19950977 Ver 1_Complete File_20150911

JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
5TA7Eo
e0
„ten '
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
September 7, 1995
Regulatory Branch
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Field Office
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Sir:
q 59-77
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
L 1
SEP 1 ci
RE-TLAidDS Cpt..
^',3EEI . U€ L 1 TY 5
SUBJECT: Davidson County, Replacement of Bridge No. 139 over Abbotts Creek on
SR 1743, TIP No. B-2822, State Project No. 8.2603401, Federal Aid
Project No. BRZ-1743(2).
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 Water Quality Certification No. 2745 (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.
M-0

2
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Mr. Gordon
Cashin at [phone].
Sincerely
H. Franklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/gec
Attachments
cc: Mr. John Thomas, COE, Raleigh
Mr. John Dorney, NCEHNR, DEM
Mr. Kelly Barger, PE, Program Development, Branch
Mr. Don Morton, State Highway Engineer - Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, PE, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. B. Waters, Division 9 Engineer
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and Environmental Branch
Mr. Philip S. Harris, PE, Project Planning Engineer

Davidson County
SR 1743
Bridge No. 139
Over Abbotts Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1743(2)
State Project No. 8.2603401
T.I.P. No. B-2822
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
-712, 14C z • IOLZ_
D E H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
z12-
-7/z6) K
DAfE .e Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
i
f , y .
Davidson County
SR 1743
Bridge No. 139
Over Abbotts Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1743(2)
State Project No. 8.2603401
T.I.P. No. B-2822
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
JULY 1995
Document Prepared by Wang Engineering Company, Inc.
?2
Pamela R. Williams .p?ESSI?, •.
Project Manager SE
7521
%
?.
Ao"g-g, 90
900
ames Wang, Ph.D., .E. ?`•••ts<<???•
Principal 641111
For North Carolina Department of Transportation (lul-yk-tIn
4L.iimes, E., Unit Head
Consultant Engineering Unit
Ptka-p 4. ga,? MC
Phil Harr P.E.
Project Planning Engineer
1i
Bridge No. 139 is included
Transportation Improvement
impacts are anticipated as
"Categorical Exclusion."
Davidson County
SR 1743
Bridge No. 139 Over Abbotts Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-1743(2)
State Project No. 8.2603401
T.I.P. No. B-2822
in the North Carolina Department of Transportation 1996-2002
Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial
a result of this action. The project is classified as a Federal
1. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All Standard procedures and measures, including NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters, will be implemented, as applicable, to
avoid or minimize environmental impacts.
2. Construction will be scheduled to include the summer months to minimize impacts on
school bus traffic.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 139 will be replaced on existing location as shown in Figure 2. The new bridge will
have a. clear roadway width of 9.2 meters (30 ft) and a length of 40 meters (131 ft). The
structure will provide a 7.2 meter (24 ft) travelway with 1.0 meter (3 ft) shoulders on each side.
The roadway grade of the new bridge will be approximately the same as the existing bridge
grade at this location. The existing roadway will be widened to a 7.2 meter (24 ft) travelway
with 2.4 meter (8.0 ft) grassed shoulders with minor improvements for approximately 79 meters
(260 ft) north and south of the bridge.
During construction, traffic will be detoured off-site as shown in Figure 1.
The estimated cost, based on current prices, is $647,500 including $172,500 for right-of-way
and $475,000 for construction. The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 1996-2002
Transportation Improvement Program, is $625,000 including $175,000 for right-of-way and
$450,000 for construction.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1743 is classed as a urban local route in the Statewide Functional Classification System.
Land use is primarily commercial and residential in the immediate vicinity of the bridge. Willow
Creek Golf Course is located on both sides of SR 1743 (Abbotts Church Road). There are
several bridges to facilitate golf carts that allows access over Abbotts Creek.
Near the bridge, SR 1743 has a 5.4 meter (18 ft) pavement width with 1.8 meter (6.0 ft)
shoulders. The horizontal alignment is tangent at the bridge on the north and south approach.
The vertical alignment is relatively flat. The roadway is situated approximately 4.0 meters (13 ft)
above the creek bed.
The projected traffic volume is 1200 vehicles per day (vpd) for 1997 and 2700 vpd for the
design year 2017. The volumes include two percent truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) and one
percent dual-tired vehicles (DT). The speed limit is 90 kilometers per hour (posted 55 mph).
The existing bridge was built in 1951 (Figure 3). The superstructure consists of timber deck on
steel I-beams with an asphalt wearing surface. The substructure consists of timber piles and
timber bulkheads.
The overall length of the bridge is 32 meters (106 ft). The clear roadway width is 5.8 meters (19
ft). The posted weight limit is 10,896 kilograms (12 tons) for single vehicles and 14,528
kilograms (16 tons) for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
Bridge No. 139 has a sufficiency rating of 21.3, compared to a rating of 100 for a new structure.
Two accidents were reported on the bridge during the period from April 1, 1991 to March 31,
1994, both were single vehicle accidents related to ice on the bridge.
Aerial utility lines are located on the west side of SR 1743 in the project area. Utility impacts are
anticipated to be low.
Davidson County School buses cross the bridge four times daily and Westchester Academy
buses cross the bridge five times a day.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
No alternative alignments were considered for replacement of the existing bridge. Utilizing the
existing roadway provides the best alignment, lowest cost and the least amount of
environmental impact. A relocated alignment would result in excessive cost and undesirable
environmental consequences, since it would have a very damaging effect on a golf course
bordering both sides of the bridge (see Figure 2). Similarly, the alternative of providing an on-
site detour is not feasible due to the excessive cost and damages to the putting greens and
landscape of the golf course.
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not
desirable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1743.
Investigation of the existing structure by the Bridge Maintenance Unit indicates the rehabilitation
of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated condition.
2
V. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs, based on current prices, are as follow:
Structure Removal (existing)
Structure (proposed)
Roadway Approaches
Miscellaneous and Mobilization
Engineering and Contingencies
ROW/Const. Easements/Utilities
TOTAL
(Recommended)
$ 10,300
226,600
107,000
69,100
62,000
172.500
$ 647,500
VI. TRAFFIC DETOUR
The Division Engineer concurs that traffic can be detoured on existing roads during the
construction period. An eight month road closure period is anticipated. Traffic would be
detoured on SR 1743, SR 1741, and SR 1756, a distance of 7.2 kilometers (4.5 miles). The
detour roadway and bridges are adequate to accommodate affected traffic during the
construction period.
Provision of an on-site detour is not justifiable due to it excessive cost and availability of a
suitable detour route. A road user analysis was performed based on 1200 vpd and an average
of 7.2 kilometers (4.5 miles) of indirectional travel. The cost of additional travel would be
approximately $388,000 during the eight month construction period. The estimated cost of
providing an on-site detour is $475,000 resulting in a benefit-cost ratio of 0.81. This ratio
indicates it is not justifiable to maintain traffic on-site during the construction period and that the
detouring of traffic is the more economical course of action.
Construction of the bridge will be scheduled to be completed in one season to minimize impacts
on school bus traffic.
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 139 will be replaced at its existing location with a bridge 39.5 meters (130 ft) long
with a clear roadway width of 9.2 meters (30 ft). Traffic will be detoured on existing roads during
the approximately eight month construction period as shown in Figure 1.
The Division Office concurs with the recommended structure to be replaced at the existing
location utilizing the detour of traffic along existing roads.
A 7.2 meter (24 ft) travelway with 2.4 meter (8 ft) grassed shoulders will be provided on the
approach work.
A 9.2 meter (30 ft) clear roadway width is recommended on the replacement structure in
accordance with the current NCDOT Bridge Policy. This will provide a 7.2 meter (24 ft)
3
travelway with 1.0 meter (3.0 ft) shoulders across the structure. The design speed is 90
kilometers per hour (55 miles per hour).
Based on a preliminary hydraulic analysis utilizing the 25 year design storm, the new structure is
recommended to have a length of approximately 40 meters (131 ft.). The elevation of the
roadway will be approximately the same as the existing bridge. The replacement bridge will
maintain a minimum 0.3 percent grade to facilitate deck drainage. The length and opening size
may be increased or decreased as necessary to accommodate peak flows as determined by
further hydrologic studies.
VIII. NATURAL RESOURCES
The proposed project study area lies in Davidson County (Figure 1) and incorporates
agricultural, residential and recreational areas. The project area contains an active 18-hole golf
course. The project site lies within the central portion of the Piedmont Physiographic Province.
Davidson County's major economic resources are agriculture and textiles.
Methodology
Informational sources used to prepare this report include: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
quadrangle map (High Point West); NCDOT aerial photographs of the project area (1:1200);
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil maps; United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
National wetlands Inventory Map (High Point West); USFWS list of protected and candidate
species; and N.C. Natural Heritage Program's (NC-NHPs) database of uncommon species and
unique habitats. Research using these resources was conducted prior to the field investigation.
A general field survey was conducted within the proposed project limits by Resource Southeast
biologists on October 12, 1994. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were identified
using a variety of observation techniques, including active searching, visual observations with
binoculars, and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, tracks, scats, and burrows).
Topography and Soils
The topography of the project area is characterized as being gently sloping. The project site is
located on Abbotts Creek south of Willow Creek Country Club. Elevations within the project
corridor are approximately 231.65 meters (760.0 feet). The general vicinity of the project study
area has experienced some low-density residential development, along with some recreational
and undeveloped land uses.
This portion of Davidson County contains soils from the Chewacla-Wehadkee soil association,
which are characterized as being somewhat poorly drained and having moderately permeable
loamy subsoils on nearly level bottom lands, floodplains and old alluvial deposits.
4
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Living systems described in the following sections include communities of associated plants and
animals. These descriptions refer to the dominant flora and fauna in each community and the
relationship of these biotic components. Scientific nomenclature and common names (when
applicable) are used for the plant and animal species described. Subsequent references to the
same species include the common name only.
Terrestrial Communities
The man-dominated community is the only terrestrial community found in the project study area.
This highly disturbed community includes road shoulders, utility line easements, and an active
18-hole golf course. Many plant species are adapted to these disturbed and regularly
maintained areas. Areas along the road shoulders are dominated by fescue (Festuca sp.),
ryegrass (Lolium sp.), white clover (Trifolium repens), red clover (Tiifolium pratense), plantain
(Plantago rugelii), and dandelion (Taraxacum officinale). Irregularly maintained areas are
dominated by those species previously listed as_well as black willow (Salix nigra) seedlings,
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), goldenrod (Solidago sp.), tick-seed sunflower
(Bidens aristosa), and daisy fleabane (Erigeron annuus). A narrow strip of red-tip photinia
(Photinia serrulata) exists between SR 1743 and the golf course along the eastern side of the
SR 1743's south approach.
The animal species present in this habitat are limited due to the developed nature of the area.
Gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), Eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floddanus), red-wing blackbird
(Agelaius phoeniceus), Eastern meadowlark (Stumella magna), bluebird (Sialia sialis), starlings
(Stumidae), and vultures (Cathartidae), can be attracted to this habitat due to the surrounding
agricultural land uses. Many faunal species, such as the Virginia opossum, which migrate
across heavily traveled roadways become vehicular fatalities and forage items for other
animals, such as the turkey vulture (Cathartes aura).
Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community in the study area exists within Abbotts Creek which flows northeast to
southwest through an active 18-hole golf course. The banks of Abbotts Creek are gently sloped
and vegetated to the water's surface with species indicative of man-dominated areas. No
submerged or emergent vegetation was observed in Abbotts Creek during the time of the site
visit. Animals such as the bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), spring peeper (Hyla crucifet), and
salamanders likely reside along the water's edge. Abbotts Creek is a moderately flowing stream
with a cobble, gravel and coarse sand substrate. Many of the larger cobbles were covered with
algae. The macroinvertebrates observed within the stream include mayfly larvae (Stenonema
sp.) and dragonfly larvae (Gomphus sp.). It is likely that chironomid larvae, oligochaetes, and
grazers such as freshwater snails and limpets would be associated with algal cover. Fish
species expected to inhabit Abbotts Creek include shiner (Notropus sp.), bream (Lepomis sp.),
darters (Etheostoma sp.), and mosquitofish (Gambusia sp.).
Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Natural communities occur within the project area, and those communities have been
fragmented and reduced due to past and present agricultural activity.
5
Table 1 details the anticipated impacts to terrestrial and aquatic communities by habitat type.
TABLE 1
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO
TERRESTRIAL and AQUATIC COMMUNITIES
HECTARES(ACRES)
SR 1743 Man- Aquatic Combined
Bridge No. 139 Dominated Community Total
Replacement Community
Estimated 0.19 (0.46) 0.01 (0.01) 0.20 (0.47)
Impacts
Terrestrial Communities
Most of the project area is urban. Clearing and conversion of the land for the 18 hole golf
course has eliminated cover and protection for many species of wildlife. Proposed construction
will be restricted to narrow strips immediately adjacent to the existing bridge and roadway
approach segments. The man-dominated community will receive the greatest impact from
project construction, resulting in the loss of existing habitats and displacement and mortality of
faunal species in residence. The replacement of Bridge No. 139 will result in 0.19 hectare
(0.46 acre) of impact to man-dominated community.
Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community in the project area exists within Abbotts Creek. The replacement of
Bridge No. 139 will result in 0.01 hectare (0.01 acre) of impact to aquatic communities.
Construction of the project is likely to temporarily increase sediment loads to this aquatic habitat.
Construction-related sedimentation can be harmful to local populations of invertebrates which
are important parts of the aquatic food chain. Less mobile organisms such as many of the fitter
feeders may be covered by this sedimentation, preventing their feeding. Potential adverse
effects will be minimized through the implementation of NCDOT's current erosion control policy,
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Guidelines and "Best Management Practices for Protection
of Surface Waters".
WATER RESOURCES
This section describes each water resource and its relationship to major water systems. The
proposed project limits is located on Abbotts Creek within the High Rock LakeNadkin River
watershed.
6
Water Resource Characteristics
Abbotts Creek originates near Kernersville, NC and is a perennial tributary of High Rock Lake,
which is located approximately 29.0 km (18 miles) downstream of the project area. Abbotts
Creek is approximately 6.1 meters (20.0 feet) wide and 0.6 meter (0.5 foot) deep with a cobble,
gravel and coarse sand substrate. The banks of Abbotts Creek are gently sloped throughout
the project corridor. Abbotts Creek flows northeast to southwest through an active 18-hole golf
course. Vegetation is typical of man-dominated areas, with some riparian species occurring
along the fringes of the creek. The North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resource, Division of Environmental Management does not maintain any fish or
macroinvertebrate monitoring stations in this location due to the small size of this creek.
According to the Division of Environmental Management, Abbotts Creek, from its source to a
point 0.8 kilometer (0.5 mile) upstream of SR 1810, is classed as a WS-III stream. This best
usage classification means that these waters are protected as water supplies which are
generally in low to moderately developed watersheds, point source discharges of treated
wastewater are permitted, local programs to control nonpoint source and stormwater discharge
of pollution are required, and these waters are suitable for all Class C uses. Class C uses
include fishing, fish propagation, boating, wading or otheruses requiring waters of lower quality.
No waters classed as High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resources Waters (ORW), or
waters designated as WS-I or WS-II are located within 1.6 km (1.0 mile) of the project study
area. No impacts to sensitive water resources will take place as a result of the project
construction.
Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Short term impacts to the streambed will be minimized by replacing Bridge No. 139 with a bridge
instead of a culvert, and minimizing in-stream construction activities. Short-term impacts will be
minimized by the implementation of NCDOT's "Best Management Practices for Protection of
Surface Waters", as applicable. Long-term impacts to water resources are not expected as a
result of proposed improvements.
SPECIAL TOPICS
Waters of the United States: Jurisdictional Issues
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United States" as
defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE).
Impacts to Wetlands and Surface Waters
No wetlands will be impacted by the proposed project. Investigation into wetland occurrence in
the project impact area was conducted using methods from the 1987 Wetland Delineation
Manual. Anticipated surface water impacts fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE), and project construction cannot be accomplished without infringing on
jurisdictional surface waters. Approximately 0.01 hectare (0.01 acre) of jurisdictional surface
water impacts will occur due to the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 139.
7
Permits
Construction will be authorized as a Categorical Exclusion under Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) guidelines and pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Nationwide Permit No. 23 has been issued by the COE for Categorical Exclusion's due to the
expected minimal impacts. Also, Section 401 of the CWA requires that the state issue or deny
water quality certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in a
discharge to the waters of the United States prior to issuance of COE permits. Nationwide
Permits 23 require a Pre-Discharge Notification (PDN) to the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management before certification can be issued. A final determination regarding
mitigation requirements rests with the COE.
Mitigation
Projects authorized under the nationwide permit program usually do not require compensatory
mitigation based on the 1989 Memorandum of Agreement between the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of the Army (Page and Wilcher 1991). However,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters will be implemented, as
applicable, to minimize adverse impacts.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals are in decline either due to natural forces or due to
their inability to coexist with man. Rare and protected species listed for Davidson County, and
any likely impacts to these species as a result of the proposed project construction, are
discussed in the following sections.
Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7
and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists one federally protected species for
Davidson County as of March 28, 1995.
TABLE 2
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
FOR DAVIDSON COUNTY
Scientific Name Common Name Status
Helianthus schweiniizii Schweinitz's sunflower Endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower is a rhizomatous perennial herb approximately 1-2 meters (3.28-6.56
feet) tall from a carrot-like tuberous root. Stems are usually solitary, branching only at or above
the mid-stem, pubescent, and often purple in color. The leaves are opposite on the lower stem
and changing to alternate above, lanceolate, pubescent, and have a rough and thick texture.
8
From September until frost, Schweinitz's sunflower blooms with rather small heads of yellow
flowers. The nutlets are approximately 3.3 to 3.5 millimeters (0.13 to 0.14 inches) long and are
glabrous with rounded tips.
Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to the Piedmont region of the Carolinas, and occurs in
clearings and edges of upland woods on moist to dryish clays, clay loams, or sandy clay loams
with a high gravel content. The sunflower usually grows in open habitats such as the edge of
upland woods, roadside ditches and shoulders, and pastures.
Habitat exists in the project area for this species. All roadside margins and woodland
fringes were searched for the presence of Schweinitz's sunflower. No individuals of this
species were observed in or adjacent to the study area during the site visit. It can be
concluded that the proposed project will not impact this Endangered species.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Federal Candidate
Federal Candidate species are not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act and are
not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed
as Threatened or Endangered. Table 3 includes 1 federal candidate species listed for Davidson
County and its state classification. Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened
(T), or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program list of Rare Plant
and Animal species are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and
the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
TABLE 3
FEDERAL CANDIDATE SPECIES
DAVIDSON COUNTY
Scientific Name North Carolina Habitat
(Common Name) Status Present
Lotus purshianus var. belled C No
(Heller's trefoil)
notes:
C denotes Candidate species, which are considered by the State to be rare and need
population monitoring.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Habitat does exist in the study area for the federally-protected Schweinitz's sunflower. A search
for this species was conducted along the project corridor, and no plant individuals were
observed in or adjacent to the project corridor during the site visit. No habitat exists in the
project area for any candidate species known to occur in Davidson County. Also, the North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program database was reviewed, and no records exist for rare
species or habitats in the project area.
9
IX. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The bridge replacement will not have an 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 plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No significant
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. No relocatees are expected with
implementation of the proposed alternatives.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
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.
No geodetic survey markers will be impacted.
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historical Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, coded at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106
requires that for federally funded, licensed, or permitted projects having an effect on properties
listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation be given the opportunity to comment.
In a letter dated January 26, 1995, the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurred
that there are no properties either listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places located in the project's area of potential effect. A copy of the SHPO letter is included in
the Appendix.
Mr. David Brook, the Deputy SHPO, in a letter dated July 13, 1995, commented the presence
of the National Register eligible archaeological site in the proposed project area is unlikely.
Therefore no archaeological survey will be conducted for the project. A copy of the SHPO letter
is included in the Appendix. No further compliance with Section 106 is required.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to
consider the potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land acquisition and
construction projects. Prime and important farmland soils are defined by the U.S. Soil
Conservation Service (SCS). The completed form is included in the Appendix.
According to SCS, the proposed project will impact 0.101 hectare (0.25 acre) of soils defined as
prime and statewide or local important farmland soils. This accounts for very little of the
101,366 hectares (250,471 acres) of prime or important soils found in Davidson County. The
impact rating determined through completion of Form AD-1006, Farmland Conversion Impact
10
Rating, indicates that the site's assessment and relative valve score is 71.5 out of a possible
260. A score higher than 160 would indicate that mitigation should be considered.
The project is located in Davidson County, which is within the Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High
Point nonattainment area for ozone (03) as defined by the EPA. The 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments (CAAA) designated these areas as "moderate" nonattainment area for 03.
However, due to improved monitoring data, these areas were redesignated as "maintenance"
for 03 on November 7, 1993. Section 176(c) of the CAAA requires that transportation plans,
programs, and projects conform to the intent of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP).
The current SIP does not contain any transportation control measures for Davidson County.
The Greensboro Urban Area 1995 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) has been
determined to conform to the intent of the SIP. The MPO approval date for the TIP is October
25, 1994. The USDOT approval date of the TIP is January 24, 1995. The current conformity
determination is consistent with the final conformity rule found in 40 CFR Part 51. The project is
to replace the existing 2-lane bridge over Abbotts Creek with a new 2-lane bridge; hence, the
project is classified as a neutral project. This project is not anticipated to create any adverse
effect on the air quality of this maintenance area.
The traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project and the bridge will be
replaced at its existing location with another bridge. Therefore, its impact on noise and air
quality will not be significant.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If vegetation is disposed
of by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations
of the North Carolina SIP air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation
completes the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air
quality (1990 CAAA and NEPA) and no additional reports are required.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section and the
North Carolina Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed
no underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area.
Davidson County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The
detailed 100 year floodplain in the project area is shown in Figure 4. The amount of floodplain
area to be affected is not considered to be significant.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no adverse environmental effects will
result from implementation of the project.
The project is a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of significant
environmental consequences.
11
REFERENCES
Burt, W.H. and R.P. Grossenheider. 1952. A Field Guide to Mammals. Houghton Mifflin
Publishing, Boston, Massachusetts.
Conant, R., and J.T. Collins. 1958. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and
Central North America. Houghton Mifflin Publishing, Boston, Massachusetts.
Delorit, R.J. 1970. An Illustrated Taxonomy Manual of Weed Seeds. Agronomy Publications,
River Falls, Wisconsin.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
Farrand, J., Jr. 1993. Audubon Society Guide to Animal Tracks of North America. Chanticleer
Press, New York, New York.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr. 1993 (September 1994 update). Natural Heritage Program List of Rare
Animal Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North
Carolina.
Newcomb, L. 1977. Newcomb's Wildflower Guide. Little, Brown and Company, Boston,
Massachusetts.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Robbins, C.S., B. Bruun and H.S. Zim. 1966. A Guide to Field Identification of Birds of North
America. Western Publishing, Racine, Wisconsin.
State of North Carolina, Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources. 1993.
Classification and Water Quality Standards. NCAC:15A NCAC213.0306.
Sutton, A. and M. Sutton. 1985. Eastern Forests. Alfred Knopf Publishing, New York, New
York.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1972.
General Soils Map of Davidson County, North Carolina. North Carolina Agricultural Experiment
Station, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Weakley, A.S. 1993 (September 1994 update). Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant
Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Whitaker, J.O., Jr. 1980. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mammals.
Alfred Knopf Publishing, New York, New York.
12
I
{BRIDGE # 1391

