19950411 Ver 1_Complete File_19950427

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
AM
ID FE F1
July 25, 1995
Polk County
DEM Project #---
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Mr. Franklin Vick
Planning and Environmental Branch
DOT
P. O. Box 25201
P. FILE COP
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
You have our approval to place temporary fill material in 0.0106 hectares of wetlands or waters
for the purpose of constructing two temporary access causeways at SR 1302, Bridge # 74, as you
described in your application dated 13 July 1995. After reviewing your application, we have decided
that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 2727. This certification allows
you to use Nationwide Permit Number 33 when it is issued by the Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If
you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application.
For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification. An
additional condition is that you install silt fence around the work platform. In addition, you should get
any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing,
send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the
Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and
its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Environmental Management under Section 401
of the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
incerely,
ifs,
0,-;,F-,-
A. Presto Howard, Jr. P.E.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
95754.1tr
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

4
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
July 13 , 1995
Regulatory Branch
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Field Office
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
ATTENTION: Mr. G. Wayne Wright
Dear Sir:
95-75q
RECEIVED
JUL 2 1 1995
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
RR.c n ink I
IZ. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Polk County - Replacement of Bridge No. 74 on SR 1302 over the
Green River; T.I.P. No. B-3017; State Project No. 8.2980701
The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers issued Nationwide Permit No. 23
(Approved Categorical Exclusions) for this project on June 5, 1995. We have
been informed that two temporary work platforms will be necessary during
construction of the new bridge. The attached drawings illustrate the
location and dimensions of the proposed platforms. Two causeways are to be
located on the north and south banks of the river, within NCDOT right-of-way.
Each causeway will provide a 7.6m X 7.5m work area above ordinary high water,
with 1.5:1 side slopes. They are to be constructed of Class II Rip Rap taken
from an upland source. These work platforms may be required throughout
construction of the bridge, a pd wfl-l--be removed u completion."
We hereby request approval of Nationwi a Permit No. 33 emporary
Construction, Access and Dewatering) for th roposed By copy of this
letter, issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification by the N. C. Division of
Environmental Management is also requested. In accordance with current
procedures for projects located in the designated trout counties, the
concurrence of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission must be
obtained prior to construction. By copy of this letter, we hereby request
review of this proposal by WRC.
G)
July 13, 1995
Page 2
Thank you for your assistance. If you have any questions, please call
Cyndi Bell and [phone], Extension 306. A
Sincere
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/tp
cc: Steve Lund, COE, Asheville Field Office
John Dorney, DEM, DEHNR
David Yow, DEM, DEHNR
John Parker, DCM, DEHNR
John L. Smith, Jr., P. E, Structure Design
Kelly Barger, P. E., Program Development
Don Morton,-P. E., Highway Design
A. L. Hankins, P. E., Hydraulics
Tom Shearin, P. E., Roadway Design
F. D. Martin, P. E., Division 14 Engineer
John Williams, Planning & Environmental
NOTIFICATION FORM Y
INFORMATION SHEET
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
A. NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS DISTRICT ENGINEER. (REFER TO -
ITEM B. BELOW FOR DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT APPLICATION RE-
QUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICALLY NOTE NWP 26 DIFFERENCE.)
Certain nationwide permits require notification to the Corps of Engineers before work can proceed. They are as follows:
NWP 5 (only for discharges of 10 to 25 cubic yards)
NWP'7
NWP 13 (only for stabilization activities in excess of 500 feet in length or greater than an average of one cubic yard
per running foot)
NWP 14 (only for fills in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, and must include a delineation of affected special
aquatic sites)
NWP 17
NWP 18 (required when discharge exceeds 10 cubic yards or the discharge is in a special aquatic site and must include _
a delineation of the affected special aquatic site, including wetlands)
NWP 21 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands)
NWP 26 (only for greater than 1 acre total impacts and must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites,
including wetlands)
NWP 33 (must include a restoration plan of reasonable measures to avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic resources)
NWP 37
NWP 38 (must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands)
For activities that may be authorized by the above listed nationwide permits that. require notification, the
applicant shall not begin work
a. Until notified that the work may proceed under the nationwide permit with any special conditions imposed by
the District Engineer; or
b. If notified that an individual permit may be required, or
c. Unless 30 days (calendar) have passed from the time a complete notification is received by the District Engineer
and no notice has been received from the District Engineer, and required state approvals have been obtained.
Required state approvals include: 1) a Section 401 water quality certification if authorization is requested for a
discharge of dredged or fill material, and 2) an approved coastal zone management consistency determination if
the activity will affect the coastal area.
Use of NWP 12 also requires notification to the District Engineer, but work may not begin until written
concurrence is received from the District Engineer. The time periods described above do not apply.
Furthermore, requirements to notify the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), as indicated below and on the
notification form, do not apply.
B. APPLICATION TO DEM FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION.
Certain nationwide permits require an application to DEM in order to obtain Section 401 water quality certification.
They are NWP 6, NWP 12, NWP 15, NWP 16, NWP 17, NWP 21, NWP 33, NWP 34, NWP 38, and NWP 40.
Certain nationwide permits were issued general certifications and require no application. They are NWP 3, NWP 4,
NWP 5, NWP 7, NWP 20, NWP 22, NWP 23 (requires notification to DEM), NWP 25, NWP 27, NWP 32, NWP 36,
and NWP 37.
The following nationwide permits were issued general certifications for only limited activities: NAP 13 (for projects
less than 500 feet in length), NWP 14 (for projects that impact waters only), NWP 18 (for projects with less than 10
cubic yards of fill in waters only), and NWP 26 (for projects with less than or equal to one-third acre fill of waters or
wetlands). Projects that do not meet these criteria require application for Section 401 water quality certifications.
C. NOTMCATION/APPLICATION PROCEDURES.
The attached form should be used to obtain approval from the Corps of Engineers and/or the N.C. Division of
Environmental Management as specified above. The permittee should make sure that all necessary information is
provided in order to avoid delays. One copy of the completed form is required by the Corps of Engineers and seven
copies are required by DEM. Plans and maps must be on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper.
Endangered species requirement: For Corps of Engineers notifications only, applica nts must notify the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service regarding the presence of endangered species that may
be affected by the proposed project.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
RALEIGH FIELD OFFICE
P.O. Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636*3726
Telephone [phone]
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
HABITAT CONSERVATION DIVISION
Pivers Island
Beaufort, NC 28516
Telephone [phone]
Historic resources requirement: For Corps of Engineers notifications only, applicants must notify the State Historic
Preservation Office regarding the presence of historic properties that may be affected by the proposed project.
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
N.C. DIVISION OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY
109 East Jones Street _
Raleigh, NC 27601
Telephone [phone]
Information obtained from these agencies should be forwarded to the Corps.
DEM ID:
w_
ACTION ID: 199501505
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Permit #):
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTN: CESAW CO-E
Telephone [phone]
WATER QUALITY PLANNING
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
P.O. Boy. 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
ATTN: MR. jOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
PLEASE PRINT.
1. Owners Name: North Carolina Department of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. Owners Address: P-0. Box 25201; Raleigh, NC 27611
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): --- (Work): [phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E.
Manager
5. Location of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County: Polk
Nearest Town or City: Spindale
Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Replace Bridge No. 74 on SR 1302
6. Name of Closest Stream/River.
7. River Basin:
Broad
Green River
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS H? YES [X] NO [ ]
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [X] NO [ ]
If yes, explain. Received NWP 23 permit dated 6/5/95
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
0.0106 ha
11. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled: 0.0106 ha
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted: 0.0106 ha
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/2" X 11 drawings only): Constr?ction:..of. two
temporary access casueways on both sides of the Green River on SR 1302
13. Purpose of proposed work: To provide access over the Green River during the
replacement of the bridge on location.
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimize wetland impacts.
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed orproposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES NO [ ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done. so? YES D4 NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What is land use of surrounding property?
Rura 1
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? N/A
Owner's Signature Date
H
H
po" al
d?
a
\ Q
4
C J
U?
in
i
i

