20061616 Ver 1_Application_20061017

4
.,44
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION R"'w174
MICHAEL F EASLEY LYNDO T PC?ETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
October 12, 2006
U S Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889-1000

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
T
?9N0 41
061616
ATTENTION Mr William Wescott
NCDOT Coordinator
n L
Dear Sir
Subject Nationwide 23 and 33 Permit Application and Neuse Riparian Buffer Authorization
Request for the Replacement of Bridge No 415 over Buffalo Creek on SR 1718,
Johnston County, TIP Project B-3672, Federal Aid Project No BRZ-1718(4), State
r,
n' Project No 8 2312401, WBS 33216 1 1
Please find enclosed the Preconstruction Notification (PCN), permit drawings, half-size plans, Natural
?- Resources Technical Report (NRTR) and the Programmatic Categorical Exclusion (PCE) for the above-
mentioned project The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to replace existing Bridge
No 415 over Buffalo Creek on SR 1718 in Johnston County The project involves replacement of the
existing bridge and related approaches with a new bridge and new approaches The new bridge will
feature two 11-foot lanes with 4-foot shoulders The project schedule calls for a March 20, 2007 let with
a review date of January 30, 2007 Proposed permanent impacts include 0 004 acre of wetland impacts
Proposed temporary impacts to surface water will be 0 02 acre and 0 014 acre of hand clearing in
wetlands
Impacts to Water of the United States
General Description Buffalo Creek is located in the 03020201 CU of the Neuse River Basin The
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has assigned Buffalo Creek a Stream Index Number of 27-57-16-(3)
DWQ has assigned a best usage classification of C NSW
Buffalo Creek is not designated as a North Carolina Natural or Scenic River, or as a National Wild and
Scenic River, nor is it listed as a 303(d) stream No designated Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW),
High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supply I (WS-1), or Water Supply II (WS-II) waters occur within 3 0
rules of the project study area
Permanent Impacts As stated above, permanent impacts total 0 018 acre of wetland impacts The impacts
are as follows 0 001 acre for drilled shafts and 0 003 acre for excavation and 0 014 acre for hand
clearing
MAILING ADDRESS
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE [phone]
FAX [phone]
WEBSITE WWW NCDOT ORG
LOCATION
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
a
Temporary Impacts Temporary impacts arf 102 acre to surface waters foi i workpad and 0 014 acre for
hand clearing
Utility Impacts There will be no impacts to jurisdictional resources due to utilities
Neuse Buffer Rules This project lies within the Neuse River Basin, therefore, the regulations pertaining
to the Neuse River Buffer Rules will apply There are 3,417 square feet of impacts to Zone 1 and 2,895
square feet of impacts to Zone 2 Of these impacts, 3,651 square feet are considered allowable and 2,661
square feet are allowable with mitigation
Bridge Demolition
The superstructure for Bridge No 415 will allow removal without dropping components into the water
Likewise, it should be possible to remove the timber piles without dropping them into the water The
concrete piers may result in as much as 10 cubic yards of fill depending on the method of removal to be
determined after a contractor is selected Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and
Removal will be implemented Any component of the bridge dropped into the water shall be immediately
removed
Avoidance and Minimization
To avoid impacts, NCDOT is replacing Bridge No 415 in place and utilizing an off-site detour
NCDOT is also minimizing impacts to surface waters by utilizing longer spans with fewer bents than the
existing bridge
Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not proposed for this project Permanent impacts are 0 004 acre to wetlands
and the temporary impacts to surface waters are due to the workpad and bridge demolition
Compensatory mitigation is not proposed for riparian buffer impacts because the threshold has not been
exceeded that requires mitigation
Federally Protected Species
As of April 27, 2006, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists five federally protected species
for Johnston County The following table lists these species
Common Name Scientific Name Status Habitat Conclusion
Red-cockaded Woodpecker Picoides borealis E N No Effect
Bald eagle Hakaeetus leucoce halus T N No Effect
Dwarf wedge mussel Alasmidonta heterodon E Y MANLTAA
Tars in ussel Elli do steinstansana E N No Effect
Michaux's sumac Rhus michauxii E Y No Effect
Note E - endangered, T - threatened, MANLTAA - may affect, not likely to adversely affect
Please refer to the US Fish and Wildlife Service concurrence letter for Dwarf wedge mussel included
with this application
2
R
Regulatory Approvals
Section 404 Permit This 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 23 and 33 as authorized by
Nationwide Permits 23 and 33 (67 FR 2020, January 15, 2002)
Section 401 Pennit We anticipate 401 General Certification numbers 3403 and 3366 will apply to this
project In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H, Section 0500(a) we are providing five copies of this
application to the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources, Division of
Water Quality, for their review
Neuse River Riparian Buffer Authorization This project lies within the Neuse River Basin, therefore, the
regulations pertaining to the Neuse River Buffer Rules will apply However, all improvements associated
with B-3672 will remain inside the limits of the existing transportation facility and, therefore, this project
is considered exempt from the buffer rules
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT websrte at
http //www ncdot org/doh/t)reconstru(,t/pe/neu/permit html
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Chris Underwood at (919) 715-
1451
Sincerely,
Ad GregoryJ Thorpe, PhD, Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
W/attachment
Mr John Hennessy, NCDWQ (5 copies)
Mr Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr Michael Street, NCDMF
Dr David Chang, P E, Hydraulics
Mr Greg Perfetti, P E , Structure Design
Mr Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr Richard E Greene, P E , Division 4 Engineer
Mr Jamie Guerrero, Division 4 Environmental Officer
W/o attachment
Mr Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr Jay Bennett, P E , Roadway Design
Mr Mated Alghandour, P E , Programming and TIP
Mr Art McMillan, P E, Highway Design
Ms Mane Sutton, Planning Engineer
r
3
0 9
Office Use Only: Form Version March 05
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No. 2 0 0 6 1 6 1 6
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" )
1. Processing
1 Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project
® Section 404 Permit ® Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification ? Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2 Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested NW 23 & 33
3 If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here ?
4 If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here ?
5 If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here ?
II. Applicant Information
1 Owner/Applicant Information
Name GregoryJ Thorpe, Ph D . Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address 1598 Mail Service Center
Telephone Number [phone] Fax Number [phone]
E-mail Address
2 Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant )
Name
Company Affiliation
Mailing Address
Telephone Number
E-mail Address
Fax Number
Page I of 8

III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow The specific footpnnts of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format,
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided '
1 Name of project Replacement of Bridge No 415 on SR 1718 over Buffalo Creek
2 T I P Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only) B-3672
3 Property Identification Number (Tax PIN) N/A
4 Location
County Johnston Nearest Town Wendell
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number) N/A
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc ) Take NC 231 south out of
Wendell to SR 1701 in Johnston County, Take SR 1718 west to Buffalo Creek Crossing
5 Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody )
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum) 35° 45 02 ON 78°21 62 °W
6 Property size (acres) N/A
7 Name of nearest receiving body of water Little River
8 River Basin Neuse
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins The
River Basin map is available at http //h2o enr state nc us/admen/maps/ )
9 Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application Residential & Forest
10 Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used Replacing
a structurally deficient bridge using top-down construction Standard road buildin
equipment will be used
Page 2 of 8
•

I 1 Explain the purpose of the proposed work To replace a structurally deficient bridge
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable) If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T I P project, along with
construction schedules N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project9 If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application
No
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e g, culvert installation should be listed separately from
nprap dissipater pads) Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying sife plan All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet
1 Provide a written description of the proposed impacts 0 018 acre of wetland impacts
and 0 02 acre of temporary fill in surface waters
2 Individually list wetland impacts Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding
Page 3 of 8

Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e g , forested, marsh,
herbaceous, bog, etc) Located within
100-year
Floodplam
es/no Distance to
Nearest
Stream
linear feet Area of
Impact
(acres)
1 Fill Rrverme Yes 0 0 001
I Excavation Rrverme Yes 0 0 003
1 Hand clearing Rrverme Yes 0 0 014

Total Wetland Impact (acres) 0 018
3 List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property -1
4 Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts Be sure to identify temporary
impacts Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e g , cement walls, np-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc ), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included To calculate acreage- midtinly lenuth X width then divide by 41 5((1
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Impact Impact
Length
linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)
N/A

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage)
5 Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U S ) Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill. excavation- dredmnn_ flooding- drainage- hulkheads_ etc
Open Water Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma Name
(if applicable) Watee)
Type of Impact Type of Waterbody
(lake, Pand estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc Area of
Impact
acres
Buffalo Creek temporary fill second order stream 0 02

Total Open Water Impact (acres) 0 02

Page 4 of 8
6 List the cumulative impact to all Waters of the U S resulting from the project
Stream Impact (acres) N/A
Wetland Impact (acres) 0 018
Open Water Impact (acres) 0 02
Total Impact to Waters of the U S (acres) 0 038
Total Stream Impact (linear feet) N/A
7 Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ? Yes ® No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet) Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE
N/A
8 Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application
Pond to be created in (check all that apply) ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e g, dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc ) N/A
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e g, livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc ) N/A
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond N/A
Size of watershed draining to pond Expected pond surface area
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts Off-site detour, bridge was
lengthened, and minimum widths were used for structures and approaches
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H 0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams
Page 5 of 8
3 1
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to reducing the size of the project, establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams, and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http //h2o enr state nc us/ncwetlands/strmaide html
1 Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e g , deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc ), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed
Due to the minimal impacts, the lengthening of the bridge and causeway removal,
NCDOT is not proposing any mitigation
2 Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP) Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http //h2o enr state nc us/wrp/index htm If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet) N/A
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet) N/A
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres) N/A
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres) N/A
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres) N/A
Page 6 of 8
4 a
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
1 Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ?
2 If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)9
Note If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation
Yes ® No ?
3 If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Cleannghouse9 If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter Yes ® No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion
1 Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B 0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B 0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B 0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B 0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ® No ?
2 If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers
Zone* I Impact I Multiplier I Required
1 3,417 3 (2 for Catawba) None
2 2,895 1 5 None
Total I 6,312 I L None
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near bank of channel, Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone I
3 If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i e,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund) Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B 0242 or 0244, or 0260 Buffer mitigation is not required for these
allowable impacts
Page 7 of 8
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site Discuss
stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level Impervious acreage will not appreciably increase
as a result of the bndf4e construction
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility
No wastewater will be generated from the implementation of the proposed project
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0500) or any Buffer Rules9
Yes ? , No
Is this an after-the-fact permit applicarion9 Yes ? No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality Yes ? No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
httn //h2o enr state nc us/ncwetlands If no, please provide a short narrative description
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e g, draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control)
F.
Iv • Woc
ApplicsWAgent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided )
Page 8 of 8
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
October 8, 2004
Gregory J Thorpe, Ph D
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1598 Mall Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Dr Thorpe
RECEIVED
OCT 12 2004
WION OF MAYS
PDEA-0FFICEOF NATUA OMA M
This letter is in response to your letter of September 27, 2004 which provided the U S Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological determination of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) that the replacement of Bridge No 415 on SR 1718 over Buffalo
Creek in Johnston County (TIP No B-3672) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the
federally endangered dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) These comments are
provided in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as
amended (16 U S C 1531-1543)
According to the information you submitted, a mussel survey was conducted at the project site
on August 12, 2004 The survey extended 100 meters upstream and 100 meters downstream of
the crossing The survey deviated from the usual 400 meters downstream after it was determined
that no habitat was present for the dwarf wedgemussel This portion of the stream is slack water
which flows into Wendell Lake, less than one mile downstream No mussels of any species were
observed during the survey However, the dwarf wedgemussel has been observed in Buffalo
Creek several miles downstream of the project area
Based o the information prodded and othor in ormation available, the Service concurs with
your determination that the proposed bridge replacement may affect, but is not likely to
adversely affect the dwarf wedgemussel We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of
the ESA have been satisfied for this species We remind you that obligations under section 7
consultation must be reconsidered if (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified
action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered in
this review, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this
review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by this
identified action
A
1?
t
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project If you have any questions
regarding our response, please contact Mr Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext 32)
Sincerely,
John Hammond
Acting Ecological Services Supervisor
cc Mike Bell, USACE, Washington, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Milrtscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
+ u

18
:GIN PROJECT ?'? •?,.?
-(
JOHNSTON Co.
VICINITY
MAPS
WE-Rh N-0 15TR 4M
END ?'OJECT

fi't'
f ?

NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
JOHNSTON COUNTY
PROJECT: 3321611 cB-3672)
BRIDGE NO. 416
OVER BUFFALO CREEK
ON SR U18
SHEET OF 6 / 06 1
We+lcih Orgw,ng 1 ?4 is
?. NORTH CAROLINA
0
WETLAND LEGEND
--dLB- WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
L
® DENOTES FILL IN
-? -> FLOW DIRECTION
T? TOP OF BANK
WE --- EDGE OF WATER
- - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
WETLAND
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
® DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
®DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
®DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
• • w DENOTES MECHANIZED
w w w' w w • CLEARING
- F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
-? PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
-21-- - PROPERTY LINE
- TDE - TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
-EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
----------- WATER SURFACE
s x s LIVE STAKES
C?D BOULDER
CORE FIBER ROLLS
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
W SINGLE TREE
WOODS LINE

DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD

RIP RAP
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE
WITH LEVEL SPREADER (PSH)
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)

GRASS SWALE
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
JOHNSTON COUNTY
PROJECT:33216JU (B-3672)
BRIDGE NO 413
OVER BUFFALO CREEK
ON SR 1718
SHEET OF g Ja
W,zkko (a Arcm,, y a co la
wk+l(.,Ad oraw.A% 4 J Ia
a
PLAN VIEW
NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
JOHNSTON COUNTY
PROJECT 3321611 (B-3672)
REPLACE BRIDGE #415
OVER BUFFALO CREED
ON SR 1715
SHEET OF
43o4-1 ti A 6roL11.AQ. .i 0
la

• 1
PLAN VIEW
A \ ` DOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
JOHNSTON COUNTY
PROJECT. 33216.11 (B-5672)
REPLACE BRIDGE "415
OVER BUFFALO CREEK
ON SR 1718
SHEET OF
W eAetvt& brew -i4 to O to

S
D
Ca
G
0

D
3
N
d
C
fD
O
'O
N
n
.
co

0
a
m
a
N
S
tU
N

3 a

19

CL m

I m

CD

co o_ D

CA
CL

N
2
m
Z
Qp >

D
a
m

T

co
O 9
W
5
`

C

o
N m
3
3 v d
-
-?

rn z m
o
(D
z
-
m
.?
Z p
0
C) 2 -3
Z
s z Vi 0
E N

a N
C,
rn a
N ?
O Z
Cs d

? N Z ?
O ?

r r
d
T ?
m
V
+
m
3
m
O?

o
0
0
ou ?
?

N W

0 m ? N
?
o
N N 0 ?

A

° -n3
o v d o?
N
7
C
N T ?

7
T c
N C
m
? n D ?
0
00 0
°
od3? z
° 5
z

N :0
D
'O

0 0 ?? s ? ?

a m N 3

? n n
?-'jOfD'm

N ?
7

N ? n <3 -n
N fif
N

'D
m 3 T x G
D
N

N
»
- { 3 T X D

y fD 10

? N m C
?
v 3
1-11 .
?SSS48#8t4?i E48SE?GNSl8SS84f4f8188SE
O ECT
PR 1
1
33216 OJECT B -3 672-
--- : .
.

M ul z °
f1 m
° CA
a ° °z
n

O
z v
?

J

1
O O 22

C

y

C 03 D

_{ 0 ^
C cn cn
z
I 3 z z

o
o
N 8 z F
np n

r
N =
?z
-- 1 ??

j

< -
b
v N h7

I o 0

N W

Z°?
N

\

C1

@cn
aQ

u
°
u u
V v ti
u n n
m

O
1

S
t
T A O?
N 14 W b m
"a
;a c
Z ,
I $

m nc auo

Z en
O m m a
r?
Fn N
ca'//a

o n

E
Oo
`m ?1

m

•
na.
RWR
14
N N N ?
?
?
\
? ?
?
F?

O U _n
N w
cowl" y
z V
M m m J 1 Q
m

`
0 o
V C) to
O ? ? ? ? Z ? BUFFALO CRF ? ?
m
m
= C
.\ E?Y
1y I
1
a ° x ?n ?
C O

o a

?? iC ?
'1
a

C
~
g e a 1 O
p Q ?
z
c
a
m >
$ o A
mz
C) ??

I
C
m ? a 1
CZC
??A Z
N
m A
@ m
r 'a
V1 0
m ?.
O - m = '
Fa- copi

b om ` J
v

x ?
_
a
N y
° NAD 95 Q
? P??
IJ
T

a b ? E °° m V
N
o m w m
x ?" d & b
o

FOCI A
? ? ? ?° 7

W
C ?F

REVISIONS
3 1EP z,,ae h 2s
s egg oro Fd\?rS?jc t?\gelen\b 3672\design\b 72_hyd_pe-tl dgn
gg m o g m o
NN

s s O C
fi = r
s N O C
M =
n
N

1+°i r _
m Z' s
u r
,., r
yi
m 05

N
8N 1 Yrrn

`
Ym
r

C Y
D
n O O ?I
-1
C OC
0 1
/1?
o 0 0 m m
`?~r
yy N o= o207 -1 Y3 D DOn
ss m °m m? P ?
oomri
z+
0 A n S
; l?
N 0
OY Q; _
Y
V
00 p

? J
rr A r n o
N N ii 0=
T T 4 T O(i0
Y mom=
Y Y m
Y Y
mZ
Z0
NA
~y r OX
NN -Ly OX
o OQ ONy
0
?~ aZ
<KQ
Co
x
n
D
D
0
D
n2 mx
D CN
0o~ °°N zz Ilz
m Z ~
OA
H?
VQ
T
O
S

N 0
?
C
=
-?
a r
D
_y
°
m
o oa
m
a
~
0
0
yi ?mn
a
v '-I
I ? m S
?"n
- U'BNN
00
0O
100
0[
m 05mm l01
?r ?JODOV c
xm •;
0
?
m 0
1
£n
Jq ?
0 NO
7 23 p m?
M-n

CDv ti
AAO N
o?
Fe (A

Am
v° D ZmCD
_

?

ooD
1 0

o

Z 0
D
Y ?
N
_
m Z
m
m C
7
o MO
D n DX
o D ` A
Y_ S o O
-Yr 7 Z M
sg
rt0
?

0 0 pm l? % o m
c? UO
n a Cm
NA n t O m, 0 OJ

0 8 f?' M I* M x ac
O s S
v m O
N N -
T T T1 V1
Y Y Y Q=
m
I I N m
m m m m
?Z Z Z Z
PO ? ° p
m
'-m Zm cam mm
E z c^ s m (n rn
-+1^m ?x ?m z?
M,S DD ZCi Or
no Z? om r
0
D ., z
m > ;D 1
O N
-< z m
0
i
D
a
O g
a?
?a
3 r
~ 5888@
a -+
N m
m ?
"+a ry 1
44 1 /

1I? I
1
l!!
a'

??p i ?
o IIF I

11?

a ? I' J
wa I
?J 1
Inc?
o ?
= ?i hl I
s
+\yd 11

\
1
I
1' J

\y
C?
Y
m?
t =
C,
ro
~
A A M

A
A?
4
ti$
?Y
i
a /

,/
®ga

A
A
Z 4 A?
F'
~
79
C?
Y
Ai O
1
tr^i
A

! N
0y ,Q?
y
4
r a
I
rrn
. N

m
/ A a
4

ti y
2 at--
m N?
?t
t?
w
?a
s
O,+
G
a
MC OND
MAD 83
T
k
.
p
e+

N
Hw 25
S $ [cif 8 ezy
C >
z
E a

'h N

q o .?
R
n P
P ?n
N

\

9
Z
0

J„I- U BUT Jc Fyn U J Yyd_F --tl dgn

C m
O r m ,
O
yr yr
a s r
a y °r,
n

iD+ r --
i
J o-a
m n
W _m
r'
J OA
m
ON l Yr-m U l Yam
o
C>
C n v °nD 1

o
D
mv ° °C

i
yN (+r

1
p
N T+1 O
4
N o- 0 C13

N m m

0
r
-
O
-n3 a ggD
nn m am m? a ?vr oomn
?n? A Ol 1 I in O?o C _
O
N
D ?-f I
Y j
00
p o?
7 a v
r r
ti
D Q m Q 0 r,
-?
rr
rr
N N -- 0 - - NO;
O

T T T T D- 7
Y Y m
?
Y Y Y Y N
o?
m
mZ

IM Zo
?
D
NN
O
170 ox
Djn
N
`m Dn Om
rn

x
n
oa
D 0 i
2
=
D
m ?
p
?
?n
v
mx a
on cy Sr
ON z

mO
m Z
z ~
p
-1fD-
?O
0
m
?z
r- o
rm
m
E z'^
DNS
mAm
ATm
> O
n M
m>
m
0 7
s

ti °
c
7
n r
D

O ozRt
-1 -1

o 0.
Dr
v ?m(7
D ?°-p4

0 6 pN N
O °
is
m n3
ol MCI
zC oi
60 coD

nJ
YY--?
Jm Y
m
JCm m
`-0 m
YO

?N 7 _ «
7 = 3
n ,

o fTl:q
rtm 7 r0
?o y N?
oa ° N -0m
QD D imp
C- °

m o Z 00
N
O m
ommo
10 Z
7
>
Ovm
N it
D < 0 -o2
SA
Y_ M? O
Zm
v c 5 1.
O p Lf)
Zi
ON
;
? , 0
N O
C_
J?
n s c N
0
lWlr 4
O? m N 0
r0 0.

m8 X
0 p
? a

?!• a A
0
A?
o _
4
N J
r
V mo AA0? y
y it rr ri sN ?
N N -
T T T N ti
Y t Y ?- ~O ?C
m ?m"n? m
A
I a
I N m
0 0 0
m m
z z m 0 Z
0
2-1
nm m 0
m m
s in r L -4N
m r
_'X ?m OZr
r? n
Zc 0:1 r
O ti M Z
O m
z 0
D
a
i
? ? \
O rrl??
~ /
r C
a -+
m s n

Rq
$a
0
,

*+ r ?A
_ A I° 6 my
NH \ W
IM
m
a N
r ?
m
mi a
0
1
Z
. gR
yo
25
I
y?s
C?
y
^1?
'Ol
l s>Q,sx?
I
r
a
tAt
s y^
ma• O
tY
A
r#1
a
as
A
NC GN/D
?i `-
NAD 83
yP t?`
Ab
?I oy
n
C'
l
:s^
A
M

C)
Z"
m p P
R ye

S
? 8z 4? o
8 i
F ?? ?b Z ? ro
az Am tb.
s
In =
c
a

h zz?
N
0
n
a
V
?
O
O

m
k
m

i

C
m
k

m

0
rn

o - -

• V n • V `
LAI 110
C
O-!aN
II LrI II

rn
LN ?
rnw?
?
N
? o
2
o i ee? I 1
C[
? i p r
y
N ''I
" m
m
? ?
? wyz
?

r
r
rn
?

?
rnrn `

`V"2 `2 m
cn Q)
k ill
4Q
?
Q)

N
N
'
(J1 lJl ?
:

?
A
f
r{D

o-noaoaooovvv
<x<naaminm
mInmcnvi(oto0v)

k
.
I X DXF) mmc)c?Cc)
zzz
-
omOx
n0
-V -V In x -n v
'U
_°?
nc
?
(n
x0
C D 2 0 2
0 O C
-n Dz??CD
- zm
r
n t.;
1 1 [k ill 1 m
O<C)M mo n
vma
kil l m

xr m C
k
ill
.
m?
m n
< <
m-
< Z Qo

g

0 DO

v r") nNNW O
Vi00WLn0
O
N; O
OK

n n w , O
fn 444 44 4-4
- -h Ul -I+ -.h
N v -4
i,
Ul un W { { UI
Lo O Ln
W O O

0
I 'll ki l l I I
?
P
p
~ A

? P
I 1 -1-T
1 1. 1
-Ni m o
;1u m

? m 6a?
M N a m?
k il l I

Z N a?$
x m
N

C N
2
V) m
I m

?
O " S m
P x I "

tea- q yb
M ? ? N
? z M
a
?
r
E a c
ki l l
??
s
x
N
V `O V1
u
f /
GIN PROJECT
.•
of ,
o ..?••?HNSfON
•..
i
J \ ^I
a
ENTOJE
CT
CD
a Ira

NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
VICINITY JOHNSTON COUNTY
PROJECT: 3321611 (B-3672)
MAPS BRIDGE NO. 415
OVER BUFFALO CREEK
ON SR 1718
?u ?Fr1?
SHEET OF $ / 06
`.? ui 1 er lbrf?.jk ? i ov (o
NORTH CAROLINA
B gJ]F1F1ER LEGEND
-WLB WETLAND BOUNDARY
WETLAND
CL ,
uXXX`? ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE I
ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2
MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE I
® MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2
- BZ RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE
BZI - RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE 1
30 f t (9.2m)
- BZ2 - RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE 2
20 ft (6 lm)
- o ?o FLOW DIRECTION
TIB -_ TOP OF BANK
-- WE- - EDGE OF WATER
c- - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- -F - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
-M- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- - - PROPERTY LINE
- TDE - TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-PDE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- - 17 - - - WATER SURFACE
X LIVE STAKES
X XX X X
BOULDER
-- CORE FIBER ROLLS
PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
ff SINGLE TREE
Fr?- WOODS LINE
DRAINAGE INLET
---? ROOTWAD
RIP RAP
5 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
? PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE (PSH)
?--l LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
GRASS SWALE

N C DEFT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
JOHNSTON COUNTY
PROJECT- 33216.1.1 (B-3672)
REPLACE BRIDGE "415
OVER BUFFALO CREEK
ON SR 1715
&WQr lbmuj , A,? a J k o
SHEET OF
/p?

TEMPORARY
WORK PAD
( Not to Scale)
PROPOSED
PIER
Existing
Ground
CLASS A
RIP RAP
170 TONS
CLASS II -
RIP RAP
BELOW N.W.S.
258 TONS
o ,
N.W.S.
Elev.= 24304
NCD®T
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
JOHNSTON COUNTY
PROJECT-.3321611 (8-3672)
BRIDGE NO. 416
OVER BUFFALO CREEK
ON SR M8
OF /"1
9ujTu N1 w.,nq 3 oV 10
1P ROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES
O ANTHONY L WHITLEY & 331 STOTTS MILL ROAD
KATHY S. WHITLEY WENDEL, NC 27591
O JACK W. LILES &
EVA F. LILES
208 N. CHURCH STREET
ZEEULON, NC 27597

BaV Pe,r 4"&Q, Ay qjD ? 10
N
Z Zc4
w v
c
c
w G
NN
W
L
U
co
J
co r
a w
cr O

J
Q p
O
O
1- N N
w
J
Q N O O
o Z = M
I- 0 - N LO
N

W -? O p
Z w
0- m

c°Do
N
J
? O O
F-
O
LO
Q w Cl) 07
J
U CO N
c
G Q
0 W N
z O
04 O

? O

N Cl) p
M
A
A J
'
A Q ?
W p O
F- _
O " V

U

N co
co

Q
Ii J F-
V
c
C j
Q Q
oC a
?
? Q
a
W W
U. } o x
LL
m
? O
O ?
0o x

cc
U F

as of
Z O J J
O C co n
+ +
O
F T m
LL N
co
+

7 +

r
7
N
d

C/i
-O _
lL
W W
CC
cc
D C: R:
H
U cc a
cc
CA o
Q
m

O
0 J

F-
tn Q
H
A
vi
3
3
0
L.d-
0

L
S
(..L
Ca
CG
C
M
N
H
U
a
Ca
NC
LLJ
LL
U.
m
af N
w w n
z
0-
o

o
LL N

co
Z
cn
0
z
g
w Wry
0
N o 0
F-
d'
O ?
(6 ?

J

i
SSSE84ESSSS9SSE
PROJECT: 33216.1.
LA

N o

N
^
M z v
A m
v H
N O N N O Z

ran
?
? A
O Q
?
1 a 9

o N

O c fA

c
y

z
z 3
y n A
o c g ;
Z

3E
< -? O vN N
S
v
1 b

ti o0

m

u u u 4
u n n A
+ ??
m
v
? o o
; sae N w ?Ai
aeo o b ?y
O

g
z
v a

rm m
m
??

Fri
c
if

O n
7O
b c

X

gy
['
m H ul

14 01
N N
u u ?? v
0 0 ?
? y
OD N
OD Ca LVI Z

H
r
m C
m
A
0

ran A
v
C7
V ,?
?
Z
0
n.
o
e
m
E
a
P 17
?A
z I
I m

C

m Q
C O
IP
09H 3::o
R Z
0
m Iti

-
?
r
N
_ 1
- --- --

om
vm

b

xx ??

?C

Z
y

z v
C
V1
)
OFE
AO?
?Zy
z o
R I
O
-n Z
kE?
•
•
1
J ?
??FF'?O CREFK
1
I ,
1.
?j

y ? J
At
n
Foto
LIS
NAD 95
x
to
? ? hrJ
Sao
b ?o
x
oo po
n
1
Q
' ri
C" cs-
0
a
0
0
x

`c$ f$
l? D
0 1
1
o
mk
O`er
1114
g6

M
?-4
0
00
"w
_N N y
P ? ? Jmr_
r r ? Cal ?
N 0%
V
;? e

-00b 10 8
\Pn?r uTaH-I N? F1arrs gales ?b-?67?\des?gn\6_ 72 hyd permit] dgn
T ?
pp
0 O
= D 1
0 O
NN
as O C
n N O c

++
p
m OFQ
Yam

` s
l.r N
m Zn

00
Y
\
0N

1 O >
m
'

0

Y?
°
01

-1
°
n
01

0 I
N
0
m
O
0 0
Na
r
O= OQCO
: H M? v og>
as m or
0 }?IOn a ?N OOmn
++
M N Ol F. x
"
??
l + x
m
O
OO .
i I
D ti I
O ? J
5 N
N 5
7
rr
I H o
D Q m n ° r
~ n°
rr ii
?r ?r rr rr

N N - - ? - - V1°T
l
T "?I Dn0
T T 0=
v- Y Y 0j.7
rt rt
m
M
:i

W
Z
y0
N

NN ox
K < n
m
m C,<
n
n
< °oo

a
? Zz

NO
-!rr
O a
on cN ;r
N
ZO O Z n
m Z
m ~
o
Z A
- D
?r
?o

O
t

N
0
c
7
?
a r
a
0?mm
Y
O °Dr
N nfN'in
ti

00-00
v
c
Oo 7m
o
05Q;0
7r °ovx o-
.nTm

1 ?C * 7 5,

0 0
Y0
0
f

0
:r °

O 90
=3
~l
D
_

?
no n n < m
_
YA 7 rO
1 O N
A ?
°
ov
v
c ° ° Z D
Y Q(/1
-

° Z
0 C
)
O ?O

v ' D D U
S X

n* > 0
r
Z
m
n

o?

¦ vaN

F
yN
?

N?
LZ M
, IY x
7g & cm
00
0 I* c
m
OO w 7
5
Q m °
A
? rr .r rr
N N -
T Y NT
m

D a
r r-
r r
0 0
E ?
D D
W r-
r
R1 m
D 7>
('1 n
? -I
N
Z 0
M m
N -
A
3a m?
ny r
r
Nn ~ A
T A
`S I
/ I
O
1 O /F 1
-•a
?? 1/ I
w+
s ?'J 1
,, ?ll rir /
+\ya 1 ' l
\ 1
0
N
w•

REVISIONS
4" AV .?
wAP
a
4a //;
m N +?
C ? ?\hh
ti
?r<
~A1
A D
I'
1 ?
i

?
c

/hy

F \hh /
??a
,?Y? o A?
a`
n _
YR
s}Q ?SX?
r y
m a
.U
N a
m
v
H
x
g r
ys
? h
w
s
ti
<10
a
/p
R
i
Oy
s
na
Y
A
yC? O
Y ?
z?
0
P P
Ift- t
MAD 83 Att
=s?
%? 19
8 4
?
25 ? r S ?
?

E s? :m
c: S r

oy £
zZ
00

,
:h O

B 4
s ° _UJb W W
y-__.,r d\ IIa -q len b sC72\d-q-b 72 hyd_pe,mltl dgn
... I ?-1 , 2ry 1 4

LC m p m p
s
ss
iii r
m oma s
u r ^v
m °'-'G
O , *rm '?fll
N O?D O p
?
CO t7 v
Q Nr C ,
v
m 0 Nye
y-1 O p OQ? y -1?3 D 0
nP mvm ?~ D ?N OOmn
?e
oO i oso m i
x

00
O
5 N :t
O
rr o r a v
N N - - rt ? ?np
r Op- O7?
N

n mZ
ZO
A
>
Im
m
?
~
-D
I
D r
`v o
ox
r0
`m nn rOrn
n°?n

x s
D GC
<
D
ti =Z
'L
O

nz
n
mx

OD
CN
Cr
N
C Zh
m Z
ZO ~
r
H
?O
T
?
l
r

en O
c
?
-1
s
°
° r
s
+ o mm

p 7
pDr
n
0
'
H ? m4
N
00 Aon
,60C
10
n57;oii
O]p m 0a
F m V N] m? 0 0
Y
En
70 p ?O
j =3 D l
O
M; o
o. 7 m
to
mo \
ti 1-
p
N?
o° o ?m
v D m°
c°v_ p o Z -pip N
o o
d
Z m m < p m
'nC
o
? N O 1
D < O ?
0 O
O
-
C,
xY 7 r
z m
° cg
OQ Q >E O 01 N 70 V)

?NO I? a Cm
C
n 0z
o=om
N
oo
8 ?
x a`
7
V?
I
If
$a
0
r
NH p
a'
\ J.
x
\yo \?
A
A?
A$
8/17/99

O
?a
C,
Y
1
y?
YA'~
IN,
A
I
s x
m °
s 9
r
m
Q
y
i
.1
s>_n
-S>as:?Zp
1
r
s
s y^
lei O
e
A
ac
w
A 10
F+?
Z"
n
m p P
N
NC GND
Z
NAD 83
p
:tj

25 3r

M so
1

3: yy
1 1%
E az ?

?
o r ?

y ?8 W

m
m

V - r 1 -t -

2
O
b TT

?

y tft
y
IF. IF

m

0

n
k

N
O
O
f MR
MI i i. rT
A T

f±
m
2q? zz
q Z

# - - -
1 1 1
11
1
+4- 5i
, Y
Nn n?

44- c
II
II ro
?A
II N
?? it

HTFF O }
?a r
Cp?tb
b m
Rn rnwn
N

?CZ ? I
? O I
N ? C
I ? O r
7
1 I ?
1
HEFFF

r r

ni --
I N LA
ra q
t
D L
O Op 2

?
O
-
U
`O
<
IM S 2 II
N N

Cum
- 2
D

NO
r- OD

T
Fill I-sis

omommmovv
<M<nnnmmm
11 4++- -H+ +f4+ 111111
mmmcn(ncnLA(A0
?c??mm
Z Z Z
0 M 0= m 0
vzvmv

C = C7

o
?m? mom
<
1. I's
?

r^__4mr- m C
n
mOm< .. 11
_
±
<
<
SZo W :f± tfl IF
z

g

- ,IF I

-

++4+

-- -4+
r
-
: VR 0
+ _
u u ii n n u
?j + ?F
+ :
#f 1 I

Ln00w
o
OK N? O
n u m p
(j) 0
l -?+ Vl fi fi '-F
N v
+n
Hi

+H+ 4F

T
Ill jIll I Ill I M! -
,
1 to W { { Vi
V m:
I W! -4 tD O U1 p
w o o
+ + y
{ iG n D

m

Z2

?
0
r
P
P

N
-I m o
Xm x
I
F.

? +H- H
U)
?m r
cm
m
m N ig
v j
+ H+ ,?- cn z a?
n N T
z?

N m
m
°

c cn

cn m
I
F
il
l
-? m °
i b

M >,
$ c?n o m
n

IF. E

a
?
>
a
?
t't
o a ? Z

+7 x Z
z
T
V O p U
i
? C =
Z CA
7?v
yyO
agmm
L) o!q
?zVf
?o
yI
Yz
i

22-AUG 2006 II
,dy-tsh dgn
33216.1.1
o c z v

w A m
v
Q
v
O o w w O
Z

m m o n
O ?c
Q ZV m
0
N H
V O
o O o 0
A
m
C

-< z
(A X
o
N N

V V

H
C: 1-4
CA 0
m
z
7o
+ II II II II II II x y
m F

P
CO A p VO A
3E O
a m
m
w= v v `
?
m
?
z
C
y

r r
0
Z Z m
?
y
m
-O
? A
y
?
C7
=n
?
O? c
? b m

232 C)
m n y m

N ? V
N

N ? F
n u ° o
o ° ° D
ul N w z
v
co w
c
m
m m
m

° ^AO ,b
O

y3 e
a> 8

Z
z Fn > O A
r
?

N Z
C
m m
?
0:
NL r
3:O
=pip z
y
$ 66? m -i
H
r 'n
O
- - - - m` -
m
v

ti = to
Cm
H
L1 - -n
= T

m
v

H
i

.d
p ti d C?i7
xx ??

A ?M

x
y z
y

is +
I
+ y
?1 /
1

1 i y
r

J

BUFF-qC
p O•R?.eK
?N
1

/ II +
1
1
2 I I
I
I

1
I
I
l?

1
i
P.
1 I-

H 8I It 1

I FA
' b
BUFFgCp ?
?m
4
AD 95
I

h
0
0
r?
b ?o
10,
o
to
CO)
H
LnLn
22
?o
o ?
o?
v. x
to
N
g y
O ?>
C?
00
?x
a
W
V
* N ?
i
1?
III IIII IA
Y

C HUU--vo IU 9 1
rondwo \ ro B 3672_ RD Y_ 7 YP_ 18 dgn 5/28/99
2. 2 C C S ? .0 ? C C ''D 91 T 91 n M :F g, g, ? a ? -u 01 (•? ? ? ? .0 .0 ? n m
-0 0 H o 3 ?' ° it I o v v° °o o O o a c o c o o' o' a °' o c
m m
a p c p v p a v p v s o
M? c v o 0 0 0 0 o o m c m m m W n s o s o 0 0 $' '?
, a c o a 3 3 3 ?. o T v 3» eo o ;u N o m g• o m o g
ID 'a to S N O p n j O G -1 - r. O?' ~' rt 3 3 c a a S C' N CA ° C
ca -n
4M 0
3 C
C Q 1?.
31 -n
A
7 7 3 0 n O T n Ql N
p x n p
A i 7 7
-) m m a ° n C
CL tl CL -0
C O ° O r 00 ° S A A
W 0 1 p Q A O M W O n F Q C
N? rt? 3 7r O O O ?? D
A O A p ' yr en
I I 3 0 o O ? 3C
CL ?- °
I' 1 1 1 1 c? z
n ?
I?I T ? ? 4Y I I ? 1 I ? i i l l
'' t 1 ? I ? ? ? m m n 1>Cll D? ? ? ?® I T I? I ?
31 -1 m ?
I=I g ?? y 1 i i l
II I I( ? ? I I I
ao o o o 0 0 0 o c c= m o o c N g= T L' g' o -° = 3
o rt m `" H °° 3 m c_ o o 19 s o-0 `.=t v M 1 M 0° o v Z
O Vf -1 C ° 1 S 3 ° rt' 3 'O 3° S rt° ° -1 S W O O_ p m °. C " M
X 7 _ n 7 3 O° A 7° ° s a m O A° 7 Q m p O n m O m
n? N c o f . 3. ° 0° o o o < s, A o o m p C 0 -0 3, X Ca
C 70 C ? °+ ° W
m°° m s g O O° ° 6-0- m O_ 3 p 0 C 3: .0
O Q A S w° S -? O a n C O O
- O G
° O -1 O 7 m 0_ O_
O ° S d ° S m W
° m O x ° °O =
a
00 Y
®OO QOOmO®O?®I >`t0?'?00+®?aC?7?O00??? 0 t o. I ? I I? O ?o-?a 41
-o r 'r1 -o v -o 7o n -1 n N m ?r gi p 7o p 70 C p p w p 7o N p p 7o N p 70
.00 Or 0 0
>>o c omm moZrEL ? a a a. I S a. 5 a 5 EL 5 a_? a.o 3 3
mm ?D3 to ?Z1'14 ?o ° S Tyr ?° o x. ° A m O ° o A ? ° A
M m o g 7 c r- ?- ' ° v C, m ?. 'o a rt a a m a c a m a o °-
a a !D A 3 c o O n -0 >> o > r o °- _ a T ?- C a c. n. -v ?- a N o
° ° occ c 3 > > > A ° D ° 3' s ° - m ° y o o
m m C` O ' Q' C° o C O fP 1O? O 0 O a G -? V?
m A 7 a m O N '??Gi O Vf ° W 5. O S m N r rt C' O
t C
C. C. N 3 O` O !Val O a Q D O 0C O C> > ° Q N r 7
O CL C m_ 3 m S O , O O O ° 4
aa ?o 0 R c o s0 Fn 'a
pa n H N ?+
3° c h'1 n s so °
0 o ° o
°- o 00 y °?_ m ° f1 s° C '' c C
O m °' O M
O o .: 0
M in -n M
7 0 No>> A UJ O a N .:
a O N O_ N C O C O
e C m c?m
T m CA
I I I I I I I I I I I e °,
? I I I*x I I I I ? I ? o o < < ? I I I I ? it I ? d N ? I >k ?
D o o Q.
I I I 1 y 3e e o l I I I I I I I I I $
m z ?• eon I ( I A A I ,?Z
mm
V I I I + I I pp-
N 70 N p 19 = N N C ' 1 "n n '1f W N 'O F n n 2 N N N p n v [l "n w
o a. 0 °- m m co a° Z x a 0 o S c° o 1 o m_ c c ?. p
?' a t o a o- A n co a rt s 3 a 3 c 3 ?' o n o a
O o n c° .n °m ? N 3 o ° s c° m
c m
& :L M
be, b-4-
m C N ° S 0 ?
o m
0 o c n• y O 5a
I 3 O N I I I I ' y 4'??
rt
b
' C
try ,
D ? n
ii C y? G
r
y r Qpq]? , I I I I I I r I C 'b
9 $?O I I ` O cc++,, VQ ' 1 I I 1 O , I ED 00 ICI I I I ti I 'r
I^' K W 1 1 I I i I z
L I, I \
N ?' o 1 I I I y
I ' I 1 1 I
s
a
10
72_rdy_psh dgn
T QQT T
ZZ m

? O
C

J

r r

e m

? O

c
s s

%Ti
r
m
-,?
O
p? .
s
i
r
0 n
n ^v
O
no

N
, >
k
ir
0
1
~ RI
O ?? D
O 0
y
00
o ° D
Nml= y
° AT
ram v
c
Syr
yy H o=' o4W 0 57 .3 v °o_3a
1. P.
W
om
m_y
P
o0
oom?
r 0-
00 V p N m x J
rr

yy A
O
avW J

nv r
y n o
0 _ n0T

m J
. WZ
m
z0
?
nz ?
ON
7y _ vy
0 yz
W KGl
m
n
y
m
0
0z W x
?VI
O? m_ y
Z°N zo
z
mz I
ZA
yr
vo
T
O
1
s

N ?
J
y
s
m r
s
Zmo
*
o 0
Fn
° O Vr
?rrnn
0
s
i ?
-_
N
m j
v W o
ll? N -
?O'Boo
00 on
O c

W 10
J CO
n mnn

?r OJ0
'0 09 Ov
CV'
OJ
xm i?_?
?NJmm
_ im
?
w0
-4p
JN J 0
E
i3
J m
>
o
-+
rX
MX
TN a O <M

-4m
J M-n
r-O
?o ?X
o? m ?m
70
00 - a z M
0 ov Z D N
I° 0o Z m 0?0
O D?
.io
; n
D
O

c Z
0 O
O
a,
si r
Z M
n
N
op a • o W T > ?o N::?
Cc
O I? I?
x
a =
W
no ? i
O -0-8-0
N
= cm
p0
on
G ?
8 IN ?.h N
~ li x O-h D
N

m co
n
7

?g
ym
mrpi
i?
r
m
y_
z? ? p
a
///9
°m
O
m
aLA
6
1

mrn me
WA Nrn
c?,m mz
T
v
\0 ti ydY
a
o ?
?ti? ?
V? ?P'i1 u1,, may
Cn m /
4 S?
p- R
N
M
v_v2p G
m r ?
A
;?B
0?•
m y
f710?S n m z &
O
?+l?m
r,? OD

ny,?^y m s
aa rp
2aM V1
v
Al
?

y
r ? rTl ? ? Q
X
C
I?vn2i n??o???oT
A m 2 N? O ? ?i M O
tt?
1f.
tr W?O `rn
ac?00Tn1?'Crnr?*1 'f..•1
rim
?,T ..
Ln ::0 . 0700 20q}?fT
o? °3 -I??obc,?royom
?o
w ? L-n a
?o
i?° '111
i
O t?71 ? ? ? aka
r I ? ,
r ?
V
o<
s? 1
r? O
? c
?N 1
_? 3 0 f t I? I
Fl SL2 pp ' '
Mir 00•f2N HN Lr I
0
I
1
IJ
om o
xc zc
mm rnrn
N
t'o
S 6.
J? s
I
m aa,,
c
C
m
9 A
? 40
A?
RJR
\N
S'
NN a^
x
N m a ? 9
&A;R W
yr W NN
I

,.
v ?^
aAC ?17of x ?..??5y?!' ?A?
pp??
d?j ?_\a
F
pp \
K?

Y?
r?
''a
a $?
A
?S
??'tZ??
?m
ygr A
A; 'v
A

4
O 2 O
+ A
1? ? r
I m 1
l? ?tl' - j2 on`
om xc
mrn Ax
? m2 ?2
13S IIVN --- - J
99 C02 = A3-13
)d U0 00's sa-Il-
V
7 SmN s
y r x 1Ar
s A ``,`?ia
V
a

? f 110,1y tips co
1j$
'
p 2
?i y4 ?a W?
?9 >'v? S + yp
(n

?
r n `9 vii i ? to ?n
¦m I N
y\ !l? N=
m A
_y
00 6G1ZS
!f
a
Nw
Z5
-4iN Vs.-
MAD 95
M
fy
g?yy qy

2 F 0? P1
zi?
0
n p P
a
It'll
?a
g?
q M
R
az Z<

?

r
?
z

rn a
Z

W
c

o
O O
O ?0
o Io
I o}
O
0
o m
0
0
O co
0
0
o
00
0
0 rn
O
0
0 rn}
0
0
0 cn
O
0
0 cn
00
0
0 a
O
0
0 a
O
0
0 w
CAJi
0
0 9? m
V C
i

C A

' O.
n
W N V a IO 'W

i W

W N

(O W
j
Cn
W

O
t

i
I I
? I
? ? I i a ?
t
w ao a
N IN I V -+ V W W a N Ia C, C IO 1
i i
i v
i ?
d
I?
I ?
rA
m
rS
I
o
0
A C
I ,
I ?
I y
Ip
? m
I s
? O
1 ?
?m
?m
t'
A O ?
0
d
ro
`rcR
W
0
N
t0
a

? O
'
e
?
d
'
o
At

°
a
>v
'a

.9
a
'`m
' 0 y
e
o

h

a
Cl) ;
CO)

'"
0.0
Q

y
a
f o
'
' m

~

y
O
v
3
n
? C
r
8
z
O
y
m
O
A
n
O
z
N
1
M
C
O
O
z
? A
N ?
I. m Im
N
S
X m
_. Z
z
O
A
O
N
N?
O
A
N
IA
O
I?
1
24 A?G-2006 d,, ?,,,07
Ib3672_,d 1 d
aaa ai iCFf?r1?Mi?aaaa y-xP 9^
K
ham!
r
24-AUG-2006 07 10
adwa \,sc\b3672-rdy_xpl dgn
gees, lc FPPMont?sssl
2v-AUG 2g,06 07 11
\?Q a„_ey\--\b3672_rdy rpl dqn
d
4
6 ?
?a
ttl' M¦M
tQ9 >hjl
0
l

11r UG ad ?cQ\b367?_rd ld
x.ca xi c?on?.?rs c? y-xP 9n
' kd
i?] M
..
24 AUO-2006 07 12
2. \?rq d?ay?\Y1,?\b3672rdy gyp] dgn
o ?
U44
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F EASLEY 1501 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, N C 27699-1501 LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
March 28, 2001
MEMORANDUM TO: Dennis Pipkin, Bridge Replacement Unit
Project Planning Unit
FROM: Lynn Smith, Natural Systems Specialist At
Natural Systems Unit
SUBJECT: Natural Resources Technical Report for the Proposed
Replacement of Bridge No 415 on SR 1718 over Buffalo
Creek, Johnston County, TIP No B-3672, State Project No
8 2312401, Federal Aid No BRZ-1718(4)
The attached Natural Resources Technical Report provides inventories and
descriptions of natural resources within the project area, and estimations of impacts likely
to occur to these resources as a result of project construction Pertinent information on
Waters of the United States and federally-protected species is also provided
I would appreciate the opportunity to review the draft Categorical Exclusion for
this project Please contact me if you have any questions, or need this report copied onto
disk format (ext 286)
cc Randy Turner, Natural Systems Unit Head
File B-3672

Replacement of Bridge No 415
On SR 1718 over Buffalo Creek
Johnston County
TIP No B-3672
Federal Aid Project No BRZ-1718(4)
State Project No 8 2312401
Natural Resources Technical Report
B-3672
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
NATURAL SYSTEMS UNIT
A Lynn Smith, Naturat Systems Specialist
March 28, 2001
J /
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 0 INTRODUCTION
1 1 Project Description
12 Bridge Demolition
13 Environmental Commitments
14 Purpose
15 Methodology
16 Qualifications of Investigators
1 7 Definitions
2 0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
21 Soils
2 2 Water Resources
2 2 1 Waters Impacted and Characteristics
2 2 2 Best Usage Classification
2 2 3 Water Quality
2 2 4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
3 0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
3 1 Terrestrial Communities
3 1 1 Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Brownwater Subtype)
3 12 Mixed Pine Hardwood Forest
3 1 3 Maintained/Disturbed Community
3 14 Wildlife
3 2 Aquatic Communities
3 3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
4 0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
4 1 Waters of the United States
4 1 1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
4 12 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
4 1 3 Permits
4 13 1 Neuse River Buffers
414 Mitigation
4 14 1 Avoidance
4 14 2 Minimization
4 14 3 Compensatory Mitigation
4 2 Rare and Protected Species
4 2 1 Federally-Protected Species
4 2 2 Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
5 0 REFERENCES
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Soils within the Project Study Area
Table 2 Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Table 3 Federally-Protected Species for Johnston County
Table 4 Federal Species of Concern for Johnston County
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Bridge No 415 Project Area Map
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
6
6
7
7
7
7
8
9
9
9
10
10
10
11
11
13
13
13
13
13
14
14
15
15
15
15
16
19
20
6
12
16
20
4
5
(#
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following Natural Resources Technical Report is submitted to assist in the
preparation of a Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the proposed project The project is
located in northern Johnston County (Figure 1)
1.1 Project Description
The proposed project calls for the replacement of Bridge No 415 on SR 1718,
over Buffalo Creek (Figure 2) The existing right-of-way (ROW) and proposed ROW are
60 0 ft (18 3 m) wide The existing and proposed cross-sections are two-lane shoulder
sections Project length is approximately 300 0 ft (914 m) The project consists of
replacing the existing structure with a new bridge on existing location Traffic will be
detoured onto other local roads during construction
1.2 Bridge Demolition
Bridge No 415 is comprised of asphalt and timber Therefore, no components of
the bridge will be dropped into Waters of the U S Bridge removal for this project is
classified as `Case 3' Case 3 projects do not have special restrictions beyond those
outlined in Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters and the
supplements added by the Bridge Demolition document Restrictions outlined in the Best
Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be adhered to by
NCDOT
1.3 Environmental Commitments
There are not any site specific environmental commitments at this time All
standard guidelines apply
1.4 Purpose
The purpose of this technical report is to inventory, catalog and describe the
various natural resources likely to be impacted by the proposed action This report also
attempts to identify and estimate the probable consequences of the anticipated impacts to
these resources Recommendations are made for measures which will minimize resource
impacts These descriptions and estimates are relevant only in the context of existing
preliminary design concepts. If design parameters and criteria change, additional
field investigations will need to be conducted.
1.5 Methodology
Research was conducted prior to field investigations Information sources used in
this pre-field investigation of the study area include U S Geological Survey (USGS)
quadrangle maps for Johnston and Wake Counties (Flowers & Zebulon), Geographical
Information Systems (NC Center for Geographical Information & Analysis), National
Wetland Inventory Maps (Flowers & Zebulon), Natural Resources Conservation Service
(MRCS, formerly the Soil Conservation Service) soil maps, and NCDOT aerial ,
photographs of project area (1 1200) Water resource information was obtained from
publications of the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR,
1992 and 1993) and DENR Internet Page 2001 and from the NC Center for Geographic
-2-
I I
Information and Analysis (Environmental Sensitivity Base Map of Johnston County,
1995) Information concerning the occurrence of federal and state protected species in
the study area was gathered from the U S Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) list of
protected species and species of concern, and the NC Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) database of rare species and unique habitats
General field surveys were conducted along the proposed alignment by NCDOT
biologists Bradley E Suther and Sue Brady on 30 March 2000 Additional field surveys
were conducted on 26 September 2000 by NCDOT biologists Lynn Smith, Chris
Rivenbark and Jill Holmes Plant communities and their associated wildlife were
identified and recorded Wildlife identification involved using one or more of the
following observation techniques active searching and capture, visual observations
(binoculars) and identifying characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scat, tracks and
burrows) Jurisdictional wetland determinations were performed utilizing delineation
criteria prescribed in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual"
(Environmental Laboratory, 1987) Jurisdictional surface water determinations were
performed using guidance provided by N C Division of Water Quality [(DWQ), formerly
known as the Division of Environmental Management (DEM)],"Field Location of
Streams, Ditches, and Ponding" (NCDENR-DWQ, 1997)
1.6 Qualifications of Investigators
1) Investigator Bradley E Suther, Natural Systems Specialist, NCDOT
Education B S Natural Resources, NC State University, 2000
Experience NC Department of Transportation/ Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch, June 1999 - June 2000
Expertise Soil classification, wetland delineation, natural history
2) Investigator Susan G Brady, Natural Systems Specialist, NCDOT
Education B S Environmental Studies, University of Maine at Machias, 1993
M S Marine Biology, University of North Carolina at Wilmington,
1995
Experience NC Department of Transportation/ Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch, Oct 1998-Feb 2001
Contract Biologist, NC Wildlife Resources Commission/ Nongame
and Endangered Species Division, May 1998-Sept 1998
Research Technician, UNC-Wilmington, Jan 1995- Dec 1995
Expertise Field ecology, natural history, mollusk surveys, wetland
delineation
1.7 Definitions
Definitions for areal descriptions used in this report are as follows Project
Study Area denotes the area bounded by proposed construction limits, Project Vicinity
describes an area extending 0 5 mi (0 8 km) on all sides of the project study area, and
Project Region is equivalent to an area represented by a 7 5 minute USGS quadrangle
map with the project occupying the central position
-3-
A

d O" QO 6
\ 3g3
003
2j 2 \a\ u? 2393 m W ?P
v / \?7
`? 5 /
E 2% '1 360
_ 3
5 - , ph 2353
h
y v 9y ry 8S Za
`k a
7 r ? r-
2>g0 - ZcjpS , N 5A
,A Bridge No. 415
'w
4 -
-
24 2% 3 _-' -3 \o N \N
6
250 e\ G - 2 \o rno Z w
t 5, '
i`
-p s co
r - ? J f0 r
\J y `
Goui1 ?Oc?0
a, J /) O 1 4 a, , 6 rk. - 4 J,
cn y 0%.5
; xJ ?o
J . O -! r . -
01 V
t
O \J CA - N LP' - 6 L r 1 i
C-I
X 0
52 O
J ?
rCO3
J V' - \Oo
\ N \W 1-6 E?8

North Carolina Dept of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development &
Environmental Analysis Branch
a
Johnston County
Replace Bridge No. 415 on SR 1718
Over Buffalo Creek
B-3672
SCUM 1 in = 1 mi Figure 1
?r
,
?drdSO , Sr+rIl
O"
_ ? ?f+ir?ry V??' ?
IJ
y O
Nn ?cr
v
R7 ? vii '^ p c ° m
p r c tz
` o
C
nvrc
f M d
? fn lT1 13a
? o
o '+
00
0
r
it fill'
r
W
CL
co
(D
Z
O
t
r
'I
+I
a
c'
'f
+,t
t
.1
t 1?
M i
4*1 r
ky
?t
I ? s-
jr

W* +
0)
Im '
-? W
A„
? a4
F?
t7
+n ?
?r t
?r
, t I
ilf`r,'
t'Y •
e?S r•??.R-+??.'`i?1• "`+iJ,.+?:9"3S?J3?lfl4^?k? t
V
Flar

?rt
b ,

h `Tr1y?./f.1ryl ?r1
?.r •.r f ? ? , • 4 J.
yf,f'? rr, ? i ?,? 1 ?i ? ?, ?I f
10 lot
r c' ,''j ? ?+ tt+
r 1 .r

Y
a t'
c
1
l ..r
,y
+f=t c
+, N ti
II 1'

1
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources, which occur in the study area, are discussed below
Soils and availability of water directly influence composition and distribution of flora and
fauna in any biotic community
The project study area lies within the Southern piedmont physiographic region in
the central part of North Carolina The topography in this section of Johnston County is
characterized by gently rolling hills Project elevation is approximately 240 0 ft (73 2 m)
above mean sea level (msl)
2.1 Soils
Three soil map units occur within project vicinity Wehadkee loam (Wt),
Wedowee sandy loam (WoD) and Gilead sandy loam (GeB) Table 1 lists study area soils
and their characteristics
Table 1. Soils within the Proiect Studv Area
Map
Unit Soil Percent
Slope 'Drainage
Class . Hydric
Classification
Wt Wehadkee loam 0-2 Poorly Hydric
WoD Wedowee sandy loam 8-15 Well Non-hydric
GeB Gilead sandy loam 2-8 Moderately well Non-hydrtc
Wehadkee loam is a nearly level and poorly drained soil generally located along
streams The seasonal high water table is at the surface or within a depth of 1 0 ft
(0 3 m) Surface runoff is slow and permeability is moderate This soil is well suited for
woodlands but poorly suited for urban and recreational uses Main limitations are
flooding and wetness. Wehadkee loam is listed as a hydric soil
Wedowee sandy loam is a well drained soil on side slopes of uplands on the
Piedmont Surface runoff is rapid and permeability is moderate This soil is best used as
woodland and pasture It is suited for most urban and recreational uses, however,
moderate permeability is a limitation Main limitations include the slope and erosion
Wedowee sandy loam is a non-hydric soil
Gilead sandy loam is a moderately well drained soil found in the uplands on the
Coastal Plain Surface runoff is medium and permeability is moderately slow or slow A
perched water table is at a depth of 1 5 - 2 5 ft (0 5 - 0 8 m) during the spring This soil
is used as pasture, woodland or cropland Main limitations include the slope, surface
runoff and the clayey subsoil The hazard of erosion is moderate The soil is suited to
most urban and recreational uses, however, wetness and slow permeability are
limitations Gilead sandy loam is a non-hydric soil
-6-
11 ,r
Soil core samples taken throughout the project area revealed soils with a sandy
clay texture The soils did exhibit hydric conditions, such as low chroma colors, in areas
adjacent to Buffalo Creek Therefore, hydric soil indicators, as defined in the "Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual", 1987, were observed within the project study
area
2.2 Water Resources
This section contains information concerning those water resources likely to be
impacted by the project Water resource information encompasses physical aspects of the
resource, its relationship to mayor water systems, Best Usage Standards and water quality
of the resources Probable impacts to these water bodies are also discussed, as are means
to minimize impacts
2.2.1 Waters Impacted and Characteristics
Buffalo Creek will be the only surface water resource directly impacted by the
proposed project (Figure 2) Buffalo Creek is located in sub-basin 03-04-06 of the Neuse
River Basin
At Bridge No 415, the channel of Buffalo Creek is approximately 45 0 ft
(13 7 m) wide and has an average depth of 5 0 ft (1 5 m) The substrate is composed of
sand, silt, clay and organic muck
2.2.2 Best Usage Classification
Streams are assigned a best usage classification by the DWQ The classification
of Buffalo Creek [Index no 27-57-16-(3)] is C NSW Class C uses include aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture The
supplemental classification of NSW denotes Nutrient Sensitive Waters which require
limitations on nutrient inputs
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I: undeveloped
watersheds or WS-II: predominately undeveloped watersheds) nor Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.0 mile (1.6 km) of project study area.
2.2.3 Water Quality
The DWQ has initiated a whole basin approach to water quality management for
the 17 river basins within the state The basinwide approach allows for more intensive
sampling of biological, chemical and physical data that can be used in basinwide
assessment and planning Benthic macromvertebrates are intensively sampled for
specific river basins Benthic macromvertebrates have proven to be a good indicator of
water quality because they are sensitive to subtle changes in water quality, have a
relatively long life cycle, are nonmobile (compared to fish) and are extremely diverse
The overall species richness and presence of indicator organisms help to assess the health
of streams and rivers All basins are reassessed every five years to detect changes in
water quality and to facilitate National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
-7-
permit review There are not any biological sampling sites located within 1.0 mi (1.6
km) of Bridge No. 415.
Point source dischargers located-throughout North Carolina are permitted through
the NPDES Program Any discharger is required to register for a permit One permitted
discharger is located approximately 1.6 mi (2.5 km) upstream of Bridge No. 415.
The Wendell WWTP discharges directly into Buffalo Creek with a permitted flow of 0 70
MGD
Nonpomt source discharge refers to runoff that enters surface waters through
stormwater or snowmelt Agricultural activities may serve as a source for various forms
of nonpomt source pollutants Land clearing and plowing disturb soils to a degree where
they are susceptible to erosion, which can lead to sedimentation in streams Sediment is
the most widespread cause of nonpomt source pollution in North Carolina Pesticides,
chemical fertilizers, and land application of animal wastes can be transported via runoff
to receiving streams and potentially elevate concentrations of toxic compounds and
nutrients Animal wastes can also be a source of bacterial contamination and elevate
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) Drainage ditches on poorly drained soils enhances
the transportation of stormwater into surface waters (NCDEHNR-DEM, 1993)
2.2.4 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Replacing an existing structure in the same location without constructing a detour
bridge during construction is almost always preferred It poses the least risk to aquatic
organisms and other natural resources Utilizing the full ROW width of 60 0 ft (18 3 m),
anticipated impacts to Buffalo Creek will be 60 0 ft (18 3 m) No other alternates are
being studied at this time Usually, project construction does not require the entire ROW,
therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less
Project construction may result in the following impacts to surface waters
1 Increased sedimentation and siltation from construction and/or erosion
2 Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation and
vegetation removal
3 Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface
and ground water flow from construction
4 Changes in water temperature due to streamside vegetation removal
5 Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas
6 Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff, construction and
toxic spills
Precautions must be taken to minimize impacts to water resources in the
study area, NCDOT's Best Management Practices (BMP) for the Protection of
Surface Waters must be strictly enforced during the construction stage of the
protect. Guidelines for these BMPs include, but are not limited to: minimizing built
upon area and diversion of stormwater away from surface waters as much as
-8-
11
possible. Provisions to preclude contamination by toxic substances during the
construction interval must also be strictly enforced.
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems This section describes
those ecosystems encountered in the study area, as well as, the relationships between
fauna and flora within these ecosystems Composition and distribution of biotic
communities throughout the project area are reflective of topography, hydrologic
influences and past and present land uses in the study area Descriptions of the terrestrial
systems are presented in the context of plant community classifications and follow
descriptions presented by Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible Dominant flora
and fauna observed, or likely to occur, in each community are described and discussed
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided for
each animal and plant species described Plant taxonomy generally follows Radford, et
al (1968) Animal taxonomy follows Martof, et al (1980), Menhmick (1991), Potter, et
al (1980), and Webster, et al (1985) Subsequent references to the same organism will
include the common name only Fauna observed during the site visit are denoted with an
asterisk (*) Published range distributions and habitat analysis are used in estimating
fauna expected to be present within the project area
3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Three distinct terrestrial communities are present in the project study area Coastal
Plain Small Stream Swamp (brownwater subtype), mixed pine hardwood forest and
maintained/disturbed Community boundaries within the study area are generally well
defined without a significant transition zone between them Many faunal species likely to
occur within the study area may exploit all communities for shelter and foraging
opportunities, or as movement corridors
3.1.1 Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Brownwater Subtype)
The Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp is located adjacent to Buffalo Creek and
continues away from the creek as the creek extends north and south of the existing bridge
This wetland serves to aid with flood control, retain and filter pollution and provide plant
and wildlife habitat The canopy is primarily composed of tupelo gum (Nyssa biflora), red
maple (Acer rubrum), river birch (Betula nigra) and bald cypress (Taxodium distichum)
The shrub layer consists of saplings of canopy trees and musclewood (Carpinus
carohmana) The herbaceous layer consists of giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea), rush
(Juncus sp ), sedge (Carex sp ), jewel-weed (Impatiens capensis), violets (Viola spp ),
curly dock (Rumex sp mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum), knotweed (Polygonum sp
blackberry (Rubus sp goldenrod (Solidago sp ) and arrowhead (Sagittaria spp ) Poison
ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) and cross vine (Anisostichus capreolata) comprise the vine
layer
-9-
3.1.2 Mixed Pine Hardwood Forest
The mixed pine hardwood forest is adjacent to the maintained roadside
community and grades into Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp approximately 75 0 ft
(22 9 m) from the centerline of the existing road Dominant canopy trees include
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) and sweetgum
(Liquidambar styraciflua) The shrub layer consists primarily of flowering dogwood
(Corpus florida) and American holly (Ilex opaca) Herbaceous species include multiflora
rose (Rosa multiflora), chickweed (Stellaria sp ), bitter cress (Cardamine sp ) and St
John's wort (Hypericum spp ) Greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), muskadme grape (Vrtis
rotundifolia) and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicerajaponica) comprise the vine layer
3.1.3 Maintained/Disturbed Community
The maintained/disturbed community includes highly maintained road shoulders
along SR 1718 that are present along the entire length of the project and less intensively
managed areas that grade into the surrounding natural communities Significant soil
disturbance and compaction, along with frequent mowing or herbicide application, keep
this community in an early successional state
Road shoulders act as buffers between the roadway and surrounding communities
by filtering stormwater runoff and reducing runoff velocities The width of the road
shoulder is approximately 8 0 ft (2 4 m) Vegetation occurring along the road shoulder
include low growing species such as fescue grass (Festuca sp ), lanced-leaf plantain
(Plantago lanceolata), vetch (Vicia spp ), chickweed, Carolina geranium (Geranium
carohnense), and henbit (Lamium amplexicaule) The less maintained areas contained
pokeweed (Phytolacca americana), dogfennel (Eupatorium captllifoltum), elderberry
(Sambucus canadensrs), Japanese honeysuckle and blackberry
3.1.4 Wildlife
Wildlife associated with the communities present within the project vicinity
include white-tailed deer* (Odocoileus virgrmanus), eastern mole (Scalopus aquahcus),
opossum (Didelphis virgiruana), meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanzcus), muskrat
(Ondatra zibethicus), gray squirrel (Sciurus carohnensis), beaver* (Castor canadensrs)
and raccoon* (Procyon lotor) White-tailed deer will use these communities for cover
and will forage on twigs and leaves as well as mast
The wetter areas such as the Coastal Plain small stream swamp may be inhabited
by reptiles and amphibians such as green tree frog* (Rana clamitans), eastern box turtle
(Terrapene c carohna), ground skink (Sincella lateralts), Eastern garter snake
(Thamnophis sirtahs), spotted salamander (Ambystoma maculatum) and spring peeper
(Hyla crucifer)
Avian species utilizing the project vicinity include Amencan crow* (Corvus
brachyrhynchos), white-eyed vireo* (Vireo griseus), kingfisher* (Megaceryle alcyon),
Canada geese* (Branca canadensrs), yellow ramped warblers* (Dendroica coronata),
-10-

juncos* (Junco hyemahs), American goldfinch* (Carduelis tristis) and brown cowbird*
(Molothrus ater)
The maintained habitat within the project area is surrounded by extensive forested
areas and represents only a minor constituent of a larger community structure within the
project vicinity Therefore, faunal species frequenting the maintained community will be
largely those species inhabiting the adjacent communities
3.2 Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community, Buffalo Creek, will be impacted by the proposed project
Physical characteristics of the water body and condition of the water resource influence
faunal composition of aquatic communities Terrestrial communities adjacent to a water
resource also greatly influence aquatic communities
Fauna associated with these aquatic communities includes various invertebrate
and vertebrate species Fish species likely to occur in Buffalo Creek include mosquito
fish (Gambusia holbrooki), sunfish (Lepomis sp ) and bluegill sunfish (L macrochirus)
Invertebrates that would be present include crayfish* (Decapoda), water striders*
(Aquarius sp ), whirligig beetles (Gynnidae), and dragonflies and damselflies (Odonata)
Mollusks identified in Buffalo Creek includes three species of freshwater mussels*
including shells of (Utterbackia imbecillis) and green lance (Elliptio viriduhs) and a live
(Elliptio sp ) and a snail* (Campeloma decisum)
3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the subject project will have various 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 Temporary
and permanent impacts are considered here as well
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the relative abundance of each
community present within the study area Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of these communities Table 2 summarizes potential quantitative
losses to these biotic communities, resulting from project construction Estimated
impacts are derived using the entire proposed ROW width of 60 0 ft (18 3 m) The paved
roadway width of 20 0 ft (6 1 m) has been excluded from the impact calculations
Usually, project construction does not require the entire ROW, therefore, actual impacts
may be considerably less
-11-
Table 2. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
COMMUNITY IMPACTS
Mixed Pine Hardwood 0070(0028)
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp 0012(0005)
Maintained/Disturbed 0 152(0062)
TOTAL. 0.234 (0.095)
Note Values cited are ?n acres (hectares)
Plant communities found within the proposed project area serve as nesting and
sheltering habitat for various wildlife Replacing Bridge No 415 and its associated
improvements will reduce habitat for faunal species, thereby diminishing faunal numbers
However, due to the size and scope of this project, it is anticipated that impacts to fauna
will be minimal
Areas modified by construction (but not paved) will become road shoulders and
early successional habitat Reduced habitat will displace some wildlife further from the
roadway while attracting other wildlife by the creation of more early successional habitat
Animals temporarily displaced by construction activities will repopulate areas suitable for
the species
Aquatic communities are sensitive to even small changes in their environment
Stream channelization, scouring, siltation, sedimentation and erosion from construction-
related work will effect water quality and biological constituents Although direct
impacts may be temporary, environmental impacts from these construction processes may
result in long term or irreversible effects
Impacts often associated with in-stream construction include increased
channelization and scouring of the streambed In-stream construction alters the stream
substrate and may remove streamside vegetation at the site Disturbances to the substrate
will produce siltation, which clogs the gills and/or feeding mechanisms of benthic
organisms (sessile filter-feeders and deposit-feeders), fish and amphibian species
Benthic organisms can also be covered by excessive amounts of sediment These
organisms are slow to recover or repopulate a stream
The removal of streamside vegetation and placement of fill material at the
construction site alters the terrain Alterations of the streambank enhances the likelihood
of erosion and sedimentation Revegetation stabilizes and holds the soil thus mitigating
these processes Erosion and sedimentation carry soils, toxic compounds and other
materials into aquatic communities at the construction site These processes magnify
turbidity and can cause the formation of sandbars at the site and downstream, thereby
altering water flow and the growth of vegetation Streamside alterations also lead to
more direct sunlight penetration and to elevations of water temperatures which may
impact many species
-12-
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides descriptions, inventories and impact analysis pertinent to
two important issues--Waters of the United States and rare and protected species
4.1 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 (CFR) Part
328 3 Wetlands, defined in 33 CFR 328 3, are those areas that are inundated or saturated
by surface or ground water 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 (USCOE) under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (33 U S C 1344)
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Potential wetland communities were investigated pursuant to the 1987 "Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual" The three parameter approach is used where
hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation and prescribed hydrologic characteristics must all be
present for an area to be considered a wetland
Wetlands are present within the project area, and are associated with Buffalo
Creek (Figure 2) The wetlands can be described as Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp
(Schafale and Weakley, 1990) Soils within the wetlands have a sandy clay texture and a
Munsell color notation of 2 5 Y 5/2 Mottles found in the soils have a Munsell color
notation of 10 YR 5/8 Hydrological indicators include saturated soils, water in the pit at
2 0 inches, water stained leaves and wrack lines Vegetation within the wetland includes
river birch, red maple, bald cypress, tupelo gum, musclewood, rush, sedge, giant cane,
jewel-weed, violets, curly dock, mayapple, arrowhead, knotweed, goldenrod, blackberry,
poison ivy and cross vine
Buffalo Creek is a jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (33 U S C 1344) Discussion of the biological, physical and water quality
aspects of Buffalo Creek are presented in previous sections of this report
4.1.2 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Anticipated impacts to wetland areas are determined by using the entire project
ROW width of 60 0 ft (18 3 m) As a result of total impacts to wetlands have been
determined to be 0 012 ac (0 005 ha) Impacts to Buffalo Creek have been determined to
be 60 0 linear feet (18 3 m) Usually, project construction does not require the entire
ROW, therefore, actual wetlands and surface water impacts may be considerably less
4.1.3 Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated In accordance with
provisions of section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U S C 1344), a permit will be
-13-
40
required from the COE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the
United States "
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 regulation for
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act,
(1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment,
and,
(2) that 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 Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality
General Certification is required prior to the issuance of the Section 404 Nationwide
Permit No 23 Section 401 Certification allows surface waters to be temporarily
impacted for the duration of the construction or other land manipulations
4.1.3.1 Neuse River Buffers
As the project is located in the Neuse River Basin, Riparian Area Rules for
Nutrient Sensitive Waters apply The rules state that roads, bridges, stormwater
management facilities, ponds and utilities may be allowed where no practical alternative
exists They also state that these structures shall be located, designed, constructed, and
maintained to have minimal disturbance, to provide maximum erosion protection, to have
the least adverse effects on aquatic life and habitat, and to protect water quality to the
maximum extent practical through the use of best management practices Every
reasonable effort will be made to avoid and minimize riparian buffer impacts
Estimated impacts to the riparian buffers are 0 09 ac (0 04 ha) Natural
communities impacted include the Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp and maintained/
disturbed habitats It is possible the water resource listed below may be exempted when
an on-site determination by the Division of Water Quality is conducted Therefore
impacts may be considerably less
4.1.4 Mitigation
The USCOE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (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
-14-
wetland impacts has been defined by the 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
4.1.4.1 Avoidance
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 overall project
purposes
4.1.4.2 Minimization
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 road 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 By
keeping construction within the proposed right-of-way and detouring traffic along
existing roads, the NCDOT will minimize, to the extent possible, all impacts to Waters of
the U S
4.1.4.3 Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to
Waters of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
possible It is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be
achieved in each and every permit action Appropriate and practicable compensatory
mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been required Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United States Such actions should
be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site Compensatory
mitigation is not usually necessary with a Nationwide Permit No 23, however the final
decision lies with the USCOE
4.2 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
-15-

(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 USFWS Other species may receive additional protection under separate
state laws
4.2.1 Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended As of
26 February 2001, the USFWS lists the following federally-protected species for
Johnston County (Table 3) A brief description of each species' characteristics and
habitat follows
Table 3. Federally-Protected Species for Johnston County
Scientific Name Common Name Status
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded woodpecker Endangered
Alasmidonta heterodon Dwarf wedge mussel Endangered
Elliptio steinstansana Tar spinymussel Endangered
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac Endangered*
Endangered - A taxon "which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range"
(Endangered Species Act, Section 3)
Indicates the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) Endangered
Animal Family Picidae
Date Listed 13 October 1970
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that is entirely black
and white except for small red streaks on the sides of the nape in the male The back of
the RCW is black and white with horizontal stripes The breast and underside of this
woodpecker are white with streaked flanks The RCW has a large white cheek patch
surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf
pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting habitat A forested usually contains at
least 50% pine, lack a thick understory, and be contiguous with other stands to be
appropriate habitat for the RCW These birds nest particularly in trees that are >60 years
old and are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age The foraging range of the
RCW is up to 500 0 ac (200 0 ha) This acreage must be contiguous with suitable nesting
sites
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees and usually in trees that
are infected with the fungus that causes red-heart disease Cavities are located in colomes
from 12 0-100 0 ft (3 6-30 3 m) above the ground and average 30 0-50 0 ft (9 1- 15 7 m)
high They can be identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds the
-16-
tree The RCW lays its eggs in April, May, and June, the eggs hatch approximately 38
days later
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION NO EFFECT
Suitable nesting habitat in the form of large pine trees with little understory is not present
within the project vicinity The mixed pine hardwood forest present is primarily
comprised of hardwoods and has a dense understory A review of the NCNHP database
of rare species and unique habitats, on 30 November 2000, has no record for the presence
of red-cockaded woodpecker within the project vicinity Therefore, project construction
will not affect the red-cockaded woodpecker
A/asmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel) Endangered
Animal Family Umomdae
Date Listed 14 March 1990
The dwarf wedge mussel is a small mussel ranging in size from 2 5 cm to 3 8 cm
in length It has a distinguishable shell noted by two lateral teeth on the right half and
one on the left half The penostracum (outer shell) is olive green to dark brown in color
and the nacre (inner shell) is bluish to silvery white
Successful reproduction is dependent on the attachment of larval mussels to a host
fish It is not known what the host fish is but evidence suggests that it is either an
anadromous or catadromous species Known populations of the dwarf wedge mussel in
North Carolina are found in Middle Creek and the Little River of the Neuse River Basin
and in the upper Tar River and Cedar, Crooked, and Stony Creeks of the Tar River
system This mussel is sensitive to agricultural, domestic, and industrial pollutants and
requires a stable silt free streambed with well oxygenated water to survive
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION Unresolved, pending further
survey
NCDOT biologists have not adequately surveyed Buffalo Creek within the project
study area Suitable habitat for dwarf wedge mussel is present within this portion of
Buffalo Creek, therefore a scuba survey is necessary The survey will be conducted as
soon as possible A review of the NCNHP database on 30 November 2000 indicated that
there are no known occurrences of dwarf wedge mussel within the project study area
However, the effect this project will have on the dwarf wedge mussel can not be
determined until an additional survey has been conducted
-17-

Elliptio steinstansana (Tar spmymussel) Endangered
Animal Family Unionidae
Date Listed 29 July 1985
The Tar River spmymussel is endemic to the Tar River drainage basin, from
Falkland in Pitt County to Spring Hope in Nash County Populations of the Tar River
spmymussel can be found in streams of the Tar River Drainage Basin and of the Swift
Creek Drainage Sub-Basin
This mussel requires a stream with fast flowing, well oxygenated, circumneutral
pH water The bottom is composed of uncompacted gravel and coarse sand The water
needs to be relatively silt-free It is known to rely on a species of freshwater fish to act as
an intermediate host for its larvae
The Tar River spmymussel is a very small mussel This mussel is named for its
spines which project perpendicularly from the surface and curve slightly ventrally As
many as 12 spines can be found on the shell which is generally smooth in texture The
nacre is pinkish (anterior) and bluish-white (posterior)
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION NO EFFECT
NCDOT biologists Logan Williams, Sue Brady and Jeffrey Burleson surveyed
Buffalo Creek within the project study area Suitable habitat for tar spmymussel is not
present within this portion of Buffalo Creek nor were any mussels found during the
survy The survey was conducted by wading through the stream and utilizing visual and
tactile survey techniques A review of the NCNHP database on 30 November 2000
indicated that there are no known occurrences of tar spmymussel within the project study
area Therefore, this project will not affect tar spmymussel
Rhus mtchauxii (Michaux's sumac) Endangered
Family Cashew (Anacardiaceae)
Federally Listed September 28, 1989
Best Search Time During the growing season (June - September)
Michaux's sumac is a dioecious shrub growing to a height of 10-2 0 ft
(0 3-0 6 m) Plants flower in June, producing a terminal, erect, dense cluster of 4-5
parted greenish-yellow to white flowers Fruits, produced from August through
September, are red, densely short-pubescent drupes, 0 25 in (5-6 mm) across Most
populations, however, are single sexed and reproduce only by rhizomes The entire plant
is densely pubescent The deciduous leaves are composed of 9-13 sessile, oblong leaflets
on a narrowly winged or wingless rachis The acute to acuminate leaflets have rounded
bases and are 15-3 5 in (4-9 cm) long and 10-2 0 in (2-5 cm) wide They are simply or
doubly serrate Distinctive characteristics include short stature, densely pubescent
throughout, evenly serrate leaflets
-18-

This species prefers sandy, rocky, open woods and roadsides Its survival is
dependent on disturbance (mowing, clearing, fire) to maintain an open habitat It is often
found with other members of its genus as well as with poison ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans) There is no longer believed to be an association between this species and
specific soil types
Michaux's sumac is endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and Piedmont
physiographic provinces of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia Most
populations occur in North Carolina This species is threatened by loss of habitat Since
its discovery, 50 percent of Michaux's sumac habitat has been lost due to its conversion to
silvicultural and agricultural purposes and development Fire suppression and herbicide
drift have also negatively impacted this species
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION NO EFFECT
Potential habitat for Michaux's sumac is present within the road shoulder portions
of the project area A plant by plant survey for Michaux's sumac, within areas of
potential habitat, was conducted by NCDOT biologists on 30 March and 26 September
2000 No Michaux's sumac was observed during these surveys A review of the
NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats on 30 November 2000 indicated that
there are no known occurrences of Michaux's sumac within the project study area
Therefore, project construction will not affect Michaux's sumac
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
There are nine Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed for Johnston County
Federal Species of Concern are not afforded federal protection under the ESA and are not
subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or
listed as Threatened or Endangered Federal Species of Concern are defined as those
species which may or may not be listed in the future These species were formally
candidate species, or species under consideration for listing for which there was
insufficient information to support a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered and Proposed Threatened Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Significantly Rare (SR) or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) list of rare plant and animal species are afforded
state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979
Table 4 lists Federal Candidate and State listed species, the species state status
and the existence of suitable habitat for each species in the study area This species list is
provided for information purposes as the status of these species may be upgraded in the
future
-19-

Table 4. Federal Species of Concern for Johnston County
Scientific Name Common Name State Status Habitat
Lythrurus matutinus Pinewoods shiner SR Yes
Elliptio lanceolata Yellow lance T (PE), Yes
Fusconaia masons Atlantic pigtoe T (PE) Yes
Lampsilis cariosa Yellow lampmussel T (PE) Yes
Lasmigona subviridus Green floater E Yes
Procambarus medialis Tar River crayfish W3 Yes
Solidago verna Spring-flowering goldenrod T No
Tofieldta glabra Carolina asphodel C* No
Trillium pusillum var Carolina least trillium E No
usill um
"*"-------Historic record (Last observed in Johnston County more than twenty years ago )
"E"-----"Any native or once-native species of wild animal whose continued existence as a viable
component of the State's fauna is determined by the WRC to be in jeopardy or any species of wild animal
determined to be an `endangered species' pursuant to the Endangered Species Act " (Article 25 of Chapter
113 of the General Statutes, 1987) "Any species or higher taxon of plant whose continued existence as a
viable component of the State's flora is determined to be in jeopardy" (GS 19B 106, 202 12) _
"T'----- A Threatened species is one which is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range
"C"----- A Candidate species is one which is very rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20 populations
in the state, generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat destruction, direct exploitation or
disease The species is also either rare throughout its range or disjunct in North Carolina from a main
range in a different part of the country or the world
"SR"---- A Significantly Rare species is one which has not been listed by the N C Wildlife Resources
Commission as an Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species, but which exists in the state in
small numbers and has been determined by the N C Natural Heritage Program to need monitoring
Species which are very rare in N C , generally with 1-20 populations in the state, generally substantially
reduced in numbers by habitat destruction (and sometimes also by direct exploitation or disease
"(PE)"-Species has been proposed by a Scientific Council as a status that is different from the current
status, but the status has not yet completed the legally mandated listing process
"W3" A Watch Category 3 includes species that are poorly known in N C , but are not necessarily
considered to be declining or otherwise in trouble
A review of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique habitats on 30
November 2000 revealed no records of North Carolina rare and/or protected species in or
near the project study area Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site
visit, nor were any of these species observed
5.0 REFERENCES
Amoroso, Jame L 1999 "Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of
North Carolina" Raleigh North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
Cowardm, Lewis M , Virginia Carter, Francis C Golet, and Edward T LaRoe 1979
"Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, U S Fish and
Wildlife Service, U S Department of the Interior
-20-
Environmental Laboratory 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,"
Technical Report Y-87-1, U S Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Miss
Godfrey, Michael A, 1997 Field Guide to the Piedmont Chapel Hill, The University of
North Carolina Press
LeGrand, Jr , H E , and S P Hall 1999 "Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare
Animal Species of North Carolina" Raleigh North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
Martof, B S , W M Palmer, J R Bailey and J R Harrison 111 1980 Amphibians and
Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina
Press
Menhimck, E F 1991 The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina N C WRC , Raleigh
NCDEHNR-DEM 1992 Basmwide Assessment Report Neuse River Basin Raleigh,
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
NCDEHNR-DEM 1993 "Classifications and Water Quality Standards for North
Carolina River Basins " Raleigh, Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources
NCDENR-DWQ 1997 "Field location of Streams, Ditches, and Pondmg"
(Environmental Lab) Raleigh, Department of Environment and Natural Resources
NCDENR-DWQ 2001 Internet Web Page
http //esb ehnr state nc usBAUwww/benthosdata pdf
Patrick, T S , J R Allison, and G A Krakow 1995, Protected Plants of Georgia
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Potter, E F , J F Parnell and R P Teulmgs 1980 Birds of the Carolinas Chapel Hill,
The University of North Carolina Press
Radford, A E , H E Ahles and G R Bell 1968 Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press
Schafale, M P and A S Weakley 1990 Classification of The Natural Communities of
North Carolina Third Approximation North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDEHNR
U S Department of Agriculture, 1994 Soil Survey of Johnston County, Soil
Conservation Service North Carolina Agriculture Experiment Station

r
-21-
J 4
V
w
U S Fish and Wildlife Service 1993 Michaux's Sumac Recovery Plan U S Fish and
Wildlife Service Atlanta, GA
Webster, W D , J F Parnell and W C Biggs 1985 Mammals of the Carolinas, Virginia
and Maryland Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina Press

-22-
14
4
e.w SW[ o
O
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F EASLEY
GOVERNOR
April 5, 2005
MEMORANDUM TO Mr Omar Sultan
Program Development Branch
FROM Gregory J Thorpe, PhD
Environmental Management Director,
RECEIVED
APR 6 2005
W SIONOMMIAYS
POEkME OF MIM ENVY
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
SUBJECT Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Approval for Federal Aid Project
BRZ-1718 (4), Replacement of Bridge No 415 on SR 1718 over Buffalo
Creek, Johnston County, WBS 33216 1 1, State Project 8 2312401,
TIP No B-3672
Attached are four copies of the subject report, including 2 copies for your files and 1 copy for
distribution to FHWA No significant adverse environmental effects are expected as a result of the
project, therefore, no other distribution of the report is necessary
GJT/cdb
Attachment
cc/atta Mrs Deborah M Barbour
Mr Art McMillan
Mr Jay Bennett (2 copies)
Mr Greg Perfetti (2 copies)
Mr Victor Barbour
Mr D R Henderson
Mr N W Wamama (2 copies)
Mr Charles W Brown (3 copies)
Mr C B Goode, Jr (3 copies)
Mr Phillip S Harris, III
Mr S D DeWitt
Mr Don G Lee
Mr J Kevin Lacy (3 copies)
Mr J B Williamson, Jr
Mr Mike Bruff
Mr William H Williams, Jr
Mr Tom Norman
Mr Jim Trogdon (3 copies)
Mr Ron Lucas, FHWA
Mr John Emerson, Attn Mike Summers
Mr Doug Lane
Mr Mike Bell, US Army Corps of Engineers Rep
N C State Publications Clearinghouse (10 copies)
MAILING ADDRESS
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE [phone]
FAX [phone]
WEBSITE WWW NCDOT ORG
LOCATION
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
i
A
B
C
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No
State Project No
W B S No
Federal Project No
Project Description
B-3672
8.2312404
33216.1.1
BRZ-1718(4)
The purpose of this project is to replace Johnston County Bridge No 415 on
SR 1718 over Buffalo Creek The replacement structure will be a bridge 120 feet
long with 30 feet clear deck width The cross section will include two 11-foot
lanes and 4-foot offsets The roadway grade of the new structure will be raised
approximately six feet
The approach roadway will extend 393 feet from the northwest end of the new
bridge and 262 feet from the southeast end of the new bridge The approaches
will be widened to include a 22-foot pavement width providing two 11-foot lanes
Six-foot grass shoulders will be provided on each side (9-foot shoulders where
guardrail is included) The roadway will be designed as a Rural Local Route with
a 60 mile per hour design speed
Traffic will be detoured off-site during construction (see Figure 1)
Purpose and Need
Bridge No 415 includes a six-span superstructure composed of a timber deck on
timber joists The substructure includes timber caps on timber piles
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate the bridge has a sufficiency rating of
27 7 out of a possible 100 for a new structure The bridge is considered
structurally deficient due to a structural appraisal of 2 out of 9 and functionally
obsolete due to a deck geometry appraisal of 2 out of 9 according to Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) standards and is therefore eligible for FHWA's
Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program
Timber sub-structures typically do not last beyond 30 to 40 years of age due to the
natural deterioration rates of wood Rehabilitation of timber structure is generally
practical only when a few members are damaged or prematurely deteriorated
However, past a certain degree of deterioration, timber structures become
impractical to maintain and upon eligibility are programmed for replacement
Bridge 415 is approaching the end of its useful life
Proposed Improvements
Circle one or more of the following Type II improvements which apply to the
project
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 drams
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)
i Slide Stabilization
1 Structural BMW's for water quality improvement
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. Improving intersections including relocation and/or realignment
h Making minor roadway realignment
i Channelizing traffic
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
3. 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. Rehabilitating bridges including painting (no red lead paint), scour
repair, fender 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
2
v
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
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 planned construction projects, which may
be required in the NEPA process No project development on such land
may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed
13 Acquisition and construction of wetland, stream and endangered species
mitigation sites
14 Remedial activities involving the removal, treatment or monitoring of soil
or groundwater contamination pursuant to state or federal remediation
guidelines
SSnecial Protect Information-
D
Estimated Costs:
Total Construction
Right of Way
Total
Estimated Traffic:
Year 1999 - 400 vpd
TTST -I%
$ 575,000
$ 16,000
$ 591,000
Year 2025 - 700 vpd
Dual - 3%
Design Exceptions: There are design exceptions for horizontal curve radius and
sag vertical curves A 45mph speed limit is required for the vertical alignment
J I
Bridge Demolition: Most timber and steel structures (as is Bridge No 415) can
be removed using standard practices without any resulting fill in the stream
Offsite Detour: NCDOT Guidelines for Evaluation of Offsite Detours for Bridge
Replacement Projects considers multiple project variables beginning with the
additional time traveled by the average road user resulting from the offsite detour
The offsrte detour for this project would include SR 1701, SR 1716, and SR 1003
The detour for the average road user would result in 7 0 minutes additional travel
tune (2 4 miles additional travel) Up to a seven-month duration of construction is
expected on this project According to the guidelines, a project with an offsite
detour route requiring five to ten minutes travel time and at least six months of
closure must be evaluated to determine if an onsite detour is appropriate In this
particular case, maintaining traffic onsite would result in higher costs Johnston
County Emergency Services has indicated that an offsite detour is acceptable and
that services can be adequately re-routed during construction The Division
concurs in this recommendation Johnston County School Transportation has
indicated that rerouting buses around this project will be a problem due to a lack
of a good turn around NCDOT will coordinate a turn around for the school
buses on this project for safety of the students Coordination with Johnston
County Schools will be done prior to bridge closure In view of the cost savings
and no mayor opposition, an offsite detour is recommended
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?
(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-tenth (1/10) of an acre and have all practicable measures

to avoid and minimize wetland takings been 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
. J

U
(8) Will the project require fill in waters of the United States
in any of the designated mountain trout counties9 X
(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage
tanks (UST's) or hazardous materials sites9 X

PERMITS AND COORDINATION YES NO
(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)9 X
(11)' Does the project involve Coastal Bamer Resources Act
resources9 X
(12) Will a U. S Coast Guard permit be required9
X
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway9 X
(14) Will the protect require any stream relocations or channel
changes'? X
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES YES NO
(15) Will the protect induce substantial impacts to planned
growth or land use for the area? X
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or
business? X
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any minority or
low-income population X
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the
amount of right of way acquisition considered minor? X
(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control? ?
X
(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness
and/or land use of adjacent property? X
(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent
local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness? X
5

(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)9 X
(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic
volumes X
(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing
roads, staged construction, or on-site detours X
(25) If the project is a bridge replacement protect, 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 facilrty9 X
(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or
environmental grounds concerning the project9 X
(27) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws
relating to the environmental aspects of the project9 X
(28) Will the project have an "effect" on structures/properties
eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places9 X
(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remains which are
important to history or pre-history9 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 National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers9 X
F Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E
Response to Question 2 Habitat exists for the Dwarf wedgemussel. A survey in August
2004 indicates no species found near the bridge. However, the species is present
downstream US Fish and Wildlife Service has concurred in the biological conclusion of
May Effect, Not Likely to Adversely Effect for the Dwarf wedgemussel. The USFWS
concurrence letter is located in the appendix
6
I I :A
G CE Approval
TIP Project No
State Project No
WBS No
Federal Project No
Project Description
B-3672
8.2312401
33216.1.1
BRZ-1718(4)
The purpose of this project is to replace Johnston County Bridge No 415 on
SR 1718 over Buffalo Creek The replacement structure will be a bridge 120 feet
long with 30 feet clear deck width The cross section will include two 11-foot
lanes and 4-foot offsets The roadway grade of the new structure will be raised
approximately six feet
The approach roadway will extend 393 feet from the northwest end of the new
bridge and 262 feet from the southeast end of the new bridge The approaches
will be widened to include a 22-foot pavement width providing two 11-foot lanes
Six-foot grass shoulders will be provided on each side (9-foot shoulders where
guardrail is included) The roadway will be designed as a Rural Local Route with
a 60 mile per hour design speed
Traffic will be detoured off-site during construction (see Figure 1)
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification (Check one)
TYPE II(A)
X TYPE II(B)
A rov
y la?
D e Assistant Manager

3 2 G?
Date
3 a o5
Date
ect Planning Engr*er
ect Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
For Type II(B) projects only
,
Date /.John F Sullivan, III, Division Administrator
, Federal Highway Administration
7
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
J
PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
Johnston County
Bridge No. 415 on SR 1718
Over Buffalo Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1718 (4)
State Project No. 8.2312401
W.B.S. No. 33216.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-3672
Division Construction Engineer
NCDOT will coordinate a turn around for the school buses near the bridge
Office of Natural Environment/Hydraulic Design Unit
This project is subject to the Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
Green Sheet
March 2005
Page 1 of 1
J
L
1
v ?
3
Goo
?SCpix ! ?rpe ( ? \NS (? 8
-.1 Ln J o ?' 1 ?s' / \J J r '? 7 \\ I
6\ y ?' 5 VW^r O
v
p Cn ?P r / 6 1 1
O
\03 A /
J _
v 9 \J N
\NO\v ? / ? O 1 O ' 11 O
i! N J v
N °
N b N 00 1 1 ? '?
2 Q 25p5 7 XN 54
OA / m Bridge No. 415
/
2j _ \o
3 ? o
5 G -
/ N
!9'.
r d
393 ? ,
2
/? -
3 2
N 1
m
5 5 19-0"
of
%19
eO C?
ty ,N P
s a /?l1
MYRA `/% rn .-> ? " -
?0p3
5 r ' o Oy 2? ~
O 1 -
IpKE
tour Route r• Ah a a

North Carolina Dept of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development &
" Environmental Analysts Branch
Johnston County
Replace Bridge No. 415 on SR 1718
Over Buffalo Creek
B-3672
SCALE. 1 m = 1 m, Figure 1
A L/ ILA
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh. North Carolma 276363728
October 8, 2004
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Nortb Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
RECEIVED
OCT 12 2004
OMSM OF MAYS
PDD OF NATMBMI1lEir'T
This letter is in response to your letter of September 27, 2004 which provided the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological determination of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) that the replacement of Bridge No. 415 on SR 1718 over Buffalo
Creek in Johnston County (TIP No. B-3672) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the
federally endangered dwarf wedgemussel (Alasnfulonua helcrodon). These comments are
provided in accordance with sect?nr 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
According to the information you submitted, a mussel survey was conducted at the project site
on August 12, 2004. The survey extended 100 meters upstream and 100 meters downstream of
the crossing The survey deviated front the usual 400 meters downstream after it was determined
that no habitat was present for die dwarf wedgemussel. This portion of the stream is slack water
which flows into Wendell Lake, less than one mile downstream. No mussels of any species weie
observed during the survey. However. the dwarf wedgemussel has been observed in Buffalo
Creek several miles downstream of the project area.
Based on the fnfomiatfon provided and othcr information available, the Service concurs with
your determination that the proposed bridge replacement may affect, but is not likely to
adversely affect the dwarf wedgemussel. We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of
the ESA have been satisfied for this species. We remind you that obligations under section 7
consultation must be reconsidered if. (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified
action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered in
this review; (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this
review; or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by this
identified action.
1 J T
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this pioJect If you have any questions
regarding our response, please contact Mr Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext 32).
Sincerely.
Jahn Flamm?ond'7/
Acting Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Mike Bell. USACE, Washington, NC
Nicole Thomson, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
14 ) i?4
Federal Aid #BRZ-1718(4) TIP 9B-3672 County Johnston
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL
REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Project Description Replace Bridge No 415 on SR 1718 over Buffalo Creek
On November 2, 2000, representatives of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
? Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
?? North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Reviewed the subject project at
? a scopmg meeting
photograph review session/consultation
other
?\
All parties present agreed
there are no properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effect
there are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criterion
Consideration G within the project's area of potential effect
? there are properties over fifty years old (list attached) within the project's area of potential effect,
but based on the historical information available and the photographs of each property, properties
identified as "i 1 L i- -1? I are considered not eligible for the National
Register and no further evaluation of them is necessary
Q there are no National Register-listed properties located within the project's area of potential effect
Signed
j
Representative,14CDOT' Date

/i
Date
FHWA, for the Division Admmistrator, or other Federal Agency
Z A-1t)
Date
State Historic Preservation Officer Date
If a survey report is prepared, a final copy of this form and the attached list will be included

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L S Brook, Administrator
Michael F Easley, Governor Division of Archives and History
Lisbeth C Evans, Secretary Jeffrey J Crow, Director
March 30, 2001
MEMORANDUM
To William D Gilmore P E \lanaoer
Project Development and EnN ironmental Analysis Branch
From David Brook ?.,
Deputy State Histor P set' art ice
Re Replacement of Bridge No 415 on SR 1713 over Buffalo Creek
TIP No 13-3672 Johnston County ER 00-7677
On November 3 2000 April Montgomer} of our staff met with North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of '` minds concernin the
above project We reported our available intormation on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources alone \%lth 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 \\e are aware of no historic structures located
within the area of potential effect However we recommend that an historic architectural
survey be conducted for this project
To date, we have received the results of the archaeological survey and determined that
there are no historic properties within the project s area of potential effect
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 ma%
be eligible for inclusion in the National Registei of Historic Places well bL atteLted b%
the project construction We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation
be conducted in connection with this project
Location Mailing Addrew Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N Blount St. Raleigh NC 4617 Mad Service Center Raleigh NC 27699.4617 (919) 7334763 . 733 8651
RESTORATION 515 N Blount St Raleigh NC 4613 Mad Service Center Raleigh NC 2 769 9136 1 3 [phone] . 715-4801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N Blount St Raleigh NC 4618 Mad Service Center Raleigh NC 2 7699116 1 8 [phone] . 71 5 4801
A -,-,e M7
Page Two
William D Gilmore
March 30, 2001
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 300
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration If you have any questions concerning
the above comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator,
at 919 733-4763
CC Mary Pope Furr
Tom Padgett