19940687 Ver 1_Complete File_19940727

a
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DATE
TRANSMITTAL SLIP W
TO: REF. N OR ROOM, BLDG.
• ? ?
FROM:
I REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR. INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
1
ICJ

[i li"'
X661 1

da.. SLATE' o
? ?? M.sun ?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TP NSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
July 18, 1994
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, N.C. 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir/Madame:
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Rowan County, Replacement of Bridge #101 on SR 2134
over Church Creek; State Project No. 8.2631801;
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-2134(1); TIP No. B-1369.
Attached for your information are three copies 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 request' individual
permit but propose to proceed under a ation ide Permit in
accordance with 33CFR 330 Appendix A -23) issued November
22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers. provisions of
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be
followed in the construction of the project.
(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.
We anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2734
If you have any questions or need additional information,
please call Robin Little at [phone].
.Sincerely,
B. 0'Qu' n, P.E.
Assis nt Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
M

C
BJO/rml
Attachment
cc: w/attachment
Mr..Steve Chapin, COE-Asheville
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr..John Dorney, NCDEHNR, DEM
Mr. John Parker, NCDEHNR, DEM
w/out attachment
Mr. Kelly Barger, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. D. B. Waters, Division 9 Engineer
Mr. Byron Brady, P.E., Project' Planning Engineer
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and Environmental Branch

Rowan County, SR 2134
Bridge #101 over Church Creek
State Project 8.2631801
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-2134(1)
B-1369
6 9?'
Date
- 9- 6,4
Date
-rvA--
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
moo.
C.D. Adkins
M ager of Planning and Research Branch, NCDOT
7C%;??-
Kenneth Bellamy
Division Administrator, FHWA
L7
Rowan County, SR 2134
Bridge #101 over Church Creek
State Project 8.2631801
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-2134(1)
B-1369
Bridge No..101 is included in the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The
location is shown in Figure 1. Since no substantial environmental impacts are
anticipated, the project has been classified as a Federal "categorical exclusion" in
accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b)(9).
I. Summary of Recommendations
Bridge No. 101 should be replaced at the existing location as shown in Figure 2.
The recommended structure is a 105 foot long bridge with a clear width of 24 feet.
Only a limited amount of approach work is necessary.
The floor elevation of the new structure should be approximately the same as the
floor elevation of the existing bridge.
Traffic should be detoured along existing roads.
Estimated cost, based on current prices, is $166,000.
II. Existing Conditions
SR 2134 is classified as a local route in the Statewide Functional Classification
System and is not a part of the Federal-Aid System. The paved secondary road
serves a rural area of Rowan County near High Rock Lake (see-Figure 1). Only
scattered development exists in the project area. Land use is predominantly
woodland except for an occasional farm or vacation cottage.
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 2134 has a pavement width of 16 feet 10 inches
with 4 foot shoulders. The bridge is located in a 1000 foot tangent section between
a 12 degree curve located about 300 feet to the south, and a 6 degree curve
apprximately 100 feet to the north of the bridge. Vertical alignment is good. Each
approach is on a downgrade toward the creek.
Speed limit in the project area is not posted.
The current traffic volume of 500 VPD is expected to increase to approximately
800 VPD by the year 2006. The projected volume includes 1% TTST and 2% dual-
tired vehicles (DTT).
The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was constructed in 1935, rebuilt in 1978, and
consists of a creosote timber floor on steel I-beams supported by timber caps, and
piles on end bents, and a concrete interior bent.
Overall length is 741-8". Clear deck width is 13 feet, 2 inches. The posted weight
limit is 15 tons for single vehicles (SV) and 20 tons for truck-tractor semitrailer
(TTST).
-2-

Bridge No. 101 has a sufficiency rating of 48.8 (structurally deficient) compared to
a rating of 100 for a new structure.
One accident due to the narrowness of the structure was reported during the period
from January, 1982 thru April, 1985. No school buses cross the subject bridge.
The water level beneath the structure is dependent on the level of High Rock Lake
(See Figure 4), which is formed by a dam across the Yadkin River. The dam is
owned by Aluminum Company of America which uses the facility to generate
power for its Baden plant. The normal pool elevation of High Rock Lake causes
about a 5 foot water depth at the bridge site. It is normal practice for the water
level to be lowered during the winter months, in which case Church Creek flows at
normal stream levels.
III. Discussion of Recommended Improvements
The recommended replacement structure is a. 105 foot bridge, with a deck
elevation approximately the same as the existing bridge. The clear deck width
should be 24 feet in accordance with current Bridge Policy.
Both the recommended 105 foot bridge and a 4 @ 12' x 11' reinforced box culvert
were considered for the replacement structure. Alternate cost studies indicate
that with comparable hydraulic capacity, the bridge would cost about $10,000 less
than a box culvert. In addition, the bridge would be less environmentally
disruptive, and would be easier to construct with High Rock Lake at normal pool
elevation. The bridge is recommended.
The drainage area at the existing bridge site is approximately 18.3 square miles.
The size of the structure may be increased or decreased as necessary to
accommodate peak flows as determined by further hydrologic studies.
The small volume of traffic can be effectively detoured during construction by
utilizing SR 2168 and SR 1002 as shown in Figure 1. Approximately 3.1 miles of
additional travel will be necessary for the average vehicle affected by the closure.
Additional road user costs incurred by motorists are estimated to be approximately
$63,000 during the 200 day closure period. Detour roadways and bridges are
adequate to accommodate affected traffic during the construction period.
The road closure and recommended detour are acceptable to the Division Office.
Provision of a detour structure at the site (estimated cost $78,000) is not
recommended due to the low traffic volume and the availability of a suitable
detour route.
IV. Alternatives
Utilizing the existing roadway and replacing the bridge in its current location
results in the most economical and least disruptive replacement scheme; therefore,
other locations were not considered.
Two replacement alternatives were considered for the project, as follows:
-3-
•
Alternate 1 - Replacement of the structure at the existing location with
350 feet of approach work in order to widen the south
approach to 2 lanes. Construction of a temporary detour on
the east side for maintenance of traffic. The detour
roadway would be approximately 450 feet in length with 9
degree curves for a design speed of 30 mph. The temporary
detour structure would be an 85 foot bridge. Three-way
stop signs would be used at the north approach to the detour
(See Figure 2).
Alternate 2 - Replacement of the structure at the existing location with
350 feet of approach work in order to widen south approach
to 2 lanes. Detour traffic via SR 2168 and SR 1002 during
the construction period.
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge.
This is not desirable due to the traffic service provided by SR 2134.
Rehabilitation of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated
condition.
Alternate 2 is recommended.
V. Estimated Cost
Based on current prices, the estimated costs of the studied alternates are as
follows:
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Structure
Roadway Approaches
Structure Removal
Temporary Detour
Engineering and Contingencies
Right-of-Way
$114,000 $114,000
21,000 21,000
5,000 5,000
78,000 0
33,000 21,000
10,000 5.000
Total $261,000 $166,000
VI. 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.
-4-
n
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.
The project is located in the Metropolitan-Charlotte Interstate Air Quality Region.
The ambient air quality for Rowan 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 23 CFR 770 do not
apply to this project.
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
the North Carolina State Implementation Plan for air quality in compliance with 15
NCAC 2D. 0520. This evaluation completes the noise and air quality assessment
requirements of FHPM 7-7-3 and no additional reports are required.
SR 2134 crosses Church Creek, a tributary to High Rock Lake, southeast of
Spencer. Church Creek is within the Yadkin River basin and has a watershed of
approximately 18.3 square miles. At the point of the bridge crossing, the stream is
greatly influenced by water level management in High Rock Lake. At the time of
the site visit (January 1986), the lake level was very low (estimated 6 to 8 feet
below full pool) and the stream was flowing within its apparent preimpoundment
channel. The stream is a typical shallow piedmont stream and has a bottom
comprising numerous rocks and stones up to one foot in diameter. The assessment
was made following recent rain, and the water was flowing at a moderate rate and
was slightly muddy. Small ditches flow into Second Creek on each side of the
bridge. The North Carolina -Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development, Division of Environmental Management, Water Quality Planning
Branch has classified Church Creek as Class A-II. Stream classification ratings are
assigned "on the basis of best usage in the interest of the public". Class A-II
streams are "suitable for raw water supply requiring conventional treatment" (15
North Carolina Administrative Code 2B.0200 and personal communication, Aldridge
Renn, NCDNRCD, DEM).
The bridge is located in a low density residential and agricultural area of Rowan
County. Land use north of the stream/bridge intersection is single family
residential and small farms. The southwestern quadrant is forested. A main arm
of High Rock Lake extends through the bridge, and the shoreline is forested and
occupied by single family residences including both permanent and summer homes.
The vegetation immediately adjacent to the stream is ruderal, exhibiting a high
degree of disturbance by man. Vegetation within the right of way includes various
species of grasses, japanese honeysuckle ( Lonicera japonica. ), greenbrier ( Smilax
spp.), winged elm saplings ( Ulmus alata ), cross vine ( Anisostichus capreolata ),
and numerous weedy annuals. On the north side of the bridge outside of the right
of way are large upland oaks ( uercus nigra and Q. laurifolia ). as well as tulip
-5-
ft.
poplar ( Lireodendron tulipif era ). The lake bed has no emergent or submergent
vegetation. Figure 3 provides an overview of existing environmental conditions.
The stream channel comprises no submerged or aquatic vegetation and would fall
within U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetland Inventory category of
riverine (system: riverine, subsystem: lower perennial, class: unconsolidated
bottom, subclass: cobble/gravel/mud, water regime: permanently flooded, water
chemistry: 'fresh) as described in Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al. 1979). The adjacent vegetation is
upland.
Terrestrial wildlife habitat in the immediate vicinity of the bridge is poor because
of lack of food and cover; however, various small mammals such as gray squirrel
(Sciurus carolinensis ), raccoon (Procyon lotor ), Virginia opossum (Didelphis
marsupialis ), and cottontail rabbit ( Sylvilagus floridanus) likely occur in the area.
Birds such as cardinal ( Richmondena cardinalis mockingbird ( Mimus.
polyglottus ), and bobwhite ( Colinus viriginianus ) use habitat as is present, and
reptiles such as box turtle ( Terrapene Carolina ), rat snake ( Elaphe obsoleta ), and
copperhead ( Agkistrodon contortrix ) are typically common in the habitat
described above. The stream provides habitat for characteristic fish listed on
Table 1 (B-1369). Because of its location in the upper end of an arm of High Rock
Lake, Church Creek is a popular fishing spot when the reservoir is at normal pool
level. Typical sport species present include largemouth bass ( Micro terus
Salmoides ), white bass ( Morone chrysops ), sunfish ( Le omis spp.), and catfish
Ictalurus spp.). The shallow flats of the lake probably provide spawning areas for
the sport fish. The existing good water quality contributes to maintaining desirable
conditions downstream in High Rock Lake.
During this study contacts were established with the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program regarding the presence of rare, threatened, or endangered
species or other unique natural features. Current U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
literature ( Endangered and Threatened Species of the Southeastern United States)
was also researched regarding- endangered and threatened species protected by the
Federal government. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission utilizes
the Federal list as a guideline for protecting endangered and threatened animals.
The project area has no known occurrences of unique species or features.
The North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources was contacted 'to assess
whether any known historic or archaeologic resources would be affected by the
project. The site has no known cultural resources, and it is unlikely that any
resources will be affected by replacement in the existing alignment.
Because of the probable use of the area by spawning fish, and to take advantage of
the midwinter draindown at the site, construction of the foundation embankment
and slope protection should be planned during the midwinter months. Construction
activities should be coordinated with Mr. Don Baker, North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission.
Construction of the bridge at the site will minimize conflict with the channel in
the project area. Possible impacts will be restricted to some limited sediment
debris after project completion. Likely adverse impacts can be minimized through
-6-
I--
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. Overall environmental impacts are expected
to be negligible as a result of this project.
The approximate limits of the 100-year floodplain are about the same as normal
pool and shown in Figure 4. The proposed structure is not expected to adversely
affect existing floodplain conditions. Rowan County is a participant in the
National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The planned replacement with a
crossing design of similar conveyance to the existing structure will be consistent
with the intent and requirements of the zoning regulations.
A permit will not be required from the Corps of Engineers since the Nationwide
Section 404 permit provisions of 33 CFR 330.5(a)(23) are applicable, and the
provisions of 330.5(b) and 330.6 will be followed.
Since the bridge is to be replaced in its present location, the project is exempt
from the Farmland Protection Policy Act.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious adverse
environmental effects will result from implementation of the project.
N
N
iJ
M
m
d
a
?p
G
O
a
L
ro
N
Z
s1
C
41
ro
N
L
L
M
C
L
U
w
c?
z
z
.r
F
a?
U
r x x x x
. i

l En
a,
QI
W

` x x x x
r
n
.4 rl

v
b
rn x x x x x x x x x x x

1 N
m
C) U)
N
I c0
a 1 +J

OaN

M x x x x X x x X X X X x
J C
1
U CL
?
J L+ r
?pp
8
LM X x x X X X k X x x 8

3 do
:3 C
0) X X x x x x x X X X X V; O
_ I--' 'O 'OtJ?

k. U

x .ti
`x
Ln x x x

ID
CN y
In x
U

rN-I X X x x x x x x x rT. d
° a N
I

ro
- U
19; -
En U) co m
a O h

U2 •.i N
U) 4J V
0 Ch
Q) N 1
+ a ro-H N C G .-?
co (a ?l 'A 0 :3 fa
U
r'
p?= N
N
M
R 'C r
pa N $4 C H
7 7 C W? 7 -1
(a
y

y U
fu cc
JJ a U7 r1
-I U U vv
ro O
N N N -4 N W ?+ N y 0) a G
S .,
d 41
E . 4
m +J N U a N
N M
ro
?
W
Sa
U
t 0
a 7 c
Sr N N N
4
u to .? N (p? ro
ro
0) q _q a N ro
N
iJ N
O ro rI N a 45
-4 :3 c
w ?
U
N
Li
M
I. ~ E
2 R
w 8 C
?
?
?
N
X ro C
C 1.?
S
1 O D U
1
pp C 3 N
C E

N G U O

U 1.i L+ • U Q C C O M
G O O C
a.1 2 .r .•? k yJ t1 4q1 y
C O
O li++
?z?? ?w cs?wla z u? v rz?E N NIH44 V a x J ro

U iJ
•H ro
cv
a
a

la to N

Er
y
W
N
' r
S4

•
C
y N
f
C
N
G
N
U
.
CL aly
It r
.
+
•.
w 4
Sa u
i N
c ?ro ••
tSaCCL
U d
1
a
N
2
N
.
0
?
y,
? ?roU NNW'OI.1C
Cm2t aU
N •? ?` d p. U t.
W N L d i1 3a
U C L L •? C •H N $.I J.7 Sa R1 r 'C ,Cro W ro X •rC+ t
+ N N }
X •
c
C
. Z

mmyys+
41CQ -1, .1 .
.
'
•.+ .
0 b•1 0
0 U
?-IC U
Ut ONtNfaproC y
ro
2 N rl 7 ?+ L d
N a E
w
-4
G
N
N N
ro N U •r
l
q y rtf
3.1
a U 03 r•I N
N
C '? •'? ro ro U 'O

C
d •.+ •'+ E 3

L C Y N N ?c O N
?
1 ?
--i 41
y d C i+ U
1] C, W ro U •.a •14 .,? ?1.C d •?+ O .u
N C L
(p >,•H 0 4.) rl p L1 N W a (0
A
c 3 L Y U) _.x
C N d G •.i N
i
s
C4
J
1 la
i 4
) 4
41
N

S4 0
•i

8 Q)
F
p
(0 -4
I
C
J r
p
C
.
-
p
s
C, %• 4i
R l4 -4 C w
G -4-I N 3 C .C C 7 y fU
N
? n -q
t
?
N
F' N
C C
1,
o
S
?
'
L
M
4
o
)
o im
c
•
3
s 9 m
0
$`3
u
1 ti
% g
ro '
Ci
C
7 a
G
U3 C
A
z
.
U
3
n
R
.
13
.]
a
z
cc C
.) 2 R
40 2208
38 FqU ?!t! ; -
URBAN 13
EXT. 2120 S .
5 •6 /
BDY. 2 120 Bethel p 2173 i'
Ch. 1% .4 1\
i 2207 i
?s rPe? r 2220
85 h 2172 'i 2168 /r ?-
Cr. .9
1.0
2120 `?.
1915 2171. Duke.
10 2229 ,0 ; 1•I
2125 ?-
G{a 2168 2228 \ .,
2204 Ik:1 2170 r
JL. (0
?/. 3 2169 J 8-1369 ?? `? •
r--?1 BRIDGE No.101
2188
?. -
1002 ^ qS 1915
? / 2219 14 /168 B 2167 ??. 221 -IN
6 v :6 `? ,/`•r/?/? -- 2134 1.1
2205 5i 2218.*, Union 2166
G{CC ??2165 2213 22
i1 ? 22 Ch. cb
"3 2235
.17 3 2217 /
*0 2129 •) = I5 2212 clo N .7 2130 Providence 2189 22'.
h Ch.1.2' A -
0 2179 - a 1002 FAS` s 2164
•5. 2132 2133 2134
2136 .2
unn A ?o
qS 1.2- \ 2193
'w
100- 0 1002
S 2135 6
2309 2134 f
1.0 S l9 2138 F"9S fl
--- 2309 1
C? 7
RECOMMENDED DETOUR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND RESEARCH BRANCH
ROWAN COUNTY
BRIDGE No. 101 ON SR 2134
OVER CHURCH CREEK
B-1369
3/86- 0 mi. I FIGURE I
. /
3 ?' ?t a r -' ?• 1
C? f
y ' 4x y??' ?7r f'A
,
x
tJ
,
s
c
- J
_ I
r
W
I* ?V7
T
4 ¢ j t
r
r
r•„ Go
1 U)
(„oz
A : Y'
CR.
tA,
-n 71 ? , " ?".41? s' i; , " , III I "I
' A
F.
co
it, jo
z
1 ? . 3+ V30
M ?, { r
71. .1
Li.
?'? > 3 f u 't 61,
??'? >?. 'r •? j
{ r
11`E w ?
41
^ W 1^' f t rYt
14"
Bridge No. iul
Rowan County
B-1369
ft

x
r•- -. ?A ; •y-
?' A s
Looking North
x - Looking South
f ?*
Fig. 3A
Bridge No. 101
Rowan County
B-1369

/' 7
fyjiF?/ /
1
f }Y:
t

Sid` Viers
High Rock
Lake at
Low Water
Fin '2R

'--! _rmvidenee. ` 1 _ w1
14 . NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND RESEARCH BRANCH
ROWAN COUNTY
.BRIDGE No. 101 ON SR 2134
OVER CHURCH CREEK
B-1369
100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
3/86- FIGURE 4
.nSWEo i:t_L?? VLD
• al' e ,,.e.,,
JAN 9
COASTAL IONS
RESOURCES
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Division of Parks and Recreation
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor Dr. William W. Davis
S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary Director
January 20, 1986
Mr. Rhodes Robinson
Coastal Zone Resources, Inc.
1001 West Highway #1
Suite 603
Jupiter, Florida 33477
Dear Mr. Robinson:
I have reviewed the locations of the 10 bridge replacement projects,
in the North Carolina Piedmont, on which you..-requested information. The
Natural Heritage Program has no record of rare species or natural areas of
concern near any of the projects. We have no information from these sites.
Sincerely,
Michael P. Schafale
NC Natural Heritage Program
MPS/mjw
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 276117687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
. STATt o
EGi D
.?` FEB
1 0 1986
COASTAL ZOryE
RESOURCES
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives and History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
January 31, 1986
Mr. Rhodes Robinson, Vice President
Coastal Zone Resources, Inc.
4505 Franklin Avenue
Wilmington, N.C. 28403
Re: Replacement of Ten Bridges: B-1152, B-1153,
B-1012, B-1235, B-1240, B-1159,.E-1237, B-1332,
B-1369, B-1374, Multicounty, ER 86-7701
Dear Mr. Robinson:
Thank you for your letter of January 13, 1986 concerning the above
projects.
According to our files, temporary site #A11513 is.located immediately to
the east of bridge No. 43 (B-1012) in Alleghany County. Unfortunately,
little information is available beyond location for this site. However,
the area around this bridge is considered to have a high probability for .
the location of archaeological sites. We therefore recommend that B-
1012 be surveyed to relocate and assess•All-513 as well as locate any
other sites that may be in the vicinity.
There are no recorded archaeological sites within the proposed project
areas for the remaining nine bridges. If the replacements are to be
located along the existing alignments, it is unlikely that significant
archaeological resources would be affected and no investigations would
be recommended. If, however., any replacements are to be on new locations,
we request that a map(s) be forwarded to this office indicating the
location of the new alignment(s) in order that we may.evaluate the
potential effects of the replacements upon archaeological resources.
In addition, we are unable to provide comments on the possible effects
of the undertakings upon significant historic structures without addi-
tional information. Please forward to this office photographs of the
bridges in their surroundings, and information concerning dates of
construction for the bridges. We will complete our review of these
replacements upon receipt of this information.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
[phone]
Mr. Rhodes Robinson
January 31, 1986, Page Two
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at
36 CFR.Part 800, and to Executive Order 11593, "Protection and Enhance-
ment of the Cultural Environment."
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comments, please contact Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,.
David Brook, Deputy State
Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
RErrri it n
IN REPLY REFER TO
Regulatory Branch
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402.1890
January 21, 1986
Mr. Rhodes Robinson
Coastal Zone Resources, Incorporated
4505 Franklin Avenue
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
Dear Mr. Robinson:
FES 1 0..
1-986
COASTq
RESOUR ONE
Reference your letter of January 13, 1986, regarding your
plans to assist Rimley-Horn and Associates, Incorporated, in
bridge replacement study for the North Carolina Department of
Transportation.
The U. S. Coast Guard has Federal regulatory responsibility
for bridges pursuant to Section 9 of the River and Harbor Act of
1899; and therefore, your proposed bridge replacements should be
coordinated with the Fifth Coast Guard District in Portsmouth,
Virginia. We, the Corps of Engineers, will be concerned with the
placement of any dredged or fill material in waters or wetlands
to effect construction of causeways or approaches. This limited
regulatory jurisdiction is in accordance with Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act.
The site plans you furnished with your letter are not
sufficiently descriptive for us to determine whether we will have
regulatory jurisdiction. We will appreciate the opportunity to
review more detailed, construction plans as they become available.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Cliff
Winefordner, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
a W. tlis
ie Regulatory Branch
Copy Furnished:
Commander
Fifth U. S. Coast Guard District
610 Federal Building
431 Crawford Street
Portsmouth, Virginia 23705
United States Sod
Department of Conservation
Agriculture Service
Federal Building, Rm 535
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27601
March 12, 1986
Ms. Pamela B. Townsend
Structural Analyst
Rimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
901 Jones Franklin Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
RE: Letter dated 1/21/86 requesting soils information
for 10 bridge replacement studies.
Dear Ms. Townsend:
We have not yet completed the land evaluation process for the soils that
will be affected by these projects. We, therefore, are unable to complete
Part IV of Form AD 1006 for these projects.
We are returning all aerials and general location maps to your.
Sincer ly,
C G nett
State Conservations
Enclosures
r n v :?1
lO The Soil Conservation Service
.J is an agency of the
Department of Agriculture
04 C
O
r
414 ILO
of I
BIZ 1 2 + 1
$pWAAr
March 17, 1986
TELEPHONE [phone] -
Ms. Pamela Townsend
Kemley-Horn & Associates
Box 33068
Raleigh, NC 27606
Dear Ms. Townsend:
This letter is to acknowledge your request by phone March 13th for
information concerning bridge use in Rowan County.
For the two bridges being replaced in Rowan County, the impact on
our school buses is as follows:
Buses can be detoured around Emanual Church Road by way of Rockwell
Road. Emanual Church Road has four buses crossing this bridge.
There are no buses-crossing Church Creek Bridge. No problem has
been created with the bus routes.
If I can be of further assistance, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Gilberf D. Dyson/f
Transportation & Safety
ROWAN COUNTY
K
BOARD OF EDUCATION
POST OFFICE BOX 1348
SALISBURY, NORTH CAROLINA 28145-1348
ng
f+.
ATt
W..._ n 1
,11 Aj
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives and History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
March 19, 1986
Mr. Rhodes Robinson, Vice President
Coastal Zone Resources, Inc.
4505 Franklin Avenue
Wilmington, N.C. 28403
Re: Replacement of ten bridges, B-1152, B-1153,
B-1012, B-1235, B-1240, B-1159, B-1237, B-1332,
B-1369, B-1374, Multi-county, ER 86-7701
Dear Mr. Robinson:
We have received photographs of the above referenced bridge projects
from Mr. David Modlin at the Planning and Research Branch, North Carolina
Department of Transportation. We are returning the photographs to him,
along with a copy of this letter, as requested.
The only project with which we have concerns is B-1235 in Iredell County.
Our files indicate that the bridge to be replaced-is in the vicinity of
Redmond's Mill, which is located on the east bank of Rocky Creek, on the
west side of NC 115, .4 mile south of the junction with SR 1597. Now
abandoned, the mill was built in the 1880s on the site of an early nine-
teenth century forge. The mill is not listed in the National Register,
nor-has it been determined eligible.
The photographs of bridge B-1235 indicate the existence of the Cole
Redmond Store, which may be associated with the mill. The mill structure
does not appear in the photographs and we have no way of knowing exactly
how close it is to the subject bridge. However, based on the information
provided, the bridge is to be replaced in the same location, with no
demolition of the store proposed. If this is the case, we do not feel
that there should be impacts upon the mill or the store, especially since
the detour will be on existing roads. We simply would like you to be
aware of the existence of the historic resource. Please notify this
office if plans for this replacement change.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at
36 CFR Part 800, and to Executive Order 11593, "Protection and Enhance-
ment of the Cultural Environment."
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
[phone]

Mr. Rhodes Robinson
March 19, 1986, Page Two
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comments, please contact Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
David Brook, Deputy State
Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: C. D. Adkins
-David Modlin (Enclosures/photos)
Commander Federal Building
U.S. Department
of Transportation ? °• 'e'.. Fifth Coast Guard District 431 Crawford Street
r„? t Portsmouth, VA 23705
United States Staff Symbol: ( oan )
RFC ? ?,,- Phone:
Coast Guard Q?.? 804-398-6222
VAR 1 16591 -r? ?t?r
i9gb'+ Mar h_. 1986
ASj ?? •'
CO 7-AL
:.
r_1 J-
RFSOUROei ONE t 7
1.
Mr. Rhodes Robinson
Coastal Zone Resources ,-?
1001 US Highway 1 ????.• -? ?;???
Suite 603
Jupiter, FL .33458
Dear Mr. Robinson:
This is in response to your letter of February 19, 1986,
requesting advice as to whether Coast Guard permits will
be required for the replacement of 10 bridges. The
bridges are across non-tidal streams in the western part
of North Carolina.
We have reviewed your request and the decision has been
made that these streams are not navigable for bridge
administration purposes. Therefore, Coast Guard bridge
permits will not be required for the replacement of those
bridges.
The fact that Coast Guard bridge permits will not be
required does not relieve you of the responsibility of
compliance with any other State or Federal agency that may
have jurisdiction over these streams.
Sincerely,
If7ain MO THAN
Ca II.S. Coast Guard
C , Aids to Navigation Branch
y di ection of the Commander
Fifth Coast Guard District

1
_ •._ i _ _.

., sJ_ _? ,_ I `? 1 t
J
.
I1
.?
1
.

`; _ ?
_
'__
_
?
I_. ,. ,
;t`- _t ?? ? '? , • / 1 - -
j i i\ J? l ?•"\.. (
77
1
-
1 I
-
? '
? .
I
€
_

?
, --? _ i--1}}}
r I i
111-
I
-

I
I-.
1 _ _1
i
I
? f

?

_ .

_ - , , w- , ? f
}. ,

I Q , 1 '
111

E
I

?

?

_ -- - ?

? ,

i I
71
I
I?

I,? ` ? , _. r z ? I 1 I I

t

-1-?
J_ I
-
- . .
R
. T

I •. i

i I
I

• I _ I -

, i
_
. -

, a I

{ .c .
I

,
- q ff ?
1

11 1 I
- ,. T -7 -1

4

I I

i?? 1 I

,

I
J
I
-" 1

;T

-

r

1
S
s
o
+
o W z o0 Ln i
.o?, _
° Oo
n +98.70 212,54' N87-09'42T

•
K L
i ? .
w ?J1 PT 11+30.00
j 1 U t? ti r
I L% _?-
IF
E c? (

K-

t I 11 x r m
.

? rn?
E3)
. + D
i JIN O r

Z
0

`

-1{
m
, cn

o
s' Z C3 O()j -0
o N Z

w
+
D
,

15
U m

77
F lo/ .?-
?

?o
+ 57A-.
,Og vg gN
sp
a 77-
F
Cy
lO

O U)
rl x
m
?n
i =
z- U)
m=
z* z
?
? Z
O
?m
oD
m0
z
r
m