ti

0

o?
c ,m a: of
?' W W
C7
zy z- > >
m
0 ?

rQ
CO . LLJ
Z

L- YN W
Z J • W
.0 CL O

? U
p
Q W

U O
Of
a
f?
4 ? \ a
\ ?e
hI
L-
Q
E
O
a

a
F
a
w
z

a
c F ?
?v
Qj oQQ
? Q N
Q Q if
k6u V) V)
V
0
0
N
0
0
N

i

y ? vN
Ci
3

V
? v
t

I j _
'

I_ o
?I

I D
+,

Z9
I
WIC
I
? a
i ac
I ?}
c3
bW
?w
I ?7:)
Q?
? sm
? N

? kc) o N
N N
G
9

O

_ ?- W W
z? Z_ > >
? 00
J
Q t.., O
?
r^ t1
U Q

Q
I

r?
%
0

Y N
-J - C),
00
W

LLJ I

N 0 m
d O
U mI
Ld ?. ,
- U a

W
E
)?r 0
s?
? x
A o
w
U
z
O U
N
O W
E s
o ?
o c

DETAIL OF CAUSEWAY
CLASS II.
RIP RAP
CAUSEWAY
17.6 m f
0.61 m_ f-
1.5:1
W. S N. G.
(NOT TO SCALE)
VOLUME AND ACERAGE OF
CLASS II RIP RAP BELOW W. S.
ACERAGE = .005814A
CLASS 11 RIP RAP = 120 CU, m
r
PROPERTY OWNER
NAME AND ADDRESS
Louis Barwell
Rt. 4 Box 87N
Rutherfordton, NC 28139
C. B. Contracting
P.O. Box 303
Tuxedo, NC 28782
Champion Paper Corp.
Piedmont East - 37
Villa Road
Greenville, SC 29615;1
CLYDE T. GASPERSON
P. 0. BOX 74
ARDEN, NC 28704
ROYCE P. THOMAS
832-4TH AVE.
HENDERSONVILLE,-.NC 28739.
HORACE L. WATSUN
RT. 6 BOX 270
RUTHERFORDTON, NC 28139

N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
POLK COUNTY
PROJECT : 8.2980701 (B-3017
BRIDGE OVER,
GREEN RIVER
SHEET .5 OF 5

?e saw ?.
JAMES B. HUNT, JR.
GOVERNOR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TkWSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
October 4, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
RECEIVED
OCT 14 1994
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
Review of Scoping Sheets for Bridge No. 74 on SR 1302
in Polk County over Green River; B-3017
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 November 8, 1994 at 9:30 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 John Williams, Project Planning Engineer, at 733-7842.
JW/pl r D3og?3
Attachment 6,? 2',PK 7 _ Zq (3 3)

AID
A
BRIDGE
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
TIP PROJECT B-3017
STATE PROJECT
F.A. PROJECT
DIVISION FOURTEEN
COUNTY Polk
ROUTE SR 1302
PURPOSE OF PROJECT: REPLACE OBSOLETE BRIDGE
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Replace Bridge No. 74 on SR 1302 over
Green River in Palk County; B-3017.
WILL THERE BE SPECIAL FUNDING PARTICIPATION BY MUNICIPALITY,
DEVELOPERS, OR OTHERS? YES NO X
EXISTING STRUCTURE: LENGTH 37 METERS; WIDTH 4.4 METERS
121 FEET 14.5 FEET

TIP CONSTRUCTION COST ................................ $ 350,000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST ................................ $ 25,000
TIP TOTAL COST ................................... $ 375,000
CLASSIFICATION: RURAL LOCAL ROUTE
w
1145
---AP If
._
6 "j
t 148 - A
-
?? , b
1143 -12079
16 `S
1141 11
42 1106 p 11
1
005 p 1141 1004 J
.
? ,
G /1 1.6
!
..4 1-0OS -3,9 1,3 1139
'I Rutherford - 144
Grays
;o
Polk County 4 Creek Ch. ; .9 =
Cox Store County
1106
1:118
J 1351 Kist6 ?_ 1 •?
1127
26 ' . Chal Bridge No. 74 ?. v.
9: -? 195., 1132
. a s .
RIVER 1

Creek '
352 1 128 r
3 3 4 4. 1_t
i o *+ .-1 133 ;3
b,
- 302 ZV)
of
1130 1131
is.

'
0
1106
1362 2 b 113A
.?
1302 1356
6
'
?
? - •
.. b 1195
.o
.6 1363,
?
1341 .9'
Green .4
Q 1106

-1340
?IVeI` ,?. ,
1-004
0
S
2 1126
1340
1214
b 1004 F. 1359
`? 1303 ?•.2
b
?fi
1 56
•t? 8 O
135 1101
6i 22 1125
1357 '.6 ,?
..1112
i 356 5. .? ..
,j 2? 1343 o p_ 9 1 1112

1103 1104
15

1
3 55
.
1'33 1102 1105
b 1104 (b
1102. 1106
_ 1108
w 1305
,' ' 1100 1
Vft `1
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
POLK COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 74 ON SR 1302
OVER GREEN RIVER
B - 3017
0 km 1.6 km 3.2
t t ,
0 miles 1 miles 2
\
\ - ^s.
111 q? { !. ?;.? I ?! i1? - V• - i "/ -'-
0 i '\ p ?S U ?/ /i ?Tir T ! O ?? 7
II n `?
Rutherfordton South
ee,
USGS 7.5 Minute
Quadrangle
I? z \ .
i _ / ?.•, r''\: ?/? !llr ? ?);iF.at ?,?? LEGHdRN ', 928 ` -
• J ? -747 % -\ ??. •\\ ___\???' ;? _-? _ i _ -?/ ,
Mashburn
e U,
1, V.1 r\
'.lV
%
\Grvys Creek Ch/,3•
{,
?J
if
II
\i'
m?
-, if _ off , ? <
r ;.1 t \ ' /
11 ?"? :••, ? `? ? r?? `.?. 1
t t
Istlers
U qN rn,
"Al
- ? AV?l
.v.
893
:970
G Rr -? J \a?AA
' - "?1' { ?Jti• ,' C. ?• ljj o.. _ ?? :>? /?.' \._? 820
kz;
1197tp'Ar, Ford
?G396?,? r?? - J/?\?r. //- _ 7IjGr -• ?•Ch _rt
?? ?7 \\ l r/ i 1 \
' %n /? 1. /' \ 755
??: ?/ 1; \
N. DEPARTMENT 'OF TRANSPORTATION
;. -
TRANSMITTAL SLIP- DATE ;. ,.' ., .
auk L
? REF. N OR %OOM, BLDG.
FROM: 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 ? IdVESTIGATE-AND REPORT
COMMENTS: '.

• / paf STATE. o
?s
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
April 13, 1995
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
RECEIVED
APR 2 41995
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
BRANCH
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
r
Subject: Polk County - Replacement of Bridge No. 74 on SR 1302 over the
Green River; T.I.P. No. B-3017; State Project No. 8.2980701
The North Carolina Dep
above-referenced structure
cessed as a Categorical"E
expect to proceed with th'
with 33 CFR 330 Appendix
Corps of Engineers. The
these regulations will be
ra Tent f Transportation proposes to replace the
n an ne location. This project is being pro-
asion i accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). We
project under a Nationwide Permit in accordance
(B-23) ssued November 22, 1991, by the U.S. Army
visi s of Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of
ed in the construction of this project.
No jurisdictional wetlands will be affected by the proposed work. In
accordance with current procedures for projects located in the designated
trout counties, the concurrence of WRC must be obtained prior to
construction. At this location, the Green River is not a Designated Public
Mountain Trout Water. By copy of this letter, we hereby request that WRC
review the proposed project and provide any comments they find necessary. A
copy of the CE document is included for the WRC review.
If you have any questions, please call Cyndi Bell at [phone]
extension 306.
S' r
1
. Fr nklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Attachment
cc: Steve Lund, COE, Asheville Field Office
David Yow, WRC, Asheville
John Dorney, DEHNR, DEM
John Parker, DEHNR, DCM/Permit Coordinator
Kelly Barger, P.E., Program Development
Don Morton, P.E., Highway Design
A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
John L. Smith, Jr., P.E., Structure Design
Tom Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design
F. D. Martin, P.E., Division 14 Engineer
John Williams, Planning & Environmental

Polk County
Bridge No. 74 on SR 1302
Over Green River
Federal Project BRZ-1302(18)
State Project 8.2980701
TIP # B-3017
4v
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

APPROVED:
3-22-95 Tr -
Date .,H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Date Fait Nicholas Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Polk County
Bridge No. 74 on SR 1302
Over Green River
Federal Project BRZ-1302(18)
State Project 8.2980701
TIP # B-3017
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
March, 1995
Documentation Prepared in
Planning and Environmental Branch By:

01,
I r„wc` ' 1. 1V\,6
John Willihm
Proje t Planning Engineer
C A RO
Y/7 -P- 0 SS
•
Wayne Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head S E A L
6916
l/ 3 = :A, r
2 2-7S
/ •......• ??
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager ''•.?' V pR?-t,.+'
Planning and Environmental Branch •''••x,,,,+.•111'
Polls County
Bridge No. 74 on SR 1302
Over Green River
Federal Project BRZ-1302(18)
State Project 8.2980701
TIP # B-3017
Bridge No. 74 is located in Polk County on SR 1302 crossing over Green River. It
is programmed in the 1995-2001 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge
replacement project. This project is part of the Federal Aid Bridge Replacement Program
and has been classified as a "Categorical Exclusion". No substantial environmental impacts
are expected.
I. SAY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
The North Carolina Department of Transportation is proposing replacement of
Bridge No. 74 on a new alignment at the existing location (see Figure 2) with a bridge.
The estimated cost of the project is $535,000. The estimated cost shown in the
1995-2001 TIP is $ 375,000.
II. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
NCDOT will implement Best Management Practices.
NCDOT will implement Sedimentation Control Guidelines.
NCDOT will survey the project area during the flowering season to determine
whether the white irisette (Sigy chium dichotomum) exists on the project site. If the
white insette does exist on the project site NCDOT will carry out a Section 7 Consultation
(informal) in coordination with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
NCDOT will implement all standard procedures and measures (where the above
commitments do not supersede) to avoid and minimize environmental impacts.
NCDOT will get a North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM)
Section 401 Water Quality General Certification prior to issue of the Army Corps of
Engineers Nationwide Permit #23.
Polk County is designated as a trout water county and as such NCDOT has
coordinated with The North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC).
NCWRC has reviewed the project and has stated they "anticipated no special
recommendations on the permit to protect trout, since the project lies downstream of trout
waters" (see Attachment 3).
III. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT does not anticipate any design exceptions. The 30 km/h (20 mph ) design
speed meets AASHTO's standards for mountainous terrain.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1302 is classified as a Rural Local Route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. It serves approximately 100 vehicles per day. SR 1302 (Kim Miller
Road) is unpaved and runs in a north/south direction in the vicinity of Bridge No. 74.
The existing bridge was completed in 1940. It is 36.9 meters (121 feet) long
consisting of 3 spans @ 12.3 meters (40.3 feet) each. There are approximately 3 meters (10
feet) of vertical clearance between the bridge deck and streambed. The deck is 4.4 meters
(14.5 feet) wide with 4.2 meters (13.8 feet) of clear deck width. The bridge serves one lane
of traffic.
According to Bridge Maintenance Department records, the sufficiency rating of the
bridge is 25.9 out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge is posted at 15 tons for single
vehicles and 18 tons for truck-tractor semi-traders. The structure has less than 4 years of
estimated remaining life.
The horizontal alignment is such that there are sharp curves on both ends of the
bridge. The bridge is in a vertical sag. The roadway width to the east and west of the bridge
is 5.4 meters (18 feet) wide. Shoulder widths on the north and south ends of the bridge vary
from 0 to 1 meter (0 to 3 feet). Both shoulder and roadway width widen quickly coming
out of the curves on the ends of the bridge.
Traffic volume is presently 100 vehicles per day (VPD) and projected at 300 VPD
for the year 2020. Truck percentages are 1% truck-tractor semi-trailer and 1% dual-tired
vehicles. The speed limit on this segment of road is 90 kilometers per hour (statutory 55
miles per hour).
Consultation with the Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that no accidents have
occurred within the last three years.
No school busses cross over the studied bridge.
There are no utilities in the area that will be impacted by this project.
V. ALTERNATIVES
A replacement bridge at the existing location, with the same orientation, was not
considered due to intolerable approach alignments. Therefore, a new alignment is required
(see figure 2). This alignment was chosen based on achieving acceptable approaches while
Other impacts. R
"Do-nothing" is not a practical alternate because it would require the eventual
closing of the road as the existing bridge completely deteriorates. w
Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating bridge is neither practical nor economical.
VI. PROJECT PLAN OF ACTION
This document discusses only one plan of action (see Figure 2). Bridge No. 74 will
be replaced on an alignment that is skewed to the existing alignment. The existing structure
will be replaced with a new bridge approximately 54 meters (180 feet) long. The new bridge
will have a clear deck width of 8.4 meters (24 feet) including two 3-meter (10-foot) lanes
and 0.6-meter (2-foot) offsets.
The elevation of the new roadway will be approximately 1 meter (3 feet) higher than
the existing roadway. The design speed will be 30 kilometers per hour (20 miles per hour).
There will be 6 meters (20 feet) of pavement with 1.2-meter (4-foot) shoulders on the
approaches. Traffic will be detoured along SR 1005, SR 1352, and back to SR 1302
during construction (see figure 1).
VI. ESTIMATED COST
TABLE 1
COMPONENT COST
Mobilization & Miscellaneous
New Bridge Structure
Bridge Removal
Roadway & Approaches
Engineering & Contingencies $ 74,000
254,000
10,000
102,000
60,000

Total Construction 500,000
Right of Way 35,000

Total Cost $ 535,000
VII. TRAFFIC DETOUR
The offsite detour carries traffic around the project by way of SR 1005, SR 1352, and
back to SR 1302, as shown in Figure 1. The roadways along the detour are equal to or better
than SR 1302. The other two bridges along the route are not posted and will be sufficient to
carry traffic detoured from SR 1302.
The division engineer supports improving the alignment and detouring traffic for the
duration of construction.
VIII. RECOM1 MNDED IMPROVEMENT
Bridge No. 74 will be replaced on an alignment that crosses the existing bridge
alignment on a skew to improve design speed and safety (see figure 2). The existing
structure will be replaced with a new bridge approximately 54 meters (180 feet) long. The
new bridge will have a clear deck width of 8.4 meters (24 feet) including two 3-meter (10-
foot) lanes and 0.6-meter (2-foot) offsets.
The elevation of the new roadway will be approximately 1 meter (3 feet) higher than
the existing roadway. The design speed will be 30 kilometers per hour (20 miles per hour).
There will be 6 meters (20 feet) of pavement with 1.2-meter (4-foot) shoulders on the
approach. The existing driveways tied in near the bridge will be reworked to join the new
alignment as shown in Figure 2. Traffic will be detoured along SR 1005, SR 1352, and
back to SR 1302 during construction (see figure 1).
IX. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. GENERAL
This project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an
inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
This project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
This bridge replacement will not have a substantial 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 change in land use is expected to result from construction of this project.
There are no hazardous waste impacts.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way
acquisition will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not
expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
4
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl
refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
The proposed project will place fill in the floodplain but the new structure has been
designed to provide equivalent conveyance of water. Therefore this project will not raise
the floodplain more than 0.3 meters (1-foot).
B. AIR AND NOISE
The project area is within the Northern Piedmont Air Quality Control Region. The
ambient air quality for Caswell County has been determined to be in compliance with the
National Ambient Air quality Standards. This project is in an area where the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control measures. NCDOT
and the FHWA do not anticipate that it will create any adverse effect on the air quality of
this attainment area.
The impact on air quality will be insignificant. if the project disposes of vegetation by
burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of
the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This
evaluation completes the assessment requirements of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments
and the National Environmental Policy Act. The project requires no additional reports.
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes. Therefore, will not have a
significant impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during
construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
In compliance with the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FFPA) of 1981, the U. S.
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) was asked to determine whether project under
consideration will impact prime or important farmland soils. The SCS did not respond
which indicates that the project will not impact prime or important farmland soils.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Upon review of area photographs, aerial photographs, and cultural resources
databases, the Department of Cultural Resources has indicated that they "are aware of no
historic structures within the area of potential effect." Bridge No. 74 is the only structure in
the area over 50 years of age and it was determined not to be eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places. They therefore recommend no historic architectural surveys be
conducted.
The Office of State Archeology has commented that an inspection of proposed
bridge replacement area was conducted while in the general vicinity. It is unlikely that
National Register-eligible archaeological resources will be affected by the proposed
replacement and they recommend no archaeological investigation.
E. NATURAL SYSTEM
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Water and soil resources, which occur in the study area, are discussed below. The
availability of water and soH.- directly influence composition and distribution of flora and
fauna in any biotic community.
Water Resources
Project B-3017 is located within the Green River sub-basin of the Broad River
Basin. The Green River originates in southwest Polk County and flows eastward
approximately 56.0 kilometers (35.0 miles) before converging with the Broad River. The
proposed project is approximately 1.6 kilometers (1.0 mile) west of the confluence of the
Green and Broad Rivers.
At the B-3017 project site, Green River had heavy flow rates and mud colored water
as a result of precipitation received the day before the site visit. The substrate was
indeterminable due to high water conditions. Channel width was approximately 27.4 meters
(90.0 feet) and water was within 0.3 meters (1.0-foot) of the bridge.
Two perennial streams, one northwest and one southwest of the existing bridge,
divert water from areas west of SR 1302 to the Green River. They are located just outside
of the project limits and range in width from 0.9 meters (3.0 feet) to 3.1 meters (10.0 feet),
respectively.
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of
Em?ironmental Management (DEM). Green River is designated as "Class C". This
classification denotes waters suitable for secondary uses such as aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-Il) nor
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 kilometers (1.0 mile) of the study
area for the project.
Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is managed by DEM
and is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses long
term trends in water quality. The program assesses water quality by sampling for selected
benthic macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites. Macroinvertebrates are
sensitive to very subtle changes in water quality, thus, the species richness and overall
biomass are reflections of water quality. BMAN information is available for Green River at
the location of the existing bridge. Sampling dates were 7/87 and 7/89 and ratings are good.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Any discharger is
required to register for a permit. The NPDES does not list any discharges within 16.0
kilometers (10.0 miles) of the proposed project.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Replacing an existing structure in the same location with a road closure during
construction is almost always preferred. It poses the least risk to aquatic organisms and other
natural resources. Bridge replacement on new location usually results in more severe
impacts. Impacts expected with the B-3017 lateral flows is projected to include: increased
channelization and sedimentation; scouring of the stream bed; soil compaction and loss of
shading due to vegetation removal.
Precautions will be taken to minimize impacts to water resources in the study
area, NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and
Sedimentation Control guidelines will be strictly enforced during the construction
stage of the project.
Soils and Topography
Mixed alluvial soils dominate the study area. These soils consist of areas of
unconsolidated alluvium recently deposited by streams. They are found on narrow terraces
adjacent to the stream. These are subject to frequent overflow and soil colors are light
brown.
Polk County lies in the Mountain Physiographic Province. The geology of the project
site exhibits intrusive rocks consisting of metamorphosed granitic rocks foliated to weakly
foliated and locally migmatitic, originating in the Late Proterozoic to Middle Paleozoic Eras.
The topography consists of steep side slopes leading to narrow valleys containing drainage
patterns of a dendritic subtype.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
This section describes the existing vegetation and associated wildlife communities
that occur on the project site. It also discusses potential impacts affecting these
communities as a result of the proposed actions.
All species are cited with their common names accompanied by their scientific
names. Subsequent references to the same species will include common names only.
Faunal species observed during the site visit are noted with an asterisk (*).
Terrestrial Communities
Three distinct terrestrial communities were identified in the project study area:
(1) alluvial forest; (2) maintained pine forest; and (3) roadside/disturbed community. Many
faunal species are highly adaptive and may populate the entire range of the three terrestrial
communities discussed.
Alluvial Forest
The alluvial forest is found along floodplain ridges, terraces and active levees
adjacent to a river channel. The hydrology is palustrine with intermittent flooding during
wet periods. Alluvial forests are believed to form a stable climax forest, having a stable
uneven aged canopy composed primarily of bottomland hardwood trees.

7
The canopy is dominated by various bottomland trees such as sycamore, tulip poplar,
green ash, sweetgum and river birch. Understory vegetation includes red maple, ironwood,
dogwood, privet and various saplings of canopy trees mentioned above. Vine and
herbaceous species present at the project site are poison-ivy, Japanese honeysuckle,
greenbner, , Christmas fern, resurrection fern, river oats, aster greenbrier, uniola grass, and
giant cane.
Wildlife associated with the alluvial forest include species associated with ecosystems
that are temporarily flooded during periods of heavy precipitation. A few of the species that
may be found in this community include spotted salamander, marbled salamander, two-lined
salamander, spring salamander and spring peeper which forage on small arthropods, insects
and worms. The gray squirrel, raccoon, black bear and white-tailed deer also may be
observed in this community. Dominant predators of this community include the barred owl
and red shouldered hawk, which prey on small rodents, birds, reptiles and amphibians.
Maintained Pine Forest
The maintained pine forest contains mostly shordeaf pine with intrusions of Virginia
pine. This forest is managed by Champion Paper Company and trees range in height
between 6.1 and 9.1 meters (20.0 and 30.0 feet). Other species found sporadically
throughout the stand are white oak, red cedar, northern red oak and black cherry. Japanese
honeysuckle dominates the vine and herbaceous layer throughout this community.
The maintained pine forest offers relatively low quality habitat for fauna compared to
more diverse areas of uneven aged trees. Species that may be observed interacting in this
community are pine warbler, downy woodpecker, hairy woodpecker, ringneck snake and
eastern box turtle.
Roadside/Disturbed Community
The roadside/disturbed community is dominated by saplings, vines and small herbs
that are regularly controlled by mowing. Species found along the B-3017 project site
include pine and hardwood seedlings, persimmon, black cherry, privet, Joe-pye-weed, aster,
fescue, barnyard grass, blackberry and Japanese honeysuckle.
This landscape setting provides habitat for the existence of many faunal species
related to open settings. Species such as the northern cardinal, mourning dove and Carolina
chickadee are found throughout this community. The eastern cottontail and woodchuck may
also find foraging opportunities and shelter in this community. Major predators include the
red-tailed hawk, red fox and black racer.
Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community type, small mountain river, will be impacted by the proposed
project. Physical and chemical characteristics of the water body dictate faunal composition
of the aquatic communities. Terrestrial communities adjacent to a water resource also
greatly influence aquatic communities and vice versa.
Since water levels were high due to recent precipitation, no fish, invertebrates nor
fresh water mussel shells were encountered. However, prey species likely to be present in
the Green River include golden shiner, central stoneroller, highback chub, fantail darter and
spottail shiner. These fish feed on algae, invertebrates and juvenile fish while acting as
forage items themselves for such species as redbreast sunfish, bluegill and largemouth bass.
8
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the subject project will have various impacts on the biotic resources
described (habitat reduction, faunal displacement, etc.). Any construction related activities
in or near these resources have the potential to impact biological functions. This section
quantifies and qualifies impacts to the natural resources in terms of area impacted and
ecosystems affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered here as well.
Calculated impacts to aquatic and terrestrial resources reflect the relative abundance
of each community present in the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of these communities. Table 1 summarizes potential quantitative
losses to these biotic communities, resulting from project construction. Estimated impacts
are derived using the entire proposed right-of-way width of 24.0 meters (80.0 feet).
Usually, project construction does not require the entire right of way; therefore, actual
impacts may be considerably less.
TABLE 2. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
Community Area Impacted
Alluvial Forest 0.1 (0.2)
Maintained Forest Community 0.4 (0.9)
Roadside/Disturbed Community 0.3 (0.7)
Total Impacts 0.8 (1.8)
NOTES: Values cited are in hectares (acres).
Impacts to terrestrial communities will occur in the form of habitat reduction. Since
the project area is already fragmented, relatively little impact will occur to species that live
along the edges and open areas. However, ground dwellers and slow moving organisms will
decrease in numbers. Mobile species will be permanently displaced. Increased predation
will occur as a result of habitat reduction.
Impacts to aquatic communities will occur from increased sedimentation, increased
light penetration and loss of habitat. Sedimentation covers benthic organisms inhibiting them
to feed and obtain oxygen. Increased light penetration from removal of stream side
vegetation increases biological oxygen demand (BOD). Warmer water contains less oxygen
thus, reducing aquatic life that depends on high oxygen concentrations.
SPECIAL TOPICS
This section provides descriptions, irventories and impact analysis pertinent to two
sensitive issues--Waters of the United States and rare and protected species.
Waters of the United States: Jurisdictional Topics
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States," as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CFR) Part 328.3.
Wetlands, defined in 33 CFR 328.3, are those areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated
conditions. Any action that proposes to place fill into these areas falls under the jurisdiction
of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1344). No jurisdictional wetlands occur at the project site.
Anticipated Permit Requirements
Impacts to waters of the United States come under jurisdiction of the COE. A
Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 23 will authorize impacts to natural resources
concerned with the proposed project. This permit authorizes:
(1) activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in whole, or
in part, by another federal agency or department, and;
(2) that agency or department has determined pursuant to the council on environmental
quality regulation that the activity, work or discharge is categorically excluded
from environmental documentation because it is included within a category of
actions which neither individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment, and;
(3) the office of the chief on engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with the
determination.
A Section 401 General Water Quality Certification (WQC # 2745) is also required
for any activity which may result in a discharge and for which a federal permit is required.
State permits are administered through the Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources (DEHNR).
Polk County is listed by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(WRC) as a county containing Mountain Trout Waters (MTW). No discharge
activities will be authorized by the Nationwide Permits within designated MTW
counties without a letter of approval from the WRC and written concurrence from the
Wilmington District Engineer.
Mitigation
Nationwide permits usually do not require compensatory mitigation according to the
memorandum of Agreement (MOE) between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
and the COE. However, final permit/mitigation decisions will be made by the COE.
10
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of decline
either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with man. Federal law (under the
provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires that any action,
likely to adversely impact a species classified as federally-protected, be subject to review by
the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other species may receive additional protection under
separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of
November 17, 1994, the FWS lists one federally-protected species for Polk County: white
inisette (Sjoy chium dichotomum).
Sjnvdi chium dichotomum (white irisette) Endangered
Plant Family: Iridaceae
Federally Listed: October 28, 1991
Flowers Present: June
Distribution in N.C.: Henderson, Polk, Rutherford.
The white irisette is a perennial herb with dichotomously branching stems. The
basal leaves are bluish green in color and are 1/3 to 1/2 the overall height of the plant. White
flowers are borne at the ends of winged stems and the fiuit is a round, pale to medium
brown capsule containing three to six round or elliptical black seeds.
The white irisette is endemic to the upper piedmont of North Carolina. This plant is
found in sunny clearings and along the edges of upland woods where a thin canopy is
present. These open areas often are where runoff has removed the deep litter layer that is
usually present. It occurs on rich, basic soils that are probably weathered from amphibolite.
It is dependent on a form of disturbance to maintain the open quality of its habitat.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: UNRESOLVED
Suitable habitat for white irisette exists only along the roadsides of the proposed
project. A plant-by-plant survey will need to be conducted in June of 1995 while the plant is
in flower.
Federal Candidate and State Protected Species
There are thirteen federal candidate (C2) species listed for Polk County. Federal
Candidate species are not afforded federal protection 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. C2 species are defined as organisms which are
vulnerable to extinction although no sufficient data currently exists to warrant a listing of
Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered or Proposed Threatened. Organisms which
are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by the North
Carolina Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and Animal Species 1993 are afforded state
protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection
and Conservation Act of 1979.
11
Table 3 lists federal candidate species, the species' state status (if afforded state
protection) and the existence of suitable habitat for each species in the study area. This
species list is provided for information purposes as the status of these species may be
upgraded in the. future.
TABLE 3
FEDERAL CANDIDATE / N.C. PROTECTED SPECIES
FOR POLK COUNTY
Scientific
Name
Neotoma floridanamagister
Dendroica cerulea
Pituophis m.melanoleucus
P3TMwyandot
Psoralea macrophylla
Hexastylis rhombifonnis
Juglans cinerea
Marshallia grandiflora
Monotropsis odorata
Nestronia umbellula
Platxhypnidium pringlei
Saxifrage caroliniana
Senecio millefolium
Common Name NC Suitable
Status Habitat
Eastern woodrat SC N
Cerulean warbler - N
Northern pine snake Sc N
Southern grizzled skipper - N
Bigleaf scurf-pea E -*
French Broad heardeaf - N
Butternut - Y
Large-flowered Barbara's buttons - N*
Sweet pinesap - N
Nestronia - N*
Pringle's eurhynchium - N
Gray's saxifrage - N
Divided-leaf ragwort T N
NOTE: "*" Population not documented in Polk County in the past twenty years.
Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site visit, nor were any of
these species observed. A review of the database of the N.C. Natural Heritage Program
Rare Species and Unique Habitats revealed no records of North Carolina rare and/or
protected species in or near the project study area.
12
FIGURES

--- P. 1 145 •y .6 ?- 1148
1.2.
?
1143 a - 1207
1.6 ,s
11
41 1142 1106 p - 11
, _
1005 114 1004 /

` 1.6
?.4 1005 .9
Rutherford 1 as 1.7

Grays

?• 1139

:o
Pak County 4 Creek Ch. G{?' •9
O Cox Store County ' 1106
1.118
_ _135t - Kistl ? •? '4
26 Chal Bridge No. 74
2 1127
1132
• ?9. . 195• /
RIVER - ?•

Creek 1 128 J 3 4
1_1
1362 0« 3
-1 133
302
0
1130 1131

?6
'd 0
1106
1362 1302 2 6 1134
.6 1356
b 1195
J 363 \
41 1106
13 .9. Green .6... .4 •? 5 f
1340 1004
River b
1340 2 1126
r
!4 1064 a: 1359 f ?
1303 •?
•? . j 1.56 •
136
135 h 1101
? 6 ? 2.2
5 1357; b ,
i 1112
' f 356
2i h,
rA4
Thermal ity
{Union 19 ? •? . ,? ? ? 343 p _ q
s -Vills 1104 f
\ .-b... 1103 1.
T F
Imne0ock RstD Sunshine : 1355••'
a Lure H Gil Y E R
1 mmster Hollis Polk'
'Logan 1'35 11
:ak•e Lure ? - ?s 02 1 105
v1- ?.?,ao? rWashburn .. ?.i
Ruth { ! b •4
i + Fo
a? ostic
9 At er lord o bo o C si4 a 54 b 1 104
p oinda e
Lake'Adpe> trC+p ?'P , ` 74 1 102
-'Mill S1Nin9 2 a? it z der =_
O
?o m Z 1 5 C; a 221 calRle? ' w i 305 1 100 O
• _ c,iffsid _
176 e,
O
tl
1214
1125
2 1112
1166 /
1108
North Carolina Department Of
Transportation
Planning & Environmental Branch
POLK COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 74 ON SR 1302
OVER GREEN RIVER
B-3017
0 kilometers 1.6 kilometers 3.2
Figure 1
0 miles 1 miles 2
BRIDGE NO. 74
POLK COUNTY
B-3017
VIEW OF NORTH APPROACH
EAST FACE OF BRIDGE
VIEW OF SOUTH APPROACH
FIGURE 4
?.
ATTACHMENTS

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
November 14, 1994
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State Histo is Preservation Officer
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
SUBJECT: Replace Bridge No. 74 on SR 1302 in Polk County
over Green River, B-3017, ER 95-7661
Thank you for your letter of October 4, 1994, concerning the above project. We
regret staff was unable to attend the scoping meeting for this project on November
8, 1994. However, John Williams provided an aerial and individual photographs to
us for review.
Based on these materials there appear to be no historic structures in the area and
an architectural survey is not recommended. Neither is an archaeological survey
recommended if the bridge is replaced in its current location. However, if there is
ground disturbing activity outside the existing right-of-way, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation will need to undertake an archaeological survey well
in advance of construction.
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.
DB:slw
Enclosures (map and photos)
cc: N. Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ATTACHMENT 1
John ?tllt0-w? r
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
January 31, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replacement of Bridge No. 54 on US 601 over
Yadkin River, Surry and Yadkin Counties, Federal
Aid Project BRSTP-601(2), State Project
8.1770501, TIP B-2181; ER.94-8887, ER 95-8161
Dear Mr. Graf:

FEB 0 3 1995
'L
Z2 DIVISION OF: ,
G' HIGHWA r:D
C??N??RONt??'?P
Thank you for your letter of January 9, 1995, transmitting the archaeological
survey report by Anna L. Gray concerning the above project.
No archaeological sites were identified within the area of potential effect and no
additional archaeological investigation has been recommended. We concur with
this recommendation.
The report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,

David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: -1 . F. Vick
T. Padget
A. Gray
-1
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ATTACHMENT 2
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director.
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation y
FROM: David Yow, District 9 Habitat Biologist Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: February 10, 1995
SUBJECT: Request for scoping comments, Bridge No. 74 on SR
1302 over the Green River, Polk County, North
Carolina, TIP No. B-3017.
This memorandum responds to your request for our
concerns regarding impacts on fish and wildlife resources
resulting from the subject project. The N. C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC) has reviewed the proposed
project, and 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).
The proposed work involves replacement of an obsolete
roadway bridge. We anticipate that a spanning structure
will be required for the site, given the size of the
existing bridge. The Green River is not managed as trout
waters in the project area. Construction impacts on other
fisheries and wildlife resources will depend on the extent
of disturbance in the stream bed and surrounding floodplain
areas. Environmental documentation for this project should
include description of any wetlands on the project site and
surveys for any threatened or endangered species that may be
affected by construction.
Because Polk County is a "trout water county", the
NCWRC anticipates review of the environmental document for
this project when a 404 permit application is submitted to
the Corps of Engineers. We anticipate no special
ATTACHMENT3
B-3017 Memo Page 2 February 10, 1995
recommendations on the permit to protect trout, since the
project lies downstream of trout waters.
It is the policy of the NCWRC that impacts to wetlands
be avoided. If wetland areas are identified during project
planning, alternatives to avoid or minimize impacts on these
areas should be examined during project design.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the
early planning stages for this project. If I can further
assist your office; please contact me at [phone].
CC: Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist
David Cox, Highway Project Coordinator
&-John Williams, Project Planning Engineer

7