20011281 Ver 1_Complete File_20010817

F WA]F Michael F. Easley, Governor
-
W William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
?O G North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
r Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
> Acting Director
p Division of Water Quality
August 31, 2001
Cleveland County
DWQ Project No. 011281
F.A. Project BRSTP-150(9); State Project 8.1801501
TIP Project B-3139
Replacement of Bridge No. 42 over Beaver Dam Creek on NC 150
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place
fill material for the purpose of constructing a temporary work causeway for Bridge 42 on NC 150, as
you described in your application dated August 3, 2001. After reviewing your application, we have
decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3114. , This
certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 33 when the Corps of Engineers issues it.
In addition, you must get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your
project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water
Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will expire when the accompanying 404 permit expires
unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us in writing and send us a new
application. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and
approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total wetland fills for
this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certification and any additional conditions listed below.
• Temporary access roads or detours shall be restored to the original elevations upon completion of
the project. Disturbed areas shall be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil. Native trees should
be planted with a spacing of no greater than 10 feet x 10 feet.
• It is recommended that during construction of the temporary causeway, the area is cleared, but not
grubbed. This will minimize soil disturbance and allow natural regeneration of plant material.
• Live concrete shall not be allowed to come into contact with the stream.
• Stone required for the causeway or pad shall not be dumped on the streambank and pushed in. It
shall be placed or dumped directly to the stream bottom.
• Sedimentation and Erosion Control Guidelines for Sensitive Watersheds (15A NCAC 4B .0024)
must be implemented prior to any ground-disturbing activities to minimize impacts to
downstream aquatic resources. it
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone]
Customer Service
1 800 623-7748
Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed
"Certificate of Completion" form to notify NCDWQ when all work included in the §401
Certification has been completed. The responsible party shall complete the attached form
and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the NC Division of Water Quality upon
completion of the project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an
adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter.
To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final and
binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the
Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Cynthia Van Der Wiele at
919.733.5715 or Mr. Pete Colwell of the Mooresville Regional Office at 704.663.1699.
Sincerely,
Attachment
Pc: - Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Steve Lund, USACE, Asheville Field Office
Pete Colwell, DWQ Mooresville Regional Office
Central Files
File Copy
y J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Director

TO: Mr. Steve Lund, USACOE
Asheville Field Office
FROM: Maryellen Haggard, DOT Permit Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: August 30, 2001
SUBJECT: NCDOT bridge replacement of No. 42 on NC 150 over Beaver Dam Creek,
Cleveland County. Federal Project BRSTP-150(9); State Project 8.1801501; TIP
No. B-3139
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is requesting a concurrence
letter from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) to obtain a 404 permit
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Biologists on staff with the NCWRC have reviewed the
proposed improvements and are familiar with habitat values of the project area. These
comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C.
466 et seq.).
NCDOT proposes to replace the existing bridge over Beaver Dam Creek with a new
bridge at the same location. During construction, NCDOT will route traffic to a temporary on-
site detour. Replacing the bridge with another bridge should have minimal impacts on aquatic
resources. We do not object to the project as proposed provided the following conditions are
implemented.
Temporary access roads or detours should be removed back to original ground
elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed areas should be
seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should be planted with a
spacing of not more than 10'x10'. If possible, when using temporary structures the
area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers,
bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact,
allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
2. If concrete will be used, work must 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.
Bridge No. 42, NC 150 2 August 30, 2001
TIP No. B-3139
3. Stone for pads or causeways should be placed or dumped onto the stream bottom.
Stone should not be dumped on the stream bank and pushed into the water. This can
cause unnecessary stream bank disturbance and can introduce sediment into the
stream.
4. Stringent erosion control measures should be installed where soil is disturbed and
maintained until project completion.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please contact me at [phone].
cc: Cynthia Van Der Wiele, NCDWQ
Jill Holmes, NCDOT
r
TC
M$r
STAVE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR ..
August 3, 2001.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Ave. Rm 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006

LYNDO TIPPE CT
SECRE`I'.ARY
011281
Attention: Mr. Steve Lund
NCDOT Project Coordinator
Subject: Cleveland County; Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 42 over Beaver Dam
Creek on NC 150, Federal Project BRSTP-150(9); State Project 8.1801501; TIP
No. B-3139
Dear Mr. Lund:
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. 42 over Beaver Dam Creek on NC 150. A temporary causeway will be
needed to construct thebridge, and the NCDOT asks that this action be authorized under a
Section 404 NWP 33. The project has a let date of February 2002.
Bridge No. 42 over Beaver Dam Creek on NC 150 will be replaced with a 176 foot (ft)
long bridge at the existing location. It will be 32 ft wide with two 12 ft lanes with 4 ft wide
offsets. There will be 679 ft of new approach work to the east and 469 ft of new approach work
to the west. The pavement width on the approaches will include two 12 ft lanes with 4 ft paved
shoulders and 4 ft grassed shoulders. The new bridge will be approximately 2 ft higher in
elevation that the existing bridge.
Due to the high volume of traffic and the lack of a suitable off-site detour route, during
construction, traffic will be maintained on a temporary on-site detour to the south. An on-site
detour to the north was not possible due to the presence of a power substation. The temporary
alignment will be 1184 ft long with a temporary bridge. The temporary bridge will be 100 ft
long with two 11 ft lanes and 3 ft offsets. Upon construction completion, the temporary bridge
and the approaches will be removed, and the site will be restored to original contours and
replanted with appropriate vegetation.
The superstructure of Bridge No. 42 is composed of a reinforced concrete deck on timber
joists. The substructure is composed of timber caps and piles with timber bulkheads at the ends.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX'. 919-733-9794 TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
r
Only the reinforced concrete deck would result in potential temporary fill amounting to
approximately 15 yd3 (11.5 m3).
The project has been described in a Categorical Exclusion (CE) Action Classification
Form signed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on January 31, 2001. 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 Register 65874, 65916, issued
December 13, 1996.
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.
A causeway is needed in order to construct the new bridge. The causeway will result in
a temporary impact of 0.0094 ac (0.0038 ha) of surface waters and 207 yd3 (158 m3) of material
will be placed in the stream temporarily. Upon completion of construction, the causeway will be
removed, and the stream will be restored to its original contours, and the area of disturbance will
be replanted with appropriate vegetation. Permit drawings of the causeway are attached to this
letter.
Written concurrence for 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the N. C. Division
of Water Quality (NCDWQ) is not required for either the Section 404 NWP 23 or 33. The
NCDWQ is provided written notification of the proposed action by a copy of this Section 404
NWP 23 and 33 application. The NCDOT will adhere to all conditions of the general
certification for Section 404 NWP 23 and 33 thereby not necessitating a written concurrence
from the NCDWQ.
In summary, the NCDOT requests authorization from USACE, under a Section 404
NWP 23, to replace Bridge No. 42 over Beaver Dam Creek on NC 150 and under a Section 404
NWP 33, to construct a temporary causeway. The NCDOT will adhere to the general conditions
of the 401 WQC associated with these Section 404 NWPs, thereby not requiring written
notification from the NCDWQ.
If you have any questions or need any additional information concerning this project,
please contact Ms. Jill Holmes of my staff at [phone], extension 332.
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
Ms. Mary Ellen Haggard, NCWRC
Mr. "rim 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. Ken Pace, P.E., Roadside Environmental
Mr. Michael L. Holder, P.E., Division 12 Engineer
I
-II
+. } it , 'tl
.56 1 'U'p
nnali? eJr" i'+
SOILING SPRINGS
POP, 2,381
356
42
?r PRO?EG un
1001 I 1 RL ii! )9
Ead ir!':j
f I.5 / j1
Ilrr
130
W.
LID
R
T
1!ES f I+t ? ?reo
SCALE
p I MILE
VICINITY
MAP
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CLEVELAND COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1801501 (B-3139)
NC 150 - BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
SHEET 1 OF I
IF
10
V 800
g, g
PROTEcr s ME
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
LOCATION
MAP CLEVELAND COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1801501 (B-3139)
(APPROX.SCALE 1" = 20001) NC 150 •• BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
SHEET L 'OF
I 1 152
oj,

• ?
•
`
XB
1
R
?,4 /
f0 Q

s

J ? 1 p

?-• ISO
I '

w
C Alan
1e gal k
r "Vzs??J \ // •?•/

£B
"
y +
O
U ?
h
1
a?
h
h o
co
F
e
E
4
t
F
G
E~
W ,
cn ? W

m
?
z o?
M
?

N 0 U
® x
0 o
z z
w r.
o,

U 0 E-1
a a ? w
U x
z
0
0
H

x
?EAvER?
Q
A
1
O
?-r
OZ
110° d
I I 0 `"

U
rj)
O
H
O
z
? v
k?

0
ro
?J I
a
I

? ye gg y
?N d
S
+ A

u I
0
m 9
a

N
d
R
0
o
+ s?
b
a3'

O i K
oolm PEE
+ a
O
N
+
O
+
r
Q g 1 u
a ? \
? Q
?e b 1 }{
u
o
J \
a
J V
m \
N
?o
13 ? a
I ? 1 ? m
I
I i

0
A \ LL-
/ I

I
F
W
W
WS
U
W
k -
z
w
V1
a
z M W
•

®
0
o
U
.?
L a
w
•

U •

Z k„
0

o A

z
c
W o°o

V W

w ?,

O

a W
U o
p•
? y
w

z w

E
O
N
w
J
a
O 0
E
2
o?
a
0
Q

1 ?
W
g
w
N
W
K
N
W
iL
a
E ?
Nl N i0
Y m N
_wr.m
1 ?
fV? N
J m O
_ T
CC)
mW W
r•
N N ~ ? W
II 11 Q
~ ?_ K
In W W l7
yi Q N N (4J
Cn M
.44
?

v
M
s x ?
U
c
® ?
O
ZO

A A
z
W
w
.a
U
F
w

O

a
K?
FtJ
01
HIn 'D

Zrb
I
O T m
NN I
o- w
u
;
a I? o
OF J
JNW ( = U1 p
O 2
r a
J N
O J

_ O

E~
.Lj Z W
>
E

n e
'?
o
>
O In SI
a 11
O F
N W
E Y
N
j
. w
11 S co
> F M w
w f
a W < O
V .. O
u `) o
> tr
L a
3 e
N
m
a
Z
? o
'. U
x
S J
i- a
J ?
d r
2 Q
VI Z
I I I
N N ? ZI
W
V
N
J
H
w
r=T=l
® W
J
V1
J
0

(\I
z
. w
co
-
z
`4' N<
COOOC??_ N
cu OOOOOC?L N
? o000000? w
oooooG
Oc?oo
?S ? CLOG
z?
D. ? f
= i ; o
Oi
, w
i'
w
C
N
O_I
N
w
1 ?
00;
?.5=? 00000
OOOOO _
OOOOOOQ '
000000' `0000, - ,_
00?? - n z
O<CO
w V)
-
m <n
(n
c3j U Cr w

F
z

?!
® 3
Cx7
x z
o
U

o
?
w
a
A o

p c
y
U
H
° w

°n
U
z

W
tn
N
0
Ln
+
N
co
+
Q0
+
+
N
v
+
0
N
co
M
?z
QO
®®
E
Ln
b
0
TEMPORARY CAUSEWAY
ROCK FILL
SURFACE AREA BELOW OHW:
z
A ensf - rn
?9 /, x Z
-TYrA L - 3 S ?» 2.. `?.
VOLUME BELOW OHW:
V eAS_- _ 0 M 3
r,1 = 19 r,'
Vwws+ _ L38 ?y) Z x 0, -5-
T?Ti1 L = 19 rn 3 6CtASS jr R/P k-AP)
VOLUME OF CAUSEWAY:
VCns+ = L /9 M x Z.6 M x I-.S n,I_
vwe,54" _ [ )9 M X Z.?v M X /./ M?
T'rAL ISS ro 3
TONAGE OF CAUSEWAY:/
W e?s?1^?was?. _ (Sa.•,3`1.63 „,-r?NsrM3\
T Tfi c = 2S3 MTo,r"
SUMMARY
OF
QUANTITIES
74 r, 3
84 ,,3
1 Z 1 /')TON S
I37 MTorrs
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CLEVELAND COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1801501 (B-3139)
NC 150 - BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
SHEET 7 OF `?_

z
0

o3 z OR
0 m 0

1-0 Z °
°

Ix °
U)
W U
00
U
Z

CL
o
0 M
r
t

.3

L
c: ?i
fn

CL 5
(1
r
.

Tt.
a
n

(I

y
r N
78
N
N
m E u?
o
o
LL
t

o °

o °

N T;
E
a u'?U E

o
a
N? o

a ° °
LL 3 .,

N N
Sor
v
?
O °

C Z v

C N
> m t
a

W 0 O O
N
Z ~ a?

W °
N
=?r

0
W
W
N j
? H
u (
W
07 N d'

N d
? ? E ?
? E w

0
t
J
?
N v
N
N
J
O O ?

= p
o
Z, ct
H
z
o

a x ? ?
a
x
A .?
c? x w =° w
NJ

o z y W m o
E-4 o
u
o
?I
?-4 0 ?
-4
U A 4 U W
® z
z
.?
00
co

N
N

W

W

N

Z

p
D
a

L

l

0 C C NL
POO!

W
Z
O

H
Of
W

d
0

Ix

m

Q.

0 0 }
N
N N ?N
NZ I~-Z NN
X D a'

?C X
OC_ U
LQj
L mL L}
U
Q
N ?? O
.
O C- O+ N L

O

O N
V
V
m m
Z
Y
0 Z
? Q
?
_I C) O
U
Q
m ? Ix
? W
O
Q W
N ? W
Y

p
T
0112
Cleveland County
Bridge No. 42 on NC 150
Over Beaver Dam Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-150(9)
State Project 8.1801501
TIP No. B-3139
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
Date William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
o1
ate ..? Nicholas Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Cleveland County
Bridge No. 42 on NC 150
Over Beaver Dam Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-150(9)
State Project 8.1801501
TIP No. B-3139
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
JANUARY 2001
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:

en

• o
Ff\1
022 5 2
Date John L. Williams, P. E. DY nGli;;c:
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Acting Unit Head ,,
N ?•••,??;```?;.
???

Date ? v
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
Cleveland County
Bridge No. 42 on NC 150
Over Beaver Dam Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-150(9)
State Project 8.1801501
TIP No. B-3139
Resident Engineer & Roadside Environmental
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition will be followed during design
and construction of the project.
Due to the silt substrate of the streambed, a turbidity curtain is recommended to
contain sediment raised during the demolition and construction process. It is understood
that a curtain is only effective to a certain depth which shall be addressed by Roadside
Environmental.
Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
January 2001
Cleveland County
Bridge No. 42 on NC 150
Over Beaver Dam Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-150(9)
State Project 8.1801501
TIP No. B-3139
Bridge No. 42 is located in Cleveland County over Beaver Dam Creek. It is programmed
in the Draft 2002-2008 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge
replacement project due to deteriorating structural integrity and a deficient cross section.
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.
1. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 42 will be replaced on the existing location while traffic is maintained on a
temporary alignment during construction (see Figure 2). The new 170.6-foot (52-meter)
long bridge will include two 12-foot (3.6-meter) wide lanes with 4-foot (1.2-meter) wide
offsets (shoulders). The elevation of the new bridge will be approximately 2 feet (0.6
meters) higher than the existing bridge. The total clear roadway width will be 32 feet (9.6
meters).
There will'be 679 feet (207 meters) of new approach work to the east and 469 feet (143
meters) of new approach work to the-west. The pavement width on the approaches will
include two 12-foot (3.6-meter) lanes with 4-foot (1.2-meter) paved shoulders.
Additionally there will be 4-foot (1.2-meter) grass shoulders. Based on preliminary
design, the design speed should be 60 mph (100 kph) for horizontal alignment and
40 mph (65 kph) for vertical alignment.
The temporary alignment will be 1184 feet (361 meters) long utilizing a temporary
bridge. The temporary bridge will be 100 feet (30 meters) long and 28 feet (8.6 meters)
wide including two 11-foot (3.3-meter) lanes and 1-meter (3-foot) offsets.
The estimated cost of the project is $2,317,000 including $2,100,000 in construction costs
and $2,317,000 in right of way costs. The estimated cost shown in the Draft 2002-2008
TIP is $1,675,000.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
A design exception is anticipated for sag vertical curve. To improve the curve beyond the
proposed 40 mph (65 kph) design is not practical given the increased costs and lack of
reported accidents.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NC 150 is classified as an Rural Major Collector in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. It is located just east of Boiling Springs, N.C. Currently the traffic
volume is 7600 vehicles per day (VPD) and projected at 16100 VPD for the year 2025.
There is a posted speed limit of 55 mph in the vicinity of the bridge. Development in the
area is largely agricultural with scattered residential.
The existing bridge was completed in 1963. It is composed of seven-spans with a
reinforced concrete deck and timber sub-structure. The deck is 121 feet (37 meters) long
and 29.5 feet (9.0 meters) wide. There is vertical clearance of approximately 24 feet (7.3
meters) between the floorbeams of the bridge deck and streambed. The bridge carries
two lanes of traffic.
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the bridge is
41.2 out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge is not posted with weight restrictions.
Both vertical and horizontal alignment are good in the project vicinity. The pavement
width on the approaches to the existing bridge is 24 feet (7.3 meters). Shoulders on the
approaches of the bridge are approximately 4 feet (1.2 meters) wide.
In an analysis of a recent three year period the Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that
no accidents was reported.
There are 12 daily school bus crossings over the studied bridge. According to the
Transportation Director for Cleveland County closing the road would create a significant
burden on their transportation system.
There is a power substation in the northeast quadrant. There are high tension power lines
crossing the road from the substation. Aerial power lines are along the north side of the
road. A water line and underground telephone line are along the south side of the road.
A gas line crosses the road just east of the bridge.
IV. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
There is one "build" option considered in this document as follows:
Replace Bridge No. 42 on the existing location. A temporary detour alignment will be
built approximately 65 feet (20 meters) south of the existing bridge. The horizontal
design speed is approximately 60 mph (100 kph).
An offsite detour is not viable for this project due to the high volumes of traffic and the
lack of a suitable route.
A temporary onsite detour to the north is not practical due to the presence of the power
substation.
"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 I
COMPONENT
New Bridge
Temporary Detour Structure
Bridge Removal
Roadway & Approaches 383,000
128,000
25,000
819,000
Mobilization & Miscellaneous 468,000
Engineering & Contingencies 277,000
Total Construction $ 2,100,000
Right of Way $ 217,000
Total Cost $ 2517,000
VI. 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 of this
document 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. This project
will not impact any resource protected by Section 4(f) of the DOT 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 heavy 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 will not increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not have an impact on
noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
This bridge replacement project will not result in the substantial loss o f any federally or
state designated prime, unique or important farmland soils.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
On April 15, 1998, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) reviewed the subject
project. Subsequently, the SHPO determined that this project is not likely to affect any
resources of architectural significance (see attachment). An archaeological survey was
requested and performed. There were no sites of significance located. The SHPO
concurs that no further testing is required (see attachment).
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Topography, soil, and water resources, which occur in the project study area, are
discussed below. In addition, a general description of the project vicinity and project
region is also described.
Topography
The project study area lies within the Piedmont Physiographic Province. The project
study area is characterized by gently rolling terrain with steep, incised stream banks along
Beaver Dam Creek. Elevations within the project study area range from 207 to 219
meters (680 to 720 feet) above mean sea level (amsl).
Soils
Soil types and availability of water directly influence composition and distribution of
flora and fauna in any biotic community. This section describes the soil characteristics of
the project study area.
Soil Classifications
Based on information contained in the available soil data for Cleveland County, the soils
within the project study area are composed of Pacolet, Pacolet-Saw, and Toccoa series
soils. Pacolet sandy clay loam (32C2) (8 to 15 percent slopes), occur on well-drained,
sloping uplands in the project study area. Pacolet-Saw Complex soils (68C2)(8 to 15
percent slopes) are well-drained soils found on uplands. Along the Beaver Dam Creek
floodplain are Toccoa loam soils (1 A) (0 to 2 percent slopes) which consist of well-
drained, nearly level soils that occur along floodplains. Depth to seasonal high water
table is generally greater than 1.8 meters (6 feet) for Pacolet and Saw series soils and
between 0.9 to 1.5 meters (3 to 5 feet) for Toccoa series soils. Permeability for all three
soils types is moderate. Soil borings taken during field reconnaissance confirmed these
findings.
Hydric Soils
The NRCS defines a hydric soil as one that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough
during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part of the soil.
Such soils usually support hydrophytic vegetation. No hydric soils were mapped within
the study area and no hydric soils were found in the project study area during field
reconnaissance.
Water Resources
This section contains information concerning those water resources likely to be impacted
by the project. Water resource information encompasses the resources' relationship to
major water systems, its physical aspects, Best Usage Classification, and water quality of
the resources. Probable impacts to these water bodies are also discussed, as are means to
minimize impacts.
Waters Impacted and Characteristics
The project study area lies within the Broad River drainage basin which encompasses
3,900 square kilometers (1,506 square miles) in North Carolina. The proposed project
will involve two crossings of Beaver Dam Creek (sub-basin 03-08-04)(NC Department of
the Environment and Natural Resources - Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Index No.
9-50-(32)). One of the crossings will include the permanent structure and the other for the
temporary detour. Beaver Dam Creek flows south in the vicinity of the project study area
and is the only stream to be impacted by the project.
Beaver Dam Creek has an average base flow width of approximately 8 meters (25 feet)
wide and an average depth of 0.6 meters (2 feet) in the area of the proposed project.
Substrate consists of sand, silt and small gravel and varies throughout the riffle/pool
system in the project vicinity.
The detour crossing of the Beaver Dam Creek would be approximately 15 meters (50
feet) to the south of the existing bridge. The replacement of the existing bridge would
result in a new bridge of approximately 40 meters (130 feet) long and the temporary
bridge would be approximately 31 meters (100 feet) long.
Best Usage Classifications
Beaver Dam Creek has been classified by DWQ as a Class C stream. Class C uses
5
include aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and
agriculture. No water resources classified as High Quality Waters (HQW's), Water
Supply Watershed (WS-I or WS II), or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW's) are
located within the project vicinity.
Water Quality
Based on information obtained from the Broad Basinwide Water Quality Management
Plan (DWQ 1998), sub-basin 03-08-04 is considered to be impaired and partially
supporting of its classification and identified uses. The DWQ has initiated a whole basin
approach to water quality management for the 17 river basins in the state. Prior to the
implementation of the basinwide approach to water quality management, the Benthic
Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) assessed water quality by sampling for
Benthic macroinvertebrates at fixed monitoring stations throughout the state. BMAN data
taken from a monitoring station on Beaver Dam Creek immediately downstream of the
project study area on NC 150 indicated a Fair rating in July of 1995.
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 NPDES permit. The Whispering Pines Nursing Home on Sugar
Branch Road approximately 2500 feet east/southeast, of the project study area was
identified as a point source discharger by DWQ. The potential for non-point source
discharges in the project study area is fairly high and includes runoff from existing roads
and driveways, agriculture, and a large power station.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
This section addresses the impacted areas of the proposed project study area. Table 2
shows the impacts for the proposed project within the 30.5 meter (100 foot) corridor.
Beaver Dam Creek is the only water resource that will be impacted by the proposed
project. The proposed project will impact 30.5 meters (100 feet) of Beaver Dam Creek
for the permanent right-of-way and 30.5 meters (100 feet) of Beaver Dam Creek for the
temporary detour.
Table 2.
Approximate Impacts of Proposed Project to Water Resources
Type of Impact Permanent Right-of-way Temporary Detour
Meters Linear Feet Meters Linear Feet
Beaver Dam Creek 30.5 100 30.5 100
*All impacts are approximate based on uniform corridor width and project sketches
provided by NCDOT.
Both the permanent structure and the temporary detour will impact water resources. The
permanent crossing will span Beaver Dam Creek with a 40 meter (130 foot) bridge while
the temporary detour will provide a 30.5 meter (100 foot) span. Utilizing the full 30.5
meter (100 foot) right-of-way for both the permanent and temporary structure will yield
the impacts shown in Table 2 above. Usually project construction does not require the
entire right-of-way, therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less. Short-term
impacts include erosion and sedimentation of the stream bed, which may occur during
construction activities.
The greatest impacts to water resources in the project study area will be at stream
crossings, which will require vegetation clearing and fill placement in and/or around
streambeds and floodplains. Short term impacts include erosion and sedimentation of the
streambed, which may occur during construction activities. Other adverse effects may
include degradation of water quality, disturbance of the stream bottom, and increased
turbidity during construction. Highly turbid waters can result in oxygen depletion,
coating of gills on fish, siltation of filter feeding structures, reduced solar radiation, and
interference with spawning activities. Impacts are especially detrimental to the less
mobile benthic organisms. Many fish will exhibit an avoidance response and leave the
immediate area.
Impacts to water quality will be minimized by adherence to NCDOT's "Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters" (June 1991). In addition, a detailed sediment
and erosion control plan'consisting of best management practices will be developed for
the project. Sedimentation and erosion can be reduced through sediment controls such as
retention/detention basins, limits on the extent of disturbed areas, turbidity curtains, and
discharging stormwater over vegetated buffers. Cut and fill areas should be appropriately
graded and vegetated promptly. Best management practices to control non-point source
pollution would aid in delaying the entry of hazardous material spills into the waterway.
Hazardous spill containment basins will be considered during the design phases for the
proposed project. The N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) has recommended
standard erosion control measures.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial communities. This section describes those
communities encountered in the.project study area, as well as the relationships between
flora and fauna within those communities. Composition and distribution of biotic
communities throughout the project study area are reflective of topography, hydrologic
influences and past and present land uses. Description of the terrestrial communities are
present in the context of plant community classifications. Representative animal species
that are likely to occur in these habitats (based on published range distributions) are also
cited.
Scientific and common names (when applicable) are provided for each animal and plant
species described. Subsequent references to the same organism refer to common name
only.
Terrestrial Communities
Three terrestrial communities were identified in the project study area through aerial
interpretation and field reconnaissance conducted on April 12, 2000. The communities
7
identified included a mixed pine/hardwood community, maintained/disturbed areas and
agricultural lands. Photographs of the project study area are included in Appendix 2.
Mixed Pine/ Hardwood Communities
Within the project study area, forested, alluvial communities occur along the banks of
Beaver Dam Creek. These somewhat disturbed, mixed pine/hardwood forests are
dominated by American beech (Fagus grandifolia), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis),
and scrub pine (Pinus virginiana). Understory composition includes saplings of the
overstory as well as red maple (Ater rubrum), flowering dogwood (Cornus f orida), and
ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana). At stream's edge, several black willow (Salix nigra)
and tag alder (Alnus serrulata) were also present. The herbaceous layer consisted mainly
of Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) and multiflora rose (Rosa multijlora) which
has severely overgrown the banks and eliminated most other species in the herbaceous
layer.
Mixed pine/deciduous forest provide food, shelter, and nesting resources for a relatively
diverse population of wildlife. These areas may be particularly suited to wildlife
diversity when located adjacent to successional and maintained/disturbed areas as they
provide corridors for movement of wildlife as well as a variety of food and other
resources. Canopy species common in such areas, hickory and oak forests in particular,
provide valuable materials for browser forage as well as materials for nesting, shelter, and
cover. A mourning dove (Zenaida macronura) and raccoon (Procyon lotor) tracks were
observed in the project study area.
Mammalian fauna likely to inhabit forested areas include the gray squirrel (Sciurus
carolinerisis), raccoon, eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus), and Virginia opossum
(Didelphis virginiana). The transitional areas are likely to be inhabited by the eastern
cottontail (Sylvilagus jloridanus), woodchuck (Marmota monax), and many varieties of
small rodents such as field mice and voles.
Common reptiles and amphibians found in forested communities include the eastern box
turtle (Terrapene carolina), black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta), wood frog (Rana
sylvatica), and redback salamander (Plethodon cinereus). In addition to these species, the
black racer (Coluber constrictor), eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and
copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix) are likely to be found in the transition areas.
Avian species likely to be found in these forested communities include the blue jay
(Cyanocitta cristata), red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus), tufted titmouse
(Parus bicolor), and red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis). The common crow (Corvus
brachyrhynchos), American robin (Turdis migratorius), and American kestrel (Falco
sparverius) are most likely to be found in the transitional areas.
Maintained/Disturbed Areas
Maintained/disturbed areas are present in the project study area along the maintained
right-of-way for NC 150. These areas include maintained grasses within the existing
alignment and an abandoned business on SR 1159. *Dominant vegetation includes fescue