;hurchl
sr. n.
Yauale _
1 ? ands and y
' 0rk
Arcadia ry`
9
elcomel
Yadkin
College 3y
_ fd ?rl"
? a
r l
sot

•

b
109 I
0 1
I
IU r
a Cld IA I
a r
nt =
Dente
eating Sol"
i sTr
lock 6
1 Hill ii
? d9 1
e 1
'.911
1106
I
I
STUDIED DETOUR ROUTE
d
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
16 PLANNING AND ENVIRIONMENTAL
o, BRANCH
BRIDGE NO. 139
DAVIDSON COUNTY
B-2822
3/95 SCALE = 1:30 000 FIG. 1
0 (kilometers) 1
1
DAVIDSON COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 139
B-2822
LOOKING NORTH
ON SR 1743
LOOKING SOUTH
ON SR 1743
FIGURE 3A
DAVIDSON COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 139
B-2822
UPSTREAM SIDE
OF BRIDGE # 139
DOWNSTREAM SIDE
OF BRIDGE #139
FIGURE 3B
DAVIDSON
COUNTY
B-2822
BG
BF
i
RM-DE-49
• x
T
• RM- BE /
• 8/4 r3C DEB4D8
i
W i I IO le RM-DE-47 BE
GOL?c OU CIU
BA CARATT _?' • 2
• H r 840+00 /
BRIDGE # 139 BD SST AND
GOLF AZ / BB
PATH RM-DE
/ -46 / BC / GOLF CART
AY BA PATH
AX
/R5 % 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN •
/7VAlestchester
_ Academy
A M-DE / AZ RM-DE-44 /
-43 ?. AX
W AY
-DE
0+00 GOLF \
AV /RM-DE PCART
ATH
/ -42 174
827 •
•
• <852
\ 1751
APPROXIMATE SCALE
METERS
0 X00 1000
FIGURE 4
STATE
Y
t'. p.
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
January 26, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Concurrence forms for nineteen bridge
replacement projects, Multicounty,. ER 95-8232
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of January 17, 1995, transmitting the concurrence forms
for nineteen bridge replacement projects. I have signed and dated them, and they
are enclosed.
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
DB:slw
r
Preservation Officer
Enclosures
cc: VH. F. Vick (w/enclosures)
B. Church
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 Q3

TIP # F,7 2f•:.Z..
Federal Aid # 417- - 114S i2) County
T-

, or other Federal Agency
CONCURRENCE FORM
FOR
PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Brief Project Description EP?n i? ^3 Sr- 114-3 cyex Ae ae- .1-5 CaEE,c„
? ,:,c ?tivGC tJ=-
On representatives of the
? North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHwA)
? North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Other
reviewed the subject project at
A scoping meeting
Historic architectural resources photograph review session/consultation
Other
All parties present agreed
/ there are no properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effect.
? there are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criterion
Consideration G within the project's area of potential effect.
there are properties over fifty years old (list attached) within the project's area of potential effect,
but based on the historical information available and the photographs of each property, properties
identified as are
considered not eligible for the National Register and no further evaluation of the necessary.
? there are no National Register-listed properties within the project's area of potential effect.
Signed:
eze_,_? / G - 1;s--
Representative, NCDOT Date

FHwYfor the-Division Ai
Representative, SHPO
State Historic Preservation
/- S-- 5' S
1 - 2 6 -'yS
If a survey report is prepared, a final copy of this form and the attached list will be included.

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
July 13, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Group VII Bridge Replacement Projects,
ER 95-9216
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
P C E /\
D
JUL 17 1995
DIVISIGN OF=
t11GHWAYS
Thank you for your letter of June 14, 1995, concerning the following bridge
replacements.
Bridge 56 on NC 150 over Reedy Creek, B-2126, Davidson County
As noted in our letter of December 8, 1994, site 31 DV401 is likely to be affected
and should be tested to determine its National Register eligibility. The remaining
area involved in the on-site detour should be surveyed to determine if additional
archaeological sites will be affected. '
Bridge 139 on SR 1743 over Abbotts Creek, B-2822, Davidson County
Had we been informed that Bridge 139 is located in the middle of Willow Creek golf
course, we probably would not have recommended an archaeological survey. We
agree that prior land disturbance associated with golf course development has
reduced the likelihood of significant archaeological remains within the area of
potential effect. Therefore, we no longer recommend an archaeological survey for
this project.
Bridge 90 on SR 1928 over Muddy Creek, B-2847, Randolph County
Bridge 404 on SR 2830 over Richland Creek, B-2858, Randolph County
Bridge 1 on SR 1526 over Grants Creek, B-2865, Rowan County
Because of the location and topographic situation of the proposed project areas, it
is unlikely that any archaeological sites which may be eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places will be affected by the proposed construction.
We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with these projects.
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
July 13, 1995, Page 2
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
1 erely,
David Brook

Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: " H. F. Vick
T. Padgett

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
312 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-11$8, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Office of Policy Development, DEHNR
FROM: David Cox, Highway P;
Habitat Conservation
DATE: December 6, 1994
SUBJECT: Request for comments
Replacement Projects
Project No. 95-0298.
roject Coordinator
Program
on Group VII Bridge
in North Carolina, SCH
Staff biologists of the N. C. Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) have the following preliminary comments
on the subject bridge replacements. Our comments are
provided in accordance with provisions of the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act (G.S. 113A-1 et seq., as amended; 1
NCAC 25).
After reviewing the information provided and data we
have on the subject streams we have the following comments
and recommendations:
1. 2-2126, Davidson County, on NC 150 over Reedy Creek.
Two small tributaries intersect Reedy Creek in the
vicinity of the NC 150 bridge. There is a broad,
forested floodplain along this section of stream which
may be wetlands. The stream is approximately 30 feet
wide with sandy substrate and has fair fish habitat.
There are no known endangered or threatened fauna
concerns at this site. We recommend that the bridge be
replaced with a spanning structure, on-site with road
closure. NCDOT should avoid any channel relocation,
survey for wetlands and maintain standard sedimentation
and erosion control measures.
2. B-2804, Avery County, on SR 1154 over North Toe River.
The North Toe River is habitat for many pollution
: ?C?1 C,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Dec 06'94 15 49 No.006 P.07
Memo Page 2 December 6, 1994
intolerant aquatic species and is listed as DPMTW at
this site. We also stock this section of the river
yearly with catchable-sized trout. Downstream we have
found the Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana)
federally listed endangered (E) and the blotchside
logpexch (Percina burtoni), state listed endangered.
We recommend sedimentation and erosion controls for
High Quality Waters (HQW) be employed to protect the
listed species downstream. We also recommend close
coordination with our District 8 Fisheries Biologist,
Chris Goudreau, [phone], on this project.
3. B-2808, Cabarrus County, on SR 1132 over Rocky River,
At this site, Rocky River has a wide forested
floodplain some of which may be wetlands. This section
of Rocky River has excellent in-stream cover with a
rocky substrate, deep pools and nice riffles providing
excellent fish habitat. There are no known threatened
or endangered fauna at this site. We recommend that
the bridge be replaced on-site with road closure. No
in-water work should be performed in April or may.
Also, no in-stream cover should be removed including
the old granite bridge abutment located upstream from
the bridge. We also recommend that NCDOT survey for
wetlands and maintain standard sedimentation and
erosion controls throughout the project. If possible,
we ask that NCDOT provide a safe parking area for
fishermen as this area is currently heavily used for
bank fishing.
4. S-2817, Cleveland County, on SR 2245 over Kings Creek.
We have no recent fishery data at this site and no
threatened or endangered fauna is expected to occur in
this vicinity. We recommend close coordination with
our District 8 Fisheries Biologist, Chris Gaudreau,
[phone], on this project.
5. B-2821, Davidson County, on NC 150 over Fryes Creek.
Fryes Creek is a small stream with a sandy substrate
and has poor fishery habitat. We do nor- oppose a
culvert at this location. However, the culvert should
be placed one foot below the natural stream bed and
have a "dry" box to allow wildlife passage.
6. B-2822, Davidson County, on SR 1743 over Abbotts Creek.
Abbotts Creek is a small stream with a fair fishery.
There are no known threatened or endangered fauna at
this site. We have no specific recommendations at this
time.
4CWR C,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Dec 06'94 15:50 N0.006 P.08
Memo
Page 3
December 6, 1994
7. B-2647, Union County, on SR 1547 over Duck Creek. This
may actually be on Goose Creek. Goose Creek is a small
stream with good pools and riffles, rocky substrate and
excellent in-stream cover. There appears to be quality
bottomland hardwood wetlands on both sides of the
stream. Goose Creek is excellent fish and wildlife
habitat and serves as habitat for the Carolina
heelsplitter (Lasmigona decorata) which is federally
listed endangered (E). We recommend that NCDOT hold an
on-site visit with the U.S. Fish and'Wildlife Service
and NCWRC personnel to discuss this project.
8. B-2833, Guilford County, on SR 1556 over East Prong
Deep River. The stream at this location is too small
to be of fishing significance; however, it is a
tributary to the water supply for High Point. We
recommend that NCDOT survey for wetlands at this
location. This stream likely serves as an important
wildlife corridor, therefore, we prefer that this
bridge be replaced with a spanning structure.
9. B-2857, Randolph County, on SR 1928 over Muddy Creek.
This stream provides a fair fishery for sunfish and
catfish. We prefer that the bridge be replaced with a
spanning structure.
10. B-2858,, Randolph County, on SR 2830 over Richland
Creek. This stream is too small at this location to be
of fishing significance.
i1. B-2865, Rowan County, on SR 1526 over Grants Creek.
Grants Creek is medium sized stream with long pools.
The stream is surrounded by wooded lowlands, possibly
wetlands. We request that NCDOT survey for wetlands.
We recommend that the bridge be replaced on-site with
road closure. We also request that there be no in-
water work in April or May.
12. B-2867, Stanley County, on SR 1917 over
Norfolk/Southern Railroad. No comment.
13. B-2874, Wilkes County, on SR 1122 over Warrior Creek.
Big Warrior Creek is a warmwater stream approximately
25 feet wide and has a substrate of silt, sand, gravel,
cobble, boulders and bedrock. We recommend standard
soil and erosion control measures be used at this site.
14. B-3089, Yancey County, on NC 80 over North Toe River
and Seaboard Railroad. This section of the North Toe
River contains many pollution intolerant species.
Downstream in the Toe River the Appalachian elktoe
NCWIC,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Dec 06'91 15:50 No-006 P.09
Memo
Page 4
December 6, 1994
(Alasmidonta raveneliana), federally listed endangered
(E) effective 12/23/94, has been found. Approximately
2 miles downstream of the project the blotchside
logperch (Percina burtoni), state listed endangered,
has been found near the mouth of the South Toe River.
We recommend sedimentation and erosion controls for
High Quality Waters (HQW) be employed to protect the
listed species downstream. We also recommend close
coordination with our-District 8 Fisheries Biologist,
Chris Goudreau, [phone], on this project.
15. B-3175, Guilford County, on SR 1695 over US 421 and
Southern Railroad. No comment.
In addition to any specific comments above, the NCWRC
expects the NCDOT to routinely minimize adverse impacts to
fish and wildlife resources in the vicinity of bridge
replacements. The NCDOT should install and maintain
sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the
project and prevent wet concrete from contacting water in or
entering into these streams. Replacement of bridges with
spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box
culverts, is recommended in all cases. Spanning structures
allow wildlife passage along streambanks, reducing habitat
fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway
crossings.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC
concerns regarding bridge replacements, please contact David
Cox, Highway Project Coordinator, at [phone]. Thank
you for the opportunity to review and commene on these
projects .
cc: Shari Bryant, District 5 Fisheries Biologist
Wayne Chapman, District 6 Fisheries Biologist
Chris Goudreau, District 8 Fisheries Biologist
Joe Mickey, District 7 Fisheries Biologist
Randy Wilson, Nongame/Endangered Species Section Mgr.
State of North Carolina IT
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources / • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor IL
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary C
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
November 30, 1994
TO: Melba McGee, Legislative Affairs
FROM: Monica Swihart'Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #95-0298; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Group VII Bridge Replacement Projedts
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be considered in
the Planning and Environmental Studies (Categorical Exclusions)
prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the stream classifications of the streams
potentially impacted by the bridge replacements. The stream
classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated,
it is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks
be revegetated.
C. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party for maintenance.
D. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary)
to be employed.
E. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
F. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested
from DEM.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action employer 501. recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
Melba McGee
November 30, 1994
Page 2
G. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
H. Did NCDOT utilize the existing bridge alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
I. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
J. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same
watershed is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may
be required for this project. Applications requesting coverage
under our General Certification 14 or General Permit 31 will
require written concurrence.. Please be aware that 401
Certification may be denied if wetland impacts have not been
avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
10777er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
e f
• State of North Carolina
Department of Environment. Health, and Natural Resources
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
Reviewing Office:
Project Number, Due Date:
9s-C) 1 -l

After review of this project It has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtaineC in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicted on the reverse of the form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the. same
Regional Office. Normal Process
Tim
e
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS tstatutory time
knit)
Permit to consltuCt L Operate wastewater treatment Apotication X days before be^yin construction or award of 30 days
facilities. Sewer System extensions, [ sewer construction Contra:,: On-sift inspection. POS1i,plicatlon
systems not discharging into state surface waters. .technical conference usual f90 days)
NPDES • permit to discharge into surface water anWor Application IM days before be-.in activity. On-site inspection. 90.120 days
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities fare-application conference usual Acditionai!y. obtain permn to
deschargi4 into state surface waters. ccnsiruct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPDES Reply (NIA)
time. 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-rhrChever is Later.
Water Use Permit Pre-application tecttmcal eorttaente usually necessary 30 days
(NIA;
Well ConstructrOn PYrtnr! Gxnptett application muse be received and permit issued 7 days
prior to the installation of a well. (15 days)
- ' ' Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property 55 days
Dredge and Fill Permit owner On-site inspection. Pre-application conference usual Fillmq
may require Easement to Fitt from N.C Department of (90 days)
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permrl to Construct t operate Air Pollution Abatement so Cays
_ facilities andlor emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21H. NIA (90 days)
Any open burning tssoc:a:eC will, subject proposal
1 must to in eomp!ance with 15A NCAC 20.04..20.
C'emolil'on Of renc?at,ons of structures containing ,
aSt?estcs maters' mus: be in compliance with 15A 6C days
J NCAC 20 0525 which requires notification and removal NIA
prior to demolition Coniac- As:>estes Control Group
919 733.0820
(9G ea

Compre: Source Fe!mit requireC under 1SA NCAC 2D.0800 ysl
e Sedimental-on Pol ulron Como! Act of 1973 must lit prc;erfy addressed for any land d+sturting ac:ivily An e'cs,on 8 sed:mentat,o
contro! pran will tie required if one or more acres 10 tie d,s:urted Plan filed with pro;.er Re-,ions' Office (Land Cuaht
y Sec:.! a: teas: 30
20 days
Cass terore be^ nnrn ac:,rft A fee o! S3C for the first acre a^d 12000 for ea^r• atV-ona' acre or art mus! accompany the Clan t3G Caysl
J The SeCrmentatron Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to tl,,e referenced Local Ord,nanee: (3G days)
On site inspection usual. Surely bond filed with EHNR SonC amount
!fining Permit varies with type mine and numter of acres of affected Land Any area 30 days
m-ned greater than one acre must be perm,trd. The appr0;nale bond (tv daYS)
must t>e receiveC before the permit can b-e issued.
j North Carolina Burning permit On site inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit 1 day
exceeds 4 days (NIA)
1 Special Ground Clearance Surning Permit • 22 Cn si:e inspection by N 0. Division Forest Resources required -If more 1 day
counties In c0a_.ta! N.C. with organic "Ire Man five acres of Qround cfeanng activities are ,nvo!ved InspedAons (NIA)
should be requested at least ten days before actual burn is planned-
go 120 days
Oil Refining Facilities NIA IN 'A)
If pe:mlt required. application tx; days before b,;*n construction.
A;,;Gcanl must h;,C N C. quahLee engineer 10 prepare plans. 3V days
D.m °dlCty FUmit ;n:peel r,n3lrrp,. ce:.. OnS:ruc:ipn fL d!COrd rig t0 [Hr:n a;prOr-

ed ; ar,s, }f,y a(;,.; require pC:mil under mosq;;i10 con;rcl prpyram. And r, da
(6 Ys)
a Ail pc!rnit from Corps of Engineers An inzpeolon of site is neees-
sa'y to verlfy If.:aid C:aevfical;on. A minimum (C L. C! &::C. or, !rust aC•
car ;ar.y if.e a «f cat on. An add.,iun p•ocet_ r• rue ?= led en a
L
or t:.e lCt.! CC_ w.. G' rec ,r_^ ,. . rc .c!rtiOn
?:I

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS Project Numoer: Due Date:
?%S - /-? - /-
After revievv of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
All applications, information ano guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same
Normal Process
Regional Office. Time
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS )statutory :om?
limo) ;
Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions. & sewer construction contracts On-site inspection. Post •aoplication
systems not discharging into state surface waters. technical conference usual (90 days) i
NPDES - permit to discharge into surface water andlor Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection 90.120 days
r-, permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities Pre-application conference usual. Additionally. obtain permit to
u iischarging into state surface waters construct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPDES Reply (NiAi i
time. 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-whichever is later.
30 days
C '.Vat=-r use Permit Pre-application technical conference usually necessary

7 days I
We,![ Construction Permit Complete application must be received and permit issued '
U prior to the installation of a well. (15 days)
Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property 55 days
r- Dredge arc F?d Permit owner. On-site inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of 90 cavs;
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit ti
?ermu c :or.siruct & operate Air Pollution Abatement 50 d
U es a. J:or Emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21H.06 NIA 90 cavst
Anv ocen ournine associated with subject proposal i
t_
must be :n compliance with 15A NCAC 20.0520.
?emow:cr 'enovat;ons of structures containing
asceslos -a.er,ai must be in compliance with 15A 50 days (
. 77 NC:., 2 :.nicn requires notification ano removal NIA
-" or or :c oemc ,:on Contact Asbestos Control Group
K .33
s)
`? Como!e., S.-. ice Permit required under 15A NCAC 2D.0800. .
'
?• r -: a::on Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An .rps;cn & sea mentatio i
v
on:rci o;ar -e required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Lana Quality Sec;.i at least 30
I 20 da•:s
7 a':s
^ ' ze.::nnina activity. A fee of S30 for 'he first acre and 520.00 for each additional acre or part must acoomeanv me plan .. avs
!
? Th= S--. anon Pollution Control Act of 1971 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance: ( 30 a, s)
I
On-site inspection usual. Surety bona filed with E^NR. Bond amount
Mining Perm :7 varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land. Any area
mined greater than one acre must be permited. The appropriate bond 160 lays)
must be received before the permit can be issued.
C:rani, permit On-site inspection by N C. Division Forest Resources :f permit
_ f exceeds a days I (NIA,
Soy;:ai C:earance Burning Permit 22 On-site inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required 'if more day
-' _ount,e n : astal N.C with organic sods than five acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections
I should be requested at least ten days before actual burn is planned."
r- 90 120 days

0
i -
till acil ties

I
NIA

t
(NIA)
I
If permit required. application 60 days before begin construction
l- Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans. :;ass ;
n i inspect construction. certify construction is accorctng !o EHNR aoorov
en plans Mw also require permit under mosgwtq ,pn:rgl program. And
a 40- parmn Iron: C,irps of Engineeiii ;r, ;nspect:cn :,1 site 's neces-
nary to vents Hazard Classification :. minimum 'ee of 5200 00 must ac i
company the application. An additional processing fee based on a (
_ percentage or the total project cost will be required ucon cornolew ?
// _V
I Reviewing Office: - A/r 0
CGntlnued or. ., ...
!?? !\'i ?'. ??•?' i .'?, I.. ?. { 1.' ,'? ! ! !' l I-- - -.,/_, _? _.. ! .i .?_......- - -- --.-
v I.1.\ k.,.
„t?t!oty
Cater-Agency Project .t\evle?y 1\espoilse J)c4? _ --
rojr?c:. Nan- (\<7 -- ! ypc of project /'-IC
he applicant sriould be advised that: plans and speclflcaclon5 for all water system
-.-? iinproven-ierles rnusL be approved by chi Division of L• rvironi-nencal T iealtl•1 pr!or co:che award
of a contract or Life initlaLioll Of C6l1SC1"UCCtOtl (aS requ :ed by 1SA NTCAC 1Si..0300 et.. seq.).
For inforlnacioll, Collcacc the Public Wam.- Supply Se:Li.on, [phone].
?--? This-project will be. classified as a. non-community pui lic water supply and must comply aTiLc_
r
L•--) SLate and renC!'al dl"1l11C11?, W:1CP.1• iaOnlLOrtll- I"eClllrenlef'.tS. For 11101"C !nf01•n-IaC;O11 the appliCanC
should contact the Public Water Supply' Section, (91c', 733-232-1.
r . -• •~•,•-feec?of adjace:i?:
r--? ..lr Chis project is consLlucced as proposed, we ?ril1_ reccnmend closure of _
L--J `.raters to the har/esc of shellfish. For information regardirlg the -shell; -i sanitation progra
on, the applicant should concac' the Shzllirlsh Sanicati Dn Branch at [phone].
r '
The s,DDcll disposal area(s) proposed for chls proiecc ::.a".• produce a rnosqulto breeding-problem
I
p-•? tor inrornlauon concerning aoproprlaLZ n:osgluto _on.Lrol measures, the app icant'shoulc
concacc Lhe Public He21Lh Pest.ManagernenL• Section c (919) 726--5970.
---1 The applicanC St-IOUid be ?6v1SeQ LhaT prior co -1he ierno-vat or de_molitior_ of allapl_cLe
SCilICCllI'eS, an eY.LellSlye 1'OdcP?C C011L1'Oi pt'Ogr?.il iZ. be neCCSSa! l.rl order tO prevent' trl
J
r
mi-racion Of ChC rodents cc ,rll'aCCllt The :'EOrn1?.tlOn.C0:1Ce1rililb rodent COi1tC0
COl'icaCL the iOcal heal[ i depa!-Li- erll' Or inc.- Public Heallch PeSL' )\?a1i2?e r1:enC. ?eCClOr1. <?t 1`.
733-64-07.
- Tle ar,i,i,r.nnl: should be advised cc c:;rlcac: Lhe pia, h .11.1 dell -art l i-iert ...ard_no t?.,.
• , 1
'\--q i ! T ,l aL,.-,n ,n?; _ler..ia?l• L`I?_•A?• I"P, .:.7CiCi _nr. Se`,
rl:.V itu ?.aa.:.....r. .vr .. "':: r'• La:.: tncf???I .....5 »$ ' 'I_'?11
1-C! lrlfc>: nL?.C:On Cn_ nr`rn,ho P_nrtr v.^* ? : ,f C! •?Ll 'C !fir. St!:°. Nvasce disoOS11 rii-- hods, CO11t tCL
-----} T1-le app;!Can.c should bC advised cc) cow ract. t 1 . local healdh dep- 1-,,Inen; regardir.g Lhe sailic
t._ . .? 11ciliti<: renlli-ed fo,- ill's proi
?•• ! t if 11C1CS will hr to," 1,11:`. C.0I.1SLrIlLl'j(7)I1, i5?i :15 foj- C11C
(- --? tCIOCat:Orl IilL1St he skii)m"la•CC1 Cc) Lh1 .?1':tS1011 o'i "IlVil'onlrlental -l,a?Cll, 1)ul7llC??'al'C1' SLll.l
JCCC10i1, Nils 1\t_VIC'{V Bral.'ICl'1, 1) )0 Sc N/fal- i Cl' i\.alClhh No-t•t.,1 ?_:,lr>ll.a2., (ii9) 733-.i
2
1
y: ;r4
.7.
-
gy ?sL, e??lcviel.
.?G" Sectioi!/Branch, /D 'u
.
.

•_ i ti> ? •i7M?+r:.?•^-,•?aY ........2?'. Z: 1.iia? _:.e
c ?

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Charles H. Gardner
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Project Number: _ cl 5-07--f County: + /tl vC- Tl
Project Name: p Z 9,P
Geodetic Survey
This project will impact geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
Survey should be contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box 27687,
.Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Geodetic Survey office at [phone].
Reviewer 2__u Date 1
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
No comment

This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land=disturbing activity if more
than one (1) acre will be disturbed.
V/ If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of the erosion.and sedimentation control plan.
s/ If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water
Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
increased design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Land Quality section at [phone].
Reviewer Date
P.O. Box 27687 • Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
t ;
J.S. :?eoar;rnent or .4grncuiture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I (-,o ^e _a?ro?ete? of =s?er?! ge.^.cYl I Oats at Lana Evaluation rieoust /Z/3O I9 7
Name Ct ;^oiec; B Z8 22 2 , E 1 ?? Il Federal Agencv Involved
Prooosec ;:1nc Use County And State
??c??w?Y I ??v ? n ?n>?1 ?\1,C
?ART 11 (i o oe comp/ere oy SCS) I Oace Rwuly"O ILL WSW
Oces me site -amain prime, unique, statewide or 1001 important farmland? Yes 1*40 Acres irngated 'Average Farm Site
(If no, the FPPA does nor aoo/y - do nor compiere additional aarw of this fort). nl ? /fDN? I di '-
Wlor C. Oats/ Fern%wte Lana in Govt. Junsd+anon Amount Ot Farmtand As Oetinso m PPPA
Cyr Yt I A=ds: z.'15, Z3 4 % ?S •4 Acres: Z50, 0,47 1 -11.4
Name Ot Lano Evaluation system ;;sea man" Ot Loos Site Assmment System Cate Land Evaluation Returned By SCS
'-b\-E Na>?.? VI-alas, WCLJ
PART I11 (To ce completed by Fecerai AgenC/1 I
I
Site A Alternative Dice canna
I Site 3 I Site C I Site O
A. Total Acres To Be Conve.-red Oirec ly I 0-25
l b . ZS I
S. Total Acres To Be Conver-ed lndirectiv I 1 I I
C. Total Acres In Site I 0.25 1 O•Z5 I I
?ART IV (716 be completed by SCS) Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acre P-ime and Unique Farmland 1 0 1 C7
3. Totai Acres Statewide Ane Local Imoortant Farmland I •p +23 1 0• Z3 I I
C. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt. Unit To Se Converted I 0 . C>01 I . 0 D I 1
0. ?ercarttage O' Fermuind In Govt..unsdiezon yrtm Sarre Or Nigner Ae+attve Value I "r? s I "'j + 4 I I
PART V (776 ce completed oy SCS/ Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted(Sca/eofOro t00Points) I
'4M".. rJ
I `? t.
'ART Vi (To be.comolerer by Feceral Agenc-1) I Maximum
et
m Assessment Cirena (77tese errnrria an exviasned in 7 CfR 658-(bl I Poits
Si I y
1. Area In Nonur=an Use 1 15 1 O 1 D 1 1
2. Perimeter in Nonuman Use I /Q I O I O I I
3. Percent Of Site Heine Farmed I 28 I I Q _ I __ I
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government I 2D 1 D 1 Q 1 I
2. Oistance =tom Urban 3uiituo Area I - 1 -- I - 1 I
6. Oistance To Urban Succor, Services I - I I I
7. Sze Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average ? /O 1 /D 1 /0 I I
& Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland I 2$ I D I O I 1
9 Availability Of Farm Sueoort Services I S I $ I 5 I I __
10. On-Farm Investments I ?? I /0 I /D I 1
11. Effec-s Of Conversion On Farm Sueoort Service I 25 I O D I
. 12- Compatibility Witt Existing Agricultural Usa 1 /D I 0 1 I 1 10
TOTAL SITE ASSE:MEVT ?DINTS I 160 I 25 ZS I
ART VII (To be cornplered by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Parr V) 100 I ,?, Jt ¢??,!
Total Site Assessment (From Par, VI aoove Ora loop

ra assestmenr!
s I
160 I
I
ZS I
2S
I OTAL POINTS (T oral of aoove 2lines) I 260 I 7/,? I '711 5'
I
I
weer A Law Site Asaeamasst usear
is Selected: ( Oats Of Selection Yes ? No ?
eason Pot s++ec:on:
......,
- ]NM.-
SfATps
y
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
January 21, 1994
MEMORANDUM T0:
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheet for Replacing Bridge No. 139 on
SR 1743 over Abbotts Creek, Davidson County, B-2822
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets for the
subject project (See attached map for project location). The purpose of
these sheets and the related review procedure is to have an early "meeting
of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the project. A scoping meeting for this
project is scheduled for February 23, 1994 at 10:30 A. M. in the Planning
and Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 434). You may provide us
with your comments at the meeting or mail them to us prior to that date.
Thank you for your assistance in this part of our planning process.
If there are any questions about the meeting or the scoping sheets, please
call Michele Jame U,ro ject Planning Engineer, at 733- 42. fat -??
;Qt ICW 7_
/ rm. e,Z 2e? d
MJ/plr
Attachment
S
F
.. " [IS
r?;cs
c
rot
?i u
,G f/Yrlryy?Piyl 110 C???S wt,e . v rJ D ?-
sva - ?6 a?

BRIDGE
FROJ'ECT SCOPI.NG S11:EET
DATE 1
-21-; 4
ROG.1?AM i 3: NG
!-.ANN-s N(
TIP RRO'TECT
ST iT.h: :PROJEUT t1 _(03401
t' -A- P RO:.'EC;'.1' 2-
I)TVI ------ -y - --
G"J"UNTY
ROUTE ._._ .... 7 ;3_ ._._...?__.. _
PURPOSE OF PROJECT: 'REPLACE OBSO:t FETE HR I X-il'.
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT_- SR I743. BRIDGE #139, DAVIDSON z OL'INTtl
REPLACE BR:1 DGE OVER ABBOTT' ; r
METHOD OF REP LAC:(;'Vi.l-WT :
_ EXISTING LOCATION - ROAD- CLOSURE
2- EXIS'T'ING :1:,0CATION - ONSITE 1.>E'I'0I.IR
3- };ELOC.AT I:ON
4- OTITE R
W11..,L ,THERE; BE SPT CI.A1 FUNDING PART1CI:PATION BY Pi0111 ClPA1,.1:`1'`? ,
DEVELOPERS, OR OTHERS? YES
IF YES, BY WHOM AND WHAT AMOUNT: M _._ _._._._.----__-_-, t % }
1 0
SFU-ET
YEAR t7PI)
u
..i. ._ 7 _... .+_ LENGTH .. ..... a.)?,,. -i.3. ..-. b-lE'IERS; f l'.I S.)..t 1,5_8, __. ... M.7,'?IER'Ll
FEE`.[" 19. FEET
BR:t:lx:?E
PROJX-C_r' SCOPINC3
TRAFF]: C -- CU I.tRI.a 3?ES; CAN
TYPICAL, ROADWAY SECTION:
I''.A I )I"?l'I C~ ilrf flE?t"?Lfliiv'' - v" •- jPROPOSED STRUCTURE
BRIDGE -- I.JT*NGTH
OR
C[I]:,VKR'l:" -
DETOUR STRUCTURE _
4d METERS
__?34- FEET
ME'T'ERS
FEET
BR:IDGGE - Ild?:NG'T'H _ ZD METERS;
FEET
PIPS: - SIZE MILLIME'T'
--------- --- INuH?:ti
C ONST
RIGHT
FORCE
,gU("'T--ION C:OS`z
OF WAY COST
AC;COUIN`t' ITEt
WID'T'H _..._ METERS
FEET
WIDTH METERS
5")Jl FEET
4-
ERS
(INCLUDING E.:NG:INEFR .NGT AND
CON°1'[€+It7ENCIES)---------------------- -
C.INCLUD.-ING RE:LOCAT.-f.ON, UTILITIES,
AND ACt_UISITION)----------..---
tS----------------------------------
OTAL COST -----------------------$
TIP CONSTRUCTION COST-------------------------------- $ 330,000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST ---------_- --- $ 20,000
B TOTAL- ------ ------ s 350,00() PRIOR YEARS COST ----------------- ------ ?
IP '1'O`L'AL., C;OS'P---------- ------------------------$ :350,000

BRT IX-1s
PROJECT SCO.I':I NG SITEET
ADDTTONAL COMMENTS: USGS QUAD SHEE;'1': HI:GHPOI N'I' WEST, #714
TRAFFIC ESTIMATES AND HYDRAULIC INFORMA'T'ION
WILL E' PKUV :D:ED AT' `S'HE SCOPING MEETING.
PREPARED BY: :MICHELE JAMES
DATE: 1-21-94
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERro ?
WILIVIINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID. 199505675 County Davidson
GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner/Agent NC DOT / Frank Vick
Address Post Office Box 25201, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Telephone No.
Size and Location of project (waterway, road name/number, town, etc.) Davidson County
Bridge No. 139 located off of S. R.1743,ajacent to Abbotts Creek. Thomasville. Davidson
Coun . North Carolina. State Project No. 8.260340 1. T.I.P. No. B-2822
Description of Activity
emplacement of Bridge No. 139 at the existing location resulting in 0.01 acres of impacts to the
jurisdictional waters of Abbotts Creek.
_X Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344) only.
Section 10 (River and Harbor Act of 1899) only.
Section 404 and Section 10.
NWP 23 Regional General Permit or Nationwide Permit Number.
Any violation of the conditions of the Regional General or Nationwide Permit referenced above
may subject the permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order, and/or appropriate legal
action.
This Department of the, Army Regional General/Nationwide Permit verification does not relieve
the undersigned permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal, State, or
local approvals/permits. The permittee may need to contact appropriate State and local agencies
before beginning work.
By signature below, the permittee certifies an understanding and acceptance of all terms and
conditions of this permit.
Property Owner/Authorized Agent Signature
Regulatory Project Manager Signature
Date September 29. 1995 Expiration
SURVEY PLATS, FIELD SKETCH, WETLAND DELINEATION FORM, ETC., MUST BE
ATTACHED TO THE FILE COPY OF THIS FORM, IF REQUIRED OR AVAILABLE.
????