20081168 Ver 1_Application_20080731

:1 _ 9
IZI

Q STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

DEPAR"TAENT OF TRANSPORTATION

MIQ-IAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO nPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
July 22, 2008

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006

ATTENTION: Mr. David Baker
NCDOT Coordinator

Dear Sir:
c7

SUBJECT: Application for Nationwide Permit 23 and 33 for the replacement of
Bridge No. 39 over Swannanoa River on NC 81 (Biltmore Avenue) in
Buncombe County. Federal Project No. BRSTP-81(1), WBS Element
32643.1.1, Division 13, T.I.P. No. B-2515.

Please see the enclosed Pre-Construction Notification (PCN), Approved Jurisdictional
Determination Form, permit drawings and design plans for the above referenced project. A
Categorical Exclusion and Right of Way Consultation were completed for this project in 2005
and 2007, respectively, and distributed shortly thereafter. Additional copies are available
upon request. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to
replace the 123-foot, three-span Bridge No. 39 with a new 126-foot, single-span steel girder
bridge over the Swannanoa River. The existing bridge will be replaced in place and traffic
will be maintained with an on-site detour during construction. There will be 20 linear feet of
permanent impacts to the Swannanoa River from pipe outlet protection and 0.05 acre of
temporary impacts to the Swannanoa River from a temporary causeway.

MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX. [phone] PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING,
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 2728 CAPITAL BLVD.
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC 27604
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548

r

IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES

General Description:
The single water resource impacted for project B-2515 is the Swannanoa River. The
Swannanoa River is located in the French Broad River Basin (Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) subbasin 04-03-02) and is approximately 70 feet wide and 3 feet deep within the
project area. The DWQ Index number for this section of the Swannanoa River is 6-78 and the
Hydrological Cataloguing Unit is 06010105. The DWQ classifies the Swannanoa River as
"C". There are no High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WSII),
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) or 303(d) streams within one mile of the project study
area. No wetlands will be impacted by this project.

Permanent Impacts:
There will be 20 linear feet of permanent impacts to the Swannanoa River as a result of outlet
protection for two corrugated steel pipes.

Temporarmpacts:
There will be 0.05 acre of temporary impacts to the Swannanoa River from a temporary
causeway, which will be used to remove the existing bridge and piers.

Bridge Demolition:
Bridge No. 39 consists of a three-span structure with reinforced concrete deck girders, vertical
abutments and piers. The removal of the concrete abutments and piers may create some
disturbance in the streambed. Temporary fill resulting from bridge demolition will be
minimal due to the construction of a temporary workpad for bridge and pier removal. 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.

Utility Impacts:
There will be no jurisdictional impacts associated with utilities for this project.

Schedule:
The project schedule calls for a January 20, 2009 Let date and a review date of December 2,
2008.

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 USFWS lists twelve federally protected species for Buncombe County (Table 1). Within
the project area, there is habitat present for one species, spotfin chub. The project was last
surveyed for spotfin chub on May 10, 2007. No individuals were found within the project
area. Therefore, this project will have No Effect on spotfin chub. The biological conclusion
for the eleven remaining species is No Effect due to lack of habitat.

2

Table 1. Federally Protected Species for Buncombe County

Common Name Scientific Name Status Survey Notes Biological
Conclusion
Appalachian elktoe , lasmidonta raveneliana E No Habitat No Effect
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii S/T~ No Habitat No Effect
Bunched arrowhead a ittaria asciculata E No Habitat No Effect
Carolina northern Glaucomys sabrinus E No Habitat No Effect
flying squirrel oloratus
Eastern cougar elis concolor cou uar E No Habitat No Effect
Gray bat otis risescens E No Habitat No Effect
Mountain sweet pitcher arracenia rubra jonesii E No Habitat No Effect
plant
Rock gnome lichen G mnoderma lineare E No Habitat No Effect
S otfin chub C rinella monacha T Habitat Present No Effect
Spreading avens Geum radiatum E No Habitat No Effect
an riffleshell pioblasma florentina E No Habitat No Effect
alkei
[Virginia s iraea iraea vir iniana T No Habitat No Effect
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.

• The new bridge will be longer than the existing bridge, spanning the Swannanoa River.
• Water will not be directly discharged into the Swannanoa River via deck drains.

In addition, Best Management Practices will be followed as outlined in "NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for Construction and Maintenance Activities".

Compensatory Mitigation:
NCDOT proposes no mitigation for the 20 linear feet of permanent impacts to the Swannanoa
River because the permanent impacts total less than 150 linear feet. In addition, the 20 linear
feet of permanent impacts from the pipe outlet protection will not have a significant adverse
effect in waters of the United States.

REGULATORY APPROVALS

Section 404 Permit:
It is anticipated that the temporary dewatering of the Swannanoa River will be authorized
under Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33 (Temporary Construction Access and Dewatering).
We are, therefore, requesting the issuance of a Nationwide Permit 33 authorizing the
temporary dewatering of the Swannanoa River. All other aspects of this project are being
processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance
with 23 CFR § 771.115(b). The NCDOT requests that these activities be authorized by a
Nationwide Permit 23 (FR number 10, pages 2020-2095; January 15, 2002).

3

Section 401 Permit:
We anticipate 401 General Certification numbers 3688 and 3701 will apply to this project.
Therefore, in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0501(a) we are providing two copies of this
application to the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, for their records. The NCDOT will adhere to all general
conditions of the Water Quality Certifications.

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
attachment, 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.

A copy of this application will be posted on the NCDOT website at
http://www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/pe/neu/permit.html.

Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please contact Erin Cheely at [e-mail] or [phone].

Sincerely,

C' " .

l~ Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
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 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.J. Swain, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Roger Bryan, DEO
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Joseph Miller, P.E., PDEA Project Planning Engineer

4

Office Use Only: Form Version March 05

USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 2 6 8
(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: , NW 23 and 33

3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:

4. If payment into the North Carolina 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

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: ekcheely(a ncdot. og_ v

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: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:

Pagel of 8

III. Project Information

Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.

1. Name of project: Bridge No. 39 over the Swannanoa River on NC 81

2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-2515

3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A

4. Location
County: Buncombe Nearest Town: Asheville
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.):

5. 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°34'07.58" ON -82°32'39.53" °W

6. Property size (acres): N/A

7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: French Broad River

8. River Basin: French Broad River Basin
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)

9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: 95% urban/developed, 5% riparian forest

Page 2 of 8

10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Standard construction equipment will be used (backhoes, bulldozers cranes and/or other
heavy machinery)

11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of the project is to replace a
functionally deficient and structurally obsolete structure (sufficiency rating 27.3 out of 100).

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: Permanent: 20 linear feet (<0.01
acre) of impact to the Swannanoa River due to pipe outlet protection Temporary: 0.05 acre
of impact due to temporary causeway in the Swannanoa River.

Page 3 of 8

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 Type of Wetland Located within Distance to Area of
100-year Nearest Impact
Site Number Type of Impact (e.g., forested, marsh,
(indicate on map) herbaceous, bog, etc.) Floodplain Stream (acres)
(yes/no) (linear feet)
No Wetlands

Total Wetland Impact (acres)

3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:N/A

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 Average Impact Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact Perennial or Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on map) Before Impact (linear feet) (acres)
res)
Site 1 Swannanoa River Temporary Perennial 70 ft. 65 0.05
Site 2 Swannanoa River Permanent Perennial 70 ft. 10 <0.01
Site 3 Swannanoa River Permanent Perennial 70 ft. 10 <0.01

Total Permanent Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 20 <0.01

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 Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody Area of
Site Number (if applicable) Type of Impact (lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay, Impact
(indicate on map) ocean, etc.) (acres)
No open water
impacts

Total Open Water Impact (acres)

Page 4 of 8

6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.05 (temp)
<0.01 (permanent)
Wetland Impact (acres): 0
Open Water Impact (acres): 0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.05 (temp)
<0.01 (permanent)
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 65 (temp)
20 (permanent)

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.
N/A

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 new bridge will be
longer than the old bridge and will span the Swannanoa River. No deck drains will be used and
NCDOT's Best Management Practices will be followed A temporary work pad will minimize
in-stream activities during construction.

VIII. Mitigation

DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to

Page 5 of 8

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, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/stringide.html.

1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
No mitigation is proposed for this project because the 20 linear feet of impacts from the
pipe outlet protection will not cause an adverse effect or significant 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
(919) 715-0476 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 hqp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/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): 0
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0

Page 6 of 8

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)?
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.

1. 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.

Zone* Impact Multiplier Required
(square feet) Mitigation
1 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 I.
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. N/A

Page 7 of 8

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. Impervious surfaces will not significantly
increase as a result of this project. There will be no deck drains installed.

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

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:
The new bridge will be constructed in the same location as the old bridge.

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).
N/A

e-, &dA- 7. V- 08
Applicant/ gen Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)

Page 8 of 8

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.
SECTION 1: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION (JD):
B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME, AND NUMBER: B-2515, Replacement of Bridge No. 39 over the Swannanoa River on NC18

C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
State: North Carolina County/parish/borough: Buncombe City: Asheville
Center coordinates of site (lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. 35 34 07.58° N, Long. -82 32 39.53° W.
Universal Transverse Mercator:
Name of nearest waterbody: Swannanoa River
Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water (TNW) Into which the aquatic resource flows:
Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC):
® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request.
? Check if other sites (e.g., offsite mitigation sites, disposal sites, etc...) are associated with this action and are recorded on a
different JD form.
D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
Office (Desk) Determination. Date:
Field Determination. Date(s):
SECTION 11: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Ate no "navigable waters of the U.S." within Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 329) in the
review area. [Required]
Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.
Waters are presently used, or have been used in the past, or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Explain:
B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION.
There Are "waters of the U.S." within Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction (as defined by 33 CFR part 328) in the review area. [Required]
1. Waters of the U.S.
a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S. in review area (check all that apply): t
TNWs, including territorial seas
Wetlands adjacent to TNWs
Relatively permanent waters2 (RPWs) that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
? Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs
Impoundments of jurisdictional waters
Isolated (interstate or intrastate) waters, including isolated wetlands
b. Identify (estimate) size of waters of the U.S. in the review area:
Non-wetland waters: 1000 linear feet: 70 width (ft) and/or acres.
Wetlands: acres.
c. Limits (boundaries) of jurisdiction based on: Established by OHWN
Elevation of established OHWM (if known):
2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands (check if applicable):3
Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional.
Explain:
Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below.
z For purposes of this form, an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least "seasonally"
(e.g., typically 3 months).
3 Supporting documentation is presented in Section III.F.

SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS
A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs

The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW, complete
Section HI.A.1 and Section III.D.1. only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW, complete Sections III.A.1 and 2
and Section III.D.1.; otherwise, see Section IILB below.
1. TNW
Identify TNW:
Summarize rationale supporting determination:
2. Wetland adjacent to TNW
Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is "adjacent":

B. CHARACTERISTICS OF TRIBUTARY (THAT IS NOT A TNW) AND ITS ADJACENT WETLANDS (IF ANY):

This section summarizes information regarding characteristics of the tributary and its adjacent wetlands, if any, and it helps
determine whether or not the standards for jurisdiction established under Rapanos have been met.
The agencies will assert jurisdiction over non-navigable tributaries of TNWs where the tributaries are "relatively permanent
waters" (RPWs), i.e. tributaries that typically flow year-round or have continuous flow at least seasonally (e.g., typically 3
months). A wetland that directly abuts an RPW is also jurisdictional. If the aquatic resource is not a TNW, but has year-round
(perennial) flow, skip to Section III.D.2. If the aquatic resource is a wetland directly abutting a tributary with perennial flow,
skip to Section III.D.4.
A wetland that is adjacent to but that does not directly abut an RPW requires a significant nexus evaluation. Corps districts and
EPA regions will include in the record any available information that documents the existence of a significant nexus between a
relatively permanent tributary that is not perennial (and its adjacent wetlands if any) and a traditional navigable water, even
though a significant nexus finding is not required as a matter of law.
If the waterbodya is not an RPW, or a wetland directly abutting an RPW, a JD will require additional data to determine if the
waterbody has a significant nexus with a TNW. If the tributary has adjacent wetlands, the significant nexus evaluation must
consider the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands. This significant nexus evaluation that combines, for
analytical purposes, the tributary and all of its adjacent wetlands is used whether the review area identified in the JD request is
the tributary, or its adjacent wetlands, or both. If the JD covers a tributary with adjacent wetlands, complete Section III.B.1 for
the tributary, Section III.B.2 for any onsite wetlands, and Section III.B.3 for all wetlands adjacent to that tributary, both onsite
and offsite. The determination whether a significant nexus exists is determined in Section III.C below.
1. Characteristics of non-TNWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) General Area Conditions:
Watershed size: Pick List
Drainage area: Pick List
Average annual rainfall: inches
Average annual snowfall: inches
(ii) Physical Characteristics:
(a) Relationship with TNW:
? Tributary flows directly into TNW.
? Tributary flows through Pick List tributaries before entering TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List river miles from RPW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from RPW.
Project waters cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
Identify flow route to TNW5:
Tributary stream order, if known:
Note that the Instructional Guidebook contains additional information regarding swales, ditches, washes, and erosional features generally and in the and
West.
5 Flow route can be described by identifying, e.g., tributary a, which flows through the review area, to flow into tributary b, which then flows into TNW.

(b) General Tributary Characteristics (check all that apply):
Tributary is: ? Natural
? Artificial (man-made). Explain:
? Manipulated (man-altered). Explain:
Tributary properties with respect to top of bank (estimate):
Average width: feet
Average depth: feet
Average side slopes: Pick List.
Primary tributary substrate composition (check all that apply):
? Silts ? Sands ? Concrete
? Cobbles ? Gravel ? Muck
? Bedrock ? Vegetation. Type/% cover:
? Other. Explain:
Tributary condition/stability [e.g., highly eroding, sloughing banks]. Explain:
Presence of run/riffle/pool complexes. Explain:
Tributary geometry: Pick List
Tributary gradient (approximate average slope): %
(c) Flow:
Tributary provides for: Pick List
Estimate average number of flow events in review area/year: Pick List
Describe flow regime:
Other information on duration and volume:
Surface flow is: Pick List. Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
Tributary has (check all that apply):
? Bed and banks
? OHWM6 (check all indicators that apply):
? clear, natural line impressed on the bank ? the presence of litter and debris
? changes in the character of soil ? destruction of terrestrial vegetation
? shelving ? the presence of wrack line
? vegetation matted down, bent, or absent ? sediment sorting
? leaf litter disturbed or washed away ? scour
? sediment deposition ? multiple observed or predicted flow events
? water staining ? abrupt change in plant community
? other (list):
El Discontinuous OHWM.7 Explain:
If factors other than the OHWM were used to determine lateral extent of CWA jurisdiction (check all that apply):
High Tide Line indicated by: 0 Mean High Water Mark indicated by:
? oil or scum line along shore objects ? survey to available datum;
? fine shell or debris deposits (foreshore) ? physical markings;
? physical markings/characteristics ? vegetation lines/changes in vegetation types.
? tidal gauges
? other (list):
(iii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize tributary (e.g., water color is clear, discolored, oily film; water quality; general watershed characteristics, etc.).
Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
6A natural or man-made discontinuity in the OHWM does not necessarily sever jurisdiction (e.g., where the stream temporarily flows underground, or where
the OHWM has been removed by development or agricultural practices). Where there is a break in the OHWM that is unrelated to the waterbody's flow
regime (e.g., flow over a rock outcrop or through a culvert), the agencies will look for indicators of flow above and below the break.
'Ibid.

(iv) Biological Characteristics. Channel supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian corridor. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Wetland fringe. Characteristics:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
2. Characteristics of wetlands adjacent to non-TNW that flow directly or indirectly into TNW
(i) Physical Characteristics:
(a) General Wetland Characteristics:
Properties:
Wetland size: acres
Wetland type. Explain:
Wetland quality. Explain:
Project wetlands cross or serve as state boundaries. Explain:
(b) General Flow Relationship with Non-TNW:
Flow is: PickList. Explain:
Surface flow is: Picts List
Characteristics:
Subsurface flow: Pick List. Explain findings:
? Dye (or other) test performed:
(c) Wetland Adjacency Determination with Non-TNW:
? Directly abutting
? Not directly abutting
? Discrete wetland hydrologic connection. Explain:
? Ecological connection. Explain:
? Separated by berm/barrier. Explain:
(d) Proximity (Relationship) to TNW
Project wetlands are Pick List river miles from TNW.
Project waters are Pick List aerial (straight) miles from TNW.
Flow is from: Pick List.
Estimate approximate location of wetland as within the Pick List floodplain.
(ii) Chemical Characteristics:
Characterize wetland system (e.g., water color is clear, brown, oil film on surface; water quality; general watershed
characteristics; etc.). Explain:
Identify specific pollutants, if known:
(iii) Biological Characteristics. Wetland supports (check all that apply):
? Riparian buffer. Characteristics (type, average width):
? Vegetation type/percent cover. Explain:
? Habitat for:
? Federally Listed species. Explain findings:
? Fish/spawn areas. Explain findings:
? Other environmentally-sensitive species. Explain findings:
? Aquatic/wildlife diversity. Explain findings:
3. Characteristics of all wetlands adjacent to the tributary (if any)
All wetland(s) being considered in the cumulative analysis: Pick List
Approximately ( ) acres in total are being considered in the cumulative analysis.

r
For each wetland, specify the following:
' Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres) Directly abuts? (Y/N) Size (in acres)

Summarize overall biological, chemical and physical functions being performed:

C. SIGNIFICANT NEXUS DETERMINATION

A significant nexus analysis will assess the flow characteristics and functions of the tributary itself and the functions performed
by any wetlands adjacent to the tributary to determine if they significantly affect the chemical, physical, and biological integrity
of a TNW. For each of the following situations, a significant nexus exists if the tributary, in combination with all of-its adjacent
wetlands, has more than a speculative or insubstantial effect on the chemical, physical and/or biological integrity of a TNW.
Considerations when evaluating significant nexus include, but are not limited to the volume,,duration, and frequency of the flow
of water in the tributary and its proximity to a TNW, and the functions performed by the tributary and all its adjacent
wetlands. It is not appropriate to determine significant nexus based solely on any specific threshold of distance (e.g. between a
tributary and its adjacent wetland or between a tributary and the TNW). Similarly, the fact an adjacent wetland lies within or
outside of a floodplain is not solely determinative of significant nexus.
Draw connections between the features documented and the effects on the TNW, as identified in the Rapanos Guidance and
discussed in the Instructional Guidebook. Factors to consider include, for example:
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to carry pollutants or flood waters to
TNWs, or to reduce the amount of pollutants or flood waters reaching a TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), provide habitat and lifecycle support functions for fish and
other species, such as feeding, nesting, spawning, or rearing young for species that are present in the TNW?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have the capacity to transfer nutrients and organic carbon that
support downstream foodwebs?
• Does the tributary, in combination with its adjacent wetlands (if any), have other relationships to the physical, chemical, or
biological integrity of the TNW?
Note: the above list of considerations is not inclusive and other functions observed or known to occur should be documented
below:
1. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW that has no adjacent wetlands and flows directly or indirectly into TNWs. Explain
findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary itself, then go to Section III.D:
2. Significant nexus findings for non-RPW and its adjacent wetlands, where the non-RPW flows directly or indirectly into
TNWs. Explain findings of presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its
adjacent wetlands, then go to Section III.D:
3. Significant nexus findings for wetlands adjacent to an RPW but that do not directly abut the RPW. Explain findings of
presence or absence of significant nexus below, based on the tributary in combination with all of its adjacent wetlands, then go to
Section III.D:
D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS. THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE (CHECK ALL
THAT APPLY):
1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area:
] TNWs: linear feet width (ft), Or, acres.
0 Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres.
2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional. Provide data and rationale indicating that
tributary is perennial: The NCDWQ stream form score for the Swannanoa River is >30.
Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow "seasonally" (e.g., typically three months each year) are
jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows
seasonally:

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
0 Tributary waters: 1000 linear feet 70 width (ft).
•
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
3. Non-RPWss that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW, but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW, and it has a significant nexus with a
TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands.
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale
indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is
directly abutting an RPW:
Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow "seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is
seasonal in Section III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2, above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly
abutting an RPW:
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW, but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent
and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.

