20071582 Ver 1_Application_20070919

~.
3
,,
`7

_a.~
~~~~.
~ ~:n .
@~.~~
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
~,~„
_, ~;_, ,:n,~
~;
SFP ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~:~ D
6~~,,~ -~ 1
"~NOSq ~ ` TORK ~~~~c; ~~j
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Mw,q,~ ~
.R q~~
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
September 14, 2007
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office O ~ ~ ~j ~ 2
6508 Falls of the Neuse Rd. Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
ATTENTION: Mr. John Thomas
NCDOT Coordinator, Division 9
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: Application for Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33. Replacement of
Bridge No. 54 on NC 66 over Pinch Gut Creek, Stokes County, North
Carolina. Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-0066(1), State Project No.
8.1641101, WBS Element 33622.1.1, TIP No. B-4282.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 54
on NC 66 over Pinch Gut Creek, between SR 1467 and SR 1212 in Stokes County. The existing
97-foot 3-span bridge was constructed in 1923 and received a sufficiency rating of 46.6 out of a
possible 100 for a new structure. Based on this rating, the bridge is considered structurally
deficient. The project proposes to demolish the existing bridge and replace with a three span,
pre-stressed concrete girder structure spanning Pinch Gut Creek. The new bridge will be
approximately 165 feet long with 33 feet of roadway width. During construction, traffic will be
detoured off-site. The proposed detour route is approximately 5.2 miles in length. Please see the
enclosed Pre-Construction Notification (PCN), permit drawings, and design plans for the subject
project. A Categorical Exclusion was completed for this project in April of 2005 and distributed
shortly thereafter. Additional copies are available upon request.
IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
General Description: The project is located in sub basin 03-02-01 of the Roanoke River Basin in
Stokes County. This area is part of Hydrologic Cataloging Unit 03010103. The project area is
located within the Central Piedmont ecoregion of North Carolina.
Pinch Gut Creek is the only stream located within the project study area and has been assigned
Stream Index Number 22-9-1 by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ). The
MAILING ADDRESS: LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TELEPHONE: [phone] Of 2725 CAPITAL BLVD. SUITE 240
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 919-715-1335 RALEIGH NC 27604
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT
159H MAIL SERVICE CENTER FAX: [phone]
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG

stream enters the study area as awell-defined perennial stream. Pinch Gut Creek is described as
having a substrate consisting primarily of sand, gravel, and cobble, and flowing northeastward
towards Big Creek and eventually into the Dan River. Within the project study area, Pinch Gut
Creek is approximately 30 feet wide and 1 foot deep. The stretch of stream in the project study
area has been assigned a Best Usage Classification of C Tr. There are no wetlands associated
with this bridge replacement project.
Through written correspondence with Marla Chambers of the North Carolina Wildlife Resource
Commission (NCWRC), it has been decided that there will be no in stream trout moratorium for
this project.
The North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission has requested a moratorium for Pinch Gut
Creek from May 1 to July 15 due to the smallmouth bass fishery within .the project area.
However, due to the lack of statutory regulations requiring this moratorium, NCDOT does not
believe this moratorium is warranted and will not adhere to the request.
No portion of Pinch Gut Creek, its tributaries, or other surface waters within 1.0 mile of the
project are listed on the North Carolina Division of Water Quality's (NCDWQ) 2006 Final
303(d) List of Impaired Waters.
No waters classified as High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II), nor
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 miles of the project study area.
Permanent Impacts: There are no anticipated permanent impacts to surface waters associated
with this project. The new bridge will span the creek avoiding permanent impacts to the stream.
Temporary Impacts: There will be 0.04 acres of jurisdictional impacts associated with the
construction of a temporary causeway. The causeway will be constructed of Class II rip rap and
located on the northwestern bank of Pinch Gut Creek. No temporary wetland impacts are
associated with this project.
Bridge Demolition: The existing structure has a reinforced concrete deck and railings. The
substructure is composed of reinforced concrete abutments and reinforced concrete round nose
post and web. The existing bridge will be removed without dropping components into Pinch Gut
Creek. There is currently one bent within the channel of Pinch Gut Creek. All guidelines for
Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed in addition to Best Management Practices for
the Protection of Surface Waters.
Utility Impacts: There are no anticipated utility impacts associated with this project.
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists three Federally Protected species, as of May 10, 2007, for Stokes
County. Table 1 lists the species and their federal status.
B-4282 Permit Application
2

Table 1. Federally Protected Species in Stokes County, NC
Common Name Scientific Federal Status Biological Habitat
Name Conclusion Present
James Pleurobema

s in ussel
collina E No Effect Yes
Small-anthered Cardamine

bittercress
micranthera E No Effect Yes
Schweinitz's Helianthus

sunflower
schweinitzii E No Effect Yes
A James spinymussel survey was conducted for this project on August 1, 2002 by NCDOT
biologists Neil Medlin, Jeff Burleson, and Jared Gray. An additional screening was performed by
NCDOT biologists Dennis Herman, Mike Sanderson, Neil Medlin, and Jared Gray from the
confluence of Big Creek and Pinch Gut up to the existing bridge on Apri16, 2005. Surveys were
conducted by wading using a batiscope 100 meters upstream from the project crossing and down
to the confluence of Pinch Gut and Big Creeks. No freshwater mussels were found in 6.5 man-
hours of survey time. NC Natural Heritage Program records show the nearest population of
James spinymussel to be at the confluence of Big Creek and the Dan River, 7.5 miles
downstream of the project area. Given the results of the survey, distance of the project location
from the nearest known population, it can be concluded that this project will not effect the James
spinymussel.
An initial survey for small-anthered bittercress was conducted on Apri130, 2002. The survey
resulted in a biological conclusion of "No Effect", as no specimens were identified. As small-
anthered bittercress is considered to be a plant that can migrate, an additional survey was
performed. On May 2, 2005, NCDOT biologists Karen Lynch, Rachelle Beauregard, Brett
Feulner, and Bill Barrett surveyed the project area for small-anthered bittercress. The potential
habitat consisted of Pinch Gut Creek and an unnamed tributary. During the survey, no
individuals of small-anthered bittercress were observed, thus warranting a biological conclusion
of "No Effect". A search of the Natural Heritage Program database (updated March 1, 2007)
showed no populations of small-anthered bittercress within one mile of the project area, nor are
there any occurrences of the species upstream of the proposed project. USFWS informally
concurred on July 9, 2007, that due to the lack of occurences upstream of the project, as well as
two separate surveys yielding no individuals, this project should have no effect on small-anthered
bittercress.
A survey for Schweinitz's sunflower was conducted in September 2001 where no individuals
were observed. USFWS issued a concurrence letter with the biological conclusion of no effect
for Schweinitz's sunflower on July 11, 2003. An additional survey was performed on September
23, 2005 by NCDOT biologists, Bill Barrett, Susan Thebert, and Erica McLamb. Although
potential habitat is present within the project study area in the form of regularly maintained
roadside shoulder, fields, and utility easements, no individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower were
observed. A search of the Natural Heritage Program database, updated on March 1, 2007,
revealed no occurrences of the species within one mile of the project area. Therefore, a
biological conclusion for Schweinitz's sunflower of "No Effect" is warranted.
B-4282 Permit Application
3

AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION and MITIGATION
The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all reasonable and practicable design features to
avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to provide full compensatory mitigation of all
remaining, unavoidable jurisdictional impacts. Avoidance measures were taken during the
planning and NEPA compliance stages; minimization measures were incorporated as part of the
project design.
According to the Clean Water Act (CWA) §404(b)(1) guidelines, NCDOT must avoid, minimize,
and mitigate, in sequential order, impacts to waters of the US: The following is a list of the
project's avoidance/minimization activities proposed or completed by NCDOT:
Avoidance/ Minimization: Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of
averting impacts to "Waters of the US". The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all
reasonable and practicable design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts and to
minimize impacts as part of the project design.
• Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation will be minimized through
implementation of stringent erosion control methods and use of Best Management Practices
(BMPs) highlighted in NCDOT's "Best Management Practices for Construction and
Maintenance Activities".
• Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters and Bridge Demolition and
Removal will be implemented during the entirety of this project.
• During construction, traffic will utilize an off-site detour.
• No bents are to be placed in Pinch Gut Creek.
• Stormwater will be carried across the bridge (no deck drain over the stream) and diverted
through grass-lined ditches, vegetated buffers or directed to a storm water collection system.
• Preformed scour holes will be constructed for this project.
Compensatory Miti ation: No mitigation is proposed for this bridge replacement because of the
minimal temporary impacts associated with the project.
SCHEDULE
The project calls for a let date of February 19, 2008 and a review date of January 1, 2008. This
project has a date of availability of April 2, 2008. It is expected that the contractor will begin
construction shortly after that date.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
Section 404 Permit: It is anticipated that the impacts from the construction of a temporary
causeway will be authorized under a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33. We are therefore
requesting the issuance of a Nationwide Permit 33 for the temporary impacts sustained during the
construction.
B-4282 Permit Application
4

Section 401 Permit: We anticipate Section 401 General Water Quality Certification (WQC) 3634
will be applicable to this project. All general conditions of this WQC will be met. Therefore,
written concurrence from the NCDWQ is not required. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500
and 15A NCAC 2B .0200 we are providing two copies of this application to the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, as notification.
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 and the NCDOT within 30 calendar days of receipt of this application.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/pe/neu/permit.html. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Ashley Cox at 919-715-5534 or [e-mail].
Sincere ,
~.
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
'C" Environmental Management Director, PDEA
Cc:
w/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (2 copies)
Ms. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Victor Barbour, P.E., Project Services Unit
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. S. P. Ivey, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Kent Boyer, DEO
w/o attachment
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Conforti, PDEA Project Planning Engineer
B-4282 Permit Application
5

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
200T~562
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. 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 ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: Nationwide Permit 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 Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, 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
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Gregor~J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: NC Department of Transportation
Natural Environment Unit
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: gthorpe(a,dot.state.nc.us
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:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 1 of 9

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 maybe 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. 54 on NC 66 over Pinch Gut Creek.
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-4282
6
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Stokes Nearest Town: Francisco
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): Located on NC 66, 2 miles
sutheast of the NC 66/NC 89 intersection, between SR 1467 and SR 1212.
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): °N °W
Property size (acres): N/A
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Pinch Gut Creek
8. River Basin: Roanoke
(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/.)
Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application:
Primary land use in the vicinity of the nroiect is predominantly rural, consisting of single-
family residential dwellin sg and agricultural tracts. Pinch Gut Creek has a wide floodplain
with general topography var n~n~greatly on the northern and southern sides of the creek. The
Page 2 of 9

landscape south of Pinch Gut Creek is steeply sloping, while being much more gentle to the
north of the proiect.
9. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: NCDOT
Proposes to replace Bride No. 54 over Pinch Gut Creek in Stokes County. Heavy_ duty
excavation equipment will be used such as trucks, dozers, cranes and other various
equipment necessary for roadway construction.
10. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The bridge is considered structurally defficient.
The replacement of the structure will provide safer and more efficient travel.
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.N/A
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.
N/A
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. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should 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
Page 3 of 9

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 approximately
0.04 acres of cool perennial stream temporarily impacted due to the construction of a temporary
causeway associated with the project.
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of 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.
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
( es/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)

Total Wetland Impact (acres)
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:0
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acreage, multiply length X width, then divide by 43,560.
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Im act Impact
Length
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
Site 1 Pinch Gut Creek Temporary Perennial 30 35 0.04

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 35 0.04
Page 4 of 9

5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
Open Water Impact

Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable)

Type of Impact Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.) Area of

Impact
(acres)
N/A

Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project:
Stream Impact (acres): 0.04
Wetland Impact (acres):
O en Water Impact (acres):
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.04
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 35
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
N/A
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 stormwater requirement, etc.): N/A
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond: 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 maybe 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
Page 5 of 9

techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. NCDOT will minimize
i_pacts to the stream through the use of Best Management Practices. Guidelines for
Construction of Highway Improvements Adjacent to or Crossing Trout Waters in North Carolina
will be adhered to throughout the duration of the project.
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.
USAGE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, 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 maybe 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 USAGE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP 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. eru•.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/stnn ~ide.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.
No mitigation is proposed for this project because of the minimal temporary impacts
associated with this project.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
Page 6 of 9

[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
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 ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested. (acres): N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): N/A
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. 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 ^
3. 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.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", 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 7 of 9

Zone* Impact
(s ware feet)
Multiplier Required
Miti ation
I 3 (2 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. N/A
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (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. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level.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.
N/A
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 anafter-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
Replacement of Bridf;e No. 54 over Pinch Gut Creek
Page 8 of 9

XV. 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).
~•~H~a~
" A~licant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 9 of 9

n
"/

_.~, ~,
,,
7214 1 ^
I
o I~
15
~ 721E
i
tZt
13 1
1195 1
p J 196
~~~~~~~~
1~J1~~~
7471 a`E
- ,466 p , Q P ~ / O
517 1 /
t ` 14
~ ~ ' L 7
~~ 71
PROJECT
.~
14
/ ~~~-'b,46 1458 ~ B-4282
'~ ~ ~ ,
`I
71 C 1^v 6
4
,o
1464 1~7
~ 1472
/ /
t \ _ \ ..
~tbs
12 ~ 1477
1 ~~~
'1475
~ 1476 1 1
~ 1
\~ ~ /
\ ~ ~, I
~O ~ ~ 1478
(NOT .TO SCALE(
~~~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
STOKES COUNTY
PROJECT: 33622.1.1 (B-4282)
BRI®GE N0.54 OVER
PINCH GUT CREEK
,AND E4PPRO~CHES ON NC 66
SHEET I OF ~ 11 // 1 % OS

//
//
//
~~
//~
/~~2
~~ 5~
\ /~ ,~0
1 //o 0
1 ~~
~l I
~" ~
z~
w

"'
~ e.,
~
w U
z

~ 3

rte,
®
®
~ ~.

®
~
®
~ a'

`~
~
(~
® ®

®
z
C~
~ ~
~
~
~
U
z
W
U
~
~
~
>
® ~
~ ~ ~
~

~a~
~~ ~
'~jy.
;~
~~
iv ~ ~J/ J
b
rWr^
I Z VV FF--
J W W
E lL6/ CIS O1 / 1 ~~
V
L9ll ~lS '0~1 H1/rYS
\ ZW
~~
_~ ~\ I~
\ 6/~
~O
\~~
.,,
P,

N
H
~a
caa

- { Mi/y • ~. fr~,1.!///i.- 1.-, n 1 t ~,' Vt vl ,. \ -- .-' yam/ -~~~ ~ f. r •'^ ' ~,
~~ s l~/ 1 ~ t~ f~ ..\ } J/I~f•~_. ;7 ~ r f tel.' • ql ~•\ t_ :l J ` _ ~,~.
`i\\~.~.~ ~ 1.%~~t~~ ~ :: ~~ \ ~1~~•1` •1 t, ~i ~ { ~ ~'T . ~ ~'-- • ~\--.~. :. 1. i r ,/ j- 1 ~ ,
~~ ~._y~~>.\ "~/~ . ~' _ 1e. ~ _ -teh 'iLl ~ d \ -•( /,.~•/ ~ r 1~ ~~-•_ 1 ~.~ ~~. r ~I~~.
I'~ ~ ~j O~ ~, _i~ 1 r{. ti \ {/. r r / / ~ r r ! ~~~ I J r ]( ill /1 ~ ~.,Jx Clt{4\, ij,.
~` I ,i-^\`~~e -.. ```- 1 ii s.~..-^-i~1 _. \~ / % j,G f I 1 1 t, / •1~ (} i -~. l 'Cr"' ~~~.~ r } ~..
/y ~. f ~.i ~ ~ ~ ~\ mil, ~l/ ~ J f ~ X1:.(4 { I.~ ~ J{ r I
j~~ J/l••r .~./•r.r ~ ./~~ ~~e\\~ I ~ 1~. f Itt~ .~i' ~`~ • :_r Y ,~._,~I
r- t7 r 9 f' ~ s l ~ ~/~'~
Jr~/F ( ~ti ! ,.\ ~~\-• /'`_. /~ /^'" f ' 1 ~.I tr ~`-- , i t ! ~ r. L. ~ l~. C~ r", J•1 :_.r~/..
f 7 if ~ ' ~ •_`\~ ~`~!"• 'r,~ ~ 1 Y~l - - ~ } 'r (. .. ~/ j `i` (~ Qjri'\ {
f, C>, ~~ ~t rr'i' 1 "'j~~ ~ly't~~~ 1) ! ~~'a / ~~ .~ lLr,~ ~ _.-7._ ~/ ~, ~~~.._ r~ r !~
S • I /~ •.. f / / ~ ~
!,
It l z r ~ ~ ~ , ,. ,,~ .. 'Ly.-.~,,i \'~- ~ ~.-.\~ . ' :: 9'l` /f r r' ~ , ' • i ~~• t.,:e
~~\ t~f `~'if.7'" f ~ It~' r I r~ ~ ) t L~r r . ~~fq~ SI1g' .. /. tlt fi~ C ~ ~ f U ~-: ~- ~. ~ = L .. 1 4 .
~"'~~, lr i a--{ Irk { / t•-. ,« - ~"'/s '~ { • C, i, i i ~~ t -. • -t1! .!d
~`-~ • ~ ~ ~~ 1'~w~ til r _:. 1]1G} ti I _~^..,~~r ~,_ /ir- ~ i r ~~ _.--~){{` lti~t
~ ~ S ~ ~ % \. r ~ C~r: '~ K1 /r r ~ ~ ~.l 1 Sri
S.~ r it
( xt~5 ~• 111 _. I ,..-~-'=-r .~ J.,.--~. } J -~..~~ ~i I !C!G ~ ~~' ~ s ~~ ~` Zi.
t~•~ ~/~a h{ \l' •~~.r~ ,+ll' /,r~z ~~ ; ~ ' ,,~.~ a s ~t _I ~~rl
~, \\ ~/,~Cl~~ 1'\, mil' s ~ i ,~,- / 1 f ~ it y li t- t r Itl ( "
,.r ~~ , . ~ z ~)~
~__-~-'`
::~`~ ~_ l` • w ~ f 1 t ( o 8-42 82 ~f S ~t // + l o _~ ; JI: ~tl ~~ f l ~.OJ/~fJ ~ /~.
~ ~~A., ~, 7(/rte/v/~~J l ~1~A~~^~q~s ~~ ~ ~r~ tl c-~'~ ~ ~ FF- ~ -~ / ~. - ~ :~/~-....~, •-.~~`
~r 1 J f \- 1 j ~ ~ ~)• f!- • TV ,./ lll~I- 1 ~! ~ "~R` `,ti -Jf.` !~! / \~ 17 1
l.+ / \!U./ \' t I ~ ~~ ~ ~ +.-:~ tt r `tt,.. ` ~ ~;_ ~ ~/i' l ~t r? ,~/ ry , k~ r~'rrr'. ~'s ~ '
/f .~".-»~ ~'~ ~ I~ ]/ 1L~ r~-. 1 \' ~ ~, ! ~ r^fr-~/ sw.f \~ (~.
/ 1t~--~ ~i:r/ /f.~= -y- ~ ~~Ill ,!' I ~'t ,'C. ~ ,...+. ( r, ~. ~ ~ ~ s~` C ~'
-' h -~-~. ~ ~ / ! 1. `• -•..r •... L, 1 e '_` ~ •,~~-. rte. \a s } -
.^ \ . 'c
fr'rl~~~ \ ~l /"'~~ ~r ~~~~` -~ _' t.~ `-'"~ (/ '\ .. 'ter n` Is(i~~'r{G~ / ^T?` , ,lk..s.
~~~C ~/,.-~`T ~. .V`(r'~._ / ~ 1 {~:~ Iti~ r2-~ _1 ~ ~+ ~ v ~i\` f '` r • ° ~r f•~ UC1 (1 ~~i'~ J~:~ `T~,~~:
~.
~ (~l~r •`' .• iit /~/!'~~1 ..~% t.- ~_ ..- r _a ~ rii f 4{' ~~`~ ,'i-./+~• ~.`,3'
! f ~ ~.. ~ ;1 f I~ _ + Forest \~. ~-~..: ~i"i~
d 1 ,,;~,--. ~ ~ 1J79r-~.__~.. ~~"ri~~fl ~ \\ `--_.. { -'~: _Y f~ /: ~~1 t i~ ~. •~ ~ 4F / j "`/ ('~_._./!•J
'~~ frpJ~" r it / .:i '_=( ) / P~1 _)t ~`.... ;v f.. s +.::..-~ $YOtrn Ai -~(.h; ~• /' r ~ \ ~'
. ~: ' t ,/~''~ 1 tF, ,• / i 1 ' , ~ f 4::~~ `1~ t ~ t ~.' r ~ r .r..,=,J` ~6'~~.~ ~ }~I t \ e : ~ i ~ / 7°Y_ i _ ;
1i \~ { \ f /° ~/~ 1•~ { • ..~ rvf~.t ~'/ 1 /~~-1:- J 3' ~ .~ /^ J ~~ .) ~/i „"'. `+ y efa"'~ ~ti.~~ \ ~._-.. \~ ;,/l/ ~ ;ti _~
`~,a U.. Mt f~~~ \.n ~\ 1'''1t ~~l(P ~ ..I/.. ~ ~.?_-,.. /! .:I r /i /_ - x_. / l~y,r.\~•-:-~s~t:,..,~ ~;.~.i'i
L r .. ~:. ~ . tiff ~}ii lflir ~ "---'a',. ~~_1~\..S )..^/ r ~ r ;.'?.~~ ~... • :../.f ~p6 >t., / \`.,. '---~ ~~. "1.:. .i
_ ~ ~. .._ ._. fir' .._ - 'fY ~. ~^ 'L,/ L:i`
d. ~ `lam
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
STORES. COUNTY
°~° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ PROJECT: 33622.1.1 (B-4282)
BRIDGE N0.54 OVER
SCALE: 1" :2000' PINCH GUT CREEK
AND APPROACHES ON NC 66
SHEET 3 OF ~ 11 % 1 % 05

NAMES AND ADDRESSES
REFERENCE N®. NAMES
ADDRESSES
wi~~iam S. ~
1
Luci~~e S. Huszfek
2 Debra R. Fompeo
3 1'errY L. ~.
Danie~~e K. B. Comer
34125 AsEon SEreeE
Annandale, VA 22003°1408
4338 Four Farms Rond
Greensboro, NC 27410-9402

m E ~
rn
'
~ ~
a
zoo
~ C~ C U ~-
I- rn m a ~ ~
'
U ic ~ E F-
Q w U -
d
~_ ~
~
~ C U C
C
~ .~ m a~~
L
w U ~ d

W
U
L¢L w
~ ~ U
p
p
~ tN ~ ~ ~ O O
~ ~
Q
~ U
~ ~
N
N d
~ ~ ~
U a

Q
d
~ ~
-~ ~' -~
ca m
~
`
a c
c
~ U
~ ~ ~
N ~ C
G. C ~
0
Z U
L ~ N (D
~~
F U ~

~ °' ° v,
~ ~
~ ~
•~
N
Z U
X ~
g W

W ~,
~ C ~ U
- (6
~ LL j
C tO
C C C
(4 _ l6 ~
E LL ~
,
a~ ~
a
a~
-6
a~ C7
> >` O
V ~
~ N m
U
~ ~ O
U

m

o
o C ao
•~ ~ o
0
0

+~ O J
~
(~ Z O
F-

REVISIONS
ROW Revfelon - Dafe: -Parcel 1 -Added Drives ;Parcel 3 -Revised Parcel Nems 8 Dssd Book Reference
1 vltnoor w+4e,~s

r
N
W

O~
~. I -
! I ..,.. .. i I
~_ ~
r°
~ ~ a
- ~• !i
I
i '~ F ~ P9 I
_s

m I ~ oz n ~ J,
7 i m~o~I o _ { + ..
_i" ,` \
~z~ n ~,
: o -I ~ i ^I
~g ~$ ~~, ~

m
r
~O
~
g
°"
'

-
20 Vf
~ _~
i
r
~ ~ ~ rm
~
r r ~ a'^
r = m
~ I o ;
ci2.F-nx ~~ ~I m~
~fl NNmN m~ m Dn
I D ~ a -{ -~ b N r
I ~ ~ ~
~ ~e~D ' ~ ~ t yrD ~~
~ , . ~ o o - -
r-
~ j .~, g T pOn ~`
I. ~ gn O1 i vn ~ ~ 9y' ~ ~~
_ I
D~ O WLb lD000 { I ~~~y ' i ym Td'; ~+ 7 ,,.i
om m ~~~rnn~n,rn'~v,v, ~ ~• o e ~~ ~~T~ ,.~ ..
~ y y G7 G~ G7 ~ I' ' I nl~',. ~n70 S 'a °., nn u~lnmN i ti.. .. ,
yr p OOO~~p222 ~ i ~~ `', ~yy ~! I T ~ $ ~ ~ ~
o n
~2 c ~~~rnI~rn~rn~i
r~ rn I I ~l li , 8 t ~ o
O ti
g
~ ~ ~m~~~rnn~^' ~ I I 4 ~
~ a m a°
rn n~~2 ~ O I, ~ e o`- m
°°
Zorn C i ., $
I -

u u n ~
i ~ ~~;
~3~
n n n u u n n n o ''' I
t I
. ~
~ \ ln
~`NN`WNOaNO
S D . ~. ~
~ r,
b ~O~ o~ 8 ~ 1
~ b, a ~ I i,
y u~i y~~y~~~~~ I ~ I I I ,..
~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~_ I II I

I I
::
I i ..
...
..
I }, ;..
1 ~ : ~
I ,. ~ ~~~_
1.
~ I ,
1 ~~'~._
,

I , (
I ~
j
+ I t I S
'rA,~5+50.00 ' ,
~ 1
L
,_,
~
,
~
I ' ~

...
I_ o 'B~GJN' T1~ PRO C7 E3-4~ 8 ~~
. 1.. `? :i,i
j ~ ~~ -, 27...9 ; cn z I . ~ ~
I ~ '_
~ ~ l ~ rA~15+75.00 ~ D ~ ,a
~~
I
' BEGIN ' LA7"ERAL 'V' DITCH + ~E l
t B:L
-
~ GR E
927
86 f2 ~ %2'1 ~ o ~ '

~
I PI Sta. l6+OO.DQ RT, i .
° .
. I f ;
~ L

~
L. _ / 0 ~!
~ I
~
~ .
,

~.~,
. ~
,
~ ~
I ti
li' -i
I I '~ i
I UR~t~i~- i
~ II I p
~ ~ .. i
<
I I'I Sta'~ 16+50:Ob RT: ,918
~
' 8 I .
~
I{ q n
~ ;
'..{
.~ t,,
; I' ~._ ~,~. 1
i ~ ~ ~ ~,
~,W~~ ; ~ .
~ ';~
EGJN LATERAL i'w alrc ~,~ ~ ~ '+_ " ~ ~ $ ~ ~: I : I , ~~
P! la.'l6+ .0 L ''~ vg I j
~'L T 9/8.50 I . ' q •\ ~ , . ~ ~'; ~ ~ , ' I . I . ~ ~
v I .. I _ z"~ ~ _ I
EL. _ ` 9/6.50 ' `
ENDi LATERAL ~'V' DITCH' I
Pl Sto, ' 7+50.Q0 RT. ,
~; EL, ~'_91SJ0
Ib ,. i _I STA. l7+ 87 I ; I ~"'~,..
~' BE IN BRIDGE ~ I ,,
,,,, r- a . _ ~ , I .. ~ , .
I.. ' '' 1 I ~'i
~. ;px~h~ ~ 1 '';
o ~,„ r~„ ,j ~'
i 11 l i o I ~
I PJ Sfa. i7 +50.00 ! T j. I- . - ~l ~, ~~„ ~ o ~A ~. I 1 ~ -.
~ E~ ..916.40 I j I ~ 01~9p }°q~ ( I t- '~..
1 I ', ~ t ~. ~ . ~~ ~I,~ R ^~ I i I i ~ ~ ..

,~% ~ _
I ~ ~~~~rn ~ \'dt _.-.fig u l ~
A
C7 I i I ~ I '

1
1 t
^ I
I q
jY ~~
~ ~I r I
1
~ir
o
~ M ,, ~ I ~. I I ..
` I yy
yY
m~.j~ ~ . ~~
I I
- r .ST 10+ 7 - {- i
... ~(.
'o ,
I ~ EN ~ BRIDGEI
~
' I

`~' I

:

P

.t
m
I I
I { r yg CT
I i 'A +~~ lD~~
~ 7~~.
{
`;
I
, ~ ~ '
+ Q
~ ~
] a'~
aim y~
zm m
' .~il~i~l~~ I~~' I
..I : ' o T m onD
I1 I
{ I 1~ I P y.~
M ~I
i I
~ ,. I ~ n o
<
I,I II i
, I' ~-~E
~` f~~' ~ o H $ o
p il~ i~ ;
I + ~ bxl~rn~ m m y
l
~
I ' I ~ i
~ e~crN cur br~
Pl SIb ~O~b~:C1C .;
~r~ ' `
i I .
1 l~x'" ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ } .
5 ' '
~
~;;
~ ~ ~
~ . I ~
~ ~
~ L 2
~ Ir ~ _ ~ $ ~
~

~' ~' `~ ,

~
P
l
~
..
RF. ~

' ~
~ ~
j.. ~

I
~ I Si
o. - 2/t
BL. = 927.50
i
~ ~ - N
^~t 1
I
{ I

:

I
~ :I

I
ci
I >~~, _~ 11 a
I ~
~ C '~ STA. 21 +45.00

I .
I
', 1, i
~ ~ 00 I "•.: IEJd GR ' ;
V
i
-
I I Z1+5
PI S,i
P 0 { EL.~ 930.36` r2• z'I t
,~
~
, i
~

E~I :
1 ~
FI II X29.40
~4
~~ ;_
~
~ ±f ~
~ ;
~ , . .
~ ~ ~
~,
~
I
~
f' ~ I ~ ~ Q
I I ~
'
~ ~ , " p~s
ip 22+oa v s ~r. ~ ~
'~ .
~
/P PRQJED ~3 4 ~2
l ~ ~ ~
N i . ~ i ~ ~
I
i .. I I -'1 I
- ~ C
m
~
~ ; . ,
t;
' I ~o~~
I L I I
~,
~
I I :
'
'
+
°
N
o
oTx' s

~
i
i .
x I
~I! $ ~ a
- n
-~
I I ~~ I~ ~ I ~ I
• y .
~

;I
I
I f
fff
7I N
_
o m
d m
I
~ , ~,I ~ I I ~ $ t , o o~n

N

,
t

a .

I
~

~
-
..I',
;

'~ ~
ii

~ .r

°
W '

E I ~

1 rl : I ~

~ j

I ~'d. ''~

o a

Z. m
o
O y
m ^~ ~
~...
' y
f ~~ i
I
1.~ ~ 1 I

~ I ~

r C ~.Z
I ~ I ~
I ~ i
,
~
pp ~O i ~ ~p ~O
I O b
i ~O ~O
O O ~ O
I
O

O
O I O
O
, srA
2/~a oo
~
a
a
~I
r
~
{
'tom ~ ~~
~jr c
i / t l~ /,
` ~, ~
// i / ,
:`/
r c~sxO
O
. ~ r ~I
_ ~
m ~
S x

{6'-5'
;~
l6'-5'
2 ~
o~
B ~ m it

°m
~ O U
y
'.
m~
~m
Eo
°?
x r

-
it n•

i5k0~
...... ........ '!:i
Zk _. ___.
..-..~ -.
.: !~
"m~}o
,I o~~'
I y I, r,NUP T~~ ~~+~
~f ~~ V~ ~O
inpd i
' i 1 '[~ O~ Og€ 7~+ jy~
C ~
---, ~ "c,
se S~~ T~~
Z~~ VN
r1r
~~ ~~€ ~~~
~ ~~~ S~
~ ~~ .
;,
+~ ,
{
t
~~
v~
~.~
~m~
~/
/,
,,
t
,_ „ 2 ,
`_ .... .. tll ~ ..

20+00
J
/°
y
/Jrr
f 1 ,)r 1
> > l ~
s'"
fi
~~_ 3
:;~ sr
F : .~
~~
0
n
M
~~O

REVISIONS
ROW Revision -Dale: -Parcel 1 -Added Drives ; Porcel 3 -Revised Parcel Name iL Dsed Book Reference
1/12/2007

r
N
10198150 ~MP 1\HytlrOUllt6\Pa rmll \09282.hyd .P• 09 /B V.tlO n

~ I
"O O 1~1 W ~ V1 ~ ~I
.~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~
r
I I I Q
~~ i ~ I ° n~
I G 1d' > t ~ C I I I Q Q leil ~ r9i
I v
8 8 g ~ 4~ C r= ~m
I
i~ I,
i n
F v r
E ~'i. I .. n '1n
~ ~. - - Pc
I !i I m
'~ ''~ 6 ~ .!y I I! I IIJJ. i i t C ~>> Z O m
..I - ~ I / ~. gym=; G~v1 C '^
J e ~ / { ~. m ~ O Ztn s;
1 I 1 I vl"ty1 ~ 'o
n I I I ~~ ox~,x F2 mp
b b gp 1 I,. .I I11~ Q r tnNmN ~~ a N~
~ ~°,.. P e~n II ~ ~ il~ + ~ ~~~' ~ ~ ~ III ~
4 - ~ ~I I $ ,rte - ,, ou
1 ~ ~ ~ 6~ I 'I I. 'y y °F-- c ~ ~~
I I I I 'I I~ .r o ~< `c
~ I ~1~ ~ ~ ~_ori o
I V I ~ F.' ~ -1 O ] _ ' kr
i
' c` ~ 'c ~ ,
I ~ rntiO~ I P O _ ~ ~ ~`
1
~ A II to ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ r,
:
~ .. I . I I I I I ' ,~ b ~ ~ ~ , ` 4 ,~ ~( f~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~
, i I~ ...
a
a c~ s
r L I
I
z~
b
~~
-nl 2

/6'-5'

/6'-5'
i `^
o~
/r n•
~8
~ ~
b ~
tn,

1
r
y
m +~
~ In
~o
o=
2 I

f

e

/r !r
!. `i n < g C f71 m nl - I ; '. rnx I N ~ _ ~ y N~N '~k\ \\\\
~~ I y ~• ~.
W ( ~~i, O O O O 2 2 2 ~ I ~•i ~~~ :.I. S t °, ~ n ~~m~ O ~vQ .~ `. „ IG)~'QO ..,
777 < b ~ ~ 3 ~' ~ ~ I I ' I ~ k ~ ~ ry I ~ '" p ° o `v ~ x ~ +\,
_;. n 11 i ~7 (n ~ llO ~ ~ t I !yl Z p , " ~-i ~ . •r... ~ am~c x ~HI~~ \ \\
.I ~ 1 G7 ' n ' ,...., ~ r- 1
..I. 2 O O ~ C ~ Rl 2 ~ I G71. = 2 .1 8 A m ° aq ~ .... =~N., yRw~ `~ x \\. ~•.~1 , I_ 'I' I ...=
C ~ I~~~On(2~c~j~~ ~ I 1 I I~ ~ u g~ T~~ ~ ~ l,, ~ - i1I _ _
{ -c ('i rTl ~ 1 `t D ' I ' I I ~,. 2 ~I r! II „ ~ '.°.. _ ~g~ ~I~ ( ,.I.r S.
A ~ n p = 2 ~i ~ I,1 ~ ~ ' I.. ' p ::.. $' O° n c c ~•~ uVi~m pg€ ~O Y..~~ Lei I 4 - ZI - _... _ _.... -__ ...
_.
,: " :r <, ~
u n n n n u II n n u n I I I 1 y~N~ ~ ~ 3~ 11~~~i ~ ~~ ~~ ~ i V h ~ ~ '• ym i
O I I I O uT '' I~ ryC~^ :{ ~P O
.i. lp W lp ~ W lD O~ W i0 l~ N ~ I - I I :..1 ~ ~' I t ~j~ ~ti~ o~, v~~~O
b ~ V ~~~O.j9~~OCpb y ,._ I E "'f u c,x-x
~. ~ bl I l1# V ~ O ~ t .. I. I I n .. I~ I I`114~ '; K! ~n U~~ Lyl u1Nr^N
I ~ ° ~<n~<n~<n I ~, I! I "! II : .. ' 'j I(j1 f o~oo€ ~ ~ i-,$ m
I `.,' I ~
Ij ti `!\~ ~ ~~ 5
;,. II,:,,~:I _ I> .... .. .. !. ;. .. ..: 'I it ~ I
~ L. L.i
.U
.~..~..I I:.. ~.I ; I.i~..l... .! III :.,. 11 ,.I. ~.. I .: ..- a Il .: I]Ir II II ~ ~~ y ~ .
. I_I all j. l I, I I I
... , ,
:
~..
~< I I~ I i +' -~1'.LSTa/5t~ti.QO I I i~ I ;~,~.~. .,; ~1~ ~_ ~
I I 1 t~ I_ I~ I ~'I ~ /
l y l ~ ~ , _ o C !N Tl~ PffO 71 I ~ 4Z ', s< I I . 21 ~.,; ,.I I:: i
;... ,
.~
I 1 (I ' ~I ' ' ~ ~# ~A. / ~+7 ~ 'I ~ ~ ~I I ~ h ~`~` v ~~ ~ Ij l li j ~ ~ i I
..
eEG~iu ~ LATER 'v' olrC~ ' B~' ~ lry cBaoel I ~ ~ ~ ., I,,. ~.;
PI SP l6'+OO.Od `RT. ' ~ o ' ~L.~ 92T.BE l2 j l "1 I I ~' ~ v • ~ ~ t :} t ~
.. ;. ..
1.. .. ..
~7 I ~ I I , ; ~. ~ m
,.1,
1~1 I I ~ I i ' . I S~'` ~n ~ ~ I I '; j I ,. ~ ~ ~ 1~ ~~ v
- t I
In ~ (
d I
I I I l'!5a ~+ d. b R~ i,. ,I gj (' II I' II i ' `' \, ~ ~4 ,
_ 1
I ~ I, ~ >
1 ;
LI ... l4,OQ , . l „ ': ~ I ,
I.I.if 1~~.j.. I .. ., ~ I... I' 1 I I (~j, ""~taN~ II 11 \ ~ ~ is ~ i + 5~~,
:~
.. I +I j.j o#.N I , I ~ f
4 ©© \
f •,
/ '. I. ' I ._: A I ~ ~ ~ N J ~ ~,. ~4. 14 ~" .. .... \ 1. , to '!.'l
_ ...
,.
P/ CI 1 I I I ! ~ I I } R 9 I .i.., r .~, . ,~~, ~. ~ -•,t..,
I ~,
~~
I I
- ~' ~ $
~ I ,... I o' I ~, I. .. I :. I I I I
: -,
P/ a`=I 17µ00.00'CT. ~ {° I i I I ~"'~ m~' ~,.,€$~~" c,s i'- (
TA l7 1 ~~~ ~ ; I , 1 ~ ~ / ~ \
I'' ~Nb LATERAL 'V' Olt'CN BAG/N BRIQG~ I II t. _~~' ..~~,e ~ ~~ il: I 'U" 7oZ ,~ ~~
I ' 1 ' Pl sip. l + .po Rr. 1 '{'~ I , L. I I , ~ I j ~.~ g € l i,, ~ 11, ~ °
1 X11 i 9.50 I I :'b I p~~ ,+ I.p4,. I r'
,
I I T ~V l / I .•;G +/1 '1~Rr1i I _ ~ ~w y~ r_,' '"p < <~ s.e! ..
.
:' ~ ,. I ~ ~~? - ~ 11 j I ill I I+I I \., 11 ~ ~f l `
f
i. ~~ ~.: U1 I f:, I#t
~:.
1 ~i 1 ~ I'1 4 ~,
~ ~514.;1I;+`J0.00 LT I .I ... ! :, ; - +T I t I I ~ * `~ R`l.. I 1 ': I r ~ ~'bb°~0'
: :..
E4.' .9/6:40, I I I f_L} I '', t,_I ; 1 .. ;~ ~ I "' I ~ ~C I , ~ -
I .
I I ~ II.L' . #Ili r°1t ~.. I I II}~! I. ,. I j' t it I I: i I
I
I I E
r
f I i~~ I, t ~., } II I11~ ~ I
,....;
I ,
o ~
..
,1I° ~ r ,
'~
1'~ ~ , 1'
< }}
1! ., I n~ 'III;.: 1 4 %~ TA.1gt0 7 Z •'~' Iii} I l I ~~ ~~ n
,~ - s ~i ~
'~ ~ ag
m
f.1 m I
I I I ~p; ; I i I AND BRIDGEI f ~ O ,a o
I N ~.
: ~,
: ~ 1
I -IP ~( ~ ~i I 1(
m- I d I , + O fll -. ' ~ III:',/~ 1n
, ~ g ,
I o
r m~ o ,.
I
~ ~,p.~; nl I ~ I 18 T ~ a$ ° D D /~5. r .'~ I I ,s]f'! ye~0 ,s}.
I ~ ~ ~ 4
I
i v \/ / ~ I ' ~j>'
III I I I CMm .}_I I t f I .: ~ n a N< r .. .~/.. b ~J6 ~~}~. e(q .. /, Li,' I i ] 1 SN OCP m / r..
N I I o ?.1~M ~ ] I ~ ~Z~i~ ~~1 1
,..J . I. ~ mm~I'~ ~I t"I 1 Y' }{ i h!~~'~.~ I I. i ~ u e p~ ..\ ...I I (' I I ~ q 4 !
I I I I T II ~ 111 `~ 1 y ~~ + 1 I. II y
~~~ .. X ~ t ~.! I ,.... ~,f• u!^ m v [ [ n p IN I:f I f 1-€~ \ 111.1. , I ~ aT #""~ { ~
m I '1 II ~ II III 2! n °~ ~I = O ~ ~~\~I Q}.~11 ~ ' III S€~~~ / f I:
jI rn I +II I If .; IIII iII juOe o' NQ°~ y ;y ~ ~~L;m ApF •,~ 111 ~; ! ~' ~f fR 1^r' f f ,
a
~..~ ~ w ' I '' ~' I i . rnN`~O I.:.~ _ u °m~''a.~~'I~N I , t _~ ~ €~~ ~,6/'' 2
' I ~~~,,,
~,
{ ~ I e~'crN ~ ct~r onto-r I I ~ ~ : - g7~ ° ~ -'_ I
»*
.~I II i_y I /~/.~%p,~C~+50UFJ..iyl 1.. .. ., ~,..~3a, i ~ $a °~x I_Ly~~l~$.~~ I 'i ;~lt ~\~': ~' .f
S~ ,
, t
.1..7...1 1 I ..', c I L k ,. _. -. ~ I ~ A no,T~, ~~ ~+,~ ~ , ; , ~ / !I 4 iI ~v ( __
: 1
•
1 ~ + ~ ~ , : ;_, : ~,: No , °rt nt' ~ , . ': r r I y. ,>
,. , I w
1! I I p ~ z
,
II{; ~, E(,. 9~7 Q :~ ~ I ,I I'° III ~ 1 { 8 ~;,~ ' ' ~ f ~Ixl ` s.
I I ~ ~ I ~ I I 1 ~I : R 4
t ~ r
I I
f
1 ,
c~ ~
'. I ~ t , I !- I I i., I ! I ' '~ a .., ~ ~.` $T A (+45.Q0 I I !' 9 /~ ' c ~~tl ` I"
-"".
I
I
' •
iii ~ PlSll ~I=+2~f5 ~ ~ ~N R i I I-' i -/ ~it "a~
tII I ~ I ~LI pLy~~~~nn#nnn' jlj;It. + L= 930. 6'(~ I7')I I~t „`r// .r~~•„ om s ~::~ 3
~..}_L U I - , I III rv, : I :.~ 1 ,:~y /~ ( ~ ° ::~_ ~C
.. ':., -,
I I I '
1. ~ ~Nd CYIT (7/ ~~I f ~~U u,. L- STA. I1~9 .~Q j~' t~Gj~' ~~ ,f ~> t 1. t ~ o.' m :c~y ~"
I ~-
N I I I I ~ F'I Stn, ~~t~ ~ RT ~ ~ A I ~ ~~ ~Q~ C 4 ~ ~a , ~ 1 4 /r ' ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~(~
... L. -, I.I. ~ I ,- _' , ',.. a ..3 # I I ; I I I I I I~~I I I ,., ~ ~ S: l ao
I I 93l
- I I -I I I ~ _ ~r ~ ~~
I f i (I I
`s' / ~ <'
I I '~ V I I I I ~ I J- ~ r ?
- , ~oct /
' j - t I l I t ~I F I i l'- I O N n M? 7L ~ / /~ ~./
rT
~~ III I I I I I I I ,- ' 1 i t A r /x' ~~ ~ !~ ~r
~~
I I ~'IIII j I !~I Ij I ~ I I+ o~ ;~ € m ~ y s~ i -. o ~
a
;~ o
I r"".~' 1 ~ , 1 Om
N ii ~ ~11 111111 I !~ _.. 1 o ~ ~ o <D ~ I I. t
- '/
W 1'..,..oll I IILi1 } I L.L..I { .. ..~ t ;y H m .~ n r- ' "%' t I ~ O ~~~ ~K ~
I + ~~ I I I I _ I I ~ I 1 ~ ~ ~ ~+ ~~~ ~ ~ / _ 70~ ~~ I
1 ~~:'~ I ~ ~ ~~ I 1 ~.~._ I~~ ! '~~'' °_~ a ne ~ ~~~ Y~ / I www~~~ ~ 7~ ~~~ CL~1 ~ ~
I{ L. 1~ I: I~ I.t r I I. .~ fl I ~ o ~ 1 r: ~ ~ I I ~ ~1 WZy~N Z~ W
1 i... I` 1 I 1 1 j 1 I I r~ PZ ~ 1:, ' l
I'
I I O a~An ~ ~ o
141 ~ ~ ..wal I.L. I 1 I~~T ~'I '~ / r /1,
+`~ I A -7
1 r Z
n
{ I I I 1 j` I 11 1 I
IU ,.._; I I L' I I, .. I ., I I I t,; ~In. :ll,' I 1 ut t ,.._ _ _~ ADZ
....
(' I'fl
E
1 i I O• C ~A
p0 ~O I p ~ h0 ~O ~O I ~O ~O ~O I I R
O O I ~ O O O I ~O O O " '~ e- o
- __J I I j I c' ,

~oxTnacT•
TIP: B-4282
-a o 0
N N ~
O

o rn o o x
S v ~
~
Q
N N ~
..
o Q o o
Z
-
-I
r

~ O O
»

~ ~„
c
Sz

°°

~
N~ b
NN~
v
oo ~

+ II u n II n n n~
$wo"'
a
c pc wa
r m ~ 3 ,E ;e a` a
i
v
N ~ _ ~
o Q

-i r r
Q m m
D G1 Gl
r' -~ -i
r = _
m
G~ '~ O
_~
~~g
~ D
~ ~ ~
m
O ~ ~ o~
r`n y ~ ~1
~ ~
~~~ y
N
N
N ~ G7
~ N
N
II II II
O O ~
0
o
~ 3 3
R y
amo ~ m ~' ~
~~ ~ ~~
~c~ ~~ b x~
0
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ''•7Zr

Q• ~ N O 6
a
~ o
ro O
S b 3 ti
a ~ ~ ~ ; o ~,
~ ~ D a
~ ~ ~ m
~' x ~+
b y
N m ~~
a
ti

-_._
__.__.
_
_. °z ~'
J

~~

x
M
z
n
v
0
n
0
D
.Q
70
0 =
~~
2
mQ
Z
G1 vCi
Zm
m~
7o m
0
D
'Z
~b
~~
~ ~b
~
~o
~
~ o
xx
b
!
~~ /
4 ~~
~~
a
°xx ~'~

7fi
au~o ?.l
~ga "a o° w
~uN=~ A
r"=u ~
~'_~., a
~ao• u n~
J
$7NN B
nq u n~
o> u O
_~ ° n
c~
H
D~
u
m~
~~
_~
;~
~ ~~
\~~~• oA
~ o \\ ~~
kFSI~
TF~o~ \ \ ~
~ N
~,i \\ SMITH R0. SR 1167
~-----
~ ~ \ / TO fRANSISCO --~
Oo ~
mp
J i
`~
\,
~~ ,~ ~
\_~ _~~~
\~~
i'
O ~
~~ ~
~ ~i
,~
~ !~
~ j
r ~~
1
a\~ay // ~
~j j~~ a o
// ~ ~ ~
~~ ~
it ~~ oA
// / nN
/ / \.,
/ / ` N
I€

` ~ j
~

~~
11 O ~ IMF ~i J~ _ ( ~ ) l l _
b ~~ ~ ~
\
~:

a ~
. ~ :~
i i'
i
o
y
O
o ~ ~+
b~
O
~~ ~
~ ~O
~~
~ ~
~ ~b
b n~
ax
G~ ^y
r~ "
b
n
~I
n~
O
~~
m rnT
~(~
~ «cDDD
WA
0 0
l
o~
N ~
~ k
~~
o~
~~
g~

~~
y___,
® ~
~ ~
~y~
~~

W W W C~
~, ~, W
N N N
w

N N

IJ
~.

~ ~ ~

~
~
Q N
Oo
b
a a a ~ N ~
N

~ ~ ~ ~~
Q
~ 9
m
~ ~
~
~r

n ~ N ~ p T ao m C` S ~+ p fl n °° (~ ~ T rn ~ N ~ Ql ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ Q+ e ~ ~ fir, -moo ~ C1 c C1 ~^ QJ
,~ v° u 7. o ~ ~ ~ ~' a '~° 3 c S c, o m c o m ~ ° ~'' ~ ~ v° ~ -°o v v° ~; n -°o v° ~; v° m '~ °c ~ O
m $ 3 ,7° ~ ~ ~ a o 3 T °o_ ~ m ° 7a - -a ti 7' 7' u°. 7 $ u°i u°i ' W ° `° 7 m z ~ ~ 7 ~o
N <D 'D O ~ N N ~; a'J 10 N O ° 3 C ~ ~ ~ N ~ N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ?; ~ r
3 °' 3 ~. o > > ° v o ~ S. ti 7' 3 R, m o_ a a o. .~ ~ ~ o• o ~ c ~
o ~ ~ 7 ~ v 7 7 ~ m a ~ n C C 7 7
-o n o 7~ A m c W h 7 <~ a a~~ o n~ 7 c o 0 7 7 C°
(~D S ~° N ~ N ~ O O N N O ~ j ~ O ~ _O ~ ~ 7 C 3 .9 N r ~
o ~ ~ m ~ 'n ~ ~ m ~ a. n, 7 ~ r m 3 ~ ~ m
p 3 3 ~ -.. ~ O ~ O_ O_ ~ O ~ 7 ~ tD C ~ `1
O ~ ~ C 7r
o o 3' o
a 7 Q W c~ ~ m
v '~ _ °° b
o ~
n ~ a ~
7- ~° ~ o b
C ~
I I~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~
T , III IN
~ ~~ I I I ~ I ~ I I I i i
N N ~ T ~ 'O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '9 ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N
o ~ > >' ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ o o 'o o ~ o ~ o 'o 'o ~ ~ ,~ f o
m T o a in is ° ° -o _. v = a- v v v ~ ~ 1~Op v v ~o v ~ -o ~ f1'a ~ ~ 'o = = m ^ ~` N 7
D ° N N O O ~ ~ N 7' N 7 N N N 7 7 6 N N N N 7 N 7• O N O N N 7• 7 `YJ Q ~ S (Q O
~ a H ~ A ~ c~ 1O ° ~ n o m tD 'O 'O ° m m ° tO m ~ ~ m 7 c~ m 1O 'O ~ ~ ° 7
a ~ 2 m y ,_„ N a n a~~ a a a n m~ a a a a m a n~ a ~ a a~ 70 ~ °~ c a
~ (~ ° O rt O V1 H C ~ ~ ~ -I ~ y°j n O ~ 70 7' 70 70 tC tG p ~. ~ ~ O O
Q- ly fD 3 O ~ C O ~ O O a" O a N N N N fp p ~ f0 ° IC ID _7„ .T` 7 O N ~p C
30 C ~_ N O T lD ID fD O ~ ~ 'O 'O 3 rt p ~ rt 7 r "' -Oi, ~. O ~ d O. "O f°
° O C ° ° IUD S O O ~ ~ W N O O ~ C ~. G ~. -°i. 'Oi+ D O O ~ ~, N
~ ~ p f ~ N N 3 L"' C p p ~ N n ~ ~ `f `G `G ~_ ~ ~
O - ~ 3 T ~ ~ ~ ~ Q. ~• ~ N N O W. ~ W ID A O
q• 3 0 0 z z
3 ~ ~ 3 3
v ~'1 ~ m m
i ~ ~i
O ~ ~ ~ ® ~~ ~~ I I m ~ ~ m m in~i D. i a~~~E
I ; f= U
p 7o p ~ p 70 --I --1 -1 -1 ~ m p A ~ -o -o -o v O N ~ ~ p T ~ _ ~ W m
so W o m ° ° ~ m m ~o m ~ ~ r ° m ~ ~ 0 0 0 -+ ~', -, ~ ~ ~ o ~ O 7. 7.
n n n O m n o 0 0 0 ~' ~ Z
H ° ~. o ~^ o m ~o A m v '~ -v '^ o ~1 f f ~ ~ ~, -o -_«, ~ ~ o 0 0 ° p rc ~ O
IC' -~ t0 -~ t0' ~ 'O 'O ~ 'O O 10' ~ p ID fD lD O 0 m ~ ~ ~ O_ 7~ ~ O.
7 0_ 7 a 7 a -i 7- >• 7- T H ~ = 7 a v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ?~ 0 7. f1 ~ o m
c m c m o co ° o 0 0 o m O
a ~ a a ~ 7 7 7 7 a Z ° a c3o ~ ~ ~ ~ fDa ~ ~Da !y en v+ p m ~ c ~ ~ --i
n. ~ n. ~ °a ~ T m m m co ~ ~ m n. ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~. o. -o c ~ ~ f ^ oo ~ ° o. 7 ~
~ ~ m o c ~ v ~ f1 ~' c o ~ ~ ~ m ~z7 m ~ T O ~ m 1O A I~
~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -1 u0i S T ~' ? 4' .e ~ 3 ~ O C ~ ~ y o c n G O
~? ~? C1 O w O O o ~ A ~ a -o o ~ o ~ _ ~
-n W N fD ~ W ° ~ ~ W 7 N O ~ ~ W .9 O N ? i n O p
~ ~ N ~ N 'O Q' W ID ~ ~ ~ O "C O N O_ T - = x
S S '~ O fD
O~ T 7 S 7 w9 O N ~ r d fOD N O D a n ^~
~' ° f1 W n o. c7u o °` ~
o ~ ~ °' °c ~ o_ N ° O
o- ° a c C ~ ~ ~!!
~ C 7' O N m ~
r H ..y T
N Vf C d
m m V c
~ ~ ~
I I I I I Y
I I I I I I I I v
o~~oo¢~ ~ Ion®o~~o-• o~^
~ I I m ~ a s
~ I i I I I I I I n f~ ~~
CS N O
7 ~ 47 ~ ~ -_C-, C C C rt N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p Z ~ ~ N O C ~ ~ N ~ <D ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ID G ` ` ` D
O_ D - Cl N n O 7 7 p = n N fn = ~ _, ^ 444~~] O _, ^ ~ ~ .0,. .O. 'i
0 7 ~ ~' ~' ~' ~ ^~ ro' ° ~ o o ~ m 'n' ° < '° $ '° $ o m o coo ~° ° m ~ m m ~
~, a~ -i .1 ~ 7 a cn D 7 a~° 7 a 7 a~~ a~ c~
0 0 o C -i r~~ o co c~~ 7o c m co o m o m 2<
7 7 ~, 3 7 7 ~ O O O ~ O_ O 7 '~ O .+ d 't < + O_ -~ O_ ID ID O rt d
-n ~ 7r n N ~ y' Yn N ~ N N N N N -~ ~ ~ N ~ O O O
_ ~~ o m a m a i„ o°~ m v, o a ~ a a C7 °~ o a a<~ 7
O ~ O ~ O T ~ N O C1 ~ ~ O O T ~ S 7'
~• ~ to ~ `~ O ~ 07 ~ ~ D ~ ~p p O D T ~ ~ O p O
m o '~ m ~, o r ~ ~ C1 ° ~
m
~ ~ 7
co
C_ ~• r" ~ in n o H
~ ~ m C ° ~ C N
W lD m ~ N 1'11 C
n VI ~ ~ IT
O C N
a IT C
~*
~ I I
I ~ ~ ~ I I
D I ~ ~ I I I
O C 8 ~ a z ® O ^ • ~ ~ O OO ! ®O ~ ~ ®~ GC o ~ ~ ® 0
_ i ~ ~ I I
~ I I I
~ I ~ I ! I I I
(~
0
Z
rn
Z
O
z
D
r
N
r
N
~~
a
~o
~'
~~
~.
~~
`--4 "-i
®~
~~
~-i

9/il/I007 11~29~J2 oAl R~\NOadwoy\Pro~\E9I82_rdy_ty0•d9n
ti
z~
~~~,~ ~g
~~~~ ~rn
v D O O D
~ ~ ~ ~ rn O
~~ry r~
a ~1
In ,l y y ~l ~
~ O I ~ I -
o ~~~~ -.
rn yo~rn ~ ~TT
O~ ~ ~ ~ O ~_ ~NO~ n ` ~ O
m~ ~ ~ N N O~ i o ~Oti ~ ~ N
~r ~ ~ O ~' y0 Q yrnU~ ~
~1 I N ]~ ~ rn O O cn y n r - -
~A ° rn ~ ~' ~ ~ zrnwo ° n m N
~~ Z n c N c~`~• - y
~W N ~ y p O ~ ,~~
DV ~ ? ~ I ~°~rn ~ Z
rnO~ D O N ~ N ~ ~ rn~ r -
~ O
r
~~ ~ ~ ~ r~Z~ p ~ CIO
O~Z ~ O ? Vi I A~ I ~ ` ~D y
tn~ ~ ~ ~ ~Npy CO,rnO7 `ooo
~o cn N v, NornA m-lo
00 ~ O~cn
rn oa ~ -
0 0
00 o° 00
2 r ~ v ~i ~I
y I O O
~ ~ ~ ~
-. N ~
~I- +
rn O O to
D~ °o °o
~o m
N ,~ R~ n
°~
rn ~n
2 ~ ~~
o ~rn
o ~rn
rn °
2
O ~ O
O ~ ~ O Z
~ p~ ~~~
O
oZ
o~
---}-rte
h I
r'
I

Z
O
rn
D
r
r
C
rn
Z
r~
0
m
r
0
rn
rn
c
z
O
m
m
z
~ nl N ~
~~
~ O y ~ yO
= R1o r00 ~~
~ ~~ ~~rn
~~~ N
`
y ~~
~
~~C ~
~
~ ~ ~
~ ~~ ~~ rnb
~~ ~~~ ~o

mrn
~o~ m~
~
~-~ ~~y O
~D
rnN y~D ~

~
m `~
~ Z
~~
pZ ry
y
~O ~?c~ ~n
~
~
\
`~O ~~
~
o
iRl
m l~~
Rl
Am ~
O ~
r
~ y
o~~ ~N
~
~
~ ~
~~ ~o~ zm
cn p ~ n rn (./~

o'er m°c ~m
~rn y~
_ o ~ O
{
rn rn~ ~
N ~n

y

rn
D
y
nl
1'
9+~# i
~; ~~
6Yt '~
~~
~'~
~f
K
~~
0
Zm~
% A

REVISIONS
ROW Revision - Dafa: -Parcel 1 -Added Drives ;Parcel 3 -Revised Parcel Name 6 Dead Book Ra/srence
4/N/2001 142509 ON flr\NOOOway\Pro1~b42B2.rUy_OSh04.dpn
`O III O N W
.... ~ ~ ~ I O ~ Q i ~ I
O I O 0 O O I O ~_ ,
.._ r
I =^ I _.I,I ~t.~ II I i ar=m'
I11 ~ I ~ I~ oar r-
I GY, i = e i row
$ 8$ r~ ~ a ~~ I, i t I{ I I I -in ~ c s
} F ,~ .~y I~ . II I `
,'~ ~ w I 14 I I l i ~:' I' I I. ~,..~. I 1 l: ~ N o n m~ ~
I ,
N N ~ ~ 1 C ~i ~ ~mZ~
~1 N N
'O'
} u ''o e = gv I f I ~~ cn N cix~x
+ c
~ t. a E ngg~ ~ O I.. .' I If s n p d ~NmN
u c m j~ I I.. I. a D o ti
~8 n I j i' ~ + ° ~`
p_
I
b ~ G I I 1,-. ~, '~ g o D
I'' ~
} a Si ~ - , :~ i I I {;'. ~ I! ;i t °~ .II' _ ~ ~/ r i:.t Iq1
i e. it ~~ I ~ ~ .N I' mo !!!!I,.JJI~)__' 1 '. ~x ~ ~
1 I lilyO ~~ ° ~./ /r
N ~ 8~ I I I .~2"'n~ I ~S. '\ Z
~ ± u m~ovl ~~ ~ , "ti .r
~~~ I
,;~ t 4 ;~z
t \~ ~~
I I
i ~bA~~ I ~ ~ ~ ,\
> ,
I .. ~~~ ,
I I II I I I I I~ ~, c ~ 4~~ - i,~
~ I` r
V ..I-- a.. ...I L. I- nml~ A z omn ~ y`rq \ ~~
y~ n° gggyw yw nwooo ~;1.. I ,-.~I'. ~~~~ I ~ ~nmzC ` ,`,„.ZI f \ a~~'.\\ }, },\ R
...1 y rn rn 111 Vl (/1 ~ lrn/1 lrn/1 l/1 I.. '. /p rq2 ~. N m °m ~ ~' ~N°ln O (~,. ~~ 2 •, Q
rn ~ ~~~ ~ ~ T I I ~C': ~ r p NN N ry j .~
` ' I 1 -1 r 2 ~ Y -1 -I \
4 O Z _. N p m ~ C m m m ~ ~ ~``'_
O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rn n ~ ~ O O ~ , i ~ w.. m nl N ~ ~ y ~ Ji JC {{IT~Q ` ~( / \
~, o c a 'a 'a m lvriJ I ~ ~, ~ i ~4,
z o00 ~=rnoZ , `~ Ix g t ~ °oD ~aa~ '~ ~
t ~ rn~ r C rn ~° r ~ GNU $ 5 S
to D ..
C ~ ~~~ry~rn~rn~ ~ G4 I~ ~ H e~ T~~ ~z ~g+ t~
(1~~ ^~rnc~ nC=~I~ ~ 1'i~ ?y ' oa N zc~Q ~yG o ~8~ r~ •.,'~.
`~ C ~ 2 y ~ ~ I ! '~ I I v ai oFO vN ~~ SZ m~ 1
I n ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~1
1 I O g D [ N: ~ Utim Q
0 2 2 ~ I I I ~ 4, ~~ ~ a o a ~~ G "' t 1 ,
~' I I N K] K Oy~
~ x C ~ I (,'. o n° H x 'O ~I I
I 1 1 I ~ :: n o ~ ~E ~_ ~, ~ + ,
u n n n n n n n u n u ~ I ~ I,~ ~~ ~ Y g~; ~ ~~ ~ 1D I/
_I IU \ NONNg~NO~ O I I ~ ~~ I +~ D Ti
`a ~ :.,
I f , I i 11
~ } .. I I ~., I I I
r I .
I l :: I I l ~ I.
I
~'
TA.ISt5D00 ~ I
C '
:. I I` - ~ ~ ,, -~ • ~C.~ T~^oxo-I 4x1,
I o BAG N~ }"lfl Pp0 ECT B-428 rn ~ ~ m
1.. I
::. I I~ ~: 4, ~ ~:. ' .., x ~~x $ ~ i
I I w '~ P
I ' I I ~` . ,L ~ ~,4.f/5+~5.OC1 ~ ~ s ~;\ \ ~ mm~"A''~'1 ~ N ' I ~
: BEGlN LATERAL 'V' D1TGH , , I : *. i ~~~/ ' G._ A j r I ~ I . ~ Q' , i.'...I ~ •.., ' , t.:, I," , ~~-~i~O ~
AI 5/'0. 16+00.00 RT, I l o I E?L , ~927_a9~ f~ . ~2 1 I I ., `~ ~ x oo~ ~ C;
1 ~i I, I..~ I t ~.I ~ ,..~~8 t~ l !.. ~, ~ I'.~ ~ ` ~~~, ~~ x ~~ ~r. ~a.
i
~. o it
I~
' :. I ,o m
Pl Sto. I +50.00 Rt'. ~ ,r II
~.
I~ I,~ L `~19/ .00 1~ ~ ~ ~R~~~~ I ~~ ,. ,, ~ s. ~o ~)~ ,fro
~2 _. ,
8EG N ..LATE ftL... V' 0/TC r ~ , ~ I I , o . N ,
_, ~ '- ~~
~:..- ,
:
..... .....} .}. ~. -_~ t ..'. ~ _ -I- In i -. { -.... _ r -. '.. ~'~.,. lD~ ~ -
.I .~„ ~ ~ I I ~ ~
.
I '
.,
r _
I ~ I
P! sro.'',=1 /~+od.oo 'LT. ~ ~ ~ 'a I I L I _ - „~g~~ ~'~ ~-' F
1,. ! I, _.. i I ~ I~ I I I -t TA.l7t 71 I { "'~ } z°° ~ ~° -
-+
~- E'AID~ L' rERAL yr DITChI I ~ ~, IBEGIN RIDGE _ ~ a~ ~~ ~$ ~ r
15fA.17~-50.00 T, , ` I i ti I .+ ~.:.i~ ~ €
I ~ '' I EL =' 9/5.P0 r ~ I o ~ 'C ~ ~~ ~ ~.,. ~ n~ ..~ rl , s,
I I I ~ ~ n r- i. :
I I ~ I b II ~ 11 ,'I Y~ A
EN 'AT A ~'V' DlT H_ ~ ~ r ~ I 11 ~ n! 4 L i I " f t
-N ~'LjSto~Il7 +50.00 _ LT I - .-, ~-( c~ U, ~ w i o ~ ! o ~ ~ -I ~ o D rn i M
~ EC. = 9/6.40 ' ~..~ I I I ; ~ ,, I lll, {J~Op, ~.- I ; t^ n II II II II II ~ ..._i : jIm :~ ~'
t . ~j f II
I i ,-'~ !~ i I ~ ~ ~ ~ bR~I I I,..J aoa-n~y~° C~ t~ ;.A ire
I :
.I~~ I ~ `~rnNA _
I' ~
I I
Ol ' ~. -
lu
- ~ _ 1 .I } I I i I ~
..
I I
I ~~
i
I , ~ _ ~ , ~ : , j'
.,rT
I r~ I
~ f ~ ~ :Ili 1 1
I
`i +
t I
~ I I I I t ~ ~ + -L` 'STA./9 .87 ~ .,, r.. i
~ t i'. C.I -F . } z ~ ~ ~ ~~I
I I , I I I END~BRIpOE ~ m y ~~ ~-1~oD~ a L. pa ,I
i j ~ ~ i ~ I I ©' ' '. +° o ~'~ II ° II 11 II II (^ < i``I I T .
I I J ~o„~ I'I ~ ':L, i ~ ~ e II O~~N~lJ1~ ~ ,, I ~ }
I :. I ~~~„'R I ~~gi~r r j ~ I ! , , $ o ~ ~ ~y ~ Qp7ux.1W~~N+ ~ ~yl ~ ''
i 9 r.. ! .
I'. ,~ I I a~pl~~i X25°. I . ~` I ~ ~: + 'a 'n $, ~'~"o m`1~~NO 10+`i~ l' °'40 ~. ~+ , !I' IY I
'+ f i rD ~ ~~ ~~
~o~~~~ll1=l I I I i ~ `~ l' o~rD-- ~R>~ •5j~?JO,.r`' r'~ ~, I i D
L. n o 6' s Q N•
E I o 'r' ~ ~ ~ "~ r!7'
I L~~I I ° u p ~ I
I a ~
N _o ~ '
O ~ ~ ~^' ~ ~ I b~:~rn~ f ~' um ~ '~ ` t` m ~nm1 ~~'In~ ~~m I
m ~ I I I I ~ ~ nr- o%z .I = Ocn ~~I~oD b I o ~~ i m' ~~!'` I f
If ~ II I i I I ,II N;p 111°~ ~o ~ in `D > ~~~[~~~a) '0O 1
f -. ; I -. ~: N U O° ~nno „ II II II II II ~ o= m$gN:R Li I ~ ~ rz
y I r. ~ ~ I In iTN~O pi ~o II `N .p O~ m~ynrn°*. Qo
;_: ~I I I Gl ~C T- 1TC I u'; ro+ - pN~NNy ,,,m A ~ +°~,
' B~ N U D N I g
~' PI 51.0. 20+60.00 ft J` i , ~~ :5~~ '-' ~_ in~Oh~~wQN ~7.~r ~~~ ~~~4 ~ ,tr J3 r c
I I I I ~i ~ ~I ~' ~ 0'. I I''" ~ ± I ~; O ~ U $~ d OU~i mmmo :O ~ ' S ' {.;
~ . .. I i i$ ~ ~ W
I~ bl I .: I I I NS ~ I I I I I N~ N ~ r} '3 ~
. I !, :,
I ; ' ~ ~ ~ t ~ PI 15/0. 2/+DO 00 RT; I o, h ~ I . I 1 I i i I I ~ ~„ `~ 8 0~ ~;
~ ~ I EL' ~ 9~7 501 I t ~ ~ I I I ~ I ~ ~' .~ fit, ~~ i ' -
I ~,~. ~ #.
I ~ I~ j^I I I I I IW ~ I I I I_ ~ ~ ov,~~~oD~ ~ ~°
I I 1 f I ~- ~TA.21fi45.¢Q I I I inm :_, ,~ / ~
y ~ ~ © ':, I' ~ ~ I ~.. I II II 'I II II II ~ i5 1_•~~
I t I END GRA E- 1 'I t:;'
~ pll5to.= 2/~~d.000 ~' m i w N t.,o S
~I 1.~ ELI ~ 929.00 ~ ~ I ' `~ ~, IEL.c 930.6,(2 z,'!1 ~;~ ~ O~o~oNU~~ 7r/ /~'i
I v'li I I i i g,' ~ i I i I I ~p t I~ ~~~.a~N t~ + // I
I I a ~ 'I D. -Q W v ~ J ~ ~
m~
~~
~°
m
m
'/ !4./
• -_~ ~ _...-
~
rn . ..-
...
.......1

'~~
~
~. ~
mm
ml
r
r' t
c -
~ x n ?~n
' ~a~
~ ° r~
ymo;
N
F
~
Li
~
NO
~ VN
~ ~c Cl2 E
g~ ~~.
s~ >o a
f~ Sy
t
° ~ W
ss
yy°~ ~~ +
° ~
~ '
1 fll ~ Z
O IA
I
I
~ ~ ~
~'~ o
2b ~~
~N ~~ ,
i oll

~,

$ In
my
n
S ~ `~
a

6'-5' r ~ I
I

6'-5'
8?
~g
g
$

rr

rr
~
Orn i
U ~
O
^~i ~
~~o
o -I
__ r
I
`.
IY Il'
t
15~~~
~~ D~ r
rn~ ~
~ ~ N ~w
/~ ~ ~ .
~ s
~\ ~ Z
rap / , ~ _ U5 g, ~' ~
~ ~ N54'S)17Er
/ r Z
~"'' ~ ~
'rib4~6~ ANN }.- ...
btl mD~ '1....,
< ..,
.. nNw
s
~~~,-
m ~
Np,m
>Q GNU ~~~
~,~,; c~ ~~ g~~ ~~8 20f00
.a o ~ ~~1 ~ L~~
l/, (y1 gOej r2wyl
A 5 rn Nfl
~A ~~ x /
I
I ~ ,'
~ nuu, 'imn 7
I
1 ~ ~AC ~~~ ,~ l
Il~ , 4' I~
I END CUT DITCH ~ ~+ -; STA. !#9 00 I
,4282 c~ ° I
OD RT
~ A! Sf
~ ~ ~ ~NQ} TIP
22+OO
P OJEGT 13
U ~ N .~
;, ~
'
/
/
z., -. ?
~
ti
~ o
N .
.
p.
' , . i
f f
'dtl ° o
N j Li ~ 9 0 I I
Et,= 931.3'! I ry '
S Z ~, `
,, rn~~<
I
I ~ j ~ I 1 ~~
~
~
t II 1 m i ~ d~ / ly-
~ ~.',Z _ry
...,1.~~ o
(} ' ~
l
I
: ,
I I ~ I I t I I ~ I
I
~ I •I
\~
~
~' _
/~ ~ 1
' N
r
~ . I '.
I O m ,n M ~
J / S ~
\
~ ,)( ~.,~ ~ * u
.
.' 1. rn. I ~ ~
I. + n, / 7 O O

.
III
~

~ ! ~ ~
N

- x'

O

,
I /
`/~ / ~

o

P ~ N

N
W i ~
' ~ ' ' a
p ~ vv em~ m ~ ," ~~ ~~~ `~ *
`, w
N
I I I 1 I ~ ~ ~~
I I
I
~ ~L ' :
D 1 I I
i I o pp
Yg
X xl 0~ =
~+ j } Y S'
~
r, N ~
~ .A ~
t
I I III
~ , I I 4 0 t
~.v? t ~ N v
tl '
1
I I I I ~ ~ / ~ A
i
'
I I
I
I G i r'
I ~
I
I
l

I
I
: : I I
,

I
1
I

~
o

~

K
•

N

a

x

O
1 ~ ~
1 m
N 1
_ f I I } ~
}
__. -I
....... { ~ ..
i
~ ~
~O ~O
~ OD ~O I ~p ~ ~O ~ ~O
I
I O ~ O i ~ ~ O I O
I I I ~ O i O
L. -- _- O I
I O I
_!
~-- o
I om
moo ~
~ y n r`
his tUO
W c~~°;
0
_s
m -' ~
'mm m
A o ~
iii i ~~
`"~° ~C
~ii~'y ~
~bYr ~~
~~
~£
m
ss~
0
m~
G'

z
~e~y\Xsc\64282 _rdy_ I.pl.dgn

Xsc\b42B2_rdy_Ixpl.dgn

282_rdy_Ixpl.dgn ~,~~„

\Xec\b4282_r dy_ixpl.dgn

Xac\64282_rdy_Ixpl.dg~

ac\b42B2_rdy_Ixpl.dgn
~:i:f.'1,:.11 ~,;,..Aiii"l,..x. y.; ~ ~ f~, ~_.~' ;~-}.:~.. t , '',.. f L~: E, ~C7'~~1,' ~.' ~~.!;C7. ~ I~''.-~ ;'. ....~... ..., i_., ~Q ~ '!, ~ r.C7..I"I~~ii ~.' i ~. I ~'.J..~, ~i,.. ~' i:.1~i...._
~i4i .IP ;~tl~~~t"~`11 ,II I ~ ~ l ~ !pl ~ I I'I I I i I ~ I C_,l 11 ~ , .(y i {~~ ,, ;. ~ ~ F I~
f ~ + ii
gal I ~:~~ ; ;,~;11~ t~, i !~_ ~_ I ~ ~,' I,, ~ ,~ ~p ,~ , ~ :.. ~
{.
'..:
.. ~ !, ~ '»

\Xsc\b4282_rdy_IxpLdgn _ __

t
NC 66
Stokes County
Bridge No. 54 over Pinch Gut Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRSTP-0066(1)
State Project No. 8.1641101
WBS No. 33622.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-4282
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
to r ~, .. , i
~~ 4 _ r
x ..,. s

PDEA-0F~1C: u.:..., _„z i ~~iVaROtlNif NT
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
.q.~ ~ ~~~
DATE Gregory J. Thorpe .D.
Environmental anagement Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
D TE ohn F. Sullivan III, P.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
~ ~

NC 66
Stokes County
Bridge No. 54 over Pinch Gut Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRSTP-0066(1)
State Project No. 8.1641101
WBS No. 33622.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-4282
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
April 2005
Document Prepared by:
Mulkey Engineers and Consultants
~Q®~~
C~C~ea~~ ~
_~_ ~ -
Date . A. Bissett, Jr., PE
Branch Manager
~ `
- i - o~ ~~,~-~
Date amela R. Williams
Project Manager
$~ ~~~~,
$ 14842 0
~ o
~ ooooaoo ~
00 F~ "S ` JO
000©ouo q O (,~ OCS~,~`~ J~OJ
For the North Carolina Department of Transportation
Date Brian Yam to, PE
Consultant Engineering Unit Head

PROJECT COMMITMENTS
NC 66
Stokes County
Bridge No. 54 over Pinch Gut Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRSTP-0066(1)
State Project No. 8.1641101
WBS No. 33622.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-4282
In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit No. 23 Conditions, the General Nationwide Permit
Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency Conditions,
NCDOT's Guidelines for Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters,
Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for Contract Construction, General Certification
Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of Certification, the following special commitments
have been agreed to by NCDOT:
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
• A re-survey for the James spinymussel will be performed during the 2006 survey window
from the end of the previous survey downstream to Big Creek prior to project
construction.
A re-survey for the small-anthered bittercress will be performed during the 2006 survey
window prior to project construction.
Division Engineer
• A moratorium for in-stream construction activities will be in place from May 1 to July 15
due to the smallmouth bass fishery in the project area.
• "Guidelines for Construction of Highway Improvements Adjacent to or Crossing Trout
Waters in North Carolina" (October 27, 1992) will be adhered to throughout the life of
this project.
Hydraulics Unit /Structures
• No piers will be placed in Pinch Gut Creek.
• Stormwater will be designed to be carried across the bridge (no deck drain over the
stream) and diverted through grass-lined ditches, vegetated buffers or directed to a storm
water collection system.
Apri12005
Categorical Exclusion
Green Sheet
Page 1 of 1

NC 66
Stokes County
Bridge No. 54 over Pinch Gut Creek
Federal-Aid Project No. BRSTP-0066(1)
State Project No. 8.1641101
WBS No. 33622.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-4282
INTRODUCTION: The replacement of Bridge No. 54 is included in the North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 2004-2010 Transportation Improvement Program
(T.I.P.) and in the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location of the bridge is
shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is
classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion."
I. PURPOSE AND NEED
The NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate that Bridge No. 54 has a sufficiency
rating of 46.6 out of a possible 100 and is considered structurally deficient. Replacement of this
inadequate structure will result in safer and more efficient traffic operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Bridge No. 54 over Pinch Gut Creek is located on NC 66 in Stokes County, approximately 12
miles (19 kilometers) northwest of Danbury. NC 66 is classified as a rural major collector by the
statewide functional classification system. It connects NC 89 east of Westfield southward to NC
65 in Rural Hall.
Land use in the project area is rural in nature, primarily consisting of single-family residential
and agricultural properties. There is no immediate development anticipated within the
surrounding area.
The 2005 estimated average daily traffic (ADT) volume is 330 vehicles per day (vpd). The
projected ADT is 550 vpd by the design year 2030. The percentages of truck traffic are 2% dual
tired vehicles (DUALS) and 1%truck-tractor semi trailer (TTST). The speed limit on NC 66 is
not posted in the vicinity of Bridge No. 54; therefore, a statuary speed limit of 55 miles per hour
(mph) { 90 kilometers per hour (km/h) } applies.
Bridge No. 54 was built in 1923. It is a two-lane facility with an approximate roadway width of
20 feet (6 meters). The bridge has three spans and totals 97 feet (29 meters) in length. The deck
and railings of the superstructure are composed of reinforced concrete. The substructure is
composed of reinforced concrete abutments and reinforced concrete round nose post and web.
The bridge deck is approximately 18 feet (5.4 meters) from crown to streambed. Bridge No. 54
is not presently posted for single vehicle or TTST. Bridge No. 54 provides for farm equipment
passage underneath the structure.

The approach roadway is a two-lane facility with two 8.5-foot (2.6-meter) travel lanes and 4-foot
(1.2-meter) grass shoulders. Approximately 160 feet (49 meters) west of Bridge No. 54 the
approach roadway is on curve with a radius of approximately 310 feet (95 meters) and a safe
speed of 30 mph (50 km/h). Approximately 280 feet (85 meters) east of Bridge No. 54 the
approach roadway is on curve with a radius of approximately 250 feet (85 meters) and a safe
speed of 30 mph (50 km/h).
There is no evidence of overhead or buried utilities in the vicinity of the existing bridge.
Approximately six school buses cross Bridge No. 54 daily.
No accidents were reported in the project area during the period from January 2000 to December
2002.
This section of NC 66 in Stokes County is not part of a designated bicycle route and is it not
listed in the T.I.P. as needing incidental bicycle accommodations.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The recommended replacement structure is a bridge approximately 135 feet (40.5 meters) in
length. The existing vertical clearance will be maintained and provide for farm equipment
passage underneath the structure. A minimum 0.3 percent grade is recommended to facilitate
bridge deck drainage. The new bridge will provide two 11-foot (3.3-meter) lanes, with 4-foot
(1.2-meter) shoulders (Figure 3). The shoulders may be widened to accommodate drainage. The
length of the new structure may increase or decrease as necessary to accommodate peak flows as
determined by a detailed hydrologic analysis during the final design phase.
The approach roadway will provide two 11-foot (3.3-meter) lanes with 6-foot (1.8-meter) grass
shoulders (Figure 3).
B. Build Alternatives
Three build alternatives were studied for this project. They are described below.
Alternative A (Preferred) replaces Bridge No. 54 at the existing location (Figure 2). During
construction, traffic will be detoured off-site along the following route: SR 1210 (Brown
Mountain Road), SR 1215 (Pell Road), and SR 1214 (Jackson Road). The proposed detour route
is approximately 5.2 miles (8.4 kilometers) in length.
Alternative B replaces Bridge No. 54 at the existing location.(Figure 2A). During construction,
traffic will be maintained by a single lane temporary onsite detour located just downstream of the
existing bridge. The detour structure will be approximately 110 feet (33 meters) in length.

The proposed temporary detour structure will provide one 9-foot (2.7-meter) lane with 3-foot
(l.0-meter) shoulders. The detour approach roadway will provide one 9-foot (2.7-meter) lane
with 3-foot (1.0-meter) grass shoulders. Alternative B is approximately 0.20 mile (0.30
kilometer) in length. Alternative B was not selected as the preferred alternative because it
requires a temporary structure. Use of a temporary structure will increase construction time and
environmental impacts.
Alternative C replaces Bridge No. 54 on new alignment just downstream of the existing bridge
(Figure 2B). During construction, traffic will be maintained on the existing roadway and
structure. Alternative C is approximately 0.22 mile (0.35 kilometer) in length and provides a
design speed of 40 mph (60 km/h) on the approach curves to the bridge. The proposed approach
curve from the south will tie to an existing curve with a 30 mph (50 km/h) design speed.
Alternative C was not selected as the preferred alternative because the new alignment has more
environmental impacts and is less economical than Alternative A.
C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Study
The "do-nothing" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not
desirable because of the traffic service and community connectivity provided by NC 66 and
Bridge No. 54.
Investigation of the existing structure by the Bridge Maintenance Unit indicates that
"rehabilitation" of this bridge is not feasible because of its age and deteriorated condition.
D. Preferred Alternative
Alternative A is the preferred alternative. This alternative replaces the bridge at the existing
location, which eliminates the need for horizontal curves on the bridge and provides better sight
distance across the bridge. It also minimizes environmental impacts and construction time, and is
more economical than other alternatives. The bridge will be widened to accommodate drainage.
A cored slab bridge is anticipated and no piers will be placed in the water. An off-site detour will
be provided along SR 1210 (Brown Mountain Road), SR 1215 (Pell Road), and SR 1214
(Jackson Road). This alternative can be constructed in one season if it is let for construction in
November.
The Division Engineer concurs with Alternative A as the preferred.
E. Anticipated Design Exception
A design exception for the existing horizontal curves will be required. A statuary speed limit of
55 mph (90 km/h) applies in the project area. The existing approach curves have a design speed
of approximately 30 mph (50 km/h). Due to the existing terrain restriction, additional
environmental impacts, excessive construction costs, and no accidents in the project area,
changes to the horizontal alignment are not justified to increase the design speed of the approach
curves to 55 mph (90 km/h).

IV. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs, based on 2004 prices are as follows:
Alternative A
(Preferred) Alternative B Alternative C
Structure Removal (Existing) $ 17,480 $ 17,480 $ 17,480
Proposed Structure 283,500 283,500 283,500
Roadway Approaches 150,320 150,320 247,420
Temporary Detour Bridge 0 66,000 0
Detour Approaches 0 75,380 0
Miscellaneous and Mobilization 1 13,700 142,320 156,600
Engineering Contingencies 85,000 115,000 120,000
ROW/Const. Easements/LTtilities 33,700 54,100 56,300
TOTAL $683,700 $904,100 $881.,300
The estimated cost of the project as shown in the 2004-2010 Transportation Improvement
Program is $770,000, including $70,000 for right-of-way (ROW) and $700,000 for construction.
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
A. Methodology
Research was conducted prior to field investigation. Published resource information pertaining
to the project area was gathered and reviewed. Resources utilized in this preliminary
investigation of the project area include:
• Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle maps (Hanging Rock, Pilot Mountain)
• United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
quadrangle map (Hanging Rock, Pilot Mountain)
• Aerial photograph of project area (1 in = 100 ft)
• Natural Resource Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Stokes County, North Carolina
(1995)
Water resource information was obtained from publications posted on the World Wide Web by
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
(DWQ). Information concerning the occurrence of federally protected species in the study area
was obtained from the USFWS list of protected and candidate species (on-line list checked
3/28/05, last updated 2/25/03), and from the NC Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database of
rare species and unique habitats. NCNHP files were reviewed for documented occurrences of
state or federally listed species and locations of significant natural areas.

General natural resource surveys and federally protected species surveys were conducted along
the proposed alignment on August 2, 2001 and September 12, 2001, respectively. Water
resources were identified and their physical characteristics were recorded. Plant communities
and their associated wildlife were also identified and described. Terrestrial community
classifications generally follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible, and plant
taxonomy follows Radford et al. (1968). Vertebrate taxonomy follows Martof et al. (1980),
Potter et al. (1980), and Webster et al. (1985). Predictions regarding wildlife community
composition involved general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing vegetative
communities. Wildlife identification involved using a variety of observation techniques.
Techniques included qualitative habitat assessment based on vegetative communities, active
searching, and identification of characteristic wildlife signs (sounds, scat, tracks, and burrows).
Cursory surveys of aquatic organisms were also conducted. Organisms captured during these
searches were identified and then released.
For the purposes of this document, the following terms are used concerning the limits of natural
resources investigations. "Project area" denotes the area bounded by the proposed right-of-way
limits along the full length of the project alignment. "Project vicinity" is defined as an area
extending 0.5 mi (0.8 km) on all sides of the project area, and "Project region" denotes an area
equivalent in size to the area represented by a 7.5 minute USGS quadrangle map. "Study area"
denotes the area that was covered during the natural resource surveys.
B. Physiography and Soils
Stokes County lies primarily in the Piedmont physiographic region. A small range of mountains,
the Sauratown Mountain Range, is in the central part of the county. Elevations in the county
range from 2,579 ft (786 m) at Moore's Knob, to 590 ft (180 m) along the eastern border where
the Dan River leaves the county. The project area lies in the Dan River drainage in the
northwestern part of the county. Project area elevations average 940 ft (287 m).
There are three soil types located in the project area. A brief description of each soil type is
provided.
• Masada sandy clay loam 8 to 15 percent slopes eroded (MaC2) is a well drained soil
found on high stream terraces across the Piedmont. Permeability is moderate and depth
to the seasonal high water table is greater than 72 inches (183 centimeters). The surface
is a yellowish brown sandy clay loam about 10 inches (25.4 centimeters) thick and the
shrink-swell potential in the subsoil is moderate. The greatest limitation is severe erosion
that has removed a large amount of topsoil combined with the moderate slope. The
Capability Unit is IVe. Masada soils are not hydric.
• Pacolet sandy clay loam 15 to 25 percent slopes eroded (PcD2) is a very deep and well
drained soil found on side slopes and very narrow ridges throughout the Piedmont. It has
a surface layer of 8-inch (20-centimeter) yellowish red sandy clay loam. The depth to
bedrock is more than 60 inches (152 centimeters). This soil has moderate permeability
and low shrink-swell potential. The Capability Unit is VIe. Pacolet soils are not hydric.
• Riverview and Toccoa soils 0 to 4 percent slopes occasional flooding (RtA) map unit
consists of very deep and well drained soils found on floodplains throughout the

Piedmont with the Toccoa series positioned closer to the stream. Permeability is
moderate in the Riverview series and moderately rapid in the Toccoa series and depth to
the seasonal high water table is between 36 to 60 inches (91 to 152 centimeters) below
the surface. The surface layers for both soils are 8-inch (20-centimeter) thick dark brown
loam variations and the subsoil has a low shrink-swell potential. The main limitations for
this map unit are wetness and flooding and the Capability Unit is IIw. Although present
on the floodplain, these soils are not present on the North Carolina Hydric Soils List
(NRCS 1995).
C. Water Resources
1. Waters Impacted
Water resources within the study area are located in the Roanoke River Basin. There is one
water resource in the project study area. NC 66 crosses Pinch Gut.Creek, a tributary to Dan
River. Pinch Gut Creek in not on the 303d list.
2. Water Resource Characteristics
Pinch Gut Creek at NC 66 is approximately 30 ft (9 m) wide and is approximately 1 ft (0.3 m)
deep. The creek has substrate composed primarily of sand, gravel, and cobble. The drainage area
of Pinch Gut Creek at the proposed crossing is 11.2 square miles (29.1 square kilometers).
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the DWQ, which reflects water quality
conditions and potential resource usage. The classification for Pinch Gut Creek (DWQ Index
No. 22-9-1, 9/1/57) is C Tr. Class C refers to waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and
survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. The Tr (trout waters)
subclassification is a supplemental classification intended to protect freshwaters for natural trout
propagation and survival of stocked trout. No waters classified as High Quality Water (HQW),
Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 mile
(1.6 kilometers) of the project study area.
The Basinwide Monitoring Program, managed by DWQ, is part of an ongoing ambient water
quality monitoring program that addresses long-term trends in water quality. The program
monitors ambient water quality by sampling at fixed sites for selected benthic macroinvertebrate
organisms, which are sensitive to water quality conditions. Samples are evaluated on the number
of taxa present of intolerant groups [Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT)] and a taxa
richness (EPT S) is calculated. A biotic index value is also. calculated for the sample that
summarizes tolerance data for all species in each collection. The two rankings are given equal
weight in final site classification. The biotic index and taxa richness values primarily reflect the
effects of chemical pollution and are a poor measure of the effects of such physical pollutants as
sediment. There are no benthic monitoring stations on Pinch Gut Creek in or above the project
area.
Point source discharge is defined as "a discharge that enters surface waters through a pipe, ditch
or any other well-defined point of discharge. The term applies to wastewater and stormwater

discharges from a variety of sources" (DWQ, 2001). 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. No registered
point source dischargers are located in or directly upstream from the project study area.
Non-point source discharge refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater,
snowmelt, or atmospheric deposition (DWQ, 1998). Many types of land-use activities serve as
sources of non-point source pollution, including land development, construction, crop
production, animal feeding lots, failing septic systems, landfills, roads, and parking lots.
Sediment and nutrients are major pollution-causing substances associated with non-point source
pollution. Other sources of pollution include fecal coliform bacteria, heavy metals, oil and
grease, and any other substance that may be washed off the ground or removed from the
atmosphere and carried into surface waters. The major non-point sources in the project study
area appear to be from crop production and road runoff.
3. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
a. GeneralImpacts
Impacts to water resources in the project area are likely to result from activities associated with
project construction, such as clearing and grubbing on streambanks, riparian canopy removal,
instream construction, fertilizers and pesticides in revegetation, and pavement installation.
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. Impacts can be further reduced by limiting instream activities
and revegetating stream banks immediately following the completion of grading.
b. Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal
Dropping any portion of the structure into waters of the United States will be avoided unless
there is no other practical method of removal. In the event that no other practical method is
feasible, aworst-case scenario is assumed for calculations of fill entering waters of the United
States. The maximum potential temporary fill associated with demolition procedures is
estimated to be 203 cubic yards (155 cubic meters). Because of concerns regarding potential
sedimentation resulting from demolition of the bridge, a turbidity curtain will be used when
applicable to contain and- minimize sedimentation in the water. The resident engineer will
coordinate with appropriate agencies prior to demolition and removal of the existing bridge.
D. Biotic Resources
1. Plant Communities
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.
Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community
classifications. 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.
a. Disturbed/Maintained Community
This community is located on both sides of NC 66 and SR 1467 (Smith Road), in abandoned
fields (south side of SR 1467), and along power line clearings and maintained road access areas
located in the project area. It encompasses habitats that have recently been or are currently
impacted by human disturbance. Because of mowing and periodic clearing, this community is
kept in a constant state of early succession.
The Disturbed/Maintained Community is made up of a diverse community of grasses, herbs, and
vines including fescue (Festuca spp.), panic grasses (Panicum spp.), foxtail grass (Setaria spp.),
goldenrod (Solidago spp.), knotweed (Pol}~gonum spp.), pokeweed (Phytolacca americana),
ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), heal-all (Prunella spp.), sunflowers (Helianthus spp.),
coreopsis (Coreopsis spp.j, beggar ticks (Bidens spp.), tick-trefoils (Desmodium spp.), partridge
pea (Cassia fasciculata), white snakeroot (Eupatorium rugosum), evening primrose (Oenothera
biennis), Queen Anne's Lace (Daucus carota), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica),
poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), wild
grape (Vitis spp.), asters (Aster spp.), Joe-pye-weed (Eupatorium fistulosum), ironweed
(Vernonia noveboracensis), morning glory (Ipomoea spp.), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans),
and cross-vine (Bignonia capreolata). Staghorn sumac (Rhus typhina), blackberry (Rebus spp.),
and saplings of sweet gum (Liguidambar st}•raciflua), river birch (Betula nigra), sycamore
(Platanus occidentalis), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) were also present. Transitions
of this community with other communities (upland forest and floodplain forest) also exist.
b. Fooodplain Forest
A floodplain forest community consisting predominantly of river birch, spicebush (Lindera
ben<,oin), microstegium, and trumpet creeper exists east of NC 66 and south of Pinch Gut Creek.
This community lies in the floodplain of Pinch Gut Creek and its confluence with a major
tributary that is located just east of the project area. The floodplain forest community most
closely resembles aPiedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest as described in Schafale and
Weakley (1990).
Dominant woody vegetation in the floodplain forest community includes river birch, sycamore,
tulip poplar, black walnut (Juglans nigra), silky dogwood (Corms amomum), tag alder (Alms
serrulata), hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana), spicebush, flowering dogwood (Corms florida),
black cherry (Prunes serotina), and yellowroot (Xanthorhiza simplicissima). Vine species

consist of poison ivy, trumpet creeper. Virginia creeper, greenbrier (Smilax spp.), and wild grape.
The herb community is composed of microstegium (Microstegium vimineum), jewelweed
(Impatiens capensis), panic grasses, false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), Christmas fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides), knotweed, marsh dayflower (Murdannia keisak), dayflower
(Commelina communis), and water-horehound (Lt~copus virginicus).
c. Upland Forest
The upland forest community is located along steep slopes and ridges on the west side of NC 66,
south of Pinch Gut Creek. This community most closely resembles a Chestnut Oak Forest as
described in Schafale and Weakley (1990). This community is typically found in the Blue Ridge
region and is very rare in the Piedmont. However, Stokes County contains most of the few
examples of this community type in the North Carolina Piedmont (NCNHP, 1998).
The dominant canopy includes a mixture of rock chestnut oak (Quercus montana), northern red
oak (Quercus rubra), white oak (Quercus alba), hickories (Carya spp.), tulip poplar, red maple
(Ater rubrum), and black gum (Nyssa sylvatica). A few white (Pinus strobus) and Virginia
(Pinus virginiana) pines were scattered in the open canopy areas. The subcanopy and shrub
species include chestnut oak saplings, flowering dogwood, American chestnut (Castanea
dentata) saplings, sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), hornbeam, basswood (Tilia americana),
hop-hornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), cucumber tree (Magnolia
ac•uminata), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), American holly (Ilex opaca), maple-leaf viburnum
(Viburnum acerifolium), mountain laurel (Kalmia lati folic), smooth hydrangea (Hydrangea
arborescens), and blueberry (Vaccinium spp.).
The herbaceous and vine components include tick-trefoils, maidenhair fern (Adiantum pedatum),
spleenwort (Asplenium spp.), Christmas fern, clubmoss (Lycopodium spp.), violets (Viola spp.),
poison ivy, green-brier, Virginia creeper, and wild grape.
d. Agriculture
Croplands (tobacco) exist along both sides of NC 66 at the intersection of SR 1467 (Smith
Road).
2. Wildlife
Maintained/disturbed communities adjacent to forested tracts provide rich ecotones for foraging,
while the forests provide forage and cover. Common mammals associated with ecotones and
upland forests are least shrew (Cryptotis parva), northern short-tailed shrew (Blarina
brevicauda), hispid cottonaat (Sigmodon hispidus), eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus
floridanus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), white-tailed deer
(Odocoileus virginianus), and Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana).

Common bird species may include northern mockingbird (Mimus poh~glottos), northern cardinal
(Cardinalis cardinulis), Carolina chickadee (Poecile carolinensis), tufted titmouse (Baeolohhus
bicolor), European starling (Sturnus >>ulguris), and common grackle (Quiscalus quiscula).
The agriculture community also provides good habitat for mourning dove (Zenaidu macrouru)
and northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus).
3. Aquatic Communities
This community consists of Pinch Gut Creek. Aquatic insects found in this community from the
cursory survey included mayflies (family Heptageniidae), stoneflies (families Perlidae and
Capniidae), caddisflies (family Hydropsychidae), craneflies (Tipula spp.), dragonflies (Boyeria
spp.) and hellgrammites (Corydalus cornutus). Crayfish (order Decapoda) were also found in
this community.
4. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
a. Terrestrial Communities
Impacts to terrestrial communities 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 1 summarizes
potential losses to these communities resulting from project construction. Calculated impacts to
terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance of each community present in the study
area. Estimated impacts are derived based on the project lengths where they intersect with the
natural communities, and the entire proposed right-of-way width of 100 feet (30 meters) for the
bridge replacement. However, project construction often does not require the entire right-of-
way; therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
Table 1. Estimated Areas of Impact to Terrestrial Communities
Community Area of Impact
acres (hectares)
Disturbed/Maintained 1.66 (0.672)
Flood lain Forest 0.14 (0.057)
U land Forest 0.28 (0.113)
A riculture 0.08 (0.032)
Total Im act 2.16 (0.874)
b. Aquatic Communities
Impacts to the aquatic community of Pinch Gut Creek will result from the replacement of Bridge
No. 54. 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 will be minimized by strict adherence to Best
Management Practices (BMPs).

The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) requests that a moratorium for
in-stream activities be in place from May 1 to July 15 due to the smallmouth bass fishery in the
project area. The NCWRC also requests that listed species (James River Spinymussel, hog
sucker, and riverweed darter, etc.) be thoroughly reviewed. Bridge No. _54 is approximately 1400
feet (426 meters) west of the confluence of Pinch Gut Creek and Big Creek and approximately
6.2 miles (9.9 kilometers) west of the confluence of Big Creek and the Dan River. Dan River is
a NCWRC Priority Aquatic Conservation Area.
E. Special Topics
1. Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "waters of the United States," as
defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CFR) Part 328.3. 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.
Jurisdictional wetlands are evaluated based on criteria established in the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987) and Guidance,for
Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina (Division of Environmental Management,
1995), and are classified based on the classification scheme of Cowardin et al. (1979). There are
no wetlands in the project area.
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are calculated based on the linear feet of the stream
located within the proposed right-of-way. Approximately 301inear feet (9 linear meters) of
Pinch Gut Creek may be temporarily impacted by the proposed bridge replacement.
2. 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 23 [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.

(2) That the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
This project will also require 401 Water Quality General Certification No. 3403 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 quality 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.
If no practical alternative exists to remove the current bridge other than to drop it into the water,
prior to removal of debris off-site, fill related to demolition procedures will need to be
considered during the permitting process. A worst-case scenario will be assumed with the
understanding that if there is any other practical method available, the bridge will not be dropped
into the water. Permitting will be coordinated such that any permit needed for bridge
construction will also address issues related to bridge demolition.
3. Mitigation
The COE has adopted through the Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ) a wetland mitigation
policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of
this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of waters of
the United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the
CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts,
reducing impacts over time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these
three aspects (avoidance, minimization and compensatory mitigation) must be considered
sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts
to waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE, in determining "appropriate
and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures will be appropriate to
the scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and
logistics in light of overall project purposes.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the adverse
impacts to waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required through
project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on decreasing the
footprint of the proposed project through the reduction to median widths, right-of-way widths,
fill slopes and/or road shoulder widths.
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to waters of the
United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is
recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and

every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for
unavoidable adverse impacts that remain after all appropriate and practicable minimization has
been required. Compensatory actions often include restoration, creation, and enhancement of
waters of the United States, specifically wetlands. Such actions should be undertaken in areas
adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site.
Compensatory mitigation is required for those projects authorized under Nationwide Permits that
result in the fill or alteration of:
• More than 0.10 ac (0.04 ha) of wetlands
• More than 150 ft (45.7 m) of streams
The impacts from this project do not meet the minimum mitigation thresholds. Therefore, no
mitigation requirement is anticipated; however, final permit/mitigation decisions rest with the
COE.
F. Rare and Protected Species
1. Federally Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora 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 (USFWS). Other species may receive additional protection under separate state
laws.
Plants and animals with a federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The USFWS lists three federally
protected species (Table 2) for Stokes County (on-line list checked 3/28/05, last updated
2/25/03).
Table 2. Federally Protected Species for Stokes County
C©nunon Name Scientific Name Status
James spinymussel Pleurobema collina Endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered
Small-anthered bittercress Cardamine micranthera Endangered
Note:
• "Endangered" denotes a species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Federally protected species descriptions and biological conclusions are provided below. A
review of the NCNHP database (list checked 3/28/05, last updated January 2004) of rare species
and unique habitats shows no occurrence of federally protected species within 1.0 mile (1.6 km)
of the project study area.

Pleurobema collina (James spinymussel)
Animal Family: Unionidae
Federally Listed: July 22, 1988
The James spinymussel is an oblong-shaped freshwater mussel believed to be endemic to the
upper James River system in Virginia and West Virginia. The adult shell reaches to 2 inches (5
centimeters) in length and has 0-6 short spines on each valve. This mussel inhabits stream sites
that vary in width from 10 to 75 feet (3 to 22.5 meters) and depth of 0.5 to 3 feet (.15 to 0.9
meters). It requires a slow to moderate water current with clean sand and cobble bottom
sediments. Reproduction is similar to that of other freshwater mussels, with known hosts to be
cyprinids such as bluehead chub (Nocomis leptocephalus), rosyside dace (Clinostomus
funduloides), blacknose dace (Rhinichth}'s atratulus), mountain redbelly dace (Phoxinus oreas),
rosefin shiner (Lythrurus ardens), satinfin shiner (Cyprinella analostana), and stoneroller
(Campostoma anomalum).
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Mussel surveys were conducted on August 1, 2002 by NCDOT biologists. The Pinch Gut
Creek crossing at NC 66 contains a natural levee and the substrate above and below the
bridge on NC 66 consists of mostly silt and sand, with some cobble, pebble and gravel with
slow to moderate current. Surveys were conducted by wading using a batiscope from
approximately 500 feet (152 meters) downstream to 250 feet (76 meters) upstream of the
project crossing. No freshwater mussels were found. Given the survey results, it is apparent
that James spinymussel does not occur in the project footprint. The North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) does not list a known population up or downstream
for James spinymussel. The USFWS requests that an additional survey be conducted from
the previous survey stopping point downstream to Big Creek prior to project construction.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower)
Plant Family: Asteraceae
Federally Listed: May 7, 1991
Schweinitz's sunflower, usually 3 to 6 feet (0.9 to 1.8 meters) tall, is a perennial herb with one to
several fuzzy purple stems growing from a cluster of carrot-like tuberous roots. Leaves are 2 to
7 inches (5 to 18 centimeters) long, 0.4 to 0.8 inch (1 to 2 centimeter) wide, lance-shaped, and
usually opposite, with upper leaves alternate. Leaves feel like felt on the underside and rough,
like sandpaper, on the upper surface. The edges of the leaves tend to curl under. Flowers are
yellow composites, and generally smaller than other sunflowers in North America. Flowering
and fruiting occur mid-September to frost. This plant grows in clearings and along the edges of
upland woods, thickets and pastures. It is also found along roadsides, power line clearings, old
pastures, and woodland openings. It prefers full sunlight or partial shade, but is intolerant of full
shade.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT

Potential habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower occurs along roadsides, power line right-of-
ways, and field edges throughout the project area. The project study area was evaluated
for potential Schweinitz's sunflower habitat and extensive field surveys were performed in
September 2001. No populations were found within the area of potential impact. The
NCNHP's database of rare species and unique habitats was checked on July 25, 2001. No
populations of this species have been reported in the project area. Therefore, the proposed
project is not anticipated to result in an adverse impact to this species.
Carda~nine rnicranthera (Small-anthered bittercress)
Plant Family: Brassicaceae
Federally Listed: September 21, 1989
Small-anthered bittercress is a slender, erect, perennial herb of the mustard family, usually with
one, but occasionally with multiple, stems, either simple or branched, 8 to 16 inches (20 to 41
centimeters) tall. Leaf edges have shallow, rounded teeth. Bottom leaves are lobed, 0.4 to 0.8
inch (1 to 2 centimeters) long, and 0.2 to 0.24 inch (0.5 to .06 centimeter) wide. Upper leaves
are alternate and usually unlobed, 0.4 to 0.6 inch (1 to 1.5 centimeters) long, and wedge-shaped,
with the narrow point at the stem. Reduced leaves (bracts) occur at the base of the flowers,
which have four small white petals and six stamens with small round anthers. Flowering and
fruiting occur in April and May. This plant grows primarily in seeps and wet rock crevices of
streambanks adjoining sandbars, floodplain depressions, and moist woods near small streams
fully to partially shaded by trees and shrubs.
Small-anthered bittercress is endemic to the Dan River drainage in Stokes County. Historically,
it was also known from Forsyth County.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
Potential habitat for small-anthered bittercress occurs throughout the project area.
NCDOT biologists conducted a field survey for this species on Apri130, 2002. No
specimens of this plant were found. The USFWS recommends an additional survey at the
appropriate time of year prior to construction to ensure that this species have not relocated
to the project area since the previous survey.
2. Federal Species of Concern
Federal species of concern (FSC) 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 will be included for consideration. Federal Species of Concern are
defined as species that are under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient
information to support listing. The NCNHP on-line database was researched (list checked
3/25/05, last updated January 2004) for the listings provided in Table 3.

Table 3. Federal Species of Concern for Stokes County
Common Name Scientific Name NC
Status Habitat
,Present
Orangefin Madtom Noturus gilberti E Yes
Diana Fritillary Butterfly Spe~~eria Jana SR Yes
Butternut Juglans cinerea WSA No
Sweet Pinesap Monotropsis odorata SR-T Yes
Green Floater Lrismigona subviridis E Yes
Rustyside sucker Thoburnia harniltoni E No
Note:
E An Endangered species is one whose continued existence as a viable component of the state's flora or fauna is
determined to be in jeopardy.
SR A Significantly Rare species is not listed as "E", "T", or "SC", but exists in the state in small numbers and has been
determined to need monitoring.
-T Throughout -The species is rare throughout its range.
Species with NC status of E, T, or SC receive limited protection under appropriate state laws, SR and W do not.
WSA Watchlist
A review of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats shows no occurrence of
FSC species within 1.0 mi (1.6 km) the project study area.
3. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
No federal threatened or endangered species have been found in the project area, and none are
expected to be impacted. An additional survey for the small-anthered bittercress will be
performed prior to project construction. A survey for the James spinymussel will be performed
from the end of the previous survey downstream to Big Creek prior to project construction.
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, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance Section 106, codified at 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 to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable
opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
B. Historic Architecture
A field survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) was conducted on May 17, 2002. All
structures over 50 years of age within the APE were photographed, and later reviewed by the
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO). In a concurrence form dated October 1,
2002 the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurred that there are no historic

architectural resources either listed on or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places within the APE. A copy of the concurrence form is included in the Appendix.
C. Archaeology
The SHPO, in a memorandum dated March 20, 2002 stated that there are prehistoric
archaeological sites (31 SK110 and 31 SK111) located within one-half mile north of the project
area in similar topographic settings. The project site was surveyed and one previously
unrecorded archaeological site, and one isolated find were identified, sites 31 SK219/219* and
31SK220 were recommended as not eligible. An archaeological survey report was prepared and
submitted to the HPO. SHPO in a memorandum dated October 21, 2004, concurred that
31 SK220 is not eligible for listing under criterion D. SHPO, also, concurred that Site 31 SK219
and 219~`~ is located out of the APE and no further archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project. Copies of the SHPO memorandums are included in the Appendix.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate bridge
will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of substantial
environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No
substantial change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition will be
limited. No relocations of residents or businesses are expected with implementation of the
proposed alternative.
In compliance with Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low Income Populations) a review was conducted to determine
whether minority or low-income populations were receiving disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental impacts as a result of this project. The investigation determined
the project would not disproportionately impact any minority or low-income populations.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national,
state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.

The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to
consider the potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land acquisition and
construction projects. Prime and important farmland soils are defined by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS). Since the proposed bridge will be replaced at the existing location
the Farmland Protection Policy does not apply.
The project is located in Stokes County, which has been determined to be in compliance with the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93 are not applicable, because the
proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is not anticipated to create any
adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included the regional
emission analysis (if applicable) and a project level CO analysis is not required.
The traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project. There are no receptors
located in the immediate project area. The project's impact on noise and air quality will not be
substantial.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If vegetation is disposed
of by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations
of the North Carolina State Implementation Plan for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC
2D.0520. This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise (23
CFR Part 772) and for air quality (1990 CAA-1 and NEPA) and no additional reports are
required.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality, Groundwater Section and the North Carolina Division of
Solid Waste Management revealed no hazardous waste sites in the project area. A field
reconnaissance survey was performed and no underground storage tank (UST) sites were found
within the project area. If any unregulated USTs or any potential source of contamination is
discovered during right-of-way initial contacts with impacted property owners, then an
assessment will be conducted to determine the extent of any contamination at that time.
The drainage area of Pinch Gut Creek at the proposed crossing is 11.2 square miles (29.1 square
kilometers). Stokes County is currently participating in the National Flood Insurance Regular
Program. The project site on Pinch Gut Creek is located in an approximate flood hazard zone.
However, it is not anticipated that a floodway modification will be required since the bridge will
be an "in kind" replacement. Since the proposed bridge will be a structure similar in length and
waterway opening size, it is not anticipated that this project will have any substantial impact on
the existing floodplain or floodway. The Flood Hazard Boundary Map (Figure 5) shows the
approximate limits of the 100-year flood plain in the vicinity of the project.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental
effects will result from implementation of the project.

VIII. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Efforts were undertaken early in the planning process to contact local officials and involve them
in the project development. Scoping letters requesting comments on the proposed project were
sent to local officials as well as various agencies. Responses to the scoping letters are included
in the Appendix.
A citizen's informational meeting was held on October 28, 2003 at the Danbury Library to
review the preferred alternative and answer questions. Four citizens attended the workshop and
one comment sheet was received at the workshop. There was no opposition to Alternative A.
IX. COMMENTS FROM SLOPING LETTERS
Stokes County EmerQency Medical Service/Emer~ency Mana eg ment
Comments: Two EMS stations serve the project area. Station #2 would have an increased
distance of 0.6 mile for calls on the east side of the bridge. Station #3 would
have an increase of 1.4 miles for calls on the west side of the bridge.
Response: So noted.
Comment: Francisco Fire/Rescue and Double Creek Fire/Rescue handle fire department and
rescue squad services in the project area. Double Creek's primary response from
the east side of the bridge would be approximately 5.3 miles. Calls west of the
bridge would increase mileage by 3.5 miles. Francisco's primary response from
the west side of the bridge would be approximately 5.4 miles. Calls east of the
bridge would increase the response mileage by 7.6 miles.
Response: So noted.
Comment: The EMS situation does not appear to be unworkable. The additional response
burden placed upon the fire departments, both primary, and assisting, is of
concern.
Response: So noted.
All comments from other agencies, state and local officials are addressed elsewhere in this
document.

»-
• c
SR 1467
o t ~ ~
s
SR 1214
~ •
:i .,,

~
~ P P
~ S 1470
E
~z~ ~ =
,~ h
ride o. 5
~
a `.~-L
ss

i A~ Gt
~ ~ \

1
~
, ,.`
.
215 a
~ ~.
Pell Rd.
SR 1215 ~ ~
me O ~
o ° O
'~ ~ M ~
'
O ~ d,,, ,~ o
1 ~ j

/ --~
s9
d`° a
9 rho ,
,
9 r3 ~,
t2` \
• 9
~
a
Y ...~ p.
~
g 1 ~
~
•- - - - - - PROPOSED DETOUR ROUTE
N. CAAOU A
a
ft na ~ Sandy R
' Lswsonville
esttie
f ~ 1
~ Moor Prestonvilte ~
.
r b SWi •
1
ilot Mount n ~- J m ~ n S illard
G
~"08''~ 3
Nl
~ P `s
Mea s ~ g
x
°S T O K I ~ 63u
~ 'sr alts U 8 Walnut Pi a
;ro, 52 ~ re 1
ermmto
,~ _ S
5_
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
STOKES COUNTY
BRIDGE N0. 54 ON NC 66
OVER
PINCH GUT CREEK
8-4282
FIGURE 1

~s~
. ~ ~ `''~

v;.~,_~
'ice" '>1
~/ ~~
M
~' ~<~
f'
i ;~ ~ `... t v `~.
S ~ 4a'1 lyh d
< £; t~` ~~' `r .
. ~ ~._ ~ ~ .
~ ~r i ~.
s k~ ~ ^
~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ .~
x ~: ~
t wZ v. ` ~jv. :.
1 i ~~
t
t, t ""' ~.u e. .,.ti ., ~'
e„3~ o Y'w s''
~ to .~
x~~
r
.~~~ w ~.
n
~ ;ms
«
s
.
fy
• p
~~
t ~
L • Y
Z
r
~.y '~ ~`
ti 6
~ ~ , s
~
~~~

,
~
~L
.. Y

~''~'

:.~~:.
~`~ .%
~~`
.:F ~ p4.,
!~~ r ~t
R~ ~
~° ~
.~.
~, ~ .,~ -.
,. ¢'.
.:a~ ,
.~r+ ,r.
" ,t"s
~~ erg` :~'
~~ ~ ; {
~~ ~~, .
~- ,r~..

~i; s'
~
~ ~
~ i'
f ~ ~~
~
r ~, ;
i
~~ ~ ~
7 ~f. +
~
a Fj~ _ K
t.
.
K! ~ ~ ~ Y~ "`
,
y
~
Iw s f ~ ~
~ #
~yyM~ ::w.fy ?'. t~ ~,
. ~ -
4 ~~'~ ~~.~
~~ ~.. 5
f,L
~ ~ J'r

_ .. ~F ,qty
~~ .
; ~ A
h ~
kiM ~ F ~~.~

w
~ ~, .
._,~

e
s ~
~
....
Y„ ~
:~`

~= ~'' :
~

i
.' , _

s ~~

~~~ :
.
~ r .

~ r,r ~
~ ~~
~ ~ ~ ~~
-~ I
~r
~y'w
r, ~ w ~
~,~ ~~
~ ~ '~"~`
~, M ~ ~ ~ ~ + ,, ti its I
h~ ~ Ems. ~ Y ..'~ _ ' '
1
h ~ ~ ~ ~I
.~~ ~ .' S
~t ~ ~
~, »i ~~ '4
,~ ?~ ~ ~;.r~- ~ i ~ . - ,~
.,
~' ~.
M Z
^!~ ' •i III 1~ `I ~ ~ ~ ~{ 3 y `,
~'' iF. '.
1F i ~ s ~ -.
"~'~
s
. .
Y'.
~,
3'
~~ ~ ~rY~ r h:
~,, ~. ~ ~
~,
~ s ..x~ `
~.. ,`
~~ }~:~
r «.
~i
~` ~~~~ ~~
tz ~
~ , ~
~. ? ~~
`r
!tr } ~
w~..
~~ w N r ~
~~
I'~~ .r'
r~ .

~.
. --.
~ ~
N ~.,~ ~t

~
~
O
'$ -~
N
•o C .
Z ~, `
~ Z
H ~

~
~
~~ V
N~..~
~
~
F
w

~~--
r.-j
NO
= `Q
~
r~-j
NO ~
N W
O U~
~ O W N
0
(~ --- ---- ------------- ---- 0 ~ --- ---- ----------- ----- ~
N
O ~~
-~ N
O ~~
ma
'~ ~ O
~ dd
Q -- ~ E
~ c
~ ~
~ Z Q ~
~ Z V
~ U
~ ~
a. a
"
~ ~ c o ~ '~ 0 O
°p o ~ ~ ..
'O = c9 C9
N
~~
~~
0
W
H
Z
3
N
J
a
c~
H
E
O
a
1c
0
U
LL

M
M 0
~

~~
~~
~~
O~
Q ~
° O V~
a a ~ ~
C p y yoC
0
N o
N o
N o ~ g
VW
~
~ OC
~ N ~ JJ
Z
~
~ Q
O
F- y ~ J V DC
O
y 0
V W
D Q t~/f
~ Z
~
~ ~
sl

'F'.I.I~. I~ic~. x-4282 fridge Igo. 54 Doer Pinch ~t creek can I~T~ 66, Stakes +~~unty
Peder~~-~ir~ P~°€~ject ~It~. 5-t3~a(~ State Prc~jeet I~b~. 8.~411~1.
{~~: Y,
;~ $
=~,
T •,, r } .
- ;~
~ ~`.;9 -
~.`an~
~~, ~: e
4f~ OF'.. ~ ',•
~`~~-~ ~ ~,~ ; Sine ~~iev~~ cif brici~e.
~~:
_ ~'
_ ~~~ ~~.
IR1 ~ i~ ~~
~i~~~J
A. .R.`..3 V SJ

Y P
v
rr r A Cxq
~ Y O ~ i
°~a

p
° >E
°~
a`°CS s °~ ~, ~ m e EL
a$ E
B ~~~
N
F•• O ~ ¢ V) m N ~ ..r
O ~
~ W ~"'~ "J a ~ O 0 c C
~ ~ ~ ~ m
w '
eWa t Z rya ~~ a m ~
~ ~ Q ° Z ~ v m `~~io
a
~°
~
~
Z
J '
Z Z ~ ~E. p o. }~ W~ ~
U ~~ ~ -~.. ..- W .
,$
C
~E+0~8R
~'

Cal
p
~~
° p O .r _~'?""' ~ H ~
~ Z
W
~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~~~ ~ ~ S
o~EELL
° cF
~
W
~ ~w/
A
t W ~~"~ N ~' ~
~ C
_O CULL

x
o 0 .ny OZ S 6.1 ~
F
C}/ ~~jj
Z ~ li ~ F-1 ? C
~ w ~~09~
L ~ ~
O F Y
n
SfE
a
d
a ® g
~LLC v
~c4o~
~£
p E
ii~~
O
~m
oLL g
N t
i
F
°~~YE
e ~ E ~ m
~aoQ
~~o`sd
~ \ :;;; to ~ 1
•.._~ ~__ _ 01i
~.` \~` ~i~
/
/
` `
~``
~=i~~ o /
.;, :o .:
Q ~.: ~,.. _ .~.
..~___... J ~...: •.
//~o; x - a

Q~ O N
`\ v ~'
/~
.
gN10`~ ~ • N ...f
.
~i ~~- 1l
_. ~~ ~- t.
J c
~'
~
.
w
..
Qo ••~v::':~~ cc ;
~ ~ - =
.
~.
,
:•;
:,
'u°I : `` ` x r ~ i

. 1 ~ ~.•::•.-
~., ~,
::::~•~ x
b
•~
1 .
~. x
~
.
W ;, Z
,(`~. Z ..
.. ~
o
. _~ ~ O ~_r~ ~ ~ N
~
~
IAN ~
~~
~l ~~'~.
% •
'
•
~
.
~
• .
\

~~
i
~;Y~ ~~1
W
H

N'l/16/2C~17s 12:56 NC DOT PDEA -~ 98511918 ~ 299
~ r;, L, .~ .~-.
r
N
" United States Department of the Interior
t 1l
FY5H AND WILD1.1~ SERVICE
~ ~ ~ 1$ 9 Asheville Field Uffice ~~G ~~~~
160 7.illicoa Street ~
Asheville, North Catalina 28801
July 11, 2003
t $ ~nr
~~
~~
~bt- o
ter'
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. D '
Environtriental Managemern Director, PDEA
North Carolina Department of Transportation JUL 1 6 2003
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Thorpe:
D02

Sub}ect: F~ndanger~ed Species Concurrence for Three Bridge Rcplacernents in North
Carolina B-4103, Bridge No. 416 on SR 2550 over Beaver Dam Creek, Davidson
County; B-4255, Bridge No. 28 on NC 801 over Withrow Creek, Rowan County; and
B-~F282, fridge No. S4 on NC b6 over pinch Gut Creek, Stokes County
As requested by Mulkey Inc., engineers and consultants for the North Carolina Department of
Transportation, we have reviewed the natural resources information and biological conclusions
for federally protected species for the subject projects. We provide the following cotruncnts in
accordance with the provisions of section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(16 C].S.C. 1531-1543) (Act), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended
{16 U.S.C. 661-b67e).
B-41~3 (>;rog Number 4-2-03-332)
According to the information provided, three federally listed species in Davidson County were
considered. These include the endangered Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitait~, the
threatened bald eagle (Haliaeelus leucocephalus}, and the threatened (due to similarity of
appearance) bog turtle (Clemrnys rnuhlenbergir~. The report considered these species and
concluded that there would be "no effect" on the bald eagle, Schweinitz's sunflower, or bog
turtle. Criven the results of the field survey, we concur with the conclusion of "no effect" for the
Schweinitz's sunflower and bog turtle. In view of this, we believe the requirements under
section 7(c) of the Act are fulfilled regarding this species. However, obligations under section 7
of the Act must be reconsidered if; (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action
that mar affect listed species or eritiGal habitat in a manner not previousl~r considered, {2) this

07/16/2003 12:56 NC DOT PDEA ~ 98511918
NO.299 D03
action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new
species is listed or critical habitat is determined that maybe affected by the identified action.
Regarding impacts to the bald eagle, this project is located very near Kadin Lake, which provides
suitable habitat for eagles. Surveys for bald eagles in the vicinity of this project were last
conducted in 2001. Because it has been two years since these surveys and because there has been
an increase in eagle activity in this part of the Yadkin River basin, we believe it would be prudent
to resurvey for eagles prior to beginning work on this project. Therefore, at this time we cannot
concur with a conclusion of "no effect" for this species. We recommend resurveying far the bald
eagle, coordinating with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and Alcoa Power
Company with regard to the latest monitoring data they have collected for eagle nests and
foraging areas.
B-4255 (Log Number 4-2-03-333)
According to the information provided, two federally listed species in Aavidson County were
considered. These include the endangered Schweinitz's sunflower (iSTelianthus schweinitzir~ and
the threatened bald eagle (Halraeetus leucocephalus~. The report considered these species and
considded that implementation of the subject project would be "not likely to adversely affect" the
bald eagle or Schweinit2's sunflower. Given the results of the field survey and the habitat
conditions in tl-e action azea, we concur with the conclusion of "not likely to adversely affect" for
the Schweinitz's sunflower and bald eagle. Yn view of this, we believe the requirements under
section 7(c) of the Act are fulfilled regazding this species. 1-Iowever, obligations under section 7
of the Act must be reconsidered if: {1) new information reveals impacts of thin identified action
that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) this
action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new
species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the identified action.
B-~4Z8Z (Log Number ~-2-03-334)
According to the information provided, three federally listed species in Stokes County were
considered. These include the endangered Schweinitz's sunflower (Helia~nihus schweinit~ir~,
3amcs spi~aymussel (Pleurobema~collina), and small-authered ~bittereress {Car amine .. .
..._ .. ,,,:~icranthera). The report considered these species and concluded that this project would have
"no effect" on them. Given the results of field surveys, we concur with the conclusion of "no
effect" for the Schweinitz's sunflower. In view of this, we believe the requirements under
section 7(c) of the Act are fulfilled regarding this species. However, obligations under section 7
of the Act must be reconsidered if (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action
that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) this
action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3}anew
species is listed ar critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the identified action.
According to information provided, mussel surveys were conducted in Pinch Gut Creek from
250 feet above to 540 feet below the project location. Pinch Gut Creek flows into Big Creek
approximately one-quarter of a mile downstream of the project area. Although the tames

@7i16i2003 12:56
t
.,,
NC DOT PDEA ~ 98511918
N0.299
spinymussel has been found only in the train stem of the 13an River, other native fieshwater
mussels have been found in Big Creak. Given the difficulty of surveying for the James
spiuymussel and the relative lack of surveys in Big Creek, we strongly recommend an additional
mussel survey from the end of the previous survey downstream to Big Creek prior to project
construction. Similarly, the small-anthered bittexcress, while not located in surveys conducted in
2002, could have relocated to the project site from an upstream location during recent high fIo'ws.
We also strongly recommend that a preconstruction survey (at the appropriate tune of year) be
conducted for this species. At this tune we cannot concur with a conclusion of "no effect" for the
Yames spinymussel or small-anthered bittercress and recommend further surveys as described
above.
Xf you have questions about these comments, please contact Ms. Morello Buncick of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 237. In any future correspondence concerning these projects, please
~~~ reference the log numbers assigned with our comments about each of the three projects:
Sincerely,
~~~~
Ck~ "
Brian P, Cole
State Supervisor
cc:
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, U.S. At7ny Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Regulatory Field Office, 6508 Falls
of the Neuse Road, Suite 120, Raleigh, NC 2761 S
Ivls. Marla J. Chambers, Highway Projects Coordinator, North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, 12275 Swift Road, Qakboro, NC 28129
Ms. Cynthia'U'an Der allele, North Carolina Aepartment of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of'Water Quality, 'W'etlands Section, 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC
27699-1621
D04