(Festuca sp.), crab grass (Digitaria sp.), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japanica) and multiflora rose.
The maintained/disturbed habitat within the project study area is surrounded by mixed
pine/hardwood forest and agricultural land. It represents only a minor constituent of a
larger community structure within the project vicinity. Therefore, faunal species
frequenting the maintained community will be largely those species inhabiting the mixed
pine/hardwood forest or agricultural lands.
Agricultural Lands
Agricultural lands are defined by the evidence of recent, active management of open
fields. These areas include actively farmed cropland as well as pasture lands used for
forage and hay production. These areas are found to the south of the existing bridge
right-of-way.
The agricultural lands are likely to be inhabited by the eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus
jloridanus), woodchuck (Marmota monax), and many varieties of small rodents such as
field mice and voles. In addition to these species, the black racer (Coluber constrictor),
eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), and copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix) are
likely to be found in the agricultural fields or along the transition areas. The common
crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), American robin (Turdis migratorius), and American
kestrel (Falco sparverius) are most likely to be found in the agricultural and transitional
areas.
Aquatic Communities
This category typically includes streams and waterbodies within a project study area and
may or may not include a vegetative component. Beaver Dam Creek is the only aquatic
community that will be impacted by the proposed project.
No fish or aquatic organism surveys were performed on the stream. According to WRC,
typical fish species that are likely to inhabit such areas include the creek chub (Semotilus
atromaculatus), common sucker (Catostomas commersoni), longnose dace (Rhinichthys
cataractae). blacknose dace (Rhinichthys atratulus), and rock bass (Ambloplites
rupe.stris).
Common benthic invertebrates found in such communities would include stoneflies
(Plecoptera), caddisflies (Tricoptera), and crayfish (Cambarus spp.). In addition to these
invertebrate species, the pickerel frog (Rana palustris), bullfrog (Rana catesbiana),
mountain dusky salamander (Desmognathus ochrophaeus), and northern water snake
(Nerodia sipedon) are likely to occur within the stream as well.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the subject property will have various impacts on the biotic resources
described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources have a potential
to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies impacts to the
9
natural resources in terms of area impacted and community affected. Temporary and
permanent impacts are considered here as well.
Within the proposed 30.5 meter (100 foot) right-of-way limits for the permanent
alignment and 30.5 meter (100 foot) right-of-way for the temporary detour, impacts to
plant communities associated with the construction or widening of a roadway through
natural ecosystems would consist largely of community modification resulting from
clearing, filling, paving, and creation of borrow areas. As shown in Table 5, the
permanent right-of-way will result in approximately 0.4 hectares (0.9 acres) of permanent
impact to forested communities, 0.5 hectares (1.2 acres) of agricultural lands, and 0.2
hectares (0.5 acres) of maintained/disturbed impact. The temporary detour will impact
0.3 hectares (0.8 acres) of forested communities 0.3 hectares (0.8 acres) of agricultural
lands, and 0.1 hectares (0.2 acres) or maintained/disturbed lands. Typically project
construction does not require the entire right-of-way; therefore, actual impacts may be
considerably less than those shown in Table 3.
Table 3.
Approximate Impacts of Proposed Project to Terrestrial Communities
Type of Impact Permanent Ri ght-of-way Temporary Detour
Hectares Acres Hectares Acres
Mixed Pine/Hardwood 0.4 0.9 0.3 0.8
Agricultural Lands 0.5 1.2 0.3 0.8
Maintained/Disturbed
Lands 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.2
*All impacts are approximate based on uniform corridor width and project sketches
provided by NCDOT.
The terrestrial communities found within the project study area will be altered as a result
of project construction. These communities serve as nesting, foraging and shelter habitat
for fauna. Agricultural and forested areas account for most of the impacts to terrestrial
communities for the proposed project while a small portion of the project study area is
disturbed by the existing road and residences. Impacts to forested areas can contribute to
habitat fragmentation and eliminate nesting, foraging, and shelter habitat for wildlife.
This may force animals into a smaller area, which can cause degradation of remaining
habitat and increased mortality due to predation, disease and starvation. Some mortality
to smaller animals is likely to occur directly from construction activities. These impacts
can be minimized by clearing and grading only the areas necessary for construction and
leaving natural vegetation along the remaining right-of-way. Due to the size and scope of
this project, it is anticipated that impacts to fauna will be minimal.
Aquatic communities are sensitive to even small changes in their environment. Stream
channelization, scouring, siltation, sedimentation and erosion from construction related
work will affect water quality and biological constituents. Although direct impacts may
be temporary, environmental impacts from these construction processes may result in
10
long term or irreversible effects. Table 2 summarizes the anticipated impacts to aquatic
communities.
Impacts often associated with in-stream construction include increased scouring and
channelization of the streambed. In-stream construction alters the stream substrate and
may remove streamside vegetation at the site. Disturbances to the substrate will produce
siltation which clogs the gills and/or feeding mechanisms of benthic organisms (sessile
filter feeders and deposit feeders), fish, and amphibian species. Benthic organisms can
also be covered by excessive amounts of sediment. These organisms are slow to recover
or repopulate a stream.
JURISDICTIONAL Topics
This section provides descriptions, inventories, and impact analysis related to two
jurisdictional topics: Waters of the United States and rare and protected species.
Waters of the United States
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) promulgated the definition of "Waters of
the United States" under 33 CFR 328.3 (a). Waters of the United States include most
interstate or intrastate surface waters tributaries and wetlands. Any action that proposes
the placement of dredge or fill materials into Waters of the United States falls under the
jurisdiction of the USACE, and must follow the statutory provisions under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Wetlands are defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (33 CFR 328.3) as:
"areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands
generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas."
In accordance with this definition, wetlands must possess three essential parameters:
hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and evidence of hydrology (USACE Wetlands
Delineation Manual, 1987). Besides providing valuable habitat for a diverse number of
plant and animal species, wetlands also control floodwaters and erosion, replenish
groundwater, filter contaminants and excess nutrients from runoff, and protect municipal
water supplies.
An evaluation of wetlands within the project study area was conducted on April 12, 2000.
The location, extent, and quality of potential wetlands within the proposed right-of-way
were determined by:
Interpretation of 1:1250 scale black-and-white aerial photography.
Review of U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps and NWI wetland maps (Boiling
Springs North and Boiling Springs South, NC quadrangles).
Review of the NRCS soil/hydric soil data for Cleveland County.
Field reconnaissance of the project study area.
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Beaver Dam Creek is the only jurisdictional surface waters under Section 404 of CWA
that will be impacted by the proposed project. The biological, physical, and water quality
aspects of this jurisdictional system is described in previous section of the report.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
The proposed project will cross jurisdictional surface waters. Anticipated impacts to
surface waters were determined using the entire right-of-way width of each alignment.
Impacts are summarized in Table 2. The amount of surface water impacts may be
modified by any changes in functional design and may lead to increased stream impacts
or wetland impacts. The permanent alignment impacts 30.5 meters (100 feet) of Beaver
Dam Creek and the temporary detour will impact an additional 30.5 meters (100 feet) of
Beaver Dam Creek. Typically, project construction does not require the entire right-of-
way, therefore, actual surface water impacts may be considerably less. No wetlands will
be impacted by the proposed right-of-way for either alignment.
Permits
In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), permits will be required
from the USACE for any activities that encroach into jurisdictional wetlands or "Waters
of the United States." In addition, Section 401 of the CWA requires each state to certify
that state water quality standards will not be violated for activities which 1) involve
issuance of a federal permit or license; or 2) require discharges into "Waters of the United
States." The Corp of Engineers cannot issue a 404 permit until 401 water quality
certification is approved by the N.C. Department of the Environment and Natural
Resources -- Division of Water Quality.
It is anticipated that a Nationwide Section 404 Permit Number 23 will be required from
the USACE for waterbody crossings along both alignments. These permits authorize
activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded, or financed in whole or part
by another federally funded agency or department to fill Waters of the United States for
those activities categorically excluded from environmental documentation because they
are determined by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to be within the category
of actions which are deemed to neither individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the natural environment. A permit will be required for this project for the
temporary fill that may result from bridge demolition and the temporary detour as well as
for the impacts of permanent construction.
Mitigation
The USACE has adopted, through the 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
12
impacts, reducing impacts over time, and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20).
Each of the three general aspects (avoidance, minimization, and compensatory
mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance
Avoidance 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 USACE, 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
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps could 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. Other
practical mechanisms to minimize impacts to Waters of the United States crossed by the
proposed project include: strict enforcement of sedimentation control BMP's for the
protection of surface waters during the entire life of the project; reduction of clearing and
grubbing activity; reduction/elimination of direct discharge into streams; reduction of
runoff velocity; re-establishment of vegetation on exposed areas, judicious use of
pesticides and herbicides; minimization of "in-stream activity"; and litter/debris control.
Bridge demolition must minimize the impacts to water courses. This project should
follow Case 3 guidelines as established in NCDOT's Best Management Practices for
Bridge Demolition and Removal. The superstructure of Bridge No. 42 is composed of a
reinforced concrete deck on timber joists. The substructure is composed of timber caps
and piles with timber bulkheads at the ends. Only the reinforced concrete deck would
result in potential temporary fill amounting to approximately 15 cubic yards. Due to the
silt substrate of the stream, a turbidity curtain is recommended. Impacts to Waters
of the United States will be minimized by adherence to NCDOT's BMP's for Bridge
Demolition during this stage of the project.
Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until the 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 which remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation, and enhancement of Waters of the United States. Such actions
should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site. Although
the 1989 MOA between the USACE and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
13
does not require compensatory mitigation with Nationwide Permit 23, the DWQ has
stated in 15A NCAC 211 .0506(h), that compensatory mitigation may be necessary with
Nationwide Permit No. 23 if more than 46 meters (150 feet) of stream is filled or altered.
Rare and Protected Species
Any action which has the potential to result in a negative impact to federally protected
plants or animals is subject to review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
under one or more provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. North Carolina
laws are also designed to protect certain plants and animals that are endemic to North
Carolina or whose populations are in severe decline.
Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal status of Endangered (LE), Threatened (LT), Proposed
Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). Federal actions (permits) or federally-funded actions
with potential adverse impacts to protected species require prior consultation with the
USFWS under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Even in the absence of
federal funds or permits, the provisions of Section 9 of the ESA authorize the USFWS to
exercise jurisdiction on behalf of the protected species.
A review of USFWS and the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
databases (as of April 2000) identified the following federal and state listed species that
may occur in Cleveland County as listed in Table 4 and described in the following
paragraphs.
Table 4
Federal and State Protected Species for Cleveland County
Federal State
Scientific Name Common Name .
Status* Status*
Dwarf-flowered
Hexasrylis naniflora LT T
heartleaf
*LT and T = threatened
Federally endangered species (LE) are species that are threatened with extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Federally threatened species (LT) are
species that are likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all
or a significant portion of its range.
Surveys were conducted for the dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Hexasrylis naniflora), a federal
and state threatened species, within the proposed right-of-way for the project on April 12,
2000. This species was identified for survey based on the potential for appropriate
habitat and flowering season. No individuals were identified within the project right-of-
way for each alignment.
14
Hexasrylis naniflora (dwarf-flowered heartleaf) Federally Threatened
Family: Aristolochiaceae
Date Listed: 14 April 1989
Flowers Present: , mid-March to early June
The dwarf-flowered heartleaf, a federally and state threatened species, is a perennial with
jug-shaped flowers and evergreen, leathery, heart-shaped leaves. It is typically found in
the upper piedmont regions of North and South Carolina. It is found on Pacolet,
Madison, or Musella soils and is reliant upon soil type for adequate growth and
reproduction. Once this requirement is met, the moisture levels are highly variable but it
is most common adjacent to creekheads and streams as well as on bluffs and slopes of
hillsides and ravines (USFWS 1990). Surveys were conducted for the dwarf-flowered
heartleaf (Hexasrylis naniflora), a federal and state threatened species, within the
proposed right-of-way for the project. No individuals were identified within the project
study area. Based on the information above and field reconnaissance, no impacts to this
species are anticipated as a result of the proposed project construction.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Federal Species of Concern and State Protected Species
Federal species of concern are not afforded federal protection under the ESA and are not
included in the Section 7 process. These species are those that merit further study to
determine their status or which may be listed in the future. In addition, those species
listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by the NCNHP
database are afforded state protection under the NC State Endangered Species Act and the
NC Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. Table 5 lists those species that are
designated as Federal Species of Concern or are state listed for Cleveland County and the
existence of suitable habitat for each species in the project study area. This species list is
provided for information purposes as the status of these species may be upgraded in the
future.
Table S
Federal Species of Concern for Cleveland County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal State Habitat Habitat
Status* Status* Present
Speyerla dlana Diana frittilary FSC SR Rich woods and Yes
adjacent edges
Monotropsis Sweet Pinesap FSC C Dry forests and Yes
odorata bluffs
Saxifraga Carolina Saxifrage FSC C High to mid- No
caroliniana elevation cliffs
15
* FSC = Federal Species of Concern, SR = Significantly Rare, C = State Candidate (those
species whose
status is under consideration)
State endangered species (E) are species whose continued existence as a viable
component of the state's flora or fauna is determined to be in jeopardy. A state
threatened species (T) is one which is likely to become an endangered species in the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A Federal Species
of Concern (FSC) is a species which may or may not be listed in the future. Significantly
rare species (SR) are those which exist in the state in small numbers and have been
determined to need further monitoring. Candidate species (C) are very rare in North
Carolina and reflect fewer than 20 populations in the state. Species of special concern
(SC) are those species which require further monitoring in the state.
Based on information from the NCNHP, it is possible that the Diana frittilary (Speyeria
diana) and sweet pinesap (Monotropsis odorata) could occur in the project vicinity but
due to the overgrown and disturbed nature of the impacted areas, it is unlikely that they
would occur within the project study area. Carolina saxifrage (Saxifraga caroliniana) is
not likely to occur in the project study area due to lack of adequate habitat.
16
\ 1159
/
/
\1 I I
/OIUNG SPRINGS \\
POP 2.477 \ I
\ Bridge No. 42
1
1
I
I
.95
L ! ? , 35
i I L
(150>'?'I I? I
/
/ - ? 150
/ ^y
\ ? 1
1286
03
.0
.
L ---

\

l
\
\ I
\
1147
1148
\ I. 7

\
\ r
.,

1 /
J
CAF .
/
N-?
IM
/ 1123 /
1
C
.02 .3
/
I
e /
1
1
1147
/
I
1148
1143
MOp2M
'1k `'?
North Carolina
ry
\ Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
j
OFM Planning & Environmental Branch
Cleveland County
Rep lace Bridge No. 42 on NC 150
Over Beaverdam Creek
B-3139
Figure One
1151

• I a
it 5
I ?Looking East Across
Bridge No. 42

/pf NVnTN North Carolina Department of
Transportation
b
} Division of Highways
Project Development &
"..oFr?? Environmental Analysis Branch
Cleveland County
Replace Bridge No. 42 on NC 150
Over Beaver Dam Creek
B-3139
' A AEL&I ?. lAAA
North Face of
Bridge No. 42
Looking South Across
Utility Corridor
ST :A1 TE „
tee'" . .. ..
f ? R 4? // ? ? S
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
November 7, 2000
MEMORANDUM
TO: William D. Gilmore, PE, Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
NC Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook It ?J4 -''?
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
RE: Archaeological Survey Report, ReplaZB7.-39--, t-of Bridge 42
on NC 150, Cleveland County, TIP N 1Federal
Aid No. BRSTP-150(9), ER 98-8647
Thank you for your letter of October 6, 2000, transmitting the archaeological survey report by
Daniel Cassedy and Marvin Brown of URS Corporation for the above project.
During the course of the survey no prehistoric or historic archaeological sites were located within
the project area. Due to the eroded nature of the soils and the absence of cultural resources, Dr.
Cassedy has recommended that no further archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project. We concur with this recommendation since the project will not
involve significant archaeological resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section
106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above
comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-
4763.
DB:kgc
cc: Roy Shelton, FHWA
Thomas Padgett, NC DOT
Daniel Cassedy, URS Corporation
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone] 733-8653
ARCHAEOLOGY 421 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4619 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4619 [phone] 715-2671
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4613 [phone] 715-4801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC 4618 Mail Service Center. Raleigh NC 27699-4618 [phone] 715-4801

swr
Z
l? ? f
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
April 28, 1998
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge #42 on NC 150 over Beaverdam Creek,
Cleveland County, B-3139, Federal Aid Project
BRSTP-150(9), State Project 8.1801501, ER 98-
8647
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
GEIV O
IT APR 3 0 1998 T
' DIVISION OF <<
HIC
H V'JA':'S ?:i
On April 15, 1998, 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.
An archaeological survey will be necessary if replacement is to be on a new
alignment.
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 27601-2807 g
Nicholas L. Graf
April 28, 1998, 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,
I
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: ?H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett