20001447 Ver 1_Complete File_20001117

WA TF?QG
Michael F. Easley, Governor
y William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
s_ Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
O Division of Water Quality
February 9, 2001
Mr. John Hennessy
DENR - Division of Water Quality
Wetland/401 Unit
1621 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1621
Dear Mr. Hennessy: 2001
Subject: Bridge Replacement Over Terrible Creek; T.I.P.
. No. B-3055; Wake County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) is willing to accept payment from the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) for buffer impacts associated with the replacement of Bridge
No. 299 over Terrible Creek in Wake County. Based on information supplied by the
NCDOT in a letter dated January 5, 2001, 0.785 acre of buffer is required to satisfy
compensatory mitigation requirements for this project. As requested by the NCDOT, the
NCWRP will provide the required restoration within the Neuse River Basin.
As a point of clarification, the payment required for this impact was incorrectly
calculated by the NCDOT. Payment is always calculated based on square footage of
impact. The following calculations reflect the accurate payment:
Impact Area
Zone 1: 0.663 acre X 43,560 ft2 = 28,880.28 ft2
Zone 2: 0.122 acre X 43,560 ft2 = 5,314.32 ft2
Total 34,194.60 ft2
Payment
34,194.60 ft2 X $0.96/ft2 = $32,826.82
If you have any questions or need additional information, I can be reached at 919-715-
5219.
g,SS' erely,
Ronald E. Ferrell
Program Manager
Wetlands Restoration Program
cc: William Gilmore, NCDOT
Rob Ridings, Wetland/401 Unit
A;?A
NCUEfR
Customer Service Wetlands Restoration Program 1619 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1619 [phone]
1 800 623-7748 Fax: [phone]

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
January 24, 2001
Wake County
DWQ Project No. 001447
APPROVAL OF 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS and Neuse
River Buffer Rules
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., btanager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC, 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
You have our approval, as described in your application dated March 1, 2000, and in accordance with the
attached conditions and those listed below, to place fill material in 1.66 acres of surface waters for the
purpose of replacing Bridge Number 299 on SR 1404 in Wake County. The project should be constructed
in accordance with your application dated October 9, 2000. After reviewing your application, we have
decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3197. Certification 3197
corresponds to Nationwide Permit Number 23 issued by the Corps of Engineers. This approval is also valid
for the Neuse River buffer rules (15A NCAC 2B .033). In addition, you should acquire any other federal.
state or local permits before you proceed with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and
Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will expire when
the accompanying 404 permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is valid solely for the purpose and design described in your application (unless modified
below). Should your project change, you must notify the DWQ and submit a new application. If the
property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and is thereby
responsible for complying with all the conditions. If additional fills to jurisdictional waters for this project
(now or in the future) exceed one acre, or if additional impacts to streams (now or in the future) exceed 150
linear feet, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7).
This approval shall expire with the corresponding Nationwide Permit expires or as otherwise provided in the
General Certification. For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additional conditions listed below.
1. Stormwater shall be directed to sheetflow at nonerosive velocities through the protected stream buffers.
2. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts to 0.302 acres of Neuse Riparian Buffers shall be provided through
an in lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program. The payment shall be
submitted for the amount of 0.75 acres of buffers as calculated as described below:
Wetlands/401 Unit 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50170 recycleLVI077o post consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
4 0 o
rt
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
GENERAL CERTIFICATION FOR PROJECTS ELIGIBLE FOR CORPS OF ENGINEERS
NATIONWIDE PERMIT NUMBER 23 (APPROVED CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS)
This General Certification is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401, Public Laws 92-
500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Re.tulations in 15A NCAC 2H, Section .0500 and 15A NCAC 2B .0200 for the discharge of till material to
waters and wetland areas as described in 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B) (23). This Certification replaces
Water Quality Certification Number 2670 issued on January 21, 1992 and Water Quality Certification
Number 2734 issued on May 1 1993. This WQC is rescinded when the Corps of Engineers reauthorize
Nationwide Permit 23 or when deemed appropriate by the Director of the DWQ.
The State of North Carolina certifies that the specified category of activity will not violate applicable
portions of Sections 301, 302, 303.306 and 307 of the Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 if conducted in
accordance with the conditions hereinafter set forth.
Conditions of Certification:
1. Proposed fill or substantial modification of waters or wetlands for this General Certification requires
written notification to the Division of Water Quality regarding the extent of impact to waters and
wetlands;
2. Two copies shall be submitted to DWQ at the time of notification in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H
.0501(a);
3. Fill or alteration of more than one acre (0.45 ha) of wetlands will require compensatory mitigation in
accordance with 15A NCAC.0506 (h). Written DWQ approval is required for this mitigation plan
which may utilize the State's Wetland Restoration Program;
4. Fill or alteration of more than 150 linear feet (45.7 meters) or streams may require compensatory
mitigation in accordance with 15A NCAC 21-1.0506(h). Written DWQ approval is required for this
mitigation plan which may utilize the State's Wetland Restoration Program;
5. That appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those outlined in the
most recent edition of the "North Carolina Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design
;Manual" or "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" (available from the Division of Land Resources
in the DEHNR Regional or Central Offices) are utilized to prevent exceedances of the appropriate
turbidity water quality standard (50 NTUs in streams and rivers not designated as trout by DWQ; 25
NTUs in all saltwater classes, and all lakes and reservoirs; and 10 NTUs in trout waters);
6. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters shall be removed and the
natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources has released the project;
7. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a FONSI or ROD is issued
by the State Clearinghouse;
Wetlands/401 Unit 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, Notch Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 507v recycled/10% post consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
8. That additional site-specific conditions may be added to projects proposed under this Certification in
order to ensure compliance with all applicable water quality and effluent standards;
9. If the project is not completed within three years from the date of the first notification to DWQ, then
the applicant will main need to notify DWQ.
Non-compliance with or violation of the conditions herein set forth by a specific till project shall result in
revocation of this Certification for the project and may also result in criminal and/or civil penalties.
The Director of the North Carolina Division of Water Quality may require submission of a formal
application for individual certification for any project in this category of activity, if it is determined that the
project is likely to have a significant adverse effect upon water quality or degrade the waters so that existing
uses of the wetland or downstream waters are precluded.
Public hearings may be held for specific applications or group of applications prior to a Certification
decision if deemed in the public's best interest by the Director of the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality.
Effective date: 11 February 1997.
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
By
A. Preston Howard, Jr. P.E.,
Director
Wetlands/301 Unit 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50ric recycled/107o post consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
d o
LD). j\j-, D
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Certificate of Completeness
DWQ Project No.:
Applicant:
Project Name:
County:
Date of Issuance of 401 Water Quality Certification:
Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer
Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the
401/Wetlands Unit, North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1621 Mail Service Center, Raleigh. NC.
27699-1621. This form may be returned to DWQ by the applicant, the applicant's authorized went, or the
Project Engineer. It is not necessary to send certificates from all of these.
Applicant's Certification
I, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and
diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built
within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the
approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature: D
Agent's Certification
I, hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and
diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be built
within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the
approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature:
If this project was designed by a Certified Professional
Date:
I, , as a duly registered Professional (i.e.,
Engineer, Landscape Architect, Surveyor, ect.) in the State of North Carolina, having been authorized to
observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project, for the Permittee hereby state that,
to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that
the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality
Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature
Date
Registration N
Wetlands/401 Unit 1631 Mail Service Center Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 5011o recycled/l09o post consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
.., 4 © o
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
NORTH CAROLINA - DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
SUMMARY OF PERMITTED IMPACTS AND MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0500. the North Carolina Department of Transportation is authorized to
impact the surface waters of the State of North Carolina as indicated below for the purpose of replacing
Bridge Number 299 on SR 1404 in Wake County (TIP No. B-3055. DWQ No. 001447). All activities
associated with these authorized impacts must be conducted in accordance with the conditions listed in the
attached certification transmittal letter. THIS CERTIFICATION IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE
ATTACHMENTS.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS FOR WETLAND RESTORATION:
LOCATION: Replacement of Bridge 299 on SR 1304
COUNTY: Wake
BASIN/SUBBASIN: Neuse, Cataloging Unit 03020201
DWQ No.: 001347
As required by 15A NCAC 2H.0506, and the conditions of this certification, you are required to
compensate for the above impacts through the restoration, creation, enhancement or preservation of
wetlands and surface waters as outlined below prior to conducting any activities that impact or degrade
waters of the state. Note: Acreage requirements proposed to be mitigated through the Wetland Restoration
Program must be rounded to one-quarter increments according to 15A 2R.0503(b).
0.0 acres of Class WL wetlands
0.0 acres of riparian wetlands
0.0 acres of non-riparian wetlands
0.75 acres of Neuse Riparian Buffers
0 linear feet of stream channel
One of the options you have available to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements is through
payment of a fee to the Wetland Restoration Fund per 15A NCAC 2R.0503. If you choose this option.
please sign this form and mail it to the Wetlands Restoration Fund at the address listed below. An invoice
for the appropriate amount of payment will be sent to you upon receipt of this form. PLEASE NOTE. THE
ABOVE IMPACTS ARE NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL YOU RECEIVE NOTIFICATION THAT YOUR
PAYMENT HAS BEEN PROCESSED BY THE WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM.
Signature
WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
P.O. BOX 29535
RALEIGH, NC, 27626-0535
[phone]
Date
Wetlands/301 Unit 1621 %Iail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50"o recycled/10'7o post consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
40
C [(DIE X_ 1' R-1,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Impacts (acres) Zone 1
Mitigation
(acres) Zone 2 Mitigation
(acres) Total Mitigation
(acres)
Zone 1 Impacts 0.221 (0.221)(3)=0.663 0.663
Zone 2Impacts 0.081 (0.081)(1.5)=0.122 0.122
Total 0.302 0.785
Acreage requirements proposed to be mitigated through the Wetland Restoration Program must be
rounded to one-quarter increments according to I5A 2R.0503(b). Therefore, mitigation for
unavoidable impacts to Neuse Riparian Buffers shall be provided through an in-lieu payment to the
North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) at a rate of S41.625 per acre for 0.75 acres of
buffer impacts. Therefore, a total payment of $31.219 shall be submitted to the NCWRP to offset the
impacts incurred for the project.
3. Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed.
The responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the
Division of Water Quality upon completion of the 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. 27611-7437. This certification and its conditions
are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.
If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-9646.
Sincerely,
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Raleigh DWQ Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
c:\ncdot\TIP 13-3055\wqc\001447wgc.doc
1
P.Stevens
Wetlands/401 Unit 1621 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1621
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 5017v recycled/l0% post consumer paper
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact:
Non-Dischar Branch WD Supervisor:
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND S NFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name NCDOT Bri:':,v 299 on SP 1414 B-3055
Project Number 00 1447
Recvd From DOT
Received Date 11/17/00
Project Type bridge replace ownt
Recvd By Region 11/21/2000
County Wake
County2
Region Raleigh
Certificates Stream
Permit Wetland Wetland We'I- ncl Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Sc. re Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req.
23 Stream PT @N '7-43 1 -5 -S Is F N-w s 30,403.
NBR F-- P7- @N F F-F-F-F-r-F-
F--F--[5 Y -ON F =F- I-- F- F- F--
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attachc-' O Y ON Did you request more info? O Y ON
Have Project Cha cues/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? O Y O N
Is Mitigation required? O Y ( N Recommendation: O Issue O Issue/fond O Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (, nmss)
Longitude (ddmmss)
Comments:
DENY without mitigation m? J E_vcilh?f p1 {Zri'ate $$$$$.
Stream Impacts (ft.)
0 N
F- I
cc: Regional Office
Central Office Page Number 1
Facility Name NCDOT Bridge 299 on SR 1404 B-3055 County ake
Project Number 00 1447 Regional Contact: Steve Mitchell
Rate:
Comments (continued from page 1):
cc: Regional Office Page Number 2
Central Office
4 001447
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
October 9, 2000
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - -
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 120 7
Raleigh, NC 27609
Lt 00 C, I n I f)
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer WET'':
NCDOT Coordinator
SUBJECT: Wake County, Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
over Terrible Creek. Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1404(2), State
Project No. 8.2404501, TIP No. B-3055.
Dear Sir:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge
No. 299 with a new bridge just west of the existing bridge in the lower edge of Johnson's
Pond. The proposed project involves the construction of a new structure 150 feet long
and approximately 28 feet wide with causeways out into Johnson's Pond to facilitate
crossing this surface water. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during as
much of the construction period as is possible; otherwise traffic will be detoured along
existing area roads.
Impacts to Waters of the United States
No jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted by the construction of the proposed project.
However, construction will result in 1.66 acres of surface water impacts to Terrible
Creek/Johnson's Pond. Surface water impacts include 1.56 acres of permanent fill to
facilitate the placement of the permanent causeway and 0.10 acres of temporary fill from
the installation of the temporary causeways. Surface water impacts associated with the
placement of the permanent and temporary causeways are depicted on sheets 3 and 4 of
the attached permit drawings.
The existing bridge will not be demolished. Components of the bridge's substructure are
part of the buttressing for the dam of Johnson's Pond and shall remain in place. Due to
the poor condition of the bridge deck and its substructure, any removal or demolition
activities would likely lead to the collapse of the dam, which the NCDOT does not own.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWWDOH.DOT. STATE. NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27899-1548
n n
rn
o z
--q
Avoidance / Minimization
Johnson's Pond will have to be partially drained to facilitate placement of fill for
causeways. The water level in the pond will be lowered to approximately one half of its
original level, from near 10 feet to approximately 5 feet. The pond will be drained
gradually using a pumping and/or a siphoning mechanism. Lower water levels will
facilitate construction and will also reduce the potential construction related stresses on
the pond's dam. The water level of the pond will be maintained by additional pumping
and siphoning, until construction progresses to point were the pond's water level is no
longer a limiting factor, at which time the pond will be allowed to refill. Construction of
the permanent causeway (rock embankment) out into the pond will be accomplished by
starting at the upland edge and back-dumping clean stone material into the pond. This
method will be used from both sides of the pond.
Under law, the NCDOT is required to follow avoidance and minimization policies
pertaining to impacts to Waters of the United States. In accordance to those policies and
the additional recommendations set forth by the NC Wildlife Resource Commission
(NCWRC) to avoid and minimize adverse affects to the surface waters and ecosystems of
Terrible Creek/Johnson's Pond, the NCDOT is committed to implementation of the
following:
Project Commitments
• Johnson's Pond will be partially drained during the winter months while the water
temperature levels are low. Water levels will be lowered slowly to avoid flushing fish
out of the pond and some water will be maintained in the pond during construction.
• Clearing activities will be kept to a minimum within the boundaries of the J. Beale
Johnson House, which is a National Register Listed residence located just southeast of
Bridge No. 299. The removal of trees on the property will be limited to those trees
absolutely necessary to construct the project.
• In an effort to restore additional riparian buffer around Terrible Creek/Johnson's Pond,
paved portions of existing roadbed which will no longer be used, will be removed and the
resulting areas will be reestablished using native vegetation.
Summary
Proposed project activities are being processed by the Federal Highway Administration
as a programmatic "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771 115(b). The
NCDOT requests that these activities be authorized by a Nationwide Permit 23 [33 CFR
330.5(a) (23)]. Additionally, we anticipate a 401 "Major" Water Quality Certification
will apply to this project, and are providing seven copies of the application to the North
Carolina Division of Water Quality. In compliance with Section 143-215.3D(e) NCAA
we have enclosed a check for $475.00 to act as payment for the processing of the Section
401 Water Quality Certification.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Mrs. Heather Montague at [phone].
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
VCB/hwm
cc: w/attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington Field Office
Mr. John Hennessy, DWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development
Mr. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Design Services
Mr. D.R. Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Tim Roundtree, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Tracey N. Parrott, P.E., 5 Division Engineer

-- FUQUAyp
j - - VARIN , r --
i
--
ev?%J - - 1 i -
55
- - ,l l f Hal nd
401 - -
VICINITY MAP
Creek
1404 = 1.
0 Creek - -
Terrlble. -
- 1 - -
JOHNSON'S 401 -
-
POND - -' _
`
1404 BEGIN
PROJECT
\ r ! Fuqua

cep _ ,r x?
--'?I .
/ . p21
\?J Willow
Springs;
} - -

r -_
`
- 4
01
y
-_
? r

42
s_ -

f
-
--- 2• 55 42
- ? - 1301
_ END -
r -- PROJECT
N. C. DEPT. ;OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
W.-kKE COUNTY
PROJEC'T': 8.24-04501 B-3055
I3IMM-' NO. 299 ON SR 140
01'ER TERRIBLF, CREIBK
(JOHNSON POND) ?? II
SHI E"r 01' 9
LEGEND
--WI-B-- WETLAND BOUNDARY
WETLAND
-W L 888---??'
DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
R
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
T T DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
DENOTES TEMPORARY
TS TS FILL IN SURFACE WATERS
O DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
?- -c-- FLOW DIRECTION
TB -- TOP OF BANK
WE EDGE OF WATER
C PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
F PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
-? PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
NG NATURAL GROUND
PL PROPERTY LINE
- TDE - TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
-EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
-- 0 WATER SURFACE
X X X LIVE STAKES
X X
O BOULDER
-- - - CORE FIBER ROLLS
0 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
PROPOSED BRIDGE
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
--- - PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
(DASHED LINES DENOTE
EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
0 SINGLE TREE
WOODS L I N E
DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
VORTEX ROCK WEIR
C)0oc) 0
RIP RAP
RIP RAP ENERGY
DISSIPATOR BASIN
-? VANE
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAKE COUNTY
DRDJECT: 8-2404501 B-?055
BRIDGE NO.299 ON SR I404
DVE'R TERRIBLE CREED
001-INSON POND)
SHF1I? I° Z 01'

N
peso ? -"? ?i"
/ / ? N?9?j18C
19
CS
Z
0.
0.-
-7-
CD
Z
Z
O
WN
GA
a>
NW
NW
4
u?

