20091138 All Versions_Complete File_20060526

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE v4
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
August 1, 2006??o
Mr. William T. Goodwin, Jr., P.E.,
Bridge Project Development Unit Head
Attention: Mr. Dennis Pipkin, Project Development Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1551 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1551
Dear Mr. Goodwin:
Subject: Bridge Replacements in North Carolina - Catawba County (TIP No. B-4456),
Cleveland County (TIP No. B-4468), Gaston County (TIP Nos. B-4517 and B-4519),
Iredell County (TIP No. B-4553), and Rutherford County (TIP No. B-4632)
We have reviewed the subject bridge replacement projects and are providing the following
comments in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.
661-667e);. the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703, et seq.) (MBTA); and section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Fish and Wildlife Resources - The information provided for these six projects does not include
detailed descriptions of the structures that will replace the existing bridges; therefore, our
comments are general. We will provide more substantive comments when the categorical
exclusions are prepared. In all cases we recommend that an existing bridge be replaced with a
new bridge, and we request that National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents for these
projects consider replacing existing bridges with new bridges as an alternative. If an alternative
is chosen that does not replace an existing bridge with a new bridge, such as an alternative that
involves the replacement of an existing bridge with a culvert, we request that the NEPA
document include an evaluation as to why an alternative of replacing an existing bridge with a
new bridge was not chosen.
We recommend that each new bridge design include provisions for the roadbed and deck
drainage to flow through a vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer
should be large enough to alleviate any potential effects from the runoff of storm water and
pollutants. The bridge designs should not alter the natural stream or the stream-bank
morphology or impede fish passage. Any piers or bents should be placed outside the bank-full

ed to avoid any fill that will
the floodplain is
he bridges and approaches should be design If s anning to
p
or floodplain. order
lain portion of the approaches
width of the streams. or constriction of the channel
of
e damming the floodp and reduce high velocities in
result in th
not feasible, culverts sho to bcal sfunct ons of the floodplain an
restore some of the hy?O ? disturbing
floodwaters within the affected areas. in place prior to any gro?d_di most
ion and sedimentation b to contact with a stream' staged
control eros should be w bridge through
Measures to constructing the ne
Wet concrete should never be ?° lace by ome in
activities. W e be replace p
traffic to existing off-site routes.
cases we prefer that a bridge
construction or by detouring end that only native plant
strongly recomm ecies (such as
etating disturbed areas, we of be found, that noninvaslveof
When rese the exotic
eding/reveg While many adequate seed source cann roven beneficial to
species be used or, if nt lants can reestablish the efforts have p s y
e) be used until native p and reclamation f these species outweigh
annual ry ically used in erosion-contr°l av .. e nature o including tall
aslv
plant species typically
we now know that tl1e1n rovide. Exotic species,
species, may p sia species), redtop (a
some wildlife enefits they eastern A d Kentucky bluegrass
short-term erosion-control or Tean land Sericea le pedeza (to Africa), an in
etation and often result.
fescue (native to Eurasia), ass and Bermuda grass (native
to the
species), Sudan grass
Canada), choke out native Veg be very detrimental
Eurasian asia and northern (native to Ems' that rove to be of little benefit to wildlife and can
monocultures p
stem as a whole. killing, possession,
ecosystem Prohibits the taking ,le their eggs, parts,
The META (16 U.S.C.i 70rds (i the bald eag ), To avoid
Migratory Birds - brds {including of the Interior. es and any
and importation o by the Department
transportation, ally authorized y a visual inspection of theb d nesting
except when specific end conducting the migratory
and nests, birds, we recomm area during - n the project
impacts to migratory habitat within the project s
migratory bird nesting bey. If migratory birds are discovered nestin nt of Trap portation
other Septem the North Carolina Department
season (March
season__Ma 'ch though sting bridges, the migratory bird nesting riot to the
impact area, including on the exi acting the nests during years se p
during on the bridges measures to
(NCDOT) should avoid imp us, should develop the take
September). If birds are discover ions 1 ation Wim ans that will not result in th
during
through ction date, the NC es by me
ction and. demolition actiznties
proposed constru establishing nests on the bridges
discourage birds from T should avoid constru
of the birds or eggs, or the NeDO
thenesting period. primarily to the
species
Our comments aboueCieseof concern.
Federally Listed Species -
concern. are limited cies and federal sp ton County . encourage the impacts NCDOT to
and
ii) occurs in Gaston should avoid those
surveys
turtle (Clemmys muhlenberg tici ated, y articipates actively
are anticipated, whop
The bog turtle. If impacts m
assess habitat for the bog wildlife wire
While the bog turtle technically does not require
ct the North Carolina urtleWes Corr
conta
and conservation efforts for the bog t
2
s of concern, and the NCDOT is actively managing
section 7 consultation, it is a specie
species.
mitigation sites or parts of sites for this our Log No. 4-2-06-358. The
e over interstate 40, It will be replaced in place, an
Tip No. B-4456, Bridge
an urbanized area). ste
Catawba County - e are no known occurrences of federally ll d
existing bridge is over interstate 40 , within pro ect will affect any
be used, and there
sting off-site detour will
project area; therefore, we do not believe this p J
species near the No. 4-2-06-359.
species. Run Creek, our Log
Tip No. B-4468, Bridge over Sandy threatened
Cleveland County - indicate occurrences of the federally
ro ect area. We recommend
lis naniflora) near the p J o ect. area for this
J
dwarf- records records for flowered heeavrtelaf (HexnasTyty an suitable habitat in the Pr
conducting habitat assessments d o of hthrough May
its flowering p No. 4-2-06-360. The
species during our Log
4517, Bridge e over Cr wder's Creek, aster County. No. B e over r weinitzii) and Georgia
T We
area
Gaston County - federal listing, Occur in Gaston
gh
endangered Schweini orgi nurn aecandidate for f e .ng any suitable habitat in the tY the- pr
?Symphyotrichum geOrgianum) ,
habitat assessme tfo g S hWe1? z'S shower is late oveln
recommend conducting mid-November. The
The best time to survey aster is October through open, and
for these species. e for Georgia
currently a candidate for
habitats similar to that of the Schweinitz's sun over
October. The best time to survey
eor ' a aster is curr south and
a aster is found in h not federally listed, the G
Georgi dough It appears that there are wet these wetlands
often disturbed areas' area. We recommend avoiding
and could. be listed in the near future
federal listing within the project study
st of the bridge, turtle.
northwe e ng any suitable habitat for the bog our Log No 4-2_06_361. The
and sure N Creek,
, Bridge over Little Long W
Gaston County' o ect area
Tip No. B-4519 Georgia aster also occur in
Gaston County - and surveYg any suitable habitat in the PL the
s
dan eyed Schweinitz' s flO sess and
an a subject bridge crossing,
en g habitat stream of th al Hentage
recommend conducting the North Carolin
for these a Nam Meadow
species. Approximately 0.5 w Bog°l sted by turtle in Friday bog Long Creek flows into Ff ant s Mite. There are occurrences ofw estro gly encourage the NCDOT
a state signs turtle occur downstream'
' •that sedimeno? and
that sediment ntro
pro as he bog and the bog does not
Creek. Since t bridge with abridge and
ensure project constructi
to replace the existing
s are in place an d maintainedeanthroughout measureact the downstr
leave the site and imp our Log No. 4-2-06-362.
over Fourth Creek, listed species in iredell
Tip No B-4553, Bridge
occurrences of federally listed
- ro ect will affect any
Iredell County
ording to our records theree efore, we do not believe this p J
Acc the project area,
County or near
species ourLogNo.4-2-06-363. The
over Railroad, whorled p Isotria medeoloides)
TIP No. B-4632, Bridge ogonia
veered heartleaf and small
Rutherford at ned dwarf .flo
federally thre 3
r°
and the federally endangered white irisette (Sisyrinchium dichotomum) occur in Rutherford
County. We recommend conducting habitat assessments and surveying any suitable habitat in
the project area for these species during their flowering period of March through May for
dwarf-flowered heartleaf, mid-May through early July for small whorled pogonia, and late May
through July for white irisette. There is winter habitat for the federally endangered Indiana bat
(Myotis sodalis) in Rutherford County. A visual survey of the bridge should be conducted to
ensure that bats are not using the bridge for temporary roosting. The NCDOT should check for
caves and mines near the project area and within its right-of-way. If there are no caves or mines
within or near the project area and if no Indiana bats are discovered using the bridge as a
temporary roosting site, the NCDOT can determine that the project will have no effect on the
Indiana bat. However, if there are caves or mines in the area and if the caves or mines will be
directly or indirectly impacted by the project, consultation should be initiated with this office
If we can be of assistance or if you have any questions about these comments, please contact
Ms. Denise Moldenhauer of our staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 226.
S' cerely,
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
cc:
Ms. Marla J. Chambers, Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator, North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, 4614 Wilgrove-Mint Hill Road, Suite M, Charlotte; NC 28227
Mr. Brian Wrenn, North Carolina Division of Water Quality, Central Office, 2321 Crabtree
Blvd., Suite 250, Raleigh, NC 27604
Ms. Polly Lespinasse, Mooresville Regional Office, North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301, Mooresville, NC 28115
Mr. Steve Lund, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 151 Patton
Avenue, Room 208, Asheville, NC 28801-5006
11
11
4
r
MEMORANDUM
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
44)-
V8 2006
'A0 T?& Qu
q
T FRB??h
TO: William T. Goodwin, Jr., P.E., NCDOT
FROM: Polly Lespinasse, NC Division of Water Quality, Mooresville Regional Office
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
May 23, 2006
SUBJECT: Scoping Review of NCDOT's Proposed Bridge Replacement Projects: B-4456 (Catawba County),
B-4468 (Cleveland County), B-4517 and B-4519 (Gaston County), and B-4553 (Iredell County)
In reply to your correspondence dated May 5, 2006 (received May 8, 2006) in which you requested comments for the
above referenced projects, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) offers the following comments:
Project Specific Comments
B-4456, Bridge No. 49 Over Interstate 40, Catawba County
Based on a review of topographical maps and the limited information provided, it appears that no jurisdictional streams
and/or wetlands exist within the project area. If the project limits change or jurisdictional streams and/or wetlands are
identified within the project limits, further evaluation may be required.
B-4468, Bridge No. 144 Over Sandy Run Creek, Cleveland County
Sandy Run Creek is Class C Waters of the State.
B-4517, Bridge No. 49 Over Crowder's Creek, Gaston County
Crowder's Creek is Class C; 303(d) Waters of the State. Crowder's 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 Crowder's 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.
B-4519, Bridge No. 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.
Noe Carolina
Naturally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Intemet: wvvw.ncvvaterqualitv.orR Mooresville, NC 28115
Phone [phone]
FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycied/10% Post Consumer Paper
Page 2
B-4553, Bridge No. 312 Over Fourth Creek, Iredell County
Fourth Creek is Class C; 303(d)-Waters of the State. Fourth Long Creek is on the 303(d) list for impaired use for aquatic,
life due to impaired biological integrity, turbidity and fecal coliform. 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 Fourth 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
1. DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. NCDOT should
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 should be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is approved under
General 401 Certification Number 3494/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for Survey Activities.
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 should not discharge directly into the stream. Storm water should 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 Storm Water Best Management
Practices.
7. If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area should be maintained to prevent direct contact between
curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete should not be discharged to
surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and fish kills.
8. Bridge supports (bents) should 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 should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and appropriate native woody species
should be planted. When using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area
with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact
allows the area to 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.
Page 3
11. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should 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 should be used to prevent
excavation in flowing water.
12. Heavy equipment should 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 should 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 should 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 should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-year floodplain. Approach fills should be
removed and restored to the natural ground elevation. The area should be stabilized with grass and planted with
native tree species. Tall fescue should not be used in riparian areas.
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.
2. If multiple pipes or barrels are required, they should be designed to mimic the 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 should 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.
3. 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 properly designed, sized and installed.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The NCDOT 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 Cottimission
Marella Buncick, US Fish and Wildlife Servide
Sonia Gregory, Central Office Wetlands Unit

y. STATE
d Aso
v?^
v rgTFR ?QO6
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ?'?R
?
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDSeO TIPPE
TIP v
GOVERNOR
May 5, 2006
Mr. John Hennessy
NCDENR - DWQ / WETLANDS
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
SUBJECT: Bridge Group No. 59
Dear Mr. Hennessy:
The Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch is starting the project
development, environmental and engineering studies for the following projects: B-4456, B-4468,
B-4517, B-4519, B-4553, and B-4632. The projects are included in the 2006=2012 North
Carolina Transportation Improvement Program and are scheduled for construction in fiscal
year(s) 2009, 2009, 2009, 2009, 2009, and 2010 (respectively).
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 onsite detour to the east of the existing bridge.
Replace in place with offsite detour.
B-4517
Replace in place with onsite detour to the south of the existing bridge.
Replace on new. alignment to the south of the existing bridge and maintain traffic on the
existing bridge.
B-4519
Replace in: place with offsite detour.
LOCATION:
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] PARKER LINCOLN BLDG
- SUITE 168
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone]
168
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 2728 CAPITOL BLVD RALEIGH 27
BRIDGE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT UNIT WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG NC 27604
1551 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
{
B-4553
Replace in place with onsite detour on north of the existing bridge.
Replace in place with onsite detour on south of the existing bridge.
B-4632
Replace in place with offsite detour.
Replace on new alignment to the South of the existing bridge and maintain traffic on the
existing bridge.
When available, we will provide you a copy of the Executive Summary of the Natural
Resources Technical Report (NRTR) for each project. At that time, we will solicit information
about these projects to be used in the preparation of federally funded Categorical Exclusions. If
your agency has critical information that can be furnished at this time, please feel free to do so.
If you have any questions concerning any of these projects, please contact Mr. Dennis Pipkin, PE
at 715-5515. Please include the TIP Project Number in all correspondence and comments.
Sincerely,
William T. Goodwin, Jr. PE
Bridge Project Development Unit Head
Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch

1877 1805

9 \
t
t 1804 i
1800 ? William C \
Friday JHS\ North Gaston
Senior HS
`
tew
in
\ 1001
/ 1803
di
1679 1724 1896 \ /
\ s
/
10

\ \\Ai `, 1859
180
1695
t \
fsf?
Ith / \ r
o
18961- ?/' cc h 1800
4
1711 .1 1694, 1848 4

171D J
- 14
39
1700
001
l
`
17D4. J%7

ae / / 1.7 2 27 . .03
2335
.33 / as ,s .a TMds 51. ae
"' 3
t x ` ,

/ 2278
i '° J S
/
1343 '6
/ 1371
s Elem DEleallas
h
/
os "0 '? 8
ton
Ga
county Ste, t kh BRIDGE
2289
PSI*

:h
-krf o
Community
Q es&wcawnty C09ege
FsmrlelasDem
/ /
I

ITE f 0- ?L
c
O .
Me
ur
Sav
r I 2271 Sapt Ch
/ th
Ch
1336 ro 1390 in 7
c ` Gingtes I
Sch ry" 2271
1336 F-" J 22772 i
-` 2378 ch
_ t
GASTON CO.
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA
SR 1800
Replace Bridge No. 155 over
Little Long Creek
Gaston County, North Carolina
TIP NO. B-4519
PROJECT VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 1

ILL

BRIDGE NO. 155
TO BE REPLACED

PROJECT AREA LIMITS '

ROM
?? sue.

1 ¦ t
m
1
SR IM
Replace Bridge No. 1W Over
Little Long Creek
Gaston County, North Caroina
11P NO. 4519
NOT TO SCALE FORE 3