19961068 Ver 1_Complete File_19961114

401 ISSUED
qtr = 3,? ?n?
i s 961668
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
November 15, 1996
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTN: Mr. Cliff Winefordner
Chief, Southern Section
Dear Sir;-

SUBJECT: Polk County, Replacement of Bridge No. 47 over Green River on SR
1151. TIP No. B-2604, State Project No. 8.2980301, Federal Aid Project
No. BRZ-1151(1).
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 project.
Test borings will be required for a foundation investigation. Please review the project for
authorization under a Nationwide Permit # 6 as well.
We anticipate that 401 General Water Quality Certifications No. 2745 (Categorical
Exclusion) and No. 2725 (Foundation Investigations) 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 Water Quality, for their review.
{ Since this project occurs in a designated trout county, a copy of this document is also
being provided to the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission for their review.
9

2
You may note on page 2 of the CE document, the NCDOT has committed to providing
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission any
plans for temporary work pads to be placed in the river. This can not be determined until
the results of the foundation investigation are considered. If it is subsequently determined
that temporary work pads will be required, NCDOT will forward these plans to the
agencies.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Michael
Wood at [phone] extension 315.
Sincereil ,
H. Franklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/plr
cc: w/ attachment
Mr. Steve Lund, COE, NCDOT Coordinator
Mrs. Stephanie Goudreau, NCWRC, Marion
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Mr. William J. Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
w/o attachments
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Kelly Barger, P.E., Program Development
Mr. Don Morton, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. F. D. Martin, P.E., Division 14 Engineer
Ms. John Williams, Planning & Environmental

I-
Polk County
Bridge No. 47 on SR 1151
Over Green River
Federal Proj ect BRZ-1151(1)
State Project 8.2980301
TIP # B-2604
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
& PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(f)
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
Date-(,,.H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
LI
Date ich Graf, P. E.
i ivision Administrator, FHWA
*? Y.

Polk County
Bridge No. 47 on SR 1151
Over Green River
Federal Project BRZ-1151(1)
State Project 8.2980301
TIP # B-2604
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
& PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(f)
August 1996
Documentation Prepared in
Planning and Environmental Branch By:
t,
Date John Williams
Project Planning Engineer
82/-96 fNayNe ?/f'??"
Date Wayne Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Polk County
Bridge No. 47 on SR 1151
Over Green River
Federal Project BRZ-1151(1)
State Project 8.2980301
TIP # B-2604
Bridge No. 47 is located in Polk County on SR 1151 crossing over Green River.
It is programmed in the 1996-2002 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.
1. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
Bridge No. 47 (a Parker Truss Bridge eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places) will be replaced with a new bridge on new alignment approximately 24 meters
(80 feet) west of the existing structure. Traffic will be maintained on Bridge No. 47
during construction.
The new bridge will be approximately 50 meters (164 feet) in length and 7.2
meters (24 feet) in width including two 3.0-meter (10-foot) lanes and 0.6-meter (2-foot)
offsets.
New approaches will extend approximately 45 meters (150 feet) to the south and
91 meters (300 feet) to the north. The roadway will include two 3.0-meter (10-foot) lanes
and 2.2-meter (8-foot) grassed shoulders to accommodate guardrail. The grassed
shoulders will taper to 1.2 meters (4 feet) where guardrail is not required. The existing
bridge will be removed upon completion of the new bridge. Based on preliminary design
work, the design speed will be approximately 40 km/h (25 mph).
North of Bridge No. 47 are two other very small bridges (No. 189 and 160) which
cross small streams. These crossings are not presently sufficient to carry construction
equipment and materials across them and will therefore be improved up as a part of this
project.
The estimated cost of the project is $814,000 including $775,000 in construction
costs and $39,000 in right of way costs. The estimated cost shown in the 1997-2003 TIP
is $ 1,065,000. Project B-2604 could be clustered with project B-2605.
II. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. All applicable Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be
included and properly maintained during project construction.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of
dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States."
Prior to issue of the Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit No. 23 or
General Regional Permit No. 31 a North Carolina Division of Environmental
Management (DEM) Section 401 Water Quality General Certification must be obtained.
Bridge No. 47 is a Parker Truss Bridge eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places. As such, the bridge will be properly recorded prior to demolition as
described in the attached Memorandum of Agreement (MOA).
In early coordination with the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission
(NCWRC), NCDOT has asked NCWRC to comment on the proposed project. The
NCWRC responded that the Green River is a hatchery supported Public Mountain Trout
Water in the project area. The following are commitments resulting from
NCWRC coordination (see attached letter from NC);VRC) and standard practice in
Mountain Trout Counties.
• Proper erosion control (e.g. hardwood mulch, straw, etc.) will be used such that soil
is not left unnecessarily bare during construction.
• Construction will be accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact stream water
thus lessening the chance of altering the stream's water chemistry and causing a fish
kill.
• The NCWRC will review the environmental document during the 404 permit
application. NCDOT will provide any plans for temporary work pads to be placed in
the river along with the application.
• NCDOT will conduct foundation investigations on this project. The investigation
will include test borings in soil and/or rock for in-site testing as well as obtaining
samples for laboratory testing. This may require test borings in streams and/or
wetlands.
Construction on Bridge No. 47 will begin only after project B-2605 has been
completed (replacement of Bridge No. 105 north of Bridge No. 47 on SR 1151) for the
following two reasons.
• Extreme curvature on SR 1151 south of Bridge No. 47 is prohibitive to any sort of
tractor-trailer travel and therefore, the transport of construction material required for
construction of Bridge No. 47 is not possible.
• The transport of construction materials required for construction of Bridge No. 47 can
not make the turns through the trusses of Bridge 105.
Between Bridges No. 47 and 105 are two other very small bridges (No. 189 and
160) which cross small streams. These crossings are not presently sufficient to carry
construction equipment and materials across them and will therefore be shored up as a
part of this project. The estimated cost of shoring up each of these small timber
structures is approximately $1,600 each.
2
III. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT anticipates a design exception will be likely because the horizontal
curvature will limit design speed to below the statutory speed limit.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1151 is classified as a Rural Local Route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. It carries 300 vehicles per day. There is no posted speed limit and
is therefore subject to the statutory 55 mph speed limit. The road serves mostly local
residential traffic and some recreational traffic.
The existing bridge was originally built in Henderson County in 1930 but was
moved to it present location in 1965. The deck is 44 meters (144 feet) long with 6.1
meters (20 feet) of bridge roadway width. The vertical distance between the bridge deck
and the stream bed is approximately 6.4 meters (21 feet). There are two lanes of traffic on
the bridge.
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the
bridge is 33.1 out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge is posted 15 tons for single
vehicles and 18 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers. The vertical clearance is posted at
13 feet, 11 inches.
The existing bridge and approaches lie on relatively flat terrain.. A vehicle
approaching the bridge from the southwest would travel along a series of reversing curves
following the Green River, the last of which terminates on the south end of the bridge.
As a vehicle crosses the bridge it turns sharply into a curve traveling northeast and
continues following alongside of the Green River. Roadway width on both approaches is
4.8 meters (16 feet) and shoulders vary from 0.3 to 1.5 meters (1 to 5 feet) in width.
Traffic volume is 300 vehicles per day (VPD) and projected at 500 VPD for the
year 2020.
The Traffic Engineering Branch reports that no accidents have taken place within
the last three years in the vicinity of the project.
There is one school bus crossing twice daily over the studied bridge.
There is a recreational area just east of the existing bridge including a mobile
home for rent, a permanent residence, picnic tables, and what appears to be a small
concession stand (see Figure 4).
A power line is located along the east side of the southwest approach and then
crosses the river approximately 5 meters (16 feet) downstream (east) of the existing
bridge.
V. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
The most feasible alternative is to replace the existing bridge with a new structure
approximately 24 meters (80 feet) west of the existing bridge. Traffic will be maintained
on the existing bridge during construction.
There are no reasonable detour routes. Therefore traffic must be maintained
onsite during construction. A new alignment to the east of the existing bridge would
require taking of part of the private recreational area and offers no design advantages over
the west side. A temporary detour alignment was not considered to be cost competitive
because of the construction of a temporary structure in addition to a permanent structure.
Therefore, only one build alternative to the west is considered in this document.
"Do-nothing" is not practical, requiring the eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates.
Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating bridge is neither practical nor
economical.
VI. ESTIMATED COST
COMPONENT COST
Mobilization & Miscellaneous
New Bridge Structure
Bridge Removal
Roadway & Approaches
Engineering & Contingencies $155,000
225,000
18,000
267,000
110,000

Total Construction $ 775,000
Right of Way $ 39,000
Total Cost $ 814,000
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 47 will be replaced with a bridge 50 meters (164 feet) in length and
7.2 meters (24 feet) in width including two 3.0-meter (10-foot) lanes and 0.6-meter
(2-foot) offsets. It will be located just west of the existing structure at approximately the
same elevation as the existing structure with a minimum gradient of 0.3% provided to
facilitate deck drainage. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during
construction.
Approach work from the new bridge will extend approximately 45 meters (150 feet)
to the south and 91 meters (200 feet) to the north. The roadway will include two 3.0-meter
(10-foot) lanes and 2.2-meter (8-foot) grassed shoulders to accommodate guardrail. The
4
grassed shoulders will taper to 1.2 meters (4 feet) where guardrail is not required. The
existing bridge will be removed upon completion of the new bridge. Based on preliminary
design work, the design speed will be approximately 40 km/h (25 mph).
North of Bridge No. 47 are two other very small bridges (No. 189 and 160) which
cross small streams. According to the Bridge Maintenance Unit (BMU) these crossings
are not presently sufficient to carry construction equipment and materials across them and
will therefore be improved as a part of this project. The BMU estimates the cost of
shoring to be approximately $1,600 each.
The Division 14 Engineer concurs with the proposed project.
VIII. 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 by implementing the environmental commitments
listed in Section II of this document in addition to 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.
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 bridge replacement project will not raise the existing flood levels or
have any significant adverse effect on the existing floodplain.
A power line is located along the east side of the south approach and crosses the
river approximately 5 meters (16 feet) downstream (east) of the existing bridge. The
power line will be relocated as a result of this project.
B. AIR AND NOISE
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included
in the regional emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required.
The project is located in Polk County, which has been determined to be in '
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part 51 is not
applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not
have 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 (FPPA) of 1981, the U. S.
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) was asked to determine whether the project being
considered will impact prime or important farmland soils. The SCS responded that the
project will not impact prime or important farmland soils.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Upon review of area photographs, aerial photos, and cultural resources databases,
the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has indicated that Bridge No. 47 is the
only structure over fifty years of age. Bridge No. 47 has been determined to be eligible
for the National Register of Historic Places. Since the bridge will be demolished as a
result of the project, the SHPO has concurred that there is an "adverse effect." The
bridge will therefore be recorded as described in Section II (Summary of Project
Commitments) of this document as well as in the Memorandum of Agreement (see
attachments).
Since this project necessitates the use of a historic bridge and meets the criteria set
forth in the Federal Register (July 5, 1983), a programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation
satisfies the requirements of Section 4(f).
The following alternatives, which avoid use of the historic bridge structure, have
been fully evaluated: (1) do nothing; (2) build a new structure at a different location
without affecting the historic integrity of the structure; and (3) rehabilitate the historic
bridge without affecting the historic integrity of the structure. These alternatives were not
found to be feasible and prudent.
All possible planning to minimize harm to the historic bridge have been
incorporated into the project. Measures to minimize harm include recording the bridge as
described in the attached Memorandum of Agreement.
There are no other structures in the area over 50 years of age. This concludes
compliance with Section 106 and Section 4(f) requirements.
In the attached letter, the Department of Cultural Resources (DCR) indicated that
an archaeological survey for Bridge No. 47 was completed. During the course of the
survey, no sites were located within the project area. The DCR recommended that since
the project will not involve significant archaeological resources, that no further
investigations be conducted in connection with this project.
6
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
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 and are subject to frequent overflow. 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. The substrate is composed of
boulder, cobble, pebble, sand and silt. Channel width varies between 18.3 meters (60.0
feet) and 21.3 meters (70.0 feet) and depth averages 0.9 meters (3.0 feet).
Water Resources
Project B-2604 is located within the Green River sub-basin of the Broad River
Basin. The Green River originates in Henderson County and flows eastward through Polk
County some 56.0 kilometers (35.0 miles) before converging with the Broad River along
the Rutherford County Line. The proposed project is located approximately 8.0 kilometers
(5.0 miles) upstream and west of Lake Adger. Lake Adger lies approximately 8.0
kilometers (5.0 miles) north of Columbus and 32.0 kilometers (10.0 miles) upstream of the
confluence of the Green and Broad Rivers.
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of
Environmental Management (DEM). Green River is designated as "Class C Tr". This
classification denotes waters suitable for secondary uses such as aquatic life propagation
and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture as well as waters
suitable for natural trout propagation and maintenance of stocked trout.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II) nor
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 kilometers (1.0 miles) 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. No BMAN information is available for Green River at or near
the proposed project site.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. The NPDES
does not list any discharges within 16.0 kilometers (10.0 miles) of the proposed project.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Impacts expected with the B-2604 project include: increased sedimentation;
scouring of the stream bed; soil compaction and loss of shading due to vegetation removal.
Increased sedimentation from lateral flows is expected.
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.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Terrestrial Communities
Two distinct terrestrial communities were identified in the project study area: (1)
alluvial forest and (2) roadside/disturbed community. Many faunal species are highly
adaptive and may populate the entire range of the two 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
un-even aged canopy composed primarily of bottomland hardwood trees.
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, rhododendron, and various saplings of canopy trees mentioned above.
Examples of vine and herbaceous species present at the project site are poison-ivy,
Japanese honeysuckle, and greenbrier.
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, and two-lined salamander. The gray squirrel, belted kingfisher, American
crow, 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.
Roadside/Disturbed Community
The roadside/disturbed community is dominated by saplings, vines and small herbs
that are regularly controlled by mowing. Some floral species found along the proposed
project sites include pine and hardwood seedlings, persimmon, and black cherry.
This landscape setting provides habitat for the existence of many faunal species
related to open settings. Species such as the northern cardinal, American goldfinch,
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 precipitation at the time of the field survey, no
fish, invertebrates nor fresh water mussel shells were encountered. E'-,,never, prey species
likely to be present in the Green River include golden shiner, central ,,-Oneroller, highback
chub, fantail darter, and spottail shiner. These fish provide forage items for predator
species like brown trout and rainbow trout.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
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 2 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 (0.3)
Roadside/Disturbed Community <0.1(0.1)
Total Impacts < 0.2 (0.4)
NOTES: Values cited are in hectares (acres).
Permanent impacts to terrestrial communities will occur in the form of habitat
reduction. Since the project area is already fragmented, relatively minor impacts 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.
Both permanent and temporary impacts will occur to aquatic communities 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.
JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
Waters of the United States
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).
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to delineate jurisdictional wetlands include evidence of hydric soils,
hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology. No jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted by
either project as a result of construction. However, impacts will occur to surface waters.
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
(surface waters) concerned with the project.
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 (MOA) between the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the COE. However, final permit/mitigation decisions will be made by the COE.
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.
10
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
April 1, 1996, the FWS lists two federally-protected species for Polk County: white
irrisette (Sisyrinchium dichotomum).
The white irisette (Sisyrinchium dichotomum, Endangered) 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 fruit 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.
Suitable habitat for white irisette was found along the road shoulder, in ditches and
in runoff areas in the vicinity of the project. White irisette was not found after a plant by
plant survey of the project area. Therefore, no effects to this species will result from the
proposed construction.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora, Threatened) has heart-
shaped leaves, supported by long thin petioles that grow from a subsurface rhizome.
Populations are found along bluffs and their adjacent slopes, in boggy areas next to
streams and creek heads, and along the slopes of nearby hillsides and ravines. It grows in
acidic soils in regions with a cool moist climate. Regional vegetation is described as
upper piedmont oak-pine forest and as part of the southeastern mixed forest.
Although wetlands are present at the project site, no bluffs, ravines or upper
Piedmont oak-pine forests are present. Plant by plant surveys were conducted and
revealed no populations of dwarf-flowered heartleaf in the project study area, therefore,
this species will not be affected by this project. A survey of the NC Natural Heritage
Program's database of rare and protected species revealed that no populations of this
species have been reported near the project site.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
11
J&
IX. PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(f) FOR A HISTORIC BRIDGE
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS
THAT NECESSITATE THE USE OF HISTORIC BRIDGES
F. A. Project: BRZ-1151(1)
State Project: 8.2980301
T. I. P. No.: B-2604
Description: Replace Bridge No. 47 on SR 1151 over Green River in Polk County. The
new bridge will be on new alignment approximately 24 meters (80 feet) to
the west of the existing bridge.
Yes No
1. Is the bridge to be replaced or
rehabilitated with Federal funds? X r_1
2. Does the project require the use of
a historic bridge structure which is
on or eligible for listing on the x
National Register of Historic Places?
3. Is the bridge a National Historic
Landmark? X
4. Has agreement been reached among the
FHWA, the State Historic Preservation a
Officer (SHPO), and the Advisory Council X
on Historic Preservation (ACHP) through
procedures pursuant to Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)?
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE
ND PRUDENT
The following alternatives were evaluated and found
not to be feasible and prudent:
Yes No
1. Do nothing X F-1
Does the "do nothing" alternative:
(a) correct the problem situation that
caused the bridge to be considered F-1 X
deficient?
(b) pose serious and unacceptable safety a
hazards? X
12
a

