20000775 Ver 1_Complete File_20000606

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TkANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GowmoR
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 7, 1997
MEMORANDUM TO
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Ms. Cyndi Bell
DWQ - DENR
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
RECEIvFL)
NOV 1997
?? 1? 0 N N1 ? N 1A L S c ?? CC'S
GARLAND B. ?GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY
Review of Scoping Sheets for the following projects:
Project T.I.P. County Bridge No. State?Route Planning Engineer
B-3112 Bladen No. 59 NC 11', Jeff Inghamp/
B-3115 Brunswick No. 61 NC 133 Bill Goodwin t/
B-3116 Brunswick No. 56 NC 133 Bill Goodwin ,`_
B-3312 Burke No. 347 SR 1984 John Williams v1""
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets and location maps for the
subject projects. The purpose of this information and the related review procedure is to have an
early "meeting of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the projects. Scoping meetings for these projects are scheduled for
December 10, 1997 in the Planning and Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 470).
These scoping meetings will be held back to back beginning at 2:00 P. M. in the order shown
above. These meetings typically last 10 to 15 minutes per project, so all attendees should plan to
arrive at the beginning of the 2:00 P. M. session as applicable. You may provide us with your
comments at the meeting, mail them to us prior to the meeting, or e-mail them to
[e-mail] prior to the meeting.
Thank you for your assistance in this part of our planning process. If there are any
questions about the meetings or the scoping sheets, please call the indicated Project Planning
Engineer, at 733-3141.
HFV/bg
Attachments
?r
. 4 a
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT .TR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID McCoy
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 143
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
ATTENTION: Mr. Steve Lund
Y...
NM GROUP
9ryP?'?Q OfJA:P !'Y SECT!'.,
May 15, 2000
NCDOT Coordinator Dear Sir: 000775
Subject: Burke County, Replacement of Bridge No. 347 over Laurel Creek on SR 1984.
Federal Aid Project No. MABRZ-1984(2), State Project No. 8.2851901, TIP
Project No. B-3312.
. Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above
referenced project. This project involves the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 347 on
SR 1984 over Laurel Creek in Burke County. The existing bridge will be replaced with a
double-barrel box culvert, with each barrel 9 feet x 9 feet, on existing alignment. Project
length is 200 feet, and the proposed roadway will have a 30-foot paved surface and 4-foot
grass shoulders.
The existing bridge is composed entirely of timber and steel and will result in no
temporary fill due to bridge demolition debris. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for
Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed during demolition of the existing bridge.
Traffic will be maintained on a temporary on-site detour during construction. This
detour will be located approximately 50 feet west of the existing structure, and will utilize
two 72-inch corrugated metal pipes to maintain the flow of Laurel Creek.
No wetlands are contained within the proposed project limits; however, temporary
and permanent impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated. Temporary impacts
to Laurel Creek from the detour will be 75 linear feet and permanent impacts from the

proposed culvert will be 62 linear feet. In addition, there will be a 35-foot channel
relocation at the culvert outlet.
An intermittent stream channel was identified after the completion of the planning
document, and will have temporary and permanent impacts. This intermittent stream flows
into Laurel Creek just west of the existing bridge, and parallels SR 1984 (see attached plan
view). Temporary impacts due to detour fill will be 65 linear feet and permanent impacts
due to proposed piping will be 55 linear feet.
This 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 Nationwide
Permit 23 in accordance with the Federal Register of December 13, 1996, Part VII,
Volume 61, Number 241.
We anticipate a 401 General Certification will apply to this project, and are
providing one copy of the CE document to the North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their review.
This project will take place in a mountain trout county. Thus we anticipate that
comments from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) will be
required. By copy of this letter and attachment, NCDOT hereby requests NCWRC review.
We request that the NCWRC forward their comments to the US Army Corps of Engineers.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Ms. Sue Brady
at [phone].
S'ncerely,
??a1) William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: w/ attachment
Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Joe Mickey, Jr., NCWRC
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Structure Design
w/o attachment
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Dan Martin, P.E., Division 13 Engineer
Mr. John Williams, P.E., Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
4
Burke County
Bridge No. 347 on SR 1984
Over Laurel Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1984(2)
State Project 8.2851901
TIP # B-3312
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
Datc-?,.William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
la-lb-4g ` ?M4044,
Date VNicholas Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA

:+
Burke County
Bridge No. 347 on SR 1984
Over Laurel Creek
Federal Project MA13RZ-1984(2)
State Project 8.2851901
TIP # B-3312
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
November, 1998
Documentation Prepared in
Planning and Environmental Branch By:
01A CARO
•Q
- 1.
SEAL
-I4 t s 022552
Date Jo L. Williams, P.E. '-`O NGIPtE??%'•ry ?`?
Project Planning Engineer
/z-/4/-98 W4 yH `?-
Date Wayne Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
12-/6 y? J?r?
Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
}
Burke County
Bridge No. 347 on SR 1984
Over Laurel Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1984(2)
State Project 8.2851901
TIP # B-3312
Bridge No. 347 is located in Burke County over Laurel Creek. It is programmed
in the Draft 2000-2006 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge
replacement project. This protect is part of the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and
Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP) and has been classified as a "Categorical Exclusion".
No substantial environmental impacts are expected.
1. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 347 will be replaced with a two-barrel box culvert on the existing
alignment (see Figure 2). Each barrel of the box culvert will be 2.7 x 2.7 meters (9 x 9
feet). Traffic will be maintained on a temporary alignment 15 meters (50 feet) west of
the existing structure.
The project length is 61 meters (200 feet) (see Figure 2). The pavement width
will be 6.0 meters (20 feet) including two 3.0-meter (10-foot) lanes. The grass shoulders
will be 1.2 meters (4 feet) wide. Based on preliminary design, the design speed should be
approximately 50 km/h (30 mph).
The pavement width on the temporary alignment will be 5.4 meters (18 feet). The
width of the grass shoulders will be 1.2 meters (4.0 feet). Two 1800-millimeter (72-
inch) corrugated metal pipes will maintain the flow in Laurel Creek during construction.
The design speed for the detour alignment will be 30 km/h (20 mph).
The estimated cost of the project is $420,000 including $375,000 in construction
costs and $45,000 in right of way costs. The estimated cost shown in the Draft 2000-
2006 TIP is $355,000; including $328,000 in construction costs, and $27,000 in right of
way costs.
II. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. All practical Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be
included and properly maintained during project construction.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of
dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States."
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DEM) Section 401 Water Quality
General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Army Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit # 23.
Foundation investigations will be required on this project. The investigation will
include test borings in soil and/or rock for in-site testing as well as obtaining samples for
laboratory testing. This may require test borings in streams and/or wetlands.
NCWRC has commented that Laurel Creek is not Designated Public Mountain
Trout Waters. NCWRC has no special concerns regarding this project.
III. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT anticipates that a design exception may be necessary due to horizontal
and vertical alignment. The topography of the project makes it impossible to improve
horizontal or vertical alignment without significant blasting into the mountain on the
south approach to the bridge.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1984 is classified as a Rural Local route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. Traffic volume is 300 vehicles per day (VPD) and projected at
600 VPD for the year 2020. There is no posted speed limit on SR 1984 in the vicinity of
the bridge. The land along SR 1984 is a mixture of undeveloped land with pockets of
residential development.
The existing bridge was completed in 1963. It is 11 meters (36 feet) long. The
deck is 6.1 meters (20 feet) wide. There is approximately 3.4 meters (11 feet) vertical
clearance between the bridge deck and streambed. There are two lanes of traffic on the
bridge.
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the
bridge is 14.8 out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge is posted with weight
restrictions of 12 tons for single vehicles and 16 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
The vertical alignment near the bridge is fair. Immediately south of the bridge the
road begins to climb quickly. The horizontal alignment as shown in Figure 2 is fair.
Shoulders on both approaches of the bridge are approximately 1.0 meter (3 feet) wide.
The Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that two accidents have been reported in
the period from May 1994 to April 1997 in the vicinity of the project. The accidents were
not the result of the bridge or the alignment.
There are 8 daily school bus crossings over the studied bridge. The
Transportation Director noted that the crossing was the only access to SR 1984 and
assumed that some provision would be made to leave the road open.
There are aerial power and telephone utilities in the project vicinity but it is uncertain
as to what might be affected by the project. Even so, utility impacts would be considered
low.
2

V. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
One build alternative was fully evaluated during the planning process. Bridge
No. 347 will be replaced on the existing location. Traffic will be maintained on a
temporary alignment during construction.
Detouring traffic is not possible because SR 1984 is a dead end road.
Realigning SR 1984 along the proposed detour route and maintaining traffic on
the existing structure during construction would have required a curved approach to the
intersection or a skewed intersection. This would potentially create a hazard not currently
experienced by travelers trying to turn onto NC 18.
Because of topography and buildings, all other considerations would have been
far more costly and environmentally damaging than the option chosen.
"Do-nothing" is not practical, requiring the eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating
bridge is neither practical nor economical.
VI. ESTIMATED COST (Table 1)
COMPONENT
2 Barrel Box Culvert
Bridge Removal
Roadway & Approaches
Detour $70,000
7,000
119,000
41,000
Mobilization & Miscellaneous 71,000
Engineering & Contingencies 67,000
Total Construction $ 375,000
Right of Way $ 45,000
Total Cost $ 420,000
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 347 will be replaced as with a two-barrel box culvert on the existing
alignment (see Figure 2). Each barrel of the box culvert will be 2.7 x 2.7 meters (9 x 9
feet). Traffic will be maintained on a temporary alignment 15 meters (50 feet) west of
the existing structure.
The project length is 61 meters (200 feet) (see Figure 2). The pavement width
will be 6.0 meters (20 feet) including two 3.0-meter (10-foot) lanes. The grass shoulders
t ,
e
will be 1.2 meters (4 feet) wide. Based on preliminary design, the design speed should be
approximately 50 km/h (30 mph).
The pavement width on the temporary alignment will be 5.4 meters (18 feet). The
width of the grass shoulders will be 1.2 meters (4.0 feet). Two 1800-millimeter (72-
inch) corrugated metal pipes will maintain the flow in Laurel Creek. The design speed
for the detour alignment will be 30 km/h (20 mph).
Because all other possible alternates would have been far more expensive and
more environmentally damaging, the recommended improvement is the only reasonable
and feasible choice.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. GENERAL
This project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an
inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
This project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
This bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality
of the human or natural environment by implementing the environmental commitments
listed in Section II of this document in addition to use of current NCDOT standards and
specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning
regulation. No change in land use is expected to result from construction of this project.
There are no hazardous waste impacts.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way
acquisition will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not
expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and
waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
The proposed bridge replacement project will not raise the existing flood levels or
have any significant adverse effect on the existing floodplain.
Utility impacts are considered to be low for the proposed project.
B. AIR AND NOISE
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included
in the regional emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required.
4
The project is located in Burke County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part 51 is not
applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not
have substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during
construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
In compliance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) of 1981, the
project was evaluated for impacts to prime or important farmland soils. The project will
have no impacts to prime or important farmland soils.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Upon review of area photographs, aerial photographs, and cultural resources
databases, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has recommended that neither
an architectural or archaeological survey is required.
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
Physical Resources
Water and soil resources, which occur in the study area, are discussed below. The
availability of water and soils directly influence composition and distribution of flora and
fauna in any biotic community.
Water Resources
Field surveys revealed that one body of surface water is located within the project
area. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has assigned index numbers for streams and
tributaries in North Carolina. One perennial stream in the Catawba River Basin, Laurel
Creek [DWQ Index No. 11-129-1-13, (3/1/62)] is crossed by SR 1984. This stream
carries a Best Usage Classification of Class C. Class C refers to waters suitable for
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and
agriculture.
The stream flow of Laurel Creek was moderate at the time of field visit. The
stream was approximately 3.6 meters (12 feet) in width with an average channel width of
6.1 meters (20 feet). The stream was approximately 0.46 meters (1.5 feet) deep. The
substrate consisted of sand, silt, and cobble.
Point sources refer to discharges that enter surface water through a pipe, ditch, or
other defined points of discharge. The term most commonly refers to discharges
associated with wastewater treatment plants. Point source dischargers located throughout
North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program. Any discharger is required to register for a permit. There is
one NPDES site located within 1.6 kilometers (1.0 mile) upstream of the project study
area. Permit No. NCG550655 was issued on 2/10/94 to the Laurel Creek Mobile Home
Park. This permittee discharges into Laurel Creek approximately 1823 meters (5981 feet)
upstream of the project area.
Non-point source refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater
flow or no defined point of discharge. There are many types of land use activities that
can serve as sources of nonpoint source pollution including land development,
construction, crop production, animal feeding lots, failing septic systems, landfills, roads,
and parking lots. Sediment and nutrients are major pollution-causing substances
associated with nonpoint source pollution. Others include fecal coliform bacteria, heavy
metals, oil and grease, and any other substance that may be washed off the ground or
removed from the atmosphere and carried into surface waters.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is managed by DWQ
and is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses
long term trends in water quality. The program assesses water quality by sampling for
selected benthic macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites. Some
macroinvertebrates are sensitive to very subtle changes in water quality; thus, the species
richness and overall biomass of these organisms are reflections of water quality. There
are no BMAN sites within the project vicinity.
Soils and Topography
The Cliffside series is the dominant soil series occurring at the project site (Table
1). The Cliffside series consists of soils on upland ridges and side slopes. The
Udorthents series consists of areas where the natural soils have been altered by digging,
grading, or filling, to the extent that individual soil types can no longer be recognized.
Table 1. Soils occurring in the project area.
Map Knit
Symbol Mapping Unit Permeability Slope (°/O) Shrink-
swell Hydric
Class=-`
Ud Udorthents, loam n/a 0-2 n/a Non H dric
66C Cliffside-Woolwine moderate 8-15 low Non H dric
66D Cliffside-Fairview moderate 15-25 low Non H dric
The topography within the project area ranges from approximately 323.1-
335.3 meters (1060-1100 feet) above mean sea level.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Terrestrial Communities
Three terrestrial communities, maintained roadside, riparian fringe, and
residential/business, exist within the project area, and will be impacted by the subject
project. The maintained roadside community consists of the highly maintained shoulders
and some less intensively managed areas that grade into the surrounding natural
communities. Significant soil disturbance and compaction, along with frequent mowing
or herbicide application, keep this community in an early successional state.
Dominant plants in the heavily maintained portions of the roadside community
include fescue and plantain. In the areas that receive lower levels of maintenance, more
diverse communities can develop. Japanese honeysuckle, dog fennel, bush clover, grape,
Southern lady fern, ragweed, pokeweed, poison oak, and smooth sumac populate this
community.
6

N
A residentiallbusintss community exists in the location of the proposed temporary
bridge and road. This commmunity includes the following sjpeCies: fescue, winged elm,
mimosa, Canada hemlock), white pine, ragweed, Southern lady fern, and smooth sumac.
The riparian edge community included herb and vine species such as poison ivy,
jewelweed, elderberry, Virginia creeper, rosebay and Christmas fern. Trees found in this
community are white oak, red maple, tulip poplar, black gum, black cherry, dogwood,
sycamore, sweet gum, and tree-of-heaven.
Wildlife found in these communities is limited and consists primarily of
wide-ranging, adaptable species, which are well suited to coexistence with human
development. Mammals common to disturbed edge areas, such as eastern cottontail
rabbit, raccoon, white-tailed deer, and gray squirrel may inhabit forested fringes. The
most common reptiles found in such habitats are eastern box turtle and predators such as
black racer, and eastern garter snake.
Birds likely to frequent such habitats include common crow, American robin,
mourning dove, and European starling. Freshwater fishes likely to be found in creeks
such as Laurel Creek may include creek chub, redbreast sunfish, white shiner, and
rosyside dace.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed project will have various impacts on the biotic
resources described. This section quantifies and qualifies potential impacts to the natural
communities within the project area in terms of the area impacted and the organisms
affected. Temporary versus permanent impacts are considered as well, along with
recommendations to minimize or eliminate impacts.
/Anticipated Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
Impacts to terrestrial communities will result from project construction due to the
clearing and paving of portions of the project area, and thus the loss of community area.
Calculated quantitative impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance
of each community present in the study area (Table 2). Estimated impacts are derived
based -on the project length of 61 meters (200 ft.). The entire right-of-way
(24.4 meters (80 feet)) was used for this calculation. Impacts as a result of the temporary
detour are included. The entire right-of-way will probably not be impacted; therefore
actual impacts to the communities may be considerably less.
Table 2_ Estimated Terrestrial Impacts to communities
Community type Estimated impacts
ha fac)' racy unpacts
ha (ac) anent impacts
ha (ac)
Maintained roadside 0.05 0.13 0.03 0.07 0.02 0.05
Riparian fringe 0.06 0.15 0.03 0.07 0.03 0.07
Residential/business 0.04 0.10 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.05
Total 0.15 0.38 0.08 0.19 0.07 0.17
Flora and fauna occurring in these communities are generally common throughout
North Carolina because of their adaptability to wide ranging environmental factors.
Moreover, a similar roadside shoulder community will be re-established after
construction. Animals temporarily displaced by construction activities should repopulate
areas suitable for the species following project completion. As a result, it is unlikely that
7
r +r
existing species will be displaced Fignificantly from the project &vea following
construction. However, to minimize the temporary effects of project construction, all
cleared areas along the roadwgs should be revegetated promptly after project completion
to minimize erosion and the loss of wildlife habitat.
Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW) or Water Supplies (WS-I or
WS-II) occur within 1.6 kilometers (1.0 mile) of project study area, however impacts will
occur to Laurel Creek. One Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) is located
approximately 0.43 kilometers (0.27 miles) south of the project area. This watershed,
which flows to Willis Lake [DWQ index no. 11-129-2-9,(8/3/92)], does not flow into
Laurel Creek for approximately 4.5 kilometers (2.8 miles) downstream.
Estimated Impacts to Laurel Creek are provided in Table 3. Impacts are
calculated by using the width of the stream channel [6.1 meters (20 feet)] and the length
of the culvert [17 meters (56 feet)] and the length of the temporary corrugated metal pipe
[21meters (70 feet)].
Table 3. Estimated Impacts to Laurel Creek
New Culvest _ Tern r Alig m ent '.
cream 103.7 (1120.0) 1 128 1400.0
Aquatic communities are sensitive to any changes in the environment. Any action
that affects water quality can have an adverse impact on aquatic organisms. Although
most of the disturbance caused by project construction will be temporary, some
environmental impacts caused by the proposed project will be long term or irreversible.
Installation or modification of in-stream structures, such as replacement or extension of
culverts, can permanently affect many physical stream parameters.
Project construction may result in the following impacts to surface waters:
Increased silt loading and sedimentation from erosion of disturbed soils.
Changes in light incidence, water clarity and water temperature due to increased
sediment load and riparian vegetation removal.
Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface or
ground water drainage patterns.
Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil from
construction equipment and other vehicles.
Precautions will be taken to minimize these and other impacts to water resources
in the study area. NCDOT's Best Management Practices (BMP) for the Protection of
Surface Waters will be strictly enforced throughout the construction stage of the project.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides inventories and impact analyses pertinent to two substantial
regulatory issues: Waters of the United States and rare and protected species. These
issues retain particular importance because of federal and state mandates which regulate
their protection. This section deals specifically with the impact analyses required to
satisfy regulatory authority prior to project construction.
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the
United States, as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CRF) Part
328.3. Any action that proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters or
wetlands falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Surface waters are waters used in
interstate or foreign commerce, waters subject to the ebb and flow of tides, all interstate
waters including interstate wetlands, and all other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers,
and streams. Surface waters include all standing or flowing waters which have
commercial or recreational value to the public. Wetlands are identified based on the
presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and saturated or flooded conditions
during all or part of the growing season.
Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the proposed project.
As a result, construction activities will require permits and certifications from various
regulatory agencies in charge of protecting the water quality of public water resources.
A Nationwide Permit 23 CFR 330 Appendix A (B) (23) is likely to be applicable.
for the crossing of Laurel Creek. This permit authorizes construction provided the
following conditions are met:
• the width of the fill is limited to the minimum necessary for the actual crossing;
• the fill place in Waters of the United States is limited to a filled area of no more than
0.45 ha ( 1.0 ac);
• no more than a total of 45.7 meters (150 linear feet) of the fill for the roadway can
occur in special aquatic sites, including wetlands;
• the crossing is culverted, bridged or otherwise designed to prevent the restriction of,
and to withstand, expected high flows and tidal flows and movement of aquatic
organisms, and;
• the crossing, including all attendant features, both temporary and permanent, is part of
a single and complete project for crossing of Waters of the United States.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification from the DWQ
prior to the issuance of the Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires that the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or
licensed activity that may result in a discharge to Waters of the United States. Section
401 Certification allows surface waters to be temporarily impacted for the duration of the
construction or other land manipulation. The issuance of a 401 permit from the DWQ is
a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 permit.
The N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) has designated Burke County
as a Trout County but Laurel Creek is not Designated Public Mountain Trout Waters.
Concurrence with the WRC will be required due to the crossing of Laurel Creek.
Federally Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of decline
either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human activities. Federal law
(under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires that
any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally protected, be subject
to review by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. An
endangered species is considered to be a species that is in danger of becoming extinct
throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is considered to
be a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
As of 14 May 1998, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) lists six federally
protected species for Burke County (Table 4). Descriptions and biological conclusions
for each species are given below.
Table 4. Federally Protected Species for Burke County.
Scientific Name Common Name' Status
Falco ere inus anatum Peregrine falcon Endangered
Geum radiatum s readin avens Endangered
Hexas lis nani ora dwarf-flowered heartleaf Threatened
Hudsonia montana mountain olden heather Threatened
Isotria medeoloides small-whorled o onia Threatened
Liatris helleri Heller's blazing star Threatened
Endangered- a species is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its range.
Threatened- a species is likely to become extinct within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.
- Falco peregrinus anatum (American peregrine falcon) Endangered
Animal Family: Falconidae
Date Listed: March 20, 1970
The anatum subspecies of the peregrine falcon is intermediate in coloring. The
back is dark gray and the underside is off-white to tannish with dark barring. This
subspecies appears slightly larger than the tundrius subspecies and has a wider black
wedge forming the side of the helmet. Males of this species grow to an average length of
40 centimeters and females average 47.5 centimeters in length.
The American peregrine falcon is found throughout the United States in areas
with high cliffs and open land for foraging. Nesting for the falcons is generally on high
cliff ledges but they may also nest in broken off treetops in the eastern deciduous forest
and on skyscrapers and bridges in urban areas.
Prey for the peregrine falcon consists of small mammals and,birds. They occupy
a range from 0.25 to 120 square miles depending on the availability of food. The hunting
range usually extends 10 miles from the nest. Nesting occurs from mid-March to May.
Suitable habitat consisting of high cliffs and open land for foraging is not present
in the project area. No American peregrine falcons were observed during a survey
conducted on July 27, 1998 by NCDOT biologists Chris Rivenbark, Logan Williams, and
Josh Witherspoon. In addition, a review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
10
(NCNHP) database on July 31, 1998 indicated that there is no known occurrence of
American peregrine falcon within the project area. Therefore, this project will not affect
this species.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
Geum radiatum (spreading avens) Endangered
Plant Family: Rosaceae
Federally Listed: April 5, 1990
Flowers Present: June - early July
This species is found only in the North Carolina and Tennessee sections of the
Southern Appalachian Mountains. Known populations in Burke County have been
extirpated and populations in any other counties have shown- a serious decline.
Stems of this perennial herb grow from horizontal rhizomes and obtain a height of
2-5 decimeters. The stems are topped with an indefinite cyme of bright yellow radially
symmetrical flowers. Basal leaves are odd-pinnately compound, terminal leaflets are
kidney shaped and much larger than the lateral leaflets, which are reduced or absent.
Leaflets have lobed or uneven margins and are serrate, with long petioles. Stem leaves
are smaller than the basal, rounded to obovate, with irregularly cut margins. Fruits are
hemispheric aggregates of hairy achenes that are 7-9 mm in diameter.
Spreading avens occurs on scarps, bluffs, cliffs and escarpments on mountains,
hills, and ridges. Known populations of this plant have been found to occur at elevations
of 1535-1541 meters (5060-5080 feet), 1723-1747 meters (5680-5760 feet) and 1759
meters (5800 feet). Other habitat requirements for this species include full sunlight and
shallow acidic soils. The spreading avens is found in soils composed of sand, pebbles,
humus, sandy loam, clay loam, and humus. Most populations are pioneers on rocky
outcrops.
Suitable habitat in the form of scarps, bluffs, cliffs and escarpments are not
present in the project area. Spreading avers was not observed during a survey conducted
on July 27, 1998 by NCDOT biologists Chris Rivenbark, Logan Williams, and Josh
Witherspoon. In addition, a review of the NCNHP database on July 31, 1998 indicated
that there is no known occurrence of spreading avens within the project area. Therefore,
this project will not affect this species.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Hexastylis naniflora (dwarf-flowered heartleaf) Threatened
This plant has heart-shaped leaves, supported by long thin petioles that grow from
a subsurface rhizome. It rarely exceeds 15 cm in height. The leaves are dark green in
color, evergreen, and leathery. Flowers are small, inconspicuous, jugshaped, and dark
brown in color. They are found near the base of the petioles. Fruits mature from mid-May
to early July.
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf populations are found along bluffs and their adjacent
slopes, in boggy areas next to streams and creekheads, and along the slopes of nearby
hillsides and ravines. It grows in acidic soils in regions with a cool moist climate.
11
Regional vegetation is described as upper piedmont oak-pine forest and as part of the
southeastern mixed forest.
Suitable habitat in the form of bluffs and adjacent slopes is not present in the
project area. Dwarf-flowered heartleaf was not observed during a survey conducted on
July 27, 1998 by NCDOT biologists Chris Rivenbark, Logan Williams, and Josh
Witherspoon. A review of the NCNHP database on July 31, 1998 indicated that there is
one known occurrence of dwarf-flowered heartleaf within the project area. One
population is recorded approximately 0.97 kilometers (0.6 miles) south of the project.
However, this project will not affect this population.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Hudsonia Montana (mountain golden heather) Threatened
Mountain golden heather is a low, needle-leaved shrub that is yellow-green in
color. It usually grows in clumps 10 centimeters to 20 centimeters across and 15
centimeters high, it sometimes occurs in clumps that are a 30 centimeters or more across.
The leaves from the previous year are retained and appear scale-like on the older
branches. Leaves are from 3-7 millimeters long and appear awl-shaped and thread-like.
It forms solitary, terminal, lanceolate flowers that are nearly three centimeters across.
These yellow flowers have five blunt-tipped petals and 20 to 30 stamens. Fruit capsules
have three projecting points at the tips, are rounded, and are found on 1.3-centimeter
stalks.
Hudsonia montana occurs in weathered rocky soils on mountaintops. It can be
found on exposed quartzite ledges in an ecotone between bare rock and heath balds
dominated by Leiophyllum which merge into pine forest. Plants do live in partially
shaded areas, but do not appear to be as healthy as those found in open areas.
Critical habitat has been designated in Burke County, North Carolina. The area is .
bounded by the following: on the west by the 2200 foot contour; on the east by the
Linville Gorge Wilderness Boundary north from the intersection of the 2200 foot contour
and the Shortoff Mountain Trail to where it intersects the 3400 foot contour at
"Chimneys"--then follow the 3400 foot contour north until it reintersects with the
Wilderness Boundary--then follow the Wilderness Boundary again northward until it
intersect the 3200 foot contour extending west from its intersection with the Wilderness
Boundary until it begins to turn south--at this point the Boundary extends due east until it
intersects the 2200 foot contour.
Suitable habitat in the form of ecotones between bare rock and heath balds is not
present in the project area. Mountain golden heather was not observed during a survey
conducted on July 27, 1998 by NCDOT biologists Chris Rivenbark, Logan Williams, and
Josh Witherspoon. In addition, a review of NCNHP database on July 31, 1998 indicated
that there is no known occurrence of mountain golden heather within the project area.
Therefore, this project will not affect this species.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Isotria medeoloides (small-whorled pogonia) Threatened
The small-whorled pogonia was known historically from Maine to Georgia, with
the exception of Delaware, along the eastern seaboard and in Michigan, Illinois, and
Missouri. In North Carolina it is found in the Nantahala National Forest, Macon County
and near the town of Flat Rock, Henderson County.
12
This perennial orchid has long pubescent roots and a hollow stem 9.5 centimeters
to 25 centimeters tall. Stems terminate in a whorl of five or six light green, elliptical
leaves that are somewhat pointed. Leaves measure approximately 8 x 4 centimeters. One
or two light green flowers are produced at the end of the stem. Flowers have short sepals
that are only 2.5 centimeters long.
The small-whorled pogonia grows in "second growth deciduous" or
deciduous-coniferous forests, with an open canopy, open shrub layer, and sparse herb
layer. It prefers acidic soils. Flowering is inhibited in areas where there is relatively high
shrub coverage or high sapling density.
Suitable habitat in the form of second growth deciduous is not present in the
project area. Small-whorled pogonia was not observed during a survey conducted on July
27, 1998 by NCDOT biologists Chris Rivenbark, Logan Williams, and Josh
Witherspoon. In addition, a review of NCNHP database on July 31, 1998 indicated that
there is no known occurrence of small-whorled pogonia within the project area.
Therefore, this project will not affect this species.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Liatris helleri (Heller's blazing star) Threatened
This plant is endemic to high elevation ledges of rock outcrops of the northern
Blue Ridge Mountains in North Carolina. Of nine historic populations only seven remain
in existence.
Heller's blazing star is a short stocky plant that has one or more erect stems that
arise from a tuft of narrow, pale green basal leaves. Leaves are accuminate and diminish
in size and breadth upward on the stem. Stems are 4 dm tall and are topped with a
raceme of small (7-20 cm) lavender flowers. Fruits are present from September to
November.
This plant is a high altitude early pioneer species and can be found growing on
high elevation ledges of rock outcrops in grassy areas where it is exposed to full sunlight.
It prefers shallow acid soils associated with granite rocks.
Suitable habitat in the form of high elevation ledges of rock outcrops is not
present in the project area. Heller's blazing star was not observed during a survey
conducted on July 27, 1998 by NCDOT biologists Chris Rivenbark, Logan Williams, and
Josh Witherspoon. In addition, a review the NCNHP database on July 31, 1998 indicated
that there is no known occurrence of Heller's blazing star within the project area.
Therefore, this project will not affect this species.
Biological, Conclusion: No. Effect
13
1
Bridge No.347
e
00 -
.9 1916,
i 1922 .` %
Carswell '
r
Ch, a?
1924
BUTLER ,
KNOB
ELEV. 2052
1900
i
PROSPECT
' 1737
1746 W
.3 a
t.
1747
' 18 `
- _.._. 2.3 1 Sg 1748
1001
'-?I 964 Cremt' - ' - `' -• -
3.2 ;.
1916
1786
'•' •.? ._wlry
i --
9 Walkers 1 -' `. _.._
Chapel
' -'
1915 :•
= r
- creek
'
1796
''
.` ; 0 ;

' Ch.
1797
1914
4
1915 0 `•.
8
1913
Pleasant Grove
1913 .'

1900,
'

-
191

:,

1924 i
0 1909
; Y" •>.4
6 `
'` ' 9
1908
•'? 1907 ? ,.._:
; ! .

1 910
i . ! 2028 `•1
y w.
119-04-
i % ` ?•'?` 119011
- STAMP MTN.
•, , %• ???• ; 191 1

d01wB _
North Carolina
Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
tsS Planning & Environmental Branch
OF
Burke County
Replace Bridge No. 347
On SR 1984 Over Laurel Creek
B-3312
FIGURE I
'c-
L ,
L taw
O .4 ?s
y is ,?? •< ??.
3 y,.
1%. -job
low
Replace Bridge No. 347
With 2-Barrel Boa Culvert

. r
c,90, North Carolina Department of
q Transportation
Division of Highways
P?OF"`j Planning & Environmental Branch
Burke County
Replace Bridge No. 347 on SR 1984
Over Laurel Creek
B-3312
Figure Two
r

a
w

Replace Bridge No. 347
x
7 With 2-Barrel Box Culvert
N

x
1.
' ,? , .
South Approach to Bridge No. 347
Facing Toward Intersection with NC 18
Intersection at NC 18 Facing South Toward
Bridge No. 347 v
i
Buildings East of Bridge No. 347
Buildings West of Bridge No. 347

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John L. Williams, Planning Engineer
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Joe H. Mickey, Jr. Western Piedmont Region Coordinator _
Habitat Conservation Program ' e-
DATE: May 8, 1998
SUBJECT: Review of scoping sheets for replacement of Bridge No. 347 on SR 1964 over
Laurel Creek, Burke County, TIP B-3312
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our review and comments on the
scoping sheets for the above referenced project..
Biological staff of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed the
scoping sheet for the subject project and have not identified any special concerns regarding this
project. Although McDowell County is designated a trout county by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Laurel Creek does not support trout. Our comments on the 404 permit process will
reflect this fact.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment during the early stages of this
project. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 336/366-
2982.
SURVEY/PLANNING-NCSHPO TEL:[phone] Jun 17'98 8:41 No.001 P.02
.? J
pYY
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain. Sc=tary Jefficy J. Crow, Dircctor
December 16, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge #347 on SR 1984 over Laurel Creek,
Burke Countv, B-3312, Federal Aid Project
MABRZ-1984(2), State Project 8.2851901, ER
98-7933
Dear Mr. Graf:
On December 10, 1997, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning
the above project. We reported our available information on historic architectural
and archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations.
NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic structures
located within the area of potential effect. We recommend that no historic
architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which. indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
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 Fasi Jones Street - R31ci914 North Carolina 27601-2807
SURVEY/PLANNING-NCSHPO TEL:[phone] Jun 17'98 8:41 No.001 P.03 ..
Nicholas L. Graf ,
December 16, 1997, Page 2
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,
L&'
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:siw
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett