin-Pee Dee River
Drainage Area of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin. Water quality in the lower Yadkin River has been given
a good/fair bio-classification. A best usage classification of WS-IV and B, has been assigned to this stretch
of the Yadkin River signifying a water supply segment with restrictions on watershed development or
discharges. WS-IV waters are suitable for all Class C uses including aquatic life propagation and survival,
fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. This segment has also been designated a Critical
Area, due to the presence of a water supply intake downstream of the bridge. DEM classifications are based
upon existing or contemplated best uses for various river or stream segments. Water quality standards
applicable to these classifications are set forth in 15 NCAC 213.0200.
8
No waters classified as high quality waters (HOW), outstanding resource waters (ORW), WS-1 or WS-II occur
within 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) of the project area.
Waters north of the project area originate within the Middle Yadkin-Pee Dee Drainage area. This drainage
area, which is confined along a 32 kilometer (20 mile) segment of the Yadkin River, supports 21 point
sources having permitted discharge flows of greater than 1.9 million liters (0.5 million gallons) per day (ESI,
1992). Major metropolitan areas which drain into the Yadkin River segment above the project area include
Winston-Salem, High Point, Thomasville, Lexington, Mocksville, Kannapolis, and Salisbury.
The proposed project is sited partially within the jurisdiction of Rowan County and Davidson County, both
of which participate in the National Flood Insurance, Regular Program. The impacted reach of the Yadkin
River is situated in a flood hazard area as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Administration
(FEMA), however, no detailed flood study has been made. The 100-year floodplain as delinated on FEMA
mapping is reproduced in Figure 3.
A review of the hydrology of this portion of the Yadkin River reveals that the 100-year flood elevation at the
bridge site is controlled by the backwater effects of the Tuckertown Dam located 2.2 kilometers (1.4 miles)
downstream. The Tuckertown Lake and Dam are owned and controlled by Yadkin, Inc./Alcoa located in
Badin, North Carolina. The drainage area at the dam is 10,611 square kilometers (4,097 square miles). The
capacity of the dam is 11,865 cubic meters per second (419,000 cubic feet per second) at elevation 173.3
meters (568.6 feet), NGVD 29, which is the approximate probable maximum flood. The normal operating
pool is controlled by Yadkin, Inc. at an elevation of 172.1 meters (564.6 feet), NGVD. Minimum pool
elevation is 171.1 meters (561.3 feet).
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Plant Communitv Patterns
The composition of the plant communities in the project area reflects landscape-level variations in
topography, soils, moisture, and past or present land use practices. Generally, natural communities have
been heavily modified by previous disturbances. Three community types were identified in the project area.
Pine Mixed Hardwood Forest (PHW)
This community is the primary plant community in the study area and is present along both sides of NC 49
on both the approach and exit. Shortleaf pine (Pins echinata), hickories (Carya spp.), black-jack oak
(Quercus marilandica), scarlet oak (Quercus coccinea) are the dominant trees. The understory contained
poison ivy (Rhus radicans), blackberry (Rubus sp), winged sumac (Rhus copallina), and tickseed-sunflower
(Bidens aristosa).
Successional (SUC)
Successional communities occur along the railroad easement, the roadway embankments, and the power
line right-of-way. Typical species include various goldenrods (Solidago sps.), smooth sumac (Rhus glabra),
dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), golden aster (Heterotheca mariana), and blackberry. Systematic
maintenance along these right-of-ways is expected to keep further successional development in check.
Pine Woodlands (P)
Pine woodlands dominated by thick stands of loblolly pine (Pins taeda) are present in areas that have been
recently logged. This area is present on the north side of NC 49 on the west edge of the project area.
9
WILDLIFE
Terrestrial
The project area is located in a rural portion of Rowan and Davidson Counties. The wooded areas north
of NC 49 offer all the necessary components (food, water, cover) to support a number of small mammals
and birds. Common mammals expected to be found in the project area include the grey squirrel (Sciurus
carolinensis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris), and white-footed mouse
(Peromyscus leucopus). Larger mammals, such as white-tailed deer (Ocdocoileus virginianus), are also
common in Rowan and Davidson Counties.
Avifaunal abundance is typical of rural areas in the Piedmont region of North Carolina where a patchwork
of habitat types is available. The highway corridor provides few resources for avifaunal inhabitants. Resident
populations are anticipated in areas away from the highway alignment where better cover and protection
is provided. Common bird species likely to occur in the study area include: cardinal (Cardinals cardinals),
mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), bluejay (Cyanocitta cristata), common crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos),
Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis) and tufted titmouse (Parus bicolor).
Aquatic
Larger rivers within the Piedmont of North Carolina typically support a more diverse fishery than smaller
tributaries. Common gamefish expected to be found in the Yadkin River include largemouth bass
(Micropterus salmoides), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), and catfish (Ictalurus sp.). Portions of the Yadkin
River also provides suitable riparian and floodplain habitat for a variety of amphibians and aquatic reptiles.
However, the river segment crossed by NC 49 is a well defined, bank-to-bank system which contains
negligible riparian habitat (ESI, 1992).
Rare/Unique Natural Areas
There are no designated rare or unique natural areas within the project vicinity (ESI, 1992). There are no
water bodies deserving of special attention as denoted under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1986
[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 no rare or unique resources were identified
in the study area, no adverse impacts are anticipated.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Wetlands
Wetlands subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) are defined by the presence of three criteria:
hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and evidence of hydrology. The Yadkin River segment crossed by the
project bridge is a bank to bank system, and based on the three parameter approach, contains no
jurisdictional wetlands within adjacent riparian areas (ESI, 1992). However, the Yadkin River falls into the
category of "waters of the United States", and is subject to jurisdictional consideration.
Permitting
This project is being processed as a Categorical Exclusion under Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
guidelines. Incidental fill associated with bridge replacement over jurisdictional surface waters will most likely
be permitted under a Nationwide Permit No. 23 or a General Permit (Permit No. 198200031) issued by the
Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers office for bridge repair and replacement. General 401
Water Quality Certification issued by DEM, DEHNR is also available for bridge replacement.
10
Mitioation
Due to the limited impacts associated with proposed activities, no mitigation is proposed. However,
utilization of best management practices (BMP's) is recommended in effort to minimize adverse impacts.
BMP's may include strict erosion and sediment control procedures, careful containment of oil, gasoline, and
other hazardous materials, and reduced canopy removal within riparian fringes along the Yadkin River.
Protected Species
Under federal law, any federal action which is likely to result in a negative impact to federally protected
plants and animals is subject to review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) under one or more
provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. In the case of state-funded actions, where federal
wetland permits are likely to be required, for example, the FWS can require consultation to insure that the
proposed action does not jeopardize any endangered, threatened or protected species. Even in the
absence of federal actions, the FWS has the power, through provisions of Section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act, to exercise jurisdiction on behalf of a protected plant or animal. The FWS and other wildlife
resource agencies also exercise jurisdiction in this resource area in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended, 16 USC 661 et seq). North Carolina laws are also designed
to protect certain plants and animals where statewide populations are in decline.
Federally Listed Species
The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service has identified one species listed as endangered and two candidate species
currently under status review for Rowan and Davidson Counties. Species listed as Endangered (E) or
Threatened (T) receive protection under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq.). These
species include:
Endangered or Proposed Endangered (E or PEA Davidson Rowan
Schweinitz' sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzli) (E) X X
Status Review
Georgia Aster (Aster georgianus) (C2')
Heller's trefoil (Lotus hellen) (C2)
X
X X
* C2 designation indicates candidate species under status review: adequate information of biological vulnerability and
threat(s) on biological vulnerability is insufficient to support listing.
Schweinitz' sunflower is an erect herb that thrives in full sun characteristic of relict piedmont prairies,
successional fields, forest ecotonal margins, and forest openings, on moist to dryish clays, clay-loams, or
sandy clay-loams. Soils supporting this species are mainly of the Iredell soil series. This sunflower grows
from 1 to 2 meters (3.2 to 6.4 feet) tall. Yellow flowers approximately 55 millimeters (2.2 inches) in diameter
are borne from September to frost. This species is endemic to the Carolinas and is known to exist on 15
sites, all within 145 kilometers (90 miles) of Charlotte, North Carolina. There are no documented sitings of
Schweinitz' sunflower in the project area. On September 23, 1993, impact areas along this section of NC
49 were visually surveyed for Schweinitz' sunflower. No suitable habitat or individual sunflower specimens
were observed during the September site visit. Based on the site visit and review of information provided
in the ESI report (ESI, 1992) this project will have no effect on the Schweinitz' sunflower.
11
State Listed Species
Species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and plants classified as Endangered (E), Threatened (),
or Special Concern (SC) receive limited protection under the North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S.
133-331 et seq.) and the North Carolina Plant Protection Act of 1979 (G.S. 106-202.12 et seq.). North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program records indicate that no known populations of state listed species occur
in the project vicinity (ESI, 1992).
IMPACTS
Physical Resource Impacts
No long term adverse impacts to physical resources are anticipated as a result of bridge construction and
roadway improvements. Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation should be
minimized through implementation of a stringent erosion control schedule and the use of best management
practices. Dikes, berms, silt basins, and other containment measures can be used as needed to control
runoff. Rapid re-seeding of disturbed area will also help reduce sediment loading within the Yadkin River.
Utilization of best management practices is recommended during all phases of construction to reduce any
risk of river degradation.
Plant Community Impacts
Proposed construction is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts to the plant communities in
the project vicinity. Disturbance of plant communities will be primarily on the north side of NC 49. Most
roadway improvements will be undertaken within disturbed right-of-way limits which currently do not support
significant natural plant community characteristics. Infringement on undisturbed adjacent areas is expected
to be minimal. Table 1 summarizes potential plant community losses by alternate which could result from
the bridge replacement. Alternate 3 provides the greatest impacts to current plant communities.
TABLE 1
Plant Community Impacts [In Hectares (Acres)]
Alternative Pine Mixed Pine woods Successional Total
Hardwoods
Alternate 1 1.3 (3.2) 0.5(l.3) 1.1 (2.8) 2.9 (7.3)
Alternate 2 1.3 (3.2) 0.5(l.3) 1.1 (2.8) 2.9 (7.3)
Alternate 3 2.3 (5.7) 1.2 (2.9) 1.3 (3.3) 4.8 (11.9)
Notes: Impacts for Alternates 1 and 2 are based on 30 meter (100 foot) corridor on
north side of NC 49. Impacts for Alternate 3 are based on 60 meter (200
foot) corridor on north side of NC 49. No impacts are expected for south
side of NC 49.
12
Wildlife Impacts
The proposed replacement of the existing bridge is not expected to result in significant impacts to local
wildlife populations, as most construction is to occur within disturbed right-of-way limits. Infringement on
contiguous plant communities will be minimal and will not result in significant loss or displacement of known
animal populations.
The Yadkin River serves as habitat for a variety of aquatic organisms. However, because of the large size
of this system, and the fact that total bridging will be employed, no significant impacts on aquatic wildlife
are expected if satisfactory sediment and erosion control measures are enacted.
This section of the Yadkin River is classified as a Water Supply Critical Area, therefore the Alternate 2 bridge
will be designed such that no direct discharge of stormwater runoff will occur off the deck into the receiving
water.
Wetland Impacts
There will be no wetland impacts associated with this project.
Protected Species Impacts
Based on contact with resource agency personnel, and due to lack of suitable habitat, this project is not
expected to affect federally or state protected species.
PERMIT COORDINATION
The Yadkin River at this location is anticipated to fall 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 is not expected to require a Coast Guard Bridge Permit under Sections 9 or 10 of the River and
Harbors Act of 1899.
This project is expected to have minimal to no impact to wetlands or other waters of the United States.
Therefore, an individual Section 404 permit will not be required from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
(COE). A Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 23 (33 CFR 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) has issued a General 401 Water Quality Certification for NWP No. 23. In the event that
NWP No. 23 will not suffice, minor impacts attributed to bridging and associated approach improvements
are allowable under General Bridge Permit 031 issued by the COE, Wilmington District. Notification to the
COE, Wilmington District Office is required if this General Permit 031 is utilized.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and insignificant
environmental consequences.
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate bridge will result
in safer traffic operations.
13
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural environment
with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any county existing land use, or zoning regulation. No change in land use
is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition will be limited. No
relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternate.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. There are no publicly owned parks,
recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance that are
impacted by the project.
Access to a public boat ramp and scenic overlook will not be affected by construction of this project.
The project is not expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
Since the bridge is to be replaced in its present location, the project is exempt from the Farmland Protection
Policy Act.
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as
amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with
Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires that if a federally funded, licensed, or
permitted project has an effect on a property listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places,
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be given an opportunity to comment.
There are no buildings nor other structures located within the project limits except for the two bridges over
the Yadkin River. Bridge No. 8, known as the Stokes Ferry Bridge, has been determined to be eligible for
the National Register of Historic Places. The Area of Potential Effect (APE) was surveyed and is shown on
Figure 2.
Bridge No. 8 was constructed over the Yadkin River and the Winston-Salem South Bound Railroad in 1932
under State Project No. 517. The twelve-span structure, commonly known as the Stokes Ferry Bridge,
measures 348 meters (1,139 feet) in length and has a deck width of 7 meters (23.2 feet). This bridge now
handles only southbound vehicular traffic on NC 49 utilizing a two-lane, 6-meter (20-foot) roadway width.
The existing bridge deck rises 13.7 meters (45 feet) above the high water mark of the Yadkin River. A
vertical underclearance of 7 meters (23 feet) is provided over its crossing of the railroad. The main spans
of the Stokes Ferry Bridge are supported by a steel, Warren, deck truss resting on reinforced concrete piers
and supporting a reinforced concrete roadbed. The truss members are steel I-beams connected by gusset
plates, and the truss is bolted to the piers. The bottom lateral members are lattice I-beams. The Warren
truss has vertical bracing members. The approach spans are constructed of a reinforced concrete and steel
I-beam deck mounted on reinforced concrete piers. The roadway is flanked by a concrete, balustrade
railing.
Bridge No. 8 is one of only four bridges of its type (Type 309) in North Carolina, and the only one of its type
over the Yadkin River (NCDOT, Computer Data Base 1992).
Because of the rarity of this steel, Warren, deck truss bridge type in the state, Bridge No. 8 is considered
to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A, for Transportation and Criterion
C, for Engineering Design. The potential National Register boundaries encompass only the bridge.
14
Since this project necessitates the use of a historic bridge and meets the criteria set forth in the Federal
Register (July 5, 1983), a programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation satisfies the requirements of Section 4(f).
The following alternatives, which avoid use of the historic bridge structure, have been fully evaluated. These
alternatives were not found to be feasible and prudent as noted below:
(1) do nothing;
The "do nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge due to safety
considerations as noted by its classification as "structurally deficient". Closure of the bridge at
this location is not acceptable due to the traffic service provided by NC 49.
(2) build a new structure at a different location without affecting the historic integrity of the structure,
as determined by procedures implementing the National Historic Preservation Act;
A new structure over the Yadkin River, located nearby, which would not affect the existing bridge
requires an extensive relocation and regrading of the existing lanes on NC 49 through difficult
rock formations. The expense of this alternative as well as the additional environmental impacts
of relocating a new section of highway through undeveloped forest is not an acceptable solution.
(3) rehabilitate the historic bridge without affecting the historic integrity of the structure, as
determined by procedures implementing the National Historic Preservation Act;
"Rehabilitation" of the existing bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated condition.
The bridge is 62 years old and has a sufficiency rating of 16.3 out of a possible rating of 100.0.
In particular, the steel deck truss superstructure and steel beam approach spans are critically
deficient in live load capacity at design level stresses. Because of this load deficiency and the
deterioration in the structure, major rehabilitation and strengthening would be required in order
to utilize the old superstructure. The process of rebuilding the riveted structure, widening with
similiar trusses, or reconstructing the trusses with overhangs for widening is prohibitively difficult
and expensive compared to alternative modern structural systems such as high strength steel
plate girders. Maintenance of the lead-based paint system on the old structure is also a large
and continuing expense. Widening the superstructure would also necessitate obscuring the
architectural features which make preservation of the old structure desirable.
In addition, the existing grade across the bridge is 0.0 percent. To match the minimum 0.3
percent grade requirements for adequate drainage, extensive retrofitting of the bridge seats and
reconstruction of the bearings over the 348 meter (1,139 feet) length of the bridge would be
necessary. Given these considerations, rehabilitation is not considered a feasible alternative.
This project has been coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) whose
correspondence is included in the Appendix. Section 106 has been resolved and documented in the form
of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between FHWA, NCDOT, SHPO, and the Advisory Council of
Historic Preservation (see Appendix).
Approval of the programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation by the Federal Highway Division Administrator is
included in the Appendix of this document. Summary documentation has been forwarded to the Advisory
Council of Historic Preservation (see Appendix).
The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) completed between the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
and the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and accepted by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACHP) stipulates the measures that shall be implemented to mitigate the adverse effect of this
15
project on Bridge No. 8. The following commitments have been made to the SHPO because of the eligibility
of Bridge No. 8 for the National Register of Historic Places.
Measures to mitigate the adverse effect to Bridge No. 8 shall include:
1. Photographic recordation which thoroughly document the bridge and provide details of
construction. Specific photographic requirements are included in the MOA (copy in the
Appendix of this report).
2. Graphic documentation to include the reproduction of the construction blueprints on vellum.
3. Description of the current conditions and engineering of the bridge.
4. Copy and Curation of one set of all photographic and graphic documentation deposited with
the North Carolina Division of Archives and State History/State Historic Preservation Office.
The Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, in a letter dated August 10, 1993, concluded the project will
not involve any National Register-eligible archaeological sites within the area of potential effect. The
statement was based upon the results of a survey of archaeological resources within the project area
performed by the State. 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 49 within the project limits discovered no
contamination site.
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Winston-Salem and Mooresville Regional
Offices of the N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Rowan County has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Davidson County was
designated as a moderate nonattainment area for Ozone (03); however, due to recent improved ozone
monitoring data, this area has now been designated as a maintenance area. Also, the northern area of this
county lies just south of Greensboro (Guilford County), that contributed to the original designation of
nonattainment for the entire county. The current State Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any
transportation control measures (TCM) for Davidson County. The High Point 2010 Urbanized Area
Thoroughfare Plan (TP) and 1994 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) have been determined to be
in conformity to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and the Interim Conformity Guidance dated June 7,
1991. The approval dates of the TP and the TIP by the MPO were on October 1, 1991 and October 26,
1993, respectively. The approval dates of the TP and the TIP by USDOT were on November 15, 1991 and
December 15, 1993, respectively. The project is located in the southerly and westerly area of Davidson
County that is outside of the High Point Thoroughfare Plan. The scope of the project is to replace the
existing 2-lane bridge over the Yadkin River with a new 2-lane bridge; hence, the project is classified as a
neutral project. This project is not anticipated to create any adverse effect on the air quality of the
attainment area (Rowan County) or the maintenance area (Davidson County).
The project consists of replacing Bridge No. 8 on NC 49 over the Yadkin River with an improved 2-lane
structure. The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes and no additional through travel lanes
are planned. Hence, the project's impact on noise and air quality will be insignificant.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If vegetation is disposed of by
burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North
16
Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation completes the assessment
requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air quality (1990 CAAA and NEPA) and no
additional reports are required.
There are no practical alternatives to crossing the flood easement area in the project vicinity. Any shift in
alignment would result in a crossing of about the same magnitude. The alignment of the project is
perpendicular to the Yadkin River and its flood easement area. All reasonable measures will be taken to
minimize any possible harm. The project is not expected to increase the upstream limits of the 100-year
floodplain. Since construction activity on the bridge will take place within the boundary of a federally
licensed activity (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission License No. 2197), Yadkin, Inc. will be coordinated
with prior to construction. A Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Permit may be required with this
project.
The Yadkin River is not designated as a Wild or Scenic River nor is it included in the National Park Service's
Nationwide Rivers Inventory.
Mitigation of construction impacts associated with this project will include implementation of NCDOT's Best
Manaciement Practices For Protection of Surface Waters (BMP's) to minimize adverse impacts of
construction activities, and the implementation of the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan established
by NCDOT in co-operation with NCDEHNR.
The N.C. Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior to construction to coordinate the relocation of any
geodetic survey markers impacted by this project.
If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws
and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This
evaluation completes the assessment requirements of 23 CFR 770. No additional reports are required.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious adverse environmental impacts will
result from implementation of the project.
17
REFERENCES CITED
Environmental Services, Inc., 1993 Natural Systems Report, Proposed Improvements to NC 49,
Harrisburg to the Yadkin River, Cabarrus, Stanley, Rowan, Davidson Counties, N.C., Raleigh, NC.
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 NC.
18
APPENDIX
2152{??
A
J
Z t
is 2154 ( I ?\J rJs`?
5 9A_ Q?° O• ?JJS ?y6•
r
1 3
N
2153
2191 N1 S na ° ?.
2152 Je E!!iS ?, J
F X / ZI °Gi a 1.7 ?C ^? ?J?D 1.2
7 9
.6 2 0
2148 Z OR"- \
N B
swan O
„
2152 ` .
s ?'p END
2150 ° PROJECT N
s Antioch . ? FA?D
s ! Ch. - ?J
JJ
FAS 49 ?O
ROWAN COUNTY FA S 1004 DAVIDSON COUNTY
- ?? ¦ ?? ¦• ??¦ r?? ¦ rte. E0019-ok
004 MONTGOMERY COUNTY
STANLY COUNTY .• ;.
111505 l so9 S ? " UWHARRIE 6
BEGIN 1164 NATIONAL 1-
PROJECT FOREST 116 O2
635
" . ?P? ss..:...
G o ` 1162
1617 .3 6 TUCKER q y MOH.
?j
1508 - 1512 TOWN d.?? y'O
1636 DAM? l6r 9Y
.2 Cp
1307 R??ER , , :: UNr?.
1 643
1513
Nay ??_ t
39 ? / 1642
•O ` ?''? 101 •p !? 60T..? C° ?
1514 ., 1516 1521 ??5 ti QTY'.
? 13ez ?
1513 \-:5 •4 • 1514 5 ?1 r 1
163• 8 ]51 ` ?•? O 1510
? f •
F9 3 5 ?'? ? IS1 7
FAS •?
142 1 J 1 NORM
F CAROLINA DEPABISUM OF
.S X. .4 ;IS TRANSPORTATION
1,0 740
C? ? DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
4• °!/,V • ` / 1320 6 PLANNING AND ENVIRONII MAL
p ;:) * BRANCH
1440 .3 1522
s l 8-2612
4 ° NEW ._, \ LOCATION MAP
1r11 LONDON a11?1 Ferry BRIDGE NO. 8
POP. 454 T J undion ?? .? ti NC 49 OVER YADKIN RIVER
1441 162 ROWAN & DAVIDSON COUNTIES
1519
..ou?? , SIR s1 [074/94 FIG. 1

9

• Q

A
E
w
s
a
s
w
w
?
s
w
s
.
r
Eta w
?."
=Dg D
m? mo D
m
i
m
qm-
? w I
,
w

i

t

s
s

Rd.
Rd.
^J?
rte-

Rd. 1004 i
SOUTH BOUND
RAILROAD
Q. ?
OOG
vI
ZONE A
Z
SITE
?m
ROWAN COUNTY
STANLY COUNTY
rtU, i I,57g?
/p
>> 4r
V?? lb
100-YEAR
FLOODPLAIN
LIMITS
END
PROJECT
N 49
DAVIDSON COUNTY
jXAMO M ¦ 1f1= IkW? ¦ ¦ = ¦
MONTGOMERY COUNTY
_ ZONE C°
NORM CABOLM DEPAWfN3M OF
R'RANBPORTATION
DIVMON OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNMG AND ENVMONIUMAL
BRANCH
6-2612
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN MAP
BRIDGE NO. 8
NC 49 OVER YADKIN RIVER
ROWAN & DAVIDSON COUNTIES
' 20? 04/94 „Z FIG. 3
UNNAMED
STREET

3 INSTONi
SALEM
BOUND i
'
;
,RAILROAD

0
C
?
UCKER TOWN .
DAM
BEGIN
PROJECT-
BRIDGE NO.8
ROWAN AND
DAMSON COUNTIES
B-2612
LOOKING WEST ON NC 49
AT BRIDGE NO.8
LOOKING WEST ON NC 49
AT BRIDGE NO.8
BRIDGE NO.8
SHOWING STEEL WARREN TRUSS
FIGURE 4
BRIDGES NO.3 AND NO.8
ROWAN AND
DAVIDSON COUNTIES
8-2612
LOOKING EAST ON NC 49
TOWARDS BRIDGE APPROACHES
FOR BRIDGES NO.8 AND NO.3

3
-

r f-
LOOKING EAST ON NC 49
AT BRIDGE NO.8
LOOKING EAST ON NC 49
AT BRIDGE NO.3
FIGURE 5
04
BRIDGES NO. 3, NO.8
AND SCENIC OVERLOOK
ROWAN AND
DAVIDSON COUNTIES
8-2612
LOOKING SOUTHWEST AT
BRIDGE NO.8
LOOKING NORTHEAST AT
BRIDGES NO.8 AND NO.
LOOKING WEST ON NC 49
TOWARDS ENTRANCE TO
SCENIC OVERLOOK
FIGURE 6
a • • T
W A
r
_
? D
?
m
m
% 3

H NG POINT
CUT
m d?
eo
3
<N
? w ?
na
3 3
m
os
?
a .-. N
°° a
C a ro 3
ss .. 3
s
z
N W O

- o

Cs ?u
N ?
-
2 3
1 m m
?l9
A O ps ? r

A ^
Aa D

., 3
O

^ O T
N
O
.. D
? m
v 0
z
D

N a O
o ? :L a; 3 m

IL
zv
70
-a m Z
a A

N m
3
W K O
w?
?, 3 W
N OT
t ., 3
I
n
o

?
d _
A
a
?
O O N
K _ w
_ ? O p
y
O $
HINGE POINT
FOR F LL

?. 3
O
-ph
co O Z -j
W
P n F s

46 n y
m
m
ft°?
O o

o <?oao 2 °x
ma
0 {gam
r*t g -< N O x
z
0 rn Do;
q
an
c
ZZ :j
-Irno
N?Z
s
s
V 40
co
cr- W_
LL.
V)

-
>z
D
M
z C b z
O
Q Q? A oaozv
AZ z
L
J
C L
N LLJ to

E ' o
M ° M V?->Q Z
W

D w e^
a amo
? as

2-4
Z O OJ

Ld 2 0
I--- O
LLJ

//yy
LL. w
W
?
U
z
M " OD N
V

O N
U axis E
ti
(ILIO)UWGOZ
N ..
Q b
W J
m
V) E ^ N
v ?p
?
V7 - - -
W O M
?y
LL w
w
r
V I
F
0

Ld z
a
r Q
i
C

0

z
0
)---t

U -
W w? ^
V) d o Q
M
J ?
Q W W

U Q Q
z-j
P-- 4 <w
°
o
Q W
W N
IL >-
N N

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGIONAL OFFICE
730 PEACHTREE STREET, N.E. (r7
ATL
ANTA, GEORGIA 30308 July 16, 1992
UL 201992
DI\/1S1ON OF 'p
HIGHWAYS ?Q0
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
NC Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
This acknowledges receipt of your letter dated June 2, 1992,
soliciting comments on the Federal Draft Environmental Impact
Statement for the relocation of North Carolina Route 49 in
Cabarrus, Stanly, Rowan, and Davidson counties, North Carolina;
State Project No. 8.1661001. It appears that the improvement will
not impact any of the hydroelectric developments under the
jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Therefore, we have no comment.
Very truly yours,
i
Robert W. Crisg?.E.
Director
5rATE

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
August 10, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Widen NC 49 from Harrisburg to Yadkin River, R-
2533, B-2612, Cabarrus, Stanly, Rowan, Davidson
Counties, ER 94-7183
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of August 3, 1993, transmitting the archaeological
survey report by Dr. Lee Novick concerning the above project.
In general, the report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of
the Interior. Archaeological site 31 ST133 previously recorded in 1989 has been
determined to be not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
Since no additional archaeological resources were identified by the survey, we
conclude the project will not involve any National Register-eligible archaeological
sites within the area of potential effect.
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,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: L. J. Ward
Lam. Novick
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ?P
i

7
7
4
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
December 14, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Re: Historic Structures Survey Report for widening NC
49 from Harrisburg to Yadkin River, Cabarrus,
Davidson, Rowan, and Stanly Counties, R-2533
and B-2612, 8..1661001, NH-28-1(5), ER 94-7854
Dear Mr. Graf:
Thank you for your letter of November 12, 1993, transmitting the historic
structures survey report by Mattson and Associates concerning the above project.
The following properties are listed in the National Register of Historic Places:
Stonewall Jackson Training School (CA 945). The school was included in
the National Register on March 15, 1984, under Criterion A for its
association with the humanitarian reform movement, B for its association
with James Cook and Louis Asbury, and C for its Colonial Revival and
Gothic Revival architecture.
Mount Pleasant Historic District (#36). The historic district was included in
the National Register on May 12, 1986, under Criterion A for community
development, B for persons important to the development of the town, C for
architecture, and D for the information it is likely to yield.
The following properties are included in the state study list. For purposes of
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we concur they are eligible
for the National Register under the criteria cited:
Daniel Luther Barringer House (CA 298). Criterion C-The house is one of
the most prominent examples of late nineteenth century rural domestic
architecture in Cabarrus County.
A. C. Lentz House and Harness Shop (CA 460). Criterion A-The well-
preserved house and substantial harness and collar shops are rare surviving
examples of early rural industrial activity in Cabarrus County. The array of
farm buildings with rolling fields is one of the most complete farmsteads in
Cabarrus County.
109 Fast Jo= Street • Raleigh. North Carolina 27601-2907
Nicholas L. Graf
December 14, 1993, Page 2
Morgan Walker House (CA 248). Criterion C--The mid-nineteenth century
dwelling is among the more intact surviving examples of vernacular Greek
Revival farmhouse design in Cabarrus County.
For purposes of Section 106, we also concur the following properties are eligible
for the National Register:
Barring er-Lanning House (rr13). Criterion C--The property expresses the
outstanding stonework that exemplified the buildings erected by the
Wagoner family.
Barringer-Melchor House (CA 295). Criterion A-'-The property is a good
representative of a late nineteenth-early twentieth century farmstead in
central Cabarrus County. Criterion C--The house is one of the more intact
examples of mid-nineteenth century rural domestic architecture in the
county.
Bessie Dry House (#16). Criterion C--The Victorian house ranks among the
best-preserved early twentieth century farmhouses in Stanly County.
George Miller House (#26). Criterion C--This well-preserved residence is
exemplary of the adaptation of stylish, picturesque elements to the
traditional 1-house in Stanly County.
St. Peter's Lutheran Church (CA 572). Criterion A-The building represents
the formation of independent African American churches in Cabarrus County
following the Civil War. Criterion C--The church is an intact example of the
small, rural churches built in the county between the late nineteenth and
early twentieth century.
Stokes Ferry Bridge (7#2). Criterion A--The bridge reflects the Good Roads
Movement as it improved highway transportation in the Piedmont of North
Carolina. Criterion C--The bridge is a rare example of a steel Warren deck
truss type in North Carolina.
Matthew Franklin Teeter House (CA. 581). Criterion C-The house is among
the most imposing and architecturally sophisticated early twentieth century
farmhouses in Cabarrus County.
The following properties were determined not eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places for the reasons cited below:
These properties have undergone numerous character-altering changes:
Arey House (#1)
Barnhardt Family Farm (CA 279)
William Dry House (#18)
Daniel C. Faggart House (CA 385)
3i3
1
Nicholas L. Graf
December 14, 1993, Page 3
Walter Fisher House (CA 400)
Harrisburg High School (#47)
Victor Columbus House (CA 461)
McLester-Fraley House (#4)
Mount Pleasant High School (#34)
George H. Walker House (CA 591)
C. L. Earnhardt House and Shop (#21)
These properties do not possess the historical or architectural significance
necessary for inclusion in the National Register:
Corum Barbee House (CA 270)
George Barringer Farmstead (#19)
House (CA 435)
These properties are no longer extant and no above ground architectural
evidence remains:
Davis Farm (CA 372)
House (CA 480)
Melchor Log Barn (CA 254)
William Mensinger Log House (CA 486)
Victor Melchor House (CA 294). The house has lost the physical integrity
necessary for inclusion in the National Register.
Warren (Monk) Wagoner House (#11). The house does not meet the
exceptions specified in Criteria Consideration G of the National Park
Service's Guidelines regarding the registration of properties less than fifty
years of age.
H. H. Cassil House (#44). Better examples of this type and Peep's work
exist in the county.
Overall, the boundaries for the aforementioned National Register-eligible properties
appear appropriate. However, for each of these properties, we believe the
historical boundary should follow the edge of the roadway rather than the North
Carolina Department of Transportation's right-of-way line.
J

Nicholas L. Graf
December 14, 1993, Page 4
In general the report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of
the Interior.
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,
David Brook
V Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: Mattson, and Associates
H. F. Vick, NCDO T
?B. Church, NCDOT

1
t
STATE
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
June 28, 1994
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replacement of Stokes Ferry Bridge (No. 8) on NC
49 over Yadkin River, Davidson and Rowan
Counties, B-2612, 8.1631701, BRNHF-49(3), ER
94-9004
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of June 1, 1994, concerning the above project.
As noted in our December 14, 1993, letter to the Federal Highway Administration
(FHwA), we concur with FHwA's determination that the Stokes Ferry Bridge is
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and C
in the areas of transportation and engineering, respectively.
We have reviewed the preliminary documentation provided to us to determine the
project's effect on the Stokes Ferry Bridge. We understand that the existing steel
deck truss superstructure and steel beam approach spans are critically deficient in
live load capacity at design level stresses and would require major rehabilitation
and strengthening to utilize the existing superstructure. Further, it is likely that the
bridge would lose its integrity of design, materials, and workmanship from the
necessary widening and strengthening of the bridge. Based upon the information
provided, we agree with FHwA's determination that the proposed undertaking will
have an adverse effect upon the Stokes Ferry Bridge since it will be destroyed.
Please notify the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation of your adverse effect
determination and plans to consult with us to develop ways to mitigate the loss of
the bridge. As part of the investigation of mitigative measures, we have asked the
North Carolina Department of Transportation to provide us information, including
cost estimates, on replacing the historic bridge with a similar steel truss deck
structure.
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.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
icholas L. Graf
une 28, 1994, Page 2
hank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
oncerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
nvironmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
' cerely,
-?? David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
b:
Kron/Stancil
County
RF

North Carolina Department of Cultural
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
October 31, 1994
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replacement of Bridge No. 8 on NC 49 over
Yadkin River, Davidson and Rowan Counties, B-
2612, 8.1631701, BRNHF-49(3), ER 95-7209
Dear Mr. Graf:
27
GEC
Divisjp??f ?.r4d4W$nd
Wti ?am S. Price, Jr.,
'L
2? DIVISION OF
0 HIGHWAYS
C??NVIROI,Im
RECD
NOV 9 1994
RUST E &I
Thank you for your letter of July 27, 1994, concerning the above project. On
October 25, 1994, we received the revisions to Appendix 1 of the Memorandum
of Agreement (MOA) from Jay Bissett of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation. We understand that the revised Appendix 1 will be attached to
the original MOA by the Federal Highway Administration prior to transmittal to the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
I have reviewed the MOA for the above project which will adversely affect Bridge
No. 8, a property eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places
and protected under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. As
state historic preservation officer, I have signed the MOA and believe it adequately
addresses our concerns regarding the bridge, if the, revised Appendix 1 is attached
as intended.
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,
(? i ,?I&LAI
William S. Price, Jr.
State Historic Preservation Officer
WSP:sIw
Enc;iosure
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ??
,-/
r`
J
J14TIS 04
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
REGION FOUR
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
November 7, 1994
Mr. Don Klima, Director
Eastern Office of Project Review
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
The Old Post Office Building
1100 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. No. 809
Washington, D.C. 20004
Dear Mr. Klima:
VI/ C'<
REC' D
NOV 1 4 1994
RUST E& l
In Reply Refer To:
HO-NC
NOV0g
1994
2? UIV/Slpr?
? ??IGNwAYOF ??..
Fti?7R??? P??
Subject: BRNHF-49(3), B-2612, 8.1631701, Davidson and Rowan
Counties, North Carolina, Memorandum of Agreement for
Replacement of Stokes Ferry Bridge on NC 49 over the
Yadkin River
our letter of July 5, 1994(copy enclosed) advised you of a finding
of adverse effect for the subject project and the initiation of
consultation with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation
Officer(NCSHPO) to develop ways to mitigate the loss of bridge,
which is considered eligible for the National Register. We have
completed our consultation and a signed Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) is enclosed for your consideration.
Also enclosed is (1) the required Finding of Adverse Effect
Documentation, (2) NCSHPO's letter of June 28, 1994, concurring
with the decision to replace the structure and the subsequent
finding of adverse effect, and (3) NCSHPO's letter dated October
31, 1994 transmitting the signed MOA.
Appendix 1 which is attached to the MOA is the revised Appendix 1
referred to in NCSHPO I s letter. Please note that this is different
from the proposed recording criteria included in the Finding of
Adverse Effect Documentation.

a
We would appreciate your review and approval of this MOA. If you
have any questions or need any additional information, please
contact -Mr. Wady Williams at 919-856-4350. Thank you for your
assistance.
Sincerely yours,
'e C S'
For Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator
Enclosures
cc : NCDOT
Mr. David Brook, SHPO
Advisory
Council On
Historic
Preservation
The Old Post Office Building
1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, #809
Washington, DC 20004
NOV 3 0 1994
Mr. Nicholas L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, NC 27601
REF: BRNF F-49(3)
Replacement of Stokes Ferry Bridge
Davidson and Rowan Counties, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Graf:
The enclosed Memorandum of Agreement for the referenced project has been accepted by the
Council. This acceptance completes the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Council's regulations. A copy of the Agreement has also been sent to
the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer.
We appreciate your cooperation in reaching a satisfactory resolution of this matter.
Eastern Office of Review
Enclosure
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
SUBMITTED TO
THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PURSUANT TO 36 CFR PART 800.5(e)(4)
REGARDING TIP 18-2612
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO. 8
ON NC 49 OVER YADKIN RIVER,
ROWAN/DAVIDSON COUNTIES, NORTH CAROLINA
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has determined that the
replacement of Bridge Number 8, a property eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places, will result in an adverse effect on
that bridge, and has consulted with the North Carolina Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800, regulations
implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16
U.S.C. Part 470f); and
NOW, THEREFORE, the FHWA and the SHPO agree that if the Council accepts
this Memorandum of Agreement, the undertaking shall be implemented in
accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account
the effects of the undertaking on Bridge No. 8.
Stipulations
FHWA will ensure that the following measure will be carried out:
1. Bridge No. 8 will be recorded in accordance with the recordation plan
attached hereto as Appendix 1.
Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement by FHWA and the North Carolina
Historic Preservation Officer, its subsequent acceptance by the Council,
and implementation of its terms, evidence that FHWA has afforded the
Council an opportunity to comment on the replacement of Bridge No. 8 on
NC 49 over Yadkin River, Rowan and Davidson Counties, North Carolina, and
that FHWA has taken into account the effects of the undertaking on
historic properties.
Date: L-2,;? Z?P4_
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICSR
ACCEPTED or /
visor council on istoric Prese vation
:RTH-LAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
concurring party
Date: 10"-? I-f `
Date: /l ?zr/yam
Date: e? -S? 9¢
-7 7
APPENDIX 1
Historic Structure Recordation Plan
for.the Replacement of Bridge No. 8
Rowan and Davidson Counties,
North Carolina
Photographic Requirements
Photographic Views of the bridge including:
Overall views (elevations and oblique views)
Distant Views of the property in its setting
Details of construction or design
Format:
Representative color transparencies
4 x S inch large format black and white negative's (all views)
4 x 5 inch black and white prints (all views)
All processing to be done to archival standards
All photographs and negatives to be labeled according to
Division of Archives and History Standards
Graphic Documentation
Reproduction of the construction blueprints on vellum
Description
Provision of an engineering description of the bridge
Provision of a description of the current conditions of the
bridge
Copies and Curation
One (1) set of all photographic nd graphic Division of Archives and
be deposited with the North Carolina
History/State Historic Preservation Office and made a permanent
part of the statewide survey and iconographic collection.

1

t _
1
i
I
i
1
i
i
I
I
1
V
FROM RALEIGH REGULGTOR'V
?TJ
03.24.1997 14:
PS S77
P.02
U.S, ARMY COAT'S OF ENGINEt
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID. 199501933 County Davidg owan
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner/Agen NC D Mr. H_ -ftanklin Vi
Address P st Office Box 25201, aleigh Nosh Carolina 27611 5201
Telephone Np 919-733-3jAl-ext..314
Size and Location of project (waterway, road name/number, town, etc.) NC bridge rCpLacement
of bridge #8 located off of N.C. 49, 0jacent to Turktertown i,ake (Yadkin River,), near Denton,
in Da on County. North CUMlina St= r ject,No. $.1631701 _ T.I.P. Np?612
Description of Activity
l21acemenof_ referenced bridge with a new„ bride od'fication„from original authorization
to incl . disposal- of existing substructure that would result inAnproximately 0.15 acre-,, of
'sdicti al mmttex-rA of Tucktertown Lake Yadkin RiyjW,
20L-Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 bSC 1344) only.
Section 10 (River and Harbor Act of 1899) only.
Section 404 and Section 10.
NWP 23 Regional General Permit or Nationwide Permit Number.
Any violation of the conditions of the Regional General or Nationwide Permit referenced Aovc
may subject the permittce to a stop work order, a restoration order., and/or appropriate legal
action.
This Department of the Army Regional General/Nationwide Permit verifention does not relieve
the undersigned permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal, State, or
local approvals/permits. The permittee may need to contact appropriate State and local agencies
before beginning work.
By signature below, the permittee certifies an understanding and acceptance of all terms and
conditions of tWs permit
Regulatory Project Manager
Date q&e 19
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORM, ETC., MUST BE
ATTACHED TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
FROM RALEIGH REGULATORY
JAMES B. HUNT JR
GOVERNOR
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
October 18, 1996
ATTNI - Mr. N ichael Smith
Chief, Northern Section
Dear Mr. Smith:
SUBJECT: Rowan and Davidson Counties, Replacement of Bridge No. 8 over Tuckertown
Lake (Yadkin River) on NC 49, COB Action ID No. 199503833, State Project
No. 8.1631701, T.I.P. No. B72612.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is proposing to replace
Bridge No. 8 over Tuckertown Lake (Yadkin River) in Rowan and Davidson Counties. This
project has been processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion"
in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Consequently, your agency approved Section 404
authorization for the project under Nationwide Permit No. 23. ?
This project was originally let in May of 1996, but the bids on the project were excessively
high. The NCDOT has been considering alternatives to reduce the cost of the removal of the
existing structure. The NCDOT currently proposes to remove and deposit approximately 1300
cubic yards of reinforced concrete from the existing substructure into the lake. Our special
provisions will limit the disposal area betwoon new bents 4 through 7, and further limit the
Contractor to placing the matcrial to a maximum height of five feet and a minimum remaining
water depth of 30 feet.
Fnelosed you will find drawings depicting the proposed bridge. Bents 4 and 7 are labeled,
and the limits of the disposal zone are indicated. Please note that the scale on the drawings is in
meters. The depth of the lake within the disposal area averages about 20 meters under normal
)
?I;
s' s
OCT 2 5 1996
Regulatory Branch
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPMSPOKTATTON
DMSION OF HIGHWAYS GJARLAN0 B. GARRETT JIz
PO BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C 27611-5201 SECRETARY
03.24.1997 14:32
P.03

FROM RALEIGH REGULATORY 03.24.1997 14:33
conditions. Please review this proposal as a modification to the existing Nationwide Permit No.
23 authorization. If you have any questions, or need additional information, please contact Mr.
Gordon Cashin at [phone], Extension 278.
Sincerely
r fin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/plr
cc: Mr. John Thomas, COE, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Water Quality Section
Mr. William Rogers, P.E. Structure Design
Mr. Tole Shearin, P.E. Roadway Design ,
Mr. Kelly Barger, P.E., Program Development`
Mr. Don Morton, P,E., Highway Design
Mr. A_ L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. D. B. Waters, Division 9 Engineer
P.04
FROM RALEIGH REGULATORY 03.24.1997 14:33 P.05
• 1 A ? '
PROJECT: 8.1631701
(E-2612)
Replacement of Bridge No, 8 on
N.C. 49 over Yadkin River
SHEEP' I OF 5
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF MGHWAYS
Rowan J Davidson Counties
FROM RALEIGH REGULATORY
03.24.1997 14:33 P.06

.
do-
vt!
wIN
=4
• 9
ao
a
S N
} 4-
a
a?
_t
03
! V?

r
l
{ ! I c
•'v
*+C x a
Lt. m S+
! O A W C
! O C7 S ti
lz
zr?
J
? F
_ OZ?
i
1 s
f i - +b z
yl 0
0 <
r ?
i
r
94
t ? . "' UC
i O U
M
0 W
r
Q)
L.11
FROM RALEIGH REGULATORY
9
d
C
J
J

. ,

03.24.1997 14:33 P.07
I ! ( 0

b -llg? I ns 31v t-7 touv" O C b .11 I

+!a °Q
?
.
? Ls w La ?"
?
.
a

o G
?+ L
il
I ?,l o ...

?4 ; v a

.? r I o
I
v !

I
I
I •
L
. ?

o A
?
? der

? O x
1n f
?
7
a
? •
?
1

J
I
V In
l
•- .?
"Z L1
m P;
J
? C? r;l

d
'3 jx,,?
o

v r ? .

r ?

U

r H
,-a
o u
N
R C?7 Q
r
seas 7ri-i tiuvw
d q Q
FROM RALEIGH REGULATORY 03.24.1997 14:33 P.08
E-• ? y ?a
d
4?
13M? 3Nt"! t{71F? O o Lc)
D
0 x
F+ r . ca
14 w?"j _U
pA? wz
' ti ci x
oZ
• x
to ? ? ? ? z
11 CC) -411
` 0.
1
e«
1
q;n
• 9 ? ? vat + ? ?
o•
?r
i
t
1 ?
•? • 1 Q
1
9 li*;,iv 07401
o' .
'O •
r? °I :~
FROM RALEIGH REGULATORY
• i
i
d
J
V
w
C?
03.24.1997 14:34
P.09
O
a ? ? 4 ? a try
C2
40V LL
0
1
f .. x
ro %n
r
1
?6- tin

1 FQ

w' ;? la .
L)

G
l ?'
°

d o

_
of
L

I Q ce

. .
.,
741
1
+
.
1 ? 7
U3
J
I
1 1
•, `
Ve
.. S 1
V7
u
0
t
i7
rv
1 '

'
pn
e
1

?q

I
I
. i ,
b }39H?'r 31?t?: ti7LVW
I ri u
4
f
o
t
1I
f
a
I
on
t?
Vii" I f
I
i
U ?
i?
r a

OCT 2 61998
WETLANDS GRG'`'
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ' F
QUALITY
JAMES B. Hurry JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS E. No VVJER
Tol on
GovERNOR SECRETARY
October 22, 1998
TIP No: B-2612
Project No: 8.1631701
F. A. No: BRNHF-49(3)
County: Davidson-Rowan-Stanly
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
"Bridge No. 8 Over Yadkin River (Tuckeriown Lake) on NC 45"
Subject: Construction Change #2 - Drilled Piers
Mr. Sam White
Jones Brothers Incorporated
Post Office Box 727
Mt. Juliet, Tennessee 37122
Dear Mr. White:
I have received approval from Water Quality to drill in the lake without a temporary casing
providing that water quality is monitored and the permitted 25 NTU's are not exceeded. Should
25 NTU's be exceeded, drilling is to stop and corrective actions taken. Failure to take appro-
priate action will result in revocation of the approval to drill without temporary casing. Drilling
without the temporary casing shall commence once the construction change is returned signed.
The construction change agreement contains language that was discussed with Mr. Phillip Brown
of Jones Brothers, and Mr. Keith Anderson of A. H. Beck. Please review, sign and date the
attached construction change form and return to my office.
If I may be of further assistance to you, please let me know.
Sinceree y,
,? • 79-64-?
K. E. Raulston, P.E.
Resident Engineer
KER/pal
Attachment
cc: Mr. S. D_DeWitt, Mr. D. B. Waters, Mr. T. O. Grubbs,
,/Ms. Cindi Bell, Mr. Phillip Brown, Mr. Gus Beck
452 Central Avenue, Lexington, NC 27292
Phone [phone] Fax [phone]
Form 880
Rev. 1-1-83 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT AND/OR CONSTRUCTION CHANGE
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO:
REQUEST FOR CONSTRUCTION CHANGE NO: 2
CONTRACTOR: JONES BROTHERS, INC.
FEDERAL AID NO: BRNHF-49(3)
COUNTY: STANLEY-ROWAN-DAVIDSON
1. Description, location, and justification for change:
This construction change is for a change in drilled shaft procedures and equipment. Permission is
granted to drill in the water without a temporary casing providing that water turbidity levels do not exceed
the permitted level of 25 NTU's. Turbidity curtains and other measures shall continue to be used to
ensure water quality. Should water turbidity exceed 25 NTU's drilling is to cease and appropriate
measures taken to correct the problem. As a consideration for allowing this construction change Jones
Brothers Inc. by signing this construction change agrees to forfeit all rights to all claims for additional
compensation or for an extension in contract time for any reason for the items of drilled piers not in rock
and drilled piers in rock both 1220 mm diameter and 1830 mm diameter. Compensation for these items
will be as stated in the contract special provisions.
2. Estimation of quantities of work resulting from change and the basis of payment:
Line Code Negotiated or Field Chang e Quantity Original Plan Quantity
No. Description Unit Contract Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount
142 1220mm DIA. DRILLED PIERS
NOT IN ROCK M NA NA NA NA NA
143 1220mm DIA. DRILLED PIERS
IN ROCK M NA NA NA NA NA
144 1830m m DIA DRILLED PIERS
NOT IN ROCK M NA NA NA NA NA
145 1830mm DIA. DRILLED PIERS
IN ROCK M NA NA NA NA NA

Total
Net Underrun
$ NA
Total
$ NA
$ NA
3. Extension of contract time (if applicable):
PROJECT NO: 8,1631701
Net Overrun $
NA
"No additional time beyond that allowed for overruns in accordance with Article No. 108-10(B)1 of the standard
specifications will be allowed for performing the affected work."

BASIS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND CONTRACTOR
1. The Contractor agrees to perform the work described in this Supplemental Agreement in consideration of the pay-
ment set out herein.
2. The terms and conditions of said contract are hereby ratified and remain in full force and effect except as modified
by such Supplemental Agreement(s) as may heretofore have been entered into between the Department and the
Contractor and as modified by this Supplemental Agreement.
3. All terms and conditions of this Supplemental Agreement are herein set out and there are no agreements relating
thereto not expressed herein.
4. This Supplemental Agreement shall not constitute a release or waiver of any lawful claims that the Contractor has
or may have against the Department under said contract pursuant to G.S. 136-29 except for the matters specifically
covered herein.
In v fitness i 1hersof, the Dep8 twin t and the Contractor have caused h.Is Supplarnanta. Agreement tG be executed
by their duty authorized representatives.
APPROVAL RECOMMENDED CONTRACTOR
BY: BY:
RESIDENT ENGINEER AUTHORIMD REPRESENTATIVE
DATE: DATE:
BY:
DIVISION ENGINEER
DATE:
APPROVAL GRANTED
BY:
ENGINEER
DATE:
Approval of the Federal Highway Administration is/is not requested.
APPROVED with the understanding that Federal participation in this work, the cost of which cannot be met from
Federal aid funds provided for under the now effective project agreement, will be contingent upon additional Federal
aid funds being made available for the project by a modified project agreement, to be executed prior to or at the final
voucher stage.
APPROVED: FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
BY:
DATE: