19991302 Ver 1_Complete File_19991130

4•
l
da• S7A7Eo
99130
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID MCCOY
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
November 22, 1991;
US Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Field Office
107 Union Drive,
Suite 20
Washington, North Carolina 27889
ATTENTION: Mr. Mike Bell
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Wayne County, Replacement of Bridge No. 67 over Beaver Dam Creek on
SR 1007, Federal Project No. MABRSTP - 1007(4), State Project No.
8.2331101, T.I.P. No. B-3265.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above
referenced project. A change in design plans for the above project has resulted in several
minor changes since the CE was published. Bridge No. 67 will be replaced in-place.
Because it is located on a curve, the bridge replacement will be slightly longer and wider
than originally planned due to limited sight distance. Bridge length is proposed to be 125
feet (rather than 120 feet as stated in the CE). Bridge width will be 36 feet, rather than 30
feet. The ROW has been increased from 60 feet to 80 feet. These changes will be
incorporated in the construction consultation which is held prior to the project let date.
This bridge will allow for two 3.6 meter (12.0 foot) travel lanes and a 1.8 meter (6.0 foot)
offset on each side. The approach roadway will consist of a 7.2 meter (24.0 foot)
travelway and a total shoulder width of at least 2.4 meters (8.0 feet). Traffic will be
maintained on a temporary on-site detour structure during construction to be located
south of the existing bridge.
w
1
No wetlands wi11 be impacted as a result of the change in design plans, however
community impacts have changed slightly for the permanent crossing and are listed
below. Temporary impacts will be the same as listed in the CE document.
Permanent Impacts to Community Types with Alternate 1
Community Impacts in hectares (acres)
60' ROW 80' ROW
Disturbed Upland Community 0.5 (1.26) 0.54 (1.36)
Floodplain Forest 0.02 (0.05) 0.03 (0.06)
Upland Forest 0 0.01 (0.02)
Total Impacts 0.52 (1.31) 0.58 (1.44)
Wetlands will not be impacted with the selection of the preferred alternate. Bridge
construction may impact 24 m (80 ft) of Beaver Dam Creek in addition to temporarily
impacting 18m (60 ft) of Beaver Dam Creek for the temporary crossing. These
anticipated impacts are based upon a right-of-way width of 24 m for the bridge
replacement and 18 m for the temporary crossing. However, project construction usually
does not require the entire right-of way, therefore, actual impacts to surface waters may
be less.
As outlined in NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and
Removal, this project is considered under Group II (Case II) with bridge demolition being
addressed at the time of the Permit Application. Best Management Practices for Bridge
Demolition and Removal will be followed. Bridge No 67 over Beaver Dam Creek in
Wayne County has six spans totaling 104 feet in length. The bridge deck is composed of
concrete with a substructure of timber bents with concrete sills. The bridge railings and
bents will be removed without dropping any components into Waters of the United
States. The concrete sills are entirely submerged in the water. There is potential for the
components of the deck to be dropped into Waters of the United States during
construction. The resulting temporary fill associated with the concrete deck is
approximately 7 m3 (8 yd3).
Bridge No. 67 is located within the Neuse River Basin, therefore Neuse River
Riparian Buffer Rules must be strictly adhered to. In order to comply with the Neuse
Buffer Rules and to follow the NCDOT Best Management Practices for Protection of
Surface Waters, the following measures have been taken.
I j Existing ditches will no longer discharge directly into Beaver Dam Creek.
2) There will be no scuppers placed on the bridge deck to avoid discharging directly
into Beaver Dam Creek.
) The storm drain systems will discharge onto a rip-rap pad. There will be two 2Gl
3
n
y
box inlets. The northern most 2GI box inlet empties at the toe of the proposed
slope and sheetflows for 92 feet before draining to a ditch. The southern-most
2GI comes off the ROW to a rip-rap pad approximately 50 feet from the top of the
bank.
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 to proceed under Nationwide
Permit 23 in accordance with the Federal Register of December 13, 1996, Part VII,
Volume 61, Number 241.
. We anticipate the 401 General Certification No. 2745 (Categorical Exclusion) will
apply to this project, and are providing one copy of the CE document to the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water QualitN.
for their review.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Karen M. Lynch
at 733-1173.
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore. P.E., Branch Manager
Project Development and Environmental Planning Branch
cc: w/attachment:
Mr. David Franklin, Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
w/o attachment:
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P. E., Program Development Branch
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Timothy V. Rountree, P.E. Structure Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E. Roadway Design Unit
Mr. D. R. Dupree, P.E., Division 4 Engineer
Ms. Karen Orthner, PD &EA Project Planning Engineer
Wayne County,
Bridge No. 67 on SR 1007
Over Beaver Dam Creek
Federal Aid Project MABRSTP - 1007(4)
State Project 8.2331101
TIP Project B-3265
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
ANp
APPROVED:
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
2-13 -q8 oT.?-r? `'!/, Pga'"?
Date ?y H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
;LB-9s
Date ;sf Nicholas L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
Wayne County,
Bridge No. 67 on SR 1007
Over Beaver Dam Creek
Federal Aid Project MABRSTP -1007(4)
State Project 8.2331101
TIP Project B-3265
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
February 1998
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
William T. Goodwin, Jr., P. E.
Project Planning Engineer

Wayn6 Elliott
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
r
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
``?a??eunrpq
?•..t? GARp? i??i?i
,= Av L!?aOQ
zr>;ss:::t??a
Wayne County,
Bridge No. 67 on SR 1007
Over Beaver Dam Creek
Federal Aid Project MABRSTP -1007(4)
State Project 8.2331101
TIP Project B-3265
1. SUMMARY OF PROJECT
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge
No. 67 in Wayne County. This bridge carries SR 1007 over the Beaver Dam Creek (see
Figure 1). NCDOT includes this bridge in the 1998-2004 Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP) as a bridge replacement project. NCDOT and the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) classify this project as a federal Categorical Exclusion. These agencies expect no
notable environmental impacts.
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 67 in-place as shown by Alternate One in Figure 2.
Traffic will be maintained on a temporary on-site detour structure during construction. NCDOT
recommends that the replacement structure be a new bridge. The new bridge will be
approximately 37 meters (120 feet) in length and 9.2 meters (30 feet) in width. This bridge width
will allow for two 3.6 meter (12 foot) travel lanes and a 1.0 meter (3 foot) offset on each side.
The approach roadway will consist of a 7.2 meter (24 foot) travelway and a total shoulder width
of at least 2.4 meters (8 feet). The new roadway will be at approximately the same elevation as
the existing bridge. The completed project will provide a design speed of approximately 100
km/h (60 mph).
The estimated cost is $ 842,000 including $ 17,000 for right of way acquisition and
$ 825,000 for construction. The estimated cost included in the 1998-2004 TIP is $ 435,000.
H. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT is not expected to need any design exceptions for this project.
III. SiTMMARY OF PROJECT COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts. Standard Soil and Erosion Control Measures will be implemented and
maintained throughout project constriction. All applicable Best Management Practices will be
installed and properly maintained during project construction.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States." A Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit # 23 will
likely be applicable for this project.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water
Quality General Certification will be obtained prior to issue of the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit # 23.
Once construction of the new bridge and approaches are complete, the on-site detour
bridge will be removed. The temporary approach fill will be removed to natural grade and the
area will be planted with native grasses and/or tree species as appropriate.
IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NCDOT classifies SR 1007 as a Rural Major Collector in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. The surrounding area is wooded with a scattering of homes and other uses
mixed in.
Near Bridge No. 67, SR 1007 is a two lane paved road, 6.1 meters (20 feet) wide with
grassed shoulders. The horizontal and vertical alignment in the area are fair to good.
NCDOT built Bridge No. 67 in 1963. The bridge has an asphalt surface on a concrete
deck on timber joists. The substructure consists of timber caps and piles. The deck of Bridge No.
67 is 5.5 meters (18 feet) above the streambed. The bridge is 31.7 meters (104 feet) long with a
7.3 meter (24 foot) roadway width. The bridge carries two lanes of traffic and is currently posted
at 23 tons for single vehicles and 31 tons for Truck-tractor Semi-trailer (TTST).
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of Bridge No. 67 is
34.2 of a possible 100.0.
The current traffic volume is 1800 vehicles per day (VPD), projected to 4000 VPD by the
design year (2020). No speed limit'is posted in the project area, therefore it is assumed to be 55
mph by statute.
Traffic Engineering Branch accident records indicate three accidents were reported in the
vicinity of Bridge No. 67 between October 1, 1993 and September 31, 1996. None of these
accidents show signs of being caused by the existing roadway alignment or narrow bridge width.
The Wayne County School Bus Transportation Coordinator has indicated that there are
two school busses using this route. Detouring traffic off site would cause some inconvenience in
school bus operations, but not unacceptable complications.
V. ALTERNATES
Three methods of replacing Bridge No. 67 were studied. All other possible alternates can
be eliminated either from an economic standpoint or due to environmental impacts.
2
Alternate One (Recommended) - replace the bridge in the existing location with a new bridge.
Traffic will be maintained on a temporary bridge located south of the existing bridge
during construction.
Alternate Two - replace the bridge on new alignment to the south of the existing bridge with a
new bridge. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
Alternate Three - replace the bridge on new alignment to the north of the existing bridge with a
new bridge. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
The "do-nothing,, alternate is not practical. The existing bridge would continue
deteriorating until it was unusable. This would require closing the road, or continued intensive
maintenance. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating bridge is neither practical nor
economical.
VI. COST ESTIMATE
Estimated costs of the alternates studied are as follows:
Structure
Roadway Approaches
Structure Removal
Temporary Detour
Misc. and Mobilization
Engineering & Contingencies
Total Construction
Right of Way & Utilities
TOTAL PROJECT COST
Alternate One Alternate Two Alternate Three
Recommended
$ 234,000 $ 234,000 $ 234,000
99,000 344,000 377,000
21,000 21,000 21,000
185,000 -0- - 0 -
161,000 179,000 190,000
125,000 122,000 128,000
825,000 900,000 950,000
17,000 20,000 56,000
$ 842,000 $ 920,000 $ 1,006,000
VII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
NCDOT will replace Bridge No. 67 in place as shown in Figure 2. NCDOT recommends
that the replacement structure be a new bridge. The new bridge will be approximately 37 meters
(120 feet) in length and 9.2 meters (30 feet) in width. This bridge width will allow for two 3.6
meter (12 foot) travel lanes and a 1.0 meter (3 foot) offset on each side. The approach roadway
will consist of a 7.2 meter (24 foot) travelway, and a total shoulder width of at least 2.4 meters
(8 feet). The new roadway will be at approximately the same elevation as the existing bridge.
The new approach roadway will extend a distance of approximately 45 meters (150 feet) on both
approaches for the proposed structure. The completed project will provide a design speed of
approximately 100 km/h (60 mph).
Traffic will be maintained on-site on a temporary detour bridge located just south of the
existing bridge. The detour bridge will be 27 meters (90 feet) in length and can be placed as
much as 1 meter (3 feet) lower than the existing bridge.
NCDOT recommends Alternate 1 because it is the most reasonable and leasible alternate
for replacing Bridge No. 67. Alternate 1 has the lowest cost and does not have significant
environmental impacts.
An alternate involving replacement in place with traffic detoured off site was not
considered due to the length of the available detour, the traffic volume, and the duration of
closure. As shown in alternate one, traffic could be maintained on-site for about $185,000. A
road user analysis would yield a benefit/cost ratio of over 2.8, indicating that maintenance of
traffic on-site is economically justifiable.
The Division Engineer has indicated that replacing Bridge No. 67 in place with traffic
maintained on a temporary bridge located south of the existing bridge during construction, would
be acceptable from his perspective.
Construction of Alternate 1 will not have a notable adverse impact on the floodplain or
associated flood hazard.
NCDOT expects utility conflicts to be low for a project of this type and magnitude.
VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. General Environmental Effects
The project is considered to be a "categorical exclusion" due to its limited scope and
insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not have a substantial 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 effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition
will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected
to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
4
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and waterfowl
refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
There are no known hazardous waste sites in the project area.
B. Architectural and Archaeological Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has indicated that there are no known
architectural or archaeological sites in the project area and no unknown architectural or
archaeological sites are likely to be found. Therefore, SHPO has recommended in their letter
dated March 20, 1997 that no architectural or archaeological surveys be conducted in connection
with this project.
C. Natural Systems
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Regional Characteristics
The proposed project lies in Wayne County northwest of Goldsboro in the eastern portion
of North Carolina. The project area lies within the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province.
Elevations in the project area range from approximately 21 to 29 meters (70 to 95 feet) National
Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD).
Wayne County's major economic resources include agriculture and forestry. Land uses in
the project vicinity are a mixture of rural, residential, agricultural, commercial, and industrial.
The land use in the northern project vicinity is primarily agricultural with some one-story
residential dwellings. Two automobile junkyards are located within the immediate project
vicinity, to the south of SR 1007. The land to the south of the project is utilized by Carolina
Power & Light (CP&L) Company for a power plant facility, including an ash sluice
impoundment and a borrow pit. Several permitted stormwater and point discharge outfalls are
located at this facility. Discharge from these outfalls are all downstream of the project site.
Soils
According to information provided in the Wayne County Soil Survey, soils in the project
area consist of five main types: Bibb sandy loam, Kalmia loamy sand (2 to 6 and 10 to 15
percent slopes), Craven sandy loam (2 to 6 percent slopes), Norfolk loamy sand (2 to 6 percent
slopes), and Ruston loamy sand (2 to 6 percent slopes). Bibb sandy loam occurs in the project
area within the low lying areas adjacent to Beaver Dam Creek. These soils predominantly occur
on floodplains with zero to two percent slopes and are characterized as being poorly drained with
slow surface runoff, frequent flooding and surface ponding. The seasonal high water table is
typically at the surface. Bibb soils are classified as a hydric soil by the NRCS.
The remaining four soil types are found in the higher upland areas adjacent the Beaver
Dam Creek floodplain; all are characterized as well drained with medium surface runoff. The
5
seasonal high water table for Kalmia and Craven soils is typically below a depth of 0.7 meters
(2.5 feet) for Kalmia and Craven soils and is typically below 1.5 meters (5 feet) for Norfolk and
Ruston soils.
Water Resources
Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
The project is located in the Neuse River basin. Two surface water resources will be
impacted by the proposed project: Beaver Dam Creek and an unnamed intermittent tributary to
Beaver Dam Creek.
Beaver Dam Creek originates about 12 kilometers (7.5 miles) north of the project area
and flows to the south to its confluence with the Neuse River, about 0.5 kilometer (0.3 mile)
south of the project area. The creek is approximately 3 to 6 meters (10 to 20 feet) wide within the
project area. Observed stream flows were likely much higher than average, as a result of
inclement weather occurring at the time of the field survey. At the time of the field survey,
Beaver Dam Creek averaged 0.75 meters (2.5 feet) in depth on the downstream (southern) side
and 1.2 meters (4 feet) and greater in depth on the upstream side of the bridge. The water was
highly turbid. During a return visit, stream flow was slower and the water less turbid. In the
project area, the stream contains a moderate amount of bends, typically every 23 meters (75 feet).
Stream substrate consists of predominantly coarse material on the downstream (southern side) of
the bridge, and sands and gravels on the north (upstream side).of the bridge. The river has a
partly shaded canopy and riparian vegetation consists mostly of deciduous trees.
The western stream bank is steep and highly eroded in several areas. On the southern side
of SR 1007 concrete and construction demolition debris was observed within the channel as well
as along the eastern bank. This debris is located in the vicinity of a small automobile
junkyard/repair facility. The stream bank along the west side of Beaver Dam Creek gradually
slopes up from the creek, creating a narrow floodplain. Bald cypress root growths, or knees were
observed growing within and along the edges of the stream bank on both sides of the existing
bridge. Thick mats of filamentous algae were observed within the project area upon the
inundated surface of cobbles and boulders on the downstream side of the bridge.
The unnamed intermittent drainage channel is located on the eastern bank of Beaver Dam
Creek, approximately 18 to 20 meters (60 to 65 feet) north of the existing bridge crossing. This
tributary averages 0.5 meters (1.5 feet) in width. This tributary is at its widest at the top of the
stream bank of Beaver Dam Creek, at which point the drainage flows underground into Beaver
Dam Creek. Despite the heavy rainfall which occurred during and immediately preceding the
time of the field survey, surface water was observed only within the lower 30 meters (100 feet)
of the drainage segment. Substrate within the channel consisted of sand with some gravel.
Best Usage Classification
Surface waters in North Carolina are assigned a classification by the Division of
Environmental Management (DEM) that is designed to maintain, protect, and enhance water
6
quality within the State. Beaver Dam Creek (Index # 27-55) is classified as a Class WS-IV NSW
waterbody. Class WS-IV water resources are protected as water supplies which are generally in
moderately to highly developed watersheds; suitable for all Class C uses. Class C water
resources are used for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary
recreation, and agriculture. Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) are waters which are subject to
growths of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation requiring limitations on nutrient inputs.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HWQ), Water Supplies (WS-I of WS-II) or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) of the project study
area.
Water Quality
General Watershed Characteristics
Non-point source runoff from agricultural land is likely to be the primary source of water
quality degradation to the water resources located within the project vicinity. The surrounding
upstream vicinity appears to be an approximate even mixture of forested land and cropland.
Nutrient loading and increased sedimentation from agricultural runoff affects water quality. The
two junkyards located to the east of the bridge crossing are also a contributor of non-point source
runoff downstream of the bridge crossing. The CP&L power plant additionally contributes to
non-point source runoff downstream of the project area. Inputs of non-point source pollution
from private residences within the project area may also contribute to water quality degradation.
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), managed by the DEHNR,
Division of Water Quality (DWQ) and established in 1982, is part of an on-going ambient long-
term water quality monitoring program. The program has established fixed water quality
monitoring stations for selected benthic macroinvertebrates. A BMAN station has not been
established by DEHNR along Beaver Dam Creek.
Point Source Dischargers
Point source discharges in North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program administered by the DWQ. All discharges are
required to obtain a permit to discharge. There are no known permitted point source dischargers
to Beaver Dam Creek within the project vicinity. One permitted discharger, the CP&L Power
Plant facility, is located within the project vicinity, approximately 2,500 feet southeast of the
bridge crossing. This facility has two permitted point discharge outfalls to the Neuse River, both
of which are downstream of the confluence of Beaver Dam Creek. Both of these outfalls are for
overflows from several storage ponds at the CP&L facility, and actual discharge to the Neuse
River is rare.
7
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Any action which affects water quality can adversely affect aquatic organisms.
Temporary impacts during the construction phases may result in long-term impacts to the aquatic
community. Replacing an existing structure in the same location, with a temporary on-site
detour, is the preferred environmental approach. Bridge replacement on a new location with a
detour on existing location generally results in more severe impacts. Therefore, based on
environmental impacts, Alternate 1 is the preferred alternative. Physical impacts will be the most
severe at the point of bridge replacement.
Project construction may result in the following impacts to surface water resources:
• Increased sediment loading and siltation as a consequence of watershed vegetation
removal, erosion/and or construction.
• Decreased light penetration/water clarity from increased sedimentation.
• Changes in water temperature with vegetation removal.
• Changes in the amount of available organic matter with vegetation removal.
• Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff, construction activities
and construction equipment, and spills.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface and
groundwater flow from construction.
• Increased scouring of the existing channel due to increased water flows from the
stormwater runoff associated with curb and gutter systems.
Construction impacts may not be restricted to the natural communities in which the
construction activity occurs. Downstream communities could potentially be affected by
stormwater runoff or sediments from the project site. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for
the Protection of Surface Waters will be followed in order to minimize the amount of sediment
being released by construction activities.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Terrestrial and aquatic communities are included in the description of biotic resources.
Living systems described in the following sections include communities of associated plants and
animals. These descriptions refer to the dominant flora and fauna in each community and the
relationship of these biotic components. Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in
the context of plant community classifications. These classifications follow Schafale and
Weakley (1990) where possible. Representative animal species which are likely to occur in these
habitats (based on published range distributions) are also cited.
8
Terrestrial Communities
Four distinct terrestrial communities were identified within the project area: agricultural
cropland, a disturbed upland community, a floodplain forest community located to the west of
the bridge crossing, and an upland forest to the east of the bridge. Dominant faunal components
associated with these terrestrial areas will be discussed in each community description. Many
species are adapted to the entire range of habitats found along the project alignment, but may not
be mentioned separately in each community description.
Agricultural Cropland
The agricultural community includes two areas on the northern side of SR 1007, located
separately at each project terminus. Crops grown included corn and tobacco.
Disturbed Upland Community
The disturbed upland community includes the road shoulders, drainage ditches, and
embankments along both sides of SR 1007. Included with this community are several disturbed,
unvegetated areas located within the project area as well as an approximate 12 meter (40 foot)
wide strip of maintained vegetation fronting the two residences to the east of the bridge. One
disturbed area to the west of the bridge crossing contained scattered debris, rubbish, and apparent
fill material. Several areas adjacent to the two automobile junkyards are predominantly
unvegetated.
Many plant species are adapted to these disturbed and regularly maintained areas.
Regularly maintained areas are dominated by various grasses including rye grass, fescue, white
clover, common plantain, and wild onion. Poison ivy, winged sumac, Japanese honeysuckle,
trumpet creeper, common greenbrier, pokeweed, Asiatic dayflower, Virginia creeper, bush
clover, and three-seeded mercury were observed along the edge between this disturbed area and
the adjacent forested communities. The roadside ditches contain similar vegetation with the
addition of marsh dewflower and cinnamon fern. Red maple and sweetgum saplings are
additionally present along the steep embankment, adjacent to the eastern automobile junkyard.
The animal species present in these disturbed habitats are opportunistic and capable of
surviving on a variety of resources, ranging from vegetation (flowers, leaves, fruits, and seeds) to
both living and dead faunal components. American robins and starlings are two of the more
common birds that use these habitats. Due to the location and linear nature of this community, it
is unlikely that it is used by any reptile or amphibians, except as they cross the road between
forested habitats.
Upland Forest
The project area is dominated by upland forest including a floodplain forest and a
pine/hardwood forest community. There is no distinct boundary separating these two
communities, however, the species composition differs slightly.
9
Fooodplain Forest
The entire forest community along the west side of the bridge is similar in terms of
species composition for both the narrow floodplain as well as the upland areas further away from
the creek. Along the low-lying floodplain immediately adjacent to Beaver Dam Creek are bald
cypress trees with only a small amount of herbaceous vegetation. The floodplain is present only
on the west of the creek. Along the northern side of the bridge, the floodplain was disturbed with
many fallen trees.
To the west of the floodplain, sweetgum and red maple are the dominant canopy trees
along the north side of the road, while overcup oak and black gum are the dominant canopy trees
to the south of the road. The understory north of SR 1007 is comprised of river birch, ironwood,
and water oak saplings while the understory to the south of the road is comprised of willow oak,
sweetgum, river birch, and red maple saplings. The herbaceous layer on either side of the road
consists predominantly of poison ivy, grape, Virginia creeper, wild violets, common greenbrier,
and microstigium grass.
No mammals were directly observed during the field activities in this community due to
inclement weather conditions. Empty bivalve shells were observed along the western stream
bank, indicating prior foraging activity, most likely by raccoon. Additionally, grey squirrels,
white-tailed deer, opossum, and cotton mouse likely utilize this habitat.
No reptiles were observed, however, this habitat type is utilized by the eastern king snake
and the rough green snake. American toads and pickerel frogs were observed near the stream. A
variety of other amphibians are often present along floodplains. Maybee's salamander, marbled
salamander, southern dusky salamander and three-lined salamander, gray treefrog, and river frog
are all species that can be found in the floodplain forest.
A wide variety of birds use the forest for foraging and nesting. The summer tanager,
barred owl, and red-shouldered hawk were observed during the field survey. Other bird species
which may be present in this habitat include downy woodpecker, Carolina chickadee, yellow-
billed cuckoo, acadian flycatcher, and common yellowthroat.
Due to past disturbance, it is difficult to classify this community based on the NHP
classification system. An old dam immediately north of the project area has greatly influenced
the vegetation. It is likely that this community will eventually develop into a Mixed Mesic
Hardwood Forest (Coastal Plain Subtype).
Pine/Hardwood Forest
The upland forest community to the east of the bridge is dominated by loblolly pine and
sweetgum trees. The forested community to the north of the road consists almost entirely of pine
while the southern forested overstory consists predominately of sweetgum, pine, and red maple
with lesser amounts of flowering dogwood and willow oak. Herbaceous vegetation observed
includes trumpet creeper, poison ivy, and common greenbrier.
10
Large mammals utilizing the upland forest are likely similar to those found in the forest
community located west of the bridge. A wide variety of birds also use the forest for foraging
and nesting.
Due to the suppression of natural fires, introduction of loblolly pines, and man-induced
disturbance over the years, this upland forested community is difficult to classify within the NHP
system.
Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community composition, including total species number, species richness,
taxa richness and density, and species tolerance data, is reflective of the physical, chemical, and
biological condition of the water resource.
Within the project area Beaver Dam Creek is a low gradient, low to mid order, partly
shaded stream containing predominantly sand and gravel substrates. Coarser substrates were
located beneath and downstream of the bridge structure within the project area. Low water clarity
was observed at the time of the field survey. The riparian community, especially on the western
bank, contains mostly trees. The bank riparian community was disturbed and eroded; many fallen
trees were observed on the upstream side of the bridge and the downstream side was observed to
be degraded by the placement of construction materials as well as by the loss of a wide riparian
buffer along the eastern bank.
Table 1
Summary of Qualitative Benthic Macroinvertebrate Survey
Beaver Dam Creek, 7/24/97
Taxa Abundant Common Present
Phylum Arthropoda
Class Insecta
Order Ephemeroptera
Order Trichoptera X
X
Order Odonata, Suborder Anisoptera
family Libellulidae, genus Libella
family Gomphidae x
X
Order Diptera, family Chironomidae X
Class Gastropoda
Family Lymnaeidea X
Class Crustacea
Order Isopoda, family Asellidae X
Order Amphipoda, family Gammaridae X
Phylum Annelida --
Class Hirundinea t
x
11
According to Wayne Jones, the District 3 Biologist for the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC), fish species known to exist in Beaver Dam Creek within the
project area include largemouth bass, bluegill, chain pickerel, redbreast sunfish, and channel
catfish. Beaver Dam Creek has not been stocked for gamefish species.
Empty bivalve shells were identified along the western stream bank. These shells were
identified as the invasive Asian clam and two species of pearly mussel shells. Additionally, one
crayfish was identified within the intermittent tributary. The families of benthic
macroinvertebrate species found in Beaver Dam Creek during the field survey are presented
above in Table 1.
Based on the survey results, this stream segment generally contains a moderate diversity
of organisms typical of lotic depositional environments in low gradient stream systems. The most
abundant organisms identified during the survey typically reside in the benthos of slow velocity,
low oxygenated waters.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Project construction will have various impacts to the previously described terrestrial and
aquatic communities. Any construction activities in or near these resources have the potential to
impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies potential impacts to the natural
communities within the project area in terms of the area impacted and the plants and animals
affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered here along with recommendations to
minimize or eliminate impacts.
Terrestrial Communities
Terrestrial communities in the project area will be impacted by project construction from
clearing and paving and loss of the terrestrial community area along SR 1007. Estimated impacts
are derived based on the maximum anticipated project lengths for Alternates 1, 2, and 3 of 460
meters (1,500 feet), and the entire proposed right-of-way width of 18 meters (60 feet). Table 2
details the potential impacts to terrestrial communities by habitat type. It should be noted that
impacts are based on the. entire right-of-way width and actual loss of habitat will likely be less.
Table 2 Estimated Area Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
Impacted Area in ha (ac)
Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3
Community Temporary Permanent Permanent Permanent
Agricultural cropland --- --- --- 0.03 (0.07)
Disturbed Upland Community 0.25 (0.62) 0.5(l.26) 0.25 (0.62) 0.16(0.40)
Floodplain Forest 0.28 (0.69) 0.02 (0.05) 0.28 (0.69) 0.28 (0.69)
Upland Forest 0.28 (0.69) --- 0.28 (0.69) 0.19 (0.48)
Total Impacts 0.81 (2.0) 0.52(l.31) 0.81 (2.0) 0.66(l.64)
12
Destruction of natural communities along the project alignment will result in the loss of
foraging and breeding habitats for the various animal species which utilize the area. Animal
species will be displaced into surrounding communities. Adult birds, mammals, and some
reptiles are mobile enough to avoid mortality during construction. Young animals and less
mobile species, such as many amphibians, may suffer direct loss during construction. Plants and
animals found in these communities are generally common throughout North Carolina.
Impacts to terrestrial communities, particularly in locations having steep to moderate
slopes, can result in the aquatic community receiving heavy sediment loads as a consequence of
erosion. It is important to understand that construction impacts may not be restricted to the
communities in which the construction activity occurs, but may affect downstream communities.
Efforts should be made to ensure that no sediment leaves the construction site.
Aquatic Communities
Impacts to aquatic communities include fluctuations in water temperatures due to the loss
of riparian vegetation. Shelter and food resources, both in the aquatic and terrestrial portions of
these organisms' life cycles, will be affected by losses in the terrestrial communities. The loss of
aquatic plants and animals will affect terrestrial fauna which rely on them as a food source.
Temporary and permanent impacts may result to aquatic organisms from increased
sedimentation. Aquatic invertebrates may drift downstream during construction and recolonize
the disturbed area once it has been stabilized. Sediments have the potential to affect fish and
other aquatic life in several ways, including the clogging and abrading of gills and other
respiratory surfaces; affecting the habitat by scouring and filling of pools and riffles; altering
water chemistry; and smothering different life stages. Increased sedimentation may caused
decreased light penetration through an increase in turbidity.
Wet concrete will not be permitted to come into contact with surface water during bridge
construction in order to minimize effects of runoff on the stream water quality. Potential adverse
effects can be minimized through the implementation of NCDOT Best Management Practices for
Protection of Surface Waters.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Waters of the United States
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 (33 U.S.C. 1344), and are regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(COE). Any action that proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters or wetlands
falls under these provisions.
13
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
One small jurisdictional wetland was identified north of SR 1007 on the west side of
Beaver Dam Creek. This is a small ponded area containing 5 to 8 centimeters (2 to 3 inches) of
water, with bald cypress and river birch growing around the perimeter. The soils were disturbed
but contained hydric characteristics (low chroma) indicative of wetlands.
Beaver Dam Creek and its intermittent tributary meet the definition of surface waters and
are therefore classified as Waters of the United States.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Alternatives 1 and 2 will not impact jurisdictional wetlands. However, Alternate 3 will
impact the small wetland area described above. This wetland area is about 69 square meters (750
square feet) in size, and the entire wetland would likely be impacted.
Project construction cannot be accomplished without infringing on jurisdictional surface
waters. Anticipated impacts to surface water are greatest under Alternate l due to the widening
of the existing bridge in addition to impacts related to the temporary crossing. Alternate 1 would
impact 18 meters (60 feet) of stream, plus temporary impacts of 18 meters (60 feet). Alternate 2
would impact 18 meters (60 feet) of stream. These impacts would be slightly mitigated by
removal of the existing bridge once the new bridge is constructed. Alternative 3 would impact 18
meters (60 feet) of Beaver Dam Creek, plus about 20 meters (69 feet) of the intermittent stream
north of SR 1007. These anticipated impacts are based upon a right-of-way width of 18 meters
(60 feet). Project construction typically does not require the entire right-of-way, therefore, actual
surface water impacts may be less.
Anticipated wetland and surface water impacts fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (COE).
Permits
impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and surface waters are anticipated from the proposed
project. Permits and certifications from various state and federal agencies will be required prior
to construction activities.
Construction is likely to be authorized by provisions of CFR 330.5 (a) Nationwide Permit
(NWP) No. 23, which authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded, or
financed in whole or in part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or
department has determined, pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for
Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act:
? that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither individually
nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment, and
14
? that the Office of the Chief Engineer has been furnished notice of the agency's or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification or waiver thereof, from
DEHNR prior to issuance of the NWP 23. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the
state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that results
in a discharge into Waters of the U.S.
Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation
Since this project will likely be authorized under a Nationwide permit, mitigation for
impacts to surface waters is generally not required by the COE. A final determination regarding
mitigation requirements rests with the COE.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals are declining either due to natural forces or due
to their inability to coexist with man. Rare and protected species listed for Wayne County, and
any likely impacts to these species as a result of the proposed project construction, are discussed
in the following sections.
Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classification of Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended.
As of November 4, 1997, the only federally protected species for Wayne County listed by
the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is the red cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis).
Picoides borealis (Red-cockaded woodpecker) Endangered
The red-cockaded woodpecker is a small to medium sized bird 18 to 20 centimeters (7.4
to inches) long with a wing span of 35 to 38 centimeters (14 to 15 inches). The back and top of
the head are black. The cheek is white. Numerous small white spots arranged in horizontal rows
give a ladder-back appearance. The chest is dull white with small black spots on the side. Males
and females look alike except males have a small red streak above the cheek.
Among woodpeckers, the red-cockaded has an advanced social system. They live in a
group termed a clan. The clan may have from two to nine birds, but never more than one
breeding pair. The other adults are usually males and are called helpers. The helpers are usually
the sons of the breeding male and can be from 1 to 3 years old. The helpers assist in incubating
eggs, feeding young, making new cavities, and defending the clan's area from other red-
cockaded woodpeckers.
15
Roosting cavities are excavated in living pines, and usually in those which are infected
with a fungus producing red-heart disease. A clan nests and roosts in a group of cavity trees
called a colony. The colony may have one or two cavity trees to more than 12, but it is used only
by one clan. In most colonies, all the cavity trees are within a circle about 450 meters (1,500 feet)
wide. Open stands of pines with a minimum age of 80 to 120 years provide suitable nesting
habitat. Longleaf pines are the most commonly used, but other species of southern pine are also
acceptable. Dense stands of pines, or stands that have. a dense hardwood understory are avoided.
Foraging habitat is provided in pine and pine hardwood, stands 30 years or older with foraging
preference for pine trees 25 centimeters (10 inches) or larger in diameter. The woodpeckers diet
consists mainly of insects which includes ants, beetles, wood-boring insects, and caterpillars.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Biologists from Rust Environmental & Infrastructure conducted field investigations on
July 24, 1997. This investigation found no suitable nesting habitat in the project area or adjacent
areas. Although, there is potential foraging habitat for the red-cockaded woodpecker in the
project area, no individual birds were observed during field activities. A search of the NHP
database found no recorded occurrence of the red-cockaded woodpecker in the project vicinity. It
can be concluded that the project will not impact this Endangered species.
D. Air Quality and Traffic Noise
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included in the
regional emissions analysis (if applicable) and a project level CO analysis is not required.
If the project disposes of vegetation 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.
The project will not significantly increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will have no
significant impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during construction.
E. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal agencies or their
representatives, to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on prime and
important farmland soils. These soils are determined by the US Natural Resource Conservation
Service (NRCS) based on criteria such as potential crop yield and possible level of input of
economic resources. According to the NRCS, the proposed bridge replacement will not impact
prime farmland. The project will result in the conversion of a small amount of land but the area
to be converted is wooded and void of agricultural uses. Therefore, no further consideration of
impacts to farmland is required.
16

? ! North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
Wayne County
Replace Bridge No. 67 on SR 1007
Over Beaver Dam Creek
B-3265
Figure One

3a ' srq
n ?
CD 0 o
A
? D
mq
o?r S
a?
?oa
V "d 4>I
..
ON tl??
O

Gd to
a `F
a' °
c
(D M
?tv o CFO
o
o ?
Orel*

C) a?
tv
11
CD V) (D
V

y n
O
b

91
? Y;
I
Y
Fia7ua e 3
,--, ?ttuIuXJW+r1
?<! 1 ??C???L
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
March 20, 1997
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 67 on SR 1007 over Beaver Dam Creek,
Wayne County, B-3265,,Federal Aid Project
MABRSTP-1007(4), State Project 8.2331101,
ER 97-8349
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
On March 11, 1997, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above
project. We reported our available information on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT
provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we are aware of no historic structures
located within the area of potential effect. We recommend that no historic
architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
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.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2307 ??J
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.
7n"??
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: Ki. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett