19970345 Ver 1_Complete File_19970422

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. Franklin Vick
N.C. Dept. of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
ATM.MAI
[D F=1
April 25, 1997
Henderson County
WQC 401 Project #970345
TIP #B-2573, State Project No. 8.1950101
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to place temporary fill in 0.015 acres
of wetlands or waters for the purpose of replacing Bridge 145 over Broad River at US 74, as you described in
your application dated 15 April 1997. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is
covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3114. 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. If total
wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required
as described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certification. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local
permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control,
Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. Also this approval will expire
when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
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 Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
f2
ston Hdw , Jr. P. .
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Asheville DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
970345.1tr
Division of Water Quality - Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Aff irmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/100/6 post consumer paper
9 7 0 3 4?
033
401 ISSUEC)
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
Gowen" K
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201. PATIGI1. N.C. 27611-5201
April 15, 1997
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
ATTN: Mr. Cliff Winefordner
Chief, Southern Section
Dear Sir:
GARLAND B. GARRETT )R.
Sfciierv:v
RECEIVED
APR 2 2 1997
ENV1 RON?NTAL SCIENCES
,,
SUBJECT: Henderson County, US 74, Replacement of Bridge No. 145 over the Broad
River, State Project No. 8.1950101, TIP No. B-2573.
The Corps of Engineers (COE) has authorized the replacement of the referenced
bridge under a Section 404 Nationwide 23 permit (COE Action ID 199403010). Since
issuance of the permit for the project, changes in the project construction plans have been
made. The proposed project is scheduled to let to construction in May 1997.
Present construction plans not only include those documented in the Categorical
Exclusion for the subject project but also involve the construction of a temporary ,
causeway in the French Broad River. The temporary causeway is necessary in order to
construct the new bridge crossing of the French Broad River. Temporary impacts to the
surface waters from the temporary causeway total 0.015 acre. Construction plans
detailing the proposed causeway are depicted in the attached drawing.
Attached to this cover letter is a copy of the biological conclusions for the
protected species which occur in Henderson County. This issue was addressed in the
Natural Resources Technical Report prepared by the DOT Natural Resources Group. The
species listing has remained the same since completion of the NRTR. By copy of this
letter, the DOT has contacted the US Fish and Wildlife Service and fulfilled Section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act.
0
It is anticipated that the above mentioned activities will be authorized under a
Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33 (Temporary Construction Access and Dewatering)
The DOT is therefore requesting the issuance ofa nationwide permit authorizing the
construction of the causeway.
Enclosed is a project site map, constriction drawings, as well as a completed
preconstruction notification form for a Nationwide Permit 33 and General 401 Water
Quality Certification. Since this project occurs in a designated trout county, the DOT is
also requesting that the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) provide comments
to the COE in regard to this permit application. By copy of this letter, the DOT also asks
that the appropriate General 401 Water Quality Certification be issued by the Division of
Water Quality for this construction work.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact
Mr. Lindsey Riddick at [phone] extension 315.
Sincerely,
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/plr
cc: Mr. Bob Johnson, COE, Asheville
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Mark Cantrell. USFWS, Asheville
Mr. William Rogers, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Davis, WRC, Waynesville
Mr. Kelly Barger, P.E., Program Development
Mr. Don Morton, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. F. D. Martin, P.E., Division 14 Engineer
DEM ID: CORPS ACTION ID: 199403010 T.I.P. No. B-2573
NATIONWIDE PERMIT REQUESTED (PROVIDE NATIONWIDE PERMIT #): NWP 33
PRE - CON S TRLI CT 2 ON NOT 2 F 2 CAT 2 ON AP P L =CAT = ON
FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS THAT REQUIRE:
1) NOTIFICATION TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS
2) APPLICATION FOR SECTION 401 CERTIFICATION
3) COORDINATION WITH THE NC DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
SEND THE ORIGINAL AND (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE
FIELD OFFICE OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). SEVEN
(7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
(SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET). PLEASE PRINT.
1. OWNERS NAME: NC Dept. of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. MAILING ADDRESS: Post Office Box 25201
CITY: Raleigh STATE:
SUBDIVISION NAME:
NC
ZIP CODE: 27611
PROJECT LOCATION ADDRESS, INCLUDING SUBDIVISION NAME (IF DIFFERENT FROM
MAILING ADDRESS ABOVE):
3. TELEPHONE 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 (PROVIDE A MAP, PREFERABLY A COPY OF USGS TOPOGRAPHIC
MAP OR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY WITH SCALE):
COUNTY: Henderson NEAREST TOWN OR CITY: Bat Cave, NC
1
SPECIFIC LOCATION (INCLUDE ROAD
NUMBERS, LANDMARKS, ETC.): Bridge No. 145 over Broad River on US 74
6. IMPACTED OR NEAREST STREAM/RIVER: Broad River
RIVER BASIN:
Broad
7a. IS PROJECT LOCATED NEAR WATER CLASSIFIED AS TROUT, TIDAL SALTWATER (SA),
HIGH QUALITY WATERS (HQW), OUTSTANDING RESOURCE WATERS (ORW), WATER SUPPLY
(WS-I OR WS-II)? YES [X] NO [ ] IF YES, EXPLAIN: Designated Public
trout water. No HWQ, ORW, WS-I or WS-II occur in the project area.
7b. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN A NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT AREA OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN (AEC)? YES [ ] NO [X]
7c. IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A COASTAL COUNTY (SEE PAGE 7 FOR LIST
OF COASTAL COUNTIES), WHAT IS THE LAND USE PLAN (LUP) DESIGNATION?
8a. HAVE ANY SECTION 404 PERMITS BEEN PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED FOR USE ON THIS
PROPERTY? YES [X] NO [ ] IF YES, PROVIDE ACTION I.D. NUMBER OF
PREVIOUS PERMIT AND ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (INCLUDE PHOTOCOPY OF 401
CERTIFICATION): Action ID No. 199403010 - Nationwide Permit Nos. 6 and 23
8b. ARE ADDITIONAL PERMIT REQUESTS EXPECTED FOR THIS PROPERTY IN THE
FUTURE? YES [ ] NO [X] IF YES, DESCRIBE ANTICIPATED WORK:
2
9a. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES IN TRACT OF LAND: 1 N/A
9b. ESTIMATED TOTAL NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS LOCATED ON PROJECT SITE:
(0.006 Ha) 0.015 acre
10a. NUMBER OF ACRES OF WETLANDS IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT BY:
FILLING: (0.006 Ha) 0.015 ac
FLOODING:
EXCAVATION:
OTHER:
DRAINAGE: TOTAL ACRES TO BE IMPACTED: (0.006 Ha)
0.015 acre
10b. (1) STREAM CHANNEL TO BE IMPACTED BY.THE PROPOSED PROJECT (IF
RELOCATED PROVIDE DISTANCE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER RELOCATION):
LENGTH BEFORE: N/A FT -AFTER: N/A
WIDTH BEFORE:-(based on normal high water contours):
WIDTH AFTER:
AVERAGE DEPTH BEFORE:
FT AFTER:
FT
FT
FT
FT
(2) STREAM CHANNEL IMPACTS WILL RESULT FROM: (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
OPEN CHANNEL RELOCATION: PLACEMENT OF PIPE IN CHANNEL:
CHANNEL EXCAVATION:
OTHER:
CONSTRUCTION OF A DAM/FLOODING:,
11. IF CONSTRUCTION OF A POND IS PROPOSED, WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE WATERSHED
DRAINING TO THE POND? N/A
WHAT IS THE EXPECTED POND SURFACE AREA?
12. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK INCLUDING DISCUSSION OF TYPE OF MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT TO BE USED (ATTACH PLANS: 8 1/2" X 11" DRAWINGS ONLY):
Construction of rock causeway in river. Road construction equipment.
3
13. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED WORK: To provide construction access for
replacement of Bridge No. 145.
14. STATE REASONS WHY IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS ACTIVITY MUST BE CARRIED OUT
IN WETLANDS. (INCLUDE ANY MEASURES TAKEN TO MINIMIZE WETLAND IMPACTS):
Project is bridged across river on new location.
15. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (USFWS)
AND/OR NATIONAL,MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE (NMFS) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET)
REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEDERALLY LISTED OR PROPOSED FOR LISTING
ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES OR CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE PERMIT AREA THAT
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT. DATE CONTACTED: March 12, 1993
(See Categorical Exclusion) (ATTACH RESPONSES FROM THESE AGENCIES.)
16. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
(SHPO) (SEE AGENCY ADDRESSES SHEET) REGARDING THE PRESENCE OF HISTORIC
PROPERTIES IN THE PERMIT AREA WHICH MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
DATE CONTACTED: October 13, 1992, See Categorical Exclusion
17. DOES THE PROJECT INVOLVE AN EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR THE USE OF
PUBLIC (STATE) LAND?
YES [X] NO [] (IF NO, GO TO 18)
a. IF YES, DOES THE PROJECT REQUIRE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENT PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT?
YES [X] NO []
b. IF YES, HAS THE DOCUMENT BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE?
YES [X] NO []
4
IF ANSWER TO 17b IS YES, THEN SUBMIT APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE TO DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT.
See Categorical Exclusion
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS SHOULD BE
DIRECTED TO MS. CHRYS BAGGETT, DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE, NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, 116 WEST JONES STREET, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
27603-8003, TELEPHONE [phone].
18. THE FOLLOWING ITEMS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITH THIS APPLICATION IF
PROPOSED ACTIVITY INVOLVES THE DISCHARGE OF EXCAVATED OR FILL MATERIAL INTO
WETLANDS:
a. WETLAND DELINEATION MAP SHOWING ALL WETLANDS, STREAMS, LAKES
AND PONDS ON THE PROPERTY (FOR NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBERS 14, 18, 21, 26, 29,
AND 38). ALL STREAMS (INTERMITTENT AND PERMANENT) ON THE PROPERTY MUST BE
SHOWN ON THE MAP. MAP SCALES SHOULD BE 1 INCH EQUALS 50 FEET OR 1 INCH
EQUALS 100 FEET OR THEIR EQUIVALENT.
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. ATTACH A COPY OF THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN IF REQUIRED.
e. WHAT IS LAND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY? Residential
f. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS PROPOSED METHOD OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL?
N/A
g. SIGNED AND DATED AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER, IF APPLICABLE.
NOTE: WETLANDS OR WATERS OF THE U.S. MAY NOT BE IMPACTED PRIOR TO:
1) ISSUANCE OF A SECTION 404 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT,
2) EITHER THE ISSUANCE OR WAIVER OF A 401 DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT (WATER QUALITY) CERTIFICATION, AND
3) (IN THE TWENTY COASTAL COUNTIES ONLY), A LETTER FROM THE NORTH
CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT STATING THE PROPOSED ACTIVITY IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.
1
i
OWN S/AGENT'S SIGNATURE
(AGENT'S SIGNATURE VALID ONLY
IF AUTHORIZATION LETTER FROM
THE OWNER IS PROVIDED (189.))
? l-5 97
D TE

97 0345
US 74
Bridge No. 145 over Broad River
Henderson County
Federal-Aid Project BRSTP-74(2)
State Project 8.1951001
B-2573
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Date H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
--or Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Otoe oin, Nicholas Graf , P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
US 74
Bridge No. 145 over Broad River
Henderson County
Federal-Aid Project BRSTP-74(2)
State Project 8.1951001
B-2573
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
April, 1994
Documentation Prepared in
Planning and Environmental Branch By:
J ie A. u ins, P. E.
P ject Planning Engineer

Wayne Elliott
Bridge Replacement Project Planning Unit Head
47
p?A CAR
- 1g??FLubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
US 74
Bridge No. 145 over Broad River
Henderson County
Federal-Aid Project BRSTP-74(2)
State Project 8.1951001
B-2573
Bridge No. 145 is included in the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement
Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental
impacts are anticipated. The project has been classified as a Federal
"categorical exclusion".
I. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 145 should be replaced on new location about 50 feet north
(upstream) of its present location, as shown by Alternate 2 in Figure 3.
The recommended structure consists of a bridge 44 feet wide and 250 feet
long. The recommended bridge width will accommodate two 12-foot travel
lanes with eight feet of lateral clearance on each side and a 4-foot
sidewalk on the south side of the structure. The approach roadway will
provide a 24-foot travelway with 8-foot graded shoulders. Traffic will be
maintained on the existing structure during the construction period.
The estimated cost, based on current prices, is $ 1,529,000. The
estimated cost of the project, as shown in the current Transportation
Improvement Program is $ 995,000.
II. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts. No wetlands will be disrupted by
implementation of this project. Best Management Practices will be
utilized to minimize construction impacts.
A 401 Water Quality Certification administered through the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources will be
required.
While no wetlands will be impacted by construction of the recommended
alternate, consideration will be given to removal of the existing approach
roadways to their original elevations. Appropriate vegetation should be
replanted to restore the areas, as nearly as possible, to their previous
natural state.
The NCWRC concurs that the bridge should be replaced with another
spanning structure. Other recommendations for consideration during design
and construction of the project include:
(1) If concrete will be used, construction should be accomplished so that
wet concrete does not contact river water. This will lessen the
chance of altering the river's water chemistry and causing a fish
kill.
2
(2) Native trees and shrubs should be planted at the site of the old
bridge upon its removal. This will provide bank stability and shade
to the stream.
(3) Temporary ground cover (e.g. hardwood mulch or straw) should be
placed on all bare soil during construction. Permanent herbaceous
vegetation in these same areas should be established within fifteen
days of ground disturbance activities to provide long term erosion
control.
Construction operations will be carefully planned to minimize
disturbance of the existing stream banks. Cofferdam sheeting will be
needed for bridge footings in water; any material excavated for footings
in or near water must be removed from the immediate vicinity to prevent it
from eroding back into the water. All runoff crossing the construction
area will be directed to temporary silt basins via lateral ditches with
rock check dams to slow and filter the runoff prior to discharging into
the river. Approach roadway fill slopes shall be stabilized with seeding,
and temporary silt ditches, silt fence, etc. shall be provided at the toe
of fill. Berms along the top of the fill slope will be used to convey
runoff laterally to temporary slope drains, which empty into temporary
sediment basins. Early placement of rip-rap slope protection will also
protect against surface erosion. Special attention will be given to
proper installation and maintenance of all erosion and sedimentation
control devices.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
US 74 is classified as a rural minor arterial in the Statewide
Functional Classification System and is part of the Federal-Aid System.
The project is located in a moderately developed area of the town of
Bat Cave. The Bat Cave Fire Department, a focal point of the community,
is located on the southwest quadrant of the project. In the northeast
quadrant, SR 1611 (Freeman Road) intersects with US 74 and parallels the
Broad River north of the Bridge No. 145. The development along SR 1611,
currently a dirt road, is residential.
A car repair shop and small grocery store are located on the
southeast quadrant of the project. A house with a small shed is located
in the northeast quadrant between the Broad River and NC 9.
In the vicinity of the bridge, US 74 has a pavement width of about 22
feet with 4-foot shoulders (see Figure 2). The posted speed limit on US 74
through the Bat Cave Community is 35 MPH.
The existing roadway is relatively flat through the project area.
The horizontal curvature is poor, and sight distance is limited due to the
sharply curved approached to the structure. The intersection of US 74
with NC 9 is located immediately east of Bridge No. 145 (see Figure 3).
3
The current traffic volume of 2300 VPD is expected to increase to
approximately 2500 VPD in the construction year (1997) and to 4200 VPD by
the year 2017. The projected volume includes 2% truck-tractor semi-
trailer (TTST) and 3% dual-tired vehicles (DDT).
The existing bridge (see Figure 2), constructed in 1923, consists of
a 4-span reinforced concrete deck girder bridge on reinforced concrete
abutments. The structure is approximately 170 feet long with a 20'-2"
clear travelway. The remaining life of this structure is estimated to be
seven years.
Bridge No. 145 is currently not posted for restricted weight limits;
however, US 74 is posted in this area and does not allow thru trucks over
13,000 pounds.
A 4-foot wooden sidewalk is attached to the outside of the bridge
rail on the south side of the structure. No sidewalk is currently
provided on the approaches to the bridge.
Bridge No. 145 has a sufficiency rating of 36.4 compared to a rating
of 100 for a new structure.
An overhead utility line traverses the Broad River on the south side
of Bridge No. 145.
Three accidents were reported in the project area during the period
from November, 1989 to October, 1992. Two of these accidents occurred at
the US 74-NC 9 intersection. One fatality resulted when the brakes of a
tractor-trailer, which was headed south on NC 9, failed. The vehicle
collided with a highway sign, traversed US 74, traveled down the
embankment, collided with a ditch bank, and overturned. The other
accident at the US 74-NC 9 intersection involved a car which was making a
left turn from NC 9 onto US 74 and collided with a vehicle which was
traveling west along US 74. The third accident, which occurred during
this three-year period at the project site involved two vehicles which
were traveling west on US 74 just west of Bridge No. 145. The first
vehicle attempted to turn left into the Bat Cave Fire Department; a
motorcycle, which was traveling behind the first car, failed to reduce
speed to avoid an accident and struck the car. No significant injuries
resulted from the latter two accidents.
There are six school bus crossings daily over this bridge.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Two methods of replacing Bridge No. 145 were studied. Both of the
alternates studied assume traffic is to be maintained on-site during the
construction period due to lack of a suitable detour route.
The replacement structure for the alternates studied consists of a
bridge approximately 250 feet long. A minimum deck width of 44 feet,
which would provide for two 12-foot travel lanes with eight feet of
lateral clearance and a 4-foot sidewalk on the south side, is recommended.
4
The approach roadway will have a 24-foot pavement with 8-foot useable
shoulders. The roadway grade at the proposed structure will be
approximately the same as the existing bridge; however, a minimum grade of
0.3 % is desired for deck drainage.
The alternates studied, shown in Figure 3, are as follows:
Alternate 1 - Replace bridge in existing location. Traffic would be
maintained on-site by constructing a temporary detour
immediately north of the existing bridge. A slight shift
in the alignment over the river would be necessary to
provide a smooth, continuous alignment through the project
area. Approximately 275 feet of approach roadway work
would be necessary on both sides of the new structure to
tie in the new bridge to the existing roadway. A minimum
design speed of 40 MPH would be provided.
Recommended Alternate 2 - Replace bridge on new location about 50 feet
north o its present location. Traffic will be maintained
on the existing bridge during the construction period. New
approach roadways to the replacement structure will
necessitate construction for a distance of about 300 feet
on each side of the new bridge. A design speed of about
35 MPH will be provided.
A phase constructed method of replacing Bridge No. 145 immediately
north of its present location was also investigated to determine if the
impact to the houses on the north side of the structure could be
minimized. However, it was determined that the relocation of SR 1611
(Freeman Road) would necessitate the relocation of the first two homes
along Freeman Road, regardless if the replacement structure were phased
constructed or not. The loss of use of the septic system, which is
located between Freeman Road and the Broad River immediately north of the
bridge, will inevitably result in the removal or alteration of the septic
system, which is shared by these two homes.
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of
the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic service provided by
US 74.
"Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and
deteriorated condition.
5
V. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated cost of the alternates studied is as follows:
Recommended
Alternate Alternate
1 2
Structure $ 835,000 $ 835,000
Roadway Approaches 177,000 194,000
Temporary Detour 258,000 --
Structure Removal 23,000 239000
Engineering & 200,000 140,000
Contingencies
Right of Way, Utilities 693,000 337,000
Total $ 2,186,000 $ 1,529,000
VI. DISCUSSION OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 145 should be replaced approximately 50 feet north of its
present location, as shown as Alternate 2 in Figure 3. Traffic will be
maintained on the existing structure during the construction period.
The recommended structure is a bridge about 250 feet long and 44 feet
wide. The size of the structure may be increased or decreased as
necessary to accommodate peak flows as determined by further hydrologic
studies.
The proposed bridge width will accommodate a 24-foot travelway with a
minimum of eight feet of lateral clearance on each side. A 4-foot raised
sidewalk is proposed on the south side of the bridge.
Approximately 600 feet of new roadway will be constructed to improve
the horizontal alignment through the project area. The approach roadway
will consist of two 12-foot lanes with 8-foot useable shoulders. Along
the south side of the approach roadway, the shoulder will be sufficient to
accommodate future sidewalks.
The relocation of SR 1611 (Freeman Road) will also be required to tie
SR 1611 into US 74 just beyond the guardrail, which will extend about 100
feet west of the replacement bridge. Based on preliminary design, the
realignment of SR 1611, coupled with the impact on the septic system
located between SR 1611 and the Broad River, will necessitate two
6
residential relocations along SR 1611. The project will also require the
relocation of the residence which is located immediately north of US 74
between the Broad River and NC 9.
Of the alternates studied, recommended Alternate 2 provides an
improvement in the horizontal alignment through the project area at the
lowest cost and is roughly $ 700,000 less expensive than Alternate 1.
While Alternate 1 would provide a design speed of 40 MPH, as opposed to
the 35 MPH design speed offered by Recommended Alternate 2, Alternate 1
involves relocation of the Bat Cave Fire Station, which is an integral
part of the community. The division engineer concurs with the recommended
alternate.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact.
Replacement of an inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic
operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "categorical exclusion" due
to its limited scope and insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not
the quality of human life or natural
NCDOT standards and specifications.
have a significant adverse effect on
environment with the use of current
Three homes are to be relocated. No businesses will be relocated as
a result of proposed project construction. It is anticipated that
adequate replacement housing will be available for the relocatees. It is
the policy of the NCDOT to ensure that no person will be displaced by the
NCDOT's state or federally-assisted construction projects unless and until
comparable or adequate replacement housing has been offered or provided
for each displacee within a reasonable period of time prior to
displacement. Therefore, no adverse impact on families or communities is
anticipated. A Relocation Assistance Report for Recommended Alternate 2
is included in this report as Attachment 1.
No significant adverse effect on public facilities or services is
expected. The project is not expected to adversely affect social,
economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
Bat Cave lies along the Broad
escarpments. Two plant communities
floodplain forest and man-dominated.
River and is surrounded by steep
were identified in the project area:
The floodplain forest is intermittently flooded and is confined to
the southeast quadrant of the project area, adjacent to the river channel.
Well-drained alluvial soils support a canopy dominated by bottomland trees
such as sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), red maple (Acer rubrum), and
tulip tree (Lirioden ron tuli i era . Understory trees include muscle
wood (Car inus caroliniana , persimmon (Dios ?!ros vir iniana), horse sugar
(S m locos tinctoria , tag alder (Alnus serrulata ac cherry (Prunus
serot?na hickory Carya sp.), and Cana ad-seem ock (Tsuga canadensilF-
Commonly occurring herbaceous plants include Joe-pye-weed (Eupatorium
maculatum), verbesina (Verbesina alternifolia), and poison ivy
Toxico endron radicans). Japanese oneysuc< a (Lonicera a onica),
hen it Lamium am 1e caule), microstegium (Microsteciumm irmineum , and
kudzu (Pueraria o ata are "weedy" plants t afi t have heavi y inva ed the
area, supping native herb growth.
Lawns comprised of turf (Festuca sp.) occupy the northwest, northeast
and southwest quadrants of tt e project area and are considered
man-dominated. Because of routine management practices associated with
lawn maintenance, this community is considered to retain only isolated
remnants of its native character, providing little of its initial value as
wildlife habitat. Ornamental plants such as weeping willow (Salix
babylonia), redtip (Photinia x fraseri), and dogwood Cornus flori a are
common.
Communities adjacent to man-dominated areas and bottomlands, provide
ecotonal areas rich for foraging, while bottomland forests provide cover.
Raccoons (Procyon lotor) are very adaptable and eat a wide variety of both
plant and anima matter. They are commonly associated with streamside
forests. Mink (Mustela vison) and muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus) are
carnivorous, semiaqu- at c ma-mss that utilize tFieeriver oor food sources.
Bottomland forest communities are also valuable habitat for reptiles
and amphibians. Amphibians, in particular, are highly water-dependent for
completion of larval stages in their life cycle. Likely amphibians to be
found are the three-lined salamander (Eur cea uttolineata), eastern newt
(Noto hthalmus viridescens), blackbelly salaman er Desmo nathus
ua ramacu atus), an sea salamander (D. monticola). Fow er s toad (Bufo
woo ousei is abundant in most habitats, an -a-y most likely occur at tfie
rived edge. Reptiles, such as the northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon)
may be found basking on logs or boulders in the water.
Year-round residents are the red-bellied woodpecker (Melaner es
carolinus), Carolina wren (Thr_othorus ludovicianus), American goldfinch
Car ue is tristis), song sparrow Me osAza me o is , and American crow
Corvus rac iiyr?ynchos) .
The upper reaches of the Broad River support a diverse aquatic
community. Likely fish to be found in the cool waters and tributaries are
the central stoneroller (Cam ostoma anomalum), fantail darter (Etheostoma
flabellare), Swannanoa darter E. swannanoa , redline darter
E. rufiineatum , saffron shiner Notro is rubricroceus), Tennessee
shiner N. euciodus), mirror shiner N. s ectruncu us , warpaint shiner
N. cocco enis acknose dace (Rhinic th satratu us , longnose dace
R. cataractae), northern hog suc er H ente iu? n gricans). Common game
fish include the musky (Esox mas uin)M, rainbow trout (OncorhXnchus
mmykiss), and brown trout Sa mo trutta Brown trout were spawning at
time of field visit. Large numbers of smallmouth bass (Micro terus
dolomieui), and a few largemouth bass (M. salmoides) may be found.
Bullhead - catfish (Ictalurus spp.) are common, as are redbreast sunfish
(Le omis auritus) aan otter pan fish (pers. comm. Mickey Clemmons, WRC
Fisheries Biologist). Food sources are generally terrestrial and aquatic
invertebrates, principally insects, and benthic organisms.
8
Potential impacts resulting from bridge replacement and the
construction of a temporary detour will result in the addition of sediment
to the aquatic system being crossed. Siltation has many adverse impacts
on aquatic organisms; decreases the depth of light penetration; inhibiting
plant growth, which is a food source; clogs the filtration apparatus of
filter-feeding benthos and the gills of fish; buries benthic organisms on
the bottom, cutting them off from a food source; adversely effects
preferred benthic substrate; and spoils downstream spawning beds for fish.
The anticipated impacts to the biotic communities for construction of
the recommended alternate are approximately 0.1 acre (0.2 hectare) of
flood plain forest and 0.4 acre (1.0 hectare) of the man-dominated
community.
While no wetlands will be impacted by construction of the recommended
alternate, consideration will be given to removal of the existing approach
roadways to their original elevations. Appropriate vegetation should be
replanted to restore the areas, as nearly as possible, to their previous
natural state.
The project is located in the Blue Ridge Mountains Physiographic
province in the Low to Intermediate Mountain Soil System. Mountains with
sharp ridges, steeply sloping valley walls characterize the topography,
with altitudes from 1400 to 4600 feet above mean sea level (427 to 1400
meters). The parent material in northeastern Henderson County is mostly
granite and gneiss. This material contains considerable amounts of quartz
and feldspar and lenses of hornblende and muscovite. Ashe strong sandy
loam, a predominate soil in the study area, formed from this residuum, and
is characterized as excessively drained.
Floodplain soils associated with the Broad River are comprised of
Comus fine sandy loam. This well drained soil formed in alluvial deposits
of sand, silt, clay, and gravel alluvial deposits.
The Broad River is a large, meandering mountain river which lies in
the Broad River basin. The Broad River basin encompasses 1,506 square
miles (2,429 square kilometers) in the mountain and upper piedmont
ecoregions of North Carolina. The Broad River eventually flows into South
Carolina, from it's headwaters in northeastern Henderson County.
The stretch of the Broad River in the project area is assigned a
"best usage" classification of C by the North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Class C designates waters
suitable for secondary recreation, aquatic life propagation and survival,
fishing, wildlife and agriculture. This waterbody also has a state
supplemental designation "Tr" (Trout Waters). This designation is
intended to protect freshwaters for natural trout propagation and the
survival of stocked trout. The North Carolina Division of Land Resources
has a special buffer zone requirement which applies to all Division of
Environmental Management Trout Waters. These rules require an
undisturbed buffer zone of 7.6 m (25 ft wide) or of sufficient width to
confine visible siltation within the twenty-five percent of the buffer
zone nearest the land-disturbing activity, whichever is greatest.
Protection measures include special numeric instream water quality
standards to protect trout.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) (NC-DEHNR,
Division of Environmental Management) addresses long term trends in water
quality at fixed monitoring sites by the sampling for selected benthic
macroinvertebrates. These organisms are sensitive to very subtle changes
in water quality. Subject project lies approximately 8.1 km (5 mi)
upstream of two biological sampling sites. The site on the Broad River at
Uree has a "Fair" classification as of 1989, probably due to variations in
water level created from discharge from Lake Lure. In contrast, Cove
Creek, a major tributary in the same area was rated "Good", as of 1989;
down from "Excellent" in 1986. This limited data suggests that headwaters
for the Broad River generally have "Good" water quality.
Neither High Quality Water, Outstanding Resource Waters, nor waters
classified as WS-I and WS-11 are located in the study area, or within 1.4
km (one mile) downstream. No National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System permits have been issued for the project area.
Potential impacts to water resources in the study area include the
following: increased sedimentation from construction and/or erosion;
alterations of water level due to interruptions and/or additions to
surface and ground water flow from construction; and/or changes in water
temperature and light incidence due to the removal of vegetative cover.
Stringent application of Best Management Practices should be
advocated during the design and construction phases of this project, in
order to minimize impacts to water resources.
No jurisdictional wetlands are located within the project area.
The subject project is classified as a categorical exclusion, and is
likely to fall under the provisions of Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5 (A)
23. This permit authorizes any activities, work, and discharges
undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded, or financed, in whole
or by part, by another federal agency that the activity is "categorically
excluded" from environmental documentation because it is included as a
category of actions which neither individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the environment. However, final permit decisions
are left to the discretionary authority of the United States Army Corps of
Engineers.
All waters within Henderson County are Mountain Trout Waters as
designated by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC).
This designation requires that applicants obtain a letter of comment and
recommendation from the NCWRC and a letter of concurrence from the
Wilmington District Corps of Engineers before discharging any dredged or
fill material into waters of the United States that occur within any of
the 25 designated counties. A letter of comment from the NCWRC is
included as Attachment 2.
10
Coordination with the NCWRC indicates the Broad River (also called
the Rocky Broad River in this area) is Hatchery Supported Designated
Public Mountain Trout Water at the project site and may also support wild
rainbow trout. Fishing pressure is somewhat heavy in this area.
The NCWRC concurs that the bridge should be replaced with another
spanning structure. Other recommendations for consideration during design
and construction of the project include:
(1) If concrete will be used, construction should be accomplished so that
wet concrete does not contact river water. This will lessen the
chance of altering the river's water chemistry and causing a fish
kill.
(2) Native trees and shrubs should be planted at the site of the old
bridge upon its removal. This will provide bank stability and shade
to the stream.
(3) Temporary ground cover (e.g. hardwood mulch or straw) should be
placed on all bare soil during construction. Permanent herbaceous
vegetation in these same areas should be established within fifteen
days of ground disturbance activities to provide long term erosion
control.
The NCDOT Hydraulics Unit also recommends measures to minimize impact
to the environmentally sensitive Broad River. Erosion and sedimentation
control is very important, and construction operations will be carefully
planned to minimize disturbance of the existing stream banks. Cofferdam
sheeting will be needed for bridge footings in water; any material
excavated for footings in or near water must be removed from the immediate
vicinity to prevent it from eroding back into the water. All runoff
crossing the construction area will be directed to temporary silt basins
via lateral ditches with rock check dams to slow and filter the runoff
prior to discharging into the river. Approach roadway fill slopes shall
be stabilized with seeding, and temporary silt ditches, silt fence, etc.
shall be provided at the toe of fill. Berms along the top of the fill
slope will be used to convey runoff laterally to temporary slope drains,
which empty into temporary sediment basins. Early placement of rip-rap
slope protection will also protect against surface erosion. Special
attention will be given to proper installation and maintenance of all
erosion and sedimentation control devices.
A 401 Water Quality Certification administered through the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources will be
required. This certificate is issued for any activity which may result in
a discharge into waters for which a federal permit is issued.
Federal law requires that any action, which has the potential to have
a detrimental impact to the survival and well being of any species
classified as federally protected, is subject to review by the U. S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS), under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended.
11
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 December 20, 1993, the USFWS lists five federally protected
species for Henderson County. These species are tabulated below.
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES FOR HENDERSON COUNTY
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Sagittaria fasciculata Bunched arrowhead E
Sarracen a ru ra
var. Jo-nesii Mountain sweet pitcher plant E
Isotria med-eoloides Small whorled pogonia E
is rinc iFiium dichotomum White irisette E
He onus u lata Swamp pink T
No suitable habitat exists at the project site for any of these
species. Therefore, it is concluded that the project will not affect
these species.
Candidate species are those species currently under review by the
USFWS for possible listing as Threatened or Endangered. These species are
not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject
to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally
proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. A compilation of these
species is found in the table below.
12
FEDERAL CANDIDATE SPECIES FOR HENDERSON COUNTY
SUITABLE
NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME CATEGMV-RIBITAT
PLANTS
Bog ashphodel Narthecium americanum* 1 No
Mountain
heartleaf Hexast lii contracta 2 No
French broad Hexastylis rr oiormis 2 No
heartleaf
White butternut Ju lans cinerea 2 Yes
Gray's lily Li ium grayi 2 No
Large-flowered
Barbara's buttons Marshallia randiflora* 2 No
Sweet pinesap Monotr s s o orata 2 No
White fringeless P antant era integrilabia* 2 No
orchid
Gray's saxifrage Saxifra a caroliniana 2 No
Divided-leaf ragwort Senecio mi e o ium 2 No
Mountain catchfly Silfene ovata 2 No
REPTILES
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii 2 No
AMPHIBIANS
Green salamander Aneides aeneus 2 Yes
Hellbender CryptoEranus
alleganni s s 2 Yes
CRUSTACEANS
French Broad stream
crayfish Cambarus reburrus 2 Yes
MOLLUSKS
Tennessee Lasmigona holstonia 2 No
heelsplitter
INSECTS
Diana fritillary
butterfly Speyeria diana 2 Yes
* Indicates no specimen from that county in at least 20 years
Category 1 - Taxa for which the Fish and Wildlife Service has on file
enough substantial information on biological vulnerability and threat(s)
to support proposals to list them as endangered or threatened.
Category 2 - Taxa for which there is some evidence of vulnerability, but
for which there are not enough data to support listing at this time.
13
These species are mentioned here for the purpose of in .rmation, as
they may be listed under a protected status at a later date. Many of
these species have state protected statuses are discussed below.
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T) or Special Concern (SC) are granted protection by the State
Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and Conservation Act of
1979, administered and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission and the NC Department of Agriculture.
The following compilation of organisms includes federal Candidate
species that have state protected statuses, as well as taxa that have been
recorded by the NCNHP near the immediate project area. Surveys were not
conducted for organisms nor their suitable habitat.
STATE PROTECTED SPECIES FOR HENDERSON COUNTY
NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
STATUS
PLANTS
Bog ashphodel Narthecium americanum*
Mountain heartleaf Hex?a- slis contracta
Gray's lily Lii
'1um ra i-
White fringeless orchid Pint era inte rilabia*
Divided leaf ragwort Senecio mi e o ium
MAMMALS
Eastern small-footed
bat
Northern long-eared
bat
Indiana bat
REPTILES
Bog turtle
Myotis leibii leibii
M_yot s se tentrionalis
Myotis so a is
Clemmys muhlenbergii
AMPHIBIANS
Crevice salamander
Green salamander
Hellbender
Plethodon longicrus
Anei es aeneus
C tobranchus
a eganiensis
MOLLUSKS
Tennessee heelsplitter Lasmigona holstonia
E
T/SC
E
T
SC
EC
T
SC
E
SC
E
* - Indicates no specimen from that county in at least 20 years.
14
The project is located within the Western Mountain Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Henderson County has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Since this project is located in an area where the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control
measures, the conformity procedures of Title 23, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Part 770 do not apply to this project.
It is noted the impact on air quality will be insignificant. If
vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be done in
accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North
Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This
evaluation completes the assessment requirements of Title 23, Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 770, and no additional reports are
required.
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes.
Therefore, its impact on noise levels will be insignificant. Noise levels
could increase during construction but will be temporary.
This project has been coordinated with the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO). Correspondence from the SHPO is included as
Attachment 3. There are no known structures over 50 years old which are
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The
buildings which are greater than 50 years old lack architectural
distinction, and the bridge is an example of a type prevalent throughout
the state.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project
area, and it is unlikely that any archaeological resources which may be
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places will be
affected by project construction. The SHPO recommends that no
archaeological survey be performed in conjunction with this project. This
coordination fulfills the requirements for this project, in compliance
with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as
amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Henderson County is not a participant in the National Flood Insurance
Program; however, Flood Insurance Rate Maps and a Flood Insurance Study
have been developed for Henderson County in anticipation of future
participation. This crossing of the Broad River is included in the
detained flood study. Three or four of the small dwellings along SR 1611
(Freeman Road) may have floor elevations below the 100-year flood level;
however, there is no evidence of frequent flooding problems. The proposed
bridge replacement project will not effect the existing floodplain. The
approximate limits of the 100-year floodplain are shown in Figure 4.
An individual permit will not be required from the Corps of Engineers
since the Nationwide Section 404 permit provisions are applicable, and the
provisions of 330.5(b) and 330 will be followed.
15
Coordination with the U. S. Soil Conservation Service indicates that
both of the alternatives studied will impact prime farmland. Alternates 1
and 2 will impact 0.92 acre of prime farmland and 0.10 acre of statewide
important farmland soils. However, the project area is characterized by
low density residential development, and no active farm will be impacted
by the proposed improvement. Because of the project's overall impact to
farming in its immediate vicinity and throughout Henderson County is
minimal, no further consideration of farmland impacts is necessary. The
Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Form (Form AD-1006) is included as
Attachment 4.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious
adverse environmental effects will result from implementation of the
project.
JH/plr
a
1662 Ig
c E
?o
4RWALLOW
MTN.
EV. 4,249
6
5
\ 160!6 0-
h
WALLOW l
1605
0-
y?
,`O
O
1
"P AP 1661
Creek
0
?O N
C? 1604
.a
? EDNEYVILLE 1514
1603 16,02 if No. I
1636-,
•,.I" '
1592 1612
,7 r> 1631 ?
4
b 591 1613 •? `? /qa
1613 /
_ 1614 Q
?v .
b
%
1608. c-4
a
1609 ,
?• /
Bat
Cave

I,iif,
Bat Cav
/ Fletcher 64
Hoe. Fr wtlsnd 6 ^,
,,???,,, M 111 R yer 9, 3 Mountain
e
, Id 191 r dnevvdll
??• SON
Hors
, • e East
64 towA
endersonvtlle plop
a ose Fl at Rock
y
is Zaonia
47 Ed" $I Fore t 2
tle Rr verTuxedo
L
J 3 burry,
?I
111111 L ?
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
US 74
BRIDGE NO. 145
OVER BROAD RIVER
HENDERSON COUNTY
B-2573
0 mile 1
1 1 1 FIG. 1
,6
ba ?? ?08
?? 64
i ?O
a ?? ?i .74 T
efto
^ DTO?V
)T,p ?,?I ,???? ~ 0
1702 ? ,??i ??
I ?? ?
B - 2573
HENDERSON COUNTY
LOOKING EAST ON US 74
TOWARD BRIDGE NO. 145
ND US 74 / NC 9 INTERSECTION
LOOKING WEST ON US 74
FROM US 74 / NC 9 INTERSECTION
TOWARD BRIDGE NO. 145
SIDE VIEW OF BRIDGE NO. 145
FROM SR 1611 (FREEMAN ROAD)
FIGURE 2
*C.
?C
Shu t
°'
]` l r
u
I - \ 4 ? ':KiiZ
? arr.. .
--- o
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
/U
a G'
LuL
1 ?• 1`
L f,

Cwt g
S d
I Y.
PROJECT SITE
u
O ,.
•11
0
0
O• ? r ? M1600 /-
??
q6?? %:: + FIGURE 4
R E IL O CAT I O N R E P O R T North Carolina'Department of Transportation
X E.I.S. - CORRIDOR _ DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROJECT= 8.1951001 COUNTY- Henderson Sections 2 of 2 Sections
I.D. NO.- B-2573 F.A. PROJECT: Unknown
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT- Bridge No. 145 Over Broad River _
._---._-_.........._..._........ ........... _............... ........._._....
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES
Type of Minor-
Displacee Owners Tenants Total ities 0-15M 15-25M

..___...__....._ ..
_._.........
Individuals 0 0 0 0 0 ?

Families

3

0

3

0
_
_....._........ .......
0 0
................... ._.............. __..
Businesses _.__...
0 ....... ......
0
0
0 ..... ._._..._....._.... ..................
VALUE OF DWELLING

Farms
0 _..............__.___
0
"" ._.
..__-
?
' _..__._...__._..
0 ..... _......... .._._.......__
Owners Tenants

Non-Profit
0
0
t 0--
0
0-20M 0 $ 0-150
ES NO
.....................
X
.
_X....
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
....................
X
........................
X
_ ......... ..........
X
X
AIJSGIER ALL ("ILEST I ONS. .................. __.. 20-40M 3 _ 150-250
...... ......... _-._ ......_....__.._...... ..
EXPLAIN ALL "YES" ANSWERS 40-70M 0 250-400
..
........... _-............. ...._......... ...... _.......... __ __......._....... ...__..- ................. ...........___-_...._. _._.........................
1. Will special relocation 70-100 0 400-600
... ............. ..... ....... _................
INCOME LEVEL
25-35M 35-SOM 50 UP
..........
0 ....... ........ .... __..-_-....___..__....
0 ..._................ ................... __
0 ....
_. -.._._..
3 ..........._.........................__
0
0
DSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE

For Sale . .............-._........
For Rent __
0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 D
0-----. ..2?-40M .._.._..4._........ . .150-250....... ._............ 1
_._.____..
0 .......___...__...... ._........__.___..
40-70M 2
250-400
..
..
.
...
1
0............. , . .70-100............ 2._..._... .
..
.
40 0-600 ..... 2
services be necessary ..___...._...__..... ........_._....._...__.._
2. Will schools or churches be 100 UP 0 600 UP 0 100
._..
affected by displacement ......... ...... _ ..........
3. Will business services still TOTAL 3 0
be available after project ................. .................... ............ _ ................. ................. .................
4. Will any business be dis- REMARKS (Respond by Number)
placed. If so, indicate size
type, estimated number of 3.
employees, minorities, etc.
5. Will relocation cause a 6.
Housing shortage
6. Source for available hous-
ing (list) B.
7. Will additional housing
programs be needed 11.
B. Should Last Resort Housing
be considered
9. Are there large, disabled,
elderly, etc. families
ANSWER THESE ALSO FOR DESIGN
10. Will public housing be
needed for project
11. Is public housing avail-
able
12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate DDS housing available
during relocation period
13. Will there be a problem of
housing within financial
means
14. Are suitable business sites
available (list source)
15. Number months estimated to
C?mp I ete,RELOCATION 6
3 600 UP 1. 0
...... .
11 4
Project will not affect business services.
Burch Real Estate, Bat Cave, N. C.
Habitat Realty, Hendersonville, N. C. and Times News
As necessary in accordance with State law.
Hendersonville Public Housing
_.. -
..... ..... .............._._....,........ ........ ........._.._ ..__....... _........... _........
-LIAJ;
"- - atP
-Re ocatlon gent ate Approved
Form 15.4 Revised 5/90 Original & 1 1
2 ATTACHMENT 11
N
0 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 9
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Julie A. Hunkins, P. E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
FROM: Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: March 12, 1993
SUBJECT: Scoping comments regarding impacts to trout from
replacing Bridge #145 on US 74 over Broad River,
Henderson County (TIP #B-2573)
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our
comments regarding impacts to trout from replacing Bridge #145
along US 74 over the Broad River in Henderson County.
The Broad River (also called the Rocky Broad River in this
area) is Hatchery Supported Designated Public Mountain Trout
Water at the project site and may also support wild rainbow
trout. Fishing pressure is somewhat heavy in this area.
A major concern of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) is that the existing bridge be replaced with
another spanning structure as described in NCDOT preliminary
plans. Other recommendations include:
1) If concrete will be used, construction must be accomplished
so that wet concrete does not contact river water. This
will lessen the chance of altering the river's water
chemistry and causing a fish kill.
2) Native trees and shrubs should be planted at the on-site
detour area upon removal of the detour structure
(Alternative 1) or at the site of the old bridge upon its
removal (Alternative 2). This will provide bank stability
and shade to the stream.
3) Temporary ground cover (e.g. hardwood mulch, straw, etc.)
must be placed on all bare soil during construction.
Permanent herbaceous vegetation in these same areas must be
ATTACHMENT 2
established within 15 days of ground disturbing activities
to provide long term erosion control.
I appreciate the opportunity to provide this information
request in the early planning stages of this project. Please
contact me at 704/652-4257 if you have any questions regarding
these comments.
cc: Mr. Micky Clemmons, District 9 Fisheries Biologist
Mr. David Yow, NCWRC Highway Coordinator
NOV 2
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
October 29, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge No. 145 on US 74 over Broad
River, Henderson County, B-2573, 8.1951001,
BRSTP-74(2), GS 93-0016
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and I-{icttiry
William S. Price,7r ,- irector
On October 13, 1992, Robin Stancil of our staff met with North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds
concerning the above project. We reported our available information on historic
architectural and archaeological surveys and resources along with our
recommendations. NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial
photographs at the meeting and for our use afterwards.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
We feel that the structures over fifty years of age--Nos. 5, 6, 8, and Bridge No.
145--are not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The
buildings lack architectural distinction and the bridge is an example of a type
prevalent throughout the state.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Basec
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend
that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a
Categorical Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT
addressed our concerns.
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.
109 East ones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
ATTACHMENT 3
Nicholas L. Graf
October 29, 1992, Page 2
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,
/D'a L rook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: "L. J. Ward
B. Church
T. Padgett

1000N AdOD
1000N- AdOD
U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
PART I t ro he cornolered by jedera/ Agency) Date of Land Evaluation Areu.st ?? ? .tea ?CN01, ?
Name Of Project a,5 7 1 Faoeral Agenev Involved
Proposed Land Us* J County And State
c" do .VS7y Ovtc v'coo.d ZZ?vcr ?ac.r_rao Co. N • sr, .
PART II (To be completed by SCSJ Oace Request Received By SCS
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No
(if no, the FPPA does not apply - do not complete addidaml parts of this form). Apes Irrigated
- -- Ave.ge Farm Sim
/ v
,Msior CroO t
?2• j? r" p-, arm sWe Land In Govt. Jurisdiction
Asses: .; % 3;1 Amount and N Defined n A
Acres: ¢' L': , --,7 _l x
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used Name Of Lilical Site Assassai nt System ate Land Evakeedon Returned Y
PART 111 (To be completed b
Federal A
) Altemat" to att
y
gency Site A Site a Site C Site D
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly
S. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
C. Total Acres In Site
PART IV (To be completed by SCSI Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland > ?= •,
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland tr_), go C. I c
C. Percentage Of Farmland In Coup Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted c ` c c
O. Pereetttage Of farmland In Govt. Jurisdiction With Some Or Higher Ralatlw Valve 3
PART V 17b be completed by SCSI Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Sa/eof0to 100Pointsl
7 -
> ),
PART V I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assasrment Criteria nW*m MefNe are eAWWmd In 7 C/rR 66a alb/ Maximum
Point
1. Area In Nonurban Use ? B
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use k co
3. Percent Of Site Beim Farmed ac C) r-,
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government o ct) C)
S. Distance From Urban Builtup Area t? /A
-
-
8. Distance To Urban Support Services
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared 7d Average
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland
9. Availability Of Farm Support Services 5 n __5
10. On-Farm Investments QJ (NI
14. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services C9
1Z Compatibility With Existing A cultural Use
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 180 \ $ \?
%RT VI I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Pier Vl 100
el? tetea Site eAsment nom err V/ above or a local 160 \$ \
TOTAL P01 NTS (Total of above ? lines/ 280

to Selected:
Date Of Selection Was A Local Site Assessment Used?
Yes ? No ?
Own- For ?Sefection:
? -- - - -- ? - .. - -- - . -
ATTACHMENT 4?