20060041 Ver 2_Complete File_20070713

? y
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTWNT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
July 10, 2007
WBS Element:
Contract No.:
F. A. No.:
County:
Description:
SUBJECT:
33145.3.1 (B-3538)
C201478
BRZ-1222 (9)
Wayne
Bridge over Neuse River and Approaches on SR 1222
K
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE & PERMIT MEETING
Mr. Tim Meyer
Atwell Construction Company, Inc.
305 Airport Road
Greenville, North Carolina 27834-1408
Dear Mr. Meyer:
Per our conversation, the Preconstruction Conference and Permit Meeting for this project is being
scheduled for Tuesday, July 31, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. The Preconstruction Conference is contingent
upon the award of the project by the Board of Transportation. The conference will be held in the
Conference Room of the Wilson Division Office. Our office is located at 509 Ward Boulevard in
Wilson, N. C.
Please be prepared to present the following documents at this conference: progress schedule, letter
naming persons authorized to sign Supplemental Agreements, letter naming your Company EEO
Officer and Minority Liaison Officer, and letter naming Erosion and Sediment Control/Storm Water
Certified Supervisor, Certified Foreman and Certified Installer.
We look forward to meeting with you at the above time.
Cordially yours,
Wendi O. Johnson, PE
Division Construction Engineer
WOJ/cbl
Post Office Box 3165, Wilson, North Carolina 27895-3165
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Mr. Tim Meyer
July 10, 2007
Page 2
c: Ron Lucas (FHWA)
Gary Jordan (US Fish & Wildlife)
Rob Ridings (NCDENR, Division of Water Quality)
Brian Wrenn (NCDENR, Division of Water Quality)
John Holley (NCDENR, Land Quality Section)
Travis Wilson (NCWRC)
David Cox (NCWRC)
Ron Sechler (National Marine Fisheries)
William Wescott (US Army Corps of Engineers)
Richard White (Bell South)
Ray Pigott (Progress Energy)
Clay Rollins (Time Warner)
ec: Cecil L. Jones, PE
Donald Pearson, EI, CPESC
Robert Simpson
Andy Brown, PE
Bobby Lewis, PE
Mike Robinson, PE
Andy Pridgen
Ron Hancock, PE
Lloyd Johnston, Jr.
Mike McKeel, PE
Keith Honeycutt, PE
Charles W. Brown, PE, PLS
Kevin Lacy, PE
Victor Barbour, PE
Ellis C. Powell, Jr., PE
Don G. Lee
Jimmy Marler
Jamie Guerrero
Warren Walker, PE
Haywood Daughtry, PE
Doug Allison
Robert Memory
K. J. Kim, Ph.D., PE
D. R. Henderson, PE
Queen Crittendon
Greg Dixon
Tim Little, PE
Chris Pendergraph, PE
Kenny Baines
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
February 17, 2006
Wayne County
DWQ No. 060041
TIP No. B-3538
APPROVAL of NEUSE RIVER BUFFER RULES AUTHORIZATION CERTIFICATE with ADDITIONAL
CONDITIONS
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, PhD., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe,
You have our approval, in accordance with the conditions listed below, for the following impacts for the purpose of
replacement of Bridge No. 296 over Neuse River Cut-off (Overflow) on SR 1222 (Bryan Boulevard) in Wayne
County:
Stream Impact Table
Site Stream Impacts - Temporary
(ac) Stream Impacts - Permanent
(ac)
Site 1 0.001 0.001 (bridge bents)
Total 0.001 0.001
Neuse River Buffer Impact Table
Site - Allowable
Zone 1 (s q. ft.) Zone 2 (s q. ft.)
Site 1 6,830 4,876
Totals 11,706
The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated received on January 6, 2006. After
reviewing your application, we have decided that the stream impacts and riparian buffer impacts described are
covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers 3403. This certification corresponds to the Nationwide
Permit 23 issued by the Corps of Engineers. This approval is also valid for the Neuse Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B
.0233). In addition, you should acquire any other federal, state or local permits before you proceed with your project
including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed
regulations. This approval will expire with the accompanying 404 permit.
This approval is valid solely for the purpose and design described in your application (unless modified below). .
Should your project change, you must notify the DWQ and submit a new application. If the property is sold, the
new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and is thereby responsible for complying
with all the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, or of total
impacts to streams (now or in the future) exceed 150 linear feet, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to remain valid, you must adhere to the
conditions listed in the attached certification.
Nose Carolina
Transportation Permitting Unit Natura!!tJ
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone] / Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
1.) Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed. The
responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 401JWetlands Unit of the Division of
Water Quality upon completion of the project.
2.) No in-water work is permitted between February 15 and June 15 of any year, without prior approval from the
NC Division of Water Quality and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission. In addition, NCDOT shall conform
with the most recent version of the officially adopted document entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for
Anadromous Fish Passage at all times.
3.) All stormwater runoff shall be directed to sheetflow through stream buffers at nonerosive velocities, unless
approved otherwise by this certification.
4.) During the construction of the project, no staging of equipment of any kind is permitted in waters of the U.S., or
riparian buffers.
5.) Riparian vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of the growing
season following completion of construction.
6.) The dimension, pattern and profile of the stream above and below the crossing should not be modified by
widening the stream channel or reducing the depth of the stream. Disturbed floodplains and streams should be
restored to natural geomorphic conditions.
7.) Any riprap used must not interfere with thalweg performance and aquatic life passage during low flow
conditions.
8.) All mechanized equipment operated near surface waters must be regularly inspected and maintained to prevent
contamination of stream waters. from fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
9.) Discharging hydroseed mixtures and washing out hydroseeders and other equipment in or adjacent to surface
waters is prohibited.
10.) The outside buffer, wetland or water boundary located within the construction corridor approved by this
authorization shall be clearly marked by highly visible fencing prior to any land disturbing activities. Impacts
to areas within the fencing are prohibited unless otherwise authorized by this certification.
11.) There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with this
permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in wetlands or
stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road construction activities.
12.) Heavy equipment must be operated from the banks rather than in the stream channel in order to minimize
sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into the stream.
13.) No live or fresh concrete shall come into contact with waters of the state until the concrete has hardened
14.) The presence of equipment in the channels must be minimized. Under no circumstances must rock, sand or
other materials be dredged from the wetted stream channel under authorization of this permit, except in the
immediate vicinity of the culverts.
15.) All work shall be performed during low or normal flow conditions.
16.) A copy of this Water Quality Certification shall be posted on the construction site at all times. In addition, the
Water Quality Certification and all subsequent modifications, if any, shall be maintained with the Division
Engineer and the on-site project manager.
17.) All riparian buffers impacted by the placement of temporary fill or clearing activities shall be restored to the
preconstruction contours and revegetated with native woody species upon completion of the project
construction. A post-construction as-built with the restoration activities included shall be submitted to the
DWQ no later than 60 days after the project is closed out by the Department of Transportation.
18.) Pursuant to NCACI5A 2B.0233(6) sediment and erosion control devices shall not be placed in Zone 1 of any
Neuse Buffer without prior approval by the NCDWQ. At this time, the NCDWQ has approved no sediment and
erosion control devices in Zone 1, outside of the approved project impacts, anywhere on this project. Moreover,
sediment and erosion control devices shall be allowed in Zone 2 of the buffers provided that Zone 1 is not
compromised and that discharge is released as diffuse flow.
19.) Erosion and sediment control practices must be in full compliance with all specifications governing the proper
design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best Management Practices in order to protect
surface waters standards:
a. The erosion and sediment control measures for the project must be designed, installed, operated, and
maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion
Control Planning and Design Manual.
b. The design, installation, operation, and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control measures
must be such that they equal, or exceed, the requirements specified in the most recent version of the
North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Manual. The devices shall be maintained on all
construction sites, borrow sites, and waste pile (spoil) projects, including contractor-owned or leased
borrow pits associated with the project.
c. For borrow pit sites, the erosion and sediment control measures must be designed, installed, operated,
and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of the North Carolina Surface Mining
Manual.
d. The reclamation measures and implementation must comply with the reclamation in accordance with
the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act.
20.) The post-construction removal of any temporary bridge structures will need to return the project site to its
preconstruction contours and elevations. The revegetation of the impacted areas with appropriate native species
is required.
21.) If the old bridge is removed, no discharge of bridge material into surface waters is preferred. Strict adherence
the Corps of Engineers guidelines for bridge demolition will be a condition of the 401 Water Quality
Certification.
22.) This approval will expire with the accompanying 404 federal permit. This condition supercedes condition No.
10 in the General Certification 3403.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must
act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition that conforms
to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final and, binding unless you ask for a
hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you
have any questions,, please contact Nicole Thomson at [phone].
;AI,, ly,
W. Klimek, P.E.
JH/njt
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District US Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. William Wescott, US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington Field Office
Mr. Tyler Stanton, PDEA-NEU
Mr. Richard E. Greene, Jr., Division 4 Engineer, PO Box 3165, Wilson, NC 27895
Division 4 Environmental Officer, PO Box 3165, Wilson, NC 27895
Mr. Garcy Ward, NC DWQ Washington Regional Office
File Copy
c:\Correspondence\2006BridgeProjects\DWQ060041\021406wgc.doc
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA tigr???oEy P '?0
DEPART ENT OF TRANSPORTATIOI ?'?DSr ?77??iry?6
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYND(?'T*&TT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY'
December 29, 2005
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
ATTN: Mr. William Wescott
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
osoo4i
Subject: Nationwide 23 Permit Application and Buffer Authorization for the
proposed replacement of Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222 over Neuse River Cut-off
(Overflow) in Wayne County, Federal Aid Project: BRZ-1222(4), State Project
No. 8.2331301, WBS Element 33145.1.1, TIP B-3538
Please find enclosed a copy of the Buffer Drawings, FHWA Right of Way Consultation,
Planning Document, and half-size plan sheets, for the above referenced project. The North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace existing Bridge No. 296
on SR 1222 (Bryan Boulevard) over Neuse River Cut-Off (DWQ Index # 27-59) in Wayne
County. The FHWA Right of Way Consultation dated June 30, 2002 reverses the preferred
alternative (see FHWA Right of Way Consultation). The project involves replacement of the
existing 161-foot structure with a new structure at the same location. The proposed replacement
structure is a 176-foot-3/-inch long bridge with a 29-foot-10-inch clear roadway width. During
construction, traffic will be maintained with an on-site detour that utilizes a temporary bridge
located approximately 40 feet north of the existing bridge. The total buffer impact is 11,706 W.
Less than 0.001 acre of surface water impacts will occur from construction of the bridge bents.
IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
General Description: The project is located in the United States Geologic Survey (USGS)
Hydrologic Unit 03020201 of the Neuse River Basin and in the North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (DWQ) sub-basin 03-04-12. Neuse River Cut-Off joins with the Neuse River
approximately 0.6 miles downstream from Bridge No. 296. A Best Usage Classification of "C
NSW" has been assigned to Neuse River Cut-Off. Approximately 0.6 miles upstream of Bridge
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.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548

. w? It
No. 296 lies a water supply protected area classified a WS-IV. Wetlands are not present within
the project area.
Permanent Impacts: Less than 0.001 acre of surface water impacts from construction of the
bridge bents will occur. There are no permanent stream impacts expected to Neuse River Cut-Off
from the construction of the new bridge.
Temporary Impacts: Temporary impacts to surface waters from installation of the temporary
detour bridge bents are expected to be less than 0.001 acre. There are no temporary stream
impacts expected to Neuse River Cut-Off from the construction of the new bridge.
After construction activities are completed, the temporary bridge will be removed and disturbed
upland areas will be revegetated and returned to preconstruction elevation.
BUFFER IMPACTS
NEUSE RIVER BASIN BUFFER RULES
This project is located in the Neuse River Basin; therefore, the regulations pertaining to the
buffer rules apply. There will be a total of 11,706 ft2 of impacts to riparian buffers, 6,830 ft2 in
Zone 1 and 4,876 ft2 in Zone 2, due to the detour and construction of the new bridge. All
practicable measures to minimize impacts within buffer zones were followed. According to the
buffer rules, bridges are allowable. Uses designated as allowable may proceed within the
riparian buffer provided that there are no practical alternatives to the requested use pursuant to
Item (8) of this Rule. These uses require written authorization from the Division of Water
Quality. Therefore, NCDOT requests that the NC Division of Water Quality review this
application and issue a written authorization for a Neuse River Riparian Buffer Certification.
UTILITY IMPACTS
Southern Bell Telephone Company owns underground telephone cables along SR 1222, which
become aerial over the Neuse River Cut-Off. Along the south side of SR 1222, Southern Wayne
Sanitary District owns a water line, which is suspended on timber pilings over the Neuse River
Cut-Off next to the existing bridge. No utility impacts to surface waters are expected from the
proposed project.
BRIDGE DEMOLITION
The existing bridge has four spans totaling 161 feet. It is composed entirely of timber and steel.
These components are slated for removal in a manner that will avoid dropping any bridge
components into Neuse River Cut-Off. Because the Neuse River Cut-Off is known to support
anadromous fish, "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage" will be followed
and no in-stream work will be allowed between February 15 and June 15. There are no other
special restrictions beyond those outlined in the BMPs for Protection of Surface Waters and
BMPs for Bridge Demolition and Removal. Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition
and Removal will be followed to avoid any temporary fill from entering Waters of the United
States.
Schedule: The project schedule calls for a January 16, 2007 Let date, with a Let Review date of
November 28, 2006.
NCDOT TIP B-3538 Page 2 of 4
0
AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION, AND MITIGATION
Avoidance and Minimization:
Avoidance examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to "Waters
of the United States". Because of the presence of surface waters within the project study area,
avoidance of all impacts is not practicable. The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all
reasonable and practicable design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to
providing full compensatory mitigation of all remaining, unavoidable jurisdictional impacts.
Because avoidance of all impacts was not possible, minimization measures were incorporated as
part of the project design. As part of this commitment, impacts to Neuse River Cut-Off were
minimized by replacing the bridge in the same location. -
Miti ag tion:
No mitigation is proposed for this project.
FEDERAL 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 US Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) lists one federally protected species for Wayne County; the red-cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis), which is listed as Endangered. No species have been added to or
deleted from this list since the completion of the CE (September 2000).
Field surveys conducted in 2001 determined that the project area does not contain habitat for the
red-cockaded woodpecker. Therefore, a biological conclusion of "No Effect" has been given for
this species and remains valid.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
Section 404 Permit: All aspects of this project are being processed by the Federal Highway
Administration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). The
NCDOT requests that these activities be authorized by a Nationwide Permit 23 (FR number 10,
pages 2020-2095; January 15, 2002).
Section 401 Permit: We anticipate 401 General Water Quality Certification number 3403 will
apply to this project. All general conditions of the Water Quality Certifications will be met.
Therefore, in accordance with 15A NCAC 2H, Section .0500(a) and 15A NCAC 2B.0200, we are
providing copies of this application to the North Carolina Department of Environmental and
Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality for their review.
A copy of this application will be posted on the NCDOT website at:
http://www.doh.dot.state.nc.us/preconstruct/pe/neu/permit.html
NCDOT TIP B-3538
Page 3 of 4
It
Thank you for your time and assistance with this project. Please contact Tyler Stanton at
[e-mail] or [phone] if you have any questions or need any additional
information.
Sincerely,
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
cc:
W/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (7 Copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Richard E. Greene, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Jamie Shern, Division 4 Environmental Officer
W/o attachment
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Hank Schwab, P.E., PDEA Project Planning Engineer
NCDOT TIP B-3538 Page 4 of 4
RECEIVED
JUL 6 2004
North Carolina Department of Transportation DIZION OF HIGHVIAYS
PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTATION FOR EA.OFFCE Cf ?r' I p .Eli'v'? f1 E t
TIP No. B-3538
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
a. Consultation Phase: Revised Right of Way Consultation
b. Project Description: Replacement of Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222 over Neuse
River Cutoff in Wayne County
c. State Project: 8.2331301
WBS Project: 33145.1.1
Federal Project: BRZ4222 (4)
d. Document Type: Right of Way Consultation 6-30-02
Categorical Exclusion 9-27-00
H. ACTION PROPOSED IN RIGHT OF WAY CONSULTATION
This project proposed to replace Bridge No. 296 with a new 175-foot long bridge on new
alignment approximately 40 feet north (upstream) of the existing structure. Traffic would be
maintained on the existing structure during construction.
M. CONCLUSIONS
The Categorical Exclusion and Right of Way Consultation have been reevaluated as required by
23 CFR 771. It was determined that the current proposed action is not the same as the action
proposed in the previous documents. Proposed changes, are noted below in Section W. It has
been determined that anticipated social, economic, and environmental impacts were accurately
deperibed in the Categorical Exclusion unless noted otherwise herein.
IV. CHANGES IN PROPOSED ACTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEOUENCES
The original Categorical Exclusion (CE) proposed two alternatives. Alternate One recommended
replacing the existing bridge with a new bridge at approximately the same location and elevation
and maintaining traffic onsite using a temporary detour bridge to the north. Alternate Two
recommended replacing the bridge on new location to the north and maintaining traffic along the
existing alignment. Alternate Two was the recommended alternate in the CE Document.
Since that time, Hurricane Floyd caused a lot of flood damage to eastern North Carolina. The
vicinity of this bridge project was flooded and FEMA bought most of the surrounding houses and
property. FEMA regulations declare no new impervious surface (includes pavement) is allowed
to be placed on land acquired using Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)/Supplemental
funding. NCDOT's Roadway Design Unit has been coordinating with FEMA as well as the NC
Division of Emergency Management (NCDEM). These agencies have conditionally approved
the replacement of Bridge No. 296 utilizing Alternate One. These conditions are stated on the
Green Sheet.
13-351? Revised RO'?/ ^onsv.!rat+.o
PatP 1 of 2
Therefore, the recommended alternate will change from Alternate Two, to Alternate One (onsite
detour to the north). The previously attained Total Cost Estimate (Construction and Right of
Way Cost) for Alternate One is $1,668,000. The new recommended Alternate will not affect any
houses, nor result in any relocatees because the properties surrounding the project have been
purchased by FEMA resulting from flooding caused by Hurricane Floyd.
According to the February 2003 updated list for Wayne County, the only listed Threatened and
Endangered Species is the Red-cockaded Woodpecker. As stated in the Categorical Exclusion,
the Biological Conclusion of No Effect remains valid.
V. COORDINATION
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch personnel have discussed
current project proposals with others as follows:
Design Engineer: Greg Brew 6-9-04
Date
Permits Section: Tyler Stanton 5-17-04
ate e
VI. NCDOT CONCURRENCE
6-3b-04
Robin Y. Hancock, PE, Project Development Engineer Date
i&<?- - 6.- 'w - 0
Teresa Hart, PE, CPM, Assistant Branch Manager Date
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
VII. FHWA CONCURRENCE
6-d oe
?- John F. Ivan, III, PE Date
g Division Administrator, FHWA
B-3538 Revised ROW Consultation Page 2 of 2
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Wayne County
Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222
over Neuse River Cutoff
Federal-Aid No. BRZ-1222(4)
State Project No. 8.2331301
WBS 33145.1.1
TIP No. B-3538
Commitments Developed Through Project Development and Design
Division 4 Construction, Roadside Environmental Unit, Structure Design Unit
Bridge Demolition: Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition & Removal will
be implemented. The existing bridge is constructed entirely of timber and steel.
Therefore, Bridge No. 296 will be removed without dropping any component into Waters
of the United States during construction.
Hydraulics Unit, Roadway Design Unit
As recommended by the Wildlife Resources Commission, NCDOT will consider using
measures to avoid bridge deck drainage directly into the Neuse River Overflow during
the hydraulic analysis of the proposed bridge replacement.
Roadside Environmental Unit, Hydraulics Unit, Division 4 Construction Office
NCDOT will adhere to construction guidelines outlined in "NCDOT Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage" during the construction of Bridge No. 296 in
Wayne County. No in-water work will occur from February 15 to June 15.
Roadside Environmental Unit, Division 4 Construction Office
Once construction of the new bridge and approaches are complete, the detour bridge will
be removed. The approach fill for the detour will be removed to natural grade and the
area will be revegetated with appropriate plant species.
Roadside Environmental Unit, Division 4 Construction Office, Roadway Design Unit
The following conditions are required through FEMA and the Division of Emergency
Management:
1. The time required for the temporary roadway and bridge is not to exceed 18 months
from the date of earth moving startup.
2. The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) Property must be returned to pre-
construction state.
3. NCDOT will maintain HMGP Property; keeping it free of storm debris.
4. NCDOT will publish a public notice in the local newspaper and provide FEMA with
a copy
5. NCDOT will provide FEMA with a detailed engineering site plan for review.
Green Sheet
CE Revised ROW Consultation Page 1 of l
innP ?nnA
c
Wayne County
Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222
Over Neuse River Overflow
Federal Project BRZ-1222 (4)
State Project 8.2331301
TIP No. B-3538
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
cl- Z S--oo
Date
q-v-a°
Date

William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project DevelopmentAnd Environmental Analysis Branch

Nicholas Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Wayne County
Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222
Over Neuse River Overflow
Federal Project BRZ-1222 (4)
State Project 8.2331301
TIP No. B-3538
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
September 2000
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
Date aren T. Orthner
Project Development Engineer

Date Wayne Elliott
Bridge Project Development Engineer, Unit Head ,?,puaaaHp1aa
'??N CARO
."? ?D? QQO F E S S ip? l ?!fi9 % =
SEAL
?'ZS-ate < =
: 6976
Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch?iNE'.?;
(,

PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Replacement of Bridge No. 296
on SR 1222 over Neuse River
Wayne County
Federal-Aid No. BRZ-1222(4)
State Project No. 8.2331301
T.I.P. No. B-3538
Commitments Developed Through Project Development and Design
Hydraulics Unit, Roadway Design Unit
As recommended by the Wildlife Resources Commission, NCDOT will
consider using measures to avoid bridge deck drainage directly into the Neuse
River Overflow during the hydraulic analysis of the proposed `bridge
replacement.
Roadside Environmental Unit, Division Four Construction, Structure Design
Unit
NCDOT will adhere to the Best Management Practices (BMPs) for "Bridge
Demolition and Removal" during the removal of Bridge No. 296 in Wayne
County.
Roadside Environmental Unit, Hydraulics Unit, Division Four Construction
Office
NCDOT will adhere to construction guidelines outlined in "NCDOT
Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage" during the
construction of %rid e No. 296 in Wayne County. No in-water work will occur
from February 15 tolune 15.
Roadside Environmental Unit, Division Four Construction Office
Once construction of the new bridge and approaches are complete, the
existing bridge will be removed. The existing approach fill will be removed to
natural grade and the area will be planted with native grasses and/or tree
species as appropriate.
Green Sheet
Categorical Exclusion
September 26, 2000
Page 1 of 1
Wayne County
Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222
Over Neuse River Overflow
Federal Project BRZ-1222 (4)
State Project 8.2331301
. TIP No. B-3538
Bridge No. 296 is located in Wayne County over the Neuse River Overflow. It is
programmed in the Draft 2002-2008 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a
bridge replacement project. This project is part of the Federal Highway Bridge
Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP) and has been classified as a
"Categorical Exclusion". No substantial environmental impacts are expected.
1. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No.296 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 2 with a new bridge
on new alignment approximately 40 feet (12.2 m) north (upstream) of the existing
structure (see Figure 2). The new structure will be approximately 175 feet (53.3 m) long
and 30 feet (9.2 m) wide. The cross section of the new bridge will include two 12-foot
(3.6-m) lanes with 3-foot (1.0-m) offsets on each side of the bridge. Traffic will be
maintained on the existing structure during construction.
There will be approximately 1250 feet (381 m) of new approach work to the east
of and 850 feet (260 m) of new approach work to the west of the new bridge, The
pavement width of the roadway approaches will be 24 feet (7.2 m). Additionally, there
will be 8-foot (2.4-m) grass shoulders. The design speed will be 25 mph (40 km/h).
The estimated cost of the project is $1,365,000 including $1,272,000 in
construction costs and $93,000 in right of way costs. The estimated cost shown in the
Draft 2002-2008 TIP is $1,800,000.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
Based on preliminary analysis, a design exception will not be required for this
project.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1222 is classified as a Rural Local Route in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. The dead-end road is located approximately one mile southwest of
Goldsboro, N. C. Currently the traffic volume is 800 vehicles per day (VPD) and
projected at 1300 VPD for the year 2025. There is a 20 mph (30 km/h) posted speed limit
in the vicinity of the bridge. The road serves primarily local residential and industrial
traffic.
The existing bridge was completed in 1953_ It is composed of a four-span timber
and steel superstructure. The deck is 161 feet (49 m) long and 19 feet (6 m) wide. The
substructure is composed of timber bents with timber caps. There are approximately
28 feet (8.5 m) of vertical clearance between the floorbeams of the bridge deck and
streambed. There is one lane of traffic on the bridge. -
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the
bridge is 5.0 out of a possible 100. Presently, the bridge is posted with weight
restrictions of 14 tons for single vehicles and 17 tons for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
Vertical alignment is good in the project vicinity. The existing bridge lies in a
tangent section of roadway that curves sharply on both the east and west approaches to
the bridge. The pavement width on the approaches to the bridge is 19 feet (6 m).
Shoulders on the approaches of the bridge are approximately 4 feet (1.2 m) wide.
The Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that no accidents have been reported
during a recent three-year period in the vicinity of the project.
There are six daily school bus crossings over the studied bridge. Because
SR 1222 is a dead-end road, there is no alternate route available for the school buses in
the case of road closure.
Southern Bell Telephone Company owns underground telephone cables along
SR 1222, which become aerial over the Neuse River Overflow. CP&L owns power lines
along SR 1247 with a service drop at the intersection of SR 1222. No power lines cross the
Neuse River Overflow. Along the south side of SR 1222, Southern Wayne Sanitary District
owns a water line, which is suspended on timber pilings over the Neuse River Overflow next
to the bridge.
IV. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
There are two "build" options considered in this document as follows:
Alternate 1: Bridge No. 296 would be replaced with a new 175-foot (53 m) long bridge
at approximately the same location and roadway elevation as the existing
bridge. Traffic would be maintained on-site using a temporary detour
north of the existing bridge. The design speed would be 25 mph
(40 km/h).
Alternate 2: (Recommended) Bridge No. 296 will be replaced with a new 175-foot
(53 m) long bridge on new location approximately 40 feet (12.2 m) north
(upstream) of the existing structure. Traffic will be maintained on the
existing bridge during construction. The design speed will be 25 mph
(40 km/h).
Both alternates were evaluated on the north side of the bridge in order to avoid a
water line suspended on timber pilings along the south side of the bridge.
Bridge No. 296 is the only access in and out of a residential and industrial
community northeast of the Neuse River Overflow on SR 1222. Therefore, closing the
road during construction is not an option, as access to this community would be cut off.-
"Do-nothing" is not practical; requiring the eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating
bridge is neither practical nor economical.
2
V. ESTIMATED COST (Table 1)

COMPONENT
ALTERNATE I Recommended
ALTERNATE 2
New Bridge
Existing Bridge Removal
Roadway & Approaches
Detour Bridge and Approaches 383,000
28,000
198,000
322,000 383,000
28,000
345,000
N/A
Mobilization & Miscellaneous 371,000 316,000
Engineering & Contingencies 220,000 200,000
Total Construction $1,522,000 $1,272,000
Right of Way $146,000 $93,000
Total Cost $1,668,000 $1,365,000
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No.296 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 2 with a new bridge
on new alignment approximately 40 feet (12.2 m) north (upstream) of the existing
structure (see Figure 2). The new structure will be approximately 175 feet (53.3 m) long
and 30 feet (9.2 m) wide. The cross section of the new bridge will include two 12-foot
(3.6-m) lanes with 3-foot (1.0-m) offsets on each side of the bridge. Traffic will be
maintained on the existing structure during construction.
There will be approximately 1250 feet (381 m) of new approach work to the east
of and 850 feet (260 m) of new approach work to the west of the new bridge. The
pavement width of the roadway approaches will be 24 feet (7.2 m). Additionally, there
will be 8-foot (2.4-m) grass shoulders. The design speed will be 25 mph (40 km/h).
Once construction of the new bridge and approaches are complete, the existing
bridge will be removed. The existing approach fill will be removed to natural grade and
the area will be planted with native grasses and/or tree species as appropriate.
Alternate 2 is recommended due to lower cost. Each alternate would provide a
25 mph (40 km/h) design speed. Each alternate maintains traffic on site, since there are
no alternate routes available in the area. In addition, the environmental consequences are
essentially the same for both alternates.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. GENERAL
This project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an
inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
This project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
This bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality
of the human or natural environment by implementing the environmental commitments
listed in the "Project Commitments" (green) sheet of this document. In addition, the use
of current NCDOT standards and specifications will be implemented.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning
regulation. No change in land use is expected to result from construction of this project.
There are no hazardous waste impacts.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way
acquisition will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not
expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and
waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
This project will not impact any resource protected by Section 4(f) of the U. S.
Department of Transportation Act of 1966.
The proposed bridge replacement project will not raise the existing flood levels or
have any significant adverse effect on the existing floodplain.
Utility impacts are considered to be low for the proposed project.
B. AIR AND NOISE
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included
in the regional emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required.
The project is located in Wayne County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part 51 is not
applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not
have substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during
construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
In the vicinity of this project, Wayne County has no zoning. This project will
impact no soils considered to be prime or important farmland.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) indicated that there are no known
architectural or archaeological sites in the project area and no unknown sites are likely to
be found. Therefore, the SHPO recommended no architectural or archaeological surveys
be conducted in connection with this project. (See attachment.)
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
I. PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources, which occur in the study area, are discussed below.
Soils and the availability of water directly influence composition and distribution of flora
and fauna in any biotic community.
The project lies in the Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic province.
Topography within the project region can be described as smooth, but short, sloping to
moderately steep breaks occurring along the floodplain of permanent streams.
Topography in the project area is flat with steep slopes occurring on the waters edge.
Primary land use is agriculture, but it includes urban areas around Goldsboro. Project
elevation is approximately 60.0 ft (18.3 m) above mean sea level (msl).
SOILS
Two soil phases occur within project boundaries. Wickham loamy sands (WhA)
are well-drained soils found on broad stream terraces. These soils formed in stream
sediments. Permeability is moderate and the seasonal high water table remains below a
depth of 5.0 ft (1.5 m). The slopes of this Wickham loamy sand are 0-2 percent.
Infiltration is moderate, and surface runoff is slow. Major hazards include flooding for
short periods of time and erosion for the steeper sloped areas. Wickham loamy sands are
listed as non-hydric.
Wickham sandy loam (WkB2) is a well-drained soil on smooth, low ridges on
stream terraces, which formed in stream sediments. Permeability is moderate and the
seasonal high water table remains below a depth of 5.0 ft (1.5 m). Slopes range from 2-6
percent. Infiltration is moderately slow, and surface runoff is medium. Erosion is a _
moderate hazard because of the steep slope's. Wickham sandy loam is listed as non-
hydric.
- Wickham soils are low in natural fertility and organic matter content. They are
important for farming and well suited to locally grown crops.
WATER RESOURCES
This section contains information concerning those water resources likely to be
impacted by the project. Water resource information encompasses physical aspects of the
resource, its relationship to major water systems, Best Usage Standards and water quality
of the resources. Probable impacts to these water bodies are also discussed, as are means
to minimize those impacts.
Waters Impacted and Characteristics
Neuse River Overflow will be the only surface water resource directly impacted by the
proposed project (Figure 2). Neuse River Overflow is located in sub-basin 03-04-12 of the
Neuse River Basin, and has its confluence with the Neuse River approximately 0.6 mi (1.0 km
stream channel distance) downstream of Bridge No. 296. The Neuse River Overflow is not
considered a navigable waterway.
At Bridge No. 296, the channel of Neuse River Overflow is approximately 90.0 ft
(27.4 m) wide and has a depth of 10.0 ft (3.1 m). The average baseflow width is 40.0 ft (12.2 m)
and the average baseflow depth is 4.0 f t (1.2 m). Rip-rap is located under both sides of the
bridge to stabilize the banks. The streambanks are steep, but stable. On July 29, 1999, very little
flow was observed in this portion of Neuse River Overflow. Approximately 0.1 mi (0.2 km)
downstream of the bridge is a riffle area comprised of clay, sand, cobbles, and boulders.
Upstream of the bridge, rock ledges are visible and the-substrate consists of clay and sand.
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ). The DWQ identifies Neuse River Overflow as Neuse River Cut-Off. In
this report, I will address it as Neuse River Overflow. The classification of Neuse River
Overflow (Cut-Off) [index no. 27-59] is C NSW. The "C" classification denotes
freshwaters suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary
recreation and agriculture. The supplemental classification of NSW denotes Nutrient
Sensitive Waters which require limitations on nutrient inputs.
Within the project region lies the Neuse River Water Supply Watershed.
Approximately 0.6 mi (1.0 km) west of Bridge No. 296 lies a water supply protected area.
A protected area is only located within WS-IV watersheds. WS-IV refers to those waters
used as sources of water supply for drinking, culinary, or food processing
purposes for those users where a WS-I, WS-II, or WS-III classification is not
feasible. WS-IV waters are generally located within moderately to highly developed
watersheds. A protected area is defined as land within five miles and draining to the
normal pool elevation of water supplies, or within ten miles upstream and draining to a
river intake.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I: undeveloped
watersheds, or WS-II: predominately undeveloped watersheds) nor Outstanding Resource
Waters (ORW) occur 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. All
basins are reassessed every five years. Prior to the implementation of the basinwide
approach to water quality management, the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
(managed by the DEM) assessed water quality by sampling for benthic macroinvertebrate
organisms at fixed monitoring sites throughout the state. Biological monitoring is now
performed as part of the basinwide assessment program.
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; therefore, 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 is a biological sampling station located on the
Neuse River at NC 117, within 1.0 mi (1.6 km) of the project corridor. This site was last
sampled in August 1995 and received a rating of Good-Fair.
The Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) is a network of stream, lake, and
estuarine water quality monitoring stations strategically located for the collection of
physical and chemical water quality data. The type of water quality data or parameters
that are collected are determined by the waterbody's freshwater or saltwater classification
and corresponding water quality standards. Class C waters are sampled at a minimum
frequency of once per month. There is one AMS station located within 3.0 mi (4.8 km)
downstream of Bridge No. 296. A review of the monitoring information-obtained from
this location indicated no significant water quality problems.
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. Two permitted dischargers are located within
1.0 mi (1.6 km) of Bridge No. 296.
Table 2. Maior Dischargers Within 1.0 mi (1.6 km) of Bridge No. 296

19 M 1 Design vb. Fto "
Facility NPDES # -Flow from 1991 Location
® m - (MOD) 4 ____
Wayne County Genoa Industrial NC0030392 0.4000 0.0882 Neuse R.
Park WWTP *downstream
Celotex Corporation NC0050695 N/A 0.0000 Neuse R. Ut
*downstream
"MGD" Quantifies the flow in millions of gallons per day (MGD).
"*" Denotes if the discharger is located upstream or downstream of Bridge No. 296.
"Ut" Unnamed Tributary
Nonpoint source discharge refers to runoff that enters surface waters through
stormwater or snowmelt. Agricultural activities may serve as a source for various forms
of nonpoint source pollutants. Land clearing and plowing disturb soils to a degree where
they are susceptible to erosion, which can lead to sedimentation in streams. Sediment is
the most widespread cause of nonpoint source pollution in North Carolina. Pesticides,
chemical fertilizers, and land application of animal wastes can be transported via runoff
to receiving streams and potentially elevate concentrations of toxic compounds and
nutrients. Animal wastes can also be a source of bacterial contamination and elevate
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). Drainage ditches on poorly drained soils enhances
the transportation of stormwater into surface waters.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Surface waters present in the project area include the Neuse River Overflow.
Estimated linear impacts are derived using the combined ROW width of 90.0 feet
(27.4 m) for Alternate 1 and 80.0 feet (24.4 m) for Alternate 2. Anticipated impacts to
the Neuse River Overflow will be 90.0 feet (27.4 m) for Alternate 1 and 80.0 feet .
(24.4 m) for Alternate 2. Usually, project construction does not require the entire ROW;
therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
7
Project construction may result in the following impacts to surface waters:
1. Increased sedimentation and siltation from construction and/or erosion.
2. Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased sedimentation and vegetation
removal
3. Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface and
ground water flow from construction.
4. Changes in water temperature due to removal of streamside vegetation.
5. Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas.
6. Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff, construction, toxic spills,
and increased vehicular use.
Precautions will be taken to minimize impacts to water resources in the study
area. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be
strictly enforced during the construction stage of the project. Guidelines for these BMPs
include, but are not limited to: minimizing built upon area and diversion of stormwater
away from surface water supply waters as much as possible. In addition, measures to
avoid deck drainage directly into the stream will be considered in the hydraulic analysis
of this project. Provisions to preclude contamination by toxic substances during the
construction interval must also be strictly enforced.
II. BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial communities. This section
describes those communities encountered in the study area as well as the relationships
between fauna and flora within these communities. Composition and distribution of
biotic communities throughout the project area are reflective of topography, hydrologic
influences and past and present land uses in the study area. Descriptions of the terrestrial
systems are presented in the context of plant community classifications and follow
descriptions presented by Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible. Dominant flora
and fauna observed, or likely to occur, in each community are described and discussed.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided for
each animal and plant species described. Plant taxonomy generally follows Radford, et
al. (1968). Animal taxonomy follows Martof, et al. (1980), Menhinick (1991), Potter, et
al. (1980), Webster, et al. (1985), Glassberg (1999), and Borror, et al (1970). Subsequent
references to the same organism will include the common name only. Fauna observed
during the site visit are denoted with an asterisk (*). Spoor evidence equates to
observation of the species. Published range distributions and habitat analysis are used in
estimating fauna expected to be present within the project area.
TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES
Two distinct terrestrial communities are identified in the project study area: mixed
pine hardwood forest and maintained/disturbed. Community boundaries within the study
area are generally well defined without a significant transition zone between them. Many
faunal species likely to occur within the study area may exploit all communities for
shelter and foraging opportunities, or as movement corridors.
Mixed Pine Hardwood Forest
The mixed pine hardwood forest is present in the upland areas adjacent to Neuse
River Overflow. The transition from mixed pine hardwood forest to the surrounding
communities is abrupt due to the change in vegetation and road shoulder and agricultural
maintenance activities.
On the southwest comer of the bridge, the area adjacent to the mixed pine
hardwood forest appears to have been previously inhabited and maintained. The forest
community is littered with debris including concrete and trash. The other three comers of
the bridge are relatively undisturbed mixed pine hardwood forest. The canopy is
primarily composed of sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), water oak (Quercus nigra),
southern red oak (Q. falcata), sweetgum (Liquidambar styracijlua), laurel oak (Q.
laurifolia), river birch (Betula nigra), bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), and eastern
redcedar (Juniperus virginiana). The shrub layer consists of saplings of the canopy trees,
ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), and sassafras (Sassafras albidum). Herbs within the
forest consist of river oats (Chasmanthium latifolium) and Japanese grass (Microstegium
virmineum). Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron
radicans), and greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia) comprise the vine layer of this
community.
Maintained/Disturbed
The maintained/disturbed community includes road shoulders along SR 1222 that
are present along the entire length of the project, a utility corridor, and an agricultural
field. Road shoulders and utility corridors are irregularly maintained, receiving only
periodic mowing and herbicide applications. The portion of the agricultural field that
will be impacted is less maintained; therefore, vegetation occurring along the utility
corridor would be similar to, but denser than that in the agricultural field.
Road shoulders act as buffers between the roadway and surrounding communities
by filtering storm water run-off and reducing run-off velocities. The width of the road
shoulder is approximately 10.0 ft (3.1 m). Vegetation occurring within frequently
maintained portions of the road shoulder include low growing species such as: fescue
(Festuca spp.), crab grass (Digitaria sp.), dwarf dandelion (Krigia virginica), clover
(Trifolium spp.), common chickweed (Stellaria media), and buckhorn plantain (Plantago
lanceolata). Areas receiving less frequent maintenance, such as utility corridors are
occupied by Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), chrysanthemum
(Chrysanthemum sp.), dog-fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), ragweed (Ambrosia sp.),
pokeweed (Phytolacca americana), dayflower (Commelina sp.), greenbrier, morning
glory Qpomoea sp.), curly dock (Rumex crispus),: horse nettle (Solanum carolinensis),
grape (Vitis sp.), sneeze-weed (Helenium sp.), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans)
Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), Chinese wisteria (Wisteria sinensis), passion-flower
(Passijlora sp.), and saplings of longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), water oak (Quercus
nigra), mimosa-tree (Albizia julibrissin), and redbud (Cercis canadensis).
Wildlife
Many faunal species are highly adaptive and may populate or exploit the entire
range of biotic communities discussed. Generally, community boundaries are abrupt,
with little transitional area between them. Forested tracts and drainageways provide
habitat for species requiring a forest community, and also provide shelter and movement
9
corridors for other species of wildlife within the project vicinity.
Mammals that commonly exploit habitats found within the project area include:
the hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), house mouse (Mus musculus), Norway rat
(Rattus norvegicus), and least shrew (Cryptotis parva). The hispid cotton rat thrives in
dense vegetation associated with field edges. The Virginia oppossum (Didelphis
virginiana) and raccoon (Procyon lotor) are very adaptive mammals which frequent areas
of human settlement. The gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) preys heavily on
cottontails (Sylvilagus floridanus) and other rodents which can be found in abundance in
this type of habitat.
Birds found foraging within the project area include: brown thrasher* (Toxostoma
rufum), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), great blue heron (Ardea herodias),
common crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), field sparrow (Spizella pusilla), eastern bluebird
(Sialia sialis), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), and killdeer (Charadrius vociferus).
Insects observed utilizing the area were cicadas* (Family Cicadidae), Horace's
duskywing* (Erynnis horatius), and least skipper* (Ancyloxypha numitor). An orb-
weaver spider* (Order Araneida) was also observed in the project area.
Reptiles that can be expected to utilize the terrestrial communities within the
project area include: redbelly snake (Storeria occipitomaculata), rat snake (Elaphe
obsoleta), rough green snake (Opheodrys aestivus), Carolina anole (Anolis carolinensis),
five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus), easternhognose snake (Heterodon platyrhinos),
snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata), and eastern fence
lizard (Sceloporus undulatus). The diet of the rat snake consist primarily of rats and mice.
The forest communities near surface water provide excellent habitat for
amphibians such as Carolina mudpuppy (Necturus lewisi), dwarf salamander (Eurycea
quadridigitata), Fowler's toad* (Bufo woodhousei), little grass frog (Limnaoedus
ocularis), spring peeper (Hyla crucifer), and Brimley's chorus frog (Pseudacris brimleyi).
Brimley's chorus frog occurs along streams flowing through hardwood forests, with
females depositing eggs on plant stems and other submerged objects.
AQUATIC COMMUNITIES
One aquatic community, Neuse River Overflow, will be impacted by the proposed
project. Fauna present within the project area are dependent upon physical characteristics
of the water body and overall condition of the water resource. Terrestrial communities
adjacent to a water resource also greatly influence aquatic communities. Fauna associated
with the aquatic communities include various invertebrate and vertebrate species.
The streambank along this portion of Neuse River Overflow is steep, yet stable.
Vegetation along the streambank includes various mosses (Musci), liverwort (Hepaticae),
and Japanese grass.
Fish species likely to occur in Neuse River Overflow include mosquitofish*
(Gambusia holbrooki), sunfish* (Family Centrarchidae), creek chub (Semotilus
atromaculatus), and margined madtom (Noturus insignis). Invertebrates that would be
present include: crayfish* (Cambaridae), dragonflies* and damselflies* (Odonata),
nymphal and larval stages of caddisflies* (Trichoptera) and stoneflies* (Plecoptera),
whirligig beetles* (Gynnidae), and water striders* (Aquarius sp.). Mollusks identified in
Neuse River Overflow include two types of freshwater mussels, including four specimens
of Elliptio spp.* and three eastern floaters* (Pyganodon cataracta), as well as asiatic
clams* (Corbicula fluminea) and snails* (Gastropoda).
10
The Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) indicated this section of Neuse River
Overflow is known to support anadromous fish. WRC has requested that NCDOT
comply with the "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage" and that no
in-water work occur from February 15 to June 15.
SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
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 area impacted and ecosystems affected. Temporary
and permanent impacts are considered here as well.
Calculated impacts to biotic resources reflects the relative abundance of each
community present within the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of these communities. Table 3 summarizes potential quantitative
losses to these biotic communities resulting from project construction. Estimated impacts
for Alternate 1 and Alternate 2 are derived using the proposed ROW of 80.0 feet (24.4 m)
for the Replacement Bridge. In addition, Alternate 1 involves a detour bridge with a
ROW of 60.0 feet (18.3 m), for a combined width of 90.0 feet (27.4 m), excluding
overlap. The paved roadway width of 19.0 ft (5.8 m) has been excluded from the impact
calculations. Usually, project construction does not require the use of the entire ROW or
study area width, therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less. Surface water
impacts are presented in "Water Resources" section of this document.
Table 3. Anticipated ImDacts to Biotic Communities
Community Alternate I* Alternate 2
Mixed, Pine Hardwood .0.39 (0.16) 0.65 (0.26)
Maintained/Disturbed 2.27 (0.92) 2.39 (0.97)
Total 2.66(l.08) 3.04(l.23)
Note: Values cited are in acres (hectares).
*Approximately 30% of Alternate 1 involve temporary impacts.
Plant communities found along the proposed project area serve as nesting and
sheltering habitat for various wildlife. Replacing Bridge No. 296 will reduce habitat for
faunal species, thereby diminishing faunal numbers., Habitat reduction concentrates
wildlife into smaller areas of refuge, thus causing some species to become more
susceptible to disease, predation and starvation.
Areas modified by construction (but not paved) will become road shoulders and
early successional habitat. Increased traffic noise and reduced habitat will displace some
wildlife further from the roadway while attracting other wildlife by the creation of more
early successional habitat. Animals temporarily displaced by construction activities will
repopulate areas suitable for the species. This temporary displacement of animals may
result in an increase of competition for the remaining resources.
Aquatic communities are sensitive to small changes in their environment. Stream
channelization, scouring, siltation, sedimentation and erosion from construction- related
work would effect water quality and biological constituents. Although direct impacts
may be temporary, environmental impacts from these construction processes may result
in long term or irreversible effects.
11
In-stream construction alters the stream substrate and may remove streamside
vegetation at the site. Disturbances to the substrate will destroy aquatic vegetation and
produce siltation, which clogs the gills and/or feeding mechanisms of benthic organisms
(sessile filter-feeders and deposit- feeders), fish and amphibian species. Benthic
organisms can also be covered by excessive amounts of sediment. These organisms are
slow to recover or repopulate a stream. Turbidity reduces light penetration thus
decreasing the growth of aquatic vegetation.
The removal of streamside vegetation and placement of fill material at the
construction site alters the terrain. Alterations of the streambank enhances the likelihood
of erosion and sedimentation. Revegetation stabilizes and holds the soil thus mitigating
these processes. Erosion and sedimentation carry soils, toxic compounds and other
materials into aquatic communities at the construction site. These processes magnify
turbidity and can cause the formation of sandbars at the site and downstream, thereby
altering water flow and the growth of vegetation. Streamside alterations also lead to
more direct sunlight penetration and to elevations of water temperatures which may
impact many species.
III. JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides descriptions, inventories and impact analysis pertinent to
two important issues--Waters of the United States, and rare and protected species.
WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) promulgated the definition of
"Waters of the United States" under 33 CFR §328.3(a). Waters of the United States
include most interstate and intrastate surface waters, tributaries, and wetlands. Areas that
are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions are considered "wetlands"
under 33 CFR §328.3(b). Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and
similar areas. Any action that proposes to place dredged or fill materials into Waters of
the United States falls under the jurisdiction of the USACE, and must follow the statutory
provisions under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Potential wetland communities were investigated pursuant to the 1987 "Corps of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual". The three parameter approach is used where
hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation and prescribed hydrologic characteristics must all be
present for an area to be considered a wetland. Wetlands are not present within the
project area.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Surface waters present in the project area include the Neuse River Overflow.
Estimated linear impacts are derived using the combined ROW width of 90.0 feet
(27.4 m) for Alternate 1 and 80.0 feet (24.4 m) for Alternate 2. Anticipated impacts to
the Neuse River Overflow will be 90.0 feet (27.4 m) for Alternate 1 and 80.0 feet
(24.4 m) for Alternate 2. Usually, project construction does not require the entire ROW;
therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
12
Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated. In accordance with
provisions of section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be
required from the COE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the
United States."
A Section 404 Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be applicable
for all impacts to Waters of the United States from the proposed project. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in
whole, or part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or department
has determined that pursuant to the council on environmental quality regulation for
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act;
(1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment,
and;
(2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency' or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
A North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Section 401 Water Quality
General Certification is required prior to the issuance of the Section 404 Nationwide
Permit No. 23. Section 401 Certification allows surface waters to be temporarily
impacted for the duration of the construction or other land manipulations.
Neuse River Buffers
As the project is located in the Neuse River Basin, Riparian Area Rules for
Nutrient Sensitive Waters apply. The rules state that roads, bridges, stormwater
management facilities, ponds, and utilities may be allowed where no practical alternative
exists. They also state that these structures shall be located, designed, constructed, and
maintained to have minimal disturbance, to provide maximum erosion protection, to have
the least adverse effects on aquatic life and habitat, and to protect water quality to the
maximum extent practical through the use of best management practices. Every
reasonable effort will be made to avoid and minimize wetland and stream impacts.
Estimated impacts to the. riparian buffers are derived using the combined ROW
width of 90.0 ft (27.4 m) for Alternate 1 and 80.0 feet (24.4 m) for Alternate 2, and the
required buffer width of 50.0 ft (15.2 m) on each side of the water resource. Anticipated
impacts to riparian buffers are calculated to be 0.21 ac (0.08 ha) for Alternate 1 and 0.18
acres (0.07 ha) for Alternate 2. It is possible the Neuse River Overflow may be exempted
when an on-site determination by the Division of Water Quality is conducted. Therefore,
impacts may be considerably less.
Mitigation
The USACE has adopted, through the Council on 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 restore and maintain the chemical, biological
and physical integrity of Waters of the United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of
13
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 (EPA) and the
USACE, 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. Minimization
typically focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the
reduction of median widths, ROW widths, and/or fill slopes. Other practical mechanisms
to minimize impacts to Waters of the United States crossed by the proposed project
include: strict enforcement of sedimentation control BMP's for the protection of surface
waters during the entire life of the project; reduction of clearing and grubbing activity;
reduction/elimination of direct discharge into streams; reduction of runoff velocity; re-
establishment of vegetation on exposed areas, judicious pesticide and herbicide usage;
minimization of "in-stream" activity; and litter/debris control. In addition, once
construction of the new bridge and approaches are complete as recommended in
Alternate 2, the existing bridge will be removed. The existing approach fill will be
removed to natural grade and the area will be planted with native grasses and/or tree
species as appropriate.
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. Compensatory
mitigation is not usually necessary with a Nationwide Permit No. 23, however the final
decision lies with the COE.
Bridge Demolition
Bridge No. 296 has four spans totaling 161 feet (49 m) in length. The bridge is
composed entirely of timber and steel. Therefore, Bridge No. 296 will be removed
without dropping any components into Waters of the U.S. during construction.
14
RARE AND PROTECTED 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 of 1973, as amended) requires that
any action, likely to adversely affect a species classified'as federally-protected, be subject
to review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife (FWS). Other species may receive additional
protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of
December 20, 1999, the FWS lists one federally-protected species for Wayne County. A
brief description of the species' characteristics and habitat follows.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) Endangered
Family: Picidae
Date Listed: October 10, 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 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 percent 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 greater
than 60 years old and are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age. The
foraging range of the RCW is up to500 acres (200 hectares). This acreage must be
contiguous with suitable nesting sites.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees and usually in trees that
are infected with the fungus that causes red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies
from 12.0-100.0 ft (3.6-30.3 m) above the ground and average 30.0-50.0 ft (9.1- 15.2 m)
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 habitat, in the form of open old growth stands of southern pines, does not
exist within the project area. The project area is dominated by mixed pine hardwood
forest community. Pines within this forested community are interspersed within the
community and represent less than fifty percent of the canopy. A review of the NC
Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique habitats on January 19,
2000 revealed that there are no known occurrences of the red-cockaded woodpecker
within 2.0 mi (3.2 km) of the project study area. Therefore, project construction will not
affect the red-cockaded woodpecker.
15
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
There are five Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed for Wayne County.
Federal Species of Concern 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. Federal Species of Concern are defined as those
species which may or may not be listed in the future. These species were formally
candidate species, or species under consideration for listing for which there was
insufficient information to support a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered and Proposed Threatened. Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Significantly Rare (SR) or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) list of rare species and unique habitats are afforded
state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
Table 4 lists Federal Species of Concern and State listed species, the species state
status and the existence of suitable habitat for each species in the study area. This species
list is provided for information purposes as the status of these species may be upgraded in
the future.
Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site visit, nor were any of
these species observed. A review of the NCNHP database of rare species and unique
habitats on January 19, 2000 revealed no records of North Carolina rare and/or protected
species in or near the project study area.
Table 4. Federal Species of Concern for Wayne Countv
ScientificN4me nnimon Name- Status Habitat
Corynorhinus rafinesquii Rafinesque's big-eared bat Sc*
PT Yes
Heterodon simus southern hognose snake SR
PSC Yes
L thrurus matutinus pinewoods shiner SR Yes
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe T
PE Yes
Litsea aestivalis Ponds ice C No
"*" ----- Historic record (Last observed in Wayne County more than twenty years ago.)
"E"------An Endangered species is any native or once-native species of wild animal whose continued
existence as a viable component of the State's fauna is determined by the Wildlife Resources Commission
to be in. jeopardy or any species of wild animal determined to be an "endangered species" pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act.
"SC"---- A Special Concern species is any species of wild animal native or once-native to North Carolina
which is determined by the Wildlife Resources Commission to require monitoring but which may be taken
under regulations adopted under the provisions of Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes;
1987.
"SR"----A Significantly Rare species is one which has not been listed by the N.C. Wildlife Resources
Commission as an Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern species, but which exists in the state in
small numbers and has been determined by the N.C. Natural Heritage Program to need monitoring.
"T"----- A Threatened species is any native or once-native species of wild animal which is likely to
become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range or one that is designated as a threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act.
"C"----- A Candidate species is one which is very rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20 populations
in the state, generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat destruction, direct exploitation or
disease. The species is also either rare throughout its range or disjunct in North Carolina from a main
16

range in a different part of the country or the world.
"PE"---- Proposed Endangered
"PT"---- Proposed Threatened
"PSC"---Proposed Special Concern
17
? t
1222
x
00
MAR-MAC
(UNINC.)
POP. 3,366
2108 `.
``•
1247 13
•`•
Bridge No. 296 1222 1248 11
1258 O 1247
1272 l0 01
o? 1290 , & N9 •OQ ? '•.
1222
1291 1219
j'
1262
Oq
1263 1926
1219
1130
North Carolina
Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
Wayne County
Replace Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222
Over Neuse River Overflow
B-3538
Figure 1
;i
?k

i
i
i
4 4E

j YYY l ? l
' ?Sy9y7,
i CD s
l >}4.
t y.
i?
?f v
? I
'c' II
t
y ?; I
r
,I
-Audi
I
5
>n _ - I
I

lw R ? ?'-,?
4 Y 'lit ? v t ?s r "y?.'' y, ? rs - A ? y d ?. raS
ss

I _ ., JO,;!,-,

Looking West from the Bridge
Looking East from the Fridge

South Face of Bridge

f

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
MAILING ADDRESS LOCATION
4617 Mail Service Center 507 North Blount Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617 Raleigh, NC
State Courier 53-31-31
August 17, 1999
MEMORANDUM
TO: Karen Orthner
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Bridge 296 on SR 1222 over Neuse River
Overflow, B-3538, Wayne County, ER 99-
8120
Thank you for contacting us regarding the above project. We have reviewed our files
and found that our Environmental Review Coordinator, Renee Gledhill-Earley, called
Karen Orthner, North Carolina Department of Transportation, on February 3, 1999,
and advised that no architectural or archaeological surveys were recommended for
this project.
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 questions concerning
the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review
coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: Nicholas Graf
William D. Gilmore
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ???
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
312 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Karen Orthner, Project Planning Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Coor '
Habitat Conservation Program ?.
DATE: February 25, 1999
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacement Projects in Wayne County, North Carolina.
TIP Nos. B-3378, B-3538 and B-3539.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have
reviewed the information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the
subject project. 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 February 25, 1999
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 (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of
the steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the
option of requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and
we can recommend that the project require an individual `404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist
Mr. Tim Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these
sensitive species may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service for information on requirements of the Endangered
Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy
entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12,
1997)" should be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
If corrugated metal pipe arches or concrete box culverts are used:
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for fish passage. Generally, this means
that the culvert or pipe invert is buried at least 1 foot below the natural stream
bed. If multiple cells are required the second and/or third cells should be
placed so that their bottoms are at stream bankful stage (similar to Lyonsfield
design). This will allow sufficient water depth in the culvert or pipe during
normal flows to accommodate fish movements. If culverts are long, baffle
systems are required to trap gravel and provide resting areas for fish and other
aquatic organisms.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed
to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or
widening is required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of
structures usually causes a decrease in water velocity causing sediment
deposition that will require future maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on the stream bed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same
location with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be
designed and located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to

Bridge Replacement Memo 3 February 25, 1999
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-3378 - Wayne County - Bridge # 34 is located over Nahunta Swamp. With the
recent dam removal in the Neuse River this site now may support anadromous fish.
NCDOT should follow the officially adopted document "Stream Crossing Guidelines
for Anadromous Fish Passage". No in-water work should be conducted between
February 15 and June 15.
2. B-3538 - Wayne County - Bridge # 296 is over the Neuse River overflow. This site
is known to support anadromous fish. NCDOT should follow the officially adopted
document "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage". No in-water
work should be conducted between February 15 and June 15.
3. B-3539 - Wayne County - Bridge # 164 is over Stony Creek. This site is known to
support anadromous fish. NCDOT should follow the officially adopted document
"Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage". No in-water work
should be conducted between February 15 and June 15.
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.
OK ;
r T-
r _
? ? r L F?S ??} }-' ?NI p
I
k? 1 z .y?A ,[ :192
Vvz
r
-x
i
Fl,
ka.
Y ?} rt f a -- #?=
v Y G: f If w S a'?y
?.-
.
i
64, ;r
TOPOGRAPHIC
MAPS
NEUSE RIVER BUFFER
NCD®T
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAYNE COUNTY
PROJECT: 33145.1.1 (R-3538)
REPLACE BRIDGE # 296 OVER.
NEUSE RIVER CUT-OFF
ALONG SR 1222
SHEET OF
4%5%05
• 1
PR
VICINITY
MAPS
NEUSE RIVER BUFFER
NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAYNE COUNTY
PROJECT: 33145.1.1 (B-3538)
REPLACE BRIDGE # 296 OVER.
NEUSE RIVER CUT-OFF
ALONG SR 1222
SHEET -7- OF f 1 4/5/05
NORTH CAR.OLINA

6-MAY-2005 034
h Para I c A\Dermit\b3538_hyd_Dermmaps.dQn
T 09/08/99
KoNTRACT.* TIP PROJECT: B-3538
o O O I
,n w w b \\
p >
o0 Aft cn
R
-0 0 0 -ton
cl Q
P"
N N -
N < -I G to th ? _? ?o se ,ms ?
Cn
-i rn rn
Z
C, `
a
ST aw
30
;a
ER WERfWN ?-
m 1In1?? NEUSE RN 1=I
-t- NEUSE RNER OVERflAY O I=?
1 II 1 I :' ? G? ? ? ?jr
O°O N '?+
P pWca No ®?
b O C)
co N C b y v?
I-
e? ? C
a ? I v+
I n
ro D\ rl
IQed ? ? ? I
V ? I y?v
I
II VI
y III

??
I m
m c-
0
\. 0
?U--a
y
y
b rn

!

m
O
>m

? ::E?u
pp
'e
? Z
l?1
O l
O
f
.

b

a

ti

N
N X 71

w

t = C1
I I
?I
??? Q
I
M V rrl
m
I

m
_ I 115' CP
W CT IRON 36' U/G ?D
SR 1247 -AUr
11j?'4RN R
l78' BST GD)

- ? n m
N
r
TI

- BS R -n
goo o ';I< I ° 0 o

Cl
Z 0

V

I W
V
AO + m

G?
a
?-
(}
?D DrC X
'lH -I

? N (7
® v l
- ' ' - 0 cn +
0 c r

. N
. Vl
?O
3.90.1 3.L£,90.£ _ O
--- --- --- ---
?N- 9:TIIV O
En
m
ZD? p I
C:
-0
O -pD
(A U) r
m
z?
m
NEUSE RIVER CUTOFFW o l
c
-
- o
Zpl
o
0
N

---? -- - --? 9b5 O

3.Zb,90.S£5
OT ? `

+
o N
MO

o
D O
mDD
°° r
21 I
D\IT
mNr
N
p
ONO D
p ?c70
n --I
C1.4
? ?-m
Ir
G z rZ
?O
0 0

•
1 z
X
o° "
D ?
N

c04
I
O
Or-
= _
® z
m ?
c
-
m I n

p?
V i
? °? f7
??• ,a v)
r
m
m
`
O D
N
p
c")
?
p? ? ? mcnu,
N

P 6x
® c "t 1
LPJ W
ox
Z
rr??
?J D
N-p
T

C? O
® o D
W X >r-
DD n
D
Z
N Qt/i
m
O
O
o
(
3 X
x

0 11/ X
(A
L
1.0 O W;o-
?-DC
C)
?: OT X - 4
A
1
0 ? + v O - v
of
D
c:3 rn
c :i w c7 ?'
I I .0 •
I p W .?
N `Cl
a?+ ?+ r +
oto
Sao •
0 ?p
91
o• v 00
m 0
36' U G
------------ mk__---- -
---------- ----------
---- `?__-- SOIL p -
-n EASEMENT
U
N ? --I (h (? ? r
Co v)
X p
` mx °D Z
ao Lq ppx
D 4 ;Q N Z
v o
co ZN CO U4 D
I
m M.OZ, . N --? ?? > r
O O
D
NEUSE RIVER CUTE
?- m m
oc
III W,Z .1bN • • M i
rrl? M.Z£,61.L£N m
C) p d0 + ..
°o Re o D
vi m -I n
x -?
C V)
- < n N
N
?o-10m Z O
omZ-D m z
<:< r-m N m
O rl- Dm?omN -
?- o wre 0x
t ?
? 0D01 'Q
occ-xnc-?m
C7 ;0mZWN
fr*7?O
< MOO 0 Z z _0 p 0 0
mM- c-)go -+ z n ? w Z
S n oNr .v
D\m -? W< 00 r
? w o
-INC cNn?o 0 r r(A (A
O 1
mo 6?Z o to
y0- pC? +
-I ?7- ...J -4::1-4
--I
31 A=C N 00
CSI Cn
1'l 1 (A
Q) r- OD
I
to I Q
n
CJ1 Z 0
00 + ()
'n
? m r- O
N V Ln
v
m ? W
rn a

0
x B I E3 $ S + I I r51 r
s I I xlit -Xx ?
y
E r
° © --------- T s aa. wSx to us 7v& k •4 Sg w
Ci tRON OK N 5 Hw _
U/C Al
r: y :c r : 805.dgn l 8/17/99
40'}
M26 U5.53.8
S aim
Y? I $ ?--
F
,'? I .09
8559' 1 ° I y _ 3[0
N2916.07M 88.9' BTJO'
Q B 56'N 8&06• y 2
Y N28'?2'I6'W 3.962Y,BLS 3.? L I I
of a ,trB
'cam gg {? ? ? 9 I I k" ? ??
Art y
at,? :n?? ? Q s
2 Ra
ap,
G CYJ ter- W ?$ 10 v 9? v 3
H m m o
>b2?
N 1 c ccl
I C3 s.
Co 1
-n rL
m
? ? 1 n E ? ? 4 L ?f
> 6'? ¦ 6• T IRON 36•U ObBB
D
m i? ~i j 1!?C x + Ro a ?O
N
-it
N
Ic O
REUSE RNER pLfroff
..t- REUSE INNER
r r r .w0
W
•4)
m
n } 9?
c (O ?t
O g
n
G?i •
4
2(i?l 1 0
} N
zN ? b
?W o
m c^7i A
R
r. ? N 2
ONQ ?O O g ?? 1
? rI
i yti ? R ? ? V ? x
O I
s 7A/5-"
f
y
N,Z601
I'D?
m+?, ,ooou •Bn.eY
o s}
m
m101
rr ??
A/sf85 m R m N y ?
?O s y
m R
2r
a Se

+
?? ?
?
?aaP
N J
l
y
al
'v

r
L
+ a
Art ----- r - r
•`atvet `
a
A
1 Q (2?
V
agg
Yi O
a V)
r?
?aa?
M 0
? v R
M9
C z o
d. rz I
a
I .,,APT-2905 yeu ics ermit\b3538_hyd-pfl.dgn
13:24 5/28/
S3 Ln 14 m
HEM
?i `iii iiir
O V
-Mifi6 - - -- rll+

. .... ... ........ ........

N M I M I "
'0
N
W O

- - - -- - -
- --- -
- - - -- - -- --- - -

A

- -- -- - - -- - - -- -- - -

N r
w N
w
.1a
N
O?
V
W
10

S ?a W

au

? a [?1

ro r

V1 =
0
L ?
r-
NCDOT L&S WILLIHMSTON Fax:[phone]
Rpr 4 'U5 16:U9 F..U1
V
C ?L C Z c m J J J J J J
O O O 0 ?
rO ? ?
c a, a s a, a CL a a a a a a a,,,, a m
°v u S ° ° °c g o Q' o O O C°
CEO
v
C t C 0 C t C
o 0 0 $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
c, h CO W C07 H y cn Pn w to to tR rg
V = = S s= s s x x z x s s = s
a ?!

i
1-
4
i
m
m
m
m
m
m
0
m
N
`-V
m
m
m
m
m
N N N N N U) N

C? V `

(P `

IV V L V `

(P L

d) L

CD L

CD 0 (D
V
4)
V
V O 0 V 0 V

V m m Cl) ° M eLL°? ?1 t") [?D M !07 M C?7
H h n ^ ti h ti ?
t? ti A ti Go n n CO
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z
A

o S B $ 2

a o

B 0

B 0

.8 0

B 0

y, 9
.8 m

e S

Is P
0
.

m
?y o a
o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d O 4 4
C9 C9 0 C9 C9 C7 C9 C9 C9 0 C7 C7 C7

? m

€ _?

p
Ad
5D
o
N m m _
m m ._ p l4 m U

6=

l0
a
lC
CIA
k

l0

=m

l0

N

Q =

Y

U

C

d CL

N
OI

m T

I-" =

N£

in m Z'

m a-

m E-

m a-

m O

J

m C

m 1 31
O
M
J .2
U)

a
w s
T O
Q N
?•- Q to
r °
r -
r r`
r P- °
O7 002
O' P- S
O m
O M N
? ?D 0
m
to Q .- m to a %0 LO L W u Pr x W) n 3 z

F
C3 c

73
a

W

:3

w
.3

?

¢
E

B

tj

?1/
'V
r

y y

$

-

?

C
E

m

G
m
m A Z ?. a -EE c m r EVER
E
m
< m m a Y a 66
's
IL to
O

Received Apr-04-2005 01:28pm From-25 278840 36 To- Page 001

e
ti
9
I-
0
N
.y
c
v
L
T
0
a
NUDUI LKS W1LLIRMSTUN Fax:[phone] Apr 4 '05 16:10 P.02
%1 4

C3
3

m A
m m

J m
J
J m
L.1 m
J
V 2
c
c

--
a H 0 a
? a

d
a
' D m
a m
a m
a ,,,
w
d v
v
v
v
v
v
0 0 0 0 0

V

?
v t
o t
0 t
0
Co of [S
? a a a a s

I
.g

a

'v
V7 m
r ? ? n r
y
z z z z z

C 1 2
32 :2

G .? C 7 i
m m ? m m
C
m
m
l7 f
D ¢
? Co m
N N
N ,
a to PY
v
c Q
a Z C
r e
W
? o
x E a

4: O m m m

Received Apr-04-2005 01:28pm From-Z5ZT994036 To- Page OOZ

Z
O
O
°

O m

z
LL
ax ?
Z ; 00
0;

U
N
f'O Win
tLZ Zm v W
:055
vn
F.
?w

po O

w Ix
ci n

LLI

Ul)

04

CO
C
?
O 1

C)
z m
V) co
(D

2 W
?

a?

O

U
R
W
LL
3
U .D
?- on
c
o

to U 4
O

:C
_ y
O
O =?
o

v

f- N
Z w?
W z ?
W ? O v
W
?
U
a
m W ...
W
a' N
0
J O
?
H
O
F-

m
N

o
_
W
4 C,
Z

Q ? ? o o m

SG
GG Q M N

> ?v N N ?
c O N
?
A
J
r
en
o

a s-
a

J U
J Q
a
W a?
? W
a

W Q N
O co
X

U
Z ? O
? O
O N Ol O

w
N
_ fA m
?a m

m
0

F
y
O .J
z Q
w ? F
~ O

?
LLI
Z
F„
18-MAY-2005 11.09
r. roodway?,\ _ro j ?b F538-rdy-tsh.dgn
019/RA/99
[gC(:0: tTRACT: TIP PRDt?[ECT: B-3538

-v p to En r -\
O
m
F
m 0 m
_ O
-0 O

A _ -TEl`Jj?J

m
I
22 -" $
,?-?
' o o
r?yr g „ m
0 0 0
0
y
D /
O ao/'? ? a3 ?
t
i. -i -i
C7 t4
y < -i a twit b-.i
q,

o cp
tj
00

° II II II II II Il ,
_
'~- s4 its CID
I C, N
/ . p 25
_
_

? x * ? ? r

p'z R

z?o
:d cg
Y
m -.;,1
???,..
?
?- AAm
m
H

W W r
?. MEUSE FNE
!??y
m f- NfUSE mrA OVEWW v
--------
o
8
®

°°o
a
la
?
w
c
i
? NQ
o ??

b o
? b
N y
°D

N

K
°o
to
to
M
„ o a

..
b

11 I??-1

h N O
?

+Q y
Ca!i
th A
N
IJ v
IJ r
qq

X11 ?s E !., > OD
M
b

a

y z? F

lull
" s

r
I ;
18-MAY-2005\ 11:09
ri\roo ?o pro \63538-rdy_typ.dgn 6/2/99
::5E C y ? N ?n?, W N
r
I I
I I y
I I m
I I
I
y
-I m n? a1n nvt\'i ti
8 ;t 21 CD (n
? Q I I ?
I rn
77 Z ?yD ?
T ?I I ?
N tQ I I m
I I n
Z w Q I/
0 izI
0 CD
OD om
z 'o rrl
C
P
r n I C1
y l I .? ?
it
?•
A? N
00 P T
CO
CA 't
Iz m
IN
C C?y
I.n
q Q? O O A
A
O
r
R ; R
Cll$
r
m N
m ? n rn
.Q -o r
r ?ro n ? ? ?N ?`? ? Z Z ?
m x m z i (? Z
n ?g r
F,2
c r?
m ?z
rr ?' w rr m N ti
r r
1 1 1 ? 1 1 1 ??
p? g $?00 IIb ?? CC
c p 4
rn ?Ny m 4 n, PA
m
APP 0 co o O V O
cilU Z Z? Z
0 gv$ p oo p
OOq Cq N
PP?' pPP ?a?
ENO' ?bo a
y C Fl ?g W
Co
D&

N ? ?
2 ~~ ~ Q 2 yy ? ~ O ~
4 ~ O
. y
? ? y
p
A
? ? b A 2? g b A
Z?
~ ?
h y
2 9; ? i
m A ? D ? ?1 D yC
?C D ? D ? D ?p
?°
l
bO O

" y
y

NN ACa
Nrn?
? Cb
nth!
?O b
Nnt•
?p C.o
rn?
? C?
rn ?
? C-p
rn?
?
b
rn
Q
q
p
q
D
O

x
y n1
? 'Yq y
17 ? q?
'?l y h0y
O ?1 y O ?
't1 b 4'D
?1 a ON
?1 Z ?`+
O
b ? y ? A
wpb °?'? "N? j
c ?? o

?
rn
'
zti?
? ?rn ??"?' oc o? qN y
QbVO Oc O
rn
? n
dy
O?
mz? m rao am m M Z

? ? c
N n p
? e n
O `-
rn = r
T1 x N
rn ?
ll C
N ^O
C
?rn N ?? E rn
M
? aN ?rn rn b
m
N O ? 0~ ? O? N

ti rn N "?

A
x cn ? ? P

C7 6

typ.dgn
Itl
m
A
y7
A
M1
y
a
y
ai
x?wD
mo?o?o
rq A
cn
4?7,c'a0p???4i
L
D
cn
m
n
O
z
z
0
m
N V
N
0
z
z
0
v
a
?o
z
C
°p
2
F
V
N
a
p
rn
°c

b
A
0
A
N
lp
C ''? N Vl ?A W N

t

x

?
A
<

?'1

n
m
z

h
z
?
rn

rn
b

y

m
m
N

Cb
m
x

I?
o
?
M

,
n

y

m
m

N
i`°n
'

a

Z

?
M

o
n
?'
v

y
O

rn
v
rn

w
n 1l
r
b
rrl

mss.

y
?7
?

rn
O
C
m

? A
m
H
rn
.may \v
c?
O W
Ig
a
m
O
z
z
0
H
D
N
9
O
z
z
0
a
Y, ?
Nb
M
rn
0
m

i

38_rdy_pe1,4_l.dgn
b
? aY
m a? ?+ 9 w spy
+ W ri n B k'' ? ? ) ? B'f8' 8 NZ83i'07~`? ? ?
a c
r f ? ? ? @ K ? 'lip WN N = $ i?
0? llp++ll AAry
p Q 1? ??I •fHL
XI pIC ip ? i A ?? ? /!? K ?] ?Q 1 'J L
.._.rousmo M 7.17'4
6'DNCt HIGH
•w DR
R lie
u
0
R
yy
r Q ??
y r
7Z' r
ZZ
Q L1 B,? 8 ? rn s C/1
{? iQ N
?0" -fnp b
D
?D -n-op
r111°?
c
r
?it "It40
]bri?Op'b
"a11u"v.2
`+ ?IV
nD^IIopb
It "It 1 "u/
??tiA•ga
`Q•2 § y C3
r•
1
T!1 ----_
?!
x
b T ??
?s
? A
pY{

? a
$

its
P

at P A
c")
$b I c w m
O
N m
ui
y
w
y w""?{ ,
p ?m

?g ?
z
l 1 fi ? ?'
a---- d
t

r

?
e? ?s
to ill

O
A
All
a^
$ as
a?
S} * ,?xAA $
x ax a iw
2
n Ia 1
fs RNfR Cf7fOFF
NEUSE
{••• NEUSE RNER
a

cO 1'M 1
fAp P'r?P ? I
XQ 5`44
'

a? r
a
? w d r
g
G n
$ m
9 y? ?
a
S
Y P m
?O O ? ti
oo8
o gg -+r
Q: Q: Li ,E $3 a
$s
9
sip
I a
esZ
r
P
z
GI
?I
?' N26•pS'9S'"
$
? h 7? a
a : ro9• •H , I ?
• .. ,. HN.09
-1 ?]?A 3.f0.9Z.Zf9
00 $O
1x
(f '
I p
Ca LZI
C;l
i
Npp
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET

A
- ? !5
A2 . - ? a
'? IiM?mN
a rn R? c -i 3S
ion pal;j ARSE
ipv
arm -? ? P : 'x Iyi
O - ..
Ln
N V
rS f11'f. 4 '?'t.
i_ N
}
o `n n ?
lit
V •gF.
5 STA. 17+60.00
wA
I

Y
Ldgn
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 4 STA. 17+60.00

O? X 1 A O r y ? ??. .?
P y •I.
m OO ?. rf 1 z O$$ V Q~
N -r T
3lf.ZAZfS,7xo .9? ? ? _
k00'Ol-mow x o --_---
S?-
3 i Syi I >r?.,
oo'ou wa Je??. ?" Q a Q a
U 29
h
4
O
m?
F
?-Ir-Op
4 N " 4 ? ti
y?
v
?ti?bp o
V a ?
r
I
O
n "
a a°
4 ?
W
H
J ?
r ?
J
c h
N
! T ONE
r +
I ? g
i
t. 11!
ak
IP
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
I?
y o gW
JJ Q ?
m? b
41n, K
H
O
\C
20
A n
NRy-?
T
V
l ?s
ro
? 4 .Sv ?
co °€n
b"Hf
x 2h :: s „
}
o {y o
? yi r n
I
9
-Ilk
1
• •gr
?aF
o?
$ro?
a
I
m
19

I-r
38_rdy-pshG-det.dgn
agA
?a?l-op v
0
7p _{r OD b
+4
wad
?b "1 oD-0 12,
0u1
?lyo
T
11 II ° 11 ° V„1
y
V
zA 'o t+
?? and
OA ?? rt?
WA
1?1 O ? Ir
I
I ?a+ ' 1 ' _ _ ` east ?,
' 0'
8 m ? ' 1 ? "' N76.06'63•N
9 I I tsp?"?-?.
f4 ? ?l'? o cV. fA $; O- $ m I I ? 5Z ? tj2
t7gt J0 t? .. .. .. .. .. ?.09
A5
19•
.?L'f i
46•w bi.r0• tPe4.06' lYm I Igl .. .. 3?
6YZ,,6,N 3.91,t6.BtS 0.9b,
I I a
W 01 40.trs
L
K
N +
g; ? ? ,? aP
a
c ? ?' tN in ? ' I p ?? ?>
i° I I
?4fl
4111,11,
I I o
N
m.I i. Ca
?? ?1 ?? II +I oN ? .s,
Oil
s i NION 36• , °
Q \ f5 ?? a? a? ? `? Iti \ -ca $
T
• I ? ? 3 IU ? Y
a ?Jl t o ? R I t to •s
-------------------
a
-.- N£USE RNER CUTOFF
t
F
vm
x?
e?i {~{
?p 4
iN

-NA
'ro m
me
? I •oz A
?? vo
X?
zrry
vp
y A`
I
s
a P(s
m?
3•lf.2L2fS A ? ??
.00'0 1•??
A to
0
NEUSE RNER CUTOFF
R1 IM T, e
.8 m
- - +? --pit1}n
g;- b1arO0g•?•/v?
Y
nai I y n O ? , Am?Kx°
C) y P g a$$
u 1
P }
I -og
? " ? NNa pp??
x
1. ?I
APO
6
?6111
\N? x I I IAN;(
¦ .
.K
...._ .. _ ., w.
w
„1@ AAAY-2005. j1A?„
n: ?noopye y?2 J 5 0 ?.?0 _noy_? _:cN:.c+y? t
02
/0
3/
98
tes t F1 Fl [ S C

- -- --
-- -- -- -

-- - - -- - -- -- --

- - -- - -- -- -- --

- - - - - - - -
- - -
- - - -
- - - -
- - - -
- - -
- -
- -
-
- -
-

- - --- - -- - --- - -- --

It 1 : t , 14

-- H4
7 T T 77 -1. I 1
FFT 1 1
-

= .. . -
.

-
W
. L? _T

-
.
;
T_ 4 .
-- - --- - -- -- -- - --- - -

T :
, 1

-

-

- - - - - - - -- - - - - - -

?
y

m

T
- r . ' 4 - -- - - - - -i - - - - -- - - -?- l T

"
:
.1..
t
t d
1 1- .: 1:i. :1 . _ Iffl t
L ?
i ,
L LL U
4 1 w : 1:
O

.. . _. . ...
_r 1.
r _ .. .1-
f_?. 4
.
..
. _ `
'.r
.
.
..
....
. _
f. _ _ __ _ -

1

.. ..... ......... .. .................. ...........i,_..... ..._ ...... ;.. ....,, .... .. ..,_. .. ....,... ..,. .,. .. ... ...... ..... ..W ..... .....s.. ..x...?,.., ...v,.?.......... n ..... .......,.. . !. _....... ?.
I\Roeg n %?'&153538_Rdy_l_xpl.dgn
Z, 02/03/98
i
-4 5
AY?20Q
:?

? ? ?

18-MAY-2005 11:12_

iA-MAr-2no5 ua2
Most o AT ey?2 :i1kf5 ».aa-nay_t_xpi.ogn
... ....... . ..... ........
i
s
:*
'? awn w°'`
STATE of NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. Box 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TOLSON
C
l ss?
G
15?
GovERNOR
January 21, 1999
MEMORANDUM TO
Ms. Cyndi Bell
DWQ - DENR
FROM:
SUBJECT:
W. D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager "
Planning and Environmental Branch
SECRETARY
r? JAN 2 1 1999
WETLANDS GROUP
WATER l1ALITY SECT
Review of Scoping Sheets foijhe following projects:
Project T.I.P. County Bridge No. State Route Planning Engineer
B-3435 Chowan No. 4 SR 1207 Bill Goodwin
-321.7 Onslow No. 21 SR 1503 Bill Goodwin
B-3378 Wayne No. 34 NC 111 Karen Orthner
-3538 Wayne No. 296 SR 1222 Karen Orthner
B-3539 Wayne No. 164 SR 1571 Karen Orthner
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
February 18, 1999 in the Planning and Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 470).
These scoping meetings will be held back to back beginning at 9:00 A. M. in the order shown
above. 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.
WDG/bg
Attachments

C ub-V --- -
? Ns

BRIDGE PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
TIP PROJECT: B-3538
F. A. PROJECT: BRZ - 1222(4
STATE PROJECT: 8.2331301
DIVISION: Four
COUNTY: Wayne
ROUTE: SR 1222
DESCRIPTION: Replacement of Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222 over Neuse River Overflow
PROJECT PURPOSE: Replace obsolete bridge
PROJECT U.S.G.S. QUAD SHEET(S): Southwest Goldsboro Quad Sheet
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION: Rural Local Route
TIP CONSTRUCTION COST .......................................................................... $ 810,000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST .......................................................................... $ 66,000
TIP TOTAL COST ........................................................................................... $ 876,000
TRAFFIC: CURRENT 800 VPD; DESIGN YEAR (2025) 1300 VPD
TTST 2 % DUAL 2 %
EXISTING ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION: Two lane shoulder section, 19 foot
pavement
EXISTING STRUCTURE: LENGTH 49.1 METERS WIDTH 5.9 METERS
161.0 FEET 19.2 FEET
COMMENTS:
N
O
1222
MAR-MAC
(UNINC.)
POP. 3,366
.f
1247
Bridge No. 296 1 1248
N
1258 Np 1247
1272 O O?
O? 1290 O
? Q
1291 1222
1219 p o
3
6` ?O
,1s
1219
1130
1263
W a
W'U,
1926
R?
` North Carolina
0*
Department of Transportation
g Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
Wayne County
Replace Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222
Over Neuse River Overflow
B-3538
Figure 1
JIJU L 1-1 YY L=.J L ?7VLLJDV[?V %iAUHLLCHLIUL.M
.<CES NORTH CAROLINA-WAYNE CO.
_ ..7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) VC,
WILSON 26 MI. °
768 2'3011 769 - - 770 2 290 000 FEET 771 PIKEVILLE 2.5 Ml. 772 78 00'
. 35*22'
13
Radio ?? Y q
loud 1 . 11 • - ;..
117 ?? • I?
7" i?iT
\??, \)!V ?/ I-_ 1=` __ ••J i\c?._? fl r? • 3918
/ ala?? =-cos :GR QEL PI7? OLD 0. 0
` ;r 7 • • •
Park
590 000
-_;, (\4 ?_? ° 1 / . \• 'i °` i= `, --- FEET
73
;rr ./\ 1 /? ° • / Golf
Course 3917
i ?.?? ?? \ I •,z ???_ ,?o O -,,Emmanuel
'168
•i `? '1 Allie
$olltll
?:..,..Goldsboro
lzzz ` :
?? Jl{??Zye? 1 o t• I• ?? ?o ?? - l., . i? 3916 1.
92/'-n f /> \p Ramp A,
BM 74
Pic
pI Trailer . o iv i 1 \ J PLO \'
?I< ,' 7d' •• Park _ 0Q 3915
i n McArthur
\ u Pak •1 • '?: _ : / - J/ y Lake
Ii '/ ?\.• / ?.., /? l 1,71
-22 ravel
pit
f
\`p tea`` , ri •?;• .. ?? - J .\? A.I? _C;`, ---1?--?? ?.\?.
u` a •- ?, Sewage' i -
°???_ i? `? / •• ° ?, Disposal
` ?? J`"nl i,, I'• _ Il`/71Trailer / ?•1 \? n \ _ `_ -???
a`
Le Memorial _ Park
i Ch \ -
BM87 C2
PER
3914
20'
' ? i 1130 ? ?1 ? c ? I / / / .. -,, -
Sewage Disposal
Ponds
_ ? 1?--- ? -,,/i; , '' , 0 -,' I ? f •- -? / ? ?/ .._ :mot
UVU
-: Fairgrounds
1 .? _ • =Genoa 1 _? 3913
19 •/ _ j ane
? Iy/, •I ?(F (e 1 u1? r?
?Voorlland Fri.n.Js -?-_-? ' :.-? :/ 1.n•(1?.. \i, ??_ , / .
3 ?
? .o
CD
?w
^? N
O
d ?
CCD "Y
z
°
a
-- (T4
0
?NOHJA
a?`?a 6y
w
9 ?
O N
a D
Fc' yeti
?'Y AGEN??'

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
May 12, 2006
Phil S. Harris, P.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1598
Dear Mr. Harris:

o?
2
F
?FT?NOS N?s'?lFR <;006"
roRM??? ry
Cy
This letter is in response to your letter of May 4, 2006 which provided the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) with the biological determination of the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) that the replacement of Bridge No. 296 on SR 1222 over Neuse River Overflow in Wayne
County (TIP No. B-3538) may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the federally threatened bald
eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus). In addition, NCDOT has determined that the project will have no
effect on the federally endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis). These comments are
provided in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as. amended (16
U.S.C.1531-1543).
According to information provided, an eagle survey was conducted within a one mile radius of the project
site on April 17, 2006. No eagles or eagle nests were observed. Based on the survey results, the Service
concurs with your determination that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the bald
eagle. Also, based on the lack of habitat, the Service concurs with your determination that the project will
have no effect on the red-cockaded woodpecker. We believe that the requirements of section 7(a)(2) of
the ESA have been satisfied. We remind you that obligations under section 7 consultation must be
reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species
or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered in this review; (2) this action is subsequently
modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or (3) a new species is listed or critical
habitat determined that may be affected by this identified action.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions regarding our
response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
Si ere ,
z
Pete amin
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: William Wescott, USACE, Washington, NC
Rob K6,15 , NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
John Sullivan, FHwA, Raleigh, NC