19900074 All Versions_Complete File_19901010

Permit Class
Permit Number
156-90
STATE OFN CAROLINA
Department of Envi nm
ealt} & Natural Resources J a t
and
Co4i4es6?rces orrig ' n
{?. .o C \J
Major Develol'PO ?1!rrQrirrtental Concern
pursuant to NCGS,11
QUAM
X Excavation and/or filling pliant to NCGS 113-229
Issued
authorizing development in Carteret County at Broad Ct
as requested in the
-1?+e e6h ^+& '4A-+4-F4na k% MT me nD-r.-r2 ?.??.
's
h
This permit, issued on October 26, 1990 , is subject to compliance with the application (where consistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation Qf these terms may be
subject to a fine, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
1) In order to protect juvenile shrimp and finfish -populations, no
excavation or filling will be permitted between April 1 and September 30
of any year without the prior approval of the Division of Coastal
Management through coordination with the Division of Marine Fisheries.
2) Remedial excavation of the old causeways must average at least -3.5'
relative to the MLW level. All areas adjusted by remedial excavation
will assume bottom elevation below the MLW level.
3) The riprap material used at each of the buttress locations must be free
from loose dirt and other pollutants other than in trace quantities.
4) All earthen fill material placed below the MHW level must be clean and
free of all pollutants, except in trace quantities.
(See attached sheet for Additional Conditions)
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the
issuing date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work
initiation or continuance, as the case may be.
This permit must be accessible on-site to Department
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not
covered hereunder requires further Departmental approval.
All work must cease when the permit expires on
In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program.
Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DEHNR and the
Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
Roger N. Schecter, Director
ivision of Coastal Management
This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
Signature of Permittee
NC Dept. of Transportation Permit #156-90
Page 2 of 2
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
5) All earthen fill material will be obtained from a highground -source and
confined behind adequate retaining structures.
6) No marsh grass will be excavated or filled outside the permitted
alignment as shown on the workplat drawings.
7) The temporary placement or double-handling of excavated or filled
material within the waters and wetlands of the State is not authorized.
8) Any additions or changes to the permitted project will require a
reevaluation by the Division of Coastal Management and a modification of
this permit.
9) The activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent significant
increase in turbidity outside the area of construction or
construction-related discharge (increases such that the turbidity in the
stream is 25 NTUs or less are not considered significant).
NOTE: The Division of Environmental Management issued Section 401 Water
Quality Certification No. 2524 for this project on October 10, 1990.
NOTE: The Division of Coastal Management supports the recommendation by
the Division of Marine Fisheries that demolition rubble from the
abandoned bridge be made available for use in the artificial reef
program. Program contact is Steve Murphy at 919/726-7021.
NOTE: The permittee is encouraged to meet with representatives of the
Division of Coastal Management for a pre-construction review of
project plans before the project is initiated.

e,. srnr£ o
f t Y
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street O Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
Wiliam W. Cobey, Jr., secretary
October 10, 1990
Dr. L. R. Goode, PhD, P. E.
Manager, Program and Policy Branch
Division of Highways
N. C. Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Dr. Goode:
George T. Everett, Ph.D.
Director
Subject: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal
Clean Water Act,
Proposed Bridge Replacement - N. C. Hwy. 24
N. C. Department of Transportation
Broad Creek
Carteret County
Attached hereto are two (2) copies of Certification No. 2524
issued to N. C. Department of Transportation dated October 10,
1990.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to
contact us.
Stcer'ely,
i
i ,
George,T. Everett
Director
Attachments
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regional Office
r. William Mills
Mr. John Parker
Poiludon Prevendon Pays
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
NORTH CAROLINA
CARTERET COUNTY
CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the
requirements of Section 401 Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the
United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management Regulations in 15 NCAC 2H, Section .0500
to N. C. Department of Transportation pursuant to an application
filed on the 31st day of August, 1990 to place fill in waters and
wetlands of Broad Creek in conjunction with the construction
of the N. C. Highway 24 Bridge replacement.
The Application provides adequate assurance that the
discharge of fill material into the waters and wetlands of Broad
Creek in conjunction with the proposed bridge replacement in
Carteret County will not result in a violation of applicable
Water Quality Standards and discharge guidelines. Therefore, the
State of North Carolina certifies that this activity will not
violate Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL
95-217 if conducted in accordance with the application and
conditions hereinafter set forth.
Condition(s) of Certification:
1. That the activity be conducted in such a manner as
to prevent significant increase in turbidity
outside the area of construction or construction
related discharge (increases such that the
turbidity in the Stream is 25 NTU's or less are not
considered significant).
Violations of any condition herein set forth shall result in
revocation of this Certification.
This Certification shall become null and void unless the
above condition is made a condition of the Federal Permit.
This the 10th day of October, 1990.
l?
George T. E.ve ett, Director
DIVIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WQC# 2524
NOTICE OF FILING OF
APPLICATION FOR OCA QUALITY CERTIFICATION
PERMIT AND WATER The Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
hereby gives public notice as required by NCGS 113A-119(b) and
143-215 3(a)(1)(c) that the N.C. Department of Transportation of
Raleigh, NC, filed a revised application on August 23, 1990, for
a permit from the Division of Coastal Management to develop in an
Area of Environmental Concern and for certification from the
Division of Environmental Management that a discharge of wfill
ater
material in project wetlands will not violate applicable
quality standards.
According to said application, the applicant proposes to
replace the existing Bridge #11 over Broad Creek with a new
structure. A temporary detour and bridgerillCbeeinstallarteret
the downstream side of NC Hwy.
County .
A copy of the entire application and additional information
may be examined (or copies furnished upon request and paym
reproduction costs) during normal business hours at the office of
Jim Mercer, Division of Coastal Management, located in the
Division of Marine Fisheries Building, Morehead City, N .C.,
919/726-7021, and/or the office
DEHNR Regional Howard, of
Environmental Management
Wilmington, N.C., 919/256-4161.
The Division of Environmental Management proposes to take
final action on this water quality certification on or before
October 11, 1990. The issuance of the CAMA Major Development
permit and the Section 401 Certification may deviate from this natu projected dndesubsequent hupon the earings ofresultthe
submitted a
All persons desiring to make comments should do so in
writing to Roger N. Schecter, Director, Division of Coastal
Management, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C., 27611, prior
October 6, 1990 for consideration in the CAMA permit decision,
and to Mr. Bill Mills, Division of Environmental Management, P.O.
Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C., 27611, prior to October 1, 1990 for
consideration in the water quality certification decision. Later
comments on the CAMA application will be accepted and considered
up to the time of permit decision. Project modifications may
occur based on review and comment by the public and state and
federal agencies. Notice of the permit decision in this matter
will be provided upon request.
PUBLISHED ON: Sunday, September 16, 1990

To: Bill Mills
Planning Branch
0

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IIANAGEMENT .'_; ? `•? Q t.??,ch
CAMA MAJOR PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW C
\N0
PROJECT NAME: NC DOT Broad Creek Bridge Replacement 2
COUNTY: Carteret Project #: 9009-A
STREAM OR ADJACENT WATER BODY: Broad Creek
CLASS: SA
OPEN OR CLOSED: Closed
STORMWATER PLAN REQ'D: Yes
IF YES, DATE APPROVED:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: NC DOT proposes to replace the existing
bridge over Broad Creek. As proposed, the intertidal opening at
the MHW shoreline will be 1971, which is 103' longer than the
intertidal opening with existing structure. Six brid ge spans will
be used, each 37.51. 2178 sq. ft. of saltmarsh and 7375 sq ft.
of intertidal bottom will be lost with the excavation of the
existing causeway. 6534 sq. ft. of saltmarsh and 13 ,068 sq. ft.
of intertidal bottom will be filled with the new app roaches.
A
REVIEWER: Gregso? _JOINT NOTICE: Yes
DATE APP. RECD: 90/08/31 _RECOMMENDATION: Other
INITIAL REPORT: 90/09/24 _(ISSUE/DENY/OTHER)
FINAL REPORT:
WATER QUALITY CERT. (401)
CERT. REQ'D• Yes
IF YES, TYPE: Individual
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
TYPE OF DISPOSAL PROPOSED: N/A
(EXISTING, PROPOSED, SEPTIC TANK ETC.)
TO BE PERMITTED BY: N/A
(DEM, DHS, COUNTY)
IF BY DEM, IS SITE AVAILABLE AND PERMIT ISSUANCE PROBABLE: N/A
WATER/WETLAND FILL
AREA OF FILL: WATER: 13,068 sq. ft.
WETLAND: 6534 sa. ft.
IS FILL ELIMINATING A SIGNIFICANT USE? Yes
DREDGING
IS DREDGING ACTIVITY EXPECTED TO CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT LOSS
OF RESOURCE? No
IS SPOIL DISPOSAL ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED? Yes
MARINA
ARE THE FOLLOWING ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED?
SEWAGE DISPOSAL: N/A
MARINA SERVICES: N/A
OXYGEN IN BASIN: N/A
CLOSURE OF SHELLFISHING WATERS: N/A
(ATTACH A MARINA USE ATTAINABILITY EVAL.)
9009-A.SEP
Page Two
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OR PERMIT RESTRICTIONS: It is recommended
the intertidal opening be increased by two more spans on the west
side of the bridge. This would eliminate a significant amount
of fill, create more intertidal habitat and enhance flushing to a
greater extent than proposed. Fill required for the widening of
the causeway has been substantially reduced on the east side of
the bridge by increasing the span on the east side. Approximately
half of the fill required for causeway widening on the west side
could be eliminated by adding two more spans on the west side.
Mitigation was not offered for the wetland fill. This Office
feels the impacts from the widening of the causeway should be
minimized to a greater extent than proposed. Widening the span
would not only reduce wetland impacts but should improve water
quality in Broad Creek.
cc: CF, WiRO
DCM -
Jim Gregson
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT * Lat:34043122"N
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT Long:76055152"W
**REVISED**
1, APPLICANT'S NAME(B-109D) Brideet#11/LrRnsGoodet1Ph.D. Broad Creek
P.E.
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE NC Hwy. 24, bridge over Broad Creek,
Carteret County; *SEE 1984 AERIAL PHOTO STRIP #31 FRAME 41181
® x-1 d
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: DREDGE & FILL X CAMA X
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE:
(A) DATES OF SITE VISIT 7-24-90
(B) WAS APPLICANT PRESENT NO REVISED. 8-23-90B
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: APPLICATION RECEIVED July 18, 1990
OFFICE Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) LOCAL LAND USE PLAN Carteret County 1985 Update
LAND CLASSIFICATION FROM LUP Community/Conservation
DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS IDENTIFIED IN LUP SEE CAMA REVIEW SEC.
(B) AEC(S) INVOLVED: OCEAN HAZARD ESTUARINE SHORELINE X
COASTAL WETLANDS X PUBLIC TRUST WATERS X
ESTUARINE WATERS X OTHER
(C) WATER DEPENDENT: YES X NO
(D) INTENDED USE: PUBLIC X PRIVATE COMMERCIAL
(E) TYPE OF WASTE WATER TREATMENT: EXISTING N/A
PLANNED N/A
(F) TYPE OF STRUCTURES: EXISTING Bridge with approach roads
PLANNED Bridge replacement, a proach roads & detour crossin
(G) ESTI14ATED ANNUAL RATE OF EROSION SOURCE bulkhead
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: AREA
(A) VEGETATED WETLANDS DREDGED FILLED OTHER
saltmarsh cordgrass, black 2178 sq.ft. 6534 sq.ft.
needlerush
(B) NON-VEGETATED WETLANDS:
intertidal bottomland 7375 sq.ft. 13,068 sq.ft
(C) OTHER: 3 ac.
highground approaches
(D) TOTAL AREA DISTURBED: Approximately 3.6 acres
* U.S.G.S. 7.5 MIN. TOPO 'SALTER PATH' PR. 1983
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT - N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
BROAD CREEK BRIDGE #11, CARTERET CO.
PAGE #2
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to replace the
existing bridge over Broad Creek with a new structure
approximately 197' long on the same alignment. A temporary
detour and bridge will be installed on the downstream side
of N.C. Hwy. 24.
9. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION: The 'revised' application submitted
by NCDOT reflects an increase bridge length and a reduction
in the amount of fill in estuarine waters for the
replacement of Bridge #11 over Broad Creek, on N.C. Hwy. 24,
in Carteret County. The resource agencies will recall that
the original application request made by DOT was circulated
in March of 1989. Processing was subsequently terminated in
August of 1989 pending further studies to formulate
alternative designs that would lessen impacts on the aquatic
environment and enhance water quality in Broad Creek.
As proposed, the new bridge will utilize six individual
bridge spans, each 37.5' in length. This will generate a
"bridge" 225' long. The actual intertidal opening at the
MHW shoreline is estimated to be 197' long from buttress to
buttress. This represents a 64% increase in the open-water
length or 77' from what was originally proposed by DOT in
1989. It is also important to keep in mind that the new
bridge opening will be 103' longer than the existing 94'
intertidal opening; that equals an increase of 1100.
In order to gain the increased intertidal opening, DOT
proposes to excavate a portion of the existing causeway. On
the west side of the bridge, a 15-25' section of bridge
abutment will be removed to a depth of approximately -4'
MLW. On the east side, excavation will remove a 100'
section of existing causeway. The proposed plans show that
excavation in this area will remove about 2,000 sq. ft. of
marsh dominated by black needlerush and cordgrass. The old
causeway will be removed to a depth of approximately -4'
MLW. Requirements to place fill material in wetlands and
open waters remain similar in nature to the original project
proposal, however, the size and amount has been reduced due
to the excavation associated with the increased bridge
length. Approximately 6500 sq. ft. of coastal wetlands and
13,000 sq. ft. of open-water are scheduled to be filled.
The amount of fill is divided equally in all four quadrants
as the increased road width of 150' will occupy the fringing
marsh and shallow-water habitat. Some 2,250 cu. yds. of
suitable fill material will be placed below the level of the
MHW shoreline. A pile-supported detour bridge will be
constructed on the south side of Highway 24 so that traffic
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT - N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
BROAD CREEK BRIDGE #11, CARTERET CO.
PAGE #3
flow will not be interrupted, and, construction can take
place on the preferred alignment. In July of 1990, the West
Carteret Water Company installed a 12" iron pipe across
Broad Creek along the south side of Hwy. 24. The pipe
alignment is located some 45' off the centerline of the
existing road and should pose no environmental or
construction problems for the new road and detour.
The 'SA' surface waters of Broad Creek remain closed to the
harvesting of shellfish. The Primary Nursery Area on the
north side of Highway 24 continues to be biologically
productive. Broad Creek, within the limits of the project
boundaries, is not considered a part of the designated
Outstanding Resource Waters of Western Bogue Sound.
At this time, mitigation of wetland losses is not proposed.
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS: The projected impacts of the actual
construction will be similar in scope to the 1989 DOT
proposal, except the net result will increase the overall
tidal opening of Broad Creek. The excavation will transform
some 7,000 sq. ft. of existing roadway property into
subtidal habitat. Bottom dwelling organisms should
re-colonize the new substrate, and, the increased waterway
should be used as a thoroughfare for shrimp, crabs and
finfish. The increased opening should also enhance tidal
flushing and the hydrologic connection of Broad Creek above
Highway 24 with Bogue Sound. The impacts due to filling
estuarine habitat have been reduced by approximately 7300
sq. ft. An estimated 2250 cu. yds. of improved fill
material will be placed below the MHW shoreline which will
result in the displacement of 6500 sq. ft. of marsh
vegetation, and 13,000 sq. ft. of shallow-water habitat.
PREPARED BY: JAMES L. MERCER
DATE: AUGUST 28, 1990
Pease t}•Pe or print. Carefully describe all an- iJUJf+ e.tJ;)
ticipated development activities, including construc-
tion, excavation, filling, paving, land clearing, and
stormwater control. If the requested information is
not relevant to your project, write N/A (not ap-
plicable). Items 1-4 and 8-9 must be completed for
all projects.
d. Describe the planned use of the project.
Public Transportation

7 ?
T-Al

a. North Carolina Department of Trans r
Name L. R. Goode Ph.D. Pg tation a.
6. Size of entire acct -N/A
Size of individual loc(s)?(/n
Address P. O. Box 25201. e. Elevation of tract above mean sea level or Na.
City sleigh State tat' tional Geodetic Vertical Datum o
Zip 27611 ?Day Phone 733 -?0 }1 d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract z

b Landowner or Authorized agent Sn hrnnL rit's
. Project name (if any) N/A e. Vegetation on tract Fringing marsh grass ;

C.
If the applicant is not the landowner, also give
f. open wa Pr harm 1
Man-made features now on tract Marina in
the owner's name and address. SE Quad: remaining land and y 1 oped
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan Classifica-
tion of the site? (Consult the- local land use
plan.) ,-
Consc
d
m
on _X Transitional
---- Developed Community

-
h. Rural Other
How is the tract zoned by local government?
a. Street address or secondary road number " i. How are adjacent waters classified? S_A
NC 24 - Bridge Ov r Broad Creek j• Has a professional archaeological survey been
b. City, town, community, or landmark carried out for the tract? YaS
-Broad Creek' If so, by whom?_ NMOT Arrhap„t..gist
c. County Carteret
d. Is proposed work within city limits or plannin
g
jurisdiction? No
e. Name of body of water nearest project
Broad Creek - Romig Sound Complete this section if the project includes any
upland development.
a. Type and number of buildings, facilities, or
Room=
structures proposed -N/A
a. Describe all development activities you propose b. Number of lots or parcels.- N/A
(for example, building a home, motel
marina C. with' (Give the number of residential units
,
,
bulkhead, or pier). and the units per age.) 1VTA
Replacement of Bridge Over Broad
_
. , ?_-- d. Size of area to be graded or disturbed
e. If the proposed project will disturb more than
If you plan to build a marina, also complete one acre of land, the Division of Land
and attach Form D.Iv{.MP-2. Resources must receive an erosion and scdimcn-
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an ex- cation control plan at least 30 days before land
siting project, new work, or both? _ Rn? disturbing activity begins. If applicable, has a
sedimentation and erosion control plan been
c. Will the project be for
community, private, or submitted to the Division of Land Resources?
commercial use?
f.
(Ave the perccitage of the tract within 75 feet i
of mean high water to be covered by im-
permeable surfaces,-such as pavement
1
,
buildings, or rooftops.
JUL 1 8 )990 1
? ?
w t, r

G• List the materials Such as mall 100014 • AJO D
, paver scone, G.
Amount of material co be excavated from
asphalt, or concrete, to be used for paved below water level in cubic
yards N/A
surfaces. Asphalt & Concrete c. ,
Type of material N/A

h.
If applicable, has a stormwater management d. Does the area co be excavated include marzln-
land swamps, or other•wetlands? N/A
plan been submitted to the Division of En- e. High ground excavation, in cubic yards N A
vironmental Management. f. Dimensions of spoil disposal area N/A
i. Describe proposed sewage disposal and/or waste g. Location of spoil disposal area N/A
water treatment facilities.- N/A
h. Do you claim title to the disposal area? N/A
j. Have these facilities received state or local If not, attach a letter granting permission from
approval?_ N/A the owner.
k. Describe existing treatment facilities. i. Will a disposal area be available for future
N/A maintenance?? N/A
If so, where?- N/A
1. Describe location and of di
type ow- argcs to j. Does the disposal area include any marzhland,
swampland,-or water areas. _ N/A
waters of the state (for examplersurface runoff,
i k. Will the fill materio be placed below mean
san
tary wastewater, industriallcommercial high water? Yes
effluent, or "wash down"). 1. Amount of fill in cubic yards 2250
Surface Rimnff m. Type of fill material
r

m.
Water supply source _ N/A n.
o. Source of fill mataiakSu i to 1 e Borrow
Will fill material be placed on marsh or other
n. If the project is oceanfront development, wetlands? Yes
describe the steps that will be taken to main- p. 435
Dimensions of the wetland to be filled

twin established public beach accessways or pro-
q. _
_
How will excavated or fill material be kept on
vide new access. N/A site and erosion controlled?_ • F 1 na t i nq_
Silt fpnrp, tilt hacinc and nthpr

o.

If the project is on the oceanfront, what will

r. appropl iatp erncinn rnntrnl
MpaclUrpe,
What type of construction equipment will be
be the elevation above mean sea level of the used (for example, dragline
backhoe
or
first habitable floor? N/A ,
,
hydraulic dredge)? Standard RnadiqAv
f.nnrtrurtinn Equipment
s. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equip-
ment to the project site?_Ao?_ If yes, explain
the steps that will be taken to lessen en-
a. Describe below the purpose of proposed excava- vironmental impacts.
tion or fill activities (excluding bulkheads, .
which are covered in Section 7).
Length Width Depth
Access channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Boat basin
Other (break-
water, pier,
boat ramp,
rock jetty)
Fill placed in
wetland or below
MHW
Upland fill
areas
520 45
a. Length of bulkhead or riprap_ N/A
b. Average distance waterward of mean high water
or normal water level t1 /A
c. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months,
in feet _ N/A
d. Type of bulkhead material NIA
e. Amount of fill, in cubic yards, to be placed
below mean high water N/A
f. Type of fill material N/A
2
Name
Address
Name
Address
Name
Address
A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
A check for $100 made payable to the Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development to
cover the costs of processing the application.
A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront
and inlet areas.
A statement on the use of public funds. If the project
involves the expenditure of public funds, attach a state-
ment documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A-1 to 10).
9 CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
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 ap-
proved Coastal Management Program and will be con-
ducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I further 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
project.
This is the
x
192D
Landowner or
4/89
IOUZ)1.109205 AJOJ
PROPERTY OWNERS
B-1097 - NC 24 OVER BROAD CREEK
A. H. RUSSELL
ROUTE 1, BOX 142
NEWPORT, NORTH CAROLINA 28570
HATTIE C. HEATH
UNKNOWN
BROAD CREEK ENTERPRISES, INC.
ROUTE 5, BOX 475B
NEWPORT, NORTH CAROLINA 28557
DOUGLAS W. STEWART
600 WEST NASH STREET
WILSON, NORTH CAROLINA 27893
ESTON T. MILLER
ROUTE 1, BOX 140
NEWPORT, NORTH CAROLINA 28570
CHARLES BOYD
230 1I0ODLAND ROAD
HENDERSON, NORTH CAROLINA 27536
MARY K. BOYD
2330 WOODLAND ROAD
HENDERSON, NORTH CAROLINA 27536
BROAD & GALES CREEK RESCUE SQUAD
UNKNOWN
I -
COUNTY LOCATION
NEWDO
'I ?"?1L2 .j ? 11 <!L
P „
,? ..
Q ( N£kPORf .9
11,1; •• ,1
A ..nu
PROJECT
u I
u 1? / - uu l Imo, ..
lit
1Sj
_ • \ _.. /j.. ?,mil ?••? I
rte-
.
t llli r t.` t /gyp`
NI ROCK r0wT
04
41*
i
- 19V
mod, :.....:;a.?ig?
.tK.a ,
ICI. )•
165
r"' 1 C
v is
T L
A 0 C E A N
PROJECT VICINITY MAP
.N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION.OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET COUNTY
_ PROJECT 8.1161402 B-1097
PROPOSED BRIDGE REPLACEMENT ON
NC 24 OVER BROAD CREEK
SHEET 1 OF 5 DEC. 1988
Mp1rH :c A_A ,r-- - -
'f• iQ I I ..?,. ?
J \ !'
'rQw? ' \ t I l
A w rr U)
f-
`? I ;I I w cr ° Q
I -? Z
I
\,? I ! 3 o
? I •I J J
x I I Y ?- Q '• +? ?-
W
W lj LL.",
4 w I tl I J i M 8 p
? ? Z
3--
a W w
? I ? ? I ? o Q p p
Z
7
,i I I ;7 y
+ I =
k-c -Al
l? ` I I J J
.. I I I 0 yam.
O O
LL. 4 F I 6 Q
r? 1 AQ W W
cc m
a a
'7 in ti I I l ,\ i• IV V
In i ,
,A
325
I '
, lid W ,
i J < ? I J
?I I I 4l W o
r i
W? I I 1 ?,, N :cr > I z
a .4 Z
i '
a =
Ins
- I I' o.W
I R
?x
J '? I I/ 13 W ? J FQ-
is V.. r
I I , to '
rc
a '
? 11 i I ?Ir •. =: J
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
-??- I DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Q, CARTERET COUNTY
I I PROJECT 8.1161402 B-1097
PROPOSED BRIDGE REPLACEMENT ON
I I NC 24 OVER BROAD CREEK
I I ( SHEET 2. OF 5 DEC. 1988
U
tf?
1.1
a
W
z
W
Y
W
W
u
u
0
co
?35 W
Z r
J
N
W
a
O
J
J '
1 1
O
z
a
J
S
o W
tW? _
W ()
W
cc
? I w
3 z
.a---• i ? Q J J
I 2 Q ; ty 4.
W ?
I r{
I ? ? I z z
? J
I J W W
I I W
L'i Li
I ' I U I O O
I. I
U I _,
01
C?
? FO
I i ?? J7
I 1 w
?<
W I
2
I N
I
I I I KU ` W .. ?
• I 1 1 1 O0 ? t
I 1 1 oy ? .?
I I 1 , ; -?oi- • i -
?
1_
50? 0 100'
Y t SCALE • 0-100' t
I I y 1 ? ?I ? -
1 = N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION \'•
I I 1 ??
- NI H 1dW DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET COUNTY
PROJECT 8.1161402 • B-1097
PROPOSED BRIDGE REPLACEMENT ON
• NC 24 OVER BROAD CREEK
SHEET 3 0 F 15 DEC. 1988
N ? o 0

a-
N
N
?l
ti
N
ID
N
0
a
Ln
h N
U1 W ?
lk
c\j
0 ?W
U
CO Q 10
Q
m n u
0
Q) 0 ?Q
n
W

m

J
? U.
J
L.1.
9p
?aa?Fv U'
X00- o ?

<
Z
w
c6

I O

Q

I ?
a
I
,J
O -?
(:)7Q3
O F. p
C
a?
?o
ou
V
J_
LL
r
/1 O
in
I +1
I ?
Z ?
J N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION,OF HIGHWAYS
4 CARTERET COUNTY
0 ` PROJECT 8.1161402 B-1097
zoo PROPOSED BRIDGE REPLACEMENT ON
NC 24 OVER BROAD CREEK
SHEET OF Jam" DEC: 1988
I
o ?o
_

VJ
O
O

. ? Q
z v

T
° L 0
?=- T • I T
2
= 1-
0
J
I
Cj-

..1 J
J J
lL 1%
C7
Z
t
w- X
d W
Q
Q
z0
U
W

(
j?
) O ~ _
u
J N
I

JI
Ld z; QI
J p
?
Q v
.
r
C)
01 >.

r,r
W
f--
z
W
n
0
Cl
Q
0
z
Q
F-
W
Z
J
L%
W- -
O
Z
W
O
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CARTERET COUNTY
PROJECT 8.1161402 B-1097
PROPOSED BRIDGE REPLACEMENT ON
NC 24 OVER BROAD CREEK
SHEET C _ OF 5_ DEC: 1988
NOTICE OF FILING OF
APPLICATION FOR CAMA MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT AND WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
The Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
hereby gives public notice as required by NCGS 113A-119(b) and
143-215 3(a)(1)(c) that the N.C. Department of Transportation of
Raleigh, NC, filed a revised application on August 23, 1990, for
a permit from the Division of Coastal Management to develop in an
Area of Environmental Concern and for certification from the
Division of Environmental Management that a discharge of fill
material in project wetlands will not violate applicable water
quality standards.
According to said application, the applicant is proposing to
replace Bridge #23 over Gales Creek with a new structure. A
temporary detour and bridge will be installed on the downstream
side of NC Hwy. 24, over Gales Creek, in Carteret County.
A copy of the entire application and additional information
may be examined (or copies furnished upon request and payment of
reproduction costs) during normal business hours at the office of
Jim Mercer, Division of Coastal Management, located in the
Division of Marine Fisheries Building, Morehead City, N.C.,
919/726-7021, and/or the office of Preston Howard, Division of
Environmental Management, DEHNR Regional Field Office,
Wilmington, N.C., 919/256-4161.
The Division of Environmental Management proposes to take
final action on this water quality certification on or before
October 11, 1990. The issuance of the CAMA Major Development
permit and the Section 401 Certification may deviate from this
projected date depending upon the nature of the comments
submitted and subsequent hearings that may result.
All persons desiring to make comments should do so in
writing to Roger N. Schecter, Director, Division of Coastal
Management, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C., 27611, prior to
October 6, 1990 for consideration in the CAMA permit decision,
and to Mr. Bill Mills, Division of Environmental Management, P.O.
Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C., 27611, prior to October 1, 1990 for
consideration in the water quality certification decision. Later
comments on the CAMA application will be accepted and considered
up to the time of permit decision. Project modifications may
occur based on review and comment by the public and state and
federal agencies. Notice of the permit decision in this matter
will be provided upon request.
PUBLISHED ON: Sunday, September 16, 1990

Agenda Item Update on Water Quality Considerations on
DOT Projects on Broad and Gales Creeks in
Carteret County
Explanation: At the March EMC Commission Meeting, Dr.
Peterson requested an update on the Broad
and Gales Creek DOT bridge renovation pro-
jects proposed along HWY 24 in Carteret
County. A summary of the environmental
issues associated with these projects is
provided in the following attachment.

Environmental Impact Review of the Dept. of Transportation Plan
for Replacement of Bridges Over Broad and Gales Creeks
along NC HWY 24, Carteret County
MARCH 15, 1990 STATUS REPORT
This briefing is provided in response to an inquiry by the Commission
regarding the environmental issues associated with the Department of Trans-
portation (DOT) projects involving the replacement of roadway bridges over
Broad and Gales Creeks in Carteret County. Concerns regarding the impacts
to these estuary waters from the existing and proposed causeway structures '
for NC HWY 24 have brought together several agencies within the Department
of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources (DEHNR) to review and respond
to DOT's plans. Discussion of these matters first began in 1984, and
clarification of the Department's concerns occurred upon review of the
environmental impact assessments prepared by DOT and submitted to the State
Clearing House for review in February, 1989. Subsequent pursuit by DOT of
a CAMA permit and 401 Water Quality Certification to allow for lateral
expansion of the causeways into documented wetlands areas further stimu-
lated discussion between the two agencies.
Several meetings have taken place between DEHNR and DOT staff to
review perceived problem areas. DEHNR participants have included the
Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), the Division of Coastal Management
(DCM), the Division of Planning & Assessment (DPA), and the Division of
Environmental Management (DEM). Discussions have centered around the
impact of the causeways on the natural flushing patterns of each estuary,
and the subsequent effects on water quality and estuarine life.
DEHNR has expressed concern that these waters are designated primary
nursery areas (PNAs) and, therefore, disturbance of these areas should be
avoided. Recent designation of the Western Bogue Sound, which receives
inflows from Broad and Gales Creeks, as an outstanding resource water (ORW)
further supports this argument. DEHNR further contends that the restriction
of the natural channel to a 100 foot width by each bridge opening has
resulted in a gradual degradation of water quality and habitat behind the
existing causeways with subsequent inhibition or loss of a shellfish
resource. Preliminary modeling efforts produced by DOT to show that
flushing has not been affected by the causeways have been deemed insuffi-
cient by DEHNR.
As a result of these discussions, DOT requested that their applica-
tions to DEHNR for a CAMA permit and 401 Water Quality Certification be
held in abeyance until the environmental issues can be resolved. The two
departments met recently (October 5, 1989) to discuss what steps needed to
be taken in this regard. During that meeting, the merits of further field
and modeling studies were debated. DOT was concerned about further time
delays given current bridge conditions and that further study would be
wasteful unless DEHNR would agree upfront to a definition of what would
constitute significant or nonsignificant impacts in interpreting the study
results. DEHNR agreed to provide a scope of work for further study.
C a,
Page 2
Broad & Gales
Following the October meeting and in consideration of the facts
presented by the various agencies involved in the matter, our Department
Secretary, Mr. William W. Cobey, proposed an alternative to further study.
A copy of that proposal is provided for your review. In essence, DEHNR has
agreed to provide DOT with the necessary permits to complete their bridge
renovation projects if DOT agrees to remove a portion of the existing
causeways to allow for a 300 foot opening. It is expected that this action
would allow for more natural tidal exchange patterns to occur within each
estuary and thereby mitigate the bottom-disturbing activities and wetlands
loss associated with the bridge projects. However, this proposal was
rejected by DOT.
In November of 1989 representatives of DEM and DMF jointly prepared a
draft study plan for DOT as requested to provide clarification of what the
DEHNR expected to be performed to thoroughly address the outstanding envi-
ronmental issues. That study plan was forwarded through the Division of
Planning & Assessment to the DEHNR administration in December, 1989 for
further consideration. At present, the staff is awaiting the outcome of
negotiations between the two departments.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1690
'Iris I WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1690
IN REPLY REFER TO August 1, 1989
Regulatory Branch 23Q S
0<
SUBJECT: File No. CESAW-C089-N-016-0287
AW6 1989
rr, o ?
Mr. .John Parker
Division of Coastal Management ZzlzUZ6
North Carolina Department of
Natural Resources and
Community Development
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Dear Mr. Parker:
Reference the application of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation, Division of Highways, for a Department of the Army permit to
place fill material in the waters/wetlands of Broad Creek associated with the
replacement of Bridge No. 11 on North Carolina Highway 24, in Carteret County,
North Carolina, State project No. B-1097.
The Federal agencies have completed review of the proposal as presented by
the application and your field investigation report. By letters of July 10
and 13, 1989 (copies enclosed), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and
the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) recommended that the work as
proposed not be authorized. The agencies object to the placement of fill
material in 0.02 acre of salt marsh and 0.5 acre of shallow subtidal habitat
within this primary nursery area. Concerns were also expressed regarding the
effects of the causeway/bridge lengths on the hydrology of Broad Creek. At
present, we support the recommendations of the review agencies.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Hugh Heine, telephone (919)
251-4725.
Sincerely,
w
_ Charles W. Hollis
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosures
-2-

Copies Furnished (without enclosures):
Mr. William Mills
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental
Management
North Carolina Department of
Natural Resources and
Community Development
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Ms. L. K. (Mike) Gantt
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Robert F. McGhee, Chief
Wetlands Section
Region IV
Marine and Estuarine Branch
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
345 Courtland Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30365
Mr. Charles Jones
Morehead City Regional Office
North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management
Post Office Box 769
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Mr. Larry Hardy
National Marine Fisheries Service
Habitat Conservation Division
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
<sY PH
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Wilmington Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor- Hob Jamieson
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
August 2, 1989
L. R. Goode, Ph.D., P.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Subject: Proposed Wetland Fill
Project No. 8906-I
Bridge #11 / Broad Creek
Carteret
Dear Dr. Goode:
The Wilmington Regional office received your CAMA
application on June 19, 1989. A preliminary review indicates
that a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required from our
Division due to the proposed wetland fill. A 401 certification
is required prior to issuance of a LAMA permit.
Because of the many essential functions wetlands provide,
including purification of surface and groundwater, any loss of
wetlands as the result of filling activities is viewed by this
office as degradation of water quality, and potentially, a loss
of these essential functions wetlands provide.
Your project, as proposed, will result in the loss of 8,712
sq. ft. of wetland areas. As a result, this office is requesting
the following additional information be submitted within 30 days
upon receipt of this letter: an alternate proposal that will
eliminate or reduce the proposed fill in wetland areas; or submit
an explanation of why such reductions are not possible and what
mitigating factors we should consider.
7225 %Vri?htsville A\'enuc, Wdnlington, N.C. 28403-3696 • Telephone 919-25(>-416I
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
L. R. Goode
Page Two
Until this office receives your response, your proposal for a
401 Certification will be considered incomplete.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please
contact Jim Gregson, Donald Safrit or me at [phone].
Si cerely,
r., P.E.
Preston &V?orj
Regional SuAPH:J
G:trw
cc: Bill Mills
Steve Tedder
Jim Herstine
Charles Hollis
John Parker
Stephen Benton
WiRO, CF

State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Wilmington Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor Bob Jamieson
William W Cobey, Jr., Secretary Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
c•-t .
August 2, 1989 i
AUG 3 1989
L. R. Goode, Ph.D., P.E. ?i
North Carolina Department of Transportation WATER QL ?LITY
ION
P.O. Box 25201 SECTION
Raleigh, NC 27611
Subject: Proposed Wetland Fill
Project No. 8906-I
Bridge #11 / Broad Creek
Carteret
Dear Dr. Goode:
The Wilmington Regional Office received your CAMA
application on June 19, 1989. A preliminary review indicates
that a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required from our
Division due to the proposed wetland fill. A 401 certification
is required prior to issuance of a LAMA permit.
Because of the many essential functions wetlands provide,
including purification of surface and groundwater, any loss of
wetlands as the result of filling activities is viewed by this
office as degradation of water quality, and potentially, a loss
of these essential functions wetlands provide.
Your project, as proposed, will result in the loss of 8,712
sq. ft. of wetland areas. As a result, this office is requesting
the following additional information be submitted within 30 days
upon receipt of this letter: an alternate proposal that will
eliminate or reduce the proposed fill in wetland areas; or submit
an explanation of why such reductions are not possible and what
mitigating factors we should consider.
7225 %Vrightsvillc Avcnuc, Wilmington, N.C. 28-103-3096 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
L. R. Goode
Page Two
Until this office receives your response, your proposal for a
401 Certification will be considered incomplete.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please
contact Jim Gregson, Donald Safrit or me at [phone].
i
S cerely,
r., P.E.
. Preston &V?orj
Regional SuAPH:
JG:trw
cc: Bill Mills
Steve Tedder
Jim Herstine
Charles Hollis
John Parker
Stephen Benton
WiRO, CF