19930373 Ver 1_Complete File_19930412

A ?'-'73

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
April 5, 1993
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
E1APR 21993
WETLAINUS GRQ0PAS z
WATER QUALITY SECTION` 4
SAM HUNT
SECRETARY
Subject: Anson County, SR 1600, Replace Bridge No. 199
over Richardson Creek, Federal-Aid Project BRZ-
1600(3), State Project 8.2651001, T.I.P. No. B-
2106.
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).
Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an individual
permit but propose to proceed under a Nationwide Permit in
accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B-23) issued November
22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers. 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 401 General Certification No. 2734
(Categorical Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are
providing one copy of the CE document to the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, for their review.
If you have any questions or need additional information,
please call Robin Little at 733-9770.
Since ely,
----------------
B. Quinn
Assistant Manage
Planning an -Environmental Branch

BJO/rml
Attachment
cc: G. Wayne Wright, Chief Regulatory Branch
Scott McLendon, Regulatory Field Office
John Dorney, NC DEHNR DEM
John Parker, NC DEHNR DCM/Permit Coord.
Kelly Barger, PE, Program Development Branch,
Don Morton, PE, State Highway Engineer- Design,
A.L. Hankins, PE, Hydraulics Unit,
John L. Smith, Jr., PE, Structure Design Unit,,
Tom Shearin, PE, State Roadway Design Engineer,
J. D. Goins, Division 10 Engineer
Leigh B. Cobb, Project Manager, P & E Branch
?' f r
Anson County
SR 1600
Bridge No. 199 over Richardson Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1600(3)
State Project 8.2651001
T.I.P. I.D. NO. B-2106
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
/20 s 61

. J.-Ward, P . E . , ManaJ0_r
lanning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
t Is 93 "w, ' 0.
DA E Nicholas
i"" Division Graf,
Admin P.E.
istrator, FHWA

Anson County
SR 1600
Bridge No. 199 over Richardson Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1600(3)
State Project 8.2651001
T.I.P. I.D. NO. B-2106
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
October, 1992
Documentation Prepared by Wang Engineering Company:

GreenhA L-P.E. 1?
Manager
For North Carolina Departmer,4t of Transportation
lb-11, :252 ez?yfi
n E1 re, P.E., Unit Head
Consultant Engineering Unit
•••O??N CAR
??.?OFESSIpj1; . 9
%
SEAL
12979
G V.,
ect Manager

% OW
Anson County
SR 1600
Bridge No. 199 over Richardson Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1600(3)
State Project 8.2651001
T.I.P. I.D. No. B-2106
Bridge No. 199 has been included in the Federal-Aid Bridge
Replacement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. The
project is not expected to have a significant impact on the human
environment and has been classified by the Federal Highway
Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion".
I. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 199 should be replaced at its existing location
as shown by Alternate 2 in Figure 2.
The recommended width of the new bridge is 24 feet. The
cross section on the structure will consist of a 20-foot traveled
way with 2-foot shoulders.
Approximately 500 feet of rebuilt roadway approaches will be
required. The approach roadway should consist of a 20-foot
pavement with 6-foot graded shoulders.
Preliminary hydraulic studies indicate that a bridge 210
feet in length should be provided. The deck elevation of the new
structure should be approximately the same as the floor elevation
of the existing bridge.
During construction of the replacement bridge, traffic would
be maintained on existing routes (see Figure 1) with a "road
closure" at the construction site.
The estimated cost of construction, based on current prices,
is $410,000 including right of way and utility relocation costs.
The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 1993-1999
Transportation Improvement Program, is $413,000.
II. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to
avoid or minimize environmental impacts. No special or unique
environmental commitments are necessary. "Best Management
Practices" (33 CFR 330.6) will be utilized to minimize any
possible impacts.

III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1600 is classified as a rural local route in the
Statewide Functional Classification system and is not a Federal-
aid Road.
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1600 has a 18-foot
pavement with 4-foot shoulders (see Figure 3). Vertical
alignment is rolling. Horizontal alignment of the structure is
tangent with an approximate 22 degree curve on the south approach
and 9 degree curve on the north approach. The structure deck is
located 29 feet above the stream bed and is above the 100-year
floodplain.
There was no posted speed limit observed along this route in
the vicinity of the bridge.
Land use in the immediate vicinity of the bridge is
primarily scattered rural-residential and agricultural.
There are no known utilities in the vicinity of this bridge.
The traffic volume for the anticipated construction year of
1995 is projected to be 100 vehicles per day (VPD) and is
expected to increase to approximately 300 VPD by the year 2015.
The projected volume includes 1% truck-tractor semi-trailer
(TTST) and 3% dual-tired vehicles (DTT).
The existing bridge, as shown in Figure 3, was constructed
in 1937. The 3-span superstructure consists of a paved timber
deck supported by pony trusses. The substructure is composed of
concrete abutments and piers.
Overall length of the bridge is 199 feet. Clear roadway
width is 17.2 feet. The posted weight limit is 7 tons.
Bridge No. 199 has a sufficiency rating of 29.0 compared to
a rating of 100 for a new structure.
No accidents were reported on/or near Bridge No. 199 during
the three year period from January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1991.
Two school buses cross the studied bridge daily.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Two alternative methods of replacing Bridge No. 199 were
studied. In each alternative, a bridge 210 feet long with a deck
width of 24 feet would be provided. This structure will
accommodate two 10-foot lanes with 2-foot shoulders. The minimum
grade on the proposed structure will be 0.3% for surface
drainage. The approaches should consist of a 20-foot travelway
with 6-foot shoulders. On both alternatives, the elevation of
the proposed bridge and roadway should closely match the existing
elevation.
2
•
The alternatives studied are as follows (see Figure 2):
Alternative 1 - involves replacement of the bridge on new
location immediately east (downstream) of the existing
structure. Improvements to the alignment of the bridge
approaches include approximately 800 feet of new pavement.
The existing bridge would be used for maintenance of traffic
during the construction period. The design speed for this
alternative is 40 mph.
Alternative 2 (Recommended) - involves replacement of the
structure along the existing alignment. Improvements to the
alignment of the bridge approaches include approximately 500
feet of new pavement. During construction, traffic would be
maintained on nearby existing routes with a "road closure"
at the construction site. The design speed for this
alternative is 30 mph.
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate
closure of the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic
service provided by SR 1600.
"Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due to
its age and deteriorated condition.
Alternatives discussed in this section and shown on Figure 2
are based on functional plans prepared on an uncontrolled photo
map. All distances and directions are approximate. Final
construction plans will be based on detailed survey information
and may slightly vary from the alternatives presented here.
V. ESTIMATED COST
Estimated costs of the studied alternatives are as follows:
(Recommended)
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Structure $241,920 $241,920
Roadway Approaches 170,170 90,170
Structure Removal 17,910 17,910
Engineering &
Contingencies 70,000 50,000
Right of Way & 13,000 10,000
Utilities
Total
$513,000
$410,000
3
VI. TRAFFIC DETOUR
Traffic can be detoured on existing roads during the
construction period as shown in Figure 1. The average vehicle
would be required to travel an additional 7.8 miles. A nine
month construction period is anticipated.
A road user analysis (based on 100 VPD, 30 cents per vehicle
mile, and an average of 7.8 miles of indirectional travel)
indicates the cost of additional travel would be approximately
$63,000 during the construction period. The estimated cost of
providing an on-site detour is $250,000, resulting in a benefit-
cost ratio of 0.25. This ratio indicates that detouring traffic
along secondary roads is justifiable.
The existing roadway and bridges on the proposed detour are
adequate to accommodate traffic during construction of the new
bridge. No existing bridges on the proposed detour are scheduled
for replacement in the current Transportation Improvement Program
(T.I.P.).
VII. DISCUSSION OF
Bridge No. 199 should be replaced at its existing location
as shown by Alternate No. 2 in Figure 2.
The recommended improvements will include about 500 feet of
rebuilt roadway approaches. This includes 250 feet on each
approach. A 20-foot pavement with 6-foot graded shoulders should
be provided on the approaches. A 24-foot clear roadway width is
recommended on the replacement structure. The cross section on
the structure will consist of a 20-foot travelway with 2-foot
shoulders. The minimum grade on the proposed structure is 0.3%.
The design speed for the new alignment is 30 mph. This will
require a design exception since the assumed speed limit is 55
mph.
Traffic will be maintained on existing routes during the
construction period with a "road closure" at the bridge site.
Based on preliminary hydraulic studies, it is recommended
that the new structure be a bridge approximately 210 feet long.
It is anticipated the elevation of the new bridge and roadway
will closely match the elevation of the existing; which is above
the 100-year storm frequency. The length and height may be
increased or decreased as necessary to accommodate peak flows as
determined by future hydraulic studies.
The Division Engineer concurs with the recommendation that
Bridge No. 199 be replaced at the existing location and that
traffic may be detoured to other existing routes during the
construction period. (See letter in Appendix.)
cost.
Alternate No. 1 was not favored due to its higher estimated
4
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact.
Replacement of an inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic
operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "categorical
exclusion" due to its limited scope and insignificant
environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have a significant adverse
effect on the quality of the human or natural environment with
the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any existing or planned
land use and/or zoning regulations. No change in land use is
expected to result from construction of this project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated
and no families or businesses will require relocation. Right of
way acquisition will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is
expected. The project is not expected to adversely affect
social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
This project does not involve any Section 4(f) properties.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or
wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local
significance in the vicinity of the project.
The project is located west of Cedar Hill in Anson County in
the lowlands of the Piedmont physiographic province of the
Appalachian Highlands. The study area is located in a rural
setting of farm fields and scattered residential sites. Farming
is the major industry in this predominantly rural county.
NOISE & AIR QUALITY
The project is located within the Sandhills Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Anson 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 Plan (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.
The project will not substantially 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 the North Carolina SIP for air quality in
compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation completes the
5
.?
assessment requirements of Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), Part 770 and 772 and no additional reports are required.
NATURAL RESOURCES
Plant Life
Piedmont Bottomland Forest covers the 250' wide floodplain
southwest of Bridge #199. Remnants of this same forest type also
cover the steep slopes between the creek and the corn fields on
the other three sides of the bridge. This is a mixed bottomland
hardwoods / mixed subcanopy hardwoods / mixed vines / mixed herbs
community with slight variations depending on exposure.
Canopy species include the following:
Hackberry - Celtis laevigatus
Red Ash - Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Sycamore - Platanus occidentalis
Sweet gum - Liquidambar styraciflua
White oak - Ouercus alba
Bitternut hickory - Carya cardiformis
Shagbark hickory - Carya ovata
Subcanopy species include:
Box elder - Acer negundo
Red mulberry - Morus rubra
American holly - Ilex opaca
Chalk maple - Acer leucoderme
Shrub species include:
Privet - Ligustrum sinense
Dogwood - Cornus ammomum
vines include:
Crossvine - Anisostichus capreolata
Grapes - Vitis ssp.
Virginia creeper - Parthenocissus guinquefolia
Poison ivy - Toxicodendron radicans
Greenbriar - Smilax rotundifolia
Smilax bona-nox
Herb species include:
Panic grass - Panicum dichotomum
Violet - Viola sp.
Ebony spleenwort - Asplenium platyneuron
Sedum - Sedum ternatum
6

In the open areas along the road and bridge right-of-ways,
the following weedy species occur:
Tree-of-Heaven - Ailanthus altissima
Smooth sumac - Rhus glabra
Blackberry - Rubus argutus
Trumpet creeper - Campsis radicans
Green coneflower - Rudbeckia laciniata
Wingstem - Verbesina occidentalis
Knotweed - Polygonum punctatum
Pokeweed - Phytolacca americana
Queen Anne's lace - Daucus carota
Wild lettuce - Lactuca canadensis
Ragweed - Ambrosia artemisiifolia
Horse - Solanum carolinense
The minimal removal of vegetation associated with the
construction of approaches should have a negligible impact to
fauna utilizing the area because it represents only a tiny
fraction of the available habitat.
Animal Life
The borders of forest along the creek and the extensive
forest southwest of the bridge provides cover, food, nesting
sites and dens for a variety of wildlife. Mammals likely to be
in the area include:
Gray fox - Urocyon c. cinereoargenteus
Raccoon - Procyon lotor lotor
White-tailed deer - Odocoileus virginianus virginianus
Opossum - Didelphis virginiana virginiana
Mink - Mustela vision
Striped skunk - Mephitis mephitis elongata
Eastern chipmunk - Tamias striatus striatus
Woodchuck - Marmota monax monax
Eastern cottontail - Sylvilagus floridanus mallurus
Carolina short-tailed shrew - Blaring carolinensis
Eastern harvest mouse - Reithrodontomys humulis humulis
Few birds were seen or heard during the field visit to this
site, however, the following would occur:
Red-shouldered hawk - Buteo lineatus
Turkey vulture - Cathartes dura
Common crow - Corvus brachyrhynchos
Hairy woodpecker - Dendrocopos villosus
Pileated woodpecker - Dryocopus pileatus
White-eyed vireo - Vireo griseus
Cerulean warbler - Dendroica cerulea
Various reptiles and amphibians would also be found in the
area, but no species of special concern have been reported from
this area.
7

•
Fish known to occur in this stream include Largemouth bass,
Sunfish, Catfish, Crappie, and Carp.
Other than the aquatic species, the proposed construction
would have minimal effect on the wildlife in the area. Most of
the species found here would move out of the construction area
and return once the new bridge is in place. Fragmentation of
habitats would be minimal.
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soils
The 1992 soil map supplied by the Anson County Soil
Conservation Office indicated that all the soil along the
northern side of Richardson Creek is McQueen Loam, 1 to 6 percent
slopes. McQueen Loam is classified as prime farmland. These are
very deep, well drained soils on stream terraces. They have
formed in loamy alluvial deposits. They have a loamy surface
layer and subsoil. Permeability is moderate and available water
capacity is moderate. Shrink-swell potential is low. The
seasonal high water table is below 6 feet.
South of Richardson Creek, Riverview Loam occupies a 125-
foot wide strip along the creek. Riverview Loam, 0 to 2 percent
slopes, occasionally flooded soils are very deep, well drained
soils on floodplains. They formed in loamy alluvial deposits.
They have a loamy surface layer and subsoil. Permeability is
moderate and available water capacity is high. Shrink-swell
potential is low. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of
between 2.5 and 4.0 feet. These soils are subject to occasional
flooding. Riverview Loam is also classified as prime farmland.
As the land rises south of the Riverview Loam, the soil
becomes Badin Channery Silt Loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes. The
first 300 feet of Alternate No. 1 from the south would pass over
this soil. This moderately deep, well drained soil is on
uplands. It has formed in residuum from Carolina slates. The
surface layer is loamy with 15 to 35 percent channers mixed in.
The subsoil is clayey and loamy with some channers mixed in.
Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is moderate
to low. Shrink-swell potential is moderate. Bedrock is within a
depth of 20 to 40 inches. The seasonal high water table is below
6 feet. This is not a prime farmland soil.
Neither of the soils in this construction area is classified
as a hydric soil.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) requires all
federal agencies or their representatives to consider the
potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all
land acquisition and construction projects. Prime and important
farmland soils are defined by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service
(SCS). The SCS was asked to determine whether the proposed
8
project will impact farmland soils and to complete Form AD-1006,
Farmland Conversion Impact Rating.
Inasmuch as the SCS did not respond within the 45 days, in
accordance with SCS Regulation (7 CFR 658.4(a)), the Farmland
Protection Policy Act does not apply to this project. Also, if
the recommended alternate is constructed, the project would be
exempt from the FPPA since the bridge would be replaced at its
existing location.
Water Resources
Richardson Creek is a tributary to the Rocky River at river
mile 18 about 0.6 mile southeast of Bridge #199. From its mouth
to the confluence of Pine Log Branch, Richardson Creek averages
53' wide, but the creek is about 125' wide where Bridge #199
crosses. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
states, "This is a large stream with significant warmwater fish
habitat. Species of particular concern include a listed fish
(Carolina Darter, Special Concern)." Aquatic species would be
adversely affected by sedimentation of the stream bed at or below
the construction site.
Richardson Creek has a bottom of gravel, silt, and muck with
moderately long deep pools. The summer temperatures are warm and
the turbidity varies.
Long term changes in bioclassification have been recorded by
the Benthic Macro invertebrate Ambient Network. Samplings taken
in 1987 and 1990 gave a classification of "fair" in both years,
which meant no improvement in water quality had occurred. Trends
may have been affected by scour or low flow during droughts.
Siltation from area fields also probably reduces the invertebrate
populations in the stream.
The stream classification for Richardson Creek is "Class C".
This class indicates a stream suitable for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary
recreation, and agriculture. Neither Richardson Creek nor Rocky
River are trout streams.
Sedimentation and river water contact with wet concrete must
be carefully controlled to prevent degradation of water quality
and damage to bottom dwelling animals or spawning fishes.
Possible stream impacts will be restricted to some limited
sediment debris after project completion. Likely adverse impacts
can be minimized through the employment of silt basins, berms,
silt curtains, and other erosion control measures required of the
contractor and specified in the State approved Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Program. To avoid adding to the silt load
and degradation of this stream, NCDOT's Best Management Practices
for Protection of Surface Waters will also be implemented. No
channel changes, channel fills, or alteration of drainage
patterns are foreseen. Care should be taken to assure that any
9
fill used does not interfere with the normal stream flow and is
kept well away from the bed of this flood-prone stream.
With proper implementation of the Department's sediment and
erosion control measures and "Best Management Practices", overall
environmental stream impacts are expected to be negligible as a
result of this project.
The approximate 100-year floodplain in the project area is
shown in Figure 4.
There are no practical alternatives to crossing the flood-
plain area. Any shift in alignment would result in a crossing of
about the same magnitude. The floodplain in the adjacent area of
the crossing is rural/wooded and agricultural. The amount of
floodplain and floodway to be affected is not considered to be
significant and no modification of the floodway is anticipated.
All reasonable measures will be taken to minimize any possible
harm.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Wetlands
No wetlands exist within the project boundaries based on the
soils, hydrology, and plant life found there.
Protected Species
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP), the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), and the
U.S. Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
were contacted to obtain current lists of protected species known
to inhabit Anson County. Due to the relatively small area to be
investigated, an on-site survey was conducted by carefully
walking over the entire area to search for protected species.
Special attention was given if suitable habitat for a protected
species was found.
Federally Protected Species:
Plants and animals with federal classification of Endangered-
(E) and Threatened (T) are protected under provisions of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. Federal Candidate (C)
species have also been listed, but are not provided protection
under this Act. No survey was conducted to determine the
presence of candidate species.
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) - (E)
Length 3011-31"; wingspan 72-90". A large blackish eagle with
white head, white tail, and a long, heavy yellow bill. Young
birds lack the white head and tail and resemble adult golden
eagles, but have pale wing linings and a more massive bill.
Range: Formerly bred throughout most of North America, but
now restricted as a breeding bird to Alaska, parts of northern
10
c
and eastern Canada, northern U.S., and Florida. In winter, along
almost any body of water, especially the larger rivers in the
interior of the continent.
Habitat: Lakes, rivers, marshes, and seacoasts.
This river does not contain suitable habitat for bald
eagles. There is too little open water due to overhanging trees.
This project will not impact on this endangered species.
Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) - (E)
A bluebird-sized woodpecker (8" long). Cap and nape black;
large white cheek patch; back barred black-and-white; white below
with black spots on the sides and flanks. Male has small red spot
behind eye.
Range: Maryland and Kentucky to southeastern United States
and west to eastern Texas. Although widespread in the southeast,
it is local and restricted to mature pine forests.
Habitat: Pine forests, especially mature yellow and longleaf
pines.
Habitat for this bird does not exist in the vicinity of this
project. This woodpecker will not be impacted by this project.
Shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) - (E)
A primitive bony fish with a prolonged shovel-shape snout
under which is a sucker-like mouth with thick lips. Small opening
between eye and upper corner of opercle; caudal peduncle heavy
and not entirely covered by bony plates; lower lip with 2
slightly papillose lobes, none on upper lip. Bony plates between
pelvic and anal fins in one row of 1-4 plates; dorsal rays less
than 45. Space between dorsal and lateral rows of plates
containing many rows of minute plates or spicules. Front of anal
fin below front of dorsal fin and 1/2 as long as dorsal fin;
dorsal rays about 41; anal rays about 22; about 8-11 dorsal
plates and 22-33 lateral plates.
Range: Atlantic coast from Florida to Cape Cod. (Stocked in
large inland lakes in N.C.)
Habitat: Anadromous. Along Atlantic coast but enters
freshwater streams to spawn. Stocked in some large inland lakes
in N.C. and uses feeder streams for spawning.
Richardson Creek is not known to support a population of
shortnose sturgeon. This project will not impact this species
directly, but sedimentation should be strictly controlled to
prevent damage to potential spawning areas downstream in the
adjoining Rocky River.
Candidate Species:
Bog spicebush (Lindera subcoriacea) - (C)
Puck's orpine (Sedum pusillum) - (C)
None of the species listed by the USFWS were found or would
be expected to occur in the habitats available at this site. The
NCNHP has no records of any of the Federally listed species being
reported from this site. No federally listed or candidate species
will be impacted by this project.
11
State Protected Species:
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) are granted protection by
the State Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979, administered and enforced by the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the NC Department of
Agriculture.
The NCNHP office has no records of any state-protected
species being reported from the Richardson Creek area near bridge
No. 199. However, the NCWRC reports that the Carolina darter, an
N.C. special concern species has been collected from Richardson
Creek.
Carolina darter (Etheostoma collis collis) - (SC)
This darter characteristically has no interorbital pores,
only 1 anal spine, and the margin of the preopercle is usually
smooth. The infraorbital canal is interrupted with only 4-5
pores, 6 branchiostegal rays, and a coronal pore. The
supratemporal canal may be interrupted. The parietal region is
unscaled; the breast is unscaled. The nape is unscaled or partly
scaled. The opercle and cheek are partly to fully scaled. The
belly may be fully scaled or unscaled along a median strip.
The side of the body is mottled with brown, the dorsum is
dark, and the venter is white to light yellow with no
melanophores on the female and scattered melanophores on the
male. The pored lateral line forms a light lateral stripe.
Range: Found in Atlantic Piedmont streams, this particular
subspecies is found in streams in the Peedee and Santee River
systems in North and South Carolina.
Habitat: This darter is found in sluggish stream backwaters
or pools with a substrate of mud or dedritus.
No sluggish backwaters or pools were found in Richardson
Creek near the bridge to be replaced, therefore, suitable habitat
for this darter does not exist in the area to be impacted by
replacement of bridge No. 199.
PERMITS
It is anticipated that an individual permit will not be
required from the Corps of Engineers since the Nationwide Section
404 permit provisions are applicable and the provisions of
330.5(b) and 330.6 will be followed. A Section 401 Water Quality
certification administered through the North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources is required for any
activity which may result in a discharge and for which a federal
permit is required.
CULTURAL
The "Area of Potential Effect" of this project on cultural
resources has been delineated and is shown on Figure 2.
12
There are no historic architectural resources in the
vicinity of the project that are eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places. The bridge itself is not
historically significant. The State Historic Preservation
Officer was consulted and concurred with the above statements.
(See letter in Appendix.)
There are no known archaeological sites within the project
area. Based on current knowledge of the area, the State Historic
Preservation Officer has recommended that no archaeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
IX. CONCLUSION
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that
with proper implementation of the Department's erosion and
sediment control measures and "Best Management Practices" no
serious adverse environmental effects will result from the
implementation of this project.
13
a ?
'e 1601
1601 1943 1942 1937
1600
° 1980

1 ?j o 19

N
'

aa<
ca ,
Z 8 1935
?•
River Ch. 1603 $ 12
N
1601 b 1944

.a W 0 • 1943
1160 9 1600

1653
1603 .
4 ? S C?-
r' f? -\
N
''a
?
742 {ds° '
a
? 1606 o 1935

• / / 1609
139
1 ? -607
`?f
AS / 1600
1460 >> / / Wightmans
1.4 ,'rr ,Ch.
1 59 p
610
NN / :p p 1
?• 454 1.4
610
U
1454 .
?
U
/ 160
4 T Poplar 1612
pangs
Ch. s B !
Cb
1610

? / 1 G?
J 1612
1459 + .2 610 O
1611

l/
0ftftft %%*

STUDIED DETOUR ROUTE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
tAffiz?IDIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
SR 1600, BRIDGE NO. 199
OVER RICHARDSON CREEK
ANSON COUNTY
B-2106
792 mid 1
i FIG.1
DOWNSTREAM SIDE VIEW
WEST APPROACH
EAST APPROACH
B-2106
BRIDGE NO. 199
ANSON COUNTY
FIGURE 3
S f i r
436
- -$M 428
? ? _? 1606
O \ ` ? ? .l X330 c ? ,.i
SCALE IN FEET r L.
iD 1 ' (D C
\ 19 f
loo0 0 1000; .<
1
• 100 f h g' H ???? y??? ?. Z
::2j:vf1 _j
350
ilk
qffL1 CSC i ''?.
? ??? ? '?? ? \ V•` Vim= ? ?'?2s
r^? PROJECT SITE
??
B-2106
\. 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN ?• ?? J - / \?
5cc
?.?? I ''ice s?/l'/J

11
B-2106
BRIDGE NO. 199
ANSON COUNTY
FIGURE 4
1 r ,, r
,,, ? STATE o
a? GwM ? a
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
716 WEST MAIN STREET
ALBEMARLE, N. C. 28001
SEPTEMBER 15, 1992
JAMES G. MARTIN DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
MEMORANDUM TO: MR. JEFF WILLIAMS, P. E.
PROJECT ENGINEER
FROM: J. D. GOINS, P. E.
DIVISION ENGINEER
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY DRAFT CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
DOCUMENTS FOR T. I. P. IDS. B-2001 & B-2106
WE HAVE REVIEWED THE SUBJECT DOCUMENTS AND ARE IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATES.
AWW:ST
CC: MS. LEIGH COBB - PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
An Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer
.f 11 q r
E North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission KN
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
June 24, 1992
Ms.'Ruby D. Pharr
Environmental Consultant
111 York Street
Morganton, NC 28655
SUBJECT: Request for special concerns regarding fish and
wildlife resources in the vicinity of 11 bridges to be
replaced by the NCDOT
Dear Ms. Pharr:
This correspondence responds to a request by you for any
special concerns the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) has regarding fish and wildlife resources in the vicinity
of each of 11 bridges. The North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace these bridges with new
structures.
We have the following comments on these projects:
ALLEGHANY COUNTY cl ?'?4 wrt, t?F?n
Bridge #11 on NC 113 over PinevBranch: This stream is a
tributary to Piney Fork,) whichlis Designated Public Mountain
Trout Water. PinelBranch may support wild brown trout. A
state listed snail may also occur within the wa ershed.
ANSON COUNTY
1) Bridge #199 on SR 1600 over Richardson Creek: This is a
large stream with significant warmwater fish habitat.
Species of particular concern include a listed fish
(Carolina darter, Special Concern) and several listed-or
proposed freshwater mussels, all of which have been reported
from nearby Rocky River tributaries. Many of these aquatic
species would be adversely affected by sedimentation of the
stream bed at or below the construction site.
2) Bridge #207 on SR 1610 over Cribs Creek: Although this is a
smaller tributary than the previous site, similar concerns

• 1, i 1 f
Memo Page 2 June 24, 1992
exist regarding fish and mussel habitat. The Carolina
darter has been collected from Cribs Creek.
NOTE: Both of these bridge sites presently involve sharp
road curves in the immediate vicinity of the existing
structures. For purposes of improving safety, NCDOT may
propose relocation of these bridges up- or downstream, using
existing bridges as on-site detours. Additional aquatic and
riparian habitat affected by such operations should be
included in the study area.
BURKE COUNTY
1) Bridge #210 on SR 1647 over Drowning Creek: No special
concar:zns.
2) Bridge #102 on SR 1438 over Johns River: This stream
supports an excellent smallmouth bass fishery in the
vicinity of the bridge replacement. A federal candidate
mussel species is also known from the Johns River system.
CALDWELL COUNTY

1) Bridge #5 on SR 1178 over Lower Creek: No special concerns.
2) Bridge #106 on SR 1142 over Lower Creek: No special
concerns.
CLEVELAND COUNTY
Bridge #213 on SR 1512 over First Broad River: No special
concerns regarding fishery resources. A state threatened
mussel has been reported from the First Broad River
watershed.
RUTHERFORD COUNTY
Bridge #126 on US 64 over Clinchfield Railroad: No special
concerns.
SURRY COUNTY
Bridge 164 on SR 2233 over Fisher River: No special
concerns.
WATAUGA COUNTY
Bridge 298 on SR 1580 over Watauga River: The stream is
Designated Public Mountain Trout Water in the vicinity of
the bridge and provides excellent fishing for brown trout.
Fishing pressure is heavy in this area. A state listed
endangered mussel occurs in the Watauga River system.
c 1 r
Memo Page 3 June 24, 1992
Although we have no special concerns in the vicinity of
several of-tfiese projects, the 'NCWRC expects fie XC15Dfi to
routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish_ an _wildlife resources
in- h,d--vicinity-of-bridge replacements The_NCDOT s 1_d install
and-maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life
of each_project and prevent-wet concrete-from contacting water
f lowing in orinf:o these streams.
While no special wildlife concerns exist for any of these
bridge sites, replacement of bridges with spanning structures of
some tyke.., as opposes-I-to pipe culverts, is recommended in all
cases-._ Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along
streamba_nks,-reducing popu lation fragmentation anUve icle-
related mortality at highway crossings.
For additional information regarding endangered or
threatened species in the vicinity of these construction sites,
please contact Randy Wilson, Nongame and Endangered Wildlife
Section Manager, at [phone]. If you need further
assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding bridge
replacements, please contact David Yow, Highway Project
Coordinator, at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity to
review and comment on this project.
Sin erely,
Dennis L. Stewart, Manager
Habitat Conservation Program
DLS/lp
cc: Stephanie Goudreau, Mt. Region Habitat Biologist
Chris Goudreau, District 8 Fisheries Biologist
Joe Mickey, District 7 Fisheries Biologist
Wayne Chapman, District 6 Fisheries Biologist
David Yow, NCWRC Highway Coordinator
Randy Wilson, Nongame Section Manager
John Alderman, Piedmont Region Nongame Project Leader
41,
x ? 1 9 7' r Z
(G, p
i
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
July 16, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Section 106 Consultation on Consultant
Bridge Projects
Dear Mr. Graf:
rg JUL 201992
O/v/S/O,y OF
N>GHWAys?'
?RFSEARG??'?r
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of June 15, 1992, concerning twenty-two bridge replacement
projects.
On June 8, 1992, Robin Stancil of our staff met with North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) staff and project consultants for a meeting concerning the bridge
replacements. NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the
meeting and for our use afterwards. Based upon our review of the photographs and the
information discussed at the meeting, our preliminary comments regarding these bridge
replacements are attached for each project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categoricai
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
concerns.
Our 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
Attachments
cc: L. J. Ward 109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
B. Church
T. Padgett

'k? r A AW
Replace Bridge No. 199 on SR 1600 over Richardson Creek,
Anson County, B-2106, 8.2651001, ER 92-8544
In terms of historical architectural resources, we feel that the one structure over
fifty years of age in the area of potential effect--Bridge No. 199--is not eligible for
listing in the National Register of Historic Places since it does not possess the
necessary historical or architectural significance.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend
that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
July 16, 1992
WILMIN
h
Fjk ARMY
P ?a .
CORPS Of ENGINEERS
1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
Action ID No. 199301900 and Nationwide Permit No. 23 (Approved Categorical
Exclusions)
Mr. B.J. O'Quinn, P.E.
Assistant Branch Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
State of North Carolina
,df -'ranstortatioiff
Postk dice Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina °27611-5201
Dear Mr. Q'Quinn:
Reference your application of September 15, 1993, for Department of the
Army (DA) authorization to replace Bridge No. 199 over Richardson Creek on
S.R. 1600 in VW;County, North Carolina (Federal Aid Project BRZ-1600[3],
State Project 8.2651001, T.I.P. No. B-2106).
For the purposes of the 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 provided
you receive a Section 401 water quality certification from the North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM). You should contact Mr. John
Dorney, telephone [phone], regarding water quality certification. This
nationwide permit does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain other
required State or local approval.
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
1
:4 -2-

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 Mr. Rudolf Schiener, Wilmington
Area Field Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copy Furnished (without enclosure):
john Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
•