19991300 Ver 1_Complete File_19991130

uo
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT.OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVIDMcCOY ,
GOVERNOR SECRETARY ca
November 22 1999
e r c
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office ' ??.,
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Raleigh,-NC. 27609
_t
ATTENTION:_Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
SUBJECT: Wilkes County, Replace Bridge No. 176 on SR 1706 over Hay Meadow.
Creek with a new structure on an improved alignment; TIP No. B-3077, State Project .
No. 8.2760801, Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1706(1).
Dear Sir:
Please fmd attached the Categorical Exclusion for the referenced project. The
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No.
176 with a new bridge structure on an improved alignment over Hay Meadow Creek
adjacent to the existing alignment. Traffic will be maintained during construction on an
off-site detour. The new structure will be a precast reinforced concrete box culvert
(RCBC) approximately 14.4 meters (47.0 feet) long to accommodate 3.0-meter (10.0-
foot) travel lanes and shoulders.
Bridge No. 176, constructed by NCDOT in 1957, carries SR 1706 over Hay
Meadow Creek in Wilkes County. It has one span that is 27 feet 7 inches in length. The
deck and bridge railings for the superstructure are composed of timber. The substructure
is composed of timber. Both the bridge rail and the substructure will be removed without
dropping them into Waters of the U.S. There is no potential for components of the deck
to be dropped into Waters of the U.S. during construction.
Hay Meadow Creek is the only jurisdictional surface water resource that will be
impacted. The recommended alternative includes no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands
and up to 24.4 meters (80.0 feet) of linear stream channel or 0.02 hectare (0.04 acre) of
jurisdictional surface water impacts. The project is being processed by the Federal
Highway Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion" (CE) in accordance with 23 CFR
771.115(b). Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose
to proceed under a Nationwide Permit in accordance with 61 Federal Register 65874,
65916 (December 13, 1996).
We anticipate that 401 General Water Quality Certification No. 2734 (Categorical
Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are providing one copy of the CE document to
the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,; Division of
Water Quality, for their review. The NCDOT will adhere to the general conditions of the
401 Water Quality Certification; therefore; written authorization from the NC Division of
Water Quality is not required.
If you have any questions, please contact Elizabeth L. Lusk at [phone], extension
335.
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
b Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Attachment
cc: Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Joe Mickey, NCWRC
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, DWQ
Mr. William J. Rogers, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E.; Roadway Design
Mr. Calvin W. Leggett, P.E., Program Development
Mr. A.L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
.Mr. W.E. Hoke, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Engineer
Mr. Jay Bissett, Jr., P.E., Unit Head
VMH3 `,IO1R9s uiuIpV uOiSIAWT
3d `.uIJ "I suIo x a?EQ
13 6/0
.LO(jDM `gour.Ig Ivjuau-molinug puu 3unmid 1
I E?Y?i `3d `?iocn uTi}IilE13 •Ij ai Q ?
' v
C"W
:poAolddd
sXvAigSiH;o uoisiAiQ
uoljvj.iodsuvj L jo TuatupodaQ jH
pug
uoijualsiumpV 9vAtg2iH jgaapa3
uoi;g?odsug.i,L jo patupodaQ SIl
uoisnjaxa jgapo2a;ga
LLO£-g ON dLL
10809LZ'8;aafo.Id MIS
(1)90LI - ZUR 13 foad pig'-ig.iapal
?jaa.I j MopgaLll XgH.IOAO
9L I 'ONI a3p!ag
90L T US
f4unoj saxliAj,
I
I

I
iaaut?ug ?utuczeid Iaa o.?d
ad `xpeig UpIxg
Itun 2uua2uigug Iue;InsuoD
F?qp I!Ufl ad ..If `uassig •v
too$# l
KOI.'.LIIOdS?N,Vl gI 'X 4W LHIddaG VNI'IOHV3 H.LHOAI
.••.... ioi 19, 5 9 £ •; ?
' Ia8euew Iaafold
gd `,K t11! k ueuuoN
?oul Isajntaoss6'llmayla .;,.,:.1;;,1•,
,iq
pa.redaid Iuaumao(I
8661 f-nnuuf
sgvmgglH JO uOISIAIQ
uoi;e;aodsue.i J„;o ;ualu;.Ieda(l jH
pug
uoUe.I;stutuIpv ,fensgg!H ie.Iap A
uoi;e;aodsuea,L jo ;uam;jvdaa Sfl
uoisniazg jeapoSa;a j
LLO£-S *ON dI.L
I0809LZ'81;)afo.Id MIS
(D90LI - ZHEI;aafo.Id MV-Ie.Iapad
3100.13 MopeaN 98H .10A0
9LI *ON 32pI.IH
90LI US
f4unoa saijltA*,
l
C

a

sXuP S I u. p!m punoiS pogjmsip
lit uo paluuld aq Ipm uot?eiaBan snoaougtaq juauuuuod io X iodutal
mma-ns aq; ut usgi iaglui )Iueq otg uiog palmado aq lpm juautdmba XnuaH
•jalum utuans aqp Ioujuoo of pamollu oq jou Illm olonuoo IaM
•afussud qsU opaduzt jou of se os (jooj 0•I) jajaut £•0 duns ialunoo !
oq ll!M (DgDU) ItanlnD xog ajaiouoD pootojup-d oql jo utouoq oqs
•juautdolanaP 13afoid alp BuunP pautuIumut oq IIlm (DUAL DN)
uotssTUtutoD saoanosaZl QJIIPI!Ak uutloipD gljoM oql tpyA uoiMutpaooD
:Ioafoid sigj uo paluautalduTt aq Ipm soinsuaui SuLvw1lo3 oqi `(xtpuaddd
ut iaUol aas) Ino.4 jtoddns Iou saop 3100-ID nnopuaW Aul-I gBnoglld •,,sapunoo lnoaj„ su
paluuSTsap si Imp uutlomo gjtoK uialsom uT saTjunoo LZ 3o ouo si ?4unoo swjj! 1
•uoTjotuisuoo pafold gutmp pautulu! uT Xlladoid puu papnloui
aq ll!m (s,dWq) saopuzd luautasumW Isag alquoilddu IId •siouduit IuIuautuoaTnua
aztuTAttui 1o ptonu of paluauialdutt oq ll!m somseaut pue sompaoo.Td pmpums IId •
SINHWIIWW03 MaL1 N UTAM 3 2I L1IL1i 'I
uo.1ou snp uuoij llnsoi of pajoadxo am sjoudun
luluoutuoitnua Iuijuulsgns ON •,,uotsnloxg luouoBaluo„ u su pautssujo uaoq suq puu
urei8o.td juautaouldo-d o2pug pid-Iuzapa3 otp jo uud si loofoid siq ,, joafotd juautaoeldat
a2puq u su (dIZ) utuaoad Iuautanoidutl uotjuUodsuu.i j VOOZ-866I aql ut poututua2oid si
II •3I20ao mop ow ?iupl gutsson 90L 12IS uo 44unoD sa)U!A& ut polmol sT 9L I 'ON aspug
LLO£-g 'ON dLL
10809LV81340.1d WIS
(I)90LI - ZH9;30rojd my-18.1apm
Va.13 MopeaW f-UH.tang
9LI 'oAI 03MIg

3
90L I US
,4unoj saiiiiA4,
a
t
1
•)Izon aql of
nnaxs.g I aluuuuxoiddu ut, seq ll •sauel janeul OM4.uo3 Butpinoid glptnn ui (laaj„ i i-,S I) s.ualaui
98.1 put, Buol (laa3 9Z) saalaut 6'L sT II 'L961 ut palalduuoo seen a2puq ftlsTxa aq.L
-
•saouapTsa.i uuuej panuins glues `pmllnouft, Xluuutud si eaze Xpnls QM L
•ojogsa3UtM gPOMJO quou 14unoo sa3UiM3o ease IZ~tm aql ui 3Wu4luool sanlas Xlueuuud
pt,oi olu •(gduu SS) giuq 06 sT peoi 3o uouloas snll 8uole luuul paads oql •uualsAS I
uotluogTssujD luuogoun j opuenalelS aql uu luoo-j lean-d a su pagTsst,lo ST 90L 12IS
mOI.LI(IN0 NIlsIX3 'III
000`0£Z$ ST dLL
1002-8661 aql uu loafo.id agl jo lsoo polt,uuulso oqZ •lsoo S e n n jo lgSu uT 000`01$ Pue lsoo
uoTlouulsuoo uu 000`SLZ$ $ulpnlaut ` 0001SI£$ si loafoid oql jo lsoo paluuuTlso aqZ
E
(gduu 09) qlw l 001 Xialuunxoidde
oq lltnn paads uSusap agl `}t.uoen uBtsop fauuuuutlaud uo posug •pasn su lte.upmns atagnn
(laai 8Z'£) ialauu p I luuoclTppu ut, pauapTen ag IITM qI !m uaplnogs aqZ suaplnogs (look -t,)
aalout Z' I put, souel (loos-01) sualauu 0•£ oenl sapnlouu sagououddu Xunnpuoi atLL •agpuq agl
Jo pua lsea aql uio4 (laaJ 065) s.ualaut 0.081 put, a2puq agl jo pua lsam agl uuo4 (laaj 01 Z)
s.ualauu 0119 ao (laa3 008) s.zalauu 11Z f,laluuuixoiddu pualxo Ilion 3poen gououddd
•s.ioplnogs put, souel lant,al
(loot-p I) .ualauu 0• £ oenl alepouuuuooou of puu gl2ual uu (laaJ L1) sialauu 1' 1 I ? 1QT9UITxo iddu
(Dgo-d) juanlno xoq alanuoo pao.uojunai lseoaid u aq lpm ainlongs enau aqs
•(I amgT3 aaS) 'LOLI 2IS Puu ZOOI )IS VIA -MOJOP 31!S
-jjo ut, uo uoulouulsuoo 8uunp poureluuuuu oq IITM otgjed•, •uotlt,ool Sutlstxa agl of luaoefpe
luoum2iju panozdutt uo ainlotuls mou a pm pooeldai aq IITM 9LI 'olnl a8pu9
'II

2
s
•amion.iis guTlsixo aip .ILau Iuauiu211e panoidun uo agpuq otp saortda.i d airtuaitd '
- •IuauTu2TtE Sugsixa atp uo a2puq atp aoutdw ptnom migi
pzdapisuoo Senn aniiruiaitr ou irqj (agpuq zip jo spua aip of Iuaou fpu Ajaiutpatutui san mo
snTpri (13 OOZ) ialatu 19 asianaT Imq of 3I3rq) food os si luatuuSttu Sutpsixo aqj
I Q d Ud 'Al T
i
•rair loafoid alripaunui atp ui Iuuairui oixoi/snopar q jo amasoid aip3o aouapcna
Auu puij lou pip uoiloadsui alis uo uu puu sp,iomi Iriuauuuoiinuo oitgnd jo gon;Dsod
'Mot si Builm lordmi XlilTin
aq.L •Xrnn jo itt`du aip opisino (iaaj OOT) s.1alatu S'0£ AIalruuixoiddu a2puq oql jo opis itliou _
atp uo pairool si ouil ,Clitiln puailiano ud ?iinuTOin loafozd aip ut sauil aannas so Talrnn otlgnd
ou air ajatLL oBpuq atp jo ?ItuioIA atp ui atquo oildo iagg jo u2is ou si aiagL
•f4unoo atp jo rare siui saoinaas snq Ioudtui AIQS.zanpr lou Itinn inolop
olis-jjo ue polroiput aoloanQ uoilepodsuuiZ IoottoS AiunoD swipAN aU -Wcl atp ui (Z) oAu
pur ?jd otp ui (Z) onu `oSpuq atp jo s2uissoio snq Ioottos App (t,) mo3 an iiogjL f
•suoiltpuoo lane Buunp `ataa.io aui uT pau3nl.Tano pur Arnnproi atp jjo ur.i `aOpuq
atp uo papp IS atonlan r uatlnn paunooo II •agpuq otp jo ,?iiutoTn alp uT SJUOX aanp Isut aql
u. pyA pouodoi uaaq sell Iuoppm auo luip solmipui gourig BuuaauiBug oWuis Pitt,
'OZOZ read aqi Xq pdn OOb
of asuaioui of poloofoid pur (pdn) Aup sad satontan OOZ Xtiuauno si auunton ojUUiZ
-apis isam atp uo (IaaJ 8) s-Ialatu t"Z pur apis Isea atp uo (laa3 t,) s.ialatu Z' l AIalruzixoiddu
an a2puq aqj of sattouoaddr atp uo stppinn iaplnoi{S •o2puq aul jo isra pairool si
an-m3 snipui (Iooj OOZ) puu iolatu 19 r pue a2puq atp jo isann paluoot st anmo snipm (looj
OOZ) ialatu 19 d 'ogpuq oql jo spua tpoq Ir iood AJan si Iuauiu2119 Iriuozuoq aqj
•s.uattrzl-ituas ?IoTUI-.iolortl
ioi (suol OZ) suMi20tpl VVt`8I Pur satonlan alSuis Tod (suoi t,t) souri2olPi OOL`Zt 30
siggiam uunuiixrtu io3 palsod si a2puq aqj `,?Ijuosaid '001 atgissod r jo Ino 9'69 si o8puq
aTp jo Btu AouoToWns otp spzooaa Inuit oouuualutrW aSpug atp of Buipioood

t
I
i
VI. ESTIMATED COST
ITEM ALTERNATE A ...ALTERNATE B
COST (RECOMMENDED) ;
COST
New Bridge Structure (Culvert) 87,600 87,600
Bridge Removal 8,000 8,000
Roadway Approaches 142,400 142,400
Temporary Detour 163,000 --
Engineering & Contingencies 74,000 37,000
Total Construction 475,000 275,000
Right of Way $40,000 $40,000
I Total Cost I $515,000 I $315,000
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 176 will be replaced with a culvert near its existing .location with
realigned approaches. Traffic will be maintained on an off-site detour during construction.
The new structure will be a precast RCBC approximately 14.4 meters (47.0 feet)
in length to accommodate two 3.0 meters (10 feet) lanes and two 1.2 meter (4 foot)
shoulders. It will be constructed at approximately the same elevation as the existing bridge.
The proposed culvert bottom will be counter sunk 0.3 meters (1 foot) below the surface of
the bottom of the stream channel to eliminate impacts to the trout stream.
Approach work will extend approximately 64.0 meters (210 feet) from the west end
of the bridge and approximately 180.0 meters (590 feet) from the east end of the bridge.
It includes two 3.0 meter (10 foot) lanes and 1.0 meter (3.28 foot) shoulders tapering to an
7
a
I
additional 1.2 meters (4 feet) where guardrail is required. Based on preliminary design
work the design speed will be approximately 100 km/h (60 mph).
_ The off-site detour will be along portions of SR 1707, SR 1002 and SR 1706 and
it is approximately 7.7 km (4.8 miles) in length. See Figure 1.
The NCDOT 11th Division Engineer concurs in the recommendation of the
preferred improvement.
VIII. NATURAL RESOURCES

The proposed project study area lies in a rural area of Wilkes County,
approximately 6.0 km (3.7 miles) north of North Wilkesboro, North Carolina (Figure 1).
Methodology
Information sources used to prepare this report include: U.S. Geological Survey
j (USGS) Wilkesboro quadrangle map (1966); Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil maps
of Wilkes County (1984); United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National
Wetlands Inventory Map (Wilkesboro 1994); USFWS list of protected and candidate
species (1997); North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database of rare
species and unique habitats (1997); North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (NCDENR) Division of Water Quality (DWQ) water resource data; and
s North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) proposed critical habitat
information. Research using these resources was conducted prior to the field investigation.
A general field survey was conducted along the proposed project corridor on
February 3, 1997. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were identified using
a variety of observation techniques including active searching, visual observations with
binoculars, and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, tracks, scats, and
burrows).
Impact calculations were based on the worst-case scenario using the full 24.4 meter
(80.0 foot) wide right-of-way limits and the width of the replacement structure, the width
of the stream for aquatic impacts, and the length of the project approaches. The actual
construction impacts should be less, but without specific replacement structure design
information the worst-case was assumed for the impact calculations.
8
v
1
Definitions for areal descriptions used in this report are as follows: "project study
area", "project area", and "project corridor" denote the specific area being directly impacted
by each alternative. "Project vicinity" denotes the area within a 1.6 kilometer (1.0 mile)
_ radius of the project area.
Topography and Soils
The topography of the project vicinity is characterized as rolling hills with moderate
to steeply sloping banks along the major streams. Project area elevation is approximately
335 meters (1100 feet) above mean sea level. The project site lies within the Blue Ridge
Mountain Physiographic Province.
According to the soil map for Wilkes County (SCS,1984), the areas along the creek
are dominated by Rion fine sandy loam (25 to 60 % slopes), which is described as a well
drained soil, on side slopes of the Piedmont uplands. Within the northeast and northwest
quadrants are some smaller areas mapped as Masada gravelly sandy clay loam (8 to 15 %),
which is a well drained, eroded soil found on stream terraces adjacent to flood plains along
streams. In the southeast quadrant is an area of Pacolet sandy loam. This soil is well
drained and is on ridges and side slopes on Piedmont uplands. There are no hydric soils
mapped within the project area. These soil types were confirmed in the field by taking soil
borings.
Ll
Biotic Resources
Living systems described in the following sections include communities of
associated plants and animal. These descriptions refer to the dominant flora and fauna in
each community and the relationship of these biotic components. Classification of plant
communities is based on a system used by the NCNHP (Schafale and Weakley, 1990).
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are used for the plant and
animal species described. Subsequent references to the same species include the common
name only. Vascular plant names follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968).
Terrestrial and aquatic wildlife were determined through field observations, evaluation of
habitat, and review of field guides and other documentation (Conant, 1958; Farrand, 1993; _
Robbins et al., 1966; and Whitaker, 1980).
9
5
1
Terrestrial Communities
The predominant terrestrial communities found in the project study area are man-
dominated and mesic mixed hardwood forest communities. There are no hydrologic
indicators or hydric soils present within the project area. Dominant faunal components
associated with these terrestrial areas are discussed in each community description. Many
species are adapted to the entire range of habitats found along the project alignment but
may not be mentioned separately in each community description.
Man-Dominated Community
This highly disturbed community within the project area includes the road shoulders
and the fields within all quadrants of the project area. Many plant species are adapted to
these disturbed and regularly maintained areas. Regularly maintained areas along the road
shoulders and the fields within the northwest, northeast, and southwest quadrants are
dominated by fescue (Festuca spp.), ryegrass (Lolium spp.), plantain (Plantago spp.), white
clover (Trifolium repens), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), and thistle (Cirsium discolor).
Adjacent to the road shoulder within the southeast quadrant is a steep bank which is
irregularly maintained and includes broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus), blackberry
(Rubus spp.), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and aster (Aster spp.).
On the day of the site visit, a red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus), turkey vulture
(Cathartes aura), and Northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) were observed in the
field in these areas. Species such as Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), Eastern wood peewee
(Contopus virens), American robin (Turdus migratorius), striped skunk (Mephitis
mephitis), Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), Eastern mole (Scalopus aquaticus),
black racer (Coluber constrictor), and rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta) are often attracted to
these disturbed habitats.
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest Community
This community occurs in the southeast quadrant of the project area along a rocky
slope on the east side of Hay Meadow Creek. The canopy layer is dominated by tulip
poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), white pine (Pinus strobus), shortleaf pine (P. echinata),
and red oak (Quercus rubra). The understory includes red maple (Acer rubrum). The
shrub layer includes mountain laurel (Kalmia latifolia) which is primarily growing along
the rocky slope; Eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), and American holly (Ilex opaca).
- The herbaceous layer includes Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), common
10
a
I
greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), and Japanese honeysuckle.
On the day of the site visit, a song sparrow (Melospiza melodis) and tracks of
raccoon (Procyon lotor) were observed in the field. Other species which may reside or
forage in these areas include downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), Eastern bluebird
(Sialia sialias), Eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus), coal skink (Eumeces anthracinus),
Eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis), timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus),
American toad (Bufo americanus), and blackbelly salamander (Desmognathus
quadramaculatus).
Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community in the project area exists within Hay Meadow Creek.
Approximately 46.0 meters (150.0 feet ) downstream of Bridge No. 176, Hay Meadow
Creek has its confluence with Mulberry Creek. Within the project area, Hay Meadow
Creek is approximately 5.5 meters (18.0 feet) wide. On the day of the field investigation
the water was clear and moving moderately fast. The depth of the creek ranges from 0.1
to 0.3 meters (0.3 to 1.0 foot). The creek bottom was visible, and the substrate consisted
of a fine micaceous sand with some gravel, cobbles and boulders.
Vegetation-along the creek banks was sparse, and the banks were slightly eroded.
Scattered vegetation along the creek banks includes tag alder (Alnus serrulata), red maple,
black walnut (Juglans nigra), blackberry, Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), mountain
laurel, Japanese honeysuckle, and common greenbrier.
On the day of the site visit a tessellated darter (Etheostoma olmstedi) was observed
in the creek. Species such as the Eastern painted turtle (Chrysemys picta picta), Northern
water snake (Natrix sipedon sipedon), bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), and beaver (Castor
canadensis) may also reside or forage within this aquatic community or along the waters
edge. Macroinvertebrates such as larvae of the mayfly (Ephemeroptera), stonefly
(Plecoptera), and caddisfly (Trichoptera) would be expected to be found within the snag
habitats and within the riffle areas in the creek. On the day of the site investigation, mayfly,
stonefly and chironomid larvae (midges) were collected by dipnetting in the creek
According to Joseph Mickey, District 7 Biologist for the NCWRC, species that
would likely be found in the project area of Bridge No. 176 may include rosyside dace
(Clinostomus funduloides), redlip shiner (Notropis chiliticus), creek chub (Semotilus spp.),
fantail darter (Etheostoma flabellare), and bluehead chub. Additional species which may
11
E
I
be found in Mulberry Creek include redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritiis) and piedmont
darter (Percina crassa).
According to Fish (1968), there is no fisheries data available for Hay Meadow
Creek. Fish caught in Mulberry Creek include redbreast sunfish and smallmouth bass
(Micropterus dolomieui).
Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Biotic community impacts resulting from project construction are addressed
separately as terrestrial impacts and aquatic impacts. However, impacts to terrestrial
communities, particularly in locations exhibiting gentle slopes, can result in the aquatic
community receiving heavy sediment loads as a consequence of erosion. Construction
impacts may not be restricted to the communities in which the construction activity occurs.
Efforts will be made to ensure that no sediment leaves the construction site.
Terrestrial Communities
I
The man-dominated and mesic mixed hardwood forest communities serve as
nesting, foraging and shelter habitat for fauna. Removal of plants and other construction
related activities will result in the displacement and mortality of faunal species in residence.
Although there will be no direct impacts to the mesic mixed hardwood forest, animals
displaced from the impacted communities may concentrate into this smaller area. This may
cause degradation of remaining habitat and increased mortality due to disease, predation,
and starvation. Individual mortalities are likely to occur to terrestrial animals from
construction machinery used during clearing activities.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the relative abundance of each
community present in the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of these communities. Often, project construction does not require
L the entire right-of-way; therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less. Alternate B will
result in the least amount of impact to the terrestrial and aquatic communities, as traffic will
be detoured off-.site. Table 1 details the anticipated impacts to terrestrial and aquatic
communities by habitat type.
12
5
I
TABLE 1
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO
TERRESTRIAL and AQUATIC COMMUNITIES
HECTARES ACRES
Bridge No. 176 Man- Aquatic Combined Total
Replacement Dominated Community
Impacts Community
Alternate A 0.74(l.83) 0.02 (0.04) 0.76(l.87)
Temporary 0.43 (1.06) 0.02 (0.05) 0.45 (l.l l)
Alternate B 0.74(l.83) 0.02 (0.04) 0.76(l.87)
(Recommended)
I NOTES:
• Impacts are based on 24.4 meter (80 foot) Right-of-Way limits.
• Actual construction impacts may be less than those indicated above,
calculations were based on the worst-case scenario.
0
Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community in the study area exists within Hay Meadow Creek.
Alternate B (recommended) will result in the least disturbance of stream bottom with up
to 24.4 meters (80 feet) or 0.02 hectare (0.04 acres) as traffic will be detoured off site (This
T represents worst-case conditions; actual disturbance area will likely be less). In addition,
impacts to the adjacent man dominated communities can have a direct impact on aquatic
• communities. The construction of the culvert and approach work will likely result in an
increase in sediment loads and water temperatures and a decrease in dissolved oxygen in
the short term. Construction activities can also increase the possibility of toxins, such as
engine fluids and particulate rubber, entering the waterways. The combination of these
factors can potentially cause the displacement and mortality of fish and local populations
of invertebrates which inhabit these areas.
Potential adverse effects to surface waters can be minimized through the use of
NCDOT's Best Management Practices, (BMPs) for the protection of surface waters
13
a
1
Water Resources
This section describes each water resource and its relationship to major water
systems. The proposed project lies within the Yadkin-Pee Dee River drainage basin.
Water Resource Characteristics
Hay Meadow Creek flows southwest through the proposed project area with a width
of 5.5 meters (18.0 feet). This section of the creek has a classification of C from the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), Division of
Water Quality (DWQ). Class C indicates freshwaters protected for secondary recreation,
fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife. The Classification
Index number for this portion of the creek is 12-42-7.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
for Wilkes County indicates the project area lies in Zone A, where no base flood elevations
have been determined.
it
i
Benthic macroinvertebrates, or benthos, are organisms that live in and on the bottom
substrates of rivers and streams. The DWQ uses benthos data as a tool to monitor water
quality as benthic macroinvertebrates are sensitive to subtle changes in water quality. The
DWQ also uses the North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity (NCIBI) as another method to
determine general water quality. The method was developed for assessing a stream's
= biological integrity by examining the structure and health of its fish community. According
to Ms. Nancy Guthrie, the DWQ does not have any benthic macroinvertebrate data or
NCIBI data for Hay Meadow Creek. Ms. Guthrie also indicated that there was no data
available for any nearby locations that would give reliable information about the water
quality at this site.
The Wilkes County Watershed Map (1994) indicates that the project area is not
within a Critical Area.
There are no water resources classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), water
supplies (WS-1 or WS-II), or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) within 1.6 kilometer
(1.0 miles) of the project area.
A review of point-source dischargers located within the project vicinity was
conducted. Point-source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted
through the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System program. Any discharger
is required to register for a permit. There are no point-source dischargers within the project
14

vicinity.
Non-point source refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater flow
or no defined point of discharge. In the project area, there is virtually no buffer area
between the cow pasture in the northeastern quadrant and the creek, thus non-point runoff
from excrement can cause water quality degradation. In addition, stormwater runoff from
SR 1706 and runoff from any fertilizer or pesticides used on the fields within the project
area may cause water quality degradation.
Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Vri
lti,
Impacts to the water resources will result due to the placement of a culvert in the
creek channel. In the short term, construction of the culvert and approach work will
increase sediment loads. Construction of the culvert and approach work will increase
sediment loads, and additional sediment loading can reduce flow and result in a decrease
in oxygen levels.
The NCDOT, in cooperation with DWQ of the NCDENR (formerly NCDEM) has
developed a sedimentation control program for highway projects which adopts formal
BMPs for the protection of surface waters. The following are methods to reduce
sedimentation and water quality impacts:
• strict adherence to BMPs for the protection of surface waters during the life of the
project
• reduction and elimination of direct and non-point discharge into the water bodies
and minimization of activities conducted in streams
• placement of temporary ground cover or re-seeding of disturbed sites to reduce
runoff and decrease sediment loadings
t
• reduction of clearing and grubbing along streams
Special Topics
Jurisdictional Issues: Waters of the United States
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the
15

Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Waters of the United States are regulated by the United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE).
No wetlands will be impacted by the subject project as Hay Meadow Creek has well
defined banks within the bridge replacement corridor. Investigation into wetland occurrence
in the project impact area was conducted using methods of the 1987 Wetland Delineation
Manual. Project construction cannot be accomplished without infringing on jurisdictional
surface waters. Anticipated surface water impacts fall under the jurisdiction of the
USACOE. Up to 24.4 meters (80 feet) of linear stream channel or 0.02 hectare (0.04 acre)
of jurisdictional surface water impacts may occur due to the proposed replacement of
Bridge No. 176 with a RCBC.
Permits
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USACOE,
1344), a permit will be required from the USACOE for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States".
Since the subject project is classified as a Categorical Exclusion, it is likely that this
project will be subject to the Nationwide Permit Provisions of 33 CFR 33-.5 (A) 23. This
permit authorizes any activities, work and discharges undertaken, assisted, authorized,
regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part, by another federal agency and that the
activity is "categorically excluded" from environmental documentation because it is
included within a category of actions which neither individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the environment. However, final permit decisions are left to the
discretionary authority of the USACOE and DWQ.
A 401 Water Quality Certification, administered through the NCDENR will also
be required. This certificate is issued for any activity which may result in a discharge into
waters for which a federal permit is required. Wilkes County is designated as a "Trout
County". Thus, coordination will be maintained with NCWRC during the development of
this project.
Wilkes County is one of the "trout counties" in western North Carolina. However,
NCWRC has advised that Hay Meadow Creek does not support trout. The DWQ stream
classification does not include trout (Tr.)
Foundation investigations will be required for the project. The investigations will
include test borings in soil and/or rock for in-situ testing as well as obtaining samples for
laboratory testing. This may require test borings in streams. This is covered under General
16
6
I
401 Certification No. 3027/Nationwide Permit No. 6
Mitigation
Since this project is likely to be covered by Nationwide Permit 23 and no wetland
impacts are anticipated, mitigation should not be required by the USACOE. Mitigation for
impacts to surface waters of less than 45.7 meter (150 feet) are generally not required by
the USACOE. A final determination regarding mitigation requirements rests with the
USACOE and DWQ.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals have been or are in the process of decline
due either to natural forces or their inability to coexist with humans. Rare and protected
species listed for Wilkes County, and any likely impacts to these species as a result of the
proposed project construction are discussed in the following sections.
It Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with 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 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) does not list any federally
protected species for Wilkes County as of the November 4, 1997 listing. One species, the
bog turtle (clemmys muhlenbergi), is listed as threatened by similarity of appearance.
Clemmys muhlenbergi (Bog turtle)
Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance T(S/A)
Family: Emydidae
L Date Listed: 01 May 1997
The bog turtle is North Carolina's smallest turtle, measuring 7 to 10 cm (3
to 4 in.) In length. It has a dark brown carapace and a black plastron. "The bridge
orange or yellow blotch on each side of the head and neck is a readily identifiable
characteristic. The bog turtle inhabits damp grassy fields, bogs and marshes in the
mountains and western Piedmont.
The bog turtle is shy and secretive and will burrow rapidly in mud or debris
when disturbed. The bog turtle forages on insects, worms, snails, amphibians and
17

71
seeds. In June or July, three to five eggs are laid in a shallow nest in moss of loose
soil. The eggs hatch in about 55 days.
The bog turtle is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of Appearance (T
S/A). This is due to its similarity of appearance to another rare species that is listed
for protection. T S/A species are not subject to Section 7 consultation and a
biological conclusion for this species is not required.
No habitat present within project corridor.
Federal Species of Concern
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered
Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Species designated as FSC are
defined as taxa which may or may not be listed in the future. These species were formerly
Candidate 2 (C2) species or species under consideration for listing for which there is
insufficient information to support listing. Some of these species are listed as Endangered,
Threatened, or Special Concern by the NCNEP list of Rare Plant and Animal Species and
are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North
Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979; however, the level of protection
given to state listed species does not apply to NCDOT activities. Table. 2 includes listed
FSC species for Wilkes County and their state classifications.
18
a
I

I
TABLE 2
FEDERAL SPECIES OF CONCERN
WILKES COUNTY
Scientific Name North Carolina Habitat
(Common Name) Status Present
Dendroica cerulea SR Yes
Cerulean warbler
Speyeria diana SR No
(Diana fritillary butterfly)

Juglans cinerea NL No
(Butternut)

Orthotrichum keeverae E No
eever's bristle-moss
NOTES:
E Denotes Endangered (species which are afforded protection by state
laws).
T Denotes Threatened (species which are afforded protection by state
laws).
SR Denotes Significantly Rare (species for which population
monitoring and conservation action is recommended).
NL Denotes Not listed (species for which there is no state designation).
A search of the NCNHP database no showed occurrences of any Federal Species
of Concern within the project vicinity.!
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
No habitat is present for federally protected species, however, habitat is present for
one FSC species, the cerulean warbler. According to the NCNHP database, there have been
no reported occurrences of any Federal Species of Concern or state protected species. No
individuals were observed at the time of the site visit.
19
6
I IX CULTURAL EFFECTS
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historical
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 35 CFR Part 800.
Section 106 requires that for federally funded, licensed, or permitted projects having an
effect on properties listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation can be given the opportunity to comment.
In a Concurrence Form, dated June 5,1997; the State Historic Preservation.Office
(SHPO) concurred that there are no historic architectural resources either listed in or
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places located in the project's area
of potential effect. A copy of the SHPO concurrence form is included in the Appendix.
The SHPO, in a memorandum dated March 14, 1997, stated the project area is
considered unlikely to have any archaeological sites and therefore, SHPO recommended
that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project. A copy
of the SHPO memorandum is included in the Appendix.
I
X. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of the
inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse affect 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 significant change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
T
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. No relocatees are
expected with implementation of the proposed alternatives.
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 parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl
20
I
I refugees of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
No geodetic survey markers will be impacted.
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 U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS). Since the bridges will be replaced
at the existing location, the Farmland Protection Policy Act does not apply.
The 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 project is located in Wilkes County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR Part 51 is not
applicable because the proposed project is located in an attainments area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project. There are
no receptors located in the immediate project area. The projects impact on noise and air
quality will not be significant.
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 SIP 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 CAAA 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
t Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed no
r
underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area.
Wilkes County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program. The
approximate 100 year floodplain in the project area is shown in Figure 3. The amount of
floodplain area to be affected is not considered to be significant.
21
¦
All borrow and solid waste sites will be the responsibility of the Contractor. Solid
waste will be disposed of in strict adherence to the NC Division of Highways "Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures". The Contractor will observe and comply with
all laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees regarding the disposal of solid waste.
Solid waste will not be placed into any existing land disposal sites that is in violation of
_ state or local rules and regulations. Waste and debris will be disposed of in areas that are
outside the right-of-way and provided by the Contractor. The Contractor will be
responsible for obtaining borrow sites, delineating wetlands in borrow sites, and obtaining
written concurrence on delineated wetlands in borrow sites from the Corps of Engineers.
Borrow material will not be stockpiled or disposed adjacent to or in areas where they may
runoff with stormwater into streams and impoundments. Where it is absolutely necessary
to store materials adjacent to streams, they will be stored above the mean highwater mark
in such a manner that they would not runoff with stormwater. Disposal of waste and debris
will not be allowed in areas under the Corps of Engineers regulating jurisdiction. In the
event that COE jurisdictional areas cannot be avoided, the Department will be responsible
for mitigation.
The Contractor will maintain the earth surface of all waste areas, both during the
construction phase and until the completion of all seeding and mulching, or other erosion
control measures specified, in a manner that will effectively control erosion and siltation
into areas under the Corps of Engineers regulatory jurisdiction, streams and impoundments.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no significant adverse
environmental effects will result from implementation of the project. The project is a
Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of significant
environmental consequences.
22
¦
1
FIGURES
t

1
\
1J` 'e\ 1703 \
1792 \ \ ' •"
\ 1
I I
1 l
fl
?a

17e9
r..K
BRIDGE NO. 176 -

•
' .
?
o /

i
i I9W
\ I
2097 Z
.
/
- .22
R 2112
R
1

/ o
1969

1

\
1002

1

\
16
2097

O o ? `0 1]9D
?. 9 1
O r 'D zc7s
I
NCDOT HIGHWAY MAP SCALE 2 1 MILE
a
FIGURE 1
SITE LOCATION MAP
TIP NO. B-3077
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
BRIDGE NO. 176 ON SR 1706
WILKES COUNTY, NC
¦

Roaring GaD 1
6 '
ira0hl11 Thur.'ond ``
=i 1
McGiadv Austm
Norri Goo
I'm' 6 malls MdIK C S
W,lbar
6 6 Mayi
Roaring 1 n sv e
Arhngton-
R
wer
ulDeir 7 Fanplal
- Onda I.
Millers 90.
P? reek 6! '
N ' kesDa
? d se9ro u
,
'-'- CvI le
O ?
0 - ?.
J?\ Fer
uson 13
F
lls
g otarran
a
w \ ' -- -I'
Roamer
_?

STUDIED DETOUR ROUTE
??
t' ?
/?I
?

1. y
?
?
?;1 Hi ?4 ?
r ?,

• '
t'

* ` ?l „y 1

??
'i
i
- L

c

i ?,
? !

t
a t ?
. ?.
??- ?;
.'.L_
t
I
'tK
3
NNE
ZONE X
Ell ZONE A-!
BRIDGE NO. 176
cr..- ?..? ..4.
AA '
ROAD
141
FENIA MAP :ii 370256 0175 B
EFFECTIVE DATE MAY I5, 1991
NOT TO SCALE
r
L
LEGEND
ZONE A -NO BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS DETERMINED.
ZONE X -AREAS DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE 500-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN.
FIGURE 3
FLOOD PLAIN MAP
TIP NO. B-3077
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
BRIDGE NO. 176 ON SR 1706
WILKES COUNTY, NC
in

F
a
FACING EAST - OVERVIEW OF BRIDGE #176
FACING WEST- OVERVIEW OF BRIDGE #176
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
BRIDGE NO. 176 ON SR 1706
WILKES COUNTY
FIGURE 3A
TIP NO. B-3077
¦
I7

v

BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
BRIDGE NO. 176 ON SR 1706
WILKES COUNTY
FIGURE 313
TIP NO. B-3077
¦
FACING NORTH - OVERVIEW OF BRIDGE #176
FACING SOUTH- OVERVIEW OF BRIDGE #176
VT
k-
APPENDIX A
¦

Wiftes County Schooi's t 1

201 West Main Street - 1
Superintendent Wilke sboro, North Carolina 2869-1,
Dr. Joseph H. Johnson Q 10-66 7-1 121
-=^"''???ir=.t n
- Associate Superintendent 910-838-021 FAX D ?;,;;? •. -:,•.C:
Dr. Linda H. Greene
Assistant Superintendents -
Gic^.::. -!o:.u
K. Wayne Barker
C. Eezene Reavis
Julv 7, 1997
Mr. Norman Willey
Wetherell Associates, Inc.
4915 Waters Edge Drive
Suite 295
Raleigh. NC 27606
Dear. M; r. Willey:
A few months aao I received written information from the Department of
Transportation. Division of Highways for "request for scoping" comments concerning
four bridles in Wilkes County. The information requested pertained to school bus travel
on these bridges and the impact to travel if the roads were closed during the replacement
of the bridles. After reviewing the routes in question, it was determined very little
impact to school bus transportation would occur with TIP No. B-3071, B-3072, or B-
3077. However, construction and closing the road on TIP No. B-3079 would cause a
routing problem for mutiple school buses, serving nearly twenty children at several
different schools. I spoke to Mr. Herman Lancaster in regards to the situation.
Sincerel-,- vours.

Charles Wooten, Director of Transportation
Wilkes Countv Schools
¦
l

Carolina'Xlilcllife Resources Commi ssion `_
- Nor`?h
SS, 919-733-3391
512 N. Salisbury Screet, Raleigh, Nor-,.h Carolina Executive Director
Charles R. Fullwood, E
1viEvlOR NDUN1
TO: H. Franklin Vick. P.E.. Manager
Pl: nnin` and Envirormental Branch; NCDOT
FRONd: Stephanie E. Goudreau. _vit. Region Coordinator _
? - •,i cl-t..
Habitat Conservation Program ')_
DATE 'larch 11. 1997
SUBJECT: Scoping comments for replacement of Bridge 176 on SR 1706 over Hay
Meadow Creek. Wilkes County. TIP -B-30 77.
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our review and preliminary
comments on the subject project..-,-
Ha Ieado,.v Creek does not support trout. and our comments to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers will reflect this during the 404 permit process. We have the following general
comments for minimizing adverse impacts to fisheries resources:
1) If concrete will be used. worn must be accomplished so that "vet concrete does not contact
stream water. This will lessen the chance of altering the stream's water chemistry and
causing a fish kill.
21 Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the stream channel in
order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the lik-eilhood of lntioducing other pollutants
into the stream.
?l Temporary or peirnanent herbaceous ve?etation should be planted on all bare soil within
13 dati's i1997. then tleit\CDOT should return erosion control. 11 li April 1998 to reseed if s
doneatter 1 October
necessary.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment during the early stages of this
project. If you have any questions re?arding these comments. please contact me at 70-1 6-;--
-1_57
1
•
February 26. 1997

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Ja mes B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes. Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
.kIEMORANDUM
LTI.KXA
IT
A&4
I D FE F1
17JP
r t#A r,
f. J
.t •`--ti-" _ _ _ list
To: Mr. Byron Brady, NCDOT, Planning 8: Environmental
From: Cvndi Bell, NC Division of Water Quality C, L 6
Subiect: Water Quality Checklist for Bridge Replacement Projects
Reference your correspondence dated Februarv 12, 1997. in which you requested comments concerning
the scope of work to be performed by Wetherill Associates. Inc., for five bridge replacement projects. The
Division of Water Quality requests that NCDOT and iLs consultant consider the following generic
environmental commitments for design and construction of bridge replacements:
A. DWQ requests that DOT strictly adhere to North Carolina regulations entitled " '? tandards
in Sensitive Watersheds", (15A NCAC 04B .00?24)'bhroughout design and construction for nc
project in the area that drain -t streams having WS (Water Supply), ORS;' (Outstanding.
Resource \N`ater), MQW (IIigh Quality Water). B (Body Contact), SA (Shellfish Water)
(Trout''Vater) classifications to protect existing uses.
B. DWQ requests that bridges be replaced on existing location with road closure, when practical. If
an on-site detour is necessary, remediation measures in accordance with DWQ requirements for
General 401 Certification 2726/Nationwide Permit No. 33 (Temporary Construction, Access and
Dewatering) must be followed.
C. DWQ requests that hazardous spill catch basins be installed at any bridge crossing a strca m
classified w; HQW or WS (Water Supply). The number of catch basins installed should be
determined by the design of the bridge, so that runoff would enter said basin(s) rather than
direcdv flowing into the stream.
D. To the maximum extent practicable. DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek.
E. Wedand impacts should be avoided (including sediment and erosion control
structures/measures) to the maximum extent practical. It' this is not passible, alternatives that
minimize wetland impacts should be chosen. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts will he
required by DWQ if impacts exceed one acre. Smaller impacts may require mitigation by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
F. Borrow/waste areas should not he located in wetlands. It is likely that compensatory mitigation
,,till he required if wetlands are impacted by waste or borrow.
G. DWQ Prefers replacement of bridges witlt bridges. If the new• structure is to be a culvert, it
should be countersunk to allow unimpeded fish passage through the crossing.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal opportunity Altirmalive Action Employer 50%b recycled/10 %o post consumer paper
T
Mr. uvron Brady Memo
Pebruarv 26. 1`.x`•17
PaL,e 2
II. If foundation test boringS will be required, this should be noted in the document. C'Cotechnical
work is approved under Gcner l 401 Certification Number.10?7/Nationwide Permit No. 6 for
Survey Activities. Written concurrence from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
.gineers is required in designated mountain trout counties.
and U.S. Army Corps of Em
I. If this project is processed as a Categorical Exclusion. NCDOT is reminded that nuugation will
he required if wetland impacts exceed one acre, in accordance with DWQ Wetland Rules 115A
NCAC 2I1.0?;06 (h)(2)) -
Tile attached t`lhle htls been prepared by DWQ for your assistvtce in studying the systems involved ill
these bridge replacements. This information includes the DWQ Index Number, DWQ Strewn
Classification, river basin, and preliminary comments for each crossing. Please note that National
W, eland Inventory (,N'R'I) map references are not to be replaced by onsite wetland determinations by
qualified biologists.
Thank you for your request for DWQ input. DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires satisfaction of water quality concerns, to ensure that water quality standards are met
and designated uses are not lost or degraded. Questions regarding the 401 Certification or other water
quality issues should be directed to Cyndi Bell at (919) 7.3-1786 in DWQ's Water Quality Environmental
Scienczs Branch.
cc: Michelle Suverkruhbe
Melba McGee
B29 36.DOC

5
N
N
a
z
LU

N
>` N 'J
?O
O t

I o' 7 a 5A a o7 aa
a c-

= 1 -y a
3° a n4 a U
??
c 3> ° 3-
3 01 p

c=?? y Y ?
c c o ?-
p
=
X
C3 z y
0 -
:9 3 >
>
a m a
3 ?i a
c i s
E O U Q? V
7
O^ m O y N .?
a
a c w ?_

O ' N N H a O .p.. O

D N
7 N
O C O N p V ?. O

> G N

a ?^
y p 7 .V 72 N C
7
0
U ?_ .N C

(.)
p p
AC n '? C
)
?
i .7- _
'N A f6
N
C f+ O
N fC
y'
N
C y N f7
C ,_ d = V y f0

z ? I z 3 3 z= -
d m
p
= - CD
ai
12 r W 4) a
d } C C C Y
f0 } } }
I
}

C fS]

v ? I y U
.ch CJ I cn
O ? U ?
U !
I I
i
!

v I

I ?
L%l
N
N
Q

p
O
c0
z
>K '-'
I N I

tD

N

c
72
II
I
II
II

II II
0 I
I
i
I _
d
? d
( d I
I I
N m
Y

U I U I I I
I I I Y c

E CD
m
V
z j (j I U Y ?_
O = m LL ¢ .2
` i r I A ( (D co
N

p
m j
I CD
U
U
ai _ c I m
3 A
0. a
y
T a`
H
d ¢ i d

c

o I

I m I
I
0

0
o

m
?
N
L)
Z
p I
z
cn
cn N
J I
I

d
I
I
~
Ln 0)
Lo I I

r LO
m !
!
?
I
r` N
Z I
O
0
I ? o O

c7
d I N
cD I m m m m

¦
iOC?Y - •aJ?
U.S. CeOarMen: of Agrie1it1.1re
n CONVI=Rsl(D 1 IMPAC i F.A iNC
L 4.
Cate (:t Lane =vatuatton riecuest -
i ??11
P,r.n T I ( 0 7t C_rrrcrer?' CY 't=G' , 3D I 1 `PC
vamt ! :ro,tc., C DT r P • I Gunrt Alto State ` L E C?
p G T1 E j? c m ?? ?aeaty? =?
r. I pate reouest .
?reoosae ..:no :JSa L AC S=
,? ?-e! lrr7QttG i F1rrn Si a
br 2AF I1 ( 76 cc-C'
ocal imCOt?+t `artsiand? C? ?' i_ { _
rs far
-a Sim =r-=1r, ;'rne. unicue.:3-tce or : rr f"'u
-n ). gees mG/erv additiarsa/ mount
%
o trot :DC/Y "CO troC- FtrIn unsctcton ?- ` t v 1 t
4, % iv
rwtoroc:sr ` I Acs: ! I 'X Gate um M??asaan neturn.e o?•'
yM e S (? N Na,r. of Loot Sin :+tz?rtstrtc 5rst
a?Wtlon SY=tern I , ?, .
N ?t ;,?ter?at:v? ??tt ?attna
(?lartwr Ct :anc =v ;jsac
S-ta 1 Si tt t.. I Site ..
Sitt
P:• A I t t (To a ccr-Crrr•d ay '_Crrzl _ •rre/1 _ DC f c,v i < 1, ?! (^ I I I
_o Be Conver:_c ir_c: v-_ I G L I
n. I :a, Acres C
s ?C Be Cm.•VG^O-= Indirec=t/
C3, Acres I V 1
T
C. Site I 1 I
(;o .,s Land =vaiuaacn !n{a:-+a?on I I
itt'r' .Y SC=i
- I I
;., Tc3! Acres ?tine ;.rd Unic_e =2r-,ianC e I I
_?l imccr-n: at-iand I I
T otai Acres S=:_wice F.nc yr Lx3i Cant. Unt" I a to CanYe^'= I I
... ;gun:'/ I I
C. w i 1
.rrn yCe'Cf r3r mand •• In: ` n YliL, Same or hligner gna?e Vat
iCC ? I 1
oe car..aierr' dy S.:=i :?nc =raiua?or. G-' I
FAR ; V (i a ,, - 9e C ;raver -d (?!a of C'a l CO Poirrrs.
Seladre VaiueO` =ar-band 1 a
NLa:imurtt
I, ;,raa In Ncr•::-an use
Fe.^:meter in Nonurtan Use
L -
Sits Being tart-ems'
53te „nr- L:ci Ccvernrnet-:
d• p?c ^cn ¢-rwiced dV
c 3uiitc:e ;,tea
= t "t Uroan
• ' e
o. is3r.^
rervtc?
U^an SucoC -o average
04 P-eser--, Parrn Unit CZ-scared
a. C aa?cn Of Nontr---acle par-n:and
G GerviG'3
? Av:iiaaiiir? C` :ar-t -uccart •'
T
I;IYCS?tenLS r Strvi^....5"
Ccnvericn On =ar'= Suc?
irrnc ,^.d=t=rai use
?- I
I
I I
I I
I I
I I
i I
I 1?
. PART VII ('c be cCr7 7/etn cY -? = 1 Ica I
Pare t/7 I
Reis-vs Vaiue Cf =art lei?
lard f?r'm V1 aaove
?0?1 ora toclr I
Site ?:?.:^ten: (tram Par
of aDOVe esi
;v;:.LPG1NiC (70ral C fir:
Cate Of Seiecton
I
I
I
Site Aseassro ?tOl
'val. A „ es No C
r
S? Seiec?: `?
Ra?eaon mar S.?K:on: It
Co
2E?©R-T
Federal Aid;T 6>ZZ. 110L TIP ? V- 771-7-1 County
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Brief Project Desc:;ption "Ptkc-f, 6P-IoC-E yAe• 11(p ON Sty rle? ev?¢ IA*7 *4EA0VW
C.RE; tL ?6?t0 CrQouP XN11
On JUNE Ci 1°11-1 representatives of the ?•••••._• -?-r
7 (7,
North Carolina Dcparlmcnt of Transporation (tiCDOT?_ i;i -
Fcccral Hisinouv Administration (Fri,.vA)
? North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SF.PO)
L Otncr
l
rcvic:ccd the subject project at
A scooing mec:Ing
? Historic arc, itccr?ral reseurces photograph revic•.v session/corsultarcn
0 ti-:c
All pa.;ics present agreed
th-rc arc no propemcs oV'Cr ililV vcars old within tic prolcct*s arca of potcntial c..?ccs.
? thC7C ara :IO proccrtics less dlan f177; years old which are considered to r.-,cc: Criterion
Ccrsidcmdon G wit:`Iin the project's ar= of potential c.:"-:s.
? crc arc prcc.,ics aver -1:1 'cars o I d (list attache:) «;thin the prcicct's area o: potential c::ects,
built based on the r.IStor.cal inior-matlon avaiiable and the photograur.s of c: ch orcoc.'zy, nropC::ICs
ide...if::.d as KouSF -arc considered not cligioie
`:r Naticnal F=;ster and no furllier evaluation of mcm is ncccssan•.
? •b-^ -re N t;^-mil R??;?tcr-':istcd prepcr:ics within tl:c projcc.*s area of potential c-,5.--.:s.
S i cr,C"
Y
Rcprese :t-• c?CpOT
X4,1 ? ???j?j ? ?.?
F-iwA, or uic Divisioli Adrtinistr;
6/s/ 11

, or other Federal Agcnc-:
Date
P..:?-,rcZc ,=1vc. 1HPO LLLl
/ 11Ct I T_
ate Histcr Preservation OFicc. ? / Bate
. Ira sun-ev rcpcrt is prcocrcc:. a Iiitai coov oCdhis fora and t,x att_t;'Wd li,t «ill 1% inc:udcd.
IF _ IZJ
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
March 14, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook 'GZ/ V
Deputy State islt r Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Bridge Group XIII, Bridge 176 on SR 1706
over Hag Meadow Creek, Wilkes County,
E B-3077, State Project 8.2760801, ER 97-
8559
Thank you for your letter of February 12, 1997, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures of
historical or architectural importance located within the planning area. We look
forward to meeting with an architectural historian from the North Carolina
Department of Transportation to review the aerial and photographs of the project
area so we can make our survey recommendation.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
I The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
tt 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
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: N. Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett
. 109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina ?7601-2307 ???