20040160 Ver 1_Complete File_20040204

1 q'N
r "'. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
February 6, 2003
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
ATTN: Mr. John Thomas
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
FILE COPY
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
040160
WETLANDS /401 GROUP
'EB () 4 2UU4
WATER QUALITySECTION
Subject: Nationwide 23 and 33 application. Ashe County, Replacement of Bridge No.
46 Over Little Helton Creek on NC 194, Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-
194(3), State Project No. 8.1711201, TIP Project No. B-3605.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above referenced
project. We plan to replace this bridge with a new bridge. The horizontal alignment will be
shifted westward to allow phase construction of the bridge and to allow for maintenance of one
lane, two-way traffic on-site during construction. The recommended replacement structure is a
new bridge structure 65 ft long and 28 ft wide. No wetlands will be impacted by this project.
Bridge Demolition
The existing bridge is composed of timber and steel with rubble masonry. No
component of Bridge No. 46 will be dropped into waters of the U.S. during construction. This
project can be classified as Case 2, which allows no work at all in the water during moratorium
periods associated with fish migration, spawning, and larval recruitment into nursery areas. In-
stream work and land disturbance within the 25 ft wide buffer zone will be prohibited during
the trout spawning season of November 1 through April 15 to protect the egg and fry stages of
trout.
Temporary Causeways
There will be 250 ft (0.02 ac) temporary impacts from the construction of temporary
rock causeways in Little Helton Creek for the construction of Bridge No. 46. Temporary rock
causeways will be required for construction of retaining walls in order to provide for
construction access. The causeways will consist of plain Class I rip rap.
Restoration Plan: No permanent fill will result from the subject activity. The materials used as
tempogary'rtll*ih Me construction of the retaining walls will be removed.
Schedule for Construction of Causeways: It is assumed that the Contractor will begin
construction of the proposed causeways shortly after the date of availability for the project.
The Let date is April 20, 2004 with a date of availability of May 23, 2004.
Removal and Disposal: The causeways will be removed within 90 days of the completion of
the deck slab for the structure. The temporary rock causeways will be removed by the
Contractor using excavating equipment. All materials placed in the stream by the Contractor
will be removed. The Class I rip rap that is removed may be used on end slopes where Class I
rip rap is required at the discretion of the Engineer. All other materials removed by the
Contractor will be disposed of at an off-site upland location.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered, and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section
9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of January 29, 2003, the Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) lists seven federally protected species for Ashe County (Table 1).
Common Name Scientific Name Status
Bo turtle Clemm s muhlenber ii T S/A)
Heller's blazing star Liatris helleri Threatened
Roan Mountain bluet Houstonia montana
(=Hedyotis purpurea
var. montana) Endangered
Spreading avens Geum radiatum Endangered
Swam ink Helonias bullata Threatened
Virginia s iraea S iraea vir iniana Threatened
Rock gnome lichen G mnoderma lineare Endangered
T(S/A)- Threatened due to similarity of appearance--a species that is threatened due to
similarity of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection. These species
are not biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation.
Threatened- A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all
or a significant portion of its range."
Endangered- A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range."
A Biological Conclusion of "No Effect" remains valid for all of these species except for
Virginia spiraea. A Biological Conclusion of "May Affect-Not Likely to Adversely Affect" is
rendered for Virginia spiraea, since habitat is present for this plant. A letter has been sent to the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) requesting their concurrence with this biological
conclusion. A copy is attached for your convenience. Ms. Marella Buncick of the USFWS
was contacted during the week of January 12, 2004. She said that there would be problem in
concurring with our "May Affect-Not Likely to Adversely Affect" Biological Conclusion. A
copy of the concurrence letter will be sent to the regulatory agencies as soon as we receive it.
Regulatory Approvals
Section 404 Permit: This 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 Nationwide 23 and 33
as authorized by Nationwide Permits 23 and 33 (FR number 10, pages 2020-2095; January 15,
2002).
Section 401 Permit: We anticipate 401 General Certification numbers 3361 and 3366 will
apply to this project. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0501(a) we are providing two copies
of this application to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality, for their records.
We also anticipate that comments from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) will be required prior to authorization by the Corps of Engineers. By copy of this
letter and attachment, NCDOT hereby requests NCWRC review. NCDOT requests that
NCWRC forward their comments to the Corps of Engineers.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Matt Haney at
[phone].
Sincerely,
?... Grego J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
w/attachment
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality (2 copies)
Ms. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
w/o attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Carl McCann, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
Mr. Heath Slaughter, Division 11 Environmental Officer
Ms. Robin Hancock, Planning Engineer
s.,. SEAT[
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
November 4, 2003
Ms. Marella Buncick
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Biological Conclusion for the Virginia spiraea for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 46 over Little Helton Creek on NC 194, Ashe
County, TIP No. B-3605; State Project No. 8.1711201; Federal Aid
Project No. BRSTP-194(3).
Dear Ms. Buncick:
The Natural Heritage Program documented one occurrence of Virginia spiraea within 9
miles of the project study area. This occurrence is in Ashe County near the intersection
of SR 1645 and SR 1302.
A systematic survey of all potentially suitable habitat was conducted on July 17,2003.
No members of the genus Spiraea were observed in the field. Therefore, a biological
conclusion of "Not Likely to Adversely Affect" was given.
Given the findings, we are seeking your concurrence with our biological conclusion of
Not Likely to Adversely Affect.
This information is being provided to your Agency on behalf of the Federal Highway
Administration in order to coordinate Section 7 issues with your agency. Should you
have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at [phone].
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
lovd
Matt Haney
Environmental Specialist
cc: Robin Hancock, NCDOT Planning Engineer
File
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
I
Office Use Only: Form Version May 2002
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 040160
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A°.)
1. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
? 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 23 & 33
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NC Department of Transportation
Mailing Address: 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number: 919-733-3141 Fax Number: 919-715-1501
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: N/A
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Fax Number:
Page 5 of 13
V
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bridge No. 46 over Little Helton Creek on NC 194
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3605
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Ashe Nearest Town: Helton
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Bridge No. 46 over Little Helton
Creek on NC 194
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 36° 35'/ 81° 30'(approx.)
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Property size (acres)
N/A
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Little Helton Creek
8. River Basin: New
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: residential and agricultural
Page 6 of 13
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
proposed project will consist of replacing the existing bridge with a new bridge west of the
existing alignment to allow phase construction of the bridge and to allow for maintenance of
one lane two-way traffic onsite during construction. Construction equipment will consist of
heavy duty trucks earth moving equipment, and cranes, etc.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: Replace substandard bridge over Little Helton
Creek resulting in safer and more efficient traffic operations.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
Page 7 of 13
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: There will be temporary stream
impacts to approximately 0.02 acres (250 feet) of jurisdictional stream.
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
acres Located within
100-year Floodplain**
es/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
linear feet
Type of Wetland***
N/A

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at htip://www.fema.Pov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:
Total area of wetland impact proposed:
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma
Type of Impact* Length.of
Impact
linear feet
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
leasespecify)
1 Temporary fill 115 Little Helton Creek 12 ft perennial
1 Temporary fill 135 Little Helton Creek 12 ft perennial

Page 8 of 13
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditch ing/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.ust;s.Qov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.coni, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 250
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name of Waterbody
(if applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.
1 Temporary fill 0.01 Little Helton Creek stream
1 Temporary fill 0.01 Little Helton Creek stream

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stotmwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond: N/A Expected pond surface area: N/A
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The existing structure will be replaced with a 65 ft long bridge west of the existing alignment
to allow phase construction of the bridge and to allow for maintenance of one lane, two-way
traffic on-site during construction.
Page 9 of 13
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide.html.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Page 10 of 13
if
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ® No ?
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ?
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ® No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Page I 1 of 12

Zone* Impact
(square feet Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
* "Zone I extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of "Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
No mitigation required.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
N/A
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
N/A - -
AppUcant/Agent's Signature ' Daft-
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 12 of 12
f r=
1374
-- ---
1377'. '. J~I' 1376 1530....,, VIRGINI.4
`r'1'? 1376 j r; \` ?• .
1528
1376 194 PROJECT AREA
v! ?
1373
1529
.\ 1528
1375
1526 ??.
1525
1\ 1527
PORTION OF ASHE COUNTY
1374
PORTION OF STATE MAP
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
ASHE COUNTY
B1711201 (B-3605)
REPLACE BRIDGE NO.46 AND APPROACHES
OVER LITTLE HELTON CREEK ON NC 194
d
Ts - 3 WETLAND IMPACTS
SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET ? OF .L
q ???' 7? / r l \ ? ?y t i
?• /'??-?-'.'?1\1 ? ;'?I?/.s??? ? r-._ 1 ' !I® i ?? v ;L ll1J?\ ???\\??1??\O l? ??) ???II.?? 1
0
?. I I

9
l
QUAD MAP OVERLAY
WETLAND SITE MAP
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
ASHE COUNTY
8.1711201 (B-3605)
REPLACE BRIDGE NO 46 AND APPROACHES
OVER LITTLE HELTON CREEK ON NC 194
M
1000 0 2000
SCALE IN FEET SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET 2 OF A
?a
sr
S?
30
T ?•
WETLAND
--WLB- WETLAND BOUNDARY
WETLAND
C L
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
® DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
• CLEARING
FLOW DIRECTION
TB
_ TOP OF BANK
- WE.._ EDGE OF WATER
- PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
--F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG - - NATURAL GROUND
--'!L-• PROPERTY LINE
-TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-POE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB-• EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB-. EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
-•• ?- WATER SURFACE
xx xxx x x LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
CORE FIBER ROLLS
LEGEND
PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12"-48"
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54" PIPES
& ABOVE
W SINGLE TREE
WOODS LINE
DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAO
RIP RAP
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
? PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE (PSH)
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)

GRASS SWALE
ASHE COUNTY
BJ711201(B-3605)
REPLACE BRIDGE N0.46 AND APPROACHES
OVER LITTLE HELTON CREEK ON NC 194
I I SCALE AS SHOWN
II

O
Cl
CL I RIPRAP
WE CL B RIPRAP
WE E rB R ?SDG` w RV-
F). CREE,? i C?? -
- -
-?> C194
/ SDG S-?
/ A - x
/ CL 11 RIP RAP
/ CL B RIPRAP
/ REMOVE EXISTING
BRIDGE
O

?. WEB .!?
?WE
{-
X
S
N
H
W
LLI
2
cl)
LLI
Z
J
Q
1 II
ASHE COUNTY
8.911201 (B --w5)
TS REPLACE BRIDGE N0.46 AND APPROACHES
LEGEND OVER LITTLE HELTON CREEK ON NC 194
25 0 50
TEMPORARY FILL d
®
IN SURFACE WATER SCALE IN FEET SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET! Of J-?
s?
FF
I
O O
X R c
TO SR 1530 /
/ +
30'
X ?-
EXIST R/W? F
goo
O ,
' R
w '..
cn _ _ X F
w F
z :?-
UT??E CL IP IPRAPTE 10 +
? SEEDDEXTAI-" ?X
1 X
O
o
x 0
x-xJ
8-f
ISHEET21
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
ASHE COUNTY
8!71120/ fB-3605!
REPLACE BRIDGE NO.46 AND APPROACHES
LEGEND OVER LITTLE HELTON CREEK ON NC 194
TEMPORARY FILL 25 0 50
®IN SURFACE WATER SCALE IN FEET SCALE AS 51100 SHEET OF j u
s?

M N O

N 04 04 N C4

1

I

I
1
1 i
0
V

z
z
+Ot_O
M ' II X Z
W O?
47.
II II I
` I 0
II W
Z
1
0

° I
1 W
a I a
v

W 1 ?
1 ?-
?

?

a
0

L 2

?
??

?

c
co

i

H332IJ N0173H-TUI7
`
1
1
1
?g? \

N W;
in
1
a

+ V1 N n
I W
U) Z
:3
v
?;
aa?WW 1
.\• I
1 I
J
1/1N?WN In
O
? ?
?
I
1
1

I
1 I ?
9
R ? ?
? I
I
tp $ ?
In ni + I
I

M II
I
x. I

I CD
m
I

I In
+ I

I ~
w

?
I LL
_Z

i

I

o w

a
N

&g .96'0010'73

--
+
tj
.
3(7VbfV N103&
o
Q
NORTH CAROLINA
M N O p 0 DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS

N C4 N N N ASHE COUNTY
BJ711201IB-36051
(ELEVATION IN FEET) REPLACE BRIDGE NO.46 AND APPROACHES
OVER LITTLE HELTON CREEK ON NC 194
SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET k OF L

rv 3 .
o<,
W
N O Ld
L3
N N N >- W
cr V
\ 0 cr
\ ?tA
\ wz
O I
M
I
I
o
N
I
O
r-
I Q
I o ?
:3 Q o
m T7 F
O -.. -.._.._.._.._.._ . ...... _.. ZO w w 59
\ N W
\ ? H
\ N U (n Ix "
\ X W U
'^
I W vI
I
O
LD
O I
N
w
W
Z
LAJ
J
a
U
\'O I ?
M/ I
I Ln
I
NORTH CAROLINA
N O ?O DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
N N N ASHE COUNTY
BJ711201 fB-36051
REPLACE BRIDGE N0.46 AND APPROACHES
(ELEVATION IN FEET) OVER LITTLE HELTON CREEK ON NC 194
SCALE A5 SHOWN SHEET ? OF L&
O
_

N N N
LI
J !-
J Q
O > W
- Qa
M
a..
M; N
' W
? Z

0 _ I
ch I
I

\h.
` I

N /
z
/ o
U
/
/ 0
z

¦ .
I W j
m z
04
o
I Z Lu

I C)
N
o - -.._. uj ------ - ;_.._.._.._. _.
I F-- U) o J
U
I

I I
LI
W
o -
/ 2

N
w
/ w
J

/ O U
N

M /
ul

/ NORTH CAROLINA
n / DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
O
V /
ASHE COUNTY
/
8.1711201 f8-3605!
"
O REPLACE BRIDGE NO.46 AND APPROACHES
c\j
OVER LITTLE HELTON CREEK ON NC 194
N
N N
(ELEVATION IN FEET) SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET L OF!D
0
a-
rb
elo
a
m
m
E
m
gam
.o?
SUMMARY OF AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS

TRACT NO. PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS SITE NO.

NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
ASHE COUNTY
BJ711201(B-36051
REPLACE BRIDGE N0.46 AND APPROACHES
OVER LITTLE HELTON CREEK ON NC 194
SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET -t OF C

O JESSIE L. JONES (L/E)
C/0 JO ANN FRAZIER 8925 RIVERCRES
SUFFOLK, VA 23433
1,2

2O
LESSIE GAY WALTON 214 EDWARDS ROAD
WEST JEFFERSON,
NC 28694
1,2
3O CATHERINE S. HORNE 824 BELLVIEW
INSTON SALEM, NC 2710 2
4O JOHN AND JEAN STURGILL 18258 NC HWY 194 N
GRASSY CREEK,NC 28631 2

? E c
`i o
to
Od ?j

fA c C _
Co
`
M
LO

.
G
X =
N
a WUE

a

w
(
Q c.
m o
o 0
6 0
3 E
c 0
w
U
Q

cn sow o
= a --
ll.
vii L
C .?.
f0 O
Z

I-

a d r s
O
H
V c N

U M
> y
Cl

IL

o
Z

w LL c
m
CL

o
g 3
?C

7
N
C ?
a N O
LL S
J
J
d

2
N z
W

Lo
O to
co
N

65 l2 p
+ p?
+
to
r I
.-

J
O
Z
O
H
, a 1 .
Ashe County
Bridge No. 46 on NC 194
Over Little Helton Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-194 (3)
State Project 8.1711201
TIP No. B-3605
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
3- /2-02
Date William D. Gilmore, PE, Manager
Project Development and Environmenta Analysis Branch
3?3 oa
Date icholas L. Graf, PE
? Division Administrator, FHWA
Ashe County
Bridge No. 46 on NC 194
Over Little Helton Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-194 (3)
State Project 8.1711201
TIP No. B-3605
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
3-11-02 T6-X,_ C-
Date Robin C. Young
Project Planning Engineer
.3 v
r
Date William T. oodwin Jr., P nit Head
Bridge Replacement Planning Unit
3-12-0:2 Date Lubin V. Prevatt, PE, Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
PROJECT CO MTMENTS
Ashe County
Bridge No. 46 on NC 194
Over Little Helton Creek
Federal Project BRSTP--194 (3)
State Project 8.1711241
TIP No. B-3605
Commitments Developed Through Project Development and Design
Division 11 Construction, Roadside Environmental Unit, Structure Design Unit,
Project Development A Environmental Analysis (Natural Resource Specialist)
Bridge Demolition: Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition & Removal will
be implemented during the construction of Bridge No. 46. It is composed entirely of
timber, steel with rubble masonry. Therefore, no component of Bridge No. 46 will be
dropped into Waters of the United States during construction.
Roadway Design Unit, Hydraulics Unit, Division 11 Construction
Due to the classification of Little Helton Creek as a trout stream, NCDOT will adhere to
the following commitments:
1. In-stream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot wide buffer zone will be
prohibited during the trout spawning season of November 1 through April 15 to
protect the egg and fly stages of trout.
2. If concrete will be used, work must be accomplished so that wet concrete does not
contact stream water.
3. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the stream
channel in order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing
other pollutants into the stream.
4. Stringent erosion control measures should be installed where soil is disturbed and
maintained until project completion.
Green Sheet
Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
February 7, 2002
V
Ashe County
Bridge No. 46 on NC 194
Over Little Helton Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-194 (3)
State Project 8.1711201
TIP No. B-3605
INTRODUCTION: Bridge No. 46 is included in the 2002-2008 North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program and in the Federal-Aid Bridge
Replacement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts
are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion".
1. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 48.7 out of a
possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered to be structurally deficient and
functionally obsolete. The replacement of this inadequate structure will result in safer traffic
operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located approximately 1 mile south of the Virginia State Line in Ashe County,
near the intersection of NC 194 and SR 1379 (see Figure 1). Development in the area is
primarily residential and agricultural in nature.
NC 194 is classified as a Rural Major Collector Route in the Statewide Functional Classification
System and it is a Federal-Aid Highway. This route is not a designated bicycle route and there is
no indication that an unusual number of bicyclists use this roadway.
In the vicinity of the bridge, NC 194 has an 18-foot (5.4-meter) pavement width with 4-foot (1.2-
meter) grass shoulders (see Figure 3). The roadway grade is in a slight vertical curve and poor
horizontal alignment exists throughout the project limits. The existing bridge is on a tangent.
The roadway is situated approximately 7 feet (2.1 meters) above the creek bed.
Bridge No. 46 is a single span structure that consists of a timber deck on I-beams with an asphalt
wearing surface. The abutments consist of rubble masonry. The existing bridge (see Figure 3)
was constructed in 1955. The overall length of the structure is 26 feet (7.8 meters). The clear
roadway width is 20 feet (6 meters). The bridge is posted with weight restrictions of 18 tons for
single vehicles and 24 tons for truck transfer semi-trailers.
Blue Ridge Telephone Membership Corporation has an underground telephone service along the
east side of NC 194. This service is aerial across Little Helton Creek. Utility impacts are
considered to be low.
The current traffic volume of 300 vehicles per day (VPD) is expected to increase to 600 VPD by
the year 2025. The projected volume includes 1% truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) and 2%
dual-tired vehicles (DT). The speed limit in the vicinity of the bridge is statutory 55 mph (90
kmh).
There were no reported accidents in the vicinity of the project during a recent three year period.
According to the Transportation Director for Ashe County Schools, there are no school bus
crossings on Bridge No. 46.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The replacement structure will consist of a 65-foot (20-meter) long bridge. The bridge will be of
sufficient width to provide for two 11-foot (3.3-meter) lanes with 3-foot (1-meter) offsets on each
side.
The roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately the same as the existing grade at
this location.
The existing roadway will be widened to a 22-foot (6.6-meter) pavement width to provide two
11-foot (3.3-meter) lanes. Shoulder widths will be 4 feet (1.2 meters) on each side. The
shoulder widths will be increased 3 feet (1 meter) where guardrail-is warranted.
B. Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives
The alternative studied for replacing Bridge No. 46 is described below.
Alternate 1: (Recommended) Replace Bridge No. 46 with a new bridge approximately 65 feet
(20 meters) in length. Elevation of the new bridge will be approximately the same
as the existing structure. The horizontal alignment will be shifted westward to
allow phase construction of the bridge and to allow for maintenance of one lane,
two-way traffic on-site during construction. Possible signalization of the one lane,
two-way traffic phase will be investigated during development of the preliminary
design. The design speed will be approximately 60 mph (100 kmh). It is
anticipated that a design exception will be required for the horizontal alignment.
2
C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration
An off-site detour is not considered to be prudent due to traffic volume and the lack of a suitable
detour route.
The "do-nothing" alternative is not practical and will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge.
This is not acceptable due to the traffic service provided by NC 194.
"Rehabilitation" of the existing deteriorating bridge is neither practical nor economical.
New location to the west of the existing structure, while maintaining traffic on the existing
roadway was eliminated from further consideration. There is a one story frame house located
approximately 60 feet (18 meters) west of NC 194. Based on preliminary design, this alternate
would likely require the relocation of the inhabitants. On the east side, in addition to the
underground telephone line, a rock ledge runs along the roadway. Any blasting required would
increase the construction costs significantly.
D. Recommended Alternate
Bridge No. 46 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate I with a new bridge by shifting the
horizontal alignment westward to allow phase construction of the new bridge (see Figure 2). The
elevation of the new bridge will be approximately the same as the existing structure. The new
bridge will be approximately 65 feet (20 meters) in length and 28 feet (8.6 meters) in width. A
travelway of 22 feet (6.6 meters) will be accommodated, with an offset of 3 feet (1 meter) on
each side of the bridge. Based on preliminary design, the design speed should be approximately
60 mph (100 kmh).
The approach roadway will consist of two 11-foot (3.3-meter) travel lanes and shoulder widths of
at least 4 feet (1.2 meters). The shoulder widths will be 3 feet (1 meter) wider where guardrail is
warranted. There will be approximately 320 feet (98 meters) of approach work on each side of
the bridge.
The new bridge will be phase constructed to allow for maintenance of one lane, two-way traffic
on-site during construction.
Alternative 1 is recommended because it is the most cost effective and minimizes impacts on the
sensitive natural ecosystems in the vicinity of the site. This alternative will have a minimal
impact to adjacent properties while maintaining the flow of traffic.
The NCDOT Division 11 Engineer concurs with the selection of Alternative 1 as the preferred
alternative.
3
IV. ESTIMATED COSTS (Table 1)
The estimated costs for the alternate is as follows:

