20081170 Ver 1_Application_20080731

4141i, 't.~
r,

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINAPgAry
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ti

MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
July 18, 2008

U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office 1170
3331 Heritage Trade Drive Suite 105 08 Wake Forest, NC 27587

ATTENTION: Mr. Monte Matthews
NCDOT Coordinator

SUBJECT: Nationwide Permit 13 and 23 Application for the replacement of Bridge
No. 302 over Cove Creek on SR 1233 in Watauga County, Federal Aid
Project No. BRZ-1217(3), State Project No. 8.2751301, WBS Element
33025.1.1, TIP No. B-3377. $570.00 Debit work order 8.2751301.

Dear Sir:

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 was completed for this project in August 2007 and distributed shortly
thereafter. Additional copies are available upon request. NCDOT proposes to replace the existing
two-span, 51-foot long bridge, with a new 90-foot long single-barrel bottomless culvert; same
location. There will 186 linear feet of permanent stream impacts from the new structure. There are
no temporary impacts to Cove Creek. Traffic will be detoured off-site during construction.

IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES

General Description:
The water resource impacted for project B-3377 is Cove Creek. Cove Creek is located in the
Watauga River Basin (Division of Water Quality (DWQ) subbasin 04-02-01) and is approximately
9.0 feet wide and 1.0 feet deep within the project area. The DWQ Index number for this section of
Cove Creek is 8-15 and the Hydrological Cataloguing Unit is 06010103. The DWQ classifies Cove
Creek as class "C". Within the project area, Cove Creek is not listed as 303(d) water and no 303(d)
waters are within a mile downstream of the project area. There is no High Quality Waters (HQW)
and no Water Supplies (WS-I or WSII) located within one mile of the project study area. There are
no wetlands in the project area.

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

w

Permanent Impacts:
There will be 90 feet of permanent impacts to Cove Creek due to the use of riprap for bank
stabilization at both ends of the new structure. There will also be 96 feet of permanent impacts on
one side of Cove Creek due to the installation of a bottomless culvert.

Temporary Impacts:
There will be no temporary impacts to Cove Creek.

Utility Impacts:
No water or sewer lines are present within the project study area. There are underground telephone
lines and aerial power lines on the north and south sides of old US 421 (SR 1223). These lines will
be relocated without impacting Cove Creek. There are no utility impacts associated with this
project.

Bridge Demolition:
Bridge No. 302 is constructed entirely of timber and steel and can be removed without dropping fill
into Cove Creek. Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the Protection of Surface Waters and
BMPs for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed.

FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES

Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of January 31, 2008, the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists eight federally protected species for Watauga
County (Table 1). The Bald Eagle has been de-listed from the Endangered Species Act as of August
8, 2007 but is still protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Act.

Table 1. Federally Protected Species for Watauga County

Common Name Scientific Name Status Habitat Biological
Conclusion
Blue Ridge goldenrod Solidago spithamaea T No No Effect
Bog Turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii T (S/A) Not Subject N/A
Carolina northern flying Glaucomys sabrinus E No No Effect
squirrel coloratus
Heller's blazing star Liatris helleri T No No Effect
Roan mountain bluet Hedyotis purpurea montana E No No Effect
Spreading avens Geum radiatum E No No Effect
Spruce-fir moss spider Microhexura montivaga E No No Effect
Virginia big-eared bat Hedyotis purpurea montana E No No Effect

2

• AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION AND MITIGATION

Avoidance and Minimization:
Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to "Waters of
the United States." The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all reasonable and practicable
design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional stages; minimization measures were
incorporated as part of the project design. In addition, Best Management Practices will be followed
as outlined in "NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Construction and Maintenance
Activities". Aditional minimization measures for this project are:

• A trout moratorium on in-water construction is to be enforced from October 15 to March 31.

• Use of a bottomless culvert allows natural stream sediment bottom to remain.

Mitigation:
There are a total of 186 feet of stream impacts on this project. The 90 feet of impacts due to bank
stabilization does not constitute a "loss of waters". The 96 feet of stream impacts from the
bottomless culvert are due to the side of the culvert in the stream bed. Impacts associated with each
factor do not exceed mitigation thresholds.

Schedule:
The project schedule calls for a January 20, 2009 Let date and a review date of November 28, 2009.

REGULATORY APPROVALS

Section 404 Permit:
It is anticipated that the permanent impacts to Cove Creek will be authorized under Section 404
Nationwide Permit 23 (Approved Categorical Exclusion). We are, therefore, requesting the issuance
of a Nationwide Permit 23 to encompass the 96 feet of impacts to Cove Creek due to the culvert. A
Nationwide Permit 13 (Bank Stabilization) is also requested to authorize the 90 feet of permanent
impacts due bank stabilization.

Section 401 Permit:
We anticipate 401 General Certification numbers 3701 and 3689 will apply to this project. All
general conditions of the General Certification will be adhered to. We are requesting written
concurrence from the DWQ. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0501(a) We are submitting five
copies of this permit application to the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality, for your approval.

Comments from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) will be required
prior to authorization by the Corps of Engineers. By copy of this letter and attachments, NCDOT

3

r

r
hereby requests NCWRC review. NCDOT requests that NCWRC forward their comments to the
Corps of Engineers and the NCDOT within 30 calendar days of receipt of this application.

Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need additional
information, please contact Jennifer Harrod at jwharrodndot.state.nc.us or (919) 715-7241. The
application will be posted at http://207.4.62.65/PDEA/PermApps/.
i
I
Sincerely,

Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch

cc:
W/attachment
Mr. Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ (5 copies)
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Ms. Marla Chambers, NCWRC

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. Michael Pettyjohn, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Heath Slaughter, DEO
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P.E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillian, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Scott McLendon, USAGE, Wilmington
Ms. Pam Williams, Project Planning Engineer

4

Office Use Only: Form Version March 05

USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 2 0 0 8 1 1 7 0
(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: Nationwide 23 and 13

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 PhD Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: 1598 Mail Service Center

Telephone Number: _(919) 733-3141 Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: iwharrodAdot.state.nc.us

2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:

Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
III. Project Information

Page 5 of 12

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. 302 on SR 1233 over Cove Ceek.

2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3377

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

4. Location
County: Watauga Nearest Town: Amantha, NC
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): 1-40 West to US 421 N,
Continue on US 221; Left on US 321, Right on NC -1233/Old 421; Arrive B-3711.

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): 36'16'55.98 ON 81'46'42.85 °W

6. Property size (acres): N/A

7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Watauga River

8. River Basin: Watauga
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/mgps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Man-Dominated, Old Field and Montane Oak-Hickory
Forest.

10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: Bridge
No. 302 will be replaced with a 90 ft. long single-barrel bottomless culvert. Page 6 of 12

11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records
indicate Bridge No. 302 has a sufficiency rating of 24.2 out of a possible 100 for a new
structure. The bridge is considered structurally deficient and functionally obsolete. The
replacement of this inadequate structure will result in safer and more efficient traffic
operations.

IV. Prior Project History

If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. N/A

V. Future Project Plans

Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
N/A

VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State

It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.

1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts. There will be 96 feet of permanent
impacts to Cove Creek from the new structure and 90 feet of impacts due to bank
stabilization.. There will be no temporary stream impacts to Cove Creek.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.

Page 7 of 12

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

Total Wetland Impact (acres)

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

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 Stream Width Length Impact
indicate on ma Intermittent? Before Impact linear feet
p) (linear feet) (acres)
1 Cove Creek Permanent Perennial 9.0' 186' <0.01

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 186' <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)

Total Open Water Impact (acres) 0

Page 8of12

6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): <0.01 (perm.)
Wetland Impact (acres): 0
Open Water Impact (acres): 0
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) <0.01 (perm)
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 186' (perm.)

7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ? Yes ® No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.

8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:

VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)

Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. The current bridge will be
replaced at the existing location. Traffic will be maintained through an off-site detour using the
following roads: old US 421, Sherwood Road Joe Shoemaker Road and Silverstone Road
NCDOT Best Management Practices will be implemented during all phases of construction and
demolition.

VIII. Mitigation

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

Page 9 of 12

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/ncwetiands/strmgide.html.

1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide as much
information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions and/or map, if offsite),
affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet) of mitigation proposed (restoration,
enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view, preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions,
conservation easement, etc.), and a description of the current site conditions and proposed method of
construction. Please attach a separate sheet if more space is needed. NCDOT proposes no mitigation for
the 186 linear feet of permanent impacts to Cove Creek. Of these impacts 90 feet are due to
the use of riper for bank stabilization and are not considered a 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 http://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

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 ?

Page 10 of 12

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
(Neuse), 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 1.

3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 213.0242 or.0244, or.0260.

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. Stormwater from this bridge replacement will not
be directly discharged into Cove Creek.

Page 11 of 12

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 (I 5A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No

Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ? No

XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)

Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ? No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
This project is limited to a bridge replacement. No indirect or cumulative impacts are anticipated

XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):

It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
N/A

2

Applic t/Age is Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)

Page 12 of 12

NORTH CAROLINA
WATAUGA COUNTY

a

PROJECT LOCATION

1365
1305
/ 305
1218 1233 , -
1303
Mast , \ 1306 Silverstone
1217 - ~ _ f
-1216- PROJECT
, E PQ
1215 233 1307
1371 \
ntha 1368
1308 \
1233 1371
1309
Sherwood 1312
1213 421
1311 \
DETOUR ROUTE

NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
VICINITY WATAUGA COUNTY
~~YY PROJECT: C202023 (B-3377)

MAPS BRIDGE N0.302
OVER COVE CREEK
ON SR 1233
SHEET OF 04 / 08

PermR Drawing

1 11-4

1

, IN
N III
oil-

Ilk
NCDOT
a
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WATAUGA COUNTY
. + PROJECT: C202023 (B-3377)
BRIDGE NO. 302
OVER COVE CREEK
ON SR 1233
1 . r 15 `
r
SHEET OF 04/08
permit DMWNV
-2 C%f

PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES

PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES

O STACY C. EGGERS JR. P.O. BOX 248
BOONE, NC 28607

O GLEN HENSON RT.1 BOX 325
VILAS, NC 28692

CHRISTINA CALLEJAS 2565 OLD US HWY 421
VILAS, NC 28692

NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WATAUGA COUNTY
PROJECT: C202023 (B-3377)

BRIDGE NO. 302
OVER COVE CREEK
ON SR 1233

SHEET OF 04/08 Draw*

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
Hand Existing Existing
Permanent Temp. Excavation Mechanized Clearing Permanent Temp. Channel Channel Natural
Site Station Structure Fill In Fill In in Clearing in SW SW Impacts Impacts Stream
No. From/To Size / Type Wetlands Wetlands Wetlands in Wetlands Wetlands impacts impacts Permanent Temp. Desi n
(ac) (ac) I ac (ac) ac ac ac ft ft (ft)
1 18+00 -L-LT to 40'X 9.5' Crown Span <0.01 96
19+15 -L-RT
1 18+00 -L-LT to Bank Stabilization <0.01 90
19+15 -L-RT

TOTALS: <0.01 186

NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

Watauga County
WBS - 33025.1.1.1.1 (B-3377)
ATN Revised 313V05 SHEET 7/18/2008
V

See Sleet f-A For Index Steels STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
See Sheet 1--8 8 For CorneNio fonalSymbols nm rua wo~cT remora „a ®TO`.~,n
5 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS .C. _ 8-3377 1
curs rrmnn e~wrarn omne:nr
1305 33429,1,1- EIRZA217 1218 , 1233 Qj 305
3 Q2 .2. BRZ 121 LIIILUIES
1303 -
- WA UGA _ COUNTY - -

1306 Silverstone
Most \
1217
PROJECT LOCATION: BRMGE_ NO. 302 OVER_ COYE_ CREEK
I -1-16-
m 4 aP ON SR-1233

1215 233 1,1307
1371 \ TYPE OF WORK: GRADING PAVING DRAINAGE,. CULVERT _
ntha \ 1368
` 1308 \
v 1233 1371
_

~ 1309 o STREA7A--tM-PACTS- -
O Sherwood 1312 ~4I - - - -
1213 421 Lu i
i
311 =Vi ~
r. r
VICINITY MAP Mouw Roue
END CULVERT S
J -L- STA,18+76.68
SR 1216 FLETCHER -

l1 BRANCH RD.
COVE CRE K
0'tl
SST
Cok
- STA. 23 + 10.00 -L-
END TIP PROJECT B-3377
STA.18+2425
A0 rSTA.. N CULVERT
I
.00 -L- IMPACTS
N OQ~ BEGIN TIP PROJECT B-3377
_ V
NOTES: (1) CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD III
" DESIGN EXCEPTION FOR DESIGN SPEED (2) THIS PROJECT IS NOT WITHIN ANY MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES,
GRAPHIC SCALES DESIGN DATA PROTECT LENGTH Prepared in the Office of: HYDRAULWS ENGriM
DIKSION OF HIGHWAYS
ADT 2007 = 445 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS STATE OF NORTH cAROL41fi9
50' 25' 0 50' 100' 1000 Birch Ridge Dr.
ADT 2030 = 645 LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT 9-3377 = 0.126 MILES Raleigh, NC 27610
PLANS DHV = 10 % LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT 8-3377 0.010 MILES 2M STAMU D'P~"~
r
Z D = 60 % SIGM M.
50' 25' 50' 100' T = _ 4 % TOTAL LENGTH OF TIP PROJECT B-3377 = 0.136 MILES RIB OF WAY DATE: ROGER D. THOMAS, P.E. '
JANUARY 3.2008
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL) V = 30 MPH '"0~°OUHR RO ~GIGN Q
I ~ v 10' 5' 0 10' 20' FUNC. CLASS. = LOCAL ;EEMG DATE MICHAEL W. LITTLE, P.E rNeL~~~R~n LENS
TTST 1% DUAL 3% JANUARY 20.2009 PAOJ°`x

PROFILE (VERTICAL)
P F~
JlIXA7TJR& S7A73 ffiG$MAY lldSfGN EY!rIIVBBR

-L- 1 TAI J LE~tlO moxcr I RS1114C[ ra. &HST NO.
P/ Stu 15+87.68 PI Slo 18+0459 P/ Sro 21+42J3+
4
a = 27'Or 390•(RT) A = 40'12'29O(LT) A = 7208.49Z(RT) xRr .p saau J ® DENOTES IMPACTS IN J B w SHffT NO.
D = 13 30'00.1 0 = 1505'549 D = 28'38'524 Not SURFACE WATER F UAYD OH HYDRAULICS
L = 217020' L = 21063' L = 251,54 p aww
T = 10200' T - 1pg$r T = 14571 J
R = 424,4r R = 300,00' R = 20000' IaD Ft. J
SE = SEE PLANS SE = SEE PLANS SE = SEE~LANS J so' o• so' 10, ISO' J PRELDUN RY PLANS
Type of LR»r= PSRY DO NOT USE PC R OUr1S,AUMON
TAI A \ TAI ~ STA•37+so-L-Iran STA,1e+11I J s&ALE= HHm
RIP RAP A I S OUTLET DETAIL ,8' LATERAL 'W DITCH 1 J
I Not to seeu
I xor to saaa J
LAcNot v' DITCH
I Not to a00w1 FR 1 J
p ' r SAK- f„r D: L3 F
O r t. 1 (HISTORIC)
J
Fae.IO`` o= Is Ft. DESIGN EXCEPTION FOR DESIGN SPEED
On. 0- zo Ft. 3.0 Ft. 1 GERALD R. MERSCHDORF
Type of LA,an a I Alpilap D- 3 Ft. TYP. L = CL 13 Rip-Rap /
SHI RLEY S. MAST N°A TrA. n+rRk LT.TO arA.l9+aoa a Mom ST T+ oaA Lr I su Si 3 IT / -d NARVIE S.MOORE I I / I J O
` II ~ I ~ 3
Qx/ I I I 0 O CHRISTINA CALLEJAS
Np I IT W J STACY C. STACY C. EGGERS JR. JI 2 \ 7
_ EGGERS JR. 43 O
I END PROJECT B-3377
o` ARa~" q z 5 RpcK tSHIRLEY :51 1 J I ~4 GLENN -L- STA. 23+ 10.00
Imlo HENSON
w Qs ~7 Ect`~ cw a p o _ y S. MA$L g I N?fl 1 J 000
3 5
L - 2 AlR TL L
f 5 R o n ti DARES I E _ o C] g~ =a / I € y
1 eApA, w0. ~ ~ ~ ~ Y
K
WILSQAL JR. ; GAR o
\ \ \ \ 36 COwC. wuK f F- d g P , ANY, EQ I I sCP V 0 GARKGE I
z~\\ \I,ml £y 1=;Q p ~';sEe,~ps"~ fl,1 3 II d N TXc ° sfp
\w0ap \svae \ 4, 0A,dj% JJ~, ©pl ©e xl _ "~J8" {Ip 4~J Aa A`k o R` zA"A 13~~ SF° I - _
to \ \ ~.,4 ' - t:1 I.S 5 ROCK 0 Q c p f O 7 R ! P1E 9"I I f EL Cvn I Roa r;LL
Z \ lQ { Q ~I p p b z s~ j rmi I I~ gcFSs ~SO~"' I > ~y s c /
t Ilk 31- SG GGac wALI p I I Y MOD
4QH's3l' { \ I~ p = "'A d I i / X i IFw / r~h~y I cEU *DO
Q,i,d, fl,r, `
p €7 ' Q s~L U~ - - ' / / ~ ~ 1 _ ' 'i, a'I'£? , A ~ 1A~ Ls s f o
a' •`~s p,o _ -0 , (95 r I/ I WI S ~Y4Y~Q/
Vii, \l`\ \ ` . I k CL L qF RAP a \ /t W as DID
€3 JN II;GCPRISTINA
CL I '---I,iC?-_ - ¢cer""F / i sfo lIICALLE~Jy~A
coy /J = -%I
'F- tERS OIL t" \ \ 1 g5T
Q,\ I / COVE cRomK
5 \ \
v,Q r,d ' Q,r,fl,oCpq'd` p I p l . - - / / / O \ \ yi
Q I a I Via'' p,r,Q,, p e / RR RAF GRASS
40 Rp
C3 { © p p Us J wpoos fs s _ a°
AB (n rQ' a / STACY C. EGGERS JR.
I/ `y5f J~' \ ~ \ .'I1al'•'p q'Q I' •'P. - I
WOWS •,,,~1~ I
x x I , ' ~`I n61rN4 F r@I' i, \ vAPo w I,. rI'{npm9'I~b'I'~3a,a Q,,,p` \ \
1 J n 19;9 r i~ /'6 'I P'PEjI ` _ QAQ~ Q%p, \ \ {I
1 1x x x)(\\ Q a`t' .oo~s I Q''fi,,,y Q p~ 'E}/\Q~\ car -N,
(HISTORIC) LEIGHTON R.
HENSON CHAPEL SCOTT p p~ '
METHODIST CHURCHF
s 0 ~a',,tJ SITE I I Q Q-II p l Q I-;I d,I-fl,I,p,I Q. Ii,d''p'I'(7
G! K \ \ tipp~ /,9 A I
1 / / °y I STACY C. EGGERS JR.
5 to
joLCONC
/ STACY C. EGGERS JR. I
wOODS _ i IN 7 V
1 N AEGIN PROJECT B-3377 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
1 fl JII . -L- STA. 15+90.00 WATAUGA COUNTY
1
1 l _ - \ PROJECT: C202023 (B-3377)
Z
I - - BRIDGE NO. 302
\ ' I - - - - - - OVER COVE CREEK
~wi \ 1 I I ..,I, 48, CSI'
}~W1Z I 1 I HENSON CHAPEL \ LEGEND ON SR 1233
" \ I I I I ETHODIST
CEMETERY CHURCH
\ HISTORIC PROPERTY BOUNDARY SHEET OF x/08

