19920418 Ver al_Complete File_19920821

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO August 21, 1992
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199203107 and Nationwide Permit No. 23
(Approved Categorical Exclusions)
NC Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning and Environmental Branch
L.J. Ward, P.E.
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
Reference your application of July 29, 1992, for Department of the Army
authorization to replace Bridge No. 158 on SR 1359 over the Valley River
(TIP B-2016) near Topton, Cherokee County, North Carolina. The project has
been reviewed by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) for potential
adverse impacts to trout waters.
For the purposes of the U.S. Army Corps Corps of Engineers' Regulatory
Program, Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in
the Federal Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits.
Authorization, pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, was provided for 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 CEQ Regulation for the Implementing
the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 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 of Engineers has been furnished
notice of the agency's or department's application for the categorical
exclusion and concurs with that determination.
Your work is authorized by this nationwide permit provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions, and those
outlined in the attached June 5, 1992 letter. This nationwide permit does not
relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any required State or local
approval. Information regarding obtaining a Section 401 Water Quality
Certification may be obtained through John Dorney, Division of Environmental
Management, at [phone].

-2-
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also,
this verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period,
the nationwide permit authorization is reissued without modification or the
activity complies with any subsequent modification of the nationwide permit
authorization. If during the 2 years, the nationwide permit authorization
expires or is suspended or revoked, or is modified, such that the activity
would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit,
activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or are under
contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit will remain
authorized provided the activity is completed within 12 months of the date of
the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify,
suspend, or revoke the authorization.
Questions or comments may be addressed to David Baker in our Asheville
Regulatory office at [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Mickey Clemmons
Route 1, Box 624
Waynesville, North Carolina 28786
g+-'??a STATE
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina
June 19, 1992
28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
c:.

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
'ATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Subject: SR 1359, Bridge No. 158 Over Valley River, Cherokee County,
Project No. 8.2910301, Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1359(1), TIP
No. B-2016
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning report for
the subject project. The project is being processed by the Federal Highway
Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with
23 CFR 771.115(b). This project, located in one of the 25 western North
Carolina counties, falls under the discretionary authority of the Corps.
In accordance with this policy, the North Carolina Department of
Transportation has coordinated fully with the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (see Appendix B of the subject document). The
provisions of Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be
followed in the construction of the project.
We anticipate that a permit will be required from the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources for this project.
DOT will apply directly to DEHNR for that permit when plans have been
developed.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at
733-3141.
Sincerely,
d" - DM
L. J. lard, P. E., Manager
LJW/plr Planning and Environmental Branch
Attachment
cc: Mr. John Parker, Permit Coordinator, w/report
Mr. John Dorney, Environmental Management, w/report
Mr. C. W. Leggett, P. E.
Mr. J. T. Peacock, Jr., P. E.
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Jr., P. E.
Mr. Verlin Edwards, P. E.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
SR 1359, Bridge No. 158
over Valley River
Cherokee County
F. A. Project BRZ-1359(1)
State Project 8.2910301
B-2016
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
Da a d, P. E., Manager
Planni iggand Environmental Branch, NCDOT
/,S 9Z 99--,1Y 41. O-W,4eF27
Date Nich s L. Graf, P. E.
FC4 Division Administrator, FHWA
SR 1359, Bridge No. 158
over Valley River
Cherokee County
F. A. Project BRZ-1359(1)
State Project 8.2910301
B-2016
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
M zazar
Bill Kinlaw
Project Planning Engineer
Linwood Stone
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
H. Franklin Vick, P.E.
Assistant Manager of Planning and Environmental
kk CA Rol",
ql Ny
? SEAL
} 7754
z :F
J
SR 1359, Bridge No. 158
over Valley River
Cherokee County
F. A. Project BRZ-1359(1)
State Project 8.2910301
B-2016
Bridge No. 158 has been included in the current Transportation
Improvement Program for right-of-way acquisition in fiscal year 1992 and
construction in fiscal year 1993. The project location is shown in Figure
1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project has
been classified as a Federal "categorical exclusion".
I. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts. No special or unique environmental
commitments are necessary. No reduction in wetlands will result from the
proposed action. Best Management Practices will be utilized to minimize
these impacts.
The proposed project will have no impacts upon any archaeological
sites in the area of potential effect (APE) that are on or eligible for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. No historic
properties either listed in or eligible for the National Register are in
the APE.
There will be no 4(f) involvement nor involvement with US Forest
Service lands.
It is anticipated a Bridge Replacement General Permit will be
required by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 158 should be replaced on new location approximately 52
feet west of its existing location with a pre-cast reinforced concrete box
culvert (RCBC) as shown by Alternative 2 in Figure 2. Upon completion of
the new structure and road improvements, the existing crossing will be
removed.
Preliminary hydrographic studies indicate that a double 10'x 9' RCBC
should be provided. A spanning structure such as a bottomless culvert is
recommended. If this type of structure is found to not be suitable for
the existing conditions in Valley River, the structure should be buried 12
inches into the substrate to allow fish passage. The length of the
culvert should be adequate to accommodate a 20-foot pavement with 2-foot
graded shoulders. Shoulders should be increased to 1 feet where guardrail
is needed.
2
Approximately 230 feet of new roadway approaches will be required.
Approximately 200 feet on the northern approach is due to the shift in
alignment of the driveway and railroad crossing. Due to the relocated
bridge, it is not feasible to shift the road back to the original
alignment prior to crossing the railroad. The approach roadway should
consist of a 20-foot pavement with 2-foot graded shoulders.
The replacement of Bridge No. 158 on SR 1359 over the Valley River
affects the Dillsboro to Murphy rail corridor, which is owned by the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and operated by Sylva-based
Great Smoky Mountains Railway (GSMR). GSMR operates both passenger and
freight traffic over this line.
GSMR currently operates one (1) passenger train each way daily and up
to two (2) freight trains each way weekly through the proposed project
area. The maximum train speed through the crossing is 25 mph.
Since this is a relocation of an existing crossing with relatively
low rail/highway traffic conflicts, signalization is unnecessary at this
time. However, it is recommended that high-visibility crossbucks be
installed at the crossing along with the appropriate reflective striping
and signs on the approaches.
Traffic will use the existing bridge during the construction period.
When the new structure is completed and the new road is open to traffic,
the existing bridge will be removed.