COMPONENT Recommended
ALTERNATE 1
on-site detour
Structure
Bridge Removal
Roadway & Approaches $ 136,000
$ 5,000
$ 191,000
Mobilization & Miscellaneous $ 147,000
Engineering & Contingencies $ 71,000
Total Construction $ 550,000
Right of Way $ 27,000
Total Cost $ 577,000
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources that occur in the project area are discussed below with respect to
possible environmental concerns. Soil properties and site topography significantly influence the
potential for soil erosion and compaction, along with other possible construction limitations or
management concerns. Water resources within the project area present important management
limitations due to the need to regulate water movement and the increased potential for water
quality degradation. Excessive soil disturbance resulting from construction activities can
potentially alter both the flow and quality of water resources, limiting downstream uses. In
addition, soil characteristics and the availability of water directly influence the composition and
distribution of flora and fauna in biotic communities, thus affecting the characteristics of these
resources.
Regional Characteristics
Ashe County is located in the northwestern corner of North Carolina within the Blue Ridge
Mountain physiographic province. The county topography is characterized as predominately
hilly and mountainous and has many mountain peaks, such as The Peak, Bluff, Three Top,
Paddy, Phoenix, Pond, and Mount Jefferson. The elevation ranges from about 2,480 feet (756
meters) where the New River leaves the county to 5,130 feet (1564 meters) atop The Peak. Ashe
County is located in the New River drainage basin. The county is predominately drained by the
New River and its tributaries. This drainage way flows northward into the Kanawha River and
then into the Ohio River system. The New River drainage basin is the fourth smallest basin in
4
North Carolina, covering 765 square miles (1981 square kilometers). Water quality in the
drainage basin is high and nearly 70 percent of the waters are classified as trout waters. Land
cover in the county is predominately forested with about 25 percent in agriculture and
pastureland. This is due to the steep slopes in the region and the unsuitability of these slopes for
development or agriculture purposes.
The project area topography along Little Helton Creek is steeply sloping to moderately sloping.
The riparian area on either side of the creek is moderately sloping at an angle of approximately
10 to 20 degrees. Beyond the riparian zone to the west approximately 50 feet (15.2 meters), the
slope increases and rises 60 to 80 feet (18 to 24 meters) above the creek. This slope is
pastureland that appears to be used for livestock. The riparian area to the east of the creek is
much smaller and confined by NC 194. The riparian area to the east between NC 194 and the
creek ranges in width from 20 to 60 feet (6 to 18 meters) wide within the project area. This area
is also pastureland and appears to be used by livestock. Located east of NC 194, directly adjacent
to the road there is a granite slope that appeared to be cut when the road was constructed. This
granite slope is steeply sloping and is approximately 30 feet (9 meters) high. This granite slope
parallels NC 194 until it reaches Little Helton Creek where it turns with the creek and becomes
the bank of the creek continuing northeast out of the project area.
Soils
Generally, soils are characterized into Soil Associations or "General Soil Mapping Units" with
consistent patterns of soil, relief, and drainage. The project study area in Ashe County lies in the
Evard-Ashe "General Soil Mapping Unit". The Evard-Ashe grouping is moderately steep to very
steep, well-drained and somewhat excessively drained soils that have a loamy subsoil; on
uplands at elevations of 2,700 to 3,500 feet (823 to 1067 meters). There are two soil types within
the Evard-Ashe mapping unit, located in the project area. A brief description of these soil types is
provided following Table 2.
Table 2. Soils occurring in the project area, Ashe County
Map Specific Hydric Capability
Symbol Mapping Unit % Slope Classification Unit
Co Colvard fine sandy loam Nearly level Non-hydric IIw
EvF Evard loam 25-45 Non-hydric VIIe
Colvard fine sandy loam,(Co) this nearly level, will drained soil is along the major streams
throughout the county. Areas are generally long and narrow and range from 5 to 100 acres (2 to
41 hectares). Typically, the surface layer is dark brown fine sandy loam 10 inches (25
centimeters) thick. The underlying material to a depth of 60 inches (152 centimeters) is brown
and yellowish brown fine sandy loam in the upper part, yellowish brown loamy sand in the
middle part, and brown cobbly sand in the lower part. Permeability is moderately rapid, and
available water capacity is moderate. Surface runoff is slow. The seasonal high water table is
below a depth of 48 inches (122 centimeters). This soil is subject to occasional flooding for very
5
brief periods. This soil is poorly suited to urban uses, such as dwellings, septic tank filter fields,
and small commercial buildings.
Evard loam.(EvFI this well drained soil is on side slopes bordering the drainageways. Elevation
ranges from 2,700 to 3,200 feet (823 to 975 meters). Typically, the surface layer is brown loam 7
inches (18 centimeters) thick. The subsoil, which is 29 inches (74 centimeters) thick, is strong
brown clay loam in the upper part, yellowish red clay loam in the middle part, and yellowish red
sandy loam in the lower part. The underlying material to a depth of 90 inches (229 centimeters)
is yellowish red and strong brown fine sandy loam. The permeability is moderate, and available
water capacity is moderate. Surface runoff is very rapid, and the hazard of erosion is very severe
on bare and exposed areas. This soil is poorly suited to crops, pasture, or urban and recreation
uses. Slope and erosion are the main limitations.
Water Resources
This section contains information concerning surface water resources likely to be impacted by
the proposed project. Water resource assessments include the physical characteristics, best usage
standards, and water quality aspects of the water resources, along with their relationship to major
regional drainage systems. Probable impacts to surface water resources are also discussed, as are
means to minimize impacts.
Best Usage Classification
Water resources within the study area are located in the New River Drainage Basin; Division of
Water Quality sub-basin number 05-07-02; United States Department of Interior Hydrologic Unit
is 05050001. There is one water resource, Little Helton Creek, in the project study area crossed
by NC 194. (Figure 1)
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water Quality (DWQ),
formerly Division of Environmental Management (DEM), which reflects water quality
conditions and potential resource usage. Unnamed tributaries receive the same classification as
the streams to which they flow. The classification for Little Helton Creek [ DEM Index No. 10-
2-27-4, 2/1/93 ] is class C Tr. Class C waters are freshwaters protected for secondary recreation,
fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife. All freshwaters shall be
classified to protect these uses at a minimum. The supplemental classification Tr refers to
freshwaters protected for natural trout propagation and survival of stocked trout.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Source (WS I or WS II), or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1 mile (1.6 km) of the project study area.
Little Helton Creek is not designated as a North Carolina Natural and Scenic River, nor is it
designated as a National Wild and Scenic River.
6
Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
Little Helton Creek comes into the project area in the northeast quadrant, flows under NC 194
where it bends south and parallels the road for approximately 400 feet (122 meters) and then
flows out of the project area. Within the project area the creek lies 20 to 50 feet (6 to 15 meters)
west of NC 194. Little Helton Creek at the study area is approximately 10-12 feet (3-4 meters)
wide at the top of the bank and ranges in depth at normal stage from 2-12 inches (5-31 cm) with
a northerly, moderate to swift flow. The Creek channel appeared to have its natural dimension,
pattern, and profile and represents an E3b type channel (Rosgen stream classification). The E3b
type channel is slightly entrenched, very low width to depth ratio and has high sinuosity. The
substrate in the study area is composed of a sandy loam with a lot of pebble, cobble, and bedrock
present in the streambed. The creek has relatively steep banks [2 feet (0.6 meters) deep at bank
full ] that appear to be stable, showing no signs of elevated levels of erosion. The banks are
vegetated primarily with various grasses that provide bank stabilization. There are a few trees
and shrubs along the bank that provide shading. However, most of the bank within the project
area is maintained and open to full sunlight. The cobble and bedrock in the streambed creates
riffles and small pools of water that are important habitat areas for invertebrates and fish
inhabiting the creek. The bridge is located on a straight run of riffle and pool sequences between
two bends. On the day of the site visit, turbidity in the water column appeared to be very low.
There was no evidence of elevated levels of sedimentation occurring in Little Helton Creek.
Water Quality
This section describes the quality of the water resources within the project area. Potential
sediment loads and toxin concentrations of these waters from both point sources and nonpoint
sources are evaluated. Water quality assessments are made based on published resource
information and existing general watershed characteristics. These data provide insight into the
value of water resources within the project area to meet human needs and to provide habitat for
aquatic organisms.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), managed by the DWQ, is part of an
ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses long term trends in water
quality. The program monitors ambient water quality by sampling at fixed sites for selected
benthic macroinvertebrates organisms, which are sensitive to water quality conditions. There are
no BMAN monitoring stations within the project vicinity.
Point source and Nonpoint source dischargers
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program. Any discharger is required to
register for a permit. There are no permitted dischargers within the project vicinity.
7
Nonpoint source discharge refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater or
snowmelt. Agricultural activities may serve as a source for various forms of nonpoint source
pollutants. Land clearing and plowing disturbs soils to a degree where they are susceptible to
erosion, which can lead to sedimentation in streams. Sediment is the most widespread cause of
nonpoint source pollution in North Carolina. Pesticides, chemical fertilizers, and land
application of animal wastes can be transported via runoff to receiving streams and potentially
elevate concentrations of toxic compounds and nutrients. Animal wastes can also be a source of
bacterial contamination and elevate biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). Drainage ditches on
poorly drained soils enhances the transportation of stormwater into surface waters (DEM, 1993).
The primary nonpoint pollution source in the project vicinity is runoff from pastureland that is
located throughout the project area. Runoff from the pasture could contain chemicals used in the
practice of farming that might be harmful to water quality. Another nonpoint pollution source is
runoff from NC 194, which could contain petroleum product residues deposited by automobiles
driving on the road.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Impacts to water resources in the project area are likely to result from activities associated with
project construction. Activities likely to result in impacts are clearing and grubbing on
streambanks, riparian canopy removal, instream construction, fertilizers and pesticides used in
revegetation, and pavement installation. The following impacts to surface water resources are
likely to result from the above mentioned construction activities.
• Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of the crossing and increased erosion in the
project area.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation and vegetation
removal.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface and
ground water flow from construction.
• Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to vegetation removal.
• Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil from construction
equipment and other vehicles.
• Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and groundwater
drainage patterns.
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project area, NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be strictly enforced during the
construction phase of the project. Limiting instream activities and revegetating stream banks
immediately following the completion of grading can further reduce impacts.
8
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include terrestrial and aquatic communities. This section describes the biotic
communities encountered in the project area, as well as the relationships between fauna and flora
within these communities. The composition and distribution of biotic communities throughout
the project area are reflective of topography, soils, hydrology, and past and present land uses.
These classifications follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible. Representative animal
species that are likely to occur in these habitats (based on published range distributions) are also
cited.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided for each animal and
plant species described. Subsequent references to the same organism refer to the common name
only. Fauna observed during the site visit is denoted in the text with an asterisk (*).
Terrestrial communities
Description of the terrestrial system is presented in the context of plant community
classifications. Terrestrial wildlife relationships are discussed after the terrestrial community
description.
Disturbed/maintained roadside community
This community is located on both sides of NC 194 and both sides of Little Helton Creek. This
community will be impacted by Alternate 1. Because of mowing and the use of herbicides this
community is kept in a constant state of early succession. The ground cover of this community is
composed of several species of herbaceous grasses and weeds, these include: common chickweed
(Stellaria media), wild ginger (Asarum canadense), star toadflax (Comandra umbellata), field
sorrel (Rumex acetosella), corn salad (Valerianella olitoria), viola (Viola sp.), wild geranium
(Geranium maculatum), purple dead nettle (Lamium purpureum), panic grass (Panicum sp.),
milkweed (Asclepias sp.), ragweed (Ambrosia artemisifolia), wood sorrel (Oxalis sp.), red clover
(Trifolium pratense), thistle (Carduus sp.), beggar's tick (Bidens sp.), plantain (Plantago sp.),
vaseygrass (Paspalum sp.), and bluegrass (Poa sp.). Vines that occupy these areas include,
swamp rose (Rosa sp.), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), trumpet vine (Campsis
radicans), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and blackberry (Rubus sp.). Often, the
duration between maintenance sessions of the area is quite long, allowing time for larger
herbaceous shrubs and woody vegetation to inhabit this disturbed area. Some of these herbaceous
shrubs and woody vegetation that was observed in the disturbed community include: sweet gum
(Liquidambar styracijlua), red maple (Acer rubrum), eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), tulip
poplar (Lirodendron tulipifera), black cherry (Prunus serotina), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda),
black walnut (Juglans nigra), and smooth sumac (Rhus glabra). Along the bank of Little Helton
Creek the woody vegetation includes arrowwood (Viburnum dentatum), black willow (Salix
nigra), and black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia).
9
Terrestrial Wildlife
The disturbed/maintained area and pastureland adjacent to forested tracts provide rich ecotones
for foraging, while the forests provide forage areas and cover. Birds that are often associated with
ecotones between these communities are ruby-crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula), Carolina
chickadee (Parus carolinensis)*, bluebird (Sialia sialis)*, downy woodpecker (Picoides
pubescens), yellow-throated warbler (Dendroica dominica), blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila
caerulea)*, white-breasted nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis), northern cardinal (Cardinalis
cardinalis)*, ruby-throated hummingbird (Archilochus colubris), indigo bunting (Passerina
cyanea), yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus), blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata), tuffed
titmouse (Parus bicolor)*, acadian flycatcher (Empidonax traillii), and mourning dove (Zenaida
macroura)*. The red-tailed hawk (Bueto jamaicensis) is a major predator in this habitat, feeding
on small mammals, reptiles, and amphibians.
Small mammals may inhabit these early successional habitats along forested areas, roadsides,
and streams for nesting and feeding. Some of these small mammals include, woodchuck
(Marmota monax), white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus), least shrew (Crypototis parva),
southern short-tailed shrew (Blarina carolinensis), hispid cottonrat (Sigmodon hispidus), and
eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus floridanus).
Larger mammals that may be present in these habitat areas for foraging, feeding, watering,
bedding, and mating include: raccoon (Procyon lotor), white-tailed. deer (Odocoilus virginiana),
opossum (Didelphis virginiana), eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis)*, red fox (Vulpes
vulpes), and gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus).
Reptiles and amphibians that may inhabit these community types include, queen snake (Regina
septenvittata), black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta), copperhead (Aghistrodon contortrix), garter
snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), American toad (Bufo americanus), Fowler's toad (Bufo
woodhousii), fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus), and five-lined skink (Eumeces laticeps).
Aquatic Community
This community consists of Little Helton Creek. Research has shown that a large amount of food
chain energy of stream communities is derived from allochthonous (produced outside the river
ecosystem) sources, in the form of terrestrial detritus. Rocks, fallen debris (logs, sticks, etc.), and
low velocity areas in the river trap detritus within the river. The detritus is then decomposed by
heterotrophic microorganisms, such as bacteria and consumed by macroinvertebrates, such as
aquatic insects. In turn, the aquatic insects are then consumed by larger organisms. The amount
of allochthonous energy input within a river varies seasonally. Autochthonous (produced within
the river ecosystem) energy sources include planktonic and benthic micro and macro algae as
well as aquatic vascular vegetation. Fallen logs in the water and rock surfaces offer an
attachment substrate for algae.
Aquatic insects that may be found in this community include the water strider* (Gerris spp.),
water beetle (Dytiscidae), stonefly (Plecoptera), dragonfly (Odonata), cranefly (Tipula spp.),
10
caddisfly (Trichoptera), stream mayfly (Ephemeroptera) and black-winged damselfly
(Calopteryx maculata).
Aquatic insects found in this community may be eaten by gamefish and other fishes that may
occur in Little Helton Creek and the tributary. Gamefish such as chain pickeral (Esox nigra),
smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), brown trout
(Salmo trutta), brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and sunfishes (Lepomis spp.) may occupy these
tributaries. Other fishes, such as shiners (Notropis spp.), golden shiners (Notemigonus
crysoleucas), eastern mosquitofish (Gambusia afnis), darters (Etheostoma spp.)*, chubs
(Semotilus spp.), daces (Clinostomus spp.), and catfishes (Ictaluridae) may occupy these
tributaries, as well.
Several other animals representing all vertebrate classes are integral parts of the aquatic system.
The northern dusky salamander (Desmognathus fuscus) and the two-lined salamander (Eurycea
bislineata) may occur under rocks and logs within the riverbed. Frogs, such as pickeral frog
(Rana palustris), upland chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata), southern leopard frog (Rana
sphenocephala), and bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), may occur in this habitat along stream banks
feeding on aquatic invertebrates. Other reptiles and amphibians occurring in this habitat feeding
on small fish and mussels, may include, northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon) and snapping
turtle (Chelydra serpentina).
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed project will have various impacts on the biotic resources described.
Any construction related activities in or near these resources have the potential to impact
biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies potential impacts to the natural
communities within the project area in terms of the area impacted and the organisms affected.
Temporary and permanent impacts are considered here as well, along with recommendations to
minimize or eliminate impacts.
Terrestrial Impacts
Impacts to the terrestrial community will result from project construction due to the clearing and
paving of portions of the project area, and thus the loss of community area. Table 3 (next page)
summarizes potential losses to the community, resulting from project construction. Calculated
impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance of the community present in the
study area. Estimated impacts are derived based on the project lengths described in Section III-D
(page 3), and the entire proposed right-of-way width of 80 feet (24 meters) for the bridge
replacement for Alternate 1. However, project construction often does not require the entire
right-of-way; therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
Table 3. Estimated Area Impacts to Terrestrial Communities.
_ommunity Impacted Area ha (ac)*
Maintained / disturbed 0.31 ha (0.78 ac)
Total Impacts 0.31 ha (0.78 ac)
*Permanent Impacts
Aquatic Impacts
Impacts to the aquatic communities of Little Helton Creek will result from the replacement of
Bridge 46. Impacts are likely to result from the physical disturbance of aquatic habitats (i.e.
substrate and water quality). Disturbance of aquatic habitats has a detrimental effect on aquatic
community composition by reducing species diversity and the overall quality of aquatic habitats.
Physical alterations to aquatic habitats can result in the following impacts to aquatic
communities:
• Inhibition of plant growth.
• Algae blooms resulting from increased nutrient concentrations.
• Loss of benthic macroinvertebrates through scouring resulting from an increased sediment
load.
Impacts to aquatic communities can be minimized by strict adherence to Best Management
Practices (BMP's). For the protection of Surface Waters, Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal will be adhered to. Bridge No. 46 is located on NC 194 over Little
Helton Creek. The bridge has one span totaling 26 feet in length. The bridge is composed entirely
of timber, steel, and rubble masonry. Therefore, no component of Bridge No. 46 will be dropped
into Waters of the United States during construction. This bridge demolition is classified as a
Case 2 - (allows no work at all in the water during moratorium periods associated with fish
migration, spawning, and larval recruitment into nursery areas). The Case 2 bridge demolition
classification is a result of the Tr classification for Little Helton Creek. The Tr classification
indicates these are waters protected for natural trout propagation and survival of stocked trout. To
prevent interference with spawning, the Wildlife Resource Commission request that no in-stream
work be permitted between Nov. 1 and April 15.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides inventories and impact analyses pertinent to two significant regulatory
issues: Waters of the United States and rare and protected species. These issues retain particular
significance because of federal and state mandates that regulate their protection. This section
deals specifically with the impact analyses required to satisfy regulatory authority prior to project
12
construction.
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United States," as
defined in Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CRF) Part 328.3. Any action that
proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters or wetlands 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). Surface waters include all standing or flowing waters which have
commercial or recreational value to the public. Wetlands are identified based on the presence of
hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and saturated or flooded conditions during all or part of the
growing season.
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to delineate jurisdictional wetlands include evidence of hydric soils, hydrophytic
vegetation and hydrology. There are no jurisdictional wetlands located in the project area,
therefore no wetland impacts will result from the construction of this project. Impacts to
jurisdictional surface waters are calculated based on the linear feet of the stream that is located
within the proposed right-of-way. Physical aspects of surface waters are described in the Best
Usage Classification section (page 6). Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters within in the
project right-of-way could possibly impact, but not to exceed, 60 linear feet (18 meters) of creek
(proposed right-of-way) for Alternate 1. This impact calculation to Little Helton Creek assumes
that the new road location will not require a relocating of the creek bed to the west. If the
construction of the roadbed requires stream relocation, additional impacts will need to be
calculated.
Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the proposed project. As a result,
construction activities will require permits and certifications from various regulatory agencies in
charge of protecting the water quality of public water resources.
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be applicable for all impacts to Waters of
the United States resulting from the proposed project. This permit authorizes activities
undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in whole, or part, by another
Federal agency or department where that agency or department has determined that pursuant to
the council on environmental quality regulation for implementing the procedural provisions of
the National Environmental Policy Act:
1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither individually
nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and;
2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency' or
13
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification from the DWQ prior to the
issuance of the Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state
issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in
a discharge to Waters of the United States. Section 401 Certification allows surface waters to be
temporarily impacted for the duration of the construction or other land manipulation. The
issuance of a 401 permit from the DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 permit.
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 human development. Federal law (under the
provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires that any action, likely to
adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected, be subject to review by the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other species may receive additional protection under
separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the provisions of Section 7
and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of March 22, 2001, the
FWS lists six species as federally-protected for Ashe County. A brief description of the
characteristics and habitat requirements for this species along with a conclusion regarding
potential project construction impacts follows Table 4.
Table 4. Federally-Protected Species for Ashe County.
Common Name Scientific Name Status
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii T(S/A)
Spreading Avens Geum radiatum Endangered
Swamp Pink Helonias bullata Threatened
Roan Mountain bluet Houstonia montana Endangered
Heller's blazing star Liatris helleri Threatened
Virginia spiraea Spiraea virginiana Threatened
Rock gnome lichen Gymnoderma lineare Endangered
Note:
Endangered- A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
Threatened- A taxon "likely to becoming endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a
portion of its range."
T(S/A)- Threatened due to similarity of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection.
These species are not biologically endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation.
14
The Bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii). It is listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance
to a northern population of Bog turtle. The northern population ranges from New York state to
Maryland where it is listed as a threatened species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service. Habitat
does not exist within the project area for this species and it will not be effected by the
construction of this project. This species is not biologically endangered or threatened and is not
subject to Section 7 consultation.
Name: Spreading Avens (Geum radiatum)
Family: Rosaceae
Federal Status: Endangered
Date Listed: April 5,1990
Best Search Time: June-July
Spreading avens is a perennial herb having stems with an indefinite cyme of bright yellow
radially symmetrical flowers. Flowers of spreading avens are present from June to early July.
Spreading avens has basal leaves which are odd-pinnately compound; terminal leaflets are
kidney shaped and much larger than the lateral leaflets, which are reduced or absent.
Spreading avens is found only in the North Carolina and Tennessee sections of the Southern
Appalachian Mountains. Spreading avens occurs on scarps, bluffs, cliffs and escarpments on
mountains, hills, and ridges. Known populations of this plant have been found to occur at
elevations of 5060 to 5080 feet (1535 to 1541 meters), 5680-5760 feet (1723 to 1747 meters),
and 5800 feet (1759 meters). Other habitat requirements for this species include full sunlight and
shallow acidic soils. These soils contain a composition of sand, pebbles, humus, sandy loam,