/
/ ?Aw Jv ?

z
r-+ R
t
M \ ? i%-? efJ --a r?
o W
,d Q
\ s ®x E-a ? ? U z
?\ '? ? ? z o z W
00
d
\?\ \ ®®Q U ZNx
N \
s
°. W ''\ \ \ 0 ?v ?' \
N
T Z ?
o ?f l ? 1 •f b??i
0
4
W
V
I yy?1
ll ? 1 / Y .:c
~ 4
'p
"
N
0
0
Q
C

L7.
m
W
W
W
v
?. O
Z?
p?
k?
M
w
J
O
N
?-1 N
® N
M
a
lz
N
? N
i N
N
J ° I.I
pp
Iy ? I

?
VI V
o '=„O
n I
I
w ? ? 11 11 I
U p, N w W
?, n v+? ', j a I
I
\ N I

t J
\ I?
?w
Q ?
a z
a Q
¢ m
w
L?
H
4
2
Nll ?I Q
N
N

a I''
3 5
o Z
Q
om
?W
03
? q d
Asa
ow.
a ? -
5 4 N
? U N
JQ t
U

IsQ
z

E..,
cr) ke)
o
?

W W
a ? ? AWx 7..

U
W
z
cn
C4
.a
U
f-
0
O
CL 1
2 W
W J
f- W
oa
S
dW
O in
H ?
Q
U
C
U J
•K W
lr
x o w
W
v+ VI N
V
N
n
I

/
19

vv?
l-?
k?
r?rm
?J
i it
I
N

Q?!,kJ\\
Ngre?a?
r
r
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
1
0
0 %b
z ?>
W
C) NW?
a n
i
i?
/
I
I
I?
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1 '

\ o

1

1\ \

\t 9xl
soei3Ub ? $'?, \\ \\ \
3 21
N \ \ r
I ? \
1
0
03?.
CL x E-•
707'
.f,
E-? o v
W
Q
?>
U
1-71
.n
0
te)
R
o?
w
U J
0
C, fQ
Q
w
? Q
c4
0
R
0
c?
00
E?
U
w
ti
0
x
Cl.
0
0
0-)
LL.
Q
VN
E?
w
w
x
0
0
;•
I _
\ \ \ ` `\
z \ \ \
?r z \ ` a e
? ,11? II I \ '4KI
?/ n
p I'i I i / -
i l .,BSI / ?
n
w
a
p
D

\ o
\ 1 \? /
\ \ I IL CU w W

\ O '\ W

?J \ N
?fiI
/ r
w
e ?
o

I-P

? lid
?
W
U
N
?
?
1 ?h y pofS o w

,

` Y
?T?
k? "\ 1 1 1 1
?'', '
1 1 1 1 \ r
i? _

1 1 1 1 1 `•.

? 1 1 1 1 `
1

yl \
,
? "1 1 1 1 ? •1
111 111
I-
'
1
111
,?
1
1 1
1
v ?

o m$
U
c
c
W U
m ?
C
O m
O L
? U
rn m
N N M
H
U < a
Q W U E
a

LL
w
H (i U)
E v
Ci
a? -
3 F-

W

a C
co
L
L
LL U
C O m ?

N U-

C .0 m
m .
Z
LL
(U p) -
N
C
C C O U
I
Q (U U
U)
U N
IL ? C
M
w m
X v

w c

3 U)
a=
E w T
H
c
C ?
co m
=
m v

m
O
U N W
ui
2u p

co
o
O t

0

R
IO
I

w O ?a
Z
F-

0
0
0
M
M
N (r
f0
Q
LL
Z O
O
F..
Q
F- U)
w >-
0 Q Lr)
CL Lo
Z C)
2 D co
F- U- O C)
LL O U to
O Z w 3:1
~ O
N
Q
CL U)
p
0
W o
Q F-
U W F-
Z
W
O
d

?
w 00

:3 (U
U) p U
_

U) i r LA N

LL

Q

W
LL.
LL

OD

W

W

W
Z
N
Z Q ?
°
°
o
o
0
0
O ?
N _

N
N N
Z Q? O
O n- 0 0
N ?
N

U N W
(D W
U)

U ? o
m M
C O 0 ?
'
O
.
B O O O

.- N ?
J
O
Z r N F--'
? O
F-

N_ MI:S .AND ADDRESSES
OWNER'S NAME ADDRESSES
TOWN OF FUQUAY VARINA FU,QUAY VARINA, NC
FUQUAY VARINA P.O. BOX 162
AMERICAN LEGION POST 116 FU'QUAY VARINA, NC 27526
6212 JOHNSON POND ROAD
WHIT'' S. DIINCEY, JR.
FUQUAY VARINA, NC 27526
LINWOOD E. AND 6521 JOHNSON POND ROAD
ERM.k T.TURNER FUQUAY VARIN:?,,NC 27526
P. 0. BOX 276
VIRGINI:? Y.A\'CEY TI\TGEN
FUQUAY VARINA, NC 27526
WAYNE BAKER, D. N. BAKER 433 HOLLY SOAK COURT
AND N. G. MANGUM FUQUAY VARINA, NC 27526
P. 0. Bfl% 645
CARL R. HELTON
:APEX, NC 27502
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAKE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.240-6501 B-5055
BRIDGE NO.299 ON SR 1404
OVER TERRIBLE CREEK
(JOHNSON POND)
SHEET 9 OF 9

APPENDIX ONE
{+?,;?,?
?uG`0

PAYMENT
RECEIVED
Appendix 1 of 3
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
REVISED ADDENDUM TO
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
APPROVED:
Cf- 2/-00
Date
/.- 27 '-10
Date
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
l ?
William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
plicholas'L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
REVISED ADDENDUM TO
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
September 2000
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental ,&NcL Xgig?,l? fle,i By:
SEAL
(( l
Z?-C s 022552
64
Jo L. Williams P. E. •'
0 ••%c?GIN?
Project Planning Engineer ?''•,yN?L???W?L?'?,•``?
0- -7 17- 2-1 -00
Wayne/Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head

Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
B-3055, Wake County
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Project BRZ-1404(2)
State Project 3.2404501
Resident Engineer
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition & Removal are still in place to
prevent debris from falling into the stream. Proper application of Best Management
Practices should address the concerns of all concerned agencies.
Clearing activities will be kept to a minimum within the boundaries of the J. Beale Johnson House
which is a National Register Listed residence located just southeast of Bridge No. 299. The
removal of trees on the property will be limited to those trees absolutely necessary to construct the
project.
Recommendations from the NC%VRC include draining the pond during the winter months when
water temperature levels are lower, allowing the water level to be lowered slowly; thus not forcing
fish out of the pond, and keeping some water in the pond during construction. NCDOT is
committed to the implementation of these recommendations along with the standard NCDOT
procedures for avoiding and minimizing environmental impacts.
Structure Design
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition & Removal are still in place to
prevent debris from falling into the stream. Proper application of Best Management
Practices should address the concerns of all concerned agencies.
Roadway Design
Clearing activities will be kept to a minimum within the boundaries of the J. Beale Johnson House
which is a National Register Listed residence located just southeast of Bridge No. 299. The
removal of trees on the property will be limited to those trees absolutely necessary to construct the
project.
Revised Addendum to Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
September 21, 2000
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
I. BACKGROUND
An Addendum To Categorical Exclusion was approved on March 23, 1999. Final
Designs have indicated that the environmental impacts need to be updated.
II. DISCUSSION
Surface Water and Wetland Impacts
This project proposes to permanently fill 1.56 acres of surface water and proposes to temporarily
fill 0.10 acres of surface water for installation of the causeways. The major disadvantage of
selecting Alternate 2-A is that the installation of causeways will require the partial draining of
Johnson's Pond. Impacts associated with draining the pond involve the degradation of a large
aquatic ecosystem and therefore can not be easily measured. Coordination between the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) is essential to assure issues concerning avoidance, minimization, and mitigation for
impacts to Johnson's Pond are adequately addressed.
The US Army Corps of Engineers will not require mitigation for impacts to Johnson's Pond as
long as the DOT satisfies the NCWRC's concerns about a massive fish kill associated with
draining the pond. The NCWRC has no mechanism to require mitigation for fish kill in a private
pond, but they have offered recommendations for some construction practices that may minimize
the impacts to this ecosystem. Recommendations from the NCWRC include draining the pond
during the winter months when water temperature levels are lower, allowing the water level to be
lowered slowly; thus not forcing fish out of the pond, and keeping some water in the pond during
construction. NCDOT is committed to the implementation of these recommendations along with
the standard NCDOT procedures for avoiding and minimizing environmental impacts.
Neuse River Basin Buffer Impacts
Johnson's Pond and Terrible Creek are both water resources subject to the Neuse River Basin
Buffer Rules and impacts to their riparian buffers are regulated by the Division of Water Quality.
Alternate 2-A proposes to permanently impact riparian buffer areas to the north and to the south
of Johnson's Pond's lower edge. The rules divide riparian buffers into zone 1 and zone 2, for
regulation and mitigation purposes. Zone 1, for Ponds, begins at the most landward limit of the
normal water level or the rooted herbaceous vegetation and extends landward a distance of 30
feet, measured horizontally on a line perpendicular to the surface water. Zone 2 shall begin at the
outer edge of Zone 1 and extend landward 20 feet as measured horizontally on a line
perpendicular to the surface water. The combined width of Zones 1 and 2 shall be 50 feet on all
sides of the surface water. This project proposes to impact 0.221 acres of 'Lone 1 and 0.081 acres
of Zone 2. Therefore, Alternate 2-A will impact a total of 0.302 acres of Neuse River Basin
Buffer.
Breakdown of Environmental Impacts for Alternate 2-A
Impacts III. Alternate 2-A
Surface Waters
Permanent 1.56 acres
Temporary 0.10 acres
Wetlands 0.00 acres
Neuse River Basin Buffer
Zone 1 0.221 acres
Zone 2 0.081 acres
111. CONCLUSIONS
Alternate 2-A is still the most reasonable, feasible, and cost effective method for
replacing Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404 over Terrible Creek in Wake County.
2
APPENDIX TWO
Appendix 2 of 3
1
}
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
ADDENDUM TO
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
3'- 23-9q ->?t V. f,--2
Date ?. William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Q3/A31151y?
Date icholas L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
1
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
ADDENDUM TO
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
March 1999
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
Way de Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head

otitUUnNp/i
`fit O •?b..s$###*
SS/p 9
??/'•?.;?
7/;
SEAL c =
21077 '
GOM%O
%
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Project Planning Engineer
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
I. BACKGROUND
A Categorical Exclusion and Programmatic 4(f) Evaluation for the subject project were
approved on October 24, 1996. The document recommended Alternate 1 (the replacement of
Bridge No. 299 with a culvert on new alignment to the east of the existing bridge). Traffic was to
be maintained on the existing bridge during construction. A Public Hearing for the project was
held on July 2, 1997. There was significant opposition to the recommended alternate at the
Public Hearing.
Alternate 2 consisted of providing a new bridge just west of the existing bridge in the
lower edge of Johnson's Pond. A structure length of 740 feet was proposed. Alternate 2 was
rejected due to excessive cost. Alternate 2-A, a modification to Alternate 2, was developed and
also presented at the Hearing. This modification follows the same alignment as Alternate 2 and
involves a much shorter bridge (150 feet) and causeways out into the pond to facilitate the
crossing of the pond. This modification made Alternate 2-A cost competitive with the previously
recommended Alternate 1.
II. DISCUSSION
Alternate 2-A has essentially the same environmental effects as Alternate 2 which was
evaluated in the original document. This alignment provides a better design speed (60 mph),
reduces wetland impacts over Alternate 1, avoids impacts to a National Register of Historic
Places listed house (J. Beale Johnson House), and avoids impacts to an archaeological site
located just southeast of the existing bridge. The architectural and archaeological issues had been
resolved for Alternate 1, but avoidance is preferable to minimization or mitigation where these
types of resources are involved. Since the cost estimate for Alternate 2-A is much closer to the
cost estimate for Alternate 1 and Alternate 2-A addresses all of these environmental issues it
seems to be a better alternative for replacing Bridge No. 299.
A drawback to Alternate 2-A is the fact that the pond will probably have to be drained, at
least partially, to allow the fill for the causeways to be placed. This drawback can be turned to an
advantage if the owner of the dam, American Legion Post 116, will take advantage of the
situation and repair the dam while the pond is drained for construction activities to take place.
The Legion Post is the main property owner involved in right-of-way acquisition, so the funds
they receive in compensation for right-of-way purchased could be applied to the cost of having
the dam repaired.
Another alternate that was discussed briefly in the original document and which was
presented to the public at the Hearing, identified as Alternate 3 would replace Bridge No. 299 in-
place and replaces the dam for Johnson's Pond. As the cost estimates in the following section
show, this alternate is significantly more expensive than any of the other alternatives. Due to the
cost of the alternate and the fact that NCDOT does not own the Johnson's Pond dam Alternate 3
is not considered a reasonable and feasible alternative.
Structure
Roadway Approaches
Dam Replacement
Structure Removal'
Misc. and Mobilization
Engineering & Contingencies
Total Construction
Right of Way & Utilities
TOTAL PROJECT COST
III. COST ESTIMATE
Alternate Alternate Alternate Alternate
One Two Two-A Three
Recommended
195,000 1,225,000 297,000 1,173,000
420,000 230,000 284,000 202,000
0 0 0 1,000,000
18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000
190,000 442,000 178,000 717,000
127,000 285,000 123,000 490,000
950,000 2,200,000 900,000 3,600,000
-
35,000 42,000 218,500 254,000
985,000 2,242,000 1,118,500 3,854,000
'The existing bridge will be removed down to the buttresses of the dam. The bridge
abutments may be left in-place if the integrity of the dam would be affected by their
removal.
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 299 on new alignment, to the west of the existing
bridge, as recommended in Alternate 2-A described above. The new roadway and bridge will be
at a slightly higher elevation than the existing bridge. Traffic will be maintained on the existing
bridge during as much of the construction period as is possible; otherwise traffic will be detoured
along existing area roads during construction.
V. CONCLUSIONS
Alternate 2-A is the most reasonable, feasible, and cost effective method for replacing
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404 over Terrible Creek in Wake County. Environmental effects are less
than those outlined for Alternate 1, and project cost is only slightly higher than Alternate 1.
Roadway alignment is better than Alternate 1, which was the recommended alternative in the
original Categorical Exclusion.
WTG/
2

k akr
Mom sr
11 C
rN
Apex
I . r
mn .
?1
4
D4
.d e
_ TIM.
un
51 Im .3u uvl
IS _
4
Tm a ?412 _ 9
T4u
lflt
.T9 .79 AA_ Y
LM c°
L t'o>'
LM so
1 ?•?VJt
e • , Garner-,
?¢e
h AuDurq..
/

mo"w Spr10o7 ,

1
L?
i
ifor
zm
!34! /OHNSONS
POND
1404
0
lZ!i
_t
6? •• IrO?
.11
.Lb
L•?1
- - ----• a ?59
r•"
w ' Liu
° o.
401 ....,....1
!sn ? ?
?f
a 01 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMI;NTAI.
BRANCH
L%17
WAKE COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 299 ON SR 1404
OVER TERRIBLE CREEK
B - 3055
0 mile 1 FIG. 1
i=ed_ral Aid lqL)'j L21 TLS

Ccu:tty WAt-t:
CONCURRENCE FOP.Nl
FOR
ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Brief Project Desc: iption
V,e do CG- (-?r vi P_ KI.. zcl '"i o n S ?? 1 `I v y ?1 ?1,? T
Yee
On 12 ( 1CIcIC'I , representatives of the
? North Carolina Department or Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal uiQhway Adminis.;ation (F-HNVA)
_? North Carolina State Historic Prese:-,,ation OF ce (SF-PO)
Other
revieweddtthe subject proiec: and a-rec-
there are no e:-rerts on the National Remster-listed property within the proiect's
area or potential et:e= and listed on the r e•: e-
me-e are no c., --,s on the National Re2ister.0 oreeerties located wit^.in the
prone= 's area of potential e ect and listed on :he reverse.
there is an effect on the Niational Register-listed prone^•/oropemes within the
prole-.'s area of potential ee? . The property-prooeries and the e5ec:(s) are
liste,d on the reverse.
there is an er=ect on the National Registe--eii<hie prone^?/properties within the
proje=:'s area oc potential eye=:. The prepe^;i;roce::,.es and a ec:(s) are listed
on :he -everse.
Siczn-- d:
1`Ac,- 1'cb; ,1 12-111 qc-IC7
Recresenm e, N DOT, Historic Architectural Resources Sec:ion ace
FH VA,Nbr the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
?J ! . I ZI 19CI
Representative, SHPO Date
St:.t° L:i?•.. D-c?r%at;rn b f-:,ce. r Date
(ov. r)
Federal Aid .T F1Z7- - HOq (Z TIP County \J lA-V-E
Properties within area of potential e ec; for which there is no c.re-. Indicate if prooe,;y is
National Register-listed Coal or determined elisible (DE).
?'j?
Proaerties within area of potential effect for which there is an a sec;. indicate property status (NR
or DE) and desc.be a ec:.
Reason(s) wl..r exec; is not adverse (if aeolicabie).
Initialed: NCDOT ??P F-HWA i f ??' cJ-.TO ?
APPENDIX THREE
Appendix 3 of 3
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
001447
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
and
PROGRAMMATIC 4(f) EVALUATION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
10-21--%
U.
Date ?vr H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
r Planning and Environmental Branch
/<?lz4lf? ??.? -da
Date , iicho L. Graf, P. E.
IFf' Division Administrator, FHWA
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
and
PROGRAMMATIC 4(f) EVALUATION
October 1996
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
W ? ? /1f?CR1YM
William T. Goodwin, Jr., P. E.
Project Planning Engineer
Ala y n e 111, :;-#
/a -ZY-96
Waynd"'Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head

`,011111111111', 11
?`' O(A CARO/
???OFESS43A '.?
SEAL =
21011
R J
e e'
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
1. SUMMARY OF PROJECT
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge
No. 299, Wake County. This bridge carries SR 1404 over Terrible Creek (see Figure 1). NCDOT
includes this bridge in the 1997-2003 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge
replacement project. NCDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) classify this
project as a federal Categorical Exclusion. These agencies expect no notable environmental
impacts.
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 299 on new location as shown in Alternate 1, Figure 2.
NCDOT recommends replacing the bridge with a culvert, on new location approximately 65
meters (215 feet) east of the existing bridge. The new culvert will be a three barrel reinforced
concrete culvert, with each barrel measuring 3.0 meters (10 feet) by 2.4 meters (8 feet). The new
roadway will be constructed at a slightly higher roadway elevation than the existing roadway and
bridge. The new roadway will have a 7.2 meter (24 foot) wide travelway plus 2.4 meter (8 foot)
shoulders. The completed project will provide a design speed of approximately 65 km/h
(40 mph).
The estimated cost is $ 985,000 including $ 35,000 for right of way acquisition and
$ 950,000 for construction. The estimated cost included in the 1997-2003 TIP is $ 480,000.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT may be required to seek a design exception due to the low design speed for this
project. The design speed for the project is affected by the poor existing horizontal alignment.
The recommended alternate will improve the design speed of the roadway, but it may not reach
the desired design speed.
III. SUMMARY OF PROJECT COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. All applicable Best Management Practices will be installed and properly
maintained during project construction.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States." A Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will
likely be applicable for this project.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water
Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit # 23.
Clearing activities will be kept to a minimum within the boundaries of the J. Beale
Johnson House which is a National Register Listed residence located just southeast of Bridge No.
299. The removal of trees on the property will be limited to those trees absolutely necessary to
construct the project.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NCDOT classifies SR 1404 as a rural local route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. The surrounding area is primarily rural-residential in nature, with few
scattered residences among wooded lots and farm fields. However, the area is experiencing
significant growth with several subdivisions being developed north and west of the bridge site.
Near Bridge No. 299, SR 1404 is a two lane paved road, 5.4 meters (18 feet) wide with
minimal grassed shoulders. Both the vertical and horizontal alignment of the south approach to
the bridge are poor. The alignment of the north approach is much better.
NCDOT built Bridge No. 299 in 1955. The bridge has an asphalt overlay surface on a
timber deck with steel I-beam girders (see Figure 3). The southern abutment and two of the bents
of the bridge are made of timber. The northernmost bent and end bent are solid reinforced
concrete piers. These two piers are part of the buttressing for the dam that forms Johnson's
pond. The spillway for the dam is directly adjacent to Bridge No. 299. The deck of Bridge No.
299 is 6.4 meters (21 feet) above the streambed. Water depth is approximately 0.3 meters (1.0
foot) in the project area. The bridge is 39.3 meters (129 feet) long with a 5.5 meter (18 foot)
roadway width. It carries two lanes of traffic and the posted load limits are 9 tons for single
vehicles and 12 tons for Truck-tractor Semi-trailer (TTST).
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of Bridge No. 299
is 2.0 of a possible 100.0.
The current traffic volume is 1400 vehicles per day (VPD), projected to 3700 VPD by the
design year (2020). The speed limit is posted at 35 mph on SR 1404 in the area of Bridge No.
299.
Traffic Engineering accident records indicate four accidents occurred in the vicinity of
Bridge No. 299 between October 1, 1992 and September 30, 1994.
The Transportation Director for Wake County Schools indicated there are 10 school
buses crossing the bridge twice each per day.
2
V. ALTERNATES
Two methods of replacing Bridge No. 299 were studied. The alternates studied are as
follows:
Alternate One (Recommended) - replace the bridge on new alignment approximately 65 meters
(215 feet) east of the existing bridge with a culvert. Traffic will be maintained on the
existing bridge during construction.
Alternate Two - replace the bridge on new alignment approximately 50 meters (164 feet) west
of the existing bridge with a new 225 meter (740 feet) long bridge, over Johnson's Pond.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
The "do-nothing" alternate is not practical. The existing bridge would continue
deteriorating until it was unusable. This would require closing the road, or continued intensive
maintenance.
Replacing Bridge No. 299 in-place with traffic detoured off-site was also considered and
found not to be feasible due to the likelihood that the dam for Johnson's Pond would have to be
replaced as well as the bridge, adding considerable cost to the project.
VI. COST ESTIMATE
Estimated costs of the alternates studied are as follows:
Alternate One Alternate Two
Recommended
Structure
Roadway Approaches
Structure Removal'
Misc. and Mobilization
Engineering & Contingencies
Total Construction
Right of Way & Utilities
TOTAL PROJECT COST
195,000 1,2259000
420,000 230,000
189000 18,000
190,000 442,000
127,000 285,000
950,000 2,200,000
35,000 42,000
985,000 2,242,000
' The existing bridge will be removed down to the buttresses of the dam. The bridge abutments
may be left in-place if the integrity of the dam would be affected by their removal.
3
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 299 on new location, as shown in Alternate 1, Figure 2.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge and roadway during construction.
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 299 with a culvert, on new location approximately 65
meters (215 feet) east of the existing bridge. The new culvert will be a three barrel reinforced
concrete culvert, with each barrel measuring 3.0 meters (10 feet) by 2.4 meters (8 feet). The new
roadway will be constructed at a slightly higher roadway elevation than the existing roadway and
bridge. The new roadway will have a 7.2 meter (24 foot) wide travelway plus 2.4 meter (8 foot)
shoulders. The project will require approximately 440 meters (1450 feet) of new approach
roadway. Where the design requires guardrail, the shoulder will be at least 3.3 meters (11 feet)
wide. The completed project will provide a design speed of approximately 65 km/h (40 mph).
NCDOT recommends Alternate 1 in order to replace existing Bridge No. 299 in the most
economical fashion. Alternate 2 has a significantly higher cost than Alternate 1. Alternate 2
would reduce direct wetland impacts, but might require the partial draining of Johnson's Pond to
complete construction. All architectural and archaeological issues raised by Alternate 1 have
been resolved to the satisfaction of the SHPO, FHWA and NCDOT. Alternate 2 would have
avoided direct impacts to the J. Beale Johnson House, but may have had a more substantial
visual effect on the historic setting of the house. Alternate 2 would have avoided the former
Alford's Mill site, but an archaeological survey recovered all information of historic significance
at the site.
NCDOT expects utility conflicts to be low for a project of this type and magnitude.
The division engineer concurs with the selection of Alternate 1. He states that traffic
should be maintained on-site due to the number of vehicles involved. The recommended alternate
will allow traffic to use the existing road and bridge during project construction.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. General Environmental Effects
The project is considered to be a "categorical exclusion" due to its limited scope and
insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality of the
human or natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
4
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition
will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected
to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl
refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
There are no known hazardous waste sites in the project area and no unknown sites are
likely to be found.
Construction of the recommended alternate will not have a significant adverse impact on
the floodplain or associated flood hazard. The elevation of the 100-year flood will not be
increased by more than 30 centimeters (12 inches).
B. Architectural and Archaeological Resources
Architectural Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has indicated that in terms of historic
architectural resources, there are two sites of interest in the project vicinity. The J. Beale Johnson
House is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and is located within the project's
area of potential effect. The Atkinson-Whitted House and Tower is on the state study list, and is
located north of the project area on SR 1407. No additional historic architectural survey is
required for this project.
The Atkinson-Whitted House and Tower are not within the area of potential effect (APE)
for the project and will not be effected by project construction. The J. Beale Johnson House is
within the APE for the project but, as shown by the concurrence form in the appendix, the project
has been determined to have "No Effect" on this National Register Listed property.
Archaeological Resources
The SHPO has indicated that there are the remains of a historic period mill site located
east of the existing bridge. This site will be affected by the recommended alternate, and was
evaluated and recorded during the archaeological survey. The SHPO has stated, by letter dated
May 9, 1996, that the mill site is eligible for listing on the National Register. However, all
significant information has been adequately retrieved so that the project will have No Adverse
Effect upon the site.
C. Natural Systems
Southwestern Wake County lies in the Piedmont physiographic province. The topography
of the project region is characterized by rolling hills. Soil types and availability of water directly
influence the composition and distribution of flora and fauna in any biotic community. The
elevation at the project site is approximately 88 meters (290 feet) above mean sea level.
Soils
Soils of the immediate project study area are dominated by the Appling, Herndon and
Wehadkee Series. Soils of the Appling series vary in slope from 2-10 percent. Of the soil series
present in the project area, only Wehadkee and Bibb soils are considered hydric. Table 1
summarizes characteristics of the soils mapped in the project study area.
Table 1. Summary of the soils of the project site.
Unit Soil Phase % Slope Hydric Class
AgC Appling gravelly sandy loam 6-10 -
ApB Appling sandy loam 2-6 -
HrE Herndon silt loam 15-25 -
Hydric Class 1 - Hydric soils, only because of saturation for a significant period during the
growing season.
For each soil series, site indices for several forest tree species that are commercially
important are included. The site index is the average total height, in feet, of the dominant and
codominant trees in a well-stocked, even-aged stand at 50 years of age and is a means of
expressing the potential productivity of a soil for a given kind of tree. Soils of the Appling and
Herndon series have a site index of 75-85 for loblolly pine, yellow poplar and sweetgum and 65-
75 for shortleaf pine and southern red oak. Wehadkee and Bibb soils have a site index of 85-95
for loblolly pine, sweetgum and water oak and 85-100 for yellow poplar (USDA Soil
Conservation Service 1970). Overall, the soils in the project vicinity have a high potential
productivity for forest resources. However, much of the area is currently maintained as cultivated
fields and residential areas.
Water resource information encompasses the resource's relationship to major water
systems, physical aspects, Best Usage Classification, and water quality. Impacts to water
resources are discussed, along with suggestions to minimize impacts.
Characteristics of Water Resources
Water resources located within the project study area lie in the Neuse River Drainage
Basin. Terrible Creek [DEM Index No. 27- 43-15-8-(2)] originates approximately 3.2 kilometers
(2.0 miles) west of the project site and flows into Middle Creek approximately 6.4 kilometers
(4.0 miles) downstream from the project site. Middle Creek eventually flows into the Neuse
River near Smithfield, central Johnston County. Currently SR 1404 crosses Terrible Creek on the
dam that forms Johnson's Pond. The pond is a 6.9 hectares (17 acres) lake located on the west
side of SR 1404 at the subject bridge.
6
Alternative 1 will cross Terrible Creek which is approximately 3 meters (10 feet) wide
and 30.5 centimeters (12.0 inches) deep at the project site. This creek has fast flow, clear water.
and a sand/silt-gravel bottom. Various unnamed tributaries of Terrible Creek transverse the east
side of the project vicinity. The NWI map classifies this area as a PFO1 A (Palustrine Forested
Broad-leaved Deciduous, temporarily flooded) wetland.
Johnson's Pond [DEM Index No. 27-43-15-8-(1)] is located on the west side of SR 1404
and will be bridged if Alternative 2 is chosen. The pond has shallow edges but quickly grades off
into water greater than 4.5 meters (15.0 feet) deep. The NWI map classifies Johnson's pond as
L 1 UBHh (Lacustrine, Limnetic, Unconsolidated Bottomland, Permanently flooded
impoundment).
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a Best Usage Classification by the Division of
Environmental Management (DEM). The best usage classification for Terrible Creek from the
dam to Middle Creek is Class C NSW. Class C refers to waters suitable for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. The
supplemental NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) classification refers to waters which require
limitations on nutrient inputs. Johnson's Pond is classified as Class B NSW. Class B waters are
considered primarily for recreation and any other usage specified by the "C" classification. NSW
waters require limitations on nutrient inputs. Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water
Supplies (WS-I or WS-II) nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 kilometers
(1.0 miles) of the project study area.
Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is managed by the DEM and
is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses long term
trends in water quality. The program assesses water quality by sampling for selected benthic
macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites. Macroinvertebrates are sensitive to very
subtle changes in water quality; thus, the species richness and overall biomass of these organisms
are reflections of water quality. BMAN information is not available for Terrible Creek (NC
DEHNR 1991).
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. One permitted discharger is located in the project vicinity. The Fuquay
Varina/Terrible Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant is located approximately 0.5 kilometers (0.3
miles) northeast of the project site on a tributary of Terrible Creek. This tributary enters Terrible
Creek downstream from the project site.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Project construction could involve either the installation of a culvert through which
Terrible Creek will flow (Alternative 1) or bridging the lower end of Johnson's Pond (Alternative
2). Crossing Terrible Creek at a new location downstream from the current crossing at the dam
will result in temporary impacts to the water quality of the stream.
Project construction from either alternative may result in the following impacts to
surface waters:
- Increased sedimentation and siltation from erosion;
- 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 water temperature due to vegetation removal, and;
- Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway construction and toxic spills.
Precautions should be taken to minimize these and other impacts to water resources in
the study area. This can be accomplished by protecting stream bank vegetation, installing silt
fences as well as other erosion and sedimentation controls. NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and Sedimentation Control guidelines should be
strictly enforced during the construction stage of the project. Provisions to preclude unnecessary
contamination by toxic substances during the construction interval should also be strictly
enforced.
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. This section describes those
ecosystems encountered in the study area, as well as the relationships between fauna and flora
within these ecosystems. Composition and distribution of biotic communities throughout the
project area are reflective of topography, hydrologic influences and past and present land uses.
Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community
classifications. Natural plant community titles follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where
possible. Dominant flora and fauna likely to occur in each community are described and
discussed. Identifications and nomenclature of vascular plants were made primarily with Radford
cl al. (1968). Fauna observed during field investigations are designated with an asterisk (*).
Terrestrial Communities
A variety of disturbed biotic communities dominate the project study area. The roadside
shoulder, newly installed sewer line and hay field are maintained at an early successional stage.
A Piedmont Bottomland Forest is present along Terrible Creek on the east side of the existing
bridge.
Disturbed Communities
The roadside shoulder, sewer line ROW and hay field are dominated mostly by
herbaceous and shrubby, early successional species. Herbaceous plants include meadow fescue,
broomsedge, black nightshade, dog fennel, various species of goldenrods and elephant's foot.
Pokeweed, greenbrier, poison ivy and Florida blue lettuce were also common within the
disturbed portions of the project study area. Shrubby species common to these disturbed sites
include blackberry, green ash, loblolly pine and red maple.
Disturbed areas such as these are used by a variety of animals for foraging and nesting.
Avian species such as rufous sided towhee*, northern cardinal*, brown thrasher*, Carolina
chickadee* and red tailed hawk* were observed in both the disturbed and forested portion of the
project study area. Mourning dove, ruby throated hummingbird, American goldfinch and various
other songbirds are also likely to be found in the project study area. Scavenging birds such as the
American crow* and turkey vulture are probably present during most of the year.
8
Other faunal species likely to inhabit or use these disturbed areas include white-tailed
deer, raccoon*, Virginia opossum, white-footed mouse and the southeastern shrew. Upland
chorus frog, spring peeper and northern cricket frog are likely amphibians. Black rat snakes and
rough green snakes may be found throughout the disturbed areas.
Piedmont Bottomland Forest
The forested area lying within the project study area is primarily Piedmont Bottomland
Forest. Based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydrology and hydric soils, much of
this area meets the necessary criteria to be classified as a jurisdictional wetland. Herbaceous
species common to the wetland areas of the Bottomland Forest include common rush, Japanese
grass, false nettle, spotted touch-me-not, privet, Japanese honeysuckle and meadow fescue. Other
herbaceous species include meadow garlic, wild strawberry and mouse-ear chickweed. Canopy
species common to this forest include sycamore, red maple, river birch, water oak, loblolly pine,
sweetgum and dogwood.
Great blue herons and green backed herons are likely residents of the Bottomland Forest
and spend a considerable amount of time feeding in Johnson's Pond and Terrible Creek. Many of
the animals that inhabit or use the disturbed areas are probably also found in the adjacent
Bottomland Forest including birds such as northern cardinal, Carolina chickadee, red-tailed hawk
and American crow. White-tailed deer, raccoon, Virginia opossum, upland chorus frogs, eastern
newt, slimy salamander, eastern box turtle and black snakes are all likely inhabitants.
Aquatic Communities
Two types of aquatic communities are present in the project study area. Johnson's Pond
dominates the western half of the project study area while Terrible Creek and one of its unnamed
tributaries is to the east of the current bridge.
Johnson's Pond
Johnson's Pond was created as a result of a dam on Terrible Creek at the current bridge.
Aquatic vegetation such as cattails, smartweeds and submerged pondweeds are likely to be found
in the pond.
Great blue herons and green-backed herons feed on various species of fish, reptiles and
amphibians as well as crustaceans associated with the pond. Fish species likely to inhabit
Johnson's Pond include eastern mosquito fish, largemouth bass, bluegill, red-breasted sunfish and
catfish. Snapping turtle and stinkpot are common turtles in aquatic habitats of the Piedmont.
Bullfrog, southern leopard frog and pickerel frog are all common in lakes and ponds in the
project region. Crayfish species are commonly found in or near aquatic habitats in the Piedmont.
Piedmont Perennial Stream
Terrible Creek and its unnamed tributary are both considered Piedmont perennial
streams. Fish species common to Piedmont streams include creek chub, green sunfish,
pumpkinseed, bluegill and rosyside dace. These fish species feed on a variety of aquatic insects
including caddisflies and mayflies.
Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Construction of the subject project will have various impacts on the biotic resources
described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources has the potential to
9
impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies impacts to the natural resources
in terms of the ecosystems affected. Both temporary and permanent impacts are considered.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance of each
community at the project site. Project construction will result in the clearing and degradation of
portions of these communities. Table 2 summarizes potential quantitative losses of these biotic
communities resulting from project construction. Estimated terrestrial impacts are derived using
a ROW width of 18.3 meters (60.0 feet) on the northern end of Alternative 1 and 40 meters (130
feet) in the portion of Alternative 1 where Terrible Creek will be culverted. Usually, project
construction does not require the entire ROW width; therefore, actual impacts may be
considerably less. Impacts to Johnson's Pond (Alternative 2) are based on the surface area of the
bridge and a 18.3 meter (60.0 foot) ROW width.
Terrestrial communities found in the study area serve as nesting, feeding and sheltering
habitat for various wildlife. Alternative 1 will impact approximately 1.1 hectares (2.7 acres) of
land. Approximately 0.6 hectares (1.5 acres) of this area is Bottomland Forest while the other 0.1
hectares (0.2 acres) constitutes disturbed areas including an agricultural field and existing
roadside shoulder. Approximately 0.4 hectares (1.0 acres) of the Bottomland Hardwood Forest in
the vicinity of the proposed culvert is jurisdictional wetland.
Habitat reduction concentrates wildlife into smaller areas of refuge, thus causing some
species to become more susceptible to disease, predation and starvation. Impacts to the aquatic
community include degradation of water quality, thus negatively impacting the aquatic
organisms living in the stream. The surface area impacts to Terrible Creek will be extensive
where the stream will be culverted. The culvert will require stream widening upstream and
downstream from the crossing. The channelization of 40 meters (130 feet) of the stream is
required for the culvert and will disrupt the aquatic community in Terrible Creek. Culverting
such a long section of Terrible Creek will most likely displace all of the fish and most of the
aquatic invertebrates that are currently inhabiting this portion of the stream.
Alternative 2 (bridging Johnson's Pond) will have the least impact on the terrestrial
communities within the project area. Only 0.2 hectares (0.5 acres) of Bottomland Forest and 0.1
hectares (0.2 acres) of disturbed habitat will be impacted by Alternative 2. This alternative will
also impact a narrow fringing wetland along the northeastern edge of Johnson's Pond. This
wetland is less than 0.03 hectares (0.07 acres) in size. The initial impacts to the aquatic
community of Johnson's Pond resulting from bridge construction could be great. The substrate of
the pond will be impacted as pilings are inserted during bridge construction. If the water level
must be lowered for construction activities, large numbers of fish will likely be killed. If the
pond is completely drained and the substrate dries out, aquatic invertebrates will also be lost.
Permanent impacts to Johnson's Pond include shading 0.14 hectares (0.35 acres) of surface
waters. Shading will negatively impact the lake community by reducing the amount of
phytoplankton as well as reducing water temperatures in this portion of the lake. Normal traffic
as well as maintenance activities (salt, paint, etc.) will contribute toxic compounds into the pond.
Table 2 Anticipated impacts to biotic communities, wetlands and surface waters.
Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Disturbed 0.1 ha (0.2 ac) 0.1 ha (0.2 ac)
Bottomland Forest 0.6 ha (1.5 ac) 0.2 ha (0.5 ac)
Wetland 0.4 ha (1.0 ac)
Surface Water 0.01 ha (0.02 ac) 0.03 ha (0.07 ac)
0.14 ha (0.35 ac)
10
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and jurisdictional wetlands fall under the broad category of Waters of the
United States, as defined Section 33 of the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Part 328.3.
Wetlands are defined in 33 CFR 328.3 as those areas inundated or saturated by surface or ground
water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any action
that proposes to place fill material into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to determine the presence of jurisdictional wetlands includes evidence of hydric
soils, hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology. Wetlands and surface waters will be impacted by
the proposed project.
One large wetland is located to the east of the dam creating Johnson's Pond.
Approximately 0.6 hectares (1.5 acres) of this wetland will be impacted by Alternative 1. A
second wetland located in the project study area fringes Johnson's Pond. Alternative 2 will only
impact less than 0.03 hectares (0.07 acres) of jurisdictional wetland near the northeastern corner
of the pond. Both wetlands contained hydrophytic plants such as red maple, sweet gum, river
birch, sycamore, spotted touch-me-not and false nettle. Hydric soils with a color of I OYR 4/1 and
3/1 were present with mottles of 10 YR 4/6. Terrible Creek will be impacted by Alternative 1
while Alternative 2 will impact Johnson's Pond.
Permits
As mentioned above, impacts to surface waters and jurisdictional wetlands are
anticipated from project construction. In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the CWA,
a permit will be required from the COE for the discharge of dredge or fill material into "Waters
of the United States."
A Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5 (A) (23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States from the proposed project. This permit authorizes
activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in whole, or part, by
another Federal agency or department where that agency or department has determined that
pursuant to the council on environmental quality regulation for implementing the procedural
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act;
(1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither individually nor
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and;
(2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with the determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality General Certification from the DEM
prior to the issuance of a Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the CWA requires that the state
issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in
a discharge to Waters of the United States. Final decisions concerning applicable permits rest
with the COE.
Mitigation
The COE has adopted, through the Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ), a wetland
mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands." The purpose of this
policy is to maintain and restore the chemical, biological and physical integrity of Waters of the
United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ
to include: avoiding impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing
impacts over time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR) 1508.20. Each of these three aspects
(avoidance, minimization and compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance
Avoidance alternatives examine all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Environmental Protection Agency and the COE, in determining "appropriate and
practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measure should be appropriate to the
scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and
logistics.
Alternative 1 involves crossing Terrible Creek downstream from the current crossing (on
the dam). This alternative would have the greatest impact to jurisdictional wetlands which could
only be avoided by bridging the wetland or moving this section of new location further east.
Alternative 2 would have only minor impacts to wetlands that fringe the edge of Johnson's Pond
but would have the greatest impact to surface waters as it crosses Johnson's Pond.
Minimization
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practical steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required
through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on
decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of median widths, ROW
widths, fill slopes and/or road shoulder widths. Since much of the bottomland area east of the
dam is jurisdictional wetland, shifting the relocated section of Alternative 1 either west or
slightly east of its proposed location would still have significant wetland impacts. Shifting the
new location section several hundred meters to the east would minimize impacts to wetlands.
Alternative 2, involving bridging Johnson's Pond would only impact a small wetland along the
edge of the pond. Impacts to this wetland could be lessened by extending the bridge over the
fringing wetland. Impacts to surface waters would be great.
Additional means to minimize impacts to the waters and wetlands crossed by the
proposed project include: strict enforcement of sedimentation control using Best Management
Practices for the protection of surface waters during the entire construction life of the project;
reduction of clearing and grubbing activity, particularly in riparian areas and reduction or
elimination of direct discharge into streams; reduction of runoff velocity; re-establishment of
vegetation on exposed areas, with prudent pesticide and herbicide management; minimization of
in-stream activity and litter and debris control. The use of any number of these methods will be
effective in reducing the degradation of water quality resulting from project construction.
Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to Waters
of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is
recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and
every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for
12
unavoidable, adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate and practicable minimization
has been done. Compensatory actions often include restoration, creation and enhancement of
Waters of the United States. Such actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous
the project site, when possible.
Projects authorized under Nationwide Permits usually do not require compensatory
mitigation according to the 1989 Memorandum Agreement between the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of the Army. The final decision regarding mitigation rests
with the Corps of Engineers.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in the process of decline either due to
natural forces or their inability to coexist with human activities. Federal law (under the
provisions of the Endangered Species Act [ESA] of 1973, as amended) requires that any action,
likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected, be subject to review by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other species may receive additional protection under
separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9
of the ESA. Four federally-protected species are known from Wake County as of April 1, 1996
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1995). An endangered species is a species that is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Alismodonta beterodon (dwarf wedge mussel)
The dwarf wedge mussel is a small mussel having a distinguishable shell noted by two
lateral teeth on the right half and one on the left half. The periostracum (outer shell) is olive
green to dark brown in color and the nacre (inner shell) is bluish to silvery white.
Known populations of the dwarf wedge mussel in North Carolina are in portions of the
Neuse and Tar River systems. This mussel is sensitive to agricultural, domestic, and industrial
pollutants and requires a stable silt free streambed with well oxygenated water to survive.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
NCDOT biologist Tim Savidge surveyed Terrible Creek at the project site for dwarf
wedge mussels on September 5, 1995 and found no specimens of this species. Further, the NC
Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats currently does not indicate
any populations of dwarf wedge mussel in the project vicinity. This project will not affect the
dwarf wedge mussel.
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (bald eagle)
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), in the largest living
tree in an area, and having an open view of the surrounding land. Human disturbance can cause
an eagle to abandon otherwise suitable habitat. The breeding season for the bald eagle begins in
13
December or January. Fish are a major food source for bald eagles. Other sources include coots.
herons, and wounded ducks. Food may be either live or carrion.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Johnson's Pond, the only body of water in the project site, is not likely to support bald
eagle foraging because of its size. No bald eagles or their nests were observed during either site
visit. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats does not
indicate any populations of bald eagles in the vicinity of the project. This project will not affect
the bald eagle.
(red-cockaded woodpecker)
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker 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 red cockaded
woodpecker is black and white with horizontal stripes. The breast and underside of this
woodpecker are white with streaked flanks. The red cockaded woodpecker has a large white
cheek patch surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
Red cockaded woodpeckers use open old growth stands of southern pines, particularly
longleaf pine, 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 this species is up to 200 hectares (500
acres). 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 3.6-
30.3 meters (12.0-100.0 feet) above the ground and average 9.1-15.7 meters (30.0-50.0 feet)
high. Cavity trees can be identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree.
The red cockaded woodpecker lays its eggs in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch
approximately 38 days later.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The project vicinity is mainly composed of a bottomland hardwood forest. No mature
pine stands are present at or near the project site. Thus, suitable habitat for this species does not
exist. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats does not
indicate any populations of red-cockaded woodpeckers in the project vicinity. Therefore, this
project will not affect the red-cockaded woodpecker.
Rhm michaux" (Michaux's sumac)
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizomatous shrub. The bases of the leaves are
rounded and their edges are simply or doubly serrate. The flowers of Michaux's sumac are
greenish to white in color. Fruits, which develop from August to September on female plants, are
a red densely short-pubescent drupe.
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods. Michaux's sumac is dependent on some
sort of disturbance to maintain the openness of its habitat. It usually grows in association with
basic soils and occurs on sand or sandy loams. Michaux's sumac grows only in open habitat
where it can get full sunlight. Michaux's sumac does not compete well with other species, such as
Japanese honeysuckle, with which it is often associated.
14
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Very little habitat exists for this species at the project site. Most of the disturbed areas are
mowed on a regular basis. A plant by plant survey for $hua michauxii was conducted by walking
the disturbed habitats during the site visits and no specimens were found. The NC Natural
Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats does not indicate any populations
Michaux's sumac in the project vicinity. This project will not affect Michaux's sumac.
D. Air Quality and Traffic Noise
The project is located in Wake County, which is within the Raleigh-Durham nonattainment
area for ozone (03) as defined by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The 1990 Clean
Air Act Amendments (CAAA) designated these areas as a "moderate" nonattainment area for 03.
and CO. However, due to improved monitoring data, these areas were redesignated as
"maintenance" for 03 on June 17, 1994, and "maintenance" for CO on September 18, 1995.
Section 176(c) of the CAAA requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to
the intent of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). The current SIP does not contain any
transportation control measures for Wake County. The Capital Area 1995 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) has been determined to conform to the intent of the SIP. The MPO
approval date for the TIP is August 9, 1995. The USDOT approval date of the TIP is November 1,
1995. The current conformity determination is consistent with the final conformity rules found in
40 CFR Part 51. There have been no significant changes in the project design concept or scope, as
used in the conformity analysis.
The impact on air quality will be insignificant. This project is an air quality neutral project,
therefore a project level CO analysis is not required. If the project disposes of vegetation by
burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation
completes the assessment requirements of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments and the National
Environmental Policy Act. The project requires no additional reports.
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will have no
substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during construction.
E. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal agencies or their
representatives to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on prime and
important farmland soils. These soils are determined by the US Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
based on criteria such as potential crop yield and possible level of input of economic resources.
The SCS was consulted to determine whether the proposed realignment and replacement of
Bridge No. 299 will impact farmland soils. The SCS completed Form AD-1006, Farmland
Conversion Impact Rating, indicating approximately 0.50 acres of prime farmland soils would be
affected in the proposed realignment alternate [Alternate One]. The relative value of the farmland
to be converted by Alternate One was 13.4 on a scale of 100 points. The total farmland
conversion impact rating is 46.4 on a scale of 260. An impact rating of 160 or above would have
constituted the rejection of an alternate as a possible project location.
There is no active farmland in the project area, therefore the impact of the project to
prime farmland soils will not be mitigated.
15
IX. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above discussion, NCDOT and FHWA conclude that the project will cause
no significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the project may be processed as a Categorical
Exclusion.
WTG/
16
nx
im an
2w
T T
Im
POND
L

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
WAKE COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 299 ON SR 1404
OVER TERRIBLE CREEK
B - 3055
0 mile 1 FIG. 1

:• X?t 1
??ii ys i , jaw$
.earl ? F ? q4 ?` ? •? s
?t ? ? i `4t ?? ? r 4 $
O
N
0
Nyy
'V
O
Q
r
7I
?a
Ab-
FA

&P, v

f S?
f r
i
AV # f
?.E
as ??
'S
r
MP "4

Fy.? I
yr?
4 ?y
j%'3
-422
a
N
I?1
e
f,

4 1 * -- q'L North Carolina Department ?
Transportation
i?

rpl 1t;
DiNision of Highways

Planning & Environmental B
Wake County
Replace Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
B-3055
Figure Th
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS WITH MINOR INVOLVEMENTS WITH
HISTORIC SITES
TIP Project No.: B-3055
State Project No. 8.2404501 Is
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRZ-1404(2)1
DESCRIPTION: Replacement of Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404 over Terrible Creek in Wake
County. The historic resource involved in the project is the J. Beale Johnson
House, a National Register Listed house located just southeast of the
existing bridge.
YES NQ
1. Is the proposed project designed to improve the
operational characteristics, safety, and/or physical
condition of the existing highway facility on essentially X
the same alignment?
X
2. Is the project on new location ?
X
3. Is the historic site adjacent to the existing highway?
4. Does the project require the removal or alteration X
of historic buildings, structures, or objects?
5. Does the project disturb or remove archaeological
resources which are important to preserve in place X
rather than to recover for archaeological research?
6. a. Is the impact on the Section 4(f) site considered X
minor (i.e. no effect, no adverse effect) ?
b. If the project is determined to have "no adverse
effect" on the historic site, does the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation object to the determination N/A
of "no adverse effect"?
7. Has the SHPO agreed, in writing, with the assessment
X
of impacts and the proposed mitigation?
? 1:1 X
8. Does the project require the preparation of an EIS
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT
The following alternatives were evaluated and found not to be feasible and prudent:
YYIS NQ
1. Do nothing
Does the "do nothing" alternative:
F-I
X
(a) correct capacity deficiencies?
t
h
d
?
i
f
i
b F-I X
y
azar
s
st
ng sa
e
) correct ex
or (
di
i
?
i
d F-I X
ons
con
t
or (c) correct deter
orate
F] X
and (d) create a cost or impact of extraordinary measure ?
2. Improve the highway without using the adjacent
historic site.
(a) Have minor alignment shifts, changes in standards,
use of retaining walls, etc., or traffic management
measures been evaluated? X
(b) The items in 2(a) would result in:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) substantial adverse environmental impacts
or (ii substantial increased costs
or (iii unique engineering, transportation,
maintenance, or safety problems
or (iv) substantial social, environmental, or
economic impacts
or (v) a project which does not meet the need
or (vi) impacts, costs, or problems which are of
extraordinary magnitude
Y-U
3. Build an improved facility on new location without
using the historic site.
(a) An alternate on new location would result in:
(circle, as appropriate)
or
or
(i) a project which does not solve the
existing problems
(ii) substantial social, environmental, or
economic impacts

and (iv)
MINIMIZATION OF HARM
The project includes all possible planning to minimize
harm necessary to preserve the historic integrity of the
site.
a substantial increase in project cost
or engineering difficulties
such impacts, costs, or difficulties of
truly unusual or unique or extraordinary
magnitude
yo NQ
2.
3.
Measures to minimize harm have been agreed to, in
accordance with 36 CFR Part 800, by the FHWA,
the SHPO, and as appropriate, the ACHP.
X
0
X F-I
X
Specific measures to minimize harm are described as follows:
The clearing and removal of trees within the boundary of the National Register
Listed property will be kept to the minimum necessary for project construction.
Note: Any response in a box requires additional information prior to approval. Consult
Nationwide 4(f) evaluation.
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. State Historic Preservation Officer x
b. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation N/A
c. Property owner N/A
d. Local/State/Federal Agencies x_
e. US Coast Guard N/A
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation approved on
December 23, 1986.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable
to this project. There are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of the historic site.
The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm, and the measures to minimize
harm will be incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed with local and state agencies.
Approved:
10.24 •9"g,
Date Ast Manager, Planning & Environmental Branch NCDOT
/alZ 41yd Agy C kc,P
Date r-YrDlvlsl Admimstraetor, FHWA
Federal Aid V t=7- 14 (z? TIP ? ? County
CONCURRENCE FORtiI
FOR
ASSESSIIENT OF EFFECTS
W)6,KP-
Brief Project Description
(~ErLAe_E, er-IGCrF_ r10. VII •N e-? 14e4 oyeq- TER-¢.tbL.E 69-soy-
On Ju"1 1`l f'1(6 , representatives of the

North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Other
reviewed the subject project and agreed
? there are no effects on the National Resister-listed property within the project's
area of potential a ect and listed on the reverse.
there are no effects on the National Resister-eligible properties located within the
project's area of potential er ect and listed on the reverse.
there is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties within the
project's area of potential effect. The property-grope..-?ies and the effect(s) are
listed on the reverse.
there is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties within the
project's area of potential effect. Tice property/properties and effect(s) are listed
on the reverse.
Siened:
, Historic Architectural Resources Section
Dat
r the Divisic0i Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
Representative, SHPO
D

tate Historic Preservation Officer
(over)
ederal Aid m 6a-z • 14404 (2> . TIP 9
t), 3oC? S
County
W A K.E.
ope ?ies within area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
,aticnaI Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
.-._,. (?Et??-Fi•?oNNSoIJ 140NbE_ ( NR-)
Dpr,.?.Ww-4- will irlg4Kje, NV (ti(d!l,ltwta*•W GOrNwtl wrr- mtwt•Klzc, ri{"rivl^
,-jiktivi Vbtr, prvr*- (C.(, V, ^ql -• #?- &)&j vliFL?iH tWe, "' Mr, lp,,AKAwI -P(i tu, ?0174r? .
'rcperties within area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status (NR
)r DE) and describe effect.
season(s) why effect is not adverse (if applicable).
Initialed: NCDOT FH'VVA SHPO ?G
ell
a
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
May 9, 1996
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Archaeological report for replacement of Bridge
No. 299 on SR 1404, Federal Aid Project BRZ-
1404(2). State Project 8.2404501, TIP B-3055,
Wake County, ER 95-8113, ER 96-8761
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
`l ? A `996
M?p
O \G?W
Thank you for your letters of March 18, 1996, and April 11, 1996, and the
accompanying archaeological report and site form by John Mintz and Thomas
Beaman of the North Carolina Department of Transportation for the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, it is our opinion that the following property is eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places under Criterion D:
31 WA1255**
The Johnson's Mill (Alford's Mill) Site (31 WA1255 * *) is eligible because it is a
good example of early twentieth century water powered technology in the North
Carolina Piedmont and has yielded important information about that technology.
The archaeological report is excellent. The research and recordation already
accomplished is comprehensive. The significant information concerning water
powered technology has been adequately retrieved so that the proposed bridge
replacement will have No Adverse Effect upon archaeological site 31 WA 1255 * *
Mr. Mintz and Mr. Beaman are to be commended for the quality of their report
which meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ??V
Nicholas L. Graf
May 9, 1996, 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.
Since ely, 414
avid Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw /
cc: H. F. Vick
T. Padgett
J. Mintz
T. Beaman
FEB
U: z
•.?,?,?? ?: ? 2 1995
n , J
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resour DIVISICti
Z HIGH,` NI a
v,
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Division
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary William S. rector
February 17, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge 299 on SR 1404 over Terrible
Creek, Wake County, B-3055, Federal Aid Project
BRZ-1404(2), State Project 8.2404501, ER 95-
8113
Dear Mr. Graf:
On February 7, 1995, 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 and for our use afterwards.
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, the J. Beale Johnson House, which is
listed in the National Register of Historic Places, is located within the project's area
of potential effect. The Atkinson-Whitted House and Tower, which is included on
the state study list, is located north of the project area on SR 1407. We
recommend that no historic architectural survey be conducted for this project.
The remains of a historic period mill site are located east of the existing bridge. If
this site will be affected by the proposed replacement, archaeological
investigations to record and evaluate the site are recommended prior to
construction activities.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a
Categorical Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT
addressed our comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance With Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
OQ
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2507 13p
Nicholas L. Graf
February 17, 1995, 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,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw/
cc: vH. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
L

APPENDIX ONE

`
55
tt? r ? Ujl 7 Fr,7n'
i 21,
i

PAYMENT
RECEIVED
Appendix 1 of 3
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
REVISED ADDENDUM TO
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
Date William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Z-z7 .-11,
Date

Alicholas L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
REVISED ADDENDUM TO
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
September 2000
11111,
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental fE1 .A'fro By:
SS/pN.y9
- 2 1. -
I J 1 SEAL
_ l lu J /i i ??irUt? 9 " 2I - oo _ 022552 s
Johri L. Williams, P. E. "pti:;NG?NE;;P?`° -
Project Planning Engineer w
2-1
Wayn Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
( ' `)- GJ 1-0
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
B-305, Wake County
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Project BRZ-1404(2)
State Project 3.2404501
Resident Engineer
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition & Removal are still in place to
prevent debris from falling into the stream. Proper application of Best Management
Practices should address the concerns of all concerned agencies.
Clearing activities will be kept to a minimum within the boundaries of the J. Beale Johnson House
which is a National Register Listed residence located just southeast of Bridge No. 299. The
removal of trees on the property will be limited to those trees absolutely necessary to construct the
project.
Recommendations from the NCIVRC include draining the pond during the winter months when
water temperature levels are lower, allowing the water level to be lowered slowly; thus not forcing
fish out of the pond, and keeping some water in the pond during construction. NCDOT is
committed to the implementation of these recommendations along with the standard NCDOT
procedures for avoiding and minimizing environmental impacts.
Structure Design
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition & Removal are still in place to
prevent debris from falling into the stream. Proper application of Best Management
Practices should address the concerns of all concerned agencies.
Roadway Design
Clearing activities will be kept to a minimum within the boundaries of the J. Beale Johnson House
which is a National Register Listed residence located just southeast of Bridge No. 299. The
removal of trees on the property will be limited to those trees absolutely necessary to construct the
project.
Revised Addendum to Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
September 21, 2000
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
I. BACKGROUND
An Addendum To Categorical Exclusion was approved on March 23, 1999. Final
Designs have indicated that the environmental impacts need to be updated.
II. DISCUSSION
Surface Water and Wetland Impacts
This project proposes to permanently fill 1.56 acres of surface water and proposes to temporarily
fill 0.10 acres of surface water for installation of the causeways. The major disadvantage of
selecting Alternate 2-A is that the installation of causeways will require the partial draining of
Johnson's Pond. Impacts associated with draining the pond involve the degradation of a large
aquatic ecosystem and therefore can not be easily measured. Coordination between the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) is essential to assure issues concerning avoidance, minimization, and mitigation for
impacts to Johnson's Pond are adequately addressed.
The US Army Corps of Engineers will not require mitigation for impacts to Johnson's Pond as
long as the DOT satisfies the NCWRC's concerns about a massive fish kill associated with
draining the pond. The NCWRC has no mechanism to require mitigation for fish kill in a private
pond, but they have offered recommendations for some construction practices that may minimize
the impacts to this ecosystem. Recommendations from the NCWRC include draining the pond
during the winter months when water temperature levels are lower, allowing the water level to be
lowered slowly; thus not forcing fish out of the pond, and keeping some water in the pond during
construction. NCDOT is committed to the implementation of these recommendations along with
the standard NCDOT procedures for avoiding and minimizing environmental impacts.
Neuse River Basin Buffer Impacts
Johnson's Pond and Terrible Creek are both water resources subject to the Neuse River Basin
Buffer Rules and impacts to their riparian buffers are regulated by the Division of Water Quality.
Alternate 2-A proposes to permanently impact riparian buffer areas to the north and to the south
of Johnson's Pond's lower edge. The rules divide riparian buffers into zone 1 and zone 2, for
regulation and mitigation purposes. Zone 1, for Ponds, begins at the most landward limit of the
normal water level or the rooted herbaceous vegetation and extends landward a distance of 30
feet, measured horizontally on a line perpendicular to the surface water. Zone 2 shall begin at the
outer edge of Zone 1 and extend landward 20 feet as measured horizontally on a line
perpendicular to the surface water. The combined width of Zones 1 and 2 shall be 50 feet on all
sides of the surface water. This project proposes to impact 0.221 acres of Zone 1 and 0.081 acres
of Zone 2. Therefore, Alternate 2-A will impact a total of 0.302 acres of Neese River Basin
Buffer.
Breakdown of Environmental Impacts for Alternate 2-A
Impacts III. Alternate 2-A
Surface Waters
Permanent 1.56 acres
Temporary 0.10 acres
Wetlands 0.00 acres
Neuse River Basin Buffer
Zone 1 0.221 acres
Zone 2 0.081 acres
III. CONCLUSIONS
Alternate 2-A is still the most reasonable, feasible, and cost effective method for
replacing Bridge No. 299 on SR 140.1 over "terrible Creek in Wake County.
2
APPENDIX TWO
Appendix 2 of 3

Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
00
ADDENDUM TO
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
APPROVED:
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
3'-2 3-yg CX?; 9/. O-lam
Date -?-OY William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Q12311'fi?
Date
icholas L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
k
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
ADDENDUM TO
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
March 1999
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
Way de Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head

Q? T;
SEAL e -
a21077
' T G OOp???.
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Project Planning Engineer
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
I. BACKGROUND
A Categorical Exclusion and Programmatic 4(f) Evaluation for the subject project were
approved on October 24, 1996. The document recommended Alternate 1 (the replacement of
Bridge No. 299 with a culvert on new alignment to the east of the existing bridge). Traffic was to
be maintained on the existing bridge during construction. A Public Hearing for the project was
held on July 2, 1997. There was significant opposition to the recommended alternate at the
Public Hearing.
Alternate 2 consisted of providing a new bridge just west of the existing bridge in the
lower edge of Johnson's Pond. A structure length of 740 feet was proposed. Alternate 2 was
rejected due to excessive cost. Alternate 2-A, a modification to Alternate 2, was developed and
also presented at the Hearing. This modification follows the same alignment as Alternate'-' and
involves a much shorter bridge (150 feet) and causeways out into the pond to facilitate the
crossing of the pond. This modification made Alternate 2-A cost competitive with the previously
recommended Alternate 1.
II. DISCUSSION
Alternate 2-A has essentially the same environmental effects as Alternate 2 which was
evaluated in the original document. This alignment provides a better design speed (60 mph),
reduces wetland impacts over Alternate 1, avoids impacts to a National Register of Historic
Places listed house (J. Beale Johnson House), and avoids impacts to an archaeological site
located just southeast of the existing bridge. The architectural and archaeological issues had been
resolved for Alternate 1, but avoidance is preferable to minimization or mitigation where these
types of resources are involved. Since the cost estimate for Alternate 2-A is much closer to the
cost estimate for Alternate 1 and Alternate 2-A addresses all of these environmental issues it
seems to be a better alternative for replacing Bridge No. 299.
A drawback to Alternate 2-A is the fact that the pond will probably have to be drained, at
least partially, to allow the fill for the causeways to be placed. This drawback can be turned to an
advantage if the owner of the dam, American Legion Post 116, will take advantage of the
situation and repair the dam while the pond is drained for construction activities to take place.
The Legion Post is the main property owner involved in right-of-way acquisition, so the funds
they receive in compensation for right-of-way purchased could be applied to the cost of having
the dam repaired.
Another alternate that was discussed briefly in the original document and which was
presented to the public at the Hearing, identified as Alternate 3 would replace Bridge No. 299 in-
place and replaces the dam for Johnson's Pond. As the cost estimates in the following section
show, this alternate is significantly more expensive than any of the other alternatives. Due to the
cost of the alternate and the fact that NCDOT does not own the Johnson's Pond dam Alternate 3
is not considered a reasonable and feasible alternative.
Structure
Roadway Approaches
Dam Replacement
Structure Removal'
Misc. and Mobilization
Engineering & Contingencies
Total Construction
Right of Way & Utilities
TOTAL PROJECT COST
III. COST ESTIMATE
Alternate Alternate Alternate Alternate
One Two Two-A Three
Recommended
195,000 1,225,000 297,000 1,173,000
420,000 230,000 284,000 202,000
0 0 0 1,000,000
18,000 18,000 18,000 18,000
190,000 442,000 178,000 717,000
127,000 285,000 123,000 490,000
950,000 2,200,000 900,000 3,600,000
35,000 42,000 218,500 254,000
985,000 2,242,000 1,118,500 3,854,000
'The existing bridge will be removed down to the buttresses of the dam. The bridge
abutments may be left in-place if the integrity of the dam would be affected by their
removal.
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 299 on new alignment, to the west of the existing
bridge, as recommended in Alternate 2-A described above. The new roadway and bridge will be
at a slightly higher elevation than the existing bridge. Traffic will be maintained on the existing
bridge during as much of the construction period as is possible; otherwise traffic will be detoured
along existing area roads during construction.
V. CONCLUSIONS
Alternate 2-A is the most reasonable, feasible, and cost effective method for replacing
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404 over Terrible Creek in Wake County. Environmental effects are less
than those outlined for Alternate 1, and project cost is only slightly higher than Alternate 1.
Roadway alignment is better than Alternate 1, which was the recommended alternative in the
original Categorical Exclusion.
WTG/
2
p14
4
h
lqzzll
0
0
.doe?v
11
51 1411 '
.17 Lin .30 111
- .17 D
? I
1:11 u" 2M
4.
5 4
3, 4
1 4
j497- 4
19 ,39
LM 1171
1191 1,°7
11:1- ? 11-e
I
19S JOHNSONS
PoND
uo.
'o
Lit
IM I 1. 1
k
le, -
' i
IM-
I]77
RTMENT OF
>N`ILNTAL
.? DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIR(
.13` BRANCH
LA" zu-, WAKE COUNTY
Sv ?"
F REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 299 ON S
OVER TERRIBLE CREEK
B - 3055
...,..ii !ss »
I
/-jIM
R 1404
0 mile 1 FIG. 1
eae-a! a.:d ILv L21 TLS'
V
Ccunt,; WAY-L
CONCURRENCE FORM
FOR
ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Brief Project Description
olc.c(H-- e)r mrP_ 5z I`I Vq
C Alt e Y YIGI I'1 ?? ??= c?
On 112-11 IcIcjC-1 representatives of the
? North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
rederal HiQhwav Adminiszration (F NVA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Ot=ce (SF-PO)
Othe-
reviewed the subject proiect and agreed
there are no e--c--,s on the National Resister-listed orope.:v within the pro_ie='s
asea of potential erie= and listed on the revere.
_ there are no effects on the National Re?ister-_fizioie oret:erties located wit:.in the
proie_:'s area of potential e Fec: and listed on the reve:-se.
there is an erect on the Naronal Re3iste--listed orcoe.;:/grope. ties within the
proier:'s area of potential ere=. The proper ty-praner-Lies and the e5ect(s) are
listed on the reverse.
Sictr--d:
d-1-ere is an etrec: on the National Resister-eii<bie prone^r/properties within the
proje^'s area of potentia I T'ne praoer7 iprocemes and a see(s) ?; e listed
on the reverse.
Re:resenm e, iV DOT. Historic Archicec:.:ral Resources Senon ace
(i
FHWA,S'or the Division Administrator, or ocher Federal Agency Date
?? ?J I I ?Zi qCj
Representative, SHPO Date
i
State ?t*IC.°.. r Dace-
Federal Aid .T NZI - IgOq (2 TIP m ? 3C?5 County \J-A,+ -!F
Properties within area of potential e ect for which there is no ere . Indicate if prooe.;y is
National Register-listed C NR) or deterrrnined eligible (DE).
4?u,.CP- O"',E) il')C, if 4,cc?
Properties wi-Nhin area of potential effect for which there is an e ec;. indicate proper-y statLS (\R
or DE) and desc.-- oe a ect.
Reason(s) w;.•; "C; is not adverse (ifapplic:bie).
Initialed: NCDOT PV FHIV L2-2j
APPENDIX THREE
Appendix 3 of 3
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
fit! Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
and
PROGRAMMATIC 4(f) EVALUATION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
APPROVED:
10 -z¢-%
Date
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
U.
?r H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
147,4lf,?
Date
ichoaL. Graf, P. E.
ivision Administrator, FHWA
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
and
PROGRAMMATIC 4(f) EVALUATION
October 1996
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
ii
William T. Goodwin, Jr., P. E.
Project Planning Engineer
wa y " e n/, --
/0 -zy-96
WayndfElliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head

%•D??H CARO
.,
????FESS/p14,-
1Y
:Q SEAL =
21077
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Wake County,
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
Over Terrible Creek
Federal Aid Project BRZ - 1404(2)
State Project 8.2404501
TIP Project B-3055
1. SUMMARY OF PROJECT
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge
No. 299, Wake County. This bridge carves SR 1404 over Terrible Creek (see Figure 1). NCDOT
includes this bridge in the 1997-2003 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge
replacement project. NCDOT and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) classify this
project as a federal Categorical Exclusion. These agencies expect no notable environmental
impacts.
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 299 on new location as shown in Alternate 1, Figure 2.
NCDOT recommends replacing the bridge with a culvert, on new location approximately 65
meters (215 feet) east of the existing bridge. The new culvert will be a three barrel reinforced
concrete culvert, with each barrel measuring 3.0 meters (10 feet) by 2.4 meters (8 feet). The new
roadway will be constructed at a slightly higher roadway elevation than the existing roadway and
bridge. The new roadway will have a 7.2 meter (24 foot) wide travelway plus 2.4 meter (8 foot)
shoulders. The completed project will provide a design speed of approximately 65 km/h
(40 mph).
The estimated cost is $ 985,000 including $ 35,000 for right of way acquisition and
$ 950,000 for construction. The estimated cost included in the 1997-2003 TIP is $ 480,000.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT may be required to seek a design exception due to the low design speed for this
project. The design speed for the project is affected by the poor existing horizontal alignment.
The recommended alternate will improve the design speed of the roadway, but it may not reach
the desired design speed.
III. SUMMARY OF PROJECT COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. All applicable Best Management Practices will be installed and properly
maintained during project construction.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States." A Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will
likely be applicable for this project.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water
Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit # 23.
Clearing activities will be kept to a minimum within the boundaries of the J. Beale
Johnson House which is a National Register Listed residence located just southeast of Bridge No.
299. The removal of trees on the property will be limited to those trees absolutely necessary to
construct the project.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NCDOT classifies SR 1404 as a rural local route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. The surrounding area is primarily rural-residential in nature, with few
scattered residences among wooded lots and farm fields. However, the area is experiencing
significant growth with several subdivisions being developed north and west of the bridge site.
Near Bridge No. 299, SR 1404 is a two lane paved road, 5.4 meters (18 feet) wide with
minimal grassed shoulders. Both the vertical and horizontal alignment of the south approach to
the bridge are poor. The alignment of the north approach is much better.
NCDOT built Bridge No. 299 in 1955. The bridge has an asphalt overlay surface on a
timber deck with steel I-beam girders (see Figure 3). The southern abutment and two of the bents
of the bridge are made of timber. The northernmost bent and end bent are solid reinforced
concrete piers. These two piers are part of the buttressing for the dam that forms Johnson's
pond. The spillway for the dam is directly adjacent to Bridge No. 299. The deck of Bridge No.
299 is 6.4 meters (21 feet) above the streambed. Water depth is approximately 0.3 meters (1.0
foot) in the project area. The bridge is 39.3 meters (129 feet) long with a 5.5 meter (18 foot)
roadway width. It carries two lanes of traffic and the posted load limits are 9 tons for single
vehicles and 12 tons for Truck-tractor Semi-trailer (TTST).
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of Bridge No. 299
is 2.0 of a possible 100.0.
The current traffic volume is 1400 vehicles per day (VPD), projected to 3700 VPD by the
design year (2020). The speed limit is posted at 35 mph on SR 1404 in the area of Bridge No.
299.
Traffic Engineering accident records indicate four accidents occurred in the vicinity of
Bridge No. 299 between October 1, 1992 and September 30, 1994.
The Transportation Director for Wake County Schools indicated there are 10 school
buses crossing the bridge twice each per day.
2
V. ALTERNATES
Two methods of replacing Bridge No. 299 were studied. The alternates studied are as
follows:
Alternate One (Recommended) - replace the bridge on new alignment approximately 65 meters
(215 feet) east of the existing bridge with a culvert. Traffic will be maintained on the
existing bridge during construction.
Alternate Two - replace the bridge on new alignment approximately 50 meters (164 feet) west
of the existing bridge with a new 225 meter (740 feet) long bridge, over Johnson's Pond.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
The "do-nothing" alternate is not practical. The existing bridge would continue
deteriorating until it was unusable. This would require closing the road, or continued intensive
maintenance.
Replacing Bridge No. 299 in-place with traffic detoured off-site was also considered and
found not to be feasible due to the likelihood that the dam for Johnson's Pond would have to be
replaced as well as the bridge, adding considerable cost to the project.
VI. COST ESTIMATE
Estimated costs of the alternates studied are as follows:
Alternate One Alternate Two
Recommended
Structure
Roadway Approaches
Structure Removal i
Misc. and Mobilization
Engineering & Contingencies
Total Construction
Right of Way & Utilities
TOTAL PROJECT COST
195,000 1,225,000
420,000 230,000
18,000 18,000
190,000 442,000
127,000 285,000
950,000 2,200,000
35,000 42,000
985,000 2,242,000
I The existing bridge will be removed down to the buttresses of the dam. The bridge abutments
may be left in-place if the integrity of the dam would be affected by their removal.
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 299 on new location, as shown in Alternate 1, Figure 2.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge and roadway during construction.
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 299 with a culvert, on new location approximately 65
meters (215 feet) east of the existing bridge. The new culvert will be a three barrel reinforced
concrete culvert, with each barrel measuring 3.0 meters (10 feet) by 2.4 meters (8 feet). The new
roadway will be constructed at a slightly higher roadway elevation than the existing roadway and
bridge. The new roadway will have a 7.2 meter (24 foot) wide travelway plus 2.4 meter (8 foot)
shoulders. The project will require approximately 440 meters (1450 feet) of new approach
roadway. Where the design requires guardrail, the shoulder will be at least 3.3 meters (I 1 feet)
wide. The completed project will provide a design speed of approximately 65 km/h (40 mph).
NCDOT recommends Alternate 1 in order to replace existing Bridge No. 299 in the most
economical fashion. Alternate 2 has a significantly higher cost than Alternate 1. Alternate 2
would reduce direct wetland impacts, but might require the partial draining of Johnson's Pond to
complete construction. All architectural and archaeological issues raised by Alternate 1 have
been resolved to the satisfaction of the SHPO, FHWA and NCDOT. Alternate 2 would have
avoided direct impacts to the J. Beale Johnson House, but may have had a more substantial
visual effect on the historic setting of the house. Alternate 2 would have avoided the former
Alford's Mill site, but an archaeological survey recovered all information of historic significance
at the site.
NCDOT expects utility conflicts to be low for a project of this type and magnitude.
The division engineer concurs with the selection of Alternate 1. He states that traffic
should be maintained on-site due to the number of vehicles involved. The recommended alternate
will allow traffic to use the existing road and bridge during project construction.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL. EFFECTS
A. General Environmental Effects
The project is considered to be a "categorical exclusion" due to its limited scope and
insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality of the
human or natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
4
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition
will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected
to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl
refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
There are no known hazardous waste sites in the project area and no unknown sites are
likely to be found.
Construction of the recommended alternate will not have a significant adverse impact on
the floodplain or associated flood hazard. The elevation of the 100-year flood will not be
increased by more than 30 centimeters (12 inches).
B. Architectural and Archaeological Resources
Architectural Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has indicated that in terms of historic
architectural resources, there are two sites of interest in the project vicinity. The J. Beale Johnson
House is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and is located within the project's
area of potential effect. The Atkinson-Whiffed House and Tower is on the state study list, and is
located north of the project area on SR 1407. No additional historic architectural survey is
required for this project.
The Atkinson-Whiffed House and Tower are not within the area of potential effect (APE)
for the project and will not be effected by project construction. The J. Beale Johnson House is
within the APE for the project but, as shown by the concurrence form in the appendix, the project
has been determined to have "No Effect" on this National Register Listed property.
Archaeological Resources
The SHPO has indicated that there are the remains of a historic period mill site located
east of the existing bridge. This site will be affected by the recommended alternate, and was
evaluated and recorded during the archaeological survey. The SHPO has stated, by letter dated
May 9, 1996, that the mill site is eligible for listing on the National Register. However, all
significant information has been adequately retrieved so that the project will have No Adverse
Effect upon the site.
C. Natural Systems
Southwestern Wake County lies in the Piedmont physiographic province. The topography
of the project region is characterized by rolling hills. Soil types and availability of water directly
influence the composition and distribution of flora and fauna in any biotic community. The
elevation at the project site is approximately 88 meters (290 feet) above mean sea level.
Soils
Soils of the immediate project study area are dominated by the Appling, Herndon and
Wehadkee Series. Soils of the Appling series vary in slope from 2-10 percent. Of the soil series
present in the project area, only Wehadkee and Bibb soils are considered hydric. Table 1
summarizes characteristics of the soils mapped in the project study area.
Table 1. Summary of the soils of the project site.
Unit Soil Phase % Slope Hydric Class
AgC Appling gravelly sandy loam 6-10 -
ApB Appling sandy loam 2-6 -
HrE Herndon silt loam 15-25 -
Wo Wehadkee and Bibb Soils N/A 1
Hydric Class 1 - Hydric soils, only because of saturation for a significant period during the
growing season.
For each soil series, site indices for several forest tree species that are commercially
important are included. The site index is the average total height, in feet, of the dominant and
codominant trees in a well-stocked, even-aged stand at 50 years of age and is a means of
expressing the potential productivity of a soil for a given kind of tree. Soils of the Appling and
Herndon series have a site index of 75-85 for loblolly pine, yellow poplar and sweetgum and 65-
75 for shortleaf pine and southern red oak. Wehadkee and Bibb soils have a site index of 85-95
for loblolly pine, sweetgum and water oak and 85-100 for yellow poplar (USDA Soil
Conservation Service 1970). Overall, the soils in the project vicinity have a high potential
productivity for forest resources. However, much of the area is currently maintained as cultivated
fields and residential areas.
Water resource information encompasses the resource's relationship to major water
systems, physical aspects, Best Usage Classification, and water quality. Impacts to water
resources are discussed, along with suggestions to minimize impacts.
Characteristics of Water Resources
Water resources located within the project study area lie in the Neuse River Drainage
Basin. Terrible Creek [DEM Index No. 27- 43-15-8-(2)] originates approximately 3.2 kilometers
(2.0 miles) west of the project site and flows into Middle Creek approximately 6.4 kilometers
(4.0 miles) downstream from the project site. Middle Creek eventually flows into the Neuse
River near Smithfield, central Johnston County. Currently SR 1404 crosses Terrible Creek on the
dam that forms Johnson's Pond. The pond is a 6.9 hectares (17 acres) lake located on the west
side of SR 1404 at the subject bridge.
6
Alternative 1 will cross Terrible Creek which is approximately 3 meters (10 feet) wide
and 30.5 centimeters (12.0 inches) deep at the project site. This creek has fast flow. clear water.
and a sand/silt-gravel bottom. Various unnamed tributaries of Terrible Creek transverse the east
side of the project vicinity. The NWI map classifies this area as a PFOIA (Palustrine Forested
Broad-leaved Deciduous, temporarily flooded) wetland.
Johnson's Pond [DEM Index No. 27-43-15-8-(1)] is located on the west side of SR 1404
and will be bridged if Alternative 2 is chosen. The pond has shallow edges but quickly grades off
into water greater than 4.5 meters (15.0 feet) deep. The NWI map classifies Johnson's pond as
L 1 UBHh (Lacustrine, Limnetic, Unconsolidated Bottomland, Permanently flooded
impoundment).
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a Best Usage Classification by the Division of
Environmental Management (DEM). The best usage classification for Terrible Creek from the
dam to Middle Creek is Class C NSW. Class C refers to waters suitable for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture. The
supplemental NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) classification refers to waters which require
limitations on nutrient inputs. Johnson's Pond is classified as Class B NSW. Class B waters are
considered primarily for recreation and any other usage specified by the "C" classification. NSW
waters require limitations on nutrient inputs. Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water
Supplies (WS-I or WS-II) nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 kilometers
(1.0 miles) of the project study area.
Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is managed by the DEM and
is part of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses long term
trends in water quality. The program assesses water quality by sampling for selected benthic
macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites. Macroinvertebrates are sensitive to very
subtle changes in water quality; thus, the species richness and overall biomass of these organisms
are reflections of water quality. BMAN information is not available for Terrible Creek (NC
DEHNR 1991).
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. One permitted discharger is located in the project vicinity. The Fuquay
Varina/Terrible Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant is located approximately 0.5 kilometers (0.3
miles) northeast of the project site on a tributary of Terrible Creek. This tributary enters Terrible
Creek downstream from the project site.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Project construction could involve either the installation of a culvert through which
Terrible Creek will flow (Alternative 1) or bridging the lower end of Johnson's Pond (Alternative
2). Crossing Terrible Creek at a new location downstream from the current crossing at the dam
will result in temporary impacts to the water quality of the stream.
Project construction from either alternative may result in the following impacts to
surface waters:
- Increased sedimentation and siltation from erosion;
7
- 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 water temperature due to vegetation removal, and;
- Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway construction and toxic spills.
Precautions should be taken to minimize these and other impacts to water resources in
the study area. This can be accomplished by protecting stream bank vegetation, installing silt
fences as well as other erosion and sedimentation controls. NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and Sedimentation Control guidelines should be
strictly enforced during the construction stage of the project. Provisions to preclude unnecessary
contamination by toxic substances during the construction interval should also be strictly
enforced.
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. This section describes those
ecosystems encountered in the study area, as well as the relationships between fauna and flora
within these ecosystems. Composition and distribution of biotic communities throughout the
project area are reflective of topography, hydrologic influences and past and present land uses.
Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community
classifications. Natural plant community titles follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where
possible. Dominant flora and fauna likely to occur in each community are described and
discussed. Identifications and nomenclature of vascular plants were made primarily with Radford
rA al. (1968). Fauna observed during field investigations are designated with an asterisk (*).
Terrestrial Communities
A variety of disturbed biotic communities dominate the project study area. The roadside
shoulder, newly installed sewer line and hay field are maintained at an early successional stage.
A Piedmont Bottomland Forest is present along Terrible Creek on the east side of the existing
bridge.
Disturbed Communities
The roadside shoulder, sewer line ROW and hay field are dominated mostly by
herbaceous and shrubby, early successional species. Herbaceous plants include meadow fescue,
broomsedge, black nightshade, dog fennel, various species of goldenrods and elephant's foot.
Pokeweed, greenbrier, poison ivy and Florida blue lettuce were also common within the
disturbed portions of the project study area. Shrubby species common to these disturbed sites
include blackberry, green ash, loblolly pine and red maple.
Disturbed areas such as these are used by a variety of animals for foraging and nesting.
Avian species such as rufous sided towhee*, northern cardinal*, brown thrasher*, Carolina
chickadee* and red tailed hawk* were observed in both the disturbed and forested portion of the
project study area. Mourning dove, ruby throated hummingbird, American goldfinch and various
other songbirds are also likely to be found in the project study area. Scavenging birds such as the
American crow* and turkey vulture are probably present during most of the year.
Other faunal species likely to inhabit or use these disturbed areas include white-tailed
deer, raccoon*, Virginia opossum, white-footed mouse and the southeastern shrew. Upland
chorus frog, spring peeper and northern cricket frog are likely amphibians. Black rat snakes and
rough green snakes may be found throughout the disturbed areas.
Piedmont Bottomland Forest
The forested area lying within the project study area is primarily Piedmont Bottomland
Forest. Based on the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydrology and hydric soils, much of
this area meets the necessary criteria to be classified as a jurisdictional wetland. Herbaceous
species common to the wetland areas of the Bottomland Forest include common rush, Japanese
grass, false nettle, spotted touch-me-not, privet, Japanese honeysuckle and meadow fescue. Other
herbaceous species include meadow garlic, wild strawberry and mouse-ear chickweed. Canopy
species common to this forest include sycamore, red maple, river birch, water oak, loblolly pine,
sweetgum and dogwood.
Great blue herons and green backed herons are likely residents of the Bottomland Forest
and spend a considerable amount of time feeding in Johnson's Pond and Terrible Creek. Many of
the animals that inhabit or use the disturbed areas are probably also found in the adjacent
Bottomland Forest including birds such as northern cardinal, Carolina chickadee, red-tailed hawk
and American crow. White-tailed deer, raccoon, Virginia opossum, upland chorus frogs, eastern
newt, slimy salamander, eastern box turtle and black snakes are all likely inhabitants.
Aquatic Communities
Two types of aquatic communities are present in the project study area. Johnson's Pond
dominates the western half of the project study area while Terrible Creek and one of its unnamed
tributaries is to the east of the current bridge.
Johnson's Pond
Johnson's Pond was created as a result of a dam on Terrible Creek at the current bridge.
Aquatic vegetation such as cattails, smartweeds and submerged pondweeds are likely to be found
in the pond.
Great blue herons and green-backed herons feed on various species of fish, reptiles and
amphibians as well as crustaceans associated with the pond. Fish species likely to inhabit
Johnson's Pond include eastern mosquito fish, largemouth bass, bluegill, red-breasted sunfish and
catfish. Snapping turtle and stinkpot are common turtles in aquatic habitats of the Piedmont.
Bullfrog, southern leopard frog and pickerel frog are all common in lakes and ponds in the
project region. Crayfish species are commonly found in or near aquatic habitats in the Piedmont.
Piedmont Perennial Stream
Terrible Creek and its unnamed tributary are both considered Piedmont perennial
streams. Fish species common to Piedmont streams include creek chub, green sunfish,
pumpkinseed, bluegill and rosyside dace. These fish species feed on a variety of aquatic insects
including caddisflies and mayflies.
Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Construction of the subject project will have various impacts on the biotic resources
described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources has the potential to
9
impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies impacts to the natural resources
in terms of the ecosystems affected. Both temporary and permanent impacts are considered.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance of each
community at the project site. Project construction will result in the clearing and degradation of
portions of these communities. Table 2 summarizes potential quantitative losses of these biotic
communities resulting from project construction. Estimated terrestrial impacts are derived using
a ROW width of 18.3 meters (60.0 feet) on the northern end of Alternative 1 and 40 meters (130
feet) in the portion of Alternative 1 where Terrible Creek will be culverted. Usually, project
construction does not require the entire ROW width; therefore, actual impacts may be
considerably less. Impacts to Johnson's Pond (Alternative 2) are based on the surface area of the
bridge and a 18.3 meter (60.0 foot) ROW width.
Terrestrial communities found in the study area serve as nesting, feeding and sheltering
habitat for various wildlife. Alternative 1 will impact approximately 1.1 hectares (2.7 acres) of
land. Approximately 0.6 hectares (1.5 acres) of this area is Bottomland Forest while the other 0.1
hectares (0.2 acres) constitutes disturbed areas including an agricultural field and existing
roadside shoulder. Approximately 0.4 hectares (1.0 acres) of the Bottomland Hardwood Forest in
the vicinity of the proposed culvert is jurisdictional wetland.
Habitat reduction concentrates wildlife into smaller areas of refuge, thus causing some
species to become more susceptible to disease, predation and starvation. Impacts to the aquatic
community include degradation of water quality, thus negatively impacting the aquatic
organisms living in the stream. The surface area impacts to Terrible Creek will be extensive
where the stream will be culverted. The culvert will require stream widening upstream and
downstream from the crossing. The channelization of 40 meters (130 feet) of the stream is
required for the culvert and will disrupt the aquatic community in Terrible Creek. Culverting
such a long section of Terrible Creek will most likely displace all of the fish and most of the
aquatic invertebrates that are currently inhabiting this portion of the stream.
Alternative 2 (bridging Johnson's Pond) will have the least impact on the terrestrial
communities within the project area. Only 0.2 hectares (0.5 acres) of Bottomland Forest and 0.1
hectares (0.2 acres) of disturbed habitat will be impacted by Alternative 2. This alternative will
also impact a narrow fringing wetland along the northeastern edge of Johnson's Pond. This
wetland is less than 0.03 hectares (0.07 acres) in size. The initial impacts to the aquatic
community of Johnson's Pond resulting from bridge construction could be great. The substrate of
the pond will be impacted as pilings are inserted during bridge construction. If the water level
must be lowered for construction activities, large numbers of fish will likely be killed. If the
pond is completely drained and the substrate dries out, aquatic invertebrates will also be lost.
Permanent impacts to Johnson's Pond include shading 0.14 hectares (0.35 acres) of surface
waters. Shading will negatively impact the lake community by reducing the amount of
phytoplankton as well as reducing water temperatures in this portion of the lake. Normal traffic
as well as maintenance activities (salt, paint, etc.) will contribute toxic compounds into the pond.
Table 2. Anticipated impacts to biotic communities. wetlands and s urface waters.
Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Disturbed 0.1 ha (0.2 ac) 0.1 ha (0.2 ac)
Bottomland Forest 0.6 ha (1.5 ac) 0.2 ha (0.5 ac)
Wetland 0.4 ha (1.0 ac)
Surface Water 0.01 ha (0.02 ac) 0.03 ha (0.07 ac)
0.14 ha (0.35 ac)
10
Jurisdictional Topics
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and jurisdictional wetlands fall under the broad category of Waters of the
United States, as defined Section 33 of the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Part 328.3.
Wetlands are defined in 33 CFR 328.3 as those areas inundated or saturated by surface or ground
water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any action
that proposes to place fill material into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to determine the presence of jurisdictional wetlands includes evidence of hydric
soils, hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology. Wetlands and surface waters will be impacted by
the proposed project.
One large wetland is located to the east of the dam creating Johnson's Pond.
Approximately 0.6 hectares (1.5 acres) of this wetland will be impacted by Alternative 1. A
second wetland located in the project study area fringes Johnson's Pond. Alternative 2 will only
impact less than 0.03 hectares (0.07 acres) of jurisdictional wetland near the northeastern corner
of the pond. Both wetlands contained hydrophytic plants such as red maple, sweet gum, river
birch, sycamore, spotted touch-me-not and false nettle. Hydric soils with a color of IOYR 4/1 and
3/1 were present with mottles of 10 YR 4/6. Terrible Creek will be impacted by Alternative l
while Alternative 2 will impact Johnson's Pond.
Permits
As mentioned above, impacts to surface waters and jurisdictional wetlands are
anticipated from project construction. In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the CWA,
a permit will be required from the COE for the discharge of dredge or fill material into "Waters
of the United States."
A Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5 (A) (23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States from the proposed project. This permit authorizes
activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in whole, or part, by
another Federal agency or department where that agency or department has determined that
pursuant to the council on environmental quality regulation for implementing the procedural
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act;
(1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither individually nor
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and;
(2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with the determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality General Certification from the DEM
prior to the issuance of a Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the CWA requires that the state
issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result in
a discharge to Waters of the United States. Final decisions concerning applicable permits rest
with the COE.
Mitigation
The COE has adopted, through the Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ), a wetland
mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands." The purpose of this
policy is to maintain and restore the chemical, biological and physical integrity of Waters of the
United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ
to include: avoiding impacts (to wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing
impacts over time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR) 1508.20. Each of these three aspects
(avoidance, minimization and compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance
Avoidance alternatives examine all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Environmental Protection Agency and the COE, in determining "appropriate and
practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measure should be appropriate to the
scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and
logistics.
Alternative 1 involves crossing Terrible Creek downstream from the current crossing (on
the dam). This alternative would have the greatest impact to jurisdictional wetlands which could
only be avoided by bridging the wetland or moving this section of new location further east.
Alternative 2 would have only minor impacts to wetlands that fringe the edge of Johnson's Pond
but would have the greatest impact to surface waters as it crosses Johnson's Pond.
Minimization
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practical steps to reduce the
adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps will be required
through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on
decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of median widths, ROW
widths, fill slopes and/or road shoulder widths. Since much of the bottomland area east of the
dam is jurisdictional wetland, shifting the relocated section of Alternative 1 either west or
slightly east of its proposed location would still have significant wetland impacts. Shifting the
new location section several hundred meters to the east would minimize impacts to wetlands.
Alternative 2, involving bridging Johnson's Pond would only impact a small wetland along the
edge of the pond. Impacts to this wetland could be lessened by extending the bridge over the
fringing wetland. Impacts to surface waters would be great.
Additional means to minimize impacts to the waters and wetlands crossed by the
proposed project include: strict enforcement of sedimentation control using Best Management
Practices for the protection of surface waters during the entire construction life of the project;
reduction of clearing and grubbing activity, particularly in riparian areas and reduction or
elimination of direct discharge into streams; reduction of runoff velocity; re-establishment of
vegetation on exposed areas, with prudent pesticide and herbicide management; minimization of
in-stream activity and litter and debris control. The use of any number of these methods will be
effective in reducing the degradation of water quality resulting from project construction.
Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until anticipated impacts to Waters
of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is
recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and
every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for
12
unavoidable, adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate and practicable minimization
has been done. Compensatory actions often include restoration, creation and enhancement of
Waters of the United States. Such actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous
the project site, when possible.
Projects authorized under Nationwide Permits usually do not require compensatory
mitigation according to the 1989 Memorandum Agreement between the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of the Army. The final decision regarding mitigation rests
with the Corps of Engineers.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in the process of decline either due to
natural forces or their inability to coexist with human activities. Federal law (under the
provisions of the Endangered Species Act [ESA] of 1973, as amended) requires that any action,
likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected, be subject to review by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other species may receive additional protection under
separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9
of the ESA. Four federally-protected species are known from Wake County as of April 1, 1996
(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1995). An endangered species is a species that is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Alismodonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel)
The dwarf wedge mussel is a small mussel having a distinguishable shell noted by two
lateral teeth on the right half and one on the left half. The periostracum (outer shell) is olive
green to dark brown in color and the nacre (inner shell) is bluish to silvery white.
Known populations of the dwarf wedge mussel in North Carolina are in portions of the
Neuse and Tar River systems. This mussel is sensitive to agricultural, domestic, and industrial
pollutants and requires a stable silt free streambed with well oxygenated water to survive.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
NCDOT biologist Tim Savidge surveyed Terrible Creek at the project site for dwarf
wedge mussels on September 5, 1995 and found no specimens of this species. Further, the NC
Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats currently does not indicate
any populations of dwarf wedge mussel in the project vicinity. This project will not affect the
dwarf wedge mussel.
Haliaeetus leucoce hp alus (bald eagle)
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), in the largest living
tree in an area, and having an open view of the surrounding land. Human disturbance can cause
an eagle to abandon otherwise suitable habitat. The breeding season for the bald eagle begins in
13
December or January. Fish are a major food source for bald eagles. Other sources include coots.
herons, and wounded ducks. Food may be either live or carrion.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Johnson's Pond, the only body of water in the project site, is not likely to support bald
eagle foraging because of its size. No bald eagles or their nests were observed during either site
visit. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats does not
indicate any populations of bald eagles in the vicinity of the project. This project will not affect
the bald eagle.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker)
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker 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 red cockaded
woodpecker is black and white with horizontal stripes. The breast and underside of this
woodpecker are white with streaked flanks. The red cockaded woodpecker has a large white
cheek patch surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
Red cockaded woodpeckers use open old growth stands of southern pines, particularly
longleaf pine, 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 this species is up to 200 hectares (500
acres). 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 3.6-
30.3 meters (12.0-100.0 feet) above the ground and average 9.1-15.7 meters (30.0-50.0 feet)
high. Cavity trees can be identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree.
The red cockaded woodpecker lays its eggs in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch
approximately 38 days later.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The project vicinity is mainly composed of a bottomland hardwood forest. No mature
pine stands are present at or near the project site. Thus, suitable habitat for this species does not
exist. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats does not
indicate any populations of red-cockaded woodpeckers in the project vicinity. Therefore, this
project will not affect the red-cockaded woodpecker.
Rhm michauxii (Michaux's sumac)
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizomatous shrub. The bases of the leaves are
rounded and their edges are simply or doubly serrate. The flowers of Michaux's sumac are
greenish to white in color. Fruits, which develop from August to September on female plants, are
a red densely short-pubescent drupe.
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods. Michaux's sumac is dependent on some
sort of disturbance to maintain the openness of its habitat. It usually grows in association with
basic soils and occurs on sand or sandy loams. Michaux's sumac grows only in open habitat
where it can get full sunlight. Michaux's sumac does not compete well with other species, such as
Japanese honeysuckle, with which it is often associated.
14
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Very little habitat exists for this species at the project site. Most of the disturbed areas are
mowed on a regular basis. A plant by plant survey for $jil?i michauxii was conducted by walking
the disturbed habitats during the site visits and no specimens were found. The NC Natural
Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats does not indicate any populations
Michaux's sumac in the project vicinity. This project will not affect Michaux's sumac.
D. Air Quality and Traffic Noise
The project is located in Wake County, which is within the Raleigh-Durham nonattainment
area for ozone (03) as defined by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The 1990 Clean
Air Act Amendments (CAAA) designated these areas as a "moderate" nonattainment area for 03.
and CO. However, due to improved monitoring data, these areas were redesignated as
"maintenance" for 03 on June 17, 1994, and "maintenance" for CO on September 18, 1995.
Section 176(c) of the CAAA requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to
the intent of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). The current SIP does not contain any
transportation control measures for Wake County. The Capital Area 1995 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) has been determined to conform to the intent of the SIP. The MPO
approval date for the TIP is August 9, 1995. The USDOT approval date of the TIP is November 1,
1995. The current conformity determination is consistent with the final conformity rules found in
40 CFR Part 51. There have been no significant changes in the project design concept or scope, as
used in the conformity analysis.
The impact on air quality will be insignificant. This project is an air quality neutral project,
therefore a project level CO analysis is not required. If the project disposes of vegetation by
burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation
completes the assessment requirements of the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments and the National
Environmental Policy Act. The project requires no additional reports.
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will have no
substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during construction.
E. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal agencies or their
representatives to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on prime and
important farmland soils. These soils are determined by the US Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
based on criteria such as potential crop yield and possible level of input of economic resources.
The SCS was consulted to determine whether the proposed realignment and replacement of
Bridge No. 299 will impact farmland soils. The SCS completed Form AD-1006, Farmland
Conversion Impact Rating, indicating approximately 0.50 acres of prime farmland soils would be
affected in the proposed realignment alternate [Alternate One]. The relative value of the farmland
to be converted by Alternate One was 13.4 on a scale of 100 points. The total farmland
conversion impact rating is 46.4 on a scale of 260. An impact rating of 160 or above would have
constituted the rejection of an alternate as a possible project location.
There is no active farmland in the project area, therefore the impact of the project to
prime farmland soils will not be mitigated.
15
IX. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above discussion, NCDOT and FHWA conclude that the project will cause
no significant environmental impacts. Therefore, the project may be processed as a Categorical
Exclusion.
WTG/
16
w-A
I
'Nk
'Nk
_.
ovif I
I A
HLI v,
p1m
Im im
I?Ai
1273
Im
POND
M !
.q
lb
L14i :... 2w
11)
9 ,
It
---
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
INV PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
WAKE COUNTY
REPLACE BRIDGE NO. 299 ON SR 1404
OVER TERRIBLE CREEK
B - 9055
0 mile 1 FIG. 1

? Sly,
tyo
4
"?. s e x.15 r?`? ?-? }?. ? J £ i ?, •? a
cr ?`
"ho
VIA"
ftlk
LI
7
D
H
O
H
0
d
a
L

O
I ?

t-
h
b
L
4?.
i
c r - iL

7t, 4

Ab

y

.a
d

u Q
C:
?t c
a
xHaa G
O
CA wg
-ikk 11
CY'i T•,.
e
haul-l g4pa
C
O
a
H
C
y
C,
0
rik"'A..s? 4r Z` ? -
i
LOOKING NORTH
ACROSS BRIDGE
LOOKING EAST
TOWARD BRIDGE
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
DiNision of Highways
Branch
Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
h-er Terrible Creek
B-3055
Three
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS WITH MINOR INVOLVEMENTS WITH
HISTORIC SITES
TIP Project No.: B-3055
State Project No. 8,2404501 IN
Federal-Aid Project No.: BRZ-1404(2)
DESCRIPTION: Replacement of Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404 over Tensible Creek in Wake
County. The historic resource involved in the project is the J. Beale Johnson
House, a National Register Listed house located just southeast of the
existing bridge.
YES ND
1. Is the proposed project designed to improve the
operational characteristics, safety, and/or physical
condition of the existing highway facility on essentially X 1:1
the same alignment?
X
2. Is the project on new location ?
X F-1
3. Is the historic site adjacent to the existing highway?
4. Does the project require the removal or alteration ? X
of historic buildings, structures, or objects?
5. Does the project disturb or remove archaeological
resources which are important to preserve in place a X
rather than to recover for archaeological research?
6. a. Is the impact on the Section 4(f) site considered X
minor (i.e. no effect, no adverse effect) ?
b. If the project is determined to have "no adverse
effect" on the historic site, does the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation object to the determination a N/A
of "no adverse effect"?
7. Has the SHPO agreed, in writing, with the assessment X a
of impacts and the proposed mitigation?
I
f
? F? X
8. an E
S
Does the project require the preparation o
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT
The following alternatives were evaluated and found not to be feasible and prudent:
YES NO
1. Do nothing
Does the "do nothing" alternative:

F-I

X
(a) correct capacity deficiencies?
?
i
f
h
d
i
b F-I X
s
ng sa
ety
azar
) correct ex
st
or (
d
di
i
?
d
i F] X
orate
con
t
ons
or (c) correct
eter
-
and (d) create a cost or impact of extraordinary measure ? F
I X
2. Improve the highway without using the adjacent
historic site.
(a) Have minor alignment shifts, changes in standards,
use of retaining walls, etc., or traffic management
measures been evaluated? X
(b) The items in 2(a) would result in:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) substantial adverse environmental impacts
or (ii substantial increased costs
or (iii) unique engineering, transportation,
maintenance, or safety problems
or (iv) substantial social, environmental, or
economic impacts
or (v) a project which does not meet the need
or (vi) impacts, costs, or problems which are of
extraordinary magnitude
Y.U
3. Build an improved facility on new location without X
using the historic site.
(a) An alternate on new location would result in:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) a project which does not solve the
existing problems
or (ii) substantial social, environmental, or
economic impacts
or (iii a substantial increase in project cost
or engineering difficulties
and (iv) such impacts, costs, or difficulties of
truly unusual or unique or extraordinary
magnitude
Ys0 NQ
1. The project includes all possible planning to minimize X
harm necessary to preserve the historic integrity of the
site.
2. Measures to minimize harm have been agreed to, in X
accordance with 36 CFR Part 800, by the FHWA,
the SHPO, and as appropriate, the ACHP.
3. Specific measures to minimize harm are described as follows:
0
11
F-I
The clearing and removal of trees within the boundary of the National Register
Listed property will be kept to the minimum necessary for project construction.
Note: Any response in a box requires additional information prior to approval. Consult
Nationwide 4(f) evaluation.
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. State Historic Preservation Officer x
b. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation N/A
c. Property owner N/A
d. Local/State/Federal Agencies _ x
e. US Coast Guard N/A
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation approved on
December 23, 1986.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable
to this project. There are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of the historic site.
The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm, and the measures to minimize
harm will be incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed with local and state agencies.
Approved:
10-24.9 ?,?...r?
Date ASt; Manager, Planning & Environmental Branch NCDOT
Ia/2.4/f` A 'gc
Date /-??ivisi Administrator, FHWA
Federal Aid T --- 14 (2? TIP Tr
E;, - -tlw C,=?
CONCURRENCE FORtii
FOR
ASSESSI[ENT OF EFFECTS
County
WAwa
Brief Project Description
l`Brt.ALE 1+0. 2611 ON SX 14o4 0vF,7. Te;L42_te.t.E GZLEV-K-
On Ju'-`9 1`1 ?191(6 , representatives of the
? North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
? North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Other
reviewed the subject project and agreed
? there are no e5ects on the National Register-listed property within the project's
area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
there are no effects on the National Register-eligible properties located within the
project's area of potential eriect and listed on the reverse.
there is an effect on the National Register-listed property/ properties within the
project's area of potential effect. The property-properties and the eiiect(s) are
listed on the reverse.
there is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed
on the reverse.
Siened:
Represe OT, Historic Architectural Resources Section bat
_11A)f Ak??_?? Z??/A,
FHW or thebivisic(A Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
'
Lk A- V=Igg A Representative, HPO Date

tate Historic Preservation Officer i '
(over)
ederal Aid 6?L'z t4o4 ( TIP A County WAKE-
roperties within area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
rational Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
..??. ?EA.uF??oN?JSoN ?Aou',aE CP1R>
Dor.,?»tiw l- Nill irtc.IN?1v {4iv PM?it,Nwtw^l? l cow??.ti ?Mu,?- f. W%ti Vq-iZC. CA"e VI?

,roperties within area of potential effect for which there is an e:iect. Indicate property status (NR
)r DE) and describe effect.
keason(s) why effect is not adverse (if applicable).
Initialed: NCDOT FHtiVA SHPO ?G

. SUTF o
V ?0
•? PMr?
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
May 9, 1996
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Archaeological report for replacement of Bridge
No. 299 on SR 1404, Federal Aid Project BRZ-
1404(2), State Project 8.2404501, TIP B-3055,
Wake County, ER 95-8113, ER 96-8761
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
r 1 ? ?qqb
Mp <:
`5\0? of
Thank you for your letters of March 18, 1996, and April 11, 1996, and the
accompanying archaeological report and site form by John Mintz and Thomas
Beaman of the North Carolina Department of Transportation for the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, it is our opinion that the following property is eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places under Criterion D:
31 WA1255**
The Johnson's Mill (Alford's Mill) Site (31 WA1255 * *) is eligible because it is a
good example of early twentieth century water powered technology in the North
Carolina Piedmont and has yielded important information about that technology.
The archaeological report is excellent. The research and recordation already
accomplished is comprehensive. The significant information concerning water
powered technology has been adequately retrieved so that the proposed bridge
replacement will have No Adverse Effect upon archaeological site 31WA1255**.
Mr. Mintz and Mr. Beaman are to be commended for the quality of their report
which meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ??V
Nicholas L. Graf
May 9, 1996, 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.
/:avid ince )ely, 464
Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw /
cc: H. F. Vick
T. Padgett
J. Mintz
T. Beaman
~ ??r•i R is
. FEB 2
2 1995
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resour 2 o?v?S?cti r, .
HIC,
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Division
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary William S. i rector
February 17, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Replace Bridge 299 on SR 1404 over Terrible
Creek, Wake County, B-3055, Federal Aid Project
BRZ-1404(2), State Project 8.2404501, ER 95-
8113
Dear Mr. Graf:
On February 7, 1995, 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 and for our use afterwards.
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, the J. Beale Johnson House, which is
listed in the National Register of Historic Places, is located within the project's area
of potential effect. The Atkinson-Whiffed House and Tower, which is included on
the state study list, is located north of the project area on SR 1407. We
recommend that no historic architectural survey be conducted for this project.
The remains of a historic period mill site are located east of the existing bridge. If
this site will be affected by the proposed replacement, archaeological
investigations to record and evaluate the site are recommended prior to
construction activities.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a
Categorical Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT
addressed our comments.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance With Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ?p
Nicholas L. Graf
February 17, 1995, 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,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw/
cc: vH. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
'.? OCT.30'2000 16:19 9198765823 USACE RAL R G #2512 P.002/014
( q
1 I c, )C c
'A- OCT 10 ZG00
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ?tegulatotytltlCh
DEPARTMENTOE 'TRA'v FORT?.TION
DAVID MCC
JANiFS B. Ht1N7 JR. ox
SECRETAXY
GOVtsit740R A
October 9, 000 Iq01 & O7
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road ,
Suite 120 j
Raleigh, NC 27609
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
SUBJECT: Wake County, Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 299 on SR 1404
over Terrible Creek. Federal Ad Project No. BRZ-1404(2), State
Project No. 8.2404501, TIP No. B-3055.
Dear Sir:
The North Carolina Department of Transportation ,'`=OT) proposes to replace Bridge
No. 299 with a new bridge just west of the existing bridge in the lower edge of Johnson's
Pond. The proposed project involves the construe 'on of a new structure 150 feet long
and approximately 28 feet wide with causeways ut into Johnson's Pond to facilitate
crossing this surface water. Traffic will be maint ned on the existing bridge during as
much of the construction period as is possible; o ?erwise traffic will be detoured along
existing area roads.
Impacts to Waters of the United States
,
No jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted by the, construction of the proposed project.
However, construction will result in 1.66 acres f surface water impacts to Terrible
Creek/Johnson's Pond. Surface water impacts in?lude 1.56 acres of permanent fill to
facilitate the placement of the permanent causcwayl and 0.10 acres of temporary fill from
the installation of the temporary causeways. Surf ice water impacts associated with the
placement of the permanent and temporary causev?ays are depicted on sheets 3 and 4 of
the attached permit drawings. I
The existing bridge will not be demolisbcd. Comp nents of the bridge's substructure are
part of the buttressing for the dam of Johnson's P nd and shall remain in place. Due to
the poor condition of the bridge deck and its su structure, any removal or demolition
activities would likely lead to the collapse of the d ri, which the NCDOT does not own.
TF."FCNoNc: 919.133-3141 LOCATION:
MAILING ADOT Or T FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BU wi
NC DEPARTMENRANSPORTATION 1 1 SOUTH WLMINGTON STRUT
Pnp?ECT DEyEI,pPMTGNT AND EKVIRONMENTAI ANALY313 ALEK;H NO
1548 MAILSiRVICECc:+TER AZZAtS)7$: WbvW.00H,IT-SrA 7 E.NC.US R
RALimm NO 27699.1648
. 4
OCT.30'2000 16:19 9198765823 USACE RAL R #2512 P.003/014
i
Impacts to Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffer
Two sites involving Neuse River Basin Riparian B Iffier impacts are proposed with this
project and include 0.300 acres to the buffer surro=axned Terrible Creek/Johnson's Pond
(Site 1) and 0.002 acres to the buffer surrounding tributary to Terrible Creek
(Site 2). Sediment and erosion is possible from the cleared areas of both proposed buffer
impact sites. Therefore, control basins (temporary s It ditches and rock silt checks) must
be placed in the most effective locations to adequa , ly control any sediment or erosion.
These locations have been determined for the pro sed project and include locations
within Zone 1 of the riparian buffers. The locations were selected as the most reasonable
locations with no other practical altematives avails le. The control basins proposed for
this project represent the least invasive method of control. Impacts to riparian buffers,
locations of the control basins, and a summary of bu'?ffer impacts by zone are depicted on
sheets 5, 6, and 8 of the attached permit drawings Total buffer impacts are less than
0.333 acres for each site, therefore requiring no midi ation.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications o.
Endangered, and Proposed Threatened are protect
Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,;
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) lists four federal]
(Table 1). The CE (dated October 1996) rendered 1
for each of these species due to lack of habitat in tl
conditions have not changed within the study are
Natural Heritage Program database of Rare and
revealed that no known occurrences of bald eae
wedgemussel, or Michaux's sumac occur within or
the Biological Conclusions of "No Effect" rcmaia
Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
under provisions of Section 7 and
amended. As of 16 June 2000, the
protected species for Wake County
ological Conclusions of "No Effcct"
project study area. To date, habitat
Additionally, a review of the NC
Jnique Habitats on 3 March 2000
red.-cockaded woodpecker, dwarf
mile of the project area. Therefore,
lid for each of these species.
Table 1. Federally-Protected Spccies for Wake unty
;. Scirentific Nume: Fedcral, Biialogical
Coinmdn None
:Status:, Conclusion
ZT-n .ee/ao Loiirne-onh hrv T No Effect
O
s sumac Rhos mtchauuii I I E I No
is in
significant portion of its range).
or a
"r' denotes Threatened (a species that is likely to ecome an endangered species within
the foreseeable future throughout all or a significan portion of its range).
OCT.30'2000 16:20 9198765823
Avoidance / Minimization
USACE RAL RE$
I
#2512 P.004/014
Johnson's Pond will have to be partially drained Ito facilitate placement of fill for
causeways. The water level in the pond will be lowered to approximately one half of its
original level, from near 10 feet to approximately feet. Thp pond will be drained
gradually using a pumping and/or a siphoning me hanism. Lower water levels will
facilitate construction and will also reduce the pote 'al construction related presses on
the pond's dam. The water level of the pond will maintained by additional pumping
and siphoning, until construction progresses to poin were the pond's water level is no
longer a limiting factor, at which time the pond will be allowed to refill. Construction of
the permanent causeway (rock embankment) out in the pond will be accomplished by
starting at the upland edge and back-dumping clean stone material into the fond. This
method will be used from both sides of the pond.
Under law, the NCDOT is required to follow ai
pertaining to impacts to Waters of the United States.
the additional recommendations set forth by the
(NCWRC) to avoid and minimize adverse affects to
Terrible Creek/Johnson's Pond, the NCDOT is a
following:
Project Commitments
?idance and minimization policies
in. accordance to those policies and
C Wildlife Resource Commission
Le surface waters and ecosystems of
emitted to implementation of the
• Johnson's Pond will be partially drained during the winter months while the water
temperature levcis are low. Water levels will be lowered slowly to avoid flushing fish
out of the pond and some water will be maintained in the pond during construction.
• Clearing activities will be kept to a minimum thin the boundaries of the J. Beale
Johnson House, which is a National Register List residence located just southeast of
Bridge No. 299. The removal of trees on the pro crty will be limited to those trees
absolutely necessary to construct the project.
• In an effort to restore additional riparian buffer
paved portions of existing roadbed which will no
resulting areas will be reestablished using native ,
Summary
Proposed project activities are being processed by I
as a programmatic "Categorical Exclusion" in aceor
NCDOT requests that these activities be authorized
330.5(x) (23)J. Additionally, we anticipate a 401
will apply to this project, and are providing seven c
Carolina Division of Water Quality. In compliance
we have enclosed a check for $475.00 to act as payr
401 Water Quality Certification.
i Terrible Creek/Johnson's Pond,
be used, will be removed and the
he Federal Highway Administration
Lance with 23 CFR 771 115(b). The
ry a Nationwide Permit 23 [33 CFR
`Major" Water Quality Certification
)pies of the application to the North
with Section. 143-215.3D(e) NCAA
Lent for the processing of the Section
OCT.30'2000 16:20 9198765823 USAGE RAL R
Thank you for your assistance with this project.
additional information, please contact Mrs. Heather
Sincerely,
bo _ W illiam D. Gilmore, P
- Project Development f
VCB/hwm
cc: w/attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington Fi
Mr. John Hennessy, DWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Developn
Mr. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Design Services
Mr. D.R. Henderson, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Tim Roundtree, P.E., Stricture Design
Mr. Tracey N. Parrott, P.E., 5 Division Engn
#2512 P.005/014
you have any questions or need
ntague at [phone].
Manager
Environmental Analysis Branch
Office
OCT.30'2000 16:20 9198765823
1301 ? r? Y ? Crc,??
II ?
END
r PROJECT ,Q
? JOHNSO \1
r
POND
_ -i
1 BEGIN'
} I - r ?/ .. J! PROJECT ;>
wilow
r ySp?n9s
401
` . J 42
Z. J i 53 1 a2
I F?lQUAY?I , '•
1• 1 VARIN
pgo_ k- t -
6 55
0i
1?m Ulm
VICINITY
USACE RAL REG
I
#2512 P.006/014
f1
f
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATIO;
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAKE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.2404601 B-5055
BRIDGE NO.299 ON SR 1404
OVER TERRIBLE CREEK
(JOHNSON POND)
,SHEET / 0 F 9
OCT.30'2000 16:21 9198765823 USACE RAL REG
LEGEND
PROPOSED BR
I
PROPOSED BO
w
PROPOSED PI
I
i(DASHED LINES DENOTE
EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
SINGLE TREE
I
WOODS LINE
DRAINAGE IN
ROOTWAD
G v.. .
VORTEX ROCK
OO?
RIP RAP
RIP RAP ENE
DISSIPATOR
VANE
-%LB WETLAND BOUNDARY
WETLAND
L
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
R
DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
R
(PONOI
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
S,l TS FIL L IN SUERMFACE WATERS
• DENOTES MECHANIZED
• • •' •' • CLEARING
? FLOW DIRECTION
T??r TOP 01: SANK
WE EDGE OF WATER
C PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
F PROP.LIMIT OF FILL
?- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
NG NATURAL GROUND
PL PROPERTY LINE
-TOE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
_pOE- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-EAB-- EANIMALNBOUNDARYY
-EPB EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
v WATER.SURFACE
XXXXX LIVE STAKES
a BOULDER
--- CORE FIBER ROLLS
1 g 1 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
#2512 P.007/014
IDLE
X CULVERT
PE CULVERT
LET
WEIR
RGY
BASIN
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
C WAKE COUNTY
PROMM 1,1111111 B-3055
BRIDGE NO.299 ON SR 1404
OVER TERRIBLE CREEK
+ (JOHNSON POND)
SHEET Z OF 9

OCT.30'2000 16:21 9198765823

t.
USACE AAL AET
#2512 P.008/014
z

0
0
P
cl
/
4r1 /
4V
Y

z
o
\\1? r ? W ? Q ?? a
1,? ! c6
O R:
\ \ S o C
\ \\ ?; C ..
04 d0
\ ? CS Ca

AS

(r-I
0
ml
x
U
y ,?? / 4-?
•OCT.30'2000 16:21 9198765823
{.
USACE RAL REJ
42512 P.009/014,
!b
C?
f- i
A
WJJ
u
F
N
M
0
'
{
z
?
o
Q
E-
0
H Z
0 Z
`
F N 4.
0 W x

o 1I
Y'
o
U a a c ti

z

1
a
?a
'lg
0
w
U.
r v;
an
t
o
w
? ?
A
r} _J Ig
M
o v?
r?

K N
N

OCT.30'2000 16:22 9198765823 USACE RAL RL?
#2512 P.010/014
0
0=1 1 \ F D+ -+ ?]
0 P4
o ?
IN 0
!: ? " 7L \ ? \\ ? ? ? W , Fi A r7
1??h
% a!! {,\\` \ \ a
i S \ \ \
\ \ \
v 1 ?d ??
441
w//
1 dd
OCT.30'2000 16:22 9198765823 USACE AAL AE #251z Poll/v14
rr??ll \
Iii \
1
\
\01
\
\

1

1 1?
11 1
i

`I

W 1

?J
1

IW4
z?p z N zaaa.
Q .4
0 q p. ? p W
oo V3
1 Al
1
1
f
\
O o
?

?
\ y Q ?Qj
U M

Fob' m ?
?2

\

? i
'
i

1
"
1 11 1 t
ti
\i 11 ;
1 1r f
1 ? i
I
04 a
Q
g
11
:r
ig-
4
,OCT.30'2000 16:22 9198765823 USAGE RAL RT;ir-
23

4
73
W
a ?

U
C? ? I
d LLJ V E I

Q
U
t0
S
C
? ?
3 ta' I

W
r
v T ?

IiL

fD
V
?
tlG L
V ? ?
O ?

1
(l C
C!
LL

C
C
(Ol
U. ?j

m W
.9 o
V a
m

O ? U3

r N

d
vi z
O
#2512 P.012/014
0.-
O O

P

% Q
0u>
S2 m
xa
U U. O u°I)
OZ
O
ul5 C
? v
O
OCT.30'2000 16:22 9198765823 USAGE RAL R4G #2512 P.013/014
a
l

Ii

Q

U ?
a¢
.

W
LL
W

m

W
>

W

D
W
Z
N (
U
Z to O
Q w v G ? ?
N x

c? •-
cNy
v ° ° O
N $
?
uJ

?

D NN
U
N a: 'o
Ca M

V) N
v + + +

Le) N
N

O
?z r N O
r
91,
IL
z
O p
F

o l u>
z

ru.o
LL O V
O ZO W¢
?

v1
? H
m Oo
UQ

z W
O
CL W
OCT.30'2000 16:23 9198765823 USACE RAL REt
PROPERTY
NAMES AND A
W1V ERS
RESSES
#2512 P.014/014
OWNER'S NAME ADDRESSES
TOWN OF FUQUAY VARINA FUQUAY VARINA,NC
FUQUAY VARINA P.O. BOX 162
AMERICAN LEGION POST 116 FUQUAY N-ARINA NC 27526
6212 JOHNSON POND ROAD
WHITT S. MINCEY, JR.
- FU QUAY V.ARINA NC 27526
LINWOOD E. AND 6321 JOHNSON POND ROAD
ERMA T.TURNER FUQUAY VARINA,NC 27526
P. O. BOX 276
VIRGINIA YANCEY TINGEN
. FUQUAY VARINA, NC 27526_ _
WAYNE BAKER, D. W. BAKER 433 HOLLY OAK COURT
AND W.G. NGUM FUQUAY V ARINA, NC 27,526
. P. O. BOX 643
CART. R. HELTON APEX, NC 27602
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAKE COUNTY
PROJECTc 8.2404601 B-3055
BRIDGE NO. 299 ON SR 1404
OVER TERRIBLE CREEK
(JOHNSON POND)
SHEET 9 OF 9
0
0
0
N
i
A
rl
ri
y-+
tB
z
O
1-
Q
cc
00
?a
0
?Z
cc F-
U LL.
W
ct: ~
O Z
w
Z `
LL F"'
a
W
U
Z
O
Z
c
co
c9

F- 0
o
z ?
O
O
r
r d,
Q
F-
W
z
F-
0
W
Cf
LL

F-
Z
m
O
U
N
O

z °
D
O LO
r
Q ?
w
U_
O
z
-
?

09 CV

~ Uf
10
'
0 u - .. ••J?_..I
e
jii
Q •- ;
U_
O
Z
w
m
z
w
U_
O
Z