1lEVMKM

SS4SS4SSY'i(MES4S$S
$$$$$$$$S$$SS$$$DGN$$SS$$$$$44SSSS$
$$$$USERIJAME$$$$
' m~
~ 1 \ •1~, ~I~ / ~~~Il~// //~i~ ~'//iiii~ ~ '
/A
~~Rzi:
o
/ ~ / I /rri \ \ 1 IIIII l T ~ , , ~

Y'/~~-Q 1 / A\\-`\`

\ \ \ \ \ o= x a rll : I Y1 f,
- ,Y~ / I 1\ blllll \h
oz ~p\ ~z I~ II I J I I1 0 °8 1 \ \l "1 \
-T r"Dr

U11
( 11111111\\
\ \ \ p 1 \1 11
/ I / \ C / 1 \
I ~ . \ ~ ~ ~ \ Qr~''`~g~ ~ ` IIIII , . I \I / / - / / / ~ ?r - 1 ~<n \
1\ \ t 5~ I 1. / I/
2' S _ \111 I \ / / IIII I'/ E~* ARO Nc ~Y 1 \T 8 on /r~ 31/ 11\ \ \ \
1 1 1\\\\\ \ / yl IIII Id7 s'`~ / ~cn_zl ~ ~
\\\\\~\\\~\\\\~~~\\\\\\1\I`Itl~tl ~i IIII 1111 l I IIII N I n-l
\ \ \ \M I J I ~I I r m 1 / /
/ = \ \ \ \ 1 o I \ ~J / 5
/ \ \ \ \ \ loq HENSCW ANCM OEM Ex f
' r \ \ . 1 I I I,~\ I sm _ /
/ \\1 \ \ 1111 1 l~ = 1 ~I b b, c
~ \ ll 1 111111 I Q / /
/ll// ~ii r \\\A\\\~\\\\1111111111111111
\ \ \ 11 111 1 _ I I I I / / / 1 1 1 / % i i
~~\\\\C~\`~\ \\\\\\~\~\\\\\\\1~1 1 II I II'1 1 / 1 ~F~ / l I 1 I / l / l l llpblc11/
11\~\
\~\\\\\\l\1\

111111 I~ h I ~ m' ~
1\~
/ /m~ \ Chill \\\\111\ 111\I\1\\\\\ \1 1 ~ • 1 I / / ~ ) / / / J / / I I /1 I III I 1 / / / /
\ ~1\\\
% / / -I-^ \ \`~1111111~111111111111\\\\\\ \111\\\\ I I 1 / 1 i ~ _ \ / / / I ~ 1 Ill /III ! / l l l 1,
I / ' ^ \ \ \I 1 11\\\\1\\\ \ \ \ 1 / / r l l 11 / III 111 I~ II I I I I I LI
/ I \\~1 X11111 \ \ I 1 / / / / / y\ < I I I I1( \\I i
I I vVA \ .A I 111\\ \ 111\V A\ \ \ / / / IIIII I ( 1 1 1 \ 1 1 1 X11
I~ l1 \ ,11111 ~G \ \ \ 1A\ \1A\\\\\~A\VA 1\I II 11 1 1 / / l l - 1 11// ~1 I \1 vI V11\11111\ 11 I I II II
1 I / \ 1 \ \ \ \ \\\\111 \1\ 1 II II I I / / / / - ~1 111 1
1111 \ \ 1 1\1 \ l l I 1 1 / / / rT( - 1 I\, ~~~\\\\\1111,1
~ 1 1 1 \ 1 ~v VA\\ VA \ \VA\\ 1~\1 t111A \ \VAA\111 III I I IIII III1 \1VAv\;
111 ~ 11\ I \ \ vA\vvvAAVAA\v~ ~\\\111 \ J 111 IIIII IIII IIII III IIJi~~ p I / l I l / m~' _ 1 Vv v v ~vvA vv~~~.
I 1 111111 \ \ 1 1\\\ 111111 I l~ 1)111 II III II I IIIIIII lIl -l l 1 1 / ~ i \ ~
1 h JI l \ \ \ 1111 11 I 1111 I lil I/ III 1 I I I ~ ~ / P~ ~ ~ ,1\
I ~ 1 IIII / ~1 \\Illt l 1111?)1111 III 1111/ IIIJ IIII 1 /III ~ I I 1 I I l ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~J~ ~
II I) I ~ \ 1 1111 I 1 IIII ll 11 J 1 / I ~ _ \
I I X I I I I IIII 111 11 / /IIlI~I I I I I 1 I~~ I I ~ , ~
Ill 111 JIII ~l / \ 111 JIII II 11 I I ! J/l/I / / J 11 / ~ t I I / ~ , ~ ~ ~
Il / / / ~i ~ 111 I 11111111 II 111 I l/J// l l//l/ll / 1 \ ~ I 1 1 l ////i/i ~ _ - _ >>1
l 1 /I l 1 t IIIII I II I II I J/I/j/ I/ l / _ 1 1 1 1
~
- a~
/ ) I)' JJIl~/llll(lllJ11/I/ I//l//~I \IIIIII II IIIIIII I I II I I IIII III1I1I 11111IIII I III iIi IIIIIiIII/I/IlII l/IlII11l1(l1~11 I 1/I IIIIIIIIIljIlI1IJIl1 II I \ E x t 1-ti ` \ \v1~ 1v4
111/ 111 / lL/~ll/11l1r 1 / l//
IIIII IIII II IIIII I I IIIII I IIIJI 1 I I~I II 11111 III ~ a / 1 ©1 1 I @ / I / i,- = _ _
-
1 111 I ~`1 / I I I III III I I I / I l l l/ l/IJJIIIII l 11 1 11) ITS 111?11 ~1~.,, I 11 II I I I II I _ \ \ © I I / / _
/11 ;
i/ //rll l l/I I I1 1 I I I JI I)11I11111/II1I 'hllj11111~
/1
/l/ / l/Il 1111II III III I _
r%/jlll/ rll///I I/~lJ 11111)/ll/Il//11/Illlll 11111111/ ~

/
II
/
(l l l 111 l l /l / /
IIf
/I/1/I/Jl/lulll~l// lllJljllllllllJIIIIIIIIIII I 1I ~I1 r~ I IIIIIJIIJII l ll /ll////
IJ III II/ll /1 llJ/1/I)/ 11 /1 /1 I ~`~~11'Q \ 1_~~ 1 b~' III I IIIII /l/1111// / / /
III I I/lllllllllll/J/Ill Illlll///l Il/II II IIIJI Jlfll II~~1J.~ 1,~/ 1 m (I . IIIII (!I 1111//l/~~ll/III/1l%//j/j% /j ~ofK
~~L,))~,~JIJII~I~~1~1I11111111IIIIIIIIIjiI~ ~I III 11111 IIIII'~Il%l~1 II iJ#fjl` ~I ~j
/~1 II I)I l/ 11 1111IIlllll II II1111111)Ill Illlll ~/,//l cn ~Z m\ I 1I1ll If I l 1II1111111
If
I 1 , IIIl1/ll 111 I IIII 11111111 1 II Jf 111111111/Il/I Ir/ I /_l 1 / Jll JII I/ ~1 1/111 I l/ J Jli % l '
let
11/JJJlllllll III%//I/IIIIIIIIiIIJ///l/ Illllllill}~IIIII 111111 IIII)/~// //.l l// - F ~B 1 I I l~/l l/ 1 / l / l/ //~/i;
1111 //IIIII 4l l1)///Ill III1j 11llJlllJll Jll/Ill I Il~~ IId~J`lll/~l. l / 1I I 11 /Il I/I/1 111 I
51111 %/illl~llll///, I~// lJ///l/ l~ 11111J1111 j I 1 /Il/111111/Il~ 1 III JJIII~ - / ~ i/ % /ll /J 1 I l~,/~/ /11 / l Jj /l
/l/ l/l l / 1111 ~llll Illlll 1 / l /l R, / / a / /{~l 11 l % /'l l l 1111 /
/ l / ll I /111 /111/ll l•// c~/ % r 11/11 / l/l l~l l / l l/ / /
l/ llllllll// / l// / /lllllll/Ill(\\ I / ' P / / 1 /)1 / /llj lj/l l l l l l~1 'rTll~l l / /
I ~ l l /ll// ,A?~
/llllllllll/IIUI(11/111,// j//////
I llllllllllillllll( l 1( I l
IIIIIII '~I I I11I ll
1 I NIl((dlllllN/lllll HIII III I Illlll~l I IJ IIIIIII !1(1111( ~l///1111/\1111111// /(I
III I(I(II((IIIII~IIIII I I III III I i 1~11lIIII 1111111 I I1 Illlll) I 1 / / / / N 1 I I / / ///JIII I I 1 11`1 ` \
1 1111111 I I J 1111111111 / l III I111I \
II IIIIIIIIIII 11 II ~ III I~I 1111111111111111111111111/1 I l l / /~l r Jl////////l/ / / 1111 I I \ \ \ \
/I
11111II11 ~ °i// l II I I III I i \ _
II 1UIIIIIillllll~'1111 I I III
II II I IIIIIII I l I I Il I I 1I I 1l1lllIlll)1l1l1l1l1l1 l jll ~ I ~ l ~ I ~ ~ / / ~ 40
' ' / / / / / I 1 , ~ 1 1 111 \ \j \ _
\\\\\\\1l'~\\11111 IIIItt~i9. I ~ 1 / / I 1 1 \ \ _
III IIIIIII III II III IIIII111111111111///~lllllli~l ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 1l / ~ ' III 1 1 I / \ ~
Il I\ 1111 , , 1 _ "(I ~ t - t I I Jl~~b\\1\\\\\\`~ ~ = / 111
11 II 1111111111111111 III 111111\\t1t111111 ( IJ~d/~ I / ,l~l~ CJ, 'mil ~1 ~ 1111 I y I I v v 1„//
11z\\\\\1
~-1\~\Illlll/ 1 I(IIII(U((_, I I G !I III I i 1 J
1\\ u\\\~((illl\\?11II 111111\111Ollllt`\1111111111111 1 1 I I ( /1 JI /ll lI Iy I \ / 1 f+ I I ( \ \ 1 1 I / /
\\\\~\\\\1111111i~~1 \1 \1 11111111\l\\\1\\\\`\\\\\\\\\I I I I I I I II / 1 / 11 ~i ~~J-l ~N I I / I I 1 1 ) I / At ip l
/ / 1 11
I Nllll\\\\ 11\ \\\\\1\11\\\ \\I 1~\\\\\\\\\\\ \ ~ I I 1 I! ~ ~ p~ II JI l l l ( l / ~ ( 1 1 1 ~
1 III IfIIIIIIINIII~II \1\11 ~ 1 , I I I I I I . III ~ _ ~ ~ I l 111111 ~ ~ \
I:I I 111111111 11111111111111111~'s~\11\\1111111\\\\\\\\\111111111111 ICI I ~ 1111111111n1 G I I I I 11 V ~ 1 I \ 1 \ \ ~ I \ \ ~ \ 1 1 \ ` 1 `I ~ ~ \
>1 I I 1111111 I 1 I t ( I I 111 77 7
JII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII,IIIIIIIIII\1\\1\1111111111111\111111111111111111111111IIIIlrI IIIIIIIII 1 I '1 1 1 g IJ~ 1 ~i ~M• \ \ \ \ \ IV,
/d MIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII\111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111! 1 I i I I Ib~l ll~\\\\\ \ 1 2\ \ I ~ 1\V1 1~`~ 1) \ \ \ \ ` \ z `
, ////~/~~,~)lIlllll//I/llllilllllll111111111111111111111111\1\11111111111 ,11~~1.~ 1 l I 1\ I~ ~~~1~~~1~11 I glJlll~ ~ 1 ~~/1 i~ j`/~'/ /~I~I 1~~ w~>~ 1>vw I ~ Z

• See Sheet -8 For Index of Steets STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
A•11 Ifni MO=I RWa M 19f•t
See Sheet 1-8 For CornenfionalSym Symbols
1365. •C B-3377 1
. 1305 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R.". m v-•
305 33025.1.1 BRZ-1217 3 PE
1218 1233 m 33025.2.2 BRZ-12173 RhV 6 LRILRIES
1303 WAPrA UGA COUNTy
Matt 1306 Silverstone
M 1217 , _
1~ 6 PROJECT LOCATION: BRIDGE NO. 302 OVER COVE CREEK
E ae ON SR 1233
1215 233 1307
1371 TYPE OF WORK GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE, & CULVERT
ntho \ 1368
r ` 1308 \
v 1233 1371
1309 2
O Sherwood 1312 ~p' i
i
1213•
421 31 =
1 Zi ~
VICINITY MAP CETOU0. ROUTE NIA
` Q: 1 END CULVERT S~
w -L- STA18+76.68
SR BR ANC RDNER
COVE CRE K y T
- - - - O

STA. 23 + 10.00 -L-
- END TIP PROJECT B-3377

pZi BEGIN CULVERT
-L- STA.18+24.25

~
N Q~/ STA. 15 + 90.00 -L-
c-,
BEGIN TIP PROJECT B-3377
N

NOTES; 0) CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD III

` r~ • " DESIGN EXCEPTION FOR DESIGN SPEED (2) THIS PROJECT IS NOT WITHIN ANY MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES.
GRAPAIC SCALES DESIGN DATA PROJECT LENGTH Pr°pAd °re offroo 0: HYDRAULICS E?VGAZM AMSION OF HIGHWAYS
ADT 2007 = 445 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS srA2a of xoR221 cAROtDVA
sa 25' 0 50, loo' ADT 2030 = 645 LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT B-3377 = 0.126 MILES Ari ~Oh, NCr 27610 eF son
h
C
PLANS DHV ° 10 % LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT 8-3377 = 0.010 MILES
D = 60 % ra
y~ 50' 25' 0 50, 100' T - 4 % ' TOTAL LENGTH OF TIP PROJECT 5-3377 = 0.136 MILES RIB OF WAY DATE. ROGER D. THOMAS. P.E.
^I JANUARY 3.2008 ROADWAY DESIGN
0 PROFILE (HORIZONTAL) V = 30 MPH gvGArggR T~?w~'
i 10, 5' 0 10' 20' FUNC, CLASS. = LOCAL rxsraxmnRx plntrs PEf111~t
LETTING DATE MICHAEL W. LITTLE, P.E.
C `TTST 1% DUAL 3% JANUARY 20.2009 PRQM=ZSL0rMGM= Shad ~~0f~
r ra
N v PROFILE (VERTICAL) I A szwurvim- J STArl IUGWAY Zfflg= ANGDOM

Note: Not to Scale e
*SU.E. = Subjwface Unrry EngimP*g STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

CONVENTIONAL PLAN SHEET SYMBOLS
WATER:
RAILROADS' Water Manhole
BOUNDARIES AND PROPERTY
State Una Standard Gauge Water Meier
6' TMVSPpRANY
County Una RR Signal Milepost Water Valve
35
Township Una Switch C~ EXISTING STRUMERES.' Water Hydrant
swr. cw
City Una RR Abandoned MAJOR: Recorded UG Water Una

Reservation Una RR Dismantled Bridge, Tunnel or Box Culvert cow Designated UG Water Una (S.U.E.")
Property Line RI Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall and End Wall - co- Above Ground Water Una Wat
RIGHT OF WAY
Existing Iron Pin MINOR:
Baseline Control Paint
Head and End Wall o H. TV:
Properly Comer Existing Right of Way Marker Z-\
Property Monument 0 Pipe Culvert TV Satellite Dish
Existing Right of Way Una Footbrid e > -------C TV Pedestal
Parcel/Sequence Number ® Proposed Right of Way Una g
Existing Fence Una -x-x-x- ~ Drainage Box: Catch Basin, DI or JB ?Ce TV Tower
Proposed Right of Way Una with Payed Ditch Gutter UV; TV Cable Hand Hole
Proposed Woven Wire Fence a Iron Pin and Cap Marker
Proposed Chain Unk Fence Proposed Right of Way Una with Storm Sewer Manhole Os Recorded UG TV Cable "
Concrete or Granite Marker ~ Storm Sewer Designated UG TV Cable (S.U.E.")- - - - r- - -
i Proposed Barbed Wire Fence Existing Control of Access ro--
Existing Wetland Boundary - - - - - - Recorded UG Fiber Optic Cable
Proposed Control of Access UTILITIES. Designated UG Fiber Optic Cable (S.U.E'- - -
Proposed Wetland Boundary ti
Easement line POWER:
Existing Endangered Animal Boundary Existing proposed Temporary Construction Easement- E
Existing Endangered Plant Boundary Fro- Existing Power Pole j GAS: Proposed Temporary Drainage Easement- -TDE- Proposed Power Pole b Gas Valve 0
BUILDINGS AND OTHER CULTURE' Proposed Permanent Drainage Easement - -PDE--- Existing Joint Use Pole Gas Meter
Gas Pump Vent or UG Tank Cap o Proposed Permanent Utility Easement - rue- Proposed Joint Use Pole Recorded UG Gas Una
Sign S Power Manhole © Designated UG Gas Una

• (S.U.E.1
o ROADS AND REMEW FE42URES. ---„-C GO$
Well
Small Mine x Existing Edge of Pavement Power Line Tower ® Above Ground Gas Line
Power
Foundation 0 Existing Curb Transformer 8
Area Outline Proposed Slope Stakes Cut ~ Power Cable Hand Hole ® SANITARY SEWER:
Cemetery ~ Proposed Slope Stakes Fill H-Frame Pole e--+ Sanitary Sewer Manhole
Building Proposed Wheal Chair Romp Recorded USG Power Line P Sanitary Sewer Cleanoui 0
~ Wheel Chair Ramp Curb Cut - uc Designated l6G Power Line (S.U.E.") ----P---- UG Sanitary Sewer Una
School Proposed ss
Above Ground
Church Curb Cut for Future Wheel Chair Romp - cF SaridarySewer e~~ s~„,~Y Sewer
Existing Metal Guardrail TELEPHONE: Recorded SS Forced Main Una ~ T
Existing Telephone Pole + Designated SS Forced Main Una (S.U.E."(- - - - -rss- - - -
HYDROLOGY,' Proposed
Existing Cable Guard Grail iderail ~ , T n Proposed Telephone Pole -0-
Stream or Body of Water Telephone Manhole 0 MISCELLANEOUS:
Hydro, Pool or Reservoir ---J Proposed Cable Guiderail Tel x Utility Pole •
Telephone Booth ?
Equality Symbol
Jurisdictional Stream -~s - Pavement Removal ® Telephone Pedestal M Utility Pole with Base O
Buffer Zone 1 -e2, - Telephone Cell Tower T Utility Located Object o
Buffer Zone 2 -rZ 2- FEGETATION.' UG Telephone Cable Hand Hole ER Utility Traffic Signal Box m
Flow Arrow - Single Tree Recorded UG Telephone Cable Utility Unknown U43 line
Disappearing Stream > - - Single Shrub 0 Designated UG Telephone Cable S.U.E." - - - - - - - - - UG Tank; Water, Gas, Oil 0
Spring Hedge Recorded WG Telephone Conduit R AG Tank; Water, Gas, Oil 0
TC-
Wetland Woods Una Designated LPG Telephone Conduit (S.U.E.'Y - - - - - UG Test Hole (S.U.E.1 m
Proposed Lateral, Tail, Head Ditch
Orchard r3Q p Abandoned g to y
a Recorded UG Fiber 0Piis Coble
False Sump m Vineyard
Designated UG Fiber Optic Cable (S.U.E.')- ----„o- _ - End of Information pwwa 1o" ~Y,,E 0.1
...+sr?
She*

~ P I
N ROIKT @RRlNa NO. !N!R No.
D B-.7.377 I~
1365
location and
S UR SurvVEY CONTROL SHE
ET
B-3377
1305
1233 BL BM•1 ELEVATION•2716.4
1218 a1 POINT DESC. NORTH EAST ELEVATION L STATION OFFSET N 931629 E 1180019
1303 DES
OUTSIDE PROJECT LIMITS
93062-CI 9315113.3560 1180177.7520 2732.56 OUTSIDE PROJECT LIMITS P.H. NAIL SET ON WEST SIDE OF COVE CREEK
1306 Si"rstone 101 BL-2 931712.5360 80315.1230 2730.70 OUTS DE PROJECT LIMITS IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF CONC.
M031 02 BL-3 931801.2950 118m635.816m 2728.57 16.10.74 3.59 LT WING WALL OF A PRIVATE BRIDGE
1
1217 103 BL -4 931833.1430
- ' - . , 118i077.0100 2727.00 20-70.12 14.47 RT
PROJECT ~ ~ 104 9L-5 931595.5140 I JE41490. 4200 2733.21 OUTSIDE PROJECT LIMITS
3 B3062-C3 931619.2470 1181959.8270 2738.33 OUTSIDE PROJECT LIMITS BM-2 ELEVATION-2732.36'
"1Z16-
F PP N 932330 E 1180055
BY2 OUTSIDE PROJECT LIMITS
1215 233 1307 POINT DESC. NORTH EAST ELEVATION Y STATION OFFSET P.K. NAIL SET IN A ROCK, IN A CUT. ON
- - NORTH SIDE OF SR-1216 (FLETCHER BRANCH
_ 1371 - - -
ntha BY2-1 931915.3870 1180662.5920 2724.10 OUTSIDE PROJECT LIMITS ROAD)
30 1 2003 BY2-2 931801.2950 1130635.8160 2728.57 11.28,22 4 4h55ik4{4F5 Si y4 ti51 i 4154t~y 51 1 4Lti4i
\ 8.14 LT
13~
1233 BM-3 ELEVATION-2729.86'
1371 N 931554 E 1181829
1309 OUTSIDE PROJECT LIMITS
8' SPIKE IN BASE OF 28' MAPLE TREE ON
Sherwood 1312 NORTH BANK OF COVE CREEK

1213 NC DOT GPS STATION 93062•C2 LOCALIZED PROJECT COORDINATES
421 311 N=932648.136
B=1179603.917
VICINITY MAP p NC DOT GPS STATION B3062-C3
.1 1 LOCALIZED PROJECT COORDINATES
ZQ3 I I N=931619347
IIJ~ 1 I E=1181959.827
Z=I I
V I I
I I
gym' ` S
cr-
SR 1216 FLETCHER V)
BRANCH RD.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
/
COVE CREEK- 0
-L- POT STA.15+90.00 1 coy
c
BEGIN TIP PROJECT B-3377
1 RFF~ -L- POT STA. 23+10.00
END TIP PROJECT B-3377
N=931789.0437
N=931739.3721
E=1180613.9428
`
E=1181278.4389
i NOTES;
DATUM DESCRIPTION
k2,
~~,THE LOCALIZED COORDINATE SYSTEM DEVELOPED FOR THIS PROJECT
/ i
1S BASED ON THE STATE PLANE COORDINATES ESTABLISHED BY 1. THE CONTROL DATA FOR THIS PROJECT CAN BE FOUND ELECTRONICALLY BY SELECTING
- Q r OTHERS400.05' FOR MONUMENT "B306 - i" PROJECT CONTROL DATA
2 C AT.
WITH NAD 83 STATE PLANE GRID COORDINATES OF HTTP;/Www.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US'PRECONSTRUCT/HIGHWAYhOCAT10NlPROJECTI
P / ~ r NORTHING: 931513.3561ft1 FASTING: 1160177.752cft1
THE AVERAGE COMBINED GRID FACTOR USED ON THIS PROJECT THE B3377 LS FILES TO CONTR BE OL FOUND 071010.HTML ARE AS FOLLOWS-
( GROUND TO GRID) IS: 0.999902200 - - -
THE N.C. LAMBERT GRID BEARING AND SITE CALIBRATION INFORMATION HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED FOR THIS PROJECT. D? FURTIMB
LOCALIZED HORIZONTAL GROUND DISTANCE FROM INFORMATION IS NEEDED,PLEASE CONTACT THE LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT.
"63062-C1" TO -L- STATION 15+90.00 IS
NC DOT GPS STATION BM62-C1 N 57°4220" E 516.00'
LOCALIZED ALL LINEAR DIMENSIONS ARE LOCALIZED HORIZONTAL DISTANCES 'D INDICATES GEODETIC CONTROL MONUMENTS USED OR SET FOR HORIZONTAL PROJECT CONTROL
PROJECT COORDINATES BY THE NCDOT LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT.
o N=931513356 VERTICAL DATUM USED IS NGVD 29
E=1180177.752 PROJECT CONTROL ESTABLISHED USING GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM.
o NETWORK ESTABLISHED FROM NGS ONLINE POSITIONING SERVICE (OPUS)
a
NZ
DBAWIN SEE GPS CALIBRATION SHEET FOR HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL COOK
NOTE;
a G NOT TO SCALE
„~,,.,d....•
Shod

FSONCr UFUMCS NO. SHI ff NO.
8-3377 2
SOAWAY ON M~FUBi:
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
C' PROP. APPROX. 21t" ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE, TYPE SF4.6A, PRELIMIN IARY PLANS
AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 137.6 LBS. PER SQ. YD. IN EACH OF 2 LAYERS
E1 PROP. APPROX. 4%" ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE COURSE, TYPE 825.03,
AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 513 LBO. PER SO. YD.

R1 EXPRESSWAY GUTTER

R2 SHOULDER BERN BUTTER
h
W 6
T EARTH MATERIAL
CI 2
ROrE,PaEVEWr EOGE SLOPES ARE 4IOMESS SHMWW OTHERWISE 6° 2;, _ul
MAX AWL) 6;1

T
RI

5' 10' r0' 5' 8'
8' W/GR W/GR
INSET NO.I
GRADE
POINT USE INSET NO.1 WITH TYPICAL SECTION NO. I

t02 -L- STA. 15+90.00 (RT.) TO -L- STA. 17+60.00 (RT.)
-L- STA. 19+80.00 (LT.) TO -L- STA. 21+75.00 (LT.)
OB 02 oar Z~ VAR.
4;I 4,•1 6:1 1=1311
31nE11 111 MEIN F, I
!i
VAR. T 7' T
nEUE E I w
31EIII
GRADE TO THIS LINE Q
5, 3'
w
TYPICAL SECTION NO.I
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.IFOR: Cl R2
-L- STA. 16+50.00 TO -L- STA. 22+00.00 w
NOTES: 04
TRANSITION FROM EXISTING TO T.S. NO.1 w 2~
-L- STA. 15+90.00 TO -L- STA. 16+50.00 p I~
TRANSITION FROM T.S. NO.1 TO EXISTING w '
-L- STA. 22+00.00 TO -L- STA. 22+50.90 El T
SHLD. WORK ONLY -L- STA. 22+50.90 TO -L- STA. 23+10.00
GRADE TO THIS LINE
INSET NO.2
USE INSET NO.2 WITH TYPICAL SECTION NO.1
a -L- STA. 16+95.00 (LT.) TO -L- STA. 19+05.00 (LT.)
Mp
0

_LW
mia
9
d 0=
C L~
N
N Lw

i
-L- NHOJECT AEPERE ICE NO, SHEET NO.
PI S1a 15+67,66 P1 Sta 18+0459 P1 Slo 21+42.33 RP RAP AT OAET'k, OUTLET TAI ' ' LATERAL I'r DITCH TOE PROTEDrax B-3317 4
A = 27.Or 39.a (RT) O = 40.12 291)' (LT) A = 7Z W 49r (RT) LATERAL 'V' DITCH NOt to sC° I Not to xnWI RAN SHEET NO.
D = 13•,30' 00.0' D = 19'05' 549 0 = 28'36'52.4' Fl, ROADWAY ONION 1HrDEAUEJa
L = 20020' L = 210.53' L = 25184' D slops Gr= `P SwR. ENOeiEER aJCaNeeE F1N T = 10200' T = 109Br T = 145,70' slope
~-1 1 e
R - 424.4r R - 3W.W R - 20000 D Nln D= I.3 Ff.
SE SEE PLANS SE SEE PLANS SE SEE PLANS a r N n o= z.o Ff. Fa°"` o= 3.o Fis Ff. a=l.o Ff. PRELIMINARY PLANS
Type o1 Lher= CL 'r AIP AAP 0= 3 Ff. oo NOT ,~tB:POR COH3TlVClIOo
TYDe of Liner- CL W RIP RAP Type of Llner= PSAM
k ETA 17+73 (LT.) TO 4, ErA.19+00 4TJ 4Y STA. 19+00 ILL) TO 4- JIM 19+49 0.T.) k kTA 17+60 (ITT.) TO -4 sm III + 62 OTT.)
sq
Z W
EP D ~
y4 8TH6DB4 (HISTORIC) _ DESIGN EXCEPTION FOR DESIGN SPEED
GERALD R.MERSCHDORP Ew
?Sono 40 as HRL PG 2%
z~ 9J T'do
"
SHIRLEY S. MAST EIP
P a
91
TRACT v W
011 232E PG W Ew NARVIE S.
150 PG 3AoORE q3 u TRACT II Ew 31 Ew 33Z wr O
V&9~9rE u O VI O' B +6r CHRISTINA CALLEJAS
•6 DB 04 PG JIM
10 0 Ie
E
°a v P
{ a 5 o ik BYI-107 POT 18+03.24 ST ACY C. I ST ACY C. EGGERS JR.
© Ew Tpur LNE BY2-107 POT 5+002LT*,231,4 00 1 I TRACT ONE
EGGERS JR. I0 DEB Hw uB yw/I O END PROJECT B-3377
51 o~ •L- POTRACT FIVE I
QA,ZWEL + ,RPM /2 S RD' SHIRLEY 12AB2 Do oss PG EGe GLENN -L- STA. 23+ 10.00
G o c AR HENSON
a S. M AS; 'a W 04 PO BQ
LT WELL
2 RAIL WOOD T4u
15 8 0 fN0 EXP.
GUTTER
+pJA, ES E. ` AAN
W I LS JR~a 06 2a Pc M
7Y R@ RWELL I TOxe NAE~E it 101A TER FPIPEC -L- PT 510.+4641
onc. en
PG Oa E
Ew EAT.'V'DITCN CB ID EEE OETTRACT
CLAK . BCY
0 • iNL7EE fNAIC Racx wdLL
s Race BEGIN qXP'~
BF.ODE a 19 CY
E3,Y LocAdeE ro -L_ WOOD
© '6 wOCo
flITCH 0
'
36 CONCAL' D I ©
AIL'P DECe DE
• u eT 97 171.7'ER PAeRIC
3
s.o0. 0.m 0..w No sntp. RN GUl7E -L- ~'r, ~
N /
a"00'/,dFCR~~ ~V o rs L BL'sTEPS r ~e>>as P o + - 6+05 -t 9 t WOODS w•
iaiK CRJST I NA
aq,~, E3,- C7 I; II,, P CLNRIP RAP 9J0' AWAL CUT DI H .
01II' ,lIC1 SEEDUAL'A' - /OARBOR ~ €~CALLEJA
7• . , l.. ,1• LASTIC / IS { - E
A 1-0 5;_,_~ OB 07k PG i0i.,*'apJf 1
1+c9" r
f~
it Q~1E,'''/• / Q%,~ E _C d6 EA AP ~c W _ APPflOx, iURN1
CREEK
f ELL ~
~CO?£ E r n y~~ RASS `A eoA 3 C3 , m q a 7 /w OI D 421
e~ B es 50. 123
BYI.106 ,1'Q = I~ F3E E - ER 'e 'L
p,l,d a'I,~,, a a r
BYIPwC 14+79.70 j~~~? ft+ p UP RAP
P DETAILA• STACY C. EGGERS JR. -
TRACT IV
ewX W , o00 J • ,ILL _ Ni - - Sto.19+96.63 w 055 PC 6iB
-L- POT $10.23+6310 BL-104
L'JT'' ( to XIST.RIW ,,~pQl1Q -
d. x C11 BL PING 19+93.89
0 { ~ARDEW / i 6e 4 WOODS 'P p~ll€T 3,,,fl fl
x f ~I aW f bi VARIABLE ;~H C31
N 'ro
I H / N X R ~
wwx~ k,r«~>E L- -c ~~S~IUlla( I
-L- PT S10.15 5.31,/,1 ewc7 %
F5'~'
Roc L T 35i d Q "El Cq
(HISTORIC( LEIGHTON R. ox,,
CE.AS7 wwP PLAP a,,, ~1.~ Fek R,E7 L
HENSON CHAPEL pas L- N BEGIN CULVERT A~eis PRUNER PARRIC Q a ` Q'
SCOTT
E DID NB PO z3o g~ C} EXIST.RAY g -L- PC S1o.16+94,79 -L- STAJB+24,25 `WOODS
METHODIST CHURCH BL I03
DO E PG 59G woods BL-PINC 15+17.05
oe a rc z+9 D Ash ~Ew~~ a,p'. BECiNIEXcurr R S
W 32 PG 35B i4 5429B'E -L- POC 20+70.12
e S eK 0 6 - - 0.1 + 5.89 ' 14.47' RT
c. 1d BL-102 BL-PINC 10+74.71
,tat ' p BY2.102 BY2 POT 6+11.19
-L- POT Sta.14+55.08
RwNO'~ 1 / -L' L 16+10.74
a'
1 ~;m ati / -L- PC S?o.14-f8568 13.59 LT STACY C. EGGERS JR.
00~ I TRACT W
60'
O I DB 055 PG 6"
BL-IOI
BL-PINC 7+4L96
~aa" S,GN ST ACY C. EGGERS JR.
TRACT h
WOODS 06 0% PG EEB
BEGIN PROJECT B-3377
D~
/ . -L- STA. 15 + 90.00
N
n B57 I I
~ ~ 1111
k serJ9 xrt
Ew Q631'
r P A NAIL CI S81,2
m Nq
E
r, BL-POT 5+00.00 _ aTw
$ 7 T'Se4
Ew S7M0'17'E q ~9z ~3 Cy
,n 175.w5'
,
sa' Ew A6' CNL ,
I 1 a
o,e W ,I o f W A .
HENSON CHAPEL LEGEND NOTES: (/)SEE SHEET 5 FOR -L- PROFILE
METHODIST CHURCH l f, (2)SEE SHEETS C-1TO C- FOR CULVERT DETAILS
em We
a L~ f CEMETERY •HlSTOR
- We - We - - We We We We
1C PROPERTY BOUNDARY

