20030490 Ver 1_Complete File_20030417

GM
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR OCT -3,
September 26, 2001
0 3o?-(4v
V1 Sw ?clL
LYNDO TIPPETT
, SECRETARY
Memorandum To: File
From: Beverly Robinson
Project Development Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Subject: Agency Meeting Minutes for Replacing Bridge No. 56 on
NC 133 over Allen Creek, Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-
133(2), State Project No. 8.1231501, TIP Project No. B-
3116 and Replacing Bridge No. 61 on NC 133 over Town
Creek, Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-133(1), State
Project No. 8.123140 1, TIP Project No. B-3115
Citizens Informational Workshop
A citizens informational workshop was held on May 22, 2001. Approximately 25
persons attended this meeting. An aerial mosaic of the two bridges was displayed as well
as a map of the proposed detour route. Most of the comments at the workshop were in
opposition to closing the road. Most of the citizens agreed with the idea of replacing both
bridges at the same time, but had some concerns about closing the road because of the
inconvenience to school buses, evacuation during the hurricane season, emergency
response time and increased travel cost due to high gas prices.
June, 2001 Concurrence Meeting
A concurrence meeting was held on June 14, 2001 for TIP Projects B-3115 and
B-3116. The following persons were in attendance:
Tom McCartney
David Cox
John Hennessy
Joe Blair
Mason Herndon
Dave Timpy
Cathy Brittingham
Bill Arrington
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
USFWS
NCWRC
NCDWQ
NCDOT-Division 3
NCDOT-Division 3 DEO
COE
Coastal Management
Coastal Management
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBS/TE: WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
Stephen Roberts Roadway Design
Sue Flowers Roadway Design
Jay McInnis PDEA
Beverly Robinson PDEA
The following information was presented at the meeting:
Purpose for Meeting
The purpose of this meeting was to discuss alternatives for TIP Projects B-3115
and B-3116 and to obtain concurrence on the recommended alternative for each of these
projects. These projects both involve replacing bridges carrying NC 133 over streams in
Brunswick County. The two bridges are within 4.5 miles of each other. Because of this
close proximity, NCDOT is considering constructing both bridges at the same time in
order to minimize the disruption to roadway users and area residents.
II. Purpose and Need
The purpose of the proposed projects is to replace structurally deficient bridges.
III. Project Description
Both projects are included in the North Carolina Department of Transportation's
2002-2008 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). TIP Project B-3116 proposes to
replace Bridge No. 56 carrying NC 133 over Allen Creek. TIP Project B-3115 proposes
to replace Bridge No. 61 carrying NC 133 over Town Creek.
Bridge No. 56 was built in 1950. The deck of this structure is 61 feet long and 25
feet wide. There is approximately 12 feet of vertical clearance between the floor beams
of the bridge deck and streambed. There are two lanes of traffic on the bridge.
According to Bridge Maintenance records, the sufficiency rating of Bridge No. 56
is 37.9 out a possible 100. Presently Bridge No. 56 is posted with weight restrictions of
30 tons for single vehicles and legal load limit for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
Bridge No. 61 was built in 1955. The deck of this structure is 300 feet long and
26 feet wide. There is approximately 26 feet of vertical clearance between the floor
beams of the bridge deck and streambed. There are two lanes of traffic on the bridge.
According to Bridge Maintenance records, the sufficiency rating of Bridge No. 61
is 27.9 out o possible 100. Presently the bridge is posted with weight restrictions of 37
tons for single vehicles and the legal load limit for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
IV. Studied Alternatives
Status of Proposed Project B-3116
Planning studies for TIP Project B-3116 are currently underway. The categorical
exclusion for this project is scheduled to be completed in October 2001. Right of way
acquisition is scheduled for June 2002 and construction is scheduled for May 2003. The
cost and impacts of the alternatives being considered for the proposed bridge replacement
are shown on the table below:
Bridge
Lengths Cost - In
Place Cost -
Realignment Impacts-In
Place Impacts-
Realignment Restoration/
Creation-In
Place Restoration/
Creation-
Realignment
80 feet $ 525,000 $1,000,000 0.88 acres 2.76 acres 0 1.30 acres
150 feet $ 725,000 $1,250,000 0.82 acres 2.49 acres 0.09 acres 1.30 acres
*300 feet $1,200,000 $1,650,000 0.69 acres 2.18 acres 0.28 acres 1.30 acres
Impacts are based on mechanized clearing 10 feet outside of construction limits.
Cost = construction cost only.
*Bridge length recommended by NCDOT.
Status of Proposed Project B-3115
Planning studies for TIP Project B-3115 were completed in May 2000. The
categorical exclusion for this project recommended replacing the existing bridge on new
alignment 50 feet west of the existing structure. The recommended length for the new
bridge would be approximately 300 feet. Replacing the bridge at its existing location and
constructing a temporary detour bridge was considered.
Since completion of the categorical exclusion, replacing the bridge at its existing
location has been suggested as a third alternative. A comparison of the three alternatives
are listed below:
Bridge Cost - In Cost - Impacts-In Impacts- Restoration Restoration/
Lengths Place Realignment Place Realignment /Creation- Creation-
In Place Realignment
*300 feet $1,400,000 $2,000,000 0.17 acres 0.27 acres 0 0.64 acres
Detour $475,000 0.27 0.64
Impacts are based on mechanized clearing 10 feet outside of construction limits.
Cost = construction cost only.
*Bridge length recommended by NCDOT.
VI. Agency Comments and Questions
Constructability
Both bridges will be constructed using drilled shafts at the existing elevation.
Bridge No. 61 over Town Creek will be constructed from barges. Bridge No. 56 over
Allen Creek will require a temporary work bridge or the existing structure will be
strengthened to support construction equipment.
Moratoriums
An in-water construction moratorium is required from April through June for the
short-nosed sturgeon. If in-water construction is not completed by June the agencies
discussed possibly extending the moratorium to September. Guidelines would be
developed by the agencies for the extension.
Mitigation
A preliminary mitigation plan will be included in the CE for both projects.
The Division of Coastal Management (DCM) regulations requires mitigation for
coastal wetland impacts over 1000 square feet. DCM will allow for enhancement credits
if mitigation is required.
The agencies recommended that DOT look at the total need for mitigation to
determine if mitigation for these bridge sites could help with overall mitigation needs.
Permit applications should be submitted as early as possible because of the
mitigation component.
The Corps of Engineers will require 2:1 mitigation for an 80-foot bridge for B-
3116 but will not require any mitigation for a 300-foot bridge.
DCM will consider no mitigation for a 300-foot bridge for B-3116.
Impacts
Impacts mentioned in the information presented at the June 14, 2001 meeting
were based on widening shoulders in the project areas to 8 feet with a 3:1 slope. Wetland
boundaries were determined to skirt the edge of the existing pavement. 8-foot shoulders
are required to meet AASHTO standards. The 3:1 slope is required for slope stability. A
2:1 slope was proposed as an alternative to the 3:1 slope. Joe Blair of the Division 3
stated 2:1 slopes are hard to maintain during and after construction.
The agencies asked that a description of the slope and justification for the slope be
included in the Categorical Exclusion (CE) and permit application.
Impacts presented were based on clearing limits extending 5 feet beyond the slope
stake line. Wildlife Resources Commission suggested that a 5-ft clearing area should not
be presented unless it is within NCDOT capabilities to limit clearing to only five feet
outside the slope stake line.
Allen Creek will require a temporary work bridge or the existing structure will be
strengthened to support construction equipment.
Moratoriums
An in-water construction moratorium is required from April through June for the
short-nosed sturgeon. If in-water construction is not completed by June the agencies
discussed possibly extending the moratorium to September. Guidelines would be
developed by the agencies for the extension.
Mitigation
A preliminary mitigation plan will be included in the CE for both projects.
The Division of Coastal Management (DCM) regulations requires mitigation for
coastal wetland impacts over 1000 square feet. DCM will allow for enhancement credits
if mitigation is required.
The agencies recommended that DOT look at the total need for mitigation to
determine if mitigation for these bridge sites could help with overall mitigation needs.
Permit applications should be submitted as early as possible because of the
mitigation component.
The Corps of Engineers will require 2:1 mitigation for an 80-foot bridge for B-
3116 but will not require any mitigation for a 300-foot bridge.
DCM will consider no mitigation for a 300-foot bridge for B-3116.
Impacts
Impacts mentioned in the information presented at the June 14, 2001 meeting
were based on widening shoulders in the project areas to 8 feet with a 3:1 slope. Wetland
boundaries were determined to skirt the edge of the existing pavement.' 8-foot shoulders
are required to meet AASHTO standards. The 3:1 slope is required for slope stability. A
2:1 slope was proposed as an alternative to the 3:1 slope. Joe Blair of the Division 3
stated 2:1 slopes are hard to maintain during and after construction.
The agencies asked that a description of the slope and justification for the slope be
included in the Categorical Exclusion (CE) and permit application.
Impacts presented were based on clearing limits extending 5 feet beyond the slope
stake line. Wildlife Resources Commission suggested that a 5-ft clearing area should not
be presented unless it is within NCDOT capabilities to limit clearing to only five feet
outside the slope stake line.
Division of Coastal Management (DCM) will require temporary wetland impact
areas be monitored for 3 to 5 years after construction of the proposed bridges. A report
concerning regeneration will also be required. If the wetlands have not regenerated by
that time, the impacts will be considered permanent and mitigation will be required.
The estimated temporary wetland impacts due to a temporary work bridge are
0.003 acres.
July, 2001 Public Officials Meeting
A meeting was held on July 9, 2001 with public officials in Brunswick County.
The meeting concluded with the following requests:
Several public safety officials and town officials were contacted concerning the
impact closing the road to replace the bridges would have on their daily processes. The
agencies represented included the following:
Brunswick County Emergency Management
Brunswick County Emergency Medical Services
Brunswick County Sheriff's Department
Brunswick County Planning
Town of Belville
Town of Leland
Town of Southport
CP&L (Southport Plant)
Brunswick County Schools
NC State Highway Patrol
Brunswick County Utilities
Brunswick County Solid Waste
Brunswick County Manager
The above officials were in favor of replacing the bridges at the same time. Some
officials were concerned about the inconvenience of a detour but could work around it.
Closing only the Allen Creek Bridge was also mentioned as an option to replacing the
bridges. Closing only one bridge would still result in the inconvenience of a detour. No
substantial opposition was given for the alternatives under consideration. The local
emergency management officials had the following requests:
1) The let date be changed from July to September
2) NCDOT investigate the necessary improvements needed for NC 87 to be used as a
detour route, including the need for additional traffic signals and resurfacing
3) NCDOT review and update the Evacuation Time Estimates for Plume Exposure
Pathway Emergency Planning Zone Brunswick Nuclear Plant Document
4) NCDOT provide a process to educate the public about bridge replacements, road
closures and detour routes.
Conclusion
Bridge No. 56 will be replaced in its existing location with a 300-ft bridge.
Bridge No. 61 will be replaced in its existing location with a 300-ft bridge.
The requests from the June 9, 2001 meeting will be addressed as the project
progresses. These issues will be included on the project commitment sheets of the
Categorical Exclusion.
No mitigation may be needed for constructing a 300-foot bridge for the proposed
bridge replacement.
Please respond by October 18th with any comments or changes to this memo. If you
have any question feel free to call me at [phone] extension 254.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION
V. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
BRIDGE NO. 56 OVER ALLEN CREEK AND
BRIDGE NO. 61 OVER TOWN CREEK
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
TIP PROJECT NO. B-3116 AND B-3115
FIGURE 1
,, . l
C
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JPL DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARPETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
December 16, 1997
MEMO TO: Project File
FROM: Bill Goodwin, P. E.?
Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: Scoping Meeting for Replacement of Bridge No. 56 on NC 133 over
Allen Creek in Brunswick County, Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-
133(2), State Project No. 8.1231501, TIP No. B-3116
A scoping meeting for the subject project was held on December 10, 1997. The following
persons were in attendance:
Debbie Bevin SHPO
Ray Moore Structure Design
Lanette Cook Program Development
Jerry Snead Hydraulics
Chris Howard Traffic Control
Eddie Sasser Traffic Control
Sue Flowers Roadway Design
Lee McCrory Roadway Design
Gary Foster Roadway Design
Bill Goodwin Planning and Environmental
Utility conflicts will be low for this project. There are underground phone cables on the
west side of NC 133 going aerial across the creek. There is also a fiber optic cable underground
along the west side of NC 133. Also along the west side of NC 133 there are overhead power
lines.
Ms. Cyndi Bell of DWQ indicated, prior to the meeting, that Allen Creek is classified as
Class C - SW. Implementation of Standard Sedimentation and Erosion Control Measures will be
acceptable. Surface water and wetland impacts should be avoided and minimized where ever
possible.
Mr. David Cox of NC WRC indicated by memo, that NCDOT should routinely minimize
adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. NCDOT
should install and maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and
prevent wet concrete from contacting water in or entering into the stream. Replacement of

S. M
bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is
recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along streambanks,
reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway crossings. Allen Creek
has high potential for anadromous fish usage and the NCDOT policy entitled "Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage" should be followed for this project.
Ms. Debbie Bevin of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) indicated that there
are no known architectural or archaeological resources in the project area and no unknown
resources are likely to be found. Therefore, no surveys will be required for this project.
Mr. Jerry Snead of the Hydraulics Unit indicated that a new bridge will be required to
replace the existing bridge. This bridge should be 24 meters (80 feet) in length. This new bridge
should be placed at approximately the same roadway elevation as the existing bridge. An on-site
detour structure should be a bridge 18 meters (60 feet) in length and could be placed
approximately 1 meter (3 feet) lower than the existing bridge. The detour structure should be
located west of the existing bridge to avoid a tributary east of the bridge. Brunswick County is
one of the counties under the jurisdiction of the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
Therefore, a CAS ?A permit will be required for this project.
A desired design speed of 100 km/h (60 mph) should be achieved on this project. The
roadway approaches will have two 3.6 meter (12 ft) travel lanes, 1.2 meter (4 foot) paved
shoulders, and a total shoulder width of at least 2.4 meters (8 ft). The shoulder will be 1.0 meters
(3 feet) wider where guardrail is warranted. This section of NC 133 is classified as a Rural Major
Collector Route in the Statewide Functional Classification System.
The Brunswick County School Bus Transportation Coordinator indicated that four school
busses cross this bridge twice per day during the school year. Closing the bridge during
construction would cause significant delays for these busses. Any detour route would involve
may miles of indirect travel; therefore, school bus traffic needs to be maintained on-site.
The Traffic Forecasting Unit has indicated that near Bridge No. 61, NC 133 carries 5900
vehicles per day at present [1998]. This figure is expected to increase to 12,500 vehicles per day
by the year 2020. These traffic figures include 3% dual tired vehicles [DUAL], and 2% truck-
tractor semi-trailers [TTST]. The design hourly volume [DHV] is 10%.
The Division Engineer has indicated that replacing the bridge in-place, with an on-site
detour is important for this project. The traffic volume and length of indirect travel routes make
an off-site detour unreasonable.
Two alternates will be evaluated for replacing Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek.
Alternate 1: Replace Bridge No. 56 in place with a new bridge. Traffic will be maintained on a
temporary detour located west of the existing bridge during construction.
Alternate 2: Replace Bridge No. 56 on new alignment to the west of the existing bridge with a
new bridge. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
M . Y J
Alternate 2 may involve a significantly longer bridge than recommended by hydraulics. A
permit requirement of alternate 2 may be bridging a significant portion of the wetland in the
project area and removal of the existing causeway. Early coordination with the local CAMA
office will help clarify their position on this issue and help eliminate permit problems later in the
project process. Planning will contact the local CAMA office on this issue.
The TIP cost estimate for this project is $ 380,000 including, $ 75,000 spent in prior
years, $ 275,000 for construction and $ 30,000 for right of way acquisition. The current project
schedule calls for right of way acquisition to begin in April 2000 and construction to begin in
May 2001. `
BG/
9.. E , `V

'?oF NOAT;hj North Carolina Department of
y ?;\ Transportation
Division of Highways
9
F QO?? Planning & Environmental Branch
?T OF TAANS
Brunswick County
Replace Bridge No. 56 on NC 133
Over Allen Creek
B-3116
Figure One
N
)g-85"
GSA
Caf f-- Few- 4,3
KU
ly ?OFNORT1yCg904v North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
9 sQ°?P Planning & Environmental Branch
OF*M
Brunswick County
Replace Bridge No. 56 on NC 133
Over Allen Creek
B-3116
Figure One
BRIDGE PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
11/6/97
TIP PROJECT: B-3116 DIVISION: Three
F. A. PROJECT: BRSTP - 133(2)
_ STATE PROJECT: 8.1231501
COUNTY: Brunswick
ROUTE: NC 133
DESCRIPTION: Replacement of Bridge No. 56 on NC 133 over Allen Creek
PROJECT PURPOSE: replace obsolete bridge
PROJECT U.S.G.S. QUAD SHEET(S): Carolina Beach NC Quad
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION: -Rural Major Collector
TIP CONSTRUCTION COST .......................................................................... $ 275,000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST .......................................................................... $ 30,000
PRIOR YEARS COST ...................................................................................... $ 75,000
TIP TOTAL COST ........................................................................................... $ 380,000
TRAFFIC: CURRENT 5600 VPD; DESIGN YEAR (2020) 12500 VPD
TTST 1 % DUAL 3 %
EXISTING ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION: Two lane shoulder section. 20 foot
pavement. grassed shoulders
EXISTING STRUCTURE:
LENGTH 18.6 METERS WIDTH 7.7 METERS
61 FEET 25.3 FEET
COMMENTS:

P7
1

,

z,
'`

ti

r ? t
=
o ? t
1

v

T ??
•

?j

. 46,
4 F. f ?' '? 'P, , • •

NCDOT BRIDGE REPLACEMENT SCOPING MEETING
DATE: T.I.P. No.: Project Engineer:
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. over on in County
Existing bridge built 19 Sufficiency Rating Paved/Unpaved
Right of Way 19_ Let/Construction 20_ Design Year 20
Posted limits: mph; lbs cars lbs trucks
dimensions existing: wide x long travel lanes elevation above stream
proposed: wide x long travel lanes elevation above stream
structure existing:
proposed:
school buses accidents
current use v.p.d., anticipated use
e.p.d. Design Year
Classification:
Division Engineer recommendations:
Hydraulics recommendations:
Detour type/rationale:
Design constraints:
Right-of-Way issues:
WRC comments:
Moratorium recommended - for
Sediment and Erosion control recommended -
DWQ comments:
Utility conflicts:
Historic properties:
Anticipated wetland issues:
Other cultural/natural resource issues:
checklist:
avoid wetlands, show alternatives in document
maximize bridging (i.e. cost of mitigation vs. cost of extra bridging)
replace with bridge if possible, need rational for culvert
discuss temporary impacts and restoration c.Q, /t/,4/3 3
any geotechnical work?
prefer bridge to culvert
anadromous fish
any stream rechannelization or new wetland impacts (mitigation)?
hazardous spill basins
erosion/side slope problems
approach work impacts
any associated highway projects?
Stream name: DWQ Index No. River Basin:
DWQ Classification: NWI Info:
- 1
D ? 6 L W
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TkkNSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GovERNOR
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 7, 1997
MEMORANDUM TO
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Ms. Cyndi Bell
DWQ - DENR
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Review of Scoping Sheets for the following projects:

Project T.I.P. County Bridge No. Stateloute Planning Engineer
B-3112 Bladen No. 59 NC 11'". Jeff Inghamf/
B-3115 Brunswick No. 61 NC 133 Bill Goodwinvl`?
B-3116 Brunswick No. 56 NC 133 Bill Goodwin, ' ?
B-3312 Burke No. 347 SR 1984 John Williams ?
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets and location maps for the
subject projects. The purpose of this information and the related review procedure is to have an
early "meeting of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the projects. Scoping meetings for these projects are scheduled for
December 10, 1997 in the Planning and Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 470).
These scoping meetings will be held back to back beginning at 2:00 P. M. in the order shown
above. These meetings typically last 10 to 15 minutes per project, so all attendees should plan to
arrive at the beginning of the 2:00 P. M. session as applicable. You may provide us with your
comments at the meeting, mail them to us prior to the meeting, or e-mail them to
[e-mail] prior to the meeting.
Thank you for your assistance in this part of our planning process. If there are any
questions about the meetings or the scoping sheets, please call the indicated Project Planning
Engineer, at 733-3141.
HFV/bg
Attachments
RECEIVED
NOv 1 01997
???Ran+,,?rv rAC sci?c?s
GARLAND B.,GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY
9
•%r-
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTNTN T OF TRANSPORTATION
N. C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources APR 2003
Division of Coastal Management
Hestron Plaza II
151 -B NC Highway 24 ? SECTION
d ?d 11LIAILI Y Morehead City, NC 28557
ATTENTION: Mr. Bill Arrington
SUBJECT: Application for CAMA Major Development Permit for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 56 on NC 133 over Allen Creek
(Lilliput Creek) in Brunswick County, NCDOT Division 3.
Federal Project No. BRSTP-133(2), State Project No.. 8.1231501,
T.I.P. No. B-3116.
?,yy MSTAh'o
aw
April 7, 2003
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
?up
Dear Sir:
Please find enclosed copies of the Programmatic Categorical Exclusion form (PCE),
1998 Natural Resources Technical Report and Amendment letter dated October 18, 2001,
Onsite Mitigation Plan, the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permit application,
permit drawings, Foundation Layout sheets, Utilities By Others sheet, copy of the Adjacent
Riparian Property Owners Notification and reply form, a North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) Stormwater Exemption letter, half size roadway plans, and a check for
$400.00 for the application fee for the above referenced project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Department of Transportation is proposing to replace a structurally deficient bridge
which was built in 1950. Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) in Brunswick
County will be replaced on the existing alignment with a new bridge approximately
300 feet in length and 39 feet in width. During construction traffic will be detoured onto
NC 87. Onsite mitigation is being proposed for this project and is addressed within the
attached Mitigation Plan. Please note?that there are minor differences between the PCE and
the plan sheets. As the project design was refined, estimates for impacts totals as well as
structure sizes became more precise.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
P_ Y^
PROPOSED IMPACTS
Permanent Fill and Mechanized Clearing
The 'PCE reports wetland impacts of 0.22 acre of permanent fill and 0.38 acre of
mechanized clearing. The design has been refined and the final estimate for impacts to
wetlands associated with this project now consist of 0.33 acre of permanent fill and
0.21 acre of mechanized clearing. Please note that the mechanized clearing limits are
merely included on the drawings to allow room for the installation and maintenance of
sediment and erosion control devices. No clearing or grubbing of marsh grasses is
proposed within this five feet zone. NCDOT does not anticipate a permanent impact will
result from the activity within this area.
Bent Placements
The replacement bridge will be a spanning structure. However, due to the skew of this
crossing it will be necessary for Bent #3 to be placed along the edge of the stream channel
and a very small portion of Bent #2 to extend into the stream as well (see attached
Foundation Layout sheets). Please note that less than 0.004 acre of surface water impacts
will be associated with the installation of these two bents. Therefore, negligible impacts
are proposed to Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) [DWQ Index No. 18-851; Class C Sw.
Pile Installation
The bridge will have drilled piers for the interior bents and steel piles for the end bents.
Drilled pier excavations will be stabilized with permanent steel casing (36" dia.) and
drilling slurry. The permanent casing will be installed by driving, screwing, or vibrating
prior to drilling below the casing. Once the permanent casing is installed to the weathered
limestone, the excavation below that will be stabilized with slurry. Drilled pier
specifications require containment of the slurry and disposal of slurry off site. The drilled
piers may be installed either before or after the existing embankment is removed at
the Contractor's option. NCDOT has committed to a Construction Moratorium, as listed
in the green sheet within the attached PCE form. There will be no in-water or in-marsh
activity during the months of February 15 through September 30. This is considered the
in-migration, spawning and out-migration period for the endangered shortnose sturgeon
and other anadromous fish.
Utility Relocation
BellSouth will have to relocate their aerial phone lines and proposes to 'directional bore
under Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) from approximately station 22+00 to station 12+00
(see attached Utilities By Others sheet). All existing buried BellSouth cable within these
limits left of line -L- will be abandoned. The two existing BellSouth poles will be
removed. BellSouth will cut off the poles at ground level and the contractor will remove
the poles from the roadway or bridge. BellSouth expects to need about five weeks to
complete their work and will not begin until after all permits have been received for this
project. Time Warner Communications are in joint use with Brunswick EMC and will
remain in place.
•o_,
BRIDGE DEMOLITION
The project commitments green sheet attached to the PCE assumes the worst-case scenario
that all the spans over the water are potential discharge. It states that removal of the
existing bridge could potentially drop a maximum of 27.4 yd3 of fill into the creek.
However, Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be
followed during Construction. Therefore, Bridge No. 56 will be removed without dropping
components into Waters of the United States. To ensure the project will not adversely
affect the endangered shortnose sturgeon, explosives will not be used in the bridge
demolition.
AVOIDANCE and MINIMIZATION
Through efforts to minimize and avoid impacts to Waters of the United States, the project
design has been refined. The existing 60-foot bridge will be replaced with a 300-foot
bridge rather than with a shorter bridge and it will be replaced in place rather than on new
location.
There will be negligible impacts to surface water, because the new bridge will span the
majority of Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) with one support bent being placed along the edge
of the stream. There are no deck drains on the proposed bridge from station 15+50 -L-
to 16+50 -L-. This eliminates deck drains from discharging directly into the creek (as is the
present. case). The other drainage is as shown on the plans. A state stormwater permit
application addressing all the stormwater runoff was sent to the DWQ Wilmington
Regional Office for their review and approval. A State Stormwater exemption letter was
received from that office, dated July 24, 2002 (see attached).
Top down construction will be used so that no temporary construction access is necessary.
An offsite detour will be used during construction rather than using an onsite detour, as
originally proposed. Since soils within the project area are not sufficiently stable for
maintaining 2:1 slopes, 3:1 slopes will be provided to lessen wetland impacts and for slope
stabilization. Please note that 2:1 slopes with class II riprap will be used on the spill
through slopes under the bridge only (as depicted on the profile drawing, sheet 7 of 10).
All mechanized clearing limits for this project have been reduced from 10 feet in width to a
minimum of 5 feet, with the exception of 10466t wide clearing limits only at pipe outlet
locations for erosion control measures. This minimization effort has cut the proposed
mechanized clearing from 0.41. acre to 0.21 acre. Please note that the clearing limits
beyond the slope stake line is primarily for erosion control purposes. The mechanized
clearing limits are merely included on the drawings to allow room for the installation and
maintenance of sediment and erosion control devices. No clearing or grubbing of marsh
grasses is proposed within this five-foot zone.
MITIGATION
The project will permanently impact a total of 0.33 acre of wetlands. In order to mitigate
for these losses, NCDOT is proposing onsite restoration and enhancement through removal
of 220 feet of the existing causeway and planting Spartina alterniflora. Elevations will be
restored to pre-disturbance contours, mimicking the elevation of the adjacent healthy
natural areas of Spartina alterniflora. See attached Mitigation Plan for details.

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 Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of January 29, 2003,
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service lists fifteen federally protected species
for Brunswick County. The Biological Conclusions for each of these species remain
valid and are presented in the attached PCE form and/or NRTR.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has developed a list of "Precautions for the general
construction in areas which may be used by the West Indian manatee in North Carolina."
These precautions will be considered in all aspects of project construction (see final pages
of the attached PCE form). To ensure the project will not adversely affect the endangered
shortnose sturgeon, explosives will not be used in the bridge demolition. To protect the
shortnose sturgeon and other anadromous fish, there will be no in-water or in-marsh
activity during the months of February 15 through September 30.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
NCDOT requests that the proposed work be authorized under a Coastal Area Management
Act Major Development Permit. A check for $400.00 for the application fee is enclosed.
Copies of the green cards will be forwarded as soon as they are available. By copy of this
letter, we are also requesting issuance of a United States Army Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit 23 (FR number 10, pages 2020-2095; January 15, 2002). We anticipate
a 401 General Certification number 3371 will apply to this project. In compliance with
Condition 1 of GC 3371 we hereby request written concurrence from the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need
additional information please call Ms. Heather Montague at [phone].
Sincerely,
f '
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
GJT/hwm
cc:
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Mike Street, NCDMF
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Mason Herndon, DIV 3 DEO
Mr. Dave Timpy, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E.; Structure Design
Mr. H. Allen Pope, PE; Division 3 Engineer
•.,a
On-site Mitigation Plan .
for the Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 56
on NC 133 over Allen Creek
in Brunswick County, North Carolina.
TIP No. B-3116
April 7, 2003
Overview:
The NCDOT will replace the existing 60-foot long bridge over Allen Creek (Lilliput
Creek) with a new bridge approximately 300 feet in length. The additional bridge
length will allow for the removal of 220 linear feet of causeway in previously filled
wetlands. The existing causeway will be removed and returned to an elevation
resembling that of the adjacent wetlands.
Causeway Removal:
The removal of the old causeway will mean that approximately 0.24 acre of fill
will be removed from wetlands associated with Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek).
Approximately 1450 yd3 of existing causeway will be lifted, restoring the riverine
wetland underneath. It is anticipated that the removal of the existing causeway
will in turn enhance the high quality riverine wetlands upstream and downstream
of the bridge, since water will be able to flow unimpeded beneath the new
structure, allowing the natural wetland hydrologic conductivity to return.
Therefore, in addition to the 0.24. acre of restoration, the NCDOT proposes
riverine wetland enhancement extending outward from the lifted causeway. The
area of potential enhancement has been calculated based on the "Cox" half-
circle proposal set forth by the NCWRC, where the length of fill removed is the
radius of the circle (115 feet from southern causeway section and 105 feet from
the northern causeway section). Enhancement areas were calculated within the
quadrants surrounding the existing bridge and causeway for a total of 0.76 acre,
with 0.25 acre within the proposed right-of-way limit and 0.51 acre beyond the
right-of-way limits.
Vegetation:
Wetland grass (Spartina altemiflora) will be planted in areas where the existing
causeway fill is removed down to the adjacent marsh elevation, as directed by
the Engineer. Elevations will be restored to pre-disturbance contours, mimicking
the elevation of the adjacent healthy natural areas of Spartina alterniflora.
NCDOT proposes to monitor vegetation through annual photographs.
AJft
The proposed enhancement area is currently a coastal swamp community
dominated by cordgrass (Spartina altemiflora). The NCDOT does not propose
any vegetative manipulation in this area as it is expected that the greatest benefit
to the system will be realized through the return of the natural hydrologic
processes.
Hydrology:
Restored elevations and the proximity of the enhancement and restoration areas
to Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) ensures that both areas will be saturated and/or
inundated for extended periods of time. The NCDOT requests that post
construction elevation verification be allowed in place of tide gauge monitoring.
Credits:
With a 4:1 ratio, the 0.76 acre of enhancement would serve as 0.19 acre of
proposed enhancement credit. Combined with the 0.24 acre proposed from
credits from a 1:1 ratio for onsite restoration, NCDOT proposes to offer 0.43 acre
of onsite mitigation to compensate for the 0.33 acre of permanent wetland fill.
NCDOT does not propose to offer mitigation for the 0.20 acre of mechanized
clearing as listed on Sheet 9 of 10 from the attached permit drawings. Please
note that the mechanized clearing limits are merely included on the drawings to
allow room for the installation and maintenance of sediment and erosion control
devices. No clearing or grubbing of marsh grasses is proposed within this five
feet zone. Therefore, NCDOT does not anticipate a permanent impact will
result from the activity within this area and proposes confirmation of maintained
jurisdictional criteria through annual photographs.

Form DCM-MP-1
APPLICATION
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner:
Name N. C. Department of Transportation
Address 1548 Mail Service Center
City Raleigh State NC
Zip 27699 Day Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
Name
Address
City State
Zip Day Phone
Fax
c. Project name (if any) B-3116 (8.1231501)
Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek on NC 133
NOTE. Permit will be issued in name of landowner(s), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Brunswick
Revised 03/95
b. City, town, community or landmark
north of Orton and north of Brunswick Town
c. Street address or secondary road number
NC 133
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? Yes X No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek)
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Replacing existing bridge with a new bridge.
220 ft of existing causeway will be removed.
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? new work
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public transportation
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages. Purpose of project is to provide
Dubuc transportation. TOD down construction will
be used to reduce impacts in the creek and
wetlands.

Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract 1.83 acre
b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or
NWL 5.0 feet
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Bohicket silty clay loam
e. Vegetation on tract
predominately Spartina alterniflora
f. Man-made features now on tract existing bridge,
roadway, and utilities
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
X Conservation Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
N/A
L Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? X Yes No
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? Yes X No
If yes, by whom?
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes X No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes No
Coastal (marsh) X Other
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? YES
(Attach documentation, if available)
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
N/A
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters of
the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and, residential discharges.)
surface runoff
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N/A
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
f;
Form DCM-MP-1
•A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary
•A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and
signed return receipts as proof that such owners
have received a copy of the application and plats
by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised
that they have 30 days in which to submit comments
on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Laurence G. Sprunt
Address 4528 River Rd. SE
Winnabow, NC 28479
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
Revised 03/95
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the day of ,
r
Print Name A / l? l f
Signature allyl glk29AT/ ?
Landowner or Authorized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-4 Structures Information
X DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE. Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
A
Form DCM-MP-5
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES
a. Public X Private
b. Type of bridge (construction material)
concrete - cored slab
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
Allen Creek
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
NWL approldmately 6 ft
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge 58.6 ft
(2) Width of existing bridge 24.0 ft
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge 2.0 ft
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain) all of the eadstin?
bridge will be removed.
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert N/A
(2) Width of existing culvert N/A
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL N/A
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain) N/A
g. Length of proposed bridge 300 ft
h. Width of proposed bridge 39 ft
i. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
2.5 ft
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
X Yes No
If yes, explain The proposed bridge will enhance
flow in the wetlands through the removal of 220 ft of
the existhm causeway.
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
2.5 ft
Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? Yes X No
If yes, explain
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
no navigable waters? Yes X No
If yes, explain
n. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard
concerning their approval?
Yes X No
if yes, please provide record of their action.
Revised 03/95

Form DCM-MP-5
2. CULVERTS N/A
a. Water body -in which culvert is to be placed
b. Number of culverts proposed
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style)
d. Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge
(2) Width of existing bridge
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain)
e. Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert
(2) Width of existing culvert
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain)
f. Length of proposed culvert
g. Width of proposed culvert
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the
MHW or NWL
i. Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
Yes No
If yes, explain
j. Will the proposed culvert affect existing navigation
potential? Yes No
If yes, explain
Revised 03/95
3. EXCAVATION AND FILL.
a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated 220 ft +/-
(2) Width of area to be excavated 45-50 ft
(3) Depth of area to be excavated 0.5 ft +/-
(4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards 205
b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation within: NO
Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated
(2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards
c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any highground excavation?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated 220 ft +/-
(2) Width of area to be excavated 45-50 ft
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards 1450
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves
any excavation, please complete the following:
(1) Location of the spoil disposal area
To be determined by contractor.
(2) Dimensions of spoil disposal area
N/A
(3) Do you claim title to the disposal area?
Yes X No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from
the owner.
(4) Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes X No
(5) Does the disposal area include any coastal
wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
Yes X No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
(6) Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW or NWL? Yes X No
If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above.
M
Form DCM-MP-5
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed below
MHW or NWL? X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 1630 ft
(2) Width of area to be filled 8.5 ft (avg.)
(3) Purpose of fill roadway fill
d. Will the proposed project require any work
channels? Yes X No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? Design Standards for
Sensitive Watersheds will be used.
Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed within:
X Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 1630 ft
(2) Width of area to be filled 8.5 ft (avg.)
(3) Purpose of fill roadway fill
What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or hydraulic
dredge)? Standard bridge and roadway
construction equipment. [Drilled pier excavations
will be stabilized with permanent steel casing
(36" dia.) and drilling slurry. The permanent
casing will be installed by either driving, screwing
or vibrating prior to drilling below the casing]
g. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert to project site? Yes X No
result in any fill (other than excavated material If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
described in Item d. above) to be placed on environmental impacts.
highground? X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 875 ft
(2) Width of area to be filled 45 ft h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
(3) Purpose of fill roadway fill require any shoreline stabilization?
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation? ACW
X Yes No AppUcan r Proje Name
If yes, explain in detail see onsite mitigation plan M?/ ,
V V ?-
Signature
b. Will . the proposed project require the relocation of 4-69
any existing utility lines? X Yes No Date
If yes, explain in detail Telephone lines on both
sides of the bridge will be relocated. Time Warner
Communications are in ioint use with Brunswick
EMC and will remain in place.
Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
Revised 03/95

?? t U V d
i4m
? O
7 '? own
-? O W JECT
r
' .,.% NIOSN
1 ?
87
S
_ uoo. - RR
B GS
ggEEGG//
- n PR I CT
DETOUR ROUTE NCD®T
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1231501 (B-3116)
VICINITY
REPLACE BRIDGE X56 ON
NC 133 OVER ALLEN CREEK
MAPS
SHEET OF 7 / 24 / 02
? NOR-TH CAROLINA
`tih _ _ ?i•rth.4",•txr 't?' __v' f,?; (Cr?'f. i t _.?fSI.Yi .{F 4 L}„SFi .. t, " •
M
' .. ? ?= ?tR? Lfe r ? d ii Fxf } .
t ,
,' L L
,
iggf
fu%FftR's! t ---}} t ftt 'A r,r:?€rxf°?ft skl-:.J'?
-Mal
c { _
?'?'rr=t.Q=uT.'Ftf rc,- L$b e.L`•t_)..Y. Cr ?? R'f
- x r• i 7, -
g v.. .: 1•-?°:•F _- _ :?bi 'f?' eLe?:R!- M_e•""_ R e 1 1 1
?c?•??,;fbrd; -F: .?E?I:,r!_Y:'=`: Y. °G€ff"r' t,+: - rY': }.• 9, k -?
:+?€?c•=-??.°-T_?-??-;€i?€- ?'? - :c€_€?k?} '?"ffr - - i -«._ _'Y ?E _?€=#' .:L _ ?'f` --_- .f4 .:?` yn:rr
?. - `?b - sue= v{ -ttrR??- 1'.s .hht?FFi-Fsr F 5 _ __ ? Y
,?Rt€ L ?' •tR ?- r..t+,rF€t - -: ° it . ; 61 e e P:. ___ '-€?.,+ f .tt? __ '•i - " ?.•:r t i t
. '?€f S: _,;'f?,b--? : , •;'f€?siF-,? ? =:c-trC{4?. ?? ? t ? . ? ::}!:?if? ??:d: Fr 1??'?C^' :. ...? 1 ,t/ ?.l ?. J G ? ?,A i .1 ` -
.iC+ ? - -Y,??`P? 1- F d •F c? i• .,L€ -F ? ?y , , El
#?? ?€?r,. ?: Y€ f?, i K',sf ? xf r,:7- ?_rc+t+f E?{ Y If61G ? t ?.....1 f Ii
St ._--.=--*L' t _•_'x__..i_ ?c-F ? '-YSf fti z rtfh ..rk+: -bf t?+ t_ s ? ,
PRIME
.t ..:_`_:'- .t xt :: +:::r.+` tft .t: + 'f :? ?? ? e'.,. .t ?` st: •f/:``- .`Y: :4 ,
12
-t _
# t .. lr rt R :+? :Ftcr€E {i:€? yry?y fi ?? 1;.k;, ±I•F„-wr. HT f u :f ga ` k
€F?: escv: a :Sh.R. ,-€fF+€?€. f ? ?""RRiJ a S t..Y ;,? r.l•.: --- RIB` • Zfgc: € ??l lr '4? > c tSC, ;, '1 t _?3 i
t'' ? _- Lr? -f'#?y ?f :??:t€w.??ff?t?.y zLf e?sG: 1, t f ? k +,.?4c?t ),-•1 -? ?'fX 7 ? r:?? .? ,:b', 1 ?4
MAN
$+7t'+ i `?",:1 - _?•: ???tcffr`f' - 'i• i 'd 4;!: i x4h ttrt.._: Lb: j<E4 f ., ?+z r{€'_-?.. nt i€?rr ``'I+?_Frfcif'?+?)jl f
' ?i ?•fft"--=_i_s.. s^t?,?t):Rtt.t. ? t ? q F ? Fmrtxt - 'F€RFf ff`' F t xt? ' Ll??
. S _ x f r # - i< : }f "tSr.Cfr1 er-_ "i x i ?L6r ? } y ? ? ? _ s_?
' ti . t ;bet t rt+x?n
it+-F' tttt::::-.-. - €?'Sr€.
rk
:;;44::: a .'' ' t€:,t , rrG•: t __ ._?,.,.. ?..r d t:?-RE .fit . =?::fr'&X t,??. - ? ?t
?
------ -fctF? ._ .ttm:-?-- ? i ..?:?.:.: ?brr•:?tt :.fS ? ` ?:f:
f€° -` f :LY?:;cc:.'t'?ff' xe r?tr z- ' t???T,7'•f-. ''-'rt'e-h-?' wt? j. ?- ?? .`.Y_ .?• _ '? 1) !? l.: ?.?.. •. l
•tFr: ? _:ir._; .efR' ? rB.G-•-:?€r-a,? ? i-? -fs€ 'K-' _ _ ???v :::•c -? ? - { =t - _
gmp
_- _-rc''?.?'=f ? --?j'•?fi yyr i 2 . ?9 ?:
5) v. s kH? y,Y?) L 7 7 it ?'?? e? ;cffr ? ?i??,Y ¢ xt I 4. ' ~i?l ,.? 7a
tr:: d
IT.?F of .'r .;•r:? r v{-,ALL+x ? L+' Ri. t??'i,_• ?/ erk? E? ? ' ? ?-?
€+R FC);,t•' ?.` ? _::-rfG?'" L hF ?.?..:. '? ? i . ?,? ? ? L w!:L • '? tti ? p Il? ? }
r?•G ? Y / ` - : t
? ,t e€ .a' x f ' : gY.4at Kr ?;t F x ? -€ rx'S 1 _ ' P '. 1 i r
l
X ? -2????J."?4 ? xF' F r - L' ? ? f ? ?? ??'• '? i 1` ? ? `t i y'k
t-
'?
R c , j-L.t,?i•: a. s x i, ?' s•',? x3; E ''r? - _ --# .. f r+ "'+e? 'ir r jL +?
r
rt ? St f u ?jr ? ? 4L
ta.
- ' , t 4' _ , b., t_ • r Y 'r.. ?1•Rx _ --Y,.ti_ti: r?:' :?--': € ?? ,?'?'? ??' C I ' r? r?:
T
t '? h ' €s r €f f _.'';_-'- v:blrr '' "''?,;C"-•?•1??? 6 -€,. ? T?.'c:+- ? , :? ? ?=
???.. r ' ? ?_ _ - tf ? t-_ '.tf?4"" [?•t A -N-c-?'
r 1.
t 'k e - iFff;: t i f __ '???ff ' . ?.?.: rff?? t'.?ti:•r , {-?..iq 1.a:?:? ??'?i' 'L? L_???
•fR .f ct
?k-:. xh'? ---= :??;u:: ax' Rt* ? _:?t •t": • '' ???L t?k? . 3 it rv .. ? .? ? r<
= Y 1 Y?:cb +?• .tai ? 11 -x- ,Sa ?.'.
NOT"
?1rt
fF. 2 ?` ?'Y+i { ? ? -. ?}? k??-)'4i4 4 •?I ?v p 't
... -r
So
? + ? ? v i L. 'ir ? FR?f ti -1: r 4. I ? f,. f ? i ? ki ?? ?
€ l YL - + 1 x .SIF`,xj-i. fY ; ' 1 >. R 'R' Ka?x V",? l{16f7i 1 ,
r -
. .,,?t?r. .... ... ?":. .,a. t..:: ;„ - sm'-???rtf t.?r _.'?1.?.-' ..., bM t? ._. ._--r:.•t. kAL
l?..
NCD®T
SlTIE MAP DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
PROJECT. 8.1231501 (B-31%)
REPLACE BRIDGE 856 ON
NC 133 OVER ALLEN CREEK
SHEET 2 OF 10 10/22/02
w

WETLAND LEGEND
- -WLB- - - WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPO.SED BRIDGE
-WLBJ WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
* * DENOTES MECHANIZED
* * ** * * * CLEARING
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12"-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54" PIPES
& ABOVE
SINGLE TREE
WOODS LINE
DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
FLOW DIRECTION RIP RAP
TB
T_ TOP OF BANK
WE - EDGE OF WATER 5 ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
- -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
- - - --- - WATER SURFACE
x x x x x LIVE STAKES
x x x
E2D BOULDER
- CORE FIBER ROLLS
? PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE (PSH)
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
GRASS SWALE
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1231501 (8-3116)
REPLACE BRIDGE 7x56 ON
NC 133 OVER ALLEN CREEK
SHEET 3 OF 10 7/24/02

M
O

GV

LTa M
to Z
oa
-1- 00+171 3N11 HOlbW H M %0 U
?Z
z

? 2 ? ??m? xc
1 I

x? H
4 z
.1

I ?

LL-

/ b f?
NC
?q0

0
? O
z?
v .
z
I
Qr) W
J
Q

I a
w
I
? z
a_ w
/ In M N
LL z
uz
w
1/ J
z zx um,: ca,
LL) L" W J
' H3 WU
O
1 J w °z o
1 ° o
1S/??
Lr)
O
Ln
N
0
O
w
J
Q
N U

-1- 00+81 3N11 HOldW
J Q
Q
w y?.
H
z
n
a
N
C7 ?
W
U ?
z
w
Q
J
N
N ? 83p
o
ovol ? i

d
O.
OG
m
J
u.
1

a

lD
LLJ
I 1ld/77/7 z
-- J Z
l ¢~
~ W
e 3Lu
Q L OZ
W ~_
Zw
F- w
z O
a_
N
U
N\l
W
U O
z N Lli
W C3 O
y? az a?
J F- MO U? N
3a u-¢ 7a O
cr J
/ WO WW LuU
I ? 3 H O
Z cr Z Z Ln
wo o wo O =?
:. w
: J
`C s*? N U
-1- 00+171 3N11 HOiVN • . N
0
Ln
o I
I
I
? C\j
? LL-I
? J
oe?,o
J
Q
H
W
H
Z OZ
Cr
d
N
W
U
Z
W
cr
Q
J
'1S 3
1
0

.a
N
w M
z
d
Z o a z

? U ; O

a ? a w
24
a U

z E -
W
x

O
W
Z N
.
+ Z
O
J 2 Z
J O U
Lea ?Q N
Y) -? W
W J O
~0 3 W U 2
Z z O
p o tf )
f
!• J
'? In Q
CV N
-?- 00+81 3NI? HOldW
O
.!^

64
0
O 0 ?
44
Dd
z W

0
0
® O p w w
I p + x U C7 a O
00
0 ® U ca a cz.
o
< I

I ? z

® 3

m (?

U

U w
C-1 I -I p
o
z
w
CD <
p
I p O
o ..
a CG
a a
N Q 0 U
z
w
n , I z Q-J
CO o ; >a x
Q fl? < l v,
cn L
< X F-
z
I
\ N?
w
Lc) O 1
1 \ aw
J +
Ln U , U

N
>
W I
J
W -Ii
H Ln
e ?
z I
_
O N O I
W 0 to 0
I
+ CT - ---
W Ln
in
Q Q CcJ W I r- 1
f I N
C? (nLn0 !- ----
-
?
O
-cam I = O
+
I
I D
I

? , ?
I J
w
CD
p
m ?

z I
I

N
I rvel

_
X
W
O
W
p p
O O
+
Q , Z
f- Ln
? , O
CD Z n-
I O C.7
CD
z
I
Q?
>a
cn Q
X
w , X
I w Q
I - , Z
N I = w
I Q

? N
I Q
p
I U
+
O 0
0
0
O O O \
a
G4 \
I z? M
,.
0
M
z T Z
ao ® ? p
LL G4 M o

i z
I
Z
w
I a c M
I ? a 0 a a '?
I az m

i
?
I y
O

O
N

CD N
O ( U

+ S
W O f

`--I
G 1 o--
?

1 a
1
\ O
N

M

I O
O
N W
>
I J as
J O
I U- Q N
~ o
O w S
I ? 3
~
I O
w o
I p N
O
I
J
O Q
co O N
O
N O
? N
1,10-

F- MO cc
Z M

IL o
Q cn ? o

C6
O? Z v
2
OU
`
Y
H U- U O
04
U
- Z co
00
d U)
? U O`

0 co 5; w w
co
00
O ww
U a w
2
z

U
W
O

a

2
z?
Oz
?O
Z
O w
co LLI
z

Z z
? w
H

U)

LO 3:
z
5

a LL
O
W

? t
LO U
0
-

Q 0
N
O Q

Z6 E In
N

LL
0
1-
W O
o
Z
W Q
2
H
W

O
z

O
? C
N
O^
7 y ? ?
Z co
?
O
C C ?
_
"
Q X ? Q
W U ?

0
Q: -
Q ? co

W
Q O
W
? Cl) C
U

v
0

Q Z
i
L
..

N ? O O
N C ? O U
v
U ? ?
?
Q ?
? 0,0
N U
cu
d
W c
W
a p to o

o g
??

Z W ?
N m

W Cl) Cl)
? ? o 0

m

a a?
`
d o

? N N p?j
N

O

O O
J
•-O` O to

O
? N

w O d
Z

Cl)
O
o=
W z
F-
PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES
LAURENCE G. SPRUNT 4528 RIVER RD. SE
WINNABOW, N.C. 28479

no
xa
ms
0 0
x =
m?
°n
m

H
r O

m V) m

H I
F' (n r
T 0 y H
--I Z .n z
D
?uN
K DD
m
D
A .
-
pA
'- D H f
a
+
•
0 }
-0
A d O
+ 0 In Z
Nm
w ;0I .A.O H
N
Az
Ap
NI a D O N
ax O
rm ° ?? r m
z I D
-i
w I
I ao
C6
,
0

O Z
? N
..
> .. I p
Z r N
'-
co m
:- z
01
? M
V)z
?o mz M -
I i
D °m
Z T I ,*_
:s W A
D+? I ?
z WZZ- w
I m N X
O
r
rr
' H
'm
i s
'O
M
N
D
M
M
z
0
x
O
z
Z
T
O
n
r
H

II
0
m H N
a
'1A 1 r n ?
9 r Z
r ft z
D
Z
Ln
_?
3
s ?
i
K-
D
I m
= I N z D
-I H X
?L N
N
I\ I D w
+( g
I 0`°D
NZ?
i OAfpW
0
, r
r -
H
M
I 00?
M I I ?-4
H I D w
00 0 - Z w
m I m?Ra
n
?
LJ W
z -.4
MCA
N M I o x a°
r
?' I I
o? I
F)
r rj
...p I I I Z V
I ?
I
I
- p i co
Z
?Cl I n
o m
nzL +O•v
I
'
I w
OAS N
rO
f'
D
A
N
x
z? I
D m H I / Cl
zm rz I!F`- i
s Wr
m
N D
A
?D I
;u
N
x
K-
N O
" o
fN 10
°v
m
I f?6?.0 I
I
M (A
(n z H
; D c a M
n
z
o
m
n
`n I +
I vl o ?m
+
N 1
x 10
L" bz
o °
a

? r
m r
a I Z
M
Ln
o
Z
I N

m
rn m O
L
Q n o
- X n
^
:T7Z m
Z
m n
W
Z

m
~
Z7m
>
Z
~ Z
V
.
to N('7F-W N
s D
. 14,E r
D W H
z(A ° o
m
Ln L4
0
.rM m J -1 -1 A 1 0 0)
N Z Z i c°' r C
A N
= r O M 7
f.
N Z
NSF z u? '?
o m
N
O
Ill O
llftl O
lllll O
lllll O
lll

m
r
A
fn
It
G7 D Z
?.
a m
I
rm .+n A
O
-f I n N
O M 1•'?' I ?° r
.Z
IN N (TYP
)
D..
te
.- vx
H . m
m r
-O-j ? mw
N
z 0 0 I
° n m =-
1 --
W v d -
m
z \ X

# z
r D n
H? i
c
Az
rap
"r- c
m Z
XN,
'I v
x
m "
r
c
oa Ln
><
Oul
Z
m HH
"C :-n
O m H
z m
0
\
m
m
m ?
z

A
7 I X
,,
r W
r;
c
'0X
H
I
n
1
°mZ
n
M

in
M in
r I+
W

rri m

I
z o P
m µ

M 7
m
z
i
X
f
n
m

N

!
z n ,
II
I

?n m- -I
I ^ m x
rH
•
In ?
I+ aAx
H Q sl °1 L' >

z
Z ,n

-4 _ m
I A
-
A II ??Z
z I

H
Z
I N-ICn
I
N
z Q ? Ix

c? m I
m x
m Z r
f
n -I
' -I
l
X
O I # + ?
m r
1 W r m
r
z
1
N ? 1 Zn
W
K J
It 't
3

1 D n +
v- m N
0

?n a z
A
0 O
1 co
A
r z
o
L

r
+
+

O O

H
?
N
D a
A +

H z
co

m
D

N
D
Z p
0
N
v
D m
z o
n O
m
O
O1
A
0
((A
D
Z
°
co I^ o

z
-I
m
x
7i
p O
i O
O,
N
H
c ? D
x?O A Z N
DAD < 9 . O
Ditn :0
O
m
1 C H
m D
H
OZmv
Z
°
IX M
O

CO
m
z
Mr
--4 0
N
<
H

J
-0DI,.I CA
H? VI r +
O)
N ?H m
_
I
Nm
c?nn
o
rN I > H ?. ?
HX ! Onz RI}m
rin
mW
I ?.y m
m+z - FLn a
ulv
I r '
,o z
t°_ m z
w+

? 'n w 1
iD ID N
-
? [p O
co r- O ' Z
'm
I N Z;
0
0
M
O
I+

D ?s
0
0
L
m v?
?
c
C.) M .A- -{
X M in
D < r D N
Z s
9

m
° "<II y

m
moll ?
ui A ?
D W
N
L
-? o
D o
-v
c ..
W
(
N

' o
?- = N
f Q e 11 H ?'+
t N u z \Y! J F H W W l1')
a ;' I LLm U 1 >Y3~
?o M a° Q OIWI-N o
N I LLw m N a ?Vm0
0
8 I Y Dam= O I MZ
$ L) . U. d J X?-a z
ca -j o')
?I Q .? ' Z w
w
M
N
CLI S33Id U Q wo a W OQ:
W H N a 0
W
Q S3lId 30VW3 Q W o m
w cc
a N (A P
I
J I O •t
t
In ° I N 4. 241
« I K H " lVl ?/
a: c"
W "WLIV' .
-' H
a I °a
N I
i
I
v
«w
I z W J
. 111 J
O
t- Z 1
?O
Cep
i
J I 0
d
O I ?1 H >
K H
• d M I p v O + 0)
W
I p H
d ,a
N
o
M
z
I N 9-.Li 9-.LI vi a w w
J Lj
m J I I..,-, H . a
O a 0 m
-
°w o
as I w f -Z J
?v c-y I O N m= o a :
x 0aa w
Z N ZNN co
a J o
J i O !L
I-WH ZN
2 V a
w
d W."O J _ d H w O
M LO I H> F- m JOO M j
H Q W N
n« N m Q
1- I O
' N Z J Z J
+
OF-I" HO':
3~ I H Z H NO-i ad''..
°a Z IL Z w ww
~ I ?+ J wzz al~-!
O J a
HmW w te
LL. a o mm
LLJ
(TI F
Z
N
« W
FH „9-,LI I „9-,L1
W J
co 0-i
.6 z I
I-
O
o0
I,
J O
? w
I J ..
i O I H }
ri o
a
3 1 w
w
H
? I O' a
N I in
iw
I-Z „9-,Li I „9-,11
Z H
W J
CD J
?c I
F Z
'7 O I
?v I
I
I
S31Id 30V88:5
n n
N o0
w
J I '. oo m
N N
a a' S31Id 3j o 0
??_ 1 I r ?
- - W
Ui
F-
V w w J
M Uh >
a L"n wm J Q
+
N J F
NO
Z
a I, W
tA , m
N mo
Z r
V
a w
x x
G V

i
N
I
I
O
C]
y co co
Lli
& o? H
m f-
iii$CCC H
J
H
A
Y J
? J
3 H
3
w
W
H O O
00 SNIn
H
z W = W
0 zO
0 O
cr. Lu
CL CO
J =
4U)
OLU
m ? ? I1
OZ d J o
Jf Q N
* NO * I c II
OU , ? I
z
* * ON II
ILO*
ILm
* *
O ? QNg??'g 1 ? ? ??
* * * mJJtopJ . s tier
V@.:N ` O at!O,m
Sft 2711*7711
oN
v, * * W ! 8 a'?"fit
? ? ` >? 'MWO •Q>?a'?C7N,yp. * ? ?? § +'??'?????! 3?? N t „''in
J? < 3?N < s Y lid, 1 >
hna it ~ Nlhg es's u<a
co N,
O N "s ?i
Z/fr ?? Y ?? 4 O H dS S 4?,x,« `' i I H
S, OLU es-
3 -p3 j, is •$ m
.. ? m
I • Z3 p8, ..
s
ILO
[r co x aI N AA c LU C3 _jw
oz
V0
x
NO I ! ? O
Q
LLI
x
ric
LUW
Occ I r. OW
LL 0
CC >- h Q
* ? V1 a N O 3 $?Nptpm??ep?ep Z I
I
CL m N I 1' JHLin ? ? * N Q?N? g77ii7 ~J
W QNJf y?? "LLJ
\ d -H
r. ? O x 4_NWUU J xz
J
??akl= x * II -ILL
? 7i $gBY?g ? r * QO
O ti Nn?e?eJ
299924 j
I 4 III
* II
J
.lK
a
'-, 8M IN
?' ids
e.
O/ * i * /I 1111,}1
Y
.`-
®R
. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
April 7, 2003
Laurence G.Sprunt
4528 River Rd. SE
Winnabow, NC 28479
Dear Mr Sprunt:
LYNW TIPPETr
SECRETARY
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 56
over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) on NC 133. The project lies in Brunswick County.
This project crosses an Area of Environmental Concern, as defined by the North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management (DCM), and must be approved by the DCM under provisions of
the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). One of the prerequisites to this approval is that
adjacent riparian landowners be given an opportunity to comment on the proposal. A copy of the
permit application is enclosed for your review.
The attached form is submitted to insure that you have an opportunity to comment on the
proposal. The work planned is depicted in the attached drawing. If you have no objections to the
proposal, please return the form with your response within 30 days to this office. If you do have
objections to the project, please forward your comments to:
. Mr. Bill Arrington-
N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
151-B Hwy 24 Hestron Plaza II
Morehead City, N.C. 28557
Written comments must be received by the Division of Coastal Management within 30 days of
receipt of this notice. NO RESPONSE WITHIN 30-DAYS of receipt of the correspondence will
be INTERPRETED AS NO OBJECTION.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to
contact Ms. Heather Montague, at [phone].
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
GJT%hwm
Enclosure: Permit Application for Bridge No. 56
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone]
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone]
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS WEBSITE? NCDOT.ORG
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
.LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
-Adk
ADJACENT RIPARIAN LANDOWNER STATEMENT
Replacement of Bridge No. 56
on NC 133 over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek)
in Brunswick County, NCDOT Division 3.
General Statutes and Division of Coastal Management Major Development Permit
approval procedures require that riparian landowners with property adjoining a proposed
development in an Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) be given thirty (30) days in
which to comment on the proposed development. This form allows the adjacent riparian
landowner to express either: (1) that he objects to the project; or, (2) that he does not
object and desires to waive his/her right to the 30-day period so that the processing of the
application can progress more rapidly. Of course, the adjacent riparian landowner need
not sign this format all if he/she so chooses.
I, , am an adjacent riparian property owner and am
aware of the North Carolina Department of Transportation's proposed replacement of
Bridge No. 56 on NC 133 over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) in Brunswick County,
North Carolina. I am further aware that this work will occur in one or more AEC's and
therefore will require authorization from the Division of Coastal Management in
accordance with the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
I have no objection to the project as presently proposed and hereby
waive that right of objection as provided in General Statute 113-229.
I have objections to the project as presently proposed and my comments
are attached.
Signature of Adjacent Riparian Landowner
Date:
.Aa

O
OF
WA
TFR.
QG
...ONW.- `C
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Wilm
ETIVZI.
J U L 2 9 2002
July 24, 2002
Mr. Andrew Nottingham, P.E.
NC Department of Transportation
1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590
Dear Mr. Nottingham:
DIVISION OF HIGMAYS
Subject: EXEMPTION from Stormwatet`
Management Permit Regulations
Stormwater Project No. SW8020632
Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek on NC 133
Brunswick County
The Wilmington Regional Office received a copy of your application for the project
known as Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek on NC 133. Staff of the Wilmington Regional Office
have reviewed the application for the applicability of the Stormwater Management rules to the
proposed activity at this project. Based on our review, you do not appear to be proposing a
development activity on this site at this point in time that would be subject to the stormwater
requirements as provided for in 15A NCAC 2H.1000. Please be advised that other regulations
will potentially apply to your proposed activities.
If your project disturbs five acres or more and has a point source discharge of stormwater
runoff, then it is subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
stormwater discharge requirements. You are required to have an NPDES permit for stormwater
discharge from projects meeting these criteria.
This exemption applies only to the Coastal Stormwater Management Permit for the
currently proposed activity. If at anytime in the future, development of any part of this site is
planned, as defined in NCAC 2H.1000, or if the proposed activities differ in any manner from
what is shown on the plans on file with the Division, you must submit the project for review of
the applicability of the stormwater management rules. If you have any questions concerning this
matter, please do not hesitate to cull me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Rick Shiver
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
RSS/arl: S:\WQS\STORMWAT\EXEMPT\020632.JUL
cc:
Delaney Aycock, Brunswick County Building Inspections
Linda Lewis
Wilmington Regional Office
Central Files
NCDENR
N.C. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, N.C. 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service
800-623-7748
-AL.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
October 18, 2001
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
Jay McInnis, Jr., P.E., Unit Head
Bridge Replacement Unit
Elizabeth L. Lusk, Environmental Biologist
Natural Systems Unit
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Amendment to the Natural Resources Technical Report for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 56 on NC 133 over Allen Creek in Brunswick
County. TIP No. B-3116, State Project No. 8.1231501; Federal Aid No.
BRSTP-133(2).
ATTENTION: Beverly Robinson, P.E., Project Manager
The following serves to update the Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) for the subject
project. In an effort to minimize and avoid impacts to Waters of the U.S., design of the bridge
replacement has changed. The existing 60-foot bridge will be replaced with a longer 300-foot bridge in
place, rather than on new location. During construction traffic will detoured off site, rather than using an
onsite detour, as originally proposed.
As a result of redesign, there will be minimal surface water impacts, because the new bridge will
span the entire width of Allen Creek with one supporting bent placed in the creek. The new bridge will
be 240 feet longer than the existing bridge and the proposed right-of-way will be the same as the current
60-foot right-of-way. Therefore rather than impacting wetlands, there will be an opportunity to restore
approximately 0.3 acres of brackish marsh community currently filled with the existing causeway. This
will in turn enhance the brackish marsh community directly upstream and downstream of the bridge.
Restoration would consists of removing fill from as much of the existing causeway as is
available (0.3 acres). The fill will be removed down to the adjacent marsh elevation. Compacted areas
of the restoration site will be sub-soiled (ripped) and re-vegetated using similar brackish marsh species
found in the adjacent marshes such as giant cordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides), various rushes (Scirpus
americanus, S. robustus, and S. validus), sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), and arrowhead (Sagittaria
falcata). Of course, species planted depends on availability at the time of planting.
cc: Hal Bain, Unit Head
File`B-3f16
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. WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
r
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM
TIP Project No.
State Project No.
Federal Project No
A. Project Description:
APR .7.003
Replace a structurally deficient bridge.
.?:
Wda`d ? ;?V
9QUALITY SECTION
C. Proposed Improvements:
B-3116
8.1231501
BRSTP-133(2)
030490
Replace Bridge No. 56 on its existing alignment. The new bridge will be
approximately 300 feet in length and placed at approximately the same elevation
as the existing bridge. During construction, traffic will be detoured onto NC 87.
V] E L. Sr DS / , s?, r?.rU3
B. Purpose and Need:
Circle one or more of the following Type II improvements which apply to the
project:
Modernization of a highway. by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking;
weaving, turning, climbing).
a. Restoring, Resurfacing, Rehabilitating, and Reconstructing
pavement (3R and 4R improvements)
b. Widening roadway and shoulders without adding through lanes
c. Modernizing gore treatments
d. Constructing lane improvements (merge, auxiliary, and turn lanes)
e. Adding shoulder drains
f. Replacing and rehabilitating culverts, inlets, and drainage pipes,
including safety treatments
g. Providing driveway pipes
h. Performing minor bridge widening (less than one through lane)
2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects including the
installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.
a. Installing ramp metering devices
b. Installing lights
c. Adding or upgrading guardrail
d. Installing safety barriers including Jersey type barriers and pier
protection
e. Installing or replacing impact attenuators
f. Upgrading medians including adding or upgrading median barriers
g. Improving intersections including relocation and/or realignment
h. Making minor roadway realignment
i. Channelizing traffic
j. Performing clear zone safety improvements including removing
hazards and flattening slopes
k. Implementing traffic aid systems, signals, and motorist aid
1. Installing bridge safety hardware including bridge rail retrofit
O Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of
grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings.
a. Rehabilitating, reconstructing, or replacing bridge approach slabs
b. Rehabilitating or replacing bridge decks
c. Rehabilitating bridges including painting (no red lead paint), scour
repair, fender systems, and minor structural improvements
O Replacing a bridge (structure and/or fill)
4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.
5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
6. Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or for joint or limited use of
right-of-way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse
impacts.
7. Approvals for changes in access control.
8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or near
a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support
vehicle traffic.
9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and
ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are
required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users.
10. Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of
passenger shelters, boarding areas, kiosks and related street
improvements) when located in a commercial area or other high activity
center in which there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic.
11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used
predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such
construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no
significant noise impact on the surrounding community.
12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes, advance land
acquisition loans under section 3(b) of the UMT Act. Hardship and
protective buying will be permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited
number of parcels. These types of land acquisition qualify for a CE only
where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives,
including shifts in alignment for planned construction projects, which may
be required in the NEPA process. No project development on such land
may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed.
D. Additional Project Information
1. Environmental Commitments
SEE ATTACHED LIST OF PROJECT COMMITMENTS (GREENSHEET)
2. Existing Conditions
NC 133 is classified as a Rural Major Collector in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. NC 133 has a posted speed limit of 55 mph.
The existing bridge was built in 1950. It has a reinforced concrete deck on steel I-
beams and the substructure is concrete caps on timber piles. The deck is 61 feet (18.5
meters) long and 25 feet (7.6 meters) wide. There is approximately 12 feet (3.6 meters)
of vertical clearance between the floorbeams of the bridge deck and streambed. There
are two lanes of traffic on the bridge.
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the
bridge is 37.9 out of a possible 100. This structure is functionally deficient and the
substructure is becoming structurally deficient. Presently the bridge is posted with
weight restrictions of 30 tons for single vehicles and the legal load limit for truck-tractor
semi-trailers.
Vertical and horizontal alignments are good. The approach roadway is 19 feet (5.8
meters) with 8 foot grass shoulders.
The Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that 14 accidents have been reported
during the period April 1998 through March 2001 from SR 1518 (Daws Creek Road) to
SR 1555 (Mellaney Road).
Eight school buses cross the studied bridge twice daily.
Utility conflicts will be low for this project. There are underground phone cables on
the west side of NC 133 going aerial across the creek. There is also a fiber optic cable
underground along the west side of NC 133. Also along the west side of NC 133, there are
overhead power lines.
The proposed offsite detour for Bridge No. 56 is NC 87. This route will be used
to access US 17 as well as the Southport area. NC 87 runs parallel to NC 133. Daws
Creek Road (SR 1518) connects NC 133 and NC 87.
3. Cost Estimate
The project cost is estimated at $1,237,000 including $1,200,000 for construction
and $37,000 for right of way acquisition.
4. Estimated Traffic
2001- 5,300 vehicles per day
2025 -19,000 vehicles per day
Single unit trucks and tractor-trailers make up three percent and two percent of
these volumes, respectively.
5. Environmental Issues
The estimated wetland impacts will include 0.22 acres of fill in wetlands and 0.38
acres of mechanized clearing in wetlands. Replacing Bridge No. 56 with a 300-foot
bridge will allow for wetland restoration due to the removal of the existing roadway.
Approximately 0.24 acre of causeway will be restored as a result of the proposed project.
Restoring the causeway will lessen the wetland impacts to 0.36 acres.
NCDOT Biologist Randy Turner coordinated with the Division of Coastal
Management and per conversations with this agency, mitigation will not be required for
the proposed project. The following are reasons mitigation will not be required for
replacing Bridge No. 56:
1. The existing Bridge is 60 feet and the proposed bridge is 300 feet.
2. Approximately 0.24 acres of causeway will be restored as a result of the longer
bridge.
3. A 3:1 slope will be provided to lessen wetland impacts and for slope stabilization.
4. An offsite detour will be used to further reduce the impacts to wetlands.
4

E. Threshold Criteria
The following evaluation of threshold criteria must be completed for Type II actions.
ECOLOGICAL YES
(1) Will the project have a substantial impact on any
unique or important natural resource? ?
(2) Does the project involve any habitat where federally
listed endangered or threatened species may occur? F
(3) Will the project affect anadromous fish?
(4) If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of
permanent and/or temporary wetland taking less than
one-third (1/3) acre and have all practicable measures
to avoid and minimize wetland takings been evaluated?
(5) Will the project require use of U. S. Forest Service lands?
(6) Will the quality of adjacent water resources be adversely
impacted by proposed construction activities?
(7) Does the project involve waters classified as Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW) and/or High Quality Waters (HQW)?
(8) Will the project require fill in "Waters of the United States"
in any of the designated mountain trout counties?
(9) Does the project involve any known underground storage
tanks (UST's) or hazardous materials sites?
PERMITS AND COORDINATION
(10) If the project is located within a CAMA county, will the
project significantly affect the coastal zone and/or any
"Area of Environmental Concern" (AEC)?
(11) Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act
resources?
(12) Will a U. S. Coast Guard permit be required?
(13) Will the project result in the modification of any existing
regulatory floodway?
NO
x
O
_D
?x
F-1 X
F] x
F-1 x
1:1 x
F-1 x
5
r
YES NO
(14) Will the project require any stream relocations or channel F-1 x
changes?
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
(15) Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned
growth or land use for the area? F-1 x
(16) Will the project require the relocation of any family or
business? ? x
(17) Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effect on any minority or F-1 x
low-income population?
(18) If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the
amount of ri
ht of wa
ac
uisiti
n considered mino
? ?
g
y
q
o
r x
(19) Will the project involve any changes in access control? ? x
(20) Will the project substantially alter the usefulness
and/or land use of adjacent property? _ X
(21) Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent
local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness?

x
F
(22) Is the project included in an approved thoroughfare plan
and/ or Transportation Improvement Program (and is,
therefore
in conformance with the Clean Air Act of 1990)?
x F
,
(23) Is the project anticipated to cause an increase in traffic
-
volumes? 1 x
F
(24) Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing
F-1
roads, staged construction, or on-site detours? X
(25) If the project is a bridge replacement project, will the bridge
be replaced at its existing location (along the existing facility)
and will all construction proposed in association with the
.bridge replacement project be contained on the existing facility?
(26) Is there substantial controversy on social, economic and
environmental grounds concerning aspects of the action? F x
(27) Is the project consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws
relating to the environmental aspects of the project? x
6

(28) Will the project have an "effect" on structures/properties
eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places?
(29) Will the project affect any archaeological remains which are
important to history or pre-history?
(30) Will the project require the use of Section 4(f) resources
(public parks, recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges,
historic sites or historic bridges, as defined in Section 4(f)
of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966)?
(31) Will the project result in any conversion of assisted public
recreation sites or facilities to non-recreation uses, as defined
by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act
of 1965, as amended?
(32) Will the project involve construction in, across, or adjacent
to a river designated as a component of or proposed for
inclusion in the Natural System of Wild and Scenic Rivers?
YES NO
F-I x
F1 x
F-I x
F? x
F-I x

F. Additional Documentation Required for Unfavorable Responses in Part E
Question 2, 3, 4, and 25 have negative responses. The following is an explanation of
these negative responses:
Question 2 This project does involve habitat where federally listed endangered or
threatened species may occur. This species is the shortnose sturgeon. The following is
information about the shortnose sturgeon and the biological conclusion of impacts to the
sturgeon.
Name: Shortnose sturgeon Endangered
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NOT LIKELY TO ADVERSELY AFFECT
The short-nosed sturgeon is a small (1 meter in length) species of fish that occurs
in the lower sections of large rivers and in coastal marine habitats from the St. John
River, Canada to the Indian River, Florida. It can be differentiated from the Atlantic
sturgeon because of its shorter snout, wider mouth, and the pattern of its preanal shields
(the short-nose having one row and the Atlantic that has two).
The short-nosed sturgeon prefers deep channels with salinity less than seawater.
It feeds benthicly on invertebrates and plant material and is most active at night. It is an
anadromous species that spawns upstream in the spring and spends most of its life within
close proximity of the rivers mouth. At least two entirely freshwater populations have
been recorded, in South Carolina and Massachusetts.
The short-nosed sturgeon requires large fresh water rivers that are unobstructed
by dams or pollutants to reproduce successfully.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program's database of rare species and unique
habitats was checked on September 12, 2001. No populations of this species have been
reported from the project vicinity. However, favorable habitat does exist for this species.
Based on a conversation with the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Service on December 3,
1999, a moratorium is recommended to avoid in-water activity from February 15 through
September 30. The National Marine Fisheries Services concurs with the recommendation
of North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, and has issued a finding the subject
project is "Not likely to Adversely Affect" the shortnose sturgeon (see letter in Appendix).
This is dependent on the commitments found on the Project Commitment Green Sheet.
Questions 2 and 3 The project will affect. anadromous fish however, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service has developed a construction moratorium to further protect the shortnose
sturgeon during construction. There will be no in-water or in-marsh activity from
February 15 through September 30. This is considered the in-migration, spawning, and
out-migration period for the endangered shortnose sturgeon and another anadromous fish.
Question 4 This project will impact wetlands. The estimated wetland impacts for the
proposed project is not less than one-third (1/3) acre. All practicable measures to avoid
and minimize wetland takings have been evaluated. The estimated wetland impacts will
include 0.22 acres of fill in wetlands and 0.38 acres of mechanized clearing in wetlands.
A 3:1 slope will be used to minimize impacts to wetlands and provide for slope stability
an offsite detour will be used to lessen wetland impacts.
Question 25 The bridge will be replaced at its existing location (along the
existing facility). However, construction proposed in association with the bridge
replacement project will not be contained on the existing facility. Shoulders in the vicinity
of the bridge are substandard and will be widened as a part of the project.
CE Approval
TIP Project No. B-3116
State Project No. 8.1231501
Federal-Aid Project No. BRSTP-133(2)
Project Description:
Replace Bridge No. 56 on its existing alignment. The new bridge will be
approximately 300 feet in length and placed at approximately the same elevation
as the existing bridge. During construction, traffic will be detoured onto NC 87.
Categorical Exclusion Action Classification: (Check one)
TYPE II(A)
X TYPE II(B)
Approved:
,; 3,O /V1
at Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
11 29 01 ?. I ' . .
Date P ject Planning Unit Hea
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Project Planni g Engineer
VaPf
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
For Type II(B) projects only:
2
Date Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
10
PROJECT COMIVIITMENTS
TIP Project B-3116, Brunswick County
Bridge No. 56, on NC 133
Over Allen Creek
Federal Aid Project BRSTP-133(2)
State Project 8.1231501
1. Division 3
The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service has developed a list of "Precautions for the
general construction in areas which may be used by the West Indian manatee in North
Carolina." These precautions will be considered in all aspects of project construction.
Construction Moratorium: There will be no in-water or in marsh activity during
the months of February 15 through September 30, This is considered the in-migration,
spawning and out-migration period for the endangered shortnose sturgeon and other
anadromous fish.
NCDOT agreed to delay closing NC 133 until after Labor Day.
2. Roadway Design Unit, Structure Design Unit, Project Development &
Environmental Analysis Branch (Permits), Division 3:
Bridge Demolition: Bridge No. 56 is 61 feet (18.5 meters) in length. It has a
reinforced concrete deck on steel I-beams and the sub structure is concrete caps on timber
piles. Thus, there is a potential for components.of the bridge to be dropped into Waters
of the United States during construction. The resulting temporary fill associated with the
bridge demolition will be as much as approximately 27.4 cubic yards (20.9 cubic meters).
This calculation is based on the entire length of the bridge extending over surface waters
as well as jurisdictional wetlands. All deposited components will be removed from the
Waters of the U.S., as quickly as possible. During construction, Best Management
Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed. To ensure the project
will not adversely affect the endangered shortnose sturgeon, explosives will not be used
in the bridge demolition.
3. Hydraulics Unit, Structure Design Unit, Division 3:
Stream Crossing Guidelines: NCDOT's "Stream Crossing Guidelines for
Anadromous Fish Passage" will be followed in the design & construction phases.
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
December 2001 Pagel of 2
e
4 Roadside Environmental Unit:
Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds: To ensure the project will not
adversely affect the endangered shortnose sturgeon, Design Standards for Sensitive
Watersheds (formerly High Quality Water Guidelines) will be used.
5. Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1) NCDOT will investigate whether any improvements are needed for NC 87 to be used
as a detour route, including additional traffic signals and/or resurfacing.
2) NCDOT will provide Carolina Power and Light Company and Brunswick County
Emergency Management Officials with an estimate of the amount of time the closure
of NC 133 will add to evacuation times for the Brunswick Nuclear Plant.
3) In response to local government requests, NCDOT will provide further public
notification regarding this bridge replacement, road closure and detour route. This
will be coordinated with Brunswick County Emergency Management.
Programmatic Categorical Exclusion
December 2001 Page 2 of 2
FIGURES
_ s
1 \ v Y
2 Pinelevel
44
5 ; 6 CAMPBELL
1516 ISLAND
don -? -
` t
%
` 1 r
3• a
1521
%
1
_ i
?` PRETTY _
POND IE t ?0 .L : i _
s
`
1529
Cr 1530 Orton
1' ,l l /?O Tr1AI
r $PKInV? 1 .S? ? 'rte.-' ? '
l 529 ' S- ,
LAKE.?
f
i
B R U N S W A
rueaww > sCa/wr?•/??1
I:rrrr.Yrl/ .•, .:;I? - l'.?..?' ? ? ` err
a-+rxr '?•?

?

North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
Brunswick County
Replace Bridge No. 56 on NC 133
Over Allen Creek
B-3116
Figure One I

END OF BRIDGE LOOKING SOUTH
FIGURE 3
END OF BRIDGE LONG NORTH
TIDE EAST FACE OF BRIDGE NC. 56
FIGIRE 4

i?
•»- ,
/
/
i fes Z'
-?
t\ f {
I
f t3?'
\ weer
\ 001U17G SN1NG '
\ wls
h > roe.?n?

r?evfrr
rot. M
k
?I
I
SuullY rank / /!
an??r trmmi.i
1
t ?=
I
!
- redwel re1M
i
i
THE •. AS
?? ZEKE
ISLAND
Detour
Route

".'' 1 ' - I mss/ i? I 3CUS
?/? 7 t MRFS
ror l I 1411,? V n.s T MME
f .. ?j Ba77E{YY `~"? NOTE: MAP INCLUDES ONLY STATE M40ITh INEO ROADS
?? ISLAM / OR IMPORTANT NON-SYSTEM ROADS.
4? u•re. MILEAGE NOT SHOWN ON FRONTAGE ROADS.
-.-•`,} ? ? ? I ROADS SHOWN AS S OF OF JAN. I, I998
ph
S T RIKIPIG
. ISLAND
N.[. B I T Z?AR
p
ASSEAI Y•c OUrln SAY
k B,Iy I 9
BRUNSWTICK l
NORTH CAROLINA -?
;Bridge No. 61
V
G" t
h.d.-.r J V

>L
>a
D
7-
0
rn
:o
CAURBELL
ISl ANb `
I
0
C
1
I?
Bridge No. 56 -i
tllr??;?ll
FIGURE 5
APPENDIX

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission P
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Goodwin, Project Planning Engineer
Planning & Environmental Branch, NCDOT
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project C to for
,wl Habitat Conservation Prograny
`
DATE: December 5, 1997
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements, Brunswick, Onslow, Wayne, Cumberland,
Richmond, Wilson, Lenoir, and Northampton counties, North Carolina,
TIP Nos. B-3115, B-3116, B-3358, B-3379, B-3322, B-3365, B-2110, 13-
3267, B-3200, B-1303.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have
conducted site visits as need and have the-following preliminary comments on the subject
projects. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
On bridge replacement projects of this scope our standard recommendations are as
follows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
require work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment.
The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human
and wildlife passage beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the
stream.
4. if possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
Bridge Replacement Memo 2 December 5, 1997
5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed
back to original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the
project. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
native tree species should be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'.
If possible, when using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not
grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact, allows the
area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (r iprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of
the steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the
option of requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and
we can recommend that the project require an individual `404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist
Mr. Tim Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these
sensitive species may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service for information on requirements of the Endangered
Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy
entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12,
1997)" should be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
If corrugated metal pipe arches or concrete box culverts are used:
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for fish passage. Generally, this means
that the culvert or pipe invert is buried at least 1 foot below the natural stream
bed. If multiple cells are required the second and/or third cells should be
placed so that their bottoms are at stream bankful stage (similar to Lyonsfield
design). This will allow sufficient water depth in the culvert or pipe during
normal flows to accommodate fish movements. If culverts are long, baffle
systems are required to trap gravel and provide resting areas for fish and other
aquatic organisms.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed
to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or
widening is required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of
structures usually causes a decrease in water velocity causing sediment
deposition that will require future maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on the stream bed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same
location with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be
Bridge Replacement Memo 3 December 5, 1997
designed and located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to
avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old
structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-year
floodplain. Approach fills should be removed down to the natural ground elevation. The
area should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. If the area that
is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to wetlands. If
successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other
projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments:
1. B-3115 - The potential is high for anadromous fish usage at this site.
Therefore, the guidelines apply (See Item 9 above).
2. B-3116 - The potential is high for anadromous fish usage at this site.
Therefore, the guidelines apply (See Item 9 above).
3. B-3358 - This bridge is surrounded by swamp. We request that NCDOT
minimize wetland impacts.
4. B-3379 - This site has a high potential for wetlands adjacent to the bridge.
This are is classified as nutrient sensitive waters so we request that
sedimentation and erosion controls for high quality waters be followed.
5. B-3322 - No specific concerns.
6. B-3365 - No specific concerns.
7. B-2110 - High potential for wetland impacts. NCDOT should minimize
wetland impacts.
8. B-3267 - No specific concerns.
9. B-3200 - Anadromous fish are known to us this area so the guidelines apply
(See Item 9 above). There is a high potential for wetland involvement.
10. B-1303 - Anadromous fish are known to use this area so the guidelines apply
(See Item 9 above).
We request that NCDOT routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and
maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent
wet concrete from contacting water in or entering into these streams. Replacement of
bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is
recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along
streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway
crossings.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding
bridge replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity
to review and comment on these projects.
STA?
LY ,t+J} ??1i
?s
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
GOVERNOR
23 December 1998
Memorandum To: Wayne Elliott, Unit Head
Bridge Replacement Unit
From: Chris Murray, P.W.S.
Natural Systems Unit
E. NoRRIs TOLSON
SECRETARY
Subject: Proposed replacement of Bridge No. 56 on NC 133
over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) in Brunswick
County. TIP No. B-3116; Federal Aid Project No.
BRSTP-133(2); State Project No. 8.1231501.
Attention: Bill Goodwin, P.E., Project Planning Engineer
Bridge Replacement Unit
The attached Natural Resources Technical Report provides
inventories and descriptions of natural resources within the
project study area, and estimations of impacts likely to occur to
these resources as a result of project construction. Pertinent
information concerning Waters of the United States and protected
species is also provided.
c: File
9
Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 56
on NC 133 over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek)
Brunswick County
TIP No. B-3116
State Project No. 8.1231501
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-133(2)
Natural Resources Technical Report
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
NATURAL SYSTEMS UNIT
CHRIS MURRAY, P.W.S.
NATURAL SYSTEMS UNIT
23 DECEMBER, 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 . 0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.3 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.4 Qualifications of Principal Biologist . . . . . . . . 3
2.0 Physical Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1 Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2 Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.1 Subbasin Characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.2 Stream Characteristics . . . ... . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.3 Best Usage Classification . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.4 Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.5 Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources. . . . . 6
3.0 Biotic Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1 Terrestrial Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1.1 Disturbed Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1.2 Pine-hardwood Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1.3 Brackish Marsh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2 Aquatic Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3 Faunal Component . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.4 Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Resources . . . . . . .10
4.0 Jurisdictional Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
4.1 Waters of the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters.ll
4.1.2 Summary of Anticipated Impacts. . . . . . . . .12
4.1.3 Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
4.1.4 Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
4.1.4.1 Avoidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
4.1.4.2 Minimizaiton . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
4.1.4.3 Compensatory Mitigation . . . . . . . .14
4.2 Protected and Rare Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
4.2.1 Federally-Protected Species . . . . . . . . .14
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern . . . . . . . . .26
5.0 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities. . . . . .10
Table 2. Federally Protected Species . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Table 3. Federally Species of Concern . . . . . . . . . . . .27
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. Precautions for General Construction in Areas which
May Be Used By the West Indian Manatee in North
Carolina.
4,
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following Natural Resources Technical Report is
submitted to assist in the preparation of a Categorical Exclusion
for the proposed project.
1.1 Project Description
The project involves the replacement of Bridge No. 56 on NC
133 over Allen Creek in Brunswick County. Allen Creek is also
known as Lilliput Creek, and is referred to by that name by the
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) and on the USGS topographic map.
The existing and proposed right-of-ways (ROW) are 18 m (60 ft).
Two alternates are proposed for this project:
Alternate 1-Replace Bridge No. 56 in place with traffic
maintained on an on-site temporary detour to the west during
construction. The length of the on-site detour is approximately
351 m (1150 ft). The on-site detour bridge and roadway approaches
will be removed after project construction. The replacement of
the existing structure over Allen Creek involves the removal and
replacement of Bridge No. 56 and adjacent roadway approaches.
Project length of this on-site replacement is approximately 220 m
(720 ft).
Alternate 2-Replace Bridge No. 56 on new location to the west
with traffic maintained on existing during construction. The
length of the new location alignment is approximately 473 m (1550
ft). The length of the existing bridge and associated roadway
that will be removed after construction of the new alignment is
approximately 488 m (1600 ft).
1.2 Purpose - '
The purpose of this technical report is to inventory,
catalog and describe the various natural resources likely to be
impacted by the proposed action. This report also attempts to
identify and estimate the probable consequences of the
anticipated impacts to these resources. Recommendations are made
for measures which will minimize resource impacts. These
descriptions are relevant only in the context of existing design
concepts. If design parameters and criteria change, additional
field investigations will need to be conducted.
1.3 Methodology
Research of the project study area was conducted prior to
field investigations. Information sources used in the pre-field
investigation include: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle
map (Carolina Beach, NC), NCDOT aerial photomosaics of the
project study area (1:1200) and Soil Survey of Brunswick County
(USDA, 1986). Water resource information was obtained from
publications of the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (NCDENR) (1998), North Carolina Department of
N
`^1
_ 51a
7518 \
stop
1 s?)n
14
1 ? ? ? c
i 1

i
i

4
i I
I 1
't
i 1
t
PRi
POI
i

? z n 1
l
4 1

J? l
{ I ?
1 . '-
iAK
i

CAMPBELL `1I1
ISLAND
i ?
1 J
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
t."
_ Division of Highways
F? Planning & Environmental Branch
OF tp?N`'
Brunswick County
Replace Bridge No. 56 on NC 133
Over Allen Creek
B-3116
Figure One
Orton
ORTON
PLA'.'A'ON
k6 GARDENS j
0_O? ??'`SwK
RUINS(
153

3
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR) (1995a,
1996), and from the Environmental Sensitivity Base Map of
Brunswick County (North Carolina Center for Geographic
Information and Analysis, 1995). Information concerning the
occurrence of federal and state protected species in the study
area was gathered from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
list of protected and candidate species (14 May 1998) and from
the North.Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of
rare species and unique habitats.
General field surveys were conducted along the proposed
alignment by NCDOT biologists Chris Murray, Jared Gray, and Susan
Brady on 30 October, 1998. Plant communities and their
associated wildlife were identified and recorded. Wildlife
identification involved using one or more of the following
observational techniques: active searching and capture, visual
observations (binoculars), identifying characteristic signs of
wildlife (sounds, scat, tracks and burrows). Jurisdictional
wetland determinations were performed utilizing delineation
criteria prescribed in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual" (Environmental Laboratory, 1987)..
Definitions for areal descriptions used in this report are
as follows: Project Study.Area denotes the area bound by proposed
ROW limits; Project Vicinity describes an area extending 0.8 km
(0.5 mi) on all sides of the project study area; and Project
Region is equivalent to an.area represented by.a 7.5 minute USGS
quadrangle map centered on the project.
1.4 Qualifications of Principal Investigator
Investigator: Christopher A. Murray
Education: M.S. Coastal Ecology, Univ. North Carolina at
Wilmington, North Carolina
B.S. Zoology, St. Cloud State University, St.
Cloud, Minnesota
Certification: Professional Wetland Scientist No. 1130
Experience: N.C. Dept. of Transportation 1995-present
Environmental Investigations, P.A. 1992-1994
Environmental Services, Inc. 1991-1992
Expertise: Wetland Delineation, NEPA Investigations, and
Protected Species Surveys
2.0 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Soil and water resources, which occur in the project study
area, are discussed below. Soil types and availability of water
directly influence composition and distribution of flora and
fauna in any biotic community.
Brunswick County lies in the Coastal Plain Physiographic
Province. Land in the project study area is characterized as
relatively flat. The project is located in a rural area of
Brunswick County'surrounded by undeveloped land, including marsh
4
and forested land. The project study area is located
approximately 0-2 m (0-5 ft) above mean sea level.
2.1 Soils
Two mapped soil units are located in the project study area
and include Bohicket silty clay loam and Blanton fine sand, 0-5%
slopes. Bohicket silty clay loam is a nearly level, very poorly
drained soil on tidal flats. It is dissected by narrow areas of
water. Surface runoff and permeability is very slow. The water
table fluctuates with the rise and fall of the daily tides and
the soil is flooded each day by tidal water. Bohicket silty clay
loam is a hydric soil.
Blanton fine sand, 0-5% slope is a moderately well drained
soil in slightly convex, interstream areas. Surface runoff is
slow and permeability is rapid in the thick sandy surface and
moderate in the loamy subsoil. The available water capacity is
low. A perched water table can be above the subsoil for a short
time during wet periods. Blanton fine sand is a non-hydric soil
with inclusions of Muckalee loam in narrow drainageways.
2.2 Water Resources
This section contains information concerning those water
resources likely to be impacted by the project. Water resource
information encompasses the resources' relationship to major
water systems, its physical aspects, Best Usage Classification,
and water quality of the resources. Probable impacts to these
water bodies are also discussed, as are means to minimize
impacts.
2.2.1 Subbasin Characteristics
Water resources located within the project study area lie in
the Lower Cape Fear River and Coastal Watershed (Subbasin 03-06-
17) of the Cape Fear River Drainage Basin. The Cape Fear River
Basin is the largest river basin in the state, covering 9,149
square miles (NCDEHNR, 1995a).
2.2.2 Stream Characteristics
The proposed project crosses Allen Creek, a tidally
influenced brackish water body and its associated brackish marsh.
Brackish marshes develop where freshwater from rivers dilutes
saltwater from tides. The tidal action reduces local salinity,
removes toxic materials, supplies nutrients,.and modifies soil
anoxia (Mitsch and Gosselink, 1986). Allen Creek has its
headwaters approximately 14 km (9 mi) southwest of Bridge No. 56.
The water body flows to the northeast where it outfalls into
McKinzie Pond. Allen Creek continues eastward where it crosses
under Bridge No. 56 and outfalls into the Cape Fear River
approximately 1341 m (4400 ft) east of the project study area.
5
Allen Creek at the project site is approximately 18 m (60
ft) wide. The site visit was conducted during high tide and
depth could not be determined. The substrate is likely comprised
of an organic muck.
2.2.3 Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by
the NCDENR (1998). The best usage classification of Allen Creek
(Index No. 18-85) is C Sw. Class C waters are suitable for
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife,
secondary recreation, and agriculture. Swamp Waters (Sw) is a
supplemental classification intended to recognize those waters
that generally have naturally occurring very low velocities, low
pH and low dissolved oxygen. No water resources classified as
High Quality Waters (HQW's), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II), or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW's) are located within 1.6 km
(1.0 mi) of the project study area.
2.2.4 Water Quality
The DWQ has initiated a whole basin approach to water
quality management for the 17 river basins within the state. To
accomplish this goal the DWQ collects biological, chemical and
physical data that can be used in basinwide assessment and
planning. All basins are reassessed every five years. An
assessment of water quality data indicates that the Lower Cape
Fear River and Coastal Watershed has generally good to excellent
water quality due largely to good tidal flushing (NCDEHNR,
1995a).
Prior to the implementation of the basinwide approach to
water quality management, the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient
Network assessed water quality by sampling for benthic
macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites throughout
the state. Many benthic macroinvertebrates have stages-in their
life cycle that can last from six months to a year, therefore,
the adverse effects of a toxic spill will not be overcome until
the next generation. Different taxa of macroinvertebrates have
different tolerances to pollution, thereby, long term changes in
water quality conditions can be identified by population shifts
from pollution sensitive to pollution tolerant organisms (and
vice versa). Overall, the species present, the population
diversity and the biomass are reflections of long term water
quality conditions. There are no BMAN sampling stations in the
project vicinity (NCDEHNR, 1995a).
Point sources refer to discharges that enter surface water
through a pipe, ditch, or other defined points of discharge.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are
permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program. Any discharger is required to register
for a permit. There are no NPDES sites located within 1.6 km
(1.0 mi) of the project study area.
6
Non-point source refers to runoff that enters surface waters
through stormwater flow or no defined point of discharge. There
are many types of land use activities that can serve as sources
of nonpoint source pollution including land development,
construction, crop production, animal feeding lots, failing
septic systems, landfills, roads, and parking lots. Sediment and
nutrients are major pollution-causing substances associated with
nonpoint source pollution. Others include fecal coliform
bacteria, heavy metals, oil and grease, and any other substance
that may be washed off the ground or removed from the atmosphere
and carried into surface waters. Excluding road runoff, there
were no identifiable non-point sources that could be observed
during the site visit.
2.2.5 Summary of Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Potential impacts to water resources in the project study
area are dependent upon final construction limits. Roadway
construction in Allen Creek and the adjacent brackish marsh will
result in water quality impacts. The proposed project will
bridge Allen Creek but fill portions of the brackish marsh and
result in both temporary and permanent impacts. Clearing and
grubbing activities near the creek and in the marsh will result
in soil erosion leading to increased sedimentation and turbidity.
These effects may extend downstream for considerable distance
with decreasing intensity.
Removal of the marsh vegetation will have a negative effect
on water quality. The vegetation at the site typically
stabilizes streambanks and reduces sedimentation by trapping soil
particles. The vegetation helps to absorb tidal surges by
slowing water movement. Because of their location, brackish
marshes are valuable for storing floodwaters from rivers and
tides (NCDEHNR, 1996).
Construction activities adjacent to water resources increase
the potential for toxic compounds (gas, oil, and highway spills)
to be carried into nearby water resources via precipitation,
sheet flow, and subsurface drainage. Increased amounts of toxic
materials can adversely alter the water quality of any water
resource, thus impacting its biological and chemical functions.
Indirect impacts to surface waters may extend,both upstream and
downstream of the project study area. Indirect impacts may
include isolated changes in flooding/tidal regime, discharge,
erosion and sedimentation patterns.
In order to minimize impacts to water resources in the
entire impact area, NCDOT's Best Management Practices (BMP's) for
the Protection of Surface Waters must be strictly enforced during
the entire life of the project. The NCDOT, in cooperation with
the DWQ, has developed a sedimentation control program for
highway projects which adopts formal BMPs for the protection of
surface waters. The short-nosed sturgeon (Acipenser
brevirostrum) may inhabit the project study area (see Section
A,
7
4.2.1). Accordingly, Design Standards In Sensitive Watersheds
(formerly High Quality Water guidelines) must be enforced during
the entire life of the project. The project study area is
located within the coastal plain and crosses a perennial stream.
NCDOT Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage must
be adhered to during the life of the project.
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.
This section describes those ecosystems encountered in the study
area, as well as the relationships between fauna and flora within
these ecosystems. Composition and distribution of biotic
communities throughout the project area are reflective of
topography, hydrologic influences and past and present land uses.
Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the
context of plant community classifications.
Dominant flora and fauna likely to occur in each community
are described and discussed. Fauna observed during field
investigations are denoted with an asterisk (*). Scientific
nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided for
each animal and plant species described. Subsequent references
to the same organism will include the common name only.
Plant community descriptions are based on a classification
system utilized by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) (Schafale and Weakley 1990). When appropriate, community
classifications were modified to better reflect field
observations. vascular plant names follow.nomenclature found in
Radford et a1. (1968). Habitats used by terrestrial wildlife and
aquatic organisms, as well as expected population distributions,
were determined through field observations, evaluation of
available habitat, and supportive documentation (Fish, 1960,
Martof et al., 1980; Webster et a1., 1985; Rhode et al.,.1994;
Potter et a1., 1980).
3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Three terrestrial communities are identifiable in the
project study area: disturbed community, pine-hardwood forest,
and brackish marsh.
3.1.1 Disturbed Community
This community encompasses two types of habitats that have
recently been or are currently impacted by human disturbance:
roadside shoulder and disturbed fringe. Roadside shoulder is a
regularly maintained habitat that is kept in a low-growing, early
successional state. Herbs, grasses and vines located here
include broomsedge (Andropogon sp.), crabgrass (Digitaria spp.),
bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), yellow jessamine (Gelsemium
sempervirens), elephant's foot (Elephantopus tomentosus),
partridge pea (Cassia fasciculata), dewberry (Rubus flagellaris),
8
St. John's wort (Hypericum sp.), beadgrass (Paspalum sp.),
evening primrose (Oenothera sp.), pennywort (Hydrocotyle sp.),
horse nettle (Solanum carolinense), Viginia creeper
(Parthenocissus quinquefolia), trumpet creeper (Campsis
radicans), and greenbrier (Smilax bona-nox).
Disturbed fringe is comprised of shrubs and sapling sized
trees that exist in the roadside shoulder/brackish marsh ecotone.
Species observed here include: silverling (Baccharis
halimifolia), dotted horsemint (Monarda punctata), live oak
(Quercus virginiana), coral honeysuckle (Lonicera sempervirens),
black cherry (Prunus serotina) and red cedar (Juniperus
virginiana).
3.1.2 Pine-hardwood Forest
This upland community is restricted in the project study
area to a narrow band located along the southern project limits
adjacent to existing NC 133. Species located in the herbaceous
and vine layer include netted chain fern (Woodwardia areolata),
black stem chain fern (Woodwardia virginica) and crossvine
(Anisostichus capreolata). Red bay (Persea borbonia), loblolly
pine (Pinus taeda), high-bush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosym),
black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), fetterbush (Lyonia lucida), yaupon
(Ilex vomitoria), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), and red
maple (Acer rubrum) are located in the sapling and canopy layer.
3.1.3. Brackish Marsh
Brackish marshes develop near mouths of coastal rivers with
heavy freshwater discharge. that empty into the oceans that
exhibit low tidal ranges (Tiner, 1993). These marshes are
distinguished by their lack of trees and shrubs and by the
dominance of giant cordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides). Despite
apparent uniformity, the plants form a mosaic reflecting subtle
changes in salinity. Additional species observed here include
rushes (Scirpus americanus, S. robustus, and S. validus), aster
(Aster tenuifolius), sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), cattail
(Typha angustifolia), arrowhead (Sagittaria falcata) and arrow-
arum (Peltandra virginica).
3.2 Aquatic Communities
one aquatic community type, coastal plain tidal stream, is
located in the project study area. Here, significant amounts of
freshwater dilute seawater to create moderately to slightly salty
environments. Average salinities range from moderately high [18
parts per thousand (ppt)] to essentially fresh (0.5 ppt) (Tiner
1993). The tides rise and fall twice each 24 hour period. On
the North Carolina coast, the tidal range for streams of this
size is between 0.6 to 1.3 m (1.9 to 4.3 ft).
9
3.3 Faunal Component
Many species found in the outer coastal plain are highly
adaptive and may utilize the upland communities, brackish marsh,
and Allen Creek for survival and reproduction. Brackish marshes
are some of the most productive ecosystems in the world; this is
attributable to overbank flooding and tidal flushing. Overbank
flooding deposits nutrient-rich sediments from upland communities
along tidal systems, promoting plant growth. When brackish marsh
plants die, they break into fragments of detritus. Fungi and
bacteria feed upon plant detritus, enriching it with their bodies
and making nutrients more available to other grazers. Once it is
begins to be broken down, the enriched detritus is flushed
throughout the marsh system and adjacent estuaries by tidal
flooding. There, the detritus forms the basis of many food
chains for marine and estuarine fish and shellfish (NCDENR,
1996). Few animals feed directly on marsh plants but many feed
on detritus including microorganisms (e.g. zooplankton),
macroinvertebrates (e.g. marine worms, amphipods, penaeid shrimp
[Penaeus spp.], and blue crabs [Callinectes sapidus]), and forage
fish (e.g. killifish [Fundulus spp.], mullet [Mugi1 cephalus],
spot [Leiostomus xanthurus], and menhaden [Brevoortia tyrannus])
which are in turn are food for larger fish such as southern
flounder [Paralichthys lethostigma] and juvenile weakfish
[Cynoscion regalis] (Tiner, 1993). The brackish marsh provides
important nursery and spawning grounds for many of the above
mentioned fish species in addition to blue crab and penaeid
shrimp. Fish (1969) indicates that Allen Creek is of no fishing
significance due to its small size.
The brackish marsh community is home to many other
invertebrates including marsh periwinkle (Littorina irrorata),
-marsh fiddler crab* (Uca pugnax), mud snail- (I1y_araassa obsoleta),
and Carolina marsh clam* (Polymesoda caroliniana). Coastal
wetlands also provide food, shelter, nesting, and resting areas
for other vertebrates, including migratory waterfowl, shorebirds,
and wading birds. Year-round residents observed in brackish
marshes include great egret* (Casmerodius albus), snowy egret
(Egretta thula), Louisiana heron (Hydranassa tricolor), least
bittern (Ixobrychus exilis), black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis),
red-winged bluebird (Agelaius phoeniceus), and long-billed marsh
wren (Cistohorus palustris). Several species of mammals are
often found in the marsh community including raccoon (Procyon
lotor), marsh rice rat (Oryzomys palustris), northern short-
tailed shrew (Blaring brevicauda), southern short-tailed shrew
(Blaring carolinensis), least shrew (Cryptotis parva), marsh
rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris), and mink (Mustela vison).
Amphibians and reptiles commonly observed in and adjacent to
brackish marshes and adjacent mixed pine-hardwood forest include
green treefrog (Hyla cinerea), American alligator (Alligator
mississippiensis), diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin),
eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina), rainbow snake (Farancia
10
erytrogramma), pine woods snake (Rhadinaea flavilata), and
cottonmouth (Agkistrodon piscivorus).
3.4 Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Resources
Construction of the subject project will have various
impacts on the biotic resources described. Any construction
related activities in or near these resources have the potential
to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and
qualifies impacts to the natural resources in terms of the
ecosystems affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are
considered here as well.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the
relative abundance of each community (Table 1). Project
construction will result in the clearing and degradation of
portions of these communities. Estimated impacts are derived
using the entire ROW width and length presented in Section 1.1.
Usually, project construction does not require the entire ROW
width; therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
Table 1. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities.
Community Alternate 1 Alternate 2
In Place Temporary New In Place
Replacement Detour Alignment Removal
Disturbed Community 0.2/0.4 0.1/0.2 0.1/0.3 0.4/1.1
Pine-Hardwood Forest -- <0.1/<0.1 <0.1/0.1 <0.1/0.1
Brackish Marsh 0.1/0.1 0.5/1.1 0.5/1.3 0.1/0.3
TOTAL (see note) 0.2/0.6 0.6/1.4 0.7/1.7 0.6/1.4
Notes:
-Values are cited in hectares/acres
-Total impacts may not equal the sum impacts associated with each
specific community due to rounding of significant digits.
-Alternate 1 In Place Replacement values indicate both temporary and
permanent impacts associated with the removal and replacement of Bridge
No. 56 and adjacent roadway approaches.
-Alternate 1 Temporary Detour values indicate temporary impacts
associated with the placement and subsequent removal of the temporary
bridge and roadway approaches.
-Alternate 2 New Alignment values indicate permanent impacts to the new
bridge and roadway approaches on new location.
-Alternate 2 In Place Removal values indicate permanent and temporary
impacts associated with the removal of Bridge No. 56 and adjacent
roadway approaches.
The biotic communities found within the project area will be
altered as a result of project construction. The brackish marsh
habitat is an ecologically important habitat that will be
affected by the permanent placement of fill, temporary placement
of fill, and the removal of existing fill. Typically,
disturbance in this type of habitat will result in the
colonization of invasive species including silverling and giant
reed grass (Phragmites australis). It is recommended that areas
that receive temporary fill and where existing bridge and
adjacent roadways are removed be graded down to normal elevation
and revegetated with native flora.
11
Clearing and conversion o
for roadway development affects
habitat for faunal organisms.
will displace animals from this
additional habitat. Individual
to terrestrial animals (shrews,
machinery used during clearing
f the marsh and forested habitat
nesting, foraging, and shelter
Temporary and permanent impacts
area as they search for
mortalities are likely to occur
snakes, etc.) from construction
activities.
Construction activities will impact the water resources
located in the project area as well as those downstream.
Increased sedimentation and siltation is often directly
attributable to construction activities. The suspended particles
will clog the feeding mechanisms of benthic organisms, fish, and
amphibians. These impacts eventually are magnified throughout
the food chain and ultimately affect organisms located in higher
trophic levels. Strict erosion and sedimentation controls should
be maintained during the entire life of the project.
Construction runoff and highway spills may result in mortality to
aquatic species inhabiting Allen Creek and the brackish marsh
located in the project area.
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
This section provides descriptions, inventories and impact
analysis pertinent to two important issues--Waters of the United
States and Protected and Rare Species.
4.1 Waters of the United States
Surface waters and jurisdictional wetlands fall under the
broad category of "Waters of the United States," under 33 CFR
§328.3(a). Wetlands, defined in 33 CFR §328.3 (b), are those
areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water
at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under
normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation
typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Surface
waters are waters used in interstate or foreign commerce, waters
subject to the ebb and flow of tides, all interstate waters
including interstate wetlands, and all other waters such as
intrastate lakes, rivers, and streams. Any action that proposes
to place fill material into these areas falls under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344).
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Allen Creek is considered a jurisdictional surface water.
This tidal creek is thoroughly described in Section 2.2.1. The
brackish marsh is a jurisdictional wetland. Species observed in
this wetland area include giant cordgrass, rushes, aster,
sawgrass, cattail, arrowhead and arrow-arum. The organic muck at
this site exhibited a soil color of 10YR 2/1 in the A layer.
12
Observations of wetland hydrology include inundation, saturation,
drift lines, sediment deposits, and drainage patterns.
4.1.2 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
The proposed project will cross jurisdictional surface
waters and wetlands. Both temporary and permanent impacts to the
brackish marsh are clearly summarized in Table 1. Allen Creek is
proposed to be bridged. Approximately 18 m (60 ft) of Allen
Creek is located in the ROW of the In Place Replacement and
Temporary Detour associated with Alternate 1 and the New
Alignment and In Place Removal associated with Alternate 2. The
amount of wetland and surface water impacts may be modified by
any changes in roadway design.
Two systems are currently being used in North Carolina to
describe or rate wetlands: a classification system developed by
Cowardin et a1. (1979) and a numerical rating system developed by
the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (NCDEHNR,
1995b). The Cowardin system provides a uniform approach in
describing concepts and terms used in classifying wetland
systems. The brackish marsh has a Cowardin Classification of
Estuarine, Emergent, Persistent, with a tidal regime that is
regularly flooded (EEM1N). The NCDEHNR wetland rating system is
not typically used to rate tidal brackish marsh ecosystems.
Construction impacts can severely affect the functions
that wetlands perform in an ecosystem. Wetlands influence
regional water flow regimes by intercepting and storing storm
water runoff which ultimately reduces the danger of flooding in
surrounding and downstream areas. Wetlands have been documented
to remove organic and inorganic nutrients and toxic materials _
from water that flows through them. The presence of wetlands
adjacent to roadways can act as filters to runoff pollutants and
toxins.
4.1.3 Permits
Impacts to wetlands are anticipated from project
construction. In accordance with provisions of the Clean Water
Act §404, a permit will be required from the USACE for discharge
of dredge or fill material into "Waters of the United States."
Due to wetland and surface water impacts expected at the project
study area (and the need for a Coastal Area Management Act [CAMA]
major development permit), a Nationwide 23 Permit or Regional
General Permit 291 will likely be necessary for this project.
Final decision concerning applicable permits rests with the
USACE.
This project will require a 401 Water Quality Certification
from the DWQ. 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
f..
13
United States. The issuance of a 401 permit from the DWQ is a
prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 or CAMA permit.
CAMA requires a permit if a project meets all of the
following conditions: (1) it is located in one of the 20 coastal
counties covered by CAMA; (2) it is in or affects an area of
environmental concern (AEC) designated by the Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC); (3) it is considered "development" under the
terms of CAMA and (4) it does not qualify for an exemption
identified by CAMA or by the CRC. The project fulfills all of
the above statements. The project study area is located in the
estuarine system AEC. More specifically, the project will
require a CAMA major development permit because impacts to the
AEC are likely.
4.1.4 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" and sequencing. 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.
4.1.4.1 Avoidance
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and
practicable possibilities of averting impacts to Waters of the
United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the Environmental Protection Agency 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 in light of overall
project purposes. Impacts to the brackish marsh ecosystem cannot
be avoided by project construction.
4.1.4.2 Minimization
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and
practicable steps to reduce the adverse impacts to Waters of the
United States. Implementation of these steps will be required
through project modifications and permit conditions. Impacts to
the wetland could be minimized by: (1) decreasing the footprint
of the proposed project through the reduction of ROW widths, fill
slopes and/or road shoulder widths; (2) installation of temporary
silt fences, earth berms, and temporary ground cover during
construction; (3) strict enforcement of sedimentation and erosion
control BMPs for the protection of surface waters and wetlands;
14
and (4) reduction of clearing and grubbing activity in and
adjacent to water bodies and wetlands.
4.1.4.3 Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not normally considered until
anticipated impacts to Waters of the United States have been
avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is
recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values
may not be achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate
and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for
unavoidable, adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory
actions often include restoration, creation and enhancement of
Waters of the United States. Such actions should be undertaken
in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site.
DWQ regulations state that fill or alteration of more than
0.45 ha (1.0 ac) of wetland will require compensatory mitigation
in accordance with 15A NCAC 211 .0506(a) and (h) and fill or
alteration of more than 450 linear m (150 linear ft) of streams
may require compensatory mitigation in accordance with 15A NCAC
211 .0506(a) and (h). If these acreage and linear thresholds are
exceeded from project construction, NCDOT will follow these
regulations.
If Alternate 2 is chosen, the removal of Bridge No. 56 and
its adjacent roadway and the subsequent grading down to normal
elevation and revegetation with native flora could serve as on-
site mitigation for the construction of the new alignment.
4.2 Protected and Rare Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in,
the process of decline either due to natural forces or their
inability to coexist with human activities. Federal law (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 FWS. Other species may receive additional protection
under separate state laws.
4.2.1 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. As of 14 May 1998, there are 16
federally-protected species listed for Brunswick County (Table
2). A brief description of each species' characteristics and
habitat follows.
15
Table 2. Federally protected species.
Common Name Scientific Name Status
short-nosed sturgeon Acispenser brevirostrum endangered
American alligator Alligator mississippiensis T(S/A)
loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta threatened
piping plover Charadrius melodus threatened
green sea turtle Chelonia mydas threatened
leatherback sea turtle Dermochelys coriacea endangered
peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus anatum endangered
eastern cougar Felis concolor cougar endangered
bald eagle Halieetus leucocephalus threatened
Kemp's ridley sea turtle Lepidochelys kempii endangered
wood stork Mycteria americana endangered
red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis endangered
manatee Trichechus manatus endangered
seabeach amaranth Amaranthus pumilis threatened
rough-leaved loosestrife Lysimachia asperulaefolia endangered
Cooley's meadowrue Thalictrum cooleyi endangered
' Endangered species are a taxon in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Threatened species are a taxon likely to become endangered within
the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of
its range.
Threatened by similarity of appearance T(S/A) are a taxon that is
threatened by similarity of appearance with other species and is
listed for its protection. These species are not biologically
endangered or threatened and are not subject to Section 7
consultation.
short-nosed sturgeon
Animal Family: Aciperseridae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967
The short-nosed sturgeon is a small species of sturgeon which
occurs in coastal rivers and estuaries with soft vegetated
substrates. It prefers deep channels with a salinity less than
sea water. Although generally considered anadramous, because of
the avoidance of high salinities, this species has been described
as intermediate between fully anadramous and potamodromous.
Adult short-nosed sturgeons are commonly reported in shallow
water (2-10 m) in summer and in deeper water (10-30 m) in winter.
At spawning time, however, the fish may move considerable distance
upstream if unimpeded by dams. Spawning sites have been described
as freshwater swamps, or freshwater areas with fast flow and rough
bottoms. In the southern portion of its range, short-nosed
sturgeon spawning occurs from January to April.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: UNRESOLVED
A fishery-dependent gillnet survey and sonic tracking study
was conducted in 1990-1992 to determine the distribution and
16
movement pattern of short-nosed sturgeon in the Cape Fear River
(Moser and Ross, 1993). This species has been tracked from the
Cape Fear River near its confluence with Allen Creek. The project
study area is located approximately 1341 m (4400 ft) upstream of
this point. The short-nosed sturgeon could inhabit the project
study area. A Section 7 Consultation with the National Marine
Fisheries Service will need to be scheduled to assess potential
impacts to this species. The consultation process will likely
involve an on-site meeting to address concerns to this species
from project construction.
American alligator
Animal Family: Crocodilidae
The American alligator is threatened due to similarity of
appearance with other rare species and is listed to protect these
species. The American alligator is not biologically endangered or
threatened and is not subject to Section 7 consultation.
Potential habitat for the American alligator does exist in the
project study area; although no individuals were observed during
the site visit. A review of NHP database of rare species and
unique habitats revealed known observations of the American
alligator approximately 610 m (2000 ft) east of the project study
area along Allen Creek.
loggerhead sea turtle
Animal Family: Cheloniidae
Date Listed: 28 July, 1978
Loggerhead turtles can be distinguished from other sea
turtles by its unique reddish-brown color. The loggerhead is
characterized by a large head and blunt jaws. Otherwise they have
5 or more costal plates with the first-touching -th- nuchal and 3
to 4 bridge scutes.
The loggerhead nests on beaches from Ocracoke inlet, North
Carolina through Florida. There are also major nesting grounds on
the eastern coast of Australia. It lives worldwide in temperate
to subtropical waters. Loggerheads nest nocturnally between May
and September on isolated beaches that are characterized by fine
grained sediments. It is mainly carnivorous feeding on small
marine animals.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is dominated by brackish marsh, upland
forest, disturbed habitat, and Allen Creek; there are no beach or
marine habitats located in the project study area. Additionally,
the project study area does not exhibit the salinity necessary to
support this species. Therefore, no effects to the loggerhead sea
turtle will occur from the construction of this project. A review
of the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and
unique habitats did not indicate the presence of loggerhead sea

17
turtle habitat or nesting activity within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the
project area.
piping plover
Animal Family: Charadriidae
Date Listed: 11 December, 1985
The piping plover is a small migratory shorebird that
resembles a sandpiper. It can be identified by the orange legs
and black band around the base of its neck. During the winter the
plover loses its black band, its legs fade to pale yellow, and the
bill fades to black. Breeding birds are characterized by white
underparts, a single black breastband, and a black bar across the
forehead.
The piping plover breeds along the east coast. This bird, in
North Carolina, nests in flat areas with fine sand and mixtures of
shells and pebbles. They nest most commonly where there is little
or no vegetation, but some may nest in stands of beach grass. The
nest is a shallow depression in the sand that is usually lined
with shells and pebbles. The piping plover is very sensitive to
human disturbances. The presence of people can cause the plover
to abandon its nest and quit feeding.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is comprised of brackish marsh
habitat, Allen Creek, pine-hardwood forest, and disturbed
communities. There is no suitable piping plover nesting,
foraging, or wintering habitat in or adjacent to the project study
area. A review of the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of
rare species and unique habitats did not indicate the presence of
any piping plover habitat or known populations within 1.6 km (1.0
mi) of the project area. This project will not impact the piping
plover.
green sea turtle
Animal Family: Cheloniidae
Date Listed: 28 July, 1978
The distinguishing factors found in the green of elongated
sea turtle are the single clawed flippers and a single pair scales
between the eyes. This sea turtle has a small head and a strong,
serrate, lower jaw.
The green sea turtle is found in temperate and tropical
oceans and seas. Nesting in North America is limited to small
communities on the east coast of Florida requiring beaches with
minimal disturbances and a sloping platform for nesting. The
green sea turtle can be found in*shallow waters. They are
attracted to lagoons, reefs, bays, mangrove swamps and inlets
where an abundance of marine grasses can be found. Marine grasses
are the principle food source for the green turtle. These turtles
18
require beaches with minimal disturbances and a sloping platform
for nesting. There are no records of green sea turtle nests in
North Carolina.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is dominated by brackish marsh, upland
forest, disturbed habitat, and Allen Creek; there are no beach or
marine habitats located in the project study area. Additionally,
the project study area does not exhibit the salinity necessary to
support this species. A review of the Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) database of rare species and unique habitats did not
indicate the presence of any green sea turtle habitat or nesting
activity within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project area. The
construction of this project will not affect this species.
leatherback sea turtle
Animal Family: Dermochelydae
Date Listed: 2 June, 1972
The leatherback sea turtle is the largest of the marine
turtles. Unlike other marine turtles, the leatherback has a shell
composed of tough leathery skin. The carapace has 7 longitudinal
ridges and the plastron has 5 ridges. The leatherback is black to
dark brown in color and may have white blotches on the head and
limbs.
Leatherbacks are distributed world-wide in tropical waters of
the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans. Leatherbacks prefer deep
waters and are often found near the edge of the continental shelf.
In northern waters they are reported to enter into bays,
estuaries, and other inland bodies of water. Leatherback nesting
requirements are very specific. They need sandy beaches backed
with vegetation in the proximity of deep water and generally with
rough seas. Beaches with a suitable slope and a suitable depth of
coarse dry sand are necessary for the leatherback to nest. Major
nesting areas occur in tropical regions and the only nesting
population in the United States is found in Martin County,
Florida. Leatherback nesting occurs from April to August.
Artificial light has been shown to cause hatchlings to divert
away from the sea. Leatherbacks feed mainly on jellyfish. They
are also known to feed on sea urchins, crustaceans, fish,
mollusks, tunicates, and floating seaweed.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is comprised of brackish marsh
habitat, Allen Creek, pine-hardwood forest, and disturbed
communities. . There are no suitable beach or marine habitats
located in the project study area. Additionally, the project
study area does not exhibit the salinity necessary to support this
species. Therefore, no effects to this species will occur from

19
the construction of this project. A review of the Natural
Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and unique
habitats did not indicate the presence of leatherback sea turtle
habitat or activity within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project area.
peregrine falcon
Animal Family: Falconidae
Date Listed: 20 March, 1984
The peregrine falcon has dark plumage along its back and its
underside is lighter, barred and spotted. It is most easily
recognized by a dark crown and a dark wedge that extends below the
eye forming a distinct helmet.
The American peregrine falcon is found throughout the United
States in areas with high cliffs and open land for foraging.
Nesting for the falcons is generally on high cliff ledges, but
they may also nest in broken off tree tops in the eastern
deciduous forest and on skyscrapers and bridges in urban areas.
Nesting occurs from mid-March to May.
Prey for the peregrine falcon consists of small mammals and
birds, including mammals as large as a woodchuck, birds as large
as a duck, and insects. The preferred prey is medium sized birds
such as pigeons.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is comprised of disturbed habitat,
brackish marsh, pine-hardwood forest, and Allen Creek. Portions
of the project study area could provide excellent foraging habitat
for this species. However, the construction of the project will -
not affect the foraging opportunity for this species. No peregrine
falcons or their nests were observed during the site visit. A
review of the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of. rare
species and unique habitats did not indicate the presence of
peregrine falcon nests or records within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the
project.area. This project will not affect the peregrine falcon.
eastern cougar
Animal Family: Felidae
Date Listed: June 4, 1973
The eastern cougar is described as a large, unspotted, long-
tailed cat. Cougars feed primarily on deer, but their diet may
also include small mammals, wild turkeys, and occasionally
domestic livestock, when available. Observations of the western
subspecies suggest that cougars begin breeding when 2 or 3 years
old and breed thereafter once every 2 to 3 years.
Historic records indicate that the eastern cougar once
occurred from eastern Canada southward into Tennessee and South
Carolina. Present United States distribution is limited to only a
20
few scattered areas at best. Recently there have been some
sightings reported in Minnesota and Michigan. In the Southeast
Region, there have been a number of sightings, but the best
evidence for a small permanent population has come from the Great
Smoky Mountain National Park Region. Based on a National Park
Service study that included both sighting reports and field
observations, there-were.an estimated three to six cougars living
in the park in 1975. Sightings have also be reported in three
other North Carolina areas including the Nantahala National
Forest, the northern portion of the Uwharrie National Forest, and
the State's southeastern counties. The remaining population of
this species is extremely small; exact numbers are unknown.
No preference for specific habitat types has been noted. The
primary need is apparently for a large wilderness
area with an adequate food supply. Male cougars of other
subspecies have been observed to occupy a range of 25 or more
square miles, and females from 5 to 20 square miles.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is surrounded by vast areas of
undeveloped upland and wetland communities. The brackish marsh
and Allen Creek could provide an adequate supply of food for this
species. However, the construction of the proposed project will
not limit foraging opportunities for this large predator. A
review of the Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare
species and unique habitats did not indicate the presence of
eastern cougar within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project area. No
Eastern cougars were observed during the site visit. This project
will not affect this species.
bald eagle
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 11 March, 1967
Adult bald eagles can be identified by their large white head
and short white tail. The body plumage is dark-brown to chocolate-
brown in color. In flight bald eagles can be identified by their
flat wing soar.
Eagle nests are found in close proximity to water (within a
half mile) with a clear flight path to the water, in the largest
living tree in an area, and having an open view of the surrounding
land. Human disturbance can cause an eagle to abandon otherwise
suitable habitat. The breeding season for the bald eagle begins
in December or January. Fish are the major food source for bald
eagles. Other sources include coots, herons, and wounded ducks.
Food may be live or carrion.
t Q
21
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is comprised of disturbed habitat,
brackish marsh, pine-hardwood forest, and Allen Creek. The
brackish marsh habitat and Allen Creek could provide foraging
habitat for the species; however, the construction of the project
will not affect foraging opportunities for the bald-eagle as marsh
habitat is abundant in the project vicinity. There were no bald
eagle nests or activity observed at or near the project study area
during the.site visit. A review of the Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) database of rare species and unique habitats did not
indicate the presence of bald eagle nests or records within 1.6 km
(1.0 mi) of the project area. This project will not affect the
bald eagle.
Kemp's ridley sea turtle
Animal .Family: Cheloniidae
Date Listed: 2 December, 1970
Kemp's ridley sea turtle is the smallest of the sea turtles
that visit North Carolina's coast. These turtles have a
triangular shaped head and a hooked beak with large crushing
surfaces. It has a heart-shaped carapace that is nearly as wide
as it is long with the first of five costal plates touching the
nuchal plates. Adult Kemp's ridley sea turtles have white or
yellow plastrons with a gray and olive green carapace. The head
and flippers are gray.
Kemp's ridley sea turtles live in shallow coastal and
estuarine waters, in association with red mangrove trees. A
majority of this sea turtle's nesting occurs in a 24 km (14.9
mile) stretch of beach between Barra del Tordo and Ostioal in the
state of Tamaulipas, Mexico. This turtle is an infrequent visitor
to the North Carolina coast and usually does not nest here.
Kemp's ridley sea turtle can lay eggs as many as three times
during the April to June breeding season. Kemp's ridley sea
turtles prefer beach sections that are backed up by extensive
swamps or large bodies of open water having seasonal narrow ocean
connections and a well defined elevated dune area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is comprised of brackish marsh
habitat, Allen Creek, pine-hardwood forest, and disturbed
communities. There are no suitable beach or marine habitats
located in the project study area. Additionally, the project
study area does not exhibit the salinity necessary to support this
species. Therefore, no effects to this species will occur from
the construction of this project. A review of the Natural
Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and unique
habitats did not indicate the presence of Kemp's ridl.ey sea turtle
habitat or activity within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project area.
22
wood stork
Animal Family: Ciconiidae
Date Listed: February 28, 1984)
Wood storks are large, long-legged wading birds, about 125 cm
(50 in) tall, with a wingspan of about 150 cm (60 in). Small fish
from 1 to 6 inches long, especially topminnows and sunfish,
provide this bird's primary diet. Feeding often occurs in
water 6 to 10 inches deep, where a stork probes with the bill
partly open.
The wood stork is a highly colonial species usually nesting
in large rookeries and feeding in flocks. Age at first breeding
is 4 years. In South Carolina, storks lay eggs from March to late
May, with fledging occurring in July and August. Nests are
frequently located in the upper branches of large cypress trees or
in mangroves on islands. Several nests are usually located in each
tree. Wood storks have also nested in man-made structures.
Recent United States breeding is restricted to Florida, Georgia,
and South Carolina. Storks from both populations move northward
after breeding, as far as Arkansas and Tennessee in the
Mississippi Valley, and North Carolina on the Atlantic coast.
Storks are birds of freshwater and brackish wetlands,
primarily nesting in cypress or mangrove swamps. They
feed in freshwater marshes, narrow-tidal creeks, or flooded tidal
pools. Particularly attractive feeding sites are depressions in
marshes or swamps where fish become concentrated during periods of
falling water levels.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study does provide suitable foraging habitat for
this species, as the brackish marsh would provide an abundant
supply of prey items. Cypress trees were also observed in the
project study area; however, there are no records of wood stork
nesting in North Carolina. The construction of the project will
not affect the foraging opportunity for the wood stork as marsh
habitat is abundant in the project vicinity. There were no wood
stork nests or activity observed at or near the project study area
during the site visit. A review of the Natural Heritage Program
(NHP) database of rare species and unique habitats did not
indicate the presence of wood stork nests or records within 1.6 km
(1.0 mi) of the project area. This project will not affect this
species.
red-cockaded woodpecker
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 13 October 1970
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that is
entirely black and white except for small red streaks on the sides
of the nape in the male. The back of the RCW is black and white
I . t
23
with horizontal stripes. -The breast and underside of this
woodpecker are white with streaked flanks. The RCW has a large
white cheek patch surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and
nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at least 50% pine,
lack a thick understory, and be contiguous with other stands to be
appropriate habitat for the RCW. These birds nest exclusively in
trees that are ,> 60 years old and are contiguous with pine stands
at least 30'years of age. The foraging range of the RCW is up to
200.0 hectares (500.0 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
m (12-100 ft) above the ground and average 9.1- 15.7 m (30-50 ft)
high. They can be identified by a large incrustation of running
sap that surrounds the tree. The RCW lays its eggs in April, May,
and June; the eggs hatch approximately 38 days later.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Suitable nesting and foraging habitat for red-cockaded
woodpeckers, in the form of old growth pine forests, is not
located in the project study area. There were no pines of
sufficient size and density located in the project study area or
nearby vicinity. A review of NHP database of rare species and
unique habitats revealed no known populations of RCW within 1.0 km
(1.6 mi) of the project study area. Impacts to this species will
not occur from project construction.
manatee
Animal Family: Trichechidae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967
The manatee is a large gray or brown aquatic mammal. Adults
average about 3 m (10 ft) long and weighing around 1,000 pounds.
The body of the manatee is nearly hairless except for a muzzle
covered with stiff "whiskers". The U.S. manatee population was
probably twice as abundant in the 1700's and early 1800's as at
present. Initial population decreases resulted from
overharvesting-for meat, oil, and leather. Today, heavy mortality
is attributed to accidental collisions with boats and barges,
along with loss of suitable habitat.
Manatees inhabit both salt and freshwater habits of
sufficient depth (greater than 1.5 m). They may be encountered in
canals, sluggish rivers, estuarine beaches, and salt water bays.
Observations of salt water populations indicate that they may
require fresh water for drinking purposes. Manatees also require
warm water. When water temperature drops below 20 C, they begin
24
to move into warmer water, often forming large aggregations in
natural springs and industrial outfalls during the winter.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
It has been documented that the manatee utilizes brackish
waters, as it will move freely between salinity extremes. They
are often found in waters 1 to 2 m (3 to 7 ft) deep. Manatees
often spend much of their time underwater or partially submerged.
This species could potentially utilize the project study area.
The USFWS has developed a document titled "Precautions for
general construction in areas which may be used by the West
Indian manatee in North Carolina" (see Appendix A). If these
precautions are considered in all aspects of project
construction, this project will not affect the manatee. If in
the event that a manatee is observed during construction,'a May
Affect scenario would apply and Section 7 Consultation with the
USFWS should be initiated, to resolve concerns over the species.
seabeach amaranth
Plant Family: Amaranthaceae
Federally Listed: 7 May, 1993
Flowers Present: June to frost
Seabeach amaranth is an annual legume that grows in clumps
containing 5 to 20 branches and are often over a foot across. The
trailing stems are fleshy and reddish-pink or reddish in color.
Seabeach amaranth has thick, fleshy leaves that are small, ovate-
spatulate, emarginate and rounded. The leaves are usually spinach
green in color, cluster towards the end of a stem, and have winged
petioles. Flowers grow in axillary fascicles and the legume has
smooth, indehiscent fruits. Seeds are glossy black. Both fruits
and flowers are relatively inconspicuous and born along the stem.
Seabeach amaranth is endemic to the Atlantic Coastal Plain
beaches. Habitat for seabeach amaranth is found on barrier island
beaches functioning in a relatively dynamic and natural manner.
Seabeach amaranth grows well in overwash flats at the accreting
ends of islands and the lower foredunes and upper strands of non-
eroding beaches. Temporary populations often form in blowouts,
sound-side beaches, dredge spoil, and beach replenishment. This
species is very intolerant to competition and is not usually found
in association with other species. Threats to seabeach amaranth
include beach stabilization projects, all terrain vehicles
(ATV's), herbivory by insects, animals, beach grooming, and beach
erosion.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is comprised of brackish marsh
habitat, Allen Creek, pine-hardwood forest, and disturbed
communities. There are no beach habitats located in the project
study area. Therefore, no effects to this species will occur from
the construction of this project. A review of the Natural

25
Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and unique
habitats did not indicate the presence of sea beach amaranth
within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project area.
rough-leaved loosestrife
Plant Family: Primulaceae
Federally Listed: June 12, 1987
Flowers Present: June
Rough-leaved loosestrife is a perennial herb having slender
stems and whorled leaves. This herb has showy yellow flowers
which usually occur in threes or fours. Fruits are present from
July through October.
Rough-leaved loosestrife is endemic to the coastal plain and
sandhills of North and South Carolina. This species occurs in the
ecotones or edges between longleaf pine uplands and pond pine
pocosins (areas of dense shrub and vine growth usually on a wet,
peat, poorly drained soil), on moist to seasonally saturated sands
and on shallow organic soils overlaying sand. It has also been
found to occur on deep peat in the low shrub community of large
Carolina bays (shallow, elliptical, poorly drained depressions of
unknown origins). The areas it occurs in are fire maintained.
Rough-leaved loosestrife rarely occurs in association with
hardwood stands and prefers acidic soils.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION NO EFFECT
Suitable habitat for rough-leaved loosestrife does not exist
as there are no ecotones or edges between longleaf pine uplands
and pond pine pocosins on moist to seasonally saturated sands and
on shallow organic soils overlaying sand in the project study
area. A review of the NHP rare species and unique habitat
database did not reveal the presence of rough-leaved loosestrife
within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project area. Impacts to this
species will not occur from project construction.
Cooley's meadowrue
Plant Family: Ranunculaceae
Federally Listed: February 7, 1989
Flowers Present: late June-July (best mid July)
Cooley's meadowrue is a rhizomatous perennial plant with
stems that grow to one meter in length. Stems are usually erect
in direct sunlight but are-lax and may lean on other plants or
trail along the ground in shady areas. Leaves are usually
narrowly lanceolate and unlobed, some two or three lobed leaves
can be seen. The flowers lack petals. Fruits mature from August
to September.
Cooley's meadowrue occurs in moist to wet bogs and savannahs.
It also grows along fireplow lines, roadside ditches, woodland
clearings, and powerline rights-of-way that provide the hydrology
26
necessary to support this species. Cooley's meadowrue needs some
type of disturbance to maintain its open habitat. Plants often
found growing with the meadowrue include tulip poplar growing with
cypress and/or Atlantic white cedar. Cooley's meadowrue only
grows well in areas with full sunlight.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project study area is comprised of brackish marsh
habitat, Allen Creek, pine-hardwood forest, and disturbed
communities. There are no wet bogs or savannahs at the site. The
disturbed community at the project area is regularly maintained is
a xeric, upland site. Therefore, there is no suitable habitat for
this species located in the project study area. A review of the
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and unique
habitats did not indicate the presence of Cooley's meadowrue
within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project area. No effects to this
species will occur from the construction of this project.
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are those plant and animal
species which may or may not be listed in the future. Thirty-five
FSC are listed for Brunswick County (Table 3).
27
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern.
Common Name Scientific Name NC
Status Habitat
Bachman's sparrow Aimophila aestivalis SC No
Henslow's sparrow Ammodramus henslowii SR No
Carolina pygmy sunfish Elassoma boehlkei T No
southern hognose snake Heterodon simus SR Yes
mimic glass lizard Ophisaurus mimicus SC Yes
eastern painted bunting Passerini c. ciris SR Yes
Northern pine snake Pituophis m. melanoleucus SC Yes
Carolina gopher frog Rana c. capito SC No
Bucholz's dart moth Agrotis bucholzi SR No
Arogos skipper Atrytone a. arogos SR No
Waccamaw spike Elliptio waccamawensis T No
Venus flytrap cutworm Hemipachnobia s. SR No
moth subporphyrea
magnificent ramshorn Planorbella magnifica E No
rare skipper Problema bulenta SR Yes
Cape Fear threetooth Triodopsis soelneri T Yes
savanna indigo-bush Amorpha georgiana var. E No
confusa
honeycomb head Balduina atropurpurea C No
Chapman's sedge Carex chapmanii W1 No
Venus flytrap Dionaea muscipula C-SC No
dwarf burhead Echinodorus parvulus C No
Harper's fimbry Fimbristylis perpusilla T No
pondspice Litsea aestivalis C No
Carolina bogmint Macbridea caroliniana C/PT No
loose watermilfoil Myriophyllum laxum T No
savanna cowbane Oxypolis ternata W1 No
Carolina grass-of- Parnassia caroliniana E No
parnassus
pineland plantain Plantago sparsiflora E No
awned meadow-beauty Rhexia aristosa T No
swamp forest beaksedge Rhynchospora decurrens C No
Thorne's beaksedge Rhynchospora thornei C/PE No
Carolina goldenrod Solidago pulchra E No
spring-flowering Solidago versa E/PT No
goldenrod
wireleaf dropseed Sporobolus teretifolius T No
sensus stricto
Carolina asphodel Tofieldia glabra C No
dune bluecurls Trichostema sp. 1 C No
savanna campylopus Campylopus carolinae C No
Threatened (T) are native or once-native species of wild
plant or animal which is likely to become an endangered species
within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant
portion of its range. An Endangered (E) species is any native
species or once-native species of fauna or flora whose continued
existence as a viable component of the State's flora or fauna is
determined to be in jeopardy. Significantly rare (SR) species
are very rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20 populations
28
in the state. Special Concern (SC) species require monitoring
but which may be collected and sold under regulations adopted
under provisions of the Plant Protection and Conservation Act.
Proposed Threatened (PT) are species which have been formally
proposed for listing as Threatened, but has not yet completed the
legally mandated listing process. Candidate (C) species are very
rare in North Carolina, with 1-20 populations in the state,
generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat
destruction. Proposed Candidate (PC) are species which have been
formally proposed for listing as Candidate but has not yet
completed the legally mandated listing process. Watch Category 1
(W1) includes rare species whose status in North Carolina is
relatively well known and which appear to be relatively secure at
this time.
FSC species are not afforded federal protection under the
ESA and are not subject to any of its provisions, including
Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as
Threatened or Endangered. Organisms which are listed as
Endangered (E), Threatened (T) or Special Concern (SC) by the NHP
list of Rare Plant and Animal species are afforded state
protection under the State ESA and the North Carolina Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979; however, the level of
protection given to state listed species does not apply to NCDOT
activities.
A review of the NHP database of rare species and unique
habitats revealed records of the following species located within
1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project study area:
• southern hognose snake approximately 488 m (1600 ft) south of
the project study area.
• Carolina gopher frog approximately 915 m (3000 ft) south of
the project study area.
• eastern painted bunting approximately 1585 m (5200 ft)
southeast of the project study area.
Surveys for the above-mentioned species were not conducted during
the site visit, nor were these species observed during the site
visit.
5.0 References
Amoroso, J.L. 1995. "Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare
Plant Species of North Carolina." Raleigh, North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Goulet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979.
Classifications of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United States., U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C.
29
Environmental Laboratory.- 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army
Enginneer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Fish, F.F. 1968. A Catalog of the Inland Fishing Waters of
North Carolina. North Carolina Wildlife Resource
Commission, Division of Inland Fisheries.
Lee, D.S., J.B. Funderburg, Jr., and M.K. Clark. 1982. _A
Distributional Survey of North Carolina Mammals. Raleigh,
North Carolina Museum of Natural History.
LeGrand, Jr., H.E. and S.P. Hall. 1997. "Natural Heritage
Program List of the Rare Animal Species of North Carolina".
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III.
1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and
Virginia. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina
Press.
Menhinick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina.
Raleigh, North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission.
Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink. 1986. Wetlands. New York, Van
Nostrand Reichold.
Moser, M. and Ross, S. 1993. Distribution and Movements of
Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) and Other
Anadromous Fishes of the Lower Cape Fear River, North
Carolina. Final Report to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
North Carolina Center far-Geographic Information and Analysis.
1995. Environmental Sensitivity Base Map of Brunswick
County, North Carolina.
"North Carolina Division of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR). 1995a. Cape Fear River Basinwide
Water Quality Management Plan. Division of Environmental
Management.
North Carolina Division of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR). 1995b. Guidance for Rating the Values
of Wetlands in North Carolina. Division of Environmental
Management.
North Carolina Division of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR). 1996. A Field Guide to North Carolina
Wetlands. Division of Environmental Management.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(NCDENR). 1998. Stream Classification-Internet
Website. Division of Water Quality.
30
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of
the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, The University of North
Carolina Press.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the
Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, The
University of North Carolina Press.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the
Natural Communities of North Carolina (3rd Approx.)
Raleigh, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
Tiner, R. 1993. Field Guide to Coastal Wetland Plants of the
Southeastern United States. Amherst, The University of
Massachusetts Press.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1986. Soil
Survey of Brunswick County. Soil Conservation
Service.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of
the Carolinas, Virginia, and Maryland. Chapel Hill, The
University of North Carolina Press.
APPENDIX A
- ... _?_... QPTiONAL FOAM 99 (7-90) --'-
FAX TRANSMITTAL •of pages W
70 From
?" E eJT?G y
D?w?Agenry Pnor• r
United States Departrr Faxr D° F,x, S-6 - yS
s r ?:
OGl""'^='`• ? k5N X540-07_JiT_778p T 7 y Sppg-701 GENERAL SERVICES FISH AND ?VILDLI.- ADMINISTRATION
_, ...,..... ___
Raleigh Feld Office
..Pi Post OL9ce Boa 33726
A .3 »• Raleigh. Noah Carolina 27636-3726 July 2, 1996
PRECAUTIONS FOR GENERAL- CONSTRUCTION IN AREAS WHICH MAY BE
USED BY THE WEST INDLrN KL AT^.E IN NORTH CAIRCLIN.a
The West Indian m.manatse rmsnatus) , also kncwn as the
Florida manatee or sea cow, is a Fader-ally-listed en:ancered
mamma. Alt ough the manatee's principal stronghold in the
_n ced States is Florida, it ecca-sionally manes seasonal
iIdgrations into and trroug *_h= C.oas' waters C= North Carolina
i- =n addition to przcection
= the '.ear
c: .:r_-
under ? =the=? warner :?..nt s o: _ Federal En da:_ce_ed Species Act (ESA) of 1973, the
oecies is listed as endue-gered in North Carolina under t e State
F: dangered Species Act (G.S. 113-331 to Z13-337). Additional
is pier'-ded under the Marine* Mammal Prot act_on
-ct of 972. The J. S. r =5;1 a _d ` Id" i e Service is res=cnsihle
or rCCeC=_cn and recover t/ Cf the manatee under rrovisions
.e p
of the ESQ..
Tanatee is an acua-lic mam-tr.31 w.hic= -aJ use fresh water,
i:rac'.?_sh, or marine habitats. The species can, move freely
I tween Sa_inity .°xtrermes. The species may he round in Si allow
_oastal waters, baya, lagoons, estuaries, Fivers, and _r.land
_-t
7='.-,=s. r:ana.. --_es are commcn i v found in water haree t.^. seven -feet
of the; time underwater or pa -- -
rap . _^_ o ' Y
manatees spend -,.uc
s utD(`;:__ _ _d, and this be...av-_r often makes the species difficult to
detac_ Most adult manatees are about 10 fee= long and weig'r__a
^.ez-..',een SGT and 1,200 coun.S alt::ough score i?divid'uals 'have ?een
CCrd_d at Greater than 12 feet -n lergLh and weigh- ng as ma:c'-
re-
as 1,200 pounds.
_n order to protect the manatee in ?north Carolina, the Raleigh
Field: G fife daVelOped reGOm-nendations for general conSt=uc ion
actin- es in aquatic areas which may ba used by. the sC?CleS.
The riana-ee -s generally considered a seasonal inhabitant of.
North Caro" .ina with reported. occurrences bei._a craatest du=gin?
1l the months o= June through October. The Service prefers that in-
water construction which carp be completed in several months be
scheduled during the seven month period of November through May.
• Y.cwetr_'r,--th= Service believes that the implementation of the
following recor.mendations will allow major, in-water construction
projects which- ^o not rec.,.ire blasting to proceed without adverse
1
i:roacts to manatees. While most ccnditions must be implemanted
throughout the year, other requirements may be implemented only
during the period when manatees are most likely to he in North
Carolina waters, currently considered to be the months of June
through October. The conditions which should be implemented
thrcuahout the year are:
1. The project manager and/or contractor will inform all .
personnel associated with the project that manatees may be
present in the project area, primarily during the months of
June through October, and the need to avoid any harm to
these endangered mammals. The project manager will ensure
that all construction De=scnnel knew the general a:,pearance
of the species and their habit of moving about completely or
partially. submerged in shallcw water (see Figure 1) . 21-1-_1
construction personnel will be irforn:ei that they are
responsible for oise_v_ng water---elated activities for tho
presence oz manatees.
. The nrcjec= rranage_ a d; or the ?co :tractor will advise a!-"
cc•r.struczion persc..ne t .----t there are civil and criminal
penalties for harm.-- a, hara5sina, or killing Itianatees :Y ii; .=h
are prntec_ed under Lein Marine Mamma- F_otect_on Act c_ 1972
a-nd the ESA.
a manate°_ 1s seen wic124_n 1010 yards c-f t^e active
:g oT__?erazicn or vcSSel mOJE.T.ei'ic, all
s=zrozriate precautions will be imr1lement°_d to ensure
rotecticn of the crana tee. These prec unions will include
_e imr:ediaze shutdowrn of mov l :-, eaui z-zzient if a manatee
comes wizhin ^0 feet of ODerational area of the
er,:ioment.' -Activities will not resume until 'the manatee has
aecartec the n=osed- area cn its own vol:tisn.
4. Ary collision with and/or injury to a manatee will be
reported icxnediately. The rec_ort must be made to the
Service's manatee coordinator in Jacksonville, F_crida lnr.
904-232-2560 , the Rale_ah Field O`--`ice (ph. 915-8=E-4520),
and the North Carolina Wildlife -Resources Corr- miss ion (ph
519-224-1288) . The project manager should coordinate iii
the Serv'_cs immediately -crior to the start of ccnst= cticn
-for the name and current telephone cumber cf the individuals
.
to be contacted.
_ A' sign should be.. posted in all vessels associated with the
project where it is clearly visib'e?to tie vessel ope_atcr.
The sign should state:,

2
f
:+u 11r.D J:._b i 1.\ I 511J J.i.i ;.;.,b I'? r'? la-1C'L.I-. IL.II.\t.
CAUTION: The endangered manatee may occur in these
waters during the warmer months, primarily from June
through October. Idle sp=ed is required if operating
this vessel in shallow water during these months: All
equiomert must be shut down if a -manatee comes within
50 feet of operating equipment. A collision with
and/or injury to a manatee will be reported Immediately
to U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service at 919-856-4520 and
the North Carolina Wildlife Resources commission at
919-224-1288.
(?. The contractor will maintain a Ica detailing sigtir_gs,
collisions, or injuries to manatees during project
construction. After construction the project manager will
prepare a report which summarizes all ir_formation or.
;,(a nat_eS daring construction. This repart will be submitted
to the Se_vi-:'s Za_ei;a Field Of `_ice and NC;vzC.
'^ f_l l ow4 na conditions Wiil only b= r=cn i d
u re Lor corst=.:C+-
Z z oTI
the period Lrcm June 1 tf:rOL'QTl CCLo'--er 31, the mariod w-en
ma. aLees are most likely to be in Port_ Caroli..a:
ki 1 vessels asscCiatel with the coast-ucti cn project will
operate at ono wake/idle" speeds a= all times while in water
fi -Pre the deaf= c= the vessel provides =ess the
ra .ce _=rn th-e hcttom. Ali. vessels will follow
of deep war-e= W °_*:°_Ve: poss=bl°_. ..L S
8. i. slitat:Cn barriers must be places in shallow water, these
barrier will he. (a) maC?e O material '.n WhiCh man--tees
r
can. o_ become entangled; (b; sec;,:re•i iZ >,.wnr.=r that they
ca'_•lnot break free and entangle manatees; and, (C) re_ularly
:'tvl2=tGY°d t0 ens-..:re nens-..:re that P ai:at__3 have not b2C0.:.8 er::MIM led.
Barriers will be placed i : a manner to al l:,:•r manatees en-: r-
=n or =::?t from essential habitat.
F_r projects which require an Envirorcrental Assessment or t
virc't!_n eel I.:.p_ct Statement pursuant to the National
?vi.or e^t.1 Po'i-Y Act (NEPAL), the inclusion of these
c•)ndl___ons in the environmental documentation as part c,= e
tZ
-t,,:er:alnat_s of 4rrpacts on the manatee will axgedi-e t e
S't rvlceI s =evlew of the INE"P docu-ment for the TUlflll-en- of
requirements under Section 7 cf the ESA.
OPTIONAL FOMM 19 (7. 9.31
FAX TRAtISMITTAL •ofavarsI,
To FMm
D?ptlAyiwR •, _ :. _
Faa'r Fax `
NSN 7S•t0-Jt.Jt7. 7;611 , bz"-lUt GENrAa: seRwcas ACl./IWSTAA7ICN 3
Lo()u1

F'_ju're 1. Illustration of a typical surface view of a
suLmerged manatee (A), a side vie%, of a partially submerged1clly
=:anatee (B), and the typical body of shape of the manatee •(C) .
Source; Clark, M. K. 1987. Trichechus manatus Linnaeus, West
Indian (Florida) Manatee. PP-18-21 in M. K. Clark (ed.)
Endangered, Threatened, and Ra=e Fauna of North Carolina. Part
I. A re-evaluation of the mammals. Occasional Papers of the
North Carolina Biological Survey. No. 1987-3. North Carolina
State Museum of Natural Sciences. Raleigh, NC.

7S
:-3
B
•• • ' ' ... -?>,.::' ??'a_ mot:
?•t' ) .1w .• .w Lam..
Fie. 10. The whsle body of the West Indian (Florida) -Aanatee may be visible in clear water; but in the dart: and mudey
waters of caastai `forth Carolina, one normally sees oniy a small part of the -head when the rnana:ee raises its rose to
breathe (upper !eft).
4
a„
EPR:IOIE4"CT** 8.1231503 B-3116
O 3! E . .
3 o m o ?i
Z O 5 A ? 1 V ?I
8
y O
N ? ? v
0 c ? ? n
0
'
f
0: to o. o• r oD y
? 3???0o a ^? `? a
w
aE Oy ?i
O
O z z y? to to
WN
v +
o?
L-
O y ?Cy? y Q y
O m
L-
ROJ Q
C
w o+
F
Cq It
A t?
`p 4
n n n ?
° o
CO) c°a m r
°D 3 3 I ? ? Qtr----
W
g 7m
m b
SO
W y^, ? ?i
10 bx ?
N O
V
0 a r Rik, x
C-i
b ? ? w
+
y
M y
w
m
04,
12 2 2
?o
?o xx

y

w ia 3

m 3. y m N N N p T z0 N
am fee
0 V 3
O a
0
p• ° 7
SQ 40
p V
3 O ? N
Q
m
C O 'O O Q Q O d'. O
go
m
y R m
T 07 C
oQ a ? o a

m x n o 3 ? ?!
Q A CL ° O

?
? I
I

O O O p• a
? •a p ; • u
y? --1 0 0? m c m so ?° o.
O O O qQq??
' ZO
3 3 IP * rt O S S«
3 O 0 S - m n
p p A o O o- O. - _O. oC w
m ° O A Ap' ` 4
171 G ; O O O -Q 1?
3 0 ? ° A T A S? m? O
m 13
m m -'' a a
r
m Q. Q_
?p p
T'J'1
7 t
III
,v M 0 91 -0 .0 -0
O O' O A m
C O C
v? spcp p p a p a- o
O 4 C C A` p S N v?
° O' a a, A °- r O N N O
0 b
0 o c o ,,, ? y
c T o o A
3 s 7 = c
A O s
o'
? y
v
ti
I I
? "II
I ? I? I
I I I
I i i t I
v!C --1 T..1 -1NN y-I? yy =C (7 -1 yN ?N2 A -1y y y y p 'n ? _ ;
o_ Q o Q o° 0 ° o Q o -+ o
3 O 1 S o m 1 ?I ms1 0 s?? °a•8O••oa •,°o v c °_ o o °Q Z
Q °?. o? 3 =? O •O o a rt o c_ m O O _ m v v ° Q_ p
p A °' rt y - I `2.0 O O O_ p m c. C Re
a °, -I Z -1 0° ?• 3 O O A o o o Ox 0 40 A N 3 0 0 0 03 y 0 3 O-1 ° 3 Op p o A O '°C o m o m
0 N° ?•, ° ;; ° W O s p W s a; Q y s CCs -. s oa 7
0 O'O O O S; AZo o
•a p a m O
$ o 0 0 y y K O.
v ?.? 0 3 Q o so o O° Q o °-o Q_p °°$ C
O O '+ O= Q b O_ y b
O O 0 0 0 0 S' °; _ of Q 0 0 O
° a O
l0 O X M O o 3 °
y O X = 0 Q
O 3
A
®eB):?O O ®m0®oa I II
®I3?0?'B®O+®Csa®®0?13?? o- .. I 0 1 II
I I ??
Z?. m y y y y y y o A O A N
-0 -0 3 3 3 !? m 0 0• O O r 3 0
Q d` ° Q.. C Op 0-0 3 T2 r m O O
033 °° °
' CC
?cm QQ $
3 0 ?,? o
d Q O o rt C
y ? C
C 3
3 3 c ° y
c ON i
d. C
3
I I I I
I ;*X
I i
I :. :I 6? N ?I '?00
v a W
I I I I=I I ?
I I I I '? + I? I I
N ? N
A N 3
s m o
0
p C
O
= N N
03 S O °• m m
p ? ?- q O m
m
c

A
H
O
s
O
c
O
--1
y
? ? Iv I ? I
rr?
vJ
tl p 7p
O p
° 7p C p
O p
O O p
° OH p p N
O Q p
O a
O
° ?•
0
2 O ?• O m O O O
O ?• O m• ?f E O
CL -1 ` 3 0 '
3 "
0
-1 0-
-n
CL Q. 3 S7
0- CL 0
0- CL
a- CL
00- m Q
CL O.
U,
< 0 S O a
o fA O 5. •
r
C ; rt
O
r

Fn O

C N-
'

V ° r
a " A A a o Q
• y o
A
' c• °o- m 3
° o
A °
Lr o
° H
C C
rn °
c in
C
o o o
Vi A
0 O
0. ° m - n m
C Q
O C in
rt .? m
3
in
r rt to v O
3
..
in
C
V
T T y y I
r 1
1 N ? N N N
H e O i i I i
i i ?
i i I'I ? I I I

I

? ? ?

I

I

I
9
I

I?

?

I

I

? I 1
•
1

I
O C O K O C 40
O < .
C O Q 71
C O Q. O
° Q Q
:L S
O
C

A O

n A 2 s
O
° c N
C
7 ?.
oss
Q
Q.
s

i I I I ? 1

' 1
i I I I

1 I I 1
i i I I I ;
? I I ?
i I 1

N

3
e0
0
O

ca n
3 7R" p c
O C 7" C
O
O

0
3
°
0 c
3 a
CL 3
o
O

n
0
z
m
Z
O
Z
D
r
N
0
r
N
C
V

/l r

x 00 No I? I I O' L.r''
LI I?
N
C
m
II
N
C
n
m
z
a
m
m
M
00
? a
\p of \60311609:59
6/2/99
:0 ? S > Mm-IM -I= am?m j9 >-ly -0 ?i?a m?a -4 Ow ->l9
0 M.
1
i?1
> -4 010 010 a -u IUD a> O>
g
N
t
MT mmi C=WQ ?DCZ'? DO map Q ?Omo9 OmDZ !OZ 3: z '••?
s
w
CA 9m S
?•
p O
L
v
p + s
ca c
n ?N' s N
m Z? c
o ?
r
i
i
Z
O L L
+°t Z 1? 5 m `4
46
a L
Jr. x a -4
I rr N
1
m I U" + Z I " CCU $ Z r
xzth 'MM fi 0 D $ O.o I t3 z O Z
G;U O r Cv $ Z N I m A O ? O ym
c> m z Z 68a o . m
CL? OZ rn LJ- m O rn n l J-` O m i
I-I
UZI
?O w (7 Ol 5 C? n
m > I r 7 OZ ' m m OZ
O O a
mr O A?r is Z'" I OOW O Z'° w
cM oFA Z I or + 9 1 I } o
c l
? a' I Z I r?? Z Z
F. Z co
R° Z I ??8 Z p 1 gt s
> fl N :14. E
Z O is N O I_ ?s r a
E
' •* °1
7 00 s W I p m?? O
8 W
m
v
M a
M
z
M
rip
? C N ? N M N ? 171 ? w
N
.A..
m m ?mD? >10 oo v v r
D o
m o a
zr?M o
I? mvvo
mv
i v0
my
v
v
•o>v

m»
o
,•, i ?z• ?. rz• a =v
m o 9
>
o "
ms my -,oaDi :°y ¢v ? m¢> <v av

?o
m
a-
a
s
x •
o
ar
o my M10 am= my my

?
m
a
D
>O
>mm
m0
yip
yip
?+>•
>O yy
>O
1 O Z ZOO zm-
m .
X pX pX 200 DX OX
z D mm
Or m A?D'o m• M. mm m• m.
m pp r mDs1
W? 9!o sr1-f
. x y
-iN ?N r
Da-1 9N ;+
i
m l
i >I?npo ? >x
m >
?
?
o =??^? ? z?
? m . m a 7
omD m m -D

? .. zmx
o •nx mw<x
z <m
i 4i? tom 1
s?
xrD
1
A N -
< m
0 O tma m-i m m ON O-r 01 R1
m mro ro m o -1 -1 O
r1c i
r, Z

-i i m m zmm
cz i
m
• z
m m 1
m ? ?

?
9
?
?? vmm mm mm n
m m m r ?+ m ? ? 9 7°m
?m
c ca>o M-_ w
m p p
ra m
?c ° m

m

Z•
m

m

-
mA9-?

i
c
c
c r
c me

D
_ C
a °
°c ° ? > zom o> o>
m• c M m?
• m
N ? 9 M Z. M m ? m O O m m
n 0
-0> ' z
O ?
o : m
m
+r mD
;
m O
c am=
?9w o
o 0
c
v a.. s o a m c
m
_ ?
a
m zPs ?o xm :^ im m
o m O• C?
o
-IN N IOiIOm Om -T m
m
9xa m i• m ? v i
om m m
1°m °m xm
m o
o? 9a D om m m
m
o 6
? a
sa a m m
mm m

6-MMAR p1 09:59
_ _\P , o?\631 64um _

n
T
O.
°
s
P ZO
O

o?o
o?o
a
D
r 13
??
M??
? m m ?
N
N
a j

pl m_ m
x
o
pAp y?
C C r p r p

?
? o w
Q

En J N r
0
0 N
0 5!
25
v

O

6 O ??

W N

J
N J
IT

w a
w

C
W
o TS

E
K
m n
C ° ?1
1

a

A
a g
S

? g
?I
N N
O°
y
Z
>

A
N N
r a
O? a
O? a
0? a
01

o
? ? IOCATION aT.W.OR Cy
N - IR?

C

WW MAIM 0 .

d C
N - 6NM KWA7IDH

? Z ? Z N
'^
K o N N DWW ENA710H 'Al 0

JIM R
JW Yi
J1f4 Z
JI/4

A"

.079

w un DUN IM y
V
n•sm Dom
24' S DMN ME
x
LCP

T8 W" {D'TNp1
SM
QUANUM
FM DR%*": r?

r?

SJM 4iM aff
> S1RIRYISS3
• TOTAL L.F. FOR MT
7RrAHO
AWE . auw+m MALL M COL

A + X COI.
c.L s10. mm m Man=

^b
DJ. SID. NQ1S OR M ON."
DJ. RAMS S GM7E SID. SMA t

M=TWE'A' SUL S17 OR 84026 I

.
ALD.LTYIE'rSM MU OR MV
?
ALDJ.7"% IV SID. 840.1! OR $020
AUKL IMME WITH DRAIE SID. 84LS2
AID.. MWM W H TWO GMTES SID. 84022
"L CIS} IRAME WDH ORATE SID 006U
M AL P34 M%W WDH IWO GRATES SID. S40.U
JL SID:8" OR 840.52
MD.L EMME WOH TWO GRACES STD. M "
TJL DJ. SID. Sam
GOER Sim awn HQ S sm
CONG COIIASS 0.'r C.Y. sm son
COW-& L Es1E MA r-11.SUL n
ASUML UK".
s °°r
911
Y
N N
y m
r ? ?

K

a
?
C

<
?

a
o
n m
?

H
pp
2 ?
s

r
r
C

o

?

0

n m
a

?
8
m

c
°°
0
r o
S
a
'-
?
m
0 +
0 ?
p O+D c°o ? ? w w

i
? a
a s
s
o
0

s
N
N
D
O
y
N
N
e
C ? ?

b

a
lol l

o ? 8

9
i
M?
f?
i4\
C
C
6/21/00
C?
z ®
z
x?
x?
fl

jut
n
No
?
~
r? I

I

.
oo
m1yN

,
I
ai:
H ? r

i N i
I.
cccelcc
OPPP?$
e'xob $
;; 11 ?rN
r{iiN
N?

Q
r
N ?
a+ tY
aaz
? O 4 " 0"

?O

a
d
,

? K
?I
x
x
m? b
o
ww
it 71{
?O
le Z

V
I II I
a
? I
I i! I
I ?? g
a 2
a
?X
3 ?
Q
rO
A
2?; C5
4^c?,
y
nnnll"n":
y
n
?c
ae
iw
-0
-?r
-?w
-,w
1.0
A n
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
April 16, 2003
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Applicant:
Mr. John R. Dorney
Environmental Biological Supervisor
Division of Water Quality
Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
030490
?f
APR 1 7 ?_ 003
CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
NC Department of Transportation
Project Location: Brunswick County, Bridge No. 56, on NC 133 over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek).
Proposed Project: Proposes to replace the existing 60- foot long timber, concrete and steel bridge over
Allen Creek with a 300-foot long cored slab concrete bridge spanning Allen Creek
and the adjacent Coastal Wetlands. Approximately 220 feet of causeway would be
excavated from the existing roadbed and restored to its previous wetland hydrology.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form by
May 7, 2003. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Bill Arrington at
[phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
SIGNED Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]]DAMnet: www.nccoastalmanag-ement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
?} s
,
t
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NAME: North Carolina Department of Transportation
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: Bridge No. 56, on NC 133 over Allen Creek
(Lilliput Creek) in Brunswick County
Photo Index - 2000: No Photo 1995: 13 -127 grid: L-9
State Plane Coordinates: x 2316368 y: 120067 GPS: Rover File # X031317A
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 3/13/2003
Was Agent Present - No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received as Complete - 4/14/2003
Office -Morehead City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION: ®8 ®4
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Brunswick County
Land Classification from LUP - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: CW, PTA and PTS
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - NC 133 and 60-foot long by 24-foot wide bridge
Plann ed - NC 133 and 300-foot long by 39-foot wide bridge
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: N/A Source: N/A
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
Excavated Filled Ot her
(A) Coastal Wetlands 0.33 acres 0.21 acres temporary
Disturbance for
erosion control

B) Public Trust Area - Shallow ggItlh
144
0 sq. ft.
Kal
Bottom Shading 900 sq. ft.
(C) Other - High Ground 0.25 acres 1.04 acres
(causeway (In roadway)
removal)
(D) Total CAMA AEC Disturbed: 1.83 acres
(E) Total area disturbed by project: 1.83 acres
(F) Primary Nursery Area: No
(G) Water Classification: C-SW
(H) Open for Shellfi shing: No
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The N.C. Department of Transportation is proposing to replace the
existing 60-foot long timber, concrete and steel bridge over Allen Creek with a 300-foot long
cored slab concrete bridge spanning Allen Creek and the adjacent Coastal Wetlands.
Approximately 220 feet of causeway would be.excavated from the existing roadbed and restored
to its previous wetland hydrology.
1L
V
l
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
NC DOT - B-3116, Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek, Brunswick County
PAGE 2
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION :
The site of this proposal is Bridge No. 56 on NC 133, 0.8 miles north of Orton at the crossing of
Allen Creek, in Brunswick County. The general purpose of the project is to replace the
deteriorated 60-foot long by 24-foot wide timber, steel and concrete bridge with an 300- foot long
by 39-foot wide concrete cored slab bridge Spanning Allen Creek and the adjacent Coastal
Wetlands, to alleviate flooding of the bridge approaches, allow safer driving conditions for the
traveling public and restore a more natural hydrology to the Coastal Wetlands adjacent to bridge
No. 56.
Bridge No. 56 crosses Allen Creek 0.5 miles west of its confluence with the Cape Fear River. The
bridge crossing Allen Creek is flanked with Coastal Wetlands, except for the narrow spoils berm
on both sides of the creek. Creek width at the crossing is approximately 60 feet. Bridge No. 56
crosses Allen Creek at a sharp curve in the creek, with the downstream side of the bridge
intersecting the stream at an approximate angle of 90 degrees and the upstream side of the bridge
intersecting the stream an approximate angle of 60 degrees. Vertical clearance between the water
and bridge bottom is approximately 2 feet. An approximately 1500-foot long by 45-foot wide
causeway was constructed through the Coastal Wetlands on Bohicket silty clay loam soils when
the bridge was constructed in 1950. The Coastal Wetland area consists of Spartina alterniflora and
Spartina cynosuroides. The narrow spoils berm roughly parallel to Allen Creek is vegetated with
Red Cedar and Baccaris halimifolia. Soils on this site are mainly Bohicket silty clay loam as
classified by the NC Soil Conservation Service. Approximate elevations on the site range between
1 feet and 5 feet above Normal High Water (NH W). No evidence of SAV beds was noted. The
North Carolina Division of Water Quality classifies waters of Allen Creek as C -SW at the project
site. No Primary Nursery Area, as designated by the North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries, is located at this site. The entire project area is within CAMA Areas of Environmental
Concern and is designated as Conservation by the Brunswick County Land Use Plan.
The proposal is to replace the existing 60-foot long by 24-foot wide timber, steel and concrete
bridge with a 300-foot long by 39-foot wide cored slab concrete bridge on the existing alignment.
The proposed bridge would have a vertical clearance 0.5 foot greater than the existing bridge
(approximately 2.5 feet). Constructing this project would include removing 220 feet of the
previously filled causeway (that is approximately 45 feet wide) and grading it 6 inches below
NHW to correspond with the surrounding Coastal Wetlands which are predominately vegetated
with Spartina alterniflora. The bridge approaches would be approximately 1-foot higher than the
existing fill causeway to prevent future flooding. The bridge is being widened from 24 feet to 39
feet to more closely correspond to the 12 foot paved travel lanes and 6 foot grassed shoulders of
NC 133. NC DOT Best Management Practices would be used for bridge demolition and Design
Standards for Sensitive Watersheds would be used for Erosion control. NC DOT has committed
to no in-water and no in-marsh work from February 15 through September 30 of each year, due to
the Shortnose Sturgeon and anadromous fish moratoriums.
r ?
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
NC DOT - B-3116, Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek, Brunswick County
PAGE 3
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS:
As proposed, the construction of the bridge approaches with 3:1 slopes would require the filling of
approximately 0.33 acres of Coastal Wetlands and approximately 1.04 acres of impacts to high
ground. To allow room for installation of erosion control measures, approximately 0.21 acres (5
feet outside construction limits) of Coastal Wetlands would be temporarily disturbed adjacent to
the road shoulders. The additional width of the bridge would cause approximately 900 square feet
of additional shading impacts to Public Trust Waters AEC. Removal of 230 feet of previously
filled causeway (5 feet on each side will later be used to armor the end bents under the new
bridge) would result in the disturbance of approximately 0.25 acres of high ground. A minimal
disturbance of the creek bottom is expected during the installation of the pilings for bents 2 and 3.
The entire work area would be within the CAMA Coastal Shoreline AEC.
NC DOT has reduced the Coastal Wetland excavation and fill impacts associated with this
proposal by lengthening the bridge from 60 to 300 feet. This would reduce fill in wetlands that
would have occurred in raising the causeway and widening the bridge. Lengthening the bridge
also creates a wetland buffer between the bridge approaches and the waters of Allen Creek,
allowing some treatment of the storm water run off associated with the bridge and roadway. NC
DOT has committed to dropping no materials from the bridge demolition in the water and to using
top down construction to minimize impacts. Due to the presence of Shortnose Sturgeon and
anadromous fish in Allen Creek, NC DOT has committed to an in-water and in-marsh work
moratorium from February 15 to September 30. The NC DOT has proposed to use Design
Standards for Sensitive Watersheds BMP's to minimize the impacts of erosion.
The proposed removal of 220 feet of existing causeway should restore approximately 0.24 acres of
fill causeway to its natural hydrology. NC DOT is asking for riverine restoration mitigation credit
for this area as well as enhancement mitigation credit for an area extending outward from the
removed causeway, calculated as a quarter circle, the radius of which is the length of the removed
causeway (0.76acres at 4:1 ratio = 0.19 acres credit). Due to the relatively small areas involved
and the direct connection to the tidal waters of Allen Creek, NC DOT has asked to use
verification of elevations in the restoration area rather than performing hydrologic monitoring
(see included mitigation plan). NC DOT would be impacting approximately 0.33 acres of Coastal
Wetlands in this proposal and would like to use the restoration and enhancement created (0.24+
0.19 = 0.43 acres credit) to offset these impacts. No mitigation is proposed for the 0.21 acres of
temporary impacts that may be caused during the installation of erosion control measures.
However, NC DOT has offered to submit verification (annual photographs) these areas maintain
jurisdictional criteria.
The collective disturbance area for the project is 1.83 acres.
Bill Arrington
April 15, 2003
Morehead City

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPART ENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
N. C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Hestron Plaza II
151-B NC Highway 24
Morehead City, NC 28557
ATTENTION: Mr. Bill Arrington
SUBJECT: Application for CAMA Major Development Permit for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 56 on NC .133 over Allen Creek
(Lilliput Creek) in Brunswick County, NCDOT Division 3.
Federal Project No. BRSTP-133(2), State Project No., 8.1231501,
T.I.P. No. B-3116.
Dear Sir:
Please find enclosed copies of the Programmatic Categorical Exclusion form (PCE),
1998 Natural Resources Technical Report and Amendment letter dated October 18, 2001,
Onsite Mitigation Plan, the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permit application,
permit drawings, Foundation Layout sheets, Utilities By Others sheet, copy of the Adjacent
Riparian Property Owners Notification and reply form, a North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) Stormwater Exemption letter, half size roadway plans, and. a check for
$400.00 for the application fee for the above referenced project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
M SURE
V
April 7, 2003
r"1 ? _.?I3
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
The Department of Transportation is proposing to replace a structurally deficient bridge
which was built in 1950. Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) in Brunswick
County will be replaced on the existing alignment with a new bridge approximately
300 feet in length and 39 feet in width. During construction traffic will be detoured onto
NC 87. Onsite mitigation is being proposed for this project and is addressed within the
attached Mitigation Plan. Please note that there are minor differences between the PCE and
the plan sheets. As the project design was refined, estimates for impacts totals as well as
structure sizes became more precise.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WESSITE: WWWNCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
fi.
PROPOSED IMPACTS
Permanent Fill and Mechanized Clearing 3
The PCE reports wetland impacts of 0.22 acre of permanent fill and 0.38 acre of
mechanized clearing. The design has been refined and the final estimate for impacts to
wetlands associated with this project now consist of 0.33 acre of permanent fill and
0.21 acre of mechanized clearing. Please note that. the mechanized clearing limits are
merely included on the drawings to allow room for the installation and maintenance of
sediment and erosion control devices. No clearing or grubbing of marsh grasses is
proposed within this five feet zone. NCDOT does not anticipate 'a permanent impact will
result from the activity within this area.
Bent Placements
The replacement bridge will be a spanning structure. However, due to the skew of this
crossing it will be necessary for Bent #3 to be placed along the edge of the stream channel
and a very small portion of Bent #2 to extend into the stream as well (see attached
Foundation Layout sheets). Please note that less than 0.004 acre of surface water impacts
will be associated with the installation of these two bents. Therefore, negligible impacts
are proposed to Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) [DWQ Index No. 18-85]; Class C Sw.
Pile Installation
The bridge will have drilled piers for the interior bents and steel piles for the end bents.
Drilled pier excavations will be stabilized with permanent steel casing (36" dia.) and
drilling slurry. The permanent casing will be installed by driving, screwing, or vibrating
prior to drilling below the casing. Once the permanent casing is installed to the weathered
limestone, the excavation below that will be stabilized with slurry. Drilled pier
specifications require containment of the slurry and disposal of slurry off site. The drilled
piers may be installed either before or after the existing embankment is removed at
the Contractor's option. NCDOT has committed to a Construction Moratorium, as listed
in the green sheet within the attached PCE form. There will be no in-water or in-marsh
activity during the months of February 15 through September 30. This is considered the
in-migration, spawning and out--migration period for the endangered shortnose sturgeon
and other anadromous fish.
Utility Relocation
BellSouth will have to relocate their aerial phone lines and proposes to directional bore
under Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) from approximately station 22+00 to station 12+00
(see attached Utilities By Others sheet). All existing buried BellSouth cable within these
limits left of line -L- will be abandoned. The two existing BellSouth poles will be
removed. BellSouth will cut off the poles at ground level and the contractor will remove
the poles from the roadway or bridge. BellSouth expects to need about five weeks to
complete their work and will not begin until after all permits have been received for this
project. Time Warner Communications are in joint use with Brunswick EMC and will
remain in place.
` s
• 1
t l
i
BRIDGE DEMOLITION
The project commitments green sheet attached to the PCE assumes the worst-case scenario
that all the spans over the water are potential discharge. It states that removal of the
existing bridge could potentially drop a maximum of 27.4 yd3 of fill into the creek.
However, Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be
followed during Construction. Therefore, Bridge No. 56 will be removed without dropping
components into Waters of the United States. To ensure the project will not adversely
affect the endangered shortnose sturgeon, explosives will not be used in the bridge
demolition.
AVOIDANCE and MINIMIZATION
Through efforts to minimize and avoid impacts to Waters of the United States, the project
design has been refined. The existing 60-foot bridge will be replaced with a 300-foot
bridge rather than with a shorter bridge and it will be replaced in place rather than on new
location.
There will be negligible impacts to surface water, because the new bridge will span the
majority of Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) with one support bent being placed along the edge
of the stream. There are no deck drains on the proposed bridge from station 15+50 -L-
to 16+50 -L-. This eliminates deck drains from discharging directly into the creek (as is the
present. case). The other drainage is as shown on the plans. A state stormwater permit
application addressing all the stormwater runoff was sent to the DWQ Wilmington
Regional Office for their review and approval. A State Stormwater exemption letter was
received from that office, dated July 24, 2002 (see attached).
Top down construction will be used so that no temporary construction access is necessary.
An offsite detour will be used during construction rather than using an onsite detour, as
originally proposed. Since soils within the project area are not sufficiently stable for
maintaining 2:1 slopes, 3:1 slopes will be provided to lessen wetland impacts and for slope
stabilization. Please note that 2:1 slopes with class II riprap will be used on the spill
through slopes under the bridge only (as depicted on the profile drawing, sheet 7 of 10).
All mechanized clearing limits for this project have been reduced from 10 feet in width to a
minimum of 5 feet, with the exception of 10-foot wide clearing limits only at pipe outlet
locations for erosion control measures. This minimization effort has cut the proposed
mechanized clearing from 0.41 acre to 0.21 acre. Please note that the clearing limits
beyond the slope stake line is primarily for erosion control purposes. The mechanized
clearing limits are merely included on the drawings to allow room for the installation and
maintenance of sediment and erosion control devices. No clearing or grubbing of marsh
grasses is proposed within this five-foot zone.
MITIGATION
The project will permanently impact a total of 0.33 acre of wetlands. In order to mitigate
for these losses, NCDOT is proposing onsite restoration and enhancement through removal
of 220 feet of the existing causeway and planting Spartina alterniflora. Elevations will be
restored to pre-disturbance contours, mimicking the elevation of the adjacent healthy
natural areas of Spartina alterniflora. See attached Mitigation Plan for details.
f L i
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 Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of January 29, 2003,
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service lists fifteen federally protected species
for Brunswick County. The Biological Conclusions for.each of these species remain
valid and are presented in the attached PCE form and/or NRTR.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has developed a list of "Precautions for the general
construction in areas which may be used by the West Indian manatee in North Carolina."
These precautions will be considered in all aspects of project construction (see final pages
of the attached PCE form). To ensure the project will not adversely affect the endangered
shortnose sturgeon, explosives will not be used in the bridge demolition. To protect the
shortnose sturgeon and other anadromous ' fish, there will be no in-water or in-marsh
activity during the months of February 15 through September 30.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
NCDOT requests that the proposed work be authorized under a Coastal Area Management
Act Major Development Permit. A check for $400.00 for the application fee is enclosed.
Copies of the green cards will be forwarded as soon as they are available. By copy of this
letter, we are also requesting issuance of a United States Army Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit 23 (FR number 10, pages 2020-2095; January 15, 2002). We anticipate
a 401 General Certification number 3371 will apply to this project. In compliance with
Condition 1 of GC 3371 we hereby request written concurrence from the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality.
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or need
additional information please call Ms. Heather Montague at [phone].
Sincerely,
U U ?
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
GJT/hwm
cc:
Ms. Cathy Brittingham, NCDCM
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ, Raleigh
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Mike Street, NCDMF
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Mason Herndon, DIV 3 DEO
Mr. Dave Timpy, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. H. Allen Pope, PE; Division 3 Engineer

t

On-site Mitigation Plan .
for the Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 56
on NC 133 over Allen Creek
in Brunswick County, North Carolina.
TIP No. B-3116
April 7, 2003
Overview:
The NCDOT will replace the existing 60-foot long bridge over Allen Creek (Lilliput
Creek) with a new bridge approximately 300 feet in length. The additional bridge
length will allow for the removal of 220 linear feet of causeway in previously filled
wetlands. The existing causeway will be removed and returned to an elevation
resembling that of the adjacent wetlands.
Causeway Removal:
The removal of the old causeway will mean that approximately 0.24 acre of fill
will be removed from wetlands associated with Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek).
Approximately 1450 yd3 of existing causeway will be lifted, restoring the riverine
wetland underneath. It is anticipated that the removal of the existing causeway
will in turn enhance the high quality riverine wetlands upstream and downstream
of the bridge, since water will be able to flow unimpeded beneath the new
structure, allowing the natural wetland hydrologic conductivity to return.
Therefore, in addition to the 0.24 acre of restoration, the NCDOT proposes
riverine wetland enhancement extending outward from the lifted causeway. The
area of potential enhancement has been calculated based on the "Cox" half-
circle proposal set forth by the NCWRC, where the length of fill removed is the
radius of the circle (115 feet from southern causeway section and 105 feet from
the northern causeway section). Enhancement areas were calculated within the
quadrants surrounding the existing bridge and causeway for a total of 0.76 acre,
with 0.25 acre within the proposed right-of-way limit and 0.51 acre beyond the
right-of-way limits.
Vegetation:
Wetland grass (Spartina alterniflora) will be planted in areas where the existing
causeway fill is removed down to the adjacent marsh elevation, as directed by
the Engineer. Elevations will be restored to pre-disturbance contours, mimicking
the elevation of the adjacent healthy natural areas of Spartina alterniflora.
NCDOT proposes to monitor vegetation through annual photographs.
r ?-
t ?

The proposed enhancement area is currently a coastal swamp community
dominated by cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora). The NCDOT does not propose
any vegetative manipulation in this area as it is expected that the greatest benefit
to the system will be realized through the return of the natural hydrologic
processes.
Hydrology:
Restored elevations and the proximity of the enhancement and restoration areas
to Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) ensures that both areas will be saturated and/or
inundated for extended periods of time. The NCDOT requests that post
construction elevation verification be allowed in place of tide gauge monitoring.
Credits:
With a 4:1 ratio, the 0.76 acre of enhancement would serve as 0.19 acre of
proposed enhancement credit. Combined with the 0.24 acre proposed from
credits from a 1:1 ratio for onsite restoration, NCDOT proposes to offer 0.43 acre
of onsite mitigation to compensate for the 0.33 acre of permanent wetland fill.
NCDOT does not propose to offer mitigation for the 0.20 acre of mechanized
clearing as listed on Sheet 9 of 10 from the attached permit drawings. Please
note that the mechanized clearing limits are merely included on the drawings to
allow room for the installation and maintenance of sediment and erosion control
devices. No clearing or grubbing of marsh grasses is proposed within this five
feet zone. Therefore, NCDOT does not anticipate a permanent impact will
result from the activity within this area and proposes confirmation of maintained
jurisdictional criteria through annual photographs.
2

Form DCM-MP-1
APPLICATION
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner:
Name N. C. Department of Transportation
Address 1548 Mail Service Center
City Raleigh State NC
Zip 27699
Fax [phone]
b. Authorized Agent:
b. City, town, community or landmark
north of Orton and north of Brunswick Town
c. Street address or secondary road number
NC 133
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? Yes X No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek)
Day Phone [phone]. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Name
Address
City
Zip Day Phone
Fax
State
c. Project name (if any) B-3116 (8.1231501)
Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek on NC 133
NOTE: Permit will be issued in name of landowner(s), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Brunswick
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities.
Replacing existing bridge with a new bridge.
220 ft of existing causeway will be removed.
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? new work
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Public transportation
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages. Purpose of project is to provide
public transportation. TOD down construction will
be used to reduce impacts in the creek and
wetlands.
Revised 03/95
t i
Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
in. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
N/A
a. Size of entire tract 1.83 acre
b
Size of individual lot(s) N/A
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or
NWL 5.0 feet
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
Bohicket silty clay loam
e. Vegetation on tract
predominately Spartina alterniflora
f. Man-made features now on tract existing bridge,
roadway, and utilities
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
X Conservation Transitional
Developed Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
NIA
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? X Yes No
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been
done for the tract? Yes X No
If yes, by whom?
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes X No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes No
Coastal (marsh) X Other
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? YES
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters of
the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and, residential discharges.)
surface runoff
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N/A
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
• A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
• An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
C ,
Form DCM-MP-1
•A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary
•A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and
signed return receipts as proof that such owners
have received a copy of the application and plats
by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised
that they have 30 days in which to submit comments
on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal
Management. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name Laurence G. Sprunt
Address 4528 River Rd. SE
Winnabow. NC 28479
Name
Address
Phone
Name
Address
Phone
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.
N/A
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public lands, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact,
grant permission to representatives of state and federal
review agencies to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this
permit application and follow-up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the -t? day of ,
Print Name
i
Signature
Landowner or Authorized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-4 Structures Information
X DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE. Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.

Form DCM-MP-5
BRIDGES AND
CULVERTS
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all
other sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
1. BRIDGES
a. Public X Private
b. Type of bridge (construction material)
concrete - cored slab
c. Water body to be crossed by bridge
Allen Creek
d. Water depth at the proposed crossing at MLW or
NWL approximately 6 ft
e. Will proposed bridge replace an existing bridge?
X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge 58.6 ft
(2) Width of existing bridge 24.0 ft
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing
bridge 2.0 ft
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be
removed? (Explain) all of the existing
bridge will be removed.
f. Will proposed bridge replace an existing culvert(s)?
Yes X No
If yes,
(1) Length of existing culvert N/A
(2) Width of existing culvert N/A
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above
the MHW or NWL N/A
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be
removed? (Explain) N/A
Revised 03/95

g. Length of proposed bridge 300 ft
h. Width of proposed bridge 39 ft
i. Height of proposed bridge above wetlands
2.5 ft
j. Will the proposed bridge affect existing water flow?
X Yes No
If yes, explain The proposed bridge will enhance
now in the wetlands through the removal of 220 ft of
the existing causeway.
k. Navigation clearance underneath proposed bridge
2.5 ft
Will the proposed bridge affect navigation by
reducing or increasing the existing navigable
opening? Yes X No
If yes, explain
m. Will the proposed bridge cross wetlands containing
no navigable waters? Yes X No
If yes, explain
n. Have you contacted the U.S. Coast Guard
concerning their approval?
Yes X No
If yes, please provide record of their action.
r
Form DCM-MP-5
2. CULVERTS N/A 3. EXCAVATION AND FILL
a. Water body in which culvert is to be placed a. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any excavation below the MHW or NWL?
X Yes No
b. Number of culverts proposed if yes,
(1) Length of area to be excavated 220 ft + /-
c. Type of culvert (construction material, style) (2) Width of area to be excavated 45-50 ft
(3) Depth of area to be excavated 0.5 ft + /-
d. Will proposed culvert replace an existing bridge? (4) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
Yes No yards 205
If yes,
(1) Length of existing bridge b. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
(2) Width of existing bridge require any excavation within: NO
(3) Navigation clearance underneath existing - Coastal Wetlands - SAVs _ Other Wetlands
bridge If yes,
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing bridge be (1) Length of area to be excavated
removed? (Explain) (2) Width of area to be excavated
(3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
e. Will proposed culvert replace an existing culvert? yards
Yes No
If yes, c. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
(1) Length of existing culvert require any highground excavation?
(2) Width of existing culvert X Yes No
(3) Height of the top of the existing culvert above If yes,
the MHW or NWL (1) Length of area to be excavated 220 ft +/-
(4) Will all, or a part of, the existing culvert be (2) Width of area to be excavated 45-50 ft
removed? (Explain) (3) Amount of material to be excavated in cubic
yards 1450
f. Length of proposed culvert
g. Width of proposed culvert
d. If the placement of the bridge or culvert involves
any excavation, please complete the following:
(1) Location of the spoil disposal area
To be determined by contractor
h. Height of the top of the proposed culvert above the
MHW or NWL
Will the proposed culvert affect existing water flow?
Yes No
If yes, explain
j. Will the proposed culvert affect existing navigation
potential? Yes No
If yes, explain
(2) Dimensions of spoil disposal area
N/A
(3) Do you claim title to the disposal area?
Yes X No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from
the owner.
(4) Will the disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes X No
(5) Does the disposal area include any coastal
wetlands (marsh), SAVs, or other wetlands?
Yes X No
If yes, give dimensions if different from (2)
above.
(6) Does the disposal area include any area below
the MHW or NWL? Yes X No
If yes, give dimension if different from No. 2
above.
L. ?
Form DCM-MP-S
e. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed below
MHW or NWL? X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 1630 ft
(2) Width of area to be filled 8.5 ft (avg.)
(3) Purpose of fill roadway fill
f. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed within:
X Coastal Wetlands _ SAVs _ Other Wetlands
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 1630 ft
(2) Width of area to be filled 8.5 ft (avg )
(3) Purpose of fill roadway fill
g. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
result in any fill (other than excavated material
described in Item d. above) to be placed on
highground? X Yes No
If yes,
(1) Length of area to be filled 875 ft
(2) Width of area to be filled 45 ft
(3) Purpose of fill roadway fill
4. GENERAL
a. Will the proposed project involve any mitigation?
X Yes No
If yes, explain in detail see onsite mitigation plan
b. Will the proposed project require the relocation of
any existing utility lines? X Yes No
If yes, explain in detail Telephone lines on both
sides of the bridge will be relocated. Time Warner
Communications are in joint use with Brunswick
EMC and will remain in place.
c. Will the proposed project require the construction of
any temporary detour structures?
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
d. Will the proposed project require any work
channels? Yes X No
If yes, complete Form DCM-MP-2
e. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion controlled? Design Standards for
Sensitive Watersheds Nvill be used.

f. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe or hydraulic
dredge)? Standard bridge and roadway
construction equipment. [Drilled pier excavations
will be stabilized with permanent steel casing
(36" dia.) and drilling slurry. The permanent
casing will be installed by either driving, screwing
or vibrating prior to drilling below the casing]
g. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment
to project site? Yes X No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
h. Will the placement of the proposed bridge or culvert
require any shoreline stabilization?
Yes X No
If yes, explain in detail
dVU"VT
Applican r Proje Name
Signature
4-&--G
Date
Revised 03/95

NOB 1406 ' N cc
n
a ?
1407 7 inele p,l
u
?I
-. u
New / 151e
1D6 OBJECT
51 - , , r ,52,
17 N ten
5ts _ N 29
"° ON
LtJTAION
151 NS
/ 13
$7 7 O N
SU
16?-BB' I F /?
B GS
D
,601 ? PROJECT
DETOUR ROUTE NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1231501 (B-3116)
VICINITY REPLACE BRIDGE V56 ON
MAPS NC 133 OVER ALLEN CREEK
SHEET I OF 10 7 / 24 / 02
NORTH CAROLINA
r,
40
MI.
j
,ll F? FkgIM s , : t
1
E ER 1 Iel.
? }
r sa t
r
rf 1
1 '? ? 1 I?FfT,U
Rf?_
E
SIT
- 11

r

a t
_,Y
{EElCr #(

'y? }yn L Y
111
rho'
Y
1
?
' ".
5
'?..
"
f77Ql?J ! C?#7011i'
PT
?,•
r / 16N

L 117,
T'
I.
SITE MAP
f
k
y e

WETLAND LEGEND
- -WLB- - - WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
--WLBJ WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
* * * DENOTES MECHANIZED
**** CLEARING
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
- - --- - - - WATER SURFACE
x x x x x LIVE STAKES
x x x
C2D BOULDER
--- CORE FIBER ROLLS
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54" PIPES
& ABOVE
0 SINGLE TREE
WOODS LINE

DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD

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

GRASS SWALE
N. C. DEPT.OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1231501 (B-3116)
REPLACE BRIDGE X56 ON
NC 133 OVER ALLEN CREEK
SHEET 3 OF 10 7/24/02
i
r

O
e

as ?
z w M
oa
--I- 00+W 3NII HOlbW 3 z " :° U

W
?
O •, GLl
? Z ? G:. ad ? a C
I I
? ?
0
G?.
? ?
3
w o
z? U>
10 z
P-4 :D o a o

z
w

-X-.

LL-

N
N Ode i0

Nei I
I
O I J
? a
j + ( I w
QZ C:)
O I I / oW
(A N
Q Z lf'1
Q ? N
W .J Z u
z W ¢ WX Q =
J
W
U) -1
LLI Q:) j 1 ZD 03 ?(-u U Ln
J LZ OZ O II
WQ -
W
1S/X? 3 Ln a
/ I : • N (J
/ ' O

T
-?- 00+81 3NI? H31dW

z w
w
,, o
a

? z
w
® x o
v ,
4 w a
c

C o as
. ) w w
O w O

a a x v
z
rl
0
w
O
h
H
w
w

9611>717

¢?
J Z
F- W
W 2:
3W
U
Ul) Z
W Q
?- _
O Z
ZW
W
^Tjl- O
W
O N
Z Z
¢z ¢?
JO J =Z
F- .-i J_ 0 U .-3¢ WQ X¢
LLI
NO M MJ
W? WW WU
F- Cn ~ 3 t-
Ow O O
Z? Z Z
W W W O
O 0 O
*
* r
*
0

O
Lr)
N_
CL
O
S
O
Ln
W
J
Ln Q
N U
N
--I- 00+bI 3NI? HOldW
•
I I
C"i
f
z °O
O LC)
jN
vCL-
? J
W I
Nq0 eRip
J
Q
W
F-
:ZD 0Z
11
Ln
W
Z
W
cr
?I Q
J
L
L
? 3m
11 A
A
0

cr

a

E-1
z

M z
o
,D
t W
x
U

?
QQ®

?

I-A
x
o

U
o
a -?

; w

p
m w

J

O

z
A
z
?
U
a
U
a
C? w
>

U
z c

E-

w
? w

b b
A?
k?
W
N_
Q
J = Z
_Jz U.
LL x ¢
J W
W~ W-i LLj
03 FU
z z z
w W
O ?
**
r
-?- 00+81 3NI I HOiVN
O
Ln
O
Ln
_N
O
2
0
II
W
J
Ln Q
N U
N
it
?s •
0
SD

pd p
z
® W
I I U
x M
z z
O
°
®
x ® .-ip w GL?
a
o
1
00 ? o
U o 1Z.
W
C) °
' I CD
I Z 3
cn H W
Q
rr ,
J
I
I o

O ®
..
U

w U
C7 N I ; ® a P5
o ( ~ z cG a,
U
Lf)
z
;
0

z E?
0 I 1- w
w
m
a o
C:?
I >
a
a?

J
In W

W

X

O I v) ? z 0
0
Q

Ln O
I
I Q
I U
0 ,
>
W N
J
W J
i
+ I
z .4-
(\i N O

w?Ln

Q Q (pi W I- I
Q? ?- :Z I N
cD c/) Ln V) I - - - - - - O
_ 01 I = ? O
+

i Q0

I
I , - r. 21?
W
(-D `

?Y7
9
co

QD I
I
Z
~
I
I
V)
X
W
O
W
C p
0
- O
+
)
a , 7 Ln
cr- ' z°rf?
0CD
U F=-
z , QJ
I > Q
Vn Q
X
w I X
' wz
I - I
N I = W
a
I U) Cr

' aw
I i
I
0
U 0
+
O O
O
i
-r
.
N
0 N
O IO
C) CO
D O
r -
m
- O
ii
o
m
O Z
O O
O MM O

N Z
r
o
? r
< z
m N
;a o
-+ o

N
O

?j O
Q

N
O
O

cl4

O

-4
W
o

r
z

z
c

4
..
0Z

o

Z d
C

z
o
x

?

®
o

o
e ?c

r i
® p
0
w

O
N
O
I o
co
`o
I O +

co I

6.04
0
N
O
O
I
r„
7??
O

z
O
-?
Z
m

D m
z r''
v?
m
o
N
c
r+ o
CDi A
o n
-n ' @
M v'
-i T
z
m
v
(D
?
m?
zz
=v
D
@
(o
n CL
m Cf)

m O
z?
z0
-4 z
2
C)
ti

0
`
m
n

X0

cn z
_ n
m
m
0 O M CC) <

O
O ? z
?
T P Z
C N O O
o
cn =1 3
o
O = -0

D D

v
W
Z
C) cn
CL (a

D
m
r

J
o
O
_
J T
?
cn o ?. o
--1
.
3
O ?? j
O

O
D
r co
'? in cn ?
N -' N
V ? n
" o v
o
c

m
v

I11 N =
° v a o
C
w
w W
w m
-?

g? ? D

v
? T
a

?' Z
?
o v m
m m ?

?
v
o ° ? ? m C
o a
D
z ?'

v
?
0
T
=o C
v Q.
v?
v
D
o n
m

?
? D
c
P
i C
v C T -I
?

o ?

X D
S
?
n

0
z
i
xvoi
? c
.

0 C: U5 -i
'r
r?'k
PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES ,
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES
1 LAURENCE G. SPRUNT 4528 RIVER RD. SE
WINNABOW, N.C. 28479
ti•
So--
4 ST
ATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTNffi-NI' OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
April 7, 2003
Laurence G. Sprunt
4528 River Rd. SE
Winnabow, NC 28479
Dear Mr Sprunt:
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY

The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 56
over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) on NC 133. The project lies in Brunswick County.
This project crosses an Area of Environmental Concern, as defined by the North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management (DCM), and must be approved by the DCM under provisions of
the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). One of the prerequisites to this approval is that
adjacent riparian landowners be given an opportunity to comment on the proposal. A copy of the
permit application is enclosed for your review.
The attached form is submitted to insure that you have an opportunity to comment on the
proposal. The work planned is depicted in the attached drawing. If you have no objections to the
proposal, please return the form with your response within 30 days to this office. If you do have
objections to the project, please forward your comments to:
Mr. Bill Arrington
N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
151-B Hwy 24 Hestron Plaza II
Morehead City, N.C. 28557
Written comments must be received by the Division of Coastal Management within 30 days of
receipt of this notice. NO RESPONSE WITHIN 30 DAYS of receipt of the correspondence will
be INTERPRETED AS NO OBJECTION.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to
contact Ms. Heather Montague, at [phone].
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
GJT/hwm
Enclosure: Permit Application for Bridge No. 56
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone]
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone]
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS w=BSI,: WWW.NCDOT.ORG
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

ADJACENT RIPARIAN LANDOWNER STATEMENT
Replacement of Bridge No. 56
on NC 133 over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek)
in Brunswick County, NCDOT Division 3.
General Statutes and Division of Coastal Management Major Development Permit
approval procedures require that riparian landowners with property adjoining a proposed
development in an Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) be given thirty (30) days in
which to comment on the proposed development. This form allows the adjacent riparian
landowner to express either: (1) that he objects to the project; or, (2) that he does not
object and desires to waive his/her right to the 30-day period so that the processing of the
application can progress more rapidly. Of course, the adjacent riparian landowner need
not sign this form at all if he/she so chooses.
I, , am an adjacent riparian property owner and am
aware of the North Carolina Department of Transportation's proposed replacement of
Bridge No. 56 on NC 133 over Allen Creek (Lilliput Creek) in Brunswick County,
North Carolina. I am further aware that this work will occur in one or more AEC's and
therefore will require authorization from the Division of Coastal Management in
accordance with the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA).
I have no objection to the project as presently proposed and hereby
waive that right of objection as provided in General Statute 113-229.
I have objections to the project as presently proposed and my comments
are attached.
Signature of Adjacent Riparian Landowner
Date:
1 F
r
0
0
OF
W AT F9
?' ¦ V r
.viv® -i
r® 'C
July 24, 2002
Mr. Andrew Nottingham, P.E.
NC Department of Transportation
1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1590
Dear Mr. Nottingham:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Wilminaton Reaionat.OWw)e,
ZT.
JUL 2 9 2002
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
Subject: EXEMPTION from StormwaAYDRAULICSUMT
Management Permit Regulations
Stormwater Project No. SW8020632
Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek on NC 133
Brunswick County
The Wilmington Regional Office received a copy of your application for the project
known as Bridge No. 56 over Allen Creek on NC 133. Staff of the Wilmington Regional Office
have reviewed the application for the applicability of the Stormwater Management rules to the
proposed activity at this project. Based on our review, you do not appear to be proposing a
development activity on this site at this point in time that would be subject to the stormwater
requirements as provided for in 15A NCAC 211.1000.. Please be advised that other regulations
will potentially apply to your proposed activities.
If your project disturbs five acres or more and has a point source discharge of stormwater
runoff, then it is subject to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
stormwater discharge requirements. You are required to have an NPDES permit for stormwater
discharge from projects meeting these criteria.
This exemption applies only to the -Coastal Stormwater Management Permit for the
currently proposed activity. If at any time in the future, development of any part of this site is
planned, as defined in NCAC 211. 1000, or if the proposed activities differ in any manner from
what is shown on the plans on file with the Division, you must submit the project for review of
the applicability of the stormwater management rules. If you have any questions concerning this
mater, please do not hesitate to Du'it. me uJ
t (010) 39?-?9o0.
Sincerely,
Rick Shiver
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
RSS/arl: S:\WQS\STORMWAT\EXEMPT\020632.JJL
cc:
Delaney Aycock, Brunswick County Building Inspections
Linda Lewis
Wilmington Regional Office
Central Files
NCDENR
N.C. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, N.C. 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service
800-623-7748
e "? STAJF°
w?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
October 18, 2001
MEMORANDUM TO:
Jay McInnis, Jr., P.E., Unit Head
Bridge Replacement Unit
j
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
FROM: Elizabeth L. Lusk, Environmental Biologist
Natural Systems Unit
SUBJECT: Amendment to the Natural Resources Technical Report for the proposed
replacement of Bridge No. 56 on NC 133 over Allen Creek in Brunswick
County. TIP No. B-3116, State Project No. 8.1231501; Federal Aid No.
BRSTP-133(2).
ATTENTION: Beverly Robinson, P.E., Project Manager
The following serves to update the Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) for the subject
project. In an effort to minimize and avoid impacts to Waters of the U.S., design of the bridge
replacement has changed. The existing 60-foot bridge will be replaced with a longer 300-foot bridge in
place, rather than on new location. During construction traffic will detoured off site, rather than using an
onsite detour, as originally proposed.
As a result of redesign, there will be minimal surface water impacts, because the new bridge will
span the entire width of Allen Creek with one supporting bent placed in the creek. The new bridge will
be 240 feet longer than the existing bridge and the proposed right-of-way will be the same as the current
60-foot right-of-way. Therefore rather than impacting wetlands, there will be an opportunity to restore
approximately 0.3 acres of brackish marsh community currently filled with the existing causeway. This
will in turn enhance the brackish marsh community directly. upstream and downstream of the bridge.
Restoration would consists of removing fill from as much of the existing causeway as is
available (0.3 acres). The fill will be removed down to the adjacent marsh elevation. Compacted areas
of the restoration site will be sub-soiled (ripped) and re-vegetated using similar brackish marsh species
found in the adjacent marshes such as giant cordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides), various rushes (Scirpus
americanus, S. robustus, and S. validus), sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), and arrowhead (Sagittaria
falcata). Of course, species planted depends on availability at the time of planting.
cc: Hal Bain, Unit Head
•'6
•r?
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: IMNW DOH.DOT STATE.NC. US RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
0 3 014 9 ?
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2004
Allen Creek Bridge Mitigation Site
Brunswick County
TIP No.

Prepared By:
Natural Systems Unit & Roadside Environmental Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
December 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY ...........................................................................................................1
1.0 Introduction ...............................................................................................2
1.1. Project Description .........................................................................2
1.2. Purpose .........................................................................................2
1.3. Project History ................................................................................2
2.0 Vegetation: ................................................................................................ 4
2.1. Success Criteria .............................................................................4
2.2. Description of Species .....................................................................4
2.3. Results of Vegetation Monitoring ....................................................4
2.4. Conclusions ....................................................................................4
3.0 Overall Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................4
FIGURES
Figure 1 - Site Location Map ...............................................................................3
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Site Photos .....................................................................................5
SUMMARY
The Allen Creek Bridge Mitigation Site is located in Brunswick County. The site
was planted in 2004 and was designed as wetland mitigation for impacts
associated with bridge project B-3116.
The mitigation encompasses approximately 0.24 acres total of wetland
restoration. The restoration effort involved re-vegetating the area that was
temporarily impacted due to the use of mechanized land clearing. The area that
was impacted by mechanized clearing is being monitored to ensure that it re-
attains wetland jurisdictional status. The restoration area was re-vegetated with
Spartina alterniflora. No hydrologic monitoring is required for this project;
however, vegetation monitoring is required for three years.
After the first year of monitoring, the Allen Creek Bridge site shows by visual
observation that the Spartina alterniflora in the wetland are surviving and that the
impacted area is re-attaining jurisdictional status.
NCDOT recommends continuing vegetation monitoring of this site.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
The Allen Creek Bridge Mitigation Site is located at Bridge No. 56 over Allen
Creek on NC 133 (Figure 1). The site consists of approximately 0.24 acres of
mitigation for wetland impacts associated with project B-3116.
1.2 Purpose
In order for a mitigation site to be considered successful, the site must meet
vegetation success criteria. This report details the vegetation monitoring in 2004
at the Allen Creek Bridge mitigation Site. Hydrologic monitoring was not required
for the site.
1.3 Project History
May 2004 1 Site planted
September 2004 1 Vegetation Monitoring (1 year)

r
• 1t !121
' ?t r ?
?. ? tip,
"
' Y
l??I +? t
.?..f ?S yyJJ 11f

r
• r ? P
.
/
JE t

? --

VICINITY MAP
FIGURE I
B-3116
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
3
2.0 VEGETATION: ALLEN CREEK BRIDGE MITIGATION SITE
(YEAR 1 MONITORING)
2.1 Success Criteria
Success Criteria states that the temporarily impacted area where mechanized
clearing occurred shall be replanted using Sparfina alterniflora and the
temporarily impacted area must re-attain jurisdictional status at the end of three
years.
2.2 Description of Species
The following wetland specie was planted in the Wetland Reforestation area:
Spartina alterniflora, Smooth Cordgrass
2.3 Results of Vegetation Monitoring
The impacted area where the mechanized clearing occurred and was re-
vegetated is re-attaining jurisdictional status and the planted species is surviving.
Site Notes: Other species noted: big cordgrass, juncus sp., and water grass.
2.4 Conclusions
There were approximately 0.24 acres total of wetland restoration on site. There
were no plots established on the site. By visual observation the Allen Creek
Bridge site shows that the planted species is surviving and that the impacted
area is re-attaining jurisdictional status.
3.0 Overall Conclusions and Recommendations
NCDOT will continue vegetation monitoring at the Allen Creek Bridge Site.
4
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOS
Allen Creek Bridge
2004
Photo 1
Photo 3
Photo 2
Photo 4