NCDOT_80-04 Town Creek

Permit Class
NEW
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
and
Coastal Resources ,Vermtt
for
X Major Development in an Area of Environmental Concern
pursuant to NCGS 113A-118
X Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Permit Number
80-04
Issued to N.C. Department of Transportation, 1548 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Authorizing development in Brunswick County at Town Creek, Bridge No. 61 on NC 133
(TIP No. B-3115) , as requested in the permittee's application dated 3/5/04 and 4/2/04.
including the attached workplan drawings G 1) 1 dated I1/18/03; 3 dated 2/9/04; and 6 dated 2/20/04
This permit, issued on 5/26104 , is subject to compliance with the application (where consistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms mays
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
B-3115, Bridle Replacement
i) Due to the presence of the endangered Shortnose Sturgeon and other anadromous fish, no in -water or in -
marsh work shall be conducted from February lst to Tune 30th of any year without prior approval of the
NC Division of Coastal Management (I)CM), in consultation with the NC Division of Marine Fisheries
(DMF), the NC Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC), and the US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE). For purposes of this mortorium, in -water is defined as those areas that are inundated at any
time during construction, including the waters or contiguous marsh of Town Creek.
2) The permittee shall implement NC DOT'S Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage.
(See attached sheets for Additional Conditions)
This permit action may be- appealed by the permittee or
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing
date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work initiation or
continuance as the case may be.
This permit must be accessible on -site to Department
personnel when the project -is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered
hereunder requires further Division approval.
dl work must cease when the permit expires on
No Expiration Date, pursuant to GS 136-44.7B
Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DENR and the
Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
_w Gh es�:-•Jones Director •
Division of Coastal Management
This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program.
Signature of Permittee

N.C. Department of Transportation
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Permit #80-04
Page 2 of 5
3) Turbidity curtains shall be used to contain all bottom disturbing activities, including pile or casement
installation, placement of riprap, excavation or filling. The turbidity curtains are to be properly
maintained and retained in the water until construction is complete and turbidity within the curtains
reaches ambient levels. The turbidity curtains shall be installed parallel to the stream banks on each
side of the stream, extend past the construction limits, and attach to the silt fences containing the work
site. The turbidity curtains shall not encircle a work area or extend across the streams. Turbidity
curtains are to be retained in the water until construction is complete and all of the work area contained
by the turbidity curtains has been stabilized by vegetation or other means.
4) In accordance with project commitments made within the Categorical Exclusion document dated June
2002, Design Standards for Sensitive Watersheds will be used to ensure the project will not adversely
affect the endangered Shortnose Sturgeon and anadromous fish.
5) In accordance with project commitments made within the Categorical Exclusion document dated June
2002, "Guidelines for Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee, Precautionary Measures for
Construction Activities in North Carolina Waters" will be used to ensure the project will not adversely
affect the endangered West Indian Manatee. The most recent version of these guidelines, revised
6/2003, shall be followed.
6) The NCDOT document "Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal" (final
9/20/99) shall be followed during demolition and construction activities.
7) Debris resulting from demolition of the existing bridge, including deck components, shall not enter
wetlands or waters of the United States, even temporarily.
8) All excavated materials and debris associated with the removal of the existing bridge and temporary
work bridge will be disposed of on an approved upland site.
NOTE: The bridge demolition debris may be suitable for use as artificial reef material. The permittee is
encouraged to contact the Artificial Reef Coordinator, at the NC Division of Marine Fisheries
Morehead City office at [phone] to coordinate review of the suitability of the material
and arrangements for such use.
9) The permanent and temporary work bridges shall be constructed with driven piles. Should drilled shaft
construction or jetting of any bridge piles become necessary, a modification to this permit will be
required.
10) . Temporary work bridges or platforms and barge will be. utilized far construction acce%. se of Lu
mats for construction access is not authorized. Dredging in any manner, including "kicking" with boat
propellers is not authorized.
11) Work barges shall be floated into place and then sunk. They shall not be sunk then dragged into plac,,.
12) The temporary work bridges shall be removed within 90 days of project completion or within 30 days
of the moratorium end date if the project is completed while the moratorium is in effect.

N.C. Department of Transportation
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
13) Existing bridge pilings shall be extracted or removed flush with the streambed.
Permit #80-04
Page 3 of 5
14) No excavated or fill material will be placed at any time in any vegetated wetlands or surrounding
waters outside of the alignment of the fill area indicated on the work plan drawing(s).
15) The temporary placement or double handling of excavated or fill materials within waters or vegetated
wetlands are not authorized.
16) There shall be no clearing or grubbing in wetlands outside of the area indicated on the workplan
drawing(s).
17) No excavation will occur within waters or wetlands of the State.
18) All excavated materials will be confined above normal high water and landward of regularly or
irregularly flooded wetlands behind adequate dikes or other retaining structures to prevent spillover of
solids into any wetlands or surrounding waters.
19) The fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants except in trace quantities.
20) Live concrete shall not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream.
21) Placement of riprap shall be limited to the areas as depicted on the attached work plan drawings. The
riprap material must be free from loose dirt or any pollutant. It must be of a size sufficient to prevent
its movement from the site by wave or current action. The riprap material must consist of clean rock
or masonry materials, such as but not limited to, granite or broken concrete.
Mitigation
NOTE: This project will permanently impact approximately 0.17 acres of 404 wetlands and will
temporarily impact approximately 0.01 acres of 404 wetlands. This project will permanently
impact <0.01 acres of surface waters and will temporarily impact <0.01 acres of surface waters.
22) Due to the possibility that compaction, mechanized clearing and/or other site alterations might .prevent
the temporary wetland impact area from re -attaining jurisdictional wetland status, the permittee shall
provide an annual update on the wetland areas temporarily impacted by this project. This annual
update will consist of photographs provided during the agency monitoring report meeting and a brief
report on the progress of these temporarily impacted areas in re -attaining wetland jurisdictional status.
Three ,years after project camplp49n, the permittee shall schedule an agency field mee�with DCM,
the NC Division of Water Quality and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission to determine if the
wetland areas temporarily impacted by this project have re -attained jurisdictional wetland status. If at
the end of 3 years the wetland areas temporarily impacted by this project have not re -attained
jurisdictional wetland status, NC DCM and the above listed agencies shall determine whether a
compensatory wetland mitigation plan will be required.

N.C. Department of Transportation
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Permit #80-04
Page 4 of 5
23) In accordance with the 7/22/03 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the N.C. Department of
Transportation (NCDOT), N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), compensatory mitigation for 0.17 acres of permanent 404
wetland impacts associated with the proposed project shall be provided by the Ecosystem
Enhancement Program (EEP).
Sedimentation and Erosion Control
24) The permittee shall follow Best Management Practices for the protection of Surface Waters and
sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources.
25) Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control devices, measures or structures must be implemented to
ensure that eroded materials do not enter adjacent wetlands, watercourses and property (e.g. silt fence,
diversion swales or berms, sand fence, etc.).
26) This project must conform to all requirements of the NC Sedimentation Pollution Control Act and NC
DDT's Memorandum of Agreement with the Division of Land Resources.
27) In order to protect water quality, runoff from the construction must not visibly increase the amount c
suspended sediments in adjacent waters.
28) All disturbed areas shall be properly graded and provided a ground cover sufficient to restrain erosion
within thirty days of project completion.
General
29) The authorized activity will not cause an unacceptable interference with navigation.
30) Any relocation of utility lines that is not already depicted on the attached work plan drawings, or
described within the attached permit application, will require approval by DCM, either under the
authority of this permit, or by the utility company obtaining separate authorization.
31) If the permittee determines that additional permanent and/or temporary impacts will occur that are not
shown on the attached permit drawings, additional authorization from DCM will be required.
32) This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional permits, approvals or authorizations
that may be required.
33) The N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has authorized the proposed project under a Generalw
Water Quality Certification (DWQ Project No. 04-0363), which was issued on 3/11/04. Any violation
of the Certification approved by the DWQ will be considered a violation of this CAMA permit.
NOTE: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers authorized the proposed project under Nationwide Permit
Number 23/33 (COE Action ID No. 200100914), which was issued on 5/20/04.

N.C. Department of Transportation
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Permit #80-04
Page 5 of 5
NOTE: The NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ) reviewed the proposed activity of this project for the
applicability of the Stormwater Management rules and determined that the development activity,
as proposed at this site, is not subject to the stormwater requirements as provided for in 15A
NCAC 2H .1000. If at any time in the future, development of any part of this site is planned or if
proposed activities differ in any manner from what is shown on the plans on file with DWQ, the
permittee must submit the project to DWQ and DCM for review and additional authorization
from DCM may be required.
f-..- -- -. . - . ... - ­.. .. Iry . � r.- - ' r- -

0 1 1 1 L,34
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
April 2, 2004
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
151-B Hwy 24
Hestron Plaza II
Morehead City, NC 28557
Attention: Mr. Bill Arrington
District Manager
Dear Sir:
Subject: Amendment to Application for CAMA Major Development Permit for the
proposed replacement of Bridge No. 61 on NC 133 over Town Creek in Brunswick
County, NCDOT Division 3. Federal Project No. BRSTP-133(1), State Project No.
8.1231401, WBS Element: 32874.1.1, TIP No. B-3115
Please see the following amended items for the permit application sent March 12, 2004.
Bridge Demolition (Page 2)
The Final 1999 NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal
states that "If a CAMA permit is required, dropping any components of a bridge into the
water will not be acceptable unless it is proven that there is no feasible alternative. Such an
activity would require coordination with and approval of CAMA."
Therefore, language in the permit application for bridge demolition will change to the
following:
Bridge Demolition: Bridge No. 61 is 300 feet long and 26.4 feet wide. It has a reinforced
concrete deck on steel I -beams with concrete caps on timber piles. Best Management
Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal, which dictates that all existing structures
M1 over water be removed by non -shattering methods, will be followed during demolition and
construction. Bridge No. 61 will be removed without dropping any components into the
surface waters. 1f during construction it is determined that this is not feasible, then an
alternate bridge demolition plan will be coordinated with the Division of Coastal
Management. The bridge will be removed in pieees that Femain in plaee en the eaps until
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: 919-71 F-1501 2728 CAPITAL BLVD
PROTECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PLB SURE 168
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE. WWWNCDOrORG RALEIGH NC 27604
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598

APR 19 2004
Frade to rerneve thesethe . Turbidity curtains shall be installed along the banks
of Town Creek to help prevent components of the existing bridge from entering the
watercourse. NCDOT will adhere to a moratorium allowing no work in water during the
period of February I through June 15 to protect the shortnose sturgeon and other
anadromous fish.
Piles and Bents (Include new information with PROPOSED IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE
UNITED STATES section on page 2)
Pile Installation :
The bridge will have pre -stressed concrete driven piles. Since the piles will not be jetted
and therefore cannot be driven as deep, they will be in a braced A -frame form. The square
piles will be 65 feet by 20 square feet. Subsequently, the bents are located in the water at
four locations across the creek.
Page 4. Mitigation Options. The statement concerning supporting structures will be removed.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION: Specific avoidance and minimization measures for
this project include using a maximum slope of 3:1 and replacing the existing bridge in its
current location with an off -site detour. The new bridge will span the entire widtr...r'I`..m%
The tidal freshwater
marsh will not be impacted because the new bridge will span this community as well.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need additional
information please call Carla Dagnino at [phone].
Sincerely
��" - �UA
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
cc:
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Mr. Bill Biddlecomb, USACE, Washington
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Mike Street, NCDMF
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. H. Allen Pope, PE; Division 3 Engineer
Mr. Dave Timpy, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Hennessy, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Mason Herndon, DIV 3 DEO

/ DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT pp���
L�
APPLICATION TRANSMITTAL AND PROCESSING RECOIRD
1) APPLICANT: NC Department of Transportation County: Brunswick
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Bridge # 61, on NC 133 over Town Creek
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED COMPLETE BY FIELD: 04/02/04
FIELD RECOMMENDATION: Attached: Yes To Be Forwarded: No
CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION: Attached: NO To Be Forwarded: YES
FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: Bill Arrington DISTRICT OFFICE: Morehead\
DISTRICT MANAGER REVIEW:
B) DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED IN RALEIGH: FEE REC'D: $ *o, 0 601016
PUBLIC NOTICE RECD: OV Iii /o 1V END OF NOTICE DATE: 61112
a
ADJ. RIP. PROP NOTICES REC'D: DEED RECD:
APPLICATION ASSIGNED TO: ON:
C) 75 DAY DEADLINE: 150 DAY DEADLINE:
MAIL OUT DATE: STATE DUE DATE:
FEDERAL DUE DATE: FED COMMENTS REC'D:
PERMIT FINAL ACTION:.ISSUE,..: ...:..:.... DENYIi\. DRAFTON
AGENCY
DATE
COMMENTS
'RETURNED
OBJECTION
S:
YES NO
NOTES
Coastal Management - Regional Representative
Coastal Management,-LUPiConsistency:Iz 1a1•vi
w.
Division of Community Assistance
Land Quality Section
Division of Water Quality
Storm Water Management (DWQ)
Stafe'Properry'Office
Division of Archives & History
Division of Environmental Health
Division of Highways
Wildlife Resources Commission
Division. of Water Resources
Division of Marine Fisheries
hI I Lv4V:U�
I t..+
.. ,
Submerged Lands (DMF)

NCDENR
North Carolina. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Acting Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM:
TO: DOUG HUGGETT
FROM: BILL ARRINGTON
SUBJECT: COMMENTS & RECOMMENDATIONS - CAMA MAJOR PERMIT —
Replacement of Bridge No. 61 at the crossing of Town Creek on NC 133 in
Brunswick County
DATE: April 5, 2004
The following are my comments and recommendations regarding the above -mentioned proposal.
The proposal is to replace the existing 300-foot long by 27-foot wide timber, steel and concrete
bridge with a 300-foot long by 36-foot wide cored slab concrete bridge on the existing alignment.
The proposed bridge would have a vertical clearance ± 2 feet greater than the existing bridge
(approximately 8 feet). The bridge is being widened from 27 feet to 36 feet to more closely
correspond to the 12 foot paved travel lanes and 8 foot grassed shoulders of NC 133. At each end
bent, a work platform approximately 39-feet wide by 60-feet long will be installed from high -
ground, upland of the end bent, towards the first bent water -ward of the end bent. An additiona120-
foot wide work platform will be installed in the northwest quadrant from the high -ground behind the
north end bent to approximately 20 feet into the water of Town Creek. NC DOT Best Management
Practices would be used for Bridge Demolition and Design Standards for Sensitive Watersheds
would be used for Erosion. control. NC DOT has committed to no in -water work from February 1
through June 15 of each year, due to the Shortnose Sturgeon and anadromous fish moratoriums.
The project is well designed with minimization of impacts. I would recommend the project be
approved contingent upon the following conditions:
1) No bridge demolition debri or excavated or fill material will be placed at any time, in any
wetlands or surrounding waters, outside of the alignment of the fill area indicated on the
work plats.
2) The temporary placement or double handling of excavated or fill materials within waters or
vegetated wetlands are not authorized.
3) All excavated materials will be confined above normal high water and landward of regularly
or irregularly flooded wetlands behind adequate dikes or other retaining structures to prevent
spillover of solids into any wetlands or surrounding waters.
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled % 10% Post Consumer Paper

4
4) In order to protect Shortnose Sturgeon and anadromous fish populations, no excavation or
filling will be permitted in the waters or contiguous marsh of Town Creek between February
1 and June 15 of any year without the prior approval of the DCM, in consultation with the
DMF and NC WRC.
5) In order to protect water quality, runoff from the construction must not visibly increase the
amount of suspended sediments in adjacent waters.
6) All fill material must be clean and free of any pollutants, except in trace quantities. Metal
products, organic materials, or unsightly debris will not be used.
7) The riprap material must be free from loose dirt or any pollutant. It must be of a size
sufficient to prevent its movement from the site by wave or current action.
8) Mitigation for the project impacts are debited from the EEP in accordance with the MOA.
9) Temporary impacted areas are monitored as in 9) above and considered permanent impacts if
they do not retain the hydrology and vegetation that existed prior to the project construction.
10) Turbidity curtains shall be used to isolate all work areas from the stream at Town Creek,
including pile or casement installation, placement of riprap, excavation or filling. The
turbidity curtains shall be installed parallel to the stream banks on each side of the stream.
The turbidity curtains shall extend past the construction limits and attach to the silt fences
containing the work site. The turbidity curtains shall not encircle a work area or extend
across the streams. The turbidity curtains are to be properly maintained and retained in the
water until construction is complete and all of the work area contained by the turbidity
curtains has been stabilized by vegetation or other means. The turbidity curtains shall be
removed when turbidity within the curtains reaches ambient levels.
11) All commitments in the application and CE made by NC DOT are observed.
Cc: Cathy Brittingham
Charles Jones
Jim Gregson

ON
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
ALWT,.WA
NC®ENR
NOF G OU . DEPuiTH OF
ENNRONM EM .WO RE cuRCE3
151-B HWY. 24, HESTRON BUILDING
MOREHEAD CITY, NC 28557
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
TO: STD
OFFICE: Z-a5;4z- 4,6VEieTlsEME^1-r- .S6GT7dAl
TELEPHONE #:
FROM: �l L(� Ae4e/n/47d.-1
FAX#: rglbl3Y3-2Z2
OFFICE: DIVISION OF COASTAL NfANAGti'vIENT
RE:
I I , 2� isS'aie-- nF 774S-;44 A/Ei t�
DATE SENT: 651166 ! 6e/
TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET:

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Acting Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
April 5, 2004
Star News
Legal Advertisement Section
P.O. Box 840
Wilmington, NC 28402
Re: Public Notice - Brunswick/New Hanover County
Dear Sir:
Please publish the attached Notice in the Sunday, April 11, 204 issue of the Star
News.
The State Office of Budget and Management requires an original Affidavit of Publication
prior to payment for newspaper advertising. Please send the affidavit, an original
copy of the published notice, and an original invoice to Jaye Poole, NC Division of
Coastal Management, 1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-
1638, Telephone [phone].
Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you should have any questions, please
contact me at our Morehead City office [phone].
Sincerely,
&4� ---
Bill Arrington
D.O.T. Field Representative
wla
Enclosure
cc: Jim Gregson, District Manager
Doug Huggett
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagemeni.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer —50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

t
NOTICE OF FILING
OF APPLICATION FOR
CAMA MAJOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources hereby gives public notice as
required by NCGS 113A-119(b) that application for a development permit in an Area of
Environmental Concern as designated under the CAMA was received on April 2, 2004.
According to said application, the North Carolina Department of Transportation is requesting to
replace Bridge No. 61, on NC 133, 1.1 miles north of Pinelevel, at the crossing of Town Creek,
in Brunswick County. A copy of the entire application may be examined or copied at the office of
Bill Arrington, NC Division of Coastal Management, located at 151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza Il,
Morehead City, NC, [phone] during normal business hours.
Comments mailed to Charles S. Jones, Director, Division of Coastal Management, 1638
Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1638, prior to May 2, 2004, will be considered in
making the permit decision. Later comments will be accepted and considered up to the time of
permit decision. Project modification may occur based on review and comment by the public and
state and federal agencies. Notice of the permit decision in this matter will be provided upon
written request.
PUBLISHED ON: Please publish on April 11, 2004

P. 01
TRANSACTION REPORT
APR-06-2004 TUE 07:33 AM
DATE START RECEIVER TX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE M# DP
APR-06 07:31 AM 89103432229 54" 3 SEND OK 352
� Mc

DCM%
DWQ%
Development Type
FEE
(14300 1601 4351000931625 62531
(24300 1602 435100095 2341)
I. Private, non-commercial
-
development that does not involve
$250
100% ($250)
0% (SO)
the filing or excavation of any
wetlands or open water areas:
it. Public or commercial development
:r
that does not involve the filling or
S400
100% ($400)
0% (SO)
-. excavation of any wetlands or open
water areas:
III. For development that involves the
filling andlor excavation of up to 1
acre of wetlands and/or open water
areas, determine if A. B, C. or D
-
below applies:
(
III(A). For Private, noncommercial
development, If General water Quality
5250
100%($250)
0%(50)
Certification No.3301 (see attached)
can be applied:
,
III(B): For public or commercial
development, if General water Quality
S400
100%(S400)
0%(SO)
Certification No.3301 (see attached)
can be applied:
III(C). If General Water Quality
Certification No. 3301 (see attached)
could be applied, but DCM staff
determined that additional review and
$400
60% (S240)
40% (S160)
written DWQ concurrence is needed
because or concerns related to water
quality or aquatic life:
III(D). If General Water Quality
Certification No. 3301 (see attached)
5400
60% ($240)
40% (SI60)
can not be applied:
IV. For development that involves
the filling and/or excavation of more
S475
60% (S285)
40% (S19O)
than one acre of wetlands and/or
open water areas:

B-3115 Permit app Amendment
Subject: B-3115 Permit app Amendment
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 10:18:55 -0500
From: "Carla S. Dagnino" <[e-mail]>
Organization: North Carolina Department of Transportation
To: [e-mail]
Hi Bill,
Please take a look at the attached amendment to the permit application.
I checked with Joe Blair from the Division and he said that he would like to leave the .07 acre of Mech.
clearing as is (permanent). He said that possibly it will be just mowing, but there may be some other
clearing and he would rather be on the conservative side and not get a modification later.
I addressed the other issues
• Bridge demolition
• Pile Installation
• Bents in the water.
Please let me now what you think and I will send out to the other agencies.
Thanks.
Carla
DB-3115 CAMA Permit Ammendment.doc
Name: B-3115 CAMA Permit
Ammendment.doc
Type: WINWORD File (application/msword)
Encoding: base64
Download Status: Not downloaded with message
A/1111A I.AA

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: North Carolina Department of Transportation
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Bridge No. 61, on NC 133 over Town Creek in
Brunswick County
Photo Index - 2000: No Photo 1995: No Photo
State Plane Coordinates: x: 2306425 y: 142276 GPS: Rover File # X032917A
INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 12/8/03 & 3/29/2004
Was Agent Present - Yes on 12/8/03
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received as Complete- 4/2/2004
Office - Morehead City
SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Brunswick County
Land Classification from LUP - Rural & Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: CW, PTA and PTS
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - NC 133 and 300-foot long by 27-foot wide bridge
Planned - NC 133 and 300-foot long by 36-foot wide bridge
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A Source: N/A
HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
Excavated Filled
Other
(A) 404 Type Wetlands
0.10 acres (Permanent)
0.07 acres Mechanized
<0.01 acres (Temp.)
Clearing
(B) Coastal Wetlands
(C) Public Trust Area - Shallow
ds t 6�10 sq. ft.
nt na
Bottom
Shading 2070 sq. ft.
(D)Other - High Ground
0.85 acres (In roadway
and shoulders)
(D) Total CAMA AEC Disturbed: approx. 0.27 acres Shading and Buffer Impacts
(E) Total area disturbed by project: 2.5 acres
(F) Primary Nursery Area: No
(G) Water Classification: C-SW
(H) Open for Shellfishing: No
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The N.C. Department of Transportation is proposing to replace the
existing 300-foot long timber, concrete and steel bridge over Town Creek with a 300-foot long
cored slab concrete bridge spanning Town Creek and the adjacent Coastal Wetlands.

FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
NC DOT — B-3115, Bridge No. 61 over Town Creek, Brunswick County
PAGE 2
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The site of this proposal is Bridge No. 61 on NC 133, 1.1 miles north of Pinelevel at the crossing
of Town Creek, in Brunswick County. The general purpose of the project is to replace the
deteriorated 300-foot long by 27-foot wide timber, steel and concrete bridge with an 300- foot
long by 36-foot wide concrete cored slab bridge Spanning Town Creek and the adjacent Coastal
Wetlands to allow safer driving conditions for the traveling public.
Bridge No. 61 crosses Town Creek 2 miles west of its confluence with the Cape Fear River. The
bridge crossing Town Creek is flanked with Coastal Wetlands and 404 type wetlands. Creek width
at the crossing is approximately 120 feet. Bridge No. 61 crosses Town Creek at approximately a
45-degree angle. Vertical clearance between the water and bridge bottom is approximately 6 feet.
An approximately 500-foot long by 60-foot wide causeway was constructed through wetlands on
Chowan silt loam soils when the bridge was constructed. The Coastal Wetland area exists
immediately adjacent to Town Creek and consists of Cladium and Spartina cynbsuroi des. The 404
type wetlands betweerr the coastal wetlands and the high ground is vegetated with Red Cedar and
Baccaris halimifolia, Pine, Maple, Gum, Honeysuckle, Myrtle, Cypress and Carex. Soils on this
site are mainly Chowan silt loam with Baymeade fine sand and Blanton fine sand in the upper
elevations farthest from the bridge, as classified by the NC Soil Conservation Service.
Approximate elevations on the site range between 0 feet and 10 feet above Normal High Water
(NHW). No evidence of SAV beds was noted. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality
classifies waters of Town Creek as C-SW at the project site. Town Creek is not classified as
Primary Nursery Area, as designated by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries, at this
site. The project area is within CAMA Areas of Environmental Concern and is designated as
Rural and Conservation by the Brunswick County Land Use Plan.
The proposal is to replace the existing 300-foot long by 27-foot wide timber, steel and concrete
bridge with a 300-foot long by 36-foot wide cored slab concrete bridge on the existing alignment.
The proposed bridge would have a vertical clearance ± 2 feet greater than the existing bridge
(approximately 8 feet). The bridge is being widened from 27 feet to 36 feet to more c losely
correspond to the 12 foot paved travel lanes and 8 foot grassed shoulders of NC 133. At each end
bent, a work platform approximately 39-feet wide by 60-feet long will be installed from high -
ground, upland of the end bent, towards the first bent water -ward of the end bent. An additional
20-foot wide work platform will be installed in the northwest quadrant from the high -ground
behind the north end bent to approximately 20 feet into the water of Town Creek. NC DOT Best
Management Practices would be used for Bridge Demolition and Design Standards for Sensitive
Watersheds would be used for Erosion control. NC DOT has committed to no in -water work
from February I through June 15 of each year, due to the Shormose Sturgeon and anadromous
fish moratoriums.

FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
NC DOT — B-3115, Bridge No. 61 over Town Creek, Brunswick County
PAGE
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS:
As proposed, the construction of the bridge approaches with 3:1 slopes would require the filling of
approximately 0.10 acres of 404 type wetlands and approximately 2 acres of impacts to high
ground. To allow room for installation of erosion control measures, approximately 0.07 acres (10
feet outside construction limits) of 404 type Wetlands would be disturbed adjacent to the road
shoulders. Installation of the pilings for the three work platforms would temporarily fill less than
0.01 acres of 404 type wetlands and open water. The additional width of the bridge would cause
approximately 2070 square feet of additional shading impacts to Public Trust Waters AEC. A
minimal disturbance of the creek bottom is expected when driving the pre -stressed concrete piles
for the 4 bents in the stream.
NC DOT has reduced the fill in wetlands that would have occurred in raising the causeway and
widening the bridge by using 3:1 approach shoulder slopes. NC DOT has committed to dropping
no materials from the bridge demolition in the water and to using top down construction and an
off -site detour to minimize impacts. Due to the presence of Shortnose Sturgeon and anadromous
fish in Town Creek, NC DOT has committed to an in -water work moratorium from February 1 to
June 15. The NC DOT has proposed to use Design Standards for Sensitive Watersheds BMP's to
minimize the impacts of erosion.
NC DOT would be impacting approximately 0.17 acres of 404 type wetlands caused by the
permanent bridge in this proposal and requests to debit the EEP to offset these impacts. No
mitigation is proposed for the <0.01 acres of temporary impacts that may be caused during the
installation of the work platform pilings.
The collective disturbance area for the project is 2.5 acres.
Bill Arrington
April 5, 2004
Morehead City

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
March 12, 2004
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
151-B Hwy 24
Hestron Plaza II
Morehead City, NC 28557
Attention: Mr. Bill Arrington
District Manager
Dear Sir:
Subject: Application for CAMA Major. Development Permit for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 61 on NC 133 over Town Creek in Brunswick
County, NCDOT Division 3. Federal Project No. BRSTP-133(1), State
Project No. 8.1231401, WBS Element: 32874.1.1, TIP No. B-3115
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No.
61 over Town Creek on NC133. Bridge No. 61 will be replaced on the existing alignment
with a new bridge approximately 300 feet in length and a with cleared roadway width of 32
feet. The approaches will include two 12 foot lanes with 8 foot shoulders. Permanent
impacts to non coastal wetlands associated with the replacement of Bridge No. 61 will.
include 0.10 acre of permanent fill and 0.07 acre of mechanized clearing. The traffic will be
detoured to NC 87 during bridge construction.
Please find enclosed copies of the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permit
application (MPI and MP5), Categorical Exclusion (CE), permit drawings, half size plans, a
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Stormwater Exemption letter, Guidelines for
Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee, an EEP Request Letter, green cards from the
Adjacent Riparian Land Owners and a method of debiting $400 to be submitted to the DCM
for processing the CAMA permit.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
2728 CAPITAL BLVD
PLB SUITE 168
RALEIGH NC 27604

3'
• Schedule for Construction: It is assumed that the Contractor will begin
construction of the proposed temporary work bridge shortly after the date of
availability for the project. The Let date is July 20, 2004 with a date of
availability of August 25, 2004.
Restoration Plan: Following the construction of the temporary work bridge, the
construction of the permanent bridge will be completed. Once the temporary
work bridge is no longer needed, all material used in the construction of the
temporary work bridge will be removed. The temporary impact area associated
with the work bridge is expected to recover naturally. Restoration of the project
area will take place immediately following project completion and prior to traffic
flow to the new bridge.
Removal and Disposal Plan: After the temporary work bridge is no longer
needed, all temporary work bridge material will become the property of the
contractor. The contractor will be required to submit a reclamation plan for the
removal and disposal of all work bridge material and demolished bridge material
to an off -site upland location.
Utility Relocation: There are four utility lines located at the project site. NCDOT's Utility -
Right -of -Way (Unit 3) has provided relocation plans for two utilities (Bell South and
AT&T). Preliminary relocation plans were also provided for Brunswick EMC and Time
Warner. At this time our data indicate that there will be no CAMA or Section 404
jurisdictional resources impacted. If final plans result in 404 and/or CAMA impacts,
NCDOT will apply for a Nationwide 12 Permit.
PROTECTED SPECIES
Threatened and Endangered Species: Plants and animals with federal classification of
Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered and Proposed Threatened are protected
under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. As of January 29, 2003, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists 14
federally protected species for Brunswick County. In August 1999 a survey for the federally
protected species found that habitat does exist for the endangered woodstork (Mycteria
americana), roughed -leaved loosestrife (Lysimachia asperulaefolia), Cooley's Meadowrue
(Thalictrun cooleyr) and the threatened bald eagle (Halieetus leucocephalus) species.
Currently these species receive biological conclusions of "Unresolved". However, another
survey will be conducted for each of these species in May of 2004, prior to construction.
Biological conclusions of "No Effect" for each of the remaining species are valid and are
presented in the attached CE.
• West Indian Manatee: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has developed a list
of "Precautions for the general construction in areas which may be used by the

i
Section 404 compensatory mitigation requirements for NCDOT projects that'are listed in
Exhibit 1 of the subject MOA during the Ecological Enhancement Program (EEP) transition
period which ends on July 1, 2005.
Since the subject project is listed in Exhibit 1 the necessary compensatory mitigation to
offset unavoidable impacts to waters that are jurisdictional under the federal Clean Water
Act will be provided by the EEP (see attached letter to EEP). The offsetting mitigation will
derive from an inventory of assets already in existence within the same Ecoregion and the
same 8-digit cataloguing unit. We have avoided and minimized the impacts to jurisdictional
resources to the greatest extent possible as described above. The remaining, unavoidable
impacts to 0.17 acre of jurisdictional wetlands will be offset by compensatory mitigation
provided by the EEP program.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
NCDOT requests that the proposed work be authorized under a Coastal Area Nanagement
Act Major Development Permit. NCDOT will also be applying for issuance of a United
States Army Corps of Engineers NWP 23 and NWP 33 and a section 401 Water Quality
Certification from the North Carolina Division of Water Quality under a separate cover.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need additional
information please call Carla Dagnino at [phone].
Sincerely
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
cc:
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Mr. Bill Biddlecomb, USACE, Washington
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Mike Street, NCDMF
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. H. Allen Pope, PE; Division 3 Engineer
Mr. Dave Timpy, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Hennessy, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Mason Hemdon, DIV 3 DEO

Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract 2.5 acres
b. Size of individual lots) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or NWL
0 = 10 feet
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Chowan silt loam (ch)• Bavmeade Fine Sand
e. Vegetation on tract: Tidal Freshwater/Brackish
Marsh; Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Upland
Pine Forest
f. Man-made features now on tract existing bridge.
roadway, and utilities
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land classification
of the site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
_ Conservation —Transitional
_ Developed _ Community
X Rural _ Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government? '
Zoned for some commercial, some residential,
see Tax map #86
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? X Yes _No
(Attach zoning compliance certificate. ifapplicable)
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? _ Yes X No
If yes, by whom?
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes X No
Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes —No
Coastal (marsh) X Other X
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? YES
(Attach documentation. ifavailable)
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters of
the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.)
surface runoff
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N/A
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then forward
a copy of the deed or other instrument under which the
owner claims title, plus written permission from the
owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross -sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by I V white paper. (Refer to Coastal
Resources Commission Rule 710203 for a detailed
description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue -line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
regarding that agency's use of larger drawings.) A site
or location map is a part of plat requirements and it
must be sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel
unfamiliar with the area to the site. Include highway or
secondary road (SR) numbers, landmarks, and the like.

Form DCM-MP-5
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES
a. Public X Private
b. Type of bridge (construction material)
concrete - cored slab
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
Town Creek
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
NWL 30 Feet
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes _ No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge 300 ft
(2) Width of existing bridge 24.0 ft
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge 6.0 ft
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain) all of the existing bridge
will be removed.
Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert N/A
(2) Width of existing culvert N/A
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW orNWL N/A
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain) N/A
g. Length of proposed bridge 300 ft
h. Width of proposed bridge 36 ft
i. Height of proposed bridge 2bove wetlands
loft
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
X Yes _ No
If yes, explain The low chord on the proposed bridge
is 2 ft +/- higher than that of the existing structure.
Therefore there is more flow area under the
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
Will the proposed bridge affect navigation --by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? X Yes No
If yes, explain The low chord on the proposed bridge
is 2 ft +/- higher than that of the existing structure.
Therefore there is more area to navigate under
the bridge
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
no navigable waters? _ Yes X No
If yes, explain
n. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard concerning
their approval?
_ Yes X No
If yes, please provide record of their action.
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-S
(6) Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW orNWL? Yes X No
If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above.
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed below MHW
orNWL? _Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled
(2) Width of area to be filled
(3) Purpose of fill
Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed within:
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs X Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 320 ft
(2) Width of area to be filled 15 ft (avg.)
(3) Purpose of fill roadway embankment .
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed on
highground? X Yes _No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 930 ft +/-
(2) Width of area to be filled 70 ft+/-
(3) Purpose of fill roadway embankment
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
X Yes _ No
If yes, explain in detail For 0.17 acres impact in wetland
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? —Yes —No
If yes, explain in detail
c. Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
_ Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
d. Will the proposed project require any work channels?
_ Yes X No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? Design Standards for
Sensitive Watersheds will be used.
f. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or hydraulic dredge)?
Standard bridge and roadway construction
equipment.
g. Will wetlands be crossed ;in transporting equipment
to project site? X Yes No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts. Work bridges will be used
to minimize impacts
h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any shoreline stabilization?
—Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
TMiP>S. ITU,vv;1 IT
Aeplicant or Project Name
z
Signature
zN;164
Date
Revised 03/95

The project is located in the Southern Outer Coastal Plain in Brunswick County in the Cape
Fear River basin in Hydrological Cataloguing Unit 03030005.
The wetland impacts, summarized in Table 1, totals 0.17 acre of non-riverine bottomland
wetlands. We propose to provide compensatory mitigation for the wetland impacts by using
the EEP for the 0.17 acres of impacts.
Table 1: Summary of Jurisdictional Impacts
Section
Permanent Wetlands ac
Streams ft
Riverine
Non riverine
RJW 13+70-L-
To 16 + 70-L-
0.17
Please send the letter of confirmation to Dave Timpy (USACE Coordinator) at U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers Division 3 Regulatory Field Office, (P.O. Box 1890, Wilmington, NC
28402-1890). Mr. Timpy's FAX number is [phone]. The current let date for the project is
July 20, 2004 for which the let review date is (June 1, 2004).
In order to satisfy regulatory assurances that mitigation will be performed; the NCD WQ
(North Carolina Division of Water Quality) requires a formal letter from EEP indicating their
willingness and ability to provide the mitigation work requested by NCDOT. The NCDOT
requests such a letter of confirmation be addressed to Mr. John Hennessy of NCDWQ, with
copies submitted to NCDOT.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Carla Dagnino at
[phone]
Sincerely, z
jiGregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.,
Environmental Management Director
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
cc:
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM Mr. Dave Timpy, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. John Hennessy, DWQ, Raleigh Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Mike Street, NCDMF Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E. , Hydraulics Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental Mr. H. Allen Pope, PE; Division 3 Engineer
Mr. Mason Hemdon, DIV 3 DEO

M AN
0"I RIO
It
ruA
stab
> NN
gn -mgvi
X to 4 0 fvxlli wvh
8 Orr pq nz3 � 0- SERA
Cy Ail
z .4
P.1

S III PENHISH UNITS pMWAY IOd
DETAIL A
LATERAL BASE DITCH
Iwr ra seaw�
n
PiD•
• Al,D a1SF1.
Ptr w..a M13FR.
'•w.!YCW �A.2.0Ff.
r,H, •v LV -CLASS B 519 .OF"
STA-1A+A0 TO 17+50 L LT
DETAIL B
SPECUL LATERAL BASE DITCH
wn� Iwr ro se-.R
kpytd n
/ p •w• RaPP
nr� iaM Y H0 •1.5Ft.
Hax.a-1.SF+.
B-2.OF1.
TIM •Y LI., - CLASS S R► RAP
STA. 17+50 TO 19+00 .-L. LT_
DETAIF C
SPECUL CC DI CN
pray
• tt! vvvv
'^ D
STA. 19+00 TO 20+50 4,- LT. O
2
Q T. F. HDLDINGS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
LP PROJECT B-3115
SKETCH OF RRiDGE NN RELATION TO PAVEMENT
ryPE III a "PE 111
W TE ill p '4
000
_IWIii
5©%GI
_
-
�rvvvv.-.-.-vim
vvrr��
vi--4
•�
1 \X1N
THEN CREEK TIMBER COMPANY
\W 1
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND Lo;
•� DENOTES MECHANIZED
• ' • • CLEARING IN WETLANDS
+
OxaGE - N
✓wvs✓
k
8 I'M9 w CbIC BR,R,
iibc §�TSAi�O.TJfRY-
A
-L-
P1 5/a 20+•58DD
A- 165r3D.P(RTl
D - Y45'00.0
T - 4
SE -226,60
OD9
RO - 2/0
•✓vn
i
DAVID R. HAPLESS
\ O
I
• �•q� ✓�3
I
/ DAVID R. HAPLESS
I
I
END TIP PROJECT B-3115
a a+
o
WA
A RAMP
END *PS.
..
I
>
BM7[Rra
ML •
t1•
APK TI
L c
I
I
11 Pp
40. w
TL I
6N.5
o9•10R ¢
l
RAIRLL
3:FLD'MT.' a
��`
1
1 /
�
•iYc�p1 1
r vosR
mLc N6I �
SpTRARCO
uM
1 /
8
/
_IS'R
/�
1 A e ITCR[0
4u5
BELL SOUTH - �$•
\
L lu rS .b._y^y 1
1
T AA1
i
WILLIAM C. RARRICK. IN
J. CLARK MPP QO 1{:`
MLLIAM Z-Wff11( _
2
+3138 �
LT.& RT. /
r/
A X'r bE
CHARLES G. SUFF, ■ �------
NOTE: SEE SHEET 5 FOR -L- PROFILE
S wza
NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
PROJECT: 32874.1.1(B-3115)
REPLACE BRIDGE NO.61ON NC 133
OVER TOWN CREEK
P'A\V'T REMOVAL
hce T Ot I V 11-18-03

IM D-1.5F1.
Fatrlp Wat.E-1.5Ft.
eB =25.OFt.
TYo• of LMr = CLASS I RAP RA► OFt
STA.16+I0 TO 17+30 -L- L7
DETAIL I
SPECUL LATERAL BASE DITCH
p • yid Fsbw
Fllt Fm W MI'D=1.5Ft.
Mo..a=1.$Ft.
8=2.Oft.
Trp• of Llr,•F = CLASS I RP RAR
STA 17+50 TO 1I+00 y IT
SPE Mi Cu� DITCH
lwt ro smw
td
wY. • t
p
IWu D=2.0Ft.
STA. 19+00 TO 20+50 4, LT.
O
T. F. HOLDINGS LISTED PARTNERSHIP
Q
BEGIN TIP PROJECT
YAKn
CIF
•cops O
I
TOWN CRM TIMBER COMPANY
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
'•'•'�• CLEARING IN WETLANDS
* YgYSn
ISHIIN PENIM UNITS
SNc7CH OF BRIDGE IN RELATION TO PAVEMENT
]YPF nr Y TYP
E 111
T��YPE In v nff a K
t7�
TR
IQ C*
*
.OWS �—YS•HO'bc BNiOLE
{/�1 pp 5y
/ I � W 1.01
MIDGE • 1i 5LL
Jk i AND RRWgE�
NO Rf1ET3
tpp p .1D.P6
( . p Y iY �ITFY YASX
YWDS 4
YYRfII i GQV
N /
PoT SJa 13#6877 8
M1
z°
S
-L-
PJ SJo 217+5IDO
A- 1652 300(RT)
D - X45'000
T - 4
R . I-WJ7
SE - OW
AD - 2NY
mumN S NO.
SNHT WO.
Rw Mlen No.
' pE3ICH
VHR
MTDM1WIc3
FtlppV�R
/ W+
��Y � r9 • /
1p.F /i
DAVID R. HARLESS
i DAVID R. HARLESS I
IJo. /8+3136 I
7 u8°dEr°E w END TIP PROJECT 8-3115
o .aaos L 2J+25D0
MDA Txu .. 5 • fN0 4'P.S.
•+AV
MTp.. Y.. YRu
(p IE I sxs V'e+101 § 1 I I I •TVWS
tout I /
ppl�yy• �y6Y 1
arosr
�_ 9 fesr 1 I gitiCgAFn 1 1 }d.`y I
�n e c !P 3 ` 1 SallEgySY' 1
hY3
B(1L SONIN • �X• \ I h6144.\,[� 1
L'D3 zAv
�►
EST.—
SW 0 6T.3 T rt
Rk HPP 4
St
WILLIAY �•
WILLIAM C. WARWICK.O
G�
x
3 M'rY yr E
• CHARLES G. SCAFF. R -��
' NOTE: SEE SHEET 5 FOR -L- PROALE
RT.
RT.
NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
PROJECT: 32874.1.1(B-3115)
REPLACE BRIDGE NO.61ON NC 133
OVER TOWN CREEK
PAV'T REMOVAL
Aee� 6 4 IU II-18-03

PROPOSED GRADE
10'
EXISTING GRADE J
lza'
PI = 15+20.00
—�— EL=12.15'
VC = 260'
(+)0.4545%
CLASS II�
RIP RAP I
0----------- - -
--- ,�
-10'
-20'
-30'
14+00
I
HIGF _ TIDE ELL\
�T SILRW.. T1DE�
I
� I
\� I
PL STA. 15+20 -L- PI = 17+50.00
ELEV.- 11.85' EL = 11.10'
5 SPANS Q 60'; 21' CORED SLAB ( O.A.L.- 300' ) VC = 140'
SKEW 1200 (-)0.4565%
I
I
I.09' 1019/01)
-EV— Q89' U/2
I
I
I
I
� I
15+00
II
I CLASS II
RIP RAP"
1
10,
IOOYR WSEL 8.61'
50YR WSEL 8.00'
-10'
NOTE: NO DECK DRAINS WILL BE
REQUIRED ON THIS STRUCTURE
n 17+00
—20'

PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES
2 T. F. HOLDINGS
1 y- TOWN CREEK
TIMBER COMPANY
3 W` DAVID R.HARLESS
4 ;<: J.CLARK HIPP
4 W.C. WARWICK, III
,� .. Cl�_k�! H��{Y�J aue,tzrg +�IY�r•.zld;
Ml
ADDRESSES
1202 EASTWOOD RD.
WILMINGTON, NC 28403
P.O. BOX 4886
WILMINGTON, NC 28406
2765 RIVER RD.SE
WINNABOW, NC 28479
504 DOCK ST.
WILMINGTON, NC 38401
9165 RIVER OAKS LANE SE
WINNABOW, NC 28479

LENA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Acting Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
April 5, 2004
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
NC Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Thorpe,
The NC Division of Coastal Management hereby acknowledges receipt of your application for State
approval for the replacement and widening of Bridge No. 61 at the crossing of Town Creek on NC
133 in Brunswick County, T.I.P. project 133115. The information submitted April 2004, completed
your application and it appears to be adequate for processing at this time. The rojected deadline
for making a decision is June 15, 2004. An additional 75-day review period is provided by law
when such time is necessary to complete the review. If you have not been notified of a final action
by the initial deadline stated above, you should consider the review period extended. Under those
circumstances, this letter will serve as your notice of an extended review. However, an additional
letter will be provided on or about the 75th day.
If this agency does not render a permit decision within 70 days from theDATE RECEIVED, you
may request a meeting with the Director of the Division of Coastal Management and permit staff to
discuss the status of your project. Such a meeting will be held within five working days from the
receipt of your written request and shall include the property owner, developer, and project
designer/consultant.
NCGS 113A-119(b) requires that Notice of an application be posted at the location of the proposed
development. Enclosed you will find a."Notice of Permit Filing" postcard which must be posted at
the proposed development. You should post this notice at a conspicuous point along the roadway
where it can be observed from the road. An example would be: nailing the notice card to a
telephone pole or tree along the road right of -way near the project. Failure to post this notice could
result in an incomplete application.
An onsite inspection will be made,and if additional information is required, you will be contacted by
the appropriate State or Federal agency. Please contact me if you have any questions and notify
me in writing if you wish to receive a copy of my field report and/or comments from reviewing
agencies.
Thank you for the well -prepared application Package and drawings.
Sincerely,
Bill Arrington,
D.O.T. Field Representative, NC Division of Coastal Management
Enclosure cc: Doug Huggett, Jim Gregson, District Manager
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastaimanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

AL T
COMMENTS ACCEPTED THROUGH Mo. 2-1) 200Y
APPLICANT:
t4c InT
VC/
FOR MORE DETAILS CONTACT
THE LOCAL PERMIT OFFICER BELOW:

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLANIMPACTS
D
SURFACE WATER IMPACTS
Station
(From/io)
Structure
Size /Type
Fill In
Wetlands
ac
Temp. Fill
In Wetlands
ac)
Excavation
In Wetlands
ac
Mechanized
Clearing
(Method III)
ac
Fill In SW
(Natural)
ac
Fill In SW
(Pond)
ac
Temp. Fill
In SW
(ac
Existing
Channel
Impacted
(it)
Natural
Stream
Design
Site
No.
BRIDGE
0.10
<0.01
0.07
<0.01
<0.01
1
13+70-L-TO
16+70 -L-
...
LE 0.07
TOTALS: 0.10 0 0
NOTE: FILL IN SURFACE WATER IS DUE TO THE PIERS FOR THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE AND
THE TEMPORARY FILL IN WETLANDS AND TEMPORARY FILL IN SURFACE WATER IS DUE TO THE
PILES FOR THE TEMPORARY WORK BRIDGES.
0
0 0 0 0
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
NC DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRUNSW ICK COUNTY
PROJECT 32874.1.1 (B-3115)
SHEET / ✓ C O 2 9 2009

APPROVED:
L GL
Date
/ZkZ'
Date
Brunswick County
Bridge No. 61 on NC 133
Over Town Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-133 (1)
State Project 8.1231401
TIP No. B-31 IS
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
}
Robert P. Hanson, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
JNicholas Graf, P. E.
6. Division Administrator, FHWA

Brunswick County
Bridge No. 61 on NC 133
Over Town Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-133 (1)
State Project 8.1231401
TIP No. B-3115
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
a e Beverly G. R on
4a e
Project Development Engineer ��....,..,,,,,•
r•`�1� CCARN ,y9
ESS10,
Date Ames A. McInnis Jr., P.E. 20701 ;
Project Development, Unit Head ,�lj•'•.th'GINE,:Q c
��''•. A •M '14
-f� 1 9-t-o2
�J 2 G 2
•
Dat Robert P. Hanson, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
I.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
...................................................
1
II.
HISTORY OF PROPOSED PROJECT
.........................................................
2
III.
ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
2
....................................................
IV.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
2
............................................................................
V.
STUDIED ALTERNATIVES
3
........................................................................
VI.
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
4
........................................................
VH.
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
4
...................................................................
A. General Project Information...............................................................
4
B. Air and Noise
.....................................................................................
C. Land Use & Farmland Effects
5
............................................................
D. Historical Effects & Archaeological
5
Effects ......................................
6
E. Natural Resources..............................................................................
6
1. Soils.......................................................................................
6
2. Water Resources....................................................................
6
a. Best Usage Classification ...........................................
7
b. Stream Characteristics...............................................
7
C. Water Quality .............................................................
7
d. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network...........
8
e. Summary of Anticipated Impacts ...............................
8
3. Biotic Resources....................................................................
9
a. Terrestrial Communities ............................................
9
b. Aquatic Community ...................................................
I I
4. Wildlife..................................................................................
11
a. Terrestrial Impacts .....................................................
I 1
b. Aquatic Impacts.........................................................
12

5. Jurisdictional Topics..............................................................
12
a. Waters of the United States ........................................
12
b. Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters .......
13
C. Permits.......................................................................
13
d. Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation ........................
14
6. Bridge Demolition.................................................................
14
7. Rare and Protected Species ....................................................
14
a. Federally -Protected Species .......................................
14
b. Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
23
VIII. COMMENTS, COORDINATION AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT..........
25
IX. CONCLUSION..............................................................................................
26
TABLES
Table 1
Estimated Impacts to Terrestrial Communities ..................................
12
Table 2
Federally Protected Species for Brunswick County ...........................
15
Table 3
Federal Species of Concern for Brunswick County ...........................
24
FIGURES
Figure I
Vicinity Map
Figure 2
Aerial Mosaic
Figure 3
Snapshots of Bridge
Figure 4
Proposed Detour Route
APPENDIX
1

PROJECT COMMITMENTS [ ;1:1 , ' t, '•
TIP PROJECT B-3115, Brunswick County
Bridge No. 61, on NC 133
Over Town Creek
Federal Aid Project BRSTP-133(1)
State Project 8.1231401
1. Structure Design Unit, Division 3:
Bridge Demolition: Bridge No. 61 is 300 feet (91.4 meters) long and 26.4 feet
(8.04 meters) wide. It has a reinforced concrete deck on steel I -beams with concrete caps
on timber piles. Thus, there is a potential for components of the bridge to be dropped
into Waters of the United States during construction. The resulting temporary fill
associated with the bridge will be as much as approximately 158.9 cubic yards. This
calculation was based on the entire length of the bridge extending over surface waters as
well as jurisdictional wetlands. All deposited components will be removed from the
Waters of the U.S. as quickly as possible. During construction, Best Management
Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed. To ensure the project
will not adversely affect the endangered shortnose sturgeon, explosives will not be used
in the bridge demolition.
2. Hydraulics Unit, Structure Design Unit, Division 3:
Stream Crossing Guidelines: NCDOT's "Stream Crossing Guidelines. for
Anadromous Fish Passage" will be followed in the design & construction phases.
3. Division 3:
Construction Moratorium: There will be no in -water or in -marsh activity from
February 1 through June 15. This is considered the in -migration, spawning, and out -
migration period for the endangered shortnose sturgeon and another anadromous fish.
All measures should be taken to prevent sedimentation in Town Creek during '
construction.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has developed a list of "Precautions for the
general construction in areas which may be used by the West Indian manatee in North.
Carolina." These precautions will be considered in all aspects of project construction;
therefore, this project will not affect the West Indian manatee.
NCDOT has agreed to delay closing NC 133 until after Labor Day.
Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 2
June 2002

4. Roadside Environmental Unit:
Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds: To ensure the project will not
adversely affect the endangered shomiose sturgeon, Design Standards for Sensitive
Watersheds (formerly High Quality Water Guidelines) will be used.
5. Roadway Design Unit:
Fill slope in wetland areas: To minimize wetland impacts and provide for slope
stability, the maximum fill slope of 3:1 will be used in wetland areas.
6. Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, Division 3:
1) NCDOT will investigate whether any necessary improvements are needed for NC 87
to be used as a detour route, including the need for additional traffic signals and
resurfacing.
2) NCDOT will provide Carolina Power and Light Company and Brunswick County
Emergency Management_ Officials with an estimate of the amount of time the closure
of NC 133 will add to evacuation times for the Brunswick Nuclear Plant.
3) In response to local government requests, NCDOT will provide further public
notification regarding this bridge replacement, road closure and detour route. This
will be coordinated with Brunswick County Emergency Management.
Categorical Exclusion Page 2 of 2
June 2002

Brunswick County
Bridge No. 61 on NC 133
Over Town Creek
Federal Project BRSTP-133 (1)
State Project 8.1231401
TIP No. B-3115
Bridge No. 61 carries NC 133 over Town Creek in Brunswick County. TIP
Project B-3115 proposes to replace this bridge, and is programmed in the Draft 2004-
2010 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge replacement project. NC 87
will be used as a detour route during the replacement of Bridge No. 61 and will be
patched and resurfaced as a part of this project. This project is part of the Federal
Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP) and has been
classified as a "Categorical Exclusion". No substantial environmental impacts are
expected.
I. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 61 will be replaced in its existing location on NC 133 over Town
Creek (see Figure 2). The new bridge will be approximately 300 feet (91 meters) in
length and placed at approximately the same elevation as the existing bridge. Traffic will
be detoured onto NC 87 (See Figure 4).
The proposed bridge will have a clear roadway width of 32 feet (9.6 meters),
which will provide two 12-foot (3.6-meter) lanes with 4-foot (1.2-meter) offsets. The
approaches will include two 12-foot (3.6-meter) lanes and 8-foot (2.4 meter) shoulders
with 4-foot (1.2 meter) full depth paved shoulders. Based on preliminary design, the
design speed should be approximately 60 mph (100 km/h).
NC 87 will be used as the detour route during the replacement of Bridge No. 61.
NC 87 will be patched and resurfaced from the southern city limits of Boiling Spring
Lakes to the northern city limits of Boiling Spring Lakes.
The proposed project is included in the Draft 2004-2010 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). The current schedule includes right of way acquisition in
July 2003 and construction in July 2004.
The estimated cost of the project is $1,905,000 including $1,400,000 in
construction costs, $5,000 in right of way costs and $500,000 for patching and resurfacing
NC 87. The estimated cost shown in the Draft 2004-2010 TIP is $1,935,000 which
includes $235,000 for right of way acquisition and $1,700,000 for construction.

II. HISTORY OF PROPOSED PROJECT
A Categorical Exclusion was approved for this project on May 23, 2000 by
NCDOT and the Federal Highway Administration. In the approved Categorical
Exclusion, the recommended alternative would replace Bridge No. 61 on new location
west of the existing bridge. The existing bridge would be utilized as a detour structure.
After further investigation, it was determined the proposed horizontal alignment would be
worse than the existing horizontal alignment. It was determined replacing the bridge on
existing alignment with an offsite detour would be the best alternative for this project and
reduce the project cost. Because this alternative was not discussed in the May 2000
categorical exclusion, this new document has been prepared.
A second bridge project is located along NC 133 in the area. TIP Project B-3116
will replace Bridge Number 56 carrying NC 133 over Allen Creek. This bridge is located
approximately 4.5 miles (7.24 kilometers) south of Bridge Number 61. NC 133 will be
closed and NC 87 used as a detour for this project also. Right of way acquisition for
Project B-3116 is scheduled for federal fiscal year 2002 and construction is scheduled for
federal fiscal year NO.
III. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT does not anticipate any design exceptions will be required.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NC 133 is classified as a Rural Major Collector in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. Currently (2001) the traffic volume is 12,000 vehicles per day
(VPD). By the year 2025, the traffic volume is projected to increase to 25,000 vpd. Single
unit trucks and tractor -trailers make up three percent and two percent of these volumes,
respectively. NC 133 has a speed limit of 55 miles per hour.
The existing bridge was built in 1955. It has a reinforced concrete deck on steel
I -beams and the substructure is concrete caps on timber piles. The deck is 300 feet
(91 meters) long and 26 feet (7.8 meters) wide. There is approximately 26 feet
(7.8 meters) of vertical clearance between the floorbeams of the bridge deck and the
streambed. There are two lanes of traffic on the bridge.
Presently the bridge is posted with weight restrictions of 35 tons (31751.5
kilograms) for single vehicles and the legal load limit for truck -tractor semi -trailers. The
sufficiency rating is 27.9. This structure is functionally obsolete and the substructure is
becoming structurally deficient.

Vertical alignment is good with a slight upgrade on the north side of the bridge.
There is a slight curve in the horizontal alignment, which begins approximately 150 feet
(45.7 meters) from the north end of the bridge. The approach pavement width is 19 feet
(5.8 meters) with acceptable width grass shoulders.
The Traffic Engineering Branch indicates 14 accidents were reported between
April 1998 through March 2001 from SR 1518 (Daws Creek Road) to SR 1555 (Mellaney
Lane).
Four school buses cross over the studied bridge with 2 trips per day.
Utility conflicts will be low for this project. There are underground phone cables
on both sides of NC 133 going aerial across the creek. There is also a fiber optic cable
underground along the east side of NC 133. Also along the east side of NC 133, there are
overhead power lines that cross over to the west side just south of the bridge.
V. STUDIED ALTERNATIVES
The four "build" options considered for this project are as follows:
Alternate 1) Replace Bridge No. 61 in place with a temporary detour bridge located to
the west during construction. The estimated cost for Alternate 1 is
$2,110,000 to include $1,975,000 for construction and $235,000 for right
of way acquisition.
Alternate 2) Replace bridge No. 61 on new alignment to the west of the existing bridge..
Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction. The
estimated cost for Alternate 2 is $1,935,000 to include $1,700,000 for
construction and $235,000 for right of way acquisition.
Alternate 3) (Recommended) Replace Bridge No. 61 in place with a new bridge.
Traffic will be detoured onto NC 87 during construction. The estimated
cost for Alternate 3 is $1,405,000 to include $1,400,000 for construction
and $5,000 for right of way acquisition.
Alternate 4) Replace Bridge No. 61 on new alignment to the east of the existing bridge.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction. The
estimated cost for Alternate 4 is $3,425,000 to include $2,475,000 for
construction and $950,000 for right of way acquisition.
"Do-nothing" is not practical; requiring the eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating
bridge is neither practical nor economical.

Alternates I and 3 both replace the existing structure in the same location with a
bridge approximately 300 feet (91 meters) in length and maintain a design speed of 60
mph (100 km/h). Alternate 3 is recommended because there is no onsite detour.
Although Alternate 2 offers the same benefits; but, this alignment would require an on -
site detour. Alternate 4 would increase the impacts to the project area. The Division
concurs in the recommendation.
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 61 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 3 with a new bridge
in the same location. The new bridge will be approximately 300 feet (91 meters) in
length and placed at approximately the same elevation as the existing bridge. Traffic will
be detoured onto NC 87 during construction (See Figure 4).
NC 87 will be patched and resurfaced from the southern city limits of Boiling
Spring Lakes to the northern city limits of Boiling Spring Lakes as a part of this project
(see Figure 5).
The proposed bridge will have a clear roadway width of 32 feet (9.6 meters),
which will provide two 12-foot (3.6 meter) lanes with 4-foot (1.2 meter) offsets. The
approaches will include two 12-foot (3.6-meter) lanes and 8-foot (2.4-meter) shoulders
with 4-foot (1.2-meter) full depth paved shoulders. Approach work will extend
approximately 600 feet (180 meters) to either side of the new bridge. Based on
preliminary design, the design speed should be approximately 60 mph (100 km/h).
NC 133 will be closed during replacement of Bridge No. 61.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
This project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an
inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
This project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
This bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality of
the human or natural environment with implementation of the environmental
commitments listed in the project commitments section of this document and use of
current NCDOT standards and specifications.

The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning
regulation. No change in land use is expected to result from construction of this project.
There are no known hazardous waste impacts.
No significant adverse effects on families or communities are anticipated. Right-
of-way acquisition will be very minimal.
No significant adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The
project is not expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in
the area.
Closing NC 133 to construct Bridge No. 61 will require 18.6 miles (29.9
kilometers) of additional travel for residents traveling from south of Bridge No. 61 to
US 17. Road user cost for this additional travel will be approximately $300,000.
Additional time will be required for school bus services and other public services. The
public officials in charge of administering these services have been consulted and do not
object to the recommended alternative.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and
waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
This project will not impact any resource protected by Section 4(f) of the DOT act.
The proposed bridge replacement project will not raise the existing flood levels or
have any significant adverse effect on the existing floodplain.
Utility impacts are considered to be low for the proposed project.
B. AIR AND NOISE
.I
This project is an air quality "neutral' project, so it is not required to be included
in the regional emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required.
The project is located in Brunswick County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part 51 is not
applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not
have substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during
construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
This project will impact no soils considered to be prime or important farmland.

D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Upon review of area photographs, aerial photographs, and cultural resources
databases, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) indicates they "are aware of no
historic structures within the area of potential effect." Therefore, the SHPO
recommended no historic architectural surveys be conducted (see appendix).
The SHPO knows of no archaeological sites within the proposed project area. It is
unlikely that any archaeological resources, which may be eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places, will be affected by the project construction.
Therefore, the SHPO recommended that no archaeological investigations be conducted in
connection with this project (see appendix).
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
1. Soils
There are two soil types located in the project area. A brief description of
each soil type is provided.
Chowan silt loam (CH) is nearly level, poorly drained soil found on
floodplains of the Cape Fear River and its tributaries. It has a
surface layer of dark grayish -brown silt loam, underlain by grayish -
brown silty clay loam. It has slow surface runoff, moderately slow
permeability, and is flooded for six months of most years. The
main limitations of this soil are wetness and flooding. The
Capability Unit is VIIw. This soil is listed as hydric for Brunswick
County.
.1
Bavmeade fine sand (BB) is a well -drained soil found on low ridges
and convex divides. The surface layer is dark gray fine sand,
underlain with a light gray fine sand. Surface runoff is slow,
permeability is moderately rapid, and the available water capacity
is low. The seasonal high water table is four to five feet below the
surface. The Capability Unit is Ms.
2. Water Resources
There is one water resource in the project study area. NC 133 crosses one
perennial stream, Town Creek (also known as Rattlesnake Branch).

a. Best Usage Classification
Water resources located within the project study area lie in the
Lower Cape Fear River, Coastal Watershed (Subbasin 03-06-17), and
Hydrologic Unit 03030005 of the Cape Fear River Drainage Basin.
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) which reflects water quality conditions
and potential resource usage. Unnamed tributaries receive the same
classification as the streams to which they flow. The classification for
Town Creek [DEM Index No. 18-18, 9/1/74] is CSw. Class C refers to
waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife,
secondary recreation and agriculture. The Sw (Swamp Waters)
subclassification is a supplemental classification intended to recognize
those waters having naturally occurring low velocities, low pH, and low
dissolved oxygen. Town Creek is also classified as an Anadromous Fish
Stream.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Water
Supplies (WS-I or WS-II) or Outstanding Resource -Waters (ORW) occur
within 1.6 kilometers (1.0 mile) of the project study area.
b. Stream Characteristics
The headwaters of Town Creek are approximately 23.3 kilometers
(14.5 miles) west-northwest of Bridge No. 61. The creek flows east
southeastward under the project bridge and outfalls into the Cape Fear
River approximately 3.1 kilometers (1.9 miles) east of the project study
area.
Town Creek, at NC 133, is approximately 80.0 feet (24.4 meter)
wide and ranges in depth from 6.0 to 8.0 feet (1.8 to 2.4 meter). The
substrate in the study area is most likely composed of organic muck. The
creek is tidal, occasionally bringing brackish water into what would
otherwise be a freshwater marsh.
C. Water Quality
Point sources refer to discharges that enter surface water through a
pipe, ditch, or other defined points of discharge. Point source dischargers
located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Any
discharger is required to register for a permit. There are no NPDES sites
located within 1.0 mile (1.6 kilometers) of the project study area.

Non -point source refers to runoff that enters surface waters through
stormwater flow or no defined point of discharge. Excluding road runoff,
there were no identifiable non -point sources that could be observed during
the site visit. Due to the potential of impacts from deck drains, every effort
will be made not to discharge the bridge deck drains directly into the
stream, if possible.
d. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The DWQ has initiated a whole basin approach to water quality
management for the 17 river basins within the state. To accomplish this
goal the DWQ collects biological, chemical and physical data that can be
used in basinwide assessment and planning. All basins are reassessed
every 5 years. An assessment of water quality data indicates that the
Lower Cape Fear River and Coastal Watershed generally has good to
excellent water quality due largely to good tidal flushing (NCDEHNR
1995a).
Prior to the implementation of the basinwide approach to water
quality management, DWQ's Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient
Network assessed water quality by sampling for benthic macroinvertebrate
organisms at fixed monitoring sites throughout the state. There are no
BMAN sampling stations in the project vicinity (NCDEHNR 1995a).
e. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Impacts to water resources in the project area are likely to result
from activities associated with project construction, such as clearing and
grubbing on streambanks, riparian canopy removal, instream construction,
fertilizers and pesticides used in revegetation, and pavement installation.
The following impacts to surface water resources are likely to result from
the above mentioned construction activities.
• Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of the
crossing and increased erosion in the project area.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased
sedimentation and vegetation removal.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or
additions to surface and ground water flow from construction.
• Changes in and destabilization of water temperature due to
vegetation removal.
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from
exposed areas.
• Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in roadway
runoff.

Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel
and oil from construction equipment and other vehicles.
Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes
in surface and groundwater drainage patterns.
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the
project area, NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of
Surface Waters will be strictly enforced during the construction phase of
the project. The short -nosed sturgeon may inhabit the project study area.
Accordingly, Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds (formerly High
Quality Water Guidelines) will be enforced during the construction phase
of the project. The project study area is located within the coastal plain
and crosses a perennial stream. NCDOT Stream Crossing Guidelines for
Anadromous Fish Passage (see Appendix) will be adhered to during the
life of the project. To further insure water quality suitable for the
shormose sturgeon and other anadromous fish, a moratorium on in -stream
work will be enforced from February 1 through June 15 All measures
should be taken to prevent sedimentation in Town Creek during
construction.
3. Biotic Resources
Biotic resources include terrestrial and aquatic communities. Descriptions
of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community
classifications. Fauna observed during the site visit are denoted in the text with an
asterisk (*).
a. Terrestrial Communities
i Much of the flora and fauna described from biotic communities
utilize resources from different communities, making boundaries between
contiguous communities difficult to define. There are four communities
located in the project area to the west of NC 133 (impact area). While not
lying within the project area boundaries, the adjacent cypress -gum swamps
are nevertheless noteworthy. The communities contained within the
project area are discussed below.
Tidal Freshwater/ Brackish Marsh
Tidal freshwater (brackish influenced) marsh, oligohaline variant,
is found to the north and south of Town Creek. This variant occurs in
areas with slight salt influence. Salt levels may be higher during rare high
tide events. Although these marshes form upstream of the mouth of the
creek, they are still tidally influenced. Tidal flooding brings in nutrients
derived from seawater and varying amounts of sediment to the community.

Much of the tidal freshwater marsh community is unusual in appearing to
have recently replaced tidal cypress -gum swamp. Numerous dead trees
and some live trees remain in the marsh. It is uncertain what caused the
shift. Possibilities include storm -driven salt -water intrusion or rising sea
level. It is presumed to be a natural process. In contrast to brackish and
saltwater marshes, tidal freshwater marshes are very diverse. The Town
Creek site is dominated by common cattail, wax myrtle, black willow,
Arrow an -urn, and beakrush.
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
This community exists in what appears to be an old borrow pit,
which originates from the southern edge of the marsh community and
roughly parallels NC 133 to the southwest of the bridge. It was most
likely formed when the road was constructed. It is approximately 30 feet
(9.1 meters) wide and 5 feet (1.5 meters) deep. The soils here are
composed of highly organic mucks and there is evidence of frequent
flooding, presumably overflow from Town Creek. The overstory, is
dominated by bald cypress, swamp tupelo, red maple, and sweet gum.
Dominant herbs and vine include: netted chain fem, arrow arum, catbrier,
rush, royal fem, Virginia chain fem, and poison ivy.
Upland Pine Forest
This strip of woods borders the west side of the "borrow pit".
Mature loblolly pine and sweet gum dominate this community. The
understory consists primarily of red bay, water oak, southern magnolia,
sassafras, and mockernut hickory. Other species present include
muscadine, honeysuckle, wax myrtle, and poison ivy.
Di&rbed Roadside
This upland community is located to the north and south of the
marsh community on both sides of NC 133. It encompasses two types of
habitats that have recently been or are currently impacted by human
disturbance: maintained roadside shoulder and disturbed fringe. Because
of mowing and the use of herbicides, this community is kept in a constant
state of early succession. Roadside shoulder is a regularly maintained
habitat that is kept in a low -growing, early successional state. Herbs,
grasses, and vines located here include: goldenrod, morning glory, pepper
vine, ragweed, Japanese honeysuckle, common plantain, winged sumac,
muscadine grape, and catbrier.
Disturbed fringe is comprised of shrubs and sapling sized trees that
exist in the roadside shoulder/ freshwater marsh ecotone. Species
i

observed here include: wax myrtle, red maple, sweet gum, and black
willow.
b. Aquatic Community
The Natural Heritage Program lists the area east of Town Creek as
a priority Aquatic Habitat and the area west of Town Creek as priority
Tidal Wetlands.
4. Wildlife
Maintained/disturbed communities adjacent to forested tracts provide rich
ecotones for foraging, while the forests provide forage and cover. Common
mammals and birds associated with ecotones and upland forests are woodchuck,
least shrew, southern short -tailed shrew, hispid cottonrat, eastern cottontail
rabbits, ruby crowned kinglet, Carolina chickadee, bluebird, downy woodpecker
and white -breasted nuthatch. The ground beetle and bessbug were also found in
this community, feeding under logs.
The adjacent cypress -gum swamp provides habitat for an assortment of
birds and mammals. Birds often associated with swamp communities include red -
winged blackbird, white -throated sparrow, song sparrow, and northern cardinal.
Yellow-rumped warblers and common yellow throat may also be found in this
community. Yellow warbler, red -eyed vireo, Carolina wren and mourning dove
may also frequent this area.
Mammals that may frequent the swamp community include white-footed
mouse and raccoon. In addition, white-tailed deer* and gray squirrel may also forage
in or near this community. Amphibians and reptiles are likely to be locally abundant
in the riparilm edge. Spring peeper* and northern cricket frog* breed in semi-
permanent pools during the spring. Rat snake, worm snake, ring-necked snake and
queen snake may be found here as well. The box turtle may also be found in the
swamp community.
a. Terrestrial Impacts
Impacts to terrestrial communities will result from project
construction. Table 1 summarizes potential losses to these communities
resulting from project construction. Estimated impacts are derived based on a
project length of 1,000 feet (304.8 meters), and the entire proposed right of
way width of 60 feet (18.3 meters). However, project construction often does
not require the entire right-of-way; therefore, actual impacts may be less.

Table 1. Estimated Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
Impacted Area ac (ha)
Alternate 1
Alternate 2
Alternate 3
Alternate 4
Community
Existing
Location
Permanent
Existing
Permanent
Ternporary
Realignment
Location
Realignment
detour
West
Road Closure
East
Tidal Freshwater Marsh
0.16ac/o.12 ac
0.16 ac
0.16 ac
0.90 ac
(wetland)
(0.07 ha)(o.os ha)
(0.07 ha)
(0.07 ha)
(0.36 ha)
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
0.12ac/o.10 ac
0.12 ac
0.12 ac
0.25 ac
(wetland)
(0.05 ha)(0.04 ha)
(0.05 ha)
(0.05 ha
(0.10 ha)
Pine Forest
0.29 ac/0.21 ac
0.29 ac
0.29 ac
0.29 ac
(upland)
(0.12 ha)(0.09 ha)
(0.12 ha)
(0.12 ha)
(0.12 ha)
Disturbed Roadside
1.12 ac/o.83 ac
1.12 ac
1.12 ac
1.12 ac
(upland)
(0.44 ba)1(033 ha)
(0.44 ha)
(0.44 ha)
(0.44 ha)
Total Impacts
1.69 ac11.26 ac
1.69 ac
1.69 ac
2.56 ac
(0.68 ha)(o.si ha)
(0.68 ha)
(0.68 ha)
(1.02 ha)
Note: Detour impacts are
based on a right of way width of 80 feet (24.4 meters).
Temporary detour impacts are shown in italics.
b. Aquatic Impacts
Impacts to the aquatic community of Town Creek will result from
the replacement of Bridge No. 61. Impacts are likely to result from the
physical disturbance of aquatic habitats (i.e. substrate and water quality).
Disturbance of aquatic habitats has a detrimental effect on aquatic
community composition by reducing species diversity and the overall
quality of aquatic habitats. Physical alterations to aquatic habitats can
result in the following impacts to aquatic communities.
Inhibition of plant growth.
Algal blooms resulting from increased nutrient concentrations.
Loss of benthic macroinvertebrates through scouring resulting
from an increased sediment load.
5. Jurisdictional Topics
a. 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 Regulations (CFR) Part 328.3. Any action that proposes to dredge
or place fill material into surface waters or wetlands falls under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
12

b. Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters �;'.`. ' _ .`. ".��6"
There are wetlands in the project area in the form of tidal
freshwater marshes. Vegetation includes common cattail, wax myrtle,
Arrow arrum, and beakrush. Permanent and temporary impacts are as
follows:
Alternate 1 - Permanent wetland impacts for the replacement of the
bridge on the same alignment are approximately 0.28 acres (0.12
hectares). Temporary impacts for the construction of a temporary
detour to the west of the existing bridge are 0.22 acres (0.09
hectares).
Alternate 2—Permanent wetland impacts for the replacement of
the bridge to the west of the existing bridge with a new bridge are
approximately 0.28 acres (0.12 hectares).
Alternate 3 - Permanent wetland impacts for the replacement of the
bridge on the same alignment are approximately 0.28 acres (0.12
hectares).
Alternate 4 —Permanent wetland impacts for the replacement of
the bridge to the east of the existing bridge with a new bridge are
approximately 1.15 acres (0.46 hectares).
There will be no impacts to jurisdictional surface waters because
the new bridge will span the entire width of Town Creek.
C. Permits
1
The subject project is located within a county that is under the
jurisdiction of Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). CAMA is
administered by the N. C. Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM).
CAMA directs the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) to
identify and designate Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC) in which
uncontrolled development might cause irreversible damage to property,
public health and natural environment. A CAMA permit from the
NCDCM is required if the project meets all of the following conditions:
a) Located in one of the twenty counties covered by CAMA;
b) Located in or affects an AEC designated by the CRC;
c) Considered to be "development" under CAMA; and,
d) Not qualify for an exemption as identified by CAMA or the CRC.
13

The project fulfills all of the above statements. More specifically,
the project will require a CAMA major development permit.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification
from the DWQ prior to the issuance of the Section 404 Nationwide Permit.
The issuance of a 401 permit from the DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance
of a Section 404 permit or CAMA permit.
The FHWA has determined a US Coast Guard permit will not be
required for construction of this project.
d. Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation
Specific avoidance and minimization measures for this project
include: using a maximum slope of 3:1, and replacing the existing bridge
in its current location with an off -site detour. Final design will reveal final
impacts. However, final permit/mitigation decisions rest on the Corps of
Engineers.
6. Bridge Demolition
Bridge No. 61 is 300 feet (91 meters) long and 26.4 feet (8.04 meters)
wide. It has a reinforced concrete deck on steel I -beams with concrete caps on
timber piles. There is potential for some components of the bridge to be dropped
into Waters of the U.S. during construction. The resulting temporary fill
associated with the reinforced concrete floor would be a maximum of 158.9 cubic
yards (121.5 cubic meters). This calculation was based on the entire length of the
bridge extending over surface waters as well as jurisdictional wetlands. All
deposited components will be removed from the Waters of the U.S. as quickly as
possible. .
Bridge removal for this project is classified as Case 2 for bridge removal
which allows no work at all in water through a moratorium period of February 1
through June 15.
Rare and Protected Species
a. Federally -Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened
(PT) are protected under the provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of March 7, 2002, the
US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) lists fifteen federally protected
species for Brunswick County. Biological Conclusions of "No Effect'
14

were found for all federally protected species, except the shortnose
sturgeon. Although no populations of this species have been reported from
the project vicinity, favorable habitat does exist for this species. Based on
concurrence of the National Marine Fisheries Service, a biological
conclusion of "Not Likely to Adversely Affect" has been determined for
the shortnose sturgeon.
A review of the NHP database of rare species and unique habitats
shows two occurrences of federally protected species in the project study
area. The American alligator and the red -cockaded woodpecker (last
observed in 1973) have been observed within 1 mile (1.6 kilometer) of the
project area.
Table 2. Federally Protected Species for Brunswick County.
Common Name_ :Scientific Name
•,_
Status
Shormose Sturgeon
American Alligator
Loggerhead Sea Turtle
Piping Plover
Greet Sea Turtle
Leatherback Sea Turtle
Eastern Cougar
Bald Eagle
Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle
Wood Stork
Red -Cockaded Woodpecker
West Indian Manatee
Seabeach Amaranth
Rough -Leaved Loosestrife
Acipenser brevirostrum
Alligator mississippiensis
Caretta caretta
Charadrius melodus
Chelonia mydas
Dermochelys coriacea
Felis concolor couguar
Halieetus leucocephalus
Lepidochelys kempii
Mycteria americans
Picoides borealis
Trichechus manatus
Amaranthus pumilus
Lysimachia asperulaefolia
Thalictrum coolevi
Endangered
Threatened,
due to similarity of appearance
Threatened
Threatened
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Endangered
Threatened
Endangered
Note: "Endangered" denotes a species in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range.
"Threatened" denotes a species likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Descriptions of Federally Protected Species found in Brunswick County, NC
Name: Shortnose sturgeon
Endangered
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
The short -nosed sturgeon is a small (1 meter in length) species of fish that occurs
in the lower sections of large rivers and in coastal marine habitats from the St. John
River, Canada to the Indian River, Florida. It can be differentiated from the Atlantic
15

sturgeon because of its shorter snout, wider mouth, and the pattern of its preanal shields
(the short -nose having one row and the Atlantic that has two).
The short -nosed sturgeon prefers deep channels with salinity less than seawater.
It feeds benthicly on invertebrates and plant material and is most active at night. It is an
anadromous species that spawns upstream in the spring and spends most of its life within
close proximity of the rivers mouth. At least two entirely freshwater populations have
been recorded, in South Carolina and Massachusetts.
The short -nosed sturgeon requires large fresh water rivers that are unobstructed by
dams or pollutants to reproduce successfully.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and unique
habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. No populations of this species have been
reported from the project vicinity. However, favorable habitat does exist for this species.
Based on a conversation with the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Service on December 3,.
1999, a moratorium is recommended to avoid in -water activity from February 1 through
June 15. The National Marine Fisheries Services concurs with the recommendation of
North Carolina Marine Fisheries, and has issued a finding of "Not likely to Adversely
Affect" for the impacts of the shortnose sturgeon (see letter in Appendix). This is
dependent on the commitments found on the Project Commitment Green Sheet.
Name: American alligator Threatened Due to Similarity of Appearance
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
This species is listed as Threatened Due to Similarity of Appearance, and is
therefore not protected under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. However, in
order to. control the illegal trade of other protected crocodilians such as the American
crocodile, federal 14egulations (such as hide tagging) are maintained on the commercial
trade of alligators. No survey is required for this species. The North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program's database of rare species and unique habitats was checked on
September 12, 2001. There has been a sighting of this species within 1.0 km (0.6 mile) of
the project area.
Name: Loggerhead sea turtle Threatened
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
The loggerhead sea turtle is found in a wide variety of habitats, including the open ocean,
bays, lagoons, salt marshes, creeks, ship channels, and large river mouths. Hatchlings are
often seen in association with floating sargassum seaweed. The diet includes sponges,
jellyfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and fish. Loggerheads often forage in coral reefs, rocky
areas, and shipwrecks.
16

The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species -and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. No populations of this species have
been reported from the project vicinity. There are no suitable beach or marine habitats
located in the project study area. Additionally, the project study area does not exhibit the
salinity necessary to support this species. Therefore, no effects to this species will occur
from the construction of this project.
Name: Piping plover Threatened
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
The piping plover has a breeding range including the Great Lakes region and the
Atlantic Coast between Newfoundland and Cape Lookout, NC. Populations in the Great
Lakes region are listed as Endangered; populations elsewhere in the range are listed as
Threatened. This species winters on the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts from North
Carolina to Mexico, and the Bahamas and West Indies. Preferred habitat consists of large
sandflats or mudflats for foraging in close proximity to a sandy beach for roosting and
nesting.
Piping plovers nest on sandy or gravelly beaches in sparsely vegetated areas that
are slightly higher in elevation than the surrounding beach
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. No populations of this species have
been reported from the project vicinity. Suitable habitat does not exist within the project
vicinity for this species.
Name: Green sea turtle Threatened
1
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The green sea turtle can be found in tropical and temperate waters from
Massachusetts to Mexico on the east coast of North America, and British Columbia to
Baja California on the west coast, as well as Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Most nesting in the United States takes place on the eastern coast of Florida between
Volusia and Dade Counties, though some nests have been observed in Puerto Rico and
the U.S. Virgin Islands as well
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. Suitable habitat does not exist
within the project vicinity for this species and no populations of this species have been
reported from the project vicinity.
17

Name: Leatherback sea turtle
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
Endangered
NO EFFECT
The leatherback sea turtle is the largest of the turtles, weighing 295-680 kg with a
length of 1.2-1.8 in. This turtle is unique in that its carapace is not composed of hard
scutes, but is rubbery with small bones embedded in it. Preferred nesting beaches are
usually isolated, with close proximity to deep water, bordered by vegetation, and steep
enough so that dry sand is not too far from the water.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. Suitable habitat does not exist
within the project vicinity for this species and no populations of this species have been
reported from the project vicinity.
Name: Eastern cougar Endangered
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The eastern cougar is a large, unspotted, long-tailed cat weighing between 68 and
91 kg. The cougar's body and legs are a uniform tawny color, although the belly is a pale
reddish color, and the backs of the ears, tip of the tail, and sides of the muzzle are black.
Habitat requirements consist primarily ofdarge tracts of wilderness and adequate
prey, and this species can live in coastal swamps as well as mountainous regions.
Cougars feed mainly on white-tailed deer, although they may also eat small mammals,
wild turkeys, and occasionally domestic livestock. It is estimated that a female cougar
can have a range of 5-20 square miles, and a male can have a range upwards of25 square
miles.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. Suitable habitat does not exist
within the project vicinity for this species and no populations of this species have been
reported from the project vicinity.
Name: Bald eagle Endangered
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
Adult bald eagles can be identified by their large white head and short white tail.
The body plumage is dark -brown to chocolate -brown in color. In flight bald eagles can
be identified by their flat wing soar.
Eagle nests are found in close proximity to water (within a half mile) with a clear
flight path to the water, in the largest living tree in an area, and having an open view of
18

the surrounding land. Human disturbance can cause an eagle to abandon otherwise
suitable habitat. The breeding season for the bald eagle begins in December or January.
Fish are the major food source for bald eagles. Other sources include coots, herons, and
wounded ducks. Food may be live or carrion.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. No populations of this species have
been reported from the project vicinity and no birds or nests were observed during the site
visit.
Name: Kemp's ridley sea turtle Endangered
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
The Kemp's ridley sea turtle is the smallest of the sea turtles in our area, weighing
36-50 kg. This turtle is unique in that its broad, heart -shaped carapace is gray, and there .
is a secretory pore near the posterior edge of each scute forming the bridge between the
carapace and plastron.
The Kemp's ridley sea turtle is found in shallow water, usually near coastal forests
of red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle). Nearly the entire population nests. on
approximately 24 km of beach in the state of Tamaulipas, Mexico. Preferred nesting
beaches are backed by large swamps or open water with narrow ocean connections.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. Suitable habitat does not exist
within the project vicinity for this species and no populations of this species have been
reported from the project vicinity.
Name: Wood stork Endangered
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
Wood storks are large wading birds with long legs. They are approximately
1.27 m tall, with a wingspan of 1.52-1.65 m. Their plumage is mainly white, except for
black primaries and secondaries and a short black tail. The head and neck are
unfeathered, with dark gray skin; legs are dark, and the bill is black and slightly decurved.
Juveniles are grayish and have a yellow bill.
Nesting occurs in large colonies, primarily in cypress and mangrove swamps.
Favored feeding habitat includes freshwater marshes, tidal creeks, and tide pools,
especially pools in marshes or swamps where fish are concentrated by falling water
19

J
levels. The feeding grounds may be as far as 128 km from the nest location, as the storks
use thermals to soar great distances.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. Suitable habitat does exist within
the project vicinity for this species. However, only a few representatives of this species
have reached southeastern North Carolina, residing primarily in coastal South Carolina,
from near Georgetown southward (Potter 1980). There have been no populations of this
species reported from the project vicinity.
Name: Red -cockaded woodpecker Endangered
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
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 (Pins. palustris), for foraging and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at
least 50% pine, lack a thick understory, and be contiguous with other stands to be
appropriate habitat for the RCW. These birds nest exclusively 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 acres (200 hectares). 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 colonies
from 12-100 feet (3.6-30.3 meters) above the ground and average 30-50 feet (9.1- 15.7
meters) high. They can be identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds
the tree. The RCW lays its eggs in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch approximately
38 days later.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. The red -cockaded woodpecker was
last observed from the project vicinity in 1973. However, habitat suitable for this species
is no longer present in the project vicinity.
20

Name: West Indian Manatee Endangered rw-
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The manatee is a large gray or brown aquatic mammal. Adults average about 10
feet (3 m) long and weighing around 1000 pounds. The body of the manatee is nearly
hairless except for a muzzle covered with stiff "whiskers." The U.S. manatee population
was probably twice as abundant in the 1700's and early 1800's as at present. Initial
population decreases resulted from overharvesting for meat, oil, and leather. Today,
heavy mortality is attributed to accidental collisions with boats and barges, along with
loss of suitable habitat.
Manatees inhabit both salt and freshwater habitats of sufficient depth (greater than
1.5 m). They may be encountered in canals, sluggish rivers, estuarine beaches, and salt
water bays. Observations of salt water populations indicate that they may require
freshwater for drinking purposes. Manatees also require warm water. When water
temperatures drop below 20 C, they begin to move into warmer water, often forming
large aggregations in natural springs and industrial outfalls during the winter.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. No populations of the West Indian
Manatee have been reported from the project vicinity. This species typically inhabits
more southern areas but has been observed on occasion in North Carolina's coastal waters
near South Port. Nevertheless, manatees are not likely to swim as far north as the NC 133
crossing of Town Creek.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has developed a list of "Precautions for the
general construction in areas which may be used by the West Indian manatee in North
Carolina." These precautions will be considered in all aspects of project construction;
therefore, this project will not affect the West Indian manatee.
Name: Seabeach Amaranth
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
Threatened
NO EFFECT
Seabeach amaranth is an annual legume that grows in clumps containing 5 to 20
branches and are often over a foot across. The trailing stems are fleshy and reddish -pink or
reddish in color. Seabeach amaranth has thick, fleshy leaves that are small, ovate-
spatulate, emarginate and rounded. The leaves are usually spinach green in color, cluster
towards the end of a stem, and have winged petioles.
Seabeach amaranth is endemic to the Atlantic Coastal Plain beaches. Habitat for
seabeach amaranth is found on barrier island beaches functioning in a relatively dynamic
and natural manner. Seabeach amaranth grows well in overwash flats at the accreting ends
21

of islands and the lower foredunes and upper strands of noneroding beaches. Temporary
populations often form in blowouts, sound -side beaches, dredge spoil, and beach
replenishment.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and
unique habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. Suitable habitat does not exist
within the project vicinity for this species and no populations of this species have been
reported from the project vicinity.
Name: Roughed -leaved Loosestrife
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
Endangered
NO EFFECT
Rough -leaved loosestrife is endemic to the Coastal Plain and Sandhills of North
Carolina and South Carolina.
Typical habitat for rough -leaved loosestrife is the ecotone between high pocosin
and longleaf pine (or oak) savannas that contain sandy or peaty soils and full sunlight.
Rough -leaved loosestrife sometimes occurs in low pocosin openings where light is
abundant at ground level. Other habitats where this species is found include ecotones of
stream -head pocosin in the Sandhills and Sandhill Seeps where wet sands are underlain
by clay, allowing water to seep to the surface along slopes.
Two population of rough -leaved loosestrife occur along NCDOT rights -of -way
in Brunswick County.
Rough -leaved loosestrife is a perennial herb growing from 30 - 60 cm (12 - 24 in)
tall. Its sessile leaves, in whorls of three to four, are broadest at the base and have three
prominent veins. The leaves are entire, slightly revolute (rolled under along the margins),
yellow -green or b ue-green in color and lustrous. Rough -leaved loosestrife flowers from
May to June.
Suitable habitat for this species does not occur in the project area. During a
general survey of the area, the project area was also surveyed for this species by NCDOT
biologists on June 23, 1999. No individuals of this species were located in the project
area nor does the NCNHP database show in previous records of this species occurring in
the project area. Thus, construction of this project will have no effect on this species.
22

Name: Cooley's meadowrue Endangered _
Best Search Time: mid June to early July
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION:
NO EFFECT
Cooley's meadowrue occurs in wet pine savannas, grass -sedge bogs and savanna
like areas, often at the border of intermittent drainages or swamp forests. This species is
usually found in areas that contain some type of disturbance such as clearings, burned
savanna edges, maintained roadsides and power line rights -of -ways. It is found on fine
sandy loam, circumneutral soils that are seasonally (winter) moist or saturated and only
slightly acidic (pH 5.8-6.6).
Cooley's meadowrue is a tall herb growing to 1 in or more when in flower. Its
slender stems are erect in sunny locations and lax or sprawling when shaded.
Suitable habitat for this species does not occur in the project area. During a
general survey of the area, the project area was also surveyed for this species by NCDOT
biologists on June 23, 1999. No individuals of this species were located in the project
area nor does the NCNHP database show in previous records of this species occurring in
the project area. Thus, construction of this project will have no effect on this species.
b. Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
There are thirty-seven federal species of concern listed by the FWS
for Brunswick County (Table 3). Federal species of concern are not
afforded federal protection under the Endangered Species Act and are not
subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally
proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. In addition, organisms
which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern
(Sq) by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program list of Rare Plant
and Animal Species are afforded state protection under the NC State
Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and Conservation
Act of 1979.
Table 3 lists federal species of concern, the state status of these
species (if afforded state protection), and the potential for suitable habitat
in the project area for each species. This species list is provided for
information purposes as the protection status of these species may be
upgraded in the future.
A review of the NHP database of rare species and unique habitats
shows one occurrence of FSC species in the project study area. The
Northern pine snake has been observed within 1 mile (1.6 kilometers) of
the project area.
23

Table 3. Federal species of concern for Brunswick Countv
Common Name
Scientific Name
NC
Habitat
Bachman's Sparrow
Aimophila aestivalis
Status
Pres ent
Henslow's Sparrow
Ammodramus henslowd
SC
SR
No
No
Carolina Pygmy Sunfish
Elassoma boehlkei
T
Yes
Southern Hognose Snake
Heterodon simus
SR*
No
Mimic Glass Lizard
Ophisaurus mimicus
SC/PT
No
Eastern Painted Bunting
Passetina this ciris
SR
Yes
Northern Pine Snake
Pituophis melanoleucus melanoleucus
SC'
Yes
Buchholz's Dart Moth
Agrotis buchholzt
`" 1
SR
11U --
No
Arogos Skipper
Atrytone arogos arogos
SR
No
Waccamaw Spike
Elliptio waccamawensis
T
No
Venus Flytrap Cutworm Moth
Hemipachnobia subporphvrea subporphvrea
SR
No
Greenfield rams -horn
Helisoma eucosmium
SR
No
Magnificent Rams -horn
Planorbella magnifica
E
No
Rare Skipper
Problema bulenta
SR
Yes
Cape Fear Threetooth
Diodopsis soelneri
T
Yes
Savanna Indigo -Bush
Amorpha georgiana var confusa
T
_
Yes
Honeycomb Head
Balduina atropurpurea
C*
C
No
Chapman's Sedge
Carer chapmanii
Yes
Venus Flytrap
Dionaea muscipula
C-SC
No
DwarfBurhead
Echinodorusparvulus
C
Yes
Harper's Fimbry
Fimbristylis perpusilla
T
Yes
Pondspice
Litsea aestivalis
C
No
Carolina Bogmint
Macbndea caroliniana
T
Yes
Loose Watermilfoil
Myriophyllum laxum
T
No
Savanna Cowbane
Ottypolis ternata
W 1
No
Carolina Grass-Of-Pamassus
Parnassia caroliniana
E -
No
Pineland Plantain
Plantago sparsifora
E
No
Awned Meadow -Beauty
Rhezia arlstosa
T'
No
Swamp Forest Beaksedge
Rhynchospora decurrens
C
Yes
Thome's Beaksedge
Rhvnchospora thornei
E.
No
Carolina Goldenrod
Solidago pulchra
E
No
Spring -Flowering Goldenrod
Solidago verna
T
Nor
Wireleaf Dropseed I
Sporobolus teretifolius senses stricto
T
No
Carolina Asphodel
Tofieldia glabra
C
No
Dune Bluecurls
Trichostema sp I
C
No
Savanna campylopus
Campvlopus carolinae
C
No
Note:
C ACandidate is any species which
is very rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20 populations
in the state, generally substantially
reduced in numbers by habitat destruction.
E An Endangered species is one whose continued existence as a viable component of the State's flora is determined to be in jeopardy.
SC A Special Concern species is one which requires monitoring but may be taken or collected and sold under regulations adopted under
the provisions of Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes (animals) and the Plant Protection and Conservation Act (plants).
Only propagated material may be sold of Special Concern plants that are also listed as Threatened
or Endangered.
SR A Significantly Rare species is not
listed as "E", "T". or "SC', but which exists in the state in small numbers and has been
determined to need monitoring.
T A Threatened species is any native
or once native species which is likely to become an Endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range, or one that is designated as a threatened
species pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act.
W I A Watch Category I species is a rare species whose status in North Carolina is relatively well known and which appears to be
relatively secure at this time.
/P_ denotes a species which has been formally proposed for listing as Endangered (PE), Threatened (PT), or Special Coneem (PSC), but
has not yet completed the listing process.
' Historic record, the species was last observed prior to 1979.
24

VIII. COMMENTS, COORDINATION AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
On May 22, 2001 a citizens informational workshop was held in Brunswick
County for both this project and TIP Project B-3116. This workshop was held to obtain
comments and suggestions from the citizens in the project area. Approximately 25
persons attended this meeting. Most of the citizens in attendance opposed the road
closure to replace the two bridges. Some of the concerns with closing the road included
inconveniences to school buses, evacuation during hurricane season, emergency response
time and increased travel cost due to high gas prices. Most citizens, however, agreed the
bridge requires replacement.
With the option of closing NC 133 being the proposed recommendation, NCDOT
coordinated with Orton Plantation, a set of formal and informal gardens open to the
public to determine how this would affect their.business. A spokesperson from Orton
Plantation was in favor of replacing the bridges and did not object to closing the road.
The let date was adjusted to allow construction to begin after mid -September to
accommodate Orton Plantation's schedule. This tourist attraction is open March through
November.
A meeting was held with natural resource agencies on June 14, 2001. The
purpose of this meeting was to discuss alternatives for TIP Projects B-3115 and B-3116
and to obtain concurrence on the recommended alternative for both projects. The result
of this meeting was a recommendation to replace Bridge No. 61 in its existing location
with a 300-foot (91 meter) bridge.
A meeting was held on July 9, 2001 with public officials in Brunswick County.
Representatives from Carolina Power and Light Company's (CP&L) Brunswick Nuclear
Plant and local emergency management officials had concerns with the road being closed
during hurricane season. They agreed however, the replacement of Bridge No. 61 along
with the adjacent bridge project were needed. CP&L and other officials did not object to
closing the road; however, they asked that NC 133 not be closed until after Labor Day, in
order to avoid the peak tourist season and reduce the amount of time the road will be
closed during hurricane season. NCDOT agreed to delay closing NC 133 until after
Labor Day. NCDOT will provide CP&L and the emergency management officials with
an estimate of the amount of time the road closure will add to evacuation times for the
plant.
A meeting was held on January 31, 2002 with representatives from emergency
management and other local officials from Brunswick County, CP&L, citizens, State and
Federal Resource Agencies, and NCDOT representatives. The purpose of this meeting
was to discuss closing NC 133 to replace the two bridges. The meeting concluded with
NCDOT agreeing to gather information on cost and impacts for replacing the bridge on
new location to the east and making a decision after comparing all of the proposed
alternatives. NCDOT also agreed to leave Bridge No. 56 open while Bridge No. 61 is
being replaced.
25

A meeting was held on March 8, 2002 with NCDOT officials at the existing
bridge location. After consideration with the Board of Transportation Member for
Division 3 and the Division Construction Engineer it was decided to replace the bridge on
existing location with road closure and an offsite detour.
IX. CONCLUSION
Based on the above discussion, NCDOT and FHWA conclude the project will
cause no significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the project may be processed as a
Categorical Exclusion.
VV

FIGURES

46
1�
J
' - J
CAMPBELL
ISLAND
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
y Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
Brunswick County
Replace Bridge No.61 on NC 133
Over Town Creek
B-31IS
Figure One

1A r
If"F -0
I N't

J.. A.� rf 1.�, .. r..
� ; "` �
� ,• � v f -.
i IQ -�� i
f'•
{
,�
� �
f � V Y` ��
.nt _� 1,'A '.( .fit I.i

Proposed
Detour
Route
No. 61
E1. `nr'.•vi �� / - 1y f I 'Ay-"�O a 03 �1 wo
e. � AIifRT J NOTE: MAR INCLUDES ONLY STATE MAINTAINED nUepS
OR IMPORTANT NON -SYSTEM ROADS.
,/�l�``\ u•A�. MILEAGE NOT SHOWN ON FRONTAGE ROADS.
ROADS SHOWN A5 OF JAN. 1. 1998
111B1B1G� 4`
Isll1O I
n
.rx 1 f' n0.B �'' 9 j i11R � I
A i `ess'[u j'0 0u'm F BWY
BRUNSWI f� COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA -�
FIGURE 4

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 0
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Goodwin, Project Planning Engineer
Planning & Environmental Branch ,NCDOT
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project C m for
Habitat Conservation Progr 6 /
DATE: - December 5, 1997
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements, Brunswick, Onslow, Wayne, Cumberland,
Richmond, Wilson, Lenoir, and Northampton counties, North Carolina,
TIP Nos. B-3115, B-3116, B-3358, B-3379, B-3322, B-3365, B-2110, B-
3267, B-3200, B-1303.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have
conducted site'visits as need and have the following preliminary comments on the subject
projects. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401. as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
On bridge replacement projects of this scope our standard recommendations are as
follows:
1. We generally pref�t spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
require work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment.
The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human
and wildlife passage beneath.the structure, does not block fish passage, and
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the
stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.

Bridge Replacement Memo
December 5, 1997
If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed
back to original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the
project. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
native tree species should be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'.
If possible, when using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not
grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush -hogs, or other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact, allows the
area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of
the steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the
option of requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and
we can recommend that the project require an individual '404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist
Mr. Tim Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these.
sensitive species may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service for information on requirements of the Endangered
Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy
entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12,
1997)" should be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
If corrugated metal pipe arches or concrete box culverts are used:
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for fish passage. Generally, this means
that the culvert or pipe invert is buried at least 1 foot below the natural stream
bed. If multiple cells are required the second and/or third cells should be
placed so that their bottoms are at stream bankful stage (similar to Lyonsfield
design). This will allow sufficient water depth in the culvert or pipe during
normal flows to accommodate fish movements. If culverts are long, baffle
systems are required to trap gravel and provide resting areas for fish and other
aquatic organisms.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed
to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or
widening is required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of
structures usually causes a decrease in water velocity causing sediment
deposition that will require future maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on the stream bed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same
location with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be

Bridge Replacement Memo 3 December 5, 1997
designed and located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to
avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old
structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-year
floodplain. Approach fills should be removed down to the natural.ground elevation. The
area should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. If the area that
is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to wetlands. If
successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other
projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments:
1. B-3115 - The potential ins high for anadromous fish usage at this site.
Therefore, the guidelines apply (See Item 9 above).
2. B-3116 - The potential is high for anadromous fish usage at this site.
Therefore, the guidelines apply (See Item 9 above).
3. B-3358 -This bridge is surrounded by swamp. We request that NCDOT
minimize wetland impacts.
4. B-3379 - This site has a high potential. for wetlands adjacent to the bridge.
This are is classified as nutrient sensitive waters so we request that
sedimentation and erosion controls for high quality waters be followed.
5. B-3322 - No specific concerns.
6. B-3365 - No specific concerns.
7. B-2110 - High potential for wetland impacts. NCDOT should minimize
wetland impacts.
8. B-3267 - No specific concerns.
9. B-3200 - Aadromous fish are known to us this area so the guidelines apply
(See Item 9 above). There is a high potential for wetland involvement.
10. B-1303 - Aadromous fish are known to use this area so the guidelines apply
(See Item 9 above).
We request that NCDOT routinely ainimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and
maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent
wet concrete from contacting water in or enteritig into these streams. Replacement of
bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is
recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along
streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway
crossings.
If. you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding
bridge replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity
to review and comment on these projects.

STREAM CROSSING GUIDELINES
FOR ANADROMOUS FISH PASSAGE
Anadromous Fish are a valuable resource and
must not be adversely impacted. The purpose
is to provide guidance to the North Carolina
Transportation to ensure that replacement of
highway stream crossing structures will not
movement of Anadromous Fish.
Applicable When:
their migration
of this document
Department of
existing and new
impede the
o Project is in the coastal plain defined by the
"Fall Line" as the approximate western limit
(see attached figure).
o For perennial and intermittent streams delineated
on most recent USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle maps.
General Guidelines:
o Design and scheduling of projects should avoid the
necessity of instream activities during the spring
migration period. For the purposes of these
guidelines "Spring" is considered to fall between
February 15 and June 15. (In areas where the
shortnose sturgeon may be present,.the Cape Fear,
Brunswick and Waccamaw Rivers, spring shall be
defined as February 1 to June 15).
o pridges and other channel spanning structures
are preferred where practical.
Technical Guidelines:
o In all cases, the width, height and gradient of
the proposed opening shall be such as to pass
the average historical spring flow without
adversely altering flow velocity. Spring flow
should be determined from gage data if available.
In the absence of this data, bankfull flow can be
used as a comparative level. (Reference, "Fisheries
Handbook of Engineering Requirements and Biological
Criteria", Bell 1973, for fish swimming
limitations.)
o The invert of culverts shall be set at least one
foot below the natural stream bed.

K �
Stream Crossing Guidelines
for Anadromous Fish Passage
Page -2-
o Crossings of perennial streams serving watersheds
greater than one square mile shall provide a
minimum of four (4) feet of additional opening
width (measured at spring flow elevation) to allow
for terrestrial wildlife passage.
o In stream footings for bridges will be set one foot
below the natural stream bed when practical.
For crossing sites which require permit review the following
information will be provided as a minimum to facilitate
resource agency review.
o Plan and profile views showing the existing and
proposed crossing structures in relation to the
stream bank and bed.
o Average historical spring flow (or bankfull flow)
for the site.
o How the proposed structure will affect the velocity
and stage of the spring flow (bankfull).
o Justification for any variance from the guideline
recommendations.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
F National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Regiona101fice-- '
9721 Executive Center Drive Not
St. Petersburg. FL 33712
(727)570-531'_:Fax [phone]
APR 10 2323
F.:SC-Pv:JLL
Mr. Greeory Blakenev
Project Development and Environmental
Analvsis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh. NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Blakenev:
This letter responds to your March 31. 2000 letter regarding two proposed bridge replacement projects in
Brunswick County. Both bridges to be demolished are made out of concrete and will be replaced with
reinforced concrete and steel or concrete girders. Bridge No. 61 on NC 133 over Town Creek (State
Project No.8.1231401, TIP No. B-3115) is approximately 300 feet Ion_ and 26 feet wide and will be
replaced with a bridge 300 feet long and 32 feet wide. Bridge No. 56 on NC 133 over Allen Creek (Sate
Project No. 8.1231501, TIP NO. B-3116) is approximately 61 feet long and 25 feet .vide and will be
replaced with an 80 feet long and 32 feet wide bridge. Explosives will not be used in the demolitions.
Allen Creek and Town Creek are tributaries to the lower Cape Fear River. Shortnose sturgeon, protected
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), are rare but do occur in the Cape Fear River. There are no
known occurrences of the shortnose sturgeon within these creeks, but potential habitat is present. No in -
stream construction in Town Creek or Allen Creek will occur during the months of January, February,
March. or April, when shortnose sturgeon could potentially be present. The NCDOT will abide by the
Best Management Practices For Bridge Demolition and Removal policy. High Quality Waters (HQW)
Erosion Control Guidelines will also be adhered to throughout construction. Based on this information,
the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) concurs with your conclusion that the proposed projects
are not likely to adversely affect the shormose sturgeon.
This concludes the consultation responsibilities under section 7 of the ESA for the proposed action for
Federally -listed species, and their critical habitat, under NMFS purview. Consultation should be
reinitiated if new information reveals impacts of the proposed action that may affect listed species or
their critical habitat, a new species is listed, the identified action is subsequently modified, or critical
habitat determined that may be affected by the proposed activity.
If you have any questions, please call Jennifer Lee, Fishery Biologist, of my Protected Resources staff.
Sincerely,
William T. Hogarth, Pit. D.
Regional Administrator
cc: F/PR3
1514-22 L.2

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Division of Archives and History
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
December 16, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge #61 on NC 133 over Town Creek,
Brunswick County, B-31 15, Federal Aid Project
BRSTP-133(1), State Project 8.1231401-, ER 98-
7931
Dear Mr. Graf:
On December 10, 1997, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning
the above project. We reported our available information on historic architectural
and archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations.
NCDOT provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic structures
located within the area of potential effect. We recommend that no historic
architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Regulations for Compliance with' Section 06, codified ats361es
CFR Part 800.
log East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 Ina

Nicholas L. Graf
December 16, 1997, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
Z4
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
1

i �ti oc TRg1,p
°9r U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAYADMINISTRATION ;?
310 New Bern Avenue. Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
INTES OF To May 5, 2000
IN REPLY REFER T6
HO-NC
Mr. William Gilmore, P.E.
Manager of Planning and
Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Raleigh, North Carolina
Subject: Federal -aid Project BRSTP-133(1), State No. 6.1231401, B-
3115, Brunswick County Determination of Need for a Coast
Guard Permit
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
As requested by Mr. Gregory Blakeney, the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) has reviewed the information submitted on the
subject project relative to the type and size of vessels that
utilize Town Creek in the vicinity of the proposed project.
In accordance with 23 CFR 650.805(b), the FHWA has determined that
the proposed project is over water that is not used or is 'not
susceptible to use in its natural condition or by reasonable
improvement as a means .to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
Although this waterway is tidal, the only vessels that use the
stream are recreational, fishing or other small boats less than 6.4
meters (21 feet) in length. Accordingly, a US Coast Guard permit
is not required for construction of this project.
Sincerely yours,
v/f`. G &e�
FOGY Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator

N.C.
Michael F. Easley, Governor
North Carolina Department of Environmtlen iam and NaturalG. RossrRe ourec6s'
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Wilmington Regional Office
August Mr.
2002
Mr. Andrew Nottingham, P.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Hydraulics Unit, 1590 Mail Service Center AUG 0 8 2002
Raleigh NC 27699-1590
DIVISIOPj OF HIGHWAYc
Subject: EXEMPTION from Stormwater HYDRAULICS-UN17-
Management Permit Regulations
NCDOT Project Number 8.1231401 (B-3115)
Stormwater Project No. S W8 020803
Bridge No. 61 over Town Creek on NC 133
Brunswick County
Dear Mr. Nottingham:
The Wilmington Regional Office received a copy of a Stormwater Management Permit
Application Form for the NCDOT Public Road or Bridge project known as Bridge No. 61 over
Town Creek on NC 133. Staff of the Wilmington Regional Office have reviewed the application
for the applicability of the Stormwater Management rules to the proposed activity at this project.
Based on our review; the proposed development activity at this site is not subject to the
stormwater requirements as provided for in 15A NCAC 2H.1000. Please be advised that other
regulations may potentially apply to the proposed activities.
If your project disturbs five acres or more and has a point source discharge of stormwater
runoff, then it is subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
stormwater discharge requirements. You are required to have an NPDES permit for stormwater
discharge from projects meeting these criteria.
This exemption applies only to the Coastal Stormwater Management Permit for the
currently proposed activity. If at any time in the future, development of any part of this site is
planned, as defined in NCAC 2H.I000, or if the proposed activities differ in any manner from
what is shown on the plans on file with the Division, you must submit the project for review of
the applicability of the stormwater management rules. If you have any questions conceminthis
matter, please do not hesitate to call me at [phone]. g
Sincerely,
Rick Shiver
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
RSS/arl: S:\1VQS\STORMIN'AT\EXEMP-f\020803.Aug
cc: Delaney Aycock, Brunswick County Building Inspections
Linda Cewis
Wilmington Regional Office
Central Files
ERR
on of Water Quality 727 Cardinal Dn•,z Extznsion Wilmington, N.C. 2a405 [phone] Fax [phone] customer service
800-623-7748

e•`":yui�'"F� United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
d Raleigh Field OfBoc
Post Office Box 33726
VRcH 1.0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
GUIDELINES FOR AVOIDING IMPACTS TO THE WEST INDIAN MANATEE
Precautionary Measures for Construction Activities in North Carolina Waters
The West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus), also known as the Florida manatee, is
a Federally -listed endangered aquatic mammal protected under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.1531 et seq.) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act
of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.0 1461 et seq.). The manatee is also listed as endangered
under the North Carolina Endangered Species Act of 1987 (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of
the General Statutes). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is the lead Federal
agency responsible for the protection and recovery of the West Indian manatee under the
provisions of the Endangered Species Act.
Adult manatees average 10 feet long and weigh about 2,200 pounds, although some
individuals have been recorded at lengths greater than 13 feet and weighing as much as
3,500 pounds. Manatees are commonly found in fresh, brackish, or marine water habitats,
including shallow coastal bays, lagoons, estuaries, and inland rivers of varying salinity
extremes. Manatees spend much of their time underwater or partly submerged, making
them difficult to detect even in shallow water. While the manatee's principal stronghold in
the United States is Florida, the species is considered a seasonal inhabitant of North
Carolina with most occurrences reported from June through October.
To protect manatees in North Carolina, the Service's Raleigh Field Office has prepared
precautionary measures for general construction activities in waters used by the species.
Implementation of1hese measure will allow in -water projects which do not require blasting
to proceed without adverse impacts to manatees. In addition, inclusion of these guidelines
as conservation measures in a Biological Assessment or Biological Evaluation, or as part
of the determination of impacts on the manatee in an environmental document prepared
pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, will expedite the Service's review of the
document for the fulfillment of requirements under Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act. These measures include:
1. The project manager and/or contractor will inform all personnel associated with the
project that manatees may be present in the project area, and the need to avoid any harm
to these endangered mammals. The project manager will ensure that all construction
personnel know the general appearance of the species and their habit of moving about
completely or partially submerged in shallow water. All construction personnel will be
informed that they are responsible for observing water -related activities for the presence
of manatees.
2. The project manager and/or the contractor will advise all construction personnel that

i
there are civil and criminal penalties for harming, harassing, or killing manatees which are
protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Endangered Species Act.
3. If a manatee is seen within 100 yards of the active construction and/or dredging
operation or vessel movement, all appropriate precautions will be implemented to ensure
protection of the manatee. These precautions will include the immediate shutdown of
moving equipment if a manatee comes within 50 feet of the operational area of the
equipment. Activities will not resume until the manatee has departed the project area on
its own volition (i.e., it may not be herded or harassed from the area).
4. Any collision with and/or injury to a manatee will be reported immediately. The report
must be made to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (ph. 919.856.4520 ext. 16), the
National Marine Fisheries Service (ph. 252.728.8762), and the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (ph. 252.448.1546).
5. A sign will be posted in all vessels associated with the projectwhere it is clearly visible
to the vessel operator. The sign should state:
CAUTION: The endangered manatee may occur in these waters during the warmer
months, primarily from June through October. Idle speed is required if operating
this vessel in shallowwater during these months. All equipment must be shutdown
if a manatee comes within 50 feet of the vessel or operating equipment. A collision
with and/or injury to the manatee must be reported immediately to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (919-856-4520 ext. 16), the National Marine Fisheries Service
(252.728.8762), and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
(252.448.1546).
6. The, contractor will maintain a log detailing sightings, collisions, and/or injuries to
manatees during project activities. Upon completion of the action, the project managerwill
prepare a report which summarizes all information on manatees encountered and submit
the report to the Service's Raleigh Field Office.
7. All vessels associated with the construction project will operate at"no wake/idle" speeds
at all times while in water where the draft of the vessel provides less than a four foot
clearance from the bottom. All vessels will follow routes of deep water whenever possible.
8. If siltation barriers must be placed in shallow water, these barriers will be: (a) made of
material in which manatees cannot become entangled; (b) secured in a manner that they
cannot break free and entangle manatees; and, (c) regularly monitored to ensure that
manatees have not become entangled. Barriers will be placed in a manner to allow
manatees entry to or exit from essential habitat.
Prepared by (rev. 06/2003):
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
919/856-4520

Figure 1. The whole body of the West Indian manatee may be visible in clear water; but
in the dark and muddy waters of coastal North Carolina, one normally sees only a small
part of the head when the manatee raises its nose to breathe.
ATB
Illustration used with the permission of the North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences.
Source: Clark, M. K. 1987. Endangered, Threatened, and Ran: Fauna of North Carolina: Part I.
A re-evaluation of the mammals. Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Biological Survey 1987-
3. North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences. Raleigh, NC. pp. 52.

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Arucle Addressed to:
T. F. Holdings
1202 Eastwood Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
A Signature
❑ Agem❑
Addressee
ceived by
Pin'.
Prf ed Name)
C.Dgte
off/DDellivery
Cal
//rPM
d/9/flY
D. Is delivery address different from Rem 1? ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
3. Se ice Type /
Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchidise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? IErfm Feel ❑ Yes
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service taboo -70 0 1 a76 o m 3 ZS6b B5(o4
PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt I
702595O2.b1-tsne
■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Punt your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front N space permits.
1. Article Addressed to
Mr. David R. Harless
2765 Rivcr Road, SE
Winnabow, NC 28479
A. Signature
X ❑ Agent
❑ Addressee
,deceived b Printed e) C.
Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑ Yes
If YES enter delivery address below: ❑ No
3. Type
)
ti rfied Mail
❑ Express Mal
1
❑ Registered
❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail
❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra. Fee) ❑ Yes
2. Ankle Number /1 /^ G f� t�
2. Article
mbar ice label) -7UV0 I670 0063 2JU0 eL%ID
PS Form 3811. August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 1025e5-02-M-1540

See Sheet I -A For -Index of Sleets
See Sheet 1-B For Conventionol Symbols
-�— DETOuR ROUTE
TO SOUTHPORT
-L— STA. 9+00.00
BEGIN TIP PRO
V
OK GRAPHIC SCALES DESIGN DATA
50 25 0' S0 100 ADT 2004 = 13,600
ADT 20 = 4,
PLANS DHV 1% = 4 %
50 25 0 50 100 D = 6D %
O PROFILE (HORIZONTAL) T = 5 %
V = 60 MPH
r ` 10 5 0 10 20
Vooncu c vcon�.n TTST 2 % + DUAL 3
NC
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAYS
BR UNS WICK CO UNIT
LOCATIOMBRIDGE NO. 61OVER TOWN CREEK ON NC 133
TYPE OF WORK GRADING, STRUCTURE, DRAINAGE, PAVING
AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS
'IN BRIDGE
STA13+6577 P
E�
� ENL
t� -L-
PROJECT LENGTH
LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT B-3m = 0.175 MI
LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT B-3115 = 0.057 MI
TOTAL LENGTH OF TIP PROJECT B-3115 = 0.232 MI
PlWared In Ila ornm of,
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
7000 Llyd Rldp Dr., NC, 27610
RIGHT OF WAY DATE. GARY LOVERING, P.E.
JULY 31,2003 rAq=T
LETTMG ➢ATE: ANTHONY C. WEST
JULY 20, 2004 I•+ama Bau srau®e
C• B-3115 i am
-L- STA. 21 +25.00
END TIP PROM
0
HYDRAMCs EuGnaU
DESIGN
Fig' Von
DEPARTMENT OF i
MURAL HIGHWAY

DETAIL A
LATERAL BAD CH
Sbq
TD
10 rK],r w.0 1.51',
fmnc IAI =1.5 Ft.
.NA11 B I,< Lp 0B=2.OFt.
Tyne of LI =CLASS B RIP N .5'OFT.
TA S. 16+80 TO 17+io -1-P LT
DETAILB
SPECIAL LATERAL BASE DITCH
Iwf Lo sco.t
6r �ro
10 f,R, svoN
nlrer rmrvr B ' WAR, 0=1.5Ft.
uoY.A o1.5Ft.
B
type Rt liner = CLASS B RIP RAP
STA. 17+50 TO 18+00 4— LT
DETAIL C
SPECIAL CUT DITCH
txm to svaNt
LFrom
m•u
u ma.
ova ]r pw+sAr
um.D =2.0ft.
STA. 19+00 TO 20+50 -1r LT.
O
O T.F.HOLDINGS
LMTEO PARTNERSHIP
DB 907 P4 049
BEGIN TIP PROJECT B-3115
POTSIO. 9+00D0
BEG.4' PS. ,
YtVyl
✓6M + _ k
Q+ y+ (L56 k
Ybp$N
k k
uwv5y _
LT. A RT. _a__a IwR�r etcvl -
T o u Kl— —L— POT 5
-1 F.
N
N 4f 58' 35T2WYE
—tsvcv F— _ _F gym
�4
TO 50ffb F
k
•OCOS
., �..
[l. B PPRAP
rL
Ep
i
IS
L1.56T
1 W
if
eEtE/
N v000S
`
YLIfN O h•
G\�
O
TOWN CREEK TIMBER COMPANY
DB 2AO PE 700
DD ms PE ma
LGINDG
/ POT 510.13466.77
—L—
P15T0 20+5600
A— 16,52'30D'IRTI
�.
R 152789'
M
Y.RSW +
k
CqK ARAI
r e°nwa
i°6E �LIE4'"sSo KiiD�
JLE ' 61 SENT 0
T
HVER1 ALP
k —Ta
uae6N
ygik�4�s'�g
+
SE - OD6 /K "566y2
\✓
0 ST6Z•6N.. \ //O �
I
I
/
DAVID R. HAPLESS
' OB Q67 PG BB
NO 2 PG 265
I
yTpOyV�p,L E To. /8+3136
PESET
I
I
J
]aco'
o
•Boos
p
4REA
E iNP
_66LR•
51
LIE mq .. ..xl
B AN
•m"x + 5EP1K
BLv ELL. I
s o
I I
\ •
p AB'
ICY,
TCYEAT
IL
I
�.TERYL
60 TDSIH If
/ MO-Tii r E"
\
I 1 I
r'POST
I'
�L \
NSS6
e
/ 9
6f
6sr —1
SC',)I pFd
1 a4y
m
•
�yC y, o�
—"--I
.. SCUP _
\
G
L soulI
TPE f Ar qJ E'0T •'E
+�
• AT 1
_ F 6: .. .. nt
ti
L•r� ©Es1.RT5 •.
MI.5 AT IP
_
J.'CLARK HIPPO R
V
/ OB.QB] pG IJl v0005
NILLIAN c---wI III
FTLOI] E 0 074 PG 845
vE
\
+'
' ��
50
1L-1022.91 H+61.91 PINC
\ \ \
LT
- W+9
+3136
/
ss LT.
LT.& RT. /
NO APPROACH SLAB /
.1. S. [OMEPSM0PER HI6DI
WITHNBNNE55 C
VG
c, HIGH "'ER LIE EVIDEADE. WILLIAM C. WARNICK. III
SHE S7AIAD THAT THE vglEP POSE TO
a $M1P r� Nry ELEvpTMx OF 2 TO ] IxCxES DELOv OB pi9 P4 095
rL V IYIRPICLV AH OFSSEPT.W XE INL NO Z PG I79
E E�TICN OFI0.6 FEETE MW vRTEP LIM
-Al-
/ / CHARLE)S) G. SLAFF III Sp,36'
a HBDB IZ]A PE 179 ja
je° •%L'
+ NOTE: SEE SHEET 5 FOR -L- PROFILE
DAVID R. HAPLESS
OB 452 P4 93
x0 19 PC ]I<
NB 2 PO 265
B
END TIP PRCUEC
POCSfa 21+25A7
END 4' PS. \
Y^aUS_\
RT.