BENCHMARK UST: rAOJ[cr AeeA No. SHEET rJO.
• B-3377 7 5
CULVERT HYDRAULIC DATA 8M •r - P. K.NAIL SET ON WEST SIDE OF OWE CREEK IN THE A0A0*A& 'G" EHM 01
NORTHWEST CORNER OF CONC. WING WALL OF PRIVATE BRIM
DESIGN &WHARG£ - 3100 CFS 1968'LT.OF STA5+05.B
DESIGN FREQUENCY = 25 YRS ELEV.= 2718,41 N 931,629 E IJ8009 PPE1dMINARY PLANS
DESIGN Iff ELEVATION - 27255 FT
BM 2 - PX, NAIL SET IN A ROCK.IN A CI/T.ON NORTH 51X£ OF
BASE DISCHARGE -4600 CFS SR 1216 (FLETCHER BRANCH RDJ,36ZLT.OF -BYI- STA10+49S
BASE FREQUENCY = 100 YRS ELEV.- 2732-W N 932.330 E 1780.055
BAS Hw
E ELEVATION =27283 FT
OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE = 5100 CFS 8M •3 - 8 SPIKE IN BASE OF 28' MAPLE TREE ON NORTH BANK
OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY= JbO+ YRS DESIGN EXCEPTION FOR DESIGN SPEED OF COVE CREEK 576' RT.OF STA23+302
ELEV.- 2729.86' N 931554 E /J81B29
OVERTOPPING ELEVATION - 2731D FT
PI = 18+54D0
EC - 273346'
VC = 300'
K-79
SSD = 433'
P1. 16+50.00
EL - 2,72877'
H+fi
vC - lon Pr- 500
FHdFFi
2,740 0
K - 54 EC --2 12806'
VC =200
tit
K=66
-1+ 44
2,730 +H+
,720
2.720
N
d ~ d
N~ ~hwl
NW e~
FOR -L- PLAN VIEW
SEE SHEET 4
Q1W: WWI
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
i

tttt

0

v I
I

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No. B-3377
State Project No. 8.2751301
W.B.S. No. 33025.1.1
Federal Project No. BRZ-1217(3)

A. Project Description:

The purpose of this project is to replace Watauga County Bridge No. 302 on
SR 1233 (Old Highway 421) over Cove Creek. The replacement structure will be
a single barrel bottomless culvert approximately 90 feet in length and 40 feet in
width. The culvert size is based on preliminary design information and is set by
hydraulic requirements. This structure will be of sufficient length and width to
provide two 10-foot lanes with 8-foot shoulders on each side. The roadway grade
at the new culvert will be raised approximately three feet above the existing
structure.
The approach roadway will extend approximately 350 feet from the west side of
the new culvert and 390 feet from the east side of the new culvert. The
approaches will be widened to include a 20-foot pavement width providing two
10-foot lanes. Five-foot grass shoulders will be provided on each side (8-foot
shoulders where guardrail is included). The roadway will be designed as a Rural
Local Route with a 30 mile per hour design speed.
Traffic will be detoured off-site during construction (see Figure 1).
B. Purpose and Need:

NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate Bridge No. 302 has a
sufficiency rating of 24.2 out of a possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is
considered structurally deficient due to structural appraisal of 2 out of 9 and the
deck conditions rating of 4 out of 9 according to Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) standards and therefore eligible for FHWA's Bridge Replacement
Program. The low rating can be attributed to pier footings have delaminated and
spalled, cracking and decay of timber, rust and corrosion in steel beams and bank
erosion and settlement.

The posted weight limit on the bridge is down to 11 tons for single vehicles (SV)
and 16 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers (TTST). By comparison, a new bridge
would be designed for 25 tons SV and for 45 tons TTST.

The superstructure and substructure of Bridge No. 302 have timber and steel
elements that are 45 years old (Figure 3). Timber components have a typical life
expectancy between 40 to 50 years due to the natural deterioration rate of wood.
Rehabilitation of a timber structure is generally practical only when a few
elements are damaged or prematurely deteriorated. However, past a certain
degree of deterioration, most timber elements become impractical to maintain and

1

upon eligibility are programmed for replacement. Timber components of bridge
No. 302 are experiencing an increasing degree of deterioration that can no longer
be addressed by reasonable maintenance activities, therefore the bridge is
approaching the end of its useful life.

Replacement of the bridge will result in safer traffic operations.

C. Proposed Improvements:

Circle one or more of the following Type Il improvements that apply to the
project:

1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking,
weaving, turning, climbing).
a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing
pavement (3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through lanes
c. Modernizing gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn lanes)
e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage pipes,
including safety treatments
g. Providing driveway pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening (less than one through lane)
i. Slide Stabilization
j. Structural BMP's for water quality improvement
2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects including the
installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.
a. Installing ramp metering devices
b. Installing lights
c. Adding or upgrading guardrail
d. Installing safety barriers including Jersey type barriers and pier
protection
e. Installing or replacing impact attenuators
f. Upgrading medians including adding or upgrading median barriers
g. Improving intersections including relocation and/or realignment
h. Making minor roadway realignment
i. Channelizing traffic
j. Performing clear zone safety improvements including removing
hazards and flattening slopes
k. Implementing traffic aid systems, signals, and motorist aid
1. Installing bridge safety hardware including bridge rail retrofit
3. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of
grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings.
a. Rehabilitating, reconstructing, or replacing bridge approach slabs
b. Rehabilitating or replacing bridge decks

2

C. Rehabilitating bridges including painting (no red lead paint), scour
repair, fender systems, and minor structural improvements
O Replacing a bridge (structure and/or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.

5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
6. Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or for joint or limited use of
right-of-way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse
impacts.

7. Approvals for changes in access control.

8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or near
a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support
vehicle traffic.
9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and
ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are
required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users.
10. Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of
passenger shelters, boarding areas, kiosks and related street
improvements) when located in a commercial area or other high activity
center in which there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic.

11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no
significant noise impact on the surrounding community.
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land
acquisition loans under section 3(b) of the UMT Act. Hardship and
protective buying will be permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited
number of parcels. These types of land acquisition qualify for a CE only
where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives,
including shifts in alignment for planned construction projects, which may
be required in the NEPA process. No project development on such land
may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed.
13. Acquisition and construction of wetland, stream and endangered species
mitigation sites.

14. Remedial activities involving the removal, treatment or monitoring of soil
or groundwater contamination pursuant to state or federal remediation
guidelines.

3

D. Special Project Information:
The estimated costs, based on 2007 prices, are as follows:

Alternative Alternative Alternative Alternative
1 2 3 4

(preferred)
29,000 29,000 29,000 14,000
Structure (proposed No. 302) 567,000 273,000 563,000 563,000
Structure (proposed No. 168) 0 343,000 0 0
Detour 0 224,000 0 0
Roadway Approaches 262,000 182,000 518,000 255,000
Miscellaneous & Mobilization 207,000 280,000 322,000 202,000

Engineering and Contingencies 186,000 220,000 219,000 166,000
ROW/Const. Easements/Utilities 197,000 737,000 210,000 16,000
Total $1,448,000 $2,288,000 $1,861,000 $1,216,000

Estimated Traffic:

Year 2007 - 445 vpd
Year 2030 - 645 vpd
TTST - 1%
Dual - 3%
Accidents: Traffic Engineering has evaluated a recent three year period and
found two accidents occurring in the vicinity of the project. One was associated
with the bridge approach roadway and speeding.

Design Exceptions: The existing roadway in this area is not designed for a 55-
mph statutory speed limit and will be designed for a 30-mph design speed, which
is within the character of the roadway.
Bridge Demolition: Bridge No. 302 is constructed entirely of timber and steel
and should be possible to remove with no resulting debris in the water based on
standard demolition practices.

Alternatives Discussion:

No Build - The no build alternative would result in eventually closing the road
which is unacceptable given the volume of traffic served by SR 1233 (Old
US 421).

Rehabilitation - Bridge No. 302 was constructed in 1962 and the timber
materials within the bridge are reaching the end of their useful life. Rehabilitation
would require replacing the timber components which would constitute
effectively replacing the bridge.

4

Alternative 1 replaces Bridge No. 302 with a bridge west (Figure 2A). During
construction traffic would be maintained on existing Bridge Nos. 302 and 168. A
new roadway parallel to Cove Creek approximately 400 feet in length would
connect Old US 421 to Henson Chapel Road and Fletchers Branch Road. When
traffic is routed onto the new culvert on SR 1233 and the new connector road,
Bridge Nos. 168 and 302 would be removed.

Alternative 2 replaces Bridge No. 302 with a bridge on new alignment west
(Figure 2B) of the existing structure and Bridge No. 168 on the existing
alignment. Bridge No. 168 would be constructed first. During construction, the
existing Bridge No. 302 would maintain traffic on Old US 421. A temporary
connector roadway, approximately 400 feet in length and parallel to Cove Creek
would maintain traffic from Old US 421 to Henson Chapel Road and Fletchers
Branch Road. After construction of both bridges the connector road would be
removed. This alternative would relocate two (2) homes on Fletchers Branch
Road.

Alternative 3 replaces Bridge No. 302 with a culvert at approximately the same
location (Figure 2C). During construction, traffic will be maintain by an off site
detour along SR 1306 (Silverstone Road), SR 1308 (Joe Shoemaker Road), and
SR 1309 (Sherwood Road). A new permanent roadway parallel to Cove Creek
approximately 400 feet in length would be build to connect Old US 421 to
Henson Chapel Road and Fletchers Branch Road. When traffic is routed onto the
culvert on SR 1233, the new connector roadway would be opened and Bridge
No. 168 would be removed.

Alternative 4 (preferred) will replace Bridge No. 302 on the existing alignment
n (Figure 2D). Traffic will be detoured offsite during the construction period.
Bridge No. 168 will remain in place to provide access to Henson Chapel Road
and Fletchers Branch Road.

NCDOT Guidelines for Evaluation of Offsite Detours for Bridge Replacement
Projects considers multiple project variables beginning with the additional time
traveled by the average road user resulting from the offsite detour. The offsite
detour (Figure 1) for this project would be SR 1306 (Silverstone Road), SR 1308
(Joe Shoemaker Road), and SR 1309 (Sherwood Road). The majority of traffic on
the road is local traffic. The detour for the average road user would result in nine
minutes additional travel time (four miles additional travel). Up to a 10-month
duration of construction is expected on this project.

Based on the Guidelines, the criteria above indicate that on the basis of delay
alone the detour is acceptable. Watauga County Emergency Services along with
Watauga County Schools Transportation have also indicated that the detour is
acceptable. NCDOT Division 11 has indicated the condition of all roads, bridges
and intersections on the offsite detour are acceptable without improvement and
concurs with the use of the detour.

5

• Y '

Onsite Detour - An onsite detour was not evaluated due to the presence of an
acceptable offsite detour.

Staged Construction - Staged construction was not considered because of the
availability of an acceptable offsite detour.

Structure Type: The current structure is a bridge built in 1962. The reason for
building a bridge was not because a culvert would not work but because the
design, materials and labor were not practical in the time when this structure was
built. A culvert has been determined adequate from a hydraulics standpoint.
Because a culvert is less than half the cost, twice the life expectancy, and virtually
no maintenance in comparison to a bridge, a culvert is the preferred structure
type.

Other Agency Comments:

The N.C. Wildlife Resource Commission in standardized letters provided a
request that they prefer any replacement structure to be a spanning structure.

Response: At smaller stream crossing it is more economical to replace bridges
with box culverts. Culverts cost less than bridges, require less maintenance
throughout their service life than bridges, and last longer than bridges. Therefore,
where appropriate NCDOT prefers to use box culverts to replace bridges. Since
the creek is Hatchery Supported Designated Public Mountain Trout Waters and
supports a good rock bass population, the proposed bottomless culvert will be
designed according to current NCDOT design practices. If a bottomless culvert is
not appropriate for this location measures such as buried box bottoms to facilitate
fish passage, dry cell(s) to allow wildlife passage, and placement to minimize
channel widening and realignment will be incorporated as appropriate.

Public Involvement:

A Citizens Informational Workshop for was held in June 2001 and December
2006 at Henson Chapel Methodist Church. Residents, property owners, and
business owners had the opportunity to take part in project development, ask
questions, and voice concerns. In the June 2001, Alternatives 1 and 2 were
displayed for review and discussion. In December 2006, Alternatives 1, 2, 3 and
4 as previously described were displayed. In December 2006 a small group
meeting was held with the property owners prior to the workshop. Approximately
20 citizens attended the workshop and small group meeting for a presentation and
then a question and answer session. Since the workshop, 33 comment sheets have
been received, including 25 for Alternative 4, seven (7) for Alternative 3, and one
(1) for Alternative 1. The Watauga County Board of Commission submitted a

6

resolution in support of Alternative 4. Most citizens at both meetings were
opposed to the physical change that Alternative 1, 2 and 3 would cause.

An informational newsletter was mailed to area residents and appropriate officials
in March 2007 identifying Alternative 4 as the preferred alternative. No
comments were received in response to the newsletter.

E. Threshold Criteria

The following evaluation of threshold criteria must be completed for Type II
actions

ECOLOGICAL YES NO

(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any
unique or important natural resource? ? X
(2) Does the project involve habitat where federally
listed endangered or threatened species may occur? X

(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish? ?
X

(4) If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of
permanent and/or temporary wetland taking less than
one-tenth (1/10) of an acre and have all practicable measures ?
to avoid and minimize wetland takings been evaluated? X
(5) Will the project require the use of U. S. Forest Service lands? ?
X

(6) Will the quality of adjacent water resources be adversely
impacted by proposed construction activities? ? X

(7) Does the project involve waters classified as Outstanding Water
Resources (OWR) and/or High Quality Waters (HQW)? X
(8) Will the project require fill in waters of the United States
in any of the designated mountain trout counties? X

(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage
tanks (UST's) or hazardous materials sites? X

7

YES NO
PERMITS AND COORDINATION

(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the
project significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any
"Area of Environmental Concern" (AEC)? X

(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act
resources? X
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required? ?
X

(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway? X

(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel
changes? X

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES NO

(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned
growth or land use for the area? X

(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or
business? X

(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any minority or
low-income population? X
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the ?
amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? X

(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control? ?
X

(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness ?
and/or land use of adjacent property? X
(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent
local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? X

(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan
and/or Transportation Improvement Program (and is, ?
therefore, in conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)? X

(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic ?
volumes? X

8

(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing
roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? X

(25) If the project is a bridge replacement project, will the bridge
be replaced at its existing location (along the existing facility)
and will all construction proposed in association with the ?
bridge replacement project be contained on the existing facility? X

(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or
environmental grounds concerning the project? ? X
(27) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws ?
relating to the environmental aspects of the project? X

(28) Will the project have an "effect" on structures/properties
eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places? ? X

(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remains which are
important to history or pre-history? X

(30) Will the project require the use of Section 4(f) resources
(public parks, recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges,
historic sites, or historic bridges, as defined in Section 4(f)
of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966)? ? X
(31) Will the project result in any conversion of assisted public
recreation sites or facilities to non-recreation uses, as defined
by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act ?
of 1965, as amended? X
(32) Will the project involve construction in, across, or adjacent
to a river designated as a component of or proposed for
inclusion in the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers? ? X

F. Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E

Response to Question 8: The proposed bridge will be replaced with a bottomless
culvert. Due to the nature of the construction of a
bottomless culvert temporary fill will occur in Cove Creek,
which is a Hatchery Supported Designated Public
Mountain Trout Waters. NCDOT will implement
Guidelines for Construction of Highway Improvements
Adiacent to or Crossing Trout Waters in North Carolina in
the design and construction of this project.

9

G. CE Approval

TIP Project No. B-3377
State Project No. 8.2751301
W.B.S. No. 33025.1.1
Federal Project No. BRZ-1217(3)

Project Description:

The purpose of this project is to replace Watauga County Bridge No. 302 on
SR 1233 (Old Highway 421) over Cove Creek. The replacement structure will be
a single barrel bottomless culvert approximately 90 feet in length and 40 feet in
width. The culvert size is based on preliminary design information and is set by
hydraulic requirements. This structure will be of sufficient length to provide two
10-foot lanes with 8-foot shoulders on each side. The roadway grade at the new
culvert will be raised approximately three feet above the existing structure.
The approach roadway will extend approximately 350 feet from the west end of
the new culvert and 390 feet from the east end of the new culvert. The
approaches will be widened to include a 20-foot pavement width providing two
10-foot lanes. Five-foot grass shoulders will be provided on each side (8-foot
shoulders where guardrail is included). The roadway will be designed as a Rural
Local Route with a 30 mile per hour design speed. Traffic will be detoured off-
site during construction (see Figure 1).

