20030844 Ver 1_Complete File_20030630

sM?o?
??wwvl?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
June 30, 2003
030344
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTN: Mr. Richard Spencer
NCDOT Coordinator
WETLANDS/401 GROUP
JUN 4i iw ;011:?
MATER QUALITY SECTION
Subject: Nationwide 23 and 33 application. Randolph County, Replacement of Bridge
No. 370 Over Mill Creek on SR 2609, Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-2609(1),
State Project No. 8.257280 1, TIP Project No. B-3689.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above referenced
project. We plan to replace this bridge at the existing location with a triple barrel, 7-foot (2.1-
meter) wide by 6-foot (1.8-meter) high reinforced concrete box culvert. Traffic will be
maintained with a temporary onsite detour structure placed to the east of the existing bridge.
The proposed culvert will be of sufficient length to provide two 10-foot (3.1-meter) travel lanes
with 4-foot (1.2-meter) turf shoulders on each side. There will be no impacts to wetlands.
There will be impacts to approximately 125 ft of jurisdictional stream.
Bridge Demolition
The existing bridge is composed of timber and concrete. There is potential for
components of the substructure to be dropped into waters of the United States during
construction. The resulting temporary fill associated with the concrete support associated with
Bridge No. 370 is approximately 3 yd3. This project can be classified as Case 3, where there
are no special restrictions beyond those outlined in Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal.
Culvert Installation
There will be 0.013 ac temporary impacts from the installation of a temporary diversion
pipe in Mill Creek for the construction of the culvert. We propose to phase by using a
temporary diversion pipe with impervious dikes/sandbags and build the box culvert around it.
a„a ANta?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENTOF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
June 30, 2003
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTN: Mr. Richard Spencer
NCDOT Coordinator
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Subject: Nationwide 23 and 33 application. Randolph County, Replacement of Bridge
No. 370 Over Mill Creek on SR 2609, Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-2609(1),
State Project No. 8.257280 1, TIP Project No. B-3689.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above referenced
project. We plan to replace this bridge at the existing location with a triple barrel, 7-foot (2.1-
meter) wide by 6-foot (1.8-meter) high reinforced concrete box culvert. Traffic will be
maintained with a temporary onsite detour structure placed to the east of the existing bridge.
The proposed culvert will be of sufficient length to provide two 10-foot (3.1-meter) travel lanes
with 4-foot (1.2-meter) turf shoulders on each side. There will be no impacts to wetlands.
There will be impacts to approximately 125 ft of jurisdictional stream.
Bridge Demolition
The existing bridge is composed of timber and concrete. There is potential for
components of the substructure to be dropped into waters of the United States during
construction. The resulting temporary fill associated with the concrete support associated with
Bridge No. 370 is approximately 3 yd3. This project can be classified as Case 3, where there
are no special restrictions beyond those outlined in Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal.
Culvert Installation
There will be 0.013 ac temporary impacts from the installation of a temporary diversion
pipe in Mill Creek for the construction of the culvert. We propose to phase by using a
temporary diversion pipe with impervious dikes/sandbags and build the box culvert around it.
This eliminates the need for a temporary diversion channel, which would have to be cut
through the existing road.
Restoration Plan: No permanent fill will result from the subject activity. The materials used as
temporary fill in the installation of the pipe will be removed.
Schedule for Installation of Pipe: It is assumed that the Contractor will begin installation of the
proposed pipe shortly after the date of availability for the project. The Let date is September
16, 2003 with a date of availability of October 19, 2003.
Removal and Disposal: The pipe and sandbags will be removed within 90 days of the
completion of the culvert. The pipe and sandbags will be removed by the Contractor using
excavating equipment. All materials placed in the stream by the Contractor will be removed.
All materials removed by the Contractor will be disposed of at an off-site upland location.
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 Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of January 29, 2003, the Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) lists two federally protected species for Randolph County (Table 1).
Table 1. Federallv-protected species for
Common Name I Scientific Name I Status
cape rear sinner Ivotropis melastocnoias hnaangerea
Schweinitz's sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered
Endangered species are in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
A Biological Conclusion of "No Effect" was reached for this species as reflected in the
attached CE dated August 2002.
Regulatory Approvals
Section 404 Permit: This project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as
a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not
anticipate requesting an individual permit, but propose to proceed under a Nationwide 23 and
33 as authorized by a Nationwide Permits 23 and 33 (ER number 10, pages 2020-2095; January
15, 2002).
Section 401 Permit: We anticipate 401 General Certification number 3361 and 3366 will apply
to this project. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H.0501(a) we are providing two copies of this
application to the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division
of Water Quality, for their records.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Matt Haney at
[phone].
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. Environmental Management Director,
14 Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
w/attachment
Mr. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality (2 copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
w/o attachment
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. W.F. Rosser, P.E. (Div. 8), Division Engineer
Mr. Art King (Div. 8), DEO
Mr. Dennis Pipkin, P.E., Planning Engineer
Office Use Only: Form Version May 2002
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
R Section 10 Permit Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NW 23 & 33
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Mailing Address: Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number: 919-733-3141
E-mail Address:_gthorpe(a-),dot.state.nc.us
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name:
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Fax Number: 919-733-9794
Telephone Number:
E-mail Address:
Fax Number:
Page 5 of 13
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bridge No 370 on SR 2609 over Mill Creek
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only):
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN):
4. Location
B-3689
County: Randolph Nearest Town: Ramseur
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Bridge No. 370 over Mill Creek
on SR 2609. Approximately 4.5 miles southwest of Ramseur. Take US 64 west out of
Ramseur. Turn left onto SR 2611. Turn right onto SR 2609. The project site is
approximately 1.5 miles down SR 2609.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 35°40'00"/79°45'00" (approximate)
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Property size (acres):
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake):
Mill Creek
8. River Basin: Cape Fear
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: rural
Page 6 of 13
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: This
project proposes to replace Bridge No. 370 on SR 2609 over Mill Creek in Randolph County.
The bridge will be replaced with a triple barrel, 7-foot (2.1-meter) wide by 6-foot (1.8-meter)
high reinforced concrete box culvert in the existing location. The roadway cross section will
include two 10-foot (3.1 m) lanes with 4-foot (1.2 m) turf shoulders on each side. Guardrail
will be installed where warranted. Traffic will be maintained on-site using a temporary
detour east of the existing alignment.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: Replacement of existing bridge with two 10-foot
lanes with 4-foot turf shoulders on each side. The existing bridge will be replaced with a
tale barrel, 7-foot (2.1 meter) wide by 6-foot (1.8 meter) high reinforced concrete box
culvert.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
No
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
Page 7 of 13
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Approximately 65 ft of surface
waters will be permanenty filled as a result of the culvert installation. Approximately 60 ft
(0.013 ac) will be temporarily filled as a result of the temporary detour.
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at http://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:
Total area of wetland impact proposed:
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact Length of Average Width Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact Stream Name** of Stream Intermittent?
(indicate on map) (linear feet) Before Impact (please specify)
I Fill in SW 65 Mill Creek 12 ft perennial
2 Temp. fill in SW 60 Mill Creek 12 ft perennial
Page 8 of 13
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several intemet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 125
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres)
Name Wat)
(if applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
2 Temporary fill 0.013 Mill Creek stream

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): F-1 uplands F-1 stream
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation,
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
? wetlands
installation of
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
Page 9 of 13
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
One alternate was evaluated for this project. Alternate 1 involves replacing the bridge in
place with a triple barrel, 7-foot (2.1 m) wide by 6-foot (1.8 m) high reinforced concrete box
culvert. Traffic will be maintained with a temporary onsite detour structure placed to the east of
the existing bridge. No permanent wetland impacts will occur as a result of this project. Only
minimal permanent and temporary stream impacts will occur.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/stnngide.html.
Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
No proposed mitigation.
Page 10 of 13
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 0
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): 0
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres)
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): 0
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
0
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ® No
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No M
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ® No E]
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Page 11 of 13
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 3
2 1.5
Total
- cone t extenas out su reet perpenaicular trom near banK or channel; Gone Z extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Page 12 of 13
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes [] No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
Page 13 of 13
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
l ? 244? ? ---
? E444 ?
PROJECT AREA 2610
ni4
__ ? 1?3S
I
Im
n2
3444 l . __/ /,.
Il91 lama 4
-, 1
?n7l
Inwill
PORTION OF RANDOLPH COUNTY
PORTION OF STATE MAP
f
W
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHNAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
82512801 fB-36891
REPLACE BRIDGE N0370 ON SR 2609
OVER MILL CREEK
WETLAND IMPACTS
SCALE AS SHOWN
SHEET L OF Z
a
S„
??
e ?s
WETLAND LEGEND

---WLB- WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
L
WETLAND
?1?J L
PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
DENOTES FILL IN
® WETLAND PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'

DENOTES FILL IN (DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
® SURFACE WATER EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
54' PIPES
& ABOVE
DENOTES FILL
® SURFACE WATER
R
(POND) SINGLE TREE
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND 1^
WOODS LINE
DENOTES EXCAVATION
® IN WETLAND DRAINAGE INLET
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER ROOTWAD
DENOTES
MECHANIZED
CLEARING
0
E
FLOW DIRECTION
TB
? TOP OF BANK
- WE— EDGE OF WATER
- 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
BOULDER
CORE FIBER ROLLS
RIP RAP
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
O OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
a PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE (PSH)
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
GRASS SWALE
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
62572801(8-J689)
REPLACE BRIDGE NOJ70 ON SR 2609
OVER MILL CREEK
I L- I I SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET 3 OF
SPECIAL CUT
BASE DITCH
O WOODS O2
k
SPECIAL CUT DITCH
w
Q REMOVE
f" EXISTING
I BRIDGE -
/ ROCK
PLANTER \
i
SPECIAL CUT
DITCH
0
STA13+4250 -DET-
3 t2 72C SP
I F
Fl 1 .
SILLS I
O I '
1 ?
' J\
® ?V) `
1 I
WOODS
20'PAVED R
SR 2609 URO
C SPECIAL CUT
ASE DITCH
WOODS SPECIAL CUT
r BASE DITCH
CLASS I RIP RAP
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGI-AVAYS
LEGEND RAVDOLPH COUNTY
82572801IB-36891
/ DENOTES FILL IN REPLACE BRIDGE NO 70 ON SR 2609
SURFACE WATER OVER MILL CREEK
25 0 50
®DENOTES TEMPORARY I --? 4
FILL IN SURFACE WATER SCALE ua FEET rr.
SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET ? OF
E
0 °
° °
0
0 %
o L0 v
Lo Ln Ln Lo En

W 0%

W

\ Z
w
O
w

a
ZLL
:

O
w

\

\ O

? Q
0 W
M
W
f-
W \
\

O
aW
o=
\ X=
W O

w
u ¢
m?
v
\ ?m
\ -v)
J
x J

?N
L• VZn"

? nom-
1
J
O

o • k
-'
W a
uu?iu?
* I
1i-- ?- w
z
'
?pLn pl)
II IL
L N -
J
II i
I I
J
/

/ Ln
°
m

LL

N
Q Ln Li
II II r °

II v
Ln
Q
O?

cr) NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGMVAYS

co
N %0
c) C)
Ln
C)l

C)l RANDOLPH COUNTY
to Ln Lo Ln Ln 82572801(B-3689)
(ELEVATION IN FEET) REPLACE BRIDGE NOJ70 ON SR 2609
OVER MILL CREEK
SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET 5 OFZ

SUMMARY OF AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS

TRACT NO. PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS SITE NO.

NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
82572801 f8-36891
REPLACE BRIDGE N0370 ON SR 2609
OVER MILL CREEK

7
SCALE AS SHOWN SHEET ? OF

OI
DOUGLAS DRAUGHN 970 IRON MOUNTAIN
VIEW RD
AHEBORO,NC 27203
I
O R.J DOSS JR. 1618 OHIO CT
FROSTPROOF,FL 33843 I
O
3
TIMOTHY DRAUGHN 949 IRON MOUNTAIN
VIEW RD
AHEBORO,NC 27203
I

40
DOUGLAS DRAUGHN 970 IRON MOUNTAIN
VIEW RD
AHEBORO,NC 27203
I

WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS

NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGMVAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT 8.2572801 B-3689
Fa Revised 3/22/01 SIIEET 7 OF
WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUh1MARY

Site
No.
Station
(From/To)
Structure
Size /Type
Fill In
Wetlands
(ac)
Temp. Fill
In Wetlands
ac
Excavation
In Wetlands
(ac) Mechanized
Clearing
(Method III)
ac)
Fill In SW
(Natural)
(ac)
F:InSW
T Existing
Channel
Impacted
ft) Natural
Stream
Design
(ft)
1 16+00 -L- 399'x7' RCBC w/ sills 0.02 65
2 13+40 -DET- 3972' CSP 0.013 60

TOTALS: 0 0 0 0 0.02 0 0.013 125 0
m
0\
DO
M
M4
See Steet 1-A For Index of Stress

2610
2806 09
2609
606 /
2811
1881 / / lJ /
VICINITY MAP
RAND OLPH COUNTY
LOCATION; REPLACE BRIDGE N0.370 ON SR 2609
OVER MILL CREEK
TYPE OF WORK GRADING, DRAINAGE, PAVING
AND CULVERT

-L- STA 21+50.00
END STATE PROJECT 8.2572801
END F.A. PROJECT BRZ-2609(l)
-L- STA 10+50.00
BEGIN STATE PROJECT 8.2572801
BEGIN FA. PROJECT BRZ-2609(l)

Ez?
L-I
d - I BEGIN CULVERTA \C
RON,y70 -L- STA. 15+86.50
11? ?
? I
END CULVERT
U STA. 16+13.50
SR 2609
r
'DET,
"DESIGN EXCEPTION REQUIRED FOR HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ALIGNMENT
To U.S, 64
GRAPHIC SCALES DESIGN DATA
ADT 2002
50 25 0 50 too = 120
ADT 2025 = 200
PLANS DHV = 10 %
?v 50 25 0 50 100 D = 60 %
?N T = 3 % '
ma PROFILE (HORIZONTAL) 10V = 60 MPH

r 10 50 0
10 20 V(DET) = 20 MPH
- TTST 1 % DUAL 2 %
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT LENGTH Prejnred In the Office d, HYDRAULICS WGINi M
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
1000 Binh Rldp Dr., NC, 27610
LENGTH ROADWAY F. A. PROJECT BRZ-2609(1) = 0.203 MILES ?? tascr2ro?
LENGTH STRUCTURE F. A. PROJECT BRZ-2609(l) _ .005 MILES P$
RIGHT OF WAY DATE; ROGER D. THOMAS. PE ?`"R'?'
TOTAL LENGTH STATE PROJECT 8.2572801 = 0.208 MILES OCTOBER 17, 2002 PACJZCTlalZEM ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGLom
LETTING DATE; BRIAN P ROBINSON
FPTEMRrR . PANSCr DESYWV
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
PS
67A28 DSVC.Y &VLR88R
DEPARnlB.V7' OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY AD.NIISISMA7TO,V
m
v Mar -a IFFEEENCF No. SNHT NO.
N R-iF,R9-A
N
'S.U.E = SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEER
ROADS & RELATED ITEMS
Edge of Pavement ------------------------ ------
Curb ---
Prop. Slope Stakes Cut ------------------ ------- ___ c _--
Prop. Slope Stakes Fill __________________ ______ ___F
Prop. Woven Wire Fence ________________ ______ e E)
Prop. Chain Link Fence --------------- ------- -E3 E3
Prop. Barbed Wire Fence ---------------- ------ -19 0
Prop. Wheelchair Ramp -----------------------
Curb Cut for Future Wheelchair Ramp - -------
Exist. Guardrail ------------------------- ------- ?i ,__
Prop. Guardrail -------------------------- ------- -, . .
Equality Symbol ------------------------- ------
Pavement Removal ----------------------- -------
RIGHT OF WAY
Baseline Control Point ------------------- ------
Existing Right of Way Marker ----------- ------- A
Exist. Right of Way Lino wMarker _______ _______
Prop. Right of Way Line with Proposed
PAV Marker (Iron Pin & Cap) ________ ______.
Prop. Right of Way Line with Proposed
(Concrete or Granite) RrW Marker _____ _____--
Exist. Control of Access Lino _____________ _______ - c ,-
Prop. Control of Access Lino ------------- ------- @
Exist. Easement Lino E_
Prop. Temp. Construction Easement Lino ------ E
Prop. Temp. Drainage Easement Line _________ -TOE-
Prop. Perm. Drainage Easement Line --- ------- -
PEE-HYDROLOGY

Stream or Body of Water _____________________ _ .., _
River Basin Buffer
-------------------------------
Flow Arrow -PEB-
-------------------------------------
Disappearing Stream --------------------------- __..?
?. _
Spring ------------------------------------------- o-..-/
Swamp Marsh ----------------------------------
Shorelino - - - - - -
Falls, Rapids ------------------------------------- -?
Prop Lateral, Tail, Hood Ditches _______________
F- FW.
STRUCTURES
MAJOR
Bridge, Tunnel, or Box Culvert ---------------- coNC_]
Bridge Wing Wall, Hood Wall
and End Wall ------------------------------ )CONL WWI

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLS
MINOR
Head & End Wall ___________________________ coN/
Pipe Culvert ------------------------------------ - = = _
Footbridge--------------------------------------- i- - - - - - _<
Drainage Boxes--------------------------------- 0 CB
Paved Ditch Gutter
UTILITIES
Exist. Polo
Exist. Power Pole--------------------------------
Prop. Power Pale ------------------------------- b
Exist. Telephone- -Pole ---------------------------- +
Prop. Telephone Pole___________________________ .o-
Exist. Joint Use Polo ----------------------------- 4-
Prop. Joint Use- -Pole ----------------------------- -6-
Telephone Pedestal ---------------------------- ID
WG Telephone Cable Hand Hold ------------ 0
Cable TV Pedestal ID
UG TV Cable Hand Hold El
USG Power Cable Hand Hold_________________
Hydrant ------------------------------------------ -0
Satellite Dish------------------------------------
Exist. Water Volvo
Sewer Clean Out ------------------------------- 0+
Power Manhole
Telephone Booth -------------------------------- p
Cellular Telephone Tower----------------------
Water Manhole
Light Polo ---------------------------------------
H-Frame Polo o---0
Power Line Tower_______________________________
Pole with Base o
Gas Valve -------------------------------------- 0
Gas Meter --------------------------------------
Telephone Manhole ----------------------------. 0
Power Transformer
Sanitary Sewer Manhole ------------------------ E)
Storm Sewer Manhole OS
Tank; Water, Gas, Oil --------------------------
Water Tank With Legs_________________________ O
Traffic Signal Junction Box_____________________ 0
Fiber Optic Splice Box__________________________ p
Television or Radio Tower
Utility Power Line Connects to Traffic
Signal Lines Cut Into the Pavement-----------. - ,S-TS-
Recorded Water Line ________________________ -„
Designated Water Line (S.U.E.*) ______________ _ -,,,_ .W_ _
Sanitary Sewer ---------------------------------
Recorded Sanitary Sewer Force Main ------ -SS-SS-
-FSS-FSS-
Designated Sanitary Sower Force Main(S.U.E.` )_ FSS-FSS -
Recorded Gas Line ------------------ ??-
Designated Gas Line (S.U.E.') ________________
Storm Sower -----------------------------------
Recorded Power Line _________________________ -S-S-
Designated Power Line (S.U.E.*) -------------
Recorded Telephone Cable -------------------
Designated Telephone Cable (S.U.E.*) ------- _ _T- -T- -
Recorded UG Telephone Conduit ------- -TC-TO-
Designated UG Telephone Conduit (S.U.E.')
Unknown Utility (S.U.E!) ___________________ _ _TC--TC- -
-ML-?UTL-
Recorded Television Cable __________________ -Tr-Tr-
Designated Television Cable (S.U.E.*) _______ __TV--T?-
Recorded Fiber Optics Cable ________________ -FO-FO-
Designated Fiber Optics Cable (S.U.E!)
Exist. Water Meter ---------------------------- __Fo--FO-
Q
U,G Test Hole (S.U.E `) ------------------------
Abandoned According to U43 Record________
End of Information _____________________________ .TTLR
co,,
BOUNDARIES & PROPERTIES
State Lino ------
County Line -----------------
-------------------------
Township line ----------------------------------
City Lino ----------------------------------------------
Reservation Une - - -
BUILDINGS & OTHER CULTURE
Buildings ----------------------------------------
Foundations -------------------------------------
(J
Area Outline ---------------------------------- 11? , /
Gate -----------
---------------------------------
Gas Pump Vent or UG Tank Cap ______ W
Church
School
Park ------------------------------------------- -- - -

Cemetery ---------------------------------------- _ J

I t J
Dam
Sign --------------------------------------------- o
Well ---------------------------------------------
Small Mine ------------------------------------- x
Swimming Pool -----------------------
TOPOGRAPHY
Loose Surface ----------
Hard Surface -----------
Change in Road Surface
Curb
Right of Way Symbol ------------------------- Riw
Guard Post ------------------------------------- ocP
Paved Walk - - - - - - -
Bridge ------------------------------------------
Box Culvert or Tunnel ----
-----------------------
Ferry ------------------------------------------- ---------
Culvert
Footbridge ___.
Trail, Footpath _
Property Line -----------------------------------
LightHouse
Property Line Symbol --------------------------- R -------------------------------
Exist. Iron Pin ---------------------------------- . o VEGETATION
Property Comer -------------------------------- - + Single Tree ------------------------------------- Cr
Property Monument ----------------------------- N Single Shrub ----------------------------------- o
Property Number ------------------------------- 123 Hedge ------------------------------------
Parcel Number _ 6
Fence Line Woods Line-------------------------------------- w ti
-x-x-x-
Existing Wetland Boundaries------------------. -"-wK.LIB_ _ Orchard ----------------------------------------
4QQt{
B
High Quality Wetland Boundary -------------- -BO WLB- Vineyard --------------------------------------- vwE'
Medium Quality Wetland Boundaries-------- -NO WLB- RAILROADS --
Low Quality Wetland Boundaries_____________ -LO WLB- Standard Gauge________________________________
Proposed Wetland Boundaries_________________ -„LB_ eu*w:varow
Existing Endangered Animal Boundaries------ EAB- _ Signal Milepost O
Wxegrr ss
Existing Endangered Plant Boundaries ________ Switch ___________
N

PROJECT RZELENCE NO. N@T NO,
B-3689 2
IOADWAY DESIGN ? AYEML4T C=N
ENCANM ENG414m
L-L-
W/GR
4'-0'
5.5' U w
GRADE TO THIS LINE
TYPICAL SECTION NO. I
'L -L-
10'-0'
a
% GRADE TO THIS LINE ---?
TYPICAL SECTION NO. 2
it
( SO
t A `A Sf01M0 )
tST,f
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO. I
-L- STA. I1+00 TO STA. 15+00
-L- STA.16+50 TO STA.21+50
NOTE: OVERLAY EXISTING PAVEMENT WITH © FROM
-L- STA. 10+50 TO STA. 11+00
tt
2
4;1 A?1 70
V Sff % 5f0SY)?
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.2
-L- STA. 15+00 TO STA. 16+50
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
c PROP. APPROX. 1'-i ASPHALT CONC. SURFACE COURSE. TYPE S9.SA.
AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 140 LBS. PER SO. YARD.
CI PROP. APPROX. 2'•= ASPHALT CONC. SURFACE COURSE. TYPE S9.5?. AT
AN AVERAGE RATE OF 140 LBS. PER SO. YARD IN EACH OF TWO LAYERS.

C2 PROP. VAR, DEPTH ASPHALT CONC. SURFACE COURSE. TYPE S9.5A. AT AN
AVERAGE RA7E OF 112 LBS. PER S0. YARD PER 1' DEPTH. 70 BE PLACED
IN LAYERS NOT TO EXCEED 11,2' iN DEPTH.
E PROP. APPROX. 3' ASPHALT CONC. BASE COURSE. TYPE B2S.OB. AT AN
AVERAGE RATE OF 342 LBS. PER SO. YARD.
El PROP. VAR. DEPTH ASPHALT CONC. BASE COURSE. TYPE 825.08. AT AN
AVERAGE RATE OF 114 LBS. PER SO. YARD. PER 1- DEPTH. TO BE PLACED
IN LAYERS NOT LESS THAN 3' IN DEPTH OR GREATER THAN S'7 IN DEPTH.
J PRO. 6- AGGREGATE BASE COURSE
P PROP. PRIME COAT AT THE RATE OF .35 GAL. PER SO. YARD.
T EARTH MATERIAL
U EXISTING PAVEMENT
W VARIABLE DEPTH ASPHALT PAVEMENT. (SEE WEDGING DETAIL)
.w.i c, -L-1 - "x Lt • L 191 UHLL" DHUNN UIHLHWI$L
W/GR
L DET-
2'-0' 101-01 101-0• 2.-O.
POINT I T SUxYEY
T, DZ POINT
Da CI
--? E I
J B.5'
GRADE TO THIS LINE 3.0' \ 3,\ \
USE TYPICAL SECTION N0.3 AU N.
TYPICAL SECTION NO. 3 C2 PI N.
-DET: STA. 11+54.86 TO STA. 16+15.58 U
DETAIL SHOWING METHOD OF WEDGING
REVISIONS
12-16-02 LO MODIFY DRIVEWAY ON PARCEL No. 3
(2)CHAMSED PROPERTY OWNER NAME AND ELIMINATED
EASEMENT ON PARCEL Na5
(3) A11A)STED RLG• OFFSET AT STA 15+4949 FROM
50DO RIGHT TO 55.W RIGHF ON PARCEL Na7
(4)ADIUSTED RaW OFFSET AT STA. 16+35117 FROM
50.00' RIGHT TO 55.00' RIGHT ON PARCEL Nab
JRM
PROJECT
R.J. DOSS JR.
DO 47 PG 104

I
mw
Ps
o•
12-
0
2.gY,
DOUGLAS DRAUGHN
DB 577 PD 33
0 m.
WF?
it
N
I R +
\ 'o
SL-1 POT 5+00.00
-L- 10+15.36 ' Q
14.0 FT.(RT.) F
COLLAR L EY7END 4'
/
DANNY DOSS
CB 1070 0 PD 49
6 DIP/1
pD.D? ??' DPF 1 I I E
-? ??upy'A9'W'E ( L?? S'
7 ?
DETAIL A
SPECIAL CUT DITCH
!rot to SwW)
I H
nab y 1 M1d?16! op:
D
Nln D • LO Fl.
S7A H-00 TO 6-00 RT
U ?
\2?
h
JO o\
DETAIL 8
SPECIAL CUT DITCH \
(hot CUT DI
om
Nat 0r 5af ,t
oma $, D
Mn D • LO Ft.
Mel B=2.OFt.
STA rt+q 10 18-50 LT
STA IS' 50 TO 20.50 R7
STA 0150 TO 6.90 RT (DETOUR)
DATUM! DESCRIPTION
THE LCALIZED CLMUTE SYSTEM DEYELD°ED FOR THIS PF"CT
IS aCED ON THE STATE PL(E OANDINATES EST,((EISHED BY
ACTOI FOR A101"ENT '&W9-2-
WITH Er0 83 STATE FWE GRID CMI ZES OF
AOUHIAFn 71343757off) FASTING( I7671411TMIlt)
THE ATRCE COWBINED GRID FACTOR USED Or THIS P%fCT
4 ,69.0 TO GRIN IS D9W2430
THE A=IAWERF (RID "HAD MD
UxKIZED NDRIZDLTALGUND DISTA&CE FROV
'836392' TO 1- STATION 10.51 OOO Is
S 10' LIS97- r 2935-95711
AL LINEAR DI"IOENS ARE LOCALIZED HORIZDR/A1 DISTA4CES
VERTICAL DATLV USED IS An M
DETAIL C
SPECIAL CUT DITCH
(rot to Scab)
otter Gltcn
W-.{ Win D = LO Ft.
B M!,d • 1.0 Ft,
B = 2.OFt.
Type of 0- =PERM. SOIL REINF. MAT7INO
STA 16-10 TO 6-50 RT
DESIGN EXCEPTION REQUIRED FOR HORIZONTAL CURVE
P/ Star 14+17,02 P1 S1ar 20+43.10
A= 2620'3876(LTJ A= .1756'48.69(LT)
D = 945'00.0' D = T30'OOD'
L = 27020' L = 39668'
T = 13753' T = 19952'
R = 58765' R = 3.81972'
SE = SEE PLANS SE - SEE PLANS
DODUAS DRAUWn
Da 1004 PD 55
BL-2 PNC 8+24.75
L- 13+40J6
15502 FT. (LT.)
c>a'
'01'AV1
SpJ
ey'

R. J. DOSS J L
D8 cc PG 59
B® ELEY = 55255' O

BL-3 PNC 11+14.42
g -L- 16+32.5 005 FT.IRTJ

S 73.51Y59.4'E
/
aw-D, I - __ .- --- ____
SEE CHAxMFL IE'fAIL Sff
1?Pf .ODDS
ErrSr.?LM'F
+
11 ,p07 LT 7
+n.sa 4 ?1'.7 5
L'A-?E\
RaH \
PLANTER J
LYAPFRT
MSSO -L
Wx 2'1
' T140TNY DRAUGN JOYZCSP >IatVal'C
CIE LM PD 1244
HE 0
7
\

7J.y
D
DETAIL \
SPECI
AL
CUT pTCN
(rot to smu
a< et Dir<o
ocaa ., pT S"
Min. D • LO Ft.
Lira • LO Ft.
Type of LI-r =PERM. SOIL RENF.MATTNO
STA 6400 10 6490 LT
Nf01Etf REFff84CE No. I SHHT No.
- D
PI St0 12+68.19 Pl St015+1030 P151016+6.5177
,
a = 26 /9 495'lLTJ ?= 2728 SOD QT) ?= 18'40'197'(RTJ
- 1622'12,8
D D - 16'22'12B' D - 1622'12B'
L - 16OB4' L - 13122' L - 114.06'
T - 81,67' T - 6639' T - 5754'
R - 350D0' R - 35OW R • 350.00'
SE = SEE PLANS SE = SEE PLANS SE = SEE PLANS
DRI
P/ Star 10+25.04
0= 3f03123J'(LT)
D = 114'35'296
L = 21JO'
0.
T=5IJB9 0D0'
R = 5
75OS'31aE=_ CC
??u??xT,v5x 't+
? - 50' R
1 ) - L- rPaED IHAnVV
1 SP P2w hFlOx AnrxTAx
-GAAU 3-44
E
"D
y
ILIA IFT
'
WOODS C OCTAL
K
CLAS T PIP RAN= $pE'(VL E D
??sgr.?6N4! $E L'6
SEE AV-EL AIL
in
DOUGLAS DRAUGM
W 1004 PC 54
0
op ?' 63
N
--L- STA?J+50DO
18n.oD•
gp4a/, I
RONNIE YCNELL ml NAHCr L DOSS STONY
D6 R4 PO 6" 1 CC IVA PG 2T8
O 0
g
IS F D ?c [v sus ?
7PEOSEE '.Eivtl ? R
(LOWER of
GARDEN
6•
cow
- - - -SLOPE STAKE SYMBOLOGY FOR -L-
- - - - -SLOPE STAKE SYMBOLOGY FOR -DEF-
NOTE: FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET 5
FOR -DET- PROFILE SEE SHEET 5
FOR -DRI- PPG)r1 F cF?sP,.?rs?
>v
HL Q S?,
T ? oS
I .. nn=?
.? FETAN4 6'COK
y

1 CASTND CHANNEL
ERSTNG
a ? GPUUq
1• p
Q*N
ti C
? ? I II II I?
WIDTH BARES I ERITWIG DOSE L
O.OFT TO S.CFT WIDTH LOFT
BASE DITCH AT
FI YFRT re T
E7.S.
EHISTlC CnuWEL
E¢S7NL
GRONO
CLASS T
RP RAP
WIDTH VARIES
O.OPT TO S"t E)D57NG 6ASE
10TH 9A FT
gau n?
SHw NO.
HYDRAULIC)
ENGINEER
POT 0+33.52
R. J. DOSS JR.
tB 1012 PO 59
N Og06'4918'E
(p1. 26OFI. DOE
2)I S[E
"-SLOPES 71110
_ DEPTH AWES
O.SFT TO 2.OFT
LSF'T
WIDTH TARES
O.OIT TO 9.OFT
2.1 SIDE
SLOPES GYP)
_ DEPTH VARIES
03FT TO 2.CFT
- LSFT
LOFT EMBEDMENT
10TH HARES
O.OFT TO 9.TTT
oc
ox
a•
?!
oc
or
a•
?u
4.
c a
on
o.
cv ? n
Q?
-a
oa
ox
?.o
c Q
Op
Ow
N . 0
I - . Vim{
Randolph County
Bridge No. 370 on SR 2609
over Mill Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-2609(1)
State Project No. 8.2572801
T.I.P. No. B-3689
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
F-7-02
Date
g-9-02
Date
Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E.
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Randolph County
Bridge No. 370 on SR 2609
over Mill Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-2609(1)
State Project No. 8.2572801
T.I.P. No. B-3689
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Branch By:
Date Dennis Pipkin
Project Planning Engineer
?-7- . i?j AN?Y"-- A? ?k ,
Date William T. Goodwin, Jr., P.E.
Unit Head, Bridge Replacement Planning Unit
g-?-oz
Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS:
Randolph County
Bridge No. 370 on SR 2609
over Mill Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-2609(1)
State Project No. 8.2572801
T.I.P. No. B-3689
1. Roadway Design Unit, Structure Design Unit, Project Development & Environmental
Analysis Branch (Permits), Resident Engineer:
Bride Demolition:
The existing bridge has an asphalt wearing surface, and the remainder of the bridge, both
superstructure and substructure, is composed of timber. There are concrete encasements on the
lower portions of the piles. The asphalt surface will be removed prior to demolition. The
remainder of the timber components of the bridge will be removed without dropping into Waters
of the U.S. There is a potential for approximately 3 cubic yards of concrete to enter Waters of the
US. During construction, Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will
be followed.
Greensheet Page 1 of 1
Randolph County
Bridge No. 370 on SR 2609
over Mill Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-2609(1)
State Project No. 8.2572801 _
T.I.P. No. B-3689
INTRODUCTION:
Bridge No. 370 is included in the 2002-2008 North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program and is eligible for the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement
and Rehabilitation Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are
anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion".
1. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT
Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate the bridge has a sufficiency rating of 34.5 out of a
possible 100 for a new structure. The bridge is considered to be structurally deficient and functionally
obsolete. The replacement of this inadequate structure will result in safer traffic operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located in central Randolph County. (see Figure 1). Development in the area is
suburban residential in nature.
SR 2609 is classified as a Rural Local facility in the Statewide Functional Classification System.
This route is not a designated bicycle route and there is no indication that an unusual number of
bicyclists use this roadway.
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 2609 has a 18-foot (5.5-meter) pavement width with 4-foot (1.2-
meter) grass shoulders (see Figure 3). The roadway is situated approximately 10 feet (3.1 meters) above
the creek bed.
Bridge No. 370 consists of two spans and is constructed entirely of timber except for concrete
encasements of the lower portions of the piles. The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was constructed in
1960. The overall length of the structure is 53 feet (16.2 meters). The clear roadway width is 19.1 feet
(5.8 meters). The posted weight limit on this bridge is 10 tons for single vehicles and 18 tons for TTST's.
There are no utilities attached to the existing structure, and utility impacts are anticipated to be
low for this project.
The current traffic volume of approximately 120 vehicles per day (VPD) is expected to increase
to 200 VPD by the year 2025. The projected volume includes one percent truck-tractor semi-trailer
(TTST) and two percent dual-tired vehicles (DT). Speed limits are not posted in the bridge vicinity.
period.
There were no accidents reported in the vicinity of Bridge No. 370 during a recent three year
School busses and emergency vehicles will be accommodated by maintaining traffic with a
temporary on site detour structure during construction of the new bridge.
III. ALTERNATES
A. Project Description
The replacement structure will consist of a triple barrel, 9-foot (2.7 meter) wide by 7-foot
(2.1 meter) high reinforced concrete box culvert. This structure will be of sufficient length to
provide two 10-foot (3.1-meter) travel lanes with 4-foot (1.2-meter) turf shoulders on each side. Shoulder
width will be increased by 3 feet (1 meter) where guardrail is warranted.
This roadway will be designed as a Rural Local facility. The roadway grade of the new structure
will be approximately the same as the existing grade at this location.
Initial design indicates that completed project will provide a design speed of 60 mph
(100 km/hr). A Design Exception will likely be required for the horizontal and vertical alignment.
B. Reasonable and Feasible Alternates
One alternate for replacing Bridge No. 370 is described below.
Alternate One: - Replace bridge on existing location, with a triple barrel, 7-foot (2.1-meter) wide by 6-
foot (1.8-meter) high reinforced concrete box culvert. Traffic would be maintained for this dead end road
with a temporary onsite detour structure placed to the east of the existing bridge.
C. Alternates Eliminated From Further Consideration
The "do-nothing" alternate will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not
acceptable due to the traffic service provided by SR 2609.
"Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not practical due to its age and deteriorated condition. The
bridge is considered structurally deficient due to the aging of the timber components.
D. Preferred Alternate
Bridge No. 370 will be replaced at the existing location as shown by Alternate One in Figure 2.
Alternate One is recommended because there is no offsite detour for this dead end road.
The NCDOT Division 8 Engineer concurs with the selection of Alternate One as the preferred
alternate.
IV. Estimated Costs
The estimated costs for the project alternate is as follows:
Alternate 1
Structure $77,000
Roadway Approaches 410,000
Detour Structure and Approaches 95,000
Structure Removal 8,000
Contract Cost $590,000
Eng. & Contingencies 85,000
Total Construction Cost $675,000
Right-of-way Costs 45,000
Total Project Cost $720,000
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
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.
Randolph County lies in the Piedmont Physiographic Province. Land in the project study area is
characterized as relatively flat. The project is located in a rural area of Randolph County surrounded by
forestland and residential houses. The project study area is located. approximately 750 ft (228.6 m)
above mean sea level.
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.
Subbasin Characteristics
Water resources located within the project study area lie in the Deep River Watershed (Subbasin
03-06-09) of the Cape Fear River Drainage Basin (N.C. Hydrologic Unit 03030003). The Cape Fear
River Basin is the largest river basin in the state, covering 9,149 square miles (NCDEHNR, 1995).
Stream Characteristics
The proposed project crosses Mill Creek. Mill Creek at the project site is approximately 12 ft
(3.6 m) wide. The depth is approximately 10 inches (254 mm). The substrate consists of gravel, cobble,
and sand.
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the NCDENR (2000). The best usage
classification for Mill Creek (Index No. 17-18) is C. Class C waters are suitable for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. 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 1.0 mile (1.6 km) of the project study area.
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. Specific river basins within North Carolina
are intensively sampled for benthic macroinvertebrates. The macroinvertebrates are a good indicator of
water quality because of their sensitivity to subtle environmental changes, mobility (as compared to
fish), diversity, and relatively long life cycle. The overall species richness and presence of indicator
organisms help to assess the health of streams and rivers. River basins are reassessed every five years to
detect changes in water quality and facilitate the NPDES permit review.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) monitors ambient water quality by
sampling at fixed sites for selected benthic macroinvertebrate organisms that are sensitive to water
quality conditions. Criteria have been developed to assign bioclassifications based on the number of taxa
present in the intolerant groups Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera (EPTs). Mill Creek received
Good-Fair bioclassifications (NCDEHNR, 1995). There were no BMAN monitoring sites in the project
vicinity.
Point sources refer to discharges that enter surface water through a pipe, ditch, or other defined
points of discharge. The term most commonly refers to discharges associated with wastewater treatment
plants. Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Any discharger is required to register for a
permit. There are no NPDES sites located within 1.0 mile (1.6 km) of the project study area.
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 non-
point 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 non-point 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.
Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Roadway construction in Mill Creek will result in water quality impacts. The proposed project
will bridge Mill Creek and result in both temporary and permanent impacts. Clearing and grubbing
activities near the creek may result in soil erosion leading to increased sedimentation and turbidity.
These effects may extend downstream for considerable distance with decreasing intensity. Potential
impacts to water resources in the project study area are dependent upon final construction limits.
Removal of streamside vegetation will have a negative effect on water quality. The vegetation
typically shades the water's surface from sunlight, thus moderating water temperature. The removal of
streamside canopy during construction will result in fluctuating water temperatures. An increase in
water temperature results in a decrease in dissolved oxygen because warmer water holds less oxygen.
Streambank vegetation also stabilizes streambanks and reduces sedimentation by trapping soil particles.
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 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 BMP's for the protection of surface waters.
The project study area is located within the piedmont and crosses a perennial stream.
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 al. (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 al., 1985;
Rohde et al., 1994; Potter et al., 1980).
Terrestrial Communities
Three terrestrial communities are identifiable in the project study area: maintained/disturbed
community, riparian fringe, and pine/hardwood woody thicket.
Maintained/Disturbed Community
This community encompasses three types of habitats that have recently been or are currently
impacted by human disturbance: roadside shoulder, maintained yard, and powerline corridor.
Roadside shoulder is a regularly maintained habitat that is kept in a low-growing, early
successional state. Herbs, grasses, and vines located here include fescue (Festuca sp.), bead grass
(Paspalum sp.), bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon), clover (Trifolium sp.), white clover (Trifolium
repens), poison ivy (Rhus radicans), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans), bush clover (Lespedeza sp.),
and dandelion (Taraxacum sp.).
Maintained yard is also a regularly maintained habitat. The herbaceous canopy is comprised of
common plantain (Plantago sp.), bead grass, fescue, clover, bush clover, white clover, vetch (Vicia sp.),
and low hop clover (Trifolium sp.). One tree species, white pine (Pinus strobus), was observed here.
Powerline corridor contains a thick canopy of high-growing herbaceous species. This habitat is
located in the northeast quadrant of the project study area. Herbs, grasses, and vines observed here
include poison ivy, greenbrier (Smilax sp.), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), trumpet
creeper, milkweed (Asclepias sp.), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), Queen Anne's lace (Daucus
carota), aster (Aster sp.), ragweed (Ambrosia sp.), plume grass (Erianthus sp.), and partridge pea (Cassia
fasciculata). Shrub and tree species observed here include bush clover (Lespedeza bicolor), blackberry
(Rubus sp.), and black gum (Nyssa sylvatica).
Riparian Fringe
Riparian fringe is located adjacent to Mill Creek and serves as a streamside buffer. The
herbaceous canopy is comprised of Japanese grass (Microstegium vimineum), false nettle (Boehmeria
cylindrica), jewel-weed (Impatiens capensis), greenbrier, Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica),
muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia), poison ivy, Virginia creeper, Christmas fern (Polystichum
acrostichoides), and Joe-pye weed (Eupatorium fistulosum). Shrub and tree species observed here
include flowering dogwood (Corpus jlorida), sweetgum (Liquidambar styracijlua), tag alder (Alnus
serrulata), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), black cherry (Prunus serotina), holly (Ilex opaca), white
oak (Quercus alba), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), beech (Fagus grandifolia), red maple (Ater
rubrum), sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), and mountain laurel
(Kalmia latifolia).
Pine/Hardwood Woody Thicket
Pine/hardwood woody thicket is located between the powerline corridor and roadside shoulder in
the northeast quadrant of the project study area. Vines observed here include greenbrier and carrion-
flower (Smilax herbacea). Shrub and tree species observed here include red bud (Cercis canadensis),
tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), sweetgum, live oak (Quercus
virginiana), ironwood, hickory (Carya sp.), white oak, winged sumac (Rhus copallina), pecan (Carya
illinoensis), flowering dogwood, black cherry, bear-grass (Yuccafilamentosa), Virginia pine (Pinus
virginiana), and sassafras (Sassafras albidum).
Faunal Component
Much of the wildlife in the project area likely use various communities for forage, cover, and
nesting habitat. Many species are highly adaptive and may utilize the edges of forests and clearings. In
addition, many species utilize both aquatic and terrestrial habitats, such that both are required for
survival and reproduction.
The raccoon (Procyon lotor) is a carnivore often observed along wetland habitats to moist forests
as well as urban areas. White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) are occasionally observed along
broken areas of mixed young forests, old fields, and crop lands. These two ubiquitous species are often
observed as roadkill on adjacent roadways.
The least shrew (Cryptotis parva), eastern harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis), and hispid
cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus) frequent disturbed or open areas dominated by herbaceous vegetation
which provide foraging and nesting habitat. Eastern cottontails (Sylvilagus floridanus) prefer brushy
edges where they primarily feed on woody perennials.
Mammals commonly occurring in forested habitats include southern short-tailed shrew (Blaring
carolinensis), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), and white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus).
Shrews and smaller mice prefer forests with a thick layer of leaf litter.
Eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus) and five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus) inhabit
open habitats with plenty of sunlight. The slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus) inhabits woodlands
where they are known to forage at night and spend the day in burrows under logs, stones, and leaf litter.
The spring peeper (Hyla crucifer) inhabits woodlands where it may be observed under forest litter or
brushy undergrowth. Eastern box turtles (Terrapene carolina) are commonly observed throughout
forested habitats where they feed on plants and small animals.
The common crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos) is seen in a wide variety of fields and open country
habitats. Cardinals (Cardinalis cardinalis) favor woodland margins and residential shrubbery. The
mourning dove (Zenaida macroura) occurs in open country habitats such as fields, woodland margins,
and suburban neighborhoods. Carolina wrens (Thryothorus ludovicianus) are found in remote swamps,
woodlands, farmyards, and residential sections of cities. The mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos) is
common in woodlands and residential areas. A turkey vulture* (Cathartes aura) was observed in the
project study area.
Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community type, piedmont perennial stream, is located in the project study area.
Physical characteristics of the surface waters and condition of the water influence the faunal composition
of the aquatic communities. Perennial streams support an assemblage of fauna that require a constant
source of flowing water, as compared to intermittent or standing water.
Amphibians and reptiles commonly observed in and adjacent to moderately sized perennial
streams in rural areas may include northern dusky salamander (Desmognathus fuscus), three lined
salamander (Eurycea guttolineata), green frog (Rana clamitans), pickerel frog (R. palustris), and
northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon).
visit.
One mussel species, Elliptio sp.*, and a crayfish* were observed in Mill Creek during the site
Mill Creek provides habitat for redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus), warmouth (Lepomis
gulosus), rosyside dace (Clinostomus funduloides), shiners (Cyprinella sp.), bluehead chub (Nocomis
leptocephalus), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), other sunfish (Lepomis sp.), brown bullhead
(Ameiurus nebulosus), and margined madtom (Noturus insignis).
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. 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
In Place Replacement Temporary Detour
Maintained/Disturbed 0.06/0.14 0.09/0.22
Riparian Fringe 0.01/0.02 0.01/0.02
Pine/Hardwood Woody
Thicket 0.004/0.01 0.02/0.04
Total (see note) 0.07/0.17 0.12/0.28
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 permanent impacts associated with the removal and
replacement of Bridge No. 370 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.
The biotic communities found within the project area will be altered as a'result of project
construction. Terrestrial communities serve as nesting, foraging, and shelter habitat for fauna. A
majority of the project study area is located in maintained/disturbed habitat. The maintained/disturbed
areas are currently in a highly altered state and plants and animals here are well adapted to disturbed
conditions. Flora and fauna occurring in the disturbed community are common throughout North
Carolina because of their ability to persist in disturbed habitats. Moreover, similar additional disturbed
habitats will be re-established after project construction.
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 must be maintained during the
entire life of the project.
Construction activities often affect water level and flow due to interruption and/or additions to
surface and groundwater flow. The change in water level may severely impact spawning activities of
mobile and sessile organisms. Construction runoff and highway spills may result in mortality to aquatic
species inhabiting the water resources located in the project area.
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.
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).
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Mill Creek is considered a jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act. Potential jurisdictional wetland communities were examined pursuant to the 1987 U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. The manual is a technical guideline for wetlands. According
to the manual, an area is considered a wetland if three parameters, hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation,
and hydrologic characteristics concurrently exist. Based upon the results of the field investigation, the
project area contains no jurisdictional wetlands.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
The proposed project will cross jurisdictional surface waters. Mill Creek is proposed to be
bridged. Approximately 60 ft (18.3 m) of Mill Creek is located in the ROW of the In Place Replacement
associated with Alternate 1. Approximately 60 ft (18.3 m) of Mill Creek is located in the ROW of the
Temporary Detour associated with Alternate 1. The amount of surface water impacts may be modified
by any changes in roadway design.
There is potential for components of the substructure to be dropped into the waters of the U.S.
during construction. The resulting temporary fill associated with the concrete support associated with
Bridge No. 370 is approximately 3 yd3. This project can be classified as Case 3, where there are no
special restrictions beyond those outlined in Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters
and Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal.
Permits
Impacts to surface waters are anticipated from project construction. In accordance with
provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, a permit will be required from the COE for discharge
of dredge or fill material into "Waters of the United States." Due to surface water impacts expected at
the project study area, Nationwide 23 & 33 Permits will likely be necessary for this project. Final
decision concerning applicable permits rests with the COE.
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 United States. The issuance of a 401 permit from
the DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 permit.
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.
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 measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those
impacts and practicable in terms of cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project
purposes.
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 surface waters can 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 BMP's for the protection of
surface waters; and (4) reduction of clearing and grubbing activity in and adjacent to water bodies.
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 to or contiguous to the discharge site.
DWQ regulations state that fill or alteration of more than 0.5 ac (0.20 ha) of wetland will require
compensatory mitigation in accordance with 15A NCAC 211.0506(a) and (h); and fill or alteration of
more than 150 linear ft (45.7 linear m) 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.
10
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 of 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.
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 March 7, 2002, there are two federally protected species listed for Randolph County (Table
2). A brief description of each Endangered or Threatened species characteristics and habitat follows.
Table 2. Federally-protected Species for Randolph County.
Common Name Scientific Name Status
Cape Fear shiner Notropis mekistocholas Endangered
Schweinitz's sunflower Helianthus schweinitzii Endangered
Endangered=a taxon in danger of
range.
throughout all or a significant portion of its
Notropis mekistocholas (Cape Fear shiner)
Animal Family: Cyprinidae
Date Listed: September 25, 1987
The Cape Fear shiner is small, rarely exceeding 2 inches in length. The fish's body is flushed
with a pale silvery yellow, and a black band runs along its sides. The fins are yellowish and somewhat
pointed. The upper lip is black, and the lower lip bears a thin black bar along its margin. The species is
generally associated with gravel, cobble, and boulder substrates and has been observed to inhabit slow
pools, riffles, and slow runs. In these habitats, the species is typically associated with schools of other
related species, but it is never the numerically dominant species. Potential threats to the species and its
habitat could come from such activities as road construction, stream channel modification, changes in
stream flows for hydroelectric power, impoundments, land use changes, wastewater discharges, and
other projects in the watershed. No information is presently available on the species' breeding behavior,
fecundity, or longevity. Plant material forms the primary part of the shiner's diet.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The only known occurrences of Cape Fear shiners in Randolph County are in Fork Creek and the
Deep River. This project is not located near these streams. A review of the NHP database for rare
species and unique habitats revealed no known populations of Cape Fear shiner within 1.0 mile (1.6 km)
of the project study area. Impacts to this species will not occur from project construction.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower)
Plant Family: Asteraceae
Date Listed: May 7, 1991
Flowers Present: September
This rhizomatous perennial herb grows from 1 to 2 meters tall from a cluster of carrot-like
tuberous roots. The leaves are opposite on the lower stem, changing to alternate above. In shape, they
are lanceolate, wider near their bases, but variable in size, being generally larger on the lower stem, and
gradually reduced upwards. Leaf margins are entire or with a few obscure serrations and are generally
also somewhat revolute. From September to frost, Schweinitz's sunflower blooms with comparatively
small heads of yellow flowers. The nutlets are 3.3 to 3.5 millimeters long and are glabrous with rounded
tips.
The species occurs in clearings and edges of upland woods on moist to dryish clays, clay-loams,
or sandy clay-loams that often have a high gravel content and are moderately podzolized. The
underlying rock types are highly weatherable, generally contain low amounts of resistant minerals such
as quartz, and generally weather to fine-textured soils. Schweinitz's sunflower usually grows in open
habitats not typical of the current general landscape in the piedmont of the Carolinas.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
A survey for Schweinitz's sunflower was conducted on October 5, 2000. No plants were
observed. A review of the NHP database for rare species and unique habitats revealed no known
populations of Schweinitz's sunflower within 1.0 mile (1.6 km) of the project study area. Impacts to this
species will not occur from project construction.
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. Six FSC are listed for Randolph County (Table 3).
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern for Randolph County.
Common Name Scientific Name NC Status Habitat
Carolina darter Etheostoma collis collis SC no
Carolina redhorse Moxostoma sp. SR no
brook floater Alasmidonta varicosa T(PE) yes
Pee Dee crayfish ostracod Dactylocythere peedeensis W3* no
Atlantic pigtoe Fusconaia masoni T(PE) yes
Carolina creekshell Villosa vaughaniana SC(PE) no
* indicates the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
Threatened (T) species 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 in the
state. Special Concern (SC) species require monitoring but may be collected and sold under regulations
adopted under provisions of Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes; 1987. Proposed (P_)
species have been formally proposed for listing as Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern, but have
not yet completed the legally mandated listing process. Watch Category 3 (W3) includes species which
have been reported from North Carolina without adequate documentation.
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 (F,), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by the NHP list
12
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 conducted on August 3, 2000
revealed no records of animal or plant species within 1.0 mile (1.6 km) 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.
VI. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for
Compliance with Section 106, codified at Title 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires Federal agencies
to take into account the effect of their undertakings (federally funded, licensed, or permitted) on
properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places and afford the
Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
B. Historic Architecture
The NC Historic Preservation Office stated in a letter of March 29, 2001, that a historic
architectural survey is not recommended.
C. Archaeology
The NC Historic Preservation Office stated in a letter of March 29, 2001, that an archeological
survey is not recommended.
VII. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate bridge
will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and
lack of substantial environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of the current North Carolina Department of Transportation standards and
specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No change in
land use is expected to result from the construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-Way acquisition will be
limited. No relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
13
The proposed project will not require right-of-way acquisition or easement from any land
protected under Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to
consider the potential impact to prime farmland of all land acquisition and construction projects. There
are no soils classified as prime, unique, or having state or local importance in the vicinity of the project.
Therefore, the project will not involve the direct conversion of farmland acreage within these
classifications.
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included in the regional
emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required. If vegetation is disposed of by
burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North
Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. This evaluation completes
the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise of Title 23, Code of Federal Regulation (CFR),
Part 772 and for air quality (1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and the National Environmental Policy
Act) and no additional reports are required.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section and the North Carolina
Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed no underground storage
tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental
impacts will result from implementation of the project.
VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS
Wildlife Resources Commission
In a March 10, 2000, letter to NCDOT the Wildlife Resources Commission, in a general
comment, stated that the agency prefers that existing bridges be replaced with spanning structures.
Response: Standard NCDOT practice dictates that a replacement bridge be considered in the preliminary
hydraulic evaluation for all bridge replacement projects. At smaller stream crossing it is more
economical to replace bridges with box culverts. Culverts cost less than bridges, require less maintenance
throughout their service life than bridges, and last longer than bridges. Therefore, where appropriate
NCDOT prefers to use box culverts to replace bridges.
The proposed culvert will be designed according to current NCDOT design practices which
include such measures as buried box bottoms to facilitate fish passage, dry cell(s) to allow wildlife
passage, and placement to minimize channel widening and realignment.
14
C A 'v Vl
r ~s?
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Archives and Histon-
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretan_• Jeffrey J. Crow. Director
March 29, 2001
MEMORANDUM
To: William D. Gilmore. P.E., Manager
Project Development nvironmental Analysis Branch
From: David Brook
Depute State Historic Preservation Officer
Re: Replacement of Bridle No. 370 on SR 2609 over Un-Named Creek,
TIP No. B-3689. Randolph County. ER 00-8447
On January 20. 2001. April Montgomery of our staff met with North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the
above project. We reported our available information on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT
provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the meeting,
we offer our preliminan, continents regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources we are aware of no historic structures located
within the area of potential effect. We recommend that no historic architectural survey
be conducted for this project.
There are no ]mown archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on our
present knowled-e of the area. it is unlikely that any archaeolo,,ical resources which may
be eliuible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, will be affected by
the project construction. We. therefore. recommend that no archaeological investigation
be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information. we look for\vard to the receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment. which indicates ho NCDOT addressed our
comments.
1 AWN 11011 \ f allint :%d d rr•-
.\DMINR•TR \Tln.N 507 N Bimini St., Ralett;h NC 4617 Mail Service Venter, kaleich NC 27699.4617
RF.I FOR.\TION 515 \' I4lnunt .Si . I:aletgh .\? 4613 Mall SLn tce C ITICr, kaletch \L'
h l i
"I RVF) ,\ PI. \\'\'INC 11, M."111! "I R. CTO) \C 4616 \I:nl sent e Center kalru h \C _?r.ua.461s
Trlephune/Fui
[phone] • 7 t t.st, t
[phone] • 71 ?-4X01
(719)711-6S4t .71t-4sul
Page 2 of 2
William D. Gilmore
March 29, 2001
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for
Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have any questions concerning
the above comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, Environmental Review Coordinator,
at 919 733-4763:
Y?or NDRTH North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development S Environmental
Analysis Branch
Randolph County
Replace Bridge No. 370 on SR 2609
Over Mill Creek
B-3689
Figure 1
I
.• r? N `w
. Y
?.
Ik'
`' ? .irk ?o.J?
_ yM y

North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
,.?., Branch
Randolph County
Replace Bridge No. 370 on SR 2609
Over Mill Creek
Looking north
across Bridge
No. 370
Looking south
across Bridge
No. 370
.ft