20071945 Ver 1_Application_20071116

y ~+' SfAtF u•
~ -
~~Q~~.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPART2VIEENT' OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
November 8, 2007
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
151 Patton Avenue- Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801
ATTN: Mr. David Baker
NCDOT Coordinator
~~~
/VO~• ~~
0
`'~T~~~s r:;: ~ ~~~; ~ ~~o~
'~N~~,~ „~M',f4kt „~
Wgrh_ .,
"h'~?n,~,~rh'
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
071945
SUBJECT: Nationwide 23 and 33 Permit Application for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 73 over Dales Creek on SR 1552.
McDowell County, Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1552(9),
Division 13, T.I.P. No. B-4197, Debit $570 from WBS Element
33544.1.1.
Dear Mr. Baker:
Please find enclosed the Preconstruction Notification, Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) acceptance letter, permit drawings, and half-size design plans for the above-
mentioned project. A Categorical Exclusion (CE) and aRight-of--Way Consultation were
completed for this project in April 2005 and August 2007 respectively, and distributed
shortly thereafter. Additional copies of the CE and Consultation are available upon
request. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) plans to replace the
existing 65-foot long bridge, No. 73 with a new 95-foot long, 36-foot wide structure on
the existing alignment. Traffic will use an onsite detour during construction, as no
reasonable offsite detour exists. Project impacts total 167 feet of permanent fill in an
Unnamed Tributary (UT) to Dales Creek and 0.02 acre of temporary fill in Dales Creek.
IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
General Description: The project is located in the Catawba River Basin (HUC
03050101) and will impact Dales Creek and an UT to Dales Creek. Dales Creek (Index #
11-27) and the UT are assigned a best usage classification of C, by the N.C. Division of
Water Quality (DWQ). Dales Creek is not designated as a North Carolina Natural or
Scenic River, or as a National Wild and Scenic River, nor is it listed on the 2006 Final
303(d) list. The project does not drain to a 303(d) stream within one mile of the project
limits. No designated Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), Water Supply I (WS-I), or
Water Supply II (WS-II) waters occur within 1.0 mile of the project. Dales Creek is not
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone]
NC DEPARTMENT OP TRANSPtO~R..T~ATION FAX: [phone]
PROTECT DEVELOPMENT AND Grv vIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1$98 MAIl. SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1$48 WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
2728 CAPITAL acw
SUrrE 240
RALEIGH, NC 27604

classified as a trout river by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) according to
the letter in the CE dated July 12, 2002. No wetlands occur on the project.
Permanent Impacts: Permanent stream impacts will occur, and total 167 feet. Impacts
occur from the relocation of and the placement of a pipe in the UT to Dales Creek to the
north of SR 1552 due to the construction of the temporary onsite detour structure. A
portion of the UT to Dales Creek will remain in the culvert after the removal of the
temporary detour structure since the channel slope would be very steep and would likely
erode.
Temporary Impacts: Temporary impacts of 0.02 acre of fill are expected from the
placement of three 84-inch corrugated metal pipes in Dales Creek for the temporary
detour structure.
Utility Impacts: No impacts will occur due to utility relocations. Duke Energy (power)
will install a temporary pole line on the left side of the project, inside the proposed right
of way, after the contractor has built the detour. The temporary poles will be set in
uplands, approximately at Stations 22+70, 23+80 and 24+80. Verizon (telephone) will
also attach, temporarily, to these poles and abandon its underground facilities inside the
project limits.
After the highway construction is complete, Duke Energy plans to remove the temporary
facilities and install permanent facilities at the same location they are presently
occupying. Verizon will install its permanent facilities on the same pole line.
There are no water, sewer or gas facilities on this project.
Bridge Demolition: Bridge No. 73 consists of timber decks on I-beams. The
substructure is composed of reinforced concrete abutments and pier with timber crutch
bents. Neither the superstructure nor the substructure will create any temporary fill in the
creek. Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be
implemented.
FEDERALLY-PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) lists 4 federally protected species in McDowell County
(Table 1).
The Carolina northern flying squirrel has been added to the list of federally protected
species know to occur within McDowell County since the completion of the CE
document. No Habitat is available in the project area for the Carolina northern flying
squirrel.
Page 2

t 'k
In the CE, the small whorled pogonia was given a biological conclusion of "May affect,
not likely to adversely affect," however the biological conclusion had been changed to
"No Effect." The biological conclusion has been changed because no specimens were
found during the last surveys on June 11, 2003 and September 17, 2007 and a search of
the NHP database on June 1, 2007 found no occurrences within 1 mile of the project.
The bald eagle was delisted as of August 8, 2007 and is no longer protected by the
Endangered Species Act. It is, however, protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act. No nests or individuals were observed within 660 feet of the project area.
Tahle 1: Federally Protected Species of McDowell County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal
Status Biological
Conclusion Habitat
Present
Haliaeetus leucocephalus Bald eagle Delisted NA No
Clemmys muhlenbergii Southern bog turtle T (S/A) Not Required No
Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus Carolina northern flying
s uirrel E No Effect No
Hudsonia montana Mountain golden heather T No Effect No
Isotria medeoloides Small whorled pagonia T No Effect Yes
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
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 impacts. Avoidance measures were taken
during the planning and NEPA compliance stages; minimization measures were
incorporated as part of the project design and include:
• The new bridge will completely span the channel.
• The new bridge will be longer then the current bridge.
• Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed.
• Selection of Alternative C, as detailed in the CE, because it has the least amount of
impacts to Dales Creek.
• The temporary onsite detour will be one lane and signalized in order to reduce the
footprint.
MITIGATION
Mitigation for 167 feet of impacts to Dales Creek will be provided by the EEP.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
The project is scheduled to let March 18, 2008 and has a review date of February 5, 2008.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
Section 404 Permit: This project has been processed by the Federal Highway
Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion." NCDOT is hereby applying for a Clean
Water Act Section 404 Nationwide Permit. It is anticipated that the construction will be
authorized under Section-404 Nationwide Permits 23 and 33.
Page 3

t ~
Section 401 Permit: We anticipate 401 General Certification number 3701 and 3688 will
apply to this project. All general conditions of the Water Quality Certifications will be
adhered to however permanent stream impacts total 167 feet, therefore requiring a major
certification and written concurrence. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H, Section
.0500(a), we are providing five copies of this application to the DWQ for their records
and $570 to act as payment for processing the permit application (See subject line).
This project is located in a trout county, therefore comments from the WRC will be
required prior to authorization by the Corps of Engineers. By copy of this letter and
attachment, NCDOT hereby requests WRC Review. NCDOT requests that WRC forward
their comments to the Corps of Engineers and the NCDOT within 30 ~:alendar days of
receipt of this application.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Brett Feulner at [e-mail] or
[phone].
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the DOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.or~/doh/preconstruct/pe/neu/permit.html.
Sincerel
~~
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. Environmental Management Director,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: w/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (5 Copies)
Ms. Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Ms. Marella Buncick, USFWS
Mr. Victor Barbour, P.E. Project Services
Mr. JJ Swain, P.E. Division 13 Engineer
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Roger Bryan, Div 13 DEO
w/o attachment
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P.E., Prog. and TIP Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Vince Rhea, PDEA Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
Page 4

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
2 0 0 7 1 9 4 5
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 ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 23 & 33
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 Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, 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
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: 1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: (9191 733-9794
E-mail Address: tg horpe(a~dot.state.nc.us
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:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
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 maybe 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: Replacement of Bridge No 73 over Dales Creek
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-4197
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: McDowell Nearest Town: Nebo
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): The site is located at the
crossing of SR 1552 over Dales Creek
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.7609°N, 81.9507°W
6. Property size (acres): N/A
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Dales Creek
8. River Basin: Catawba 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/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: Forestland
Page 2 of 8

P
~ ~ ~..
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Standard DOT construction equipment.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose is to replace the old bridge that is
functionally obsolete and structurally deficient.
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. NA
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. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should 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 maybe 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. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts:_ The project impacts are as
follows 167 feet of permanent stream impacts 0 02 acre of temporary stream impacts
Page 3 of 8

2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
s aratel list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact
Site Number

(indicate on map)
T e of Im act
yP p Type of Wetland

(e.g., forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year

Floodplain
( es/no) Distance to
Nearest

Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact

(acres)

Total Wetland Impact (acres)
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, 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. To calculate acreage. multiply length X width_ then [l;v;rle by 4'~ ~~n

Stream Impact

Perennial or
Average -., -,-
Impact -
Area of
Number Stream Name Type of Impact
Intermittent? Stream Width Length Impact
(indicate on map) Before Impact (linear feet) (acres)

Site 1 Dales Creek Temporary Perennial 15 0.02
Site 1 UT to Dales Creek Permanent Perennial 5 167

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage) 167 0.02
5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dredging, flooding, drainage. bulkheads. etc.
Open Water Impact

Site Number
mdicate on ma
(~
Name of Waterbody
¢ a h
( PP cable)

Type of Impact Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,

ocean, etc. Area of

Impact

acres)

Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U_S_ resultinu frnm the r,rn;ecr•
Stream Impact (acres): 0.02
Wetland Impact (acres): p
en Water Impact (acres): p
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres) 0.02
Total Stream Impact (linear feet): 167
Page 4 of 8

7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. 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.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
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. Best Mana_g,ement Practices for
the Protection of Surface Waters and BMP's for Bridge Demolition and Removal
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 January 15, 2002, 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,
Page 5 of 8

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 NCEEP 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/ncwetl ands/strm gi de.html.
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.
Mitigation will be provided by EEP.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at httn://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wro/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 167
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):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. 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 ^
Page 6 of 8

r
3. 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.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules- and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ^ No
2. If "yes", 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 for Catawba)
2 1.5
Total
^' gone i extenas out ~u ree[ perpenmcutar irom the top of the near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (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. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level. Approximately the same as current conditions
no water will directly discharge into Dales Creek.
Page 7 of 8

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.
AT/A
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. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
Replace an existing structure
XV. 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).
~.
q• x.03
ApplicilntlAgent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 8 of 8

~~....___. _ o stem, .
PROGRAM
1
August 21, 2007
J1111~~~~71~ tlsh ~~..arir tj"1.;15,~~~FM~~`~~
~~FFIVL~r A~
Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-4197, Replace Bridge Number 73 on SR 1552 (Lake James
Road) over Dales Creek, McDowell County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) will provide the compensatory stream mitigation for the subject project.
Based on the information supplied by you on August 1, 2007, the impacts are located in
CU 03050101 of the Catawba River Basin in the Northern Mountains (NM) Eco-Region,
and are as follows:
Cool Stream: 167 feet
During the review of this request, it was noted that this project did not include any
wetland or stream impacts in the 2007 Impact Projection Database; however, EEP will
provide the requested stream mitigation. Depending on the availability and projected
need of stream mitigation in this cataloging unit, additional stream mitigation may be
required that was not included in the biennial budget submitted to NCDOT on April 2,
2007 (revised April 16, 2007).
EEP commits to implementing sufficient compensatory stream mitigation to
offset the impacts associated with this project by the end of the MOA Year in which this
project is permitted, in accordance with Section X of the Amendment No. 2 to the
Memorandum of Agreement between the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers, fully executed on March 8, 2007. If the above referenced impact
R.e-sto~r,~..,. ~r~~Cc~~~~~. ~~ o~~~.~ ~:~:~,~° ..~~tatp- r~DEN
~,
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699-1652 / 919-715-0416 / www.nceep.net

amounts are revised, then this mitigation acceptance letter will no longer be valid and a
new mitigation acceptance letter will be required from EEP.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
6_
Willi D. Gilmore, P.E..
EEP Director
cc: Mr. David Baker, USACE -Asheville
Mr. John Hennessy, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-4197

z~
~' A
I
~ BO
1r
SF~ i WSET ~
,o
BELOW :~,
~~~_
J vo
~~~
•~,
McDO'INELL COIIVTY ~' - "
BE
PROI
~-~ ~- SITE

OJEC
WETLA11lD IMPACT

]~I~®I~IEI~~~ ®yVN]EI~~
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES
Mary Teague Adams P.O. Box 545
~' SEeven Ray Adams Glen Alpine, NC 28628
Linville View, LLC

Proposed Bridge is a single span. No causeway is required.
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
McDowell County
1 PROJECT: 33544.2.2 (B-4197)
ATN Revised 3/31/05 SHEET ~ C~ 6 7 2007

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS

Site
No.

1

Station
(From/To)

24+20to25+15

Structure
Size /Type

BRIDGE
Permanent
Fillln
Wetlands
ac
Temp.
Fillln
Wetlands
ac)
Excavation
in
Wetlands
(ac)
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
(ac) Hand
Clearing
in
Wetlands
ac
Permanent
SW
impacts
(ac)
Temp.
SW
impacts
(ac Existing
Channel
Impacts
Permanent
(ft) Existing
Channel
Impacts
Temp.
(ft)
Natural
Stream
Design
ft)

22+70to24+22
Ch 0 02 82 0
annel Im act 0.01 167

TOTALS: 0.000 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 167 82.0

r
W
a
r
Y
M
A
N
p
See Suet 1-A For Index of Sheets
See Suet 1-B For Conventional Symbols
O~
I~
~~
V
W
ti
ti
U
O
U
VICINITY MAP
a
U
Z
M
O
Q
Z
SMet~! de~•
SUNGAiE DESIGN GRDUP, P,A.
9i .KN[S muNLN NOW
AN[ip{Xe11N LYGNI SeIX
re eeeaeo eeeewe
~~C~~°lE ®lF N®I$~C~ ~A11$®]L~l~TA
~~V~~~®N ®1F l[~~~~[tiV~1~~
McDOWELL COUNTY
rtm rtan nawcr ew¢u tla ~+'
N~ Mai
e~
.~. B-4197 1
rtan cameo r.arenNa eeeeameme
33544.1.1 BRZ-1552 9 P.E. _
33544.2.2 BRZ-1552 RhV & UT1L
33544.3.1 BRZ-1552 9 C0N5T.

LOCATION: BRIDGE_N0._73 OVER_DALES CREEK ON SR_1552 LLAKE_,jAMES RD.~_
TYPE OF WORK GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE AND STRUCTURE
O
-L- POT STA. 21+25.00 BEGIN TIP PROJECT B-4197
0 $ °° p
° ° ~o a SITE 1
~
.o
o
s
°~ ~
,~ ,,.
, ,.
~

o t~ ,~
'

'
°
' ° '
'
,
--
~1~0
--wee" °~~~
~ ``\
~ °
~
'
° ~~
END BRIDGE
~ ~
°° ''
°~~~
\
1 ° °''~ -L- STA. 25+15.00
TO MARION
\ ~~ ~
~ ~~,~'
° '~ ~~
'' ~ DETOUR
1\~
BEGIN BRIDGE ~
-L- STA. 24+20.00 ~\
~~ \`~ ~
~
~
~
END TIP PROJECT 8-4197
\
\ ~ -L- STA. 27+25.00
END CONSTRUCTION B-4197 \ ~F \~~ ;-
~s
-L- POC STA. 27+70.00 ~~

11 0
~ ~
" DESIGN EXCEPTION fOR DESIGN SPEED

REVISIONS
~~
/~ 1
O
MARY TEAGUE ADAN$
STEVEN RAY ADAN$
D8 391 PG 587
DB 162 PG 169
DB 59B PG 765
~
{.,~ II

• O ~

0 ~ I
Q ~ ~ O
~ -
____
__,
1 ~
\
f
Q
Z
D
l7
U
z
4~4 c1
~ ~ ~
ISFD
9oA,T. Q
DETAIL "I
LATERAL BASE DITCH
error rp scmai
ie
crwna y D a sore
IYFr.
1 =1 Min. D= LD Ft.
e= 2.D Fr.
D= 7.0 ft,
-DET- sTA. owo rD n.is L1,
DETAIL '2
TOE PROTECTION
1NOt tc Scola~
NOturd Flll
c.puna tia slope
a
d= I.OFr,
Lsr. BS Tans CIpsS '8' Rip Rap
-l- STA. 29«50 U. 10 -l- 9Td, 2t«69 Li.
_L_
_L_

x~. h o I
~ ~~~ ~r ~ ~
!L ~ ~ ~ ~ f
I
~J ~~~ x~ r 1'~ I v °
+
ti
~~~ 4 Y ~
~o' ~
'
~ ~~
~ N
`
~ ' ~
O
~ Q
V
QV
~
, P
1 °
' -L- STd.23+92.27
13.84' LT,
~

1
~
~ 'a
'~~; '~ 2'LATERAL BASE DITCH
EDETaL •I
ND Ds ~ m'
'
R

:'~
xooos '~ '
0 ro'
x
~ '
Q 1' ''
~',
~.
~ woods ~
BM-IELEV. = 1268.32 ~_'-
-'

L
SLAT aJ B '

NAIL IN BASE OF IB'
WHITE OAK
~
-
~? S 83' 20' OO.P E '
+ ' B, ~
N

~
~ c
BM-2 ELEV. = 1242.23 ~'
-B

I L- $TA. 17.22 BO'
NAIL IN BASE OF 12' RT EXISTING AR
TO Bf RfIAC/EB
J POPLAR 5, lSTR.PAY lfElO

~
N EXCAVATE EXISTING
ROAD Flu ,~zj'
SS~
n 45 CI.+/- LC

N ~
P
~'
h
o
~ x
ti
P
I p•

! / N
~p
~
a ~ !
O ~~ / Q~
L
V
G
I ~ ~
oE
~
$; p
~ ~
I
t.F .
,
a
~
zy~
e~
5,1
~a

``
SLAT 1135.
~G
e 1 Q
RI Ar .z5
~~

S ~
y TB
~
W/
\ GR.
csec A~ ~`
+ ~
3
111
ES7.2 iNSCC
R7P RAP
EST.7 SY.FF F.
END SRG J
+7295
t ~",r ,
~ ~~.
PROJECT xEFFIlA4CE N0. 6H&7 N0.
8-4197 q
® fff N0.
$I1R~~~AC ~$TER ~ B4GIANEER ~ RYDRwua
ENGINEER
,~z
ti
9h,~ 6~~
\Az 1°
5~°~ o`~~~o~ `~k
~5ti
00 ~ 5~0.
~~0 ,0~'~
e~ ~'
Q
10
PC -Y- S~+p000
O
o LINYILLE VIEW, LLC
~ OB 824 PC 2J4
s
~~s 0
JOAN KILLALEA McGUIRE / ~ S 39' 39' 482" E 09 ~
OB 862 PG 759 ~ 1 k ~ \
~9•
Q 2 BM-3 EIE. - 1227.8 4
X10• -BL- STA 33' 90+
NO DECK DRNNS ON BRI1~E ~ NAIL 1N BA$ 0 TRIPL
,L POPLAR ON E BANK' ~e
QC
_ O \ ',
Y Y LAKE JAMES POINTE OEYELOPNENT, INC.
PI StD 1!+09.32 PI StD I +17,74 OB 864 PG tl \
p= 34'25'S9b'IRTJ p- 3 OS'30b"lLTJ
D = 190' S9' 09.4' D - 86'48' 42.4' /
L = 18.03' L 34b6'
T = 9.30' T = 17.74' /
R = 30.00' ~R = 66.00' 4
WIDENING TO REMAIN 1N PLACE ~$
PI Sta 21+27.41 PI StD 23+29.25 P! StD 25+44.57 PI Sfo 28+72.31
p= 18'!4'00.3'fLTJ p= 09'S6'04.8`lRTJ p= 33'44'07.0'IRTJ p= !6'SO4B.4'fRTJ
D = 19' 05' 54.9° D = 08' 98' 53.0" 0 = 28' 38' 52.4' D = 6' 2P 58.3'
L = 95.47 L = N2.7r' L = A7.76' L = 269b3'
T = 48.14' T = 56.49' T = 60b4' T = !3328'
R = 300.00' R = 650.00' R = 200.00' R = 900.00'
Se =SEE PLANS Se = SEE PLANS Se =SEE PLANS Se =SEE PLANS
•• DESIGN EXCEPTION FOR DESIGN SPEED
FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET N0.6
SEE SHEETS S-I THRU S-
FOR STRUCTURE PLANS
TO TDf PROTECTION
-L- STAZS+50 70 -L- STAR+68 ,
sEE DEraL •z
~o
~~
\ ,~~:ur~De1
Hoods
~\\\
9 \ ,~ ~ Y•••N~ Vtf•~
Tf ~
N~\ ' SPRMG %~ ~ ~ HOODS SAlEt ~ OI
r aA \ \ rlEnu ~r~ +n~~ 30
ai Inv. ins.s
l 2
v:1n7.4 \ 30+03~
\ ~ y StD.
f ` ,~ -L
kIP R \ 1 \ P ..
~' 1~~"
~'~ ~~ ~ RAMEY KEMP
S~NGAIE DESIGN GRODP,P.A. ASSOCIATES, INC,

REVISIONS

II \~ M
R'~- ~~~
~F An -
C x ;~
.w,!
O
MARY TEAGUE ADAMS
STEVEN RAY ADAM$
DA 391 PG 583
DB 7fi2 PG iW
DB 39E PG 365
I
`` 1~ J O+
~ N
e° ~ ~' ~~'
N ~', ~ -BL-4 PII>~ 17
' s ~ 13.84' L .
~' o~~ 7LATE BASE
' E L'I
~~ `~', ~
1 ,,
. S~ R • B(F TO n ~ IB' ACP

Q ryn1~r+"~
Z ~~ ~ w
/ \
D ~:.~
~~
~`~ ~ ~ "° O
U % ~~ JDAN KILLALEA McGUIRE-~
Z j^~\~ DD Bfi2 PC 759 ~--
/ ~
~~~ ~
a ~
/~
ITCH
n ~ -Y- -
51opa P! StG I1+09.32 PI Sta 1 + .
r~r,.
~' p = 34' 25' S9b' fRTJ p = 3 05' 38~
Min. D= I.o F+. D = 190' S9' 09.4" D - 86' 48' 42x4'
B= 2.0 Fi.
„~,~~«; c= 3.D Ft. L = 18.03' L 34b6' -
D - A, A.DO iD Il.rs Lr. T = 9.30' T = 17.74'
R = 3ooa ~R = 6s.aa
DETAIL '2
TOE PROTECTION _L_ _L_ _L_ L_
cnot t° scum
x a~ 1.~ s`i°P° Pl SiG 21+27.41 PI StG 23+2925 PJ StG 25+44.57 PI StG 28+~
c p= 18'14'00.3"fLTJ p= 09'56'04.8"IRTJ p= 33'44'07.0"IR7J p= 16'50'
D = 15 05' 54.9" D = 08' 48' 53.0' D = 2B' 38' 52.4' D = 6' 21' S :3,; •~~
a= Lorf• L = 95.41 L = 112.71' L = 117.76' L = 264.63' \
T = 48.14' T = 56.49' T = 60b4' T = 133.28'
Est. 99 tons GIU:: '9• Aio Aap R = 300.00' R = 650.00' R = 200.00' R = 900.00'
-E- sra.z9sD u. ro -E- srn.z7se ~r. Se =SEE PLANS Se =SEE PLANS Se =SEE PLANS Se =SEE PLANS
I` 1\^
°aY ~~ x
HOODS
f
,11111~~ ~
4 , ~•
.', ~
4."
11 I ,
~ '. ~
r
~'~
m~ ~~~ ~
~'~ ~' ~
V
33'
® SURiMCECTATEA
\~
~ `~
PROkCT REFERENCE N0. SHFEE N0.
8-4197 4
RM' SNEFf N0.
AADWAY DgN;N
ENGINEER NYdUUUa
ENGINEER
~IIE1R
Sheet ~ ~ of ..~.,
r
/,
~r
3~ ~
1
~.
DESIGN
WIDENING TO RE.RAIN IN PLFCE

REVISIONS
O
MARY TEAGOE ADAMS
STEVEN RAY ROAMS
OB 791 PG BB3
OB 762 PG 159
DB 59E PG 365

IsFD ~ ~} II
~ ~
~ O
~
SAT
O X
O ~
,
c~ O
~ J ~ 1
+

.,
ti . 4,,
~1' ~ ~ ~ o s

..
..
\O I _
x~ ' ,1~ = I v O
`
a ~ ,
o
-~ .~~ ~ . ~~ v h~~ 1 N
~ ,
~ ,,
~
~~ 2 v ~ -BL-4 PING 17+49.8

~~ ~ ', ~,
Q
' -L- STA. 23+92.27
j ~
, ', ~
.~ A 13.84'LT.
~~~ __----_ ~\
~ -D -Rw
~' s o.1+0"+~85. ~~~~~ ~
' 2' RAIBASE OIfCH
~
C
~~ ~,~ \ ~ ~^
~ SEE
LI

\~
,`
,1 vl
~ '
. ~
,
wooos ~
,
( ~ o
~ ,
s
p
~'
, 0.
Q
,
r~ ~, , l

~. ~ r
>
,
a ~
~ ~
Q

,','.
'
n ~
I ~I
e 4' "P
'w x ~+
S X51 ~ ~
B waoos .,, _ , ~ ,
BM-I ELEV.= 1268.32 ~ ~~~ C,
-BL- 570..14+3q BS'RT. ~~ ~~ ~\ ~ ~
NAIL IN BASE OF IB' ^ ~L
WHITE OAK \
~? S 83' 20' OOP E ~
~ R
ti ~
0 BM-2 ELEV.= p42.23
V7 -BL- S1A. 11+22 BO' RT EXISTING BRI
NAIL IN BASE OF 12' TO BE REMOVED
I POPLAR S (STR.PAY ITEUI 1
J 71C`1
~ ~ 2'~23,SS ADf
~ ~ F
~ P
N ~ / ~~
M'
x
~ N p"
I moo. / ti
~ ~ ~p• ~
I ~ ~
~ v r 0
Q>` / G
O Q gyp.
JOAN KILLALEA McGWRE / v S 3539'482'E
OB 862 PC 759
Q
Q/
W
Q
Z
O
u
Z
ti
® PERMAgNENNpT
9URIM~pCTS TER
® DENOTES TENPDAAAY
SDRFALE wATEfl IMPALiE
5ti~ S~o• ..
~~ 'S
.~k~ ~~ ok~A~' \~x9~ Ctk~~ ~6
~a 2h S`o ~ Ito. ~~ 5~o~~h><
~ e~ ~ ,o~~ ~~,o°o`~~ ~~o.
Q~c e~ ~ ~
e
10
PC -Y- Sta. 10+00.00
END GRADE
-DET- STA 13+967 3
-L ~ 57A25+53.05VILLE wEw, uc
\ ,. °$~ DB B24 PG 234
\~ \\
~\
X \\
~\
s
~`"*
k
BM-3 ELF - 1227.8
-BL- STA 33'
NAIL IN BAS 0 TF
POPLAR ON E I
-DET- -DET- -DET- -DET-
PI StD 10+5035 PI StD f1+49.32 PI Sta 13+70.97 PI Sta 14+11.22
p = 1T 20' 542" RT1
'
" p = 2T 45' 03.D' fRTJ p = 62 3D' 56.5' IRTJ p = 3S 35' 10.2' 2T 1 FOR -DET - PROFILE SEE SHEET N0
6
D = 1T 21
44.5 D = 28' 38' 52.6" D = 114' 35' 29.6" D = R4 35' 29.6" .
L = 9992' L = 96L'T L = 54.56' L = 31
05'
T = 50.35' T = 49.40' T = 30.35' .
T = 16.05' SEE SHEETS S-l THRU S-
R = 330.00' R = 200.00' R = 50.00' R = 50.00' FOR STRUCTURE PCANS
PAOIECf REf£RENCE NO. SHEEP N0.
B-4197 5 I
RW SHEET N0.
lOADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER HYDRAUMCS
ENGINEER
DETAIL xil
LATERAL BASE DITCH
,xat to scowl
m
ow~a 7 D a ~ s0p°
riFt.
4.=1 Mln D• I,D Ft.
B= 2.0 Ft.
D= 3,0 Ft,
-DET- 57A 71+W TO If+75 LT.
3~
1 \ ~P RAF 1` ~^ r ~ '~
\ StB 0
\ \ ~ +6129
.~' Peflll~ ~~
\\ ` P°T Sheet `~ _ ~ I ~
~~
`~ ~~~~
~1 ~ `` ~~ -------- -------
SUNGAiE DESIGN GRDUP, P,A,

REVISIONS PRO1ECf REFER@!CE N0. SHEEf NO.
8-4197 5
Bw sI~EY No.
~ ROADWAY DESIGN HY9RAlIUCS
~ ENGINffR ENGWEER
0
a
MARY TEACUE ADAMS ~ Z '
STEVEN RAY ADAMS
DB 391 PC 583
OB 762 PG 169 '
DB 59B PG 3fiE
O
s'' ~
`~ ~ DETAIL °i
.~ o {} ~ II Z LATERAL BASE DITCH
c nor +o sw.l
" ~ ~ b
N ~- A
ounG 9ope
D rnf.
vi ` Mm. D= LD F+.
p 8
?..~ i. sy ~ n ~ p ~.. ~ ^ N ~"~ B= 2A Ft.
N ~ ~ ~ ,I X b= 7.0 Ft.
~ '~ ~~ h 0 a ~'+.~_ ~ °L •~ I . NOTEg -DET- STA IHOO TO U+75 LT.
Q ~ ~ ~ ~ v '~ ~. i ~ ® SUR~Q~EERNWQTER
~' ti ~~ ~ o ~s WoaDS 1 II INPADT9
W ~ I V ~ II 1 '. N ~ ® pENOTES TEMPORARY
~ ~ ~ CO ~ SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
~~ {.~ ~ • 11` ~ J p ~ I\ ,II III p
R.n ~ ~, ~ ~ ti0 ~ N e 's I
~~ !>~' 3ry .,4r Q V III ~ -BL-4 PI li .8 - `, 'I ~, ~ ~~
-~~ I r
~'e ~ I ' f 13.84' L . ~ , I ~ ~
,~ ~
_ _ _ ,I C
~ s +85... ~I,~ '6 r RnL e c S~~,o~
.. I I SEE ~ L I I'.5'~
^~^ •W, ETAIN
ti ~S y I
.. .. .. .. nal rq 8 °~ -- - y
O I A ~ ~ ~ ~"\
~, , a ~ '~ ~ :Y I
I 'I ~ ~~
R ~~ ~ f
R.
~ynrte /f`- •M \~ \ `p,~ .J/
~~WSI M ~ '~'•. Y/
~m ~' ~ ~ J
~I® flCl 11t!
nm R \ 'L '4 '~~
~ ' \~ ~ ` ~s
u*'
'i; \
/~ ~ -
j ~ JDAN RILLALEA McGW ~, ~ \\ w' C /
/^w\~ DB 962 PG 759
/^`~~~p~ ors 'Aqy ~ ~, Lk Y" 4 3TRIPL oV sy \ ~ j
f~/ ~ BANR' ~ SsN 'I ~ !`s
-~ ~ ~
f ~ ~ ~ •~~-
~~ A ° ~
-DET- -DET- -DET- °';~ '~\ ~ •~ ,3 ~?~ ~:. !' ~~
PI Sta 10+50.35 P1 Sta A+49.32 P! Sto t3+7097 PI Sto 14+11.22 (~ . \
~ = 0' 20' 54.2° (LT1 p = 2T 45' 03.0' IRTI p = 62' 3D' 565' (RTI p = 35' 35' 102" 271 FOR -DET- PROFILE SEE SHEET N0.6 I `
D = 0'21'44.5" D = 28'38'52.6' D = N4'35'29.6' D = 11435'29b° i1 `~ ~~________ _______
L = 9992' L = 96bT L = 54.56' L = 31.05' SUNGAiE DESIGN GROUP, P.A,
T = 50.35' T = 49.40' T = 30.35' T = 16.05' SEE SHEETS S-1 THRU S-
R = 330.00' R = 200.00' R = 50.00' R = 50.00' FOR STRUCTURE PLANS ~ m ;ro`";~„m

PROIECf PEFEAENCE NO. SHFB N0.
EG1N GR E -DET STAIO+ 5.0lLA= B-4197 6
L- STA 2 +6098 GP 10' LT. RoAOw~r oESICN NroEAUUCs

c ENGINEER
n 4yr ENGINEER
,gWUp,,

SRE t
END
GRADE -
ET- ST
13+96.78
B.M.•2 ELEV.= 129223
,,'PSN ca~o~~-%,
` ,
,, jN.cAROl~'~•,,
~
PERM S
WATER RF CE
PCT -L- A25+5 .06 EOP 0' LT. NAIL !N BASE OF 12' POPLAR
' ,' ~ ~FSSip~q~9
; ,
-;,
~~ESSIay9ti9
TEMP U = x2373 50
RT. OF -BL- STA (I+22
' .
' ~ SEAL ~ ' ~ ~ ' a SEAL ~ ' '
~~ 36.62
RT.OF -L- STA23+62.48 27711 ~ 9334
:
;

\
~ I = ! +35
36 00
0'
:,
~1.`~
cir4E~~`~~,
%
,,
~~'•
:,
,y~NGINE~~
Q'
E 1 1 ~ BEG! GRADf Y- STAI +00.00 ,
,
,
'•~,~'W 8
~ ,,
S,`
''n;~Y WEB
V I
1
~
-DE
- 13+951 .
,m,,,,,,o ,,
~„~„„~~,,,,,
~ K _ E = 1237.3
~
\ I \

,..
\ \ \ ~ I \ ~
-~6' '.., PJ
5 ~ -- /
~~ ~ + .83 18' 1 I l
w ~ I I END GR E -Y- S A!!+18.05
I
I I I ELEV. = 1 33D3
m
~
~
I I
! I
I
ti
v
N m
ry
T II
N
n II

\~
~
l
I

ti
3
a
C
P
(-IQ$3
B% I
I
m v
i w ~ W r\
' s~ 1
' t+ll.eaae'

-DET 1= 10+2 .00 PI
' f0+90.
'
-Y _
, L = 1,2 A
EL = 12325
lFCR PLhY.SEE SHEET NQ 51 - 7 K 6 fFOR PL/JLSEE SHEET N0.41

1 1 1 1 1 1 1

~\
~
EGIN GR
E -L-
A 2l+5
00
cPV o
~ LEV.= I' 8.48 ~ d o

PI 23+1. I ~ N
E _ !,2385 ' J Q
K = 55 w ~~' i' o ~'
~ ,
M ~
V = 310' ~ ~
m ~ a N ,~
~ 2 j m II O N
\
(~
' \ ~ ~ J ~ II
6 41 W
_ W
(-J 3910% ~;- ----___
-, __ _(_10.39 0% ( W
J22 w
, _ _ 3I3i
~~
I
P
= 26+30.
{I E = 1237 5' ~~
EXCAVA E EX75TING

i
~
.
RaAO E w5 a +i 1 9 K = 70

STRUCTURE HYDRAULIC DATA
~~
~~
~
~
-

~.
,
~,
,

DESIGN DISCHARGE = 1175 CFS
i ,
i ~
`~

~
DESIGN FREQUENCY = 25 YRS ~
' ~ ~ ~ ws 122.ro ~ ,

DESIGN NW ELEVATION = 1233.0 FT. ~,
~ j ~
~ suRV o7-w- 004
~-~
-

BASE DISCHARGE = 1790 CFS
I j
~ _
-

-
____
BASE FREQUENCY = 100 YRS
BASE NW ELEVATION = 12346 FT ==DESIGN EXCEPTION FOR DESIGN SPEED
~
~,
OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE _) 2710 CFS 01
_
OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY = > 500 YR.

OVERTOPPING ELEVATION = !237.8 FT
RAMEY KEMP
-
-
L SINCA iER~GNGROUP P
a ASSOCIATES, INC.
!FOR PLAN,SEE SHEET N0.41 ,
.
n „~
20 21 22 2 3 2 4 2 5 26 27 28 29 3 0

1

1 0~~~~{5{ PROJC{T R6EAENCE N0. SFEEf N0.
liJ1lJ 8-4!97 X-2
T

SIT 1 . P. 124 .21

1250 ~ ° °uR 1250

0. 15
4

1240

--------

---------

--------- Z.~

--

Z.i --------- -------- --------- --------
--
-----__
~ •i
-
.: -

1240
'--" E STA.
EL. 22+5
1242 E
87

1250 . P • 12 4 .6 z 1250

I 0. 0 . l6
-

240

--------

------_

----

-----
----

--------

---------
----- ---

E -
~

P

240
STA.
EL. 22+0
1245
26

.P. 124 .48
1250 .I6 i 4.36 z
- 1250
--
-----
-- --
---= ----
- " atch exfs
I
., ,-

1240 -------- --------- --------- -------- --------
- --------- -------- E
STA.
EL.
21+5
1248

38

240
BE IN P OJFC -L- STA. 21+2 .00 Of
7 0 0 0 1 -L- I 0 7

E
L
IN I 0 5 %IOJECf AfFERENCE N0. SHEEf N0.
~
S RFACE TER ~ 8-4197 X-3
1 - - 1 T
DETOU

I
+80.39 .P. 123 .09

1240

~ ~ C
'T°~ 1240

~~
' ' 0.04
0 0~

I
'
2
i
1230 ~ - 1230
- ---- - - __
___ -- ---~' STA. 24+5 P
_ p EL. 1233 07
ROPO ED

8
' CSP g GIN RIDG -L- STA. 24+2 .00
FILL I N SU ACE
WAT R ~ D TOUR • p• 123 .69
1240 ,%~ 1240
'~

--
---_ 0.02 .02 -
--- -- ---- --------- -
SIT 1 , - -~t _ --- -= - - ---
~
2 Z,I ~~
/
1230 _ _ 1230
GUAR RAIL BE LACED STA. 24+0
AFTE REM VAL 0 DET R
(TYP.I EL. 1238 53
WATE
TOUR
.P. 123 .74
ll 7 .68
END 2' LAT RAL B SE
1240 DITC STA. 12+25 0. 4 .04
1240

-

--

.
2 . .

-

_-_-_
-
--------
--------
--- -
------
------

~~
2/ •I P P -
1 35.48 STA. 23+5
1230 EL. 1239 45 1230

FILL
IN SU
FACE
ll ETOU
24.89 .P. 1241 .25
WA ER
0.014, 3;I 0,0 5 0 035 ;'~
~
1240 .i --- -------- --------- -------- ------- - --------- ' 1240
-------- -------- -------- ----
~ :i ` -- ~
STA. 23+0
237.34 EL. 1240 96
1230 1230
BEGIN 'LAT RAL B SE Shut
DITCH STA. !! 00 -""
0 0 1 -L- I 0 0 4 0 5 0 T

4
~4
.• •
iii
t,O
o ~
~~ ~ •
W N ~ W
~.

~. _

~ ~ ~Q
_¢ V
i O¢
z~
J
~ Q ti

M
°, o
~~

w
~"
See Sla?et 1•A For Index of Sleets
See Sleet 1-B Far Corweniionol Symbols
~'
3
5
VICINITY MAP
0
U
Z
M
Z
~~~~~ ®~ 1V ®~~1L d ~~~®1L~~1V
~~V~~~®N ®~ 1H~~G~I~A~Y~
McDOWELL COUNTY
LOCATION: BRIDGE N0.73 OVER DALES CREEK ON SR 1552 (LAKE JAMES RD.)
TYPE OF WORK GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE AND STRUCTURE
O
-L- POT $TA.21+25.00 BEGIN TIP PROJECT 8-4197
0 8 ~ ~~
° ° 9. . \
Vin O ~~ Y~ 1, .
d~ ~ +1.
1 ~
1 a~
~ ®~1o h~o,1.
,~ -- END BRIDGE
`\~~\ ®~ ~ ° (~ ° ~I ( -L- STA. 25+15.00
TO MARION \~~•- ~ ~ I
-. °
~{ DETOUR
tT i
\\
BEGIN BRIDGE
-L- STA. 24+20.00 ~\ ~ /
~~\ • \ / /
~\ / END TIP PROJECT 8-4197
-L- STA. 27+25.00
END CONSTRUCTION B-4197 9~ \~~ / /
-L- POC STA. 27+70.00 \'~ ~~
\~~ \~~ <0
~~ 1;; 20,0
1\ O~i
.,
rt~n rt°n nws ~ooian ra ^y
.C. 8-4197 1
,.~~.,
33544.1.1 BRZ-1552 9 P.E.
33544.2.2 BRZ-1552 9 RNI 8 UTII
33544.3.1 BRZ-1552 9 CONST.

SIWGAIE OESN~I I,Pd
R~` sm hesM
"DESIGN EXCEPTION FOR DESIGN SPEED
GRAPHIC SCALES DESIGN DATA PROJECT LENGTH ~`°" °"'°"' " °is"" °f HYDRAUls(~S ENGINEER DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
-~ RAMEY KEMP ,~`"tH ~u+tyw.,, STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
50 25 0 50 100 ADT 2008 = 258 associ~Tes Tile. ' ~~ ~~:

LANS
ADT 2028 = 425

LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT B-4197 = 0.096mi ........,.~~~.~...
~= =. K
"'"" e ~ SEAL `Qe
~ vss~
'''-. F p; ,
~
E
DHV = 10%
LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT 8-4197 = 0
018
i
la `~" N~ ~'"° D`~"""`°(r""`~`°'"" `-
'~:
'
51'''~
'''~ •it«
50 25 0 50 100 D
° .
m ~ ssum
+Rn srRCrFrcanoRS „
~° ~" ~
= 60
k . W. NRNRY a'E7fS,JR

T = 3 % ,
RO
~~"
IGN
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL( +. y = 60 MPH TOTAL LENGTH TIP PROJECT B-4197 = 0.114 mi ~~ OF WAY DATE:
OCTOBER 20.2006 N.C.D.O.T. CONTACT:
CATHY S. ROUSER
PE ,.
E~
`` '4
•
10 5 0 10 20
I ,
PROJECT ENGINEER SEAL
tltri
LnJ

TTST 1% D LETTWG DATE:
ROADWAY DESIGN ~ F e
•~•..~iKt;~~„i
PROFILE (VERTICAL) UAL 2% MARCH 18.2008 '°~.„;t'e-e.c~'~ ,
A1,IYYHSN aC°rrlF

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI~
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRAI

ROADWAY ENGLISH STANDARD DRAWINGS
The following Roadway StOndords as appear in "Roadway Standard Drawings" Highway Design Branch -
N. C. Departmentof TransDOrtation - Roieigh. N. C.. Dated July 18. 2006 are applicable to this project
and by reference hereby ore considered a Dort of these plans:
STD. NO. TITLE
DIVISION 2 - EARTHWORK
200.02 Method of Clearing - Method II
225.02 Guide for Grading Subgrade -Secondary and Local
225.04 Methotl of Obtaining Superelevation - Two Lone Pavement
DIVISION 3 -PIPE CULVERTS
)00.01 Method of Pipe Installation - Method 'A'
DIVISION 4 --MAJOR STRUCTURES
422.10 Reinforced Bridge Approach Fills
DIVISION 5 - SUBGRADE. BASES AND SHOULDERS
560.01 Method of Shoulder Construction -High Side of Superelevated Curve - Nethad I
DIVISION B -INCIDENTALS
806.01 Concrete Right-of-Way Marker
806.02 Granite Right-of-WOy Marker
840.29 Frames and Narrow Slot Flot Grates
840.36 Traffio Bear7ng Grated Drop Inlet -for Steel 1840.371 Double Frame antl Grates
862.01 Guardrail Placement
862.02 Guardrail Installation
862.03 Structure Anchor Units
876.04 Drainage Ditches with Class 'B' Rip Rap
SHOULDER CONSTAUCTIDN:
ASPHALT. EARTH. AND CONCRETE SHOULDER CONSTRUCTION ON THE HIGH SIDE OF
SUPERELEVaiED CURVES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STD. N0. 560.Ot.
INDEX OF SHEETS
SHEET NUMBER SHEET
1 TITLE SHEET
1-A INDEX OF SHEETS. GENERAL NOTES.
AND LIST OF STANDARD DRAWINGS
1-B CDNVENTIONaL SYMBOLS
1-C SURVEY CONTROL SHEET
2 THRU 2-A PAVEMENT SCHEDULE. TYPICAL SECTIONS. AND
STRUCTURE DETAIL
3 SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES
3-A SUMMARY OF DRAINAGE QUANTITIES
GUARDRAIL. PAVEMENT REMOVAL.
AND EARTHWORK
4 PLAN SHEET
5 DETOUR PLAN SHEET
6 PROFILE SHEET
TCP-1 THRU TCP-? TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS
EC-1 THRU EC-? EROSION CONTROL PLANS
SIGN-1 THRU SIGN-? SIGNING PLANS
%-1 CROSS-SECTION SUMMARY
%-2 THRU X-7 CROSS-SECTIONS
S-I THRU S-? STRUCTURE PLANS
ENGIFH
SEAL
71111
GENERAL NOTES: 2006 SPECIFICATIONS
EFFECTIVE: 7-18-06
GRADING AND SURFACING OR RESURFACING AND WIDENING:
THE GRADE LINES SHOWN DENOTE THE FINISHED ELEVATION OF THE PROPOSED
SURFACING AT GRADE POINTS SHOWN DN THE TYPICAL SECTIONS. WHERE NO GRADE LINES
ARE SHOWN. THE PROFILES SHOWN DENOTE THE TOP ELEVATION DF THE EXISTING PAVEMENT
ALONG THE CENTER LINE OF SURVEY ON WHICH THE PROPOSED RESURFACING WILL BE PLACED.
GRADE LINES MAY BE ADJUSTED BY THE ENGINEER IN ORDER TO SECURE A PROPER TIE-IN.
CLEARING'
CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY
METHOD II.
SUPERELEVATION:
ALL CURVES a4 THIS PROJECT SHALL BE SUPERELEYATED IN ACCORDANCE MITH STD.
N0. 225.04 USING THE RATE OF SUPERELEVATION AND RUNOFF SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
SUPERELEYATION IS TO BE AEvOLVED ABOUT THE GRADE POINTS SHOWN ~ THE TYPICAL
SECTIONS.
DRIVEWAYS:
DRIVEWAYS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STD. 848.03
AT LOCATIONS SHOWN ON PLANS OR AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
GUARDRAIL:
THE GUARDRAIL LOCATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLANS MAY 8E ADJUSTED DURING
CONSTRUCTION AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHOULD CONSULT
WITH THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO ORDERING GUARDRAIL MATERIAL.
TEMPORARY SHORING:
SHORING REQUIRED FOA THE MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC WILL eE PAID FDR AS "E%TRA
WORK" IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 104-T.
END BENTS:
THE ENGINEER SHALL CHECK THE STRUCTURE END BENT PLANS. DETAILS. AND CROSS-
SECTION PRIOR TO SETTING ~' THE SLOPE STAKES FOR THE EMBANKMENT OR E%CAVATION
APPROACHING A BRIDGE.
UTILITIES:
UTILITY OWNERS ON THIS PROJECT ARE: DUKE POWER AND BELL SOUTH.
ANY RELOCATION OF E%ISTING UTILITIES MILL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY OTHERS.
RIGHT-OF-WAY MARKERS:
ALL RIGHT-DF-MAY MARKERS INJ THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PLACED BY CONTRACT.
~1 RAMEY KEMP
e -------+------
i ASSOCIATES, IN(
hu.1 1U." {11~nun
6101 FYYpYn INw, {uY 100
111MIII1IIMw CSOY 11111
M41T}OM{Ti M6{MpNFu

~o.R ~ ~ ~.
Note: Not to Scale ~°l[°A°I°1E ®1F N®l[$°]I"1FI ~AI~®1LIN~ B-+
*S.U.E. = Subsurface Util:'ty Engineen'ng I~I~JI~I®N ®~' I~I~~'I~f~~~
CONVENTIONAL PLAN SHEET SYMBOLS
BOUNDARIES AND PROPERTY.•
State Line --•
County Une -•-
Township Line -•-
C'riy Line --
___ -__ __
Reservation Line
-
Property Line -
Exisfing Iron Pin
Property Comer
Properly Monument
Parcel/Sequence Number
Existing Fence Line -x
Proposed Woven Wire Fence
Proposed Chain Link Fence
Proposed Barbed Wire Fence -
Existing Wetland Boundary - - -
Proposed Wetland Boundary
Existing Endangered Animal Boundary
Existing Endangered Plant Boundary
BUILDINGS AND OTHER CULTURE.•
Gas Pump Vent or WG Tank Cap
Si
gn
W
ll
e
Small Mine
Foundation
Area Outline C
Cemetery
Building
School
Church
Dam
HYDROLOGY.•
Stream or Body of Water
RAILROADS.•
._,,,•_ Standard Gauge
m rnrsrper,v,~r
.
RR Signal Milepost ~
--__- wtrosr u
-,-- switch ~
~c~
-_- RR Abandoned -- - ~ -
- - - - -RR-Dismantled - --
0
d
-«
a
-x-x-
-~--
a
-•~-
-~-
-q-
0
0
0
'k
0
L.J
Hydro, Pool or Reservoir f ----~
Jurisdictional Stream ~ u- J
Buffer Zone 1 -~ ,
Buffer Zone 2 -~ z-
Flow Arrow ~...-...-
Disappearing Stream }-..-_-
Spring ~-...`_,.-~
Swamp Marsh ~
Proposed Lateral, Tail, Head Ditch ~
False Sump ~y
RIGHT OF WAY.'
Baseline Control Point
Existing Right of Way Marker
Existin
Ri
ht
f W
Li
g
g
o
ay
ne ---
Proposed Right of Way Line -®--
Proposed Right of Way Line with
Iron Pin and Cap Marker
Proposed Right of Way Line with
Concrete or Granite Marker
Existing Control of Access - ~_-
Proposed Control of Aaess ~_
Existing Easement Line - -E--
Proposed Temporary Construction Easement- -E
Proposed Temporary Drainage Easement- -TpE-
Proposed Permanent Drainage Easement- -ppE-
Proposed Permanent Utility Easement -rue-
ROADS AND RELATED FEATURES.•
Existing Edge of Pavement --
Existing Curb -•
Proposed Slope Stakes Cut - - - ~ - - -
Proposed Slope Stakes Fill - - - P -- -
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp
Proposed Wheel Chair Ramp Curb Cut -
Curb Cut for Future Wheel Chair Ramp - cr
Existing Metal Guardrail
Proposed Guardrail '
Existing Cable Guideroil
P
d C
bl
G
id
l
ropose
a
e
u
eroi
Equality Symbol 0
Pavement Removal
I~EGETATION.•
Single Tree Q
Single Shrub o
Hedge ^~^^~^~^^'
Woods Line ~^u^,.r,r,.
Orchard 0 0 t3 fl
Vineyard •~.raa
EXISTING STRUCTURES.'
MAJOR:
Bridge, Tunnel or Box Culvert corx
Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall and End Wall - ~ coxc ~~
MINOR:
Head and End Wall coxc ~.
Pipe Culvert
Footbridge ~--------(
Drainage Box: Catch Basin, DI or JB ^~B
Paved Ditch Gutter -----
Storm Sewer Manhole 0
Stone Sewer ,
UTILITIES.•
POWER:
Existing Power Pole
Proposed Power Pole b
Existing Joint Use Pole ~-
Proposed Joint Use Pole
Power Manhole
Power Line Tower
Power Transformer 0
U-C Power Cable Hand Hole
H-Frame Pole
Recorded ltd, Power Line
Designated lLG Power Line (S.U.E.')
TELEPHONE:
Existing Telephone Pole +
Proposed Telephone Pole -0•
Telephone Manhole 0
Telephone Booth p
Telephone Pedestal 0
Telephone Cell Tower ~,
lYG Telephone Cable Hand Hole
Recorded l6G Telephone Cable
Designated U~G Telephone Cable (S.U.E.')- ----~----
Recorded WG Telephone Conduit ~~-
Designated USG Telephone Conduit ($.U.E.')- - - - -~~- - --
Recorded USG Fiber Optiu Cable -~ •^-
Designated USG Fiber Optics Cable (S.U.E.'~- - - - -~ ~•- - -
WATER: p
Water Manhole
Water Meier o
Water Valve
Water Hydronf Q
Recorded U~G Water Line •-
Designated U~ Water Line (S.U.E.')--- - - - -•- - -
Above Ground Water Line "~~ gym..
N:
N Satellite Dish p
N Pedestal
N Tower
llG N Cable Hand Hole p
Recorded lYG N Cable ^-
Designated lYG N Cable (S.U.E.') ----n---
Recorded lLG Fiber Optic Cable ~~o-
Designated U~G Fiber Optic Cable (S.U.E.'r - - - -* •>- - -
GAS:
Gas Valve Q
Gas Meter
Recorded U~G Gas Line •-
Designated lLG Gas Line (S.U.E.`) ----•---
Above Ground Gas Line "" `°'
SANITARY SEWER:
Sanitary Sewer Manhole
Sanitary Sewer Cleanout p
lLG Sanitary Sewer Line ::-
Above Ground Sanitary Sewer ~~~ :~,QY s....
Recorded SS Forced Main Line ,s-
Designated SS Forced Main Une (S.U.E.') - - - - _,„_ _ _
MISCELLANEOUS:
Utility Pole ~
Utility Pole wish Base ~
Utility Located Object p
Utility Traffic Signal Box (9
Utility Unknown lYG Line „~-
lLG Tank; Water, Gas, Oil
AEG Tank; Water, Gas, Oil
lLG Test Hole (S.U.E.") ~
Abandoned According to Utility Records - AATUR
End of Information E.0.1.

ro _-RAMEY"KEMI
~t ASSOCIATES, I

SURVEY C01~TROL SHEET 8-4197
eL~~
DATUM SCRIPT ION
BL

PO1 NT DISC.
NORTH iNE UCA[IIED OXlAOlMNE SSFEY OEYEIQ°ED Fp4 THIS PAOIECT

- - ~ - - - - -
..... .. EAST ELEVAT ION L STAT 1 ON OFFSET 1S fllSED DY ill S7QE PUII D.',n9D(NgES EAABLISMED lit'

1
. - - - - - - 1~ FD91pNAIENf 'fli~IBE4'

2 Bl • I 744865.2103 1123468.7950 1332.31 11.46.23
14
54 L T IIIIN JW dS SIAiE PUKE G4ID DSI~f1lAFE5 CF

3 BL ~ 2 745174.6990 1123780.0595 1296.68 .
15.80.68 17
67 L T ACrtIHAi 14551$99AYU EAS7L6e 11~2T9Y711
BL-3 745214.6945 1124178.3203 1262.94 .
19.77
58 i
~'~~ DJ10lNED C8I0 FN:iD4 USED D1 lNIS PFO.EC/
4 BL-4 745110.4810 1124575.5538 1237.91 .
15, 23 LT
23.92
27

5
BL 5
744784.4980
1124943
3200
1230
44 .
13.64 LT iMEGUYBFMiYI/pt7E,WD

6
BL-6
744413.4807 .
1125085
4220 . 28.90.56 15.12 LT IDCN.fEED M74lIdDAI (~gM10 DfAA1CE FIIY
'
'

7
BL-7
744049
9513 . 1220, 05 32.84.35 15.66 RT BIIpI~BL•2
i0 {• AAT70M tD~lp IS
. 1125341.2335 1218,54 OUTSIDE PROJECT LIMITS S ~~~`~~ 472Q9
N! LINEM DIIlMS1DY5 AAE UIF11ZE01QV1NYUL 0lSTA1fE5

................
........
...... YEMIGII DAUY USED !5 MNO 9B

BM1 ELEVATION 1268.32

N 745109 E 1124248 .. .....

BM2 .......

ELEVATION 1242.23
" " " " " " '••
BM3 ELEVATION 1227, B6

L STATION 20.83 53 RIGHT N 745 069 E 1124536 N 744832 E 1124840

NAIL IN BASE OF ]B' WHITE
OAK L STA TION 23.64 37 RIGHT
L STATION 27.93 46 RIGHT

................................ NAIL
........ .. IN BASE OF 12' POPLAR NAIL IN BASE OF TRIPLE POPLAR DN CREEK
... .......................... .
"""••
BANK
........................................
U STA 10+00.00 BEGIN STATE PROJECT 335444.1
LOCALIZED PROJECT COORDINATES
N = 744131.8494
E = 1113404.0284
NOTES:
I END STATE PROJECT 33544.1.1
D PROJECT COORDINATES
N = 7441184866
E = 11252397358
THE CONTROL DATA FOR THIS PROJECT CAN BE FOUND ELECTRONICALLY BY SELECTING
PRQIECT CONTROL DATA AT:
HTTP: \WWWDOHDOT.STATENC. USPRECONSTR UCTiHIGB'WAY/IACAT1011GPROJECT
B4197 ~ CONTROL 050304.TXT
® INDICATES GEODETIC CONTROL MONUMENTS USED OR SET FOR HORIZONTAL PROJECT CONTROL
BY THE NCDOT LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT.
SITE CALIBRATION INFORMATION HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED FOR TH73 PROJECT.
IF FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, PLEASE CONTACT THE LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT.
NOTE: DRAWING NOT TO SCALE
VICINITY MAP

-L- (SR 1552)
8'-0" 6'-0" VARIES VARIES
10'-11' I 10'-11'
i
VARIES VARIES
9.3'-10' i 9.3'-10'
i
VARIES I VARIES
0'-1.7' I 0'-22'
I
CI ~ Ci C1
GRADE
POINT ~
~~M~~ ._OR Ol
W ~
T GRADE TO El 6, U 6,
THIS LINE
LOCATION AND WIDTH Of
IXISTING PAVEMENT VARIES
TRANSITION FROM EXISTING PAVEMENT TO TYPICAL SECTION N0.1 FROM:
-L- STA. 21+25.00 TO STA. 21+50.00
USE TYPICAL SECTION N0. 1 TYPICAL SECTION N0. 1
-L- STA. 21+50.00 TO STA. 23+50.00
-L- STA. 26+00.00 TO STA. 27+00.00
TRANSITION FROM TYPICAL SECTION N0.1 TO EXISTING PAVEMENT FROM:
-L- STA. 27+00.00 TO STA. 27+25.00
l
oR
USE TYPICAL SECTION N0. 2
-L- STA. 23+50.00 TO STA. 24+20,00 BEGIN BRIDGE)
-L- STA. 25+15.00 TEND BRIDGE) TO STA. 26+00.00
W/GUARDRAIL
oe
GRADE TO
THIS UNE
ROADWAY DESIGN PAYeAe1T OES
91GI~~ ENWNEER
,.'~tN L'~oi;''
aQ~~ESSIOtil~O`~-
SEaI
21111
-;~iyrFNG I NEAP i~ c
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
~ PROP. APPAOX. T ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE, TYPE SFP.SA, AT AN
AVERAGE MTE OF 110 LBS. PER S0. YD.IN EACH Of iW0 IAYERS.
PROP. VAR DEPIFI ASPELLLT CONCRFIE SUAFACE COURSE, TYPE SF93A, AT AN
C2 AVERAGE RATE OF 110 LIS. PER 50, YT). PER 1' DEPRI TO PIACED IN IAYFRS
NOT IESS THAN 2.5' W OEPD1 OR GREATER THAN 5 ' IN DEPTH.
~ PRW. APMAX /' ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE COUASE, TYPE ROS.OR, AT AN
AVENGE RATE OF 156 LRS. PER N,1. Y0.
PROP. VA0. OEPM ASPHALT CONCPEIE RASE CW RSE, TYFE 835.01, A7 AN
E2 AY9IAGE PATE OF 111 LBS. PDI SQ YD. PER 1' DEP1N TO PIACED W IAYERS
NOT LESS THAN S' IN DFIRI 0A GREAT9 TtMN 5 1 R' RJ DEPRI.
T EARTH MATERIAL
U D05IING PAVEAIENf.
W VARWIE DEPTH ASPIW.T PAVFMBVT tSEE WEDGING DELL THIS SXEEII
NOTE: PAVEMENT EDGE SLOPES ARE I:1 UNIESS SHOWN OTHERWISE.
-L- (SR 1552)
VARIES 11'-0" - I VARIES 11'-0' 6'-0'
U'-0' I - 22'-0' W/GUARDRAIL
I AUN.
C1 I C1
GRADE I
D3 POINT I m
.OB
v ~ ~ b• L
GRADE TO THIS UNE
TYPICAL SECTION N0. 2
MIN. ~
UjU
Detail Showing Method of Wedging
RAMEY KEMP
A------
_} ASSOCIATES, INC
' ::::~:w;:.
..w...~..~..

?,~ oa
USE TYPICAL SECTION N0. 3
-DET- STA. 10+85.01 TO STA. 13+96.78
~. -~-
' 2 I'-0' OUT TO OUT WIDTH OF BOX BEAMS
(STAGE U
6' I 19'-5' I'- I
~ 18'-~/q' CLEAR ROADWAY
TEMPORARY
GUARDRAIL
RADE ~
DINT ~ C I
'I
0.04
20'-6"
7 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE
BOX BEAM UNITS = 21'-0'
STAGED CONSTRUCTION

-DET-
14'-0'
C1
C1
GRADE
.a1 POINT
m
9.5' (
GRADE TO THIS UNE
TYPICAL SECTION N0. 3
I BAR
METAL
RAIL
W/GUARDRAIL
?\~
~ -L-
~~~I- ins
PROkCT AEF9IENCE NO. SE@ET
8-4197 2-
ROADWAY DE9GN PAVF/AENf DD
ENGINffR ENGINEER
r~PtH CARp~ ~~.
~F.SSIpN
y9 ~=
?
(
Q
SEAL
21111
f Pr~
4.
`~.I EIL~
;.~
4n
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
~ PROP. APPAO%. I N' ASPNAIT CONCRETE SURFACE LOUSE, TYPE SPR.SA, Ai AN
AVERAGE FATE OF 81.5 U4t PFR 54. YD. 0.J FACN OF TWO IAYFA3.
J PROPOSED 8' AGG0.EGATE BASE COURSE.
T FARTN AulERL1L
NOTE: PAVEMENT EDGE SLOPES ARE 1:1 UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE.
12 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BOX BEAM UNITS = 36'
BOXED BEAM DETAIL
o~ -_RAMEYAKEMP_
f ASSOCIATES, INC
.~W.~~.
:-~_ "`
__ _ _. __ .

SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES
!: RAMEY KEMP
f ASSOCIATES, IN(
~..,:o::,;a..,~.~.
..,,,...~....,n»

...,...., ~,, uuG 1I-I6-0d
CXECIQD BY: M. COFFEE DAn: D8--07-06
PAOIECT RffRENCE N1. SHER
ASPHALT PAVEMENT STATE ®F N®RTIi CAR®LINA SUMMARY OF EARTHWORK 8-4'97 3 '
REMOVAL SUMMARY ntvTCrnu nF urruwAV~
RATAN TO RADON 50UARE YAA05
-L- RA 33+50 - RA 11+33.56 117.75
~- RA 71 a96be - RA 36+00.00 321.66

PRO1Ea Toru 799.01

SAY 100

NOTE: APf40IfWAtE QUAIR110F5 ONLY. IRlOA551FED IXGVAnON, BOROW
IXGVAIAN, NNE GAAgNG, CIFAIING MID GRUBING, AND lFNgVAL OF
EIIISTING MYFAIFNi V!LL @ PAID FOR AT 117E CCNJIMR lUW SWA PACE
F01 'GAADH9G'.

STATION 70 RA7AN UNCUSIFlFp
IXGVATAN
la ~1
UNOFRCUF
la. Yd-0 ROADWAY
EAIBMIIMD1i
+%
la r6t1
IOAROW
la. rd0
WARE
la. Y60
-0R- RA 10+00.00
-0R RA.17+96.71 751 BOA 557

-L-srAn+sD.oo
~- STA 11+30.00 BEGIN &IOGq 91 leg 9e

k RA 35+ISA0 IFND eAIDGq
1- RA 77+00.00 19 107 el

PROTECT SUROTAIS 361 1,1W 713

EST. LOSS DUE TO CIEWNG ANO GAUBDNG -10 10

FR. S% FOR REMCING TOPSOIL ON 70
BOAICYN /ITS

GRAND TO1M 7R 1,101 191

SAY 360 100
FSTYMTFD FAMIC FOR SOIL RABW7A710N • 500 SY
ESNNIED ORAWIGF ODCM FRGYADON AO CY.
x . oluNO rROx iaa a 1.1NF l0 ua a cwloUlL FRONTED 59FCF GRANUW DATFALLL CL II d ul • 500 CY.
rota Rlouoa uRn . oelara PION ewe a lure are ro Drol.3m uDR Pn0. FSiNUiFD UNDEtlCU7 - 100 CY.
Flue UN6a , mriwa PION uEr SLCipN a rAUUa aUABeAI m M a awq.e GUARDJRAIL J UM/Yl!!11\Y FSiWAt® R+OD@tfu AON~NSE ~IFA~tt IV • 500 7Nf.
w - rorawax a N+a PBaM Yfi.~w a raa ro em a cLUBOUA

5161WY'

RG
RA

FND RA

LOGTN)N
lFeeGIN
WAIRAM PORIT
~
rota
FINE IDAIN
W
'W~u
OMAC1
SRGLE
AEMOYE AEA/OYF
ANO
UNE .

'~'U~
5110E
GJRVED
DOUIE
FACED
APNlOACN
EPA
iWL01G
~ ~~

RO.L SHOUL
WID7X
APIAOACX
ENO
iRWNG
FND
APROACM
FND
IAAIIING
END
RI
M00

A
GRAD
350
TED!
150
TYPE
10
GT-1
W
NAD
AT-1
6.77 ATiBAIATOR
TYPE 750 FAC®
GUMDWI FaRNG
(RWDIM

CADBDIIAII ~a
L 37+01.92 71+39.12 R. 177.50' S/i79A7 e' v s6.ar 1.00' 1 1
-!. 77+16.01 11+0551 lT. 67.50' 77+16.06 7' 9' 50.00' 1 1
b 15+56.51 26+56.58 R. 100.00' 35+56.51 7' 9' 50.00' 1 1
~4 3f+00.00 35+15.00 LT. 50.00' ti.ar 55+00,00 3' 9' 6.15' 1 I
3 1 1 7
0®UL71ON FOR ANCHOR UNITS:
SUROTAL 375.00' 35.00' 7 GRALL-350 Q SO.ar • ISO.ar ADDDIONAL GUMDWL PO5T5 .-... 5 FA
OFOUCfI0N5 FOl AIJOfOR lMDS: -337.50' 3 6.71 Q 11.75' 5615'
1 AT-I Q 635' 6.35'
TOTAL IJ7.50' 25.00' I TYPE b Q IS.ar • 75.00'
SAY 137.50' 15.00' I37.50'

a. 11+1135 35+17.75 R. 11250' 3 iFAO'OIARY GUAADWL ON (RIDGE FOR RACAO CONSTRU
-0ET- 17+3&66 13+76.16 R. IJ7.50' 13+71.66 1' d' 50.00' 7 1FDFOMRY GUAPDRAIL
-0R- 11+11.21 17+37.71 li. 112.50' 13+17.71 3' b' 50.00' 7 7GVOAARY GUARDRAIL
6
SURCNM 36350' DFWC710N fOR ANCHOR IRarS:
OFDIICfI0N5 FOR ANCHOR UMIS: ~pp.Op' 6 iFAV 350 Q SO.ar . 300.OV
300.OD'
TOTAL 67.50'
SAY 67.30'

LIST OF PIPES, ENDWALLS, ETC. (FOR PIPES 48" ~ UNDER)
e7DwAtls ~ $ ;
"" ~ ~ o EV
A
e
o
+s
O.CSS Itl RC NPE ~ I
AB
R
n
r
RADON Z L1AS5 Itl RC FOE ^IlkAl11011f COATED CS. NPE 1YPE B CS N1E, TYPE R Mt6WN® RD. Ae.01 ~~~ i~N
0 ~ ~ n pp C.R GTCH BASIN
~
u " NIFSS N0191 01XBPM
N 3q
NNLF55 NOTED OIHRYASq
~ ~ ~
O
" ~
° G N.D.1. NARROW D0.0P INLET
O
~ HOR NPE,IYPE 5 OR D SID. 0.18.11 D
~
p + FAAME,GN7E5
MN HOOD ' D.I. DROP INIET
~
rt Z Z N~ ~ <
O RANDARD 810.0] ~ ~ ALDJ. A1EDW1 DROP INLET
r '
^ Z ~
` ~
i ~ OIHEAWISD o ~ S MAI.IPl. 3.1
RR
W SL
7
~
F <
L
t
~
uN. m
i (MA
O
O
1
~ y to YT. ~ g 1.8. IUNCIION BOR
S~ 3 ~ F
w F r
~ lY 13' 16' 21' 30' 36' {7' /8' I!' IS' 10' ZP 70' 76' /Z' 18' Il' 15' lY 21' 70' 36' {3' /8'
~ W CU.YDS. 'o
" A B a M.N. MANXOIF
0 0 = ~ ~ s O 0 ; i.B.D.I. TRAFFIC BEARING DIOP tl
_ Z Z ~ ~ Z s T.BJ.B. TRAFFIC BFANNG 1LICDOI
~ ~ ~ ° a
° < ° ~ Z
DR GAUGE O ~
° a ~ a D o D s z ~ D , TYPE OF GRATE a
0 0 0 0 ~ a 9 ~ u ~ ~ Ti ~ U
~ ~~~
° u E F G
Y RA 15+71 R. 1
1
1
I
-J' RA 35+7{ R. 1 ]3 31

TOTMS A 31 1 1 7
F RAMEYKEMP
ASSOCIATES. IN
,..wry

5 /,1
1~ „~
4:,~ :~
~ti-: ti
r ?w% ~ t:i
_,~ '~ ~~ O
it'.
1 -
V' ~1+
-~-~
~~; , ,.
__ _:,
-- >_ _ ~`
- - ~,~ ,y~
•L- STA, 23+92.27
13.8' LT.
rwERU BASE OrrcH
k~SEE OETNL •1
~~,i~l
/ -. ~r L.....
ry ~~:~~~
'°'" \:;`
aO
Z
0
U
Z
DETAIL °I
LATERAL BASE DITCH
~xoi ro Scau
_ ^
~ }. SbD~
~ um. D=1.o Ft.
20. Ft.
D= 30. Fi.
-DET- STA. IWO TO NTS LT.
DETAIL '2
TOE PROTECTION
~f ,o S~w
~d TW
fisvis E 4J 5rops
a= LOFT.
Est.65 Tons Class '1'Rlp Aap
-L- STA. 2550 Li. TO •L- STA.27~6A LT.
~'AT
N:
{,.
0
y ,,, y ,
~% ,.
r ~;
~~l ~~~
,; y~
~~~
~~~ ~ ~ ~
~ Q i
:ECi 5: Q~
_~.T I - .'.. c
w;wes 19~- I ';
,t.
f
'1 ~~ . J
~I'f ?, a ~ 1~~ `?;
I ~-
- g,~' ~ 1
I ~~; , 'i
'I~~~~~ ` i
~. rL'L71 RIP RA1j
.. '~ FBA o ., .~ '`\,

~~'G-.ril ~ - ~
BN-I ELEV. = 1268.32
-BL- STA. 1439 BS'AT.

~
.
~'~~~• =_
' _- -~

~~
NAIL IN BASE OF IB' +30
WHITE DAK ~
2976' d' n
'
' ' p,
YYY'"
,~ S 83
2D
001
E ~
N '
BEG1M TIP PROJ CT -91 +n
/+T~ cr..
~G1N ~~~~ ~ BN-Z ELEV.= 1242.23
T
2
AT
-L- POC STA 21+25D0 ~ NAIL N
BASE
0F52' TO EE REMOVE
~:

~
~ !
V POPLAR lSTR.PAY REV!
~
'~ 7 ^ E ~ ATE EXISTWG ~~~ $.~G~,
~ /

O
y ~
ti

v (?

!
i
!

0 e ~
/
JOAN KRIALEA McGIpPE
i OB /6t PC 759 / ~
Q
`~ NO DECK ARNNS ON BRILGE
~~~
\ \\
~ M
~\~
~\ ~ ~1 I

'VX~ i``~~~ V
y ~~~ ~
/ i i
~ ~1
ti ~ `c.
~~ ~ h J
~l i.~~
Ise
~~
-Y- -Y /
_L_
P1 Sto l1a09.32 P/ StG !0+(774
D= 34'25'598'fR71 p= 3P05'3O8'¢T1
0 = 190' 59' 09.4 D =8548' 42.4'
1 ~~
T =
9.30' T =
R = 300.0' R = 66.IX1'

P1 Sta 21+27.41 P1 Sta 2312925 P! Sto 25+4451 PI Sta 28+72.37
~= 18'14'003'fLT! 0' 0556'048'fRT) ~= 33'44'0117fRT1 p= 1550'48,4'(RTJ
D =!9'05'549' D =08'48' 53.0' D =28'38' 524' D = 521' 58.3'
L =95.41' L = 11271' L = 1076' L =26483'
T =4814' T =56.99' T =6084' T = 13328'
R = 300.00' R = 6500.0' R = 2OOA0' R = 9OOA0'
Se =SEE PLANS Se =SEE PUWS Se =SEE P1AN5 Se =SEE PCANS
O
MANY TEApE ADAMS
STEVEN RAY ROANS
oe 391 Pc yen
OB 762 PG 169
OB 591 P6 ]65

t
V \I
1 ._
y` . 'S ~.
"7 ESL2 TNS.CL'B'J ° ' ~
1,
i r F
.FF
P ESI. \
~`
°
YaJil +p
~
`
SSA'RT

fN0 SfiG
~ ~~+
~~
~~~ ~~
•
>
+7295 ~
~ , y\

S 39' 39' 482 E 9~
'
~x
S
BM-3
a,
AiL
5t
N
o
. i
O
LAKE JAIES PONTE pEVELOP11Eiii, pC.
D9 669 PO D
W/ ft
GRATE
aw sirE6i No.
ROADWAY DESIGN II701AI1DCS
FNGf~
,µ„11111,14,,,I,
~
!JRO1 B4GINE[i
„,111111,11,,,
~
.
,,,~~~
~~5
~~q,I•.
0
~ ,
~
,~`cSSpNy~~•'•;
4
l':
i 4~ l'•.
: Q~
E
i 21711 i
~~`~`~,:~
-'.
Viy ~NCIN4 9734
~ -
.,
y~!YCINE~QS
,
, ,
,
~d
~~ ~x~~
r i• ~V
~~
ro
Y- StD.10+00.00 03
L14VI.LE VEII, LLC
D/ 629 PG 231
0
.~
,,L ;' ,~
,- -~ J, ~ ~
TD i0E PROTECTIOI j"
y fXl (AG {- 5(0.25+50 TO -L- STADNiB kl". ~ ~ (^~~
y SEE OETNL •2 ,~ j j
7 ~i / j
EMD'>TIP PROJECT 8-4197 ~ ~ a
~~~ \ 4; rw ~tRSnr~u cRc
~
~ t. wOGP- ~, j
r /
ELEM
122786 A~~ /
'~
.
-,
5(0. PIT33 73 R'~ '
IN BASE OP TRIPLE
- ~ (
V~, / / ~~'
\~
'
~
~~
40. ON CREEK BANIF~, ~
`~
sa '- wr.,;:r,
\
Z '~. ~ I Ea,~wr
h 1' \
nw
~ ~ Jo
~z z
.
\ >'
J \
\$
i'~~~ ~~
~~P,
y -
~i 4 v ~
`-
.:~/ //
W/OEN/NG TO REMAIN 1N PLACE
•• DESIGN EXCEPTION FOR DESIGN SPEED
l
r,/ FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET N0.6
SEE SHEETS S-1 THRU S-
FOR STRUCTURE PLANS
~ ~~
y + ~~~~
~ \ ,_
1 ~;,, ~ , '' N~,!,
-r ~ ' ~
,; ,`
-' SIIRICLiE
\ ~`.
~ ``
7(711 GFDIR,P.~I
1;
J" I
~t
~~
~L, 5j4 ~
'.
RAMEY KEMP
ASSOCIATES, INC.
,..~~„ ;

O
AWtT tEAGE ABAYS
STEVEN RAT ABAAIS
OB 74 Pi SB]
Bi Tit iD H
q !10 Nr 363
1
ry
r"~
/ -
r'
07
a0
0
Z
O
c~
u
Z
~ a,~~ .~
Q
BED iE~P.BARR/ER Ral
-L- 5Ta25+5306
I TE~P.BARRIER RNL
LNVUE VE~.ILC
N0.
e~nta B1GItFfA
'}~ CARpI~''••. ~}H CARpI
'~~~,ESSIp :~ :'~a~'~ESSIOH
_' .a
21111 9734E
'• 5 ~ `•.
w
DETAIL =I
LATERU BASE OITCR
art ro Se°°
ww D r er. Sb°'
W~. D• l0 Ft.
B' 2A Ft.
0= 3A iT.
-TE'f- STA. qK0 TD it7S U.
i "~ zJ• -bRALT: T0~ ~ -- DB W PG tlq
QI NN 5~2'FJ Aaax ~
N ~ ~ ~ \
~ ~ '
~ b y •~ \
v ~
I " ~ >~
v
Q
y
~ ~~
,IOAx IuAUU YcuRRE v 5 3935182E ¢! _~ ~.
oe ~ rro n9 ,~ ~ ,
BY-3 ELEV. = 1227.86 \
a Z; ~
a -BL- STA 21.33 3T RT
~' ~ NAIL RI BASE DF TRIPLE
~~,~ PDPLAR ON CREEN,BANK
e
0 ~ ~ ~ ..
LATE ,wES ~ ew k n~OPIETTT, NE. ~ - ' \+ ~~Z
~~ 5ia~
~' ~ . ~ ~~~ ,,p
N ~IZ9
'~ ~ 5ta~
-OET- -OET- -DET-
Pl S1o b+5095 PI Slo 11+4g„gt PI Slo 13+7097 -~-
~ • IT 20' S421LTJ a ° 2T45'030' 1RT1 p ° 6230' 565 tRT1 Pl Sio 14+11,22
0 = 1T 21' 445' 0 =2838'526 D ° 114'35'296 a ° 3535' 102'ICTJ FOR -DET- PROFILE SEE SHEET NR6 cn
L =9992. C , ~, C = ~~, D = 114'35'296
R = ~ R ~ 49.40' T •3095' L =3105' SIIIGIIiE UESIDI (AgP,PA
~~, R = ~, T =1605' SEE SHEETS S-1 THRU S- .n
R ° 50D0' fOR STRLC7URE PLANS _ ~ =.=; ~~
~, -
RAMEY KEMP
A-
ASSOCIATES, IN
~~ ~~~.,
REVISIONS
,_, ,... ,
,_. \ ~ .~
~-
B \
Bu-IELEV.=1268.72 -
-AL- STA. Iq.3q BB'AT,
NAIL IN BASE Of IB'
WHITE OAR i
1
Q
t
V
I
V

f ~

OTE: EMBANKMENT COLUMN INCLUDES BACKFILL FOR UNDERCUT STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA PROJ REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
8.4197 x-1
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CROSS-SECTION SUMMARY
Station Uncl. Exc.
I~~ yd.) Embt
(cu. yd.) Station Uncl. Exc.
(cu. yd.) Embt
Icu. yd.)
-L- .DET-
21+50.00 0 D 10+00.00 0 0
22+00.00 1 9 ip+73.80 0 18
22+50.00 8 22 11+24.89 4 37
23+00.00 18 29 11+78.68 6 43
23+50.00 Z6 49 12+30.39 20 42
24+00.00 38 55 12+80.39 16 ?RR
Approzirnate quantities a1y. Unclassfied Excavation, Borrow
Excavaton, Fine Grading, Clearing and Grubbing, and Removal of
Existing Pavement wdl be paid fa at the contract lump sum price fa
'Grading'

_. , , . ~ _
i(~, t„i ' ~I " II I I'IYj I I ' I r;
~(~ I li{~ i. jl, fIi`} ~ I! Lt,(, I~fh I~I~.i_~. I~~ 11~11'~I., 1 13 III 'I. ,,.i I 1 '.(."~- tl ;~' , '
' ~ i .{,; li L'. I jl II `i I I ,' l.,I ,I'. 1. I li ILI i
~_~ 1
i , ~~ ~ , 11 I l , Ji II ~ 'I,II Ii f ~II, III li I ~ I ,'~ ~!`~ ~_{ ~(~l
~' I', I~ I, (y~~'
I I 1 1 I
'~ '~ _1 ! L.I ,~I Ir ~~.. _l I~. f~...'~ ,I 111 ~, ~~~I ~ I }.Ir V.J I,, Ii II~i'~~ I Il.~ I ,'~ I '~ ~ !I~ ' ~,. ~, r..
~ _~~
f'
~i~ ! ~~ i; I~ 11 l~ ~,L,1,~1 ( ~ 11~~ 111, ~~
~f~ 11 ~
(~. I II-f.', I,.. X11. ~ , III. ,L~I,~I ,I ~i i it i ~. ~ r III 'I' ~, '~ ' I •O
I
{ ~ I~r~j11, i-
I t ~
};; ~ { , f I I I '{ ~~' } ;~
I I { ~ I i , i~ { 1, I I
''
,~ ~ ~'{i, I't , I j , 1 ~ l _ 1 I
~.~I ,~' I:i ~ '~ ~ ,'
~~~' ~ i fi ~ ~ ~. I1i'I
(' ,. ~II
I
,
~{
~~
I
{ 1 ~ f ' r ~ ( , , I ~ I ~~
' ' ~ `~ o..i I 1 i ~ ~ ~~ { '.i
I I ~ }
I ,~
I1
I
i
......
' ..-
~' ~.; , _ I
1 ~ j + ~ ~I' ~' ' ~~' ,{
l'
1 i +~ ~ ~ r
( , I
~ I i I
I ~ ,
I.
/ t' I 1 c ~ + II'
,_ _ ~1, I li' 1 1 11 I ~ _
' "..~ , I ~I ' {.-~j ~ -~ ~ ~ -~,.~.~.I ~ 1 it ~ I i `I i T I- ~ -I-~ 1 I-f ~'1 ~-L.! ~ l ',-. I 1 .~-,-. i ~,. 1 I , I I. ~ ~. ~ ,..~. , ~ ~. I
. ~ ~ ~ i { I i_, ~ I I 1 , I I i~ .-, : 11. 1 i I I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I I T1 i I~' ~ :. '. ' ' I ~{ ,
ICI , 1 I ' : ' I I I ~I i I ~ ! I I r j I { ~ i ( : ~ ~ } } ~ ~ Ii 1 4 I 1 } ~ ~ I ~ I , ~ ~f f_ ~ ~~ i ~1 II i ~ ~ I i ~~ ~ ~ ~ (i ! i ~ i i I I .-'
I ~ ~ ' ~ I ~ '; 1 .I ~ 1 ~ ~:. ' { , i.. , (} ~ ~. I , , I ~ } ..III ~ I~ I ;. , r ! } ~ } '.. {. i (I ", , ~ i. ! L' ~ , I ~ i I. ' ~ ~ ( ~. I. r.. (. , ~ I I I ~ .. ~i I ~ I ~ ! i ~..
~.~~ r I I;~..; rl~~;. i. 'll~i ~~ ~I~- I.1.'~Ill,f. lL;.i; L I.,. ~ ,~ ~~. ~I: .,.1111 I}.I ~.~I I, _~~. 1. t.l ~ X11.11 ! I~ I li~'~ ~ ~ } ~ '
~,L., ~.1 ~.. ILl ~ ~ I I ~ ~I ~'} I ~t,1 I
,~ . ' ::J-. : 1_ r ~.L~~ ~ ~ } ~ I ~. ~` ", 1- -}->`'~~ _ } ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L, ~ ~ ~ i L ~ 1.1.1 i~~ .~.~- 'r1 I _f. }.1. .1_ . ~:' Y •_~r . I. I I I ~ ~ _ ' ~_ I i '.
r I -1 III ~ II. U 1. ;.~: I~I -I ~~ ~L: I. ~LI~{:I_i ~i I:~r' I:~I- ~ ''I Y.. ~ '
;~Ir I I'''~ -I ~ ~ ~ , ) ~~ I I ~ 1 tl~ I 1 t '1' }-~ I-~'il~ ~ ,,
f
".~ I I j.~t ~~ ! i i I J I , ~.. { t I , I! {.~l:i , ,_I ~ ~'I: ~. i (~~~ ~~~
I , ~ .I~!~r ~ }~ :~ ~ I ~ } ~{ ~ ICI ill_ II } I 1 _ I ~ ~~', I~I i~ '
I '_I I I ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ I ~. i I r. ( ~ I (. f I. ~:I. ~ 1 1 ~ , i I i ~ I. ~.i l ~ { ~ ~ ~ 1 {..~... ~. ~ I _ (} ~ .. , I III _ I ~ r : I . I i I '~ i ~ I
~ I ~ ~.. ~ .~ I t. I ! I III ,
1 } I ,,I I ..1~ -.~ ,! ~ ~. I, 1~ <<tif~ ll '11•. , { , ~ I;i j; ~I;I, , ~, _I .
{ _I I I IJ 1 ~I ~ t~ ~ ~ f I 1
... I I~ I r ~.,I ,~f I ~; 11.1. 1 __~ I I ill. I~ I ~ ~. I
II I-a~ L { 1 ~ I ~I L 1.'I~ L~~ r I' {-. I-J{ i{ ~ L I { ! ,;~'~-;_!t-f ,. I I.-Y+-+,- ~~.r, I :., I~.I II ,
_'~~~ I ,~I i i~' { :I.rI., ICI I,f I. {.~;. {:.i~~:'~ ~..ff ~. ~ C.I ~...' '.1 ~~I ~ {..'.~1{..'..( '~~ I ~I~~(. I. !1~~~ ~~~.~~~ ~' ~( ~ j~I.,-~ i :I~ -',Ii ~~'; ~ I
:I~ I~,~I,1 {11 Ij{I I~~. ,l ~~~11} L~1;'~'r~l ~i~~ (~,I ( ~~~ I:}II;{~ I ~(~I~ ~~ 11}~ ~ {~ :II jl.'1~1~ ,~1~~1 I~IIi; "~~~IL~ !~L~~ ~~~
J{ 1 +
~ _: 1. L a.:- . I ~, ~{ L I I .,~ I I.. I 1 i 1' ~ ,.. i i I I I, ~ }. ~ 1 f I , I I ., i - i I ,
~. .. .I. ~ I. 1':;...~ I -~. :'. I ~.,~ I lrl,.}. I ;~I F,..i... ~I ~~~.t.~ ~~~.r~ { ,.~.~L~-~.~.}r'"i a±~-1-a{. r.~-1 ~ +L,.;. 1~, ~, !I. ..~.~~ '~.~.~ I, '~~
' I ~ I;!~~ I.l,ifl{Il1i'I} ~I~I~~~i~ { ~,' I{~+tT~~,,11; I{~ f , ~ ,: ~.p
1 I ~ , 1 1 C~
:~', ~ .~ .' I~:~,,I I .ILI Ifl~~~ IL~~( I~l..ll I' ~-~~II ,~li(.. i ~ ~ I ~ ~II~!. ~i ~I~!...fl 1' L1..~1 1111.. ~~I~III ~{i~ i( ~~ li Vii,' i I: (,~ I I' I~ " ,;'
~ ' l l J l I~ II I I I I I ,I I (~ I i ~ ~~ I l i i ~ (} ~ I I II((I ~ 1;~ }( ~ 1 ~, ~ I~ ~~~~~ f i ~~ ~~~ I I I{ 1 ~~ ~~, '' I I I I ~ I I (% I X 1 1 j
1 , l~ I I;, i i i !, l l I; -ia ~I-: 1 a -~. I , I I I } I I I I I r I
, ~ i 1 {...
I I t ....r 1 f {.:L ,. Ill r II,~ 'i~.
~1 ~~ I 1 I I ~ I I , I ,. , I1 ~~ ~I !;~ I,I , r~, ~, I :~ 1 ~ j-I4 i i1, - 1. ;"
,. ~ i! I j'I'r i 1 ;I I', ~ it
I i.l
I
1 I I I I,{II I ~,~ '
' ;~ ~ ~ I~ f ' ! I' ~, ~ 1i1~~I I ~ '~ 'I ~ :} i I I ~II ~I.~I ~I Ili i '. I~ ~ ', '
I ~ I ~_ ! ~I ~~ ~ ,
~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~l
I
Iil: ~ I i. ~ Ili liI,I
I
I . ~ .
i ~ 1{ I I~ ~ ~~~ I I I~ (
~~ ~ {' II I ~~'-+ I ( I ~ l ~ ~ I~
I i 1 ' i
!' i1
' ~ ~,
i ! is I
I ~ ~ ~ ~ i
I I ,
' , I I
I I 1 II
~~~~ li
I
;~~ ~ ~ ~
I
,
1
1~ ~~{;
I
i
1
I
(
1
i it ~I
I °~ '1 I ,
I
I
~. ~ I I I ! I
I, I
I I ,,
I I ~ ~ ~ I~I I ' l'~ I 1~ Ili ;, I ~ ( I it r I ~ I I jl I I...~~ { '~,I i I.
I l l ~ i ~ ~. I' I I I, ~ I I I I l i ~ I I 'I
~'. ( J ~ (~ ~,'l I ~ l ~ .I 1 ~ I II. ! 1, 1' rl I~ I ,i '.( II , ~ , I:'. ~I I~~~I Ill 1 "(~ "
I~i L I I I I l" I ~' I I. li ~ i 'I I II I i\ ~ i
~I I {.' I I~ I S ~'.I I Ili' ~ it i~' -! ,1 iil'f ~'~ ~ II '~ { "~`~ I I , I I -
_ ~ ~I ~, i' ~ ~ ~; ~. J. 11 i it II Ir :I. ..i. W I.II~ ~{~I I ~ , 1: I I
1 I,It,
j It ~ I i' t 'li;
I
~ I ~ ~ ~'~': I P~.II,lil ~ Ili 'I ~I11 II L.}. i Ij ~ I~ , I ~Ill~t,. I'r. 1 I :~I,. I. ! 1
~' ~ ~~I ~
t 'ril'l I~~, ~I'I,IIJ ~~ 111 ~I III`~'~I ,~' ,~1: I~1, t ~ ~N~ 1 I
m l~: f le I 1 1
II~ ~ I I
II ~ ,
I J_ 11
.. ~I ~ ii ~'~ I 1...
I
I ~ ~ •,--
~~ ~~ '~
i' II r~ ~ i1. iil' ~ ,
l1 ~ I, ~
~ G'~ I ~ I'r~~ I i ; - .~L . } ~ t ~'-~_~ i l III ; I ! I_.. I ~ t' I' ' ' '
F rT1 l: '
I t I ~ ~ fl ,
~ +i I I }L,! j ,I,CI 1 111{li , II '; I ~~~ ,1 `~- r...l + - .. 1 ,
..... I I : ' ~ `.il I I". I I,I'' ~ f 11~. ~. I II r I. I III{ ^r~+ ,I', I.II ~I ~II III~.~ I I 11'~' i~, .'.
, I i JI
I ~ 1 1 : i f~ ~I I f i l
' '.,' z, I I I~ + , 1 1, II ~, ~ fl 11'1 I II I' II{11, li ~ ii ~ I I I I .1 { II I' ~ ;
!~.. i ~ I ~:I~ I ~1~:~1 I'I.,~ ]ill X1.;1 I}.I ~~ ~. ~~1... II~~~}~. ' ~'' ~; III i'~~a f~ l I}1~1 ,~ ,I I 11:~ I ~' ~:I
I i tl1 I I J I, ,Ilil 1 ;{ „ 1 1 li
0 -, .~.:., } _~ ,~~'?Y a~-r-.-;;-111 I ~~~Y}~,,~ ~-I"r-11..~~ ,,t~_a It lml'Ilfi a I i:Jl.~ :J.II 'I. ~_ll ,_ II{I'}~I ifl ,~ I ~ ~„ r~ l '!, ' I
11 I ~ ~ i.~ l
. o;ll ~ 1 ; ~~ ;II ~iI;I ~i ;;, II. ii ,,ir l ~T I'Fl I I'I 11 i ~` ~ ~ ~?~.... ~
fn II II' 1 ~I 1 ILI III }~ t{f~}I ~, fl i{ II++I ~I I, ft 1 Iji~ i(l li ~---' IIII , _li r ,
i,.ll I. , I ~ Iil ,!I. ~; ~~ '~., 1..'.1111 li I liI':(,I{~I:~~ ,lli IIf I. , 11`~~..li „ I; 1 {Ii{ r V..' i
iJ I lil I
' ! , ~ i ,11~ ! , t (, 1. Ill ~,
1 I' l l ~ .~} 1 I I;I '~~i 111 ~+;~ ~ II i i~L,~ ,~i L.I.
c'~' I I 1 I I I t I ~ } I ~' I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ,
~,..) ' {._.I Lj ...l_~I I 1 ,I I I II I II ,
I NI ;I},,~_~'~1~~~~;~ I~ L, .~ a~~.l~_ ~1 , I~ ~ rluul ~~ ~'' ~~''.' Iv'° ~ I ' ~ 1 I
~'~I I 1 ~ } + ~- 6~ ~ 1. li II,I III ~ ,
I 1 ~'I ~' !',o `' , ~, I I 1 l 1 I (I.{ 1 i'I}I it ~'~ ~ (, ,, -~,-i ~ {, I,c1~ _ L I II
~ I ( I ~ ~r.I
- :.~'. ~ } i I. ~~; I!: ~ I 1. ~ Ili li. rn , I ~il L:iL l ja .:I. ~i:.~ii 1 I J l~ 1 ~ I ~I ~I~~I - i. r ,
~~Dj ~ I ~ ~, I ~ ~I' ~I p1 I ~ ~ .I
: ,. ~ I, li,.t Ali ~i. ~i II~~~~ I I II~,I I II [ I. I; I: ~. I.l. l~~l~l li ~l~ I Ijll ~ I ~~~ ~'~~ li ~I '' ~ ,
~~ ~ ~~ ( II r-' ~' 1 ~{. 1 1 I ~1 if
.~^~..'. ~..._: ~ ~, ~ i I I~~I i~l „11-~ Ir I' ~' ~ ~ I'. 111:. (.. '~{ •II_. I i I{ Ili ,IIII III ~ II{! '~,!' I ' 11 I' l I
I
I!f ! ,' '.I II '..I rrl II I I I~ I I', ~~~I ~}' ~ - }IJ-I .I. I ~ I ~ '-.
~ -1 N ~:-+ ( ' !i ~~'~~~ '.r: .ill _i ~ I I I {I'~ ~~ ~ II ~ 11.1+~'~IIIL.I I '' ( ~~~ -I ~'..I
~ D ~ i k II 'i~ I I(I >'~ I I II 'Ii I I ISI LI11 ~I ~1 I jll I Ili
~ OD '~U'f ~ II ~ , N I 11 I b ,III l~ I! f II,'I I:rt li 111 N ~ N _,
.. - ~ ~' ~~._ ~ ~ ~+ ! ~~1 ~~~~} I.I ,~'II J f~l~l I'~( Ilo 11 l~ I IL~,1 I~li~„ ~I II~{ i
,, ~ f rl I N
N IN I , ~I I -~ I , IQ I~+ I ~ 'I Q I. I, I ll1 : r I I I ' I ~ I I I N ~~ r ~ C5~ ~.~ r"
.~' ~ iI N'' ICI ,I I o o ~~ w
II_
t~ ~I I I
Go ~ f I I! li ~i 1
Imo: 1 ~ I I 1 1
'~ ~ ;. ~
+` I ~ ~ ~ rn ; ~ ~ I I I ~ ~, ~ I ~~ 1 . I I I~, I ~ I~ I ~~,,;
I
N 1 I I N„ II:~ N
I
, ,.
I
~I
I I
I
i
(17 ,
m ~ 1
o, .~
I
I I
I
, I~ilr I~
'~
' O~ ~ ~I I .1 I I { ~ 1~_ ~,~ 11 li. III ~L, I I i ; 1' I II hb ~
I I
O . I 1 i.1 I,. ~ 'IIjII il~il(II i,~ III I I 1 I II ~ ~ I,,I~ ' I I i ~ _ ~O
I ( I I I I III I I I I I I I I I I~ I I
I 1 ! ~ Ill ~I I ,II I~ lily illl. ~ 1 { i 111 I I i~l~ IIII I~~I ( I, { -
I 1 r' , I ! 1 l~' I ' I~ I I ~- I
.f I 1 l., l I 1 ., ., ,. ~.i ~..L_, 1. i_~~I IIJ ICI-1. :.l;f .i I I i.:~ ~I'11111 ~~~~1, III I I I ! ,
r
I ,
,. I I 1 'i I
I ~ } I ~ I I ~~Il I ! , !I l 'I. ..1 ~ I
r ~ I I I ~ I III 1 I ,~1 I ~( i 1 I~1 I
~ ~ I~ II I j , i 1 I n I
I I ~ ~l,il I I I '.I '-Y~ I 'I , I~ I!~I ~~ I I
I I ~~ ,- ~ ,I. , 7 .. 1-~ =-{''~~YY~1 I L r.,- I I !{ I I_ 1 I I I I i t ~ I
~I,
I I
~r-
L. I ~. ~ i'
I ~~" 1 I' I l l ~ I ~ I I I~' TI'I '{ ~r- I
I 11 { I , 'li ~1 I I{ L' I I~~~i 1.'~ i~ I I I I I I I ~1 i ,' II ~-I ~V
I ) ~I I ~. i';1 I!1!..I I:,LI I I~lil ill 1, Ij 1.1 i~ ~I, ~I II Ir I i~: I~'I I I lil: ~ ' '
f II II~ I~LII 1i. Ijll .Ill { ;i , 11.~ 111111 ~i I,II '} llll ~ ~ I,,; III it I~ I ~~
I I I ~ I i I i II I IL1' li I II I I ~~ f
I ...I . ~;. 111 ':.~:'-I , ~, IF~.I I I.~ ~II~ I~'I ~'I III ! Li{III ,llll,f I I ;I'I I
.~i I'
J .i1' I
7 ~ ~.
i. I
t ~I
I •J - Li
l I I I I ~i I{ ;. ~ I I 1{ ~-i "' ~l I.~~ i I "i I' ,.1-, l L} ~ _I. i l I
'~~ I I it , I,,. L. { I. {.. ~1 I, ., ,
I.I I Ili { .!111 I III I i } ~. I I I~i i .} II I( I '1111 ' II .(~. 1~I.1 i. i t' ~ '. j.
I I 1 I i ~~ I L.11; I ~I.~.I i,fllil III LI IL}I (~I ~ I IJ(r' j III.. ' iLL~I I. I 1 I1.~,. ILI II. 1j .!I iI~ III I IIII ~~
~ I IIII 11 ( ~ I I I
1 _IF1 II ,.,I 1 ~j I I I Il } f I~ ~ ~ Ii,I ` I
,. L ~ 1 ' l:i .-,1.~1 1: ,,.~~.ff } '1~~ ~ L Ll!~ ~ i ~ I~ ~ I~~~ {I lil ~ Illljl r III I I'1~1 II~I~ i
1 t~ r 1 l
~( „l 1 i r\ I i i{{1 I ~'I ` ILI l II t)~~~ II If Ir ..!1 II I III,.
' } I ~ , II ,IL I I 1 ~ ;(il ~I i 11 1 ; f.}I~ I ~ cam,
l I ,
I I 111 }'";' I LIB ~ i I. ~I' i } it ILC~ I I Il j\l\I L' I- ~t #;{ 1 11 'jIIT}-~1, I II-,; ~;' jl ; II;'I1 ~,' 'il 'jl
.!I ILIii~;l' 11;;11 11111 i ,11 I1 ~ I I L '~l i' I ilr~il~l lrll ~I~ ,~ `~ ~ LI I II lili., u;~~, I IL I 'O
{ ~ II. lll~~ll }.,.1;111 ~ ~'_I~ 11 Ili,i l- I I,II~ II~,II I ,~ I I}~; ICI ill ~J~'J Fill. I~ v ' ' ,I ~' ,
, ,. ,
i ~~I~~L ', 1 1. ~~~. 1 I' .111, { 1,.1 { ''I, , , I
, II - I 1 ~!~_I_, ~L...L f.)-{J~ lI !I. {' tII,~I~L1 I, I 1 I ,r
7 1~ `I
~ 1 1 I 1I J 1 ail 1 1 1 11 I II ~ 1 I'• I ~ ~ ~..1- I I 11, ,.:'I 1 I! \ l ,I ~
I' I I i'Il' II 11 { ~ ~ ( ILII~II I lil I I~I~I I I ~ I
'. :~. I 1~1,, I II~1,1 I. I I ~i1 I...I I1 {I .. I f ff ~..}.l_L1 {11 111 II11{I , :.. { L~ I~~,f i
f I ~ { ~,, I' Dill l( I; ~~ I ~ { ~ ~.i i ~ i Ifi 1. }I I~~I~l~~j'il {~ !{. { ( ~~{l i1111'i ~lj i~li ~; i ,IIII ~ II ~'I I II'i ~ l
~~ jjI'~ '~ I ~ ~ t,
I~ I i? I I.,il ~ l~ li~ 1 ~li~l II ~l { I} il'l}II iI Illl !I (~I I ~i~ t) I~I ~ I~ ,r,l~li"1 I.' III I ~I~I ' I~i I I 11 `~
! I11.~:.1.}.~I ~;.i1.1:'I~ Ili l r IJ'i~~.l I~ !:Ilil~ j I'I. 'll~ ~.~~.~,I,.I.~ i I '1 I i I I ~l I ~~II I}~ ,.li I(il I I~~1 i~! I
I 1 i 111
j ~~ ~I I ~ ~I I, ~ 1111 1. rl~~_ f {I 1~..:. { J ~1 i II I ~.I~' ~ ~ I ~~~
I I~ I , L+ 1~ 'I,T 1'`11 -r- i I l I I S_. ~. ,li~ { Ili '~iI r}I I III I~ I ff , I ~I'
I { ~I. 1 I ~ ~+.I ~~ I II I ~ I ' ~ !
t + '~ .t. I ~ ~.
IiII
I ~I ,
! ~'
I
I
1~
~_ ~
1
' i I I I I~ ~ ~ ~ ;~ I
~'
I
I \ r
, {!
I *
',~ r~ ~ I~~ ~ I' I II
1.
s' I ,
, 11
s , t I
I
II , t
i ,
I~I
I
I 1
I I
I I
,
II' I 'I
I ,
IiII ~11I I \ ,
{ I, 'I ,1 ~ ,I j ~ ~I I s ;I .~ I '~ I ,
I ~ I I I I~ ~ Il I I ,.~'I~ ~ II. Ili, i~:.l ~; i'. I(III~ lil'~.ill I '1 ;I ~i,~ ~1 ~ ~ ., I
III
1
II
I I
r I
I
~ I ~ I~ ~ I i l . I_: _I 1 I , , I _
i
Ci ,
i I~ ..
I ~ ~1 ~l , ,~1: II
'~I I: 1 I.. I'i ~'.I~ c ~II ~ I _
i 11 I I I~ 1. ) I i. I 1 I ~ 1 I i I' I I~If
' I I I
i 1 I. I I I
I
i
.. I I I
I
, I I
'~~~I
I
(
l '
,I I
~ ii
I
I~ I
I
I
i .
I
1
' f I
I I I it
I
I i I.I) I '.I. I it i I~ 11.11 ~I I ~I"I I I I i ~.1 I ~~ ~ ,
_ i~ ~ ~I I~I'l 1 I 'l ICI t i'.I I fl I I ~I Ili i 'I I
rI ~ I I~ I I I ~... ~I,:- ry,v., ~~' __~1. ~ I _~ 1 'II ~ I ~1 hfI ~I~I
, I 1 ' t* rL-1 t H ~ , I I ,. j I I (x~
~,,I I ~~ I 1'~,~ I I~ ~ ~' II. I L.II I I.. I J.I~ f 11.;.._ ~... LI. II L'_L.aL,.{.._~, TAI IL. ,.. ':~ ~.i ~ '~, ~ ~
I J
I I I. 11 l I ~ II I
~~ , ':, I ~I}~' I.I..I: ~ 1~~~~Ii ~ I.~.. ~.~ I,L.. JjI~ 1~.I ~ i ~f ~, ~ .III ~~.~ ~~. '~I I' }.I ;1 ~'I (I Ii; II; 11! III ~: ~ I, ~ ~V ~j ~
I I I
f;i I'!'il 1 LIT I II {_i{I I I_I_{I 111 j J II', i 1i'II ~ I Il }i ,li' i}I~ I ti }III + Illy I~11.11'~ J~'I I' i '' I I i'I,. a ~'
i_l.i. f:l I~I~~'.11~1 , f I ' Illf I ~~!_i i I ,_I { I ~.I. , I.II IIII I II i IIII 111.~'.l li({:{ 1 ~. 11. I ~l,l{'. li I lp [~
ll ~ It I
I~ I C I 1 I
I ~.. I 11 ~ I I~ l ~, t i 1 II ~.I,I i~ I- I f I I it I I`II If ,1 ~ m
II - I I t.1 ~" r~~ ~It-'~~Lt- ~ f.~ !' Itl _' II~ I Illl 1~ I LII~ JII~ I ~~ n
I
I,- , ~
~~ i' I' ~ i I ILf l ~~ ~ II ;I I, } ~ I..I .~ ~ ~( 11~fjl I L 1 1 I I.~ I ,
~I I J
I 11 I. I II ' I li 1 1 i~ I~' I ~ f~ ~~ 'i, ~ Ilt I~i'il~ 1 I II ~ ~; r'. ~ o
,: i' I 17 ~,~~~~ i LL,'JI ILI j L{ ~I II 'Ill; IIIJII li~'I ,,IIII 11 1 ,;111, 1 11111' ~ ',1.11 r ,'1 I I ~~1 I 1 s
I 1 111 11 I I ~~ I i 11 tl ~ } } I ! }I I I'
' :. I I: ~ If I~.'Il '.I~ 1 i li ! ~i.. (II ~ it .III II.I. If1 It I 1. , ,I~ ~ II '~I II'f ~ !'I I il' I 'I 't( !~
,{I ~ ,. I I. ~', 1 1 ~ i~ j ~I ~ ~ l u }~ II i`. it }ill' II~ ,~ I , ~ I II ,I~ 11
" ..~~. ;.. ~. C...:,.. ~,-~~.-.~I'~j'+~*1 T+'~ :.~L~`~I,i" ~'f"+~i-t't ~.j~.~l i I~L.. j U-.~~I~1 '..~..~.~ {I. {I ~Ii..~ ~1 , :.I~ III l.I~..( .l l i': '.' ~.''' I ''I ~, I i.~' r I , '. ,...
;. , !R, ~~' ~1,, '` ' 'r; I~;i ~ ~I I'i~~ I!I!; II -~ ~Il,,~r++fi~-t-~ I-~ I , ,~~~ ~''~~~~~' rf{r-~*!,r1.~1;~ , I ;~:;, I ~1!i: 1' ~.:..I ;;~~ 1
.,. ~i~ ~:{ !., ::~ I !}i.I;.1.. LL ~l,l~~.f~ a ~:II ~~~.,:i' _ n`i.ti~ :. ii:..(,.~ Ili ~~~ Il~~i -{{!Itt~lt~.ill{fllil ~.-.. t~~i~ I~I~II'ill~~jl{-~I (1~.1', ..Q k ~
!, ~ f. ;._ ~ I I I I ,I

A
_ - -_
77
0 -

60 50 4(1 _

3D
20 ~~
- PROhCf PfFERENCE NO SXFEI 1
~ 8-4/97 X-:
_
..- - ~ -L- ID
DETOUR 20 30
_ 40
50 60 - -
_
7dJ:

j240 G. P_. = 1.238.09..
12+8039 ~
~ _
- ~
D~2, 0.02 - 1 0.04,
- ~ _ ~ _ _:__.
-
. i _
9: _
_ 238
._._... _
_.... __
~
_ _ -

__
1230
- _
_
_
~, - -
_ _ ~
_, _ --
- _
_
.-
-- -
- -
;_
-
-

~
c'~
_ .
STA. :24+50 -EP ~
- ---
-
_ _: _ _ - _
EP - _EL.1233.07
-
_ _____
__ _ .
PROPOSED - -: - - _
-
- -- _
~_ ---- --- - -:
_
_
: __ - 3 ~
84'CSP $EG:IN BRIDGE -L=,STA. 24+20.00
_: -_~ - -- -
_

_

_

__.
- ~ .DETOUR = _: G.P. 123.69 _ ___~

-

i
_ = --- -
- -
__ .~

~ -

. . - - _ _ ._
- _
__ _ . _ J2+30.39 __ - - _ r
- -
-
-
-

-
_ _ - _.,
J240 - - _ _ - _ - = _ - - -

- _ - ---1 _~ .~
- . , - 002 - 3F - - - _ _, 0.04 -- _ _- -
0.02
~
--
-- - _- r _
- - - - - - _
- ;--~
--- --- ,. 2 - -
_. ,~.~. _,.. ~
- --_ _ _ -L - -
~

__
_ ~ ~ -- -
~-
~.- _ _
..
C-
_
- - - -_ _ - _
--- -
- - -- -
- -f
.._ -- - --
~ ~_ /-- _ - _ _. - -
~2 ~=
30 y ~ _ ~-_
__ _
- -
- _
- _ - ~ - - __
-
-,
.-
- _
- - --- -- - _x - - _.
~

- _
- w__ -- -

~

_

~' _
-_ GUARDRAIL T0=8~~=E'-~>q~-E-0
~" `_ _ _
STA
- ~~___=__.~.___ _ ._ _
_
-- ~ _~ ~-I

_
_ _ _ ~
fi
~ . X24+00
' A1=TER REM04!AC37~=DFIDUhr ~

_. -
_ _
~ _

-_ -
'- -
-
-
- rrrPa -- - EL;'~238.53-
_ __

_ _ ~ -
~
-
_
-T- -
-_
T
- ___~_._.___ r . ~ .
___.
- - - T _ __ - ~:
_- ~
_ - - - -_ _
_
--- - _-_
- = 1 - ~- - ~ DETOUR - ~ --
~ _ -- _ _
..-;. ,._ ~ - _ - _,39.74
11+78:68 _ _ --
..
-

1240 -
DfTOH_ ~~tL~225-,'-;- _ _
-
= r - ~
-
~ ~
~
~
-
-
_ i= _ -+ ~- _- --
--
_ + - I -
fl _
-
C
- -_

-_
_

._,
I ~::
_
_ _

`

-- _
__
_
,. _- - ,

~
~ r
_-
~._ -,
:-
--
/

-~---
- -
. - ,

_

~

, ._ _
--

2/ ~ ~ ._ _
- _ _ - --
-----

-

~.-,~

- -_ , ,
- ~-

-
, ~ __ ' '~
- .

-
-- _ :-1235.9& --_ ,_ ~ v,...~_

__~ _
. ,- - -
- _- -- _ __ 3 +5 - -
,_
-

H
~~ ~-
- - - - __
TM

-
- -
_ -
1
-230_ _
- ---

._ _ ~

- - _._ _ -.__ . -
r=

- _._
--- - _-__ ,
-,- -- - 23 .4 -
_

~
- - _ _
- - _
!

ra
- _ _ - __
- - -
- -

T

- ---
- - -

_
- - -r _ - -
-
_-.
------- _-~--~----.
UR ___._
r--"
- ~ DETO

_

~
- -
- -

-

. _
- - - --
-
_ - _,_
_
- _
77+24.85 = _ _ = ~ P . = 124 t .-Z5
- 7 _ , . - _ ~__ _

-
- _ - _ , '__.~.._.
_
- --

- -
_ _ - ~_
--._ - ~
. -
-

_
- - _
-
-
-
_,
0
03 -- -

-- -

-

-

l240
~ _-r- ~ .
0014
5
_.
- 3 I -- -- _O.o:~S -
.
- __ _ _ _

~
_
_
_.._ - - - - - _~.__ _.._ - - ~ }
, - - __ - _ _
-r- _
r -.
_
_ - Z ,

~_
_
,~.

_ ~
-
_ _
_ _
__ _ ~:.
_
~i :_
- -
~ -
l

-
_ ~.- , _._ _
~
_- -
t . _ - - - ~-
-- 34 ...
~ .7237
- _:_.._- - --==E-P ___ STA..23+Ofl=__- . ._
- _ j
: -
.96 EP
_ - E~. '-124fl
- ~ -
-_ _ --- -_ _ - -_ --- - _
-1230 - _ --- }} - _ _ _ _ _ ~ - _ - _
T. __. _ _ .. _

_ __._ _
_ ~_. _ ___
- _ _
BEGIN 2' LATERAL BASE _.

_ _

_._ _ _ _. _ __
__- _ _
-

-

-- -- - --
- -
- 1C
DITCH STA 1l+00 _ _<;

0

0 50 _ 40
__ ..
-
-
30 20
10 - _ -

._
-

- ._ .. _

.. ___.__.
. 20 _ 30 40 50 _60 _ _ 70
- __ - - - -
_
_ -
_ - -

r

1 ~~ M

.~

_ ~ _-

- -- -

--
T

- --

~ -

w
~---r--~-
--
-- --
_ _
-
~ -
~
_- ..~ - _ ~
--~ -.
:-- - I-- -- ..
_. _ _
_-
_ - -- r
_ - - - __
~- - _ ~_
T~ -.

7 -- _
-- --
-

i
~
I t
!
_
.-_.~~ ,

~

-.. :
-' - Jam- :.
--- - --~-- - -_
- _- - ------- ._..- ___- r--._ _. ____ --- --- -- - -- - --
--- - r ~ -_., i -- ~ - - - - -- - - - ---- ---
-. ~
_ .~ _ __
.- ~~_
- ti 1 - _- ___
_ I ._

_ _ ~_
~ __ _
__
- - ~
_ - __ _-_-.~-T_~_ T
-
~..-._ .. .. -. - _ .-.. _ _... _- _ _
~
_ __.J _-._ - 1 ..~ _ - - _ _ _ .. ...
. __ -_ -
~-
.- _ ___
- ~ - .
-
-
-
- - --
.

_ _ _

y _
1
T _
_ _
._.__. _

.._.... _. _- ~ -. r. -._~. y_. __--

._. -_.-.- -i- -__. - ._.. ~ -._.

___ .~ - - - - _
-~-r--
. ,_.._ _._.-. .Y. __- - -. - - -. _. ~ _

_ ~~ .--yf- _ _ - -

_.. ___-_ -_.._
.. '

--__
- `
-
-.._ 1 __' -. _. .. -~ ._- -.-.._ __.
i .._ - _-_• _ _ .
-
~
~
~.~~ -123-05
T
~ -
~
D.f12 --- -

--~-. -
-- - _ _ -- _ i _
-g. ~ -- -- - -
- - -- - - -
-- --
- - - - ?
-- -

f-230 _ _ . _ ~ ~ - - -Et . t2-3b.-22 _ _- -- ~
=
- ~_- =_ -~

-, E
-
P- _~~
.r ____
- - - _ _ ~.

-- - - - - -
=--
_ _ _
_
_ .__

_ _ - - ~
_-
--- -

70 =- - _ . _

60 _ 50,- _ _ 40 _ ~

_.___30_ _. _

20 -~ ~0 . --~: ~ t-_ 10.
__ _
---
20 '. - _ 30 --J _ 40

50 _ : _ ~0 .:

- -- ~~ ~=
Q -_- -_ ~-- --. - __ __ _. _.. ._ -

ti
t

M
MCDOWELL COUNTY
BRIDGE N0.73 ON SR 1552 (LAKE JAMES ROAD)
OVER DALES CREEK
FEDERAL-AID PROJECT N0. BRZ-1552(9)
STATE PROJECT N0. 8.2872501
TIP N0. B-4197
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
RECEIVED

~'~ .,,.~
~a _
074945
6(0 ~
DA E ~°v12 regory J. horpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
~i3/~ .
DATE John F. Sullivan, III, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration

Y
MCDOWELL COUNTY
BRIDGE N0.73 ON SR 1552 (LAKE JAMES ROAD)
OVER DALES CREEK
FEDERAL-AID PROJECT N0. BRZ-1552(9)
STATE PROJECT N0. 8.2872501
TIP N0. B-4197
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
April 2005
Document Prepared by
Ramey Kemp & Associates, Inc.
4928-A Windy Hill Drive
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
~'~,~.
St hen C. Greene, P.E.
Ramey Kemp & Associates, Inc.
o®°e®~~~H CARS ®~~'`i
~~4oF dy~<~ti9
SEAL
cn 030455
F.o °•:cNGINE~~.•~2
'~o FN C. G~
Date
For the North Carolina Department of Transportation

Vincent J. Rh~.E., Project Development Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch

~ ~
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
MCDOWELL COUNTY
BRIDGE N0.73 ON SR 1552 (LAKE JAMES ROAD)
OVER DALES CREEK
FEDERAL-AID PROJECT N0. BRZ-1552(9)
STATE PROJECT N0. 8.2872501
TIP N0. B-4197
In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit #23 Conditions, the General Nationwide Permit Conditions, Section
404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency Conditions, NCDOT's Guidelines for Best
Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters, NCDOT's Guidelines for Best Management
Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal, General Certification Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of
Certification, the following special commitments have been agreed to by NCDOT:
A mussel survey will need to be performed if requested by USFWS prior to the start of construction.
Categorical Exclusion
April 2005 Page 1 of 1

t ~
MCDOWELL COUNTY
BRIDGE N0.73 ON SR 1552 (LAKE JAMES ROAD)
OVER DALES CREEK
FEDERAL-AID PROJECT N0. BRZ-1552(9)
STATE PROJECT N0. 8.2872501
T.I.P. N0. B-4197
INTRODUCTION
The replacement of Bridge No. 73 located on SR 1552 (Lake James Road) over Dales Creek is included in the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 2004-2010 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as
B-4197 and in the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program (BRZ-1552(9)). The location is shown in Figure 1.
No substantial impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion".
PURPOSE AND NEED
The NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate Bridge No. 73 has a sufficiency rating of 68.0 out of a
possible 100 for a new structure. In 1998, the bridge had a sufficiency rating of 38 and was considered
structurally deficient. In 2001, a temporary crutch bent was added to the structure to increase its sufficiency
rating and to make it adequate for continued us until replacement of the structure. The bridge is considered
structurally deficient and functionally obsolete. The replacement of this inadequate structure will result in safer
and more efficient traffic operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Bridge No. 73 is located on SR 1552 (Lake James Road) in rural McDowell County. Refer to Figure 1 for the
project location and Figures 2 and 3 for photos of the existing project area.
Bridge No. 73 was constructed in 1917 and rehabilitated in 1963. The bridge is not currently posted to restrict
weight limits.
The overall length of the 4-span structure is 65 ft. It has a clear roadway width of 18.3 ft that includes two travel
lanes over the bridge. The superstructure consists of a timber deck on I-beams. The substructure consists of
reinforced concrete abutments and pier with timber crutch bents. The height from crown to streambed is 11 ft.
SR 1552 is classified as a rural local in the Statewide Functional Classification System. The 2001 average daily
traffic volume (ADT) is estimated to be 200 vehicles per day (vpd). The percentages of truck traffic are 1 percent
TTST vehicles and 2 percent dual-tired vehicles. The projected 2025 ADT is 400 vpd.
The two-lane facility measures approximately 18 ft in width and has varying width grassed shoulders on each side
of the roadway in the vicinity of the bridge. The horizontal alignment of SR 1552 is poor with numerous curves on
both sides of the existing bridge. There is a dirt driveway adjacent to the eastern end of the existing bridge. The

Y 3
vertical alignment is generally good within the project area. There is no posted speed limit in the immediate
vicinity of the bridge. Therefore, the statutory speed limit is 55 miles per hour (mph). Existing right-of-way is
approximately 60 ft in width.
There are overhead power and underground telephone lines in the vicinity of the bridge. There are no other
apparent utilities. Utility impacts are expected to be minimal.
This section of SR 1552 is not part of a designated bicycle route nor is it listed in the Transportation Improvement
Program as needing incidental bicycle accommodations. There is no indication that an unusual number of
bicyclists use this roadway.
Land use within the project study area is rural, consisting of forest land and a few scattered residences.
One school bus crosses Bridge No.73 two times per day, for a total of two bus trips per day.
Crash records maintained by the NCDOT indicate there have been no crashes reported in the vicinity of Bridge
No. 73 during a recent three year period.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
Based upon the preliminary hydraulic report, the proposed replacement structure for Bridge No. 73 will consist of
an 85 ft bridge. The structure will provide two 11 ft travel lanes with 4 ft of lateral clearance on each side of the
bridge.
The length and opening size of the proposed structure may increase or decrease as necessary to accommodate
peak flows as determined by a more detailed hydraulic analysis to be performed during the final design phase of
the bridge.
The roadway approaches will provide two 11 ft travel lanes 5 ft grassed shoulders. The grade will be
approximately the same as the existing roadway. The design speed varies for each alternative.
B. Build Alternatives
Three (3) build alternatives for replacing the Bridge No. 73 are described below:
Alternative A
Alternative A consists of replacing the bridge in-place with a new bridge. During construction, traffic will be
maintained by an on-site one-lane signalized detour south of SR 1552. The total length of roadway approach
work for this alternative is approximately 1045 ft. This alternative will meet a 25 mph design speed due to the
horizontal alignment of the current roadway. Refer to Figures 4 and 5 for illustration of this alternative.
The on-site detour will be located approximately 10 ft south of the proposed bridge. The temporary structure will
consist of two 84 inch CMP's. The detour roadway approaches will provide one 14 ft travel lane and 3 ft wide
shoulders on each side. The length of the temporary detour will be approximately 700 ft.
2

t s
Alternative B
Alternative B consists of replacing the bridge with a new bridge on new alignment south of SR 1552. During
construction, the existing bridge will be used to maintain traffic. The total length of roadway approach work for
this alternative is approximately 702 ft. This alternative will meet a 45 mph design speed due to the existing
horizontal curvature of the roadway. Refer to Figure 6 for illustration of this alternative.
Alternative B was not selected as the preferred because of the longitudinal impacts of the alignment to Dales
Creek.
Alternative C (Preferred)
Alternative C consists of replacing the bridge in-place with a new bridge. During construction, traffic will be
maintained by an on-site one-lane signalized detour north of SR 1552. The total length of roadway approach
work for this alternative is approximately 1045 ft. This alternative will meet a 25 mph design speed due to the
horizontal alignment of the current roadway. Refer to Figures 4 and 7 for illustration of this alternative.
The on-site detour will be located approximately 10 ft north of the proposed bridge. The temporary structure will
consist of two 84 inch CMP's. The detour roadway approaches will provide one 14 ft travel lane and 3 ft wide
shoulders on each side. The length of the temporary detour will be approximately 700 ft.
C. Alternates Eliminated From Further Consideration
The "Do-Nothing" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge due to its poor condition. This is not
desirable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1552.
Investigation of the existing structure by the NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit indicates that rehabilitation of the
old bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated condition.
D. Preferred Alternative (Alternative C)
Alternative C was selected as the preferred because it has the least impact to Dales Creek and maintains traffic
on-site during construction.
The Division Engineer concurs with Alternative C as the Preferred Alternative.
E. Anticipated Design Exception
The speed limit is not posted on SR 1552; therefore, a statutory speed limit of 55 mph applies. Due to the
existing road conditions a design exception will be required for the horizontal.alignmentfnr all alternatives.

IV. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs for each alternate, based on current dollars, are shown below:
Table 1
Estimated Project Costs
Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C
(Preferred)
Structure Removal Existin $12,550 $12,550 $12,550
Structure Pro osed $216,750 $202,300 $216,750
Detour Structure and A roaches $150,718 $0 $184,219
Roadwa Ap roaches $60,888 $127,648 $60,888
Miscellaneous and Mobilization $130,094 $90,502 $144,593
En ineerin and Contin encies $129,000 $67,000 $131,000
Right-of-Way/Easement and Utilities $60,000 73,600 Don't have yet
Total Project Cost $760,000 $573,600 $750,000??
The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 2004-2010 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program is
$760,000 including $100,000 spent in prior years, $60,000 for right-of-way and $600,000 for construction.
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
Natural resources within the project study area were evaluated to provide: 1) an assessment of existing
vegetation, wildlife, protected species, streams, wetlands, and water quality; 2) an evaluation of probable impacts
resulting from construction; and 3) a preliminary determination of permit needs.
A. Methodology
Research was conducted prior to the field investigations. Published resource information pertaining to the project
area was collected and reviewed. Resources utilized in this preliminary investigation of the project area include:
• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Ashford and Marion East 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle maps
(1994).
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map for Ashford and Marion
East 7.5 -minute quadrangles (1995).
• North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) aerial photographs of the project area (1:1,200
scale). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service -Soil Survey of
McDowell County, North Carolina (1995).
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Water Discharges and RCRA Map accessed via EPA's
EnviroMapper Program (September 2001).
Water research information was obtained from publications of the North Carolina Department of Environment,
and Natural Resources (NCDENR, 1999, 2000, 2001). Information concerning the occurrence of federal and
state protected species in the project area was obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service list of protected
and candidate species (March 3, 2001) and from the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
4

y
database of rare species and unique habitats (NCNHP, 2001). NCNHP files were reviewed for documented
occurrences of state and federally listed species. USFWS Recovery Plans for federal listed species were
reviewed, where applicable.
A field investigation of natural resources within the project area was conducted on July 25, 2001. Water
resources were identified and categorized, and their physical characteristics were documented while in the field.
Plant communities and their associated wildlife were also identified and documented. The Classification of
Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third Approximation (Schafale and Weakley, 1990) was used to classify
plant communities, where possible. Plant taxonomy was based primarily upon the Manual of the Vascular Flora
of the Carolinas (Radford, et al., 1968). Animal taxonomy was based primarily upon Amphibians and Reptiles of
the Carolinas and Virginia (Martof, et al., 1980), Freshwater Fishes of the Carolinas, Virginia, Maryland, and
Delaware (Rohde, et al., 1994), Birds of the Carolinas (Potter, et al., 1980), and Mammals of the Carolinas,
Virginia, and Maryland (Webster, et al., 1985).
Approximate boundaries of major vegetation communities were mapped while in the field utilizing aerial
photography of the project site. Wildlife identification involved active searching of known or suspected species,
incidental visual observations, incidental auditory indicators (such as Birdsong and other sounds), and secondary
indicators of species presence or site utilization (such as scat, tracks, and burrows). Predictions regarding wildlife
community composition were supplemented utilizing a general qualitative habitat assessment based on existing
vegetation communities and aquatic habitat.
Wetlands subject to regulation by the Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section
10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 were identified and delineated according to methods prescribed in the
1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y-87-1) and the Corps' March 6, 1992
guidance document titled Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987 Manual. Values of wetlands delineated were
assessed utilizing the Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina (NCDEHNR, 1995). Wetland
types were classified based on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States (Cowardin, et al., 1979). Wetland boundaries were surveyed and recorded in the
field using Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) survey methods.
B. Physiography and Soils
Most of McDowell County lies in the Blue Ridge (Southem Appalachian Mountains) Physiographic Province of
western North Carolina, with the exception of the southeastern portion of the county, which lies within the
Southem Piedmont Physiographic Province (USDA, 1995). The county encompasses 437 square miles and is
primarily rural. The county ranges in elevation from approximately 980 ft mean sea level (msl) along Cane Creek
on the Rutherford County line to 5,665 ft msl on Pinnacle Mountain where Buncombe and Yancey Counties abut
McDowell County. Elevations within the project area range from approximately 1,220 to 1,260 ft msl, with the
stream bed near the bridge lying at approximately 1,220 ft msl.
The portion of McDowell County within the project area (NRCS map panel 4 of 10) has been mapped by NRCS
under the most recently published soil survey of McDowell County (USDA, 1995). A brief description of mapped
and observed soil units is as follows:
• Fluvaouents-Udifluvents complex along the stream bed (unmapped but observed).
5

Chestnut-Ashe complex, 25 to 80 percent slopes, stony (CaF). This unit consists mainly of a moderately
deep, well-drained Chestnut soil and a moderately deep, somewhat excessively drained Ashe soil.
These soils are found on mountain ridgetops and side slopes. The surface layer of the Chestnut soil is
brown gravelly sandy loam up to 5.0 inches thick, and the surface layer of the Ashe soil is gravelly loam
that is dark brown in the upper 3.0 inches and yellowish brown in the lower 4.0 inches. Permeability is
moderately rapid and surface runoff is rapid in bare or unprotected areas. Depth to soft bedrock is 20 to
40 inches in the Chestnut soil and the seasonal high water table is below a depth of 6.0 ft in the Ashe
soil. Chestnut-Ashe complex soil occurs upon moderate to steep slopes west of Dales Creek in the
southwestern most portion of the project area. These soils are classified as non-hydric (USDA, 1996).
Evard-Cowee complex, 25 to 60 percent slopes (EwE). This unit consists mainly of very deep, well-
drained, steep Evard soil and a moderately deep, well-drained, steep Cowee soil. These soils are found
on mountain side slopes. The surface layer of the Evard and Cowee soils is brown loam up to 5.0 inches
thick. Permeability is moderate and surface runoff is rapid in bare or unprotected areas for both soils.
The seasonal high water table is below a depth of 6.0 ft. Evard-Cowee complex soil occurs upon
moderate slopes south of SR 1552 in the northwestern portion of the project area. These soils are
classified as non-hydric (USDA, 1996).
Lonon-Northcove complex, 6 to 15 percent slopes (LnC). This unit consists mainly of very deep, well-
drained, strongly sloping Lonon and Northcove soils on foot slopes and colluvial fans. The surface layer
of this complex is up to 3.0 inches thick. Lonon soil is a dark brown fine sandy loam and Northcove soil
is a dark grayish brown very cobbly sandy loam. Permeability is moderate in the Lonon soils and
moderately rapid in the Northcove soil. Surface runoff is medium or rapid in bare or unprotected areas of
Lonon soil and rapid in bare or unprotected areas of Northcove soil. The seasonal high water table is
below a depth of 6.0 ft. In the project area, soils of the Lonon-Northcove complex occur along floodplain
terraces and stream banks bordering Dales Creek. These soils are classified as non-hydric (USDA,
1996).
C. Water Resources
C.1. Waters Impacted
Dales Creek comprises the single water resource within the project area. Dales Creek is located within the
Catawba River drainage basin. The Catawba River basin is the eighth largest river basin in North Carolina,
encompassing 3,279 square miles. Dales Creek ranges in width from approximately 10 ft to 15 ft within the
project area. The average stream depth observed at the time of the field investigation was 0.5 ft in well-defined
riffles to 2.0 ft in pools. The field investigation was performed during a rainfall event. Surface waters were clear
and water levels appeared to be slightly above the ordinarily high water level.
C.2. Water Resource Characteristics
The substrate of Dales Creek in the project area is comprised of sediments ranging in size from fine sand to
cobbles. Scattered bedrock outcrops occur along the stream bed and stream banks of Dales Creek. The survey
area consists of a series of frequent, well-defined riffles and runs that are as wide as the stream and are at least
twice as long as the width of the stream. Pools are infrequent (comprising less than 30 percent of the total
aquatic habitat) and are present in a variety of sizes. No sand bars or major channel meanders are present.
6

y k
The stream banks (both upstream and downstream of the bridge) are well vegetated with woody vegetation and
appear stable throughout the northern quadrants and the southwest quadrant of the site. The banks in the
southeast quadrant of the site are vegetated with few trees and shrubs that appear to be generally healthy and,
as a result, the southeast bank exhibits indicators of moderate erosion at the southern boundary of the site. The
width of the riparian vegetation zone is greater than 60 ft in the northern and southwest quadrants, but is less
than 20 ft in the southeast quadrant of the project area. An ephemeral tributary exists on a side terrace in the
northwest quadrant of the project area and an intermittent tributary enters the site directly north of the bridge.
Riprap armoring is restricted to the area immediately adjacent to the bridge.
Under the federal system for cataloging drainage basins, the drainage basin containing the project area is
designated as USGS Hydrologic Unit 03050101 (the Upper Catawba drainage basin). Under the North Carolina
DWQ system for cataloging drainage basins, the drainage basin containing the project area is designated as
Subbasin 03-08-30, the Catawba River Headwaters. Dales Creek has been assigned Stream Index Number
(SIN) 11-27.
Dales Creek has been assigned a best usage classification of C. The C designation indicates waters that are
protected for secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and survival, agriculture, and
other uses found suitable for Class C waters. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses
involving human body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or
incidental manner. There are no restrictions on watershed development or types of discharges in Class C waters.
No surface waters classified as High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II), or Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 0.6 mile of the project area.
One method used by DWQ to monitor water quality is through long-term monitoring of macroinvertebrates. No
previously monitored or presently monitored benthic monitoring stations exist within the Dales Creek watershed.
Discharges that enter surface waters through a pipe, ditch or other well-defined point of discharge are broadly
referred to as "point sources." No registered point source discharges are located within the Dales Creek
watershed or the project study area (EPA, 2001).
C.3. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Impacts to water resources in the project area are likely to result from activities associated with project
construction. Activities likely to result in impacts consist of clearing and grubbing along stream banks, removal of
riparian canopy, instream construction, use of fertilizers and pesticides as part of revegetation operations, and
installation of pavement. The following impacts to surface water resources are likely to result from the
aforementioned construction activities:
• Short-term increases in sedimentation and siltation downstream of the crossing associated with
increased erosion potential in the project area during and immediately following construction.
• Short-term changes in incident light levels and turbidity due to increased sedimentation rates and
vegetation removal.
• Short-term alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions andlor additions of surface water and
groundwater during construction.
7

M
• Short-term increases in nutrient loading during construction via runoff from temporarily exposed land
surfaces.
• A short-term increase in the potential for the release of toxic compounds (such as petroleum products)
from construction equipment and other vehicles.
• Changes in and possible destabilization of water temperature regimes due to removal of vegetation
within or overhanging the watercourse.
• Increased concentrations of pollutants typically associated within roadway runoff.
To minimize potential impacts to water resources in and downstream of the project area, NCDOT's Besf
Management Practices for the Protection of Sun`ace Waters (NCDOT, 1997) will be strictly enforced during the
construction phase of the project. Impacts will be minimized to the fullest degree practicable by limiting instream
activities and by revegetating stream banks immediately following the completion of grading.
C.4. Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal
In order to protect the water quality and aquatic life in the area affected by this project, the NCDOT and all
contractors will follow appropriate guidelines for bridge demolition and removal. These guidelines are presented
in three NCDOT documents entitled: Pre-Construction Guidelines for Bridge Demolition and Removal, Policy:
Bridge Demolition and Removal in Water of the United States, and Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal.
The superstructure for Bridge No. 73 consists of a timber deck on I-beams. The substructure is composed of
reinforced concrete abutments and pier with timber crutch bents. Neither the superstructure nor the substructure
will create any temporary fill in the creek. However, the removal of the substructure may create some
disturbance of the streambed. If removal of the substructure will create disturbance in the streambed, a turbidity
curtain will be used due to sediment concerns.
Because no moratoriums apply and Dales Creek is a Class C water, this project falls under Case 3 (no special
restrictions) of the Besf Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal.
D. Biotic Resources
Living systems described in the following sections include communities of associated plants and animals
observed within the project area. These descriptions refer to the flora and fauna in each community and the
relationship of these biotic components. Biotic resources assessed as part of this investigation include
discernable terrestrial and aquatic communities. The composition and distribution of biotic communities within the
study area are a function of topography, soils, hydrology, and past and present land uses.
Terrestrial systems are discussed primarily from the perspective of dominant plant communities and are classified
in accordance with the Classification of Natural Communities of North Carolina: Third Approximation (Schafale
and Weakley, 1990) where applicable. Representative animal species likely to inhabit or utilize biotic
communities of the project area (based on published range distributions) are also discussed. Species observed
during field investigation are listed.
D.1. Plant Communities
Boundaries between contiguous biotic communities are gradational in certain portions of the project area, making
boundaries sometimes difficult to delineate. Four visually discernable terrestrial communities are located within
8

•
the project area. Two of these communities have been altered to the extent that they cannot be classified as a
natural vegetation community under the Classification of Natural Communities of North Carolina. These altered
communities consist of (1) altered right-of-way communities and (2) landscaped areas. Two communities within
the project area retain enough of their natural characteristics to be classifiable under the Classification of Natural
Communities of North Carolina. These natural communities consist of (1) PiedmontiMountain Bottomland Forest
and (2) Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype). In addition to the aforementioned terrestrial
components, the aquatic community associated with Dales Creek was assessed within the project area.
Altered Right-of-Way Communities -- These communities are located along the right-of-way bordering on SR
1552. Vegetation within these areas has been maintained in an early succession through mechanical and
possibly chemical vegetation management practices. Well-drained Evard-Cowee and Lonon-Northcove complex
soils underlie this community.
No mature woody plant species were observed within the altered rights-of-way communities of the project area.
Dominant herbaceous species observed at the time of site investigation include wood sorrel (Oxalis sp.), English
plantain (Plantago lanceolata), common milkweed (Asclepias syriaca), red-stemmed plantain (Plantago rugelli),
oxeye daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum), orange jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), pokeweed (Phytolacca
americana), goldenrod (Solidago sp.), crown vetch (Coronilla varia), asters (Aster spp.), barnyard grass
(Echinochloa crusgalli), tick-trefoil (Desmodium nudiflorum), Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota), bush clover
(Lespedeza sp.), white clover (Trifolium repens), red clover (Trifolium pratense), partridge pea (Cassia
fasciculata), woolly mullein (Verbascum thapsus), and Joe-pye-weed (Eupatorium fistulosum).
Landscaped Areas -This community consists of cleared, landscaped, and vegetatively managed areas around
a residential dwelling located in the northwest quadrant of the project area. Well-drained Lonon and Northcove
soils underlie this community.
Dominant plant species observed at the time of site investigation includes assorted cultivars, crab grass (Digitaria
sanguinalis), unidentified grasses (Poaceae), common chickweed (Stellaria media), dandelion (Taraxacum
officinale), common plantain (Plantago major), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), and Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica).
Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest -These communities occur as narrow remnants (less than 20 ft wide)
along the banks and floodplain of Dales Creek in all quadrants of the project area. The PiedmontlMountain
Bottomland Forest occurs upon a narrow, gently sloping floodplain terrace perched approximately 3.5 to 4.5 ft
above the stream bed. Well-drained Lonon-Northcove complex soils underlie this community.
Dominant tree species observed within the Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest at the time of site investigation
include sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), eastern hemlock (Tsuga
canadensis), and black walnut (Juglans nigra). Dominant sapling and shrub species observed at the time of site
investigation include American holly (Ilex opaca), spicebush (Lindera benzoin), black willow (Salix nigra), black
locust (Robina pseudo-acacia), pale rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum), tag alder (Alnus serrulata),
flowering dogwood (Comus florida), witch-hazel (Hamamelis virginiana), and ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana).
Dominant herbaceous species observed at the time of site investigation- include pokeweed (Phytolacca
americans), goldenrod (Solidago, sp.), jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), and aster (Aster, sp.). Dominant
9

vine species observed at the time of site investigation include poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), common
greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), and riverside grape (Vitis riparia).
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype) - A Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest occurs on moderate
slopes south of SR 1552 in the southwest quadrant of the project area. As mapped by NRCS, this community is
underlain by well-drained Evard and Cowee soils. Soils observed within this community are relatively thin and
scattered rock outcrops are present.
Dominant tree species observed within the Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forests (Piedmont Subtype) at the time of site
investigation include tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), black oak (Quercus velutina), rock chestnut oak (Quercus
prinus), eastem hemlock (Tsuga canadensis), black walnut (Juglans nigra), and white oak (Quercus alba).
Dominant sapling and shrub species observed at the time of site investigation include American holly (Ilex
opaca), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), hickory saplings and seedlings (Carya spp.), black locust (Robinia
pseudo-acacia), pale rhododendron (Rhododendrum maximum), and witch-hazel (Hamamelis virginiana). The
dominant vine species observed at the time of the site investigation was poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans).
D.2. Wildlife
The communities within the project vicinity have been altered or affected by man's activities to varying degrees.
Due to forest tract fragmentation common to the project region, species that require large contiguous tracts of
forests are not likely to utilize the site on a normal basis. Certain opportunistic wildlife species, such as white-
tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), woodchuck (Marmota monax) and eastem cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus
floridanus), can be expected to utilize edge habitat present within the project area. Due to the relatively small
size of the project area and the fact that many wildlife species are capable of moving between and/or utilizing
adjoining communities, no distinct terrestrial wildlife habitat can be assigned to any one terrestrial plant
community within the project area.
No mammals were observed in the project vicinity at the time of field investigation. Tracks and scat of raccoon
(Procyon lotor) and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) were observed along stream banks. Other
mammals common to the project region which can be expected to periodically utilize habitat of the project area
include the Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), shrews and moles (Insectivora), gray squirrel (Sciurus
carolinensis), beaver (Castor canadensis), eastem harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis), white-footed
mouse (Peromyscus leucopus), golden mouse (Ochrotomys nuttalli), hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus),
eastem woodrat (Neotoma floridana), meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus), woodland vole (Microtus
pinetorum), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), black rat (Rattus rattus), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), house mouse
(Mus musculus), meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius), woodland jumping mouse (Napaeozapus insignis),
red fox (Vulpes vulpes), gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus), eastem spotted skunk (Spilogale putorius), and
striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis).
The forest tracts of the project area provide suitable habitat and forage areas for a wide variety of birds common
to the region. These resident and migratory songbirds can be expected to periodically utilize habitat present in
the project vicinity. The open areas and edge habitat within the project vicinity provide probable hunting grounds
for birds of prey such as hawks and owls.
No reptiles were observed in the project area at the time of field investigation. Adult green frogs (Rana clamitans)
were observed in ephemeral areas along Dales Creek, and treefrogs (Hyla sp.) were observed in adjacent
10

forests. Additionally, a variety of reptile and amphibian species may use the communities located in the project
area. These animals include the rat snake (Elaphe obsolete), eastern box turtle (Terrapene Carolina), five-lined
skink (Eumeces fasciatus), two-lined salamander (Eurycea bislineata), pickerel frog (Rana patustris), and
American toad (Bufo americanus). Fish species are discussed in following sections.
D.3. Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community consists of Dales Creek below the ordinary high water line. The dominant aquatic
habitats within this section of Dales Creek consist of cobblelboulder substrate, snags, and root mats. The aquatic
habitat within the project area is characterized by a series of frequent, well-defined, riffles and runs that are as
wide as the stream and are at least as long as twice the width of the stream. Cobble and boulder substrate was
less than 20 percent embedded on the day of the field investigation. Pools are infrequent (comprising less than
30 percent of the total aquatic habitat) and are present in a variety of sizes. Pools forming on the sides of the
channel adjacent to roots, snags, and boulders function as good fish habitat.
No aquatic vegetation was observed below the ordinary high water line of Dales Creek at the time of field
investigation. A narrow fringe (generally less than 3.0 ft wide) of hydrophilic vegetation occurs along portions of
the stream banks.
Aquatic vertebrates observed at the time of field investigation consists of unidentified minnows (Cyprinidae),
green frog (Rana clamitans), and an unidentified species of tree frog (Hyla sp.). Aquatic invertebrates observed
within the project area at the time of field investigation include crayfish (Cambaridae), snail (Pleuroceridae),
caddisfly larvae (Neophylax sp.), net-spinning caddisfly larvae (Hydropsychidae), caddisfly larvae (Trichoptera),
beetle larvae (Psephenidae), alderfly (Sialis sp.), and water striders (Gemdae).
D.4. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
D.4.a. Terrestrial Communities Impacts
Potential impacts to plant communities are estimated based on the approximate area of each plant community
present within both the proposed right-of--way and the temporary construction limits of any on-site detour or
easement that falls outside the estimated permanent right-of-way limit. A summary of potential plant community
impacts is presented in Table 2. All plant community impacts are based on aerial photograph base mapping. A
portion of the permanent plant community impact amount will consist of proposed right-of-way for the road after
the bridge replacement is complete. Impervious surface and open water areas are not included in this analysis.
11

Table 2
Potential Impacts to Plant Communities
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
PLANT Acres
COMMUNITY ALT A ALT B ALT C (Preferred)
Impacts Temp. Impacts Impacts Temp.
Im acts* Im acts*
Altered Right-of-Way Communities 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15
Landscaped Areas 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.08
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.12
Total (acre) 0.27 0.29 0.57 0.27 0.35
TOTAL FOR ALT acre 0.56 0.57 0. 62
* Note: Temporary construction impacts are based on the portion of the impacts that fall outside the estimated
right-of-way limit or impacts of temporary on-site detours.
Permanent community impacts for Altemative A represent the least amount of the three altematives when the
potential temporary impacts are included. The highest amount of permanent plant community impacts result from
Alternative B, which calls for bridge replacement on new location. The plant communities with the largest amount
of potential permanent and temporary impacts for all proposed altematives are the piedmont/mountain
bottomland forest and mesic mixed hardwood forest communities.
D.4.b. Aquatic Communities Impacts
The replacement of the Bridge No. 73 on SR 1552 over Dales Creek will result in certain unavoidable impacts to
the aquatic community. Probable impacts will be associated with the physical disturbance of the benthic habitat
and water column disturbances resulting from changes in water quantity and quality. Significant disturbance of
stream segments can have an adverse effect on aquatic community composition by reducing species diversity
and the overall quality of aquatic habitats. Physical alterations to aquatic habitats can result in the following
impacts to aquatic communities:
• Inhibition of plant growth.
• Resuspension of organic detritus and removal of aquatic vegetation that can lead to increased nutrient
loading. Nutrient loading can, in tum, lead to algal blooms and ensuing depletion of dissolved oxygen
levels.
• Increases in suspended and settleable solids that can, in turn, lead to clogging of feeding structures of
filter-feeding organisms and the gills of fish.
• Loss of benthic macroinvertebrates through increased scouring and sediment loading.
• Loss of fish shelter through removal of overhanging stream banks and snags.
• Increases in seasonal water temperatures resulting from removal of riparian canopy.
• Burial of benthic organisms and associated habitat.
Unavoidable impacts to aquatic communities within and immediately downstream of the project area will be
minimized to the fullest degree practicable through strict adherence to NCDOT's Best Management Practices for
12

the Protection of Surface Waters (NCDOT, 1997) and other applicable guidelines pertaining to best management
practices. Means to minimize impacts will include (1) utilizing construction methods that will limit instream
activities as much as practicable, (2) restoring the stream bed as needed, and (3) revegetating stream banks
immediately following the completion of grading.
E. Special Topics
E.1. "Waters of the United States": Jurisdictional Issues
Surface waters within the embankments of Dales Creek are subject to jurisdictional consideration under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act as "Waters of the United States" (33 CFR 328.3). 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 within 12 inches of the soil surface for a portion (12.5
percent) of the growing season (DOA 1987). No wetlands have been mapped within the project area under the
National Wetland Inventory (NWI) program.
The surface waters within Dales Creek exhibit characteristics of a permanently flooded, upper perennial, riverine
habitat with an unconsolidated bottom (R3UBH). Dales Creek is a jurisdictional surface water
E.2. Anticipated Impacts to Waters of the United States
Temporary and permanent impacts to surface waters and wetlands are estimated based on the amount of each
jurisdictional area within the project limits. Temporary impacts include those impacts that will result from
temporary construction activities outside of permanent right-of-way and/or those associated with temporary on-
site detours. Temporary impact areas will be restored to their original condition after the project has been
completed. Permanent impacts are those areas that will be in the construction limits and/or the proposed right-of-
way of the new structure and approaches. Portions of those areas that are considered temporary impact areas
often end up being within the final right-of-way. Potential surface water impacts are included in Table 3.
Table 3
Anticipated Impacts to Surface Waters
JURISDICTIONAL AREAS ALT A ALT B ALT C (Preferred)

Perennial Stream Channel Impacts ft Impacts Temp.
Impacts* Impacts Impacts Temp.
Im acts'`
0.0 100 0.0. 0.0 70
TOTAL FOR ALT ft 100 0.0 70
*Note: Temporary construction impacts are based on the portion of the impacts not included in the construction
limits for the permanent structure.
No jurisdictional wetlands were found within the project study area. None of the studied altemative will have any
permanent stream channel impacts because each altemative calls for the existing bridge to be replaced with a
new bridge. The on-site detour for Alternative A will impact 100 feet of stream channel temporarily, Alternative C
(Preferred) will have 70 feet of temporary stream channel impacts.
13

.~
E.3. Permits
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act - In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344),
a permit is required from the United States Army Corp of Engineers (USAGE) for projects of this type for the
discharge of dredge or fill material in "Waters of the United States." The USAGE issues two types of permits for
these activities. A general permit may be issued on a nationwide or regional basis for a category, or categories,
of activities when: those activities are substantially similar in nature and cause only minimal individual or
cumulative environmental impacts, or when the general permit would result in avoiding unnecessary duplication
of regulatory control exercised by another Federal, state, or local agency provided that the environmental
consequences of the action are individually and cumulatively minimal. If a general permit is not appropriate for a
particular activity, then an individual permit must be utilized. Individual permits are authorized on a case-by-case
evaluation of a specific project involving the proposed discharges.
It is anticipated that this project will fall under Nationwide Permit 23, which is a type of general permit. Nationwide
Permit 23 is relevant to approved Categorical Exclusions. This permit authorizes any activities, work, and
discharges undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded, or financed, in whole or in part, by another
federal agency and that the activity is "categorically excluded" from environmental documentation because it is
included within a category of actions which neither individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the
environment. Activities authorized under nationwide permits must satisfy all terms and conditions of the particular
permit. However, final permit decisions are left to the discretionary authority of the USAGE. Since the proposed
project is located in a designated "Trout" county, the authorization of a nationwide permit by the USAGE is
conditioned upon the concurrence of the NCWRC.
Section 401 Water Quality Certification - A 401 Water Quality Certification, administered through the DWQ, will
also be required. This certification is issued for any activity which may result in a discharge into waters for which
a federal permit is required. According to the DWQ, one condition of the permit is that the appropriate sediment
and erosion control practices must be utilized to prevent exceedences of the appropriate turbidity water quality
standard.
E.4. Mitigation
The USAGE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a wetland mitigation policy which
embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and
maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of the waters of the United States, specifically wetlands.
Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts, minimizing impacts,
rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time, and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these
three aspects (avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance -Mitigation by avoidance examines appropriate and practicable measures for averting impact to
Waters of the United States. A 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the USAGE, states that in determining appropriate and practicable measures to offset unavoidable
impacts; such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in
terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes.
The project purpose necessitates traversing Dales Creek; therefore totally avoiding surface water impacts is
impossible.
14

Minimization -Minimization of adverse impact to Waters of the United States includes examination of
appropriate and practicable measures to reduce such impacts. Implementation of these steps will be required
through project modifications and permit conditions. Adverse impacts are typically minimized by decreasing the
proposed project footprint through reduction of median widths, right-of-way widths, andlor fill slopes.
Other practical mechanisms to minimize impacts to waters of the United States include strict enforcement of
sedimentation control BMPs for protection of surface waters during the entire life of the project; reduction of
clearing and grubbing activity; reduction/elimination of direct discharge into streams; reduction of runoff velocity;
reestablishment of vegetation on exposed areas, with judicious pesticide and herbicide management;
minimization of instream activity; and litter/debris control.
No measures are proposed for this project because there are no jurisdictional wetlands within the project study
area.
Compensatory Mitigation -Compensatory mitigation, including restoration, creation and enhancement of
waters of the United States, is typically not considered unless anticipated impacts to Waters of the United States
have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Further, it is recognized that "no net loss
of wetlands" may not be achievable in every permit action. Therefore, compensatory mitigation is required for
unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate and practicable minimization measures have
been required.
Compensatory mitigation is not expected to be required for this project. A final determination regarding mitigation
requirements rest with the USACE.
F. Protected Species
F.1. Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E) or Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), and
Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species
Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Table 4 lists the federal protected species for
McDowell County (USFWS list dated February 24, 2003):
Table 4
Federally Protected Species Listed for McDowell County
Common Name Scientific Name Status Biolo ical Conclusion
Bald Ea le Haliaeefus leucoce halus T No Effect
Bo Turtle Clemm s muhlenber ii T S/A NIA
Mountain Golden Heather Hudsonia Montana T No Effect
Small-Whorled Po onia Isotria medeoloides T Ma Effect, Not Likel to Adverse) Effect
Threatened -any native oronce-native species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Threatened (S/A) - a species carrying the threatened status due to having a similar appearance to another listed species.
15

Bald Eagle -The bald eagle is a large raptor. The characteristic adult plumage consists of a white head and tail
with a dark brown body. Juvenile eagles are completely dark brown and do not fully develop the white head and
tail until the fifth or sixth year. Fish are the primary food source, but bald eagles will also take a variety of birds,
mammals, and turtles (both live and as carrion) when fish are not readily available. Adults average about 3.0 ft.
from head to tail, weigh approximately 10 to 12 pounds and have a wingspan that can reach 7.0 ft. Generally,
female bald eagles are somewhat larger than the males.
Habitat includes quiet coastal areas, rivers or lakeshores with large, tall trees. Man-made reservoirs have also
provided habitat.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and unique habitats was reviewed in
September of 2001. No populations of the species have been recorded in the project vicinity. The project area
was investigated on July 25, 2001. No individual organisms, populations, or suitable habitat were observed
within the project area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Bog Turtle -The bog turtle is a small freshwater turtle that has a carapace length of 4.5 inches or less. The
surface of the carapace is rough with growth annuli, (wom smooth on adults) and a dark brown, black or
mahogany color. The plastron is hingeless and black with irregular shaped yellow to cream blotches along the
midline. Fleshy parts are brown to pink-brown and may have some red mottles on limbs. A large conspicuous
orange; yellow or reddish blotch lies behind both eyes, but is degenerated in old adults. A low medial keel is
present in juveniles. They are found in freshwater wetlands characterized by open fields, meadows, marshes,
slow moving streams, ditches, or boggy areas. In July and August they aestivate in the soft mud.
It is found in freshwater wetlands characterized by open fields, meadows, marshes with slow moving streams,
ditches, and boggy areas. In July and August, the turtle aestivates in soft mud. During winter they hibernate
below the frost zone in holes, muskrat borrows, clumps of sedges, or the mud of waterways.
The southern population of the bog turtle is listed as a Threatened (S/A) due to similarity of appearance with the
northern population of the bog turtle (which is federally fisted as threatened but which does not occur in North
Carolina). Species identified as "Threatened (S/A)" are not subject to Section 7 Consultation.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO SURVEY REQUIRED
Mountain Golden Heather -Mountain golden heather is a low, needle-leaved shrub with yellow flowers and
long-stalked fruit capsules. It usually grows in clumps of 4 to 8 inches across and about 6 inches high, and
sometimes is seen in larger patches of 1.0 to 2.0 ft across. The plants have the general aspect of a big moss or a
low juniper, but their branching is more open; their leaves are about 0.25 inch long; and the plant is often
somewhat yellow-green in color, especially in shade. The leaves from previous years appear scale-like and
persist on the older branches. The flowers appear in early or mid-June, and are yellow, nearly 1.0 inch across,
with five blunt-tipped petals and 20 to 30 stamens. The fruit capsules are on 0.5 inch stalks, and are roundish
with three projecting points at the tips. These fruits often persist after opening, and may be seen at any time of
the year.
16

Mountain golden heather grows on exposed quartzite ledges in an ecotone between bare rock and Leiophyllum
dominated heath balds that merge into pine/oak forest. The plant persists for some time in the partial shade of
pines, but it appears less healthy than in open areas.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and unique habitats was reviewed in
September of 2001. No populations of the species have been recorded in the project vicinity. The project area
was investigated on July 25, 2001 and no suitable habitat was observed within the project area. Elevations within
the project area range from approximately 1,220 to 1,260 ft. These elevations are below the required elevations
of 2,800 to 4,000 ft.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Small-Whorled Pogonia -The small-whorled pogonia is a terrestrial orchid growing to about 10.0 inches high.
Five or six drooping, pale, dusty green, widely rounded leaves with pointed tips are arranged in a whorl at the
apex of the green or purple, hollow stem. Typically a single, yellowish-green, nearly stalkless flower is produced
just above the leaves; a second flower rarely may be present. Flowers consist of three petals, which may reach
lengths of 0.7 inch, surrounded by three narrow sepals up to 1.0 inch in length. Flower production, which occurs
from May to July, is followed by the formulation of an erect ellipsoidal capsule 0.7 to 1.2 inches in length (Massey
et al. 1983). This species may remain dormant for periods up to 10 years between blooming periods (Newcomb
1977).
The small-whorled pogonia is widespread, occurring from southern Maine to northern Georgia, but is very local in
distribution. In North Carolina, this species is found scattered locations in the Mountains, Piedmont and Sandhills
(Amoroso 2002). Small-whorled pogonia is found in open, dry deciduous or mixed pine-deciduous forest, or
along stream banks. Examples of areas providing suitable conditions (open canopy and shrub layer with a
sparse herb layer) where small-whorled pogonia has been found include old fields, pastures, windthrow areas,
cutover forests, old orchards, and semi-permanent canopy breaks along roads, streams, lakes, and cliffs (Massey
et al. 1983). In the Mountains and Piedmont of North Carolina, this species is usually found in association with
white pine (Pinus strobus) (Weakley 1993).
Suitable habitat for small-whorled pogonia was found in more open, wooded sections of the project study corridor
near SR 1552. A systematic survey of the suitable habitat yielded no individuals of small-whorled pogonia. NHP
records document no occurrences of small-whorled pogonia within 2.0 miles of the study corridor.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY EFFECT, NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY EFFECT
F.2. Federal Species of Concern
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not afforded federal protection under the Endangered Species Act and are
not subject to any of the provisions included in Section 7 until they are formally proposed or listed as Threatened
or Endangered. In addition to the federal program, organisms that are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
or Special Concem (SC) by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) on its list of Rare Plant and
Animal Species are afforded state protection under the N.C. State Endangered Species Act and the N.C. Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. Table 5 lists the Federal Species of Concem for McDowell County, the
state status of these species, and the potential for suitable habitat in the project area. The NCNHP database
shows no occurrences of FSC within 1 mile of the project area as of July 2001.
17

Table 5
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed for McDowell County
Common Name Scientific Name Potential
Habitat State
Status
Southern A alachian Woodrat Neotoma floridana haematoreia Yes SC
Ile hen Woodrat Neotoma ma ister Yes SC
Olive-sided FI catcher Conto us borealis No SC
Cerulean Warbler Dendroica cerulea Yes SR
Bennett's Mill Cave Water Slater Caecidotea carolinensis No SR
Diana Fritilla Butterfl S e eria diana Yes SR
Roan Sed a Carex roanenis Yes C
all Larkspur el hinium exaltafum No E
Rock Shoal S ider Lil menocallis coronaria Yes -
Buttemut u fans cinerea Yes --
Cuthbert's turtlehead Chelone cuthbertii No SR
Gra 's Lil ilium ra i No T
Sweet Pinesap Monotro sis odorata Yes C
Northern Oconee-bells Shortia alacifolia var. brevist la No E
Endangered (E) -any native oronce-native species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Threatened (T) -any native oronce-native species which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Special Concern (SC) -any species which requires monitoring but which may be collected and sold under specific regulations.
Candidate(C) - a species for which USUSFWS has enough information on file to support proposals for listing as endangered
or threatened.
Significantly Rare(SR) -species which are very rare, generally with 1-20 populations in the state, and generally reduced in
numbers by habitat destruction.
F.3. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
The proposed project is not anticipated to impact any threatened or endangered species.
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 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect
of their undertakings (federally funded, licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in
the National Register of Historic Places and to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable
opportunity to comment on such undertakings. This project has been coordinated with the North Carolina State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in accordance with the Advisory Council's regulations and FHWA
procedures.
18

B. Historic Architecture
A field survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) for Bridge No. 73 was conducted on November 12, 2002. All
structures within the APE were photographed, and later reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Office (HPO).
In a concurrence form dated June 20, 2003 the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurred that there
are no historic architectural resources either listed or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places
within the APE. A copy of the concurrence form is included in the Appendix.
C. Archaeology
The SHPO, in a memorandum dated January 29, 2002, stated "Because of the location and topography of the
project area, it is unlikely that any archeological site which may be eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places wilt be affected by the proposed construction. We, therefore, recommend that no archeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project". A copy of the SHPO memorandum is included in the
Appendix.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of the inadequate bridge will result in
safer traffic operations.
The project is considered a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of substantial
environmental consequences.
Replacement of Bridge No. 73 will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural environment
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.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition will be limited. No
relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected to adversely affect
social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
In compliance with Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low Income Populations) the project would not disproportionately impact any minority or low-
income populations.
The studied route does not contain any bicycle accommodations, nor is it a designated bicycle route; therefore,
no bicycle accommodations have been included as part of this project.
This project has been coordinated with the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources
Conservation Service. The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives
to consider the potential impact to prime farmland for all land acquisition and construction projects. The proposed
19

project involves replacing the bridge in its existing location; therefore, no impacts to prime or locally important
farmland are anticipated.
No publicly owned parks or recreational facilities, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or historic sites of national, state
or local significance in the immediate vicinity of the project will be impacted.
The proposed project will not require right-of-way acquisition or easement from any land protected under Section
4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966.
No adverse effects to air quality are anticipated from this project. This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so
it is not required to be included in the regional emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required.
Since the project is located in an attainment area, 40 CFR Part 51 is not applicable. If vegetation or wood debris
is disposed of by open burning, it 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 NCAC 2D.0520 and 1990
Clean Air Act Amendments and the National Environmental Policy Act. This evaluation completes the
assessment requirements for air quality, and no additional reports are required.
Ambient noise levels may increase during the construction of this project; however this increase will be only
temporary and usually confined to daylight hours. There should be no notable change in traffic volumes after this
project is complete. Therefore, this project will have no adverse effect on existing noise levels. Noise receptors in
the project area will not be impacted by this project. This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for
highway noise set forth in 23 CFR Part 772. No additional reports are required.
The NCDOT Geotechnical Unit determined that no underground storage tanks or areas of other contamination
were present at or near the project study area.
McDowell County is a participant in the Federal Flood Insurance Regular Program. The bridge is within an
Approximate Study Area. The replacement structure is proposed as an in-kind replacement and in the absence
of historical problems, increased flood impacts associated with this bridge replacement are not anticipated. The
approximate 100-year floodplain in the project area is shown in Figure 7.
Geotechnical borings for the bridge foundation will be necessary.
Based on the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental impacts will result from
the replacement of Bridge No. 73.
IX. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Due to the isolated nature of this bridge replacement project, no formal public involvement program was initiated.
Efforts were undertaken early in the planning process to contact local officials to involve them in the project
development with a scoping letter.
20

XI. AGENCY COMMENTS
Agencies have commented on the proposed bridge replacement (see letters in the Appendix). These comments
were noted and considered during the environmental and design processes.
21

X. REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats
of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and
Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, Basinwide Planning
Program. December 1999. Catawba River: Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan.
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/basinwide/catawba wq management plan.htm.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. 2000.
Watershed Restoration Action Strategy. (as revised through 2 February 2000) Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 2001. Basinwide Information Management
System. North Carolina Waterbodies Reports: Catawba River. Accessed 10 September 2001.
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/reports/basinsandwaterbodies/hydro/Catawba.pdf.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1993. Classifications and
Water Quality Standards for North Carolina River Basins. Division of Environmental Management. Raleigh, North
Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental
Management, Water Quality Section. 1995. Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina, Fourth
Version.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1997. Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface
Waters.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species of
North Carolina. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North
Carolina. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 2001. Element Occurrence Search Report: McDowell County, North
Carolina. http://www.ncsparks.net/nhp/search.html. Updated July 2001.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1987. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. University of North
Carolina Press. Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
22

r
Rohde, F.C., R.G. Amdt, D.G. Lindquist, and J.F. Pamell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the Carolinas, Virginia,
Maryland, and Delaware. The University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Third
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDEHNR. Raleigh,
North Carolina.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1.
Environmental Laboratory, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1992. Clarification and Interpretation of the 1987 Manual. Memo to
USACE districts from Headquarters, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC, 6 Mar 1992,
signed by MG Arthur E. Williams, Directorate of Civil Works.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 1995. Soil Survey of McDowell County,
North Carolina.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service and the National Technical Committee
for Hydric Soils. 1996. NRCS National Hydric Soils List.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. National Wetlands Inventory Map, Ashford 7.5-minute Quadrangle, North
Carolina.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1995. National Wetlands Inventory Map, Marion East 7.5-minute Quadrangle, North
Carolina.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1996. National List of Plants That Occur in Wetlands: Summary of Indicators.
Washington, D.C.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 4: Southeast Region, North Carolina Ecological Services. 2001. Threatened
and Endangered Species in North Carolina: McDowell County. Updated 22 March 2001. http://nc_
es.fws.gov/es/countyfr.html
U.S. Geological Survey. 1994. Ashford, North Carolina, Topographic Quadrangle (7.5-minute series).
U.S. Geological Survey. 1994. Marion East, North Carolina, Topographic Quadrangle (7.5-minute series).
Webster, W.D., J.F. Pamell, and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Maryland. The
University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
23

FIGURES

~ _ -
NORTH CAROLINA
g DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
~`:.
~~
t}.
-~,::ys.
SR 1552
Replace Bridge No. 73 over
Dales Creek
McDowell County, North Carolina
TIP NO. B,4197
PROJECT VICINITY MAP
Not to Scale FIGURE 1
i

~ e.
rt ~ ..: ~ ~ 'i,~
.~ ~_ ~ ~-
4 ~ ~'`
., ~
r ~~
~ - 1 .t~
h a'
.. ~i
4
_, rm,~...~..e.~.. ,.........~.._., . ~.
~~,.
'~
~,
-~,~
~'
-..
r ,~
Fd~ ~~

~ .a.;.
F = ~_
ti F

v ~
-~-_ ~
_ _ ~~ , .
.:
C'
~~~
.iii. °:'.
~ 1*;r-.
a.?''s"
{~~
~~,.~_.
°v
~,~rir
'` ~y
"~ ~:.

~~ .xw

~~
r .'_
. 3 . ~ ..
'~'j
4F ~. '.~,. J. C .., ti..
.~-
-~-Ytna -_ei`:.
sxrim~-. .K-.wm a .m-r ~cm-~....s~...v :.z'--i-. _..._ ...... _

°~..
~~
-~''~
iB
i
ICI
,.
r 3
~-- ~ , ~~;
a,. ,._ - x
k e
`~ ~~
n~
_ '~a

L~€~~~a ~~ gat ~d~ f~_= j

M .
MCDOWELL COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA AND
INCORP012ATED AREAS
PANEL 125 OF Z00
(SEE MAI INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED)
CONTAINS:
COYNNNIIT NNMNEN MNEL SUFFIX
UNINOORPORIITED AREAS 370118 0125 B
PANEL LOCATION
MAP NUMBER:
3~ulcolz5 e
EFFECTIVE DATE:
IULY 15,1988
Federal Bmeigen t'
~ __.._
+, ` NORTH CAROLINA
'`~ ' DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SR 1552
Replace Bridge No. 73 over
Dales Creek
McDowell County, North Carolina
TIP NO. B-4197
FEMA 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
MAP
Not to Scale
FIGURE 8

APPENDIX

~ a
Y }'ederul Ard # j I3lZZ-252(9} TIP# I3-4197
C'ourty:y 1gcI~uw•ell ~ ~ -l
CONC~`It.RE:VCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT £I<IrIfiLE FOR_
THE NATlOr7AL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
°rajcsC: ~(^.~::iifii7•h' ~~Pp~2,"( ~:ri(i~t; ~'o. ?3 an 5R 152, !1'1cDott•ell Cou?!~3
On Junc 2U. 2043 representatives of the
(7~ North Carolina Dep~rtruent of Trarspottation ('vCDOT;
?~ederal HighHav Administra:iou (hI-i ~'Al
t, North Czro;itta State Histo;ic;'res~-a:ion Ci:i"ice (HPCi
[~i OthPr .
Reviewed !_ne suaject rr.~ject at
Scopirg mPering
(~ Histcr-ic architecr~ral reso~lxces uiio;o~aplt re:~ie;4~ session,~cons~rltz:ion
Ou:er
.r1f1 parties pr9sent weed
There are no properties over fif:-y }ears old withir. the prpject's area of potential c2I`ects.
Them a~•e ro pmperties less ti-zn i`~f'y years old u•hicn are considered to meet Criteria i~o^si~eratior- Ci u~•id:~*r the
project`s :r:a ofpotet:tial effects.
There are progenies over fiP,~ years old within rite rrciect~s ~;rea of i'otenti;rl l:~ccts (APEI, but l,a,Sed crt the
historical information available ar:d the photo~aph; of each property, the properties identified as #ti (Haase) and
#t2- (Bridle Nom. T) a ~ considered not eligible for the :~'arion3l Register and ro fitr,her evaluation o; [ttcm is
necessary.
There are no National Register-listed or Study listed properties within the project's a: ea of potential effec~~.
?,`~j A!i properties ~eatrt titan SC ,•ears of age located in ti~t~ APE have been consider ed at this consultation, a:;c: b::sed
apor: the at:ovr concurrence; ail comoiiance ror historic architecttue with Sec?ion 146 of L'te iri'LlOnal Histc>ric
PresZrvat~on ACt and GS 12 : -12(a; ;'ras been completed for this project.
TherL are no his:~ric l;ropet vies affected by ttis project. (.4rr~ch arty pores or ;tncu»:enrs ~~s rreecizv~
~igred:
Fee esentative, NCDOT late
FHWA, for the liivisiort Adriiinisaator,~r oG`ee~ Federal A~zacy
Rept•esentative, HPO
.~ __
7%; J ~.'
Date J
`'~~
Da~,e
~~ y ~ :~~
State Historic Preservation Officer j}~j Date
If n s;t;vcc rc~on is pz;p:~-cd, a final coat' of this tom, and the att3che+J list will be included.

•" swt •
r
~. 1
• v.r.+~~
Michael F. Easley. Governor
Lisb~Kh C. Evans, Scxretary
lcttrcy 1. Crow. D~~uty Scxrctary
Ollice of Archives and History
January 29, 2002
~IEi\IORANDUI`I
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L S. Brook. Administrator
'I'O: William D. Gilmore, Manager
NCDOT, Division of Highwa~•s
J`~,, -~
FROiti: David Brook 4 - ~~l~_ ~-;._
SUBJECT: Replace Bodge 73~on ji'S~ 1552 over Dales Creek,
11
a Y
~-lC~'1v~
Division of Historical Resources
David 1. Olson, Dirator
TIP B-197, i`IcDowell County, ER 02-8528
Thank .-ou for your letter of September 25, 2001, regarding the above project.
Because of the location and topograph~• of the project area, it is unlikely that anv archaeological sites which
ma~~ be eligible forlisting in the National Register of Historic Places will be affected by the proposed
construction. ~t~'e, therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection
with this project.
~~'e have conducted a search of our maps and Eiles and have located the following structures of historical or
architectural importance within the general area of the project:
Bridge No. 73 on SR 1552 over Dales Creek
~~n architectural historian for the Department of Transportation should inventory and evaluate this propert3*
and anv others, that aze fifr3~ years old or older and located ~L-ithin the area of potential effect.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section lOG of the National Historic Preservation :pct and the
~d~•isory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section lOG codified at 3G CFR
Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you hae-e questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Farley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-47G3. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: 1~Iary Pope Furr, NCDOT.~~
Matt Willcerson, NCDOT
Location . Msiling Address
Adminlstntlon SU7 N. Blount. St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail ServiceCenta, Raleigh 27699-4617
Restoration S I S N. Blount St, Raleigh , NC 461 J Mail Service Crnta, Raleigh 27699613
Survey & Planning 315 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC a61 R Mail Service Cents, Raleigh 27699-4618
Telepltone/Fa:
[phone].733-E653
(919)7]3-6347.713-4801
[phone] •7tS~80i

~ ~- ~
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: William T. Goodwin, P.E., Unit Head
Bridge Replacement Planning Unit
Project Developmjent~,and Eanvironmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
~~ t
FROM: Owen F. Anderson, Mountain Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: July 12, 2002
SUBJECT: Scoping and Natural Resources Technical Report, Replace Bridge No 73 on SR
1552 Over Dales Creek McDowell County, TIP No. B-4197
Fish and l~ldlife Project Status: GREEN
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission familiar with the
project area have reviewed the technical report for the subject project to assess the potential for
adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources. 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).
The proposed work involves the replacement of bridge number 73 on SR 1552 over Dales
Creek. Construction impacts on fish and wildlife resources will depend on the extent of
disturbance in the streambed and surrounding floodplain areas. The riparian corridor is composed
of piedmont/mountain bottomland forest (with discontinuous wetland fringe along river). This
riparian corridor provides high quality wildlife habitat and a travel corridor for wildlife.
The Division of Water Quality classifies Dales Creek as C. This reach is not classified or
designated as trout water. It is the opinion of biologists with the NCWRC that this project will
not result in adverse impacts to trout.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, I\TC 2%699-172]

~ ~^ f
Tip No B-4197, Bridge No 73on SR 1552 2 July 12, 2002
McDowell County, Dales Creek
We prefer bridge designs that do not alter the natural stream morphology or impede fish
passage. Efforts should be made during design to place bridge supports outside of the bankfull
channel. Bridge designs should also include provisions for the deck drainage to flow through a
vegetated upland buffer prior to reaching the subject surface waters. Correction of altered stream
morphology at the road crossing should be considered during design. Waste rock and dirt from
bridge construction and road realignments should be disposed of in upland areas that are outside
of riparian area and above the 100-year floodplain.
Streams and riparian zones provide connectivity of the landscape; and thus, are natural
movement corridors for terrestrial wildlife species. Bridge designs should consider leaving
sufficient corridors under the bridge to encourage movement of wildlife under the bridge rather
than across the highway. The movement of animals, especially larger animals (e.g., deer and
bear), under the bridge may reduce automobile crashes involving wildlife. Where feasible,
increasing the riparian comdor width under the bridge is recommended.
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 native herbaceous species and
planted with native tree species. If the area that is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT
should restore the area to wetlands. If successful, the site maybe used as wetland mitigation for
the subject project or other projects in the watershed.
Listed below are our standard recommendations on this project. Because the Corps of
Engineers (COE) recognizes the project county as a "trout water county", the NCWRC will
review any nationwide or genera1404 permits for the proposed projects and will likely request the
following as conditions of the 404 permit.
I. This bridge should be replaced with another spanning structure.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream.
Water that has inadvertently come in contact with live concrete should not be
discharged to surface waters but should be disposed in an upland area.
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

July 12, 2002
~y ~ 1552 3
<, ~ Bridge No '13on SR the stumps and
No B-4197, eat and ]eav~ng
Tip Dales Creek e ui m zes disturbed soil.
McDowell County, s or other mechanized q p and rnimmr
bush-hog > etate naturally
saws, mowers,
at intact, allows the area to reve each side oft e
root m 0 feet should remain on
n rap free) area of at least 1
6 p clear bank (p waters must
steam underneath the bridge rotect surface
erosion control measures suffrcient to Structures should be
round disturbing activities.
-~ Sedimentation and
lemented prior to any g rainfall events.
be imp ularly, especially following
ma~ntarned reg ion should be planted onosion control.
ve etat er
ermanent hesbu brag actirgities to provrde long-terra
g Temporary or p round d work area.
within 15 days °f g conducted in a dry where
eat to stream waters sho d d e Sion structures should be used
All work in °i adJac s cofferdams, or othe
9 s rock berm , water•
Sandbag ~ in stream channels in
ossible to prevent excavation in flowrng bank rather than in other
p
o erated from t the likelihood of introduc
10. Heavy equipment should be p
er to minimize sedimentarson and reduce s and
ord fill (causeway )~
pollutants into surface Ovate as temporary bottom when
sive disturbance of the natural stream
clean, sediment-free roeXCe ould be use
11. Only ved without
should be remo feted. aintained
construction is comp ected daily an h draulic
equipment should be rnsfpuels' lubricants, Y
12. During subsurface rnvestigations,
ination of surface waters from leaking
to prevent contain ed to surface waters but
fluids, or other toxic materials. uld not be discharg
drilling operations sho
13 . Wastewater fro ed to upland areas. e should be
should be Pump aters from demolition e ie °ea h surface waters
Discharge of materials i t° ableac~'y materials that inadvert y
14.
avoided as much as prac d other equipment in
should be removed. out hydroseeders an
xtures and washing
h droseed mi rohibited.
15. Discharging y waters is strictly p
or adjacent to surface ated metal
structure. If corrug
arming should be
• d es be replaced with another sp
t bn g rete box culverts are used the following
We prefer tha i es, or cons 404 permit.
reinforced concrete p p
pipe arches, conditions of any
considered as these will likely be

Tip No B-4197, Brid
McDowell County, DaleNo 73on SR 1552
Creek 4
l The calve
calve rt must be desi July 12, 2002
rt °r p'Pe invert is bun d ° allow for fish passa
multiple Cells are r q the at least 12 inches below, Generall
botto e aired second Y, this means
ms are at str and/or the natural that the
accomplished b eam bankfull sta third cells sho streambed. If
dive Y construCtin ge ~s'trular to Ly°nsfield uld be placed
rt low flow g a low sill o desi so that their
Pipe Burin s to another cell. n the upstrea gn)- This could be
notched bad] ormal flows This will allow ~' eAd °f the
es sho t0 acCOmrnOdate fish su~C1ent other cells that
interv uld be paced i Water depth in the wrll
als to alto n reinforced movements. If calve culvert or
velocities v' fOT the collection Concrete rts are long,
and to provide restin °f sediments in t bOx culverts at
through the structure. g Places for fish he Calve reduces foot
rt ro
and other aquatic °r flow
2. If multiple pipes or garvsms moving
remain d Cells are used
3 'y during normal flows to allow forne p'pe °r box should
Culverts °T wildlife passage, be designed to
Pipes should be situated
required. Widenin so that
causes a decre g of the stream channel n° channel reali
maintenance. ase in water veloci at the inlet g'unent or ~,i
tY causin °r outlet of Bening ~
g sediment de structures usuall
position that wil] re Y
4. R'Prap should not quire future
Tha be Placed °n the streambed.
projects. Ifs you for the
You have an °PP°rtunity to review
2546. Y 9Uestions regarding thesea o°rnment during the earl
rnments, please Y stages °f these
cc: Mr. Steve contact
Lund, NCD me at (828) 4S2_
Ms. Marella B OT Coordinator, CO
Ms. C uncick, Biolo i E, Asheville
ynthia V Wiele, Hi h
an Der SFWS Asheville
g N'aY Coordinator Division of .
Water Quality
J

f` 4 ~
US Fish and Wildlife Service
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 23801
Phone 828-2~8-3939 Ext 237, Fax 828-2~S-330
MEMO FOR: William T. Goodwin, P.E. DATE: lone 27, 2002
FROM: Marella Buncick
SUBJECT: Review of NCDOT 2005 Bridge Program
I have completed initial review of the approximately 70 proposed bridge replacements for
NCDOT Divisions 9-14 for the near 2005. I would like to commend NCDOT for
obtaining the natural resource information up front and allowing the agencies to review
the proposals and provide continents so early in the process. It was a large volume of
work for everyone involved but I feel that the input will be much more meaningful at this
early planning stage.
Attached is a spreadsheet with specific comments .for each project reviewed. A]1 of the
projects have been assigned a Green, Yellow, or Red ranking depending on the resources
affected and the need for future consultation. As you will note; the majority of the
projects received a Yellow ranking. This is due in large part to the fact that there are
unresolved issues related to listed species. Many of these projects likely will become
Green projects after further field review. However, obligations under Section 7 of the
Act must be reconsidered if: (1) new inforration reveals impacts of this identified action
that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2)
actions are subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or
(3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may be affected by the
identified action.
I also have general comments regarding the process and reports. My general comments
follow.
Report Content and Organization
1. The reports would be more. easily handled if they were not spiral or otherwise
bound.
2. Maps need to be much better. Without a significant landmark-- highway, larger
town, other feature - it sometimes took a long time to figure out the location of
the project within a county.
3. The reports were organized somewhat similarly, but more consistency would aid
in the review process. Perhaps a table that has the significant features ---stream
width, depth, DWQ class, etc.--also would help.

- ;;yy?::
4. For listed species, •it,often was _difficulr<to~aell whether, field surveys had been
conducted or whether the information was limited to^a database search.
~. In the future, I would appreciate having the Rosgen stream classification included
as part of the information.
Listed Species Surveys
Projects currently ranked as Yellow will need to be reviewed in the future after~the stated
issues are resolved. For those reports with unresolved issues related to listed species, I
would recommend that NCDOT wait until closer to implementation time to conduct final
surveys. In general, after three to five years we need updated information regarding the
project and listed species. Additionally, when aquatic species are involved (particularly
mussels) several surveys may be required to adequately determine presence or absenlre.
The three projects receiving a Red ranking will need to be followed very closely.to
determine future consultation requirements. These include B-4287 (actually 2 bridge
replacements), B-4286, and B-4282. These projects were ranked as Red because of the
significance of the number of listed resources potentially affected and the river (either
main stem or tributary) involved.
I would encourage NCDOT to require consultants to at least assess habitat for the bog
turtle. While the bog turtle technically does not require Section 7 consultation, it is a
species of concern and NCDOT is actively managing mitigation sites or parts of sites for
this species. Additionally, the Wildlife Resources Commission considers this animal rare
in NC and participates actively in surveys and conservation efforts on its behalf.
Bridge Design and Construction Practices
I am assuming that FWS comments/recommendations in the past regarding bridge design.
demolition, and construction practices will be folded into each of these projects. Since
NCDOT is also working on a BMP manual that covers these practices, I think it would be
redundant to state them again. However, if any questions arise; please let me know. I
would like to emphasize that eve prefer off-site detours wherever possible, to minimize
effects to resources.
Each of these projects has been assigned a log number. Please refer to these numbers in
future requests regarding the subject projects., Thank you again for the opportunity to
provide these comments. If you have questions, please let me know.
-, -' T

USFWS comments (6/2002)
Piyy,; 1
bridgeproje. Y2005
PDE ;TIP
--- County Rank Reason for Rank FWS Log Number

SH B-2988

Haywood

Y - -
-
unresolved for listed species, FWS requests review of bridge design
--- - -~
4-2-02-3.
MD B-4011 Ashe Y FWS requests resurvey for spiraea assessment for bog turtle and green floater, review bridge plans; 4-2-02-4(

MD IB-4012
Ashe
Y --- - _.
FWS requests resurvey for spiraea and habitat assessment fo
r bog turtle _
4 2 02-4(
MD B-4013 Ashe Y _
FWS requests resurvey for spiraea and habitat assessment for bog turtle, review bridge design 4 2 02 4i
MD B-4015 Ashe Y _
FWS requests resurvey for spiraea and habitat assessment for bog turtle, review bridge design ~ ~ _ _ _
4 2 02-4~
MD B 4016 Ashe __ Y FWS requests resurvey for spiraea, and habitat assessment for bog turtle, review bridge design ~ 4-2-02-4
SH B-4032 Buncombe G
---- - FWS requests review of bridge design
~
, 4-2-02-3

H B-4036 _
Buncombe
Y _ _ _ _ _____________ ___ ________
____
_ r
unresolved for mussels, FWS requests review of bridge design T ~ ..._.--- ---...--- ----
4-2-02-3
SH B-4037 Buncombe Y unresolved for mussels, FWS requests review of bridge design i 4-2-02-3

W j8-4038
Burke _
Y
unresolved for listed species, be careful of downstream effects ~ -- -
4-2-02-3

DW !B-4039 B
Burke
Y
unresolved for heartleaf i __. _ _..
4-2-02-3
RY jB-4040 Burke Y FWS requests resurvey for heartleaf ` 4-2-02-3
DW ;B-4041 Burke Y FWS requests resurvey for heartleaf 4-2-02-3
RY i8-4043
_ Burke _
.. _ Y FWS requests mussel survey, requests bridge to bridge and review of bridge des
ig
n
._ 4-2-02-3
RY B 4044 Burke Y _ _
_
FWS requests resurvey for heartleaf a
nd pogonia, bridge to badge 4 2-02-3
RY B 4045 _
- Burke
_ - Y _
FWS requests resurvey for heartleaf, new occurrence w/in 1 m
ile I _
4-2-02-3

RY B-4046

Burke

Y _
_ _ ,
unresolved for pogonia, FWS re nests resurve for heartleaf, re nest brid a for hi h ualit stream;
q Y q 9 9 9 Y ~
.4 2-02-4

RY B-4047

MD B-4052
Burke _____

Caldwell
Y _ _
-
Y
unresolved for heartleaf ' ~

unresolved for heartleaf be careful of the USGS gaging station at this location i . ...
4-2-02-3
___
4-2-02-4
___ ._ B-4059
--- - -- Cawtaba
-- - ------ Y Need survey for heartleaf--habitat assessment inadequate
4-2-02-4
I

DW
._ . --- __

,B-4060
_ -- ----- '

Cawtaba
- - - --_
--
------
Y
- --- - _
__ _ _
-- --------- -- _ _______ _ ____ _ __ ___ ___ __ _ _
- -- ---
Need survey for heartleaf--habitat assessment inadequate ~ - - ~ ~ I ~ ~ 4-2-02-4
----...

RY

B-4067

Cherokee

Y - .. _ . i
_.. _ ___ _........ i_.
unresolved for listed species, close coordination w/USES, high quality stream 4-2-02-3
DW B-4070 Cherokee Y all listed species unresolved, FWS requests special consideration here for sicklefin redhorse ' i 4-2-02-3
JJ B-4076 _ , Cleveland Y Need survey for heartleof habitat assessment inadequate
q 2 p
2_q
SH i B-4103 Davidson __ Y __ ___ _
_ _
FWS requests mussel survey, requests bridge to bridge because of stream ualit
q Y ~ 4-2-02-3
JJ I
- - -- B-4116
---- - - - Gaston
------- Y Need resurvey for heartleaf - ~ -- -~ -- - - -
4 2 0
2
4
DW IB-4123 Graham Y _ _ _
unresolved for listed
i
I
d
B _ _ _ __
_
-

- -- ---_ .._ -
-------- spec
es,
n
iana
at close coordination w/USES hi h ualit stream
9 q Y
4 2-02-3
SH B-4144
~
~ Haywood Y ..
unresolved for listed species, FWS requests revie
w
of b
rid
ge
design
, _ _ _
4-2-
02
-3
DP
B 4155 Iredell G _
_ _
_
__
_
__ __ _ _
____
~ ~ -~ ____ _
---
_ _ FWS requests survey for bog turtle _
_
--- -2 02 4

DP B 4158
_ __. ----
Iredell
----- .. ___
G _ _ _ __ ... -. _ _ ..._._..--- ------------------..- --__..
FWS re nests surve for bo turtle contractor su ested surve for heartleaf
F
W
S re uests
brid ~
q
g i __
4 2 02
4

DW B 4161
_
Jackson _
Y _,_
__
_
_
__ __ _ _ p
unresolved for listed species
, FWS requests review of bridge design -9~- -
- --- -- - q 2 p2-

JJ iB-4177
l

Lincoln
..

Y _ _.-.

Need resurvey for heartleaf
~
- _ _.

4-2-02-4
DW B-4178 Lincoln
-. _ Y
.__ _ __._.._ _ _ _
Need resurvey for heartleaf
_- _ __ _
4 2 02 4
DW B-4179
(- ~--- ~--- Macon
- -- ----_ Y
_.. ._ _ _ __ __ _ _ _
unresolved for listed s ecies, FWS re nests review of brid a desi n
r
_. _ P q
._ 9 9 _
- ~
4-2-02-..

RY ~B-4180
(Macon
Y _
_
_ _._. _. _
unresolved for listed species, FWS requests bridge to bridge consideration for green salamander _
4-2-02-?
RY B-4183 Madison These 2 br idge replacements are part of R-2518 and 2519 merger process, review by merger team
~ ~
3
3
3
9
3
3
3
.~

USFV1 ~mmenls (6/2002)
P
DE ( TIP County
_
DW ~ B-4192 McDowell
_
_
JJ
- B-4194
r:_ -
_ _- McDowell
-
_
JJ _
B-4195 . ____
McDowell
bridgeprojt ~Y2005
Rank
Reason for Rank
(Need to assess
Y _ _______ Need_to_assess pogonia_
Y Need to assess ~oaonia
FWS

J i
B-4196
McDowell
Y -- -. ----- -..._ -- - -- ~--- - --
Need to assess pogonia -
- ~-
- - .. F
---
4~2' 02~42
1
+
DW ' B 4197 McDowell Y Need o'ass~ss,pogorna; fWS requests mussel surveys bridge to bndg2 for high quallty stream _ t
`
4-2-02-422
JJ ~ B-4198 McDowell

_. Y _ _ Need to assess pogonia.

... __.. . - - -. _....
_._
T --
__._-__._ 4-2 02=
423 <:

DW
DW ~
B 4199 __ _
B
4202
M_c_D_owe_ 11 _ __
-
Mit
h
ll ~
Y
~----- --
Need to assess pogonia - -_ , ~- ,
----------- -._.._.._ . _ _ ._ .. _ _._ _ .. - - --- _ ....._. - - - -
._ -
~ ,.
-•--r-
4-2 02-~~4

-
c
e
Y _
Unresolved for Elktoe, FWS requests bridge to bridge, NO SURVEY NEEDED FOR INDIANA BAT '
,, _ _
_~'"
4-2 02
4
17
,
B-4239 Polk Y unresolved for small-whorled pogonia and heartleaf - -
,
..

DW TB 4240
Poik
Y
unresolved for small-whorled pogonia and heartleaf
---- -_ 4 2-02 369 ~.
___--
SH i B 4255 Rowan G may need resurvey for Schweinitz's sunflower --- - ~ - --- -- _ ___ ___4- 0 361
SH

. B-.4258

_
---- - -
Rutherford _
_ _ _ _
Y unresolved for small-whorled pogonia -- - - - - " " - ~ ~ -- 36`5

J

RY I

B-4259 .

Rutherford _. _

Y
. -.. _.__ _

unresolved for small-whorled pogonia, FWS requests another heartleaf surve
_ __ .. Y

~ 4
2
- 02.3 2
~ - ~-'
4-2 02
363
RY ' B-4260 Rutherford Y unresolved for small whorled pogonia
_ _. :

42
02~36~
SH j B-4261 Rutherford Y _ unresolved for small whorled pogonia and heartleaf
. I ~1~2 02x36
RY B-4264 Rutherford Y unresolved for small whorled pogonia, FWS requests another survey for heartleaf _ ___ __
4= 8

RY
B 4265
Rutherford
Y _._
unresolved for small whorled pogonia, FWS requests another survey for heartleaf and iris
et
t
e _ .
4-2 02-3 fi ~>
RY B 4266 Rutherford Y _
_
_
unresolved for small whorled pogonia, FWS requests another surve_y_for heartleaf
~ 4-2 02 367,<
note for Rutherford Co pr ojects--No survey Is required for In
dfana bat because the record Is a winter record ~ ~' '~~`
SH i B 4282 _ (Stokes R
. _ _ - _ _
.. ____- - -_ ___
unresolved for cardamrne and James spiny mussel, FWS concerned about bridge.design '
._. _ .. _ . _ _
- 4 2 02 37

DP

;
.

4284 '
.. _.._ .

urry
...-

_
- _ _ - ~---- -- - -~----i-
~-------
'
un
esolved for pogonia FWS requests assessment for bog turtle and
brook floater, bridge to
b
...._.
ri
dge
_
---- -- ~ ,
-
-- -
4.2 02 426

~ ry -
_. ... r
_
_
_
__
.... .
. _.P .9. _ .......q_ .
9
n
f _ ._ ...., ,
2
02.425
RY B 4286, . Swain R _.. _..._ _._ _
------ - _.. _. .----. _.. _.
unresolved for listed
spec es, esp Indiana bat FWS
concerned with.bridg_e,desig_n ''
~ 4`
.
.202
~
1
~~
"
DW , B 4287 Swain R unresolved for listed species, esp. Indiana bat, FWS concerned with brid a desl n ~
-
'~'
r
RY I B-4288 . Transylvania Y unresolved for listed species, FWS requests survey for bunched arrow
head „ ~4=2 02 3'7~'
SH B-4290 __ T_r_ansylva_nia
- Y _
unresolved for listed s ecies
P
i 1 ~

4202~7~~
SH `

_ B 4291

. Trans ivarna
Y -~ -------~-
Y --------- -- __ ..._.__ _ ___ _ __ _____ _ _ _ _ _
need mussel surve s - ~ ~ --
Y ....-
_ ._ a - _ -~
4
,2
02 372
MD B-4316 _ i Watau a Y :
~ _ _ _ ____ _
FWS requests bridge to.bndge for high quality stream, FWS requests survey_for g
een floater _ _ _ _ __
_
_
4-2 02,339
JJ ; B-4317 Watauga G r
FWS requests bridge to bridge for high quality stream 4-2 02 `39J
MD i B-4318 Watauga G _ __
FWS requests bridge to bridge for high quality stream, FWS requests survey, for green floater _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ ___
;4_=202„,
y
MD ~ B-4322 Wilkes G , FWS requests bridge to bridge for high quality stream, assessment for,bog~fUrt'fe- ~ •._ 4-2 02
' 0~ g
DW !B-4330 Yancey Y unresolved for elktoe, FWSrequests resurvey for Spiraea, be careful of downstream effects 4-2-02-397

..
) ~'~:;~ .
~ ~R
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael-Easley, Governor
Bill Ross, Secretary
Gregory Thorpe, Director
June 18, 2002
~ •
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Memorandum To: William T. Goodwin, Jr., PE, Unit Head
Bridge Replacement Planning Unit
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Through: John Do ~
NC Divisi o Wa e Quality
From: Robert Ridings ,/~~~.a,~ 'I~
NC Division of W ~/~~~ /"
ater Quality
Subject: Review of Natural Systems Technical Reports for bridge
replacement projects scheduled for construction in CFY 2005:
"Green Light" Projects: B-4077, B-4082, B-4090, B-4152, B-4248,
B-4036, B-4059, B-4060, B-4155, B-4158, B-4177, B-4178,
B-4198, B-4197• B~194, & B-4192.
On all projects, use of proper sediment and erosion control will be needed. Sediment and erosion
control measures should not be placed in wetlands. Sediment should be removed from any water
pumped from behind a cofferdam before the water is returned to the stream.
This office would prefer bridges to be replaced with new bridges. However if the bridge must be
replaced by a culvert and 150 linear feet or more of stream is impacted, a stream mitigation plan
will be needed prior to the issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification. While the NCDWQ
realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted that for projects requiring
mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification
For permitting, any project that falls under the Corps of Engineers' Nationwide Permits 23 or 33
do not require written concurrence by the NC Division of Water Quality. Notification and
courtesy copies of materials sent to the Corps, including mitigation plans, are required. For
projects that fall under the Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 14 or Regional General Bridge
Permit 31, the formal 401 application process will be required including. appropriate fees and
mitigation plans.
Any proposed culverts shall be installed in such a manner that the original stream profile is 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.
Wetlands1401 Unit 2321 Crabtree Blvd. Suite 250 Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]

r

Do not use any machinery in the stream channels unless absolutely necessary. Additionally,
vegetation should not be removed from the stream bank unless it is absolutely necessary.
NCDOT should especially avoid removing large trees and undercut banks. If large, undercut
trees must be removed, then the wnks should be cut and the stumps and root systems left in
place to minimize damage to stream banks.
Special Note on projects B-4077 and B-4090: these waters are classified as 303(d) waters.
Special measures for sediment control will be needed
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.

ti ~ ~+

e.r 5U1[ o
~3~ ~-~
4 ,+..
.~ ~~~.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTIVIENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICI-IAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
September 27, 2004
Memorandum to: Vincent Rhea, P.E., Project Planning Engineer
Consultant Project Planning Unit
From: Karen M. Lynch~vironmental Supervisor
Office of the Natural Environment
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Freshwater mussel survey report for proposed replacement of
Bridge No. 289 on SR 1158 over Colbert Creek, Yancey County;
TIP No. B-4330.
The proposed project involves replacing Bridge No. 289 over Colbert Creek on SR
1158 (Colbert's Creek Road) in Yancey County. A site assessment was conducted on
July 7, 2004 by NCDOT biologists, K. M. Lynch and Logan Williams along with
Environmental Consultant, Tim Savidge (The Catena Group), and USFWS Biologist,
John Fridell. Colbert Creek is a high gradient stream, approximately 15 to 20 ft wide
with a water depth of up to 1.5 ft.
One federally endangered mussel, the Appalachian elktoe (Alasmidonta raveneliana)
is listed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (January 29, 2003) as occurring in Yancey
County. Appalachian elktoe has been reported from relatively shallow, medium-sized
creeks and rivers with cool, clean, well-oxygenated, moderate or swift waters. The
species is most often found in riffles, runs, and shallow flowing .pools with stable,
relatively silt-free substrate. Shifting sands or shifting substrates do not provide suitable
habitat for the Appalachian elktoe.
During the site visit, Colbert Creek was observed to have a very high gradient. High
gradient, upper reaches of streams .(such as Colbert Creek) do not provide adequate
habitat for mussel fauna. Therefore the replacement of bridge No. 289 will have No
Effect on the Appalachian elktoe.
Biological Conclusion for Appalachian elktoe: No Effect
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone]
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone]
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WESSITE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

~. `~ Y
~ r
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
March 10, 2005
Mr. Vincent J. Rhea, P.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Rhea:
Subject: Endangered Species Concurrence for the Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 73 over
Dales Creek in McDowell County, North Carolina (TII' No. B-4197)
As requested by the North Carolina Department of Transportation, we have reviewed the natural
resources information and biological conclusions for federally protected species for the subject
project. The following comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of section,? of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Given the information provided, including the habitat assessment and field surveys, we concur
with your conclusion of "not likely to adversely affect" for the small whorled pogonia (Isotria
medeoloides) for the subject project. We believe the requirements under section 7(c) of the Act
are fulfilled regarding listed species for the project. However, obligations under section 7 of the
Act must be reconsidered if (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that
may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) this action
is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new species
is listed or critical habitat is determined that maybe affected by the identified action.
If you have questions about these comments, please contact Ms. Marella Buncick of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 237. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference
our Log No. 4-2-02-422.
Sincerely,
i' ~u~
v
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor

., ~~ ~
AUG `~ 2007
North Carolina Department of Transportation
PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTATION FORM
I.D. No. B-4197
I.
a.
b.
c.
d.
II.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Consultation Phase:
Project Description
State Project:
Federal Project:
Document Type:
CONCLUSIONS
Construction
DIVISION CF HIGH'NAYS
PDEA•OFFiCE OF NATURAL tNVIRONMENT
McDowell County, Bridge Number 73 on SR 1552 (Lake
James Road) over Dales Creek
8. 33544.1.1
BRZ-1552 (9)
CE
April 13, 2005
Date
The above environmental document has been reevaluated as required by 23 CFR 771. It
was determined that the current proposed action is essentially the same as the original proposed
action. Proposed changes, if any, are noted below in Section III. It has been determined that
anticipated social, economic, and environmental impacts were accurately described in the above
referenced document(s) unless noted otherwise herein. Therefore, the original Administration
Action remains valid.
III. CHANGES IN PROPOSED ACTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
WATER RESOURCES
This project will cross Dales Creek, DWQ index number 11-27, and has been assigned a best
usage classification of Class C. Class C waters are protected for secondary recreation, fishing,
wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and survival, agriculture and other uses suitable for
Class C. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving human body
contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental
manner.
PROTECTED SPECIES '
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of May 10, 2007 the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists 5 federally protected species in McDowell County (Table 1).
The Carolina northern flying squirrel has been added to the list of federally protected species
know to occur within McDowell County. A species description and a biological conclusion are
included below.
Construction Consultation - B-4197
August 2007

... ~ ,
Table 1. Federally Protected Species for McDowell County
Scientific Name Common Name Status Biological Habitat
Conclusion
Hatiaeetus leucocephalus
Clemmys muhlenbergii
Glaucomys sabrinus
coloratus
Hudsonia montana
Isotria medeoloides
Bald Eagle
Bog turtle
Carolina northern flying
squirrel
Mountain golden heather
Small whorled pogonia
Threatened
Threatened(S/A)
Endangered
Threatened
Threatened
No Effect No
N/A N/A
No Effect N/A
No Effect No
No Effect Yes
Carolina northern flying squirrel -The Carolina northern flying squirrel is an isolated,
endangered subspecies of the more wide-ranging northern flying squirrel. Flying
squirrels are nocturnal and have a loose, fully furred fold of skin on each side of the body
between the wrists and the ankles that enables the squirrels to glide from tree to tree or to
the ground for foraging. The Carolina northern flying squirrel can be distinguished from
the similar southern flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans) by larger size ranging from 10 to
12 inches total length and by having gray rather than white bases of the ventral hairs
(Weigl 1987).
The Carolina northern flying squirrel typically occurs in spruce-fir forests and mature
hardwood forest adjacent to spruce-fir forests at elevations above 4000 feet (Weigl 1987).
Endemic to the Appalachians of western North Carolina and eastern Tennessee, this
subspecies is known from the Great Smoky Mountains, Roan Mountain, and Mount
Mitchell.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Project elevation is approximately 1,200 feet. No habitat in the form of spruce-fir forests
and mature hardwood forest adjacent to spruce-fir forests at elevations above 4,000 feet is
present in the project area. This project will have no effect on the Carolina northern
flying squirrel. Additionally a search of the N1iP database on August 15, 2006 found no
occurrence of the Carolina northern flying squirrel within 1 mile of the project
In the CE, the small whorled pogonia was given a biological conclusion of "May affect, not likely
to adversely affect," however the biological conclusion can be changed to "No effect." The bog
turtle is listed as threatened due to similarity of appearance and is not subject to Section 7
consultation and a biological conclusion is not required. The biological conclusion remains valid
for all other species addressed in the CE.
IV. LIST OF ENVIItONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
A list of the special project commitments for this project is attached.
Construction Consultation - B-4197
August 2007

.r, ~ , Y
V. COORDINATION
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch personnel have discussed
current project proposals with others as follows:
Design Engineer:
David Scheffel
8/2//07
Date
Permits Section:
FHWA
Brett Feulner
Donnie Brew
8/2/07
Date
8/2/07
Date
VI. N T CONCURRENCE
Z a7
P oject Developme En n ate
Construction Consultation - B-4197
August 2007

w
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
McDowell County
Bridge No. 73 on SR 1552 (Lake James Road)
Over Dales Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1552 (9)
State Project No. 8.2872501
T.I.P Project No. B-4197
No commitments have been agreed to by NCDOT except the standard Nationwide Pernut #23
Conditions, the General Nationwide Permit Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional
Conditions, State Consistency Conditions, NCDOT's Guidelines for Best Management Practices
for the Protection of Surface Waters, NCDOT's Guidelines for Best Management Practices for
Bridge Demolition and Removal, General Certification Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions
of Certification.
Categorical Exclusion B-4197
August 2007
Green Sheet
Sheet 1 of 1

ALTERNATIVE A
(REPLACE IN-PLACE WITH DOWNSTREAM DETQUR)
~ ~ t~f~ ~1
~ ~ ~
`~
~ O
NOTE: THE EXISTING ROAD IS NOT PoSTED THEREFORE 55 MPH STATUARY SPEED LIMIT APPLrfS.
ALTERNATNE A !REPLACE IN-PLACE WITH ON-SITE DETOURITIES TO THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT
WHICH MEETS 25 MPN DESIGN CRITERIA
~ ~~~
`
~
~ , ~
~
~
~ ~
PI Sta 19+3128
p= 2T3259.41RT1 ~
~~~ ^
l~
D = IT 2r 445' ~ ~
L = 158b8' ~ ~
T =80.90' ~ ~ ~
R = 330D0' ~~
DS = 30 mph ~ 11
A 11
~. {;~ ~ l ~
`~ 1 ~ -L-
PI Sto 23+
SRSR 15`b~~~

J
y
I
,o`
u,

~°~ ~ ~ p= 9'56' 048 fRTI
~' 1 1 D =8'48' 53,0'
•
~~
~ ~'~ 4 N I R =/6504DO'
--~.,- ./~ ~ II - 45 mph
d
I II
~ I BEGIN E
\ \ ~ , e III ~..
~ _~~'
~~`_ S r ~
ono. f ~~
~ ~
i ~ BEGIN PROJECT
~ ~,~' -4197
~' `G -L- STA 2f+7681
3
~ y.
o ~ -L- N
,~ P7 Sia 21+2352
Q p= 18'40'128'rLTJ N
D = 17'2r 445
L =10753' v`°,
T =5425'
~ R = 330A0'
I Gs = 3o mph ~
5'-0' 11'-0' I II'-0' S'-0'
B'-o'
I N~ GUdRDRdI~
I
I
z,
GRADE M5k
POINT
TYPICAL ROADWAY CROSS SECTION '
x
N
w
Q
I~
II
1 ~ ry
1S'
11
11'.
II
11
\~ I I
11~
11
1 il,
Y:? ~ I I .
1 Q I II _L_
I I P15to 25+4456
~ III .~,;:>' p= 33'4407D'fRT1
{~ QI II ~ _ !~ 6 B' 524
~f T = 6Db;'
X11 I ~ R = 200DD'
III ~ II II DS = 25 mph
41 I END BRIDGE
I` I, -L- STA 25+12D0
I ~~
`..
r
°ry \\, t
N \\'' \\~
~~ \\\~
v
1~~ \
~~f ~
~'~~
ti
5~°~
~(~ iL
C-
_L_
END PROJECT
8-4197
_~-~-u.,
DESrGN DATA
T = r26.49'
R =900.00'
DS = 50 mpA
na~[er erae+c~ no. I per no.
8-4197 - -~ 4
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
m xor ue ro axnxurnoN
INCOMPLE E PLANS
no Nm ue me is .irnummw
II
~I' ~'
e e
1 ` END BRIDGE
~`Il ~ `" -L- STA25t1200
'~ I
` R
\~ ~\
g\ D r
n\ ~
\.
,~ \\~
© ~~i
,,
~~~
,.
\~ \\ © ~,
~ \ ° ~ i
~ i
\\ ~/ ~// ~
v
~ ~,
~~.
~ ~ ~V~
\\ ~ \ `\~ ~
~~
\~`~'
p= 16'00'OOb'fRT1 \\~\ ~\
~ = 25L33'8~•
P1/
DESIGN SPEED 60 mph
POSTED SPEED 55 mpg
CURRENT YEAR ADT r200r1 200 vpd
DESIGN YEAR ADT (20251 400 vp0
TTST ~% DUALS I% ,2%
fUNCT10NAL CLASSIPICATION RurolLncol
TERRAIN M[wMalnous
MAX RADNS 1205 tt
MAXIMUM GRADE !0%
SUPERECEVATION RATE Se = 0.08
• DESIGN EXCEPTION REOUIREd
1\ `1 ~
\ ` ``
X11 ~ ~N
3Q
SCALE
50 0 50 100
FIGURE 4
TYPICAL BRIDGE CROSS SECTION

ALTERNATIVE A
(DOWNSTREAM DETOUR DESIGN
~ ~ 44 ~1
~ ~ ° ~ ~~~~
4~ p
.~
~ ~ ~~~~
~` ~.1~
o ~,,
\\
QII ~
~ ~ \~
11 !~~ `
/ 11
11
1
"/ \ ~ 1 11
'~ 1 11
1
~___SR 1552 _~ „~~. ~.(•~{J 1 11
------ ~`~~~~\ ,1111
1 ~ 1
~ _ F/ \
~ \ ~ `\ ,,`
\~~
~~

BEGIN PROJECT B-4I97
-L- STA IO+OpAO

111.
11.
14
11'.
.. 1 1
11'
1
11 1
1
1 ~ {~11 1 r',
.1
1 I .
{~ 1
1 ''~
I
~ 1
I4 ~~~ 11
iii
i
i ~
±1
~1 1
1 1
`~
~ 1 1
~~~ ~
\~ ~.
~~
e,~
2 ~ 8f CNP ~
V
~~

-L-
PI Sfa l5+25,,42
~ = 49'54' 485' fR
D = 8' IP 06,4'
L =60981
T = 325T7'
R = 700.00'
DS = 45 mpA
i
~"'
`\ \ END PROJECT B-4197
-l - CTA IR+I)<iRf~
neoxcr mae+ce ra. ~ car ra.
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
m xor ua wwnucime~
INCOMPLE 'E PLANS
m rw2 ue row i. ,uauwrua
~' ~
`\ \`
N
\` ``
DETOUR DESIGN DATA
DESIGN SPEED 45 mpA
IIIN.RADJUS 660 tt.
gAXIYUM GRADE 8%
SUPERELEVATION RATE Se = 0.06
SCALE
50 0 50 100
FIGURE 5
~ ~„
\ `~~~
c
\\ . `~
~~ \_,r\•
TYPICAL DETOUR ROADWAY CROSS SEC'TiON

ALTERNATIVE C
REPLACE IN-PLACE WITH UPSTREAM DETOUR
PREFERRED ALTERNATE
~~ ~~
~ O
O
Q ~~~
~~
~~
• ~ \~ \\
~K
~~
~~ ~
~~
~~
i
~~~~ m
1 ~1 i
1 ~
~ ~~ o
~ PC -DETI- Sta. ro+OOAO ~ 1 ~ c
\~ BEGIN PROJECT B-4197 ,4 ~ u
~ ~~
1~
~ ~1
" ""'" SR r552 y ~
~~ ~ 1
----------_~` ~\ ` ~ 1
~ `~\ \\ ~\ \ 1 `I
~~~~ ~~,
v' `iro \\~''-
~~
2 ~~
_=
~__'\.
_ ~
5 7255' S12'E
-DETI-
Pr Sra 10+5035
o = Ir 20 54z rcT,
D = lr2r44s•
L =9992'
T =5035'
R = 330.00'
DS = 30 mph
a

5'-D'
W/ GIIARpRNL
~~ ~: ,- -a.o~ o~.
cRnoE -~
POIIJT
TYPICAL DETOUR ROADWAY CROSS SECTION
11~
-DETI- ~-
Pr Sta a+4932
~= 2T45'03J'rRTJ
D = 28' 38' 52.4
L =9687'
T =49.40'
R = 200A(Y
~. = 25 mph
'~~ `,~.
}~
.~~
1
l
1
\
1
\
~ 1
\\~ ~
~:?
1
~
F
Q~

i
~'~
'
` v ~ ~
Q
I

~T"~~
~~. ~ ~ 1-

i
-DETI-
PI Sto r3+88br
~ = 39 54' 24T fRTJ
D = 2838' 52.4
L = l393P'
T = 72b1'
R = 2001)0'
DS = 25 mph
,.~~
. ~
is~ i , ~
~~F \
C
~~ ~ ~
\\` ~~ \~~
. ..\\\ \\ '.A
S \\ \~ \` c
~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~
o ~\ ~~~~ ~\~~
~ ~
\~°~ ;~
~~\ ~
\~.
/1) ISf
~~.
na~cr imeie~ ~a . ser ~a.
8-4197 4
pADWAY D6Kd1 NIgNAf3
elGIIla Blplm!

PRELIMIN RY PLANS
m twr ua ro carantuc~
INCOMPLE PLANS
ro xor ua va /~ eausmaa
DETOUR DESIGN DATA
DESIGN SPEED 25 mpA
MlN.RADIUS 200 ft.
NAXIMUk GRADE 8%
SUPERELEVATION RATE Se = 0.06
~5
~ .
i~
~ ~ i~
' ~ ,~
~,
,,
© ,~,
© ,,,
~~
~,
~~ ~,
~ ~,
~,
~ ~~ ~,
,,
,,
f~ , ,
~,r-,~
'~'
~~ ~~~~ ~-
~~ ~ \
•
~~ \\
\\~ ``
4 ~ ~~
`` \s`
N
~~ ~. ~ ~
SCALE
50 0 50 100
FIGURE 7