clay loam, and humus. Most populations are pioneers on rocky outcrops.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Habitat for this species is at elevations at or above 5060 feet (1535 meters). The project site is
located at an elevation of approximately 2700 feet (823 meters). Therefore, habitat for spreading
avens does not exist in the project area. It can be concluded that the construction of this project
will have no effect on this species.
Name: Swamp Pink (Helonias bullata)
Family: Lily (Liliaceae)
Federal Status: Threatened
Date Listed: September 9,1988
Best Search Time: April-May
Swamp pink is a perennial, evergreen herb growing from a rhizome. The basal rosette of light
green leaves are 18 to 64 inches (7-25 cm) long. In April and May, clusters of 30-50 small, pink
flowers are borne at the tips of 8 to 35 inches (20-89 cm) flower stalks. This stalk may elongate
to 5 feet (1.5 meters) during fruiting. The leaves often turn reddish brown and lie flat on the
15
ground during the winter, hidden by leaf litter. Next season's flowerhead may be visible as a
large button in the center of the leaves.
Most reproduction in this species is asexual, through clonal root growth. Plants are therefore
frequently found in dense clumps, since even when reproduction is sexual, seed dispersal is low.
Flowering is limited, with only zero to six percent of the plants flowering in any given North
Carolina population per year (Sutter 1984).
Swamp pink is found from New Jersey south to Georgia. Northern populations are located
primarily in the Coastal Plain while the southern populations (including all the North Carolina
populations) are found primarily in the mountains.
Swamp pink is found in perennially saturated, but not flooded, habitats. These include seeps,
bogs, meadows, and shrub and forested wetlands. It is commonly associated with sphagnum
moss, red maple, spicebush, black gum and various evergreens such as Atlantic white-cedar,
pitch pine, American larch, and black spruce. Swamp pink tolerates some shade, which may be
necessary to exclude competitive plant species.
Wetland loss and habitat degradation through increasing residential, commercial, and agricultural
development have contributed greatly to the rarity of swamp pink. Swamp pink is also
susceptible to activities which have major influences on water quality (such as an increase in
sedimentation, pollutant runoff) or quantity (flooding). The plant's slow growth, limited
flowering and seed dispersal, and mostly asexual reproduction mean that the potential for genetic
isolation is increased (Sutter 1982). Other threats to this species are over collecting, trampling,
and natural wetland succession.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
There are no wetlands associated with the project area that could provide suitable habitat for
swamp pink. It can be concluded that the construction of this project will have no effect on this
species.
Name: Roan Mountain bluet (Hedyotis purpurea var. montana)
Family: Rubiaceae
Federal Status: Endangered
Date Listed: April 5, 1990
Best Search Time: June-July
Roan Mountain bluet is a perennial species with roots and grows in low tufts. Roan Mountain
bluet has several bright purple flowers arranged in a terminal cyme that are visible from June to
July although best viewing is mid June. This plant can be found on cliffs, outcrops, steep slopes,
and in the gravelly talus associated with cliffs. Known populations of Roan Mountain bluet occur
at elevations of 4600-6200 feet (1400-1900 meters). It grows best in areas where it is exposed to
full sunlight and in shallow acidic soils composed of various igneous, metamorphic, and
16
metasedimentary rocks.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
Habitat for this species is at elevations at or above 4600 feet (1400 meters). The project site is
located at an elevation of approximately 2700 feet (823 meters). Therefore, habitat for roan
mountain bluet does not exist in the project area. It can be concluded that the construction of this
project will have no effect on this species.
Name: Heller's blazing star (Liatris helleri)
Family: Acteraceae
Federal Status: Threatened
Date Listed: November 19, 1987
Best Search Time: June-August
Heller's blazing star is a short, stocky plant that has one or more erect stems that arise from a tuft
of narrow, pale green basal leaves. Leaves are accuminate and diminish in size and breadth
upward on the stem. Heller's blazin star has small lavender flowers and its fruits appear from
September to November.
Heller's blazing star is endemic to high elevation ledges of rock outcrops of the northern Blue
Ridge Mountains in North Carolina. Known populations of this plant occur at elevations of
3500-6000 feet (1067-1829 meters). Heller's blazing star is an early pioneer species growing on
grassy rock outcrops where it is exposed to full sunlight. Heller's blazing star prefers shallow
acid soils associated with granite rocks.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Heller's blazing star is found at elevations at or above 3500 feet (1067 meters) on ledges of rock
outcrops. The project area is located in a valley along a stream crossing at an elevation around
2700 feet (823 meters). Habitat does not exist for Heller's blazing star within project area. It can
be concluded that the construction of this project will have no effect on this species.
Name: Spiraea virginiana (Virginia spiraea)
Family: Rosaceae
Federal Status: Threatened
Date Listed: June 15, 1990
Best Search Time: June-July
This shrub has arching and upright stems that grow from one to three meters tall. Virginia
spiraea often grows in dense clumps, having alternate leaves which vary greatly in size, shape,
and degree of serration. The leaves are green above and usually somewhat glaucous below. The
cream colored flowers are present from June to July and occur in branched, flattoped
17
inflorescences. Virginia spiraea is easily located during the late fall while herbaceous growth is
minimal and the leaves are down.
Virginia spiraea is found in a very narrow range of habitats in the mountains of North Carolina.
Habitats for the plants consist of scoured banks of high gradient streams, on meander scrolls,
point bars, natural levees, or braided features of lower reaches. The scour must be sufficient to
prevent canopy closure, but not extreme enough to completely remove small, woody species.
This species occurs in the maximum floodplain, usually at the water's edge with various other
disturbance-dependent species. It is most successful in areas with full sunlight, but can survive
in shaded areas until it is released from competition.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Habitat does exist within the project area for Virginia spiraea. The riparian area around Little
Helton Creek is open on both sides of the creek. This riparian community is maintained pasture
area that has no canopy closure. A survey for this species was conducted on June 26, 2001 by
NCDOT biologists. Virginia spiraea was not observed to occur within the project area or within
150 feet of the project area boundary. It can be concluded that the construction of this project
will have no effect on this species.
Name: Rock gnome lichen (Gymnoderme lineare)
Family: Cladoniaceae
Federal Status: Endangered
Date Listed: January 18, 1995
Best Search Time: all year
Rock gnome lichen occurs in dense colonies of squamules (narrow strap-like lobes). The ends of
the individual squamules are blue-gray above and shiny-white below, grading to black near the
base. The squamules are 1 millimeter across at the tips, tapering to the base, and approximately
1-2 centimeters long. Squamules grow parallel to the rock surface and curl away at the tips.
Fruiting bodies are black, borne singly or in clusters, and are located at the tips (and rarely at the
sides) of the squamules. They are cylindrical, radially symmetrical, and can be either sessile or
supported by short podetia (<2 mm in length). This species appears to propagate primarily
asexually.
Rock gnome lichen is endemic to the southern Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina and
Tennessee. Currently, there are only 32 populations known, and of those, only seven are larger
than 6.7 square feet (2 square meters).
This species requires high humidity and bare rock faces for its survival. Suitable habitat can be
found either at high elevations where it is frequently exposed to fog, or (less frequently) deep
river gorges. In both cases, it prefers vertical rock faces with limited seepage from the soil
above. Most populations are found at elevations above 5000 feet (1524 meters).
18
The major threat to this species is destruction/degradation of habitat through recreational use and
development. Loss of high-elevation spruce-fir forests can lead to lower humidity in areas
formerly suitable for the species, and air pollution can directly harm the rock gnome lichen by
affecting its metabolic processes.
Rock gnome lichen is the only species of Gymnoderme occurring in North America. It can be
distinguished from the squamulose Cladonia lichens by having black bases on its squamules and
black fruiting bodies (unlike the red or brown fruiting bodies found on Cladonia).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Rock gnome lichen is found at elevations at or above 5000 feet (1524 meters) on ledges of rock
outcrops. The project area is located in a valley along a stream crossing at an elevation around
2700 feet (823 meters). Habitat does not exist for Rock gnome lichen within project area. It can
be concluded that the construction of this project will have no effect on this species.
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
Federal species of concern are not afforded federal protection under the Endangered Species Act
and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed
or listed as Threatened or Endangered. However, the status of these species is subject to change,
and so should be included for consideration. Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are defined as a
species that is under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to
support listing. In addition, organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or
Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and
Animal Species are afforded state protection under the NC State Endangered Species Act and the
NC Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. There are sixteen federal species of concern
listed by the FWS for Ashe County. (Table 5, next page)
19
Table 5. Federal Species of Concern for Ashe County.
Scientific Name Common Name NC Status Habitat
Lilium grayi Gray's lily T-SC Absent
Poa paludigena Bog bluegrass E Absent
Saxifraga caroliniana Carolina saxifrage C Absent
Cladonia psoromica Bluff Mountain lichen C Absent
Lasmigona subviridus Green floater E Present
Ophiogomphus howei Pygmy snaketail SR Present
Speyeria dana' Diana fritillary butterfly SR Present
Speyeria idala Regal fritillary butterfly SR Present
Stenelmis gammom Gammon's stenelmis beetle SR Absent
Delphinium exaltatum Tall larkspur E-SC Absent
Euphorbia purpurea Glade spurge C Absent
Gymnocarpium appalachianum Appalachian oak fern E Absent
Juglans cinerea Butternut W5 Absent
Phenacobius teretulus Kanawha minnow SC Present
Sylvilagus obscurus Appalachian cotton tail SR* Absent
Thryomanes bewickii altus Appalachian Bewick's wren E Present
• "E" - A taxon "which is is danger of extinction throughout all or a signficant portion of its range"
• "T" - A taxon "which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range"
• "SR" - Any species which has not been listed by the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission as an
Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species, but which exists in the state in small numbers
and has been determined by the N.C. Natural Heritage Program to need monitoring.
• "SC"-Any species of wild animal native or once-native to North Carolina which is determined by
the Wildlife Resources Commission to require monitoring but which may be taken under regulations
adopted under the provisions of this article. (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes;
1987).
• "C"--A Candidate species is one which is very rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20
populations in the state, generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat destruction, direct
exploitation or disease. The species is also either rare throughout its range or disjunct in North
Carolina from a main range in a different part of the country or the world.
* Historic record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
A review of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats shows no occurrences of
rare species within the project vicinity.
20
VI. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to 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 Title 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106
requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings (federally funded,
licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register
of Historic Places and afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such
undertakings.
B. Historic Architecture
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the subject project and there are no
known properties of architectural significance within the proposed project area. The SHPO
concurs that this project is not likely to affect any resources of historical significance (see letter
dated January 11, 2001).
C. Archaeology
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the subject project. There are no known
archaeological sites within the proposed project area, and no archaeological investigation need be
conducted (see letter dated January 11, 2001).
VII. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
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 on the Project
Commitments Sheet (Green Sheet) 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 relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
21
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. This project will not impact
any resource protected by Section 4(f) of the US Department of Transportation Act of 1966.
This project has been coordinated with the United States Natural Resources Conservation
Service. The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives
to consider the potential impact to prime farmland of all land acquisition and construction
projects. With the exception of the construction of a temporary detour, all work will be done
within the existing right-of-way. There are no soils classified as prime, unique, or having state or
local importance in the vicinity of the project. Therefore, the project will not involve the direct
conversion of farmland acreage within these classifications.
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. If vegetation is disposed of by
burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC
2D.0520. This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for air quality (1990 Clean Air
Act Amendments and the National Environmental Policy Act) and no additional reports are
required.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. This evaluation completes
the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise of Title 23, Code of Federal Regulation
(CFR), Part 772 and no additional reports are required.
The proposed bridge replacement project will not raise the existing flood levels or have any
significant adverse effect on the existing floodplain.
22
C O U N T Y
/
Off'
h
sr
10
Bridge No. 46 194
ter" •-•-•- _,
_ ...
.
?. 1378

.2
1370 1372 _._.._.374 137 -,_ _ °
3 1528
i ; - - -
1.0 4-M ; 1534
' `
1376 1532 •.
1!

1371
1373 1375
; ID o
1533
4 N ` 137 P 1531

369 ?`•
1373
Shurgills

: _

Sussex D (p
1 E Little

2
1370
•_.. Z Helton ?. !
.7
5`
'
$ 194 Ch. 15 1528 !
,
? _.._ _.._
1368 .._
1669
Helton - ...-..,
to 194 1
e
.
O
1526 %' '.."''? ? ' :' '•,• • ?i
N
N 1525.5 1527 `, . ` 1536 S
1367 1523 :
15
w 1573
,
1520 `r"R 1528 -
1.3 3 p
3

1366
1656 1524 .'6
D 1539
• C) i
1536 1538
1521 C? 6
?
O

Brandon
.0 1523
.--, ' ... 1
151
9
n t 7t.,

1537` O 1556

•`
Liberty
r .
16
Ch.
1540` J
1.0
N .?
`
1353 W 1522 ` _ i 1.2
194 1 1519
1523 . 1539
1
1541
!
A%
6 ;
•` ? s io i
1518
? ? ?• .f-
1
S 1500 157
1.2 •
1516 1522 ' 1523
N
w
` 1544 Crumpler a
4 1516
1 o- 1513 D
.
,.
z
1517 1. 0 '•. _ _
1500 i 1667 '
North Carolina Department
Of Transportation
• Division of Highways
Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch
a
Ashe County
Replace Bridge No. 46 on NC 194
Over Little Helton Creek
B-3605
SCALE: 1 in = 1 mi Figure 1
u`, . , ' - j:,, tt I ??'(? a E" T Tq?j[:?4 d •d ,` Jt,• 6 +wy'?"P??
?`t ,.kA
a n •F@f,Ay l ?:•,'t N?'a A±k y@ a 1t\:z "r ?{p? a 'f s°F? a
ryr c:?r " 4 ^ w Srr R. L•?M ! a` \..'? \ dd a a
L '? _ yl,, 'f ' s' •? f ; 5t ltr !_?`t l? k .fit ? s .. S?. I 4 ?. ,, ,y{ " -
. a
a"T° "? r '?? r?`? 4`°, 1?. r*'jt \?a+ l.?,di ? t ?^r$'?,? Ya ?:aF 1 4 f ?'I 1??? ?' ??.
' v
t ?
'r r yjS T a- 'Ar ? '} *lF, ?p ? t': 4' "e?? ?''?}!? . WR 4•Lr f .F " ' +? tA.. + r i ,X...
-JIM
j
4! + s+ ?"1? y? k ?3e 5 ?ti
14, i t 4r k` 4 ,`1 ?? f s
J.V
m?' A ? t (,a dw?" 'l. k i t
? ? ?? + ?t ?t 4 {?` r z•t'??' ?. ?? say
.t_
Y'
.?4
ra''
r
tt ?i
?? : i3' r .MEN a, a^d ap 4.
AiN
A ?
a
?'? ? r 6 7 r A, aa? i
7-10
,.5rs & 4 t
ill r ?' '7 Y Y
t A'ri y ?:? j? ( , ' ' k a r?, All
t
? •'. xe ?fi s(a ?' st c + d W i,` ? { ; ai??` a`
,
i
,
£, u
7
` E t a k, gegs ,
day t??r
r
r '*
,
a ,
r a
x n f ? ?? ? '` - ?• r? III ; ,r_ I' !,. ? 'e?
!
a r
T , - S
?i g?-
?C R
x ,
r
aa1
41,
{'° i
,
it
V? ,,
r? ???+? t? ?s t tk?S,,`r`L4??Atkks?
a
to ro t "d tv V. ¢ ? ? `a ?4 ?, w \\
^7 ? ? ?• 0 3` ? t4 qty It v ??}\ ?. ', i
«M
Q, Fe o q `? ?? s d INA"!1 v ?r
tip d G e! ? Q' ?. '?t'' .,:?`•' A ? \ ? ??`,Et???ti . •
Ul :M C? ?"CI aid" r.j ?d))1/ ?#+ ?' ?? R?\\ a+
a
?. ? an ti .;u l t , ?
i
i'
fl a•
I low,
Looking North from the Bridge
B-3605 FIGURE 3A
Looking South from the Bridge
•

1
. d
Si}r9.,y.,? l
. s*i
AA
-?
r
West Face of Bridge
4
East Face of Bridge
B-3605
FIGURE 3B
? . 0dL1Lb,-
Iowa"
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
January 11, 2001
MEMORANDUM
To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
From: David Brook ?i' C
Deputy State HistorlPreservatlon Officer
Re: Replacement of Bridge No. 46 on NC 194 over.Little Helton Creek,
TIP No. B-3605, Ashe County, ER 00-8462
Thank you for your recent inquiry concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no properties of
architectural, historic or archaeological significance which would be affected by the
project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as currently proposed.
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 any questions concerning
the above comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator,
at 919 733-4763.
DB:aam
cc: Mary Pope Furr
Tom Padgett
Location Malflag Address Telepbone/Ba:
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount SL, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Cater, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/733-8633
RESTORATION 315 N. Blount SL, Raleigh NC 4613 Mail Service Cater, Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone]/7134801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount SL, Raleigh NC 4619 Mail Service Cater, Raleigh NC 27699-4618 [phone]/713-4801
E North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission®
312 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Karen Orthner, Project Planning Engineer
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Coordi or
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: March 10, 2000
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements in Alamance, Ashe, and Rockingham
counties. TIP Nos. B-3801, B-3605, B-3106, B-3695, and B-3696.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have
reviewed the information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the
subject project. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
On bridge replacement projects of this scope our standard recommendations are as
follows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
require work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment.
The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human
and wildlife passage beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the
stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
Bridge Replacement Memo 2 March 10, 2000 -
5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed
back to original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the
project. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
native tree species should be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'.
If possible, when using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not
grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact, allows the
area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of
the steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the
option of requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and
we can recommend that the project require an individual `404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist
Mr. Tim Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these
sensitive species may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service for information on requirements of the Endangered
Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy
entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12,
1997)" should be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
If corrugated metal pipe arches or concrete box culverts are used:
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for fish passage. Generally, this means
that the culvert or pipe invert is buried at least 1 foot below the natural stream
bed. If multiple cells are required the second and/or third cells should be
placed so that their bottoms are at stream bankful stage (similar to Lyonsfield
design). This will allow sufficient water depth in the culvert or pipe during
normal flows to accommodate fish movements. If culverts are long, baffle
systems are required to trap gravel and provide resting areas for fish and other
aquatic organisms.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed
to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or
widening is required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of
structures usually causes a decrease in water velocity causing sediment
deposition that will require future maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on the stream bed.
r
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same
location with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be
designed and located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to
Bridge Replacement Memo 3 March 10, 2000
avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old
structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-year
floodplain. Approach fills should be removed down to the natural ground elevation. The
area should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. If the area that
is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to wetlands. If
successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other
projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments:
1. B-3801 - Alamance County - Bridge No. 6 over Travis Creek. We would prefer this
bridge be replaced with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
2. B-3605 - Ashe County - Bridge No. 46 over Little Helton Creek. Standard
recommendations apply.
3. B-3106 - Ashe County - Bridge No. 36 over North Fork New River. Standard
recommendations apply.
4. B-3695 - Rockingham County - Bridge No. 34 over Jacobs Creek. We would prefer
this bridge be replaced with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
5. B-3696 - Rockingham County - Bridge No. 84 over Jones Creek. We would prefer
this bridge be replaced with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
We request that NCDOT routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and
maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent
wet concrete from contacting water in or entering into these streams. Replacement of
bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is
recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along
streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway
crossings.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding
bridge replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity
to review and comment on these projects.

©9/©8/99
I [ (C (ON TR
U w
O O O
U
O r
'? ..... O In O
r' o
09
40 o y
C) y
+ a n u a u u
V w" o c o
C O ?`
aeaeaR a
z z
z om
? c
M w
m
o n
m !4
a?
0
w
u o
0 Ul
0
w II
II
0 o p
OoD N P
N N
r ? b
N ? m
:.x8
n ? 3
H b
m
C jO
m o
r ,
70
m
h
n
M h
?°a o
Qx
7(;° C200816 TIP PRO
C.Too B-3605
i
V
O
\ \
\, to ? IA\ A
?? la
N
rn IN J 2m
Gl + X w 71 Iv D _
z 5 ° V V
A ? • v v
z rt1 ,t??
n
m o0
0
z
gn
a ?-
m O y, i „ IN
o ; -- -- -n
vs ?j Z ?
?n° Ql On
CA)
C m n?? N ?
v z 2 h
117 Z / r m
>° ?Z O o?bi-
v?
i
+° l f a??
Cp% oul.m wG)
O
Q
as i
/;/ --- co
1 w ? x
CIO
I CA
'' CGS -?I-?-
z + a
n o to «.
T O aR
z
v n
'D
r v
f C)
0 ? A
° T 4 M_
--- Ul w w w q ('? y
Z wwLn
IJ??
?z
2.2
m NA 9aAlUl
+Z oww
V
V C
co
n
° z?v P
z p 5 m
I I
R0-POV-1
I*:52
o?\ 60 ty F 6/2/99
k
v a pe rn -0
m ?
a
rrl
r D
e
O ° rI N
2 r
-4 0
D r
D + V•
D ?tro
N p D I v t?
/y (per ?
DD / _? O
rD r
m r `? m
O D D -
-r Z
O D
m + M 1
v O
C 1 I +_e rte. n
N N o
v
p? p e
m t D
° n
rWc ? co $ m
z
A- -MA
:v Y
m
v
m
t-? 1 c
1' R z
N
?`?1 p o
M
Z p
?.. Q 7CQ m
Ogg,
=i <
o ? 'rtGl
On z': ?
R
v ?
• " I
N
Z
?p O
IS O
N

m _
•v C: Om>
?°O m? pmL
77ss rr?" m?
pp70 m?

70
O m ? m
A c H ?
p
A? ?O
t?i ?? ,,,,?>v
Ori > O
r"i
l ?
O
N
? A OAT: P-n
(COs O
:
-n O

? ?
C u,AO
Z O Sa?oU
Z r?iO
z twit-?
;u n >
m pa C SA
? vrQ ZA A N
Z Z
-Z-1 m A? ? ?
? ?
r^ ?? N
H
m FiZ?
Ira ? y
N
ZC
y? _
Z?
> Z?
m ?`
O
' O
C ?m ?nm
2 ?>
? ?
•C
?
O m 'A
rn
C A
OG m
?A C

Z
O w

7q

? m
?(
O m
m
? ?rno ? mH r'S,. ? ?m

z z?

or
0 NOV 200 17:52
t\ ra,J\ t?0 ,?ty?
0
rnm ? ??w 1 ?? ^? o??
00 \/ s zz a;o
u?zZ tLA
+ ad N NQ [07L
O > + L%
•-r1 rn O cam - 7-t
s ae a a •, ? ?
-,3 1
?z von
+ z^ ?R p= t as °r
° o +
w c)o
4 5z o zz
:J9p 09
a 9
,
zz Sz
H? z?
cl
1
-3 cl
N m ? m ti I T m '+
z z u ?- z M p ?-
/ 1 Z N I
z z z z O? a z z ?+ a
0
? N T a:
4 Jam C07L
c
?s v
_ m t=n
? L
m
5
4 >?,
?? 1
Tt m 7 N +Z
y? m U
m + + A
z Pg Z m $+Z + z z 03:
t z Ng
o o!l z ?-+p ° +
+ p ° ? p Q • y, O +L
• N Pz
141. ZQw n t??
p 1 ?° P 1 ?° P `y Q
D + n + U +O 1m t in
T m a m 08 C7 T
a Ewa F +°
-, u
o ?cl z ?z
z tZ z Q 0
5 p 5 5 z
80 5 a
z o
z q1
Izn 1zn z H N w
_ •"'? ?a' v R m fn.1 N ? ? In
$
Z
t M N
I
r

a ? 55?
{
PROP. LINE f n WS FENCE
V
a
:21iT0.09
?h\
f-
x
I I
1 \
8/17/99
\p O\
\ l
fz
? t b

?I
O
Z
O
?
O
z? L
0> N
Z N }
?
s taw
=
> m t
+ V 0
+
_ i -2 Z: • U
00
T
Ol
P +

R ? `,, A o
rrp? K p /d .6d 5? / ?
•1 ? \ F \ p ?A S? M S.X? ??
vivo
n t`7 ?c0a S' D • `pp?}a tV ?2}Y
Q
N Imo ?+o?? ?e ~ ? \
9 I ?r
PT 5415+23.J6
A: f 25 i °r
N
r* L
> Q D ', ? ? ? = c?L n m O
?tC ? J lI ? ? n ¢ a HP
?y 2 G ?±?. r ? y =1 A m
N _
} 4 ` 8,
-L- PG Sta./6+ ..' N
'w , 4 79
co• A
.
v ° ? ? 4 ?+ ? -• x N \
n m
rn-4
o ?a
ro I?PPRO {?3 -i
Z??•65' y?? E
.i Fla
? a _g +
mm0 8-
CA (A
Mm r
g y C
21
CC77 yrf' 0
yy yaa ?: r n N
Z? It?9- 8 s ?• \ ? r A ? ? N?
s w +
01
n
.? o.r wn
O v
N g Lp No4 rn ?
,n y
F vIw
y

n
A w
f7 1i
O
s
n
ti
M?2
°
o??a
Tbta
°
i
uu"u°N
nnpu?N y
a o `-
??'A ? I?,IIU ?o
Q?
11 11 " 11 " ?
II w?aty???'?C
f?l???• 11 ? V
a
15 y ?
u
Nt"ilw.r?A??
nu"uuN
ou wyE4?
Y? V
20
Q
W
6L" s
X ? I
\ s ? ? Z ?7 ZZ
\? O
O
o \ ?? I
8/23/g9
8/23/99
20-NOV-2003 13:46
o n Y Sr \ V.'iF01F 1 ..,1 _.Inn
Ai77/99
d-l.-t Al HULUJLS

8/23/99
20-NOV-2003 13:50
1 8/23/99
51
\
MC\6360'?116M251
t a ? (. .
.
e ,
c em en I N

FI
H T

f il l[

- 1-11 1
- 3 0 4
- - - I I ll
H H H H 1

H
i
ll 44 4-

[F il l

,I F I F..

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-
4 4

TTT

O

- -- - -- - -- -- --
O

CO

I ?s
w
m
p z
v' (a
Z
O

X
1
r ^?
Q? a

.. STA1j
f?t?? S
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT 1R. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
March 14, 2000
MEMORANDUM TO: Project File
FROM: Karen T. Orthner
Project Development Engineer
SUBJECT: B-3605, Ashe County, Replacement of Bridge No. 46 on NC 194
Over Little Helton Creek, State Project 8.1711201,
F. A. Project BRSTP-194(3)
A scoping meeting for the subject bridge was held in the Transportation Building
on February 3, 2000.
The following people were in attendance:
Marshall Clawson Hydraulics
Lanette Ingham Programming and TIP
Chris Howard Traffic Control
Jim Kellenberger Traffic Control
Sid Autry Location and Surveys
Sue Flowers Roadway Design
Roger Thomas Roadway Design
Bill Bunting Roadway Design
Betsy Cox Structure Design
Greg Blakeney Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Karen Orthner Project Development and Environmental Analysis
The following comments were either given at the meeting or received previously:
Sid Autry of Location and Surveys located an underground telephone service along the east
side of NC 194 owned by Blue Ridge Telephone Membership Corporation. Sid noted that the
service is aerial across Little Helton Creek. Sid also noted additional project improvements on
NC 194.
April Alperin of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) recommended an
architectural survey in connection with this project. In addition, an archaeological survey is
needed due to archaeological site # 31AH30 in the project vicinity.
Jim Kellenberger of Traffic Control recommended consideration of phase construction to
replace Bridge No. 46 in order to maintain traffic on-site.
Tim Savidge, Natural Systems Specialist, noted that the project vicinity has the potential to
have the federally protected threatened species Virginia spirea.
Marshall Clawson of Hydraulics reconunended a 45-foot long bridge at approximately the
same location and roadway elevation as the existing bridge. Also, Marshall commented that
drainage will not be discharged directly into the trout stream. To facilitate deck drainage, Marshall
recommended at least a 0.3 % roadway gradient on the bridge. Marshall suggested that the bridge
be phase-constructed.
Curtis Yates of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Division commented that this section
of NC 194 is not part of a designated bicycle route nor is it listed in the TIP as needing
incidental bicycle accommodations.
Sue Flowers and Roger Thomas of Roadway Design recommended replacing
Bridge No. 46 to the west of the existing alignment either by phase construction or
roadway realignment in order to maintain traffic on-site.
future.
Comments from the Wildlife Resources Commission will be available in the near
PROJECT INFORMATION
Existing Bridge Information:
Bridge No. 46 was built in 1956. It is 505 feet long and 33 feet wide. The current
weight limit for the bridge is not posted.
Traffic Information:
NC 16 is a Rural Major Collector with a 55-mph posted speed limit in the
vicinity. The current average daily traffic (ADT) for the bridge is 2800 vpd, while the
projected 2025 ADT is 5000 vpd. Approximately 9% of the ADT are dual trucks and 3%
of the ADT are truck transfer semi-trailers.
Accident Information:
No crashes were reported in the bridge vicinity from November 1996 to
November 1999.
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATES
During the alternate discussion, Roger Thomas of Roadway Design agreed to
complete preliminary cost estimates and roadway sketches by November, 2000.
Alternate 1: Replace Bridge No. 46 with a 45-foot long bridge on new location to the
west of the existing bridge. Phase construct the bridge to allow for maintenance of one
lane of traffic on-site during construction.
Alternate 2: Replace Bridge No. 46 with a 45-foot bridge on new location to the west of
the existing bridge. Maintain traffic on the existing bridge during construction.
Due to some inconsistencies between the 1994 Greenbook and the Roadway
Design Unit Design Manual, Roadway Design will be responsible for choosing the
appropriate reference and indicating their choice in their cost estimate.