20080305 Ver 1_Application_20080213

OF LE+Y
p ti2~
ti
b CA¢O
CRV MANAGER
W. LANE BAILEY
20080305
C I T Y O F L E N O I R
NORTH C A R O L I N A
MAVOR
DAVID W. BARLOW
arv couNCa
J. L. GIBBONS
T. H. PERDUE
M. F. PERRY
H. L. PRICE
T. J. ROHR
D. F STEVENS
M. O. STRAWN
January 29, 2008
NCDWQ
401 Wetlands Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
Subject: PCN Application
Old North Road Bridge Replacement
Bridge No.61 over Blair Fork Creek
City of Lenoir, North Cazolina
The City of Lenoir in Caldwell County is requesting a Section 404 Permit (NWP 23)
approval for the proposed replacement of Caldwell County Bridge No. 61, located on Old
North Road over Blair Fork Creek. This project is funded jointly by FHWA~NCDOT and
the City of Lenoir. Project design, construction and permitting is the responsibility of the
City of Lenoir.
The former bridge over Blair Fork Creek was removed in 2004 due to severe flood
damage. Currently, commerce and emergency service vehicles must utilize anoff--site
detour to cross Blair Fork Creek that requires the use of the southeastern portion of Old
North Road and portions of North Main Street. The southeastern portion of Old North
Road has substandard geometrics, including travel lanes that are too narrow to safely
accommodate commerce or to allow expedient, safe passage by emergency service
vehicles. Construction of the proposed project will correct this deficiency by restoring the
former, more direct route over Blair Fork Creek on Old North Road and by providing a
roadway system that will meet current design standards.
Blair Fork Creek is classified as Class C water of the State. Located in the Catawba River
Basin, this stream serves as a tributary to Spainhour Creek. Blair Fork Creek has been
altered previously in the location of the proposed project and is currently lined with rip
rap on both banks. A site visit on May 3, 2007 revealed stream scouring in the vicinity of
the former culvert.
The former culvert that provided access across Blair Fork Creek was described as a 2-
lane corrugated structure steel plate pipe azch culvert bridge. The length along the
o ~C~Lad~ D
FEB 1 3 2008
~~ . WATER ~R g~iCH
~~NDS AND ~~
POST OFFICE BOX 958 • LENUIR, NORTH CAROLINA 2 864 5-09 58 • [phone]

centerline of the culvert was approximately 45 feet-10 inches. The structure consisted of
three 8 foot by 13 foot-six inches structural plate pipes.
The proposed bridge for this site is approximately 60 feet in length and 39 feet in width
and will span Blair Fork Creek. The proposed structure will be able to accommodate two
11 foot lanes, and 2 foot offsets to the sidewalks on both the north and south sides of the
bridge. The proposed approach to the bridge will match the existing approach and will
extend approximately 30 feet from the west end of the bridge and 60 feet from the east
end of the bridge. The approaches will include a 22-foot pavement width, providing two
11-foot lanes with 2 foot-6 inch curb and gutter sections, matching the existing
approaches. A 5 foot sidewalk will be included on the north and south sides of the bridge.
There is no bridge demolition associated with this proposed project.
A field investigation was conducted on May 3, 2007 by environmental scientists of The
Louis Berger Group did not reveal any jurisdictional wetlands within the project site. The
proposed design does not include permanent placement of fill materials within the
channel.
The anticipated permanent impact to Blair Fork Creek associated with project
construction is cumulatively 90 linear feet. This impact is attributed to the replacement of
rip rap for bank stabilization within the existing disturbed limits of the former culvert (70
foot linear impact) and temporary soil disturbance that is likely to occur within ten feet of
the outermost linear boundaries of rip rap (20 foot linear impact-10 feet on each side of
the structure) due to the utilization of mechanized equipment when replacing rip rap.
Techniques to be followed during construction activities to reduce impacts are as follows:
• The proposed bridge structure is to span the Blair Fork Creek.
• The approaches will be placed in the same alignment at the approaches utilized
for the former culvert thus minimizing development footprint.
• Rip rap will be replaced within existing disturbed limits and will not be placed in
an active thalweg channel or in the stream bed in a manner that precludes aquatic
life passage.
• Design plans adhere to requirements regarding the treatment of construction
related stormwater runoff through Best Management Practices as detailed in the
most recent version of NCDOT Best Management Practices Manual for
Construction and Maintenance Activities and NC DWQ Stormwater Best
Management Practices.
• Temporary stabilizing activities, including seeding will be utilized to reduce
construction related soil erosion as specified in specified in NC Sediment and
Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual.
The enclosed permit application package includes the following:
• PCN Application Form;
• Vicinity Map (Figure 1);
• Site Map (Figure 2);
• Project Study Area (Figure 3)
2

r
~` i
`a
• Soils Map (Figure 4);
• Coordination with NCWRC, USFWS, and SHPO;
• FHWA and NCDOT approved Programmatic Categorical Exclusion;
• Stream Data Forms; and
• Photographs
Should you have any questions regarding this application or require additional project
information please contact Ms. Julie Flesch-Pate, The Louis Berger Group at 919-866-
4415 or jpate(a~louisber eg r.com.
Sincerely,

Charles K. Beck
Public Works and Engineering Director
City of Lenoir
Enclosures
cc: USACE- 1 copy
3

t
Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
+~ X0305
USAGE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 23
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 Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information p LS ~ ~ I.~ ~7~ D
l0. Owner/Applicant Information FEB ~ 3
Name: Mr. Charles Beck, Director of Public Works 2008
Mailing Address: City of Lenoir DENk _ ~prfk rwAUl,r
801 West Avenue LANDSAND STORMWATER BRANCH
Lenoir, NC 28645
Telephone Number: 828-757-2183 Fax Number: 828-757-2112
E-mail Address: CKBeck(a,ci.lenoir.nc.us
10. Agent/Consultant 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: Julie Flesch-Pate
Company Affiliation: The Louis Ber>~er Group
Mailing Address: 1001 Wade Avenue, Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27605
Telephone Number: 919-866-4415 Fax Number: 919-735-3502
E-mail Address: jpate(c~louisber~er.com
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 1 of 9

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: Caldwell County Bridge No. 61 Replacement, Old North Road over Blair
Fork Creek.
2. T.LP. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-5012
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): Properties within project area: 2840627193,
2840629150,2840720361,2840628365
4. Location
County: Caldwell Nearest Town: Lenoir
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): From US 321 take
US321A / NC90 traveling south to Old North Road. Turn left on Old North Road and
proceed to site adjacent to First Advent Christian Church (1102 Old North Road, Lenoir, NC
28645).
Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.9281 °N 81.5446 °W
6. Property size (acres): Project Area is approximately 10 acres.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Blair Fork Creek
8. River Basin: Catawba
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 2 of 9

9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The site consists of previously disturbed land and is
bordered to the east by impervious asphalt utilized for parkin~• and to the west by
commercial businesses The general land use encompassing the project site is commercial
and residential.
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
proposed replacement will span Blair Fork Creek utilizing a 60-foot bride. Heavy duty earth
moving eequi~ment will be needed to construct the bride structure. New riprap will be
required during_construction but will be placed within existinP disturbed limits.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: Replace Bride No. 61 that was removed due to
severe flood damage in 2004 Restore expedient safe passage by emer~ency service vehicles
across Blair Fork Creek.
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. This is an NCDOT~roject. There are no prior permits associated with
the proposed bridge replacement
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. There are
no future permit requests anticipated for this project
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. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 3 of 9

1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: The proposed project includes the
replacement of riprap within the existing limits of disturbance at the project site (see riprap
replacement (1) on Site Plan . Temporary construction related activities including
mechanized clearing_ is anticipated to occur 10 feet beyond the linear boundaries of riprap
re lacement (see construction boundaries) on Site Plan). There is no bride demolition
associated with this proposed project.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of 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.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
( esbo) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
N/A

Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0 acres - No
wetlands exist within the Project Area
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, 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. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Perennial or Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact
Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
indicate on ma Before Im act (linear feet acres)
1 Blair Fork Stabilization Perennial 25 ft 70 ft 0.04
2 Blair Fork Temporary perennial 25 ft 20 ft 0.01
Staging
Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 90 ft 0.05
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 4 of 9

Open Water Impact
Site Number

indicate on ma
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)
T e of Im act
yp p Type of Waterbody
lake, and estua ,bay,
( p ry, sound
ocean, etc. Area of
Impact

acres
N/A

Total Open Water Impact (acres) 0
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Im act (acres): 0
Wetland Im act (acres): 0
O en Water Im act (acres): 0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0
Total Stream Im act (linear feet): 0
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE. No
impacts to isolated waters.
8. 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. No anticipated
pond creation.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Expected pond surface area:
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. Design plans provide treatment
of the storm water runoff throu:?h best management practices (BMPs) as detailed in the most
recent version of NCDOT BMP Manual for construction and maintenance activities / NCDWQ
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 5 of 9

storm water BMPs. Design limits the placement of riprap outside the existing limits of
disturbance of the project. Riprap will not be placed in the active thalweg, channel, or in the
streambed in a manner that precludes aquatic passage. Temporary stabilizing activities including
endemic seeding as specified in NC Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual
will be utilized to reduce soil erosion.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, 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 NCEEP 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 (see DWQ website for most current
version.).
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. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0500,
mitigation is not required for this project since anticipated impacts are less than 150 linear
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 6 of 9

website at http://www.nceep.net/pages/inlieureplace.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed,
please check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. 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) i
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 ^
3. 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 (required by DWQ)
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 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", 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.
Updated l l/1/2005
Page 7 of 9

Zone* Impact
(s uare feet Multiplier Required
Miti ation
1 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total 0
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additiona120 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. No buffer impacts are anticipated; therefore
buffer mitigation will not be reauired. 15A NCAC 2B.0244 is not applicable to the proposed
protect.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (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. If
percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations demonstrating total proposed
impervious level. Existing impervious surfaces include a parking lot located on the east side of
Blair Fork Creek and commercial and residential development footprints on both sides. The
proposed impervious level including the proposed project is anticipated to be less than 20 percent
in total.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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.
It is anticipated that there will be no wastewater 1enerated during the construction of this project.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
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. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 8 of 9

This project proposes to replace a bride that was dammed in 2004. No new improvements are
proposed
XV. 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).
~~
-~-G~
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Updated 11/1/2005
Page 9 of 9

Attachments

Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
Figure 2: Site Plan
Figure 3 : Project Study Area
Figure 4: Soils Map

~ 1
~ ~ ~ r, ~ -!~ ~, Legend
/~ ` .. I ~ , i ~'. # ~ ~ r i ~~ ~- 0
,: j jf ~ ~ ~ ~f~~' i ~ ` '~ i f 1. ~ Project Study Area
1 I ~ i t
~~ ~ 1 ~~ ~ ~~~'- ~ ~ .r.. ^ "~~ ~ •- Project (Old North Road Bridge) ~
. y ,'~ ~ ~J,r- ""~, ~?: ` 111 ~ ~ ~ ~ itDADS ArtD peu~rea FEArIgtES
, ~ ~' x r--. ~ ~~,/~' ~`-,. ~ f'~ w Ir ~. I~nta .fuw1»I. n rtt~iVSi+
,~ if ~ I ~ ~~., ~ ~ C1 ,n r i.tar Y z,ty -? r..:.r rN ~'~aA
- y `' v F ~ ~./~~'~ ~ ~} ~ ~ ~ arpt.., h mJ . y,,,,t tl2eil n, , arne :: t .. t ...o roxdz.
~.
,_
-.
.~...-.. ~•"f 1 i ~ ~ 4 ~~ t ~ ~F '~ r •5 ~ x, ~1 t ,li „e:.1. IfralR r
a J ~ ~e+~~jh$ dilly tgtpd~ fatla(.%,C'frllstif'
•4. - i. ~ ~~- 4 Al11A7~'?T ~s9 rtaad
y,,,.y , r /~Y r'~ JJJ ~ ~, Uni n'e:t read'
i 1 ~ d9U ~aad
,, ~' i
~:.~,` .,
~~'t5~~ ff~ /1`*` ~ . # ~ ~ ~ f3ETATrtX1
~ t~, '` ; Project Study Area ~ ~ro~dfr~rta
~~,~ s , o
' t'+~ lam' o> '~ '', . .. s~~~I>~hd
~' 4 ,
I'; r1, 1 # j' .{ b5e,eysrd
~~ ~ ~« ~ :'~ y~"' '~ r ~~'''"~" ~NERS tAKfS.AMf3CANALS
!, ~ I ~~ y `~...t ~ '-.+ - ~ ; ~ Pcr~entt,al str?um
e ,~ ~ r (°°°~.r,,atralrlutrs
~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ +R {~ ` f~`
~... t 1 ~ y~ ~ * ~ f,! ~(~ Irric ,day It s?rv~rn
r~ tti ti t ~ * ~# .~ r'- -
• 4 ~ R f1 ~ ~~y+ ~~ ~ y _T 3~ ~~ f fk4Y,'tta!(I'21: f11 fl4"Ur
5, `~ .- rr ~ y,~ * ` ~ t ~ ~ ~~ ~ f~ Yr' f~' G~ISaDrea=,ng stream
t r
i r 1,
'« Ir (~` #'. 4 7 ~ *~ ~ ~ I ~ t t ~ y1 M'efntlrxaal la.tit,)rid ...
;r"
,,~ ~ *,, ~') ~; 1,J,~ ~ ~:a~.~; _ y -~i , ~ ^~~ ~ 'fir' !""~';'~~~ ~,,~
` ty~~ !' ,
~'~ Jr 4
°~y i +; ~ { +;,/ ~~, Y~,~ e~ Project ~ j l'~` ~ :~ :•„~~~ t
- ,
.~
~. f r
_ ,,
I fr h i
f J t '~ ~~ ~ ~ Cit of Lenoir .~
f t ,
1 C
i ~``~ ~ A r 5,r ,~ t=- of ry:: ~' ;K~.,`
, ~ ~~ ~ ~~ '~ ~ ,. ~ rw~. ' 'ri .
MGM ~ 1 ~ ~ ;i ~, ~~ ~ X~ ~ ~ ~ ~' h,. ~r ~i~
N Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Old North Road Bridge Replacement a
for the
City of Lenior, Caldwell County ~
North Carolina
0 500 1,000 Feet NCDOT STIP No. B-5012 City of Lenoir, North Carolina
i f f f ~ Federal Number BRZ-1115(15) 5.3.2007

/ °®
/
~/ INCOi~PLETE PL~~NS
CURVE DATA FOR -L- // PRELIMINARY PLANS
Pl Sfo /2+1220 /
p = 9'S5'55.CY(RTJ //
0 = if 2T 33.0" /-- _
L = 86bT -~
T = 43.45' -' S1xo -- "
R = 500.00' S1 MN~ / ~ - ,-_
5 321 tMa~ ,
/ _
_ N0 ~~~ ~' ~,~
~ ~
/ a~0 .v..,t^
/ \ _
/ / ~ ~ ~ ~ BEG/N PROJECT -
~/ "~ ~ o ~ -L- STA10+75A0 '"
~ .\ ~ 6 1115
°•r IZ
~-Sry 0as
rn N 802245.0643 I N=802 6.6735 /--
E 1246883.4201 E'124 3.0603 N=802380.4842
~ EI=1118.26 ~ - 802344 7816
E a~•:'A i EI=1118.1 E .124694 3 104 2 '"E=1246963.8655
"°"' b N=802}20.IOV -- -E1 1116.60 --+e..E1-1115.65
d - ~ N=802290.67 9 -i ro., - -
EE 3 5
N 802238.3387 " i E=12. 2 EI 11166332.0 r. ~ ,,.w
' 0
,' 1246880.1246 ~ _- . - - ,-_,~, , - ' '
EI-1114.64~ T~.y ~ ~ N=80 428.5451
.M ,~: '1 ~~°O~- E=1247037.4424
~ ~ ~° ~• ~~ ~'- EI=1114.71
ur r~
...1 l ~ ,'~ ~ J ~ ` .ure. z "'ti
w
E "~ N 802198.0683 ` ~ '
= E 1246879.3643 ~" -. o-slwe•~ ~
° ~ ~ EI 1115.23 s+ -- -----
w "~ '~ ,,;."~ ~oamneuKE Ui 1 ~ ~ - ~ ~=12A6992 ~86Ft,~, -
n
m - I ~ ~ N=80 - .
$ N=80213 T.6033 .. -"
m E=1246870.35~Y' / ' / - 970.1249
"~ EI=1116.40~~ ~ ps-P'P cs.' n cis.!' EI=1116.21
` -N 802052.0292 "~~ - ' "
~ E 1246824.9315 ,,.'p `p ~°. '.. ~
I-1117.95 ~ --- E=802407.5942
o ~. 11'` / ~ -!- ~ ~ ~ N=802233.3157 -- ,,,~ EI X1115665.2970
~, .. E-IP46950.4281
~;- ~ EI=1116.46
~ ,. =802165 5372
~, ,~,,,a,.o- ! ~ i~ E=1246920.2156 ~ ~ , ~ ~^o
m - ~ g~. - EI=1115.83
4•
D ~ __ ! i
a;
'~`e
- ' N=802 .216 ~ rya
o a m N=802029.3105
" _I 95.2237.
"
a ~_
m E=1246859.7357
EI=1114.05 E 3.95 ,•`
~
_ u
",a"~
~ ~ Advanl ChrleHan Chureh
END PROJECT
-L- STA12+25.00 I
/ ,.
1

pj
® THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP, Inc.
1513 Welnul Street, SuNe 250
Cary, NoM Calollna 27511
CALDViIELL COUNTY
OLD NORTH ROAD OVER
BLAIR'8 FORK CREEK
8-6012
FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN
BRIDGE N0.61

_ -
~ ~ ~ 1 rl~
~ I ~ > ~"
tr'• ~-;~
~r:.
70~ v -~ ;.
~ Syr . ~ ` ~^
,, ~ t:' !r
'ri~,'~ Z - ti it ti. f ~
SS
•. ~ ~ tt. ~ .;rs ~~(~ •- .'~~ ~,?~~` Fii t~dv~nt ,tiristi~n liiir~,h .
- e . ~~.. i' ~ ~ Y
y ~ R ~
r i. h ,'! i µ r_
i
` ~ 9~;.' ~ ~, ~ .rte . ~. ~i'~' -~
a~ `~ ~:
~ i/, ~ t '~
. \ ~ x s ~,;
F
r `~
~ ~ ~ a,~ ,.
~' A ~f y'
~Y v t ~e
r
r~ ~,
r ~
~" i ~ y~1
~~ _ ~-
~ ` ~ t
~` c - ;k ~4:° 1. k`t`-~ 1
~,I, ~ ~ ~ Legend
tt ~ ,.: 'r
-~ . >.
' ,t?Rv, ~' 1-_ ~-- ~, ~ ~ ' O Protect Study Area
T y' - Iris _ _ ~. ~
F
~+~' -~ ~. '~.` ,~ ~ 1' ~ Blair Fork Creek
"' ~ ' ~ :' Project (Old North Road Bridge)
t' ~
N Aerial Photography taken Figure 3. Project Study Area Map
3/6/1993 Old North Road Bridge Replacement
for the
City of Lenior, Caldwell County
North Carolina
0 125 250 Feet NCDOT STIP No. B-5012 City of Lenoir, North Carolina
t . . I Federal Number BRZ-1115(15) 5.s.zom

s
.. ----'_.~c~.-.. _ ...
FT - ,. ,
:. ~., .
.. _
r ,+
~.~,~,, Project Study Area ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^r ~ r ,
f ,~ tea. ~ _ ~k~.~' ~~ ~" rl'~Ir..~~ r ~ ~-~~
' ~ ~ • 'SKI ',~ ~ ~ ti~ ~ ~~ }' s • p ~
o f\ ~,~ - ~ +' ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ 1 ~ .~ ~ l~ is ~ ~'~
j of a'~~ ~ ~pi~ ~h ~~~~ ~,~~y~~~~~ ,~ ~
I!t ~
,~~ `a6ri "~' ~' ~,, \ /`~ '~~~ ~ ti Y;;'~~~` ~;,;• j~~Y First Advent Christian Church
'~ ~ r ~.~` xis ~ ~ r.
i~ ',. 1~~ ,~; ~. far.-. S~..JJ ~ ~ • P t"~, ~ . • _;~ - "t~, ''~` ,, ' y~-[,~'
r ~ . ~ r ~ i, ~ ~ • -~ .~ . ~ r
~~ ~ r ~ t ~ wF a'f
~_ '~` a t ~, ~ ti yf i -
E, '~ ~ P, :.~} ~ a1,:,~, ~ : '~. y~~'' nrys ~ .~~ ~ ~'~ ,w < ~ ~ ~"'' "rte,, i ~ i ~
v ~ ± r ~ ~ ~ s.. ~~~ ., ~ ~ ~ ~ . T. ~;~ ~ ."< sat ~ y
~. r , f g t i~ .,gyp ° v J:
~~ , - . r.~
t i~Y~.. ~ ~ Project ~~ • ` ~ C
~ z -
• ., * ~J _ ~ -" `~ '>~,,' `,- ~,~.,~;~ legend
-,
~~.~~ ~ a t ~ ~ ~. ~ I , ~~ ~ Q Protect swdyar~
,,r~'1 t <~ 11 ~ ~ -BlairFrnkCreek
rf~,''~',i. 4 ~~ " ~,"L i~ ~1 ` ~ -=~,j ~ '~' .~'~~,, ~~WoSed(Ot~ahROad&id~)
1! . '. 'r~ ~ .. , ~, ~, ~ ~~ ~+ ra ~,~.. ~,, , Rf ~ ti Cddwell county
y ~~_.. ~ '~ ~ .:~ * ..c ~, r.~...~' ~ f ~'< ~/ . ''-~~~'t Q Urbantand•ArEtltat~yllx
tr-:: r w°~ ~ w F Jri. a i ~ 'k"t . ~., ~t ~ - ~ ~~.;,.. P~otai20%d0%~
-K; '~ Ceculkban lend wmphex
r ' , d ~y , ~.: R Q Chewada loam
_ r 4 ! .c; ~ i rJ "+, ~' Q Mawda loam
^
~~„ . j' ~ i.a. ~• f ~PACOlOl15%-2(f7oilODa
d •.
..,'
r
? . ~.
~ Mdd Phdoeugy Uksn Figure 4 Project Study Area Soiis Map
aronws p~ Np~ Road Bridge Replacement
for the
City of Lenior, Caldwell County
North Carolina
o t2S 250Fee1 NCDOTSTIPNo.B-5012 Cityotlenoir.NoMCerW~na
t , , , I Federal Number BRZ-1115(15) 5.3.20Q7

Coordination
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
US Fish and Wildlife Service
State Historic Preservation Office
Categorical Exclusion Approval

Page 1 of 2
Sekula, Tina
From: marla chambers [[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 12:13 PM
To: Sekula, Tina
Subject: RE: Early Scoping letter follow-up, NCDOT TIP B-5012
We have no specific concerns for this project. So sorry for not responding to this soonerll
Marla Chambers
Western NCDO'F Permit Coordinator
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
12275 Swift Rd.
Oakboro, NC 28129
[e-mail]
phone (cell): 704-984-1070
-----Original Message-----
From: Sekula, Tina [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 8:29 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Flesch-Pate, Julfe
Subject: FW: Early Scoping letter follow-up, NCDOT TIP B-5012
Hi Ms. Chambers,
1 am following up for Julie Flesch-Pate regarding the B-5012 Bridge Replacement. We have yet to receive
a response from the NCWRC to our early scoping letter. I have attached the letter and Vicinity Map sent
in the original request for your convenience. I am preparing the permit application for submittal this week.
A response would be greatly appreciated. Email coordination would be fine. Feel free to contact me with
any quesaans.
Thank you.
Tina L. Sekula, PWS
Senior Environmental Scientist
The Louis Berger Group
1001 Wade Avenue, Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27605
[phone]
From: Flesch-Pate, Julie
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 4:04 PM
To: Sekula, Tina
Subject: FIN: Early Scoping letter follow-up, NCDOT TIP B-5012
Julie
From: Flesch-Pate, Julie
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 7:47 AM
vasi2aos

THE Louis Berger Group, irlc
1513 Walnut Street, Suite 250, Cary, North Carolina 27511
Tel [phone] Fax [phone]
New Address Effective June 8, 2007
1001 Wade Avenue, Suite 400, NC 27605
May 11, 2007
Brian Cole
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Re: Replacement of Old North Road Bridge Over Blair Fork Creek, City of
Lenoir, Caldwell County, North Carolina (Federal Number BRZ-
1115(15), NCDOT STIP No. B-5012).
Dear Mr. Cole,
The Louis Berger Group (Berger) has been contracted by the City of Lenoir, North Carolina to
examine environmental constraints associated with the proposed replacement of the Old North
Road Bridge over Blair Fork Creek. Berger is requesting USFWS review and comment on any
possible issues relating to endangered species and migratory birds from the proposed project.
The project site is located within the municipal limits of the City of Lenoir in Caldwell
County, North Carolina near the intersection of Hwy 321 and Old North Road (Figure 1).
Old North Road runs roughly northwest to southeast into the city. Blair Fork Creek was
crossed by the road with a paired steel culvert opening until 2004 when it was heavily
damaged by hurricanes Frances and Ivan. The entire structure was removed later that
year. The proposed project would replace this structure at the existing location with a
new single span prestressed concrete box beam bridge structure with rip-rap slope
protection.
Berger scientists conducted a site visit on May 3, 2007. The project study area
surrounding the project site encompassed approximately 6.4 acres in an urban setting
primarily occupied by church, residential and commercial properties. The topography of
the area gently sloped towards Blair Fork Creek. Elevation in the project study area was
approximately 1170 feet MSL. The majority of the stream was adjacent to parking lots,
driveways, and road surfaces. At the project site the stream was deeply incised and
was approximately 20 feet wide between banks measured at top of bank. The water
depth averaged less than one foot with a moderate flow at the time of the survey. At,
and adjacent to the project site the stream banks were lined with rip-rap. The substrate
material of the stream was largely silt and fine sand with depositional bars of coarse
sand. Some rip-rap appeared to have migrated into the channel. Throughout the
project study area the channel has been significantly altered through straightening and
bank armoring resulting in very low sinuosity and poor riffle/pool sequencing. At the
project site, few woody plants lined the stream banks and impervious surfaces cover the
me Louis Berger Group, i~~

land directly adjacent to the site.
We thank you in advance for your timely response and cooperation. Please feel free to
contact us with any questions that you may have concerning the extent of site
disturbance associated with this project.
Sincerely,
Ray Bode
Louis Berger Group, Inc.
1513 Walnut Street, Suite 250
Cary, NC 27511
919.467.3885 ext 15
me Louis Berger Group, n,c

THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP, INC.
1001 Wade Ave, Suite 400, Raleigh, North Carolina 27605-3323
Tel [phone] Fax [phone] www.louisberger.com
MEMORANDUM
Old North Road over Blair Fork Creek
Bridge No. 61
Caldwell County
PCN Application Attachment
Regarding the US Fish and Wildlife Service:
A scoping letter was sent to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on May 11, 2007 (letter
attached). No response has been received; therefore, it is assumed that the USFWS has no
comment on federally threatened and endangered species listed for Caldwell County. In addition,
no habitat for federally listed threatened and endangered species was identified in the project
area during field investigations by Louis Berger biologists. Therefore, it is anticipated the
proposed project will have no effect on threatened and endangered species listed for Caldwell
County.

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandberk ~~in,ausm= Office of Archives aad History
Division of Historical Resources
~~ g, Easiep, Governor David Brook, Director
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary .
Jeffrey J. Crrnv, Deputy Seaerary
June G, 2007
Julie Flesch-Pate
'',Che Louis Berger Gxoup
1513 Walnut Street, Suite 250
Cary, NC 27511
Re: Replacement of Bridge 61 on Old North Road over Blair's Fork Creek, B-5012, Lenoir,
Caldwell County, ER 07-1041
Deaf Ms. Flesch-Pate:
Thank you for your letter of May 14, 2007, concerning the above project
conducted a review of the proposed undertaking and are aware of no historic resources that would be
We have as ro osed.
affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the undertaing p P
eats are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Histo SePtlon 10G odified at3 1 CFR
The above comet
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations fol. Compliance wi
Part 800.
1"hank you for your cooperation and consideration. If y orb toruat 919/733-4763,gxh 2~ In a ~t~e
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental ievie~v co
communication coneern1II-o t~ proleC~ Please ate d1e above referenced cracking number.
Sincerely,
. s~~---
. ~~~~
Perez Sa,ndbeek
~ygIltATfON
Y ~~pyANN1NG
Locadoa '""°'~ """""" LSC z7699-abt7
46trMail same ~. rzalo~
567 N. Blount Street, NC 1(,17 Mad Service Cmtey ~'-7699-4617
5t5 N. Blount Scat. ~F~+ NC 4617 Mu1 Servirs Cmter.Itak~ NC 27699~I617
5t5 N. Bbuat Sheet. Ralagb, NC

_; ~ .
~:=,:
_A~.

~ ,;
_~~
-,
G.
CE Approval
TIP Project No. B-5012
Federal Project No. _BRZ-1115(15____
Project Description:
The purpose of this project is to replace Caldwell County Bridge No. 61 located on Old
North Road over Blair's Fork Creek. The North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) removed Bridge No. 61 in 2004 due to severe flood damage. The previous
stream crossing was a triple 13 foot-6 inch x 8 foot steel plate arch pipe culvert built in
1987.
The proposed bridge for this site is approximately 60 feet in length and 39 feet in width.
The proposed stricture will be able to accommodate two 11 foot lanes, and 2 foot
offsets to the sidewalks on both the north and south sides of the bridge. The sidewalks
will be 5 foot-1 and ~z inches in width, using 3-har metal rail. The 2 foot offsets on the
bridge is the minimum, once hydraulics is completed for this project additional offsets
may be required for the hydraulic spread. The length of Bridge No. 61 is based on
preliminary design information and is set by hydraulic requirements. The roadway grade
of the new bridge will be approximately the same as the former roadway grade with a
minimum 0.3 percent grade.
The proposed approach to the bridge will match the existing approach and will extend
approximately 30 feet from the west end of the bridge and 60 feet from the east end of
the bridge. The approaches will include a 22-foot pavement width, providing'two 11-
foot lanes with 2 foot-6 inch curb and gutter sections, matching the existing approaches.
A 5 foot sidewalk will be included on the north and south sides of the bridge. The
roadway will be designed as an urban collector using 3R guidelines with a 25 mile per
hour design speed. The bridge site is not currently posted, but the City of Lenoir has a
city wide posting of 35 miles per hour unless otherwise posted.
Traffic information derived from the NCDOT Bridge Inspection Report completed in
2004 indicated that the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on the bridge was 1000 vehicles.
Future ADT for year 2025 is expected to be approximately 3000 vehicles.
`" Cate orical Exclusion Action Classification:
TYPE II(A) "
" X TYPE II(B) ~. "
Anvro~ved~: p
late Bridge Project Deve op ent Engineer
Date
Da
Project Development & t!;nvironmentai fu-arysia nrxuxL~~
For Type II (B) projects only: ~ ~ ~'
ate ~/ John 1?. Sullivan, III, PE, Dives
17~' Federal Highway Administration

Data Forms
NCDWQ Stream Classification Form
USACE Stream Quality Assessment Worksheet

North Carolina Division of Water Quality -Stream Identification Form; Version 3.1
Date: ^~ ~, (~ ~ ProJect:~71~ ~ . ~~- Qni~ ~~ ~~~:~,,,,~ Latitude:
Evaluator: ~:~ ~ ~ ~ ,.,~ Site: Ci •. ~~i ~"~ Longitude:
Total Points: ~~~ ~ ~~ ll
Stream is at least intermittent ~_/~ ~ County: Other~Z~av ~1~~°+G-~ '"}~
!f a 19 or erennial if z 30 7 ~ e.g. Quad Name: ~ ~ F ~1~
A. Geomor holo Subtotal = ~ ~' `~ Absent Weak Moderate Strong
1°. Continuous bed and bank 0 1 2
2. Sinuosity 0 1 C~ 3
_
3. In-channel structure: riffle-pool sequence 0 1 ~~ 3
4. Soil texture or stream substrate sorting 0 1 ~:.,,~,w..~ 3
5, Activalrelic floodplain - 0 1 ~,;,;,2:~ 3
8, Depositional bars or benches 0 1 2 K"•w ~ M9
7. Braided channel 0 C"~~~~" 2 3
8. Recent alluvial deposits 0 1 2 c:,w„$,.: ~>
9' Natural Levees 0 ~'"1`~ 2 3
10. Headcuts 0 1 2 r`3"""`>
11. Grade controls 0 0.5 1 Y`„ 1;~:'"~
12. Natural valley or drainageway 0 0.5 ~`"~ " ~ 1.5
13. Second or greater order channel on xi in
USGS or NRCS map or other documented
evidence.
No = 0
~ Yes M3~'~'`~
w,~J
° Man-made ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
r,,..
B. Hvdroloav (Subtotal = ~ . ~~ )
14. Groundwater flow/discharge 0 1 2 3
15. Water in channel and > 48 hrs since rain, or
Water in channel -- d or rowin season 0 1 2 C.....3
18. Leaflitter '~~~vS-F;,. 1 0.5 0
17. Sediment on plants or debris 0 0.5 ~:',L~ 1.5
18. O anic debris lines or piles (Wrack lines) 0 0.5 1.5
19. tiydric soils (redoximorphic features) present? No = 0 Yes = 1.5
C. Bioloav (Subtotal = 1 ~~ )
20 . Fibrous roots in channel 3 C 2 ,,. 1 0
21 . Rooted plants in channel 3 ,,~„~ 1 0
22. Crayfish
23. Bivalves C,""'0 '?
C'~.;~~:,.} 0.5
1 1
2 1.5
3
24. Fish _ 0 C 5.w' 1 1.5
25. Amphibians "~..'~ 0.5 1 1.5
28. Macrobanthos (note diversity and abundance) s;;, O,~M:~ 0.5 1 1.5
27. Filamentous algae; periphyton ~ ,.,,Q~,.> 1 2 3
28. Iron oxidizing bacteria/fun us. s~,Q: 0.5 1 1.5
29 . Wetland plants in streambed FAC = 0.5; FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 SAV = 2.0; Other = 0
-Items 20 and 21 focus on the presence of upland plants, Item 29 focuses on the presence of aquatic or wetland plants.
Notes: (use back side of this form for additional notes.} Sketch:
tiH~S~,~. ("+~l1G.. taY /,t,~'~rJl~~ ~+i~ Y9l 11~+tr+. ,
Naait ('l~F;~.

USACE AID# DWQ # Site # (indicate. on attached snap)
;,~,; STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET ~,,•
Provide the following information for the strewn reach wider assessment: ` /~
1. Applicant's name: ~ + • - ~~!• •~.~_. 2. Evaluator's name: ~1 +«~ ~ JCrh.c./~ ~
3. Date of evaluation: ~ ~~ ~ d '~ 4. Time of evaluation:
5. Name of stream: ~QIY' ~-' ~.Y~~.~ G. River basin: (`fir!-~" a~! r•~'r~+!'~
7. Approximate drainage area: ~ l,? 00 LLt^.Y~S 8. Stream order:. 7n
9. Length of reach evaluated: r`~ « J.~ 10. County: ~ ~ ~• t~ s~ x E ~'
11. Site coordinates (if known): prefer in d,,c1cimal degrees. 12. Subdivision name (if any};
Latitude {ex. 34.872312): ~ • ~ Z1 {p 0 I v Longittule (ex -77.55661 l ): ~ ~ 5~ 3~ ~ w
Method location determined (circle): GPS opo Shcct Ortho (Aerial) PltotolGlS Other GIS Other
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note near y roads and landmarks and attach tttap identifying stream(s) location):
14. Proposed channel work (~~any): P~ o N f
IS. Recent weather conditions: ' ~- y
1G. Site conditions at time of visit: ~. r, N+/ 'f' .~~,`~S'
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: -.,Section 10 -Tidal Waters ,Essential Fisheries Habitat
-Trout Waters -Outstanding Resource Waters -Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watet•shed (i-IV)
18. Is thet~e a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES~:NO~ if yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map?",~5~ NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? •Y)~$? NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: 1 O % Residential ?, J~% Commercial 20 % Industt•ial _% Agricultural
~% Forested
22. Bankfull width: t~n ~k
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%)
2S. Channel sinuosity; ~ Straight -Occasional bends
_% Cleared /Logged _% Other f ~
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): ~ ~~'
,-Gentle (2 to 4%) -Moderate {4 to 10%) -Steep (>10%)
Frequent meander ~Ve~y sinuous Braided channel
Instructions fot• completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregiott based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points
to each characteristic within the range shown far the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the
characteristics identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a
characteristic cannot be evaluated due to site ot• weather cortditiorts, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the
comment section. Where there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows front a pasture
into a forest), the strea»t may be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each
reach. The total score assigned to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a scw•e of 100 representing a stream of the
highest quality.
2
Total Score (fromt•everse): ~ Comments: ~aztii. G,l~'1 ~ rrwa~!~b~~'a 1J+;rv~'
IfrlD Gtl lc++.~~ urn/%G/2 ~.t''~rLS
Evaluator's Signature ~ < ' f.' GF•°" ~ •~ uare
This channel evaluation form is intended to be use fitly as a guide to assist landowners and• nvitonmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The fatal score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requh•ement. Forln subject to change- vet•siou OG/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 2G.

~ r
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
' Pt•esencc~ of flow /persistent pods tn~stream 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 ~
i no flow oraaturation 0 strop :flow r- max Dints '
Evidence of past human alteration 0 - b 0 - 5 ' ' 0 - 5
2 extensive alteration = 0• na alteration a max Dints

" 3 Riparian zouo 0- 6 0- 4` 0- 5
no'buffer= 0• Conti eons wide buffer = max Dints
Evidence of nutrient ar chemical discharges 0 _ 5 0 _ q ` 0 - 4
` 4 extensive dischar es = 0• no dischar es = max ints

~ Groundwater discharge
` 0- 3 0- 4 0- 4
"~"
s see s wetlands etc. = max Dints
'~ no dischar a ='0• s rip
' Presenco of adjacent floodplaiu 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 2
~ no flood laic ~ 0• extensive flood lain = tnax points

~ Entrcnclttnent / floodplain access::
' 0 5 0- 4` 0- 2
' din = max Dints
' dee>l entre~iched - 0• fi•e bent floo
~ Presence of adjacent wetlands
'
` 0 - 6 0 - 4 0 - 2
aceut.iaretlauds = max Dints
a ad
no wetlands ~ 0• lar
r~ Channel '§inuosity 0 - 5 0 - 4 ! 0 - 3 (~
extensive channelization ~ 0• natural meander.- max ints
IO ,Sediment input :' 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 -- 4 ~
extenswe de sition~ 0• little or uo sediment = max Dints

~ ~ ~
Slxe & dipersity of channel bed substrate ~~._~_~
= ~ ~
~~
0 - 4
0 - 5
~.. fi'e `hd o"Brous - 0• lar a .dive esizes = ntax Dints ,~
=
l~ Evidenco o[,channei incist9nor widening 0 ~ 5 4 - 4 0 - 5
, ,.. ..; , ..: dee 1 .tnaised. ~ 0• stable:6ed &baitlcs:= max ints
.
i3 P`resence of major bank failures' 0 ^ 5 0 - 5' 0 - 5 ' ~
,....: . severeerosion:~0,noeiosiotl stablabaaks.~•max Dints
~ foot depot snd'dens~tar o~ barbs 0 3 0 - q 0 - 5
~...
~
,..., ~. no visible.rQ.ots' 0 tdense roots throe 4ut.gmax omts
Impact by. J(~t•Ict~lturc, liveistock, qt• tiJttber liroduction 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5
iS
substaiytial ii act 0 no evidence R;max fats 7
` ~
~ >~resence of x~ftle-~ooUr~ppl~ool cotnplezes
" 0 -~ 3 0 , 5 0 - G ' 1
"1 ies or is .:0 :welt develo ed ~ max ints
_ no.rif~les/Xi

~~ . `.' Aab)itat complexity
' 0 T G 0- 6 0- b
= max Dints
little or no: habitat ; Q ;~ ben. varied habitats
~ 8 ~Rgo~y coverAge over streautbed 0 - 5 0 - 5 0 - 5 ~
C
no shadu# .ire elation: .O~ contJnuouslcano ~ max Dints -
°"'i 9 ' ~ Substrate embeddedness

' - ~ ~~~
,~.;~ ,, .
' 0 - 4 ; 0 - 4 `
embedded . 0'=loose structure ° max
deg `l ~ ~"~~
Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4) ;', 0 - 4 0 - 5 0 - 5
.` 20 no:evidence:~ 0• common numeroust es = max Dints ~ `

~1 ` ' Presence of amphibians
' 0 --'4 0 - 4 0 4, ;: I
max Dints
no evidence= O~ common numerous es =
22 Presence of fish 0 -'4 0 - 4 0 4 ; .
' 1
,..
no evidence~:0"•:commOn iiumea'QUS.t es =:max Dints
Evidence of wiidlif'e: use 0 '. ~ Q- 5 0 S
~
W"
(i,n avirlni,rw a~~A•=A}lnnitAit? PVI(tP.ll[:P. . n1aX l1[11nt43

These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
2

Photographs

Photo 1: View of former bridge approach, looking east.
~„ ~ „ ~'
~ °^
Photo 2: View of riprap along left bank, looking east.
Old North Road over Blair Fork Creek Pre-Construction Notification
Bridge No. 61

Photo 3: View of riprap along right bank, looking west.
~ . 3
~I
gg's a . .. .. ~.
Photo 4: View of stream substrate at proposed bridge crossing.
Old North Road over Blair Fork Creek Pre-Construction Notification
Bridge No. 61

Photo 5: View of upstream of Blair Fork Creek, looking north.
Photo 6: View of downstream of Blair Fork Creek, looking south.
Old North Road over Blair Fork Creek Pre-Construction Notification
Bridge No. 61