Categorical Exclusion Action Classification:

TYPE II(A)
X TYPE II(B)

Approved:

JL
Da Bridge Project Development Engineer
Project Devel ent & Environmental Analysis Branch
O/ 67 l~
Date ect neer
Pro' t Develo ent & Environmental Analysis Branch

at eMJe4ctJ Pianrung gineer
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
For Type II(B) projects only:

4 o
Ale -
ate Jo F. Sullivan, III, PE, Division A for
ederal Highway Administration

11

PROJECT COMMITMENTS:

Watauga County
Bridge No. 302 on SR 1233 (Old US 421)

Over Cove Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1217(3)
State Project No. 8.2751301
W.B.S. No. 33025.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-3377

Division Eleven Construction, Resident Engineer's Office - Offsite Detour

In order to have time to adequately reroute school busses, Watauga County Schools
should be contacted at [phone] at least one month prior to road closure.

Watauga County Emergency Services needs to be contacted at [phone]
at least one month prior to road closure to make the necessary temporary reassignments
to primary response units.

Contracts Unit - Length of Construction

In order to address specific requests from the School Transportation Director for Watauga
County, NCDOT will set the minimum reasonable contract time to reduce the period of
road closure.

All Design Groups/Division Resident Construction Engineer - Trout Issues

Cove Creek is designated, as Hatchery Supported Designated Public Mountain Trout
Waters and supports a good rock bass population.. Therefore a moratorium on all in
water work will be in place from October 15 to March 31 -of any given year.

NCDOT will implement Guidelines for Construction of Highway Improvements
Adjacent to or Crossing Trout Waters in North Carolina in the design and construction of
this project.
Structure Design - TVA Permit

The proposed project is located in the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) Land
Management District. If the bridge is replaced along existing alignment, as proposed, an
approval under Section 26a of the TVA Act will not be needed. However, TVA will
review final bridge design plans to confirm this determination.
Roadway Design / Division Eleven Traffic Engineering - Speed Limit

The existing roadway in this area is not designed for a 55-mph statutory speed limit and a
30-mph design speed will be used, which is within the character of the existing facility.

Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
August 2007

Mast
.0000
1~ 53verstone
23- Rd. -
i Creek - _
00
A/' er erg
Tom
~N \ °he i o NvR
Amantha

BRIDGE
O. 168
Henso
Ch
dl jist$o _
-M eth apoe
Church gld- _
tJ oia BRIDGE
G NO. 302 -
ssr ! Shoem~ r Rai Bud
20

°'0 7 i
qP 421
j t S
herwood 1
29
Sherwood DETOUR ROUTE

Z:on~ \
`W ~ A U G A
sr. •wooC
auga-.194'
V,as Deep.
Van Boone 11 a „ c
'.MOUntan _ - - -
L RIDGe
tt~~1 5 m _
M,
De s 105: \ o. ~
i~
c^ ~ i
sic s owing Rock North Carolina Department of Transportation
L_._._._._._.
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
WATAUGA COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 168 ON SR 1217 (HENSON BRANCH ROAD
AND
BRIDGE NO. 301 ON SR 1233 (OLD US 421)
OVER COVE CREEK
8-3377
FIGURE 1

GERALD R MERSCHDi)RF `r
i k! i ~ d 1 '
~ ~ i ,iuc, x >f ~•y II I
STACY C. EGGERS JR.~ CHRISTINA CALLEJAS
(9 p~~ NAME S. MOORE j i w c, ow[ J,'[ -V
o p I ENN
WILSON JR, T---m,~ a-- 1 2, b 14 H~SON
A ~A
d i v o 0 0 x I~
STACY C~lGGlRS JR 1 Sir
d d h a SHMAST S. ° LL e i
A ° - r I
V Do ;E, b
le,
all
11~ = gW T I. _ ~ ~ ~ I
+ n®d,~~dE r i y _
tim.QQv®y,°' aO.E7~d107~Wv,041" •LL i i' owss
q tl
b
s -
S3
pug®:o
0 ~ STACY C. EGGERS JR. 1
Q d ip~W ~ ~®'M~ tun xr i
• ~ ~a ~ pM ~%®I,1@~ C?s,6y,~w-@a.O,rQ~i~©u~~v, / 1
. ~ .•ow j 'f'Qv.p,I,Q!" ®yfl''nuTri~4-~,9
LEIGHTON R Alternative 1
- SCOTT '
IR~
1
Al-
A STACY C~EGGERS A.
STACY C. EGGERS 1R,
(HISTORIC)
HENSON CHAPEL
DIST CHURCH °F "°"T" °+qo North Carolina
Department of Transportation
I N y
f
9 e Project Development and
- j"FyT Nsa°Q~ Environmental Analysis Branch
F P
TP
rlwo~NAK
Watauga County
Replace Bridge No. 302 on SR 1233
Note: Properties shaded light green are eligible for the Over Cove Creek
National Register of Historic Places B-3377
:
Figure 2A

GERALD A. MFRSCHOORF C+.c`ot 'r

j mnn n x I j
NARVIE S. MOORE i STACY C. EGGERS JR r~ CHRISTINA CALLEJAS
d o e 0 IR -C, oxc Lrl --V
~e z 1 WILSON ER T--m zee-- i *b I ENSON II
@g o` x "t •o Jt STACY C.
EGGERS JR oeo'~°~ ~a o
e T'
SHIRM S, o 0
x
MAST Eu.
Do[
f ; e+'
r`
•~art r ' -Q/,~,n ~"13y~4© `;Qi= ~n~~ i
~v. - ~JLVJJLS" i i
• I ra.r ~ ~ . tau Q
r~ li(4.MQ~'Fay p'Qy. ~ ~ - I
Q (3 dl~4~b ®~MQQ QTY O~h~-:i iP / sa
p~~ ~w~ ? • y _ STACY C. EGGERS JR i
a sue' ~ Fpb it
* ~ ~ a\ „ 'b.Far ~ ©'~:n.ga.~$n6ti~h0.1~6>•am ©v.py
/l f
~ ^ rose 13y,Q q.QJ'~~'f5 T{y~p m~l~~y4 $%p.-'Tir, Y~~.~ f MTO LBSCOTTN R Alternative 2
df STAGY C. EGGERS A. +r
I
i STACY C.~EGGERS JR.
(HISTORIC)
f
HENSON CHAPEL F~
METHODIST CHURCH
Of NORTH GO
North Carolina
yP Department of Transportation
-----s-----_- - o Project Development and
%A Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch
Watauga County
Note: Properties shaded light green are eligible for the Replace Bridge No. 302 on SR 1233
National Register of Historic Places Over Cove Creek
: B-3377
Figure 2B

_ • GERALD R_ MERSCHDORF p a
Y \
J 1 4 ~ I r
1 I
Q ° o NAME S. MOORE STACY C. EGGERS JR. Yi CHRISTINA CALLEJAS
JAMES - - ~ I -IT o r GLENN 1
t; d °6 'r~ JR Ir--tuxniat--- st.,;;r,+tra_' STACIE C.EGGERS 1R I C7 HENSON 11CSON a Y! P T 1x.12+62.71 .,K t i
¦
Q tiOF~.i' ' O ° ¦ .1 ` 1 oo0
m -Yl- PC STo.13i00.0! l by Q (3r' I a
,'i 1 d SHIRLEY S_ - -Yl- PT Sta.l4+07.42
- y T
r I m 1 14 a MAST rF9'I -L- Pr sio.22+4fl97
cc?
~,~fr 001 me r' I
lea
I I©= y - mr i/ ~
a., 'L.hr.: r - © ~ ' ' tan
Y -r _ bll
PC Sta. 1542M3 - 4 5 •
m:, „m'
d
-YI- \ 1
POT Sto. 14+6928 f
Q
a -
STACY C. EGGERS JR.
~ p
b a,
-L- POr 57a.2j+63J0
1'©q,p, n pv.~,i /pv'Q,
~x Alternative 3
- - LEIGHTON R. -L L- PC Sta. i -Yl- or ra /4 9 sm pmE7
SCOTT PT Sta.16+8599 Ifi+94.79 r
!
_.1\~ b ® tl
VA -L- PC SYo.14+8568 F,
i -L- POT Sta.14+55M 1
STACY C. EGGERS JR.
STACY C. EGGERS JR.
"wT p
(HISTORIC) 0
HENSON METHODIST CHAPEL H 0 11 e ~oF HOR7~ ~qqo North Carolina
yP Department of Transportation
1 ,
--q Project Development and YJ ~NTOFTR05QOQ Environmental Analysis Branch
Watauga County
Note: Properties shaded light green are eligible for the Replace Bridge No. 302 on SR 1233
National Register of Historic Places Over Cove Creek
% B-3377
Figure 2C

GERALD R MIRSCHOORF = f
i
`~J ~ roar ~ ~ i
NAME t moon J° STACY C. EGGERS JR. `
d Q e ~ f II I~ mar »a: L€r'I
° R. i I {3 Q' H& SON '
A+~ M/l SdN JR. _ _ne zR_ _ _ /STACY C. EGGERS JR. fr i
i eoe r f
e a r ~ ~ ~r r
e r 1 ~ ` o a~ i QQ 4 d~ lI o
o ~ e i8 a t! f
- dR f I I,~ 9 6 O P
I SHIM S.
rMS.
~ O Fr '~rmppl'ftw
4*
Q loei ~A $6 a?
i 10~ APO 'f• i I 21
7t s,~y ? ® ' i iL ~!I
BLRQrmpue 4 ^M ,,i~''l ~0 Q QII
u~p h~M ~pi~~'d4i~,h~Vi Qi 191 Vr ~U~~•pR~ 0 f /
~ (g A~Mg.40r'Q ~y a ,„a'" gxR ` iTACY C. EGGERS JR. ~
t` ~Y M1.~'I~L44. -L- Fff
a Y "a A'u¢il o6;~E 'L~+gag y~9sq.®~ 4
s_ ` c- rr sfe. I "'v ,mH Rwtl»AAK~ me
_ LEIGHTON R Alternative 4
$CO1T a~a -L- Fr scars+asas -L- Ac car
0, (Preferred)
-L- PC ftwtsw
Aar 5rd.M+5WM
' SrACY C. EGGERS JR
~ I
_-c_ _ Marx ! STACY C. EMU JR
r rMn
a+~4~ ~.t7yrtyINIT M 0 r PR OF NOR r"North Carolina
+7acrra f ; ,y = Department of Transportation
% Project Development and
J P`P Environmental Analysis Branch
-v- - ` 4F"-O TRPNvo

Watauga County
Note: Properties shaded light green are eligible for the Replace Bridge No. 302 on SR 1233
National Register of Historic Places Over Cove Creek
B-3377
Figure 2D

a1 4
i' ~ IIhI~I I.a~ti
r`

'fit }

`

a+.. .rte

Looking Northeast from South Approach

7-4
S
?r

Yn~
K
V;% T

w

s~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ t Aye
i~
.3.

Loo irffi a`ia East i{ z $g saga s

r

Federal Aid # BRZS-1217(3) TIP # B-3377 County: Watauga
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS

Project Description: Replace Bridge No.- 168 on SR 1217 and Bridge No. 302 on SR 1233
over Cove Creek

On 19 December 2006 representatives of

® North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
® 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 pmperty/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 witt=n the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed on the
reverse.

Signed:

Representative, N T ell- Date

0 7
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date

q'-,
R tative, HPO Date

fate Historic Preservation Officer Date

•

Federal Aid # BRZS-1217(3) 77P# 8-3377 County: Watauga

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).

Dr. Filmore Bingham House (DE) - Alternative 4

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

Dr. Filmore Bingham House (DE) - Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 - No Adverse Effect

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

The setting is not a contributing factor to the property's eligibility.

Initialed: NCDOT ( FHWA _ HPO 1

lars~

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Archives and History
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
September 12, 2001

MEMORANDUM

To Thomas Padgett
NCDOT

From: David Brook'
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer

Re- Bridge-#168 on SR 1217 over cove Creek, B-3377, Watauga County, ER 99-8185

Thank you for forwarding the archaeological site form for 31WT333/333**. We have completed our
review of the archaeological report for the above project

During the course of the survey one site was located within the project area. The authors have
recommended that no further archaeological investigation be conduced in connection with this project
We concur with this recommendation since this project will not involve significant archaeological
resources:

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800.

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-4763.

DB:kgc

cc John Wadsworth, FHwA

Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
Administration 507 N. Blo nst 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 1618 [phone].715-4801

U}iww.?+

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources

James B. Hunt Jr:, Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crew, Director
February 24, 1999

MEMORANDUM

TO: William D. Gilmore; P.E., Manager ',F- C
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook 4f ~a) cv Iyq~
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer

SUBJECT: Bridge No. 168 on SR 1217 over Cove Creek,G
B-3377, Watauga County, ER 99-8185

Thank you for your letter of January 29, 1999, concerning the above project.

We have reviewed our files and located Henson Chapel Methodist Church (WT 52), a
property listed on the state study list for possible nomination to the National Register of
Historic Places. We look forward to checking the aerial maps and photographs to determine
if this property is within the area of potential effect.
With regard to archaeological resources, site 31 WT116 is located nearby. We recommend
an archaeological survey be conducted of the project area.

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with
Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the
above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
9197733-4763.

DB:slw
cc: N. Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett

s t• s

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Junes B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Dirtctor
September 25, 1997

MEMORANDUM

TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E:, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportati n
;/V
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation OffiLer
SUBJECT: Bridge SR 1233 over Cove
Creek : byWatauga Co. ER 96-9019, ER 98-7374
Thank you for your I ttWof August 19, 1997,transmitting the archaeological
survey report by Megan O'Connell concerning the above project.

One site 31 WT116 was revisitied and evaluated during this survey. The site is not
eligible for listing on the National Register. We concur with the recommendation.
No further archaeological investigations are recommended in association 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, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
c . Mr. Padgett
Nicholas Graf

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND EVALUATION
REPLACEMENTS OF BRIDGE NO. 168
ON SR 1217 AND BRIDGE NO. 302 ON SR 1233
OVER COVE CREEK
WATAUGA COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA

FEDERAL AID NO. BRZ-1217(3)
STATE PROJECT 8.2751301
WBS #33025.1.1

TIP NO. B-3377
MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

This management summary has been prepared by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) in Raleigh, North Carolina. It describes the conjoining of TIP projects
B-3062 and B-3377, as well as the results of the archaeological investigations that have been
conducted for both projects, including the survey and evaluation of archaeological site 31 WTI 16.
This is a federally-funded project subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
(1966, as amended), which requires consultation with the North Carolina Historic Preservation
Office (NC HPO) on possible effects of the proposed project on historic properties. The NC HPO
has assigned tracking number ER 99-8185 to this project.
Project History

TIP project B-3062 was originally designated to replace Bridge No. 302 on SR 1233 over
Cove Creek. Two alternatives were'implemented for study. In 1997, NCDOT archaeologists
Megan O'Connell and Tom Beaman conducted archaeological survey for these two alternatives
(O'Connell 1997). Their survey investigations relocated archaeological site 31 WTI 16, originally
recorded in 1974 by students from Appalachian State University. O'Connell (1997:11,12)
recommended that site 31 WTI 16's cultural deposits were confined to disturbed soils and that the
project would not impact any significant archaeological materials. In correspondence dated
9/25/1997, the NC HPO concurred with O'Connell's recommendations, and further determined
that site 31 WTI 16 was not eligible.
TIP project B-3377 was originally designated to replace Bridge No. 168 on SR 1217 over
Cove Creek. Bridge No. 168 is approximately 250 feet (76.2 meters) downstream from Bridge
No. 302. In 2001, NCDOT archaeologists Jesse Zinn and Shane Petersen conducted
archaeological survey for the single alternative (Zinn et al 2001). That survey identified one
archaeological site, 31WT333/333**. Zinn et al (2001:12,13) recommended that site
31 W7333/333** held no potential to contribute significant information to the understanding of
North Carolina's history, and that it was not eligible. In correspondence dated 9/12/2001, the NC
HPO concurred with Zinn et al's recommendations.

In 2006, the Archaeology Group of the NCDOT was contacted by the department's
Bridge Unit as the two bridge replacement projects had been combined and organized under the
B-3377 project designation. TIP project B-3377 now proposes to address both adjacent crossings
of Cove Creek (bridges No. 302 and No. 168). At that time, there were four alternatives
implemented for study. In email correspondence to the NC HPO dated 10/5/2006, it was notified
that projects B-3062 and B-3377 were combined, and recommendations for finther archaeological

work were requested. In email correspondence dated 10/10/2006, NC HPO recommended that
additional survey testing be conducted in the areas of site 31WT116's limits that would be
possibly impacted by the redesign. On 10/13/2006, Zinn conducted archaeological survey across
the portions of site 31 WT116 proposed to be impacted by the project's new alteratives. Results
of this survey work are detailed below.

Results of Expanded Archaeological Survey

An expanded intensive archaeological survey for the new alteratives associated with the -
newly redesignated B-3377 project was conducted in October 2006. This work was accomplished
through the excavation of six shovel test pits (STPs). While some archaeological materials were
recovered from one of the tests, they were found in disturbed, mixed soil deposits, and found to be associated with the original site 31WT116 site.

. A visual inspection of the project area did not identify any structures, deposits or surface
features. A visual inspection of the ground surface along Cove Creek did not identify any
artifacts, deposits or features. A visual inspection of the creek bank profile did not identify any
deposits or features.

No eligible archaeological resources were identified during this expanded archaeological
survey. No funther archaeological work is recommended.

Current Recommendations and Conclusions

In the spring of 2007, the department's Bridge Unit selected Alterative 4 as the
Preferred Alternative. Alterative 4 essentially follows the original B-3062 alignment, which was
cleared by NC HPO 1997. In email correspondence to the NC BPO, this situation was explained
and concurrence requested, to clear the current B-3377 alterative. In an email response from the
Office of State Archaeology reviewer, dated 05/08/2007 (see attachment), this clearance was
given.

B;3062LB-3377 Watauga Co.]

Subject: Re: B-3062/B-3377 Watauga Co.]
Date: Tue, 8 May 200710:43:11 -0400
From: "Linda Hall" <[e-mail]>
To: "Jesse D. Zinn" <[e-mail]>

Whew! Yes, sounds like clearance is appropriate.
Linda

Original Message
From: "Jesse D. Zinn" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Cc: "Matt T. Wilkerson" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 10:29 AM
Subject: [Fwd: B-3062/B-3377 Watauga Co.]
> Linda,
> I'm still working on the write-up of the additional work I did at
> 31WT116 - the addendum to the original B-3377 report from 2001
> (though, I guess in a way, it's also an addendum to the B-3062
> report of 1997, as well).
> However, the project design has changed again, and now the
> preferred alternative has reverted back to basically the original
> alternative from the B-3062 project - that is, the replacement of
> Bridge No. 302. Under the current preferred alternative, Bridge
> No. 168 (original B-3377) will not be replaced, and the field
> containing 31WT116 (not eligible) won't be affected any further
> than basically the original B-.3062 limits. Please see the
> attached PDF file with the current preferred alternative.
> So, bascially, we've had two separate projects - B-3062 and
> B-3377 - that had merged due to their proximity to each other,
> and codified under the one's, B-3377, designation, which, through
> the design process, have now reverted back to the original
> other's, B-3062, original design, more or less. I've never heard
> of anything like this happening before, but there it is.
> Since we've got an original concurrence letter for B-3062 (and
> also for the original B-3377), it would seem as though we're
> clear? However, we reopened Sec. 106 consultation with your
> office because the project changed, but now it's basically
> changed back. So, where are we? I guess I'd like to request
> concurrence that the current B-3377 design is covered under the
> original B-3062 report's concurrence letter. Could we get a
> letter stating such? Perhaps conditioned on your office's review
> of the final plans?
> In the meantime, since I did the additional, now irrelevant, work
> on 31WT116, I'll write it up as I said, as an addendum to the
> original B-3377 report. I'll get that to you most likely In
> June.
> Would your office just now consolidate the B-3062 and B-3377
> files/reports?
>
> Thanks, Linda,
> -Jess
> Jesse D. Zinn

' i

Natural Resources Technical Report

Proposed Bridge Realignment
State Route 1233 Bridge 302 over Cove Creek
Watauga County

TIP No. B-3062
State Project No. 8.2750401
FAP # BRZ-1233 (2)

Prepared for:

North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning and Environmental Branch
Environmental Unit

Issued by:

Rust Environment & Infrastructure
5510 Six Forks Road, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609

Rust Project No. 40530

January, 1997
(Revised February, 1997)

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina
TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................I
1.1 Project Description 1
1.2 Methodology .....................................................1
1.3 Terminology and Definitions 4
1.4 Qualifications of the Principal Investigators 4

2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES 5
2.1 Regional Characteristics 5
2.2 Soils ............................................................5
2.3 Water Resources 6
2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters 6
2.3.2 Best Usage Classification 6
2.3.3 Water Quality 6
2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics 6
2.3.3.2 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network 7
2.3.3.3 Point Source Dischargers 7
2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts 7

3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES 8
3.1 Terrestrial Communities 8
3. 1.1 Man-Dominated 8
3.1.2 Old Field 9
3.1.3 Montane Oak-Hickory Forest 9
3.2 Aquatic Communities 10
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts 11
3.3.1 Terrestrial Communities 11
3.3.2 Aquatic Communities 12

4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS 13
4.1 Waters of the United States 13
4. 1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters 13
4.1.2 Summary of Anticipated Impacts 13
4.1.3 Permits ...................................................13
4.1.4 Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation 14
4.2 Rare and Protected Species 14
4.2.1 Federally Protected Species 14
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species 17

5.0 REFERENCES ........................................................20

G:v,NVIMPROrEC740530.000WArru .tzyr February 1997

i

Natural Resources Technical Report
" Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

FIGURES

Figure I - Site Location Map 2
Figure 2 - Alternatives Map 3

APPENDIX A -BMAN Data

G:ViNV/RWRO?1sC7140530.000wATRES.RP7' February 1997
ii

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Natural Resources Technical Report is submitted to assist in the preparation of a Categorical
Exclusion (CE) for the proposed project. The purpose of this technical report is to inventory, catalog
and describe the various natural resources likely to be impacted by the proposed action. The report
also attempts to identify and estimate the likely consequences of the anticipated impacts to these
resources. These descriptions and estimates are relevant only in the context of the preliminary
design concepts. It may become necessary to conduct additional field investigations should design
parameters and criteria change.

1.1 Project Description

The proposed project involves the replacement of Bridge No. 302 over Cove Creek. The project is
located in Watauga County, in the northeastern corner of North Carolina (Figure 1). Two
alternatives are proposed for this project. The proposed bridge approaches under either alternatives
would consist of a 1.8 in (6 ft) shoulder, 3.3 m (11 ft) wide travel lanes with ditches on either side.
The total proposed right-of-way is 21 in (70 ft).

Alternative 1

Alternative 1 calls for minor realignment of State Route 1233 and bridge replacement in the existing
location (Figure 2). Traffic would be detoured along secondary roads during construction. The total
project length is 122 m (400 ft).

Alternative 2

Alternative 2 involves a greater change in the road configuration along State Route 1233 and the
replacement of the existing bridge with a bridge in a northern location. Traffic would be maintained
on the existing bridge during construction. The total project length is 152 in (500 ft).

1.2 Methodology

Research of published information and resources was conducted prior to the field investigation.
Information sources used to prepare this report include:

• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map (Sherwood, 1938, photorevised 1969)
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map (Sherwood)
• NCDOT aerial photographs of project area (1:100)
• Soil Conservation Service [now known as the Natural Resource Conservation Service
(SCS)] soil survey for Watauga County.
• N.C. benthic macroinvertebrate information
• Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) list of protected and candidate species
• N.C. Natural Heritage Programs (NHP) database of uncommon species and unique habitats.

C:UNl'IRV'RO.IlC.'7140530.000WAT-RES.RPT February 1997

1

122 , C 13^;

1219 c 9 O _ -
1355

1201 - 6 1305 ~O
. O 5
121 3.0
121b 1233 ' e 'POTATC
G232 1303 11 HILL
• ~i \ m 1372
6 1213 ' h4a0 , 1306 - 1385
6 121
<<X, 1216 • 2 .21383 .306 \ -
F p? • 1
1215'(9 .233 130E I ~
0 1 •b 13'J6
1211 1371 '0
\
2 307
b \ 1213 nt4>a `
6 G 1` \ 8 1368 \ 11C2 p
121c.1 - 21 ~ _ ~
1212 37'
N 209 n 38 \ 1241 Sherwood 1312 1373 1 x.
I P
1 co 14.2
1 6 8
6 °j 121 j Sugar 8 _
32t 1. 1 y 131
4
Gram t'3. 2
) AP rJ 1102
1121 131 1 1313 1380
156 1155
2 Villas6 1 - '1 • ~ 1.3
`sue > \ `,~C', 1313
1 1C° MAST
Y ~y rV 375
3.0 121 1116 GAP g
O 1165 ? .9
01) 194 FAM
1 1 T 17n - 0 PO
117 7 - 3 J
- iil5 4321
21 Far
•v~
1113 / 141
~
41p* G
nenood ~ Tod6~~ ( - .
r Grove G+~ ,
tun Crud ,u 5. u '40"1 * • S 1114
1 34 94 Oerai lY r:a
0 ~~E STUDIED DETOUR ROUTE
221 1 Blow ng R! k / 1 i
ee
40
e North Carolina
Department Of Transportation
Planning & Environmental Branch
WATAUGA COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 302 ON SR 1233
r OVER COVE CREEK
B-3062
0 kilometers 1.6 kilometers 3.2
Figure 1
0 miles 1.0 miles 2.0

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina
Water resource information was obtained from publications of the North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR, 1993), Division of Water Quality.
Information concerning the occurrence of federal and state protected species in the study area was
obtained from the FWS list of protected and candidate species (August 23, 1996) and from the NC
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and unique habitats. NHP files were
reviewed for documented sightings of state or federally listed species and locations of significant

natural areas.

A general field survey was conducted along the proposed project route by Rust biologists on
December 10, 1996. Water resources were identified and their physical characteristics were recorded.
For the purposes of this study, a qualitative aquatic survey and brief habitat assessment were
performed within the project area of Cove Creek. The survey was conducted using a 1,000-micron
mesh D-frame hand-held dip net. A composite sample of four locations was collected and preserved
immediately after collection for later laboratory identification. Principal identification keys
included Merrit and Cummins (1996) and Peckarsky (1990). Macroinvertebrate identification was
generally performed to family level.

Plant communities and their associated wildlife were identified using a variety of observation
techniques, including active searching, visual observations, and identifying characteristic signs of
wildlife (sounds, tracks, scats, and burrows). Terrestrial community classifications generally follow
Schafale and Weakley (1990) where appropriate, and plant taxonomy follows Radford et. al. (1968).
Animal taxonomy follows Robbins et. al. (1966), Rohde et. al. (1994), Potter, et. al. (1980), Palmer
and Braswell (1995), and Webster, et. al. (1985). Vegetative communities were mapped utilizing
aerial photography of the project site. Predictions regarding wildlife community composition
involved general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing vegetative communities.

Jurisdictional wetlands, if present, were identified and evaluated based on criteria established in the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineer's (COE's) " 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual."
Wetlands were classified based on Cowardin, et al. (1979).

1.3 Terminology and Definitions

For the purposes of this report, the following terms are used for describing the limits of natural
resources investigations. "Project area" denotes the area bounded by the proposed right-of-way
limits along the full length of the project alignment. The "project vicinity" is an area extending 1.0
km (0.6 mile) on all sides of the project area, and "project region" is an area equivalent in size to the
area represented by a 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle map (about 163.3 sq l cm or 61.8 sq mi).

1.4 Qualifications of the Principal Investigators

Investigator Stacey E. Moulds, Environmental Scientist
Education: BA Environmental Science, University of Virginia, May 1992
Experience: Biologist, Rust Environment & Infrastructure, 3 years
Expertise: Water quality testing, macro-invertebrates surveys

G:16NVlRI1'ROJCC7140530.0011INA7'RESIZI'7' February 1997
4

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

Investigator: Ron Johnson, Senior Biologist
Education: MS, Biological Sciences, Illinois State University, Normal, IL, 1982
Experience: Biologist, Rust Environment & Infrastructure, 10 years
Expertise: Natural resource surveys, wetland delineations.

2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES

Soil and water resources which occur in the project area are discussed with respect to possible
environmental concerns.

2.1 Regional Characteristics

The proposed project lies in Watauga County, in a rural mountain area located in the northwestern
corner of North Carolina. The project area lies within the Blue Ridge Mountain Physiographic
Province. The topography of the project area is characterized as sloping towards Cove Creek, with

a greater degree of sloping on the southern side of State Route 1233. Elevations in the project area
range from approximately 836 to 839 in (2,750 to 2,760 ft) National Geodetic Vertical Datum
(NGVD).

Watauga County's major economic resources include agriculture, forestry, and tourism. The project
site is located in the village of Amantha. Boone, the location of Appalachian State University, is
located approximately 6 miles to the southeast of the project area.

2.2 Soils

Soils in the project area consist of three main types: Reddies loam; Chestnut -Edneyville complex;
and Saunook loam. Reddies loam is described as containing 0 to 3 percent slopes, very deep,
moderately well drained soils located on floodplains that are subject to frequent flooding. The
Chestnut-Edneyville complex consists of soils having 30 to 60 percent slopes that formed in
residuum weathered from granite, schist, and gneiss. Chestnut soils are moderately deep and well
drained and contain a significant amount of gravel and cobbles. Edneyville soils are very deep and
well drained, have a loamy surface layer with a significant amount of gravel and loamy subsoil. An
occasional amount of stones are scattered over the surface. Saunook loams are strongly sloping (8
to 15 percent slopes), very deep, well drained soils located on benches, fans, and coves of the
Southern Appalachian mountains.

Site index is a measure of soil quality and productivity. The index is the average height, in feet, that
dominant and codominant trees of a given species attain in a specified number of years (typically
50). The site index applies to fully stocked, even-aged, unmanaged stands. The soils in the project
area have a site index range of 83 to 95 for Eastern white pine (Pinus strobus) and 95 to 115 for
yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera).

G: VNVIRvTorcc7140530.000WA7-RES.RPT February 1997

5

c

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

2.3 Water Resources

This section contains information concerning water resources likely to be impacted by the proposed
project. Water resources assessments include the physical characteristics likely to be impacted by
proposed project (determined by field survey), best usage classifications, and water quality aspects
of the water resources. Probable impacts to surface water are also discussed as well as means to
minimize impacts.

2.3.1 Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters

The project is located in the Watauga River drainage basin. One water resource, Cove Creek, will
be impacted by the proposed project. Cove Creek originates about 10 km (6 mi) north of the project
area and flows to the south to its confluence with the Watauga River.

Cove,Creek is approximately 7.6 to 10.6 in (25 to 35 ft) wide within the project area. This is a
stream system with normal high flow. The stream contains primarily shallow riffles approximately
15 to 20 cm (6 to 8 in) deep and some runs ranging from 20 to 45 cm (8 in to 1.5 ft) deep. Substrates
were estimated in the following percentages: cobbles (35 bedrock/boulder (25 gravel (25
and coarse sand (15 Water clarity was good. The stream has an open canopy and riparian
vegetation consisted of mostly maintained grass with some shrubs and trees on the banks toward the
eastern terminus of the project area. One perennial tributary to Cove Creek was denoted on the
USGS quadrangle map within the immediate project area. However, this tributary was not identified
during the field survey.

2.3.2 Best Usage Classification

Surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a classification by the Division of Environmental
Management (DEM) that is designed to maintain, protect, and enhance water quality within the
State. Cove Creek (Index # 8-15) is classified as a Class C waterbody. Class C water resources are
used for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and
agriculture.

No waters classified as Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HWQ)
or Water Supplies (WS-1 of WS-II) occur within 1.6 km (1 mi) if the project study area.

2.3.3 Water Quality

This section describes the water quality of the water resources within the project area. Potential
impacts to water quality from point and nonpoint sources are evaluated. Water quality assessments
are based upon published resource information and field study observations.

2.3.3.1 General Watershed Characteristics

Nonpoint source runoff from agricultural and pasture land are likely to be the primary source of
water quality degradation to the water resources located within the project vicinity. The surrounding

G:ir:NVIRIPROrccr14os3o.ooowsriusarT February 1997
6

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina
vicinity appears to be mainly used for agriculture with forested land on many of the steeper slopes.
Nutrient loading and increased sedimentation from agricultural runoff and forestry affects water
quality. Inputs of nonpoint source pollution from private residences within the project area also are
likely to contribute to water quality degradation.

2.3.3.2 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network

The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), managed by the DEHNR, Division of
Water Quality and established in 1982, is part of an on-going ambient long-term water quality
monitoring program. The program has established fixed water quality monitoring stations for
selected benthic macroinvertebrates. Four different benthic macroinvertebrate sampling
methodologies are used by the Division of Water Quality. For the Cove Creek stations, the EPT
method has been employed, which consists of one kick-net sample, one sweep-net sample, one leaf-
pack sample, and visual collections. Macroinvertebrate collections focus on the Ephemeroptera,
Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) insect orders. The physical water quality conditions are recorded
and a habitat assessment is also performed at each station. The Biological Assessment group has
assigned water quality ratings (bioclassifications) based on biotic index values and EPT taxa richness

values.

Two BMAN stations are located along Cove Creek, one each at upgradient and downgradient
locations. One station is located approximately 3.2 km (2 mi) upstream of the project area at the
crossing of State Route 1305. The second station is located approximately 4.8 km (3 mi)
downstream of the project area at the crossing of U.S. Route 321. Both stations received "good"
bioclassification ratings.

2.3.3.3 Point Source Dischargers

There are no known permitted point source dischargers to Cove Creek within the project vicinity.

2.3.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts

Any action which affects water quality can adversely affect aquatic organisms. Temporary impacts
during the construction phases may have long-term impacts from these processes. Replacing an
existing structure in the same location with a road closure is often the preferred environmental
approach. Bridge replacement on a new location with a detour on existing location generally results
in more severe impacts. Therefore, based on environmental impacts, Alternate 1 is the preferred
alignment. Physical impacts will be the most severe at the point of bridge replacement.

Project construction may result in the following impacts to surface water resources:

• Increased sediment loading and siltation as a consequence of watershed vegetation removal,
erosion/and or construction.
• Decreased light penetration/water clarity from increased sedimentation and vegetation
removal.
• Changes in water temperature with vegetation removal.

c: v,NVUtvetto?tCn-ros3o.VOOW,a7-tzcstv'r February, 1997

7

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

• Changes in the amount of available organic matter with vegetation removal.
• Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff, construction activities and
construction equipment, and spills.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface and
groundwater flow from construction.
• Increased scouring of the existing channel due to increased water flows from the stormwater
runoff associated with curb and gutter systems.

It is important to understand that construction impacts may not be restricted to the communities in
which the construction activity occurs. Efforts should be made to ensure that no sediment leaves the
construction site. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters should
be followed during the construction phase of the project.

3.0 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 relationship 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) where
possible. Representative animal species which are likely to occur in these habitats (based on
published range distributions) are also cited. 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.

3.1 Terrestrial Communities

Three distinct terrestrial communities were identified within the project area: a disturbed man-
dominated community, old field community, and a developing montane oak-hickory forest.
Dominant faunal components associated with these terrestrial areas will be discussed in each
community description. Many species are adapted to the entire range of habitats found along the
project alignment, but may not be mentioned separately in each community description.

3.1.1 Man-Dominated

This highly disturbed community includes road shoulder, residential lawns, and mowed pasture land.
Many plant species are adapted to these disturbed and regularly maintained areas. Regularly
maintained areas are dominated by fescue grass, but also contain wild onion (A Mum canadensis) and
clover (Trifolium spp.).

The animal species present in these disturbed habitats are opportunistic and capable of surviving on
a variety of resources, ranging from vegetation (flowers, leaves, fruits, and seeds) to both living and
dead faunal components. Robins (Turdus migratorius) and starlings are the two most common birds
that use these habitats. Other animal species that may visit these areas for feeding include black rat

c: IENVIRV'ROrEC71a053o.000wAT-RESRPT February 1997

8

r

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina
snake (Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta), Eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis), American toad
(Bufo americanus), and meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus).

3.1.2 Old Field

Old field communities have typically developed from abandoned pasture land or cultivated farm
land. Small patches of this habitat are present on either side of Cove Creek. These communities are
dominated by herbaceous vegetation with scattered shrubs or small trees. A variety of grasses are
common as well as other herbaceous species such as goldenrods (Solidago spp. asters (Aster spp.
milkweed (Asclepias spp.), and Queen Ann's lace (Daucus carota). Blackberries (Rubus spp.) are
the principle shrub. At the western end of the project area several large Balm of Gilead (Populous
candicans) trees and a red maple (Ater rubrum) are present, but beneath them the vegetation is
similar to the old field.

Old fields are often utilized by white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) for feeding. Additionally,
a number of small mammals such as least shrew (Cryptotis parva) and meadow vole are found in
this community. Birds utilizing old fields include field sparrow (Spizella pusilla), cardinal
(Cardinalis cardinalis), quail (Colinus virginianus), white-throated sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis),
and slate-sided junco (Junco hyemalis). Reptiles and amphibians are similar to those listed above
for the pastureland areas.

3.1.3 Montane Oak-Hickory Forest

This community is located on the relatively steep slope on the east edge of the project area. This
forested area contains a mixture of oaks, hickories, and other hardwoods. The oldest trees in this
community are currently about 30 to 40 years in age. The dominant canopy trees are white oak
(Quer-cus alba), and red oak (Q. rubra). Other trees present included black cherry (Prunus serotina)
and black locust (Robina pseudo-acacia). Rhododendron (Rhododendron spp.) is the predominant
shrub in this area, although several Vacciniums were noted. Herbaceous vegetation is sparse in
December when the surveys were conducted. In addition, snow cover obscured many plants.
However, Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides) and Solomon's seal (Polygonatum biflorum)
were noted. When mature, this community will likely correspond most closely to the Montane Oak-
Hickory Forest community of the NHP system.

Only grey squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis) were observed during field activities. However, white-
tailed deer, raccoon (Procyon lotor), and opossum (Didelphis virginiana) probably utilize the
forested areas. It is likely that small mammals such as masked shrew (Sorex cinerus), Eastern
chipmunk (Tamias striatus) and white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus) also are present in this
community. Snakes that can be found in this habitat include northern ringneck snake (Diadophis
punctatus edwardsii), Eastern milk snake (Lampropeltis triangulum triangulum), and northern
copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix mokasen).

A wide variety of birds use the forest for foraging and nesting. Species observed during the field
survey included robin, slate-sided junco, Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis), blue jay
(Cyanocitta cristata), and tufted titmouse (Parus bicolor).

G: ENVIRUIOri.'t.-7140530 0001NAia EMPT February 1997

9

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

3.2 Aquatic Communities

The aquatic community composition, including total species number, species richness, taxa richness
and density, and species tolerance data, is reflective of the physical, chemical and biological
condition of the water resource.

Within the project area Cove Creek is a high gradient, high velocity, mid order, open canopied
stream, containing large substrata and having good water clarity. The riparian community contains
mostly maintained grasses.

Although fish populations were not observed during the field survey, habitat was determined to exist
for many species of fish. According to Joel Mickey, District Biologist for the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC), Cove Creek is stocked for brook trout (Salvelinus
fontinalis), brown trout (Salmo trutta), and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Cove Creek in
the project vicinity supports a wild population of brown trout as well. Based on sampling performed
in the vicinity of the project area, Cove Creek is also known to support rock bass (Ambloplites
rupestris), greenfin darter (Etheostoma chlorobranchium), black nosed dace (Rhinichthys atratulus),
Tennessee shiner (Notropsis leiuciodus), river chub (Nocomis micropogon), creek chub (Semotilus
atromaculatus), central stoneroller (Campostoma anomalum), and northern hog sucker (Hypentelium
nigricans) (personal communication, 1997).

Cove Creek is designated as Hatchery Supported Designated Public Mountain Trout Waters from
Bridge No. 302 upstream to the bridge over Cove Creek in Zionville.

Benthic macroinvertebrate species found in Cove Creek, during the field survey, are presented in
Table 1.

Table 1
Summary of Qualitative Benthic Macroinverteb rate Survey
Cove Creek, 12/10/96

Taxa Abundant Common Present
Phylum Arthropoda

Class Insecta

Order Ephemeroptera
Heptageniidae X

Order Plecoptera

Perlodidae X

G: U NVIRTRO?rC7140530.000WAT RLSRPT February 1997
10

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

Table 1
Summary of Qualitative Benthic Macroinverteb rate Survey
Cove Creek, 12/10/96

Taxa Abundant Common Present

Order Trichopera
Hydropsychidae X

Trichopteran sp. X
(In Superfamily Limnephiloidea)

Order Coleoptera
Psephenidae X

Elmidae X

Order Diptera
Tipulidae X

Chironomidae X

Based on the above survey results as well as DEHNR survey results (Appendix A), this stream
segment generally contains a high diversity and abundance of organisms typical of lotic erosional
environments, which generally contain coarse sediments and a high amount of stream riffles.
Generally, the most abundant organisms found in the survey performed by Rust were from the
Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPT) insect orders and are generally indicative of
undegraded water conditions. Additional organisms common to both surveys are either present in
almost every lotic environment or are also generally found in unimpaired erosional streams.

3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts

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 and the plants and animals
affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered here along with recommendations to
minimize or eliminate impacts.

3.3.1 Terrestrial Communities

Terrestrial communities in the project area will be impacted by project construction from clearing

and paving and loss of the terrestrial community area along State Route 1233. Estimated impacts
are derived based on the project lengths for Alternates 1 and 2 of 122 in (400 ft) and 152 in (500 ft),
respectively, and the entire proposed right-of-way width of 21 m (70 ft). Table 2 details the potential

G:IENVIJUROJEC7140530.000WA7=1?I:S.R1'l' Februan- 1997
11

Natural Resources Technical Report
w Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

impacts to terrestrial communities by habitat type. It should be noted that impacts are based on the
entire right-of-way width and actual loss of habitat will likely be less.

Table 2
Estimated Area Impacts to Terrestrial Communities

Community Impacted Area in ha (ac)
Alternative 1 Alternative 2

Man-dominated Community (0.0) 0.004 (0.01)
Old Field 0.004 (0.01) 0.16 (0.40)

Montane Oak-Hickory Forest <0.004 (<0.01) (0.0)

Total Impacts 0.004 (0.01) 0.17 (0.41)

Destruction of natural communities along the project alignment will result in the loss of foraging and
breeding habitats for the various animal species which utilize the area. Animal species within the
communities 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 may suffer direct loss during construction. Plants and animals found in these communities
are generally common throughout North Carolina and are well adapted to life in disturbed areas. The
major terrestrial community which will be affected by the project construction is a man-dominated
community containing lawn grasses and agricultural fields, and old field habitat. Alternative 1 calls
for only minor roadway alignment, thereby minimizing terrestrial impacts.

Impacts to terrestrial communities, particularly in locations having steep to moderate slopes, can
result in the aquatic community receiving heavy sediment loads as a consequence of erosion. It is
important to understand that construction impacts may not be restricted to the communities in which
the construction activity occurs. Efforts should be made to ensure that no sediment leaves the
construction site.

3.3.2 Aquatic Communities

Impacts to aquatic communities include fluctuations in water temperatures due to 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 terrestrial fauna which rely on them as a food source.

Temporary and permanent impacts may result to aquatic organisms from increased sedimentation.
Aquatic invertebrates may drift downstream during construction and recolonize the disturbed area
once it has been stabilized. 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

c.irvvIRIPROrrcn4os3o.onOMTIMS.RP February 1997

12

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

the habitat by scouring and filling of pools and riffles; altering water chemistry; and smothering
different life stages. Increased sedimentation may caused decreased light penetration with an
increase in turbidity.

Although both alternatives involve some terrestrial losses with increased roadway pavement along
State Route 1233, Alternative 2 involves a greater amount of roadway paving than Alternative 1.
Alternative 1 calls for only minor road realignment and bridge replacement in the existing bridge
location, which minimize impacts. Potential adverse effects can be minimized through the
utilization of erosion and sediment control measures and implementation of NCDOT Best
Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.

4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS

This section provides inventories and impact analyses for two federal and state regulatory issues:
Waters of the U.S. (includes wetlands) and rare and protected species.

4.1 Waters of the United States

Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United States" as
defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344), and are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). Any action that
proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters or wetlands falls under these provisions.

4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters

No wetlands are present in the project area. Cove Creek meets the definition of surface waters and
thus are classified as Waters of the United States.

4.1.2 Summary of Anticipated Impacts

No wetlands will be impacted by the subject project as Cove Creek has well defined banks. Project
construction cannot be accomplished without infringing on jurisdictional surface waters. Anticipated
surface water impacts fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE).

4.1.3 Permits

Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the proposed project. Permits and
certifications from various state and federal agencies may be required prior to construction activities.

Construction is likely to be authorized by provisions of CFR 330.5 (a) Nationwide Permit (NWP)
No. 23, which authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded, or financed
in whole or in part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or department has
determined, pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the
Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act:

.il-NVttrv'tro?ECnaos3o.oaow,arttLS.fv'r February 1997
13

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga Count}, North Carolina
• that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither individually
nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and

• the Office of the Chief Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or department's
application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that determination.

This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification or waiver thereof, from DEHNR
prior to issuance of the NWP 23. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state issue
or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that results in a discharge
into Waters of the U.S. In addition, the project is located in a designated "trout" county where
NCDOT is required to obtain a letter of approval from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission.
Final permit descision rests with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.

4.1.4 Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation

Since this project will likely be authorized under a Nationwide permit, mitigation for impacts to
surface waters is generally not required by the COE. A final determination regarding mitigation
requirements rests with the COE.

4.2 Rare and Protected Species

Some populations of plants and animals are declining either due to natural forces or due to their
inability to coexist with man. Rare and protected species listed for Watauga County, and any likely
impacts to these species as a result of the proposed project construction, are discussed in the
following sections.

4.2.1 Federally Protected Species

Plants and animals with federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species. Act of 1973, as amended.

The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) lists four federally protected species for Watauga County as
of August 23, 1996. These species are listed in Table 3.

Table 3
Federally-protected Species For Watauga County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status

Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus Carolina northern flying squirrel E

Geum radiatum Spreading avens E

G:IENV/KV'ROJEC7140530.OOOWAT-RES.R/'T February 1997

14

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga Count,, North Carolina

Table 3
Federally-protected Species For Watauga County

Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status

Houstonia montana (=Hedyotis Roan Mountain bluet E
purpurea var. montana)

Liatris helleri Heller's Blazing star T

Notes: "E" Denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range).
"T" Denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range).

A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements of each species along with a
conclusion regarding potential project impact follows.

Glaucomys sabrinus coloratus (Carolina northern flying squirrel) Endangered
Vertebrate Family: Sciuridae
Date Listed: 1985

The Carolina northern flying squirrel is a medium-sized, grey squirrel with a broad, flattened tail and
dense silky fur. One of the distinquishing characteristics are folds of skin between the front and hind
legs that enabe the squirrel to glide. Adults are grey with brownish, tan or reddish wash dorsally and
grayish white or buffy white-ventrally. It is believed that this species is a relict form of the northern
flying squirrel that has become isolated in small patches of suitable habitat by changing climatic and
vegetational conditions since the last ice age. In North Carolina it is known from Roan Mountain,
Mount Mitchell and the Great Smoky Mountatins.

The Carolina northern flying squirrel is found in high altitude [above 1,520 in (5,000 ft)] spruce fir
forests and the adjacent stands of mature hardwoods. Mature forests dominated by beech (Fagus
grandifolia), yellow birch (Betula lutea), maple (Ater spp), hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), northern
red oak (Quercus rubra var. borealis), and buckeye (Aesculus octandra), are preferred because of
their open habitat which is suitable for their gliding form of locomotion and the abundance of natural
cavities in old hardwoods. Their diet consists of lichens and fungi, but they occasionally feed on
seeds, insects, buds, and fruits.

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

No habitat exists in the project area for the Carolina northern flying squirrel. The project site is
located at an elevation of 840 in (2,750 ft) with no stands of mature hardwoods or spruce-fir and
does not meet the habitat requirement for the Carolina northern flying squirrel. A search of the NHP

G:ENV/RV'Ro?ECnaos3aooowarrES.RPT Februan_, 1997
15

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina
database found no occurrence of the Carolina northern flying squirrel in the project vicinity. It can
be concluded that the project will not impact this Endangered species.

Geum radiatum (spreading avens) Endangered
Plant Family: Rosaceae
Federally Listed: 1990

Spreading avens is a perennial herb with basal rosettes of leaves arising from horizontal rhizomes.
The basal leaves are odd-pinnately compound. The terminal leaflets are kidney shaped and much
larger than the lateral leaflets, which are reduced or absent. Bright yellow radially symmetrical
flowers are borne on an indefinite cyme atop a stem 20 to 50 cm (8 to 20 in) tall. The flowers of
spreading avens are present from June through September.

Spreading avens, sometimes called cliff avens, is endemic to a few scattered mountaintops in
western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee. It grows in shallow acidic soils on scarps, bluffs,
cliffs, outcrops, and gravelly talus slopes. Known populations of this plant have been found to occur
at elevations of 1,400 to 1,911 in (4,600-6,270 ft). Other habitat requirements for this species
include full sunlight and shallow acidic soils (pH 4-5). The soil usually collects in the cracks and
crevices of the underlying rock, where it varies in depth from 2 to 36 cm (0.8 to 15 in). These soils
contaid a composition of sand, pebbles, humus, sandy loam and clay loam. The hydrology of the
site is usually uniform and moderately well drained. Soils are intermittently saturated by rain,
melting snow, high-elevation fogs, and downslope drainage. Consistent moisture may be one of the
most important habitat requirements for this species. Most populations are pioneers on rocky
outcrops.

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

No suitable habitat exists in the project area for spreading avens. The project site is located at an
elevation of 840 m (2,750 ft) with no cliffs, outcrops, or talus slopes and does not meet the habitat
requirement for spreading avens. A search of the NHP database found no occurrence of spreading
avens in the project vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will not impact this Endangered
species.

Houstonia montana (Roan Mountain bluet) Endangered
Plant Family: Rubiaceae
Federally Listed: 1990

Roan Mountain bluet is a cespitose perennial herb with erect or ascending, unbranched or weakly
terminally branched stems to 21 cm (8 in) tall from a basal winter rosette. Cauline leaves are
opposite, sessile and ovate, 0.8 to 3.0 cm (0.3 to 1.2 in) long and 0.6 to 1.3 cm (0.2 to 0.5 in) wide.
Flowers are reddish purple and funnel-shaped. The inflorescence is few flowered, with flowers
occurring from late May through August, with peak flowering in June and July. There is
considerable disagreement among the experts concerning whether the Roan Mountain bluet belongs
to the Hedyotis or Houstonia genus, and whether it is a variety or deserves a full species ranking.

c:V;NVrRV'RO?rcnaosso.ooowaT-RES.RPT February 1997
16

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

Roan Mountain bluet grows on rocky exposures at high elevations of 1,400 to 1,900 in (4,600 to
6270 ft). Bedrock geology is critical for the growth of this species. All sites are on mafic (i.e. basic)
rock, which contrasts with most other high elevation rocky-summit sites, which are typically on
felsic or acidic rock. The plants typically grow in gravel-filled pockets found on north or northwest
facing cliff ledges, or on talus slopes associated with outcrop exposures on the south or southwest
slopes of mountain balds. Most sites are kept moist by frequent fog, mid-elevation clouds, or
summer thunderstorms.

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

No suitable habitat exists in the project area for the Roan Mountain bluet. The project site is located
at an elevation of 840 m (2,750 ft) with no mafic rocky exposures and does not meet the habitat
requirement for the Roan Mountain bluet. A search of the NHP database found no occurrence of the
Roan Mountain bluet in the project vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will not impact this
Endangered species.

Liatris helleri (Heller's blazing star) Threatened
Plant Family: Asteraceae
Federally Listed: 1987

Heller's blazing star is a perennial herb with an erect stem from a cormlike rootstock. The stiff stems
are purple near the base turning to green, strongly ribbed and angulate. Both basal and cauline

leaves are numerous, decreasing in size upward. The leaves are long and narrow, with those at the
base 20 to 30 cm (8 to 12 in) in length. The stems reach up to 40 cm (16 in) in height and are topped
by a showy spike of lavender flowers 7 to 20 cm (0.3 to 8 in) long. Flowering occurs from July
through September.

Heller's blazing star typically occurs on sandy soil on rocky summits, cliffs, ledges and rocky woods
at high elevation [1,067 to 1,829 in (3,500 to 6,000 ft). The plants grow in humus or clay loams on
igneous and metasedimentary rock. Soils are generally acidic (pH 4) and shallow. Sites occupied
by the Heller's blazing star are generally exposed to full sun.

Biological Conclusion: No Effect

No suitable habitat exists in the project area for Heller's blazing star. The project site is located at
an elevation of 840 m (2,750 ft) with no cliffs or rocky summetsand does not meet the habitat
requirement for Heller's blazing star. A search of the NHP database found no occurrence of Heller's
blazing star in the project vicinity. It can be concluded that the project will not impact this
Threatened species.

4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species

Federal Candidate species 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 3 includes federal candidate species listed for Watauga County

G.-TNVIRV'ROAC71a0530.000WAT RL•S.RP7' February 1997
17

Natural Resources Technical Report
• Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina
and their state classifications. Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or
Special Concern (SC) by 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.

Table 4
Federal Candidate Species And NC Protected Species for Watauga County

Scientific Name Common Name NC Status Habitat present
Clemm s muhlenber ii Bo turtle T No

C tobranchus alle aniensis Hellbender SC Yes

Dendroica cerulea Cerulean warbler SR No
Neotoma ma ister Allegheny woodrat SC* No

Phenocobius teretulus Kanahwah minnow SC No

Sorex alustris unctulatus Southern water shrew SC* No
S lvila s obscurus Appalachian cottontail Not Listed Unknown

Lasmigona subviridus Green floater E yes

Speyeria dana Diana fritillary butterfly SR No
Abies fraseri Fraser fir C No

Cardamine clematitis Mountain bittercress C No

Delphinium exaltatum Tall larkspur E-SC* No

Euphorbia purpurea Glade spurge C** No

Geum geniculatum Bent avens T No
Junglans cinerea Butternut Not Listed Yes

Lilium grayi Gray's lily T-SC No

Poa paludigena Bog bluegrass E* No

Bazzania nudicaulis A liverwort C No

Notes: Source, LeGrand, 1993 and Weakley, 1993
T - Threatened, E - Endangered, SC - Special Concern, SR - State Rare
* Denotes a historic record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
Denotes an obscure record - the date and/or location of observation is uncertain.

G:V,, NVIRV'ROJEC7140530.00001.4 T RES.RI17' February 1997

18

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Curolinu

Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site visit, nor were any of these species
observed. A review of the Natural Heritage Program data base of rare species and unique habitats
revealed no records of North Carolina rare/and or protected species in or near the project study area.

G:IENVIRIPROJEC71J0530.000WAT-RLS.RPT February 1997
19

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

5.0 REFERENCES

Clark, M. K., 1987. Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Fauna of North Carolina, Part I. A Re-
evaluation of the Mammals. Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Biological Survey 1987-3.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, United
States Department of the Interior, Washington DC.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.

LeGrand, H.E., Jr. 1993 (5/16/94 update). Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Animal Species
of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Martof, B. S., W. M. Palmer, J. R. Bailey, and J. R. Harrison III, 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles
of the Carolinas and Virginia. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.

Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins, 1996. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America,
Third Edition. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa.

NC Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, 1988, Benthic Macroinvertebrate
Ambient Network (BMAN) Water Quality Review 1983-1986.

NC Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, 1993. Classifications and Water
Quality Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Watauga River Basin.

Palmer, W. M., and A. L. Brasswell, 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill

Peckarsky, B.L., P.R. Fraissinet, M.A. Penton, and D.J. Conklin, Jr. 1990. Freshwater
Macroinvertebrates of North America. Cornell University Press, Ithica, New York.

Plafkin, J.L., et al. 1989. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for use in Streams and Rivers: Benthic
Macroinvertebrates and Fish. Previously published as US EPA/444/4-89-001.

Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Robbins, C.S., B. Bruun and H.S. Zim. 1966. A Guide to Field Identification of Birds of North
America. Western Publishing, Racine, Wisconsin.

20

Natural Resources Technical Report
Cove Creek, Watauga County, North Carolina

Rhode, F. C., R. G. Arndt, D. G. Lindquist, and J. F. Parnell. 1994 Freshwater Fishes of the
Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. Univ. Of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

Schafale, M. P., and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, Dept. of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC.

United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Selected portions from the Soil
Survey of Watauga County, North Carolina.

Webster, W. D., J. F. Parnell, and W. C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia, and
Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.

Weakley, A.S. 1993 (5/16/94 update). Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of
North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina.

rnnnn /~At~F71/(13 t1B(JBW47'R~SI~!'7' Februa,ty 1997
21

APPENDIX A

Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network Data

COVE CR COVE CR
Location SR 1305 NC 321
Date 7/88 8/94
Taxon
EPHEMEROPTERA
BAETIS FLAVISTRIGA R C
BAETIS INTERCALARIS R A
BAETIS PROPINQUUS C
CAENIS SPP C R
CENTROPTILUM SPP C
EPHEMERELLA CATAWBA R
EPEORUS RUBIDUS A A
EPHEMERA SPP C
EPHEMERA BLANDA C
EPHORON LEUKON R
ISONYCHIA SPP A A
LEUCROCUTA SPP C
LEUCROCUTA APHRODITE A
PARALEPTOPHLEBIA SPP A
POTAMANTHUS SPP A C
PSEUDOCLOEON SPP C A
STENONEMA ITHACA A C
STENONEMA MODESTUM C
STENONEMA PUDICUM C
SERRATELLASERRATOIDES C A
STENACRONINTERPUNCTATUM C
STENACRON PALLIDUM R
TRICORYTHODES SPP R C
PLECOPTERA
ACRONEURIA ABNORMIS C C
ALLOCAPNIA SPP C A
PARAGNETINA IMMARGINATA C C
PERLESTA PLACIDA A
PTERONARCYS SPP R
TALLAPERLA SPP R
TRICHOPTERA
CHEUMATOPSYCHE SPP A A
CHIMARRA SPP A
GLOSSOSOMA SPP C C
GOERA SPP R
LYPE DIVERSA R
MICRASEMA WATAGA R
NEOPHYLAX SPP A
NEOPHYLAX CONSIMILIS C
NEOPHYLAX OLIGIUS C
NYCTIOPHYLAX SPP C
OECETIS PERSIMILLIS R
POLYCENTROPUSSPP R C
RHYACOPHILA FUSCULA R
SYMPHITOPSYCHE BIFIDA R
SYMPHTTOPSYCHE BRONTA A A
SYMPHITOPSYCHE MOROSA R
SYMPHITOPSYCHE SPARNA C
TRIAENODES TARDUS C

LARSEN ENGINEERS, INC
5501 Greenwich Road, Suite 120
Virginia Beach, VA 23462-6540
Tel. (757) 456-9714

STANDARD FORM 254

CIVIL/TRANSPORTATION/SURVEYS

I'i

1. Firm Name / Business Address: 2. Year Present Firm 3. Date Prepared:#
'S Established:
($:.;:;><'>»`:<> 1983 2/05/97
a e
LrsnEngineers, '
Inc
5501 Greenwich Road, Suite 120 4. Specify type of ownership & check below, if applicable.
Virginia Beach, VA 23462
Duns /1101911121 Corporation, Maryland
g..•..:. Federal ID # 52-1283163 A. Small Business
a d:SSiy ee; z<::
estcviuu la. Submittal is for Brent Company BrEbh or Subsidiary Office X B. Small Disadvantaged Business
C. Woman-owned Business
5. Name of Parent Company, if any: 5a. Former Parent Company Name(s), if any, and Year(s) Established:
N~ne
None
6., Names of not more than Two Principals to Contact: Title / Telephone
1j Mann B. Patel, P.E., President (301) 5954600
2) Lawrence Gassman, P.E., Vice President [phone]
7. Present Offices: City / State / Telephone / No. Personnel Each Office 7a. Total Personnel 36
I
Beltsville, Maryland; [phone] Fax [phone] - 20
Virginia Beach, Virginia [phone] Fax [phone] - 16

8. Personnel by Discipline: (List each person only once, by primary function.)
Administrative 4 Electrical Engineers 0 Oceanographers 6 CADD Operators
Architects * Estimators 0 Planners: Urban/Regional
Chemical Engineers 0 Geologists 1 Sanitary Engineers
Civil Engineers * Hydrologists * Soils Engineers * Our Engineers and
Construction Inspectors * Interior Designers * Specification Writers Arclutects are
Draftsmen * Landscape Architects 2 Structural Engineers Performing these
Ecologists 4 Mechanical Engineers 5 Surveyors Disciplines
Economists 0 Mining Engineers 2 Transportation Engineers 36
9. Summary of Professional Service Fees Ranges of Professional Service Fees
Received: (Insert index number) Last 5 Years (most recent year first) INDEX
19 96 19 95 19 94 19 93 1992 1. Less than $100,000
2. $100,000 to $250,000
Direct Federal contract work, including overseas 4 4 5 5 5 3. $250,000 to $500
- 000
Ali, other domestic work 2 2 4 3 3 4. $ 0 to $1 1 milli on
Alu other foreign work* 5. $1 1 million to $2 million
1 1 3 3 1 6. $2 million to $5 million
7. $5 million to $10 million
*Firms interested in foreign work, but without such experience, check here: ® 8. $10 million or greater
STANDARD FORM 234 PAGE 4 (REV. 11-92)
it

1 I. Profile of Finns's Project Experience, Last 5 Years
Orofile Number of Total Gross Fees Profile Number of Total Gross Fees Profile Number of Total Gross Fees
'f ode. Projects (in thousands) Code Projects (in thousands) Code Projects (in thousands)
I 011 4 95 11) 088 9 240 21) 115 8 180
2 021 18 975 12) 092 7 210 22) 206 3 80
3 033 10 145 13) 096 5 155 23) 219 4 150
4 046 20 850 14) 097 5 210 24) 243 8 285
5 051 3 185 15) 099 5 180 25) 257 5 150
6 054 5 225 16) 102 42 2,450 26) 258 10 265
7 056 6 205 17) 104 6 145 27) 265 5 325
8 059 4 126 18) 106 6 240 28) 273 30 1,250
9 062 8 305 19) 107 12 350 29) 274 5 215
10~ 087 7 1,020 20) 114 4 180 30) 275 14 2,000
1 P. Project Examples, Last 5 Years
Completion file "P" "C", etion Date
Co le "JV" or "[E„ Cost of Work (Actual or Name and Location Owner Name and Address (in thousands) ( r
Estimated)
(t05 P 1
Q06 General Task Type A/E Services MWAA 1,300 06/95
46 at National and Dulles Airport 44 Canal Center Plaza Fee
Bldg. Fac/Runways & Taxiways Alexandria, VA 22314-1562
l07 C 2
Q46 Rte 123 & Rte 66, Interchange VDOT, c/o RKK, Inc. 20 12/96
Washington, D.C. 1205 E. Main Street fee
Richmond, VA 23219
88 P 3
97 Subsurface Investigation, Soil MD Dept. of Natural Resources 1,200 06/97
04 Erosion Control, Deep Creek Tawes State Office Bldg., E-4
11 Lake State Park Annapolis, MD
321 P 4
46 North Service Road Dualization MWAA 1,500 06/94
756 at Washington Dulles International 44 Canal Center Plaza
02 Airport, Herdon, VA Alexandria, VA 22314-1562
87 C 5
102 Surve mg Services for Park WAIATA, c/o Kajima-Kiska, JV 200 04/96
109 Road Tunnels, Section E31) 3636 Georgia Avenue Fee
Greenbelt Road, WNIATA Washington, D.C. 20010
33 C 6
87 Section Etc: for Greenbelt Line Washington Area Transit 42,000 06/94
~02 for WNIATA, Washington, D.C. Authority c/o Maguire Group,
1 I Washington, D.C., 20001
7
10 P
46 Indefinite Deliver Contract U.S. Army COE, District, Norf 4,500 09/97
y
~89 for A/E/Services, Forts Eustis 803 Front Street
13 and Story, Vireinia Norfolk, VA 23510-1096
STANDARD FORM 254 P.1GE 5 (R L1" . 11 -9]I

02 C 8 r
04 Design/Widening of Rte. 29 VDOT c/o H.S.M.M. 5,000 12/97
10 Albemarle County, VA 1401 E. Broad Street
l1 Richmond, VA 23219
04 P 9
10 Centerville Turnpike/Land of Promise City of Chesapeake 1,500 10/96
10 Road, City of Chesapeake, VA City Hall
I I Chesapeake, VA 23320
04 P 10
10 Various Surveys of Interstate, Major NC Dept. of Transportation 150 06/96
27 Arterial & Collection Highway Utilizing 1020 Brich Ridge Road Fee
27 Vangarde 505 System, Statewide NC Raleigh, NC 27610
03 C 11
08 Design of Glenmount Storage Yard WMATA/c/o H.N.T.B. 22,000 02/94
10 Section B-12 99 Canal Center Plaza
11 Montgomery County, MD Alexandria, VA 22314-1562
10 C 12
11 IQC Contract for Norfolk Navy U.S. Navy, c/o PBQD 400 06/97
Public Works Center 6161 Kempsville Circle Fee
NOB Norfolk, VA Norfolk, VA 23502
04 C 13
10 Route 210 Improvement VA DOT, c/o RKK 115 09/96
10 Amherst County, VA 1205 East Main Street Fee
10 Riclmiond, VA 23219
10 C 14
l0 Volvo Parkway Improvement City of Chesapeake c/o HDR 22 06/96
27 City of Chesapeake, VA Engineering, 5700 Cleveland Fee
St. VA. Beach, VA 23462
04 C 15
10 Statewide Utility Adjustment Va Dept. of Transportation 100 06/97
11 Contract Region #5, Suffolk 1401 East Broad Street, Fee
27, District, VA Richmond, VA 23219
08 IE 16
10 Paradise Beach (Hines Pond): Anne Anlndel County 50 02/93
10, Water Quality Pond Retrofit Department of Public Works
114 Annapolis, MD 21401
09 C 17
10, Upgrade Sewage Treatment Plant U. S. Navy 500 04/93
27 at Naval Surface Warfare Center C/O HSNIM
Dalilgren, VA Roanoke, VA 24034
01 P 18
07 Super K-Mart Surveying, Traffic Impact ASG, Inc. 500 12/96
10 Study, Traffic Signals 412 Executive Tower Drive
10 Norfolk, VA Knoxville, TN 37923
C 19
Route 29 Bypass Stnlctures Va. Dept. of Transportation 08/98
Madison Heights, VA 1401 E. Broad Street FEE
Richmond, Virginia
STANDARD FORM _54 PAGE 6 IRE'. 11 -9-1

01 C 20
04 Vangarde 505 Surveying Service Delaware DOT, c/o WBCM 150 06/96
10 I-95, Wilmington, Delaware 849 Fainnottttt Avenue Fee
27 Baltimore, MD 21286
10 P 21
11 George Washington Highway/Mount Pleasant City of Cheaapeake, c/o 85 10/96
27 Road Langley & McDonald, 5544 Fee
City of Chesapeake, VA Greenwich Rd, VA. Beach, VA.
04 P 22
10 Shore Drive Hazard Elimination Project City of Virginia Beach, Dept. 1,000 09/97
10 Deptment of Public Works of Public Works, Municipal Ct
21 City of Virginia Beach, VA Virginia Beach, VA 23456
04 P 23
06 A/E Services for Street and Intersection City of Takoma Park 100 10/95
10 Improvement 7500 Marple Avenue
10 Takoma Park, MD Takoma Park, MD 20912
01 P 24
04 Indefinite Delivery Contract U.S. Army COE Fort Norfolk 750 FEE 09/97
08 U.S. Anny COE, Fort Norfolk,VA 803 Front Street FEE
11 Norfolk, VA 235 1 0-1 096
01 C 25
04 Surveying Services for Father Hurley Montgomery County Govt. 30 03/96
10 Boulevard c/o Sheladia Associates 15825 Fee
1 I I Montgomery County, MD Shady" Gr. Rd, Gait hersburg,MD
26
Piscataway Creek Relief Sewer WSSC c/o HSM1`1 6.5 07/92
at Bowie, NID 1801 Rockville Pike, #205
Contract #80CT1000-A Rockville, b•1D 20852
10 P 27
27 Surveying Services for System/ Foss it Baltunore Gas & Electric Co. 100 12/95
27 Engineering Constriction De 7artnnent P.O. Box 1742, Rutherford Fee
Statewide, MD, Contract #97130D Business Ctr, Balt. AID 21203
04 C 28
10 Surveying Services for VA Hospital OMNI Construction, Inc. 22 04/96
Loch Raven Road 7500 Old Georgetown Road Fee
Baltimore, MD Bethesda, MD 20814
07 C 29
10 Field Survey and Stakeout Services for Gilbane Building Company 26 06/95
American Management System Headquarters 7901 Sandyy S inn Road Fee
at Fairfax, VA Laurel, M 0707
00 C 30
10 Field Survey and Stakeout Services OMNI Constriction Company 18 06/95
Concourse "C" Addition fuid Modification . 7500 Old Georgeto.wu Road Fee
at B W I Airport, MD Bethesda, MD 20814
The foregoing is a sfa3er~3ei~f of (acts Nw
ZIOSf91
S~gtnahi r ` £Yhed Natue and Title: Lamence Gassman; P.E., V, P,
STANDARD FORM 254 PAGE 7 MFV. 11.977

a
,a M

s,~"., +ief.fi 7,,.a., 1 Q•I L 4 ~ri: a
i F

1
t l w ie ~ R
i d y t
' L
v
v f
,
,
x~-,: pit v*^ '+f edYr:

ALTERNA
~S
10
v
r
ey" r,
w
f"~ y
r b
w
ALTERNATE 1

s.
I% ~ill
F'
1
North Carolina Department Of
r
Transportation
Planning & Environmental Branch
z . # WATAUGA COUNT
i
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 302
yf](yp: ' z „r
ON R "233 OVER CONE GREEK
r a r P-3062
` 0, :peters 30 meters 60
Figure 2
Dui,