Estimated cost, based on current prices, is approximately $167,000.
The total estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 1992-1998
Transportation Improvement Program, is $449,000 ($25,000 is prior years
cost).
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1359 is classified as a rural local route in the Statewide
Functional Classification System and is not part of the Federal Aid
System.
Bridge No. 158 is located on SR 1359 approximately 50 feet from the
centerline of US 19-74-129. US 19-74-129 is on the Federal Aid Primary
road system. It- has a 20-foot pavement width with 4 feet of paved
shoulder each side. Due to the curvature and the presence of a mountain
on the south side of US 19-74-129, sight distance for vehicles approaching
the intersection from the east is limited. Vehicles approaching from the
west have good sight distance. No accidents on US 19-74-129 were reported
within 200 feet of SR 1359 from May, 1987 to April 1990.
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1359 has a 10-foot pavement with
variable width grass shoulders. Vertical alignment is generally flat.
Horizontal alignment is tangent. The structure is situated 14 feet above
the creek bed. Land use in the immediate vicinity of the bridge is
primarily rural residential. Speed limit is posted at 35 mph.
l
3
The current traffic volume of 100 vehicles per day (vpd) is expected
to increase to approximately 200 vpd by the design year 2011. The
projected volume includes 0-1% truck tractors semi-trailers and 2% dual
tired vehicles.
The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was constructed in 1939. The
superstructure consists of a timber floor on steel girder floor beams.
The substructure is composed of timber piles, posts, and caps.
Overall length is 36 feet. Clear roadway width is 11.2 feet. The
posted weight limit is 10 tons for single vehicles and 18 tons for truck
tractors semi-trailers.
Bridge No. 158 has a sufficiency rating of 7.5 compared to a rating
of 100 for a new structure. It has an estimated remaining life of two (2)
years.
No accidents were reported on Bridge No. 158 during the period from
May, 1987 to April, 1990.
No school buses cross the studied bridge.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Three methods of replacing Bridge No. 158 were studied as follows:
Alternative 1 - Replacement at existing location with an on-site
detour to maintain traffic during the construction period.
Alternative 2 (Recommended) - Replacement with a new structure just
west of the existing bridge and use the existing facility for the
maintenance of traffic during the construction period.
Alternative 3 - Replacement with a new structure approximately 0.1
mile west of the existing bridge and use the existing facility for the
maintenance of traffic during the construction period.
Two replacement structures were considered for each alternative: a
cored-slab bridge and reinforced concrete box culverts (RCBC).
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of
the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic service provided by
SR 1359 to residences in the immediate vicinity.
"Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and
deteriorated condition.
V. TRAFFIC DETOUR
During the construction period, maintenance of traffic at the studied
bridge site is necessary. No other outlet roads are available for traffic
currently using the existing bridge. In view of this factor, traffic
4
should be maintained at or near the existing bridge site during
construction. Since it is less expensive to use the existing bridge as a
detour structure than constructing a temporary detour, Alternative 2 is
recommended. Alternative 3 also uses the existing bridge as a temporary
detour, but the construction of Alternative 3 is cost prohibitive.
The Division Engineer concurs that Bridge No. 158 be replaced on new
location just west of the existing bridge. This will allow traffic to be
maintained on the existing bridge during the construction period. Since
no school buses use the existing bridge, school bus traffic was not
considered.
VI. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs of the studied alternatives are as follows:
Alternative 1 *Alternative 2 Alternative 3
Cored- RCBC Cored- *RCBC Cored- RCBC
slab slab slab
Rdwy. App. $ 32,300 $ 51,200 $ 42,300 $ 46,400 $101,800 $109,400
Structure 89,900 67,800 89,900 67,800 89,900 67,800
Str. Remvl. 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800
Temp. Det. 38,700 38,700 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Det. Struct. 17,300 17,300 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Eng. & Con. 28,000 26,000 20,000 18,000 29,500 27,000
ROW/Util. 32,000 32,000 30,000 30,000 49,000 49,000
Tot. Cost $243,000 $237,800 $187,000 $167,000 $275,000 $258,000
*Recommended
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 158 should be replaced on new location approximately 52
feet west of the existing location. According to a preliminary
hydrographic study, a double 10'x 9' RCBC will accommodate the flow of
Valley River at this point. A spanning structure such as a bottomless
culvert is recommended. If this type of structure if found to not be
suitable for the existing conditions in Valley River, the structure should
be buried 12 inches into the substate to allow fish passage. The
structure dimensions may be increased or decreased as necessary to
accommodate peak water flows as determined by further hydrologic studies.
The existing alignment is considered acceptable due to the
residential setting of the area and low accident rate at the intersection
of SR 1358 and US 19-74-127. A shift in alignment, approximately 52 feet
west of the existing bridge, should not be detrimental to the proposed
project.
5

It was determined that tying the proposed north approach into the
south side of the existing railroad crossing was not reasonable from a
design standpoint. Both the railroad crossing and the existing drive will
be relocated to the west and aligned with the new structure. The
recommended improvements will include about 230 feet of new roadway
approaches, approximately 200 feet on the northern approach and
approximately 30 feet on the southern approach. A 20-foot pavement with
2-foot graded shoulder should be provided on the approaches. Shoulders
should be increased to 7 feet where guardrail is needed.
Alternative 1 detour and Alternative 2 both cross the railroad at the
same location and use the same alignment to tie into the existing road.
However, the additional costs of the temporary detour is much greater than
replacing the existing bridge in the Alternative 2 location. The total
estimated cost of Alternative 2 is considerably lower than Alternatives 1
or 3, and the RCBC for Alternative 2 is less costly than a cored-slab
bridge. Thus, it is recommended a double 10' x 9' RCBC be constructed
just west of the existing bridge. NCWRC concurs with this recommendation
(see Appendix).
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Social Environment
The proposed project is expected to have an overall positive impact
on the area's human and natural environment. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations. Current NCDOT standards
and specification for construction practices will minimize any potential
adverse environmental impacts.
The project is considered to be a Federal "categorical exclusion" due
to its limited scope and insignificant environmental consequences.
No businesses or homes are to be relocated. Therefore, no adverse
impact on families or communities is anticipated.
No significant adverse effect on public facilities or services is
expected. The project is not expected to adversely affect social,
economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
Natural and Cultural Resources
The project was surveyed on October 30, 1991, by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation, Division of Highways staff archaeologist.
The results of that study indicate that the project will have no impacts
upon any archaeological sites that are on or eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places.
Photographs, maps, and information about the area of potential effect
(APE) were provided by the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) and reviewed with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO).
SHPO agreed with the NCDOT that there are no historic structures located
within the APE. (The SHPO letter is included in the Appendix).
6
Since there are no properties either listed in or eligible for the
National Register in the APE, no further compliance with Section 106 is
required.
Ecological Resources
The proposed project was surveyed on November 14, 1991 by a staff
biologist. That study,. and the associated preliminary investigation,
resulted in the d termination of no wetland takings and no threatened or
endangered species impacted by the proposed project.
Terrestrial plant communities are presented within the context of two
broad categories,lUplands and Wetlands. Three upland plant communities
were encountered in the study area. These communities are: Disturbed
Scrub-Shrub, Riparian and Rich Cove Forest. It is estimated that less
than 0.7 acre of plant communities will be impacted. Wetlands are
variously defined, but, ecologically, they tend to be ecotones, or
transitional areas between uplands and deeper water systems. These areas
can be important to wildlife and, depending on individual attributes, can
serve to buffer flood flow and remove pollutants from surface waters.
Although "wetlands" are often viewed only as sites with a combination of
Plant, Soil and Hydrological characteristics, open water, or "waters of
the U.S." are also jurisdictional wetlands. No wetland plant community
exists in the study area.
It is estimated that approximately 0.6 acre of plant communities will
be impacted. Anticipated impacts to plant communities are viewed as
temporary, with no long-term consequences, since habitat will be replaced
in the vicinity of the old bridge structure and its associated
approachways.
The project will impact both terrestrial and aquatic wildlife
communities. The proposed action does not pose a significant threat to
terrestrial fauna. These disturbed areas are attractive to a range of
adaptable wildlife which thrive in man dominated zones. Their adaptive
behavior has enabled them to enjoy a relatively safe existence at the
fringes of man's domain, often cohabiting the same structures (rodents,
owls, barn swallows, lizards, etc.). Impacts to these habitat zones are
not likely to be severe in terms of diminishing populations, etc. Some
temporary fluctuations in populations of animal groups which utilize these
areas is anticipated during the course of construction, but post-project
levels are expected to return to normal after the old bridge is removed
and habitat zones are restored to normal.
Slow-moving, burrowing and/or subterranean organisms will be directly
impacted by construction activities, while mobile organisms will be
displaced to adjacent communities. Competitive forces in these adoptive
communities will result in a redefining of population equilibria.
7
Soils
A completed soil survey for Cherokee County is not available at this
time. The soil survey has just begun by the county.
Surface Water and Water Quality
The proposed action is likely to have substantial affects on the
aquatic environment unless strict enforcement of sedimentation control
measures are observed. Demolition activities are likely to place sediment
into the water column, as will pier/end bent installation activities.
Sediment-loading of the stream channels by such activities can be harmful
to local populations of aquatic organisms, trout and bream (or sunfish),
as well as invertebrates such as molluscs, crustacea and insect larvae,
important parts of the aquatic food chain.
The only water source in the study area is Valley River, a tributary
to Hiawassee River, which originates northwest of Topton near the Graham-
Cherokee County line. It empties into the Hiawassee River northwest of
Murphy, south of Hiawassee Lake.
Valley River is approximately 20 feet wide in the study area and
varies in channel width elsewhere, depending on channel depth and
configuration, meanders, etc. The stream flows west through the study
area across substrates varying between sand and pebble to cobble with
occasional large boulders. Depth of the stream is considerably variable,
from 2-3 inches near shoals and quiet areas, to more than 12 inches in
some locations, although pools and holes several feet deep may occur in
other portions of the stream.
A best usage classification of C Tr has been assigned to Valley River
by the Division of Environmental Management of the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR) agency.
Class C waters are best suited for aquatic life propagation and survival,
fishing, wildlife, and secondary recreation. Water quality standards
designed to protect class C usage are reported in 15A NCAC .0211. The
"Tr" (Trout) supplemental classification denotes that the waters are
suitable for natural trout (brook trout) propagation and maintenance of
stocked trout (rainbow trout).
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) lists the
study area portion of Valley River as a Designated Public Mountain Trout
Water (DPWTW) within the Hatchery Supported Trout Waters category. This
designation is applicable between the river's source in northeast Cherokee
County to its mouth at the Hiawassee River, near Murphy.
The NCWRC does not object to this project if the following
stipulations to avoid and minimize adverse impacts are implemented (see
appendix):
1) Construction is prohibited during the trout spawning period of
November 1 to April 15 in order to protect the egg and fry
stages from sedimentation.
8
2) Heavy equipment should not be operated in the stream.
3) Construction must be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact water entering or flowing in the stream. This will
reduce the likelihood of fish kills associated with bridge
construction.
4) Stringent erosion control measures should be implemented where
soil is disturbed and maintained until project completion.
5) Temporary ground cover should be placed on bare surfaces,
including spoil piles, as soon as constr uction is complete.
Permanent vegetation in these same areas must be established
within 15 days of project completion to provide long term
erosion control.
These stipulations will be followed by NCDOT to the extent necessary
to avoid and minimize adverse impacts.
Potential impacts to Valley River include: increased sedimentation
from construction-related erosion, changes in ambient water temperature,
and incidence of light due to elimination of adjacent vegetation. Best
management practices and HQW-designed sedimentation controls for high
quality waters will be applied during construction of this facility.
Wetlands Findings
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) has primary
responsibility for reviewing actions which propose to place fill into
"waters of the United States". Jurisdictional ly, wetlands (subsets of
"waters of the United States") are defined as "Those areas that are
inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions."
The Division of Environmental Management (NCDEHNR) also has a
jurisdictional role under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Section 401
Permits, when required, must be issued prior to authorization of any
Section 404 Permit by the COE.
Since the study area stream is a DPMTW, the NCWRC must review the
proposed action and concur before the COE will authorize the project under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
The only jurisdictional wetlands in the study area are the "waters of
the U.S." represented by Valley River. The area of involvement includes
"bank-to-bank", a distance of approximately 20 feet. No channel
realignment is anticipated and no fill will be placed in the stream during
proposed construction and demolition activities.
9
In the absence of the DPMTW classification, this project would
normally be authorized under Nationwide Permit 23, the Categorical
Exclusion Permit (33 CFR 330.5 (a) (23)). However, the COE implemented
Discretionary Authority in Designated Trout Waters in N.C. on March 27,
1989. This policy resulted in overriding certain Nationwide General
Permits, including 33 CFR 330.5 (a)(23), and requiring instead
authorization under an Individual Permit or by a Regional General Permit.
Either permit will allow for the review of the proposal and for the
identification of appropriate measures to preclude or minimize adverse
impacts on trout waters. Although, as mentioned, the COE can require an
Individual Permit for such actions, it is more likely that they will
authorize the proposed action under a Bridge Replacement General Permit.
Such authorization is subject to NCDOT acquiring a letter of approval from
the NCWRC. Final discretionary permit authority rests with the COE.
No reduction in wetlands will result from the proposed action, thus
no compensatory mitigation will be required.
Threatened and Endangered Species
As of December 10, 1991, only one federally protected species, the
endangered little-wing pearly mussel (Pegias fabula) is listed by the
USFWS for Cherokee County. Habitat in the study area is considered to be
suitable to this species and surveys for the species in the study area and
downstream sections of Valley River were conducted during the Fall of
1991. Visual and tactile, in-stream surveys were conducted by the NCWRC
and no evidence of the subject species was found. The report from the
NCWRC confirms that the species does not occur in the project vicinity and
suggested a "very low probability" of the species occurring. No impacts
to this species will occur from the proposed action. Although suitable
habitat exists in the study area for several federal candidate and/or
state protected species, no surveys were conducted for these species.
Farmlands
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or
their representatives to consider the potential impact to prime farmland
soils by land acquisition or construction projects. Prime and important
farmland soils are determined by the US Soil Conservation Service (SCS),
and may include soils that are not currently used for agricultural
purposes. The SCS was contacted concerning the location of prime and
important farmland soils in the project area. The SCS indicated that no
modern soil surveys have been conducted for Cherokee County. Therefore,
no information on farmland soils is available. Further consideration of
potential impacts to farmland soils is not required.
Air Quality and Traffic Noise Analyses
The project is located within the Western Mountain Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Cherokee County has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Since this project is located in an area where the State
Implementation Program (SIP) does not contain any transportation control
measures, the conformity procedures of Title 23, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Part 770 do not apply to this project.
10
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes.
Therefore, its impact on noise levels and air quality will be
insignificant. Noise levels could increase during construction but will
be temporary. If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall
be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of North
Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This
evaluation completes the assessment requirements of Title 23, Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 770 and 772 and no additional reports are
required.
Floodplain Involvement
The approximate limits of the 100-year floodplain are shown in
Figure 4. The proposed structure is not expected to adversely affect
existing floodplain conditions. Cherokee County is a participant in the
National Flood Insurance emergency program. The studied crossing of
Valley River is within a designated flood hazard zone. The planned
lacement with a crossing design of similar conveyance to the existing
structure will be consistent with the intent and requirements of the zone
regulations.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious
adverse environmental effects will result from implementation of project.
WBK/plr
I A D,
PPE'"..lN Ix A
FIGURES
I r? 19
IN T A l i N"a
BRIDGE NO. 158 1359
.9
Rhodo 1608 ''Me % •
p 1501
RY. "o
q 1635 - Of
1502 -` W
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
' TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONi1IENTAL
BRANCH
BRIDGE NO. 150
OVER VALLEY RIVER
CHEROKEE COU14TY
0-2016
0 mile 1
j FIG.1
?J I 999

-, r
'y
F
Jam' , f .

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OP
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
k
BRIDGE NO. 158
OVER VALLEY RIVER
CHEROKEE COUNTY
B-2016

J "
? 0 feet 100
FIG. 2
yy
1M

B-2016
BRIDGE NO. 135
CHEROKEE COUNTY
LOOKING NORTH
LOOKING SOUTH
?i
E:
,f
i
l
};
/ ZONE X
GRAHAM COU NTY ?cye \ TOPTON
C7EROKEE COUNTY
ZONE X
11 i
a I ter`' l?NC
\l9 RRTDGF' Nll _ 1 Su
yes SR1359--?,
aP
Pw /ups
RHODO pJ?, rya'
y RivErt ' - - ? ?- ??
?II
?G
q
re
ly,4RRIS
fK
ya ,?

BFI
PF
?y

_ ZONE X
4

yA/
?F
CP?
ZONE X \
G?
?e
1
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL,
BRANCH
BRIDGE NO. 158
OVER VALLEY RIVER
CHEROKEE COUNTY
B-2016
0 ff et 2000
P1 G. 4
n
M
r
i•r-)k.
STATE
N d'r R?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27011-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
jack Ward, Mat:ager
Plartfihng afid Research
Room 462, Huy Building
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Cuss B. Yates, Bicycle Coordinator
Bicycle Program
-io 0l^'•?lr? 'l
SEP c
-11 199, i
Scoping Meeting for Replacing Bridge No. 158 on
SR 1359 over Valley River, Cherokee County, TIP No. B-2016
In your memorandum of qppt .m? ePr 4 , 1q91 , you requested our comments
regarding the proposed improvements to the above mentioned project.
There does not appear to be any need for special accommodations for bicycles on this project.
This section of SR 1359 in Cherokee County does not
correspond to a bicycle TIP request, nor is it part of our Bicycling Highway system. We have no
indication that there are unusual levels of bicycling on this roadway.
As with any of our roads and highways (except, of course, for those which have limited
access where bicycles are prohibited), bicycle travel will occur as part', of the overall traffic mix.
Even though this project has no special bicycle element, reasonable a orts should be made to
accommodate existing bicycle traffic within the overall project design[
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the above named project. Please feel free to
contact us again regarding this or any other bicycle related matter.
CBY/jc
An Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer
STATE
North Carolina Department of Cul
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
September 26, 1991
MEMORANDUM
X11 t'?. n ` ^J
cr- 0, 113
Mesoun!ts " `) CO
?tqiyision Archi and History
Vlliam SM Jr., Director
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook l `
Deputy State His oric-Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Replace Bridge No. 158 on SR 1359 over
Valley River, Cherokee County, B-2016,
8.2910301, BR2-1359(1), ER 92-7263
Thank you for your memorandum of September 4, 1991, concerning the above project.
Michael Ann Williams conducted a Cherokee County survey in 1981. Our Western
Office has the survey maps, but this particular quad, Topton, is missing. The
publication,
Marble and Log: The History and Architecture of Cherokee County, shows no historic
structures in the area of potential effect. Our files show no National Register or study
list structures in the area. The bridge was built in 1939, but does not appear eligible
for the National Register of Historic Places due to changes.
There are no known recorded archaeological sites within the project boundaries.
However, the project area has never been systematically surveyed to determine the
location of significance of archaeological resources.
We recommend that a comprehensive survey be conducted by an experienced
archaeologist to identify the presence and significance of archaeological remains that
may be damaged or destroyed by the proposed project. Potential effects on unknown
resources should be assessed prior to the initiation of construction activities.
Robin Stancil will be on vacation and will not attend the'tneeting of the minds" on
October 8, 1991, at 10:00 AM. These notes should serve as our comments.
DB:slw
109 East Jones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
?W r 11 L y?;
,4Y' u ari.s+rs? ''
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
October 10, 1991
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION & RAIL DIVISION
POST OFFICE BOX 25201
919/733-4713
HMRANDUM TO: Bill Kinlaw, Project Planning Engineer
Planning and Environmental Branch
FROM: Paul Worley
State Rail Corridor Manag6r
SUBJECT: B-2016, BRIDGE 1\10. 158, CHEROKEE COUNTY
The replacement of bridge No. 158 on SR-1359 over the Valley River of
the Dillsboro to Murphy rail corridor, which is owned by NCDOT and op,
by Sylva-based Great Smoky Mountains Railway (GSMR). GSMR operates b
passenger and freight traffic over this line.
Last year, GSMR carried 165,000 passengers and currently operates one
passenger train each way daily and up to two (2) freight trains each
weekly through the proposed project area. The maximum train speed th
the crossing is 25 mph.
Per our conversation, it is my understanding that the existing crossi
(720144S at GSMR milepost T 93.03) will be relocated to the west to r
in alignment with the proposed bridge. The existing crossing will be
removed.
Since this is a relocation of an existing crossing with relatively low
rail/highway traffic conflicts, signalization is unnecessary at this t
However, we ask that high-visibility crossbucks be installed at the cr,
along with the appropriate reflective striping and signs on the approa
According to NCDOT Traffic Engineering, the average traffic over the
crossing is 20 cars per day (ADTyear - 1974).
Please contact me if I may be of further assistance. The contact at
Doug Ellis (704-586-8811).
Pw
cc: Doug Ellis, GSMR
An Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer
ted

Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902
December 2, 1991
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
State of North Carolina
Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Mr. Ward:

REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO.1?5?8.OVER VALLEY RIVER IN CHEROKEE COUNTY,
PROJECT NO. 8.2910301, B-2 6, AND BRIDGE NO. 130 OVER SNOWBIRD CREEK
IN GRAHAM COUNTY, PROJECT NO. 8.2910201, B-2039
This is in reference to your letters of November 12, 1991, regarding
replacement of Bridge 158 and Bridge 130. Both these projects will
likely require a 26a permit from TVA. Please contact Kenneth Spencer at
[phone] in Norris, Tennessee, for details on this permitting
procedure.
Since TVA conducts environmental reviews for all 26a permit requests and
because key technical staff are currently involved in the preparation of
a priority environmental impact statement, we will defer providing
environmental comments on the subject projects until receipt of the 26a
permit applications from your office. If there are questions regarding
this environmental review process, please contact Dale K. Fowler at (615)
632-6716 in Knoxville, Tennessee.
Sincerely,
au ierbach, Manager
f4
Environmental Quality
S 4s..., lit, r..
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission P
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
December 6, 1991
Mr. Bill Kinlaw
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
SUBJECT: Replacement of Bridge No. IX'58 on SR 1359 over Valley
River in Cherokee County and Bridge No. 130 on SR 1119
over Big Snowbird Creek in Graham County.
Dear Mr. Kinlaw:
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our
comments regarding the replacement of Bridge No. 158 on SR 1359
over Valley River in Cherokee County and Bridge No. 130 on SR
1119 over Big Snowbird Creek in Graham County. At this time, we
understand that the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) proposes to replace both bridges with new bridges at the
same sites. Temporary bridges will be constructed to detour
traffic around construction sites.
Valley River (HIW 1-10) is Hatchery Supported Designated
Public Mountain Trout Water that may support wild rainbow trout
in its upper reaches. Big Snowbird Creek (LTN 1-2-2-22-6) is
?. I ft1
:. *av--?Iaral.Lu ? In l rout- Y'Yat`r lr, t le
Supported Des i'Y ?ri:atc u PLl.;)b , 1
Hatchery
area of the bridge and also supports wild populations of brook
and rainbow trout.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC)
does not object to these projects if the following stipulations
to avoid and minimize adverse impacts are implemented:
1) Construction is prohibited during the trout spawning
period of November 1 to April 15 in order to protect the egg
and fry stages from sedimentation.
2) Heavy equipment should not be operated in the streams.
3) Construction must be accomplished so that wet concrete
does not contact water entering or flowing in the streams.
. Memo Page 2 December 6, 1991
This will reduce the likelihood of fish kills associated
with bridge construction.
4) Stringent erosion control measures should be implemented
where soil is disturbed and maintained until project
completion.
5) Temporary ground cover should be placed on bare surfaces,
including spoil piles, as soon as construction is complete.
Permanent vegetation in these same areas must be established
within 15 days of project completion to provide long term
erosion control.
These comments are provided in accordance with provisions of
the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et seq.), and the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d.). Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comment on this project. If we can be of further assistance,
please advise.
Sincerely,
?"- k'uj?
Dennis Stewart, Program Manager
Habitat Conservation Program
DLS/lp
cc: Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, Mt. Region Habitat Biologist
Mr. Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist
E North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles &Full j%o , F?cecult '§ Pirector
cem er ,
Mr. David Baker, Permit Coordinator
USACOE, Regulatory Field Office
Room 75, Grove Arcade Building
37 Battery Park Avenue
Asheville, NC 28801-2714
SUBJECT: Trout water exclusion
replacement of Bridge
River west of Topton,
letter of concurrence for
No. 158 on SR 1359 over Valley
Cherokee County.
Dear Mr. Baker:
This correspondence is in response to a request from Mr.
Bill Kinlaw of the Planning and Environmental Branch, North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) for a letter of
concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) to replace Bridge No. 158 on SR 1359 over Valley River,
Cherokee County. Valley River (HIW 1-10) is Hatchery Supported
Designated Public Mountain Trout Water and may also contain wild
rainbow trout in the upper reaches. The NCDOT proposes to
replace the bridge with another bridge at the same site. A
temporary bridge will be used to detour traffic around the
construction site.
The NCWRC does not object to this project if the following
stipulations to avoid and minimize impacts are implemented:
1) Construction is prohibited during the trout spawning
period of November 1 to April 15 in order to protect the egg
and fry stages from sedimentation.
2) No heavy equipment should be operated in the stream.
3) Construction must be accomplished so that wet concrete
does not contact water entering or flowing in Valley River.
This will reduce the likelihood of fish kills associated
with bridge construction.
Memo Page 2 December 9, 1991'-
4) Stringent erosion control measures should be implemented
where soil is disturbed and maintained until project
completion.
5) Temporary ground cover should be placed on bare surfaces,
including,spoil piles, as soon as construction is complete.
Permanent vegetation in these same areas must be established
within 15 days of project completion to provide long term
erosion control.
These comments are provided in accordance with provisions of
the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et seq.), and the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d.). Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comment on this project. If we can be of further assistance,
please advise.
Sincerely,
glx?v
DLS/lp
Dennis Stewart, Program Manager
Habitat Conservation Program
cc: Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, Mt. Region Habitat Biologist
A ?Ir. Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist
Mr. Bill Kinlaw, NCDOT

l ..Ff Ir'
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
June 5, 1992
Mr. Bill Kinlaw
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
SUBJECT: Second response to proposed replacement of Bridge No.
158 on SR 1359 over the Valley River, Cherokee County
Dear Mr. Kinlaw:
This correspondence responds to a request by you during a
conversation with Ms. Stephanie Goudreau of the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) on May 27, 1992 for further
comments regarding the replacement of Bridge No. 158 on SR 1359
over the Valley River in Cherokee County. We previously
commented on this project in a letter to you dated December 9,
1991. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is
now proposing to replace the existing bridge with a culvert of
some type rather than with another bridge. Traffic will continue
to use the existing bridge during construction so that no detour
will be required.
Valley River (HIW 1-10) is Hatchery Supported Designated
Public Mountain Trout Water that may support wild rainbow trout
in its upper reaches.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC)
does not object to this project if the following stipulations to
avoid and minimize adverse impacts are implemented:
1) We prefer that a spanning structure (not necessarily a
bridge) be installed. If conditions at the site do not
allow a spanning structure such as a bottomless
culvert, the structure should be buried 12 inches into
the substrate to allow fish passage.
Memo Page 2
June 5, 1992
2) Construction is prohibited during the trout spawning
period of November 1 to April 15 in order to protect
the egg and fry stages from sedimentation.
3) Heavy equipment should not be operated in the streams.
4) Construction must be accomplished so that wet concrete
does not contact water entering or flowing in the
streams. This will reduce the likelihood of fish kills
associated with bridge construction.
5) Stringent erosion control measures should be
implemented where soil is disturbed and maintained
until project completion.
6) Temporary ground cover should be placed on bare
surfaces, including spoil piles, as soon as
construction is complete. Permanent vegetation in
these same areas must be established within 15 days of
project completion to provide long term erosion
control.
These comments are provided in accordance with provisions of
the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et seq.), and the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d.). Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comment on this project. If we can be of further assistance,
please advise.
Sincerely,
04V'w- "-?
Dennis Stewart, Program Manager
Habitat Conservation Program
DLS/lp
cc: Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, Mt. Region Habitat Biologist
Mr. Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
a FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADLIIt11STRATiON
• REGION FOUR
310 Now Born Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
December 18, 1991
In Reply Rotor To:
HB-NC
Dr. David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Department of Cultural Resources
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
Dear Dr. Brook:
Subject: Section 106 Consultation, Archaeological Study, Bridge
No. 158 Over Valley River, Cherokee County, NC, TIP No.
B-2016, State Project No. 8.2910301 - BRZ-1359(1)
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) performed
the archaeological study on the subject project. The project
involves the replacement of an existing bridge structure.
Enclosed are two copies of the Archaeologic Study for your review.
The results of the study show that there are no archaeologic
resources in the area to be impacted by the construction of this
project.
We are in agreement with the findings made by the NCDOT and ask
that you concur with them. If you have any questions related to
the survey, please feel free to contact our office. Thank you for
your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely yours,
?O G WFoicholas L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator
Enclosures
cc:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E.

?}y?d ?SCNFo?
North Carolina Department of Cultural
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
January 23, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 26806
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Re: Section 106 Consultation
Archaeological Study, Bridge No. 158 over
Valley River, Cherokee County, TIP No. B-2016,
ER 92-7263, ER 92-7671
Dear Mr. Graf:
I/ ?
4S C
2so • rc
Di mon 1?Trc4j es and [= story
illia S. { rfc?; Director
Thank you for your letter of December 23, 1991, transmitting the archaeo-
logical survey report by Thomas Padgett concerning the above project.
During the course of the survey no sites were located within the project
area. Mr. Padgett has recommended that no further archaeological
investigation be conducted 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 of 1966 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.
Sincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: Z. J. Ward
T. Padgett
109 EastJones Street * Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807