The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20110401 Ver 1_Application_20110502? d 10 FwarF t r >_ SAY- D 22011 ??-W 1 Office Use Only: Corps action ID no. DWQ project no. Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008 Pre-ConstiifeOj tification C Form A. Xfioucant Information 1. Processing la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps: N Section 404 Permit E] Section 10 Permit 1b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: 3 or General Permit (GP) number: 1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ? Yes ® No 1d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply): N 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit ? 401 Water Quality Certification -Express ® Riparian Buffer Authorization le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401 Certification: ? Yes N No For the record only for Corps Permit: ? Yes N No 1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program. ? Yes N No 1g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1h below. ? Yes N No 1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes N No 2. Project Information 2a. Name of project: B-4232 Pitt 9, NC 903 Over Swift Creek Pitt County Bridge to Bridge Replacement WBS Element Number 33575.1.1 2b. County: Pitt 2c. Nearest municipality / town: Winterville 2d. Subdivision name: N/A 2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state project no: 33575 3. Owner Information 3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: North Carolina Department of Transportation 3b. Deed Book and Page No. N/A 3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if applicable): N/A 3d. Street address: 105 Pactolus Highway NC 33 P.O. Box 1587 3e. City, state, zip: Greenville, NC 27835 3f. Telephone no.: 252-830-3490 3g. Fax no.: 252-830-3341 3h. Email address: jbjohnson@ncdot.gov Page 1 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version 4. Applicant Information (if different from owner) r+ 4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ® Other, specify: Division 2 Environmental Officer 4b. Name: Jay B. Johnson 4c. Business name (if applicable): North Carolina Depratment of Transportation 4d. Street address: P.O. Box 1587 4e. City, state, zip: Greenville, NC 27835 4f. Telephone no.: 252-830-3490 4g. Fax no.: 252-830-3341 4h. Email address: jbjohnson?ncdot.gov 5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable) 5a. Name: N/A 5b. Business name (if applicable): 5c. Street address: 5d. City, state, zip: 5e. Telephone no.: 5f. Fax no. 5g. Email address: Page 2 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version B. Project Information and Prior Project History 1. Property Identification 1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): B-4232 Pitt 9,NC 903 Over Swift Creek Latitude: N 35.526444 Longitude: - W 1b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): 77.425986 (DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD) 1c. Property size: N/A acres 2. Surface Waters 2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Swift Creek proposed project: 2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C;Sw;NSW 2c. River basin: Neuse Middle Neuse 03020202 3. Project Description 3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application: B-4232 Pitt 9, NC 903 Over Swift Creek is a paved Primary State Highway. Woodlands and Agriculture dominate the landscape. 3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property: 90 Square Feet (0.002 Acres) of 404 Wetland Impacts For The Bridge to Bridge Replacement. 3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property: 60' This site is part of a longer adjacent stream system 3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: Bridge To Bridge Replacement ; the Existing Bridge has deteoriated and needs replacing. 3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The Existing 52' Long by 24' Wide Timber Bridge will be replaced with a Proposed 80' Long by 42' Wide 21 Cored Slab Bridge. Excavators,Dump Trucks,and Crane Trucks will be used for the Bridge To Bridge Replacement. 4. Jurisdictional Determinations 4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property / ? Yes ® No ? Unknown project (including all prior phases) in the past. Comments: 4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type ? Preliminary ? Final of determination was made? 4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: Name (if known): NCDOT Other. NCDOT 4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation. August,2006 and March,2010 5. Project History 5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ? Yes ® No ? Unknown this project (including all prior phases) in the past? 5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file' instructions. Page 3 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version 6. Future Project Plans 6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No 6b. If yes, explain. Page 4 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version C. Proposed Impacts Inventory 1. Impacts Summary 1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply): ® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ® Buffers ? Open Waters ? Pond Construction 2. Wetland Impacts If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted. 2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f. Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction number- Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres) Temporary W1 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps 0 ? No ? DWQ W2 El P r-1 T ® Yes ® Corps 0 ? No ? DWQ W3 ®P ? T Fill/Excavation For Bottomland ® Yes ® Corps Retaining Wall Hardwood Forest ? No ? DWQ 90 W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps 0 ? No ? DWQ W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps ? No ? DWQ W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps ? No ? DWQ 2g. Total wetland impacts 90 Sq. Ft. 2h. Comments: 90 Sq. ft.(0.002 Acres) 404 Wetland Impacts 3. Stream Impacts If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this question for all stream sites impacted. 3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g. Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear Temporary M (INT)? other) (feet) feet) S1 ®P ? T Proposed Pilings Swift Creek ® PER ? INT ? Corps ® DWQ 25' 52 Sq. Ft.' S2 ®P ? T ? PER ? Corps 0' 26 El INT ? DWQ S3 ® P ? T ? PER ? Corps 0' 0' ? INT ? DWQ S4 ® P ? T Proposed Pilings Swift Creek ® PER ? INT ? Corps ® DWQ 25' 52 Sq. Ft. S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps ? INT ? DWQ S6 ? PEI T ? PER ? Corps ? INT ? DWQ 3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 130 Sq. Ft 3i. Comments: 130 Sq. ft. Feet of Stream Impacts Page 5 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version 4. Open Water Impacts If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below. 4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e. Open water Name of waterbody impact number- (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres) Permanent (P) or Tem ora 01 ?P?T 02 ?P?T 03 ?P?T 04 ?P?T 4f. Total open water impacts None 4g. Comments: None 5. Pond or Lake Construction If and or lake construction ro osed, then complete the chart below. 5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e. Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland Pond ID Proposed use or purpose (acres) number of pond Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded P1 P2 5f. Total None 5g. Comments: None 5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required? ? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no: 5i. Expected pond surface area (acres): 5j. Size of pond watershed (acres): 5k. Method of construction: 6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ) If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form. 6a. ® Neuse ?Tar-Pamlico ? Other: Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman 6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g. Buffer impact number- Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet) Temporary impact required? 61 N P ? T Fill Swift Creek ® Nos 1305 Sq. Ft. 905 Sq. Ft. B2 N P ? T Fill Swift Creek ® Nos 4990 Sq. Ft. 3160 Sq. Ft. B3 N P ? T Fill Swift Creek N ? YeNo s 3220 Sq. Ft. 2250 Sq. Ft. 6h. Total buffer impacts 6i. Comments: See Page 6-A For Total Buffer Impacts Page 6 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version 4. Open Water Impacts If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below. 4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e. Open water Name of waterbody impact number - (if applicable) Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres) Permanent(P)or Temporary 01 ?P?T 02 ?P,?T 03 ?P?T 04 ?P?T 4f. Total open water impacts None 4g. Comments: None 5. Pond or Lake Construction If and or lake construction proposed, then complete the chart below. 5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. 5e. Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland Pond ID Proposed use or purpose (acres) number of pond Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded P1 P2 5f. Total None 5g. Comments: None 5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required? ? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no: 5i. Expected pond surface area (acres): 5j. Size of pond watershed (acres): 5k. Method of construction: 6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ) If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form. 6a. ® Neuse ?Tar-Pamlico ? Other: None Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman 6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g. Buffer impact number- Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact Permanent (P) or for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet) Temporary impact required? 61 ®P ? T B4 Fill Swift Creek ® Nos 1060 Sq. Ft. 710 Sq. Ft. B2 ?P?T ?Yes ? No 83 ?P?T ?Yes ? No 6h. Total buffer impacts 10575 Sq. Ft. 7025 Sq. Ft. 6i. Comments: Buffer Zone 1 Impacts = 0.2 Acres Buffer Zone 2 Impacts = 0.2 Acres oPagefi of 10 PCN Form -Version 1.3 December.10, 2008 Version D. Impact Justification and Mitigation 1. Avoidance and Minimization la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project. There are 90 Sq. Ft.(0.002 Acres) of 404 Wetland Impacts for this Project; Therefore,The Wetland Impacts have been minimized to the greatest extent feasible, with just those impacts occurring for the Proposed Bridge,Power Line,Water Line,and Cable TV Lines. 1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques. Use of existing roadway to operate construction equipment; no equipment will enter wetlands. 2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State 2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State? ? Yes ®No 2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps 2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project? ? Mitigation bank El Payment to in-lieu fee program ? Permittee Responsible Mitigation 3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank 3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: 3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity 3c. Comments: 4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program 4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes 4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet 4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold 4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet 4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres 4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres 4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres 4h. Comments: 5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan 5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan. Page 7 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version 6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ 6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires ? Yes ®No buffer mitigation? 6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the amount of mitigation required. 6c. 6d. 6e. Zone . Reason for impact Total impact Multiplier Required mitigation (square feet) (square feet) Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba) Zone 2 1.5 6f. Total buffer mitigation required: None 6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank, permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund). N/A 6h. Comments: Page 8 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ) 1. Diffuse Flow Plan 1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ®Yes ? No within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules? 1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why. Comments: Sheet Flow through the Vegetated Shoulders and Special Sediment Control Fence will be used to treat Stormwater Run-Off From the Road. New Pipes Will Be Installed At Station 16+75 to take stormwater from the Proposed Bridge and from Line Ahead Stations. Stor mwater Will Flow Through the Existing Driveway Pipe at Station 15+90 Lt -L-. The Existing 18" RCP will be Extended to Accommodate the Relocated Maintenance Road at Station 17+00 Lt. -L-. The ® Yes ? No Existing 15" RCP located at Station 16+50 Rt.-L- will be removed. A Proposed 15", RCP will be installed to replace the existing 18" RCP at Station 17+50Rt. -L-.The stor mwater will then be routed through a Proposed 18" RCP located at Station 16+50 Rt.-L- and the water will sheetflow through vegetated uplands. A vegetated swale will be constructed starting at Station 13+50, Lt-L- and tying into Swift Creek at Station 16+00 Lt. -L-. No Deck Drains will Discharge Storm water directly into the stream or the Riparian Buffer. 2. Stormwater Management Plan 2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? N/A Roadway/Bridge Project % 2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ® Yes ? No 2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: 2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan: Sheet Flow through the Vegetated Shoulders and Special Sediment Control Fence will be used to treat Stonmwater Run- Off From the Road. New Pipes Will Be Installed At Station 16+75 to take stor mwater from the Proposed Bridge and from Line Ahead Stations. Stormwater Will Flow Through the Existing Driveway Pipe at Station 15+90 Lt -L-. The Existing 18" RCP will be Extended to Accommodate the Relocated Maintenance Road at Station 17+00 Lt. -L-. The Existing 15" RCP located at Station 16+50 Rt.-L- will be removed. A Proposed 15" RCP will be installed to replace the existing 18" RCP at Station 17+50Rt. -L-.The stormwater will then be routed through a Proposed 18" RCP located at Station 16+50 Rt.-L- and the water will sheetflow through vegetated uplands. A vegetated swale will be constructed starting at Station 13+50, Lt-L- and tying into Swift Creek at Station 16+00 Lt. -L-. No Deck Drains will Discharge Storm water directly into the stream or the Riparian Buffer. ? Certified Local Government 2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stonmwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program ® DWQ 401 Unit 3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review 3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? N/A ? Phase II 3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ? NSW El USMP apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed ? Other. N/A 3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ®No attached? Page 9 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version 4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review ? Coastal counties 4a . Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? HQW ? ORW (check all that apply): ? Session Law 2006-246 ® Other: NPDES Permit 4b . Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been attached? ? Yes ®No 5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review 5a . Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ? Yes ? No 5b . Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ? No F. Supplementary Information 1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement) I a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ® Yes ? No use of public (federal/state) land? 1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ®No (North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)? 1c- If you answered Tres" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.) ? Yes ? No Comments: 2. Violations (DWQ Requirement) 2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B.0200)? 2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No 2c. If you answered "yes° to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s): 3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement) 3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in Yes ®No additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? 3b. If you answered "yes° to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the most recent DWQ policy. If you answered 'no,' provide a short narrative description. 4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement) 4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility. N/A Page 10 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version 5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement) 5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or ? Yes ® No habitat? 5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act ? Yes ®No impacts? 5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. E] Raleigh ? Asheville 5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat? NCWRC,Mr. Travis Wilson and On-Site Investigation 6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement) 6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ® No 6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat? On-Site Investigation and Moratorium Information From Travis Wilson, NCWRC 7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement) 7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ® No status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in North Carolina history and archaeology)? 7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources? NCDOT Historic Architecture and Archaeology Natural Environment Unit of PD&EA 8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement) Sa. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ® Yes ? No 8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: Bridge designed to no-rise standards 8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? FEMA FIRM Maps Jay B. Johnson April 20, 2011 Applicant/Agent's Printed Name A Ica Ag s ignature Date (Agent's signature is hal id on if an a thorization letter from the applicant Iss provided.) Page 11 of 11 PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version B-4232 f BRIDGE TO BRIDGE REPLACEMENT OFPITT 9 S NC 903 OVER SWIFT CREEK / t ' GREENVILLE,SW USGS QUAD MAP SHEET NUMBER 56-A OF THE SOIL SURVEY OF PITT COUNTY FIRM PANEL 4665 J MIDDLE NEUSE 03020202 3 cem , ,., MAP NUMBER 3720466500 J OCTOBER 27, 2010 ?I za) ; r ? SWIFT CREEK C;Sw;NSW WBS ELEMENT NUMBER 335751.1 £4 _ -" 30049 I ' f (rl( iq 5 ; \? I = 1 tit 3R#2 3 1125 `mA \. m r I"/.! A 6.7 Y= 650140.0879 a y` `i. \l Y X=1468306.0691 _ Cem.: ` N35^_3/•_35'• \ -. W 77"-2S•-34" N 35.526444 DEGREES _,II tI W 77.425986 DEGREES m 00 b .. - _ "o co m , G?11 •10.6 `? ' 11 ( i 1119 3 i ~ .1 1 1h j.= r '' f E t - YV 1 inch = 2,000 feetaoo1 `S, j m 0 7001,400 2,800 4,200 5,600 u S ?\` Feet %1 \t FF Nf '4 A B-4232 4 : u r ? IS. BRIDGE TO BRIDGE REPLACEMENT OF PITT 9 f?j NC 903 OVER SWIFT CREEK t n' GREENVILLE,SW USGS QUAD MAP e y y+ SHEET NUMBER 56-A OF THE SOIL SURVEYOFPITT COUNTY FIRM PANEL 4665 J MIDDLE NEUSE 03020202 ,73383 MAP NUMBER 3720466500 J OCTOBER 27, 2010 ° SWIFT CREEKC;Sw;NSW WBS ELEMENT NUMBER 3357511 r • r._... fir( a.fi.?r v ?.« \ I . 1 wr per{ 6 ak ?, t ,TllltC7??', (I J F?zhS 4° Co I MIR \ '1 '' ?9' II v? .dl I .I + 7300 j Y=650240.0879 c? ?crs????7 c X- 2468306 0691"?* ?rY o tt .. Y N35^-3V-35" F 7 sn4 m«d ! / .. -? W77^-15'-34" s N N 35.526444 DEGREES r -'4 W 77.425986 DEGREES ` t ? z ., '° - ?tSkJk W l E 1 inch = 2,000 feet "?? orsoo?s 0 700 1,400 2,800 4,200 5,600 Feet ?t o ra s?? RE Pitt 9 B-4232 Bridge Replacement.txt From: Wilson, Travis W. Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 4:09 PM To: Sutton, Michael W Cc: Rogerson, Maria A; Johnson, Jay B subject: RE: Pitt 9, B-4232 Bridge Replacement Attachments: multibridge070303.doc Mike i've attached our comments from July 2003. No concerns. -----original Message----- From: Sutton, Michael w sent: Wednesday, october 27, 2010 3:37 PM To: Wilson, Travis W. Cc: Rogerson, Maria A; Johnson, Jay B subject: Pitt 9, B-4232 Bridge Replacement Good Afternoon Mr. Travis.... Division 2 plans to replace Pitt 9, B-4232 NC 903 Over swift creek. We respectfully request a moratorium determination for this location; . and if a moratorium exists; the dates associated with that moratorium. Attached are maps for your use in making these determinations. Many Thanks.... mike Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties. Page 1 Core ?,i,,:: on 'vice of North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources State Historic Preservation Office David L. S. Brook, Administrator Michael F. Easley, Governor Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary April 28, 2003 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Thorpe, Manager Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch NCDOT Division of Highways FROM: David Brook 111/\ U WA I Division of Historical Resources David J. Olson. Director SUBJECT: Bridge 9 on NC 903 over Swift Creek, B-4232, Pitt County, ER 03-0961 Thank you for your memorandum of April 7, 2003, concerning the above project. We have determined that the project as proposed will not affect any historic structures. We have reviewed the information provided and note that there is a high probability for the presence of archaeological resources on the west side of Swift Creek within the project area. We therefore recommend that the west side of the bridge and approach be surveyed for archaeological resources. We wish top note that the information provided for this project was unusually complete and that it was based on that information that we eliminated the need to survey the east side of the project. The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment, contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number. cc: Mao Wilkerson, NCDOT V Mary Pope Furr www.hoo.dcr.st2te.nc.us Location Mailing Address TekpboedFu ADMINIS PL%T10N 507 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4617 Mal Service Center, Raleigh NC 276994617 (919) 7334763 • 733.8653 RESTOR,\TION 515 N. Blount St., Raleigh NC 4613 MuI Service Center, Raleigh NC :7699-4613 (919) 733-6547 . 7154901 SURVEY & PLANNING, 515 N. Blount St.. Raleigh NC 4618 Mal Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4618 (919) 73346545 . 7154901 s+ase o> lr?? Z rn v ? m U W LL LL LL Q W Q Z W ~ N O a c O y U c a y c? F- O U Z a ca MN 41 m m Y d d U 3 m 0 M O 01 Z C 01 ? Z m ? 00 dm v ? a d 0 0 N a Z r? tg Q? zd xa O 3 i? Project Tracking No. (internal use) 10-10-0o\\ NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM PROJECT INFORMATION Project No: B-4232 WBSNo: 33575.1.1 F.A. No: Federal (USACE) Permit Required? County: Pitt Document: PCE Funding: State X Yes No Permit Type: X Federal NWP3or14 Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 9 on NC 903 over Swift Creek. No improvements to off-site detour; no ROW acquisition planned. SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW Briefdescription of review activities, results of review, and conclusions: HPO quad maps; historic designations roster, and indexes reviewed on 17 November 2010 and yielded no NR, SL, LD, DE, or SS properties in the Area of Potential Effects (APE). Pitt County current GIS mapping, aerial photography, and tax information indicate largely wooded parcels and cultivated fields, as well as several structures dating to the later twentieth century in the APE (viewed 17 November 2010). The county architectural survey (1980s) and related publication recorded no properties in the APE (Scott Power, ed., 7be HistoticArchilecture ofNtt County, North Carolina ([Greenville]: Pitt County Historical Society, Inc, 1991)). Constructed in 1958, Bridge No. 9 is a 52-foot-long, three-span, timber stringer, multi-beam bridge and is not eligible for the National Register according to the NCDOT Historic Bridge Survey as it is not historically, architecturally, or technologically significant The State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) reviewed project 8-4232 in 2003 and determined that it will not affect any historic architectural resources (see attached copy of correspondence). Google Maps "Street View" confirmed absence of historic structures/landscapes in APE (viewed 17 November 2010). No architectural survey required for project as currently defined. Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predicting that there are no unidentified historic properties in the APE: APE centered on existing bridge and extends 750 feet to E and W and 250 feet N and S to encompass proposed construction activities. While not recent, the county survey is well-executed and records no properties in the APE. County GIS/tax materials and other images support absence of significant architectural resources. Two properties, each containing an early-twentieth-century house, are partially included in the APE. However, the structures -- one of which is the previously surveyed William Amos Shivers House (PT 377) -- stand well outside the APE, screened from the proposed project by intervening woodland and later buildings. No National Register-listed or -eligible properties or other properties of concern are located within the APE. SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION See attached: APE map; HPO correspondence - 2003 FINDING BY NCDOT CULTURAL RESOURCES PROFESSIONAL NO SURVEY REQUIRED - Historic Structures \Ir1Ml?bA ? .-?? Cultural Resources ?-t Date "No Survg Required "form for Minor Tramportanon Projects as Quaked in the 1007 Programmatic Agreement. NCDOTArchaeolaV & Historic Architecture Groups "No Su wy Required-form for Minor Traraportation Projects ae Qualified in the 1007 Programmatic Agreement. NCDOTArchaeology & Historic Architecture Groups .-ev...n.aym S. 335/ 5 TIP PROJECT: B®4; rP z A i? O? 1 ,>Y N1 g N 0 0 0 m Z G1 -1 x A 0 D O f D y A `m I? 0 N m t 2 +a W r'`17 n !Nn M1 O N G nO y O Z N n x Lo. K H m v O m H F C JO _A !1 m D O y Z m Z A ? Z m o ? S w m m m Z A m y p Z p ? m m Z m 0 9 N T ? mo g p N p 00 f an Z n K A m ...Cddd 'r?i' Mc O n p x m m p N I Im? ? < Aa 1 ? C as C Z ?. GITlZENS PARTOPATION RECEIVED MAY 1 2 2005 ?? we . 4i +. North Carolina Department of Cultural ResoulC`e;'' State Historic Preservation Office Pour B. Sandbcck, Adminismmr Michael F. Easley, Gocemor Lisbeth C. IS, aru, Secretary Jeffrey 1. Crow, Deputy Secretary May 6, 2005 MEMORANDUM Office of Archives and I listorv Division of I-Iistorical Resources David Brook, Director TO: Matt Wilkerson, Archaeology Supervisor Office of the Human Environment NCDOT FROM: Peter Sandbeck ?,Z4h SUBJECT: Archaeological study, replacement of Bridge No. 9, B-4232, Federal Aid No. BRSTP-903(3), State Project No. 8.1222201, Division 2, Pitt County, ER 03-0961 Though our database indicates we reviewed and cleared the above-mentioned report August 31, 2004, we fund no letter copy in our files. We write now to rectify this absence. Thank you for your letter of August 20, 2004, transmitting the archaeological survey report by Clay Swindell for the above project. During the course of the survey, no sites were located within the project area. Mr. Swindell has recommended that no further archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project. We concur with this recommendation since the project will not involve significant archaeological resources. The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number. cc: John Williams, NCDOT PD&EA John Sullivan, FHWA ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount strem Rildgh NC 4617 Mad Ser.ice Cenreq Raleigh NC 27699-4617 RESTORATION 515 N. Blounr Srtceq FkAogh NC 4617 Mad Ser.ice Crnmq Ralegh NC 27699-0617 SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blounr Srr,m R>kigh, NC 4617 Mil Smice Cenmq Raeigh NC 27699-4617 Project Tracking No. Qnternal Use) 10_10-0011 NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM PROJECT INFORMATION Project No: WBS No: B-4232 33575.1.1 County: Pitt Document: PCE F.A. No: ER-03-0961 Federal (USA CE) Permit Required? Funding: ? State ® Federal ® Yes ? No Permit Type: NWP 3 or NWP 14 Project Description: Replacement of existing bridge Pitt 9 over Swift Creek on NC 903. Replacement of 52 ft existing bridge with 62 ft cored slab bridge. Minor realignments of driveways/access are also anticipated SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW Brief description of review activities, results ofreview, and conclusions: This undertaking was previously reviewed by HPO/OSA- A survey was recommended for B-4232, and conducted by NCDOT archaeologist Clay Swindell in March, 2004. The results of the investigation, which included subsurface testing, was that the project would have no effects on significant archaeological resources. Further, no archeological deposits were identified during the survey. HPO/OSA concurred with these findings in a letter dated May 6, 2005. The project design has been updated since that time and those minor changes, mainly involving property access/driveways, were considered during this review. Brief Explanation of why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonablypredicting that there are no unidentified historic properties in theAPE.- The undertaking involves a bridge replacement. Limited changes to the existing transportation feature are planned. The existing facility has already disturbed a large portion of the APE. No previously recorded archaeological sites were noted during investigations at the Office of State Archaeology. A previous survey cleared the project of archaeological concerns. Combined, these factors suggest that undocumented, significant archaeological sites are not located within the APE. SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION See attached: USGS quadrangle (Greenville SW), HPO-NCDOT concurrence 5-6-05, design - FIND\\11PDOT CULTURAL RESOURCES PROFESSIONAL {`` ARCHAEOLOGY HISTORIC ARCHITECTURE (CIRCLE ONE) "No Survey Required "form for Minor Transportation Promo as Quaked in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement. NCDOT Archeology & Historic Architecture Groups f ? r-I Q I l i i ?1 J ?' ti m Y]tz I _ [? -YY - I Q ?a 1'? T g .. . A l? ? Q s ?_ m x I _ e F.. m' O ?So V Wo'3 WWWW III ? ? ? Y: _ i In In I , In I? j tl 9 II 1 II II 1 11 1 II Y p m m g I . \t ' ^ q Q rt? ? e ,? T• ? W i2 W O Q N a wanmP WON ? 3 N ,? ?tl a g a _ l3 ?u x Lu W ?a L F Mae t W? W LQ ? L m? ti F ?222p ? ? < nmm Om iv t ? W 3 _ In W a ? ? m mu iri \ a O 22 4 4C W ??C W ? CmJmJ 2 1? m B ?O Yac zW ' - x o ? ??? W W¢¢? W S m W in n O VVV O I. Oo p 0 ¢ i ? ! N M W m 0 Q . ? / h^ v /I O g 7a' / p 6ONb _ N I p Of V \ 4 ?' U ?/` /I N p Ii 11 T . o y o ? /I W1W H p 1_ ? ?O N ! n n I /Z ?S 4 moo" j w P o? tl Y '? e Y _ W 4Q0 ?hC In l^ Y ? ? I W 6W>Y _ '?'' W Y O^ ?$ 9 Y ? $ W N m a , WJ \\ 0 /I /I F z N ' ' O Z i Q 41 0 1 VV m NNQy OW - O R N M 14-IM I ? 111 -V 1 1:1. - i^ a ? ws ?55 a o4 s^?? Its _- M J I = I ? may.. ? I s ? QQQQ3 ? ? ? ? ? ? ?I _ °m ,N¢a s? ?I W ] W ? ` m W ?I 0 4 R11 110 e Y N W J py ? m `s m W W W - I V IM _ e mm - mm O , N I Zmm V1 _ ?y : ¢ z a "oJ' = ^ _ ? W m m W WAX mew _ 7 7 yy r N W ? 4 Y8 O ? N ^ WCcGM W , W W I' Si i " / J ON ? Q u 1/1 V pqk 2 N.N ? ^l F ? i ? O ? ]n? _ ?v. .. _ _ _ u r C ?' m G{SS vvov p : ma C y i u? 4 ' 8g i N ? ? ? I ? m + ? - n u n - Q ? ^ c ? " I xo y 7? ? f F ? ? u OQ W W Q ` ,. wJp W E O U O j$gsyg 94 r W .°. 'L' 3m W F YSW a w o $ 5 ? - p 1 t7 0 2 m m_ , z - _ . aNCI. .l . j _ I n n n p _ 1 9 r ? lV I I X ? : I I _ __ N m- a? '` X-? I ? - w1111 mn W - Q $ V \.1 /5YI 4 4 o 4O Q pa 41 < 111 ? - - - ? ??U\ i 1' 11 N h u?j ;? G p N i : ¢ 11I?? 2 ] p1`1p t ? ? ? Ci ? LL? I? t:r1.' y Qi pm 3 N Itn? II i a W 2 YW ry ? } rN 4 2 4 W N WNW ?{ Q OQN W W i NN ?Q q]? In d ?` W y I . I? ?4W ?N ?. °o I m WW ?W ? ? W 1 W m * i d i a l O a Q - ` - MaWgW ?i n a 5 uwm -? ? ? I I I I Oo? ? i I o6p'uap-fip.-ZEZSq\110Z-bFC0 'uo[d '-N\ZEZV-0 b a11d\-?u..... ldey e6pue\lltd\G03fOUd\- +.....0 fiN\uay?na.w\Y6uq\eg lpw a N83snslst o\a 0F£11102-edV-02 3131VU$i I, lO Q ?x I ? tad' ? ,\ P ? C r1p?? W ? 'C Li?H SZ ? C N O N ? • x -. _ V ?a °a???l ? s •C U?I~I CW i??V?I?I Y1 ? ? 0.„ .. .. ?7 ? w?3 C Q ? N N 3b ?j A a„ I x - O 1II 1 .+ o [ ? ff 4 .? l? ? yY q Riq'nt `l?l( Ul?Y1 Nh ? 1.,, F Q O W I P ro 1y ° 6, ? ?' a ?o P b rS a ? 4 1? 1 ` U o I II 1 II 11 1 II 0 11 1 - U' OSCo ? ? ? WZ?i2 ct: 2 20 z¢nm w a W?a mml+a 111 i. + ~? W W ? ?U'CC U' OW ? ?W i ?W 222 1? o < N 6mmoom ' µz, u^S +\?Ila IW, - H ? :' ? ( ? $Ily1? 44Y Q ? 22 aW ?? 0 0 ? ?? m mJ ?m1 aWGmJZW 1? I 1.. ?3h?W W W?2¢ W WO , ? LLo W W W ooo?mmaaa O 11 8 \? ? _ - z? g .p . m N x I rI\ \\\ Z m CL N \ ???\ `y a 1 I 'n r d ????\\V 4 4 \\ V - -- O O a- Iml U I ? bm ^ 7 ? i N W9 ? / r? Zdn O ?' LL4 ° \ W Ur - _ .. OlV a 01111 ? J 1 H )P I 0 I ?b ?? P[.a 4 V ?/I\ IO YJ1.L/J a tl 4 + ONON zw WsW TITPT 1 p? Q 4 Q ? ? ' $ o fi S ^ bin In ? ? o I ¦ h vt 111111 II II P I bl/?1 V V ,1 (I I N ? LL M In hK ?QQ 4 b I > Y. 6 ? bVl 1 N J o '?I - -- P N N mazV+ 3' i I = a N P I " b 8 § i ?: N N WW HW 8H$ . b>X? H 4 (p \ 4J 0 1 2 ? N l a co V I 41, i V u g 4 W N N b ' ? aoti \ /1 11 I M m I ? v \ \ W 4 li ?•s? ? TI NNW _? W m \ ?'1m bLL b W P ?? _ X I yN1 $ g \ d .. .. •o Iy? ° N 2 \ i p \... - -. . ..- .. b O - --------- -- 2 ?O n NN p } m1+0 W a I .. ., .. .... - . H . N b ? -osn! m tl~0 o. m b W el ? ? „ °1 w - i Y a - ? Wr ? o y b W m ' x ¢ x' a m I a mm W W y, ? Y J a _ 0 p 2 NN n ? ` ` T a o ° ? Wp °Og r ' ^ 2 N O I 0 $8 L O J + ? mt v l . ? A 3 0 a ? r ? I n ? 1 ? ? w„?. N S ?? um = ? ,n ' Il Il I p y y ZbNG2 ?pW ?Y 2 ij I ? ? 1 ? ? .. 6W71L " , ? 1 i? 2 LL ai ? ? F E1 i 1 Joe? : ? v" - W 2 W O `f 0 g vv ?? gg Q ?o ? w I C N R if 1yy mpg; 3 4 - - d !7 88 bq y d a '?' ? z W S 9 t „ I? 8 z _ o _ o gi n W 41 I ° O N p , I W . . + / C ?m Nm : - L I z Zi Z1 "-nnn _ c ' l O `J I l IN - r a ? m ? rx x a ? .I 11 0 xh ? X0 ? n I i? Z WMJ "_ mdW r I 1 z 51" ; 2 51 J 4% 1? ' I - X N I VI b y ! I ? ? p F ? 1 Yl1 rs 1t ° - I - 9 N ] 2 g? - U W pp Y W N y W "1°P yy 000 00 Wg ma>vN,b1 333 W Z 3 Q O ? wy WW ?? ° ? y 1<? } i j i< W' 1 « - - O p 0 ?am o I aW°a?? k Mrllu?4l Wi uYU?U`?o"xa nJJ d m Z Y m h l d- ^g p ' ?:, ? I 2? mN Hl mill 6 ?= nu.. wem oan fiN\uw .?c.w\c6uo 1493WVNH ?eg puo we„n $$ 000\q a W ^x 8Y ? ^? mm u6p-u%p-fip.-ZEZY9\IIBZ-61-00 1--td '-N\ZEZV-0 6 "l\.wm..eae1 ed e P 9\111d 81'01t1UZ-ddV-0Z f13LV0ts --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I '? - sh?5i uez-dnW-ol "_-dvJ? oy?W\ZEZh-8 6 avd\°au°w...Id°d •6P"8\llid\81J3f8dd\nO°"'"'O? fiWWwa"`"w\1629hZ4nJZ0 ltlu°wuoaa h ldx-k' ZL2h9\4°'o?°d v6P'C Z' ------------------------- ------------------------ "__________------ t.: