20021904 Ver 1_Complete File_20021213

?d Imo,.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
May 2, 2000
MEMORANDUM TO: Project File
Ca L q Cy
Vvt av-, C'e
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
FROM: Karen T. Orthner
Project Development Engineer
SUBJECT: B-3801, Alamance County, Replacement of Bridge No. 6
On SR 1504 over Travis Creek, State Project 8.2473001,
F. A. Project BRZ-1504(6)
A scoping meeting for the subject bridge was held in the Transportation Building
on February 3, 2000.
The following people were in attendance:
Jerome Nix Hydraulics
Mike Cowan Division Seven Construction
Lanette Ingham Programming and TIP
Chris Howard Traffic Control
Jim Kellenberger Traffic Control
Sid Autry Location and Surveys
Sue Flowers Roadway Design
Stephen Roberts Roadway Design
Betsy Cox Structure Design
John Williams Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Karen Orthner Project Development and Environmental Analysis
The following comments were either given at the meeting or received previously:
Jerome Nix of Hydraulics recommended the existing bridge be replaced with a 75-foot
long bridge at approximately the same location and roadway grade as the existing bridge. To.
facilitate deck drainage, Jerome recommended that at least a 0.3% gradient be used on the new
bridge.
Sid Autry of Location and Surveys located a multiple line electrical service along the east
side of SR 1504 south of the existing bridge owned by Duke Power. Sid also noted underground
cables along the west side of SR 1504 owned by Bell South. In addition, he located telephone
cables along the east side of SR 1504 beginning at SR 1547 and running north.
Curtis Yates of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Division commented that this section of
SR 1504 is not part of a designated bicycle route nor is it listed in the TIP as needing incidental
bicycle accommodations.
Jim Kellenberger of Traffic Control commented that phase construction should be
considered for this project in order to maintain traffic on-site.
Mike Cowan of Division Seven Construction commented that road closure should be
contingent upon the ability for EMS to accommodate response teams using the off-site detour.
Mike also commented that phase construction might be a more viable option than an off-site
detour.
April Alperin of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) recommended no
architectural historic or archaeological surveys in connection with this project.
David Cox of the Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) stated that general WRC
recommendations apply to this project.
Drew Sharpe of Alamance County Emergency Response Services commented that
re-routing emergency response efforts would not be a problem in the event of road
closure.
Sue Flowers and Stephen Roberts of Roadway Design recommended including
improvements to the intersections just north and south of the bridge as a part of this
project.
PROTECT INFORMATION
Bridge Information:
Bridge No. 6 was built in 1955. It is 65 feet long and 20 feet wide. The current
weight limit for the bridge is posted 12 tons for single vehicles and 20 tons for truck
transfer semi-trailers. The sufficiency rating for the bridge is 39.4 out of 100.
Traffic Information:
SR 1504 is a Rural Local Route with a posted 45-mph speed limit in the vicinity.
The current average daily traffic (ADT) is 2000 vehicles per day (vpd) while the projected
2025 ADT is 4700 vpd. Approximately 3% of the ADT are dual trucks and 1% of the
ADT are truck transfer semi-trailers.
Crash Data:
In the past three years, three accidents have occurred at the bridge site. Each
accident involved a car that ran off the road to the right side due to excessive speeds or
alcohol/drug impairment.
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATES
During the alternate discussion, Stephen Roberts of Roadway Design agreed to
complete the preliminary cost estimates and roadway sketches by early May.
Alternate 1: Replace Bridge No. 6 with a 75-foot long bridge in approximately the
same location and roadway grade as the existing bridge. Detour traffic along surrounding
roads during construction. Improve the intersections with SR 1504 to the north and south
of the bridge.
Alternate 2: Replace Bridge No. 6 with a 75-foot long bridge in approximately the
same location as the existing bridge. Phase construct the bridge to allow for maintenance
of one lane of traffic on-site during construction. Improve the intersections with SR 1504
to the north and south of the bridge.
A third alternate involving an on-site detour to the west was dropped from further
consideration when EMS indicated their consent to an off-site detour regarding their
response efforts. The phase construction alternate will remain for cost-comparison
purposes for maintaining traffic on-site.
New Cross Section: Due to some inconsistencies between the 1994 Greenbook and the
Roadway Design Unit Design Manual, Roadway Design will be responsible for choosing
the appropriate reference and indicating their choice in their cost estimate.
a""?E4
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
December 12, 2002
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
ATTN: Mr. John Thomas
NCDOT Coordinator
Si.
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
021904
Subject: Alamance County, Bridge No. 6 over Travis Creek on SR 1504, TIP No.
B-3801, State Project No. 8.2473001, Federal Aid No. BRZ-1504(6).
Dear Sir:
Attached for your information are permit drawings, half-sized plans, and
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification Form for the subject project. This project
consists of a bridge replacement at the existing location, with traffic being maintained
off-site. The existing bridge is 65 ft (19.8 m) long and 20 ft (6.1 m) wide. The proposed
bridge is 75 ft (22.9 m) long. The roadway cross section of the bridge will consist of two
12 ft (3.6 m) lanes with 8 ft (2.4 m) offsets.
Bridge Demolition
The existing bridge is composed of concrete, steel, and timber. The bridge can be
removed without dropping any components into waters of the United States. This project
can be classified as Case 3, where there are no special restrictions beyond those outlined
in Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters and Bridge Demolition.
Approximately 0.0066 ac of surface waters will be temporarily filled as a result of a rock
work-pad. Approximately 93 ft of creek bank and riparian flood plain will be cleared as
a result of the project.
Restoration Plan
If detailed on the plans, construction of a temporary rock causeway within the
limits shown on the plans is permitted. The Engineer will build the causeway with Class
II riprap topped by a layer of Class A riprap or as otherwise designated on the plans or
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENTAND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.DOH.DOTSTATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
approved. If desired, the Class II riprap may be recycled and used in the causeway for
placement in the final riprap slope protection as directed by the Engineer.
All causeway material will be completely removed, including pipes and the entire
causeway footprint will be returned to the original contours and elevations within 90 days
of the completion of the deck slab or as otherwise required by permits.
The project schedule calls fora February 18, 2003 let date. It is expected that the
contractor will choose to start construction of the causeways shortly after that date. The
causeways will likely be in place for approximately twelve (12) months.
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 Nationwide
Permit 23 and 33 in accordance with 67 FR 2020, 2082; January 15, 2002. The General
Conditions of 67 FR 2020; January 15, 2002 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 33. It is anticipated that 401 General Certification No.
3361 (Approved Categorical Exclusions) and General Certification No. 3366 (Temporary
Construction, Access, and Dewatering) will apply to this project. Two copies are 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 Matt Haney at
[phone], extension 333.
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality (7 copies) .
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC Mr. David Franklin, USACE,
Mr. Garland Pardue, USFWS Wilmington (Cover Letter
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E.,. Roadway Design Only)
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP Mr. Len Smith, Division 7
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Environmental Officer
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Ms. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. J.M. Mills, P.E., Division 7 Engineer
Project 8.2473001 (B-3801)
Replacement of bridge no. 6 over Travis Creek
Alamance County
Surface Water Impact Summary
The Project involves removing and replacing an aging steel and timber bridge
with a modern concrete bridge. The proposed bridge will be a two-span cored slab bridge
with span lengths of 30' and 55' for an overall length of 85'. The interior bent will
consist of drilled shaft piers. The location of the interior bent is out of the water,
however the close proximity to the bank warrants a rock work-pad for the drilling
operation.
Approximately 287 square feet (0.0066ac.) of surface water will be temporarily
filled as a result of the work-pad. Spoils from the drilling operation will be contained
through the installation and use of appropriate erosion control devices.
Removal of the existing bridge will require removing eight (8) interior wood piers
and any associated footings. Four (4) of the existing piers are adjacent to the water's
edge. The installation and use of appropriate erosion control devices will minimize any
surface water disturbance associated with the removal of the interior bents.
Approximately 93 feet of creek bank and riparian flood plain will be cleared as a
result of the project. Only those areas in the vicinity of the roadway fill and bridge end
bents and interior bent will be grubbed. No additional areas will be disturbed by a
temporary detour structure, as traffic will be detoured off-site during construction.
6/17/02
srm
\ 1552
1500 l
,\ l 87
1504
1551 Rd
1549
pla
\ Sc O 1547
1639
SITE 1504 301 ?a
0 0.5 1.0 MILE `
Q 87
G
DENOTES PROPOSED DETOUR ROUTE
I LOCATION MAPS I
NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ALAMANCE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.2473001 (B-3801)
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO.6
ON SR 1504 OVER TRAVIS CREEK
SHEET I OF ?, 06®17902
VICINITY MAID
0 1000 2000 Feet
NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ALAMANCE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.2473001 (B-3801)
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO.6
ON SR 1504 OVER TRAVIS CREEK.
SHEET L OF 06/17/02
0.
frJ
O
ii >
Wm
0p0
W J
JmU
SO / I
\ 1
\ U 1
?b
°J ?OJ
lds.? ? ? _ Qs? .?l
J O
O ?
U
0
I
W
Q m
U_
a LL 1
J ?
U?
?I
W
J Li. I
N I
z ?cwa I
t9 m = ow o
v ??om I C
Q
?. N N Q I
U
cj? Qp
wwI--z
>- mmNw'L f
J V)
W
°O
Y S 0
cam
N
-JCL
OZ
UU
??d
I
I az
? v
?w
~O Of
~
N Q- W
N LL -
< w LL
J U O
U H
O
Z
Q
W
J
W
/V-) o2S
O co
O
F
W
r m
a°a Of
a

?a
?W
W U
H

a

?+ c z
W
J
J
z
O
V)
LO
C?

O
LL
O

\ U
O
Ln
w
LD
w
J
J
O
U
z
O
J
0
0
so
w
CD
0
0'
co
co
a
J
N
J 0
W
Ln
o U 0
N loJU ii
N 'O
QOUW
?M= Y
(n ? N (n
so
01.1 co
0 0--T-
Li L
a r
w a
w
~ ?•
V) I ?
z N
of
o
?l
I z } z
In l/ ?
=Z
M
I? \ N
I ?
Q I \ \ Utr
00
-Jul
? W
I - - • Z3
fI
I I III (V
N
I \ N
L _
?o
/ I aQ
Oa
I i
I I a< wo
'I w } ux
?I I ? 1
w
? z
I' O
N
l 0. co
to tn

w
a
w
u
w
z
.a
r?
a
W
w
F
w
0
w
c

PROPERTY OWNERS
Michael D. Holt
2661 Pitt Road
Elon, NC 27244
Town of Gibsonville
Gibsonville, NC 27249
NCD®T
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ALAMANCE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.2473001 <B-3801>
REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO.6
ON SR 1504 OVER TRAVIS CREEK
SHEET r3 OF (? 6/17/02

N
Z O
z O
W co

0
OW
< U) OD
}
O?z m Ocn
n =? •- o>
U) 0 C)
0 ER
Z

0) a) r_

CV) = M
m
W n
??U N Oa'
Z w
IL
?
M
?g W
? LL CD 0
CL 5;

(o
p a O U LO
O

Z W W
U)

LL
'
D
CO

z

J LL
N

ui

rn
a?
U
C
(D
m

N

U) N

co 7
y
(6
N

N
N
3
U

C/) ?

N fd
Q
E
N
C
C
t0
L

O
z

c
z in o

N cvo ? ? rn
F
-
Q .y ?
w U E

W Q ? co
U)
co
p O
O
? ? O O
H
W
U

?
C
U
vs o m
5
a

? m
c w
v

U
v

U ?
a?
? v
W ?
0

W w
V
Z
LL.

W
Q d ?

Z
Q N
J 5 °

W ?"
?-

N
m a Ul
C9

U ? ?
i N m

O
CO t
O

p N

J
d
o
r-
Q
Z
(n H

O p z a
U d j

CL W
U
N
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No. B-3801
State Project No. 8.2473001
Federal Project No. BRZ-1504 (6)
A. Project Description:
This project proposes to replace Bridge No. 6 on SR 1504 over
Travis Creek in Alamance County. The bridge will be replaced with a
75-foot (22.9-m) long bridge in approximately the same location and
roadway elevation as the existing bridge. The cross section of the new
bridge will include two 12-foot (3.6-m) lanes with 8-foot (2.4-m) offsets.
Approach work to the bridge will consist of resurfacing and tieing into the
existing alignment. The total project length on SR 1504 will be
appproximately 1205 feet (367.3 m). In addition, the intersections of
S121504 with SR 1547 and SR 1549 lust north and south of the bridge will
be realigned. The project length associated with the intersection
improvements will be approximately 320 feet (97.5 m) for SR 1547 and
550 feet (167.6 m) for SR 1549. Guardrail will be installed where
warranted. Traffic will be detoured off-site along surrounding roads
during construction.
B. Purpose and Need:
Bridge No. 6 has a sufficiencyy rating of 39.4 out of a possible 100.
The deck and substructure of this 45-year old bridge are in poor
condition. Therefore, the bridge needs to be replaced.
C. Proposed Improvements:
The following Type II improvements which apply to the project are
circled:
1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration,
rehabilitation, reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding
auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking, weaving, turning, climbing).
a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing
pavement (3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through
lanes
c. Modernizing gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn
lanes)
e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage
pipes, including safety treatments
g Providing driveway pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening (less than one through
lane)
1
2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects
including the installation of ramp metering control devices and
lighting.
a. Installing ramp metering devices
b. Installing lights
c. Adding or upgrading guardrail
d. Installing safety barriers including Jersey type barriers and
pier protection
e. Installing or replacing impact attenuators
f. Upgrading medians including adding or upgrading median
barriers
g. Impproving intersections including relocation and/or
realignment
h. Making minor roadway realignment
i. Channelizing traffic
j. Performing clear zone safety improvements including
removing hazards and flattening slopes
k. Implementing traffic aid systems, signals, and motorist aid
1. Installing bridge safety hardware including bridge rail
retrofit
O3 Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the
construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade
railroad crossings.
a. Rehabilitating, reconstructing, or replacing bridge approach
slabs
b. Rehabilitating or replacing bridge decks
c. Rehabilitatin bridges including painti ng (no red lead paint),
scour repair, ender systems, and minor structural
improvements
O Replacing a bridge (structure and/or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.
5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
6. Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or for joint or limited
use of right-of-way, where the proposed use does not have
significant adverse impacts.
7. Approvals for changes in access control.
8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas
used predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes
where such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning
and located on or near a street with adequate capacity to handle
anticipated bus and support vehicle traffic.
9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings
and ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional
land are required and there is not a substantial increase in the
number of users.
2
10. Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of
passenger shelters, boarding areas, kiosks and related street
improvements) when located in a commercial area or other high
activity center in which there is adequate street capacity for
projected bus traffic.
11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where
such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and
where there is no significant noise impact on the surrounding
community.
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance
land acquisition loans under section 3(b) of the UMT Act.
Hardship and protective buying will be permitted only for a
particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types of
land acquisition qualify for a CE only where the acquisition will not
limit the evaluation of alternatives, including shifts in alignment for
p hich may be required in the NEPA
planned construction proJects, w
process. No project development on such land may proceed until
the NEPA process has been completed.
D. Special Project Information:
Estimated Costs:
Total Construction $1,000,000
Right of Way $ 202 000
Total Cost 1,202,000
Estimated Traffic:
Current - 2000 vpd
Year 2025 - 4700 vpd
TTST - 1 %
Dual - 3%
Proposed Typical Cross. Section:
The approach roadway cross section will include two 12-foot lanes
with 8-foot (2.4-m) shoulders, including 2 feet (0.6 m) of full depth paved
shoulders. Shoulders will be increased to 3 feet (1.0 m) where guardrail is
installed.
Design Speed:
50 mph (80 km/h)
Functional Classification:
Rural Local Route
3
Division Office Comments:
The Division Seven Construction Office concurs in the
recommendation to replace Bridge No. 6 in approximately the same
location as the existing bridge while detouring traffic along surrounding
roads.
Bridge Demolition:
Bride No. 6 contains three spans totaling 65 feet (19.8 m) in length.
The bridge is composed entirely of timber steel with the exception of
concrete encasements. The concrete encasements are not located in
Waters of the United States. Therefore, Bridge No. 6 will be removed
without dropping any of its components into Waters of the United States.
E. Threshold Criteria
The following evaluation of threshold criteria must be completed for Type
II actions
ECOLOGICAL YES NO
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any unique ?
or important natural resource? X
(2) Does the project involve habitat where federally listed
endangered or threatened species may occur? X
(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish? ?
X
(4) If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of
permanent and/or temporary wetland taking less than
one-third (1/3) of an acre and have all practicable
measures to avoid and minimize wetland takings been a
evaluated? X
(5) Will the project require the use of U. S. Forest Service
lands?
X
(6) Will the quality of adjacent water resources be adversely
impacted by proposed construction activities?
X
(7 Does the project involve waters classified as Outstanding
Water Resources (OWR) and/or High Quality Waters
(HQW)?

X
(8)

r Will the project require fill in waters of the United States
in any of the designated mountain trout counties?
X
4
(9) . Does the project involve any known underground storage
tanks (UST's) or hazardous materials sites?
PERMITS AND COORDINATION YES
(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the
project significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any
"Area of Environmental Concern" (AEC)?
?
(11) Does the roject involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act
resources. ?
(12) Will a U. S. Coast'Guard permit be required? ?
(13) Will the protJect result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway? ?
(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel
changes?

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned
growth or land use for the area? ?
(16) Will the roject require the relocation of any family or
business. ?
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and
adverse human health and environmental effect on any
minority or low-income population?

(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is
the amount of right of way acquisition considered minor?
X
(19)
(20)
(21)
Will the project involve any changes in access control? ?
Will the project substantially alter the usefulness and/or ?
land use of adjacent property?
Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent local ?
traffic patterns or community cohesiveness?
(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan
and/or Transportation Improvement Program (and is,
therefore, in conformance with the Clean Air Act of
1990)? X
(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic ?
volumes?
X
NO
X
X
X
X
X
NO
X
X
0
X
X
X

X
5
(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using ?
existing roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? X
(25) If the project is a bride replacement project, will the
bridge be replaced at its existing location (along the
existing facility) and will all construction proposed in
association with the bridge replacement project be ?
contained on the existing facility? X
(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or
environmental grounds concerning the project? X
(27 Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local
laws relating to the environmental-aspects of the project? X
(28) Will the project have an "effect" on structures/ properties
eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic ?
Places? X
(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remains, which
are important to history or pre-history? X
(30) Will the project require the use of Section 4(f) resources
(public parks, recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl
refuges, historic sites, or historic bridges, as defined in
Section 4(f) of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act ?
of 1966)? X
(31) Will the project result in any conversion of assisted public
recreation sites or facilities to non-recreation uses, as
defined by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water
Conservation Act of 1965, as amended? X
(32) Will the project involve construction in, across, or
adjacent to a river designated as a component of or
proposed for inclusion in the Natural System of Wild and ?
Scenic Rivers? X
F. Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E
(Discussion regarding all unfavorable responses in Part E should be
provided below. Additional supporting documentation may be attached,
as necessary..)
None Required.
6
G. CE Approval
TIP Project No. B-3801
State Project No. 8.2473001
Federal-Aid Project No. BRZ-1504 (6)
Project Description:
This project proposes to replace Bridge No. 6 on SR 1504 over
Travis Creek in Alamance County. The bridge will be replaced with a
75-foot (22.9-m) long bridge in approximately the same location and
roadway elevation as the existing bridge. The cross section of the new
bridge will include two 12-foot (3.6-m) lanes with 8-foot (2.4-m) offsets.
Approach work to the bridge will consist of resurfacing and tieing into the
existing alignment. The total pro'ect length on SR 1504 will be
approximately 1205 feet (367.3 mi. In addition, the intersections of
SR 1504 with SR 1547 and SR 1549 just north and south of the bridge will
be realigned. The project length associated with the intersection
improvements will be approximately 320 feet (97.5 m) for SR 1547 and
550 feet (167.6 m) for SR 1549. Guardrail will be installed where
warranted. Traffic will be detoured off-site along surrounding roads
during construction.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification:
X TYPE II (A)
TYPE II (B)
Approved:
Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
U)QXW%Q_ Or
Date Wayne Elliott, Project Development, Unit Head
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
//- 8 - DO &n 4 7,UAJ
Date K en Orthner, Project Development Engineer
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
7
1574
v 1 NO ;1565 g 1 .3
I co
1667 y 1002
156 1.3

s Altam %
aw %' 1590 .3
a ^ .4 1587 Q

a 1606
t
168- ?.2 1683 ti
156 002
'
1
3
` i 1685'
s
163_
?••,1693 1593 ' .2
3
?°
1594 .
1954 '•? a., ? ;' `' 163

I ?
?;•...
Ossipeb
:?
-

1500 160 -
1593 71602
` 1604 .2
..

151601 \ I v
` `, 1595
- lb
;
'
-•
$ 7 _ ,

1553
J \
1
1.5
5

1552
•? Tickle 1504`° 1529
1
68Y
,? -
150d' -.._ - -
' -
a -
y
1549 1551 169 N ..:.3 `
s 7°
?
? Creek ; len

1549 -•% MORGANTOWN
,
Bridge No. 6
-' 1547 (UNINC.)
- '
----
---------
-
- 1? 1301 ; _•._. ?,. -
---
--------

" -
-T504 ?' .,
$7 VE

NINC
1503
,'-"
•? ?
/ 100 - b
100 `
9
. 1s
87

LLEG 10
`
i FLO O
POP. i p

f 5 5`8? •

! u ...62
\ ,5
` S I.

North Carolina Department
Of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch
a
Alamance County
Replace Bridge No. 6 on SR 1504.
Over Travis Creek
B-3801
SCALE: 1 in = 1 mi Figure 1
Studied Detour Route
may( J= ,
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and Historv
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
March 2, 2000
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge No. 6 on SR 1504 over Travis Creek, TIP No. B-3801, Johnston
County, ER 00-8463
Dear Mr. Graf:
On February 14, 2000, April Alperin 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, 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.
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.
ADMINISTRATION
ARCHAEOLOGY
RESTORATION
SURVEY & PLANNING
Location
507 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC
42 1 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC'
21 N Blount St., Raleigh \C
51; \ Blount St.. Raleigh NC
Mailing Address
4617 Mail Scrcice Center
1019 Mail Service Center
4(,13 \1ail Service Center
4(,1.',' Mad Seri ice Center
Raleteh NC 27(,09-4617
Raleigh NC 27699.41119
Raleigh NC 2'(,99-461
Raleigh NC 2_7699-1615
Telephone/Fax
tgl0i ?-=-170. - ;_863
t919t ??-?=12 71`-26'1
(9191 7-6517 71?-4501
0191 733-654,; 71 5-18(11
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.
Sincerely,
a
it a? C ?1 ` ?4 .c
David Brook
j, Deputy Sate Historic Preservation Officer
DB:scb
cc: W. D. Gilmore,,,_.
B. Church
T. Padgett
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission®
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
. Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Karen Orthner, Project Planning Engineer
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
FROM:- David Cox, Highway Project Coordi or
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: March 10, 2000
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements in Alamance, Ashe, and Rockingham
counties. TIP Nos. B-3801, B-3605, B-3106, B-3695, and B-3696.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have
reviewed the information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the
subject project. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
On bridge replacement projects of this scope our standard recommendations are as
follows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
require work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment.
The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human
and wildlife passage beneath the structure, does not block fish passage; and
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the
stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
Bridge Replacement Memo 2 March 10, 2000
5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed
back to original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the
project. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
native tree species should be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'xl0'.
If possible, when using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not
grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact, allows the
area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of
the steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the
option of requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and
we can recommend that the project require an individual `404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist
Mr. Tim Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these
sensitive species may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service for information on requirements of the Endangered
Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy
entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12,
1997)" should be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
If corrugated metal pipe arches or concrete box culverts are used:
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for fish passage. Generally, this means
that the culvert or. pipe invert is buried at least 1 foot below the natural stream
bed. If multiple cells are required the second. and/or third cells should be
placed so that their bottoms are at stream bankful stage (similar to Lyonsfield
design). This will allow sufficient water depth in the culvert or pipe during
normal flows to accommodate fish movements. If culverts are long, baffle
systems are required to trap gravel and provide resting areas for fish and other
aquatic organisms.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed
to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or
widening is required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of
structures usually causes a decrease in water velocity causing sediment
deposition that will require future maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on the stream bed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same
location with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be
designed and located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to
Bridge Replacement Memo 3 March 10, 2000
avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old
structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-year
floodplain. Approach fills should be removed down to the natural ground elevation. The
area should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. If the area that _
is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to wetlands. If
successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other
projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments:
1. B-3801 - Alamance County - Bridge No. 6 over Travis Creek. We would prefer this
bridge be replaced with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
2. B-3605 - Ashe County - Bridge No. 46 over Little Helton Creek. Standard
recommendations apply.
3. B-3106 Ashe County - Bridge No. 36 over North Fork New River. Standard
recommendations apply.
4. B-3695 - Rockingham County - Bridge No. 34 over Jacobs Creek. We would prefer
this bridge be replaced with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
5. B-3696 -Rockingham County -.Bridge No. 84 over Jones Creek. We would prefer
this bridge be replaced with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
We request that NCDOT routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and
maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent
wet concrete from contacting water in or entering into these streams. Replacement of
bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is
recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along
streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway
crossings.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding
bridge replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity
to review and comment on these projects.
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Replacement of Bridge No. 6
On SR 1504 over Travis Creek
Alamance County
Federal-Aid No. BRZ-1504 (6)
State Project No. 8.2473001
T.I.P. No. B-3801
Commitments Developed Through Project Development and Design
Hydraulics Unit, Roadside Environmental Unit, Division Seven Construction
Office, Structure Design Unit
NCDOT will adhere to the Best Management Practices (BMPs) for "Bridge
Demolition and Removal" during the removal of Bridge No. 6.
Green Sheet
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
November 9, 2000
Page 1 of 1
27-Y?,V 002 11:5?P `
W:_ o?ect_ iles\?a for \Acvve_Pro,Jects\63801\Proj\83801.tsh
\IP 09/08!9'
m
I PR 0 'CT: 8.2473003 B-3801
000
w o ? w ?
O m c
= A
c c N o y
C 8. 8
• o g
m -' b
LA, o
mo y
< -+z ta G1
Q n n n n x n x
C 0 V m a
? m 21 p A p
O O y
O O
Z y we
W
y0
h Q Q
x x
? y yO
n b
GO
b
y ? qq
y y
m to
w
? c
? 0 0
?N
C ? C
O W O ? ?' b
dam=
w
cob
V• v N
H
MM V
Q N '=
m
b y
`41 1
y
y y?
ai y
x
a ti
ox
O/
e)
? fr r
z{- jtr
? ro
s o rrmo,?
oo ^? + 1
? ?8 11
t i z ?-
? z
11
ego ^?e® ? ? Z ? ?Z 2
© ? oa n
+ w
\\ 4. c w A
Z \?? ° ®o®
00,
C4
4
r m, --
ilt Z?
no
' z
o:
m ? ? 1 +
u
v IW i Z g
+ 1
Z
A
P
n
0
U)

?C O
Z
c
y
C*j
b
tfl
i I?
b
W
t O
$ O
a
o?
tive_P-jects\63801\Proj\83801.typ
1?
e?Z
r mI N r
N --1 : N
Q O - - . r? r"
O H I O
Z Z
sl N
Q m O p
w N N
{11
m °
a

i?.

Z
N
N Q N
Z
N
_n
V
D
+ 0% o

O y p O
O
Z 00
{
v
-4 -1
O CA) OO
O 1
+ +
+
0
0
X71 C03
-8 ?%
- w
0 --i Cc
I
I
C
(A D
m
+
•°
m O
O
Z N
Z +
O o
O
G)
O
rIF)
s

z I
r ?-
I r-

_1 CA y
-ice

D I
CA CA r

I
O D CA V V H u'-

Z
rN
m
N J
17m I
D
NO
O w A + +
jvN
00 n

D p0

D O

O
-I + + r 0 0 p
to j j m + -a m O
z -1
O _j O
O
00
_

N Z O
+
Z
.r
`Gl
O ++ z b, co Z w
m w? O +Q O O
X NN N G+
oo ?
Z
O i
0
m
v
cS
3
m
s
0
m
0
S.
3
m
C -1 m a a W N j
m m Dv OOiv <v mDV rDV Dv
m x D 19 91n« 9 T-19 -19
D 19
O

O

m
9

i
O
D
7
memo

T:
Di
mO

? m
O

D?
O
<
TD
9 B
DO

?
2•
1
- x 2• S
-I
M. r
> F
z z
o DD
<9
-io)D =D
rov c
m<D DD
<m DD
<v
, my -40• 9 • 7 Om9 A'0 m7
ao
m 'Y
D m
9 99
DO x O•.
oDW- 09
mo 9•
D 99
Do 99
Do
m <
m ..
D ox
M. m- °
m - x zoo
mm ox
m- ox
.m•
r
-1 z DA Dix -4 PO <Dx DN Dom"
rDi ~ mD zmzD z am9 m m o V
r v °
•m D m D OD
O
?x v
°
D
mw <x D
<m ov
z71x 0
?m •fIm
- D M;cmD my O D 'a m
a-4 x D
--4 D i?? AD AD 3
m H ei ON or, o m
0 o L O
Z f
m z a Z 9 A m m m o mo
?9 m i 9 > Z nm 9 mZ m o
m m . 9 N
'Q -4
m O
i
1 111 9 0 -1
m
°
m
m y
m
m y9
a n
y m-4 o
7 m
i --1 =
- to
D r m
M -.r?m?m
9 m m
a
O
m m+-4 N'0 Om m 0
m coAZ z
m y a s C
<O -•Irm rm <O <n <?I r
00 D WO in 3 = O m
? F0 °O m
. 9 Z. m O
o m m
m ?m 9? Im me °c
< mo mm > om m
•a
m ..PC
z- 9 oo
- o
°i xm m
-
<
N mp. Om -1m
m 1 m xm m m
m s' CD G0 0
- m m
D D
I
N r
N

Z
_n + n,
O
0o
0
r
O

o
m m
v
?n
X + n N

z O A

O O Z
N Z m
+ O
-1 Ul
to
to
IV ,p
Z O
O
-+ I
N
i

O
-[ v
r v I N N
vA m lI
C1 O
rfr)
z
z Z ?I n
?o I v _t

le5\Tnylor\Active-Projects\B3801\Proj\B-3801.p5h
111'
Om x
?p V1
?S y
rnn 3O
vo
xz
m
JD
C
O
M
M
0

1
z ,

m 8$m
?

O
M ?I;

1-0 Ago.
m
0
O : i +
il) S j o s
Sl %? ?s4r° 3,50'
.• 1
wol".r ? . ? 1
\ eZ r O 1
R? ? ry
O Cr
?\ \ N \ \ ,:0
1
O
m
+
01
rn??M1Q?
N,rto,
i
¦
J
I
"' wva iros -...
?1 .
k
? Yfs? r
?? \?op Uj'??r Tsr \ \\
If X4

70
e J
m
o
? o

?V n m 19 u
00
Wz x
? o
CM (A

X? N
rn
N .
?m
?m
N
Ay

Z il
D n
m to
? D
O
?+
O
m O
14i O
? o
O
1 gel ?
I
I
II
I I
ICI
6
?6q 30 ? SBS ??s'
Y ?s Dix
`? NB3gZ; r 15--
PRO
0
WIWI
!I H
Za
n
O to
z D
70 O• u'I?S? s
0 mo J °m ads ' n £? N
O o ??u ? ? ? a 1 ? ? o X
z O m _m m' F
s n o a?a
» Nir
M n 9r
S f:,
70 T QM? $ f?0 ° LQ>'
9- ? ? ? 9 'I m pt C O S
q r X J N
.BY2- 5+00.00 POT
.?: X - -
A?a
tin -SL-10 23+27.14 PINC Y gga
y
Y
198.61'
5695P5Tw e+p'°. • - 20
?° r YNepE•
p? _ S6 d'
M 0.
z°Iq? gS sN?yy6yy O ?V? (?? yp ry/
S yA PP5e?i? r / ?$97 y
IMP
J ¦' ? ?Y'u 1T1 ''?ua?•9'
g?=? N axe
Y
t? OO
?ts /5g0,?2
T9.26'
5652 '25•W 279.78'
?„?? 5652Y25•w
74
am• ?/$ ?" -all ? I !
S ,Sg opp I ! ?a°
a E} ?3q. OT -BY 3- 81 POT I
-il- 6+12. PINC
\ s ELEV _ 59 82,
?Trt An ??i -8L-1126+99.54 PINC 1 I! .
JCOAr'f S? .t. . \ \ .e?y,? ?, "mss I't/ ?1 M1 0 D-b
11 ?i ?v 1
I: f •?
to C-0,
I r ? ? nO
1 a
M l<
I I °o ??? ? z o
I wa o -I
I I ?? z
+ $$
1 + a?
I 1 _ O 1^ .. .. .. ..
I I z o
o?y
d',a
? b
'. i
8/ti/99

p?
f \ L
?- TRAVIS
uo ?I 1
"? Q\\ p m
6'60+62 'pl 7- 8 '

A

i ?
N
y

"n ?
* .?

Iip
S (n `
i
y

w / g¦C

7 pfs?

? : I
es\T a ylor\A ctive_P r ojects\83801\Proj\B3801.pf1
r

1
111 11 44
I'LL I-
+
till till

[

J
O?

-
J 0

J
V
J
V

J
co

CD
J
N
O
N

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

till
till
ILL

1: ILL

N

N ILL

+H+ I H
Hl
.

I ILI-

N
W

N

A

N.`
V,

N
O?

I' LL, 11
N

V

I ILL L LLL

N

co

0
I I t ill 1 1
i

o_
t ill 1 1
i D
i
19
fY o

Z
N

I, I LL I

ILL
4 -4 4H+ +4 +4
'In

V CA ?O O N W
o
0 O O O O O O

..