Yes No
2. Build a new structure at a different
location without affecting the historic X
integrity of the structure.
(a) The following reasons were reviewed:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) The present bridge has already
been located at the only feasible
and prudent site
and/or (ii) Adverse social, environmental,
or economic impacts were noted
and/or (iii) Cost and engineering difficulties
reach extraordinary magnitude
and/or (iv) The existing bridge cannot be
preserved due to the extent of
rehabilitation, because no
responsible party will maintain
and preserve the historic bridge,
or the permitting authority
requires removal or demolition.
Rehabilitate the historic bridge
affecting the historic integrity x F
structure.
(a) The following reasons were reviewed:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) The bridge is so structurally
deficient that it cannot be
rehabilitated to meet the
acceptable load requirements
and meet National Register
criteria
and/or (ii) The bridge is seriously
deficient geometrically and
cannot be widened to meet the
required capacity and meet
National Register criteria
13
MINIMIZATION OF HARM
Yes No
1. The project includes all possible planning x F-I
to minimize harm.
2. Measures to minimize harm include the
following: (circle, as appropriate)
a. For bridges that are to be
rehabilitated, the historic
integrity of the bridge is preserved
to the greatest extent possible,
consistent with unavoidable transpor-
tation needs, safety, and load
requirements.
b. For bridges that are to be
rehabilitated to the point that the
historic integrity is affected or that
are to be removed or demolished, the
FHWA ensures that, in accordance with
the Historic American Engineering
Record (HAER) standards, or other
suitable means developed through
consultation, fully adequate records
are made of the bridge.
c. For bridges that are to be replaced,
the existing bridge is made available
for an alternative use, provided a
responsible party agrees to maintain
and preserve the bridge.
9 For bridges that are adversely affected,
agreement among the SHPO, ACHP, and
FHWA is reached through the Section
106 process of the NHPA on measures
to minimize harm and those measures
are incorporated into the project.
3. Specific measures to minimize harm are
discussed below:
The bridge will be recorded as described in the attached Memorandum of Agreement.
Note: Any response in a box requires additional information prior to approval. Consult
Nationwide 4(f) evaluation. Not Applicable
14
COORDINATION
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. State Historic Preservation Officer see attachment
b. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation see attachment
c. Local/State/Federal Agencies see attachment
d. US Coast Guard not applicable
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation approved on
July 5, 1983.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable
to this project.
There are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of the historic bridge. The
project includes all possible planning to minimize harm, and there are assurances that the
measures to minimize harm will be incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed.
Approved:
8 - 22-V c?t V.
Date h Manager, Planning & Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Date FWXDivisi dmin strator, FHWA
15
FIGURES
b :
1.151
BRIDGE NO. 105
B-2605 - ?.. -
7'
BRIDGE NO. 160 1 EY Z 'elf
i u r,
170.
f ` 1154
,
•i , B-2604 y Q?a? 1 1C2 J
BRIDGE NO. 47
BRIDGE N0.189
• / 1151 ?.-\ ! ?--
-'A K
TRYON PEAK
6
• '? _ ELEV. x.231 l
? ` :?v? 1130
\ ,?8
J •.• 1142
255
?J f TOL
POE
DA c ° _
?, ,?? WARRIOR
NTN.
? 1.
,? / P \ Valhalla \ RNER
rMin 2 'bs ! i l
: s 4
9_c 9 1 "_ rLly <? l \
I TRYON
? POP. 1,796
EL EV. 1,0751
•
I .,*
is - '
North Carolina
_ Department Of Transportation
Planning & Environmental Branch
POLK COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 47 ON SR 1151
OVER GREEN RIVER
B-2604
0 kilometers 1.6 kilometers 3.2
Figure 1
0 miles 1.0 miles 2.0
i

