20020031 Ver 1_Complete File_20020109

r
4p?
?.Q??, d 2 0
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTNffiNT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNm TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
December 17, 2001
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
ra?
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTENTION: Ms. Jean Manuele
Regulatory Specialist
SUBJECT: Nationwide Permit Application 23 and 33 for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 40 on SR 1132 over Roaring Creek,
Division 11, Avery County. Federal Project No. MABRZ-1132(4),
State Project No. 8.2721101, T.I.P. No. B-3303.
Dear Madam:
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above referenced
project, along with a project site map and preconstruction notification form. Bridge No.
40 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 1 with a 95-foot (29-meter) long bridge
on approximately the same alignment. The cross section of the new bridge will include
two 12-foot (3.6-meter) wide lanes with 3-foot (1-meter) wide offsets (shoulders).
Traffic will be maintained on a temporary alignment to the north during construction.
PROPOSED IMPACTS
The construction of the bridge will require the use of causeways to provide access to the
site by the construction equipment and a causeway to provide a temporary detour for
commuters, which will result in the combined temporary fill of surface waters of 0.186 ac
(0.075 ha). Construction of the proposed temporary rock causeways and detour pipes
causeway are depicted in the attached drawings (Sheets 1 to 8). No jurisdictional
wetlands will be impacted by the proposed project.
Temporary Causeway Information:
A temporary rock causeway will be required at Bent 1 and Bent 2 of the proposed
Roaring Creek bridge. The causeways will facilitate the construction of drilled shafts.
The causeways will consist of riprap as described on Sheet 5 of 8 of the attached
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE. WWW..DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
f
drawings.. A temporary pipe arches causeway will be required north of the existing
bridge alignindnt. The causeway will accommodate local commuters during bridge
construction. The causeway will consist of two 66 inch (1700 mm) corrugated steel pipe
arches. The causeway will consist of riprap as described in Sheet 7 of 8 of the attached
drawings.
Restoration Plan:
The materials used, as temporary fill in the construction of the causeways will be
removed after their purpose has been served. The temporary fill area will be restored to
their original contours. Elevations and contours in the vicinity of the proposed
causeways are available from field survey notes.
The project schedule calls for a June 18, 2002 let date. It is expected that the contractor
will chose to start construction of the causeways shortly after that date. The causeway
will be in place for approximately twelve (12) months.
After the causeways are no longer needed, the contractor will use excavating equipment
to remove the corrugated steel pipe. All causeway material will become the property of
the contractor. The contractor will be required to submit a reclamation plan for removal
of and disposal of all materials off-site.
Bridge Demolition:
Bridge No. 40 is 72.0 ft (21.9 m) long. The superstructure is composed of a timber floor
on I-beams. The substructure is composed of reinforced concrete abutments and pier.
The interior bent is the only element that may be pulled into the water. The resulting
temporary fill would be a maximum of 6.2 yd3 (4.7 m3). The removal of the abutments
along the interior bent will result in disturbing the streambed and, therefore, a turbidity
curtain is recommended.
SUMMARY
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. NCDOT requests that NCWRC forward their comments to the Corps of
Engineers.
It is anticipated that the construction of the causeways will be authorized under Section
404 Nationwide Permit 33 (Temporary Construction Access and Dewatering). We are,
therefore, requesting the issuance of a Nationwide Permit 33 authorizing construction of
the causeway. All other aspects of this project are 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 Permits 23 in accordance with the Federal Register of
March 9, 2000 (65 FR 12817, 12899).
We anticipate 401 General Certifications will apply to this project. We are providing one
copy of the CE document and the Nationwide 33 permit application information to the
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality, for their review.
Thank you for your assistance in this project. If you have any questions or need
additional information please call Ms. Heather Montague at [phone].
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
cc: w/attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington Field Office
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Bryan Cole, USFWS, Asheville
Ms. MaryEllen Haggard, NCWRC, Elkin
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Ms. Deborah Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. David Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. Carl McCann, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
Mr. Bill Goodwin, PD & EA Planning Engineer Unit Head
Office Use Only: Form Version April 2001
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
1. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit
F1 Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification
M Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 23 & NW 33
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII Mitigation), check here: E]
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NCDOT Proiect Development & Environmental Analvsis Branch
Mailing Address: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Dev & Environmental Analysis Branch
Attention: William D. Gilmore
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548 _
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
2. Agent Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Pagel of 8
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of No. 40 on SR 1132 over Roaring Creek. Ave C
2. T.I.P. Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3303
3: Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Avery Nearest Town: Valley
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): US-19 E to SR 1132.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 36.07° N Lat 82.03° W Long
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application: Existing
land uses include forested and maintained communities. The area has a mixture of
residential and undeveloped landuse. SR 1132, a Rural Local Route runs through the project
area with Bridge No. 40 serving residential uses.
7. Property size (acres): N/A
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Roaring Creek
9. River Basin: French Broad River Basin
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: To replace an inadequate bridge, Bridge No.
40 with a new 95-foot (29.0 meter) long bridge on approximately the same alignment.
Page 2 of 8
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: heavy d= construction
equipment
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: Existing land uses include maintained
and forested communities. The area has a mixture of residential and woodland landuse. SR
1132, a Rural Local Route runs through the project with Bridge No. 40 serving residential
uses.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any additional permit requests anticipated for this project in the future? If so, describe the
anticipated work, and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current
application: N/A
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Page 3 of 8
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact Area of Located within Distance to
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact 100-year Floodplain** Nearest Stream Type of Wetland***
(indicate on map) (acres) (yes/no) (linear feet)
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at httb://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: N/A
Total area of wetland impact proposed: NIA
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
Stream Impact Length of Average Width Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact Stream Name** of Stream Intermittent?
(indicate on map) (linear feet) Before Impact (please specify)

B-3303 p
or
ary
T 95.0 if Roaring Creek 17.0 to 20.0 If Perennial
D
o
ra
Temp. W.P. 1 Temporary Fill 0.067 ac Roaring Creek 17.0 to 20.0 if Perennial
Temp. W.P. 2 Temporary Fill 0.05 ac Roaring Creek 17.0 to 20.0 if Perennial
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated tip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 95.0 if
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S.
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name Waterbody
(if applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. impacts include, but are not umned to: nu, excavation, ureugmg,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Page 4 of 8
4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): Eluplands F? stream E] wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
Construction of Highway Improvements Adjacent to or Crossing Trout Waters". NCDOT will
also comply with all USACE and NCWRC permit conditions in order to minimize impacts to
aquatic resources.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
Page 5 of 8
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
N/A
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htin. If
use of the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide
the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
land?
Yes ® No ?
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ?
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ® No ?
Page 6 of 8
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
N/A
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
The guidelines for the NCDOT's "Best Management Practices for the Protection of Sensitive
Watersheds" will be followed. These include minimizing the project footprint and diverting
stormwater away from surface water supply waters as much as possible. Provisions to preclude
contamination by toxic substances during the construction interval will also be strictly enforced.
Page 7 of 8

XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (I 5A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes EJ No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
N/A
plicant/Agent'slignature ' , Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 8 of 8

8
8
N
---WLBWETLAND BOUNDARY
CL> WETLAND
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
® DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
ANDENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE WATER
• • + • DENOTES MECHANIZED
• • CLEARING
'F- ?-- FLOW DIRECTION
T- B TOP OF BANK
---wE EDGE OF WATER
- C - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- -E - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
?- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -et~-- - PROPERTY LINE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-PDE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
-EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
-- WATER SURFACE
LEGEND
x x x x x
O
LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
COIR FIBER ROLLS
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER

PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
(DASHED LINES DENOTE
EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
0 SINGLE TREE
WOODS LINE
¦ DRAINAGE INLET
(mm ROOTWAD
VANE
Ana RIP RAP
RIP RAP ENERGY
DISSIPATOR BASIN
BUFFER ZONE BUFFER ZONE
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
AVERY COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.2721101 (B-3303)
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO. 40
OVER ROARING CREEK ON SR 1132
BETWEEN US 19 AND SR 1134
cv
Lr)
f lz
_ _z
CIA
C6 o
F Z co,
CL oz G U Zz?
i ! D?N fl z V2
lfl J / 4n J A .^.. a
i X
e
04
z
Ol/
Mz
E- Z
LIJLLJ
?tw
0 I ;'r
cli
I T O - ° "'
LL)
I I Y? e^ :7z:
2 O ''
o I I lu ao
5 I / cc?l ?.
I o? ?1 ? i ' ? F F?uo
? z 0
W _ rz a ?
JN c.,? -a ?z M
W
I J J ? ? ? ? x
\ ` I L4
111 , /
00
/ a
l \?\,e'J 1? p Z ® a H
00
Q/ / 3 H
;4 95
l o' ? ?. :a F a
i /
Ww
IQ
mow. I i / Cho.
rn?
O ?
JIB
i

O
N
/-• ;/? •r ?r i

? x?ca
?z
cli
o ® U
?' I E-y F C7 ? ?
d .? ZZ? 9
I

O
0
O .N
N?
W j
00 O
O` a
i?
W,
IN
b z
1 V 0
a E-
p v Q :r,
G..
Lai
cno o mWm? N
W1
my ' ? Ov + F Q
a'o Q z
r
W
V W ?IW r ?Q a
m ? mlo ? o v a
W?
95
i
LQ Lu
f CC i o0
f i i p? 'I
1 I ,?a
II
r

In Ali ' o
? 1\ r o
O ? L r ? py

tn
Z W
/ m p
?N 1.2
zi (r-
N
?O
.j
4

3 W O,
/ O Q ?N
1
'

l V)
ti?

W
1 Q?
?Q
(n r
1
r

N m
1" N O
O.- O% D• D` 0` O? 0` O?
O?

O
No
o.1
dUZ
u?N
>o
® x

0
O

CL
1 p
CL Lu
Qz-
® Qz
0 W
O
rTl
!? y`
t?9 ? p Q.
1
rk?
W Y oz
WO ?N
W il
W
~ L
2

?cc
O LJ
Z?
? QL
® ~
2?a W
W
3
c
ii

Q

Ln Ln LC)
+ rn ,
---I C-)
L,
?W
+C)
O M
W
I ?
-iI W
I
a(D
v o-?
N
r-
a
+ O
O ?
? Z
Q
N
CL
cr
CL
00 ? N
O'. O- O?
WSJ
Q
LLJ
L?
k O
W`
m
poi
Q?
3W
O It

ti
Q
r
?
W Q 1 °.

U.J
Q°
??
W ? . z
? J N< o

N

2 m' +
r J

W WW
1 ? Q
,
I
I O
1
o N

'"s' - Go
I '? Nz?
W°
m
%0
IW- 3 +
o ?
0
Ory
QM
y
m?
O v
ti
WJ
QW
? Q
o
o N
+
1
N f
f
r
r
r,

?V r
r

r

r
r

1
f
j
1

,
r

1

O? 01% 0. O?

zwM O
r

z? ? p:?z
t,

oz a az?

°
?j

0
0
o.2
8.2
4.?
cuz
°
® ?N
>x

0
o

'
b ?? Q
C)
?W

W
W ac
?I o W
CC
WO
3
? W?W W2
A

i?o W(r
N3

?t 9--t
j?
p to ?
Q --
ti zz
Lu LO
?N
Q
cil-
g
0
O ? LJJ
i v
I
I

0
ti z
®3 z a

H?
® °

®z
?;

J F°?

z5
z

o
y o -1, ® z .?
x u® `

z

F4 C)

? ' 0

P-4 0 0

R
r
HOM1218_53/770W -- --
^ -- O
cr- \ y?
71
?.
yN
?K ILL
1 1_ ' J' i O Psi \
C\J
\o\\ \\? \\??\\
?, . o\\
L-LJLLJ
Laj
® r
A
?A
1
2g
5z
-n
z
6
N.
?I
?j

b

M
4
M
-:-' z
0 c]
Paz
Ale
'r E-
? i~
0

0
0
0
e
U ?
h :a
z?

N a
g
F
w ?
F A
a
aC
9
F
:a
Gl
C
z ovr c
o
O C4
4!: ln?
C3 U.J C) o?
p H e` z
Q Y??
Q ®? _ ` a O ''
QL
LLJ CL 0 = z v U o n y z
2?u !R
jz? IX -1
???20 ? c? O U Z Z?D O
p3oc? W W O O > ti W n
lll?QOW 1 O '.:4 @ w
u j co
U C J
N°W3 + z
?W
w O
?ii3W?Q? W o
Ole
c-
OWQ??W ? j 1
?j O ?IF
W ?x
U
11 11 II N
CX.
w ..
&0*9L6 79 tu?? N?
09.090+0/ d1S 9(7VYS 938 O
3v?
*-o Lo cn CN
O% 0` a ok o, o. o?
It

® ?-4 o
0 cv
..M
9 3 z I-j 0
z L Q ."C1 z $
On n =,n >x ED,
40 'A 0 ?N N ?M ?+ N 00
4® ?U? co
?z w az?
=a ?
C.) 0
se se
..?
?.,
Cl-
z :a
:2 a:
CL ? -? Z ?
CL m
cr-
N
W 0

Z
r
H

w
0
0
tN VV
SZ`Zt
??

?
??

N

id
14
aDZ
O

?V
l z
?H
g
?

?Z
w
It
z
V
N Z
N
W U
Q ? ? ? O
?-
O
I- = CO
?
C
W

d
O
Z
J
(yJ
-
N
M
Q
ttl
U
Q
d

!/) V R L O
U ? U
Q
IL
?

m

g
C N
O n
W N m
LL

m
^L
O
-
Z
N •
N
2
O po
c_ r
N F
.Q
T
L o 3 wo
=
z O
O
a c
7
:D
V zu p oZ
'moo cc U C W
t E
l o LL
? m?
a
i
Qv o
O? > °m

a
m

? u N ^
m
y .
a
E
N
N

U i_cA

V
E
w
U
Z U
w
a OY
a a. "U
a
l n ,0
2 ci to
C 0
C
N
0
O c
1 N
n U
Q H
I O co
3
1 LL
0
U 3: ^ Q
L o
CL
L w
N =
y

C ? t O
Z

a:
Q v
N co
? C
?
C
G L
L m O
? m U

I- a V C N
O-

?
U 0 -°
r
>
m O
?Z w3
? l1
3 ?
amt

m3 o
?- c
c

{L CD L O

m
7 m
N
N
O
C J J
O
m
N w co
0
N
a a
m d 3 3 'o

Q
F 0

Avery County
Bridge No. 40 on SR 1132
Over Roaring Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1132(4)
State Project 8.2721101
TIP No. B-3303

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
02003'
APPROVED:
g -3 i- oa / V. ?0
?--?4
Date William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
5-31-040
Date
L) J,
Nicholas Gr , P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA

Avery County
Bridge No. 40 on SR 1132
Over Roaring Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1132(4)
State Project 8.2721101
TIP No. B-3303
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
SEPTEMBER 2000
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
Date John L. Williams, P. E.
Project Planning Engineer
`+N++tnurill
%`' N CARP /
%
%
? ?FESS%p••,9 ?;
Q? y9<
•
= SEAL _
t 022552 '
t6iE??'•V•a ?
9- 30-0'0 W, y k e. ` / ? .?.
Date Wayne Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
r "U
2-31-00
Date u in V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
B-3303, Avery County
Bridge No. 40 on SR 1132
Over Roaring Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1132(4)
State Project 8.2721101
Resident Engineer
"Trout County: NCWRC requires the following to be implemented to minimize impacts to
aquatic resources:
• There will be a moratorium on "in-water" construction from January 1 through April
15 of any construction period to protect spawning and early growth of trout:
• Where concrete is used, work will be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact stream water.
• Where possible, heavy equipment will be operated from the bank rather than in the
stream channel to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of.introducing other
pollutants into the stream: -
• Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
w*thin '15 days of completion of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion
control.
Guidelines for Construction of Highway Improvements Adjacent to or
Crossing Trout Waters: These will be implemented in this project.
Bridge Demolition: Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition &
Removal will be implemented. -
Roadside Environmental Unit
Ground Cover: Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be
planted on all bare soil within 15 days of completion of ground disturbing activities to
provide long-term erosion control.
Guidelines for Construction of Highway Improvements Adjacent to or
Crossing Trout Waters: will be implemented in this project.
Structure Design -
TVA: This project must be reviewed under Section 26a of the Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA) Act. The final.bridge plans, hydraulic analysis of the effects of the
replacement structure on the 100-year flood elevation, and notice of compliance with the
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 will be forwarded to TVA for approval.
Bridge Demolition: Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition &
Removal will be implemented. -
Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
August 30, 2000
Avery County
Bridge No. 40 on SR 1132
Over Roaring Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1132(4)
State Project 8.2721101
TIP No. B-3303
Bridge No. 40 is located in Avery County over Roaring Creek. 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. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 40 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 1 with a new 95-foot (29-
meter) long bridge on approximately the same alignment (see Figure 2A). The cross
section of the new bridge will include two 12-foot (3.6-meter) wide lanes with 3-foot (1-
meter) wide offsets (shoulders). Traffic will be maintained on a temporary alignment to
the north during construction.
There will be 250 feet (75 meters) of new approach work to the east and 310 feet (95
meters) of new approach work to the west. The pavement width on the approaches will be
24 feet 7.2 (meters) including two 12-foot (3.6-meter) lanes. Additionally there will be 6-
foot (1.8-meter) grass shoulders [9 feet (2.8 meters) where guardrail is required]. Based on
preliminary design, the design speed should be approximately 45 mph (70 kph).
The estimated cost of the project is $1,207,000 including $1,083,000 in construction costs
and $124,000 in right of way costs. The estimated cost shown in the Draft 2002-2008
TIP is $790,000.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT expects a design exception due to the curvature of the approach on SR 1135 to
the south. No design exceptions are anticipated for the remainder of the project.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1132 is classified as a Rural Local Route in the Statewide Functional Classification
System. It is located near the northwest border of Avery County Currently the traffic
volume is 900 vehicles per day (VPD) and projected at 1700 VPD for the year 2025.
There is no posted speed limit in the project vicinity. The area has a mixture of
residential and undeveloped land use.
The existing bridge was completed in 1950. It is composed of a two-span timber and
steel superstructure. The substructure includes two reinforced concrete abutments and
one reinforced concrete pier. The deck is 72 feet long and 20 feet wide. There is vertical
clearance of approximately 9 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 5
out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge is posted with weight restrictions of 13 tons
for single vehicles and 17 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
Vertical alignment is fair and horizontal alignment is poor in the project vicinity. The
pavement width on the approaches to the existing bridge is 17 feet. Shoulders on the
approaches of the bridge are approximately 4 feet wide.
In an analysis of a recent three year period the Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that
two accidents were reported. Both accidents occurred when the driver lost control in the
curved approaches to the bridge and ran into the bridge rail. Snow conditions contributed
to one of the two accidents.
There are 4 daily school bus crossings over the studied bridge. Because SR 1132 is a
dead end road, road closure is not an option. According to the School Transportation
Director, so long as traffic service is continued, there will be no burden to the school
system.
Bell South Telephone has telephone poles 50 feet north of the bridge. TVA Electric has three
phase electrical service attached to the Bell South Poles.
IV. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
There are two "build" options considered in this document as follows:
Alternate 1) (Recommended) Replace Bridge No. 40 on the existing location. Traffic
would be maintained with a temporary onsite detour to the north during
construction. The design speed will be approximately 45 mph (70 kph).
Alternate 2) Replace Bridge No. 60 on new location to the north. Traffic would be
maintained on the existing bridge during construction. The design speed
would be approximately 45 mph (70 kph).
SR 1132 is a dead end road. Therefore, traffic maintenance onsite is required.
"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 Recommended
ALTERNATE 1
ALTERNATE 2
New Bridge
Temporary Detour
Bridge Removal
Roadway & Approaches 452,000
103,000
10,000
123,000 452,000
N/A
10,000
148,000
Mobilization & Miscellaneous 241,000 213,000
Engineering & Contingencies 154,000 123,000
Total Construction $ 1,083,000 $ 946,000
Right of Way $ 124,000 $ 139,000
Total Cost $ 1,207,000
5,000
$1,08
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 40 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 1 with a new 95-foot (29-
meter) long bridge on approximately the same alignment (see Figure 2). The cross
section of the new bridge will include two 12-foot (3.6-meter) wide lanes with 3-foot (1-
meter) wide offsets (shoulders). Traffic will be maintained on a temporary alignment
utilizing a 66inch (1700 mm) corrugated steel pipe to the north during construction.
There will be 250 feet (75 meters) of new approach work to the east and 310 feet (95
meters) of new approach work to the west. The pavement width on the approaches will be
24 feet 7.2 (meters) including two 12-foot (3.6-meter) lanes. Additionally there will be 6-
foot (1.8-meter) grass shoulders [9 feet (2.8 meters) where guardrail is required]. Based on
preliminary design, the design speed should be approximately 45 mph (70 kph).
Both Alternates 1 and 2 were designed to prevent disruption to traffic. There is one
prominent natural environment issue at this location. NCWRC has identified Roaring
Creek as Public Mountain Trout Water. So long as NCDOT adheres to the Project
Commitments listed in the attached Greensheet, both alternates would equally address
this environmental concern. Alternate 2 would result in the taking of one resident's home
on the west end of the project. Alternate 2 would also result in a poorer alignment and a
lower design speed. Although Alternate 1 costs 11 % more than Alternate 2, Alternate 1
is recommended because of a better alignment and design speed as well as avoiding a
relocatee. The Division concurs in the recommendation.
VII. 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 substantial 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 29, 1998, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the subject
project. Subsequently, the SHPO determined that this project is not likely to affect any
resources of architectural significance (see attachments). At that time they also
determined that an archaeological survey would be required if the project affected
anything beyond the existing alignment. NCDOT conducted an archaeological
investigation and determined that the project would not affect anything of archeological
