20051608 Ver 1_Other Agency Comments_20040415

B-2532 storm water
Subject: B-2532 storm water
From: Brian Wrenn <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:10:31 -0500
To: Andrew Nottingham <[e-mail]>, Chris Rivenbark
<crivenbarkC dot.state.nc.us>, William Wescott
<[e-mail]>, Chris Militscher <militscher.chrisC epa.gov>,
Travis Wilson <wilsontwC mail.wildlife.state.nc.us>, Gary Jordan
<garyjordanC~fws.gov>, Steve Sollod <Steve.SollodC ncmail.net>, Bill Arrington
<Bi11.Arrington @ ncmail.net>
I spoke with Scott Vinson in the WaRO regarding storm water management for the
additional impervious surface for the sidewalk. He stated that what DOT proposed
in the permit drawings meeting was adequate to meet DWQ's storm water
requirements.
One comment on the Storm Water Management Plan:
In addition to the discussion of eliminating of deck drains over shallow water, there
should be a description of the deck drains that will discharge over the rip-rap on
either end of the bridge.
As a note to the commitment to avoid impacts to SAVs, the dominant species in
NC, Zostera marina and Halodule wrightii, are dormant in the fall and winter
months. Taking this into consideration when setting up a construction schedule
would be helpful.
Thanks,
Brian
1 of 1 2/23/2006 3:29 PM

TO: Phillip S. Harris III, P.E., ONE
John Hennessy, DWQ
Cathy Brittingham, DCM
Mike Bell, COE
Pete Stafford, RK&K
FROM: Bruce O. Ellis, CLM, Environmental Supervisor
Mary Frazer, Environmental Specialist
SUBJECT: REVISED REPORT -Submersed Aquatic Vegetation Survey for US 17 Neuse
River Bridge Relocation and Trent River Bridge Widening, Federal Aid Project {
No. BR- OOOS(33), State Project No. 8.1170801, TIP Nos. B-2531 and B-2532.--- i1 U 1"
DATE: 04/15/04 (Original date of this report was 5/22/03)
REFERENCE: Memorandum: Results of Submersed Aquatic Vegetation Survey by NCDOT
environmental specialist, Robin Little, October 6, 1994
The following revised memorandum provides the results of a submersed aquatic vegetation
(SAV) survey for the subject project. The survey was conducted on June 5, 2001 by NCDOT
environmental biologists Bruce Ellis and Mary Frazer, and members of the NCDOT dive team,
Bill Lotz and Allen Hancock to determine impacts to SAVs as a result of the subject project.
Supplemental surveys were conducted by Ellis and Frazer on June 27 to look at nearby SAV
growth for comparison, and on October 27 to survey marsh vegetation at Lawson Creek.
Previous surveys were conducted in August 1994, prior to project construction; June 1996, after
construction was initiated; August 2000, after construction was complete and June, 2001.
Surveys between 1996 and 2000 were disrupted by inclement weather (i.e., hurricanes) and
construction work, which made survey conditions dangerous.
METHODOLOGY
SAV survey methodology followed procedures outlined in the above referenced memorandum.
Briefly, transects were run perpendicular to the shoreline at ten meter intervals within the
temporary construction zones and permanent construction limits. A one meter square grid, which
was subdivided into nine 33 cm by 33 cm subplots, was then placed on the river bottom at ten
meter intervals along each transect. SAV species present within the one-meter square grid were
identified, and percent cover within the grid was determined for each sample location. Survey
work was conducted using contaminated-water protocol, to minimize exposure to water-born
pathogens. Vegetation from each sample plot was collected and identified according to Godfrey
and Wooten (1981) and Fassett (1975).
At Lawson Creek (Site 1), the majority of the creek was visually inspected from a small rowboat
on 27 June 2001. Care was taken in the survey to establish the transects at the same locations as
the August 1994 and June 1996 surveys. However, there were five exceptions, listed below.
1. In 1996, five additional transects were established on the western shoreline of the Neuse
River at loop BA and ramp CD. These transects are identified as 2A'-2E'. The transects
were to measure impacts from loop BA that had not been previously staked out in the field.

2. Scotts Creek (Site 4) was not sampled in 1996, 2000 or 2001 due to shallow water depths and
a substrate of extremely soft muck, which prohibited divers from working safely in the area.
3. In August 2000, three additional transects were conducted on the east side of the Trent River.
These transects were located l Om, 17m, and 23m south of transects 3A-3D and are referred to
as transects 3E'-3G', respectively.
4. In order to gain a better understanding about habitat in the vicinity of the project, two
supplemental areas were examined for SAVs in 2001 as a reference to determine the presence
or absence of pondweeds in the overall New Bern area, which had been found in earlier, but
not recent sampling years. The locations, north and south of Union Point, are described
below. Standard SAV sampling was conducted on 27 June 2001.
• A small cove north of Union Point (north of the Best Western) -Site 2 in Figure lA
• Neuse River, near the new bridge, at the confluence of the Neuse and Trent Rivers,
outside the construction impact area -Site 3 in Figure lA
5. Supplemental surveying was also conducted at the marsh along the new Trent River/Lawson
Creek bridge to determine the effects of temporary work bridge. Trsects were conducted
on 24 October 2001 as follows. The transect on the south side of the bridge (As) starts near
the channel within the marsh (site 1 in Figure lA), which is approximately 200 ft west of the
Trent River. The south side transect proceeds west to the first bridge bent near Lawson Creek
(Js). On the north side of bridge (site 4 in Figure lA), transect starts (AN) at first bridge bent
in the marsh east of Lawson Creek and precedes eastward to Trent River (MN). Plots are 10
ft. by 10 ft. and placed at 100 ft. intervals. It was not physically possible to extend the south
side transect to the Trent River due to the channel and extremely wet conditions.
QUALIFICATIONS OF PRINCIl'AL INVESTIGATOR
Investigator: Bruce O. Ellis, Environmental Supervisor, NCDOT.
Education: BS Agriculture/Environmental Science, Rutgers University, College of
Agriculture and Environmental Science.
Certification: Certified Lake Manager (North American Lake Management Society).
Professional Wetland Scientist (Society of Wetland Scientists).
Experience: Biologist, Allied Biological, Inc., March 1976-April 1994. Lake and
watershed management, natural resource investigations, water quality,
stream bioassessment, fisheries inventories, wetland delineation.
Expertise: Aquatic resource management, wetland delineation, Section 7 field
investigations, NEPA investigations and documentation.
2

RESULTS
Results of the 2001 SAV survey are included in Tables 1-3. Previous survey results are also
included for comparison. Sample locations are depicted in Figure 1. Supplemental sampling
locations from 2001 are in Figure 1 A. During the June 2001 survey, water salinity was 1.5 ppt
(vs. 2.8 ppt the previous August) in the Neuse River and the Trent River, and secchi depth was
four feet in the Neuse, the same as the previous year. Two SAV species were identified during
the course of the survey:
Tapegrass (Vallisneria americana)
Homed pondweed (Zannichellia palustris)
The tapegrass averaged 1-2 feet in height, while the horned pondweed was no more than eight to
ten inches high.
The 1994 and 1996 surveys identified coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum) in addition to the two
species above, but only in Lawson Creek. No SAV's were found at the Lawson Creek site after
1996. During the 2001 survey, the water at this site was slightly turbid; a loose silty substrate was
present. The creek south of the bridge was examined until the channel split, a distance of at least
75 meters: only detritus and leaves were found in the creek. The water depth was 0.60-1.2
meters. The August 1994 survey identified tapegrass and either coontail or horned pondweed at
this site, which were misidentified as eelgrass (Zostera sp.) and milfoil (Myriophyllum sp.).
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. SAV Coverage, 1994-2001
Table 2. SAV Coverage, Minus Sites Not Common to Every Survey Period
Table 3. SAV Species Composition, 1994-2001
Table 4. SAV Sampling Data, 1994-2001
Table 5. SAV Sampling Data from Neuse River at Confluence with Trent River, 2001
Table 6. Marsh Plant List, Trent River Bridge, 2001
Table 7. Marsh Vegetation Sampling Results, Trent River Bridge, 2001
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. SAV Sample Site Locations
Figure lA. Supplemental Survey Locations, 2001
Figure 2. Photo of North Side of Trent River Bridge, 2001
Figure 3. Photo of SAVs in Neuse River Impact Area, 2001
Figure 4. Photo of South Side of Trent River Bridge, 2001
Figure 5. Photo of Marsh Vegetation in Trent River Impact Area, 2001
Figures labeled "Photo 1-4" are of marsh vegetation along the Trent River Bridge, 1997

Table 1. SAV Coverage
SITE LOCATION 1994 1996 2000 2001
Site 1, Lawson Creek 0.14 ha 0.14 ha 0.0 ha 0.0 ha
Site 2, West Shoreline Ram DB (2A-2L) 0.0 ha 0.08 ha 0.12 ha 0.16 ha
of Neuse River Ram DC (2M-2Q 0.0 ha 0.09 ha 0.04 ha 0.08 ha
Ram DA (2R-2V) 0.18 ha 0.16 ha 0.14 ha 0.15 ha
Ramp CD/Loop BA
(2A'-2E') No Data
Collected 0.26 ha 0.0 ha 0.01 ha
Site 3, Freedom
Memorial Bridge over Southeast Shoreline
(3A-3D) 0.12 ha 0.08 ha 0.02 ha 0.04 ha
Trent River Southeast Shoreline
(3E'-3G') No Data
Collected. No Data. 0.01 ha No Data
Northwest Shoreline
(3E-3H) 0.35 ha 0.01 ha 0.00 ha 0.04 ha
Ram BD 0.12 ha No Data Coll ected
Site 4, Scotts Creek 0.10 ha No Data Collected.
Site 5 East Shoreline
of Neuse River (SA-SG) 0.0 ha 0.0 ha 0.0 ha 0.05 ha
TOTAL 1.01 ha 0.82 ha 0.33 ha 0.53 ha
There are a few discrepancies in which areas were sampled from year to year, as discussed under
Methodology. To allow for a more equitable comparison of survey results from one year to
another, transects that were not routinely sampled each year were removed from the table above,
with Table 2 (below) as the result.
Table 2. SAV Covera e, Minus Sites Not Common to Eve Surve Period
STTE LOCATION 1994 1996 2000 2001
Site 1, Lawson Creek 0.14 ha 0.14 ha 0.0 ha 0.0 ha
Site 2, West Shoreline R DB (2A-2L 0.0 ha 0.08 ha 0.12 ha 0.16 ha
of Neuse River Ramp DC (2M-2Q) 0.0 ha 0.09 ha 0.04 ha 0.08 ha
Ramp DA (2R-2V) 0.18 ha 0.16 ha 0.14 ha 0.15 ha
Site 3, Freedom
Memorial Bridge over Southeast Shoreline
(3A-3D) 0.12 ha 0.08 ha 0.02 ha 0.04 ha
Trent River Northwest Shoreline
(3E-3H) 0.35 ha 0.01 ha 0.00 ha 0.04 ha
Site 5 East Shoreline
of Neuse River (SA-SG) 0.0 ha 0.0 ha 0.0 ha 0.05 ha
TOTAL 0.79 ha 0.56 ha 0.32 ha 0.52 ha
Note: Site 3, northwest shoreline, only had transects along 3E-3F in 1996. 3G-3H were blocked
by a barge..
4

Table 3. SAV Species Composition, 1994-2001
(Number of vegetated plots/total plots conducted that year)
.-
SPECIES
NO. PLOTS WITH
NO. PLOTS WITH
NO. PLOTS WIT~-I
NO. PLOTS WITH
COMPOSITION SAVs Au `94 SAVs June `96 SAVs Au `00 SAVs June `O1
A. Tapegrass 32/215 12/178 32/181 40/155
(Vallisneria
americana)
B. Horned 20/215 38/178 0/181 7/155
pondweed
(Zannichellia
palustris)
A & B. Tapegrass 16/215 18/178 1/181 4/155
and Horned
ondweed
C. Arrowhead 0/215 0/178 0/181 1/155
(Sagittaria subulata)
TOTAL 68/215 68/178 33/181 52/155
PLOTS WITH 32% 38% 18% 34%
SAVs
Note: Site 1, Lawson Creek, contained coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum) in 1994 and 1996.
No plots were taken, however, since 100% coverage was assumed.
As shown in Table 3, the number of plots sampled each year ranged from 215 in 1994 to 155 in
2001. Causes for these discrepancies are as follows:
• Variations in the number and location of some of the transects from year to year.
• The location of barges and newly constructed bridge bulkheads prevented a few sample plots
from being placed.
• Sampling along each transect is stopped when three consecutive plots were encountered with
no SAVs, or when the water depth reached approximately two meters. This resulted in a
range of plots per transect, varying from year to year and site to site, depending on water
level, and the amount and location SAVs along each transect.
RESULTS FROM 2001 SUPPLEMENTAL SAMPLING AREAS
The cove north of Union Point (Site 2 in Figure 1 A) contained a small sandy beach about 23
meters long, while most adjacent areas of shoreline contained low seawalls. No SAVs were
found. The water was clear and one meter deep at about 18 meters out from the shoreline.
SAVs in the Neuse River near the confluence with the Trent River (Site 3 in Figure lA) were
sampled with the first transect 30 meters north of northern edge of the new bridge; the following
transects were 40 m north, 50 m north, etc. Tapegrass was found in all of the sample plots
between 10 and 40 m from the shoreline. Results of this survey are present in Table 5.
5

No horned pondweed was found in either of the supplemental SAV sampling areas, nor was any
found washed up on shore or observed casually. In contrast, tapegrass was observed washed up
on shore in several areas during the June 2001 surveys.
Marsh vegetation was examined along each side of the Trent River bridge. Data are presented in
Tables 6 and 7. The results of the survey indicate that vegetation is re-establishing on the site,
however, the vegetation that is present is of a much smaller type than the surrounding marsh. The
marsh in vicinity of the bridge is dominated by cattail (Typha latifolia) and giant cord grass
(Spartina cynosuroides). Since the vegetation in the footprint of the workbridges is of a smaller
type than the surrounding marsh, the footprints of the work bridges are very apparent. Little or
no vegetation was observed directly underneath the permanent bridge. One area adjacent to the
northern edge of the bridge appeared to have been mowed earlier in the summer.
DISCUSSION -SAVs
Both Table 1 and Table 2 show a decrease in areal coverage of SAVs from 1994-2001. The
lowest areal coverage was in the year 2000. Coverage in 2001 rebounded somewhat. Table 3
also shows a decline in the number of SAVs per sample plot for 2000. This may be the result of
the hurricanes and flooding that took place in 1999, which would have caused scouring and
sedimentation.
The reduction in SAV coverage from 1994-1996 was due to factors other than hurricanes.
Possible explanations for the reduction in coverage include:
• Effects from project construction
• Reduced water clarity due to increasing watershed development
• If the SAVs experience a late season decline, that may explain some of the reduction in SAV
coverage in 1996, since sampling took place that year in August, instead of in June.
Site 1, Lawson Creek, was found to have coontail in 1994 and 1996. When surveys commenced
again in 2000 and 2001, no coontail or SAVs of any kind were found. Since coontail has a weak
root system, the hurricanes of 1999 may have carried it away.
Areal coverage of SAVs decreased at Site 3 (Trent River) after 1994, when construction started.
At the time of the 1996 survey, there was considerable construction activity in the vicinity of Site
3, including construction barges along the shoreline. It is assumed that the decrease in SAVs is
largely due to the placement of construction barges and not the result of sedimentation or other
disturbances, due to the physical presence of barges in the area.
Site 4, Scotts Creek, only had transects conducted in 1994. No transects were conducted in the
following years due to soft substrate and the presence of filamentous algae. It is possible that the
1994 dive team misidentified algae as an SAV, and that SAVs were never present at this site.
Algae was present in 1996, even though no construction work had taken place anywhere near the
site yet.
Site 2 (west shore of Neuse River) and Site 5 (east shore of Neuse River) have increased slightly
in SAV coverage from 1994-2001.

Supplemental SAV sampling conducted in 2001 showed there to be tapegrass outside the bridge
construction area ,but no horned pondweed. This suggests that horned pondweed has been
removed from the New Bern area due to regional environmental factors, rather than bridge
construction. There was a decrease in SAV coverage from 1994-2001 of 0.27 ha (0.67 acres),
based on data in Table 2.
DISCUSSION -MARSH AT TRENT RIVER BRIDGE
The primary vegetation found at the temporary work bridge sites, big cordgrass and cattails, were
the same as those found at the site in 1997, before the bridges were installed. Several other
genuses (Cyperus spp., Carex spp., Pluchea spp. and Polygonum spp.) are the same as were
found before construction began. Saplings (Ater rubrum and Salix nigra) were absent in 2001,
however. Since vegetation in the footprint of the workbridges is smaller than that of the
surrounding marsh, it must be assumed that there were at least temporary, if not long-term
impacts from the bridges. Shading impacts have also occurred as a result of the permanent
bridge.