6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs.
Wetlands adjacent to such waters, and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and
with similarly situated adjacent wetlands, have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional. Data supporting this
conclusion is provided at Section III.C.
Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres.
7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.9
As a general rule, the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional.
? Demonstrate that impoundment was created from "waters of the U.S.," or
Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above (1-6), or
? Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce (see E below).
E. ISOLATED [INTERSTATE OR INTRA-STATE] WATERS, INCLUDING ISOLATED WETLANDS, THE USE,
DEGRADATION OR DESTRUCTION OF WHICH COULD AFFECT INTERSTATE COMMERCE, INCLUDING ANY
SUCH WATERS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):"
? which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes.
from which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce.
? which are or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce.
Interstate isolated waters. Explain:
Other factors. Explain:
Identify water body and summarize rationale supporting determination:
8See Footnote # 3.
9 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III. D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook.
10 Prior to asserting or declining CWA jurisdiction based solely on this category, Corps Districts will elevate the action to Corps and EPA HQ for
review consistent with the process described in the Corps/EPA Memorandum Regarding CWA Act Jurisdiction Following Rapanos.

Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area (check all that apply):
Tributary waters: linear feet width (ft).
Other non-wetland waters: acres.
Identify type(s) of waters:
? Wetlands: acres.
F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS, INCLUDING WETLANDS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):
If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area, these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements.
Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate (or foreign) commerce.
? Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in "SWANCC," the review area would have been regulated based solely on the
"Migratory Bird Rule" (MBR).
Waters do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain:
Other: (explain, if not covered above):
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area, where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR
factors (i.e., presence of migratory birds, presence of endangered species, use of water for irrigated agriculture), using best professional
judgment (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet width (ft).
Lakes/ponds: acres.
Other, non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the "Significant Nexus" standard, where such
a finding is required for jurisdiction (check all that apply):
Non-wetland waters (i.e., rivers, streams): linear feet, width (ft).
? Lakes/ponds: acres.
? Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource:
Wetlands: acres.
SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES.
A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD (check all that apply -checked items shall be included in case file and, where checked
and requested, appropriately reference sources below):
Maps, plans, plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:
Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant.
? Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report.
? Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report.
? Data sheets prepared by the Corps:
? Corps navigable waters' study:
? U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas:
? USGS NHD data.
? USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps.
? U.S. Geological Survey map(s). Cite scale & quad name:
? USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey. Citation:
? National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name:
? State/Local wetland inventory map(s):
FEMA/FIRM maps:
? 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929)
? Photographs: ? Aerial (Name & Date):
or ? Other (Name & Date):
? Previous determination(s). File no. and date of response letter:
? Applicable/supporting case law:
? Applicable/supporting scientific literature:
Other information (please specify):
B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD:

NORTH LAROUNA

0

° d

ri

'tom - 1Y~f - •~j t a~,, ~ ~ I ' ,y~ _ ~ .
' 1 i ~ ~ .'dt'6 ba. ` / ~ ~ 0'~°~
~ jI-
" _ ~k yr{{ 4` ,r.~ ` ? f,~~f,~ ~ _ wry ~ -
~ j`._ i \t i-lsr~ ~ ~ •~}i .fir [~,Na~

~ ~ ! J, ~ c-' - ~ q It {F ly~~ 1-3r~ 1 f' + •3~.,. ~i ~ 3/~Ng
• ~,r. ,y`~ l~ ~~~1t8 •rt~~~+` `-v ~~l3~__ - 1~ _ - v1 ~ .~~-..r1 . ~ ' i~~~y~~ . p 1

k

'S'c ~l?.^` y,nar -.f.' ,y~_r \ 3;~ } '7,,~~aa~~*;.` p ~ ~ . -~~1"-.

r~ i i ~ is / ,r = t~} - ~ ~.r'i. l r~"~ ~ -+f~+' q~~Y3 rJ - ~l ~ ~f~
Zr-
a t t 7-3 S

N CDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

VICINITY BUNCOMBE COUNTY
PROJECT: C202024 (B-2515)
MAPS BRIDGE N0.39 OVER
SWANANOA RIVER ON
NC 81(BILTMORE AVENUE)
Permit Drawing
Sheet ? of ! a~
SHEET OF 3/28/081

NAMES AND ADDRESSES

]PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES

2 HERSCIHEL SUITS 24 1HIG]HBRIDGE CROSSING
APT 1316
ASIHEVILLE, NC 28803

3 LONG JOHN SILVERS INC PO BOX 35370
LOUISVILLE KY 40232

4 BILTMORE AVENUE LLC PO BOX 15012
ASIHEVILLE NC 28813

NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

BUNCOMBE COUNTY
PROJECT: C202024 (B-2515)
BRIDGE NO.39 OVER
SWANANOA RIVER ON
NC 81(BILTMORE AVENUE)
Permit DraWrng
Sheet of
SHEET OF 3 28 % 08

WORKPAD DETAIL

(NOT TO SCALE)

PROPOSED BRIDGE DECK

5' 5' WORKPAD
(TYPICALLY I'-CLASS B RIP RAP)
2'

N.W.S. ELEV=197809' T_2(2(~) O O

oo °00000 00 s E
0 000 000 0 OOO FLOW
00 ooo oo
0

ROCK CAUSEWAY
(CLASS II RIP RAP) STREAM BED

ETCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
? QUANTITIES OF ESTIMATES
VOLUME OF CLASS II RIP RAP= 900 cy CABARRUS COUNTY
O AREA OF CLASS 11 RIP RAP::: 0.11 cc PROJECT: 8.2661601 (R-2246C)
ESTIMATE 1220 TONS CLASS II RIP RAP
CONCORD-KANNAPOLIS
Rn WESTSIDE BYP EXT FROM
SR 1431 TO SR 1555
d
SHEET OF 10/16/01

PROW RFFERB*m NO. Rm NO.
H!1! f
IGDWAY DOPM h VWAIW DOM
FNOHW ENDDm
I
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE PRELIMINARY PLANS
D¢ NOT Ut 8 sPOR 00NML1C'Pt6N
C1 PROP. APPROX. S" ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE, TYPE $S.bC,
AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 188 LBO. PER SQ. YD. IN EACH OF TWO LAYERS R1 2'-B" CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER.
PROP. VAR.
TYPE 89.50,
AVERAGE DEPTH RATE ASPHALT
OFA 112 CONCRETE LBS. PER SURFACE SQ. YD . COURSE
C2
PER S I' DEPTH. TO
BE PLACED IN LAYERS NOT TO EXCEED 1%" IN DEPTH. R2 8" x 12" CONCRETE CURB
D1 PROP. APPROX. 4" ASPHALT CONCRETE INTERMEDIATE COURSE,
TYPE I18.OC, AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 488 LBO. PER $0. YD. S 4" CONCRETE SIDEWALK.
PROP. VAR. DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE INTERMEDIATE COURSE,
D2 TYPE I19.0C, AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 114 LBS. PER 80. YD. PER 1"
DEPTH, TO BE PLACED IN LAYERS NOT LESS THAN 214" IN DEPTH OR T EARTH MATERIAL
GREATER THAN 4" IN DEPTH. LT CONCRETE El APROP. APPROX. 7" T AN AVERAGE RATE8OFA706 LOS. PERBSQ. YDUR8E, TYPE BZb.OC, U EXISTING PAVEMENT
PROP. VAR. DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE COURSE, TYPE B25.OC,
E2 AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 114 LOS. PER 8Q. YD. PER 1" DEPTH. TO VARIABLE DEPTH ASPHALT PAVEMENT
BE PLACED IN LAYERS NOT LEBS THAN S" IN DEPTH OR GREATER ~1 (SEE DETAIL W1, THIS SHEET)
THAN 5%" IN DEPTH.
NOTE: PAVEMENT EDGE SLOPES ARE 1:1 UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE.
Detail W PROFUE DErAt Sf1gVM
TIE-4#S ar AU AWS
SE&W vw i$•70 r-%M CORSrR~O
n T
02 a CY
n
f REFER rO
WEMM
DETAX
U
MIl~L 7 VP U `
3• MIN. MRL YAW.
Detail Showing Method of Wedging for -L- Resurfacing r?uEn mar TO IrEr r "m
N,•s2w
DETA& SfMIAG PLACEMENT
OF sXJPd/RlB ON --L- fMTSJ
VARIABLE
1
1'-0' MW 3'-B• n
PAIMMIM REMOVAL
y,1
a
u D1
ap:

P
See Sheet 1-A For Index of Sheets
rta rtwawesr~smu•a
~
See Sheet 1-B for Convent/onal Symbols STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
m B-2515 ~
. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
32643.1.1 BRSTP-0081 P.E.
32643.2.2 BRSTP-0081 *W UTIL
B U N CO MBE 32643.3.2 BRSTP-0081 CONST.
25 COUNTY
81
N LOCATION: BRIDGE NO. 39 OVER
I ~ SWANNANOA RIVER
M ON NC 81 (BILTMORE AVENUE)
^1 ~ pM 5
81
TYPE OF WORK GRADING, DRAINAGE,
C ( Z5 A PAVING, STRUCTURE,
V 40 E SIGNALS AND SIGNING
W 50
Io
O 25
d/ Nc ~R10
VICINITY MAP OF B-2515
u°C+ NAD 83
BEGIN BRIDGE END BRIDGE _ END T.I.P. PROJECT B-2515
A -L- POT Sta. 13+27.0 . -L- POT Sta. 14+53.00 -L- POT Sta. 17+65.00
~ Z
BEGIN T.I.P. PROJECT B-2515
-L- POT Sta. 11 + 39.60 N 3
4
SITE 1
°
11
r U TO
TO 1-40 --L- NC 81 u - DOWNTOWN
BILTMORE AVENUE'w ASHEVILLE
r
=DET-
J,~Z
00
y0 ( ii t /END CONSTRUCTION
F t] -L- POT Sta. 19+00.00
0 1z0
-DET- POT Sta. 5+11.35
-DET- POC Sta.0+00.00 ( Z W END DETOUR
N BEGIN DETOUR 3
O -DET- POC Sta
N BEGIN TEMP. BRIDGE -DET- POT Sta. 2+89.35+/-
O END TEMP. BRIDGE
rN~ Permit Drawing
V sheet ? r of C
NCDOT PROJECT ENGINEER:
CATHY S. HOUSER, P.E
V EO0 IN r~ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GRAPHIC SCALES DESIGN DATA PROJECT LENGTH EarthTech
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
701Corporate Center Drive, Suite 475
50 25 0 50 19o ADT 2008 = 34,000 Raleigh, NC 27607
~e b
ADT 2026 = 51,750 [phone] [phone](FAX)
ZM STAAUX4W SI ECUIIGT20NS
42
PLANS DHV = 10 % LENGTH ROADWAY T.I.P. PROJECT B-2515 = 0.094 MILES
50 25 50 1 0 D = 60 % LENGTH STRUCTURES T.I.P. PROJECT B-2515 = 0.014 MILES n"a ra T 19 RIGHT OF WAY DATE: ROADWAY DESIGN ENGIIIEER
T = 6 % ' TOTAL LENGTH OF T.I.P. PROJECT B-2515 = 0.118 MILES JULY 20. 2007 pA~~
el PROFILE (HORIZONTAL) y = 40 MPH EARTH TL eca PRROfECT M SUf.KR " T
of O l0 5 10 20 • TTST 2% DUAL 4% LE777NG DATE:
°a9 FUNC. CLASS. = URBAN JULY 15, 2008
PROFILE (VERTICAL) it
rs ,
MINOR ARTERIAL

REVISIONS
1. 3252008 - PARCEL 2 - REVISED TCE FROM PROPERTY LINE TO CONSTANT OFFSET FROM -L-. ADDED RIGHT IN / RIGHT OUT
-e
Ilce\Permft\B2515-permit-peh-2D.dpn 8/17/99

0 O b~~~~~op~
IIUURIIlII1N~
A

p•hNNNNNNT/J
BSS'

Pffsft

y W r
oD~
O I - - ~l„ RNN08\N II
]0-,DU-

J, 0

ry
d y

- _-m N
i 3
Shy 3 0

- 15
03 0
vfVfvf
• I ~ O
uf(g4) ; l ui a
ZZZ
COO F. ~ O
mmm -s - i m g
rri CM
- -
Xz r - , I A
tvcna D Z
o 710
AtS
Nm cam
Z --j
jt
l (nom
c o D Y t Z
m
v!L
~j X0 v
Rl~ y~
-I \ a j a
D O E 7I M;
I
VA M-<
Z
Ifj , D
as a
.mss` .~W.
ado 02 02
r
A'
PEDEST
PATHWAY
2'70 FAC C TO FACE R ! 20
OF BAR OF BARRIER
Iz Iz
PC slat co 0 0
$ O2 02 R t 101
Z K 1
~7 .Q :f I
Z
Z n o 0
8 0. cn
o D
n m
T
~N o
o

i
a
P PWECT REFERENCE N0. SHIRT NO.
n
8-2515 2-D
RW
-L- DETOUR SH Er NO.
ROADWAY EERDERIGN HYBVOAIUIIGNl9lC3
PI Sto 0+49,07 P/ Ste I+43.91 P1 Sto 3+4922 PI Ste 4+55J6 DETAIL SHOWING DETOUR PLAN ENGIN
A - 3613' 425'(RT) A - 36'13' 425' (LT) & - 321'324 (LT) a - 32'17' 324' (RT)
D - 36'lr 49,9• D - 38'1r 499' D - 33' 42' 122 D = 27 W 57A"
L = 94,85' L = 94.85' L = 95,Br L = 115.54
T 49,07 T 49,07' T = 49.W T - 5935'
R At 150.W R = 150.W R = 170.00' R -205,~
Se a 0,02 ft1fr Se - 0,02 fort Se = 0,02 filft Se = OA2 frift Dn
DS.. 20 mph DS = 20 mph O.S. 20 mph as. • 20 mph
RD. = See Plans R,0.. See Plans R.O. = See Plans R,0.= See Plans w~
GRAPHIC SCALE
BILTNGRE AVENLF-LLC 30 1 5,0 1
DB 2216 PG 120 11111 BONN, 1 -.0990
s
~ Puws
A 1N - R
PoT STA !1+51A -L- LB ©o POC STA 5+1135 END -DETOUR- L8A
I 02 2A• Cac A + J -L- LA
w
NERSCHEL L. SLITS END WNSTRUCTION
1 DB 1105 PG 257264 -L- Al9
C) DI 1157 PG 141
DS 1335 PG 748 6 VENT
LEES WILL 85E 120 RIVE RU B 1559 PG 700
AND EL a .
- D8 1943 PG 775 de
E POC ST41 ,0 I © [oNC
DCOM 1047 PGG55I51 N~ -III,- in
Q q PAD
?e~ Im NON. <
V+ I WELLS U
a ? Q TAWS 3
lq BSl PNW:YC
Q) •cac cox[
PAWrED 75r41~ * p1`\VACUUM
FUR RRilr a/ POC SrAO A
R R ~pIT OPr
AaTEiN! ° 6L 0 0 BA Q
= ONC C ~~i
E
I ti
~ CONf R CANOPI
O
R CURT CANVAS q• G Y E. © _ - o n 4 Cho
CANCP
o N 14
R Q
C. C. LNGEHFELT. • CON Og CLLR
DEI 891 PG 305 O GRASS E 0
DB 1960 PG 475 FLOW
g 1 7
W CON / Y•Ma[ DRVEO
Z
PAR
.7
BSf RING
PL m
CONC SkR
MP 00 / I Q
Poi STA -YI - • 06
A I+ -DETOUR- _ Permit Drawing
I FFC LDWrEO RaarNERSIm Sheet
L NP DB 1998 PG 587 0
-Y1 -10+90,00
I
r e 7
W~ 0
d c L j
PoTSta 11+43.31 d Sf4 #1
~ Er- sa7+rur+~- ~
,nom "
LEGEND
BILTMORE STAnON NvESTOMLLC
DB 3157 PG 14 ® DENOTES IMPACTS IN
SURFACE WATER AS o I IN L
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
IMPACTS IN SURFACE WATER
Rwr CURVED
O METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE DISTRICT8 W~
OF BLINICOIABE COUETT,N,C. ~C 9B2 PG I p m SKEW _ /Oa
a5 LONG JOIN SILVERS, NC aRwaRR ~o BARRIER
DB 2210 PG 190 SEE SHEET 4 FOR PLAN "Wa`
SEE SHEET 5 FOR -DET- AND -Y1DET- PROFILES FOR
SEE SHEET 2-E FOR INTERSECTION DETAILS NSTABrpALL LL BARARRIERER Mp APPRRpIEO FOR
AND TRAVEI
a ON TERPMARf STRUCTURE
~oFo

~ naECr REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO
B-2515 4
WW SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYORAUUCS
ENGINEER ENGINEER

_C7
61BE N TJP.PRafELT B- 5 ~ Inao
GRAPHIC SCALE
BLTHOW AYEWF LLC 50 2,5 50 ]go
n mm raw
milli-
PRC SMaB1 _ PLANS
- f A J -0
%
_P'
5STPA O I t 3Lt;
-L- PPU STA
PClf STA 1 + f -L- ~ PC 9 P S4 Y2- PUT SfA
BI m PO NO
`
0 = P9 741 _ Cpf 6 -7 Ad% L 1l1 0E O!D bred l ( ON M ~ m
0 ~CO~ E
p w s` S. ~ti 1 c
~ I ~ bdCN ~ a r
I /
M a 1 1101
I -
q~~r/)1 yy !
r I 1I ~ ~ ~ I ~ (S a C4C~I
e E _ 0 n_ ? w J
a W
Z O E D l + r! I
pg r I
fi
Iwo
-L- ;
VT -L- I
o N lf4O'MiYWl` r' N 1t4000D'
1 _
y / r.
Yl i ~ ~r ~ M1
p _
Co LBIOEAFII.T,J
01 a Pe 306 I f E 4 1
P E 40'OD /0 p Ds 010 PO TYPE ,411
/
SHOP CURY®
q ,o I
Z r 7 7 .LT Fb~iR15G s^-~` P?=30
7 4` A7-1
_ Permit Drawing
PD / Sheet of
o ° PROPOSED LATERAL 'V' DITCH
p+ -Y2- STA 11 + 00 to 11 + 65 LT
N O x 2-Asta.
NTS
a? 11+1367 A av -r2 FFC LIMPED PAri11ER51~
0o es1 ro se7 I(ISTIN~
_y/-pTsk. N+3~46 0 / CRO N0
J
-t fll SAZ lI "
LEGEND I DETAIL SHOWING PAVEMENT- BRIDGE RELATIONSHIP
s -r/_pOrS a N+aes+ _ END CnwsfRUCfroN
PUT snx12467a - MNOf TO SCALE)
S DENOTES IMPACTS IN -rte
® SURFACE WATER - -
O s'SIDEW"
I {
~I GRAU 350
BLTMOK STATION WESTOM LLC
5'SlO
DO WT PC M C&G
mac a -r~cRc
I I
' h
„ r s cac
w
e O OF WFROPMH
µ SEVWAGE jam, SEE SHEET E-D FOR DETOUR N SHOP CURVED
BUNCOMBE COLJN`rY,
Be su P1 I SEE SHEET 2-E FOR fl- AND -YZ- YYPE411pI-771 7'Smtwau
INTERSECTION DETAILS AND GEOMETRY AT-1 P
t~ LONG JOIN SLVERSONc SEE SHEET 2-F FOR OURASIDE 7 SIDEWALK
DO saD PO no AND QWEWAY DETAILS
SEE SHEET 5 FOR -L- PROFILE
SEE SHEET 5 FAR Y?- PROFILE
a a a o SEE SHEET 5 FOR -YR- PROFILE
°o(;
c! (2

P
P
IROJEa REfERENa N0. SHEET N0.
B-2515 4
co
RW SHEEr NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAUUCS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
~zo
"TJP.PROJECT B-
-L PDi 7 ~ wo
OO GRAPHIC SCALE
OLTNOW AYENF LLC 5,0 25 50 1 0
h ~M roMD
PLANS
PRC Sta l +1~3 DETOUR-
r~ r
c
J,r~ D T!P RA %fff 65 OV
-i- f17T STA I~
N]ISCIli L 311TS -'2- POr STA A
POT STA 11f51 -L- a = ro ST,Ul
00161 PC N 1
*ji
D? Mo PC TN
rul6EED
ro -r ~ I ON ea PC
0 zo 1
ro T15
CORPORATION Q DES we
. ? ' i E i ~7~ ~E a 1
i DO Da Pon
P k i n ; . 'r
AN &LA
E ~ 1
36
J ,
„ F
i
r
ii
I
•
j
I~ ~/y /y{ry y( I
LL 1'I 7V lAN/ Nly
0 M _
JI
,
z -
r~.
Tr: C
U G LNOFIIFELT pTl t ~t r C
_F E
ANIroDDO ,
0 y~
M PC 473
r -f 41Y
r CURVED
/ !df ~ =man r; x
Permit Drawing
Sheet 'I ? o
/ !
Ir 4
D
I
F
PROPOSED LATERAL V DITCH
GRADE TG
~~DLUN x 2-PC Sim d0+3 -Y2- STA 11+Oro to 11+65 LT
YI /1+1361 • eg
F 2 FFC UNITED P
r 1I-PTSly 11+31146 1 cRouND 2
~EY -POTS ll~i5 O
LEGEND
DETAIL SHOWING PAVEMENT- BRIDGE RELATIONSHIP
0 --yl-POrslO:I1f9B94 I END CONSTRUCTION AlOT TO SCALED _
b124610 m
S ® DENOTES IMPACTS IN POT Somm
SURFACE WATER _
O I 3fT/ 5S1
DEWALK
mHll GRAD-3W
BLTYORE STATION INVESTORS, LLC
S
DO ]EST P9 N SlDEWAlX
r-6 CdG
-6CdG II } ~
/I J
~I 6 I M~
r-6C&G
E O IETROPOI.Trm .SEOEAA6E DISTRICT Gd
h
OF BUNCOMBE C0IRITY N
NX- / SEE SHEET 2-D FOR DETOUR ~ N sNw OJRYEO ~
N DES = ro I 6- SEE SHEET 2-E FOR -Yl- AND -Y2- TYPE-411 (R-231 rSIDEWALR
INTERSECTION DETAILS AND GEOMETRY AT-I
O5 LONG JaN avElrs rRC SEE SHEET 2f FOR CURB,SIDEWALK, i
DES END Pa no AND aWEWAY DETALS rsDEwAx
SEE SHEET 5 FOR -L- PROFILE
8oaa SEE SHEET 5 FOR -17- PROFILE
SEE SHEET 5 FOR -Y2- PROFILE
a9

m - . : PWJECF REFERENCE NO. SHEET N0.
- = 8-2515 5
_LL
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
+ BRIDGE HYDRAULIC DATA PRELIMIN Y PLANS ~
DES,GM asCNARCE - nan cFs
DESIGN FREQUENCY _/00 .4-1-
XS1011 ro NOT v- Ro coNR AVRIVN
BASE DISCHARGE - ~'4 CF
_ f/I00 CFS
-L- BASE FREQUENCY _/00 YRS
BASE HW ELEVATION - 1991.4 FT
BENCHYARK'BRYSOIV!' OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE= 7,320 CFS _
-
MCGS wOWMENT OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY- !O+ YRS
-L- SIa18+38.32 3811'RT OVERTOPPING ELEVATION - 1 2.3 FT _
GIN '-U- S7 A t! _ f ELEV.199cw E VD ST ff DO -Yl -
- m_ PT
j DATE OF SURVEY - 01/04/2" r_
WS.ELEVATiOM _
- A AT DATE of SURVEY = 19189 FT
7,010
I-- +
+41.; L50
- P1 18 ! / 6 -Yl U+ 4,46
Fl 45 09,11
vc 14 7'
_ I3 VA C-1 ! K
X69 7
V
- - -
1 -990 1 1 -
90 "o.
E G1 ~ L ,
1980 lfle--QE {
45,
Fcz - -
- k IAN. MEW, E Sf- -ET 4
10970 wl"T k -4 1 ~7n
- - _ - WHE MG
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 10 11
- - Permit-Drawin
- BRIDGE HYDRAULIC DATA
Sheet I c
- - _ _ _ - : DESIGN DISCHARGE -4940 CFS - -
DESIGN FREOUENCY -5 YRS
DESM IN ELEVATJON -I98~3 PT _ ' _ - - - -
: - - - -
i BASE DISCHARGE - N/A CFS
BASE FREQUENCY - N/A YRS
-Y2- -L- DETOUR BASE /M ELEVATION - MIA FT -Yl - DETOUR -
MEWOPPIMC DISCHARGE- N/A CFS
OVERr'OPP/MG FREQUENCY- N/A YRS : -
f OVERTOPPING ELEVATION - N/A FT -
- - : DATE SURVEY - ol 006
L__ i ± PJ¦ - _ : I WSELEVATION - -
M-ar F1 -
AT DATE OF SURVEY -1978.9 FT
vc,
-
Et - 4 0'
- r 41-, 7
- -
_Y2 7.0,5
A + 2- Al +1I
~ J
49W4r q92
-EL
L r 1991 - _
~p - _ _
2,000 2,6M
AL
- - -
_ _ - - - 190- - f - - - _ 1 gp - - - _ .44A Ma
1,990
J 5t ii+b R = = - - - 1
91
70 - -

- FOR Y - E S ET 4 El EV E9 }Te Z - - - - -
-
7 4r
1980 - se MEET s w ANLIJ _ -v AIL
1970 r 70= 4 =P m &H z 1 70 - -
- SEE -FOR.. CLI
o MC 1MG To- G_ - - fl
= 1960 1 6D
aao 1. Q = -
TT 19 0 1 2 3 4 5 10 11

R.
See Sheet 1-A For Index of Sheets T{ R.n no.rr apcw~s m
See Sheet t-8 for ConventlonalSymbols STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA N.C. 8-2515 1
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R.111~NR K&~m
32613.1.1 BRSTP-0081 P.E.
" 32643.2.2 BRSTF 00811 R'W LRIL
oil
I
16 BUNCOMBE COUNTY
n
lei
N LOCATION: BRIDGE NO. 39 OVER SWANNANOA RIVER
M ON NC 81 (BILTMORE AVENUE)
TYPE OF WORK: GRADING, DRAINAGE,
25 u PAVING, STRUCTURE,
' SIGNALS AND SIGNING
so
40 -
1e
0
Nc C4
VICINITY MAP OF B-2515 83
BEGIN BRIDGE END BRIDGE END T.I.P. PROJECT B-2515
` -L- POT Sta. 13+27.0 40 -L- POT Sta. 14+53.00 -lr POT Sta. 17+65.00
e9
BEGIN T.I.P. PROJECT B-2515
4, POT Sta. 11+39.60
/ lo TO
rz~ U ' i
DOWNTOWN
70 1-40 4, NC 81 ASHEVILLE
-PTO- BILTMORE AVENUE
ET
y0 , 2 la /END CONSTRUCTION
O 0 -L- POT Sta. 19+00.00
er -0ET- POT Sta. 5+11.35
-DEf- POC Sta. 0+00.00 I W END DETOUR
BEGIN DETOUR
-DET- POC Sto.1+84.37+/-
BEGIN TEMP. BRIDGE I-DET- POT Sta. 2+89.35+ PRELIMINARY PLANS
END TEMP. BRIDGE Do mmeR pm
_ NCDOT PROJECT ENGINEER:
THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES OF ASHEVILLE. CATHY S. HOUSER, P.E
CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD II.
HYDRAULICS ENGzXM DIVISION OF JHGHWAYS
V GRAPIHC SCALES DESIGN DATA PROJECT LENGTH a EarthTech STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
A1AIenArllll6n?1
701Corporate Center Drive.5uite 475
50 25 0 50 1 0 ADT 2008 = 34,000 Raleigh. NC 27607 ee ee x
[phone] (919) 854-62S9(FAX) fi
ADT 2028 = 51,750 rope arArm4w aracnmcalama
PLANS DHV - 10 % LENGTH ROADWAY T.I.P. PROJECT 8-2515 = 0.094 MILES ra
50 25 50 Igo D = 60 % LENGTH STRUCTURES T.I.P. PROJECT B-2515 = 0.024 MILES RIG1TJ' OF WAY DATE:
e, e
NONNI T = 6 % " JULY 20 2007 ROADWAY DESIGN
TOTAL LENGTH OF T.I.P. PROTECT B-2515 0,118 MILES NBEM DEAN. P.E. ~'G~
^^1I PROFILE (HORIZONTAL) X
O V = 40 MPH LE77ING DATE.
10 5 10 20 • TTST 2% DUAL 4% ULY 15, 2008 rs PA
FUNC. CLASS. = URBAN SrArz ffiaNwAY A&trav BVCi>7~R
;;o PROFILE (VERTICAL) MINOR ARTERIAL

mma unuw-e No. smw NO.
N
A.iwam I-C
SURVEY CONTROL SHEET B-2515 Location and Surve
as BL
e+ POINT DESC. NORTH EAST ELEVATION L STATION OFFSET

3 B-2515-3 680456.6263 946382.0846 1993.46 10-73.29 91.98 RT
" 4 B-2515-4 680811.4484 946262.4926 1992.17 14-46.83 66.13 RT
v BRYSONI NCGS MON BRYSON 681182.1055 946136.3262 1994.97 18 38.32 38.17 RT
A
IIIACq
. \ a tar
40
.L. A7d y+" Alm aria rr ;ra &"m i
ti ae tocer~ ~ ooaeoua+>sa
i . 11 Nm mom mnysON•
LOCALCTD9A T COaIDDYAT9S
VICINITY MAP OF B-2616 ~ N - ~ auaLzm
B•9
All
DATUM DESCRIPTION 111
THE LOCALIZED COORDINATE SYSTEM DEVELOPED FOR THIS PROJECT 1 1 -n- sua+37.X
IS BASED ON THE STATE PLANE COORDINATES ESTABLISHED BY
couYa.® rRQPLT coaxauursr
NCG$ FOR MONUMENT -BRYSON- 1 1 N . 6W=4Z7
WITH MAD 83 STATE PLANE GRID COORDINATES OF 1 1~,,o w"E i • Naaolf7p
NORTHING: 681182.1055(ft) EASTING: 946136.32621ft1
THE AVERAGE COMBINED GRID FACTOR USED ON THIS PROJECT NC GRID
83 11
(GROD TO GRID) IS: 0.9997498 .n erAU+sAa
zoGfuAm oaaeurutaA
THE N.C. LAMBERT GRID BEARING AND s ~ aNVAN
LOCALIZED HORIZONTAL GROUND DISTANCE FROM ft
s
'BRYSON' TO -L- STATION 10+00.00 IS ~i STWO
S 12'04'26' E 838-21' 1 _n
ALL LINEAR DIMENSIONS ARE LOCALIZED HORIZONTAL DISTANCES 1
VERTICAL DATUM USED IS NGVD 29
1
1 ~1
.4 AA »+Mff ffi®P 6fd7E PROJ&S &Is~ 11 11
Loa4L=D PROP= oomramwa
dusuAw
a:
t4aUASU
N
OTE: NO SUPPLEMENTAL BENCHMARKS WERE SET FOR THIS PROJECT
as
r
NOTES:
1. THE CONTROL DATA FOR THIS PROJECT CAN BE FOUND ELECTRONICALLY BY SELECTING
PROJECT CONTROL DATA AT.
HTTPJIWWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC. USTRECONSTRUCT(HIGHWAY/LOCATIONIPROJECT/
THE FILES TO
BE FOUND ARE AS FOLLOWS:
82616 LS_CONTROL 060322.TXT
GLOBAL POSITIONING WAS NOT USED ON THIS PROJECT. EXISTING NCGS MONUMENTS WERE USED.
SITE CALIBRATION INFORMATION HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED FOR THIS PROJECT. IF FURTHER
INFORMATION IS NEEDED, PLEASE CONTACT THE LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT.
a
0 INDICATES GEODETIC CONTROL MONUMENTS USED OR SET FOR HORIZONTAL PROJECT CONTROL NCGS MON, ICE="
BY THE NCDOT LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT. Loc"uzm PATQnWT roan>rurs9
N = 67877QJ69
B - 9167040416
Oq
NOTE, DRAWING NOT TO SCALE
a

PROAa REFERENCE N0. GCr NQ
HEIE E-A
ROADWAY 00NOW i rL -L- d+oiNSR M ENGREER
la-0' 2614' 261-W E, la-0'
5'-V 31-0' n 14'-0' 12'-4V 1Y-0' 14'-V M 3'4)' PRELIMINARY PLANS
COS+ETRVCTIObi
VAR a-0' 21'4' no NOT U9R FOR
21'4)' VAR, W4Y
TO 11-2' TO 91-1 Ia.
E1fISTNG
RI
a-6• Dt T BADE CI RI E)BSIIN NG
A:1 - - - - - 01-61 0`2 GROUND
VARIAKF
EXISTING_ - - _ SLOPE
GROUND S T~, - - T SEE X-SECEIONS
^
GROUND VARIABLE GRADE TO THIS LINE El U - - - El -GRADE T S
SLOPE 14' 0 THIS LIVE
SEE X-SECTIONS 14'
TYPICAL SECTION NO.1
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.1
4- STA. 11+39.60 TO -Ir STA. 12+55.00
-L- STA. 15+25.00 TO 4- STA. 17+65.00
10, 4v 2614)' 2614)' 10-0'
5`-0' 121-0' 1214)' Iy-0' Tv 31-V 3-0.
i
EXISTNG GRm
a- Dt C G RADE Rl A,1 1 _ EJSSTIN NG
W 6' GROUND
A:1 01 02 VARIABLE
FbSTING_ r 11 SLOPE
GROUND S T SEE X-SECION5
EIUSDNG_ r Ei T S
GROUND VARIAKE GRADE TO THIS LINE
SLOPE IA'
SEE x4ECUoNS
TYPICAL SECTION NO.2
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.2
-I- STA. 12+85.00 TO 4, STA. 13+27.00 (BEGIN BRIDGE)
-I- STA. 14+53.00 (END BRIDGE) TO k STA. 15+25.00
11.0' N 26'4)' 261-V
(SEE NOTE p 121-0 714'
(m NOTE 1)
_ GRADE PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
m m` Cl 3" S9.5C
C2 VAR S9.5C
D1 4" I19.0C
NOTE 1: r-V SIDEWAULS INCWD® AS D2 VAR. I19. OC
REQUESTED BY CRY OF ASHEVILLE
E1 7" B25.OC
E2 VAR. B25.OC
TYPICAL SECTION NO.3 R1 2'-6" C&G
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.3 S SIDEWALK
4- STA. 13+27.00 (BEGIN BRIDGE) TO
A- STA. 14+53.00 (END BRIDGE) T EARTH
U EXIST. PAVEMENT
W WEDGING
HAs

nLOAC,T RsFee~cE No. uer No.
Here >a
ROADWAY 095M FAYU#Dff DOOM
UrAmm
61-0 ' u'-0• rr-0iv e'-0• F RfiLIMIN.ARY PLANS
DO NOT USE polt mNnRul_rl"
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.4
_ER1mNG Y1- STA. 10+26.50 TO -YI- STA. 11+34.46
Rl L7 w G E a in 1. GRO
UND Y2- STA 10+27.50 TO Y2- STA 10+74.57 T
EWnNG
Ai1 ^ GROUND
T 0-2
A:1 - m VARIABLE
SLOPE
ERISTING _ r T y.4• a~• T SEE %-SECTIONS
GROUND
GROUND ^ VAAIAIIf D1 EI U U 4• D1 El
SLOPE
SO X-SECr10NS TYPICAL SECTION NO.4
(L-Y2-
4r ir-0' e'4•
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.5
_ Fx1mNG 42- STA. 10+74.57 TO 42- STA. 12+17.82
Rl Dt C1 RADE In 1~ GROUND
GROUND
A.1 of VARIABLE
SLOPE
ERISmNG
GROUND T q• D-6• T SEE xsECDONs
E>OSTING _ El
GROUND VARIABLE
SLOPE 14•
SEE X-SKMGNS TYPICAL SECTION NO. 5
~_-EXIST-
('L -DET-
YAL a-0•
TO 7CJ•
1r-0' lr-0` S'-0• I. -0'
r-0' r-0•
MBET 0lPIET
r-0• r
umx
- - - - 4n _Enm(FOA GROUND
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.6
C - - - - - - - - NOTE;
T -DET- STA. 0+33.71 TO -0ET STA. 0+79.00 Lr WATER FILLED BARBER SHOWN FOR
U 11 _EXISTING GROUND -M- STA. 4+18.17 TO -DET- STA. 4+51.04 ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY. REFER TO
(FOR FILLS) TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS FOR BARRIER
TYPICAL SECTION NO. b ,o• REQUIREMENTS.
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
~_-EXIST- -DET- Cl 3" S9.5C
VAB20'-A' C2 VAR S9.5C
ra 77'a•
~-0 1r-0r y-0 In •p D1 4" I19.OC
2'-0• 2'4• USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.7 D2 VAR. I19.0C
onur ro ET- STA. 0+79.00 TO -DET- STA. 0+96.81 "
rr -0 E1 7 B26.0C
LAMER LAMER -DET- STA.3+92,41 TO -DET- STA.4+18.17 E2 VAR. B25.OC
GRADE L7
R1 2'•8" C&G
7 GROUND
C R cum S SIDEWALK
E1 T T EARTH
lll~~~JJJ _ E>am(~ FILLS) U EXIST, PAVEMENT
1tr
W~~= TYPICAL SECTION NO. 7 W WEDGING
~'s:s

m B-2515 2-D
-L- DETOUR 1w EIIEFT NO.
ECAMAY 019HOM g1ORMA=
INONM
P/ Ste 0+4907 PI Ste 1+4391 PISle 3+4922 P/ Ste 4+5516 DETAIL SHOWING DETOUR PLAN
6. 3E13'425'iRT/ o - 3813'425fLT1 & - 3Z0'324'(LT) A - 32'0'324'1RTt
D = 381r 499• D = 36Ir 499' D = 33'42' 122' D = 2r56 57O
L = 9485' L ' 94B5' L = 95Br L = 11554' PRELIMIN RY PLANS
T = 4907' T = 49,07' T = 4922' T = 59,35' P~ D~~u~N
R = 150DO' R = 15000' R = 0000' R = 20500
Se- 002 ft/ft se - 002 fl/ft se = 002 ff/f? Sew 002 ft/fl Dr)
DS.- 20 nWh DS.- 20 Wh D.S.= 20 ffoh Ds = 20 nwh p
R,0.- See PAM RQ¦ See PAwa RD.= See Pkm RO.= See Pions
s5oe7rE m~
s 3 ~ 188.50'
GRAPHIC SCALE M
A~ 6+ IF 5L YJ 0 50 100
BILTMORE AVENUE. LLC
I
DB 2216 PG 120
o s PUNS
60. IRON
~Vi .7/ A it f5L11 'L- LB R N - 0, +p © EIP S N 1551'12' E
?216. PLC $TA 541135 END -DETOUR- LB-
wy h O q 24• C&G ,°O.A 7.7 8N & BLA
CLOSURE
P OUNPSTER A 'P -L LA
-
_N
RERSCREL L. SUITS T-3606 5+00.0 so . IF
41 END CON T
DB 1105 PG 257,264 E v- wp & SiL g0°~•oj SDO
NI 1381110 172A0. De 1157 PG 141 h _ AT SUP IOR '0i9g TM L- A,
OB 1335 PL 748 91. PR ERTIE VENT
LEES KOPF WILL 85E 120 ' C MPIOR 57.94.
ANO FRANBEL ~N. TE FABRE: WALL IvE 7RPU 6 1559 PG 300 E
_LgLVMZ CORPORATION - If Tq'KF1c - r OB 1947 PG n5 T 2a'c~ RiR- PIKE
D3 1047 PG 551 I R AX PLUS) PM STA4+lQ 7 r E4NEAN / G
CLOUi ~CONC LI
l
BST
USGS GAGING n m + BST 'PA IS BRK B S PA 1101 ON. ~Ll~ Pap I 2.71' 1
s . EMP, Ag9~C N~nON us wG
/ T F WELLS IS BK B idNNS
~TML PLANS) qq~~~ ul Li awc wool
Iu~ 2 C&C BST PARKA" CONC Bk I w
/ x II L IS M&BK BU 1 !
fl
/ Plk STA _ - I s a,rz uu. 'rte VACUUM ,A'.
y a
R!R / BST P4 m s ONC. I S y~wc °MR Ia 1 p 15 BRA US
~Y t)'S 11 BAN 1 I AN r LT , PUBIP ISL41~ O BA ¦Aw dx aI- iI 7 S BRM BUS
IB' .C&G C(WC F BUS CI !1
S4 «<^///f / IANDPy~ CONC UNDER L4NOP7 GONC L o 1 I I
! 6'BSi C4NV45 s EL_ ts. 60 IRON 51 '
S R IJ•MDA >D. - m wr T ~ 24' G& I \
f BIK > {L- ^ Z4' G
S 1514'05'E ~ C 9wC R4C C4NOP Ap. yo_~. w Qo 7.r wAL S ~ 6.c~ eClE4NOUi9~.~g O ! \
0.61' 105 WK La i. n: 4ca or N• \ IS~ n l cLI 1w CONC _ ~I n
a
L o - - CONC W4X _ .~~d6r.an
S 14'79'IA' w BIL7WBRE AVE. 4.35 NC 81 1iE- --o 2 ss - - 717 _ • - - -
`^rS'LLWCCSG
IZB
- - - - - - - -
ST SR 304
-t---- - - - c----- - - - - FA - I --N - -000 W res
,s, mxG nc -
LTQ
~o wi Isr. iLt
2 5 BRK BUS CR d C ExISt.lrw I , n--_.
C. C. LINGERFELT, mw EONN/ 139 N 14'4Y
DB 691 PG 305 vAD
DB 1960 PG 475 a°P I L C / P +p~
y~p ER P SBR
~aec. cu / e°
0 51LEWALK El " Ip1 1f4ED . g II eca¢'.~ WAIN
ay 0 Bsr 49rt1 P-1311 .TI.- I I BST P4sr7 m.s.7o y
E3 E[G0V rs.rsar Bsr
"S'
I +5UN- IS BRK BUS S / ~5
N438'09'w = / C6N[ a \~5~ EC o - IS F -BUST
60.07' T NaEf W
~ ! ~
woo ! Q 1 ISM WV. .9D l NOT~@E~
/wry ~ I /5 ,%,c1 TE&1PoR CAp549A1K
TEMPORARY I C J Nt~ \ 014 SE RAFf RQ PLANS
02
3 &ggEq I C dJ 1 - o (FM 6 a 8Sr PAaxmG
3+53 2 s BLx Bus ~ II J I 1 \ P i ELFV.•19111IVA7 6oe sn
A -YI N 7 06'04BE W N 'V^5' iece 1 '7WOT 8*83A3 = i
ENl• 3P A 1f -
DETOUR - I i I 170
a C-0.90
Q~ ; I T-3607 9+22&11 -0.300AFC LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
N INS D1 N
- f I W 02 , . DB 1998 PG 587
-yI Du ki .00
1101 @ Ii 2 0 TIDI Rn8.i10.7A' q`v / \
a° WD RA~ 10M 9190.95
ix 01 OP 9lV.-1 a
+76 Q T
-YI- Dlr W c p TOE 8/19. I byi ~2j O / /
9" BIY.-I 93 2 a WV.9N.•1911.70
701 [iN.•19991.00 A7EA.0371911.17 . Em.-1 R i 601
W. EDW.-1911.77 C-0.9 C• 9 3
6.2o~=;K- - _ - _ - -c / /
AEEA-0.11 AE&•O.W z go ~ ~ El ~ 0
C-0.9 E61r TEMP 8g12aE
AREA-.W POT.§F11f43.31 -
C-0.7 € g d / -LIFT- 510.Z+eASS*i-
8E04N TEA&° ORM gg
' -DET- SW#84.37+1- ~W
M ORCX M DRCII I '
0ET 0+7t td4 I / - TM~i ±60 to 10+76 I 7{ m h
-YI- DET 10+76 Ilf W.- ~ D{
Ie9DM.no• . lN.DUT~•11WA0 i
M; &ION IN1 LLC
s
NwWwQb.MW YI IA7y11 PG 14 EOA OAI 04
AREA-0.02
W C-0A
0
,o w I
D N~ CuRm
m 6' ° 1"m
3 METROPOLITAN SEWERAGE DISTRICT £ (1-131
Typ"
OF BUNCOMBE COUNTY, N.C. EIP
OB 982 PG 1
EI S 1353'14'E SKEW _
O LONG JOHN SILVERS. INC 2&751 n G1A0J70 ~Om BARRIER
DB 2210 PG 190
SEE SHEET 4 FOR PLAN
SEE SHEET 5 FOR -DET- AND -Y1DET- PROFILES a°
SEE SHEET 2-E FOR INTERSECTION DETAILS INSTALL BARRIER APPRDVED FOR
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN TRAIEL
ON TENRORARY STRKTURE
a?u

P
P
n
now NO• SN6T NO.
B-2515 P-F
nw RM NO.
INTERSECTION FOAGM'AYDBION NV0"NM
DETAILS
PRBLIMIN RY PLANS
oa nor use cxsrauclwn
GRAPHIC SCALE
40 20 0 40 so
PUNS

IWERSECrA N DETAIL OF INTERSECTION DETAILS OF INTERSECTAN DETAILS OF
AET- (BILTWRE AVENUE DETOUR) AND -L- (BILTWRE AVENUE) AND -L- (BILTiIf01RE AVENUE) AND
YI-DU (TIiDI(PMN ST. DETOUR) YI- (TMONPSON STREET) Y2- (SWANNANOA RNER ROAD)

g L- POT STA 15+4127 =
-L- POT A 12+p+00 W65 = * g -Y2- POT STA 10*OODO
-YI- POT STA 00 BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
T S?o.+2650
-YIDET- POT STA IO+00 -LYI- St POXTI-A..7106 f26'M)
-DETOUR-POC sra I+52 I 4w-
75 PC Sto.10+3454
_'GIM CONSTRUCTION
n AJVO + N 14'40'00-vW 4-
-DET7POC STA 1+56,44 (21D0'R11 TEMP.
eR1(~ N 6t13'072E rsrclEwAU(
1 _ 40 1® ~1 rSIDEwAU
-DET J5 sD£wax d PRA END ® 6839 4A~E'-*
Sr Nl~ 510E'M r
Ip + REMOVE EX. A m "
r2 SHOP Q1RM OP 02 GUARDRML * o
R- , TYPE411(R-131 R=}f "~9 t s'SlDEwNX
55
+70 I R=3'
E~,1q ~L X454
- - ~ I TIf TORfX~i,S'TlMG IE i~ i re, 16" Y
P Sto.11+34A5
I N PNEMENT , F
-YI- Sto. h+34. 1 REPMR
I
I +6174 x
c')
9
RoF
R
POTS1o.II+4331 110
POTSto.11+98.94 +%,y ~°os
2 p p
REMOVE EX. X1 R XIS
+n
CUMORML RB2 EMp TAPER
1 fX TIE To
PNEMEMI PT Sto. 12+17.82
REPMR N 80'30' 35f E
-Yl- -Y2-
PI Sto 11+2422 Pt Sto 10+84.62 PI Sto 11+76.71
= 13' 52' 57,7' (RT) A = 15'50' 15.4 (RT) p = 26'39' 50.9' (LT)
D = 6 * 24 245• D = 15'5455B" D = 3r 49 51.6'
L = 20'W L = 995r L = 83.77'
T=10.35' T=50.07' T=42.66'
R = 85.W R = 360,W R = 180.0(7
Se = RC Se = RC Se = RC
R-0.= See Plans R.O. = See Plans R.O. = See Plans
iru
~u i

i
Moor "275" a Ho. meu No.

DETAIL SHOWING LOCATION OF 8-w SKWNO 2-F
.Di\ AONDWAY DMA HYDRAU=
8"X12" CURB, CURB AND GUTTER, `o~ mmm
DRIVEWAYS, AND SIDEWALK

GRAPHIC SCALE
40 so o 410 8D
0
PUNS

-L- POT A 15+4127 END CONSTRUCTION
-Y2- POT A /0+00.00 -L- POT STA 1 2+64S5 = -L- T STa19+0000
-Yl- POT STA /0+00.00
/ IVITHRU

I Ex '
I f 62 LT1 ~ 71 XI ~ ~ \ g
I ND Ip ~o~
n
NEW RB Q
I I CI P
CURB
~I
!N 1 ~
+6 !M PARKING
r
END MG
l TI TO END C
+ !p DISSIPATE EX/SrING N ADI
I * CURB IN ll
1 IF
THIS AREA f
0 0 O J ;
M I~
o U 1 I I, I 4
END rAr I
co
O O / T R END SIDEWALK CdG
58151
426.64
s
L
_ - - -
VIC; - ~s~--
Put DR
E -
*low
-L N 14'4(Y W
- ® R
.p R=
1 C ® F / t BEGC6G
i7g -r /
a41B3 B L_ BEGT'SIDEW ND A!K
/ BE&C x/2CU £N C _ F +65.00
BEGSIDEWALK END 7' DEWAK II
AP x +4929 -YI- ~i I _ 2_ IR4 TIE C TI
I PAVEWENr REPAIR fN0 S@EW °nnnl ~~'I I I T!E TO EXISTING /
BS7 PARKING ~ ~ R
~i WIBB //v
90.00 -Y ATa APP X N C TIE
I '
END Txlz CURB
\ TIE TO EXISTING /
TIE TO E LAG R"~ i6381-Y2PwEYENr PAIR
II+I END 2'x88 R I I +41.55
n BEG. 8x18CURB
0 YI' G.7'SIDEWALK I /
+34 -YI- II
BEGIN PR - 5l5 END C&G f -r1-
-L- POT 11+3 I W X NR APP
AV N REP ~g6,Ig
-Yl- PTStO.//+34.96 I I X R• S~-Y2- PC Sto.10+3454
L 41- t Il+ IT p-0S
PT Sto. l2+n82
AOTEsRADNON 8•XIZCURB IS 31
+R -r - UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED
END 2'-6 MG
Q I SEE PUNS FOR
® cli ® LOCATIONS OF TAPERS
-y2- POT St0.13+37J6

COMAM K: DAR:
racm= ft"Re Ct 060.
iNM N0.
c CN[OQD By.
OAir
B-2515 3
i

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

S UMMARY OF EARTHWORK

IN CUBIC YARDS
i
LOCATION UNCLASSIFIED UNDERCUT EMBT+% BORROW WASTE
EXCAVATION
-DET- STA 0+16.72 TO -DET- STA. 1+84.37+,- (BEGIN BRIDGE) 191 191
-Y1DET- STA 10+26.50 TO YIDET- STA. 10+70.00 57 57
SUBTOTAL 248 248

-DET- STA 2+89.35+,- (END BRIDGE) TO -DET- STA. 4+51,04 250 6 241
I
-L- (LEFT SIDE) STA 11+49.53 TO -1r (LEFT SIDE) STA. 12+85,00 22 5 17
4- STA 12+85.00 TO 4, STA. 13+27.00 (BEG. BRIDGE) 55 9 46
k STA 14+53.00 (END BRIDGE) TO 4- STA. 15+25.00 124 70 54
-L,-{LEFT SIDE) STA 15+25,00 TO -L-(LEFT SIDE) STA. 17+65.00 47 3 44
SUBTOTAL 248 87 161

4- (RIGHT SIDE) STA 11+39.60 TO 4- (RIGHT SIDE) STA. 12+85.00 21 2 19
YI- STA 10+26.50 TO YI- STA. 11+34.46 42 30 12
Y2- STA 10+27.50 TO 42- STA. 12+17.82 21 2 19
4- (RIGHT SIDE) STA 15+25.00 TO 4- (RIGHT SIDE) STA. 17+65.00 393 32 361
SUBTOTAL 477 66 411

PROJECT TOTAL 1,223 159 1,064
SAY 1,300 200 1,100
i

m
m
1
n
N
M~
oQ
d
oa
N,
o.

REYISIOM
tiDSERH
itDATE$*
'S TIME**
41DCN8t 8/17/99

\J 0J
z m~~
L.0 I
° g ~ In
Z I
ZIA
E m + b
gON Q~
s
OOrh'Fq o~m~ NE oa OD
l7 ^/q ~~~A mo 1
q/<k i m IV
'1 I~ .m o qY o aN~~
RnTsta. 10+00m
100
3rrv / t 9W 90 I ,E& 159.38' °mnZr
~T~ ~ \ °6' ~7 ccc Op
~i1 I N~~ U OD m
p ` \ ~ m vmm
Q [ r.E 390503 1 Q 1 I I Q tiPq~ -
+ [IS. s_°B. W =~8 18 r m - 5 No~z Z JE~
AA ii~~ A 1 ~~11 ~a `f I p u'Z m in
<~1 Q>Q+ 1 2~i Ing
T A ~r - Irk •~Z$•a~ •~~5r
Ip ~ I to \cpI ~z~~,Ry°,~~~y'"y< y~Q~ I Q 1 j s1 j Sx4QSb
i
+ Nil, a 1
- W T Z
O ~O $ P I kn ~^a vs~° Q~~a4~
P /z > @
pL I mte $ 1 Ig 8i ?1jQyS
a s $ 2 M 1 r r
n +P~ 1 > 8 30 ft ~
~s
C1 1 O' ~C N WW I' a a 1
s S
I Y t.yT I O~g II •O+~
v ~ oi1 o~O y
M.60.1>•0L5 'Y~ $Z RQaa 'ip
'ZI 3.41.4y49N THONPSLW STREE nl /j. v~ f / m °m m 3ST@S,N bb O
ND APER
vw/Aere
_ _ A a rw~n x
~ _ IW 9 I ~~~~r O 1
_5S 24' CI O o in n chi r
R1 ^1 ^1 nl Rl n1 N + 0y
' m n iv y + 99 9 5
AI n1 n1 n12~I~1 1~ ~.M'a°NA49ARNER-~ m I ~a t Ss ,°N>.,'
Z=~0=y22 a ~ .ez ~<< .59zb "~9b, or
fR1~11rn1T1~1 ffl1~1 1t1~111I111~1 r 1 / 5p=.1. -3.51,9599` MAZ 65.055 66002s,W PF.~~«
~I y~~ y~ VI o n + y n- H 1 ¦ ! 1y~~.92'Sb •e 1 .rrriiiY«
1711711/1 1\1 I\l I\1 1 I,FZ.LLa V p j 1 ~°0$
e~~s ~ ; ~r+ ~ I Or R«Q G 1.95
QQs 1 11 J 5 I/77 b
~~•9 ~C 11A1IZ.-) 'gyp 1-> 60s€ONC. I m s _ ^ $
o11~j 111111 Y11 O' R~b~ 'I'I'!'
i E.} n _ 'JNOJ .09 ~~~III
'
N OA NfR _ I } _ V
N 1 1 (11C I "O !t7 C. VI
NC @rE L L ~Nq II + and ; ~y QQss~~Q~
T•O ~ ~ B57
~w .Z1 P;` 106
NIS golds
4!10196 3
i' I\1 >S I\7 f, Z, S I B I m '-4 o -I 01, 1
1LL G3 I Q ' ! ,~f1 S 1 m o O e
i0 1 I p V
= Oa y ~lA ~il LIuI~ ~jj7 ~ ~ 11 I ~~~V?'~ ~ ~r~n
y rill P ~ Z
N L' I -m - Vy « 'N • 1 ~1Q..S I s o m 045 e~ps:
NRO' -G--1 ti I a r q, 4,k Is1~,~
2 m 9 tS j i AAAAAPfffff ~
I p 'TB )6 1YY rZ. 7lv G J 3.01 ,11
88~ ~ 1 ~s>7 ~ O i 6@, s3~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ r 8 Bar o y~
o ~ I aRl`• B q
+o~+! , Ida - ~l ©y04 ~,wo8
m
ro I _ b s ~ I~ 11 ~1 V~ o
~ nIZT ~15~ I I e Imp r _ > y1' ~ fa ~a,•
A'', ti~a~~ Im / / / 1 - I = mCI X211
L 66
z o i i o~'§S~
~I v Nul as $~^'ll8
os H~~ ~oe1 ; \B Z_
O girl Y \ `~1°~4 rn
~1Y1 O~~! 6i i' 01~11 \ \ ~ ~ O O 1 I ~ p N ~tm V
I •.°e 1 I I II"'..
$11. o \ \ \n \ \ I -I I ° r w ,9.z' `o ri
!1 ` M w \ \6. 31 a h I t I~ 1 p- n6i P 1~ gi< op~~p
1 S w o Q o sy~ coti ory ~ Z III J 8~ IOW N ` R'+ rS
0 1 rt •7~ I _ ' Lr
481
~w I +ogg 1 10~~. \ y pf ~J ~ ~ In K O ~ ~ 1 >Up° ~ 6~p .9
II olg~ J~
g
+
j
jlg' o3~s ` sex s GIs ~I i I° ° a S, '
0 sill
y ~ &A L \~9• 6 O
tfi ~ L~L ~ nr c 1
> L
2•.6, o• 1/
WASH "~,J y~QAI
II
~l + Y' 1 0 -A yI~Q~ I I 12', RD. .fo,BS w a P~ 10+
O II ~7O ~ Aix, ~ 1 Z~ a§«
P 2 /4 / l l4 T nE~ I "~+/Sr [P Ir _ n' Is
Sc E C ~i ~1
3 7Rl c I oi\\ 1 ^8%
20
IIP s ~I II1I
Mal r+0c III ~a~ I I ~
1IP7S I ~4~ II A O
1
"IMP
PUP
H U1
D FC
s m 1 r
Zz
o

naxcr ~ ra. aer Ho. i
N
N - 515 5
ROADWAY MOM XYOM LM
BRIDGE HYDRAULIC DATA
DESIGN DISCHARGE - /7/70 CFS PRELIMIN RY PLANS
DESIGN FREQUENCY - 100 YRS xm oa~~
DESIGN Mw ELEVATION - 1997.4 FT
BASE DISCHARGE - OIOO CFS
HE]
BASE FREQUENCY - 100 YRS
BASE IN ELEVATION - 19974 FT .11 1
.11 ITT.,
BENCHMARK BRYSONr OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE - 7320 CFS
-
FFFFF
NCGS MQMUYENT OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY- 10+ YRS
-L- S1a18+3832 3&A'RT OVERTOPPING ELEVATION -19923 FT
ELEV.19W.97 Yl -
DATE OF SURVEY - 0110412"
-HH
ffH ii
w.3.ELEVATVN
'WIN
AT DATE OF SURVEY - 1978,9 FT
dH444-F
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 11 18 19 20 10 11
BRIDGE HYDRAULIC DATA
DESIGN DISCHARGE -4940 CFS
I 1 .11 ITT.
DESIGN FREQUENCY - 5 YRS
DESIGN Mw ELEVATION - 19893 FT
BASE DISCHARGE - N/A CFS
Y2- -L- DETOUR ELEVATION - N/A Yl- DETOUR
BASE OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE- N/A CFS
aERroPPiNG FREQUENCY- N/A IRS
OVERrOPPING ELEVATION - N/A FT
DATE OF SURVEY - ai0412006
w,S.ELEVATION
AT DATE OF SURVEY -1978-9 Fr
IT.
2,000
1990

ifH 11
1980

1,970

1960
=x 10 11 12 0 1 2 3 4 5 10 11

I

NC 81
Buncombe County
Bridge No. 39 Over Swannanoa River
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-81(1)

State Project 8.1843001
WBS # 32643.1.1
TIP Project No. B-2515

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

AND
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

APPROVED:

Date - regory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT

x/05
Date A John F. Sullivan III, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA

NC 81
Buncombe County
Bridge No. 39 Over Swannanoa River
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-81(1)
State Project 8.1843001
WBS # 32643.1.1
TIP Project No. B-2515

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

June 2005

Document Prepared by

EarthTech
A Tyco internatmnai lta. Company

C ~oF ,o ~

Jo Schrohenloher, P.E., Project Engineer 02EAALL a=
Earth Tech ;sy CS
R11

For the North Carolina Department of Transportation

Stacy Baldyl, .E., C.PM, Unit Head
Consultant gineering Unit
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch

NC 81
Buncombe County
Bridge No. 39 Over Swannanoa River
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-81(1)
State Project 8.1843001
WBS # 32643.1.1
TIP Project No. B-2515

ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS

In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit No. 23 Conditions, the General Nationwide
Permit Conditions, Section 404 Only conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency
conditions, NCDOT's Guidelines for Best Management Practices for the Protection of
Surface Waters, General Certification Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of
Certification, the following special commitments have been agreed to by NCDOT:

Highway Design Branch

The pattern on the bridge rails will mimic that of the McDowell Street Bridge. Lamps
and quatrefoil designs will be incorporated into the bridge design. NCDOT will
consult with the State Historic Preservation Office, Biltmore Village Historic
Museum, and Biltmore Village Historic District on the design details.

Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch

Approval under Section 26a of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Act is required.
A copy of the environmental document will be provided to the TVA.

Roadway Design Unit

The temporary detour structure will have a pedestrian walkway.
The new structure will carry two travel lanes, one 12-foot and one 14-foot, in each
direction. The 14-foot outside lanes will accommodate bicyclists. Sidewalks, 7 feet
wide, will be included on each side of the structure.

Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of l
June 2005

NC 81
Buncombe County
Bridge No. 39 Over Swannanoa River
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-81(1)
State Project 8.1843001
WBS # 32643.1.1
TIP Project No. B-2515

INTRODUCTION: The replacement of Bridge No. 39 is included in the 2004-2010
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement
Program and in the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location is shown in
Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified
as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion".

I. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT

Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 27.3 out
of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered functionally obsolete and
structurally deficient. The replacement of this inadequate structure will result in safer and
more efficient traffic operations.

II. EXISTING CONDITIONS

NCDOT classifies NC 81 (Biltmore Avenue) as an "urban minor arterial" in the
Statewide Functional Classification System.
Through the project area, NC 81 is a four-lane paved facility with a 40-foot clear
roadway width and 6-foot wide sidewalks on each side. This section of NC 81 is on a
60-foot wide right of way. The horizontal and vertical alignments are flat. The posted
speed limit is 35 miles per hour.

The existing bridge was constructed in 1935. It has reinforced concrete deck girders,
vertical abutments, and piers. The bridge is 123 feet long with three spans of 41 feet each.
The roadway width is 40 feet and carries four 10-foot lanes of traffic. The crown of the
roadway is 19 feet over the bed of Swannanoa River. There are no posted load limits. The
bridge is located in a tangent section of NC 81 and crosses Swannanoa River at
approximately 90 degrees. Photographs of the approaches to the existing bridge are
shown in Figures 4a and 4b.
Bridge No. 39 lies in a heavily urbanized area. Land use along NC 81 in the vicinity of
Bridge No. 39 is primarily fueling stations, fast-food and other restaurants, and small
shops. Approximately 250 feet to the south of Bridge No. 39 are railroad tracks. To the
south of the rail road tracks is the Biltmore Village Historic District.
The average daily traffic volume on NC 81 at Bridge No. 39 is estimated at
30,800 vehicles per day in 2005. By the design year, 2025, the average daily traffic

1

volume is expected to increase to 49,100 vehicles per day. The projected traffic volume
includes four percent dual-tired vehicles and two percent truck-tractor semi-trailers.
No school buses cross this bridge as part of a regular route.

In the period between December 1, 2001 and November 30, 2004, there were 15 crashes
reported within 500 feet on either side of the Bridge No. 39. Six of the crashes were in
the vicinity of the Thompson Road intersection, and five crashes were either at or north
of the Swannanoa River Road intersection. Four crashes where at Bridge No. 39.

Ill. ALTERNATIVES

A. Project Description

The proposed structure is a bridge with a clear roadway width accommodating four lanes
of traffic. The bridge will be approximately 119 feet long and use a single span. The
facility will carry two travel lanes, one 12-foot and one 14-foot, in each direction. The
14-foot outside lanes will accommodate bicyclists in a "share the road" situation.
Sidewalks, 7 feet wide, will be included on each side of the bridge. The typical section
for the proposed approaches and bridge are shown in Figure 3.
B. Build Alternatives

Alternative 1 (Preferred) will use a two-lane, two-way on-site detour to the east of the
existing bridge. The temporary structure will have a pedestrian walkway. See Figure 2
for Alternative 1.
Alternative 2 will close the existing facility during construction, redirecting traffic to an
off-site detour using McDowell Street (see Figure 1 for off-site detour route). The detour
would follow McDowell Street to Short McDowell Street, to Meadow Road, and back to
Biltmore Avenue approximately 500 feet north of Bridge No. 39. An on-site detour
structure for pedestrians would be provided. See Figure 2 for Alternative 2.
Alternative 2 was not selected as the preferred alternative because the off-site detour will
not be able to accommodate the total traffic volumes. In addition, there are local concerns
that tourists will have a difficult time navigating an off-site detour.

C. Alternatives Eliminated from Further Study
Phased construction was considered but eliminated from further study. Phase one of this
alternative would require the partial construction of the replacement structure: transfer
two lanes of traffic to the replacement structure, and removal of half of the existing
structure. The Bridge Maintenance Unit evaluated the existing structure and determined it
to be unsuitable for phased removal, thereby eliminating this alternative from further
study.
An on-site detour to the west was considered but eliminated from further study. The
project area is dense with commercial development and intersecting roads and railroads,
which would create additional conflict with a detour to the west. An on-site detour to the
west would encroach on the railroad right-of-way to the south, and the connections of
Thompson Street and Swannanoa River Road with NC 81 would have to be eliminated to

2

avoid conflicts between turning vehicles on and off of these side streets and construction
activities at the existing bridge location. In addition, any construction encroaching on the
railroad tracks would also encroach on the Biltmore Village Historic District, bordered to
the north by the railroad.
Rehabilitation of the existing structure and the "No Build" alternative was considered
early in the project study but eliminated from further study. Because of the poor bridge
condition, rehabilitating the existing structure is not feasible. The "no build" alternative
would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge and would thereby eliminate the traffic
service provided by NC 81 in the project area.

D. Preferred Alternative
Alternative 1, replacing Bridge No. 39 on the existing roadway alignment while
maintaining traffic on a temporary detour structure to the east of the existing bridge is the
preferred alternative. Alternative 1 was selected because an off-site detour (as
Alternative 2 proposes) will not be able to accommodate the total traffic volumes. In
addition, there are local concerns that tourists will have a difficult time navigating an off-
site detour.
Because of the heavy volume of traffic using NC 81 and Bridge No. 39, the two-lane
two-way on-site detour, by itself, will not be able to accommodate travel demand. An off-
site detour, as proposed in Alternative 2, will be signed as an "alternative detour route" to
provide additional detour capacity.

IV. ESTIMATED COSTS

Construction and right of way cost estimates for the alternatives studied are presented
below in Table 1.

Table 1. Estimated Construction Costs
Alt. 1 (Preferred) Alt. 2
Structure Removal $ 67,500 $ 67,500
Structure $ 667,590 $ 628,320
Detour $ 228,400 N/A
Roadway and Approaches $ 439,400 $ 264,800
Miscellaneous and Mobility $ 351,510 $ 237,780
Engineering and Contingencies $ 283,000 $ 205,000
Right of way/Utilities $1,294,469 $1,296,728
Relocations 0 0
Total Cost of Alternative $3 331,869 $ 2,700,128

The estimated cost of right of way and construction of the project, as shown in the 2004-
2010 TIP, is $2,190,000 including $540,000 for right of way and $1,400,000 for
constriction. Right of way acquisition is scheduled for Federal Fiscal Year 2005, with
construction to follow in Federal fiscal Year 2006.

3

V. NATURAL RESOURCES

An evaluation of natural resources in the immediate area of potential project impact was
performed. The evaluation describes the various natural resources likely to be impacted
by the proposed project. This section identifies and estimates the likely consequences of
the anticipated impacts to these resources. The information in this section is based on the
Natural Resources Technical Report dated November 2004.
A. Methodology

Published information and resources were collected prior to the field investigation.
Information sources used to prepare this report include the following:
• United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-Minute Topographic Maps,
Asheville (1984), NC Quadrangle

• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands
Inventory (NWI) Maps, Asheville (1993), NC Quadrangle
• United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource
Conservation Service (NRCS) Soil Survey for Buncombe County,
Unpublished
• North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(NCDENR) basinwide assessment information for the French Broad River
Basin (NCDENR, 2003)

• USFWS list of protected and candidate species (January 2004)
• North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) files of rare species and
unique habitats, 2004

Water resource information was obtained from publications posted on the World Wide
Web by NCDENR, Division of Water Quality (DWQ). Information concerning the
occurrence of federally protected species in the project area was obtained from the
USFWS list of protected and candidate species (January 2004). Information about species
under state protection was obtained from the North Carolina NHP database of rare
species and unique habitats. NHP files were reviewed for documented occurrences of
species on state or federal lists and locations of significant natural areas.
Biologists performed a field survey on February 12, 2004, to inventory natural resources.
Plant communities were identified by observing and recording dominant species. A
combination of classification schemes was used to describe the communities. Terrestrial
community classifications generally follow the NHP's Classification of the Natural
Communities of North Carolina, Third Approximation (Schafale and Weakley, 1990).
Plant names follow the usage in Radford et al. (1968). Vertebrate taxonomy follows
Potter et al. (1980), Martof et al. (1980), Webster et al. (1985), and Menhinnick (1991).
Predictions regarding wildlife community composition involved general qualitative
habitat assessment based on existing vegetative communities. Water resources were
identified and their physical characteristics were recorded. The presence or absence of
wetlands was determined by reviewing the NWI maps of the project area. No wetlands
were listed on the NWI maps or observed during the field survey within the project area.

4

The following terms are used to describe the limits of the natural resource investigations.
"Project study area" or "project area" refer to the areas along the full length of the project
alignment (400 feet long and 80 feet wide). The "project vicinity" is an area extending
0.5 miles on all sides of the project study area. The "project region" is an area equivalent
in size to the area represented by a 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle map (61.8 square miles)
with the project study area occupying the center of the project region.
B. Physiography and Soils

1. Regional Characteristics
The project area is located in the southwestern part of the Mountain physiographic
province. The project area lies within the Blue Ridge Level III ecoregion, and more
specifically, the Broad Basins IV ecoregion (Griffith et al., 2002). The topography of the
project area is flat (typical of river floodplains). Steep riverbanks are also located on both
the north and south banks of the Swannanoa River. Project area elevation is
approximately 2,000 feet above sea level.
2. Soils

The process of soil development depends upon both biotic and abiotic influences. These
influences include past geologic activities, nature of parent material, environmental and
human influences, plant and animal activity, time, climate, and topographical position.
The project area includes one main soil type: Udorthents- Urban land complex, 0-5
percent slopes, occasionally flooded. The Udorthents component is composed of loamy
and stony soils typically found in gravel pits, mines, and cut-and-fill areas where the soil
and underlying material has been removed and placed on the adjacent site (USDA, 2004).
No hydric soils were found in the project study area.
C. Water Resources

1. Waters Impacted
The proposed project is located within the Upper French Broad River Basin, DWQ
subbasin 04-03-02 (USGS 8-digit Hydrologic Unit 06010105). The drainage area is
approximately 130 square miles. The Swannanoa River flows east to west through the
proposed project area before entering the French Broad River approximately 1.7 miles
downstream of the project area.
2. Water Resource Characteristics

The Swannanoa River is approximately 70 feet wide with depth averages of 2-3 feet in
the project area. The bottom substrate of the Swannanoa River in the project area is
composed of silt overlaying rock, gravel, and sand.
Surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a best usage classification by the DWQ,
which is designated to maintain, protect, and enhance water quality within the state. The
Swannanoa River within the project study area is assigned a DWQ stream index number
of 6-78. The best usage classification for the Swannanoa River is Class C. Class C water
resources are used for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary
recreation, and agriculture. There are no restrictions on watershed development activities.

5

No waters classified as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters
(HQW), Critical Area (CA), or Water Supply (WS-II or WS-I) occur within 1.0 mile of
the project area.
The DWQ has initiated a basin-wide approach to water quality management for each of
the 17 river basins in the state. DWQ collects biological and physical data for use within
the basin-wide assessment and planning. River basins are re-assessed every five years.

The Swannanoa River within the project area, last sampled in 2002, received a Good-Fair
rating. It has been rated Good-Fair since 1992 (NCDENR, 2003). Swannanoa River is not
listed on the DWQ Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 303(d) list of impaired streams.
There are no streams listed on the Section 303(d) located within one mile of the project
study area.
Point source discharges in North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by the DWQ. All
dischargers are required to obtain a permit to discharge. There were no discharges
observed within the project study area during field investigations. No permitted
dischargers are located within one mile of the project area.
3. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources

Impacts to water resources in the project area are likely to result from activities
associated with project construction, such as clearing and grubbing on stream banks,
riparian canopy removal, in-stream bent removal, bridge construction, fertilizers, and
pesticides application during re-vegetation, and pavement construction. The following
impacts to surface water resources are likely to result from the above-mentioned
construction activities:
• Increased sediment loading and siltation downstream of the crossing and
increased erosion in the project area.

• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation
and vegetation removal.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to
surface and groundwater flow from construction.
• Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to vegetation
removal.

• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
• Increased concentration of toxic compounds from roadway runoff.

• Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil from
construction equipment and other vehicles.
• Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and
groundwater drainage patterns.

• Alteration of water levels and flows as a result of interruptions and/or
additions to surface and groundwater flow from construction.

6

' NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be
implemented during the construction phase of the project to minimize potential impacts
to water resources in the project area.
4. Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal

The existing superstructure consists reinforced concrete deck girders with reinforced
concrete deck having sidewalk and concrete rails. The substructure consists of two
reinforced concreted abutments and two piers in the water. The maximum potential fill
from bridge demolition is 800 cubic yards.
The streambed in the project area contains a substantial amount of silt and sand. This
condition is conducive to high turbidity when disturbed; therefore, turbidity curtains are
recommended.

D. Biotic Resources
Terrestrial and aquatic communities are included in the description of biotic resources.
Living systems described in the following sections include communities of associated
plants and animals. These descriptions refer to the dominant flora and fauna in each
community and the relationships of these biotic components. Descriptions of the
terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community classifications. These
classifications follow Schafale and Weakley (1990). Scientific nomenclature and
common names (when applicable) are used for the plant and animal species described.
Subsequent references to the same species are by the common name only.
1. Terrestrial Communities

Maintained/Disturbed and Riparian Forest are the two terrestrial communities found in
the project area. Dominant faunal components associated with these terrestrial areas will
be discussed in each community description; however, many species are adapted to the
entire range of habitats found in the project area and may not be mentioned in each
community description.
a) Maintained/Disturbed Community

The Maintained/Disturbed community is the dominant community within the project
area. It encompasses habitats that have recently been or are currently impacted by human
disturbance, such as maintained roadside right-of-ways and commercial land use
property. Because of mowing and periodic clearing, this community is kept in a constant
state of early succession. The intensely maintained (mowed) areas are dominated by
fescue (Festuca sp.), plantain (Plantago sp.), and dandelion (Taraxacum sp.), as well as a
variety of landscape ornamentals.
Many animals present in these disturbed habitats are opportunistic and capable of
surviving on a variety of forage resources, ranging from vegetation (flowers, leaves,
seeds, and fruits) to animal matter (living and dead). Virginia opossum (Didelphis
virginiana), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), Northern mockingbird (Mimus
polvglottos), American crow (Corvits brachyrhynchos), Carolina chickadee (Poecile
carolinensis), tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor), and mourning dove (Zenaida
macroura) are examples of species attracted to lawns and roadside habitats. The Carolina
wren (Thryothonts htdovicianits), eastern towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), and several

7

' species of mice (Peromyscus spp.) inhabit the less maintained margins or ecotones of
road shoulders. Mortality among animals that migrate across roadways provides forage
for opportunistic species such as the turkey vulture (Cathartes aura).

b) Riparian Forest Community
The Riparian Forest community forms a narrow buffer less than 20 feet wide along the
banks of the Swannanoa River. The open canopy is composed of sycamore (Platanars
occidentalis) and box elder (Acer negundo). Subcanopy growth is spotty and is
dominated by black willow (Saliz nigra) and saplings of previously mentioned canopy
species. Dense shrub and ground cover consisting of privet (Ligustrum sinense),
elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), blackberry (Rubus sp.), grape (Vitis rotundifolia), and
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) blanket the riverbanks. The Riparian Forest
community appears to be a remnant of the Montane Alluvial Forest natural community as
described by Schafale and Weakley (1990), which most likely preexisted floodplain
development along the Swannanoa River.
Animals previously mentioned may be found in this community as well as two-lined
salamander (Eurycea bislineata) and slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus), which
may reside under vegetative litter. Raccoon (Procyon lotor), eastern box turtle
(Terrapene carolina), and rough green snake (Opheodrys aestivus) are also likely
residents in the project area.

2. Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community in the project area exists within the Swannanoa River. This water
body has undergone substantial sedimentation as a result of urban development. Only an
extremely narrow forested buffer zone exists on site to filter stormwater runoff. The
Swannanoa River also receives direct discharges from stormwater outfall pipes.
Riverbanks, which are steep and heavily eroded, exhibit vegetation previously mentioned
in the Riparian Forest Community descriptions. Animals such as bullfrog (Rana
catesbiana) may reside along the water's edge along with mountain dusky salamander
(Desmognathus ochrophaeus), crayfish, mayflies, stoneflies, caddisflies, dragonflies,
damselflies, and segmented worms (oligochaetes), which exist under stones and other
substrate on the river bed. Fish species in this section of the Swannanoa River include
golden shiner (Notemigonus crysoleucas), river chub (Nocomis micropogon), flat
bullhead (Ictalztrus platycephalus), Northern hog sucker (Hypentelium nigricans),
warpaint shiner (Li rilus coccogenis), Swannanoa darter (Etheostoma swannanoa),
redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), mirror shiner
(Notropsis spectninculus), whitetail shiner (Cyprinella galactura), rock bass (Ambloplites
rupestris), and one individual of blotched chub (Erimystax insignis), which is listed as a
USFWS Federal Species of Concern.
3. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities

Project construction will have various impacts to the previously described terrestrial and
aquatic communities. Any construction activities in or near these resources have the
potential to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies potential
impacts to the natural communities within the project area in terms of the area impacted

8

• and the plants and animals affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered
here along with recommendations to minimize or eliminate impacts.
a) Terrestrial Communities

Terrestrial communities in the project area will be impacted permanently by project
construction from clearing and paving. Estimated impacts are based on the length of the
permanent structure and the entire study corridor width. Alternative 1 (Preferred) will
have an on-site detour east of the existing bridge that will have temporary impacts. Table
2 describes the potential impacts to terrestrial communities by habitat type. Because
impacts are based on the entire study corridor width, the actual loss of habitat will be less
than the estimate.

Table 2. Estimated Area of Impact to Terrestrial Communities
Area of Impact in Acres
Alternative 1 Preferred Alternative 2
Community Type Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent
Maintained 0.52 0.00 0.33 0.00
Riparian Buffer 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
Total Impact 0.56 0.04 0.37 0.04

Destruction of natural communities along the project alignment will result in the loss of
foraging and breeding habitats for the various animal species that utilize the area. Animal
species will be displaced into surrounding communities. Adult birds, mammals, and some
reptiles are mobile enough to avoid mortality during construction. Young animals and
less mobile species, such as many amphibians, may suffer direct loss during construction.
The plants and animals that are found in the upland communities are generally common
throughout western North Carolina.
b) Wetland Communities

The Asheville, North Carolina NWI map shows no wetlands in the project vicinity. No
jurisdictional wetlands were observed within the project area.
c) Aquatic Communities

Aquatic habitat in the project area will be both directly and indirectly affected by
construction of the project. Impacts to aquatic communities include fluctuations in water
temperatures as a result of the loss of riparian vegetation. Shelter and food resources,
both in the aquatic and terrestrial portions of these organisms' life cycles, will be affected
by losses in the terrestrial communities. The loss of aquatic plants and animals will affect
the terrestrial fauna that rely on them as a food source.
Temporary and permanent impacts to aquatic organisms may result from increased
sedimentation. Sediments have the potential to affect fish and other aquatic life in several
ways, including the clogging and abrading of gills and other respiratory surfaces,
affecting the habitat by scouring and filling of pools and riffles, altering water chemistry,
and smothering different life stages. Increased sedimentation may cause decreased light
penetration through an increase in turbidity. Dissolved oxygen rates may be lower as well
due to the influx of organic materials and increase in water temperature. Impacts to

9

aquatic communities will be minimized by adherence to Best Management Practices for
the Protection of Surface Waters.

E. Special Topics
This section provides inventories and impact analyses for two federal and state regulatory
issues: "Waters of the United States" and rare and protected species.
1. "Waters of the United States": Jurisdictional Issues

Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States" as defined in 33 CFR § 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of
the CWA (33 U.S.C. 1344). These waters are regulated by the US Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE). Any action that proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface
waters or wetlands is subject to these provisions.
Swannanoa River is the only surface water to be affected by the proposed project. No
wetlands will be directly impacted by the proposed project. Table 3 lists the surface
water impacts.

Table 3. Estimated Area of Impact to Surface Waters
Length of Impact in Linear Feet
Alternative 1 Preferred Alternative 2
Surface Waters Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent
Swannanoa River 50 13 0 13

2. Permits

a) Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
Construction is anticipated to be authorized by provisions of the General Nationwide 33
Permit. Buncombe County is one of the 25 counties designated by the WRC as having
trout waters. Projects in these counties must be reviewed and approved by the WRC prior
to issuance of the USACE Permit.

b) Section 401 Water Quality Certification
Section 401 of the CWA requires that the state issue or deny water quality certifications
for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge to the waters
of the United States prior to issuance of USACE permits.
c) Bridge Demolition and Removal

Demolition and removal of a highway bridge over Waters of the United States must be
addressed when applying to the USACE for a permit. A worst-case scenario of dropping
components of the bridge in the water is assumed. Effective September 20, 1999, this
issue is included in the permit application for bridge reconstruction. The permit
application henceforth will require disclosure of demolition methods and potential
impacts to the body of water in the planning document for the bridge reconstruction.
The existing superstructure consists of reinforced concrete deck girders with reinforced
concrete deck having sidewalk and concrete rails. The substructure consists of two

10

reinforced concreted abutments and two piers in the water. The maximum potential fill
from bridge demolition is 800 cubic yards.
The Swannanoa River is a tributary to the French Broad River in the French Broad
watershed and has a water quality classification of "C". No instream moratorium on this
stream has been requested by the WRC.

d) Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
The project lies in TVA's jurisdiction. TVA approval must be obtained before any
construction activities (Section 26a of the TVA Act). A copy of this document will be
sent to TVA.
3. Mitigation

The USACE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a
wetland mitigation policy that embraces the concepts of "no net loss of wetlands" and
sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the physical, chemical,
and biological integrity of "Waters of the United States", including wetlands. Mitigation
of stream and wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding
impacts, minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time, and
compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of the three aspects (avoidance,
minimization, and compensatory mitigation) must be considered in sequential order.
Mitigation efforts should not be required since this project is anticipated to be authorized
under a Nationwide 33 Permit.
F. Rare and Protected Species

Some populations of plants and animals are declining as a result of either natural forces
or their difficulty competing with humans for resources. Rare and protected species listed
for Buncombe County, and any likely impacts to these species as a result of the proposed
project construction, are discussed in the following sections.
1. Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The USFWS lists
twelve species (as of January 2004) under federal protection for Buncombe County.
These species are listed in Table 4.

11

Table 4. Species Under Federal Protection in Buncombe County

Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status
Vertebrates
Bo turtle Clemm s muhlenber ii T S/A
Carolina northern flying squirrel G/aucom s sabrinus coloratus E
Eastern cougar Puma concolor cou uar E
Gray bat M otis risescens E**
S otfin chub H bo sis monacha T*
Invertebrates
Appalachian elktoe A/asmidonta raveneliana E
Oyster mussel E iob/asma ca saeformis E***
Vascular Plants
Bunched arrowhead Sa ittaria fasciculata E*
Mountain sweet pitcher plant Sarracenia 'onesii E*
S readin avens Geum radiatum E
Virginia s iraea S iraea vir iniana T
Nonvascular Plants
Rock Gnome Lichen G mnoderma lineare E
Notes:
E Endangered - A species that is threatened with extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.
T Threatened - A species that is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
T(S/A) Similarity of Appearance - A species that is listed as threatened due to similarity of
appearance with other rare species.
Historic record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
Incidental/migrant record - the species was observed outside of its normal range or
habitat.
Historic record - obscure and incidental record.
In the November 4, 1997, Federal Register (55822-55825), the northern population of the bog turtle
(from New York south to Maryland) was listed as T (threatened), and the southern population (from
Virginia south to Georgia) was listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance). The T(S/A)
designation bans the collection and interstate and international commercial trade of bog turtles from the
southern population. The T(S/A) designation has no effect on land-management activities by private
landowners in North Carolina, part of the southern population of the species.
A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements of each species
follows, along with a conclusion regarding potential project impact. Surveys for federally
protected species are valid for two years from the survey date. If the project is not
constructed within those two years then the area may need to be resurveyed prior to the
let date.
Bog turtle (Clemmys mirhlenbergia) Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance
Vertebrate Family: Emydidae
Federally Listed: 1997
The bog turtle is a small freshwater turtle reaching a maximum carapace length of
4.5 inches. These turtles have a domed carapace that is weakly keeled and is light brown
to ebony in color. The scutes have a lighter-colored starburst pattern. The plastron is

12

brownish-black with contrasting yellow or cream areas along the midline. This species is
distinguished by a conspicuous orange, yellow, or red blotch on each side of the head.
The bog turtle is semi-aquatic and is typically found in freshwater wetlands characterized
by open fields, meadows, or marshes with slow-moving streams, ditches, and boggy
areas. The bog turtle is also found in wetlands in agricultural areas subject to light to
moderate livestock grazing, which helps to maintain an intermediate stage of succession.
During the winter, this species hibernates just below the upper surface of mud. Mating
occurs in May and June, and the female deposits two to six eggs in sphagnum moss or
sedge tussocks in May, June, or July. The diet of the bog turtle is varied, consisting of
beetles, lepidopteron and caddis fly larvae, snails, millipedes, pondweed and sedge seeds,
and carrion.
The southern population of the bog turtle ranges from southern Virginia to northern
Georgia, and is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance to the northern
population. Therefore, the southern population is not afforded protection under Section 7
of the Endangered Species Act.

Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No habitat exists within the project area for the bog turtle. There are no freshwater
wetlands, or marshes with slow moving streams, ditches, or boggy areas near the bridge.
A search of the NHP database revealed no occurrences of the bog turtle within 2 miles. It
can be concluded that the project will not impact this species.

Carolina northern flying squirrel (Glaucomysabrinus coloratus) Endangered
Vertebrate Family: Sciuridae

Federally Listed: 1985
The Carolina northern flying squirrel is a small mammal weighing about 3 to 5 ounces.
The adult squirrel is gray with a reddish or brownish wash on the back and a grayish-
white to white underside. It has a large flap of skin along either side of its body from
wrist to ankle. The skin flaps and its broad flattened tail allow the northern flying squirrel
to glide from tree to tree. It is a strictly nocturnal animal with large dark eyes.
There are several isolated populations of the northern flying squirrel in the western part
of North Carolina along the Tennessee border. This squirrel is found above 5000 feet in
the vegetation transition zone between hardwood and coniferous forests. Both forest
types are used to search for food and the hardwood forest is used for nesting sites. The
squirrel can subsist on lichens and fungi throughout much of its range; however, the diet
can also include seeds, buds, fruits, cones, and insects.

Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No habitat exists in the project area for the Carolina northern flying squirrel. The
elevation of the project area is approximately 1976 feet and lacks forest habitat. A search
of the NHP database found no occurrences of Carolina northern flying squirrel in the
project vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will not impact this endangered
species.

13

Eastern cougar (Fells concolor cougar) Endangered

Family: Felidae
Federally Listed: 1973
The Eastern cougar or panther (also referred to as a mountain lion), is a very large, long-
tailed cat, attaining total lengths of 6 to 7.5 feet and weights of 100 to 150 pounds. In
adults the fur is short brownish on the back and sides, with whitish under parts. The
muzzle and tip of the tail are dark. Tracks of the adults are large (3.5 inches), and the
retractive claws do not show.

The cougar's diet consists mainly of deer, but includes small mammals, fish, wild
turkeys, and occasionally domestic livestock. The Eastern cougar typically stalks its prey
and leaps upon it from the ground rather than from ambush in trees or rocks. It will often
hide uneaten portions of its kill for future meals, but it will not eat spoiled meat.
It does seem to need a large undisturbed wilderness area with adequate food supply. The
Eastern cougar prefers large tracts of wilderness area and is found in remote, rugged
habitats such as mountains, gorges, and swamps. The home range of the cougar averages
9.6 to 19.3 square miles. Males are solitary most of the year, but a female may be
accompanied by her young for up to two years after their birth. The Eastern cougar's
endangered status is largely a result of habitat loss through deforestation, as well as
hunting and trapping.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect

No habitat exists in the project area for the Eastern cougar. The bridge is within the City
of Asheville and is not close to large tracts of wilderness area. A search of the NHP
database revealed no occurrences of the Eastern cougar within 2 miles. It can be
concluded that the project will not impact this endangered species.

Gray bat (Myotis grisescens) Endangered

Family: Vespertilionidae
Federally Listed: 1976

The gray bat is easily distinguished from other bats by its large size and uniform fur
color. It weighs 0.2 to 0.5 ounces and the forearm measures 1.5 to 1.8 inches in length.
The dorsal fur is uniformly gray or russet, as opposed to bi- or tri-colored as in other bats.
In all other species of Myotis, the wing membrane connects to the base of the first toe,
whereas in the gray bat it connects at the ankle.
The gray bat is found mainly in the cave regions of Arkansas, Missouri, Kentucky,
Tennessee, and Alabama, although colonies and individuals are occasionally found in
neighboring states. Gray bats live in caves all year, but move between summer and winter
caves. In winter, they hibernate primarily in deep vertical caves with large rooms acting
as cold air traps. During summer, females form maternity colonies of a few hundred to
many thousands of individuals, often in large caves containing streams. These colonies

14

prefer caves that, because of their configuration, trap warm air or provide restricted
rooms or domed ceilings capable of trapping body heat from clustered individuals. These
summer caves are usually less than 1.0 mile from rivers or lakes.

Gray bats forage primarily over water along rivers or lakeshores. Most foraging occurs
within 15 feet of the surface. Mayflies are apparently a major item in the diet, but they
may feed on other insects as well.
Biological Conclusion No Effect
No caves were discovered within the project areas. The Swannanoa River may serve as
suitable foraging habitat for this species. However, no individuals of this species or
indications of their presence were observed. A search of the NHP database found no
occurrence of this animal within the project vicinity. Furthermore, the record of this
species in Buncombe County is an incidental/migratory record, implying that the species
was observed outside its normal range or habitat. It can be concluded that the project will
not impact this endangered species.

Spotfin chub (Cyprinella monacha) Threatened
Vertebrate Family: Cyprinidae

Federally Listed: 1977
This small, elongate fish is recognized by the large black spot in the caudal region. The
spotfin chub grows to a length of 3.6 inches. The mouth is inferior, with a tiny pair of
terminal labial barbels. Breeding males are brilliant turquoise on the back and sides and
have white-tipped fins. Juveniles and adult females have olive-colored backs, silvery
sides, and white undersides. The spotfin chub is believed to spawn in June. It feeds by
sight and taste, and its diet consists mainly of tiny insect larvae that occur on the stream
bottom.
The habitat of the spotfin chub is moderate to large streams with alternating riffles and
pools and clear, cool to warm, fast-flowing water. They rarely, if ever, occupy heavily
silted streams. It is restricted to the Tennessee River drainage area. In North Carolina, it
is known only from the Little Tennessee River in Macon and Swain counties, and has
never been found in streams with significantly silted substrates.

Biological Conclusion No Effect
The Swannanoa River is within the Tennessee River drainage. Stream habitat within the
project area, although cobbles and boulders are present, has a significantly silted
substrate. The Swannanoa River is heavily impacted by urban development, polluted by
domestic and industrial wastes, negatively affecting stream habitat. Furthermore, the
record of this species in Buncombe County is a historic record, indicating that the species
was observed more than 50 years ago. A search of the NHP database found no occurrence
of this animal within the project vicinity. No individuals of this species were observed. It
can be concluded that the project will not impact this threatened species.

15

• Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana) Endangered
Invertebrate Family: Unionidae

Federally Listed: 1994
The Appalachian elk-toe is a kidney-shaped freshwater mussel endemic to the upper
Tennessee River system in western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee. The adult shell
reaches to 3.5 inches in length and is usually dark brown with prominent to obscure
greenish rays. This mussel inhabits relatively shallow medium-sized creeks and rivers
with moderate to fast flowing water. It is generally found in gravelly substrates mixed
with cobbles and boulders or occasionally in silt-free, coarse sandy substrates.
Reproduction is similar to that of other freshwater mussels and the banded sculpin
(Cottus carolinae) has been identified as a host species for developing glochidia.
Historically, this mussel was found in the French Broad River system, including French
Broad mainstem and the Little River in Transylvania County. Surveys conducted in the
French Broad River system from 1986 through the spring of 1992 failed to locate any
specimens of the Appalachian elktoe (USFWS, 2002).
Biological Conclusion May Affect - Not Likely to Adversely Affect

A search of the NHP database of rare species and unique habitats, conducted on February
3, 2004, shows one historical occurrence of this species approximately 0.75 miles
downstream of the project area. However, no recent records within the last 20 years have
been reported. No individuals of this species were observed field visit on May 6, 2005. It
is believed that the Appalachian elktoe has been extirpated from the project area, based
upon excessive silt levels caused by development within the project area. Therefore, no
impacts to the Appalachian elktoe are anticipated during project construction.
Water quality data collected by the NCDENR - Division of Water Quality at the project
site indicates that the river is impaired by many factors associated with development,
however since the 1980's the site has improved from a rating of Poor to Fair and then to
Good-Fair in the 1990's. The middle section of the river, upstream of the project site, still
has a rating of Fair, indicating that the river is impaired. Efforts are under way to identify
and repair sources of degradation and it is likely that the water quality of the area will
continue to improve with time. Mills River and the Little River are part of the headwaters
of the French Broad, upstream of its confluence with the Swannanoa, and could possibly
serve as a source population for natural re-colonization of the Asheville area in the future.
This projects close proximity to the mouth of the river and patches of suitable habitat
make it a plausible candidate for future recruitment of Appalachian elktoe. These factors
as well as the cryptic nature of mussels make it impossible to rule out the possibility that
mussels do still exist in close proximity to the project area.

Oyster mussel (Epioblasma capsaeformis) Endangered

Invertebrate Family: Unionidae
Federally Listed: 1997

The shell of the oyster mussel is a dull to sub-shiny, yellowish to green color with
numerous narrow dark green rays. It may attain lengths of 2.0 to 2.7 inches. The inside of

16

the shell is white to bluish-white. Shells of females are slightly inflated and very thin
toward the posterior margin of the shell. When the larvae are released into the water, they
attach and encyst on the gills and/or fins of a host fish.
The oyster mussel historically occurred throughout much of the Cumberland region of the
Tennessee and Cumberland River drainages in Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee, and
Virginia. It is now considered endangered in Kentucky and Virginia, and is known to
survive in small populations in only a few locations in Kentucky, Tennessee, and
Virginia. Recent research uncovered a record of a collection of this species in Madison
County in 1918 and from the French Broad River at Asheville.

The oyster mussel inhabits medium-size streams to large rivers on shoals and riffles in
course sand/gravel/cobble substrate and moderate to swift currents. It is not associated
with small stream habitats and does not extend far upstream in tributaries. It prefers water
depths of less than three feet and is sometimes found associated with water-willow
(Justicia americana) beds. Fish that have been identified as host include the spotted
darter (Etheostoma maculatum), redline darter (Etheostoma rz flineatum), dusky darter
(Percina sclera), and banded sculpin (Cottus carollinae) (Yager and Saylor 1995). The
loss of riverine habitat because of impoundments adversely affects aquatic habitat and
changes the fish fauna essential to a mussel's reproductive cycle.
Biological Conclusion May Affect - Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Habitat for the oyster mussel does not exist within the project area. As previously
mentioned, no record has been found in Buncombe County in the last 20 years. No
individuals of this species were observed during the field visit on May 6, 2005. It can be
concluded that the proposed project will not impact the oyster mussel.
As with the Appalachian elktoe, this projects close proximity to the mouth of the river
and patches of suitable habitat make it a plausible candidate for future recruitment of the
oyster mussel. These factors as well as the cryptic nature of mussels make it impossible
to rule out the possibility that mussels do still exist in close proximity to the project area.

Bunched arrowhead (Sagittaria fasciculata) Endangered

Family: Alismataceae
Federally Listed: 1979
The emergent aquatic perennial bunched arrowhead has spatulate leaves that reach
12 inches in length and 0.75 inches in width. The long-petiolate leaves are basal about an
erect scape. The scape bears three-petaled white flowers in whorls of three, with male
flowers above and female flowers below. Fruits ascend from the stalks of the lowest
whorl of flowers. The fruit is a head of achenes. Flowering and fruiting occurs from May
to July.

Bunched arrowhead is known in North Carolina from only one location in Henderson
County. There is a questionable historic record from. Buncombe County. The plant is
found in non-stagnant seepage areas that have very low or no net flow and sandy loam
soils with a thick muck layer.

17

Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No suitable habitat for this species exists within the project area. Areas having a very low
or no net flow, and soils with a muck layer are absent within the project area. A search of
the NHP database found no occurrence of this plant within the project vicinity. It can be
concluded that the project will not impact this endangered species.

Mountain sweet pitcher plant (Sarracenia jonesh) Endangered
Family: Sarraceniaceae

Federally Listed: 1989
The mountain sweet pitcher plant is a perennial herb with numerous tubular leaves
growing in clusters. The leaves grow from 8 to 29 inches tall and have a heart-shaped
hood. The waxy dull green of the leaves is criss-crossed with maroon-purple veins. The
erect scape bears one maroon flower with five recurved petals.

Populations of mountain sweet pitcher plant are known from ten locations in North and
South Carolina. The four North Carolina populations occur in Henderson and
Transylvania counties in the French Broad River drainage basin. The plant is restricted to
bogs and streamsides and is usually found in level depressions on floodplains, but has
also been found on granite rock faces beside waterfalls. Soils supporting the plant are
deep, poorly drained acidic soils with a high organic matter content.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No suitable habitat for this species exists within the project area. No bogs or wet
depressions exist within the floodplain of the project area. A search of the NHP database
found no occurrence of this plant within the project vicinity. It can be concluded that the
project will not impact this endangered species.

Spreading avens (Geum radiatum) Endangered
Plant Family: Rosaceae

Federally Listed: 1990
Spreading avens is a perennial herb having stems with an indefinite cyme of bright
yellow, radially symmetrical flowers. Flowers of spreading avens are present from June
to early July. Spreading avens has basal leaves, which are odd-pinnately compound;
terminal leaflets are kidney shaped and much larger than the lateral leaflets, which are
reduced or absent.
Spreading avens is found only in the North Carolina and Tennessee section of the
Southern Appalachian Mountains. Spreading avens occurs on scarps, bluffs, cliffs, and
escarpments on mountains, hills, and ridges. Known populations of this plant have been
found to occur at elevations from 5,060 to 5,800 feet. Other habitat requirements for this
species include full sunlight and shallow acidic soils. These soils are composed of sand,
pebbles, humus, sandy loam, and clay loam. Most populations are pioneers on rocky
outcrops.

18

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

No suitable habitat for this species exists within the project area. This species only occurs
at high elevations. A search of the NHP database found no occurrence of this plant within
the project vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will not impact this endangered
species.

Virginia spiraea (Spiraea virginiana) Threatened

Family: Rosaceae
Federally Listed: 1990
Virginia spiraea is a perennial shrub with arching, upright stems. Its growth form is
described as "plastic" and varies depending upon age and environmental conditions. The
roots are a complex system of horizontal rootstock with mats of small fibrous roots. If
exposed, the horizontal rootstock gives rise to upright stems. Virginia spiraea typically
has a diffuse branching pattern and grows to 3 to 10 feet in height. Leaves are simple,
ovate to lanceolate, with an acute base. The leaf margins range from entire to completely
serrate. Virginia spiraea flowers from late May to late July, with bright to creamy white
flowers forming a corymb.

Virginia spiraea is typically found in disturbed sites along rivers and streams. It forms
dense clumps around boulders and in rock crevices, and apparently depends on flood
scour to eliminate woody competitors and create suitable early successional habitats.
Typical habitat includes scoured banks of high gradient streams, or on meander scrolls,
point bars, natural levees, and braided features of lower stream reaches. In North
Carolina, existing populations are known from Ashe, Macon, Mitchell, and Yancey
counties. In Buncombe County, there is an historic record of an extirpated population.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No suitable habitat for this species exists within the project area. No exposed boulders are
present and the Swannanoa River is not considered a high gradient stream. Scouring
along the stream banks was minimal. In Buncombe County, the only record there is an
historic record of an extirpated population. A search of the NHP database found no
occurrence of this plant within the project vicinity. It can be concluded that the project
will not impact this threatened species.

Rock gnome lichen (Gymnoderma lineare) Endangered
Family: Cladoniaceae

Federally Listed: 1994
The rock gnome lichen is a strap like or squamulose lichen in the reindeer moss family. It
grows in dense colonies of narrow (0.04 inch) straps that are blue-grey on the upper
surface and generally shiny-white on the lower surface. The lichen can be identified by
its fruiting bodies, which are borne singly or in clusters, are black in color, and are found

19

at the tips of the squamules. The fruiting season of the rock gnome lichen occurs from
July through September.
The rock gnome lichen is a narrow endemic, restricted to areas of high humidity. These
high-humidity environments occur on high-elevation (4,000 feet) mountaintops and cliff
faces that are frequently bathed in fog, or in lower elevation (2,500 feet) deep gorges in
the southern Appalachians. The rock gnome lichen primarily occurs on vertical rock
faces where seepage water from forest soils above flows only at very wet times. The rock
gnome lichen is almost always found growing with the moss Adreaea in these vertical
intermittent seeps. The major threat of extinction to the rock gnome lichen relates directly
to habitat alteration/loss of high elevation coniferous forests. These coniferous forests
usually lie adjacent to the habitat occupied by the rock gnome lichen. The high elevation
habitat occurs in Ashe, Avery, Buncombe, Mitchell, Swain, and Yancey counties. The
lower elevation habitat of the rock gnome lichen can be found in Jackson, Rutherford,
and Transylvania counties.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect

No habitat exists in the project area for the rock gnome lichen. The elevation of the
project area is approximately 1,976 feet. In Buncombe County, this species occurs on
high-elevation mountaintops and cliff faces above 4,000 feet. A search of the NHP
database found no occurrences of rock gnome lichen in the project vicinity. It can be
concluded that the project will not impact this endangered species.
2. Federal Species of Concern
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered Species
Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Table 5 includes FSC species
listed for Buncombe County and their state classifications. Organisms that are listed as
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) on the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and Animal Species are afforded state protection
under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979. However, the level of protection given to state-listed species
does not apply to NCDOT activities.

20

Table 5. Federal Species of Concern in Buncombe County
Common Name Scientific Name State Habitat
Status Present
Vertebrates
Alle han woodrat Neotoma ma ister E N
Blotched chub Erim stax insi nis SR Y
Cerulean warbler Dendroica cerulea SR N
Eastern small-footed m otis M otis leibii SR N
Hellbender C tobranchus alle aniensis Sc Y
Southern Appalachian black-capped
chickadee poecile atricapillus practicus SC N
Southern Appalachian red crossbill Loxia curvirostra T N
Southern Appalachian saw-whet Aegolius acadicus Sc N
owl
Southern Appalachian woodrat Neotoma floridana haematoreia SC N
Southern Appalachian yellow-
bellied sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius appalaciensis SC N
Southern water shrew Sorex alustris punctulatus E N
Appalachian Bewick's wren Th omanes bewickii altus Sc * N
Bachman's sparrow Aimo hila aestivalis SC * N
Lon head darter Percina macrocephala E* N
Paddlefish Pol odon s athula T * Y
Rafines ue's big-eared bat Co norhinus =Plecotus rafines uii N
Invertebrates
French Broad crayfish Cambarus reburrus Y
Diana fritillary butterfly S e eria diana SR * N
Ph coides batesii batesii Tawny crescent butterfly SR * N
Vascular Plants
Butternut Ju lans cinerea W5 N
Cain's reed grass Calama rostis cainii E N
Carolina saxifrage Saxifra a caroliniana SR-T N
Divided-leaf ragwort Senecio millefolium T N
Fraser fir Abies fraseri N
French Broad heartleaf Hexast /is rhombiformis SR-L N
Gladespurge Eu horbia ur urea SR-T N
Gray's lily Lilium ra i T-SC N
Mountain catchfl Silene ovata SR-T N
Mountain heartleaf Hexast lis contracts E N
Pinnate-lobed black-eyed Susan Rudbeckia triloba var. innatoloba SR-T N
Piratebush Buckle a disticho h Ila E N
Sweet inesa Monotro sis odorata SR-T N
Fraser's loosestrife L simachia fraseri E * N
T= Threatened
E= Endangered
SC = Special Concern
SR= Significantly Rare
-T = Fewer than 100 populations throughout the species' range
-L = Fewer than 50 populations throughout the species' range
* = Historic record; the species was observed over 20 ears ago
Sources: Amoroso, ed., 2002; LeGrand, Hall, and Finnegan, 2001
21

3. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
No Federally Protected species or FSC species were observed during the site visit, and
none are recorded at NHP as occurring within 2 miles of the project area. However,
records from the DWQ fish monitoring database indicate that one individual of blotched
chub was collected in the project area on June 28, 1993.

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, and implemented by the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR
Part 800. Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of
Federally funded, licensed, or permitted undertakings on properties listed on or eligible
for the National Register of Historic Places and afford the Advisory Council of Historic
Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings.

B. Historic Architecture
A field survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) was conducted on November 8,
2001. All structures within the APE were photographed, and later reviewed by the State
Historic Preservation Office (HPO). Two resources were identified in the APE; the
Biltmore Village Historic District, listed in the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP), and Bridge No. 39, on the State Study list. While the Biltmore Village is listed
on the NRHP, it will not be directly impacted by the replacement of Bridge No. 39.
Bridge No. 39 was determined not eligible for the NRHP, as concurred upon by the State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in a letter dated September 9, 2002. A copy of the
concurrence memorandum is included in the Appendix.

It was determined that there will be no effect on the Biltmore Village Historic District.
NCDOT will work with the HPO and property owners in the Biltmore Village Historic
District on the aesthetics of the new bridge railings and lights. A copy of the concurrence
form (dated February 22, 2005) is included in the Appendix
The Asheville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization requested that NCDOT work
with Biltmore Village representatives due to the bridge's close proximity to the historic
district. A copy of the request is included in the Appendix. The pattern on the bridge rails
will mimic that of the McDowell Street Bridge. Lamps and quatrefoil designs will be
incorporated into the bridge design. NCDOT will consult with the State Historic
Preservation Office, Biltmore Village Historic Museum; and Biltmore Village Historic
District on the design details.

C. Archaeology
The SHPO, in a memorandum dated May 10, 2002, stated that it is "unlikely that any
archaeological resources that may be eligible for [inclusion] in the National Register of
Historic Places will affected by the project" and recommended "no archaeological

22

investigation be conducted in connection with this project." These statements fulfill the
requirements of 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. A copy of the SHPO memorandum is included in the Appendix.

VI1. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Anticipated impacts to the resources in the project area are described in this section. The
project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" because of its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences. The project is expected to have an overall
positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic
operations.

The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No
substaintial change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not
expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition
will be limited.

Maintaining driveway access to adjacent businesses will be a concern during
construction. Maintaining driveway access to adjacent properties will be investigated
during design.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl
refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.

The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all Federal agencies or their representatives
to consider the potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land
acquisition and construction projects. Prime and important farmland soils are defined by
the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service. No prime or important farmlands will
be impacted by the proposed project.
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included a
regional emission analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required. The project is
located in Buncombe County, which has been determined to be in compliance with the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The proposed project is located in an attainment
area, therefore 40 CFR part 51 is not applicable. This project is not anticipated to create
any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
Traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project. The project's
impact on noise and air quality will not be significant.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If vegetation is
disposed of by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local
laws and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15
NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for highway
traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air quality (1990 CAAA and NEPA), and no
additional reports are required.

23

An examination of records was conducted to identify areas known to contain hazardous
materials. In addition, a field reconnaissance survey along the project corridor was
conducted. Five sites presently or formally containing petroleum underground storage
tanks were identified within the project limits-one active gas station and four former gas
stations. No hazardous waste sites, regulated or unregulated landfills, or dump sites were
found in the project area. Low to moderate monetary and scheduling impacts resulting
from these sites are anticipated.
Buncombe County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
Flood Insurance Study maps for Buncombe County show Bridge No. 39 is located in a
FEMA 100-year floodplain (see Figure 5). There are no practical alternatives to the
crossing. Replacement of this bridge is not expected to affect the 100-year floodplain.
On the basis of the above discussions, it is concluded that no significant adverse
environmental effects will result from implementation of this project.

VIII. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

A newsletter was circulated to inform residents in the area of the proposed project. A
Citizens Informational Workshop was held May 27, 2004 from 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. in
the Asheville High School Theater. This meeting gave residents and local officials an
opportunity to become familiar with the proposed project and to give their comments.
Twenty-one area residents attended the meeting, along with representatives from the City
of Asheville. Comments were submitted during and following the meeting in person as
well as by postal and electronic mail.
Comments from citizens included concerns over retail access and livelihood during
construction. In addition, citizens verified the need to maintain pedestrian and bicycle
traffic during construction.

IX. AGENCY COMMENTS
United States Department of the Interior: Fish and Wildlife Service

The recorded occurrence of Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveniliana) led USFWS to
recommend surveys of fish and mussels to identify any existing species in the vicinity of
the bridge.
Response: A search of the NHP database of rare species and unique habitats,
conducted on February 3, 2004, shows one historical occurrence of this species
approximately 0.75 miles downstream of the project area. However, no recent
records within the last 20 years have been reported. No individuals of this species
were observed field visit on May 6, 2005. It is believed that the Appalachian
elktoe has been extirpated from the project area, based upon excessive silt levels
caused by development within the project area. Therefore, no impacts to the
Appalachian elktoe are anticipated during project construction.

24

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission

The Swannanoa River is not considered a trout water and the proposed project will not
result in adverse impacts to trout. The WRC does recommend surveys of fish and mussels
in the vicinity of Bridge No. 39 to identify any potentially impacted mussel species,
specifically the Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana).
Response: See response to United States Department of the Interior.
In addition, standard recommendations include designing deck drainage flow through a
vegetated buffer before entering the river and designing a bridge to improve and/or avoid
altering the natural stream morphology.

Response: Due to the limited amount of existing vegetative buffer (less than
20 feet wide) adjacent to the bridge, providing for deck drainage flow through a
vegetated buffer may not be possible. tiVhile vegetative buffers are not required
within this basin, water quality will be taken into account while designing the
deck drainage system.
Asheville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
The MPO requests that the project designers work closely with Biltmore Village to find a
bridge design that is consistent with the historic architecture of the village and
incorporates historic elements into the design. The MPO requests that minimum 6-foot
wide sidewalks, preferably wider, be provided on both sides of the bridge. The MPO
requests that the outside lanes be 14-feet wide to accommodate bicyclists.

Response: NCDOT will coordinate with the Biltmore Historic Village to properly
incorporate period lamps and quatrefoil designs into the bridge design. In
addition, the pattern on the bridge rails will mimic that of the McDowell Street
Bridge.
The bridge will have 7 -foot wide sidewalks on both sides of the bridge. The
outside lanes will be 14 feet wide.

25

Figures

N

1

Asheville i
High School'

Bridge #39 1 II z5
,~~cOok- ~ ~r I - ~S( aRwe~Rd
ISOs
r s
Off-Site Detour

o Biitmoie
Historic
r
CD
District ~
25A
f
Biltmore Estate
'81 J
25

MADISON
1. North Carolina - Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
BUNCOMBE'
} McDWEL -
H WOOD+J
FIGURE 1
VICINITY MAP
Replacement of Bridge Number 39
on NC 81 (Biltmore Avenue)
over Swannanoa River
Asheville, Buncombe County
TIP No. B-2515
1,000 500 0 1,000 2,000 Feet

k-u

Legend

K Riparian Community
Alt 1-Temporary Detour Z

° ° - ° - Construction Limits

Centerline
i
Edge of Pavement
I
Barrier
f
Structure
Sidewalk Access during construction will be
Alt 1 & 2 - Permanent Alignment Swannanoa River Road investigated during final design.
IT will be closed during
Construction Limits construction.
Centerline t .
Detour Bridge
Edge of Pavement
t o 0
Structure •
e
a.

'S(Y"'yry _ • d

n

• Bridge #39

0 25 50 100 150
Feet

• ' • • North Carolina - Department of Transportation
. Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch

" FIGURE 2
ALTERNATIVES
° Replacement of Bridge Number 39
x.,. on NC 81(Biltmore Avenue)
over Swannanoa River
Asheville, Buncombe County
TIP No. B-2515

~ I
=10 i
1= IE
JII
Fag
0

J W
Z
z
o O
W
O °
L1J
N
W
O Q
~a z U
z
LLJ
; ~ rl
I L LJ ~
z U) D
O J
I- Q
L U) w U
U) z
o~
~a 0 Q } z
z v F- <
z } 2
0 w
U Q
w o
C
J a
a z
Q
i ~
w
a
Z
a
" North Carolina - Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
all FIGURE 3a
-gym
TYPICAL SECTIONS
Replacement of Bridge Number 39
on NC 89 (Biltmore Avenue)
over Swannanoa River
Asheville, Buncombe County
TIP No. B-2515

D Q
>
v W
Z U
wZ
O Y
~z
I Z
2 Q
> ~ S
Y
a
LLa
i
z
:D _O
O
cy)
w 1=
Q ? O Z
~N Z Q ~ O
cJ = z U Q
` U
i .1 ~
O } O 't ~
LLJ
~Oa O U
21 W U Q
O (j-i z
J a_ O
Q a w
U ¢ U
a- LU
O D
E- w J x
p Q F
U W
o_ Z)
} O
w
p
ti
C North Carolina - Department of Transportation
f Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
FIGURE 3b
TYPICAL SECTIONS
Replacement of Bridge Number 39
on NC 81 (Biltmore Avenue)
over Swannanoa River
Asheville, Buncombe County
TIP No. B-2515

x i Isla ~ x.
ly

I

~ V• C

{

h n` r

it~
E

qV
4 j}

3
l 1
-I'URE 4n

v r
D e e, c J
i
~E 4
fjj

i
i

ryA r

j

j

AMA
sir

E
{
i

I

1

_ - _ - - _ ;rte.=

ZONE X

_ 'r-'NE X

ZONE %
Zola
All ZONE
ZONE 1 ZONE X
x
/ l

ZONE X

~~..ZONE - - -

ZONE X ,k yy
"TP
't_ ZONE X e r - X ZONE_
_ ZONE

M~ SR
Runrnmhc• Cnimn• 70NF

FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP: BUNCOMBE COUNTY,NC 500 1000 iSOO
MAP #37021C0308C; PANEL: 308 OF 550: MAY6, 1996

NoarH r North Carolina - Department of
p4 4A~y Transportation FIGURE 5
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NUMBER 39
z Division of Highways ON NC 81 OVER SWANNANOA RIVER
fi
Project Development and BUNCOMBE COUNTY
TIP NO. B-2515
°C `4 n~ Environmental Analysis Branch

Appendix

1~d£NT or r

a T s United States Department of the Interior
3 a ~
FGGIVF~
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
19CH 9 ~8Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
-
May 2, 2002 MAY 6 2002
o r
U
0JYt610N OF Q _
i d Hr-vmAYS
'PQ MENTAL ANP SS
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Subject: Replacement of Bridge No. 39 on NC 81 over the Swannanoa River, Buncombe
County, TIP Project No. B-2515

This letter responds to a request for our review and comments regarding the subject project. Our
comments are provided in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973; as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).

The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to replace Bridge No. 39 over the _
Swannanoa River. Given the very early stage of planning, our comments are limited primarily to
concerns for listed species. We would like to provide comments on impacts to aquatic resources
and terrestrial wildlife habitat when more detailed information is available, including bridge
design, plans for treating storm water, and any other connected street improvements.

Enclosed is a list of species from Buncombe County that are on the Federal List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife and Plants, as well as Federal species of concern. Our records indicate
that the federally endangered Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveniliana) may occur in the
area impacted by the proposal. In addition, there are several Federal species of concern that
occur nearby. We recommend surveying for these species prior to any further planning or
on-the-ground activities to ensure that no adverse impacts occur. If federally listed species are
located, further consultation is required. Federal species of concern are not legally protected
under the Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, unless they are
formally proposed or listed as endangered or threatened. We are including these species in our
response to give you advance notification and to request your assistance in protecting them if any
are found in the vicinity of your project.

If you have questions about these comments, please contact Ms. Marella Buncick of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 237. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference
our Log Number 4-2-02-281.

Sincerely,

Brian P. Cole
State Supervisor

Enclosure

` ENDANGERED, THREATENED, AND CANDIDATE SPECIES AND FEDER.XL
SPECIES OF CONCERN, BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

This list was adapted from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's County Species List. It is a
listing, for Buncombe County, of North Carolina's federally listed and proposed endangered, threatened,
and candidate species and Federal species of concern (for a complete list of rare species in the state,
please contact the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program). The information in this list is compiled
from a variety of sources, including field surveys, museums and herbariums, literature, and personal
communications. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database is dynamic, with new records
being added and old records being revised as new information is received. Please note that this list
cannot be considered a definitive record of listed species and Federal species of concern, and it should
not be considered a substitute for field surveys.
Critical habitat: Critical habitat is noted, with a description, for the counties where it is designated or
proposed.
Aquatic species: Fishes and aquatic invertebrates are noted for counties where they are known to occur.
However, projects may have effects on downstream aquatic systems in adjacent
counties

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS

BUNCOMBE COUNTY
Vertebrates
Southern Appalachian saw-whet owl Aegolius acadicus FSC
Bachman's sparrow Aimophila aestivalis FSC*
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii T(S/A)1
Rafinesque's big-eared bat Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) rafinesquii FSC*
Hellbender Cryptobranchus alleganiensis FSC
Cerulean warbler Dendroica cerulea FSC
Blotched chub Erimystax fnsignis FSC
Eastern cougar Felis concolor couguar Endangered*
Carolina northern flying squirrel Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus Endangered
Spotfin chub Hybopsis monacha Threatened*
Southern Appalachian red crossbill Loxia curvirostra FSC
Gray bat Myotis grisescens Endangered***
Eastern small-footed myotis Myotis leibii FSC
Southern Appalachian woodrat Neotoma floridana haematoreia FSC
Alleghany woodrat Neotoma magister FSC
Southern Appalachian black-capped Parus atricapillus practices FSC
chickadee
Longhead darter Percina macrocephala FSC*
Paddlefish Polyodon spathula FSC*
Southern water shrew Sorex palustris punctulatus FSC
Southern Appalachian yellow-bellied Sphyrapicus varius appalaciensis FSC
sapsucker
Appalachian Bewick's wren Thryomanes bewickii altus FSC*

March 7, 2002 Page ! of 3

COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS

Invertebrates
Appalachian elktoe Alasmidonta raveneliana Endangered
French Broad crayfish Cambarus reburrus FSC
Oyster mussel Epioblasma capsaeformis Endangered
Tawny crescent butterfly Phycoides batesii FSC*
Diana fritillary butterfly Speyeria diana FSC*
Vascular Plants
Fraser fir Abies fraseri FSC
Piratebush Buckleya distichophylla FSC
Cain's reedgrass Calamagrostis cainii FSC
Glade spurge Euphorbia purpurea FSC
Spreading avens Geum radiatum Endangered
Mountain heartleaf Hexastylis contracta FSC
French Broad heartleaf Hexastylis rhombiformis FSC
Butternut Juglans cinerea FSC
Gray's lily Lilium grayi FSC
Fraser's loosestrife Lysimachia fraseri FSC*
Sweet pinesap Monotropsis odorata FSC
Pinnate-lobed black-eyed susan Rudbeckia triloba var. pinnatoloba FSC
Bunched arrowhead Sagittaria fasciculat-- Endangered*
Mountain sweet pitcher plant S'arracenia jonestf Endangered*
Carolina saxifrage Saxifraga carohniana FSC
Divided-leaf ragwort Senecio millefolium FSC
Mountain catchfly Silene ovata FSC
Virginia Spiraea Spiraea virginiana Threatened
Nonvascular Plants
Rock gnome lichen Gymnoderma lineare Endangered

KEY: -

Status Definition
Endangered A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
Threatened A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
significant portion of its range."
FSC A Federal species of concern-a species that may or may not be listed in the future (formerly
C2 candidate species or species under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient
information to support listing).
T(S/A) Threatened due to similarity of appearance (e.g., American alligator )-a species that is
threatened due to similarity of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection.
These species are not biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7
consultation.
Species with 1, 2, 3, or 4 asterisks behind them indicate historic, obscure, or incidental records.
*Historic record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
**Obscure record - the date and/or location of observation is uncertain.
***Incidental/migrant record - the species was observed outside of its normal range or habitat.
****Historic record - obscure and incidental record.
March 7, 2002 Page 2 of 3

' al
In the November 4, 1997, Feder Register (55822-55825), the northern population of the bog turtle (from New
York south to Maryland) was listed as T (threatened), and the southern population (from Virginia south to Georgia)
was listed as T(S/A) (threatened due to similarity of appearance). The T(S/A) designation bans the collection and
interstate and international commercial trade of bog turtles from the southern population. The T(S/A) designation
has no effect on land-management activities by private landowners in North Carolina, part of the southern
population of the species. In addition to its official status as T(S/A), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers
the southern population of the bog turtle as a Federal species of concern due to habitat loss.

:March 7002 Page 3 of 3

l
JUL 12 20Q2 o x
Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902-1499 ,o '2

July 8, 2002 ~y 'FcTDEVEL
N~61 A L NN Ply

Mr. William D. Gilmore, Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch .
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center =
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548

Dear Mr. Gilmore:

PROPOSED BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM (TIP) PROJECT NUMBER B-2515, NC 81 OVER SWANNANOA RIVER,
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA '

TVA has reviewed information provided in your letter of April 10, 2002, on the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 39 on NC 81 over the Swannanoa River in Asheville. TVA is
not aware of any unique environmental issues related to this proposal. However, the
Federal Categorical Exclusion prepared for this project should note that an approval
under Section 26a of the TVA Act may be needed for structure construction.

Should you have any questions, please contact Harold M. Draper at [phone] or
[e-mail].
Sincerely,

~l
' e-10
Jon ey,. anager
PA
NEPminis
tration
Environmental Policy and Planning
cc: Mr. Nicholas L. Graf
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1441

Federal Aid # BRSTP-81(1) TIP # B-2515 County: Buncombe

CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS

Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 39 on NC 81 (Biltmore Avenue) over Swannanoa River

On 2/22/2005, representatives of the

Dll~ North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
[v]~ Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
? Other
Reviewed the subject project and agreed

There are no effects on the National Register-listed property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.

? There are no effects on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.

? There is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s) are listed on
the reverse.
? There is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed on the
reverse.

Signed:

Q h ZZ ZDOS
Representa ' NC OT Date

-H.
/06- _(?P~ FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date

a-t_-U, U J
Representative, HPO Date

State Historic Preservation Officer Date

Federal Aid # BRSTP-81(1) TIP # B-2515 County: Buncombe

Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
National Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).

'Ji 4mOre Y d1a_.cje_ Phe_)6i1C^bi4V4 WR-

n D e e c+ e v i ron Yyu-A , I
a-Q. CD~YL~I
(N CEO 1 Will Woi'L with Hj~ 3 Ylv~
o L-)NJ S; Y) Hru- C 5~1 C C+ o n 1'1't,2 Fk=-e-s
(01U& 11 A-V 3

Soy RQi i ~v

Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status
(NR or DE) and describe the effect.

Reason(s) why the effect is not adverse (if applicable).

Initialed:. NCDOT~ FHWA HPO

r rA

am

all

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

DEPARTIENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
February 23, 2004

Mr. Robert S. Griffin
Biltmore Village Historic Museum
7 Angle Street
Asheville, NC 28803

RE: Effects Form for the Replacement of Bridge No. 39 on NC 81 (Biltmore Avenue)
over the Swannanoa River, Buncombe County, TIP B-2515

Dear Mr. Griffin:

At a meeting on February 22, 2005 representatives of the Department of Transportation,
the Federal Highway Administration, and the State Historic Preservation Office gathered
to discuss the potential effects of the proposed bridge replacement on the Biltmore
Village Historic District. The attached form documents the findings of the meeting, more
specifically, that the replacement of Bridge No. 39 would have no effect on the historic
district so long as the Department of Transportation coordinates with the property owners
in the district on the design of the new bridge. I know that your organization has already
proposed a design for the railing and the lights and I look forward to finalizing these
plans once the structural engineers have worked out the technological constraints on the
new structure.

I will be in touch, but if you have any questions concerning the accompanying
information, please contact me at 919-715-1620.

llSincerely,
N1
Mary Pope rr~
Historic Architecture Section
Office of Human Environment

Attachment
Cc: Renee Gledhill-Earley, State Historic Preservation Office
Khaled Al-Akhdar, NCDOT, PDEA
Stacy A. Merten, Asheville-Buncombe County Historic Resources Commission
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING
OFFICE OF HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 2725 CAPITAL BOULEVARD, SUITE 168
1583 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH, NC 27604
RALEIGH NC 27699-1583

' ~.SrATEo -
f .

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Historical Resources
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary David J. Olson, Director
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
September 9, 2002 ~i E I V
MEMORANDUM

TO: William D. Gilmore, Manager SEp 1 t 2119
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch c3v
NCDOT Division of Highways 0 ti-0~ Ott of tP

n' n~ '~i ,,F Ass
FROM: David Brook r ~~~'""'t n,l~ `~~LQ,y~~
SUBJECT: Historic Architectural Survey Report, Replace Bridge No. 39 on NC 81 (Biltmore Avenue)
over the Swannanoa River, Asheville, B-2515, Buncombe County, ER 02-9547

Thank you for your letter of August 26, 2002, transmitting the survey report by Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
concerning the above project.

The following property is determined not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places:

Bridge No. 39 located on NC 81 (Biltmore Avenue) over the Swannanoa River
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.

cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
Asheville/Buncombe County HRC

Location Mailing Address TelephonelFax
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
Survey & Planning 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4618 [phone] 9715-4801

N DID

• North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Historical Resources
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary Olson, Director
Jeffrey 1. Crow, Deputy Secretary
~
+
Office of Archives and History V
May 10, 2002
MEMORANDUM
MAY 2001
TO: William D. Gilmore, Manager ,o ov
-10
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch -0 ~ VOF
Division of Highways
a
'r1 L S
Department of Transportation ~NTq A11A~-y
~ l
FROM: David Brook
SUBJECT: Scoping comments'on replacement of Bridge No. 39 on NC 81 over the Swannanoa River, _
Asheville, Buncombe County, ER 02-9547
Thank you for your letter of April 10, 2002, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following structures of historical
or architectural importance within the general area of the project:
• Biltmore Village Historic District (BN 149), a district listed in the National Register of Historic Places
• Bridge (NCDOT #39) (BN 1403), a resource listed on the State Study List
The replacement of this bridge would potentially constitute an adverse effect on both the bridge and the
adjacent district. Please forward plans and specifications for the new bridge design and construction for
our review when available.
There are no known archaeological sites within the project area. Based on our knowledge of the area, it is +
unlikely that any archaeological resources that may be eligible for conclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places will be affected by the project. We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
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.
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT

Location Mailing Address TelephoneJFax
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
Survey & Planning 515 N. Blount St. Raleigh, NC 4618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4618 [phone].715-4801

I NA rFR Michael F Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
O~ pig North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
r Gregory J. Thorpe. Ph.D.
-i Acting Director
(D Division of Water Quality

April 15, 2002
R~ CC MEMORANDUM CO

a
TO: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager QP
NCDOT, Project Development & Environmental Analysis ~rn Q 13

FROM: Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele. NCDOT Coordinator Gu&A)
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheets for Replacement of Bridge No. 39 over Swan
Asheville, Buncombe County, TIP Project B-2515.

This letter is in reply to your correspondence dated April 10, 2002 in which you requested comments
for the referenced project. The Division of Water Quality offers these comments on impacts to =
Swannanoa River (stream index 6-75, HU 040302, stream class C):

1. NCDWQ requests that NCDOT explain how the bridge will be removed. It is NCnVNQ's
understanding that all permit applications for bridge replacement projects based upon
environmental documents completed on or after April 30, 1999 shall include the potential impacts
of bridge demolition and debris removal in addition to the impacts of constructing the
replacement bridge (NCDOT policy, 9/20/99).
2. While vegetated buffers are not a requirement within this basin, NCDOT is encouraged to retain
vegetation as much as possible. Do not remove vegetation from the stream bank unless it is
absolutely necessary. Especially avoid removing large trees and undercut banks. If large,
undercut trees must be removed, then cut the trunks and leave the stumps and root systems in
place to minimize damage to stream banks.
3. Any environmental documents pertaining to this project should provide a detailed and itemized
presentation of the proposed impacts to wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping. There
should be a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is required, it is
preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental
documentation. For projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required
prior to issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality
standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require
additional information. please contact Cynthia Van Der Wield at [phone].

pc: Steve Lund, USACE Asheville Field Office
Marcella Buncick. USFWS
MaryEllen Haggard, NCWRC
Central Files
File Copy

North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit.
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh. NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http1/h2o.enr.state.nc.usmcwetlands/

r

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commiss' r, v
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director

May 29, 2002
JUN 4 2002
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
NC Department of Transportation ;r -off Q
Project Development and Environmental Analysis v~~~? it,FiWA`~ ~o- .
1548 Mail Service Center TDEVE1.Dg\5
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548 fFNrAL Jkk%
SUBJECT: Scoping Comments, Replacement of Bridge No. 39 on NC 81 - Swannanoa River
Asheville, Buncombe County, North Carolina

Dear Mr. Gilmore:
Mr. William D. Gilmore, RE.. Manager of the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
of the North Carolina Department of Transportation is requesting input concerning the potential impacts of a
bridge replacement project in Asheville, North Carolina. I have reviewed information provided by the applicant,
and I am familiar with habitat values of the project area. These comments are provided in accordance with
provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48
Stat. 401, as amended. 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 39 on NC 81. Construction impacts on fish and wildlife
resources will depend on the extent of disturbance in the streambed and surrounding floodplain areas. The Division
of Water Quality classifies the Swannanoa River C. The stream is not designated as trout water by the NCWRC. -
It is the opinion of biologists with the NCWRC that this project will not result in adverse impacts to trout.
However, A State and Federally Endangered mussel, the Appalachian Elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana), was
collected at an unknown time within one mile downstream of the construction site. Thus, we recommend surveys
of fish and mussels in the upstream and downstream vicinity of the site. The findings of these surveys will need to
be considered in the design and construction alternatives of the project.
We prefer bridge designs that do not alter the natural stream morphology or impede fish passage. Efforts
should be made during design to place bridge supports outside of the bankfull channel. Bridge designs should also
include provisions for the deck drainage to flow through a vegetated upland buffer prior to reaching the subject
surface waters. Correction of altered stream morphology at the road crossing should be considered during design.
Streams and riparian zones provide connectivity of the landscape; and thus, are natural movement
corridors for terrestrial wildlife species. Bridge designs should consider leaving sufficient corridors under the
bridge to encourage movement of wildlife under the bridge rather than across the highway. The movement of
animals, especially larger animals (e.g., deer and bear), under the bridge may reduce automobile crashes involving
wildlife. Where feasible, increasing the riparian corridor width under the bridge is recommended.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location with road closure.
If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and located to avoid wetland impacts,

Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telenhone: [phone] ext. 281 • Fax: [phone]

Bridge No. 39 on NC 81 -3- May 29, 2002

• Fish and Wildlife Service for information on requirements of the Endangered Species Act as it relates
to the project

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment during the early stages of this project. If you have
any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 828.452.0422.

Since ly,

Powell Wheeler
Asst. Fisheries Biologist

cc: Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Mr. John Hendrix, Highway Coordinator, Corps of Engineers
Ms. Marella Buncick, Biologist, USFWS Asheville
Ms. Cynthia Van Der Wiele, Highway Coordinator, Division of Water Quality

05/09/02 14:06 FAX [phone] CITY ENGINEERING 1202
R

Memorandum

May 9, 2002
TO: Blake Norwood, P.E_, Manager C - 3
Statewide Planning Branch

la ;
FROM Dan Baechtold, WO Coordinator
Asheville Area NCO > > o
N ~ O
SUBJECT: Request for Comments for NC 81, Asheville, Bridge No. 39 0 m _
Over the Swannanoa River, Buncombe County, Federal Aid
Project BRSTP-81(l) State Project 8. 1943001, TIP No. B-2515 e m
landscaping
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the subject project, and to provide
written comments in lieu of a formal scoping meeting. This is an important project for
the Asheville area because of the high visibility and prominence of Biltmore Avenue-
0 This street serves as the primary corridor between Interstate 40, the hospitals and
buses , downtown Asheville. Also, as indicated on the map attached to the request for
comments, this bridge is located directly adjacent to the entrance to the Biltmore
Estate and to the Biltmore Village Historic District
The Asheville WO requests that the project designers work closely with
representatives of Biltmore Village to find a bridge design that is consistent with the
bicycles historic architecture of the village and incorporates historic elements into the desigm
Attached to this memo are two letters and a sketch design related to this project from
Robert Griffin, Chairman of the Biltmore Village Historic Museum and local
architect. The museum has generously donated four of the historic Biltmore Village
sh,eetlights to the City of Asheville for the purpose of incorporating them into the
r0 adway5 historic Biltmore Avenue Bridge. The MPO requests that these streetlights be
incorporated into the design along with handrails and/or pedestals that include the
historic elements identified by Mr. Griffin (see sketch). _
It should also be noted that the Biltmare Village area has a lot of pedestrian activity,
and the zone of pedestrian activity is rapidly expanding. Therefore, we request that
signs pedestrian accommodations on the bridge include a minimum of 6 foot wide
sidewalks on both sides of the bridge. Larger sidewalks would be beneficial, as would
some type of physical separation of the pedestrians from the travel lane. This corridor
is also an important route for bicyclists- To serve this need, the bridge should be wide
enough to accommodate wide outside lanes (14 foot lane width).
s i d o w at ks and Finally, the WO would greatly appreciate the exploration any opportunities to
pedestrians address excessive overhead utility wires If these wires can be consolidated or placed
below ground as apart of this project, those considerations are greatly appreciated.
Thank you again for the opportunity to commmit.

atty. dan 6aachtoId p.o. box 7148 ashavillep n.c. 28s02
628.259.5943 fax: $28.232.4517 www.el.ashev1tls.no.ua

05/09/02 14:06 FILM 828 232 4517 CITY ENGINEERING X103

z B iitmore Villa e Hi stori Museum

7 Angle Street Asheville, NC 28803 828-274-9707

comwI SSION September 13, 2001 _
DIRECTORS

Rnberl S. Griffin.
ChAlrnlnn
Warrene WillWrts
Secrelaur
.114rg Ann Rfre Cathy Ball
'(•rrasnrdr
SlajforJ .finders City of Asheville
-
'rfncy o. Cecil City Engineer
Jlarfha IV, Fullfnsrae PO Box 7148
J. Rnnrtld hfellaprd
Crum F. Tnnrpwins Asheville, NC 28807
Beverlr Nero=ell
Phil Mahan
Phillip aroughten
Pry„y Byrd Dear
Cathy,
.liffircn! Waals
Gear Mnatt
Hal Kelner Enclosed is a copy of my letter, dated and mailed November 14, 2000, to the
North Carolina Department of Transportation with copies to those shown on the
letter. As of today, I have received no acknowledgement of the Museum's gift from
the North Carolina DOT. I am concerned that the mitigation process fol enhancing
the new Biltmore Avenue Bridge is not currently being pursued. Please review the
drawings, photos and documents which were attached to my original letter and let
me know the disposition of this project.
As always, I appreciate your help in Biltmore Village and look forward to
speaking with you soon. Please call if you need assistance or any further
information.
Sincerely,
Robert S. Griffin
cc Ed Hay
Stacey Harris
Tony Houser
Clay Griffith

05/09/02 14:06 FAX [phone] CITY ENGINEERING 04
n

Biltmore V illage Historic Museum

7 Biltmore Plaza Asheville, NC 28803 828-274-9707.
COMMISSION
DIRECTORS

Robert S. Grim,
Chairnian
Warren it WdifMas
Secreran, November 14, 2000
Mary Ann lute
Treasurer
SiaffordAnden
!Nancy O. Cecil
Martha W. Fu ingto?i W. Max Phillips
J. Ronald Rolland PO BOX 3279
Bete F. epkiris
Btrerly Ntwewall Asheville NC 28802
Hal Mahan
Phillip Brougratan Dear Max,
Pamu Byrd =
Millicent
Ma bgoats
Beau _ eptember about the Biltmore Avenue
Btn r~o 'Thank you for speaking with me in S
Hat Keiner Bridge and the McDowell Street Viaduct We are all very pleased with the
handrails and sreedights on the Viaduct and have received many
complements for our part in assisting to facilitate their design and placement
We also want you to know how much we appreciate yours and Gordon
Myers' efforts, along with your entire staff; for helping create such a
beautiful addition to our Village_
As a thank you, the Biltmore Village Historic Museum has donated four of
the historic Biltmore Village Streetlights to the City of Asheville, with the
understanding that they will be used to help mitigate the removal of the
Historic Biltmore Avenue Bridge-
I am enclosing scaled drawings of how the pedestals at each end might
support the fixtures and provide "frames" to display remnants of the original
bridge's handrails. These drawings also show the pedestals at each end of
handrails similar to the McDowell Street viaduct.
Should you need my assistance locating artisans who could remove the
historic quadrafoil panels with a concrete saw prior to your demolition of the
original handrails, I would be happy to help you locate them. I would, of
course need appropriate notice.
We recognize that this will be an expensive project Would it be possible to
save and re-use the existing pedestals supporting the original bridge? They
appear sound.

05/09/02 14:06 F.AJ 828 232 4517 CITY ENGINEERING 1 05

Page Two

If I carr.psovide your office with any other preliminary information to assist
you v&h-the mitigation of the removal of the Bridge, I would be happy to do
so on a pro-bono basis.

Sincerely,

Robert S. Griffin, AIA

Rnc

cc : Gordon Meyers Betty McCain =
Ron Bradley Stacy B. Harris
Scott Shuford Tony Houser
Mark Coombs Clay Griffith
Tom Frederick Richard Davis
Laura Ingle Ben Slosman
Mac Williams

f II

O

River

. ~ 1
•
-
•
I
I
I
r I
I
1 M O.

U
- Four Steeillghts donated by Biltmora Village Plusaum
~ I
Cast Stone Peclastle Design Documents
Donated by Blltmore Village Museum

-----141storic Artifacts salvadged from existing bridge
,r--- SImIlar Rail as McDolr<<ell St. Viaduct

co eA

~ r -
O \ _
•,{R'--- C:. Y~:o
l t `n{. c~£'•s ~;`~:'>t_ 14• 'ou 7e~,

0
I
1
i

I