significance. The SHPO concurs with that opinion (see attached letter).
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources that occur in the study area are discussed below. Soils and
availability of water directly influence composition and distribution of flora and fauna in
any biotic community.
The project study area lies within the Blue Ridge Mountain Physiographic Province. The
topography in this section of Avery County is hilly and mountainous. Project elevation is
approximately 1,024.1 meters (3,360.0 feet) above mean sea.level (msl).
Soils
Three soil phases occur within project boundaries: Cullasaja cobbly loam, Porters
gravelly loam, and Saunook-Thunder complex soils.
Cullasaja cobbl loam with 8 to 15 percent slopes is a well-drained soil that occurs on
oof t slopes and slopes. Permeability is moderately rapid and the seasonal high water
table is located greater than 1.8 meters (6.0 feet) below the surface. This soil's main
limitation includes the severe hazard of erosion.
Porters gravelly loam with 30 to 50 percent slopes is a well-drained soil that occurs on
si es opes anri getops. Permeability is moderately rapid and the seasonal high water
table is located greater than 1.8 meters (6.0 feet) below the surface. This soil's main
limitation includes the severe hazard of erosion.
Saunook-Thunder complex soils with 8 to 15 percent slopes, is a well-drained soil that
occurs on toot slopes antoes opes. Permeability is moderate and the seasonal high
water table is greater than 1.8 meters (6.0 feet) below the surface. This soil's main
limitation includes the severe hazard of erosion.
Water Resources
This section contains information concerning those water resources likely to be impacted
by the project. Water resource information encompasses physical aspects of the resource,
its relationship to major water systems, Best Usage Standards and water quality of the
resources. Probable impacts to these water bodies are also discussed, as are means to
minimize impacts. Probable impacts to surface water resources and minimization
methods are also discussed.
Waters Impacted and Characteristics
Roaring Creek will be the only surface water resource directly impacted by the proposed
project (Figure 2). Roaring Creek is located in sub-basin 04-03-06 of the French Broad
River Basin. At Bridge No. 40, Roaring Creek's substrate is mostly rocky and cobble
materials. Roaring Creek is typified by its steady flow with an average baseflow width of
approximately 5.2 to 6.1 meters (17.0 to 20.0 feet). The average depth is approximately
0.8 meters (2.5 feet).
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the NC Division of Water
Quality. The classification of Roaring Creek (DEM Index no. 7-2-15) is C Tr. Class C
uses include aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation
and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving
human body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent,
unorganized, or incidental manner. The supplemental classification of Tr denotes Trout
Waters. This designation is intended to protect freshwaters for natural trout propagation
and survival of stocked trout.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I: undeveloped
watersheds or WS-II: predominately undeveloped watersheds) nor Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 km (1.0 mile) of the project study area.
Water Quality
The DWQ has initiated a basin-wide approach to water quality management for each of
the 17 river basins within the state. To accomplish this goal the DWQ collects biological,
chemical, and physical data that can be used in basinwide assessment and planning. All
basins are reassessed every five years. Prior to the implementation of the basinwide
approach to water quality management, the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
(BMAN, managed by the DEM) assessed water quality by sampling for benthic
macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites throughout the state. There is not
a BMAN station located on Roaring Creek within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project
study area.
Many benthic macroinvertebrates have stages in their life cycle that can last from six
months to a year, therefore, the adverse effects of a toxic spill will not be overcome until
the next generation. Different taxa of macroinvertebrates have different tolerances to
pollution, thereby, long-term changes in water quality conditions can be identified by
population shifts from pollution sensitive to pollution tolerant organisms (and vice versa).
Overall, the species present, the population diversity and the biomass are reflections of
long-term water quality conditions.
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. No point source discharger is located on Roaring
Creek within 1.6 km (1.0 mile) of the project study area.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Utilizing the full ROW width of 24.4 meters (80.0 feet), anticipated impacts to Roaring
Creek will be 76.2 meters (250.0 feet) for Alternate 1 and the same for Alternate 2.
Alternate 1 impacts, both aquatic and terrestrial total 1.22 hectares (3.00 ac). The area of
aquatic and terrestrial environments impacted is•0.17 hectares (0.41 acres)and 1.05
hectares (2.59 acres)respectively. Alternate 2 impacts, both aquatic and terrestrial total
1.19 hectares (2.90 ac). The area of aquatic and terrestrial environments impacted is 0.17
hectares (0.41 acres)and 1.02 hectares (149 acres)respectively. From an environmental
standpoint, the estimated impacts are virtually equal. Usually, project construction does
not require the entire right-of-way, therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
6
Project construction may result in the following impacts to surface waters:
1. Increased sedimentation and siltation from construction and/or erosion,
2. Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation and
vegetation removal,
3. Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/additions to surface
and ground water flow from construction,
4. Changes in water temperature due to streamside vegetation removal,
5. Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas,
and/or
6. Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff, construction
and toxic spills.
Precautions must be taken to minimize impacts to water resources in the study area.
The NCDOT's Best Management Practices (BMP) for the Protection of Surface
Waters must be strictly enforced during the construction stage of the project.
Guidelines for these BMPs include, but are not limited to minimizing built upon
area and diverting stormwater away from surface water supply waters as much as
possible. Provisions to preclude contamination by toxic substances during the
construction interval must also be strictly enforced.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. This section describes those
ecosystems encountered in the study area, as well as the relationships between fauna and
flora within these ecosystems. Composition and distribution of biotic communities
throughout the project area are reflective of topography, hydrologic influences and past
and present land uses in the study area. Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are
presented in the context of plant community classifications and follow descriptions
presented by Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible. Dominant flora and fauna
observed, or likely to occur, in each community are described and discussed.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided for each
animal and plant species described. Plant taxonomy generally follows Radford et al.
(1968). Animal taxonomy follows Martof et al. (1980), Potter et al. (1980) and Webster
et al. (1985). Subsequent references to the same organism will include the common name
only. Fauna observed during the site visits are denoted with an asterisk (*). Published
range distributions and habitat analysis are used in estimating fauna expected to be
present within the project area.
Terrestrial Communities
Four distinct terrestrial communities are identified in the project study area: Acidic Cove
Forest, Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest, maintained yard and
maintained/disturbed roadside. Community boundaries within the study area are well
defined without a significant transition zone between them. Faunal species likely to
occur within the study area will exploit both communities for shelter and foraging
opportunities or as movement corridors.
Acidic Cove Forest
The Acidic Cove Forest is present along SR 1132. The transition from forest to
maintained/disturbed community is abrupt due to road shoulder maintenance activities.
Flora within this community includes white pine (Pinus strobus), persimmon (Diospyros
virginiana), yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), red
maple (Aces rubrum) and red oak (Quercus rubra).
Wildlife associated with the Acidic Cove Forest include white-tailed deer (Odocoileus
virginianus), eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus), opossum (Didelphis marsupialis), deer
mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), striped skunk
(Mephitis mephitis), raccoon (Procyon lotor) and timber rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus).
Avian species utilizing the Acidic Cove Forest likely include broad-winged hawk (Buteo
platypterus), ruffed grouse (Bonasa umbellus), rufous-sided towhee (Pipilo
erythrophthalmus), ovenbird (Seiurus aurocapillus) and gray catbird (Dumetella
carolinensis).
Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest
This riparian community is present along the Roaring Creek corridor. Flora that
comprises this community includes fescue (Festuca sp.), Bermuda grass (Cynodon
dactylon), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), wood sorrel (Oxalis dillenii), blue
flag (Iris virginica), Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota), Joe-pye-weed (Eupatorium
fistulosum) and silky willow (Salix sericea).
This riparian habitat within the project area is surrounded by extensive forested areas and
represents only a minor constituent of a larger community structure within the project
vicinity. Therefore, faunal species frequenting the riparian community will be largely
those species inhabiting the Acidic Cove Forest and open areas.
Maintained Yard
This maintained community includes residential areas along SR 1132 that are present
along the project corridor. Flora within this. periodically maintained community includes
Japanese honeysuckle, blue flag, Queen Anne's lace, white pine, Joe-pye-weed, yellow
buckeye (Aesculus octandra), tag alder and silky willow.
This maintained habitat within the project area is surrounded by extensive forested areas
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 Acidic Cove Forest.
Maintained/Disturbed Roadside
This maintained/disturbed roadside community includes road shoulders along SR 1132
that are present along the entire length of the project. Flora within this periodically
maintained community is the same as that of the yard community. The width of the road
shoulder is approximately 3.0 meters (10.0 feet).
The maintained habitat within the project area is surrounded by extensive forested areas
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 Acidic Cove Forest.
Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community, Roaring Creek, will be impacted by the proposed project.
Physical characteristics of a water body and the condition of the water resource influence
faunal composition of aquatic communities. Terrestrial communities adjacent to a water
resource also greatly influence aquatic communities. No submersed or emergent aquatic
vegetation was observed within this section of Roaring Creek. Vegetation along the bank
of Roaring Creek includes Bermuda grass, Japanese honeysuckle, wood sorrel, blue flag,
Queen Anne's lace, Joe-pye-weed and silky willow.
Fauna associated with these aquatic communities includes various invertebrate and
vertebrate species. Fish species likely to occur in the Watauga River include brown trout
(Salmo trutta), redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis)
and small mouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu). Invertebrates that would be present
include: various species of caddisflies (Trichoptera), mayfly* (Ephemeroptera),
dragonflies (Odonata) and damselflies (Odonata).
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the subject project will have various impacts on the biotic resources
described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources have the
potential to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies impacts to
the natural resources in terms of area impacted and ecosystems affected. Temporary and
permanent impacts are considered here as well.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the relative abundance of each
community present within the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of these communities. Table 2 summarizes potential quantitative
losses to these biotic communities, resulting from project construction. Estimated
impacts are derived using the entire proposed right of way width of 24.4 meters (80.0
feet). From an environmental standpoint, the estimated impacts are virtually equal.
Usually, project construction does not require the entire right-of-way, therefore, actual
impacts may be considerably less.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission designates Roaring Creek as Public
Mountain Trout Water. There is concern about the impacts that this project may have on
wild trout populations, therefore, instream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot
wide buffer zone are prohibited during the trout spawning season of January 1 through
April 15. (WRC 1998)
Table 2. Anticipated impacts from the pro osed roiect to biotic communities.
Community Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Acidic Cove Forest 0.11 (0.26) 0.11 (0.26)
Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest 0.68(l.69) 0.66(l.63)
Maintained Yard 0.13 (0.32) 0.13 (0.32)
Maintained/Disturbed Roadside 0.13 (0.32) 0.12 (0.28)
Total 1.05 (2.59) 1.02 (2.49)
Note: Values cited are in hectares (acres).
Plant communities found within the proposed project area serve as nesting and sheltering
habitat for various wildlife species. Replacing Bridge No. 40 and its associated
improvements will reduce habitat for faunal species, thereby diminishing faunal numbers.
However, due to the size and scope of this project, it is anticipated that impacts to fauna
will be minimal.
Areas modified by construction (but not paved) will become road shoulders and early
successional habitat. Reduced habitat will displace some wildlife further from the
roadway while attracting other wildlife by the creation of earlier successional habitat.
Animals temporarily displaced by construction activities will repopulate areas suitable for
the species.
Aquatic communities are sensitive to even small changes in their environment. Stream
channelization, scouring, siltation, sedimentation and erosion from construction- related
work would 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.
Impacts often associated with in-stream construction include increased channelization
and scouring 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.
The removal of streamside vegetation and placement of fill material at the construction
site alters the terrain. Alterations of the streambank enhance the likelihood of erosion and
sedimentation. Revegetation stabilizes and holds the soil thus mitigating these processes.
Erosion and sedimentation carry soils, toxic compounds and other materials into aquatic
communities at the construction site. These processes magnify turbidity and can cause
the formation of sandbars at the site and downstream, thereby altering water flow and the
growth of vegetation. Streamside alterations also lead to more direct sunlight penetration
and to elevations of water temperatures that may impact many species.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides descriptions, inventories and impact analysis pertinent to two
important issues-"waters of the United States" and rare and protected species.
10
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "waters of the United
States," as defined in 22 CFR 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 USC 1344).
Surface waters include all standing or flowing waters that 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.
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Potential wetland communities were investigated pursuant to the 1987 Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. The three-parameter approach is used where
hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation and prescribed hydrologic characteristics must all be
present for an area to be considered a wetland. Wetlands are not present within the project
area.
Roaring Creek is a jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 USC 1344). Discussion of the biological, physical and water quality aspects of all
surface waters in the project area are presented in previous sections of this report.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Anticipated impacts to surface waters are determined by using the entire project ROW
width of 24.4 meters (80.0 feet). Considering Alternate 1, impacts to Roaring Creek will
consist of a 76.2 meters (250.0 feet) wide and a 21.9 meters (72.0 feet) long crossing of
Roaring Creek, for an area of 0.17 hectares (0.41 acre). Alternative 2 impacts to Roaring
Creek will be the approximately the same as Alternatel. Compensatory mitigation is
required for those projects authorized under Nationwide Permits that result in the fill or
alteration of 0.13 hectares (0.33 acres)or more of wetlands and/or 45.7 meters (150.0
linear feet) or more of perennial streams. Usually, project construction does not require
the entire ROW, therefore, actual surface water impacts may be considerably less.
Permits
As described above, 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 charged with protecting the water quality
of public water resources
Nationwide Permit 23 (33 CFR 330.5(a) (23)) is likely to be applicable for all impacts to
"waters of the United States" resulting from the proposed project. This permit authorizes
activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in whole or part
by another federal agency or department where that agency or department has determined
that pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality regulation for implementing the
procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act
the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and
that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or
11
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
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.
A North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality General
Certification is required prior to the issuance of the Section 401 Individual Permit. Since
the proposed project is located in a designated "Trout" county, the authorization of a
nationwide permit by the COE is conditioned upon the concurrence of the WRC.
Mitigation
The COE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (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 these three aspects (avoidance,
minimization and compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance
Avoidance mitigation 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 the COE,
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 will 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, ROW 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 pesticide and
herbicide usage; minimization of "in-stream" activity; and litter/debris control.
Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to "waters
12
of the United States" have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
practicable. It is recognized that "no net o 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 that remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been performed. 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 whenever
practicable. Compensatory mitigation is not usually necessary with a Nationwide Permit
No. 23.
Rare and 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 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other species may receive
additional protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. As of 13 March 2000 the FWS lists nine federally protected species for Avery
County (Table 3). A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements for
these species along with a conclusion regarding potential project impacts follows Table 2.
Tahle I_ Federally Protected Species for Averv Countv.
Scientific Name - - - Common Name Status
Co norhinus townsendii vir inianus Virginia big-eared bat Endangered
Glaucom s sabrinus coloratus Carolina northern flying squirrel Endangered
Clemm s muhlenber ii Bo turtle T S/A
Microhexura montiva a Spruce-fir moss spider Endangered
G mnoderma lineare Rock gnome lichen Endangered
Geum radiatum Spreading avens Endangered
Houstonia montana Roan Mountain bluet Endangered
Liastris helleri Heller's blazing star Threatened
Solids o s ithamaea Blue Ride goldenrod Threatened
Threatened species are species that are likely to become endangered within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
E-Endangered is defined as a species that is threatened with extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.
T(S/A)-Threatened due to similarity of appearance; a species that is threatened due to
similarity of appearance with other rare species
Plecotus townsendii virginianus (Virginia big-eared bat) Endangered
Family: Vespertilionidae
Federally Listed: October 30, 1979
Plecotus townsendii virginianus is widespread in the western United States, but the range
of the eastern subspecies is fragmented into several populations. These populations are
found in caves near Potomac tributaries in eastern West Virginia, Tazwell County,
13
Virginia, and in Lee County, Kentucky. It was not known in North Carolina until the
early 1980's when small populations were discovered in Avery and Watauga counties.
The Virginia big-eared bat is most easily recognized by its large ears (more than 2.5 cm
(1.0 in)) and large glandular masses on its muzzle. The ears are held erect when the bat is
awake and are curled around the head when it is hibernating or at its summer roost. This
bat has an overall length of 92.0 to 112.0 mm (9.2 to 11.2 cm) and weighs from 9.0 to
12.0 grams (0.3 to 0.4 ounces). The fur on Virginia big-eared bats is long and soft. It is
brown in color and darker on the dorsal side. The hair on the feet does not extend beyond
the toes.
Virginia big-eared bats occupy caves in the summer and winter. Hibernating colonies are
typically located in deep cave passageways that have stable temperatures and air
movement. The temperature in these hibernacula may be lower than that tolerated by
other bats (6.0 tol2.0 °C (42.8 to 53.6 °F)). Maternity colonies form in the spring and
require warm caves. Roost sites are generally located in mines or caves in oak-hickory
forests. They will use alternate roost sites but there is no record of long migrations.
Virginia big-eared bats are nocturnal and leave their roost to forage on moths, beetles,
and other insects. Bats mate in the fall and winter and a single young is born in June.
The young grow rapidly and reach adult size in one month's time.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Suitable habitat in the form of mines or caves is not present within the project study area.
A review of the NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique
habitats on 27 March 2000 revealed no record of the presence of Virginia big-eared bat
within the project vicinity. Construction will not affect the Virginia big-eared bat.
Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus (Carolina northern flying squirrel) Endangered
Family: Sciurdiae
Federally Listed: July 1, 1985
The northern flying squirrel is widely distributed in northern North America and was not
known to exist on the east coast south of New York until well into the 20th century.
There are several isolated populations of the northern flying squirrel in the western part of
North Carolina along the Tennessee border. These populations are in Yancey and
Haywood counties and in the vicinity of Mt. Mitchell.
The northern flying squirrel is a small gliding rodent that measures 26 to 31 cm (10.2 to
12.2 in) in total length and 95 to 140 gm (3.4 to 4.9 oz) in weight. This squirrel has a
large well furred flap of skin along either side of its body. This flap of skin is connected
at the wrist in the front and at the ankle in the rear. The skin flaps and its broad flattened
tail allow the northern flying squirrel to glide from tree to tree. It is a solely nocturnal
animal with large dark eyes. Juvenile squirrels have a uniform dark gray back and an
off-white underside. Adult squirrels are characteristically gray with a brownish, tan, or
reddish wash on the back and a grayish-white to buffy white underside.
This squirrel is found above 1,517.0 meters (5,000.0 feet) in the vegetation transition
zone between hardwood and coniferous forests. Both forest types are used to search for
food, and the hardwood forest is used for nesting sites. Northern flying squirrels feed on
lichens, fungi, seeds, buds, fruit, staminate cones, insects, and animal flesh. The northern
flying squirrel occupies tree cavities, woodpecker holes, and less often leaf nests in the
winter. Leaf nests are most often occupied in the summer. The inside of their nests is
lined with lichens, moss, or finely chewed bark. A West Virginia study has preliminary
14
results that show the use of burrows by northern flying squirrels.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The elevation within the project study area does not meet the habitat requirements (higher
than 1,517.0 meters (5;000.0 feet) ) for the northern flying squirrel. A review of the NC
Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats on 27 March 2000
revealed no record of the presence of northern flying squirrel within the project vicinity.
Project construction will not affect the northern flying squirrel.
Clemmys muhlenbergii (bog turtle) Threatened (S/A)
Family: Emydidae
Federally Listed: December 1, 1997
The bog turtle is North Carolina's smallest turtle, measuring 7 to 10 cm (3 to 4 in) in
length. It has a dark brown carapace and a black plastron. The bright orange or yellow
blotch on each side of the head and neck is a readily identifiable characteristic. The bog
turtle inhabits damp grassy fields, bogs and marshes in the mountains and western
Piedmont.
The bog turtle is shy and secretive, and will burrow rapidly in mud or debris when
disturbed. The bog turtle forages on insects, worms, snails, amphibians and seeds. In
June or July, three to five eggs are laid in a shallow nest in moss or loose soil. The eggs
hatch in about 55 days.
The bog turtle is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance (T S/A). This is
due to its similarity of appearance to another rare species that is listed for protection. T
S/A species are not subject to Section 7 consultation and a biological conclusion for this
species is not required.
Microhexura montivaga (spruce-fir moss spider) Endangered
Family: Dipluridae
Federally Listed: January 27, 1994
The spruce-fir moss spider occurs in well-drained moss and liverwort mats growing on
rocks or boulders. These mats are found in well-shaded areas in mature, high elevation
(> 1524 meters (>5000 feet)) Fraser fir and red spruce forests. The spruce-fir moss spider
is very sensitive to desiccation and requires situations of high and constant humidity. The
need for humidity relates to the moss mats that cannot become too parched or else the
mats become dry and loose. The moss mats cannot be too wet either because large drops
of water can also pose a threat to the spider. The spider constructs its tube-shaped webs
in the interface between the moss mat and the rock surface. Some webs have been found
to extend into the interior of the moss mat. No prey has been found in the webs, but the
probable prey for the spruce-fir moss spider is the abundant springtails found in the moss
mats.
Males of the species mature during September and October, and females are known to lay
eggs in June. The egg sac usually contains between seven to nine eggs. The life span of
these spiders is unknown although it has been estimated that maturity may take four
years.
The loss and decline of the spruce-fir moss spider relates directly to habitat loss/alteration
15
of the spruce-fir forest from air pollution and exotic insect pests, particularly the balsam
wooly adelgid. The death and thinning of the forest canopy results in locally drastic
changes in microclimate, including increased temperatures, increased light and decreased
moisture on the forest floor. These alterations of the microclimate lead to desiccation of
the moss mats on which the spider and, possibly its prey base, depend for survival.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Suitable habitat in the form of spruce-fir forests is not present in the study area. A review
of the NCNHP database on 27 March 2000 indicates that there is no known occurrence of
the spruce-fir moss spider within the project vicinity. Project construction will not affect
the spruce-fir moss spider.
Gymnoderma lineare (rock gnome lichen) Endangered
Family: Cladoniaceae
Federally Listed: December 28, 1994
The rock gnome lichen is a squamulose lichen in the reindeer moss family. This lichen is
a narrow endemic, restricted to areas of high humidity. These high humidity
environments occur on high elevation (> 1,220 meters (>4,000 feet)) mountaintops and
cliff faces which are frequently bathed in fog or lower erevation (< 762 meters (<2,500
feet)) deep gorges in the Southern Appalachians. The rock gnome lichen primarily
occurs on vertical rock faces where seepage water from forest soils above flows at (and
only at) very wet times. The rock gnome lichen is almost always found growing with the
moss Adreaea in these vertical intermittent seeps. The high elevation habitat occurs in
the counties of Ashe, Avery, Buncombe, Graham, Haywood, Jackson, Mitchell,
Rutherford, Swain, Transylvania, and Yancey. The lower elevation habitat of the rock
gnome lichen can be found in the counties of Jackson, Rutherford and Transylvania.
The terminal portions of the rock gnome lichen resemble strap-like lobes, having a
blue-gray color on the upper surface and generally a shiny-white color on the lower
surface. The color of the fungi near the base is black. The squamules are nearly parallel
to the rock surface and are generally 1 to 2 cm (0.4 to 0.8 in) in length. The fruiting
bodies are born singly or in clusters, black in color, and are found at the tips of the
squamules. The fruiting season of the rock gnome lichen occurs from July through
September. The primary means of propagation appears to be asexual, with colonies
spreading clonally.
The major threat of extinction to the rock gnome lichen relates directly to habitat
alteration/loss of high elevation coniferous forests. The thinning and death of these forest
occurs from exotic insect pests, trampling of hikers and associated soil erosion and
compaction from hikers. These coniferous forests usually lie adjacent to the habitat
occupied by the rock gnome lichen. Drastic changes in microclimate (including
increased temperatures and decreased moisture) result from the impacts to these forests.
These alterations of the microclimate lead to the desiccation of the rock gnome lichen.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Suitable habitat in the form of high elevation rock ledges ((> 1,220 meters (>4,000 feet))
or lower elevation (< 762 meters (<2,500 feet)) deep gorges does not occur within the
project study area. A review of the NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species
and unique habitats on 27 March 2000 revealed no record of the presence of rock gnome
lichen within the project vicinity. Project construction will not affect the rock gnome
lichen.
16
Geum radiatum (spreading avens) Endangered
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 all other counties have shown a serious decline.
Stems of this perennial herb grow from horizontal rhizomes and obtain a height of 2 to 5
dm (7.9 to 19.7 in). 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 to 9 mm (0.3 to 0.4 in) 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
1,535.0 to 1,541.0 meters (5,060.0 to 5,080.0 feet), 1,723.0 to 1,747.0 meters (5,680.0 to
5,760.0 feet) and 1,759.0 meters (5,800.0 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.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Suitable habitat for this species, such as scarps, bluffs, cliffs and escarpments on
mountains, hills, and ridges, was not present in the project area. A review of the NC
Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats on 27 March 2000
revealed no record of the presence of spreading avens within the project vicinity. Project
construction will not affect this endangered plant species.
Houstonia montana (Roan Mountain bluet) Endangered
Family: Rubiaceae
Federally Listed: April 5, 1990
Flowers Present: June - July (peak is mid June)
Roan Mountain bluet is a perennial species with roots and grows in low tufts. Roan
Mountain bluet has several bright purple flowers arranged in a terminal cyme.
This plant can be found on cliffs, outcrops, steep slopes, and in the gravelly talus
associated with cliffs. Known populations of Roan Mountain bluet occur at elevations of
1,400.0 to 1,900.0 meters (4,600 to 6,200 feet). It grows best in areas where it is exposed
to full sunlight and in shallow acidic soils composed of various igneous, metamorphic,
and metasedimentary rocks.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
Suitable habitat in the form of high elevation and steep slopes was not found in the
project study area. Known populations of Roan Mountain bluet occur at elevations of
1,400.0 to 1,900.0 meters (4,600 to 6,200 feet). Project elevation is approximately
1,024.1 meters (3,360.0 feet). The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species
17
r r
and unique habitats reviewed on 27 March 2000 revealed no records of Roan Mountain
bluet within the project vicinity. Construction of the proposed project will have no effect
on this species.
Liatris helleri (Heller's blazing star) Threatened
Family: Asteraceae
Federally Listed: November 19, 1987
Flowers Present: late June - August
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 acuminate and diminish in size
and breadth upward on the stem. Heller's blazing star has small lavender flowers, and its
fruits appear from September to November.
Heller's blazing star is endemic to high elevation ledges of rock outcrops of the northern
Blue Ridge Mountains in North Carolina. Known populations of this plant occur at
elevations of 1,067 to 1,829 meters (3,500 to 6,000 feet). Heller's blazing star is an early
pioneer species growing on grassy rock outcrops where it is exposed to full sunlight.
Heller's blazing star prefers shallow acid soils associated with granite rocks.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Known populations of this plant occur at elevations of 1,067 to 1,829 meters (3,500 to
6,000 feet). Project elevation is approximately 1,024.1 meters (3,360.0 feet). There are
no high elevation ledges of rock outcrops in the project area therefore habitat for Heller's
blazing star is not present. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species
and unique habitats was reviewed on 27 March 2000 revealed no records of Heller's
blazing star within the project vicinity. Construction of the proposed project will have no
effect on this species.
Solidago spithamaea (Blue-Ridge goldenrod) Threatened
Family: Asteraceae
Federally Listed: March 28, 1985
Flowers Present: mid July - August
The Blue-Ridge goldenrod is found only on high mountain peaks in North Carolina and
Tennessee.
This perennial herb has an erect 10 to 20 cm (3.9 to 7.9 in) stem that grows from a short
stout rhizome. The stem is terete, longitudinally striate, and greenish-brown proximally.
It becomes more strongly ribbed and reddish distally, and is usually covered with whitish
hairs. The stem is generally unbranched below the flower. The oblanceolate and
spatulate leaves are acute with the offshoot and basal stem leaves being the largest and
longest. The broad portions of the leaves are ascending-serrate and the bases are
long-attenuate. Stem leaves are reduced and more sessile as they approach the top of the
stem. The yellow flowers are borne in heads arranged in a corymbiform inflorescence.
The Blue Ridge goldenrod inhabits rock outcrops, ledges, cliffs, and balds at elevations
above 1400.0 meters (4593.2 feet). It grows in humus or clay loams on igneous and
metasedimentary rock. Sites are usually exposed to full sun and have shallow acidic soils
(pH 4). Ideal sites are intermittently saturated but excessively to moderately poorly
drained.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
18
. J
P
TENN. i -
. N. C •y?'; BIG YELLOW Q.,
-"
MTN. 1132 `
•? ELEV. 6,189 8
N C
000
A
n
x1%
r
VOO
1200
i C*
t Valley
2.o
1
1133
\
. 1134 Qom„ • 9
?
1132
113

C LITTLE YELLOW MTN.
ELEV. 5,504
1
Bridge No. 40
C r.
113C
7
'`\ 1 131
'
- 1131
129
?
? • \ 1 128
4
2 1126
•1183 ? ?
Henson
Creek
Ch.

1127 .5
\;;r

N.
,,,,
1166
1167
A
C^? 1199 2v
1160
Of NORTH _
??,?os\ North Carolina
Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
LOFTS-
Avery County
Replace Bridge No. 40 on SR 1132
Over Roaring Creek
B-3303
Figure One
1.2
2
1207 1141
v, 1139
N
F p5
Fronk Cheftut
y 193
? 2
i sa
1 140
H
19E BIG ELK
MOUNTAIN
's N 1 120
1121 '
4
1114 1174
1 22
W
a Mul
Potential habitat in the form of rock outcrops, ledges, cliffs and balds does not exist in the
project area. A review of the NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and
unique habitats on 27 March 2000 revealed no record of the presence of Blue Ridge
goldenrod within the project vicinity. Therefore, project construction will not affect the
threatened plant species.
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
There are twenty-five Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed for Avery County.
Federal Species of Concern are not afforded federal protection under the ESA and are not
subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or
listed as Threatened or Endangered. Federal Species of Concern are defined as those
species that may or may not be listed in the future. These species were formally
candidate species, or species under consideration for listing for which there was
insufficient information to support a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered and Proposed Threatened. Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Significantly Rare (SR) or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) list of rare plant and animal species are afforded
state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
Table 4 lists Federal Species of Concern, their state status (if afforded state protection)
and the existence of suitable habitat for each species in the study area. This species list is
provided for information purposes as the status of these species may be upgraded in the
future. Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site visit, nor were any of
these species observed. A review of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique
habitats on 27 March 2000 revealed no records of North Carolina rare and/or protected
species in or near the project study area.
19
Table 4. Federal Sneciec of Concern for AvPrv Vnnntw
-
Scientific Name

Ae olius acadicus -

Common Name
Southern Appalachian saw-whet owl
State
Status
SC `
Habitat
Present
No
C tobranchus alle aniensis Hellbender SC Yes
Loxia curvirostra Southern Appalachian red crossbill SR No
Microtus chrotorrhinus carolinensis Southern rock vole SC No
M otis leibii Eastern small-footed bat SC No
Neotoma ma ister Allegheny woodrat SC No
Parus aurocapillus practicus Southern Appalachian black-capped
chickadee SC No
Sorex alustris unctulatus Southern water shrew SC No
Sphyrapicus varius appalachiensis Southern Appalachian yellow-bellied
sapsucker SR/PSC No
S lvila s obscurus Appalachian cottontail SR No
Th omanes bewickii altus Appalachian Bewick's wren E No
Ascetoc there cosmeta Gra son crayfish ostracod SR/PSC Yes
S e eria diana Diana fritillary butterfly SR No
S e eria idalia Regal fritillary butterfly SR No
Astilbe crenatiloba Roan false oat's beard C No
Abies aseri Fraser fir C No
Cardamine clematitis Mountain bittercress C No
Carex manhartii Manhart's sedge PE Yes
Geum geniculatum Bent avens T No
Ju lans cinerea Butternut W5 Yes
Lilium a i Gray's lily T-SC No
Poa aludi ena Bo bluegrass E No
Saxifra a caroliniana Carolina saxifrage C No
Pla iochila vir inica var. caroliniana A liverwort C Yes
S henolobo sis earsonii
GC 19 'r A liverwort PE Yes
E -An Endangered species continued existence as a viable component of the flora is
determined to be in jeopardy.
"T"-A Threatened species is one which is likely to become endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
"SC"-A Special Concern species is one which requires monitoring but may be taken or
collected and sold under regulations adopted under the provisions of Article 25 of
Chapter 113 of the General Statutes (animals) and the Plant Protection and Conservation
Act (plants). Only propagated material may be sold of Special Concern plants that are
also listed as Threatened or Endangered.
"C"-A Candidate species is one which is very rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20
populations in the state, generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat
destruction, direct exploitation or disease. The species is also either rare throughout its
range or disjunct in North Carolina from a main range in a different part of the country or
the world.
"SR"-A Significantly Rare species is one which is very rare in North Carolina, generally
with 1-20 populations in the state, generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat
destruction, direct exploitation or disease. The species is generally more common
elsewhere in its range, occurring peripherally in North Carolina.
"W5"--A Watch Category 5 species is a species with increasing amounts of threats to its
habitat; populations may or may not be known to be declining.
"/P "--denotes a species which has been formally proposed for listing as Endangered,
Threatened, or Special Concern, but has not yet completed the listing process.
20
Looking West Across
Bridge No. 40
Looking East Across
Bridge No. 40
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development &
Environmental Analysis Branch
Avery County
Replace Bridge No. 40 on SR 1132
Over Roaring Creek
B-3303
Figure Three
South Face of
Bridge No. 40
House Northeast of
Bridge No. 40
OfjiORTij ^-,
J4 North Carolina Department of
r Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development &
7+1, ,,, Environmental Analvsis Branch
Avery County
Repla ce Bridge No. 40 on SR 1132
Over Roaring Creek
B-3303
Figure Four
House Southwest of
Bridge No. 40
House West of
Bridge No. 40
.
of "°"'" North Carolina Department of
Transportation
2 Division of Highways
\•,1pry or P`?,
m ` Project Development &
Environmental Analvsis Branch
Avery County
Replace Bridge No. 40 on SR 1132
Over Roaring Creek
B-3303
Fi<(ure Five
i

s
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
May 19, 1998
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 40 on SR 1132 over Roaring Creek,
Avery County, B-3303, Federal Aid Project
MABRZ- 1132(4), State Project 8.272110 1, ER
98-8640
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
On April 29, 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, 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.
An archaeological survey will be necessary if replacement is to be 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. ??c?

Nicholas L. Graf
May 19, 1998, 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,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: -"'.'H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
K t 4 •
mod.„? STATE a?
Syr ?

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
August 24, 2000
MEMORANDUM
To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development d Environmental Analysis Branch
From: David Brook
Deputy State istoric Preservation Officer
Re: Bridge #40 on SR 1132, B 3303, Avery County, ER 98-8640
Thank you for your letter transmitting the archaeological survey report for this project by Shane
Peterson and Megan O'Connell. This is an excellent report.
During the course of the survey no sites were located within the project area. The authors have
recommended that no further archaeological investigation be conduced in connection with this
project. We concur with this recommendation since this 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.
DB:kgc
r.;
101-
f
cc: Tom Padgett
ADMINISTRATION
ARCHAEOLOGY
RESTORATION
SURVEY & PLANNING
Location
507 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC
421 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC
515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC
515 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC
Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone] 733-8653
4619 Mail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-4619 [phone] 715-2671
4613 Mail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone] 715-4801
4618 Mail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-4618 [phone] 715-4801
!? f 4 ex
P 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 Williams, Project Planning Engineer
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Joe H. Mickey, Jr. Western Piedmont Regi Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: May 8, 1998
SUBJECT: Scoping comments for bridge replacement project B-3303, Bridge No. 40 on SR 11132 over
Roaring Fork, Avery County
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our review and comments on the above referenced
project. We are concerned about impacts that this project may have on wild trout populations in Roaring Creek,
which is designated by North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission as Public Mountain Trout Water.
Since project plans have not been finalized, we offer the following general recommendations during this
scoping phase of the project for minimizing adverse impacts to aquatic resources:
1. The existing bridge should be replaced with another spanning structure to maintain fish passage and
minimize disturbance to stream substrate. We would be opposed to the use of a culvert at this site.
2. Instream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot wide buffer zone are prohibited during the trout
spawning season of January 1 through April 15 to protect the egg and fry stages of trout.
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.
3. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the stream channel in order to minimize
sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into the stream.
4. Stringent erosion control measures should be installed where soil is disturbed and maintained until project
completion.
5. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within 15 days of
ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
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.