20080356 Ver 1_Application_20080226

1

~~~~.
~' ~`~"
~ ,,; ` J~
.~~~,.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
D ~^~
~." D~~
R_ g
~'k~3TI~LB
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
February 12, 2008
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889-1000
Attention: Mr. William Wescott
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
pg1~856 ,
Subject: Individual Section 404 and 401 Permit Application and Tar-Pamlico
Riparian Buffer Authorization Request for the proposed replacement of
Bridge Nos. 127 over the Tar River Overflow and 129 over the Tar River on SR
1565 in Pitt County. TIP No. B-3684; Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1565(4);
State Project No. 8.2221101. Debit $570 from WBS No. 33225.1.1
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace existing Bridge
No. 129 (359 feet long) over the Tar River Overflow and Bridge No. 127 (512 feet long) over the
Tar River on SR 1565 in Pitt County with a single structure approximately 1,963 feet in length.
The proposed approach roadway will consist of a 24-foot travel-way providing for two 12-foot
travel lanes with eight-foot shoulders including two-foot paved. The proposed navigational
clearances are 45-foot vertically and 75-foot horizontally. The proposed structure will provide a
30-foot clear roadway width, allowing for two 12-foot travel lanes with three-foot shoulders.
The purpose of this application is to submit this final design for approval and to request a Section
404 Individual Permit, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification, and aTar-Pamlico Riparian
Buffer Authorization. This application consists of the cover letter, permit drawings, utility
drawings, plan sheets, property owner address labels, ENG form 4345, EEP Acceptance Letter,
and a wetland mitigation plan.
Purpose and Need: The NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate that both Bridge Nos.
127 and 129 have sufficiency ratings of 28.2 and 42.3 respectively, out of a possible 100 for a new
structure. The bridges are considered functionally obsolete and structurally deficient. The
replacement of the inadequate structures will result in safer and more efficient traffic operations.
Summary of Impacts: Construction of the proposed project will necessitate impacts to
jurisdictional waters. There will be a total of 1.29 acres of permanent wetland impacts and 181
linear feet (0.04 acre) of permanent surface water impacts. There will be a total of 12,717 ft2 of
impacts to riparian buffers.
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 2728 CAPITAL BOULEVARD
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598

f
~ Summary of Miti ation: The proposed construction of B-3684 will impact 1.29 acres of
jurisdictional wetlands and 181 linear feet of stream, that will require mitigation within the Tar-
Pamlico River Basin. The proposed wetland mitigation will consist of restoring 3.05 acres of
riverine wetland onsite. The North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) will assume responsibility for satisfying the federal
Clean Water Act compensatory mitigation requirements for the unavoidable impacts to the 181
linear feet of stream.
NEPA Document Status
A Categorical Exclusion (CE) was prepared for the NCDOT and approved on July 30, 2004. The
CE was provided to regulatory review agencies involved in the approval process after their
approval. Additional copies will be provided upon request.
Resource Status
Waters of the United States: Impacts to surface waters occur within HUC 03020103 of the Tar
River Basin. The jurisdictional areas associated with the replacement of Bridge Nos. 127 and 129
are the Tar River, the Tar River Overflow, and Reedy Branch. The North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) best usage classification for the reach of the Tar River [DWQ Index # 28-
(99.5)] within the project area is "B NSW". Reedy Branch [DWQ Index # 28-96-2] is "C NSW".
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I: undeveloped
watersheds or WS-II: predominately undeveloped watersheds), or Outstanding Resource Waters
(ORW) occur within 1.0 mile of project study area. The Tar River and its tributaries are not
designated as a North Carolina Natural or Scenic River, or as a National Wild and Scenic River.
Additionally, the Tar River and Tar River Overflow are not listed on the Final 2006 303(d) list of
impaired waters due to sedimentation for the Tar-Pamilico River Basin, nor does it drain into any
Section 303(d) waters within 1.0 mile of the project study area.
Delineation: Wetland delineations were conducted in February 2001 using the criteria specified in
the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USAGE) September 18, 2002. By copy of this application, NCDOT requests an update
to the Jurisdictional Determination. Approved Jurisdictional Forms are attached.
Wetland Impacts: B-3684 will have 1.29 acres of permanent riverine wetland impacts. Permanent
impacts to jurisdictional wetland resources include the approach fill for the new bridge,
excavation, and mechanized clearing. Wetland impacts will require mitigation. Mitigation is to be
provided onsite.
Stream Impacts: B-3684 will have 181 linear feet (0.04 acre) of permanent surface water impacts
due to the 48-inch and one 60-inch pipe installation at Reedy Branch (Sites 1 & 2).
Bridge Demolition
Following construction of the bridge, all components of the existing structure will be removed.
With the exception of the temporary work bridges (see permit drawings) no additional impacts are
anticipated from the removal of the existing structure. The existing approach fill will be removed
to natural grade and the area will be re-vegetated according to NCDOT guidelines (see attached
mitigation plan). Pre-project elevations will be restored. The contractor will be required to submit
a reclamation plan for the removal of and disposal of all materials off-site at an upland location.
Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed to avoid any
temporary fill from entering Waters of the United States.
Utilities
The following utilities have been identified as being in conflict with this project and the conflicts
will be handled as follows:
1) There are no water and sewer lines within the limits of the project.
Page 2 of 7

~ 2) Telephone Cables - Embarq and Sprint have buried cables along the left side of the existing
SR 1565 and along the left side of -Y1-. All of these facilities will be relocated. The
Telephone Companies will use the directional bore method to bore the proposed telephone
cables to the right side of the road along the existing Right-of--Way (R/W) line from the
beginning of the project to Sta. 22+50 -L-; then will bore the cables under the existing
pavement from the intersection of existing -Y1- line and existing -L- line to the beginning of
the existing bridge. They will then continue boring on to the left of the existing bridge and all
the way to the other end of the bridge, tying to the existing cable line near the end of the
project. The existing cable along -Y1- will be relocated under the existing pavement. Due to
the use of directional bore, the Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffers will be avoided.
3) Power line -Progress Energy and Edgecombe-Martin EMC has existing aerial lines along SR
1565 from the beginning of the project to the end of the project. The power company will
relocate the power poles around Reedy Branch by using two new poles placed to the north of
the creek close to proposed R/W line. The power company will relocate the power line by
using the directional bore method at the intersection of -Y- line and -L- line and remove the
pole around Zone 1.
Independent Utility
B-3684 complies with 23 CFR Section 771.111(f), which lists the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) characteristics of independent utility of a project:
1) The project connects logical termini and is of sufficient length to address environmental
matters on a broad scope;
2) The project is usable and a reasonable expenditure, even if no additional transportation
improvements are made in the area; and
3) The project does not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonable foreseeable
transportation improvements.
Indirect and Cumulative Effects Analysis
Existing rules for the 401 Water Quality Certification Program (15A NCAC 2H .0506(b)(4)
require that the DWQ determine that a project "does not result in cumulative impacts, based on
past or reasonably anticipated future impacts, that cause or will cause a violation of downstream
water quality standards."
This project consists of replacing two deficient structures. Capacity, traffic patterns and access
improvements are not a part of the project's scope of work. Thus, changes in the patterns of
development and/or land uses in the vicinity of the bridge project would not be anticipated as
stemming from the bridge's replacement. This type of project is not anticipated to alter the
existing land uses or increase accessibility to adjacent parcels. Thus, a detailed cumulative
impacts study is not necessary.
There are no impaired (303d) streams listed in the project area.
Cultural Resources
Historical Architecture: Pitt County Bridge No. 129 is eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places under Criterion C for engineering technology as one of four Warren Through truss bridges
functioning as swing spans in North Carolina. The replacement of the 1931 bridge was determined
to have an adverse effect on an eligible resource because the truss will be removed. Therefore,
NCDOT, FHWA, and the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) executed a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) in 2001 to resolve the adverse effects as per Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act. Commitments stipulated in the MOA have been fulfilled;
the structure has been documented in photographs and the offered for reuse in accordance with
NCDOT's Historic Bridge Relocation & Reuse Program. However, over two years have elapsed
and their have been no applicants for the historic bridge, therefore NCDOT may dispose of the
Page 3 of 7

bridge when it is removed (as per the MOA). Copies of the eligibility determination, adverse
effect forms, and MOA are included in Appendix A of the CE.
Archaeolo~y: The State Historic Preservation Office (NC-HPO), in a memorandum dated 3 Jul
2003, "recommended that a comprehensive survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist
to identify and evaluate the significance of any archaeological remains that may be damaged or
destroyed by the proposed project." An archaeological survey and evaluation for the proposed
project was completed in March 2004 in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (1966, as amended) and the guidelines issued by the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation (Council).
As a result of that survey, one (1) previously unrecorded archaeological site (31PT542) was
located within the project APE. Modern disturbances and the absence of cultural features
suggested that this site lacked integrity and the potential for additional data to increase our
knowledge of prehistory. Therefore, Site 31 PT542 was not recommended as eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) per Criterion D; no further archaeological work was
recommended for Site 31 PT542. The location of one (1) previously recorded archaeological site
(31PT6/6**) was reestablished within the project APE. Based on the presence of an intact Early
to Middle Woodland component, Site 31PT6/6** contained sufficient information to be
recommended as eligible for the NRHP per Criterion D. Based on the proposed bridge design at
that time, this project would have had an adverse effect on Site 31PT6/6**; therefore, mitigation
efforts were recommended. In a memorandum dated 11 May 2004, the SHPO concurred with
these recommendations. A Notification of Adverse Effect packet was then submitted on 21 Sep
2005, and in order to mitigate the adverse effects to Site 31PT6/6**, a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) was signed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), NC-HPO, and NCDOT,
effective 19 Oct 2005.
However, in a report dated 23 May 2006, field personnel under contract with NCDOT noted "that
a significant amount of clearing and mechanical excavation had recently occurred in the site area.
In addition, within the APE, a large pile of uprooted tree stumps was smoldering ca. 250 m north
of Concentration 1." An interview with the landowner (Mr. Jake Adams) indicated that he had
excavated the area in October 2005 for construction purposes, therefore essentially destroying all
remnants of Site 31PT6/6**. This was corroborated by a neighboring property owner who also
indicated that the removed fill material was relocated to another part of the Adams parcel. In a
memo to the SHPO dated 1 Jun 2006, a timeline of events shows that destruction of Site
31PT6/6** occurred when Mr. Adams was still in ownership of the property on which the
archaeological site was located. Even though ROW stakes were in position at the time of
destruction, the property was still his to use as he saw fit. Based on these findings, all data
recovery operations at Site 31PT6/6** were halted. All efforts up to this point were immediately
documented to serve as the final field report for this project; no additional archaeological
investigations are required given the site's destruction.
Wild and Scenic River System
The project will not affect any designated Wild and Scenic Rivers or any rivers included in the list
of study rivers (Public Law 90-542, as amended).
Tar-Pamlico Basin Riparian Buffer Rules
This project is located in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin (subbasin 03-03-05, TAR4 03020103),
therefore the regulations pertaining to the Tar-Pamlico River Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B.0259)
a~ply. There will be a total of 12,717 ft2 of impacts to riparian buffers. This includes 916 ft2 (304
ft in Zone 1 and 99 ft2 in Zone 2) due to the bridge crossing. 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. In
addition, 11,801 ft2 (8,160 ft2 in Zone 1 and 3,641 ft2 in Zone 2) of impacts will occur from
approach fill and mechanized clearing activities. These sites (nos. 7 & 8 on Buffer Drawings) are
completely within impacted wetlands and will be mitigated through wetland mitigation (see
attached mitigation plan). According to the buffer rules, road crossings greater than 150 feet are
Page 4 of 7

u
Allowable with Mitigation. Uses designated as Allowable with Mitigation may proceed within the
riparian buffer provided that there are no practical alternatives to the requested use pursuant to
Item (8) of this Rule and an appropriate mitigation strategy has been approved pursuant to Item
(10) of this Rule. All practicable measures to minimize impacts within buffer zones were followed.
According to the Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer Rules, overhead electric utility line perpendicular
crossings of streams and other surface waters that disturb equal to or less than 150 linear feet or
one-third of an acre of riparian buffer are Exempt. Uses designated as Exempt are allowed within
the riparian buffer. Exempt uses shall be designed, constructed, and maintained to minimize soil
disturbance and to provide the maximum water quality protection practicable. This project meets
this threshold and is therefore Exempt from the buffer Rules. Consequently, a Buffer Certification
from the Division of Water Quality for utility work is not required.
Federally-Protected Species
As of January 31, 2007, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) list three federally protected species
(Table 1) for Pitt County. Biological conclusions of "No Effect" were rendered for red-cockaded
woodpecker and Tar spinymussel due to lack of suitable habitat within the project area.
Habitat for the West Indian Manatee is present; therefore, the Guidelines for Avoiding Impacts to
the West Indian Manatee: Precautionary Measures for Construction Activities in North Carolina
Waters will be utilized to the maximum extent practicable.
The Bald eagle was removed from the Endangered Species List on August 8, 2007. It is however,
protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. Surveys conducted on October 29,
2007 found no nests within 660 feet of the project limits; however, nesting and foraging habitat is
present.
Table 1. Federally protected species of Pitt County
Scientific Name Common Name Federal Status Biolo ical Conclusion
Trichechus manatus West Indian Manatee Endangered May Affect, Not Likely
to Adversel Affect
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded wood ecker Endan ered No Effect
Elli do steinstansana Tars in ussel Endan ered No Effect
FHWA Compliance
All compensatory mitigation must be in compliance with 23 CFR Part 777.9, "Mitigation of
Impacts" that describes the actions that should be followed to qualify for Federal-aid highway
funding. This process is known as the FHWA "Step Down" procedures:
1) Consideration must be given to mitigation within the R/W and should include the enhancement
of existing wetlands and the creation of new wetlands in the highway median, borrow pit
areas, interchange areas and along the roadside.
2) Where mitigation within the R/W does not fully offset wetland losses, compensatory
mitigation may be conducted outside the R/W including enhancement, creation, and
preservation.
Avoidance and Minimization
The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all reasonable and practicable design features to avoid
and minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to provide full compensatory mitigation of all remaining,
unavoidable jurisdictional impacts. Avoidance measures were taken during the planning and
NEPA compliance stages; minimization measures were incorporated as part of the project design.
All wetland areas not affected by the project will be protected from unnecessary encroachment. No
staging of construction equipment or storage of construction supplies will be allowed in wetlands
or near surface waters.
Page 5 of 7

~ For avoidance and minimization, the following measures were/will be accomplished:
1) The existing bridges of 512 feet and 359 feet will be replaced with a 1,963-foot single
structure on new alignment west of the existing bridges.
2) The portion of SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) maintained by NCDOT will be removed and
restored to wetlands. All portions of the existing embankment for SR 1565 adjacent to
'wetlands (north side of the Tar River) and not utilized in the new facility will be removed and
the area restored to wetlands or buffer as appropriate. The buffer area on the south side of the
Tar River will be restored by plantings after removal of the existing bridge.
3) Work bridges will be utilized in the construction of the new structure across wetlands. To the
extent practicable, work bridges will be located between the new bridge and the existing
roadway embankment to minimize disturbance of the adjacent wetlands. Construction in open
water will be from work bridges or barges.
4) The project will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Riparian Buffer
Protection Rules for the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The new bridge will completely span the
riparian buffers on either side of the Tar River.
5) To avoid and/or minimize impacts to anadromous fish, the "Stream Crossing Guidelines for
Anadromous Fish Passage" will be followed including an in-stream construction moratorium
to from February 15 to September 30.
6) The Guidelines for Avoiding Impacts to the West Indian Manatee• Precautionary Measures for
Construction Activities in North Carolina Waters will be utilized to the maximum extent
practicable.
7) Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds will be implemented.
8) NCDOT's guidelines for Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will
be enforced throughout the duration of the project construction.
Mitigation
The construction of B-3684 will result in 1.29 acres of jurisdictional riverine wetlands that will
require mitigation within the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The Department has avoided and
minimized impacts to jurisdictional resources to the greatest extent possible as described above.
NCDOT will restore 3.05 acres of riverine swamp forest wetland as onsite mitigation for B-3684.
The onsite mitigation will result in 1.76 acres of wetland mitigation assets onsite. Therefore, no
offsite mitigation will be necessary. Specific strategies are detailed in the attached wetland
mitigation plan.
The EEP will assume responsibility for satisfying the federal Clean Water Act compensatory
mitigation requirements for the unavoidable impacts to 181 linear feet to Reedy Branch. A copy of
the EEP Acceptance Letter dated December 10, 2007 is attached.
Project Schedule
This project has a let date of July 15, 2008 with a review date of May 27, 2008.
Regulatory Approvals
Section 404: Application is hereby made for a USAGE Individual 404 Permit as required for the
above-described activities.
Section 401: We are hereby requesting a 401 Water Quality Certification from the N. C. Division
of Water Quality. In compliance with Section 143 215.3D(e) of the NCAC, we will provide
$570.00 to act as payment for processing the Section 401 permit application previously noted in
this application (see Subject line). We are providing five (5) copies of this application to the
NCDWQ, for their review and approval.
Page 6 of 7

~ Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer Authorization: NCDOT requests that the NC Division of Water
Quality review this application and issue a written approval for a Neuse Riparian Buffer
Authorization.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the DOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/pe/neulpennit.html.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Tyler Stanton at
[e-mail] or [phone].
Sincerely,
`~ /~
~ ~ ~ ~

Cc:
W/attachment:
Mr. Mr. Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ (5 Copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Ms. Kathy Matthews, USEPA
Mr. Ronald Mikulak, USEPA -Atlanta, GA
Mr. Clarence W. Coleman, PE, FHWA
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Ron Sechler, NMFS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
W/o attachment, (see website for attachments):
Dr. David Chang, PE, Hydraulics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, PE, Structure Design
Mr. Victor Barbour, PE, Project Services Unit
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. C. E. Lassiter, PE, Division 2 Engineer
Mr. Jay Johnson, Division 2 Environmental Officer
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Mr. Jay Bennett, PE, Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, PE, Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, PE, Highway Design
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
Ms. Stacy Oberhausen, PE, PDEA
Mr. Carl Goode, PE, Human Environment Unit Head
Ms. LeiLani Paugh, NEU
Mr. Randy Griffin, NEU
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. Environmental Management Director,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Page 7 of 7

Eco stem
. s
PROGRAM
December 10, 2007
Mr. William Wescott
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889-1000
Dear Mr. Wescott:
Subject: EEP Mitigation Acceptance Letter:
B-3684, Replace Bridge Numbers 127 and 129 on SR 1565 over the Tar
River, Pitt County; Tar-Pamlico River Basin (Cataloging Unit
03020103); Northern Inner Coastal Plain (NICP) Eco-Region
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) will provide the compensator3+ stream mitigation for the unavoidable impact associated
with the above: referenced project. As indicated in the NCDOT's mitigation request dated
December 4, 2007, stream mitigation from EEP is required for approximately 181 feet of warm,
stream impact.
Stream mitigation associated with this project will be provided in accordance with
Section X of the Amendment No. 2 to the Memorandum of Agreement between the N. C.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the N. C. Department of Transportation, and
the U. S. Anny Corps of Engineers fully executed on March 8, 2007 (Tri-Party MOA}. EEP
commits to implement sufficient warm stream mitigation up to 362 stream credits to offset the
impacts associated with this project by the end of the MOA year in which this project is
permitted. If the above referenced impact amounts are revised, then this mitigation acceptance
letter will no longer be valid and a new mitigation acceptance letter will be required from EEP.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Beth
Harmon at 919-715-1929.
Sincerely,
~ V (~
William D. Gilmore, P.E.
EEP Director
cc: Mr. Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., NCDOT - PDEA
Mr. Brian Wrenn, Division of Water Quality, Wetlands/401 Unit
File: B-3684 .
~~t,
NCDENR
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program, f652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699-1652 / 919-715-0476 / www.nceep.net

Grimesland Bridge Road Site Wetland Mitigation Plan
At Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River and
Bridge No. 127 over the Tar River Overflow
Pitt County
TIP B-3684
WBS 33225.1.1
November 6, 2007
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) will perform on-site
mitigation for unavoidable riverine wetland impacts due to replacement of Bridge No.
129 and Bridge No. 127 on Grimesland Bridge Road (SR 1565) in Pitt County. This
mitigation site occurs within Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) B-3684. The
TIP project begins approximately 1500 feet south of Bridge No. 129 and continues
approximately 1200 feet to the north of Bridge No. 127. Seine Beach Road (SR 1566)
intersects Grimesland Bridge Road from the west between the two bridges.
NCDOT will restore approximately 3.05 acres of riverine swamp forest wetland. The
roadway project will impact 1.29 acres of unavoidable wetlands, leaving approximately
1.76 acres of wetland restoration assets on-site. Also, approximately 3500 sq. ft. of buffer
will be restored along the south bank of the Tar River, all of which will be used to
partially offset the unavoidable buffer impacts.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located in Pitt County north of Grimesland along Grimesland Bridge Road
(SR 1565). The project study area land use is mainly forested floodplain and occasional
residential homesites. The Grimesland Wetland Mitigation Site, constructed in 2004, is
located in the northeast quadrant of the project.
The existing causeway of Grimesland Bridge Road and Seine Beach Road is located in
the floodplain of Tar River. The dominant community in this floodplain area is riverine
swamp forest wetland. Canopy vegetation in the wetland areas includes bald cypress
(Taxodium distichum), and water tupelo (Nyssa aquatica), with scattered understory
species of green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) sweet gum (Liquidambar sryraciflua), and
red maple (Ater rubrum).
The Categorical Exclusion for TIP B-3684, dated July 2004, provides further details
concerning existing roadway and project study area conditions.
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
DESIGN
The proposed wetland mitigation will consist of restoring 3.05 acres of riverine wetland.
Restoration will involve removing the existing causeway fill and two bridges on the -L-

line, Grimesland Bridge Road, as shown on plan sheets 5 and 6. Restoration will also
include removal of the existing causeway fill on the -Y- line, Seine Beach Road.
Elevations were taken in existing wetlands adjacent to both restoration areas. Elevations
along the -L- line ranged from 2.2 to 2.8 feet msl. Elevations along the -Y- line ranged
from 1.7 to 2.5 feet msl. Restoration areas should be graded to a target range of 2.0 to 2.2
feet msl. Care should be taken to match existing topography within the wetlands adjacent
to the causeway. Clearing maybe needed along the toe of the existing slope to achieve
the target elevation range.
The proposed buffer mitigation will consist of removing of Bridge No. 129 and
obliteration of the roadway, as shown on plan sheet 4, within the buffer zone along the
south side of the Tar River, providing approximately 3500 sq. ft. of buffer restoration.
Excavated areas will be ripped and disked prior to planting of the site if neccessary. The
restoration areas will be planted with a mix of appropriate species as shown on the
attached reforestation sheet.
The Natural Environment Unit shall be contacted to provide construction oversight to
ensure that the mitigation area is constructed appropriately.
MONITORING:
Upon successful completion of construction, the following monitoring strategy is
proposed for the mitigation site. NCDOT will document monitoring activities on the site
in an annual report distributed to the regulatory agencies.
HYDROLOGIC MONITORING
No specific hydrological monitoring is proposed for this mitigation site. The target
elevation will be based on the adjacent wetland and verified during construction.
Constructing the site at the adjacent wetland elevation will ensure the hydrology and
connectivity of the restored areas are similar to the hydrology in the reference areas.
VEGETATION SUCCESS CRITERIA
NCDOT shall monitor the mitigation site by visual observation and photo points for
survival and aerial cover of vegetation. NCDOT shall monitor the site for a minimum of
three years or until the site is deemed successful. Monitoring will be initiated upon
completion of the site planting.

w
Pitt County
Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River and
Bridge No. 127 over the Tar River Overflow
On SR 1565 (Grimesland Bridge Road)
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1565(4)
State Project No. 8.2221101
WBS No. 33225.1.1
TIP Project No. B-3684
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
AND
PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
DA E ~ Gregory J. T o e, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
7t>~l~u ~~~~~-
DATE John F. Sullivan, III, PE
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration

Y
Pitt County
Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River and
Bridge No. 127 over the Tar River OverFlow
On SR 1565 (Grimesland Bridge Road)
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1565(4)
State Project No. 8.2221101
WBS No. 33225.1.1
TIP Project No. B-3684
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
AND
PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(F) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
July 2004
Document Prepared by:
Mulkey Engineers and Consultants
? ~ ~~
r
ate J. A. Bissett, Jr., PE
Branch Manager
0
D to Pamela R. Williams
Project Manager
Document Prepared For:
North Carolina Department of Transportation
7-Zo-a~ (~
Date John Wadsworth, P.E.
Project Manager
C~Aa~®q~,~ `~~o
SSine°~~-Y
g _ SEAL ~ ~ o
o ]4842 8 a
a o
~, ~ o a
'~0~~~ ooooa Cloooo ~ )000

s
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Pitt County
Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River and
Bridge No. 127 over the Tar River OverFlow
On SR 1565 (Grimesland Bridge Road)
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1565(4)
State Project No. 8.2221101
WBS No. 33225.1.1
TIP Project No. B-3684
In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit No. 23 Conditions, the General Nationwide Permit
Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency Conditions, NCDOT's
Guidelines for Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters, Design Standards for
Sensitive Watersheds, Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for Contract Construction, Pre-Construction
Guidelines for Bridge Demolition and Removal, Policy: Bridge Demolition and Removal in Waters of the
United States, Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal, General Certification
Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of Certification, the following special commitments have been
agreed to by NCDOT:
Project Deve%pment and Environmenta/Ana/ysis
A Memorandum of Agreement and data recovery plan will be prepared and implemented, as necessary
for archaeology.
Division Engineer
An in-water construction moratorium will be in effect from February 15 to September 30. The Stream
Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage will be implemented, as applicable.
Temporary work bridges will be utilized in the construction of the new structure across wetlands. To the
extent practicable, work bridges will be located between the new bridge and the existing roadway
embankment to minimize disturbance of the adjacent wetlands. Construction in open water will be from
work bridges or barges, as applicable.
Construction activities will adhere to the guidelines outlined in Precautions For Construction In Areas Which
May Be Used By The West Indian Manatee In North Carolina X2003 USFWS).
The existing swing bridge will be disassembled and moved to a storage area as designated by NCDOT. The
bridge will be stored for up to 2 years and made available for an alternative use.
The existing portions of SR 1565 and SR 1566 that are to be removed will be restored to wetlands or
buffer area as appropriate.
The project area will be surveyed just prior to construction for eagles in the area of potential impact.
8-3684 Categorical Exclusion
Green Sheet
July 2004
Page 1 of 2

PitO)ECT COMMITMENTS
Pitt County
Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River and
Bridge No. 127 over the Tar River Overflow
On SR 1565 (Grimesland Bridge Road)
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1565(4)
State Project No. 8.2221101
WBS No. 33225.1.1
TIP Project No. B-3684
Hydrau/ic Design
The project will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Riparian Buffer Protection Rules
for the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The new bridge will completely span the riparian buffers [50 feet (15
meters)] on either side of the Tar River.
Bridge deck drains will not discharge directly into the Tar River or Zone 1.
8-3684 Categorical Exclusion
Green Sheet
July 2004
Page ~ of 2

Pitt County
SR 1565 (Grimesland Bridge Road)
Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River and
Bridge No. 127 over the Tar River OverFlow
Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1565(4)
State Project No. 8.2221101
WBS No. 33225.1.1
TIP Project No. B-3684
INTRODUCTIONS The replacement of Bridge Nos. 127 and 129 is included in the North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 2004-2010 Transportation Improvement Program (T.I.P.}
and in the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location of the bridge is shown in
Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a
Federal "Categorical Exclusion".
I. PURPOSE AND NEED
The NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicated that Bridge No. 129 and Bridge No. 127
have sufFciency ratings of 42.3 and 28.2 respectively, out of a possible 100 for a new structure.
The bridges are considered functionally obsolete and structurally deficient. The replacement of the
inadequate structures will result in safer and more efficient traffic operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The proposed action is located in Pitt County, North Carolina, at the SR 1565 (Grimesland Bridge
Road) crossing of the Tar River. SR 1565 is classified as a rural major collector by the statewide
functional classification system. SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) intersects SR 1565 approximately 480
feet (i46 meters) north of Bridge No. 129 and 470 feet (143 feet) south of Bridge No. 127.
Land use in the project vicinity is predominantly woodlands and wetlands north of the Tar River
and light residential south of the Tar River. There is one business located in the northwest
quadrant of Bridge No. 129.
The Grimesland Wetland Mitigation Site is located north of the intersection of SR 1566 and SR 1565
in the project area, Figure 2. Over a span of several years, NCDOT will convert the entire 550-acre
(223 hectares) Grimesland site to a regional mitigation site. In the project area, the mitigation site
is for wetland preservation of the existing riparian ecosystem and cypress-gum swamp.
The Corps of Engineers-Operations Branch maintains a navigational channel at the project site,
Figure 3. The Corps yearly snagging operation requires a 40 foot (12 meter) vertical clearance for
the snagging vessel.
Bridge No. 129, Figure 4A, is 359 feet (109.4 meters) in length, consisting of seven spans with the
maximum span at approximately 80 feet (25 meters). The main span is a steel deck on a swing
thru-truss. The steel truss vertical clearance over SR 1565 is 15 feet (4.5 meters). The clear
roadway width is 20.1 feet (6.1 meters), providing two 9-foot (2.7 meter)~travel lanes with 1-foot
(0.3-meter) shoulders. The superstructure consists of a reinforced concrete floor on steel I-beams.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 1

f
The substructure is a timber abutment design. The posted weight limit is 28 tons (28.4 metric
tons) for single vehicles (SV) and 34 tons (34.5 metric tons) for truck-tractors semi-trailers (TTST).
NCDOT Bridge Maintenance opens the swing bridge with a 24-hour notice as necessary. When the
swing bridge is closed, the navigational clearances are 14 feet (4.2 meter) vertically and 60 feet
(18.3 meter) horizontally. Crown height to streambed is approximately 38 feet (11.5 meter).
Bridge No. 127, Figure 4B, is 512 feet (156 meters) in length, which consist of 30 spans with the
maximum span at approximately 18 feet (5.5 meters). The clear roadway width is 20.1 feet (6.1
meters) providing two 9-foot (2.7 meter) travel lanes with 1-foot (0.3 meter) shoulders. The
superstructure consists of reinforced concrete floor on timber joists. The substructure is a timber
abutment design. The posted weight limit is 18 tons (18.3 metric tons) for SV and 26 tons (26.4
metric tons) for TTST. Crown height to streambed is approximately 12 feet (3.6 meter).
Bridge No. 129 and approaches on SR 1565 are tangent with a 1445 feet (440 meter) radius curve
approximately 120 feet (36.6 meters) from the south end of the structure. SR 1565 consists of two
9-foot (2.7 meters) travel lanes with 8-foot (2.4 meters) grass shoulders. Bridge No. 127 and
approaches on SR 1565 are tangent.
The current estimated 2004 average daily traffic volume is 4600 vehicles .per day (vpd). The
projected traffic volume is expected to increase to 7300 vpd by the design year 2030. The volumes
include one percent TTST and two percent Duals.
The posted speed limit is 55 miles per hour (mph) [90 kilometers per hour (kmh)].
Approximately 1300 feet (396 meters) south of Bridge No. 129, there are three 48-inch (1200
millimeter) concrete cross drain pipes in approximately 20 feet (6 meters) of embankment.
There were nine accidents reported in the vicinity of the bridge during the three-year period of
January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2002. One was fatal located south of Bridge No. 129 in the
curve, high speeds were involved.
SR 1565 is not part of a designated bicycle route and there are no indications that an unusual
number of bicyclists are using this route.
There are aerial power lines on the north and south sides of SR 1565 but do not cross the Tar
River. Utility impacts are anticipated to be low.
Two Pitt County school buses cross these bridges twice daily
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 2

zip. A~rE~nlAr~v~s
A. Project description
The proposed approach roadway will consist of a 24-foot (7.2 meter) travel-way providing for two
12-foot (3.6 meters) travel lanes with eight-foot (2.4 meter) shoulders including two-foot (0.6
meter} paved, Figure 5. The design speed will be 60 mph (100 km/h).
The proposed navigational clearances are 40-foot (12 meters) vertically and 60-foot (18-meter)
horizontally.
The proposed structure will provide a 30-foot (9.0 meters) clear roadway width, allowing for two
12-foot (3.6 meters} travel lanes with three-foot (1.0 meter) shoulders, Figure 5.
B. Build Alternatives
Two (2) build alternatives for replacing the existing bridges are described below.
Alternative 2 (preferred) replaces both bridges on new alignment west of the existing bridges
with a single structure approximately 1940 feet (591 meters) in length, Figure 6A. During
construction, traffic will be maintained on the existing structures. After traffic is routed onto the
new structure, the existing bridges and approach roadway will be removed and restored to
wetlands. SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) will be removed and restored to wetlands. One (1) resident
and one (1) business will require relocating.
Alternative 3 replaces both bridges on new alignment east of the existing bridges with a single
structure approximately 1900 feet (579 meters) in length, Figure 6B. During construction, traffic
will be maintained on the existing structures. After trafFc is routed onto the new structure, the
existing bridges and approach roadway will be removed and restored to wetlands. SR 1566 (Seine
Beach Road) will be removed and restored to wetlands. One (1) resident and one (1) business will
require relocating. Alternative 3 was not selected as the preferred alternative because of
constructability challenges that Alternative 2 did not have.
C. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Study
Alternative 1 replaces the bridges at the existing location with a single structure approximately
1950 feet in length. During construction, traffic will be routed off-site. SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road)
will be removed and restored to wetlands. One business will require relocating.
The proposed off-site detour will route traffic through Washington along NC 33, US 17, and US 264
approximately 18 miles (28.8 kilometers). A road user analysis was performed based on 4700
vehicles per day for construction year 2005 and an average of 18 miles (28.8 kilometers) of indirect
travel. The cost of additional travel is approximately $11 million dollars annually. The construction
period is anticipated to be approximately two years.
Alternative 1 was eliminated due to the high road user cost associated with the proposed detour for
two years and public opposition.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 3

Alternative 4 replaces both bridges on new alignment with a single structure approximately 2320
feet (707 meters) in length. The new alignment will begin approximately 3000 feet (914 meters)
south of Bridge No. i29 and routed along SR 1589 (Pokerhouse Road), it will cross the Tar River at
a 106 degree skew and tie back into SR 1565 approximately 475 feet (145 meters) north of Bridge
No. 127. During construction, traffic will be maintained on the existing structures. SR 1566 (Seine
Beach Road) will be removed and restored to wetlands. After traffic is routed onto the new
structure and roadway, the existing bridges and approach roadway will be removed and restored to
wetlands. Two (2) residents and one (1) business will require relocating. Alternative 4 was
eliminated from consideration because of the fragmentation it will create in the Grimesland
Mitigation Site and was less economical than Alternative 2 and Alternative 3.
The "do-nothing" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridges. Closure of either
bridge would render SR 1565 impassable. This is not desirable due to the traffic service and
community connectivity provided by SR 1565 and Bridge Nos. 129 and 127.
Investigation of the existing structure by the Bridge Maintenance Unit indicates that "rehabilitation"
of these bridges is not feasible due to their age and deteriorated condition.
D. Preferred Alternative
Alternative 2, replacing the bridge upstream of the existing bridge, was selected as the preferred
alternative because it maintains traffic onsite, minimizes wetland impacts, restores high quality
wetlands and provides continuity of the ecosystem. The proposed bridge will be constructed
utilizing a temporary work bridge and/or barge.
The NEPA/404 Merger Team concurred with Alternative 2 as the preferred alternative and as the
least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (Appendix C).
For avoidance and minimization, the following measures will be accomplished:
1. The existing bridges of 512 feet (156 meters) and 359 feet (109 meters) will be replaced
with a single structure on new alignment west of the existing bridges approximately
1,940 feet (591 meters) in length.
2. The portion of SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) maintained by NCDOT will be removed and
restored to wetlands. All portions of the existing embankment for SR 1565 adjacent to
wetlands (north side of Tar River) and not utilized in the new facility will be removed
and the area restored to wetlands or buffer as appropriate. The buffer area on the south
side of the Tar River will be restored by plantings after removal of the existing river
bridge.
3. Work bridges will be utilized in the construction of the new structure across wetlands.
To the extent practicable, work bridges will be located between the new bridge and the
existing roadway embankment to minimize disturbance of the adjacent wetlands.
Construction in open water will be from work bridges or barges.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 4

4. The project wilt be designed and constructed in accordance with the Riparian Buffer
Protection Rules for the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The new bridge will completely span
the riparian buffers [50 feet (15 meters}] on either side of the Tar River.
5. To avoid and/or minimize impacts to anadromous fish, the "Stream Crossing Guidelines
for Anadromous Fish Passage" will be followed including an in-stream construction
moratorium of February 15 to September 30.
6. The 2003 USFWS Manatee Guidelines for construction activities in aquatic areas will be
utilized to the maximum extent practicable.
IV. ESTIMATED COST
The estimated costs, based on current prices are as follows:
Alternative 2 Alternative 3
Structure Removal Existin $ 189,900 $ 189,900
Structure Pro osed 8 287,500 8,355,000
Roadwa A roaches 835,500 761,600
Miscellaneous and Mobilization 3,297,000 3,303,000
En ineerin Contin encies 1,890,100 1,890,500
ROW/Const. Easements/Utilities 804,000 814,500
TOTAL $ 15,304,000 $ 15,314,500
The estimated cost of the project as shown in the 2004-2010 Transportation Improvement Program
is $4,950,000 including $800,000 for right-of-way, $3,850,000 for construction, and $300,000 in
prior years.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 5

V. NATURAL RES~UR~ES
A~ Methodology
Information sources used to prepare this report include but are not limited to: USGS Grimesland,
NC 7.5 minute series topographic map (1979); United States Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service [now the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS}] Soil Survey of Pitt
County, NC (1974); United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory
(NWI) map (Grimesland, NC, 1994); USFWS Pitt County Endangered Species, Threatened Species,
and Federal Species of Concern (search performed 7/8/04, list date February 25, 2003); North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) computer database, via the Internet, of rare species
and unique habitats (accessed )une 9, 2003, list updated May 2003); and NCDOT aerial
photography of the study area. Research using these resources was conducted prior to the field
investigation. Information on hydric soils was obtained from the Pitt County hydric soils list, and
the NRCS National Hydric Soils List. Field surveys were conducted along the proposed project
corridor on August 28-31, 2001, and September 13, 2001.
A previous Natural Resources Technical Report was submitted for these bridge replacement
projects by other investigators in April 2001. Since the previous report was completed several
months prior to the natural resources investigation for this report, information has been used and
built upon where appropriate from the previous report in order to save time and prevent
duplication. Credit is given when information is used extensively from the previous report. In
addition, most of the study area north of the Tar River is included in the NCDOT Grimesland
Wetland Mitigation Site. Information from the mitigation study was utilized for this report and
credit is given where applicable.
Impacts were calculated to the proposed right-of-way, or 10 feet (3 meters) outside slope stakes
for all alternatives. This varied depending upon whether slope stake lines were inside or outside
the right-of-way. The 10-foot (3-meter) allowance was used for possible impacts due to
mechanized clearing. The actual impacts may be less.
B. Physiography and Soils
The proposed project lies within the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province, which includes all parts
of North Carolina east of the fall line. This province generally consists of unconsolidated sands,
silts, clays, and peas. The topography of the project vicinity can be characterized as flat to gently
sloping. Elevations in the project vicinity and project area range from approximately 0 to 30 feet (0
to 9.1 meters) above mean sea level (msl). Current land use in the project vicinity consists of rural
undeveloped land with some scattered residential and agricultural properties.
Soil series within the project area are described below. Potential productivity of the soils is
determined by site index for a given species of tree. The site index is the average of the measured
total height, in feet of the dominant and co-dominant trees in an even-aged stand when the trees
attain the age of 50 years. By using published results of research, site index can be converted to
expected yields. In the descriptions below, potential productivity is expressed by site class. The
site class values were obtained by rounding the site index for each species of tree to the nearest
10-foot (3-meter) interval. Site class for some broad-leaved trees was determined through
comparison with similar trees growing in the same type of soil.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 6

Chipley sand is a moderately well drained soil on broad flats and on smooth side slopes of uplands
and stream terraces. Slopes range from 0 to 4 percent. Permeability is rapid, and shrink-swell
potential is fow. In areas that have not received lime, reaction is strongly acid or very strongly
acid. The seasonal high water table is within approximately 2.5 feet (0.8 meters) of the surface,
and this soil is subject to infrequent flooding. Site indices for Chipley sand include 90 for loblolly
pine, 90 for slash pine, and 70 for longleaf pine. Chipley sand is listed as having inclusions of Osier
soil on the Pitt County Hydric Soils List. Osier soil is a hydric soil series which is poorly drained and
nearly level on uplands and stream terraces. Permeability is rapid, and shrink-swell potential is
low. In areas that have not received lime, reaction is strongly acid or very strongly acid. The
seasonal high water table is at or near the surface, and this soil is subject to frequent flooding for
brief periods. Site indices for Osier soil include 80 for loblolly pine, 80 for slash pine, and 70 for
longleaf pine. This soil is not suitable for broad-leaved trees, but is considered to have moderate
potential for needle-leaved tree species.
Swamp is a poorly drained or very poorly drained miscellaneous land type on floodplains, where it
occurs in slight depressions. It has slopes of less than 1 percent. Flooding for long periods of time
occurs very frequently, with water covering this land type throughout most of the year. This land
type is not placed in a woodland suitability group, and no site indices have been calculated.
Swamp is listed as a hydric soil on the Pitt County Hydric Soils List.
Portsmouth loam is a very poorly drained soil on broad, smooth flats in slight depressions. Slopes
are 0 to 1 percent. Permeability is moderate, and shrink-swell potential is low. In areas that have
not received lime, reaction is strongly acid or very strongly acid. The seasonal high water table is
at or near the surface, and this soil is subject to frequent flooding for brief periods. Site indices for
Portsmouth loam include 100 for loblolly pine, 100 for slash pine, 100 for sweetgum, 110 for
yellow-poplar, 90 to100 for water oak, 100 for willow oak, and 100 for cottonwood. This soil is
considered to have high potential for broad-leaved and needle-leaved tree species. Portsmouth
loam is listed as a hydric soil on both the Pitt County hydric soils list, as well as the NRCS National
Hydric Soils List.
Rains fine sandy loam is a poorly drained soil on broad flats and in slight depressions in the
uplands. Slopes are 0 to 1 percent. Permeability is moderate, and shrink-swell potential is low. In
areas that have not received lime, reaction is strongly acid or very strongly acid. The seasonal
high water table is at or near the surface, and this soil is subject to frequent ponding for brief
periods. Site indices for Rains fine sandy loam include 90 for loblolly pine, 90 for slash pine, 70 for
pond pine, and 90 for sweetgum. This soil is not suitable for broad-leaved tree species, and is
considered to have low potential for needle-leaved species. Rains fine sandy loam is listed as a
hydric soil on both the Pitt County hydric soils list and the NRCS National Hydric Soils List.
Pactolus loamy sand is a moderately well drained and somewhat poorly drained soil found on broad
flats, in depressions, and on smooth, low ridges on uplands and stream terraces. Permeability is
rapid, and shrink-swell potential is low. This soil is strongly acid or very strongly acid. The
seasonal high water table is 1.5 to 2.5 feet (0.5 to 0.8 meters) below the surface. Site indices for
Pactolus loamy sand include 80 for loblolly pine, 80 for slash pine, and 70 for longleaf pine. This
soil is not suitable for broad-leaved tree species, and is considered to have moderate potential for
needle-leaved species. Pactolus loamy sand is listed as having inclusions of Osier on the Pitt
County Hydric Soils List.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 7

Altavista sandy loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes is a moderately well drained soil that occupies broad
divides on stream terraces. Permeability is moderate, and shrink-swell potential is low. In areas
that have not received lime, reaction is strongly acid or very strongly acid. The seasonal high
water table is at a depth of approximately 2.5 feet (0.8 meters) below the surface. Site indices for
Altavista sandy foam include 90 for loblolly pine, 90 far slash pine, 70 for longleaf pine, 90 for
sweetgum, 100 for yellow-poplar, and 90 for water oak. This soil is considered to have high
potential for broad-leaved tree species, and moderate potential for needle-leaved species. Altavista
sandy loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes is listed as having inclusions of Tuckerman on the Pitt County
Hydric Soils List. Tuckerman is a hydric soil series which consists of poorly drained, nearly level
soils on stream terraces. Slopes are 0 to 1 percent. Permeability and shrink-swell potential are
moderate. In areas that have not received lime, reaction is slightly acid to medium acid. The
seasonal high water table is at or near the surface. Site indices for Tuckerman include 90 for
loblolly pine, 90 for slash pine, 70 for longleaf pine, and 90 for sweetgum. This soil is considered
to have high potential for broad-leaved and needle-leaved tree species.
Ocilla loamy fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes is a somewhat poorly drained soil on broad flats and
smooth side slopes in the uplands and on stream terraces. Permeability is moderate, and shrink-
swell potential is low. In areas that have not received lime, reaction is strongly acid or very
strongly acid. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of approximately 2.5 feet (0.8 meters)
below the surface. Site indices for Ocilla loamy fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes include 80 for
loblolly pine, 80 for slash pine, and 70 for longleaf pine. This soil is not suitable for broad-leaved
tree species, and is considered to have moderate potential for needle-leaved species. Ocilla loamy
fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes is listed as having inclusions of Rains on the Pitt County Hydric
Soils List.
Lakeland sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes is an excessively drained, sandy soil in broad, undulating
areas and on rounded divides in uplands and on stream terraces. Permeability is rapid, and shrink-
swell potential is low. In areas that have not received lime, reaction is medium acid to strongly
acid. The seasonal high water table is below a depth of 5 feet (1.5 meters). Site indices for
Lakeland sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes include 70 for slash pine, 60 for longleaf pine, and 70 for
loblolly pine. This soil is not suitable for broadleaved tree species, and is considered to have a low
potential for needle-leaved tree species.
Alaga loamy sand, banded substratum, 0 to 6 percent slopes is a somewhat excessively drained,
sandy soil on broad, high divides on uplands and stream terraces. Permeability is rapid, and
shrink-swell potential is low. In areas that have not received lime, reaction is medium acid to very
strongly acid. The seasonal high water table is below a depth of 5 feet (1.5 meters). Site indices
for Alaga loamy sand, banded substratum, 0 to 6 percent slopes include 80 for loblolly pine, 80 for
slash pine, and 60 to70 for longleaf pine. This soil is not suitable for broad-leaved tree species,
and is considered to have a moderate potential for needle-leaved tree species.
Craven fine sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes is a moderately well drained soil on smooth side
slopes in uplands. Permeability is slow, and shrink-swell potential is high. In areas that have not
received lime, reaction is strongly acid to extremely acid. The seasonal high water table is at a
depth of approximately 2.5 feet (0.8 meters) below the surface. Site indices for Craven fine sandy
loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes include 80 for loblolly pine, 80 for slash pine, and 70 for longleaf pine.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 8

This soil is not suitable for broad-leaved tree species, and is considered to have moderate potential
for needle-leaved species.
Craven fine sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes is a moderately well drained soil on narrow side
slopes in uplands. Permeability is slow, and shrink-swell potential is high. In areas that have not
received lime, reaction is strongly acid to extremely acid. The seasonal high water table is at a
depth of approximately 2.5 feet (0.8 meters) below the surface. Site indices for Craven fine sandy
loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes include 80 far loblolly pine, 80 for slash pine, and 70 for longleaf pine.
This soil is not suitable for broad-leaved tree species, and is considered to have moderate potential
for needle-leaved species.
Wagram foamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes is swell-drained soil on slightly convex, smooth, broad
divides on uplands and stream terraces. Permeability is moderately rapid, and shrink-swell
potential is low. In areas that have not received lime, reaction is strongly acid to extremely acid.
The seasonal high water table is below a depth of 5 feet (1.5 meters). Site indices for Wagram
loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes include 80 for loblolly pine, 80 for slash pine, and 60 to70 for
longleaf pine. This soil is not suitable for broad-leaved tree species, and is considered to have
moderate potential for needle-leaved species.
C. Water Resources
1. Waters Impacted
The proposed project falls within the Tar-Pamlico River Basin, and has a North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub-basin designation of 03-03-05 and a federal hydrologic unit
designation of 03020103. Characteristics of impacted waters and possible sources of pollution are
discussed below.
2~ Water Resource Characteristics
The Tar River flows southeast within the study area and is estimated to be about 270 feet (82.4
meters) wide from edge of water to edge of water, and about 25 feet (7.6 meters) deep, although
depth was undetermined during field investigations. On the day of the investigation, the flow was
moderate and the clarity was medium. Substrate consists of coarse sand and some silt. River
banks are variable. South of the bridge, the banks are approximately 30 feet (9.1 meters) high and
steeply sloping. North of the bridge, the banks are approximately 1 foot (0.3 meters) high and
gradually sloping.
An unnamed tributary of the Tar River is located south of the river, extending north, and crossing
under Grimesland Bridge Road via three 48-inch (122-centimeter) reinforced concrete pipes. The
tributary is a perennial stream with a top of bank to water surface depth of approximately 2 to3
feet (0.6 to 0.9 meters), a top of bank to top of bank width of approximately 6 to 10 feet (1.8 to
3.0 meters), and a water's edge to water's edge width of approximately 4 to 8 feet (1.2 to 2.4
meters). On the day of the field investigation, flow was slow, clarity was medium to high, and
water depth was approximately 12 to 24 inches (30.5 to 61 centimeters). Substrate consists of
medium sand with a thin layer of silt. Stream banks are unstable due to erosion, and exposed soil
and roots are evident. The stream exhibits moderate sinuosity, and there is no apparent rifFle-pool
sequence. The majority of the area where the stream is located is considerably shaded.
TeI.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 9

A large pond is at the northern edge of the study area. It was not studied in detail since ponds in
the project vicinity were discussed in detail in the Grimesland Mitigation Site report. Further
information on the pond is located in Section D.3, Aquatic Communities.
A Best usage Classification of "B NSW" (date 1/1/50) has been assigned to the reach of the Tar
River that falls within the study area by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). Class "B" indicates fresh waters protected for
aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, primary recreation, and agriculture. Primary
recreational activities include swimming, skin diving, water skiing, and similar uses involving human
contact with water where such activities take place in an organized manner or on a frequent basis.
The supplemental classification "NSW" indicates nutrient sensitive waters which require limitations
on nutrient inputs. The unnamed tributary within the study area is assumed to have the same
classification as the river. No designated High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource
Waters (ORW), Water Supply I (WS-I), or Water Supply II (WSII) waters occur within a 1.0-mile
(1.6-kilometer) radius of the study corridor.
Point-source discharges throughout North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. There are three minor permitted dischargers and
one major permitted discharger within sub-basin 03-03-05. The nearest major discharger,
Greenville WWTP, is located approximately 7.8 miles (12.6 kilometers) upstream (west) of the
study corridor and discharges 17.5 million gallons per day (66.2 million liters per day). The nearest
minor discharger is located approximately 5.0 miles (8.0 kilometers) upstream of the study corridor.
Specific types of dischargers in sub-basin 03-03-05 are listed below.
Sub-basin
MGD (MLD)
Facility Categories OS
Total Facilities 4
Total Permitted Flow (MGD)
_ __
_ _._ _. _._
. _ __.. _ _ 18.5 (70.0)
_ _ _ _ __
'
Major Dischar es
9
__
........_ ........_. . 1
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 17.5(66.2)
Minor Discharges 3
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 1.0 (3.8)
100% Domestic Waste 1
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 1.0 (3.8)
Municipal Facilities 1
Total Permitted Flow (MGD)
_._ ._. 17.5(66.2)
_ _
Industrial Facilities 0
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) 0.0 (0.0)
..
Other Facilities 3
Total Permitted Flow (MGD) i.0 (3.8)
Major non-point sources of pollution for the Tar River include runoff from cropping and pasturage.
Sedimentation and nutrient inputs are major problems associated with non-point source discharges
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 10

and often result in elevated levels of fecal coliform bacteria. Non-point source refers to runoff that
enters surface waters through storm water flow or no defined point of discharge.
Benthic macroinvertebrates, or benthos, are organisms that five in and on the bottom substrates of
rivers and streams. The NCDWQ uses benthos data as a tool to monitor water quality since benthic
macroinvertebrates are sensitive to subtle ehanges in water quality. Formerly, the NCDWQ used
the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) as a primary tool for water quality
assessment, but phased this method out several years ago. The NCDWQ has converted to a
basinwide assessment sampling protocol. Each river basin in the state is sampled once every five
years and the number of sampling stations has been increased within each basin. Each basin is
sampled for biological, chemical and physical data.
Biociassification criteria have been developed that are based upon the number of benthic
macroinvertebrate taxa present and the relevant pollution tolerance of the taxa. The
bioclassifications are used to assess the impacts of both point source discharges and non-point
source runoff.
The Tar River has been assigned a bioclassification of "Excellent" based on benthic
macroinvertebrate monitoring.
3. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
a. General Impacts
In the short term, construction and approach work could increase sediment loads in the river. The
NCDOT, in cooperation with the NCDWQ, has developed a sedimentation control program for
highway projects which adopts formal best management practices (BMPs) for the protection of
surface waters. The following are some of the standard methods to reduce sedimentation and
water quality impacts:
• Strict adherence to BMPs for the protection of surface waters during the life of the project.
• Reduction and elimination of direct and non-point discharge into water bodies and
minimization of activities conducted in the water.
• Placement of temporary ground cover or re-seeding of disturbed sites to reduce runoff and
decrease sediment loadings (tall fescue is not suitable for erosion control along stream
banks).
• Reduction of clearing and grubbing along stream banks.
b. Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal
In order to protect the water quality and aquatic life in the area affected by this project, the
NCDOT and all potential contractors will follow appropriate guidelines for bridge demolition and
removal. These guidelines are presented in three NCDOT documents entitled "Pre-Construction
Guidelines for Bridge Demolition and Removal", "Policy: Bridge Demolition and Removal in Waters
of the United States", and "Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal".
Guidelines followed for bridge demolition and removal are in addition to those implemented for
Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 11

Bridge No. 127 is located approximately 900 feet (274.5 meters) north of Bridge No. 129 and spans
an inundated section of Cypress-Gum Swamp.
Dropping any portion of the structures into waters of the United States will be avoided unless there
is no other practical method of removal. In the event that no other practical method is feasible, a
worst-case scenario is assumed for calculations of fill entering waters of the United States. The
maximum estimated potential fill calculated for the bridges is 630 cubic yards (459.3 cubic meters)
for Bridge No. 129 and 202 cubic yards (147.3 cubic meters) for Bridge No. 127. The river
substrate in the project area consists of fine silts and sands. The overflow area is underlain by
hydric soils associated with the Cypress-Gum Swamp wetlands. Due to potential sedimentation
concerns resulting from demolition of the bridges, where it is possible to do so, a turbidity curtain
will be used, as applicable, to contain and minimize sedimentation in the water. The resident
engineer will coordinate with appropriate agencies prior to structure demolition and removal.
Under the guidelines presented in the documents noted in the first paragraph of this section, work
done in the water for this project will fall under Case 2, which states that no work shall be
performed in the water during moratorium periods associated with fish migration, spawning, and
larval recruitment into nursery areas. This conclusion is based upon the classification of the waters
within the project area and vicinity, and agency comments received from the North Carolina
Division of Marine Fisheries, United States Army Corps of Engineers, and North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission.
D. Biotic Resources
1. Plant Communities
Classification of plant communities is based on the system used by the NCNHP (Schafale and
Weakley 1990). If a community is modified or otherwise disturbed such that it does not fit into an
NCNHP classification, it is given a name that best describes current characteristics. Scientific
names and common names (when applicable) are used for the plants noted, however subsequent
references to the same species include the common name only. Vascular plant names follow
nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968) unless more current information is available.
Terrestrial communities found at this site are described below.
Some natural communities in the study area are described as Brownwater Subtypes of their
classification. The Grimesland Mitigation Site report describes these communities as Blackwater
Subtypes of their classifications. Schafale and Weakley (1990) note that brownwater rivers have
their headwaters in the Piedmont or Blueridge, and blackwater rivers have their headwaters in the
Coastal Plain. The Tar River headwaters are located in the Piedmont, although many blackwater
streams flow into the river as it progresses east through the Coastal Plain. It appears to have
some blackwater characteristics within the study area and due to the fact that the headwaters are
located in the Piedmont, communities in the study area will be considered Brownwater Subtypes in
this report if they are associated with the Tar River.
T.I,P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 12

a. CypressmGum Swamp (Brownwater Subtype)
This community is located east and west of SR 1565 north of the Tar River. The canopy is closed
in most places and overall plant diversity is fairly low. A small section between Seine Beach Road
and the Tar River has been fogged recently. Baldcypress (Taxodium distichum) and water tupelo
(Nyssa aquatics) are the dominant canopy species. Scattered species in the understory and shrub
layers include red maple (Acer rubrum), Carolina ash (Fraxinus caro/iniana), and sweetbay
(Magno//a Virg/niana). Herbaceous layer species are more abundant around the edges of this
community, although some are dispersed throughout in small quantities. These species include
cardinal flower (Lobe/ia cardina/is), Jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphy//um), false-nettle (Boehmeria
cy/indrica), spotted touch-me-not (Impatiens capensis), netted chain fern (Woodwardia areolata),
lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus), arrow arum (Pe/tandra ~irginica), marsh hibiscus (Hibiscus
moscheutos), climbing hempweed (Mikania scandens), rush (Juncussp.), and sedge (Carexsp).
A Wetland Rating Worksheet for this community in included in Appendix D. The Cypress-Gum
Swamp received a total score of 84 out of 100. The community scored highest in the categories of
water storage, pollutant removal, and aquatic life value. It scored low to medium in wildlife
habitat, bank/shoreline stabilization, and recreation/education. This community is jurisdictional
wetland within the study area. It is classified on NWI mapping as palustrine, forested, broad-
leaved deciduous/needle-leaved deciduous, semipermanently flooded. The April 2001 Wetland
Rating Worksheet are included in Appendix D.
b. Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods (Brownwater Subtype)
This community is located adjacent to the Cypress-Gum Swamp community in the northern sections
of the study area, east and west of SR 1565. It is a mixture of low ridges intermingled with wetter
areas, which are in general oriented perpendicular to SR 1565. Vegetation is somewhat variable,
depending upon topography.
The lowest areas are more characteristic of Cypress-Gum Swamp species, and some of these areas
were indundated at the time of the field investigation. Common species on the slightly higher
ridges include swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), willow oak (Quercus phe/%s), water oak
(Quercus nigra), American beech (Pages grandifo/ia), sweetgum (Liquidambar styracitlua),
American holly (I/ex opaca), red maple, loblolly pine (Pines taeda), and ironwood (Carpinus
caro/inana). Most areas of this community have a fairly open understory/shrub layer. Some
portions contain younger trees of those already mentioned, as well as grape (~itis rotundifo/ia),
netted chain fern, Jack-in-the-pulpit, greenbriar (Smi/axrotundifo/ia), royal fern (Osmunda rega/is),
poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea), and a few specimens
of dwarf palmetto (Saba/minor.
Wetland Rating Worksheets for this community were included within the Grimesland Mitigation Site
report. A score of 52 out of 100 was calculated for this community in areas greater than 300 feet
(91 meters) from surface water, and a score of 76 was calculated for areas within 300 feet (91
meters) of surface water. Wetland Rating Worksheet for this community is located in Appendix D.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 13

w
c. Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Blackwater Subtype)
This community is located south of the Tar River adjacent to the unnamed tributary previously
discussed. It has swell-developed canopy and Understory. The shrub layer is fairly open in most
areas and the herb layer is variable. Herbaceous vegetation is much more abundant south of SR
1565.
Canopy species include green ash (Fraxinus pennsy/vanica), sweetgum, water oak and swamp
chestnut oak. Understory and shrub species consist of red maple, American beech and sweetgum.
The herbaceous layer, which is particularly thick in places south of the road includes giant cane
(Arundinaria gigantea), false-nettle, Cardinal flower, netted chain fern, arrow arum, Jack-in-the-
pulpit, and spotted touch-me-not.
The Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp community scored 47 out of 100 on the Wetland Rating
Worksheet. Some categories scored fairly low due either to steep topography within ~/z mile (0.8
kilometers) of the swamp or small size of the community and floodplain. The rating worksheet and
Wetland Rating Worksheet for this community are located in Appendix D.
d. Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype)
The Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest community is found on sloping areas adjacent to the Coastal
Plain Small Stream Swamp.
Canopy species include white oak (Quercusa/ba), mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa), bitternut
hickory (Carya cordiformis), water oak, sweetgum, American beech, yellow-poplar (Liriodendron
to/ipifera), sycamore (P/atanus occidenta/is), and loblolly pine. Understory trees are a mixture of
those noted above as well as red maple, American holly, and dogwood (Cornusflorida). The shrub
layer consists of beauty berry (Ca/icarpa americans), sassafras (Sassafras a/bidum), witch hazel
(Hamame/is uirginiana), strawberry bush (Euonymus americanus), devil's walking stick (Ara/ia
spinosa), and blueberry (I/accinium spp.). Vines include greenbrier, bullbrier (Smi/ax bona-nox),
grape, Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicerajaponica), poison ivy, trumpet creeper (Campsisradicans),
and Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia).
e. Planted Pine Stand
A small section of a planted pine stand is located within the study area south of the Tar River and
adjacent to the Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest. It is comprised of loblolly pine, and has a short,
shrubby layer of smaller pines and vines such as bullbrier. Average diameter of the pines is
approximately 7 to 10 inches (18 to 25 centimeters).
f. Man-Dominated Community
The remaining portions of the study area fall under this community type. Typical areas include
disturbed roadsides, the Seine Beach recreational area north of the Tar River, and maintained
lawns of private residences.
Planted grasses and ornamental landscape species are typical around private residences and the
Seine Beach recreational area. Roadside disturbed areas include scattered trees found in other
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 1~ 4

communities within the study area, spotted-touch-me-nat, goldenrod (So/idagosp.), morning glory
(Ipomoea sp.), poinsettia (Euphorbia heterophylla), dogfennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), trumpet
creeper, foxtail (Setar/asp.), grape, blackberry (Kobus sp.), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense),
poke (Phyto/acts americans), Virginia creeper, kudzu (Pueraria /obata), plantain (P/antago sp.),
Carolina falsedandelion (Pyrrhopappus taro/inianus), and white clover (Trifo/ium repens).
2~ Wildlife
Wildlife species identified in the field are based upon sight, sound, or other characteristic signs.
Field guides are also utilized to determine additional species that may find suitable habitat in the
project area, but that were not identified during the site investigation. The diverse array of wildlife
species noted below includes the Grimesland Mitigation Site report observations and investigations
for this report. In particular, the swamp and bottomland hardwood communities provide large
areas of forested habitat that are valuable to many types of wildlife.
Mammal species reported to occur within communities at the project site or noted during this
investigation include white-tailed deer (Odocoi/eus virginianus), raccoon (Procyon /oto~, Virginia
opossum (Dide/phis virginiana), gray squirrel (Sciurus taro/inensis), cotton mouse (Peromyscus
gossyp/nus), beaver (Castor canadensis), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), gray fox (Urocyon
cinereoargenteus), and eastern cottontail (Sy/vi/agusfloridanus). A local resident within the study
area noted a recent sighting of black bear (Ursus americanus) in the Coastal Plain Small Stream
Swamp area.
Bird species previously reported and/or noted during this investigation include turkey vulture
(Cathan`es aura), downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), red-bellied woodpecker (Me/anerpes
taro/inns), tufted titmouse (Baeo%phusbico%j, Carolina chickadee (Poeci/e taro/inensis), American
robin (Turdus migratorius), hermit thrush (Catharus guttatus), red-shouldered hawk (Buteo
/ineatus), Carolina wren (Thryothorus /udovicianus), common yellowthroat (Geothypis trichas),
Acadian flycatcher (Empidonax virescens), barred owl (Strix varia), summer tanager (Piranga
rubra), killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), eastern bluebird (Sia/ia sia/is), American crow (Corvus
brachyrhynchos), and blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata).
Several species of waterfowl were also noted. These include wood duck (Aix sponsa), Canada
goose (Branta canadensis), lesser scaup (Aytha a~nis), mallard (Areas p/atyrhynchos), American
black duck (Areas rubripes), and pie-billed grebe (Podi/ymbuspodiceps).
No reptiles were observed during this investigation. Those noted from the Grimesland Mitigation
Site report consist of brown snake (Storeria dekeyi), black rat snake (E/aphe obso%ta), six-lined
racerunner (Cnemidophorussex/ineatus), painted turtle (Chrysemyspicta),rnod turtle (Kinosternon
subrubrum), eastern box turtle (Terrapene taro/ins), eastern garter snake (Thamnophis sirta/is),
eastern hognose snake (Heterodon platyrhinos), and northern copperhead (Agkistrodon contortri~.
Several frogs were noted during this investigation, although not long enough to obtain a species
identification. Southern leopard frog (Rana pa/ustris), southern green frog (Rana c/amitans
me/snots), and pickerel frog (Rana pa/ustris) were noted in the Grimesland Mitigation Site report.
Additional species that could utilize swamp and bottomland hardwood communities in the study
area include rough green snake (apheodrysaest/vus), eastern ribbon snake (Thamnophissauritus),
T.I.P. No. B~3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 15

golden mouse (4chrotomys nutty//i), pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pi/eatus), yellow-throated
warbler (Dendroica dominica}, marsh rabbit (Sy/vi/agus pa/ustris}, dwarf salamander (Eurycea
quadridig/tata), eastern narrowmouth toad (Gastrophryne Caro/inensis), spotted turtle (C/emmys
guttata), and mud snake (farancia abacura).
Additional species that may be represented in the upland and disturbed areas include morning dove
(Zenaida macroura), starling (Sturnus vu/garis), mockingbird (Mimus po/yg/ottos), barn swallow
(~//rundo rustica), Carolina anole (Ano/is caro/inensis), and Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus).
3. Aquatic Communities
A cursory search of the Tar River shoreline was conducted for evidence of mussels. Asiatic clam
(Corbicufa fluminia) shells were found, as well as a few larger unidentified shells. The Grimesland
Mitigation Site report indicates that river mussels (Unionidae) were observed in the study area.
Signs of crayfish were observed during the investigation. Other aquatic species noted to occur
within the study area include redbreast sunfish (Lepomisauritus), bowfin (Amia ca/va), and eastern
mudminnow (Umbra pygmaea).
Organisms found in the unnamed tributary to the Tar River included water striders (Hemiptera),
water pennies (Coleoptera), and evidence of crayfish (Cambaridae).
The pond located at the northern edge of the study area fits the descriptions given of ponds within
the Grimesland Mitigation Site report. The report states that ponds on the mitigation site are a
result of sand mining operations. The ponds are said to have been excavated from historic
uplands, and do not have a connection to streams, however, several aquatic species were observed
in them. Examples include slider (Pseudemysscripta), snapping turtle (Che/ydraserpintina), lesser
siren (Siren intermedia), bull frog (Rana catesbeiana), largemouth bass (Micropterus sa/moides),
bluegill (Lepom/s macrochirus), warmouth (Lepomis gulosus), flier (Centrarchus macropterus),
pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus), yellow perch (Percy f/avascens), crappie (Proxomis sp.),
mosquitofish (Gambusia ahinis), shiners (Notropis spp.), and carp (Cyprinus carpio). The
Grimesland Mitigation Report concludes that since the ponds have no connection to area streams
and are not stocked, the fish species likely have been introduced through major flood events
associated with the Tar River.
Agency representatives from the Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) and the NCWRC were contacted for comments related to project construction and
requested moratoriums on in-water work. The project should comply with the NCDOT policy
entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage". All agency representatives
requested a moratorium on in-water construction and demolition beginning on February 15. The
NMFS extended the moratorium to June 1, the NCWRC to June 15, and the DMF to June 30
(Appendix D).
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 16

1
4. Anticipated Impacts to biotic Communities
a. Terrestrial communities and Wetlands
Table 1.I shows impacts to terrestrial communities and wetlands. The amount of wetlands that are
impacted within each terrestrial community is indicated in bold letters.
The Man-dominated Community has the largest amount of impacts far each alternative; however,
this community is already highly altered from human disturbance. For this reason, the impacts are
not considered substantial in terms of degrading habitat quality in the project area or in terms of
types of vegetation that will be impacted.
On-site wetland restoration is available for all alternatives. Estimated amounts are provided in
Table 1.1. All alternatives involve removal of the existing road and fill located between the two
current bridges. A single bridge will replace the current bridges and road. The existing road and
fill will be restored to wetlands for on-site mitigation. SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) will also be
removed and restored.
NOTES:
TABLE 1.1
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES AND WETLANDS

Bridge Nos. 127 & 129 Alternative 2
(Preferred) Alternative 3

acres hectares acres (hectares)
Man-Dominated Community
(Total) 4.670 (1.89) 4.620 (1.87)
Wet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Coastal
Plain Subtype)
(Total) 0.70 (0.28) 0.38 (0.15)
Wet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Coastal Plain Bottomland Hardwoods
(Brownwater Subtype)
(Total) 0.66 (0.27) 0.84 (0.34)
Wet 0.30 0.12 0.44 0.18
Cypress-Gum Swamp (Brownwater
Subtype)
(Total) 0.443 (0.18) 0.313 (0.13)
Wet 0.433 0.18 0.193 0.08
Planted Pine Stand
(Total) 0.00 (0.00) 0.45 (0.18)
(Wet) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp
(Blackwater Subtype)
(Total) 0.40 (0.16) 0.41 (0.17)
Wet 0.40 0.16 0.40 0.16
Total Wetland Impacts 1.133 (0.46) 1.033 (0.42)
Impacts to Mitigation Site Wetlands 0.73 (0.30) 0.63 (0.26]
Total Wetlands Available for Restoration 3.14 (1.27) 3.10 (1.26)
Teri estrial community and wetland impacts were calculated to 10 feet (3 meters) outside slope stakes, or to the proposed right-of-way. Wetland
figures include the footprint of the support structures of the replacement bridge. Assumptions are for 6 14-H piles per pier on land.
Instances where decimal points were taken to the 3rd or 4"' place include calculations associated with the bridge piers. This was necessary due to
the small amount of area associated with the piers. Calculations not including piers were not taken to the 3`° place to ensure the level of accuracy
was not misrepresented.
Actual impacts may be less than those indicated. Calculations were based on the worst-case scenario.
Bold Black denotes wetland impacts within that community.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 17

b. Aquatic C®rnn~unities
Table 1.2 shows impacts to surface waters, bath in terms of area and linear impacts for each
Alternative. Both the Tar River, and the unnamed tributary located south of the Tar River will be
impacted by the Alternatives. The figures shown for the Tar River are derived by estimating the
footprint of the replacement bridge piers in the water. The impacts shown for the unnamed
tributary are associated with extension of the existing pipes. Linear impacts were calculated by
f nding the width of the replacement structure over the river, or by considering fill associated with
the unnamed tributary.
TABLE 1.2
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO SURFACE WATERS
Bridge Nos. 127 & 129 Alternative 2
(Preferred) Alternative 3
Tar River
acres hectares 0.0006 (0.0002) 0.0006(0.0002)
Tar River
linear feet meters 30 (9.14) 30 (9.14)
Unnamed Tributary 0.06 (0.02) 0.06 (0.02)
acres hectares
Unnamed Tributary

linear feet meters 170 (51.8) 170 (51.8)
NOTES:
• Surface water impacts for the Tar River were calculated by estimating the footprint of the replacement bridge piers
in the water. Assumptions include 3 drilled piles per pier in water with spans 100 feet (30 meters) Surface water
impacts for the tributary represent the extension of the existing pipes.
• Actuai impacts may be less than those indicated. Calculations were based on the worst-case scenario.
E. SPEGIAI. TOPICS
1. "Waters of the United States": )urisdictional Issues
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "waters of the United States" as
defined in 33 CFR §328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344). Waters within the banks of Tar River and the unnamed tributary south of
the river are considered jurisdictional as waters of the United States and are regulated by the
USACE. The Grimesland Mitigation Site report states that since ponds on the site were excavated
from historic uplands and do not connect to streams, the Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
has determined that they are nonjurisdictional resources with respect to Section 404 of the CWA
and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Investigation into wetland occurrence in the project study area was conducted using methods of
the 1987 USACE Wetlands Delineation Manual. Wetlands were found within the study corridor east
and west of SR 1565 north of the Tar River, and adjacent to the unnamed tributary east and west
of SR 1565. The wetland boundaries were flagged and GPS surveyed, and data forms and maps
were sent to the USACE to request a jurisdictional determination. A Notification of Jurisdictional
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 18

Determination dated September 18, 2002, was received from the USACE, which approved the
delineated boundaries (Appendix D).
2. hermits
In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344.), a permit is
required from the USACE for projects of this type for the discharge of dredged or fill material into
waters of the United States. The USACE issues two types of permits for these activities. A general
permit may be issued on a nationwide or regional basis for a category or categories of activities
when: those activities are substantially similar in nature and cause only minimal individual and
cumulative environmental impacts, or when the general permit would result in avoiding
unnecessary duplication or regulatory control exercised by another federal, state, or local agency.
This is provided that the environmental consequences of the action are individually and
cumulatively minimal. If a general permit is not appropriate for a particular activity, then an
individual permit must be utilized. Individual permits are authorized on a case-by-case evaluation
of a specific project involving the proposed discharges.
This project is being processed as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) guidelines. The COE has made available Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 23
(67 FR 2020-2095, January 15, 2002) for CEs due to minimal impacts expected with bridge
construction. DWQ has made available a General 401 Water Quality Certification for NWP No. 23.
However, authorization for jurisdictional area impacts through use of this permit will require written
notice to DWQ. In the event that NWP No. 23 will not suffice, minor impacts attributed to bridging
and associated approach improvements are expected to qualify under General Bridge Permit 031
issued by the Wilmington COE District.
A Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the state is necessary for projects that require
Section 404 Permits. The state has General Certifications which will match the permit type
authorized by the USACE. Although a single form is utilized to request both the 404 Permit and the
401 Certification, the state must issue the 401 Certification before the USACE will issue the 404
Permit. Written concurrence/notification is not always required by the state, and varies depending
upon the General Certification.
The United States Coast Guard (USCG) is responsible for authorizing bridges pursuant to Section 9
of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and the General Bridge Act of 1946. The purpose of these
Acts is to preserve the public right of navigation and to prevent interference with interstate and
foreign commerce. Bridge construction or replacement over navigable waters may require USCG
authorization pursuant to 33 CFR 114-115. The United States Coast Guard has noted that Bridge
No. 129 will require a Coast Guard Permit (Appendix D).
If no practical alternative exists to remove the current bridges other than to drop them into the
water prior to removal of debris off-site, fill related to demolition procedures will need to be
considered during the permitting process. A worst-case scenario will be assumed with the
understanding that if there is any other practical method available, the bridges will not be dropped
into the water. Any permit needed for bridge construction will address issues related to bridge
demolition.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 19

y
3. Riparian Buffer Protection Rules for the Tar-Pamlico River Basin
Since this project is within the Tar-Pamlico River Basin, it is subject to NCDENR riparian buffer rules
(15A NCAC 26.0259). These rules were developed to protect and preserve existing riparian buffers
and are part of larger nutrient reduction strategies for the basin.
The buffer rules require that up to 50 feet (15 meters) in width of riparian area be protected and
maintained on the banks of waterways in the basin. The rules do not apply to portions of the
riparian buffer where a use is existing and ongoing as of January 1, 2000. Existing uses include
transportation facilities. It should be noted that only the portion of the buffer that contains the
footprint of the existing use is exempt.
Activities in the buffer area beyond the footprint of the existing use are classified as either
"exempt", "allowable", "allowable with mitigation", or "prohibited". The following chart of activities
that may be subject to buffer rules within the study area is provided along with activity
classifications. Depending upon project alternatives, not all of the uses listed may apply, and other
uses not listed here, such as utility crossings and roadside drainage ditches, among others, may be
regulated under the buffer rules. Guidelines should be consulted in entirety to review all project
related uses subject to the buffer rules.
Allowable
USE Exempt Allowable With Prohibited
Mitigation
Brid es X
Road crossings that impact less than or equal to 12 linear

meters 40 linear ft. X
Road crossings that impact greater than 12 linear meters (40
linear ft.) but less than or equal to 46 linear meters (150 linear

ft. or 0.13 hectares 0.33 acres of ri arian area X
Road crossings that impact greater than 46 linear meters (150
linear ft.) or greater than 0.13 hectares (0.33 acres) of riparian X
buffer
Temporary roads used for bridge construction or replacement
provided that restoration activities such as soil stabilization and X
reve etation occur immediate) after construction
Chart Notes: Activities deemed "exempt' should be designed, constructed, and maintained to minimize soil disturbance and to provide the maximum water
quality protection practicable. "Allowable" activities may proceed within the riparian buffer provided that there are no practical alternatives to the requested
use. Written authorization from the DWQ or delegated local authority is required. Activities deemed "allowable with mitigation" may proceed within the
riparian buffer if there are no practical alternatives to the requested use and an appropriate mitigation strategy has been approved. Written authorization
from the DWQ or delegated local authority is required. "Prohibited" activities, none of which are listed above, may not proceed within the riparian buffer
unless a variance is granted from the DWQ or delegated local authority.
Anticipated buffer impacts for this project are provided below. Buffer impacts have been minimized
to the greatest extent practicable by bridging the entire buffer zone on both sides of the Tar River.
The buffer impacts for the Tar River represent the estimated footprint of the replacement bridge
piers within the buffer zone. Buffer impacts related to the unnamed tributary south of the river
were calculated to 10 feet (3 meters) past slope stakes, or to the proposed right-of-way.
The buffer impacts are broken out in this section for clarity, however, note that these impacts are
included within the community impacts presented in Tables 1.1 and 1.2. The entire buffer impacts
associated with the unnamed tributary occurs in the Coastal Plain Smalt Stream Swamp wetland
community. Buffer impacts related to the Tar River occur in wetlands and non-wetlands. In
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 20

Alternatives 2 and 3, approximately 1/~ of the Tar River buffer impacts occur in Cypress-Gum
Swamp wetlands, and ~/~ occur in the Man-Dominated community, which is non-wetland.
Table 1.3
Estimated Buffer Im acts Tar River
Alternative 2
(Preferred)
acres hectares Alternative 3
acres (hectaresl
Zone A 0.0004 0.0002 0.0004 0.0002
Zone B 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Tota! 0.0004 0.0002 0.0004 0.0002
Table 1.4
Estimated Buffer im acts Unnamed Tributa
Alternative 2
(Preferred)
acres hectares Alternative 3
acres (hectares)
Zone A 0.123 0.050 0.123 0.050
Zone B 0.092 0.037 0.092 0.037
Total 0.215 0.087 0.215 0.087
4. Avoidance and Minimization
Avoidance and minimization was performed on this project as a means to further reduce damage to
the environment and local communities. Direct impacts have been avoided to the maximum extent
possible during the preliminary design stage. For avoidance and minimization, the following
measures will be accomplished:
1. The existing bridges of 512 feet (156 meters) and 359 feet (109 meters) will be
replaced with a single structure on new alignment west of the existing bridges
approximately 1,940 feet (591 meters) in length.
2. The portion of SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) maintained by NCDOT will be removed and
restored to wetlands. All portions of the existing embankment for SR 1565 adjacent to
wetlands (north side of Tar River) and not utilized in the new facility will be removed
and the area restored to wetlands or buffer as appropriate. The buffer area on the south
side of the Tar River will be restored by plantings after removal of the existing river
bridge.
3. Work bridges will be utilized in the construction of the new structure across wetlands.
To the extent practicable, work bridges will be located between the new bridge and the
existing roadway embankment to minimize disturbance of the adjacent wetlands.
Construction in open water will be from work bridges or barges.
4. The project will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Riparian Buffer
Protection Rules for the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The new bridge will completely span
the riparian buffers [50 feet (15 meters)] on either side of the Tar River.
T.[.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 21

To avoid and/or minimize impacts to anadromous fish, the'°Stream Crossing Guidelines
for Anadromous Fish Passage" will be followed including an in-stream construction
moratorium of February 15 to September 30.
6. The 2003 USFWS Manatee Guidelines for construction activities in aquatic areas will be
utilized to the maximum extent practicable.
5. 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". 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 wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include:
avoiding impacts to wetlands, minimizing impacts, and rectifying impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each
of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation) must be considered
sequentially.
The USACE usually requires compensatory mitigation for activities authorized under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act if unavoidable impacts to waters of the United States total more than 0.10
acre (0.04 hectare).
The DWQ may require compensatory mitigation for activities if unavoidable impacts to waters of
the United States total more than 1/3 acre (0.13 hectares) of wetlands or buffers and/or 150 linear
feet (45.7 linear meters) of stream.
According to estimates, impacts to waters of the United States do not exceed 0.10 acre (0.04
hectare) for all Alternatives. Surface water impacts on an area basis will not exceed USACE or
DWQ thresholds for mitigation. Linear stream impacts to the Tar River are also beneath the
thresholds stated above. Linear impacts exceed 150 feet (45.7 meters) on the unnamed tributary
for Alternatives 2 (preferred) and 3.
All Alternatives involve closing SR 1566. It may be possible to obtain on-site mitigation for linear
impacts and buffer impacts by restoring the riparian area along the Seine Beach recreational
property.
F. Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals have been or are in the process of decline due either to
natural forces or many other factors such as habitat destruction and introduced species
competition. Federally protected species and Federal Species of Concern listed for Pitt County, and
any likely impacts to these species as a result of the proposed project construction are discussed in
the following sections. Previous investigations have been relied upon for some information and
conclusions.
1. 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
t
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 22

Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The USFWS reports four federally
protected species for Pitt County as of February 25, 2003 (search performed 7/8/04 at http:/fnc-
es.fws.gov/es/cntylist/pitt.html) (Table 2).
TABLE 2 NOTES:
E Endangered. A species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
T Threatened. A species likely to become Endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion
of its range.
PDL Proposed for Delisting.
Species: West Indian manatee
Family: Trichechidae
Date Listed: March 11, 1967, June 2, 1970
The manatee is a large gray or brown aquatic mammal averaging 10 feet (3 meters) in length and
1,000 pounds (453.6 kilograms) in weight. The body is flattened horizontally and rounded, and is
covered sparsely with hairs.
Manatees inhabit salt and fresh water areas throughout their range. They may be found in habitats
such as canals, rivers, estuarine areas, and saltwater bays. Manatees feed upon aquatic vegetation
and occasionally fish.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT -NOT LIKELY TO
ADVERSELY AFFECT
TABLE 2
FEDERALLY `PROTECTED SPECIES IN PI1T COUNTY
Scientific Name Status
Common Name
Trichechus manatus
(West Indian Manatee) E
Picoides bores/is
(Red-cockaded woodpecker} E
Ha/iaeetus /eucocepha/us

(Bald eagle) T (PDL)
E//iptio steinstansana

(Tar spinymussel) E
It is possible that manatees could occur within the project area. No occurrences
have been recorded in the area by the NCNHP. The USFWS has developed
recommendations for construction activities in aquatic areas where the manatee
is likely to occur. Recommendations include advising construction personnel of
requirements if a manatee is sighted within the project area, contacting
appropriate agencies if the animal is found to be present and posting in all
T.I,P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 23

vessels warnings and contacts. Although it cannot be concluded that the
manatee will not occur in the project area, if construction guidelines pertaining
to the above recommendations are followed, this project is not likely to
adversely affect the species.
Species: Red-cockaded woodpecker
Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
The red-cockaded woodpecker is a small bird, 7 to 8 inches (18 to 20 centimeters) in length, with
black and white horizontal stripes on its back, a black cap and large white cheek patch. The male
has a small red spot or "cockade" behind the eye.
The preferred nesting habitat of this woodpecker is open stands of pines with a minimum age of 60
to 120 years. Longleaf pines (Pines pa/ustris) are preferred for nesting, however other mature
pines such as loblolly (Pious taeda) may be used. Typical nesting areas, or territories, are pine
stands of approximately 200 acres (81 hectares), however, nesting has been reported in stands as
small as 60 acres (24 hectares). Preferred foraging habitat is pine and pine-hardwood stands of 80
to 125 acres (32 to 50 hectares) with a minimum age of 30 years and a minimum diameter of 10
inches (25 centimeters). The red-cockaded woodpecker utilizes these areas to forage for food
sources such as ants, beetles, wood-boring insects, and caterpillars, as well as seasonal wild fruit.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
There is one pine stand within the study area. The trees are not old enough to
provide adequate nesting habitat for the woodpecker, and the stand is much
smaller than the ranges noted above for nesting and foraging preferences.
NCNHP shows no recorded occurrence of this species within one mile of the
project area. This project will not affect red-cockaded woodpecker.
Species: Bald eagle
Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 3/11/67 (E), 7/12/95 (T)
The bald eagle is a large bird, 32 to 43 inches (80 to 109 centimeters) in length, with a wingspan
of more than 6 feet (2 meters). Adults are dark brown with a white head and tail, and immatures
are brown and irregularly marked with white until their fourth year.
Bald eagles typically nest in the top of the tallest living tree in an area with a clear view of open
water. Nest size may measure 6 feet (2 meters) across and up to 6 feet (2 meters) in depth. The
species may be seen around lakes and rivers throughout the inland portions of North Carolina, as
well as along the coast. A large portion of the eagle's diet often consists of fish, but it also feeds
on small mammals, reptiles, and other birds.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: MAY AFFECT -NOT LIKELY TO
ADVERSVELY AFFECT
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 24

Investigators feel that the Tar River and nearby ponds will provide adequate
foraging habitat for this species, and that there are mature trees present that
could provide nesting sites. In addition, the Grimesland Mitigation Site report
notes one sighting of an eagle foraging along the Tar River in the study area.
Investigators surveyed for eagle nests in areas of potential impact during field
investigations for the report, and did not note any occurrences. All portions of
the study area were walked and visually surveyed to look for nests. Although
foraging and nesting habitat is present in the project area for this species, the
project is not expected to eliminate or degrade habitat in the general area such
that the species would be negatively affected. It is recommended that the area
be surveyed again prior to construction, to make sure that no eagles have begun
to nest in an area of potential impact.
Species: Tar spinymussel
Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 7/29/85
The Tar spinymussel measures approximately 2.5 inches (6.4 centimeters) in length. The outer
shell surface of young specimens is orange-brown with greenish rays. Adults are darker colored
with inconspicuous rays. The inner shell color is yellow or pinkish atone end and bluish-white at
the other. Juveniles may have up to 12 spines, which they tend to lose as they mature.
This species lives in relatively silt-free uncompacted gravel or coarse sand in fast-flowing, well
oxygenated stream reaches. It feeds by siphoning and filtering small food particles that are
suspended in the water. The Tar spinymussel is found in association with other mussels but it is
never very numerous. The known population of this species is estimated to contain 100 to 500
individuals. The Tar spinymussel is often located in the central channel of the river.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Preferred habitat for this species does not exist within the study area, and there
are no recorded occurrences of this species within the study area or vicinity. A
certified biologist visited the project site on September 12, 2001, and found no
habitat present for this species. This stretch of the river was surveyed by
NCWRC in the late 1980s, and no freshwater mussels were found. Given the site
assessment and previous survey results it is apparent that the Tar spinymussel
does not occur in the project area. It can be concluded that project
construction will not impact this species.
2. Federal Species of Concern
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act and
are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or
listed as Threatened or Endangered. Species designated as FSC are defined as taxa which mayor
may not be listed in the future. These species were formerly Candidate 2 (C2) species or species
under consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to support listing.
r.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 25

Some of these species are listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern by the NCNHP list of
Rare Plant and Animal Species and are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species
Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. Table 3 provides the
Federal Species of Concern in Pitt County and their state classifications (search performed 6/9/03, list
updated May 2003, http://www.ncsparks.net/nhp/element.html}.
On occasion, NCNHP records differ from USFWS records. Sometimes a species may be listed by
one agency and not the other, or there may be discrepancies in whether the species record is
considered Historic or Obscure. The USFWS listing is deferred to in this report for species spellings
and listing as FSCs. Both agency records are noted in the table regarding Historic and Obscure
status.
TABLE 3
NORTH CAROLINA STATUS OF FEDERAL SPECIES
OF CONCERN IN PITT COUNTY
Scientific Name North Carolina Habitat
Common Name Status Present
Ammodramus hens/owii SR No
Henslow's s arrow
Heterodon simus*+ SC No
Southern ho nose snake
Lasmigona subviridis E Yes
Green Floater
Lythrurus matutinusf SR Yes
Pinewoods shiner
Fusconaia masoni+ E No
Atlantic i toe
Lampsi/is cariosa+ E Yes
Yellow lam mussel
Noturus furiosus SC (PT) Yes
("Neuse" madtom)
Procambarus media/is* N L Yes
(Tar River crayfish)
Tofie/dia g/abra NL No
(Carolina asphodel)
TABLE 3 NOTES:
* Historic record at USFWS. Last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
+ Obscure record at NCNHP. Date last observed in the county is uncertain.
+ Historic record at NCNHP. Last observed in the county more than 20 years ago.
SR Significantly Rare. A species in need of population monitoring and conservation action.
SC Special Concern. Requires monitoring but may be collected/taken and sold under certain regulations.
E Endangered. A species whose continued existence as a viable component of the state's flora or fauna is determined to be in
jeopardy.
NL Not Listed by the State.
PT Proposed Threatened.
3. Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Wetlands will be impacted by all of the proposed alternatives. Effort has been made to minimize
these impacts by bridging wetlands and riparian buffers where possible. On-site wetland
restoration is available for all alternatives through removal of the existing roadbed and
embankment.
T.I.P. No. 8-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 26

Although a bald eagle was noted foraging in the project area by previous investigators, no eagle
nests have been found within areas of potential impact. This project is not expected to adversely
affect any federally protected species.
VI. CUL°CURAL RESOURCES
A. Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires Federal agencies to
take into account the effect of their undertakings (federally funded, licensed, or permitted) on
properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, and to
afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on such
undertakings.
B. Historic Architecture
Afield survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) was conducted on July 2, 1999. All structures
within the APE were photographed, and later reviewed by the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (HPO).
In a concurrence form dated August 16, 2001 the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)
concurred in the eligibility of Bridge No. 129 for the National Register and that the replacement of
Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River will have an adverse effect on the National Register eligible
property since the existing bridge will be removed. Mitigation for the adverse effects to Bridge No.
129 is discussed in Section VII and XI, Programmatic 4(f) Evaluation. A copy of the concurrence
form is in Appendix A.
In accordance with Section 106 of the National Preservation Act, since the alternatives will have an
adverse effect on Bridge No. 129, the HPO, NCDOT, and FHWA entered into a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA), Appendix A.
C. Archaeology
The SHPO, in a letter dated July 3, 2003, the HPO "recommended that a comprehensive survey be
conducted by an experience archaeologist to identify and evaluate the significance of any
archaeological remains that may be damaged or destroyed by the proposed project." An
archaeological survey and evaluation for the proposed project was completed in March 2004 in
compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the guidelines issued by
the Advisory Council of Historic Preservation.
Previously recorded site 31PT6&6** was revisited and subjected to evaluative testing. It revealed a
possible intact Early to Middle Woodland component that may expand our knowledge and
understanding of the specific cultural phenomena in the coastal plain region of North Carolina and
was recommended as eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. The SHPO concurred that
site 31PT6&6** as eligible to the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion D. A
T.I.P. No. B-3664, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 27

Memorandum of Agreement and data recovery plan will be prepared and implemented, as
necessary for archaeology.
r/II. SECTION 4(F) RESOURCES
Bridge No. 129 was determined eligible for listing on the National Register under Criterion C for
engineering technology as one of only four Warren thru trusses functioning asswing-spans in Narth
Carolina. The bridge demonstrates the innovation associated with NCDOT's truss bridge reuse in
the early 1950s.
Bridge No. 129 is one of six swing-span trusses remaining in the NCDOT's bridge system. Bridge
No. 129 was built in 1931 by the Roanoke Iron and Bridge Works. It originally spanned the Neuse
River between New Bern and Bridgeton. In 1951 Bridge No. 129 was dismantled and stored for
use as the swing-span of the new bridge on SR 1565 over the Tar River near Grimesland. The new
bridge was completed in 1954. The swing-span is manually operated and opened upon twenty-
four hour notice.
Since this project necessitates the use of a historic bridge and meets the criteria set forthin the
Federal Register (July 5, 1983), a programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation satisfies the requirements
of Section 4(f).
The following alternatives, which avoid use of the historic bridge, have been fully evaluated: (1) do
nothing; (2) build a new structure at a different location without affecting the historic integrity of
the structure, as determined by procedures implementing the National Historic Preservation Act;
and (3) rehabilitate the historic bridge without affecting the historic integrity of the structure, as
determined by procedures implementing the National Historic Preservation Act. These alternatives
were not found to be feasible and prudent.
All possible planning to minimize harm to the historic bridge have been incorporated into this
project. Measures to minimize harm include:
1. Photodocumentation
2. Reuse in New Location
3. Advertisement
This project has been coordinated with the SHPO whose correspondence is included in Appendix A.
Section 106 has been resolved and documented in the form of a MOA between FHWA, NCDOT, and
HPO. The SHPO concurs with the proposed mitigation.
Approval of the Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation by the Federal Highway Division
Administrator is included in Section XI of this document.
T.i.P. Na. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 28

i/III. EN~fI(t®-NMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of inadequate bridges will
result in safer traffic operations.
The project is a Federal "Categorical Exclusion°' due to its limited scope and lack of significant
environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No significant
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on communities is anticipated. Right of way acquisition will be limited. Two
relocations of residents or businesses are expected with implementation of the proposed
alternative.
It is the policy of the NCDOTto ensure that comparable replacement housing will be available prior
to the construction of state and federally assisted projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina Board
of Transportation has the following three programs to minimize the inconvenience of relocation:
• Relocation Assistance,
^ Relocation Moving Expenses Payment, and
• Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement.
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff will be available to assist
displaces with information such as availability and prices of homes, apartments, or businesses for
sale or rent and financing or other housing programs. The Relocation Moving Payments Program,
in general, provides for payment of actual moving expenses encountered in relocations. Where
displacement will force an owner or tenant to purchase or rent property of higher cost or to lose a
favorable financing arrangement (In cases of ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing
Payments or Rent Supplement Program will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible
and qualify and up to $5,250 to tenants who are eligible and qualify.
The Relocation Assistance Program for the proposed action will be conducted in accordance with
the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 (Public Law
91-646), and the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5 through 133-17). The
program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in relocation to a replacement site
in which to live or do business. At least one relocation officer is assigned to each highway project
for this purpose.
The relocation ofFcer will determine the needs of the displaced families, individuals, businesses,
non-profit organizations, and farm operations for relocation assistance advisory services without
regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The NCDOT will schedule its work to allow
ample time, prior to displacement, for negotiations and possession of replacement housing that
meets decent, safe, and sanitary standards. The displacees are given at feast a 90-day written
notice after NCDOT purchases the property. Relocation of displaced persons will be offered in
areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and commercial facilities. Rent and
sale prices of replacement property will be within the financial means of the families and individuals
T.I,P. No. B-3G84, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 29

displaced, and will be reasonable accessible to their places of employment. The relocation officer
will also assist owners of displaced businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations in
searching for and moving to replacement properly.
All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced would receive and explanation
regarding all available options, such as (1) purchase of replacement housing, (2) rental of
replacement housing, either private or public, or (3) moving existing owner-occupant housing to
another site (if possible). The relocation officer will also supply information concerning other state
or federal programs offering assistance to displaced persons and will provide other advisory
services as needed in order to minimize hardships to displaced persons in adjusting to a new
location.
The Moving Expenses Payment Program is designed to compensate the displace for the costs of
moving personal property form homes, businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations
acquired for a highway project. Under the Replacement Program for Owners, NCDOT will
participate in reasonable incidental purchase payments for replacement dwellings, such as
attorney`s fees, surveys, appraisals, and other closing costs and, if applicable, make a payment for
any increased interest expenses for replacement dwellings. Reimbursement of owner-occupants
for replacement housing payments, increased interest payments, and incidental purchase expenses
may not exceed $22,500 (combined total), except under the Last Resort Housing provision.
A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive payment, not to exceed $5,250, to rent a replacement
dwelling or to make a down payment, including incidental expenses, on the purchase of a
replacement dwelling. The down payment is based upon what the state determines is required
when the rent supplement exceeds $5,250.
It is a policy of the state that no person will be displaced by NCDOT's state or federally-assisted
construction projects unless and until comparable replacement housing has been offered or
provided each displacee with in a reasonable period of time prior to displacement. No relocation
payment received will be considered as income for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of
1954 or for the purposes of determining eligibility or the extent of eligibility of any person for
assistance under the Social Security Act or any other federal law.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement housing is not available, or
when it is unavailable with in the displacee's financial means, and the replacement payment
exceeds the federal/state legal limitation. The purpose of the program is to allow broad latitudes in
methods of implementation by the state so that decent, safe, and sanitary replacement housing
can be provided. This program would be implemented, if necessary, as mandated by state law.
In compliance with Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low Income Populations) a review was conducted to determine whether
minority or low-income populations were receiving disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental impacts as a result of this project. The investigation determined the
project would not disproportionately impact any minority or low-income populations.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Rage 30

There are no publicly owned recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national,
state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires ail federal agencies or their representatives to consider
the potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land acquisition and construction
projects. Prime and important farmland soils are defined by the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS). Since the proposed bridge will be replaced at the existing location the Farmland
Protection Policy does not apply.
The project is located in Pitt County, which has been determined to be in compliance with the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93 are not applicable, because the
proposed project is [ocated in an attainment area. This project is not anticipated to create any
adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included the regional
emission analysis (if applicable) and a project level CO analysis is not required.
The traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project. The project's impact on
noise and air quality will not be substantial.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If vegetation is disposed of
by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This evaluation completes
the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air quality (1990
CAAA and NEPA) and no additional reports are required.
A field reconnaissance survey was conducted in the vicinity of the existing bridges for hazardous
waste sites. In addition to a field survey, a file search of appropriate environmental agencies was
conducted to identify any know problem sites along the proposed project alignment. No facilities
with the possibility of underground storage tanks, regulated or unregulated landfills or dumpsites
were identified in the vicinity of the project.
Pitt County is participating in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. This project site on
the Tar River is within a detailed study area with an established floodway. However, it is not
anticipated that a floodway modification will be required since the bridge will be an "in kind"
replacement. Since the proposed bridge will lengthen the waterway opening and the existing 100
year flood overto.ps the existing roadway, it is not anticipated that this project will have any
substantial impact on the existing floodplain or floodway. Attached is a copy of the Flood Insurance
Rate Map, Figure 7, on which are shown the approximate limits of the 100-year flood plain in the
vicinity of the project.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental
effects will result from implementation of the project.
T.I.P. No. 8-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,.
Page 31

IX. PUBLIC IN\fOL~fEMENT
Efforts were undertaken early in the planning proeess to contact local officials and residents to
involve them in the project development. Two Local Officials Meetings and two Citizens
Informational Workshops were held at the G. R. Whitfield Elementary School on May 14, 2002 and
April 8, 2003 where preliminary alternatives were reviewed and discussed with local officials and
concerned citizens.
At the first Citizen's Informational Workshop approximately 35 citizens attended the workshop and
six comment sheets were received at the workshop.
At the second Citizens Informational Workshop approximately 34 citizens attended the workshop.
An aerial showing the functional design of the preferred Alternative 2 was displayed, along with the
aerial of the three alternatives shown at the May 14, 2002 workshop. One comment sheet was
received at the workshop supporting the preferred alternative. Most people at the workshop
supported the preferred alternative.
X. AGENCY COORDINATION
Coordination with federal, state, and environmental resource agencies started early in the project
development to insure quality decision-making. These agencies reviewed, evaluated, and
concurred with the FHWA and NCDOT on all major project decisions (Appendix C). The following
four "concurrence" points have been achieved.
Concurrence Point 1: The purpose of and need for the project is approved by the environmental
resource agencies before the project can proceed.
Concurrence Point 2: The identification of alternatives for detailed study is based on potential
effects on cultural resources, the human environment and the natural environment.
Concurrence Point 3: Selection of the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative
(LEDPA) or preferred alternative.
Concurrence Point 4A: The avoidance and minimization techniques that are incorporated in the
design of the LEPDA.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 32

~CIe
NORTH CAROLINA DNISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS
THAT NECESSITATE THE USE OF HISTORIC BRIDGES
F. A. Project BRSTP-1564(4)
State Project ~. 11 m
T. I. P. No . R-6£34
P~t)G{~AMMATIC SECTION 4(F) EVALUATI®N
Description:
Replacement of Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River and Bridge No. 127 over
the Tar River Overflow on SR 1565 in Pitt County. Bridae No. 129 is eli ible for
listing in the National Register of Historic Places.
Yes No
1. Is the bridge to be replaced or rehabilitated with Federal Funds? X
2. Does the project require the use of a historic bridge structure
which is on or eligible for listing on the National Register of X
Historic Places?
3. Is the bridge a National Historic Landmark ? ~ X
4. Has agreement been reached among the FHWA, the State
Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), and the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) through procedures
pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation -~L
Act (NHPA)?
ALTERNATNES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE AND
PRUDENT
The following alternatives were evaluated and found not to be feasible and prudent:
1. Do nothing
Yes No
Does the "do nothing" alternative:
a. correct the problem situation that caused the bridge to ~ X
be considered deficient?
b. pose serious and unacceptable safety hazards? X
T.I.P. No. B-3G94, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 33

t
Yes No
2. Build a new structure at a different location without affecting the X
historic integrity of the structure.
a. The following reasons were reviewed:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) The present bridge has already been located at the only
feasible and prudent site
and/or (ii} Adverse social, environmental, or economic impacts were noted
and/or (iii) Cost and engineering difficulties reach extraordinary magnitude
and/or (iv) The existing bridge cannot be preserved due to the extent of
rehabilitation, because no responsible party will maintain
and preserve the historic bridge, or the permitting authority
requires removal or demolition.
3. Rehabilitate the historic bridge without affecting the historic X
integrity of the structure.
a. The following reasons were reviewed:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) The bridge is so structurally deficient that it cannot be
rehabilitated to meet the acceptable load requirements
and meet National Register criteria
and/o (ii) The bridge is seriously deficient geometrically and
cannot be widened to meet the required capacity and meet National
Register criteria
MINIMIZATION OF HARM
Yes No
1. The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm. X
2. Measures to minimize harm include the following:
(circle, as appropriate)
a. For bridges that are to be rehabilitated, the historic
integrity of the bridge is preserved to the greatest extent
possible, consistent with unavoidable transportation
needs, safety, and load requirements.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 34

b. For bridges that are to be rehabilitated to the point
that the historic integrity is affected ar that are to
be removed or demolished, the FHWA ensures that,
in accordance with the Historic American Engineering
Record (HAER) standards, or other suitable means
developed through consultation, fully adequate records
are made of the bridge.
For bridges that are to be replaced, the existing bridge
is made available for an alternative use, provided a
responsible party agrees to maintain and preserve the
bridge.
For bridges that are adversely affected, agreement
among the SHPO, ACHP, and FHWA is reached
through the Section 106 process of the NHPA on
measures to minimize harm and those measures
are incorporated into the project.
2. Specific measures to minimize harm are discussed below:
1. Prior to removal, NCDOT will record the bridge in accordance with the
Memorandum of Agreement Historic Structures and Landscape
Recordation Plan (Appendix A).
2. The existing swing bridge will be disassembled and moved to a storage
area as designated by NCDOT. The bridge will be stored for up to 2 year
and made available for an alternative use.
3. The bridge will be advertise on the World Wide Web for a least two years
or until a new owner is identified and accepts the bridge in accordance
with NCDOT's Historic Bridge Relocation and Reuse Program.
Note: Any response in a box requires additional information prior to approval. Consult
Nationwide 4(f) evaluation.
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Fage 35

COORDINATION
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. State Historic Preservation Officer -x-
b. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation -X-
c. Local/State/Federal Agencies X
d. US Coast Guard ~_
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation approved on )uly 5,
1983.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable to
this project.
There are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of the historic bridge. The project
includes all possible planning to minimize harm, and there are assurances that the measures to
minimize harm will be incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed.
Approved:
0 I ?,~ D ~ fc~ (~-~
Da a Environm tal Management Director,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT
Date Division Administrator
FHWA
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,
Page 36

APPENDIX A
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
T.I.P. No. B~3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pita Gounty,

~~~ of 7R''HS,,o U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
e~ 9a Federal Highway Administration ~F~
W aZ 310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410 ~
Raleigh, NC 27601 ~
i ° ~G%-
~° ~~~ Dc br1
e em e 9, 2001
STS TE9 °f IN REPLY REFER TO:
HPP-NC
Mr. Don Klima, Director
Eastern Office of Project Review
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
The Old Post Office Building
1100 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. No. 809
Washington, D.C. 20004
Subject: Memorandum of Agreement for the replacement of Bridge Number 129 on
SR 1565 over the Tar River, Pitt County, North Carolina, B-33684,
ER 02-8106
Dear Mr. Klima:
As required by 36 CFR 800.6(b)(iv), we are filing the Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) that was developed in consultation with the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Officer for the subject project. It is our understanding that the filing of the
enclosed MOA with the Council completes our compliance responsibilities under
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Questions concerning this
submittal may be directed to Michael Dawson of this office at [phone], extension
116.
Sincerely,
~~~
For Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator
Enclosure
cc:
William Gilmore, NCDOT, PDEA
Renee Gledhill-Earley, NC SHPO

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
AMONG
THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
FOR
THE REPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE NO. 129 ON SR 1565
OVER THE TAR RIVER,
PITT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has determined that the
replacement of Bridge No. 129 on SR 1565 over the Tar River in Pitt County, North
Carolina (the undertaking) will have an effect upon the bridge, a property determined
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, and has consulted with the
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to 36 CFR Part 800,
regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16
U.S.C. 470f); and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) participated in
the consultation and has been invited to concur in this Memorandum of Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE, the FHWA, NCDOT, and the North Carolina SHPO agree that
the undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in
order to take in to account the effect of the undertaking on the historic property.
STIPULATIONS
FHWA will ensure that the following measures are carried out:
I. Photodocumentation: Prior to the removal of Pitt County Bridge No. 129,
NCDOT shall record the bridge in accordance with the attached Historic
Structures and Landscape Recordation Plan (Appendix A).
II. Reuse in New Location: NCDOT will offer the bridge for reuse at a new
location in accordance with NCDOT's Historic Bridge Relocation & Reuse
Program. If no responsible party accepts the bridge prior to removal, Bridge No.
129 will be disassembled and stored at a NCDOT bridge maintenance yard until a
new owner accepts the bridge. If no owner is found for the bridge within two
years then NCDOT may dispose of the bridge.
III. Advertisement: Within ninety (90) days of the Council's filing this MOA,
NCDOT shall advertise the bridge on the World Wide Web through its home
page. The advertisement will remain on NCDOT's home page for a period of at
least two (2) years or until a new owner is identified and accepts the bridge in
accordance with NCDOT's Historic Bridge Relocation & Reuse Program.

IV. Dispute Resolution: Should the North Carolina SHPO object within thirty (30)
days to any plans or documentation provided for review pursuant to this
agreement, FHWA shall consult with the North Carolina SHPO to resolve the
objection. If FHWA or the North Carolina SHPO determines that the objection
cannot be resolved, FHWA shall forward all documentation relevant to the .
dispute to the Council. Within thirty (30) days after receipt of all pertinent
documentation, the Council will either:
A. Provide FHWA with recommendations which FHWA will take into
account in reaching a final decision regarding the dispute, or
B. Notify FHWA that it will comment pursuant to 36 CFR Section
800.7(c)) and proceed to comment. Any Council comment provided in
response to such a request will be taken into account by FHWA in
accordance with 36 -CFR Section 800.7(c)(4) with reference to the subject
of the dispute.
Any recommendation or comment provided by the Council will be understood to
pertain only to the subject of the dispute; FHWA's responsibility to carry out all
the actions under this agreement that are not the subject of the dispute will remain
unchanged.

w

Execution of this MOA by FHWA, NCDOT, and the North Carolina SHPO, its
subsequent filing with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and
implementation of its terms evidence that FHWA has afforded the Council an opportunity
to comment on the replacement of Bridge No. 129 on SR 1565 over the Tar River and its
effects on the bridge, and that FHWA has taken into account the effects of the
undertaking on the historic property.
AGREE:
CONCUR:
9L~
RTH C~
FILED BY:

~ ~ >> lay la ~
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER DA
ARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~-~~ ATE
ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION DATE

w
APPENDIX A
Historic Structures and Landscape Recordation Plan
For the Replacement of Bridge No. 129 on SR 1565
Over the Tar River
Pitt County, North Carolina
TIP No. B-3684, State Project No. 8.2221101
Federal Aid No. BRSTP-1565(4)
Photographic Requirements
Selected photographic views of Bridge No. 129, as a whole, and views of the
structure and its setting, including:
• Overall views of the structure (elevations and oblique views)
• Overall views of the project area, showing the relationship of the structure to
its setting
Photographic Format
• Color slides (all views)
• 35 mm or larger black and white negatives (all views)
• Two (2) Black and white contact sheets (all views)
• All processing to be done to archival standards
• All photographs and negatives to be labeled according to Division of Archives
and History standards
Copies and Curation
One (1) set of all photographic documentation will be deposited with the North
Carolina Division of Archives and History/State Historic Preservation Office to
be made a permanent part of the statewide survey and iconographic collection.
One (1) copy of the black and white contact sheet shall be placed in the project
file located in the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch of
NCDOT.

Federal Aid # BRSTP-1565(4) TIP # B-3684 County:
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 129 on SR 1565 over Tar River
On 8/16/01, representatives of the
[~ North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
[!~ ederal Highway Administration (FHWA)
orth Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
Other
Reviewed the subject project and agreed
Pitt
There are no effects on the National Register-listed property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
There are no effects on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
There is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s) are listed on
the reverse.
[~~There is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed on the
reverse.
Signed:
kGCDOT
I~ ~I
Date
~ ~.- ,-... 8/i6~~
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
/~ ~v a;:~
Representative, HPO ~)
State Historic Preservation Officer
$ ~ ~- o
Date

Federal Aid # BRSTP-1565(4) TIP # B-3684 County: Pitt
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
National Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status
(NR or DE) and describe the effect.
CJF) !~ ~d~, -~ I z~ - ,~I ~era~- e-~ke~F-
Reason(s) why the effect is not adverse (if applicable).
Initialed: NCDOT ~ FHWA '1~ ~ HPO

~ • SiN= a ~ e
~ ~ ~G~~~
~ ~~~ ~
/I
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources ~~
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
ichael F. Easley, Governor o, Division of Archives and History
sbeth C. Evans, Secretary c~ J,e~~°~ 6ewt.pirector
ro. _.. ~~ `;..
. ~ ~„
November 19, 2001 t ";;`~ ~
W ,~~
Nicholas L. Graf, P.E. o
~ C
USDOT FHwA
310 New Bem Avenue Suite 410 ~:
Raleigh, NC 27601 ~~
`,~::. .
i~ ~.
Re: MOA for the replacement of Bridge #129 on SR 1565 over the Tar River',: .,
Pitt County, B-33684, ER 02-8106
Dear Mr. Graf
akl~~ r:-
t~~r~ c ~- s. :~
\1 _ MK)
,`; fJ~
1 ~.... ...~ \.9
,.
e ~,
%,~V.
Thank you for your letter of November 8, 2001, transmitting the Memorandum of Agreement for the
above referenced undertaking. I have signed the agreement and return it to you for the remainder of the
signatures.
Please contact Reriee Gledhill-Earley at 733-4763, if you have any questions concerning this matter. Thank
you.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey J. Crow
State Historic Preservation Officer_ /
cc: William Gilmore NCD01l/
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Fsx
dministration 507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4617 [phone] •733-8653
estoration S I S N. Blount St. Raleigh , NC 4613 tilail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4613 (9l9) 733-6547 •715-4801
~rvey 8c Planning 51 S N. 131uunt St, Raleigh, NC 4618 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-1618 [phone] •715-4801
~ Y i
J

•

y~s~
~~ S
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
Mr. Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Dear Mr. Graf:
September 10, 2001
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
RE: Notification of Adverse Effect Finding, Replace Bridge No. 129 on SR 1565 over the Tar
River, Pitt County, North Carolina, TIP No. B~8ft4; State Project No. 8.2221101, Federal
Aid No. BRSTP-1565(4) ~-~(p$~ .
The above-referenced project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's regulations for compliance codified as 36 CFR Part 800. Enclosed is the
notification of the adverse effect finding required by the Council in Part 800.6(a)(1) of the 2000
revisions to 36 CFR Part 800. According to the new regulations, the Agency Official must notify
the Council when adverse effects are found and should invite the Council to participate in the
consultation when the circumstances specified in part 800.6(a)(1)(I)(A)-(C) exist.
After consultation with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office, it was determined
that the subject project would have an adverse effect on Pitt County Bridge No. 129, a property
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Subsequently, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation has prepared the accompanying supplementary documentation
specified by the Council in Part 800.11(e). This documentation does not proffer a formal
invitation to the Council for their participation in the consultation because none of the
circumstances specified. in Part 800.6(a)(1)(I)(A)-(C) exist for this project.
Please submit this documentation to the Advisory Council and request their review pursuant to 36
CFR Part 800.6(a)(1). If you have any questions concerning the accompanying information,
please contact Mary Pope Furr, Historic Architecture Section, at [phone], extension 300.
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, P.E.,
Branch Manager
WDG/mpf
Attachments
cc: Lubin Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Branch Manager
Carl B. Goode, P.E., Assistant Branch Manager
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET

APPENDIX B
FIGURES
T.I.P. No. B-3684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,

I G~ •~ `.

- v
I ~ 15e4 \ -~ !3?'~ ~~

-- - _- - -
- _ J ~_J
~N7p~n _ \ li ~ Wo~~
~ \

~_~ ~ ~ _ _ _ .\ - ~4SFpNGT
_ !'1

~ ~
~
r \
~
~
1566 BRIDGE
,555 N0
127 ~
_
G ' ~ 2400 , ~ ~--~
~<
~-=~ ~~
. _
, _
, -
'BRIDGE _
-" _ ~~~ ~~
~ ~;
r
- _

33 0.129 _
.
~p
I J'
~ o u T Y
N ,._ ~ ~ J
~
_ T T fs
_ ~w~sl,wo p 1 i
~
__
-~ ~
~'^~'~ I s7o %
1569 '` O

~ ~ o-
`.
H 38 ,
~ ~ ---_ -
-- -. .. ~_.l_j
- --
-
,777
778 Y 1565 1779 1~6 .
,m
r~i -
I.

768 1821 --- ,~ I_., 1780 / .'~_~ _..
___ I

mt
crdcod__
~~, 11 ~~~i
~ 33
G~Q
I

'~,'' ~~ /
CAmoads 7
` 1 ~5.
. ~_~_~.._
i
'I i+__-
24021756 ~;- 1780 ,
,1172 .
'f1\~
~ ~ ne
1 no c'osnaoib i
\
0 1~
~?
~

„ ~
~
1772 -~~

, ~
7 777 1`...~ '
1565 , ~ Fjy_ `I

.. 1
A'I ~'
g~~bma` ?~j
,
r`
,
f ,f V`~ q
1
-
t ; ; ~ ~. _ ~ - <1
_~ ~ II~~,
~ 4
-~
c ~
~
-
' r
~
p¢

-r
F_~ r <-~ T
F r/ f] Y.,,ar r
' i
'
,
...
_n~.~, '
i
4 j
1
tr ~ ,- _
"
;
~,i ~ ~
1 0 1 2 3 4
MILES
SCALE
„"' ~ - - _-- XORTg CAROLINA

~
~ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
' PROJECT DEVELOPMI3NT b
~~~~~ ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCR
PITT COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. l29 OVER T7~ TAR RIVER
AND NO. l27 ON SR IS6S
OVER TTTE TAR RIVER OVERFLOW
TTI' NO. B-3684
FIGURE l

•

-~rJrt1~ 1~~3~ USAC:E l.~IILP~1iFJGTOFI
ti
CORP5 OF EN6INEEF2S
1
r Arn N
' NAZI FAX Ce.
~~~
~~•~
tiASM co.~
~.-.
UPSTREAM LIM17
C+F FE6ERAL PROJECT
li YL
_`
EC.L. q~+....
TA!
EDGECOwBE 00.
.~'
BETHEL ~~~
wrLSOe co. "`
_..
~•. ~,A A
\\``•. T
~.7p Yi,
.'' ~ ~
'`\'/ 'y a en
e
{ Y a ~
% r
`` FARYYILLE GREENVILLE
N.i R~
''.
USt~A
~~
,~ ~
:J
ORSFNE CO r
LENOIR C0
PITT CO.
Y
i
A
~ ~ Ew1ND Nwk DII.-
„1 NDe. e~ EE'
M[RT. Cl. S. A' M.r
DRAW cLDEED
F'. 1~3; ~~
11 ~ aF
idge No. 129 ~ --
~-
A
r~ y BEAUFOAT LO,
{L- wasxlNeroN ,~..~i
k~~
4o rl, ~
~r~.o
:~ ~
~a
~x
twlM Mwi. DR.
RDR CL.DD' lOYi. ~3
YERT GL. D' ww. ~ _`~•
ORAw CLDECD -•LV
A
:a1R0 l.w. 1O.
~ NDII. CL. !!. A'
YERT. Cl. T. 6'M,r 21
ORAw CLOSED
1
L__~ ~.
r-'
--_--- Y.Lrr.
,r VARYiYi ~ ~~
3 I VIRYIY6-
r.
TYPIC4L SECTION
IKilsege iD measureA eLove IhE Mor1A o! Pomllee River
PAMLIGO 81 tAR RIVERS,
NORTH CARQLINA
SCALE Of MILP9
e s a IS 2A
CORPS OF ENGINEERS MNl-MING7ON. N.C.
MAP REVISED JUNE 1986
CRAVEN CO. ~` -
\` `` \
.\
__ ``
FIGURE 3

_ _ v
} >: - _
- ~ e
~~:
yF `
~ ,$ x Yft` _
' ^
.s.
~ ..
r r
.. ~ ~ ~:
. _ s. ~,,,,~,~'
H ~~ ..
F,~~
:~ K~
r h
:x
i ~ ~ w ~ _~
Xs °
'-;~-
. .,,~;. ... »...... ~ ,. ,.. r a
« •T i r ..y
~.
` «N ~ : a
Y _ ~~ ~^ a
., w V
-.,,
... .,; , .
r. ~f 9X it
(~dn rice ,t,
~, 129 ~~ 5fi
~ r i
~f r~~
-,~~~~Er~~ .,,
:; ` "`~ ~
_.
_ ;~
_~~ .:-'`

r

~.,

~~
:~~
_~ ,

a
n~,
,,
~ ~~
*~,

,.
~::
-. ,.,,
;~
~ ~' ~`~,
.a:.

~_ ~~~
w = w~.
r _

~ . ,
~:~~
~~
~,
~
_~ ., ~, .

:~.'
a

r

10
otucmrAt
GROUND
TRAFFIC DATA
ADT 2004 4,600
ADT 2030 7,300
DUAL 2%
TTST 1%
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION:
RURAL MAJOR COLLECTOR
6 ft. 12 to 16 ft. 8 ft. IZ ft. ~ 12 ft. g ft,
i
i
i
2 Jt. PS GRADE ! 2 Jr. PS
a ~ POINT
0`8 0.02 002 0.08
4.I 6:1
i
TYPICAL ROADWAY APPROACH SECTION
(PROPOSED)
h
°a~

6:d
~l - -
r:tnrARLe
score
30 ft. °~~~
GRO[/ND
I
TYPICAL SECTION ON STRUCTURE
(PROPOSED)

a

i

.. R ate;. dP w ~ 't ~ ~.. ~~. ,: .. ,. ~ -
„„~ a _ _.
- z,-.. - - ..- ,.. ~; m .~.
~ ~ a .. _ m .,~. _. _ _ _.
L
__ ...._
,m,-C` _':~"gyp '~~'~i~ _ € _.. _~1 v~ ;~~ ~ ~`" ,.<~~~~" _ w w ~ `') 6
~~=
>. -° ~ .
r i

t ~!~ ~'a.a~'if ~C. amg ~.9 , e ~` b ~L. ba ~`v+`E l~d~ ~~~ z~,l~ §J C,°~~~m°~~~~
~ 9 6.d. Rw..v~L.ii C..~ 4r ~C.`~Z.,.o'1~4~ ~t 6`yb ~1.~4.a ~~.. Ld4 L{d~'F
~~ $~i~~. ~~i~~~~ ig~r~~...~
..~. ~~~=~
Y ~: Ef~
~ ~~~t.~m_~:~.a~ ~~ r _ Y~~~~r~~~~
~ ~~E~ ,~~
g
S°~A~!e ,~C~~-~~~~ 4..sE~,W. {-
;
d
r~
„f
~w.: _
,
~. ~., ~3+.af~i"1'~,.~~ l?fSaL 3 ~t~d `~~ €~P'm°
e ~~~ F". , _.,.. _ ': ~~ .z.~t` E`"..d ~(~ra°u~€3':.s,.~. ~.. `y~
GG
~~
~~
p
a ~0.[~~~t~ ~'~ ~. ~ ~~~` ~7~L ~°4~tl~~, TM?'~aC` ~r L',.:L ;t'~ u ~~ "JI LJ$~ ~ . , ~ ~~. ...~;~~L~Ea.!! ~,
~"~~ ~;~^^~~is~:-€eppgg ~~~~+~€~ ~ ::~~~ ~i °~ fV~u..pp/~T~~} e~~~~ }'`"~^~ °~~rp}~iy~pd(~~^~° ~~^~~° t~~t~uq~~yr~g"°i~~p~q~ ip~~~L:,~"~~r1-~~~
i~~~.'"e .L L" ~ ~,~ a`A'~~`.~ .~ «' ~-3 ;: ~`~r:.1 i.'~~~9 Eli ~~t~~f L ,~~ LLB iL.P SSE ~L:'~ #YSJ x«34 L: a~l :'a~.d ~5 aS?~'. i~vt `R
~~'s"i~~S~~?°it~ ~!°l{.:i~ t.~ °"~gE~as'~. ~~ d~'€L ~~,%~Cl` ~-h~a ~E~:i"'avi' ~:;;aSt1w ,~«: !» ~~F~~~ ~~iL.~s
,."°~il'aw ~'~~I"6?"t yr ~,:"~ ~~ L4 d " ' r^°° t ~a ~- a Q,F ~- ~i i~u
~~~`~~~~~~~~~a ~~° ~~pr~xi~r~~~ ~ r~i~e ;~o~ ~:il~~t~~~ ~~~~~~r f ~~ i ri~~ i~ ~~°~~~~'si=~,
` ~r ~r ~~caecarr~ tai ate rh ~ ~ ~€~ car
a~ nod f r the r€~ cased r~,~~ u _
® ~~~i awsaare~ ~~ i~~i~n
A e ®~~r~e~ Itcsr~! .~~car~~~
3 3

e~ ` 1
C F. r
® '~E 4e46mfi@92""ia}~ ~i $3:mi~~NS§~0.': a. ~-t ~~ s{''
J.
A .~ .~ i
it x .. ~~
<- - ~
tee. `~% ~ .. ~.
6. / r
_ -. ry

_ i Section 404/NEPA Merger Team Meeting Agreement
Concurrence Point No. 2 -Preliminary Build Alternatives
Proiect No /TIP No /Name /Description:
Federal Aid Project Number: BRSTP-1565(4)
State Project Number: 8.2221101
TIP Number: B-3684
Name: Grimesland Bridge
TIP Description: Replace Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River and Bridge No. 127
over the Tar River Overflow on SR 1565 in Pitt County
Preliminary Build Alternatives:
fl7LCf 7TO~Lf7~e'~i""~e~~'~--~~ L.i.a?., ~L...if.
. avig
Alternative 2 replaces both bridges on new alignment west of the existing bridges with a
single structure approximately 1940 feet in length. A 40-foot navigational clearance will be
provided over the main channel of the Tar River. During construction, traffic will be maintained
on the existing structures. SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) will be removed and restored to
wetlands. After traffic is routed onto the new structure, the existing bridges and approach
roadway will be removed and restored to wetlands. One business will be relocated.
Alternative 3 replaces both bridges on new alignment east of the existing bridges with a
single structure approximately 1900 feet in length. A 40-foot navigational clearance will be
provided over the main channel of the Tar River. During construction, traffic will be maintained
on the existing structures. After traffic is routed onto the new structure, the existing bridges
and approach roadway will be removed and restored to wetlands. One (1) resident and one (1)
business will be relocated.
Alternative 4 replaces both bridges on new location with a single structure approximately
2320 feet in length. A 40-foot navigational clearance will be provided over the main channel of
the Tar River. The new location will begin approximately 3000 feet south of Bridge No. 129 and
routed along SR 1589 (Poker House Road), and tie into SR 1565 approximately 475 feet north
of Bridge No. 127. During construction, traffic will be maintained on the existing structures.
After traffic is routed onto the new structure and roadway, the existing bridges and approach
roadway will be removed and restored to wetlands. SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) will be
removed and restored to wetlands. Two (2) residents and one (1) business will be relocated.
~1o~K ~~-~lc~ 5 ~~~i ~I ~~ r~Ectu~c~ -~~-~~~I ~~~6'r`~c~-~~'s
B-3684, Concurrence Point 2-Preliminary Build Alternatives

The NEPA Merger Team concurred on this date of March 27, 2002, with the
preliminary build alternatives to be studied in detail as described above.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Federal Highway Administration
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Services ~~
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
N. C. DENR - DWQ
National Marine Fisheries Service
N. C. DENR - DMF
/~/
,~
i
c%
N. C. Department of Transportation
~tiiS-or~ 2
. ~ -
s~~ -
.\

&3684, Concurrence Point 2-Preliminary Build Alternatives

Section 4O4/NEPA Merger Project Team Meeting Agreement
Concurrence Point No. 3 -Alternative Selection
Proiect No./TIP No./ Name/Description:
Federal Aid Project Number: BRSTP-1565(4)
State Project Number: 8.2221101
TIP Number: B-3684
TIP Description: Replace Bridge No. 129 on SR 1565 Over the Tar River and Bridge No.
127 on SR 1565 Over the Tar River Overflow
County: Pitt
Alternative recommended:
Alternative 2 replaces both bridges on a new alignment west of the existing bridge with a single structure
approximately 1, 940 feet (591 meters) in length. The proposed structure will provide a 30 foot (9.0
meters) clear roadway width allowing for 2-12 foot (3.6 meters) with a three foot (0.9 meter) horizontal
clearance on each side. The approach roadway will consist of a 24-foot (7.2 meters) travel way with
eight-foot shoulders including two-foot paved. Navigational clearances over the Tar River will be 40-foot
(12 meters] vertically and 60 foot (18 meters) horizontally. Design speed for Alternative 2 will be 60 mph
(100 km/h). During construction, traffic will be maintained on the existing roadway and structures. After
traffic is placed on the new facility, the existing bridges and approaches will be removed and restored to
wetlands. SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) will be removed and restored to wetlands. Alternative 2 is
shown in Figure 2 of the Merger Team meeting handout dated December 20, 2002 and is incorporated
into this Concurrence Form by reference.
The Project Team has concurred on this date of January 22, 2003 with the selection of Alternative
2, as noted above, as the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) for
TIP No. B-3684.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Services
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
N. C. Department of Cultural Resource
N. C. DENR - DWQ
Federal Highway Administration
National Marine Fisheries Ser~~ce
N. C. DENR - DMF
N. C. Department of Transportation,
Division 2
N. C. Department of Transportation
i
~ ~ /-~
~r

i
Section 404/NEPA Merger Project Team Meeting Agreement
Concurrence Point No. 4A -Avoidance and Minimization
Proiect No./TIP No./ Name/Description:
Federal Aid Project Number: BRSTP-1565(4)
State Project Number: 8.2221101
TIP Number: B-3684
TIP Description: Replace Bridge No. 129 on SR 1 X65 Over the Tar River and
Bridge No. 127 on SR 1565 Over the Tar River Overflow in Pitt
County
Recommended Alternate: Alternative 2 replaces both bridges on a new alignment west of the
existing bridge with a single structure approximately 1, 940 feet (~91 meters) in length. The
proposed structure will provide a 30 foot (9.0 meters) clear roadway width allowing for 2-12 foot
(3.6 meters) with a three foot (0.9 meter) horizontal clearance on each side. The approach
roadway will consist of a 24-foot (7.2 meters) travel vvay with eight-foot shoulders including
two-foot paved. Navigational clearances over the Tar River will be 40-foot (12 meters) vertically
and 60 foot (18 meters) horizontally. Design speed for Alternative 2 will be 60 mph (100 km/h).
During construction, traffic will be maintained on the existing roadway and structures. After
traffic is placed on the new' facility, the existing bridges and approaches will be removed and
restored to wetlands. SR 1 X66 (Seine Beach Road) will be removed and restored to wetlands.
Avoidance and Minimization:
l . The existing bridges of Sl2 feet (156 meters) and 3~9 feet (109 meters) will be replaced with a
single structure on new alignment west of the existing bridges approximately 1,940 feet (591.3
meters) in length.
2. The portion of SR 1566 (Seine Beach Road) maintained by NCDOT will be removed and
restored to wetlands. Al I portions of the existing embankment for SR 1565 adjacent to wetlands
-(north side of Tar River) and not utilized in the new facility will be removed and the area restored
to wetlands or buffer as appropriate. The buffer area on the south side of the Tar River will be
restored by plantings after removal of the existing river bridge.
3. Work bridges will be utilized in the construction of the new structure across wetlands. To the
extent practicable, work bridges will be located between the new bridge and the existing roadway
embankment to minimize disturbance of the adjacent wetlands. Construction in open water will
be from work bridges or barges.
4. The project will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Riparian Buffer Protection
Rules for the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. The new bridge will completely span the riparian buffers
[50 feet (15 meters)] on either side of the Tar River.
To avoid and/or minimize impacts to anadromous fish, the "Stream Crossing Guidelines for
Anadromous Fish Passage" will be followed including an in-stream construction moratorium of
February l5 to September 30.
The 1996 USFWS Manatee Guidelines for construction activities in aquatic areas will be utilized
to the maximum extent practicable.

y
a
The Project Team has concurred on this date of January 22, 2003 with the "avoidance and
minimization of the alternative recommended in the NEPA document" as stated above.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Services
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
N. C. DENR-DWQ
Federal Highway Administration
National Marine Fisheries Service
N. C. DENR - DMF
N. C. Department of Transportation
N. C. Department of Transportation (Div. 2)

_.
~/~.
~- ~~~

APPENDIX D
CORRESPONDENCE
T.I.P. No. 63684, Bridge Nos. 127 & 129, Pitt County,

_ >
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Wilmington District
Action ID: ~~/L`~~ ~ 1 _~~ County: t i ~ ~-'~'
Notification of Jurisdictional Determination
Property owner/Authorized Agent ~~..,,
Address
Telephone Nurt`iber ~ ~ ~_~.,`~ ~/' ~ % `~~~ ~
Size and
~? ~--
Indicate
~hic`ti of the following apply:
There are wetlands on the
delineated and eyed.
Corps wil ake a fin 'uris
• Became of the siz~of your property and,~fir present workload, our identification and define 'on
ofj~our wetly~rids cannot be accompt'ished in a timely manner~I~ou may wish toe ploy a
onsultant, o obtain a more timel3~'delineation of the wetlands.~nce your consultan as flagged
a wetland line on the prope ,Corps staff will review i .;'and if it is accura , we strongly
reco end that you have e line surveyed for final ap oval by the Corps. T e Corps will not
maCce a final 'urisdictional determination on our roe vv~thout an a roved surve .
J Y P P rtY PP Y
(~ The wetlands on yoiu lot have been delineated, and the limits of Corps jurisdiction have been
~J~ explained to you. Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceedyeazs from the date of this
notification. ~Z~'
• There are no we ands present on the above described property which are subject to the permit
requirements o ection 404 of the Cle ater Act (33 USC 1344). mess there is a ch ge in
the law or o published regulations, t s determination may be re 'ed upon for a peri not to
exceed thr years from the date oft 's notification.
• The pr ect is located in one of e 20 Coastal Counties. u should contact t neazest State
Offi of Coastal Manageme to determine their require ents.
Placement of dredged or fill material in wetlands on this property without a Department of the Army permit
is in most cases a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1311). A permit is not required
for work on the property restricted entirely to existing high ground. If you have any questions regarding the
Corps o Engineers regulatory program, please contact
Property owner/Authorizes
Project Manager~9Signature
Date ~ - ~ G ~" ~ ~ Expiration Date ~ -`l
SURVEY PLAT OR FIELD SKETCH OF DESCRIBED PROPERTY AND THE WETLAND
DELINEATION FORM MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE YELLOW (FILE) COPY OF THIS FORM.
CESAW Form 566
1 OCT 92
• ab ve described property which we strongly suggest should be
' e surveyed wetland lin ust be verified by o tall before the
dictional determinaa non your property.

-
~
?
'`
'
~
r '
.•~ ~~ ~k wws r.. - 4 _x~~-'. .a~. ~ ._.~
r~.'S.
°
.,, a~.a,= ~u:.i'~: ~'M-.' ~a ~ r. ~ ~ rM ..a,. .
. .
~'
- ~ .._~.. :E ..r:'+w.~ ;,,~ ~w _ _
, NOTIFICATION OF; ADIVIIIVISTRA'TLV~A~PEAL OPTIONS"AND PROCESS ANll~
.,. ^
R~QUES~T FOR APPE~L_ _ ~ -
_ _ ,
- ~ -
T
_ -
~
.~>
_
,
A licant: File Number: Date:
Attached is: See Section below
INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of ermission) ~ A
PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of ermission) B
PERMIT DENIAL ~ C
APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETER'~IINATION : ~ ~ D
PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E
SECTION"I -The folTowingidentifies your rights and options zegarding an administrative appeal of fie above
decision. Additional information may be found athtfpaiusace.army.miUinet/functions/cw~cecwo/ieg or`
Co s re lations at 33 CFR.Part 3"3I.
A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit.
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• OBJECT: If you object to the permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you may request that
the permit be modified accordingly. You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer.
Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice, or you will forfeit your right
to appeal the permit in the future. upon receipt of your letter, the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a)
modify the permit to address all of your concerns, (b) modify the permit to address some of your objections, or (c) not modify
the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections, the
district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration, as indicated in Section B below.
B: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit
• ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final
authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission (LOP), you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your
signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety, and waive all rights
to appeal the permit, including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit.
• APPEAL: If you choose to decline the proffered permit (Standard or LOP) because of certain terms and conditions therein, you
may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this
form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the

date of this notice.
C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrarive Appeal Process
by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division
engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or
provide new information.
• ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 days of the
date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety, and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD.
• APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD, you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative
Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received
by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice.
E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps
regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable.. If you wish, you may request an
approved JD (which maybe appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may
provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD.

SECTION II -REQUEST FOR`APPEAL- or`OBJECTIONS T0-'AN~INITIAL=PROFFERED= ,~ `' _,r
PERMIT
REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an
initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons
or objections are addressed in the administrative record.)
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record, the Corps memorandum for the
record of the appeal conference or meeting, and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to
clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However,
you may rovide additional information to clarify the location of information that is akeady in the administrative record.
POINT OF CONTAC'1:'FOR QUESTIONS ORIl~E
If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal
process you may contact:
Mr. Bill Biddlecome, Regulatory Specialist
Washington Regulatory Field Office
Post Office Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889
(2521975-1616, ext. 27
If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may
also contact:
Mr. Arthur Middleton, Administrative Appeal Review Officer
CESAD-ET-CO-R
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, South Atlantic Division
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8801
RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel, and any goveznment
consultants, to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day
notice of any site investigation, and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations.
Date:
Signature of appellant or agent.
Telephone number:
DIVISION ENGINEER:
Commander
U.S. Army Engineer Division, South Atlantic
60 Forsyth Street, Room 9M15
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3490

..~wv~~becc.,::sr~"~~~-.i~&.~+~....,.Y;..'{i+...e.~hcu.~~1.A, .'~ yw. w.'±-f,~.c ~ :.t~^^~ ,.~. .viw.r'+9r a ._~... ........,. .s......... ._.,. .-_ ....

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO October 9, 2001
Project Management Branch
~C
TIC
Mr. William D. Gilmore, PE, Manager `' ~,;~,
Project llevelopment and Environmental Analysis
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina ?7699-154Q
~~C E 1 ~
OCT F 5 2~~J1
rr q
..~ '~
L 1`,N AL~~
F'.
(~ ocd ~~, vv~-=
Dear Mr. Gilmore: ~D . ~ Z
8- 3110'
This is response to your September ?5, 2001, scopin; letter requestinv our inpu-
on vertical clearances for replacement Brid~Te No. 1 ?9 over the Tar River. and Bride>°
110. 127 over the overflow on SR 15654, Pitt County. ~~_ . d,
To continue snagg>n~r operations above the reaches of these i.~•vu bndges using or::
snagboat SHELL, we will need vertical clearances of 40-feet on both bridges in order l~
clear the vessel's vertical structure. Any clearances less than th>s will eliminate our
access above either bridge.
Please call me at [phone], if you have a:.y questions regarding our
requirements.
Sincerely,
1/tilll t..l 5111 0111
Navigation Project Manager

U.S. Department
of Transportation '~~
United States
Coast Guard
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E.
Commander
United States Coast Guard
Atlantic Area
Manager, Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North. Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:

431 Crawford Street
Portsmouth, Va. 23704-5004
Staff Symbol: (Aowb)
Phone: [phone]
16590 ~~-' ~~~~~
15 FEB UIr r .~
f'
..
;~
Our Bridge Staff has reviewed your plans and specifications dated July 3, 2000, for the
replacement of 14 bridges in 10 different counties of North Carolina. In your letter you
requested scoping comments concerning any beneficial or adverse impacts related to this project.
The original package lacked sufficient information for our office to make these determinations.
Following a request, we received additional information from Wang Engineering (Engineering
Consultant to this project) on January 2, 2001. Following that review, we determined that a field
investigation was necessary to further evaluate the scope of these projects for Coast Guard
permitting requirements.
Thirteen of the fourteen bridges involved in this project fall into the Advance Approval category.
However, bridge #129, state project B-3684, on SR 1565 over the Tar River will require a Coast
Guard Permit. It is a swing bridge that will be replaced with a fixed structure and navigational
and environmental impacts will require further Coast Guard review.
The fact that Coast Guard permits will not be required for the advance approval bridges does not
relieve you of the responsibility for compliance with the requirements of any other Federal,
State, or local agency who may have jurisdiction over any aspect of these projects.
If additional information is required, please contact Mr. Bill H. Brazier at [phone].
Sincerely,
ANN B. DEATON
Chief, Bridge Administration Section
By direction of the Commander
Fifth Coast Guard District

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
July 25, 2000
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
NCDOT
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
,...
~:. •:
Thank you for your July 3, 2000 request for information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) on the potential environmental impacts of fourteen proposed bridge replacements in
various counties in eastern North Carolina. This report provides scoping information and is
provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA) (16
U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531-1543). This report also serves as initial scoping comments to federal and state
resource agencies for use in their permitting and/or certification processes for this project.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace the following
bridge structures:
1. B-3449, Bridge No. 204 on SR 1827 over the Northeast Cape Fear River, Duplin County;
2. B-3612, Bridge No. 143 on SR 1123 over Branch of Indian Creek, Bertie County;
3. B-3626, Bridge No. 26 on SR 1154 over Branch of Newport River, Carteret County;
4. B-3640, Bridge No. 16 on SR 1400 over Merchants Mill Pond, Gates County;
5. B-3684, Bridge No. 129 on SR 1565 over the Tar River, Pitt County;
6. B-3685, Bridge No. 30 on SR 1703 over Green Mill Run, Greenville, Pitt County;
7. B-3708, Bridge No. 66 on SR 1325/SR 1583 over Welch Creek, Washington/Martin
Counties;
S. B-3711, Bridge No. 42 on NC 111 over the Neuse River Outflow, Wayne County;

w
9. B-3712, Bridge No. 88 over SR 1006, Falling Creek, Wayne County;
10. B-3809, Bridge No. 64 on NC 99 over Pungo Creek, Beaufort County;
11. B-3810, Bridge No. 272 on SR 1514 over Big Swamp, Beaufort County;
12. B-3871, Bridge No. 64 on SR 1001 over Dog Branch, Martin County;
13. B-3884, Bridge No. 40 on SR 1308 over Squires Run, Onslow County; and,
14. B-3887, Bridge No. 116 on SR 1520 over Shaken Creek, Pender County.
The following recommendations are provided to assist you in your planning process and to
facilitate a thorough and timely review of the project.
Generally, the Service recommends that wetland impacts be avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent practical as outlined in Section 404 (b)(1) of the Clean Water Act Amendments
of 1977. In regard to avoidance and minimization of impacts, we recommend that proposed
highway projects be aligned along or adjacent to existing roadways, utility corridors, or
previously developed areas in order to minimize habitat fragmentation and encroachment. Areas
exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological value important to the watershed and region should be
avoided. Crossings of streams and associated wetland systems should use existing crossings
and/or occur on a structure wherever feasible. Where bridging is not feasible, culvert structures
that maintain natural water flows and hydraulic regimes without scouring, or impeding fish and
wildlife passage, should be employed. Highway shoulder and median widths should be reduced
through wetland areas. Roadway embankments and fill areas should be stabilized by using
appropriate erosion control devices and techniques. Wherever appropriate, construction in
sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning and migratory bird nesting seasons.
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps of the Chinquapin, Grantham,Greenville SW,
Grimesland, Merchants Mill Pond, Newport, Old Ford, Ransomville, Richlands, SE Goldsboro,
Stag Park, Washington, Williamston, and Woodville 7.5 Minute Quadrangles show wetland
resources in the specific work areas. However, while the NWI maps are useful for providing an
overview of a given area, they should not be relied upon in lieu of a detailed wetland delineation
by trained personnel using an acceptable wetland classification methodology. Therefore, in
addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the environmental documentation for this
project include the following in sufficient detail to facilitate a thorough review of the action.
The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted by
filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of tivetland impact should be
differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National
Wetlands Inventory. Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987 Corps of
Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).
2. If unavoidable wetland impacts are proposed, we recommend that every effort be made to

identify compensatory mitigation sites in advance. Project planning should include a detailed
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting unavoidable wetland impacts. Opportunities to
protect mitigation areas in perpetuity, preferably via conservation easement, should be
explored at the outset.
The enclosed lists identify the federally-listed endangered and threatened species, and Federal
Species of Concern (FSC) that are known to occur in Beaufort, Bertie, Carteret, Duplin, Gates,
Martin, Onslow, Pender, Pitt, Washington, and Wayne Counties. The Service recommends that
habitat requirements for the listed species be compared with the available habitats at the
respective project sites. If suitable habitat is present within the action area of the project,
biological surveys for the listed species should be performed. Environmental documentation that
includes survey methodologies, results, and NCDOT's recommendations based on those results,
should be provided to this office for review and comment.
FSC's are those plant and animal species for which the Service remains concerned, but further
biological research and field study are needed to resolve the conservation status of these taxa.
Although FSC's receive no statutory protection under the ESA, we would encourage the NCDOT
to be alert to their potential presence, and to make every reasonable effort to conserve them if
found. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program should be contacted for information on
species under state protection.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please continue to advise us
during the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the
impacts of this project. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact Tom
McCartney at 919-856-4520, ext. 32.
Sincerely,
~~~~~
Dr. Garland B. Pardue
Ecological Services Supervisor
Enclosures
cc:
COE, Washington, NC (Michael Bell)
COE, Wilmington, NC (David Timpy)
NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC (John Hennessey)
NCDNR, Northside, NC (David Cox)
FHWA, Raleigh, NC (Nicholas Graf)
EPA, Atlanta, GA (Ted Bisterfield)
FWS/R4:TMcCartney:TM:07/24/00:919/856-4520 extension 32:\14brdgs.var

NCL~RC , klCP , BALLS LAKE TEL ~ 919-528-9839 Jun 11 ' 01 12 ~ 51 No .001 P .02
® North Carolina~ilc~)ife Resources Commissiox>t
Charles R Fullwood, Executive Director
T0: Stacy Harris, P>/
Project IIngineer, NCDOT
FROM: David Lox, Highway Project for
Habitat Conservation Progr
1:.~TF: June 8, 2001
`~I;BJBCT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements in Duplin. Bertic, Carteret, Gates, Pitt, Wayne,
Beaufort, Martin, Onslow, and Psnder counties of North Carolina. TiP Nos.
B-3449,13-3ti1Z, B-3G2b, B-3b40, B-3b84, B-3685, B-3711, B-3712, B-3809, B-
3810, B-3871,13-3$$4, and B-3887.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife ReBources Commission (NCWRG) have reviewed the
information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the subject project. Our
comments are provided in Accordance with prov~stons of the National Enviroiuncntal Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4332(2xc)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
Li.S.C. GG1-5674).
(7n bridge replacement projects of this scope our standard recommendations are as
t'~,~ (lows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require
work within the stream and do not regture stream channel realigciruent. The horizontal
and vertical clearance$ 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. i_ive 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.
5. if temporary access reads or detours sire constructed, Choy should be removed back to
original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed
:areas should he 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
Mailing Address: Division cif Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail ServiceC:enter • Raleigh, NC: 27699-1721
7clcphone: [phone] ext. 281 • Pax: (919) 715-7b43

NCivRC.HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Jun 11'01 12:52 No .001 P.03
.
Bridge Memo 2 June 8, 21701
structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain
saws, rnowcrs, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and
root mat intact, allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
G. A clear bank {riprap free) area of at least l0 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
Carps of Engineers nationwidC and $crteral `404' p8rmits. 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. ]n streams that contain threatened Or endangered species, NCDOT biologist Mr. Tim
Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these sensitive species maybe
required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish aril WiIdlifc Service for
information on reyuiremonts of the Endangered Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that arc used by anadromoue fish, the NCDp'T official policy entitled
"Str•carn Crossing Guidelines for Axiadromaus Fish Passage (MAy 12, 1997)" should
be followed,
10.1n Areas with significant $sheries for sunfish, sensorial exclusions may also be
rcc;omrnended.
11. Sedimentation and eroSlon Control riiCasurCS SufflClent to protect aquatic resources
must he implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be
maintained regulmrly, especially following rainfall events.
12. Temporary or permanent hCrbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
witl>jn 1 S days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
13. All work in or adjacent to stroain waters should be conducted in a dry work arcs.
Sxi~idbags, rock berms, cofferdams, Or other diversion structures should be used
where possible to prevent excavation in flowing wa#er.
14. Heavy equipment should be operated frvrxi the bank rather than in stream channels in
order to m~iiiinizc sedimgltgttOIl and reduce the likelihood of introducing other
pollutants into streams.
15. Only cleaii, sediment-$ee rock should be used as temporary fill {causeways), and
should be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
construction is completed.
16. Dur;ng subsurface investigations, oquiptnent should be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent Contatntrtatton of Surface waters from leaking fuels, lubrietents,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
Ii'corrugatcd metal pipe arches, reinfanced concrete pipe9, or concrete box culverts are
used:
1. The culvert must be designed to a11Qw for fish passage. Generally, this means that the
culvcit ur pipe invert is buried at toast Y foot belpw the natural stream bed. Ii'
mu]tiple cells arC required the second and/or third cells should be placed so that their

NCWRC,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Jun 11'01 12:52 No .001 P.04
Bridge Memo 3 June 8, 2001
bottoms are at stream bankful stage (similar to Lyonsfield design). This could be
xecomplished by constructing a low sill on the upstream end of the other ccUs that
wit! divert low flows to another Celh This will allow sufFicient water depth in the
culvert or pipe during normal flaws to aceonamadatc fish movements. Tf culverts are
long, notched baffles should be placed in reinforced concrete box eulvcrts at 15 foot
intervals to allow for the collection of sediments in the culvert, to reduce flow
velocities, and to provide resting places for flab and other aquatic organisms moving
through the structure.
2. if multiple pipes or cells are used, at least ono pipe or box should be designed to
remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Calvcrls or pipes should be situated so that no chamnel realignment or widening is
required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of structures usually
causes a decrease in water Volocity CauBing Bediment deposition that will require future
maitllenance,
4. Riprap should not be placed on the stream bed.
Iu most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the saint location
wish road closure. Tf road closure is sot feasible, a temporary detour should be designed told
located to avoid wetland impacts, minimiZC the Woad for clearing and to avoid destabilizing
strcan~ banks. il' the structure will be on a new alignment. the old structure should be removed
and the approach fills removed from the lOD-year floadpplain, Approach fills should be removed
down io the natural ground elevation. The tires should be stabilized with grass and planted with
native tree species. if the area that is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDQT should restore
the arcs to wetlands. If successful, the site maybe used as wetland mitigAtion (br the subject
project or ocher projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments;
1, B-3449 - Duplirt County -Bridge No. 204 over Northeast Cape Fear River. Doc to the
potential for anadromous fish at this location, NCDOT should closely follow the "Strcatn
Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage". This includes an in-water work
moratorium front February I tv Juno 15 for areas where there is the potential for Shortnosc
sturgeon, an endangered species. We request that High Quality Sedimentation and Erosion
Control Measures be used due to the presence of HQW waters.
2. T3-3612 - Bcrlie County - BPldge No. 143 over a branch of Indian Creek. Due to the potential
for anadromous fish at this location, NCDOT should closely follow the "Strcaan Crossing
Guidelines for A.nadrornous Fish Passage". This includes an in-water work moratorium from
February 15 to June 1 S. We arc sot aware of any threatened of endangered species in the
project vicinity. NCDOT should hC aware that NCWRC has designated NCWRC garnelands
in the vicinity oi'this bridge. Impacts to gameland properties should be avoided.
3. B-3626 -Carteret County -Bridge Nv. 26 over a branch of the New Port River. Standard
comments apply. We are not aware of any threatened of endangered species in the project
vicinity,
~4. B-3G40 -Cates County -Bridge No. 16 over Merchant's Mill Pond. Standard comments
apply. We ,re ndt aware of any threatened of endangered species in the project vicinity.

N'~WR~,fICP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Jun 11'01 12:53 No .001 P.05
Bridge Memo 4 Juno 8, 2001
5, 13-3684 -Pitt County -Bridge No. lZ9 Over Tat' River. Due to the potential for anadromous
fish at this lvcation, NGDOT should closely follow the "Stream Crossing Guidelines i'or
Anadromous Fish Passage". This includes an in-water work moratorium from February IS to
June 15. 1Ve are not aware of any threatened oFendangvrod species in the project vicinity.
Standard comnicnts apply.
6. B-3G85 -Pitt County - Bridge No, 30 ovmr Green Mill Run. Due to the potential for
anadromous fish at this location, NCDOT should closely follow the "Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage", This includes an in-water work moratorium from
.February 1 S to June 15. We Rte not aware of any threatened of endangered species in the
project vicinity. Standard comments apply.
'', B-371 ] - Wayne County- Bridge No. 42 over the Neuse River Overflow. Due to the
potential for anadromous fish at this location, NCDQT should closely follow the "Stream
Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Pish Passage", This includes an in-water work
moratorium from February 1S to June l5. We arc not aware of any threatened of endangered
species in the project vicinity. Standard COrnments apply,
8. B-3712 -Wayne County -Bridge No 88 over Falling Creek. Standard comments apply. We
are not aware of any threatened of endangered species in the project vicinity,
9. B-3809 ~- F3eaufprt County-Bridge No. 64 over Pungo Creek. Due to the potential for
anIIdromotts fish at this location, NCDOT should closely fallow the "Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage". TtuB includes art in-water work moratorium from
February I$ to June I5. We are not aware ofany threatened of endangered species in the
project vicinity. Standard comments apply.
10. B-3fi1t) - Beaufort County - fridge Na. Z72 fiver Big Swamp, Stdndard comments apply.
We are not aware of any threatened of endangered speCles in the project vicinity.
11. R-3871 -Martin County -Bridge No. 64 over Dog Branch. Uuc to the potential t'or
anadromous fish at this location, NCDQT should closely follow the "Stream Crossing
Guidelines fur Anadromous Fish Passage", This includes 8n in•water work moratorium fnanY
Febntary 15 to June l S. We are not aware of any threatened of endangered species in the
project vicinity. Standard comments apply,
12. F3-3884 - Onslow County ~ -Bridge Na. 4t) Duct Squires Run. Due to the potential for
anadromous fish at ttus Iocatiptl, NCD4T should closely follow the "Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage", This includes an in-water work moratorium Trom
February ] 5 to June 15. We are not aware of any threatened of endangered species in the
rroject vicinity. Standard comments apply,
3.8-3887 -Ponder County -Bridge No. 116 over Shaken Creek, pue to the potential for
anadromous fish at this location,lVCDOT should closely follow the "Stream Crossing
Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage", This includes an in-water work moratorium from
February 15 to June ! S. Wears not aware Of any threatened of endangered species in the
project vrciti;ty. Standard comments apply.
We request that NCDOT routinely minimize adverBC impacts to fish and wildlife
r. esouroes in the vicirti ty of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and maintain
sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent wet concrete from
CUI]taCtlilg walC°r in Or entering into #hese streams, Replacement of bnd~es with spanning
structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is recommended inmost cases.

NCWRC,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Jun 11'01 12:54 No .001 P.06
Bridge Mcmo 5 .lurte 8, 2001
Spanning structures allow Wildlife pa99agC along sh'eambatsks, reducing habitat fragmentation
and vehicle related mortality at highway crossings,
If you raced further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding biidgc
replacements, please contact me at [phone], 1'banIc you far the opportunity to review and
comment on these projects.

i _,
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
Office of Archives and History
May 11, 2004
MEMORANDUM
e"`SWFo
~~ +^* ° ~a
`~
.@+. ~m~
a.w ~~
North Carolina Department of Cultural ]
State Historic Preservation Office
~~~ ~ '
~~
~~
~~ ~~~ ~ 1
o ~?
~~°~~°r~C`'rical R~o~rc~
TO: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highwahs
FROM: David Brook ~?~ ~ ; ~,_. ~ ~~._~~' ',~~ ~ y~ ~l ~~. ~~-~
....,
,.
SUBJECT: Archaeological survey and Evaluation: Proposed Replacement of Bridge No. 129, SR 1565 over
the Tar River, Grimesland, B-3684, Pitt County, ER01-7088
Thank you for your letter of March 3, 2004, transmitting the archaeological survey and evaluation report by
Coastal Carolina Research, Inc., for the above project.
During the course of the archaeological investigation previously recorded site 31PT6&6** was revisited and
subjected to evaluative testing, and one newly recorded site, 31PT542 was identified. Both of these sites were
examined to determine if they are likely to yield significant new information pertaining to the prehistory of
North Carolina.
According to the report's authors testing at site 31PT6&6** revealed a possible intact Early to Middle Woodland
component that may expand our knowledge and understanding of that specific cultural phenomena in the coastal
plain region of North Carolina. They state that the Early to 1~iiddle Woodland component "appears to contain
sufficient information potential to recommend 31P7'6&6** as eligible to the National Register of Historic Places.
under Criterion D." We concur with this recommendation and add that if that portion of site 31PT6&6** cannot
be avoided during construction, data recovery mitigation may be necessary to mitigate the adverse effect. If data
recover mitigation becomes necessary, we look forward to reviewing and commenting on the data recovery plan:
The report authors also state "site 31PT542 would appear to contain some information potential. However, the
site has been disturbed by the relatively recent construction of a house." They further state "due to lack of
integrity, site 31PT542 is recommended as not eligible to the NRHP." We concur that site 31PT542 is not
eligible for listing in the Iv'ational Register of Historic Places and that it does not retain the level of integrity nor
posses the potential to yield significant new information to the prehistory- of North Carolina.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic PresenTation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Part 800.
www. h p o. d o r. s tale. n c. u s
Location Mailing Address Telephooe/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 21699-46] 7 [phone].733-8653
ncCTnD ATtf1N 515 N. Blount St Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699617 [phone].715-4801

May 11, ?004
Page 2

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above corrunent, please
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future communication
concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT
Paul I~'Iohler, NCDOT

/~
m .a
~~ ~O
North Carolina Department of Cultural
State Historic Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, :administrator
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
July 3, 2003
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
O
Jet 9 2Q~;
DIVlSIbN ?D V~
HlGy1.Vq)•~ Q,
ar~FLOPR~~~e
Division of Historical Resources
David J. Olson, Director
Re: Bridge No. 129 on SR 1565 over the Tar River; B-3684, Pitt County, ERO1-7088
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Thank you for your letter of January 30, 2003, concerning the above project. We recommend
that a comprehensive survey be conducted by an experienced archaeologist to identify and
evaluate the significance of any archaeological remains that may be damaged or destroyed by
the proposed project. In particular archaeological sites 31PT6 and 31PT26 are located with the
proposed area of potential effect (APE). In addition archaeological sites 31PT3, 31PT19,
31PT20, and 31PT21 area all located with several hundred meters of the APE. According to
the archaeological site files maintained by the Office of State Archaeology none of the sites
have been adequately assessed to determine their eligibility for listing on the National Register
of Historic Places
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 considerations. If you have any questions concerning the
above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
919/733-4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above
referenced tracking number.
erely, ~ r ~ n
avid Brook ~~,`^~''(J~
www.hao.dcr.state.nc. vs
Location ~isiling .4ddress TelephondFax
ADM1IINiSTRATION 507 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Strvict Cents, Raleigh NC 27699-i61? [phone] •733-8653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4613 Mai! Scrvice Center, Ralcigh NC 27699-3613 [phone] •715-3801
c~ iovrv x of ~ NNtNf: 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4618 Mail Scrvice Center, Raleigh NC :7699-3618 [phone] •715-3801

~~' ~
~~ State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of (Marine Fisheries
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Preston P. Pate, Jr., Director
MEMORANDUM:
~:~- `~ Oy..y t
= _~ 1 ~ ® ~ ,
= - ~ t
~1v
~ ~
i ~,n'F+ L.~~OLI N.i ~.=?.~r'iT`•1=~~ CF
>~... ;v..+?~- ,aN~ NATURAL RESCU~CES
s 'J
TO: William D. Gilmore, NCDOT Manager Project Development
and Environmental Branch
FROM: Sara E. Winslow, Biolo ist Su ervisor -
9 P ~i~~%(/
SUBJECT: Bridge Replacement Projects -TIP 2000-2006
DATE: July 13, 2000
:~~~ ~ ^/ ^
ri~r~7
f~ r., ~•
~; `..
The North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries has reviewed the information provided
relative to upcoming bridge replacement projects and submits the following comments. All of
the bridges to be replaced cross documented anadromous spawning areas. These bridges are:
B-3612 Bertie County -Replace No. 143
B-3640 Gates County -Replace No. 16
B-3684 Pitt County -Replace No. 129
B-3685 Pitt County -Replace No. 30
B-3708 Washington/Martin Counties -Replace No. 66
B-3871 Martin County -Replace No. 64
The Division assumes all of the replacements will be with another bridge.
Since all of these areas are spawning areas for anadromous fish, the Division requests
an in-water work moratorium. This would include removal and new construction. The
requested moratorium timeframe is February 15 through June 30. This will ensure the
environmental integrity is protected during critical times of usage by these species.
The Division also expresses concern relative to wetland impacts associated with
removal and construction. The importance of wetlands as spawning and nursery areas,
providing food directly and indirectly for aquatic resources and being vital to water quality in the
receiving waters has been well documented.
This agency appreciates the opportunity to comment on the proposal. If you have any
questions relative to the Divisions comments please contact me at [phone].
F.O. Ecx 7c9, i.lor~r?~~~ Cit~, ~lor'h Car:;'ina ??~~7-t17o9 T=;a~ncn~ 25~•?23--C?' F~.;< ~5%-7~;-Q2:,•i
An E..:a' ~'~• ~cr?url'.~hi`,rn~;,..-. =,C'.::r..=, ,;h,,~r ". , r=:~~c,._. !.-. _~:... _.. ~..,.~r,:. -:.

mesland Boating -~cce~s Site /Tar [Zivec ~Yt SLLnS~C Beach
Subject: Grimesland Boating Access Site /Tar River &c Sunset Beach
Date: Thu, ?9 Jun ?000 10:54:41 -0400
From: "layers, Gordon S." <[e-mail]>
To: "Gail Grimes 1 E-mail)" <Q,rimes@.dot.state.nc.us>
CC: "Cabe, Daniel E." <CABEDE@1~LaIL.W>ZDLIFE.STATE.NC.US>
MEMORANDUM VIA E-MAIL
TO: Gail Grimes
FROM: Gordon Myers
DATE: June 29, 2000
RE: Potential Boating Access Sites
Tar River at Grimesland
fJ- vlQ CTt'
Subsequent to receipt of information from your office concerning proposed
bridge replacements on the Tar River near Grimesland, NCWRC Division of
Engineering Services staff have evaluated the feasibility for the provision
of public boat access afforded by purchasing riparian property that will
remain inaccessible during the construction phase. The site is very well
suited for a public access facility. Additionally, staff recommends that in
order to realize the full potential of the site, a partnership with a parks
and recreation entity should be established. Should NCDOT elect to acquire
this property and invite the NCWRC to develop a public boating access
facility, I will strongly recommend this project to our governing board.
For your information, I have attached files sent to me by one .our engineers,
Mr. Daniel Cabe. Please let me know if you have any questions or need
additional information.
Sunset Beach
After we adjourned form our last onsite meeting, we investigated additional
sites in the vicinity. The best location that we found is located near the
two-story pink restaurant near the Sunset Beach bridge. I have attached a
vicinity map. The lon / lat are as follows:
lon 78 30.606W
tat 33 52.933N
«potensitel.jpg»
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cabe, Daniel E.
> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:41 PM
> To: Myers, Gordon S.
> Subject: DOT proposed area on the tar
> A hard copy is in ycur box.
> Attatched is the memo, new baa form, and pictures.
> «tarDOT. doc» «tarform. doc» «P0001000. JPG» «P0000999. JPG»
> «P0000998.JPG»
~t ? 7i>i1)Il'S4 :~~1

5~~o0~s
III•Il~u'Inu nl nl ll~,m~lur!'I,ilinn
siOI \lall 11;~iu•
t;n•t•milll'. \urlli l:~uul~n,i ?713;;-i
May 15, 2002
Stacy B. Harris, P.E.
NC Department of Transportation
148 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Reference: Replace Bridge No. 129 over the Tar River
Dear Stacy Harris:
I illll-r ('.l ~?) 7 Ali-I~•'~J
In November 2001 the Pitt County Board of Education approved a high assignment plan which
assigns students along the Clark Neck Road to D. H. Conley High School. This assignment plan
will be phased in over the neat three years.
Upon full implementation in the 2004-2005 school year students in grades 9 - 12 from along the
Clarks Neck Road will attend D. H. Conley. At that time our projections are that we will have
two school buses a day making two trips a day across Bridge No. 129.
If you have any questions about this correspondence, please give me a call at [phone].
Cordially,

.oey Weathington
Transportation Director
Pitt Counri- Schools
,~
Cc: Dr. Jol:n McKnnieht

"' i '10/'11/2001 16:03 ? -919-?52-743: CDEH PAGE 01
Tovc~n of ~
P. O. Sax 147
~RIMESWND, NORTH CAROLINA 27837-0147
(252) 732',337 -: Fax (Z5Z) 752-7433
OCTOBER 11, 2001
Stacy Harris, l~.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation FAX: [phone]
1548 Mail Serviee Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
RE:: PROPOSID REPIACE~>EI+TT OF DREDGE N0. 129, SR 15b5
avER ~ TAR xzvER, cRirr.>_sT;.4rrn, r>C
Dear Mr. Harris:
In reference to the NOTIC>!: OI' IN2"~Tr TO PREPAit1; A M~ARAIQDUM OF AGREEMIIVT FOi;
Tl~ PROPOSED REF'LACFMENi OF BHIDG~:, ~f 129 ON SR 1565 ONLY ~ T,El~ RIVIIt, we would 1.3.ke
to make you aware of the fallo~,ring concerns:
1. If the bridge is closed down for a period of two years, or two weeks, it
would present a potential hazard for our .residents 1i.ving on both sidee
of the. Tar River .
2. There is a public school, G.R. Whitfield School, in that area that woule
be isolated if there was an accident involv;i,ng the tx'airi, especially a
chemical spill. The children and teachers would not hAVe s way tv evacuate
that area.
3, It would hinder our law enforcement and rescue service from reaching citizens
of Pitt County vn the Ir'orth aide of the raver.
4. Would hinder both Pitt. and Beaufort County residents from going to and
from work.
S. Economically, it would be a tremendous hardship on theinwn and the
surrouc~ding. area.
In light o£ the recent events involving terrorism, the threat of chemical war
fare, and the items mentioned above, we believe there should be an access to allow
crossing the Tar River at this point,
Thank you for any consi.derat.ion you can give us in helping us have a safe way to
Ct"US9 the river at this point during thie replacement of the bridge.
S' ce e1y, .
~E` TOWN OF RIME. 0 OF ALDEE2MEi~T
Mayor Evelyn Littler
Mayor Pro-tem Edward Ear], Aldzidge
Alderman Thyra Hznson
Alderman Thomas Dixotl
Alderman Gerald Whitley
cc: Collice Moose
.1ohn McKnight

04/21/2003 10:26 NC DOT PDEA ~ 98511918 N0.916 D02

Town of
P. O. Box 147
CRIMESIAND, NORTH CAROLINA 27837-0147
(252) 752-b337 -: Fax [phone]
April 11, 2003
Ms. Stacy Harris, P.E.,
~'roject Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina I}epartment of Transportation
1548 Mail Seraice Center
Raleigh, NC 2'1699-158
Deaz IVSs. Harris:
dC vAll mA^v~1R ASUATP t}~PTP_14rJ1T1'At1t~V At7 P.X1Cft11iT AVIT111C nYI~PP.. IVC UEET~a.TtInQi'TIt of _
.-' ~ ~" ~ ' ~ ~ ' launch facility: ~ Tfie ~existu~g taunc is ease y acceasi a an can
feet in length.
However, current plans forecast construction of a new high-rise fixed type span to begin in
2005. This plan will eliminate the existing bridge, NC State Road 166 and the access it
provides to the boat landing. It also will require the removal of a significant portion of the
existing NC State Road 1565 south of the Tar River. We are formally requesting the
installation of a NCWRC Moat launch facility near the vicinity of the proposed bridge.
The reasons for our request are as foAows~
• The proposed boat ramp elimination would have an adverse economic impact
on area businesses. Two tackle shops are located within Z miles of the existing
landing. Under the proposed construction glan, the nearest iarading access
would be approximately 10 miles east and 10 miles west of the proposed
bridge. The existing landing, and the access it provides to the Tar River, helps
in large part to sustain the economic status of several families and service
oriented businesses in our community.
• The recreational impact will a]ao greatly affect our citizenry. The sting of
creating wetlands where the former NC DOT state ponds were located
(immediately north of the existing bridge) has already affected area fishermen.
For years these ponds provided a great number of anglers vvho enjoyed bank
fishing with a viable fishery. No landing access will also eliminate the reverzue
generated from recreational boaters visiting our community.

04i21i2003 10:26 NC DOT PDEA ~ 98511918
N0.916 D03
The proposed construction plan will. leave The Town of Grimesland, which
~vvas founded on the banks of the Tar River, will not have an access paint to the
River. This access has for years helped sustain and enrich the lives of citizens
in the Town of Grimesland and surrounding community.
• Development may be hindered. This can be attributed to a Tawn ~vvithaut
access to its' greatest asset.
• The existing boat ramp and facility has served all of Eastern Pitt County as a
launching facility for area emergency rescue attempts and training. Again,
with boat launching access ]0 nines upstream or downstream, valuable time or
lives could be lost.
+ The existing road that approaches the south bank of the river could be wholly
or partially used as an access point to a new landing. This could potentially
save the Bridge Project time and money since removal of the existing road
would be unnecessary.
• Anew landing could be incorporated into the proposed bridge construction
project. Doing this could lead to a cost savings on the ramp construction since
construction crews would already be mobilized.
I Look farvvard to working with you or any other interested parties on this worthwhile
endeavor. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to discuss these matters.
Sincerely,
~ ~~-~
Mayor E. Earl Aldridge
Town of Crrimesland

~~., .~r.~~ ~ra~z~sz~~~r >~auxtb~ Vecscon
..;: _. ..
..,
Project Name ~"~°~~ ~``~%~- ~' tz"~ ~'~ ~"-`" ~`~°'`''~ Nearest Road ~~ ~SLP ~
County ~'~'~'- ~ Wetland Area acres Wetland Width feet
Name of evaluator ~- • t~r~~ I ~ ~~"' ~ ~ r`"fir ~"'~'"' ~- Date ~t~'' t~~ 2~: I
Wetland Location
on pond or lake
on perecuual stream
on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
other
Soil series ~~ r..t.sr~~.`-~ l~' ~o~4t''
_ predominantly organic -humus, muck,
or peat
X predominantly mineral -non-sandy
_ predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
steep topography
ditched or channelized
total wetland width ~ 100 feet
LVetl~nri tvnP (cPlP~t nnPl*r.c~s~'r~ ~~.i+1
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius)
forested/natural vegetation- 3S
agriculture, urban suburban ~o
impervious surface _~
Dominant vegetation
(~ 15~ ~ 1, ~~tw,
(2) N~ S S A G-C~?l-c~-~-' c-~~
~~
Flooding-and tivetccess
semipermanently to permanently
flooded or inundated
,~ seasonally flooded or inundated
intermittanly flooded or temporary
surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water

- -- 1 r- ~------ ----i ~
Bottomland hardwood forest -
Pine savanna
~~~•« ~`" '~
Headwater forest Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest Bog/fen
Wet flat Eplcecneral we tland
Pocosin Carolina Bay
Bog forest Other
____ *the rating system cannot be applied to_salt or brackish rnarslres or streacri clcanccels____
'• wClght

1Z
~`ater storage
~
x 4.00 =
`~~~~~~~~~~` tiVetland
Rating
~
.4 BanklShoreline stabilization x 4.00 =
T Pollutant removal ~'~" * x 5.00 = ~~~=
I Wildlife habitat ~ x 2.00 = ~'~<~>=`
N Aquatic life value ~ x 4.00 = J
~
Cr Recreatioci/Education 00 =
x 1 >~ -
.
*Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream,
upslope, or radius

~.
~~~'~:;A~~, R.ATT~~.S ~lC~~:~SI~3.~E'T 1~aurtlx Yersioa
... ., ~. , su :. <s,
Project Name ~ ' 3 ~' ~"~" ~~' ~"r ~' • 1"Z..~1 Nearest Road 52 t SCoS
County ~'~ ~ Wetland Area acres Wetland tiVidtli feet
Name of evaluator >< • ~4r ~' u~ / C , ~^-~~ ~=+~ ~.i e Date ~~"~ ~3~ ~ `"'~'°
Wetland Location
on pond or lake
on perecuual stream
on internlittent stream
within interstream divide
other
Soil series S"~`~'
predominantly organic -humus, muck,
or peat
predominantly mineral -non-sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
steep topography
ditched or channelized
total wetland width z 100 feet
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upstream, upslope, or radius)
forested/natural vegetation
agriculture, urban suburban ~'~
impervious surface 5
Dorniriant vegetatio~i
,~
. - ..~
(2) It ,,.
.~., ,
Flooding and wetness
semipermanently to permanently
flooded or inundated
seasonally flooded or inundated
internzittanly flooded or temporary
surface tivater
no evidence of flooding or surface water
Wetland type (select one)* ~~,oc..s-~',,! (~IC,~i~ ~+"~4t1 =~`~`~~'''` `~'`'`~`'~`~`i~
)C Bottom(and hardwood forest Pine savanna
Headwater forest Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest Bog/fen
Wet flat Eplierneral wetland .
Pocosin Carolina Bay
Bog forest Other
____ *theratin~ system cannot be applied to salt or brackish rnarsiies or strea~il clianiiels _________________
wcig,ht

lZ
Water storage
~
x 4.00 = Wetland
Rating
~ Bank/Slioreline stabilization ~-~' x 4.00 = ~~'``~~~~~~'~'

T
Pollutant removal a _

00
5.
x ... ~.

j Wildlife habitat x 2.
N Aquatic life value °L x 4.00 =
G Recreation/Education `3 x 1.00 =
*Add 1 point if iii sensitive watershed and >10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstrea~ri,
upslope, or radius_ ----
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

T ~
Wetland Rating Worksheet
Project nameB3G~~~t; Sr~de~#12q. s>zlsc5 b~Pr T~,e R~v~nj~learest road S R ISl~
County ~~'~' y Name of Evaluator ~~ C~aR>Q~oc,~, ~ .Date 2 ~~- o l
Wetland location
o pond or lake
perennial stream
_ on intermittent stream
within interstream divide
_ other
Soil Series Sw ui m P
/predominantly organic-humus,
muck, or peat
_ predominantly mineral- non-sandy
_ predominantly sandy
Hydraulic Factors
_ steep topography
ditched or channelized
/wetland width >/= 50 feet
Adjacent land use (within 1/2 mile upstream)
forested/natural vegetation
agriculture, urban/suburban
impervious surface
Dominant Vegetation
(1) ~a.,l ~ Cy,~ress
(3) ~ i zoo ~c'd S ~1'r~.,l I
Flooding and Wetness
/_ semipermanently to permanently flooded
or inundated
_ seasonally flooded or inundated
_ intermittently flooded or temporary
surface water
_ no evidence of flooding or surface water
Wetland Type (select one)
_ Bottomland hardwood forest _ Pine savanna
r, Headwater forest _ Freshwater marsh
~wamp forest _ Bog/fen
_ Wet flat _ Ephemeral wetland
_ Pocosin _ Other
*The rating system cannot be applied to salt or brackish marshes
Water storage ~,_ * 4 = ~Q_
Bank/Shoreline stabilization 3 * 4 = 12 Total score
Pollutant removal S * 5 = 25
Wildlife habitat Z * 2 = '~-
Aquatic life value ~ * 4 = "Z
Recreation/Education ~ * 1 = ,~.
Add I point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% nonpoint disturbance within I/2 mile upstream

A
-~
::: ~ .
~:
'E
~'
v
- ~~T~ ~~~~ eras
.....:i - ,.:-~•_. ~.. .. ;; ...o .,: _ .. ;~.: ..,~. .:-C:. ._..ct :~+, ,g•,.~ .r a...r_'..,.'ss t aY"' ./:..-. - sc4„~ts<~ ~~
BoTToML~.N~ F}~.g~w oohs ~ 300' ~~oY~ su2~ACE WAT~~Z
Project Name GR~~..,ESUP~Nn r1~T~CA~ ~nt.~ PL~.t\~ Nearest Road .sR ~S~S _
County P 1 T T wetland Area > ~ o acres Wetland Width > 30o feet
Name of evaluatorr~~M- F~SMM zNC.. Date -4~z~loo
on pond or lake
on perennial stream
~ on intermittent stream
within interstre3nn divide
other
Wetland Location
Soil series Po r+sw~ o ~,k~ I oQ w~
predomi„~„t1y organic -humus, muck,
' or peat
~ predotinantly mineral -non-sandy
predominantly sandy
Hydraulic factors
steep topography
ditched or channelized
~ total wetland width z I00 feet
Adjacent land use
(within I/2 mile upstream, u~lope, or radius)
~ forested/natural vegetarian ~ o
~ agriculture, urbanlsuburban ~_
impervious surface
Dominant vegetation

(3) Ar ~ r~l~ v,nr~a a ~4 ~~~
Flooding and wetness
semipermanentiy to permanently
flooded or inundated
~ seasonally flooded or itaindated
intermittanly flooded o: temporary
surface water
no evidence of flooding or surface water
w etiana type (select one)'
~ Bottomiand hardwood forest Pine savanna
Headwater forest Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest Bog/fen
Wes flat Ephemeral wetland
Pocosin Carolina Bay
Bog forest Other
__________ *the ratinsz stem cannot be ap~tied to salt or brackish marshes or stream charnels
• weight
~. Wetland
R Water storaue ~ x 4.00 = >'~<~-
r4 Bank/Shoreline stabilization z x 4.00 = ~'~`~`»~~~<
T Pollutant removal 3 * x 5.00 = ~'`~''`
I Wildlife habitat 5 x 2.00 = '>>~C~~ ~°
~ Aquatic life value ~
x 4.00 = ~'`~~`;: ~=
•
G Recreation/Education ~ x I.00 =
Rating
n * Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% nonpoint disturbance within 1/2 mile upstream,
~~ upslo~e_ or radius

. "- ~
.. ~r~T~ ~hTI~~'~'O~~~T': Fourm ~"e~-~ti..,, ~~-'~ .r
tic
.~.r. ~ .: ~..» ._,<t-.ca a.~`r: _...i S. <i~.. /,.--,~J~}-ntcir%..iss <t
BOTTOMS-.4N~ N~~S7W00~5 ~ 300t ~"~OM SuR~.~cE W~'«R

t , w
Project Name ~RiM~SI ~r-an rt~T~GATtoN P~.hr.1 Nearest Road-~ ~5~s
County P ~ TT Wetland Area ~ ~o acres Wetland Width ~30o feet
Name of evaluator ALL M - N S M M s taC . Date ~{z4l ~ o
Wetland Location
on pond or lake
,~ on perennial stream
on intermittent stream
within interstrea.m divide
other
Soil series 5~.~~•.,tLaPOO~~k
Po ~~-s w. o ,, ~ ~ 1 o cz w~
~ predominantly organic -humus, much,
or peat
~.. predominantly mineral - noa-sandy
predominantly sandy
HpdrauIic factors
steep topography
ditched or chaanelized
~ total wetland width z 100 feet
Adjacent land use
(within 1/2 mile upsveam, up~:lope, or radius)
~ forested/natural vegetasion .~a.Q_ °%
~ agriculture, urban suburban ~_
impervious surface
Dominant vegetation

(2) /~Ger ru ~ru~
(3) Qr~H~ i h_c;r~a~ Q ~~ Pay
Flooding and wetness
setnipermanently to permanently
flooded or inundated
~ seasonally flooded or imtndated
intertnittanly flooded or temporary
surface water .
no evidence of flooding or surface water
weuana type (setect one)
~, Bottomland hardwood forest Pine savanna
Headwater forest Freshwater marsh
Swamp forest Bog/fen
Wes flat Ephemeral wetland
Pocosin Carolina Bay
Bog forest Other
_______ *the rating stem cannot be aoplied to salt or brackish marshes or stream channels
weight
Wetland
R Water storage
~ x 4.00 = ~' `'>
- ~:<:<;: Rating
~ Bank/Shorehne stabthzatton 3 x 4.00 = ~'- ~~~~~~
T Pollutant removal ~' * x 5.00 = ~~_~~?
I Wildlife habitat `~" x 2.00 = ->='~`~»
N Aquatic life value ~" x 4.00 = ~~>~'~<~~>
G Recreation/Education '4' x 1.00 = E -~:"~J
'Add 1 point if in sensitive watershed and > 10% nonpoint disturbance within 1~2 mile upstream,
--____ upsloDe, or radius _______~

RELOCATION REPORT
^X E.I.S. ~ CORRIDOR ~ DESIGN
North Carolina Department of Transportation
AREA RELOCATION OFFICE
PROJECT: 8.2221101 COUNTY Pitt Alternate 3 F of 4 Alternate
I.D. NO.: B-3684 F.A. PROJECT N/A
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Re lace Brid a No. 129 and No. 127 on SR 1565 over Tar River

ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of ,
Displacees Owners Tenants Total Minorities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP
Residential
Businesses VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLING AVAILABLE
Farms Owners Tenants For Sale For R ent
Non-Profit o-2oM _ $ o-iso __ o-2oM __ $ o-150 __
ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS 20-40M _ 150-250 __ 20-40M _ 150-250 _-
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers. 40-70M _ 250-400 __ 40-70M _ 250-400 _
1. Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-10oM _ 400-600 __ 70-10oM 46 400-600 --
2. Will schools or churches be affect by 100 ua __ 600 ua _ 100 uP 1 g 600 ua
displacement? TOTAL -- -- 62 __
3. Will business services still be available after REMARKS ReS and b Number
project? All residential displacees are counted as families.
4. Will any business be displaced? If so,
indicate size, type, estimated number of THIS IS A NEGATIVE REPORT
employees, minorities, etc. NO RELOCATION INVOLVED
5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage?
6. Source for available housing (list).
7. Will additional housing programs be needed?
8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered?
9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc.
families?
10. Will public housing be needed for project?
11. Is public housing available?
12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing
housing available during relocation period?
13. Wifl there be a problem of housing within
financial means?
14. Are suitable business sites available (list
source).
15. Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION?

~ ~ ~ / .
G. Alton Glover 06/26/01 ;
: ~-:( ~
. ~~ ;
Relocation A ent Date
C...... ~ G n 0....:.._J nn/nc J _
A roved b ate '
ungmai cs i ropy: state Relocation Agent
2 Copy Area Relocation Office

OCATION REPORT
^X E.I.S. ~ CORRIDOR ~ DESIGN
North Carolina Department of Transportation
AREA RELOCATION .OFFICE
PROJECT: 8.2221101 COUNTY Pitt Alternate 2 E of 4 Alternate
I.D. NO.: B-3654 F.A. PROJECT N/A
DESCRIPTION of PROJECT: Replace Bridge No. 129 and No. 127 on SR 1565 over Tar River
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES
~ Type of
Displacees Owners Tenants Total Minorities
Residential 1 0 1 0
Businesses
Farms
Non-Profit
ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers.
X •1. Will special relocation services be necessary?
X 2. Will schools or churches be affect by
displacement?
X 3. Will business services still be available after
project?
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so,
indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc.
X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage?
X 6. Source for available housing (list).
X 7. Will additional housing programs be needed?
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered?
X 9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc.
families?
X 10. Will public housing be needed for project?
X 11. Is public housing available?
X 12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing
housing available during relocation period?
X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within
financial means?
X 14. Are suitable business sites available (list
source).
15. Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION? 15 Months
INCOME LEVEL
0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP

VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLIN G AVAILABLE
Owners Tenants For S ale For R ent
a2oM __ $ a~ so __ o-2oM _ s o-1 so __
2o-aoM __ ~ so-2so __ 2o-aoM _ 15o-250 _
40-70M _ 250-400 __ 40-70M _ 25D-400
7o-1ooM __ 4oo-soo __ 7o-1ooM 46 aoo-soo _
100 uP ~ 600 uP __ 100 uP y g 600 uP _
TOTAL 1 -- 62 --
REMARKS ReS and b Number
All residential displacees are counted as families.
3. There are no businesses affected by this project.
6 & 14. MLS, newspaper, individuals, realtors
8. As Mandated by State Law
11. Pitt County
12. Or built if necessary
G. Alton Glover 06/26/01 <~; ?;; C , (~ ~ ; ~~- 17 ~- /
Relocation A ent Date A roved b ate
Form 151 Revised 42/95 d n.:..:....i o . n,._... ., n......a
_ .y..._..,. ...,,..~. .. .....................,.. .~.....
2 Copy Area Relocation Office

_~ /~ti
f \I
\ \ ~
r 8
ids
~v~ v
TAR
J
\S. r/.
-/ ~ ~_ ~~
/ :\;.
,J ~ &
i :~; ~~ c.
~~~ ,,,
~m ~~`~
MMM1-\
S \..r "
f 4 U
~ F R ~
' C
o b I
a
{
D ECT l r
~~~
~~
.~
f
O
~ 0. ~ vE
. 27
RIVER TAR

r ~~
IYAN is>o /~ )
12s? l
~_
Diu
+=/

~l: /
61
/ / ~Ib
bd / N
- a
~(~ J \ i
((~" ~ ~'" ~
-C~ _~
'VN6HINGT1l~
~ ~
e \ ~~. \

` 1 ^ ~ O
Per~-tit Drawing
Shset I of 3 5
~~~~~~~~
~~~~
~~~®~
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PITT COUNTY
PROJECT: 33225.1.1 (B-3684)
BRIDGE N®.129 OVER T.~R RIVER
AND BRIDGE N0.127 OVER TAR
RIVER OVERFLOW ON SR 1565
SHEET OF
5//707 I
1 F ~J ~, ii

Pem~lt Drawing
sr,eet _~___ of 3 's

PARCEL N®. NAMES
NAMES .~NI) .ADDRESSES
ADDRESSES
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
DAVID ~I.SMALL
GREG®RY W. SIDERS
R®BERT ALDN~A GRAY
GREG®RY I~. RAY
L®UIS ELM®RE 1H®DGES
EDWARD J. M~MULLEN
DEBBIE P~IELPS
NCD®T
310 7T~I STREET
BUTNER, NC 27509
253 S. GRIMESLAND BRIDGE RD.
GRIMESLAND, NC 27837
P® B®X 312
GRIMESLAND, NC 27837
4823 MILLEIELD LN.
GRIMESLAND, NC 27837
P® B®~ 535
GRIMESLAND, NC 27837
P® B®X 123
GRIMESLAND, NC 27837
3129 PINE BARD RD.
GREENVILLE, NC 27858
1500 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 271,99
~flhK ~faM-IA$
Shset 3 of 3 S

..
-. ~ __
~~~
- ~.
_
_. _
_L= ~ ~.. ..

_

.
_._

_
I ~ ....-
_~
- -
_ -- - -
-
-

-
_
.,: _ _ ~
- ~.
__ ,.. .

.._
.; _.

_
.
ry
_. _
__
_ .. _.

_~. -

__ ._,. ~

.. ..Y
, -

~, ~..

-,
, . :~

..

.

.-.
.. _
-
__ _, _ _
-

_ _
.,

., _
._
>..
1 ._..
, .: - , _ ,
f}..
_ ~ .~
.Y.
,~A , U

~
*
~~,

San
d
,

t,,,
i
1,
- ~., ..
- _
L. ,
.~
.. - ; ,.,,,
_ „
-,. ,,
_ - _
,.~
-
_
.4.:s ~ `T
r
. ~ .-.,.

. r---~
~;.
. )

•-

. f _ - _..
{{
a

~',
~ -
~ _
'. _
_ U _
_
- `' ~~'~ '~ I ~ ; i ~~~ ^ ~ ~ ~\ _,~ . ~ .:r ~
~ ~'!L ....
////// ~
,rte.
.

~ , ,.
~, '
~~,: ,1.~ ~M 1 f ~ y
i
l
rf ~ l
t
, f '.~ J ..w ..i.. r
i.

~ ~.4 `
>
l
~
~
,~~,. ± ....

5 I ~~...

~
Ji ~• ~ S ;,; 1 2 i4

• ~ : • it •
!~: • ~ $ ~ ~ ,,. `
I ~ i ~ ,~~'
.
~ I7 ~ l
^ '

•~
t . . ~f: ~ ~ ` !
•• i `

1 ~
1
'

`;

.~ ~ a

_
k,
•
,
O
~ •
• lf~
j • ~
II yy
I ~1

/,/~y
~J ~®~
DIVISION ®F lIIG1IW,~YS
PI'I"I' C®UNTY
PR®J
ECT:33225.1.1 (B-36840
BRIDGE N®.129 ®VER 'I't,R RIVER
AND
'
'
.
BRIDGE N®.127 ®VER
I
.~R
RIVER ®VERF1.®W ®N SR 1565
,,//~~ pp ¶ A [C
1L
SHEE'd' ®F 5 // 7 // 07
Psnn~ prewing
~r,..~t ~/ on 3 S

WETLAND PERMIT IMPACT SUMMARY
WETLAND IMPACTS SURFACE WATER IMPACTS

Site
No.

Station
(From/To)

Structure
Size /Type
Permanent
Fillln
Wetlands
ac
Temp.
Fillln
Wetlands
ac
Excavation
in
Wetlands
ac
Mechanized
Clearing
in Wetlands
ac an
Clearing
in
Wetlands
ac
Permanent
SW
impacts
ac
Temp.
SW
impacts
ac Existing
Channel
Impacts
Permanent
ft Existing
Channel
Impacts
Temp.
ft
Natural
Stream
Design
ft
1 15+00 to 17+g0 Rt. 3 48" & 1 60" 0.18 0.00 0.05 0.02 100.00

2 15+00 to 17+80 Lt. 3 48" & 1 60" 0.18 0.00 0.02 0.02 81.00

3 33+00 to 52+65 I@tos'-~r', 3@102'9^, 0.44 0.12 3.36
I ~ @100', a@so', ~ @sr-z°

4 54+00 Lt. 0.19 0.05

5 56+30 Rt. 0.01 0.03

6 57+15 Lt. 0.01 0.01

TOTALS: 1.01 0.01 0.27 0.04 181.00
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PITT COUNTY
WBS - 33225.1.1 (B-3684(
ATN Remised J/J1/05 SHEET 1 of ~ 39206.00
Plrrnit Qtawtt;i~
Shest_ 5 _ of 3 s.

e

no.
eXFA N0.
PLANTING DETAILS
SEEDLING /LINER BAREROOT PLANTING DETAIL
HE,4LING IN
L Iaate ~ heeli~lo ~ m . dedt:eel
~ . e~ hettom amoe
WETLAND REFORESTATION
~. R'ETLAND REFORESTATION SHALL BE PLANTED 6 FT, TO 10 FT. ON CENTER, RANDOM
9PAC,IPIG,AVERAGING 8 FT.ON CENTER, APPROXU4fATELY 680 PLAl1*f9 PER ACRE.
1 ]Ieold~D tEe trmeh ehh 2 3orha eeR
rated rndut Pleoe a 1 fooh Iqv d
edl roCed cedar tl e dopSy ~
area eod dthe tnah. ,C
j
4. Plea e ~ lacer dpleon
~ rlody and a thr
mot allu ~ ~ komd Ind

a Phw e 1 tech Iqs deal
~ ~ rem mam
j
~ Mw hveer d plem eed rndos
r eaereq ad emr daaa•y.
DIBBLE PLANTING METHOD
USING THE KBC PLANTING BAR
PLANTING NOTES;
elavmc ~
~~ ~ ~ I
eee~orieer ro a~ ~. p
~~~~ f1
nc ruvnva aa;t
hYde ~° . a~ite~e~lr
h. n I~ee1.I y,d`~
4 feeher ehi d
1 hrh thtri r eeder~
ROOT PRL'rIIVG ITI
al wdhw ehrh. root IW~
pi.e+,uarwee,,a dre
a raob eetrd etas t!e
to heiherhdar ~
as elec.
11'EITAND REFORESTATION
bICCfURE„YPE, SIZB,AND FURYISY H 9HA71, CO~I+ORM 7'0 THE P0I]AR'11VCn
34% NYSSA AQUATICA WATER TUPELO 12 in -18 m BR
33% TAXODIUM DISTICHUM BALD CYPRESS 12 in -18 m BR
33% FRAXINUS PENNSYLVANICA GREEN ASH 12 in -18 in BR
SEE PLAN SHEETS FOR AREAS TO BE PiANTED
WETLAND REFORESTATION
DETAIL SHEET
N.C.D.O.T.- ROADSIDE ENVIRONMENTAL UNfI'

" - DETAIL A DETAIL B DETAIL C
®DENOTES FILL IN DITCH LINER LATERAL 'V' DITCH TOE PROTECTION
W iLAN tNm rD Scaei ixor rD Scaei INOr rD Scae~
EE DI
ro Eln
®DENOIN SwEiLANO TION oonc a voD~D i~wmo r/r,. sioDe i ow,a ~ / sane
/ D a
Furor iDDrlc Ma..O : LO Ft. ° Alin. D : Lp Ft. a
DENOTES FILLL IIN FA+er No.. d = L0 Ft, a : L0 Fr. 3.D ~A^re+
SURFACE WATER Foonc Faoric
~OENOTFOS MECHANIZED 1YPe P£ Liner :CLASS 'B'RA w/ FF D =S.OFt. T e o£
LEA LNG TYDe of Liner CLd56 'B' RA W/ FF YD Liner =CLASS 'G' RIP AdP
1- STA 1l+15 TO 15+8A LT. 1- I5+84 TO 16+SO LT. -l- Il+IS i0 15+00 Ri.
1- 17+50 70 19+00 RT.
-l- 18+50 TO 19+25 Li.
Q
2
Q
O ~ ~
Z~
~ -L- POT 14+0 00
DETAIL 0
INLET /OUTLET DETAIL J-48' RCP
I NOi ip ecDbl
Sa
I.5 ~
~~
ND AiD ADD to Srreom &0.
+YDe Or Linlr : CIAS$ 'I'AIP PIP W/ FE
-L- I7+60 LT
-L- 16+88 0.T
OTTI$ W. BAILEY
OB 189, PG 589

BEGrN STATE ROJECT 8-3684
~ PREFORMED SCOUR HOfE
* {-STA ,b+58 LT.
-L- POT 13+0.00 SEE DETPIL 'E'
i '
BE rW COrySTRUCTION +48.78 ;
i fi3 .~ UTERAl v DRCH
I75
.
SEE DETAIL '8'
~ i ~ a DOE 270 CY
EST. 35 TONS I

LEON A, HARDEE, Jr. I N LEON R, HARDEE. Jr.
DB 805
PG 735 I LEON R. HARDEE. Jr,
DB 805, PG 735 i i EST. 90 SY F.F.
t; - I
DB 805. PG T35 I . I • _
!
1

_ __l

~ -_ .
:.;1.
~ i
<6
I s
l
.p _ SITE 2
'
v
~
J
' 1 ',
~ 30.00 SEE DETALL 'A' e
--
N EST.55 TONS

r N EST. I70 SY F.F.

~
r A, f
', SPECAI DITCH GRAUE ,~
. ~
••
'' ~ : SEE PRONLE ~
~ nE DosnNG DrtcH ra ~ ' - '~~:--~-.~ - _
'
-~-
*----- ~r THE PROPOSED DRCH
- i ~ BORE A LACK
~ 60' SMOOTH SREEL ~- 'L`-
'
AETNN .... RETAIN -~ _
N -72' 38 ' E C
i, , N 72 34 531' E ~

AETAI
~- - N RETARD REMOVE. AND REPLACE - _
.r.,
. .a.._,
PIP ~
I
C 0. 0
BL- IPOT 5+00.00
11-L- 10+41.48 14.54 RTI --- --
DETAIL 'E'
KFiasR o5u4A xD-E
nNN a. . x+
ollx ,~~ E4[NU,
N xn. r, , /
e:N.D
mA ~ ~,~ o ~ au'
~1 M14LNiuM~ 5,D
YCroN~~
PPF
er El d'x
wltEt
xnw~
'e RP Net , OV
v l t ~ k4
-L- 16+58 Li.
D65APAT0R PAD
CUSS 'I' RIP AAP
VHFILTEA FPBRIC q]
L = 25' Oy
W = 10' CUSS 'I' AIP CN]
T = 1.25' wVFILTFR FABRIC
EST. 38 TONS SEE DETAIL 'D' +
EST. 78 SY FF EST. IB TONS ~
EST. 10 SY f.F. ~
lesr.3D a DD ~
C
V
I
/>
A~ }~ ~ / J'

~ _,, ,~
r 0.FMOVE R' OF FAIIFQ
!8' RCP ~AEPIACE
- ~ (- TOE PAO1ECnON +
1
~ - - ~ SEE OFTAR 'C' F o ~r p 11
- EST. /O IONS ~ ~
CHRISTOPHER 00.Y10 WILLIAMS ~ ~ - ~~- .EST. 115 SY EE +75 ~~ n
OB 598. PG I)7 _ / r` . ---._., ` ~ ~ .t* h v
r e
\ m / ,,. 94.0 CUSS I'PoP AAP
12 . W/FlLTER FABRIC T
' \ ~ =-^~-- ~ SEE DETAIL '0'
- ' GREPiORY W, $IOERS f. 2 ES7. 18 iDNi
-~ \+-- C DB 272. PG 467 I EST. 10 SY F.F
~ ~ ~ x 1 EST. 35 CY DL1E
SITE 1 ~ ~ ~ A
r ~~,
al,
x ~ ti
yy ~~~ ~ ~-~,N
,~ 4 y ~' ~~
4
1 _ -. ~ y
GREGORY w. SIDERS
DB 652. PG 800 m
r
1 /
ENGLISH
USE METHOD 3 FOR
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
PiTT COUNTY
SR 1565
5/7/2007
SHEF
RNA SHEET N0.
RoADw,Ar DESIGN nrouwucs
ENGINEER ENGINEER
PRELIMIN RY PL.~4NS
W NOT VSE FO CONSTRURIPN
]NCOMPLE E PLANS
DD NOT USE FOP /W AC7U151TpN
50 0 100
PEA prawin9 5
Sheep .~- °~
O
S. FRANKLIN BROWN, Jr.
DB 691, PG 13
-~ ~~.
t ROBERT A. GRAY
DB BB. PG 781
- 0
TOE PROTECTION
,~ sE~ DEtuL'c
EST.35 TONS
EST.100 SY F.F.
0.0 SPECIAL DRCH GRAD
a 1-19+25 TO 20+5
SEE PROFRF~
N
`04.00
63.00
E~ ~::
'~~ °.
~. r, F„ i
~.-- . ~--
_- ~• `a
,r - y -'
+25.00
43.16
a
TOE PROTECTION. °
SEE DETAIL 'C'
EST. 70 TONS
EST. 195 SY F.F.
GREGORY K. RAY
DB 696.PG 622
O c
I I I i l~
- `-
+'r ~ N
.IE_ ` Q
ce a r Q
-- _ ~,r
- --_ _.- __ Z J7
-- j A
'F r
,. F ,0, X8,2£ - U
[~~ Q
BL- 2 PINC I4+50.40 :
(-L- 19+86.43 37.52 RTI
-L
PIS Sta Af67b6 PI SPo 22+2427 PIS Sto 26+57B0
Bs = 3' 25' l4.3' ~ = 33' 29' 59.0' iLTJ 8s = 3' 25' 14.3'
Ls = 160.00' D = 4' 16' 329' Ls = 160.04'
LT = 106.69' L = 783.41 CT = l06b9
ST = 53.35' T = 40329' ST = 53.35'
R = r,340.00'
Se = 0.06
FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SNEE7 8
OBLITERATION OF EXISTING ROAD

~ ®DENDiEES5 FILLL IN DETAILA
DETAIL B DETaII C DETAIL D
DITCH LINEA TDE PROTECTION INLET / DUTLET DETAIL 3-40' RCP
ME1LANp iuor ro scaei LATERALr 'V' DITCH Ixor ro SedN iuor ro scaiei
I xm a sca I
® DENOIN u~TLgND iION crouna N owa rarwai -- 71u c~ound 3'I°reL nu ~
SIODe SOD, Sboe ~
a crouna ~ p '~ rrr r.
®DENDTES FIL` IN vloer toor~c Nax. d : Lo tt. e Inln. D : Lo Tt ° 4s
SURFACE uATEfl weer Uax. a : LD Fr. a : IA Fe. 3.0 ~`m~ic ~ B° oxa
fppric
DENOTES MECHANIZED o =S.Of r, uo RJR Rao ~~ srream Bea.
CLEARING type of Liner = (LASS 'B' RR Wi fF Tyoe of Llner = CIgSS 'B' RR Wi FF 'Yoe of Liner =CLASS '9' RP RAP lyoe or Liner
ClISS 'I' RW RAP N/ ff
-L- STA 11+75 TO 15+BI lT. -L- 15+BI TO 16+50 lT. -L- U+15 TO 15+00 Ki. -L- 17aA0 LT.
~- 17+50 TO 19+00 R1. .y_ 16+BB RT.
-1-18+50 TO 19+25 U,
\~~
DETAIL 'E'
aR[lDOxEp S~dxl xR,E
Rxx
p d w~ ~ IMart mean
rq /
r xa ~ ,
nlx D ~ LD'
ei xE14LaSbx SDO I
e.~D
Atidx x-~
aeF
rl~ dl'<x Kau
WiLCI
xr l~~"P RU ~ INx ~ xLlipq
aA dM0 -
ENGLISH
USE METHOD 3 FOR
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
PITT COUNTY
SR 1565
5/7/2007
UECI REFERENCE N0. SHEI
8-3684 ,
WW SH&T NO,
OwAY DESIGN MYDAAUUCS
ENGNEER ENGINEER
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
W NOT USE CONSTRUCTION
INCOMPLE E PLANS
W NM USE i0R /• ACOVISITION
50 D 100

o ~_,°..~ L,. Perrni<Drawing S
Q DTTIS W. BAR.EY I Sheet
j 2 OB T89, PC 589
Q O
O (~ ~ S. FRANKLIN BROWN, Jr.
DB 694 PG 17
V
~ -L- POT 14+0 .00 2 DISSAPATOR PAD I
BEGIN STATE ROJECT B-3684 '~"T~~"B"'~
+ R P0.FFO0.AIFD SCOU0. IIE~ T 1B TON{S ~ SEAr FABRIC + .-~ ~ ~~~&
-L ~FO~`'S.IJ'~ JV,VC! -45TA ,6+5B LT ~ 7b S1'kF ~~~_
SEE DETAIL TE' Sff DETAIL'p'
I ' I EST.IB TONS ~ -~~ROBERT d LRAY~--
r.A BEN LOI~S+I IT1b~1'!ON +48.75 , -J LATERAL Y DRCH \\ I ' ~ rEST., 70 CY D / Dfl e~-PCJB+\.
( G ', ~ I ~ 175 6} ~ ! SEE DETM T ~ +
:. J ~ * DDE 370 CY / ~/' ~ 77
' LEON R. IJAf~I EE, Jr. ,'. L i/ E5T.35 TONS I ~ I ~I x I ~\-.
LEDN R.HARDEE.Jr. ~ ~
LEDN R. HARDEE. Jr. I ~ :' .~ / ES7.QD 5Y F.E. + .Iq I iTOri JNtQTELTai
! ~B BOSI PC)i75 / I' ~ -
DB 805, PG 775 I OB BDS. PL 1)9 ( ~ ~, / - ~,,,;/'1 j 1 I 172119 ., ~ f'sEE'DF~AR C ~~
- ~ \; .- - ~ - ~/ ESE 75I TONS ~ ,.
I '~ -~'~ Ir I ..LI y ~ E$T; 100 ST FF
/`
~ j r
..-R ~ it 1 ~ ~ v ~ 1 ~ SI'I'E~ 2 ~ j ~ ' ~ . R@ ~/ " 0 D ~ RPECU1DrtCH G"ABE `_ ~
-
R' \~__- ' ~ ~ • ~ s ~ ~. 9 .D ~ -419k75 TD 20y50 LT.. A...p
~ _ ~~!~ 10.D0 .....DITQ1 UNE0. -~ ~~ ~~ fi r - SEE PAOFBEI I ~ iS~
\ ~
~.~T I P L _ -- - SEE DETMI'A' _ 1-' ~ ( / --
'r ~ -`~ ~ t EST. 55 TONS '~~ ,, ~ ~~
kl ~ ' /~
e' ~ ~ ' I \ ;' " Esr na sr PF ~ f+Da ob ~ - _ Y~ O
~ ~ 'fPEDUi DrtcN GRADE ''r ,. ~ / - ~ a ~, / ~ }
../ i +75 r. ~~ ~ _
~~ ~ I ,C ~ / , ~ llT
i _
SEE PROHLE ~ / F - ~~ ~ f~ ~ y C~~"~ r ' °~ N
c , _
~ ~ if
/ _
~-7 ( R TIE F70511NG 61TCH TO ~'+ ,~ JB ~~.. -~~' - F I \'r U /-~
-• ~~;u-. a.x. I ,J w" ! ~'•~7i THE PROPOSED ~DIiCH r j -~-----gp8p -- -~_ I ~ f; 15 q:. 1~ G
3-1ACK.gT~
~- ~ _..._ ~ RETAIN.~~~ - RETAIN -~-~s~/ ,- _ ~- ec+~,+;r--- - ~" ~ `~~ -•--- f~ l1~ lP
I
_ ~ T -
-_.- I =_ _- _-- - _ -_-- --- -- - -- __ --- - -- _' -
~. ,~ .. _- z ~ - -
~x_=... ... RETAIN AE7 ~-~, -.: 0.EALL7VE AND REPLACE-' . ~-~..t - _ .._-~ ~/' - ~F ~,
T -.~ N _ _ _. , .. _-- "~~-- - - - - ~~ --~-"-~~~- Q
~ ~.: •. -
---~ -_
,'' I ,...' ,~ ~ _.- i I/ ~- - - J .,L 'RF/.tOVE-B`BFPAF A a .. F - ....
', ~ ..r _ ~ - .I ~~
_.. u, `
i
BL• IPOT 5+00.00 ? ' sr ~.' '; .% i D. 1 ~ % / _ V .IE .~
• ~
(-L- 10+41.48 14.54 RT1 \ ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ I
__ - ~~ B•~ ~ ( !
ToE ~TEC~ioN toE PROrErnoH. +
- ~~ ~ f f L ; n !r - /' SEE DETAII'C ~ r _
sEE o6iuL c ~ ~ ~ ti 9. 1 /'' / j ~ Esr 7o TONS
CHRISTOPHER DAVID WILLIAMS -- __ '~ j
i FST ~ OFF % ~ HW~' / '~/ /' 'EST 195 SY FF.
08 598, PC 177 ti,:. ~ I I :~ .. ~ 75. ~,~ ~ / / / ~ ~
~ - 8. ~~ ~ i BL- 2 PWC 14+50.40 =
/ m h GREGDRY Y/RAY' ~
~' ~'~~ - / ~ / '~ ~ ~. ti ~' '. DB 69rkPC 6za ~ ~ I-L- 19+86.43 37.52 RTI
r'
~~.., ... - ./ i , m 7 4.0 ~ "CLASS T'RA'-PAP ~, /i
-; ~ ~ .... -- ~^~ ~-~~J i ..~~/ f3 I ('SEE',DOETAI~'C ~ O
r "-~-~ rCR".P6Sf~3~,/. f.' t 71 f~ ~~~~57.35 ~C1"O'
_, ~,~-~- ~ ~ / F \\
/i J \
-- - - - - ~ '~ ~-~,.~ - `$ITE 1 o I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~'~
' / D
~( ~ ~. ~e ,a/1 ~ ~~ ~ -~ ~~ I
~ N
__.
r r, ~ - ,,
-~, ,
~r ~. tip. ~ I / "~ ~~
~~ ~~ ~~ -
I -
..
GREGORY W
SIDERS i "'
.
I Pls Sta f1+67.66 P! Sto 22+2427 Pls Sta 26+57.80
. DB 6s6.PL Boo o Bs = 3'25'143' p= 33'2559.0'fLTI 8s = 3'25'!4.3'
I Ls = 160.00' D = 4' 16' 329' Ls = !60.00'
1 LT = 106.65 L = 783.47 L7 = 106b9'
57 = 53.35' 7 = 40329' ST = 5335'

/I R = 1.340.00'
Se = 0.06
1 //

FOR -L- PROFIiF SEE SHEET 8
- / x ? x OBLITERATION OF FXlST1NG RDA!)

O
z"
0 ~
N
J
~ O
e
W
x
ti
2
2
e
0
h
J
O
r.
2
J
U
2~
0
~~
12
~W
~W
~~
O~
~~
O~
N~
® UECLEaRIfHiGNO
® GSENOTE9 FILL IN
URFgCE uaiER
_L_
® ~~ ~
oENOw LAN s REO P!s Sro r7+67.66 Pr Sra 22+2427 P1s Sro 26+57.80
\ Bs = 325'14.3' p= 3329'S9.0'(LT1 Bs = 3'25'14.3'
Cs = 160.00' D = 4'r6' 32.9' Ls = r6oDa
LT = f06b5 l = 783.47 L7 = 106b9'
\ ST = 53.35' T = 40329' ST = 53.35'
R = r,34o.oa
Se = 0.06
j~
ROBERT A GRAY ';
P DB RR, rG 3RI
~ +43.00 ~
O r~.:~.. `,V
O ~.. q `•~'~'
~?, \
Q
Z ~ ... ~ -
I
Z ~
~JF.~
~ i ~~
~ \ , ~ `..
,.
GREGOflY K. RAY
DB 696,PG 622
N
S. RANRLIN BROWN, Jr.
OB 691, PC 13
~.~, 1 ~ CUSS 'B' AIP NAP
WFRTE0. FABRIC
EST.3 TONS
EST.10 SY f.F. `\ I
~-- - ~r~
~~ -~_ ~~~
_ ~~~~~_~
~~ -~ ~:'~
1 1 ~ ~- , ~ EDwARO J. MCNULLEN
M1 ~~ OB 145. PC 689
~7 ' ~y _9300
/ CTA9$ 71' RIP AAP
/ WALTER fABUC
EST. iii TONS
EST. iii SY f.F.
PREFORMED SCOUR MOIE~
I SEE OETAII'E'
1
3a. o
I .oG
,,
r, - ..
- -- - ~
"P
/~~ 17
~oA ma
a
/ 3G1 ~mr pi
Wf4AT
,.. '" w0~ '+r
~,... -:-
DETAIL 'E'
wrcraerto scow xaE
~ •~RxL~RSau
n,a / }
SE.p_ y> ~.A i
B.10'
' 1.C
50'
. o.
~E,~...
nw
~, o~a~.
WttEt _ ~ _
MP w,. o~
., K l~ ~u
1 ~ 1LE SEE SHEET 8
'~ ORIITFRAT'in~ nF cvrc>•te~r on.n
WFUr q
\ GRATE i
~~
~ ~Q
G~Q
~,~
`~\
~,
BEBBI
08 5
~'\ CLOSED DAIINAGE SrSTFM REOUTAED Oi4
RAIOGE FROM STA R9+3R i0 31+6R 1-
LT. ANO RT.INTETS SPACED 13' ON CENTER.
TMS SYSTEM WRi NEED TO TE IMO THE
',\3GI•s GPP 7NE BRIDGE ~.
FROM STATION 3I+IS TO 3a+07
ClOSEO SYSTEM WRH INlE1S
~'\ SPACED iZ' ON CENER AND
OUDERNG DOWN REM -S INTO
DISSIPAf00. PAD.
X57.56 ~`
30.00
~ ~ E
E~_
+7fi.38 E~-
81.17 E_' TEMPDRARI~VlARK 6R7DGE
293:' ~
0 3 4
16' NC
PROJECT REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
8-3684 5
0.Nl SHEET N0.
0.0ADWAY DESIGN
FNGWFER HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
Permit D wing
Sheet of 35
so o roo
E PHELPS ENGLISH
40 PG 187
USE METHOD 3 FOR
GEARING AND GRUBBING
PITT COUNTY
SR 1565
5/7/2007
~ 1
DUNK `.
Id' WC \ /
~ _ ~~
~~ L
l - +
~/ / T
=0
l/~ Q
r Q
~r
Z ~
J I
SJ
UI
F-
Q
;: ~
,,. ,-~ ; . ,~ ..., ..- - _ ~ _ - sou dD ro ~,
-,, 28+BT SMBG % as 4
-~ _ ~ m
_ ~- ~ _ ' m
__
T
E_ SI1E3
^F
~. ~' _....- F.~ '_-- .._ ... -_
_ _. _ -,938-08
. '+-
N O 96
--- - -
E
0. ~Y
_.
_, _ ----- - _ _ ' 3
-_
0. ~ ..
._ I ___..-.. ..
~ 1
_. -- - F _-_ _'
~ `"- -
- =,~-
' .,; ": _...,. ',: ~ ~ ~ . _ r„ ,~,1- _ ~-'''- - .60.38
0
~.,_ , _..., .... ~ ,: ''.., ^. - - GARDE TO GRAIN ~ l ,,, '. 1 Zp9.6 11
~ ~',
ti-_. ., -
_ _ ~_
i.., -. _
I ~~ ,. ~, , - -W ~ ~. ~ ~~~
BL- 3 PINC 21+37.43 GPS '83016-P LOUIS ELUORE HOOGES ` _
,,'' = 1-L- 26+36.54 122.87 RTi ~ t DB r44,PG 729 _ ~ ~ -
1\
~ \
GREGORY K. RAY
DB 722FG 95
~~'. 1
'~ ~,~
_ -- _, ~ ~~
,~
~~
_ ~
I -.. _ ..... _ .. .__. .. . ~_ /
4FI I
,
_ r
,. \
~~ ~~,
I \
_ ~ 1
i _L_ ~ ~~ 1
~ i
~ ~
SKETCH SHOWING BRlCGE/PAVEMENT RELATIONSNlP 1 ~~ ~/
FOR -L- PROF

® DE CLEARING ND
® DSURFaCEFwaTERN \ 1
-L-
Pls Sto J7+6756 PI Sto 22+2427 Pls Sro 26+57b0
® DENDU~TLaNOS RED \ Bs = 3'25'193' p= 33'29'S9.0'fLTI Bs = 3'25'!4.3`
Ls = !60.00' D = 4l6' 32.9' Ls = 160.1)0'
17 = 10659' L = 783.47 LT = !06.69'
\ Sr = 53.35' T = 40329' S7 = 5335'
R = 1340.00'
Se = 0.06 ,\
O
n1
1 / I ~
~~
~~0
~~~0
~G
P k Drawing
sn ~a_
N0. SNEFT N0.
RW SMEET N0.
ROADWAY DESIGN NYDPAWCS
ENpNEER D.~.IEER
PRELIM[N RY PLANS
DD NDT U¢ i0 CDNATRULTDN
[NCOMPLE E PLANS
00 NDT UDR PDR /R ACDUISITRIN
5D 0 !OD
DEBBE PHELPS ENGLISH
oe saD Pc ~Ea
^. O USE METHOD 3 FOR
aos® DANNAGESYSI~~IAEy~1'~N CLEARING AND GRUBBING
BRIDGE FROM STA. 79+2& T,O ~~1+dB
Li. AND Rf. INLETS SP~CEp~.l~ `ENfEA: `.
TWS SYSTiu

'
8L- 3 PINC 21+37.43 GPS '83016 I' LOUIS ELMORE. HODGES ~ ~ ~',

~ ~
1

. ~
~ (-L- 26+36.54 122
87 AT) DB ra,PC sz9
~ ~
~
~
p . ~ '~ -
~! GREGORY ~ ~ ~ r
~
~J'
1 ~ ~ /~
~

~~
~ " K. RAY
DB 772
PC 95
~
. ~
~ ~
~
~
~ ~ ..
'~' I ~

~~~ ,,

!
i c _ ~ it

~

1
II
,
`
~
~~+ V~ ~
~ ` ti
~'~ ~ -
i
1 !_~ - ~ _ i A i 1 ~C
_.
-~ ~ _ _._
,:~,
_ _
_ _ ~

1
1
1
I i 1
I
'
'
~
\
,
1
_L_ '/ J /
l/ I
I
I

SKETCH SNOWING 8RID6E/PAVEMENT RELATIONSHIP /

~ ~ I
~
*

• ~~
~ 11
~
I '
..
,
\
~

I

1

~
~\~~
~
\ ~~~
~
~'
\-
\ \~
~
S /

'
! /
1

I (
~
1
//
?ROFILf
;._.... SEE SHEEF"8,
)h OF E XISTING ROAD';

DENOTEES5 RESTORED f
~ ® YETLaN05
® DENDTES HAND BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
cLEaRINE -YI- POTSr l0+~.~ -YI-
w~E ~ ~ P! r4+90,3
e - ~ p = 3' IRTI
~ D = T 4.3'
\ L = 4'
r 32.64'
~ = 76524'
~ ~ ~ \
I\ t r \,\O
~0 ~ t
N
~~
~ 40.l
Wp
Wp
_ +
In V
O~
f-
Q
W F-
J ~ td' PVC
UJ,__
~ K Lri~,

\`.

t .
;
~~ '~
DEBBIE PHELPS
DB 64D PG 183 I
CLOSED DRAINAGE SYSTEM AEQUTAID ON
BRIDGE FROM sunoN ~+ts TD oA+m
WIfM RdFlS SPACED I7 ON CENEER a07.59
SYSTEM ro eE dscwucED DowN I Ts
oo
BEM t5 INTO DISSIPAIOA PAD. .
e.DD
1.00 a I NOflTH ':
4o.DD { CAROLINA
DEPT OF
I
TRANSPORTATION.
~f. ~ E ~-E----_E ! No RE~ERENLE
UYIf OF NAND
' ~ NORTH CAROLNA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
~, NO REFERENCE
~ ~~ ~ J r --~~.~ E E E-
~ 4 ~ ~ Ems- .oo.Do
w r
L- 4 PINC 30+69.93 ' 145.00
~ ~E! ~ I-L- 35+64.31110.41 R7
-YI- PTSra.15+2299
~ DEBBIE PHELPS 100.00
2 DB 540 PG Ida
-rl- PGrsra. rs+6
~ r
2 ~ I
O I`
~~
~ 2 e) v
~ ~ ~ I
W
~W ~ I
O~
i ~
~ J
O~
~ ~
N~
~_
1 -
E E E
8L- 5 PINC 34+51.81=
8Y- 3 POT 10+95.32
1-L- 39+45.85 9.21 RT1
BEGIN BRIDGE END BRIDGE
APPROACH SLAB APPROACH SLAB
-L- POT 28+81.83 -L- 0 48+9
TYPE III TYPE III
~ -L- //
TYPE III TYPE III
SXETCH SHOWING BRIDGE/PAVEMENT RELATIONSHIP
r, \
~~
9`31~9SY
\~'' ~` p~NC q 5~
2 r~l ,2
75.04 00 T i
Ts.oo zs.Da -Yl- PCStD.l4+57.75
c =
93
v
G~`a ~
~G

P0.0JEC7 REFERB4CE N0. SHEET N0.
B-1684 6
Rw SHEET No.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
~~~ ENGINEER
Permit wing
sheet of 3 S
50 0 100
ENGLISH
USE METHOD 3 FOR
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
PITT COUNTY
SR 1565
5/7/2007
\\
15
Y
lYY? OF HAND C(£AAlNG
-E ~ `
E--`E~--E---~_ TEYPoRtV?I wORx BRl1x,E
E-----E E.__~- f`
/ / j ~ / ~ E
/ f // w0
/ iii ~~, ~ ~ ~ O
/ / 2+
~ ~ // // i
~ /i ~ i i i~ //, / ~~
~ / ~. ~
~~/ i F-
„~ _f. .. ~ , . ._ ,.. .. _
A y - ~ , , Q
~ • --~- ~~- _ W }-
_......
~-,I
r - ,~~L -
~~ k /f I R ~ ~' I i J
~~/ ~- .~_I _ ~ i ~_ ~ ' ~ J
~~ I
Q
E E E 86.96 _~
7--- r a65.00 r
O 115.00
SITE 3 \
d' PVC DRNNS TH0.0UGH THE RAJL ~ \
AAE RECOMMENDED AS FOLLOWS
12' DN CENTEit FROM ]I+25 TO /B+Ai 1- LT. d Ri. \
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
NO REFERENCE
FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET 8 & 9
®08LIrERATlON OF EXISTING ROAD

1
® DENOTES RESTORED
N iLAN05
TR
A UCTION
® OEC~EAaINOND ~,\,~, BEGIN CONS
X -YI- POTSta.10+00.00 -yl-
v
p = 3' IRTJ
e ~-
~ D = 7' 43'
L = 4'
T 32b4'
/ ~ = 76524'
N,
~~ ~ o
~ r
/
t
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
NO REFERENCE
r
~~ , ~• ~. ~
~

_
'" ~- ,
"
~

DEB81E PHELPS
OE Soo PL IAJ
--
~ -~iA~-~ti~
aoiEO oPAN.A RFOUIREO ol~

r7
O ~
~ '
'
-

~ ~ ~

_ --
1~ ~g S1
ewocE FAaA sE~noN is~ro zi~at
vmN 911FfS.5P/,CED Jz•oM'cENTER 1 - . 6~ ~.~ ~

U
~smEM To-aeasctuRCEI}' Down J
eENT ars INr 0651PAIOR?FD J
~
r
, ~ ~,

~ ,- 2A 5~
p~~
~ Z X11
J}
6 y
_ ~ :NORTH M `

1JECf REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
8-3684 6
ww sHEEr No.
owAr oEZCN nTVRwua
ENOINEE0. ENOIN@R
~~
P~
G~\~ ~
~G
PREL[MIN RY PLANS'l
W NOT USE FO CONSTAVRION ',
INCOMPLE E PL.9N5
DD NOT USE F00. /• nCONSITION

Permit Drawing 50 0 100
s~eec~~ ~~ ENGLISH
USE METHOD 3 FOA
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
PITT COUNTY
SR 1565
5/1/2007
I ~~~~~~ ~~~~~..w ucrnn imcni ur ircnn~rurciaiiurv
x0 REFERENCE
ill O
i
r
I TYPE III
i TYPE III
I-.
'i
~:1
E
f_ TYPE AI ~ TYPE III
l
SKETCH SHGWING BRIDGE/PAVEMENT RELATIONSHIP
'III FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET 8 & 9
IP I OBLITERATION OF EXISTING ROAD

®OENDTES FILL IN
wEErEaNo
i
DENOTEES MEECHANIZED
CLEARING
® DECLEARING NO
Z
0
N
->

~-
EiJ ~
w,
r
~r
O~
H
W ~'
Z~
J i
2
U,
F-
Q

\~e
NORTH CARDEINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ND REFERENCE
0
N,
Y ~~ y
SKETCH SHOJJlNG BRICGE/PAVEMENT RELATIONSHIP
NORTH CARDIINA DEPARTMENT OF iAANSPORTAT10N
NG REFERENCE
0
ENGLISH
USE METH00 3 FOR
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
PITT COUNTY
SR 1565
5/7/2007
t I
~ B»
-L-
P! Sta 57+6126
~= 2'23'S8.4'ILT!
D = 0' 28' 385
L = 502.56'
T = 251.32'
R = 12,000.00'
Se = NC
g3
P~
G~`0 ~
~L
Penny Drawing
Sheet ~ of ~5
RM' SNEEI N0.
ROADWAY DESIGN FIYpRAUt1C5
ENGINEER ENGINEER
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
DD NOT USE f0 CONETAUCiION
INCOMPLE E PLANS
W NOT USE fOR /A nCVUL51TI0N
50 ~ II
0
DETAIL 'E'
~trm.~n uow gal
Ra R~
.py~Cyl x.
it iGSiu
~i .s~Ki~lax
B l0
0
a ~ ma
SECIgx ~-~
M
pl[x
WI~[t
v rl ~'auu
v rt "'¢ I I
~-AVnu m LL
FOR -L- PROFIILE SEE SHEET 9
OBLITERATrON OF EXISTING ROAD

~ 0~~
SKETCH SHOWING BRIDGE/PAVEMENT RELATIONSHIP
NORTH CAROLINA ~EPARTIAENT OF TRANSPORTATION
NO REFERENCE
O
-L-
PI Sto 5- 7+g
~= 2'23'S8.4'(LTl
D = 0' 28' 38.9'
L = 502.56'
T = 25/32'
R = !2,000.00'
Se = NC
DETAIL 'E'
q¢,on,(G AM MLLE
Aw r(~ n PW u
~fIM~iVSIm
niM
~i ry51LLL1iW
o.:o
~o
0
~~_.~.,
a
ew
~,~.
Wt~R
_~
pp~ooc~~~ FOR -L- PROFIILE SEE SHEET 9
CXXXx')lvY OAl1TFRdTmu nc cv~cru~~ o~.,,

}

_60 _r_ - -L1C~ ~ .~ 1 ._....
EL' ;L1:~5~ : _ ..
_ :. ~
- ~ .... . . %tOECf REFERENCE N0.
8-3684 SMEET N0.
9
_
-. ___.__ __ _.__._._ ~ ; : Roeower oESICN
ENGINEER Nrowwua
ENGINEER

.5O PREL[MIN
DO NOT USE i0 RY PLAVS
NNST0.UCI10N

-40-=- - _
_
- ._ . -
-
-
----
29133i _ - - - - --- - --
-- ----- __

- _ _'_-- -
~; _ .: _
-30
FI = 46+50.00 ~
m
-- -
-- - - E~= I63Cr - - - -
`
= ~
~
-
- ,7"
~
30

VC
370
m
~ -
'~`_.
-
_
__ _.. - K = 139

~-
- --
--
--
- a ~ - _
- -
-- --_ --- - - w ~ - _
_ - - _- - - -- -20
- _ - _
_
~'IZ9I33i .
. ! K~.3C331. f ~ fv5lwc 60.GCE •i7;
- - - - -. -
_,

~. _

------
-

- t -JC30337.

_

_ _

-

_

_

_ - -_.
-
_i __

_

- - _ --- _ ~---- = 1.

~_
Q . ~
. - - - A55 !I RIP R
C
-- - - -I - - - - W/ FILTER FABRIC _

_
f - - -
~. - . _
1 35'
- - - .- -
--- - - -- -. _ _ _ -- ~--0
~0-__ - ---- -
- -. __ - -- -- ---- _ l

-- _ _ _
-- -
-

-.

- - - ---- _ __

_--20_
_
39+00 40+00 41+00 42+00 _
43
00 _
+
44+00 45+00 46+00 47+00
0
48+
0 49+00 50+00 51+00 52+00 53+00

60 _ . _: _ _
__ _ _ _ .: _ ._. 60__

_.
40 _ ~
BLEND r0 EXISF. _
- - N ~
. _. _. _ . 40.._
_:
:
30
_. ~, _
-
.
__
.. _ - °
u
_ ~ ~
~,
-
_
J

~ am
- - _ -
_ -
- - .: .
20
--- _ . ~ ~ ~

- _.. 20
~
!
Ip~0337 -.
w ~. o ~ _ .

10
....._l .
! -10.3033% W _.
.:..

_
_. _ , _. ! .... 10 _.

_. _ _ -
- -_
_

- - ----

-
--- - -- - - _----0--
.......-10 .---- _ -
_ __
_ -- _ _
- __ - _-- _- ,_ _ _.
-
__
_
____-10-_.

--- - - --
--._

- - -- - _- _ -

_. _- - __.-~ 0 _.
_
53+00 54+00 55+DO _ _

56+00
57+00 58+00 59+00 60+00 60+50 -

~, _ _.
_ _ _ __
.__ _
_._ _~ --
m
t 150 140.. 130 120
110 100 90 BD 70
60 •_
_ ~
10 PROJ. REFERENCE N0. SHEE7 N0.

_ 50 40 30 20 10

0
0 . 20 30
1
40 -

63
684 _

X
5
Sd 60
70 80 90 100 -110 120 130'
14D 150
5(.l _ _
- '_ _ ::
.
_ Pem~lt prawing -
:_
_ Sfi
set ~
~ ~
,
~
. sa
__ _ - _
_ - - - -- -

3C.~ 9.i 2 pG ~cc?
__
- ~n 'd r8- -

_ _
-
~
~ i ~n
z~ 3I _
,
-
.__ _ -
- -
_
_ __
_.
k
...

..
W

'

~~
f
- _ _.
~
~
T

-
-
_ -

; s~
~
~,
+ _-

.---
~~~
_
__ _ __

- _ _-

_ ,
3
...
- ._

- -
.. -
-
- _ __ / __
~
_ _. _
_.
_ _ ~ _.

- - _ _

_
_ __
__ _ _

-. __ __
- -
_ - - - .
~ _. , - ~ 19+00.00 - -
~'--':
- ~: ~_
- - - - - z ,
sz~~ 9c z
~ _ _

_L a^
~~c - _ - - -_
_
- _ _
- ~ -
- -.

~
_ ,

-
~~ _:

_. -
t

~ -
i
_
_ _
_ _
- - - - -~

_ -- -- ~ .
~ - e~
- - e , _t

f I
4 _

t

~
-

--
- - -- _- __

-__
_
- -
_= {
... ~~~c -
~
- _
c
`~
--
~ -
(
c _ -- = ---
-
-
.
_~.
.. -- -
l
_
~~ o
_..
. av .~..~
, ~
~ ~` °~ .~ _ n.
i
-
~ ~ `rte-~ -
_ _
--
_--_--
~_~
__~
._
- - ~
~-% r _ _ __. _ ~ ~ Gam-
- _..
_
_.
/ .. ___ -._r1.
._ _.

_ -
_-. - _. - .. ~ .
- _
... .. _._. _._ _.._._ _.. _._._
- ._-
_
-' -
___ _.
... _.. _- __ ~ __. i .. i -- - - -. _. _.. _.. ._

- -- --. m _.. ~ ---- _ _ -- - _ .
-
-- --- _ _
--- _ -- - -- i8~ ~uAO _ _.
_ - --- -
5~~
_
aC . _ __
- _
- _
, - __
_ _

_
_.. _
.. - ,
__
-
~0.^
_ _...
~
_ ._. _ _ 1 - . _. .. _ _
. - 4 -
-
.. _ _.
~~.
_ _ ~ ~ 1 _
- .. -._ - ~--~
.. _ ~
I ._ __ •_ ,. ...
..
-- _ _- _
... _ -_
a
- f !
J
L52 P
II {
'I
~
0 -
_.- _. _. --
- ~ - ._
_
- ,
_
li
Q
~9L ~Ji~G_ ~ 2
' ~
~
~
.
.
008
.._ .. ..
-
.
- - -- -..
=-~n - - { _

- -_ - _

_

-- ,
-
~
i 4
~
~
4I - ~ I

i
A
W~
--y \_r.... -_.
..

J
--
/ I
_. _

~ ~c
n ~ ~ --=~r
,, -~
_
-
.-

.
_ - -
_
_
- ~. r ~ _ - - - _
~
< 1: _.
_ _ Fir" rii''v' ~r h ,,''
_ _ !-

m _
_ ..
_.
_ __ _

_ _ _.
_ _
_ _ _ _ _ _
m
_
18 +.00.00
- _ -
_ _ ._
a - _: _ -- __. - - _ _ _

o. __ _.
. _
-

_ ~ _
_ _
..

eN
~~
150 140 130 .:_..130
_
-110 100
90~ 80 70
_ . _ L
-i -
60 -

...
-

_ _
;
_ 50 40 30 20 _ 10 0 i
_
_' ~ 100 110_ T20 13D_ 1d0 J50

P ....... _-.. _... _.._ _._ ._
D 5 10 PROD. REFERENCE NO SHEET N0.
i 150 , 140 130 120._ 11D 100 _ 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20
B 3684
X +7
-
- 10 0 1D 20 30 40 50 60
- 7D eo 9D loo nD l<o 3a , iao iso
!
- ~RT1~ Qr8W111~ ..
ShllAt~O ~
-
~_ ~c-
-
_ - _::
-

- ~
d 0 t20 ,'ZC
30 _ - -

_ - o~
50' - - - ~- _ _
_ - _ - .

-

_ ~ 1

_ 4
h ~~ r
Ot~FO- J.~?

_
. ~
..

__ _ - - -
--- __
.. _. ~-
_

~

~
-
_ - --
i40. ~ _ ~ - - _.. _- ~_ .. {
I

~ _.

..

_
- - ~~

3G _:: _. -- ,
_- _
_

_ __
_ . _ _ - _
- __ - - -
__ _
'

-2Q--------_-- '_ - _:.
_ . __ .
_ _

_::
--- - -- - _

'~~
~
~~
• ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ i
0
_
-- -

- ~ _
~ ~

~~~ ,
_- - _ _ 35+50.0 _ - ' -=~- .

s __--- -=-

_
_ _
_
__
_
_ _ _
__
___
_ - _
-

_

Ar .c _ tc_._ : L. _ -
_.
-_.
_ `4 _ n~.-
I ~
~ ..
-
~ ' 5'J
-.
~r _
__ ~
_. _

_,
_
_3t? ._ _
_
_ : _ _ . - _ _
_
__ _ _. - - _
x' - - - - - :: _ _

_ _

_ _ _ _

- _ _. _.
~,
,Q
JC _ . _ -
--
~_
--.

~ - -
- _.
~_

~
~ ~
_ _ _ _ _ 35T00:00- _ _. _ __ _ _ _ _

~ _ _
_ __

~~'.~
15D 14Q 130 :.. 120.. 110 _ 100 90 F80
70 60 ~ ~50 40 30 20 _ 10 V
~
_ _
10 20 30 40 50 60 _ 70 80 90 100 110 120.. 1 0 140 1 50 -

a
ti
m
n
m
oe
oQ_
~n¢~
P
V
... _.... :... .. ........
N _.. _. .. -.
y 150. 1d0 130 120 110 100 90 80 ~ - - ..... ......... ......... .....
~

0
1

PRO1. REFERENCE NO

SHEET N0.
JO 60 59 40 30 20 10
0 10 20
3684
-
X 18

- _.
_
30 40 50
60 70 80 40 100 '' 110.
_ _. 120 130 140

150
- _ Q@tCYi~'QfaWIFIQ

_ _. , .
_ _
_.
_
__ ~~

- __
-

7
_ _
_
tsC_ _
_: - -
_:

- __ _. --

-
- - -
cn _ - _. .
.- _ -- _. - 3~ X20 ,2n
J~
___.
__ __
~ ~ ~ ~- _

-
_ - _. _ .
6~ _:_
. _ -.

. _ _ _ - - - - -

_

r~zc. ~ a~2c Ij
['
.

-

~ '

~,~ ,r _ - -
_ _
-_ _
- _

_
-'...

:
-
-
_ _ - - -- - - _
- - _ _ _ a?_ .
- _
3C. _:_: : _
_ _
- -: _ _. _
- _ _

- . - - - - - __ _ _

__
32_.

- __
_ _.
--
-_

_.
~
-z~_
~~
~
- ~
~
~ e ~ ,,~
~ .
-~~
---
_~ ~ A °

- _.
_.
_
_ 36+50.00 . _. - __ ~_~ _
_

- -
-:_ _
_ ~ -
- -
-- - _ ~~
~

- ' .
--

_ *

-. J_. ~.V2C-- 1 ..-C02C

--
!
~
- _
.. .. ~ .:_ -
- ~ - _

-
`(]
_
4%. ._~ ._. _ ~
_ .:. _
_

-
- - _ _

_ _ _ .
_. ..

--
~0_ _.
--
7~ _ _

I- .._ _ _ _._ :
__
__ _ _
`_ - _ _ _

_

_
_ _- - -
_ _ _ _

_

_ -
___. - __ _ _ _
_ - __

n

__ _
_ __ . ._

. - -_
. -_ ~
_ -- _
_
-

T
\\
_ --tom
__ - -~ V `~ ~ ~ A
~
- _. - - ~~

- - ___~.-r--- ~~
_..
-
\ ~
_ ~.~ ~ `~~ ~ A
~~V ~~~
_ ~
_ _ f-~ ~ \ ~
~ `.
,~~
_ _ _ _ 3b+00.00 _ -
__ _ _
- _ - `
150 140 130 120 1'0 '100 90 80 70 _ _ ~
_
60 -- -- .'
50 _ 40
' 30 :
-
0
_
20 lU
- 10 20
3r) 40:: 50.____ 60 __ 70 80 90 100 fl0 120 130
id0 i50

. __
..
_ ._
m 150_ 140 130 ~ 120 - 110 100 qp.
r

~--

PROJ.REFERENCE NO.

SHEET NO.
_- _ eo - B-3684 X-19

~ _:: _ .:
--. _ _ _ _

,- ) 9.0 }00 110

_ 120 130 140

_ _ _ ._. 150
_ - _ p@f 1'~f~f~~
J~~t -~Z e~ ~ Q~~ -
--6P- -_. _ _ -_ _- -:: - -_ - - -- --- -
_ __
-
_
- - --

_
_-SP. _:_:_ _ _ ~ - ~ _ _ _ ~ _
_

_ _ - _ _ .. _

_
_..

__ - __ _
-

_
_ - __

_
__ -
- _ _
-._3D . _ - _ __ - _ ~.
__.

__
_-
_

_ _ _.

_ _

n

-- - _
-
- -
_._

_
~.~ _ _ _
__
_
~~
~~

~ r _.

D- _ - -_ - - - ~ '~
~ ~
~~ _ _:
--
_ -
_.
__

bl~ - _ -...:: - - .._.. -..... _- _ _.. - _.. __. _..._ _ -

__ _
-.-:.--JCS -.__
_ ..
_

_
__ .- __
-.--3~-
- __ _ _ _
. _ __
_.

~
_ _ _ - _ _ _ .-
-_.
- --- _ _ _ .
_. _ __

_ _

~,
-.._ ___
-- _
/0. _ _ ._ _ _ _

_ _ _:
m

-----
--- - ,,
._ -

V~ <
_ .

.
-
_. ~.
~
.-
__
~
~
'~~~

~

o~_ - -
- _ _ - `~'

_-

~~ ~

~c~ _.
150 ly0 i30___ 12C 110 100 90. - BO
_ _ .
90 _ 100; 110 _. 120 130 1d0 750

~
m .. _ . _ _
0 $ 10
PROI. REFERENCE N0.
SHEET N0.

1 B 3684 X-20
r
50 14D 130 _ 120 110 100 90 ,84 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
0 7D 20 30 l0 i 5p 60 7p 80 90 100 - 110 120 130 140 150
:.: - : ._ - ~HfRli~ ~~~~ -
..
Sh~eta~,,,
3~
. __
~a . .._ _ ..
_
~
_ __
_. - _ T
. _-

__ _ -
--
_ _.

_ _

---

- -
- - - -

--~L
~; - - _

_~ .
..l
:.. -.
Q, _ ..- ..I. _ I
I - . _. :.. -_ -
_ __ _ __. .-.
___ _
-__

~ ,
__ -

.. __- -~
- ~ ~ ~

~~~ A
T-_~
'' ~, ~ V `

- ~

<

~ ~ ~

' '~

A- \

~'.
..
` V ~~~~
__
-----__
__. ... __- -. _.. _: ___-
._ SnJ -.
. - _
, - ~ - 1 -~ '-~~-
,38+50:00 _ _ __
__ .. _

__
_.
. ._

..
_

. _

_. ..

-

0 _ .
•
-
:-

I
*
C _
5n
. ..
-4P - __. - _ _ .:_

- - - ._ - -
~
4
~ I
~ . ~ ~ C2o-
~

~ _

- - -

-

-
- - __

_ -

a(~
_ __- _
_ _ _ _ ___ _

-. _ _
__.
_
_
_ _ _ _ . _
_ . _ ='0

~ _. .. _
IO - -
T ~~
- - ~ ~ a\
\ ~ -~
, _
~
~
\
_
`~
\

`
_.. ..-~~~_..._-_ ...-. t

\ ~
rte'

~.
~
l

~
~
~. -
~
,. _.
~
_- ~.. .-
m 38 T 00.00
, - _
zQ _:
- -- - _
~
~ _ _
_ _, r
_ _ _
¢~'
~' _:. 150 140 1,0 . :- 120 110 ....100 90 •80 _ 70 b0 50 40 30 . 20 10 0
}0 2,0 _
30 40 50 60
70 SO 99
~ 100 110 120
30
,1
140 150

C
6
m
M
m

r
v
m
v
a
S
U
T
m
O j~
N~¢
W
o-
OQ_
~Q~
- -- ,~ ~~~ _ ,~~ Itu I30 1g0 }50

N
PROI. RENCE NO
F SHEET NO
150 1d0 130. 120. 110 ,, 100 90 . 80 70 60 SD 40
. - 30 20 lp
._
~
~
I
B
3
684
-

X 23
-
0 10 - 20 30
40 50
60 _ 70 BO 90 100 HO
120 130 140
150'
5~; _ _ __ _. _ _ . _ ._ _ _
Pe>rin~ Dtat~ - .-_ ~a
sneer ~
~5~
~ ~
_
-~r,- - - _ . _ - _ _ _ __
... _-

3U _
---
~~.fl +2.9 _ _ _

-- - - _ _
_ _ -.
~ _. ~ ~

' - .-
~
0
02[7 I _

'
_ .
0 __ - 3t~
_ __

~' _- - _

_ -:_ _
.
__

_.
_ _
__
,~
_ ,_ - _ _
_-~-

_ i.
C~
~
~
-

,_
~~ 1 V~`~`'t~ V~ \ ~~ ~~
.
.
- ~ --- - -
.` _ _
- - - - _
___ - _ _

-- __.

_ _ . _
izd _ - _
- - _. -. _ _
_
-.
_
''--
---

? _.
-
-
_ _. _ _._ _ 42'+50:00 _.
.

~, _
_

_ . _ - _.
- - _ _
_ i`

i
_ _ _. ._ _ _ _
_. i

5n

__ _ -
4C____ _-_- - __

_
- _ _
_. __ . __
.

_
- - --
__ - - - - -
- -
-

_
- ~o
- -

_
~_ :~
_ _ .

-
__._- _ _ _
-

-
_ ~ ~~ _ ,V
_ _.
_ -
ri
- - f

~~~~ ~l E~zs
~

_
_ _
-

7C - - _ _ - _

_

-

_
_ _. __

_ _,_

___
__

_
_.. _,
_
- - - -- -
- -
- -
- 1-_--,_ ~,-~- ~---T~
_-

L
~ ~
~~ ~
~
~
~: ~ ~
-

_
_
- ,
~
,
,,
~
~. ~ ~' ~~
_
~~
~. ... ~
\ ~. . F ~
. ~
~

-
__ - _ _ - _ _ ~3s - _
~
~
- __
_
_
_ _
_ _

_ _ _ _
__ _ .
_. 42`+00.00 ___
_

s~ __ _:. ___ - _ _ - _ __
_.
-. __ . _ _ _
_
_ _ __ - - -

~ _:
_ =
~
~
~ -_
~
~r~
_ _. _ { ~
_
__ _
-
-
;~
. 1 -
. _ _
-
_
. _~ - -~
_ - ~ za- ~ ~~;c
__.
_
_

} _ _

- _

_ ._.

0
- - -
7~
_
_
___ - _ -
_. __ _ - .

_ _ -
_
_ _

_ __ --
_
?p
_ _ __
t~ _ __ _
_

~
~~ ~ -
-
n _
~
-
-.
_
~ A ~
~-
.~
..

-_ 41 +SG.00 - _
_ __
15D id0 130 120 _ 110 100
90 ..80 70 60 50 40 _ _

30 20 10 / _
_ _ _ ..
0
10 20 3
0 4-0 _ 50 _ 60 70 80 90 100 11C 120 1~0 14q 150
a
m
n
x

_ .. _ __ , - -- ~,,., ~4v i~u 1

a
a
6
m
x
oa
of
oQ
oe
oQ_
ilt _N
- _: _ _:
_. ..
..
_
- ~
0 5 10
PROI. REFERENCE N0.
SHEET N0.

1 B 3684 x 28
+
50. 140 130 120 110 100 90 BO 70- 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1D 20 30 40
50 60 ` '
"
- _ _ 70 BO 90 100 11D 120 130 14D 150
_ _
_- Sheet r3. ~ .
_ _
~C _---- - --- -
- - _ : __ _ _
_ _ _ _.
--- - - - _
. - _.. __
- _.
-

_
--- _ _ _
i a
_ -~f

%u
°~ ~2D
°C'
~

4^
1rA
~
- ?fir
_.__ _ - _
_ _
f
I _
_
_ 1=

1 1 v F -

`

~~ -
- _ .._ ~~
_ _
_ _
' _
_
-- -
~~
0 ~~ ~ I

~~
'0' ~0 ~ - -
~ L '~a
$0 _
~ __
- -_
1~ _
.,
~
Y~;. `. _ - - _ - -
_ _
_ -.
.
-
w
- ~

~ ~

~

_

~
'
_! ~ -_ J_ _ .. /-. :BSc _ \
r -- -_- __

_ ~
-~ ~

c
ire J t, X ~: ~ ! 50+5V.00 _ - -

-.- _ _ _ 3(1 _ _
w

Lt
ii C.'

.Q

~-
"~9
-
(l
- - - --_ - -._ _ _
~'-- -
-- -
_ ~
-
a

-
~~ _-

~4_
_ ~ _
- _
~,
~I
ZS {_
i -
i - -- -_- - - - - -

--
~_
_ _ _ _ -
_ __
_. _ _
J--
_ ~
~.. -

-~ _ _

~~ .
~- ,~

_
___ _
~ - ------
- -.
_- ter,; _ _
_

T
- ' S2.
~

x ~
_ ~ _
_ - - _
y~
-- _ _ ._.. 50+00.00 _
~ - - -
ar _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ : -:
-. .__ : _
_a~,
_ _ - _ _ _ _
- _ _ . :_ . _ _ - _ _. _ . __ _ _. _ 3L~ .~..
_ _
--
- - _ 37e __ _ ~~ ~,p ~~ - Z,.- _ 2~ . ~r~

d~
-
_
~
_. _ _ _
i
- _ _ -' - - ~ ~ r:
V~ - ~
{
~
_ _ _
_ . _.
--

,~ > >>r
J~_ _

-
W

~
v
- a
~
~~

- _-__ _,

: _ ~ _ _

j

a
-~- - -,~- r
,-
i
,-:c~,
---
_
a~ ~ _

~
~

_ _
_

_-
-

^

_ /
~. ~
„_ ,

° _ -
_ _.
--_ -
~ ~

~
_ _ . ~-
_ `a-
44+.50.00.
_ ... _. 3 _:
_
~~ _
.150 ,- _T40 130 ~
120 ,_110. 100 90 80 _
)Q_ - ~-- 50-' " ~ 40 :: 30 .
- 20 __. _
10 'C
_- --
10, 20 __ 30
_
40 50

60 70 -
~ .:. _
80 90 100. 110 120 130 140.. ,

_ 150_ __.

~.i
N
U
a
v
m
m
x
NCB`
+ 150 1d0 130 120 110 100 - 40 80 70 60 _ 1. REFERENCE NO _ NO
"_

- 50 40 30 20
10 0 10
20 30

40 .
-

RR
4 -__

-
_
- _
- .. ...

_
50
by
70 _

g0 _
90 100 110 120 B30
,-140

50 _
:.
p,~tnit Atasring
_ -
_ _ - - _
~tneet ~ d 3S
_.
_-~a _ _ _ ~ - _ _.

- __.

_ _
_
__

-
-
_ _
-.

3~ .;
~. _ _ _ _ ..._ .. ~~f;~ - - dom. ~, i20~
2.0
[G _.9.C .... .. ..._ ...: __ _ - .. _ ._.. -.- -- _._- .__ ----

. -_. -" --- .

- - _ -

j~,
- -- .. --::. .._ ..:
. --- _ _ 1
-
- _

-
~ 4 .-
._.

..
-
~ .
~:

~ DOBQ ~

~ 0.020: -

0~0 0~

- __ _..

_

_ - -

-

- .. _ - ~.
_ _
-.

2

-
.
~ nOBG
I
~~
; ~
1
~~~
.
~~
hhh y~ ~
.
_ \

_.
_
_
__ -_
_
_ _.
_5450:00.

_.

.
u

_ -
__
_

- .j~ _' _ . _ _

_ _ .

- -. _ _.
. _..
_ __

._ _

_. _ _

_
__ _ _. _ _ _ - - _ _ _:: _ -: 30

-
. _ _
,__

~.. .,

pr
.
_
- - - - -
J4

~~ ~
~
~
~ D 79C ~~ CD~O
0.720 O~a O p8r --
_
.-

W ~~

_
_ J { ~
~' - ~, i
_..
5a,-00.00 - - - - - -_- _... -

_ _
~G

_
:
J
_
-
a~ ._;
r ' ~ ~ _~
~~ , .
~
_
_ --
_ _
. _ - - - _ -_ - _ _
- - _.
_ lr7._
_- ~_
_
t
_
_ ~~ ~ ~
~ ~..
^'1
_ _ II rr
'
- /
t
~V
-___V,y~'~ . ~
. ~
- ~ ~-
:. ' .. _.- ... -. _- ~
-
• Thai' J i -
`l~8 ~
~'
~
W
-
-
~
~ _ .
_._ - -
~
n - - --
_ _. _ ~ ~ ~ _
__ ___ - _ _. _

- _ __ ,
_ 53+50.00. - _ _-_ ~,_ ~ _--- - _.- ~____

L --

__ - _

_ - _ - I

-
~a~

-
o

~..;
I
-
~
,-~
~

o~- z~ 9c
~
~

_

_

_
- - - I
- ~
-
-~~ f
_
~
l _
_ - _

~ -- -
._ __. - - I
x''75.. Gi~2L
D20-.. _ - I
C02C- ~ ll
-
-
- - _. _- _ : -_
-

- ___
#~ _. -

- ~ .L:9
~ - ~~ ~
`~

h

_ ~. ~~
_ ,.
_._ ~
~ _

_
_

5300.00._
~

-
-_
-

~~ _ -

- - -
-------
- -_ ~~_

150 140..- 1;,0 120 _... 'i10, , .
_._100 96' . B0. 70 60 50 I
~
_
-
_
. 40
30
20
10 0 10 20 30
~

50 .

60 70 -

60
90
. ___
.._, 100 110 120 130 - 1,40 _:_.15 0

Xsc \B36B4 _rdy_71_r'pl.dgn
- -
~ si~oizoo, Asa:ziau a:~FOaar+ay~XCO~e7bea.ray
~ ~ _n,.ol.aan Bey 3/G/01

I I

~ ~
' ,
i_~
{ .
iI

~
i
~
i
'
~~
I
I~j', ;:;i~~i1
I I I ,, i' l i;_ I I.
~,
~ ~ ~
~,,
i
i
I
I ~
t,
I ~..
III
I '~,~ i I I'I
Ii
;
,'; ~
I 1

`. I

~ I
{
I I~~~ , ~ ~''
i I
~

~
~

r

~
i I ~ I

'
~ ~ ~~~ ~ 'I~~II '~I ~
I' I
, i ,
I
';, 'I
{
~
''
III ~
!
I !

I
~
I
,
~ I

•
I
I '. I
I '
~~

i

I
I

I I

,
I I. li

I I
I~: I i ~

~

i I

~
I

~,

~ ~ I ~
; I

I

I
I. ~
I
~;

'

il
1 I III

; -; ;. I. ,.. , I I
I~ !11 ii ~

I
L
I
-I f
I!
r

II

, I i~
,~ I!I

1

~
I;
l

I
i
~

I

I I

I ~

~ ~-
1
i

..

~.,

C

I

I
I

;

III ,I
,
~ .

I

I
;_I
..
I
~! I ' ' I~I ~I I

'~ I I .
,
.
1-
II ~ '
~'

~ ,

~
I
, ~

I; j

~

,
,,
_

'

...

I
,

~ I f ;

~ ~

; ;

I~: I
~. l
I , -.L; I ~.I I
I
I

L , .;

I

I ,
I l:.f I,
.I
I

I,

l ,,

' ~
,,
I

,; II

1

~~ I ! it I.

.

~ I II

r

,

.; l
I

I I ;

~

,

~~

.

: ,I I ~ I
,
. ~I

I I

l !!I
I
1 ;I ~

I

.
. I

I

I

•

~

I

I
I

I

~

~

~

. t.
I

~

I

I

I

~~ ~ I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

i

t

.
I

I

I

.
I

I

I

.

I
I

I
I

.

1

~ I

I

I

I

,

x

,

I

v

o

. II

~

~..

.,

, ..

'~

.

.
~
i

r

i
i

.

'

~,

~ ~I

I

~

I

,
l

'~ I I
I

1 I

I

r
i

I

~

I

I i I.

I
I ~

~

~ I 1 ' ~~~! I 1
. ''
I
'
I
~ I ~

I

I

I
f ~ I' ~
r.

~

-

r

I 1

~ .

I

. . II I i

I~

I II
I

I

~
I

~
I

I

I

I

I

~

I

I
it

! ~
I

I

,I,

I

~ ;~~f;

;

~

f

I
,

.

x

r

g

~
I ; ~

I ~

f

~ I . ~

I ~ I ~

I

I ~

I

II~. I

I
~[~

I ~ ~ ~

• ~ . .

•

~~

_.
~ I,,
I I
I
'~ w~.lr

g
.... I I

I

I

I I

.

_

.

~

~

I

I

~~

i

I i

~

I
i

I

. ~,

.

I

~

~

8

s= .: ~ ~
I I, ~ j ~ i ~
I !
I I ' ~

_ I

I

I'
,

I

~'

~
_.

!
I
~ . ,
~
~
,
'
I
I r e

~
~ i

r
~
~

~
I
I

I, I
~ ~

{
,,II
I`

`
I

1
C I

..

I
i; I
I ,

I I I I

I .' I ~

~ ~ 1

i ~~~

I ~ I,I I r

~ I li
I ' ' I I „ I
~ ~

~

~

~

~ i _

I

I ,

i ~

I
I
~ ~ ~ ,
i~
I
' ~ ~ ~ I

I
~
~ I

'I
~

~ ~

~ ~

,
f
i 1.
I- ~ ~ i.. . .
I
~

. . :
a

,

,

I I
1,.
'
r~ l;
I
~- I
I
.
_ , ~ t
~,~ ~!

I I
1;I

I I i
I
! I .
•; I ~
.

,

I
~
; ~ I

,
~ ~
I

I

I

~

~
I f:

I

I 1i
~

~ 1 ,

1 I
II

~
I ~
I ,
I I ~ I
rI

~~ I

I

I L.~
f I

I

! . .

, I
l I

I

l r 1.
~ I li I
I

)

I

~

~

I

I

I

~._

i

~

.

a~
L~
~ ~

I
I
~
' I
I ,.

I

I

.._

.

i

:

i I ,

s

'-6 1
:

I

I

I

I

I

.

'
~

~

~ ~ s3 _ I
.,

I

~

~

.
I
~ ~

'

~

I

I ~

~

I l
I
.. -
~ ~ I. I
~ li i• I C ~
~ ,
,.,. , ,.. ,
:~

~

~ PtB-
~

I ,

I
~' ~~ I

~ _ I ~

I

I

~
~ I I
I ,

l~
~. ~~ ~ I~ ,
I
;

I

'
•

~

k

r

I

~

~I

I

I i~ I

x~

i

I

i I

1

..
%• , t 1 I I ;~ I !
~ a

it
I I I
I

~,
i

, I
I I
~ I I l i
, I I
11
I
1 l
~
1 I '
I I
I
I I
I
~ I I I
' 1
~~ ~
IIF ~ ~~
" 6 i I
~
I

I
I ~I

~ I
a
~ ..~.
.
~
,

_
f I

~ I
~
~
' I.
i
~ I
' { ti.
' 1
~
I
1
i , ~
{ t ''~
L. ..
i :~
.
f i I I
I ~ ~I
'
J
-0I
~ I
!~,
+i
~ I

,~ I
I ~
~
~ .

,'. {~

..ll
~!b

~ ~ ~
..

.

{
,..~I.~,
I~ ! ~
II.
..~,.

~;
:.

.
I I;.;~,

I,. ; ~

. ~'

~ ~

I

h

I
~ I

~'
I. I

~

y`~~

..
~ I' m
~i.
I
h
I
I

~~ '..r.
I

I
~I
~ I
I }'
1 I

.

I~
I

~.
'
V
'

i~

I
I i ~~,`
i. II _

~

r

I
I .~.
r I II I
~ . I 6I
~ ~ I
t 1Q i ,•
{
I ~ I I r .. I
, I .., ~ l
1 I
1
~
~ ~ fi ~
a'.: ,:.; ~ I~
r ~ ~ ~I.;'.

~ I . . .I

~
~
,
~{ I 1111

~
~.
1

~ :.~., !; ~
,
7
I i I i
~ i~l
I ~
I1
{ I

! r,

~

~
~~ ;: ~..~ (~
'.
j I ~
f
~ aI
I i
I i ~ I
i I I
I I '~ I' V . ~
I I

..
I
~
~ ~
y! I I I ~
I
t I I
I i
~ i.1

~
~ ; I
i ~ j
- I
I ~

I
~~

~

I .I,
I

I
~'

~

I
~k r
~
I
~ ~ i wID ~J '~ 1!1 W~B ~ t ~ ~ I Hf0 I
~ { I ~ '
~ I
~
,
~~. 1 W _
I ~ ~ ''
I I
~ ~ I ~ ~ ~
'
~ ~ / 1 I ~ 1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~

~
1
I
I 'd

i

~
I

f ~

I
-I ~ ~

I
~ I
I

I

i

I ~
..

_

I ..
1
..

r
..
B
~ I I
~

i3

.

i

i
I I ~ ~ I { I ' I i I I

~.

r

~ , I

~

I
l _J :
I I I
I I

~ I I ,
: I
I I
~ i I
~~
I I
I
~ I ~I '
I I I I

I ~
I I
i
~
~ I b

~
l i
1
I I I .~
!
~
I
;.
i I
I
~
i
I I

1
'
I L~. is
I
' ~ I
r 'i.
~
~ I
i I
I .
~ ' ,.
I I

I I
,

, ~ I
r'
..:
i I
~.~

I

I~

~
I
4.. ~
I I I 1
~

I
'
.~
I I I
~
I
I ; I
I
'':

1

~ I I

f:,
I ~I , >;

- I I
I
I

' ~
~
I'..._J I ~ ~

' ~ ;

` ~
~
i ? ~

:,
~

I ; i I I
,
! ` I ' _

; ~~
''
~ ! ~ 1 ;

l ~ ~

' i~~'I: II I ~
I 1'

I, I ~ l~
~ '
; I I ~ ~ i '

I ! ~
I
~ ~~ i ~ I

i ~ 11

I

i

I ~ .~ , II
~ I
I ,

C

a

I~
''
` I I

1

`
~
1 I r.
~ I ~
;

~ ~
' I,~'I

1
I~
I
I ,
I I
} i
I . .
~ ~
I
I
I

• I
-
~ ~ I I 1 I
It ~ 1+ ~
I! i
t~ ,
i
I ;
.
I~ I

i 1 ~1
i r~ i i I
I I

' I I ~ I I ~~''1
~ I ~ I I I~ !
I~~ i ~I
I I .... 1I.~! I
I. I 1 I I
~ - I
i ~
~ I
I I I
I
1 C
, I r I.
~ I
~ 1 ~
1 !,
~~
1 ~.
- ~
' ~
I-j ~

I
~
I

' r

I !
~~
~~
I
• I
I ;...
~ i 1
~
~
1
'
Ij. ~
'I
11'.., I
.
~I~
I
I:I .1
I ; ;I

~
I Ir1
1
~
'
~
` ~
; i..:.
1
I
..
;
' I I~'~ ,
I

'
~ ~ !
~! I:.~ ~I

11
I I
'
I

I
gl

._ ~ ~ ~

~ i
[..

r

I ~,..
I
~
11 ~

~~,

{ I
~

I,

I I
t

..:.

-

• il.l
11

I

i
~

~~ i
,

ff
;.
I I

1 ~ !I
1 ~
l
:r ~ ~~

II
I I
~

i;

:
I

l
I
11_.

~ I I
I

~I
I

.. 1 i
r
I
E
~
,
I
I
fi I~'~~
~
~~I

i

I I

1
~

'I

, ~

I

~'
II
I

I
II -I ~
t
I

~ i 1i

I
I_I

_,
i ~i

~~ ~~

a .r

~ '

8
~

.

'
~
I
~ I ,I `

f
I
i
~i L
I I I
~~ ~
i 4 1
! f

I

.. I I ~
~

I
~ I!
1
I I II
I~

.

~ ~ I 11
I~ I~

i~~ I ~' I

__
~, ~
I

l.
~8
I Ilv
t..i
_

S ~ I' I
I I

I

I ~

~ ~

I .

I ,

... I

: I

t

I

.
i

I I I
I

I' i
t

I

~~

I

I

I

I I

I ~

I

'

I ~
~

~ i

~

I

I
I

•

I

~~

~ :

~ 1

1
I I I.

I I;
I
r

, ~

o

a

, I

I
I
I

I

r

I1,

I'
1 i

1 I

I I
I r

~

I

I ~
is
r

~
! i II ~
''_I 1
, l i

r

I.
al:

I.

'

i

-

I

i

I
i
I

~

I

I

~

~ .,

I

~

I

I

I,~ ~

i
I

I
I

i
I

i I

~
I

I
~~

I

1

I

I I

i

' ~

i
G I

-

~

~

~

s

.

_

O

~

.

!

I
!

I
I

I i
I

I

r

I ,~~

I

~

I! 1
i

I
~
r
1 V~ it
i !I I
~ I.
~ I
i
~

~
~I

,

I
I

I

I

I {I '

~ i
1

'_L'
.°i

,

I.

~

r

~

,l ,

1

,

I

I
I
•

~ r

~

~ (
I!I
I ~

I 1 ~ , ~
,,I

r~

I
I

~

I

~

I

~

I I

t

~
I

.. I
~

I

!~
i

~.:

t

.
~ ! .. I'
~~ ~ I I!
i I
I
I ! 1 !
I I r
~
! I i. I
~
~ ~•I
{
~ I~
I
I
~ I~

~ ~ m
~

' I
r
{ I ~

.

I

!

I t

I

i

I
I
~ I

I I

I

I

I

I

I

,

I ~ I i

i

I

'

.
t

I
~
I
I

.

~ I I I

~ ,

I

t:

•

~
. i
~ ~

i

~

~ , k I

l

O
lit

.

.

.

!

.

t
' I ~ ~

~ i
i

1

I
I

I

I

I
I
I

I ~.:. I. ~ I
I
1

I
~

W
(

_8:1
~.I i

~

I

I

'

i
I ,

I

J

A

Z

m

e

i

~

I

~ i

' ~'
. i
f~

I I t
I
I ~ I ,

~

i
I

~

j _

O

..

.

. '

r

i i

~

I

1

~

' K

W

X N

_

n

..

~

~,

I I

i

,.

~

,
i
i

I

MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE I
~-

Z
0
rc
DETAIL A DETAIL B DETAIL C
® MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2 DITCH LIrvEA LaiERaL 'v' DITCH
xor +o icmei 1Np1 r i0E PROTECTION
r ~ r°i o icael Ix°r icael
r un° x ,
Lr°una Fli Na,urd ~~~ < fui
d G~ou-,q 1y p '~ var. sioo< Grom° ~~p,xe sooe
Fitter Fork Max. a : L0 F1, °
Mln. D : Lo Fr. a
FmerJ Max ° : L0 Ft. ° : LD Ft. 3.0 `Weer
F°°ri~
D :5.0 Fr, Fcbrm
TYOe of Liner ~ CLASS 'B' RA w/ FF
lyoe of liner : [Lass 'B' RR N/ FG TYDe of L'mer :CLASS 'B' RIP RaP
-L- STA U+15 10 15+B1 LT. {_ 15+81 10 16+50 LT. 1- dH5 TO 15+00 R7.
1- 17+50 TO 19+00 RT.
1- 18+50 TO 19+35 LT.
Q
2
O Q
-L- POT 14f0 .00
BEGIN STATE ROJECT 8-3684
} I
INLET / OUDET DETDL 3-48'RCP
error ro scme~
0
~..
~s T-
e~.c sa
x° P.° Poo '~~ vrsam ee°.
TYDe of liner ~ CLLSS 'I'PM ALP W/ FF
-L- 17+60 LT
1- 16+BB Ri
\~~-~
OTTIS W, BAILEY
DB T89. PC SB9
PRffORMEp SCOU0. MOLE
-L - POT 13+50.00 "r -~- STA ,6+58 LT.
SEE DETAII 'E'
BE N CONSTRUCTION I .IB.TS -,
I
LEON R.NARDEE.Jr. I
DB BOS. PC 135 ,

--~- -- -
LEON R. HARDEE. Jr
BB BOS, PG 135
-
_ .;F
___ --1, I

it I
- I
+_
' I. ~ 175.63 +/ LITERAL v DDCH ~
' !
I SEE DETA4 'B' U

' ODE 370 CY H
LEON q. HARDEE, Jr. I EST. 35 TONS

I OB BOS, PG 7}5
~ I
EST. 90 5Y F.F.
I
~
_~
'

I
~ l~ SITE 8
_ -
_.
~ ~ 97.6
30.00 DR[N UNER
_
.-. SEE DETAB 'A'
EST. 55 TONS
EST. 170 SY F.F.
'. SPECUL DRCH GRADE "- Y~~
1- IN00 i0 U+75 U.
r
L
SEE PAOFBE :,
:.; :I

nE ExImNG DncH To
~ P
_.,-.;.-~,-.,., ~.
_ - --
ln
. THE PROPOSED DRCH [ 6
~~
'
REfAIN [ :~:, ~ /~
RETAN _ ,~ BOAEd JACK
'-
60' SMOOTH
__
' '--'' RETAIN RETAIN I'r -^ N 72 34 53 I E
-. REAVOVE AND
1 ~ RIY~ rypL -~.
I ~0 .00 er--
BL- I POT 5+00.00 = ~ - O, G
1f-L- 10+41.48 14.54 RTl • ~~- ~ - _.,
25'? +Ue,Ub
I' "C / 0. SPECUL DDCH GRADE
t 6. 0 1_19+25 TO 30+50 lT ~'
t x 'r ffE PROHIE S1
I ~-
I ~ `
04.00 ,1 .-- V J ~
6 .00 G ~ ~
/.,C',
~~
L
/' ~r REMOVE B' DF FAILED ,,.
Q /e' ea cE
I - TOE PROTECTION ~ -
- , . sff DETML'c'
CHRISTOPHER DAVID WILLIAMS _ EST.10 TONS
D8 598, PC 13P ~ ~ ~_ ~`~ `•, ~~ 115 SY F.F. ~ T , ~
o /
- - ~' ;SITE 7
\ !' a I
W' \ ~'~ 4 GREGORY W, $IDEAS J a:
DB 212, PG 463 ~ x I f
____.... ~O /
~ M
I
t
- ? ~_
4 ti. •_ /
I- ~ I
GREGORY N. SIDERS
OB 652, PG 800 a
'F~b~' w~ p /
~` ~\
TOE PRDTECDON
SEE DETAR 'C'
EST. 70 TONS
EST. 195 SY F.F.
y ~

94 0 CUSS TRIP RAP
10. vNFll7E0. FABDC
SEE DETAIL 'D'
EST. IB TONS
EST. 10 SY F.F.
ES7. JS CY DDE
GREGORY K. RAY
DB 696,PG 622
0
_u,, ~-
y }
J ~'~ ~ N
]E r
BL- 2 PING 14+50.40 =
I-L- 19+86.43 37.52 RTI
CP a F
Y Q
~ _ ~~
__-_-_- __ __ 2~
1
yN ,~ ~° 2~ ~ QJ
-C-
PIs Sto 0+67.66 P151a 22+2427
' P!s Sta 26+57
80
.
8s = 3
25' 14~' 4 = 33' 2g 59.0' 2T1 Bs = 3' 25' 14
3'
Ls = 160.00' D = 416' 329' .
Ls = I60
Od
1T = 10659' L = 783.47 .
LT = 106
69'
ST = 5335' 7 =403.28 .
ST = 53.35'
R = 1,340.IXY
Se = 0.06
BUFFER IMPACTS
DETAIL 'E'
PPFFGF[ o5upp x0.F
+Me rPi x
f>r[x,
xrw .n+c ~osww~
LR M F
[ N; 1 Sxi
a :.°'
~,. D
n wsTUii,°x s.e~
s[na....
FpE
r1 011p i Pfd
W,l[1 _
~ulw
LS '
e, k
1_IA+se IT
ENGLISH
USE METHOD 3 FDR
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
PITT COUNTY
SR 1565
5/7/2001
I
O
N
S. FRANKLIN BROWN, Jr.
DB 691. PG 17
---~,..
x ROBERT a. GAaY
DB BB, PG 3BI
I ~ 9.14 TOE PROIECIIONo
I zt I x ~ Sff DETAII'C'
E5T.35 TONS
EST. 100 1Y F F
rnwcu xkrklrEr4CE N0. SHEET N0.
B-3684 4
RW SNEE7 NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN ryYDRAWCS
ENGINEER ENGINEER
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
UO NOT Uef FO CONSTRURION
INCOMPLE E PLANS
DD NOT Uf[ ROR /A ACQUISITION
50 0 ' i00
Bolter Drawi~q QQ
Sheet ~Q,.,,, ~ ..1~R~Bw
OISSAPATOR PAD
CLASS 'I' RIP AAP
VHFRTER FABTOC
L = 35'
W IU' CVSS 'I' RIP RAI
T = 1.25' y(xFRTER FABRIC
EST. 38 TONS Sff DETAR'D'
EST. 70 SY FF ~ 18 TONS
EST./0 SY F".F".~
I }ESr.3D n ""Y
fOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET 8
OBLITERATION OF EXISTING ROAD
~~F.Fe. ~..,_

~xor m scaei ixor ro scasl OU xoET DETAIL 3-AE'RCP
x r~.a
cro~~a x r scaei
crov~c ix croua 5J°~xt fiu ~>
° Lro no :+ G '~ r/f r. Siaoe o Srooe ~ ~ ,.
fiber Faorlc Mo%. a _ I.0 Ft, a Min. D = I.0 Ft. \ °
Fav c MOx. 0 c L0 Fi. 0 = I.0 Ft. 7.0 `illrer i3 ~---
rowa ~°,',~'Bi--~
Tyoe of Liner :CLASS 'E' RR w/ iF ~ ' S.O Ft. xo Rio Aao io wean Rsa.
TYDB of liner = GLA$$ 'B'RR N/ FF TYDe pf Liner =CL A55 'B'RIP RIP lyoe or LiMr Ck~SS 'r RW AAV x1 if
{- STA 11+75 TO 15+Rt LT. {_ 15+B1 TO 16+50 LT. {- Ia+15 TD 15+00 0.T. {- 17+60 LT.
{- I7+50 TD 19+00 RT. {_ 16+RB RT.
{- IA+50 TO 19+75 LT.
\~~ x\
DETAIL 'E'
+x[raB.cBBSUan Bai
xx :rtr x ,
x~x ~~[ v xr
xm + ~ Sri
pD
nrx B le'
o~x.o
.i :isuu.uox
xttx>» ..r u'
~E
~tl PiA[x S
curt Er
~~ x+1Uq.L
x W
ENGLISH
USE METHOD 3 FOR
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
PITT COUNTY
SR 1565
5/7/200?
x~+n.l REPkRENCE N0. SMFET N0.
s-36sa 4
RM' SHEE7 NO.
0.0ADWAY DESIGN XYDAAULA:S
ENGINEER ENGINEE0.
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
W NOT VEE i0 LONSTRURION
INCOMPLE E PLANS
W NOT UBR FOIL /~ ACVUDITION
50 0 100
~ - -- -' ~ Butter Drawing
/ 2~ DDE lie9'PBalsasY Si1~
a ~of~
o ~ ~ o
S. FRANKLIN BflDWN, Jr.
/ (I OB 691, PC 13
-L- POT 14+0 .00 2
DISSAPAIOR PAp
BEGIN STATE POJECT 8-3684 GLASS 'I• NP RAP
W/FILTE0. FAA0.1C _ ~ :~ '\
PREFORMED SCOUR H lE` ~ T . 1135' 1. --~--~.
7 ~ {- STA 16+58 U YbflITER FARRJC ~
-L O~ \I y+ JL/,1J~/ SEE DETAIE'E' x P57 1b SY ~F SEf OETNL 'D' + ;
i ~ ~ 1 . 1 1. ES7 18 TONS / : ~ '--^~; -
~~ BE !M ~OI~.X'llVbl'lON ~4B.75 A. _ ~~ ~ / EST./D SY, F.F. t ~~ RQBERT 4. CRAY~'~
~~ 1, ~ 175.63 ~ LATERAL V DTTCFf . A ~~ FEn' OD EY DD DB :~`PG~JRI~
' I ! SEE DETA1 2' ! ~~ Ir
G
' ( ~ DDE 370 CY - 1 ~~: ~ ~.
LEON R. HARDEE. Jr, 7 ~ ~ LpON R. IiA1~j~EE, Jr. ~, i EST. ?5 TONS ~;'; ~ [ ' ~~ 7 \
LEON R. HARDEE, Jr, q ! ~ :i EST_90 SY FF ~ /. I ~+~ 9.14 I ° ~ ~~~ ~~.,
OA BOS, PG 735 ~ DB 805, PG 775 - !~± / B BO51 PfJ735 - ~~~ I f TOE P ON
! ` r ~'/' / 1 I ;~~ I 17Y I _ ~/ '~SEt<D M C'
~ ES1.75 TONS ~\
.I 7%i.l 1.x:.1. ~ ~ /.' /s~. ! - EST. 100 SY FF,'
`~ i ,
.a
/ !.
~~. ~
- I
I~ ~ i,, i ~ I '.. ' ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~-7® ~ ~~ 0. 1 SPECUl:IXT ITdBE -" -~
. SITE i ..
:1 \...-__~_-_ : i -` + .. " 0. ;. ({ 19w15 ~ 70 50 LT, 1, i _
~ - 97s ~ ~ !
~-~ , A i 30.00 _ -"~~ UN~ ~ ~ ~ :~u 1 '+ SEF P~IOFIIE] l
: f ^ ~' ~ ~ ~~ ('~ _ _ _ _. ~ SEE DETAIL'A' ,~~ ~ ~~ ~ * r ~~m ~A~r7 :~ ~;. / ` .-- f _
/ I ? -''
! J
i 1 I ~ \~ 1 ~ 55 1~DN~
70 E
i ,i I ~. j
/ /; ' ~ O
~ ~ ~ ,
} ~PECIAL Df7CM GRADE l'.- +' ~ I r,_ C ~ O
r
-: ~ v ~ ~ i -rr a+ao TD la 7s LTA ~ .~, ~~ ° / S
SEE PRObI j
~, i 1
~ -- ~`- _- - ~ - N
TIE F?751ING LATCH TO ~ / ~
_ .. ~-: ,.
,~.~,~-=~. ~ L, vv I ~"~ __rnEPaorosED'~pna E -,~' A~~~M~ ~i .~~le ~f-f ~~~ ~ _ .,tr~ ~ ~ ~',~ 1 =~ f,r., O
_._ °
~. _ -.
,. ~
_ _. Rf:TAIN ~,= I - '... ' ~ R1:TAIN . .;~/ =60,SAIOOIkf... _ BE(AICL_ ~\ 1,+-^' - Q
-~ -~
., -~_u
-._ .. - ~ -
__ _ -c- - - - - _ _ -- ---- --- ~ '- 2
_ - _,.- J 1
--- --- - _ _ __ __ ,___ r---
- - _ -
,. .~
_~ ~.~ REruN `1FTAIN ~', .7,_,,-~ _ N 72 34`53L'E' - _ -_ _ ---------_ - c J
D E ' .. _~ V
,~.::~ _
- ,~-
1 ~- REMOVE AN RF ~ - ~ ~ _ + -F _ - _. ~,
y
\'. ~-
1 'J ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x25,00
. ~ -„ ~OO.OID ' ~ e~----.~~~ a . i6,~ '-.
BL- IPOT 5+D0.00 1 >; ~ _~ ~ / c ~ 7O.DD1 I `~y/ I
I-L- 10+41.98 14.54 RTl ' ~ 1 - ~ ~ ,I, ~
..
,,
. 1 __ ,. .,
I' 'may ~
~ r- -
TOE PROTECTIO / j '\ /,
J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. TOE PROTECTION. I ~
~ _.-SEE DE ~'CTN _~" ~ ~~,
! /„ ~' SEE DETgL 'C'
CHRISTOPHER DAVID NR-CLAMS - - - - ~I r• - EST AO N5~ ~~ ~ , ~ / EST.7D TONS ~~ r
//
DB 598, PG 137 - - x -~ I 1 -EST 115 S f . ( n75: ~ ~ n ~~ 7 / ~ ~ ., ~ `EST 195 SYFF.
~'~~ -- ~ ~ 8: ~~ m J gc _ ~ `_: / ~,, / ~~ BL- 2 PINC 14+50.40
!A / GREGORY KCRAY
\ ` ` ;, / ,,I I .. / r/a ~ / oe 5'96<ec Gzz ~ ~ I-L- 19+06.43 37.52 RT1
/, v ~
\ y..''`J m i a.D :cuss rglP RnP O / /
~~ ~ ~~~'SITE 7 / / u . wrPRhR r~Aealc L 4 ~ ;
'- \ . ! ~~-~ GR~O&Y al"$10ER5. /% ~ t ~1 I.. SEE,DEfAJhry'D(' y/
_ _ - ~ ~€Si 35 Vl' ~
~ ~ I
,' ~ ,~
_ .
~-~ ~ ~~ ~ ' ,~ '1 I ,- ~ '~:
-~
.-; _
~- ~ I ~ '
,-
_ ._ ~ r ~
__ ~;
GREGORY w. SIDERS ~ 1~" ~ ~ ~~ -L-
I 1 Pls Sto 0+67.66 P1 Sto 22+24.27 Pls Slo 26+57$0
De Gsz. PG eoD Bs = 3' 25' 14.3'
Ls = 160.00' D = 416'~2~ (LTI 8s =! Opa14.3'
~ LT = 106b9' L = 783.47 LT = l06b9
ST = 5335' T = 40329' ST = 53.35'
R = 1.390.Od
Se = 0.06
SUFFER
IMPACT
S
MITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE I
DETAIL A DETAIL 8 DETaIL C DETaII D
® A1ITIGABLE IMPACTS ZONE 2 DITCH IINEA LATERAL 'V' DITCH TOE Pfl0iEC110N INLET /
xor ,B =~ae,
/ FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET 8
OBLITERATION OF EXISTING ROAD

- ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE I
~ m ®ALLOWABLE IMPAC T$ ZONE 2 BUFFER
MPA
CTS
\ -L-
\ Pls 510 l7+6766 Pr Sta 22+2427 Pls Sto 26+57.80
8s = 3'25'143' p= 33'29'S9.0'ILTI Bs = 325'143'
Ls = 160.00' D =4'!6'329' Ls = 160.00'
U = l06b9' C = 78341 LT = 106b9'
\ ST = 5335' Se = 0 6~~ ST = 5335'
~\
W
O
ti
i
o ~
N
z
3
t
c1
x
e
0
t,
a
0
J
0
2
U
Y
20
O
~ti
]2
~~
W
~W
~~
O~
I ~
O~
N~
P
~ Q
Zoe
~\ a
O~
~ Q ~
?~ .., ..
V J ~- :~
/ -..~

$. FRANK N R
L B OWN, Jr. N
OB 694 PG 13

~t '~. ~ CLASS 'g AIP RAP
_ YRFRTER FABDC
ESi
3 TO ~

~.,,~ .
NS
EST.10 SY F.F.
1 I
,,
_
.~~
\\
RO
' `
~ _-
[`
~
BERT A. GRAY
~
DB ea. PC 3B i
' _t-
_~
_J
~ _
~~ ..,
~~ ~_
+93 00 i r
1 EDWARD J. McMULLEN
4 0 ~
~ DB 1AS, PG 6a9

`~ ~ 70.0
z1
~I.,,I, ,,--9_L3I
5.00 90 6
' \ 7S F
r," ~c _ _
\ _
\<
"~ '.. -
GREGORY K. RAY
OA 696,PC 622
CLASS 'll' RIP FAP
/ Y(iRLTER FABRIC
EST. ti? TONS
EST. ii? SY F.F.
/ PREFOAIA® SCOUR HOIE~
I Sff DETAB'E'
130. 0
l'~
oD.oo F `
/~/ 17
f0~ Tm
IG7 OZO ~N
o _------- `---~~~ //
Ra 1rvc.
~ ,.
~~
SITE 10 ~_ ~i~. i
- ,''/ AF.
u ` L=
`l
,..
.. _
3GI /
.;
he ~' ~~ ,/ 1._
~ ~\\.. -
a n
r
/- '
,,.
• \•~_. ~ ~ r.n ,~-. - .. \ STA 2a+a1 SHBG _ _r~ ~' ~\
_ i
1
..-
_ '
~. ,, - _
,, -~, Dg
,a
- _ N,
_ }8,..
'S'
__. _-T _____- _. _ "
~- N _ _ -
...
\ \ 0.86 \
'~ ---- - - ~ 13
1p ..
.,
DETAIL 'E'
ncvaiet u~ xaL[
Kw ~~ ~, .,
y ~ ~ w~~Kaw E~.~
a~~ ~ ~PSw~~
/:
~~ ~F~~o
~~
n :+snuuwx
o.:o-
5.0'
XCLW ~~~
a
`~qC '~
"````~~~~\\ l[I
~u~~
O
1\
~ ~~
APO
~~0
V
\ ~G
~ DEBBIE
OB 59
CLOSED DRAINAGE SYSTEM PFOUIR®
BR~GE FROM STA. 19+19 TO 31+68 ~-
lT.AND Ri. INLETS SPACED 1Y ON CENTER
FHIS SYSTEM YALL NEED TO PE R1T0 THE
IGI'S OFF THE BRIDGE END.
FROM STATION 31+15 TO Lt07
CLOSED $YSTFAI NRIH INLFTS
'`\ SPAC® 11' ON CENTER AND
OLRLFTMG DOMN BEM !5 IMO
DISSIPAiOR PAD.
E~ _
PROIECi EEFERENCE NO. ~ SNEET N0.
RM' SHEET N0.
0.0ADWAT DESIGN HYDRAUlN3
ENGRlFFR ENGINEER
Buffer Dra~isEg
Sheet 8 of 9
50 0 100
PHELP$ ENGLISH
0 PG 183
USE METH00 3 FOR
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
PITT COUNTY
SR 1565
5/7/2007
SITE 9 \
X57.56
30.00
1.38 Ems--E
29T`
~_~
l9
SO
to Q
r~
1~ Q
wr
Z~
JI
UJ
` l- `G
n::-

1
~\
~,' :\
\\.
~~
~,
1
FOR -L- PROFILE SEE SHEET 8
OBLlTERATlO)r OF EXISTING ROAD

ALLOWABLE IMPACTS ZONE I
B U F F E 1 PROJEti REFERENCE NQ SMEE7 N0.
~ ®ALLawasLE IMVAErs toNE z 8-3684 5
R i M PA ~~ RW SHEET N0.
CTS
\ ` ~p0 ROADW~Y EDELGN NYORAUUCS
-L ENGINEER
\ PIS Sfa 17+67.66 PI Sla 22+2427 Pls Sta 26+57$0 ` 0
` Bs = 3'25'143' p= 33'2g5g,p'ILTI Bs =3'25'143' y~
Ls = 160.00' D = 4'!6' 32S Ls = 160.0(Y G
~ L~ = 106.65 L = 783.41 LT = 106.69' \ \ .~L
\ ~' - ~~•~~ 1 = 4UJ1/7/5. S! = 5335' 1 ~ pf
R = 134O.VV ~ ~
Se = 0.06 ` , G ~f ~ PRELIM[N
W NOT USE F
INCOMPLE RY PLANS
CONSTRUCTION
E PLANS
W NOT USE Po0. /• ACVULSRION
50 D 100
O
~~ DEBBIE PHELPS
1 OB 540 PG IB7
~ .^. O USE METHOD 3 FOR
In / uosED DRAENAOESrs1~RliapIRED,bN CLEARING AND GRUBBING
N FRIDGE FgOM STA Z9+.28 TO 7 +68 .~.~.
\ LT. AND RT. IPlETS SPACED.Ip' CENiEIIr.. / PITT COUNTY
rHls sYSTFM wlu NEEp m ytE JF o rFIE ~
~` 2GI'S OFF THE BdDGE ENO ti - \ ~ ~ SR 1565
SITE 9 ~ I ~ 5~7~2007
.~ 6. FAANRLIN BROWN, Jr, / ERON SiATIDN 7I+IS T0. 71+07
\ DB 691, PG 13 + QOSED SYSrFM WRH INLETS
'~~ r- SPAfED 12' ON CENTER ACID
t ~ 5 + CIA9S 'll' dP RAP ~ OVIIE}iNG. DOWN BENr fi INrO`1
W/FILTE0. FABRIC DISSIPATOR PAD
~ ~>. ~ EST izi TONS ~ i ~~ ~ ~ ~
I ~ \ ,
I ~ i ~ +~ EST. iii SY F.F. +51.56 r ...\
;.~.~ - PREFORMED SCOU0. HOIE r-
i ~ \
I ti I ~ '` -~ - C1:1S5 'B' dP AAP SEE DETAIL 'E' 130.00 \
1
1 ~ _ , W2RLTER FABRC 1 <l ~ (~ ~ ',
> i ~EST.3 iONS~ . ' ,` .,~
- ~ ~ ( ,EST-ID $'( F,F..~' I I t 0 00 ~__ ~ ~ I ~~~ UYR OF HNfD DIEM(NG ~ ~~.
C„
{
' ._~ ~~11-. ~ _ ~ I
c_.>
A08EIiTl A. GRAY ,l '. ~ ~'- ~ _~~ _ r.~ ., 7 '; ~ ~y
~ ~ 1 - I ~. ~ ~-- TfYPOR WORK,BRTIXiE i ~ ' td'. ~
h ( ~ ; - EDWARD J ucNULLEN ~_- ~ ~ m~ ~ ~\~ ~I. t ~~;~ - ~ ~
(U ,' _--D&.HS, PG 689 ~~
" ~ ~~ -_-..- ~ ." __. 04.45 i~ ~ £0 "~ ~~ L~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
O~
9 00 - ._ - ~ n w .. , ~.
Z~ ~ „~ ~ I e ~o.oo __.. s oo- sGl NTH :^ ~ 1 z ~ ~ .~ wl-
,.,~ .Tn£~ •py
~ N ~' ~ ~ t~ ~ o ,._ _ ~ ~ ~ - ~ DoE C, 1 - P 1 .. I
,. ~ Lr Y
A
~_
Q ~ -
' ~ ~.. IJISL 4
W 1,
~ 1_ __--------F. -- r ~ \ .~ 1" ~ Q
.Y$ RCP { ; ~ ~
v ,. a ~ 1 pl Is we ~ ` ` ~ J '~ ~• ~ ~ ~~ ~"
1 ~~
~.
f~ I ~ .•. 1 ~ ;,, ~ 4GI 5 / I ~
~~
._ `
~ ~ ~Q ~. ~ _r _ 1 ~-. GRATE ,,... _ ~ ~~.r I ~ I '..,
,~
~\ .
I 1 I i ~_ ~t
~~~~ _ Hsu aB+~o-ro~ -~ a 4 t - ~-t , ~ ~~
...~~ ~'` =y - ~-F - ~_ _. +BZ ateG-- ~ - `'~~. s µ~ ' I~ t i~'r~ o
., __
.__
~.~
_- 1 ~ \T
38
__ ._
.,„
~f
=` - ;
_ ~ ~ --~'~- - " _+- -Y'- t i II ~ I ~5 - - - t~' y~
~. ~ ti ,- -- - `1
I ~ ..
--r ___ _ 1.. t -
- __.,-cRnDE-r6~rw, ~ ~ ~ ~~ i I
". ~ y - w ~
~~ ~ ,, . ~ .. - N ~ m ~ ~ ~ , l ~l ~ ~~ ',
..-+ w! _ ~ . v ~ A ~ _ 11 - 1c
l - . , - -
~ /~'J ~ .,~ r ~ I1~
GREGORY N. RAY ~ ~ ~ E
I z
08 696.PG 622 ti~ ~' P 9L- 3 PING 21+37.43 GPS '83016-i' ~ l LOUIS ELA_IORE_HODGES ~ 5 ~ t I~ ` ~ I
- I I
O (-L- 26+36.54 122.87 RTI DB rRA.PG 3z9 ; ' ~ I I 1 ~~`
I ~ ~ ~\
~ ~ ~~ III ~ ~ ~
~ ~ I ~! GREGORY R. RAY i - I ~ ~
~ ~ ' DB 722.PG 96 ~ ~ I it ~ ~';,,
DETAIL 'E' ~ ~ ~~ I ~ j/~ t ~~ C,F I ~',, It I I ~ 1 ~ yv
Y ~ i 1 I I
I / I
PAFiCAi[~5~~ MOE ' ! ~1 / #1 + ~ =^+' •.., -. I ~ ~1\~
~~an rx 1 i ~+ \ ~ ~J - ~"vN ~ I ~ I
m
' u nNC vun ,~r ~ i ~ -' ~ - ~1, 1
1
a,~ an~~ I-~- ~
~~ ".,~ ~
<",r \
- -- -------- _ - m
__ .;, __ _
- ---
--- --- _ _ 5 ~,,
~i1w5,LL~:,W
o:zo
SA'
ACTgn r. G I
oA
'R! pi[x
WilFi
., l I ~ IX ~ A M.~
I
-L- aB.7/ Lr. I
rOH -L- RROFILE SEE SHEET 8
1 WJ'.xJCX.%] l1Al ircoar~nl,
- V(xx X%X %I ___.. ~.,~,, ,,,,~ ~, ~ni.~r uru nVHU

b
DETAIL A OETAII 8
gTCN LNlER L~IERAL 'V' giCN
iNOr ra sadei iNOf fA $cael
rOUn -71I I', 'Fnl
/ D $aoe
d °~"° e
tn,r Feerlc-' ua.. d : Lo Fr, mr,. o : Lo cr.
Fn,r- uD,. a : Lo vr.
Fmrl~
0 : S.0 it.
type Of Llner : CL1$$ 'B' RR W/ iF Type Of Llnr : CU$$ 'e'RR N/ FF
.+~ srti a+Te ro le+K Lr. a,. le+w To a+ee u.
TD° PROTE TIDN
I NOr rA $odel
~ 1l pf of "CM
0 y0M
d : I.0 Ff, ~ tnfr
terlo
type Of Llner . (L15S 'B' RIP RAP
~. a+le ro le+ao 9r.
a. 11+00 TD H+00 RI.
a, n+ew to H+Te LT.
FAT 15'Sg~
NSN'99
+it ~ 5gE
w9ea5 ql
5S 19' 4
N51~55 ~ Q
o
(7P
N~~~S'` -L- POT 14+0.00
C~
a
LEON R NeAOEE, J'. 1
DA 1p3,9Y1 r99 i
~I
11 ..
4`~
1
~~ a
~ ~
/ / cRECORT ~. wERs
oe as2, Pc eao
GREGOAr 1.SOERS
~\ OB ZTL k K7
` `O~
k
~BU_
~.00'~
Nt55r18~E

DETaI~ D
INLET y OUTLET DEVIL 3.16' RCP
i Nef FO SAdel
Le t.
I ~°re ~F'~
Ne Alo acp a sneo, e.a.
L.M a1 L~nr tll$$'I'RN A1P e/ tt
a. n+eo LT.
k le+N R.
~i~%
~j, i.
y,q,, 51.66'
Jf N61Y 21S
OTM ~, 94LLEY
DO iq, k 319
3
R
x ERLiLM E+f+O1N, Jr,
D61X RC N
~;R
~a_ --a.
56992'SYe
r101ECT 96EABICE No.
IH1' INKY
CNOWt91l
xl:L1MIN RY PLANS
m xor v9t ro CON9T0.VCfI0N
NCpIdPL ~ PLANS
9o h'OT tLtC TOe / e ACYytri4rifiN
UTII.ITy PLANS
ris sra ~i+57,80
es ~ 3'25' 14.7'
LS = 160.A7
cr = IG~,Sq
ST = 53.35'
FOR -~- PROFAE SEE SHEET 8
08(lrERArION OF EXISTING ROAD
nEr~n. ~
nlVtlem nLM qL
M yllee
Rw'1!e
ntnxc In9eo
am p'nur
1 •an
:: ~°
.r .eruilnw A , ~
wxna a•1
p,01
pIR[,
~L
.r_ u.y Lr

J
REYI9dV5
3DA'Ef
SF7LEf
~ ' ¢~
~ ~~`
~~g~
„~-~ ~,~~
~~~~
• E ~~
~; o.o.
~ 45~~ a
s~
O~~~~
G~
/99
MAT ~~~ ENE T 0
STA. 2 ~~OET 9
®~
L
s
117 Ot tl0~1 ~ /
I£'Ll~
,S6'YB
M.9S.22~~ _
• 13.E 3M113ff3 ]II~N'C2
'- //~
~ ~
1
t
~~ l
.r it ~ I I 9
s r2
~ ~ ~ II
_ ~ II
_~ ~I
~ II
~~ II
~ IAi ~
I I ~~ 1
r ~ I ~ r
m ~ II 1
m~ II I
r~
m ~ I I m~
~ ~ ~ ,,, ~ ~
2
~- ~ o I I I
~ ~- m r~ ~ I I m a
Fi cm5 I I p ° I
~ N
I
N ~ I vm
~~ o
j I m ~.
I ~
l~ £'.
z .
/ ~ a
l
i
r ~ ,e, z94 .
r
~~ g~
~~ ~ ~
~~~
~~~~
~

r
\
\ N ~
~ ~
I a s~
: ~
~~ ' I
m ~~~
N 's
N~
r^ a1. °'SI

i
\ ` ~~~/

~ '~
/
~
/j
/- ~,/ Alta .
~ .'

-
-
`/
~ /~.
./
/ 313Nd tNl
~S~W\
p O~ad
ya
a~~SN~ti S~ o
m ~ /-a~aSN
/„
~ r
I _
O ~ ga
x ~
7

~ m OL3y5
3.94' / ~
62
2 ~3P2
~'~
/' /
g ~ ~

~ ~ s
~, ~ ~
/~~~~
/ ~ ® s ~i
I^ 4~
®4S 6~
~~
1+ ~.\
$~
I
~ a
a
a
1
a.
~.
II
~~
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
~ ~
~~ Q ~ 1
~ 1:
~.
I.
i C~C
I° $ 8
i O~~
a~
€~ ~
._

~ ~ ~~ti
M b
\ N
\\l 8
~~~~ V1 let /
x~~~ O a
' "~~ w /
\~
~\
I \~~
I'
I ~~
-~
~~._,
bfbg5/ ~~~~4j
3' g9'g1Z 11 ~~ q II ti
/ w~$ o
w~~~a
25
~~
~~
~ 1 ~,
s ~ 4~ ~+
1 I
\` ~ X -
3 1
« L
a ~ m• X ~o
N ~o ~
~~~' ~ ~\
~ ~~~~ ~_N
- N i
}~ ~
x~~a
y O0~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ .s-
i ~-~".io•IZl
~ _~
m
,~Iw _,5~
,rr~ ~o

/ 1 N
~~
m
a~
F".~~
~~
~~~~oD~
~ ~~ ~~ II ~~ " 4
~ V (NO
~~$a~~~
o + / ~ (~ ~
1 ro i ~ ~"~
4~ ~ m r 2
/ ~ ~ SNMO` ~NS~~ a/.
~,xv>tiay ~ 2 ~
~ ,,~~0~90 y~ a~N,/i
/ ~ rL m ~ j
~' ~qy~~ °
poi ~! y o/l~ a~
./ z~z o~va~
~~ _~~~ /
~ ~ putt Zy~Zy ~ ~ ti~
~~>~' $ O~ooo~ tl3N
~ ~' M ~~o~Y ~~1 2 '~'•15S4t2 C~Q
_ ~'--
~ ~ ~ ~o
L95 ~~
R
/ r 642 ~(B O
a~
~.
.~1 tl „ ». ~
~., ~ ~v x r ~g~ ~ w ~
T p SNEET ~~ z -~c °
MpTCHL~ STA~ 3q+00 Y
r =~ ~ ~
~~ sy ~Q

N
H-
W~
z°
~+
v
o "'
-- .
a
w ~-
_Z +/~
J I
2~
UI
F-
Q
0 4
/~
m
``
'~
I I OEBBE ~~ • oo I -YI- PTSIa 1
A ~ ~ ~ Mr 155.00
~ O -Yl- PoT;
~ ~ t
i ~
6, t
PV
~ 8'
t
r
w t
m
0
D
D
~~ ~~- <S.BA'
I 5725 ~.~~ ~_
E1.E~' },
t2 ' ~ 45, BEG/N BRIOG
P H
-L- +
m
N
lrl! I
N
a
O
N y
xoxtx Gx01.w OEP~xT1ExT Or rpulSppRUrux
xo nE
V
~• rvc or~as rreioucH rxr rµ '
,~u exom k rouow~
Ar off cartel rloa~t u.a ro u+a a. ~r. t ~,
xortrx cutaw oDiaruExr Ov tWxSVORt~rlOx
~ SCE
O
~ ' 3' (RTl
0 - 1' 4.9'
L - 4'
T q~
- 76524'
r`
t•-
W~
=O
~+
OP
t- .
Q
W~
Z~
J I
= J
U~
F-
Q
FOR -L- PROFfLE SEE SHEET 8 & 911
OBUTERA7lON OF EXISTING firlAD

W
W~
WI
2
~'
W~
Z~
J I
2
U,
F-
a
41
h
NORTN curaau oEVUn-I~r OF rRW$Ppgr~rgw
~ ~~E
O
G~0
~G
i * I ~+ ~ 3 I
kB t (I_~J
f ~
4
•!~r
BEGIN BRlLGE END BRIaGE
APP H APP H
-L- ! -L-
TYIF pl AI
a
~' -L- ~
msa '~M
ShW(AfR EERY Gu7rER SM7ULgER EERY plrrER ryp
SXETCH SHOWING BR!(,y^E/PAVEMENT RELATION$H!P
Nor+rx cutaau oERUlna:r+r aF rRwsaoar.rgN
ao aEFplpca
O
-L-
P! S1o 57+6126
o- z2.~ ss.~rcn
D =0'28'389
L =50256'
r = 25L3r
P = IZ.000.fia'
5A = NC
11ER RBEAB-la N0. i4lf N0.
B-3684 1
aw ansr No.
aw~,x DtlIGN NYDGWa
ENGAIEAI lNGa1Ml
PRELIM[N RY PLANS
DO NOyT~}Uft PO pWN$TAIIC170N
INtOMPI, .y PLANS.
BO A`bT lbt. AOA 11.xCOLYMIll~H
W
D6TA[L YI
iavao s<au .at • ar n.
w ~ w
KYI ~kr
nrnO os~e
•t A
Tp LILLr
~i Ki.WTY t ~
t.~
a•io
tum....
~ ~ am
a~~
~ ~
FOR -L- PROFIIIF SEE SHEET 9
~B~lTFF~'.r i~ , ..

i.-
al
See S1~ei P-A For Index of Stets
a
M
~i
U
W
O
a
a.
•
N
N
N
M
M
h
U
~il: ~~
~.
1~ R ~ ~
f ~ l II ///V
t~~~V ~ ~~ ~~1YASMIHGi
~PROIECi N'r~^-~ ~~ __~
N0~.1796 '7~A ~iv~ 1~ ,
I N0.127 Ll
J!l
,0 5 """
BEGIN
PROJECT
rwL~ LSYAN ~
~~ L
- / -
~,
~. -,- r
~.
VICINITY MAP
CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE ESTABLISHED BY METHOD III.
THIS PROJECT IS NOT WRNIN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES OF GRIMESLAND.
NCDOT CONTACT: CATHY ROUSER, P.E., PROJECT ENGINEER -ROADWAY DESIGN
PRELIMINARY PLANS
W NOT USE PoR IVNLTRVRION
W GRAPHIC SCALES DESIGN DATA
50 25 0 5o too ADT 2005 = 4,700
PLANS ADT 2025 = 6,800
0 DHV = 13 %
50 25 0 5o too D = 55 °~
PROFILE HORIZONTAL) T = 3 % '
V = 60 MPH
10 5 o t0 20 • 71ST 1 % DUAL 2 °k
PROFILE r/ERTICAL) FUNC CUSS = RURAL COLLECTOR
PROJECT LENGTH
LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT 8684 = 0.512 mi.
LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT B-3684 = 0.372 mi.
TOTAL LENGTH TIP PROJECT B-3684 = 0.884 mi.
Prepared in ire Office of: HYDRAULICS ENGINEER
MULKEY ENGINEERING & CONSULTANTS
FOR TAE NORTH CAROLINA DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
Rb6 srAnvARD sPECrFrcAnoxs
MARCH 18, 2005 PAMELA R. WILLIAMS PE
sicJC+ruRE
RIGHT OF WAY DATE: PROJECr ENGJNEER ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
MARCH 18, 2008 PADDY JORDAN
PROJECT DESIGN fiNGJNFFR
LETTING DATE,
PE
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
srArE DESJCx ExcnvEER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINI.cTRArr~Ar
DATE
`l ~ ,y` ~ ~~ 1 tl t ~, ~ 11 I, ~{~' 11 ~ ~ ~ II,LJI ®II II ~ ~ STA1L LfAR Md6LT LL.91W R N0. AILR TOLnL
YYY 111 LI 1{L A \tY `~ l ,LO 111Ld. 1111 iii NO. SNLE15
~~~~~~®1~ ®1F I~~~~[~A~~~ .~. B-3684 ~
~u I.AAW. NO. DEL41rtpN
_-__- - _ 33225.1.1 BRSTP-1565 4 P.E.
-- 33225.2.1 BRSTP-1565 4 ROW & UTL.
PITT COUII~TY
LOCATION: BRIDGE N0.129 OVER TAR RIVER AND BRIDGE N0.127 OVER TAR R paDwA y P IRNS
RIVER OVERFLOW ON SR 1565 (GRIMESLAND BRIDGE RD.)
TYPE OF WORK PAVING, GRADING, DRAINAGE, AND STRUCTURE

ti- `S.U.E = SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEER
CONVENTIONAL SYMBQLS
ROADS ~ RELATED ITEMS
Edge of Pavement ...... .. _.__....... ---------
Curb ___._.._._ ._.. __. ...... _...
- ------
Prop. Slope Stakes Cut .. ............ .... --c
Prop. Slope Stakes Fill --F -
Prap. Woven Wire Fence .................... V 9
Prop. Chain Link Fence ~~-
Prop. Barbed Wire Fence ..
Prop. Wheelchair Ramp . _ .... _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ -~-
Exist. Guardrail ..................... .... ~ ~ ~ _
Prop. Guardrail .................... ....
Equality Symbol . _ . _ ....................... ~
Pavement Removal ..........................
RIGHT OF WAY
Baseline Control Point ..... . _........... ~
Existing Right of Way Marker ....... ...... 0
Exist. Right of Way Line w/Marker ............. ~ -
Prop. Right of Way Line with Proposed
RM/ Marker (Iron Pin & Cap) .............. ~_
Prop. Right of Way Line with Proposed
(Concrete or Granite) RM/ Marker ..... ~_
Exist. Control of Access Line ............ ..... ;
Prop. Control of Access Line ........ ~c\
~

Exist. Easement Line ............ .... .... A
_ _ _E-
Prop. Temp. Construction Easement Line
.. E
Prop. Temp. Drainage Easement Line TOE-
Prop. Perm. Drainage Easement line .... -POE-
HYDROLOGY
Stream or Body of Water _ _
Flow Arrow ..........
_ __ ~
Disappearing Stream- ........... ~ _
Spring _ .... .... _ ..... a- ./
Swamp Marsh ......... .. _ _ . ..... _ ~
Shoreline ........ _
Falls, Rapids ... _ .... _ .. ... _ .. _
~--
Prop Lateral, Tail, Head Ditches
F- ,~,
STRUCTURES
MAJOR
Bridge, Tunnel, or Box Culvert caNC
Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall /
and End Wall _ .. _ )coNC wwl
BUILDINGS f~' OTHER CULTURE
MINOR
Head & End Wall co/ c~
Pipe Culvert ............ _ .. .....
Footbridge ................ ~
Drainage Boxes ............. - ... .... _ _ ~ ca
Paved Ditch Gutter
UTILITIES
Exist. Pole _ _ ... _ _ ..... _ .. ..... .. .
Exist. Power Pole ~
Prop. Power Pole ....... .......... ..... b
Exist. Telephone Pole
.............. ... +
Prop. Telephone Pole .... ~
Exist. Joint Use Pole ..... ........ ..... ~
Prop. Joint Use Pole ...... .~
Telephone Pedestal ......... ........ . ~
Cable TV Pedestal
Hydrant ..... ....... _ .. .... ....... ~
Satellite Dish .. _ ... _ _ ... _ ... ~
Exist. Water Valve
Sewer Clean Out .. 0
Power Manhole . _ ....... _ _ ... _ .
Telephone Booth ............... ... . o
Water Manhole
Light Pole ....... ~.........
c
H-Frame Pole .. _ .. ... _ _ . _ ... ~_~
Power Line Tower
Pole with Base ... . .....
Gas Valve ..... _ .. _ _ _ .. . Q
Gas Meter ....... ... ..... ....
Telephone Manhole .. Or
Power Transformer ....
Sanitary Sewer Manhole .. .............. . ~
Storm Sewer Manhole ~
Tank; Water, Gas, Oil .. _ _ O
Water Tank With Legs
Traffic Signal Junction Box ~
Fiber Optic Splice Box ~
Television or Radio Tower ~
Utility Power Line Connects to Traffic
Signal Lines Cut Into the Pavement .. ~~~
Recorded Water Line -W-W-
Designated Water Line (S.U.E.`) .......
.... -w~_
Sanitary Sewer .................... . ...
. -ss-ss-
Recorded Sanitary Sewer Force Main
ASS-vss-
Designated Sanitary Sewer Force Main(S.U.E.') _F
SS-vss-
Recorded Gas Line
_ _ _ -o-~-
Designated Gas Line (S.U.E.') .....
....... _ _~_ _o_ _
Storm Sewer ....
........................... -S-S-
Recorded Power Line ....................... -P-P-
Designated Power Line (S.U.E.") ... ........ _ _P_ _,_ _
Recorded Telephone Cable _r_r_
Designated Telephone Cable (S.U.E.`) .. _ _ _. _ _r- -r- -
Recorded USG Telephone Conduit
-TC-,c-
Designated U~ Telephone Conduit (S.U.E.') _ _i
o__,c_ _
Unknown Utility (S.U.E.')
_ -7~r~_z~r~-
Recorded Television Cable -rv-,~-
Designated Television Cable (S.U.E.') __r~__;~__
Recorded Fiber Optics Cable
-Fa-FO-
Designated Fiber Optics Cable (S.U.E.')
....
Exist. Water Meter __FO__FO__
~
lLG Test Hole (S.U.E.`) .. _ _ ....... ~
Abandoned According to USG Record ..... . ATr~R
End of Information ........... ..... ...... E.o.,.
BOUNDARIES ~ PROPERTIES
State Line _ ... _ _ .. .
County Line ...... _ ... ..... _
Township Line
City Line
Reservation Line ... _ .......... _ ...... _ _ _ - _ - _
Property Line .. ........................ .
Property line Symbol _ _ . _ . .... _
Exist. Iron Pin _
...... ........... ~

Property Corner .. EiP
+
Property Monument ........... ........

Property Number _ .. _ . _ _ _ - i23
Parcel Number _ _ . _ _ .. _ 0
Fence Line ....................... -x-x-X-

Existing Wetland Boundaries ww & iSBw
.... wce--
Proposed Wetland Boundaries . _wce-
Existing Endangered Animal Boundaries..... - Eae -
Existing Endangered Plant Boundaries . _EP6--
Buildings ..
Foundations .
Area Outline _ .... _ . .. G~
Gate _......
__ . _.... ... ..._...._.... .. ~,
Gas Pump Vent or WG Tank Cap o
Church .. ... _ ............ . .
School ....... ........................... .
Park . ............................
Cemetery......

Dam ............. _. .... _..._ _ ,
Sign_.._..._....__.. _... .._._ _.. - o
Well..._..._._........._ -_...... ._ o
Small Mine _
..__ ..................._. _ . x
Swimming Pool ...................
TOPOGRAPHY
Loose Surface
Hard Surface .. _ .... ...
Change in Road Surface
Curb ........ .... _ _ .
Right of Way Symbol _ ~iw
Guard Post _ _ .... _ _ _ _ _ o cP
Paved Walk -
_.
.. ----
Bridge ....... .. .. .....
~~
Box Culvert or Tunnel _ _ _ ~- - - - - - - -
Ferry .......... .._.. _.-.
Culvert _ . _ . _ . .
Footbridge ....... .. ......... ..
Trail, Footpath ... ........ .. .. ...
--~-
Light House
VEGETATION
Single Tree ..... _ . _ _ ... ...... _ ... _
Single Shrub .........
Hedge ...... ... _ . _ .... - .... _ _ ,v,
Woods Line..
Orchard ..... _ . _ .... .....
Vineyard .............. _ .. _ ..... _ ..
I VINEYAR~
RAILROADS
Standard Gauge. _ ....... ~
RR Signal Milepost
__ ~5x ~Aw~Poa,.,p~
_ o

Switch _ .. _ .. _ _ _ _ _ _ uri[PoA )5
_ ~

>~
0
0
0
m
n
0
t
a
r
ao
~;
0
~o
~o
~~
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
C~ PROP. APPROX. 1L~" ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE, TYPE 59
55
AT AN AVE
.
,
flAGE RATE OF 168 LBS. PER S0. YD.
C2 AT AN
S
A
C~
pE
S
FA
C
R
T
E
AVERAGE flATE
OF
168
BS
PER
SO
YD.
IN
EACH
OF
TWO LAYERS.
C3 PROP. VAR. DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE TYPE 59.58
AT AN AVERAGE p
1
,
gTE OF 112 LBS. PER S0. YD. PER 1
' DEPTH. TO
BE PLACED IN LAYERS NOT TO E
*
"
%CEED 11
2
IN DEPTH.
E1 PflOP. APPROX. SLg" ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE COURSE, TYPE B25
OB
AT AN AVE
.
,
RAGE RATE Of 827 LBS. PER SO. YD.
POOP. VAR. DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE COURSE, TYPE 825
08
AT

E2 .
,
AN AVERAGE RATE OF 114 LBS. PER SO. YD. PEA 1" DEPTH
TO
.
8E PLACED IN LAYERS NOT LESB THAN 3" IN DEPTH OR GREATER
THAN 5L¢" IN DEPTH
.
T EARTH MATERIAL.
U EXISTING PAVEMENT.
W VARIABLE DEPTH ASPHALT PAVEMENT. (SEE STANDARD WEDGING DETAIL)
NOTE: PAVEMENT EDGE SLOPES AAE 1:1 UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE.
ORIGINAL GROUND
30'

Z B' 12' 4
11'
11' wGR
2

'

8 VAR 12' - 16'
oiz

ZO PS , , ~ 1 ~
~ E%ISTING VgR1E5 19' TO 13' ,~ J
02 GRADE
I ~

I PS j
zl ~
X
~_
POIM U2
6:1
OPE
U 18 ~" ~ ~ 812^
~~~JJJ
~ .8
I
GRADE TO THIS UNE
GRADE TO THIS UNE
TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION 1
-L- 5TA 15+50.00 TO 20+00.00
-L- STA 55+00.00 TO 60+15.00
TRANSRON FROM EXISTING TO T.S. NO 1
-L- STA 14+00.00 TO 15+50.00
-L- STA 60+15.00 TO 60+65.00
30' 8' ~L
12' 12'

8'
6:1
ORIGINAL GROUND
Z 11 wGR
i~
d ~2 { GRADE i 2,
~c PS ' POINT C2
Io ~0-B .02 .02 ~ PS
~ U8
~ El I ~8 ~" V
GRADE TO THIS LINE J \
~- GRADE TO THIS LINE
TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION 2
-L- 5TA 20+00.00 TO 29+06.92 (BEGIN BRIDGE)
-L- STA 48+69.92 (END BRIDGE) TO 55+00.00
VAR, 12' - 16'
6~ ~ ~Gi,~i~~~'v/AVA11I//,F
A'1 ORIGINAL GROUND
PROkCT REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
B-J684 2
ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER PAVEMENT DESIGN
ENGINEER
PRELIM[N Y PLANS
UO NOT VSE Po CbNS1AVC170N
4
TYPICAL SECTION ON STRUCTURE
-L- 5TA 29+06.92 (BEGIN BRIDGE) TO 48+69.92 (END BRIDGE)
~~'~ ORIGINAL GROUND

DETAIL SHOWING METHOD OF WEDGING

DETAIL A DETAIL B
~' DITCH uNER LATERAL 'v~ DITCH Uf TAII f. DFTAII D
iNO~ to $Caiet ~NOr ra $ca~~t ~ IDIN 1'111111 (IION INII I / 11111111 111A11 1 All'lll l'
N~~ur~~ ~---~L~ ~ ,,, ~., .,,~,., N ~ , „..,
Lrb/~iE ~ 'Fn Nn,~x.i ,
wou,a ~~i k, 'y~ rr. Soo ",~. T.~, ~i. ~,
MOx.O =1-() Ft. C-'!Ja1% M~n,O ~ I.0 fte '~I 11
Barer fabric ra {prerJ ///~~y,,,,,
iaoric r~Ox.O - I.0 f!, ~I Ul,i~ I i ~ ~ ~ ~'
„~„~ ~' r~olA•~
G S.Ofi.
rroe of Doer = CLaS ~9~RR wi rf Tree of Llner ~ ~ `~~ ""' "~ °' ~'""'"' °n"
_LA$~ "PPN W/ FF 'Y~~. ~., ~~, ,.. IIA'.. II I~il' ii ,i.. .. ,~., i i xn ~,,, ~ i~
{- STA 1/+75 TO 15+81 li. {- IS+B/ TO 16+50 lT. {- U~ IS TO IS 100 Ai. _~--~--- l ~ I/.60 LT
{-I7~l0 TO 19x00 AI l Idree Ai
{-le.3B ro Iv. ES Lr.
/ ~ / ~ .: ,
/ ,-
/',// / ~
-:. / Q D711S W. BULEr
2 OB 7B9, PG 599
/^ Q
~ ~ (~ ul
r _ ~ 2 .
DETAIL 'E'
MFFaY[0 SuM iQE
0.w R~ f xl SQL
a~. `~,~ '~xciPSne~
}
I~' ~ . ~
B ip
:~---L' ~; a I:o
s.o
ttcrnx ..~
R°z~ ax u
mr<e
Ou*rfr _
Ll6'i,T , -iau~n'~-
u<.
-l- Id+dR it r
L- POT 14+0 .00 DI35APATDR PAD
C1A35 T' RP R,v
BEGlN STATE PROJECT 8-3684 FILTER FABRIC
L . 03'
7 PRFFORAIED SCOUR MOLE w /0 CIASS 'I' AIP
+ {- SIA. ld+Se LT. * T ` 1.13' YNFIL7ER FAlll
-~- POT !J fSO.OO ~ ~ ~ SEE DETUI'E' EST. 7e TONS SEE DFTAII K
EST. 70 SY FF EST 18 TONS
I BE N CONSTRUCTION .A9.75 Esr.w 3Y F.I
LATERAL V OffCM EST. 30 CY D
,~ 175.63 ~-
SFE DETAIL'S'
DDE vo n
EST. 33 TONS
LEON R. HARpEE, Jr. LEON R. HARDEE. Jr. ~I I
LEON R. HARDEE, Jr. I OB SOS. PG 775 ire ' EST. 90 SY F.F.
N,
OB SOS. PG 775 I 0E 805, PL 735 '
,,
-
N„ i i j d~ - L ...~L.
Z W 6
0 ._ o. ..
N - ~ j
1 yl O 7® '
~ - i IL._ i +97.6 RC ~
.; - ~ :. DITCH LINER
I :: _.. , 30.00 ,.,, SEE OETNL 'A'
' EST. 53 TONS
~~ EST. 110 SY F.F.
SPECUL ORCH GAADE ~,
I, - SEE PAONLE '
,_ - :' '-.
~~ ~~ F ' 7 $
TIE EXISTING DRCH TO ~ ~ ,= , -y.. - '~ ati..
1B
I THE PROPOSED DITCH 'BORE 6 IACR
- ~ - .... / 60_Sd1001H STEEL
- BETAIN RETAIN r E •. ~•
~~- -` ~ ~' GRAD 730 --
-- N 72'38'.. 'E - --- -
~ E ,~. _ ..
' -L-
--- _
---
~'a:. RETAN PFFNN N 72 34' S3 I' E ~, -F - -_ ---
-.L
-; v ,... ~ „ ..,
1
P
- 1..
~"
I
BL
OT 5+00.00
(-L- 10+41.48 14.54 RTl ' ' i

CHRISTOPHER DAVID WRLIANS 1
I
,
DD 59R. PG 137
1 -_
I I
1
i
.I

-- -
- I
';I
I
~

1

1
. .
'
I
~` I
1

~
`
11

,~ a .j
..~,
~.:
ISP'UNIFORU TAPER
- .00.00 4T
~ - O.
.; --,
-_ ~ ~ ,
14, ~ 4 - roE PROTEmoN
~ ~: SEE DEFAD'C
~-~~ ` Esi. 10 TONS
,.'s~- . J - - ~ - J.- EST. 113 SY EE .75. ^. ~
' .., ---.. ~ ¢~ I
\' ~ I m
` GREGORY W, SIDEAS m
~ DB 272, PC 463
t~~: 2
~:-:` 8~wo~/
n
~1~--'~ Bar
-_ __,.
.. _ -- ~/ -
~ ,:/
GREGORr w. SIDERS
1 ~~
DD 65z, PL eoa m
I /
/,1
/ ~ ~-
'\.
r`
-~ -~
" ~^.. OYE
10 ~ CP
IWn ~.
0.^N SHEET N0.
owar DESIGN ~.~t
ENGINEER ENGINEER
NO.
PRELIMIN,4~RY PLANS
60 NOT USE Po CONdTRVCIION
I
O
Q; N
-' S. FRANRLIN BROWN, Jr.
OB 691, PL 17

~ ROBERT A. GRAY
OB Be, PL JBI
O
^
I
I4
TOE PROTECTION
I
19
SEE OEFAIL 'C'
EST. 7s roFls
,j~~ EST. 100 SY F.F.
j +04.06
` 14.4
D.D SPECUL oDa GRADE
•0 a {- 19+35 TO 30+50 LY ! ~. i ~~
SEE PROFRF
+p4pp ~
..
c lyl O
~ -
. ., ~~~t'ti~
a ~~
,,, GAAU 350
_ _- ~-
_. -.__~ -__. o _ _. __ -_ _ -
I ~
_-- -
+--r-r-v-rrrirrrv°GRAU isa ~.
,:,. `~.
Of FARED
- ~~
~' +~.e m IRu6q
TOE PROTEmON

1 .
SEE DFTAII 'C'
S HW 11
9 ESi. 70 TONS
.r• ~ Nw EST. 195 SY F.F.
~~,;!",,,;.* 0 GREGORY N. RAY
~~ N OB 696,PL 622
l~ 94 0 C1A55 'Y AIP MP
12 . W/FIITER FAeWC
4
SEE DETAIL 'D'
EST. 18 TONS
3 Esr.lD sr FE.
~ m Esr.3s n DDE

I `- ~ _N
N
P-~ O
o ~ Q
-- 'L I W
- : _. - 2
Nd 1
'm` Z J
N ~5 '_~ ~ Q
--
G
BL- 2 PING 14+50,40 =
1-L- 19+86.43 31.52 RTI
'L'
P!s Sio l7+67b6 P7 Sto 22+2427
'
' Pls Sla 26+57
80
Bs = 3
25
14.3' p = 33' 29' 59.0' RT 1 .
Bs = 3' 25' !4 3'
Ls = !60.00' D = 416' 32.9' Ls = 160
00'
LT = 106b9' L = 783.47 .
LT = 106b9'
ST = 535' T =40329' ST = 53.35'
R = 1,340.00'
Se = 0.06
FOR -L- PROF2E SEE SHEET 8
OBLITERATION OF EXISTING BOAC

Z
0
z
J
0
i
U
2~
~~
~ 2
Q
W
~W
~W
O~
n~
O~
N~
P
W~
~~
O~
ti
2~
J J
U J ° °a
~ J .,.,
'~~
ROBERT A.GR0.Y
OB 88, PG 381
~~:~
~. -
cs.
GREGORY R. RAY
DB fi%.PG 622
O
\ -L-
P!s Slo 11+6756 Pl S1o 22+2427 Pls Slo 26+5790
Bs = 3' 2Y r43' p = 33' 29' S9D' rLn Bs = 3' 25' 143'
Cs = 160.00' D = 4' 16' 329' Cs = 160,00'
CT = rO6b4' L = 783.47 CT = r06b4
ST = 5335' T = 40324' ST = 5335'
\
R = 1,340.00'
Se = 0.06
N
5. FRANKLIN BROWN, Jf,
CB 691, PG 13
O
~ ~ ~
~., F i aASS 7f' ur RAP
MNFIL7ER FABRIC
ESi. 7 r47Ns
ESE. 10 SY f.F.
~ _ ~~
`i
y~ y °~~
'~ ~ ; EDWARD J. MONULLEN
OB 145, PG 689
D.D4<I' _ ~so.oo 6
~~;+7 ~~
47.87 60,00
IIrr 0
Jf E. F 'Htl.~ /~.
~',
~ CLA55 1I'AIP RAP
W~FIITER FABRIC
/ ~ ESE.7ii TONS
EST. iii SY F.F.
PPEFOM4ED SCOLM HOLE
1 SEE DETAIL'E'
ri
.~
X04.4
/~~
i~ /// ,.

100.00 J ~ `'~' F
~ v
N

i
~o
~ ;
ZC
2G1
W/FLAT ~mP
GRATE,,., !7
G
-' aN
£~..;
w .. '.
d
7}0. ~.
.., 8 tttE
~ E ~
GRAD 7so
i DETAIL 'E'
vArJa+coouax .ac
Rw rE~ ~~ ~
P'nfa~CEUFx
k i5nn
plp /
0 ML Fi x,
~S N$111111q,
C,I.a
o ~aa
w'
A'
YC19111-I
P~
pimCX
WllCl
o,n~
,l & ~ C ~ u F
-1- 28+7/
~.
YuFw
_~ _ ~STA 28+60 TO
;L '- ~~~-~ C ~~h. - 'STA 78+82 SHBG
-.; ~ ' : ~
,~.a ! _
-~
1 _. ` PROJECT REF[IFNCE N0~ SHEET NO,
8-3684 5
1 ~~ RW SJR3r N0.
ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRMAICS
~P FNGMFFR ENGINEE0.
\ ~\Q
G
'\ ~G
=^\`,
~ 4.
~ ` `\ "~.
- DEBBIE PHELPS
'~7-` OB 540 PG IBJ
CLOSED DRAINAGE SYSTEM REQUIRED ~ON O
\ 1RIOGE FROM SrA 79+78 TO 71+A8 1-
lT. AND RT. RlET$ SPACED lY ON CFNiEIL
THIS SYSTEM YALL NEED TO nE INTO THE
`~\2GI'S OFF THE BPIDGE END. a0
FROM STAnCN 77+15 TO K+OT
CLOSED SYSTEM WRM INLEiS
~\ YACED 12' ON CENTER AHR2
OUnFTNG DOWN BEM PS RVTO ,
DISSIMTOIt PAD. ;
X57.56 BEGIN APPROACH SLAB '' ~ ' iz.o
30.00 -L- + I
BEGIN BRIDGE r ~0
-L- 9~3 '1 E
.`\ -E J ~ ~ O
B `~ --E E 16. c t/TO
E ~~: M
`~ y O
n 2 93 ~ Q
~,
Z
tA~ c ~ ~ w
-L' E J I
~:~N 32'1733. ~.© vJ
1
1 ~
C WJ. QC
N -. L
16 PVC ~ _ ~
- ~ ~~ _ e~
~ ~ ,
.', '~
_ --'
.., ~~,
,: >
//
~ ~
~ ,. ~ ~
s
/,r ~- „C~tlR;TE~~OfHfENI' °~i
IST ti41p1 ~~
- ~~ 130.86 e m o
''r \
%~`. .60.38
\ 1 209.60 ~1
H 9
Y .S' 1\
,\
-\
/!\Z~.
/y
1
11
FOR -L- RROFILE SEE SHEET 8
OBUTERATrOk OF EkISTING ROAD

N
7.
0
N
C
C0
I-
W I
W(
2
r
C
~"
w
Z~
J I
2
U,
Q
O
NORTH CAROLMA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
NO REFERENCE
O
N
~ I ,'
g 11+
D BR
= PO
APF
~ II~
-L- j
THE III
""^"-~"~ ~c^^+ ou~~cn SHOULDER BERp GUTTER
SKETCH SHOWING BRIDGE/PAVEMENT RELATIONSHIP
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
x0 REFERENCE
0
_L _
PI Sto 57+6126
~= 2'23'58.4'lLTI
D = 0' 28' 38.5
L = 50256'
T = 251.32'
R = 12,000.00'
Se = NC
g3
P~
G~\Q ~
~G
0.AV SNFET N0.
OWAY OE9GN NY0IAWC!
ENGINEER ENGINEER
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
00 NOT USE Po CON.REUCTION
O
DETAIL 'E'
vairmuEO scaw xa.~
aor ~ s~'
~~~ .nx wsw~
qid whit
a~w o iaW[0
w Iry~ ' ~t- \
~a-
SD
0 •l0'
SE[110N i-~
P~oE
9
p~Cx
~u~~E~
rw~_
•i 1. i a bAl ~ '
FOR -L- PROfIILE SEE SHEET 9
OBLITERATION OF EX1STlNG ROAD

-G~i ~ : ~ ~.y~ ~V, r~iepYFr~ t~Cr„~~In 'n~':I 5 ~ _ ~ _ .. d ~~, . ~ .. . 9r., ' p1 _ _
_. 2U.0.~ ~ ~ ~ IQIQ'TUf '~*VV. t~' ' R~ d ~ ~ Y;`LL 2 .e, : : PROIEB 3684 NO SHEB N0.
-._ 7O I LL'~ ., ,,, ,~~„ .~S ~F' .~, ~, ~ _ +~ . '7f~v _. ROADWAY DESIGN MYORAUtICS
-_ ~ ~ - _ _ .. ~'y'F '41~~"'~.: 1V` (~,"s. ~' +.. f[f[~L,,. :~~I.I.V - BJGINEFR ENGINEER
OESigI~ FRLQt1~CY ~~ _ - _ _. --
DE51GN OIYSCNAfrGE"~' ~„ r PRELIMIN RY PLANS
` ~ oo Nor use ro coNSraurnoN
60 N ro txl~r. yeESIGU ~ `E ~~N~ ~~ `~,t~~>xr ,
- -~ - ~- M, _- "t'o~~rEaa ~~~'~'~ ~~7~~ - _
.~
~ + - -
_ N ' " ~ RIO~PPrI Df~'t_~l~iQN ~.x r~~~~5, ~WrR PPJNGr w"
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ -
_ _ z ~,
-~~ - OVER70PPING fLEVATIraN . 'j P50~.'F7- . -- ,Of%F~t17JPW~ING'~„
- o w - ~ , .,. ;c~.
,.. .~. .
.~, -- --
,~ aka ~; - -- ---- - -
._
40 -- _-- -- - ~~ ~l@ ': - _
c ~ ~ - - -- - -- - - - - - - ' P! 21+60CkC
__--
_ z ~ _z v, V6 = 530'
_ K !37
- - - --- - -- _30_
__ _ r-,osrxn z --'_' +135
- - ~___-~~_ 77 _/~-
~-1D:3014%
-2U _ _ ,. -
- - --- - -- -~Q
- - ---
4
~ ~a RcP
_ ~
.10__ ~ ~~
- - -- -- -a c, -- _ ~ J
W a ~~ _- °~ ~-~ ~ -- r~xx a eo>:Ei - _ _ ti ~_ ~- - _
h.N ~+N }~i ~60 SUWrH SrEEL ,y~- ~T ---lo-
~, 8m ,m L Sfa 22f46-1~.P,CP,.: ~ ~
9 - -- -- -- - ~ - _ I U o ~ , ~ ORAtNAGE .A$~A --
- - ---
x W j ~e~RCS' - ~,~, '- - -- a.w -- - - DESIGN fRElJC1ENCY , .., 75 YR3 I _O_
-..
~Pb O ('
fIE !GN d1~LHARGE
O
z ~ dESIGN HW' ELEVA7tON 76 " ','CFS
~5'i
=1O - -- -- - -- - -- m °~, ~ g ~-_ _ _ ?OQ }'E?R D15CttARGE _' °9 ~'f i
- - ~~' ~ - - - -- - <OVERTOPPWG FREOUE^QT = 200ff_YRS ', ~lIl__.~
a OVERTr~P1~ OIS~AARGE = 51 ~ ; ~S
_ _ GlERIOPPING E{£UATION = 23S FF _...
.. -.., !
11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18+00 19+00 20+00 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 25+00
N
b0 EI - 'I86~' ~ K !~3 B - 9
m _ { +135667 /. ~=12.9I3'i _ ~~ 14.G'T
w~
mr
50
_ - - _ _ _ 50....
40 ;+1356b~ ~. _
/ za~ _ ~ %zs; 33,
40 ...
CLASS ' tl R!P RAP
W/ FILTER FABR! ,
-......30........ ~__-__~
es'~ '.
20 ~ - -:
,,1 _. ~ 20 ...
1 r-ExISi WG BROGE '129 '.
- 7 1 , ~~.
__10
1 _ 1._ 10....._.
----
-- - - --
_ _ _-
TAR:RNER ~ _~ ~
_ - _ - - _ _ 0.__
1 j
CRAIN4GE AREA . _ X858 ~r , ~ ~ I I ~
---10 - CESfGN'FREQ(IENLY ~ = 25,. ~YP.S
_ _ _ - _ __ _ _ _ -10_.-
~' DESIGN CISCHAFiGE = _34,0 CFS ~ ~ _ - _- -
QESIGN Mi' EtEUAT1QN = Ilb : ;°Fi
IUO'YEAR'OISCHARGE ° 55I~1? CSI
__ _
-2Q IOC YEAR thN ECEVATtON :, _` 138: FE _ ~
OVERTGHPRNG FREQUENCY = !0 YRJ ~ /~ _ L. 2O_.
- C`~ERTOPPING C1SCNaJ?GE = 31.CdG CFS I `'~
CAIERTDPF'NU ELEVA710N = GB >7
L-- --_-- ---- ~
25+00 26+00 27+00 28+00 29+00 30+00 31+00 32+00 33+00 34+00 35+00 36+00 37+00 38+00 39+00

~ ~ ~~ ~ - ~ PROECT REFERENCE N0. SNEEi NO.
~~ 11.~~
. B-3684 9
__bO
- I
. ROADWAY DESIGN NIUWUUCS
_
- -
___-.-_ _..__....-
..-__-._ -_._ ---_ -
.
-. .. - -...
~ - - .. WGINEER ENGINEER
_ PREL[M-N RY PLANS

-50 __ : W NM U56 FO LtlNSfRVlT10N
40_ -
- _ _

9133i - - -
~
_ ~

30

-- ---

Pl = 46+50.00

~ _
+
~
_
__.._.
_ _ - - - - -- --EL-= 1630' - - -
--
-v
Q -- -- --
------- ~0

_
_ _ I _ VC = 370'_ _
d
~
--- -. _
K 139
a i

~0--_
-----

-

-

--

_ z
w ~
~ _ _
_ _
__ _
- -- - - --- _-
_

~ - - - __
_ - _2U
(-lp.g733
7.
~--- - --- - _ _
-
-
- - _ ~ _ t-10.3033%
--
-
-
-
-
-

-

-

~-

- - -- -

-~
~---

----1_~
_ 1 ~ ~_ -
~~ ~
---
``
0 _ _ ~ CLASS n RIP AaP
_ - -- --
W/ FILTER FABRIC
- _ ._
--
-
-

J

- -

- --- - -
~ Q- - --- -- - - ----
_-
-
- _-
-- -
- -
--
-

-

- - -

-

_

-1.0_
20
- -- -

-- -

-

--- ' _ .._
-- -- ---

39
0
+
0 40+00 41+00 42+00 43+00 44+00 45+00 46+00 47+00 48+00 49+00 50+00 51+00 52+00 53+00

b0 -'',
_. _ 60...
50 _ _ '!
__ __ _ _ _ 90-..
BLENG TO EXIST.

- - _ N__ _ 40 ...
30

_
__ _ _ W
z
~ ~

- _
~, _ ~
~ a

N
-
_
30..
_
_ ~ ~
Q ~ ~ _
o
~
~ v, _ . o
~ ~
~ 20

- _..
_ _
2
~
it 'p
i .
-. _
I->C?g337,
10.._....., _ _ l-103033% ~'
-
_ - - __ _ _ _ _ 10
-0-_

__ _
____
__ _ __

_
__ _
-___ _

-

.Q- -
-l0-_ __
- _
__
___
_ __
_ -

_.10-
20
- _ _ - _ - -- _ .20. --

53+00 54+00 55+00 56+00 57+00 58+00 59+00 60+00 60+50

o
3
n ~
N ~
~IoEe: ~pproximaEe quanEiEies only. Unclassified excavaEion,
~bou~der ~orrow, Fine Grading, ~]earing and ~iru6bing,
~rea~ing of ExisEing ~avemenE and ~emova~ of ~xisEing
wi~~ be paid for aE Ebe conEracE Lump ~um price for "~ara
PRELIMINARY PLANS
DO NOT USE POR CONSTttUCf10N i
O `~

P
~

N
~
m -- - ~ - ~ _
... .. ~ - - ~ - ~ ~ -~ 0 5 10 PROI. REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
i
i 150 140 130 120. 110 100 90
BO 70 60 50 40 30 20 1
0 - ~ 8-3684 X-2
0 10

_ 20 30 40 50 60 7D 80
90 100 110 120 130 -..140
150
~ _ _ _ _

_ _ ~Q
--40-_ _
„-
~J., ~~~ ~ ~_'
ILA .~~
9.G
~
~~
~J 7
I`
~
---- -,
'I
I
_. ~
4 _
~` "
- - , - J~ ~~- - ~----.
a -
~
~
i
~ .. ~
. f
~,
_

- .. ~
~
_
~ i; 4
~~;

_ ~n
/..

mz - _ _
---~
- - _ 15+00.00.. '- ~----- --.
Vu _ - _ _ -

z~ _
.~__

- rl

I`
- W -
~' '~

- -

2D ~ r
J2

F
r
~

-

-

~
~.
~- 9J.~7A07.
- ~'
_ ~.~
.
0 r ,~ °
-~ 08v
kl ..--- :- _.. -- -- -~- -:::.- -
------ .~©_

- ~
-
__ a
y W

--
,.~ v ~

,,, _.1~'+50.00 --- -
-
-..

.... _
.. _ _ _ ~~~
1~4 R L J.'. 5'~ -
r Mfr

-

~

~0
h ~ ~ f. _ ~

~C -----_
_ _-._

~ W

~
-
-- -- -----------'
I

- -. _ _ i
~ ga~m~a
I
~
, _
~rzo ~~~nr „
_____
, ~
r.
_
~
,~
~ ;
- ~, ~
-_ _ _ _

-- - _
_

--
~~
~ _
, <
x -- ~
, ~
~~--x_~, ~~
- _

_ i
w

- _
z~au _ _
- 1d+00.00
- _ _ __ __

r
_ u
-
-
~
~L - .~
~ ,I
m
m i
~ - -- ---.
--
--
-

-
---
~ -
--- -- ----
~ ~ r
x ~
~, _ 13+50.00
~~
G 9a

0 oN
o
- ~ - ~n
o¢°.. 150 140. 130,-__ .120 110 100 40 ;8D 70 60 50 4p
30 20 10
0 -
_ 10 2Q _ 30 40 50 60 _ 70 80 90 100 110 .120 130 14Q 150..._,

.._. _ _ . _
..

-

-~--

_

_
~ ...
~

150 . _
_
0 5 10
PROD. REFERENCE N0.
SHEET N0.
-~ 1d0 130
120. 110 100 40 80 70 60 SO
40 30
~
B 3684
-
X 3
_
. _
.., ;; 20 10 0 10 20 30 40
50 60 70 BO 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
50
?(I .::.

-
_ _ _ _
_ _ 8f9
9.0
D X2.0 ~ZO '•.~i ~i,c
_
:.
.__ .._

- - -fib
. . X43.3 - , _
_ -
i
.

.
_.
e
~ Q080 ~ OD20 0:004 0. Y
---

I I
f _
~ 2G2r- .~'~~

I ~\_

-
<, y' .. .
/ ._ ~
7n
~ j
~ ._ ~

i

-<-1 I

/
I'
rr•

.
-
.
;~ -

- -~ / C ~~~
'~,I ~ 1

1 v~ ~r ~ ~~ ~ ~ -~/
~ --~ - - _
~~

,, ~ _
~, n
_

~. ~ ~.~ 454
~a5 9~ k~ ?,,, D 9p
I ~ . _. _.
684 _
q~i
-- 1-- -
____
-_
~ -~ ,,
~
~

-

.
_ __

.
,.
~
_.

_ _ ..

~

,

.
rr, ~
~, ~
, ~ , ~
~
~ ~ - - -

.
.,
~
~
~, 5
~

-
,, , ; ~. i

,
,~

~.
~' ~
,
__ - -_ w
~- -.
~
_ -F-F ~ = _

. ,
_

_
--

-_
_

- -- ---

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

~__
~ ~ `.< ~~ j~' i.
-- _

_
- - _ :_
- _
.
_ ., _.
50 _ 16+00.00 X. ~` ~"~ ~
__... _ - _
_..
~-
4C _ _ - _ _
_ _ - _
-
~
T _
~ ,
i
C J
~-
~2.
SIl
- y i ~
- -
_

- r .~
~. ~~ ~
~~ _.
_.
----_~
- ~ I ~~~, r~~, ~~ o~~~r ~~`~,_a, ~ F~
g - ~

i

- ?e

- ~,
-
_ _. ~

- r 3, ~
~- ~
~ ~
-
, _ a zs~9 ---~--:--~
~
~I ~~
_.

~
i
_
_ -
_! ~
~
~-
_ _ _
~ ._ I

- i ~

<`
~. ii ~
..

~ , _
~ 2Q

- ,L r,- -~ ` ~
~
_
~,.,, -
~
-

~ _
~~
i ~ .. -
- -
- -- _
-
;

_
_
--
_ ~
....
~ ~.
_..~,• .fit .c
- .. ,,~
r. ~
--
-ro - - - ` n ~ i r;,J
_. _.
m 15+.50.00 ~~- ` ~~ ~ 1_~~ _ :r
~ -
TSB _ . ... ~. ~ ~ ... .~. ~ .... ..
~~
,~~,; 150 140 130 _
120 110 100 90
60 70 QO 50 40
30
20
10 0 10
_
20 30 40 50
60 70 BO 9d inn ,,~ ... -_
_ .__- ~~~ - rw ~3U 140 150

__ _.._ _

~a
)50 14D 130
120
110 100
~ 0 5 10
~ PROD. REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
_
.,. 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 1D 0 1D 8-3684 X-4
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
90 __
100 li0 120 130 140 150
~f, _ _ _

__
_

_ - _

5~_.:

QO _ _ . __
_
_
- - _
_
_
~, . _ ~ .,. ~;~ zap ~ ~
-c~~ u

~;
- _

-_ ___
-
_
--

_ - ,
~
I ,, ~
~_4, 7Ci.~ '.~J'
-- D173A ~ n~c ~

------ e~ - _ _
h
~~ .._
_ --
~ w
-_ _
~ ~~
~ ~ ~
~ ~_
~
~. ~ .. ~
. ~.. ...
;
/f~ _.. _ ~. ._ ~ ; ~ ~\ ;
~ ~___.
-. ~
_ ~--
------~

- _ _ - _. _
_ ~
~,

_ G ~ ~_;K
~
- ~-

-c-
jl ~
~~
^r~

-
_. ~ .J
_ __

_ _ _
_

17+50.00.

- , :;
, T,
_. ., _
_
50 _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ so ..
ao _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _.:

__,-. .~ ~.~ ~:
- ., _.. .~
-- -,..~
- _ _.
~
_
4
~
3C __ _

- _ _ I
__ ~!

~ 1 ~ _ ~ i
_~.
aJkW
°
i
~

_

I
~ ~i _ ~ o.~
~~ o.
~~7 s1 ~
- -- -- ^°~ G~ _
~ - ~- 35

~

~

..
,~ 'f ' - ~
_ - ;~
~~ i ti
e. i
_.

.-
,.
_,
_ ?a
- .._ ~.
,, i .

a ,
"

`

''

r

Q ---- --
----

_ _
-
r ;, ,~-- -
,~ ~ „
t
~
~
,;
,

_
~
~
~
~~~~~,
r

_
,
- , ~ , ,
v :< ~

~ .,

,~ _

~ .-

- ,. ~- ,--
~

~ x
~ - T ~--

,.
,~
~~ _
----
-
m
- - , . ~, ~ ~
, _ __
Y
.
~

,.
> ,
, ~, .
~

:_~!
N¢n 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 7Q 60 50
40 30 20 10 0
10 20
30
40 50 60 10
80 40 .
,100 110 120
_;
130 140 _ 150

._.
_. _.

~
,150 Id0 130
120 110
.. 100 90 80 70 0 5 10
PRO1. REFERENCE NO
SHEET N0.
: 60 50 40 3D TO 10 0 ; 10 TO 30 ~7j B 3
684
5
x
40 50
60
7o so
90 - 100 _ . 110 120 ...130 140 150 _.
5~ _ _. _. :_. _ _. _ _ _
_ _:: _ _ _ 5Q ::

_ _ .
:CC 91J Z.O. -- _ 24 20 6.4 i85- - -- ----
.-!_2.0 _ -
__ _
---
-
_ _
30_ ~
~ ~~ !i
~e _
~ .I
dal ..
t
w
n
~
-
I
r 4,
i~~aa_~ ~
r
~.~o
aoso ~
a_. ~
~
~,,,
.
3C
----- -------
-- -

,~-
~' ~ _
il_ ,~-._
r` _
_ -
_

-
--
.
_ _ ~
_.
-1G
- _ _ ~-
_
~ ~- _
_ ~-
-_
~- _ _ _ _

_ - ---
_

_

.
-. 1
- _
_ _
-- _
~~ - _ 19 +00.00 _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
- _
__ _ ~? .
4C :. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

3.C .Z za 1:a 9.0
cu- ~ ~~5
__
~ _ _ .--~
I _ _ _ _ - an
'2 _.- _ _ _ ~ ~
- _.. - _ ~
_

7D3Q U~
~
- _ ~LSC I J,75R D
----
- - 4 i ~ ~

-__ , - - - - -- :~
,, .

= _ W
_ _
-~ ;~~_
__

< : ~ _ ^~
..
l
~, -
_._-
._ _ _ _
_ .:
_`i_
_
_
_ _ 'U

-~~~ .
- - _ - -
- __
-18+so.oa - - --- --

__
--
__
--
___ _ __ ___ 4---
_~ - _ - - - -
- _ s~~
_.._ _
ar _ _ _ _

:
_ I
2 _
WI I yg,~ 7. 0.~~ 01)52 ~L~5
CC~'° - -
W ~ _ _
_.
I -
i

- ~s* i --_:~~ i

~

-
'
- _ ~
/
,~ /
~,
~
~_
~~_
,, y
!J -

_ ~-
,/
;-
~ ] ~-
~_-
_
_--
,-

T- ~
- - -- -~ -r'
,; r

_

e

,

~. ~ ~
;
~ ,
k
.,
1
Q
-IG
~ ~
m _ _ _ - __
_18+00.00- °- - .
_ _ _ _ _~;
~a _
o
am ,
_
_ 1
o.
m
.
_ _ ,
_
-
oQ 150- 1d0_ 130 _ 120 110 100 40 80 70
60 50 L 1
40 . 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50
60 70 80 g0
. .100 110 120 130 1d0 150

n,
m
m
X
O Q
O ~~
0
~N
~ttB
~~~
P _ _ _. _ - _ _ _.
'
.
..
..
-.
.... ._..
~
m ...
..
. .. .. ._ _ :.
_ 0 S 10 PROD. REFERENCE N0. SHEEf N0.

y 750 140 130 120
110 ~ 8-3684 X-8
,
100 90 HO 70 6d Sd 40 30 20

__ _ 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
10
B0
9d 100 110 120
.130 140
-15d

,,^,C _ - __. __

- - -
- ~ - -
- - _ _ t2.tr eJ _9'
60. 2" 27- - ___
T _..,~a.~ -- ..
_
... t
l --
- ~ i ~ _ _. _ --- -- l
_ i, _

_ _ _ ~ ~ ' .

_..
30 ~
'- r:
~ ~
- oPC
-
-~ i .,~
_
~
_. ~.
~. ~.. ...
A
~-
~.,
i / f
_-~__~_
- - --------

'~~
,
~,
- ~-
- 3Q
~_
- - _ _ ~
W~
1Q_
~
- ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~
~ '~
_
_ _ -- -
-- -
- --- .
-- _
- - - -- ,
_ ~ ., ~ ,
,%
_

_ --
~~r-
-~- - _
.
----_;

-

_ 2l?
_25+00:00 W `.
,1:
_ _.
5C~
__. _ __
Z~ 3.^
49t
_
_
.5i;

-
--
I __ _
:
~
1 ~ _
4~ _
~, ~ O~U r Kd 0 ~
~ ~ __
_
h~ _ .. ~..
_~__ _.
_ , .... _ _
_-__~...- __~... T~
' _-

~
_~ sa
~-~-
~~
- ~fi5(
_ _ l
~~
i _ ~
-. _.. '~
~
t i
_ ~
n
_ z4+5o.ao_ _ ~ _ _
n_
- - ,:,
5a

,~., 4
_~ - a„
- ~~E
-
__ r
_

ac -
~
f -,
;~~ ~~~ ~~

- _

-----
J_ -__ _------_. ~
_
--
„
_~- ~~

e

~,

~,

;a ~J
_ ~~ ~_
,~ ,, ~
~ ~'~
___ _____

24+00.00 _ ~ _.

... :~~~
-_
150 14Q 130 , 120 __ 110 100 40 BO 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 LO 10 20
30 40
50 60 7D
80
90 100 11D 120
130 140
150

N ~.. _' _..
~ ,. .. ... .. . .. ..._ .... .. .......
~
. ..

5 10

PROD. REFERENCE N0.

SHEET N0.
X50 140 130 120 110 100 90 BO 7d 60 SD 40 3p ~ "
~
2U
10 ~ 8 3684 X 9
,
.0 , 10 20 30 4A 50 60 70 BO 90 100 1}0 120 130 140 150

_: _ . r,

78~ ~QW3! ~r~4? ~ OCaJ- LIMA QDI? ~
u
9G --
- ~
- ,
.
- ._.
Y - -- -- - - ~~ -- - -
_~ ~
,
~~ ~_
3.
~.,
x
r .. ~ ~ -
_ _ _ ~ \, LL ~
_ ~ ~ ~ l=~_ - - ---r----. ~" 9Q
_
_ ...
26+50
00 . ;i I
~c __ .
. _
-- _

- _
__ _ _ _ ~~

- ~~. ;~
._
_~~

~
i
~
:
i F/~
~~' -.
_
__- _ _

_.. [~

~
1

):~:
A •~` ~ _
~ f

I
-. ~~ ~~
p ~
u.- ~` F
_. _~~-__-_--__...._.
- -.__.-~ _.. -_
Jam -_-_ a .. _
`
~~.
_, ~ _
~V
.. ,
.. ~
~ _
~.
ti ~:
~ ~ _

~~ ~ IL ^''
~
,~
~~ ~
26 + 00.00 w:
;r, _

~o _ y
~
..
__ ,~ _ b~ ?~~ ~ ~ __
--
i I ~ i I ~
~ _ `_ Q..

_
7C

I
- ~ i
„_.
J
{I`
i
: I

;~~
..
~ /
_.
'"
~ ?~
~

~
_
-- -------
_ ~
: X35,
_ _

~
w
~

h ~
~
~ .,v

--
.:
~_
~.,
J

25+50.00 _ u~
~~
_~ y i..
150 1d0 1~0 _ 120 110 .100 90 80 70 60 -:. 50 40 30 20 10 0
1D 20 _ 30 40 50 60 _ 70 60 _ 90 100 110 „_120. 130 140 150
t
c
m
n
v
m
m
o ~a
aN
a..
oza
~5~

0' .. _ ....... .... _.. .. .. ._.. ..... .._.. .._.:._:
...........
~' _
m . 0 5 10 PROD. REFERENCE N0. SHEET NO
1n0 140 130 p ~ ' 8-3684 X-10
120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10
10 20

_ _ 30 40
50.: 60 70 BO 90
_.100 }}0
120 130 140
150
_ _

oC
_

_
__ _
_ _ _

_

_ _ _
_
- _ _
,,.
..
_r :..:.
C .. ~ _ ' ' it ~ ~
. .. ~ ~
7
_: . r
_ - _
ff
_ I ~~ 3020 c~ryry 0.03 n ,I
- ~ 0.08,% -. 1 -r ~Q ;l ?L3 '
_ _ ~
, ~~~
_

( _
_ _

_ _ ~,
_

~ ~ _
!" ,
_
_
-~\ _
__
~ _ -
__ ~

_
.
~ _
= " -
_ _. ~.
,~
_
4(:
~~
_ __

-

-
-
~.
~
w -
-
- _ _ -- --
- _ ~ _ 1

__~T
-- - rC.
---
-
-- -- -~----------
--
2~ ~?

----- ~-. f
~, -, e
\. - -

~i
~. W '
-
~~
~~

,

w
_ _ ,
~, ,.
_ ~ '-
_ lc _
- _

_ __ 2a+oo.ao

__
_ _.
_ ~~ ~ `
GC __- _ _ _ _ _ _
-- - - --

772 9F~ n.~ ~z., .7~ _ Gl .:...
V ~ _ ~
__
_ - - __

- - _::

- __
~;
_._0(,__'_
.. ~_

~ e ~~~ 'r' '°~ c o~ c„ca 'sa ~,
----
_ _ 5
a ~ _ _
- _
' _

_ _.
_
~. ~

_
, _
~

_
,!_
~n
u_
_ _ _ 1

-- _
~- _ _ ,.
r. _ _
_- -
-
--
2; .~
- \ _ ~,
._ _.

.
_
_
~;~~.
_. _. .
_ _.
_ n
50.7- 7~_ 2;: L3 r~ ~ Zc? y
,~,
7~~ ~ ~
f
~
o.~q ,~~ ~.~2Q _o
~,_~~ ~ ~ ,.,
~,>F ,

a~

I -
. -
~.
- _
- ~ _
_., _
_
~-
_

~~

z
,.
,, ,
,
;, `

-

i
_

;
_
~. _ ~
,_\ ;~ __
TF,
__ __ „~
~, „

_
~'
r~'

_

- „

,_
~ I

'
;;

~,
__
~ ~
~~
_ ~ L

r, _ 27+00.00
_ _ _ - ,; .
_ 150 140._,., 130 120 110 100 40 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1D 20 3Q 40 50 60 70 BO q0 100 `
110 120 130 140 150
1
a
m
m
x
~~
o aQ
~~m
a
a~
~¢9
~~~
Nd~

a
m
m
x
s ;Q
~~N
~~,
a..
~~9
,,~,
~,a~

a
a
m
m
x
~~
;Q
~~
o~
a
o~m
~n¢~

° __
~
1v
r : - _.. .... .. ~.

m ... .....
_ ..... _ ... ...... 0~
15
1~0 PROJ. REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
x150 1d0 130 120.. 110 100 90 BO 70 - 60 50 40
0 ___
____
~l.l_lJ 8-3684 X-12
3
20 10
_ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140
150
_. _ _
__ _ _ .: ._

bL _. .:.:._ 7~~ ll~J f2.0 ;.~7_
_ - - -- -
r~~ ::

- --

C _ _
-- -

-
- - ----
`~

._ D.. _..
SC _ `~ ~.:iLC _uLLC
F) ~_ r -, i I ...
.... I

-.

.. an

l,. ..
.. .... ..

. __ _ --
-_._-
... -_

_ . ~

`_ /
,_
.~
~
~iil
_ -._ __ _-
rte
.
-- _ __
i/_-_.._
.-_..-
__._ _ __

/ _..
~'

--
1: _.
. i
.
i
~~ r
_
__

- _ _ ---

_ ^,

.i
-
t
rl
_
v4 ~ ~;.
~~ U
__
E ~
i _ - _ _ ?0
4C _ _ ~~
- _ _ - - gib
~0 _ _
__ __
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ 30.
_--
~E~+

,- ~Q
_ / ~
,
-

, ,,
:

~
__ - ;
`~_

_ _ __ ~ ~;f..
. -
___,f
r _

30+00.00.... _ _:_

150 140 130 120 110 100 90 BO 70 60 50
40 30 20 1p 0
1
,
0 20 30 40 50 60 10 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150

P
~ .. ._. ..

m
N
* ..
- - - ~ -

150 140. 130 120 110 100 90 BO 70
7

_ ..., ..

_._..
-- ~~~-~ ~ ~- ~ ~
~
0 5 10

~
PROD. REFERENCE N0.

8-3684
SHEET N0.
60 50 4q
J 3p 40 10
0 10 20
30 X-15
40 50 60
70 ,, 80 90 _ 100 :110 .120 130 140- 150
_~C .'
60 ._ _ _. _
~ _ - . .

..._
_
i _... .. .
- -,
_ i .. _.
_ ._
.....
_50-_~
. f
4
- ~ .
__zs
o:a~a

_
- --
- -_
- - --- - n
4L' -
_ _
_ _
_
_ _:
q,n
_
3~' . _ _ _ _ _
_..
-- - - _

33+50.00 -
Zc___ - _ _
_ _
__ _ _ _ _ _
_

_.~r,. . _ _ _

_ _ _ nr
~_
~
_ ~
_ nc
`x~
_-
_ . ~ _ hn

~4C _ ._ _
_- _ _. _ _. _._
_

_ _ -

_ _. _ _.._
_ __ ---
-_ _ _ - - -- _ _4c,? _~_
_ ..3;' _
__ _
-_ _ -
_ __
_ _ _ 311 .
_
_. 70 ,_ _ _
- _ _

~~ _ ..
_
i,-

. _ _ ~
_ _

_ _
__
-

_
r
_
_ __
_ __ -
,.
_.
Q
-.30
;_...
_ -
m _.
33+00
00 ~ _
_

a
_ .
_
~.,_ -.3n..

_~
pia
_ _
... -. ._ ._.. _

.:.. ..:.._ _

~QN 150 140 130. 120 110 100 90 BO 70 6p 50
40
30 20 10 0 '
10 20 _ 30 40 50 60 __ 70 ~ BO 90 ._100 110 120 130 140 150

P
Q
C
V
a
a
m
m
o a
o~~
°N
a..
~¢m
~i~
~n¢~

~, ---._
_
_ _ _

~

5 ...
.. _.. ....

~
_
p
'
t 1
0 140 130 120 _ 110 100 90 80 70 b0 50 _
_. l 5 ,O PROI. REFERENCE N0. SNEEi N0.
40 30 20 1D 10 20
p

_ 3p
d0
~ _
83
684
_
X 17
_
_ 50 60 70
_ BO 90 100 110
_ 120 130
140 _
150

7„ _ _ _ _ - _
_

- _. __

---
IC
fiC __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_.~
~{ -
- c~
5p _
-- _ ~ f
- _
-
- ~ --
I
3p2D
-ti.0?r -
- _
- - - __ _ -
-__ -

-

_ _
_ _ __ _
--

- - -
S,~
_
--

f0 _
__
_ _ _ _ _ _ 3

__ -- <'

_ -
_-
- .... _
~~

~

_-~-- -
~ -
~

`~

i r
- i ~` '' > >
~,

- ~ ~ -
~ -- --~ -
-. ~
_ -. ~, ~
~
..
~
~ ~ ..
--
t
_
_ .
'
_ 35 +50.00 ---~.~:_
;
- -,-~ ~
~, -

-
I
I~
` ~ ro
s i
~ ~ ~ ~

_ ,,
~ i
_
_ __ _ _ _ _ Gn
,,~
_ _ _ _
e,.
~3~ _ _ _ -
_ _ _ _ ~n
~ : _ _ _
~~

m ,,~
_ __.
_ _ _

a
- _
_ - ..
- _. ,~'•~
~~~ ... , .
~ ~ ~ t ~
,
T
.. -__r~_~ _
~~
_ \\

v
.... ~____-__
-.. _
~
~~~ ~
~ ~
~~

~ ~
~
~
~
V ~

x _ 35+00.00

- _
_ _
- n .

~~

o ;~

_
.
_

_ _
_ __

_ __
° ~
moo .
.
-
..
~~e .. -/
'_'
~~~ 150
140 i30 120 _. 110 100 90 BO 70 60 L

50 40 30 20 10 0 1D 20 ,
30
40

,
50 ~0
TO 60 90 100 110 120 .:130 140. 150

r
n
9
m
n
m
O a
Oy
~v pN
~ Om
OR:
Ut¢~

-- ,,, ~~~_ uu Ezu :130 id0 150.

f
0
C
a
n
m
X
O ~~
Oda
N da
DQ_
NQ~

a
D
m
N
N
m
U
o a
0
N UN
ON
O~_
~i~
N~~

P .......... :--- _.. .. ...
., ..
,' ~ 0 5 10 PA01. REfERBJCE N0. SHEET N0.
m 150 140 130 ~ B-3684 X-24
( 120 110 100 90 60 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
10 20 30 4p ~
~
: _
0
60 70 BO 9d 100 }10 120 130 140 150
~ __

__ _ _: _ __~J ~ ,~,~ 3D _ _
,_ _
z
7 ~- -"-
,
,~
_ 3
,~
r

2~ __'__ -- _ _ -_ --
?~? ---
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ t~r .

--_/
~~3 ---~
- --
__
__ - _ 44+00:00.. _

_ _ _

_. _

~C _ _ _ __
_ - _ _ __
-_
-- - -
___ _
__

;,,.
- --~
3~ _, ~ i
_
__
f
_
_
~,,
` ~t ~~.
~~:
~,,,
~~ ---
__ ___ _

__
---
-_ -- __ -_
,~

~---
-

_ __~-_ _
,h _, _ - _ ~
.,
----~. _-------

.
43+50.00.. _ _
- - __
4~' _
__
_
_ _

_ _.
__
~, ~

~~^ ~ ,
I-'-~- ,
_ _
_.. _ _. - I
I. I
~
~~
- ~ -
. 7,?n-" 7.070. ~ ~~.
J; ~... -.
r _ ' - - -
- - _ _ _ - 7a
: n~
~--

- ,. '. ~
_. f ,~ ~ ~. S~
«~ .. y~y~.=~
- _.
..
__ _~.~
---_ ---

m - 43 + 00.00
a
o
oa
m __
da
°~,
Ndn ,_

150 140 130 , 120 }}0 100 90 _~.
_
BO 70 60 50 40 30 20 .
10 0
-
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 40 100 110 -120 130 140 150

..,. ~.~ wv 14U 150

..
_ _. _.
_
~,

.150

140 130 120 110
100 90
BO
.. _._
.

'" 0~ 5 JO

PROJ REFEABdCE N0.

SHEEi N0.
_
...
_ _
70 60 . ; 50 4d 30 20 10 "' ~ p 1 ; 10 ' 20
1L
1JJ
-
684
_ _
27

~ . 1_ ... .. 1}0
3p
40
50 60 70 BO
-_ _ 90, 100
120 130
.140 150
_ -
_ .._.

. _ _ _ _ _ 4G'

~c,. _ _
_ _ __
__ _
... _.

_
-- - _ 3 ~7--
--_ -12.0 __ __
-- -
;.
7C~, ~
~
_ I ~ I j - -.
-

45+50.00 _ -_
- -:_-2_
~~ .....
_ _

. _ _
___ _
Y;~ "
_.
~ -_ ~

: __ y
_._.
--~_ ___ .

-

45+00.00 -___

_ _ _ _ ,,

~. -

_
^ l
I
z~
_~.
_~
-~_

-Y .

- k
;
2(]

~
~, It? _ --
_
__: _ _ _;
_ :.
_

r
__ - !(1
Q_ __ _ _ _ _
m
~,

_ _ rc

44 + 50.00 _ .
--- n .
._

1 1
' ~ -
~Qn 50 40 130 _ 120 110
100 90 BO 70 60 50_ 40
30
20 _ - ..
_
10 0
10
20 _
30 40 50_. 60 __ 7D BO 9D - 100 :110 120
130 1d0 150

P
N
1
C
O
Q
9
m
;h
m
O ~Q
G~
^~ OJ
ee
~,e-
~ ~'
~ns~:

P

Q, ..
_.. ._,._ -..
~
150
d0
0 _ 0 5 10 P0.01. REFERENCE N0. SNEET N0.
1
13
120, _ 110 100 90 g0 70
60 50 40
30
20 i0 0 ~ 8-3684 X-29

,t
. - _ _ 1D 20
..
_, .. 30 40 50 60 70

_ 80 90 100 110 120
130 140
_ _ __ _ -

_
150
D _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

_ _
_ _
'~? ..
- _ _
-2C
- _ ----
_...
-

~ ..
. ~
~ ,
I __
- _- _ :_ --
_ ~0 _
~ ~ ~:02G
p'?BO „~ C J--- Q02~
---- 0
0080 I
~ ,,
-
!U
-_
L'aF,

,,
~~ ~,%
, W

.V
I
i _
-- -- yi P2G - f -.. -:
t ,.

~_ r~
~
52+50:06 ' ---------- -
_ - - _ - _ _

'~
_
_ -
~
.

_

_ --
-- _
--
_

_ - - -

jLl--

~~.5 ,~
~.~ -
u - rztt :U~ ~ ac _
_
_ i
f j i ~

_ ~, _...
~
~°~
~~ .~~ OD£0 ~
0020 °
0 ~
_ - f, I
~. ~
~4.

_ _
~~,
~ ~
~-~ uI
4 / -
I w
- a -~ _
- ~~
~ ~~
--
-
_
~ _
i i 3>> ~..
__ ~
,. ~~ ~ X x , ~~, -- - -- - ~ ~`-

_,~ ~ it ~ ~ ,r
,i
_ --
~- ~~;~~
~
~
_
.
~
~_ 52+OOAO _ _
z
,~, _ _ _ _ _ _
~ ~ ~~-
y _
20 _~ ~
,
~
`f

F
-
-
_ _
- _ j
~ -~
~

~
~ ~ _ - _
--- -
~'
i
~

_ _
..

- ~_~
.
~-- iAh

-
' { _
~ ~ ,. .. ..
~' k~`.
`
~
v ~~ : ~
_, K
~ 51+50.00 - .~-------
q~, _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _

.3C~

_

.

_

~ T
L _.

_

F ~
_.
__

z~
~
_i
~
~ _

~
I
.
- i
J ...., - I ~ /2.~ D
4 :.. -
I
~
c ~
0BG I ~
`
.r
w
~~
Y- ~.
. y Y `-

m
i " ' ' _ _~_
~ -
51+00:00
-- ~

_
_ 1
., _ .

r
0 oz __
_
_

-

_ _

_
oaa _ _.
- _ _
_
._
_
__
NQn 150 140_ 130 120 110 100 90 _ 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 1D
0
_ 10 ~ 20 30 40 50 60 70- 80 90 _ 100 110 120 130 140 150

m
C Q

0 5 10 PROI. REFERENCE NO. SHEET N0.

m ~ 150 140 130. 120_ 110 100
90
80 70 60 50 40 30 20 1D
~ ~ B-3684 X-30
.
- •0
10 ,,2p 3p
_ _ 40 50 6Q 70 BO 90 100 110 120
130 .::140 150
~~
._
_.
_
_
_ ?~
_ _

9L
- IZ0 cJ
-30.3 - ~u ~ ZJ 9.; ~~„

~ ~
: ~

_ %
_ _ __ -
~~~ G~ ~~ co2G OO~G ~~4 o.oeo ~ ~ _ __

_ ~ _,---
o -

-
„y i w I -
--_-------- „ ,, ~r~ _ \
_~- y-
_ 54+50.00.. - ~.__~._ ---
__
3r _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _
__ _ _" __
_ .
- _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1
_ _ 32.v ,u _G ~w ~~ ?~
.. :. - _ _ - l ._

_ __ _..._ .._ ___
-- I ~ ~ I -
i - - _ JD
Qngr, ~ .J£0 t 20 0~~~ ~p°r t ~
~- Wi ---
k

_ .~
-' ~ u9~ ~~~
,, .v / ~ - ~, ~
~,
' W~
~ I _ _ _ _ ~' _.
-
- - . _ _ _

-~- _

_
~-
.~
_ -
r~
_ _ 54 + 00.00 _ _
__ _
__

-
_ -
--
__ - -

-

. _ --

- - 31'x___

_ -
,. ~
_ i _ _ ~~

-~--- ~,
_.
y-
~~
~l~
"
~ I
i
~
~ _- ~ _
- _-53+.50.00. _ ~ ---
Jo
_ _ _ __
,,

-
~~ ~ ~ _:o
,,,~ ~ ` <<~ s.~ -,
r-- - - , --
- ~..
~l; ,
~

i G t; 3 :~ 7

put - L
p~_ ..
~Q" 150 14Q, 130. 120 ___ 110 100 90 BO 70 60 50 40 _ 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 86 90 100 110 1~0 ]30 140 150

N
m

a
v
'm
n
m
x
o a
o~
^~ a~
o~+
o~°
~i~
~~~

P
m
:. _ ._ -.
" "
0 5 10
PROI. REFERENCE N0.
SHEET N0.
I •. ,
B-3684
X-32
150 140 -136 120.. 110_- 100 90 BO 70 60 50 40 30 20 ,_ 10 0 iD 20 30 40 50 60 70 80_ 90 100 110 120 130 -140 ISD
-
j~,
-

_ _ _

30
_ _ ap _ 6, ~ ~Z~ T~0 .d 6.t
28.~ _

~ ~
i

- ~~
~
~
~°c
0
0
0
~
a~
b~~- .
2 0 cen r N
IG ~ - -
-

_
~
o.t

,~
-- ~---
~ en_
--
ai
-~~
~ . ~-

~ _h -
~ ~
-
-- - --

0 _ _..

_
58 + 50:00
~~
_ _ .~

_.
~~?
_
__

-_
_ 3~~-

. ~
_ _-
~ ~
-. - _
_ _ _ ..
-- r - _
I
~. ._ ~ _.
r- __
- --_
i _-
_ __ ..
- ___ _.
_
!~-
- f ~
1 ~ ~

r ~
~{1
~..
,
~_ _~ 4

w
`
o}
M
~,

..
_ _58+00.00. _ - _. ~~-

-
---._
r
_

-- -
_^
-

_
- --

- _ _ _

-

-- _ __
- _ _

- _

_

-_ __ _

-

-

-

- - _ _..

_
- _ - F
---T ~, ; f
__~

_ I ~~ ,r -
x
` ~i 9l~ ~u ~' ~ , L '- Q2 1y~
w ~
- - - ~ ~6, ~ 6~, : _ 1„

= ~
57+50.G0
3Q _ _
- __
_-

- _ - _ _ _ '0 -
~~~ , ~ ~ _
i
_ ~ ''~
f r
e

~~~a1~1
~
~r~~ ~,~

_~ ~i~,:
l

W
W - -- -
,
_

~
`
~-
~'
L~ ..

E7
~ -~
R
r
s_ ~.
/
~. ~
_ ~
_- ~/

-.
~~ T

- -T^-_~-.-._.~

..
-
57+-00.00
-
~-'
_ _ '--
_ -L -
-.150 14D, l30_ 120 110 100., 90 60 74 60 SO 40 30 20 19 0 ID 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 40 l00 110 120 130 140 150
m
a
ti
m
m
x
o °Q
~~
4e
~o..
aN
iv,
Nd~

is -
a
a
ti
x
0

_ ~ 5S _ ~~ l'b . lf.7 0_60..
3p
0 _ .
i(? .
. _

_ _ .
_ _
~, ~
. _
~
~,' i
i

_ ~ ¢ j
_ C
"
~ u0Z0- ~
0037..

~C
- -

- - '-
`
Q.Ca?.~ Q
DdA..

~~
~
/
y
~
--- ~j

_ _ _

_
_

_

_
_ _. _.
_

______

__ _ _

_ __

_ _ _ .. _
_ __
_
_ _

_
~.
_?U _ - -_ -- __-_ F A"_"

- ~

---
~~~~
-.~

I
f
~

t
~....

~~ ~ ~
-
_
°`~ r ~ 0:
~ - i
1 ~~
41Q8L'
' W
. _ _ _ ~
m

a
, _
'. ~
4 --~ - ~-
.~ I
f -
_ ~ 5 -~1 _ ~~

_ ~.

~~
/ ~
_ .
_ _ __ .
f~ __
_ ~
_
~: _ _ _ 60+00.00 ~.
_ - - _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ - ___ --
-
_ _
'~' -

.. _
.,

1 ~A.

..~
..
- ~_~ Jam,.,

... _.

I _ _ ~ ~
1 ~r

~ K .. i
L
~
r
- o- I

..
- .. _ - ~ -- ~ ~ ~~

-.. -
~ -.
a _ _ 59+50A0 ~:
z~
_ _
_ _ _

_ _
__ _. _

_. _ _ _ ~o
- s~ ~ -
~
_ r
_ ~_

. __ _
t i _ , .,
_ i~
~

-
_ y ..rCL~~ v_ .~ ~
LUiQ i Gi _
_
..
_ - -- - Ic
~' rl _`_` ~
~. -' -
~
, 1
~ -

y ~
~ .
q~..
_. ~
n ~ _ _

_ --- ~ ~_
_
_ - ~,
~

:
_ _ - 59+00.00. _ ~~
-150 140. 130: 120 - 110 100 40 BO 70 60 50 40 30
_. __
L-
20 10 0 _ l0 2a
30 40 50 60 10
BO _,_ 90 100 110
120 ,130 ..140 150

_
~ ..

_. ~..:
..
..- : ..

..

0 10

PROJ. REFERENCE N0.

SHEET N0.
B-36A4 X-34
...
R
l

. ~ IW b 1i0 I]0
110 ~ ..
.

.

- _.
..
_...
....
~_
-_. ..

_
_
~_~~
_
..
_.
.
_.

.....
.. l

....

_
~~
l'
~_.~
r ~
__
..
. a 15 ~~
-.
~~ r
~_ ~~ ~ V ~\

y --_______ ~-`_-
.. __ ._._- t~~-
~'
' -~
a
~
_

~
x ~
--.
~
..
~

... ..
_..
.. - -... col..
N
~
.. _..

~ '' n ~ ~ sri x -"'

~ __ _i

_ m ~_..~___~_

: ii
~_ ----
._ ~-~_

d~~i l_f_i..:t=~
.~~
-'-

. ._
~ 2+0.00 ~ ~ _ _- -- -__ ~-. _ ~-_- - -

[ g
- _.
i ~\. _ ...

~ `
~
m
.
. _

,.. ..
_
- -.
~I
_.

..
._
._ __._
r of
~. EO ~a
r
... ~ U
m SO ]0 Ip 0 1p.. :.
NI ]4 b .Sp 10 _

0' !o -v0 WO .:110 X34 ....1]0 i~a