20091138 Ver 1_Scoping Comments_20090702

r?.
w n rF9
0
Y
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
C61een H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
July 2, 2007
MEMORANDUM
TO: Hank Schwab, Bridge Project Planning Engineer, NCDOT
FROM: Polly Lespinasse, NC Division of Water Quality, Mooresville Regional Office
SUBJECT: Scoping Review of NCDOT's Proposed Bridge Replacement Projects: B- 4517 and B-
4519, Gaston County
In reply to your correspondence dated June 6, 2007 (received June 12, 2007) in which you requested
comments for the above referenced projects, the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ) offers the following
comments:
Project Specific Comments
B-4517, Bridge No. 49 Over Crowders Creek, Gaston County
Crowders Creek is a Class C; 303(d) waters of the State. Crowders Creek is on the 303(d) list for impaired use
for aquatic life due to impaired biological integrity. DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts
that could result from this project. DWQ recommends that the most protective sediment and erosion control
BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to Crowders Creek. DWQ requests that road design
plans provide treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed, in the most
recent version of NC DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices.
B-4519, Bridge 155 Over Little Long Creek, Gaston County
Little Long Creek is Class C; 303(d) Waters of the State. Little Long Creek is on the 303(d) list for impaired
use for aquatic life due to urban runoff (historical listing). DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion
impacts that could result from this project. DWQ recommends that the most protective sediment and erosion
control BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to Little Long Creek. DWQ requests that
road design plans provide treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed
in the most recent version of NC DWQ Storm Water Best Management Practices.
General Comments Regarding Bridge Replacement Projects
DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) shall address these concerns by describing the potential
impacts that may occur to the aquatic environments and any mitigating factors that would reduce the
impacts.
2. If foundation test borings are necessary; it shall be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under General 401 Certification Number 3494/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey Activities.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Internal: h2o.encstale.nc.us Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone[phone]
Fax [phone]
No One
hCarolina
aturally
y
An Equal OppodunitylAffirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycledl10% Post Consumer Paper
r41
Mr. Hank Schwab
Page Two
3. If a bridge is being replaced with a hydraulic conveyance other than another bridge, DWQ believes the
use of a Nationwide Permit may be required. Please contact the US Army Corp of Engineers to determine
the required permit(s).
4. If the old bridge is removed, no discharge of bridge material into surface waters is allowed unless
otherwise authorized by the US ACOE. Strict adherence to the Corps of Engineers guidelines for bridge
demolition will be a condition of the 401 Water Quality Certification.
5. Whenever possible, the DWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require
work within the stream or grubbing of the stream banks and do not require stream channel realignment.
The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allow for human and wildlife passage beneath
the structure, do not block fish passage and do not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
6. Bridge deck drains shall not discharge directly into the stream. Stormwater shall be directed across the
bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour holes,
vegetated buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of NC DWQ
StormwaterBest Management Practices.
7. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area shall be maintained to prevent direct contact
between curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete shall not
be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and fish
kills.
8. Bridge supports (bents) shall not be placed in the stream when possible.
9. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction
contours and elevations. Disturbed areas shall be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and appropriate
native woody species shall be planted. When using temporary structures the area shall be cleared but
not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment
and leaving the stumps and root mat intact allows the area to re-vegetate naturally and minimizes soil
disturbance.
10. Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented and
maintained in accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control
Planning and Design Manual and the most recent version of NCS000250.
11. All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry work area unless otherwise approved
by NC DWQ. Approved BMP measures from the most current version of NCDOT Construction and
Maintenance Activities manual such as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other diversion structures
shall be used to prevent excavation in flowing water.
12. Heavy equipment shall be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to minimize
sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This equipment shall
be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels,
lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
13. In most cases, the DWQ prefers the replacement of the existing structure at the same location with road
closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour shall be designed and located to avoid
wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure
will be on a new alignment, the old structure shall be removed and the approach fills removed from the
100-year floodplain. Approach fills shall be removed and restored to the natural ground elevation. The
..area shall be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. Tall fescue shall not be used in
riparian areas.
is
Mr. Hank Schwab
Page Three
General Comments if Replacing the Bridge with a Culvert
Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands shall be below the elevation
of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches, and 20 percent of the
culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow low flow passage of water
and aquatic life. Design and placement of culverts and other structures including temporary erosion
control measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or
streambeds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above structures. The applicant is
required to provide evidence that the equilibrium is being maintained if requested in writing by DWQ. If
this condition is unable to be met due to bedrock or other limiting features encountered during
construction, please contact the NC DWQ for guidance on how to proceed and to determine whether or
not a permit modification will be required.
If multiple pipes or barrels are required, they shall be designed to mimic natural stream cross section as
closely as possible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation and/or sills where appropriate.
Widening the stream channel shall 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.
Riprap shall 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 shall be properly designed, sized
and installed.
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 Polly Lespinasse at [phone].
cc: Steve Lund, US Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Field Office
Ron Lucas, Federal Highway Administration
Chris Militscher, Environmental Protection Agency
Marla Chambers, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Marella Buncick, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Sonia Gregory, DWQ Central Regional Office
File Copy

SUBJECT: Bridge Group No. 59
Dear Mr. Hennessy,
The Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch is completing the project
development, environmental and engineering studies for the following projects: B-4456, B-4468, B-4517,
B-4519, B-4553, and B-4632. These projects are included in the 2006-2012 North Carolina
Transportation Improvement Program.
The alternatives under consideration at this time for each of these bridge replacement projects are
as follows:
B-4456
Replace in place with offsite detour.
B-4468
• Replace in place with offsite detour.
B-4517
Replace in place with offsite detour.
B-4519
Replace in place with offsite detour.
B-4553
• Replace in place with offsite detour.
B-4632
Replace in place with offsite detour
9
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
q0G ?D
?S N WAT O Zoo? D
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY - LYNDO TIPPEC8
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
August 1, 2007
Mr. John Hennessy
NCDENR - DWQ / WETLANDS
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone]
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone]
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS
BRIDGE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT UNIT WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG
1551 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
LOCATION:
PARKER LINCOLN BLDG
2728 CAPITOL BLVD- SUITE 168
RALEIGH NC 27694
a
J"
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
Replacement of Bridge No. 155
SR 1800 over Little Long Creek
Gaston County, North Carolina
(B-4519)
(WBS Element 33743.1.1)
(State Project No. 82813101)
(Federal Aid No. BRZ-1800(4))
Prepared for:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, North Carolina
June 2007
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
B-4519
Gaston County
The N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 155
located on North Carolina State Road 1800 (SR 1800) over Little Long Creek in Gaston
County, North Carolina.
INTRODUCTION
The project study area is located at the crossing of SR 1800 over Little Long Creek
approximately 1 mile north of Dallas, NC (Figure 1). The project study area has been
determined to be approximately 400 feet wide, centered on SR. 1800, and approximately
300 feet long. The project study area encompasses approximately 2.8 acres (Figure 2).
Elevations within the project study area range from a high of approximately 720 feet
National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) to a low of approximately 700 feet NGVD (USGS
Gastonia North, NC 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle [1993]). Land uses within the
project study area consist of pasture, woodlands, residential lots, a sewer easement, a
powerline corridor, and. roadside shoulders. Based on soil mapping for Gaston County
(SCS 1989), the project study area is underlain by three soil series: Chewacla, Pacolet, and
Cecil. All three series are considered non-hydric in Gaston County.
The proposed replacement of Bridge No. 155 consists of replacing the bridge with a bridge
in the current location while maintaining traffic with an off-site detour. It is anticipated that
there will be no temporary fill resulting from bridge demolition. NCDOT will coordinate with
resource agencies during project planning to ensure that all concerns regarding bridge
demolition are resolved.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Water Resources
The project study area is located within sub-basin 03-08-36 of the Catawba River Basin.
This area is part of USGS Hydrologic Unit.03050102 of the South Atlantic Gulf Region.
Within the project study area, Little Long Creek is the only surface water. Bridge No. 155
spans Little Long Creek. The portion of Little Long Creek that lies within the project study
area has been assigned Stream Index Number 11-129-16-9 by NCDWQ.
A Best Usage Classification of C has been assigned to Little Long Creek. Class C waters
are suitable for aquatic life propagation and protection, . agriculture, and secondary
recreation. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses not involving
human body contact with waters on an organized or frequent basis. No Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HOW), Water Supply I (WS-1), Water Supply
II (WS-II), watershed Critical Areas (CA), or Trout Waters Jr) occur within 1.0 mile of the
project study area (NCDWQ 2004b).. Little Long Creek is not listed on any section of the
2
N.C. 2006 final Section 303(d) list. No benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring stations occur
within 1.0 mile of the project study area. With respect to temperature regimes, Little Long
Creek is designated as a warm water stream.
Biotic Resources
Two distinct plant communities were identified within the project study area:
disturbed/maintained land and alluvial forest (Figure 2). Anticipated impacts to plant
communities are based on cut-fill limits plus a 25-foot buffer, based on preliminary
construction drawings. Most of the projected impacts to natural plant communities will occur
within the disturbed/maintained plant community along roadside shoulders. Permanent
impacts to disturbed/maintained land will total 0.5 acres, while impacts to alluvial forest will
total 0.1 acres. Due to the use of an off-site detour, there will be no temporary impacts to
natural plant communities in the project study area.
Table 1. Terrestrial Community Coverage and Impacts Within the Project Study Area
Plant Community Coverage (Acres) Coverage (Percent) Area Impacted (Acres)
Disturbed/maintained land 1.6 57 0.5
Alluvial Forest 1.2 43 0.1
Total 2.8 100: 0.6
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Waters of the United States
Little Long Creek is considered to a be jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. No vegetated wetlands occur within the project study area (Figure 3). The
proposed bridge replacement results in no jurisdictional area impacts. NCDOT will
coordinate with resource agencies during project planning to ensure that all concerns
regarding bridge demolition are resolved.
Permits
Replacement of Bridge No. 155 is anticipated to result in no impacts to the open-water area
of Little Long Creek. It is anticipated that there will be no temporary fill resulting from bridge
demolition. This project may be processed as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines. USACE has made available Nationwide Permit
(NWP) 23 (67 FR 2020, 2082; January 15, 2002) for CEs due to minimal impacts to waters
of the United States expected with bridge construction. NCDWQ has made available a
General 401 Water Quality Certification for NWP 23 (GC 3403). Potential impacts to waters
of the United States resulting from replacement of this bridge are expected to be avoided.
3
Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered, Threatened, or officially Proposed for
such listing are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). As of June 19, 2007, the USFWS lists three federally protected
species for Gaston County.
Table 2. Federally Protected Species Listed for Gaston County (USFWS 2007)
Common Name Scientific Name Status* Habitat
Present? Biological
Conclusion
Schweinitz's Helianthus schweinitzii E Y No Effect
sunflower
Bald eagle Haliaeetus T N No Effect
leucocephalus
Bog turtle Glyptemys (Clemmys) T (S/A) N Not Required
muhlenbergii
-Federal Status: E--Endangered; T--Threatened; T (S/A)-- Threatened due to similarity of appearance
that is threatened due to similarity of appearance with other rare species and is listed for its protection.
Endangered or Threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation.
American alligator )--a species
species are not biologically
SCHWEINITZ'S SUNFLOWER BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Within the project study area there is suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower in some of
the disturbed/maintained areas. A systematic plant-by-plant survey was conducted on
October 11, 2006 by EcoScience biologists David O'Loughlin and Ross Andrews. No
specimens of Schweinitz's sunflower were found. NCNHP records (reviewed October 2006)
document no occurrence of the Schweinitz's sunflower within 2.0 miles of the project study
area. Based on the survey results and NCNHP records, this project will have No Effect on
Schweinitz's sunflower.
BALD EAGLE BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
There are no large bodies of water located within 1.0 mile of the project study area;
therefore, there is no habitat for bald eagle nesting. NCNHP records (reviewed October
2006) document no occurrence of bald eagle within 2.0 miles of the project study area.
Based on a lack of habitat and NCNHP records, this project will have No Effect on bald
eagle.
The bog turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii) is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of
Appearance, is not. subject to Section 7 consultation, and a biological conclusion is not
required. However, this project is not expected to affect the bog turtle as the project study,
area contains no suitable wetland habitat. NCNHP records (reviewed June 2007) document
two occurrences of bog turtles within 1.0 mile of the project study area. T (S/A) species are
not subject to Section 7 consultation and a biological conclusion for this species is not
required; however, the project study area contains no suitable habitat for bog turtle.
4
Water Supply I (W S-
Waters IHOr , out Waters (Tr) occur
CONCLUSIONS ORW)' H;gh Quality CA) or Tr
any section of the
Resource W aters ( Critical Areas ( listed on
utstanding 11 waters, watershed Creek is not contains one Jurisdictional
No o 11 (WS") area. Little Long area from replacement
1). W ater Supply project study. ar The project study It' CE due to
in 1.0 mile 01 the 303(4) the United states re ocessed as a The
With C. 2004 draft Section ac
N is to waters This project maybe bridge construction.
water. Potential imp0 be avoided. ected v Protected species
surface ected United States exP federally P
of this bridge are exP the act any
to of to adversely imP
al impacts to d
minim ro ect is not expecte
proposed p 1
5

? It
J
E
r° J
1 RI ,
DGE: NO - 69 `
i ;
, •
155

?_ / ?
s
? 1 II' I'1
,' -
` ?*r'H•t + v ? ?
, _ ? vales
J?'^ ? \.? ? .

>? I
?
f0 ? it
L ?
?-
iZ / f :. ?'i.?
? ?
__
/
.
r ? f . 6
?..

1 I s ? i? ? T- ?? 1

• V
r F ,.` II 131' f? ' p
r 417 \L 'y,

2000 0 2000
' SCALE IN FEET
`? a l6I , ry ? ,°? 13
150 I G lation
aouaP 2t +
Lowesville
,
73
9
en vl
DaIN • p noala to
?
Waco
N' Lucla
I
' ?"
S
.
I
9
;
? , Startle
fount
D \ /
7.
.
ails 1
5 u os
{ t16 s 6666RIB ,7 ? i
273

6 in s. a y Ily 376 _ and aaf'M.. •
yy
ll I
we
rMountain O1 , ?? ? o Fx:
r
oo ` - y? le o
t?
• „
9 -
n
II F
b?? fis I16 • '1! 5.???A
n
I6 stonia
??
.
,
e: ? 2{ M1 \ a is C.?E... M'..!, ?\ III 6 II9 176 t'?• .
.
.
?
e4 E wC
?
?
I
?'
?? ?
a
,
+
„? h? tp
?? th.<
l>r[ GYeAUQ->
Nh
t
6y
Ny
?
aet
^
` 667
? 166 g
'..
x
?
*F7.
t'X„ q t
0 -
'
cn>m'. °•° erg nu ar
JDG JW FIGURE
PROJECT LOCATION
FEB 2006
Replacement of Bridge No. 155 (8-4519) :.°.:
over Li ttle Long Creek - AS SHOWN
"°-
Gaston County, North Carolina
05-262