20001179 Ver 1_Complete File_20000912

??Pavnvd'?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR -
28 August, 2000
. r
U. S. Army Corps of'Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
001179
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Project Coordinator
Subject: Ashe County, Proposed replacement of Bridge No. 38 over Cranberry Creek on
SR 1603; State Project No. 8.2711201; Federal Project No. MABRZ-1603(1);
TIP No. B-3110.
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) requests authorization from
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under a Section 404 Nationwide Permit (NWP) 23
to replace Bridge No. 38 over Cranberry Creek on SR 1603. There will be temporary stream
impacts due to a causeway needed to construct the bridge, and a workpad for the removal of the
existing bridge. Permanent stream impacts of 5 ft (1.5 m) may result due to the Collar and
Extension of 60" CSP. The NCDOT asks that the areas of temporary impacts of this action be
authorized under a Section 404 NWP 33 and the areas of permanent impacts of this action be
authorized under a Section 404 NWP 23. The project has a let date of February 2001.
Bridge No. 38 over Cranberry Creek on SR 1603 will be replaced with a new bridge on a
new alignment 345 ft (105 m) northwest of the existing structure. Traffic will be maintained on
the existing bridge during construction.
The project has been described in a Categorical Exclusion (CE) signed by the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) on,16 February 2000. The project is being processed by the
FHWA as a CE in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, the NCDOT does not
anticipate requesting a Section 404 Individual Permit but proposes to proceed under a Section 404
NWP 23 in accordance with 61 Federal Re ig ster 65874, 65916, issued December 13, 1996.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS I SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
a
There have been no changes in the proposed project since the CE was completed. There .
will be no wetlands impacted by the proposed project. As described in the CE, the NCDOT will
construct a bridge instead of a culvert.
At Site 1, NCDOT anticipates permanent and temporary stream impacts. Because of
topographic restraints in the project area, 0.005 ac (218 ftz) of surface waters and 65 ft (20 m) of
length will be impacted in order to allow construction equipment access to the temporary
causeway at Site 2. Permanent stream impacts of 5 ft (1.5 m) are anticipated due to Collar &
Extension of 60" CSP. In restoring the creek, the pipe and fill will be removed to the creek's
existing elevation and NCDOT will stabilize disturbed areas with permanent ground cover. The
seed mix planted will include tall fescue, Kentucky bluegrass, and hard fescue.
At Site 2, a temporary causeway is needed in order to construct the new bridge.
Temporary ir?phcts. of 0.032 ac (1394 ftZ) of surface waters and a temporary length of 65 ft (20
m) are anticipated at Site 2. Approximately 188 cubic yards of material will be placed in the
stream temporarily at this site.
At Site 3, a temporary workpad is needed in order to remove existing Bridge No. 38.
Temporary impacts of 0.002 ac (87 ftZ) of surface waters and a temporary length of 25 ft (7.6 m)
are anticipated at Site 3. Approximately 22 cubic yards of material will be placed in the stream
temporarily at this site.
Cumulatively, the causeway, the workpad, and the piping of the stream will result in
temporary impacts to <0.04 ac (1742 ftZ) of surface waters and a temporary length of 150 ft (45.7
m), and 210 cubic yards of material to be placed in the stream temporarily. In restoring the creek,
the causeway and the workpad will be removed. 60 ft (18.3 m) of the 65 ft (20 m) of pipe will be
removed and disturbed areas will be stabilized with permanent ground cover. The total
permanent stream impacts equal 5 ft (1.5 m) due to Collar & Extension of 60" CSP. Permit
drawings of the causeway at Site 2 are attached to this letter.
Cranberry Creek has been designated by the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) as a Hatchery Supported Public Mountain Trout Water which also supports wild trout.
The NCDOT commits to implementing Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds in addition to
its standard Best Management Practices for erosion and sedimentation control. The NCDOT asks
that the NCWRC provide a letter of concurrence to USACE.
In summary, the NCDOT. requests authorization under a Section 404 NWP 23 to replace
Bridge No. 32 over Cranberry Creek on SR 1603, including bridge construction, demolition, and
Collar and Extension of 60" CSP. The NCDOT also requests authorization under a Section 404
NWP 33 for the temporary causeway, workpad, and temporary piping of the stream. NCDOT is
not proposing compensatory mitigation since permanent impacts are below mitigation thresholds.
Written concurrence for 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the N. C. Division
of Water Quality (NCDWQ) is generally not required for either the Section 404 NWP 23 or 33 as
long as NCDOT adheres to all conditions of the general certification for Section 404 NWP 23 and
33. NCDOT requests written concurrence for all NWPs on this project.
i.
If you have any questions or need any additional information concerning this project,
please contact Ms. Jill Holmes of my staff at [phone], extension 329.
Sincerely,

W. D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
WDG/jjh
cc: Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDWQ, Raleigh
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS, Asheville
Mr. Owen Anderson, NCWRC, Waynesville
Mr. Tim Rountree, P. E., Structure Design
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P. E., Program Development
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P. E., Highway Design
Mr. Dave Henderson, P. E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John Alford, P. E., Roadway Design
Mr. Randy Wise, P. E., Roadside Environmental
Mr. R. C. McCann, P. E., Division 11 Engineer
LP
TO YARA K G
> STATE
Vn; f-
Furches
,p a yCnt - \A
VOHey Ch. , 'k•
1 it
- 1607 =
0 m G
ieoe?- ? - _/ GOB
b 1609 1 N
1599 ?
r e • rl' n % grfi?
.0
o?
•? 1399 1612 4 ` 80 ? is
?
16 9
,p 1611 CM"1393 ^ 12 Sj.cyrel
L 2' pnngs
VICINITY MAP
ASHE COUNTY
BRIDGE No. 38 ON SR 1603 OYER CRANBERRY CREEK
RO
6z , E?

BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
?/?yOR BEGIN STATE PROJECT 8.2711201(CONST.)
ECT AMBRZ
16030)
O
A
B
GI
ilea
/
?) J
-
L PR
E
N FEDER
(CONST
)
-Y/- POTSto. /3+00.00 X
/ .
VQ -U- POTSto. /0+00.0O?
END CONSTRUCTION } / -YI- POTSro,144-354 O.
Y/- POCSto. /5 *60.00

END STATE PROJECT 8.2711201(CONST.)
END FEDERAL PRO CT MABRZ
1603(1)
p? -
?? gERRi ? -u- to. /
sFO
s

16? 1603
R
M SR
? \A /RP
EX/STING
BRIDGE NO-W

olf

II
II

l? w'?

I ?.
1 ? f1
l k? ? 1
/ Jr \ o \\
m x \
v W ` \
H \\ SHED /
o
\
\ N ? .
L4 ui

N
Ix
w
0
3
?w
0- t ?
:2 a
Ld LL
~ M
V) N
LLJ Z
O J
Z
W =1
I.L
ti
b
z
o Gra
C ?, Fr
U ? W
z
C\j
a
? z
N L
s? W W A°
N
I ? o °o
o n
J
N `
aM I ?
oO
a
Oil
f
N O O
/ O O
J
/
/ J
a
w
U
M O VJ `n
N' N N N

.-.
>-<c z
b Q? ? ?
" o w
?
W d M ® U
? W
I ° Q- z
u stn E-I ®
? p;

O
O ?<
44
®
z=
U
= w
z
®®II

\o
o
p
o A
O

z ° o
o
po
o
0 o
Op°p0°p0
o° o°°op
° w

0.d
Cl)
°o°pp°oopp
o°ooo
p poop°oopp°o°op°o°o
° Z
oopoo po
o po Oopooo poop poopo
ooo
°
ooo°oo °oopp
o?po°o°po°o°o
ooo°oop
°
°po°o°oopp°o
opp°
p
o
o
oopp °oopp °o ° o ° po °oopp ° o °oo °
po 0
°
O oQOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO°
ooooo°ooo o O
p o p o o p o p o 0 o p p o 0 o p p o 0 0 0 o p p o 0
o°
°
p
0 0 ° o °o0 00 ° o ° 0 0 00 ° o o po ° o ° po
°
°
°
o
°o°p
°o o
o p
°o°p°°o o p
o p o 0 0 o p
o po po 0 0o p o 0o p po o o o
o
0 0° p o °o o° o o° o 0 0 o p° p p° oo° p p° o 0 0 °o°
p o °o °o o °o ° o o ° o ° o ° ° o °p ° ° o °o
I°O
°O
(,
I
?°
?p
,
I
O°po°O°pp°O°p 00°O°pp°O
LC) °
°
°
°
°
°
O
pp°O
00
pp°O
pp°O
pp°O
p
p
°
°
pppopOOpp°°ppOp000000°p ?
W
?N
W
Oo
p O°
p OOpp
O °O
>
OpppO?pppp?pp°?

m p

?
Of
Q
°p°OOpppO ? ? Q'
A w i i O N

U

?--
Q 11

a O
W o o
'
N W M
L.1J W
Q N
Q
N ii

En
LC)
QO ?

V)
U
Q a
<

m
N W LL

o U

> O
LLJ
f-
W
:2 LL.
o _
N
J LL-
W L
?y z I w
a a
U
c3 >
>

v In l0
?2
wU O
z
O
v
a? ?
Q Q
U c ? ?
U a
U
?
?
a -
M
zz
a z
o

rn o
a
O.O
j
u G c v
5;
N f6 F In (D ? LL. O W 0 C)
N

a "T CL
WU E
cncn r-
?j a Q N F-LL,
p OD W
W
Q -_
W N O M O M p
U U (n
lL (i U) U O O O O Z W
C N O O O O O
~ CL
N
?
C N
- O
a.
?.
LL
N
U)
N O O
C U
c6
f4 O

O O

O
's
Z
I.L
a) cm=
N_ - N
C O
m Co
L U
o 0 U c? L
Q c
) ? m
U
a
s c O
E

(n > N U N
X co

"
t6
Z
J W C

H
W - f6

O
LL
Co a)
fl. ? U
3

c
C c o
U- to
N
C

X
W
X
W
>+
m U
>

:3
U N
a

fn

a
(n
3

N

a
i 3

N

o o U v
O
J

J J

J
J
N ?
3

O O
C
N
p
^
co
+ p)
D
m`
E o o m
N N O
fO
N

Q
E
O O O W

.0.
_ O
Z
#
N
M J
9
O
H

PROPERTY OWNERS
SITE
NAME
ADDRESS
2 & 3
Opel Bare Morris
Edwin E. & Earlene
Shepherd
3512 Cranberry Creek Road
Laurel Springs, NC 28644
4424 Cranberry Creek Road
Laurel Springs, NC 28644

Ashe County
Bridge No. 38 on SR 1603
Over Cranberry Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1603(1)
State Project 8.2711201
TIP No. B-3110
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
??
2-16-2000
Date f,r William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
J? . 0
'
2 1 yoco .?
o?
Date Nicholas Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Ashe County
Bridge No. 38 on SR 1603
Over Cranberry Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1603(1)
State Project 8.2711201
TIP No. B-3110
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
December 1999
Date
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
J Id 1"'3 W .
Joh4i L. Williams, P. E.
Project Planning Engineer
\\\`11A III I I U 111,1
% ..0'ou \A CA'194/' ?'?..
%OF{ESS/p'% 00
y
SEAL _
= 022552 '
'??//flilllll\\?
L''/s p0' wct " Z--? b
Date Wayne 'Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
2 -/.(- 2L
?- -2w,
'), 0 0 f C/
Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
- B-3110, Ashe County
Ashe County
Bridge No. 38 on SR 1603
Over Cranberry Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1603(1)
State Project 8.2711201
The following headings indicate the individual or organization responsible for carrying
out the project commitment(s)"listed beneath the headings.
Roadside Environmental Unit,'
Resident Engineer,
Bridge Demolition: Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition & Removal will
be implemented. The existing bridge is constructed entirely of timber and steel. Therefore, all
components of the bridge will be removed without dropping them into the stream.
Trout County: NCWRC has commented that Cranberry Creek is a Hatchery Supported
Designated Public Mountain Trout Waters and also supports wild trout.
• : Where. concrete is used, work will be accomplished so: that wet concrete does* not contact
stream water.
• Instream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot wide buffer zone will be prohibited
during the trout. spawning season of October l through April 15 to protect the egg and fiy
stages of trout.
• Where possible, heavy equipment will be operated from the bank rather than in the stream
channel to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants
into the stream.
• Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within 15
days of completion `of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
• Appropriate plant species will be used to stabilize the banks along the site of the old bridge.
• NCDOT will follow "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds".
Categorical Exclusion Document Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
February 15, 2000
Ashe County
Bridge No. 38 on SR 1603
Over Cranberry Creek
Federal Project MABRZ-1603(1)
State Project 8.2711201
TIP No. B-3110
Bridge No. 38 is located in Ashe County over Cranberry Creek. It is programmed
in the 2000-2006 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge replacement
project. This project is part of the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and
Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP) and has been classified as a "Categorical Exclusion".
No substantial environmental impacts are expected.
I. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 38 will be replaced with a new bridge on new alignment 345 feet
north of the existing structure (see Figure 2). The new structure will be approximately
122 feet long and 24 feet wide. The new bridge will include two 10-foot lanes and two-
foot offsets. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
There will be 450 feet of new approach work to the northeast and will tie into
SR 1603 as shown in Figure 2 to the southwest. The pavement width on the approaches
will be 20 feet including two 10-foot lanes. Additionally there will be 4-foot grass
shoulders. Based on preliminary design, the horizontal design speed should be
approximately 60 mph.
The estimated cost of the project is $731,000 including $650,000 in construction
costs and $81,000 in right of way costs. The estimated cost shown in the 2000-2006 TIP
is $355,000 including $328,000 in construction costs, and $27,000 in right of way costs.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
A design exception will be required due to vertical alignment. To improve the
design speed any more is not feasible considering the intersection with SR 1609 (Burnt
Mill Road) and the topography in the vicinity.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1603 is classified as a Rural Local Route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. It is located approximately 3 miles north of Laurel Springs in
Ashe County. Currently the traffic volume is 100 vehicles per day (VPD) and projected
at 300 VPD for the year 2025. There is no posted speed limit in the vicinity of the bridge.
The road serves primarily local agricultural and residential traffic.
The existing bridge was completed in 1959. It is 66 feet in length including six
short spans. The deck is a 12 feet wide timber floor resting on steel beams. The
substructure includes two main piers built of concrete and three temporary bents built of
timber. There is approximately 14 feet of vertical clearance between the bridge deck and
streambed. There is one lane of traffic on the bridge.
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the
bridge is 31.6 out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge is posted with weight
restrictions of 18 tons for single vehicles and 25 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
Traveling immediately east of the bridge, SR 1603 begins a set of reverse curves
on a vertical incline. To the west of the bridge the alignment is flat and strait. The width
on the gravel approaches to the existing bridge is 12 feet. Shoulders on the approaches of
the bridge are approximately 4 feet wide.
There are 2 daily school bus crossings over the studied bridge. According to the
Transportation Director for Ashe County closing the road would not be a major burden.
Skyline Telephone Membership Corporation has an underground cable along the west
side of SR 1609. The cable turns and crosses Cranberry Creek in a conduit attached to the
bridge. The cable continues underground along the south side of SR 1603.
IV. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
There is one "build" option considered in this document as follows:
Replace Bridge No. 38 with a new bridge on a new alignment 345 feet north of
the existing structure. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during
construction. The horizontal design speed will be approximately 60 mph.
Replacing the bridge on its existing location is not a viable alternate due to
difficulty of construction. SR 1603 crosses Cranberry Creek with a stop sign
immediately at the end of the bridge. To the right SR 1603 continues. To the left is SR
1609. This intersecting road is sandwiched between Cranberry Creek, and a mountain
bluff creates the constructibility problem.
Constructing a new bridge abutment on the existing location would likely require
blasting and removing some of the mountain bluff on the west side of SR 1603/1609. In
addition, both SR 1603 and SR 1609 would have to be closed. The detour would follow
very rough, unsatisfactory roads. Similar projects in the area, which originally
recommended such an alternate, inevitably resulted in changing recommendations due to
constructibility. Therefore, no further consideration will be given to a "replace in place"
alternate.
"Do-nothing" is not practical; requiring the eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating
bridge is neither practical nor economical.
2
V. ESTIMATED COST (Table 1)
Recommended
COMPONENT ALTERNATE 2
New Bridge Structure $234,000
Bridge Removal 7,000
Roadway & Approaches 324,000
Engineering & Contingencies 85,000
Total Construction $ 650,000
Right of Way $ 81,000
Total Cost $ 731,000
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 38 will be replaced with a new bridge on new alignment 345 feet
north of the existing structure (see Figure 2). The new structure will be approximately
122 feet long and 24 feet wide. The new bridge will include two 10-foot lanes and two-
foot offsets. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
There will be 450 feet of new approach work to the northeast which will tie into
the intersection on the southwest. The pavement width on the approaches will be 20 feet
including two 10-foot lanes. Additionally there will be 4-foot grass shoulders. Based on
preliminary design, the horizontal design speed should be approximately 60 mph.
The Division concurs with this recommendation.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. GENERAL
This project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an
inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
This project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
This bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality
of the human or natural environment by implementing the environmental commitments
listed in the Greensheet in addition to use of current NCDOT standards and
specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning
regulation. No change in land use is expected to result from construction of this project.
There are no hazardous waste impacts.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way
acquisition will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not
expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and
waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
There are no impacts to any property protected under section 4(f) of the USDOT act.
The proposed bridge replacement project will not raise the existing flood levels or
have any significant adverse effect on the existing floodplain.
Utility impacts are considered to be low for the proposed project.
B. AIR AND NOISE
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included
in the regional emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required.
The project is located in Ashe 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 attainment area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not
have substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during
construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
In the vicinity of this project, Ashe County has no zoning. On the northern side of
Cranberry Creek, Alternate 2 will impact 0.72 acres of farmland. This is well below the
threshold of significant impact for this area.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
On April 8, 1997, the State Historic Preservation Office reviewed the subject
project. Subsequently, they determined that neither architectural nor archaeological
surveys would be required. The project is not likely to affect any resources of historical
significance.
4
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
Physical Resources
Regional Characteristics
Ashe County lies in the Blue Ridge Mountain Physiographic Province of North
Carolina (Figure 2). The county is hilly and mountainous. Elevations range from about
2,480 feet to 5,130 feet above mean sea level (msl). The average elevation is about 3,000
feet above msl. Project elevations average 2800 feet above msl.
Soils
There is one soil type located in the project area. A brief description of this soil
type is provided. Watauga loam, 25-45 percent slopes (WaF). This well drained,
micaceous soil is on steep side slopes bordering drainageways. Elevations range from
2,600 to 3,500 ft. Permeability is moderate, and available water capacity is moderate.
Surface runoff is very rapid, and the hazard of erosion is very severe on bare and exposed
areas. This soil is strongly acid or medium acid, except where the surface layer has been
limed. The depth to bedrock is more than 5 feet and commonly 10 feet or more. Most of
the acreage of this soil is in woodland. Some areas are in pasture. Slope is the main
limitation to woodland use. This soil is poorly suited to crops and to urban and recreation
uses. Slope and erosion are the main limitations. This soil is in capability subclass VIIe.
Water Resources
This section contains information concerning surface water resources likely to be
impacted by the proposed project. Water resource assessments include the physical
characteristics, best usage standards, and water quality aspects of the water resources,
along with their relationship to major regional drainage systems. Probable impacts to
surface water resources are also discussed, as are means to minimize impacts.
Best Usage Classification
Water resources within the study area are located in the New River Drainage
Basin. There is one water resource in the project study area; SR 1603 crosses Cranberry
Creek, a perennial stream.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ), formerly Division of Environmental Management (DEM), which reflects
water quality conditions and potential resource usage. Cranberry Creek [DEM Index No.
10-1-37, 2/1/93] is classified as R Tr+. Class B refers to waters used for primary
recreation and other uses suitable for Class C. Class C refers to waters suitable for aquatic
life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. The
Tr supplemental classification is intended to protect freshwaters for natural trout
propagation and survival of stocked trout. The classification "+" identifies waters that are
subject to a special management strategy specified in 15A NCAC 2B .02, the Outstanding
Resource Water (ORW) Rule, in order to protect downstream waters designated as ORW.
The ORW supplemental classification is intended to protect unique and special waters
having exceptional water quality and being of exceptional state or national ecological or
recreational significance.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-1 or
WS-II) or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 mile of the project
study area.
Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
Cranberry Creek under Bridge No. 38 at SR 1603 is approximately 12 meters (40
feet) wide and ranges in depth from 0.3-0.9 meters (1-3 feet). The substrate in the study
area is composed of rocky silt and the water is clear.
Water Quality
This section describes the quality of the water resources within the project area.
Potential sediment loads and toxin concentrations of these waters from both point sources
and nonpoint sources are evaluated. Water quality assessments are made based on
published resource information and existing general watershed characteristics. These data
provide insight into the value of water resources within the project area to meet human
needs and to provide habitat for aquatic organisms.
General Watershed Characteristics
The New River basin is located entirely within the mountain ecoregion in the
northwest corner of the state in Watauga, Ashe and Alleghany counties. It is a small river
basin comprising an area of 769 square miles. The New River is formed by the
confluence of the North Fork New River and the South Fork New River, then flows
northeast into Virginia, before eventually flowing into the Kanawha River. The New
River meanders across the NC State line four times before the confluence of the Little
River, another major tributary, which also flows north into Virginia. The basin is
primarily forested or agricultural.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), managed by the
DWQ, is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses
long term trends in water quality. The program monitors ambient water quality by
sampling at fixed sites for selected benthic macroinvertebrate organisms, which are
sensitive to water quality conditions. Samples are evaluated on the number of taxa present
of intolerant groups [Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera (EPT)] and a taxa richness
value (EPT S) is calculated. A biotic index value is also calculated for the sample that
summarizes tolerance data for all species in each collection. The two rankings are given
equal weight in final site classification. The biotic index and taxa richness values
primarily reflect the effects of chemical pollution and are a poor measure of the effects of
such physical pollutants as sediment. There is one BMAN site on Cranberry Creek above
the project area at SR 1600. This site was given a bioclassification rating of Excellent
with an EPT S of 46 and an EPT N of 188 on 7/15/93.
Point Source and Non-Point Source Dischargers
Point source refers to discharges that enter surface water through a pipe, ditch, or
other defined points of discharge. The term most commonly refers to discharges
associated with wastewater treatment plants. Point source dischargers located throughout
North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program. Any discharger is required to register for a permit. There are
no NPDES sites located within 1.0 mile upstream of the project study area. Non-point
source refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater flow or no defined
point of discharge. There are many types of land use activities that can serve as sources of
non-point source pollution including land development, construction, crop production,
animal feeding lots, failing septic systems, landfills, roads, and parking lots. Sediment
and nutrients are major pollution-causing substances associated with nonpoint source
pollution. Others include fecal coliform bacteria, heavy metals, oil and grease, and any
other substance that may be washed off the ground or removed from the atmosphere and
carried into surface waters.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Impacts to water resources in the project area are likely to result from activities associated
with project construction. Activities likely to result in impacts are: clearing and grubbing
on streambanks, riparian canopy removal, instream construction, fertilizers and pesticides
used in revegetation, and pavement installation. The following impacts to surface water
resources are likely to result from the above mentioned construction activities.
• Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of the crossing and increased
erosion in the project area.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation and
vegetation removal.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface
and ground water flow from construction.
• Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to vegetation removal.
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
• Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in highway runoff.
• Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil from
construction equipment and other vehicles.
• Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and
groundwater drainage patterns.
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project area,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be
strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project. Limiting instream activities
and revegetating stream banks immediately following the completion of grading can
further reduce impacts. Because the project area is located along DWQ designated trout
waters, the NCDOT will also follow "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds",
formerly High Quality Water guidelines.
Biotic Resources
Biotic resources include terrestrial and aquatic communities. This section
describes the biotic communities encountered in the project area, as well as the
relationships between fauna and flora within these communities. The composition and
distribution of biotic communities throughout the project area are reflective of
topography, soils, hydrology, and past and present land uses. Descriptions of the
terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community classifications. These
classifications follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible. Representative
animal species that are likely to occur in these habitats (based on published range
distributions) are also cited.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided for
each animal and plant species described. Subsequent references to the same organism
refer to the common name only. Fauna observed during the site visit are denoted in the
text with an asterisk (*).
Biotic Communities
Biotic communities include terrestrial and aquatic elements. Much of the flora and
fauna described from biotic communities utilize resources from different communities,
making boundaries between contiguous communities difficult to define.
Agricultural Field/Christmas Tree Farm
A Christmas Tree farm lies northwest of the existing bridge. This area is planted with
Fraser firs (Abiesfraseri). Herbaceous plants growing under the Fraser firs include fescue
(Festuca spp.), Timothy grass (Phleum pratense), Canada cinquefoil (Potentilla
canadensis), violets (Viola sp.), Virginia Creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), common
plantain (Plantago rugeiii), Cynthia (Krigia biflora) and horse nettle (Solanum
carolinense).
Maintained Roadside Shoulder
Maintained road shoulders in the project area quickly grade into the stream bank
community. Some species common to the immediate roadside include fescue (Festuca
spp.), Timothy grass (Phleurn pratense), Canada cinquefoil (Potentilla canadensis),
common plantain (Plantago rugeiii) and Cynthia (Krigia biflora).
Riparian Habitats
Cranberry Creek is a perennial mountain stream. The south bank of the stream is adjacent
to SR 1603 and therefore is not forested. The north bank of the stream lies along the edge
of the Christmas tree farm mentioned above and is also not forested. Shrubby species
dominating the banks of Cranberry Creek include red maple (Acer rubrum) and black
cherry (Prunus serotina) saplings, multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) and ninebark
(Physiocarpus opulifolius). Herbaceous species common along the stream includes cut-
leaved coneflower (Budbeckia laciniata) panic grass (Panicum spp.), spotted Joe-Pye
weed (Eupatoriumfistulosum), golden ragwort (Senecio aureus), loosestrife (Lysimachia
sp.) and forget-me-not (Myosotis sp.). Wildlife encountered in this habitat include
American crow *(Corvus brachyrhynchos) and beaver *(Castor canadensis).
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed project will have various impacts on the biotic
resources described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources have
the potential to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies potential
impacts to the natural communities within the project area in terms of the area impacted
and the organisms affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered here as
well, along with recommendations to minimize or eliminate impacts.
Terrestrial Impacts
Impacts to terrestrial communities will result from project construction due to the
clearing and paving of portions of the project area, and thus the loss of community area.
Table 2 summarizes potential losses to these communities, resulting from project
construction. Calculated impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance
of each community present in the study area. Estimated impacts are derived based on the
project lengths and the entire proposed right-of-way width of 80 feet. However, project-
construction often does not require the entire right-of-way; therefore, actual impacts may
be considerably less.
In addition to the impacts created from new location construction, impacts from
this alternative must consider the removal of the existing road and bridge. Total impacts
from this alternative are 0.70 ac (Table 2).
9
Table 2. Quantitative impacts to biotic communities.
Maintained Roadside Shoulder 0.1
Agricultural Field/Christmas Tree Farm 0.79
Riparian Community 0.31
Total 1.13
Aquatic Impacts
Impacts to the aquatic community of Cranberry Creek will result from the
replacement of Bridge No. 38. Impacts are likely to result from the physical disturbance
of aquatic habitats (i.e. substrate. water quality, stream banks). Disturbance of aquatic
habitats has a detrimental effect on aquatic community composition by reducing species
diversity and the overall quality of aquatic habitats. Physical alteration to aquatic habitats
can result in the following impacts to aquatic communities.
• Inhibition of plant growth.
• Clogging of feeding structures of filter-feeding organisms, gills of fish, and the burial
of benthic organisms. -
• Algal blooms resulting from increased nutrient concentrations.
• Mortality among sensitive organisms resulting from introduction of toxic substances
and decreases in dissolved oxygen.
• Destabilization of water temperature resulting from riparian canopy removal.
• Loss of benthic macroinvertebrates through scouring resulting from increased
sediment load.
Impacts to aquatic communities can be minimized by minimizing riparian canopy
removal, limiting instream construction, revegetation immediately following the
completion of grading activities, and strict adherence to BMP's.
Jurisdictional Topics
This section provides inventories and impact analyses pertinent to two significant
regulatory issues: Waters of the United States and rare and protected species. These
issues retain particular significance because of federal and state mandates that regulate
their protection. This section deals specifically with the impact analyses required to
satisfy regulatory authority prior to project construction.
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the
United States," as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CFR) Part
328.3. Any action that proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters or
10
wetlands falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Surface waters include all standing
or flowing waters which have commercial or recreational value to the public. Wetlands
are identified based on the presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and saturated
or flooded conditions during all or part of the growing season.
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to delineate jurisdictional wetlands include evidence of hydric soils,
hydrophytic vegetation, and hydrology.
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are calculated based on the linear feet of
the stream that is located within the proposed right-of-way. A length of 80 feet of
Cranberry Creek and 0.07 acres of streambed may be impacted by the proposed bridge
replacement.
Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the proposed project.
As a result, construction activities will require permits and certifications from various
regulatory agencies in charge of protecting the water quality of public water resources.
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States resulting from the proposed project. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in
whole, or part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or department
has determined the pursuant to the council on environmental quality regulation for
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act:
(1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from Environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment,
and;
(2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification from the DWQ
prior to the issuance of the Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires that the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or
licensed activity that may result in a discharge to Waters of the United States. Section
401 Certification allows surface waters to be temporarily impacted for the duration of the
construction or other land manipulation. The issuance of a 401 permit from the DWQ is a
prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 permit. Since, the proposed project crosses
11
waters designated as Trout Waters, the authorization of a Section 404 Nationwide permit
by the COE is conditioned upon concurrence of the WRC.
Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation
The COE has adopted through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) a
wetland mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and
sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological
and physical integrity of Waters of the United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of
wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to wetlands),
minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating
for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization and
compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of
averting impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE,
in determining "appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts,
such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and
practicable in terms of cost,.existing technology and logistics in light of overall project
purposes.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to
reduce the adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps
will be required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization
typically focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the
reduction of median widths, right-of-way widths, fill slopes and/or road shoulder widths.
Compensatory mitigation in not normally considered until anticipated impacts to
Waters of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
possible. It is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be
achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory
mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts that remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United States, specifically
wetlands. Such actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the
discharge site.
Compensatory mitigation is required for those projects authorized under
Nationwide Permits that result in the fill or alteration of:
• More than 1.0 acres of wetlands will require compensatory mitigation;
• And/or more than 150.0 linear feet of streams will require compensatory mitigation.
12
Written approval of the final mitigation plan is required from the DWQ prior to
the issuance of a 401 Certification. Final permit/mitigation decisions rest with the COE.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of decline
either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human development. Federal
law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires
that any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected, be
subject to review by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other species
may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under the
provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. As of 15 January 1999, the FWS lists. six federally protected species for Ashe
County. A brief description of the characteristics and habitat requirements for these
species along with a conclusion regarding potential project impacts follows Table 3.
Table 3. Federally Protected Species for Ashe County
sOri N8m@ t ^'

z
.... t1tliS
'?C'?' C-1 aIIl.e¢' `v r i - . fv; r1 h ° ,.
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenbergii Threatened S/A
Spreading avens Geum radiatum Endangered
Roan mountain bluet Houstonia montana Endangered
Heller's blazing star Liatris helleri Threatened
Virginia spiraea Spiraea virginiana Threatened
Rock gnome lichen Gymnoderma lineare Endangered
Note:
• "Endangered" denotes a species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range.
• "Threatened" denotes a species likely to become endangered within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
• "Threatened (S/A)" denotes a species that is listed as threatened due to similarity of
appearance to other rare species.
Clemmys muhlenburgii (bog turtle) T (S/A)
Family: Emydidae
Federally Listed: 01 May 1997
The bog turtle is North Carolina's smallest turtle, measuring 3 to 4 inches in
length. It has a dark brown carapace and black plastron. The orange or yellow blotch on
13
each side of the head and neck is a readily identifiable characteristic. It 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 seeds. In June
or July three to five eggs are laid in a shallow nest in moss or loose soil. The eggs hatch
in about fifty-five days. (Bernard S. Martof, et. al., 1980).
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
The bog turtle is listed as Threatened due to similarity of appearance with other
rare species that are listed for protection. Species listed as T (S/A) are not biologically
endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7 consultation.
Geum radiatum (spreading avens)
Plant Family: Rosaceae
Federally Listed: Endangered, April 5, 1990
Flowers Present: June - early July
This species is found only in the North Carolina and Tennessee sections of the
Southern Appalachian Mountains. Known populations in Burke County have been
extirpated and populations in any other counties have shown a serious decline.
Stems of this perennial herb grow from horizontal rhizomes and obtain a height of
0.5-1.5 feet. The stems are topped with an indefinite cyme of bright yellow radially
symmetrical flowers. Basal leaves are odd-pinnately compound, terminal leaflets are
kidney shaped and much larger than the lateral leaflets, which are reduced or absent.
Leaflets have lobed or uneven margins and are serrate, with long petioles. Stem leaves
are smaller than the basal, rounded to ovate, with irregularly cut margins. Fruits are
hemispheric aggregates of hairy achenes that are 7-9 mm in diameter.
Spreading avens occurs on scarps, bluffs, cliffs and escarpments on mountains,
hills, and ridges. Known populations of this plant have been found to occur at elevations
of 5060-5080 feet, 5680-5750 feet and 5800 feet. Other habitat requirements for this
species include full sunlight and shallow acidic soils. The spreading avens is found in
soils composed of sand, pebbles, humus, sandy loam, clay loam, and humus. Most
populations are pioneers on rocky outcrops.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
The project is located at an elevation of 2800 feet above mean sea level. This is well
below the required elevational limits of spreading avens. Tie NCNHP database of rare
species was checked and no records for this species were found in the project study area.
The construction of the proposed project will not affect spreading avens.
14
Gymnoderma lineare (Rock gnome lichen)
Plant Family: Cladoniaceae
Federally Listed: Endangered, December 28, 1994
The rock gnome lichen is a squamulose lichen in the reindeer moss family. This
lichen is a narrow endemic, restricted to areas of high humidity. These high humidity
environments occur on high elevation (4000 feet) mountaintops and cliff faces that are
frequently bathed in fog or lower.elevation (2500 ft) deep gorges in the Southern
Appalachians. The rock gnome lichen primarily occurs on vertical rock faces where
seepage water from forest soils above flows at (and only at) very wet times. The rock
gnome lichen is almost always found growing with the moss Adreaea in these vertical
intermittent seeps. The high elevation habitat occurs in the counties of Ashe, Avery,
Buncombe, Graham, Haywood, Jackson, Mitchell, Rutherford, Swain, Transylvania, and
Yancey. The lower elevation habitat of the rock gnome lichen can be found in the
counties of Jackson, Rutherford and Transylvania.
The terminal portions of the rock gnome lichen resemble strap-like lobes, having
a blue-gray color on the upper surface and generally a shiny-white color on the lower
surface. The color of the fungi near the base is black. The squamules are nearly parallel to
the rock surface and are generally 0.5 to 1 inches in length. The fruiting bodies are born
singly or in clusters, black in color, and are found at the tips of the squamules. The
fruiting season of the rock gnome lichen occurs from July through September. - The
primary means of propagation appears to be asexual, with colonies spreading clonally.
The major threat of extinction to the rock gnome lichen relates directly to habitat
alteration/loss of high elevation coniferous forests. The thinning and death of these forest
occurs from exotic insect pests, trampling of hikers and associated soil erosion and
compaction from hikers. These coniferous forests usually lie adjacent to the habitat
occupied by the rock gnome lichen. Drastic changes in microclimate (including increased
temperatures and decreased moisture) result from the impacts to the se forests. These
alterations of the microclimate lead to the desiccation of the rock gnome lichen.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The project is located at an elevation of 2800 feet above mean sea level. This is well
below the required elevational limits of rock gnome lichen. As far as the possibility of
low elevation populations at these bridges, none of the projects contain vertical rock faces
in deep river gorges. In addition, the low elevation populations of this species are known
only from Jackson, Rutherford and Transylvania counties, well southwest of Ashe
County. The NCNHP database of rare species was checked and no records for this species
were found in the project study area. These projects will not impact rock gnome lichen.
Houstonia montana (Hedyotis purpurea var. montana (Roan Mountain Bluet))
Plant Family: Rubiaceae
Federally Listed: Endangered, April 5, 1990
15
Flowers Present: June - July (best time is mid June)
Hedyotis purpurea var. montana is known historically from seven populations in
the southern Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina and Tennessee. These populations
of Hedyotis purpurea var. montana are threatened by land use as well as natural
succession.
This perennial species is shallow rooted and grows in low tufts 4 to 8 inches tall.
The median cauline leaves are 0.4 to 2 inches long. It has several bright purple flowers
arranged in a terminal cyme. The seed capsule quickly follows the flowers that form in
July and early August.
This plant can be found on high elevation cliffs, outcrops, steel slopes, and in the
gravelly talus associated with cliffs. It grows best in areas where it is exposed to full
sunlight and in shallow acidic soils composed of various igneous, metamorphic, and
metasedimentary rocks.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The project is located at an elevation of 2800 feet above mean sea level. This is
well below the required elevational limits of this species. The NC NHP database of rare
species was checked and no records for this species were found in the project study area.
The construction of the proposed project will not affect Roan Mountain bluet.
Liatris helleri (Heller's blazing star)
Plant Family: Asteraceae
Federally Listed: Threatened, November 19, 1987 Flowers Present: late June - August
This plant is endemic to high elevation ledges of rock outcrops of the northern
Blue Ridge Mountains in North Carolina. Of nine historic populations only seven remain
in existence.
Heller's blazing star is a short stocky plant that has one or more erect stems that
arise from a tuft of narrow, pale green basal leaves. Leaves are accuminate and diminish
in size and breadth upward on the stem. Stems are 16 inches tall and are topped with a
raceme of small (3-8 inches) lavender flowers. Fruits are present from September to
November.
This plant is a high altitude early pioneer species and can be found growing on
high elevation ledges of rock outcrops in grassy areas where it is exposed to full sunlight.
It prefers shallow acid soils associated with granite rocks.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
16
1571
1.2 ^
1595 •? Liberty 1602
Hill Ch.
A 1594 ON
1593 .
1595 1666
• 0 1601
1591
1600 '? 16C
i
•, p
1596 1.0
.. 1603 1
i ?
1599 N
N
38
B
id
p ge
o.
r
C
R/fj 4
0 40
R
` .
1599 1612 1.4: 88 18
THE PEAK 1609 9
`
r - 1611

1595
2 N
Laurel Spri
1597
agoner 6:1
(9 161
.2 1614 1 V
-
1665 1599 1613
Low 1 2 1686
Gap ` Tronsou
Ch. ,
1598 8` 1662 c
f ' J
' ` s 1595
i \ .4 /, 2 : ?sZ

1626 .1616 1613
1.2 7 ?° 1 S 1653 N? 1640
Ore O 1638 am '. 1.3

ge •p
g R
Knob
. 1623

1617
Ch e
22 Ebenezer
. 1
Ch
1615 `' .
1625 .
.6 1613.,
1623 9 1618 1616 •;?
(7)
`
28 2 1622 •4 1616
• g
1628 1619 '
•
? • ?.? . -• i 2.5 1620 1620
p?
` ,
1629

-- 1122
,? _ ?•?
R'?f?r
`
b
?
6 ?'
1624
D .3 'q?•
...
' S
....
?
... .
1628 c ` -
North Carolina Dept. of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development &
Environmental Analysis Branch
Ashe County
Replace Bridge No. 38 on SR 1603
Over Cranberry Creek
B-3ll0
SCALE: 1 in = 1 mi Figure 1
c'v .......... 1605
Furches
• a i
Pleasont
` 1605
c?
Valley Ch. 1606 } S

1603
;`•. 1607 C
O m

1604 .?
1608
' •
_ _ ?

110
?? •, 1 g O
SOUTH FACE OF BRIDGE
APPROACH TO EAST END OF BRIDGE
FIGURE 3
CENTER OF BRIDGE FACING INTERSECTION
APPROACH TO WEST END OF BRIDGE
FIGURE 4
?, 6j 11/1
i4l
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
April 22, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 38 on SR 1603 over Cranberry Creek,
Ashe County, B-31 10, State Project 8.271 1201,
Federal Project MABRZ-1527(1), ER 97-8330
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
?GEj?
APR 2 S 1997,
Z
% alvrS?G.4 OF <
*,?H 1014WAYS .1W
On April 8, 1997, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above
project. We reported our available information on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT
provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic structures
located within the area of potential effect. We recommend that no historic
architectural survey be conducted for this project.
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.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina, 27601-:'.807??
Nicholas L. Graf
April 22, 1997, Page 2
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.
Sincerely,
David Brook

Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: "H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
KZ-2' North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission®
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John L. Williams, Project Planning Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
FROM: Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: April 25, 1997
SUBJECT: Scoping comments for the replacement of Bridge #38 along SR 1603 over Cranberry Creek, Ashe
County, TIP #B-3110
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our preliminary comments regarding the subject
project.
Cranberry Creek is Hatchery Supported Designated Public Mountain Trout Water and also supports wild
trout. We are pleased that the North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to replace the existing bridge
with another bridge.
We have the following recommendations for minimizing adverse impacts to fisheries resources:
1) Instream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot wide buffer zone should be prohibited during the
out.
trout spawning season of October 1 through April 15 to protect the egg and fry stages of tr
2) Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in the stream channel in order to minimize
sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into the stream.
3) If concrete will be used, work should be accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact stream water.
This will lessen the chance of altering the stream's water chemistry and causing a fish kill.
4) If the bridge is replaced on new location, native species of trees or shrubs should be planted at the site of
the old bridge for bank stability, shade, and a travel corridor for wildlife.
5) Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil within 15 days of ground
disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment during the early stages of this project. If you have
any questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 704/652-4257.