19930752 Ver 1_Complete File_19931006

EFPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
T DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
INREPL% F , TO October 6, 1993
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199304485 and Nationwide Permit No. 23 (Approved Categorical
Exclusions)
Mr. B.J. O'Quinn
-96rth Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Gentlemen:
Reference your correspondence of August 30, 1993, stating your agency's
determination of a categorically excluded activity involving the replacement
of Vftdge go. S, over Coinjock Bay on S.R. 1245, near Maple, " d;Cuck County,
North Carolina. This determination applies only to Alternate No. 1, as
described in the July 1993 Categorical Exclusion documentation prepared by the
Department of Transportation's Planning and Environmental Branch, dated July
21, 1993.
For the purposes of the Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program, Title 33,
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the Federal
Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits. Authorization,
pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and Section 404
of the Clean Water Act, was provided for activities undertaken, assisted,
authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part, by another
Federal agency or department where that agency or department has determined,
pursuant to the CEQ Regulation for the Implementing the Procedural Provisions
of the National Environmental Policy Act, that the activity, work or discharge
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 human environment, and the
office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
Your work is authorized by this nationwide permit provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions. This
nationwide permit does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any
required State or local approval.
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also,
this verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period,
the nationwide permit authorization is reissued without modification or the
activity complies with any subsequent modification of the nationwide permit
jW
-2-
authorization. If during the 2 years, the nationwide permit authorization
expires or is suspended or revoked, or is modified, such that the activity
would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit,
activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or are under
contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit will remain
authorized provided the activity is completed within 12 months of the date of
the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify,
suspend, or revoke the authorization.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Raleigh Bland, Washington
Regulatory Field Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
Mr. David Griffin, District Manager
Elizabeth City Regional Office
North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
M,t
? s c• STAT( o
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
August 30, 1993
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
93 ?5a
R. SAMUEL HUNT I I I
SECRETARY
1? l i l
Subject: Currituck County, Replacement of Bridge No. 8 over
Coinjock Bay on SR 1245, Federal Aid Project BRZ-
1245(1), State Project No. 8.2040101, TIP No.
B-2536.
Attached for your information are three copies of the
project planning report for the subject project. The project
is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an individual
permit but propose to proceed under a Nationwide Permit in
accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B-23) issued November
22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers. The provisions of
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be
followed in the construction of the project.
We anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2745
(Categorical Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are
providing one copy of the CE document to the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, for their review.
We anticipate that a permit will be required from the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Coastal Management, for this project.
DOT will apply directly to DEHNR for that permit when plans
have been developed.

1` .
If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call Mr. Doug Huggett at 733-9770.
Sincerely,
B. J. Quin PE
Assistant ranch Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
BJO/dvh
cc: w/attachment
Mr. David Lekson, COE-Washington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDEHNR, DEM
Mr. John Parker, NCDEHNR, DCM
w/out attachment
Mr. Kelly Barger, PE, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, PE, Highway Design Branch
Mr. A.L. Hankins, PE, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. John L. Smith Jr., PE, Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, PE, Roadway Design Unit
Mr. C.O. White, PE, Division 1 Engineer
Mr. R.W. Fedora, Sr., Planning and Environmental Branch
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and Environmental Branch

v mac,
r
Currituck County
Bridge No. 8 on SR 1245
Over Coinjock Bay
Federal Project BRZ-1245(1)
State Project 8.2040101
TIP# B-2536
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
r
7 -2l -q3
Date L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
7 29- 93 ?I-?-?. ?'
Date Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
?rDivision Administrator, FHWA
Currituck County
Bridge No. 8 on SR 1245
Over Coinjock Bay
Federal Project BRZ-1245(1)
State Project 8.2040101
?. TIP# B-2536

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
JULY 1993
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
`9. (A), ° ±t4" ? (I.
R. W. Fedora Sr.
Project Planning Engineer
Wayne lliott
• Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
l/ 7- 1-2
Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
R, , C A,90 ??
SEAL
6916 -
r, o
??,Ilk V
Currituck County
Bridge No. 8 on SR 1245
Over Coinjock Bay
Federal Project BRZ-1245(1)
State Project 8.2040101
TIP# B-2536
I. SUMMARY OF PROJECT
Bridge No. 8 crosses over Coinjock Bay in Currituck County. It is
included in the 1993-1999 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a
bridge replacement project. The project has been classified as a Federal
Categorical Exclusion. No substantial environmental impacts are expected.
Bridge No. 8 will be replaced on existing location using phased
construction and maintaining one lane of traffic with a traffic signal on
each approach. The recommended replacement structure is a bridge
approximately 130 feet long and 30 feet wide. The bridge will provide a
24-foot wide travelway with a 3-foot clearance on each side. The
replacement bridge will be on the existing alignment, providing an
approximately 30 mph design speed. The new roadway will have a 24-foot
wide travelway plus 8-foot graded shoulders at approximately the same
grade as the existing roadway.
Construction will be phased in order to maintain traffic on the
existing bridge. The existing bridge will be widened to provide enough
space to perform the phased construction. One lane of traffic will be
maintained with traffic signals during construction.
The estimated cost is $393,000. The estimated cost shown in the
1993-1999 TIP is $574,000.
II. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts. Standard sedimentation control measures
and best management practices will be implemented throughout construction.
Construction in marsh areas will work off of mats. The areas covered by
these mats will be replanted with native vegetation after the mats are
removed. NCDOT will mitigate the loss of all coastal wetlands due to
construction. A moratorium on construction in the water will be required
between March and June. A Coastal Area Management Act Permit is required.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1245 is classified as a rural local route in the Statewide
Functional Classification System and is not a Federal aid road. SR 1245
provides the only ingress and egress for Bell Island.
Near Bridge No. 8, SR 1245 is 18 feet wide with 5-foot grass
shoulders. Vertical alignment here is rather flat, while there is a sharp
horizontal curve just east of the bridge. Water depth is approximately
four feet in the project area. The bridge provides approximately three
feet of clearance above the surface of Coinjock Bay.
Traffic volume is projected at 1,200 VPD for 1995 (the proposed
construction year) and 2,100 VPD for 2015. Truck percentages are 1% TTST
(truck-tractor semi-trailer) and 4% dual-tired vehicles. Speed limit in
the area is 55 mph.
The existing bridge was built in 1947 and has a timber floor on a
steel girder/timber joists system with timber caps and piles. Total
length is 98 feet with a clear roadway width of 18 feet. Bridge No. 8
carries two narrow lanes of traffic and has posted load limits of 11 tons
for single vehicles and 20 tons for TTST.
According to Bridge Maintenance Department records, the sufficiency
rating is 6.0 of a possible 100.0 with an estimated remaining life of less
than five years.
Consultation with the Traffic Engineering Branch indicates no
accidents occurred at the bridge between 1 April 1989 and 31 March 1992.
The Transportation Director for Currituck County Schools indicated eight
school bus crossings daily (two buses crossing twice each in the morning
and afternoon).
IV. ALTERNATIVES
There are three build alternatives for replacing Bridge No. 8.
Alternate 1 (Recommended) is to replace Bridge No. 8 at the existing
location. The existing bridge will be widened, and construction of the
new 30-foot wide bridge will be phased with one lane of traffic maintained
by temporary traffic signals. The new bridge will be approximately 130
feet long. The design speed for this alternate will be approximately 30
mph.
Alternate 2 is to replace Bridge No. 8 on new location approximately
eight feet north of the existing bridge. The new bridge would be
approximately 140 feet long and 30 feet wide. Traffic would be maintained
on the existing bridge. The design speed for this alternate would be
approximately 30 mph.
Alternate 3 is to replace Bridge No. 8 on new location north of the
existing bridge, improving both roadway approaches. The new bridge would
be approximately 200 feet long and 30 feet wide. Traffic would be
maintained on the existing bridge. The design speed for this alternate
would be approximately 60 mph.
Closing the road to traffic during construction is not possible
because SR 1245 provides the only access to Bell Island.
2
The "do-nothing" alternate is not practical, requiring the eventual
closing of the road as the existing bridge completely deteriorates.
V. COST ESTIMATES
- Table 1 shows the estimated costs and component costs of the
alternates.
Y
Table 1. Cost Estimates
RECOMMENDED
COMPONENT ALTERNATE 1 ALTERNATE 2 ALTERNATE 3
BRIDGE $ 206,700 $ 205,900 $ 288,000
BRIDGE REMOVAL 13,300 9,500 9,500
ROADWAY &
APPROACHES 62,400 78,800 150,700
MOBILIZATION &
MISCELLANEOUS 56,400 58,800 89,600
ENGINEERING &
CONTINGENCIES 50,700 53,000 80,700
TRAFFIC CONTROL 46,500
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $ 436,000 $ 406,000 $ 618,500
RIGHT OF WAY $ 23,000 $ 23,000 $ 19,500
TOTAL COST ESTIMATE $ 459,000 $ 429,000 $ 638,000
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 8 will be replaced at the existing location as shown by
Alternate 1, Figure 3. This alignment will provide an approximately 30
mph design speed. A design speed exception will be necessary. Traffic
will be maintained on one lane of the existing bridge, and traffic signals
will be used to control traffic operation during construction.
The recommended replacement structure is a bridge approximately 100
feet long and 30 feet wide. The bridge will provide a 24-foot wide
travelway with a 3-foot clearance on each side. The roadway approaches
will have a 24-foot wide travelway plus 8-foot graded shoulders.
Alternate 1 is recommended because it will minimize environmental
impacts by staying on existing alignment. The Division of Coastal
Management indicated Alternate 1 appears to be the alternate most likely
to acquire all necessary permits.
The NCDOT Division 1 Engineer suggested an alignment that would
provide greater than 30 mph design speed. This is not feasible due to
higher costs and environmental impacts.
3
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS AND EFFECTS
A. Background
The proposed project occurs in Currituck county in the extreme
northeastern part of the Coastal Plain physiographic province. The
topography of the area is characterized as flat with associated estuarine
marsh and open water (Coinjock Bay is part of Currituck Sound). Marshes ,
exhibit less than 6 inches of relief.
B. Terrestrial Communities
Roadside and marsh are the two terrestrial communities found in the
project study area.
The roadside community is disturbed (mowed) and found along the
existing causeway on both sides of SR 1245. Many floral species
characteristic of the roadside are adapted to disturbed and maintained
habitats. Bermuda grass, thistle, cord grass, pennywort, and various
other herbaceous species dominate the roadside.
The road (SR 1245) which crosses Bridge No. 8 connects the mainland
to Bells Island and has created a barrier which divides a previously
contiguous marsh system. Mortality among animals trying to cross SR 1245
provides forage for opportunistic species such as turkey vulture and
Virginia opossum. Several reptiles (species information will be discussed
in the marsh community description) including turtles and snakes may sun
themselves on the roadside and even use the road itself at night for the
heat that radiates off the road surface.
The marsh community is part of the Currituck Sound estuarine
ecosystem and begins at the edge of the roadside community on both ends of
Bridge No. 8. A mosaic of black needlerush, giant cordgrass, cattail, and
giant reed dominate, while silverling, waxmyrtle, and hibiscus are
scattered throughout the marsh. Bald cypress is also found in the
vicinity.
Invertebrates such as crayfish, blue crab, and grass shrimp along
with fish species such as banded killifish, marsh killifish, lined
topminnow, sheepshead minnow, and eastern mosquitofish find shelter among
the marsh vegetation. These species are prey for a variety of predators.
Bluegill, redbreast, warmouth, largemouth bass, as well as a variety of
amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals comprise the remainder of the
marsh food web. Bullfrog, northern water snake, water moccasin, sliders,
great egret, belted kingfisher, osprey, redwinged blackbird, nutria, and
muskrat are other species which use the marsh system. Migratory waterfowl
and shorebirds are also seasonally common in the marsh.
Destruction of terrestrial communities along the project alignment
will result in the loss of foraging and breeding habitats for many of the
terrestrial species which utilize this area. Table 2 shows approximate
impacts to terrestrial habitat.
4
Table 2. Approximate Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
COMMUNITY TYPE Alt # 1 Alt # 2 Alt # 3
roadside (acres) 0.2 0.3 1.2
marsh (acres) 0.2 0.3 1.4
Totals 0.4 0.6 2.6
C. Aquatic Community
This community includes roadside canals (ditches) and an open water
connection from the north side of SR 1245 to Coinjock Bay. Although open
water and marsh are being discussed separately, many of the previously
mentioned vertebrate and invertebrate species found in the marsh community
are transient between the marsh and aquatic systems. A wind tidal regime
dominates the general area which includes marsh and open water and helps
create a dynamic system. Wind tides stir up previously deposited
sediments and detritus which are again deposited in the marsh. These
sediments and detritus supply nutrients not only to the marsh but to the
entire Currituck Sound estuary.
D. Soils
Currituck general soil map unit contains nearly level, poorly drained
soils that have a mucky surface layer and sandy underlying material. The
soils of this map unit are in broad, flat marshes along the Currituck and
Albemarle Sounds.
Currituck mucky peat (Cu) is a hydric soil and is the specific map
unit found in the proposed project area. Generally, areas where this map
unit is found are irregular in shape and range from 10 to several hundred
acres.
The surface layer is highly decomposed organic matter. Permeability
is moderate to moderately rapid. The soil ranges from very strongly acid
to medium acid in the organic layers and extremely acid to medium acid in
the mineral layers. The seasonal high water table is at or near the
surface. Cu is flooded frequently by changing tides for very long
periods.
E. Water Quality
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) does not
list any dischargers for the northern portion of Coinjock Bay. Coinjock
Bay is classified as having Class SC waters. Class SC waters are tidal
salt waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing,
wildlife and secondary recreation.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW), or waters designated as WS-I or WS-II will be
impacted by the proposed project, nor are these resources located within
575 feet of the subject project area.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) addresses long
term trends in water quality at fixed monitoring sites by the sampling for
selected benthic macro invertebrates. These organisms are sensitive to
very subtle changes in water quality. Good water quality is associated
with high taxa richness (the number of different types of organisms) and
the presence of many intolerant species. Water quality degradation
gradually eliminates the more sensitive species and leads to a community
structure quite different from that in an unstressed waterbody. Specific
data is not available for the immediate project area.
A moratorium on construction in the water will be required between
the months of March and June to protect fish species which spawn in these
coastal waters. Potential impact to water resources in the project area
will be increased sedimentation and turbidity from construction-related
erosion as well as non-point discharge of toxic substances from increased
roadway surface area (engine fluids and particulate rubber). Sedimentation
and erosion control measures will be strictly enforced during the
construction stage of this project.
Poorly managed application of sedimentation control policies will
result in serious damage to the aquatic environment.
F. Jurisdictional Issues and Permits
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters
of the United States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with
provisions of section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C 1344) and are
regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Marshes and roadside
ditches associated with the proposed construction are classified as Waters
of the United States.
This project requires a Coastal Area Management Act Permit. The CAMA
major development permit application form serves as an application for
three other state permits and for permits from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers required by Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section
404 of the Clean Water Act. The state permits include: (1) Permit to
Excavate and/or Fill, (2) Easement in Lands Covered by Water, and (3) 401
Water Quality Certification.
Impacts to wetlands and surface waters are anticipated. Provisions
of Nationwide permit 33 CFR 330.5 (a) (23) will apply. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded,
or financed, in whole or in part, by another federal agency or department
where that agency or department has determined pursuant to the council on
environmental quality regulation for implementing the procedural
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, that the activity,
work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which
neither individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment and the Corps of Engineers' office of the Chief of
Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or department's
application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
This project will also require a general 401 Water Quality
Certification from NCDEHNR prior to the Corps of Engineers issuance of a
general 404 permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires
that the state issue or deny water quality certification for any federally
permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge to the
waters of the United States.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District Engineer (DE) is required
to determine whether any activity, covered by the General Permitting
Process, will result in more than minimal adverse environmental effects.
If the DE determines that the adverse effects of the proposed work are
more than minimal, then he will notify the prospective permittee either:
(1) that the project does not qualify for authorization on the procedures
to seek authorization under an individual permit; or (2) that the project
is authorized under the nationwide permit subject to the permittee
submitting a mitigation proposal that would reduce the adverse
environmental effects to the minimal level. This project will likely be
authorized under a general permit, however, mitigation for impacts to
wetlands and surface waters will be required by the Corps of Engineers due
to the nature of the systems which are to be impacted.
The State of North Carolina also requires that adverse impacts to
coastal lands and waters be mitigated or minimized through proper
planning, site selection, compliance with standards for development, and
creation or restoration of coastal resources. The Coastal Resources
Commission will require mitigation for these coastal areas as defined in
Section .0700 of its Mitigation Policy.
Alternate 1 is the recommended alignment, resulting in the least
impacts to wetlands and surface waters. A CAMA representative suggested
that on-site mitigation for loss of marsh habitat will be acceptable at
the location used to stage the construction. CAMA further recommended a
5:1 mitigation ratio for the loss of coastal wetlands. NCDOT will
mitigate the loss of all coastal wetlands due to construction. The ratio
will be determined during the permitting phase. The staging area is
dominated by giant reed (Phragmites communis).
G. 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 (USFWS) lists seven species as
federally protected for Currituck County as of March 4, 1993.
7
Table 3. Federally-Protected Species for Currituck County
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Sorex longirostris dismal swamp southeastern T
fisheri shrew
Charadrius melodus piping plover T
Dermoc e s co iacr ea leatherback sea turtle E
Lepi oc a ys ke Kemp's Ridley sea turtle E
Caretta caretta loggerhead sea turtle T
Chen a mydas green sea turtle T
Amaranthus umilus seabeach amaranth T
E - Endangered T - Threatened
The Dismal Swamp shrew is a subspecies of the southeastern
shrew and is found only in the Dismal Swamp in southeastern Virginia and
northeastern North Carolina.
The Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew is found in a variety of habitats
including the most abundant in mesic, 10 to 15 year old, mid-successional
forested areas with grassy or shrubbery understories. It is common in
recent clearcuts, stands of cane, and stands of softstem rush. It is
uncommon in mature pine and hardwood forests.
The Dismal swamp shrew is found in the highest densities in early
successional stage wetlands. They prefer areas with thick ground cover
and a deep organic layer. They need the habitat diversity provided by
forested areas but there is a distinct preference for wetlands. Shrews
have been found at the edge of cane breaks and around rotting logs on
drier ground in thickets of myrtle, blackberry, poison ivy, and holly.
Biological Conclusion: The proposed project will not impact habitat
for this species. It can be concluded that the subject project will not
impact the Dismal Swamp shrew.
The piping plover is a small migratory shorebird that resembles a
sandpiper. It breeds along the east coast from New Foundland to North
Carolina. It winters from North Carolina southward into the Florida Keys
and along the Gulf of Mexico. Plovers return to their breeding grounds in
March or early April. Piping plovers nest in flat areas with fine sand
and mixtures of shells and pebbles. They nest most commonly where there
is little or no vegetation, but some may nest in stands of beachgrass.
The nest is a shallow depression in the sand that is usually lined with
shells and pebbles.
8
Biological Conclusion: The proposed project will not impact nesting
or foraging habitat for this species. It can be concluded that the
subject project will not impact the piping plover.
Leatherback sea turtles are distributed world-wide in tropical waters
of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans. They range as far north as
Nova Scotia and New Foundland and as far south as Australia and the Cape
of Good Hope. Major nesting areas occur in tropical regions and the only
nesting population in the United States is found in Martin County,
Florida.
Biological Conclusion: The proposed project will not impact nesting
or foraging habitat for this species. It can be concluded that the
subject project will not impact the leatherback sea turtle.
Adult Ridley's sea turtles inhabit the Gulf of Mexico. Immature
turtles range the east coast as far north as Massachusetts. This turtle
is an infrequent visitor to the North Carolina coast and does not nest
here. The only nesting area for these turtles is a single beach in
Mexico.
Biological Conclusion: The proposed project will not impact nesting
or foraging habitat for this species. It can be concluded that the
subject project will not impact Ridley's sea turtle.
The loggerhead sea turtle nests on suitable beaches from Ocracoke
inlet, North Carolina through Florida and on a small scale off the Gulf
States. There are also major nesting grounds on the eastern coast of
Australia. It lives worldwide in temperate to subtropical waters.
Loggerheads nest nocturnally between May and September on isolated
beaches that are characterized by fine grained sediments. It is mainly
carnivorous feeding on small marine animals.
Biological Conclusion: The proposed project will not impact nesting
or foraging habitat for this species. It can be concluded that the
subject project will not impact the loggerhead sea turtle.
The green sea turtle is found in temperate and tropical oceans and
seas. It ranges as far north as Massachusetts on the east coast and
British Columbia in the west. Nesting in North America is limited to
small communities on the east coast of Florida.
Biological Conclusion: The proposed project will not impact nesting
or foraging habitat for this species. It can be concluded that the
subject project will not impact the green sea turtle.
The seabeach amaranth is an annual plant and a member of the Amaranth
family. It initially forms a small unbranched sprig, but soon begins to
branch profusely into a clump, often reaching a foot in diameter and
consisting of 5 to 20 branches. The stems are fleshy and pink-red or
reddish, with small rounded leaves that are half an inch to an inch in
9
diameter. The leaves are clustered toward the tip of the stem, are
normally a spinach-green color, and have a small notch at the rounded tip.
Flowers and fruits are relatively inconspicuous, borne in clusters along
the stems.
The seabeach amaranth is endemic to Atlantic coastal plain beaches,
where it is currently known from 13 populations in New York, 34
populations in North Carolina and S populations in South Carolina. It
occurs on barrier island beaches, where its primary habitat consists of
overwash flats at accreting ends of islands and lower foredunes and upper
strands of noneroding beaches.
Biological Conclusion: The proposed project will not impact habitat
for this species. It can be concluded that the subject project will not
impact seabeach amaranth.
No impacts to Federally protected species are anticipated from
construction of the subject project.
H. Historic and Archaeological Resources
In terms of historic architectural resources, there are no historic
architectural resources in the project area. The SHPO recommends no
historic architectural survey. The SHPO recommends no archaeological
survey for the project.
WF/pl
10
FIGURES
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMEWT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
BRIDGE NO. 8
ON SR 1245, OVER COINJOCK BAY
CURRITUCK COUNTY
T. I. P. NO. B - 2536
0 miles 2
FIG. 1
i
BRIDGE NO. 8
CURRITUCK COUNTY
B-2536

LOOKING NORTHEAST
LOOKING SOUTHWEST
SIDE VIEW

FIGURE 3
APPENDIX
A ST 1-f s
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
June 11, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge No. 8 on SR 1245 over
Coinjock River, Currituck County, B-2536,
8.2040101, BRZ-1245(1), GS 92-01 13
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
On June 9, 1992, Robin Stancil of our staff met with North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds
concerning the above project. We reported our available information on
historic architectural and archaeological surveys and resources along with
our recommendations. NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial
photographs at the meeting and for our use afterwards.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at
the meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic
structures located within the area of potential effect. We recommend that
no historic architectural survey be conducted for this project.
If the road is moved from the existing right-of-way and/or there is a new
location for the bridge, we would want to see plans for evaluation.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a
Categorical Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how
NCDOT addressed our concerns.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36
CFR Part &00.
109 East ones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sinc ely,
avid Brook ??
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: ?C. J. Ward
B. Church
T. Padgett