1 1
SOUTHWEST APPROACH FACING BRIDGE
NORTHEAST APPROACH FACING BRIDGE
FIGURE 3

?r
MOBILE HOME SOUTH END OF BRIDGE
CONCESSION STAND TO EAST SIDE OF BRIDGE
FIGURE 4
MAP 0"00 YEAR FLOOD
?, -e/
9?
\°Cb

11 -
MOUNT
VALLEY
/i
?y7
II,
I
PALMETTO
i LAKE
i
01,

ZONE A
little
C,

#/6
C-C

It
O
!1
n

4 t
ATTACHMENTS

MAY 2 31994
® 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, NCDOT
FROM: Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Programs
DATE: May 20, 1994
SUBJECT: Review of scoping sheet for Bridge #47 on SR 1151 over
Green River, Polk County, TIP #B-2604.
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our
preliminary review and comments regarding the subject project.
The Green River is Hatchery Supported Designated Public Mountain
Trout Water at the project site. The river is somewhat degraded
from sedimentation in this area.
We have the following preliminary comments regarding the
replacement of this bridge:
1) We would prefer that the existing bridge be replaced with
another spanning structure if feasible. If the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) prefers to
install a multi-celled reinforced concrete box culvert
(RCBC), water should be directed so that at low flows all
water goes through certain cells at an adequate depth for
fish movement. The NCDOT should avoid having only a shallow
flow through all cells that may not be adequate for fish
passage.
2) If a RCBC is chosen as the final design, it should be buried
one foot into the substrate so that fish movement is not
blocked.
3) Construction must be accomplished so that wet concrete does
not contact stream water. This will lessen the chance of
altering the stream's water chemistry and causing a fish
kill.
A i. A
TIP #B-2604 Page 2 May 20, 1994
4) Temporary ground cover (e.g. hardwood mulch, straw, etc.)
should be placed on all bare soil during construction.
Permanent herbaceous vegetation in these same areas should
be established within 15 days of ground disturbing
activities to provide long term erosion control.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to the early
planning stages for this project. If we can further assist your
office, please contact me at 704/652-4257.
I
cc: Mr. Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist
Mr. David Yow, District 9 Environmental Coordinator

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
June 27, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 47, TIP B-2604, Federal-Aid Project BRZ-
1 151(1), Bridge 105, TIP B-2605, Federal-Aid
Project BRZ-1151 (2), SR 1151 over Green River,
Polk County, ER 95-9091
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director

JUL 0 3 1995
2
? MVISIGN OF
&., f4IGHWAYS _.Q
Thank you for your letter of May 23, 1995, transmitting the archaeological survey
report by Kenneth Robinson concerning the above project.
During the course of the survey-no sites were located within the project area. Mr.
Robinson has recommended that no further archaeological investigation be
conducted in connection with this project. We concur with this recommendation
since this project will not involve significant archaeological resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act 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: H. F. Vick
K. Robinson
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
s
Federal Aia #" OV--1-1151(1) TIP # ?• U04 County
pot.{.
CONCURRENCE FORM
FOR
ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Brief Project Description
V-"I,AGE ew-iDe-f, too. 47 ow ew_ ttrii oy&rz- (Its ? F-ave4-
On APf-1l, 111(o 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 and agreed
there are no effects on the National Register-listed property within the project's
area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
there are no effects on the National Register-eligible properties located within the
project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
there is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties within the
project's area of potential effect. The property-properties and the effect(s) are
listed on the reverse.
? there is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed
on the reverse.
Signed:
-? ?•?-? Ap-r(?
Repr ent tive, TOT, Historic Architectural Resources Section Date
F for the D- ion Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
Historic Preservation Officer
(over)

Federal Aid # TIP # 6.2!.04 County PoLtc_
Properties within area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
National Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
Properties within area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status (NR
or DE) and describe effect.
tmtvF? too- A7 (M) - APlev-ce t-r-r ?
Reason(s) why effect is not adverse (if applicable).
Initialed: NCDOT FHWA SHPO L??
L, Y a
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
SUBMITTED TO THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PURSUANT TO 36 CFR PART 800.6(a)
REGARDING THE REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO. 47
ON SR 1511 OVER GREEN RIVER
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TIP NO. B-2604, STATE PROJECT NO. 8.2980301
FEDERAL AID NO. BRZ-1511(1)
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has determined that
replacement of Bridge No. 47 over Green River in Polk County, North Carolina, a
property eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, will have an
effect upon the structure, and has consulted with the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800, regulations implementing
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4700; and
WHEREAS. the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) participated in
the consultation and has been invited to concur in this Memorandum of Agreement: and
WHEREAS, the Bridge Maintenance Unit of NCDOT has investigated the feasibility of
potential future use of Bridge No. 47 subsequent to replacement, and found that due to
corrosion, particularly at the joints, the bridge is structurally unsuitable for relocation and
continued use:
NOW. THEREFORE. FHWA and the North Carolina SHPO agree that the undertaking
shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take in to
account the effect of the undertaking on Polk County Bridge No. 47.
STIPULATIONS
FHWA will ensure that the following measures are carried out:
Prior to the demolition of Polk County Bridge No. 47. NCDOT shall
record the bride in accordance with the attached Historic Structures
Recordation Plan (Appendix A). The recordation plan shall be carried out
and copies of the record sent to the North Carolina SHPO prior to the start
of construction.
a ?
t K
Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement by FHWA and the North Carolina SHPO
and implementation of its terms evidences that FHWA has afforded the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation an opportunity to comment on the replacement of Polk County
Bridge No. 47 on SR 1511 over Green River and its effect on historic properties, and that
FHW A has taken into account the effects of the undertaking on historic properties.

FED
NORTH C

A
ATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER DATE
, //-4
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Concurring Party
ACCEPTED for
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
GHW`-LY ADMINISTRATION
S//7/9G
ATE
•o r
APPENDIX A
Historic Structures Recordation Plan
for the Replacement of Bridge No. 47
Polk County. North Carolina
Photographic Requirements
Photographic views of Bridge No. 47 including:
Overall views (elevations and oblique views)
Overall views of the bridge in its settinQ
Details of construction or design
Format:
Representative color transparencies
35 mm or larger black and white negatives (all views)
4 x 5 inch black and white prints (all views)
All processing to be done to archival standards
All photographs and negatives to be labeled according to Division of
Archives and History standards
Copies and Curation
One (1) set of all photographic documentation will be deposited with the 'North
Carolina Division of Archives and History;"State Historic Preservation Office to
be made a permanent part of the statewide survey and iconographic collection.
.i 0 ? •
FINDING OF ADVERSE EFFECT DOCUMENTATION
AND
SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTATION
SUBMITTED WITH THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
FOR
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO. 47
ON SR 1511 OVER GREEN RIVER
POLK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TIP NO. B-2604, STATE PROJECT NO. 8.2980301
FEDERAL AID NO. BRZ-1511(1)
Prepared and Submitted by
North Carolina Department of Transportation
May 1996
0 e-
y 9k # r
Brief description of the undertaking:
Bridge No. 47 in Polk County will be replaced with a new bridge 50 meters (164
feet) in length, located approximately 21.3 meters (70 feet) to the west (upstream)
of its existing location. The new bridge will be 7.2 meters (24 feet) wide.
Approach work will extend approximately 15 meters (50 feet) on either side of the
new bridge. Traffic will be maintained on the existing structure during
construction.
2. Description of the efforts to identify historic properties:
Please see the attached letter from NCDOT to the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA), dated October 30, 1995.
3. Description of the affected historic property:
Please see the above-referenced letter dated October 30, 1995.
4. Description of the undertaking's effects on the historic property:
The proposed undertaking will have an adverse effect on Bridge No. 47, which will
be demolished. Please see the attached Concurrence Form for Assessment of
Effects, dated April 30, 1996.
5. Description of any proposed mitigation measures or alternatives considered to deal
with the undertaking's effects on the historic property:
In addition to the recommended alternative discussed above, the only other build
alternative considered proposed replacing the bridge with a new structure in
existing location and maintaining traffic on secondary roads. Due to the remote
location of the bridge in the Green River gorge, an off-site detour is not reasonable.
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge
which is not desirable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1511.
The Bridge Maintenance Unit of NCDOT investigated the feasibility of
rehabilitating Bridge No. 47 without affecting the integrity of the structure. The
investigation concluded that due to its age and deteriorated condition, the bridge
cannot be rehabilitated without significantly compromising the integrity of the
structure. The Bridge Maintenance Unit also recommended that the bridge not be
offered for reuse as part of NCDOT's Historic Bridge Preservation Program due to
significant corrosion and deterioration of the structure. The corrosion is located in
and around the joints thereby reducing the likelihood that the bridge will survive
being disassembled.
Consideration was given also to closing the bridge and leaving it in place. Due to
the deteriorated condition of the bridge and the recreational use of the river by
canoeists and tubers, the potential risks are too high. Furthermore, leaving the
bridge in place at this remote location would have very limited public value.
-9 't w ' or
The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) stipulates that Bridge No. 47 will be
recorded by means of photographs and a brief physical description/historical
narrative prior to demolition. The written and photographic documentation will be
deposited with the North Carolina Division of Archives and History/State Historic
Preservation Office to be made a part of the permanent statewide survey and
iconographic collection.
6. Summary of the views of SHPO and any interested parties:

Please see the attached letter dated November 30, 1995, and the above-referenced
Concurrence Form for Assessment of Effects, dated April 30, 1996.
- M
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
.. DATE
TRANSMITTAL SLIP /O??/"
/
U
T - REF. NO. O
R ROOM, BLDG.
tL Rtc. M
-DEµ IN
-FROM:
?1HN W! LLi A?/Y7S _
REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
? °f- ? -
ACTfOW
? NOTE AND FILE - ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ,..? PER YOUR. REQUEST
Q RETURN WITH MORE'c DETAILS -.? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
f
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS. ??
FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR-MY SIGNATURES ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE' ACT10N ,S ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:

rl
IL 4 il
d?,a SfATpo-
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
October 7, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
RECEIVED
%J 141994
ENVIitoNMfA-rP& scomcls
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
FROM: John L. Williams.
Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: Replacement of Bridge 47 on SR 1151 over the
Green River, Polk County, B-2604, State Project
8.2980301, F. A. Project BRZ-1151
AND
Replacement of Bridge No. 105 on SR 1151 over
the Green River, Polk county, B-2605, State Project
8.2980601, F. A. Project BRZ-1151(2)
A scoping meeting for the subject bridge was held on May 31, 1994 at
9:30 AM in Room 470 of the Planning and Environmental Branch.
The following people were in attendance:
John Maddox
Mike Dixon
Bob Bumgarner
Robin Stancil
Ray Moore
Danny Rogers
Brian Williford
Kruti Shukla
John Williams
Roadway Design
Roadway Design
Location Surveys
Department of Cultural Resources
Structural Design
Program Development
Hydraulics
Hydraulics
Planning & Environmental Branch
Attached are the revised scoping sheets which include additional
information provided at the scoping meeting.
Previously B-2604 was scheduled for 1998 replacement and B-2605 was
scheduled for 1999 replacement. However, because of construction
requirements it will be necessary to replace Bridge No. 105 first. Therefore
the T.I.P. fiscal years have been reversed following the construction
sequence shown below.
-r
October 7, 1994
Page 2
R. G. Watson, Div. 14 Construction Engineer, called in the following
comments. Construction should take place as follows. First Bridge 160
should be shored first. Second Bridge 105 should be replaced. Then
Bridge 189 should be shored. Finally, Bridge 47 should be replaced.
Joel Johnston of Bridge Maintenance researched and found that Bridge 105
is in its original location. It has been struck once by a motor grader
requiring significant work to restore it. The second truss (Bridge 47) is
not in its original location. There was a flood in 1965 which wiped out the
old bridge. Bridge Maintenance brought in the present truss bridge from a
Halifax County maintenance yard in 1965.
Stephanie Goudreau of NCWRC wrote in with the following comments:
- Prefers a spanning structure
- If RCBC is chosen as the final design, it should be buried one foot
into the substrate so that fish movement is not blocked.
- Construction must be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact stream water. This will lessen the chance of altering the
stream's water chemistry and causing a fish kill.
- Temporary ground cover should be placed on all bare soil during
construction. Permanent herbaceous vegetation in these same areas
should be established within 15 days of completion of the project
to provide long term erosion control.
Melba McGee of DEHNR called in comments that the Green River is trout
waters. DEHNR does not want box culverts if at all avoidable. Any grounds
disturbed should be revegetated as soon as construction will allow.
Robin Stancil of the Department of Cultural Resources recommends an
archaeology survey. She reserves comments on bridges 47 and 105 until Bridge
Maintenance can determine whether the bridges were moved from their original
location to their present location. Ms. Stancil does point out that these
are Parker Thru Trusses and that very few are left in
North Carolina.
Ray Moore of Bridge Design comments that if the old bridges are left in
place as pedestrian bridges, some other group will need to assume
responsibility for maintenance of the bridge. He also commented that
construction will probably be limited because of trout spawning season. The
construction time will be at least 7 months depending on the type of
structure chosen to be built.
The existing roadway has no posted speed limit and is therefore
statutory 55 MPH. However due to the extreme changes in curvature due to
topography, Roadway Design will offer the best design speed possible.
The Hydraulics Unit recommends/comments the following:
- Bridge No. 47 be replaced with a bridge 50 m long (164 ft.) just
upstream (west) of existing location.
• October 7, 1994
Page 3
- Bridge No. 105 be replaced with a bridge 50 m long (164 ft.) just
downstream (north) of existing location.
The proposed bridge replacements will not raise the backwaters more than
0.3 meters (1 ft.). Green River is designated as trout waters.
NCDOT Bridge Policy indicates that an 6.32 m (24 ft) bridge width is
required including a 6.10 m (20 ft) travelway and 0.61 m (2 ft) shoulders.
Cost Estimates are not yet available.
A list of alternatives to be studied are as follows:
Alternate 1 Replace the existing bridges on their existing location with
bridges. Traffic would be detoured along secondary roads
during construction. Bridge No. 105 would be replaced first,
then Bridge No. 47.
Alternate 2 Replace Bridge No. 105 to the downstream (north) side of the
existing bridge first. Then replace Bridge No. 47 to the
upstream (west) side. Traffic would utilize the existing
structures until construction was complete on the new
structures.
JW/plr
Attachment
BRIDGE
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
TIP PROJECT B-2604 DIVISION 14

STATE PROJECT 8.2980301 COUNTY Polk

F.A. PROJECT BRZ-1151(1) ROUTE SR-1151
PURPOSE OF PROJECT: REPLACE OBSOLETE BRIDGE
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Replace Bridge No. 47 on SR 1151 over
Green River in Polk County.
TRAFFIC: CURRENT 200 VPD; DESIGN YEAR 500 VPD
TTST DT 2 %
EXISTING STRUCTURE: LENGTH 43.9 METERS; WIDTH 6.5 METERS
-IW- FEET .'f FEET
PROPOSED STRUCTURE:
BRIDGE - LENGTH 50 METERS; WIDTH .6.8 METERS
-T64- FEET- FEET
TIP CONSTRUCTION COST ................................ $ 900,000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST ................................ $ 23,000
TIP TOTAL COST ...................................; 923,000
BRIDGE
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
TIP PROJECT B-2605 DIVISION 14
STATE PROJECT 8.2980601 COUNTY Polk
F.A. PROJECT BRZ-1151(2) ROUTE SR-1151
PURPOSE OF PROJECT: REPLACE OBSOLETE BRIDGE
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Replace Bridge No. 105 on SR 1151 over
Green River in Polk County.
TRAFFIC: CURRENT 200 VPD; DESIGN YEAR 500 VPD
TTST DT 2
EXISTING STRUCTURE: LENGTH 43.9 METERS; WIDTH 6.5 METERS
14 FEET - FEET
PROPOSED STRUCTURE:
BRIDGE - LENGTH 50 METERS; WIDTH 6.8 METERS
764- FEET - FEET
TIP CONSTRUCTION COST ................................ $ 9009000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST ................................ $ 15,000
TIP TOTAL COST ...................... .............? 9159000
11311 * aKE
ok Lam''' O
.?
?i
-IMNEY
B-2605 TOP
;T_

1151 A
IN
-47
b.
B-2604
OJ
` 1153 1142

33
A 1188 •3
26 4-
1 188
d 1143
¦
9 WARRIOR'
40 1122 MTN.

JON
'r
BUCK MTN. 1175

Valhalla
1103 r » .4
2.9
.3 FAS 176 4 12IV
1179
1102 1107
Melrose 1.9 1180
ttoo t
1116
-4 b
1120 1116
b
! v

1151

•9
1142 b a?

\9 1141
OJT

1170
3

WHITE OAK MTN.
ELEV. 3,102
?
1136
"
TRYON PEAK
ELEV. 3,231
1
0
>? 4r 1136
Tryon 1190 ! 1.7 1137
v
,r

1136 1135 'x ..?. 1
FA1 .9
N

1189, US
COLUM 36
1122 •,
4
:.
POP. 727
1135
b.

'
u1 .4
514 Z
??_ C
ti- I

1
CARDIM .1 XAH T OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
POLK COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 47
ON SR 1151 OVER GREEN RIVER
B - 2604
0 km 1.6 km 3.2
0 miles 1 miles 2

...moo
aSy d ???
O
JAMES B. HUNT, JR.
GOVERNOR
April 29, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TkANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
UV
r
MAY 2'19,94
WETLAMS GRNUP
WATER QU(;i_ITY r s
R. SAMUEL HUNT I II
SECRETARY
Review of Scoping Sheet for Bridge No. 47 on SR 1151 in
Polk County over Green River, B-2604
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 May 31, 1994 at 9:30 A. M. in the Planning and
Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 470). You may provide us with
your comments at the meeting or mail them to us prior to that date.
JW/pl r ,??ZZ?
Attachment
Bridge No. 105 is just north of Bridge No. 47 on SR 1151. Because
both bridges are truss bridges as well as other similarities, we would like
to pursue planning for replacement of both bridges in your initial
evaluation.
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.
6)

BRIDGE
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
DATE 4-25-94
REVISION DATE
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT STAGE
PROGRAMMING
PLANNING
DESIGN
TIP PROJECT B-2604
STATE PROJECT not vet available
F.A. PROJECT not vet available
DIVISION 14
COUNTY Polk
ROUTE SR-1151
PURPOSE OF PROJECT: REPLACE OBSOLETE BRIDGE
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Replace Bridge No. 47 on SR 1151 over
Greene River in Polk County.
METHOD OF REPLACEMENT:
1. EXISTING LOCATION - ROAD CLOSURE
2. EXISTING LOCATION - ONSITE DETOUR
3. RELOCATION
4. OTHER
WILL THERE BE SPECIAL FUNDING PARTICIPATION BY MUNICIPALITY,
DEVELOPERS, OR OTHERS? YES NO X
IF YES, BY WHOM AND WHAT AMOUNT: ($)
I ( % /

BRIDGE
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
TRAFFIC: CURRENT VPD; DESIGN YEAR VPD
TTST % DT %
TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION:
EXISTING STRUCTURE: LENGTH 43.9 METERS; WIDTH 6.5 METERS
144 FEET 21.2 FEET
PROPOSED STRUCTURE:
BRIDGE - LENGTH METERS; WIDTH METERS
FEET FEET
OR
CULVERT - X METERS
X FEET
DETOUR STRUCTURE:
BRIDGE - LENGTH METERS; WIDTH METERS
FEET FEET
OR
PIPE - SIZE MILLIMETERS
INCHES
CONSTRUCTION COST (INCLUDING ENGINEERING AND
CONTINGENCIES) ..................... $
RIGHT OF WAY COST (INCLUDING RELOCATION, UTILITIES,
AND ACQUISITION) ................... $
FORCE ACCOUNT ITEMS .................................. $
TOTAL COST .......................................s
TIP CONSTRUCTION COST ................................ $ 900,000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST ................................ $ 23,000
SUB TOTAL ....................................... $ 923,000
PRIOR YEARS COST ................................ $
TIP TOTAL COST ................................... $ 9239000
s
1151
?
47
1153 1142
1138 LADE ,DGE
a
138 v
U 114
-0
v
V 1
1151 .X;
'.9 .7
1 5
.S
1142 b aN
x 1q 1141
CHIMNEY
TOP 3
1170
3
o5,?tifi WHITE OAK MTN.
ELEV. 3,102
?y 1142 r,
1136
TRYON PEAK
ELEV. 3,231
33
_ 26 FC4
9 WARRIOR'
?.0 1 122 MTN.
BUCK MTN. 1175
Valhallc
1103 2.9 .4
3 FAS 176 1179 ,4 -.A
T
1102 1107
Melrose 1.3 1 i 8c
1100
4 V5=V `
1120 1116
b /="?
1136
Tryon 1190 Y 17 1137
l? v b

1136 1135 :
0 :'• 11
,••
FAI •9 coy:' 1.
.?
1189 COLUMBUS 36

1122 s
4:•••
POP. 727

r

1 135 C:

u1 4 2
s ,?•
1514 ? C?
IV -
?

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
POLK COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 47
ON SR 1151 OVER GREEN RIVER
B - 2604
0 km 1.6 km 3.2
0 miles 1 miles 2
<-
\ pp,.
W g9
1l269
'•?„ t,j 1
X?x
BM ;LHT 1...86 , \e
% ` l \ ?\?\?'? ?rQn ) I PATT % /9 4 \ ??
, , \ C.? ?? l'9 ,, ? rll• - \ \ ?_??`.
\ ?_ J I BM BHT 1887
\ \\ r Raccoon Mtn ( ? ! ?\ p
3oc
t.
.` _ I ?T
h v
...Chim.oeytopl..l_ \.
,v; BR OL?'Y'CEM C , r \ _ \\
N ?ONEg PR/CE _\ > t l I` f yJ .??1^ i~` v_.
`=`)1CEM F?. 1 l \ l j ?( /.1
\
BM tCHT 108,848 le 101 ?/-
k°n - ikon
`
0 \ 1 \ ? : -Mount-Valley
%
2224 f \ D 470
--... P; (? 1299 ?^• i? ?? - q i?. _ ? O
r--5
BRADLEY'C C ff/.- ° 1y°.-r-!) 1? u] 1 j ?\J. 1 --•i '?' \ ?/_.1 `lam \
o
`/! \ l % \ L
N?
B HT 1$30 _ S (? / /au/? J / \
J / jam';/i, ?s / ?`/, J \ \ '.' l \ C so U ?, \
Falls_ LHT 1891-r
r 1066 J7 /O.
F.¢l etto L¢ke \ ?\ / ` \? \r t ?.
2106
0
\?(y Polk County'
USGS 7.5 Minute
J '
Quadrangle
;? ;qdg? -.?tJS . ; Cliffield Mountain
N c. C ?a ?', J f
i C ck. _ -