20081029 Ver 1_Application_20080627

.3 s,,. swF o
J STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRAMPORTAWN
1V O-3AEL F. EASL.EY
Q GOVERNOR
June 17, 2008
o ?C?1? 2 a??
I\
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
lJ
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Q` Regulatory Field Office
v 151 Patton Avenue, Room 208 OS10-29
C Asheville, NC 28801-5006
ATTENTION: Mr. David Baker
NCDOT Coordinator
S SUBJECT: Nationwide Permit 13 Application for the replacement of Bridge No. 26
J over Junaluska Creek on SR 1505 in Cherokee County, Federal Aid Project
No. BRSTP-1501(l), State Project No. 8.2910501, WBS Element 33813.1.1,
TIP No. B-3635.
Dear Sir:
Please see the enclosed PreConstruction Notification (PCN), Permit Drawings and Design plans for
the above referenced project. A Categorical Exclusion was completed for this project in February
2005 and distributed shortly thereafter. Additional copies are available upon request. NCDOT
proposes to replace the existing two-span, 33-foot long bridge, with a new 60-foot long single-span
bridge. There will be 10 linear feet of permanent impacts from bank stabilization and no temporary
impacts incurred from the construction of this project. As traffic must be maintained onsite and in
order to minimize impacts to the environment and surrounding structures, the project will be built
utilizing phased construction techniques with temporary signals.
IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
General Description:
The single water resource impacted for project B-3635 is Junaluska Creek. Junaluska Creek is
located in the Hiwassee River Basin (Division of Water Quality (DWQ) subbasin 04-05-02) and is
approximately 20 feet wide and 0.5 foot deep within the project area. The DWQ Index number for
this section of Junaluska Creek is 1-52-25 and the Hydrological Cataloguing Unit is 06020002. The
DWQ classifies Junaluska Creek as "C". Within the project area, Junaluska Creek is not listed as a
303(d) water. There are no 303(d) waters within a mile downstream of the project area. No High
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING,
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS R LINCOLN
CAPITAL BLVD. 2728 1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548 WESSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC 27604
i
Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II), or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)
occur within one mile of the project study area. There are no wetlands within the project study area.
Permanent Impacts:
There will be 10 linear feet of permanent stream impacts to Junaluska Creek resulting from bank
stabilization from riprap at the outlet end of a new lateral ditch.
Temporary Impacts:
There will be no temporary impacts to Junaluska Creek.
Utility Impacts:
Duke and Verizon will have to relocate one pole each and reroute the conductor/cable. Cherokee
Cable is attached to Verizon poles and will follow their new route. The rerouting of these utilities
will not impact Junaluska Creek.
Bridge Demolition:
The existing bridge's superstructure consists of asphalt-wearing surface over a timber deck on
timber joints. The interior bent utilizes timer for both cap and piles. Bridge No. 26 can be removed
without dropping components into Junaluska Creek. All guidelines for bridge demolition and
removal will be followed in addition to Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the Protection of
Surface Waters and BMPs for Bridge Demolition and Removal.
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of January 31, 2008, the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists six federally protected species for Cherokee County
(Table 1). The Bald Eagle has been de-listed from the Endangered Species Act as of August 8, 2007
but is still protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Act. A survey for Cumberland bean, Little-
wing pearly mussel and Tan riffleshell was conducted on February 10, 2003; no mussels were found
resulting in a biological conclusion of No Effect.
Table 1. Federally Protected Species for Cherokee County
Common Name Scientific Name Status Habitat Biological
Conclusion"
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus T No De-listed
Bog Turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii T (S/A) Not Subject N/A
Cumberland bean Viollsa trabalis E Yes No Effect
Indiana bat Myotis sodalis E No No Effect
Little-wing pearly mussel Pegias fabula E Yes No Effect
Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides E No No Effect
Tan riffleshell Epioblasma florentina
walkeri E Yes No Effect
2

AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION AND MITIGATION
Avoidance and Minimization:
Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to "Waters of
the United States." The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all reasonable and practicable
design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional stages; minimization measures were
incorporated as part of the project design. In addition, Best Management Practices will be followed
as outlined in "NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Construction and Maintenance
Activities".
• A longer bridge results in open floodplain approximately 27 feet (creating/enlarging) therefore
allowing better hydrologic connectivity.
• The construction of this project has minimized the extent of the built-upon area by using the
existing alignment for the widening.
• The existing structure will carry one lane of traffic until enough of the new bridge is constructed
to accommodate the traffic.
• A trout moratorium on in-water construction is to be enforced from November 1 to April 15.
Mitigation:
NCDOT proposes no mitigation for the 10 linear feet of permanent impacts to Junaluska Creek
because bank stabilization is not considered a loss of waters of the United States.
Schedule:
The project schedule calls for a December 16, 2008 Let date and a review date of October 28,
2008.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
Section 404 Permit:
It is anticipated that the permanent impacts to Junaluska Creek will be authorized under Section 404
Nationwide Permit 13 (Bank Stabilization). We are, therefore, requesting the issuance of a
Nationwide Permit 13 to encompass the 10 feet of rip rap required for stabilization.
Section 401 Permit:
We anticipate 401 General Certification number 3689 will apply to this project. All general
conditions of the General Certification will be adhered to, therefore we are not requesting
concurrence from the DWQ. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0501(a) We are submitting two
3

copies of this permit application to the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality, for your records.
Comments from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) will be required
prior to authorization by the Corps of Engineers. By copy of this letter and attachments, NCDOT
hereby requests NCWRC review. NCDOT requests that NCWRC forward their comments to the
Corps of Engineers and the NCDOT within 30 calendar days of receipt of this application.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please contact Jennifer Harrod at jwharrod(iMot.state.nc.us or [phone]. The
application will be posted at http://207.4.62.65/PDEA/PennApps/.
Sincerely,
??.?? Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
1 Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
cc:
W/attachment
Mr. Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ (2 copies)
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Ms. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Mr. Harold Draper, TVA
W/o attachment (see website for attachments)
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Victor Barbour, P.E., Project Services Unit
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. J.B. Setzer, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Mark Davis, DEO
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P.E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillian, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Williams, Project Planning Engineer
4

Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
USACE Action ID No. DWO No. 2 0 0 8 1 0 2
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1. Processing
1. 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: Nationwide13
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
III.
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Gregory J. Thorpe Ph. D. Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: 1598 Mail Service Center
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: iwharrodna dot.state.nc.us
2. 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:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:_
Project Information
Fax Number:
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: Bridge No. 26 on SR 1505 over Junaluska Creek.
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3635
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN):
4. Location
County: Cherokee Nearest Town: Andrews, NC
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): I-40 West; to exit 27
towards US 74 West; Left at Robinson Rd. and Slight Left at Junaluska Road; Arrive at B-
3635.
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): 35'11'44.13 ON 83'46'46.44 °W
6. Property size (acres):
N/A
7. Name of nearest receiving body of wtter:_ Valley River
8. River Basin: Hiwassee
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. he
River Basin map is available at ham://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/mVs/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application:_ White Pine Forest, Successional/Early Successional
Maintained yard/Disturbed Roadside Maintained Trout Pond
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Bridge
No. 26 will be replaced with a single-span bridge that is 60 feet long
Page 6 of 12
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records
indicate Bridge No. 26 has a sufficiency rating of 71.5 out of a possible 100 for a new
structure. The bridge is considered structurally deficient and functionally obsolete. The
replacement of this inadequate structure will result in safer and more efficient traffic
operations.
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. 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.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts. There will be 10 linear feet of
permanent stream impacts from the use of riprap for bank stabilization and there will be no
temporary stream impacts to the Junaluska Creek
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.
Page 7 of 12

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

(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream

(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
No Wetlands

Total Wetland Impact (acres)
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0
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, multiDly length X width. then divide by 43 560
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on map)
Stream Name
Type of Impact Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Impact Impact
Length
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
1 Junaluska Creek Permanent Perennial 20' 10 0.001

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 10 0.001
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
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map) Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)
Type of Impact Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.) Area of
Impact
(acres)

Total Open Water Impact (acres) 0
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.001 (perm.)
Wetland Impact (acres): 0
Open Water Impact (acres): 0
Page 8 of 12
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0 (perm)
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 10
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.
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.
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: 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 current bridge will be
replaced just upstream of the existing location As SR 1505 has no outlet traffic must be
maintained on site using phased construction on the new bridge. NCDOT Best Management
Practices will be implemented during all phases of construction and 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
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,
Page 9 of 12
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, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/strmgide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide as much
information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions and/or map, if offsite),
affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet) of mitigation proposed (restoration,
enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view, preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions,
conservation easement, etc.), and a description of the current site conditions and proposed method of
construction. Please attach a separate sheet if more space is needed. NCDOT proposes no mitigation for
the 10 linear feet of permanent impacts to Junaluska Creek These impacts are from bank
stabilization, which will not have an adverse effect or result in loss of waters of the United
States.
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
website at htip://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wip/index.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): 0
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): 0
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
0
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)?
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 ?
Page 10 of 12
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SERA 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.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B.0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 0213.0243 (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.
Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(square feet) Mitiuntinn
I 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. 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.
Xl. 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.
All stormwater from this bridge replacement project shall be directed to special cut ditches which
will allow for storm water treatment before discharging into Junaluska Creek
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.
N/A
Page 11 of 12
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:
This project is limited to a bridge replacement. No indirect or cumulative impacts are anticipated
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).
f.
6 .(7.0a
Applicant/Ageni/s Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 12 of 12
MIRTH CAROLINA
ce
\ v'
41
-L- BEGIN TIP PROJECT

k
1

STA. 19+50.00 -L- END TIP PROJECT B-3635
VICINITY
MAPS
NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CHEROKEE COUNTY
PROJECT: 33183.1.1 (B-3635)
BRIDGE NO. 26 OVER JUNALUSKA
CREEK AND APPROACHES
ON SR 1505 (JUNALUSKA ROAD)
SHEET OF
1/2,/08
$hW --L- Of

.j( OLD BIItY'\
' TOP
/
%

r V N T A
N S
< < .
,
_
199D •
',s ? ? 1358 ` _ ,,. .

X' r t 1
Imo
?
501
MDREWi
•
POP
I
74
%
.
A
Andrea Murphy%
. .
.

?
19 CC
._ _
? 1

4 ' ?G 27 ® 7 ?
1
J 65
29
REST -?N j

Z

?
1 or.
&
r
-
50 N Tir
3
C242
J

,
'
• r
'?

l? ? .\ ?
?• ?. BIG ` .1
..
\ .
1
$

tT

/ •....
REE ,.STAMP KNOB

......-r
.
ALD -/

Also FIRES CREEK W DUFF
• MANWGfMENT AREA
NORTH CAROLINA
G DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
-:147 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
CHEROKEE COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE 26 ON SR 1505
OVER JUNALUSKA CREEK
B-3635
Figure 1
Permit Drawing
sheet 2 of 8
1
?a -S_ ` ?r r { *y c? ?? re ?A,
vi 7?1 sR r Y ,L`y?{-ty}i?ao '.. :f! J! 1'Sy \ ?Y}^8 ?? ?+
, . I+? :..('?1 \? ;;._ .•'i •.•?^"f\fr?,,.-i"7G •. * -...?V ?;, ?,
`'?}?? ?: may,*' } .? r't• ? ? ? r??+"'r+? ? .? .;p ?•,,, > >? {+, 1•,.?*i ,??? +??ttrac""'-7?'' ?'?'??? ?^,.a'?'?! ?*1??.
:mow" ? _ r ? a r + U?' •''' ' ?? i '? --!,7 r'? ' r, 4,,. 1 -'•-???a .? _S ,?'
??t?a t\ } 1. *?'?'?+tt ? '?. -t. ff??, t t` ? ^l.?tl?`' ( ?,,. t ?? , :,... •° "^\.....?ij ,,,r, ,.
I" ors , 1 E } ?; r - a { ,-.'T? r^ ?? 1„z a .
4y ? t ? } ,+-?+ v?' {+ ?+ 7 . . ' i ??:? ?-- S ? ??:? ; S `?' _ { r'?1'ti" ? a+' r I { .., ^^'7!'?^, ';
;1 +y I { ?': ,, ? ",M ?+? ? ? ? ?++.c' ., i • ? 'li*• +??,'i?? 3S J{ ,, .,? _7`? ? ?? ; :.? r r? ?"`r' I t 7'I ?'
1 * . (31 ?' •' t i -sue 'r ` ,?+? ',?'.
IV 4
+ 11.}hir'?"r•_ ?v,?? y-`t } jf?t r 1,,1• ?J `t4??ty{,'1'' 4l
?y., .•? ` ^? ? ? iFf?? 5 ?F9 -? t .._y{ r +,A '?+i ''"*t+•. } f. 5? ?'?,'"• ,{r v?'?,-",? ? , f 1 ? ? t
35
f'1 a-? ?' 3y, 11 tya +?:*' ??,-? . }T _.J_ ?. _ ~ __; ,?d 'ti ?Z ???''?? i 1? i'•ti rT ?'?„ +i'?? •? ' ? -• ,t.
III It
41
T• + ?"" .' : ,+ t.:i '1 . t'k"' r ,.'`, _ +..- , ?*. +•' 7v7..?r4' :.,? '' a p• ?. t. .L 47
L L?': 4.• "' : w.. ?, . 5.'
'? ? t? ? ii ? ? ? ?'.•. - ?7. ? ,? -may ' t 1 -1 '•. v:"??`'?..1 Twti..{t. t;? .'t .,7{ ?
+r1 ?.. ?__,_?' ?p•. ??,. ?\? ?1,, °.:?? ? r ?,•• MI S'.,? .? t_ +?? `lrltii , 1.?„ tl ]p ,? ??{l-?~xr's-?„? 1~ 1?? ?-.'t? t?. -'-?1.i?f
f'l:: ^'i. .,.,.Jr' -e,?. ,r; '? ''1. •,??i f.•l ?' F, ,-?,T J. ?'• T...?II ? ' `'•? 'aT?"__1.. "?., ti: '{...?? 1.,,F fl..
1 ,?'?' ?? ' ?` 1\ a?t +1?. ?:?vr/t •??", ? r '? f''?, '1? , _ ??J. I ;?, ? '+i .•'-:i-.-
;...'
?+ ?f' f' .-?--?,? .•-:?•--r? ?•, 'Ir k4j ?r ,,! ?4
?'" \ ? 'tir ?1 ,,', • ^, n : X1 ? 'S ?L`?k-y- ? 'C:: j `'j ';?i+r'1' ? `•^• :>?,? r,t. ? ? ' "r ? , i ,1 ? 1?.-.,• ?•i •' l?p t ? ? ? '1L ? ' •' w 7'`?.. ? , ,i- \'?"-.
"? •i^.?; 11 ii i+ ?? 4_._.,, 1 ? S? -?•. ?R •• ''? \ _ ? .-?:', ? 'L?? fr?".'+??,[a? t,? a??` ?? ?. 1{ ?}. ? , \`? ???? r??l:'?
^•,,: 1}fi- !4 , a; ,1a? f a..'.1:., ?',"??.:' 7U ,,.: - .,.' t• - t' 7: '.r 1 .'t: 1 i ?:.; ti
+.?t,? ?:} ? 1 3.'-? ?l 1,?,?: ,,^ y f ^"sty' ?- .y"? ? ?+ ? ? ?{•}, IV. ? i. • "??, ] F . .,,-. .`'?- _? ' _4 ?L t ? ' ? j ? ?? 1i. I ;'I- ,4,,, ?,` ?,•?t'. t•
NCDOT
?j {'i? t3?,lr}{Lt?i?+l4 '? ?t+l?s#?{3G'IrI' ) *y --:? •.
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
1 : ,•a , j t ?, 1? ,?? ?,, ??' ??????; ;?`?'.??;?.:,?? r ?jj??r;r, ,, ??? E. ? ? ? t_ u CABARRUS COUNTY
ry J-? a .c, q i ? ??1. ? +.t' ?`''1 l r^ i S. 1 f t ' ' •,k•-.r_,?- ?'• .1'
. i,y ' ?'' t 1 ?~ • ?? , PROJECT: 8.2661601 (R-2246C)
r ?{ t t ?ti?`--•u", ""?.?L?L .^.`,?.. ?1 It? , ??} . or-• ?^y-,'' j"',j'.r{..•??.?'--,? i ?t
i ,L.` ? -r j,l,'. ? 1 ?• ?_Lt , 1 - a \ ?,? rt,: •,` '?1? 1?;. L ?'a ...,_ ,? ` ,,?
., ? ,- a Sr - ? ? , ? yj{? • ??, ? { ,, 4 ?} ?.:' CONCORD-KANNAPOLIS
'J ? , ??, .? :. ?r"? 7r :r„? ? ? I .fit ?}'1??:? W' \'• R ?t ? 1'?? ,,C.. ? ? }fit +.-.?.. r?'ti f' S
WESTSIDE BYP EXT FROM
{ 4 ' t l t{? 4} Z,,?:`! ?1??_: `?o .,a i . ,{? ` .. a `' - SR 1431 TO SR 1555
' ??j i? l ?? ?.-,?,^+ ?'? ??? i ,', a'???1?? ,? • ?y t •? ?L . '-• 4 '?"i 1?' ! I { 1.,; li. ,,..?'r? a ._.?
{ 't ?, + ?'? rt IY ? ,t? ?:; t? ir? ?' }F, -.t?43 M? 1' f ?: ?? ??5?\:. '? ?'•,? `
r • :' ?.. 1 7 ' i 1?{ ?. ;; i ';r ,< ?Iti'' SHEET OF 10/16/011
fz
PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES
4 BONNIE McCLURE HEIRS 1970 JUNALUSKA ROAD
ANDREWS, NC 28901
3 CORA HOYLE 1915 JUNALUSKA ROAD
ANDREWS, NC 28901
2 PAUL LEE 1310 RING STREET
RUBY M. LEE HIGH POINT, NC 27260
7 RONNAIREL N LEE MMcCCWRE 1970 JUNALUSKA ROAD
ANDREWS, NC 28901
1 WILLIAM DAVID BIRCHFIELD P.O. BOX 35
ANDREWS, NC 28901
6 BONNIE McCLURE HEIRS 1970 JUNALUSKA ROAD
ANDREWS, NC 28901
5 DOROTHY KUHN 1943 JUNALUSKA ROAD
ANDREWS, NC 28901
QermR DtfvAm ?. 3
Sheet I of ?? _
N
44
:i
' :tt
WE'
Permanent Temp.
Site Station `.+ricL e Fill In Fill In
No. (From/To) +za / Type Wetlands Wetlar-'-
_ _ ac) (ac) e
17+75 +/- RT.

- f

_t

I"

TOTALS:
Revised 3131105
PROJECT RIERFA CE NO. SHECI NO.
AW RiY4T N0.
ROADWAY DFRGN M'DRAUIJC!
EH omm !!YO!!E!
INCOMPLE
W xm IIyB PROM E PLANS
/v ACOOtllTxMl
PRELIMIN
DO NOT USE PO RY PLANS
C 5mOCYm

?v
?n
o?
o?
Zo
WOODS
VINCENT LEE
?i20Y?
Y
/
LEONARD H.PARTOH
VICKI P. PARTON
L OR EBOHE UoCLURE HEIRS VSCORA HOYLE.ET.
3 O2 1CORA HOYLE.ET.ALS.
3 Q YCORA HIOYLE. ETALS.
5 U4 1 DOROTHY 14 KU HM
yA O Y ROME YcCLURE HERS VS MR" L. MM
RYA © tVIRM L. BURDEN
3 (2 ttALWN DAVp BRORELO
6 ( , 90NE NcCLuE HELPS
HOOFIED CORCS
SEE SHEET 2--
SEE INSET A
1 \ O is ? .
11
11 ??
\\ Q1

1 SEE DETAIL A
TIE SPECIAL DITCH
i TO EXIST. DITCH
` -L- STA. 19+50.00 TO
1 STA.20+00.00 LT.
N WOODS
O
\
\ a`

\
5
Eooos \ DOROTHY K KURH

SOI+E NcCLURE HEIRS

P
`
N

_

J

7
B-3635 5

DOA"AY @UON HYDRA =
MORE mara R
PRELIM NARY'PLANS
oo N r um ft* courrxairner
1 E ILUAE ATI 14 ¦ 202 .21
•
8 L•
84 TAT
2 ON
W +00
I8T 00
13
.58
TR CT E HY C AT
N
• 588
L- 280
TAT Zoe
ON E
+57 70,
00 1.
0.0 880
' R
0HT DE N SC
R - FS
RS
C I8 M ON EA8 EN
J
OF
UIMT N
WA
L

E

CH

f
J

FS

N 3 •
888
•- ELE
688
ATI ATI
897
UN1 ¦
E
14+ 20
70
if .07
74.
7.7
930
' L

FT

OV
E
E
I
AT
fR

E
fT
RS
• ELE ATI N ¦ 208 .69
m
• Doe
L• D"
TAT Too
ON F.
0+
.Ob UAI
WS L CH -Wj
AT fVtYl
38
fT
8 810 M. N F 1 " P NE AEE

PI
¦ 1
1+45
.00
P
1
8+811
.00
EL
ZO, '
75

2,060
1
YC -
¦ 1
6'
Y -
25'

2450 gr2l
E
32 PI
EL = 11
¦ 2 1+10
,034 ,00
.03' 4
1 SYAI
45 +72.3

K
88
(DS
9
ph)
i cow am
2047
a
(4
)2.49,
"3;'

2,040 (+A .354 , 7
m
t
t i27,
1

EL
2O 2,040

2 wan
20020

c
P

2,000
a
+ D
I
IX
EPT
H
E
RED
F
DE
N
PEE
a
S
S
N
M
lp
O
O
ML
and
or
O
ryU
mj
=T` 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

1
R
a
M
`.I
o?
a
04
h
gee sneer r-A ror inoex or sneers
See Sheet I-8 For Conventional Symbols
See Sheet !-C For Survey Control Sheet
4
ew,
19 / i
- 1502
PROJECT B-3635
1505 L
1502 3
1506
00 1505
VICINITY MAP
00
O
O
U
c,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CHEROKEE COUN7T
LOCATION: BRIDGE NO. 26 OVER JUNALUSKA CREEK
AND APPROACHES ON SR 1505 (JUNALUSKA ROAD)
rtn rt•n IR"wi.T teau"a "o ¦art ror.?
•C 8-3635 1
WAT 1 M R•1• m IgRiR
33183.1.1 BRSTP-1505 P.E.
33183.2.1 BRSTP-1505 Rw & UTILITIES
33183.3.1 BRSTP-1505 CONST.

TYPE OF WORK: GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING, STRUCTURE, AND GUARDRAIL
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
A- STA 14+20.00

END - BRIDGE
4
-L- ST 17+55
00
\ v' .

-1. SR 1508
BEGIN BRIDGE
4- a1A 17+10.00 yp

STA. 14+50.00 -L- BEGIN TIP PROJECT B-3635
_ 1
1
1
Qb 1
1
END CONSTRUCTION
?A 1
1
-L- STA 40+00.00
1
1
1
1

STA. 19+50.00 -L- END TIP PROJECT B-3635

Nk
?1.
•• DESIGN EXCEPTION REQUIRED FOR DESIGN SPEED, MINIMUM HORIZONTAL CURVE RADIUS, SUPERELEVATION, AND ASSOCIATED STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE.

PRELIMINARY PLANS
ro !*OT'uB6 FM ?m,VCy%w;.

GRAPHIC SCALES DESIGN DATA PROJECT LENGTH Prepared In Ire Mice or.. HYDRAVLICS ENGINJiER
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
50 25 50 1 ADT 2008 = 1278 1000 Birch R1$• Dr., Raleigh, NC 17610
ADT 2025 = 1800 LENGTH ROADWAY OF TIP PROJECT B-3635 = 0.086 MILES 1006 J7AMMUD SRCl1RCAnW3
PLANS DHV = 14 % LENGTH STRUCTURES OF TIP PROJECT B-3635 = 0.009 MILES
ra
50 25 50 1 D = 60 % TOTAL LENGTH OF TIP PROJECT B-3635 = 0.095 MILES RIGHT OF WAY DATE JAMES A
SPEER
PE
0111100- T = 3 % " .
DECEMBER 9
2005 .
.
` ROADWAY DsSrGx
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL) V = 30 MPH** , 1INGHl9
10 5 10 20 •
TS LE7712VG DATE. DANIEL W. GARDNER, JR., PE
ma T 1 % DUAL 2 %
T ?
1 DECEMBER 16.2008 '°S1G"Q?`
Q PROFILE (VERTICAL) ?
` ??? rs
OAOF JBI7GrrWAYSINA
STATRDJ'VfSrOFNxORT
CAROL
• MO ?
r
f
•R Two,
P8
- --J rtf
Note.' Not to Scale
*S .E. = Srrkrrrrfam Utility Eviuming

CAROLINA
DIVISION OF
CONVENTIONAL PLAN SHEET SYMBOLS
BOUNDARIES AND PROPERTY
State Line
County Line
Township line
C
U
- - -
- - -
- - -
-
ity
na
Reservation Una - -
- - -
Property Una
Existing Iron Pin o
Property Comer -*
Property Monument
Parcel/Sequence Number Q
Existing Fence Una -x-x-x-
Proposed Woven Wire Fence 9
Proposed Chain Unk Fence - a
Proposed Barbed Wire Fence 0
Existing Wetland Boundary
- - - -?- - - -
Proposed Wetland Boundary
Existing Endangered Animal Boundary
?-
Existing Endangered Plant Boundary -
BUILDINGS AND OTHER CULTURE.-
Gas Pump Vent or UG Tank Cap o
Sign o
Well °
Small Mine x
Foundation F-7
Area Outline O
Cemetery
0
Building
School
Church
Dam
HYDROLOGY
Stream or Body of Water
Hydro, Pool or Reservoir
Jurisdictional Stream
Buffer Zone 1
Buffer Zone 2
Flow Arrow
Disappearing Stream
Spring
Wetland
Proposed Lateral, Tail, Head Ditch
False Sump

-is... -
-sZi-
RAILROADS.'
Standard Gouge

RR Signal Milepost - J
CSrOW
o
w£PoSr ]s
Switch D
RR Abandoned -
RR Dismantled --------
RIGHT OF WAY
Baseline Control Point
Existing Right of Way Marker
Existing Right of Way Line -
Proposed Right of Way Line -?-
Proposed Right of Way Line with A
Iron Pin and Cap Marker
Proposed Right of Way Line with m
Concrete or Granite Marker
Existing Control of Access - --
Proposed Control of Access G.__
Existing Easement Line - -E--
Proposed Temporary Construction Easement- -E
Proposed Temporary Drainage Easement- -mE-
Proposed Permanent Drainage Easement- -roE-
Proposed Permanent Utility Easement -tiE-
ROADS AND REL MP FEATURES.•
Existing Edge of Pavement
-
Existing Curb -
Proposed Slope Stakes Cut - -- - - -
Proposed Slope Stakes Fill - -- F - - -
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp (RM
Proposed Wheel Chair Romp Curb Cut -
Curb Cut for Future Wheel Choir Romp - crR
Existing Metal Guardrail
Proposed Guardrail
Existing Cable Guideroil " "
Proposed Cable Guideroil "
Equality Symbol
Pavement Removal
-!Z z- VEGETATION.-
<---- - Single Tree 0
} - - - Single Shrub o
_..? Hedge
Woods Line u"`" u^
Orchard 4 fl p
!- N
m Vineyard 1-
EXISTING STRUCTURES.•
MAJOR:
Bridge, Tunnel or Box Culvert
Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall and End Wall
MINOR:
Head and End Wall
Pipe Culvert
Footbridge -
Drainage Box: Catch Basin, DI or JB
Paved Ditch Gutter
Storm Sewer Manhole
Storm Sewer
U77UMS.'
POWER:
Existing Power Pole
Proposed Power Pole
Existing Joint Use Pole
Proposed Joint Use Pole
Power Manhole
Power Line Tower
Power Transformer
LPG Power Cable Hand Hole
H-Frome Pole
Recorded UG Power Una
Designated UCG Power Una (S.U.E *)
WATER:
Water Manhole p
Water Meter CD
WaMr Valve
Water Hydrant
Recorded U413 Water Una
?- Designated UG Water Una (S.U.E.•r-- - - - -•- - - -
*w Above Ground Water Line 1/G ¦atk

caa H. TV:
TV Satellite Dish
> N Pedestal p
?? TV Tower
----- UG TV Cable Hand Hole ER
Recorded UG TV Coble
Designated UG TV Cable (S.U.E.*) - ---„----
Recorded UG Fiber Optic Cable -? r"-
Designated UG Fiber Optic Cable (S.U.E.*)- - -
---pro---
tti
b
8
GAS:
Gas Valve 0
Gas Meter
Recorded UG Gas Una
Designated UG Gas Una (S.U.E.*) - - - -o- - _ _
Above Ground Gas Una "C G?S
SANITARY SEWER:
Sanitary Sewer Manhole
Sanitary Sewer Cleanout
UG Sanitary Sewer Una
Above Ground Sanitary Sewer Nc 5?,,?y s••x
TELEPHONE: Recorded SS Forced Main Une rr-
Existing Telephone Pole -0- Designated SS Forced Main Line (S.U.E.*) - - - - _
Proposed Telephone Pole -0-
Telephone Manhole 0 MISCELLANEOUS:
Telephone Booth p Utility Pole

Telephone Pedestal ED Utility Pole with Base El
Telephone Cell Tower Utility Located Object o
UG Telephone Cable Hand Hole © Utility Traffic Signal Box

Recorded LPG Telephone Cable Utility Unknown UG Line NR-
Designated UG Telephone Cable (S.U.E.*)- - --- ---- UG Tank, Water, Gas, Oil
Recorded UG Telephone Conduit R AAG Tank, Water, Gas, Oil a
Designated UG Telephone Conduit(S.U.E.*Y - -------- LPG Test Hole (S.U.E.*) ?
Recorded UG Fiber Optics Cable TI.- Abandoned According to Utility Records - AATUR
Designated UG Fiber Optics Coble (S.U.E,"t- - ---"Po--- End of Information E.0.i.

PAVEMENT SCHEDULE

D1
PROP. APPROX. 111' ASPHALT CONCRETE IURFACE COURSE, TYPE IF/.BA,
E2 'MOP, VAR. ASPHALT C ryps uf Do
AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 114TLGSBASPERO? .E D. PER I OEkTN TO
AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 137.1 LOS. PER 10. YD. BE PL CID
IN
LES$ THAT E IN DEPTH ON
LAYJRI OT
N
HA
P
PROP. VAR. DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE, TYPE BPE.8A,
C2 AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 110 LOS. PER 10. TO. PER 1' DEPTH. TO IE R EXPREIGWAY GUTTER
PLACED IN LAYERS HOT TO EXCEED Sly' IN DEPTH.
D1 PROP.APPROX. 21' ASPHALT CONCRETE INTERMEDIATE COURSE, T EARTH MATERIAL
TYPE I19.01, AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 281.8 LBB. PER $0. YD.

132 PROP. VAS. DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE INTERMEDIATE COURSE
TYPE 111.01, AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 114 LIB. PFR 10. I PER 1"
DEPTH
TO BE PLACED IN LAYERS NOT LESS THAN Ely" IN DEPTH OR

U

EXISTING PAVEMENT
,
GREATER THAN 4" IN DEPTH.
El PROP. APPROX. 4' ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE COURSE, TYPE BE5.08,
W
AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 480 LBO, PER 10. YD. VARIABLE DEPTH ASPHALT PAVEMENT (SEE STANDARD WEDGING DETAIL)
NUE: P"VENENT ENE NAPES ME 1:1 UaESS OWN OTHER141IE.
EXISTING
t0 •?
-L--
ln) (0) ron E2
ILLL1?//! 1
r'
i MM' ?? { SA1?M '74 -
"Im. 1 µ
Detail Showing Method of Wedging u
91 9' V6GR
4' 4'
FOPS FDIES
n w n
.02 GRADE TO THIS LINE

7.5' u u 7.5'
L ?
VAR.
TYPICAL SECTION NO.1

TRANSITION FROM TYPICAL SECTION NO.1 TO
EXISTING -L- STA 19+00.00 TO STA 19+50,00
.02
EXISTING
sl

GROUND
P..1 Y ' I -4
3, 5 ?5 T DI 7.5"? T >>?O
USE TYPICAL SECTION NON 2
GRADE TO THIS LINE -L- STA. 15+75,00 TO STA. 17+10.00 (BEGIN BRIDGE)
-L- STA. 17+55.00 (END BRIDGE) TO STA. 18+00.00
TYPICAL SECTION NO.2
4 ?-
I
2-BAR METAL RAIL II ICI 2' 0
NOTE: SR 1505, JUNALUSKA RD. IS A
DESIGNATED BICYCLE ROUTE (NC 2)
2'
BEARII
.02 .
00000
2.0
BEARING
1 PRoIECI' REPEREI4CE N0. I EMEEI No.
c_zexc .,
m
EXISTING GROUND
TRANSITION FROM EXISTING TO TYPICAL SECTION
NO.1-L- STA 14+50.00 TO STA 15+00.00
GRADE TO THIS LINE USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.1
-L- STA. 15+00.00 TO STA. 15+75.00
-L- STA. 18 + 00.00 TO STA. 19 + 00.00
24BAR METAL RAIL
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.3
-L- STA. 17+10.00 (BEGIN BRIDGE) TO STA. 17+55.00 (END BRIDGE)
RARE 2
00 00 0C
STAGE I
TYPICAL SECTION NO. 3
Permtt DrawkV
Sheet,_... d
m
E
m
m
0
Y
V
m?a
omZ
N?
m a?
w?
raOlCf WER040 NO.
C3
vm
H ? 0
r O 'n
mZ =-4
=o?nm
'11
zNmr--n
p0o"
4>
??
N H
0
z
NO
= v Z
N
O
Z M O
w=
mn --I
O
= r

O H
n
M
I
M
v
H
z
O
OTI °ro
C ?
=m
.9
i
D
NOTES:
- CONSTRUCT MODIFIED CONCRETE FLUME AND SHOULDER BERM GUTTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS DETAIL.
SHEET 1 OF 1
MODFLMDT(
OUTLET
1ti
WATER I' ® WATER
FLOW FLOW
FLOW DIVERSION
41-0"
2' •0"
a
4" CONC.
PAVE ITCH SECTION C•C
OUTLET

FLOW DIVERSION FOR
OUTLET
WATER ??
FLOW ® FLOW DIVERSION
SAG
FLOW DIVERSION EXAMPLES DOWN GRADE
• CONSTRUCT CONCRETE DITCH IN ACCORDANCE WITH STD. DWG. NO. 850.01.
CONSTRUCT RIP RAP LINED DITCH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS DETAIL, IF CALLED FOR IN PLANS.
• CONCRETE OR RIP RAP LINED DITCH SHALL BE THE TYPE AND LENGTH SPECIFIED BY THE ROADWAY PLANS. THE DITCH SHALL
TERMINATE AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS. IF NO TERMINATION IS INDICATED PLACE RIP-RAP AT THE END OF THE DITCH AS INDICATED
BY STD. DWG. 876.02 FOR AN 18" PIPE. TRANSITIONS FROM THE DITCH TO TERMINATION SHALL BE AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
MODIFICATIONS SHALL BE AS DICTATED BY SITE CONDITIONS AND DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
z
o cn
?Q
Qa
Z=V
000
= x
z Z
w
Q ? ? O M
cnI-L.L w o"J
ZN?
HH
ao
Lu
0
W
o=?
LLLO
c? a
Q2Wa
?" Lr
C3
V
Z
O W
o?W
W
cl)
H H O
JU.V
W
o?
MODFLMDTCHI
UN
smw NO.
SEE PLATE FOR TITLE
Permit Drmft
S of MOORIGINAL DIFIED ODIFIED BY: E.E. Ward DATE:
?...... ?? I? BY: E.E. Ward DATE:
LIP CURB
" 2'•4" IN. Y8" RADIUS
.at 7r, hs I,
SECTION A-A
811 21.811 8"
m fro .. o.. • . o..:o. .a
SECTION B-B
41.0"
t? 21-0"
a
m
RIP-RAP LINED DITCH
- - FILE SPEC • W' Stn lmadifiad uf1 ee a?-
DOWNGRADE OR SAG

N
, n
n
0
oa
rm
0
N<
mc
wC
?l
RIVISIONS
R.W REVISION (DWG) 05102106
THE UPDATED SURVEYS SHOW A NEW DRIVE. NEW HOME, AND A
NEW PROPERTY LINE SOUTH OF JUNALUSKA CREEL(,
THE PROPOSED R/W WAS REVISED AND TICE WAS ADDED ON
PARCEL 2 (RUBY M. LEE AND PAUL LEE). THE PROPOSED R/W.PDE,
AND TCE WERE REVISED ON PARCEL 6 (BONNIE NOCLURE HEIRSI.
PARCEL 7 (RA' ARLEN M CLURE AND CONNIE LEE MCCLURE) WAS
ADDED
DETAIL A
SPECIAL CUT DITCH
I Not to sedd
FFp1tIoM
t 1 \ 4? SbW
D
Mim D - LO Ft.
StC6 I9+30 to 19+50 -L- Lt
DEJAIL-B
ST 4 w xnlo CN
1
NIM1 Dh LO Ft,
Sto. 17+65 to 18+5 -L- Rt
DDE = 40 CY
TAI
ppRP RAP AT NEAT
(NO? to s0ow
D'a?Al 5 H ?ft
FAt.A Tarr o
Est.M "y01 }.01411 MopWlo
TV. of Lbw. lft,%M
E
i
il
A
»
A
48.91
w9'S u?
86
P m
N14-48 28-
-L-
PL S?o 13+23,54 PI Sio 18+43.42
p= 7U217 13B(LT)
D - 18'00' 0017 &= 73'09'DOI(RT)
0 = 16'23' 397'
L - 39076' L = 9575'
R - 318.3r •R - 75,010'
SE - ,04 N-15 EpV
• NOR: DTAON O(QFRON EMMM 101 MRL NOEL CURVE "ACTH.
SKETCH SHOWING RELATIONSHIP OF BRIDGE
TO PAVEMENT AND SHOULDERS
4, 61AU 1160 TYPE ¦ ? I N TYPE 150 P I'1t
~ sy ?
GAAU 7!0 TYPE IN TYIF II
k ETA 1 + .00 1M E
-L' 114117+55A0
11"A ourna
iHOUIDAY G
MFI
"AJWT AEIERINCE NO. SHEET NO.
8-3635 _r 4
ROADWAY OINWM I HYDRAULIC
DO M= E+OINER
S N25'A6'7'E
912.50
"" N25.46'7•E 177.31 TRAFFIC IS TO It MAINTAINED WITH A 310^01,U? ONEIANE-TWO WAY
oN aE LM TOUR ILEtmND "WED CONITRUCRON OF THE ROPOW
40. i' ITRUCTUI6 fB 1RAF"C CONTROL PLANT,
1 25.46'13' " woods BRIDGE DESCRIPTION NOW: DDRESWAY OIRIEE (FW-1. RA 111+011.00 TO 1E+75.00 LT.
Ill woaps 1 1 UTILITY OWNERS MM 940ULDRIERM GUTTERMq-1-AA.16+{0.001017+00.00+LKT.
;> 1 BRIDGE NO. 26 BUILT IN 1953 AND ar 81A. 17+7440+/- TO 10+50.00 RT.
1 NANLxALA POwE 8 LIGHT 33.0' LONG ,189' WVffi DECK ,17.5'CLEAR DECK WIDTH
P.O. B0x R EST SURFACE 111TH WOODEN DECK
J sf FRANBLIN, 60 NINE NON GIRDERS,TWO ROCK ABUTMENTS
Vy?sf'1 1 ` 2B734 ONE WOODEN BRIDGE PIER SUPPORT IN THE CENTER
VINCENT LEE METAL GUARD RAILS
D.B. 594 - PG. 88 GTE TELEPHONES OUT OPERATION
OF STUTN AREA INCH WATER MARK - 2043.50'
1 201 eEi CENTRAL AVE.
MUR2PHY. N.C.
\ CA
ANDREW s cdeLE BOARD
131W ST.
ey a 1 ANDREWS. N.C. 5.67 rr 28901 .?
X3.38' an waw. q Wa. 1
\ \ N °' NOR) DO NOT MWU OSR. WELL, EEAIC TTAN?S, AND DRAIN UNIE ON PARCEL 1
WOODS TYPE 370 R AI)
m \? 00 BL-2 PNC 8+43. REMOVE EEITMO Eft UCTU
L 13+0981 22. T'RT. wacDS SEPTIC I O /
IlUIN CORA HOYLE, ET.ALS,
Y° o?
\ s \? N 5M6•E EW MON. .N32'4 'o 'E 2.
VINCENT LEE 0
- 24.' o D.B.498 - PG.6
0.8. 594 - PG. 88 MTL ANOPY
mU, o°t?Frf \G?T 9 EECH RTPE E 19.03' 2e 0;1975. 40 J agT3 7 DO NOT DIENE WELL
s, d\4 ,, Ai p ?89 'E 00111 /
°+ `'i R,w wow "u•a + k % BL 4 PRk 13+78.08
xe??s z s9',.i r DEC © -L- 18+17.54 - 42.26' LT.
w10j- ?' (f9 ?\ 4'C R 4 A0'1 f.`] `^ -? ISFD P T Q \SS ?A` .^' gf.
N.a ??• c r ?? S YJ
0? 562 5 5 N37'I0'29'E /
60.99 NI255'5t'w\'2r3TE? 97.28' 4'
NSB 4' q•W ?' 7507 /
N4?'46.18-E
JACKIE HANEY 1782 Sw'0R0'w M 2/ 9d•9?
BERTHA L. HANEY 18' S12 1'20'- ???•- - _ x
SI0'16'IS'w 2512
0 .B. 842 - PG. 123 ?. _ ?4m +3.11 11" y 09753'11
20.15
Ell k SDB w 4' r V!D 0RAIY11M0 - ws
yy
26R 1 'UNKNOWN 0 X '-`QK AND MET FEN E
aF+ 08'W
"a-a-'A9-i 5.13' +00. k
EIP N24'45'32'E n2 EIP •?? L = wpx. _ \ € k.
R
ISFD N99'46'IW'E a, \ _ 7? N0079'0B'E
48.61 M 535 95? •E \ "i"
+t Pv ` 357826.11 \ RETAIN, \ z ?o T 4 SPECIAL DITCH
SEPT °TDg .ti 12.01 RW A60 . pRa \ , •0' 3'53'11 SEE DETAIL A
a nA W CONIC +
? \1rcR\ LEONARD ARTON REMOVE
m v VICKI . PARTON "? A RUBY M. LEE Q { S?+f I Ndi + IE i TIE SPECIAL DITCH
rye D. 11- PG. 208 PA EE ? TO ExIST. DITCH
= n \ \D,B. B - G.2 S P IC I £ -L- STA. 19+50.00 TO
yo RETAIN 1DTT. \( 16fD '? 5'w O W00DSSTA. 20+0p.00 LT,
ryo°.' RAY MON. \ \ DETAIN DE7AL C I \ x \
BL3 PINC 10+94.30 M0?'
ti +a> -L- 5+53.52 - 15.4 RT. SEE IOETAL a PLAN a +
f
J •F' .
2ryN CONC A OBdSNETBALL GO l .Q ? s 44. 6 9\ 30.00' LT.
'
R
G
COWC i O
MODIFIED C NCRETE WE? \ T.21 Y 8 +\?+ k 0+00. 5
SEE SHEET 2•A FOR TAq, 1 IsF 1
9N 'i GR WOODS'
a? eti BEGIN STATE PROJECT "635 _ 5 1 N I DOROTHY M D.B. Irs - PG, 17 9
4- STA 14+50.00 t m 1 S
N N16'S2 30•w PARCEL NO,= PROPERTY N0. X. S ' i N \
9.95' °= w LL \ O
N6 r
T4•w ?,j 24'w 4 :BONNIE McCLUAE HEIRS VS CORA DHOYLE. ,B. 49Ei..6 V t ?`
3 : D.B. 343 - PG. 109 'OISPUTEB'AREe; p,e 4911 PG. PG. 6 /y ISFD
a a 7824 SO. Ft. \ \ O G( t.J
SEPTI
3 1 1 l C
- : CORA HOYLE. ET,ALS.
a= D.B. 498 - PG. 6 l l 1 ?, c l
ISFD
3 - O CORA HOYLE, ET.ALS. X
D.B. 498 - PG.6 B \ \ \ a -.
Nx
5 :DOROTHY M. KUHN V V v w
BL-5 PINC 18+53.54
D.B.175 - PL. 179 \ - 4 UP c
a s:?
n \ >: x APPLE
'e" WA O: BONNIE MCCLURE HEIRS O'MIRIAM L. BURDEN '.P HOUSE ? STUMP
O.B. 347 - PG. 109 'DISPUTED aBEA: D.B. 529 - PG.57 \ l`
Z 4740 SO. FT.
WA ( MIRIAM L. BURDEN y %
O D.B. 529 - PG. 57 J N 1 -
1 - (D: WILLIAM DAVID BIRCHFIELD Ip` ISFD
9,.
D.B. 613 - PG 176 END STATE PROJECT "635
6 O: BONNIE MCCLURE HEIRS A- STA 19+50.00 0 x
D.B. 343 - PG. 109 WELL d
> '??,o' ww jyyMP14OUSC
m 0
ry a 7 e O ROY ARLEN MCCLURE
CONNIE LEE MCCLURE
NOTE; SEE SHEET 5 FOR PROFILE °°f IT \ a BONNIE MocLURE HDROarnA ?
SEE SHEETS TCP-i THRU TCP-9 FOR DETOUR OPERATION : o.B. 343 - PG.I09
SEE SHEETS S-5. THRU S-ii FOR STRUCTURE PLANS
ar
r
e
MI • ELEVATION ¦ 2020.21'
N 888 228.4880 E 888,822.8830
•SL- dTATION 8+00.00
S 84 12 53 W DIST. 138.88'
SPIKE IN 18" POPLAR TREE
SM2 - ELEVATION ¦ 2028.48'
N 888 2502060 E 870,421.3680
•BL- 6TATiON 9+87.00 10.00' RIGHT-
L- STATION 13+24.85 27.35' RIGHT
CHISLED SQUARE ON EAST END OF HEAD WALL
=3 - ELEVATION ¦ 2040.07'
N 558 659.9370 E 570 574.5330
•SL- 6fATIOH 12+95.06 49.00' LEFT=
•L- STATION 17+43.94 67.75' LEFT
CHISLED SQUARE ON ROCK
814 - ELEVATION ¦ 2051.83'
N 585 846.7550 E 571 427.5480
•SL- 6TATION 20+54.06
S S6 01 23 E DIST. 120.56'
8" SPIKE IN SASE OF 18" PINE TREE
STRUCTURE HYDRAULIC DATA
DESIGN DISCHARGE - Is50 CFS
DESIGN FREQUENCY - 25 YRS
DESIGN HW ELEVATION - 2043.4 FT
BASE DISCHARGE - 2500 CFS
BASE FR£OUEACY = 100 YRS
BASE HW ELEVATION - 20442 FT
OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE = 1200 CFS
OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY ¦ p YRS
OVERTOPPING ELEVATION - 20429 FT
DATE OF SURVEY =
W.S.ELEVAT101N = 20383 FT
AT DATE OF SURVEY
rl ¦ 10+45.o0
EL = 2,041.55'
VC ¦ 138'
tttttMK ¦ 30 DS> 31
PI = 15+10.00
EL ¦ 2,034.03'
VC ¦ 120'
K = 39 (D8? 30mph)
PI - 18+55.00
U EL = 2,048.13'
VC ¦ 125'
K=110(Ml,1
17+32J
LEN"
9- xAR u
Y"at In
+ DESIGN EXCEPTION REQUIRED FOR DESIGN SPEED
M
C
C
C
(C
4
g?
n
h
0
--- ?
PUT-
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Mo= trMw ! NO. RNSr N0.
8-3635 5
ROAWAY DAMN NYD#AUUCS
-
FP
RELLMINA RY PLANS

? L?
r

VARIES
PORTABLE \
CONCRETE
BARRIER
GRADE PT.--\
STAGE I CONSTRUCTION

DRAWN BY : nal7 , ff ? DATE : 7i19,0.f
CHECKED BY ; DATE
3'-0"
13'-9'
STAGE II CONSTRUCTION
2 BAR METAL RAIL WORK LINE
GRADE PT.
1 G,-!1"
STAGE I CONSTRUCTION
14'-9' 1' 3
6" WORK LINE

2 BAR METAL RAIL
2'(A (L BRG, 2'(1f BRG,
ASPHALT WEARING
SURFACE (SEE
ROADWAY PLANS)
0.02

3'-0"

6 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE CORED SLAB UNIT = 18'-0"
ONE LANE, TWO WAY DETOUR
ANCHORED 2 BAR METAL RAIL
PORTABLE j
CONCRETE
BARRIER
0.02
18'-0"
PRESTRESSED CONCRETE CORED SLAB UNIT = 15'-0'?1'
STAGE II CONSTRUCTION
REMOVE EXISTING STRUCTURE, CONSTRUCT STAGE II CONSTRUCTION.
r CONST.JT
/ zo
P
b+
no Hov u E FOR C ON97flucToon
FPROJECT NO. B-3635
CHEROKEE COUNTY
STATION: 17+32.50 -L-
SHEET 1 OF 2
SLATE D B TR 1180.1x.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RALEIG
CONSTRUCTION
SEQUENCE
DATE,
BYi DATE:
Do
-,
1° -2
CONST.JT
V VJ
CONSTRUCT STAGE I CONSTRUCTION, ATTACH TEMPORARY
ANCHORED PORTABLE CONCRETE BARRIER USING FERRULE
INSERTS ON CORED SLAB UNITS, AND PLACE FIRST ASPHALT
SURFACE COURSE ON STAGE I.
33'-0'
30'-6"(CLEAR ROADWAY)
. 2'-0' . 141-9"

CONST.JT
m
v
o+
30'-6"(CLEAR ROADWAY)
1'-3" 15'-3" 13'-3" 1'-3
4.648m WORK LINE
2 BAR METAL RAIL
GRADE PT. ONE LANE,TWO WAY DETOUR
?2 BAR METAL RAIL
TRAFFIC
2'Q BRG, 2.0 C BRG,
ASPHALT WEARING DRUM
SURFACE (SEE
ROADWAY PLANS)
0.02
0.07
r ?r. N
=?L==L=.L=?L? =L ..L=.L._L?
3'-0"
16'-6" 16'-6"
11 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE CORED SLAB UNIT = 33'
STAGE III CONSTRUCTION
PLACE TRAFFIC DRUMS AS SHOWN AND REMOVE TEMPORARY
ANCHORED PORTABLE CONCRETE BARRIER IN STAGE I.FILL
CONCRETE INSERTS WITH GROUT,PLACE REMAINING ASPHALT
WEARING SURFACE.
2z,-n.

DRAWN BY : Ned M..Ki& DATE : 711M
CHECKED BY : DATE
CONST.JT
m
v
m
AAf
30'-6"(CLEAR ROADWAY)
1'-3" 15'-3" 15'-3" '-3"
2 BAR METAL RAIL WORK LINE 2 BAR METAL RAIL
2"(J ? BRG, 2"0
GRADE PT. BRG, 2"(0 ? BRG,
ASPHALT WEARING
SURFACE (SEE

0.02 ROADWAY PLANS)
0.02

0 o0 oo o0 o0 oo
F3'-O" Q 1/2"0 H.S. TRANSVERSE
POST-TENSIONING STRAND
IN 2"0 HOLE
SHEAR KEYS TO BE FILLED WITH GROUT AFTER
ALL ERECTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND AFTER
FINAL TENSIONING OF TRANSVERSE STRANDS
(SEE SPECIAL PROVISION FOR GROUT)
16'-6" 16'-6"
11 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE CORED SLAB UNIT = 33'
FINAL TYPICAL SECTION
CONST.JT
m
v
CONST.JT
ro
Q
PRULDROHARV
PROJECT NO. B-3635
CHEROKEE COUNTY
STATIONi 17+32.50 -L-
SHEET 2 OF 2
STITE OF Ng1TH CARMINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RALEIf
CONSTRUCTION
SEQUENCE
REVISIONS SHEET NO,
NO. BY, DATE, NO BY, DATE,
$( TOTAL
s,EVs
NG WWMDraVj"
Shah et ?`
Cherokee County
Bridge No. 26 on SR 1505
Over Junaluska Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1505(1)
State Project No. 8.2910501
W.B.S. No. 33183.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-3635
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Approved:
-1 / "-)- w I &'?- -a' L
D TE L),IGregory J. Thorpe, PhD,
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
1i 10? W?
DATE John F. Sullivan, III
Division Administrator, FHWA

Cherokee County
Bridge No. 26 on SR 1505
Over Junaluska Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1505(1)
State Project No. 8.2910501
W.B.S. No. 33183.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-3635
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
January 2005
Jol?fi L. Williams, PE, Unit Head
Bridge Planning Unit
PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
Cherokee County
Bridge No. 26 on SR 1505
Over Junaluska Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1505(1)
State Project No. 8.2910501
W.B.S. No. 33813.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-3635
All Design Groups, Resident Engineer - Acidic Rock
High levels of acid are present in the surround rock formations of the project. All
appropriate measures will be taken to address this situation.
Roadway Design - Designated Bicycle Route
SR 1505 is designated as Bicycle Route NC 2 and should be designed accordingly.
Geotechnical - Trout Stream
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.
Construction - Trout Stream
• A moratorium on in-water construction is to be enforced from November 1 to April 15.
• 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 in a dry work area. Sandbags, rock berms
cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where possible to prevent excavation
in flowing water.
• If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area must be maintained to prevent direct
gontact between curing concrete and stream water. Uncured concrete affects water quality
and is highly toxic to fish.
• 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.
• Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and should be
removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when construction is
completed.
Structures - This project lies within TVA jurisdiction.
Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
January 2005
W
Cherokee County
Bridge No. 26 on SR 1505
Over Junaluska Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1505(1)
State Project No. 8.2910501
W.B.S. No. 33813.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-3635
INTRODUCTION: Bridge No. 26 is included in the latest approved North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program and is eligible for the
Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program. The location is shown in Figure 1.
No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal
"Categorical Exclusion".
1. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 71.5 out of a
possible 100 for a new structure. The rating was below 50 when the bridge was programmed but
its condition deteriorated to the point that Bridge Maintenance had to add a temporary crutch to
keep the bridge open. There are still problems with the timber deck and rubble masonry
abutments. Despite the temporary improvement in sufficiency rating, the bridge is still
considered to be structurally deficient and functionally obsolete and is eligible for replacement
(See Section III Part C for further elaboration). The replacement of this inadequate structure will
result in safer traffic operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located southeast of the City of Andrews in Cherokee County (see Figure 1). The
area is rural and largely undeveloped with scattered residences.
SR 1505 is classified as a rural collector in the Statewide Functional Classification System and it
is not a National Highway System Route. This road is a designated bicycle route (NC 2).
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1505 has an 18-foot pavement width with 4-foot grass shoulders.
The roadway grade is relatively flat through the project area. The existing bridge is on a 5.8%
gradient and lies within a reverse horizontal curve. The roadway is situated approximately 8 feet
above the creek bed.
Bridge No. 26 is two-span struct?e. The superstructure consists of an asphalt-wearing surface
over a timber deck on timber joists. The interior bent utilizes timber for both cap and Riles. The
existing bridge (see Figure 3A) was constructed in 1953. The overall length of the structure is 33
feet. The clear roadway width is 18 feet. There is currently no posted weight limit on the bridge.
Utility impacts are anticipated to be low. There are aerial power, phone and cable television lines
in the vicinity.
1
The current traffic volume of 1000 vehicles per day (VPD) is expected to increase to 1800 VPD
by the year 2025. The projected volume includes one-percent truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST)
and two-percent dual-tired vehicles (DT). There is no posted speed limit and is therefore 55
miles per hour by statute in the project area. In the current year there are 4 school bus crossings
per day across the bridge.
There have been 5 accidents reported in the vicinity of Bridge No. 26 during a check of a recent
three-year period. All five were associated with the curvature of the approaches to the bridge.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The replacement structure will consist of a new bridge 60 feet long and 30 feet wide. The
roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately the same as the existing facility at this
location.
The approaches will be improved approximately 240 feet south of the proposed bridge and
190 feet north and east of the proposed bridge. Along the length of the project the road will be
widened to include two 11-foot lanes, 4-foot paved shoulders to accommodate bicyclists,.
expressway gutter, and guardrail. Expressway gutter will be incorporated to minimize cut into the
mountain bluff on the south side of the road. This project will be designed with the criteria for a
rural collector; however, a 30 mile per hour design speed is used for the majority of the project
except for the horizontal curve north of the bridge.
A design exception will be required for design speed. Due to the presence of houses and
topography, it is not practical to improve the alignment any more than has been proposed. The
design curvature is comparable to other curvature on the SR 1505.
B. Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives
The one alternative for replacing Bridge No. 26 that was studied is described below.
Bridge No. 26 will be replaced on new alignment with a new bridge 60 feet long and 30 feet wide
approximately 25 feet east of the existing structure (See Figure 2). The new alignment will be
approximately 500 feet long. In order to minimize impacts to the surrounding structures, the new
structure will partially overlap the location of the old structure. Because traffic must be
maintained onsite and in order to minimize impacts to the environment and surrounding
structures, the project will be built utilizing phased construction techniques with temporary
signals. While maintaining traffic on the existing bridge, one lane of the new bridge will be
built. Traffic will then be shifted to the new lane and the old bridge demolished. Then the
remainder of the new bridge will be constructed.

C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration
The "do-nothing" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not
acceptable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1505.
An offsite detour was discussed during the scoping meeting and ruled out due to strong opposing
comments from Emergency Services (EMS), the Division, and the School Bus Transportation
Director for Cherokee County. The delay generated for EMS and school busses would be in
excess of 15 minutes. The average road user would experience a delay of more than ten minutes.
Timber structures typically do not last beyond 30 to 40 years of age due to the natural
deterioration rates of wood. Rehabilitation of a timber structure is generally practical only when a
few members are damaged or prematurely deteriorated. However, past a certain degree of
deterioration, timber structures become impractical to maintain and are programmed for
replacement.
A temporaryonsite detour was ruled out because it would have resulted in relocatees.
A new alignment to the west was ruled out because it would result in two relocatees.
D. Preferred Alternative
Bridge No. 26 will be replaced on new alignment as shown in Figure 2. This alignment is
recommended because it is the only practical alternative for replacing the bridge. Impacts to the
natural and human environments are minimal.
The NCDOT Division 14 Engineer concurs with this recommendation as the preferred
alternative.
IV. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs for the build alternative is as follows:
Cost
$ 162,000
Roadway Approaches 116,000
Removal 9,000
ob.
V 58,000
En g. Contingencies encies 55,000
struction Cost $ 400,000
ht-of-w
wa Costs
$
118,000
,000
ject Cost $ 518,100
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
A. Physical Resources
Water Resources
Junaluska Creek will be the only surface water resource directly impacted by the proposed
project. Junaluska Creek is located in sub-basin 04-05-02 of the Hiwassee River Basin. The
average baseflow width is approximately 20.0 feet. The average depth is approximately 0.5 foot
and ranges from 0.0 to 3.0 feet in depth. Junaluska Creek has a cobbly substrate.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality. The classification of Junaluska Creek (DEM Index No. 1-52-25) is C Tr (NCDWQ,
1997). Class C refers to waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing,
wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. The supplemental classification of Tr denotes
Trout Waters that requires protection for natural trout propogation and survival of stocked trout.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I: undeveloped watersheds or WS-II:
predominately undeveloped watersheds) nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within
1.0 miles of the project study area.
Since the project is located in a WRC trout county, the WRC may require a moratorium for in-
stream construction from November 1 to April 15.
Biotic Resources
Nine distinct terrestrial communities are identified in the project study area: White Pine Forest
community, successional community, early successional slope community, slope community,
riparian community, maintained garden, maintained trout pond, maintained yard, and
maintained/disturbed roadside. Community boundaries within the study area are well defined
without a significant transition zone between them. Faunal species likely to occur within the
study area will exploit all communities for shelter and foraging opportunities or as movement
corridors.
4
Table 1. Anticipated Imnactc_
Community Aquatic Upland
White Pine Forest - 0.08 ac
Successional - 0.14 ac
Early Successional Slope - 0.13 ac
Slope - 0.06 ac
Riparian - 0.02 ac
Maintained Garden - 0.10 ac
Maintained Pond 0.02 ac -
Maintained Yard - 0.07 ac
Maintained/Disturbed Roadside - 0.16 ac
Junaluska Creek 0.04 ac -
Total 0.06 ac 0.76 ac
B. Jurisdictional Topics
Junaluska Creek is jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
USC 1344). Discussion of the biological, physical, and water quality aspects of all surface
waters in the project area are presented in previous sections of this report.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
The area of impact to Junaluska Creek will consist of a 30.00 feet wide, 60.00 feet long crossing
for an area of 0.04 acres. The area of impact to the maintained pond will consist of 0.02 acres.
Removal of Bridge No. 26 will not result in any fill in Junaluska Creek. Wetlands are not present
within the project area.
Permits
Nationwide Permit 23 (33 CFR 330.5(a) (23)) is likely to be applicable for all impacts to "Waters
of the United States" resulting from the proposed project. This permit authorizes activities
undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded, or financed in whole or part by another
federal agency or department where that agency or department has determined that pursuant to
the Council on Environmental Quality regulation for implementing the procedural provisions of
the National Environmental Policy Act.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification from the DWQ prior to the
issuance of the Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state
issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in
a discharge to "Waters of the United States." Section 401 Certification allows surface waters to
be temporarily impacted for the duration of the construction or other land manipulation. The
issuance of a 401 permit from the DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 permit.
A North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality General
Certification is required prior to the issuance of the Section 404 Individual Permit. Since the
5
W
proposed project is located in a designated "Trout" county, the authorization of a nationwide
permit by the COE is conditioned upon the concurrence of the Wildlife Resources Commission
(WRC).
The proposed project is located in the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) Land Management
District. A permit pursuant to Section 26a of the TVA Act, is required for all construction or
development involving streams or floodplains in the Tennessee River drainage basin.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the provisions of Section 7
and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of February 25, 2003, the
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service lists five federally protected species for Cherokee County (Table 2).
A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements for these species along with a
conclusion regarding potential project impacts follows Table 2.
Table 2. Federally Protected Species for Cherokee Coun
Scientific Name Common Status
Clemmys muhlenbergii Bog turtle Threatened (S/A)
Myotis sodalis Indiana bat Endangered
Pegias fibula Little-wing pearly mussel Endangered
Villosa trabalis Cumberland bean Endangered
Isotria medeoloides Small-whorled pagonia Threatened
Clemmys muhlenbergii (bog turtle) Threatened (S/A)
The bog turtle is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance (T S/A). This is due to its
similarity of appearance to another rare species that is listed for protection. T S/A species are
not subject to Section 7 consultation and a biological conclusion for this species is not
required. The NCNHP database was checked on 15 May 2001 and revealed no records of bog
turtles in the project area. No habitat was observed upon site inspection on 17 Mav 2001.
Myotis sodalis (Indiana bat) Endangered
Habitat in the form of caves and abandoned mines does not occur within the project study area;
therefore, there is no potential habitat for the Indiana bat in the study area. The NC Natural
Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats was reviewed on 15 May 2000 and
revealed no records of the Indiana bat within the project vicinity.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Pegias fabula (little-wing pearly mussel) Endangered
6
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database was checked on 15 May 2001 and
there were no records of existing populations of the little-wing pearly mussel in the project area.
On February 10, 2003 surveys for mussel populations revealed various fish species, aquatic
insects, and Elimia snails. However, no evidence (live individuals or shells) of mussel fauna
were observed.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Villosa trabalis (Cumberland bean pearly mussel) Endangered
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database was checked on 15 May 2001 and
there were no records of existing populations of the little-wing pearly mussel in the project area.
On February 10, 2003 surveys for mussel populations revealed various fish species, aquatic
insects, and Elimia snails. However, no evidence (live individuals or shells) of mussel fauna
were observed.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Isotria medeoloides (small-whorled pogonia) Endangered
Habitat in the form of "second growth deciduous" forest with an open canopy, open shrub layer,
and sparse herb layer does not occur within the project study area; therefore, there is no potential
habitat for small-whorled pagonia in the study area. The NC Natural Heritage Program database
of rare species and unique habitats was reviewed on 15 May 2001 and revealed no records of
small-whorled pagonia within the project vicinity. No species of Isotria were observed during
field surveys conducted on 17 May 2001.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
VI. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at Title 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106
requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings (federally funded,
licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register
of Historic Places and afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such
undertakings.
B. Historic Architecture
r
In a letter dated November 2, 2000 (see attached letter), The North Carolina Department of
Cultural Resources (NCDCR) recommended a survey of the project site for historic architectural
resources. A survey was conducted resulting in a finding of no structures of historic significance.
The State Historic Preservation Office signed a concurrence form July 22, 2003 (see attached
form).
C. Archaeology
In a letter dated November 2, 2000 (see attached letter), the NCDCR recommended an
archaeological survey be conducted if a new alignment was proposed. In a subsequent review of
maps provided, NCDCR modified their original recommendation in a letter dated December 20,
2002 (see attached letter). The letter indicates that there are no likely archaeological resources of
historic significance that could be affected by the project. No archaeological work is
recommended for this location.
VII. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate bridge
will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and
lack of substantial environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of the current North Carolina Department of Transportation standards
and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No change in
land use is expected to result from the construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-Way acquisition will be
limited. No relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative. A storage
barn will be taken by the proposed alignment.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
The proposed project will not require right-of-way acquisition or easement from any land
protected under Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to
consider the potential impact to prime farmland of all land acquisition and construction projects.
There are no soils classified as prime, unique, or having state or local importance in the vicinity
of the project.
8

This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included in the regional
emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required. If vegetation is disposed of by
burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC
2D.0520.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. This evaluation completes
the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise of Title 23, Code of Federal Regulation
(CFR), Part 772 and for air quality (1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and the National
Environmental Policy Act) and no additional reports are required.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management, 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.
Cherokee County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program. There are no practical
alternatives to crossing the floodplain area. Any shift in alignment will result in an impact area of
about the same magnitude. The proposed project is not anticipated to increase the level or extent
of upstream flood potential.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental
impacts will result from implementation of the project.
VIII. RESPONSE TO AGENCY LETTERS
In a letter dated May 16, 2000, the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC)
indicated that Junaluska Creek is a Hatchery Supported Trout Stream and requested a spanning
structure. The proposed design accommodates their request.
v

t OLD BILLY'S '? r•
'
` `-"
,
TOP ? •?
?
,

'? ?• •? •, ?' C158

•
•
t t • ? W 501 `
1
,

iardrwfa Murphy\ 3 _ ? •.?
Mrpork

e BUS
?
9 _ >

.2 > '?

?
.
0
1 •?? 2/
_ -?
J
? M
29
REST '\ }

1 0

Awl, C242 r 3& fir
4C? ic C\241

,
•, ' ,
1 ?
•
•` }•.? BIG
,, 1 J
'?
?
\ \ STAMP KNOB ? ""r•
REE
ALD

RM CREEK VALDL1fE
MANIAG FAAENT AREA
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
g PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
CHEROKEE COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE 26 ON SR 1505
OVER JUNALUSKA CREEK
B-3635
Figure 1

r
?ji
{S o- p
r?'
'x..a ?."
c ow
ri r t
M r ; r ~
lip
'L
t

West Face of Bridge
North Approach To Bridge
FICTRE 3A
FIGURE 3B
House East of Bridge
Douse Southwest of Bridge
klobiEe flome Northwest of Bridge
GL
? a
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
nes B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
!tty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
November 2, 2000
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1442
Re: Replacement of Bridge No. 26 over Junaluska Creek on SR 1305.
TIP No. B-3635. Cherokee County. ER 00-8455
Dear Mr. Graf:
On May 7, 2000, April Montgomery met with North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above
project. We reported our available information on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT
provided project area photographs at the meeting.
Based upon a review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no structures located
within the area of potential effect. However, since the project area has not been
surveyed in over a decade, there be structures of architectural or historical
significance of which we are unaware. We recommend an architectural historic on
your staff identify and evaluate any properties over fifty years of age within the
project area and report the findings to us.
There are no recorded archaeological sites within the proposed project area. If the
replacement is to be located along the existing alignment, it is unlikely that
significant archaeological resources would be affected and no investigations would
be recommended. If, however, the replacement is to be in a new location, please
forward a map to this office indicating the location of the new alignment so we may
evaluate the potential effects of the replacement upon archaeological resources.
Location %tailing Address; Telephone/Fax
1D.NIIN1STR.1rioN 507 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC 1617 %fail Scnicc Center. Raleigh \C 27649-1617 19191 733-1763 ;t}.1653
ARCIIAEOLOCA' 1:1 v ii1ount tit.. Raleigh VC 1hll) tail Sentce Center. Raleigh %C 27699.1611) [phone] 713.21,71
RVST0R.%r1U.-, -;Ii N Illount St.. R.11e,0h NC -1hl3 `Uil Scr%wc Center. Ralogh \C :'644.1613 191ut 733.6517 71 i.111)I
r
HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE SECTION
North Carolina Department of Transportation
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Williams, Project Planning Engineer
FROM: Richard Silverman, Office of Human Environment
SUBJECT: B-3635, Cherokee County
DATE: August 11, 2003
CC: Project File
Attached is a signed concurrence form which states that NCDOT and SHPO, agree that:
• There are properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effects, but based on
the historical information available and the photographs of each property, none is considered
eligible for the National Register and no further evaluation of them is necessary.
• There are no National Register-listed properties within the project's area of potential effects.
• The bridge itself is not eligible for the National Register.
Since there are no historical properties affected by the proposed project, compliance with Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act is complete. Please notify us in writing if the scope of this project
changes. A change in scope may necessitate a new survey of the APE.
a,
t SU?ta?
?s y' A
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
December 20, 2002
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerold Glover
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: David Brook
SUBJECT: Bridge No. 26 on SR 1405 over Junaluska Creek, B-3635
Cherokee County, ER00-8455
Division of Historical Resources
David J. Olson, Director
Thank you for forwarding the new map and additional information concerning the above project.
We recommend that no archaeological work be conducted for this project as proposed.
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, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all
future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
DB:doc
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fa:
Administration 507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4617 [phone].733-8653
Restoration 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4613 [phone].715-4801
0.wrf, df I R Mail R-mvice Center. Raleigh 27699-4618 [phone].715-4801
K27-1' North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John L. Williams, Bridge Planning Unit
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
FROM:
Mark S. Davis, Mountain Region Coordinator l+?
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: May 16, 2000
SUBJECT: Scoping comments on Bridge Replacement Projects
TIP Project No. B-3635 over Junaluska Creek, Cherokee County
TIP Project No. B-3701 over Alarka Creek, Swain County
This memorandum responds to your request for our concerns regarding impacts on fish and
,vvildlife 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 2 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 floodplam 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.
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-3635 - Cherokee County, Bridge No. 26 on SR 1505 over Junaluska Creek
Junaluska Creek is managed by the NCWRC as Hatchery Supported trout water and also supports
wild trout populations in the project area. The project Scoping sheet indicates that the bridge will
be replaced with a 3 (a; 107 x 5' RCBC just upstream of the existing bridge. Due to the presence
of trout in the project area, we recommend that the existing bridge be replaced with another
spanning structure. We also recommend that instream work be prohibited during the trout
spawning period of November 1 through April 15 to protect the egg and fry stages from off-site
sedimentation.

Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries - 1721 Mail Service Center - Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
i i_ ____ in,n% 7zz zciz a )Qi - }~...,. 19181 715-7A43
TIP Project B-3635 & B-3701 Page 3 May 16, 2000
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. Steve Lund, NCDOT Coordinator, COE, Asheville