~~~~ ~I
~U.S. Department Commander 431 Crawford Street p
of transportation United States Coast Guard Portsmouth, Va. 23704-5004 ~ '~~'/~ ~~
Atlantic Area Staff Symbol: (Aowb)
United States Phone: [phone]
Coast Guard
03 DEC 02 ~~- ~"' ~ 1 ~~1~
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph. D. nor ~ ~
North Carolina Department of Transportation 1 ~ ^ ~GD2
1548 Mail Service Center ~~=-'~' ~ s
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548 *~Yv;'~c;~, ~rtit 4Y~ ~.~ ~~~
Dear Mr. Thorpe: ~ ~~ `'~'~ i ~ A 'f ~ ~j~
Tl:is ici in response t~ yo~~r letter dated October 24, 2002 requesting the Coast Guard to review
the proposed projects to replace the following nine bridges: Black River Over Flow, Black
River, Jenny's Branch, Beaver Dam Creek, New River, Stone Creek, N.E. Cape Fear River,
Withrow Creek and Pinch Gut Creek all located throughout North Carolina.
The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 1982 exempts bridge projects from Coast Guard bridge
permits when the bridge project crosses nontidal waters which are not used, susceptible to use in
their natural condition, or susceptible to use by reasonable improvement as a means to transport
interstate commerce. Such conditions for some of these waterways were confirmed in a
telephone conversation on November 27, 2002. Due to this, the bridge projects on Beaver Dam,
Withrow, and Pinch Gut Creeks and Black River Over Flow are exempt, and will not require
Coast Guard Bridge Pemuts.
Black River, Jenny's Branch, and Stone Creek are subject to tidal influence and thus considered
legally navigable for Bridge Administration purposes. But these waterways also meet the criteria
for advance approval waterways outlined in Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, Section
115.70. Advance approval waterways are those that are navigable in law, but not actually
navigated by other than small boats. The Commandant of the Coast Guard has given his advance
approval to the construction of bridges across such waterways; therefore, an individual permit
will not be required for these projects either.
Further information is required to assess the bridge replacement projects over the New River and
the North East Cape Fear River. Such information as, is the waterway affected by lunar tides? Is
there any commercial navigation? What types and sizes of boats operate on the waterway?
Bridge Permits may be required based on the answers to these questions. If a permit is required,
a higher level of environmental review will also be required.
The fact that Coast Guard permits are not required for some of these projects does not relieve
you of the responsibility for compliance with the requirements of any other Federal, State, or

- 16590
03 DEC 02
local agency who may have jurisdiction over any aspect of the project. If you have any
questions, please contact Terrance Knowles at the phone number or address show above.
Sincerely,
~ ,~L----~,.-
ANN B. DEATON
Chief, Bridge Administration Section
By direction of the Commander
Fifth Coast Guard District
2

.''r~M, w ~4.
s' ~ ~ UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic end Atmoaphet'ic Adminietretion
` ~ :f NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
~''•~~>~''~ Habitat Concerti°ation r~ivisinn
101 Pivers Island Road .
Beaufort, North Carolina ?~~ I ~~-~~,,..
DCC 0 9 ~0~2
December 6, 2UUZ
Gregory 1. Thorpe, Ph, D,
Environmental ltlanagement Director
Aroject llcvclopment and
L-nvironmental ~nalvsis Branch
NC' >Jepartment of Transportation
1548 Mail Se~ti•ice Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
!attention John ~'hadsworth, P.E.
1~ear }fir. Thorne'
'Che National iv9arine Fisheries Service (NOAH hisheries) has.reviewed your Ucrolx~~ 2=1. 'UCi?_ lettzl-
requestinz comments on eight bridge replacement pro}acts included in the Nc)rtil l~2ii>lirta
Department of Transportation 2U02-?UUB 'I~ransportation Impro~rcment Pian 11'e under~t~ir:d t!In
the NCDUT is prcpat'ing the planning and environmental studies necessary to prc~ceti, tlrr;e j~rci.jc•ct~.
as Cate~c~rical Exclusions and offers the follp,vin~ comments for your eonsideratic»~
The enti•ir~mntental documents for these projects should address rrt~;asures desi°ned t~~ avi~id and
minimize loss of open ti~•ater and wetlands that support fishery resources. In addition. ~` e support
findings contained in the 1lQay 9, 2002, letter from the Wilmington District, U.S~ :~rni~• Cores ol~
Engineers. which identitied the following issues and concerns as being relevarn ro the pmi~c~~ed
Midge replacement projects:
- Replacing Midges with culvert
- Penranent tmd tempt~rary wetland losses
- Uftsite versus onsite detours
- Time oi~year resu'ictions on instream work
- Treatment oF~a•etland restoration areas
- E/xi~tin~ bridge demolition and removal
- Len~thenin~~ eristin~> bridges as a wetland restoration measure
C~rc,up ] -The following projects will have net impact on resources t~~r ~>,~hii:h N(~;'1:1 Fi>ht.r i~•s l~a~
stewardship rc:_sportsibilit_y'; therefore, u'e have no comments:
Pr6ued rni Recycled Paper
~o~ _
tO • 4
~ s+~

Bridge Number Project Number
No. 416 B-410+
No. 28 B - 4255
No. 54 B - 4282
County
Davidson Count~•
Rowan County
Stokes County
Group 11 -These projects have the potential to affect fsherv_ resources and their associated habitat
for which N0.4_A Fisheries has stewardship responsibility:
Bridge Number Project Number County
Nv. 12 B - 1382 Sampson County
No. 26 B - 1382 Sampson County
No. 72 B - 4031 Brunswick County
Nc~ 74 B - 4214 Qnslow County
No ' 1 B - 4223 Fender County
Brid~cs 12, 2G, 2] and 24 are located in the Cape Fear and New River basins and in areas which
provide habitat for anadromous fishery resources including American shad and river herrin,=.
fridges 72 and 24 are located in areas with brackish to saline waters that also support estuarine
dependent fishery resources such as spot, Atlantic croaker, and blue crab. in addition, these projects
may affect Cssential k;sh Habiitai for Federally managed species such as red drum and s}~i•imp
which-are managed by the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, and summer flounder which
is managed by the Mid-.4tlantic Fishery Management Council. Accordingly, we recommend thzt
an 1/ssential Fish Habitat Assessment be included in an_v environmental document for these prc~jeccs.
Spawning and nursery habitat for anadromous and estuarine fishes may be adversely impacted by
these projects unless measures to avoid and minimize impacts to waters and wetlands are included
in the project plans. Therefore, NOAH Fisheries may recommend against .Department oI'the Annv
authorization of these projects under Nationwide Permit 23 unless the followin; recc~mmendatic>t~s
are incorporated:_
1. Following impact avoidance and minimization, unavoidable wetland losses shall L>e offset
through in,piementation of'a compensatory mitigation plan that has been approved by the Corp
of Engineers and in consultation with Nr7AA Fisheries.
2. .411 ccn~struction activities in waters and associated wetlands shall utilize techniques that avoid
and minimize adverse impacts to those systems and their associated flora and fauna

Althou;h the stated purpose of the project is to improve timber production. n~ infurmatierrr is
provided regarding any ongoing silviculture operation. Furthermore, there is no indication of
existence of a forest management plan for the site which might indicate that the existing excavation
and fiilin~ of wetlands is in compliance with the Clean Vb'ater Act (C'WA), Section 401 {t)(f){.~}
exemptions for silviculture.
'~O~'1.A Fishe~~ics concludes that the loss of wetlands at this site is highh~ detrimental to
commercially, recreationally, and ecologically important fishery resources that utilise thi; Newpoit
12iver. Therefore, we recommend that Department ofthe Army atthorization not be granted in this
case. ~~e further recommend that if authorization is denied, the applicant should be required tc~
restore pre-prpject elevations and contours and restore, through planting and other measures. all
impacted wetlands.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. Related cluest.ions ar comments should
be directed to tho attention of l\'lr. Ronald S. Sechler at our Beaufort Office, 101 Divers Ialnri~i Road.
Beaufort, North Carolina, or at (252) ?28-5090.
Sincerely,
i
i
m
Andreas Mager, Jr.
Assistant Regional Administrator
Habitat Conservation Division

l b/ c'7/ ~'IO174 bG : ~iti
M.• s ~ ~
hiiduel F. Easleq, Govetaor
liebeth C. Fvstts, Searmry
Jeft~y J. Goya; IDePury Sacrcoat9
October 21,2004
MEMORANDUIai
IVI, LUI I'LltH ~ yt1511y11i
`~,a
~~u~
--,~,,~:
~L{"~
N0.271
~T~7.EA1S PAA~PATION
RECD
~c~~ ~~ ~ ~ots4
D02
North Carolina Department of Cultural ~tesou~~ ~~„~~:
State Hiatotie Pteservl;ttion O$ree -'-
Peter H. Sendbeek, Adminiettator
C?fficr of ArchiveF uu[ iiQtr-ry
Dwisitm of Hia~orinl RrmueKCR
Ihvid Brook D'eaar
TO: Matt Willrrtatson, Archaeology Supervisor
Office of Humaa Environment
NCD07 Division of Highw~ags
FROM: Peter Sandbetlx ~~~'"
SUBJECT: Archaeological Survey for the Replacement of Bridge No. 54 on NC b6
Over Pinch Gut Creep, TY~' Project B-42$2, State Project No. 8.1641101,
Federal Froject No. BRZ-0066(1), Stokes County, ER 02-8573
Thank you fox gout letter of Augast.23, 2004, transmitting the archaeological survey report by Bruce idol of
TRC Garrow Associates, luc. for the above project. We apologize for the delay is our response.
Far purposes of compliance ovi~ Section 106 of the National Y Yistwic Preservations Acc, ire concur that the
follo~vix-g property is not eligible far listing m the National Register of 1-Iia>tioric Plstces under criterion D:
31SK220
T1ais pxeiaistoric lithit isolated find consists of one quarto flake and ~ aot yield information important to
pxehistary.
The other archaeological site recorded during the surveq, 31SYC219 and 219** is loa-ted outside of the Area
of Potearial Effect (APE} and was aot fully evaluated. Givea the scarcity of cultural material, Mr. Idol has
recommended that no further archaeological investigation be conducted ra connection with this project. We
conc~u with this rtcoma>Veudation since the project w~ not inv~ohre signi.5cant archaeological resources. T"he
report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior.
The above caan>mlents are made pursuant do Section 106 of the National Histiotc Preservation Act and the
.A.dvisory Couacal ou Historic Pseservadon's Regulations fox Compliance with Section 10b codif ed at 36 CFR
Pan 800.
L+a~iam MaiUeg Addasw Teie-htmr/Fan
ADtdB[JiSrJtATLOK 507 N. 9lputu Sttee< KC X617 J11n7 Saerieu C:utus, AakiAl+ NG 27ti99-a4t ; (11 7!}176}/7]J~163]
[iB4'to1A,TtON 515 N. Nlant Staay Raki~ NC e617 Myl Smrviec Cam, Aaloieh NC'~769A.1bt 7 ]h1'~j7i'+rfi547/71 ii&1I
&UaV6Y h MANNING 515 N. Blount Sttee~ Rahi[~1t, NG •1617 Mml Sceviec Genre, R.ley~, NC 27699-Ki17 (91 G-7a.Lyy15/715.4Nttl

lb/ G7/ ~YJb4 nn: ~1ti IYI. 11L.I i r11tH -~ 7ti~1 Z J1tJ NU. ~'(1 Wl~.i
s.
?bask yo~z for your cooperation and Consideration, If you have questions concreting the above comment,
please contact Renee Giedinll-Earley, envrixoaunentai review coosdiaAtor, at 919/733-4763. Yn all future
communication concernia~ this pmject, please cite the shove-refereaced traclting nutnber-
vc- Bruce Idol

_1 e y
i , t t; r
~ ' 4 t ..w ...~
.~...n 1 ~' {~ (, ~! x.41':.`.
,,,,,...s i ; {,
Fii
~ ` f L ...,...,....L_.,,.,,_.
North Carolina Department of Cultural Re~.~u~e~ .~;~; ~~~--'~ ~~ - -
State Historic Preservation Office """`""`°'_-""_'°~~`-
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of~ soi
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary David J.~? ~,6~
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary ~ ~.. ~
December 20, 2002
MEMORANDUM is 1 n ~,I ~ ;""'
~~
TO: Greg Thorpe, Manager ~~',o ~:~`,_~~~'~ ~~
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch `~~~`-'^~y_;~ •e :_ ~,,;;,~~'~~
NCDOT Division of Highways ~:~<<• _ ` ~•~ ,;~~~ ~
FROM: David Brook ~' ~`':-i ~-; Ei--. ~ as° ~ . } ._- ~i~--
SUBJECT: Replacement of Bridge No. 54 over Pinch Gut Creek on NC 66,
B-4282, Stokes County, ER02-8573
Thank you for your letter of October 24, 2002, concerning the above project.
Please see the attached March 20, 2002, memorandum outlining our recommendations for surveys.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106
codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions conceming the above
comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all
future`'communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
DB:doc
Attachment
cc: Mary Pope Furr
Matt Wilkerson
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
Administration 507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4617 [phone].733-8653
Restoration 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh , NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4613 [phone].715-4801
.. _- a ...______ c, c rr ai..,,.,« c« v~i~;~t, nrr dh1 R Marl Service Center. Raleigh 27699-4618 [phone].715-4801

d „a SfA1F o
~_~
v..,.~. ~
.@~~
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
Office of Archives and History
March 20, 2002
MEMORANDUM
TO: William D. Gilmore, Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation ~ ' ^,, ~,
FROM: David Brook ~y~x-UU~- I I~~l-~
SUBJECT: Replace Bridge No. 54 on NC 66 over Pinch Gut Creek, B-4282,
Stokes County, ER 02-8573
Fr: .
Thank you for your memorandum of September 25, 2001 concerning the above project.
~~
Division of Historical Resources
David 1.Olson, Director
Prehistoric archaeological sites 31SK110 and 31SK111 are located within one-half mile north of the project
area in similar topographic settings. It is likely that the proposed bridge replacement will affect as yet
unrecorded archaeological resources.
We recommend that a comprehensive survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist to identify and
evaluate the significance of archaeological remains that may be damaged or destroyed by the project. Potential
effects on unknown resources must be assessed prior to the initiation of construction activities.
Two copies of the resulting archaeological survey report, as well as one copy of the appropriate site forms,
should be forwarded to us for review and comment as soon as. they are available and well in advance of any
construction activities.
Bridge # 54 the Pinch Gut Creek Bridge (SK 553) was identified during the Stokes County survey. Its
eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places needs to be evaluated.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of National Historic Preservation Act and Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
Administration 507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4617 [phone] •733-8653
Restoration 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh , NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4613 [phone].715-4801
Survev & Plannin¢ 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4618 [phone] •715-4801

Federal .9id # BRSTP-0066(1) TIP # B-4282 County: Stokes
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Project Descrip[ion: Replace Bridge No. 54 on NC 66 over Pinch Gut Creek
On 10/01'2002, representatives of the
~i North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
~/ Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
^ Other
Reviewed the subject project at
Scoping meeting
L.~Y Historic architectural resources photograph review session/consultation
^ Other
All parties present agreed
^ There are no properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effects.
There are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria Consideration G within the
project's area of potential effects.
There are properties over fifty years old within the project's Area of Potential Effects (APE), but based on the
historical informa~n available and the photographs of each property, the property identified as
t is considered not eligible for the National
Register an o further evaluation of it is necessary.
[]~ There are no National Register-listed or Study Listed properties within the project's area of potential effects.
All properties greater than 50 years of age located in the APE have been considered at this consultation, and based
upon the above concur ence, all compliance for historic architecture with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has been completed for this project.
There are no historic properties affected by this project. (Attach any notes or documents as needed)
Signed: -~
~ ~ o ~ o ~ '2o~oz
Represent iv , N OT Date
to I ~L.
FHWA, for the Division Administrat r, o` ther Federal Agency Date
O-o
Representative, HPO Date
~'VIA~ '~~ ~~
r ~'~,;
State Historic Preservation Officer Date
If a survey report is prepared, a final copy of this form and the attached list will be included.

0~0~ ~~-.,r~PG
>_ y
O T
.ncy, vvvcn~~~
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
DEC 1 2 ZQ~Z
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. '""--------------
NCDOT, Project Development & Environmental Analysis
FROM: Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele, NCDOT Coordinator ~it'CY~
DEC 1 ~; 2:;~`~r
4~t.Y~~a
h r,J ~
SUBJECT: Scoping Comments for Bridge Replacement Projects: B-4103 Davidson Co., B-4255
Rowan Co., and B-4282 Stokes Co.
This letter is in response to your request for comments on the above-referenced projects.
The NC Division of Water Quality staff has the following recommendations:
1. B-4103 Bridge No. 416 over Beaver Dam Creek on SR 2550 in Davidson County
• The bridge should be replaced with a bridge structure and designed as a single span with no piers in
the stream.
^ Storm water management should be designed as a closed system. Storm water shall be designed to be
carried across the bridge (no deck drains over the stream) and diverted through grass-lined ditches,
vegetated buffers or directed to a storm water collection device prior to entering North Fork New
River.
^ Use Sedimentation and Erosion Control Guidelines for Sensitive Watersheds [15A NCAC 4B .0124;
see http://ncrules.state.nc.us/ncadministrativ_/tiflel5aenviron_/chapter04sedime_Idefault.htm) prior
to any ground-disturbing activities to minimize impacts to downstream aquatic resources.
^ NCDOT must comply with water supply watershed buffer requirements.
^ Use BMPs for bridge demolition and removal, Case 1 (9-20-99 NCDOT policy; see
http://www.ncdot.org/planning/pe/bmp.pdf).
2. B-4255 Bridge No. 28 over Withrow Creek on NC 801 in Rowan County
^ DWQ prefers that the bridge be replaced with a bridge, particularly if a Categorical Exclusion
document is being used (otherwise it should be processed as a FONSI under NEPA requirements).
^ Storm water should be directed to grass-lined ditches, vegetated buffers or other pre-treatment
method before entering the stream.
3. B-4282 Bridge No. 54 over Pinch Gut Creek on NC 66 in Stokes County
^ -The bridge should be replaced with a bridge structure and designed as a single span with no piers in
the stream.
• Storm water management should be designed as a closed system. Storm water shall be designed to be
carried across the bridge (no deck drains over the stream) and diverted through grass-lined ditches,
vegetated buffers or directed to a storm water collection device .prior to entering North Fork New
River.
^ ~ Use BMPs for. bridge demolition and removal, Case 1 (9-20-99 NCDOT policy; see 3
http://www.ncdot.org/planning/pe/bmp.pdf). ;
;~
~- _a
~ ~.~-'i
I~CDER
North Carolina Division of Water C+uality, 401 Wetlands CeRif"ication Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
.r- -
December ;,~~~-y~°~

Thank you for requesting our input at this,. time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a §401 Water
Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality
standards are met and designated-uses `are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please contact Cynthia a'an Der Wiele at [phone].
pc: Chris Militscher, USEPA
Marla Chambers, NCWRC~ ~~
File Copy

' State ofi North Carolina
a` . ~'' Z Department ofi Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael Easley, Governor
Bill Ross, Secretary
Gregory Thorpe, Director
February 20, 2002
~ ~ •
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Memorandum To: William T. Goodwin, Jr., PE, Unit Head
Bridge Replacement Planning Unit
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Through: John Dorney~ .~ ~?~~- ~
NC Division of Water Quality`'"Y\\\jY~/-~ ` ~
Y L~'
IJ ~
From: Robert Ridings
NC Division of Water Quality
Subject: Review of Natural Systems Technical Reports for bridge
replacement projects scheduled for construction in CFY 2005:
"Green Light" Projects: B-4259, B-4261, B-4258, B-4260, B-4255,
r ~~$ -4290, B-4291, B-4070, B-4239, B-4240, B-4242,
and )~ 245.
In future reports, an Executive Summary Paragraph would be helpful. This should include a
brief description of the work intended (i.e., replace bridge with another bridge or with a culvert),
the amount of impact to wetlands and streams, and types of possible permits needed.
On all projects, use of proper sediment and erosion control will be needed. Sediment and erosion
control measures should not be placed in wetlands. Sediment should be removed from any water
pumped from behind a cofferdam before the water is returned to the stream.
This office would prefer bridges to be replaced with new bridges. However if the bridge must be
replaced by a culvert and 150 linear feet or more of stream is impacted, a stream mitigation plan
will be needed prior to the issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification. While the NCDWQ
realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted that for projects requiring
mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification
For permitting, any project that falls under the Corps of Engineers' Nationwide Permits 23 or 33
do not require written concurrence by the NC Division of Water Quality. Notification and
courtesy copies of materials sent to the Corps, including mitigation plans, are required. For
projects that fall under the Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 14 or Regional General Bridge
Permit 31, the forma1401 application process will be required including appropriate fees and
mitigation plans.
Wetlands/401 Unit 2321 Crabtree Blvd. Suite 250 Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Tclephone 919-733-1786 FAX # [phone]

Special Note on project B-4261: these waters are classified as 303(d) waters. Special measures
for sediment control will be needed.
Also note that projects B-4239, B-4290, B-4258, and B-4282 occur in Trout waters. Any trout-
specific conditions that would be determined by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, to protect the egg and fry stages of trout from sedimentation during construction,
would be required on any 401 certifications.
Any proposed culverts shall be installed in such a manner that the original stream profile is not
altered (i.e. the depth of the channel must not be reduced by a widening of the streambed).
Existing stream dimensions are to be maintained above and below locations of culvert
extensions.
Do not use any machinery in the stream channels unless absolutely necessary. Additionally,
vegetation should not be removed from the stream bank unless it is absolutely necessary.
NCDOT should especially avoid removing large trees and undercut banks. If large, undercut
trees must be removed, then the trunks should be cut and the stumps and root systems left in
place to minimize damage to stream banks.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is renunded that issuance of a 401
Water Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water
quality standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost.

~ North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission _ ~'
Charles R. Fullwood, Executi~ e Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: JohnWadsworth, P.E., Project Planning Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Marla Chambers, Highway Projects Coordinator ~~ ~ U'~ ~rt,~~'U'~
Habitat Conservation Program, NCWRC
DATE: December 17, 2002
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) request for comments on
Bridge Replacement Projects B-4103 (Davidson County), B-4255 (Rowan
County} and B-4282 (Stokes County).
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is requesting comments from the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) on three bridge replacement projects.
Staff biologists have reviewed the information provided and have the following preliminary
comments. Our comments are provided in accordance with certain 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).
NCWRC has previously submitted scoping comments on these three bridge replacement
projects. The comments, dated May 8, 2002, are attached and remain appropriate; however, we
offer the following additional comments on the B-4103 project.
Bridge No. 416 on SR 2550 (Badin Lake Road) in Davidson County crosses over
Beaverdam Creek, at the headwaters of an arm of Badin Lake. which is managed by Yadkin, Inc.
under a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) permit. NCDOT should coordinate
with Yadkin, Inc. to ensure compliance with their Shoreline Management Plan and Bald Eagle
Management Plan. -Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) (Federal and State Threatened), are
found along Badin Lake and other lakes on the Yadkin/Pee Dee River system, both upstream and
downstream of the project area. The Beaverdam Creek/Grassy Fork Creek Significant Natural
Heritage Area is upstream of the project area, where a number of heartleaf plantain observations
Mailing Address: Di~~ision of Inland Fisheries • 1721 ~`lail Sergi ice C~t n.er • Raii:i;;h, ~iC 276`)9-1721
Telephone: (y t 9 ~ 7?a-ES ~ ;ext. Zfs t • i~a;~: i ;' l91 7 i;-7h~3

B-4103, SR 2550 _2 _
Beaverdam Creek, Davidson Co.
December 17, 2002
have been made. Several other listed plant species, including the Schweinitz's si~iflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii) (Federal and State Endangered) have been found in the area. Surveys
should be conducted for all federal and state listed species. Also, the bridge clearance above the
water should be sufficient to allow small boat or canoe passage underneath.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any
questions regazding these comments, please contact me at [phone].
cc: Cynthia Van Der Wiele, DWQ
Mazella Buncick, USFWS

DEC 3 Q ZQ02
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-?33-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Facecutive Director
TO: William T. Goodwin, Jr., PE, Unit Head
Bridge Replacement & Environmental Analysis Branch
FROM: Ron Linville, Habitat Conservation Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: May 8, 2002
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements:
Davidson County -Bridge No. 416, SR2550, Beaverdam Creek, B-4103
Rowan County -Bridge No. 28, NC801, Withrow Creek, B-4255
Stokes County -Bridge No. 54, NC66, Pinchgut Creek, B-4282
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).
Our standard recommendations for bridge replacement projects of this scope aze 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 Memo 2 May 8, 2002
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 cleazed 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 maybe
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. Iri 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.
11. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources
must be implemented prior to any-ground disturbing activities. Structures should be
maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
12. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
13. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work azea.
Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used
where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
14. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in
order to minunize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other
pollutants into streams.
15, Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and
should be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
construction is completed.
16. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.

Bridge Memo
May 8, 2002
If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts aze
used:
The culvert must be designed to allow for aquatic life and fish passage. Generally, the
culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural streambed
(measured from the natural thalweg depth). If multiple barrels aze required, barrels
other than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream bankfull or
floodplain bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should be
reconnected to floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by
utilizing sills on the upstream and downstream ends to restrict or divert flow to the
base flow barrel(s). Silled barrels should be filled with sediment so as not to cause
noxious or mosquito breeding conditions. Sufficient water depth should be provided
in the base flow barrel(s) during low flows to accommodate fish movement. If
culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles should be
installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This should enhance
aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by maintaining
channel depth and flow regimes, and 3) by providing resting places for fish and other
aquatic organisms. In essence, base flow barrel(s) should provide a continuum of
water depth and channel width without substantial modifications of velocity.
2. If multiple pipes or cells aze 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 along the existing channel alignment whenever
possible to avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream channel must be avoided.
Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases
water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased maintenance and
disrupts aquatic life passage.
4. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed
in a manner that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures
should be professionally designed, sized, and installed.
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 cleazing and to 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-yeaz 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 azea reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the
area to wetlands. If successful, the site may be utilized as mitigation for the subject project or
other projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments:
1. Davidson County -Bridge No. 416, SR2550, Beaverdam Creek, B-4103
YELLOW/RED LIGHT., Biologists indicate that a bridge is preferred. Potential for
wetland and stream impacts at this location due to width of stream.

Bridge Merno 4 May 8, 2002
r
2. Rowan County -Bridge No. 28, NC801, Withrow Creek, B-4255
GREEN LIGHT. No concerns indicated by biologists. Standard conditions should be
appropriate.
3. Stokes County -Bridge No. 54, NC66, Pinchgut Creek, B-4282
RED LIGHT. Class C-trout stream. Small mouth bass fishery will require moratorium
from May 1 -July 15 for instream activities. Listed species will need thorough review
(James River Spiny mussel, Hog Sucker, and Riverweed Darter, etc.). Dan River is a
WRC Priority Aquatic Conservation Area.
NCDOT should routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources in the
vicinity of bridge replacements. Restoring previously disturbed floodplain benches should
narrow and deepen streams previously widened and shallowed during initial bridge installation.
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 and reduce habitat fragmentation.
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 om these projects.
Cc: .David Cox, WRC

.~
~5 Cp
o~'.r~ i
~~~
* 1789 •
15 February 2002
N.C. Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Attn: Mr. Davis Moore
~#nltrs C~nun#,~
EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
RE: Replacement of Bridge No. 54 on NC 66 over Pinch Gut Creek
Dear Mr. Moore:
First, let me apologize for the tardiness of this report. I asked the GIS Department for
assistance regarding this matter and that information has just been forwarded to me.
Stokes County EMS Station #2 (Lawsonville) and Station #3 (Pinnacle) serves this
area. The district line is at Highway 66 and Smith Road, which is west of 'the Pinch Gut
Creek Bridge. For Station #2, the shortest route would be 13.8- miles. For calls on the
east side of the bridge, there would be an increase of 0.6 miles. For Station #3, the
shortest route would be 14.0 miles. For calls on the west side of the bridge, there would
be an increase of 1.4 miles.
Fire Department and Rescue Squad response in this area is handled by Francisco
Fire/Rescue and Double Creek Fire/Rescue. Double Creek's primary response would
be from the east side of the bridge and would be approximately 5.3 miles. Calls west of
the bridge would increase the response mileage by 3:5 miles. Francisco's primary
response would be from the west side of the bridge and would be approximately 5.4
miles. Calls east of the bridge would increase the response mileage by 7.6 miles.
I do think, with the above information, it can be determined, that this would not create
and unworkable situation, particularly for the EMS. I do question, however, the
additional response burden placed on the Fire Departments, both primary and
assisting.
P. 0. Box 20 • Danbury, North Carolina 27016 • Telephone [phone]
t

If I can be of further assistance, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
~-
Monty D. Stevens, EMT-P
Interim Director
cc: File

I~f'~'. `~ 6 ~x~t~
.~o,~.
~p r/°oy
~ s
~.Q~~..~
~ --+eA - r a.u-.r. ----~~AYM-AL
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Michael Easley
GOVERNOR
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
Lyndo Tippett
SECRETARY
March 7, 2003
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
Stacy Harris, P.E., Unit Head
Consultant Engineering Unit
Jared Gray, Environmental Biologist
Office of the Natural Environment
SUBJECT: Protected species survey report for the James spinymussel (Pleurobema
collina) for the proposed bridge replacement of Bridge 54 over Pinch
Gut Creek on NC 66; Stokes County: Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-
0066 (1); State Project No. 8.1641101; TIP Project No. B-4282.
ATTENTION: Elmo Vance, Project Planning Engineer
Project Planning Engineering Unit
The following memorandum addresses the James spinymussel (Pleurobema collina) federally
protected species listed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service for Stokes County. Habitat currently and
historically supporting the James spinymussel is given in Clarke and Neves (1984) and Boss and Clench
(1967). The habitat is generally described as runs with moderate current, with sand, gravel and cobble
substrata. Individuals from the Dan River population have been found in a variety of substrates from
sildsand, to sand, gravel, cobble, bedrock crevices and sand surrounded by boulders, with a variety of
flow patterns from slack pools, to runs with moderate to swift currents. The hardness of the water is
believed to be a significant requirement for this species, with a minimum hardness value of (>50 ppm
CaCo3) (Clarke and Neves 1984). Typical habitat for the James spiny mussel as referenced above by
Clarke and Neves and Boss and Clench was not identified in Pinch Gut Creek. A general survey for
freshwater mussel was done with no freshwater mussels being found.
Surveys, Habitat and Methods
Mussel surveys were conducted on August 1, 2002 by NCDOT biologists, Jared Gray, Neil
Medlin, and Jeff Burleson. The Pinch Gut Creek crossing at NC 66 contains a natural levee and the
substrate above and below the bridge on NC 66 consists of mostly silt and sand, with some cobble,
pebble and gravel with slow to moderate current. Surveys were conducted by wading using a batiscope
from approximately 500 feet downstream to 250 feet upstream of the project crossing. No freshwater
mussels were found in 1.5 man-hours of survey time.
Qualifications of Investigators

Investigator: Jared Gray
Education: B.S. Environmental Science, Morehead State University
Experience: Environmental Biologist, Enviro-Pro, October 1994 -May 1997
Environmental Technician, Appian Consulting Engineers, P.A., October 1997 -May
1998
Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, October 1998-present
Expertise: Endangered species (terrestriaUaquatic) surveys; benthic macroinvertebrate collection,
wetland delineation; soils, water quality analysis, and 404/401 permitting.
Investigator: Neil Medlin, Environmental Specialist
Education: M.A. Biology, Appalachian State University
B.S. Biology, Appalachian State University
Experience: Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, January 2002 -present
Environmental Biologist, NC Division of Water Quality
June 1990 -January 2002
Environmental Biologist, FL Department of Environmental Protection (formerly
Department of Environmental Regulation), August 1986 -June 1990
Expertise: Freshwater fish and benthic macroinvertebrate collection and identification; aquatic
habitat evaluations and function; biocriteria and biotic indices evaluations; Section 7
field investigations
Investigator: Jeff Burleson, Environmental Biologist
Education: B.S. Fisheries and Wildlife Science, NC State University
Experience: Procurement Forester, Canal Industries, July 1997 -June 1999
Environmental Biologist, NCDOT, June 1999 -December 2002
Expertise: Endangered species (terrestriaUaquatic) surveys; wetland delineation; wetland/stream
mitigation; 404/401 permitting; forest management
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: no effect
Given the survey results, it is apparent that James spinymussel does not occur in the project
footprint. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) does not list a known population up
or downstream for James spinymussel.
cc: Matt Haney, Environmental Specialist
File: B-4282

f
BSI-669LZ ~urloz~~ u~oN `u~tal~g
.za~ua~ aatn.zaS It~Y~I B~bS i
gou~.zg sis~~u~ ~~uauzuoitnug pug ~uauzdolanaQ ~aafozd
uot~~~odsu~.zZ ~o ~uaura.zedaQ ~uilore~ u~oN
aau~n ouilg

~ M
O
N

~ ~ ~
~ ~
~

4a ~~
~ ~ ~
~
0
~
ti
V ~ ~
° ~
`
~ ~ z

o.`~P ~ "'a``~~
~ o
~ °,~
~<
z c
~,~ ~~. ?•
`'ily,~ *. DAY P4~~
,o
~ ~ w
o ~'
~At~
w
0~ ~
C~ 0
rb\
h
:~ o

V
V
.~
'~' N
O ~
V ~
~ ~
4~
w ~:

O
U
ca
~ O
.~``jnn
VIA! C
.~
~ ~;
W `~
O ~
O
0
U
~ U .O cn i. p
FWI r •O •~ p C~ U ^ U L ~ CI-•
~-. > o o °
N '~ ~ ~ vyi ~ O p o w' p ~ O y Q 3 ~_ ~ ~ a:,
.~ o
`o Rt U Ll • ^ N cC O p rn r ~•" 4• p o [~ C ~ Cd .-~
> O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ it ~ ~ y "O ~ :'' t... O ~ C ~ a,
C s ~- 3 0~ O ° ~ >•~ o °Q ~ o o~
° ~
L
~ ~ O
i. ~ b4 ^O ~.: ~
C .^,
O w, ca O i
~ y 'C U ~ w
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
O -p ~ ~ • ~ U ~ '~ 'O
w °~'O °z ~'~-v ~ ~.o
„a Q A ~ ° o ~ ,~ ~ ~
O = z ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ a~~i o
.~
CA ° -fl +•,
V p 4 •~ •~' .C '~ C .~
a~ a~
N L ~ a. L > Q~ ~ '~ Y-d
~ FAH ° ~'Ub 3 a..n ~
~ ~
o ~
N N ' x ,~~-
~ `a 6r
•~ vT
e
3 ~ iz
~~
w ~ ~~ ~~
~ C ~ +s * n~.r°
w
.. ~
~ o
a v
J „~
~ `~ ~ i o
.fl ~' ~ 3 'O 'G bD t1: p "O y
U cC 3 ^U O ~ p ~ i , ~ V] ~ ~ ,~
pr 4r U ~ .-. ~ W ~ ~ Cd V] •~ .O
~ ~ ~ LN ~ U G> O
3 c,.., ~ L, ~ a4 _ ~ a~ y .
~ 'r•' ~ ~n O 'C O O ~ bD ~ ~ ~
~.~ M"t7 U O 3 ~ N U~'''
~~ 0 3
•U U ~ b4~ L~~ ~ •ON~^~
Q w+ . ~ e~ i Cp O ~ O N ~ ~ ~
a ~-~z ~~~ ~~ Q ~ ~~~ 3
.~

r ,

~_
/N ?; 1..'
n ~
-R r ~
`~ 4~
4 '
~ * '/t. 1
F> pis
l~Torth Carolina. ~)-epartment ~f Transportation ` ~- j
3~~` Gr T&Pt~5~0
Citizens Inforn~a~ional Workshop
Bridge Replacement on l~TC 66 over Pinch Gut Creek in Stokes County, T.I.P. l\Ta. B-4282
it~n
~nfarn~ati~~
~rh~p
The North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) has
conducted engineering and
environmental studies for replacing
Bridge No. 54 on NC 66 over Pinch
Gut Creek. Bridge No. 54 is located
just north of Mountain Gap in Stokes County. The NCDOT collected data on
the existing human and natural environments and analyzed the impacts
associated with replacing the existing bridge. The analysis consisted of
alternative evaluations, preliminary engineering, and environmental impact
studies.
The purpose of the Citizens Informational Workshop is to review the preferred
alternative with concerned citizens and to receive comments concerning the
proposed project. Representatives of the NCDOT are available to answer your
questions and discuss the project with you. If you have comments or
suggestions about the proposed improvements described in this handout, please
inform a representative of the North Carolina Department of Transportation and
complete the attached comment sheet.
YDUR THOUGHTS AND CONCERNS ARE IMPORTANT TO US!
~r~~~~t I~~s~rpt~~~.
Bridge No. 54 on NC 66 over Pinch Gut
Creek will be replaced with a new
bridge approximately 135 feet in length.
The new bridge will provide two 11-foot
travel lanes with 4-foot shoulders.
The roadway approaching the bridge
will consist of two 11-foot travel lanes
with 5-foot shoulders.
During construction, traffic will be detoured approximately 5.2 miles along the
following route: SR 1210 (Brown Mountain Road), SR 1215 (Pell Road), and
SR 1214 (Jackson Road). Use of an off-site detour will expedite construction of
the new bridge.

+~ ~ .
~-
~`~`U~QS~t~ ~~~~~~
Right-of-VVay
Construction

T.I.P NO. B-4282
Construction Cost
Right-of--Way Cost
Preferred Alternative
z~ Public involvement is an important part of the planning
~, ~ process. The NCDOT encourages citizen involvement on
~~"~ ~~~k„`cp~ transportation projects and will consider your suggestions
and address all concerns. Please send your comments to one of the
addresses listed on the left. Your opinions are important to us!
If you have transportation questions on other projects, call our Customer
Service Center toll-free at 1-877-DOT-4YOU, or visit the NCDOT
website at www.ncdot.org.
Bridge No: 54