20041422 Ver 1_Complete File_20040825

F W A rF Michael F. Easley, Governor
9 William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
?O1 pG North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
vj r Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
o ?c
September 20, 2004
Beaufort County
DWQ Project No. 041422
APPROVAL OF 401Water Quality Certification
Mr. C. E. Lassiter, P.E., District Engineer
Division 2, NCDOT
P.O. Box 1587
Greenville, NC 27835
Dear Mr. Lassiter:
Q19 kt?;5?k LE oe@ p
OCT o a zooa
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWAfl?R S14NCM
You have our approval, as described in your application dated August 23, 2004 and in accordance with the attached
conditions and those listed below, to place fill material in 1684 square feet of coastal wetlands and 2670 square feet
of 404 type wetlands for the purpose of replacing bridge number 314, over Little Creek in Beaufort County (SR
1721). The project should be constructed in accordance with your application dated August 23, 2004 (received 27
August 2004). After reviewing your application, we have decided that General Water Quality Certification Number
3351 covers this fill. This certification corresponds to the Regional Permit Number 198000291 issued by the Corps
of Engineers. This approval is also valid for the Tar-Pamlico River Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0259). In
addition, you should acquire any other federal, state or local permits before you proceed with your project including
(but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This
approval will expire with the accompanying 404 permit unless otherwise specified in the Water Quality
Certification.
This approval is valid solely for the purpose and design described in your application (unless modified below).
Should your project change, you must notify the DWQ and submit a new application. If the property is sold, the
new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and is thereby responsible for complying
with all the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, or of total
impacts to streams (now or in the future) exceed 150 linear feet, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to remain valid, you must adhere to the
conditions listed in the attached certification.
1. Stormwater shall be directed to sheet flow at non-erosive velocities through the protected stream buffers.
2. Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed. The
responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the Division of
Water Quality upon completion of the project.
3. Mitigation for the allowed impacts to coastal wetlands shall be deducted from the remaining 4000 square feet
from the existing Loop Road Mitigation site (SRI 727) as outlined in your application. Mitigation shall be
calculated at a ratio of 2:1 for the approved impacts.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing.
You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written
petition that conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
NAY
tJ NF
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
o?0? wArFRQG
r? r
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 276 1 1-7447. This certification and its
conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you
have any questions, please contact Mike Thomas at (252)-946-4287 ex. 281.
Sincerely,
<? ?
?141 Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
DWQ Central Office
File Copy
Central Files
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natura
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director
August 23, 2004
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Mr. John R. Dorney
Environmental Biological Supervisor
Division of Water Quality
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Resources
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary

WETLANDS 1401 GROUP
AUG 2 4 2004
WATER QUALITY SECTION
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
Applicant: NC Department of Transportation
Project Location: Beaufort County: SR 1721 & Bridge # 314, over Little Creek
Proposed Project: The applicant proposes to pave SRI 721 and replace the existing 26' long timber
bridge over Little Creek with a 60' long cored slab concrete bridge. Approximately
34' of causeway would be excavated from the existing roadbed with 24' of that area
restored to its previous wetland hydrology.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by
September 13, 2004. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Bill
Arrington at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED DATE
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 1 10% Post Consumer Paper
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: North Carolina Department of Transportation
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: SR 1721 and Bridge No. 314, over Little Creek in
Beaufort County
Photo Index-2000: 1440 grid: S-12 1995: 1287 grid: P-13
State Plane Coordinates: x 2702804 y: 645238 GPS: Rover File # X010818A
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 1/8/2004
Was Agent Present - Yes (Jay Johnson)
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received as Complete- 8/18/2004
Office - Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Beaufort County ?._.
Land Classification from LUP - Transitional & Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: CW, PTS and PTA
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - SR 1721 and 26-foot long by 19-foot wide bridge
Planned - SR 1721 and 60-foot long by 27-foot wide bridge
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A Source: N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
rveavafPrl Fillprl
nthor
(A) Coastal Wetlands 1684 sq. ft. (shoulder widening)
(B) 404 Type Wetlands 2670 sq. ft. (shoulder widening)

(B) Public Trust Area - Shallow ?is to g
5 sq. ft.
ln
a
d rt
n
l
Bottom Shading 120 sq. ft.
(C) Other - High Ground 1148 sq. ft. Approximately 4.67 acres
(causeway (Pavement and shoulders)
removal)
(D) Total CAMA AEC Disturbed: Approximately 0.10 acres (including Buffer)
(E) Total area disturbed by project: Approximately 4.81 acres
(F) Primary Nursery Area: No
(G) Water Classification: SC-NSW
(H) Open for Shellfishing: No
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The N.C. Department of Transportation is proposing pave SR 1721 and
to replace the existing 26-foot long timber bridge over Little Creek with a 60-foot long cored slab
concrete bridge spanning Little Creek. Approximately 34 feet of causeway would be excavated from
the existing roadbed with 24 feet of that area restored to its previous wetland hydrology.
Development Type FEE DCM % DWQ %
14300 1601 435100093 1625 62531 (24300 1602 435100095 2341)
1. Private, non-commercial
development that does not Involve $250 100%($250)
the filling or excavation of any 0%($0)
wetlands or open water areas:
II. Public or commercial development
that does not involve the filling or
$400
excavation of any wetlands or open 100% (5400) 0% (SO)
water areas:
Ill. For development that involves the
filling and/or excavation of up to 1
acre of wetlands and/or open water
areas, determine if A, B, C, or D
below applies:
III(A). For Private, non-commercial
development. If General water Quality
Certification No.3301 (see attached) 5250 100%(S250) 0%($0)
can be applied:
III(B): For public or commercial
development, if General water Quality

Certification No.3301 (see attached) $400 100%(5400)
0%($0)
can be applied:
III(C). If General Water Quality
Certification No. 3301 (see attached)
could be applied, but DCM staff
determined that additional review and 5400 60%(S240) 40% (5160)
written DWQ concurrence is needed
because of concerns related to wdter
quality or aquatic life:
III(D). If General Water Quality
Certification No. 3301 (see attached) 5400 60°0 (5240) 40°0 (5160)
can not be applied:
IV. For development that involves
the filling and/or excavation of more

than one acre of wetlands and/or $475
60-% (S285)
40% (5190)
open water areas:
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
NC DOT -Bridge No. 314 over Little Creek, Beaufort County
PAGE 2
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The site of this proposal is SR 1721 and Bridge No. 314, crossing Little Creek, just south of the
confluence of Pungo Creek and the Pungo River, in Beaufort County. The general purpose of the
project is to pave SR 1721 and replace the deteriorated 26-foot long by 19-foot wide timber bridge
with an 60- foot long by 27-foot wide concrete cored slab bridge Spanning Little Creek and the
adjacent Coastal Wetlands, to allow safer driving conditions for the traveling public and restore a
more natural hydrology and stream configuration to Little Creek.
Bridge No. 314 crosses Little Creek 0.6 miles south west of its confluence with the Pungo Creek,
approximately 700 feet upstream of where the creek changes from a wide estuary creek, to a 15-foot
wide creek. The bridge crossing Little Creek is flanked with expansive Coastal Wetlands consisting of
Juncus roemerianus, Typha spp., Spartina patens and Cladium jamaicence. The elevation adjacent to
the creek gradually rises and is vegetated with Baccharis Hamilfolia, Phragmites australis, Myrtle,
Red Cedar, Sweet Gum, and Black Willow. Vertical clearance between the water and bridge bottom
is approximately 2.5 feet. An approximately 400-foot long by 45-foot wide causeway was constructed
through the Coastal Wetlands and 404 Type Wetlands when the bridge was constructed. Soils on this
site are Currituck Muck as classified by the NC Soil Conservation Service. Approximate elevations on
the site range between 1 feet and 6 feet above Normal High Water (NHW). No evidence of SAV beds
was noted. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality classifies waters of Little Creek as SC-
NSW at the project site. Little Creek is not Primary Nursery Area, as designated by the North
Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, and the area is closed to the harvesting of shellfish at this site.
The project area is designated as Transitional and Conservation by the Beaufort County Land Use
Plan.
The proposal is to pave SR 1721 and replace the existing 26-foot long by 19-foot wide timber bridge
with a 60-foot long by 27-foot wide cored slab concrete bridge on the existing alignment. The
proposed bridge would have a vertical clearance approximately 17 inches greater than the existing
bridge (approximately 3.9 feet). Constructing this project would include removing 28 feet of the
previously filled causeway (that is approximately 41 feet wide) and grading it to correspond with the
surrounding Coastal Wetlands, which are predominately vegetated with Juncus roemerianus. The
bridge approach roadway would be approximately 6 inches higher than the existing roadway. The
bridge is being widened from 19 feet to 27 feet to more closely correspond to the 10 foot paved travel
lanes and 6 foot grassed shoulders of SR 1721. One bent for the existing bridge is in the stream of
Little Creek and NCDOT has not committed to an in-water work moratorium for removal of the
timber piles.
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
NC DOT -Bridge No. 314 over Little Creek, Beaufort County
PAGE 3
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS:
As proposed, The Paving of SR 1721 will have no wetland impacts. The construction of the bridge
approaches with 2:1 slopes would require the filling of approximately 1684 sq.ft. of Coastal Wetlands
and 2670 sq.ft. of 404 Type wetlands. The additional width of the bridge would cause approximately
120 square feet of additional shading impacts to Public Trust Waters AEC. Removal of 34 lineal feet
of previously filled causeway (5 feet on each side will later be used to armor the end bents under the
new bridge) would result in the disturbance of approximately 1148 sq.ft. of high ground. The new
bridge will be one section. No disturbance of the creek bottom is expected during the installation of
rip rap at the end bents and minimal disturbance is possible removing the in stream piles supporting
one bent of the existing bridge.
NC DOT has reduced the Coastal Wetland and 404 Type Wetland excavation and fill impacts
associated with this proposal by lengthening the bridge from 26 to 60 feet and using 2:1 fill slopes in
wetlands. The bridge will span the waters of Little Creek, be constructed by top down methods and
be lengthened to reduce impacts to the coastal wetlands adjacent to the bridge. Lengthening the
bridge also creates a wetland buffer between the bridge approaches and the waters of Little Creek,
allowing some treatment of the storm water run off associated with the bridge and roadway.
The proposed removal of 24 feet (34 feet minus 5 feet of rip rap in front of each end bent) of existing
causeway should restore approximately 647 sq.ft. of fill causeway to its natural hydrology. NC DOT
is asking for restoration mitigation credit for this area. Due to the relatively small areas involved and
the direct connection to the tidal waters of Little Creek, NC DOT has asked to use verification of
elevations in the restoration area rather than performing hydrologic and vegetative monitoring. NC
DOT would be impacting approximately 1684 sq. ft. of Coastal Wetlands and is proposing to use the
restored causeway area to reduce the off site mitigation required (1684 - 647 = 1037 sq. ft.). NCDOT
is requesting to use an existing mitigation site on SR 1727, south of the project area, for the
remainder of the Coastal Wetland impacts. Due to the 404 Type impacts being under the 0.10 acre
threshold when the USACE requires mitigation, NCDOT is not proposing to mitigate for the 404
Type impacts.
The collective disturbance area for the project is approximately 4.81 acres.
Bill Arrington
August 23, 2004
jay dASr-o
V
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS Lindo Tippett
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
July 26, 2004
Mr. Bill Arrington
Coastal Management Field Representative
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
151 - B Highway 24 Hestron Plaza
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Re: Application for Bridge #314 Beaufort County on SR 1721
Dear Mr. Arrington,
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to replace bridge no. 314 on SR 1721 over Little Creek in
Beaufort County, North Carolina. The proposed project is intended to widen and pave SR 1721 1.1 miles and replace
an obsolete bridge carrying SR 1721 over Little Creek. The current design has been reviewed for avoidance and
minimization of impacts to the surrounding wetlands. The only impacts to wetlands are found at the bridge
replacement and its approaches. The original plan with the bridge replacement would have fit a LAMA GP permit
however preplanning meetings in the field revealed that for structural and constructability reasons the bridge would
need to be elevated 6". The elevation change in the bridge will ultimately cause the approaches to the bridge to rise
and widen to accommodate the new safer slopes and mandatory guardrail requirements. A total of 2670 sq. ft. of 404
wetlands will be impacted. A total of 1684 sq. ft. of Coastal wetlands will be impacted. Buffer impacts are: 236 sq.
R. in zone one and 386 sq. ft. in none two. The proposed 60' bridge will now be 34' longer. The new longer (60')
bridge is designed to span more previously filled wetlands allowing the NCDOT to remove 647-sq. fl. of causeway
and return it to an elevation resembling that of the adjacent wetlands. The removal of the old causeway will mean
that approximately 647-sq. ft. of fill will be removed from coastal wetlands associated with Little Creek and the
Pamlico River. After the causeway is removed, wind tides and high water flows can return to a more natural
hydrologic cycle for the surrounding wetlands. Water will be able to flow more unimpeded beneath the new structure,
allowing the natural wetland hydrology to return. The NCDOT asks that mitigation credit be granted for the removal
of the causeway. Approximately 647-sq. fl. of existing causeway will be lifted, restoring the wetland underneath. The
causeway will be excavated to the elevation of the surrounding wetlands measured 20' from the edge of right of way.
The NCDOT is aware that additional mitigation will be required. A previous secondary road project required
mitigation in the vicinity of this project. The 8,000 Sq. Ft. mitigation site is on SR 1727 Loop Road and is at the end
of its monitoring period and appears to be functioning very well. "There is a balance of 4000 sq. ft. of coastal wetland
mitigation and the NCDOT requests to further debit the remainder of its coastal wetland impacts (1,037 sq. ft.) from
this existing 4000 sq. ft. balance. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to call.
l ,
Sincore
Jay Job ,on
Division 2
Environmental Officer
CC: Mr. Neil Lassiter. Jr., P.E. Division Engineer NCDO"T Div 2
Mr. Dwayne Alligood, P.E. Maintenance Engineer NCDOT Div.2
Mr. Bill Littleton, Bridge Maintenace NCDOT Div.2
Mr. John Rouse, P.E. Project Manager
Division Two • P.O. Box 1587 9 Greenville, N.C. 27835
Form DCM-MP-1
APPLICATION
(To be completed by all applicants)
$400.00 CAMA Processing Fee
PROJECT
debited to VMS Element number
a. County Beaufort
2c.007026
1. APPLICANT --
a. Landowner:
Name N. C. Department of Transportation
Address P.O. Box 1587
City Greenville, State N.C.
b. City, town, community or landmark
1440 meters south of Windmill Point
c. Street address or secondary road number
SR 1721
d. Is proposed work within city limits or plannin
jurisdiction? Yes X No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. rives
creek, sound, bay) Little Creek
Zip 27835 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Name. Jay Johnson, -NCDOT Div. 2
Address P.O. Box 1587
City Greenville, State N.C.
Zip 27835 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
c. Project name (if any) Bridge #314 Beaufort Co.
NOTE: Permit will be issued in name of landowner(s),
and/or project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
a. List all development activities you propose (e.l
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, ar
excavation and/or filling activities.
Replace Bridle #314 on SR 1721 with 27TW)-
60'(L) single span cored slab on 60 deg. Skew.
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existir
project, new work, or both? Both
c. Will the project be for public, private or commerci
use? Public Transportation
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods
construction and daily operations of propos(
project. If more space is needed, please attac
additional pages. Purpose: To upgrade existh
Bridge to improve the safety of traffic moveme
and to comply with State safety standards fi
secondary road bridge crossings.
METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION: Standard roar
and bridge construction methods; DAILY
Form DCM-MP-1
OPERATIONS: Conveyance of vehicular traffic
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract 8 acres
b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or NWL
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Currituck Muck
e. Vegetation on tract Juncus Roemeranus, Baccharis
Hamilifolia, Tyhpa Spp. Cladium iamaicense,
PhraQmites australis, Spartina patens
f. Man-made features now on tract Existing road and
timber bridge.
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Convult the local land use
plan.)
X Conservation X Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other Undeveloped
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
N/A
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? X Yes No
(Attach coning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? Yes X No
If yes, by whom9
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes X No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes _ No
Coastal (marsh) X Other X
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? No
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
N/A
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters of
the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.) Surface Runoff
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument tinder
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to Coastal
Resources Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a detailed
description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
regarding that agency's use of larger drawings.) A site
or location map is a part of plat requirements and it
must be sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel
unfamiliar with the area to
the site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
•A Stormwater Certification. if one is necessarv.
Form DCM-MP-1
•A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and
signed return receipts as proof that such owners have
received a copy of the application and plats by
certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that
they have 30 days in which to submit comments on the
proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Marv W. Ralph
Address 1306 Summit Ave.
Washington, NC 27889
Name Valerie Ellis Myers
P.O. Box 144
Pantego, NC 27860
Name Henry & Alberta Norfleet
624 Little Creek Road Ext.
Belhaven, NC 27810
Name
Address
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
N/A
• A check for $400 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to 10)
If the project involves the expenditure of public funds
or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting
compliance with the North Carolina Environmental
Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION TO
ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the 26th day of July , 2004
Print Name Jay Johnson
S ignature gd4? )
Lando er o 1 orized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
_ DCM MP-4 Structures Information
X DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the hottom of each form.
Form DCM-MP-5
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other h.
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this i.
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES
a. Public X Private
b. Type of bridge (construction material)
Timber
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
Little Creek
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
NWL 3'
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X _Yes No
1 f yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge 24'
(2) Width of existing bridge 19'
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge 3'
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain). Yes, The bridge will be
removed entirely. The existing bulkhead
will be removed to wetland elevation and
the area behind this will be taken down to
wetland elevation for wetland
credit.
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
g. Length of proposed bridge 60'
Width of proposed bridge 27'
Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
3.9'
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
_ X Yes No
If yes, explain New bridge will allow a greater flow of
water
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
T A,
1. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? X Yes No
If yes, explain Refer to_F' above
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
no navigable waters? Yes X No
If yes, explain
n. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard concerning
their approval?
Yes X No
If yes, please provide record of their action.
2. CULVERTS N/A
a. Water body in which culvert is to be placed
b. Number of culverts proposed
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style)
d. Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
Yes --No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge
(2) Width of existing bridge
Revised 03/95
Form DCM-MP-5
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
bridge require any highground excavation?
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be X Yes No
removed? (Explain) If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated 41'
e. Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert? (2) Width of area to be excavated 28'
_____Yes_ -No (3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
If yes, yardsN/A
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves any
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above excavation, please complete the following:
the MHW or NWL (1) Location of the spoil disposal area
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be Temporary spoil area is existing road bed
removed? (Explain)
(2) Dimensions of spoil disposal area
f. Length of proposed culvert 20' x 20'
(3) Do you claim title to the disposal area?
g. Width of proposed culvert X Yes No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the the owner.
MHW or NWL (4) Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? X Yes No
i. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow? (5) Does the disposal area include any coastal
Yes _ _No wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
If yes, explain Yes X No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
j. Will the proposed culvert affect existing navigation (6) Does the disposal area include any area below
potential? Yes _ No the MHW or NWL? Yes X No
If yes, explain If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above.
3. EXCAVATION AND FILL e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed below MHW
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert or NWL? - _Yes X No
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL? If yes,
Yes X
No (1) Length of area to be filled
_
_
If yes, (2) Width of area to be filled
(1) Length of area to be excavated (3) Purpose of fill
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Depth of area to be excavated f. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
(4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic result in any fill (other than excavated material
yards described in Item d. above) to be placed within:
Other
X Coastal Wetlands SAVs
X
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert _
_
Wetlands If yes, 2670Fe 404 / 1684 Fe Coastal
require any excavation within: (1) Length of area to be filled See drawings
Coastal Wetlands
SAVs
Other Wetlands (2) Width of area to be filled
_
_
If yes, (3) Purpose of fill Road Shoulders
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Approximate area to be excavated g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
1148 Fe result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed on
highground? X Yes--No
Form DCM-MP-S
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 1.1 miles
(2) Width of area to be filled 30110'
(3) Purpose of fill Pavement and road shoulder
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
X Yes No
If yes, explain in detail Restore 647' of coastal
wetlands onsite and remainder (1037 sq. ft.) will be
debited from an existing coastal wetland mitigation
site located on SR 1727 Loop Rd. approximately 6
miles away.
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
d. Will the proposed project require any work channels?
Yes X No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? Silt fence
What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or hydraulic dredge)?
Typical Bridge construction equipment
g. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to
project site? Yes X No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any shoreline stabilization?
_ _Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail RipRap will be placed in
front of new bulkhead
NCDOT-Beaufort 314
Applicant or Projoet-tame
Signature
0 /26/0
Date
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
SR 1721
BRIDGE # 314 REPLACEMENT
BEAUFORT COUNTY
DETAIL SHEET 2
- - - - -----------------------------
j
is• z.s• x.0•
? j xs•
i
30 I /
EXISTING TIMBER BRIDGE
- 60.a ---- ----- ---

s.r e.?r xa
i
37
T'
PROPOSED 60' CONCRETE CORED SLAB BRIDGE
NOTES:
1) THIS PROJECT IS IN THE BATH TWP.
2) THIS PROJECT IS IN THE TAR-PAMLICO RIVER BASIN
3) THIS PROJECT DOES NOT FALL WITHIN ANY MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES
4) PROJECT R W IS 60'
5) ROAD NAME: LITTLE CREEK ROAD
6) NO KNOWN NCGS MONUMENTS ON PROJECT
DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: 07/18.04 NO SCALE
DRB DRT
p
I O
li O O
T I 1
i i ii a m I I I
i? ii m o 1 1 1
m m a 1 1 1
j 1 ii ? ? p I I I I
5 s m$ I I 1 I
i i! -! I I 1 1
m C ? ? N I I I 1
I I I I
i I? r r>t s 0 I
A I I I I I
i R rs? m I I
i I n S m
; ' _?p ? _ ? I I I I I
I I I I I
7771 m s m 1 I ; I
j ? ? I 1 I I
I I I I I
I = ?'' I I I 1 1
I ? I I I I I I
i I -? :" I I I I I
I I I I I
1 1 1 1 1
Ir I I I
1 1 1 1 1 1
I I? -? 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
I l l i l l
? ; ? ?? I I 1 I I
' I I I I I I I
i I 1 1 1 1 1 1
r I
II ? C
!
ID C:
a o i rl I r<,Z??
1 ° ' ? 77
zm
?t T' ON O Z
1I D l 0 z ?
y A?
N
n
? O
' m v
n,
vt O 0O
II-
I _
om
Co a
I I" n N 'm 0
; 2? ca M?y
OW OM
?? N D ;a m 'AO W
mA m4?
+e :N O W? VD
4 N
N O
m o
V /?d -? li •? -ic
70 m
z CA
441
m O
a ; II ? ail
yQ I: ?? rn men
o n rn m ^
wZ? n
`^J
° p11' - N N
an
'z o
-??1 - m z o 7 y O
v cn
Z
- s'
T7
m +
C
v °! a n y
? Z O
1
rn
\ Z o, m
C)
U A
rn co '- C
o I D M rn -? m
rn
I - nr'1 v
-i n
mr
; I cn (1 g
z x ?
n
DO zrn o
i Z n T
P -3a; NN v
z
co i
T ? o
Z
i f I S +
0,C) b C W u O
I m
I I :.
I Ii
I I
I ii I
i?
I ? xc
I II
j, 1N
i?
I !;
I
n
I i? O
m l ZEE
5), I
q
_ I
!I 1 Z }" I
1
I
_- O
E
z
cl I
C
I ' 1 ? I