20041779 Ver 1_Complete File_20041102

i ~~ ~ ~ I- ~~~ ~ -_
R-3300
US 17 Bypass
Pender County
Phased Environmental Study
Prepared by the: .
Statewide Planning Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
February 1999
Persons responsible for this report:
Project Engineer: Mark Freeman, P.E.
Urban Studies Unit Head Deborah Hutchings, P.E.
Statewide Planning Branch Manager M. R. Poole, Ph.D., P.E.
Engineering Technician Jim Neely

Project History
Due to growth in traffic on US the North Carolina Department of Transportation
decided to widen US 17 through the village of Hampstead to a five lane section.
The decision to 5-lane rather than bypass was made because of the
environmental issues involved. It was felt that widening of the existing road
could be achieved long before a new location bypass could be permitted and
constructed.
The NC DOT, however, did promise to study the possibility of constructing a
bypass of Hampstead. In February of 1998, the project was assign to Mark
Freeman of the Statewide Planning Branch. The County was informed that a
Phased Environmental Study was to be done by a letter dated February 16,
1998.
A presentation was made to the Pender County Commissioners on April 21,
1998 to explain the process, and take comments to determine the purpose and
need of the project. A Public Information Session was held on August 17, 1998
in Hampstead to take comments and questions from the County Commissioners
and local citizens. The comments are summarized in Appendix A of this
report.
Project Recommendation
The following recommendation was made based on the comments from the local
citizens. A multilane principal arterial on new location is recommended to
bypass the Hampstead Area. The bypass should begin northeast of the
Hampstead area and continue to the west to connect with existing US 17.
Beginning southwest of the Holly Shelter Gameland is recommended to avoid
section 4 (f) impacts. Control of access is recommended for the section on new
location. Due to the residential density on the ocean side of existing US 17,
along with extra environmental concerns, the proposed bypass should be
constructed on the north side of US 17.
Purpose and Need
Transportation Demand: One major contributor to the amount of traffic on this
section of US 17 is the amount of development along Pender and Onslow
County's coastline. Surf City, for example, experienced a 222% increase in
housing units between 1980 and 1990. The population in Surf City has grown at
6.5 % annually between 1980 and 1996; considerably higher than the Statewide
average of 1.4 % over the same period. Topsail Beach, also accessed by US
17, has grown at an average rate of 3.2 % annually between 1980 and 1996.
The growth in tourism, population, and supporting commercial development have
created a large increase in traffic in this area. The traffic, however, is mixed

purpose. Local traffic uses this section to access schools, shopping, and
residential development. Through traffic utilizes this roadway to travel from I-40
in New Hanover County to area beaches, as well as destinations north of Pender
County. This project will remove much of the through traffic from the existing
roadway, allowing it to better serve local land use.
Capacity: The 1998 Pender County Thoroughfare Plan Technical Report
forecasts 33400 vehicles per day (VPD) in 2025 on the section of existing US 17
in the vicinity of the US 17 and NC 210 intersection. The capacity of this section
is approximately 27000 - 30000 VPD. The Thoroughfare Plan Technical Report
predicts the bypass will be carrying approximately 14000 VPD. The capacity of
the recommended bypass is 30000 VPD. Existing US 17 is expected to be over
capacity by the year 2025. If the bypass is not constructed, the addition of
14000 VPD to existing US 17 will further aggravate US 17's traffic problems. The
project will increase the capacity of the US 17 corridor, thereby providing a
higher level of service. This will be a benefit to both through and local traffic.
Safety Issues: From 1994 to 1997 the intersection of US 17 and NC 210
averaged 14 accidents per year, with a severity index of 9.2. The mix of local and
through traffic, coupled with an abundance of access points, causes conflicts
between the existing roads function of moving traffic and providing local access.
As development continues to occur in this area, the traffic conflicts will increase.
The recommended project will separate the through and local traffic, reducing
those conflicts.
System Linkage: US 17 is a regionally significant facility, spanning the eastern
part of North Carolina. US 17 connects the coastal region to four lane facilities
such as US 64, US 264, NC 70 and US 74/ 76. Its connection to I-40 allows
travelers to reach eastern destinations from other parts of the State. US 17 has
been identified as a Primary Arterial on the Pender County Thoroughfare Plan,
and is included in the North Carolina Intra-State System.
Relationship to Other Plans: This project is included in the current Pender
County Thoroughfare Plan dated June 2, 1997. The project also extends into the
area covered by the Wilmington Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan. The project
should be coordinated with these plans to insure proper transition to other
roadway networks. The relationship between this project and the proposed US
17 Bypass project is especially important.

Alternatives
The following alternatives were developed to meet the purpose and need of the
project. Figure 1 shows the location of each alternative, and shows the sections
described in the impacts table shown in Appendix B.
Alternate 1 (section ABCD):
Length - 9 miles
Acres of NWI wetlands impacted - 53
Comment: This alternate is identified on the Pender County Thoroughfare Plan
dated June 2, 1997.
Alternate 2 (section ABCED):
Length - 10.6 miles
Acres of NWI wetlands impacted - 61
Comment: This alternate is similar to the Thoroughfare Plan recommendation,
but utilizes a different crossing of NC 210.
Alternate 3 (section ABCEFOGH):
Length - 12.9 miles
Acres of NWI wetlands impacted - 63
Comment: This alternate utilizes the proposed US 17 relocation project in New
Hanover County for better regional connectivity.
Alternate 4 (section ABIJNKFGH):
Length - 13.0 miles
Acres of NWI wetlands impacted - 54
Comment: This alternate utilizes the proposed l
Hanover County for better regional connectivity,
NC 210 than Alternate 3.
S 17 relocation project in New
with a more northern crossing of
Alternate 5 (section ABIJNLM)
Length - 13.0 miles
Acres of NWI wetlands impacted - 64
Comment: This alternate connects directly to I-40 at an existing interchange.
Alternate 6 (section ABIJKLM)
Length - 13.6 miles
Acres of NWI wetlands impacted - 71
Comment: This alternate is similar to Alternate 5, but with a slight alignment
adjustment to the south.

I
Alternate 7 (section ABIPQ):
Length - 13.7 miles
Acres of NWI wetlands impacted - 53
Comment: This alternate utilizes the existing section of NC 210, with a portion on
new alignment.
Other alternatives were suggested that crossed through the Holly Shelter
Gameland and one that passed on the southeast side of existing US 17. The
alignments through the Holly Shelter Gameland were rejected based on 4(f)
concerns. The alignment on the southeast side of US 17 was rejected due to
extensive environmental issues and residential relocations.

Appendix A
Citizen Comments
IN FAVOR
Safety:
• People are driving too fast on US 17 - II
• Fire trucks and ambulances arc detained with heavy traftic on US l7
• Difficulty in entering US 17 from subdivisions (left turn) - I
• Danger associated with schools along US l7 - II
• Evacuation of people during storms and fires - I
Traffic Delay:
• No current detour route in case of accidents on US 17
• Summer and beach traffic delays residents during in-town trips
• Wilmington is the closes[ city for resteraunts, shopping, etc.
Community Growth:
• Traffic has been created by adding lanes to US l7 -III
• Hampstead is growing in population through retirees and Wilmington comnwters - II
• New school under construction
• The need of a road from Hwy 2(0 to Hoover Road for school service
• Additional congestion on US l7 due to new school
• Additional traftic lights for school will delay traftic on US 17
Preferred Routes:
• Consider a parallel road to US 17 with limited access - II
• Build a traffic corridor extension rather than a Bypass only
Cost:
• Save tax dollars by building now rather than later
Other:
• DOT owes Hampstead a Bypass
Other Related Issues:
• Intersection of Factory Road and Peanut Road
• Caution lights installed imply hazardous intcrscction
• Consider traffic light
OPPOSED
Traffic:
• Premature proposal; Analyze US l7 after 5 lanes are constructed
• Necd of a bigger solution for traffic congestion
• Consider atic-in to Wilmington Bypass for a Hampstead Bypass
Gnvironmcntal:
• Destroy valuable wetlands
Cost:
• Waste of money

CD
X
C
d
a
Q
Q ~
MM` ~~
W
1 _ O
r• U
i.
~ T~
V
MQ
\'J
0

0 0
N
' N r ~ T O O O O O O O O O O O O O
P
)
r ~
O O
'
~ ~ ~ O ~ N O O O O O O O O O O O O r
N r
~ O
O ~ O

O r N O O O O O O O O O O O O O
~ r ~

°
°
~ r
~ r o rn o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
rn v
0 0
~
~ T N ~ ~t O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0
LL (D r
O
O O
W ~ N O ~ O O O N O O O O O O O O ~ O
r ~ r
O
~

W ~
O ~ O ~
O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O ~
r O
r
°

U N N r ~ T O O r O O O O O O O O N O
r (p r
O O

~
O
O O
~ N N O O r O O O O O O O O ~ O
U
N r r

0 0
m ~ N r ~ ~ O O r O O O O O O O O ~ O
r In r
C °

O
m O
. r
U Q O
r
N r ~ T O O O O O O r O O O O O O
O
r ~
'^
V'

C
C •~

U
y
O
fti °~ ~

U U
N U ~
Q
O
O
N
cti C
N
O
~
J

' U N ~, cb
°'
~ ~ ~ ~ O N ~ a~ s
~' a ~ o
~ N ~ 3 N N a~ r N c a
i
° a, ~ ° ~ a~ s ct a
- ~ ~, ~ ~,
fn U C U U '_'
'
(n
d
N C
p
N N - fi3 (n ~ ' O N
U _
~ U
~ ~ ` ~ ~ m 2 Z 2 a c 3 3 c
E m ~
.
' a~

.C _
C
ro
O O 7
O
U
~ U
'
C
W
D
I-
L O
~ O
~ O
Z F' U . O O ~ ~ L
C O O w O f U O Q O ~
~ 7 C 0 7 ~- . ~-
~ ~ 2 Z = U Cn Z 2 (n C7 Z C7 2
X
_N
.n
wl
U
ro
Q

~.
m
X
c
c~
a
a
Q

Y ~ T r ~ (O O O r O O O O O O O O O O

O
~ O Ch

Y
~
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r
r

O
~ r O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O

(`~

d O N O c~
; r O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N ,~ ~ ~
N r
O
O
O O O O r O O O O O O O O O O
Z ~ (h N
r O
O O
O
~ r N In O O +- O O O O O O O O ~ O
N r
r
o o
r
~ M ~ f~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O
J In r M
O

O ~ N O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Y ~ N
r
O
O
0
r ~ O O N O O O O O O O O 0 0
0
N ~

~ ~
C
C .N
_ N
U N O
~° °~ ~ U
- to U ~
~ cd C Q N
~ ~
C ? N ~ J
O i
i

N
r
~
U
c
y `
m ~ a~ ~ `~ a~
~ ~
. cn ~ ~
~ ro . N Q m o
~ 3 ~ m ~ N ~ ..
o ~ o ~ ~, s ~ a.
ro ro ~ ~
n v .~ ~- U ~ .~ cn a~ ~ a~ p
~
~ ~ a E 2 Z 2 n- ~ 3 ~ 3 ~
~ a~ ~ ,
~ a
i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` o `o o m ~ ro .` 't ~ W c F-
c
a m

~ ~ ~ 2 Z 2 U Cn Z 2 (n (.7 Z C7 2
N
X
N
.~
N
~I
U
c~
a
E

•
n~ SUi[ ~
..•e~
}
~~~
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPAR7~NT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
October 25, 2004
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers ~ ~ '~ 7
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
ATTN: Mr. John T. Thomas, Jr.
NCDOT Coordinator
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY

o
~C"~ ^, r~ ~, I ~.~ r...:~
. :, n
InJ'
N (~~ V t; ~. ,; ~ 4
DENIl . r; :. ~ ,,I.~ i Y
WETLANDS ANU srol;~~wArER BRANCH
Subject: Nationwide 33 Permit Application for the Replacement of Bridge No. 57 on
NC 88, over Buffalo Creek in Ashe County. State Project No. 8.1711301,
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-88(1), WBS Element 32980.1.1, Division
11, TIP No. B-3300
Dear Sir:
Please find enclosed three copies of the Categorical Exclusion (CE) Document, as well as
the Pre-construction Notification, permit drawings and ''h size plans for the above referenced
project. The NCDOT proposes to replace the 120.5 foot Bridge No. 57 over Buffalo Creek
with a new bridge approximately 50 feet west of the existing bridge. The new bridge will be
a 115 foot pre-stressed girder, single span bridge with no bents in the water. The new bridge
will have 3 lanes and will be constructed in stages. There will 0.007 acre of temporary fill in
the surface water due to a temporary work pad. Traffic will be maintained onsite during
construction. Instream work and land disturbance activities within the 25-foot buffer zone
are prohibited during trout spawning season of October 15 through April 15.
IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
General Description: The project area is located in sub-basin 050702 (New River Basin) and
has a Hydrologic Unit Code of 05050001. There are three jurisdictional streams within the
project study area: Buffalo Creek, Little Buffalo Creek and an unnamed tributary to Little
Buffalo Creek. Impacts from the new bridge construction will involve Buffalo Creek. Little
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] CAPITAL BLVD
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PLB SUITE 168
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC 27604
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598

Buffalo Creek meets Buffalo Creek downstream of the bridge site and is listed on
NCDWQ's 303(d) list of impaired waters due to point source pollution and urban runoff.
Buffalo Creek originates west of NC 88 and flows north to its confluence with North Fork
New River downstream of the project area. Buffalo Creek has a best usage classification of
C Tr+. The Tr (Trout Waters) designation indicates waters suitable for natural trout
propagation and maintenance of stocked trout. The special designation "+" identifies waters
that are subject to a special management strategy specified in 15A NCAC 2B.0225 the
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) rule. The North Fork New River flows into the New
River approximately 25 miles downstream. The New River is designated ORW. Best
Management Practices for Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds will be followed for
this project.
Temporary Impacts: A temporary workpad will be put in place below the proposed new
bridge site to aid in construction for the new bridge. The workpad will impose 0.007acre of
fill in Buffalo Creek. The new bridge will be placed at a higher elevation (approximately 1-2
feet) than the existing bridge and the bents will be placed outside the water's edge. The new
bridge will also be located 50 feet west of the existing bridge on a new alignment. This will
greatly improve the horizontal alignment of NC 88.
Permanent Impacts: There will be no permanent impacts to surface waters due to the new
bridge.
Bridge Demolition: Bridge No. 57 has a superstructure composed of a reinforced concrete
floor on I-beams. The substructure is composed of abutments, reinforced concrete spill
throughs, interior bents and reinforced concrete posts and beams. The deck, curb and bents
are proposed for removal in a manner which avoids dropping any components into the water;
however, with the presence of reinforced concrete in the superstructure over Buffalo Creek
temporary fill associated with bridge removal may occur. Best Management Practices for
Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed to avoid any temporary fill from entering
Waters of the United States.
Utilitypacts: There will be no sewer, water, electric or other utility impacts due to this
bridge replacement project.
Restoration Plan: The material used for installation of the temporary work pad within the
surface waters will be removed after its purpose has been served. The temporary fill areas
will be restored to their original contours. After the temporary work pad is no longer needed,
the contractor will use excavating equipment to remove all material within jurisdictional
areas. All material will become the property of the contractor. The contractor will be
required to submit a reclamation plan for removal of and disposal of all material off-site.
Schedule: The project schedule calls for a February 15, 2005 LET date with a date of
availability of March 22, 2005.
2

PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classification of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). As of January 29, 2003 the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists seven federally-protected species for Ashe County (see
Table 1). Surveys for protected species were conducted in August 2001 and no species
listed in the below table were found. Habitat was found for the bog turtle and Virginia
spiraea. Habitat for the bog turtle exists near the project site, although it is completely
avoided by all project construction. Virginia spiraea was surveyed a second time in June
2004 and again, not found in or around the project area.
Table 1. Federally-protected species for Ashe County.
Common Name Scientific Name Status Habitat Biological
Conclusion
Bog turtle Clemmys
muhlenber ii T(S/A) Yes Not Required
S readin avens Geum radiatum Endan ered No No Effect
Swam ink Helonias bullata Threatened No No Effect
Roan Mountain bluet Houstonia montana Endan ered No No Effect
Heller's blazin star Liatris helleri Threatened No No Effect
Vir inia s iraea S iraea vir iniana Threatened Yes No Effect
Rock nome lichen G mnoderma lineare Endan ered No No Effect
A recent review (October 2004) of the NC Natural Heritage database of rare species and
unique habitats reveals no documentation of rare species or unique habitats found within
mile of the project study area.
AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION AND MITIGATION
Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to
"Waters of the United States". The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all reasonable and
practicable design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to provide full
compensatory mitigation of all remaining, unavoidable jurisdictional stages; minimization
measures were incorporated as part of the project design. Replacing Bridge No. 57 with a
new single span bridge that will have no bents in the water minimizes the impacts to Buffalo
Creek. Best Management Practices will be followed for this project as outlined in "Design
Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (NCAC 04B.0024). Two hazardous waste retention
basins (see permit drawing sheet No. 4 of 8) will be located between the bridge approach
ways and the surface waters for protection against hazardous spills. Due to the trout water
classification of all the waters in the project area, these practices will be adhered to during
the design and construction of this project in and around all waters in the project area.

REGULATORY APPROVALS
Section 404 Permit: It is anticipated that the temporary work pad will be authorized under
Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33. We are therefore requesting the issuance of a Nationwide
Permit 33 for the work pad. The project will be processed by the Federal Highway
Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). The
NCDOT requests that these activities be authorized by a Nationwide Permit 33.
Section 401 Permit: We anticipate 401 General Certification number 3366 will apply to this
project. All general condition of these Water Quality Certifications will be met, therefore, in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2H, Section .0500(a) and 15A NCAC 2B.0200 we are
providing two copies of this application to the North Carolina Department of Environmental
and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their notification.
Thank you for your time and assistance with this project. Please contact Carla Dagnino at
[phone] if you have any questions or need any additional information.
Sincerely,
~~~
~~:~ Grego J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
' Environmental Management Director, PDEA
Cc:
w/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality (2 copies)
Ms. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Michael A. Pettyjohn, P.E.
Mr. Heath Slaughter, DEO
w/o attachment
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Ms. Karen Capps, PDEA Project Planning Engineer
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
4

Office Use Only: Form Version May 2002
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ^ Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 23, NW
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NC Department of Transportation
Mailing Address: 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number:~919) 733-3141 Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: NA
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page 5 of 12

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Bridge No. 57 Replacement on NC 88 over Buffalo Creek
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3300
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): NA
4. Location
County: Ashe Nearest Town: West Jefferson
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): NA
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): From West Jefferson Take NC
194 North to NC 88, follow NC 88 for approximately 2 miles to the bridge
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or LatlLong): 36° 25.99'N / 81°30.67'
6. (Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
7. Property size (acres):0.246 mile x 80 feet = 2.4 acres
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Buffalo Creek
9. River Basin: New River
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
l0. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The project area is surrounded by a busy roadway, mature
forest and residential yards.
Page 6 of 12

1 1. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The protect will consist of r~lacing the old bride with a new 115 ft sinl:le span steel Girder
bride in a new location 50 feet west of the existing siteThe traffic will be maintained on the
existing bridge site. Construction equipment will consist of heav~duty trucks, earth moving
equipment cranes etc.
12. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: Bride No. 57 is considered functionally
obsolete and structurally deficient. The r~lacement of this inadequate structure will result in
a safer and more efficient traffic operations.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
Page 7 of 12

mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Provide a written description of the proposed impacts:. The new bridge will have 3 lanes and
will be constructed in stages. There will be 0.007 acre of temporary fill in the surface water due
to a temporary work pad.
1. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.14
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0
2. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
linear feet
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Im act Perennial or
Intermittent?
leases eci
Site under bridge Temporary Fill 0.007 acres Buffalo Creek 30 feet Perennial

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usas.~ov. Several intemet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.tonozone.com,
www.mapJc uest.com, etc.).
Page 8 of 12

Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 0.007 acre
3. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name of Waterbod
(if applicable) y Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
NA

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): NA
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): NA
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
Renlacin>? Bridee No. 57 with a new sinele span bridee that will have no bents in the water
minimizes the impacts to Buffalo Creek. Best Management Practices will be followed for this
project as outlined in "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (NCAC 04B.0024). Due to
the trout water classification of all the waters in the project area, these Qractices will be adhered
to during the desi~rt and construction of this nroiect in and around all waters in the nroiect area.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
Page 9 of 12

freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o. enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/stnn gide.html.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
NA
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): NA
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Page 10 of 12

IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ® No ^
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ® No ^
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ^ No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact
s uare feet) Multiplier Required
Miti ation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
gone i extends out sU feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Gone Z extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
Page 11 of 12

If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
NA
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this anafter-the-fact permit application?
Yes ^ No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
~J D~
Ap licant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 12 of 12

NORTH CAROLINA
ASHE

NCDOT
VICINITY DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ASHE COUNTY
MAPS PROJECT: 8.1711301 (B•3300)
REPLACE BRIDGE N0.57 ON NC 88
OVER BUFFALO CREEK
SHEET 1 OF $ 1011310

=.;.
,~~~ -
~~:

(\
`~' /
i `I
I ~__ -_ - ____
~~~~p 071i
Ol ~~,~
`~- UFF~-D RD.
SRJI31 6
Si
_ _;~
• ~ ,== , ;
1 '.r
~ I ~,
1
II
I~ I,1
,; II I
., 11
,, 11
/ ,, 11
~,
;, 11
,; 11
II
11
II
II
11
II
II
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
II
11
II
11 `~
II c
11
a "
1
11
II 1
\1
;II 1
„ ,
11
II
,1
11
11
II
11
11
:'
------
__~_________1
-- 11
11
11
~I~CIE ~II~IF~
~` ~ \ ~
z \\
~.t
~ , ~~\
F' ~ \ ,I II ~ ---- -_
\ ~~ II`` ~ -__-
\ ~
II; -
II
N
~ I~.
\\
\ °.
\~\\\ ~
~\ O~~ , ```I:I
1 ~. ~ INI
1
~ m I~~I
I I` I~~
1
11 .a
n
r
i ~ ~. ~
5~ , - III
/ .U , n
, ,~~ o
_ . i 1
-_~~ -____~_- f , , li
'-'-_~~ _s 1 , n
~ `I n
, u
mot' u
'~~~~ i
~` ~ f ~~
q
Y ii'
. _ ,i
_ -__ ,
'~ /
_ ~,
;;
,,
,~
,;
~-~
~~ ~ ---= 1., ,
~~ ~~ s
1 a~ Irr ; ~` ~ `r~,
~~~
~1 .,
.I
I 1'~
~ 1 11
~ 1 11
~ 1 , 1
1 1 , I
I I
~ ~ 1111
1,
-- ,
Z ~~,
~,
I ~ ~1
1w ,
~ - ,
-Ili `1
1 1 I.
1 1 I,
1 1
~j i

..
,;I ~ N - -
;; j; ;. ~ O ~ ;~
i
r d~ ~~'O~pl
,, ,
;~
~ .lp~
~
,~
~
,
,I
,~ , I
,

;
,, , 1 ,
, , ~I
, 1
~I
l~ ~-J
II
II
II
O

11
{'
. O

N
I
r
;-.I
r
11
II
1
1
1
,~
1~
1 _
1
11

,
II
,
,
, O
~ o
o ~
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ASHE COUNTY
PROJECT' 8.1711301 (8-3300)
BRIDGE N0.57 ON NC 88
OVER DUFFALO CREEK
SHEET 3 OF `~ 10/13/0

~ ~ ~ ~
~
` ~
~ ~
a
0. ;~
a5
~
`
~.
~~ ylA

~
~
g ~
~ a~

a z~

,

~
~i
~ ~
Ux ~
W~ ~o .
m ~ zg as n
r
~ M ~
ti
U,q
W
. '~
:=J
1111! 1!r'J! ~ (l`1 II lI~ ~i`<< I~~~'~It`~ \ ~~ ` ~~~
,~ ,
~~~~ !~ ~I IIII I II `~'',1~~ \`~~~ ~
,t1`11 1y Il~il ~`~~, ~\ ``~~\\\~I,~ `ix II 1i
~ ~~ ` ~ ~ ~'
Y.1 `\ ~ I ~ I
\I, ,1~ ;',I 11 , ~ y ,~ ~,~, ~~,
1~'ll~`` 'll'l 1111IN ;liH~.j1lNII!I~M~I1111 `
`I ~1 I!1~ II '~I' III iIIII~II I~~I~I''1 ti~~11.
,~' '.
I
~ '~ I
i~
I ~, ~`'''•, 1!11 I 1
,II, !,~~
~IIIIIiihl' III1~1III' ~'
Ilii !'il ~IIIII
Ill.~l.i~~ ! ht
~V ~~~1 `~I~ \~~ ~~~~
f 1 1`~`~
\,~~~~~t11 ~
,~ ~ \
., ~ tl'1 1
i) ~, ~±~ I,I~ `i~l
$ (~ ' `111
~ ~ ~ ~\ n
~. ~ \\ : i
~~,, ;
\i•...
Vie., ` ` •~ 1 , \ ; `~\ I •• -' o ~
~•. ,. `, , ,, ~ ,1
fit, ~, ~~ ' `` ~ ` .1 ~u ~ g ~ ' "
O ~•\ i ~ z ~
` _' - a
\ 1 BOEPD }9D0 ~ D U
s
` D
.n ~ 1.. / d
~. , -~
~ ~ \ ", ~ I I
L~ •~•' ` ~ 1 • M
.• ~
aw
~~ !•1 ~ _
. 6 a \ \ C(f l ~I
Z ,~
I I I ', w
I1 I 1 t `` ,^~1 [ry
K \ ~`
~ '11 ~ z~~z ~ ,
1
•`,• ~ I ~ s ~„ I
\ 1 I ~ 11 1 7
,~ '~ r ; ' 1;11 , I ~, ~7 ~ I I ' ~ \ ~ 1,1, ~ •,
~ 1 ~ it ~ ~, ~~
-~ ~. , ~
I t. ~ , ti
~a1~~-~ ,~~, ~~ 111. ~ 1,
I • _ ~ ~,
( I l~ ~ -~ II
_ ~ ~ ~...
,: ~
.,
a , ~~ ' a ,
~~ ~/ qi ~~r ~ Ill ~ /
~ ~ ~ ~i
_ ,
1`I ~ _~~,I. IIII }yI '~', I I~;I~i~~, ~,,~a
W O ~ r I ~~ }~ I ~' ~ / I~II~
a~0 ' ` ~ i
~. ~, ~ ` r:ik4:
~ ~ :,.
..
,~ -
..
..
0
~~
~~
~. ~~ ~ .
' . -'
.... `
,• oas~ BDLaM `~ o~~~ ~ -Z ~-- ,-- t
,,
__
Gat ;',~ "'~~ _"' ----- ~.
-~ _-
~ ~~ ,.off I %~-I _
c $-
„ ..
~-
~` ~ _ _
\'--~_,
~_
'-~ ~~
. ~. ~ -_ 1
l ~ ., '~_ _
»-~~ T _ ~ ^ _ _ _
r
/'-~'_ ~`
J ;` r
r2
-1xsz~ ~ ~;
Y^•-
~ ~~~
~ ~~.\
i ~\~ \ ~~
11 ~II
~\\•~,~~`~. 1 IIII !
~ ~. c
~1
r
r /,
~~ I
~ ~ ~~`~
I / I
'~ Ij `
1/ ~
it '
1
~Y ' I
~ I '``\
~. ..y .~/s I ~ I ~~~r /. .: i
x,02 "-•-~_~ ?ab~~~- ~~ 1 I I ~0 / 1 /. Ili
S ~ --
!~~'• ~' .. ~.. ••... ..~, I.~~ ~~`~~ I I+I~ ;111 ~~~/ /r//i;
. .. y ~ I. r : `~ \ IIII j l; 1`t N1
.~ ~ 1 ~ N
1I
1 1 I Ij I I
~{ C
---- •` ~~11'N1`I ```Ir II,' I'I! ' I ~ Irylll , I ,l
~ p~ U ~~. ilil- 1'~i~I ~~~. ~11~1~ ~ IIII I11~1~~1 ~I~
~~~~J ~`~,\r' 1•~ l I I!fl 1 r 1~~1111 IIII III I,
(~ }~ ~ ~,.\ 111 I~I w 1' ~~: ,I ~ III III ~;
°_~ F- m ~ ~~ `~ I ~` 1: I (I t 1 I IIII III III I
W I I I I 1~ I II
O Qi ~ Il, I I IN 1 uJ~ .
c.! _ 1
~~ yv' ~~ ~ o i ~ III ~! I I+I I I ~~ i~i fl1 i I~IIi I II
q71~ "~` ~~c r ~ ~' ' I II ~~ II ~I a II'I' I'~
?O ~rr'V'\) I~~) l l 1 Il llil /I i~l ~ ~' j' III ~/p
R\~7J~7 O frN 1 ~ ` ~ iy Iul I I I
`J z O l i ,IO I, II 11
~' ".\ In a 11
^/% / ' / ~ r ;' I ~',';! III
'1' ~~~ ~~\ f .! 1 II !~I I j i
~^(+l 1/1~ \'' ~ I ~ ill ' ~: lil
II ~!. 111 // ', ,~\ I j'I 1 111 I~11
f ~; I !!! r 1~~ ~11,I ~ I eII
Ir li f~W
~!?~ Ilj i~f' illl ~1III I ~; I ~~
O d IIII ~~,~ I I 1 I I 1. ~~ I
Illl I ~~ I ~ II 111'1 II 1~ ~`
I I IY I I ~It 11 `i III
~I I~'1 I` lil' .I 1! II .lilll ~'~IIII
f•1 I!I IIII I~''1,`1. ~j ' 11 III II ii l~~k 'I
V I 1 `: I 111 11IIr IIh i'I,
~II it ~ I
~. 1111 I ; III II I
11 ,<
• II ~ ,'I I I~ I '
1 I li' ! I'
' ' I I ! ~ 1 ~
,;', I 'll III j'I' I'1' t14~1,',
~~i p I. R• ~ 1 111 ~ 1 11•"
~1 1
~ ~! 1tiL.7
~~, ~~ i 1
J v~l- ~
I Y~~ `~
y i
~` x
~ ~ g~9~t---~ a
\ I ; tx
1, ;I `~
1
\' ~~` O 1
~ ib ; ,:: ~ ,,, o
~' '
s , 1
"ol i % ~ 1
1 F
1 `1~.. ~
1
i l' I m a `o``~ % •
~ 1 J
:21~ >1-
1 `~1 I Iu `~~~
SNOISV311
'~ i

~'~I~~
!C1~,1/
r J ~~ [i
' ` 4'
1•
l `
1
1 ~~
I ~l. O \~~
1 ~
/. j111.:1 : a ~~~~-~; ~:o;
6' !~ , j ~I' Iti t ` ~ i ~~..~;` L~ 111-~„"'\ o ~ .,..
f -~`~
~..J - ` / it •f~j~ /` -1j~ ~k ~'i
~ j~ ~ i'DY : S'lµ ~.
~~~ ~ ~,
'J% :/'_i{'r ,.; •~y., ,yam; ..]!r )A .~~,~
r a 31 r
~+~ __
r ' ' 1 .~ ~
r 1 (~ ,. ~ ~ '~ l..
/ 1 r
r ,/I ~ pit I O ! n'~ _. .....-.
~ I I 1 lT ~ 1 f. Si
G ~ ~ :" . ~'
u .W-~f- ~i 1
9 0 0 :~ 11 r~ ~ ~ mom- ~
]~uo I); }~~ o°N
4 W m~
Fs I;; - - - oW o00
~.r`i~y F3,r.,--..""' - rrkDCnccr~ ~ v ((
~ ~ ~ , ~'
/~ ; o '
ar' ~ .~ ~ ~(,I; u am
ri.o .
o + ~, 1
1~~~~~ ~ /41, ~ a`De m
` _`tn n /Q~ W"y J ~
~~ ~ 6 r
~~ Mrs \ .~ y.,~. ~ /y N d ~
\ dr ~ ~ ~ I
r
~~h~ \ 1S ~ ~ C Y I L ~'
\.
V1
ti °~'.....~~r,
' ~~p~
r ~
~~ _
_~

I I \``'
J
1 ~

1 .
~ y'l

1
~ 33~
rJ~ ZF~,

~
e

~

~_
/~ _
~~~ N ~ o. G3• 3 ~_a o
tl z8 0 ~ //~ aQ YYy J_ ~ ~
1 ' 'llo` ~! o . ~ o
~ ''' i .. a u ~ O ~ ~I^c I I
0
, ~ _
' ~ `b 2 m ^ m -
/ ~ I ~~ N~.~ ~sI UZ °°¢ J m
1 ~
1 ~ QUO 4~fOV -.Q~` ~w Jim ° N 5,~`.'yl `? r~
O ~ ~ ° p O 3._
,1 Qa~ ~ ~0~ WOW ~d2 Ij JI~t ^~
In _ .-
~9$ ''~ _1
1 a w o
N 4~• Q~ ~ 0 n
~~~ ,p..
i, ~~ O^q ;s< O ~
~ ate.
~~7 ='
_ ° ~ •~
11
1 ~
'~?/;

1 \ \ 1''1 , ~` ~~ e
C II ~~\ n a ~
~ O i~ X ~ ~ i
~ `, ~ 1 >+
~ z `~ p °' ~\ ~~^\ N 311 \ ~ ~''~/`Jg ~ u ~ ~ g ~ N ~'~'
~ P~. \ ~ \\ p 1 r, ~ ~ ¢ e O
i C ~i~.7..y ~ Y Y t~~ ~~ '~- 211 ,11`111 _`---_~ `' /~ a ~~uIP O
g ~` 'sf ~ ~ ~ S h I x ~1 Q~ N ~ ~1~ ~'~ I '~~\ X11 11 --- ---%" ~ y z a ~ ~'
~^~i~og Ova= ~ a 1 \o_',. ~~\C~'` J ~~> / y~o~Z O
r I~ t= z x~ 8 ~ I .I I r- ~u, Noi,x~`, x +Q~? ~ ~
o ~, S a \ ~z ~ ~ _ ~x ~ x eo~~o «ooo ~ 5 „ o Q
IA \ 11 ~1 ~ -'~(\-
/ ~\ \ 11 1 W n V G'~ ~
111\ ~~ J N O O Q
1\N -
// \ u O
n1
' ~ ,,1111 . y`~~ r'1
~ \, 11
~} T
• ` \ \ ,y
Q W
~ ~ ~ ,rA °3 ~ ~1 \ \ ~ °u
1 ~~t ~ 2 •[
~ ~~ - ~ - ~, ~~ , 3~,~ s~~~~~ ~~;`,~ ~ + wow
N R
O M o q «, ~n ~~ 11`11 W
11 '~
w ~ * ,~ ~~ ;g \ \ 111, p ~ °~
M N ~: _ ~ ~~ \ ~ 1
t _
~' 0 ~ 1 ~ I l3 ZCGZ~ ;,`~
~1~ p 2 1
2 . ~ // ~«,~~~G ~G ~Z }~. + 1' ~ ~ 1`11,
Q] I p
I ~
?r
\ ``~N
mow. __ .
d~6¢ ;; ~ ~ ,.1
} ~ ~t~ ~ '~\ 1 11,
61~ O l ~ ~ i i, : ~ ~ Jn °O ~ ~ ~ ~~111
~; a ii f
_ ~.y / y% ~•~
i a ))
-_ 1,
'' '( ~~ ~
~,
r. ^ a ~ r, h in ` d ~ G3 ~ ;
~-
' ;,
v~ _ _ ~ ; /~
_ ~ 5
~ ~ ~ $ ~ _~s~ --"----siir--- ---_ ~ O n ~, ~ ~ h_~ / ~f..~ irruo cacr~.. /~~% % ,
I A'JNIM ~~` / -'TW `/
1 ~ I ~._ ~ --~ 1 ~'^ ate/ 2 ~ L':. p _ ~j - _
r--~
G3 /~~... ,_Q / ~ .
: ,.a ~ .
' t /
' ~...
~~',(C~~ ~~~ R0. ! p V ~ ~~~ ^
\ },Q ~~~'~~ i SRJIJI 8(If••'~ \~Y r~~ ~ ' ?' i ~ Jiu
~ ~~ Lr=0Nrn9 yin ~-.~~-~ -- ,~\\•~l ~ / a : ~/ ffYY m~ o
~~b` L ~~~ .. .. _ ~ b~~~~ _~rl `. O yQi Wu' O
~~77 ~
1 i ieA - 9 F9 / ~ 'p4 c ~ ~. " ry
1
/ ~ ~S ~ ~ ~ Q1~' '( Y
~ ~ . + .y~ aj L \ Yr o~ o Ai~F ,~ rj1
.y~\} O ~ ~~ //~~ ~ / ~~ / l ` / ~.r~~~b\«\\ \~ ejQ~• fyK ~ 7~p,N O ;r
po // ~ ~ ~
~ ` ~'~` ~ \~,\ g 2 U ~ c,~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ / ~°~ ~ 9 ~ , ~ aryls, ~~ V / ~ ~\°~L ~'~ \q ~ \~~~` ~1'..'~..11.I ~~' S ~~.: • ,''r
.rte. 2` ~ 1 ~ ~~ r O+ ~?a\'~~~ ~ ~ , ~1 ~~ ~ I~'R«~~~d~\ \~ `` / 1 ~Y
.~ \ \ 1--
;c~'cA ~ ti o r~ a3 1 Q~ o~;,~"3t~~?~ ~~ ,
Nebo ~'- - /` ~ ~a/ M n ~/ j / 1 1 -_- t~ ~`~'``^`; --:.. --_ '
~~` `111 1 ! , \ ~~ / I ` b ~ / / ' /bl , ~ Sy "`~Jl ~ ^y
``~ ~ ,
i ~~,~;~~ 1111111 d O. ~~ ~ /7 \ i '~ ,'i 1 iv /!} O
1 1 / 1 `v,
~ / 1 1 I r ~
1 1 I
` 1 ~ ~ I ' ~ ~ ON Z~ `p u ~ O ~ ~ 1
~Vi / 1 N ! ~. n- ~IjO ryU ~ , ~.
i i I i i ~ I~ T~L'Z `~ try F•eri~Mn wad K~ n r~1~
~%'.v( i i :1 ~ ~ ~ ~~ l' b ~C~ Jan ~ a ^ ~``/'
~ 11 g Qu
n y
~ ~ ~ R
I
W -I' ~ 1 1 ,~ / t
~ ~, ~R~l o
«" ~, x ~ ~ Co,~ g
\\\. 11111 ~' ~ I I fI `` ~ ~ / _
' 1 1 1Rt /'~f1 \ /y
O ~ ~~ 11 ~ I - ~ Irk ~ 1 ~~~ 1 ;;. aO_ Q j~~
~ 1
1 ~ ~ o~ I I~~~ ~ 1 11• wad ~ ooo
i i ~x I °i ~ x ~ 11 ~ 1 04 ~ `~ $
' 1 ~ 1
W ii ~~i~i~~ ~'V 11 IlO 1 H s` °^°
OI ~. 11 11 . x 1 a, II r/R~ R ~S '( 11i511 ~' lil illl ~ittl
111 1. 1 Ilj 1T, ~x~1,\ \ ~TT
~ i I ~ ~ 1~rx 11 ~~ ~•\ \ '1 1
SNOISIA3Y

,6 p'141d"OAN'P, 7.E£~1 r.,1-o it `~u .:~
. .'UF~i:

N00'ljd'AOlI-©©CCO\f o~d\fvrpo'od\u
COOZ/Zi/90

f0/£I/OT ~ ~0 ~, .LaaHS
Baau~ o~IVa~Inu nano
@@ OI1 HO L4'Ot+I aE3QI2iQ
(00££-4I) i0£ilLi'@ .LOaf02id
A.LNf100 aHSV
SAVAIHOIH CIO t~IOISIAI4
I~IOI.LV.L2i0dSNV2i.L ci0'.LdaQ'~'I~I waT~n~.rovd•aurootce~srnvau.u+~~a

`~ ?1~~ - ss tv~ o-~t~ ~~n ~ ~ o ~
69£ Jd b-0 9d NOS02it1H~la 31A~ ~

30dd oNd X009 0334 3WdN 2~3NM0 J112i3d0ad 'ON A12~3d02~d

fOr 3/,nwun Slwi~d C'n P~/v~e TrM~~w-~ N
b00L til 0I ~. `~ ~J ~7 .I.:.i:]fIS t0/ZLE Das~navw~oj
00~£g TOETTLT'8 .LO~f 02Id
~I.LNfIOa ~HS~
S.IHA'1HJIH ,~O NOISI~IIQ
t~OI,L~.L2iOdSNH2I.L,~O.LN~W.I.2IHd3Q ON

0 0 L00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~Sltfl0l

L00'0 OVd ~IaOM'dW31 09+LL -l- l
(1))
u6isa4
wea~iS
IemleN (l1')
paloedwl
Iauue40
6uilslx3 (oe)
MS ul
pig •dwal (oe)
(puod)
MS UI II!d (oe
(Iem~eN)
MS UI II!d (oe)
(III poylaW)
6ul~ea10
pazluey~aW (oe)
spUellaM ui
uotleneox3 (oe)
spUellaM ul
pld •dwal (~e)
spUellaM
UI II!d
ad~(1 / azlg
a~nlon~lg
(oLwoi,~)
uoilelg
oN
ails
S O S S
Jl21VWWf1S lOt/dWl lIW2i3d aNb'~13M

~~
a ~ Z
~" ~ ~. U
4 ^ ~. Y o
° ~ ~~~ M
~ ~ ~mmm
~~ ~
ti
r
k ~
~ °°° [°~
PPP ~ I
e, U k '~'
r / -~ ~, ~
~3 ti z
w
-~°
w o
~~
~ ~ ~ ~~~ i
a ~ tC
y ~
o
~ '
~ $ , ~,
~ U ~ ~ ~~ ~1
~i
~ ~ ii
h ~ ~
1 ~ ~
'-' -G. ~ l l~~
r 1 A ~ 0 ~ / 1~
~. '~ ~
~' - ~ ~
~ ~ ~ '
~- .
~, ® ~ ; ,
~ ~ ~ ~~
wa
~ o ~ ~~
€~ h o ~
c~ (~ W
o~
I I
I
o ~
U ~
W
x~ o ~ ~ ~
00
g ~ m W ~' z s Ch o
~ W
~~ ~ ~ O ~~:: ai
~ t
P 'O A ~ ~ Q K
~jI A
O a V x ~ Q
~~ m ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ o ~i ~r Z
o
YOU r P
o , ~ ~
0
~~ ~
Vj ~
CQ a~
~~ 4 ~?
~7
0o we
00
hx ~~ ~
r~ ~
A~ ~~~ ~~
a a
A~ ~~
~, a
q
~ a~
~~
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~
w3 ~A ~
~~a~ ~ _
~~~~~~ ~
w g x ` ~.
~~ ~~
y~~~ x ~ h~
,. ,~ N
~N A G
A ~ O- ~ 2 U
G o O -~
LL
!a o
N O N
C C O
:o
o ~,
~ ~
h r.,
~ o~~
U
~ w o
O ~ ~ 0.
~~~
~~
~~~
~~~
~~~
gx
o 0o aR oe ~ 2 ~'
p0, ~ N O ~! O ~
Q co ~ '" 'O "' ae
II II II II II II a
x ~
W r ~° ° ' ~ ~
a ~~
rrww o o
_J J
h ~ ~ ~
y ~ o
a
z ~. ~
o o'~ o ~..
,~ o
o °~
Ch - a ~
0 0 0
~~~'~'-~l ~.IL~~I ~~'l~7! ~IIILIL ~'~Ild~~~ ~.71~I~~"LILr~I~~
}y ~ppow ouway
!M)0'-151'AOH'000t8~6-~6~~YOOZ•1 ~S~
r~
- ,`

~m
v l~
~ U
g
m o
O c ~ ,
~ ~
o c a o
•~ ~.', C
pq ~ '~ E °
a $ E c - o
m u°. ~ C7 ~ U v>' o°. V O in 3 vi
f•""i
~~
oC
W
W
_Z
W
a
N
u
W
N
bb/9Z/S
N~0•DID-HSd-
~ ~
O
L
I I 1-f I T I
' I I 1
I I
I I I I I 4 ICI
I ~ ~ I l i i ~ ~3 0 ~
1 ~ 0 , I I I ~ 1
II ~ ~ ( ~ L
I I I i ' , 1
I I ~~ I A
O ~
h
i0
C~ o
R ~ ~ ~
p
N A C
,~, ,
~ ~ ~
0 0 °
fZ 3 u ~ ?. ~ ,~[ ~ ~ p
O .n '
of ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ o o a ~' ; ~ •L
N ~
h 8=uu'ac~am~ ~u'~ ~ ~ N~~O`y
~~ I ~ ' ~ ~ ~ l l l l
N N
1777 I I'~~~~
~ 7~ ~~ ¢ ~~ ~~~
I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I
ui
' vi ~ ,
c
w •E
W ~ W ~ pup
' O •O C ~ ~ ~ oC
` N •O
~ ~ O W ~ O O V C © o p
W ~ ° : ~ ~ © U V ~ V © J
O 1] .A
V ~ ~ H ~ ~O V C L• p ~1 V U ~ °
~ N ~ ~ ~ V ° ~ n ui U ~ ~ •-
4
.° A N .D b .° Q O •~ O ~ q O C~ 4 W O .°.. tl
c ~ •p p°p o "Uq ~ o q°q ~ q°q ~ pyp ~ ..lcC ~ ~ ©°© q y o
OC •^~ N oC O GC ~ Vf oC D oC D OC O ~ oC p oG ~ ~ ~ ~ W
~I Y I
III
1
~~ a~
~ a
© O
°i a
~ O
v
.D m s
c
o
N OC N
I I I I I + X I I I I
I I I I Iml m m
x~m~ m i i
mm
I

I
I I
I
I ~'I ~ ~( I I I
O I
I ; ;
'~1
R ,
N © y
° •~ O
~ •
C ° •C
° ~ •° °
C •C p C
_J Q ? m C •O p m
tt~ •o o •,o 'o v E c

4 ~ `N~ °'1'p ~~3~~0~,~
o 0 3- c c
•
~ ~` y J
j ~ ~ o C ~ ~ d y D! °!
~ ~ ~ o
0 0~~~ o o N o 0 0 o Q •
~ ; o
Q '^ o+
<
ti7 ti7
u~ I ; 0 I ••-0+~-+~opooo4~®00©.~o^I®oo®omooQ~ao®
S I I
J l j~ I
u
~ ~~
° ~ ~ H °
_ o ~ ~ ~ ~ °
° ~ ~ _ -. K L ~O.
= C ; U m O C O
° 1 1
~ ~ ~ t7 0 ~ ~ °c 4 d ~ °c .p o o p O 4 0 .~ a o o ~ o € o ~ ~ ~ ~ '~, ~ ;j ~
C 'C m t ~ ~~.~~ 7n.°c n°., o V '~> C.c © os o f-m ~ `L "' © ` oN o `U
W b o ~_ o v n a ,., ,. p n v `• a c n c ~ o- o ~. ~~; o~ c u o n
~ CA A O ; O O c C C O V ~ 0 ~~ 4 O f- ° O C .C ® _4 O O N O 's C °1 :^, C; O
0 °~ U C o ~ a° o. a 10- F°- -°, -, t H o 1- a •E .~ 3 !` ~ .~ ° ~ a° E , •~ ° `~ .°c ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ Q •h n. _,
Z o 0 0 0 © Z' n d „ d o •o E .;? .~, ° ° c ~ ° _ ~ ° ° ~ ~ W o ° € .,c .;? ~ `o '© ~ °c
o n o .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ o ~ ~ ~ ° ~ o o © ©~ °' ~ o o ~ a v o o ° o ° E ;.n ©•- °+
= a. u. D n. a a a F- V ~ = v~ v~ a F- V 3 :7 0.. a t9 (~ F- a w v> F- 3 F- u. 1- 7 •vi
"II ~ 1 'III
.;.
I 1 T
I I , m ~ 1 I ~
I UI 4'I ~~ ~ ©a '.I IVQIV W W H O ~ i ~ ~ IUI U
I I ~ i I 1 /\ p .I ~ ~ I I ~
y I I I ~ ~ 1 I I I ~ I ~ ~"\
° '
a •° •o c ~ ;
pp ~ C
E ~ a~ q q ~,
OC ~ a. n n ~ ° ;~
° 1.LL d d d O Q Q C ~ O
u 0 ` ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ o O ~ o
' ° V o o w a v ~ ~ ~ o
c u C n < O O D O W W .... ~ .° ~y V '°
"~ ® ° C C C C
~y U n n ~ n ~ o _ ~ o o > > 'n. ~ ° ~ ~ c T' o °rn ~ ~ E ° a o = ,
O o o© •«. ~ U ° E d d C° ; c ° N o c -o
py a o 0 0 0 -~ ,,~ ~° a a ~ oZ .~ -c o c 'E ° E E~ o h o 'c ~ -° '- c c c
~ v>t in 3 Cr3 m° 3 V O l7 ;~' ° c ao oZ oZ ~ a ° V U W f° Fq- o. ° ~ q ~ c n o 1- ~ W
E •- c b E m a as a. cg ~ r~ o o -o
o{ d ci ci. a d a{ Q o© e~ .: ci a c »: d d d d °~ a c E E O °, c
°~ o o ~Q o b ~~ ~ o 0 0„ o N o 0 o q o; o ~ a °+ o
W U Q. Q. a D. ~. G. U W O. W G. m ~ ~ C. 6. V ~ a ~ O. O. D. N ~ u, Q N In Vf lL fy ~ m m r..JI
°v`'N
1 ~~-S~ ,

N CC~

m <~ ': ~+
M ~
'
~"
~; brb
oN•y~.µ~ S~`~;
a~'
> >

U
"' .e
~
Z ~
~ ~ Z
~
o ~ ~ ~
m
~ u ~ :0 9 ~ u
Z
~ p ° ° z ~ N
' W
W . . N ~ 3

V ~ ~ ~ 3
N
I-
Z
w
` z
o ~
<Z= ~
_
~ ~~ <
~ _ ~o
° ~ ~Zo
W
` N ~
~ 3
n_ ~
~ `
W `Z O
ri ty~jZ
U -
Q ~O vaim
` w
~ ~e~
'' m oSA
O

a
'o
~ ~ ~`"~
'° m
? Q
0 ~ ~
~ V
~y ~ =
u'L ~ ~
1~1 : O N
~ H M
= W
3 4 ~
~~
LL
Z ~
wa
u1
S
2 s^~
U.~'J` ~
W ;
.~
OoO
K YV .
0
} W`
~ ~ V`~
O V
W
N ~
~ .~
PL ~
N ~. Z
N
~~'=
„
W 11C
~L Q
i ~
= `~0
sz u`
~ ,,,
O
~: is
'" ~r'Z
dS
g
N Z
'^ ~
V Z
Z y
W i
H
-1 ~ O
N
V ~.~
~ . - • ~
F-o
~ ~
V'~ N
7 ~ Owh
Ua
0. ~ ~
W 1 L
~• 0 ~ ~ ~ Z
SO ~O'~ ~~
S~ ~OF ~~ ~~~'
Z
O ~~
~ =~o
~ ~
~ u _~~
~~ U -~]O
~ W =O~
~ W u
W
°CO
CVO
OW
>
~ W W
DuH
o ~"
~~
. F~
~~O

v
~<
~<~ -
`z
~
~ Z
u
~ W Z
~u~
o .~ ~~3 ~< d'~S ~< .<S

Ci f'i o o ~ r~
Fd O

n
8x ~
11
O
~
•1 ~'
~ ]]yr•
~~n
.
. o
y g:~r
Z p ~ ~ ~
WM O~~w C
~ ~
'
.O N r y ~ p

~"' ~ o ~ ,~ O N
Z o
~7 ~ P4 0`

C9 O
Z
.p P
~ ~
'~" oC
~ ~
~~ ~
~~
U) ~ Z
O + N
.p N Uv
~
O M +
N O ° ° a.

~°
+
G
w
oo
F- M
~+ N
!,
I
o~ a
~ d
~' C
~
o~
~
o0 ~N
oN
~ O
Gz i
~,
G m
m
zo
o~ ~ ~ N E~ o °
G o 0
N ~ u

N
~
~
V (~

Z N

Z Q
O M
~
I I '••" ~ m U ~ ~O
F.. -~ ~ m ~ + ~
r
- ~ r
Il!
O {~
Z
Z Z F-
~ ~
O
~
ur
m
N I
+
G ~ °z w
z
O O N_
r~ ~ O =
w N I...
N^ +
Z
~ ~ O ~ d :~ w
w
N ch `~ ~ CO
• ~
oC a (~1 ~ O w ! N
m ~ ~ ~ O f y~ ~O r- Z
w ~ r
C 0
~ ~ Q ~
e aNnH~ivw ~ 'v "'
q U 3NnH~1V1N
Q
I r-
~I
°° .r-O o
V ~ O
Z ~ I
J ~ u II ~ ~_
~ ~ e
. N r-. I-
~., ~ I I o z 'N V
° w~ II '~~ ~ vu'i
o ~o ~ I I Q
_ N II
o U
~ ~ ~ I ~
>~~ ~
N
~ ~ V 3NnHJ1VW
v aNnH~lvw ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
~ ~ m
4
~° ~I z ~
c} ~ ,~ p ~ o
O o
c o ~ Z ~Z ~
.o o •° E w Q O
O ~ E ~1 O r ~~ Z J O
'D N.C •C ~ w Z QU O
co»-o ~ - ~...~ +
.O ^ •q r C 'p N
.t' ~ 'O ° E O Z~ d
,*3 E .jp Q. ,~ N 3 N
~°- .C p O a 1
~~ E
o .o ~
`r Z -rte o E .• Z
o' 3 ~ U'=_ ~' o'
u ~ • O ~ E ~
~ O O
z
_ __I r, r-~ --
1
OC~E. Dr-~-1". ,
~ ~

i ~ ~l
I

o
~ .,° x
~ N~~ w
p i. bF i
p yp~~
ry
O a ~ ` ~ ~ ~
+ e~ g.aT ~
N ~ ~g~c'wo
r ri~l7 G7
~~ N ~i:
'~ 60~b~....»r'' ~4 u O .L ~ 8 y Q
0
o ~'
H qac~.
4 a © ~O
U -o
c
~~ L W
~,/~ F.W.. W 0
h Z
b ~;~ ~ O
s ~ 1 ~~ + a
l~%`- ~ ~
~~ a d .,
__ ~ r ~_
/ Q
W
'/' ; J
1l~~~55 '/ O
S] LJ O
w ~ Z ~ C I F ~ l'1
O ~
~ L
~.~ ~ ~ Z
r a0
~ D ~ F-
fit- p - O
~ ~ r~~ ~ °
W O
w 1 N^ z oI ~ W o
~ o w ~O ~ ~ • i ~> o W cn o
1 ~'
~ ~O ~ ~ ~y Q F
Q N
~ N ~I off= V ~
1 ~ c~~ ra ~
~.
~ U f O
~ _J~ p ry Q
~ 3 'v o a ~ a W
W ~ ~ OC ~ J
r ~ ~ ~3
r
0 W J
~ /
00 ~ f/
U ~ N
? o
o O
-' ~ Z
i
~ _N ~ O
W
~~o ~ ~ N
~d Z
~ p N O Z
0
Q G ~
H ~ ~ r ~ ~
V X ,n N ~
O.. w ~
0
W ~ W ~
~ ~ M z
~ o S
J ~ o
m :,. ~ ~ W '~~ O '~
p m Z N o Z+ Y
o, ~ N_ ~ _ ~ s ~ ~
a ~
0 O
c 0 ~ ~ ~ O O^ F- O
o O _, ____~ ° '~
.-
r: p 'U E Q9W (~'LD V p N
.°. .-. W N ~ o a
o^. E'T~ ~ ~ ~Z~ ~• J
vN c C Q. OW ~ 0
W J v_
'' O ~O DO N ~ ~ 1!1
w o `O ~ E iv o f ~- o 'w_'
Y in '~'~ Jp q t ~"" ~ ~ ~ ~
E o o Z
a ~~ ;~ •
O
~~NE
o ~ ~ j $ ~o'.a'E ~ a
W O
z
o. s ~ rn~-,-- i ~-~~-~:~
^ ~~
~ ~
0 0
~ u

Z
O
u W
~

~
~
~
~
i
U <
;, :o V O
_z
O W
~ O
d O
~ K
~ O
W
W W 3

N ~ ~ ~ ~ 3

H
Z
W
~ z

°
o ~
<ZS
W w 'a

~
L
Z
m
na~ <``U ~ o
UO
~ < ~-O
W N~
S ]
n` d
~ ~'L O <y°j Z
' w
~O P w
Nm
ui d W•
y.m•
1~ M
m ~` n
°`

Q.
~~
~O
p ~
`
~O~ W
~ „
m

00

~
U
W e
7 `Z
O~

M z
w
s `-
~~`~
U V` ~ O < X
u ~- K7 u+
S ~^ '
O
e~c= WPC
u~ ° J
Ww~ W °
u^
d ~ Z °

K w
~ K p
u`
~~ w0
Z O
~ ~ Z
V ` Z~Z O'4 U~Z' V N ZNS
~.. N O y V h O N Y N W O W If
O ~ J
`w
O t K ywj
v~ 0 u ~!
~' ~
~
s
c
p . ~O
n b
f
'~' ~ w
SF f
~ `
s~ W
~ W ^ mLL Y. ~
O <
t '" r° °~ w ~ V
~V °VO O~ ~
°u~' eOc.~ °.~p

d .~ q ~~ Q W~

~ ~ o o ~ ~
~~ ','i

z
N
0
Z

.~ i~~.. ~..:M1
r' .w.•,. ,j.
,y ~.
~.
f~~ ~~ s =;
...
;'~~~»_.~+.s/dam;:
f ~~ ~~
I ~ N ~ 1
U ~~ iW:
'•..y N Wr
i . ~ ~yoN y'~ . . . . . /S ~ ~~ '
„ ,,. .:
_. z
3 ,n-~_'o
W ~~
~~~~
Q~~s
m
T, N_ ~
~~'~'^Z
^~
~~~~~
U
3~~°~
s
~~~~~3
~~~~~o
O
Z
~~~' ~
\,~~\~

~ ~
'' { N
W F
~~ 1
J~
~~
~~
4
~ W ~ ~ ~„
i ~N y „
2 I ~ ~
~ r x ~g
,b
1 ~ ',
,6 ,6 ~ i
a
!, ~~ ~I ~~~ i~
I
- v ~ • ~~
-. \,'
5~ ~ ,
~~ ~ \
~~~~~~ w.rE,1~~951 ~
N II it n °~
i i~
I~
1 n 54
a4o.,l,a O g
M
.a

~
~6~ ,. II
~~ 'te
v,
.~
x
a
~
52
~
~^ \
oesl ~ a. _
d
~
~
1
a Q O
IY _
~
-1 1

~~ I
O d ~ o-
~ I
vl~~
z
~
~ 1
+~
r~
Q
h 1 4 4 11 II ~ ~6~5~ ~~~
~ 40.,1.0 _..._--~.. ~ 4
0 7111
~~
~~~~~~..
ti
'7 c~i~ tr~~v,
~
QQ~
W g
~~' ~'~ ~.
'29'tB !5
>~

~;
$$
,
~l
N
rJ~ ,C
„'
~~ ~

1 ti:l
~ f
~
~

a
d~ ~
_ tT
~1~ `
~~
a >~
y. ~
~1~
` ~ i +
as ~ _~. - `

O~a~~~ 1 W ~ ~ Q , a: / o<
V1 II 1 1 1 1 V 1^f ~~ 1_ ~ g
QOJh~N W ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~~ /f
w 2 2 ~~ ~
2 4, ~ 1
I
~ ~ ~
~§ \sr ~ ` /
e~~8,
*~1 ~~Ny~ ~ \ \ \\ b`N
IA g 1 1 1 1 ~ ~ ~1 ~
~QOJh~VW1 j \\ I d~ ~ ~° ~
1 \ L
~~g ~ ~~5:
1 \\
~$~hR d~ 3 11 ~ \ \
\n n n u uW i \\ •.
~QOJI~~VI ~ ~ \ 1
~ '~ 11
~~ ~ * 11
g,~~~1~~~ qy \ p~ d ~ I I
O~I(1~iV1~ 1 1 O d ~ Cj ~ ~I ~ ,,y
1`n n 1 1 1 1 ^'1 C
~QO.II~~VWI ~ x I
u v1
~ ~ `~ J I .S
0o LL ~ o ~ I I I
I
M O~ U
"'J~ ~. oU ~~ v ~ .I
lL a+ ~ t
~o~r °~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ ;
F-
wo =~ o ',Z+~ 1 II
wv ~oo ~ ~ 1 II
olo a s ~ {n I I
~ v u7 ~ p~ 1 1
°-. O ~ d 01 II 11
1 4~ 1,
I ~ ~ ~ -•
1 $~ ~
I $ 1 ~~
~
I
\ lo:.l r ,
d
I ; 1 ~
~ 1 ry
~ \ 1
I
1~~.8 x~ \~~\
W ~. J 1 _\ dF
~S
~ ~ ~(
1~
°~ S i
~I h • ~
w ~ ~ M „ •~
~g~
i~~
gZ~'~o
~, ; s
~ "s~g~
0
~ a ~S~ 4
F4 ~
G~
~ oa
a
0
o~
1
Z O J m
~NQW
~ 9 ~
~~~~
O O ~ O ~
WW~~~~
mz~m~~
NNm~j~
~~W~t~~
WIW^^9W~~W`W^^
vl ~ v, ~ v1
WWNW~W
ti
~~~
a~~ti~~
o~a1~~IR
~ ~ II II II II
a4oJ~o
J
f` N
~~
oN~8~~
to 1 II II II 11
N ~QO.IF.~
I J
h~~
N~~~.g
ob~~wn
N 1 II II II II
~QOJI,.~
`lJV'
~~!~
`O~~~M~
o~o N~
~n'lunu
4oJ1,0
V ~ y
n°~i yJo ~ ~ ~ ~~ o R"! w
°~ x ~ W °~~ ~ I4~ I
I~ IJI~~ 3 ~~ ~ ~ 1.., 4. O~,O ~ O p(~~ N V{
~. 1
$ ~ ~~ u :.~
R O ~` `' ``° Y =ao
~~ 4
~fi~ ~ ~~ ~ ~o~~~
,~ .,
ffi ~-°- N ~o
~~ ~ t c5j ~~ ~affi ~~~ ;33 ~ ,~~ ~-s-{
/ a g ~J~ Q W 9aiW:ffg5Q$~~lif~~i~~y7 4QN
_ .n^+-pie. ~ }5{y~j ~"~~{{[~''{~~~p .~I-$op~o o WwY °. o
~~' -~~ FFQi~ ~+~ ~~y~wa~y S~~^.~~~ OW ~~W O v{.3s
CJ II 3 GG~C ~~ ~ ~~ ~" ~
J
ro; F~o'.,4i~,,,,
N~a•ro-I+sa-Aaa-c«ta~ a~ p~~a~~a
fib~0i t•00~-170-Si
1 ' I

~~ ~
\ j~~ 1
,~ ~ , ,~ x
~~ ~ ,~, 1 ~
~ \ \ ~ e \ ~ `
\ ~~a tea-
\~j`91~ ~ ("mil ~ll~
\- \
^ ~ ~ k~1C:
y`°Jy \ \ c ~ ~~
N~
\\~ "
~ \\ ~° °
\ err F~ \ \\
\\ ~
~~ ' h
f" \ \ \ \ I+y ~J'
~ 1 \ \ ~,
u ` ~ o~ .
. ~
~_r.~.~\
~~+...1 J~(~`~
R .q' ^.^ . ~~ I'I~ '~ \
I kk
Tyr 1 Glw~ ~
1 ~ ~~ 0.
~ ~V~ ~ II
~`' '~'\g, a a ~
~ Y \
/ ~ ~~~ V r
~~~Jl r ~~ i N ~ n
rC ~ t~° n ~ ~ N a ~ +
~J ~
. " ~ $~ ~ ,off ~m ~ rii~s~
~+E, d = 1 rii
G3~ a~7~
~°~a
~ --- ~~~~
~~~~ .•• plFFALO p+EER Z Z m
T7825u'w -~- ? w w Z Z
_ ~ IL i0 W W
ti
W 88 ~g r
# 8g , ~v, ~
O ~„
~ J fV N
K I, ~~ ~ mm J
~~/ \
~~ OyyB~ ~ f~ ~ ~
\ E"^
\'" \ \~ ~
~ ~y
/: d °. ~ ~d ~ ~~ ~ ~ 131
(j ~I y~2•i ~~ t~'36r~ ~1
Q~ ~; y1v ~ QgF / 'z,~ti
i8 ~~ '~~
f ~7 t , ^~
V~ a~
w~ 1 1 ~ ~ a
\ 1
I / I
r ~ i °"$
-~~ 1
(, _.
•c
I ' +~-
u t
/~
i
~~ ~~
sfi~
::
JN om
_ ~ c
u
'- 3
m S 'g
YI~ i
N ti
~1

+
Jm `~
-
o_
u• I ml n
O
W
O ~
_
~
i
a
N
5
~1 11

"^A
'. y J Ny
~ ~~ _,
^! 60,1: p~...r~r ~l~a
r'
g 8 ~..
~ < ~~ ~~ t!
,-y~d r~~.
y~0,y .....»fy1 ~
r'
~:
'_
I '.
~.....:
q
0.
C.....
~~ @ ;~
0.
Get ~
~N h
'`` ~ n
~~: ~^
y~~v:~~~
N, ~N ~~pp
N~ ~~ ~F~
Ctpp ~ v
F.N .: ~ h~
g~' ~s g~
~+ ~+~ ~+
p~qgb ~g~
~~ a~~-~~
a'
O
W
C
'1 ~
ca , N
+ r
•
o
D
~[YpO
~ ~ ^ ~

d W~.~

N
N

N

O
N

~d
I
N e°• a r
a ~o
a~
u u ^~ O~
~-
d W~fL

~
O IQ
O
h
Ol~
~, ~~ b
•.~''~

~ r'
,ti}i

d~a ~C , ,

~1
~'
o i~f
at r
~. uQU_
+ 1• o
r N
Q
^ . ^, ~,
aW>9L

c'r1
r
~,-~-~ ~ I
°~
a C,~ :::~ a k~
N
Q ~~~~~~~~~~
o,¢ ~
w~ ~~~
~ ~a~~
~~~~~~o

0
i
i
ow
O N
~M
O p
+ r...
oNQ
~~~~
d~i~~
q
o~,;
u1 N
+ h-
C~ ~
,..
du>sc
~~~
O
r-
N90'l~d-AOli-64~EE6\fo a\fc~pccu\:,~
SS~Or bOG 1 ~~-SI
~ ' ~
~ ~1

l ITC!'' is fic pcc~~~~
OZ~C'~ tJl ~-l~u->'~

O~~CI ,vC~-1JV-.

LIhZ(S5~ ld p~cjuu~.
~ ~ ~ u6p•j-jd.-fip~-~~DE ~.,sX~FO~ccoN~:.

CZ'J! "CC`s-.JO-SI

rc o~ roo-i_;-_~

uEp•j-~dt'fiP ~~-f ~~£c~~~sh\fio co,`~~"~f
h\~~
~ Si'CI h%0'-1J~-;i

uEp•I~id'~F'P~`•I~~L~£'~\}s>. \'`'u»Fc'o y,.,::
~.. ~ ~ ~Z°DI t00~"'imp-il

~~ ~ 6Z'Gi COOZ-L''d-=i

~1lti
oo, ~~, o !7
~Ep•j-~d rfip i~:E~C<<~9~~~.t\FC~.,pc~~y ~~::

~bitL/8
Llb'( rr~~
u Eo't'id.-fiol-o`~ccd Isv~FO cce~ ~::
.~ i 0£'0'. bGOZ-1 ~9-:~

-,

. ~
N
~ N
X
N

4
Z

M t

M
I
m
O

ifi
O

~ +' + ~-
O

1+ ~ 'f
~ ~
Y

1
.

'~

I
~ }1 1-11 1 1 ~1 11 +~
1y + }
1 ~
{ lii 1 7 i, 1-
~ ~+ }

+' 1 .
1.
}
T _

++-r
.
+
I-

l

$b r

1

Y

~~

1Cy-
'~

y(Y'

V~

I ~
bb/EZ/B
It
~
~
•.
~ ~ • uDP•t-id.-Fp
~n
~'t
~ ~s ~ficP cdo u~
::
~ ~~ ~ - __ Cc 01 tJ~ >-L~C-i!

4
Ashe County
Bridge No. 57 on NC 88
Over Buffalo Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-88 (1)
State Project No. 8.1711301
T.I.P. No. B-3300
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
APPROVED:
T
DATE
gory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
DATE icholas L. Graf, P.E.
~~Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration

Ashe County
Bridge No. 57 on NC 88
Over Buffalo Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-88 (1)
State Project No. 8.1711301
T.I.P. No. B-3300
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
October 2002
Document Prepared By:
Rummel, Klepper & Kahl, LLP
Kimberly S. Leight J e.
Project Manager .~``~~N ~'4R~''
.~ p~ ~.......~ O'O,
k ~ y~<' '
~ sic ' ~
.Peacock, Jr., P. ,~ F
Associate ~'.,yj~o~~~NEE PCO`~,`~•
.,,~~yAS~~~~~,.•
For the North Carolina Department of Transportation
" ~'~ 0 LPL-rCc.~
Robert Andrew Joyn , P.E.
Project Manager
Consultant Engineering Unit

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pale
I. Purpose and Need Statement 1
II. Existing Conditions 1
III. Alternatives 3
A. Project Description 3
B. Build Alternatives 3
C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Study 4
D. Preferred Alternative 5
IV. Estimated Costs 5
V. Natural Resources 5
A. Methodology 6
B. Physiography and Soils 6
C. Water Resources 7
1. Waters Impacted 7
2. Water Resource Characteristics 7
3. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources 10
4. Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal 11
D. Biotic Resources 11
1. Plant Communities 11
a. Man-Dominated Communities 11
b. Other 11
2. Wildlife 12
3. Aquatic Communities 13
4. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities 15
a. Terrestrial Communities 15
b. Wetland Communities 1G
c. Aquatic Communities 17
E. Special Topics 1 g
1. "Waters of the United States": Jurisdictional Issues 18
2. Permits 18
a. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act 18

rt
b. Section 401 Water Quality lg
c. Bridge Demolition and Removal 18
d. Coast Guard 19
e. Tennessee Valley Authority 19
f. Designated Public Mountain Trout Water 19
g. Special Waters 19
3. Buffer Rules 19
4. Mitigation 20
F. Rare and Protected Species 20
1. Federally Endangered and Threatened Species 20
2. Federal Species of Concern 25
3. Summary of Anticipated Impacts 27
VI. Cultural Resources 27
A. Compliance Guidelines 27
B. Historic Architecture 27
C. Archaeology 2S
VII. Section 4(f) Resources 28
VIII. Environmental Effects 28
IX. Public Involvement 30
X. Agency Comments 31
LIST OF TABLI+;S
Table 1.0 Estimated Costs per Alternative 5
Table 2.0 Plant Communities Impacts per Alternative 15
Table 3.0 Estimated Impacts to Jurisdictional Areas per Alternative 16
Table 4.0 Federally Threatened and Endangered Species 20
Table 5.0 Federal Species of Concern 26

PROJECT COATi~IIT1~IENTS
Ashe County
Bridge No. S7 on NC 88
Over.Buffalo Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-88 (1)
State Project No. 8.1711301
T.LP. No. 8-3300
DESIGN SERVICES UNIT, DIVISION 11
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) has prohibited any in-stream work and
land disturbance activities within the 25-foot buffer zone during trout spawning season of October 15
through April 15.
Categorical Exclusion
October 2002
Green Sheet
Page 1 of 1

4
Ashc County
Bridge No. 57 on NC 88
Over Buffalo Creek
Federal Aid Projcct No. BRSTP-88 (1)
State Projcct No. 8.1711301
T.I.P. No. B-3300
INTRODUCTION: The replacement of Bridge No. 57 is included in the 2002-2008 North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and in the Federal
Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location of this bridge is shown on Figure 1. No substantial
environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion".
I. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicated the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 41.5 out of a
possible 100 for a ne~v structure. It was last inspected in May 1998. This bridge is considered
functionally obsolete and structurally deficient. The replacement of this inadequate structure will result in
safer and more efficient traffic operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located in Ashe County on NC 88, approximately 50 feet [15.2 meter (m)] north of
the junction of SR 1131 (Buffalo Road) and SR 1508 (Elliott Road). The local area surrounding the
proposed project is characterized as rolling to steep mountainous terrain. The project vicinity consists of a
floodplain forest, residential areas, mature forests and adjacent urbanized areas.
NC 88 is classified as a rural major collector in the Statewide Functional Classification System.
In the vicinity of the bridge, NC 88 is a 20-foot (G-m) paved 2-lane roadway. The roadway grade
is relatively flat through the project area. The bridge crown to bed height is approximately 21 feet (G.4 m)
above the riverbed at Bridge No. 57.
The current (2002) traffic volume of 8,300 vehicles per day (VPD) is expected to increase to
14,800 VPD by the year 2025. The project volume includes 1-percent truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST)

and 3 percent dual-tired vehicles (DT). The posted speed limit in the project area is 45 miles per hour
(mph) [70 kilometers per hour (km/h)].
There were 15 accidents reported in the vicinity of Bridge No. 57 during the 3-year period
beginning January 1, 1998 through December 31, 2000. These figures resulted in a total accident rate of
454 accidents (ACC)/100 million vehicle miles (MVM).
Bridge No. 57 has three spans totaling 120.5 feet (36.7 m) with a clear roadway width of 26 feet
(7.9 m). The bridge has an asphalt-wearing surface on a reinforced concrete floor supported by four lines
of 30-inch [76.2-centimeter (cm)] steel I-beams. The substructure consists of abuts, reinforced concrete
spill-throughs, interior bents, and reinforced concrete piles and beams. The weight limit on this bridge for
single vehicles and tractor trailer/semi-trucks (TTSTs) is not posted. Bridge No. 57 was built in 1949 and
is in poor condition. Photos of the existing bridge are shown in Figures 4a and 4b.
There are underground utilities and aerial telephone services along NC 88. Also, there are
overhead power lines along NC 88 crossing Buffalo Creek at the bridge site. Overall, utility impacts are
anticipated to be low and any specific impacts will be coordinated with appropriate utility personnel
during construction.
Twenty-eight school buses cross Bridge No. 57 twice daily on their school routes. The
transportation coordinator with Ashe County Schools stated that detouring school buses would greatly
affect local traffic. The anticipated increase in school expenditures resulting from the detour route is
$51,000, which covers only the increase in bus driver wages. 'The quickest detour has an estimated travel
time of 35 minutes. Due to the extensiveness of the detour, Alternative 1 is not feasible for school bus
transportation (see letter dated Apri127, 2001 in Appendix).
According to the Ashe County Emergency Management Services, NC 88 is the only main
highway linking the eastern and western portions of the county. Alternatives 2 or 3 would be preferred
for emergency traffic purposes. Without an on-site detour, ambulance response times could be
lengthened by 30 to 45 minutes at a minimum. An off-site detour would be entirely unacceptable.
There is an eight-foot (2.4-m) corrugated metal pipe (CMP) culvert located on SR 1508 (Elliott
Road) approximately 40 feet (12.2 m) east of the intersection of SR 1131 (Buffalo Road) and NC 88.
This culvert will not be impacted by the proposed project.
2

The NCDOT Rail Division anticipates no rail interaction on this project. No impacts are
anticipated to the old railroad bed located east of the proposed project.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
The replacement structure alternates will consist of three-span bridges approximately 115 to 140
feet (35.1 to 42.7 m) long and 44 feet (13.4 m) wide. The replacement structure will require standard
spill-through abutments on each end. This structure will provide t<vo 12-foot (3.6-m) lanes, a 12-foot
(3.6-m) fuming lane, and 4-foot (1.2-m) shoulders on each side. The proposed approach roadway will
consist of a 24-foot (7.2-m) pavement width to provide t<vo 12-foot (3.6-m) lanes with 8-foot (2.4-m) [4-
foot (1.2-m) paved] shoulders on each side (See Figure 3a).
The recommended bridge length is based on a preliminary hydraulic review. The final design of
the bridge will be such that the backwater elevation will not increase the current 100-year floodplain
limit. The proposed roadway and structure should be placed at approximately the same elevation and have
the same bridge opening to avoid affecting the floodplain and causing an increase in the backwater
upstream of the proposed construction. All alternatives follow these general guidelines and are therefore
acceptable. The new structure should satisfy economic constraints, improve existing conditions,
accommodate design flows, and minimize environmental impacts on any sensitive natural ecosystems that
maybe in the vicinity of the project study area.
B. Build Alternatives
The alternatives studied for replacing Bridge No. 57 are shown on Figure 2 and described below:
Alternative 1-replaces the bridge with a 138-foot (42-m) long bridge on the existing alignment.
The approach work will extend from approximately 500 feet (152.4 m) south of the bridge to
approximately 362 feet (110.3 m) north of the bridge for a total length of approximately 1,000
feet (304.8 m). The design speed is 50 mph (80 km/h). A design exception will not be necessary
for this altemative. During the construction, traffic will be maintained on an off-site detour,
which uses NC 194, SR 1514 (West Deep Ford Road), SR 1501 (Deep Ford Road), and SR 1573
(North Overpass Ramp Road) (See Figure 1). This alternative is not recommended because of the
length of the off-site detour, which is approximately 16 miles (25.7 km).
3

Alternative 2 -replaces the bridge with a 138-foot (42 m) long bridge on the existing alignment.
The approach work will extend from approximately 500 feet (152.4 m) south of the bridge to
approximately 362 feet (110.3 m) north of the bridge for a total length of approximately 1,000
feet (304.8 m). The design speed is 50 mph (80 km/h). During construction, traffic will be
maintained on a temporary detour structure located approximately 50 feet (15.2 m) west
(upstream) of the existing bridge. The detour structure will be approximately 115 feet (35.1 m)
long and 28 feet (8.4 m) wide. This structure will provide two 12-foot (3.6-m) lanes with 2-foot
(0.6-m) shoulders (See Figure 3b). The approach work for the detour will extend from
approximately 168 feet (51.2 m) south of the bridge to approximately 193 feet (58.8 m) north of
the bridge for a total length of approximately 476 feet (145.1 m). The design speed for the detour
is 40 mph (65 km/h). A design exception will be necessary for the horizontal curves on the
detour alignment. This altemative is not recommended due to the horizontal curves necessary for
minimizing impacts to adjacent properties.
Alternative 3 (Preferred) -replaces the bridge with a 115-foot (35-m) long bridge on a new
location approximately 50 feet (15.2 m) west (upstream) of the existing structure. The existing
Bridge No. 57 will be used to maintain traffic during the beginning of construction. The
proposed bridge will have three lanes and will be constructed in stages (See Figure 3c). Staged
construction is needed to provide adequate room for construction equipment. The first stage will
include two 10-foot (3-m) lanes and one-foot (0.3-m) shoulders. Once stage one is complete,
traffic can be shifted to the new bridge while stage two is completed. The new alignment will
have a design speed of 50 mph (80 km/h). The approach work will extend from approximately
550 feet (167.6 m) south of the bridge to approximately 550 feet (167.6 m) north of the bridge for
a total length of approximately 1,215 feet (370.3 m). A design exception will be necessary for the
horizontal alignment.
C. Alternatives Eliminated from Furtl~cr Study
The No-Build or "Do Nothing" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This
is not acceptable due to the traffic service provided by NC 88.
"Rehabilitation" of i}~e existing structure is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated condition.
A box culvert was considered but is not a feasible alternative for this location.
4

D. Preferred Alternative
Alternative 3, replacing the existing bridge on a new location approximately 50 feet (15.2 m)
west of the existing structure, is the preferred alternative. Alternative 3 was selected because it takes less
construction time by building one bridge verses building two bridges needed by Altemative 2. The
horizontal alignment of NC 88 north of the bridge would be greatly improved. This altemative would
faciliLite future widening of NC 88 to multi-lanes. Widening to the east of NC 88 is precluded by parallel
strearrls and three lines of 8-foot (2.4-m) Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP) under SR 1508 (Elliott Drive),
which is very close to the NC 88 roadway.
IV. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs, based on current prices (2002), are as follows:
Table 1.0 Estimated Costs per Alternative
Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
(Preferred)
Structure $425,040 $425,040 $360,360
Roadway Approaches $480,402 $610,317.50 $853,184
Structure Removal $25,584 $25,584 $25,584
Misc. and Mobilization $283,974 $346,808.50 $428,872
Temporary On-Site Detour $0 $111,250 $0
Engineering & Contingencies $185,000 $231,000 $282,000
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $1,400,000 $1,750,000 $1,950,000
Right of Way /Utilities $211,750 $238,150 $228,750
TOTAL PROJECT COST $1,611,750 $1,988,150 $2,178,750
The estimated cost of the project, shown in the 2002-2008 North Carolina Department of
Transportation's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is $ 710,000, including $ 50,000 for right-
of-way and $ 660,000 for construction.
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
The information contained in this section is based on the Natural Systems Report (March 2002)
prepared by Environmental Services Inc.
5

r
A. 1~Ictllodoloby
The project study area was visited, walked, and visually surveyed for significant features on
May 2, 2001. The project study area encompasses the various alternatives under consideration and is
approximately 1,500 feet (457.2 m) in length and 450 feet (137.2 m) in width. Impacts calculated for each
alignment using a width of approximately 60 feet (18.3 m); actual impacts will occur within construction
limits and will be less than those calculated for this report. Special concerns evaluated in the field include
potential habitat for protected species, streams, wetlands, and water quality protection.
Plant community descriptions are based on a classification system utilized by the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) (Schafale and Weakley 1990). When appropriate, community
classifications were modified to better reflect field observations. Vascular plant names follow
nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968). Jurisdictional areas were identified using the three
parameter approach (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, wetland hydrology) following U.S. Army
Colps of Engineers (COE) delineation guidelines (DOA 1987). Jurisdictional areas were characterized
according to a classification scheme established by Cowardin et al. (1979). Habitat used by terrestrial
wildlife and aquatic organisms, as well as expected population distributions, were determined through
field observations, evaluation of available habitat, and supportive documentation (Martof et al. 1980,
Webster et al. 1985, Menhinick 1991, Hamel 1992, Rohde et al. 1994, Palmer and Brazwell 1995).
Water quality information for area streams and tributaries was derived from available sources (DEM
1989, DEM 1993, DENR 2001a, DWQ 1999, DWQ 2000). Quantitative sampling was not undertaken to
support existing data.
The most current United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) listing of federally protected
species for Ashe County was obtained prior to initiation of the field investigation (list date
March 7, 2002). In addition, NHP records documenting presence of federal or state listed species were
consulted before commencing the field investigation.
B. Pllysiography and Soils
The project study area is located in the Mountain physiographic province in the northwestern part
of North Carolina. Topography is characterized by rolling to steep mountainous terrain. Elevations in the
project study area range from approximately 2,800 feet (853.4 m) above mean sea level (MSL) to
approximately 2,840 feet (865.6 m) above MSL. (USGS ~'Varrensville, NC quadrangle).
6

The project study area crosses seven soil mapping units. Six of the mapping units are non-hydric
and include the Clifton loam (15-25% slopes) (Typic llapludults), Tusquitee loam (8-15% slopes)
(Umbric Dystroclu-epts), Evard loam (15-25% slopes) (Typic Hapludults), Evard loam (25-45% slopes)
(Typic Hapludults), Braddock gravelly loam (2-8% slopes) (Typic Hapludults), and Porters stony loam
(25-65% slopes) (Umbric Dystrochrepts). Also included in the project study area is a hydric soil mapped
as Toxaway loam (Cumulic Humaquepts), which is a poorly drained to very poorly drained soil on
floodplains (USDA 1985).
C. Water Resources
1. Waters Impacted
The project study area is located within the sub-basin 050702 of the Ne~v River Basin (DWQ
2000). This area is part of USGS Hydrologic Unit 05050001 (USGS 1974). There are three stream
channel segments within the project study area, including Buffalo Creek as well as Little Buffalo Creek
and one of its unnamed tributaries. Buffalo Creek originates west of NC 88 near the Town of West
Jefferson in Ashe County and flows north to its confluence with the North Fork New River downstream
of the project study area. Buffalo Creek has been assigned Stream Index Number (SIN) 10-2-20 by the
DWQ from its source to its confluence with the North Fork New River (DEM 1993, DENR 2001a).
Little Buffalo Creek originates in Mount Jefferson State Park in Ashe County and flows north to
its confluence with Buffalo Creek, which is located within the project study area. Little Buffalo Creek has
been assigned SIN 10-2-20-1 by DWQ from its source to the confluence with Buffalo Creek (DEM 1993,
DENR 2001 a).
The unnamed tributary that flows into Little Buffalo Creek originates approximately 1.0 mile (1.6
km) north of the project study area and runs parallel to SR 1508. No SIN has been designated to the
unnamed tributary (DEM 1993, DENR 2001 a).
2. Water Resource Characteristics
Stream Characteristics
Buffalo Creek is a perennial mountain stream with moderate flow over substrate consisting of
sand, gravel and cobble with occasional boulders. A geomorphic characterization of the stream section
within the project study area indicates Buffalo Creek is a "B" channel (Rosgen 1996). This designation
indicates that the stream is a moderately entrenched, moderate gradient, riffle dominated channel, with
infrequently spaced pools. "B" channels are characterized by very stable plan and profile, with stable
7

a
banks (Rosgen 1996). Buffalo Creek ranges from 20 to 40 feet (6.1 to 12.2 m) in width with a bankfull
depth ranging from 30 to 40 inches (76.2 to 101.6 cm).
Little Buffalo Creek is a perennial stream channel with moderate flow over sand, gravel and silt
substrate. Little Buffalo Creek ranges from 8 to 27 feet (2.4 to 8.2 m) in width, with a bankfull depth
ranging from 12 to 20 inches (30.5 to 50.8 cm). A geomorphological classification of the channel reach
within the project study area indicates the majority of Little Buffalo Creek is a "B" type stream channel.
One section of Little Buffalo Creek located immediately downstream of SR 1588 is classified as an "F"
type stream channel. This reach includes the confluence of Little Buffalo Creek and its unnamed
tributary, which occurs immediately below the outfall of the culverts under SR 1508. Tlie section of Little
Buffalo Creek is very wide, 27 feet (8.2 m), and shallow with a bankfull depth of approximately 12 inches
(30.5 em). This section is laterally contained by an adjacent residential area and NC 88. This section has
little available floodplain.
The unnamed tributary to Little Buffalo Creek is a perennial stream channel with slow flow over
gravel, sand and silt substrate, with occasional cobble. This channel ranges from 5 to 7 feet (1.5 to 2.1 m)
in width, with a bankfull depth of 4 to 6 inches (10.2 to 15.2 cm). The channel is deeply incised, with a
high bank of approximately 6 feet (1.8 m). No available floodplain is located adjacent to the channel. The
stream has been apparently channelized and relocated to its current location. A geomorphological
classification of this stream channel indicates the unnamed tributary to Little Buffalo Creek is an "F" type
stream.
Best Usage Classifications and Water Quality
Classifications are assigned to waters of the State of Norih Carolina based on the existing or
contemplated best usage of various streams or segments of streams in the basin. Buffalo Creek has a best
usage classification of C Tr+ (DEM 1993, DENR 2001a). The designation C denotes appropriate uses
including aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
Secondary recreation refers to human body contact with waters on an infrequent or incidental basis. The
supplemental classification Tr is used for trout waters characterized as waters suitable for natural trout
propagation and maintenance of stocked trout. The special designation + identifies waters that are subject
to a special management strategy specified in 15A 2B .0216, the Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)
rule, in order to protect downstream waters designated as ORW (DEM 1993, DENR 2001a). Little
Buffalo Creek has also been assigned a Best Usage Classification of C Tr+ (DEM 1993, DENR 2001 a).
The unnamed tributary that flows into Little Buffalo Creek has not been specifically described in the
8

schedule of classifications and has not been assigned a separate Best Usage Classification, and therefore
shares the classification of its receiving water, C Tr+ (DEM 1993, DENR 2001 a).
No WS-I or WS-II Waters occur within 3.0 miles (4.8 km) upstream or downstream of the
project study area (DEM 1993). Buffalo Creek, Little Buffalo Creek, and its unnamed tributary have not
been designated as a Norih Carolina Natural and Scenic River, nor as a National Wild and Scenic River.
Buffalo Creek is a Designated Public Mountain Trout Water (DPMTW) managed for stocked and
wild trout by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC). The DPMTW designation
indicates trout waters which are publicly accessible.
There is one permitted point source dischargers located on Buffalo Creek (DENR 2001a). Buffalo
Meadows DDK Environmental (Permit No. N00030325) has a permitted discharge of 0.01 million
gallons [0.037 million liters (1)] per day, and is located approximately 1.7 miles (2.7 km) upstream of the
project study area. No other permitted discharges are located on Buffalo Creek, Little Buffalo Creek or its
unnamed tributary.
From 1985 to 1998 benthic macroinvertebrate samples were taken in three different sections of
Buffalo Creek from its source to the North Fork New River. The first monitoring site, upstream from the
confluence of Buffalo Creek and Little Buffalo Creek, is approximately 0.5 mile (0.8 km) upstream of the
project study area. This sample location was established in 1985 and received a bioclassification of Good.
The second monitoring site at NC 88/194 over Buffalo Creek is approximately 0.5 mile (0.8 km)
downstream of the project study area. This sample location was established in 1985 and received a
bioclassification of Good-Fair. The third monitoring site, at SR 1125/1133 over Buffalo Creek, is
approximately 1.5 miles (2.4 km) from the project study area. Two samples were taken at this location,
one in 1993 and one in 1998. Both years this section of Buffalo Creek received a bioclassification of
Good (DWQ 1999).
Another measure of water quality being used by DWQ is the North Carolina Index of Biotic
Integrity (NCIB>), which assesses biological integrity using the structure and health of the fish
community; however, no fish community structure sampling was taken within 3.0 miles (4.8 km) of the
project study area (DWQ 2000).
9

3. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Short-term impacts to water quality, such as sedimentation and turbidity, can be anticipated from
construction-related activities. Best Management Practices (BMP's) can minimize impacts during
construction, including implementing stringent erosion and sedimentation control measures, and avoiding
using wetlands as staging areas can minimize construction impacts.
Other impacts to water quality that are anticipated as a result of this project include: changes in
water temperature as a result of increased exposure to sunlight, increased shade due to the construction of
the bridges, and changes in stormwater flows due to changes in the amount of impervious surface
adjacent to the stream channels. However, due to the limited amount of overall change in the surrounding
areas, impacts are expected to be temporary in nature.
In-stream construction activities will be scheduled to avoid and minimize impacts to aquatic
resources/organisms. Buffalo Creek is Hatchery Supported Trout Water from its headwaters to the
intersection of NC 88/194 and SR 1131, which is located in the project study area, approximately 30 feet
(9.4 m) south of the existing bridge. In a letter dated August 6, 2001 the NC Wildlife Resources
Commission (WRC) stated that a trout moratorium would be required for this project due to the
likelihood of the presence of wild trout. In-stream work and land disturbance activities within the 25-foot
(7.6-m) buffer zone is prohibited during trout spawning season of October 15 through April 15.
Additionally, WRC requires that the bridge not be replaced with a culvert, which would be a hindrance to
fish as well as wildlife passage (See Appendix).
No adverse long-term impacts to water resources are expected to result from any of the
alternatives being considered. New location alternatives will result in limited clearing of some canopy
along the stream bank, resulting in potential for localized increase in sunlight and stream temperature. All
alternatives for the proposed project include a channel spanning structure, which will allow for
continuation of present stream flow within the existing channel, thereby protecting stream integrity.
BMP's to be followed for this project are outlined in "Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds"
(NCAC 04B .0024), and will be adhered to during design and construction of this project in and around
all waters classified as WS, ORW, HQW, or Tr. This includes all stream waters within the project study
area.
10

4. Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal
Bridge No. 57 has a superstructure composed of a reinforced concrete floor on I-beams. The
substructure is composed of abutments, reinforced concrete spill throughs, interior bents, and reinforced
concrete posts and beams.
The deck, curb and bents are proposed for removal in a manner which avoids dropping any
components into the water; however, with the presence of reinforced concrete in the superstructure over
Buffalo Creek temporary fill associated with bridge removal may occur. Up to approximately 10 cubic
yards (7.6 cubic meters) of fill from the superstructure may occur as a result of bridge removal. Although
the substructure contains reinforced concrete, no concrete piers are located in the water and will be
removed in such a manner that no components will be dropped into Buffalo Creek.
D. Biotic Resources
1. Plant Communities
Five distinct plant communities were identified within the project study area: mesic mixed
hardwood forest, maintained disturbed areas, piedmont/low mountain alluvial forest, rocky bar and shore
and rich cove forest. These plant communities are described below.
a. Man-Dominated Community
Maintained/Disturbed Areas -The maintained/disturbed areas cover approximately 3.67 acres (1.49 ha)
(29.7 percent) of the project study area and include roadsides, maintained residential yards, powerline
rights-of--way, and areas where other human related activities dominate. Roadsides and powerline rights-
of-way are maintained by mowing and/or herbicides. Residential yards are dominated by various grasses,
shrubs and ornamentals. Two small jurisdictional wetland areas are located within the community type
and are discussed in Section V.D.4.b. Vegetation consists of black willow (Salix nigra), tulip poplar
(Liriodepdron tulipifera), common cattail (Typha latifolia), silky dogwood (Corpus amomum), and
blackberry (Rhus spp.).
b. Other
Mesic Mixed IIardwood Forest -The mesic mixed hardwood forest community covers approximately
0.95 acre [0.38 hectares (ha)] (7.6 percent) of the project study area and is limited to the north and east
facing slopes along the southern edge of the streambanks of the project study area. Tree species within
these areas include tulip poplar, shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), Canadian hemlock (Tsuga canade~zsis),
and scattered American beech (Fagus grandifolia) with some areas of white pine (Pinus strobus). The

midstory is generally open, with saplings of ovcrstory species as well as sugar maple (Acer saccharinunt),
yellow buckeye (Aesculus octandra), black cherry (Prunus serotina) and eastern hophornbeam (Ostrya
virginiana). The herbaceous species present include Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides)
mayapple (Podophyllum peltantum), Solomon's seal (Polygonatum b~orum), trillium (Trillium spp.) and
scattered multifora rose (Rosa n:ultiJlora).
Piedmont/Low 1<lountain Alluvial Forest -The piedmont low mountain alluvial forest covers
approximately 1.11 acres (0.45 ha) (9.0 percent) of the project study area and is associated with the
Buffalo Creek floodplain. The piedmont low mountain alluvial forest community is located in river and
stream floodplains in which separate fluvial landforms and associated vegetation zones are too small to
distinguish (Schafale and Weakley 1990). This community is characterized by location in a floodplain
and the presence of alluvial species such as American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), tulip poplar,
silky dogwood, river birch (Betula nigra), yellow buckeye, black cherry, and mayapple.
Rocky Bar and Shore -Rocky outcrops and gravel bars cover approximately 0.03 acre (0.01 ha) (0.2
percent) of the project study area and are in or adjacent to rivers and streams, which are too rocky, too
wet, or too severely flooded to support trees. Community dynamics are dominated by flooding, sediment
input and disturbance associated with Buffalo Creek.
Rich Cove Forest -The rich cove forest covers approximately 3.75 acres (1.52 ha) (30.4 percent) of the
project study area and is classified as the dominance of mesophytic trees and diverse herb layer. It is
generally located in low to moderate elevation sites and primarily broad coves and lower slopes. The rich
cove forest in the project study area is located at the base of the north-facing slopes. The species present
in this community type include striped maple (Acer pe~tsylvanicum), black cherry, sugar maple, white
pine, multifora rose and mayapple.
2. Wildlife
The project study area was visually surveyed for signs of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife. Little
evidence of wildlife was observed during the field effort. The project study area is surrounded by a busy
roadway, mature forest cover and residential yards. Alluvial forests along streams such as Buffalo Creek
provide cover and food and allow animals to travel betveen more optimal habitats. Other expected
wildlife species are those adapted to ecotones between the maintained roadside and adjacent natural
forest.
12

Few bird species were observed within or adjacent to the project study area. Bird species
expected within and around the project study area include killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), downy
woodpecker (Picoides pubescetts), northern rough-winged swallow (Stelgidopteryx ruficollis), Carolina
wren (77tryothorus ludovicianus), wood thrush (Flylocichla mustelina), American robin (Turdus
migratorius), gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis), red-eyed vireo (Vireo olivaceus), song sparrow
(Melospiza tttelodia), and northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardittalis). Species that commonly occur in other
regional alluvial forests include barred owl (Strix varia), belted kingfisher (111egaceryle alcyon), and
pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus).
Mammal sign (tracks, scat, etc.) observed within the project study area included domestic dog
(Canis fatttiliaris), eastern chipmunk (Tantias striatus) and raccoon (Procyon lotor). Also sited within the
project study area was evidence of beaver (Castor canadensis). Species expected to use the Buffalo Creek
floodplain as a travel corridor are fox (Vulpes vulpes), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus Jloridanus), white-
tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), and bobcat (Fells rufus).
Due to the season in which the field work was conducted, no terrestrial reptiles were observed
within the project study area. Expected reptile species include eastern garter snake (Tltatnnopliis sirtalis),
ringneck snake (Diadopl:is puttctatus), black rat snake (Elaplte obsoleta), and eastern box turtle
(Terrape~te carolitta).
No terrestrial amphibians were observed within the project study area. Species expected to occur
within the project study area include slimy salamander (Pletliodon spp.), Fowler's toad (Bufo
woodhouseii), spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer), and northern cricket frog (Acris crepitans).
3. Aquatic Communities
Limited kick-netting, seining, dip-netting, and visual observation of stream banks and channel
within the project study area were conducted in Buffalo Creek.
Fish species were collected in three different locations in the project study areas; one in Little
Buffalo Creek, one in Buffalo Creek above its confluence with the Little Buffalo Creek and one below
this confluence. Fish species documented in Little Buffalo Creek are central stoneroller (Catnpostotna
anomalunt), northern hogsucker (Hypentelium nigricarts), fantail darter (Etheostoma flabellare), mountain
redbelly dace (Phoximus oreas), blacknose dace (Rhinichthys atratulus), longnose dace (Rhinichthys
cataractae), rosyside dace (Clinostontus funduloides), and bluehead chub (Nocomis leptocephalus). The
13

fish species documented in the segment of Buffalo Creek above the confluence are central stoneroller,
brown tTOllt (Sah)10 tr))tta), northern hogsucker, redlip shiner (Notropis chiliticus), mottled sculpin
(Cott))s bairdi), fantail darter, and mountain redbelly dace. The fish species documented in the segment of
Buffalo Creek below the confluence are northern hogsucker, central stoneroller, brown trout, mottled
sculpin, rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), blacknose dace, bluntnose minnow (Pi)nephales notatus),
and highback chub (Hybopsis Irypsinotus).
Aquatic invertebrate surveys consisted of walking all streambanks in the project study area to
locate freshwater mussel middens and conducting limited in-stream surveys. Visual observation of
streambanks of Buffalo Creek, Little Buffalo Creek and the unnamed tributary revealed no evidence of
freshwater mussels or middens. Kick-net, sweep-net, leaf pack, visual surveys and limited bottom
sampling conducted within Little Buffalo Creek and Buffalo Creek projected various aquatic
macroinvertebrates. Benthic invertebrate organisms collected within the Little Buffalo Creek were
identified to at least Order and Family, if possible, and include dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata),
caddisflies (Trichoptera), midges (Diptera:Chironomidae), mayflies (Ephemeroptera), stoneflies
(Plecoptera), water beetles (Coleoptera), hellgrammites (Megaloptera), and crayfish (Decopoda). Benthic
invertebrate organisms collected within the channel of Buffalo Creek, also identified to at least Order and
Family, if possible, include mayflies, stoneflies, caddisflies, midges, craneflies (Diptera: Tipulidae), water
beetles, dragonflies, hellgrammites, crayfish, aquatic earthworms (Annelids), and snails (Gastropods).
Identifications are based on McCafferty (1998) and Merritt et al. (1996).
No aquatic amphibians were observed within the project study area. Species expected to occur
within the project study area include red-spotted newt (Notophthaln)us viridescens), bullfrog (Rana
catesbeiana) and pickerel frog (Rana palustris).
No aquatic reptiles were observed within the project study area. Species expected to occur within
the project study area include the painted turtle (Chrysen)ys pitta), common snapping turtle (Chelydra
serpentina), northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon) and queen snake (Regina septenrvittata).
14

2. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
a. Terrestrial Communities
Anticipated impacts to plant communities are estimated based on the acreage of each plant
community present within the proposed right-of--way of 60 feet (18.3 m); actual impacts within
construction limits will be less. A summary of potential plant community impacts is presented below:
Table 2.0 Plant Community Impacts per Alternative
ESTIMATED IMPACTS in acres (hectares)
PLANT COMMUNITY Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
(Preferred)

Impacts
Impacts Temp.
Detour
Impacts
Impacts
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 0.02 (0.01) 0.02 (0.01) 0.00 0.07 (0.03)
Maintained/Disturbed 0.22 (0.09) 0.22 (0.09) 0.14 (0.06) 0.25 (0.10)
Piedmont/Low Mountain
Alluvial Forest 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Rocky Bar 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Rich Cove Forest 0.05 (0.02) 0.05 (0.02) 0.20 (0.08) 0.63 (0.25)
Total 0.29 (0.12) 0.29 (0.12) 0.34 (0.14) 0.95 (0.38)
Total by ALT: 0.29 (0.12) 0.63 (0.25) 0.95 (0.38)
Note: Temporary construction impacts are based on the portion of the impacts not included in the construction limits for the
permanent structure.
Alternative 1 contains the least amount of potential permanent impact of 0.29 acre (0.12 ha) with
the majority of the impact occurring within Maintained/Disturbed areas. Alternative 2 contains the
median amount of potential impact of 0.63 acre (0.25 ha), with the majority of the impact occurring
within Maintained/Disturbed areas; however, potential permanent impacts are smaller due to the
temporary detour of 0.29 acre (0.12 ha). Alternative 3 contains the largest area of potential permanent
impact of 0.95 acre (0.38 ha) and the largest area of potential impact to a natural community, Rich Cove
Forest.
Due to the limited extent of infringement on natural communities, the proposed bridge
replacement will not result in significant loss or displacement of known terrestrial animal populations.
15

Wildlife movement corridors are currently limited within the project study area and are not expected to be
significantly impacted by the proposed project.
b. Wetland Communities
Anticipated impacts to wetlands and open water areas are estimated based on the amount of each
jurisdictional area within the proposed right-of--way width of 60 feet (16.3 m); actual areas within
construction limits will be less. Open water areas of Buffalo Creek are included in this table. During
bridge removal, Best Management Practices (BMP's), including erosion control measures will be used.
Therefore, it is anticipated that removing the existing bridge will result in no impact to surrounding
surface waters. A summary of potential jurisdictional impacts is presented in Table 3.0 and shown in
Figure 6.
Table 3.0 Estimated Impacts to Jurisdictional Areas per Alternative
ESTIMATED IMPACTS
JURISDICTIONAL AREAS Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
(Preferred)

Impacts Temp.
Impacts Construction
Impacts*
Impacts
Open Water in acres (ha)
PSS1 in acres (ha) 0.04 (0.02)
0.00 0.04 (0.02) 0.03 (0.01)
0.00 0.00 0.03 (0.01)
0.00
TOTAL FOR ALTS : 0.04 (0.02) 0.07 (0.03) 0.03 (0.01)
Stream Channel Impacts
in feet (m) 60 (18.3) 60 (18.3) 40 (12.2) 60 (18.3)
TOTAL FOR ALTS: 60 (18.3) 100 (30.5) 60 (18.3)
'Note: Temporary construction impacts are based on the portion of the impacts not included in the construction lirruts for the
permanent structure.
Alternative 3 contains the least amount of potential permanent open water impacts at 0.03 acre
(0.01 ha). Alternative 3 crosses Buffalo Creek at one of its narrowest points within the project study area.
Alternative 1 contains the median amount of potential open water impact at 0.04 acre (0.02 ha).
Alternative 2 contains the largest amount of open water area at 0.07 acre (0.03 ha), as well as the longest
length of stream channel at 100 linear feet (30.5 m). Alternatives 1 and 3 each contain only 60 linear feet
16

(18.3 m) of stream channel. All proposed alternatives and temporary detours avoid the jurisdictional
wetland areas.
Wetlands subject to review under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) are
defined by the presence of three primary criteria: hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and evidence of
hydrology at or near the surface for a portion (12.5 percent) of the growing season (DOA 1987). Based on
the three-parameter approach, two jurisdictional wetlands are present within the project study area.
The first jurisdictional wetland area present is located adjacent to Little Buffalo Creek, upstream
of its confluence with Buffalo Creek at the edge of a maintained residential yard. This area consists of a
small floodplain directly adjacent to Little Buffalo Creek. Soils within this area were hydric in nature
(Munsell color 10YR3/1). Vegetation was hydrophytic in nature, consisting mostly of black willow, tulip
poplar seedlings, and common cattail. A primary jurisdictional hydrologic indicator was noted, with
saturation found at 10 inches (25.4 cm) below the soil surface. Although this area is riverine influenced,
it exhibits palustrine characteristics, as defined by Cowardin et al. (1979). This area exhibited
characteristics of a palustrine, scrub-shrub system with broad leaved, deciduous vegetation.
The second jurisdictional wetland area present within the project study area consists of a linear
depression located in a maintained/successional area between Little Buffalo Creek and NC 88/194. This
area receives runoff from an adjacent business as well as NC 88/194. Soils within this area were hydric in
nature (Munsell color 10YR3/1). Vegetation within this area was hydrophytic in nature, consisting of
silky dogwood, blackberry, and various grasses. A primary jurisdictional hydrologic indicator was noted,
with saturation noted at the soil surface. This area exhibited characteristics of a palustrine, scrub-shrub
system with broad leaved, deciduous vegetation (PSS 1).
c. Aquatic Communities
Potential down-stream impacts to aquatic habitat will be avoided by bridging Buffalo Creek to
maintain regular flow and stream integrity. In addition, temporary impacts to downstream habitat from
increased sediment during construction are expected to be reduced by limiting the in-stream work to an
absolute minimum, except for the removal of the portion of the substructure below the water. Best
Management Practices (BMP) for the protection of surface waters should be strictly enforced to reduce
impacts. Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal (BMP-BDR) will be followed
to minimize impacts due to anticipated bridge demolition. The NCWRC has prohibited any in-stream
17

work and land disturbance activities within the 25-foot (7.6-m) buffer zone during the trout spawning
season of October 15 through April 15.
E. Special Topics
1. "Waters of the United States": Jurisdictional Issues
Surface waters within the embankments of Buffalo Creek and Little Buffalo Creek are subject to
jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as "Waters of the United States"
(33 CFR 328.3). Waters associated with the reaches of both Buffalo Creek, Little Buffalo Creek and the
unnamed tributary within the project study area all exhibit characteristics of riverine, upper perennial,
unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded waters (R3UBH) (Cowardin et al. 1979).
2. Permits
a. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
This project is being processed as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) guidelines. Nationwide Permit (NWP) #23 [33 CFR 330.5(a)(23)] has been
issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) for use with projects classified as a CE due to
expected minimal impact. In the event that NWP #23 will not suffice, minor impacts attributed to
bridging and associated approach improvements are expected to qualify under General Bridge Permit 031
issued by the Wilmington COE District. Notification to the Wilmington COE office is required if this
general permit is utilized. NWP #33 maybe used if temporary structures, work and discharges, including
cofferdams are necessary for this project.
b. Section 401 Water Quality Certification
Section 401 of the CWA delegates authority to the states to issue a 401 Water Quality
Certification for all projects that require a Federal Permit, such as a Section 404 Permit. DWQ has issued
a Genera1401 Water Quality Certification for NWP #23. Use of this permit will require written notice to
DWQ. However, if mitigation is required, the project must be coordinated with DWQ for review of the
mitigation plans.
c. Bridge Demolition and Removal
Section 402-2 of NCDOT's Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures is labeled Removal
of Existinb Structure. This section outlines restrictions and BMP-BDRs, as well as guidelines for
calculating maximum potential fill in the creek resulting from demolition. This project is designated as a
Case 1 stream crossing, which applies to ORW, and a Case 2 stream crossing, which applies to designated
18

trout waters. Case 1 limits in-water work to an absolute minimum, except for the removal of a portion of
the sub-structure below the water. Case 2 allows no work at all in the water during the moratorium period
associated with fish migration, spawning, and larval recruitment in nursery areas. After construction
activities are completed, abandoned approaches associated with the existing structure and/or temporary
detours will be removed and revegetated in accordance with NCDOT guidelines.
d. Coast Guard
Bridge replacement or construction over navigable waters used for commerce or that have a
maintained navigation channel may require United States Coast Guard (USCG) authorization pursuant to
33 CFR 114-115. Buffalo Creek is not designated as a navigable river.
e. Tennessee Valley Authority
Bridge No. 57 is located outside of the Tennessee River drainage area and no TVA land or land
rights are involved. Therefore, TVA's approval of the plans pursuant to Section 26a of the TVA Act for
Bridges and Indicated Locations is not required.
f. Designated Public Mountain Trout Water
Ashe County is among the twenty-five mountain counties designated as having trout waters.
Buffalo Creek is a Designated Public Mountain Trout Water (DPMTW) from its headwaters to the
NC 194/88 and SR 1131 (Buffalo Road) intersection. The project will affect the outer limits of these
designated waters. Also, Buffalo Creek is designated as a Trout Water by DWQ. The WRC has
prohibited any in-stream work and land disturbance activities within the 25-foot (7.6-m) buffer zone
during trout spawning season of October 15 through April 15.
g. Special Waters
Buffalo Creek is designated as "+". Therefore, the waters are subject to a special management
strategy specified in 15A NCAC 2B .0225, the Outstanding Resource Waters rule, to protect downstream
waters. Buffalo Creek, Little Buffalo Creek, and its unnamed tributary have not been designated as North
Carolina Natural and Scenic Rivers, nor as National Wild and Scenic Rivers.
3. Buffer Rules
No buffer rules currently apply to the New River Basin.
19

4. Mitigation
Avoidance -Due to the presence of surface waters within the project study area, avoidance of
impacts is not possible. Wetland and stream impacts are previously discussed in Section V.D.4.b.
Minimization -The alternatives presented were developed in part to demonstrate minimization
of stream impacts. Impacts to Buffalo Creek will be minimized during demolition by removing
the existing structure in a way that avoids depositing debris in Buffalo Creek.
Mitigation -Compensatory mitigation is not proposed for this project due to the limited nature of
project impacts. However, utilization of IIMPs is recommended in an effort to minimize impacts
including avoiding placing staging areas within wetlands. Temporary impacts associated with the
construction activities could be mitigated by replanting disturbed areas with native species and
removal of temporary fill material upon project completion. Final compensatory wetland and
stream mitigation requirements will be determined by the USACE under the statutory provisions
of CWA §404 and the January 15, 2002 Final Notice of Issuance of Natiomvide Permits.
F. Rare and Protected Species
1. Federally Endangered and Threatened Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E) or Threatened (T), or officially proposed
(P) for such listing, are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The following federal protected species are listed for Ashe County (list dated
March 7, 2002 ):
Table 4.0 Federally Threatened and Endangered Species
Common Name Scientific Name Status Biological Conclusion
Bog turtle Clemmys muhlenburgii T(S/A) Not required
Spreading avens Geum radiatum E No effect
Swamp pink Helonias bullata T No effect
Roan Mountain bluet Houslonia montana E No effect
Heller's blazing star Liatris helleri T No effect
Virginia spiraea Spiraea virginialla T No effect
Rock gnome lichen Gymnodenna lineare E No effect
/Vole: C - Cndangered, 1 - t hreafened, / (J7AJ - Yhrealened due fo slmi[arlty of appearance
20

Bog Turtle -The bog turtle is a small turtle reaching an adult size of approximately 3 to 4 inches (7.G to
10.2 cm). This otherwise darkly-colored species is readily identifiable by the presence of a bright orange
or yellow blotch on the sides of the head and neck (Martof et. al. 1980). The bog turtle is typically found
in bogs, marshes, and wet pastures, usually in association with aquatic or semi-aquatic vegetation and
small, shallow streams over soft bottoms (Palmer and Braswell 1995). In North Carolina, bog turtles
have a discontinuous distribution in the Mountains and western Piedmont. NI-IP records do not indicate
that the bog turtle has been documented within 3.0 miles (4.8 km) of the project study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: The bog turtle is listed as Threatened due to Similarity of
Appearance [T(S/A)]. T (S/A) species are not subject to Section 7 consultation and a biological
conclusion is not required. This project is not expected to affect the bog turtle. This species
requires open wetland areas, including bogs and wet pastures. Although one jurisdictional area
exists which resembles this description, it is completely avoided by all project alternatives. NO
EFFECT.
Spreading Avens -Spreading avens is an erect, densely hairy, perennial herb up to 20 inches (50.8 cm)
tall. A basal rosette of odd-pinnately compound leaves is produced from a horizontal rhizome (USFWS
1993). These leaves are long stalked and terminated by a large kidney-shaped lobe; tiny leaflets are
usually present below the terminal lobe (Kral 1983). Small, sessile, serrated leaves are found on the
flowering stem. Lanceolate sepals and relatively long petal lengths of 0.5 to 0.8 inches (1.3 to 2 cm) help
differentiate spreading avens from related species (Massey et al. 1983). Bright yellow, five-petaled
flowers approximately 2.4 to 3.1 inches (G.1 to 7.9 cm) across are produced from June to August; these
are followed between July and October by hairy achenes with a persistent, straight style approximately
0.2 inches (0.5 cm) long (Massey et al. 1983). Vegetative parts may emerge in blay and persist tluough
October.
Spreading avens usually occurs at elevations greater than 5,000 feet (1,524 m) above MSL in mountain
grass balds or in grassy clearings in heath balds as well as in crevices of granitic rock. This species cannot
tolerate shading or crowding (Kral 1983). Spreading avens is found in a few northwestern counties of
North Carolina, and in nearby counties of Tennessee. NHP records indicate that spreading avens has been
documented within 3.0 miles (4.8 km) of the project study area. In 1989, spreading avens was
documented to occur on Phoenix Mountain, approximately 2.5 miles (4.0 km) northeast of the project
study area. In 1994, spreading avens was documented to occur on Bluff Mountain, approximately 3.0
miles (4.8 km) southwest of the project study area.
21

BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: The proposed project is not expected to affect spreading
avens since elevations within the project study area are a maximum of 2,840 feet (865.6 m) above
MSL, significantly below the reported minimum elevation of 5,000 feet (1,524 m) above MSL for
this species. Suitable habitat for this species, consisting of balds or rock outcroppings, was not
identified within the project study area. NO EFFECT.
Swamp Pink -Swamp pink is a perennial, hydrophytic herb in the lily family with simple leaves in a
basal rosette. Small scale-like leaves or bracts are found on a hollow flowering stem which may be 16
inches (40.6 cm) tall in flower and 24 inches (60.9 cm) tall in fruit (USFWS 1991). The inflorescence
consists of pink to lavender flowers borne on a raceme without bracts. Fruits consist of three-lobed papery
capsules. Flowering occurs in April and May, with fruits present from May through July. Vegetative
portions of the plant may emerge in April and persist through September (Massey et al. 1983).
In Norih Carolina, swamp pink is found in mountain swamps and bogs. Swamp pink occurs along small
watercourses in permanently saturated, acidic, organic soils or black muck which is mostly sphagnous
(Porter and Wieboldt 1991). Swamp pink does not tolerate prolonged inundation, but can survive
infrequent and brief flooding. NHP records do not indicate that swamp pink has been documented within
3.0 miles (4.8 km) of the project study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: The proposed project is not expected to affect swamp pink
due to the lack of potential habitat within the project study area. The wetlands within the project
study area do not offer conditions similar to mountain swamps and bogs and soils do not consist
of organic material. NO EFFECT.
Roan Mountain Bluet -Roan Mountain bluet, formerly treated as a variety of the summer bluet
(Houstonia [=Hedyotis] purpurea), is a low, erect to spreading perennial herb with a squarish stem
typically growing to 6 inches (15.2 cm) high. The leaves are opposite, sessile, rounded basally but taper
to a pointed tip and have smooth, toothless margins. Small, reddish purple, tubular flowers are produced
on small terminal clusters in May through August with fruiting occurring in August and September
(USFWS 1996). It differs from the more common H. purpurea by having larger, smooth-edged leaves,
and by larger flowers, capsules, and seeds (Weakley 1993).
22

Roan Mountain bluct is endemic to the high Blue Ridge Mountains of Norili Carolina and Tennessee,
mostly from 4,200 to 6,300 feet (1,280 to 1,920 m) above MSL in elevation. It grows in crevices of rock
outcrops as well as in thin, gravelly soils of grassy balds near summit outcrops (Weakley 1993). NHP
records indicate that Roan Mountain bluet has been documented twice to occur within 3.0 miles (4.8 km)
of the project study area. In 1997, the Roan Mountain bluet was documented to occur on Bluff Mountain,
approximately 3.0 miles (4.8 km) southwest of the project study area. In 1997, the Roan Mountain bluet
was documented to occur on Three Top Mountain, approximately 1.8 miles (2.9 km) northwest of the
project study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: The proposed project is not expected to affect Roan Mountain
bluet since elevations within the project study area are a maximum of 2,840 feet (865.6 m) above
MSL, significantly below the reported minimum elevation of 4,200 feet (1,280 m) for this
species. Suitable habitat for this species, consisting of balds, was not identified within the project
study area. NO EFFECT.
Holler's Blazing Star - Holler's blazing star is an erect herbaceous perennial with glabrous stems that
reach heights of 4 to 20 inches (10.2 to 50.8 cm). The leaves are simple, linear to lanceolate, alternate,
and arranged spirally along the stem. Leaf size is variable, with a gradual decrease in size up the stem.
The inflorescence consists of compact heads arranged in a raceme-like fashion along the stem. The heads
typically contain seven to ten tubular florets which may be purple to lavender in color. Holler's blazing
star is distinguished from related species by shorter height and relatively short pappus (modified calyx
lobes) half or less the length of the corolla tube (USFWS 1989). Flowers are produced from July to
September, with fruiting occurring from August to October (Massey et al. 1983).
Holler's blazing star has been found on rocky summits at high elevations in the mountains of western
North Carolina. This species typically is found in full sun growing in shallow, acidic soils on or around
granitic outcrops, ledges, and cliff faces (Kral 1983, Massey et al. 1983). Holler's blazing star is reported
to occur at elevations between approximately 3,500 to 6,200 feet (1,066.8 to 1889.7 m) above MSL. NHP
records do not indicate that Holler's blazing star has been documented within 3.0 miles (4.8 km) of the
project study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: The proposed project is not expected to affect Holler's
blazing star since elevations within the project study area are a maximum of 2,840 feet (865.6 m)
above MSL, below the reported minimum elevation of 3,500 feet (1,066.8 m) for this species.
23

Suitable habitat for this species, consisting of granite outcrops, ledges, or cliffs exposed to full
sunlight, was not identified within the project study area. NO EFFECT.
Virginia Spiraea -Virginia Spiraea is a deciduous shrub with a modular growth form (USFWS 1992).
This clonal shrub averages 3 to 10 feet (0.9 to 3.0 m) in height, but may reach heights of 13 feet (3.9 m).
Its short-stalked leaves are alternate, nearly toothless, and narrowly elliptic with a pointed tip (Radford et
al. 1968). Numerous small, white, 5-petaled flowers are produced on terminal clusters in June to July.
Dried corymbs often persist through winter. Seed production is reported to be sporadic and most colonies
are believed to arise from downstream dispersal and establishment of fragments of horizontal rootstock
(Porter and Wieboldt 1991).
Endemic to the southern Appalachians, Virginia Spiraea is restricted to disturbance-prone riverine areas,
specifically along scoured banks of high gradient streams, meander scrolls, point bars, natural levees, and
braided features of lower stream reaches (Porter and Wieboldt 1991). Disturbance is required for removal
of woody competitors and to aid in establishment of colonies. NHP files do not indicate that Virginia
spiraea occurs neither within Buffalo Creek upstream of the project area nor within 3.0 miles (4.8 m) of
the project study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Suitable habitat for Virginia spiraea vas identified within the
project study area; specifically, on the rocky bar communities located downstream of the existing
bridge. Detailed surveys for this species were conducted on August 9, 2001. Prior to the initiation
of the survey, a reference population was reviewed to familiarized ESI biologists with the
flowering status and growth stage of this species. Systematic surveys were conducted in potential
habitat within the project study area, as well as 100 feet (30.5 km) upstream and downstream of
the project study area. No evidence of Virginia spiraea was noted. NO EFFECT.
Rock Gnome Lichen -The rock gnome lichen is a small, squamulose (strap-like) lichen in the reindeer
moss (lichen) family. This species is similar to squamulose lichens in the genus Cladonia by having
terminal portions of its strap-like lobes that are blue-gray on the upper surface and shiny-white on the
lower surface; rock gnome lichen differs from these other lichens by having blackened lobe bases. The
lichen grows nearly parallel to the rock surface to which it is attached, but the tips curl up to a near
vertical orientation. Reproduction appears to be asexual, with colonies spreading clonally. Rock gnome
lichen is typically found growing in association with a distinctively colored, reddish-brown moss
(Andreaea) (Murdock 1993). The rock gnome lichen is endemic to the mountains of North Carolina and
24

Tennessee. Most populations occur above approximately 5000 feet (1,524 m) above MSL in areas subject
to frequent fog cover, but the species has been found at lower elevations in deep gorges where a similar
high humidity regime is present (FWS 1997). Rock gnome lichen typically occurs on vertical rock faces
subject to intermittent seepage (FWS 1997). NHP records do not indicate that rock gnome lichen has been
documented within 3.0 miles (4.8 km) of the project study area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: The proposed project is not expected to affect rock gnome
lichen since elevations within the project study area are a maximum of 2,840 feet (865.6 m)
above MSL, below the reported minimum elevation of 5,000 feet (1,524 m) above MSL for this
species. Suitable habitat, consisting of vertical rock faces with a high humidity regime, was not
identified within the project study area. NO EFFECT.
2. Federal Species of Concern
'The March 7, 2002 FWS list also includes a category of species designated as "Federal species of
concern" (FSC). The FSC designation provides no federal protection under the ESA for the species listed.
The presence of potential suitable habitat (Amoroso 1999, LeGrand and Hall 1999) within the project
study area has been evaluated for the following FSC species listed for Ashe County:
25

---- --- -- - -
Table 5.0 Federal Species of Concern

Common Name
Scientific Name
State Status Potential

)EIabitat
Kanawha minnow Phenacobius teretulus SC Y
Appalachian cottontail Sylvilagus obscurus SR N
Appalachian Bcwick's wren Thryomanes bewickii altus E N
Green floater Lasmigona subviridus E Y
Pygmy snaketail Ophiogomphus howei SR Y
Diana fritillary butterfly Speyeria dance SR Y
Regal fritillary butterfly Speyeria idala SR N
Gammon's stenelmis riffle beetle Stenelmis gantmoni SR N
Tall larkspur Delphinium exaltatum E-SC N
Glade spurge Euphorbia purpurea C N
Appalachian oak fern Gymnocarpium appalachianum E N
Butternut Jugla[ts cinerea WS Y
Gray's lily Lilium grayi T-SC N
Bog bluegrass Poa paludigena E N
Carolina saxifrage Saxifrage caroli[[ia[[a C Y
Bluff Mountain reindeer lichen Cladot:ia psoromica C N
Note: E -Endangered, T -Lhreatened, JC - Jpeciat concern, C: - C,anataate, J/t - Jtgnytcantry (tare, ~r - trarcn Lul,
P -Proposed
NHP files do not document any FSC occurrences within the project study area. NHP files do
document fourteen FSC occurrences within 3.0 miles (4.8 km) of the project study area; one Diana
fritillary butterfly, one regal fritillary butterfly, three Gray's lily, and nine Carolina saxifrage.
The Diana fritillary butterfly occurrence is a 2000 record located on Mount Jefferson,
approximately 3.0 miles (4.8 km) southeast of the project study area. The regal fritillary butterfly
occurrence is a 1932 record located near the Town of Jefferson, Ashe County, approximately 2.5 miles
(4.0 km) east of the project study area.
Tl~e first Gray's lily occurrence is a 1988 record located on Phoenix Mountain, approximately 2.5
miles (4.0 km) northeast of the project study area. The second Gray's lily occurrence is a 1991 record
26

located on Bluff Mountain, approximately 3.0 miles (4.8 km) southwest of the project study area. The
third Gray's lily occurrence is a 1968 record located at the foot of Bluff Mountain, approximately 2.5
miles (4.0 km) southwest of the project study area.
The closest Carolina saxifrage occurrence was documented in 1997 near the South Fork New
River, approximately 2.5 miles (4.0 km) northeast of the project study area. A second occurrence was
documented in 1997 on Three Top Mountain, approximately 2.5 miles (4.0 km) northwest of the project
study area. The remaining seven occurrences occurred approximately 3.0 miles (4.8 km) from the project
study area.
3. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Due to the federal status of the bog turtle [T(S/A)], this species is not subject to Section 7
consultation and a biological conclusion is not required. This project is not expected to affect the bog
turtle or the other six threatened and endangered species located in Ashe County. Potential habitat occurs
for six of the sixteen listed federal species of concern.
VI. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for
Compliance with Section 106, codified at Title 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires that for federally
funded, licensed, or permitted projects having an effect on properties listed in or eligible for inclusion in
the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be given the
opportunity to comment.
B. Historic Architecture
A field survey of the Area of Potential Effect (APE) was conducted on October 18, 2001. All
structures within the APE were photographed and later reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Office
(HPO). In a concurrence form dated October 18, 2001 and a memorandum dated October 26, 2001, the
State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurred that there are no historic architectural resources
either listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register Historic Places within the APE. A copy of
the concurrence form and the~memorandum are included in the Appendix.
27

C. Archaeology
The State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), in a memorandum dated August 27, 2001,
recommended that "no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project." A copy
of the SHPO memorandum is included in the Appendix.
VII. SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended, states in part "Tl~e
Secretary may approve a transportation project or program requiring the use of publicly owned land of a
public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or land of a historic site of national, state,
or local significance (as determined by the Federal, State, or local officials having jurisdiction over the
park, recreation area, refuge, or site) only if-
(1) there is no prudent and feasible alternative to using land; and
(2) the program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the park, recreation
area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge, or historic site resulting from such use."
There are no 4(f) impacts.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact on the local area. Replacement of an
inadequate bridge will result in safer and more efficient traffic operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and
lack of substantial environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of the current NCDOT standards or 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 the construction of the project.
All three alternatives will result in one relocation. Construction of Alternative 2 or 3 will impact
one property. Anew driveway with a retaining wall will be constructed to allow access to this property.
No other adverse effect on individual families or communities is anticipated. Right-of--way acquisition
will be limited.
28

No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the surrounding area.
The studied route does not contain any bicycle acconvnodations, nor is it a designated bicycle
route; therefore, no bicycle accommodations have been included as part of this project.
No geodetic survey markers will be impacted.
This project has been coordinated with the United States Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS). The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all Federal agencies or their representatives to
consider the potential impact to prime farmland of all land acquisition and construction projects. There
are soils classified as prime, unique, or having state or local importance within 0.5-mile of the project.
One soil, Tusquitee loam (TsD), 8 to 15% slopes, is classified as a prime farmland soil. State and local
important soils are as follows: Clifton loam (CfE), 15 to 25% slopes, Braddock gravelly loam (BrD), 8 to
15% slopes, Toxaway loam (To), Tusquitee loam (TsE), 15 to 25% slopes, and Evard loam (EvE), 15 to
25% slopes. No unique soils occur within the 0.5-mile (0.8-km) radius of Bridge No. 57.
This project is in 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.
This project is located in Watauga 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.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If vegetation is disposed of
by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality in compliance with 15 NCACZD.0520.
This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise of Title 23, Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 772 and for air quality (1190 Clean Air Act Amendments and the
National Environmental Policy Act) and no additional reports are required.
A search was performed within a 0.5-mile (0.8-km) radius of the project study area utilizing the
ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments (E 1527-00). This search included the NPL
29

(National Priority List), CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Information System), RCRIS (Resource Conservation and Recovery Information), and UST
(Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database) as well as other applicable databases. The results of this
search documented one UST site, the NCDOT Equipment Storage Unit, located at 296 Buffalo Road in
West Jefferson, NC, approximately 1,000 feet (304.8 m) southwest of Bridge No. 57. No other mapped
sites were found within the 0.5-mile (0.8-km) ASTM search radius. No impacts are anticipated to occur to
the NCDOT Equipment Storage Unit.
Field surveys were performed and a Hydraulic Technical Memorandum was produced for this
project in February 2001. Ashe County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program. Bridge
No. 57 is located in a 100-year Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain, Zone A.
(See Figure 5). No base flood elevations have been determined. The approximate 100-year floodplain in
the project area is shown on Figure 5. The amount of floodplain area to be affected is not substantial. The
project will not increase the upstream limits of the 100-year floodplain. There is a USGS gage
approximately 2.5 miles (4.0 km) downstream at site 03162110 on Buffalo Creek near Warrensville,
North Carolina.
There are no other practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area. Any shift in alignment
will result in a crossing of about the same magnitude. All reasonable measures will be taken to minimize
any possible harm.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no significant adverse environmental
effects will result from implementation of the proposed project.
IX. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Public involvement for this project initially involved compiling a database of property owners,
area business persons and local public officials. This database was used to send out Newsletter No. 1 in
October 2001 announcing the project and detailing the three alternatives being considered. A copy of the
newsletter is included in the Appendix. A Citizens Informational Workshop was held on November 7,
2001 at the Ashe County Cooperative Extension Office. One written comment was received
recommending Alternative 2.
30

X. AGENCY COM~TENTS
Agencies have commented upon the proposed bridge replacement. These comments have been
noted, considered in the environmental and design processes, and included in the Appendix.
31

E1CH1B11'S

~ ~ ~:>
L_ _., .~. lr,:,~
. ~ !
. ,,
,,
;~,_ ...
...
,~v« I
.s~"
,-.. _
.... ~..
~3•,, ~ ~ -
' ~ M
t"
' ~.5 [ :. r
~ ~
~ „
,,,
1`~i3 -
7' 9 ~ lt, ~ ti~
"2
;. °- -"
t ~'.fi ``-,", _ ~ ;.'•~ ~ :„r -~ .~~~ ~, 113
___ .. ~* v.,-. ~. 8
~' ~ __ _~ 13,2 ,° v'~. t ~7'
133 `-'~'`4~ ~, r" .~~ t.tiR4t: ,.,.~
~ 1`~le
.,
1.
~___ ~ _ ,.
1 ; P':
1'.0 ~ ~ti Ur~;t~~:n ~88 ~:1 y~ ldd9` ~..
(~ ~ -,._ f_
f
r r, N~
~{tTOri~ 112.4 - C;7, ~ ' .3
r '
_ ._ y;
1130
_1128 ~~ '3 1508 ,, ~ 1504 1512 .~ `
.~il'~~ 1185 - \~'~ ;~ lb,.,''-
1,1,48 ~-~.~,/ ~ ~ i r ~- ~ S ~ ~~ _ *~"
,„
1193 +~ '""~~-r-, ,~ i'OF'.1,•3Q2 ,' ~ , '~__.~~ - _ t
_ 1131 ~~ ;~^., ~ G~ ,
vq
- ~ s
_•
~`
1144 1132 ;, ~ ,~_,' . t ~p ._; `~ ._ 1
___..__
__w_-- 1271 ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ 1190 Smelhport~,, ~ SUS
Tr~.c~, } 1228 ~"~"_ ~~t ~ 22}
j 1229 1131 ti ...~~''.~.,r--- ~ •~..-~-~-,-
, _ ;.
_ ,
-- -
. ~
--" - ,' 1133 1133 ~ „i~ ~ d ~ ~ .~
1125 :. ,. ~ ._.__--- ~ 1? 221 ,. ~88 ~--
lyq.f ~~ .... ....__.... _. ~-,_ 1
Buffalo -~~ 221 ~ ~
~ "-
~,' 4~ P~iT. JEFFE~SO~J
ti~~N - ' _ JEFFERSON g-
~ ~~ ,~.~
1,3a Pay. ~,~02
~ BU5 12Gi ,~~
~ ~,-~ 221 ,
't
1133 %.,., `~ 1270
i `~ .___~
-- ~~ - 1154 `'
:- ~
- _.-.
OFF-SITE DETOUR ~ ~ - '~
E3caver= ; 1. f "~
__~ _-~_ ~-'~~ ~ Greek ~ __ ti97- e._ ,~
1138 ~ . ~
i. ,~, t. tc.~
1 0 1 2 MILES :° ~ ~'~~~;, Norfh Carolina Depo~imenf of Tronsp~rtafi~n
..__-_ ...._~. --_--__.___rv_.____.
SCALE ~~ tm•eronmcntalArt~rfysis Erancn
F
Swrw,...~..' t^~,,.- -.°-'""'_-~--~--' --- .._"'°- -.... _ ~ t _ . ~ 4, .-r a i .~ { i v s~ 4.+° ~'*C 3 *. i.'s '~
~ ~ ~y
y'„ _ -' s ~~` ~ ~~ f i" ~ x ~~yf ~ s d e ... F - .s ,J i ~ -. ~,. ~ t t'e v. i.i *.
~ , '`_ /°
_~Y-" -~, -~-, T °J
~''~.,./ t L ! }" f )rY'1 .~i ...sue -~ i . . t ~ 4 ~..+'""':,.T ~~ # .` ~.T
~~ ~~ ~~. 77

. I l 1 f ~~ ~ I I~ I. 1 l ~~ 1

O

•O O
fh
~
O .C
a a~
~ W
~
OC ° (;~
~
a } ~
~l
~ Q ~ Q Q ~
~~ j a
i
o
E °~c'
Z Zu O
M

p ~
~ k ~ 't a~ _
~
~ O~
m
~
~
~ ~~ ~ ~
~c ~~
~
p ~O~ ~~ E ~
cN o.
coo U
~+- O
Z
~
>~ c A Q
~

o
~ o o
o ~ ~
y ~
Z w
t~> t-~
~
^
Q~ 1 •`
~n \ O
n
!y ~ ~,~ ~
m
xx
C
\
-C ~ ~
r "~
~
~ ~ f
i
CO d' C ~ ~ rw°
.~ ~ o
s ~ ~
J ~
0
N
Z
Q
~~
R
~ V
~~ ~

p ?
~ Q O J
Q a.
N ~, ~ ~~ V
R ~ ~
~' Z ,-

Q N ~ O
~ ~
Q
a ~
N O
~~ W 2
~~
~ R

\ ~ ~
3
~
W
z
~ ~
~ ~~

mo

m
a~
~ V ~
b R ~Z

~ N
~
<O ~-~ N
W
~
CC~O~
7 ~
~ V-
~ Q ?
Cep tip
~ ~ O ~
O

C
O ~

•O fh
'C
O W
~

N V
C
oc o MM
W

~ 1
1
J
U'
~= ° m Y u..
o ~•~
cE Zw
~
O
o
~o QS V

Z
O
~
~ ~_
°o ~ Z
~ O~ M
Q
~ c°' o o U ~ t
t_ o
~ j y=.
o~ w o~ Z
~ o ,
v N Z m a.
p~ o Q w F-
Z w
~~
~~
+ ., m
.~
~

l Ar
Z
O

W
N
47 N ~ R ~ J
V
wti
°w }
~ ~ o

N
~
~
~ ~ I-
R
a
z
~ ~ N O
a° ~
N ~ ~ O W
Q ~ W ~ N

a ~
~ ~
~ ~ ~O
~ ~ W

~ ~
3 N ~ ~ ~

N ~~
~ g
W
q
(~/
~ N
~
~ ~ ~
N ~- ~ O
4 W

C7 O J
o" U
N

c
.6 ,~

M
o s
n. a.+
r
~ ~
~
oc o
-- ° °O
`
+ ~
Y
Uw ~
~
o
c.=
~ '^
c E o W
Z~
O
E °d ~ U ~
'C ~ _ Z Z
O a
_°c o o ~t
L O
o°='i
c
w w
O ~ Z
v "' n Zm ~
o c
Q ww F'-
z ~]
~~
------- ,~ ~ m
r
L. i ~
,
~ i
I ~ +<
~
I
'
I
~ I
I
~
I 4, ~A~

O I
I
I
I
' ~
I

I

1
I
I
~ I
~
~
~

N
~
~ ~ I
'

W ~
~ ~ '
~
N ~
a ~
N ~ ~
N ~
IW~
H-
Q ; ~
~
~ti
I
~ I
I I
~
~
~ ~
~
'
Z
J
' J O
~ ~ I Z O

~., - -

~ `~ -
~

-
nl

-
~'

~
_
_

O _

~
`~ o r
~_, I W V

A Q ~ ~ W ~ W

~ ~ V
C \ V O

~ Q
V
ti
`` °
m W
j
N N U
Q ` ~ 1~
Q Q
V
. ~
cn
~
~ ~
O

~~~~UO

t»ooking N®rtMh
I~
~ r

F '~ ~ ~
~'

~ ~ _.

~.
+~
_.
_~

3 _
~I'
S .I. ~;
~ ~
4 I ..
`
~ ~ f -~~
~
'- ~ ~ ' ~
1 { =:.
~ ~'. i.
f

A~~i~ ~f~1.9i~'T'~'
i~~IUGE ~c~~ fir? I .
Sµ33~t3
hooking nt Fait ~id~e
Looking at 11Vo~t ~~~~
Figure ~

F=~gur~ fi
Jurisdictional Strums and Wetlands ~
GPS Data ~~= FZoads
f
Stream banks Strums
Wetlands Boundaries Prime i=a-rmland

~,.~.~
°~
~`1
~, To
PsF
i

.~-
~--
Eve
`~~.•_

TsD
6 q BDti

® North CarolinaWildlife Resources Comrriission
Charles R Fullwood, Executive Dtrector
TO:
FROM
Ms. Kim Leight
Rummel, Klepper & Kahl
Maryellen Haggard, Highway Probe Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program ~~~~
D ~~~~~~ .
..
D
Atli, ~ 9 201
RUMMEL, KLtPPER & KARL
RALEIGH, NC
DATE:
August 6, 2001
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements in Ashe, Wilkes, Watauga, and Alleghany counties
of North Carolina. TIP Nos. B-3300, B-3607, B-3714, B-3922, B-3925, B-3926,
B-3928, B-4007, and B-4010
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the
information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the subject project. Our
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d).
On bridge replacement projects of this scope our standard recommendations are as
follows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require
work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal
and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human and wildlife passage
beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and does not block navigation by
canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Wet concrete should not be allowed to contact stream water. This will lessen the
chance of altering the stream's water chemistry and causing a fish kill.
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream
5. if temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed back to
original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed
areas should be seeded of mulched to stabilize the soil and native free species should
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721

Bridge Scopings 2 ~ 08!06/01
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.
6. A clear bank (riprap free} area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the
stream underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N:C. Wildlife Resowces Commission reviews all U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the option of
requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and we can
recommend that the project require an individual `404' permit.
8. In streams chat contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist Mr. Tim
Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these sensitive species may be
required. NCDOT should also contact the IJ. S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
information on requirements of the Endangered Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used 1}y anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy entitled
"Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12, 1997)" should
be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries far sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
11.5edimentation and erosion control measwes sufficient to protect aquatic resources
must be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be
maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
12. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should he planted on alI bare soil
within 1 S days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
13. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area.
Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used
where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
14. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in
order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other
pollutants into streams. .
15. Only Olean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and
should be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
construction is completed.
16. All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters should be regularly
inspected and maintained to prevent contamination of stream waters from fuels,
lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.

Bridge Scopings
08/06101
If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are
used:
The culvert must be designed to allow for fish passage. The culvert or pipe invert
should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural streambed. The installation of the
culvert or pipe should insure that all waters flow without freefalling or damming on
either end during loRr flow conditions. If culverts are long, notched baffles should be
placed in reinforced Concrete box culverts at 1S foot intervals to allow for the
collection of sediments in the culvert, to reduce flow velocities, and to provide resting
places for fish and other aquatic organisms moving through the structure.
2. When two pipes are installed, only the lower pipe should be buried 12" into the
substrate so that all Base flows continue uninterrupted in the lower pipe during normal
and low flow conditions to maintain aquatic life passage. The bottom of the second
pipe should be placed at grade or at bankfull elevation_ The second pipe should
remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage. Where disrupted,
natural floodplain benching should be restored upstream and downstream of the
secand,~"dry", pipe.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or widening is
required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of structures usually
causes a decrease in water velocity causing sediment deposition chat will require future
maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on the streambed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location
with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour.should be designed and
located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing
stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed
and the approach fills removed from the 100-year floodplain. Approach fills should be removed
down to the natural ground elevation. The area should be stabilized with grass and planted with
native trey species. If the azea that is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore
the area to wetlands. If successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject
project or other projects in the watershed. .
Project specific comments:
1. B-330Q -Ache County - Bridge No. ~~' over Buffalo Creek Buffalo Creek at this Iocation
in all likelihood contains wild trout. The bridge i~ located at a major intersection. A culvert
would be a hindrance to fish as well as wildlife passage. We will require a trout moratorium
from Oct. 15a' -April 15a`.
2. ' B-3607 - Ashe County - Bridge No. 503 over Buffalo Creek. Buffalo Creek at the bridge
replacement in all likelihood contains wild trout. We will require a trout moratorium from
Oct.15`t' -April 15~.
3. B-3714 -Wilkes County - Bridge No. 83 over Mulberry Creek Mulberry Creek supports
small mouth bass and redbreast sunfish at this location. We will require a moratorium from
May i~` -June 30~.

. ,
-,
Bridge Scopings
4
08/06/01
4. B-3922 -Watauga County - Bridge No. 316 over Cove Creek Cove Creek is designated
Public Mountain Trout Water_ In addition to stocked fish, it contains some wild brown trout.
We will require a trout moratorium from Oct. IS`s -April ISei. The bridge should be
replaced with another bridge. We are concerned that a box culvert will impede fish passage.
5. B-3925 -Watauga County -Bridge No. 3 5 over Meat Camp Creek Meat Camp Creek is
designated Public Mountain Trout Water. In addition to stocked fish, it contains some wild
brown trout We will require a trout moratorium from Oct. 15~ -April I Su'. The bridge
should be replaced with another bridge. We are concerned that a box culvert will impede
fish passage.
6. B-396 -Watauga County - Bridge No. 36 over Meat Camp Creek Same comments as B-
3925.
7. 8-3928 -Watauga-Ache County - Bridge No. 334 aver South Fork New Rivet We will
require a small mouth bass! rock bass moratorium from May 1~ -June 30~. The South Fork
New River is high quality water and designated "scenic" by the National Wild and Scenic
Rivers System. The bridge should be replaced with another bridge. This is a popular canoe
section; the new bridge should be at the appropriate height so boaters do not have to portage.
8. B-4007 - Alieghany Caunty -Bridge No. 38 over Crab Creek. Grab Creek is in a High
Quality Water Zone and is designated Hatchery Supported Water. We will require a trout
moratorium from Oct. I5~ -April 15`h.
9. B-4010 - Ashe County -Bridge No. '~ over South Fork New River. We will require a small
mouth bass! rock bass moratorium from May 1~` -June 30u'_ The South ForklVew River is
high quality water and designated "scenic" by the National Wiid and Scenie Rivers S~rstem.
The bridge should be replaced with another bridge.
We request thatNCDOT routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT .should install and maintain
sedimentation control measures throughout the life ofthe project and prevent wet concrete from
contacting water in or entering into these streams. We are comfortable with the bridge
demolition proposed, but are concerned about aquatic life passage with the new structure.
Replacement of bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box
culverts, is recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along
streambanks; reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway crossings.
. If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding bridge
replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity to review and
comment on these projects.

0 0 . I t~ cr.o ... ~ _ ..
ES~ OFWATER
~ 5 ~- `o~ PG
~ ~
~ r
y
O '~
.~
-. r,. , .
,: ;
Michaol F. Easloy, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Dopartmont of Environmont and Natural R©sourcos
Grogary J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
' Acting Director
Division of Waterauality
August 15, 2001
MEMORANDUM
To: Elmo Vance, NCDOT Project Developme & Environmental Analysis Branch
Through: John Dorney, NC Division of Water Qualit
From: Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele, NCDOT Coordi or GC~J -
Subject: Scoping Comments for Eleven Bridge Replacement Projects -
This-memo is in reference to your correspondence dated July 23, 2001, in which you requested Scoping
continents for the above projects. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) requests that the following
topics be addressed: .
1. Bridge projects shall comply with the requirements for Water Supply Watershed, High Quality
Waters and OutstandingResource Waters with regards to stormwater. management, sedimentation
and erosion control and buffer requirements. .
2. Ensure that sediment & erosion control measures are not placed in wetlands.
3. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Prior to the
approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the contractor must obtain a 401 certification
.from DWQ. .
4. The DWQ prefers that the structures that will be replacing the eleven deficient bridges will be
bridges.. All structures shall be installed in such a manner that the original stream profiles are.not
altered (i.e. the depth of the channel must not be reduced by a widening of the streambed).
Existing stream dimensions are to be maintained above.and below locations of culvert extensions.
5. All work shall be performed during low flow conditions.
6. Disturbance of the stream channels must be limited to only .what is necessary to perform the
bridge demolition and removal. Heavy equipment must be operated from the banks rather than in
the stream channel in order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing
other pollutants into the stream
7. All. mechanized equipment operated near surface waters should be regularly inspected and
.maintained to prevent contamination of stream waters from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or '
' other toxic materials.
8. Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required~for these projects (e.g.,
applications requesting coverage under NW i4 or Regional General Permit.198200031). Please be
aware that 401 certification may be denied if wetland or water impacts have not been avoided and
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality '
standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please contact Cynthia Van Der Wiele at [phone].
Pc: Eric Alsmeyer, USACE Raleigh Field Office .
Steve Lund, USACE Asheville Field Office
Tom McCartney, USFWS Raleigh Field Office
Morello Buncick, USFWS Asheville Field Office -
MaryEllenHaggard, NCWRC
Filr C'ngj
North Carclina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)

,~~r
~ ~~AO~
~. ~~-.~
~~m.
vQ/Y~CQ.
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
_ ___ _ . State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Archives and History
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
August 27, 2001 .
MEMORANDUM
To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch ~ •
'~G
From: David Brook ~ ~ .~ (tom (,~.
Deputy State Histo Preservation Officer ~ .29
. Re: ~ Replace Bridge No. 57 on NC 88 over Buffalo Creek., B-330.0, ~~
Ashe~ County, ER 02-7210 ~ .
Thank,you for your letter of July 23, 2001, concerning the above project.
Sirice.there is no_.aichitectural~ survey for the Ache County, we recommend that an architectural historian
• with.NCDOT identify and evaluate- all-properties over fifty years of age within the project area and report
the findings'to us, including the briiige which was built in~I949. •
• ~~ -There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project azea. Based ion our.present . •
-- knowledge of the area,.it is unlikely that anp archaeological resources, which maybe 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.
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,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT ~.
. Thomas Padgett, NCDOT
. D. ~~~
D
AUG 3 1 2001
. RUMMtt_, Kt_tPl'ER & KARL
RALEIGH, NC
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
Administration 507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4617 [phone] •733-8653
Restoration 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh , NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4613 [phone].715-4801
Survey & Planning 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4618 [phone] •715-4801

Federal Aid # BR' 88(1) TIP # B-3300 , . ~ounty: Ashe
CONCURRENCE FORI\i FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIE3LE FOR
THE NAT[ONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 57 on NC 88 over Buffalo Creek
On 10/18/Ol, representatives ofthe
Q~j North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
[`~ Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
^ Other
Reviewed the subject project at
^ ~ Scoping meeting
^ Historic architectural resources photograph review session/consultation
^ Other
All parties present agreed
^ There are no properties over fifty.years old within the project's area of potential effects.
There are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria Consideration G within the
project's area of potential effects.
[,~~ There are properties over fifty years old within the project's Area of Potential Effects (APE), but based on the
historical information available and the photographs of each property, properties identified as
'gr-t~q'L 5 ~' 3 Prao ~'" 9 are considered not eligible for the National Register and no further evaluation
of them is necessary.
There are no National Register•listed or Study Listed properties within the project's area of potential effects.
^ All properties greater than 50 years of age located in the APE have been considered at this consultation, and based
upon the above concurrence, all compliance for historic architecture with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has been completed for this project. .
.There are no historic properties affected by this project. (Attach any notes or documents as needed)
Signed:'
10 •l8•~
Representative DO Date

FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency
/o /~ ~/v
G~~
Representative, HPO ~ Date
G'~ V lJa~ ~ ~~ D~ f n J b
State Historic Preservation Officer ~ Date
If a survey report is prepared, a final copy of this form and the attached list will be included.

SAAR-27-01 14:43 FRGti1-ASHE COU~~TY SCHOOLS 3362467609 T-
_Ashe County •soard Qf Education
)onnie R. Jnhpsun $uyr(illlCn[(frtr • Chxrlci (_.I:inK. Chp~rmrtn • CharlcR ti. Jon~a, Jr:, /qC Chu~rmun • kicharG Blac6barn
PQ Box 604, 320 South Sireai • Courier Ivo. 15-65-O1 • ~enersoh: North Cgrollna 28640
• (33a) 2a6-7175 [phone] Fax
i
• April 2?, 2001
Ms. Elizabeth Mack.• . .
~ •Rummol, Klepper & Kahl ~ ~ .
Raleigh, NC
Dear Ms. Mack:
I apologize for being so late with this. I have listed t~elow the information you requested on certain
bridges in Ashe County. •
Bridge #57 (T.I.P. B=3300)
We currently hav4 38 buses crossing this bridge both mnming and afternoon, which makas the bridge •
the most holv}ly used by our buses. We have only one detour routC, which would add 35 - 40 minutes
(one way) for each bus. This would impact us negativCly in two ways. First, ihis'would cost our
• jransportatiou budget an additional $51,000, Secondly, we would have to parlc up students oarlier in
the ttwmirtg and deliver theta later in the afternoon. These.impacts are titiacceptable. Hnpefully,•a
,temporary on-sitz dolour near Bridge #57 could be an option.
Brid e~#S03 (~'.1.P. B-3607)
~ ~•~~This bridge is the one and only ontrance to our middle school with about 15 buses crossing ttwrnino
•o\ and afternoon_ poly understanding is that we could cotttinue to tee this bridga wl}ile the new one is
w under construction.' /S•s~s£r co,~+L ,~, a„~P s-~, 3: 6•.s>:sCsPc~;wr c k~~. ca,~,L ,,. ~ /rA.~r.~-A~iYt
JSSKsfs l~~s, 3S~.scs ca,.,-. c. ,r a.~d lcaoL -'Pail . • .
Bri #7 (T.I.P. B~01 U)
We currently have 4 buses crossing this bridge morning and afternoon. There is a detour route, which
would add about ?5 minutes. V/hile this would also•irnpact our budget and>•i~ing tirr;e, it is within
~ceeptabte limits.
If you have further questions, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
. fir"
len Cooper•
• Transportation Director
ICVC:dgp

RELOCATION REPORT ~~

North Carolina Department of Transportation
~L_=1 .,.~. ~ - -
couNTV Ashe Altemate 1 of 3 Altemate
oJecT:
NO.; B-3300 F.A. PROJECT
ESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Bridge No. 57 Over 8uffa10 CfeCk

ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
ype of
Displacees
Owners
Tenants
Total
Minorities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP
esidential 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 ~~ 'YALUEOFDWELLINfi DSS:DWELUNOAVAILADLE`;
uSine55eS 0 _
0 0 0 0 Owners. Tenants For Salo -~ For Ront
Farms 0 0 0 0 0.20M S 0-150 0.20M S 0-150 0
on-Profit - >ANSVrER nLC ouesTioNS ~ ~. 20-40M 150-250 1 20-40M 4 150-250 5
250-400
40
70 40-70M 10 250-400 12
No YES" answers.
Ex lain all ' ra
-
Yes . t00
0 400-600 0- 15 400600 f3
X Will special relocation services be necessary?
1 M
•
7 ~
. 1
X Will schools or churches be affect by
2 100 uP 600 uP 100 uP 30 G00 uP 4

~ ,,
.~ .
displacement? TOTAL 0 ~ 'S '1
= 59 ~ 29
~. ,:~ a
X 4
r...._
Will business services still be available after
3
,REMAR
KS (raospond by,Nu
mbot') ;, . ,
' . . 3) Similar business services In tho area of tho project are availablo and aro
~" project? d
t
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so, e
.
Not being affec
contact with local realtors
ined b
d
t
bili
l
-- indicate size, type, estimated number of ,
y
erm
e
a
ty
6) Housing avai
-*'Y employees, minorities, etc. Llst(ngs for rental and solo in local newspapers.
eeded
d
t
l
X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage? .
e
as n
emen
8) Wiil be Imp
Authorit
'
i
H
Source for available housing (list).
6 y.
ous
ng
11) Thru Asho County
. s and newspaper listings
tate listin
l
l
l
X 7. Will additional housing programs bo needed? g
rea
es
oca
12) Yes, as Indicated by
l
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered? .
Sale and renta

X 9. Are there largo, disabled, elderly, etc. 14) See Item No. 6.
-~ families?

X 10. Will public housing be needed for project?
X 11.' Is public housing available?
list was compiled from part(al Ilst and
usin
il
bl
h
A
X 12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing o
g
o
va
a
Comments: (A)
to tho total availablo housing In Ashe County. (B) Thero
dic
t I
__ ~;~ housing available during relocation period? a
n
Does no
tial rclocatces aro minority howovor this
that
t
i
i
X 13. Will there bo a problem of housing within en
po
l
ty
-. Is a possib
mined until initial contacts with thoso affected aro
d
te
b
n
'
, financial means? e
r
o
ot
Can
_
,
X 14. Are suitab-o business sites available (list Made.

- - - _ - - source).
15. Number months estimated to complete

- RELOCATION? 12' ~ ~',7;
2
5-
i~ -
30
,rt,
~
"
-a9~ v ~ , .~
~~; , ~ x
D
i h of Wa A ent Date a:=:<~:~.~?'~' rov d b
o
n.~„t„-,~ ft t f`nnv Ctatn Ralnrafinn Anent
~ Form 15.4 Revised 1 v/uv
2 Copy . Division Right of Way
Office

' RELOCATION REPORT ~~
E.I.S. ~ CORRIDOR ~ DESIGN
North Carolina Department of Transportation
OJECT: COUNTY Ashe Alternate 2 of 3 Aitemate
NO.: B-3300 F.A. PROJECT
CRIPTION OF PROJECT: BfldgC No. 57 Over Buffalo Cfeek
is ~- . ~ -.vK .:~.: ~~
,.
ESTIMATED ~ISPLACEES
'; lN¢OME LEVEL
e of
splacees
Owners
Tenants
Total
Minorities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35.50M
50 UP
sidentiai 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
Sine55eS 0 0 0 0 > VALUE OF DWELLING - DSS DWELLINO:AVAILADLE
trms 0 0 0 0 Owneru Tenants ~ For Salo For Rent
n-Profit 0 0 0 0 0-20r.1 3 0-150 0-20M S 0-150 0
'~:.' ANSWER'ALL I]uEST1oNS , 20-40M 150-250 1 20-40M 4 150-250 5
es No Ex lain a!!'YES"answers. 40.70at 250-400 40.70M 10 250-400 12
X 1. Will special relocation services be necessary?
• 70-t00M 400-600 70-
100NI ~ 15 400-600 8
X 2. Will schools or churches be affect by 100 uP 600 uP 100 uP 30 600 uP. 4
M,; K ,~,
r•~ displacement? TOTAL 0 ,''k ;~ a_ 1 ~, w :".°_,`-,; 59 ;'~;' ~ 29
3. Will business services still be available after ' RE-~ARks (Raspond:by: f~umbar) -
; 4 ,' ,; project? 3) Similar business services in the area of thn project aro available and aro
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so, Not being affected.
-
_ ' -
~,r.; indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, eta 6) Housing availability determined by contact with local realtors,
Listings for rental and sale in local newspapers.
X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage? 6) Wilt ba Implemented as needed.
6. Source for available housing (list). 11) Thru Asha County Housing Authority.
X 7. Will additional housing programs be needed? 12) Yes, as indicated by local real estate listings artd newspaper listings
X .. 8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered? Sale and rental.
X 9.. Ara there large, disabled, elderly, etc. 14) See Item No. 6.
- =:~~ families?
X. 10. Will public housing be needed for project?
X 11. Is public housing available?
X 12. Is it felt there will bQ adequate DSS housing Comments: (A) Available housing list was compiled from partial list and
-_ -_ - _
~ housing available during relocation period? Does not Indicato the total availabte housing in Asho County. (Ei) Thera
X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within Is a possibility that potential relocatces aro minority however this
°~° ; = financial means? Cannot be determined until Initial contacts with thoso affected are
X 14. Are suitable business sites available (list Made.
source).
15. Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION? 12 a,
~
~
~ ,~
~
-3_62

//J/~~~ ~
/ 1- ~
~3~.~-Li ~-a~ U~ ~1': Y"- .
4775 :F ~;

-y
1
'
'
~
am
.

Ri ht of Wa A ent Date ..
t~l
_~. y
.,.
f.~.
~~r~~+.-.,.~,b;~
A oved Dat
Form 15.4 Revised 10/00 Original A 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
2 Copy Division Right oI Way
Office

RELOCATION REPORT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
r ' E.I.S. ~ CORRIDOR ~ OESiGN
OJECT: COUNTY Ashe Alternate 3 of 3 Aitemate
. NO.: 8-3300 F.A. PROJECT
scRIPTION of PRaEC7: Bridge No. 57 over Buffalo Creek
1,,.•
fu .~ ~: .,_. ,
__ ... _ _
ESTIMATED.OISPLACEES _ IrrCOMB LEVEL-
_.
e of I
~isplacees Owners Tenants Total Minorities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M ~~_Fnne ~n ~ io
sidential 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 -0 0
5inesses 0 0 0 0 ;:<VAWEOFDWELLING.'.' DS3DWELLING:AVAICAOLE
.+..~.,, , .. , v n ~ v ~ ~ ^ a~wnura n 1 CflH fliF. ~ ~•nr c~~n ~ ~ n r... o....• ~
on•Protit 0 0 0 0 0-2oti+t s 0-150 0-zora
s also
0
ANSWER Alt.'GUesnoNS 20-40M 150-250 1 20-40M 4 150-250 5

X
t. m,a wc~:a
WAI special relocation services be necessary?
X 2. Will schools or churches be affect by
displacement?
X 3. Will business services still be available after
-_ - project?
X 4. Will any business be displaced? I(so,
indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc.
X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage?
6. Source for available housing (list).
X 7. Will additional housing programs be needed?
X S. Should Last Resort Housing be considered?
X 9. Aro there large, disabled, elderly, etc.
- ~;, __.,;`; families?
X 10. Will public housing be needed for project?
X 11. Is public housing available?
X 12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing
- . - housing available during relocation period?
X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within
- _ - financial means?
X 14. Are suitable business sites available (list
= - source).
15. Number months estimated to complete
- - RELOCATION? 12
yu-iura vu-4uu 4D-7DM 10 250-400 12
70-100M 400-600 70- 15 400-G00 ti
100r.1
100 UP 600 UP 100 UP 30 G00 UP 4
rorAL 0 V:~ t ?7 1 ~ 59 ~;:~ ='~ 29
;' REMARKS(ROSpond bj~r~u mbor) ~•
3) Similar. business services In tho area of tho project aro availablo and aro
Not being affected.
6) Housing availability detemtlned by contact with local realtors,
Listings for rental and sale in local newspapers.
13) Will be implemented as needed.
11) Thru Asho County Housing Authority.
12) Yes, as (ndlcated by local real estato listings and newspaper listings
Salo and rental.
14) See Item No. 6.
Comments: (A) Availablo housing Ifst was compiled from partial Ilst and
Does nat Indicato tho total avaitablo housing In Asho County. (Q) Thcro
Is a possibility that potential relocateas aro minority however this
Cannot bo detennlned until Initial contacts with those affected aro
Made:
c5 i nn ,q~ Uv~ ~ ` 3 rb2
Right of Way Agent Date
orm 15.4 Revised 10/00
- :`=:1 ~
Original 8~ 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
2 Copy Division Right of Way
Office

o~ NoerH
~`~~ ~~ REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE
~; ~~ _~~
N0.57 OVER BUFFALO CREEK
Asl~e County, North Carolina
October 2001 T.LP. No. I3-3300 Ne-vsleuer No. 1
NCDOT to Replace Bridge No. 57
This newsletter is published by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to inform citizens about the
proposed replacement of Bridge No. 57 on NC 88 over Buffalo Creek (tributary [o the Ne~v River) in Ache County.
Right-of-~vay acquisition and construction are scheduled to begin in 2003 and 2004, respectively.
Description of Alternatives
Planning Studies Initiated
During Step 1 of the planning process, information was
collected on the existing human and natural environments.
This information was used to identify preliminary
alternatives for replacing Bridge No. 57: In Step Z the
preliminary alternatives were evaluated and, based on their
potential impacts, three "reasonable and feasible"
alternatives were selected for detailed environmental studies.
Step 3 involves conducting detailed environmental studies
for the "reasonable and feasible" alternatives. Following
completion of the detailed studies, Step 4 will consist of
selecting the preferred alternative. Step 5 will be the
completion of the environmental document.
Step 3 includes the evaluation of three "reasonable and
feasible" alternatives. These alternatives are briefly
described below:
Alternative 1 - replaces bridge on the existing
alignment. An "off-site" detour will be used to
maintain traffic during the construction period.
Alternative 2 - replaces bridge on the existing
alignment. An "on-site" detour located along the west
side (upstream) will be used to maintain traffic during
the construction period.
Alternative 3 -replaces bridge on new alignment
approximately 50 feet west (upstream) of the existing
location. Traffic will be maintained on the existing
bridges during constniction.
NOTICE
Citizens Informational Workshop
DATE: November 7, 2001
TIME: 4:00 - 7:00 PM
PLACE: Ashe County Cooperative Extension
134 Government Circle
Jefferson, NC (ls` floor, conference room)
Informational Worlcsl~op
A Citizens Informational Workshop will be held on
November 7, 2001 at the Ashe County Cooperative
Extension Building from 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. The
workshop will provide citizens and public officials an
opportunity to review and comment on the preliminary
alternatives and the proposed project schedule. The
workshop will be an open-house format with informal
discussions on an individual basis.
"T.LP. No. 8-3300

~ t ~ ~~ '"
_..__._
~~~~~ ~ ~,...-r ~ 2';l.t ~`
,~,°" ill;i ~ t f3 i ;.>7 ~~,...._~ti`.'`""'_.~"' ;~;,,. C~~-"--~'~n , ~ ~f,< ;~ ~ }:
t ,1 - } _~ f
s .
~, ~;~ ~ s-~t ~~,. ~_.~. ~~ ~ _... ~
.~ }1a3 ~'`~ 1347 '~ ~'k~ r s~~ ;~€<':~, xa
,,/ `
_..
13dQ'` (i ;;.fC[7 88 ~ ~~.~ 1bd4
' ir~~t . ~ ~~ 1.r'
i ha q
1503 '~ ~._ ,r r ~ ,
Ciif#on tt2a 1}s~ ~ t~o~ tst2 -~
'Ci~• ~}r;s~ ~~
~' !R 114ti
` ~
tlg3 ~ f'C~t .1,F~02
~~ 1131 /''~1t _~
114A 1132 ~ ~ - ~~
~ 1271.E 1190 SRIf,'1}}(Said
Tree 1.23 ~ 1?24 1131 ~~ Paddy ,, ,~ 121 ~~"
Top , Ch.
~,, ~,.
133 1133 i~iF , .
f 1125 144 ~ 111
.r~
j ~ Buffala 121
l~~N, ~~ _ ti'JEST
JE~~ERSC3N : t1T. JEFFERSON
,: .
'~ ' ~~ : ~ 1139 POp. 1,102 ~ ,
221
..
,r„E
'i,~z >', 1133
,..
iiSd/'~
1139 QCC7Vir` +r"" 't._
;.
Gcek: ~ 1147
1133 ~ `~`
1 0 1 2 trilLfS _~"r"~,, P;,n~l Ccrclir.~ 31L'Nii+.*+«t o(Ttw~l Nvi irt~~~n
rr` • ~ t' ,..~rlti PrLj~1 Q'Pr`~~ ~J 44-.ri t1 ~.:~
~~;rcr,~r4clA~^,~ j~sis Etcndt
...,
J ` ~s~x~~lo ~r€;;w1
t
T I.~'. R~.a :J-~~CC~
EKE

r

~~~~~~
~aaki~rg Na~rt
;,
~.
~` - 1
i
~;
.:~
F
f 9
i !
i ~
.i

NCDOT Welcomes Citizen Inaut
Public Involvement is an important part of the planning process. The North Carolina Department of Transportation is
committed to ensuring all issues of concern to the public are addressed and considered before any recommendations or
decisions are made. Your opinions are important to us! Please send your comments to tt~e addresses listed below:
Mr. Elmo Vance
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1598
[phone] Ext. 262
[e-mail]
or Mr. J. T. Peacock, Jr., P.E.
or Ms. Kimberly S. Leiglrt
Rummel, Klepper & Kahl, LLP
5800 Faringdon Place, Suite 105
Raleigh, NC 27609-3960
[phone]
[e-mail]
If you have questions on other transportation projects, please call our Customer Setice Office toll free at I-877-DOT-4YOU
or check our website at www.dot.state.nc.us.
HOTLINE
A project HOTLINE has been established to provide a
toll free telephone number for information requests.
Please call [phone] for information regarding
the replacement of Bridge No. 57 over Buffalo Creek
(T.I.P. No. B-3300).
Mr. Elmo Vance
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED
PROJECT SCHEDULE
The schedule for the project is shown below:
Fall 2002 Complete Environmental Document
Fall 2002 Select Preferred Alternative
2003 Begin Right-of-Way Acquisition
2004 Begin Construction
T.LP. No. 8-3300