20011280 Ver 1_Complete File_20010817

011280
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL. F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
August 3, 2001
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Ave. Rm 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006 7
Attention: Mr. Steve Lund
NCDOT Project Coordinator
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Cleveland County; Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 10 over First Broad
River on NC 10, Federal Project BRSTP-10(1); State Project 8.1801401; TIP
No. B-3138
Dear Mr. Lund:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) requests authorization from
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under a Section 404 Nationwide Permit (NWP) 23
to replace Bridge No. 10 over the First Broad River on NC 10. A temporary causeway will be
needed to construct the bridge, and the NCDOT asks that this action be authorized under a
Section 404 NW-P33. The project has a let date of February 2002.
Bridge No. 10 over First Broad River on NC 10 will be replaced with a1365 foot ft) long
bridge at the existing location. It will be 30 ft wide with two 12 ft lanes with 3 ft offsets. There
is no viable offsite detour available to maintain traffic on, therefore, during construction, traffic
will be maintained on a temporary onsite detour to the east. The detour will be a 190 ft long
bridge with two 10 ft lanes and 2 ft offsets. The temporary alignment will be 1718 ft long, and
the temporary bridge will span from top of bank to top of bank. Upon construction completion,
the temporary bridge and the approaches will be removed, and the site will be restored to original
contours and replanted with appropriate vegetation.
The superstructure of Bridge No. 10 is composed of a reinforced concrete deck on steel
I-beams. The substructure is composed of reinforced concrete abutments and reinforced
concrete posts and beam bents. Only the portion of the reinforced concrete deck over the water
would potentially result in temporary fill. The abutments can be removed without dropping them
into the water. The resulting fill could potentially be 40 cubic yards.
The project has been described in a Categorical Exclusion (CE) Action Classification
Form signed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on January 31, 2001. The project
is being processed by the FHWA as a CE in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, the
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE'. 919-733-3141 LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWWDOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
NCDOT does not anticipate requesting a Section 404 Individual Permit but proposes to proceed
under a Section 404 NWP 23 in accordance with 61 Federal Register 65874, 65916, issued
December 13, 1996
There have been no changes in the proposed project since the CE was completed. There
will be no wetlands impacted by the proposed project. As described in the CE, the NCDOT will
construct a bridge instead of a culvert.
A causeway is needed in order to construct the new bridge. The causeway will result in
a temporary impact of surface waters as 5.9 yd3 (4.5 m3) of material will be placed in the stream
temporarily. Upon completion of construction, the causeway will be removed, and the stream
will be restored to its original contours, and the area of disturbance will be replanted with
appropriate vegetation. Permit drawings of the causeway are attached to this letter.
Written concurrence for 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the N. C. Division
of Water Quality (NCDWQ) is not required for either the Section 404 NWP 23 or 33. The
NCDWQ is provided written notification of the proposed action by a copy of this Section 404
NWP 23 and 33 application. The NCDOT will adhere to all conditions of the general
certification for Section 404 NWP 23 and 33 thereby not necessitating a written concurrence
from the NCDWQ.
In summary, the NCDOT requests authorization from USACE, under a Section 404
NWP 23, to replace Bridge No. 10 over First Broad River on NC 10 and under a Section 404
NWP 33, to construct a temporary causeway. The NCDOT will adhere to the general conditions
of the 401 WQC associated with these Section 404 NWPs, thereby not requiring written
notification from the NCDWQ.
If you have any questions or need any additional information concerning this project,
please contact Ms. Jill Holmes of my staff at [phone], extension 332.
Sincerely,

W. D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
WDG/jjh
cc: Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDWQ, Raleigh
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS, Asheville
Ms. Mary Ellen Haggard, NCWRC
Mr. Tim Rountree, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Dave Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Ken Pace, P.E., Roadside Environmental
Mr. Michael L. Holder, P.E., Division 12 Engineer

"IT

CLEVELAND
COUNTY-

N. C. DEPT.fOF 'I RA NShOWFA ION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CLI;VE1„,,ND C'MUNTY
:/ 1 \•,,
??;? '?? ? ?? ?'•? ??'?? ?? ? ,? ? ? I'I?D .iT'( l':N.Ih0 (.'Ul (1?-,il,i;i)
' tl it
At.I,;titl?;A'T 0? BRIDGE, ?`Ih
D+'J?i? FIRST ];M)All 1,
ON Nt' 'if)
ustalioTorTpa,f'cgn AWI b-7707 7TTT
DJiift IJI CARODNA
I I
I I
I
I
O % I I
i
I-
n_ / +? / /
71
w I
,?, APO
}I? I
w
m
+ N
-CL
NQ (-Dl
? zI a- LLJ
Q
? a-
J
w
J
UD'
\?\ U
I-V)
ti.
(D0
F-
z

co
?o
uz

Q w
V)o
J Q
UCL
S J
Qn
< % VY
E cr- FL of
rlCL
6 r z+

+ ? I
+ =Q 1
+ Nft?
V?
aQ I
1? I
I
1 I
11
11
1+
11
?o
I?
I?
O
00
+ r?
ll- I
1
7-1
1 i -
I ?
-1

c
<Z
I ?
Y
I o_
O
O

I ?
? 11?
I

I

I I ?I ?
n
't
1 I
?
I I
I
I I ?
?
I I
I I
I ?
I ?
Z
I
1 L I
I
I I 1
I ?
I ?
1
I
LIJ
IJ I
{ ?
II `1
I
7
V)
J
O
2
C)
p
W
Ca Q U
U
7

. Iq
(-D H
wz ?
I d

1
-l 1,
O? I
Nw
v
??
I
N I -
„ Zw - - -
z ?- ? i
aw
w
w
i
J ? I
z
W Z
I
O
J O
Mm
?
gyro I
+ cna'
w
M M ----y
?
' II
a E I
cn3
r-
V1 N ? l
+
. a. N I ?
- - - - -•-

r? -
Z _1
w
v
m+
(J H
N
H J
z'
wQ
m ?
+
(--0 n
0
+
0
v
0
N
+
v
O
O
+
v
0
OJ
-------?? -- -- +
M
=
0-
N a
-
U) CY
a 0 z
- n
mL O
---- - -'--y + +
s ? M
W?

mw
Oft?
zw

F-
co

I

1

-
0
x ?
i
?
W 1 d;
I a?

n I /
1
d 1 / ? wo
1 0- CL

1 O cr
/
LJ 0
w
1 --
f
1 U ~ ;
I Z .l
'
Z ;
0
M
O
N
r?
0
0
ri
O
co
t`J
V' ? N
U? V ? lf?
N ? N N
Q o W
F.,
U c W o
x 0 u ?-
w Q o H z
H CQ I .., F cn Cz.
06 '!•0? 7 0
O z W E-F u. 4
CC)
C4 0
Q U ce
U WCC ; ?
T ?
MH
VJ .A
(? R
W I
F A
d
3 a
W
U
d O
?a
0
F
d z
Id
Id R
U J W
W ?' F
F F F
W
W W :?
A ? D
W
J
W
.a U
z ?
® H
x
N ? 1
r C\j-_..
a v,
dm
oEl
N
Y _
0 II a J
3wrr vv)E
rZ J 3
w JM
IlJ 0 C 0?
MiLn
ON
z
IDROPE1I T)f ®WNF"I S
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO
NAMES
ADDRESSES
0 4906 JACKSON WHITE RD
BUMCARNER, WILLIAM ROY LAWNDALE, NC 28090
A

N. C. DEPT.OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CLEVELAND COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1801.401. (I3-31.38)
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE 910
OVER FIRST BROAD RIVER
ON NC 10
SHEET H OF y
01 12.80
Cleveland County
Bridge No. 10 on NC 10
Over First Broad River
Federal Project BRSTP-10(1)
State Project 8.1801401
TIP No. B-3138
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
To: Beth Harmon
From: Leslie Johnson

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
1-2q,01 r F C?:;' 1? - Date William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
31 0l Z?/'- - -
I Zwe -
Date Nicholas Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Cleveland County
Bridge No. 10 on NC 10
Over First Broad River
Federal Project BRSTP-10(l)
State Project 8.1801401
TIP No. B-3138
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
JANUARY 2001
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
?J IMA VVV>
-Z -D(
Date J L. Williams, P. E.
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, (Acting) Unit Head
Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
\\IIIIIS?+?IF11?...
C
i U a•
?, ? ANS... ?

PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
Cleveland County
Bridge No. 10 on NC 10
Over First Broad River
Federal Project BRSTP-10(1)
State Project 8.1801401
TIP No. B-3138
Resident Engineer & Roadside Environmental
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition will be followed during design
and construction of the project.
Due to the silt substrate of the streambed, a turbidity curtain is recommended to
contain sediment raised during the demolition and construction process. It is understood
that a curtain is only effective to a certain depth which shall be addressed by Roadside
Environmental.
Categorical Exclusion
Green Sheet
January 2001
Page 1 of 1
Cleveland County
Bridge No. 10 on NC 10
Over First Broad River
Federal Project BRSTP-10(1)
State Project 8.1801401
TIP No. B-3138
Bridge No. 10 is located in Cleveland County over First Broad River. It is programmed
in the Draft 2002-2008 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge
replacement project due to deteriorating structural integrity and a deficient cross section.
This project 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. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 10 will be replaced with a new 365-foot (I 11.3-meter) long bridge on the
existing location (see Figure 2). The cross section of the new bridge will include two 12-
foot (3.6-meter) wide lanes with 3-foot (I -meter) wide offsets (shoulders).
There will be 371 feet (113.1 meters) of new approach work to the south and 182 feet
(55.6 meters) of new approach work to the north. The pavement width on the approaches
will be 28 feet (8.4 meters) including two 12-foot (3.6-meter) lanes and 2-foot (0.6-meter)
paved shoulders. Additionally there will be 2-foot (0.6-meter) grass shoulders. Based on
preliminary design, the design speed should be 60 mph (100 kph).
Traffic will be maintained on a temporary alignment during construction. This alignment
will utilize a temporary bridge 190 feet (58 meters) long and 24 feet (7.2 meters) wide
including two l 0-foot (3.0-meter) lanes and 2-foot (0.6 meter) offsets. The length of the
temporary alignment will be approximately 1718 feet (524 meters).
The estimated cost of the project is $2,354,000 including $2,300,000 in construction costs
and $54,000 in right of way costs. The estimated cost shown in the Draft 2002-2008 TIP
is $2,500,000.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT does not anticipate any design exceptions.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NC 10 is classified as Rural Collector in the Statewide Functional Classification System.
It is located just north of Polkville, N.C. Currently the traffic volume is 2000 vehicles per
day (VPD) and projected at 4300 VPD for the year 2025. There is a posted speed limit of
55 mph in the vicinity of the bridge. The area has mixed development including
agricultural and residential.
The existing bridge was completed in 1939. It is composed of a seven-span concrete and
steel structure. The deck is 361 feet (110 meters) long and 27.5 feet (8.38 meters) wide.
There is vertical clearance of approximately 32 feet between the floorbeams of the bridge
deck and streambed. The bridge carries two lanes of traffic
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the bridge is
37.4 out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge is posted with weight restrictions of 29
tons for single vehicles and 33 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
Both vertical and horizontal alignment is good in the project vicinity. The pavement
width on the approaches to the existing bridge is 20 feet (6.1 meters). Shoulders on the
approaches of the bridge are approximately 4 feet (1.2 meters) wide.
In an analysis of a recent three-year period the Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that
three accidents were reported. None of the accidents were attributed to the alignment or
the bridge.
There are 2 daily school bus crossings over the studied bridge. According to the
Transportation Director for Cleveland County closing the road is not an option since there
is no viable detour.
The only utilities noted in the area were aerial power and telephone lines along the west side
of NC 10.
IV. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
There is one "build" option considered in this document as follows:
Replace Bridge No. 10 on the existing location. Traffic would be maintained
with a temporary onsite detour to the east during construction. The design speed
would be approximately 60 mph (100 kph).
Because the existing alignment is excellent, a realignment alternative was not considered
as it would only serve to diminish the design and safety of the alignment.-
There was not a viable offsite detour available to evaluate.
"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.
V. ESTIMATED COST (Table 1
COMPONENT ALTERNATE I
New Bridge
Temporary Detour Structure
Bridge Removal
Roadway & Approaches 726,000
192,000
51,000
518,000
Mobilization & Miscellaneous 513,000
Engineering & Contingencies 300,000
Total Construction $ 2,300,000
Right of Way $ 54,000
Total Cost $ 2,354,000
VI. 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 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. This project
will not impact any resource protected by Section 4(f) of the DOT act.
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.
The project will not increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not have an impact on
noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
This project will have no impact on soils considered to be prime or important farmland.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
On April 15, 1998, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the subject
project. Subsequently, the SHPO wrote that an evaluation of the bridge would be
requested but that no further architectural or archaeological surveys would be required.
At an effects meeting on March 27, 2000, the NCDOT Architectural Historian, Mary
Pope Furr, presented her findings. The SHPO concurred that the bridge and two other
buildings in the vicinity were not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (see
attachments).
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Topography, soil, and water resources, which occur in the project study area, are
discussed below. In addition, a general description of the project vicinity and project
region is also described.
Topography
The project area lies within the Piedmont Physiographic Province and is characterized by
gently rolling terrain with steep, incised stream banks along the First Broad River.
Elevations within the project study area range from 260 to 274 meters (850 to 900 feet)
above mean sea level (amsl) and the existing bridge has an established benchmark of 265
meters (869 feet) amsl (Figure 1).
Soils
Soil types and availability of water directly influence composition and distribution of
flora and fauna in any biotic community. This section describes the soil characteristics of
the project study area.
Soil Classifications
Based on available soil data for Cleveland County (Figure 3), the soils within the study
area are composed of Chewacla, Wehadkee and Pacolet series soils. Chewacla loam soils
(4A)(0 to 2 percent slopes) and Wehadkee loam soils (8A) (0 to 2 percent slopes), occur
along the streambanks of the First Broad River and consist of poorly-drained nearly level
soils that occur along floodplains. Pacolet sandy clay loam (32C2) (8 to 15 percent
slopes), occur on well-drained, sloping uplands in the project study area. Depth to the
4
seasonal high water table is generally greater than 1.8 meters (6 feet) for Pacolet series
soils and within 0.3 meters (I foot) for Wehadkee and Chewacla series soils.
Permeability for all soils identified in the project study area is moderate. Soil borings
taken during field reconnaissance confirmed these series.
Hydric Soils
The NRCS defines a hydric soil as one that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough
during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil.
Such soils usually support hydrophytic vegetation. Both Chewacla and Wehadkee soils
are included in the Hydric Soils of the United States (USDA 1991) and were identified in
the project study area. Soil borings taken during field reconnaissance confirmed the
hydric characteristics of these soils. However, wetland hydrology and hydrophytic
vegetation were not present.
Water Resources
This section contains information concerning those water resources likely to be impacted
by the project. Water resource information encompasses the resources' relationship to
major water systems, its physical aspects, Best Usage Classification, and water quality of
the resources. Probable impacts to these water bodies are also discussed, as are means to
minimize impacts.
Waters Impacted and Characteristics
The project study area lies within the Broad River drainage basin which encompasses
3,900 square kilometers (1,506 square miles) in North Carolina. The proposed project
will involve two crossings of the First Broad River (NC Department of the Environment
and Natural Resources - Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Index No. 9-50-(11)), one for
the permanent structure and one for the temporary detour. This river (sub-basin 03-08-
04) flows west to east in the vicinity of the project study area and is the only water
resource to be impacted by the project.
The First Broad River is the only water resource within the project study area. The river
has an average base flow width of approximately 9 meters (30 feet) and an average depth
of 0.6 meters (2 feet) in the proposed project study area. Substrate consists of sand, silt
and rock and varies throughout the riffle/pool system in the project vicinity. The river
has been moderately impacted by human development through residential development
and road runoff.
The detour crossing of the First Broad River would be approximately 15 meters (50 feet)
to the east of the existing bridge. The replacement of the existing bridge would result in a
new bridge of approximately 113 meters (370 feet) long and the temporary bridge would
be approximately 58 meters (190 feet) long.
Best Usage Classifications
The First Broad River has been classified by DWQ as a WS-V which are "waters
protected as water supplies which are generally upstream and draining to Class WS-IV
waters or waters previously used for drinking water supply purposes or waters used by
industry to supply their employees, but not municipalities or counties, with a raw
drinking water supply source and suitable for all Class C uses." Class C uses include
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and
agriculture. No water resources classified as High Quality Waters (HQW's), Water
Supplies (WS-I or WS II), or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW's) are located within
the project vicinity.
Water Quality
Based on information obtained from the Broad Basinwide Water Quality Management
Plan (DWQ 1998), sub-basin 03-08-04 is considered to be impaired and partially
supporting of its classification and identified uses. The DWQ has initiated a whole basin
approach to water quality management for the 17 river basins in the state. Prior to the
implementation of the basinwide approach to water quality management, the Benthic
Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) assessed water quality by sampling for
benthic macroinvertebrates at fixed monitoring stations throughout the state. BMAN data
taken from a monitoring station on the First Broad River approximately 3.0 miles north
of the proposed project area on SR 1530 near Casar indicated a Good rating in July of
1995.
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 NPDES permit. No Point Source Dischargers were identified in
the project vicinity. The potential for non-point source discharges in the project study
area is moderate and includes runoff from existing roads and driveways as well as
agricultural runoff.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
The First Broad River is the only stream that will be impacted by the proposed project.
Within the permanent right-of-way, 24 meters (80 linear feet) of the river will be
impacted. The temporary right-of-way, if utilized, will affect an additional 18 meters (60
linear feet) of the First Broad River. Table 2 shows the impacts for the proposed project.
Table 2
Approximate Imp
acts of Pro osed Project to Water Resources
Type of Impact Permanent Ri ht-of-wa Temporary Detour
Meters Linear Feet Meters Linear Feet
First Broad River 24 80 18 60
*All impacts are approximate based on uniform corridor width and project sketches
provided by NCDOT.
Both the permanent structure and the temporary detour will impact water resources. The
permanent crossing will span the First Broad River with a 133 meter (370 foot) bridge
while the temporary detour will provide a 58 meter (190 foot) span. Utilizing the full 24
meter (80 foot) right-of-way for the permanent structure and the 18 meter (60 foot) right
of way for the temporary structure will yield the impacts shown in Table 2 above.
Usually project construction does not require the entire right-of-way, therefore, actual
impacts may be considerably less. Short-term impacts include erosion and sedimentation
of the stream bed, which may occur during construction activities.
The greatest impacts to water resources in the project study area will be at river crossings,
which will require vegetation clearing and fill placement in and/or around riverbeds and
floodplains. Short-term impacts include erosion and sedimentation of the riverbed, which
may occur during construction activities. Other adverse effects may include degradation
of water quality, disturbance of the river bottom, and increased turbidity during
construction. Highly turbid waters can result in oxygen depletion, coating of gills on fish,
siltation of filter feeding structures, reduced solar radiation, and interference with
spawning activities. Impacts are especially detrimental to the less mobile benthic
organisms. Many fish will exhibit an avoidance response and leave the immediate area.
Impacts to water quality will be minimized by adherence to NCDOT's "Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters." In addition, a detailed sediment and erosion
control plan consisting of best management practices will be developed for the proposed
project. Sedimentation and erosion can be reduced through sediment controls such as
retention/detention basins, limits on the extent of disturbed areas, turbidity curtains, and
discharging stormwater over vegetated buffers. Cut and fill areas should be appropriately
graded and vegetated promptly. Best management practices to control non-point source
pollution would aid in delaying the entry of hazardous material spills into the waterway.
Hazardous spill containment basins will be considered during the design phases for the
project.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial communities. This section describes those
communities encountered in the project study area, as well as the relationships between
flora and fauna within those communities. Composition and distribution of biotic
communities throughout the project area are reflective of topography, hydrologic
influences, and past and present land uses. A description of the terrestrial communities
are present in the context of plant community classifications. Representative animal
species that are likely to occur in these habitats (based on published range distributions)
are also cited.
Scientific and common names (when applicable) are provided for each animal and plant
species described. Subsequent references to the same organism refer to common name
only.
Terrestrial Communities
Three terrestrial communities were identified in the study area through aerial
interpretation and field reconnaissance conducted in April 12, 2000. The communities
identified included an alluvial forest community, maintained/disturbed areas, and
agricultural lands. Photographs of the project area are included in Appendix 2.
Alluvial Forest Communities
Within the project area, alluvial forest communities occur along the banks of the First
Broad River. These somewhat disturbed forests are dominated by mockernut hickory
(Carya tomentosa), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis), and scrub pine (Pinus virginiana). Understory composition includes
saplings of the overstory.as well as red maple (Acer rubrum), flowering dogwood
(Corpus florida), and ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana). At stream's edge, several black
willow (Salix nigra) and tag alder (Alnus serrulata) were also present. The herbaceous
layer consisted mainly of Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) and multiflora rose
(Rosa multiflora).
Forests provide food, shelter, and nesting resources for a relatively diverse population of
wildlife. These areas may be particularly suited to wildlife diversity when located
adjacent to successional and maintained/disturbed areas as they provide corridors for
movement of wildlife as well as a variety of food and other resources. Canopy species
common in such areas, hickory and oak forests in particular, provide valuable materials
for browser forage as well as materials for nesting, shelter, and cover. A Carolina
chickadee (Parus carolinensis) and a gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), were observed
in the project study area.
Mammalian fauna likely to inhabit forested areas include the gray squirrel, racoon
(Procyon lotor), eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus), and Virginia opossum (Didelphis
virginiana). The transitional areas are likely to be inhabited by the eastern cottontail
(Sylvilagus floridanus), woodchuck (Marmota monax), and many varieties of small
rodents such as field mice and voles
Common reptiles and amphibians found in forested communities include the eastern box
turtle (Terrapene carolina), black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta), wood frog (Rana sylvatica),
and redback salamander (Plethodon cinereus). In addition to these species, the black
racer (Coluber constrictor),, eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and copperhead
(Agkistrodon contortrix) are likely to be found in the transition areas.
Avian species likely to be found in these forested communities include the blue jay
(Cyanocitta cristata), red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus), tufted titmouse
(Parus bicolor), and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). The common crow (Corvus
brachyrhynchos), American robin (Turdis migratorius), and American kestrel (Falco
sparverius) are most likely to be found in the transitional areas.
Maintained/Disturbed Areas
Disturbed areas are present in the project area along the maintained right-of-way for NC
10. These areas are primarily maintained grasses within the existing alignment.
Dominant vegetation includes fescue (Festuca sp.), crab grass (Digitaria sp.), dandelion
(Taraxacum officinale), and asters (Aster spp.).
The maintained/disturbed habitat within the project study area is surrounded by extensive
mixed pine/hardwood forest and represents only a minor constituent of a larger
community structure within the project vicinity. Therefore, faunal species frequenting
the maintained community will be largely those species inhabiting the mixed
pine/hardwood forest or agricultural lands.
Agricultural Lands
Agricultural lands are defined by the evidence of recent, active management of open
fields. These areas include actively farmed cropland as well as pasture lands used for
forage and hay production. These areas are found to the west of the existing bridge right-
of-way.
The agricultural lands are likely to be inhabited by the eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus
floridanus), woodchuck (Marmota monax), and many varieties of small rodents such as
field mice and voles. In addition to these species, the black racer (Coluber constrictor),
eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix) are
likely to be found in the agricultural fields or along the transition areas. The common
crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), American robin (Turdis migratorius), and American
kestrel (Falco sparverius) are most likely to be found in the agricultural and transitional
areas.
Aquatic Communities
This category typically includes streams and waterbodies within a project area and may
or may not include a vegetative component. The First Broad River is the only aquatic
community that will be impacted by the proposed project.
No fish or aquatic organism surveys were performed on the stream. According to WRC,
typical fish species that are likely to inhabit such areas include the creek chub (Semotilus
atromaculatus), common sucker (Catostomas commersoni), longnose dace (Rhinichthys
cataractae), blacknose dace (Rhinichthys atratulus), and rock bass (Ambloplites
rupestris).
Common benthic invertebrates found in such communities would include stoneflies
(Plecoptera), caddisflies (Tricoptera), and crayfish (Cambarus spp.). In addition to these
invertebrate species, the pickerel frog (Rana palustris), bullfrog (Rana catesbiana).
mountain dusky salamander (Desmognathus ochrophaeus), and northern water snake
(Nerodia sipedon) are likely to occur within the river as well.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the subject property will have various impacts on the biotic resources
described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources have a potential
to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies impacts to the
natural resources in terms of area impacted and community affected. Temporary and
permanent impacts are considered here as well.
Within the proposed 24 meter (80 foot) right-of-way for the permanent alignment and 18
meter (60 feet) right-of-way for the temporary alignment, impacts to terrestrial
communities associated with the construction or widening of a roadway through natural
ecosystems would consist largely of community modification resulting from clearing,
filling, paving, and creation of borrow areas. As shown in Table 3, the permanent
alignment will result in approximately 0.4 hectares (0.9 acres) of impact to the alluvial
forest community and 0.2 hectares (0.5 acres) of maintained/disturbed community
impacts. The temporary detour will impact 0.25 hectares (0.6 acres) of alluvial forest
community, 0.2 hectares (0.4 acres) of agricultural lands, and 0.04 hectares (0.1 acres) of
maintained/disturbed land (Table 3). Typically, project construction does not require the
entire right-of-way, therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
Table 3.
Approximate Impacts of Proposed Project to Terrestrial Communities
Type of Impact Permanent Right-of-way Temporary Detour
Hectares Acres Hectares Acres
Alluvial Forest
Communities 0.4 0.9 0.25 0.6
Agricultural Lands 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4
Maintained/Disturbed
Lands 0.2 0.5 0.04 0.1
*All impacts are approximate based on uniform corridor width and project sketches
provided by NCDOT.
The terrestrial communities found within the project study area will be altered as a result
of project construction. These communities serve as nesting, foraging and shelter habitat
for fauna. Forested areas account for most of the impacts to terrestrial communities for
the proposed project while a small portion of the project study area is disturbed by the
existing road and residences. Impacts to forested areas can contribute to habitat
fragmentation and eliminate nesting, foraging, and shelter habitat for wildlife. This may
force animals into a smaller area, which can cause degradation of remaining habitat and
increased mortality due to predation, disease and starvation. Some mortality to smaller
animals is likely to occur directly from construction activities. These impacts can be
minimized by clearing and grading only the areas necessary for construction and leaving
natural vegetation along the remaining right-of-way. Due to the size and scope of this
project, it is anticipated that impacts to fauna will be minimal.
Aquatic communities are sensitive to even small changes in their environment. Stream
channelization, scouring, siltation, sedimentation and erosion from construction related
work will affect water quality and biological constituents. Although direct impacts may
be temporary, environmental impacts from these construction processes may result in
long term or irreversible effects. Table 2 summarizes the anticipated impacts to aquatic
communities by the proposed Alternate and the temporary detour.
Impacts often associated with in-stream construction include increased scouring and
channelization of the streambed. In-stream construction alters the stream substrate and
may remove streamside vegetation at the site. Disturbances to the substrate will produce
siltation which clogs the gills and/or feeding mechanisms of benthic organisms (sessile
filter feeders and deposit feeders), fish, and amphibian species. Benthic organisms can
also be covered by excessive amounts of sediment. These organisms are slow to recover
or repopulate a stream.
Jurisdictional Topics
This section provides descriptions, inventories, and impact analysis related to two
jurisdictional topics: Waters of the United States and rare and protected species.
Waters of the United States
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) promulgated the definition of "Waters of
the United States" under 33 CFR 328.3 (a). Waters of the United States include most
interstate or intrastate surface waters tributaries and wetlands. Any action that proposes
the placement of dredge or fill materials into waters of the United States falls under the
jurisdiction of the USACE, and must follow the statutory provisions under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Wetlands are defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (33 CFR 328.3) as:
"areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands
generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas."
In accordance with this definition, wetlands must possess three essential parameters:
hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and evidence of hydrology (USACE Wetlands
Delineation Manual, 1987). Besides providing valuable habitat for a diverse number of
plant and animal species, wetlands also control floodwaters and erosion, replenish
groundwater, filter contaminants and excess nutrients from runoff, and protect municipal
water supplies.
An evaluation of wetlands within the study area was conducted in April 2000. The
location, extent, and quality of potential wetlands within the proposed right-of-way were
determined by:
Interpretation of (1:1250) scale black-and-white aerial photography.
Review of U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps and NWI wetland maps (Polkville
quadrangle).
Review of the NRCS soil/hydric soil data for Cleveland County.
Field reconnaissance of the study area.
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
The First Broad River is the only jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of CWA
that will be impacted by the proposed project. The biological, physical, and water quality
aspects of this jurisdictional system is described in previous sections of the report.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
The proposed project will cross jurisdictional surface waters. Anticipated impacts to
surface waters were determined using the entire right-of-way width of each alignment.
Impacts are summarized in Table 2. The amount of surface water impacts may be
10
modified by any changes in functional design and may lead to increased stream impacts
or wetland impacts. The permanent alignment impacts 24 meters (80 feet) of the First
Broad River and the temporary detour will impact an additional 18 meters (60 feet) of the
First Broad River. Typically, project construction does not require the entire right-of-
way, therefore, actual surface water impacts may be considerably less. No wetlands will
be impacted by the proposed right-of-way for either the permanent alignment or
temporary detour.
Permits
In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), permits will be required
from the USACE for any activities that encroach into jurisdictional wetlands or "waters
of the United States." In addition, Section 401 of the CWA requires each state to certify
that state water quality standards will not be violated for activities which 1) involve
issuance of a federal permit or license; or 2) require discharges into "Waters of the United
States." The Corps of Engineers cannot issue a 404 permit until 401 water quality
certification is approved by the N.C. Department of the Environment and Natural
Resources -- Division of Water Quality.
It is anticipated that a Nationwide Section 404 Permit Number 23 will be required from
the USACE for waterbody crossings along the permanent alignments and temporary
detour. These permits authorize activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated,
funded, or financed in whole or part by another federally funded agency or department to
fill waters of the United States for those activities categorically excluded from
environmental documentation because they are determined by the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) to be within the category of actions which are deemed to
neither individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the natural environment.
A permit will be required for this project for the temporary fill that may result from
bridge demolition as well as for the temporary and permanent impacts of construction.
Mitigation
The USACE has adopted, through the CEQ, a wetland mitigation policy which embraces
the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to
restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of Waters of the
United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by
the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts to wetlands, minimizing impacts, rectifying
impacts, reducing impacts over time, and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20).
Each of the three general aspects (avoidance, minimization, and compensatory
mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance
Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to
Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and USACE, in determining
"appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures
should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of
cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes.
Minimization
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps could be
required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically
focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of
median widths, right-of-way widths, fill slopes, and/or road shoulder widths. Other
practical mechanisms to minimize impacts to Waters of the United States crossed by the
proposed project include: strict enforcement of sedimentation control BMP's for the
protection of surface waters during the entire life of the project; reduction of clearing and
grubbing activity; reduction/elimination of direct discharge into streams; reduction of
runoff velocity; re-establishment of vegetation on exposed areas, judicious use of
pesticides and herbicides; minimization of "in-stream activity"; and litter/debris control.
Bridge demolition must also minimize the impacts to water courses. This project should
follow Case 3 guidelines as established in NCDOT's Best Management Practices for
Bridge Demolition and Removal. The superstructure of Bridge No. 10 is composed of a
reinforced concrete deck on steel I-beams. The substructure is composed of reinforced
concrete abutments and reinforced concrete post and beam bents. Only the portion of the
reinforced concrete deck over the water would potentially result in temporary fill. The
abutments can be removed without dropping them into the water. The resulting
temporary fill would be approximately 40 cubic yards. Due to the silt substrate of the
streambed, a turbidity curtain is recommended. Impacts to Waters of the United States
will be minimized by adherence to NCDOT's BMP's for Bridge Demolition during this
stage of the project.
Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until the anticipated impacts to
waters of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
possible. It is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be
achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory
mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation, and enhancement of Waters of the United States. Such actions
should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site. Although
the 1989 MOA between the USACE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
does not require compensatory mitigation with Nationwide Permit 23, the DWQ has
stated in 15A NCAC 211 .0506(h), that compensatory mitigation may be necessary with
Nationwide Permit No. 23 if more than 46 meters (150 feet) of stream is filled or altered.
Rare and Protected Species
Any action which has the potential to result in a negative impact to federally protected
plants or animals is subject to review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
under one or more provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. North Carolina
laws are also designed to protect certain plants and animals that are endemic to North
Carolina or whose populations are in severe decline.
Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal status of Listed Endangered (LE), Listed Threatened
(LT), Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under
provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Federal actions (permits) or federally-
funded actions with potential adverse impacts to protected species require prior
consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 of the ESA. Even in the absence of federal
funds or permits, the provisions of Section 9 of the ESA authorize the USFWS to
exercise jurisdiction on behalf of the protected species.
A review of USFWS and the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
databases (as of April 2000) identified the following federally protected species that may
occur in Cleveland County as listed in Table 4 and described in the following paragraphs.
12
Table 4
Federally Protected S ecies for Cleveland Count
Federal State
Scientific Name Common Name Status* Status*
Hexastylis naniflora Dwarf-flowered LT T
heartleaf
*LT and T = threatened
Federally endangered species (LE) are species that are threatened with extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Federally threatened species (LT) are
species that are likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all
or a significant portion of its range.
Surveys were conducted for the dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora), a federal
and state threatened species, within the proposed right-of-way for the project on April 12,
2000. This species were identified for survey based on the potential for appropriate
habitat and flowering season. No individuals were identified within the project right-of-
way for each alignment.
Hexastylis naniflora (dwarf-flowered heartleaf) Federally Threatened
Family: Aristolochiaceae
Date Listed: 14 April 1989
Flowers Present: mid-March to early June
The dwarf-flowered heartleaf, a federally and state threatened species, is a perennial with
jug-shaped flowers and evergreen, leathery, heart-shaped leaves. It is typically found in
the upper piedmont regions of North and South Carolina. It is found on Pacolet,
Madison, or Musella soils and is reliant upon soil type for adequate growth and
reproduction. Once this requirement is met, the moisture levels are highly variable but it
is most common adjacent to creekheads and streams, as well as on bluffs and slopes of
hillsides and ravines (USFWS 1990). Surveys were conducted for the dwarf-flowered
heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora), a federal and state threatened species, within the
proposed right-of-way for the project. No individuals were identified within the project
right-of-way. Based on the information above and field reconnaissance, no impacts to
this species are anticipated as a result of the proposed project construction.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
Federal species of concern are not afforded federal protection under the ESA and are not
included in the Section 7 process. These species are those that merit further study to
determine their status or which may be listed in the future. In addition, those species
listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by the NCNHP
database are afforded state protection under the NC State Endangered Species Act and the
NC Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. Table 5 lists those species that are
designated as Federal Species of Concern or are state listed for Cleveland County and the
existence of suitable habitat for each species in the project study area. This species list is
provided for information purposes as the status of these species may be upgraded in the
future.
13
Table 5
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed S ecies for Cleveland Count
Federal State Habitat
Scientific Name Common Status* Status* Habitat Present
Name
Speyeria diana Diana FSC SR Rich woods and Yes
Fritillary adjacent ed es
Monotropsis Sweet FSC C Dry forests and Yes
odorata Pinesa bluffs
Saxifraga Carolina FSC C High to mid- No
caroliniana Saxifrage elevation cliffs
* FSC = Federal Species of Concern, SR = Significantly Rare, C = State Candidate (those
species whose
status is under consideration)
State endangered species (E) are species whose continued existence as a viable
component of the state's flora or fauna is determined to be in jeopardy. A state
threatened species (T) is one which is likely to become an endangered species in the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A Federal Species
of Concern (FSC) is a species which may or may not be listed in the future. Significantly
rare species (SR) are those which exist in the state in small numbers and have been
determined to need further monitoring. Candidate species (C) are very rare in North
Carolina and reflect fewer than 20 populations in the state. Species of special concern
(SC) are those species which require further monitoring in the state.
Based on information from the NCNHP, it is possible that the Diana fritillary (Speyeria
diana) and sweet pinesap (Monotropsis odorata) could occur in the project vicinity but
due to the overgrown and disturbed nature of the project study area, it is unlikely that
they would occur within the proposed right-of-way. Carolina saxifrage (Saxifraga
caroliniana) is not likely to occur in the project vicinity due to lack of adequate habitat.
14
MIP
1572
1373
i
1522
1?1
1520
1393 5
1 '$
/ 1376
/ POLKVILLE
POP. 111

1510
Bridge No. 10
1511.
N
10

\

1509

l
i 1572

NOIIiI{
No- North Carolina
" \I Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
7. Planning & Environmental Branch
on T"q
Cleveland County
Replace Bridge No. 10 on NC 10
Over First Broad River
B-3138
Figure One
Looking South Across
Bridge No. 10

{ Y S '
East Face of
Bridge No. 10

- j ? •}' I? I114 i
of "OPT" -, North Carolina Department of
%' Transportation
/y
Division of Highways
Project Development &
Environmental Analysis Branch
Cleveland County
Replace Bridge No. 10 on NC 10
Over First Broad River
B-3138
Figure Four

d,p ![An
?rA
Y
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
April 28, 1998
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 10 on NC 10 over First Broad River,
Cleveland County, B-3138, Federal Aid Project
BRSTP-10(1), State Project 8.1801401, ER 98-
8646
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
<ZOE1
APP 3 0 1998 z
U
DIVISION OF
4'', HIGHWA ;'S
"':40NM
On April 15, 1998, 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, Bridge #10 was built in 1939 and
should be evaluated for National Register eligibility. We recommend that no
additional historic architectural survey be conducted for this project.
No archaeological survey is needed unless replacement is to take place on a new
alignment.
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 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
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: -I. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett

Federal Aid #BRSTP-10(1) TIP #13-3138 County: Cleveland
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL
REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 10 on NC 10 over First Broad River
On March 27, 2000, representatives of the
X North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Reviewed the subject project at
a scoping meeting
photograph review session/consultation
other
All parties present agreed
there are no properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effect.
there are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criterion
Consideration G within the project's area of potential effect.
there are properties over fifty years old (list attached) within the project's area of potential effect,
but based on the historical information available and the photographs of each property, properties
identified as 1-3 - are considered not eligible for the National
Register and no further evaluation of them is necessary.
there are no National Register-listed properties located within the project's area of potential effect.,
Signed:
Q •oo
Representative, CDO Date
C , ?411____
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
Re esentative, SHPO Date
; "Di/
111L? X
State Historic Preservation Officer / .1 / ' Date
If a survey report is prepared, a final copy of this form and the attached list will be included.
ST Tf „ - -
1
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
November 7. 2000
MEMORANDUM
TO: William D. Gilmore, PE, Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
NC Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
RE: Archaeological Survey Report, Replacement of Bridge 10 on
NC 10, Cleveland County, TIP No. B-3138, Federal Aid No.
BRSTP-10(1), ER 98-8646
Thank you for your letter of October 6, 2000, transmitting the archaeological survey
report by Daniel Cassedy and Marvin Brown of URS Corporation for the above project.
During the course of the survey no prehistoric or historic archaeological sites were
located within the project area. Due to the disturbed nature of the soils and the absence
of cultural resources, Dr. Cassedy has recommended that no further archaeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project. We concur with this
recommendation since the project will not involve significant archaeological resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act 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.
cc: Roy Shelton, FHwA
Thomas Padgett, NC DOT
Daniel Cassedy, URS Corporation
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 2 7699-46 1 7 [phone] 733-8653
ARCHAEOLOGY 421 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4619 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4619 [phone] 715-2671
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone] 715-4801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC 4619 Mail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-4618 [phone] 715-4801
TO: Mr. Steve Lund, USACOE
Asheville Field Office
FROM: Maryellen Haggard, DOT Permit Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: September 5, 2001
SUBJECT: NCDOT bridge replacement of No. 10 on NC 10 over First Broad River,
Cleveland County. Federal Project BRSTP-10(1); State Project 8.1801401; TIP
No. B-3138
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is requesting a concurrence
letter from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) to obtain a 404 permit
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Biologists on staff with the NCWRC have reviewed the
proposed improvements and are familiar with habitat values of the project area. These
comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C.
466 et seq.).
NCDOT proposes to replace the existing bridge over First Broad River with a new bridge
at the same location. During construction, NCDOT will route traffic to a temporary on-site
detour. Replacing the bridge with another bridge should have minimal impacts on aquatic
resources. We do not object to the project as proposed provided that NCDOT adhere to Best
Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and the following conditions are implemented.
1. Temporary access roads or detours should be removed back to original ground
elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed areas should be
seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should be planted with a
spacing of not more than 10'x10'. If possible, when using temporary structures the
area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers,
bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact,
allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
2. If concrete will be used, work must be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact stream water. This will lessen the chance of altering the stream's water
chemistry and causing a fish kill.
Bridge No. 10, NC 10 2 September 5, 2001
TIP No. B-3138
3. Stone for pads or causeways should be placed or dumped onto the stream bottom.
Stone should not be dumped on the stream bank and pushed into the water. This can
cause unnecessary stream bank disturbance and can introduce sediment into the
stream.
4. Stringent erosion control measures should be installed where soil is disturbed and
maintained until project completion.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please contact me at [phone].
cc: Cynthia Van Der Wiele, NCDWQ
Jill Holmes, NCDOT