19960424 Ver 1_Complete File_19960430

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
A?je
00
AdWMWdIbNdft
?EHNR
June 24, 1996
Gates County
DEM Project # 960424
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. Franklin Vick
N.C. Dept. of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
You have our approval to place fill material in 200 square feet of wetlands or waters for the purpose of
replacing a bridge at SR 1100, Bridge #32 over Trotman Creek, as you described in your application dated
26 April 1996. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill.is covered by General Water
Quality Certification Number 3025.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you
change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. For this
approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification. In addition, you
should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a
written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its
conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Environmental Management under Section 401 of
the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
Ik D-1
??
- n Howazd;, r. P.E.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Washington Field Office
Washington DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
John Parker, DCM
9604241tr
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer - 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Roger N. Schecter, Director
960424
RE c1 i,?r?
aY U.; 1996
FNV?,?Or.?EN?q? ScIFNr?S
April 26, 1996
?4 WA
A 40
1Dr-=HNF;Z
RECEIVEDOrFICE
WASHINGTON
N?p 3 0 1996
D"
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. A. Preston Howard, Director
Division of Environmental Management
FROM: John R. Parker, Jr.
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
Applicant: NC DOT Bridge No. 32, Trotman Creek
Project Location: Gates County, SR 1100
Proposed Project: To replace the existing 69 foot long span structure with a 100 foot
long new steel reinforced structure. The proposed structure will
eliminate two current supports within the channel of Trotman Creek.
The proposed structure will improve public trust navigation on
Trotman Creek
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
return this form by May 17, 1996. If you have any questions regarding the proposed
project, please contact Dennis Hawthorn at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth
comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY - This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the
attached comments.
Signed Date n It _? I 1367 U.S. 17 South, Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Afflrmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
A
All %
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT RECEIVED
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: NC DOT Bridge No.32, Trotman Creek MAY 1 71996
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Gates County, SR 1100 °RaNcH
Photo Index - 1995:not available 1989: not available 1984: not available
State Plane Coordinates - X:208,100 Y: 953,600
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/D&F
3
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 4/23/96 MAY
Was Applicant Present - No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 4/16/96
Office - Elizabeth City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - 1993 Gates County Land-Use Plan Update
Land Classification From LUP - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: PTW
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - NA
Planned - NA
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - wooden bridge
Planned - reinforced concrete bridge
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: Unknown
Source -
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED FILLED SHADED
(A) Veg'd Freshwater Wetlands less than 100 sf.
(B) Public Trust Waters less than 100 sf. 1200 sf. (0.028A.)
(C) Upland 1200 sf. (0.028 A.) 1400 sf. (0.033A.)
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 2800 SF. (0.065 A.)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: NO
(F) Water Classification: CSW Open: NA
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: NC DOT proposes to replace the existing 69 ft. long span structure with a
100 ft. long new steel re-inforced structure. The proposed structure will eliminate two current
supports within the channel of Trotman Creek. The proposed structure will improve public trust
navigation on Trotman Creek.

NC DOT Bridge No.32, Trotman Creek
Bio Report
Page Two
Site Description
The proposed bridge replacement site is approximately 1.5 miles west of NC 37 near Mintonsville at the
intersection of SR 1100 and Trotman Creek in Gates County. Trotman Creek is a tributary of Catherine
Creek and the Chowan River, north of the Chowan-Gates County line.
The waters of Trotman Creek are classified by the Wildlife Resources Commission as Inland Waters. These
waters are classified as Public Trust Waters by the Division of Coastal Management and are part of the
Estuarine System Area of Environmental Concern.
Trotman Creek is approximately 50 ft. wide at this crossing. The mid-channel water depth at this crossing
vicinity of Trotman Creek is approximately 4 ft. at NWL. The existing bridge allows for a vertical
clearance somewhere between 6 ft. and 7 ft. and a horizontal clearance of approximately 20 ft. at NWL.
The existing bridge is supported by five sets of wooden tress piles, three of which are within Public Trust
Waters. The existing bridge structure, as well as the natural channel, limit navigation upstream to only
small recreational vessels.
The shoreline is vegetated in a canopy of Taxodium distichum (bald cypress), Nyssa aquatica (water
Tupelo) and Acer rubrum (red maple).
Proposed Work
The applicant is currently scheduled to replace the existing bridge structure during the spring of 1996. The
applicant proposes to replace the existing 69 ft. long wooden structure with an 100 ft. long reinforced
concrete structure. The new structure will be supported by four bent piles. Two of these piles will be
placed within Public Trust Waters. The proposed replacement structure will increase horizontal clearance
to about 40 ft.. The proposed structure will provide a vertical clearance of 6.7 ft. at NWL.
The proposed structure will require that rip-rap stabilization stone be placed along both sides of the
shoreline beneath the proposed bridge structure for a total length of about 100 ft.
Anticipated Impacts
The proposed bridge structure will shade about 1200 sf. of Public Trust Waters. The proposed bridge
structure bent piles will impact less than 100 sf. of Public Trust Waters. The proposed structure will not
directly impact any Coastal Wetlands.
The proposed bridge structure will require the widening of the existing road approach. This proposed
activity will be undertaken on high ground.
The proposed bridge structure will not reduce vertical clearance over Public Trust Waters. The proposed
bridge structure will utilize less' piling supports and impact less Public Trust Waters of Trotman Creek than
the existing structure. In this regard, the proposed bridge structure will improve Public Trust Waters
navigation beneath the bridge structure.
4>
NC DOT Bridge No.32, Trotman Creek
Bio Report
Page Two
The proposed bridge and road work will result in increased turbidity within the Trotman Creek watershed
and downstream.
CAMA Review
A review of the County LUP and my comments will be presented at a later date under a separate
document.
Submitted by Dennis W. Hawthorn
April 24, 1996
Form DCM-MP-1
APPLICATION

N?R 9 111)6
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
b. City, town, community or landmark
Southeast of Gatesville
a. Landowner:
Name N. C. Department of Transportation
Address P.O. Box 25201
City Raleigh State N.C
Zip 27611-5201 Day Phone [phone]
c. Street address or secondary road number
SR 1100
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? Yes X No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Trotman Creek
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
Name H. Franklin Vick P.E., Mgt P&E Branch
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Address P.O. Box 25201
City Raleigh State N.C.
Zip 27611-5201 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
c. Project name (if any) Bridge 9 32 over Trotman
Creek on SR 1100 in Gates County
NOTE: Permit will be issued in name of landowner(s),
and/or project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Replace existing bridge with reinforced concrete
cored-slab bridge; high ground excavation will
occur at site of new end-bents; fill will be placed
along road shoulders/slopes only in uplands
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? Both
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages. Purpose: To replace an agin?_
bridge structure, Use: Public Transportation;
Methods of Construction: Standard Bridge and
Roadway Construction methodologies
a. County Gates
Form DCbi-MP-1

4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract N/A
b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or
NWL +/- 8.2 ft
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Dorovan Nawnev-Chowan complex
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
N/A
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 from brid_ae and roadwav
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
NIA
e. Vegetation on tract Mixed Hardwood Bottomland
& Gum-Cypress Swamp
f. Man-made features now on tract Existing Bridge
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consult the local land use
plan)
X Conservation Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
N/A
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the
applicable zoning? Yes No N/A
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
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
1. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes _ No
Coastal (marsh) Other
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? No
(Attach documentation, if available)
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.
41 An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" 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
Form DCM-MP-1
the site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
IDA Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary.
*A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and
signed return receipts as proof that such owners
have received a copy of the application and plats
by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised
that they have 30 days in which to submit comments
on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal
1Mlanagement. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Robert R. Carter
Address 3717 Sandpiper Lane
Chesapeake. Va 23325
Name James O. Wright
Address Route 1. Box 33
Hobbsville, NC 27946
Name Alex Clavwood Hollowell Jr.
Address _Route 1. Box 261
Phone Hobbsville. NC 27946
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued
for work on the project tract. Include permit
numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
N/A
0 A check for 5250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
REC71'!cn
APR 9 1996
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to
conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the 29th day of March . 1996
Print Name H. F in Vick- PIE/
Signature 1
andowner orAuthored Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-4 Structures Information
X DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE. Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
Form DCM-MP-5
,7:
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.
APR 9 19""
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
1. BRIDGES g. Length of proposed bridge 100 ft
h. Width of proposed bridge 24' (clear roadway)
a. Public X Private
b. Type of bridge (construction material)
steel-reinforced concrete cored-slab
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
Trotman Creek
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
NWL +/- 4.5 ft
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge 69 ft
(2) Width of existing bridge191' (clear roadway
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge 6.7 ft
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain) Entire existing bridge
will be removed
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1)
(2)
(3)
Length of existing culvert
Width of existing culvert
Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
i. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
+/- 7.3 ft
J. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
X Yes No
If yes, explain Water flows should improve since
two interior bents will be removed from the
channel proper
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
+/- 6.7 ft vert; 40 ft horizontal
1. Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? X Yes No
If yes, explain Same vertical clearance- but much
larger horizontal clearance (40 ft at channel vs .< 20
ft at the channel for the existing)
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.
Form DCM-MP-5
2. CULVERTS N/A
a. Water body in which culvert is to be placed

A 9 1996
Will the proposed culvert affect existing navigation
potential? Yes No
If yes, explain
b. Number of culverts proposed
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style)
d.
(4) Will all, or a part of the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain)
Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge
(2) Width of existing bridge
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge
e. Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MEiW or NWL
(4) Will all, or a part of the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
f. Length of proposed culvert
g. Width of proposed culvert
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the
MHW or NWL
i. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
Yes No
If yes, explain
3. EXCAVATION AND FILL
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Depth of area to be excavated
(4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation within: No
- Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any highground excavation?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated 30 ft
(2) Width of area to be excavated 40 ft
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards 225 cubic yards
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves any
excavation, please complete the following:
(1) Location of the spoil disposal area
upland site to be determined
(2) Dimensions of spoil disposal area
(3) Do you claim title to the disposal area?
Yes No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from
the owner.
Form DCM-1NII'-5
(4) Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes No
(5) Does the disposal area include any coastal
wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
Yes No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
(6) Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW or NWL? Yes No
If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above.
Ct rr_;-?
APR 9 1996
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? Yes X 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
(See Attachment)
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material d.
described in Item d. above) to be placed below
MHW or NWL? Yes X No
If yes,
(1)
(2)
(3)
f. 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: No
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled
(2) Width of area to be filled
(3) Purpose of fill
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 100 ft
(2) Width of area to be filled 14 ft
(3) Purpose of fill Enhance shoulder at bridge
approaches
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
Length of area to be filled
Width of area to be filled
Purpose of fill
Will the proposed project require any work
channels? Yes X No
If yes, complete Form DCM-NP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? Stringent application of
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the
Protection of Surface Waters in North Carolina
f. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or hydraulic
dredge)? Crane, backhoe, trucks and other standard
-construction equipment
g. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes X No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any shoreline stabilization?
X Yes No
If yes, explain in detail -Stone riprap will placed
alone shoreline beneath bridge to stabilize banks
H. Frankl' is P.E. A_zr
App t Ject Na
nature
March 29, 1996
RECEiV=".)
Supplement to APR 9 1996
Form MP-5, Part 3 (Excavation and Fill)
Subpart d. (2) thru (6)
Some of the excavated material, depending on its suitability, may be targetted
for required project fills. However, it is reasonable to predict that some undesirable
material will result from excavation. This material will be removed by the contractor to a
suitable off-site upland. More than likely the site will be privately-owned and the owner
has granted the contractor permission to deposit the excess spoil. The North Carolina
Department of Transportation requires the contractor to submit candidate spoil disposal
areas to the project inspector for approval by the Department. The Department
prohibits its contractors from using any wetland or surface water for the deposition of
spoil.
Orwn Hill C« DuU - - -
Yl
. CAROLINA' I Rtmoldson
1
--
? Moyack Gibbs
r A7.A
Gatts
Mn -am* 1 , ?
• G
2 T E S 1
s tss r
o
Q
Butkland , 37 l,p
4 ,
13 3
?
` ? tn Sl+to
Scum MAIS Snowd
t
ns
i /- 158 Is
58 urllots b«
? ura \ r
9
Come
f , ipieton r 158 t 1 r M,??Y .
7 51.N P
,t
S I7 S?wb«
C
.
\
l + Winton SIT i, sttsv4 tile.}
.
irotrilI 7 ??
c re
t r
t
O
.r ?7 7 rune Sbndyabii wY 7
?y 1 ISB
\
`
.7
of 118"Ile ` ) . tr03s
Clmdtn
J
Eli
, s E
RhM R `
I P?' F O
\
• +
et?
A
t?*
r
5
,
k
f amt Jon • ,*Ahoskie Harnllf 1
Rylan s
` t / M
r tlvidtrt CP 1 +Cp,?
13
/
s
Ip

cart
_
1 J _
_ PE UIMANS
'
_ - _
usM.+«'n. k N $rJ
,
TY^erI 3) Ilnlall 11
AW ender ? ? Pawelliville
?
.rC'+f' 7 I , Colenm 2 ? o•: vii
Ile°go
Connarltta 13 10 Wo

rd
o isonton
Z

?•
Kt11a0 ?2 n
} I
H W I?
e .
•
Bards 11 s R It . 1 i ;
nts Nock
s
tort. i ?a halt 7 , tir~,r r
Mount CWld +.. rr
' .r.
Ill p r^oa? .vw
,Asktwvrbt AsMand 1 1Ha lock [d.-,..?
' is ;`?-T 1 f...?w..ir?.'•' `C:.
`
?
c
' ':?
1 : ,?
i:?..:.
r?1?ult
lr.wwA.i:?
i.f 3..
r 7
• ' r
3 3
r
an
' E R
T I
r scale of Miles
Dfew
IAwI. .
t AAi t
2
.- ? D
. 5 ?? 70 30
20
2D
30 40 48
NA
RH CARou
No Scale le
of Kilometers
- One Inch equa t approu ttlf 17 mJn aM appro wut* 71 kAwwtta.
1799 7111 th ;k rr
t* 1341 .
J=
a
?fr 1D11
.a
1
y?
Ai R
? ?' ? 1]11 .t
li2r 1721 .S
Kellogg fork
1111 1199 N
t?
a
•t Ea. ?• '3•
? ?fl
1711
1710 t
? Ge.vaad. 2.f at Sunbury tit
t J
,LS1 t '
t
• J
1.1 M? Acorn N,7
? _
a
4b 7 ,°
+ L499 Q MERCNANIS 12121.
MILL POND
a •• 1J79. JONES
. POND / O
,? ? . 11?
QL - 1!>D .a
k Jito
C 7 v L,qt JJ9!
Oi i.
lilt
1!41 Rar 32
?'
' 1.t MarrA
J? ?.t L92 , M?
Jl21 WordviA

Jill
11
T JJ41 4 'rJ
lim N.Mn 1!27 G.w - '
a
^ lot
? man 7

.' a

ILZZ
^ r+s
v
r.a ;i;
a Jd19

??

r
11Q!
72tiI J19a 1 '+ JJ •..
lei
JJ4i Wi;. S,
•
N 22 1?
Ktyf
i
Ila
1? 27 Travel. au ra
Mudd
t;i; Go. 1413 a crow .I.l_
1J $-.!LCC-
?y ° .
i11II 1417 Ey Lt 1416 SCALE
Carf.f :4 'O ; 1 1 O I 2 7 a TAKES
1197 f
1197 [
.v Mi dalb Fork
Let 1 r
v J
_ 1.192
AtwfaavM ,
11?
~ _
Hobbni9.
• •
?, a. ar
Crbrreed. 'a 1191 1.o s (
r , Liu
uu JJl N_C. DEPT. OF TRANS.
SITI: i r DIV15ION OF HIGHWAYS
6a• 32 ??? ::: r "'ate +Jl29 ~ GATES CovwTY

, l X77 690. *31 ON 59 1100
OVER TROTMAN CREEL(
\•\ r JANUARY 19966,
COUNTY SHEET 1 OF

o
1
cam! o .y? ?:'j Q V !?
t7 -J
W Q .0 t V \
W
fa. o ? a ? ? (-- c
4 d r o ?.
Q CY Z
?t
CE) 40
-; .
c\j

jp'? J? . J
,'91^1, 9 4 1/i??
O
n
J
cC
J
N
1z
? k V
TROTMAN CREEK
1 cC
?.1
M

Z ?V
? J J
LLI Q J

1r
? Z co
tt
}
V
CL.

v

o
--- t ! H
y n: 00

m?

?: ?-
Q e -? o o? ' N 4 Q LJ
X33
4 i / ¢
N
1Z
p H H
Cie
Z6
IIJ
t q ?`
Oe-
?-
V
I
o (I- -t_ \
CC tv) -J tiJ
2
I o I
1
I
?I

n N
CC CC
I = >
_fl I a ref' IR

<1
Q V
LJ W

p
L
O?
ic! Q
V
N I 4
J
v1 W
4 N ?

n

o c 3 ° o o?

? 1 x O N
M ?

O

q •' :0 7

L7
t
j.
? tr
?3

O

UA a,
in q
o a 4

I

N.C. OV.M Of TRANS.
DIASION aP oIGHWAYS
C) d GA7*ES COU14Y
- 0 z 2RG.-#32 ON SR lloo
Z OVER -TRoTmAW CREEK
JANUARY 1996
suz&TaOr 4
0
o 0
c 0
m _ - --
1
q
V4
U
ul

t
r
0
J
H
N
y
1
O

1
Q2
7
O
1-4
v
V)

oI
Q
O
O

O
.
J '
iy
,i 'IV
a j
a
Irk
?s
Z O
%br

® lrl

^. v
-r
OC
h
T

T
h
: -?°, N.C. DEPT, of TRANS
p1YIS1AN or WI6uWAXS
o GA`f`ES COU TY
e aGG. -vZ ow sx i we
0 Y E K T14csTIAANCREEK
JANUARY 1996
SH1:El OF

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: NC DOT Bridge No.32, Trotman Creek
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Gates County, SR 1100
Photo Index - 1995:not available 1989: not available 1984: not available
State Plane Coordinates - X:2,688,100 Y: 953,600
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 4/23/96
Was Applicant Present - No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 4/16/96
Office - Elizabeth City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - 1993 Gates County Land-Use Plan Update
Land Classification From LUP - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: PTW
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - NA
Planned - NA
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - wooden bridge
Planned - reinforced concrete bridge
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: Unknown
Source -
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED FILLED
000424
SHADED
(A) Veg'd Freshwater Wetlands less than 100 sf.
(B) Public Trust Waters less than 100 sf. 1200 sf. (0.028A.)
(C) Upland 1200 sf. (0.028 A.) 1400 sf. (0.033A.)
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 2800 SF. (0.065 A.)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: NO
(F) Water Classification: CSW Open: NA
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: NC DOT proposes to replace the existing 69 ft. long span structure with a
100 ft. long new steel re-inforced structure. The proposed structure will eliminate two current
supports within the channel of Trotman Creek. The proposed structure will improve public trust
navigation on Trotman Creek.
.. # 4.
NC DOT Bridge No.32, Trotman Creek
Bio Report
Page Two
Site Description
The proposed bridge replacement site is approximately 1.5 miles west of NC 37 near Mintonsville at the
intersection of SR 1100 and Trotman Creek in Gates County. Trotman Creek is a tributary of Catherine
Creek and the Chowan River, north of the Chowan-Gates County line.
The waters of Trotman Creek are classified by the Wildlife Resources Commission as Inland Waters. These
waters are classified as Public Trust Waters by the Division of Coastal Management and are part of the
Estuarine System Area of Environmental Concern.
Trotman Creek is approximately 50 ft. wide at this crossing. The mid-channel water depth at this crossing
vicinity of Trotman Creek is approximately 4 ft. at NWL. The existing bridge allows for a vertical
clearance somewhere between 6 ft. and 7 ft. and a horizontal clearance of approximately 20 ft. at NWL.
The existing bridge is supported by five sets of wooden tress piles, three of which are within Public Trust
Waters. The existing bridge structure, as well as the natural channel, limit navigation upstream to only
small recreational vessels.
The shoreline is vegetated in a canopy of Taxodium distichum (bald cypress), Nyssa aquatica (water
Tupelo) and Acer rubrum (red maple).
Proposed Work
The applicant is currently scheduled to replace the existing bridge structure during the spring of 1996. The
applicant proposes to replace the existing 69 ft. long wooden structure with an 100 ft. long reinforced
concrete structure. The new structure will be supported by four bent piles. Two of these piles will be
placed within Public Trust Waters. The proposed replacement structure will increase horizontal clearance
to about 40 ft. The proposed structure will provide a vertical clearance of 6.7 ft. at NWL.
The proposed structure will require that rip-rap stabilization stone be placed along both sides of the
shoreline beneath the proposed bridge structure for a total length of about 100 ft.
Anticipated Impacts
The proposed bridge structure will shade about 1200 sf. of Public Trust Waters. The proposed bridge
structure bent piles will impact less than 100 sf. of Public Trust Waters. The proposed structure will not
directly impact any Coastal Wetlands.
The proposed bridge structure will require the widening of the existing road approach. This proposed
activity will be undertaken on high ground.
The proposed bridge structure will not reduce vertical clearance over Public Trust Waters. The proposed
bridge structure will utilize less piling supports and impact less Public Trust Waters of Trotman Creek than
the existing structure. In this regard, the proposed bridge structure will improve Public Trust Waters
navigation beneath the bridge structure.
NC DOT Bridge No.32, Trotman Creek
Bio Report
Page Two
The proposed bridge and road work will result in increased turbidity within the Trotman Creek watershed
and downstream.
CAMA Review
A review of the County LUP and my comments will be presented at a later date under a separate
document.
Submitted by Dennis W. Hawthorn
April 24, 1996
Form DC11-MP-1
APPLICATION
Mr-
OR 9 1»a
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
b. City, town, community or landmark
Southeast of Gatesville
a. Landowner:
Name N. C. Department of Transportation
Address P.O. Box 25201
City Raleigh State N.C
Zip 27611-5201 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
Name H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Mgt., ME Branch
Address P.O. Box 25201
City Raleigh State N.C.
Zip 27611-5201 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
c. Project name (if any) Bridge # 32 over Trotman
Creek on SR 1100 in Gates County
NOTE. Permit will be issued in name of landowner(s),
and/or project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
c. Street address or secondary road number
SR 1100
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? Yes X No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Trotman Creek
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Replace existing bridge with reinforced concrete
cored-slab bridge: high ground excavation will
occur at site of new end-bents: fill will be placed
along road shoulders/slopes only in uplands
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? Both
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages. Purpose: To replace an aging
bridae structure. Use: Public Transportation_
Methods of Construction: Standard Bridge and
Roadway Construction methodologies
a. County Gates
Form DCM-MP-1
ro '.
F li
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract N/A
b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or
NWL +/- 8.2 ft
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Dorovan Nawney-Chowan complex
e. Vegetation on tract Mixed Hardwood Bottomland
& Gum-Cypress Swamp
f. Man-made features now on tract Existing Bridge
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
N/A
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 from bridge and roadway
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N/A
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consult the local land use
plan)
X Conservation Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
N/A
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the
applicable zoning? Yes No N/A
(Attach zoning compliance certficate, if applicable)
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
1. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes _ No
Coastal (marsh) Other
if yes, has a delineation been conducted? No
(Attach documentation, if available)
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.
18 An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11 " 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
Form DCM-MP-1
the site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
0A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary.
SA list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and
signed return receipts as proof that such owners
have received a copy of the application and plats
by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised
that they have 30 days in which to submit comments
on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Robert R. Carter
Address 3717 Sandpiper Lane
Chesapeake. Va 23325
Name James O. Wright
Address Route 1. Box 33
Hobbsville, NC 27946
Name Alex Clavwood Hollowell Jr.
Address Route 1 Box 261
Phone Hobbsville. NC 27946
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued
for work on the project tract. Include permit
numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
N/A
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.

APR 9 1996
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to
conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the 29th day of March . 1996
Print Name H. Franklin Vick- PIE/
Signature 1
.ndowner orAuthor&ed Ageni
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-4 Structures Information
X DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE. Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
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.
APR 9 1990
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
1. BRIDGES g. Length of proposed bridge 100 ft
?,. h. Width of proposed bridge 24' (clear roadway)
a. Public X Private
b. Type of bridge (construction material)
steel-reinforced concrete cored-slab
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
Trotman Creek
i. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
+/- 7.3 ft
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
X Yes No
If yes, explain Water flows should improve since
two interior bents will be removed from the
channel proper
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
NWL +/- 4.5 ft
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge 69 ft
-- (2) Width of existing bridge 19.3' clear roadwayl
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge 6.7 ft
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain) Entire existing bridge
will be removed
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
+/- 6.7 ft vert, 40 ft horizontal
Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? X Yes No
If yes, explain Same vertical clearance, but much
larger horizontal clearance (40 ft at channel vs.< 20
ft at the channel for the existing)
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.
Form DCM-MP-5
2. CULVERTS N/A
a. Water body in which culvert is to be placed
b. Number of culverts proposed
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style)
d. Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
Yes No
If yes,
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Length of existing bridge
Width of existing bridge
Navigation clearance
bridge
Will all, or a part of,
removed? CExplain) _
the existing bridge be
e. Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
f. Length of proposed culvert
g. Width of proposed culvert
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the
MHW or NWL
i. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
Yes No
If yes, explain
underneath existing

Will the proposed culvert affect e 9 1996
xistting navigation
potential? Yes No
If yes, explain
3. EXCAVATION AND FILL
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Depth of area to be excavated
(4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation within: No
_ Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any highground excavation?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated 30 ft
(2) Width of area to be excavated 40 ft
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards 225 cubic yards
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves any
excavation, please complete the following:
(1) Location of the spoil disposal area
upland site to be determined
(2) Dimensions of spoil disposal area
(3) Do you claim title to the disposal area?
Yes No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from
the owner.
Form DCM-MP-S
(4) Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes No
(5) Does the disposal area include any coastal
wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
Yes No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
(6) Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW or NWL? Yes No
If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above.
RTCFIT-7)
APR 9 1996
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? Yes X 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
(See Attachment)
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material d.
described in Item d. above) to be placed below
MHW or NWL? 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: No
- Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled
(2) Width of area to be filled
(3) Purpose of fill
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 100 ft
(2) Width of area to be filled +/-14 ft
(3) Purpose of fill Enhance shoulder at bridge
approaches
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
Will the proposed project require any work
channels? Yes X No
If yes, complete Form DCM-1kP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? S ent application of
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the
Protection of Surface Waters in North Carolina
f. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or hydraulic
dredge)? _Crane, backhoe, trucks and other standard
construction equipment
g. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes X No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any shoreline stabilization?
X Yes No
If yes, explain in detail Stone riprap will placed
_alona shoreline beneath bridge to stabilize banks
H. Frankl' EXA App t nature March 29, 1996

WFIV=
Supplement to APR 9 1996
Form MP-5, Part 3 (Excavation and Fill)
Subpart d. (2) thru (6)
Some of the excavated material, depending on its suitability, may be targetted
for required project fills. However, it is reasonable to predict that some undesirable
material will result from excavation. This material will be removed by the contractor to a
suitable off-site upland. More than likely the site will be privately-owned and the owner
has granted the contractor permission to deposit the excess spoil. The North Carolina
Department of Transportation requires the contractor to submit candidate spoil disposal
areas to the project inspector for approval by the Department. The Department
prohibits its contractors from using any wetland or surface water for the deposition of
spoil.
Re oldeon Dtwn Hill Cwi take -
0 CAROLINA' Gibbs
1 rn Getes e! Moyock
yr tt?
5 M•A?:. isa orno G e A 3 T. E S ?Ik
T oduco Biicklsnd 7 32 \A Sligo
13 3 1 c If n3 South Mills `Snowden a
58 wlfees
bor ) ure ) 1'8 Corne 9
3 , iDle[on t ISB 3 I ?,Y t 17 Swbor r?
! I }Winton 5.11, llesvG ilio+ 7 A i. Iare \ S °° l F, rc
0 far
3 3 s 3) irolvilleSSnd ?y O ° v re City
I3 Tunis ?? m Ix 158
.l £eTie ? H Dsvtlp ` ' ) e trots ? \
5 r S E 3" , i R a t \ E1Ki111 TSt ?il?* Cgmdan+ y c
hq q V
• amt )on a *Ahoskie Halt* Is 1 . Rylan lridere % 9 ??
CPA 7 COAS
It I r ) 10 1 f CAeOanolet tiM?rrTh. k NAA
sere _ _ PE UIMANS `
-) ----- Il 'e9 to s
Aulender POwtllsville ? • Tynerl j) li fill I)
I ? o
.KrA Colersrn Z Ile?9.°.
H n Z
1 I 13 to p'c 1N N O Wo isonto
KNlad X11 Connsntp ' rd
Bwde 1 '
I 3 11 { R ky1 A ' ) a nts Heck '?
l a- ' halls 3 ' ) wA.r i .... *!14A
Ipp Ion. 3 Mount Gould ,`. Ir.ua ? RrY?.i ?,., .. -.•
rlb p O,Askowinlle 2 Ha cock rd.. o `G• Yc,l A..nwe n "',' r ?'I "i,.'•
'' Ashland ) M.wii/r t:?t:?wS:1J:: ,l:'. tw?tilt y
E R T I 1
i t Drew I Eden t o r 3 S t; Scale of Miles
idwar 0 S /0 10 30
ov" ScaIl20- - t e _ ID 30 40 48
of Kilometers
One kKA exult apprOSenaletf 13 mdet and spp 0VwQt* 21 'edometeM.
NORTH CAROLINA
I= UU CA. `
t ? et
7342
1191 ?? ? 'S "'T'°•1?'
1111, 'u i"(? v r `
]A .4
9 1995
t! 1]11 37 r t APR
? Lug + 1111 .t H
1111. 1199 17 1u1. 1111 S .3 Kellogs Fork
t.p
d to- v` .y 1311 `
Crorveeds 7.1 it SvnM,ry ' ..
MIA LOi /Q 7 • 1 1.1 PAP Acorn Ili
i q MERCHANTS - ,e ^ tae
N11.1. POND L4 lONP.S
r )\'1 1? _ ? p POND ( O
131 r,A
t9et 119!
1.a snwAh
111
Lou ui A
144! Oi JAU
32 N.
A
1519 1 M
. A Jlli Wordvie
/ark
PAS
114? Carter
1141 r
1341 Powl
d. Crbwoa
' BA.
B
. 32
a L.
^n Sv 37 lY 1WL
Keys
]!tt ,Q Crm "ds i
77 Mudd TreN41e U lilt SandyCiar
S .94 j cm. ur ;?,•
1113 1lli : «( 1.1 ...!? SCALE
i o 1 7 7 A MIItS
MifrheM Fork 112l 3 --
lllm Hobbsvipe A
Miilomviye " 1 15
h'1131 L •`•1.0 1 1
is ,iu II uie 1!2 N_C. DEPT. OF TRANS.
DIVISION OF 14IGHWAYS
ilal ka? +111q " GATES COUNTY
<3Y ?`e??- PG. *31 ON SR line
3197; `'k - Ov'RR TROTMAN CREEK
o JANUARY 1996
t COUNTY SHEET I OF
N
O
O
L r S T o
Qb -4
? Q
U 1.1 J ° ? Q 1,1, to
4
-H ?j
o r ,
C) F_ C4
o .d r ?u 5 W
o r -? p 4n 9 Q ce a--
cz
:7
TROTMAN ; -i CREEKS
77
0
LL
a 4¢ •? R N Z
-Cie
c v
c?J N 1 a? QZ:; a
LLJ `Q J a I 41 ? l.")
{. CC j Q o ? I ? -
ILI" a o v
C,; co
r cn ?i
V7
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANS.
DIVISION OF } 1c;j4WAYS
GO E6 ES COUNTY
ORG, *32, ON SR i loo
2 OVER TRMMAN CREEL(
I o 4ANQAiRY 1996
?o
n N
r
CC CC
C) LLI

ti A !! Spa
o \
_
vl i
n' o

v t!

n Q
LA G
L?

h
J
W
0. h
n

na
o ? 3 0 000

N M
;L -
LyJ

? 1C
`
O
O
O .'op
O ?pOO
7
`L
H
/
V
i ?J
t? J.
q t"
?l
w t e? ?
? V
I :t ell`

IVl Q
0 ??
O 1+1 <
ti`
-

N.C. 09PT. Or TRANS.
'? DIVIS1014 OP
IGHWAYS
Q d ?
GA'j*ES COVM Y
-o 0 z 8RG.•#32 ON SR ]loo
z OVER TROTMAN CREEK
JANUARY 1996
5`!lEETOr 4
O c

v
ul
V-l

-F
co
Q
H
U
??
IAJ
V)
X
of
a?
1x
7
7
D
b
N
..l
O
14
O Q
O

V
CIC
'h
-Q

a?
h t..
?

v

v

Z
0

z ?° o

z

1.
1 ?

`
D
® _ i

N.C. DEPT, OF TRANR
DIVISION Or HIGHWAYS
GA`f ES COUNTY
sRG.4.ON sit wn
DYER TRcff')&WCREEK
JANUARY 1"6
SH i' I or ?
DEHNR Fax:[phone] Jul 22 '96 14:17 P.09/18
r' r.
To: John Dorney
Flaming Branch
DIVISION OF WJIR0 M MMGFl W
CAMA/COE PERISIT APPLICATION RE{It
A - VQ SUPERVIDA ?
WUR FROJ= # FYI DATE;
WL?n AND WOPMATIQN OR CMURAL OFFICE TRACiC?iG ?A
PERMIT YR: 9 P COLWY: Z ;
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT TYPE: TYPE: I4!?BE
COE #: DOT 741"
= FRom CDA: DGK DATE FROM CDA: 4/®
REG OF71GE_ WaRO RXVER AND ?IN #-
SYRRAM OR ADJACENT WATER BODY:
CLASS: C A1SW STREAM XMEX f:
OPEN OR CI.f?S
WL DTACT: 'lm TYPE:
WL REQUESTED; 41eV WL ACR EST;
MRO CNE=?: WL SCORE:
MITIGATTON: MITIGATION TYPE:
MITIGATION SIZE: ? -R&TING S ATTACHED?
RECOMMENDATIONS ISSU$. ISSUE/COND DENY 11OLD
STpRMWATER PLAN REQ'D: ? IF YES, DATE APPROVED
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
1-2 10 "-aole
12 -
WATER UALTTT?" CMtT. (401)
CERT. REQ'D:
IF YES, TYPE: t T
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
TYPE OF DISPOSAL PROPOSED:
(EXISTING, PROPOSU, SEPTIC TANK ETC.)
TO BE PERMITTED 8Y:
(DEM, DHS, COLiN7.'Y)
IF BY DEM. IS SITE AVAILABLE AND PERMIT ISSUANCE PROBABLE:
WATER/WETLM _FILL ta- -1--
AREA OF FILL: WATER : 4 fU O WETLA.D : ??
IS FILL ELIMINATING A SIGNIFICANT USE?
DREDGING
AREA T0 BE DREDGER :
I5 DREDGING ACTIVITY EXPECTED TO CAUSE A SIGNIFICANT LOSS OF
RESOURCE?
IS SPGXL DISPOSAL ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED?
HARINA
ARE THE FOLLOWING ADEQUATELY ADDRFSSID?
SEWAGE DISPOSAL: MARINA SERVICES:
OXYGEN IN BASIN; CLOSURE OF SHELLFISHING WATERS:
CC: Wan; Central Files; DCM Field Cffiees; Cc)E washinggton office

DEHNR
1 EM01UMDUM
Fax:[phone] Jul 22 °96 14:18 P.10f18
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
To., Bill Moore, Environmental Engineer
Water Quality Section, WaRO
Frost: Deborah Sawyer, Environmental Technician
Water Quality Section, WaRO
Date:
Subject: Request for Stormwater Review of `Section 401 Applications
PROJECT NAME :
PROJECT NUMBER:
DATE EECEIVED:
DATE FINAL COMMENT:
V
NOTE: Sea attached description of project
Fr7 r6.>-
o l 6
CONSENTS: