20021600 Ver 1_Complete File_20021004

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources . ,,
`w
*A1
Division of Water Quality
NCDENR
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
October 15, 1999
MEMORANDUM

To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager, NCDOT, Proj `ve`loopment & Environmental Analysis
From: John E. Hennessy, NC Division of Water Quality (?T
Subject: Scoping comments on the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 94 (43094) on US 19 over
Richland Creek in Haywood County, TIP B-3340.
Reference your correspondence dated August 10, 1999, in which you requested Scoping comments for the
referenced project. Preliminary analysis of the project reveals that the proposed bridge will span Richland
Creek in the French Broad River Basin. The stream is classified as Class B waters. The Division of Water
Quality requests that NCDOT consider the following environmental issues for the proposed project:
A. We would like to see a discussion in the document that presents a clear purpose and need to justify
the project's existence. Based on the information presented in your report, we assume that the
Level-of- Service (LOS) is one of the primary reasons for the project. Therefore, the document
should delineate a detailed discussion on the existing Level-of-Service as well as the proposed future
Level-of-Service. The discussion for the future Level-of-Service should consider the Level-of-
Service with and without the project.
B. The document should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed impacts to
wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping.
C. There should be a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is required,
it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental
documentation. While the NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted
that for projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance
of a 401 Water Quality Certification.
D. Review of the project reveals that no Outstanding Resource Waters, Water Supply Water, High
Quality Waters, Body Contact Waters, or Trout Waters will be impacted during the project
implementation. However, should further analysis reveal the presence of any of the aforementioned
waters, the DWQ requests that DOT strictly adhere to North Carolina regulations entitled "Design
Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024) throughout design and construction of
the project. This would apply for any area that drains to streams having WS (Water Supply), ORW
(Outstanding Resource Water), HQW (High Quality Water), B (Bodv Contact), SA (Shellfish
Water) or Tr (Trout Water) classifications.
1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
Mr. William D. Gilmore memo
10/15/99
Page 2
E. When practical, the DWQ requests that bridges be replaced on the existing location with road
closure. If it detour proves necessary, remediation measures in accordance with the NCDWQ
requirements for General 401 Certification 2726/Nationwide Permit No. 33 (Temporary
Construction, Access and Dewatering) must be followed.
F. Review of the project reveals that no High Quality Waters or Water Supply Waters will be impacted
by the project. However, should further analysis reveal the presence of any of the aforementioned
water resources, the DWQ requests that hazardous spill catch basins be installed at any bridge
crossing a stream classified as HQW or WS (Water Supply). The number of catch basins installed
should be determined by the design of the bridge, so that runoff would enter said basin(s) rather than
flowing directly into the stream.
G. If applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent
practicable.
H. Wetland and stream impacts should be avoided (including sediment and erosion control
structures/measures) to the maximum extent practical. If this is not possible, alternatives that
minimize wetland impacts should be chosen. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts will be required by
DWQ for impacts to wetlands in excess of one acre and/or to streams in excess of 150 linear feet.
1. Borrow/waste areas should not be located in wetlands. It is likely that compensatory mitigation will
be required if wetlands are impacted by waste or borrow.
J. DWQ prefers replacement of bridges with bridges. However, if the new structure is to be a culvert, it
should be countersunk to allow unimpeded fish and other aquatic organisms passage through the
crossing.
K. If foundation test borings are necessary; it should be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under General 401 Certification Number 3027/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey
Activities.
L. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules { 15A NCAC 21-1.0506(b)(6)), mitigation will be
required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream. In the event that
mitigation becomes required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost
functions and values. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506
(h)(3) }, the Wetland Restoration Program may be available for use as stream mitigation.
M. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
N. The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to
discharge directly into the creek. Instead, stormwater should be designed to drain to a properly
designed stormwater detention facility/apparatus.
0. While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps and soil surveys is a useful office tool,
their inherent inaccuracies require that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior
to permit approval.
Mr. William D. Gilmore memo
10/15/99
Page 3
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met
and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information,
please contact John Hennessy at [phone].
cc: Haywood County, Corps of Engineers
Mark Cantrell, USFWS
Ron Linville, NCWRC
Personal Files
Central Files
C.\ncdot\TIP Q-3340\comments\t3-3340 scoping comments.doc
O'4? WAT -Ir G
co r
>_ y
O `C
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
October 13, 2003
To: Cynthia Van Der Weile and Mike arker (ARO)
From: Todd St. John
Re: Bridge 94
DW Q# 021600
Haywood County
I looked over DOT's most recent response i regards tot he stream relocation. I have not reviewed any other aspect of the
project. They did provide satisfactory in for ation that would indicate that the stream is not be expected to aggrade. Also,
they have provided detail showing the ext nt and nature of the planting plan. I am not certain what should be done at this
point as the file jacket seems to imply th DOT may not need written approval to proceed, so I will pass it back to you and
Mike.
? cc-
V
W ? 0
UJI-

ItllQ U7cc'
1
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/
dw? AA7[ ??
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Subject: Bridge No. 94 Stream Relocation TIP B-3340, Richland Creek,
Haywood County
DWQ Project No. 021600
Dear Mr. Dorney:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation has received the Division of
Water Quality's comments on the stream relocation at Bridge No. 94 in Haywood County
from a letter dated August 27, 2003. The following is our response to that letter.
1. Aggradation
Please see the enclosed email from our consultant.
2. Riparian Buffers and Planting Plan
October 3, 2003
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY
ftw/oftv

*MawmW&
Enclosed is a copy of our plans which show the extent and nature of the plantings
for the 30 foot buffer around the stream relocation.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27899-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE.' WWW.NCDOTORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Rachelle
Beauregard at [phone].
Sincerely,
;ova ? /-V??
Rachelle Beauregard
Environmental Biologist
cc: w/enclosure
Asheville Regional Office, DWQ
Cynthia Van Der Weile, DWQ
Todd St. John, DWQ
w/o enclosure
Randy Turner, Project Management Unit Head, NCDOT
Marshall Clawson, NCDOT
File
Re: B-3340 - Response to DWQ Comments dated 8/27/2003
Subject: Re: B-3340 - Response to DWQ Comments dated 8/27/2003
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 07:27:19 -0400
From: "Anne D. Gamber" <[e-mail]. nc.us>
Organization: North Carolina Department of Transportation
To: Kevin Williams <[e-mail]>
CC: Rachelle Beauregard <[e-mail]. nc.us>
Thank you Kevin.
I am forwarding your response and revised table to Rachelle Beauregard.
Kevin Williams wrote:
Anne,
After reviewing the DWQ comments dated 8/27/03 and talking to Todd St. John , I have revised the channel
design slightly. I have increased the average slope from 0.2% to 0.5%, the channel plan and dimensions
remain unchanged. DWQ had concerns with aggradation and after review of the previous design we were
reducing the stream power approximately one half. The change is the proposed slope will provide a similar
stream power to what currently exists within the stable section of stream that was surveyed over two years ago.
Please find attached the revised Morphological Characteristics Table (included within the permit drawings) and
we offer the following as a response to the 8/27/03 comment.
The data contained within the existing conditions was obtained from a reach immediately
upstream of the affected reach. The affected reach was visually classified in the field as a
type G5 channel, no data was collected along the affected section. The area where the
stream is being relocated is influenced by the back water effects of Jake Junaluska and
Richland Creek.
This stream has been determined as having a sand bed material and entrainment
calculations are not appropriate for sediment transport in sand bed systems. Determination
and evaluation of the stream power is an acceptable approach in regards to sediment
transport in sand bed material streams. The affected section has been classified as a G
type stream, it is entrenched and has a low width to depth ratio. When converting a channel
from a type G to C, the design approach is to reduce the stream power to minimize
degradation. The proposed design has reduced the stream power from 1.58 to 1.52 (Ibs/ft s)
and the shear stress from 0.38 to 0.37 (Ibs/sq ft). The largest size particle recorded during
the pebble count was 90mm. Using Rosgen's version of Shields Curve the shear stress to
initiate movement of a 90mm particle can be as low as 0.32 (Ibs/sq ft). Therefore the
proposed type C stream will be a stable channel because the slight reduction of stream
power and shear stress will maintain values similar to those found within the existing
conditions.
Please review and let me know if you have any comments.
I have not yet sent this directly to Todd St. John, if do not have any comments, I would be more than happy to
send a copy of this to Todd St. John. Please let me know how we should proceed.
Thank you.
R. Kevin Williams, PE, PLS, CPESC
Ko & Associates, PC
1011 Schaub Drive, Suite 202
of 2 9/30/03 3:44 PM
Table 5.1.1 Morphological Characteristics of Project Stream Channels
Proposed Conditions
B-3340
Design by: Kevin Williams, PE 7/27/2001
Revised by: Kevin Williams, PE 9/23/2003

ITEM Existing
Conditions
Proposed Conditions
Reference Reach
STREAM NAME
B-3340
B-3340
Big Branch
STREAM TYPE E5 C5 C5b
DRAINAGE AREA (DA) 448 Ac 448 Ac 941 Ac
BANKFULL WIDTH (Wbkf) 10.46 ft 12.95 ft 14.30 ft
BANKFULL MEAN DEPTH (dbkf) 1.57 ft 1.30 ft 1.73 ft
WIDTH/DEPTH RATIO (Wbkddbkf) 6.68 10.00 8.25
BANKFULL X-SECTION AREA (Abkf) 16.39 ft2 16.52 ft2 24.80 ft2
BANKFULL MEAN VELOCITY, ft/s 4.20 fps 4.10 fps 4.76 fps
BANKFULL DISCHARGE, cfs 69 cfs 69 cfs 118.00 cfs
BANKFULL MAX DEPTH (dmax) 2.67 ft 2.07 ft 2.80 ft
WIDTH Flood-Prone Area (Wfpa) 175 ft 34.0 ft 44.00 ft
ENTRENCHMENT RATIO (ER) 16.73 2.63 3.08
MEANDER LENGTH (Lm) 16 - 62 ft 27 - 49 ft 30- 55 ft
RATIO OF Lm TO Wbkf 2-6 2-4 2.1-3.8
RADIUS OF CURVATURE* 4 - 28 ft 26 - 36 ft 13 - 23 ft
RATIO OF Rc TO Wbkf 0.3 - 4 2.0- 3 0.91-2.79
BELT WIDTH 20 ft 52 ft 25 ft
MEANDER WIDTH RATIO 1.9 4.0 1.75
SINUOSITY (K) 1.07 1.09 1.09
VALLEY SLOPE 0.002 ft/ft 0.006 ft/ft 0.025 ft/ft
AVERAGE SLOPE (S) 0.002 ft/ft 0.005 ft/ft 0.023 ft/ft
POOL SLOPE 0.000 ft/ft 0.000 ft/ft 0.000 - 0.003 ft/ft
RATIO OF POOL SLOPE TO
AVERAGE SLOPE
0.00
0.07
0.02-0.14
MAX POOL DEPTH 2.06 ft 3.76 ft 4.80 - 5.10 ft
RATIO OF POOL DEPTH TO
AVERAGE BANKFULL DEPTH
1.31
2.90
2.8-2.9
POOL WIDTH 6.32 ft 25.90 ft 30 ft
RATIO OF POOL WIDTH TO
BANKFULL WIDTH
0.60
2.00
2.07
POOL TO POOL SPACING 18.0 ft 22.7 ft 25 - 62 ft
RATIO OF POOL TO POOL
SPACING TO BANKFULL WIDTH
1.72
1.75
1.7-4.3
* Due to mature vegetation root mass in the Reference Reach's side slopes and floodplain, the reference
reach data will not be matched in proposed design. The use of a higher ratio will allow the meanders to
be stable while the root system is established.
i I .B y I U V 1?? `9 F i ? ? ? FHF
c?i? ?iS?,?r$ Hazaa•7??y.a?e ra U •S?!
S R R? L c3 R R R R ,?qqg F F F S? !
Z wFFF?FP??FFFFaw?'aY'?$w?' ? i?
y
0
® y g
® m 6 ii r
® ,1 ^ ® ? ? I W 'S' ? ? y M
W v?
M
i
m
w
Nc r
2l's,
0? M M
oo
6Ff ??ZoglUud dl'Z SLOOZO
K 0?

?i

k
y
t

Z r?
O W
V) f-- N W
Y J U
U
7-) z N ~ F-mQ O
-? >- QQZ F-
W
~ :D W Q M O N F- in
W cr N WV) Z W
CD cr L- F- F- -Q U
Q Z
O W V) W
J U
W Q
Q LL JWL`J-1 Off'
W ? -1 F -
W 0 }- W Z
F- j =NWQ WJM W
p O UOmF- Z
x yF-JO JZ
0 a ?ZJ? -1 O
0
O O Z O_-:-7- 0:: = N a U
U
F- U •-ZZ= ? wW o::
L1J Q C) W Cr U F-
N O F-
U O F-WZWF- ZW> ZW
F- QU00(n0 QW OZ
U .2 U = F- OE Q Z U
Q_ Z wWQ?~O ZQW WW
W > O? ?W = O
I-- U W Z J 0 V~ W
mZ-LL UWIWZ?Li Z=
W LL 'o- ~ZUa0?0 .?~
Lf) W- U Z w v)x w U Z N w a ?-
C:j
tr W D - Y U CO
0 OO ZOpJM??W>O0
f- O?^ZQ(r ?p`-?Q-Z C-)M-Z
Q L/) C:):2 0??::) C:) V) a- Z>
U ?WWUWU W UZF-WQM
UmZJmZUQOWJOWm?F-
ZJaJ Y0mZWa-D WW
?V Cr-<F- ~nQO?>-w>QJOWV) °
v7WZ=Z)- -1 Of WZJcr -1Cr:D :D W
ZF- F- tnLjjCo-(j_ QU('QLL:2Zm
O • s Ih . q a Lfi
l0
U Z - N
W
Z
O
F-
N
2
F-
Q
W
Z
W
C13
cl
W
U
a
J
0-
W
m
O
F-
_U
x
co
Q
LL
x
W
F-
J_
LL
F-
O
Z
W
Q
Q
O
n
W

.ii; Nv. mT. '1 ttv3 03JVJd3tl0

ddd ? 5+
MIN"
437!4
431!1•
431v04

.A No
43 it
Oliva&
9
°
N
?n
p
R
gal
? 06
i?
Av j , Al w?
\\?\?
_ a
O \ O ?
z
n l/1 J a
d 2 \ \I ` 11 11 rr
o
w ? m IZ 'w
.vma \ \ >rZ--
O?
1 \ ` W X
we 1
OP qq
no,,i, \\ \?l W 12 111
61, U ? ?1
? ? mn ?~ OAP^? 1 N? ? V 1U 1
YNm ?a+ j ?? '+1 4
\ M
,nom \Ft6 \ p
.,y aaoQ°`S a'f- 1 1 X11
a 1 1 F ? 1 2
twry I a
?a?, , wp \ 1 1 , I I?4L
?
0o W.ti a
ZN? zm ?? I. I
01
mw wr ,? w
,sob
o \ n v
N
Q
O a-
V)
10
Q7
d
Zp
D
P
W M
Y
.4 GO
-10
V ? I
w i
Q- w"
o
O
C
?e -a
I$61 o,
0

J N
N I V1 II II II ?IJr II
o+ I ?QOJ1{-?
y Z
a
rn u-
M? b LL
m ^ o?PI,
O II II 11 II
o II
W ; adO-lhQ:
K ?
a Q ?W ? \ o
?$?'o
ts
r`
J W ,
2 w ' ZZ
? 'M ? ?. I 3 a
M? Nc?oo ?? I I Y
10 1p ? 113
k RCN Qom/ s I ' O tl^ 50 "' 1?
l j 11 II II II 4 II ? SE ? ? I I ? n M I ?Ld ._III I I ? W I'I ? ?7 rv
?QO h?vwi v raj //? ?u I \ I _ ¢ ( ?51I I 1`L^? I? k'?
I? Y ti II m 1? ? ? ?( L ? II 1 v I
In Et }}ll,,,, y er I ? W +? +. Q
'11Yy .n ? ?AS? O p ? 1? ? V) V) ? I
~,1OI 0.W+ 1
MQ$ d ?40 U + ^ I ' 03 +' I
??t II 1 I ?dQ. N? 1 1 d M
J Zp ? I Up P
? a
,1
I?OS,6h pZN " j I I Fw W v I• 'qH of
rl
g `Paa ` a 00'SL+b£'tl1S 9'ON 133HS HO1tlW
dOiU/9 - n0 AP S1N?YtlJ Nd5W0 tlil
I ?0 I
0
+
N
O
O
+
O
+
Oo
O
O
of 00
m Mo
O
O I
O
LD
M
OI
O
ul
M

411
Mr0#
•3130
$Voo
O31v0$
+ f

f

f
O

O ?

H Wy?
K

N

I
am ??
(7Q I
J2y ?I?
W
m
4 ? a
p Z+b£'tl1S VON 133HS Hp1tlW
¢ M.9Z Zb,g?,s • / ? ???,Q
FXi ?j/ f{p ? " 7iVV
N ? ?8 1?6?j
cr?
J
?a d
v ?
pqo? ?b Ov ?w p I ) T'
M O + O W
??am Ya
oM? W Y? 55 ?I Y?
Lr)
IE 0 '? ? ? M li I .69 ? I {Ix
W W I ,I b
Ira)
2 ? m
Ji p
m 3A 321.. v. Iq I 1 _ 11
I -n I
O
of
01
O
N
M
O
O
M
O
O
O
M
O
O
N
01
O
OD
N
63311
*3I1:
03LVO?
i
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
i
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
N?
H
.a .a .a .a .a .a .a
v e .a .a e e .a .e W
c7
z ? z
4w a
a _ a
o
EJ 1-1
c?
"Old
jj i

od.A._NSTATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Subject: Bridge No. 94 Stream Relocation TIP B-3340, Richland Creek,
Haywood County
DWQ Project No. 021600
Dear Mr. Dorney:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation has received the Division of
Water Quality's comments on the stream relocation at Bridge No. 94 in Haywood County
from a letter dated August 27, 2003. The following is our response to that letter.
1. Aggradation
Please see the enclosed email from our consultant.
2. Riparian Buffers and Planting Plan
October 3, 2003
Owle"r
Enclosed is a copy of our plans which show the extent and nature of the plantings
for the 30 foot buffer around the stream relocation.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
wo 1 a?
"Mm"No
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Rachelle
Beauregard at [phone].
Sincerely,
Rachelle Beauregard
Environmental Biologist
cc: w/enclosure
Asheville Regional Office, DWQ
Cynthia Van Der Weile, DWQ
Todd St. John, DWQ
w/o enclosure
Randy Turner, Project Management Unit Head, NCDOT
Marshall Clawson, NCDOT
File
fie: B-3340 - Response to DWQ Comments dated 8/27/2003
Subject: Re: B-3340 - Response to DWQ Comments dated 8/27/2003
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 07:27:19 -0400
From: "Anne D. Gamber" <[e-mail]>
Organization: North Carolina Department of Transportation
To: Kevin Williams <[e-mail]>
CC: Rachelle Beauregard <[e-mail]>
Thank you Kevin.
I am forwarding your response and revised table to Rachelle Beauregard.
Kevin Williams wrote:
Anne,
After reviewing the DWQ comments dated 8/27/03 and talking to Todd St. John , I have revised the channel
design slightly. I have increased the average slope from 0.2% to 0.5%, the channel plan and dimensions
remain unchanged. DWQ had concerns with aggradation and after review of the previous design we were
reducing the stream power approximately one half. The change is the proposed slope will provide a similar
stream power to what currently exists within the stable section of stream that was surveyed over two years ago.
Please find attached the revised Morphological Characteristics Table (included within the permit drawings) and
we offer the following as a response to the 8/27/03 comment.
The data contained within the existing conditions was obtained from a reach immediately
upstream of the affected reach. The affected reach was visually classified in the field as a
type G5 channel, no data was collected along the affected section. The area where the
stream is being relocated is influenced by the back water effects of Jake Junaluska and
Richland Creek.
This stream has been determined as having a sand bed material and entrainment
calculations are not appropriate for sediment transport in sand bed systems. Determination
and evaluation of the stream power is an acceptable approach in regards to sediment
transport in sand bed material streams. The affected section has been classified as a G
type stream, it is entrenched and has a low width to depth ratio. When converting a channel
from a type G to C, the design approach is to reduce the stream power to minimize
degradation. The proposed design has reduced the stream power from 1.58 to 1.52 (Ibs/ft s)
and the shear stress from 0.38 to 0.37 (Ibs/sq ft). The largest size particle recorded during
the pebble count was 90mm. Using Rosgen's version of Shields Curve the shear stress to
initiate movement of a 90mm particle can be as low as 0.32 (Ibs/sq ft). Therefore the
proposed type C stream will be a stable channel because the slight reduction of stream
power and shear stress will maintain values similar to those found within the existing
conditions.
Please review and let me know if you have any comments.
I have not yet sent this directly to Todd St. John, if do not have any comments, I would be more than happy to
send a copy of this to Todd St. John. Please let me know how we should proceed.
Thank you.
R. Kevin Williams, PE, PLS, CPESC
Ko & Associates, PC
1011 Schaub Drive, Suite 202
1 of 2 9/30/03 3:44 PM
Table 5.1.1 Morphological Characteristics of Project Stream Channels
Proposed Conditions
B-3340
Design by: Kevin Williams, PE 7/27/2001
Revised by: Kevin Williams, PE 9/23/2003

ITEM Existing
Conditions
Proposed Conditions
Reference Reach
STREAM NAME B-3340 B-3340 Big Branch
STREAM TYPE E5 C5 C5b
DRAINAGE AREA (DA) 448 Ac 448 Ac 941 Ac
BANKFULL WIDTH (Wbkf) 10.46 ft 12.95 ft 14.30 ft
BANKFULL MEAN DEPTH (dbkf) 1.57 ft 1.30 ft 1.73 ft
WIDTH/DEPTH RATIO (Wbkddbkf) 6.68 10.00 8.25
BANKFULL X-SECTION AREA (Abkf) 16.39 ftz 16.52 fe 24.80 ft2
BANKFULL MEAN VELOCITY, ft/s 4.20 fps 4.10 fps 4.76 fps
BANKFULL DISCHARGE, cfs 69 cfs 69 cfs 118.00 cfs
BANKFULL MAX DEPTH (dmax) 2.67 ft 2.07 ft 2.80 ft
WIDTH Flood-Prone Area (Wfpa) 175 ft 34.0 ft 44.00 ft
ENTRENCHMENT RATIO (ER) 16.73 2.63 3.08
MEANDER LENGTH (Lm) 16 - 62 ft 27 - 49 ft 30 - 55 ft
RATIO OF Lm TO Wbkf 2-6 2-4 2.1-3.8
RADIUS OF CURVATURE" 4 - 28 ft 26 - 36 ft 13 - 23 ft
RATIO OF Rc TO Wbkf 0.3 - 4 2.0 - 3 0.91 -2.79
BELT WIDTH 20 ft 52 ft 25 ft
MEANDER WIDTH RATIO 1.9 4.0 1.75
SINUOSITY (K) 1.07 1.09 1.09
VALLEY SLOPE 0.002 ft/ft 0.006 ft/ft 0.025 ft/ft
AVERAGE SLOPE (S) 0.002 ft/ft 0.005 ft/ft 0.023 ft/ft
POOL SLOPE 0.000 ft/ft 0.000 ft/ft 0.000 - 0.003 ft/ft
RATIO OF POOL SLOPE TO
AVERAGE SLOPE
0.00
0.07
0.02-0.14
MAX POOL DEPTH 2.06 ft 3.76 ft 4.80 - 5.10 ft
RATIO OF POOL DEPTH TO
AVERAGE BANKFULL DEPTH
1.31
2.90
2.8-2.9
POOL WIDTH 6.32 ft 25.90 ft 30 ft
RATIO OF POOL WIDTH TO
BANKFULL WIDTH
0.60
2.00
2.07
POOL TO POOL SPACING 18.0 ft 22.7 ft 25 - 62 ft
RATIO OF POOL TO POOL
SPACING TO BANKFULL WIDTH
1.72
1.75
1.7-4.3
Due to mature vegetation root mass in the Reference Reach's side slopes and floodplain, the reference
reach data will not be matched in proposed design. The use of a higher ratio will allow the meanders to
be stable while the root system is established.
Q m U w ??p
?I? F H
I C ? W t t i i t i ?O ? Jbq y??
E4 19
a c a j ®®13?
i,?? S i i .r ,.y A G E., E; i I W p Fy (? F• yk
W ? a ?? R Y Y 1c ? W
cn aU3 n ycS E;w' W x W'?.? .? a U ? r
4
e e i? i =? i e i e Y? Y q9?F F F ?
Z cCFHFmE+cCv,E FFFc?cdC.r?7icx ? ? w?
-LLLLJ
Idil
al
0
» N
VVV
m ? B
? y
w
GO)
coi
P-4 OD#SC <
® 9®
® ® Q W
4-4
r®??
®
?
E=l
1/l
Cfl? ? O W
co
W
a?a
Z
> f
10
Nc GRi??
43
F9LOOZO

.?
w W

? a a a
g I
41
pC
Q
?
c ?
C U

Z ° W Z
N W O0
H
a U
J z
U V)
N_
-? w W aaz
~ z w am °?z w a
w
LLI cD x a-V)V)[-- Qua Z w
Q ? JWUp UW? Q Cn
J J W W O~ Ir
W Z JL/,)J ~ °w
~ = N W Q W J W Q
Q O Uom? mf-- J
p ? _?- p JZ~ Z
:2E -0 Ld
O O ZO3: Q? =NZ U m
U Lr) V) Q
U F-- -?WW WW c O
I-
l i l Q p H-?EZ= WMU F-CC
LLJ U) U o F-WZ O~ ZwLLI > ZW U
Z f- a-Joocno Q w OZ
U-
U U p p U
F- o= =Z ?Z co
C? w J>ao~O?a= oW
i- w zLJ?.?pw ?? w Ir-
mz- UWF-:7V) Z= W
z ,?
LL- OF- I-
W LL •p0p,-ZUQO?O _
p?JUZUtnQ , ~
p?CD p?--?
_ Lnop=-Wtn?WUZV) Wam LL
?_W D-Y
0 Z>OOfF-amM MM -LLw>1p W
Z WJ NO =o W F-
?- amNO?0OM?ONU0-Zpg Z
I-
U (rWWUWU ? UZI-Wad
UmZ-JmZVQpWJOWmmF-
ZJQJ ?70:2EZWa-p WW
O
?Vi?af?-a<X)-W<JO2p
WZ=Z?p=WzJLrJ?ZNDW
ZI-F--0wm?f-m<u0<Li.::E Zm
Z J N r,? lJ" UC L6
U
W
Q
Q
0
Q.
Ii1

ti
?y 6p?
?a C?/ J
w
W W
Z 0
O •
z
V?
a?
U)
`" o a O
J cV
U
Z
co

N00ON
\

???1J? 1LLI? ?/Y lY?f YfJ? N]tl?/
17111
13K11
131T01
i
i
0
N
C

Igi
11-?
l7 ?Q
Z2
\ 1 11 ? 1t \1 \?.
z ? i \1 ? 1 , 11 ?
? \\ ?? $ \\1?" 111 X111 \?
? - \ 1 ? \11 ?,\ 111 1
51P53'39?_?? ? ? \ 1 m `I
jF3.00' .? w
F,•
U
lJwa W/? \ , 1? I1?1?I1z11
=3?'" E ? mw 11 1 11
Z U cap `AA11 N Z ? Il. ]I CJ?•
? / z J a ? 41 / + SlX
w m . ?'.e
w ' C
A' D Y a a o 1?` x a ? ''
J u V
?'3 b 1
50t 8 3 ,3 W
ao5 x nol3'
M.9L.MG W U ? ? O ? ?•
m ara QPv. 1 `?' i
-f 13
3.6
Ala
O 6BOr? Sp LJ J ?- FO ? bpi. J
mdJ 1 1 ,1? ?
f ?
=v Jog.
W? a_? 1 1 , II `?N
CO EL
o 0o mv??i ? ? o0
tw,I?? zzl.
szm LJ
r °
6t6 ? ? ? ? P c? ? 91
? m
m

U
J
V)
N
a
O Yti
= P
J 0
ZQ O-
I
P
lal W1
J O
I
I
O cWi 2
C) N i
W?
W Mb?.
o? Io _
Q
?11' ? ? N 1 ? 11 p II I p
0
? `' m D I WQ4J ?
1 W Z F-? J
z Ilil ?? LL-
mw +1 ?_' Z ? NII II II II II
?Y }5y? WQO?Ih?
0
2 a +
? a?W r o
I
I
d o 3
O ao -
' g § fi
K /
oL
LQI:
?? ? ?t? Qo ?;?
ig " I 1 0 ? t•5? I ? ¢•Y Q ?W ???
Np ?t?R u co I 1 103
In y§ ' ?iVA 50• T ? ? ? S?? q$? ? ry
In
o? CN° tp 'r I boa ; ' II I , 1 * ?i
oil 11 h 4
?Qplll??tLU / II I `I I_ ¢+? Q ?I °r' I W
o? In m$ 1 ???? '' ?I? W +? d d o
II??c(pp pp,. ` --t-- I 0. ?L3 1 °
11110- N ; til j OI \ 1 "w `SV m
the "7N UF,. ?+j? 1? ?3 I o4 I I• 03 +
v1 II II p II II r O Ot t0 i O
3.05.5 BLN "I faJ 1 i C' W mmj J
m -A
r3•otzgSFN
00.,?se` C1+b£•V1S 9'014 133HS HO1VW
20?J/f - 1'/! AB S1Nr10] MpSUp !M
I a I
O
HO
N
0
O
+
+
O
® O
LID O
oI
1 Yi1 MO I
ifil U of
of
of
0I
aarv ....ar. tea.... • a:.a .a+• wa. V
$Tvie
03ro11
$?1n0?
~ I .tee
?3U?
?)11?
?71rGt

j
P
0
N

dm
t7 O I
22 mlf

m
MILI
0 L+b£'tl1S 9'ON 133HS H31"
a N rs
?° ? g?S I I ?• by - 8 ??'+
O ` f
h 'L, Its' ;`i
savrze'w
ze ¦ W6 . o a 92 ti I? o
o? ?n
°.? a °o `r OG' l
- W 8 I.
In o I r/ `
ma -i
? I /1 ?? /tf a S
a x o? m o ?° r/
0 0
2 ? m w
? C97 ? I
I: I m ?l ? 3n 3a??
01+
cli
L P
CC'
m?-i
CO
^?? 1 ! QVI C? ? ?n / aPLZ a Z5 1
?QOJh?l?i1 ? ? y ? ? a?j 90• _ o+ ?? '?
/ t7 O s
15. T (76,
00-0
b .ON 133HS =r
? HOl yW
i
U-) O
co -
r LO (D N °
Ln Ln Ln Ln In ul Ln
N N N N N N N

i F+i , I
of
of
M N I
fffH Mfl °I
OM I
O
1PY1NI
0
0
' /llll
13111
- 17101

?--
??„?
????
?31rp?
p
F O H
?" q ? O ? A a 4
WWW ? ??
z z H ? c ? ?
• - qqz 0 a
W N b '? ? ? ? ? W m ? IO
za 14
F?CIyI, .ti N W
?' ? ? ? ? ? ? M ? W N N N N
rl ? N ? ? W
? O ?
A H I - I -I - ?
iii O •_°_____---- r1 ?'? I I I- ???
I I i t ? ? ,1 1
?+9 ? III
C5 ICI.
i
V1 c? I q.? ? j ,

e .vnTio
4l>.ArV ???
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Subject: Bridge No. 94 Stream Relocation TIP B-3340, Richland Creek,
Haywood County
DWQ Project No. 021600
Dear Mr. Dorney:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation has received the Division of
Water Quality's comments on the stream relocation at Bridge No. 94 in Haywood County
from a letter dated July 2, 2003. The following is our response to that letter.
1. Aggradation
The information contained within the Existing Conditions section of Appendix B
was obtained from a reach upstream of the section of stream that is being relocated. At
the time of the survey, the impacted section of stream was influenced by the backwater
effects of Lake Junaluska.
July 29, 2003
LYNDo TwPETT
SECRETARY p pup

2003
ify
A stream's stability is dependent upon its ability to transport sediment without
aggrading or degrading. A stable stream can transport both the suspended load and the
bedload without accumulating sediment or eroding sediment over an extended period of
time. The suspended load is the fine sand, silt, and clay particles collectively found
within the water column. The bedload is comprised of the course sand, gravels, and
cobbles along the stream bottom. The critical dimensionless shear stress is the force
required to initiate the general movement of particles in a streambed. This entrainment of
particles must have the ability to move materials in the bulk sample to prevent
aggradation of particles. In order to move the bulk particle, the stream design must
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
exceed a critical depth and slope. A critical dimensionless shear stress analysis was
performed to determine whether the stream has the ability to move its bedload which
reduces its susceptibility to aggredation. The dimensionless shear stress of the proposed
cross section was plotted on Rosgen's Revised Shield's Curve, utilizing the D50 channel
material, to insure the stream will not aggrade.
The shear stress (0.19 lbs/sf) of the D50 channel material (8mm) was determined
to be large enough to prevent aggredation and small enough to prevent degradation.
2. Riparian Buffers and Planting Plan
Enclosed is a copy of our planting plan for the stream buffers. The planting plan
includes tree planting densities of the appropriate native species that will result in a
survival rate of 260 trees per acre after five years, rather than the 320 trees per acre stated
in your letter. The 260 trees per acre is based on survival of 320 trees per acre after 3
years and 10% mortality per year after that.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Rachelle
Beauregard at [phone].
Sincerely,
iZstc /- Z, .,/?
Rachelle Beauregard
Environmental Biologist
cc: w/enclosure
Asheville Regional Office, DWQ
Cynthia Van Der Weile, DWQ
Todd St. John, DWQ
w/o enclosure
Randy Turner, Project Management Unit Head, NCDOT
Marshall Clawson, NCDOT
File
F WAIF
Q 9 Michael F. Easley
?O? pG Governor
7E William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
DW Department of Environment and Natural Resources
?
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
July 2, 2003
Ms. Rachelle Beauregard
NC DOT PDEA
1548 MSC
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Subject: Bridge No. 94 Stream Relocation TIP B-3340
Richland Creek
DWQ Project No. 021600
Haywood County
Dear Ms. Beauregard:
The Wetlands Unit staff reviewed the stream work plans for the subject project and would like to provide the following
comments:
Aggradation
Based on the information provided, it is not clear whether or not the design stream would have a tendency to
aggrade since the slope will not change and the bankfull stream dimensions will be wider and shallower than those
of the existing stream. This could result in stream bed aggradation which could cause the stream to erode its banks
or evulse. Please explain why the stream is not expected to aggrade.
2. Riparian Buffers and Planting Plan
Forest vegetation with a survival density of 320 trees per acres after five years is required. A planting plan must be
provided for the proposed 30 foot stream buffers. The planting plan should include tree planting densities of the
appropriate native species that will result in a survival rate of 320 trees per acre after five years. Please revise the
site plans to include the extent and nature of the plantings and buffers.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this project, please contact me at [phone]. Also, please note
that the Internal Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, April 2001, and other documents and information can
be downloaded from the Wetlands Unit web site at http://h2o.ehnr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/restore.html.
l y,
3x-I '01
I Dorney
ronmental Superviso
cc: Asheville Regional Office
Cynthia Van Der Wiele
Todd St. John
File
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.onr.state.nc.uslncwetlands/
OF W ATFR Michael F. Easley
?O? pG Governor
fi) 7r William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Za)
D
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
August 27, 2003
Ms. Rachelle Beauregard
NC DOT PDEA
1548 MSC
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Dear Ms. Beauregard:
Subject: Bridge No. 94 Stream Relocation TIP B-3340
Richland Creek
DWQ Project No. 021600
Haywood County
The Wetlands Unit staff reviewed the additional information regarding the stream work plans for the subject project and
would like to provide the following comments:
1. Aggradation
It is still not clear whether or not the stream would have a tendency to aggrade. In regards to critical dimensionless
shear stress analysis, the only method for this analysis of which we are aware users of data gathered from the
pavement and sub-pavement of riffle sediments. Typically, this method estimates whether or not the stream is
predicted to move the largest sub-pavement particle as opposed to the D50. In regards to the Shields curve, the
same holds true in that the analysis is based on the largest particle and the stream's ability to move it. As such,
please provide all of the data and calculations used to perform your sediment transport analysis.
2. Riparian Buffers and Planting Plan
Please revise the site plans to include the extent and nature of the plantings and buffers to indicate that the 30 foot
buffers will be planted according to the plan submitted.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this project, please contact Todd St. John at [phone]. Also,
please note that the Internal Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, April 2001, and other documents and
information can be downloaded from the Wetlands Unit web site at http://h2o.ehnr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/restore.html.
cc: Asheville Regional Office
Cynthia Van Der Wiele
Todd St. John
File
incerely,
rDo u pe riso
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwotlands/
n? STAt(o
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
July 29, 2003
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY

Mr. John Dorney1U1? lGi) i
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Subject: Bridge No. 94 Stream Relocation TIP B-3340, Richland Creek,
Haywood County
DWQ Project No. 021600
Dear Mr. Dorney:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation has received the Division of
Water Quality's comments on the stream relocation at Bridge No. 94 in Haywood County
from a letter dated July 2, 2003. The following is our response to that letter.
1. Aggradation
The information contained within the Existing Conditions section of Appendix B
was obtained from a reach upstream of the section of stream that is being relocated. At
the time of the survey, the impacted section of stream was influenced by the backwater
effects of Lake Junaluska.
A stream's stability is dependent upon its ability to transport sediment without
aggrading or degrading. A stable stream can transport both the suspended load and the
bedload without accumulating sediment or eroding sediment over an extended period of
time. The suspended load is the fine sand, silt, and clay particles collectively found
within the water column. The bedload is comprised of the course sand, gravels, and
cobbles along the stream bottom. The critical dimensionless shear stress is the force
required to initiate the general movement of particles in a streambed. This entrainment of
particles must have the ability to move materials in the bulk sample to prevent
aggradation of particles. In order to move the bulk particle, the stream design must
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.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
exceed a critical depth and slope. A critical dimensionless shear stress analysis was
performed to determine whether the stream has the ability to move its bedload which
reduces its susceptibility to aggredation. The dimensionless shear stress of the proposed
cross section was plotted on Rosgen's Revised Shield's Curve, utilizing the D50 channel
material, to insure the stream will not aggrade.
The shear stress (0.19 lbs/so of the D50 channel material (8mm)?was determined
to be large enough to prevent aggredation and sma ento prevent degradation.
U
2. Riparian Buffers and Planting Plan Sw ?,L
Enclosed is a copy of our planting plan for the stream buffers. The planting plan
includes tree planting densities of the appropriate native species that will result in a
survival rate of 260 trees per acre after five years, rather than the 320 trees per acre stated
in your letter. The 260 trees per acre is based on survival of 320 trees per acre after 3
years and 10% mortality per year after that. (9 k
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Rachelle
Beauregard at [phone].
Sincerely,
Rachelle Beauregard
Environmental Biologist
cc: w/enclosure
Asheville Regional Office, DWQ
Cynthia Van Der Weile, DWQ
Todd St. John, DWQ
w/o enclosure
Randy Turner, Project Management Unit Head, NCDOT
Marshall Clawson, NCDOT
File
t
.. O
o
p
i C ?,,, 1 1 1 I 1 1 I p
a r, . .9 9 41 .9 .9 .9 •9
M
° a
PR
04
?? P
o
°? - H
F
z F OZ ? P ° a o
&n UD
d•, ao .R O
0 U ? ? w a
r
f ? M M M M
?.
P0
.•?
W ? w
O
z w El
? a ?
.g 1
I 1- - ? Fr
°2 I 1 Yl ].
1% v2
s ?? y U
.94
T P4
°
Awl
H
IN,
m
ki
a ri ?a w ri d
o --?I60o ado
so
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
May 23, 2003
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Field Office
151 Patton Ave., Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
ATTENTION: John Hendrix
NCDOT Coordinator, Division 14
Dear Sir:
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY
I
JUl?1 ? ;'i 'Ull;?
Subject: Permit Modification for Nationwide Permit Application 23 and 33 for the
replacement of Bridge No. 94 over the Richland Creek, Haywood Co.
Federal Project No. BRSTP-19(2), State Project No. 8.1944001,
T.I.P. No. B-3340: Division 14.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace
Bridge No. 94 over Richland Creek (DWQ Index # 5-16-(1)) a Division of Water Quality
Class "B" Waters of the State. The project involves replacing the current bridge along
the existing alignment. The proposed structure will be approximately 300 feet (ft) (91.4
meters (m)) in length with a 64 ft (19.5 m) clear roadway width to accommodate five
lanes of traffic. There will be an additional 5.5 ft (1.7 m) of sidewalk on each side.
Phased construction and traffic control will be used for the construction of the proposed
bridge. During Phase 1, a section (approximately two lanes) of the existing bridge will be
removed and a section of the new bridge will be constructed (approximately two lanes).
During Phase 2, traffic will be shifted to the constructed section of the new bridge and the
remainder of the existing bridge will be removed. Two lanes of traffic will be maintained
during the construction period. Traffic control and signing will be implemented to ensure
motorists'safety and to reduce inconvenience.
A Section 404 Nationwide Permit No. 23 and 33, Action IDs 200330046 &
200330047, has already been issued to NCDOT from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
for this project. This letter is to provide new bridge design data and changes in the stream
relocation. Please find the enclosed project site map, revised permit drawings, revised
PCN form and revised half size plan sheets.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WLMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSI7E: WNW! NCDO7.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27899-1548
IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Originally Bridge No. 94 over Richland Creek was to be a 6-span bridge of 300 ft.
To avoid an existing sewer line under the bridge, the bridge is now 5-span bridge of 300
ft. No new impacts to streams or wetlands will occur as a result of the new bridge design.
The construction of the bridge will still require the use of 2 rock causeways consisting of
Class II and Class B riprap to provide access to the site by the construction equipment.
The impacts from the rock causeways remains the same. The resulting temporary surface
water fill will be 0.049 ac (0.020 ha). Construction of the proposed temporary rock
causeway is depicted in the attached drawings (Sheets 8 to 11).
Additionally, 260 ft (79.2 m) of a tributary to Richland Creek will be impacted by
the construction of the referenced bridge. This stream is perennial. Originally, 262 ft
(79.8 m) would be relocated. Due to a stream relocation buffer requirement of 50 ft the
stream relocation was redesigned and now 257 ft will be relocated. Additionally, Mike
Parker from the Division of Water Quality approved a 30 foot buffer instead of the
required 50 ft. The relocation is designed to "natural channel" design principles proposed
by Dave Rosgen. No jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted by the construction of the
referenced bridge (See attached drawings for details).
Existing Bridge No. 94 is 238 ft (72.6 m) long with 5 spans spaced approximately
48 ft (14.6 m) apart with end bents constructed of reinforced concrete caps on H-piles.
The superstructure consists of reinforced concrete deck girders widened with I-beams.
Bridge No. 94 will be removed without dropping any components into Waters of the
United States. All guidelines for bridge demolition and removal will be followed in
addition to Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters. This project
is classified as Case 3 in which there are no special restrictions beyond those outlined in
Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters and the supplements added
by this document on Bridge Demolition.
RESTORATION PLAN
The project schedule calls for a September 2003 let date. It is expected that the
contractor will chose to start construction of the causeways shortly after that date.
The materials used as temporary fill in the construction of the rock causeways will
be completely removed. The entire causeway footprint shall be returned to the original
contours and elevations after the purpose of the causeway has been served.
. After the causeways are no longer needed, the contractor will use excavating
equipment to remove all materials. The class II rip rap used in the causeways may be
placed as riprap slope protection. 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.
FEDERALLY-PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened,
Proposed Endangered, and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of
January 31, 2003, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists 7 federally
protected species for Haywood County (Table 1).
Biological conclusions of "No Effect" were given for the eastern cougar, Carolina
northern flying squirrel, bald eagle, Appalachian elktoe, small-whorled pogonia and rock
gnome lichen in the CE document (dated December 1999). Two new species were added
to the list of Threatened and Endangered Species after the CE document was approved.
These included the gray bat and spruce-fir moss spider. Biological conclusions of "No
Effect" were given. No habitat was found for any listed species. Table 1 lists the species,
their status and biological conclusion.
Table 1. Federally-Protected Species for Haywood County
Common Name Scientific Name Federal
Status Biological
Conclusion'
Appalachina elktoe Alasmidonta reveneliana E No Effect
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii T(S/A) Not required
Eastern cougar Felis concolor coloratus E No Effect
Carolina northern flying
squirrel Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus E No Effect
Rock gnome lichen Gymnderma lineare E No Effect
Bald eagle Gymnderma lineare T No Effect
Small-whorled pogonia Isotria meloides T No Effect
Spruce-fir moss spider Microhexura montivaga E No Effect
Gray bat Myotis grisescens E No Effect
"E" denotes Endangered (a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its range).
"T" denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or significant portion of its range).
"T(S/A)" denotes Threatened due to similarity of appearance (a species that is threatened due to similarity
of appearance with other raze species and is listed for its protection. These species are not biologically
endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section consultation.
SUMMARY
We are requesting a permit modification Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33
(Temporary Construction Access and Dewatering) and Nationwide Permit 23
(Categorical Exclusion). We still anticipate 401 General Certifications numbers 3361 and
3366 will apply to this project. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0501(a) we are
providing two copies of this permit modification application to the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their
records.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call Rachelle
Beauregard at 715-1383.
,(Siinccere/ly,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
cc: w/attachment
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Ms. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Design Services
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Ron Watson, P.E., Division 8 Engineer
Ms. Stacy Harris, P.E., Project Planning Engineer
Mr. Mark Davis, Division 14 Environmental Officer
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington (cover letter only)
Office Use Only: Form Version October 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
? Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 23 and 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: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name:_NCDOT/Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Mailing Address: 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number: 919-733-3141 Fax Number: 919-733-9794
E-mail Address:
2.
Agent Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: 919-733-3141 Fax Number: 919-733-9794
E-mail Address:
letter must be
Page 5 of 122
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 Bridge No. 94 over Richland Creek
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3340
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Haywood Nearest Town: Junaluska
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): US 19 west approximately
0.5 miles west of the US 74 split
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): N/A
(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:
Roadway and bridge with a divided variable-width median.
7. Property size (acres):
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Richland Creek
9. River Basin: French Broad
(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/mgps/.)
Page 6 of 122
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: replace and widen Bridge No. 94
over Richland Creek
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: Heavy duty excavation
equipment such as trucks, dozers, cranes and other various equipment necessary for
bridge construction.
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: suburban
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 future permit requests anticipated for this project? 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
Page 7 of 122
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***
No Impacts

• List each impact separately and identity 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 http://www.fema.aov.
*** 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: 0 ac
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0 ac
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear feet)
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
(please specify)
1 relocation 260 Tirbutary toRichland
Creek 15 R Perennial
I temporary
causeway A 0.029 ac Richland Creek 20 ft Perennial
I temporary
causeway B 0.020 ac Richland Creek 20 ft Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-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.usus.gov. Several intemet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Page 8 of 122
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: N/A
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)
(if Name p Waterbody
applicable) Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
No Impacts

List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
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): E] uplands ? 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.):
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
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.
The bridge will be replaced on existing alit?nment. The relocated portion of the
tributary to Richland Creek was designed according to "natural channel" design
principles. No portion of the existing bridge will be allowed to fall in the water during
demolition.
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
Page 9 of 122
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
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/stn-nszide.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.
No stream mitigation required for this project. Stream relocation was done at a 1:1 ratio.
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 httn://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wro/index.htm. 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
Page 10 of 122
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 R
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 F]
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
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 F] 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.
Page 11 of 122
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.
N/A
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 (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes E] 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
Page 12 of 122
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
1376
c- L ke
1lusTca
? R 19 i \ I i i
1. /%' '• '
END PROJECT
BEGIN PROJECT
1197 'by ?-? d'
1287
1255 68 9VP
/ 27
U. \\
74
G
It9 {' vwar e AC
/ ? II
\ I
I
aus
74? 1196 ?? 2J
/' Nr MRC \
147
X1184
PORTION OF HAYWOOD COUNTY MAP
16671 ? Mr Sgrlrnp
5833
? MI MOId?Wn
? NAB s?4 1 PARK
r.r d
504. rooga( C
A?
441 ? ?
Memon cveaoKee ??.
Green
1 Creek
s

woun
Swannanoa
;teen 8 0 7
0 E3
0 74A
Fa
td Gerton
e
let
untas, Fruit PROJECT
tome
SI(
174 4EEas`t
PORTION OF STATE MAP
NORTH CAROLINA
DAIISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNFY
BJ944001(B-3340)
BRIX( '94 OVFR RICH( 4VO CREEK
ON US 19
WETLAND IMPACTS
, "Oiwn Z ?
.,
` ) \ CZ
r \? \?.\,.` r.// 'Its, ?Yy:? '?' 4 /? •{ t Lt? , ?'\ •.I ??
V. ? `1? ? " l " ? ??-s I A"• "?? ',.4_ .
r•
oc ?• v`I,
wl,
_ • Sdt?j? ?` • • ! ; fi fill ' ? uSr4 ° i
BM A 344 SCc
?• i '. outn centeq 2565 ,' -? ' :•
i' --- • T SwlmminQ n a lu s k a * ?111s
1. •. _ ?lpc)bh .. -?+ "t Oool u
/f BM N ? • ;
. BMA .?• 1 \`. ?'• ?? 1 {/?^???q --4-1CXsH ELEV 2562 256 1? ?%` . •,
ark '
usc?la
11 Wit,
•`? $ l / . , ->IIS S` \
1 'mote GrLIe i a+ R a; )
j?c11 i,,C,urch,) < ? c C? C, •'I? i
Lin
airw'?+d4. i/ •r p ?o?e ;'
J ;',?, y jai .A• `?„?' ?`'C- ? ' SY `• ?tob--•. ,-, •1?`;? , J ',?
."fxl .1
• •'? ?'•T?arhWr.l .•.? .." r q• i11?, • I• r?? `'1i?• ill/// .`\? _`.
S? ' I(Nilkis?t Memo..a, / . .. > t .. ;°(
. r?ttc 'y\`. (Wjrr r/ S o // ?et?hll.;'C wr
`Y...%?. ?\/), ,••' ..' ?Y.y?.? Si'ry`p'/ /l 4 erneAS,.Vleri/ / ? L=,iI
J 7• ?L J fe ^6? ii1 t: _ )O .. ',C4C??lr?r..lt?4 . :• It
?. Sir0+
WETLAND SITE MAP
NORTH CAROLINA
ONISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNI"Y
BJ944001(B-3340)
BRIDE 194 OVER RICHLAVD CREEK
ON V 5 19

I I
T'IL,,A. ;"1[J
(;t']LN D -
--WLB- WETLAND BOUNDAPY
L
WETLAND
?1?J L
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
® DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
R
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
® DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
• CLEARING
FLOW DIRECTION
TB
T_ TOP OF BANK
- WE - EDGE OF WATER
--C - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- -F - PROP.LIMIT OF FILL
-- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
--NG-- NATURAL GROUND
--PL- PROPERTY LINE
- TDE - TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
-- -? - -• -- WATER SURFACE
x x x x x LIVE STAKES
x x x
BOU?_DER
":ORE FIBER ROLLS
N IYWOOD COUNTY
91944001(B-3340)
BRIDC£ •114 OVFR RICHLAND CRS F K
ON US 19
PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTING STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
Cf SINGLE TREE
WOODS LINE

DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD

RIP RAP
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
? PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE (PSH)
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
GRASS SWALE
NORTH CAROLINA
DNISION OF HIGHWAYS

30400
2 WO 33.50
'r? \ cm ewo[<

/
/ t I
F

eOpl ..0 ?I

U053 v.r{ it b
[kll

O

_` i ? l11[I ppp --
/ O \

\

?

eo r. ?e.Y a uv[s
xx
u[ wlUU
SO II p.Y ??t?? 54[ YOKS

O \
r.? v w?a4 u.¢
x
c ooc : -
p tt.ru a cp.r.a1
5rltti IH SHEET 10 SHEET 1C
SHEET LAYOUT
PLAN VIEW
J I T L I
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
OAMCCO COUM Y
81944001(B 3340)
8FC1?'. •9.9 G`+'n7 R:C`il.4h;"; rj?; E ti
US
r.
z 2-
30+00
-L-
EXISTS/W
ROOT WAD (TYP)
CROSS VANE (TYP) -?
O /wq
I/ IX
LEGEND
S S DENOTES SURFACE
C WATER LOSS
SEE NATURAL CHA
3.0 fit. BASE
245 LF LOO.2C
EST 1150 CY DDE
ALL RADII TO CENT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8.1944001 (Fl -JJ40)
HRIDGF ',Lr 01FR RICHI.ANO CRFf K
ONOS19
.L.L
r -7 ?7

Q
w
w
S
cr)
w
z
S
U
Q

LEGS NO
S S I DENOTES SURFACE
T_ . NA TEER Loss
SHEET
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYW00D COUNTY
8.1944001 (9 3340)
c31"F,';F •94 OVER RICNL AND CgEE,K
ON US "_
u
w
w
S
cn
w
z
J
S
Q

m
w
W
S
c.n
W
Z
J
C--)
Q
Z
(f)

SHEET IC; ?
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
rlanVOOD COUNTY
8J944001 (B 3340'
BRIDGE 94 OVER RICHLAV!? CRF`k
LEGFND ON US I9
'l DENOTES SURF ACE
WATER LOSS L
i

?i.
/ CO Z
lD

i m
? `0
N
J
V V
O
Q
or-
v 1
r .
O
Cl-

i ?
Ln
I
N
L
N [.
[1
_ U >
4, I
(5'
3
f-LI?
x
iw
m
O
Q O
= j W
C7 ? ? c?3
LL z m g
O
? U g
v ?W
? O
O
a
W Q
M Lu
? fn
W = i
OV
ax
wo
N?
?I
0
I x
cil Q?
cil
I
\ II O? '' c
?oo
j v° F ,
I A
I .. A
0
w

- Z
I -)
(J .. !
CD I I --

O I L-j
z

Q I
C'
W I I 1--- 7
I I x
w v
O ' I I `
o ? I I I
C7 I
z I I
?- I I
? I I I
X I I I
w I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
1 I I
I I I
I I I
! ? I I I
o I I I
? I I I
O ? I I I
04 1 I I
O I I 1
I I ??
I
I I
I I Y3?il:) \\j
I GlVV
I I ;
I I
I \ 0 ,
I I I
I I
I ?
W
rr-)
0 o J ?Z J
tz I` O \
JW X00 O
C) O h? A
un ULnLn0 U
(V z N ii n W
a . Q L.J LJ d
U-lfl -1 --2 O
In Q -- W In C?
a
- _ I
fry, ? I
I I
Ll I
C I I ti
!< I I ?)
Y S
Cn i! r- !
. d .
d I c U <J
C. -j >
U i I x -> > c n
?Llj I O?I?U ! r <)
L) ..I )I W c.)
.. 2 l _
art aLn <>
n_ F -
° c> loo i -j (\j
- r-
O <
I
4 r- :) I z 1-. CJ V)
C?: C•
lfl 01 O _) LP l,)
Ni
0
rn

? w
Q p U
o z o ? °
cr
Q LL
o
0
r
o co ,

a
w
0 3W
W
0
m
N !
N
W
v
ll
Q C7
O
D m
O
m Q
U l,J
I-
H
N
7
lr ?_
x c
m
r
w
N
Q --
U
U
Y
O
2

Q
W
Cr-

i
I
I
N l
n

to
I -
G L
F' Z _1
- [Y
i l
m I
1 ?
tr
.. -- -----------

O --- ---__ -.__

I -_
r
w_..
C3
-
Z 1 U U
C I ? O
nJ
r? -- -, ~ Z
o
x J
L,J <L
o u? I J
O Cf I
to 7
n
?I c?
`
I ?
m

f
? ?
I _
I
L I
? I I
LJ
L I I I
I
I I I
I I
I I I
I I I
I
I I I
I l
O I I I
? I I I
CD rn

M
I
I
O o I I ?

Nr i I l--------

' I I ? 4,
\
I
I I N,??JI
I \?
k.77ZI'?

I l
I
CINV Ili ,ICI /
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
o
I I
I
I? I I I V i\1 A
CD,
CD?
P
l -
C\l J
fY) dS
I O C7
ti
J
0O
J S?
0
Ln(?Q Lr) 0
U of-c?1 u
N
n 1'
NZ
?0,-
U Ln
Q , V W w

Ln V - L'i Ln
I
O,
CDI

I
W
Z_
J
LiJ
a
W
Ln
O
O
d
w

Q

7._
< C1
W

Y
U
Li0
0 LL1
?w
O o 00
C-j `? r O I Z z
l ul (1
L? L+ v? O

\ N ti N
tv
I I

I ? \ r

\ V ?? U

\ U
0
Ld

? a
U

\ \
\ nJ
O (-D

\ ?
\
- 0
m
?

? Q
I - Z W
cl?
I V) ?
X n_
LJ D
y
r- U
Cl)
I
O
? Lil
c I
\ O O
n °
Y I Ln
r?
CU N I -

Q1oU 1 n_
C
>- Q
W
LL l H- U
-
u - cc' a L f)
Ln .;, > - n- (-
Ln I- w a) I <
aw?C\1 J
7LJ

N

a Q

j W

S? w
J C7 z ° v
° LL
? 3
U ? D
1=- E O
a
? R = u6
0
w
a
o
m
ti
N
0
ui
_ w
w
w
_i
o a
W
O
Er-
LL
Q
W
r?
nV I
LL'

O
Q w
CD
w r
Ln ?rn
Q
Uo
w
LL ()
C) CD
-10
Q rr
F- n
W
O
N
(li
1.0
Ln
N
W
Vl
Z
>- i2c,
F- O O
U U
o
0 0
Q
co Q- L/)
V1
Q
Z_ J
QU
J d
a a
Ln I \\
? Q
Z J
Q U O
J W
a m
a
W
cr
V)
i
V) un
w
O O

Q F-
Z
O O O

F- Ln (D
M N

W
W

O
w Z
cr
3
U O
cr J
CO w
Q co

p Q V) Li
Z a Q N V)

am ? LD V
o:: a N Ln
co
V)
V)
Q

U
Li
0
w
C-D
a
z
0
F-
0
z
a
a m
a _
w

? r y
a a

w w
Ln Lln
Z ZD
a a
U U
Y Y
U U
O O
? Cr
NORT-i CAROLINA
U:VISIGN OF I15-IWovS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8 1944001 (B-3340)
BRIDGE OVER RICHLAND CREEK ON US 19
NCDOT Project I.D. B-3340
Haywood County, NC
Replacement of Bridge #94 over Richland Creek on US 19
Prepared by: Stantec Consulting
801 Jones Franklin Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27606
July 29, 2002
NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN
TRIBUTARY TO RICHLAND CREEK
Right of Project Station 30+30 to Right of Station 32+55
Permit Site 1
The replacement of Bridge Number 94 over Richland Creek in Haywood County will
require that a portion of a Tributary to Richland Creek be relocated from Right of Project
Station 30+30 -L- to Right of Station 32+55 -L-, approximately 257 feet in length. The
proposed channel relocation is designed according to "natural channel" design principles
proposed by Dave Rosgen.
The Tributary's drainage area is mostly rural and wooded in nature. The stream was
found to be perennial in nature, having flow through the riffles and pools.
There is no hydraulic gage data available on this stream or on nearby streams. Current
discharges were estimated using the NCDOT procedures for rural watersheds.
EXISTING CHANNEL
A representative portion of the existing channel (upstream of the proposed relocation)
was surveyed in detail for the purpose of channel classification. The existing channel
was measured to have an entrenchment ratio of 16.73, a width/depth ratio of 6.68, a
sinuosity of 1.07 and an average slope of 0.002 ft/ft. A pebble count was preformed and
the channel was found to have a classification of sand bottom. The channel was found to
be a E5 stream type according to the Rosgen classification system.
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOO COUNTY
81944001(8-3340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON US 19
I
I N?
SCaL? 4> SHC?4'N SHEET zOF'_'`"
REFERENCE REACH
I
The reference reach was surveyed in detail for the purpose of channel classification and
use in natural channel design. A 127 ft long reach was surveyed in detail. The reference
reach channel was measured to have an entrenchment ratio of 8.25, a width/depth ratio of
8.25, a sinuosity of 1.09 and an average slope of 0.023 ft/ft. A pebble count was
preformed and the channel was found to have a classification of sand bottom. The
channel was found to be a C5b stream type according to the Rosgen classification system.
PROPOSED CHANNEL
Based upon the existing valley type and the flood prone width desired, the proposed
channel design has a C5 stream type classification. Design data is given in the attached
table along with existing reach and reference reach data. A proposed cross-vane will
control the channel gradient upstream, while a step-pool structure will control the
gradient downstream. Mean "bankfull" depth was set at 1.30 feet. Above bankfull depth
it is proposed to excavate an approximately 35 foot wide flood plain (including the
channel).
It is believed that by forming a flood plain above bankfull depth channel stability will be
enhanced by reducing velocities for those discharges above the bankfull discharge. This
should lead to a more stable channel. It is anticipated that the proposed channel will have
a sand bottom. Maximum pool depths of 3.76 feet are proposed at outside bends of
meanders.
Sediment transport computations were performed, using the proposed channel geometry.
To determine whether the bankfull discharge would be able to transport the D50 particle
without excessive bankfull shear stress the stream power was analyzed. The stream
power will be slightly reduced from the existing conditions.
Proposed channel stabilization is shown on the attached detail sheet. It is anticipated that
channel banks will be planted with native trees and shrubs above bankfull depth. Root-
Wads, Rock Vanes, Cross Vanes and a Step-Pool Structure will be utilized to control the
near bank shear stress in the meanders, along the proposed roadway.
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8J944001 (8-J340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICH(ANO C.REE K
ON US 19
iii
2
F
f
i • +
i
C
+
LL
Y I
+
co
r
+ • ;. +
+
I ;
N I ? '
? I
A , I
?i +
_ 0+
+
+?

rn o, m
0
N
0
0
0
Z
c
L
U
°m
7
O
0
N a c") N
rn rn a m m
(4) uopenel3
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION Of HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
BJ944001(8-3340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER RiCHLANO CREEK
ON 05
I9
Z,u Proposed Conditions
B-3340
Design by: Kevin Williams, PE
Stantec Checked by: Kevin Williams, PE

ITEM Existing
Conditions
Proposed Conditions
Reference Reach
STREAM NAME
B-3340
B-3340
Big Branch
STREAM TYPE E5 C5 C5b
DRAINAGE AREA (DA) 448 Ac 448 Ac 941 Ac
BANKFULL WIDTH (Wbki) 10.46 ft 12.95 ft 14.30 ft
BANKFULL MEAN DEPTH (dbkf) 1.57 ft 1.30 ft 1.73 ft
WIDTH/DEPTH RATIO (WtaWdbki) 6.68 10.00 8,25
BANKFULL X-SECTION AREA (Abki) 16.39 ft2 16.52 ft2 24.80 ftz
BANKFULL MEAN VELOCITY, Ws 4.20 (s 4.10 fps 4.76 fps
BANKFULL DISCHARGE, cfs 69 cfs 69 cfs 118.00 cfs
BANKFULL MAX DEPTH (d,n,,) 2.67 ft 2.07 ft 2.80 ft
WIDTH Flood-Prone Area (Wjp,) 175 ft 34.0 ft 44.00 ft
ENTRENCHMENT RATIO (ER) 16.73 2.63 3.08
MEANDER LENGTH (Lm) 16 - 62 ft 27 - 49 ft 30 - 55 ft
RATIO OF Lm TO Wbkf 2- 6 2- 4 2,1- 3.8
RADIUS OF CURVATURE' 4 - 28 ft 26 - 36 ft 13- 23 ft
RATIO OF Rc TO Wbki 0.3- 4 2.0- 3 _
0.91 - 2.79
BELT WIDTH 20 ft 52 ft 25 ft
MEANDER WIDTH RATIO tg 4 0 1.75
SINUOSITY (K) 1.07 1.09 1.09
VALLEY SLOPE 0.002 ft/ft 0.002 ft/ft 0.025 fUft
AVERAGE SLOPE (S) 0.002 ft/ft 0.002 ft/ft 0.023 ft/ft
POOL SLOPE 0.000 ft/ft 0.000 ft/ft 0.000- 0.003 ft/ft
RATIO OF POOL SLOPE TO
AVERAGE SLOPE
0.00
0.07
0.02- 0.14
MAX POOL DEPTH 2.06 ft 3.76 ft 4.80 - 5.10 ft
RATIO OF POOL DEPTH TO
AVERAGE BANKFULL DEPTH
1.31
2.90
2.8- 2.9
POOL WIDTH 6.32 ft 25.90 ft 30 It
RATIO OF POOL WIDTH TO
BANKFULL WIDTH
0.60
2.00
2.07
POOL TO POOL SPACING 18.0 ft 22.7 ft 25- 62 ft
RATIO OF POOL TO POOL
SPACING TO BANKFULL WIDTH
1.72
1.75
1.7 - 4.3
Due to mature vegetation root mass in the Reference Reach's side slopes and floodplain, the
reference reach data will not be matched in proposed design. The use of a higher ratio will allow the
meanders to be stable while the root system is established.
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOO COUNTY
8194400118-33401
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON US 19
scuE as ;..ry,,v ;BSc,- '7of ZZ
i
J
=WOm ° ¢i- ¢ Y
i e pma ¢ o.
Z u. ° w7 °
2 2
d o N 2 m
U.-. `dim u
JW? '
0
V) L'i
F-
O
F- JZ v
Q c
Q
O W
U W °
N Q i
a_
J>- o ¢o ; 3
W ? ... ? Vd W < O
O J
Z
Q ~ Z Z m f m
OW- 'd
SWfD 6
U QNO. a Z 0
an ?
O y° Nuo
- Ww
i
d
0 od
0
z c
O °
U yz x 0
W z °o
J N i d LL
Q uo
w a o '?
O V ° I W?
d N
-j o
w i
z
za oW
2 vi c
U O o
EL a
cr o
a LL o
n
z
0
V
W
Q
u
0
z
m
w
e
m
0
u
a

-
N
v
z a ° OJ =
<?
,
o
?
0 o z oz

o i a
o N
? o-
¢ N
-
a uw
?
O
Z u o
S
W
° m °
m o ° 2
as
w
aw W
o?
o ? ?

aJ N a
°
o¢
a <
o g
-
Z
m o
?

?z ?
a
u
Y
a
°
6 ¢ <
W
o N
i N
~ u -,
?o¢ LL
>
°Yi
u o
o a m
° ?w
F Jo
¢ u
° Q
0 4 t LL¢ z t
0 0 0
=

W W
=
J=

W°
w - y=ou
u
ma
g

w
0
z o W
°o? =as
x d
AA?
?=oof
e
(t
N
-u
L C
7:)
4-0
0L
Z
O
F- -
U z ?'
W - Z
c
N J

z Ln w
N
Q N C - ---- /C? V)
J w
Ln L I Q
? 0 O 1)
N
N II
" cm)
?,.? _
O 0 \I o
O o

W C
+- oz
Q
- c
R=
U
cr
U -? - - -

NORTH CAROLINA
DNISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
819440011B-33401
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON US 19
iCAL.6 SNGW
I
SN` E i ?? ;?? zZ

w
O
W
J
cn o
.. w w
omzF-F-IS- U)0 Q~ UJZ
F-wz"
Q O aJ 3o w
YZ) =WF=-UZ m 0 F-ZOQW0
ZOCU> W W W F-m • OM 2F-COW
Qd O>-Wm=JO 4, O J
C3 WmQQ I--JOW4- M0pQ -J -J
wQF-Q3F-Jz=¢F=-N Q3g ^Q LL
2 >-<Z oww x WY=
F-C7LL -i L-L= S • LLF-WzCnY
Cn OOF-= Wg a=F-J+1 OOOQ U
W WJ UUJ zW 04- O MYQ
m O w w 7 J w< a z w n z m w z m
¢O¢fAr•L¢mJWI- O "Llin
F- WWI•-N 3W pWZX NW mmw
U OF- oz 2W030 F-2F-F-F-m
D F-ow r-?¢F-Smf-U++ JQF-?+
WU-F-WpF- •~QmZM JLL LL F-=J
U) 2 UQWQWp O <0"ZF-Q
O ~=QJZ30<Jpw-i wy "0 C/)
Q 07 - O.WWZz WHOW ZZ •YZ
3 Z 0 L-?2QwzwxF- NpwZQS
OLLWWMF- MZZ W OCOD U
~O QOUQmOLL W =QW? O~YF=-Zw
OW(LJM OC -U¢po LLWQWmF-
LL oww=Jwooxmom owm -WW
O mw-jo M; -z moL 2a.Q SS
W QF-O 3CLQ F-¢ LU
F- m?••?JpxUO)WLL.O WQC7>
z pJQCnW SOpOW M=Z?4z
W J =3 >QF- F-m CnHC=N
w <=wn -w>F-ZCSYJ Wwnp(?U
U U) C70 N4 LUU) QJ ¢FS-YF0•--Cw
CL MLL -j owq- 0 U) LLWQWWF-W
ZO¢=OW§mw0=w ="• mmWO
W2 WF-CL> QWF-W MM f-L J=Q
ir_ I- F- aF- U F- aWU) JF- CL
F-aoowwo"w 00 w ww< 2
Woz=Soo(L z0 xoF-oxZO
QpLL.QF-F-M>DCLQLL F-f-MMWC --LU
w
F-
w
H
p
J
Q
N 41
Q 4-
m O
W
H
z
Q
J
CL
2
Q
D -P
"n Q
H LL N
20 z
Q x W
W 0 ? Q
Z
0
H
F-
U
w
0
U
O
L
U
Q w O N
O
?Q
Qw
x>
rn Q
x
C7 0
oz
J Q
+1
w4-
F-0
O LL
U- O
41
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8J944001 (B-3340)
j HqIOGC '94 OVER GUNPOWOf R CRt F
ON US 19
A

i

w w
O
J'LL O
(n
h
m w w
3 _ W 0
i
i °
mo
?u >
w
i
m ;W
3
W
1lm/
l >
Q
_ Q

O

/ U
W
' U
I

O

J
LLI
O m
to
Y Y w
•UW
O ¢Om
Q H Q
O J
cr a: W
www
z
z
OOO7d
O5Ox
U.awU
3
W
z
Q
J
d
O
cr-
W
J
O
m
W
z
O
F-
O
J
Q
cr
W
F-
Q Z
z
w Q
>
z Ne
0 C-)
O Q
Q
O
O
Y
U
O
cc
J
J
Q
W
F-
O
z
U)
F--
z
w
J
U
O
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNFY
BJ944001 (B -3340)
BRILY',E '94 GVFR GUNPOWDER CREEK
ON US 19
z z
O OH
ag a
w a
J
W W w
w
w rn
J fA
LL W
H
LL w
O H Q ? G
aC m ?-
O >
hl
Y
z
mm
a
w
I

s}?FFr.
1 60F ?Z
w
?a zz
•
H
0
z
V J
0
cc
U
V)
z
J
N
3
G
4
V
Q
o=
w-
N Q
O 3
CL
O J
IL
liY-
O
\m
oz
w-
N O
O 3
a
O J .
J ?
a
L` Y -
0",
a
a)
o7
w t
N n
o?j
n-
0
a
a,
w Ml
r, fir:
Q: II
rn
0
w
a0
ors ?
z ,
-mT
? 3
Nisi N
Y U 0
U a 7 O
oJ_
a
cr
w X
(r
W m W z w
\ \ O J W `2
O== `I
l???ao
z
O
H
U
cl)
w 1
0) ?
Cr
W
F-
O
Cr O =
L1J LL- U
W ?
0 = ?n L,ci?
J Lil
O ?
a
a' W F n00?
-?;:Z',QI_'
N w J F- Q = L LJ
?-- Z Y Cr- o
OUL:J -_
U 0 F
QxQ cr ??- 0
I-
_
Lil ,
F WQLLJJ-0
U
LLJ U?z
U F- U
?Q Q?z?-
Z ZQw0-LJ
J
:E
?
7
F S
Y
_
Q?OOU U
~
ZCrZU
:
O
Lr Qo(nowL,JWQ
J
U C]2 -J
Z Q
O
Ow= LL' -w
Lt-
0 F- C-) V)T
~
?mN
0?
Z
Z
0 Ja?
z0?
< , LLJ c
(D
=
Q -
J
cl-
O
U
U)F---

Q LiJ>
J
C)
L ? Jr
mQM Q
O x z Z
L
1
L) zL/)L,JO
._J
i

7. cc < ?_l Y -1 L-i
>
Ln ?
>U-1 U
L?! 1T OQQ
J_ Cr z lil = _L _I
UQ0Q(L
Z ?-- Cr _ ) CY
LJ In Q O L!) W v) v)
CrY>>
F- UW -=LJ000
O __) _ OOO
QCYLiJ<r L.(rR"

J
1J
O Z ? N Z
a W
V )Q

0;

Nw
N \
03U
ON OWO
--? Jt< X
l Z m
OLD,
W oc
LL Y
O 2 O
a
m ?z
O
O z
Z
N
Z C]2 aN W>?
Lj? (A
~ a3 NO m
U M Jl w

Lu
ma V

O
W >
J w
c Z - Q J
W
a
m =
N J
W
Z L,
,7 -Cr
wI3
T.
w F-- Na
Z(wO
N O
O3: W co U N w z
Q
O J ' o W
> Y w o
LL. O N)-
J
O
o a s
i
a O
co cr co >
L,
w
O
J
z
O- F-?aW
\ m
3
w
H
Z
Q
J
a
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8.!944001 fB-33401
B,R!XE '94 OVER GUNPOWDER CREEK
ON us 19
AJ Si !(?54 ? ?
W >
OY
?_j U
~ OO
NW l- fr

J
H
Q
ui
J
J
Ow
U
O
CL
Q.
W
I-
U)
Ln
w
Fr +
Q4
> LI
a +
w ?+
o?
c
c
a
c
Ll
Z
O
a'
U
J
Q
I I I
a LLw 7i
a_ z 0
D Z F---
a ?-
N Q = O
Z U m
w
_J

X
a L U

~ O m
wQ
4- U LL_
N I
a
z
a'
- N ,
F-
Lf)
x n --
O
U
0'
m
a
LL
Z
O
H
I-
U
w
O
w
O
Q
U
W
J
H
U-
O
a

w
w
Fr_
U
?1 O
G z
C)

'A
I

Ln +-
w_ 4-
a
Q N
f- +
o?
a_
Q
W
a_ H
>
J
CL
Ln
a
U
w
V)
LiJ
V-
O
7
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
81944001!8-33401
BRIDGE '94 OVER GUNPONOE' C=;c EX
ON US 19
SCALI? A,)-
/ j
RICHL AND CREEK

SUMMARY OF AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS
NOR7-14, CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
hl Al NOCO COUNrr
8,194400117 - J 340
Ii i
TRACT NO. PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS SITE NO.

cn LO
Z
O o
? v
a?
?Q
?m N
0 z
CL =

?
co o Z o o MO
NN
d'LL prn
tiN
O O N
LL z 0 co
00 3: w
Q 2
W
7--,
p0 0

U IL

CU C)

n w c

w g

LL CD C)

C
U) Y Y
U of w
0
N
N
co

U
m

`
o
U-

?
?
N
f0
Z (Q p
N
U')
N
a
C C
O
N V O
ti ? Co co
Q w
U ? N

a

Q' LL
Q a? ? 0 0 0
? C v 0 0 O
H
W
U
Q

?

V1 C U
C O co
O

? ? U
? m O
C .
. M p O
LL
Q
CG
C O
N
C

V) C
O U
. f0
N L O
O
.
UU
'_"
L_ C)
F' ?
N
U 2
Q
C N
O

U > ? co 0
H a X o

? o

a o
°
? j E a m o

J
H
W
c ?
o
= ca coo 0
Q

o m
N a
U
(9
CO
F- o
U 7
? N
U c U

L O O

O
O ? N
co
- E o
o 0

0
M

?' o Q
z f.-
O
"
U) 0 O
fn
Z
N
E

as
k °0

47
41

k ?
0 0
k Q
U E
C
Q
m a0i
In ab
Ob££-S 100tt6l"g ?.L?? O?Id
olvm
A

w
w x
® W
a
z
? A
W
z
? a
01
V
O a
W ?
V
Z
m -1 1
o A
V ? x?o S
a
? w ?O Ay
?i
Q
O O
C)
SNV7d AVM--40-1HDIY 7VNl-4

Lis

a

W \ JJ
( ltd \?

N
000
11 A A

I
r

l
Q1
O

O

u3 ? O

O
8
O
aR G
2Q

CO)
^
O h
N P VI $

`?
A II
s II A A
so II A
>
?
ol
Q
N 'N
rw 0

in V1 th O § K
b 2r ? b- li

In 9i 4

C
W

o
C m
0
°

??y1

0)

WC

0

O
m
U
0
p

j
~
m
M

co p
3
°m
__
°
3

n
-0

m

`

W

?
°

S

j

U

_

c

L 8
5
?
u
U

O
m
o

E

0

m

o

Q

y

L

m

?
C
m
m
w

€

!n

m

m
w

€

N
W

o

I •

j
LLJ

?'

m
-

V m

°
V
t,
m
c

m m
c

p m
c

;
> 0
o
=
m
o
U m
o
V .?
a
O $
0
3

41
o 3

? _
3

_° L p

m
cl
N =

y
.
i

J U- LL
p N '? -°
S d
O ? N ?- U
d m 3 J
d N
c
N m
°
w m m far a?? o

!- l7 O 0
3 3 3 3 3 ? N'

no O

t ?
O

?

o

°

o
ttttttttt;J
0
i
m

C
3
W
W
Nb-+
F-?
C) r J
%a
O
CU?i
tti
W
z
0
V
A
w
a
v
II
w
M
W
N

;
LL
Y
W
N
O

W c
c J
vi 3 > c
O O O
m 13 c c Z ° x ?

3 o 0 C ? N p O
0 oG < U t ? 0 ,
W m
3 m
3 V1 -V
c LL N
to
O t .p IN 3 O m
0 Q O
O N m m O O -D W d m p S O
(D
>
w
-0
t
V)
V)
.C
Z
_
O
_
O
O
C
C
C
H 0
C

W
oe Q V1 V) J Q CC Q ` D > > > J Q

• -O + -¢ «"> 1-1 p I [,] I
W
7
N
m
C
m C J
C J N
W c _ 0
d °
c °°- °
a m LO, ? E
CO) S 5 0
3 L N O
N o LL c c a -p M 0-00
rn 0, 0 1? H o f mp °c
hi `° CL a 3 3 3
a 0 L6 o`_ a a° a ti
CL
+ ¢ c r-;] IF, 4 m
N M
• W W
m
m m ?
S m c T o'C U 75 U V U V u
o c c .?
m o = c C c-C c. 0
O a- L - L O_
CL c ; O 0 0
0 x -C -C LL
to 0 H m m m m CL 0 -0 0
Z~0a)-98,099-01-0,0000
S C C d d d d~ Of T L
LU a rm o?e o 000
m
E `c
m m a
° E E c ?Lt E
W N N E
C IL tL 4
m ?' m m o t
o c c o c? c •c E -
3> >, > m m m U O O E m m 3 ° m
o° 3 3 3 3u 30 c° E Q c q to in U 0 •o O o
rn cx o c°° ° t_ 0 m °a °a p ° o a? v C7 E m o o
° c tm m tp O 0 m E E m € m 2 Lc `? 0 0 m o E °
C O L L C m m m _e o0 .C m
-0 O N S
V1 .Q m U p V to oC 0> 2 c
O C? O C ° pl p1 C o? U C F f- d CL
0'
c o, p E rn m m c m e m m °' m o+ m U rn m
N C N N N N N N N N N N N N N - w m N p
L ..??9q r C_ O O ° O C O C O O O O C C O O O C O C O E V N N p1
ti in Q D V m 0 a- aV 0 += 0 a a a a a a{ a »= a m m -cm o c m
-9 CL
C N '?q •'Si H N 0 N N O O O O N O > > C C O .u. C
me w °C °` a8 ;$ 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 R' ti a ti U LLS CL 1S ti w a O 1
oc N S 3
? o. n. n. n. a Lb
io oc oc d d a
Ili I
O
p
4
-° .0 -to, CL u
w u m O o
C m c CO p m O C
c 3 p Q _
0° 3 L E o
w c a m E u 3 d 5 c 0 a ?, rn c, tt in °
0 N o
° c m> 'o f o c° c°V m a on on o CO
c ; c ° J a
[? m m c E 0 2 c ° L m m rn ? -o > c
c l d y 0 , O U < to 3 V p 3 = W W E C O 7 O ° 6°.. t°t •? 7
c c rn rn' rn rn rn m ° c O m L Q E m° Q a tm to
t c m m c o 0 o c o c c c t? d $i o v° °. c a m
° o o o L' 0 0 0 c o rn m L-c o m m c 1 'o. 3 0-p
t`o U ,-°• U ce d Ul n`_ d` d ul a` d a a` t9 in 3 to LO Q U m to V too S LL O to H a` tL
roo:n?rco
w
Z ?
?^ o I
xU fit
N1
m ?R
a
G
o v_

Es
F?
?LL
o.
Imo N
? 'o Fob a OO
F F
.? Ws?
Fob w>
" • wee
¢on m
W mww
W°a
o
a?
a w .a w
a a 0
., h
w < As
W
LL° u
LL° °
?°n
g om
am °w °
iQz
w ?o
?r ?oa
°>?
w

a
y s W
N
H
= °
Om
c+m v°
?m
m w°i
VIII
ppmt ww
Ua l
w
Um?
UmF w
m
?m 4
I
Vm
?ma
?
m
m
?
m

•
m
w

N
W H U u U 0 W

`r
of
a
y
FAN
°
- 10
m
m
a

°
rmi

CL <
m w
?Q ?g ?aS ??w ?a ?asw 3 3
e ° w
o 03 °?-Z oo °? ° aQ °??? W y

a;W
? °° u < < N
°<
m w lw
s

U N
U M
U N
O r'
W N
W N
7 N
']
Q N
2 co
Ir F ? 3
0

i
71
) I
? r N
?
LL
N `
,
v ' l? II

? 7
?
LL ? ? /??
1,
N r
LL
O I O O
•D
p

_O
• 7v

I
8$ ? I
MH N
J _
. m N O I
1- VVV??? 0
K
?Q5

4
m
7¢?I
Ij
fu
I

F
(
I
° yy
?1
i
°
TO N

J?
1
( I ([I
S u

(-_- Z __--_f-----_I
J
KI Ul
_ I F N
Uf
- a
J
I O I pp

?t I

F ? t-
G F
o.
we
s>j gq
&u
n

a
(W) 888
(Wl ?
TH V,
I
_ I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o?
s
°
LL`
i
(0,
f
Q
LL
I I
I _ I N W
I I Jti

_ o ?4j
I I
I I
I I
1
I W a ?
I? ? J

I
I
'TH
I
I

I
I -
I
r
t
8 =
W
a i
o
a)
.09,91
Rd PSW 0
f00L/61/f0

IlAl
'x131
d
64010
OC
04
OG
In Z
Nil 0
O0-4
X11 A
3
?a

r a
_
a
{j R
g Y
lk
Q
K ? Y
3
Y
O
d?
I '
Iwd moz
iIRIRI Fa IV IN
IIt?$bb !I
,

I
aaa?aa
n H
11;1111111

UVM'al,'A'o lwrw "d mm 9,310M
_ 4M'au'A'a.L YJ,UVTIOO'o110a
M r'aN SAOM MUM

a
j ?
?, t L
f ?
?! 7
LL?
V
w
? V
y u
V
Z
a
O?
0
y?
7
--- -Nf111'au •3I1M aw 3wrrd" - - - -- ?? ?r
wwlrow•IN•auxN
NAI'al, r101r1Y11 fill
a/nro {roNnu a•r
Im aurdlrroow Nll•3•rrdt"ITall
"*Ion 3<rba"Im aml t") Taw 'J{ ?{
WOM Ou W"VW OW NI3N NMI T" ^ 4 ei
-- Iral •au rtrro Iuw 3awd 1'Ow
------ Or" ro N,Mwu.& um Tall- --
1TIN ro nrn •au.r.3du roll a
N'IN ro n3I1'au.r.3dAl raw
-_ _ __ _ Il'NI'al, 31rra am 3rrrd'I'a
1-Itt -t 1-
nsI auronw aura - - - -
pry C rawa•vn{ ? ? ? ? ? -?? - - -
E k h _?_
??2 ? nlnwun ? ? ? ? ? •
??d tnnlw• lnrlw - - - s • ? w
Y p drY 9Q i1 InIVI 3dld NMg3d,x _ -
3dw Nara MAI
3dIdNMl .,ml
TIF
N{'
N1 _
a,
k x a ae
y IN'
ga k ? ?? A
Mlrra 3dOl, 9
rawnrr3lr3n? ? ? g p¦ p ay i¦Q ? ? p p ? ?l4I
rNlrOM LV3Nr -_ - !0 1$9 N R q 10 A is 1B 1(p0? 10 1 i FS 1k A
MMLWA313 401
lz 1; al m•_ 1^Y P 8 F ^- R s
ON 31NIlJatlls ---- - - - - - - -
- - - ---
Nara ? 11 9! a s
h0ro'u'1UN011r701 ®® ?lpp t; 1? t? ti tj ti ti ti ti b:
$$
folrlt ,h d$ t i fJ 1? Fl 47 A R ><1 6 J a -? a
.6.11'1!1

r<

•

?B
IE
R
G
o ¦

L L
R

J
2
a
O
a
y

a'
H
M

y
V ?

H

I

m

y
a

!!

i?I
a
{{i

011

J

O
O ?
o ?
?
Om ?

i
i

! J
?
E j

8
A
- Pill
!
F
d

o #

Y ? a a ? , l

3

3 b ? ?4
q

a

2211 v
I lgeA Ue? NM L00['91 w ?+N MM

s

¦

?NN ? ? a lA R 5 ? i A ? s U

8
?

y

> I
?J -+ a

7 Q
a

e

? R
Y
¦

V ? fI)
Q o
.? E
a
g ?; LL
? Gi .a z
n&? ? g ZZ? a 8
1
n
I
N
E
?j
Moil
52
Q
Q
O
LIJ
V
00
M?
'/ I?1
W
U
W
Q_
a
W
m
S/
J?
yyr
C?
.D
N
i
a
a
a
0•

\
lu '
J
Q?

II('tiX

? I

4?\
I

x
??
ma
1
x ??11

!f tic 2? d\1\1

,

??a WII11)
M'' I_ 1v?
s
41n? n ff
Haas o
n14
W
_j Ct V) _
osc'?d?l ;
rn+a? oa±,

JN?
11 1
I
1
3J?
.

i I ? ?? rte,

I ,l
I
t
(1l Z6'91l i
8' +bZ lOd-l f

I0'00+5 1Od l
1-19
?
_
01 j
c N
oq
Q
a m
? N
v <?
O ? y
WN ?d
I' Z 3 ° 3

2 K
m
W ? F
W
W

a W o=«o

?I o
?o< a
w
J
?aN W?
J
rY O
W
8
' ? ? LL
Oro pO
p
Z N
1
n p
l(1
I

ti N ? ? I
m w
_
I'
? 3
?i
W
pp
Z ?

I ;a I

Y I

_

I
I ? W
7
1
I
13 ?
;Ot OI
y.

!I
?
I
4 U ti
O

a
o
r' v
, {

I ? ? ?

nI Q J oQ
S I I ? ? 1/,
I
tai L'J
a
a
a'
?

I I
I
l ,

\P
?\
n
NIV13d t?f
ti
-erV
N
ND
M n, ? i;\
ni nrvn:, ,+ uin ?3a
i
co r- r-
lIl LP ( Lfl L() IP
N N N N N N N
IJ

Itl t :i
l.,
I
?
I,,11
-
4 t ';
{
.. r 1 Ifi.
i +
l r 1 :, I I ' 1 p
p
II , jjj--- i
j
+
1 4 4
r
.
r

f I I. I
"
11 IL I
' I
O
a L. 1 1 I 1 +

i
t
1
N

-

l
II

-q

-

f

i t

, J- 4 } -? ? -
O
: o

l 1 I
V) All G
k
4

1 - p

1 f Q

II
I
J r
N

! ' r 1
?
I.

i

?

I 1

t

_

?

I

I

_

j
?
+

r

i

r

_

r

j

-
I

+

I +

r?
N
7I I
l {
jt
II . r I ?. 4 I I {=?1
I 1 1 ? p
O

1
1r N
- - l I
1 N
1 +
Al l I g. _ T E

T
Ii
I-
?i
?i
'
'
I
L
V IE
O

I 1 L +
-

i -t il t _ H 6
?t
1
,
.
11 T 7 , ? ( I I F
f I
..

_L.
1 I I r

f „
L
14

I

o
{ I t ' - ? - I O

,
?
,
o
I I lf = I t ? _ r _

l 1
i..

l [r
il
t
l
t Y - If I _ -1
l 1 j 1
lq i +
,
fi
1

I I l l l r ; 1 _ 1I
-

1? I I I p
f _ . _
_ I. J .

_ I o
0

f t- r -
.
t 10

- 1 , U-)
i 1

d
1 _ +
f

I

t

-

.-I

fl

A
t
]
_
1
0 t
F
I
N It 41 i I t
4oa7-Oott6\940"W ld\ft"a\wJJ\OZO\iZO\iM'
MV 109S.4
'001/10/1

!a°?ri?°rvnuv nu. w.a ??iva m.r?.nxp
Rd [09020
COOL/6I/CO
z
a?
?+ P
Z aw
z b
Z
r <.,Z• W R
C,_
r
N
C
lII
Owls

a?
v22

2 1 \?

nis
1
?\
\
',11"'?3'1'ly?• -? ? i
,\
\
b'
wu O o;\\
W

?? g,;?M1-11 <
??v f
Y a>?' ll`t
J 1

of Q 8 'I?
J ?
,f,9'7•?}6•VI ?,? `, 1

1n`'
4F"
I. < nn.l+

y F I?

O
?
p ? N i
yx? M
m
J<pQ
.rM1f v ?I? 01
? ' ? 0
a

ti
?

F_CC M aN
a?
s W
ip
*\

C, z
w 11
Z? N ZS
Ix

ui ?2
?O W
I
°0
X V1
C\j
of. RCN n
N II II II 11 II ?

J x 1%

am-/°r I'?J nd•
VA ?

Me ? ?NO 1
oll 2? ?
p
II \ I
(ry II II II II II ?`>,, 1 ? ? v
o'
a
.
-rl g N
?3f +

o !? sr
`' 5S
y .,•Ir

4

w tN
37
?H
0
o?n,n - rn in sn+_mnu? u ?smw u_I,?
cliv,m ?mulr ep• unl 'ISI.i in,ir lnmV

w
O
oc
x tj
a
W?&J
w
C7 ?
z
J
N
a
<
_ ID
Y N
7 ?
J LD
za
Y M
Q m
J O
?I

f?R
? \
nftf IV wp
-
Jam.
?
,
t2
N I ? (((FF II
I
? II II II
OV \, j ??
a:.Ic)-j /////
ct
\
U +-j
vv
0
in
M(
?Z,
+
? ??

r1^?,
U-j
\
4 ? II II II II II
9

/7I ` 3
fl W
3
.J
Ln
m
00
Ljr) C!,
1
t I 1 -
r
r
I TUrl
1
i
I L-
fL
1 _
_ I-
J
4+111-11 H-1- M.1
-11 [411111 -14-
Effi
fn o In C
co 00 I- r
fn In Ln u
N N N C
1 .r
N N N

0
t
N
O
d
+
O
I
L
_ SI
I o
O
O
_ i
O
O
O
00
M
- S
t
t-
M
_ L
O
O
iD
M
O
- O
+
Ln

Ln O to O
LD U0 In t!'1
ui ? In u?
N N N N
fl•?s-o•ccln•+••u•?lev?wewo?+?ozo?ezouo??b
IVd sno-zo
coozielrco
r

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL, F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
US Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Field Office
151 Patton Ave., Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
ATTENTION: John Hendrix
NCDOT Coordinator, Division 14
Dear Sir:
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY
021660
Subject: Nationwide Permit Application 23 and 33 for the replacement of Bridge No. 94
over the Richland Creek, Haywood Co. Federal Project No. BRSTP-19(2),
State Project No. 8.1944001, T.I.P. No. B-3340: Division 14.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above
referenced project. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
proposes to replace Bridge No. 94 over Richland Creek (DWQ Index # 5-16-(1)) a
Division of Water Quality Class "B" Waters of the State. The project involves replacing
the current bridge along the existing alignment. The proposed structure will be
approximately 300 feet (ft) (91.4 meters (m)) in length with a 64 ft (19.5 m) clear
roadway width to accommodate five lanes of traffic. There will be an additional 5.5 ft
(1.7 m) of sidewalk on each side. Phased construction and traffic control will be used for
the construction of the proposed bridge. During Phase 1, a section (approximately two
lanes) of the existing bridge will be removed and a section of the new bridge will be
constructed (approximately two lanes). During Phase 2, traffic will be shifted to the
constructed section of the new bridge and the remainder of the existing bridge will be
removed. Two lanes of traffic will be maintained during the construction period. Traffic
control and signing will be implemented to ensure motorists'safety and to reduce
inconvenience. Please find the enclosed project site map, permit drawings, PCN form
and the CE document
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
October 3, 2002
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WYWV.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Bridge No. 94 over Richland Creek will be a 6-span bridge. The construction of
the bridge will require the use of 2 rock causeways consisting of Class II and Class B
riprap to provide access to the site by the construction equipment. The resulting
temporary surface water fill will be 0.049 ac (0.020 ha). Construction of the proposed
temporary rock causeway is depicted in the attached drawings (Sheets 8 to 11).
Additionally, 260 ft (79.2 m) of a tributary to Richland Creek will be impacted by
the construction of the referenced bridge. This stream is perennial and 262 ft (79.8 m)
will relocated. The relocation is designed to "natural channel" design principles proposed
by Dave Rosgen. No jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted by the construction of the
referenced bridge (See attached drawings for details).
Bridge No. 94 is 238 ft (72.6 m) long with 5 spans spaced approximately 48 ft
(14.6 m) apart with end bents constructed of reinforced concrete caps on H-piles. The
superstructure consists of reinforced concrete deck girders widened with 1-beams. Bridge
No. 94 will be removed without dropping any components into Waters of the United
States. All guidelines for bridge demolition and removal will be followed in addition to
Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters. This project is
classified as Case 3 in which there are no special restrictions beyond those outlined in
Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters and the supplements added
by this document on Bridge Demolition.
RESTORATION PLAN
The project schedule calls for a February 2003 let date. It is expected that the
contractor will chose to start construction of the causeways shortly after that date.
The materials used as temporary fill in the construction of the rock causeways will
be completely removed. The entire causeway footprint shall be returned to the original
contours and elevations after the purpose of the causeway has been served.
After the causeways are no longer needed, the contractor will use excavating
equipment to remove all materials. The class II rip rap used in the causeways may be
placed as riprap slope protection. 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.
FEDERALLY-PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened,
Proposed Endangered, and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of
March 7, 2002, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists 7 federally
protected species for Haywood County (Table 1).

K
Biological conclusions of "No Effect" were given for the eastern cougar, Carolina
northern flying squirrel, bald eagle, Appalachian elktoe, small-whorled pogonia and rock
gnome lichen in the CE document (dated December 1999). Two new species were added
to the list of Threatened and Endangered Species after the CE document was approved.
These included the gray bat and spruce-fir moss spider. Biological conclusions of "No
Effect" were given. No habitat was found for any listed species. Table 1 lists the species,
their status and biological conclusion.
Table 1. Federally-Protected Species for Havwood Countv
Common Name Scientific Name Federal
Status Biological
Conclusion
Appalachina elktoe Alasmidonta reveneliana E No Effect
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii T(S/A) No required
Eastern cougar Felis concolor coloratus E No Effect
Carolina northern flying
squirrel Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus E No Effect
Rock gnome lichen Gymnderma lineare E No Effect
Bald eagle Gymnderma lineare T No Effect
Small-whorled pogonia I.sotria meloides T No Effect
Spruce-fir moss spider Microhexura montivaga E No Effect
Gray bat Myotis grisescens E No Effect
n uenotes Gnaangerea ka species mat is in ganger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of
its range).
"T" denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or significant portion of its range).
"T(S/A)" denotes Threatened due to similarity of appearance (a species that is threatened due to similarity
of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection. These species are not biologically
endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section consultation.
SUMMARY
It is anticipated that the construction of the causeway 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). The NCDOT requests that these activities be authorized by a
Nationwide Permit 23 (FR number 10, pages 2020-2095; January 15, 2002). We
anticipate 401 General Certifications numbers 3361 and 3366 will apply to this project.
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0501(a) we are providing two copies of this
application to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, for their records.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call Rachelle
Beauregard at 733-1142.
Sincerely
pw?alrza`ol
Mr. V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Manager
PDEA-Office of the Natural Environment
cc: w/attachment
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Ms. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Design Services
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Ron Watson, P.E., Division 8 Engineer
Ms. Stacy Harris, P.E., Project Planning Engineer
Mr. Mark Davis, Division 14 Environmental Officer
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington (cover letter only)
k
Office Use Only: Form Version October 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
Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 23 and 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:
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NCDOT/Proiect Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Mailing Address: 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number: 919-733-3141 Fax Number: 919-733-9794
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: Mr. V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D
Company Affiliation: Office of Natural Environment Manager
Mailing Address: same as above
Telephone Number: 919-733-3141 Fax Number: 919-733-9794
E-mail Address:
Page 5 of 122
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 Bridge No. 94 over Richland Creek
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3340
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN)
N/A
4. Location
County: Haywood Nearest Town: Junaluska
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): US 19 west approximately
0.5 miles west of the US 74 split
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): N/A
(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:
Roadway and bridge with a divided variable-width median.
7. Property size (acres): N/A
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Richland Creek
9. River Basin: French Broad
(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.Lis/admin/ni ips/.)
Page 6 of 122
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: replace and widen Bridge No. 94
over Richland Creek
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: Heavy duty excavation
equipment such as trucks, dozers, cranes and other various equipment necessary for bridge
construction.
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: suburban
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 USAGE 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 future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application:
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
Page 7 of 122
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***
No Impacts

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, till.
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 FL'MA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.lema.kov.
*** 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: 0 ac
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0 ac
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear feet)
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
(please specify)
I relocation 260 Tirbutary toRichland
Creek 15 ft Perennial
I temporary
causeway A 0.029 ac Richland Creek 20 ft Perennial
I temporary
causeway B 0.020 ac Richland Creek 20 ft Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet belbre and after. and net loss/gain).
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. 11' 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 UY (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
\\ \rN\.us!.ts.Luv. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., \\w?\.toporone.coni.
\sw\%.nrip(jucst.com, etc.).
Page 8 of 122
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: N/A
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)
(if Name p Waterbody
applicable) Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
No Impacts

List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but arc not limited to: fill. excavation, dredging.
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
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): E] uplands ? stream 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.):
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
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.
The bridge will be replaced on existing alignment. The relocated portion of the tributarv to
Richland Creek was desiened according to "natural channel" design principles No portion of
the existing bridge will be allowed to fall in the water during, demolition
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
Page 9 of 122
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
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://112o.enr.state.nc. us/ncwetlands/strmL,ide.litni l .
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.
No stream mitigation required for this project. Stream relocation was done at a 1.1 ratio
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://l,2o.eiir.state.iic.tis/wrn/ilidex.hnn. 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
Page 10 of 122
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
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 E] 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.
7_one* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
cone i extenas out su tect perpenaicuiar from near nank of channel: /_one Z extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone I.
Page 1 1 of 122
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 213 .0242 or .0260.
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.
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.
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? 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).
?_?M 611-J(12 9--
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 12 of 122
iJ 76 -----
t?ralus
i
X?
,l
END PROJECT
Pw
. a , y C3
BEGIN PROJECT
?? 17 ? M j / Ham'
IWrbn vim'
12555 so 1 d 1267 / gyp
ny,? yan,eri 27
L At 74
It.
4?`' ( veos eao, rta
jl
J aU5
71 ? 119e ? 2D
11 7 Ma Rd
'-119? \
i
PORTION OF HAYWOOD COUNTY MAP
*6e`
fl?rlwl/
3-
l
M1 mwdsgon 11.% Kw
NAr 61 1 PARK
...
Ion._s0. 4LA roo C eel
1441 t ? °°''??_, _ ?
/?? -ton O All
W
s B U s N
Leicester
:rabtree ?-`??sh
?l m tffii
?Ol11it ?? •- ? i - it
srn. Cher Wi 1012 Rr ? e."Vail HIS
3 i
/5 ? ? ahr.ock ? 7 i rC ?`
QS Knob
hr 1 y SM [dal
® sam4 n old IS(s Min A Ir ('690i. ?- 1
23 1 ®* 74 illets .O ,? 0. Cruso y
1
IDi : Sylva ? , 1 Sunburst 270
1 1 ? ? Min
Green Webster NAT W„q-Rd
Creeik L 11 Gw
CUllowhe! • Cro aie a.
i I/CaY ,n East Laoort 1 362
Gac S f 'ter j y
PORTION OF STATE MAP
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
BJ944001(a-J340?
HR-IDGE '94 OVER RICHLAYL) CHEEK
ON US 19
WETLAND IMPACTS
it Ville
/ vol
1r • - ?, old
oun
i
4 Swannanoa
1 teen 8 0 7
r t
10 74A
25A Fa
14 4yland
Gorton
ti Arden
9
er F PROJECT
?TMountan
6 S
1wa iiw? 74 4EEas`
l? ?- 'V ? -?i? 11? • to ? r? ? ;:1? ,43:-+,?• .v ??? „J :i
C ?• O 1' QO ., i FultrSttal ? V t' ? ?.a ( ??-•C
1 1 r? a t s
',?• ? ..w i 1#09. ,- ^yG? r ,r;._ . ?.,' ?? ? ` ',?. ; {=
l,. • \? % SII
J . •/' fHiN
y ? t;.i. 't ? ? 'ate ? ? ^,?, • ?,;.
sm?,3? ce G • d,J
r ^F " ?- out ft ttlvtew IL ?i? d k a'6 t
!1 K.. ` t-2 rocs
ark
_ ., jA , ? ., Qt /y ,\ • v ?}" t alj.`? . ? ?'' . } ??. Luacl{lii
'?eilowslt D r 1 /?? ..•
%
l?,t"'?i.•'••ed 1 ".;ante 6ret11. '; j ' ??.? ?.. IIV1 - q ? 51 1 ? ? J ,1 P ,??+?',???? ???? ? ? , - ' ',(
eC 1 •«tt . « ' ulth s
C,
,N N•81 t K' }:?- s?+,'••..C T--_\ , fry ._ d 1.0 • r
r-' -.t ??• j r r?;t .n+,t a+' ` .r ?.te. 't , _. 1 I C- .i'
, j ?iHdk?esf,'Mem ? /' ,IIL t??,` ?"s i ? •'`r!sJ' '+---'`?-ay`L
01
. -'• • /- :rte \' ` 1 i +, / .? 1 ,
/.
loll
wE 0 S!TS
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAM000 COUNTY
8J9??;U, 9-33a?!
BHIOGF '94 (,), ,' R1Cht1 V,?, CH I <
k-I _rn1V8
n Z. z

YETLAND
LECu1?ND
-,-IWLB- WETLAND BOUNDARY
WETLAND
L
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
® DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
R
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
® DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
• CLEARING
FLOW DIRECTION
TB
, TOP OF BANK
WE _ EDGE OF WATER
--F - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
--F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
-? PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG - - NATURAL GROUND
--PL- PROPERTY LINE
-TOE- TEMP.-ORAINAGE
EASEMENT
- POE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- -U- --- WATER SURFACE
x x x
z x x x LIVE STAKES
x
BOULDER
•- CORE FIBER ROLLS

PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
C? SINGLE TREE
-(? WOODS LINE
DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
m2N RIP RAP
O ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
? PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE (PSH)
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
GRASS SWALE
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
BJ944001(8-3340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CR!_ EK
ON US 19
SCkE AS S`!OWN
S",f 3 LL.
70.00
?- 71.70 \
{ 3 .ao 72.50

+oa rw ttT
?
q.r .r nT ortt rw rtT 4G
OOtI rw riT
/ tro .ta '

O \

//
la rrNrl Orar4 ar,rt
u r ,rar .iar tot avtt
rev .atex aunt ?
nr rxo n oa 1615 . tie i
M V. Pr[
ar rrr
ro mra a urrrot O ?. . ...
rt .raro a+ra s ow.at
JI-Itt I I H
SHEET 1B
SHEET LAYOUT
PLAN VIEW
SITE 1
Si A, F N ___--
SHEET IC
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
BJ944001(8-3340)
BRICGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON Us 19
i
scA? as s +cwx sHEEr 4 or
30+00
-L-

EXIST.-1R/W
F
ROOT WAD (TYP)
CROSS VANE (TYP)
0
ZZ
LEGEND
?T DENOTES SURFACE
S WATER LOSS

SEE NATURAL CHAI
3.0 ft. BASE
245 LF cO.2C
EST 1150 CY DDE
ALL RADII TO CENT
HAYWOOD COUNTY
81944001(8-3340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON US 19
I
-,,'Ai ; N =. SCALE AS SHOWN SHf ET -5..Of Z

F-
W
W
S
Cr)
W
Z
J
U
Q

LEGEND
F,S ; S DENOTES SURFACE _ __ ---j
WATER LOSS
f N ==E'
U
W
W
2
Ul
W
Z
J
2
J
Q
SHEET IB
NORTH CAROUNA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8J944001(8-3340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON US 19
L SCALr- AS SHOWN /
Sh'?E1 ? OF

m
w
w
S
cn
w
z
J
S
U
F-
Q
(f) i

SHEET IC
LEGEND
DENOTES SURFACE o _
TS 7 WATER LOSS Sea[--ti
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8194400118-33401
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON US 19
sea 4S SHaVN
sHEEr I of 2z-
i I W
V) j I I C) Z
I ?- I I I z
z
W r
O l-(
---- ---
o -- --- - i---- ----cam w --- --
Z I U U
Q 7
U
W
Y?
I Z.
o
I ?? I I x J
? I 7? I w Q
I I
O I
I
-1 -
Q N I I?
f'? Z I I
I I
? I I
? I I
x I I
w I
I
I
I I
I
I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
I
I I I
O I I
r? I I I
O I
rh I I
I
O
---- - - -- I
O I I
I
+ r- .? ?-a? ---- - ---

f? I
I
I I
I `.
`.
`

I ? Il
I Y332??

I i
,
I ?
GNV?H Ia %

I

I
I I
I
I
0
I I i
I
I
I I
I ?
O I
O
1 I

I.

CNIJ
r? o6 z \
in
0 -
w \ \\
\
N O p O

iI)U??0 U
_w-V,NUi____
cN z N ii n W
O
uLn 2
a, Qww n \
?Ln 9iJJY O
V) V - W V) rr

Cl j I
c
j

- I I -
-
rY ? I
I I
I

w
I I
I
c I Nf I
Q I U
7 ? I d ~

< O I v - ?. _ - ?_L]
w
I c?
C r
(\ (\j
Ne j
U I X Z j tl d
L,. C) I L? l.) O C) I r a

I C Q C n
I O
a

CD
I
o ?-
c o
> -
v
I V) LL, m
O or- o jzz I ac)-- N n -' j
f I U; C7 I -j 1.- c

C NQ

O
r-
-
+ I ?_-?1-
O
? z

C
C
r )? O
n c"
) i
C
L, j
ur)
. I

-
O

L
V Nr` N

L(
\ -.J n \I
CL L??

N?
0

j Y
V O

O Z o o
O 3
o _
U ti ° $ U

Z ry °
a
LL LLI
°
0
C2

r

H
O
w

z

o a

u,
h
Q
a
3
w
V)
D
UU
Y
U
O
W ?
U
H Q
o
z o
o Q,
c
o?
a
zL
v) F
x R
W -)
L
J
L
L
n?
L
Q
L
V /
L
)

I i? I I
I I ?I
N I I ? 7

1
Z 2Y ?
- --- -
m
W - - -- -
CD - N I

z C 7 `•' Q I
Q Z O w

r? i
- I I
!- 0
o
I ?? I I
.I\ X J
w a
Q Q X
w
I I Z
O I Q
ck U

I
I ?
U -
O
o °
$ v
ct? C

Cc Or
x
?_
x I
I I I
I O
Z c
w I I a

I
I
I
I
I
I
w
? w

o

I
I I
I I
I ?
h
I
I I
I I
I
o I I
r? I I I
? M I
I I I
I
O I I
I \
} - - r- T - - -\\ - -- o

I
I I
I I ??
I I ONVIHJld / w
I I / z
- - - --- - - - - - - - - - -
I I
` N
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
?

i ?a
- I I
J
? ? I
( - - N]
\ y ? m
O? W
Z \ ?II

IIl
O -? O
Q
}
v
W

I,I
W
NO O \\
JO
O Q
? \
\ Ln
Ln 0 ~ 0 C7 \ I
U 1
lL

Mp -
Vi
\

U
O O
<u 'T WW a \ \ W
-
\
r--
?n oUJY
V1V-Wto O
cr
f
,\ \
?\
?. Q
LL.
lb
W
O ?

+ I
a
I ?
O Q
W

L
LI

?
Q I
j
I
Y
U
T (-D
- o
H- Z
U) -
p

.
\

a
ILL) V /

CD
z I

?
v O
a O
_j
t
w
Q? nC
Nr v;N
Y I --
u 5
w 0 I
1
T
Z CL d
a
o W ? 0
I W 0 U
W li I C-
_ H H Vl
I < - ?- H-
"
_ O
O O 0 0
Z Z Ul l
I Q C w w I
) _1 N
+
n
C)
` I r

I U R C?

F- ? I C

-?
N V
O
Ln Qi O
Z ?.
I _)
_ C ? ?n
W Y
rt I
_ O --
-

G.
N
lD
LP
Q Ld
CD
wo
V) rr
cn
Q
U p
W
LL V)
Op
n_
10
Q n'
?- n
W

J
W
J l/
7 3
J Z
O
J
j W
C co
CL
a
CL
Cr
In
Ln
a
U
W
O
W
CD
a
z
0
0
z
a
a
w
Cr
a
Ln Ln
w Z Z
O O O
Z
O O O
U) O
1 M N
Li
v i L.
al N Ln
LD v'
a N C)
W
a m
r >- i
a a
w w
Ln In
a a
U U
Y Y
U U
O O
CL Cr
i
NORT-I CAROLINA
DIVISION OF i?SywAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8.1944001 (B-3340)
BRIDGE OVER RICHLAND CREEK ON US 19
?. i
1
!'_ 2?
NCDOT Project I.D. B-3340
Haywood County, NC
Replacement of Bridge #94 over Richland Creek on US 19
Prepared by: Stantec Consulting
801 Jones Franklin Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27606
July 29, 2002
NATURAL CHANNEL DESIGN
TRIBUTARY TO RICHLAND CREEK
Right of Project Station 30+30 to Right of Station 32+55
Permit Site 1
The replacement of Bridge Number 94 over Richland Creek in Haywood County will
require that a portion of a Tributary to Richland Creek be relocated from Right of Project
Station 30+30 -L- to Right of Station 32+55 -L-, approximately 245 feet in length. The
proposed channel relocation is designed according to "natural channel" design principles
proposed by Dave Rosgen.
The Tributary's drainage area is mostly rural and wooded in nature. The stream was
found to be perennial in nature, having flow through the riffles and pools.
There is no hydraulic gage data available on this stream or on nearby streams. Current
discharges were estimated using the NCDOT procedures for rural watersheds.
EXISTING CHANNEL
A representative portion of the existing channel (upstream of the proposed relocation)
was surveyed in detail for the purpose of channel classification. The existing channel
was measured to have an entrenchment ratio of 16.73, a width/depth ratio of 6.68, a
sinuosity of 1.07 and an average slope of 0.002 ft/ft. A pebble count was preformed and
the channel was found to have a classification of sand bottom. The channel was found to
be a E5 stream type according to the Rosgen classification system.
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8J944001(8-3,340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON US 19
7
SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET LZ OF ? '?
REFERENCE REACH
The reference reach was surveyed in detail for the purpose of channel classification and
use in natural channel design. A 127 ft long reach was surveyed in detail. The reference
reach channel was measured to have an entrenchment ratio of 8.25, a width/depth ratio of
8.25, a sinuosity of 1.09 and an average slope of 0.023 ft/ft. A pebble count was
preformed and the channel was found to have a classification of sand bottom. The
channel was found to be a C5b stream type according to the Rosgen classification system.
PROPOSED CHANNEL
Based upon the existing valley type and the flood prone width desired, the proposed
channel design has a C5 stream type classification. Design data is given in the attached
table along with existing reach and reference reach data. A proposed cross-vane will
control the channel gradient upstream, while a step-pool structure will control the
gradient downstream. Mean "bankfull" depth was set at 1.30 feet. Above bankfull depth
it is proposed to excavate an approximately 35 foot wide flood plain (including the
channel).
It is believed that by forming a flood plain above bankfull depth channel stability will be
enhanced by reducing velocities for those discharges above the bankfull discharge. This
should lead to a more stable channel. It is anticipated that the proposed channel will have
a sand bottom. Maximum pool depths of 3.76 feet are proposed at outside bends of
meanders.
Sediment transport computations were performed, using the proposed channel geometry.
To determine whether the bankfull discharge would be able to transport the D50 particle
without excessive bankfull shear stress the stream power was analyzed. The stream
power will be slightly reduced from the existing conditions.
Proposed channel stabilization is shown on the attached detail sheet. It is anticipated that
channel banks will be planted with native trees and shrubs above bankfull depth. Root-
Wads, Rock Vanes, Cross Vanes and a Step-Pool Structure will be utilized to control the
near bank shear stress in the meanders, along the proposed roadway.
9
a
a
NORTH CAROLINA
DN/SION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
81944001(8-3340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON US 19
SCALE AS 5HOWN 13 22
_
SHEET - OF
a
C
F
r

f

N

X I
Q

i

I

I I
,

•
'
I

l

1 1
f
? .1
I . +
I
Y4

I ,
+
c
m

m .. + '
I
U ? ?

x • + I a

+
.+

+
+l
1
,
m ? co in a r>
Of Of m 01 01 ?
(4) Uopenal3
0
v
N
O
0
m
ci
c
9
O
c
c
U

0
0
N
OJ Q1

NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
BJ944001 (8-3340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER R/ChLAND CREEK
ON US 19
SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET ?! OF ??
Proposed Conditions
B-3340
Design by: Kevin Williams, PE
5tantec Checked by: Kevin Williams, PE

ITEM Existing ,
Conditions
Proposed Conditions
Reference Reach
STREAM NAME
B-3340
B-3340
Big Branch
STREAM TYPE E5 C5 C5b
DRAINAGE AREA (DA) 448 Ac 448 Ac 941 Ac
BANKFULL WIDTH (Wbk,) 10.46 ft 12.95 ft 14.30 ft
BANKFULL MEAN DEPTH (dbki) 1,57 ft 1.30 ft 1.73 ft
WIDTH/DEPTH RATIO (W,Wd,,) 6.68 10.00 8.25
BANKFULL X-SECTION AREA (Abkf) 16.39 ft' 16.52 ft2 24.80 ft?
BANKFULL MEAN VELOCITY, ft/s 4.20 s 4.10 s 4.76 s
BANKFULL DISCHARGE, cfs 69 cfs 69 cfs 118.00 cfs
BANKFULL MAX DEPTH (dm,,,) 2.67 ft 2.07 ft 2.80 ft
WIDTH Flood-Prone Area ('Wfp.) 175 ft 34.0 ft 44.00 ft
ENTRENCHMENT RATIO (ER) 16.73 2.63 3.08
MEANDER LENGTH (Lm) 16 - 62 ft 27 - 49 ft 30 - 55 ft
RATIO OF Lm TOWbk1 2-6 2-4 21-38
RADIUS OF CURVATURE' 4 - 28 ft 26 - 36 ft 13 - 23 ft
RATIO OF Rc TO Wbk, 0.3 - 4 2.0- 3 0,91- 2.79
BELT WIDTH 20 ft 52 ft 25 ft
MEANDER WIDTH RATIO 1.9 4.0 1.75
SINUOSITY (K) 1.07 1.11 1.09
VALLEY SLOPE 0.002 ft/ft 0.002 fUft 0.025 ft/ft
AVERAGE SLOPE (S) 0.002 ft/ft 0.002 ft/ft 0.023 ft/ft
POOL SLOPE 0.000 ft/ft 0.000 ft/ft 0.000- 0.003 ft/ft
RATIO OF POOL SLOPE TO
AVERAGE SLOPE
0.00
0.07
0.02- 0.14
MAX POOL DEPTH 2.06 ft 3.76 ft 4.80 - 5.10 ft
RATIO OF POOL DEPTH TO
AVERAGE BANKFULL DEPTH
1.31
2.90
2.8- 2.9
POOL WIDTH 6.32 ft 25.90 ft 30 ft
RATIO OF POOL WIDTH TO
BANKFULL WIDTH
0.60
2.00
2.07
POOL TO POOL SPACING 18.0 ft 22.7 ft 25- 62 ft
RATIO OF POOL TO POOL
SPACING TO BANKFULL WIDTH
1.72
1.75
-1.7- 4.3
Due to mature vegetation root mass in the Reference Reach's side slopes and floodplain, the
reference reach data will not be matched in proposed design. The use of a higher ratio will allow the
meanders to be stable while the root system is established.
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
81944071 I8-33401
BRIDLE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON US 19
SCE AS SHCWN SHEEr L 5 OF ?Z'
a a-
° - o
¢ o
?m o n¢, r
z o o°
O zs4?
U
JWS om
Q V1W_
W L-JZ
Q Q
OUWN
Ld >-
Z W ... wao
o?
~Z= m«m
QOW- -`i
S W m ; O
u(A o«
00 c Z? °v
O uo wW
cc
4
4 o $g
0

Z
O ° n
N
LLJ
J VI iw$
_
Q J_ uo ?.
Q 2
W
o
U _
O
uu
a w
J > o me
W 1-
Z
Z O o
Q W?
2 V1 c
U O o
CL
O
2
0
a _ ¢o
0
m
a
0
4
i
N
2
m
W
3
2
V
a
0
4 J O Z
W
F N W ?
¦ J
0

O o
N
? m Z-
Oyu
O? o%
¢N
N

w °
a Z
ow
z
w o
¢ oz w

o W
m o
z
o o

o
m a w W
u ?
a o ? ?
"
i
o
0 N ?
4 °v_i J
? iW
o?
0
o m .
i

`
" o? wd

3

N o

'

4
oo

ar

¢

?_

4
o
v°i o7 .
¢ i
0>"

?
N 0
u? Q
<
Y Q
¢

O OJ

O p ?4
U p
O ¢w
LL ¢ Z

W
WU-8 V I O _
m z
N
m
> > O W
O LL S yz1
S Z
N Z
W
1-
O
z Z ¢ O ?- i ?
Q-0
L C
7
?

z
V

O
I- z -
U g z
W - a
N
4 N

z -
Ln
W
Lil
Q C ? V)
- } W
U
In 4-
Q
D O C' O

X. c?
3
-I z
s w
? w? a
cr w

u -
n
/

5o U
5 Al. =c--- ----
i?
1
z
z
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
81944001(8-3340)
BRIDGE '94 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
ON (IS 19
SCALF AS SHONV
SHEET ) -? OF 2 z-

J
g
LL

N O
LLI
Q J W ¢ ~2 U
0mzO V)0 3o
F WZM
M
0-jzz
?=w?UZ m?0 ZO¢w0
¢U> WWW • OF -z
mawma¢mF=--QJ O Ow4- ¢OOQJJ +1 0 -1
Lu H- F-JZ1'¢HN Q3= QLL
=6 >-<Z ONW X wY=
F-- LL J "= = lLF-wZNY
N OOF-= WA e=F-J4J 000a U
w LLJ UUJ zw 04- O mYQ
¢ O ww=JwQazwm Z2N Zm
D ¢O¢NN¢mJWF- O "W=)
F- wwF-" 3w ?{?tt11ZX MW S¢w
U OF- OZ SLU030 F 2F-F F-m
7 F-OLU rr¢F-SmFF--U++ aF-?-?
¢ O=0 W F- w 4• J OWJ
F LULL)-WoF- amZf7 -j LL LL F-=J
N S UQQWaWZo O <O-ZF-Q
LU F- 0 ~SQJZ30z<-IONJ yY "in CO
3 z~OaH=QN(/?ZM=F- HDWZQS
-joomoF- 3 12 W =F-S°=XZ
O JaUi Wry O ]=L
O ¢ J W OLLLt¢ U ox WOO
¢ ow6_Jm 07 - ¢NO WQwmF-
0F- wwowF->¢ azmm
LL owW J¢OO=NOM Ow F-WW
O W?m((cn]]JOO¢F- aQ I=--M WF--•F=-
Z mOJQWWmMow w21Z"z
W J j3 >aF- F-m W"W"
cc ON?Qw"?"J ¢i=ODz
L30 WOJIW 20 0 LL F- W
W W>mJm F-
Z ¢S W M O=¢ M" m wU
W=WF-¢> ¢WF-w mm "JSQ
¢ F- F- F- o F- aUa F- O N J F- a
~w°O°Z=MOOOIL 0 SOF--ON=ZOO
QOLLQF-F-¢»aQLL F-F-NaNriU
¢
w
F-
w
Q
M
J
Q
N4-
Q 4-
m O
Z
24- ?N
p/
H LL
m0
??
Q = W
w 0 f Q
> Z O U
Q w N
O
J
a
Q W
x>
N Q
x ?
N
0 0
Oz
J Q
¢ i,
w4
0
O LL
LL O
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
81944001(B-3340)
PqIDGE '94 OVER GUNPONDER CRfFK
ON US 19
;o _ o0

4, 5"'Wq
7
hE ` 0? -
E
H
Z
Q
J
CL
Z
0
H
F-
U
W
U
N
0
LL
U

v
?p
8
J U.
q y O LL
a m W w
_ W ?

I w z
mo
lU I ? Q
¢W
m NW
ZY
m
W
H
Z
Q
J
n
W
H
Q
Q
Z
O
H
F-
U
W
O
cl)
w
O
J
O
m
W
Z
O
F -
c/)
J
cr
W
H
Z Z
W
Q
LL! Y
Z
F U
U) O
O
Y
U
O
J
J
Q
w
O
Z
i
Z
W
J
U
O
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8J94400118-33401
BRIDGE '94 OVER GUNPOWDER CREEK
ON US 19
5 !
Z z
o o
N

"Z a
g
W I
J w 1111
wai n ?
? W )?i?ll
>co Ei
¢ O r 11
w
O ?+ Q > ca
CL ¢d m " ,p s
ll
O > ?
?

r
u? ?1
r

?ql o
Iui om
III m
I Y v a

o¢om
¢H¢
o J
cc ¢w
w w w 2
ogo
u.au.U
SHEET a OF 7-7 "
SCJ-- - AS k Wti
?¢ w A
ra zQ `_

r-
O
W
Q
m
H
LLI
w ?
z Li
Li
J
C`i Q
^> N
U)
0
O 2
w?
N ?
0
a
°J?
d J ?
O Z ?`
M Q
0 r
W r-
N G
O ?
O J ':
CJ?
Oz
a?
C) =
w
N G
O 3
cl-
0v
'Y
C-) Z
C
? W
r- J
N W
Q
Q
Z
O
H
U
Lu
U
m
Q W
W ] 0 Y
W O U
HJ 00
NW wfr
O
Z
O
H
U
W
U)
U)
U
W
F-
O
O =
W LL U
O = In?w
LL ZF-p0pG::
3::Z <-
LL) Q?QXWW
zYcr 0 2
OUW
UOQ F-- LL
Of Qx 0
?a?a?z?z
Q Z??a- w2lLJ
> Z?W Z?=LL
Y
Q N O - U
V) O ~Z ZU
O QWmOwJa?Q
JI-CO
U =Q]QN? Q
Z
LL- U w= w:?E w 0
?
O=
0 V) ?F w O V? T:
?mU-) O rz
O Z= LLJ
J?ZZD
J
C ?LLJ <L m?Z
J 0LLJ J Q Uo
V) Ox:2jO7- Z
z _, LLJ Lil = z In w 0
J aL
NO
Q?IZF - co
=COQ V).Y JW
V U> U J U
W I,
000
- ? Z Z W ? 2 _i
JQ0Q0_ V)c-
z F-0? -7Q?
L1 V)Q Q (") W V) V1
c.Y>>- F-YY
F-UWSWODU
O_i =000
QQ_L,I<F-L,- --(I-
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
/ I
L'
?t
7t
i
I
0
---
S-4L_
HAYWOOD COUNTY
81944001(B-3340)
BRIDGE •94 OVER GUNPOWDER CREEK
ON US 19
'k[ AS SHC h
SHEET l OF Z
o=
LJ r- ~ aw
li

NO r-.
U
N Q W N
O3Y
0?..
a W
o? HU
0w0
?-JW X zmQ?
aZ) , °z
0

O Z 0
?
m 3
?
- Z
O ;z
O
N l.. r- N
O X Q N w j W
Wf
N O rQ NWQ
Q
J
o 3 N Z° m w /
O
J W
a
?? mQ
W
° Z ~ J W
-
< -
M m V Q w
N J
W ?
Z w
O Y -?
W 3
O=
Wr- F-Z
NQ Zw0
ZNJ
!n
03
co li.
UNV'Z
a
OJ Ow
> ]G WO
li UVf r-.
a j O m O X
Q
w m
>
E

w
° rQ a

Or^1?
J
z
z
M Q r haw

\ m ?
W
H
Z
Q
J
d
W
oc?'
?c
Z w
_ mN
S
7
N u1N
"u-
(, Q 7 O
0-j-
cr n
N Lj
L'i M
? m w Z_ w
O
0 =? 2 a
w1: - QO

J
H
Q
LLI
D
J
O
O
CL
C
u1
Cn
W_
E +
Q I}
> LI
F--
n+
w 4-
r') C\
C
C
0
N
Z
w
a
N
D
Z
O
C?
J
Q
F-
Q
z
_z
V;
L-L Q-
r
c
J _I
Q LLJ.
Ciz0
F- Q F-
Q=o
Z U m
W
_J
I-
X
-CL W U
?rr
Om
4- Lil Q
4- C-D. Li
l/)+
U W 4-
rr, M
00 Q CV
Q >
LL I
2
0 ?
Z
O
M
U
W
U
O
U
O
U
W
J
H
u-
O
cc:
EL
Y
Ll.
L'i
Cr
L?
G
Q O
F-
-? o
n
I
w
a_ H
J
Ln C
Q
J
U
W
Ln
Lil
O
Z
St.r t Of RICHLAND CREEK
NORTH CAROLINA
DNISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
8J944001 f8-33401
BRIDGE '94 OVER GUNPONDE-i CRtEK
ON US 19
SCALE AS SmV,Y ^

SUMMARY OF AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS
NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HAYWOOP COUNT1
8J9440014i 1540
WWI '91ObtR Fr'r+,av.'! C tr.
CN U `1

TRACT NO. PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS SITE NO.
cu
O
c
F
u . N O

76 N C\l
co
Z (n 0 N
rn a ? ?i
C C v
cow O
H .N N
L a "
E
N p
c0
N
a U
a

Ir -
Q aW m
lLi O
3 Vic" o

w
U
U<

m o ,-
C o ca O

LL
c
c:
v
LL? ° °
Q

?
C C -8 U
N L L cU
U ?v? o

Q
CN
O
_
cu
25
F- a x 3? " o
w c

w

g y

= v
CL LL c °
Z 3
)3 o

W
N
c

LL j O
C
O Q
_
CL m m

H
m co cn
ir >
N
U) U
Y U
C V
O Y
O
L
U ? OC
Lo
Lo
C O
O C N
E
O
O
U)
O

O
co
a)
Z Q
O

?? I I
a?al
?I ?alaa
t il: m ran
,
ly ?I Ni i
a? i I
I i
m
U
O ?O
ko
v?
L L
-r r2?
0 Qj
m?

O
w x
d
o x
x w
W
z
ao
a?
i
o

z
O Er
a

W N
?
V Z
e
z x ?

O V
?
Q

?
o z
S

O a

O w
A z

3
O

U
O 0.
1-4
SNV7d &M--4O-114J16f WNU
y
m?
x ?
4
v
s
xl? 1\1
?d
Qh

eo o?
ax

O I ?
Z
? a
w 0.0e

p
?
W h
2; ti
Q
h q yl
Itr w a

al ?,
4I ? ?
w ? ww
AW
?z
a ? cw
I
Z I 0.lti
!
A? ?Iw
A ? d'I;
W

i 4
?
' 4 o a
^?
8 ? ?
]
I ?L I
ail .'?4
2
i
? r e
u
o
4
x
? ?ol
q
?
y p
o
? ry l Q? O

I V

r ?
0 ?
0 F
0
CC,
II
r
P
'I
r
P
II
r
m
m
N
P
?

G
E. a °
d a o

LL LL F
N

LL LL
o Z
J
Q
`
Z Z ~

e
8 ° k

Z H N
^ _
C

? n S
j N
T .
a ?
P `O O
H h
II II II II II II

<
<
O
r >
y
Y Y N
rw J
~ J
z a
?.
] Q

...
u
v) IBS
g o z

a J
b b : b
? Mo
O
•
??

V ?a
. d

100tpt6l"g

I
Fr
U
w
U-i
z
6
Z
w
J
F-
U
LL
OC
mm
D
N
11
w
vi
I I ?..? I I t <;?.1
it
I I I I ? ` ?;i h
\t I I I I ? L I ?:?1
pin O?
I ? I I I I j? C
I I I I I I ( ?.1 (-
I
Z
CL
Er °
O
C
1 °
.0-
c `
N C D E c c
c' o O D E
° y " 0? E E c y o E
m ? Q (? lo u to t° V a ? 3 to V)
W
N
J
0
m
J
Q
Z
0
Z
W
Z
0
V
W
Fit
)"1
O
C7 G)
O
aa

O`
to
-0 d
?
Cwt

n

y

n

°
°
°

7

u

e

u' E
o
t

0

1

- cr)

d

v

0

)

d

m F

°

t

j

u

m

i

t

'

p

0

U-
L

o
.

'-
p
`

-

w

D

O
N

Y

r

T

i

T

i
O

l

C D

e

W
? ?
I q"
I ? ? Y
I N qI
I ?
I i
I ? i
I ?
? ?

w
vi
C to
'
, ;
a
C a w t
Z
O
w w T
0
O ?.
V r N C O N w
« U a t'

= N V O
y 3 O V C L `7 o V V ? w
d G) N V 0 O
L a W V C V t W rn

a? C
v
m C O
o 0 2 ' Q.
c
c o °? J C O
L ? G)
F- N C
o '0 t
a 0 O v c
J J
°
0 3 3 0 'n p C7 0 o a 0 ~ LL f o a
3 -O n - - a 'a _0 a 7 ~ -U LL -0 _ -0
c «) to m
a '° yd-•
O 'p
G) r0-•
O
?
4) t
O
N 0
O ° v)
d c C
G) O 0 O 0 O o G)
°
3
?- O
- ,F
o ° rn m a m o M o rn o m o m ° o
O , o o E c
y 0 0 O d G) N O
0 o o 0 G) y G) y Q! C X S C
w 0 to w 0 w
I 0 in a 0 0 w 0 ce 0 w 0 w Q w
?q
O

H
L
V)

J y
v

v) m

Ln

i v
O
O
3 o
L
`
O °,
N
C
> °
C
0
L

r^ I a' oGJ
_J I
ti
? I ? I I I I.
W
O
O "
C
O O `° v)
y c m c c
1W •o o v o v° E
N C co O m :) c *E
Q
S 2 O- N
° C m
E 0 m y c w
c V) m; A C 3 3 C
c -' al 0 C E C E °l 0 o to o
c a w ' v
0 4c) o u r L)0 Z E c ?-0 w 1
-j z
O C c J N d a y 0 d C , v N S a h
in O O •X 0 0 O 0 d •X <<C> 0 0 K
p
0 o
N U F- U d' a- a w m CL. d C. <L w= < J CL w I
I
l +4?fio?rOO??cs00H n1®?o? pD ooh
I
J
V_
t
vj v o c
W o
_ 0y
C 0 of 0
a = x ?j ?-
d = 3 ° d " x o c w
o o 0 to m o o c= ~ 0 c r O m° m° a U° o
m-
° N G) d y y d d G) y= S ' O O o G) G) C € ::E ° •v c
0 CL d o o vvi d C N U L> O O m0 C O f° ° 3 `y Vaf V
c t L S L L d a ?. N c L L m C G) G) ?C C 0 G) v)
"' > 4) C13 rn G) G) 3 3 N -Gal C C c N? V 3 0 O ci O c ?? O G) N c L > .0 c 0 to to ° o N a o O- C
w ad o v 0) 0 0 0 4) (v ' 0 0 0 0) o al u o f 0 E J v al 0 3 ?' p l1 J
O V C a a IL H F- a F- O d C= s ?° 3 1 S ° y w
Z v m > N ri N a y ri al -0 v 0 v d CL D °' z ,i 0 al "" v° `- € Y m m_ c°
=
< G) a O O > x O O. X 0 N O >. v ?x 0 O ) ? ° 0) I o o ° ° N O O ° o -0 y•- 01
U-- O IZ W W CL W d w d F- J U J J= In W N d F- U J= d a. 0( H 0- LL F- :D N
I I I I I ? I I r•--)
11 i ??? ??
q a

w
'
o
L
y

C CD C a
>
U _
iL I
) C J! o
L
L W m
V) W a) LL-
a
>
Y a c 3 .
a° o
E o J ' - E
N V) , O
v a S
; O 0 C
0 C 0
Gl C
0
O
i•? o o , a -
° ?c0 - a a `n C
o to to 3 u m S U E

_
Im O O O O O O 0
j " O > >
W V d 2 m a d U Lo CL W Cl-
0
? w d c y
` n, a y Qc1 J J
G1 0 0 - E C t
a a d a 41 C
° C u s m m ?$ E E
0 00 ' 3 3 c_ c_ " V
"- C C C C " y
CL
< J J O W W
J m V t a1
V 2 a
!•? no 3 a 3 0 3 a a J o C
o 0 °
3 v O 'o
O ` O O O V 0
O 0 0 0
S r. 0 N °
u o? s C s y c 0) E CL' M*
E E
y rn m. o rn »- o o "
c 0 2 u V to H a-
G"l 'N a o. o N a a s o.
oo x O O V •X O •X O O O
LLJ LLJ m a_ w d w a m d
"
O t n
v 3
O D
o
3 o U x °m
A
0 E
0
= °
m
>. N o 0 3
O 0
m C F-
m
0 C
° •
o 'c
o
o "

m c °).
c c
3
y
E m
Q a y
m a• ? a
?° ° 3
°` o
v
0> a
0 '^ c E d
C° 0 _
O O m

°,
C
N ii, <L 0 o N
o d m
m
t
t U-
r
-a
R?.
vi
'J ee
?? ar
GW ?^
?Y
r?
oZ G1 ;;
ff
9
R
I r I
I t: Iw

m mJ umi0 WO •O
w? F?c •a
. w- W? m md.
o ?
og ??
w
m w N ?w= ;
--?
W
J
>< w
in
<nn .
VI
uwin6 r
O U C
Q'U °m
CJ O m
O O
00 ?Om m
W ` ¢
M w
U m mN myo is z,°n` <i°n "' . ¢ n
W uv??
omm ui
om uv,'1
om1 uw
om uei`
111 m m m

m
W
a SO
<w JV FNJ
<wg H<
<w

= !-?,mL
i..

= f?
?m

= H?J
?o
ui
°? W
m <
o

o k
m

w
ao ao
?w i
iz< oti
7 i o
°?w ao
iwa m < a
_
Ko rv

oY um?
o?i <i amwn
o?<o mm
K? nm ?o
oo=i w w
S s
a ?
? °
5 s
0 i
mQ 1 Qe

o? :5 a«i S

U U V O O w w d ¢ ¢ N 3

Q=

> o ? ? l- t
T I {F, r s
25

? ?
a_ ?
? R G{ ?
>
I ri
N
O
F I
?

r ly
? ? N
I
I
G I
N R
I ?
W tl
>I
I c?
a ? S
I
? S 2
F 6 r
LL ? r V7 I
R ? pW
e~r?i G
N
H
la
?I
?J- -46)
> I IHrS s
T
I 7
I
O
1 ACI. ?
k
I
I
I
-?al
.p, -
110--
- -

I T
I yy?_yy
2
? I •N ?
1 lL 41
`? O
I i ?yf1
I •
? ? R
v'
?D
C
I
I ?W
x

l°l
?
a 0
Q,
Z
I
I ? i
?
I
I
I I
I?
I
I ,
I
I -
I
I
g
a
1lL?IKTR1?/?RYArph?•LLb70ubV 1MR
own"
W/K W
_IA
„
i
i
I
0
am
Y
O
3
a
U.
a
LL
0
a
z
o?
ux
xx
H
00
/z?
1+1 O
oU)
?A
3
?I tl?
I
m ?
W
U
u
7
i
e ? F p
m
a

? 7 7

1# k

tl
3 a ? 8 J 3 8 5
g y/71
y3 0 ICY( 1
(

o 5t
?

J
F
a
2
F
a
0
a
h

7

e ? 18a ? a

l
e
Y
?xx $
?8 R
S „
ti a
LAI 5 y
?
Q ? a
3
y
LL
O ?
y{3
6
$D ?
H
Y
6
h
P
FE

11011 011A O bald 3d14 NOIN11'ON00
2l'M'0111'0 .1. 1011"1100ON00
3212 1'ON 1A701la 11319 VW3
w

i - -
M'M'all N3A00 on 3RVbd H N

11-M Ho 1/on 'all 1111

11-0"O1131011Nr1
N - -
a '
'
'
'
"Noto
M
Oll
/
0
y
?j 910"W ItM Olt of

54i
u'M - - - - -
all 131VYO OW HIM 3MA I I M I a ¦
V

31YYD MLM .",IBM ion
t* all

aon*011131YY0 Ow NIVAa1wf'1'a'¦
- -
` U"I Oil JLVWV HIM BMW 10R
2
KMY011'M'OU.0.3dA11'0-?
-
W
h it III 11011 001 'O1t.1..WU Ia'R
-
-
Q 51-0"tlOlro"O1t.V.tU1'I'0'¦
Q.
- -
-
-
11'M Oil 31VNa ORV 31WN!'1'0
- -
0 Il'M'all NO1'M'Oil 'la

All a - - - - -
-
- - - -
38
K W
uar/u YO Ual an a> -
131J
m
U
0 • L?OIY OMY/II ? a
g?
!
?
52 I
11 mrN.1
M
?
B BB
tl U 111YN1 AI M>YI Yl1 - - Y
D 7
ee ? .>V
3dk N1YN0 301301
3" Perm 3011.11 - -
3du N0'tl0 3aa .11

for
tr
for

H
k '
uo -z AA

IN'

? M.

V

a °@? ? aa3 ae - RC 3g

MUM IdOM u

"IVA3111103AM
1? y1 p
q
q qa p
Q
%1 'A
q p
q Q
q
0
r
®¦ tyI
y
MOIIYNV 1N3N11
q q i y
0 I? l e
0 y
q 10 Q
q g
q 1 y
6?
+
f0 A?1 1
0
NOIlYN01d01 p r 4 p h till"

'ON 31.IIaaNIt Ol 1 I a . R ? 1? I R- I
Iwa. . s ? p o ^_ R
10 WIN'S 0 NalYJ01
? ? ; t t? t ; ti t

NOILYIt yy11
.F Q S
# * 't
1 pi
0 F R lip ?
A 7 p
f
R R
'?
LL?
w?
y
z
u
S
3
pb
.
H11
HI
fill
i I r,

777
C7
? ? ! s

? ?
1
AA
c a
?g ! R
F 8 E 8 ?

A !
K' C8 87

j ? ? ? Cr a

p agaq
A Qsl
3l R
? a ss es

i
tr v W v)

03

Z a

?
w ? !? f.

W 3z tx`

0
0-
In _
w

5z
s/
I 7'I
I ?l
I \
4
?g
= W
{LJ O
g?
W W
r
z
I I ?
I ? I
I m I ?
I t? I
?! I
CL I_ _ J
,!y a s
II ?
45
i I cz CL a-
I?I
?*00.00
M?(GH
rl- r__ Lo NI LQ N ?I NI NOI I I I
I`II II li ' j ! I!
?

!III I
I' I I
II I
I. I{
! t
1 1
I
..
I
1
I !
j
L
a
.
0
.
1 . ; I 16 ? r s ' Ho1 0
I I I
II
L'!II
ii : W..: t z 01,00+ ti
N

I
? and
:W AV WAM

i:, - 0,1

I
it

II { II
I Iii'
I lip

4
to

.I

.,

tD
N
, I
•
III lilt .I 'I ' I'I ?
I
4-4
0
$
III : C% J O
O
; N
t l
1 1
1 I

' ! I?::n
?J
9E 4
5'Z
f 'Y?? LO
N
- - - - `-1? x > - -- - -- --- - -Wow
l
'Il? I i
!III ?i t I
;!
Sm W.
III, , { III ! li ? ..
Zw 'Z '00+ O
! nd v
-
T
T
i!
{
1 1
?e
I
1-
j

I. _ ... .

O
u', O

I IG
Y- 1

I
I 11

f

.

?y

-

M
N
1

{t'
.00 +
O

°" I:nd N
1
?
v
rr ale
AY
OC49
N
Il ll III ..
l
l IP
II!I III! ! il,
.
t?!
Ill, S 9'£ 'Z. 9 '6b+
M07

'1 III
'
it
II
I
!
9'f
L;
'Z
01
+
±

l ,
?_.-
II

-

!

-

'-

t
-
I/
7Y
l81
- -

_

-

-

-' - N

q g l is sz s Lb+

'
li Li
it
;
I Ili
I
iI
I. O 1 -:
. op-
N .
.. - - O
I II I I I O

? ` { f_1
I I
1
I
I
--?
-
-
- +
N
1
II
I
!; Iltl
t
lid
;: - .77 -- -
I

t { !

I I
lI
'

'

'
I

°
. 1 : I ; .1 ! C '
! , . ; • i'¢e `z o 'oo+ o

III
11i II'j
I;;?
III{
illl
:C1
I!'
?I
i
1.
l:ia
?I?
'
:
d
lnd +
I 1 , , 1 ,

I , I
? ?•--?_-
I ,? any
F I I _h , I 1.,
;lil j 1! I 1 __

1 I i;i N ? 1 I
! " I I - , -- O
j O
r !;I h ;;l W MOI -
o _ - _ ?t
?i I{II ili
. ?'. .?i
1:

it
I J I 'I'j
i W i
W O
,Il f L 'z b(' 00+
O
I) ,III 1111 0?d

I I

O
I: I +

' l I

? I 1.1. I

11 1

t

I

' ,
l

, 1 I.

' I

i
obi

..
o +
I
µ
' i 1 I .. 1. 1..• 1 I .- - -- .. - - --
. : 0
. 0

f; ' I t
?
p a.
r
l I - -
t ;;i f l-!': A
1
:14 0

O Ln O in O u'f O
M VUNO
Willem
n to
QW ,.fir
a`
? o? ak
o_
n_
rI
S?T
?Qd
Z L

: }? f121 4?I

U -

w
In
w
'^
V

9

?

o I
tP a a

m
OO? cq W)
li.. I arc •V LS 9 TO
Mk)
CIO
o
LL
"
4 8 In o / -
J O II i ?? ?
b n' a
02
m a
1 or
O I I r? I
r
al ? ?V q a
r' I
1
It;
GjA A A A A AG
?Qo?tia4j
ages I
lla SZ'OBU w I'
INW~
by f6'Ct+B I
e j r
v}???jh 6-1
(?jA AA I l ??? I?gIII
II l?? ?% o

w
k
W
a a a

P.R;
01 A9 T I
so I I('
I
7
© ?a
'so
I \? aR
4- s
114 ? ?\
I
Op?? .rte ` Qv e ?
410,V4
-r?
jU
O i
s? F
aig?a
e
Og
I
J?
I
I' .1 I
1i1 III
ILI;
Ilj ,:
? II ;
+I
II
l ; I
illl
I;i
I
I
-
_ _:

IT
I'i_ III

Il I .

jlj II

I I?

? i?, I !

I I I .:
' I
II I j I
li '
l 11; I III .: .:
:' .
1 J ::
I I
?II
jl L I
I I
III II
,'. ; 1'l
_ I11 i j. I
i 1 II
II
I? 'i

!,I I I ?? I iI till : - - - - - :
1. ..
1 I IIII jjl jlll II:I t ? :: : ?. ..
II i I! I
-? IIII y 1 - - 'B1 o'C ' I'S . 'ON M S IV"

I it it I

III

II
Llll ?'?;

trr II
i Ij lljl
II

, l

.
Ill{

I

1
I

j

. 4 Z' 0 'Ob*
OA
---
J I 1 I

- I 1 4 I
I
I
I
I I

I I I
-
i I

?
I
'.r_
j I.
1 .- -.__
Q,
4 .
I
1
II
II II 1 I.1
IIII I.I i t i.I I I I I I I 1 1 I ? , . ?
?

ma ii i•'I. II?.
i
, , ?. i 11 ;.i ,.I ?, ? w
,
y
L+ l^j
,T
' ----
I i I
I II;: » i i l
I'
F 1
,J
1
11.
I Q
ti
01

/

? i
'
. .

14N I.j?l ,41I
II
II i

.III I
'
li

Itl
'il
1 1I

I
1111
l

I

1
i
?

.,
,
Il
i.
li
.1
I

_

-

--
1
3 II I,tl I? I I. III
- ,
-
-
--_

I I I- I IIII
I I
;
.
. Z
I t
I ?
a o y
qr:
N

l

cr
a
it
cy. a
u
li
-
---
-- F{71F
I
i a }

l

?

l l „ 7

. 7
--r

E'
Ct Z

I
00 It- r__ w to Ln IS)
I I OI I I I
NNNNNN N
O
O
+
M
O
O
M
M
O
O
N
M
O
O
M
O
O
+
O
M
O
O
+
Ol
N
O
O
00
N
"I 'Q 'N3 0 N051... tl3tl
..?:JJO I.I,I). 1111. •itl 'I.IR303Jtl1d3tl?J ?\?i??
M MIJ?0
i4?10./10
0
z o Yz
t

i i
7 ?
z
"
C
d 3 a
oW a Q. Y a

0 Duo
0

S? mot
ILA
O r

0,(; ?0,
?a
// yZ
14 '11,
? 1 1
may, g 4? ? 111
ct:
8??y g~ 111 !I
2 yrr?'6 VJ? T ` 11
Q rs° .$m J I i
I
41
e
,I
? o
oe m in
w?
Y? ng I,
$? .rl1l
? 11l
jl tl 1 II 1 vt? ? ??,
:Qo ti?N ?8 `? ? Ig
r ?I
.. l?9 JSI I
?U,
;1?1. Gin 1 yt?p'ti ?a
,40.i11C°a.8RYIrSm d?I
<s :v'
LUI LI,9 rYU LB SINJn
s useio ?mLm nu. au
01
4
?, 11 r`' u I
1 I, S
1 1 11m ???
1503111
'?111Z111 ?'
I
I 1 X111 /
W I V'
i
J
1
WGII C R
I
I- b
? 9W ?L
p w -
_Cj111 1
cc40v R
1. u-
?untln
®C Ifl' CM01 0 ? 111 ?.
lgi
I ^y
I? t
I gl

II Ilfy? ?J ? ' ? I
?® fir{ e y W IIII
3a ? + ?
p1 / ? nt I
oc
1?93
so- ~
C W ? ?w ? ? I I
Wd?? I a L I W` O /
t~ p&'
J
I ? J ` I ? d 1"' pry
I 8Y n1ma0? 6
Ills 9
fI1
?I!
0
,o

I I I
I?I
j' Ill 1 III
lilt IiI I
I' IIII I'll
I''
-I '
I
? I
I

I'
?

_

_
__._
LII I I I,. tl
i!1 I ?t l il.l I
',: I_ I ,1
I
I it ,i! I
1 I I I??I jlli if
11 1 1 I l.i.
I ? x+41
1 t l I; IIII

?I, _i?-i. l I 1
77 i -_ ' -- -• -- - -:- '----

II
Ii -?--
I IIII rllt -i:; O+
L

1
li Illl II

I
\_?)

I

?? W

1 - -
-
N
I I II '
j 1
I I I
i

''

it i +
I - -
. .
y :

}1 I I _ ? - -- - -- --
0
! 0
±
I,?:I ill
Li `-' ?-I IiI
I li
?• 1 i I
I I !II: 1 I
.\ . mo,-
:, ?
. c
Q
M
IIII
I I " / _

lI _T O
II

l I ii ill

J ?

?
---
- 0
l
I ?I ! I'? ?1 N. Ill +; n ? :?

j?1 I

ljl 1'11 11111

ill'
1
ti:

W L

a

- LL

-

-

0
? m
I I I! '?ii
t. l I?l tii? I !ii IIII
I±I \ it
rill ' -- - - --
It I III :I
1 I I
. 4
t
-v n frn'
+n
- I i
--
-L
-
-
-----
I l I'
11. 1 :I ? 0
l ,_-I ,l, III: o
hJn ,
[V in
; [`IJ : kV M
,
! LV 7 77 T
77
i - IIII I I ; !' - - -- ---

f_ 1d1i"11, Ili i

i;LI LII 1 ICI
I
1
poh .I
,: I
?Ej'
f .-.ti
CIn
C p
?.ID t1'l
Q
..
--
l I t ' t1J "? (V [VJ N [11 1V? ' : C1 J O

l i ttl l I

,
" -
+
C
?T a;
di is I
. .
(I ! ill I? I
t'1 I II 1 .I

IIII

'l 11

I' '
' 7-7
0
i
I L
I I ! ' Ll I
{ II,I
i.
II,
? +
M
11, t
j ' IIII tltl
I { 11.1
l I I
:
r
I
11 I
1 I
I I 'I't
yl .l
j I
( 11
ill, ?S?
:il
_

1

E
1
I
O
O
11

Jill
I L ,
t

CO

l
it, 1i
l
11 I ;LL :1

1 IIII II it III' 0

1 i I!II
1
1 ti
M
I 1
1 -
IIII I
l
Il
l .
i II fill Ili
la I ':1 I ;:i11. 0
Iti rll ?; ?'
br
'd ro

:
j 9'd! 'Z 0 `09+
?lAd
I ? I +t I t ,
l I 1 It O i 7 77 - O
O
?I' III ti i It 6C'z 5 Z 4 100+ ?

1
1' 4f
`iIY
i S
1I .
I
17 !ql

. 111'
T.
jl I'Ji l{ I I 11
III
u 1111 1
1 111 I
1 I lL Ii ll I l i, f ' t
I I
1
II 1t
r1 I
V
. ?_ I II
tj
,,1
+'
,-i_
tl-
`

Ili l:I?i IiI- '
I 1 I II J 111 t !''
lil ll .i tit
.. _
. -
III 'I ?' II.! l.J iil '1!1 _.
In 0 U')
m a) co O
co Ln
ti O U'1
l0 O u7
CO L O
Lo
?OiD?iID\lOU?e
MY 107770
. rv

US 19
Haywood County
Bridge No. 94 Over Richland Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRSTP-19(2)
State Project 8.1944001
TIP Project No. B-3340
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
021660
y Cis- C
DATE /,?cholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
r
DA E William D. Gilmore, P.E., K/knager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Branch, NCDOT
US 19
Haywood County
Bridge No. 94 Over Richland Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRSTP-19(2)
State Project 8.1944001
TIP Project No. B-3340
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
DECEMBER 1999
E A
4 4.r'z?
Document Prepared by
T H `? T E C
N••' VAN CARP '%,
.QpE Sfp,? .??
41
a
SEAL
2033 •
5
's r :
BVG ++?
A.
M
James A. Buck, P.E.
Project Manager
Earth Tech
For the North Carolina Department of Transportation
L. Gai ri es, P.E., Unit Head
Consu ?t6lnt Engineering Unit
?? &4t".
Stacy Harris, P.E., Project Manager
Consultant Engineering Unit
r
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
us 19
Haywood County
Bridge No. 94 Over Richland Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRSTP-19(2)
State Project 8.1944001
TIP Project No. B-3340
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
• Bridge demolition will be addressed at the time of the permit application.
• Approval under Section 26a of the Tennessee
be required for the bridge replacement project.
be forwarded to TVA.
Valley Authority (TVA) Act will
A copy of this document will
Categorical Exclusion
December 1999
US 19
Haywood County
Bridge No. 94 Over Richland Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRSTP-19(2)
State Project 8.1944001
TIP Project No. B-3340
INTRODUCTION: Bridge No. 94 in Haywood County is included in the 2000 - 2006
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) and in the Federal Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location of
Bridge No. 94 on US 19 (Dellwood Drive) over Richland Creek is shown in Figure 1.
No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a
Federal "Categorical Exclusion."
1. PURPOSE AND NEED
Bridge Maintenance Unit records show that Bridge No. 94 has a sufficiency
rating of 39.3 out of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered
functionally obsolete. The replacement of this inadequate structure will result in
safer and more efficient traffic operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
US 19 (Dellwood Drive) in Haywood County is classified as an urban arterial in
the Statewide Functional Classification System and is part of the Federal Aid
System.
Through the project area, US 19 has a 64-foot (19.5 m) wide clear roadway width
and a 100-foot (30.5 m) wide right of way. It is divided by a variable-width
median. The east and west approaches and the bridge are on an approximate
2-degree (873 m radius) curve. The horizontal and vertical alignments meet
current design standards. Just east of the existing bridge, US 19 tapers to one
lane in each direction, and interchanges with US 74. The posted speed limit on
US 19 is 55 mph (88.5 km/hr). The existing bridge and roadway can be seen in
Figure 2.
The existing bridge was originally constructed as a two-lane bridge in 1947 and
widened to five lanes in 1969. It consists of five (5) spans spaced approximately
48 feet (14.6 m) apart with end bents constructed of reinforced concrete caps on
H-piles. The abutments are vertical. The superstructure consists of reinforced
concrete deck girders widened with I-beams. The floor is 8 inches (20 cm) of
reinforced concrete with 1.5 inches (3.75 cm) of asphalt wearing surface. The
interior bents are reinforced concrete posts and beams widened with H-piles.
The existing bridge is approximately 238 feet (72.6 m) long and has a clear
roadway width of 64.4 feet (19.6 m). The crown of the roadway is situated
1
approximately 17 feet (5.2 m) above the streambed. Photographs of the
approaches to the existing bridge are shown in Figure 3.
The average daily traffic volume on US 19 at Bridge No. 94 was 12, 400 vehicles
per day in 1998. By the design year 2025, the average daily traffic volume is
expected to increase to 21,100 vehicles per day. The projected traffic volume
includes 5 % dual-tired vehicles and 1 % truck-tractor semi-trailers. School
buses cross the bridge approximately 10 times per day. US 19 is not a
designated bicycle route.
Three accidents, all non-fatal, were reported within 500 feet (152 m) of Bridge
No. 94 in the period between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 1997. Two of
the accidents were rear-end collisions resulting from slowing or stopping
vehicles, and one was an accident involving a vehicle turning left off of US 19.
The total accident rate for this segment of US 19 was 91.19 accidents per
100 million vehicle miles (ACC/100MVM). This rate was considerably lower than
the 1995-1997 rate of 139.93 ACC/100MVM for similar US routes.
A sewer line lies parallel to the roadway on the north. A water line parallels the
roadway on the south and is attached to the existing bridge. Aerial power and
telephone lines are parallel to US 19 on the south. No impacts to the sewer line
are anticipated, but the water line will be relocated by construction of the new
bridge.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The proposed structure will be approximately 238 feet (72.6 m) in length with a
68-foot (20.7 m) clear roadway width to accommodate five lanes of traffic. The
typical section for the approaches and bridge are included as Figure 4.
B. Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives
One alternative was determined to be reasonable and feasible; replacing Bridge
No. 94 along the existing alignment using phased construction and traffic control.
During Phase 1, a section (approximately two lanes) of the existing bridge will be
removed and a section of the new bridge will be constructed (approximately two
lanes). During Phase 2, traffic will be shifted to the constructed section of the
new bridge and the remainder of the existing bridge will be removed.
Construction of the new bridge will then be completed. Two lanes of traffic will
be maintained during the construction period. Traffic control and signing will be
implemented to ensure motorists' safety and to reduce inconvenience.
2
C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Study
Replacing the existing bridge with an off-site detour was considered but
eliminated. US 19 is a primary arterial and carries over 12,000 vehicles per day.
Closing US 19 and rerouting traffic along US 23-74 and US 276 were not
considered reasonable. Rerouting traffic along US 23-74 and US 276 would
force vehicles to maneuver through the US 19 / US 23-74 interchange and
several traffic signals, resulting in additional delays.
Realignment of US 19 with a proposed structure upstream or downstream of the
existing bridge was eliminated from consideration because of the anticipated
greater impacts to Lake Junaluska, Richland Creek, and the US 19 / US 74
interchange.
The "no build" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge.
This is not desirable due to the traffic service provided by US 19.
"Rehabilitation" of the existing bridge is not feasible due to its age and
deteriorated condition.
D. Preferred Alternative
Replacing Bridge No. 94 along the existing alignment using phased construction
and traffic control is the preferred alternative. This alternative was selected
because it was the only alternative determined to be reasonable and feasible.
The Division Engineer concurred with this selection. These improvements will
maintain US 19 traffic on-site, provide a 60-mph (96 km/hr) design speed, and
will have minimal right-of-way and environmental impacts. A 5-foot (1.5 m)
sidewalk will be provided along the north side of the replacement structure to
accommodate pedestrians.
In order to accommodate temporary lane shifts and traffic control measures
during project construction, approximately 620 feet (189 m) of the western bridge
approach and 650 feet (198 m) of the eastern bridge approach will be improved.
The bridge approaches will be resurfaced after the temporary crossovers and
lane shifts associated with traffic control are removed.
IV. ESTIMATED COSTS
Construction and right-of-way cost estimates for the alternative studied are
presented in Table 1.
3
Table 1. Estimated Costs
Structure Removal 147,582.00
Structure 1,389,920.00
Roadway Approaches 450,135.00
Miscellaneous and Mobility 925,363.00
Engineering and Contingencies 437,000.00
Right-of-way/Utilities 12,000
Total Cost of Alternative 3,362,000
The estimated cost, based on current prices, is $3,362,000 including $12,000 for
easements and utilities and $3,350,000 for construction. The estimated cost of
the project, as shown in the 2000-2006 Transportation Improvement Program, is
$2,920,000 including $219,000 for right of way and $2,701,000 for construction.
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
The proposed project is located in a suburban setting approximately 1.2 miles
(1.9 km) north of Waynesville, North Carolina. An evaluation of natural
resources in the immediate area of potential project impact was performed. The
evaluation included 1) an assessment of biological features along the alignment
including descriptions of vegetation, wildlife, protected species, wetlands, and
water quality issues; 2) an evaluation of probable impacts resulting from
construction; and 3) a preliminary determination of permit needs and conceptual
mitigation options.
The information included in this report was taken from the Natural Resources
Technical Report.
A. Methodology
Published information and resources were collected prior to the field
investigation. Information sources used to prepare this report include the
following:
• United States Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map (Clyde, 1978)
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands
Inventory (NWI) Map (Clyde, 1995)
• NCDOT aerial photograph of project area (1:1200)
• Soil Survey of Haywood County Area (Natural Resources Conservation
Service [NRCS] 1997)
• NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) basin-
wide assessment information (NCDENR, 1998)
4
• USFWS list of protected and candidate species (19 January 1999)
• NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) files of rare species and unique habitats
A general field survey was conducted along the proposed project route by Earth
Tech biologists on December 10, 1998. Water resources were identified and
their physical characteristics were recorded. For the purposes of this study, a
brief habitat assessment was performed within the project area of Richland
Creek. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were identified using a
variety of observation techniques, including active searching, visual
observations, and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, tracks,
scats, and burrows). Vegetative communities were mapped using aerial
photography of the project site. Predictions regarding wildlife community
composition involved general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing
vegetative communities.
A search for jurisdictional wetlands in the project area was based on criteria
established in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual
(USACE, 1987).
B. Physiography and Soils
The project area lies in the western portion of North Carolina within the Blue
Ridge physiographic province. Elevations in the project area are approximately
2560 feet (National Geodetic Vertical Datum, 1929). The topography of the
project vicinity is a gently rolling floodplain between intermountain hills.
The following information about soils in the project area was taken from the
Haywood County Area Soil Survey (NRCS, 1997). The Cullowhee-Nikwasi
complex is mapped on the streambanks on both sides of Bridge No. 94. The
Cullowhee-Nikwasi complex is frequently flooded for brief periods, and has a
seasonal high water table of 1.5-2.0 feet (0.46-0.61 m). This soil unit is a
complex of about 50% Cullowhee soil and 35% Nikwasi soil. These soils are
nearly level, poorly to very poorly drained soils found on narrow floodplains. The
Nikwasi portion of this soil is classified as hydric. The Dillsboro-Urban land
complex is mapped on the road shoulders and lawn area on the downstream
side of the bridge. It is a complex of about 50% very well drained, deep Dillsboro
soil and 30% urban land. The seasonal high water table is greater than 6 feet
(1.8 m). This unit is found on gently to strongly sloping areas in coves and high
stream terraces.
C. Water Resources
This section describes the physical characteristics, Best Usage Standards, and
water quality of the water resources to be impacted by the proposed project.
Probable impacts to these waters are also discussed.
5
1. Waters Impacted
The project is located in the French Broad River basin (FBR05 sub-basin).
Richland Creek originates about 9.6 miles (15.5 km) southwest of the project
area. From the project area, the creek flows directly into Lake Junaluska.
From the lake it flows in a northeasterly direction about 3 miles (4.8 km) to its
confluence with the Pigeon River.
2. Stream Characteristics
Richland Creek is approximately 20 feet (6.1 m) wide under the bridge. In
the project area, the stream flows northerly in an S-curve. The substrate of
the river at this point consists of about 50% silt and sand, 45% cobbles, and
5% small boulders. Stream flow on the day of the site visit was slow
upstream of the bridge, increasing to rapid flow where the stream channel is
split by a gravel bar and narrows to 2-5 feet (0.6-1.5 m) on the downstream
side of the bridge. The water was cloudy with a greenish cast and ranged in
depth from about 3 feet (0.9 m) to a couple of inches (5 cm) deep.
Downstream of the bridge, the south bank is a moderately steep bank of
bare mud and cobbles. The north bank is about 6-10 feet (1.8-3 m) high and
stabilized with riprap, grading into maintained lawn at the bank top.
Upstream of the bridge, the south bank is also mostly devoid of vegetation,
and slightly undercut. The north bank is covered with weedy vegetation.
A small, unnamed stream is present on the south side of US 19 east of
Richland Creek. The stream enters Richland Creek immediately south of the
bridge. The creek bed is approximately 4 feet (1.2 m) wide with vertical,
eroded banks 4 feet (1.2 m) in height. Bed material was 80% gravel and
20% silt and sand. At the time of the visit, flow was moderate and the water
was clear.
Surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a classification by the DWQ
that is designed to maintain, protect, and enhance water quality within the
state. Richland Creek [Index # 5-16-(1)] is classified as a Class B water
body (NCDENR, 1999). Class B waters are used for primary recreation and
other uses suitable for Class C. Primary recreational activities include
swimming, skin diving, water skiing, and similar uses involving human body
contact with water where such activities take place in an organized manner
or on a frequent basis. Class C water resources are waters protected for
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. There are no
restrictions on watershed development activities.
6
The Environmental Sciences Branch, Water Quality Section of the Division
of Water Quality has three monitoring stations for the Basin-Wide
Assessment Program located in the project vicinity. One station is located
about one mile (1.6 km) upstream of the project area at SR 1184. It was
sampled five times from 1983 to 1997 and classifications ranged from Poor
to Good-Fair. The most recent classification was Good-Fair. Another station
is located about 5 miles (8 km) upstream of the project area. It was sampled
in 1992 and 1997 and classifications were Fair and Good-Fair. The third
station is located about 3.1 miles (5 km) downstream of the project area. It
was sampled in 1992 and 1997 and classifications were Fair for both
samples.
Point source discharges in North Carolina are permitted through the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by
the DWQ. As of January 1999, there were three permits issued to discharge
in Richland Creek, all upstream of the project area. Autumn Care of
Waynesville holds Permit NC0032361 to discharge about 9.3 miles (15 km)
upstream of the project area. This is a Minor Non-Municipal permit classified
as "Domestic-Institutions." Ithilien Lodge holds Permit NC0062863 to
discharge into an unnamed tributary of Richland Creek about 8.7 miles
(14 km) upstream of the project area. This is a Minor Non-Municipal permit
classified as "Domestic-Lodging, Condos." Country Club Real Estate holds
Permit NC0074063 to discharge into an unnamed tributary of Richland
Creek about 4 miles (6.5 km) upstream of the project area. This is a Minor
Non-Municipal permit classified as "Domestic-Subdivisions."
3. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
No waters classified as High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or
WS-II) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur with 0.5 miles of the
project study area.
Short-term impacts to water quality can be anticipated from construction-
related activities, which may increase sedimentation and turbidity. Short-
term impacts will be minimized by the implementation of NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters, as applicable.
Long-term impacts to water resources are not expected as a result of
proposed improvements.
D. Biotic Resources
The composition of plant communities in the project area reflects landscape-level
variations in topography, soils, moisture, and past or present land use practices.
This section describes these communities of flora and fauna, including the
dominant plants and animals in each community and their relationships with
each other. Scientific nomenclature and common names, where applicable, are
7
used for the species described. Subsequent references to the same species are
by the common name only.
1. Plant Communities
Four distinct terrestrial communities were identified within the project area: a
road shoulder community, a maintained lawn, a transition community, and a
stream bank community. Dominant faunal components associated with
these terrestrial areas will be discussed in each community description.
Many species are adapted to the entire range of habitats found along the
project alignment, but may not be mentioned separately in each community
description.
a) Road Shoulder Community
This community occupies a narrow strip on both sides of US 19 in the
project area. The community is dominated by fescue (Festuca sp.) and
broomsedge (Andropogon sp.). On the south side of US 19, west of the
bridge, a steep embankment drops 15 feet (4.6 m). This embankment,
which is part of the road shoulder, contained some small shrubby
vegetation including sumac (Rhus glabra), elderberry (Sambucus
canadensis), sycamore saplings (Plantanus occidentalis), wild onion
(Allium sp.), beggar'stick (Bidens sp.), and Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica).
b) Maintained Lawn
The maintained urban lawn community is found on the north bank of
Richland Creek on the downstream side of the bridge. A similar
community is found on the golf course to the south of US 19. It is
dominated by fescue (Festuca sp.), and includes widely dispersed
individual trees such as black willow (Salix nigra), Eastern red cedar
(Juniperus virginiana), flowering dogwood (Corpus florida), and an
ornamental cherry species (Prunus sp.).
c) Transition Community
This community occurs along the top of the north bank of Richland
Creek, on the downstream side of the bridge. It consists of a narrow
band of weedy species growing from the top of the riprap to the edge of
the maintained lawn. Species include Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera
japonica), broomsedge (Andropogon sp.), a violet (Viola sp.), dandelion
(Taraxicum officinale), cinquefoil (Potentilla canadensis), and greenbrier
(Smilax sp.).
8
d) Stream Bank Community
On the upstream side of the bridge, there is a narrow shrubby zone on
both banks of Richland Creek that abruptly ends at the road shoulder on
the north side and a golf course on the south side. This stream bank
community is dominated by honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), black
willow (Salix nigra), blackberry (Rubus argutus), silky dogwood (Corpus
amomum), joe-pye-weed (Eupatorium fistulosum), and goldenrod
(Solidago sp.).
2. Wildlife
The dominant faunal components associated with these four terrestrial areas
are described below. Many species are adapted to the entire range of
habitats found along the project alignment, but may not be mentioned
separately in each community description.
a) Road Shoulder Community
The animal species present in these disturbed habitats are opportunistic
and capable of surviving on a variety of resources, ranging from
vegetation to both living and dead faunal components. Northern
mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and
American robin (Turdus migratorius) are common birds that use these
habitats. The area may also be used by Virginia opossum (Didelphis
virginiana), various species of mice (Peromyscus sp.), Eastern garter
snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and American toad (Bufo americanus).
b) Maintained Lawn
The animal species utilizing this area are the same as those listed above
in the road shoulder community. In addition, gray squirrel (Sciurus
carolinensis) and Eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus f/oridanus) may utilize an
urban area such as this. Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), house finches
(Carpodacus mexicanus), and a belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon)
were observed in the area on the day of the site visit.
c) Transition Community
The animal species expected to be found in this community are the
same as those found in the maintained lawn community.
9
d) Stream Bank Community
Typical vertebrate inhabitants of this community may include those listed
in the above communities, as well as raccoon (Procyon lotor , painted
turtle (Chrysemys picta), and northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon).
3. Aquatic Community
Haywood County is designated a "trout" county by the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission, and sections of Richland Creek
upstream of the project area are Designated Public Mountain Trout
Waters. This section of Richland Creek carries no supplemental Tr
classification. According to a communication from Scott Loftis, District 9
Biologist for the WRC, Richland Creek supports sunfish (Lepomis sp.),
crappie (Pomoxis sp.), and channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus).
4. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Terrestrial communities in the project area will be impacted permanently by
project construction from clearing and paving and loss of the terrestrial
community area along US 19. Estimated impacts are derived based on the
project length and the entire ROW width of 150 feet (45.7 m). Table 2
describes the potential impacts to terrestrial communities by habitat type.
Please note that impacts are based on the entire ROW width, and that actual
loss of habitat will likely be less.
Table 2. Estimated Areas of Impact to Terrestrial Communities
COMMUNITY IMPACTED AREA IN ACRES HECTARES
Road Shoulder 0.60 0.25
Maintained Lawn 0.19 0.08
Transition 0.01 0.006
Stream Bank 0.19 0.08
Total Impact 0.99 0.416
Destruction of natural communities along the project alignment will result in
the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for the various animal species that
utilize the area. Animal species will be displaced into surrounding
communities. Adult birds, mammals, and some reptiles are mobile enough to
avoid mortality during construction. Young animals and less mobile species,
such as many amphibians, may suffer direct loss during construction. The
10
plants and animals that are found in these upland communities are generally
common throughout western North Carolina.
Impacts to terrestrial communities, particularly in locations having steep to
moderate slopes, can result in the aquatic community receiving heavy
sediment loads as a consequence of erosion. Construction impacts may not
be restricted to the communities in which the construction activity occurs, but
may also affect downstream communities. Efforts will be made to ensure that
no sediment leaves the construction site.
E. Special Topics
1. Waters of the United States
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the
United States" as defined in 33 CFR § 328.3 and in accordance with
provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). These
wetlands and surface waters are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE). Any action that proposes to dredge or place fill
material into surface waters or wetlands falls under these provisions.
Jurisdictional wetlands do not occur within the project area. Richland Creek
meets the definition of surface waters, and is therefore classified as Waters
of the United States.
2. Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the proposed
project. Permits and certifications from various state and federal agencies
may be required prior to construction activities.
Construction is likely to be authorized by Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 23,
as promulgated under 61 FR 65874, 65916; December 13, 1996. This
project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification or waiver thereof,
from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) prior to
issuance of the NWP 23. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that
the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or
licensed activity that results in a discharge into Waters of the U.S. In
addition, the project is located in a designated "trout" county; however, the
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission has not designated the stream
as Public Mountain Trout Waters and did not express any specific concerns
about the bridge replacement project (see their December, 1998
memorandum in the Appendix). Final permit decisions rest with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
Approval under Section 26a of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Act will
be required for the bridge replacement project. TVA will likely use this
Categorical Exclusion as support for its environmental review of the same
action. In order to facilitate this process, a copy of the document will be
forwarded to TVA.
3. Mitigation
Because this project will likely be authorized under a Nationwide Permit,
mitigation for impacts to surface waters may or may not be required by the
USACE. In accordance with the Division of Water Quality Wetland Rules
[15A NCAC 211 .0506 (h)] "Fill or alteration of more than one acre of
wetlands will require compensatory mitigation; and fill or alteration of more
than 150 linear feet of streams may require compensatory mitigation."
Because there are no wetlands within the study area, wetland mitigation will
not be required. A total of 150 linear feet (45.7 m) of Richland Creek and
100 linear feet (30.5 m) of the unnamed stream are located within the right of
way for the proposed project. The stream impacts associated with the
project will likely be lower than the 150 linear-feet (45.7 m) threshold,
depending on final design plans.
F. Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals are declining either as a result of natural
forces or their difficulty competing with humans for resources. Rare and
protected species listed for Haywood County, and any likely impacts to these
species as a result of the proposed project construction, are discussed in the
following sections.
1. Federal
Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT)
are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended.
The USFWS lists 7 species under federal protection for Haywood County as
of September 15, 1999 (USFWS, 1999). These species are listed in Table 3.
12
Table 3. Species Under Federal Protection in Haywood County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal
Status
Clemm s muhlenber ii bog turtle T S/A
Glaucomys sabrinus Carolina northern flying squirrel E
coloratus
Felis concolor cougar eastern cougar E
Haliaeetus leucoce halus bald eagle T
Alasmidonta raveneliana Appalachian elktoe E
Isotria medeoloides small whorled o onia T
G mnoderma Iineare rock gnome lichen E
Key: E Endangered-A species that is threatened with extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of its range.
T Threatened-A species that is likely to become an endangered species
within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range.
T S/A Similarity of Appearance-A species that is listed as threatened due to
similarity of appearance with other rare species.
A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements of each
species follows, along with a conclusion regarding potential project impact.
C/emmys muhlenbergii (bog turtle) Threatened due to Similarity
of Appearance
Vertebrate Family: Emydidae
Federally Listed: 1997
The bog turtle is a small freshwater turtle reaching a maximum carapace
length of 4.5 inches (11.4 cm). These turtles have a domed carapace
that is weakly keeled and is light brown to ebony in color. The scutes
have a lighter-colored starburst pattern. The plastron is brownish-black
with contrasting yellow or cream areas along the midline. This species is
distinguished by a conspicuous orange, yellow, or red blotch on each
side of the head.
The bog turtle is semi-aquatic and is typically found in freshwater
wetlands characterized by open fields, meadows, or marshes with slow-
moving streams, ditches, and boggy areas. The bog turtle is also found
in wetlands in agricultural areas subject to light to moderate livestock
grazing, which helps to maintain an intermediate stage of succession.
During the winter, this species hibernates just below the upper surface of
mud. Mating occurs in May and June, and the female deposits two to six
eggs in sphagnum moss or sedge tussocks in May, June, or July. The
diet of the bog turtle is varied, consisting of beetles, lepidopteran and
13
caddisfly larvae, snails, millipedes, pondweed and sedge seeds, and
carrion.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The southern population of the bog turtle is listed as Threatened
due to Similarity of Appearance to the northern population,
therefore, the southern population is not afforded protection under
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. No habitat exists in the
project area for the bog turtle. There are no freshwater wetlands
characterized by open fields, meadows, or marshes with slow
moving streams, ditches, or boggy areas near the bridge. A search
of the NHP database revealed no occurrences of the bog turtle
within 2 miles.
Glaucomysabrinus coloratus (Carolina northern flying squirrel)
Endangered
Vertebrate Family: Sciuridae
Federally Listed: 1985
The Carolina northern flying squirrel is a small mammal weighing about
3 to 5 ounces (84-141 g). The adult squirrel is gray with a reddish or
brownish wash on the back, and a grayish white to white underside. It
has a large flap of skin along either side of its body from wrist to ankle.
The skin flaps and its broad flattened tail allow the northern flying
squirrel to glide from tree to tree. It is a strictly nocturnal animal with
large dark eyes.
There are several isolated populations of the northern flying squirrel in
the western part of North Carolina along the Tennessee border. This
squirrel is found above 5000 feet (1524 m) in the vegetation transition
zone between hardwood and coniferous forests. Both forest types are
used to search for food and the hardwood fore st is used for nesting
sites. The squirrel can subsist on lichens and fungi throughout much of
its range; however, the diet can also include seeds, buds, fruits, cones,
and insects.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No habitat exists in the project area for the Carolina northern flying
squirrel. The project area is at an elevation of 2560 feet (780 m)
with no hardwood or coniferous forests. A search of the NHP
database found no occurrence of this animal within the project
vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will not impact this
endangered species.
14
Felis concolor cougar (eastern cougar) Endangered
Family: Felidae
Federally Listed: 1973
The eastern cougar is a large, unspotted, long-tailed cat. It ranges from
7 to 9 feet (2.1 to 2.7 m) in length and from 150 to 200 pounds (67.9 kg
to 90.5 kg in mass) in weight as an adult. Its coloring is tawny over the
body and legs, with black on the muzzle, behind the ears, and the tip of
the tail. The cougar's diet consists mainly of deer, but includes small
mammals, wild turkeys, and occasionally domestic livestock.
Once found from Canada to South Carolina, the current distribution of
the eastern cougar is limited to a few scattered areas. There have been
numerous sightings, but a small permanent population apparently
inhabits the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. In North Carolina,
other sightings have been made in the Nantahala National Forest, the
northern part of the Uwharrie National Forest, and some southeastern
counties. The eastern cougar has no apparent habitat preference, as it
occurs in mountain forests as well as coastal plain swamps. It does
seem to need a large undisturbed wilderness area with adequate food
supply. The eastern cougar's endangered status is largely a result of
habitat loss through deforestation, as well as hunting and trapping.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The project area is characterized by urban and residential areas;
there are no extensive wilderness areas. A search of the NHP
database found no occurrences of the eastern cougar in the project
vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will not impact this
endangered species.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (bald eagle) Threatened
Family: Accipitridae
Federally Listed: 1995
The bald eagle is a large raptor with a wingspan reaching 7 feet (2.1 m).
Adults have a dark brown body with a pure white head and tail, whereas
the juvenile plumage is chocolate brown to blackish with white mottling
on the tail, belly and underwings. Adult plumage is fully acquired by the
fifth or sixth year.
The bald eagle is primarily associated with coasts, rivers, and lakes,
usually nesting near large bodies of water where it feeds. It preys
primarily on fish, but will feed on birds, mammals, turtles, and carrion
when fish are unavailable.
15
In the southeast, the nesting and breeding season runs from September
to December. Large nests up to 6 feet across and weighing hundreds of
pounds are constructed from large sticks, weeds, cornstalks, grasses,
and sod. Preferred nesting sites are usually within one-half mile of
water, have an open view of the surrounding area, and are in the largest
living tree, usually a pine or cypress. Excessive human activity may
exclude an otherwise suitable site from use. Wintering areas generally
have the same characteristics as nesting sites, but may be farther from
shores.
The bald eagle ranges throughout all of North America. Breeding sites
in the southeast are concentrated in Florida, coastal South Carolina, and
coastal Louisiana, and sporadically located elsewhere.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The project area is in a developed commercial and residential area.
The bald eagle is unlikely to utilize developed areas as habitat in
spite of proximity to water, and no occurrences of the bald eagle
within the project vicinity were found in the NHP files. Therefore, it
can be concluded that the project will not impact this threatened
species.
Alasmidonta raveneliana (Appalachian elktoe) Endangered
Family: Unionidae
Federally Listed: 1994
The Appalachian elktoe is recognized by a thin, kidney-shaped shell
about 3.2 inches (8.1 cm) long, 1.4 inches (3.6 cm) high, and 1 inch
(2.5 cm) wide. The outer shell surface of juvenile mussels is yellowish-
brown whereas the adult shell is dark brown to greenish-black in color.
Rays may be prominent to obscure. The inside shell surface is shiny
white to bluish-white, changing to a salmon, pinkish, or brownish color in
the central and beak cavity portions of the shell.
The Federal Register lists two known surviving populations of the
Appalachian elktoe. One is in the Little Tennessee River between
Emory Lake in Macon County and Fontana Reservoir in Swain County.
The other is in the Nolichucky River system in Yancey and Mitchell
counties. The habitat in these locations can be described as relatively
shallow, medium-sized creeks and rivers with cool, well-oxygenated,
moderate- to fast-flowing water. Substrates are gravelly mixed with
cobble and boulders, or occasionally coarse and sandy.
16
Two additional occurrences were found in the files of the North Carolina
NHP. One is a finding of a single specimen in Yancey County in the
Cane River, a major tributary of the Nolichucky River. The other finding
was a single dead specimen in the Tuckasegee River in Swain County.
Additional information from the USFWS Asheville Field Office indicates
that the extant range has recently been expanded in both the Little
Tennessee and French Broad basins.
Major factors contributing to the endangered status of this species
include water quality and habitat degradation resulting from
impoundments, stream channelization projects, and point and non-point
sources of pollution and siltation.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Historic information indicates that the Appalachian elktoe was once
widely distributed in western North Carolina, including in the area
of the Pigeon River. However, Richland Creek does not fit the
habitat description for this species. The proximity of the site to an
impoundment, along with nonpoint sources of pollution from
surrounding lawns, golf courses, and highways, exclude Richland
Creek as likely habitat. A search of the NHP files found no
occurrences of the Appalachian elktoe in the project vicinity. A
cursory review of the site by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
a NCDOT Biologist was conducted. The site is heavily degraded,
and because of the backwaters created by the impoundment of
Lake Junaluska, no habitat exists for mussels. Thus, the proposed
bridge replacement project will have no effect on the Appalachian
elktoe.
Isotria medeoloides (small whorled pogonia) Threatened
Family: Orchidaceae
Federally Listed: 1982
The specific epithet of the small whorled pogonia comes from the
resemblance of this perennial orchid to young plants of Indian cucumber
root (Medeola virginiana). However, the small whorled pogonia has a
stout, hollow stem in contrast to the solid, slender stem of Indian
cucumber root. The stem is 3.7 to 9.8 inches (9.4 to 24.9 cm) tall, with a
terminal whorl of 5 or 6 light green leaves that are elliptical in shape and
measure up to 3 inches by 1.5 inches (7.6 cm by 3.8 cm). One or two
flowers are borne at the top of the stem, appearing from mid-May to mid-
June. The flowers lack fragrance and nectar guides, and apparently are
self-pollinating.
17
The small whorled pogonia was formerly scattered in 48 counties in 16
eastern states. Currently, the majority of populations are found in New
England at the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains and in northern
coastal Massachusetts. The habitat of the small whorled pogonia varies
widely throughout its range, although there are a few common
characteristics among the majority of sites. These include sparse to
moderate ground cover; a relatively open understory; and proximity to
features that create extensive, stable breaks in the canopy, such as
logging roads or streams. The pogonia has been found in mature
forests as well as stands as young as 30 years old. Forest types include
mixed-deciduous/ white pine or hemlock in New England, mixed
deciduous in Virginia, white pine/mixed-deciduous or white pine/oak-
hickory in Georgia, and red maple in Michigan. Understory components
in the southern part of the range are most commonly found to be
flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), sourwood (Oxydendron arboreum),
mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia), American chestnut (Castanea dentata),
witch hazel (Hamamelis virginiana), and flame azalea (Rhododendron
calendulaceum). Early descriptions placed the small whorled pogonia on
dry sites, but it has since been found on sites with high soil moisture.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No habitat exists in the project area for small whorled pogonia. The
NHP files showed no occurrences of this species in the project
vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will have no impact on
the small whorled pogonia.
Gymnoderma lineare (rock gnome Iichen)Endangered
Family: Cladoniaceae
Federally Listed: 1994
The rock gnome lichen is a squamose lichen in the reindeer moss family.
The lichen can be identified by its fruiting bodies, which are borne singly
or in clusters, are 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 rock gnome lichen is a narrow endemic, restricted to areas of high
humidity. These high-humidity environments occur on high-elevation
mountaintops and cliff faces that are frequently bathed in fog (elevations
of 4000 feet (1220 m) and above), or lower elevation (2500 feet or
762 m) deep gorges in the southern Appalachians. The rock gnome
lichen primarily occurs on vertical rock faces where seepage water from
forest soils above flows only at very wet times. The rock gnome lichen is
almost always found growing with the moss Adreaea in these vertical
18
intermittent seeps. The major threat of extinction to the rock gnome
lichen relates directly to habitat alteration/loss of high elevation
coniferous forests. These coniferous forests usually lie adjacent to the
habitat occupied by the rock gnome lichen. The high elevation habitat
occurs in Ashe, Avery, Buncombe, Graham, Haywood, Mitchell, Swain,
and Yancey counties. The lower elevation habitat of the rock gnome
lichen can be found in Jackson, Rutherford, and Transylvania counties.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No habitat exists in the project area for the rock gnome lichen. The
elevation of the project area is approximately 2560 feet (780 m). In
Haywood County, this species occurs on high-elevation
mountaintops and cliff faces above 4000 feet (1220 m). A search of
the NHP database found no occurrences of rock gnome lichen in
the project vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will not
impact this threatened species.
19
2. Federal Species of Concern
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the
Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions,
including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as Threatened
or Endangered. Table 4 includes FSC species listed for Haywood County
and their state classifications.
Table 4. Federal Species of Concern in Haywood County
Scientific Name Common Name NC Status Habitat present
Contopus cooperi (borealis) Olive-sided Flycatcher SC No
Cryptobranchus alleganiensis Helibender SC No
Dendroica cerulea Cerulean Warbler SR No
Microtus chrotorrhinus carolinensis Southern Rock Vole SC No
Neotoma floridana haematoreia Southern Appalachian Woodrat SC No
Sorex palustris punctulatus Southern Water Shrew SC No
Sylvilagus obscurus Appalachian Cottontail SR No
Thryomanes bewickii altus Appalachian Bewick's Wren E No
Speyeria diana Diana Fritillary Butterfly SR No
Neotoma magister Alleghany Woodrat Not Listed No
Parus atricapillus practicus Southern Appalachian black-capped
chickadee SC No
Loxia curvirostra Southern Appalachian red crossbill SR No
Aegolius acadicus Southern Appalachian saw-whet owl SC No
Sphyrapicus varius appalaciensis Southern Appalachian yellow-bellied
sapsucker SR No
Phyciodes batesii" Tawny Crescent Butterfly SR No
Juglans cinerea Butternut Not Listed Yes
Abies fraseri Fraser fir Not Listed No
Carex manhartii Manhart's sedge Not Listed No
Plagiochila sharpii a liverwort C No
Plagiochila sullivantii var sullivantii a liverwort C No
Sphenolobopsis pearsonii a liverwort C No
Buckleya distichophylla Piratebush E No
Cardamine clematitis Mountain Bittercress C No
Euphorbia purpurea Glade Spurge (Darlington's Spurge) C No
Glyceria nubigena Smoky Mountain Manna grass T No
Rugelia nudicaulis Rugel's Ragwort T No
Saxifraga caroliniana Carolina Saxifrage C No
Silene ovata Mountain Catchfly C No
Lysimachia fraseri" Fraser's Loosestrife E Yes
Delphinium exaltatum" Tall Larkspur E-SC No
Trillium pusillum var 1 " Alabama Least Trillium E No
Sources USFWS, 1999; Amoroso, ed., 1997; LeGrand and Hall, eds., 1997
T = Threatened, E = Endangered, SC = Special Concern, C = Candidate, SR = Significantly Rare
Key: " = Historic record. The species was last observed in the county > 50 years ago.
20
Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special
Concern (SC) on the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program 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. However, the level of protection given to state-
listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities.
3. State
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
or Special Concern (SC) are given protection by the State Endangered
Species Act and the N.C. Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
This act is administered and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission and the North Carolina Department of Agriculture.
Species with these designations that are not already listed above in Table 3
or Table 4 are listed in Table 5 below.
Table 5. State Protected Species in Haywood County
Scientific Name Common Name NC Status
Accipiter cooperii Cooper's Hawk Sc
Plethodon ventralis Southern Zigzag Salamander Sc
Regulus satrapa Golden-crowned Kinglet Sc
Sorex dispar Long-tailed Shrew SC
Eurycea longicauda longicauda' Longtail Salamander sC
Pseudacris brachyphona' Mountain Chorus Frog Sc
Mesodon chilhoweensis" Queen Crater Sc
Mesodon subpalliatus" Velvet Covert Sc
Paravitrea lamellidens" Lamellate Supercoil SC
Mesodon orestes Engraved Covert T
Mesodon ferrissi" Smokey Mountain Covert T
Filipendula rubra Queen-of-the-prairie E
Plagiochila caduciloba' a liverwort E
Parnassia grandifolia Large-leaved Grass-of-parnassus T
Sources: USFWS, 1999; Amoroso, ed., 1997; LeGrand and Hall, eds., 1997
Key: T = Threatened, E = Endangered, SC = Special Concern
= Obscure record, date uncertain.
= Historic record. The species was last observed in the count > 50 ears ago
VI. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR
Part 800. Section 106 requires that for federally funded, licensed, or permitted
projects having an effect on properties list d in or eligible for the National
21
Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be
given the opportunity to comment.
B. Historic Architectural Resources
A field survey of the Area of Potential Effect (APE) was conducted on September
21, 1998. All structures within the APE were photographed, and later reviewed
by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). None of the properties were
considered eligible, and in a concurrence form dated January 7, 1999 the State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurred that there are no historic
architectural resources either listed in or eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places within the APE. A copy of the concurrence form is
included in the Appendix.
C. Archaeological Resources
The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), in a memorandum dated
January 13, 1999 stated that "This area has a high potential for the presence of
significant archaeological resources. We recommend a comprehensive
archaeological survey be conducted if construction is planned on a new
alignment." However, since the bridge will be replaced in its existing location,
and the existing right of way is already disturbed, no archaeology survey is
required. A copy of the SHPO memorandum is included in the Appendix.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Anticipated impacts to the resources in the project area are described in this
section. The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to
its limited scope and insignificant environmental consequences. The project is
expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation.
No significant change in land use is expected to result from construction of the
project.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not
expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the
area.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way
acquisition will be limited. No businesses or residences will be relocated as part
of the proposed project.
22
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.
There are no facilities with the potential to have underground storage tanks in the
project area, nor are there any regulated or unregulated landfills or dump sites.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their
representatives to consider the potential impacts to prime and important
farmland soils by all land acquisition and construction projects. Prime and
important farmland soils are defined by the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation
Service. No prime or important farmlands are located in the project vicinity. In
addition, the proposed project is anticipated to be limited to the existing right of
way, and the land uses adjacent to the roadway are a golf course and
maintained lawn area.
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included
in the regional emission analysis (if applicable) and a project level CO analysis is
not required. The project is located in Haywood County, which has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
40 CFR part 51 is not applicable because the proposed project is located in an
attainment area. This project is not anticipated to create any adverse effects on
the air quality of this attainment area.
Traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project. There are
no receptors located in the immediate project area. The project's impact on
noise and air quality will not be significant.
Noise levels could increase during construction but this increase would be
temporary. If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be done in
accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North Carolina SIP
for air quality in compliance with 15 NAACO 2D.0520. This evaluation completes
the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for
air quality (1990 CAAA and NEPA), and no additional reports are required.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, Groundwater Section and the
North Carolina Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management
Section revealed no underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the
project area.
Haywood County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP). Flood Insurance Study maps for Haywood County show that Bridge
No. 94 is in the 100-year floodplain. Replacement of this bridge will not
adversely affect the 100-year floodplain.
23
Based on the findings of this document, no substantial environmental impacts
are anticipated to result from the replacement of Bridge Number 94 in Haywood
County. Therefore, the proposed project is considered to be a "categorical
exclusion" as defined by the Federal Highway Administration's environmental
guidelines (23 CFR 771.117).
VIII. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A newsletter was circulated to inform residents in the area of the proposed
project and to solicit their comments. No comments were received. A copy of the
newsletter is included in the Appendix.
24

FIGURES
JS

WAYNESVILLE
C)
VS 1 BRIDGE SITE
i
5R
TENNESSEE ?. MAIJI
B
A
SWAIN +
JY f?
i?kKSO
I UL

North Carolina - Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
FIGURE 1
VICINITY MAP
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NUMBER 94
ON US 19 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
HAYWOOD COUNTY
TIP NO. B-3340
0.5 0 0.5 Miles
L

Looking West at the Bridge from US 19.
North Carolina - Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch
FIGURE 3a
EAST AND WEST VIEWS OF BRIDGE
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NUMBER 94
ON US 19 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
HAYWOOD COUNTY
TIP NO. B-3340
Looking East from the Bridge from US 19. 1
North Carolina - Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch
FIGURE 3b
VIEWS OF BRIDGE FROM CREEK
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NUMBER 94
ON US 19 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
HAYWOOD COUNTY
TIP NO. B-3340

Looking Downstream at the tsri ige.
a Y
W
O v W W
Z <m< V
?Zz <
"' N ZZ
Z
w
?
> Z
moo` u
ou
u
uc&
0??? stn CO
uu??r?W
O
'
W
LLW
Z
U
O
boo mu OH
gL
<
AA ?
P
Zv`
UJ'- _
W

E^ g
E? ?C)
BMW •\ WO
ui

E
O E v o
O
O E
N
M'1
-
z , Op
;? -
O

E o E U
W E
n

N M _ r
W = W
U
a

•
O
o E
O E
-U N M
M
O
Q

O
J

69
O
E
O N
Q
O
N
E -
O °'
0
0

z

M
1- Q
~
0 J
cz)
Q N
E
Q
O E LLJ W

No U J
CL Q Q
E^
o
u
f- U
z
? Q
E¢
CD
OM _. of

N
•
O
C3 i Ul F-
Q
U
_
LL-
00 In
V)
OoLn- Q
3
o Q J
N-
U
Q -N

U 07 Ln Q
z
- MN
O) U O
Li
LL - N I-
I- U
? F-?-acn z
C) C)
aaof- LL.
APPENDIX
USDA
United States
Department of
Agriculture
Natural
Resources
S Mr. William D. Gilmore, P. E. Manager
ervice Planning and Environmental Branch
4405 Bland Rd. NCDOT
Suite 205 P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27609 Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
[phone]
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
December 18, 1998
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on Group XX Bridge Replacement Projects:
1. B-3335, Graham County, Replace Bridge No. 70 on SR 1134 over the Cheoah River,
2. B-3340, Haywood County, Replace Bridge No. 94 on US 19 over Richland Creek,
3. B-3406, Avery County, Replace Brtdge No. 28 on SR 1321 over Curtis Creek,
4. B-3471, Haywood County, Replace Bridge No. 180 on SR 1123 over the West Fork Pigeon
River,
5. B-3473, Haywood County, Replace Bridge No. 364 on SR 1889 over Pisgah Creek,
6. B-3490, Madison County, Replace Bridge No. 259 on SR 1345 over Big Laurel Creek,
7. B-3491, Madison County, Replace Bridge No. 56 on SR 1369 over East Fork Bull Creek.
The Natural Resources Conservation Service does not have any comments at this time.
Sincerely,
Mary T. Kollstedt
State Conservationist
The Natural Resources Conservation Service works hand-in-hand with the
American people to conserve natural resources on private land AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902-1499
January 26, 1999
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Plannine and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
•1 _
•; ?'l.'i ? ? f ??!'? vim`'
GROUP XX BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECTS, FRENCH BROAD, LITTLE TENNESSEE, AND
HOLSTON RIVER WATERSHEDS, AVERY, GRAHAM, HAYWOOD, AND MADISON COUNTIES,
NORTH CAROLINA
TVA has reviewed the December 14, 1998 request for comments on the following proposed bridge
replacements in western North Carolina:
• B-3335, SR 1134 over the Cheoah River, Graham County
• B-3340, US 19 over Richland Creek, Haywood County
• B-3406, SR 1321 over Curtis Creek, Avery County
• B-3471, SR 1123 over West Fork Pigeon River, Haywood County
• B-3473, SR 1889 over Pisgah Creek, Haywood County
• B-3490, SR 1345 over Big Laurel Creek, Madison County
• B-3491, SR 1369 over East Fork Bull Creek, Madison County
The environmental document prepared for these projects should note that approvals under Section 26a of
the TVA Act would be required for the bridge replacements. TVA may wish to use the Federal Highway
Administration Categorical Exclusion documents as support for its environmental review of the same
actions. Therefore, the inclusion of information related to wetlands and potential mitigation, Floodplain
Management Executive Order, National Historic Preservation Act compliance, and Endangered Species
Act compliance would lower TVA's review costs and greatly facilitate TVA's eventual approval of the
projects. Other issues to be discussed would vary according to project location and impacts but may
include, as appropriate, state-listed species (biodiversity impacts) and visual impacts.
Please invite TVA to any interagency meetings, if any are found to be necessary. Please send a copy of
the completed environmental documents to TVA.
Mr. William D. Gilmore
Page 2
January 26, 1999
Should you have any questions, please contact Harold M. Draper at [phone] or [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Jon M. ZyEnvironmental Management
%I ,
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
February 3, 1999
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Subject: Proposed bridge replacements, Bridge Group XX, North Carolina
In your letter of December 14, 1998, you requested our comments and concurrence on the subject
project with regard to potential impacts to federally listed species. The following comments are
provided in accordance with the provisions of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
The proposed projects will involve the replacement of seven bridges in the western part of North
Carolina, as follows:
1. B-3335, Bridge Number 70 on SR 1134 over the Cheoah River, Graham County.
2. B-3340, Bridge Number 94 on US 19 over Richland Creek, Haywood County.
3. B-3406, Bridge Number 28 on SR 1321 over Curtis Creek, Avery County.
4. B-3471, Bridge Number 180 on SR 1123 over the West Fork Pigeon River, Haywood County.
5. B-3473, Bridge Number 364 on SR 1889 over Pisgah Creek, Haywood County.
6. B-3490, Bridge Number 259 on SR 1345 over Big Laurel Creek, Madison County.
7. B-3491, Bridge Number 56 on SR 1369 over East Fork Bull Creek, Madison County.
Enclosed is a list of the federally endangered and threatened species known from Avery,
Graham, Haywood, and Madison Counties. This list also includes species of Federal concern
that are currently under status review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which may occur in
the project impact area. Species of Federal concern are not legally protected under the Act and
are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, unless they are formally proposed or
listed as endangered or threatened. We are including these species in our response to give you
advance notification.
The project areas have not been surveyed for listed aquatic species; therefore, we recommend
aquatic surveys relative to the area of impact of this project. We have records of the Junaluska
salamander (Eurycea junaluska) in the Cheoah River at the B-3335 site in Graham County. We
are concerned about the potential effects that could occur to the Junaluska salamander as a result
of the proposed construction and related activities at the B-3335 site. We have records of the
hellbender (Cryptobranchus alleganiensis), a species of Federal concern, from near the B-3490
project site in Madison County. Big Laurel Creek should be surveyed; it has habitat that is
apparently suitable for a number of rare mussel species.
We recommend that each bridge design include provisions for the deck drainage to flow through
a vegetated upland buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. We prefer a bridge design that
does not alter the natural stream morphology or impede fish passage. Any new piers or bents
should be placed outside of the bankfull width of the river. We recommend that erosion and
sedimentation measures be in place prior to any ground-disturbing activities. Wet concrete
should never be allowed to come into contact with the stream. If any in-stream work is planned,
it should be scheduled during periods of low flow. Please address the demolition plans for the
existing bridges in any environmental document prepared for this project, as well as any
temporary access roads or coffer dams. What bridge design is planned for each replacement site?
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Mr. Mark Cantrell of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 227. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference
our Log Number 4-2-99-065.
Sinc rely,
n
( tea``' ?n l?G? l=-L,
Brian P. Cole
State Supervisor
Enclosure
cc:
Mr. Mark Davis, Mountain Region Coordinator, North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, 20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway, Waynesville, NC 28786
Mr. Bob Johnson, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, 151 Patton
Avenue, Room 143, Asheville, NC 28801-5006
ENDANGERED, THREATENED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES AND FEDERAL
SPECIES OF CONCERN, BY COUNTY, IN NORTH CAROLINA
This list was adapted from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's County Species List. It is a listing
of North Carolina's federally listed and proposed endangered, threatened, and candidate species and Federal
species of concern (for a complete list of rare species in the state, please contact the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program). The information in this list is compiled from a variety of sources, including field
surveys, museums and herbariums, literature, and personal communications. The North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program's database is dynamic, with new records being added and old records being revised as new
information is received. Please note that this list cannot be considered a definitive record of listed species
and Federal species of concern, and it should not be considered a substitute for field surveys.
Critical habitat: Critical habitat is noted, with a description, for the counties where it is designated.
Aquatic species: Fishes and aquatic invertebrates are noted for counties where they are known to occur.
However, projects may have effects on downstream aquatic systems in adjacent counties.
Sea turtles: Sea turtles occur in coastal waters and nest along beaches. This list includes sea turtles
in the counties where they are known to nest. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has
jurisdiction over sea turtle issues on terrestrial systems; the National Marine Fisheries
Service has authority over sea turtles in coastal waters.
Manatees: Manatees occur throughout North Carolina's coastal waters; this list includes manatees
in counties where there are known concentrations. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has
consultation and recovery responsibility for manatees.
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS
AVERY COUNTY
Vertebrates
Bog turtle
Virginia big-eared bat
Hellbender
Peregrine falcon
Carolina northern flying squirrel
Southern rock vole
Eastern small-footed bat
Alleghany woodrat
Southern water shrew
Appalachian cottontail
Appalachian Bewick's wren
Invertebrates
Grayson crayfish ostracod
Spruce-fir moss spider
Diana fritillary butterfly
Regal fritillary butterfly
Clemmys muhlenbergii T(S/A)'
Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) townsendii Endangered
virginianus
Cryptobranchus alleganiensis FSC
Falco peregrinus anatum Endangered
Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus Endangered
Microtus chrotorrhinus carolinensis FSC
Myotis leibii FSC
Neotoma magister FSC
Sorex palustris punctulatus FSC
Sylvilagus obscurus FSC
Thryomanes bewickii altus FSC
Ascetocythere cosmeta FSC
Microhexura montivaga Endangered
Speyeria dana FSC
Speyeria idalia FSC
Vascular Plants
Fraser fir Abies fraseri FSC
Roan false goat's beard Astilbe crenatiloba FSC*
Mountain bittercress Cardamine clematiris FSC
Manhart's sedge Carex manhartii FSC
Bent avens Geum geniculatunt FSC
Spreading avens Geum radiatum Endangered
Roan Mountain bluet Houstonia ntontana (=Hedvotis purpurea Endangered
var. montana)
Butternut Juglans cinerea FSC
Heller's blazing star Liatris helleri Threatened
Gray's lily Lilium grayi FSC
Bog bluegrass Poa paludigena FSC
Carolina saxifrage Saxifraga caroliniana FSC
Blue Ridge goldenrod Solidago spithamaea Threatened
Nonvascular Plants
Rock gnome lichen Gymnoderma lineare Endangered
A liverwort Plagiochila sullivantii var. sullivantii FSC
A liverwort Plagiochila virginica var. caroliniana FSC
A liverwort Sphenolobopsis pearsonii FSC
GRAHAM COUNTY
Vertebrates
Hellbender Cryptobranchus alleganiensis FSC
Cerulean warbler Dendroica cerulea FSC
Junaluska salamander Eurycea junaluska FSC
Carolina northern flying squirrel Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus Endangered
Northern pine snake Pituophis melanoleucus melanoleucus FSC*
Appalachian cottontail Sylvilagus obscurus FSC**
Invertebrates
Appalachian elktoe Alasmidonta raveneliana Endangered
Diana fritillary butterfly Speyeria diana FSC
Vascular Plants
Mountain bittercress Cardamine clematitis FSC
Glade spurge Euphorbia purpurea FSC
Smoky Mountain manna grass Glyceria nubigena FSC
Butternut Juglans cinerea FSC
Carolina saxifrage Saxifraga caroliniana FSC
Virginia spiraea Spiraea virginiana Threatened
Hairy blueberry Vaccinium hirsutum FSC
Nonvascular Plants
Rock gnome lichen Gymnoderma lineare Endangered
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS
HAYWOOD COUNTY
Vertebrates
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii T(S/A)'
Olive-sided flycatcher Contopus borealis FSC
Hellbender Cryptobranchus alleganiensis FSC
Cerulean warbler Dendroica cerulea FSC
Eastern cougar Felis concolor couguar Endangered
Carolina northern flying squirrel Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus Endangered
Bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus Threatened
Southern rock vole Microtus chrotorrhinus carolinensis FSC
Southern Appalachian woodrat Neotoma floridana haematoreia FSC
Alleghany woodrat Neotoma magister FSC
Southern water shrew Sorex palustris punctulatus FSC
Appalachian cottontail Sylvilagus obscurus FSC
Appalachian Bewick's wren Thryomanes bewickii altus FSC
Invertebrates
Appalachian elktoe Alasmidonta raveneliana Endangered
Tawny crescent butterfly Phyciodes batesii maconensis FSC*
Diana fritillary butterfly Speyeria diana FSC
Vascular Plants
Fraser fir Abies fraseri FSC
Piratebush Buckleya disticophylla FSC
Mountain bittercress Cardamine clematitis FSC
Manhart's sedge Carex manhartii FSC
Tall larkspur Delphinium exaltatum FSC*
Glade spurge Euphorbia purpurea FSC
Smoky Mountain manna grass Glyceria nubigena FSC
Small-whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides Threatened
Butternut Juglans cinerea FSC
Fraser's loosestrife Lysimachia fraseri FSC
Rugel's ragwort Rugelia nudicaulis FSC
Carolina saxifrage Saxifraga caroliniana FSC
Mountain catchfly Silene ovata FSC
Alabama least trillium Trillium pusillum var. 1 FSC
Nonvascular Plants
Rock gnome lichen Gymnoderma lineare Endangered
A liverwort Plagiochila sharpii FSC
A liverwort Plagiochila sullivantii var. sullivantii FSC
A liverwort Sphenolobopsis pearsonii FSC
MADISON COUNTY
Vertebrates
Lake sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens FSC*
Rafinesque's big-eared bat Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) rafcnesquii FSC*
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAAIE STATUS
Hellbender Ctyptobranchus alleganiensis FSC
Spotfin chub Hybopsis monacha Threatened*
Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus anatum Endangered
Olive darter Percina squamata FSC
Paddlefish Polyodon spathula FSC*
Invertebrates
Sculpted supercoil Paravitrea ternaria FSC
Vascular Plants
Piratebush Buckleya distichophylla FSC
Glade spurge Euphorbia purpurea FSC
Butternut Juglans cinerea FSC
Carolina saxifrage Saxifraga caroliniana FSC
Mountain catchfly Silene ovata FSC
KEY:
Status Definition
Endangered A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
Threatened A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range."
FSC A Federal species of concern--a species that may or may not be listed in the future (formerly
C2 candidate species or species under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient
infoxmation to support listing).
T(S/A) Threatened due to similarity of appearance (e.g., American alligator )--a species that is
threatened due to similarity of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection.
These species are not biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7
consultation.
Species with 1, 2, 3, or 4 asterisks behind them indicate historic, obscure, or incidental records.
*Historic record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
**Obscure record - the date and/or location of observation is uncertain.
***Incidental/migrant record - the species was observed outside of its normal range or habitat.
****Historic record - obscure and incidental record.
'In the November 4, 1997, Federal Register (55822-55825), the northern population of the bog turtle (from New
York south to Maryland) was listed as T (threatened), and the southern population (from Virginia south to Georgia)
was listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance). The T(S/A) designation bans the collection and
interstate and international commercial trade of bog turtles from the southern population. The T(S/A) designation
has no effect on land-management activities by private landowners in North Carolina, part of the southern
population of the species. In addition to its official status as T(S/A), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers
the southern population of the bog turtle as a Federal species of concern due to habitat loss.
E North Carolina Wildlife Resources
r i
y /998
ks'
Commission O
312 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Mark S. Davis, Mountain Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: December 22, 1998
SUBJECT: Comments on Group XX Bridge Replacement Projects in Avery, Graham, Haywood, and
Madison Counties.
This memorandum responds to your request for our concerns regarding impacts on fish and
wildlife resources resulting from the subject projects. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) has reviewed the proposed projects, and our comments are provided in accordance with
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The proposed work involves 7 bridge replacement projects in western North Carolina. (listed
below). Construction impacts on wildlife and fisheries resources will depend on the extent of disturbance
in the stream bed and surrounding floodplain areas. We prefer bridge designs that do not alter the natural
stream morphology or impede fish passage. Bridge designs should also include provisions for the deck
drainage to flow through a vegetated upland buffer prior to reaching the subject surface waters. We are
also concerned about impacts to designated Public Mountain Trout Waters (PMTW) and environmental
documentation for these projects should include description of any streams or wetlands on the project site
and'surveys for any threatened or endangered species that may be affected by construction.
B-3335 - Graham County, Bridge No. 70 on SR 1134 over Cheoah River
The Cheoah River is not designated PMTW at the project site; however, the stream supports a
good population of smallmouth bass and rock bass. This area may provide habitat for the
Junaluska salamander (Eurycea junaluska) which is currently under petition to be listed as
endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. We would prefer that the existing
bridge be replaced with another spanning structure. The NCWRC also requests that the bridge be
designed to better accommodate vehicles towing boat trailers. At present, it is difficult for vehicles
with trailers to make the turn onto the bridge.
Group XX Bridges Page 2 December 22, 1998
B-3340 - Haywood County, Bridge No. 94 on US 19 over Richland Creek
We have not identified any special concerns associated with this project.
B-3406 - Avery County, Bridge No. 28 on SR 1321 over Curtis Creek
Curtis Creek is a tributary to the Elk River which is designated PMTW. Both of these streams
support good populations of wild rainbow and brown trout. We prefer that the existing bridge be
replaced with another spanning structure.
B-3471 - Haywood County, Bridge No. 180 on SR 1123 over West Fork Pigeon River
The West Fork Pigeon River is designated PMTW and supports a good wild trout population. We
would prefer that the existing bridge be replaced with another spanning structure.
B-3473 - Haywood County, Bridge No. 364 on SR 1889 over Pisgah Creek
Pisgah Creek is not designated PMTW; however, the stream supports a few wild trout in the
project area. We would prefer that the existing bridge be replaced with another spanning structure.
B-3490 - Madison County, Bridge No. 259 on SR 1345 over Big Laurel Creek
Big Laurel Creek is designated PMTW and supports a good wild trout population in the project
area. We would prefer that the existing bridge be replaced with another spanning structure.
B-3491 - Madison County, Bridge No. 56 on SR 1369 over East Fork Bull Creek
We have not identified any special concerns associated with this project.
Because all of the above counties are recognized as a "trout water counties" by the Corps of
Engineers (COE), the NCWRC will review any nationwide or general 404 permits for the proposed
projects. The following conditions are likely to be placed on the subject 404 permits:
Adequate sedimentation and erosion control measures must be implemented and maintained on
the project site to avoid impacts to downstream aquatic resources. Structures should be
inspected and maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
2. 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.
3. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area. Sandbags,
rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where possible to prevent
excavation in flowing water.
4. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area should be maintained to prevent direct
contact between curing concrete and stream water. Uncured concrete affects water quality and
is highly toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms.
Group XX Bridges Page 3 December 22, 1998
5. Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and tree and shrub growth should be retained if
possible to ensure long term availability of shoreline cover for gamefish and wildlife.
6. In trout waters, all instream work should be conducted between November 1 and April 15 to
avoid impacts on trout reproduction.
7. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather thanin stream channels in order to
minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams.
8. If multi-celled reinforced concrete box culverts are utilized, they should be designed so that all
water flows through a single cell (or two if necessary) during low flow conditions. This could
be accomplished by constructing a low sill on the upstream end of the other cells that will
divert low flows to another cell. This will facilitate fish passage at low flows.
9. Notched baffles should be placed in reinforced concrete box culverts at 15 foot intervals to
allow for the collection of sediments in the culvert, reduce flow velocities, and to provide
resting places for fish moving through the structure.
10. Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and should be
removed without excessive disturbance of the natural river bottom when construction is
completed.
11. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to
prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or
other toxic materials.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment during the early stages of these projects. If
you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at [phone].
cc: Mr. Steven Lund, NCDOT Coordinator, COE, Asheville
Ms. Stacy Baldwin, P.E., Planning & Environmental Branch, NCDOT, Raleigh
E2 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission®
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Mark S. Davis, Mountain Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: September 15, 1999
SUBJECT: Comments on Group XX Bridge Replacement Projects in Avery. Haywood. Graham and
Madison Counties, North Carolina.
This memorandum responds to your request for our concerns regarding impacts on fish and
wildlife resources resulting from the subject projects. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) has reviewed the proposed projects, and our comments are provided in accordance with
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The proposed work involves 6 bridge replacement/demolition projects in western North Carolina
(listed below). Construction impacts on wildlife and fisheries resources will depend on the extent of
disturbance in the streambed and surrounding floodplain areas. We prefer bridge designs that do not alter
the natural stream morphology or impede fish passage. Bridge designs should also include provisions for
dhe ucck drainage to flow through a %,cgctatcd upland buff cr prior to reaching tt:c subject surface wawrs.
Demolition plans for the existing bridge structures should be addressed in the environmental documents
prepared for these projects, as well as any proposed causeways, temporary access roads or detours. We
are also concerned about impacts to Designated Public Mountain Trout Waters (DPMTW) and
environmental documentation for these projects should include a description of any streams or wetlands on
the project site and surveys for any threatened or endangered species that may be affected by construction.
B-3406 - Avery County, Bridge No. 28 on SR 1321 over Curtis Creek
Curtis Creek is not DPMTW at the project site, however, the stream supports a good wild trout
population in the project area. We recommend that the existing bridge be replaced with another
spanning structure. We recommend that instream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot
trout buffer zone be prohibited during the brown and brook trout spawning season of October 15
through April 15 to protect the egg and fry stages from off-site sedimentation.
Group XX Bridges Page 2 September 15, 1999
B-3335 - Graham County, Bridge No. 70 on SR 1134 over Cheoah River
The Cheoah River is not DPMTW; however, the river supports good populations of smallmouth
bass, rock bass, as well as various non-game species in the project area. The Junaluska
salamander (Eurycea junaluska), a species of concern, is also known to occur in the project area.
We recommend that the existing bridge be replaced with another spanning structure.
B-3340 - Haywood County, Bridge No. 94 on US 19 over Richland Creek
We have not identified any special concerns associated with this project.
B-3471 - Haywood County, Bridge No. 180 on SR 1123 over West Fork Pigeon River
The West Fork Pigeon River is managed by the NCWRC as Hatchery Supported trout water. The
river also supports wild trout populations in the project area. The federally endangered
Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta ravenchana) was recently discovered in the West Fork Pigeon
River. NCDOT should contact the-U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service concerning potential impacts to
this endangered species. Contact is Mr. Mark Cantrell at [phone] Ext. 227. We
recommend that the existing bridge be replaced with another spanning structure.
I
B-3490 - Madison County, Bridge No. 259 on SR 1345 over Big Laurel Creek
Big Laurel Creek is managed by the NCWRC as Hatchery Supported trout water. The stream also
supports wild trout populations in the project area. We recommend that the existing bridge be
replaced with another spanning structure.
B-3491- Madison County, Bridge No. 56 on SR 1369 over East Fork Bull Creek
We have not identified any special concerns associated with this project.
Because the Corps of Engineers (COE) recognizes all of the above counties as "trout water
counties", the NCWRC will review any nationwide or general 404 permits for the proposed projects. The
following conditions are likely to be placed on the subject 404 permits:
1. Adequate sedimentation and erosion control measures must be implemented prior to any
ground disturbing activities to minimize impacts to downstream aquatic resources. Structures
should be inspected and maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
2. 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.
All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area. Sandbags,
rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where possible to prevent
excavation in flowing water.
4. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area must be maintained to prevent direct
contact between curing concrete and stream water. Uncured concrete affects water quality and
is highly toxic to fish and other aquatic organisms.
Group XX Bridges Page 3 September 15, 1999
5. Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and tree and shrub growth should be retained if
possible to ensure long term availability of shoreline cover for gamefish and wildlife.
6. In trout waters, instream construction is prohibited during the trout spawning period of
November 1 to April 15 to avoid impacts on trout reproduction.
7. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to
minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams.
8. If multi-celled reinforced concrete box culverts are utilized, they should be designed so that all
water flows through a single cell (or two if necessary) during low flow conditions. This could
be accomplished by constructing a low sill on the upstream end of the other cells that will
divert low flowsto another cell. This will facilitate fish passage at low flows.
9. Notched baffles should be placed- in reinforced concrete box culverts at 15 foot intervals to
allow for the collection of sediments in the culvert, reduce flow velocities, and to provide
resting places for fish moving through the structure.
10. Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and should be
removed without excessive disturbance of the natural river bottom when construction is
completed.
11. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to
prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or
other toxic materials.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment during the early stages of these projects. If
you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at [phone].
cc: Mr. Steven Lund, NCDOT Coordinator, COE, Asheville
Ms. Stacy Harris, P.E., PD & EA Branch, NCDOT, Raleigh
Mr. Joe Mickey, Western Piedmont Region Coordinator, NCWRC, State Road
- B rro -1 Z 1 77,
= S' 3:3 LA 0 -1A?/?:Cdp
CO`CL•RRE-NCC FOR.tiI FOP, PROPEi.TIF.S -, OT CLIGI5L- FOR
T14C NATIONAL REGIS---,'Z OF HISTORIC P' .-kCCS
BR,' P` ' - D -Ci on ge olae? ?r ? dLa? t?So q?1 m? uS?q oven
Or, representatives of the
North Carolina Department of Transcortation (NCDOT)
Federal Hittmcav Administration (FH%vA)
?Vorth Carolina State Historic Presct•vation Ofcc (SHPO)
Other
rcvic,.%-cd tic subject prcicct at
A scootnc rncc=2
?Historic arcnitc=urai ,csourcL:s pnotc_rauit rcl,iL:",. SMior consui;arc^
Othc-
-.,: oz.:cs orescnc asrccc
-c arc no orcccrttcs ovc .:. ycars aid «ithin ;hc pro:::. s of ootcn..al eft - ca L/there arc no oroccttics less ;lian fifty Fears old N\hich : rc conslccrca ;c nnc= Crttcr,cn
Considc aticn G witntn the project s area or potcnual
" there arc prcpcrtics over `tr-: ,Yc: rs aid (list attac^cd) «Vitl;m ti,L Urolcc:'s arc: of octcnti-i c:,ccs.
but based on chc historical infornlaticn available and the chotcam-ons of cac`t prcocr^:. prccc:-ics
idcatitcd as -5r 1 &-a` arc considered riot ciig!oic
for National Rc_istc. a.=4 no -,ur,Iicr cvaluaucn of :;.c:^ is %=-Ssan.
_I it %--<Icrc arc no National Rc-,istcr-listed oroocrtics «-ithin file proicc_'s area of rctcnual ct=cc:s.
Sie!tcd.

R.:;? rsc:; tau ?6c,?V C D
FH
the Division Administrator, or other Fcdc.:.l gcnc,,
presentative, SMPO
Datc
Date
St t? c 1151oric ?reservation Officer untc
q?
Datc
is i:r_'ar.•!,,, li:.::l n? Ol :1us'ur.n,.a t cite! !i,t •?iil x ir,clt:c?!.
t5 -te
C' 2
• e.. J y
?aw„or•
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
January 13, 1999
MEMORANDUM
TO: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager E C
Planning and Environmental Branch ;
Division of Highways <
Department of Transportation h>1 ?.
J?Ti?
FROM: David Brook z J
Deputy State iOfficer Z 4!'?.? " 1999

SUBJECT: Bridge Group XX, Bridge 94 on US 19 over
I
Richland Creek, Haywood County, B-3340, ER
'
99-7909 '`^a.
Thank you for your memorandum of December 14, 1998, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following structure
of historical or architectural importance within the general area of the project:
Bridge #94. This bridge was built in 1947.
We look forward to meeting with an architectural historian from the North Carolina
Department of Transportation to review the aerial and photographs of the project area so
we can make our survey recommendation.
This area has a high potential for the presence of significant archaeological resources. We
recommend a comprehensive archaeological survey be conducted if construction is planned
on a new alignment.
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:slw
cc: N. Graf
B. Church
L. Novick
0D,
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ?V

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 27, 1999
MEMORANDUM
MOM
TO: William D. Gilmore Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
FROM: Gloria Putnam, DWQ SEPA Coordinator
RE: Comments on DOT Scoping Sheets, DWQ# 12317
Group XX Bridge Replacement Projects
JAN 29 1999- ,
c.
Df :'EClDtif ` ? Z
HIGr'IVVA
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) requests that the following topics be
discussed in the environmental review document (s):
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The current stream
classifications and use support ratings for these streams should be included. This
information is available from DWQ through the following contacts:
Liz Kovasckitz - Classifications - 919-733-5083, ext. 572
Andrea Leslie - Use Support Ratings - 919-733-5083, ext. 577
B . Identify the linear feet of stream channelization/relocations. If the original stream
banks were vegetated, it is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C . Identify the number and locations of all proposed stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DWQ requests that these catch basins
be placed at all water supply stream crossings. Identify the responsible party for
maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) that will be used.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion control measures are not placed in
wetlands.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
G. Wetland Impacts
i) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and delineating jurisdictional
wetlands.
ii) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
iii) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
iv) Mitigation measures to compensate for habitat losses.
V) Wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
vi) Quality of wetlands impacted.
vii) Total wetland impacts.
viii) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from DWQ.
H. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to the approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the contractor shall
obtain a 401 Certification from DWQ.
I. Please provide a conceptual wetland mitigation plan to help the environmental
review. The mitigation plan may state the following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after wetland impacts have
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of mitigation. In-kind
mitigation within the same watershed is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order: restoration, creation, enhancement,
and lastly preservation.
J. The EA should discuss in detail project alternatives that alleviate traffic problems
without road widening, such as mass transit and traffic congestion management
techniques.
DWQ is also concerned about secondary wetland impacts. For DWQ to concur
with an alternative in the mountains or the piedmont, DOT will need to commit to full
control of access to the wetland parcels or DOT to purchase these parcels for wetland
mitigation.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required for this
project. Applications requesting coverage under our General Certification 14 or General
Permit 31 (with wetland impact) will require written concurrence. Please be aware that 401
Certification may be denied if wetland or water impacts have not been avoided and
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Please have the applicant call Cyndi Bell at 919-733-1786 if they have any
questions on these comments.
mek:V2317, NCDOT Scoping
cc: Cyndi Bell - DWQ- ESB, Ecological Assessment Group
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
j c? Kerr T. Stevens, Director
October 15, 1999
e?A
NCDENR
MEMORANDUM
To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager, NCDOT, Proj veLloopment & Environmental Analysis
1 9C17
f=rom: John E. Hennessy, NC Division of Water Quality! ?
Subject: Scoping comments on the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 94 (43094) on US 19 over
Richland Creek in Haywood County, TIP B-3340.
Reference your correspondence dated August 10, 1999, in which you requested Scoping comments for the
referenced project. Preliminary analysis of the project reveals that the proposed bridge will span Richland
Creek in the French Broad River Basin. The stream is classified as Class B waters. The Division of Water
Quality requests that NCDOT consider the following environmental issues for the proposed project:
A. We would like to see a discussion in the document that presents a clear purpose and need to justify
the project's existence. Based on the information presented in your report, we assume that the
Level-of- Service (LOS) is one of the primary reasons for the project. Therefore, the document
should delineate a detailed discussion on the existing Level-of-Service as well as the proposed future
Level-of-Service. The discussion for the future Level-of-Service should consider the Level-of-
Service with and without the project.
B. The document should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed impacts to
wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping.
C. There should be a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is required,
it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental
documentation. While the NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted
that for projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance
of a 401 Water Quality Certification.
D. Review of the project reveals that no Outstanding Resource Waters, Water Supply Water, High
Quality Waters, Body Contact Waters, or Trout Waters will be impacted during the project
implementation. However, should further analysis reveal the presence of any of the aforementioned
waters, the DWQ requests that DOT strictly adhere to North Carolina regulations entitled "Design
Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024) throughout design and construction of
the project. This would apply for any area that drains to streams having WS (Water Supply), ORW
(Outstanding Resource Water), HQW (High Quality Water), B (Bodv Contact), SA (Shellfish
Water) or Tr (Trout Water) classifications.
1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
Mr. William D. Gilmore memo
10/15/99
Page 2
E. When practical, the DWQ requests that bridges be replaced on the existing location with road
closure. If a detour proves necessary, remediation measures in accordance with the NCDWQ
requirements for General 401 Certification 2726/Nationwide Permit No. 33 (Temporary
Construction, Access and Dewatering) must be followed.
F. Review of the project reveals that no High Quality Waters or Water Supply Waters will be impacted
by the project. However, should further analysis reveal the presence of any of the aforementioned
water resources, the DWQ requests that hazardous spill catch basins be installed at any bridge
crossing a stream classified as HQW or WS (Water Supply). The number of catch basins installed
should be determined by the design of the bridge, so that runoff would enter said basin(s) rather than
flowing directly into the stream.
G. If applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent
practicable.
H. Wetland and stream impacts should be avoided (including sediment and erosion control
structures/measures) to the maximum extent practical. If this is not possible, alternatives that
minimize wetland impacts should be chosen. Mitigation for unavoidable impact5:will be required by
DWQ for impacts to wetlands in excess of one acre and/or to streams in excess of 150 linear feet.
1. Borrow/waste areas should not be located in wetlands. It is likely that compensatory mitigation will
be required if wetlands are impacted by waste or borrow.
J. DWQ prefers replacement of bridges with bridges:. However, if the new structure is to be a culvert, it
should be countersunk to allow unimpeded fish and other aquatic organisms passage through the
crossing.
K. If foundation test borings are necessary; it should be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under General 401 Certification Number 3027/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey
Activities.
L. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6) 1, mitigation will be
required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream. In the event that
mitigation becomes required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost
functions and values. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506
(h)(3) ), the Wetland Restoration Program may be available for use as stream mitigation.
M. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
N. The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to
discharge directly into the creek. Instead, stormwater should be designed to drain to a properly
designed stormwater detention facility/apparatus.
0. While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps and soil surveys is a useful office tool,
their inherent inaccuracies require that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior
to permit approval.
Mr. William D. Gilmore memo
10115/99
Page 3
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met
and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information,
please contact John Hennessy at [phone].
cc: Haywood County, Corps of Engineers
Mark Cantrell, USFWS
Ron Linville, NCWRC
Personal Files
Central Files
C:\ncdot\TIP B-3340\comments\B-3340 scoping comments.doc
r'
HAYWOOD COUNTY SCHOOLS
1230 N. Main Street
WAYNESVILLE, NC 28786
January 14, 1999
Mr. Gerald H. Knott
School Planning
Department of Public Instruction
301 North Wilmington Street
Raleigh, NC 27601-2825
2 r L9g9 /l
SUBJECT: Comments on the Bridge Replacement Projects in Haywood County
Dear Mr. Knott:
The Haywood County School Transportation has reviewed the proposed bridge
improvements in our county and has responded below to the effect each bridge project will have
on our transportation system.
1. B-3440, Haywood County, Replace Bridge Number 94 on US 19 over Richand
Creek.
a. There be no effect on bus transportation when this bridge is closed for
repair. We will be able to bypass it by traveling on US 74 to Dellwood
Road and then to US 19.
2. B-3471, Haywood County, Replace Bridge Number 180 on SR 1123 over the
West Fork Pigeon River.
a. This is a one lane bridge and when it is closed for repair the buses will not
be able to travel on SR 1123. The parents living beyond this bridge will
have to bring the children to the nearest bus stop. There is one
elementary/middle school bus that presently travels this road twice a day
transporting 5 students on each trip.
3. B-3473, Haywood County, Replace Bridge Number 364 on SR 1889 over Pisgah
Creek.
a. There is 2 buses transporting 7 students twice a day that travels over this
bridge. When the bridge is closed for repair the parents of the 7 students
for have to bring them to the nearest bus stop.
Sincerely,

Bill Upton, Superintendent
Haywood County Schools
?Oe „wetH C*
GG
b
O
NEWSLETTER'r Or R AHSf
November 1999 TIP No. B-3340 • Project No. 8.1944001 Issue :Nu. I
Replacement of Bridge No. 94 over Richland Creek
Haywood County, North Carolina
Steps to Success
This newsletter is published by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to inform the
public about the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 94
on US 19 over Richland Creek in Haywood County. Right-
of-way acquisition and construction are scheduled for
2001 and 2002, respectively. This newsletter gives an
overview of the steps in the planning process and presents
the bridge replacement alternative under consideration.
Project Initiation/ Step 1
Scoping
Alternatives Step 2
Development
Environmental Step 3
Studies
Environmental Step 4
Document
Alternatives Under Consideration
and the Planning Process
During Step 1 of the planning process, information is
collected on the existing human and natural environments. This
information is used to identify preliminary alternatives.
In Step 2, the preliminary alternatives are evaluated and
based on their potential impacts a preferred alternative is
selected.
Bridge No. 94 will be replaced on the existing
alignment and phased construction will be used to
maintain two lanes of traffic.
Step 3 involves conducting detailed environmental
studies for the preferred alternative. Following the
detailed studies, the procedure for selecting the preferred
alternative and the information collected during the
detailed studies will be described in an environmental
document (Step 4).
PROJECT SCHEDULE:
Right-of-Way Acquisition Year.2001
Construction Year 2002

1
Public Involvement is an important part of the planning process. The North Carolina Department of Transportation
is committed to ensuring all issues of concern to the public are addressed and considered before any recommendations
or decisions are made. Your opinions are important to us! Please send comments to:
Mr. Jim Buck, PE or Ms. Stacy Harris, PE
Earth Tech NCDOT - Project Development and
701 Corporate Center Drive Environmental Analysis Branch
Suite 475 P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27607 Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
919-854-6213 919-733-7844 ext. 264
If you have transportation questions on other projects, call our Customer Service Office toll-tree 1-877-DOT 4YOU
VICINITY MAP
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
BRIDGE NO. 94

BRIDGE DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL INFORMATION
BRIDGE GROUP XX
Proposed Bridge Replacement
US 19, Bridge No. 94 over Richland Creek
Haywood County
TIP Number:
NC Structure Number:
Superstructure
B-3340
Bridge #94 (43094)
Reinforced concrete deck girders widened with I-beams.
Floor is 8 inch reinforced concrete with 1.5 inches of asphalt wearing surface.
Substructure
Interior bents are reinforced concrete posts and beams widened with H-piles.
Maximum potential fill calculation
Superstructure:
Area of slab: 2.5 in. thick x 68 ft. 11 in. wide = 71.8 sq. ft.
Area of beams:
4 x (1.5 ft. x 2.5 ft.) = 15 sq. ft.
Total cross sectional area:
15 + 71.8 = 86.8 sq. ft.
86.8 sq. ft x 90 ft. over water = 7812 cu. ft./27 = 289.3 cu. yd.
5 !I
I L ?'

1

,` ? ny
u i 4 ° BRIDGE SITE
? $a
vs! _
WAYNESNALLE r
TENNESSEE

y North Carolina - Department of Transportation
Bu AB
ision of Highways
Div
N ' ,, Planning and Environmental Branch
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NUMBER 94
ON US 19 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
HAYWOOD COUNTY
TIP NO. B-3340
0.5 0 0.5 1 Kilometers

N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRIDGE MAUT17ENANCE UNIT
ATTENTION:
BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORT
TYPE OF INSPECTION E7 L44- n c
7 INSPECTION CYCLE,
COUNTY BRIDGE NUMBER __y
ROUTE /. S Zg ACROSS 4-,4?4.jd LI-CG`C M.P.
LOCATION ZOD /Y7? 7 ?? - C,• S /?l p
DESCRIPTION
PRESENT CONDITION
INSPECTION DATE
PRESENT POSTING 401
INVENTORY RATING
OPERATING RATING T7
PROPOSED POSTING. oul c e
COMPUTER UPDATE ?Jl S ANALYSIS DATE---2 "- ; ` 1 -7
POSTING LETTER DATE OTHER SIGNS PRESENT ,/Vp.?G
SPECIAL PERMIT
SIGN NOTICE NUMBER
ISSUED FOR REQUIRED
WEIGHT LIMIT
SPECIAL PERMIT
DELINEATORS
NARROW BRIDGE
ONE LANE BRIDGE
LOW CLEARANCE _

Revised 1-10-06

I ??• -Ij1 V
G iGGE174
C'a? ?/ _?A r,? ctJ o v n
,579 %Z ._.'% -
ea 7 i 071
?7-
12L
No%? ? /7,E/?r.Sul,'E/?iG? CA,? (?A,E'y SD?"7?
?i: i LCa ` o iJ C u?? .
-53 ? I I `
??E t?oJ• -? r t4 7) q4r 3
? • 1`?4/ov s9

s to-as
rl

• I I I ? 1 ? I ! j f ? I
! ? ? I i I I I I I ( ? ? I

? ? 1
I ? I ! I i
_ I ! ? I i I I

I f

M

J •???
0 o .a;?

-
?
-
-
- ---=-- - ----- - -?-- ?
?-
•-
? ? ?o
tom ?
pe
?
? r
?
1

- - , 40 Q. I
r, , v Q1 I ?

'
_ s7fo
Z

E {f I
! f •• I I I I { I , I I I I ! i ? 1
-AO 133HS ON KIS 31`IQ AS Q3N03HO L 191-Z `dNI-IOUVO HlIdON 'H013"IYU
L07%Z XOS
NOLLYISG6--7/ 3.L%Q U'7J:?- AS 032i`dd3ldd 0NIa11n6 .kVMH01H
SAYMHOIH JO NOISIAW
.1N n07 --
N011.VlaOdSNV8l d0 1N3W
=3rOad : 7, 1--)3renS VNI-10aVO H.UiON -40 ,

North Carolina - Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch
FIGURE 2b
VIEWS OF BRIDGE FROM CREEK
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NUMBER 94
ON US 19 OVER RICHLAND CREEK
HAYWOOD COUNTY
TIP NO. B-3340
Looking Upstream at the Bridge.
Looking Downstream at the Bridge.