19950162 Ver 1_Complete File_19950214

q51(?
n r
eo ! LJ !! '! t !
??@yw„p4? -„ - 4J?a301
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TMNSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR.
GOVERNOR
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
vVilmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
R. SAMUEL HUNT t It
SECRETARY
401 ISSUED
SUBJECT: Durham, Durham County, Replacement of Bridge No. 232 over Ellerbe
Creek on Albany Street, TIP No. B-2876, State Project No. 8.2351101,
Federal Aid No. BRZ-0505(4).
Dear Sir:
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning report for the subject
project. The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
`'Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not
anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose pro4dAppendix d under a Nationwide
Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix -23) ed November 22, 1991, by
the Corps of Engineers. The provisions of Sectio 330. A (C) of these
regulations will be followed in the construction of project.
?Ve anticipate that 401 General Water Quality Certification No. 2734 (Categorical
Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are providing one copy of the CE document to the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Division of
Environmental Xlanagement, for their review.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Mr. Gordon
Cashin at [phone].
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
February 1, 1995
+i
4
-W
l
GEC
Attachments
Assistant Manager,
Planning and Environmental Branch
CC: Ms. Jean TIVIanuele, COE, Raleigh
Mr. John Dorney, NCEHNR, DEM
Mr. Kelly Barger, PE, Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, State Highway Engineer - Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, PE, State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. D. A. Allsbrook, PE, Division S Engineer
Mr. Davis Moore, Planning and Environmental Branch
Ms. Stacy Baldwin, Project Planning Engineer
Durham County, Albany Street
Bridge No. 232
over Ellerbe Creek
State Project No. 8.2351101
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-0505(4)
T.I.P. No. B-2876
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
ate H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
/Z Z 4y, c
Date Nich s L. Graf, P. E.
/'14-Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Durham County, Albany Street
Bridge No. 232
over Ellerbe Creek
State Project No. 8.2351101
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-0505(4)
T.I.P. No. B-2876
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
November, 1994
Documentation Prepared by H. W. Lochner, Inc.:
Gl""? 97?' 'V' 44!?? -
Thomas A. McCloskey
ALo CARpl''••,
Project Engineer
J, ?'??as?ESSIp*, %
i W. SE AL r
14104
Roy . Bruce, P.E.
?.
Project Manager ..?;A Nt?.
For The North Carolina Department of Transportation:

Stacy Baldwin
Project Manager
Consultant Engineering Unit
z a. Z4?? ?_
A. Bissett, Jr., P.E., Unit Head'
Consultant Engineering Unit
Durham County, Albany Street
Bridge No. 232
over Ellerbe Creek
State Project No. 8.2351101
Federal-Aid Project BRZ-0505(4)
T.I.P. No. B-2876
Replacement of Bridge No. 232 is included in the 1995-2001 North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program. The project location is shown
in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of this action.
The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion."
I. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures, including NCDOT "Best Management Practices for the
Protection of Surface Waters," will be implemented to avoid or minimize environmental
impacts. No special or unique environmental commitments are necessary.
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 232 will be replaced in its existing location with a triple reinforced concrete box
culvert at 3.05 meters (10 feet) by 2.44 meters (8 feet) as shown in Figure 2. The proposed
roadway typical section includes 6.6 meters (22 feet) of travelway with 1.8 meters (6 feet) of
shoulder on each side, 2.8 meters (9 feet) where guardrail is required. Albany Street will be
widened in the vicinity of the culvert for a length of approximately 30 meters (100 feet).
The grade of the new roadway will remain the same as the existing grade at this location.
Traffic will be detoured along existing secondary roads during the estimated six month
construction period.
The estimated total cost of the project, based on current prices, is $182,000. The estimated
cost of the project, as shown in the 1995 - 2001 NCDOT Transportation Improvement
Program, is $265,000 ($200,000 Construction; $65,000 Right-of-way).
1
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Albany Street is classified as a local route in the NCDOT Statewide Functional Classification
System. The speed limit is posted at 35 miles per hour. In the vicinity of the bridge, Albany
Street is a 5.5 meter (18 foot) paved roadway with 1.2 meter (4 foot) shoulders. The vertical
alignment is generally flat and the horizontal alignment is tangent. The structure is situated
3.4 meters (11 feet) above the creek bed. The approaches are on embankments ranging from
0.9 to 1.2 meters (3 to 4 feet) above natural ground.
Land use in the immediate vicinity of Bridge No. 232 are shown in Figure 2 and includes
residences to the east and park land to the west. Immediately northeast of the bridge is a
residence. Two additional residences are located along Jefferson Street southeast of the
bridge. Indian Trail Park located to the west of the bridge is owned by the City of Durham
and was partially funded by Land and Water Conservation Funds. Therefore, this park is
protected under the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCFA). Farther west of the
park property is the Hillandale golf course. This is a privately owned golf course that is open
for public use.
The projected 1998 traffic volume is 400 vehicles per day (vpd) and is expected to increase to
approximately 800 vpd by the year 2018. The projected volume includes 0% truck-tractor
semi-trailer (TTST) and 1 % dual-tired vehicles (DTI).
The existing bridge was constructed in 1950 and is pictured in Figure 3. The superstructure
consists of a timber deck on 13 lines of treated timber joists. The substructure is composed of
treated timber bents with timber caps. The overall length of the structure is 10.7 meters (35
feet). The clear roadway width is 7.5 meters (25 feet). The posted weight limit is 9 tons for
single vehicles and 20 tons for trucks with trailers.
A waterline and an overhead telephone line are located parallel to and west of the existing
roadway. A sewerline crosses Albany Street to the south of Bridge No. 232, while a waterline
crosses to the north.
Bridge No. 232 has a sufficiency rating of 35.4, compared to a rating of 100 for a new
structure. The existing bridge is considered structurally deficient.
No accidents were reported near Bridge No. 232 during the period from January 1, 1991 to
December 31, 1993.
Coordination with local school officials indicated that there are ten school bus trips over this
bridge per day.
2
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Several replacement alternatives were considered for Bridge No. 232. The "No-Build"
alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not prudent due to the
traffic service provided by Albany Street. "Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due
to its age and deteriorated condition.
The recommended alternative for Bridge No. 232 is replacement of the existing bridge at its
present location with a triple reinforced concrete box culvert at 3.05 meters (10 feet) by 2.44
meters (8 feet) (see Figure 2). The roadway will provide 6.6 meters (22 feet) of travelway
with 1.8 meters (6 feet) of shoulder on each side, 2.8 meters (9 feet) where guardrail is
required (see Figure 4). The roadway improvements will extend approximately 30 meters
(100 feet) in the vicinity of the culvert. Since the existing alignment is tangent, the only
prudent alternative is replacement of the existing structure on the present alignment. By
following the existing alignment the new structure will be able to be constructed without
purchasing any additional right-of-way. This will avoid impacts to the park to the west, as
well as, the residences to the east.
Since Albany Street is classified as a local route, the North Carolina Department of
Transportation specifications for roadway design for local routes was used. The design speed
for the recommended alternative is 60 kilometers per hour (37 miles per hour).
Maintenance of traffic on-site is not justified because of the availability of a suitable detour
route. The recommended alternative would detour traffic off-site along existing roadways
during the anticipated six month construction period. The logical detour route, identified in
Figure 5, follows Sprunt Avenue, Hillandale Road, and Indian Trail west of the proposed
project. According to the City of Durham Traffic Engineer, the detour roadway and bridges
are adequate to accommodate traffic during the construction period. The average vehicle will
be required to travel an additional 1.8 kilometers (1 mile). The road user costs associated with
this detour are estimated at a maximum of $22,000 based upon a six month construction time,
400 vehicles per day, and 1.8 kilometers (1 mile) of additional travel.
According to a preliminary hydraulic study, the new structure is recommended to be a triple
reinforced concrete box culvert at 3.05 meters (10 feet) by 2.44 meters (8 feet) and will
accommodate the flow of Ellerbe Creek at this point. The elevation of the new crossing is
recommended to be approximately the same as the elevation of the existing bridge. The
dimensions of the new structure will be further assessed and modified, as necessary, during
final design to accommodate peak flows as determined by further hydrologic studies. Final
design of the culvert will be such that the backwater elevation will not encroach beyond the
current 100-year floodplain limits.
3
V. ESTIMATED COST
Estimated cost of the recommended alternative is:
Structure
New Roadway and Approaches
Structure Removal
Engineering & Contingencies
Right-of-Way, Construction Easements, and Utilities
Total
$59,200
65,220
8,580
17,000
32,000
$182,000
VI. NATURAL RESOURCES
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Because much of the project area is in urban land uses, little canopy vegetation remains. The
project area does contain remnants of a Piedmont Alluvial Forest with Shagbark Hickory
(Carya ovata) and Green Ash (Fraxinus pennslyvanica) located among the remaining trees
outside of the street right-of-way. More weedy tree species are located in the canopy of Indian
Trail Park and adjacent to Ellerbe Creek. These species include Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda),
Sweet Gum (Liquidamber styraciflua), Black Cherry (Prunus serotina), and Mulberry (Mores
rubra). Except for one Green Ash, no trees are located in the existing right-of-way.
Within the Albany Street right-of-way, invasive herbaceous species are interspersed with
planted rye (Poa sp.) for slope protection. Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), Spotted Touch
Me Not (Impatiens capensis), and Day Flowers (Commelia communis) are located within the
ditches adjacent to the road and along Ellerbe Creek. These areas also include vines such as
Poison Ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Woodvine (Parthenocissus quinquifolia), and Japanese
Honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica).
Wildlife in the project area is expected to be limited to common urban song birds and rodents
such as rats, squirrels, and rabbits. Because of the urban land uses and numerous road
crossings, Ellerbe Creek does not provide a good wildlife corridor. No aquatic species were
observed in the water of Ellerbe Creek during the field investigation in July 1994.
Impacts to the natural communities are expected to be extremely minor. The project is
anticipated to impact less than 150 square meters (1,614 square feet) of land immediately
adjacent to the existing right-of-way in the vicinity of the bridge. This impact is for temporary
drainage easements near Ellerbe Creek. Construction activity in these areas would impact
4
previously disturbed areas currently dominated by ruderal and pioneer herbaceous species.
The project is not expected to impact any wildlife habitat or wildlife corridors.
WATER RESOURCES
Ellerbe Creek is the only water resource in the project area and is a tributary of Falls Lake in
the northeast portion of Durham County. At the Albany Street crossing, Ellerbe Creek has a
drainage basin of approximately 9 square kilometers (4 square miles). The drainage basin of
Ellerbe Creek upstream of Albany Street is composed entirely of urban land uses. The channel
width at the Albany Street bridge is approximately 5 meters (16 feet) and the channel depth is
approximately 2 meters (7 feet). The depth of the water in Ellerbe Creek, during a field visit
in July, 1994, was approximately 10 centimeters (4 inches). The substrate of Ellerbe Creek in
the project area is composed of mud with some large stones.
The water chemistry of Ellerbe Creek at the Albany Street bridge crossing is not known. The
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (DEHNR), Division of
Environmental Management, Water Quality Section does not maintain any water quality
monitoring stations in proximity to the project area. The only water quality monitoring station
on Ellerbe Creek is located at SR 1636 downstream of a wastewater treatment facility. This
monitoring station is approximately 8 river kilometers (5 river miles) away from the project
and would not be representative of the project area.
Water chemistry at the Albany Street bridge location is not anticipated to be good. There is
very little natural buffer between the creek and surrounding residential areas and the golf
course that would help abate stormwater runoff or trap sediments and nutrients prior to
discharge into the receiving water. DEHNR, classifies Ellerbe Creek as Water Supply-IV,
Nutrient Sensitive Waters according to the Classifications and Water Quality Standards
Assigned to the Neuse River Basin. Water Supply-IV waters are those found in moderately to
highly developed watersheds and require local programs to control non-point source and
stormwater discharges. The project does not lie within one mile or drain to water resources
designated as High Quality Water, Outstanding Resource Water, Water Supply-I, or Water
supply-II.
Impacts to water quality of Ellerbe Creek by the proposed bridge replacement will be
minimized by strict adherence to the NCDOT "Best Management Practices for the Protection
of Surface Waters." This policy was developed to minimize the degradation of the state's
waters through the development of roadway projects.
SOILS
Soils underlying the project area are listed as the Chewacla series. This soil is prevalent on
floodplains. The Chewacla series is not listed as a hydric soil in the United States Department
of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service's, Hydric Soils of North Carolina, 1989.
The Chewacla soils series is not listed as a Prime Farmland soil; however, this soil series is
listed as a state and locally important farmland soil. Because the surrounding project area is
5
built out and in urban land uses, the farmland potential of this area would be considered "other
lands" by the Soil Conservation Service and the soils not suited for crop production.
WETLANDS
Ellerbe Creek at the Albany Street bridge is listed as Riverine, Lower Perennial,
Unconsolidated Bottom, Mud, Permanently Flooded, (R2UB3H) on the National Wetlands
Inventory (NWI) mapping. Wetlands were located in the channel of Ellerbe Creek. No
additional wetlands were located outside of the creek channel. This determination was made
using the three parameter (hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrology) wetlands
determination approach specified in the US Corps of Engineers' Wetlands Delineation Manual,
1987.
Outside of the creek channel, vegetation that would be associated with wetlands and evidence
of wetland hydrology were located. However, soil probes of the area immediately adjacent to
the roadway, where construction activity would occur, provided no evidence that hydric soils
were present. According to the Durham Soils Survey, soils underlying the project area are
listed as the Chewacla series which is not listed as hydric soil in North Carolina. Therefore,
except for impacts to the channel bottom of Ellerbe Creek, no additional wetland impacts
would occur. Impacts to wetlands are anticipated to be less than 200 square meters (2,152
square feet).
PROTECTED SPECIES
In July 1994, available USGS mapping located at the DEHNR, Natural Heritage Program, was
reviewed. This mapping contained no known locations or sightings of protected plant or animal
species in the project area. Field investigations at this same time confirmed the absence of federal
and state plant or animal species adjacent to the project.
Under Federal law, any federal action which is likely to result in a negative impact to plants or
animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened M, Proposed Threatened (PT),
or Proposed Endangered (PE) is subject to review by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
under one or more provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The Fish and Wildlife
Service through provisions of Section 9 has the power to exercise jurisdiction on behalf of the plant
and animal species. The FWS and other wildlife resource agencies also exercise jurisdiction in this
resource area in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 USC 661 et seq). North Carolina laws are also designed to protect certain plants and
animals where statewide populations are in decline. Plants or animals with state designations of
Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern are granted protection by the State Endangered
Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. These Acts are
administered and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the North
Carolina Department of Agriculture.
Information for protected species in the project area was collected from the US Fish and Wildlife
Service, the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, and the Durham County Natural Areas
Inventory-
6
Federal Listed Species:
Three federally listed species are known to exist in Durham County. Each of these species and its
relationship to project area is discussed in the following paragraphs.
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
The bald eagle is the largest North Carolina raptor with a mature height of 75 to 100
centimeters (30 to 40 inches). Bald eagles are found mostly along seacoasts, lakes,
or large river shorelines where the birds can feed. In Durham County eagles are
located near Jordan Lake. They feed primarily on fish but occasionally will take
carrion, small mammals, and waterfowl. Territories contain a number of perches in
open crowned trees and a good food supply.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect - Although the project area is along Ellerbe
Creek, the creek is far from being a large river or body of water. In addition, the
urbanized area around the project does not contain suitable habitat for bald eagle
territory. Therefore, the proposed project will not impact the Bald eagle.
Smooth Coneflower (Echinacea laewgata)
This species of coneflower is 50 to 100 centimeters (20 to 40 inches) tall with deep
to pale pink flowers. In North Carolina this species is restricted to diabase glades.
The underlying soil series of these diabase glades in Durham County are Iredell
soils.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect -- The project area is not located in proximity to
a diabase glade nor are the underlying soils the Iredell series. No Smooth
Coneflowers were located during field investigations. The proposed project will not
impact the Smooth Coneflower.
Michaux's Sumac (Rhus michauxii)
Michaux's Sumac is an upright shrub with pinnately compound leaves and red
drupes that ripen in autumn. This plant is located on sandy, rocky, or open woods
and may be associated with basic soil conditions.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect -- This species was not located in the project area
during field investigations. The underlying soil conditions in the project area are
not basic. The proposed project will not impact this federally listed Sumac.
7
In addition to the federally listed endangered and threatened species, five candidate species that are
currently under status review are located in Durham County. A list of these species is provided
below and includes a determination of suitable habitat in the project area:
Common Name
Atlantic Pigtoe
Septima's Clubtail Dragonfly
Sweet Pinesap
Tall Larkspur
A Liverwort
Specific Name
Fusconaia mason
Gomphus septima
Monotropsis odorata
Delphinium exaltatum
Plagiochila columbiana
Suitable Habitat
No
No
No
No
No
State Listed Species:
Additional protected species in Durham County, protected under North Carolina State law, not
protected under Federal Law, are listed below along with an indication of suitable habitat in the
project area.
Status Common Name
SC Carolina Darter
SC Carolina Madtom
SC Four Toed Salamander
SC Neuse River Waterdog
T Low Wild Petunia
Specific Name
Etheostoma collis
Noturus furiosus
Hemidactylium scutatum
Nectums lewisi
Ruellia humilis
Suitable Habitat
No
No
No
No
No
In general, the disturbances to the surrounding project area and degradation of the water quality of
EUerbe Creek created by residential development and the adjacent golf course have eliminated
suitable habitat that may have contained federal and state protected species. Information gathered
from the jurisdictional agencies show that there are no known element occurrences of protected
species located in the project area. Field investigations conducted for this study found no suitable
habitat that would support protected species listed above. Therefore, this project will not have any
impacts to federal or state listed species.
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
According to the National Park Service, Ellerbe Creek is not on the Nationwide Rivers
Inventory, and is not a federal Wild and Scenic River. Additionally, this stream is not a state
Scenic, Natural, and Recreational River.
PERMITS
A National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for sediment control and
a 401 Water Quality Certification permit will be required from the North Carolina Department
of Environmental, Health, and Natural Resources. This permit is issued for any activity which
may result in a discharge into waters for which a federal permit is required.
8
Since the subject project is classified as a Categorical Exclusion, it is likely that this project
will be subject to the Nationwide Permit Provisions of 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 23. This permit
authorizes any activities, work and discharges undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated,
funded or financed, in whole or in part, by another federal agency and that the activity is
"categorically excluded" from environmental documentation because it is included within a
category of actions which neither individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the
environment. However, final permit decisions are left to the discretionary authority of the
United States Army Corps of Engineers.
Foundation investigations will be required on this project. The investigation will include test
borings in soil and/or rock for in-site testing as well as obtaining samples for laboratory
testing. This may require test borings in streams and/or wetlands. These activities require
authorization under Nationwide Permit No. 6.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and
insignificant 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
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. No right-of-way acquisition is
anticipated. No relocations are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected to
adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
Since the bridge is to be replaced in its present location, the project is exempt from the
Farmland Protection Policy Act.
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106
requires that if a federally funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect on a property
listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation be given an opportunity to comment.
9
The area of potential effect (APE) of the project was reviewed in the field. No properties over
fifty years old were located within the APE, only modern houses and the bridge itself, built in
1950.
In a letter dated August 12, 1994, the Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer has reviewed
the project and determined that no properties of architectural, historical, or archaeological
significance will be impacted by the recommended alternative (see appendix). Therefore, no
archaeological work was conducted for this project.
Since there are no architectural properties either listed on or eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places within the APE, no further compliance with Section 106 with respect to
architectural resources is required.
To control sedimentation from the work site, a stilling basin will be constructed downstream of
the existing bridge. All construction will be kept within existing right-of-way or temporary
easements.
The project involves no Section 4(f) or Section 6(f) properties. Since no additional right-of-
way is required, Indian Trail Park, located to the west of Bridge No. 232, will not be impacted
by the proposed improvements. There are no additional publicly-owned parks, historic sites,
recreational facilities or wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance
in the vicinity of the project.
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Raleigh Regional Office of
the North Carolina Department of the Environment Health and Natural Resources. Durham
County has been designated as a moderate nonattainment area for Carbon Monoxide (CO) and
Ozone (03). The attainment date is December 31, 1995, for CO and November 15, 1996, for
03. The current State Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control
measures (TCM) for Durham County. The Durham 2010 Urbanized Area Thoroughfare Plan
(TP) and 1994 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) have been determined to be in
conformity to the intent of the SIP. The approval dates of the TP and the TIP by the MPO
were on October 9, 1991 and October 11, 1993, respectively. The approval dates of the TP
and the TIP by USDOT were on November 15, 1991 and December 15, 1993, respectively.
There have been no significant changes in the project's design concept and scope, as used in
the conformity analyses.
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.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. This evaluation
completes the assessment requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air
quality (1990 CAAA and National Environmental Protection Act) and no additional reports are
required.
10
The project involves the replacement of Bridge No. 232 in its existing location. The existing
and traffic volumes are very low, and are not expected to substantially increase. Albany Street
is a local roadway that serves an existing developed area of the city. No changes in land use
are anticipated. Due to the aforementioned factors, the project's impact on noise and air
quality will be insignificant.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section and the
North Carolina Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed
no underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area.
Durham County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The
approximate 100-year floodplain in the project area are shown in Figure 6. The amount of
floodplain area to be affected is not considered to be significant. There are no practical
alternatives to crossing the floodplain area. Any shift in the alignment will result in a crossing
of about the same magnitude. The alignment of the project is perpendicular to the floodplain
area. All reasonable measures will be taken to minimize harm.
In the vicinity of the project, five single family residences are located within the limits of the
100-year floodplain.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no adverse environmental effects will
result from implementation of the project.
11

Q N
LJ
N
W ?
O
D
Q
J
S
85 ?? z o
0
I
J
0
a
BYP
RD
BYP
fj0?
W
Y
izi
Creek
e
N

C0

SPRUNT ST F-

N N
N
Z
Q
p O
O N

m a
3 cr
JOE UNIVERSITY RD
F-
N
C'
70 1
50
Lak
?86? ...y •' ?? 4 \ I
?o ORANGE
COONTY D rham
98 , North Carolina Department ?p4 NORM 14Ro
1 1? 51 55 . / of Transportation y?
< - - City of Division of Highways 9
Chapel Hill ^ 1 147 ? ?AKE s o
?54 ` 54 / 70 CMMTY Planning and Environmental 'NSF"rov TRO'?Seapfi
,, cit;J Branch
S - 75 RalI e 0 -
0 ' CHATHAM " - " 54 40 Durham County
?
COUNTY /</55 Bridge No.232
/ Albany Street over Ellerbe Creek
B - 2876
Figure 1 J

INDIAN TRAIL
------ ------------------------------------
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
Indian i
Trail
Park

3 - 3.05m x 2.44m i
RCBC i
i
E??erbes
Recommended
Alternative
i
Indian
Trail i
Park i
i
i
i
SCALE = 1100 i
i
i
i
i
i
I- I
LiJ
W I
V) ;
i
? i
Q '
CO
i
J
Q
i
i Bridge No. 232
STREET _
I
o
i
i Existing R/W
i
i
i
Q'i SdNSET
piV ENUE
i
i
-North Carolina Department of NO H `moo
of Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning and Environmental
Branch
Durham County
Bridge No. 232
Albany Street over Ellerbe Creek
B - 2878
Figure 2
fl
L-jE:
fl
x •.
?
??? Sgq ?i. ec h r ?
?I
North Approach

South Approach

Side Vi@W
North Carolina Department *OFT
Branch Durham County
of Transportation Division of Highways
Planning and Environmental
Bridge No.232
Albany Street over Blerbe Creek
B - 2876
Figure 3
ALBANY STREET

2: 7
2.4m 1.8m 3.3m 3.3m 1.8Mr*
(81 ) (6')

n. 08 (11')

_ 0.02 (11')
I
0.02 _ (6')

0.08

< 1
-*2.8m W/ GUARDRAIL
Proposed Typical Section
North Carolina Department of ?o TM
of Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning and Environmental
Branch
Durham County
Bridge No. 232
Merv Street over Ellerbe Creek
B - 2B76
Figure 4
'? ?.eyEA SS10
LtrPXD AVE.
KIRK ROAD
SJ
_----, ?-1

.:. ALMS n.
/ C( A
E11?? ? ? ? H
SPRLHT AVE. a
.4.PERSHV45 STREET
V1LSD/ a STREET
?oco?c
I].- ENfiFVOOD AVE.

uvHDALE ,,,,511
AVE. <
ST.
?\ ?? \ l 110.11111115' 0.llLL L'11Y11 V11 L1GLlLQ1 FNf Qp
Branch
Durham County
0 400m Bridge No.232
Albany Street over Elleft Creek
0 1000 n B -2876
, i I n. ????? J ! y Figure 5
1
?I
'I
I I J
A 1'1I Q
1 y
Z
O
,D
?m
70
I 8? 15 501 -
?w
Bridge No. Il`
232
I "m
i ; Ih
lh
I_ - - ZONE B
24
62 f
STREET
.SALLE ?_ 359

E 39
ZONE
SI
Rh
ZONE
3,
353
1? I. ml m''
'• O ? m I m?.I
m
D ZI .? ? mii I _
? °'I III' <`'??L
R M E T 27-
YjL__-
0 RM ET 2400m
0 1000'
7 RM E 47*V1 1
-ZONE B ? 1?-"
M E 42
ZONE
M E 33
y r??+
yen. ig
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain. Secretary
August 12, 1994
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Thomas McCloskey
H. W. Lochner, Inc.
3725 National Drive, Suite 123
Raleigh, NC 27612
Re: Categorical Exclusion for replacement of Bridge
232 on Albany Street over Ellerbee Creek, B-2876,
Durham County, ER 95-7126
Dear Mr. McCloskey:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of July 21, 1994, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no properties of
architectural, historic, or archaeological significance which would be affected by
the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as currently proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
4?v?
David Brook
Deputy State
DB:slw

Historic Preservation Officer
109 Fast Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807