20040726 Ver 1_Complete File_20040503

Min
•? q.y roses
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

0 4 0-7 2 FY.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR
PO BOX 3279, ASHEVILLE, NC 28802
April 30, 2004
SECRETARY
WETLANDS /,016I 6up
Mr. Steve Lund
US Army Corps of Engineers
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Subject: Nationwide Permit #23
B-3815, Bridge No. 79
Burke County, NC
Dear Mr. Lund:
MAY 1, '? %:SfV
,WATER QUA
I have enclosed plan sheets and cross-sections, a PCN application for NWP #23, and a
vicinity map relative to the purchase order bridge replacement project on SR 1956, Burke
County, NC.
We propose to replace the existing timber/steel bridge with a triple barrel box culvert.
The new culvert will be 42 feet wide by 50 feet long. The current structure is in poor
condition and needs replacement. Construction activities will be conducted from dry
work areas whenever possible. Existing channel morphology will be maintained upstream
and downstream of the bridge. Riparian vegetation will be reestablished along disturbed
areas associated with project.
No federally listed species (threatened or endangered) or critical habitats will be affected
by the proposed project.
By copy of this letter, we request the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Coordinator, to comment directly to the Corps concerning the permit request.
Erosion control measures will be employed from the "Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Guidelines for Division Maintenance Operations" and reviewed by Mr. Ed Ingle,
Roadside Environmental Field Operations Engineer.
WETLANDS/ 401 GROUP
MAY 0 '1 2004
WATER QUALITY SECTION
Mr. Steve Lund
Page -2 Bridge No. 79, Burke County
April 30, 2004
The proposed project qualifies under DWQ General Certification 3403 and therefore two
copies for notification purpose have been forwarded to the NC Division of Water Quality,
401/Wetland Unit with an additional copy to Mike Parker, NC DWQ Asheville Regional
Office for review.
Your earliest consideration for this request would be greatly appreciated. If you have any
questions or information needs, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
91, P~
Roger D. Bryan
Division 13 Environmental Officer
Enclosures
cc: J. J. Swain, Jr., P.E.
Greg Shuler
B.T. Williams
Ron Linville
Ed Ingle
Mike Parker
Cynthia Van der Wiele
Office Use Only: Form Version April 2001
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 6,3 ! 2 6
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
1. Processing
Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
X Section 404 Permit
? Section 10 Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP 23
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: X
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: NC Department of Transportation
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3279
Asheville, NC 28802
Telephone Number: 828-251-6171 Fax Number: 828-251-6394
E-mail Address: rdbryanAdot. state. nc. us
2. Agent Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be
attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.) N/A
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Fax Number:
Page 1 of 8
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 79, Bailey Fork
2. T.I.P. or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):.B-3815
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN):
4. Location
County: Burke Nearest Town: Burkemont
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Bridge 79 is located off of US 64
south of I-40, Exit 103. Take SR 1949 from US 64 for approximately 1 mile then turn right
onto SR 1956.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 35°40'46" N 81°42'41" W
(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.)
6. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:
Existing Bridge
7. Property size (acres): 0.1
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Bailey Creek (Class C)
9. River Basin: French Broad
(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/.)
Page 2 of 8
10. Describe the purpose of the proposed work: We propose to replace the existing timber/I-
beam steel bridge with a triple barrel box culvert. The new bridge will be 50' long by 42'
wide. An additional 10 feet of rip rap will be place at the culvert inlet.
11. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: Excavator, crane, and
trucks.
12. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: rural, homes, wooded
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.
N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any additional permit requests anticipated for this project in the future? If so, describe the
anticipated work, and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current
application: No, no future plans.
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
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact Area of Located within Distance to
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact 100-year Floodplain** Nearest Stream Type of Wetland***
indicate on ma) acres es/no (linear feet)
N/A
Page 3 of 8

List eacn impact separately and identity 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:?/\vww.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.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: 0.0
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0.0
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma)
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
linear feet)
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
leasespecify)
Sta. 10+00 Box Culvert 50 Bailey Creek 15 ft P
Sta. 10+00 Rip-rap 10 Bailey Creek 15 ft P

* 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.uses.Rov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozonc.cont,
www.mapqucst.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 60 feet.
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S.
Open Water Impact Area of Name of Waterbod
y Type of Waterbody
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact (if applicable) (lake, pond, estuary, sound,
(indicate on ma (acres) bay, ocean, etc.
N/A
Page 4 of 8

List each impact separately and identity temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: till, 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.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
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.
The existing bridge must be replaced due to the poor condition of the structure.
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
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
Page 5 of 8
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.cnr.state.iic.us/ncwetlands/stn-ngide.httnl.
1. 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.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. 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):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
land?
Yes X 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)?
Page 6 of 8
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 X 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 (DWQ Only)
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
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No X 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

(square feet)
Multiplier Required

Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
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 (DWQ Only)
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.
No significant change in impervious surface. Stormwater will diverted through settline basins or
grass lined buffers vrior to entering the stream.
Page 7 of 8
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
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 (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No X
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No X
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).
With regard to hazardous spill basins, the road is not classified as an arterial route, therefore
hazardous spill basins are not required.
Appocant/AgenA Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.
Page 8 of 8
001-
120
+ , `) '`;
e
a
` • ss.? I
1 ^
s
"`?• ??? pi` ???/ /? ?? 1p?757
40,
r _ '' ? V : ??.. ? R=te ?•y... .
=law
7° W
Name: MORGANTON SOUTH Location: 035'40'48.8" N 081 ° 42' 41.14" W
Date: 4/30/2004 Caption: B-3815, Bridge 79
Scale: 1 inch equals 1000 feet SR 1956, Bailey Fork
Burke County, NC
• ?%
>o
k' 11 a 22
99
Iris `??"??.?.?.I /• •\
369
f4
1107 ,
a
2013 I 0133
r - x C4
2.01 ---- ?-
o]
I941 .02
r: _ I 969 '
g ,?
Illy 25
134
\ 2120 III I' - 19x1 `\ /
_$t ? ` p ? 1970 1
Lo'? '•\ 1111, fi,`?g 1 ?r
\•'? ? p s -1106 ? /'7' -----------------
P68 :i
8 - \ 0
113 21102 I / \
1986 / 1993 ?
1112 ??
!NN- 1987 ./ .17
/ ? 1112 1947 1"9
W2 69
(UNINC.( 1 7 / 1
/ a.mb.l. °j s ti
215 - -i n 1970 9212 ( 026 f
\' G - - 1.x.9 FI \ , 1971 •\ ? / 19" 1"2
1949
1950 im
904
a m 299 1,
az ' \
i 19M
/ 2019
1976 J ? \
7 S i 974
1936
1951 k 79 0 1 2m
xI
/ O l 922
® \ .11
/ .
-000
/•W 1936
1 !.'. A \
,y Ig6p ; 196] 2017 -936
MP
O \
3922
1974
y
I .1903
1
? I w*wnoM 1
1978 \ i
\ \ i
1957
14

1
Figure 1. B-3815, Bridge 79, Bailey Fork, Burke County, NC.
PROJ. REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO. TOTAL SHEE
STATE PROD. NO. F.A. PROJ. NO. DESCRIPTIOr
HAZARDOUS SPILL BASIN CHECKLIST
RIVER BASIN: CATAWBA RIVER
WATER QUALITY CRITERIA:
I L J 1\ V
STREAM CROSSING BLUE LINE ON USGS El =
ORW O
WSI
WS 11,111 OR IV, CROSSING WITHIN 0.5mi OF W.S. CRITICAL AREA O
ROADWAY CRITERIA:
ROUTE DESIGNATION- YES NO
ARTERIAL URBAN
ARTERIAL RURAL
YES NO
IS A HAZARDOUS SPILL BASIN REQUIRED? 0
STREAM CLASSIFICATION "C"e
A DENOTES ROD SOUNDING
I? i I L W
- - Ln
• ?I N ?? ? o m
+ II
00
Q 50
V
u
+
O
O
W
O
O
L-D
O
O
O
+
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
w
'o
"U

Cf)
CO
W
0 (n
o

0 -I D
o D
m r-
(
O

\ -0 D
U
U
0
O O
O

O ?

^

, 1
r `i
1 ? 1
1
1
1

n y
C
r I

<
D

--1 I I
F)
0
C°
rn
n
I )D C
r
<
<
I I D

m
I I I ?

r
o
ni
, ,

LISH

? - f+l g
?
W I lh ?
Q d ? III
co I I Oil
c
c
W
N X
v
cn

ox m
I
z ' I (/)
v IE --?
r ? D
c I to I O
m N
D Ln

o
i m

' I I (n o
LID
o ^

Q (a11?
k ?
N
Q
m
n
m
Z
0
n
C
m

0

,
1
- 1
I
1
.
1

I
- I
I
1
I
I 1
1
I .1 1
1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
I
I I
I I
I I

I I
1
1
I
I
I I
i
1
II L
I

'

I T T ; 5
1
11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 4 1 1 R M I 11 1 11 1 1 1 % , I 1
I
I
• ? I I
I
I ,I 1
I
1
1
1
I
I 1

'I 1
1

I, I
I I

I I
I

r I

I T T R T
1
M A 1 1 1 1 1 ?

I j pp
I
1

I
, . ,,
II

V` I

DO
+
O
+
O
O
+
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
%,* y
STATE. OF NORTH CAROLINA
;MAC' 2 V { .

DEPARTNENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
Ms. Cynthia Van der Wiele
DENR - Division of Water Quality
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699
?LMY TIPPE
May 6, 2003
VVETLANDS1401 G
401 GRO
MAY 1 9 ?0(1.3
'NATER QUALITYSECTION
RE: Request for comments on Bridge Replacement Projects B-3813, B-3815, B-3874,
B-3905, B-3907, B-3910, B-3913, and B-4329.
Dear Ms. Van der Wiele:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is preparing the planning
and environmental studies for the replacement of the subject bridges. We anticipate that the
projects will be processed as Programmatic Categorical Exclusions. The bridge replacement
projects are included in NCDOT's 2002-2008 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
The purpose of this letter is to solicit your input concerning the potential impact of the
proposed projects upon social, economic, demographic, land use or environmental conditions
near the projects. A vicinity map is attached for each project, described below.
¦ B-3813, Buncombe County, Division 13, Replace Bridge No. 249 and Bridge No. 250
on SR 1742 (Edna Roberts Road) over Flat Creek, west of Weaverville.
¦ B-3815, Burke County, Division 13, Replace Bridge No. 79 on SR 1956 over Bailey
Fork Creek, south of Salem.
¦ B-3874, McDowell County, Division 13, Replace Bridge No. 68 on SR 1747 (Stacy
Hill Road) over Thompsons Fork Creek, east of Marion.
¦ B-3905, Rutherford County, Division 13, Replace Bridge No. 5 on SR 2173
(Washington Street) over Brackets Creek, in Forest City.
¦ B-3907, Stanly County, Division 10, Replace Bridge No. 135 on SRI 147 (Polk Ford
Road) over Rock Hole Creek, near Stanfield.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE UNIT FAX: [phone] BERYL ROAD
1565 MAIL SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH, NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1565 WEBSITE: WWWDOH. DOT. STATE. NC.US
¦ B-3910, Surry County, Division 11, Replace Bridge No. 37 on SR 1330 (Haystack
Road) over the Mitchell River (Tanasee Gap Road) near Devotion.
¦ B-3913, Surry County, Division 11, Replace Bridge No. 306 on SR 1801 (Campbell
Road) over Big Creek, east of Woodville.
¦ B-4329, Yadkin County, Division 11, Replace Bridge No. 1 on SR 1570 (Dinkins
Bottom Road) over Deep Creek, east of Yadkinville.
Please note that there will be no formal interagency scoping meeting for these projects.
This letter constitutes solicitation for scoping comments related to the projects. To allow us to
fully evaluate the impacts of the proposed projects, please respond in writing by June 9, 2003
concerning any beneficial or adverse impacts of the proposed projects relating to the interest of
your agency.
If you have any questions or comments concerning these projects, please contact me at
[phone], ext. 8277. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Mike Summers
Project Manager
Bridge Maintenance Unit
LWM/ms
Attachment
Level I Assessment
j The observer is to survey a minimum of 500 feet of stream, preferably in an upstream direction starting above
id the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average stream conditions. To perform a
]cation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the description which best fits the
and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions, select an intermediate score. A
is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Fork Location/road: _SR 1956 (Road Name_ Jenkins Road )County Burke
Date / 8 Digit HUC
$
Stream Order Catchment Size (miz)
Longitude Ecoregion: ? P ? Slate Belt ? Triassic 0 Sand Hills
Agency Identification/Tracking Information (TIP#, Action#, etc.)
Observer(s)
B-3815
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location.
Visible Land Use: 35_%Forest _20_%Residential 10_%Active Pasture 25 % Active Crops
_10_%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Observed driving through watershed or from maps, aerial photos, etc.
Watershed land use : X?Forest X?Agriculture X?Urban ? Animal operations upstream ? Commercial
* The following three (3) parameters are all estimated:
Width: (ft) Current wet width - Stream-231 Channel (at top of bank) ? Width variable 211-12"
Stream Depth: (ft) Riffles - Avg Max Pools - Avg Max.
Bank Height (from deepest part of channel (in riffle or run) to top of bank): (ft)
Bank Angle: ° or ? NA (Vertical is 90°, horizontal is 0°. Angles > 90° indicate slope is towards mid-channel, < 901
indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.)
?Channelized Ditch
?Manmade Stabilization
X?Deeply incised
?Steep,straight banks
?Recent overbank deposits
?Excessive periphyton growth
General Observations
?Dam upstream ?Other hydrologic alterations
?Rip-rap, cement, gabions ?Sediment/grade-control structure ?Berm/levee
?Both banks undercut at bend ?Channel filled in with sediment
X?Bar development ?Buried structures ?Exposed bedrock
?Heavy filamentous algae growth ?Green tinge ?Sewage smell
?Livestock with access to stream ?Evidence of human use (trash, foot paths, etc.)
Flow conditions : ?High X?Normal ?Low
Turbidity: X?Clear ? Slightly Turbid ?Turbid ?Tannic ?Milky ?Colored (from dyes)
Current Weather Conditions: Partly Cloudy
Photos: ?N X?Y ? Digital ?35mm
Basin Catawba Class -C
Recent Weather Conditions
Remarks: Substrate is sandy with some cobble Recent sediment deposit an alluvial fan upstream of bridge _somewhat incised
C-3 Timber and steel bridge with wooden wing walls, floor and rails
High rete
?b
<ya?
?` S??e? `'+\ Gana
o
a
Fairv?eW
? 'Pa
ad
o?nta?r Sh ?n °?N °W n ?.? ? Meadow ?
0
m
CU
I B-3815
Bridge No. 79
ey>??

Al_

Pie
tPeskel
L
CL±'
Q-a
e?
n
o?
K
v
(D
Ga-'eS
Burke County
x r
Legend
* NHP Sites
o TIP
DWQ Trout Waters
Streams
Primary Roads
Secondary Roads
0 265,000 530,000 1,060,000 1,590,000 2,120,000
Meters
Fi
ure
0 650,0%300,000 2,600,000 3,900,000 5,200,000 Data Source: g
Feet CGIA 2002

B-3815
Barbera H. Mulkey Engineering, Inc. USGS 7.5-Minute
P.C. Boa 33127
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636
TOPO9faPhIC
Project Vicinity
919-051-1912
919-651-1916F. Quadrangle:
Morganton South

Burke County, North Carolina

z?oz- -
1_ f _ F ?

O
WAr?r9
pG
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
July 9, 2003
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Summers, Project Manager
NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit
FROM: Cynthia F. Van Der Wiele, NCDOT Coordinator CUctl
SUBJECT: Scoping Review of NCDOT's proposed bridge replacement projects: B-3813, B-3815, B-3874,
B-3905, B-3907, B-3910, B-3913, and B-4329.
In reply to your correspondence dated May 6, 2003 (received June 12, 2002) in which you requested comments
for the referenced projects, the NC Division of Water Quality has the following comments:
I General Comments Rekardinje Bridxe Replacement Proiects
1. If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are used to replace the
bridge, then DWQ recommends the use of Nationwide Permit No. 14 rather than Nationwide Permit 23.
2. Bridge demolition should be performed using Best Management Practices developed by NCDOT.
3. DWQ prefers 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.
4. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream; stormwater should be directed across the
bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour holes, vegetated
'buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to NCDOT Best Management Practices for the
Protection of Surface Waters
5. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream. Concrete is mostly
made up of lime (calcium carbonate) and when in a dry or wet state (not hardened) calcium carbonate is very
soluble in water and has a pH of approximately 12. In an unhardened state concrete or cement will change the
pH of fresh water to very basic and will cause fish and other macroinvertebrate kills.
6. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
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 or mulched to
stabilize the soil and native tree species should be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'. If
possible, when using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with
chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact,
allows the area to re-vegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
8. A clear bank (rip rap-free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the steam underneath the
bridge.
* 4_d
N. C. 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)
ioioN P7- i-ruo; r.a,-p) 01Q-713-6893 (fax). thtto://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/newetlands)

9. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented prior
to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be maintained regularly, especially following rainfall
events.
10. Bare soil should be stabilized through vegetation or other means as quickly as feasible to prevent sedimentation
of water resources.
11. 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.
12. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to minimize
sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This equipment should
be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
IL General Comments if Replaciniz the Bridize with a Culvert
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for aquatic life and fish passage. Generally, the culvert or pipe invert
should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural streambed (measured from the natural thalweg depth). If
multiple barrels are required, barrels other than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream
bankfull or floodplain bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfield design). These should be reconnected to
floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by utilizing sills on the upstream end to restrict
or divert flow to the base flow barrel(s). Silled barrels should be filled with sediment so as not to cause noxious
or mosquito breeding conditions. Sufficient water depth should be provided in the base flow barrel during low
flows to accommodate fish movement. If culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched
baffles should be installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This should enhance aquatic life
passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by maintaining channel depth and flow regimes, and 3) by
providing resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms. In essence, the base flow barrel(s) should provide
a continuum of water depth and channel width without substantial modifications of velocity.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to remain dry during normal
flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever possible to avoid channel
realignment. Widening the stream channel must be avoided. Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet
end of structures typically decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased
maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
4. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that
precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be professionally designed,
sized, and installed.
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 tree species. Tall fescue should not be used in riparian areas. If the area 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.
III Proiect-Specific Comments
B-3813 Bridge 249 and Bride 250 over Flat Creek Buncombe Co.
Although this stream is listed as Class C, there are significant aquatic resources. DWQ would prefer these bridges
to be replaced with bridges.
B-3815 Bridge No 79 over Bailey Fork Creek, Burke Co.
Bailey Fork Creek is listed as WS-IV. There are 30-foot vegetated buffer requirements in WS waters in addition
to the requirements to minimize storm water runoff and maximize use of BMPs. Refer to 15A NCAC 2B
.0216(3)(b)(i)(F) and (G).
B-3874 Brid a No. 68 over Thom sons Fork Creek McDowell Co.
DWQ does not have any special concerns regarding this crossing. Refer to General Comments listed above.
B-3905 Bridize No 5 over Brackets Creek Rutherford Co.
Brackets Creek is listed as Class C, but appears to have wetlands surrounding it. Impacts should be avoided, if
practicable, and minimized. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in the wetlands.
B-3907 Bridge No 135 over Rock Hole Creek, Stanly Co.
DWQ does not have any special concerns regarding this crossing. Refer to General Comments listed above.
B-3910 Bridge No 37 over Mitchell River, Surry Co.
The Mitchell River is classified as B Tr ORW in the project area. As this is the State's highest water quality
classification, DWQ would hope that a spanning structure is planned for this crossing. In addition, we would
stress that NCDOT should use the highest possible BMPs for protecting this resource.
B-3913 Bridge 306 over Big Creek, Surrv Co.
Big Creek is classified as c Trout with a floodplain on both sides of the existing bridge. DWQ would prefer that
the replacement structure span the stream and the floodplain.
B-4329 Bridge No 1 over Deep Creek Yadkin Co.
Although Deep Creek is classified as C in this reach, there are aquatic species that are State and Federally listed.
In addition, DWQ is aware that there may be mussel populations on this site. We recommend a spanning
structure and maximizing the use of BMPs to minimize damage to these aquatic resources.
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: Steve Lund, USACE Asheville Field Office
John Thomas, USACE Raleigh Field Office
Chris Militscher, USEPA
Marla Chambers, NCWRC
File Copy
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
TO: Mike Summers, Project Manager
Bridge Maintenance Unit, NCDOT
FROM: Marla Chambers, Highway Projects Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program, NCWRC
DATE: July 8, 2003
SUBJECT: Scoping review of NCDOT's proposed bridge replacement projects B-3813, B-
3815, B-3874, B-3905, B-3907, B-3910, B-3913, B-4329 in Buncombe, Burke,
McDowell, Rutherford, Stanly, Surry and Yadkin Counties.
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has requested comments from
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) regarding impacts to fish and
wildlife resources resulting from the subject projects. Staff biologists have reviewed the
information provided and have the following preliminary comments. These comments are
provided in accordance with the 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).
Our standard recommendations for bridge replacement projects of this scope are as
follows:
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. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the
stream.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext. 281 0 Fax: [phone]
Bridge Scopings: Buncombe, Burke, McDowell,
Rutherford, Stanly, Surry & Yadkin Counties 2 July 8, 2003
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
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 or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should
be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'. If possible, when using
temporary structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area
with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the
stumps and root mat intact, allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimizes
disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the
steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources 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 that contain threatened or endangered species, Mr. Hal Bain with the
NCDOT - ONE should be notified. Special measures to protect these sensitive
species may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.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 by 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 for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
11. Sedimentation and erosion control measures 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 be planted on all bare soil
within 15 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.
A
Bridge Scopings: Buncombe, Burke, McDowell,
Rutherford, Stanly, Surry & Yadkin Counties 3 July 8, 2003
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 clean, 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. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are
used:
The culvert must be designed to allow for aquatic life and fish passage. Generally,
the culvert or pipe invert should be buried at least 1 foot below the natural streambed
(measured from the natural thalweg depth). If multiple barrels are required, barrels
other than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream bankfull or
floodplain bench elevation (similar to Lyonsfiold design). These should be
reconnected to floodplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by
utilizing sills on the upstream end to restrict or divert flow to the base flow barrel(s).
Silled barrels should be filled with sediment so as not to cause noxious or mosquito
breeding conditions. Sufficient water depth should be provided in the base flow
barrel during low flows to accommodate fish movement. If culverts are longer than
40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles should be installed in a manner that
mimics existing stream pattern. This should enhance aquatic life passage: 1) by
depositing sediments in the barrel, 2) by maintaining channel depth and flow regimes,
and 3) by providing resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms. In essence,
the base flow barrel(s) should provide a continuum of water depth and channel width
without substantial modifications of velocity.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to
remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever
possible to avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream channel must be
avoided. Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically
decreases water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires increased
maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
4. Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed
in a manner that precludes aquatic life passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures
should be professionally designed, sized, and installed.

Bridge Scopings: Buncombe, Burke, McDowell,
Rutherford, Stanly, Surry & Yadkin Counties 4 July 8, 2003
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 tree species. Tall fescue should not be used in riparian areas. If the area 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:
B-3813, Buncombe Co., Bridge No. 249 and Bridge No. 250 on SR 1742 (Edna Roberts
Road) over Flat Creek. Flat Creek is Class C waters and the area surrounding the bridges is
listed as a significant natural heritage area for the Flat Creek serpentine dike. Impacts should
be minimized. The American brook lamprey (Lampetra appendix), state Threatened, is
potentially present in the project area. Listed species present or potentially present
downstream in the French Broad River include blotched chub (Erimystax insignis), Federal
Species of Concern and state Significantly Rare; freshwater drum (Aplodinotus grunniens),
state Threatened; river carpsucker (Carpiodes carpio),'state Special Concern; Ohio lamprey
(kthyomyzon bdellium), state Significantly Rare; olive garter (Percina squamata), Federal
Species of Concern and state Special Concern; and logperch (P. caprodes), state Threatened.
Sediment and erosion control measures should adhere to the design standards for sensitive
watersheds.
2. B-3815, Burke Co., Bridge No. 79 on SR 1956 over Bailey Fork Creek. Bailey Fork Creek is
classified as WS-IV. Sediment and erosion control measures should adhere to the design
standards for sensitive watersheds to protect the water supply.
3. B-3874, McDowell Co., Bridge No. 68 on SR 1747 (Stacy Hill Road) over Thompsons Fork
Creek. Thompsons Fork Creek is Class C waters. No special concerns indicated at this time.
Standard requirements should apply.
4. B-3905, Rutherford Co., Bridge No. 5 on SR 2173 (Washington Street) over Brackets Creek.
Brackets Creek is Class C waters and appears to be surrounded by wetlands. Wetland
impacts should be avoided, if possible, and minimized to the greatest extent practicable.
Sediment and erosion control measures should adhere to the design standards for sensitive
watersheds to protect aquatic resources.
5. B-3907, Stanly Co., Bridge No. 135 on SR 1147 (Polk Ford Road) over Rock Hole Creek.
Rock Hole Creek is Class C waters. No special concerns indicated at this time. Standard
requirements should apply.
6. B-3910, Surry Co., Bridge No. 37 on SR 1330 (Haystack Road) over the Mitchell River.
Mitchell River is classified as B Tr ORW in the project area. A moratorium prohibiting in-
stream work and land disturbance within the 25-foot trout buffer is recommended from
It
Bridge Scopings: Buncombe, Burke, McDowell,
Rutherford, Stanly, Surry & Yadkin Counties 5 July 8, 2003
October 15 to April 15 to protect the egg and fry stages of brown trout. Sediment and
erosion control measures should adhere to the design standards for sensitive watersheds.
7. B-3913, Surry Co., Bridge No. 306 on SR 1801 (Campbell Road) over Big Creek. Big Creek
is classified as C Tr. No special concerns indicated at this time. Standard requirements
should apply.
8. B-4329, Yadkin Co., Bridge No. 1 on SR 1570 (Dinkins Bottom Road) over Deep Creek.
Deep Creek is Class C waters. The brook floater (Alasmidonta varicosa), Federal Special
Concern and state Endangered, is known from the vicinity and may occur in the project area.
Other state listed mussel species that could potentially occupy the site include notched
rainbow (Villosa constricta), Special Concern; eastern creekshell (V. delumbis), Significantly
Rare; and triangle floater (A. undulata), Threatened. A survey for mussel species should be
conducted.
We request that NCDOT 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 of the project and prevent wet concrete from
contacting water in or entering into these streams. 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.
cc: Cynthia Van Der Wiele, DWQ
Marella Buncick, USFWS
Sarah McRae, NBP