20001183 Ver 1_Complete File_20000912

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT 1R.
GOVERNOR
August 21, 2000
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
ATTN: Mr. Eric C. Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
001183
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
Subject: Granville County, Bridge No. 48 over Aaron's Creek on NC 96, TIP No.
B-2976, State Project No. 8.1370901, Federal Aid No. BRSTP-96(1).
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning documents for the
subject project. This project consists of a bridge replacement at the existing location,
with traffic maintained on a temporary detour bridge located just east of the existing
bridge during construction. The existing cross section of the bridge is 7.9 m (26 ft) wide.
The proposed cross section of the replacement bridge is 9.2 m (30 ft) wide. The existing
bridge has an asphalt overlay surface on a reinforced concrete floor. The substructure is a
reinforced concrete rigid frame arch. The arch slab and both abutments (above the
footing) was computed as fill for a total of 159.2 m3 (208.5 yd3). The wings were not
added to the calculated fill. This project can be classified as Case 2, which allows no
work at all in the water during moratorium periods associated with fish migration,
spawning, and larval recruitment into nursery areas. No wetlands will be disturbed by the
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.
The NCDOT requests that you review this work for authorization under
Nationwide Permit No. 23 and Nationwide Permit No. 33. It is anticipated that 401
General Certification No. 3107 (Approved Categorical Exclusions) and General
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW..DOH. DOT. STATE. NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
Certification No. 3114 (Temporary Construction, Access, and Dewatering) will apply to
this project, and the attached information is being provided to the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their
review.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call Mr. Matt
Haney at [phone] ext. 333.
Sincerely,

v William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
0 Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
cc:
Mr. David Franklin, Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Garland Pardue, USFWS, Raleigh
Mr. N.L. Graf, P.E., FHWA
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E. Program Development Branch
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. A.L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Jon Nance, P.E., Division 5 Engineer
Mr. John Williams, P.E., PD&EA
Granville County,
Bridge No. 48 on NC 96
Over Aaron's Creek
Federal Aid Project BRSTP - 96(1)
State Project 8.1370901
TIP Project B-2976
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
and
Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
8 -? -78
Date
9&
Date
?v
00113
1r William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
L. Graf, P. E.
Administrator, FHWA
Granville County,
Bridge No. 48 on NC 96
Over Aaron's Creek
Federal Aid Project BRSTP - 96(1)
State Project 8.1370901
TIP Project B-2976
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
and
Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation
August 1998
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:

.?` •.??FESS/0 N.'9
SEAL
William T. Goodwin, Jr., P. E. 21077
Project Planning Engineer F
G 061OW'%

G7/
?
e
Wa
-7
?
,
yn
-
-
1
Wayne lliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
t?
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Granville County,
Bridge No. 48 on NC 96
Over Aaron's Creek
Federal Aid Project BRSTP - 96(1)
State Project 8.1370901
TIP Project B-2976
1. SUMMARY OF PROJECT
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge
No. 48, Granville County. This bridge carries NC 96 over Aaron's Creek (see Figure 1). NCDOT
includes this bridge in the 1998-2004 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge
replacement project. NCDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) classify this
project as a federal Categorical Exclusion. These agencies expect no notable environmental
impacts.
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 48 in-place as shown in Alternate 2, Figure 2. NCDOT
recommends replacing the bridge with a new bridge approximately 32 meters (105 feet) in length
and 9.2 meters (30 feet) in width. The new bridge will be at approximately the same elevation as
the existing bridge. The new roadway approaches will have a 7.2 meter (24 foot) wide travelway
plus 2.4 meter (8 foot) shoulders. Traffic will be maintained on a temporary detour bridge
located just east of the existing bridge during construction. The completed project will provide a
design speed of approximately 100 km/h (60 mph).
The estimated cost is $ 836,500 including $ 36,500 for right of way acquisition and
$ 800,000 for construction. The estimated cost included in the 1998-2004 TIP is $ 310,000.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT is not expected to need any design exceptions for this project.
III. SUMMARY OF PROJECT COMMITMENTS
High Quality Waters - Soil and Erosion Control Measures will be implemented and
maintained throughout project construction. All applicable Best Management Practices will be
installed and properly maintained during project construction.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States." A Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will
likely be applicable for this project.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water
Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit # 23.
All clearing and other soil disturbing activities will be conducted during the period
between April 1 and November 15.
Both the replacement structure and the detour structure will be designed to span the creek
if hydraulic and design conditions permit.
Mr. Tim Savidge of NCDOT - Planning and Environmental Branch (919-733-3141), Mr.
David Cox of NCWRC (919-528-9886), Mr. John Alderman of NCWRC (919-542-5331), and
Ms. Candice Martino of USFWS (919-856-5420x18) will be invited to the preconstruction
meeting to be held before the contractor is ready to begin project construction.
Once construction of the new bridge is complete, the temporary detour will be removed.
Approach fills will be removed back to natural grade and the area will be planted with native
grasses and/or tree species as appropriate.
Prior to the demolition of Granville Bridge No. 48, NCDOT will record the bridge in
accordance with the attached Historic Structures Recordation Plan. The recordation plan will be
carried out and copies of the documentation will be sent to the North Carolina SHPO prior to the
start of construction.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NCDOT classifies NC 96 as a rural major collector route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. The surrounding area is primarily wooded with a few scattered residences,
farm fields and pastureland.
Near Bridge No. 48, NC 96 is a two lane paved road, 6.1 meters (20 feet) wide with
grassed shoulders. Both the vertical and horizontal alignment in the area are good. SR 1402 and
SR 1327 intersect NC 96 about 67 meters (220 feet) north of Bridge No. 48.
NCDOT built Bridge No. 48 in 1934. The bridge has an asphalt overlay surface on a
reinforced concrete floor. The substructure is a reinforced concrete rigid frame arch. The deck of
Bridge No. 48 is 5.5 meters (18 feet) above the streambed. Water depth is approximately 0.3
meters (1.0 foot) in the project area. The bridge is 17.1 meters (56 feet) long with a 7.9 meter (26
foot) roadway width. It carries two lane of traffic and has no posted load limit for single vehicles
or for Truck-tractor Semi-trailer (TTST).
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of Bridge No. 48 is
32.2 of a possible 100.0. The general condition of the deck of Bridge No. 48 is rated as poor, the
superstructure is also rated as poor and the substructure is rated as satisfactory.
The current (1998) traffic volume is estimated to be 1630 vehicles per day (VPD), and is
projected at 3100 VPD by the year 2020. This traffic includes 10% TTSTs and 4% Duals. No
speed limit is posted in the project area, therefore it is assumed to be 55 mph by statute.
2
Traffic Engineering accident records indicate only one accident was reported in the
vicinity of Bridge No. 48 during a recent three year period.
The Transportation Director for Granville County Schools indicated there are three
school buses crossing the bridge twice each per day. Detouring traffic off-site during
construction would delay these buses, but not make area school bus operations impossible.
V. ALTERNATES
Three methods of replacing Bridge No. 48 were studied. Each of the alternates studied
involves a replacement structure 32 meters (105 feet) long and 9.2 meters (30 feet) wide. This
structure width will accommodate a 7.2 meter (24 foot) travelway across the structure with a 1.0
meter (3 foot) offset on each side. The approach roadway will consist of 7.2 meters (24 feet) of
pavement and a minimum of 2.4 meter (8 foot) grassed shoulders.
Alternate One - replace the bridge on existing location with a new structure. This alternate
would involve approximately 100 meters (325 feet) of approach roadway work. Traffic is
to be detoured along existing roads as shown in Figure 1.
Alternate Two (Recommended) - replace the bridge on existing location with a new structure.
This alternate would involve approximately 260 meters (850 feet) of approach roadway
work. Traffic would be maintained on a detour structure located just east of the existing
structure during construction.
Alternate Three - replace the bridge on new location approximately 12 meters (40 feet)
downstream (east) of the existing bridge. This alternate would involve approximately 520
meters (1700 feet) of new approach roadway. Traffic would be maintained on the existing
structure during construction of the new bridge.
The "do-nothing" alternate is not practical. The existing bridge would continue
deteriorating until it was unusable. This would require closing the road, or continued intensive
maintenance.
VI. COST ESTIMATE
Structure
Roadway Approaches
Structure Removal
Temporary Detour
Engineering & Contingencies
Total Construction
Right of Way & Utilities
TOTAL PROJECT COST
Alternate One Alternate Two Alternate Three
Recommended
$ 297,000 $ 297,000 $ 297,000
140,000 140,000 375,000
13,000 13,000 13,000
- 0- 250,000 - 0 -
75,000 100,000 115,000
525,000 800,000 800,000
17,500 36,500 39,300
$ 542,500 $ 836,500 $ 839,300
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 48 in-place as shown in Alternate 2, Figure 2. NCDOT
recommends replacing the bridge with a new bridge approximately 32 meters (105 feet) in length
and 9.2 meters (30 feet) in width. The new bridge will be at approximately the same elevation as
the existing bridge. The new roadway approaches will have a 7.2 meter (24 foot) wide travelway
plus at least 2.4 meter (8 foot) shoulders. Traffic will be maintained on a temporary detour bridge
located just east of the existing bridge during construction. The completed project will provide a
design speed of approximately 100 km/h (60 mph).
NCDOT recommends Alternate 2 because it is the most reasonable and feasible alternate
for replacing Bridge No. 48. An alternate with an on-site detour to the west would result in a less
desirable alignment due to the sweeping curve just south of Bridge No. 48. Alternate One would
generate road user costs of approximately $ 515,000; considering the shortest detour route (4.4
miles of indirect travel) along other paved roads in the project area and the approximate 8 month
construction period. This cost is more than twice the cost of an on-site detour ($ 250,000), so
Alternate One is not reasonable. The alignment of this section of NC 96 is not substandard so
realignment, as in Alternate Three is not warranted.
The division engineer concurs with the selection of Alternate 2. He states that traffic
should be maintained on-site due to the number of vehicles involved.
Construction of Alternate 2 will not have a significant adverse impact on the floodplain
or associated flood hazard.
NCDOT expects utility conflicts to be low or less than expected for a project of this type
and magnitude.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. General Environmental Effects
The project is considered to be a "categorical exclusion" due to its limited scope and
insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality of the
human or natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition
will be limited.
4
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected
to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl
refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
There are no known hazardous waste sites in the project area and no unknown sites are
likely to be found.
B. Architectural and Archaeological Resources
Architectural Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has indicated that the only historic
architectural resource over fifty years of age in the project area is Bridge No. 48. (See SHPO
memo dated March 7, 1997.) The bridge was evaluated by NCDOT and found to be eligible for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. The bridge will be recorded as outlined in
the attached Memorandum of Agreement. (See attached Programmatic Section 4(f)
documentation for details.)
Archaeological Resources
The SHPO has indicated that there are no known archaeological sites in the project area.
Based on present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources eligible
for inclusion in the National Register will be affected by project construction. Therefore, no
archaeological investigation is recommended in connection with this project. (See SHPO letter
dated March 7, 1997.)
C. Natural Systems
Regional Characteristics
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Granville County is located in the north, central portion of North Carolina. It is situated in
the Piedmont physiographic province, which is characterized by rolling topography with rounded
hills and long, low ridges. Elevations, within the county, range from 67 to 226 meters (220 to
743 feet) above mean sea level (MSL) following a trend of increasing elevation to the northwest
part of the county.
The project area is in the Roanoke River Basin, however the southern portion of
Granville County is also drained by the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The North Carolina portion of
the Roanoke River Basin is composed of two major parts: the Dan River, and its tributaries in the
western section, upstream of Kerr Lake (the project area is situated in this portion), and the
Roanoke River as it enters North Carolina in the eastern section, in the form of Lake Gaston.
Current land use in the vicinity of the project includes forest cover, agriculture and low-
density residential. Feed crops tend to dominate the agriculture portion of the land uses.
The elevations in the area range from 122 to 131 meters (400 to 430 feet) above MSL.
Soils
According to the NRCS, Soil Survey of Granville County, North Carolina, the soil
association encompassing the project area is the Georgeville-Herndon general soil map unit. This
unit is characterized by a gently to strongly sloping topography, with well drained soils that have
a loamy surface layer and a clayey subsoil; on uplands. The somewhat poorly drained Chewacla
soils, commonly found on the floodplains in this association, are included in the "Minor Soils"
section of the Georgeville-Herndon unit.
The specific soil series that are likely to be impacted by this project include: Chewacla
and Wehadkee soils (ChA; 86; 43), Georgeville silt loam (GeB, GeC; 205B, 232B, 208B, 205C,
232C, 208C), and Tatum loam (TaE; 232E, 232D, 232F). Chewacla and Wehadkee soils are
classified as primary hydric soils. Chewacla soils are considered to be somewhat poorly drained,
while Wehadkee soils are poorly drained. The depth to the water table in the Chewacla unit
ranges from 0.15 to 0.46 meters (0.5 to 1.5 feet) from November to April with frequent flooding
for brief and long periods during this span. Wehadkee soils are frequently flooded for brief
periods from November through June with the depth to groundwater ranging from 0 to 0.3 meters
(0 to 1 foot) during this span.
It is important to note that Tatum loam (TaE) and Georgeville silt loam (GeC) are
categorized as "Highly Erodible" on the list of Highly Erodible Lands, Granville County, North
Carolina, May, 1996. Georgeville silt loam (GeB) is listed as "Potentially Highly Erodible" on
the same list.
Water Resources
Waters Impacted and Characteristics
Streams and tributaries, within the project region, are parts of the Roanoke River Basin.
In addition to impacts at the project area, it is assumed that project operations may potentially
impact Aaron's Creek further downstream.
Aaron's Creek (Index # 22-59) is designated a class "C" stream from its source to the
North Carolina - Virginia State Line. Class "C" streams are those defined as best suited for
propagation and survival of aquatic life, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture.
Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is part of an ongoing ambient
water quality monitoring program which studies long term trends in water quality. The BMAN
program assesses water quality by sampling for selected benthic macroinvertebrate organisms at
6
fixed monitoring sites. Benthic macroinvertebrates are sensitive to subtle changes in water
quality, and therefore, can be used as indicators to evaluate the overall health of stream systems.
The only sample station listed in Granville County, in Subbasin #030206, is Island Creek
at SR 1445, which is located due east of the project area, just west of the GranvilleNance
County Line below the Island Creek Dam. The most recent sample taken at this station occurred
in August 1994. The sample received a BMAN bioclassification of "Good-Fair." A review of
point source dischargers, permitted through the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
Program (NPDES), was conducted. No point source dischargers were identified within the
project vicinity.
Anticipated Impacts to Water Quality
All three alternates have the potential to impact water quality. However, with erosion and
sediment control measures set in place, impacts can be reduced to a negligible level. Minimal
disturbance to existing vegetation, especially forest cover, will reduce water quality impacts as
well. From an ecological perspective, Alternate 1 is the preferred alternate, primarily due to the
limited amount of clearing and grubbing required compared to the other two alternates. Clearing,
grubbing, and filling activities in the floodplain and adjacent upland forest cover will increase the
potential for erosion and subsequent degradation of water quality. In addition, potential impacts
may occur from the removal of stable vegetation along the streambank. Mature trees and shrubs
with well established root systems are effective protection for streambanks against erosional
forces. Loss of this type of vegetation creates the potential for both short and long term erosion.
Alternate 1 proposes to replace the bridge in the same location, and therefore, would
require only minimal clearing on either side of the bridge. Alternates 2 and 3 require impacts to
the streambanks, floodplain and forest cover. Alternates 2 and 3 have the potential to clear a total
of approximately 30 linear meters (100 linear feet) of streambank and floodplain vegetation
along Aaron's Creek
With each alternate, total long term impacts to water resources and aquatic communities
resulting from the proposed project are expected to be negligible, given that proper erosion and
sediment control measures are taken. In addition, the size of the project and typical construction
methods required pose minimal large scale or long term impacts.
Erosion and sedimentation will be most pronounced during the actual construction of the
project when vegetation removal and the addition of fill material on the site, will cause the soil to
be exposed. After completion, prompt revegetation and restoration of the disturbed area to its
original condition will reduce the potential for erosion and water quality degradation. However,
sedimentation guidelines should still be implemented and strictly enforced throughout the
construction period to reduce the potential for excessive soil erosion and the degradation of
downstream water quality. In order to minimize potential impacts, NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters should be strictly enforced during the construction
phase of the project. This would include:
7
I) Installation of temporary silt fences, dikes, and earth berms to control runoff
during construction.
2) Placement of temporary ground cover or re-seeding of disturbed sites to reduce
runoff and decrease sediment loadings.
3) Reduction of clearing along streams.
Non-point source runoff from agricultural is likely to be the primary source of water quality
degradation in the project vicinity. Water quality, in North Carolina, is significantly influenced
by nutrient loading. Long term impacts on streams, as a result of road construction, are not
expected.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Terrestrial Communities
The field investigation resulted in the identification of four terrestrial communities. These
include a riparian forest, an upland forest, a maintained utility buffer and a roadside shoulder.
The riparian forest and the upland forest meet the definition of a Piedmont/Low Mountain
Alluvial Forest and a Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest, as described by Schafale and Weakley
(1990). The buffer consists of essentially the same species as the riparian forest, however, the
trees are typically no larger than sapling size due to periodic maintenance. The roadside shoulder
is a small, approximately six meters (20 feet), buffer between NC 96 and the forested areas
adjacent to the road on either side.
The Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest community comprises an area within
approximately 60 meters (200 feet) of each of Aaron's Creek's streambanks. In general, the
dominant canopy species are tulip poplar, sweet gum, American elm, American sycamore, black
walnut, sugarberry, and shortleaf pine. Dominant trees are, between 30 and 45 centimeters (12-18
inches) in diameter at breast height (DBH) and are approximately 30 to 60 years in age.
Box elder, red maple and flowering dogwood make up the dominant understory species.
Spicebush and multiflora rose dominate the shrub layer, while the herbaceous layer consists
primarily of microstegium, false nettle and Christmas fern. Poison ivy and muscadine grape are
the vines present in the ground cover.
The Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest extends along the northeast and southeast portions of
the project area. This community is dominated by white oak, mockernut hickory, pignut hickory,
sweet gum, red oak, tulip tree, black walnut, shortleaf pine and sugarberry. The understory is
dominated primarily by red maple and flowering dogwood. The density of trees is high with trees
averaging 30 to 45 centimeters (12 to 18 inches) DBH and 30-60 years in age. A shrub layer was
sparse, however greenbrier is present. The dominant herbaceous species is microstegium.
The roadside shoulder is the smallest community in the project area. Fescue and onion
grass dominate the vegetative cover in this community.
8
The majority of the observed wildlife, especially throughout the forested areas, are
common edge dwelling avian species. Northern cardinal, song sparrow, chipping sparrow, tufted
titmouse and northern mockingbird were identified in the forest cover. Other species observed
include American crow, gray squirrel, common toad, and copperhead. Tracks of raccoon,
opossum, white tailed deer and wild turkey were also present.
The forest cover within the project area serves as part of the ecological connectivity along
the Aaron's Creek riparian corridor. The presence of large parcels of forest throughout the
project vicinity, as well as, along Aaron's Creek suggests that the corridor could serve as
foraging and breeding habitat for a diversity of wildlife species, however, this area serves as
more of an edge habitat, and therefore, would not be ideal for forest interior dwelling species.
Wildlife known to associate with the amount and type of forest cover within the project
area, vicinity, and region would include a diversity of songbirds, including migratory species,
forest interior dwelling birds, raptors, amphibians and reptiles (frogs, snakes and turtles). This
habitat would also be suitable for many mammals such as red fox, beaver, eastern rabbit, shrews,
mice, voles and eastern chipmunks.
Aquatic Communities
The only aquatic community identified throughout the project area that will be impacted
by the proposed project is Aaron's Creek. A second community was identified just beyond the
proposed right-of-way and has been included in this report. The portion of Aaron's Creek, within
the project vicinity, is a small to medium sized unvegetated stream. The stream measures
approximately 40 feet wide (12 meters), on either side of the bridge, and consists of several
riffle/pool complexes of different size and velocity. Streambanks, along Aaron's Creek, are
stabilized primarily by mature trees and shrubs and sediment deposition is evident throughout the
floodplain.
A palustrine forested wetland is located adjacent to the northwest portion of the project
area. The wetland, which measures approximately 0.14 hectare (0.06 acres), can be classified as a
temporarily flooded, broad-leafed deciduous palustrine forested wetland (PFOIA). Hydrophytic
vegetation present includes tulip tree, American elm, American sycamore, sugarberry, and sweet
gum. Northern spicebush, box elder, and red maple were also abundant in the understory. Hydric
soil indicators were evident, including low chroma soils and reducing conditions, and drift lines
are prominent throughout the system, providing evidence of hydrology.
Observation of aquatic fauna was limited to mollusks and benthic macroinvertebrates. An
abundance of Asiatic clam shells were dispersed along the river banks and shells of freshwater
mussels were evident as well. Based on a random, but qualitative sampling, along portions of
Aaron's Creek within the project area, the diversity of benthic macroinvertebrates is low to
moderate, taking into consideration the low water level, and therefore, restricted flow. Organisms
found and identified include the following: midgefly larvae (Order Diptera, family
Chironomidae), dragonfly larvae (Order Odonata, suborder Anisoptera, family Gomphidae
damselfly larvae (Order Odonata, suborder Anisoptera, family Macromiidae) and aquatic beetle
9
(Order Coleoptera, family Haliplidae, genus Peltodytes). Of these organisms, midgefly larvae
dominated the sample.
Based on a general assessment of habitat and water quality, it is likely that a number of
species of fish would typically inhabit Aaron's Creek. Some of the common fishes that occur in
similar Piedmont streams are: golden shiner, whitefin shiner, spottail shiner, rosyside dace, silver
redhorse, eastern silvery minnow, tessellated darter, fantail darter, creek chub, bluehead chub and
margined madtom.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the subject project may have several impacts on the biotic resources
described. Any construction-related activities in or near these resources have the potential to
impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies impacts to the natural
resources, in terms of area impacted and ecosystems affected.
Project construction will result in clearing and degradation of portions of these
communities. Table 1 summarizes potential quantitative losses to these communities. Impacts
were determined by using the entire right-of-way width for each alternate. Impacts may be less,
depending on the final sequence of operations.
Table 1. Summary of Community Impacts
Community Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3
Piedmont /Low Mt. 0.01 ha 0.14 ha 0.14 ha
Alluvial Forest (0.03 ac) (0.34 ac) (0.34 ac)
Dry-Mesic Oak- no impacts 0.22 ha 0.22 ha
Hickory Forest (0.54 ac) (0.54 ac)
Utility Buffer 0.01 ha 0.22 ha 0.22 ha
(0.03 ac) (0.53 ac) (0.53 ac)
Roadside Shoulder 0.01 ha 0.10 ha 0.10 ha
(0.03 ac) (0.24 ac) (0.24 ac)
Aaron's Creek 0.03 ha 0.04 ha 0.04 ha
(0.06 ac) (0.10 ac) (0.10 ac)
Total Impacts 0.06 ha 0.72 ha 0.72 ha
(0.16 ac) (1.75 ac) (1.75 ac)
Anticipated impacts to the biotic communities, in the project area, vary depending on the
alternate selected. Alterations of the current environment will be temporary if the affected areas
are revegetated and returned to their original state as quickly as possible. The aquatic community
may be more sensitive to the effects associated with the construction process. Protection of water
resources is critical to ensure that any impacts are minimal, short term and localized.
10
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States," as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register Part 328.3. Wetlands, defined in
33 CFR 328.3, are those areas inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency
and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances, do support a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any action that proposes to place fill
into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE)
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to delineate and/or determine whether wetlands are jurisdictional include
evidence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation and evidence of certain hydrologic
characteristics during the growing season.
During the August 14, 1997 investigation, each of the aforementioned components were
identified just beyond the right-of-way, to the northwest of the project area. Having met all three
criteria, this area, appears to meet the definition of a jurisdictional wetland. However, this
wetland would not be impacted as a result of the bridge replacement, as it is clearly outside of the
project right-of-way.
A review of the NWI maps for the project area identified one wetland system, Aaron's
Creek. Aaron's Creek was classified as a riverine, upper perennial stream, with an
unconsolidated bottom (R3UBH). The hydrologic regime is considered permanently flooded.
Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated. Jurisdictional surface waters are
present in the form of Aaron's Creek, which will be crossed and likely impacted as a result of the
proposed project. Alternate One would impact no more than 60 linear feet of Aaron's Creek,
while Alternates Two and Three could impact as much as 100 linear feet of the creek. In
accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit
will be required from the USACOE for the discharge of dredged of fill material into "Waters of
the United States." A Nationwide 23 Permit will be required for the proposed project.
A Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5 (a)(23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to "Waters of the United States," from the proposed project. This permit authorizes
activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in whole, or part, by
another Federal agency or department where that agency or department has determined that,
pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulation for implementing the
procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act:
1) 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,
2) the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
A North Carolina DWQ Section 401 Water Quality General Certification is required prior
to the issuance of the Section 404 Nationwide 23 Permit. Section 401 Certification allows
surface waters to be temporarily impacted for the duration of the construction or other land
manipulations.
The COE has adopted, through CEQ, a wetland mitigation policy which embraces the
concept of "no net loss of wetlands," and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and
maintain the chemical, biological and physical integrity of Waters of the United States,
specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by CEQ to include:
avoiding impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over
time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance,
minimization and compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE, in determining "appropriate
and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should be appropriate to
the scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and
logistics, in light of, project purposes.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required
through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on
decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of median widths, ROW
widths, fill slopes and/or shoulder widths. Other practical mechanisms to minimize impacts to
Waters of the United States crossed by the proposed project include: strict enforcement of
sedimentation control BMP's for the protection of surface waters during the entire life of the
project; reduction of clearing and grubbing activity; reduction/elimination of direct discharge
into streams; reduction of runoff velocity; re-establishment of vegetation on exposed areas,
judicious pesticide and herbicide usage; minimization of "in-stream" activity; and litter/debris
control.
Water Permits
A North Carolina DWQ Section 401 Water Quality General Certification is also required.
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state issue or deny water certification for
any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge into "Waters of the
12
United States." The issuance of a 401 permit from DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section
404 Permit.
This project will require a 401 Water Quality General Certification from the DWQ prior
to the issuance of the Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the
State issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may
result in a discharge into "Waters of the United States."
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of decline either
due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human activities. Federal law (under the
provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires that any action likely to
adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected, be subject to review by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Other species may receive additional protection under separate
state laws.
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of May 14,
1998, the USFWS lists the following federally-protected species for Granville County (Table 2).
Table 2. List of Federally-Protected Species in Granville County
Scientific Name Common Name Status
Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Threatened (T)
Alasmidonta heterodon dwarf wedge mussel Endangered (E)
Echinacea laevigata smooth coneflower Endangered (E)
Ptilimnium nodosum harperella Endangered (E)
Note: Endangered (E) is defined as a species that is threatened with extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Threatened (T) is defined as a species likely to become
endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (bald eagle) Threatened
The bald eagle is a large, dark brown bird having a characteristic white plumed head and
tail, as well as, a heavy yellow bill. Immature birds lack this characteristic plumage but can be
recognized by blotchy white plumage on the underside of the wings, bell and tail. These large
birds can achieve a size of 69 to 94 centimeters (27 to 37 inches) with a wingspan of 1.8 to 2.3
meters (6 to 7.5 feet). Bald eagles range across North America but restrict themselves to areas
dominated by large bodies of water. Nesting sites are generally situated within 800 meters (0.5
miles) of the water with the stick nest, up to three meters across, constructed in the largest living
tree in the area.
13
Biological Condition: NO EFFECT
A review of the Natural Heritage Program database of uncommon and protected species
revealed no recorded occurrence of the bald eagle in or near the project area. A search for the
bald eagle and its habitat was conducted on August 14, 1997, during the field investigation. The
methodology used to determine the presence of the protected species included direct audible
observations and/or comparing known habitat conditions for each species to the existing habitats
within the project area. The search did not result in the identification of either the protected
species or its habitat.
Alasmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel) Endangered
The dwarf wedge mussel is generally a small mussel, with a shell length normally
ranging between 25 and 38 millimeters. The periostracum is generally olive green to dark brown;
nacre bluish to silvery white, usually cream or salmon colored towards the umbonal cavities.
Shell outline is subhomboidal or subtrapezoidal; later teeth reversed, with one on the left valve
and two on the right. All other laterally dentate species in North Carolina have two lateral teeth
on the left valve and one on the right.
In North Carolina, the dwarf wedge mussel is known from both the Neuse and the Tar
river systems. Its historical range within those systems is unclear, but available records show that
it was once more widely distributed than at present. Today, the only known populations in the
Neuse River Basin are in the Little River in Johnston County, and in Middle Creek in Johnston
County. The status of these populations is already in doubt. In the Tar River Basin, populations
are known in the upper Tar River in Granville County and in Crooked and Cedar Creek in
Franklin County.
In North Carolina, the dwarf wedge mussel seems to prefer areas of deep runs with coarse
sands. Other habitats noted for this species are on bottoms of gravel or mud, among submersed
aquatic plants, and near the stream bank underneath overhanging tree limbs (Adams, 1990).
Biological Condition: NO EFFECT
A review of the Natural Heritage Program database of uncommon and protected species
revealed no recorded occurrence of the dwarf wedge mussel in or near the project area.
Freshwater mussel shells were directly observed on the banks of Aaron's Creek. NCDOT staff
Biologist conducted extensive mussel surveys on June 28, 1998. Water levels were low and
visibility was good. Methodologies used include wading and snorkeling in areas where
necessary. No examples of the dwarf wedge mussel were found from the project site upstream to
the Virginia State Line. It can be concluded that project construction will not impact the dwarf
wedge mussel.
However, an Atlantic pigtoe mussel and an example of an unidentified species of mussel
were found among the numerous more common mussel species in Aaron's Creek. This is the first
recorded finding of the Atlantic pigtoe in the Roanoke River basin for over 100 years. The
14
diversity and apparent health of the mussels in Aaron's Creek, along with the presence of a
couple of rare species of mussel, make Aaron's Creek one of the most important streams in the
Roanoke River basin for mussel conservation.
Due to the significance of Aaron's Creek to mussel habitat preservation, three
commitments have been included in the list of project commitments to help protect the water
quality of Aaron's Creek during project construction. These measures will ensure that the diverse
aquatic habitat in the project area will not be significantly adversely impacted.
Echinacea laevigata (smooth coneflower) Endangered
Smooth coneflower is a rhizomatous perennial herb in the aster family. This species
grows up to 1.5 meters (59 inches) tall from a vertical root stock; stems are smooth, with few
leaves. The largest leaves are the basal leaves, which reach 20 cm (7.8 inches) in length and 7.5
cm (2.9 inches) in width, have long petioles, and are elliptical to broadly lanceolate, taper to the
base, and are smooth to slightly rough. The midstem leaves have shorter petioles, if petioles are
present, and are smaller than the basal leaves. Flower heads are usually solitary. The ray flowers
are light pink to purplish, usually drooping, and 5 to 8 cm (1.9 to 3.1 inches) long. Disk flowers
are about 5 mm (0.2 inches) long; have tubular purple corollas; and have mostly erect, short
triangular teeth.
The habitat of smooth coneflower consists of open woods, cedar barrens, roadsides,
clearcuts, dry limestone bluffs and power line right-of-ways, usually on magnesium and calcium-
rich soils associated with gabbro in North Carolina. Smooth coneflower occurs in community
types described by Schafale and Weakly as xeric hardpan forests. Xeric hardpan forests occur on
upland flats and gentle slopes with impermeable clay subsoil; however, water does not stand on
them for extended periods.
Factors endangering smooth coneflower include habitat destruction and degradation,
curtailment of range, collection, fire suppression, highway right-of-way maintenance,
urbanization of the area of occurrence of the species, encroachment by exotic species, possible
predation by insects, inadequacy of existing protection afforded by state laws, small population
size and lack of formal protection for all but a few of the known populations (Murdock, 1995).
Biological Condition: NO EFFECT
A review of the Natural Heritage Program database of uncommon and protected species
revealed no recorded occurrence of the smooth coneflower in or near the project area. A search
for the smooth coneflower and its preferred habitat was conducted on August 14, 1997, during
the field investigation. The methodology used to determine the presence of this protected species
included a plant by plant survey in areas of suitable habitat within the project area. The search
did not result in the identification of either the smooth coneflower or its preferred habitat.
15
Ptilimnium nodosum (Harperella) Endangered
Harperella is an annual herb in the carrot family, having fibrous roots and erect to
spreading stems. Stems are green and often have a purplish color at the base; branching occurs
above mid-stem. Leaves are hollow and quill-like with bases that are broadly clasped. Its small,
white flowers occur in five to fifteen umbels and resemble those of Queen Anne's Lace (Daucus
carota). This species is known to inhabit two distinct habitat types. The first being an
intermittent pineland pond habitat and the second being a riverine habitat characterized by gravel
shoals or on the margins of clear, swift flowing streams. Populations occurring in pond type
habitats flower beginning in May, while those in riverine settings flower in late June to July and
continue to bloom until the first frost. This species ranges in height from 0.15 to 1.0 meters (6 to
36 inches). Harperella is relatively prolific and localized populations can achieve high densities.
Harperella requires saturated substrates and is tolerant of periodic, moderate flooding.
This type of water regime may serve to reduce or eliminate competitors for these habitat types.
Populations may be declining due to alterations of these water regimes. Impoundments, water
withdraw and drainage/deepening of ponds all contribute to hydrologic disruptions. Additional
factors such as siltation, pollution and shoreline development are known to adversely affect
harperella populations.
Historically, harperella ranged from Maryland, West Virginia, Kentucky, North Carolina,
Alabama, and the coastal plains of South Carolina and Georgia. It is now restricted to a total of
ten populations and has been eliminated from over half of its known range. There is one known
population of harperella in Granville County.
Biological Condition: NO EFFECT
A review of the Natural Heritage Program database of uncommon and protected species
revealed no recorded occurrence of harperella in or near the project area. A search for harperella
was conducted on August 14, 1997, during the field investigation. The methodology used to
determine the presence of harperella included a plant by plant survey in areas of suitable habitat
within the project area. The search did not result in the identification of either this species or its
preferred habitat.
D. Air Quality and Traffic Noise
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included in the
regional emissions analysis (if applicable) and a project level CO analysis is not required.
If the project disposes of vegetation by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance
with applicable local laws and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance
with 15 NCAC 213.0520.
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will have no
significant impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during construction.
16
E. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal agencies or their
representatives, to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on prime and
important farmland soils. These soils are determined by the US Natural Resources Conservation
Service (MRCS) based on criteria such as potential crop yield and possible level of input of
economic resources. According to the NRCS, the proposed bridge replacement will not impact
prime farmland. The project will result in the conversion of a small amount of land but the area
to be converted is wooded and void of agricultural uses. Therefore, no further consideration of
impacts to farmland is required.
IX. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above discussion, NCDOT and FHWA conclude that the project will cause
no significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the project may be processed as a Categorical
Exclusion.
WTG/
17
Studied Detour Route
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
Granville County
Replace Bridge No. 48 on NC 96
Over Aarons Creek
8-2976
Figure One
G ovc? w v?.J
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
March 7, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 48 on NC 96 over Aaron's Creek,
Granville County, B-2976, Federal Aid Project
No. BRSTP-96(1), State Project 8.137090 1, ER
97-8351
Dear Mr. Graf:
On March 5, 1997, Debbie Bevin 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.
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, Bridge 48 is the only structure within
the project's area of potential effect that is over fifty years old. We recommend
that an architectural historian with NCDOT evaluate the bridge for National Register
eligibility and report the findings to us.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
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 800.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 T??
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.
Sincerely,
C??v lJ?
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: 4-A. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
Granville County-Oxford
Historic Properties Commission
Federal County
Aid TP ?? Z? ? ?"j1?OW1 ?? lie-
CONCURRENCE FORM
FOR
ASSESSIMNT OF EFFECTS
Bri-Project Des rip on
I[?.n?_,.,, ran k?_ q(o /?l ?? ?8 r 5 ?G?i?? 'ves
On recresentan eT c` e
_? ?erh Carcllna DeCa,i, ent of 1 r=s-cr
?.1...,.rl1SUGt!c11
k
Other
reviewed the subject project and agreed
these are ro =e?; on t,. `'.. ° Naricnal Re^ ?-?.-•i?:e? :rcoer`v wit'r t^e croject's
e.. ..s _._._. ,,;,
area or potential e:;ect and listed on the :e':erse.
there are no e::ec:s on the National Re_iste:-:acie crcoe: ies Ioc-:ed within the
oroiec:'s area of cotential e::ec: and lister on t ,e reverse.
there is an effect on the \ationa! Res seer-listed !-rc0er-"//PrOoer-':es W:"-;n the
creie='s area of potential eEec:. Tile oree-v-,rece..Ies and the e..ec:(s) are
lis:e on the reverse.
X there is an efec: on the NatIonai -rGCer:v/crOce:::es "wlI„li, the
_rC'eC-'s -r of -Cten::,1 e-PC: ! ter.. ,ro-:zS an,-
/ V
I ,
Repres nrative, NCDOT, Historic Architecrural Resources Sec:-,on ID a-1: e
Fk VA, r the DIvVsion Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
k:L ' a to ?
Representative, S O D to
2- /IF
i
State Historic Preservation Office- / Date
Federal Aid T TIP R -Zml?
County Ir01n ?, I ?:
Prooe?ies within area of potential effect for which there is no effete . Indicate if prope.?y is
National Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
Probe-,ies within area of potenuai effec: cr wiLc1 the re is an e- ec;. Ind:c=e Croce; ? s,stt s (tiR
or DE) and describe effect. !/
Er•s N0. q b o E? - J
G-
Initialed: NCDOT6WL"'- FHWA 5 HPO
w'STATF?
r'
tV?4 ? ? 1
•'?4Pw?M?tl?
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
November 10, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 48 on NC 96 over Aaron's Creek,
Granville County, B-2976, Federal Aid Project
BRSTP-960 ), State Project 8.137090 1, ER 98-
7780
Dear Mr. Graf:
Thank you for your letter of October 7, 1997, concerning the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, we concur that the following property is eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places under the criterion cited:
Bridge 48. This bridge is eligible under Criterion C as an intact example of
the rare reinforced-concrete rigid frame bridge type.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
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.
Sincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic
DB:slw?
cc: " H. F. Vick
B. Church
k??
Preservation Officer
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Q30,
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS
THAT NECESSITATE THE USE OF HISTORIC BRIDGES
F. A. Project BRSTP - 960)
State Project 8.1370901
T. I. P. No. B-2976
Description: The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to replace
Bridge No. 48, Granville County. This bridge carries NC 96 over Aaron's
Creek. Bridge No. 48 has been determined to be eligible of inclusion on
the National Register of Historic Places.
Yes No
Is the bridge to be replaced or rehabilitated with Federal funds ? x F
2. Does the project require the use of a historic bridge
structure which is on or eligible for listing on the National X ?
Register of Historic Places?
3. Is the bridge a National Historic Landmark ? ? X
4. Has agreement been reached among the FHWA, the State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation (ACHP) through procedures pursuant x ?
to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)?
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT
The following alternatives were evaluated and found not to be feasible and prudent:
Yes No
Do nothing x ?
Does the "do nothing" alternative:
(a) correct the problem situation that caused the bridge ? x
to be considered deficient?
(b) pose serious and unacceptable safety hazards ? X F-1
Yes No
2. Build a new structure at a different location without X ?
affecting the historic integrity of the structure.
(a) The following reasons were reviewed:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) The present bridge has already been located
at the only feasible and prudent site
and/or (ii Adverse social, environmental, or economic
impacts were noted
and/or (iii) Cost and engineering difficulties reach
extraordinary magnitude
and/or (iv The existing bridge cannot be preserved
due to the extent of rehabilitation, because no
responsible party will maintain and preserve
the historic bridge, or the permitting authority
requires removal or demolition.
Rehabilitate the historic bridge without affecting the historic X
integritv of the structure. F-I
(a) The following reasons were reviewed:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) The bridge is so structurally deficient that it
cannot be rehabilitated to meet the acceptable
load requirements and meet National Register
criteria
and/or (ii) The bridge is seriously deficient geometrically
and cannot be widened to meet the required
capacity and meet National Register criteria
MINIMIZATION OF HARM
Yes No
1. The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm . X ?
2. Measures to minimize harm include the following:
(circle, as appropriate)
a. For bridges that are to be rehabilitated, the historic
integrity of the bridge is preserved to the greatest
extent possible, consistent with unavoidable
transportation needs, safety, and load requirements.
O For bridges that are to be rehabilitated to the point
that the historic integrity is affected or that are to
be removed or demolished, the FHWA ensures that,
in accordance with the Historic American Engineering
Record (HAER) standards, or other suitable means
developed through consultation, fully adequate records
are made of the bridge.
C. For bridges that are to be replaced, the existing bridge
is made available for an alternative use, provided a
responsible party agrees to maintain and preserve the
bridge.
O For bridges that are adversely affected, agreement
among the SHPO, ACHP, and FHWA is reached
through the Section 106 process of the NHPA on
measures to minimize harm and those measures
are incorporated into the project.
Specific measures to minimize harm are discussed below:
Prior to the demolition of Granville Bridge No. 48, NCDOT will record
the bridge in accordance with the attached Historic Structures Recordation Plan.
The recordation plan will be carried out and copies of the documentation will be
sent to the North Carolina SHPO prior to the start of construction.
Note: Any response in a box requires additional information prior to approval. Consult
Nationwide 4(f) evaluation.
COORDINATION
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. State Historic Preservation Officer x
b. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation X
C. Local/State/Federal Agencies x
d. US Coast Guard
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation approved on July 5, 1983.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable to this project.
There are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of the historic bridge. The project includes all
possible planning to minimize harm, and there are assurances that the measures to minimize harm will be
incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed.
Approved:
93 -98 - DDate otmanager, Planning & Environmental Branch
NCDOT
X13
Date ?2Dtvis' Admtn' trator, FH A
Advisory
Council On
Historic
Preservation
The Old Not Once Building
1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, #809
Washington. DC 20004
FEB 2 6 19%
Mr. Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator
Region Four
Federal Highway Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh NC 27601
?. E1;
1999
REF: Replacement of Bridge No. 48 on NC 95 Over Aaron's Creek
Granville County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Graf:
FRIVA tx ON :,'? v
7Em.
AM N.
. 0M
I MN lop al.•S T
dri !i., ZT E4(.
WME
The enclosed Memorandum of Agreement for the referenced project has been accepted by the
Council. This acceptance completes the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Council's regulations. We recommend that you provide a copy of the
fully-executed Agreement to the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Ralston Cox
Historic Preservation Analyst
Office of Planning and Review
Enclosure
+r 1 s'
n
3
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resou>n
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
January 29, 1998
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 1148 on NC 96 over Aaron's Creek, Granville
County, B-2976, Federal Aid Project BRSTP-96(1),
State Project 8.1370901, ER 98-8395
Dear Mr. Graf:
RECD. FEB 5 1900'
CIV .aC1AIN
ASST. ON AWN
SECRETARY
FN. MGR. 41 ASST
FROG CLK
BRIDGE I
IASST. W
RLTY OFC -LTV SP
R&T
S
P6 pqpp5ex I- C= Direct
SE::iETP.AY
r
1

; !C1 -C1
PL .A _
PAi r
i
! QTR
ENV
OP^>
SEM TAA r

A.; i

Thank you for your letter of January 22, 1998, transmitting the Memorandum of Agreement
for the above project, which will have an effect on Bridge 1148, a property eligible for listing
in the National Register of Historic Places. We believe the Memorandum of Agreement
adequately addresses our concerns, and I have signed the agreement.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with
Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
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.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey J. w
State Historic Preservation Officer
JJC:siw
Enclosure
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh. North Carolina 27601-2807 ?.
MEMORANDU)NI OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND
THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
SUBMITTED TO THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PURSUANT TO 36 CFR PART 800.6(a)
REGARDING THE REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO. 48
ON NC 96 OVER.AARON'S CREEK
GRATIVILLE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
TIP NO. B-2976. STATE PROJECT NO. 8.1370901
FEDERAL AID NO. BRSTP-96(1)
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has determined that
replacement of Bridge No. 48 on NC 96 over :Aaron's Creek in Granville County. North
Carolina will have an effect upon the structure, a property eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places. and has consulted with the North Carolina State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800, regulations of the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (.Advisory Council) implementing Section 106
of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f); and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) participated in
the consultation and has been invited to concur in this Memorandum of Agreement:
NOW, THEREFORE. FHWA and the North Carolina SHPO agree that the undertaking
shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take in to
account the effect of the undertaking on Bridge No. 48.
STIPULATION
FHWA will ensure that the following measure is carried out:
Prior to the demolition of Granville County Bridge No. 48, NCDOT shall
record the bridge in accordance with the attached Historic Structures
Recordation Plan (Appendix A). The recordation plan shall be carried out and
copies of the documentation shall be sent to the North Carolina SHPO prior to the
start of construction.
Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement by FHWA and the North Carolina SHPO,
its subsequent acceptance by the Advisory Council and implementation of its terms
evidence that FHWA has afforded the Advisory Council an opportunity to comment on
the replacement of Bridge No. 48 on NC 96 over Aaron's Creek and its effect on the
historic property, and that FHWA has taken into account the effects of the undertaking on
the historic property.
i
FEj?ERe,;E HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION DA
NORTH CAROL-rNMSTATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER DATE
Concurring Party

ACCEPTED for D
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION
APPENDIX A
Historic Structures Recordation Plan
for the Replacement of Bridge No. 48
Granville County. North Carolina
Historical Background
A brief physical description and historical narrative of Granville County Bridge
No. 48.
Photographic Requirements
Photographic views of Bridge No. 48 including:
Overall views (elevations and oblique views)
Overall views of the bridge in its setting
Details of construction or design
Format:
Representative color transparencies
35 mm or larger black and white negatives (all views)
4 x inch black and white prints (all views)
All processing to be done to archival standards
All photographs and negatives to be labeled according to Division of
Archives and History standards
Copies and Curation
One (1) set of all photographic documentation will be deposited with the North
Carolina Division of Archives and History/State Historic Preservation Office to
be made a permanent part of the statewide survey and iconographic collection.