20020759 Ver 1_Complete File_20020515

0 i 1 ? 1997
g ? ?NVIRnN,??NTgLSC'I?NCES
02-0-7S7
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA r L-A P1 SLA i
DEPARTMENT OF TP ANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
October 8, 1997
MEMORANDUM TO: Ms. Cyndi Bell
DWQ - DENR
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheet for the following projects:
Project T.I.P. County Bridge No. State Route Planning Engineer
B-3267 Wilson No. 29 ni SR 1653 ill Goodwin
B-2110 Brunswick No. 62 N NC 211 ill Goodwin
B-3365 Richmond No. 33 SR 1124 ill Goodwin
B-2951 Davidson No. 135 NC 109 ennis Pipkin
B-3322 Cumberland No. 36 (ir 1-95B/US 301B ill Goodwin
B-3179 Guilford No. 459 US 29 Dennis Pipkin
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets and location maps for the
subject projects. The purpose of this information and the related review procedure is to have an
early "meeting of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the projects. Scoping meetings for these projects are scheduled for
,•- in the Planning and Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 470).
These scoping meetings will be held back to back beginning at 9:00 A. M. for B-3267 and
B-2110. The remaining project meetings will begin at 9:30 A. M. in the order shown above.
These meetings typically last 10 to 15 minutes per project so all attendees should plan to arrive at
the beginning of th" r 9:30 A. M. session as applicable. You may provide us with
your comments at the meeting, mail them to us prior to the meeting, or e-mail them to
[e-mail] prior to the meeting.
Thank you for your assistance in this part of our planning process. If there are any
questions about the meetings or the scoping sheets, please call the indicated Project Planning
Engineer, at 733-3141.
HFV/bg
Attachments /? nui Sv/e S- C-??re w, ?i` e or Cv(Vr 1

I T
t
0ti
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIG' IWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
December 16. 1997
MEMO TO: Project File
FROM: Bill Goodwin, P. E. rCK
Project Planning Engineer
SUBJECT: Scoping Meeting for Replacement of Bridge No. 62 on NC 211 over
Royal Oak Swamp in Brunswick County, Federal Aid Project No.
BRSTP-211(2), State Project No. 8.1231301, TIP No. B-2110
A Scoping meeting for the subject project was held on November 4, 1997. The following
persons were in attendance:
Ray Moore
Ricky Keith
Ray McIntyre
Lanette Cook
Dan Duffield
Gary Parker
Mike Reese
Sonya Sykes
Abdul Reja
Betty Yancey
Jay Bennett
Tony Houser
Veronica McGriff-Wallace
Hal Bain
Wayne Elliott
Bill Goodwin
Structure Design
Structure Design
Program Development
Program Development
Hydraulics
Traffic Control
Traffic Control
Traffic Control
Traffic Control
Right of Way
Roadway Design
Roadway Design
Roadway Design
Planning and Environmental
Planning and Environmental
Planning and Environmental
Utility conflicts will be low for this project. There are underground phone cables on the
west side of NC 211 going aerial across the creek. There is also a fiber optic cable underground
along the west side of NC 211. Along the east side of NC 211 there are overhead power lines.
Ms. Cyndi Bell of DWQ indicated, by telephone prior to the meeting, that Royal Oak
Swamp is classified as Class C. Implementation of Standard Sedimentation and Erosion Control
RECEIVED
DEC 1 85 1997
ENVIRONMENTALSGIENCES

a
Measures will be acceptable. Surface water and wetland impacts should be avoided and
minimized where ever possible.
Mr. David Cox of NC WRC indicated by memo, that NCDOT should routinely minimize
adverse impacts to fish and wildlife resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. NCDOT
should install and maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and
prevent wet concrete from contacting water in or entering into the stream. Replacement of
bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is
recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along streambanks,
reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway crossings. Royal Oak
Swamp has high potential for anadromous fish usage and the NCDOT policy entitled "Stream
Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage" should be followed for this project.
Ms. Debbie Bevin of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) indicated that there
are no known architectural or archaeological resources in the project area and no unknown
resources are likely to be found. Therefore, no surveys will be required for this project.
Mr. Dan Duffield of the Hydraulics Unit indicated that a new bridge will be required to
replace the existing bridge. This bridge should be 43 meters (140 feet) in length. This new bridge
should be placed at approximately the same roadway elevation as the existir.?.- bridge. An on-site
detour structure should be a bridge 27 meters (90 feet) in length and could be placed
approximately 1 meter (3 feet) lower than the existing bridge. The detour structure should be
located east of the existing bridge to avoid filling into the edge of the stream, which turns and
runs parallel to NC 211 to the west side of the existing bridge. Brunswick County is one of the
counties under the jurisdiction of the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). Therefore, a
CAMA permit will be required for this project.
A desired design speed of 100 km/h (60 mph) should be achieved on this project. The
roadway approaches will have two 3.6 meter (12 ft) travel lanes and a shoulder width of at least
2.4 meters (8 ft). The shoulder will be 1.0 meters (3 feet) wider where guardrail is warranted.
This section of NC 211 is classified as a Rural Major Collector Route in the Statewide
Functional Classification System.
The Brunswick County School Bus Transportation Coordinator indicated that five school
busses cross this bridge twice per day during the school year. Closing the bridge during
construction would cause delays for these busses, but not be an obstacle to school bus operations.
The Traffic Forecasting Unit has indicated that near Bridge No. 62, NC 211 carries 2800
vehicles per day at present [1998]. This figure is expected to increase to 5300 vehicles per day by
the year 2020. These traffic figures include 2% dual tired vehicles [DUAL], and 2% truck-tractor
semi-trailers [TTST]. The design hourly volume [DHV] is 10%.
The Division Engineer has indicated that replacing the bridge in-place, with an on-site
detour would be preferred.

One alternate will be evaluated for replacing Bridge No. 62 over Royal Oak Swamp.
Alternate 1: Replace Bridge No. 62 in place with a new bridge. Traffic will be maintained on a
temporary detour located east of the existing bridge during construction.
An alternate involving a permanent alignment shift to the east was discussed at the
meeting and the existing alignment is a better alignment than would result from such a shift in
alignment.
The TIP cost estimate for this project is $ 670,000 including, $ 125,000 spent in prior
years, $ 525,000 for construction and $ 20,000 for right of way acquisition. Preliminary
construction cost estimates are not available at this time. The current project schedule calls for
right of way acquisition to begin in November 1999 and construction to begin in November
2000.
B G/

1\

,?OF NQRiN CgAO? North Carolina Department of
Transportation
y r1i
q =' Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
OF TIiP?'
Figure One
Brunswick County
Replace Bridge No. 62 on NC 211
Over Royal Oak Swamp
B-2110
BRIDGE PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
10/8/97
TIP PROJECT: B-2110 DIVISION: Three
F. A. PROJECT: BRSTP - 211(2)
STATE PROJECT: 8.1231301
COUNTY: Brunswick
ROUTE: NC 211
DESCRIPTION: Replacement of Bridge No. 62 on NC 211 over Royal Oak Swamp
PROJECT PURPOSE: replace obsolete bridge
PROJECT U.S.G.S. QUAD SHEET(S): Supply Quad
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION: Rural Major Collector
TIP CONSTRUCTION COST .......................................................................... $ 525,000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST .......................................................................... $ 20,000
PRIOR YEARS COST ...................................................................................... $ 0,000
TIP TOTAL COST ........................................................................................... $ 545,000
TRAFFIC: CURRENT 2500 VPD; DESIGN YEAR (2020) 5300 VPD
TTST 2 % DUAL 2 %
EXISTING ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION: Two lane shoulder section, 20 foot
pavement. grassed shoulders
EXISTING STRUCTURE
LENGTH 42.1 METERS WIDTH 7.7 METERS
138 FEET 25.3 FEET
COMMENTS:

N
f NORTH Cq?O North Carolina Department of
Transportation
m
4 Division of Highways
OFTfl?% Planning & Environmental Branch
Brunswick County
Rep lace Bridge No. 62 on NC 211
Over Royal Oak Swamp
B-2110
Figure One

C ?
G
n
a

O
Q
w SUIT a4q',
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
May 3, 2002
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Field Office
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTENTION: Mr. Dave Timpy
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
020759
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY

Subject: Brunswick County, Replacement of Bridge No. 62 over Royal Oak Swamp on
NC 211, Federal Project No. BRSTP-211(2), State Project No. 8.123130 1,
T.I.P. No. B-2110.
Please find enclosed copies of the project planning report for the above referenced
project. Bridge No. 62 will be replaced on the existing location with a two lane 180 foot
long bridge. The proposed bridge will be a two-lane road with two 12 foot paved lanes
with 2 ft paved shoulders on each side. Traffic will be maintained on an on-site detour to
the east during construction.
Jurisdictional wetlands will be affected by the construction of the temporary on-
site detour. There will be no permanent impacts to jurisdictional wetlands for this
prc; rct. Temporary impacts reported in the project planning document were 0.47 acres.
Since the preparation of that document, the project design has been refined. Temporary
fill in wetlands will now be 0.21 acres and 0.08 acres of mechanized clearing in the
wetlands. Mechanized clearing in the wetland from the construction of the new bridge is
0.01 acres. There are no muck soils in the project area and the temporary fill will be
removed at the end of construction.
To help off-set the temporary impacts associated with this project we are creating
some on-site restoration. Extra fill on the east side of the bridge will be removed during
the removal of the temporary fill. In this area, there will be a 2:1 slope from the
permanent fill line and graded to the existing wetland elevation. The restoration will be
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: MM..NCDOT ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
0.6 acre and will replanted with native vegetation associated with the adjacent wetland.
This area is depicted in the attached drawing.
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 January 15, 2002 (Volume 67,
Number 10, Page 2082).
We anticipate a 401 General Certification will apply to this project, and are
providing two copies of the CE document to the North Carolina Department of
Environment, and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their review.
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Rachelle
Beauregard at 733-1142.
Sincerely,
P m D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
cc: w/ attachment
Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr,. John Dorney, Division of Water Quality
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Garland Pardue, USFWS, Raleigh
w/o attachment
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Calvin Legget, P.E., Design Services
Mr. David Henderson, P.E., Hydralics
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. H. Allen Pope, P.E., Division 3
Ms. Beverly Robinson, Project Planning Engineer
Mr. Ken Pace, Roadside Environmental
PROJECT B-2110
1406
- ?Q I
Royal
`CGalloway \
Lockwor,rls FoIIYCemetery
Township Pnr I,
g \
I ?lloway - Royal O
mete Bridge
1342
Brunswick Technical
Blp Mecedonla
Chum College
et535 'H15 Su
Elementary
Ooeo? : 4? School
Supply
VICINITY
MAIDS
A V CD® 11
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.1231301 (B-2110)
REPLACE BRIDGE a62 OVER
ROYAL OAK SWAMP ON NC 211

NORTH CAROUNA
WETLAND LEGEND
- -WLB- - WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
/WL81 ?
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND
DENOTES FILL
SURFACE WATER
R
DENOTES FILL IN
SURFACE WATER
(POND)
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND
DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
WATER
"„+ • DENOTES MECHANIZED
• M • CLEARING
FLOW DIRECTION
TB
T_ TOP OF BANK
WE
- - EDGE OF WATER
- -C- - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
- -F -- PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
--?-- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
-PL - PROPERTY LINE
--TDE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-PDE-- PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
-- - - - - WATER SURFACE
x x x x x LIVE STAKES
x x x
BOULDER
- - - CORE FIBER ROLLS
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12"-48"
(DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54" PIPES
& ABOVE
r?
SINGLE TREE

WOODS LINE
DRAINAGE INLET
ROOTWAD
mr;k RIP RAP
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
5 OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE (PSH)
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
GRASS SWALE
ca
0
? i
-4 R'

-?- 00+ 9 1 I NI? HDI M cn
> Z
o

I
N ,.
Z
.?

o

-4 a

1 ® N a0

I
I
O F,
z p4
0 0
r
I I ? _? ?`
Cn W
? ?7 U

1 I ° a0 H
` ? x w

I
d
I ? I f - ??? I d
?

t_
I
S x

/
d
o -I N
?v N
LLI
I / O
I LL-

Z W

? _
-A

m
m I I z

LL-
0 v?

r,-,
i
Q

CD
LLI
Q
m O
Z
CD F--
N

O 31 Q ? Q
CD o 3

U
C

i UZ ??- W O

CC
/ LJ3
W ~ O O
LLJ

77
/ ,?
i
O
Z O J O
O F
Z (
n O i
V '.Y c, I Z

W
w

I

f W LZiJL,
O O

. « -
W W
O cLr
7
71 w

Ln Q
(v 0
t «? 1 (n
v
o
O

z

3L I E \ A o
C) C?v
c? p'
4-
X , ° w u
w ? .`" ° > z
.o 0
i ILL' I `\ 1 ? dS[Y I W ? Z e
s tt
/ x
I C7 O c a.
? + w I ® x u
1 C,C 'N A
r-LJ -4
?I \ Z cn
F"
n n u w w
?n I I^? I ?a °z w cad
+,?9? Kati ?®
W
a o ,,
I I I I ?" w
I'
V) I I il`
Li I I I <t ' I cr
I I I t! I W z
V) [) ?•
Q I I S I Q
o I I I I T N
I m I I ?1 0 _
I I I I I W
Lli
LLJ
-A 41 I I I 1
LL
F LL y
k>
Flit
LLI
r i -
I -- \ U
rinrvo
two-
y rm ° O
CC Ln
N
-MA LD 0 _j
U
M \ ?LLJ Cr Ws
-- -? _ ?.
4 ?-1 ?z o
-A - > w w
zH
o
°
z o-1
-?- 00+91 1W HDIVA o a`` w
J
« « Ln Q
« N V
« V/
«
• « 0
i-n
O
N
O
N
- I o
I
I ? IN
I
M w
a
I 00 A A W
I. Cf)
I o
I - - W Z
I r ro a
rz
CL?
I Q z O ~
I Q_ Q ? W
OJ 3
a-,- Q
Z W W O
W 3 (r
I
O
(f) W
O ?z
W W Ir 1(?
I O J o ff
?y Z ", z cn
LL I W LL W W ee
C) cr
I
I
I ?
I
r I
I t?7
I _ O
I
I
/ G Ln
G W
?u S >
N O „ O n
I
I ^ J J
I u) L a . U
I n N (./)
O
O L-0 Ln
PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO.
NAMES
ADDRESSES
I
SUSTAINABLE FORESTS, LLC.
3 FINE VALLEY DR.
WILMINGTON, N.C. 28412

3
VICTORIA SMITH, HEIRS
671 GREEN SWAMP RD. NW
SUPPLY, N.C. 28462
2
JEFFERSON HANKINS, ec .1
P.O. BOX 576
SHALLOTTE, N.C. 28459
M -

0

CL Z N
p -- o

CL o
N
_
r N V'
Q ¢

LU
LL
m
O 3: zo
:
(0 ol
Z - OU M

O U N

LL O z w
LL
O z
'
?
O
w
w j cc
U) w
LL a
s
z N

FL Z

F- C:

z
O

LL N O
U)
W

g?
(D U
W W
>1 ?p
0 F'S LL W
oa
?

F- v =

C) 0 O
W
Co
w
_J Q

U) U
WO
W
U)
2 Q
F-

O
Z

0
c

N O
2

c c

U
Q E
w

O

3 (D -

W
a o

a
"

0

Q

-

?
=
0
0 0
? ? 0 0 0
N
L ? L f0

a ?,
o
? o

U ?
3
? W
W p
a Z
5 = ?
U N
0 N
0
Q
Z w - ?
Edo

H -
W ?
N
C ?
?
-
N

W
0
m w p v

?
N
fn m
j
N ? W
O
N
N
O S a o U
a ?
0 .

(O N
O t-, i
O co +
?
J
O
O
O
L .... O O
l

N o
--
Z
O
00 co o
Z
Q =
?
J
iu
F-
F-

Brunswick County
Bridge No. 62 on NC 211
Over Royal Oak Swamp
Federal Project BRSTP-211 (2)
State Project 8.1231301
TIP No. B-2110
020759
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
61-30-00
w?
Date William D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Date Ni olas Graf, P. E.
Di Ision Administrator, FHWA

Brunswick County
Bridge No. 62 on NC 211
Over Royal Oak Swamp
Federal Project BRSTP-211 (2)
State Project 8.1231301
TIP No. B-2110
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
ate
Date
6.30.00
Date
Documentation Prepared in
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch By:
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch

ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS:
B-2110. Brunswick County
Bridge No. 62, on NC 211
Over Royal Oak Swamp
Federal Aid Project BRSTP-211(2)
State Project 8.1231301
1. Roadway Design Unit, Roadside Environmental Unit, Resident Engineer:
Reve eg tation: The temporary detour structure and approaches will be removed after the
new bridge is completed, and the area will be revegetated with appropriate plant species.
2. Roadway Design Unit, Structure Design Unit, Project Development & Environmental
Analysis Branch (Permits), Resident Engineer:
Bridge Demolition: The entire existing bridge, both superstructure and substructure, is
- composed of reinforced concrete. Thus, there is a potential for components of the bridge to be
dropped into Waters of the United States during construction. The resulting temporary fill
associated with the bridge will be as much as approximately 53.9 cubic yards. During
construction, Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal will be followed.
Categorical Exclusion Document Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
June, 2000
Brunswick County
Bridge No. 62 on NC 211
Over Royal Oak Swamp
Federal Project BRSTP-211 (2)
State Project 8.1231301
TIP No. B-2110
Bridge No. 62 is located in Brunswick County over Royal Oak Swamp. It is
programmed in the 2000-2006 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge
replacement project. This project is part of the Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and
Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP) and has been classified as a "Categorical Exclusion".
No substantial environmental impacts are expected.
I. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 62 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 1 with a new bridge
on the existing alignment. The new bridge will be approximately 140 feet (43
meters) in length and placed at approximately at the same roadway elevation as the
existing bridge (see Figure 2). During construction, traffic will be maintained on a detour
bridge, which will be located approximately 20 feet (6 meters) east of the existing bridge.
The detour bridge will have a clear roadway width of 30 feet (9.2 meters), which
will provide two 12 foot (3.6 meter) lanes with 3 foot (1.0 meter) offsets. The approach
for the detour bridge will include two 12 foot (3.6 meter) lanes and 6 foot (1.8 meter)
shoulders. The detour bridge should be 90 feet (27 meters) in length and placed
approximately 3 feet (1 meter) lower than the existing bridge. The design speed will be
approximately 50 mph (80 km/h).
The proposed bridge will have a clear roadway width of 30 feet (9.1 meters),
which will provide two 12 foot (3.6 meter) lanes with 3 foot (1.0 meter) offsets. The
approaches will include two 12 foot (3.6 meter) lanes and 8 foot (2.4 meter) shoulders
with 2 foot (0.6 meter) full depth paved shoulders. There will be 11 foot (3.3 meters)
were guardrail is warranted. Approach work will extend approximately 500 feet (152
meters) on both sides of the new bridge. Based on preliminary design, the design speed
should be approximately 60 mph (100 km/h).
The current estimated cost of the project is $975,650 including $950,000 in
construction costs and $25,650 in right of way costs. This matches the estimated cost
budgeted in the 2000-2006 TIP.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
NCDOT does not anticipate any design exceptions will be required.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NC 211 is classified as a Rural Major Collector in the Statewide Functional
Classification System. Currently the traffic volume is 3,000 vehicles per day (VPD) and
projected at 5,300 VPD for the year 2020 with a 2% dual truck volume and 2% TTST
volume. NC 211 has a posted speed limit of 55 mph by statute.
The existing bridge was built in 1954. It has a reinforced concrete deck on timber
joists and the substructure consists of concrete caps on timber piles. The deck is 138 feet
(42 meters) long and 25 feet (7.6 meters) wide. There is approximately 15 feet (4.5
meters) of vertical clearance between the floorbeams of the bridge deck and streambed.
There are two lanes of traffic on the bridge.
According to Bridge Maintenance Unit records, the sufficiency rating of the
bridge is 3.6 out of a possible 100. Presently the bridge is not posted with weight
restrictions for single vehicles or for truck-tractor semi-trailers.
The vertical alignment is good with a slight downgrade approaching from the
south, but flattens out prior to the bridge. A flat grade exists across the bridge. The
horizontal alignment is good. A slight curve to the left (west) begins approximately 450
feet (137 meters) from the north end of the bridge.
The Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that three accidents have been reported
during the period September 93 through August 96 in the vicinity of the project.
There are 10 daily school bus crossings over the studied bridge.
Utility conflicts will be low for this project. There are underground phone cables on
the west side of NC 211 going aerial across the creek. There is also a fiber optic cable
underground along the west side of NC 211. Also along the east side of NC 211, there are
overhead power lines.
IV. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
Several alternates were evaluated for replacing Bridge No. 62 over Royal Swamp,
but only one was feasible. Due to the lengthy detour and the lower speed limits on
certain roads that surround the project, an off-site detour is not a viable option.
Alternate 1) Replace Bridge No. 62 in place with a new bridge. Traffic will be
maintained on a temporary detour located east of the existing bridge
during construction
"Do-nothing" is not practical; requiring the eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating
bridge is neither practical nor economical.
V ESTIMATED COST (Table 1)

COMPONENT Recommended
ALTERNATE 1
New Bridge Structure $ 276,920
Bridge Removal 24,315
Roadway & Approaches 214,800
Temp. Bridge Structure/Detour 106,317
Mobilization & Miscellaneous 186,648
Engineering & Contingencies 141,000
Total Construction 950,000
Right of Way 25,650
Total Cost $ 975,650
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 62 will be replaced as recommended in Alternate 1 with a new bridge
on the existing alignment. The new bridge will be approximately 140 feet (43
meters) in length and placed at approximately at the same roadway elevation as the
existing bridge (see Figure 2). During construction, traffic will be maintained on a detour
bridge, which will be located approximately 20 feet (6 meters) east of the existing bridge.
The detour bridge will have a clear roadway width of 30 feet (9.2 meters), which
will provide two 12 foot (3.6 meter) lanes with 3 foot (1.0 meter) offsets. The approach
for the detour bridge will include two 12 foot (3.6 meter) lanes and 6 foot (1'.8 meter)
shoulders. The detour bridge should be 90 feet (27 meters) in length and placed
approximately 3 feet (1 meter) lower than the existing bridge. The design speed will be
approximately 50 mph (80 km/h).
The proposed bridge will have a clear roadway width of 30 feet (9.1 meters),
which will provide two 12 foot (3.6 meter) lanes with 3 foot (1.0 meter) offsets. The
approaches will include two 12 foot (3.6 meter) lanes and 8 foot (2.4 meter) shoulders
with 2 foot (0.6 meter) full depth paved shoulders. There will be 11 foot (3.3 meters)
shoulders were guardrail is warranted. Approach work will extend approximately 500
feet (152 meters) on both sides of the new bridge. Based on preliminary design, the
design speed should be approximately 60 mph (100 km/h).
Once construction of the new bridge and approaches are complete, the detour
bridge will be removed. The detour approach fill will be removed to natural grade and
the area will be replanted with native grasses and/or tree species as appropriate.
An alternate involving a permanent alignment shift to the east was discussed at
the scoping meeting, but the existing alignment is a better alignment than what would
result from such a permanent shift in alignment.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. GENERAL
This project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an
inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
This project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.
This bridge replacement will not have a substantial adverse effect on the quality
of the human or natural environment by implementing the environmental commitments
listed in Section 11 of this document in addition to 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 this project.
There are no known hazardous waste sites in the project area.
No adverse effect on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way
acquisition will be limited.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not
expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
There are no publicly owned parks, recreational facilities, or wildlife and
waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance in the vicinity of the project.
This project will not impact any resource protected by Section 4(f) of the DOT act.
The proposed bridge replacement project will not raise the existing flood levels or
have any significant adverse effect on the existing floodplain.
Utility impacts are considered to be low for the proposed project.
B. AIR AND NOISE
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, so it is not required to be included
in the regional emissions analysis and a project level CO analysis is not required.
The project is located in Brunswick County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR part 51 is not
applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will not
have substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during
construction.
C. LAND USE & FARMLAND EFFECTS
This project will impact no soils considered to be prime or important farmland.
D. HISTORICAL EFFECTS & ARCHAEOLOGICAL EFFECTS
Upon review of area photograhps, aerial photographs, and cultural resources
databases, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has indicates that they "are
aware of no historic structures within the area of potential effect." They therefore
recommend no historic architectural surveys be conducted.
The SHPO knows of no archaeological sites within the proposed project 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.
Therefore, the SHPO recommends that no archaeological investigations be conducted in
connection with this project.
E. NATURAL RESOURCES
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources which occur in the project area are discussed below with
respect to possible environmental concerns. Soil properties and site topography
significantly influence the potential for soil erosion and compaction, along with other
possible construction limitations or management concerns. Water resources within the
project area present important management limitations due to the need to regulate water
movement and the increased potential for water quality degradation. Excessive soil
disturbance resulting from construction activities can potentially alter both the flow and
quality of water resources, limiting downstream uses. In addition, soil characteristics and
the availability of water directly influence the composition and distribution of flora and
fauna in biotic communities, thus affecting the characteristics of these resources.
Regional Characteristics
Brunswick County lies in the Coastal Plain physiographic province of North
Carolina. The county is predominantly flat with large expanses of low freshwater and
saltwater wetlands. The topography of the study area is representative of that found
throughout the county. The average elevation of the project study area is approximately
25 ft. (7.6 m) above mean sea level.
Soils
Soils in the project area lie within the Muckalee Dorovan Chowan Association.
These soils are nearly level, poorly drained to very poorly drained soils with sandy,
loamy, or mucky underlying material. Baymeade and Marvyn and Muckalee soils
dominate the project study area. Baymeade and Marvyn soils (BdC) contain slopes from
6-12 %. Baymeade and Marvyn soils consist of well drained soils on uplands. The
Muckalee series (Mk) consists of poorly drained soils on low floodplains. The soils
formed in moderately coarse textured recent alluvium and contain slopes from 0-2 %
(USDA 1984). Muckalee soils are considered hydric soils or have hydric soils as a major
component. Baymeade and Marvyn soils have hydric inclusions. Each of these soil types
are listed on the Brunswick County list of hydric soils.
Water Resources
This section contains information concerning surface water resources likely to be
impacted by the proposed project. Water resource assessments include the physical
characteristics, best usage standards, and water quality aspects of the water resources,
along with their relationship to major regional drainage systems. Probable impacts to
surface water resources are also discussed, as are means to minimize impacts.
Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
One perennial stream, Royal Oak Swamp is crossed by bridge number 62. Royal
Oak Swamp is a tributary of the Lockwoods Folly River in the Lumber River Drainage
Basin. This perennial stream is surrounded by a low swamp. The wetlands associated
with Royal Oak Swamp will be discussed in the Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp
section on page 9.
Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ), which reflects water quality conditions and potential resource usage.
This section of Royal Oak Swamp [DWQ Index No. 15-25-1-12] is classified as Class C
Sw. Class C refers to waters suitable for the propagation and survival of aquatic life,
fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. Sw (Swamp water) is a
supplemental water classification given to waters that have low velocities and other
natural characteristics that are different from adjacent streams. No waters classified as
High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), or Water Supplies
(WS-I or WS-11) occur within 1.0 mi. (1.6 km) of project study area.
Water Quality
This section describes the quality of the water resources within the project area.
Potential sediment loads and toxin concentrations of these waters from both point sources
and non-point sources are evaluated. Water quality assessments are made based on
published resource information and existing general watershed characteristics. These
data provide insight into the value of water resources within the project area to meet
human needs and to provide habitat for aquatic organisms.
GENERAL WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS
Royal Oak Swamp is a tributary of the Lockwoods Folly River and lies in the
Coastal Area Watershed (Subbasin 03-07-59). The overall quality of surface waters in
the this subbasin is good to excellent based on fish community data.
BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE AMBIENT NETWORK
The DWQ has initiated a whole basin approach to water quality management for
the 17 river basins within the state. To accomplish this goal the DWQ collects biological,
chemical and physical data that can be used in basin-wide assessment and planning. All
river basins are reassessed every five years. In concurrence with this schedule, streams
and rivers are sampled for benthic macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites
in each river basin. In addition, special studies are often initiated for specific streams or
watersheds.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network, managed by the DWQ, is part
of an ongoing ambient water quality monitoring program which addresses long term
trends in water quality. Royal Oak Swamp has been sampled at NC 211 and received a
rating of Good to Excellent based on fish community data.
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
Point source dischargers are discharges that enter surface water through a pipe,
ditch, or other defined points of discharge. The term most commonly refers to discharges
associated with wastewater treatment plants. Point source dischargers located throughout
North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) program administered by the DWQ. All dischargers are required to
register for a permit. The DWQ NPDES report lists no permitted dischargers within 1.0
mi. (1.6 km) of the project study area.
Non-point source refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater
flow or no defined point of discharge. Due to the potential of impacts from deck drains,
every effort will be made not to discharge the bridge deck drains directly into the stream.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts to Water Quality
Project construction will likely result in minimal impacts to water resources in the
project area. Activities likely to cause impacts include clearing and grubbing on stream
banks, riparian canopy removal, in-stream construction, fertilizers and pesticides used in
revegetation, and pavement rehabilitation. These construction activities are likely to
result in the following impacts to surface water resources:
• Increased sedimentation and siltation downstream of the crossing and increased
erosion in the project area
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or additions to surface
and ground water flow from construction
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed areas
• Increased concentrations of toxic compounds in highway runoff
• Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil from
construction equipment and other vehicles
• Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in surface and
groundwater drainage patterns
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the project area,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters will be
strictly enforced during the construction phase of the project.
Bridge Demolition
The existing bridge has eight spans totaling 138 ft. (42 m) in length. The
superstructure is composed of a reinforced concrete deck on timber joists. The
substructure is composed of timber piles with concrete caps. The bridge railings and the
entire substructure will be removed without dropping their components into Waters of the
United States. 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 53.9 yd;.
BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include terrestrial and aquatic communities. This section
describes the biotic communities encountered in the project area, as well as the
relationships between fauna and flora within these communities. The composition and
distribution of biotic communities throughout the project area are reflective of
topography, soils, hydrology, and past and present land uses. 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.
Common names (when applicable) are provided for each animal and plant species
described. Fauna observed during the site visit are denoted in the text with an asterisk
!*\
Biotic Communities
Much of the flora and fauna described from biotic communities utilize resources
from different communities, making boundaries between contiguous communities
difficult to define. The terrestrial communities identified in the project study area include
Maintained Roadside Shoulder / Power Line Right-of-way and Coastal Plain Small
Stream Swamp. One aquatic community, a Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp also
occurs in the project study area.
Maintained Roadside Shoulder / Power Line Right-of-Way
The roadside shoulder and upland portions of the power line right-of-way along
NC 211 are dominated by herbaceous species that are common to maintained areas
including fescue, panic grass, curly dock, Japanese honeysuckle, poison ivy, hairy
thoroughwort, yellow milkwort. Parts of the power line right-of-way that are lower in
elevation support a variety of herbaceous wetland species including common rush,
lizard's tail, netted chain fern, cinnamon fern and bur-reed. These areas also contain
signs of wetland hydrology and contain hydric soils and are therefore considered
jurisdictional wetland.
8
Although woody species are present, regular mowing and herbicide application
prevent them from maturing. These species which would, under normal circumstances,
become canopy trees include water oak, sweet gum, red maple, bald cypress, swamp
chestnut oak and pecan. Woody shrubs such as southern swamp dogwood, beautyberry,
winged sumac and privet were also observed.
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp
Also within the project study area is a Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp. This
forest is dominated by black gum, sweet gum, tulip tree, red maple and bald cypress. The
understory/shrub layer contains red maple, American holly, sweet bay, titi and dwarf
palmetto. Due to flooding, the herbaceous layer is sparse. This forest is considered
jurisdictional wetland.
Coastal Plain Perennial Stream
Royal Oak Swamp is classified as a coastal plain perennial stream. Royal Oak
Swamp provides good habitat for a variety of aquatic species. Invertebrates common to
coastal plain perennial streams with good water quality include: crayfish, nymphal stages
of dragonflies and damselflies, mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies. Fish species
common to coastal plain perennial streams include: banded pygmy sunfish, eastern
mosquitofish, pirate perch, redfin pickerel and bowfin.
Wildlife
Mammals common to Coastal Plain bottomlands such as the raccoon, opossum,
and gray squirrel may inhabit the project study area. Common reptiles found in these
habitats include predators like the black racer, rat snake, brown water snake, and
cottonmouth. Amphibians present along stream banks may include bullfrog, and pickerel
frog. Birds such as the northern cardinal, Carolina chickadee, tufted titmouse, Carolina
wren, and gray catbird* are likely inhabitants here as are larger birds such as the turkey
vulture* and red tailed hawk*.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed project will have various impacts on the biotic
resources described. Any construction related activities in or near these resources have
the potential to impact biological functions. This section quantifies and qualifies
potential impacts to the natural communities within the project area in terms of the area
impacted and the organisms affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered
here as well, along with recommendations to minimize or eliminate impacts.
9
Anticipated Impacts to Terrestrial Communities
Impacts to terrestrial communities that will result from project construction will
be temporary due to the placement of the new bridge in the location of the existing
bridge. In addition, the impacts associated with the on-site detour will also be temporary.
Once construction of the new bridge and approaches are complete, the detour bridge will
be removed. The detour approach fill will be removed to natural grade and the area will
be replanted with native species. Table 1 summarizes potential temporary impacts to
these communities that will result from project construction. Calculated impacts to
terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance of each community present in the
study area. Estimated impacts are derived based on a project length of 1000 ft. (304 m)
and a proposed right-of-way width of 60 ft. (18 m).
Table 1. Estimated area impacts to terrestrial communities.
COMMUNITY IMPACTED AKEA
Maintained Roadside Shoulder 0.54 ac (0.21 ha)
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp 0.29 ac (0.12 ha)
Total Impacts 0.83 ac (0.33 ha)
Anticipated Impacts to Aquatic Communities
Impacts to the aquatic communities will likely result from the construction of the
detour bridge as well as the new bridge. Both sides of Royal Oak Swamp contain
jurisdictional wetland. The wetland boundary straddles the project limits for much of the
length of the project. This project will temporarily impact 60 linear ft. of Royal Oak
Swamp and 0.47 ac (0.19 ha) of wetland impacts due to the temporary fill on the east side
of existing NC 211. Once construction of the new bridge and approaches are complete,
the detour bridge will be removed and the approach fill will be removed to natural grade
and the area will be replanted with native species.
Such disturbances to aquatic habitats will likely have a negative effect on the
aquatic community composition by reducing species diversity and the overall quality of
aquatic habitats. Physical alterations to aquatic habitats can result in the following
impacts to aquatic communities:
• Inhibition of plant growth
• Clogging of feeding structures of filter-feeding organisms, gills of fish, and the burial
of benthic organisms
• Algal blooms resulting from increased nutrient concentrations
• Mortality among sensitive organisms resulting from introduction of toxic substances
and decreases in dissolved oxygen
10
• Destabilization of water temperature resulting from riparian canopy removal
• Loss of benthic macroinvertebrates through scouring resulting from an increased
sediment load
Impacts to aquatic communities can be minimized by reducing the removal of
riparian canopy, limiting in-stream construction, revegetating immediately following the
completion of grading activities, and strict adherence to BMPs.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides inventories and impact analyses pertinent to two significant
regulatory issues: Waters of the United States and rare and protected species. These
issues retain particular significance because of federal and state mandates which regulate
their protection. This section deals specifically with the impact analyses required to
satisfy regulatory authority prior to project construction.
Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the
United States," as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CRF) Part
328.3. Any action that proposes to dredge or place fill material into surface waters or
wetlands falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Surface waters include all
standing or flowing waters which have commercial or recreational value to the public.
Wetlands are identified based on the presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and
saturated or flooded conditions during all or part of the growing season.
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to delineate jurisdictional wetlands include evidence of hydric soils,
hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology. This project crosses Royal Oak Swamp and
therefore will impact some jurisdictional wetland. Approximately 0.47 ac (0.19 ha) of
jurisdictional wetland was identified to be temporarily impacted in the project study area.
This wetland includes the Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp as well as low wet
branches of the swamp that come into the power line right-of-way. The swamp
community is dominated by woody species such as black gum, sweet gum, tulip tree, red
maple and bald cypress. The adjacent power line right-of-way is dominated by
herbaceous species such as common rush, lizard's tail, netted chain fern, cinnamon fern
and bur-reed. Both wetland types contain signs of hydrology (water stained leaves,
drainage patterns and water at the surface) and hydric soils.
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are calculated based on the linear ft. of the
stream that is located within the proposed right-of-way. Approximately 60 linear ft. (18
m) of Royal Oak Swamp will be temporarily impacted by this project. Physical aspects of
surface waters are described on page 6. Biological qualities of this stream are discussed
on page 9.
Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the proposed project.
As a result, construction activities will require permits and certifications from various
regulatory agencies in charge of protecting the water quality of public water resources.
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be applicable for all
impacts to Waters of the United States resulting from the proposed project. This permit
authorizes activities undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed in
whole, or part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or department
has determined the pursuant to the council on environmental quality regulation for
implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act:
• (1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from environmental
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which neither
individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment,
and;
• (2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency's
or department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that
determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification from the DWQ
prior to the issuance of the 404 Nationwide Permit. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires that the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or
licensed activity that may result in a discharge to Waters of the United States. Section
401 Certification allows surface waters to be temporarily impacted for the duration of the
construction or other land manipulation.
The subject project is located within a county that is under the jurisdiction of the
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), which is administered by the Division of
Coastal Management (DCM). CAMA directs the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC)
to identify and designate Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) in which uncontrolled
development might cause irreversible damage to property, public health and the natural
environment. CAMA necessitates a permit if the project meets all of the following
conditions:
• it is located in one of the 20 counties covered by CAMA;
• it is in or affects an AEC designated by CRC;
• it is considered "development" under the terms of the Act, and;
• it does not qualify for an exemption identified by the Act or by CRC.
This project will not impact an Area of Environmental Concern, as defined by the
12
Division of Coastal Management and, therefore, will not require a CAMA major
development permit.
Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation
The COE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a
wetland mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss of wetlands" and
sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological
and physical integrity of Waters of he United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of
wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to
wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and
compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance,
minimization and compensatory mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of
averting impacts to Waters of the United States. According to a 1990 Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE,
in determining "appropriate and practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts,
such measures should be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and
practicable in terms of cost, existing technology and logistics in light of overall project
purposes.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to
reduce the adverse impacts to Waters of the United States. Implementation of these steps
will be required through project modifications and permit conditions. Minimization
typically focuses on decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the
reduction to median widths, right-of-way widths, and/or fill slopes. By replacing Bridge
# 62 in the existing location and not altering the alignment, the impacts associated with
construction will be temporary. This design avoids wetland impacts associated with a
permanent new alignment.
Compensatory mitigation in not normally considered until anticipated impacts to
Waters of the United States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent
possible. It is recognized that "no net loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be
achieved in each and every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory
mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate
and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions often include
restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United States, specifically
wetlands. Such actions should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the
discharge site.
Compensatory mitigation is required for those projects authorized under
Nationwide Permits that result in the fill or alteration of more than 1.0 ac (0.4 ha) of
wetlands and/or more than 150.0 linear ft. (46 m) of streams. Since less than 1.0 ac (0.4
ha) of jurisdictional wetland is located in the project study area, and only 60 linear ft. of
13
surface waters will be impacted, it is not anticipated that wetland or stream mitigation
will be required for this project. Final permit/mitigation decisions rest with the COE.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the process of decline
either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist with human development. Federal
law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires
that any action likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected be
subject to review by the FWS. Other species may receive additional protection under
separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened,
Proposed Endangered, and Proposed Threatened are protected under the provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of 20
December 1999, the FWS lists 14 federally protected species for Brunswick County
(Table 2). The American Alligator is listed only because of its Similarity of Appearance
to the American crocodile. A brief description of the characteristics and habitat
requirements for these species along with a conclusion regarding potential project
impacts follows.
Table 2. Federally-Protected Species known from Brunswick County.
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Acipenser brevirostrum Shortnose sturgeon >?ndangerea
Alligator mississippiensis American alligator Threatened (S/A)
Caretta caretta Loggerhead turtle Threatened
Charadrius melodus Piping plover Threatened
Chelonia mydas Green sea turtle Threatened
Dermochelys coriacea leatherback sea turtle Endangered
Felis concolor couguar eastern cougar Endangered
Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle Threatened
Lepidochelys kempii Kemp's ridley sea turtle Endangered
Mycteria americana wood stork Endangered
Picoides borealis red-cockaded woodpecker Endangered
Trichechus manatus West Indian manatee Endangered
Amaranthus pumilus seabeach amaranth Threatened
Lysimachia asperulaefolia rough-leaved loosestrife Endangered
Thalictrum cooleyi Cooley's meadowrue Endangered -
Endangered - a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Threatened - a species that is likely to become an endangered species within the forseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range.
14
Short-nosed Sturgeon
The short-nosed sturgeon is a small species of fish which occurs in the lower
sections of large rivers and in coastal marine habitats. The short-nosed sturgeon prefers
deep channels with a salinity less than sea water. It feeds benthicly on invertebrates and
plant material and is most active at night.
The short-nosed sturgeon requires large fresh water rivers that are unobstructed by
dams or pollutants to reproduce successfully. It is an anadromous species that spawns
upstream in the spring and spends most of its life within close proximity of the rivers
mouth. At least two entirely freshwater populations have been recorded, in South Carolina
and Massachusetts.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The short nosed sturgeon lives in brackish and estuarine waters and only visits
freshwater during the spring to spawn. Fritz Rohde, a biologist with the NC Division of
Marine Fisheries, was contacted on 26 April 1999 about the presence of this species in
Royal Oak Swamp. He believes that the short nosed sturgeon is not present in Royal Oak
Swamp and will not be impacted by this project. The NC Natural Heritage Program
database of rare species and unique communities was checked on 28 March 2000 and no
records of this species occur within the project study area. This project will not affect the
short-nosed sturgeon.
American Alligator
The alligator is a large aquatic reptile, measuring 1.8-5.8 meters in length, with a
broadly rounded snout, heavy body, laterally compressed tail, and a dark gray or blackish
color. Young are black with conspicuous yellow cross bands; the banding may
occasionally persist on adults, although very faintly. Unlike the American crocodile, the
fourth tooth on the lower jaw of the alligator fits in a notch in the upper jaw and is not
exposed when the jaws are closed.
The alligator can be found on the east coast of the United States from Tyrrell
County, North Carolina to Corpus Christi, Texas, and north in the Mississippi River
drainage basin to Arkansas and southeastern Oklahoma. Home ranges may vary
considerably, with 3,162 ac (1277 ha) for males and 21 ac (8.4 ha) for females being
average. Individuals can travel great distances, both overland and in the water, but males
tend to travel more than females.
The alligator is found in rivers, streams, canals, lakes, swamps, bayous, and
coastal marshes. Adult animals are highly tolerant of salt water, but the young are
apparently more sensitive, with salinities greater than 5 parts per thousand considered
harmful. The diet consists of anything of suitable size, including mammals, reptiles,
amphibians, birds, fish, and crustaceans.
15
Nesting takes place in late spring and early summer, with the female building a
mound of grass and other vegetation that may be two feet high and six feet across. The
nest is usually constructed near the water, in a shaded location. The clutch of 30-60
(average 35) eggs is laid in a cavity near the top of the mound, and is incubated by the
heat from the decaying vegetation. The female usually remains near the nest until the
eggs hatch. Hatching takes place in about nine weeks, at which time the young begin
calling to alert the female to excavate the nest.
Biological Conclusion:
Not Required
This species is listed as Threatened Due to Similarity of Appearance, and is
therefore not protected under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. However, in
order to control the illegal trade of other protected crocodilians such as the American
crocodile, federal regulations (such as hide tagging) are maintained on the commercial
trade of alligators. No survey is required for this species.
Loggerhead Turtle
Loggerhead turtles can be distinguished from other sea turtles by its unique
reddish-brown color. The loggerhead is characterized by a large head and blunt jaws.
Otherwise they have 5 or more costal plates with the first touching the nuchal and 3 to 4
bridge scutes.
The loggerhead nests on suitable beaches from Ocracoke inlet, North Carolina
through Florida and on a small scale off of the Gulf States. There are also major nesting
grounds on the eastern coast of Australia. It lives worldwide in temperate to subtropical
waters. Loggerheads nest nocturnally between May and September on isolated beaches
that are characterized by fine grained sediments. It is mainly carnivorous feeding on small
marine animals.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
The subject project crosses Royal Oak Swamp, a tributary to Lockwoods Folly
River. The area contains no suitable nesting or foraging habitat for any species of sea
turtle. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique communities
was checked on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species occur within the project
study area. This project will not affect the Loggerhead turtle.
Piping Plover
The piping plover is a small migratory shorebird that resembles a sandpiper. It can
be identified by the orange legs and black band around the base of its neck. During the
winter the plover loses its black band, its legs fade to pale yellow, and the bill fades to
black. Breeding birds are characterized by white underparts, a single black breastband, and
16
a black bar across the forehead.
The piping plover breeds along the east coast. In North Carolina, they nest in flat
areas with fine sand and mixtures of shells and pebbles, typically where there is little or no
vegetation, but some may nest in stands of beachgrass. The nest is a shallow depression in
the sand that is usually lined with shells and pebbles.
The piping plover is very sensitive to human disturbances. The presence of people
can cause the plover to abandon its nest and quit feeding.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
The subject project crosses Royal Oak Swamp, a tributary to Lockwoods Folly
River. The area contains no suitable nesting or foraging habitat for the piping plover. The
NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique communities was
checked on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species occur within the project study
area. This project will not affect the piping plover.
Green Sea Turtle
The distinguishing factors found in the green sea turtle are the single clawed
flippers and a single pair of elongated scales between the eyes. This sea turtle has a small
head and a strong, serrate, lower jaw.
The green sea turtle is found in temperate and tropical oceans and seas. Nesting in
North America is limited to small communities on the east coast of Florida requiring
beaches with minimal disturbances and a sloping platform for nesting (they do not nest in
NC). The green sea turtle can be found in shallow waters. They are attracted to lagoons,
reefs, bays, Mangrove swamps and inlets where an abundance of marine grasses can be
found, marine grasses are the principle food source for the green turtle. These turtles
require beaches with minimal disturbances and a sloping platform for nesting (they do not
nest in NC).
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The subject project crosses Royal Oak Swamp, a tributary to Lockwoods Folly
River. The area contains no suitable nesting or foraging habitat for any species of sea
turtle. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique communities
was checked on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species occur within the project
study area. This project will not affect the green sea turtle.
17
Leatherback Sea Turtle
The leatherback sea turtle is the largest of the marine turtles. Unlike other marine
turtles, the leatherback has a shell composed of tough leathery skin. The carapace has 7
longitudinal ridges and the plastron has 5 ridges. The leatherback is black to dark brown in
color and may have white blotches on the head and limbs.
Leatherbacks are distributed world-wide in tropical waters of the Atlantic, Pacific,
and Indian oceans. Leatherbacks prefer deep waters and are often found near the edge of
the continental shelf. In northern waters they are reported to enter into bays, estuaries, and
other inland bodies of water. Leather back nesting requirements are very specific, they
need sandy beaches backed with vegetation in the proximity of deep water and generally
with rough seas. Beaches with a suitable slope and a suitable depth of coarse dry sand are
necessary for the leatherback to nest. Major nesting areas occur in tropical regions and the
only nesting population in the United States is found in Martin County, Florida.
Leatherback nesting occurs from April to August.
Artificial light has been shown to cause hatchlings to divert away from the sea.
Leatherbacks feed mainly on jellyfish. They are also known to feed on sea urchins,
crustaceans, fish, mollusks, tunicates, and floating seaweed.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
The subject project crosses Royal Oak Swamp, a tributary to Lockwoods Folly
River. The area contains no suitable nesting or foraging habitat for any species of sea
turtle. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique communities
was checked on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species occur within the project
study area. This project will not affect the leatherback sea turtle.
Eastern Cougar
Cougars are tawny colored with the exception of the muzzle, the backs of the ears,
and the tip of the tail, which are black. In North Carolina the cougar is thought to occur in
only a few scattered areas, possibly including coastal swamps and the southern
Appalachian mountains. The eastern cougar is found in large remote wilderness areas
where there is an abundance of their primary food source, white-tailed deer. A cougar will
usually occupy a range of 25 mi. (40 km) and they are most active at night.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The subject project crosses Royal Oak Swamp. The area is near a large nature
preserve called the Green Swamp which contains several square miles of undeveloped
land. However, the scope of this project (bridge replacement) will not negatively impact
the adjacent habitat in such a way as to affect the eastern cougar. The NC Natural Heritage
Program database of rare species and unique communities was checked on 28 March 2000
18
and no records of this species occur within the project study area. This project will not
affect the eastern cougar.
Bald Eagle
Adult bald eagles can be identified by their large white head and short white tail.
The body plumage is dark-brown to chocolate-brown in color. In flight bald eagles can be
identified by their flat wing soar.
Eagle nests are found in close proximity to water (within a half mile) with a clear
flight path to the water, in the largest living tree in an area, and having an open view of the
surrounding land. Human disturbance can cause an eagle to abandon otherwise suitable
habitat. The breeding season for the bald eagle begins in December or January. Fish are
the major food source for bald eagles. Other sources include coots, herons, and wounded
ducks. Food may be live or carrion.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
The subject project crosses Royal Oak Swamp. The body of water is not
sufficiently wide enough to allow bald eagles to forage there. In addition, no bald eagles or
eagle nests were observed during field surveys for this project. The NC Natural Heritage
Program database of rare species and unique communities was checked on 28 March 2000
and no records of this species occur within the project study area. This project will not
affect the bald eagle.
Kemp's Ridley Sea Tturtle
Kemp's ridley sea turtle is the smallest of the sea turtles that visit North Carolina's
coast. These turtles have a triangular shaped head and a hooked beak with large crushing
surfaces. It has a heart-shaped carapace that is nearly as wide as it is long with the first of
five costal plates touching the nuchal plates. Adult Kemp's ridley sea turtles have white or
yellow plastrons with a gray and olive green carapace. The head and flippers are gray.
Kemp's ridley sea turtles live in shallow coastal and estuarine waters, in association
with red mangrove trees. A majority of this sea turtle's nesting occurs in a 14.9 mi. (24
km) stretch of beach between Barra del Tordo and Ostioal in the state of Tamaulipas,
Mexico. This turtle is an infrequent visitor to the North Carolina coast and usually does
not nest here. Kemp's ridley sea turtle can lay eggs as many as three times during the April
to June breeding season. Kemp's ridley sea turtles prefer beach sections that are backed up
by extensive swamps or large bodies of open water having seasonal narrow ocean
connections and a well defined elevated dune area.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
The subject project crosses Royal Oak Swamp, a tributary to Lockwoods Folly
19
River. The area contains no suitable nesting or foraging habitat for any species of sea
turtle. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique communities
was checked on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species occur within the project
study area. This project will not affect the Kemp's ridley sea turtle.
Wood Stork
The wood stork is the largest wading bird found in North America. The wood
storks plumage is entirely white except for the flight and tail feathers, which are black
with a bronze sheen. During the breeding season the underwing coverts have a pink tinge
and the undertail coverts elongate and make the bird appear white tailed in flight. The
bill is larger than the herons and cranes; the bill is down-turned at the tip, coloring is gray
with a yellow fringe in the adults. The legs are gray and the feet pink.
Wood storks visit extreme southwestern Brunswick County from June to
September, after breeding has concluded. They are found in the Twin Lakes region of
Sunset Beach. Storks nest mainly in stands of bald cypress, but will also nest in
mangroves and buttonwoods further south. Their nests are found in swamps, coastal
islands, and artificial impounds. They feed in freshwater to brackish wetlands including,
freshwater marshes, flooded pastures, and flooded ditches. The most attractive feeding
areas are swamp or marsh depressions where fish become concentrated during dry periods.
Biological Conclusion No Effect
The project study area contains a Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp that contains
bald cypress, though not exclusively. No wood storks or wood stork nests were observed
within the project study area. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species
and unique communities was checked on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species
occur within the project study area. This project will not affect the wood stork.
Red-cockaded Woodpecker
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that is entirely black
and white except for small red streaks on the sides of the nape in the male. The back of the
RCW is black and white with horizontal stripes. The breast and underside of this
woodpecker are white with streaked flanks. The RCW has a large white cheek patch
surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine
(Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at least
50% pine, lack a thick understory, and be contiguous with other stands to be appropriate
habitat for the RCW. These birds nest exclusively in trees that are > 60 years old and are
contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age. The foraging range of the RCW is up
to 500 ac (200 ha). This acreage must be contiguous with suitable nesting sites.
20
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees and usually in trees that are
infected with the fungus that causes red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies
from 3.6-30.3 m (12-100 ft) above the ground and average 9.1- 15.7 in (30-50 ft) high.
They can be identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree. The
RCW lays its eggs in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch approximately 38 days later.
Biological Conclusion:
No Effect
The subject project lies in an area dominated by bottomland hardwood species.
Only a few mature pines are found in the project area but none will be cut during project
construction. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique
communities was checked on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species occur within
the project study area. This project will not effect the red cockaded woodpecker.
West Indian manatee
The manatee is a large, gray or brown, barrel shaped, aquatic mammal. The
hindlimbs of the manatee are absent, and the forelimbs have been modified into flippers.
The tail is flattened horizontally. The wrinkled body is nearly hairless except for stiff
"whiskers" on the muzzle. In clear water most of a manatee's body is visible, however in
murky waters (like North Carolina) only a small part of the head and nose are visible.
Manatees are found in canals, sluggish rivers, estuarine habitats, salt water bays,
and as far off shore as 3.7 mi. (5.9 km). They are found in freshwater and marine habitats
at shallow depths of 1.5 in or higher. In the winter, between October and April, manatees
concentrate in areas with warm water. During other times of the year habitats appropriate
for the manatee are those with sufficient water depth, an adequate food supply, and in
proximity to freshwater. It is believed that manatees require a source of freshwater to
drink. Manatees are primarily herbivorous, feeding on any aquatic vegetation present, but
they may occasionally feed on fish.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The subject project crosses Royal Oak Swamp, a tributary to Lockwoods Folly
River. The area contains no suitable foraging habitat for the West Indian manatee. The NC
Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique communities was checked
on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species occur within the project study area. This
project will not affect the West Indian manatee.
Seabeach Amaranth
Flowers Present: June to frost
Seabeach amaranth is an annual that grows in clumps containing 5 to 20 branches.
The plants are often over one foot in diameter. The trailing stems are fleshy and reddish-
21
pink or reddish in color. Seabeach amaranth has thick, fleshy leaves that are small, ovate-
spatulate, emarginate and rounded. The leaves are usually spinach green in color, cluster
towards the end of a stem, and have winged petioles. Flowers grow in axillary fascicles
and the legume has smooth, indehsicent fruits. Seeds are glossy black. Both fruits and
flowers are relatively inconspicuous and born along the stem.
Seabeach amaranth is endemic to the Atlantic Coastal Plain beaches. Habitat for
seabeach amaranth is found on barrier island beaches functioning in a relatively dynamic
and natural manner. Seabeach amaranth grows well in overwash flats at the accreting ends
of islands and the lower foredunes and upper strands of non-eroding beaches. Temporary
populations often form in blowouts, sound-side beaches, dredge spoil, and beach
replenishment. This species is very intolerant to competition and is not usually found in
association with other species. Threats to seabeach amaranth include beach stabilization
projects, all terrain vehicles (ATV's), herbivory by insects and animals, beach grooming,
and beach erosion.
Biological Conclusion No Effect
This project lies inland on Royal Oak Swamp and contains no habitat for seabeach
amaranth. The NC Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique
communities was checked on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species occur within
the project study area. This project will not affect seabeach amaranth.
Rough-leaved loosestrife
Flowers Present: June
Rough-leaved loosestrife is a perennial herb having slender stems and whorled
leaves. This herb has showy yellow flowers which usually occur in threes or fours. Fruits
are present from July through October.
Rough-leaved loosestrife is endemic to the coastal plain and sandhills of North and
South Carolina. This species occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf pine
uplands and pond pine pocosins (areas of dense shrub and vine growth usually on a wet,
peat, poorly drained soil), on moist to seasonally saturated sands and on shallow organic
soils overlaying sand. It has also been found to occur on deep peat in the low shrub
community of large Carolina bays (shallow, elliptical, poorly drained depressions of
unknown origins). The areas it occurs in are fire maintained. Rough-leaved loosestrife
rarely occurs in association with hardwood stands and prefers acidic soils.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The subject project occurs in an area that is dominated by bottomland hardwood
forests. The area does not contain longleaf pine savannas, pond pine pocosins, Carolina
bays or other traditional habitat for rough-leaved loosestrife. However, the project study
22
area does contain good habitat in the form of open power line right-of-way that alternates
between wetland and upland. These wetland/upland ecotones were surveyed for rough-
leaved loosestrife on 23 June 1999 and no plants were found (Reference 1). The NC
Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and unique communities was checked
on 28 March 2000 and no records of this species occur within the project study area. This
project will not affect rough leaved loosestrife.
Cooley's meadowrue
Flowers Present: late June-July (best mid July)
Cooley's meadowrue is a rhizomatous perennial plant with stems that grow to one
meter in length. Stems are usually erect in direct sunlight but are lax and may lean on
other plants or trail along the ground in shady areas. Leaves are usually narrowly
lanceolate and unlobed, some two or three lobed leaves can be seen. The flowers lack
petals. Fruits mature from August to September.
Cooley's meadowrue occurs in moist to wet bogs, savannas and savanna-like
openings, sandy roadsides, rights-of-ways, and old clearcuts. This plant is dependent on
some form of disturbance to maintain its habitat. All known populations are on
circumneutral, poorly drained, moderately permeable soils of the Grifton series. Cooley's
meadowrue only grows well in areas with full sunlight.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The subject project occurs in an area that is dominated by bottomland hardwood
forests and does not include bog, savanna or savanna-like habitat. However, the forest -
roadside ecotone was surveyed for Cooley's meadowrue on 23 June 1999 and no
Cooley's meadowrue plants were found (Reference 1). The NC Natural Heritage
Program database of rare species and unique communities was checked on 28 March
2000 and no records of this species occur within the project study area. This project will
not affect Cooley's meadowrue.
Federal Species of Concern
There are 37 federal species of concern listed by the FWS for Brunswick County.
Federal species of concern are not afforded federal protection 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. However, the status of these
species is subject to change, and so should be included for consideration. A Federal
Species of Concern (FSC) is defined as a species which is under consideration for listing
for which there is insufficient information to support listing. In addition, organisms
which are listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Special Concern by the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and Animal Species are afforded state
protection under the NC State Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and
23
Conservation Act of 1979.
Table 3 lists federal species of concern, the state status of these species, and the
potential for suitable habitat in the project area for each species. This species list is
provided for information purposes as the protection status of these species may be
upgraded in the future.
Table 3. Federal Species of Concern for Brunswick County.
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME NC HABITAT
STATUS
Aimophila aestivalis Bachman's sparrow SC No
Ammodramus henslowii Henslow's sparrow SR No
Elassoma boehlkei Carolina pygmy sunfish T No
Heterodon simus Southern hognose snake SR/PSC * No
Ophisaurus mimicus Mimic glass lizard SC/PT No
Passerina ciris ciris Eastern painted bunting SR* No
Pituophis melanoleucus Northern pine snake SC* No
melanoleucus
Rana capito capito Carolina gopher frog SC/PT No
Agrotis buchholzi Buchholz's dart moth SR No
Atrytone arogos arogos Arogos skipper SR*** No
Elliptio waccamawensis Waccamaw spike T No
Helisoma eucosmium Greenfield ramshorn SR No
Hemipachnobia subporphyrea Venus flytrap cutworm moth SR No
subporphyrea
Planorbella magnifica Magnificent ramshorn E No
Problema bulenta Rare skipper SR No
Triodopsis soelneri Cape Fear threetooth T Yes
Amorpha georgiana var. Savanna indigo-bush T No
confusa
Balduina atropurpurea Honeycomb head C No
Carex chapmanii Chapman's sedge W1 Yes
Dionaea muscipula Venus flytrap C-SC No
Echinodorus parvulus Dwarf burhead C Yes
Fimbristylis perpusilla Harper's fimbry T Yes
Litsea aestivalis Pondspice C No
Macbridea caroliniana Carolina bogmint T Yes
Myriophyllum laxum Loose watermilfoil T No
Oxypolis ternata Savanna cowbane W1 No
Parnassia caroliniana Carolina grass-of-parnassus E No
Plantago sparsiflora Pineland plantain E No
Rhexia aristosa Awned meadowbeauty T No
Rhynchospora decurrens Swamp forest beaksedge C* Yes
Rhynchospora thornei Thorne's beaksedge E No
Solidago pulchra Carolina goldenrod E No
24
Solidago verna Spring-flowering goldenrod T No
Sporobolus teretifolius sensus Wireleaf dropseed T No
stricto
Tofieldia glabra Carolina asphodel C No
Tricho.stema sp. 1 Dune bluecurls C No
Campylopus carolinae Savanna campylopus C* No
"E"--An Endangered species is one whose continued existence as a viable component of the State's flora is
determined to be in jeopardy.
"T"--A Threatened species is one which is likely to become endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
"SC"--A Special Concern species is one which requires monitoring but may be taken or collected
and sold under regulations adopted under the provisions of Article 25 of Chapter 113 of
the General Statutes (animals) and the Plant Protection and Conservation Act (plants).
Only propagated material may be sold of Special Concern plants that are also listed as
Threatened or Endangered.
"C"--A Candidate species is one which is very rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20 populations in the
state, generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat destruction, direct exploitation or
disease. The species is also either rare throughout its range or disjunct in North Carolina from a
main range in a different part of the country or the world.
"SR"--A Significantly Rare species is one which is very rare in North Carolina, generally with 1-20
populations in the state, generally substantially reduced in numbers by habitat destruction, direct
exploitation or disease. The species is generally more common elsewhere in its range, occurring
peripherally in North Carolina.
"W 1 "--A Watch Category 1 species is a rare species whose status in North Carolina is relatively well known
and which appears to be relatively secure at this time.
"/P_"--denotes a species which has been formally proposed for listing as Endangered, Threatened, or Special
Concern, but has not yet completed the listing process.
* -- Historic record - the species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago.
*** -- Incidental/migrant record - the-species was observed outside of its normal range or habitat.
A review of the NHP database of rare species and unique habitats on 28 March
2000 showed no occurrences of FSC species in the project study area. Surveys for FSC
species were not conducted during the site visit.
25
FIGURES

N
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
i0p Division of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch
Brunswick County
Replace Bridge No. 62 on NC 211
Over Royal Oak Swamp
B-2110
Figure One
0000,
•

FIGURE 3
LOOKING NORTH FROM THE SOUTH END OF BRIDGE

{ ? i
! I ?"
{ ? i 1

?
I 1
? ,?? I
APPENDIX

4Art?.
r Z
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
December 16, 1997
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge #62 on NC 211 over
Brunswick County, B-21 10,
BRSTP-21 1(2), State Project
7694
Royal Oak Swamp,
Federal Aid Project
8.1231301, ER 98-
Dear Mr. Graf:
We regret staff was unable to attend the scoping meeting for the above project on
November 4, 1997. However, Debbie Bevin met with Bill Goodwin of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) on December 2, 1997, to discuss
the project and view the project photographs and aerial.
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.
OD,
107 East Jonc, Street • Raleigh, North Carolina "_' 601'2507 ?:
Nicholas L. Graf
December 16, 1997, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: '-f'F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
you have questions
Gledhill-Earley, environmental
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission K5
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bill Goodwin, Project Planning Engineer
Planning & Environmental Branch, NCDOT
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project C m for
Habitat Conservation Progra `
DATE: December 5, 1997
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements, Brunswick, Onslow, Wayne, Cumberland,
Richmond, Wilson, Lenoir, and Northampton counties, North Carolina,
TIP Nos. B-3115, B-3116, B-3358, B-3379, B-3322, B-3365, B-2110, B-
3267, B-3200, B-1303.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have
conducted site visits as need and have the following preliminary comments on the subject
projects. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
On bridge replacement projects of this scope our standard recommendations are as
follows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
require work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment.
The horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human
and wildlife passage beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the
stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
Bridge Replacement Memo 2 December 5, 1997
5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed
back to original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the
project. Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
native tree species should be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'.
If possible, when using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not
grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact, allows the
area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of
the steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers nationwide and general `404' permits. We have the
option of requesting additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and
we can recommend that the project require an individual `404' permit.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist
Mr. Tim Savidge should be notified. Special measures to protect these
sensitive species may be required. NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service for information on requirements of the Endangered
Species Act as it relates to the project.
9. In streams that are used by anadromousfish, the NCDOT official policy
entitled "Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12,
1997)" should be followed.
10. In areas with significant fisheries for sunfish, seasonal exclusions may also be
recommended.
If corrugated metal pipe arches or concrete box culverts are used:
1. The culvert must be designed to allow for fish passage. Generally, this means
that the culvert or pipe invert is buried at least 1 foot below the natural stream
bed. If multiple cells are required the second and/or third cells should be
placed so that their bottoms are at stream bankful stage (similar to Lyonsfield
design). This will allow sufficient water depth in the culvert or pipe during
normal flows to accommodate fish movements. If culverts are long, baffle
systems are required to trap gravel and provide resting areas for fish and other
aquatic organisms.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed
to remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or
widening is required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of
structures usually causes a decrease in water velocity causing sediment
deposition that will require future maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on the stream bed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same
location with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be
Bridge Replacement Memo 3 December 5, 1997
designed and located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to
avoid destabilizing stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old
structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-year
floodplain. Approach fills should be removed down to the natural ground elevation. The
area should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species. If the area that
is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the area to wetlands. If
successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject project or other
projects in the watershed.
Project specific comments:
1. B-3115 - The potential is high for anadromous fish usage at this site.
Therefore, the guidelines apply (See Item 9 above).
2. B-3116 - The potential is high for anadromous fish usage at this site.
Therefore, the guidelines apply (See Item 9 above).
3. B-3358 - This bridge is surrounded by swamp. We request that NCDOT
minimize wetland impacts.
4. B-3379 - This site has a high potential for wetlands adjacent to the bridge.
This are is classified as nutrient sensitive waters so we request that
sedimentation and erosion controls for high quality waters be followed.
5. B-3322 - No specific concerns.
6. B-3365 - No specific concerns.
7. B-2110 - High potential for wetland impacts. NCDOT should minimize
wetland impacts.
8. B-3267 - No specific concerns.
9. B-3200 - Anadromous fish are known to us this area so the guidelines apply
(See Item 9 above). There is a high potential for wetland involvement.
10. B-1303 - Anadromous fish are known to use this area so the guidelines apply
(See Item 9 above).
We request that NCDOT routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and
maintain sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent
wet concrete from contacting water in or entering into these streams. Replacement of
bridges with spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is
recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along
streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway
crossings.
If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns regarding
bridge replacements, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for the opportunity
to review and comment on these projects.