20030470 Ver 1_Complete File_20030415

Pv

1/99
,9
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TOLSON
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
January 29, 1999
MEMORANDUM TO: Ms. Cyndi Bell
DWQ - DENR
FROM: W. D. Gilmore, P. E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheets for the following projects:
Project T.I.P. County Bridge No. State Route Planning Engineer
B-3503 Randolph No. 382 SR 1135 Dennis Pipkin
B-3344 Haywood No. 225 SR 1888 John Williams
B-3413 Bladen No. 177 SR 1532 Bill Goodwin
B-3412 Bladen No. 100 SR 1331 Bill Goodwin
B-3409 Bladen No. 27 NC 131 Bill Goodwin
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
March 9, 1999 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. in the order shown above.
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.
WDG/bg
Attachments

BRIDGE PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
1-15-99
TIP PROJECT: B-3503 DIVISION: 8
F.A. PROJECT: BRZ-1135(4) COUNTY: Randolph
STATE PROJECT: 8.2572101 ROUTE: SR 1 135
DESCRIPTION: _ Replace Bridge No 382 on SR 1 135 over Little River
PROJECT PURPOSE: Replace Obsolete Bridge
PROJECT U.S.G.S. QUAD SHEET(S): Seagrove - in west central section
ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION: Rural Local
TIP CONSTRUCTION COST .......................................................$ 360,000
TIP RIGHT OF WAY COST ....................................................... $ 30,000
TIP TOTAL COST ................................................................... $ 390,000
TRAFFIC: CURRENT: 100 VPD; DESIGN YEAR (2025): 300 VPD
DUALS : 2 % TTST : one %
EXISTING ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION: One-lane, 16 foot, unpaved roadway
with grassed shoulders/ditches.
EXISTING STRUCTURE: LENGTH 81 FEET WIDTH 14.0 FEET
COMMENTS:
? i
159

1 N
_
1 Q
V I
1 ? J
I
i! 283
i
`
.I
4
?•
,
- 2836
f
i 220

A

i
S 134 i
I.

1143 Bridge No. 382 ?

• 9 ;
. 3 o
2843

' N /
1133
73 f
1131
. 74 N
- 1248 134 2 0 Michfield
4 '

; • 22
N
1.1

1112 1 1 Aj
1 1 121 2845
; N 1114 2 Q 1136
i s

i
i•
1239 i
i
f
i
'-

!

; CO

j

.
0 '
i
• 1113 6 .9
I
:
1.8 1127

v? f
'
-;•:' 1. i• Pisgah 1 127 1123
'

- 1114
i 1122

,:
1121 J 1259'` ; , .`f•
1.9

1114 >• i trJ
2•0
1120 -+ ----
1111 i 1109 1 1118 7 1119

1112 1119 i
1224
11 8
0
%

-... , 6 / 00
1115- N 1225
?Z

J•
ct)
/ 1 1 19 - 1 1 15
1112 1115
ay-- (1)
use 10A
North Carolina
Department of Transportation
Diviston of Highways
Planning & Environmental Branch

Randolph County
Replace Bridge No. 382 on SR U35
Over Little River
B-3503
Figure 1
O
WArF9
T -
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
May 5, 2003
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, PhD., Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Re: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act,
Modification to the Northern Wake Expressway from US 1 to US 64 in Wake County, TIP R-2000 F&G,
Federal Aid Project, State Project No. 8.U401712, WQC Project No. 030114 (DWQ No. for original
application 960319).
Attached hereto is a modification to Certification No. 3081 issued to the North Carolina Department of
Transportation on September 17, 1996. The attached modification authorizes total project impacts to 19.27
acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Of the total impacts to 19.27 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, 18.68 acres are
permanent, and 0.59 acres are temporary. In addition to the authorized impacts to jurisdictional wetlands,
impacts to 5865 linear feet of streams, and 25.53 acres of protected Neuse River Riparian Buffers are
authorized. The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated January 31, 2003 and
received February 21, 2003, and your addendum dated April 21, 2003 and received on April 21, 2003. All the
authorized activities not covered by the modification application received on February 21, 2003 and the
addendum received April 21, 2003, and its corresponding conditions of the original Water Quality Certification
dated September 17, 1996 still apply except where superceded by this Certification.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
Attachments:
Modification to WQC No. 3081
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
Ron Ferrell, NC Wetlands Restoration Program
Central Files
File Copy
nce e
limek, P.E.
it t r
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748

WAIF Michael F. Easley, Governor
\0?0 RpG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
r Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
NORTH CAROLINA 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401 Public Laws 92-500 and
95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15
NCAC 2H, Section .0500. This modification to the existing 401 Water Quality Certification authorizes total project
impacts to 19.27 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Of the total impacts to 19.27 acres of jurisdictional wetlands,
18.68 acres are permanent, and 0.59 acres are temporary. In addition to the authorized impacts to jurisdictional
wetlands, impacts to 5865 linear feet of streams, and 25.53 acres of protected Neuse River Riparian Buffers are
authorized. The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated January 31, 2003 and
received February 21, 2003, and your addendum dated April 21, 2003 and received on April 21, 2003. All the
authorized activities not covered by the modification application received on February 21, 2003 and the addendum
received April 21, 2003, and its corresponding conditions of the original Water Quality Certification dated
September 17, 1996 still apply except where superceded by this certification.
The application provides adequate assurance that the discharge of fill material into the proposed wetlands in
conjunction with the proposed development will not result in a violation of applicable Water Quality Standards and
discharge guidelines. Therefore, the State of North Carolina certifies that this activity will not violate the applicable
portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance with the
application and conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you submitted in your application, as described in the
Public Notice. Should your project change, you are required to notify the DWQ and submit a new application. If
the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and is thereby
responsible for complying with all the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future exceed
one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this
approval to remain valid, you are required to comply with all the conditions listed below. In addition, you should
obtain all other federal, state or local permits before proceeding with your project including (but not limited to)
Sediment and Erosion control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-discharge and Water Supply watershed regulations.
Condition(s) of Certification:
Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those outlined in the most
recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual" or the
"North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" whichever is more appropriate (available from the Division of
Land Resources (DLR) in the DENR Regional or Central Offices) shall be in full compliance with all
specifications governing the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best
Management Practices in order to assure compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard
(50 NTUs in all fresh water streams and rivers not designated as trout waters; 25 NTUs in all lakes and
reservoirs, and all saltwater classes; and 10 NTUs in trout waters);
2. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum extent
practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters is unavoidable,
they shall be removed and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources has released the
project;
3. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a FONSI
or ROD is issued by the State Clearinghouse. All water quality-related conditions of the FONSI or ROD
shall become conditions of this Certification;
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
O?0F \ NA TF9
7

4. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact with
waters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
5. There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with
this permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in
wetlands or stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road
construction activities.
6. All channel relocations will be constructed in a dry work area, and stabilized before stream flows are
diverted. Channel relocations will be completed and stabilized prior to diverting water into the new
channel. Whenever possible, channel relocations shall be allowed to stabilize for an entire growing
season. Vegetation used for bank stabilization shall be limited to native woody species, and should
include establishment of a 30 foot wide wooded and an adjacent 20 foot wide vegetated buffer on both
sides of the relocated channel to the maximum extent practical. A transitional phase incorporating coir
fiber and seedling establishment is allowable. Also, rip-rap may be allowed if it is necessary to maintain
the physical integrity of the stream, but the applicant must provide written justification and any
calculations used to determine the extent of rip-rap coverage requested.
7. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to streams shall be done for 5865 linear feet of stream impact at a
replacement ratio of 1:1. Compensatory mitigation for 312 linear feet of impacts to jurisdictional streams
shall be provided by onsite stream relocations of 312 linear feet of streams on site. No impacts shall occur
anywhere on the project until a final design that provides a stable stream pattern, dimension, and profile is
submitted to, and approved by, the NC Division of Water Quality. All stream relocations shall have 50-
foot wooded buffers planted on both sides of the stream. As-Builts for the completed streams shall be
submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality 401 Wetlands Unit within 30 days of the
completion of the construction of the relocations. If the parameters of this condition are not met, then the
NCDOT shall supply additional stream mitigation for the 787 linear feet of impacts. In addition to the 312
linear feet of on-site mitigation, compensatory mitigation for an additional 5,553 linear feet of streams is
required. We understand that you have chosen to perform compensatory mitigation for impacts to streams
through an in lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program (NCWRP), and that the
WRP has agreed to implement the mitigation for the project. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts to
streams shall be provided through an in-lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program
(NCWRP) at a rate of $200 per linear foot. Therefore, a total payment of $1,110,600 shall be submitted to
the NCWRP to offset the impacts. No construction activities in jurisdictional streams shall begin until
payment for stream mitigation is made and the Wetland Restoration Program receives and clears your
check (made payable to DENR - Wetland Restoration Program). The payment to NCWRP shall be sent
within two months of issuance of the 404 permit. If you have any questions concerning the Wetland
Restoration Program please contact them at 919-733-5208.
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
w A r? Michael F. Easley, Governor
`O?? qQG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
> _r
8. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to wetlands shall be done for 18.68 acres of impacts. Applying a
replacement ration of 2:1 total mitigation for 37.36 acres of riparian wetlands shall be provided as
described below.
Mitigation Site Acres of WL Type of Replacement Acres of Mitigation
Debited from Mitigation Ratio Credited
Site
Benson Grove
Mitigation Site 21.81 Restoration 1:1 21.81
Benson Grove
Mitigation Site 50.50 Preservation 5:1 10.10
Marks Creek
Mitigation Site 10.90 Restoration 2:1 5.45
Total 37.36
9. All stormwater runoff shall be directed to sheetflow through stream buffers at nonerosive velocities, unless
approved otherwise by this certification.
10. Of the total 25.53 acres of impacts to protected riparian buffers, compensatory mitigation for impacts to
22.70 acres of Neuse Riparian Buffers shall be provided for as described below.
Zone of
Impact Impacts
(Acres) Replacement
Ratio Total Acres of
Mitigation Required
Zone 1 10.06 3:1 30.18
Zone 2 6.42 1.5:1 9.63
Total 16.48 39.81
We understand that you have chosen to perform compensatory mitigation for impacts to protected buffers
through an in lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program (NCWRP), and that the
WRP has agreed to implement the mitigation for the project. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts to Neuse
Riparian Buffers shall be provided through an in-lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) at a rate of $41,625 per acre for 39.81 acres of buffer impact. Therefore, a total
payment of $1,657,091 shall be submitted to the NCWRP to offset the impacts. No construction activities
in Neuse River Riparian buffers shall begin until payment for buffer mitigation is made and the Wetland
Restoration Program receives and clears your check (made payable to DENR - Wetland Restoration
Program). The payment to NCWRP shall be sent within two months of issuance of the 404 permit. If you
have any questions concerning the Wetland Restoration Program please contact them at 919-733-5208.
11. Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed.
The responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 40UWetlands Unit of the
Division of Water Quality upon completion of the project.
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
O?O? W AT ?9QG
O '<
12. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands must be placed below the
elevation of the streambed to allow low flow passage of water and aquatic life unless it can be shown to
DWQ that providing passage would be impractical. Design and placement of culverts and other structures
including temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-
equilibrium of wetlands or stream beds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above
structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium shall be maintained if
requested in writing by DWQ.
13. No changes to the horizontal or vertical placement of the stormwater outfall locations, the horizontal or
vertical placement of the culverts, the horizontal or vertical placement of bridges, the horizontal or vertical
placement of grassed swales, or the horizontal or vertical placement of open ditches is permitted without
written approval from the NC Division of Water Quality. In addition, no changes to the flow spreader
locations or designs, preformed scour hole locations or designs are permitted without written approval
from the NC Division of Water Quality 401 Wetlands Unit. Any request for changes to the referenced
items above will require submittal of a modification request, with seven copies, and corresponding fees
will need to be submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
14. The proposed grassed swale located on the Line Y1 at Site 12 does not meet the design criteria required by
the 15A NCAC 2B .0233. No impacts for the project shall occur until a final design that does adhere to
the rules is submitted to, and approved by, the NC Division of Water Quality.
15. All other conditions written into previous Water Quality Certifications for this project still apply.
Violations of any condition herein set forth shall result in revocation of this Certification and may result
in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless the above
conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or coastal Area Management Act Permit. This
Certification shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or CAMA permit.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within sixty
(60) days following receipt of this Certification. This request must be in the form of a written petition conforming to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box
27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of the
Certification. Unless such demands are made, this Certification shall be final and binding.
This the 5's day of May 2003
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
?dL
lime , P.E.
Director
Modification to WQC No. 3081
c:\ncdot\TIP R-2000\wgc\R-2000 F and G modification.doc
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
D
wq rF9
QGy
r_
y
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
May 5, 2003
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, PhD., Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
Re: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act,
Modification to the Northern Wake Expressway from US 1 to US 64 in Wake County, TIP R-2000 F&G,
Federal Aid Project, State Project No. 8.U401712, WQC Project No. 030114 (DWQ No. for original
application 960319).
Attached hereto is a modification to Certification No. 3081 issued to the North Carolina Department of
Transportation on September 17, 1996. The attached modification authorizes total project impacts to 19.27
acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Of the total impacts to 19.27 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, 18.68 acres are
permanent, and 0.59 acres are temporary. In addition to the authorized impacts to jurisdictional wetlands,
impacts to 5865 linear feet of streams, and 25.53 acres of protected Neuse River Riparian Buffers are
authorized. The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated January 31, 2003 and
received February 21, 2003, and your addendum dated April 21, 2003 and received on April 21, 2003. All the
authorized activities not covered by the modification application received on February 21, 2003 and the
addendum received April 21, 2003, and its corresponding conditions of the original Water Quality Certification
dated September 17, 1996 still apply except where superceded by this Certification.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
Attachments:
Modification to WQC No. 3081
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
Ron Ferrell, NC Wetlands Restoration Program
Central Files
File Copy
nce e
imek, P.E.
rr t r
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748

F WArF Michael F. Easley, Governor
`OHO 9pG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
r Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
D "C
NORTH CAROLINA 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401 Public Laws 92-500 and
95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15
NCAC 2H, Section .0500. This modification to the existing 401 Water Quality Certification authorizes total project
impacts to 19.27 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Of the total impacts to 19.27 acres of jurisdictional wetlands,
18.68 acres are permanent, and 0.59 acres are temporary. In addition to the authorized impacts to jurisdictional
wetlands, impacts to 5865 linear feet of streams, and 25.53 acres of protected Neuse River Riparian Buffers are
authorized. The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated January 31, 2003 and
received February 21, 2003, and your addendum dated April 21, 2003 and received on April 21, 2003. All the
authorized activities not covered by the modification application received on February 21, 2003 and the addendum
received April 21, 2003, and its corresponding conditions of the original Water Quality Certification dated
September 17, 1996 still apply except where superceded by this certification.
The application provides adequate assurance that the discharge of fill material into the proposed wetlands in
conjunction with the proposed development will not result in a violation of applicable Water Quality Standards and
discharge guidelines. Therefore, the State of North Carolina certifies that this activity will not violate the applicable
portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance with the
application and conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you submitted in your application, as described in the
Public Notice. Should your project change, you are required to notify the DWQ and submit a new application. If
the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and is thereby
responsible for complying with all the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future exceed
one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 211.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this
approval to remain valid, you are required to comply with all the conditions listed below. In addition, you should
obtain all other federal, state or local permits before proceeding with your project including (but not limited to)
Sediment and Erosion control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-discharge and Water Supply watershed regulations.
Condition(s) of Certification:
Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those outlined in the most
recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual" or the
"North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" whichever is more appropriate (available from the Division of
Land Resources (DLR) in the DENR Regional or Central Offices) shall be in full compliance with all
specifications governing the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best
Management Practices in order to assure compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard
(50 NTUs in all fresh water streams and rivers not designated as trout waters; 25 NTUs in all lakes and
reservoirs, and all saltwater classes; and 10 NTUs in trout waters);
2. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum extent
practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters is unavoidable,
they shall be removed and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources has released the
project;
3. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a FONSI
or ROD is issued by the State Clearinghouse. All water quality-related conditions of the FONSI or ROD
shall become conditions of this Certification;
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
W A TF Michael F. Easley, Governor
?0?0 9pG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
??- Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
>
4. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact with
waters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
5. There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with
this permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in
wetlands or stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road
construction activities.
All channel relocations will be constructed in a dry work area, and stabilized before stream flows are
diverted. Channel relocations will be completed and stabilized prior to diverting water into the new
channel. Whenever possible, channel relocations shall be allowed to stabilize for an entire growing
season. Vegetation used for bank stabilization shall be limited to native woody species, and should
include establishment of a 30 foot wide wooded and an adjacent 20 foot wide vegetated buffer on both
sides of the relocated channel to the maximum extent practical. A transitional phase incorporating coir
fiber and seedling establishment is allowable. Also, rip-rap may be allowed if it is necessary to maintain
the physical integrity of the stream, but the applicant must provide written justification and any
calculations used to determine the extent of rip-rap coverage requested.
7. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to streams shall be done for 5865 linear feet of stream impact at a
replacement ratio of 1:1. Compensatory mitigation for 312 linear feet of impacts to jurisdictional streams
shall be provided by onsite stream relocations of 312 linear feet of streams on site. No impacts shall occur
anywhere on the project until a final design that provides a stable stream pattern, dimension, and profile is
submitted to, and approved by, the NC Division of Water Quality. All stream relocations shall have 50-
foot wooded buffers planted on both sides of the stream. As-Builts for the completed streams shall be
submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality 401 Wetlands Unit within 30 days of the
completion of the construction of the relocations. If the parameters of this condition are not met, then the
NCDOT shall supply additional stream mitigation for the 787 linear feet of impacts. In addition to the 312
linear feet of on-site mitigation, compensatory mitigation for an additional 5,553 linear feet of streams is
required. We understand that you have chosen to perform compensatory mitigation for impacts to streams
through an in lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program (NCWRP), and that the
WRP has agreed to implement the mitigation for the project. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts to
streams shall be provided through an in-lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program
(NCWRP) at a rate of $200 per linear foot. Therefore, a total payment of $1,110,600 shall be submitted to
the NCWRP to offset the impacts. No construction activities in jurisdictional streams shall begin until
payment for stream mitigation is made and the Wetland Restoration Program receives and clears your
check (made payable to DENR - Wetland Restoration Program). The payment to NCWRP shall be sent
within two months of issuance of the 404 permit. If you have any questions concerning the Wetland
Restoration Program please contact them at 919-733-5208.
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
?O? WA
OT ?RQG
r
5 ?.
D `'
8. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to wetlands shall be done for 18.68 acres of impacts. Applying a
replacement ration of 2:1 total mitigation for 37.36 acres of riparian wetlands shall be provided as
described below.
Mitigation Site Acres of WL Type of Replacement Acres of Mitigation
Debited from Mitigation Ratio Credited
Site
Benson Grove
Mitigation Site 21.81 Restoration 1:1 21.81
Benson Grove
Mitigation Site 50.50 Preservation 5:1 10.10
Marks Creek
Mitigation Site 10.90 Restoration 2:1 5.45
Total 37.36
9. All stormwater runoff shall be directed to sheetflow through stream buffers at nonerosive velocities, unless
approved otherwise by this certification.
10. Of the total 25.53 acres of impacts to protected riparian buffers, compensatory mitigation for impacts to
22.70 acres of Neuse Riparian Buffers shall be provided for as described below.
Zone of
Impact Impacts
Acres Replacement
Ratio Total Acres of
Mitigation Required
Zone 1 10.06 3:1 30.18
Zone 2 6.42 1.5:1 9.63
Total 16.48 39.81
We understand that you have chosen to perform compensatory mitigation for impacts to protected buffers
through an in lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program (NCWRP), and that the
WRP has agreed to implement the mitigation for the project. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts to Neuse
Riparian Buffers shall be provided through an in-lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) at a rate of $41,625 per acre for 39.81 acres of buffer impact. Therefore, a total
payment of $1,657,091 shall be submitted to the NCWRP to offset the impacts. No construction activities
in Neuse River Riparian buffers shall begin until payment for buffer mitigation is made and the Wetland
Restoration Program receives and clears your check (made payable to DENR - Wetland Restoration
Program). The payment to NCWRP shall be sent within two months of issuance of the 404 permit. If you
have any questions concerning the Wetland Restoration Program please contact them at 919-733-5208.
11. Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed.
The responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the
Division of Water Quality upon completion of the project.
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William Q. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
MATE Michael F. Easley, Governor
?O?Q RQG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
fig r Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
12. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands must be placed below the
elevation of the streambed to allow low flow passage of water and aquatic life unless it can be shown to
DWQ that providing passage would be impractical. Design and placement of culverts and other structures
including temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-
equilibrium of wetlands or stream beds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above
structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium shall be maintained if
requested in writing by DWQ.
13. No changes to the horizontal or vertical placement of the stormwater outfall locations, the horizontal or
vertical placement of the culverts, the horizontal or vertical placement of bridges, the horizontal or vertical
placement of grassed swales, or the horizontal or vertical placement of open ditches is permitted without
written approval from the NC Division of Water Quality. In addition, no changes to the flow spreader
locations or designs, preformed scour hole locations or designs are permitted without written approval
from the NC Division of Water Quality 401 Wetlands Unit. Any request for changes to the referenced
items above will require submittal of a modification request, with seven copies, and corresponding fees
will need to be submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
14. The proposed grassed swale located on the Line Y1 at Site 12 does not meet the design criteria required by
the 15A NCAC 2B .0233. No impacts for the project shall occur until a final design that does adhere to
the rules is submitted to, and approved by, the NC Division of Water Quality.
15. All other conditions written into previous Water Quality Certifications for this project still apply.
Violations of any condition herein set forth shall result in revocation of this Certification and may result
in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless the above
conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or coastal Area Management Act Permit. This
Certification shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or CAMA permit.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within sixty
(60) days following receipt of this Certification. This request must be in the form of a written petition conforming to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box
27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of the
Certification. Unless such demands are made, this Certification shall be final and binding.
This the 5`s day of May 2003
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
".ime , P.E.
Director
Modification to WQC No. 3081
c:\ncdot\TIP R-2000\wgc\R-2000 F and G modification.doc
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mall Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
O?O? \ NA
T ?9pG
00 r
o ?
May 5, 2003
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, PhD., Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:

Re: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water A ,
Modification to the Northern Wake Expressway from US 1 to U 64 in Wake County, TIP R-2000 F&G,
Federal Aid Project, State Project No. 8.U401712, WQC Proje No. 030114 (DWQ No. for original
application 960319).
Attached hereto is a modification to Certification No. 308f issued to the North Carolina Department of
Transportation on September 17, 1996. The attached modification authorizes total project impacts to 19.27
acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Of the total impacts to 19.27 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, 18.68 acres are
permanent, and 0.59 acres are temporary. In addition to the authorized impacts to jurisdictional wetlands,
impacts to 5865 linear feet of streams, and 25.53 acres of protected Neuse River Riparian Buffers are
authorized. The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated January 31, 2003 and
received February 21, 2003, and your addendum dated April 21, 2003 and received on April 21, 2003. All the
authorized activities not covered by the modification application received on February 21, 2003 and the
addendum received April 21, 2003, and its corresponding conditions of the original Water Quality Certification
dated September 17, 1996still apply except where superceded by this certification.
A
If we can be of further ass stance, do not hesitate to contact us.
OPE..
Attachments:
Modification to WQC No. 3081
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
Ron Ferrell, NC Wetlands Restoration Program
Central Files
File Copy
v
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
DOW,
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
\NA Michael F. Easley, Governor
?O?O RpG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
co 7 Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
O ~?
NORTH CAROLINA 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401 Public Laws 92-500 and
95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15
NCAC 2H, Section .0500. This modification to the existing 401 Water Quality Certification authorizes total project
impacts to 19.27 acres of jurisdictional wetlands. Of the total impacts to 19.27 acres of jurisdictional wetlands,
18.68 acres are permanent, and 0.59 acres are temporary. In addition to the authorized impacts to jurisdictional
wetlands, impacts to 5865 linear feet of streams, and 25.53 acres of protected Neuse River Riparian Buffers are
authorized. The project shall be constructed in accordance with your application dated January 31, 2003 and
received February 21, 2003, and your addendum dated April 21, 2003 and received on April 21, 2003. All the
authorized activities not covered by the modification application received on February 21, 2003 and the addendum
received April 21, 2003, and its corresponding conditions of the original Water Quality Certification dated
September 17, 1996 still apply except where superceded by this certification.
The application provides adequate assurance that the discharge of fill material into the proposed wetlands in
conjunction with the proposed development will not result in a violation of applicable Water Quality Standards and
discharge guidelines. Therefore, the State of North Carolina certifies that this activity will not violate the applicable
portions of Sections 301, 302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance with the
application and conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you submitted in your application, as described in the
Public Notice. Should your project change, you are required to notify the DWQ and submit a new application. If
the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter, and is thereby
responsible for complying with all the conditions. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future exceed
one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this
approval to remain valid, you are required to comply with all the conditions listed below. In addition, you should
obtain all other federal, state or local permits before proceeding with your project including (but not limited to)
Sediment and Erosion control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-discharge and Water Supply watershed regulations.
Condition(s) of Certification:
Appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those outlined in the most
recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control Planning and Design Manual" or the
"North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" whichever is more appropriate (available from the Division of
Land Resources (DLR) in the DENR Regional or Central Offices) shall be in full compliance with all
specifications governing the proper design, installation and operation and maintenance of such Best
Management Practices in order to assure compliance with the appropriate turbidity water quality standard
(50 NTUs in all fresh water streams and rivers not designated as trout waters; 25 NTUs in all lakes and
reservoirs, and all saltwater classes; and 10 NTUs in trout waters);
2. Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or waters to the maximum extent
practicable. If placement of sediment and erosion control devices in wetlands and waters is unavoidable,
they shall be removed and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources has released the
project;
3. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a FONSI
or ROD is issued by the State Clearinghouse. All water quality-related conditions of the FONSI or ROD
shall become conditions of this Certification;
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
W A TF Michael F. Easley, Governor
\O?? qQG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
P Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
} ?r
O 'C
4. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact with
waters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
5. There shall be no excavation from or waste disposal into jurisdictional wetlands or waters associated with
this permit without appropriate modification of this permit. Should waste or borrow sites be located in
wetlands or stream, compensatory mitigation will be required since it is a direct impact from road
construction activities.
6. All channel relocations will be constructed in a dry work area, and stabilized before stream flows are
diverted. Channel relocations will be completed and stabilized prior to diverting water into the new
channel. Whenever possible, channel relocations shall be allowed to stabilize for an entire growing
season. Vegetation used for bank stabilization shall be limited to native woody species, and should
include establishment of a 30 foot wide wooded and an adjacent 20 foot wide vegetated buffer on both
sides of the relocated channel to the maximum extent practical. A transitional phase incorporating coir
fiber and seedling establishment is allowable. Also, rip-rap may be allowed if it is necessary to maintain
the physical integrity of the stream, but the applicant must provide written justification and any
calculations used to determine the extent of rip-rap coverage requested.
7. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to streams shall be done for 5865 linear feet of stream impact at a
replacement ratio of 1:1. Compensatory mitigation for 312 linear feet of impacts to jurisdictional streams
shall be provided by onsite stream relocations of 312 linear feet of streams on site. No impacts shall occur
anywhere on the project until a final design that provides a stable stream pattern, dimension, and profile is
submitted to, and approved by, the NC Division of Water Quality. All stream relocations shall have 50-
foot wooded buffers planted on both sides of the stream. As-Builts for the completed streams shall be
submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality 401 Wetlands Unit within 30 days of the
completion of the construction of the relocations. If the parameters of this condition are not met, then the
NCDOT shall supply additional stream mitigation for the 787 linear feet of impacts. In addition to the 312
linear feet of on-site mitigation, compensatory mitigation for an additional 5,553 linear feet of streams is
required. We understand that you have chosen to perform compensatory mitigation for impacts to streams
through an in lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program (NCWRP), and that the
WRP has agreed to implement the mitigation for the project. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts to
streams shall be provided through an in-lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program
(NCWRP) at a rate of $200 per linear foot. Therefore, a total payment of $1,110,600 shall be submitted to
the NCWRP to offset the impacts. No construction activities in jurisdictional streams shall begin until
payment for stream mitigation is made and the Wetland Restoration Program receives and clears your
check (made payable to DENR - Wetland Restoration Program). The payment to NCWRP shall be sent
within two months of issuance of the 404 permit. If you have any questions concerning the Wetland
Restoration Program please contact them at 919-733-5208.
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
O?O? \ NA T 4?9pG
8. Compensatory mitigation for impacts to wetlands shall be done for 18.68 acres of impacts. Applying a
replacement ration of 2:1 total mitigation for 37.36 acres of riparian wetlands shall be provided as
described below.
Mitigation Site Acres of WL Type of Replacement Acres of Mitigation
Debited from Mitigation Ratio Credited
Site
Benson Grove
Mitigation Site 21.81 Restoration 1:1 21.81
Benson Grove
Mitigation Site 50.50 Preservation 5:1 10.10
Marks Creek
Mitigation Site 10.90 Restoration 2:1 5.45
Total 37.36
9. All stormwater runoff shall be directed to sheettlow through stream buffers at nonerosive velocities, unless
approved otherwise by this certification.
10. Of the total 25.53 acres of impacts to protected riparian buffers, compensatory mitigation for impacts to
22.70 acres of Neuse Riparian Buffers shall be provided for as described below.
Zone of
Impact Impacts
(Acres) Replacement
Ratio Total Acres of
Mitigation Required
Zone 1 10.06 3:1 30.18
Zone 2 6.42 1.5:1 9.63
Total 16.48 39.81
We understand that you have chosen to perform compensatory mitigation for impacts to protected buffers
through an in lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program (NCWRP), and that the
WRP has agreed to implement the mitigation for the project. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts to Neuse
Riparian Buffers shall be provided through an in-lieu payment to the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) at a rate of $41,625 per acre for 39.81 acres of buffer impact. Therefore, a total
payment of $1,657,091 shall be submitted to the NCWRP to offset the impacts. No construction activities
in Neuse River Riparian buffers shall begin until payment for buffer mitigation is made and the Wetland
Restoration Program receives and clears your check (made payable to DENR - Wetland Restoration
Program). The payment to NCWRP shall be sent within two months of issuance of the 404 permit. If you
have any questions concerning the Wetland Restoration Program please contact them at 919-733-5208.
11. Upon completion of the project, the NCDOT shall complete and return the enclosed "Certification of
Completion Form" to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401 Certification has been completed.
The responsible party shall complete the attached form and return it to the 401/Wetlands Unit of the
Division of Water Quality upon completion of the project.
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
W A T FRpG
C'o
12. Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands must be placed below the
elevation of the streambed to allow low flow passage of water and aquatic life unless it can be shown to
DWQ that providing passage would be impractical. Design and placement of culverts and other structures
including temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-
equilibrium of wetlands or stream beds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above
structures. The applicant is required to provide evidence that the equilibrium shall be maintained if
requested in writing by DWQ.
13. No changes to the horizontal or vertical placement of the stormwater outfall locations, the horizontal or
vertical placement of the culverts, the horizontal or vertical placement of bridges, the horizontal or vertical
placement of grassed swales, or the horizontal or vertical placement of open ditches is permitted without
written approval from the NC Division of Water Quality. In addition, no changes to the flow spreader
locations or designs, preformed scour hole locations or designs are permitted without written approval
from the NC Division of Water Quality 401 Wetlands Unit. Any request for changes to the referenced
items above will require submittal of a modification request, with seven copies, and corresponding fees
will need to be submitted to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality.
14. The proposed grassed swale located on the Line Y1 at Site 12 does not meet the design criteria required by
the 15A NCAC 2B .0233. No impacts for the project shall occur until a final design that does adhere to
the rules is submitted to, and approved by, the NC Division of Water Quality.
15. All other conditions written into previous Water Quality Certifications for this project still apply.
Violations of any condition herein set forth shall result in revocation of this Certification and may result
in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless the above
conditions are made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or coastal Area Management Act Permit. This
Certification shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or CAMA permit.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within sixty
(60) days following receipt of this Certification. This request must be in the form of a written petition conforming to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box
27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of the
Certification. Unless such demands are made, this Certification shall be final and binding.
This the 5a' day of May 2003
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
?V-Y? 1? Af -kt "
J. limek, P.E.
Director
Modification to WQC No. 3081
c:\ncdot\TIP R-2000\wqc\R-2000 F and G modification.doc
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
N. C. Division of Water Quality 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 [phone]
Customer Service: 1 800 623-7748
[Fwd: B-3503 pemlit app]
Subject: [Fwd: B-3503 permit app]
Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 12:55:40 -0400
From: Beth Barnes <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: ri chard. spencer@ usace. army. mi I
Good afternoon, Richard. I know you got this email as well, but the
initial comments from WRC requested an on-site meeting to discuss
conservation measures to be used on this project. DOT has not addressed
that request as best I can determine. Your thoughts on this , please.
Thanks, Beth
Subject: B-3503 permit app
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 16:58:54 -0400
From: "Brett M. Feulner" <bmfeulner@ dot. state.nc. us>
Organization: North Carolina Department of Transportation
To: richard. spencer@ usace. army. mi I
CC: [e-mail], Randy Turner <[e-mail]>
Richard,
It just brought to my attention that there is an error on the
permit application that was recently submitted for B-3503. In
the application and the green sheet with project commitments we
stated that a moratorium between November 15 and April 1.
However the moratorium that NCWRC requested is April 1 to June
30. Please make any changes necessary to the permit. Thanks and
sorry for the inconvenience.
Brett Feulner
715-1488
1 of 1 5/6/2003 12:56 PM
B-3503 pennit app
Subject: B-3503 permit app
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 16:58:54 -0400
From: "Brett M. Feulner" <[e-mail]>
Organization: North Carolina Department of Transportation
To: rich ard. spencer@ usace. army. mi I
CC: [e-mail], Randy Turner <[e-mail]>
Richard,
It just brought to my attention that there is an error on the
permit application that was recently submitted for B-3503. In
the application and the green sheet with project commitments we
stated that a moratorium between November 15 and April 1.
However the moratorium that NCWRC requested is April 1 to June
30. Please make any changes necessary to the permit. Thanks and
sorry for the inconvenience.
Brett Feulner
715-1488
1 of 1 4/25/2003 11:00 AM
Re: replacement of bridge no. 382 over little river
Subject: Re: replacement of bridge no. 382 over little river
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 13:03:19 -0400
From: Randy Turner <[e-mail]. nc.us>
Organization: North Carolina Department of Transportation
To: Elizabeth Lee Lusk <[e-mail]>
CC: Beth Barnes <[e-mail]>
Elizabeth, this project is assigned to Brett. Please investigate this moratorium
issue and let's discuss. This project is due to be let in September so we have
time to address the moratorium issue. Although Project Development may have
overlooked this issue when they developed the project commitments in the first
green sheet, under normal circumstances there are still two other steps that would
have the potential to capture and act on the moratorium
requirement ........ 1.Brett's review of the project file during his preparation of
the permit application, and 2. the NWP tear sheet should contain a condition which
coincides with the moratorium requirement. This is when Brett will prepare the
final green sheet that would highlight this commitment. Step 1 above relies
heavily on Brett receiving the relevant correspondence from the natural resource
agencies (of course, in this case, the letter was apparently published in the CE).
Thanks to Beth for bringing this to our attention.
Beth Barnes wrote:
> OK, the county is Randolph; SR 1135; TIP Project No. B-3503. And just for
> grins, the DWQ # is 030470. I did not think about all the other bridges in the
> state with the same number ..... now I know. Thanks, Beth
> Randy Turner wrote:
> > Beth, thanks for the info. I am trying to track down the project so I can
> > get some course corrections underway, but I have no idea where the project
> > is. I need the county and/or TIP number. The bridge numbers are
> > county-specific, in other words, there are numerous bridge number 382's in
> > the state. There are several Little Rivers also. Holler when you have the
> > info. Thanks.
> > Beth Barnes wrote:
> > > Good morning all. This project involves the replacement of bridge no.
> > > 382 over the Little River on SR 1135. I read through the "CE"
> > > documentation. The letter from WRC (March 19, 1999) specifically
> > > requests no in-water work from April 1 to June 30. The letter further
> > > requests "....a field meeting to discuss conservation measures that
> > > should be employed to protect these resources." The "green sheet"
> > > environmental commitments lists a moratorium on clearing and grubbing
> > > between November 15 and April 1, but makes NO mention of the WRC dates
> > > for in-water moratorium. I found no record/notes of any field meeting.
> > > Did the meeting occur, and what was the outcome? I think both of these
> > > issues need to be addressed.
> > > Thanks, Beth
1 of 1 4/24/2003 2:10 PM
replacement of bridge no. 382 over little river
Subject: replacement of bridge no. 382 over little river
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 11:42:10 -0400
From: Beth Barnes <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR DWQ
To: mrturner@ dot. state.nc.us, ri chard. [e-mail]. mi1,
travis.wilson @ncwildlife.org
CC: [e-mail]
Good morning all. This project involves the replacement of bridge no.
382 over the Little River on SR 1135. I read through the "CE"
documentation. The letter from WRC (March 19, 1999) specifically
requests no in-water work from April 1 to June 30. The letter further
requests "....a field meeting to discuss conservation measures that
should be employed to protect these resources." The "green sheet"
environmental commitments lists a moratorium on clearing and grubbing
between November 15 and April 1, but makes NO mention of the WRC dates
for in-water moratorium. I found no record/notes of any field meeting.
Did the meeting occur, and what was the outcome? I think both of these
issues need to be addressed.
Thanks, Beth
I of 1 4/22/2003 11:42 AM
?d..• SfA7E °?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLL'Y LYNI)o TII'I'I'; f'I'
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
April 8, 2003
US Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Branch
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
ATTENTION: Mr. Richard Spencer 03047U
NCDOT Coordinator
Subject: Nationwide 23 Permit Application for the Replacement of Bridge
No. 382 over Little River on SR 1135, Randolph County. Federal
Aid Project No. BRZ-1135(4), State Project No. 8.2572101, TIP
Project No. B-3503.
Dear Mr. Spencer:
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the above
referenced project. The document states that Bridge No. 382 will be replaced with a new
95-foot [29 meters (m)] and a 26-foot (8 m) wide bridge to the south of the existing
bridge. A travelway of 22 feet (6.7 m) will be accommodated, with an offset of 2 feet on
each side. The approach roadway will accommodate a paved travelway of 22 feet (6.7
m), with 6-foot (2 m) turf shoulders on each side. Where guardrail is required, shoulders
will be increased by a minimum of 3 feet (1 m) on each side. The new structure will be
approximately the same elevation as the existing structure. The project will require
approximately 1,140 feet (347 m) of new work on approach roadways. Total project
length will be approximately 1,235 feet (376 m). Traffic will be maintained on the
existing bridge during construction. Construction of the bridge with top-down
construction will be implemented.
Anticipated impacts to wetlands consist of 0.10 ac of fill in surface waters and
0.49 ac of temporary fill in surface waters. The Little River will have no direct impacts
from this project. There will be no deck drains over the water. The Little River is
classified by the Division of Water Quality as class C in the Categorical Exclusion (CE)
document and the classification has not changed. NCDOT's High Quality Waters
Standards will be enforced throughout project construction.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC
The removal of these bridges can be classified as a Case 2. A Case 2 allows no
work in the water during moratorium periods associated with fish migration, spawning
and larval recruitment into nursery areas. An in-water work moratorium from November
15 to April 1 will be required for this project.
Demolition: Bridge No. 382 is composed of timber and steel. The bridge
sections will be removed without dropping components into Waters of the United States.
All guidelines for bridge demolition and removal will be followed in addition to Best
Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters.
This 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 a Nationwide 23
in accordance with 67 FR 2020, 2082, Jan 15, 2002. We anticipate a 401 General
Certification number 3361 will apply to this project. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H
.0501(a) we are providing two copies of this application to the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their
records.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Brett
Feulner at [phone].
Sincerely,
rn ' PA
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
4k Environmental Management Director, PDEA
w/ attachment
Mr. John Dorney, NC Division of Water Quality
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
w/o attachment
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, Programming and TIP
Ms. Deborah Barbour, PE, Highway Design
Mr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. W.F. Rosser, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Art King, Division Environmental Officer
Mr. Dennis Pipken, P.E., Project Planning Engineer
Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmigton
NORTH CAROLINA
0
Sri i hdar I
s I GlanolD \ cross r LI art 1
o
a8 ti S 20
1 s
I I 311 Randleman Grays Chapel
1 I $ophl 1 O ortnville I
I i 6
*i 1 10 HSlaii
1 R J?A N+ D' ?0a?s L FrankPviue st l
-5? Asheboro Falls Rameeur 1
1 to r I? 48
I IY 2 I
I 1
Farmer 220' t 159 4 11 Coleridgl
?n is /r 1
We 0 1
N C .onluq•col
H IE, Yer4 t
1 I 20 Erect A
Se rove 1
Iv I. , Whynot , - ?- 1
1 ` CD® T
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
VICINITY PROJECT: 8.2572101 (B-3503)
MAPS REPLACEMENT OF BR. NO.382
OVER LITTLE RIVER ON SR 1135
SHEET 1 OF 6 5/ 28/ 02
WH,?RA Et
Of 00
&VINT
\1f
^?
?..,.?
11
? ° a rr
,.J"e ;tJ 1-° '\ J I 1 ` y°°a•'.C. 1 ? ?? % ?? ? sPv? 1 \ ?.
1r-
? 1?--
- - „ Auman Cr sroads
650 ( ' 1 1664
88
Ylenxunt Hi
Ch 1 Cem 1np
SITE MAP
WETLAND LEGEND
--WLB WETLAND BOUNDARY PROPOSED BRIDGE
WETLAND PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
CL
® DENOTES FILL IN
WETLAND PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
12'-48'
DENOTES FILL IN (DASHED LINES DENOTE PIPES
® SURFACE WATER EXISTNG STRUCTURES) 54' PIPES
& ABOVE
DENOTES FILL
® SURFACE WATER
R
(POND) SINGLE TREE
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND WOODS LINE
DENOTES EXCAVATION
® IN WETLAND DRAINAGE INLET
® DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE
ROOTWAD
WATER
• • DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
-? FLOW DIRECTION RIP RAP
TB
TOP OF BANK
WE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER
- EDGE OF WATER O
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
_ - C- - PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
F ? PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE
- - -
- - PROP. LIMIT OF FILL
-?- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
LEVEL SPREADER (LS)
- - NG- - NATURAL GROUND
- -PL - PROPERTY LINE
? DITCH /
GRASS SWALE
- TDE - TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
- EAB- • EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
- EPB- . EXIST. ENDANGERED
PLANT BOUNDARY
- -? - - - WATER SURFACE
x x
x xx x x LIVE STAKES
NCD®T
BOULDER DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
CORE FIBER ROLLS
---
PROJECT: 8.2572101 (B-3503)
REPLACEMENT OF BR. NO.382
OVER LITTLE RIVER ON SR 1135
SHEET 3 OF 6 5 / 28 / 02

' I k/T?NC
0E
EX,S r/Nc
/
F

F r-? l

SE
/ . ? Rock
' ?Q 6
Gq?eB DENOTES FILL IN
® SURFACE WATER
(POND)
DENOTES TEMPORARY
IMPACTS TO SURFACE
WATERS (POND)
so 0
25 50
POND WILL BE SCALE¦ P- 50•
TEMPORARILY 1f
DRAINED DURING SITE I
CONSTRUCTION PLAN VIEW
NCDOT
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.2572101 (B-3503)

roF .
WOODS
Y
D)
TB
WOOD
F
F?

F
\ \c pRoA ps LNG R?
ORA \ r \ 0 R?? w
18 a ? •\
1 \
PROPERTY OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO.
NAMES
ADDRESSES
JOHN FOUNTAIN 1587 HOWARD AUMAN RD. EXT.
3 ASHEBORO, NC 27205
WILLIAM THOMAS 1460 HOWARD AUMAN RD.
5 ASHEBORO,NC 27205
JOSEPH HINES 1453 HOWARD AUMAN RD.
6 ASHEBORO, NC 27205
NCD®T
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
RANDOLPH COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.2572101 (B-3503)
REPLACEMENT OF BR. NO.382
OVER LITTLE RIVER ON SR 1135
0 0
c`v E ^
M 0
6 m ?.
Zino
0 0
tm a)
'
N 6
C

U m
C
E
u?U
CL
rn O
ul LL
a
q o 0
t
E a m

W ~
V
LL
^^ o

0 0

0
tnc?
N
a m
LL

f
0 N 00
O O
O
`
C/)
?
C
N ?
LL
?j
? O O
?? C
N O O

} U N
W L)

0

?
>
c 0

.
m ?
L

O
a
= 0
0 S
J LL m O O
LU E
m
c
N O O
C C ? O O

v
LL
N
7 N
5 N
Z
2 C/)
65
0 0 0
0 N
ti J
0
U) li
LA
r U')
+
(D
y0,• O Q
(q z O
H
• C t f
Randolph County
Bridge No. 382, on SR 1 135
Over the Little River
Federal Aid Project BRZ-113 5(4)
State Project 8. 2572101
TIP Project B-3503
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
d,
Y
7
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
Date William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Date Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
9
II
T
A
1

I

Randolph County
R: idge No. 382. on SR 1 135
Over the Little River
Federal Aid Project BRZ-1 135(4)
State Project 8.2572101
TIP Project B-3503
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Branch By:
\A CAR04
Date Dennis Pipkin ?.? ?FL•...•••..?/,•r,
Project Planning Engineer -?z•.FOFES
SEAL
- - lU ! l J V i t l ?''l Yv?? _ = 022552
Date Joh L. Williams, P.E., ?• F?
NE?:•°P?
Bridge Project Planning Engineer, Acting Unit Head 0y •;?G I
?/ ••• \
4-3 - 0 1
Date Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
I
I

T
T
I
'. d
'?NYIRONMENTAL-' COMMITMF.N'rc!
'B-3503, Randolph County
Replace Bridge No. 382, on SR 1135
Over the Little River
Federal Aid Project BRZ-1135(4)
State Project' 8.2572101
Roadway Design Unit, Structure Design Unit, Project Development & Environmental
Analysis Branch (Permits), Roadside Environmental Unit, Resident Engineer:
(1 ) There will be a moratorium on clearing and grubbing - no work between
November 15 and April 1 of any year.
( 2) Equipment will be maintained such that hydraulic fluids, oil, gasoline, or other
chemicals will not enter the stream. If chemicals are stored on site, they should be stored a
sufficient distance from the stream and under secure conditions to prevent accidental contact with
the stream. If chemicals are spilled on the site they should be cleaned up immediately and not
allowed to filter down into the soil.
(3 ) No construction or demolition work will be done in the water; i.e., no in-water
construction methods will be used; such as causeway fills, construction equipment or pads in
stream, or excavations in stream.
( 4) Sedimentation & Erosion controls will be in place prior to land clearing activities.
These controls will remain in place during both construction and demolition activities.
( 5) The same stringent Sedimentation & Erosion control measures as used for
Threatened & Endangered Species will be used. These standards are entitled "Environmentally
Sensitive Area Standards" and are higher standards than those which apply to HQW's. These
"Environmentally Sensitive Area Standards" measures encompass the HQW standards, plus
more stringent clearing, grubbing, and seeding standards.
( 6) SR 1135 is a dead end road, therefore traffic must be maintained during construction.
To minimize the likelihood of sediment reaching the stream as a result of normal and construction
traffic, no temporary detour bridge or culvert will be used. The existing bridge will be used to
maintain traffic during construction. The existing bridge will be removed once the new bridge is
opened to normal traffic.
( 7) SR 1135 has recently been paved. This was scheduled in order to minimize the
likelihood of additional sediment reaching the stream as a result of construction traffic on the
unpaved road.
( 8) No bents for the new bridge will be constructed in the stream
Categorical Exclusion Document
Green Sheet
March, 2001
Page 1 of 2
L
.. 'l,. -
(9) In addition, the following factors will be considered during the design process, and
implemented to the maximum extent practicable:
a) Stormwater runoff will not be allowed to discharge directly into the stream.
b) Weep holes on the bridge will be configured so that the run-off does not fall directly
into the stream.
Roadway Design Unit, Structure Design Unit, Project Development & Environmental
Analysis Branch (Permits), Resident Engineer:
Bridge demolition for the old bridge will be done without dropping materials into the
waters. Bridge demolition & removal activities will not be conducted from the stream (no in-
water work). One existing bent consists of steel I-beams with a low concrete footing; this footing
is in the water, and the concrete extends approximately a foot above normal water level. This bent
will be removed by cutting off the steel I-beams at the concrete, above the water level, and
leaving the concrete footing in place. This will avoid sedimentation that would occur from
removal of the concrete footing.
Categorical Exclusion Document Page 2 of 2
Green Sheet
March, 2001
Randolph County
Bridge No. 382, on SR 1135
Over the Little River
Federal Aid Project BRZ-1135(4)
State Project 8.2572101
TIP Project B-3503
1. SUMMARY OF PROJECT:
NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge Number 382, in Randolph County. Bridge Number 382
carries Highway SR 1135 over the Little River, in the southern part of Randolph County. NCDOT
and FHWA classify this action as a Categorical Exclusion, due to the fact that no notable
environmental impacts are likely to occur as a result of project construction. NCDOT will replace
Bridge Number 382 at a new location, as shown in Figure 2. The new bridge will be approximately
95 feet (29 m) in length, and 26 feet (8 m) in overall width. A travelway of 22 feet (6.7 m) will be
accommodated, with an offset of 2 feet (0.6 m) on each side. The approach roadway will
accommodate a paved travelway of 22 feet (6.7 m), with 6 foot (2 m) turf shoulders on each side.
Where guardrail is required, shoulders will be increased by a minimum of 3 feet (1 m) on each side.
The new structure will be at approximately the same elevation as the existing structure. The project
will require approximately 1140 feet (347 m) of new work on approach roadways. Total project
length will be approximately 1235 feet (376 m). Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge
during construction. Initial design indicates that the completed project will provide a design speed of
30 mph (50 km/hr).
The estimated project cost is $885,000 including $35,000 for Right-of-Way acquisition and
$850,000 for construction. The project is included in the 2000-2006 Transportation Improvement
Program. The estimated cost projected by the draft 2002-2008 Transportation Improvement Program
is $460,000; including $60,000 in prior year cost, $40,000 for Right-of-Way Acquisition, and
$360,000 for construction.
II. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS:
A design exception for design speed will likely be necessary for this project. Initial design
indicates that the completed project will provide a design speed of 30 mph (50 km/hr).
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
NCDOT classifies SR 1 135 as a Rural Local Route in the Statewide Functional Classification
System. The land use of the surrounding area is rural residential.
Near Bridge No. 382, SR 1 135 is a two lane, paved facility, 20 feet (6 m) in width, with turf
shoulders on each side. The existing bridge carries one lane.
Vertical alignment in both directions is good, while horizontal alignment is poor on the east
approach.
NCDOT built Bridge No. 382 in 1940. The bridge has an asphalt overlay wearing surface on
a steel plank deck on I-beams. The abutments and one of the two interior bents are concrete. The one
remaining interior bent is steel with a concrete footing. This latter bent is the only part of the bridge
normally in the stream. The deck of Bridge 382 is 16 feet (5 m) above the stream bed. Water depth in
the Little River is approximately one foot (0.3 m) at the bridge vicinity. Bridge 382 is 81 feet (24.6
m) long, with a 13.3 foot (4 m) bridge roadway width. One lane of traffic is carried and the load limit
is posted at 32 tons for single vehicles (SV) and 38 tons for Truck-Tractor Semi-Trailers (TTST).
According to Bridge Maintenance records, the bridge's sufficiency rating is 49.6 out of a
possible 100.0. The current traffic volume is 100 vehicles per day (VPD), projected to increase to 300
VPD by the design year 2025. No speed limit is posted in area, therefore it is assumed to be 55 mph
by statute.
Traffic Engineering accident records indicate there was one vehicle crash reported in the
vicinity of Bridge No. 382 during a recent three year period. The Transportation Director of Randolph
County schools indicates that there are 3 school busses crossing the bridge twice per day, for a total of
6 trips per day. Since SR 1135 is a dead end road, traffic must be maintained during construction.
IV. ALTERNATES:
Two methods of replacing Bridge No. 382 were studied. Both alternates involve a
replacement structure consisting of a bridge 95 feet (29 m) in length. Each alternate would
accommodate a 22 foot (6.7 m) travelway across the structure with 2 foot (0.6 m) offsets on each side.
The approach roadway will consist of a 22 foot (6.7 m) travelway with a minimum of 6 foot (2 m)
grassed shoulders on each side. Where guardrail is required, shoulders will be increased by a
minimum of 3 feet (I m) on each side.
The project alternates were studied as follows:
Alternate One: - Replace bridge on existing location. Traffic would be maintained on a temporary
bridge during construction.
Alternate Two: (Recommended) - Replace bridge on new location. Traffic would be maintained on
the existing bridge during construction.
The "do-nothing" alternate is not practical, requiring eventual closing of the road as the
existing bridge completely deteriorates. The sufficiency rating of the existing bridge is only 49.6 out
of 100.0. Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating bridge is neither practical nor economical.
2
V. COST ESTIMATE
Estimated project costs of the alternates studied are as follows:
New Structure & approaches
Removal of Existing Structure &
approach asphalt
Detour Structure & Approaches, &
removal of same
Subtotal
Miscellaneous & Mobilization
Contract Cost
Engineering and Contingencies
Total Construction Cost
Right-of-Way and Utilities
Total Project Cost
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
(Recommended)
$428,000 $539,000
8,000 8,000
348,000 0
$784,000 $547,000
303,000 192,000
$1,087,000 $739,000
163,000 111,000
$1,250,000 $850,000
44,000 35,000
$1,294,000 $885,000
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
NCDOT will replace Bridge Number 382 at a new location, as shown in Figure 2. The
existing bridge will be replaced with a new bridge approximately 95 feet (29 m) long. A travelway of
22 feet (6.7 m) will be accommodated, with an offset of 2 feet (0.6 m) on each side. The approach
roadway will accommodate a paved travelway of 22 feet (6.7 m), with 6 foot (2 m) turf shoulders on
each side. Where guardrail is required, shoulders will be increased by a minimum of 3 feet (1 m) on
each side. The project will require approximately 1140 feet (347 m) of new work on approach
roadways. Traffic will be maintained on the existing bridge during construction.
NCDOT recommends that Alternate 2 be constructed, in order to improve the design speed,
and to replace the bridge using the least environmentally damaging and most economical alternate.
The Division 8 Engineer concurs with the selection of the recommended alternate.
SR 1135 is not designated as a bicycle route, and there is no indication that an unusual
number of bicyclists use the road.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. General Environmental Effects
The project is considered to be a "Categorical Exclusion" (CE) due to its limited scope and
insubstantial environmental consequences.
The bridge project 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.
3
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.
No publicly owned parks, recreational facilities or wildlife or waterfowl refuges of national,
state, or local significance are in the vicinity of the project.
Construction of the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the floodplain or
associated flood hazard. The elevation of the 100-year flood will not be increased by more than 12
inches.
NCDOT expects utility conflicts to be low for a project of this size and magnitude.
There are no known hazardous waste sites in the project area.
B. Architectural & Archaeological Resources
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, & implemented by Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
for compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 500. Section 106 requires that if a federally
funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect on property listed on or eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation will be given an
opportunity to comment.
Architectural Resources
A meeting was held with The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to evaluate potential
effects of the project. The SHPO reviewed the data and photographs for Bridge No. 434, and
concluded that no historic architectural survey would be necessary for the bridge. The SHPO also
recommended that no historic architectural surveys be conducted for any other resources within the
area of potential effect (APE). At a subsequent meeting with the SHPO held on July 1, 1999, the
SHPO signed the Concurrence Form for Properties Not Eligible For The National Register Of
Historic Places. See attached concurrence form dated July 1, 1999. Thus, it is concluded that the
project will have no effect on historic architectural resources.
Archaeological Resources
A meeting was held with The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to evaluate potential
effects of the project. The SHPO indicated that there would be a high potential for archeological
resources within the APE.
An archeological survey was accomplished by NCDOT archaeologists, and documented in a
study report dated January 2000. This investigation recorded no evidence of archeological materials
in the area of potential effect. The SHPO concurred with the NCDOT report in their letter of June 13,
2000 (see appendix). Thus, it is concluded that the project will have no effect on archaeological
resources.
4
C. Natural Systems
1.0 Introduction
The following is taken from the Natural Resources Technical Report as submitted to assist in
preparation of the Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the proposed project.
2.0 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Soil and water resources occurring in the study area are discussed below. Soils and
availability of water directly influence composition and distribution of flora and fauna in any biotic
community.
The project study area lies within the piedmont physiographic province. The topography in
this section of Randolph County is characterized as nearly level to gently rolling. The project area
consists of nearly level topography in the Little River floodplain with gently rolling hills sloping
away from the floodplain. Project elevation is approximately 198.0 m (650.0 ft) above mean sea
level.
2.1 Soils
Two soil phases occur within the proposed project study area (U.S. Department of
Agriculture; unpublished data). Neither soil type is considered to be `hydric'. Riverview loam is the
dominant soil phase which occurs in the floodplain and parallels the stream corridor. Pockets of
Georgeville silty clay loam occur on higher ground adjacent to the floodplain.
Soil core samples taken within the project area revealed soils with a loamy texture. The soil
sampled did not exhibit reduced conditions, such as low chroma colors or oxidized rhizospheres.
With the exception of a small wetland (described in Section 4.1.1), hydric soil indicators, as defined
in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual", 1987, were not observed within the project
study area. This small wetland exhibited inundated conditions and soil cores were not collected from
that area.
2.2 Water Resources
2.2.1 Waters Impacted and Characteristics
The Little River is the only surface water resource directly impacted by the proposed bridge
replacement project (Figure 1). The Little River is located in sub-basin 03-07-15 of the Yadkin-Pee
Dee River Basin. Headwaters of this river originate in Asheboro, about eight miles upstream of the
project vicinity. The Little River flows southward for approximately 45 miles where it joins the Pee
Dee River in Rockingham County. At the time of the site visit, this stream had a width of 7.6 m (25.0
ft) and a depth of 0.1 - 0.3 m (0.5 - 1.0 ft). Channel depth was 2.4 m (8.0 ft) and the width of the
channel was 10.7 m (35 ft). Water clarity was fairly good and the stream contained rocky substrate
with a nice sequence of riffles and pools.
5
2.2.2 Best Usage Classification
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has assigned streams a best usage classification. The
classification of the Little River [DWQ Index no. 13-25-(1)] is C. (source: DWQ Internet page, 1999).
The C classification denotes waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing,
wildlife, secondary recreation and agriculture.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I: undeveloped watersheds
or WS-II: predominately undeveloped watersheds) nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)
occur within 1.6 km (1.0 mile) of project study area.
2.2.3 Water Quality
The Division of Water Quality has initiated a basinwide approach to water quality
management for the 17 river basins within the state. The basinwide approach allows for more
intensive sampling of biological, chemical and physical data that are used in basinwide assessment
and planning. Likewise, benthic macroinvertebrates are intensively sampled for specific river basins.
There are no benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring sites on the Little River at SR 1135. However
the Little River was sampled at the closest downstream bridge on SR 1127 (located about 1.7 miles
downstream from the project site). This site earned a bioassessment rating of `Good/Fair' when
sampled in 1989. This upper section of the Little River is impacted by non-point source runoff as
evidenced by benthic ratings and excessive growths of periphyton present in the river. Approximately
fifteen miles downstream, improvements in water quality are found. The Little River at SR 1340 in
Montgomery County was sampled during 1995 and 1996 and attained a bioclassification of
`Excellent'.
Fish community analysis was examined from samples collected at the project site by the DWQ on
April 13, 1999. The community was found to contain a moderate diversity of species as listed in
Section 3.2.2 (Table 1).
The Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) is a network of stream, lake and estuarine water
quality monitoring stations strategically located for the collection of physical and chemical water
quality data. There are no AMS stations located near the project area.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the NPDES
Program. There are no NPDES dischargers located within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project area.
Non-point source pollution refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater flow or
through no defined point of discharge. The non-point sources that could be identified during the site
visit were sedimentation and runoff from the dirt/gravel road and overflow of any treatment, that the
pond may receive.
2.2.4.1 Impacts from Bridge Demolition
Bridge No. 382 has two spans totaling 81 feet in length. The superstructure is composed of
timber and steel. The entire bridge will be removed without dropping any components into the water.
6
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Scientific nomenclature and
common names (when applicable) are provided for each animal and plant species described. Plant
taxonomy generally follows Radford, et al. (1968). Fauna observed during the site visit are denoted
by an asterisk (*).
3.1 Biotic Communities
Six communities are identified in the project study area: maintained/disturbed, alluvial berm
and adjacent floodplain (combined and classified as piedmont alluvial forest), mixed oak-hickory
forest, mixed pine forest, piedmont river and small freshwater marsh wetland (created by overflow
from the pond). While six community types were present, they each comprised little area.
Community boundaries within the study area are fairly well defined without a significant transition
zone between them, and terrestrial faunal species likely to occur within the study area may exploit all
communities for shelter and foraging opportunities or as movement corridors.
3.1.1 Maintained/Disturbed
The maintained/disturbed community represented the most common type of community in the
project study area. This community was present in the form of frequently maintained roadside
shoulder on both sides of the existing road. The southwest portion of the project has recently been
disturbed with logging of pines adjacent to the road shoulder, while the northwest portion contained
disturbed floodplain and upland forest.
Flora found in the frequently maintained road shoulder community along both sides of the
existing road includes fescue (Festuca spp.), dandelion (Taraxacum ofcinale), geranium (Geranium
spp.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum), which appeared to be recently planted for stabilization.
Flora found in the floodplain areas differed depending upon the recentness of disturbance. On
Alternate 1 the northwest side of the project contained a recently disturbed floodplain forest which
appeared to be cut over within the past five years, dominated by weedy species such as Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), blackberry (Rebus spp.), round-leaved
greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia), New York ironweed (Vernonia noveboracensis) and multiflora rose
(Rosa multiflora). Scattered trees of black walnut (Juglans nigra) and red maple (Ater rubrum) were
present along with saplings of redbud (Cercis canadensis) and low growing herbaceous plants
including sedges (Cyperus spp.) and marsh-fleabane (Pluchea sp.). This community also included a
small area which may be higher than the floodplain, however the invasive vegetation did not
noticeably change with topography. Because of the continuity of vegetation, the degree of
disturbance and the small size of land, the community was considered as one type.
The southwestern side of the project (along Alternate 2) close to the existing road, had recently
been disturbed with logging of loblolly pines (Pinus taeda). Poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), an
opportunistic vine, was the dominant ground cover. Further south and towards the river, away from
the existing ROW, the forest is classified as mixed pine forest.
7
3.1.2 Mixed pine forest
The mixed pine forest occupies little area with loblolly pine, sweet gum (Liquidambar
styraciflua), white ash (Fraxinus americana) and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulip fera) comprising
the canopy. The understory shrub layer was comprised of black haw (Viburnum prunifolium), while
rattlesnake fern (Botrychium sp.) and bedstraw (Galium sp.) represented the ground vegetation.
3.1.3 Dry-mesic oak-hickory forest
This community is found in the higher, northeastern corner of the project'area and slopes down to
the alluvial forest. Dominant canopy trees include white oak (Quercus alba), sweetgum, tulip poplar,
red maple, white ash and hickory (Carya spp.). Sub-canopy vegetation includes American holly (Ilex
opaca), dogwood (Cornus florida), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) and red cedar (Juniperus
virginiana). Maple-leaved viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium), blueberry (Vaccinium sp.), sweet shrub
(Calycanthus floridus) and hazelnut (Corylus americana) are found in the shrub layer. The vine and
herb layers are diverse and grade into the floodplain area. Vines encountered in this area include
poison ivy, honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), trumpet creeper (Campsis radicans), and Virginia
creeper (Parthenocissus quinquefolia). Herbaceous species such as Christmas fern (Polystichum
acrostichoides), rattlesnake fern, wild yam (Dioscorea villosa) and lyre-leaved sage (Salvia lyrata)
occupied the forest floor.
3.1.4 Piedmont alluvial forest
Both sides of the river contained alluvial berms that descend slightly into floodplain forest. The
river has a wooded buffer with a canopy that is mostly closed near the project area. Canopy trees
include sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), white ash, box elder
(Ater negundo), black walnut and black cherry (Prunus serotina). The shrub layer was comprised of
Chinese privet, spicebush (Lindera benzoin), tag alder (Alnus serrulata), silky dogwood (Cornus
amomum) and multiflora rose. Rich alluvial deposits resulting from overbank flooding created a
diverse herbaceous layer consisting of trout lily (Erythronium americanum), false Solomon's seal
(Smilacina racemosa), Jack-in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), mayapple (Podophyllum peltatum),
ragwort (Senecio sp.) and blue star (Amsonia tabernaemontana). The invasive species, Japanese
grass (Microstegium vimineum) and blackberry (Rebus argutus) also occurred in the alluvial
floodplain.
3.1.4 Pond fringe/disturbed wetland
A small marsh and linear ditch [9.1 m (30 ft) in length)] which flows to the Little River was
present on the northeast end of Alternate 2. This wet area was created by pond overflow and
contains wetland flora. Sweet gums were the tree species present while saplings of black locust
provided an understory. The dense shrub layer consisted of swamp rose (Rosa palustris) and
Chinese privet. A herbaceous layer of various sedges and rushes (Cyperus spp, Juncus spp.) and
jewel-weed (Impatiens capensis) grew within the shallow surface water.
8
3.1.6 Piedmont River
The Little River is a fairly small river and is 7.6 m (25.0 ft) wide with a water depth of 15-30
cm (6 - 12 in). Channel width is 10.7 m (35.0 ft) and channel depth is 2.4 m (8.0 ft). The Little
River has a nice sequence of pools and riffles as it meanders downstream. Excessive periphyton on
stream substrate (rocks, boulders and logs) indicate organic enrichment.
3.2 Wildlife
The physical characteristics of the terrestrial and aquatic communities in an area will affect the
fauna that are present and use the area. This section addresses the fauna likely to be found in the
project study area.
3.2.1 Terrestrial Fauna
Mammals associated with the project area include raccoon* (Procyon lotor), opossum (Didelphis
virginiana), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), gray squirrel* (Sciurus carolinensis), eastern cottontail*
(Sylvilagusfloridanus), southern short tailed shrew (Blarina carolinensis) and white footed mouse
(Peromyseus leucopus). Amphibians utilizing the wooded community include southern toad (Bufo
terrestris), spring peeper* (Hyala crucifer) and upland chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata). Reptiles
commonly found in this type of habitat include black rat snake* (Elaphe obsoleta), copperhead
(Agkistrodon contortrix) and various species of skinks (Eumeces spp.) would likely inhabit the open
sunny areas of the forest.
Avian species that are considered yearlong residents utilizing this area for forage and nesting
include junco* (Junco hyemalis), Carolina chickadee* (Parus carolinensis), tufted titmouse* (Parus
bicolor), Carolina wren* (Thryothorus ludovicianus), American goldfinch* (Carduelis tristis),
cardinal* (Cardinalis cardinalis), blue jay* (Cyanocitta cristata), catbird* (Dumetella carolinensis),
red bellied woodpecker* (Melanerpes carolinus), downy woodpecker* (Picoides pubescens) and
eastern phoebe* (Contopus virens). Migratory avian species utilizing the area include wood thrush*
(Hylocichla mustelina), great crested flycatcher* (Myiarchus crinitus), common yellow throat*
(Geothlypis trichas) yellow warbler* (Dendroica petechia), yellow breasted chat* (kteria vixens),
ovenbird * (Seiurus aurocapillus), indigo bunting* (Passerina cyanea), red eyed vireo* (Vireo
olivaceus) and summer tanager* (Piranga rubra). An osprey* (Pandion haliaetus) was also observed
migrating overhead.
3.2.2 Aquatic Fauna
Fauna associated with the aquatic community includes various invertebrate and vertebrate
species. Invertebrates that were present include crayfish* (family Cambaridae) and a diversity of
benthic macroinvertebrates including nymphs and larvae of the intolerant groups, ephemeroptera*,
plecoptera* and trichoptera*.
Fish were collected (by electroshocking) and identified on April 13, 1999 by the Biological
Assessment Group of the Division of Water Quality. A list of fish found in the project area as well as
200 meters upstream is presented in Table 1. Fish diversity was moderate and lush growths of
periphyton were noted.
9
Table 1. Species of fish from the Little River, at SR 1135, Randolph County
Common Name (Family) Species
Cyprinidae
Bluehead chub Nocomis leptocephalus
Redlip shiner Notropis chiliticus
Sandbar shiner Notropis scepticus
Highfin shiner Notropis altipinnis
Highback chub Hybopsis hypsinotus

Catostomidae
Spotted sucker Minytrema melanops
Creek chubsucker Erimyzon oblongus
Brassy jumprock Scartomyzon sp.
White sucker Catostomus commersoni

Ictaluridne
Margined madtom Noturus insignis
Flat bullhead Ameiurus platycephalus

Centrarchidae
Redear sunfish Lepomis microlophus
Bluegill sunfish Lepomis macrochirus
Warmouth Lepomis gulosus
Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus
Redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus

Percidne
Fantail darter Etheostoma flabellare
Piedmont darter Percina crassa
Tessellated darter Etheostoma olmstedi

3.3 Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed bridge 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 impacts to the natural resources in terms of
area impacted and ecosystems affected.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the relative abundance of each community
present within the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and degradation of portions
of these communities. Table 2 summarizes potential quantitative losses to these biotic communities,
10
resulting from project construction A small portion of the estimated impacts to the ROW is currently
used as an approach and is therefore already in place. Estimated impacts are derived using the entire
proposed right of way width. Project construction does not usually require the entire right of way,
therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
Table 2. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Community type B. Impacts in hectares (acres)
Alternate 1 Alternate 2
Maintained/Disturbed 0.08 (0.19) 0.16 (0.40)
Alluvial floodplain forest 0.13 (0.31) 0.01 (0.03)
Dry-mesic oak-hickory forest 0.06 (0.14) 0.00 (0.00)
Mixed pine forest 0.00 (0.00) 0.09 (0.21)
Pond frinee/Disturbed wetland 0.00 (0.00) 0.001 (0.002)
(from pond overflow)

D. Total 0.27 (0.64) 0.26 (0.64)
Plant communities found within the proposed project area serve as nesting and sheltering habitat
for various wildlife. Replacing Bridge No. 382 and its associated improvements will temporarily
reduce habitat for faunal species, thereby diminishing faunal numbers. Animals temporarily displaced
by construction activities will repopulate areas suitable for the species. However, due to the size and
scope of this project, it is anticipated that impacts to fauna will be minimal.
Aquatic communities are sensitive to small changes in their environment. Stream channelization,
scouring, siltation, sedimentation and erosion from construction-related work will affect water quality
and biological constituents. Although direct impacts may be temporary, environmental impacts from
these construction processes may result in long term or irreversible effects. Impacts often associated
with in-stream construction include increased channelization and scouring of the streambed. In-
stream construction alters the stream substrate and may remove streamside vegetation, (which is vital
for streambank stabilization) at the site. Disturbances to the substrate will produce siltation, which
clogs the gills and/or feeding mechanisms of benthic organisms (sessile filter-feeders and deposit-
feeders), fish and amphibian species. Benthic organisms can also be covered by excessive amounts of
sediment. These organisms are slow to recover or repopulate a stream.
Because of the importance of the mussels in this river, including three species which are state and
federally listed (as Federal Species of Concern for Randolph County), special care will be taken to
avoid problems with sedimentation and erosion. Stringent employment of Best Management
Practices will be implemented during the construction phase of this project to lessen impacts to
aquatic organisms. There will be no in-stream construction work (see attached Greensheet).
4.0 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
This section provides descriptions, inventories and impact analysis pertinent to two important
issues--Waters of the United States and rare and protected species.
11
4.1 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 (CFR) Section 328.3(a). Wetlands, defined in
33 CFR Section 328.3(b), are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at
a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do support, a
prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any action that proposes to
place fill into these areas 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).
4.1.1 Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Potential wetland communities were investigated pursuant to the 1987 "Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual". The three parameter approach is used where hydric soils, hydrophytic
vegetation and characteristic wetland hydrology must all be present for an area to be considered a
wetland. Based on these criteria, there is one small (0.01 acre) wetland (created by pond
overflow) present within project boundaries along Alternate 2. There are no jurisdictional
wetlands present along Alternate 1.
The Little River is a jurisdictional surface water under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344). Discussion of the biological, physical and water quality aspects of this stream is
presented in previous sections of this report.
4.1.2 Summary of Anticipated Impacts to Waters of the United States
Since the Little River bridge is to be replaced with a bridge, there are minimal direct impacts to
the surface waters of the Little River.
Alternate 1 would have no impacts to wetlands. Alternate 2 would impact a small wetland impact
(0.01 acres) and it is possible that the nearby pond would have to be drained impacting a much larger
volume (estimated 0.3 ha or 0.7 ac) of surface waters. This would be a temporary impact.
4.1.3 Permits
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated. In accordance with provisions of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act, a permit will be required from the COE for the discharge of dredged or
fill material into "Waters of the United States."
A Section 404 Nationwide Permit No. 23 is likely to be applicable for all impacts to Waters of the
United States 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 that 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;
12
(2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice of the agency or
department's application for the categorical exclusion and concurs with that determination.
A North Carolina D-:sion of Water Quality Section 401 Water Quality Certification is required
prior to the issuance of the Section 404. Section 401 Certification allows surface waters to be
temporarily impacted for the duration of the construction or other land manipulations.
4.1.4 Avoidance, Minimization and Mitigation
The COE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a wetland and
stream mitigation policy which embraces the concept of "no net loss" and sequencing. The purpose
of this policy is to restore and maintain the chemical, biological and physical integrity of Waters of
the United States. Mitigation has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts, minimizing
impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR
Section 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization and compensatory
mitigation) must be considered sequentially.
The concept of `avoidance' examines all appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting
impacts to Waters of the United States. A 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE states that 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 of median widths, ROW widths, fill slopes
and/or road shoulder widths. Other practical mechanisms to minimize impacts to Waters of the
United States crossed by the proposed project include: strict enforcement of sedimentation control
BMPs for the protection of surface waters during the entire life of the project; reduction of clearing
and grubbing activity; reduction/elimination of direct discharge into streams; reduction of runoff
velocity; re-establishment of vegetation on exposed areas, judicious pesticide and herbicide usage;
minimization of "in-stream" activity; and litter/debris control.
Avoidance and minimization is addressed more specifically for this project in the attached
Greensheet.
Compensatory mitigation is 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 functions and values may not be achieved in each and every permit action.
Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts that
remain after all appropriate and practicable minimization has been required. Compensatory actions
often include restoration, creation and enhancement of Waters of the United States. Such actions
should be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site. Compensatory
mitigation is not usually required with Nationwide Permit 23.
13
4.2 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 activities. 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 Fish and Wildlife (FWS). Other
species may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
4.2.1 Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered
and Proposed Threatened are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. As of March 22, 2001, the FWS lists the following federally
protected species for Randolph County (Table 3). A brief description of each species' characteristics
and habitat requirements follows.
Table 3. Federally-Protected Species for Randolph County

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Notronis mekistocholas Cape Fear shiner *Endangered
Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz's sunflower *Endangered
*Endangered (a species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range).
Notropis mekistocholas (Cape Fear shiner) Endangered
Animal Family: Cyprinidae
Date Listed: 9/26/87
The Cape Fear shiner is a small, moderately stocky minnow. Its body is flushed with a pale
silvery yellow, and a black band runs along its sides. The fins are yellowish and somewhat pointed.
The upper lip is black and the lower lip has a black bar along its margin.
Habitat for the Cape Fear shiner occurs in streams with gravel, cobble, or boulder substrates. It is
most often observed inhabiting slow pools, riffles, and slow runs associated with beds of water
willow (Justicia americana). Juveniles can be found inhabiting slackwater, among large rock
outcrops and in flooded side channels and pools. The Cape Fear shiner is thought to feed on bottom
detritus, diatoms, and other periphytes. Captive specimens feed readily on plant and animal material.
The Cape Fear shiner is limited to a few populations in North Carolina. The strongest population
of the Cape Fear shiner is in Chatham and Lee counties from the Locksville dam upstream to Rocky
River and Bear Creek. Another population is located above the Rocky River Hydroelectric Dam in
Chatham County, and the third population is found in the Deep River system in Randolph and Moore
counties.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION
NO EFFECT
14
The Little River is a smaller river system than is typically occupied by the Cape Fear Shiner. In
addition, the vegetation (water willow) typically found as habitat for the Cape Fear shiner was not
present. The DWQ recently conducted a fish community survey at the bridge (as well as 200 meters
upstream) and found no evidence of the Cape Fear Shiner. In addition, the NC Natural Heritage
Program database of rare species and unique habitats has no record for the presence of the Cape Fear
Shiner within the project vicinity. Therefore, project construction will not affect the Cape Fear
Shiner.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower) Endangered
Plant Family: Asteraceae
Federally Listed: June 6, 1991
Flowers Present: mid September-early October
Schweinitz's sunflower is a rhizomatous perennial herb that grows 1-2 in tall from a cluster of
carrot-like tubrous roots. The stems are deep red, solitary and branch only above mid-stem. The
leaves are rough on the surface and resin-dotted and loosely soft-white-pubescent beneath. Leaves of
the sunflower are opposite on the lower portion of the stem, and appear alternate on the upper stem.
The broad flowers are borne from September until frost. These flowers are yellow in color and are
arranged in an open system of upwardly arching heads. The fruit is a smooth, gray-black achene.
Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to North and South Carolina. These sunflowers grow best in
full sunlight or in light shade in clearings and along the edges of open stands of oak-pine-hickory
upland woods. Common soils that this species is found in are moist to dry clays, clay-loams, or sandy
clay-loams, often with a high gravel content and always moderately podzolized. Natural fires and
large herbivores are considered to be historically important in maintaining open habitat for these
sunflowers.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION
NO EFFECT
A survey was conducted for Schweinitz's sunflower on roadsides and at the edge of woods that
were deemed suitable habitat for this species on August 23, 1999. No specimens of this plant were
found during the search. In addition, the Natural Heritage Program database of rare species and
unique habitats has no record for Schweinitz's sunflower in the project vicinity.
4.2.2 Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
There are six Federal Species of Concern (FSC) listed for Randolph County. Federal Species of
Concern are not afforded federal protection under the ESA and are not subject to any of its provisions,
including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Federal
Species of Concern are defined as those species that may or may not be listed in the future. These
species were formerly candidate species, or species under consideration for listing for which there
was insufficient information to support a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered
and Proposed Threatened. Organisms which are listed as Endangered, Threatened, or Special
Concern by the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) list of rare plant and animal
species are afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina
Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
15
Table 4 lists Federal Species of Concern, the species' state status (if afforded state protection) and
the presence of suitable habitat for each species in the study area. This species list is provided for
information purposes as the status of these species may be upgraded in the future.
Table 4. Federal Species of Concern for Randolph County

Scientific name Common name State Status Habitat
Alasmidonta varicosa Brook floater T Yes
Dactyloctythere peedeensis Pee Dee crayfish ostracod SR* Yes
Etheostoma collis Carolina darter SC Yes
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe T Yes
Moxostoma sp. Carolina redhorse SR Yes
Villosa vaughaniana Carolina creekshell SC Yes
"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.
"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.
"*"--Historic record (last observed in the county more than 50 years ago). (NHP, 1997)
A review of the NC Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and unique habitats
revealed no records of Federal Species of Concern in or near the project study area. However, upon
the advice of the NC Wildlife Resources Commission, a survey was conducted for the mussel species
on August 23, 1999, in the Little River in the vicinity of SR 1135. Table 5 table summarizes findings
of this survey. See the attached Greensheet for environmental commitments to protect these species.
Table 5 Mussels Found in the Little River, Randolph County,
August 23, 1999.

Scientific name Common name State Status Federal
Status
Alasmidonta varicosa Brook floater T (PE) FSC
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe T (PE) FSC
Strophitus undulates Squawfoot T
Toxolasma pullus Savannah Lilliput _ T (PE) FSC
Villosa constricta Notched Rainbow SR (PSC)
Villosa vaughaniana Carolina creekshell SC (PE) FSC
Villosa delumbis Eastern creekshell SR
16
D. Air Quality and Traffic Noise
This project is an air quality "neutral" project, thus 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 substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, it will have no
substantial impact on noise levels. Temporary noise increases may occur during construction.
E. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires that 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 Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) based on criteria such as potential crop yield and possible level of input of economic
resources. The project will result in the conversion of a small amount of land but the area to be
converted is void of agricultural uses. Therefore, no further consideration of impacts to farmland is
required.
17
f
of worn
ems` North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Division of Highways
Project Development S Environmental
Analvsis Branch
Randolph County
Replace Bridge No. 382 on SR 1135
Over The Little River
B-3503
159
i
?. 0
i. ?
i
283 D
6
220
A
s
134 ?
1143
' Bn?e \0.382
.9 .' h .3

1133; 73 1131

% 74
N
124B
4 134 0)
I
- b 22

1112
1121
1130 !
%
N 1114 2 .
1239 I

/
c 0 10
1113
1.8
1127
i'
Ln w _•
M
'
I, 1 'Pisgah 1127 1123'

-
1114 1122
0

I Q
J
1121 1259
1
H 1115
/
1114
.
3
. 20
•
J p ?
1120 .00000
1111 1109 1118 7 / 1119

1112 1119 /
1L24
I 2 0 1183
1
11 15 ' N
1225

r D 1115
-

1112
- 1
1115 1119
-ii
0
2843
Michfield ?Ir
2845
i
J i
;
0
Figure 1

?eYry
?.....Lop-
L.
A ".a

C,?rR
/rer
A,aRiwj North Carolina Department of
;.? GA_ . Transportation
Division of High%avs
?? .•` Project Development S Environmental
1714" Analysis Branch
Randolph Count}
Replace Bridge No. 382 on SR 1135
Over The Little River
B-3503
Scale 1:1200 Figure 2
jF
y 1

Looking east across
Bridge No. 382
U3 ?Oo?=0u1 01: 16 STATE APCHAEJLOGY DEI I

Forth Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Statt Histuric Preservation Office
David L. S. Brook, Administrator
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives anJ History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: William D. Gilmore, P.E., M,ariager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
NC Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brooks U `
State Hist ,
Deputy reservation Officer
DATE: June 13, 2000
RE: Arci aeological Report, Replacement of Budge 382 on SR 1 135 over Little River. Randolph
County, TIP No. 5-3303. Federal Aid No. BR-7 113-50). ER 99-8186
Thant you for your letter of February 14, 2000, transmitting the archaeological survry report by Shane Petersen
and Brian Overton concerning the above project. We receit ed the archseologrieal site form to accompany the
report on April 3, 2000 We apologize For the delay in our response.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. we concur that the
followinz sites arc not eligible for the National Resister of Historic Places under criterion D:
31RD1321
This prehistoric lithic site lacks subsu-Faci. feature-5 and depositions) pararninu of artifacts and is not likely to
yield information important to prehistory.
In general the repor meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretarn of the Interior. Ike concur with the
authors' recommendation that no additional archaeological investi_atiolt be conducted in connection with this
project as currently proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Scciion 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Prtservation's Rcguiauons for Compliance x ith Section 106 eodiFied at 36 CFR
Part 900.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above. comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley. environmental review coordinator, a, 9191733-4763.
cc: R. Shelton
T. Padgett
b??
Shrine Peter sen CE
O
`
'
-
Lnentinn NlotlinC Addres+ oljnt-y d// ?•tcrrr?
t1
1 71
?7
1
ADMINISTRATION S07 .N 141uuni St.. Raleigh NC -41,17 Mail Sent.c C'. n,: OF
.?n
n
.
TT
7;x' 715•??•71
133
ARCHAEOLUt:Y
N 421 N. niounl St..
St
nl
N Ratclln NC
h NC
R,lei 4619 .N13i1 Service Cemrr, Riie,gn .,.
41,13 \1311 Se,\icc Center, Raleigh NC' :';, .
733-(047 ? 715•4%n1
RESTORATIO
SURVFY a PLANNING .,
on,u
5I5
.
11? N nwunt s g
aweigh INC +G(H Man 5:..ied C••ewr, Rnlridh Nr 176411.46Ik 1 7).t•1,wa . 71t.4?tn1

TIP = E-1. ?5c3 Federal Aid r BR - l (y County I10_1-10LDleh
CONCURRENCE FORM
FOR
PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Brief Project Descripyon
-4-1- 3B 2 Cn SR 13 5 eat t?1e- Ri v y?
On ?'?? ??a?q representatives of the
? North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHwA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Other
reviewed the subject project at
A scoping meeting
/Historic architectural resources photograph review session/ consuitati or
Other
All parties present agreed
/ there are no propenies over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effect.
?? there are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criterion
Consideration G within the project's area of potential effect.
there are properties over fifty years old (list attached) within the project's area of potential effect.
but based on the historical information available and the Dhotographs of each property, properties
identified as are
considered not eligible for the National Register and no tiurther evaluation of them is necessary.
there are no National Register-listed properties within the project's area of potential effect.
Sig
/
?A2 21
Representative, NCDOT at
7/Z/ ZZ
FH kA the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
7 ?/
Representative, 'SHPO - Date
State Historic Preservafion 0fficter
171 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Dennis Pipkin, Project Planning Engineer
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Cootdi for
Habitat Conser<-ation Program
DATE: March 19, 1999
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements in Caldwell, Davidson, Randolph, and
Wake counties. TIP Nos. B-3125, B-3126, B-3314, B-3448, B-3503 and
B-3527.
Biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have
reviewed the information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the
subject project. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the
National Environmental Police 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 recotnmendations arc as
follows:
1. "Ale '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 passagie beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and
does not block navigation by canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridle deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or enterin'g into the
stream. `
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.

Bridge Replacement Memo 2
March 19, 1999
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'x 10'.
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 anadromous fish, 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 NNIlife passage.
I 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. F#rap 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
designed and located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to
Bridge Replacement Memo
March 19, 1999
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-3125 - Caldwell - Bridge No. 34 over Blue Creek. Our field biologists took a
backpack electrofishing unit to sample this site. No trout found. The stream was
heavily silted and no critical habitat was found near the bridge. Standard comments
apply.
2. B-3126 - Caldwell County - Bridge No. 90 over the Gunpowder Creek. Our field
biologists took a backpack electrofishing unit to sample this site. No trout found.
This stream has a sand substrate with little other habitat. We recommend avoiding a
nice riffle area approximate]}, 15 meters downstream of the bridge. Species found at
the site were creek chubs and shiners: and to our surprise a smallmouth and two
largemouth bass from a single piece of woody debris. Standard comments apply.
3. B-3;14 - Caldwell County - Bridge No. 163 over the Buffalo Creek. Our field
biologists took a backpack electrofishing unit to sample this site. No trout found.
This stream is wide and shallow with almost exclusive riffle-run habitat. There was
no critical habitat in either direction of the bridge. We found hogsuckers, darters,
black nose dace, central stonerollers, and creek chubs. Standard comments apply.
4. B-3448 - Davidson Count}, - Bridge No. 166 over Kendall Creek. No specific
comments.
B-3503 - Randolph County - Bridge No. 382 over Little River. The Little River is a
very high quality stream with a cobble and large gravel substrate. The bridge has nice
riffles both upstream and do«mstream, which provide excellent sunfish habitat. We
request specifically that a spanning structure replace the existing bridge. We request
that no in-water work occur from April 1 to June 30. There are freshwater mussels at
this site listed as federal species of concern as well as several state-listed species.
Due to the diversity of mussels and the quality of the habitat at this location, we
request a field meeting to discuss conservation measures that should be employed to
protect these resources.
6. B-3527 - Wake County - Bridge No. 437 over Lower Barton's Creek. No specific
comments.
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 \vith spanning structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is
recommended in most cases. Spanning structures allow \Nildlife passage along
streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation and vehicle related mortality at highway
crossinns.

Bridge Replacement Memo 4 March 19, 1999
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.

See Sleet 1-A For Index of Steels
See Sheet 1-8 For Conventionol Symbols
ra

STATE OIL NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
?? c k
END
PR0IECT 134
H"afd Aumm Ra j
SR 1175
x
BEGIN J J? "m
PROJECTl
VICINITY MAP
RANDOLPH lu"OUNTY
LOCATION; BRIDGE NO. 382 OVER LITTLE RIVER
ON SR 1135
TYPE OF WORK GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE, STRUCTURE,
AND GUARDRAIL
4
-i- -11 SK 1135 HOWM

en
cZi

r?
STA 9+65.00 -L- BEGIN STATE PROJECT 82572103
STA 9+65.00 -L- BEGIN FA PROJECT BRZ-1135(8)
,ry
,rA 4
?? Q
TO NC 134
STA 22+00.00 -L- END STATE PROJECT 82572103
STA. 22+00.00 -L- END FA PROJECT BRZ-1135(8)
PRELIMINARY PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR CONST2UCTION
NL
o?
o?
po
ai
DESIGN DATA PROJECT LENGTH Prepared in The Office of. MURAMCS hMMEER DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
ADT 1005 = 150 DIVISION
O
F STATE OF NORTH CAROLMA
ADT 1015 = 300 `
Ridle
Dr.,
1001
DHV = 10% Length Roadway F. A. Project BRZ-1135(8) = 0.213 MILES "M STANMUM srecafeuruv
Length Structure F. A. Project BRZ-1135(8) = 0.021 MILES
D =
% Total Length State Project 8.2572103 = 0.234 MILES RrGHT OF WAY DATE; B
L
MOORE
PE ra
3%
APRIL 30
2002 .
.
.
PXO=
ROADWAY IGN Pa
STAM oevmr Mr-%7=
V 6o MPH 00 . DEPARTMENT OF 7RANSPORT41770V
' (TEST 1% + DUAL 2%) LETTING DATE: FEDERAL HIGHWAY AD.NINISTRA770h
"DESIGN EXCERION tMV,= JUNE 17.2003 ?AQJ=DM=MUM=
E0t THE DESIGN STEED mm"
ANJ A 1>tG 1TK'CA1 QJ[rE

__ Pd

dRl.'ISiRR AlfiDNCf

nrv..mv .n.m?.+n...u n..v
BEGIN MDGE END BRXE
STA 14+45M STA 15+55M

i
r
s
m
rv
'S.U.E = SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEER
ROADS & RELATED ITEMS
Edge of Pavement ----------------------------------
Curb --------------------------------------------------
Prop. Slope Stakes Cut ---------------------------- ___
Prop. Slope Stakes Fill ---------------------------- ___ F
Prop. Woven Wire Fence ------------------------- e
Prop. Chain Link Fence ------------------------- E3 E3_
Prop. Barbed Wire Fence -------------------------
Prop. Wheelchair Ramp --------------------------
Curb Cut for Future Wheelchair Ramp --------. cF
Exist. Guardrail ------------------------------------
Prop. Guardrail ------------------------------------- - - -
Equality Symbol ------------------------------------
Pavement Removal & Obliteration ---------------
RIGHT OF WAY
Baseline Control Point ----------------------------
Existing Right of Way Marker --------------------- Q
Exist. Right of Way Line wMarker ----------------
Prop. Right of Way Line with Proposed
RW Marker (Iron Pin & Cap) ----------------- _
Prop. Right of Way Line with Proposed
(Concrete or Granite) RrW Marker -------------
Exist. Control of Access Line ----------------------- - c}-
Prop. Control of Access Line ----------------------
Exist. Easement Lino --------------------------------
Prop. Temp. Construction Easement Lino ------- -E -
Prop. Temp. Drainage Easement Lino ----------- -rCE-
Prop. Perm. Drainage Easement Line ----------- -PCE-

HYDROLOGY
Stream or Body of Water ------------------------
River Basin Buffer ----------------------------------- - 62
Flow Arrow -.._...?
Disappearing Stream ------_----_-----------------?..._
Spring ------------------------------------------------- p^,.-/
Swamp Marsh ------------------------ -------------- ?L
Shoreline - - - - - - -
Falls, Rapids ------------------------------------------
Prop lateral, Tail, Head Ditches -----------------
SIR UCTURES
MAJOR
Bridge, Tunnel, or Box Culvert
Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall
and End Wall --------------------------------- CONC WW
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLS
MINOR
Head & End Wall ------------------------------- con/-c M
Pipe Culvert --------------- ------------------------ = = = ;
Footbridge
Drainage Boxes-------------------------------------- ?ce
Paved Ditch Gutter -------------------_---------
UTILITIES
Exist. Pole ---------------- •
Exist. Power Polo ------------------------------------- +
Prop. Power Pole ------------------------------------ b
Exist. Telephone-Pole ------------------------------- +
Prop. Telephone Pole------------------------------- -
0-Exist. Joint Use Pole --------------------------------- 4-
Prop. Joint Use.Pole--------------------------------- -6-
Telephone Pedestal _------------------------------ ID
U,G Telephone Cable Hand Hold ------------- "H
Cable TV Pedestal --------------------------------- ID
USG TV Cable Hand Hold-----------------------. I]
UG Power Cable Hand Hold
-----_.-..--------
Hydrant ----------- ------------------------------------ -0
Satellite Dish b
Exist. Water Valve ------------------------------------
Sower Clean Out -----------------------------------
Power Manhole ----------------- - ------ ------- 0
Telephone Booth ------------------------------------
Cellular Telephone Tower-------------------------
Water Manhole --------------------------------------
Light Pole --------------------------------------------- 0
H-Frame, Pole ?o
Power Line Tower-----------------------------------
Pole with Base -------------------------------------- a
Gas Volvo -------------------------------------------
Gas Meter ------------------------------------------- 0
Telephone Manhole --------------------------------- 0
Power Transformer ---------------------------------- 0
Sanitary Sewer Manhole --------------------------- 0
Storm Sewer Manhole ----------------------------
Tank; Water, Gas, Oil ------------------------------
Water Tank With legs----------------------------- 0
Traffic Signal Junction Box------------------------ (]
Fiber Optic Splice Box -----------------------------. p
Television or Radio Tower------------------------
Utility Power Line Connects to Traffic
Signal Lines Cut Into the Pavement ------------- -- -- rs--rs-
Recorded Water Line ---------------------------. -,-?
Designated Water Line (S.U.E.*) ----------------
Sanitary Sewer --------------------------------------
Recorded Sanitary Sewer Force Main -------
Designated Sanitary Sewer Force Main(S.U.E.*) _ Fss?ss -
Recorded Gas Line ??-
Designated Gas Line (S.U.E.-) ------------------ G_
Storm Sewer ---------------------------------------- -s-s-
Recorded Power Line -----------------------------
Designated Power Line (S.U.E.*) ---------------
Recorded Telephone Cable ---------------------
Designated Telephone Cable (S.U.E `) -------- __r_ _r_ _
Recorded UG Telephone Conduit --------
Designated UG Telephone Conduit (S.U.E.*) Unknown Utility (S.U.E.*) --------------------- -7Url--- 'Uil-
Recorded Television Cable --------------------- -rY-TV-
Designated Television Cable (S.U.E.*) -------- --rv--rr-_
Recorded Fiber Optics Cable ------------------ -FO-FO-
Designated Fiber Optics Cable (S.U.E.*) -----
Exist. Water Meter -------------------------------- --FO--FO-
Q
UIG Test Holo (S.U.E.*) ---------------------------
Abandoned According to US Record --------- .rTIB
End of Information --------------------------------- E.Ol
BOUNDARIES & PROPERTIES
State Lino -------------------------------------------
County Lino -------------------------------------------
Township Line -------------------------------------- -- ----
City Lino ----------------------------------------------- -----
Reservation lino------------------------------------- - ------
Property Una-----------------------------------------
Property Uno Symbol------------------------------- R
Exist. Iron Pin ------------------------------------ o
Property Comor ------------------------------------- --+
Property Monument--------------------------------- 69
Property Number ----- ------------------------------

Parcel Number ---------------------------------------
123
8
Fence Lino ------------------------------------------- -X-X-X-

Existing Wetland Boundaries --------------------- wR 6 6BN
_ _wLB- _
High Quality Wetland Boundary ---------------- -NO wcB-
Medium Quality Wetland Boundaries------.-- -NO WLB-
Low Quality Wetland Boundaries--------------- -La wlB-
Proposed Wetland Boundaries------------------- -•lB-
Existing Endangered Animal Boundaries------- _ _ EAB_ _
Existing Endangered Plant Boundaries --------- - -EPB- _
PROJECT MUENCF NO.
fN@r NO.
BUILDINGS & OTHER CULTURE CaD
Buildings ---------------------------------------------
Foundations ------------------------------------------ - I
Area Outline ---------------------------------------
Gate -------------------------------------- __ -------- r
Gas Pump Vent or UG Tank Cap ---_-- o
Church C:L
School ------------------------------------------------
Park ------------------- _ ---------------------------- - -
L-?
Cemeto J
Dom ---------------------------------------------------
Sign---------------------------------------------------- o

Well --------------------------------------------------- 0
Small Mine ------------------------------------------ x
Swimming Pool -------------------------------------
TOPOGRAPHY
Loose Surface --------------------------------------
Hard Surface ---------------------------------------
Change in Road Surface ------------------------ _------_--_-
Curb ---------------------------------------------------
Right of Way Symbol ----------------------------- Riw
Guard Post ------------------------------------------ 0cP
Paved Walk -------
Bridge ------------------------------------------------
Box Culvert or Tunnel --------
)
Ferry ------------------------------------------------- ---------
Culvert ---------------------------------------------- ---------------
Footbridge ------------------------------ ..----...-•------
Trail, Footpath ------------------------------------- - - _ -
Light House
VEGETATION
Single Tree ------------------------------------------ Q
Single Shrub ---------------------------------------- o
Hodge ------------------------------------------------
Woods Une -------------------------------------------n
Orchard ---------------------------------------------- Q4QQ4Q
Vineyard --------------------------------------------- ?hErLRD
RAILROADS
Standard Gauge
[v IM.STMIaa
RR Signal Milepost ----------------------------- 0
rte ss
Switch ------------------------------------------------
n' r&1W 02IC2100

PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
( FINAL PAVEMENT DESIGN )
PROP. APPROX. 114" ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE, TYPE S9.8A,
C1 AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 140 LBS. PER 80. YD.
PROP. APPROX. 214" ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE, TYPE 69.6A,
C2 AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 140 LBB. PER 60. YD. IN EACH OF TWO
LAYERS.
PROP. VAR. DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE CCURSE TYPE S2.8A,
1
C9 AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 112 LBB. PER $D. Y0. PER 1
DEPTH. TO
"
BE PLACED IN LAYERS NOT LESS THAN 114
IN DEPTH OR GREATER
THAN 114" IN DEPTH.
E1 PROP. APPROX. 314" ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE COURSE, TYPE 625.CB, AT
AN AVERAGE RATE OF 399 LBS. PER 80. YD.
PROP. VAR. DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE BABE COURSE, TYPE B28.OB,
E2 AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 114 LBS. PER 80. YD. PER 1" DEPTH. TO
BE PLACED IN LAYERS NOT LESS THAN 3" IN DEPTH OR GREATER
THAN 811' IN DEPTH.
J1 PROP. 6" AGGREGATE BASE COURSE.
P PRIME COAT AT THE RATE OF 0.38 GAL. PER 80. YD.
T EARTH MATERIAL.
U EXISTING PAVEMENT.
vi VARIABLE DEPTH ASPHALT PAVEMENT.
(SEE WEDGING DETAIL)
null; rAYCMLNI LUUL 6LUPttl AHt 1;1 UNLE.55 6H0'8N OTHER6E6E.
VAR. SLOPE
SEE XSECT

PROIECE ESEEENa NO. SHEET NO.
B-3503 2
ROADWAY COIGN PAVWENT COIGN
ENOWNEEK ENGNEO
P?t.q
L 111 INARY1 PLANS
DO I
T USE FOR CO ;STRUCTIOZ4
VAR. SLOPE
SEE XSECT.
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.1
TRANSMON FROM EXISTING -L- STA 9+65.00
TO -L- STA. 10+5256
4, STA. 10+5256 TO -L- STA. 11+17.85
4- STA. 18+69.59 TO 4- STA. 21+40.00
-L- STA. 21+40.00 TO -L- STA. 22+00.00
TRANSMON TO EXISTING
VAR SLOPE
SEE XSECT.

0
u
DETAIL SHOWING SHOULDER BERM GUTTER ON -L-
-L- STA. 14+31 TO -L- STA. 14+44 LT
-L- STA. 14+33 TO -L- STA. 14+46 RT
-L- STA. 15+54 TO -L- STA. 15+67 LT
-L- STA. 15+56 TO -L- STA. 15+69 RT
t? C3 C1 E2
3.0' MN.
Wedging Detail For Resurfacing
Use With Typical Section No. I
VAR SLOPE
SEE X-SECI
TYPICAL SECTION NO.3
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.2
4- STA. 11+17.85 TO 4- STA. 14+45.00 (BEG. BADGE)
-L- STA. 15+55.00 (END BADGE) TO -L- STA. 18+6959
USE TYPICAL SECTION NO.3
4- STA. 14+45.CO )BEG. BRIDGE) TO
-L- STA. 15+55.00 (END EADGE)
TYPICAL SECTION NO. 1
TYPICAL SECTION NO. 2
0
DWIGHT HALL
DD RAT PG 233
Pe 39 PG 10
7,u\
FUEL KI?EY
DO M54 K 627
P6 39 PO 10
385
a?
er
N
36 S7.7g
Arg.?
SR A s
?S .nee
TIE Ex. DITCH
TO PROPOSED
i
i
i
i
1
s 5
DETAIL D DETAIL E
GRASSED Scal LATERAL BASE DITCH DETAIL DI /
r (Not to Scale) I Not to Scale) SPECIAL CUT DITCH
aun I I'",: nil Fln I Not to Scale)
D a r r. slo" N,rurm - rioua.r
Proposed Ditch S?iIasb B' M11 0 Lp Fr (rourd o
ode (Sea Proftal n1D Bap B ?DFr uhD=I OFr. y
_ FROM STA 17.00 TO STA 14.00 •L- RT, y ,oZ
1 N /yI Sxpa K 2=Ft- FROM S7A 17.50 TO STA I8.50 •l• RT.P
p ( iFr. FROM STA 16.00 TO STA 18.00 -l• LT. FROM S7A 16.00 TO STA 21.35 t• LT p't°
B uh o . LO Ft.
B . ? FFT. /
o s B . ?Ft,
aN'o, FROM STA 14.00 TO STA 6.30 -L- RT.
FROM STA 6.65 TO\ 00 -L- LT.
i
TOE PROTECTION \
(Not to Scat on \ /
3 ?? L or
S J B=?F1, \
a • -LPr.
{, • T Pe or lu+s. p . , PIP RAP
m FROM STA 13.80 TO STA 6.20 -L- LT.
o $1
2 1 0 =a
0
DETAIL F
EXCAVATE EXISTING FILL
1w.4H
SECTION VIEW
To Be
Excavat?edpr;
PROFLE VIEW
Ex. Bridge
(too bee?reemored?j -?Ex.
Ex. Abut?
Ito be
removed)
rvate Ex. Fill'
'CAV, = 1000 C.Y
FROM STA 6.00 TO STA 16.00 t• LT
1
PHILLP BARINES j 91 .. .. O
OB 1400 PG 1673 Z. m 1 .. ..
re 39 Mti q WLLMM THOMAS
+ ( 1 JORGE HERNANDEZ CD 11[43 PG 252
PS 23 PG rl
38 K S RETAIN 30'CMP Do 1397 pG S8 o EXCAVATE Ex. / T NO o
0 1 I• PB 32 Pc U °I-SEE DETAIL F } 0
I 1? I _ X -- < I 12 L- 15.38.73
1 -1 ? ^\ E
GR ' TO
Pr Sta. 13
12E
)TECTION CTION
F.7,
TDE F t a I it ME
CLASS 'B' RP RAP
EST.2 TONS
M/ T ST FF
PKOIKT KBEk?JQ NO. SHIM NO.
B-3503 4
kW II NO.
KOALNAY DESiON
ENGINEER H=MUCS
ENGNEEA
L• .taw
00 IT USE FOR co ,STRUCTION
STEPHEN KRELL
/ C8 1772 PG 6Wi
re2s PGD
4jJ?/2JF
??0r
N1?
5
>e / O
VICTOR GUEZ
q
ati a 06 1622 Pr
she "R PS h PG m /
r
A /AV
a 'D ? k
/ 6/ ? ^ti
/ hre ?AO
/ 9 BL-3 S S MR PG C54VEN
I . L / -r Pe K PG 0
L 19#30ig 0 /
Ex. R/W Y /
12
?G
6r
CLASS 'B' RIP RAP
EST.3 TONS 2' BASE LATERAL DITCH
W/ 10 SY FF W/5' BERM
SEE DETAIL E
DOE • 267 CY
128 SPECIAL DITCH
SEE DETAIL C
5171' -1 m .,,. n
iA ^ S?
°'
t
37PaED f
M - a
/ti
ONC. NW
JSR y
-- ? C c NW N• y/
50R? ?- 4 F 1 BM
? TB

c
..
EN ?
.,
?,
. EV
2 6
?' -24.A? r..
>• ?-
*c
,r 5 T gG ^? -
E ,
..
I v v ,t,,,u,
,
,
..
? •
?- .
? tray ??
SOL17 ??. WOWS
ECIAL CUT DITCH
E DETAIL A c _
_ G
y
]}
??
C f fc
o Py f. 6
O SPECIAL CUT DITCH ffL 70?,K
SEE DETAIL C iBA2G T
r 18' CSP w '
iE
\ JOHN FOUNTAIN 2 ELBOWS pp
CO 143 PG LO
' \ \
10'BASE GRASSED N6=
SWALE W/5' BERM .

I
SEE DETAIL D T
DOE = 22 Cy CLASS 'B' .
Sjl?94-(-M STATE PRM '&' s "ejn•w.E 6fG1u BRIDGE ERIP RAP
STA2 TONS
\ STA 14.45.00 w/ T SY FF
\ END BRIDGE
DETAIL A
SPECIAL CUT DITCH
( Not to Scale)
u,?re 1 drr
WM1D=_QAFr.
FROM STA 9.59 TO STA 10.00 -L- RT.
7
r
DATUM DESCRIPTION
THE LWATZED 07701119E SYSTEM CEVEJORED FOR THIS MECT
15 &IZO Da TtE STATE PIAVE C7XF>DIAAES ESTaMED 6'
ACTS FOR AU 2W -MICA'
PITH 1110 83 STATE PIAIE GRID CDY5l1?.PES OF
AOTTHIAG?2TILR7Tt1EAAlAG 1)510?'2i3TU
TnE AfW C00IAED GRID FKTDR USED OW THIS Pf"CT
IGUX TO GRID) IS O.W9 S
THE IL L WSEAT GRID EEARIAD AID
LXN ZED AORIZOTAL G9MOID DISTAACE FTC1V
-MICA' TO i• STATICA' tOIS
W SS • 413&5' W 251P FT
AL LI" DIUM10115 ARE MALIZED AQRMCII)AL D1STAICES
VERTICAL D4TW1 USED IS AGO 29
\ STA RKS.
W/10' BERM
(Not to Scale)
ELEv.=645.0 10' J
F/Ft.. IP,
tiG7PdFZ Bed
TYPE OF LINER r CLASS T'
NOILIEKTEED ROCK PLATING BEYOND DETAIL
STATION RANGE 70 COVER FILL SLOPE
TRANSITION BACK TO 2d
12' CSP W/ 1(90 DEG) ELBOW (INLET END) -
ELBOW TO BE SET W/ TOP ELEV = 644.40'
OR AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER
CLASS 'B' RIP RAP
EST. ITON
W/ 4 SY FF
SKETCH OF BRIDGE IN RELATIONSHIP TO PAVEMENT
N

QI
4`1"r
I1
\ .1 ! r)
FCP PDND RO
CK
PL
AT
ING ? F
•

RaX7X+c W
oaX ? q
W/
6ERM
EST.
66
0
SY
SEE DETAL G

F
,? r
?S
DO NOT / A21-
DISTURB
/ ..
.. s
r
• PC $fQ.17+4oJ2 iP

1 rr LT.
A7+D1 J y
POND WILL BE
T ARKY
\ PT 514. 20 +30f
.
DRAINED
DURING
CONSTRUCTION 1
CONSTIYJCTX71 {P

O
f JOSEPH Hill
..??•? `L D8 133 FIG 523
n
£x. R1w
f
w r ! ? 10 1 S?
! NrR ? i ?' \?\.
C STAPES -L- END STATE PAIXECT 8-350
aE
?+ TDp
O
9
W
0
WILLIAM ALCON

a?
''bWXr ! "_'? am CAROL MA LESS
re N5 PG 31
re 25 k 9+ De AT3 PG R03
re 25 PG 94
D ¦ T070W 0 - UJYOCV
L ¦ 25Wf L + ES3EP
T-fi72V T¦
Sm
S
F
- OD{ SE - ODS I I
?
1
?f?
r
FB '?
±
r - 'A'
'?'
rn FOR 4- PROFILE S EE SHEET 5
'D,SG.'1 EXCD701 FLrY "-r FM TICE DE =1 FOR STRUCTURE SEE SHEETS S1-S19
SPEED FAW 60 !'PH TO 30 L'PH

=Q
° ac
ci?u
h
X-4
`a
° at
c?u
r
? xo
ff r
NO.

N •?
i^0
an]
? ?O

o F
a
o?
o„
N •?
i^?
Kau
QUA
?'o
?:li

a?
"o

1