20130405 Ver 1_Application_20130417

bL
��F WATF90
APR 1 7 2013
� r
` DEW - WATER QUALITY
WETLA+VDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
X0130405
Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre - Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps:
®Section 404 Permit El Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
N Yes
❑ No
1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
® 401 Water Quality Certification — Regular ❑ Non -404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification — Express ❑ Riparian Buffer Authorization
1e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
❑ Yes ® No
For the record only for Corps Permit:
❑ Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in -lieu
fee program.
❑ Yes
® No
1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below.
N Yes
❑ No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project:
17BP.2.R.16 Carteret 76
2b. County:
Carteret
2c. Nearest municipality / town:
Newport
2d. Subdivision name:
N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no:
17BP.2.R.16
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
3b. Deed Book and Page No.
N/A
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable):
N/A
3d. Street address:
105 Pactolus Highway NC 33 P.O. Box 1587
3e. City, state, zip:
Greenville, NC 27835
I. Telephone no.:
252 -439 -2800
3g. Fax no.:
252 - 830 -3341
3h. Email address:
jbjohnson @ncdot.gov
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is:
❑ Agent ® Other, specify: Division2 Environmental Officer
4b. Name:
Jay B. Johnson
4c. Business name
(if applicable):
North Carolina Department of Transportation
4d. Street address:
P.O. Box 1587
4e. City, state, zip:
Greenville, NC 27835
4f. Telephone no.:
252439 -2800
4g. Fax no.:
252 - 830 -3341
4h. Email address:
jbjohnson @ncdot.gov
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name:
N/A
5b. Business name
(if applicable):
5c. Street address:
5d. City, state, zip:
5e. Telephone no.:
5f. Fax no.:
5g. Email address:
Page 2 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID):
17BP.2.R.16 Carteret 76 Bridge to Pipe Replacement
SR1124 Nine Foot Road over Shoe Branch
Latitude: 34.793652 Longitude: -
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees):
76.890499
(DD.DDDDDD) (- DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size:
N/A acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to
Shoe Branch, Tributary of Newport River
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water:
C
2c. River basin:
White Oak
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
SR 1124, Nine Foot Road is a paved secondary highway. Residential properties dominate the landscape.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0 Sq.Ft. (0.0 Acres) of 404 Wetland Impacts for the bridge to pipe replacement
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
132.0'; This site is part of a longer adjacent stream system.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Bridge to pipe replacement; the existing bridge has deteriorated and needs replacing.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The existing 18' long timber bridge on timber pilings will be replaced with a proposed 60' -0" x 15' -9" x 8' -0" aluminum box
culvert.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by'the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property /
F1 Yes ®No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Agency /Consultant Company:
Name (if known):
Other:
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for
❑ Yes ® No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ❑ Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a.
2b.
2c.
2d.
2e. .
2f.
Wetland impact
Type of jurisdiction
number —
Type of impact
Type of wetland
Forested
(Corps - 404, 10
Area of impact
Permanent (P) or
(if known)
DWQ — non404, other)
(acres)
Temporary T
W 1 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
W6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ Corps
❑ No
❑ DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments: No wetlands onsite - No Impacts
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a.
3b.
3c.
3d.
3e.
3f.
3g.
Stream impact
Type of impact
Stream name
Perennial
Type of jurisdiction
Average
Impact
number -
(PER) or
(Corps - 404, 10
stream
length
Permanent (P) or
intermittent
DWQ — non -404,
width
(linear
Temporary (T)
(INT)?
other)
(feet)
feet)
S1 ®P ❑ T
Pipe
Shoe Branch
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
® DWQ
15'
60'
S2 ® P ❑ T
Change in
Channel
Shoe Branch
® PER
❑ INT
® Corps
® DWQ
15'
72'
S3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S4 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S5 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
S6 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ PER
❑ Corps
❑ INT
❑ DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
132'
3i. Comments: Waiver Request: NCDOT requests a waiver to widen the existing stream channel to match the width of the
proposed culvert. This width of culvert was chosen as a best fit to accommodate conveyance.
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
4b.
4c.
4d.
4e.
Open water
Name of waterbody
impact number -
(if applicable)
Type of impact
Waterbody type
Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or
Temporary T
01 ❑P ❑T
02 ❑P ❑T
03 ❑P ❑T
04 ❑P FIT
4f. Total open water impacts
none
4g. Comments: No open water impacts.
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If pond or lake construction proposed, the complete the chart below.
5a.
5b.
5c.
5d.
5e.
Wetland Impacts (acres)
Stream Impacts (feet)
Upland
Pond ID
Proposed use or purpose
(acres)
number
of pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments: none
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes ❑ No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres):
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres):
5k. Method of construction:
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If any impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse El Tar-Pamlico El Other:
Project is in which protected basin?
❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b.
6c.
6d.
6e.
6f.
6g.
Buffer impact
number-
Reason
Buffer
Zone 1 impact
Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or
for
Stream name
mitigation
(square feet)
(square feet)
Temporary T
impact
required?
B1 ❑P ❑T
El Yes
❑ No
B2 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
B3 ❑ P ❑ T
❑ Yes
❑ No
6h. Total buffer impacts
6i. Comments: White Oak River Basin - No buffer impacts
Page 5 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1 a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
There are no 404 wetland impacts for this project no coastal wetland impacts and no buffer impacts; However, there are 132
linear feet of permanent stream impacts due to the installation of a 60' -0" x 15' -9" x 8' -0" aluminum box culvert.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Use of existing roadway to operate construction equipment; no equipment will enter wetlands.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
❑ Yes ® No
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply):
❑ DWQ ❑ Corps
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this
project?
❑ Mitigation bank
El Payment to in -lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter)
Type
Quantity
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In -lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in -lieu fee program is attached.
❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested:
linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature:
❑ warm ❑ cool , ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only):
square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4f. Non - riparian wetland mitigation requested:
acres '
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested:
acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation?
❑ Yes ® No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
Zone
6c.
Reason for impact
6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier
6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1
3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2
1.5
6f. Total buffer mitigation required:
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in -lieu fee fund).
6h. Comments:
Page 7 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified
❑ Yes ® No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments: White Oak River Basin - No buffer rules
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project?
N/A Bridge Project %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan?
® Yes ❑ No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why:
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan:
Stormwater will diffuse flow through vegetated uplands before entering stream.
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan?
❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
® DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project?
N/A
❑ Phase II
❑ NSW
3b. Which of the following locally - implemented stormwater management programs
El USMP
apply (check all that apply):
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other: N/A
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ❑ No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state - implemented stormwater management programs apply
❑ ORW
(check all that apply):
❑ Session Law 2006 -246
® Other: NPDES Permit
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
❑ Yes ® No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements?
❑ Yes ❑ No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal /state /local) funds or the
® Yes ❑ No
use of public (federal /state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State
❑ Yes ® No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
❑ Yes ❑ No
letter.)
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards,
❑ Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after - the -fact permit application?
❑ Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s):
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in
❑ Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non - discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species:and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or
habitat?
❑ Yes ® No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species;Act
impacts?
❑ Yes ® No
5c. If yes; ind icate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Raleigh
❑ Asheville
5d. What data sources.did you use to- determine whether your site would impact Endangered,Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
Onsite field investigation by Jay Johnson "No Effect'
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement),
6a. Will this project occur in or near an'area designated as essential fish habitat?
® Yes ❑-No
6b. What,data •sources did you use, to determine whether your site'would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
Mr Travis Wilson, NCWRC - See Attached Letter
7. Historic or Prehistoric.Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in:or'near an area that the °state federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation
status (e.g., National Historic Trust• designation or properties significant in.
North Carolina history:and archaeology)?
El Yes No,
7b. What data sources did you use to.determine whether your site :would impact historic,or archeological resources?
NCDOT HEU Historic Architecture'and.Archaeology - See Attached Letter-
8. Flood Zone Designation,(Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA- designated 100 -year floodplain?
®'Yes ❑ No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA• requirements: Designed to no -rise standards
8c. What source(s) did you,use to make.the floodplain determination? FEMA FIRM Maps
Jay B. Johnson
ApplicantlAgeni's Printed Name
April 9, 2013
Date
pp antJ ant's Signature
(Agent's.signatur val only an authorization letter from the applicant
rovided.
Page 10 of 10
PCN Form —Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

Brame, Bill Jr.
From:
Lane, Stephen
Sent:
Monday, December 05, 2011 9:42 AM
To:
Sutton, Michael W
Cc:
Rogerson, Maria A; Johnson, Jay B
Subject:
RE: Carteret 76
Hi Mike,
I have visited the proposed bridge replacement project at Bridge 76 over Shoe Branch on SR1124 (Nine Foot Road) in
Carteret County as requested in your December 2, 2011 email to me and determined that the project is not located
within one of DCM's AECs and therefore will not require a permit from the Division of Coastal Management. Please let
me know if I can be of any further assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
Stephen Lane
Coastal Management Representative
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Sutton, Michael W
Sent: Friday, December 02, 20116:46 PM
To: Lane, Stephen
Cc: Rogerson, Maria A; Johnson, Jay B
Subject: Carteret 76
Hey Mr. Stephen ... we would like to know if Carteret is CAMA Jurisdictional ... Thank You,sir ... mike
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third
parties.

Brame, Bill Jr.
From:
Wilson, Travis W.
Sent:
Wednesday, December 07, 2011 2:43 PM
To:
Sutton, Michael W
Cc:
Rogerson, Maria A; Johnson, Jay B
Subject:
RE: Carteret 76
WRC does not have any specific concerns with this project, we do request a bridge to bridge replacement.
- - - -- Original Message---- -
From: Sutton, Michael W
Sent: Friday, December 02, 20116:41 PM
To: Wilson, Travis W.
Cc: Rogerson, Maria A; Johnson, Jay B
Subject: Carteret 76
Hey Mr. Travis..The Last One from me for a Little While .... we would like to know if a Moratorium exists at the Carteret
76 Location and the datres if a moratorium does exist ... Thank You,Sir .... mike
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third
parties.

Project Tracking No. (Internal Use
11 -12 -0008
NO PREHISTORIC OR HISTORIC PROPERTIES
PRESENT /AFFECTED FORM
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: W -4700
WRS No: 3 7 720.1.1
F.A. No:
Federal (USA CE) Permit
Required?
County. Carteret
Document. Minimum Criteria
Funding. • ❑ State ® Federal
® Yes ❑ No Permit Type. Nationwide
Project Description.
Replace Bridge 76 on SR 1124 (Nine Foot Rd.) over Shoe Branch. No design plans provided.
Replace bridge in -place with an off -site detour. Area of Potential Effects (A.P.E.) is 18 meters
(60 ft.) wide and 152 meters (500 ft.) on either side of the bridge. Project is Federally- funded;
Federal permits will be required; no easements will be required.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) reviewed the subject project and
determined
❑ There are no National Register - listed properties within the project's area of potential effects.
❑ No subsurface archaeological investigations are required for this project.
® Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources
considered eligible for the National Register.
❑ All identified Archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all
compliance for archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act and GS 121 -12(a) has been completed for this project.
❑ There are no historic properties present or affected by this project. (Attach any notes or
documents as needed)
SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Rrief description ofreview activities, results ofreview, and conclusions:
Initial review of the project was conducted on 1/10/2012. Background research identified no
previously recorded archaeological sites in the vicinity of the A.P.E. The A.P.E. has not been
previously surveyed for archaeological sites. A project located alongside SR 1124 has been
reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) but not surveyed (ER 85- 0417). The
soil survey shows well- drained soil on both sides of the bridge. The topographic map
(Masontown, N.C.) shows landforms with a moderate to high probability for archaeological
sites on both sides of the bridge.
The archaeological survey was conducted on 3/2/2012. See attached maps, photographs, and
description of the shovel tests.
No shovel tests were excavated in the southwest, southeast, or northeast quadrants because
those areas have little archaeological potential. The landform in the southwest quadrant is a
"No Historic Properties Present "form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

level area that appears to have been graded or landscaped for a yard /park from the bridge west
for 65 meters (213 ft.), then a residence and yard. The landform in the southeast quadrant is
poorly drained from the bridge east for 65 meters (213 ft.), then a residence and yard, then a
road intersection (Thorne's Farm Rd.). The landform in the northeast quadrant is poorly
drained from the bridge east for 60 meters (197 ft.), then a residence and yard, and then a road
intersection (SR 1245 [Howard Rd.]).
The landform in the northwest quadrant is a gentle slope from the bridge west for
approximately 95 meters (312 ft.) to a driveway. There is a modern house located
approximately 90 meters (295 ft.) west of the bridge and 50 meters (164 ft.) north of the road.
The area from the bridge west for 15 meters (50 ft.) is a poorly- drained landform that is
drained by several ditches. The land from there west is a grass yard that gradually slopes
uphill to the driveway. Excavated three shovel tests (STs 1 -3) in this quadrant. ST 1 was 5
meters (16 ft.) west of the creek, ST 2 was 25 meters (82 ft.) west, and ST 3 was 55 meters (180
ft.) west, and each was approximately 10 meters (33 ft.) north of the road. None contained any
artifacts.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached:
® Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info ®Photos ❑Correspondence
Signed:
Caleb Smith
Cultural Resources Specialist, NCDOT
3/30/2012
"No Historic Properties Present "form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups
Date

r :x• 7N
p

Table 1: Description of Shovel Tests.
Quadrant
Shovel
Test
Description
Northwest
1
0-32 cm 7.5YR 3/2 sandy loam; 32 -42 7.5 YR 4/3 sandy loam; 42 -60 cm
7.5 YR 3/1 sandy clay.
Northwest
2
0-26 cm 5Y 3/2 sandy loam; 26 -38 cm 5Y 2.5/1 sandy clay.
Northwest
3
0 -30 cm 2.5Y 4/3 sandy loam; 30-40 cm 2.5Y 3/2 sandy loam.

US 70
Project Area
SR 1124 (Nine Foot Rd.) h
y \
r• - �' union
POW
w �
• y
Figure 1: Location of the project area (USGS 1990 Morehead City, NC 1:100,000 -scale
topographic map).
s

BRIDGE TO BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
CARTERET 76
SR 1124, NINE FOOT ROAD OVER SHOE BRANCH SHOE BRANCH C
MASONTOWN USGS QUAD MAP WHITE OAK RIVER BASIN
SHEET NUMBER 11 OF THE SOIL SURVEY OF CARTERET COUNTY
FIRM PANEL 6338 J DECEMBER 2, 2011 BOGUE -CORE SOUNDS 03020106
MAP NUMBER 3720633800 J WBS ELEMENT NUMBER 17BP.2.R.16
°
a
Mason low- N
anon TOk'n Roa
O
� W E
ci �k
\\y0
a co
� o �
D
CARTERET 76
2
Y= 386561.2599
CL N
X= 26332 71. 7936
c
W 76^- 53' -26" a lina Ave
P
N 34.793652 DEGREES
1 6 °
W 76.890499 DEGREES st
� Nin e FoO
m
Rd
n ens
Fo r'
Z U
on Rd ine FO
F °ye z7 ann t
s f
Rd
� Hill St d^
Ffo
How Blvd d
a
Ir
CL
O
N
LA
C0
R °beds
E
15000 L 150095
r
150008 U
W
Sa'Cil
Qo a
Gra m Dr
�
Z
4
150040
a`
Una Ogee
CIO c°ca
05
9,e
°a
r
q'e
7
aerr
a
ced
y
1 inch = 2,000 feet
2,400 1,200 0 2,400 Feet

BRIDGE TO BRIDGE REPLACEMENT
CARTERET 76
SR 1124, NINE FOOT ROAD OVER SHOE BRANCH SHOE BRANCH C
MASONTOWN USGS QUAD MAP WHITE OAK RIVER BASIN
SHEET NUMBER 11 OF THE SOIL SURVEYOF CARTERET COUNTY
FIRM PANEL 6338 J DECEMBER 2, 2011 BOGUS -CORE SOUNDS 03020106
MAP NUMBER 3720633800 J WBS ELEMENT NUMBER 17BP.2.R.16
�2 • • N
c� S
•o ,L �; y CARTERET 76
• �} �T Y= 386561.2599 \
X= 2633271.7936 /- t
N34A- 47-3711
Par k W 76A-53' -2611 ' • ina Ave I
N 34.793652 DEGREES -� r
IM_ 1; .,,to si
W 76.890499 DEGREES ,
,� - 70vver o Hi
CL
\T ikj
_
✓ f S /;; ,.
O ��a _J
� \ •j "
`f, - 1 inch = 2,000 feet xs,
2,400 1,200 0 2,400 Feet p T GA D

• r. 4
BRIDGE TO BRIDGE, REPLACEMENT
CARTERE.T 76
SR 1124, ,NINE FOOT ROAD OVF_R SHOE BRANCH SHOE BRANCH C
MASON 1'O WN USC;S Q C JI D 11A P Will T E OAK RI VF. R BASIN
SHEET NVAIBER 11 OF THE SOIL .SURVEY OF CARTERET COUNTY
FIRM PANEL 6338 J DECEMBER 2, 2011 KOGUE -CORE SOUNDS 03020106
MAP:NU,MBER 3720633800 J WBS ELEMErNT NUUBF_R 17BR2.R.16
N
n� �Oi7rjUly�£t0.)dw� \ _` -• •c..li,• .1 _ ���•�• �� _' f.
s I
CART•ERET 76
Y= 386561.2599
a= 2633271.7936
tiF AL ?x'34 ^- 47' -37" r
'e • �� �;' `ic - W 76^ -53 =26 -a Ave
N 34.793651 DEGREES
Imp a u W 76.890499 DEGREES'
lk
E ,�• _ � �''�- -• =.... . ,gyp :� � � L
--�� •
Ct(j d t
s � � r� (� iaol�ut • . SI S
j • I°"e
CA
_ ;.
rJAQ08
SP
it
" - .,,.! ,i.' rat' ? � • :'1 �', ! �' ,'/-
_•_ . +� - � ! ` -
1 inch = 2,000 feet +t --
2 400 1,200 0 2,400 Feet
to I —c- 0

W,%.
NO SURVEY REQUIRED FOWN1
PRO.IFCT INFORMATION
Prt fer.Y ,Vo.
Prafcer 7tinckmg .:'n /wend (;tri
(HA)11 -12 -0008
C.'otn n'. Carteret
WBS Na: 1713P.2.11.16 Doerrnrc ut:
F.A. No: I totding- X Statc [eflert] l
Federal (U.WT) Perutit Required? X Yc> L] No Permit 7'Ypc: NWP 3 and /or CAMA
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 76 on SR 1124 (Nine Foot Road) over Short
Branch with off -site detour (presumed no improvements planned).
SU�NIMARY OF CUL'T'URAL RESOURCES REVIEW
Brief description of review activities. results of review, tntd conclusions. NPOWeb reviewed on 9 January
2012 and yielded no NR, SL, LD, DE, or SS properties in the Area of Potential Effects (APE). Carteret
County current GIS mapping, aerial photography, and tax information indicate an APE of residential
properties containing resources dating mostly to the late- twentieth and early -twenty-first centuries
(viewed 9 January 2012). Two houses at the western end of the APE, dating to circa 1940 and 1960, are
unexceptional examples of their types and stand effectively beyond probably pro)ect impact_ Constructed
in 1965, Bridge No. 76 is neither included in the NCDOT Historic Bridge Survey, nor representative of any
distinctive engineering or aesthetic type. Google Maps "Street View" confirmed absence of critical historic
structures /landscapes in APE (viewed 9 January 2012).
No architectural survey is required for the project as currently defined.
Brief E.rplanation of tirh f
i- the availahle information provides a reliable basis u w
r reottubly predicti►rg
11tca there are no unlden4 ied himoric properties in the APE: APE extends 600 feet from each end of the
existing bridge (E -W) and 100 feet to either side of the SR 1124 (Nine Foot Road) center line (N -S) to
encompass proposed construction. County GIS /tax materials and other visuals support the absence of
significant architectural resources. No National Register- listed or - eligible properties are located within
the APE, including the Federal permit area.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached- location map
FINDING BY NCDOT (,uu t:RAL RESOURCES PROFESSIONAL
NO SURVEY REQUIRED — Historic Structures
i
cl
NCDOT Cultural Resources Specialist
M, N.!.<'t Ke( aired MrW fnI Affmw I rim wporroum Prajecn z4 fp,'rrrlett In file JdPr'rrfjXr( NW0s. ;,.greemml
�Y'1r)T.arcJfo rofox� A lflvwa .art hnez rare (;mugs
Date

t 76 \w4700_pshpe,m
�CD
m�
m —
�o
G7
-m
D c 2
z D D
0 N
C-) ID
o C/) L/)
z��
zoo
0 0 < ---�
1=mMM
D Z7 ;J ..
x N
CD o-n (-)
00
D n cz)
�
�m
R° p
m
�e
ZtDi �n
C) �a
cmo�o;�
!�rn orn -1ZErn rrI
O C rn
IV��I�Z I
QZ CD N v
I�NrnLn Ln ul
Co O�C3 �O��
DD rTl
��or=�a�o-b
-TD Do �Ocr�j
N o Q
C k�o=O
Orn� Orn
CID
C)
rn 50
rrl
rTl 4z
�CA I
O
O
O C)
rr1 p
rn Z Up
0
D k
rn n
� C
� C
rn
N
r
r_
D
W
N �
� O
C-
LID
� m
C
X
poi
of
WE
or
M
f8 N D
+ or
wN m i
. �-) (8
cn +
x 6
w
on
C0 =
Ln D
Ln
O � �
C- 2
O
�z
m
REVISIONS
m m
x x
N N
z 60.00' Z
c� c-)
m�
�r
f8�,
0
mOIp
.
o 1
Li I
MEN
I Z
I O
a�
•
•
z
c�
�I
N
z
Z
rn
C)
0
0
0
C)
�
IF-ri
60.00'
C)
n
U) --- I
C <
0
F-0
m
WE
S
f �
b
�1
•
•
O
m -0
o�
r' m
m cn r�
+
rm
a
_Wu
O
4-
0
C)
C)
0
0
0
C)
r
a
O
�--D �
,
D
�N
vCD
y+
.
ti
10
�~
P
CO
_
U' D
I Z
I O
a�
•
•
z
c�
�I
N
z
Z
rn
C)
0
0
0
C)
�
IF-ri
60.00'
C)
n
U) --- I
C <
0
F-0
m
WE
S
f �
b
�1
•
•
O
m -0
o�
r' m
m cn r�
+
rm
a
_Wu
O
4-
0
C)
C)
0
0
0
m
x
z
r w
:Z) y
a
Z �
�rn
n �
N�
o�
z�
rn..
Do
n1
rn
y
(A -D U)
C)
r
a
O
�--D �
,
D
�N
vCD
�
2
ti
10
�~
C
C
CO
_
U' D
W w m
Ln
I
m D mx
-<
r
W W C-)
Q0
—
0
mb
-0
M �x
C7
��
C7
C
C-
r +
oo w m
U
m
n
r
p0 m
z
m
m
2
O
C
C
�
X
X
m
x
z
r w
:Z) y
a
Z �
�rn
n �
N�
o�
z�
rn..
Do
n1
rn
y
(A -D U)
r
a
O
n
�N
vCD
m-0
ti
10
�G:)
CD
I
N m
U' D
W w m
°•
I
m D mx
-<
rm aco
W W C-)
w -i
m N
N
M �x
C-)
��
C7
C
r +
oo w m
m
n
r
p0 m
z
�
2
O
C
�
N
X
m
x
z
r w
:Z) y
a
Z �
�rn
n �
N�
o�
z�
rn..
Do
n1
rn
y
(A -D U)
rnnfU
n
_m
� y
ti
n N
Zb
i�
irn
yrn
y
2
rn
r
N
C-)
O
D
U
O
O
U)
N
C-)
O
O
D
e
�
Fri
a
0
�p
S�
N)
aAp
n
1
°'
z
o
Z
a
.a
w
2�
aJ
�ro
�r