20061671 Ver 1_Application_20061025

d~~4 ®~~~ l1 V ~ U
~ ~.
~ ~- ~ OCT247006
~ ~°' a^~^ ~°°'~ ~~ DrNR - YJA7F.R GUAt.' i Y
ydEfLANDS AND STORf~`NA1~R gF,ANCH
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION .
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
ATTENTION: Mr. Rob Ridings
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
October 12, 2006
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
061671
Subject: Application for Neuse Riparian Buffer Certification for the replacement of Bridge
No. 255 over an unnamed tributary to Swift Creek on SR 1006 (Old Stage Rd.), Wake
County. Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-1006 (14), WBS No. 33636.1.1, State Project
No. 8.2408401, Division 5, T.I.P. No. B-4299:
Please find enclosed a copy of the project planning report for the above referenced project. The North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No. 255 over an unnamed
tributary (UT) to Swift Creek [DWQ Index # 27-43-5-(1.5)], a Division of Water Quality Class "WS-III
NSW" Waters of the State. The project involves replacing the current bridge in its existing location,
while using an off-site detour to maintain traffic during construction. The proposed structure will be a 70
foot, single span, pre-stressed, precast box beam spill through bridge with 41'-10" of clear roadway
width. The structure will provide two 12-foot travel lanes with 8-11" of lateral clearance on each side of
the bridge. The roadway approaches will provide two 12-foot travel lanes with 8-foot shoulders (4.0 feet
paved). Enclosed with this permit application is a project site map, buffer permit drawings, PCN form,
Categorical Exclusion (CE) document, and half size plan sheets.
IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
The project is located in the Neuse River Basin (subbasin 03-04-02). This area is part of Hydrologic
Cataloging Unit 03020201 of the South Atlantic-Gulf Coast Region. US Army Corp of Engineers
(USAGE) representative Eric Alsmeyer, during field meetings held in June and July 2003, determined
that there are two jurisdictional streams located in the project area, a perennial UT to Swift Creek (UT1)
and an intermittent UT to Swift Creek (UT2).-The proposed bridge will span UT1. UT2 flows into UT1
and is located parallel to Old Stage Rd. The two tributaries are assigned a Best Usage Classification of
WS-III NSW. Traffic will be maintained by the use of an offsite detour. There will be no permanent or
temporary impacts to jurisdictional waters associated with this project.
No designated Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supply I (WS-
I), or Water Supply (II), waters occur within 1.0 mile of the study corridor. Neither tributary is listed on
MAILING ADDRESS: LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TELEPHONE: [phone] Or 2728 CAPITAL BLVD. SUITE 240
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 919-715-1335 RALEIGH NC 27604
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER FAX: [phone]
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG

~~ the 2002, Draft 2004, or Draft 2006 List of impaired waters [Section 303(d)] for the Neuse River Basin.
Listed waters do not meet water quality standards or have impaired uses.
,~
NEUSE BUFFER IMPACTS
UT1 is subject to the Neuse Buffer Rules. The North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) had
previously determined that UT2 was subject to the Neuse Riparian Buffer regulations (June and July
2003 field meetings). However, during a site visit on July 7, 2006, NCDOT biologists reevaluated UT2.
A NCDWQ stream identification form was completed and the stream received a rating of 13.5, indicating
that it was an ephemeral stream. NCDWQ representative Rob Ridings concurred with this finding and
determined that UT2 is not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rules (July 2006 field meeting). Therefore,
although considered jurisdictional by USACE, UT2 is not subject to the Neuse Buffer Rules.
Construction of the new bridge and approaches will result in impacts to the buffers of the UTl (Permit
drawing 4). A lateral base ditch will be constructed within Buffer Zone 1. This ditch, as discussed in a
field meeting with NCDWQ in 2005, will replace an existing lateral base ditch currently located with
Buffer Zone 1. Impacts to buffers are shown in Table 2 below. Under the Neuse Buffer Rules, impacts
to buffers from the construction of bridges are allowable; impacts associated with construction of the
approaches which impact less than 1501inear feet or one-third of an acre are also allowable. Mitigation
in not proposed for this project.
Table 2. Neuse River Buffer Im acts to UTl(S uare Feet)
Bridge Road Crossing
Construction Irrl acts*
Zone 1 Im act (s . ft) 4969 1317
Zone 2 Irrt act (s . ft) 0 ~ 3066
Mitigation requirements Allowable Allowable
(exempt, allowable or allowable with
miti ation)
* 129 linear feet of impacts to UT I buffers
This bridge has been determined to be structurally deficient and functionally obsolete. The replacement
of this inadequate structure will result in safer and more efficient traffic operations. Because this bridge
needs to be replaced, impacts to the riparian buffers of UT1 are unavoidable. Replacing the existing
bridge at its existing location provides the least amount of impacts to riparian buffers.
UTILITY IMPACTS
Aerial telephone lines and poles located on the west side of the bridge will be removed from the project
area. One pole, on the northwest side of the bridge, is located within Buffer Zone 2. A crane positioned
on the Bridge No. 255 will be used to remove the pole from the project area. If removal can not be
achieved in this manner, the pole will be removed manually by sawing the pole just below ground level.
Therefore, there will be no impacts to jurisdictional waters or riparian buffers associated with the
removal of the telephone lines and poles.
AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION
The NCDOT is committed to the incorporation of all reasonable and practicable design features to avoid
and minimize buffer impacts. The following measures were taken during the design of the proposed
bridge to avoid and minimize impacts to the streams and buffers:
B-4299 Permit Application
Page 2 of 4

~~` • Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters will be implemented.
. r • The proposed project includes complete bridging of UT1, without any bents located in the stream,
,~ allowing for pre-project stream flows to maintain the current water quality, aquatic habitat, and flow
-regime. .
• Impacts to UT2 will be avoided by utilizing the existing pavement width and tying into the existing
shoulder.
• Rock plating will be utilized at the end bent to avoid impacts to UT2
• The proposed bridge will be replaced in its existing location.
• The roadway grade was kept close to the existing, minimizing fill height.
• The proposed bridge will be 17~eet longer and 8.6 feet wider than the existing bridge, increasing the
floodplain under the bridge.
• An off-site detour will be utilized during construction.
• Two preformed scour holes will be constructed on the north side of the bridge to filter stonnwater
runoff.
• Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation will be minimized through
implementation of stringent erosion control methods and use of Best Management Practices (BMPs).
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered
(PE), and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
website (updated Apri127, 2006) lists 4 federally protected species for Wake County: bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus), red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW)(Picoides borealis), dwarf wedge mussel
(DWM) (Alasmidonta heterodon), and Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii). Table 1 lists the species and
their federal status.
Table 1. Federally-Protected Species for Wake County
Scientific Name Common Name Status Biological Potential Habitat
Conclusion
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded E No Effect No
wood ecker
Haliaeetus Bald Eagle T* No Effect No
leucoce halus
Alasmidonta Dwarf wedge E No Effect No
heterodon mussel
Rhus michaarxii Michaux's sumac E No Effect No
.- - u~~,.,~o, ~iwangcrcu ~a specres mar rs m ganger of exunctron throughout all or a significant portion of its range). "'I"'- denotes
Tlveatened (a species, which is likely to become endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its
range). "*"-Proposed for delisting
A biological conclusion of "No Effect" has been issued for the bald eagle due to the lack of
potential habitat within the project area. The project area does not contain large areas of open
water, and therefore lacks potential foraging habitat for bald eagles. There are no large ponds or
lakes within one-mile of the project area.
A biological conclusion of "No Effect" has been issued for the RCW due to lack of potential
habitat within the project area. A pine forest is located within the project area does not contain
trees of an age suitable to support RCW nesting. There is no suitable foraging habitat within the
project area.
On March 15, 2005 the project area was evaluated for potential habitat for Michaux's sumac. A
powerline right-of--way is located within the floodplain of UT1 and, therefore, does not provide
potential habitat. Roadside and pasture edges also do not provide potential habitat due to regular
B-4299 Permit Application
Page 3 of 4

mowing and competition for other vegetation. A biological conclusion of "No Effect" has been
issued for Michaux' sumac due to the lack of potential habitat.
Mussel surveys were conducted on October 15, 2005. No DWM were observed and it was
determined that suitable habitat. does not occur within the project area. A biological conclusion
of "No Effect" has been issued for the DWM.
REGULATORY APPROVALS
This project has been designed to comply with the Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC
2B.0233). NCDOT requests written authorization for a Buffer Certification from the Division of Water
Quality. This project has been reviewed for jurisdiction under the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA).
There are no impacts to Waters of the US, therefore none of the actions of this project fall under
jurisdiction of the CWA. Therefore, no permits pursuant to the CWA are required.
A copy of this permit application will be posted on the NCDOT website at:
http://www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/pe/. If you have any questions or need additional information,
please call Erica McLamb at 715-1521.
Sincerely
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
Cc:
w/attachment
Mr. John Hennessy, NCDWQ (5 Copies)
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Michael Street, NCDMF
Dr. David Chang, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. Mark Staley, Roadside Environmental
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. Jon Nance, P.E., Division Engineer
Mr. Chris Murray, DEO
w/o attachment
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. Majed Alghandour, P. E., Programming and TIP
Mr. Art McMillan, P.E., Highway Design
Mr. Scott McLendon, USACE, Wilmington
Ms. Theresa Ellerby, Project Planning Engineer
Ms. Beth Harmon, EEP
Mr. Todd Jones, NCDOT External Audit Branch
File-B-4299
B-4299 Permit Application
Page 4 of 4

Office Use Only: Form Version March OS
2 0 6 1 6 7 1
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
^ Section 404 Permit ® Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
^ Section 10 Permit ^ Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
^ 401 Water Quality Certification ^ Express 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested:
None
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ^
4. If payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) is proposed
for mitigation of impacts, attach the acceptance letter from NCEEP, complete section VIII,
and check here: ^
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ^
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Mailing Address: 1598 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Telephone Number:~919) 733-3141 Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: N/A
Company Affiliation:
Mailing Address:
Telephone Number: ~ Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Page I of 9

r
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of Bridge No.255 over UT to Swift Creek on SR 1006
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-4299
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): N/A
4. Location
County: Wake Nearest Town: Garner
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number):
Directions to site (include road numbers/names, landmarks, etc.): see map in permit
drawings
5. Site coordinates (For linear projects, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that
separately lists the coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
Decimal Degrees (6 digits minimum): 35.7050 °N 78.6562 °W
6. Property size (acres): N/.
7. Name of nearest receiving body of water: Swift Creek
8. River Basin: Neuse
(Note -this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application: The protect is located in a residential community consisting
of primarily maintained/distrubed areas with some forested area
Page 2 of 9

r
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
Bridge No. 225 will be replaced on existing location with a offsite detour Heavy duty
excavation equipment will be used such as trucks dozers cranes and other various
equipment necessary for roadway construction
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: To replace a deteriorating bridge
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules. N/A
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. Each impact must be
listed separately in the tables below (e.g., culvert installation should be listed separately from
riprap dissipater pads). Be sure to indicate if an impact is temporary. All proposed impacts,
permanent and temporary, must be listed, and must be labeled and clearly identifiable on an
accompanying site plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial)
should be shown on a delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems.
Wetland and stream evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate.
Photographs may be included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for
wetland or stream mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional
space is needed for listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
Page 3 of 9

1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: none
2. Individually list wetland impacts. Types of impacts include, but are not limited to
mechanized clearing, grading, fill, excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams,
separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
Wetland Impact
Site Number

(indicate on map)
Type of Impact Type of Wetland
(e.g., forested, marsh,

herbaceous, bog, etc.) Located within
100-year
Floodplain
(es/no) Distance to
Nearest
Stream
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)

Total Wetland Impact (acres)
3. List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property:
4. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts. Be sure to identify temporary
impacts. Stream impacts include, but are not limited to placement of fill or culverts, dam
construction, flooding, relocation, stabilization activities (e.g., cement walls, rip-rap, crib
walls, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is proposed,
plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams
must be included. To calculate acrea~e_ multiply length X width. then divide by 4'~ 5fiO
Stream Impact
Number
(indicate on ma)
Stream Name
Type of Impact Perennial or
Intermittent? Average
Stream Width
Before Im act Impact
Length
(linear feet) Area of
Impact
(acres)

Total Stream Impact (by length and acreage)
Page 4 of 9

5. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.). Open water impacts include, but are not limited to
fill, excavation, dred~in~, floodin~_ draina~e_ hulkheade etc_
Open Water Impact
Site Number

(indicate on ma) _ v
Name of Waterbody
(if applicable) y
T e of Im act
~ P Type of Waterbody

(lake, pond, estuary, sound, bay,
ocean, etc.) Area of

Impact
(acres)

Total Open Water Impact (acres)
6. List t
he cumulative impact to aJl Waters of the U.S. resulting from the project
Stream Impact (acres):
Wetland Impact (acres):
Open Water Impact (acres):
Total Impact to Waters of the U.S. (acres)
Total Stream Impact (linear feet):
7. Isolated Waters
Do any isolated waters exist on the property? ^ Yes ®No
Describe all impacts to isolated waters, and include the type of water (wetland or stream) and
the size of the proposed impact (acres or linear feet). Please note that this section only
applies to waters that have specifically been determined to be isolated by the USACE.
8. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ^ uplands ^ stream ^ wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.):
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.):
Current land use in the vicinity of the pond:
Size of watershed draining to pond: Expected pond surface area:
Page 5 of 9

VII. ~ Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts. Please refer to the attached
cover letter
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE -. In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2002, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCEEP concurrence shall be placed on hold as incomplete.
An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration in DWQ's
Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.em•.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/strmgide html.
Page 6 of 9

Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
Mitigation is not proposed for this project.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (NCEEP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCEEP at
[phone] to determine availability, and written approval from the NCEEP indicating
that they are will to accept payment for the mitigation must be attached to this form. For
additional information regarding the application process for the NCEEP, check the NCEEP
website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of the NCEEP is proposed, please
check the appropriate box on page five and provide the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet):
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet):
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount ofNon-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres):
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres):
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of
public (federal/state) land? Yes ® No ^
2. If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No ^
3. If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please
attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter. Yes ® No ^
Page 7 of 9

X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
1. Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Neuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 02B .0243 (Catawba) 15A NCAC
2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please
identify )? Yes ® No ^
2. If "yes", identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers.
If buffer mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the
buffer multipliers.
Zone Im act Re uired
* P Multi Tier 9
I 6286 3 (2 for Catawba] 0.0
2 3066 1.5 0.0
Total I 9352 ~ ~ I I 0.0
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from the top of the near hank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
3. If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e.,
Donation of Property, Riparian Buffer Restoration /Enhancement, or Payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as identified
within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0244, or .0260. Mitigation is not required for this project.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site. Discuss
Stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands downstream from
the property. If percent impervious surface exceeds 20%, please provide calculations
demonstrating total proposed impervious level. N/A
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
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 8 of 9

XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ^ No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application? Yes ^ No
XIV. Cumulative Impacts (required by DWQ)
Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in additional
development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality? Yes ^ No
If yes, please submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with
the most recent North Carolina Division of Water Quality policy posted on our website at
http:/,'h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands. If no, please provide a short narrative description:
XV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).

d'~Z'U~
Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 9 of 9

- __....-._ _Ir.~.~
. ' ~ ~ I i
ice'/ ``V ((
~ ~ ~/
1 '
_~~
% WAKE COUNTY
LJ ' t
% -
~ ~o
~`
~~ SEE INSET
~ ~ BEL04V _ ~ ~
` 40 ~ ~ ~ `y
WAKE COUNTY
IJ ;
J j'
i ~ ~ ~
~- ---- 2720 .~~
~~ O -
~ i~
~ j i,Z4~
~Ja 1006 R nch~ 2798 ~ : ~~~
. o'' ~ ~~_J 2718 ~~~~1'~='-----i
i
:`
~~ 401
.\
.`
..\ ~
.. ` O~~
i ~~. LL
:.: ~ i
~ ~ ~s~ i
2799 ~. '
.` .p2
"-~ i
"i i
~\ %
2800 ~, ~'
:1 j'
•\ /
2801 /
~Y
~i
~~
_-- ,.~~
.~
,~'
:•
~..
~ 2782
~~ _/
2717
2715 ~
2846
IJ
~----7 n
'~
t \ ,~,,,

/ 1~
SCALE
.5 0 1 Mile

Il _ .
_~5 ~ i ~ ~-.~ ~ _ \ , ~ ~~_ ~1 ,~~ _ -~ 1 ~ _ ~
\1 ~\~`~~ ~ ~ 0~_-- ~ ~~ ~~~ t . ~ ~~ ~l' °Z' `:.T~9epter ~' {;i I' ~53~ ~. . ~)
I"`~~~ . 300 / I 1 / •`~•, ., °, . r .~.•J, _
~, ~ °~-~ ~ , U ,
~4 y,. ~ ~,, 3¢
/ 1 ~ ,~
n ,~'
_ •` /
~ ~ ~ ~I `` • 35 .`
{ iii / ~ ~~~~ ~~-~.. .j ~• { ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ /' •I
/ V ~ J ~\
+~ /I I \~__ SITE ~ ' ~~ ,..~ s (/ ~--`~
~1 r3 I / i~
~i+ ~ .~ r ~~ ~ ll)~~Ti \ •.\• ~Q . "• 11 ~~ ~ / //•
S /~ ~1 J \~ l• .~• y
~~ ~--
-~ ~ 300. ~,- ~ v I ~ ~` ?.~ ~~ ~,~%
J\ _ ~ !~ // ~ ~'i~ 326 ~ ~ _
q ~J --~ ~ ~8M ~ fi~p
111 ''~l/~~ ( _ \ d, ~-!L_~i, (~) __ ~
\) \O .
11 ,'
II Y~ / •~~
.II ~ / _
11 / r~-...
i f (f
I~a~?50~~ ~~25 / ~5.. ~\ \ - ~~ 1, l \
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAKE COUNTY
PROJECT: 33636.1.1 (B-~299)
1000 0 2000 BRIDGE N0.255 OVER
ON SR 1006
SHEET 2 OF ~ 01 / 27 / 05

LEGIEND
PROPOSED BRIDGE
--•WLB--- WETLAND BOUNDARY

VlLB•'-~ PROPOSED BOX CULVERT
~
:
~ ~ ; WETLAND
~
~- WLB~
PROPOSED PIPE CULVERT
DENOTES FILL IN
~~ WETLAND cDASHEO LINES DENOTE
EXISTNG STRUCTURES)
~~!C~~ DENOTES FILL IN

SURFACE WATER •

DENOTES FILL IN SINGLE TREE
P SURFACE WATER
(POND) _~~~~~ WOODS LINE
T T DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN WETLAND . DRAINAGE INLET
DENOTES EXCAVATION
IN WETLAND ROOTWAD
TS S DENOTES TEMPORARY
FILL IN SURFACE WATER
RIP RAP
DENOTES MECHANIZED
CLEARING
ADJACE NT PROPERTY OWNER
O
OR PARCEL NUMBER
IF AVAILABLE
- BZ - RIPARIAN BUFFER ZONE
E- E--- FLOW DIRECTION
RIP RAP ENERGY
~- TOP OF BANK 8 DISSIPATOR BASIN
-~•-.WE.-~•- EDGE OF WATER
-- ~ -- PROP. LIMIT OF CUT
-- F -- PROP, LIMIT OF FILL
-
~
-
-- PROP. RIGHT OF WAY
-- NG -- NATURAL GROUND
--P~--- PROPERTY LINE
-TOE- TEMP. DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
-PDE - PERMANENT DRAINAGE
EASEMENT
--EAB-- EXIST. ENDANGERED
ANIMAL BOUNDARY
--EPB--
PLANT BOUNDARY
-••-••~~~-••- WATER SURFACE
XXXXX LIVE STAKES
BOULDER
- - COIR F[BER ROLLS
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAKE COUNTY
PROJECT: 33636.1.1 (B-299)
BRIDGE N0.255 OVER
~-~~ ~ ~JJ~~+ C.rQs2-Y~
3 O~ SR 1006
SHEET OF _ 01 / 27 / 05

Project No. 33636.1.1 (B-4299)
Property Owner List
Parcel Number Name Address
2 John Henry Battz 5500 Old Stage Road
Raleigh, NC 27603
5 Richard D. Abernathy 5616 Old Stage Road
Raleigh, NC 27603
6 George F. Horton 5412 Old Stage Road
Raleigh, NC 27603
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAKE COUNTY
PROJECT: 33636.1.1 (B-~299)
BRIDGE N0.255 OVER
JT ~ 5~.~ . ~~ Crux
ON SR 1006
SHEET ~ OF ~ Ol / 27 / 05

BUFFER IMPACTS SUMMARY
IMPACT

TYPE
ALLOWABLE
MITIGABLE BUFFER
REPLACEMENT

SITE NO.
1
STRUCTURE SIZE /TYPE
-L- Roaday Fill
STATION (FROMfr01
-L- 22+00 / -L- 22+35 ROAD
CROSSING
X
BRIDGE PARALLEL
IMPACT ZONE 1
(ft~)
622.0 ZONE 2
(ftZ)
1613.0 TOTAL
(ftZ)
2235.0 ZONE 1
(ft~) ZONE 2
(ftZ) TOTAL
(ftz) ZONE 1
(ftz) ZONE 2
(ftZ)
1 Bridge, 1 @ 70'-0" Box Beam -L- 22+35 / -L- 23+05 X 4969.0 4969.0
1 -L- Roaday Fill -L- 23+05 / -L- 23+40 X 695.0 1452.0 2147.0

TOTAL: s2as.o 3065.0 9351.0
Linear feet of buffer impacts = 129 feet
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WAKE COUNTY
~~~~'I
.. .. _,
SEP 5 2006
a~~~b c~ Ni~H~ars
DICE OF NATI,!khl ENVIE
PROJECT 33636.1.1 (B-4299)
BRIDGE #255 OVER UT TO SWIFT CREEK
ON SR 1006
n REV 9/2005
SHEET ~ OF (~ 5/5/2006
Rev. May 2006

WAKE COUNTY
BRIDGE N0.255 ON SR 1006 (OLD STAGE ROAD)
OVER UNNAMED CREEK
FEDERAL-AID PROJECT N0. BRSTP-1006(14)
STATE PROJECT N0. 8.2408401
T.I.P. N0. B-4299
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
JANUARY 2004
Document Prepared by Ramey Kemp & Associates, Inc.
4928-A Windy Hill Dr.
Raleigh, N
~N CARO
pQ'.••'ESSio• ~~?~
a SEAL r
• -
22032 ~„
Philip D. Edwards, P.E., Project Manager A~p
Ramey Kemp & Associates, Inc. ~ '~""'~
For the North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
~y~,„~ 9_ fi0
Theresa Ellerby, Project Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
l 30 0~
Date

PROJECT COMMITMENTS
WAKE COUNTY
BRIDGE N0.255 ON SR 1006 (OLD STAGE ROAD)
OVER UNNAMED CREEK
FEDERAL-AID PROJECT N0. BRSTP-1006(14)
STATE PROJECT N0. 8.2408401
T.I.P. N0. B-4299
In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit #23 Conditions, the General Nationwide Permit Conditions,
Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency Conditions, NCDOT's Guidelines for
Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters, NCDOT's Guidelines for Best
Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal, General Certification Conditions, and Section
401 Conditions of Certification, the following special commitments have been agreed to by NCDOT:
NCDOT Division 5, Roadway Design and Hydraulic Unif
The Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rule will be implemented during design, construction and maintenance of
the project.
Categorical Exclusion
January 2004

WAKE COUNTY
BRIDGE NO.~ 255 ON SR 106 (OLD STAGE ROAD)
OVER UNNAMED CREEK
FEDERAL-AID PROJECT N0. BRSTP-1006(14)
STATE PROJECT N0. 8.2408401
T.I.P. N0. B-4.299
INTRODUCTION
The replacement of Bridge No. 255, located on SR 1006 (Old Stage Road) over an unnamed creek, in
Wake County, is listed in the North Carolina Department. of Transportation (NCDOT) 2004-2010
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as 8-4299 and is included in the Federal-Aid Bridge
Replacement Program (BRSTP-1006(14)). The project location is shown in Figures 1 and 7.
No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal °Categorical
Exclusion".
PURPOSE AND NEED
The NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit records indicate Bridge No. 255 has a sufficiency rating of 53.7 out
of a possible 100 for a new structure. Prior to March 2002, the bridge had a sufficiency rating of 38.2 and
was considered structurally deficient. In May 1999, a joist was replaced and two bent caps were repaired.
These repairs raised the sufficiency rating to its cuRent rating of 53.7. However, the bridge is still
considered functionally obsolete. The replacement of this inadequate structure will result in safer and
more efficient traffic operations.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
Bridge No. 255 is located on SR 1006 (Old Stage Road) approximately 0.5 mile south of the intersection of
SR 1006 with US 401 in Gamer in Wake County. Refer to Figures 2 and 3 for photos of the existing
project study area.
Bridge No. 255 was constructed in 1966 and has a sufficiency rating of 53.7 out of a possible 100. The
bridge is currently posted to restrict weight limits, 16 tons for single vehicles and 23 tons for truck-tractor
semi-trailers.
The overall length of the two-span structure is 53.0 ft. It has a clear roadway width of 33.4 ft that includes
two travel lanes over the bridge. The superstructure consists of a reinforced concrete floor on timber joists
with an asphalt wearing surface. The end and interior bents are constructed of timber piles and caps. The
height from crown to streambed is 11 ft.

SR 1006 is classified as an urban minor arterial in the Statewide Functional Classification System. The
estimated 2003 average daily traffic (ADT) volume is 12,800 vehicles per day (vpd). The percentages of
truck traffic are 2 percent TTST vehicles and 3 percent dual-tired vehicles. The projected 2030 ADT is
23,200 vpd.
The two-lane facility measures approximately 24 ft in width and has variable (approximately 2 - 4 ft)
grassed shoulders on each side of the roadway. The horizontal alignment of SR 1006 is straight north of
the bridge. South of the bridge there is a left curve beginning near the bridge. The vertical alignment is
generally flat within the project area with slight upward grades both north and south from the bridge. The
speed limit in the immediate vicinity of the bridge is posted at 35 miles per hour (mph). Existing right-of-
way is approximately 60 ft in width.
Utilities parallel both the east and west sides of SR 1006. Aerial telephone wires are located along the
west side. To the east, and just outside of the immediate project study area, aerial power lines parallel SR
1006. There are no utilities attached to the existing structure. Utility impacts are expected to be minimal.
This section of SR 1006 is not part of a designated bicycle route nor is it listed in the Transportation
Improvement Program as needing incidental bicycle accommodations. There is no indication that an
unusual number of bicyclists use this roadway.
Land use within the project study area is a mixture of predominant residential properties interspersed with
cultivated /wooded areas and a small number ofservice-type business uses.
Twenty (20) school busses cross this bridge each day. School officials did not indicate there would be
significant problems with the proposed off-site detour.
There have been five (5) crashes reported in the vicinity of Bridge No. 255 during the period of August 1,
1999 and July 31, 2002. Three of the five accidents occurred at the intersection of Old Stage Road (SR
1006) with Legend Road (SR 2782).
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Project Description
Based upon the preliminary hydraulics report the proposed replacement structure will consist of a 70 foot
spill through bridge with a 40 ft clear roadway width. The structure will provide two 12 ft travel lanes with
8 ft of lateral clearance on each side of the bridge.
The length and opening size of the proposed structure may increase or decrease as necessary to
accommodate peak flows as determined by a more detailed hydraulic analysis to be performed during the
final design phase of the bridge.
The roadway approaches will provide two 12 ft travel lanes with 10 ft shoulders (4.0 ft paved). The grade
will be approximately the same as the existing roadway. The design speed is 40 mph.
2

B. Build Alternatives
Two (2) build alternatives studied for replacing the existing bridge are described below:
Alternative A (Preferred)
Altemative A consists of replacing the bridge in-place. During construction, traffic will be maintained by an
off-site detour. The total length of approach work for this alternative is approximately 470 ft. Refer to
Figure 4 for illustration of this altemative.
Existing traffic will be detoured via US 401 and SR 2782 (Legend Road). Legend Road has a structure
posted at 31/39 tons with both limits exceeding the current posting on Bridge No. 255. The detour is
estimated to be 1.5 miles long. See Figure 1 for the proposed off-site detour route.
Alternative B
Altemative 6 consists of replacing the bridge on new alignment east of SR 1006. During construction, the
existing bridge will be used to maintain traffic. The total length of roadway approach work for this
altemative is approximately 1700 ft. Refer to Figures 5 and 6 for illustration of this altemative.
Altemative B was not selected as the preferred because of the, higher construction costs and greater
environmental impacts associated with the new alignment.
C. Alternates Eliminated From Further Consideration
The °Do-Nothing" altemative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge due to its poor condition. This
is not desirable due to the traffic service provided by SR 1006.
Investigation of the existing structure by the NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit indicates that rehabilitation
of the old bridge is not feasible due to its deteriorated condition.
D. Preferred Alternative
Altemative A consists of replacing the bridge in-place. During construction, traffic will be maintained by an
off-site detour. This altemative was selected as the preferred altemative because it has the lowest
construction costs and avoids impacts to an Unnamed Tributary which is subject to the Neuse River Buffer
Rules..
School officials did not indicate there would be significant problems with the proposed off-site detour.
The Division Engineer concurs with Altemative A as the Preferred Altemative.

IV. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs for each alternative, based on current dollars, are shown below:
Table 1
Estimated Project Costs
~
~ ~ Q /~~~~ 1 t'r,
Structure Removal Existin $14,028 $14,028
Structure Pro osed $159,000 $210,000
Detour Structure and A roaches $0 $0
Roadwa A roaches $92,198 $373,672
Miscellaneous and Mobilization $119,774 $267,300
En ineerin and Contin envies $65,000 $135,000
Right-of--Way/Easement and Utilities 45,425 90,425
Total Project Cost $495,425 1,090,425
The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the 2004-2010 NCDOT Transportation Improvement
- - --- --Program is -$690,000 including $100,000-spent in prior years, $90,000 for-right-of-way and $500,000 for
construction.
V. NATURAL RESOURCES
Natural resources within the project study area were evaluated to provide: 1) an assessment of existing
vegetation, wildlife, protected species, streams, wetlands, and water quality; 2) an evaluation of probable
impacts resulting from construction; and 3) a preliminary determination of permit needs.
A. Methodology
Materials and research data in support of this investigation have been derived from a number of sources.
The Lake Wheeler, NC U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map (USGS
1993) was consulted to determine physiographic relief and to assess landscape characteristics. Additional
resources utilized include U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
mapping, and the Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina (USDA 1970). Recent aerial photography
(scale 1:2400) was furnished by NCDOT prior to starting the field investigation.
Aerial photography served as the basis for mapping plant communities and wetlands. Plant community
patterns were identified using available mapping sources and then field verified in February 2001. Plant
community descriptions are based on a classification utilized by the N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NHP)
(Schafale and Weakley 1990). When appropriate, community classifications were modified to better reflect
field observations. Vascular plant names typically follow nomenclature found in Radford of al. (1968).
Jurisdictional wetland areas were identified using the three parameter approach (hydrophytic vegetation,
hydric soils, and wetland hydrology) following the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) delineation
4

guidelines (DOA 1987). Jurisdictional areas were characterized according to a classification scheme
established by Cowardin et al. (1979). Jurisdictional stream channels were identified using criteria outlined
by the USACE and the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ).
Water resource information for project study area streams was derived from the most recent versions of
the Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan (DWQ 1998) and several DWQ intemet resources.
Quantitative sampling was not undertaken to support existing data.
At the time of the field investigation, the most current USFWS list of federal protected species listed for
Wake County was dated February 26, 2001, and this list was reviewed prior to the field investigation.
Currently, the most recent USFWS list is dated February 25, 2003. No additional species have been listed
for Wake County.. In addition, NHP records, documenting the presence of federal or state-listed species
within the project study area were consulted before commencing the field investigation. An updated NHP
records search was conducted on December 20, 2001 and November 25, 2003.
Direct observations of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife were documented, and expected population
distributions were determined through observations of available habitat and review of .supportive
documentation found in Martof et al. (1980), Webster et al. (1985), Menhinick (1991), Hamel (1992),
Rohde et al. (1994), and Palmer and Braswell (1995).
B. Physiography and Soils
The project study area is located in the Piedmont physiographic province of North Carolina. The
topography in the project study area is generally characterized as nearly level to gently sloping. Elevations
in the project study area range from 260 to 290 feet above mean sea level (MSL) (USGS 1993). -The
project study area consists of maintained/disturbed land, agricultural land, residential areas, and forested
land.
The project study area crosses three soil mapping units (USDA 1970). The soils mapped include the Cecil
(Typic Hapludults) series, Chewacla (Typic Haplaquents) series, and Worsham (Typic Ochraquults) series.
The Worsham series is the only hydric soil series mapped in the project study area. Non-hydric soils that
may contain hydric soil inclusions within the project study area include the Chewacla series. Cecil series is
anon-hydric, upland soil.
C. Water Resources
C.1. Water Impacted
The project study area is located within sub-basin 03-04-02 of the Neuse River Drainage Basin (DWQ
1998) and is part of USGS hydrologic accounting unit 03020201 (USGS 1974). This perennial tributary to
Swift Creek originates southeast of the intersection of SR 2538 and U.S. 70 / N.C. 50 in the Town of
Gamer, in Wake County, NC. It flows south to its confluence with another unnamed tributary to Swift
Creek until finally converging with Swift Creek approximately 1.8 miles south of the project study area. The
unnamed perennial tributary in the project study area is a tributary to another perennial stream that
originates around Silver Lake and flows through Yates Millpond, which is approximately 2.0 miles
upstream. The tributary flowing from Yates Millpond has been assigned Stream Index Number (SlN) 27-
43-5-(1.5) by DWQ from the dam at Silver Lake, through Yates Millpond, to a point 0.5 mile upstream of
the mouth. This area includes the point of convergence between the project study area stream and the
5

stream flowing from Yates Millpond. A small, intermittent stream channel exists within the project study
area and flows into the larger, unnamed perennial stream.
C.2. Water Resource Characteristics
The unnamed tributary is a perennial stream with moderate flow over substrate consisting of sand and silt.
Water clarity was good at the time of the field investigation. The main channel is approximately 20 feet
wide and has a bankfull depth of approximately 2.5 feet. A geomorphic characterization of the perennial
stream reach within the project study area indicates the tributary is an "G" type channel (Rosgen 1996).
"G" type channels are entrenched with a low width/depth ratio (Rosgen 1996).
The small intermittent stream also represents a "G" type channel, which is indicative of a gulley or ditch
(Rosgen 1996). This intermittent channel has been disturbed in the past and portions currently resemble a
small ditch.
The unnamed tributary, into which the perennial stream located in the project study area flows, has been
assigned a Best Usage Classification of WS-III NSW (DEM 1993, DENR 2001 a). Therefore, both the
perennial channel and the intermittent channel located in the project study area share the same Best
Usage Classification. The WS-III designation indicates waters that are protected as water supplies, which
are generally in low to moderately developed watersheds. -These waters are suitable for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. The NSW designation
indicates nutrient sensitive water which requires limitations on nutrient inputs. Point source discharges of
treated wastewater are permitted in these waters, pursuant to Rules .0104 and .0211 of 15A NCAC 2B;
however, local programs to control nonpoint source and stormwater discharge of pollution are required.
No Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HQW), WS-I or WS-II Waters occur within
3.0 miles upstream or downstream of the project study area (DEM 1993, DENR 2001 a). This tributary is
not designated as a North Carolina Natural and Scenic River, or as a national Wild and Scenic River.
One method used by DWQ to monitor water quality is through long-term monitoring of macroinvertebrates.
In 1995, benthic macroinvertebrate samples were taken at SR 1152 on Swift Creek. This location is
approximately 6.0 miles upstream on Swift Creek. This location received a bioclassification of Fair (DWQ
1998). Benthic samples were also taken in .1995 from a sampling location on SR 1525 at Swift Creek.
This location is approximately 12.0 miles downstream of the project study area on Swift Creek (DWQ
1998). This location received a bioclassification of Good-Fair (DWQ 1998). No samples were taken from
the unnamed tributary to Swift Creek into which the subject stream flows.
Another measure of water quality being used by the DWQ is the North Carolina Index of Biotic Integrity
(NCIBI), which assesses biological integrity using the structure and health of the fish community. The
location at SR 1525 (downstream of the project study area) was evaluated based on NCIBI ratings in 1991
and 1995. This location received ratings of Good to Excellent in 1991 and Fair in 1995 (DWQ 1998). No
samples were taken from the unnamed tributary to Swift Creek into which the subject stream flows.
Discharges that enter surface waters through a pipe, ditch or other well-defined point of discharge are
broadly referred to as "point sources". No permitted dischargers are located upstream of the project study
area. There are three permitted point source dischargers located downstream on unnamed tributaries to
6

Swift Creek (DENR 2001 b). One of these is located on the unnamed tributary into which the project study
area streams flow.
C.3. Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Short-term impacts to water quality, such as sedimentation and turbidity, may result from construction-
related activities. Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and sedimentation will be minimized
through implementation of a stringent erosion control schedule and the use of BMP's. The contractor will
follow contract specifications pertaining to erosion control measures as outlined in 23 CFR 650 Subpart B
and Article 107-13 entitled Control of Erosion, Siltation, and Pollution pursuant to NCDOTs Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures. These measures include: the use of dikes, berms, silt basins,
and other containment measures to control ,runoff and elimination of construction staging areas in
floodplains and adjacent waterways. Disturbed sites will be revegetated with herbaceous cover after any
temporary construction impacts:
Other impacts to water quality, such as changes in water temperature as a result of increased exposure to
sunlight due to the removal of stream-side vegetation or increased shade due to the construction of the
bridges, and changes in storm water flows due to changes in the amount of impervious surface adjacent to
the stream channels, can be anticipated as a result of this project. However, due to the limited amount of
overall change in the surrounding areas, impacts are expected to be temporary in nature.
No adverse long-term impacts to water resources are expected to result from the alternatives being
considered. The proposed bridge replacement will allow for continuation of present stream flow within the
existing channel, thereby protecting. stream integrity.
C.4. Impacts Related to Bridge Demolition and Removal
In order to protect the water quality and aquatic life in the area affected by this project, the NCDOT and all
potential contractors will follow appropriate guidelines for bridge demolition and removal. These guidelines
are presented in three NCDOT documents entitled Pre-Construction Guidelines for Bridge Demolition and
Removal, Policy: Bridge Demolition and Removal in Wafers of the United States, and Best Management
Practices for Bridge Demo!~tion and Removal.
The superstructure of Bridge No. 255 consists of a concrete deck on timber joists. The bridge has three
spans and totals 53 ft in length. There is potential for portions of the concrete deck to be dropped into
waters of the United States during demolition and removal. The maximum resulting temporary fill
associated with the removal of Bridge No: 255 is approximately 8.6 cubic yards.
,Because no moratoriums apply, this project falls under Case 3 (no special restrictions) of the Best
Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal.
D. Biotic Resources
D.1. Plant Communities
Distribution and composition of plant communities throughout the project study area reflect landscape-level
variations in topography, soils, hydrology, and past and present land use practices. When appropriate, the
plant community names have been adopted and modified from the NHP classification system (Schafale
and Weakley 1990) and the descriptions written to reflect local variations within the project study'area.
7

Five plant communities were identified within the project study area: Piedmont alluvial forest, mixed
pine/hardwood forest, pine forest, agricultural land, and maintained/disturbed areas.
Piedmont Alluvial Forest -The Piedmont alluvial forest within the project study area is associated with
the floodplain of the unnamed perennial stream. Piedmont alluvial forests are typically located in river and
stream floodplains in which separate fluvial landforms and associated vegetation zones are too small to
distinguish (Schafale and Weakley 1990). This community is dominated by tree species such as river birch
([3etula nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tuliprfera), and boxelder (Acer negundo).
Groundcover species consist primarily of Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), jack-in-the-pulpit
(Arisaema triphyllum), and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radians).
Mixed Pine/Hardwood Forest -~ The pinemardwood forest within the project study area is located at
higher elevations than the Piedmont alluvial forest. Dominant tree species include loblolly pine (Pinus
taeda), red maple, sweetgum (Liquidambar sfyraciflua), and flowering dogwood (Comus florida).
Groundcover consists primarily of poison ivy and Japanese honeysuckle.
Pine Forest -Dominant tree species is limited to loblolly pine. Shrub species consist of sweetgum and
red maple. Groundcover species consist primarily of Japanese honeysuckle, poison ivy, trumpet creeper
(Campsis radians) and greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia).
Agricultural Land -The agricultural land within the study area consists of active and fallow areas.
Several horses were observed. Various grasses dominated this community type including fescue (Festuca
sp.) and Bermuda grass (Cynodon dacfulon).
Maintained/Disturbed Areas -The maintained and/or disturbed areas include the existing road right-of-
way, maintained residential yards, and a poweriine right-of--way. The impervious surface associated with
SR 1006 (1.3 acres) is not included in this area. Dominant species include grasses such as fescue,
Bermuda grass, and broomsedge (Andropogon sp.). Maintained yards, also contain some ornamental
species.
D.2. Wildlife
The project study area was visually surveyed for signs of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife; however, little
evidence of wildlife was observed during the field effort. The project study area is surrounded by a state-
maintained road, commercial areas, pasture, and residential yards. The Piedmont alluvial forest along the
stream provides cover and food and allows animals to travel between more optimal habitats. Expected
wildlife species are those adapted to ecotones between the maintained roadsides and adjacent natural
forests.
Few bird species were observed within or adjacent to the project study area. Bird species observed
include an unidentified vireo (Vireo sp.), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), American robin (Turdus
migratorius), northern cardinal (Cardinalis ardinalis), common grackle (Quiscalus quiscula), and American
goldfinch (Carduelis fristis). Other species expected to occur in the project study area include barred owl
(Sfrix varia), belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alcyon), and pileated woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus).
A gray squirrel (Sciurus arolinensis) was the only mammal documented in the project study area. Other
mammals expected to be found in and around the project study area include raccoon (Procyon lotor),
8

Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), and eastem cottontail (Sylvilagus
floridanus). Other species that may use the floodplain as a travel corridor include white-tailed deer
(Odocoileus virginianus).
No terrestrial reptiles were observed within the project study area. Species expected to occur within the
project study area include eastem box turtle (Terrapene Carolina), eastem garter snake (Thamnophis
sirfalis), ringneck snake (Diadophis punctafus), and black rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta).
No terrestrial amphibians were observed within the project study area. Species expected to occur within
the project study area include slimy salamander (Plefhodon cylindraceus), Fowler's toad (Bufo
woodhousei~), spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer), and northern cricket frog (Acris crepitans).
D.3 Aquatic Communities
Fish species documented in the reach of the unnamed tributary to Swift Creek within the project study area
include redfin pickerel (Esox americanusi), yellow bullhead (Ameiurus natalis), redbreast sunfish (Lepomis
auritus), green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus), pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus), Johnny darter (Etheostoma
nigrum), creek chubsucker (Erimyzon oblongus), and eastem silvery minnow (Hybognathus regius).
No aquatic reptiles were observed within the project study area. Species expected to occur within the
project study area include the northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon), queen snake (Regina
septemv~tata), painted turtle (Chrysemys picfa), and common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina).
No aquatic amphibians were observed within the project study area. Species expected to occur within the
project study area include red-spotted newt (Notophfhalmus viridescens), bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), and
pickerel frog (Rana palustris).
Aquatic macroinvertebrate surveys included kick-net surveys, limited bottom sampling, and walking all
streambanks in the project study area to locate freshwater mussel middens. Visual observation of
streambanks along the unnamed perennial tributary of Swift Creek revealed evidence of the variable spike
(Ellipfio icterina) and non-native Asiatic clams.
Benthic macroinvertebrates were sampled according to current DWQ protocol. Benthic organisms
collected within the unnamed perennial tributary were identified to at least Order and Family if possible and
include: dragonflies and damselflies (Odonota: Libellulidae), caddisflies (Trichoptera: Lepidostoma), crane
flies (Diptera: Tipulidae), midges (Diptera: Chironomidae), mayflies (Ephemeroptera), beetles (Coleoptera),
Asiatic clams (Corbicula), blackfly larvae (Diptera: Simuliidae), and crayfish (Decapoda: Crustacea).
Identifications are based on McCafferty (1998).
D.4. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
D.4.a. Terrestrial Community Impacts
Potential impacts to plant communities are estimated based on the approximate area of each plant
community present within both the proposed final right-of-way and the temporary construction limits of any
on-site detour or easement that falls outside the estimated permanent right-of--way limit. A summary of
potential plant community impacts is presented in Table 2. All plant community impacts are based on
aerial photograph base mapping. A portion of the permanent plant community impact amount will consist
9

of proposed right-of--way for the road after bridge replacement is complete. Impervious surface and open
water areas are not included in this analysis.
Table 2
Potential Impacts to Plant Communities
~~ ~~ ~ ~ ,~~ ~~ y,,~J .~ ~~~
~~: ~ P ~ t3M t ~ 1MP,C~'S ~` ~
r ~., f ,~,~ ,~
K * +~
~
~ %~r
} .Y
I .r~
Y t~ x ~
~ d ~ w~4y =
t
~
'k' ~i e
~f~k l+t
~
! ~ ~
~~
.
F4
,~ lr
fi~X ~h~ . }
}~ ''^
..f.
Piedmont Alluvial Forest 0.18 0.30
Mixed Pine/Hardwood Forest 0.0 0.10
Pine Forest 0.0 0.0
Agricultural Land 0.06 0.0
Maintained/Disturbed Areas 0.25 2.16
TOTAL FOR ALT 0.49 2.56
Permanent community impacts for Alternative A represent the least amount of the two alternatives. The
plant community with the largest amount of potential permanent impacts for all proposed alternative is the
Maintained/Disturbed Areas.
D.4.b. Aquatic Communities Impacts
The proposed bridge replacement will not result in substantial loss or displacement of known aquatic
wildlife population. Potential down-stream impacts to aquatic habitat will be avoided by bridging the stream
to maintain regular flow and stream integrity. In addition, temporary impacts to downstream habitat from
increased sediment during construction are expected to be reduced by limiting in-stream work to an
absolute minimum, except for the removal of the portion of the sub-structure below the water. BMP-BDRs
will be followed to minimize impacts due to anticipated bridge demolition.
E. Special Topics
E.1. Waters of the United States
Surface waters within the embankments of the perennial unnamed tributary to Swift Creek are subject to
jurisdictional consideration under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act as "Waters of the United States" (33
CFR 328.3). The waters in the unnamed perennial tributary to Swift Creek exhibit characteristics of
riverine, lower perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded waters (R2UBH) (Cowardin et al.
1979). The unnamed intermittent stream channel exhibits characteristics of riverine, intermittent
streambed (R4S6) (Cowardin et al. 1979). Surface waters within the intermittent channel are also subject
to jurisdictional consideration. Impacts for stream channels will be assessed by the linear footage of
stream channel impacted and area of open water.
Wetlands subject to review under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) are defined by the
presence of three primary criteria: hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and evidence of hydrology within
12 inches of the soil surface for a portion (12.5 percent) of the growing season (DOA 1987). Based on this
three-parameter approach, jurisdictional wetlands do not occur within the project study area.
10

E.2. Potential Impacts to Waters of the United States
Temporary and permanent impacts to wetlands and surface waters are estimated based on the amount of
each jurisdictional area within the project limits. Permanent impacts are those areas that will be in the final
construction limits and/or the proposed right-of-way of the new structure and approaches. Temporary
impacts include those impacts that will result from temporary construction activities outside of the proposed
right-of-way and/or those associated with staging areas and/or temporary detours. Temporary impacts will
be restored to their original condition after the project has been completed. Potential wetland and surface
water impacts are included in Table 3. There are no jurisdictional wetland impacts associated with this
project.
Table 3
Potential Impacts to Jurisdictional Surface Waters
.
S ~l~E~,~`CH.A~ERt~ATE
~ ~. ~ ,~
._~ . ~~~
~#

y~'~ . ~ x j ' +^s ~ ~-.
'C~ ~ w ~ ~
`~1` ; fi~j,. ~ `~..wC7.~u`~ ~ ~ ~,
~ ..-i~'~~r .. ~LT~ B Y y ~
%
,
y
#~ ~t Y {~~ ' ~? 4 ~ ~~~
" ~~~i ~Prefierred) 7 ~
r
`
`
~~ ~ r
' ~5~ ~~,<, ~E;, t: ~ ~t
a . ~_ ,
~
~ _
~
~
t~: ~.
Perennial Channel acres 0.0 0.0
Perennial Channel feet 0.0 0.0

Intermittent Channel feet 30 ~ 270
Note: Penn Went im acts area r t d ' cl d th ed fi I ' - f-
a p pp owma a an in u e e propos na nght o way and the temporary construction easement
assoaated with the appro~amate slope-stake limits as provided by the project engineer. Temporary impacts are approximate and
are based on the area potentially affected by bridge demolition and/or temporary detours.
Neither Altemative A nor Altemative B is expected to permanently impact perennial surface waters.
Potential permanent impacts for Altemative A include approximately 30 linear feet of intermittent stream
channel that is within the final right-of--way and/or construction limits. Potential permanent impacts for
Altemative B include approximately 270 linear feet of intermittent stream channel that is within the final
right-of--way and/or construction limits.
E.3. Permits
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act - In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.
1344), a permit is required from the USACE for projects of this type for the discharge of dredged or fill
material into "Waters of the United States". The USACE issues two types of permits for these activities. A
general permit may be issued on a nationwide or regional basis for a category or categories of activities
when: those activities are substantially similar in nature and cause only a minimal individual or cumulative
environmental impacts, or when the general permit would result in avoiding unnecessary duplication or
regulatory control exercised by another Federal, state, or local agency provided that the environmental
consequences of the .action are individually and cumulatively minimal. If a general permit is not
appropriate for a particular activity, then an individual permit must be utilized. Individual permits are
authorized on a case-by-case evaluation of a specific project involving the proposed discharges.
It is anticipated that this project will fall under Nationwide Permit 23, which is a type of general permit.
Nationwide Permit 23 is relevant to approved Categorical Exclusions. This permit authorizes any activities,
work and discharges undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part,
11

by another federal agency and that -the activity 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 environment. Activities authorized under nationwide permits
must satisfy all terms and conditions of the particular permit. However, final permit decisions are left to the
discretionary authority of the USACE.
Section 401 Water Quality Certification - A 401 Water Quality Certification, administered through the
DWQ, will also be required. This certification is issued for any activity which may result in a discharge into
waters for which a federal permit is required. According to the DWQ, one condition of the permit is that the
appropriate .sediment and erosion control practices must be utilized to prevent exceedances of the
appropriate turbidity water quality standard.
E.4. Neuse River Buffer Rules
The project study area is within the Neuse River Drainage Basin, therefore jurisdictional surface waters
may be subject to the Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules. The Buffer Rules apply to a 50-foot wide
riparian buffer directly adjacent to some surface waters in the Neuse River Drainage Basin. This includes
intermittent streams, perennial streams, lakes, ponds, and estuaries that are depicted on the most current
versions of either the USGS maps or county soil survey maps, but does not include jurisdictional wetlands
(non-surface waters) regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The riparian buffer consists of
two distinct zones. Zone 1 comprises a 30-foot wide area adjacent to the surface water that cannot be
disturbed except for those specific activities that are allowed by the Buffer Rules. Zone 2 comprises a 20-
foot wide area adjacent to Zone 1 that is to be left undisturbed except for those activities specifically
allowed by the Buffer Rules. The unnamed perennial tributary to Swift Creek and the unnamed intermittent
stream are mapped on USGS maps and the Wake County soil survey maps and are subject to the Buffer
Rules.
Activities in the buffer area beyond footprint of the existing use are classified as either "exempt",
"allowable", "allowable with mitigation", or "prohibited." Table 4 provides a list of activities that may be
subject to Buffer Rules within the project study area along with their classifications. Depending upon
project altematives, not all of the uses listed may apply, and other uses not listed here, such as utility
crossings and roadside drainage ditches, among others, may be regulated under the Buffer Rules.
Guidelines will be consulted in entirety to review all project related uses subject to the Buffer Rules.
"Exempt activities will be designed, constructed, and maintained to minimize soil disturbance and to
provide the maximum water quality protection practicable. "Allowable" activities may proceed within the
riparian buffer provided that there are no practicable altematives to the requested use. Activities deemed
"allowable with mitigation" may proceed within the riparian buffer if there are no practicable altematives to
the requested use and an appropriate mitigation strategy has been approved. °Prohibited" activities, none
of which are listed below, may not proceed within the riparian buffer unless a variance is granted from the
DWQ or delegated local authority.
12

Table 5
Activities That May Be Subject To the Buffer Rules in the Project Study Area
Use Exempt Allowable Allowable With Prohibited
Miti ation
Brid es X
Road crossings that impact less
than or a ual to 40 linear feet X
Road crossings that impact greater
than 40 linear feet but less than or
equal to 150 linear feet or 0.33 acre X
of ri arian area.
Road crossings that impact greater
than 150 linear feet or greater than X
0.33 acre of ri arian buffer
Temporary roads used for bridge
construction or replacement
provided that restoration activities X
such as soil stabilization and
revegetation occur immediately
after construction.
Altemative A expands the existing right-of--way from 60 feet to 100 feet, resulting in 40 feet of impact to
riparian buffer in Zones 1 and 2 along the perennial stream. The proposed right-of-way will also impact the
riparian buffer of the intermittent channel. Approximately 225 feet of riparian buffer for the intermittent
stream occurs inside of or within 50 feet of the proposed right-of-way limits. This entire 225 feet of
intermittent stream buffer is currently within 50 feet of the existing (pre-construction) right-of-way limits.
DWQ may consider the intermittent stream buffer to be previously impacted by the current right-of-way
limits. Mitigation should not be required if only the perennial stream buffer is considered to be an impact
since it is less than or equal to 40 feet. Buffer mitigation may be required if the intermittent channel buffer
is assessed as an impact by DWQ.
Altemative B expands the existing right-of--way from 60 feet to as much as 140 feet near the bridge
resulting in 80 feet of impact to riparian buffer in Zones 1 and 2 along the perennial stream. The proposed
right-of--way will also impact the riparian buffer of the intermittent channel. Approximately 365 feet of
riparian buffer for the intermittent stream occurs inside of or within 50 feet of the proposed right-of-way
limits. Approximately 225 feet of this amount is currently within 50 feet of the existing (pre-construction)
right-of--way limits. DWQ may consider this portion of intermittent stream buffer to be previously impacted
by the current right-of-way limits, which would leave 140 feet of new buffer impact. Buffer mitigation will be
required for Altemative B .even under the best-case scenario with DWQ considering the 225 feet as
previous buffer impact.
E.S. Mitigation Evaluation
The USACE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a wetland mitigation policy
which embraces the concept of °no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to
restore and maintain the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of the waters of the United States,
13

specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding
impacts, minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time, and compensating for impacts
(40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three aspects (avoidance, minimization, and compensatory mitigation)
must be considered sequentially.
Avoidance -Mitigation by avoidance examines appropriate and practicable measures for averting impact
to Waters of the United States. A 1990 Memorandum of Agreement between the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the USACE, 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.
The proposed alternative involves replacing the bridge "in-place" and utilizing an off-site detour thereby
avoiding any impacts.
Minimization -Minimization of adverse impact to Waters of the United States includes examination of
appropriate and practicable measures to reduce such impacts. Implementation of these steps will be
required through project modifications and permit conditions. Adverse impacts are typically minimized by
decreasing the proposed project footprint through reduction of median widths, right-of--way widths, and/or
fill slopes.
Other practical mechanisms to minimize impacts to waters of the United States include strict enforcement
of sedimentation control BMPs for 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; reestablishment of vegetation on exposed areas, with judicious pesticide and herbicide
management; minimization of instream activity; and litter/debris control.
No measures are proposed for this project because there are no jurisdictional wetlands within the project
study area. However, there is an intermittent stream subject to minimization.
Compensatory Mitigation -Compensatory mitigation, including restoration, creation and enhancement of
Waters of the United States, is typically not considered unless anticipated impacts to Waters of the United
States have been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Further, it is recognized that
"no net loss of wetlands" may not be achievable in every permit action. Therefore, compensatory
mitigation is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate and practicable
minimization measures have been required.
Compensatory mitigation is not expected to be required for the buffer impacts associated with this project.
A final determination regarding mitigation requirements rest with the USACE.
F. Protected Species
F.1. Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered (E) or Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE),
and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 of seq.). The following federally
14

protected species are considered to have ranges extending into Wake County (USFWS list dated February
25, 2003).
Table 6
Federally Protected Species Listed for Wake County, North Carolina
Bald eagle -Bald eagles typically nest in tall, living trees in a conspicuous location near water and forage
over large bodies of water with adjacent trees available for perching (Hamel 1992). Preventing disturbance
activities within a primary zone extending 750 to 1500 feet outward from a nest tree is considered critical
for maintaining acceptable conditions for eagles (USFWS 1987). USFWS recommends avoiding any
disturbance activities, including construction and tree cutting, within this primary zone. Within a secondary
zone extending from the primary zone boundary out to a distance of 1.0 mile from a nest tree, construction
and land-clearing activities should be restricted to the non-nesting period. USFWS also recommends
avoiding alteration of natural shorelines where bald eagles forage, and avoiding significant land-clearing
activities within 1500 feet of roosting sites.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION - No Effect
NHP records indicate the closest occurrence of a bald eagle is documented from the head of Yates
Millpond in 1989. This location is approximately 2.1 miles northwest of the project study area. No bald
eagles have been observed there since 1989 based on the updated NHP records search.
The project study area does not contain large areas of open water, and therefore lacks potential foraging
and nesting habitat for bald eagles. No large ponds or lakes were observed outside the project study area.
This project will not have any effect on the bald eagle.
Red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) -This small woodpecker measuring 7 to 8.5 inches long has a black
head, prominent white cheek patch, and black-and-white barred back. Males often have red markings
(cockades) behind the eye, but the cockades may be absent or difficult to see (Potter et a1.1980). Primary
nest sites for RCWs include open pine stands greater than 60 years of age with little or no mid-story
development. Foraging habitat is comprised of open pine or pine/mixed hardwood stands 30 years of age
or older (Henry 1989). Primary habitat consists of mature to over-mature southern pine forests dominated
by loblolly, long-leaf (Pinus palusfris), slash (P. elliofii), and pond (P. serotina) pines. Nest cavities are
constructed in the heartwood of living pines, generally older than 60 years, that have been infected with
red-heart disease. Nest cavity trees tend to occur in clusters, which are referred to as colonies. The
woodpecker drills holes into the bark around the cavity entrance, resulting in a shiny, resinous buildup
around the entrance that allows for easy detection of active nest trees. Pine flatwoods or pine-dominated
15
Endangered (E) -any native oronce-native species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Threatened (T) -any native or once-native species which is likely to become an endangered speaes within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

savannas which have been maintained by frequent natural fires serve as ideal nesting and foraging sites
for.this woodpecker. Development of a thick understory may result in abandonment of cavity trees.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION - No Effect
NHP records do not document any occurrences of the RCW within 3.0 miles of the project study area.
Mature pine trees with open understories exist primarily within residential yards located within the project
study area. These trees were searched for evidence of RCW activity. No cavity trees were found within
the project study area. The pine forest community does not contain trees of an age suitable to support
RCW nesting and also lacks potential foraging habitat. This project will not effect the RCW or suitable
habitat.
Dwarf wedgemussel -The dwarf wedgemussel is relatively small, averaging 1.0 to 1.5 inches long. The
shells- are olive-green to dark brown in color and are subrhomboidally shaped. The shells of females are
swollen posteriorly, while males are generally flattened (TSCFTM 1990). The preferred habitats are
shaded streams with moderate flow velocities and bottoms varying in texture from gravel and coarse sand
to mud, especially just downstream of debris and on banks of accreting sediment. This species was
previously known only from a few, populations in the Neuse River basin (Johnston County) and Tar River
basin (Granville County). Statewide surveys conducted since 1992 -have expanded this species' range in
North Carolina. This species is now known from the Neuse Basin in Orange, Wake, Johnston, and Nash
Counties; and from the Tar River Basin in Granville, Vance, Warren, Franklin, Halifax, and Nash Counties.
NCDOT Environmental Specialists Mary Frazer and Sharon Snider visited the project site on April 23,
2003. Reconnaissance of the stream for freshwater mussels was conducted by wading in the water and
using batiscopes. The evaluated reach extended from approximately 925 feet downstream, where the
channel became dammed due to beavers and then intersected with SR 2782 (Legend Road) to 330 feet
upstream of the existing bridge. The downstream habitat was surrounded by horse farms, where horses
had access to the creek. The 10-13 foot wide channel was straight with unconsolidated substrate. Recent
sand deposits were observed. Upstream the substrate possessed more gravel than sand and the channel,
although narrower, was more sinuous. One live and one relict shell of the eastern elliptio (Elliptio
complanata) was observed. No other freshwater mussel species were observed.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION - No Effect
Given the survey results, and unsuitable habitat, it is apparent that the Dwarf wedgemussel does not occur
in the project footprint. Additionally, no known records of the dwarf wedgemussel exist within 1 mile
downstream of the project. In conclusion, project construction will not impact this species.
Michaux's sumac - Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent, deciduous, rhizomatous shrub, usually less
than 2 feet high. The alternate, compound leaves consist of 9 to 13 hairy, round-based, toothed leaflets
borne on a hairy rachis that may be slightly winged (Radford et al. 1968). Small male and female flowers
are produced during June on separate plants; female flowers are produced on terminal, erect clusters
followed by small, hairy, red fruits (drupes) in August and September. Michaux's sumac tends to grow in
disturbed areas where competition is reduced by periodic fire or other disturbances, and may grow along
roadside margins or utility rights-of-way. In the Piedmont, Michaux's sumac appears to prefer clay soil
16

derived from mafic rocks or sandy soil derived from granite (Weakley 1993). Michaux's sumac ranges from
south Virginia through Georgia in the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION - No Effect
NHP records do not document the occurrence of Michaux's sumac within 3.0 miles of the project study
area as of December 20, 2001.
Potential habitat for Michaux's sumac does not exist within the project study area. The maintained
powerline right-of-way is in the floodplain of the perennial stream, and the roadside and adge of the
pasture do not provide potential habitat for this species. This project will not affect any populations of
Michaux's sumac.
F.2. Federal Species of Concern
The February 25, 2003 FWS list also includes a category of species designated as "Federal Species of
Concem" (FSC). The FSC designation provides no federal protection under the ESA for the species listed.
The presence of potential suitable habitat (Amoroso 1999, LeGrand and Hall 2001) within the project study
area has been evaluated for the following FSC listed for Wake County and are presented in Table 7.
NHP files document the occurrence of one FSC within 3.0 miles of the project study area. The Carolina
least 'trillium has been documented 2.1 miles northwest of the project study area near Yates Mill Pond.
This. species has not been observed there since 1971. Habitat for this species consists of ecotones
between savannas and non-riverine wet hardwood forests over marl (Amoroso 1999). This habitat type
does not exist within the project study area. No FSC were identified during the field investigation.
Table 7
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) for Wake County, North Carolina
~:ommon Name f~ 'r ~_
~~ ~<_ i ~ ~:'~~` :-_ ° ~ ~,t;:t. Scienfific-:Name ~`~,~~~ ,t
", '~ ,~'.~X ;~ ..;~~ ~, ~ ~ ' ~ ~ :~'otential
:Habitat StaEe
-,Status"
Bachman's s arrow Aimo hila aesfivalis N SC
Carolina darter Etheostoma Collis le idinion Y SC
"Neuse" madtom Noturus furiosus Y SC-PT
Southern ho nose snake Heterodon simus N SR
Pinewoods shiner L hrurus mafutinus Y SR
Southeastern m otis M ofis ausfrori anus Y SC
Yellow lance Elli do lanceolata Y T
Atlantic i toe Fusconaia masoni Y T
Green floater Lasmi ona subviridis Y E
Diana fritilla butterFl S e eria diana Y SR
B s icebush Lindera subcoriacea N E
Flatrock anic rass Panicum 1~tho hilum N SR-T
Sweet inesa Monotro sis odorata N C
Carolina least trillium Trillium usillum var. usillum N E
~iwanyGicu tai - am ~~du~C ~~ ~~~cx-nauve species m ganger or exunenon tnrougnout an or a sigrnncant portion of its range.
17

Threatened (T) -any native or once-native species which is likely to become an endangered speaes within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Speaal Concern (SC) - any speces which requires monitoring but which may be collected and sold under specific regulations.
Candidate(C) - a species for which USFWS has enough information on file to support proposals for listing as endangered or
threatened.
Watch List (WL) - any speaes believed to be rare and of conservation concern but not warranting active monitoring.
Proposed (P) - a speaes which has been formally proposed for listed as endangered, threatened, or speaal concern, but has
not yet completed the legally mandated listing process.
Significantly Rare (SR) - speaes which are very rare, generally with 1-20 populations in the state, and generally reduced in
numbers by habitat destruction.
F.3. State Protected Species
Plant and animal species which are on the North Carolina state list as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or
Special Concern (SC), receive limited protection under the North Carolina Endangered Species Act (G.S.
113-331 et seq.) and the North Carolina Plant Protection Act of 1979 (G.S.106-202 of seq.).
NHP records (November 25, 2003) do not document any state-listed species within 3.0 miles of the project
study area with the exception of the Carolina least trillium.
VI. CULTURAL RESOURCES
A. Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as
amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance
with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires Federal agencies to take into account
the effect of their undertakings (federally funded,--.licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places and to afford the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings. This project has been
coordinated with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) in accordance with the
Advisory Council's regulations and FHWA procedures.
B. Historic Architecture
In their August 6, 2001, letter, the SHPO stated "We have conducted a review of the project and are aware
of no properties of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance, which would be affected by the
project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as currently proposed." A copy of the SHPO
memorandum is included in the Appendix.
C. Archaeology
In their August 6, 2001, letter, the SHPO stated "We have conducted a reviewof the project and are aware
of no properties of architectural, historic, or archaeological significance, which would be affected by the
project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as currently proposed." A copy of the SHPO
memorandum is included in the Appendix.
18

VII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of inadequate bridges will result
in safer traffic operations.
The project is considered a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of substantial
environmental consequences.
Replacement of Bridge No. 255 will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment. The project should have an overall positive impact due to the improvement of existing, poor
bridge conditions.
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 the construction.. of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition will be limited. No
relocates are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.
In compliance with Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low Income Populations) a review was conducted to determine whether minority of low-
income populations were receiving disproportionately high! and adverse human health and environmental
impacts as a result of this project. The investigation determined the project would not disproportionately
impact any minority orlow-income populations.
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.
The studied route does not contain any bicycle accommodations, nor is it a' jdesignated bicycle route;
therefore, no bicycle accommodations have been included as part of this project.
This project has been coordinated with the United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources
Conservation Service. The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their
representatives to consider the potential impact to prime farmland for all land acquisition and construction
projects. The project area is within an urbanized area of Wake County. Therefore, the project will not
involve the direct conversion of farmland acreage within these classifications.
No publicly owned parks or recreational facilities,~wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or historic sites of national,
state or local significance in the immediate vicinity of the project will be impacted. The proposed project
will not require right-0f-way acquisition or easement' from any land protected under Section 4(f) of the
Department of Transportation Act of 1966:
The project is located in Wake County, which is within the Raleigh-Durham nonattainment area for ozone
(03) and carbon monoxide (CO) as defined by the EPA. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA)
designated these areas as "moderate" nonattainment area for Oa and; CO. However, due ;to improved
monitoring data, these areas were redesignated as °maintenance" for Os on June 17, 1994 and
"maintenance" for CO on September 18, 1995. Section 176(c) of the CAAA requires that transportation
19

plans, programs, and projects conform to the intent of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). The
current SIP does not contain any transportation control measures for Wake County. The Capital Area
2025 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the 2004-2010 Metropolitan Transportation
Improvement Program (MTIP) has been determined to conform to the intent of the SIP. The USDOT air
quality conformity approval of the LRTP was August 20, 2002 and the USDOT air quality conformity
approval for the MTIP was October 1, 2003. The current conformity determination is consistent with the
final conformity rule found in 40 CFR Parts 51 and 93. There has been no significant changes in the
project's design concept or scope, as used in the conformity analyses.
Ambient noise levels may increase during the construction of this project; however this increase will be
only temporary and usually confined to daylight hours. There should be no notable change in traffic
volumes after this project is complete. Therefore, this project will have no adverse effect on existing noise
levels. Noise receptors in the project area will not be impacted by this project. This evaluation completes
the assessment requirements for highway noise set forth in 23 CFR Part 772. No additional reports are
required.
Observation revealed no evidence of underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project
area.
Wake County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The bridge is located in a
Detailed Study Area. The replacement structure is proposed as an in-kind replacement. It is anticipated
that this project will not have any adverse effect or impact on the existing floodplain or the adjacent
properties and existing structures. The approximate 100-year floodplain in the project study area is shown
in Figure 8.
Geotechnical borings for the bridge foundation will be necessary.
Based on the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental impacts will
result from the replacement of Bridge No. 255.
VIII. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
No formal public involvement program was initiated. Efforts were undertaken early in the planning process
to contact local officials to involve them in the project development with a scoping letter.
IX. AGENCY COMMENTS
Wake County Emergency Medical Services: Indicated by telephone conversation that road closure will
have no impact on their response times.
20

_ IIX. REFERENCES
Amoroso, J.L. 1999. Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Plant Species of North Carolina. North
Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh. 85 pp.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater
Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, DC. 103 pp.
Department of the Army (DOA). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Tech. Rpt. Y-
87-1. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. 100 pp.
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). 2001 a. NC Waterbodies Listed by Subbasin.
Web Address: httpJlh2o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/reports.
DENR. 2001 b. Active NPDES Permits. Web Address
http://h2o.ehnr.state.nc.us/NPDES/documents/permits.xls.
Division of Environmental Management (DEM). 1993. Classifications and Water Quality
Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Neuse River Basin. North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
Division of Water Quality (DWQ). 1998.. Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. Department of
Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC. 214p.
Hamel, P.B. 1992. Land Manager's Guide to the Birds of the South. The Nature Conservancy,
Southeastern Region, Chapel Hill, NC. 437 pp.
Henry, V. G. 1989. Guidelines for preparation of Biological Assessments and Evaluations for the Red-
Cockaded Woodpecker. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region, Atlanta Georgia, 13 pp.
LeGrand, H.E., Jr., and S.P. Hall. 2001: Natural Heritage Program List of the Rare Animal Species of
North Carolina. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, N.C.
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh. 91 pp.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey, and J.R. Harrison III. 1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the
Carolinas and Virginia. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 264 pp.
McCafferty, W. P. 1998. Aquatic Entomology. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, MA. 448 pp.
Menhinick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North Carolina. North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission, Raleigh. 227 pp.
Palmer, W.M. and A.L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. The University of North Carolina
Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 412 pp.
21

Potter, E.F., J.F. Pamell, and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 408 pp.
Radford, A. E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of The Carolinas. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.
Rohde, F.C., R.G Amdt, D.G. Lindquist, and J.F. Pamell. 1994. Freshwater Fishes of the Carolinas,
Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 222 pp.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology. Pagosa Springs, CO. 365 pp.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina:
Third Approximation. Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
The Scientific Council on Freshwater and Terrestrial Mollusks (TSCFTM). 1990. A Report
on the Conservation Status of North Carolina's Freshwater and Terrestrial Molluscan Fauna. Pp. 50-52.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1970. Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina. USDA Soil
Conservation Service. 118 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the
Southeast Region. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. 8 pp.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1974. Hydrologic Units Map, State of North Carolina.
USGS (1993). Lake Wheeler, NC 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle.
Weakley, A. S. 1993. Guide to the Flora of the Carolinas and Virginia. Working Draft of November 1993.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation,
Webster, W.D., J.F. Pamell, and W.C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas,
Virginia, and Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 255 pp.
22

FIGURES

~ i~
F ~o,
-,~, ~ ~,
~, y Q
~-J
~,.,, 3t RL ' •~' .,
1374
~ 8-4299
~~
'i
3
~' -_
\ 1\\ ~O1
a \`~~ \~
~"? .~a~
~RL
5Z'
Q 2829
~ ~,....
a.
cm ~°
ti 279
o ~,,. 2797 ~
i y
i Elrn.nMry /
SM.
3740 ~,,,~, a.
(~~ ? ,~"/
- ~. "" RL 220
.13 .03 ,3y
, a,.,,,. 2823
RAM .7D Zia ,pp Z -16 2~ .30
~ 2718 ~'" 2798 2836 2835 g 2
i w /,, d...n a. wb.cr. 8 r......
-~.,s ae .a 2831
s ~ 2-~ 2835 2837
~ Rii. 8 13 ~, &.5.
171 .,e $ ir.... ~8
- ~ ~ ~ .,6 2s3 2s7~
~' i.r+. ~p a. d
2832 ~ 27
a. $ y 2716 '~ 2773 r g
P
1006 ~, a' a •~
~, 2790
2846 ~" ~ ~
iyr .AY~s CIUM RL
o+.M " t 819
~j.~i~ ~
PROJECT LOCATION
IYAKE
COUNTY
~ N 2799, ~~~ b~ ~ g
~o<. ~~ \
~ ', ~
2800 ~ ~
i
2776 a
~~ 2801 `j~Jg
,~, ~ I ~
2852 ~
2~ 1
H ~ ,`\
a. s 2776 ~~ ~
~., , g .! µ ~ ~~
STUgED DETOUR
SCALE IN MILES
0.5 0 0.5 1
1Yorth Carolina Department of
Transportatwn
Division of Highways
Project Development £~' Entmm~mental
„, Analysis Branch
FIGURE I
PROJECT VICINITY MAP
SR 1006
REPLACE BRIDGE N0. 255
OVER UNNAMED CREEK
WAKE COUNTY. NORTH CAROLINA
TIP PROJECT 8-4299

}
,~_~~ _
~, _
» ..
.. .. s .. ~ "` ~ cc
'~~~~ j,.°`'sc1 si . ~. aY'.:. M' iu „a itt'^~'44sa'~~r 'a r~h~v ~'k..5+e 1, t. `.s
v ,~,,.... .... ............... .
xs~r :~ _ .:[ - . - . o"ggam~ g~~q~ys. , rf.''y ~ _ g-~g p.:,gg~~~$ . 3., pp:~~~~.~. ~+'y -.. ~.> ~ _
a _ r~_W +~ti.~~ 1.:!' ~3~iCL7~&.. l~ d£ 1
a n
-t : `{~
. $" . -Y ..
'~ ~
r ~
3x
A ~ ~ ~
s ~~ { ~~ _ °u f' ~
~ :
{ ,..fir. w ~,,;
4~~h ~ f £~ wi i rasv ~A~~ ~' ~ .r ~ '~~ws. ~ r * §Y~y~:
~ 1. ~ 44
1 .k~ :3si'uti ln~i`,~4.. ~.~~!' a't', ~."`~ ~ ~? '~.. ;`~+r,L "i~~,~~.s;'~yr 3i
Y`w ~ h .i. ~Y 4 ~ ~sA ~ N '~%'~
' ~ ~ ~~ _ ~
p~~'~^`'~J`~~S'~ x t'^ F: ~ .f 1& ~~~a y~ s ~4SsFT~., '7lIF
3. ..' 1 H` M ° Y~ fly.. ~ ~ ... .: - ~ .r'il' a~, ,, .3~. .~... r3`. ~ } ~Si €~~; -~
l..+l ~~
"__,
~ ~ ~ ;
-^
i t ~ ..

-~

~li

,
. ,,
,
n .r.
~." ~,~
,~ ,,~ i .

,.
~ ~, ? ,~
,~-' " r
'~ ~~
~
~'- 'fir

~~
',~
,~3~„ ~ i.

._tm.
---~- _ . __ - - - _... - Y

o

~r~ -
~-/ ~
j Szl€~ ~:=__~--~
' > l~JJ
f~,,t ~ "
r, ~
_ / ~ ~ ;e per.,' ~
o ;
2 ~ ~
~~d ~ f
~ ~ ~~ E s~R~~~~~~~~ ~~
t', ~~.,.~`' ~ ~~". G~~a~~ ', ~ ~'~~~
.MM ~ ~-y
E ~ f _ ~~ 'hY ~ ~; c~'iV f
... .
`~
°'l
~ vr~~
__ ~ ~
' . aEE PdBttP tNDEJf FQPi PAPd E:.S A`6T PAPt:T£!5
°n' ~.,
i~ ~ ~ ~ ~
,,
a~ ~
I~ t(t{{{j({{~, ' CiiY ~ 3762St ~
1 PAPfE7. L41:etiOh
~~
;Ilia
a ~ I ' ~
~: ~ .~
~. Ps
as ~~?
Rtf~r~.~ Y-. ~°
!: r1
Ir~' ~t
`~4,
t~
~~`t
~ r 3E ~~~~ t=r't~"t ~ir~~ d.
E

E~ r~dg~ ~a 2~ ~~a
~~ee
r~~r~

~~

__ ~~~a
~ ~

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ® __
Charles R. Fullw-ood, Executive Director
TO: Theresa Ellerby
Project Development Engineer, :1CDOT
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Co m r
Habitat Conservation Program
~riJ
DATE: October 8, 2001
SUBJECT: NCDOT Bridge Replacements in Franklin and Wake counties of North Carolina.
TIP Nos. B-4515, B-3916, and B-4299.
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 Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d).
On bridge replacement projects of this scope our standard recommendations are as
follows:
1. We generally prefer spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not require
work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment. The horizontal
and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows f'or human and wildlife passage
beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and does not block navigation by
canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream.
3. Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream.
4. If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream.
5. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed back to
original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the project. Disturbed
areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should
be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10'. If possible, when using temporary
structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • l 721 A4ail Sen•ice Center • Raleigh, NC 2 7699-1 72 1
Telephone: [phone] ext. 231 • Fax: [phone]

Bridge Memo
2 October 8, 2001
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.
1 1. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources
must be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be
maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
12. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control.
13. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area.
Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used
where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
14. Heavy equipment .should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in
order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other
pollutants into streams.
15. Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and
should be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
construction is completed.
16. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are
used:
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 could be

Bridge Memo
October 8, 2001
accomplished by constructing a low sill on the upstream end of the other cells that
will divert low flows to another cell. This will allow sufficient water depth in the
culvert or pipe during normal flows to accommodate fish movements. If culverts are
long, notched baffles should be placed in reinforced concrete box culverts at ,15 foot
intervals to allow for the collection of sediments in the culvert, to reduce flow
velocities, and to provide resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms moving
through the structure.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box should be designed to
remain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
Culverts or pipes should be situated so that no channel realignment or widening is
required. Widening of the stream channel at the inlet or outlet of structures usually
causes a decrease in water velocity causing sediment deposition. that will require future
maintenance.
4. Riprap should not be placed on the stream bed.
In most cases, we prefer the replacement of the existing structure at the same location
with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and
located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing
stream banks. If the structure will be on a new alignment, the old structure should be removed
and the approach fills removed from the 100-year floodplain. Approach fills should be removed
down to the natural ground elevation. The area should be stabilized with grass and planted with
native tree species. If the area that is reclaimed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore
the area to wetlands. If successful, the site may be used as wetland mitigation for the subject
project or other projects in the watershed.
Project specific continents:
B-4515 -Franklin County -Bridge No. 40 over Bear Swamp Creek. There are records of
state and federally listed mussels in the project vicinity. Therefore, due to the potential for
impacts to listed species we request that NCDOT perform a mussel survey prior to the
construction of this bridge. Standard comments apply.
2. B-3916 -Wake County --Bridge No. 63 over Middle Creek. There are also records of state
listed mussels upstream of the project. Therefore, due to the potential for impacts to listed
species we request that NCDOT perform a mussel survey prior to the construction of this
bridge. Standard comments apply.
3. B-4299 -Wake County -Bridge No. 255 over unnamed Creek. Standard continents apply.
We are not aware of any threatened of endangered species in the project vicinity.
We request that NCDOT routinely minimize adverse impacts to fish and wildlife
resources in the vicinity of bridge replacements. The NCDOT should install and maintain
sedimentation control measures throughout the life of the project and prevent wet concrete from
contacting water in or entering into these streams. Replacement of bridges with spanning
structures of some type, as opposed to pipe or box culverts, is recommended in most cases.
Spanning structures allow wildlife passage along streambanks, reducing habitat fragmentation
and vehicle related mortality at highway crossings.

Bridge Memo
4 October 8, 2001
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.

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
August 10, 2001
Mr. William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
NCDOT
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
F~C~Iv v
A UG ! ~i 2001
m .~
z~
i D ClL~~Y~ ~
~o~L`r~'T l:!`~:~ifSYS .~
~~MrA~ ~A~-~~
Thank you for your June 21, 2001, request for information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) on the potential environmental impacts of proposed bridge replacements in
Franklin and Wake Counties, North Carolina. This report provides scoping information and is
provided~in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)
(16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). This report also serves as initial scoping comments to federal and state
resource agencies for use in their permitting and/or certification processes for this project.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace the following
bridge structures:
1. B-4515 Bridge No. 40 on SR 1235 .over Bear Swamp Creek;
2. B-3916 Bridge No. 63 on US 401 over Middle Creek; and,
3. B-4299 Bridge No. 255 on SR 1006 over unnamed creek.
The following recommendations are provided to assist you in your planning process and to
facilitate a thorough and timely review of the project.
Generally, the Service recommends that wetland impacts be avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent practical as outlined in Section 404 (b)(1) of the Clean Water Act
Amendments of 1977. In regard to avoidance and minimization of impacts, we recommend
that proposed highway projects be aligned along or adjacent to existing roadways, utility
corridors, or previously developed areas in order to minimize habitat fragmentation and
encroachment. Areas exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological value important to the
watershed and region should be avoided. Crossings of streams and associated wetland systems
should use existing crossings and/or occur on a structure wherever feasible. Where bridging is
not feasible, culvert structures that maintain natural water flows and hydraulic regimes without
scouring, or impeding fish and wildlife passage, should be employed. Highway shoulder and

median widths should be reduced through wetland areas. Roadway embankments and fill areas
should be stabilized by using appropriate erosion control devices and techniques. Wherever
appropriate, construction insensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning and migratory
bird nesting seasons.
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps of the Ingleside and Lake Wheeler 7.5 Minute
Quadrangles show wetland resources in the specific work areas. However, while the NWI
maps are useful for providing an overview of a given area, they should not be relied upon in
lieu of a detailed wetland delineation by trained personnel using an acceptable wetland
classification methodology. Therefore, in addition to the above guidance, we recommend that
the environmental documentation for this project include the following in sufficient detail to
facilitate a thorough review of the action.
1. The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be
impacted by filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of wetland impact
should be differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of
the National Wetlands Inventory. Wetland boundaries should be determined by using
the 1987 Corps of Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (Corps).
2. If unavoidable wetland impacts are proposed, we recommend that every effort be made
to identify compensatory mitigation sites in advance. Project planning should include a
detailed compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting unavoidable wetland impacts.
Opportunities to protect mitigation azeas in perpetuity, preferably via conservation
easement, should be explored at the outset.
The document presents a number of scenarios for replacing each bridge, ranging from in-place
to relocation, with on-site and off-site detours. The Service recommends that each bridge be
replaced on the existing alignment with anoff--site detour.
The enclosed list identifies the federally-listed endangered and threatened species, and Federal
Species of Concern CSC) that are known to occur in Franklin and Wake Counties. The
Service recommends that habitat requirements for the listed species be compazed with the
available habitats at the respective project sites. If suitable habitat is present within the action
area of the project, biological surveys for the listed species should be performed.
Environmental documentation that includes survey methodologies, results, and NCDOT's
recommendations based on those results, should be provided to this office for review and
comment.
FSC's are those plant and animal species for which the Service remains concerned, but further
biological research and field study are needed to resolve the conservation status of these taxa.
Although FSC's receive no statutory protection under the ESA, we would encourage the
NCDOT to be alert to their potential presence, and to make every reasonable effort to conserve
them if found. The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program should be contacted for
information on species under state protection.

The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please continue to advise
us during the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the
impacts of the project. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact
Tom McCartney at 919-856-4520, Ext. 32.
Sincerely,
1~ r. Garland B. Pardue
~'" Ecological Services Supervisor
Enclosures
cc: COE, Raleigh, NC (Eric Alsmeyer)
NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC (John Hennessey)
NCDNR, Creedmoor, NC (David Cox)
FWS/R4:TMcCartney:TM:08/10/01:919/856-4520 extension 32:\bdgfran.wak

~~4 ~c~tc yet ~~~ ~ ~ ~.
~~~~~~j <
"....~
.~~~.
i
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources ~ ~~;: ~,
State Historic Preservation Office '~ :~.
David L. S. Brook, Administrator ~~
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
August 6, 2001
MEMORANDUM
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
To: William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
NCDOT, Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
From: ~ David Brook 11~' 1~-
De u State His
pry Preservation Officer
Re: Replace Bridge No. 255 on SR 1006 over Creek,
BRSTP-1006(14), 8.2408401, B-4299, Wake County, ER 01-10082
Thank you for your memorandum of June 21, 2001, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no properties of architectural, historic,
or archaeological significance, which would be affected by the project. Therefore, we have no
comment on the project as currently proposed. .
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.
DB:kgc
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
T. Padgett, NCDOT
Location Mailing Address Telephone/Faz
Administration 507 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4617 [phone] •733-863
Restoration 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh . NC 4613 Mail Service Center, Raleigh 27699-4613 [phone] •71 ~-4801
Survey & Planning 515 N. Blount St, Raleigh, NC 4618 Mail Servicc Center. Raleigh 27699-4(,18 [phone] •71 j-4801

W A K E
Bill McNeal
C O U N T 1' P U B L I C S C H O O L S Y S T E M
September 4, 2001
Mr. Gerald H. Knott ~5;~
Department of Public Instruction % ~:~
Section Chief, School Planning
301 North Wilmington Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 - 2825
Dear Mr. Knott:
p~ ~. ~r ~---__ ,
r ~~~- ;
~-
I~,
,~.. StN ~ 7 7001
cG~~~~;v~ ;`.. j
Impact to school sites and school bus routes by bridge replacement, B-3916 would be minimal
provided a temporary structure is used to maintain four lanes. of travel. As for bridge
replacement, B-4299, school bus routes would be impacted by adding five minutes in each
direction if an off-site detour is used.
Thank you for soliciting our input.
Sincerely,
c
W ~-~ (~ ~
William R. McNeal, Jr.

. ..., .~ ._ r .... . _ r .i /•.. ,, r .. .. ~ rr.. .,..,..ir.r -/.Ir .,r. /. ,. ~/il r..r r. /:llrll .\'1:l Il Jlir l~.r. ,!)I'.. \"lU \'r/i_

REVISIONS
sa-0s
-A~p~10N Op pGEn -0F-WAY MIOPBt1Y TIES
tTab
~ ~.TB
SNELTQN R, pEr NpiS
09,1626 PG 310

Err Y..~.. ~~ _ ER I f¢j. NORiOM .ET Ijl[
100.24' I ~ ~ ~~
E
~495'31'N
NATFLaN ROBERT RAY,.IIL X ='IX
Elp 169.08' o ~ I ~ I
D.8.2924 v0. T4 r~
SK'o9'26'E -' I you "1 I'~ I ~ Ic+ w o
176.26' _ 'u~ f I ~
Gf. NORT014 ET UX cac ~ ICI Q.6 Xl ~ ) x
EV0.YN Y, OOOY ~---
0 09.IS33 PG, 200 ~"''
KEU. D9.8017 PQ 551 uACON LFA EYANS 8 PEARLEIE T. '~ I I I o I Elv~ ~-\ /
EVANS REVOCABLE LNRIG TRUST
" D9.9332 PG, 855 ~ ~ 136.6r
N n ~. ~pNr ate' I ~ CEORCE 1EM41t Np1T014 JL ,
1 1 ~ I ET UX
I N24'S2'13'~~ I tl \\ D8,1116 iG.1T2
4'C A/ RN
I~ I wEl3. I I EST.M ff.~ U
/~ ' ~ N ~~
'm ~. ~ N2<,32~~3~w BRAeLEY 8pE01~~1~ En3 yq S
/ ,SO.oo~ 0.6.9!51 P0. 19 ~ ~ 1S~
~ I P O o aEIE •, . • >'SIl - STar3
E' ~1~ I IS BSK' I/~_ ~I I I - ~e c
I~ I blol.~C a_~ pE ~ I~ I I RErAw +39.46
Ib I ~:tl pL~ ~ IS eRK 3 xro RNV., x nv I~
x. iw
~ ~ 2 Itl
C~ P - 1 F
~~L ~ IOW JFFFFAY UVREMKaE COAfS `v' 99R ~ _
J 1 D.& 11r9 PG D7 ~ .gyp ' ~ ,.~ a 9
.47.22 ~~.'.' .~~ aE
~ '/' - ~ d~ ~ _ _' _-
e ~ ' ! ~~,. r~{ i~ /111 T E' - E 'EIP R
~., y~ ~,~ a' - ~~~~~~ ~ _ Ems',
I~~ ~ I ~ i rrr.
~~ ~~W
~ S
ii 2; 43`,. ~ ~~ ~~ ~~I~ ~ E .ww 4slrr. ~ ~f ~
EIP ~EK~ ~~ ©BECIN CONST ,~ I 1
I p BEG PROJE 8-4299 0 n~ 11.
_, ~ .. .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t I ~ -L' POT 57A x8+45,40 ~ PAYE9rEM T k :3T
J woaos I I F I1
- I I OC•W2 PNC 13+37.80. E$ ~ I I
I I -L- 19+05.03 2T,p RT N I I
O
,101e+ 1ETRt'r BATTZ
D9.2009 PC.2T9
BfG
f~ -L-
1 1
I 1
1 aIV3
-L- STA
-L- STA22+11.06 + -L- S7A23+.
SKETCH SNOWING ROADWAY
IN RELATION TO STRUCTURE
,.
p.= 9.45a
Lo
s.~aa4n
LL= SI
m•oxr¢ I I /

3 0 ~
,
~: ' 9,~ I I x 0.F. RORTOR, Er ux
aa1o+9 PQRT9
11
f Iz
I II
r5g
BC- 107 P
-~- zr ,'-tJ~
V9~36+67
9 ITJ3 5'nw+d Lance
.32: ~ x
LT¢ 3

„~ , - ~ --.....~ P
1
`Y~
~~ ~ r,
r
TO 2f ,
, ~
W
~
a
N

x aas nXr xr
SEE srpcraaP riArs
L~
4
I~
~~
II,,~3
9!
7•
J
BY • 203
BL STa, Ka55.98
30.00'Li.
ELEV.=269.75'
WaLS L¢W
0.:..45¢0
as
s:: oacs
55= 1.1
pY- tl 5c1¢
:. I.ss+04
~ La9fp¢
1
1
1
1
l
1
>"~, ` j I~~ 30.15.
3'23',~~,
~W ~~~~,i ~
`nA~ ~`
~m wao5
i,~ RT O
RR:RARO DEAN ABERNATNY,Ei UX
09. T4T2 F0.666
-L-
Pl Sto Z0+86.85
o~ uz0~r~zrRrl
D = T 30' 00.0•
C =284,52'
r = r4393~
R = 76394'
BlBOX = 6Y¢
R(IArQFF ~ SEE PLANS
DENOTES ALLOWABLE
jai ,~•, ,~;; IMPACTS ZONE 2
DETAIL I
SPECIAL LATERAL 'V' D(TCH
rxoro swu
NOIVraI
Gard Jy D F3a~ Slam
i NIn.D = lA Ft.
STA24+00 ro 25+70 LT
STA20+75 ro 2l+35 LT.
DETAIL 2
LATERAL BASE DITCR
(Nd7o Sralel ~ 0 „~ ,,
Ndw91
Giwnd Jy ~D 3a 8% Fli
B ~ i~ ArIn.O = 1~1 Ft.
e = 5A Fr.
B = 40 A.
STA22+A7 to ?2+45 LT
W
I I
Ill -I I a<
Ial r
` ~I

ICI
' 'B • 204
f P B STA.=22+72.47r
I
ICI
, I 100'LT,
I I V,=289.46' '
1
vow 1~ ~
I
~ I"
_
`~~`
~LI~ Is
o f
~~I_, \RalS.
I~ ~ ~ fl ~`~~~
~ I I ~`~ ~ R `
1
I ~
I
_ 1 30. ~ ~ 1Xp~
am ' ' p ~~~
~ ~
~ L-104 PNC 22+00.34 = °~4 r/
~s
ESP TO~
Fo
~ •L- 27+67,97 15.4
8
: ~'~
/I
p '' ~~H
p
/
(`
~V~ ~
~ I
v r~
,N V lai
o ~ / "'
ea1LU,u RAY WCEY, ET UX RI
~
, °"
09. IB46 PG 207 0
a ae w LARRY Cr ETT~ rfOppgL
40"
No
54 09.1903 P0. 285
X
j8•
era
504.7851•
~ o.op- E ~
® DEMOTES APPROACH SUIB
SEE SHEET M046 FOR PROFILE
SEE SHEErS S-rrHRU 5-
FOR srRf/CTURE Paws
TRANSITS CONSULTING RAMEyKENpdA330CIATE3,INC.
tMC N!lI3, NCOAIOAAItO
Saaa 's1x3 mr4, 3~. ua
141Ar, v.c. sr3o,

Fw
neDacr RBem9ce No, weer No.
8-4299 4
RW wEEf N0.
AOADWAY 09NrN
~
~ XYDAAIAICe
'"
¢
9pe
,,4
~~Q~~H CARp2~ti,4 Iiihigy.¢r
0'•A¢e
~ o~.j~1 CAR027~aI
~
.~QFES$/pl~•9 iy .Qp~6$$lpN~9 ~
7
. 2 SEAL ~ ' K
21111 ~ ~ ;
= : e SEAL ~ ; ~?
; n i 18442 =
•

'i~,9 FNCINf.~P`~`<, ~
:
19a ~NCINE~P~~~~er
'a;l/rEW B C~
,.•'~ ~b,2fON ~~,,`9"
•
N
O
0.5E 11AE BARRR:e rptS
D9 z9T8 vc. T2
SI VLIG.~ !Sj 0~

K
m :
,~,
N
~c

W
m 9 m
N~
a C
~`
~ m ~
J

N
~
I
9ayf ~ o w Wh
_ ~x ~ ,~ q~
~
WOp
8 W ~
4: Y !~
-L- P01'/yS7~A(~ZpS~+~25¢/(y1CI
M~. Q,~ "'W$ EwD b1M.lInW/M1M
A -C- POT STA 26+G
r II
E(E /~jl~ IxIl 1
DAN RRyIARp 11YERS.ET UX
0.8.2692 R0.513
DENOTES ALLOwaBLE
~` IMPACTS ZONE I

a
REVISIONS
snob
-ADD1110N OF pGM -0~WAY IIIOPEIIIY 11E5
SNELfON 0.CREY LEAS
08.1626 PG. 310 0
~~
+1o y,~
61476'35'E PDr Y- STO•lD+00.00
EIF ~S1559'30j - , •
iflo.ea~ - - '~ e ~ ~ ~ I GF. e011rCM ,ET Ux
nt<'3gj3•v E 1 ~ ~ lil~l ~i ~ ~ i i ~ 011.633 PO,200 ma s.uP
Eiz ,6n.oa' NATHW ROBptT~(GY,~It• 1 ' ill i I I I x _-IX ,tea sa
~• D•8.2921 P0, T1 ~~ i l i 1 1 7 I °~ I I i,.: w- 1 1
, se= amu
I III
NOn SS=1.1
s6ro6 z6c u ~ ~ t 1 ^ ~i I "~ '= ° ~_ 1°is~;: I I x
o6.z~' t I I
~ IY ~ Il I) ~~
NEITNT Yom, EOOOYi+ r ~---. " ' ~"1N' ~,p /x ~ ~t~ x IIx 1
0 0.&1533 PG, 200 i / ~, "r,J. I I , ~~~~ '
rEU 08.80TT PG 551 ~ W~~LEDE1~~~,/ "!I i ~ , A 1° ~ I l i Hv~ ~x ~ I I
~ ; D8.9332 P0. Ao~ mi I ` ~ ~~ ~,~' 1~~-rOxGE~FEN47a xplipl, J4 BL• 103 PI{~~6~si
-i~ , , ~ i ~ 66~" ~i /.~ y c'~ , / ET Ut L- 221 I J
/ i~ , _ ,' i~~ nz1e2'aMfSf°~ r n~~ h 'OSKK PWR
f~ IacnA! aio,
/- ll~.N ~i'~ 'I I,N 111 ~~ 'fS7.•i T~pS~ ~
i i~~~ BI40l,Ex l ~11ii,~~ ~/II vMELLi'~.' ~5'Le it'sl.~ ~YEQ~
~~ 4z°so~oo~ O.b~ . I III / ~ ~ ~' A R•
~~ /
/ ~ O IFl~ ~ , P• v P / 1 \
__ ~ 1 7 ~ + ~
~_
I, i 19~ l I i_ulhu w' + 1 4
~ ~ av 'r, ~ en1. _ i r I 1
q m'~~ ~,1-_seN ~•e0 ~~, Id'nl~- X.nr, x.iw I~ I •r
x-~ ~f
~I .1~ FAI. ,~ ~ ~ i/ /rt '~IJI ~ /// ~" v
~ I It ~ ~~~ ~JEF`fTRr t+ DOLTS' - / `,e+ _ -~ ~ ~ ~eR'~ /i ~,Pw" f e~ ~'
II IIIt~y / _~~ ./ /' // M
~ , . LL ~ , -, , ~-' -, , , ~~I t r: E Q4AU 330 '"a
>~ ~ ~'' - az - ~
Illlll - ~ _-`` ~~ -' i/-% i'Y~` _ •~~~ p _ E ~eia E LpB
,,1
~, 1
~y ~ ~~ ~r ~ s, _ _-/-~`
T - / _ nP~ ~'P 1
~~ I
' ~/ 1 1
~ ll/ ~ , II '~ ~ ~ BE PRO,IE - 8-49 0 _ _ - - ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ .
~' ~'~ ° / ~~~/ ~ ~l A` / / /I ~ ~. ~$-'POT 3'r=AJB*~45iOO ~~ - _ _ PA'EA'EN[~T ~ :3JCT0 P~ dl
° 1 ~
~~ 46DOj ' ilb ~1 I 1 ~ ------ s ~ tv; ~I h 1
~ ' " 1 ~ ,1 I. 1, I 1 1 ~ BLJ02-PNE-i#37,80-= _~ -1 ~ 1 I ~ I ~ ~ 1
1 I 1 _ _ -t--MYv05A3 .12 RT N ~ ~~ ~'~ ! _ _ - P
/Vti
v **
_~ ,.'~~~ °`~ - - - JOIN N=1RY BATTZ ~ N
_ 0•&2009 PG• 2T9
r .~- ~ c TO
- ~,
A I
J V
u , a
I~ -L-
1 I
I I
I siH

- STA
-L- STA22+IIA6 -L- STA23+
SKETCH SNOWlN6 ROADWAY
IN RELATION TO STRUCTURE
1 _~ ~1~
z~
_~_
Po S-o 20+86.81
~ ~ 2T20' 192(RT!
D = r3aooa
c = 284sr
T = 14393'
R = 76394
emax = 6%
RUNOFF - SEf PLANS
DENOTES ALLOWABLE
IMPACTS ZONE I
DENOTES ALLOWABLE
IMPACTS ZONE 2
DETAlL
SPECIAL LATERAL v'LYTCN
r Na ro Scgel
NONIOI [ A p( - Filf
Orwm 1., D ft~ vem
NIaO = !0 Fr.
STa24+0~ ro 25+70 LT
sra2o+~5 ro v+js cr.
nloxa Raemlce No. eN~f No.
8-9299 4
AW !NElT ND.
ROAPNAY NR1C11 NYDRAIAICi
NdMD9!
d~•4j11.A IIIII•,,• 4••1114h,I
F
QS!!.... Raf i
~`N.... R4L i~ r,
~
rti
~
r
O
0
L
.
S ?~~ESSIO,y'••q ~ o ~,`~ESSIpti•.4 S
• 1 SEAL (' ~ ' ~ a SEAL (i ~?
s 21771 ~~: 18442
•.
, ~ 49
CINE
's ri9•:~!CINEE
~
4
~ r
••
,
~
.
~
,
~,
p;~~

m N
O
aslE 31AE BAI88CK NErts
0.8 29T8 PG 72 Iv
1 I
1
l
2
'~
ral
: 1 1 m
~ ~ N

1
I
~re ~

fND PROJECT B-4
9 _ o
vr~ ~` Y
J
~' m
I
I

I \
2
9 d~g
-L- POT STA 25+25A fi#
~ N
~
w
~ ~ s
h
i I
'~ srcrkc I.P.rMa
-Sff ~M r 1 ~ ~ I
' ~: ~ Edo CONST rAJN d '~
1
~
PDr
-L
~~ V~
~~P a~"1 ~ ~~p~
id

_
~ `
I
T
a26. ' _ t
~ I I 1 t l ~l I I I , ~~ L
W A
J
+
ll
\
F I _
~. ~
d1 I ~
Y o
s~ ~ =
~
r x \ I ~~~~ _

~ ~~"'' I I // I ~Iw i~Ilii 11 s)~11
~ I
~ ssr :1 i ~
I
/
I
~
._
~~~ 1 1 ~
1
_~ `/ / II~I'016 ~` IPI ~
1
9
1
I
/ ~l IM III B Y 2()Q C /"
,°-f7~_„_ ~ JY #•~.. ~T -- . ~+ ,'t,l ~I~l 111 `` :LT. ~f
11T ~' ~1 x. '1 ~ V '- ~ 2
"~ I °~
+ II 1 ~ ~ ~"I.Si II
,~~ 1 I l
~xrcnr j~ ~ I ~ ®p Il
MWDS ..I ~I bo s
O ~ ~ ~ i~PO
RIOIARp DEAN ABER34TNY, ET Ux
D.B. T/TZ Pc. 666
F~a
DAN RICNARD WERS,ET 0x
0.6.2692 PG.513
OErac 2
LATERAL BASE LNTCN
(N4 ra Scalel ~..~_.~ '
Nanem 8% 'I Fnl ~
OrcvM J~ f0 }~ ~
B ~I ~ MIn.D = 10 FI.
D = 50 FI.
e = a.o Fr.
STA22+00 ro ~+45 LT
f , ~ _~__: c ~ ~ ,I i r II I~' • :285:46' T'
~=~~-_.~ ~ il, ill I~ ~
`4-"~ 1 1 ' T~~1 ~~ ~ _ ~ ~~ l~~r
_ ~ I
I `~~~~~A A, 1 ,~A 1 1 /
/ ~ ~ ~/ /' ,'csq, `Till ~o~~ ~ ~ '~
~ // -,.-
~_~ ~'~~l ~~} ~A ~,Illr /-~~ ~'
--~ ~ ,Gy ~ / II;,'h ~ I;''/'~'
~ ~ ~~
11LB11 RAY WCET, ETylX~ 'alxro ~ ~ i r Ill I /• ~ / 0
D.B.RN6 PG.20T I R~ ~I'1~ \ , ~
CAimt b ETT~ .DODU~
~ Nazza D8.1903 oG• 285
so.oo.
EIS
SOa•28 57.E
o.oo ~
® DENOTES a'PROACH SLAB
SEE SHEET N016 FOR PAOFlLE
SEE SHEETS 5-ITNRU S-
FOR STRUCTURE PLANS
TIANSITE CONSULTING ^RAMEY1~8A550CWTES,INC.
tA0 Flt13, ACOAIOAAitD L
Iwo 44e4 ~n4, s:, trio ~.4 P.M
triol•, v.c, nwt .~ P.a~~ a.n
O
GF. INIRTON, ET llx
Da RM9 vc, R39
5' insfA fence
.32 =
L1.~
~ y.~
V
Vii.
~~
X
~~
DY • 203
r I 1 Bl SiA. K~55.48
A y, \ I \ 30.00' Li.
,f)~~ //I ELEV; 261.75'
JI ~ ~ GrES lr.lE
<~ ail' i
.r//~ o.:rrs,a
i s ~o.'se~ls
ss• xl
DY- a. ~.
, I I ~~~~~
I I D: z.e,lm
t
/~ PII[Fgl
~ Nnc rn
~• .,
j ~ x o d o-t er
// A
1 re -----
v'~I~i 1
I
rl
i ` `~i
~
r
~ I !
~
~ I

1 '
'
~~ •
A33 eM IM ` -
Y SiNUCRNf PLMS .
1
- •~

I ( ', ( ! { ! I ) ~ '...~ i _ HIOIECf REffRENCE N0. SHEET N0.
k. ~ ~ 8~ ~
I ~
i
i . ~ ~ ~ -. _ _~ ~, i ~ ( ADWAY OES HY
__._ ~ .~'___ , - ~ ~ . _ ~ ~ . I ~ '- ~ ~ ~ ENGINEER ~ ENGNlEER
__.»..._._ ~~-- -_-t_, _,.._.._
€ ~ .~. _ .~. _ J
_ _.. __
~i_-
i
~ f i
( ~. E .
i I I
,. I i
, ' f
r
~~
---_
t ~~~ i } BAI.•203 ECEY 26475 ~ ~ BAI.•204 fCEV -289.46
{ .. _ I i i oe comr m n.~r n~ i .... ..,....,- ... ,..__ _ 1 1
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
00 NOi N8 & CON6TRUCr1ON
INCOMPL TE PLANS
0o Nor uae ~/~ ~wotrumoN
w -~--}--__~_~ ~ UHr t ur JurntT 4-LU-U4 t
-~• - , ,
~
--~ -
~ 140
Ao
"w ~ -..
~ { I.
WS.EI.EVAT/ON 1

I
_
I
_ I
I
f
E _L_ 3 { i
~
I
~ RaIRe (eR4 i Assoclatea, hc.
r
" _
~ _
- 256.76 fT .
~ V
i ,
t ~~, I -k

~

~
~ {
~

AT DATE OF SURVEY '
_ _ t
' t.
~ rFOa vuxsee srrEer xa+e
~ 1... .. d '....
~
IrmOU'ro/M CaWEhO EipEra
-w ~
- f'- _ ~ .. -
:,
--.! _j.. ~.. ;__.. i.:... TRANSITS CONSULTING .
ow
-w
nw 7 _~_ (
! i I ~ t
~ ...
I f 1... -~
t.
(
-
_ , :. ~
_ ~
.. i ~ ~ ~
{ s.iNCORroreE[o
E
d ~9tR-elRViv~MwMo~W~xarmto•w~otmoR

ew
aw I
!
{
.
.
I E
I .
E }..:
f _'. (
{ E ~ ~oov.
e
o~I one. sae c-io
~alupA, N.C. t7e07
IR+fl436 rpr islelilR
9w
A~
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

(REPLACE IN-PLACE WITH OFF-SITE DETOUR)
II~ ]7pp ~~ ALTERNATE A
'I~ p~~l'flM1`~ lS.d7--~i
~UM~ i Ili n~~
I
a,o<
TYPICAL ROADMIAY CBC45 SECTION
I
~~~ti
~ ~ T
_ aar mt
TYPICAL BRIDGE CROSS SECTIO~-
BEGIN PR(
-L- PC 5~
\.
~~\ a~ BEGIN CONSTRUCTION }
\ -c- PGr sra 7+7852 \
Ins \\ \
\\ +
x
\ \\
\ ~~
1 \\\\VV/~// /-~.
\ /~
\ \ '~ /~
~~
~:. .~-~
.~~~
~~~
,~ /
jJ'
3
,1
.~
r _.. -~
rN4t~wt ~~ I.~ .~
' I I
I I` I
o ~~ 1
II I
' ~ 1
~ I
'~ ~
~r I
~'
'~~ ~1` ~~-~ ~'~'~-~"' ~'-c~ P-T STA-r2+7~
1N~1 ~I II'I 1
.~~ ~
~ - ~
t ~ ,~
~ 1 \ l4 l ~ iP 6fIC 1 I(..
j~
j ~/ /~~/
//
/~~/ ,°;~
-,
,~
~~
~+
~,
Ili
i~
I~
1~
I~
I~
! ' II
I
II
I~
I~
I~
`I
II
I~
1~
I~
~~

N 83~

* ~ ~. I rr~r Na
~~.
OWAT OtlIGYI lIYDYAIAIC

INCOMPL TE PLANS
ro nor uee Y0~ xn Alton
PRELIMIN RY PLANS
0o nor uee aratqurna+
~ 1
END PROJECT ~ ~
-L- Por sTa I },095 , i i ~
ii
of iii
Q
+ ~
+ ~~
E _ ~^ ~ ,
'~t~~
~~ ~ f f ~'t M r~
,` + ~I
_ ~+^i C I + + i~ I
/~
j ~I I r + + \\` END BRIDGE I Y'~'''-~. I ~I
~ "~,\~ -C- STA 13+2095 ~ I~
d 1~1 CCC ~ I ~
~~~ BEGIN BRIDGE
~ ~ ,,11,~11 -L- STA t2+6797 ~
14 •~fr
~I I ,\ \ kf I C
. ~ ,~ 1 ~
~ ~~
~ ., 1 ~
~~ ~ .I ~
~.
i I „~;'
~ ~~ CURVE 1-L-
~ ~ P! Sta 13+32b1 I
' ~ ~ ~= IB09159'fLTI S
~ ~ D = 630' 376 r' 4
• ~ ~ ~ L =27895' ~",n~ I
I~ I ~ R - 8 ~ o""'~
I~ I
I
A I~ ~a
'I ~.
I ~ ~t.
'' i
~ I I
~ ~ ~~~
50 0 50 f00
-~~~
-~~ ~'
SCatE
FIGURE 4
DESICx DarA
DESCR S^fE0 10 YPAl65 fo/N
R1SfE0 SPEED J5 ~l50 ~/y
WRAENI YEM AOT (2000 IPL00 rW
IL~SIGN YEM ADP !20251 2'200 Ypd
X TT9 .:C CUAlS eX .JX
FUAC7pMAG CUSSIF,CKIpY UYM7 NNnr Artahtl
TERRNN
NAY AAOWS ~p~p
IEB IIIIU e~
NAXINtlN GRADE ~
SUPERE(EYATKW RAfE Se • OE6

~-
., cuuron
~~~ I ~M~
I
TY11GL ROADWAY GLOSS SECf10N
I
~<~~.,
"" ^ am
TYMGL 9PoDOE GLOSS SEC110N
_ EKiSI ~n _.
fMi Pn
(NEW LOCATION EAST OF EXISTING BRIDGE)
-.a, ALTERNATE B
0
- f
--- 2 a
)5'127'W ~W
- -- -- `
rL
-~'.1-
-A1T8- CURVE f
PI sla 18+5663
~ = 2f l0' fry' fRr)
o = rls'ooa
1 = Ib9372'
T = 85663'
R = 4.58366'
•I I I
~QR L>i it RT
I ~I ~ 1
I I ~ I
1~
11
1a
I I~ I
N
Yj 2
WI I4
a ~8 ml
~A I I
~~ I
~~
~~ JD
F ~~~ lol E
~ I I I I_

``I ~ _-
I I
I I
I I •
• I f
iii
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I ///"-
I I
I I ,~
~.. ~ I I
~• I I
I r
II
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
1 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 1
e3

~ E-~,~
C _ p
,f
1
---- -- y
m
-- - --~ ~
iRf rt
~y -v- -~~-1 J
__! r
-E / E
- fe- Poc sra 13+a3~a
- ~r sra ro+oODO
1
f
f
r
Ir
rr
r,
r,
11
11
11 .
11
11
1r
~.
50 0 50 100
~~
j
INCOMPL TE PLANS
0o ewr a. ~n ,w,orauon,
PRELIMIN
0o eror ues RY PLANS
oma,.~mre
FoR -acre- Aroo -r- PROM s,
SEE SNEET 6.
A11 SHOULDER TAPERS ARE 15J,
UNIESS NOTED OTHERWISE.
SCALE
FIGURE 5
DESIGN DATA
DESCN SPEED •7 A1M 165 tm/N
PDSTfO SPEED SS App f60 tAl/N
CURREM YEM ADT (?d0'! 1?D00 KA
DES~cw TEAR ADT ~ZCp51 &~0 rM
x rrsT ,x mAU Px ,r~
PUM'IIOMM CtASSIFCATxW WaM Wnr Artdfd
Y ~
RADx15 f~~H3 M
YAxINAY GRADE BX
SUPERElEYATxW RATE Se ~ DDB

(NEW LOCATION EAST OF EXISTING BRIDGE
ALTERNATE B
kID 83

A
N
~~ ~ ~.
Q iL --~' _
i
~Vt ~~ 1
Ql _
I ~
i '~
a II F
U I~
I
~ lo! E
I~~
II
II
I I -ACTH- POC
I I -n- Por s
II
I
I
I
I
i I "- --
I II
I i N
I II
f l I ~ ry
I I ~ .~
~~
i I I II
a h~ I J ~ .
I~m~ ~~ ~"~; II ~ ~ ~~
'~'~
~I I
_~' I I ~ .fI N
I i ~ ~ ~~:
f II
P I l fN0 PROJEC
\ n ~II 1 ~}I I ~ ~~ J 1 fND PROP. BRrDGE + r -ACTH- PT
I I f j '~ -ACTH POC STA 20 B8D0
II ~ I
II V~ ' ~ ~ ~1~-t~11.1I I ~ W
.r-- "~-„' I I
I =M=an ` ~ ~ ~ ! 1
____ _
~ --_ j lol II
y
° '~~
F '~
-- I'
E E E----~"~~
II
2,a
.:
II
6t88A = ~ I
70D0 I I
I
~ It
I I
I:
I,
.~ ,I.
I
rI
II
If
I I
I~
H F \ Fes``
.E._ E
`~
~~.
1
PROP. IL~GE \ ~'.
- POC A 20+08AO 1`~
~~~
noeer ~ne~n,a ra, aver No.
B-4299
~~.
~~
~~

INCOMPL TE PLANS
00 Nal' OR Rif AOpWBigN
PREL[MIN
no wvr ~ RY PLANS
cmnrx~+
-a ~~' f-~
~~ ~~
I o h N '_ _`_
~r~`n-ra~^r'V`?Ly~ ~I~ \ _ ~W Q24'55.2•µ%--~~~
E-~---_e._ 2~;--y~l I ° ~`r l ~~ ~ ~ ~ sue' r~ sr
:.-~
-Acre- CURVE r
PI Sra r8+56b3 ~~
D = 2fltTRS"fRTI ~,
0 = T 15'OOA'
L = x64372'
T = 856b3'
R = 4a83b6' j
y,. r'
mi r I i16 ni q'V i~.O ~
., w~~°~
~r1m, ~ ~M~
I
r~'a
TYPICAL ROADWAY CRO55 SECTION
WCfq.!
a`u I aar
~~- i
TYPKdI RRDGE CROSS SECTION
~ i i
~~~I
i3
~~i~
~i i~
I!!I

50 0 50 !OO
SCALE
FlGURE 6
Fq_5 qt
DESIGN DATA
OESCN SPEED q ~l65 M/N
PR5ff0 SPEED 35 eg4f60 te/N
mw~Exr rEAR AOf r2mr f?AIX! vpa
mss rEk+ wr r2oe5r 2{9t~ ,pa
r. nn .z mks ~ ..tx
flrACfg7k GYASSrf~CAigR Urmn Mlm Meld
1ENNAM
WIX RKM1S Amp
16A (tMJ M
YAYMIW GRADE BX
SUPEREIEYAfIGM nuE Se - oQB

~,
f
.~
_,
b
O~
O~
I
ti
U
O

H
See Sheet 1-A For Index of Sheets
See Sheet 1-8 For Conventionol5ymbols
a 4. ID~:
~+ 0~..,
i ,~
ENO y0
PROlEC7 0
i
BEGIN p
PROJECT
x
~'
~}~ DENOTES OFFSITE DETOUR
VICINITY MAP
Nq\
S
N~ ~R~p

O
N
V
..
V
GRAPHIC SCALES DESIGN DATA
50 25 0 50 100 ADT 2006 = 13,885
ADT 2026 = 21,585
PLANS DHV = 11 %
50 25 0 5o too D = 63 °~
T = g °~ ".
O PROFILE (HORIZONTAL V = 40 MPH
' ` 10
5 2
V 5
0
5 "
.,
,.
,- _.-_
_... TTST 2 % DUAL 3
~~171~lle ®ll' Ar®~~11A 'lilll~®IaIAr171
~IVI~I®N ®~ ][~IGIHWA~Y~
WAKE COUNTY
LOCATION: BRIDGE Noe 255 OVER UNNAMED TRIBUTARY TO SWIFT
CREEK ON SR 1006
TYPE OF WORK GRADING, PAVING, DRAINAGE AND
STRUCTURE
I i I ~
_~ ~ I I ~ I~ ~ I I~
_~ ~e (I I IF
I
oGe ~ I I~ ~rj ~-
QQ W n l I/ ~ 11
I
QQ JN i II rq is
_ I I
p `I I© Q ~ o
I I ICI o0 0f~
d
o ° ° Q ~ ~~i
~" o 0
i o ~~
IIo i
I© ~
~ I o o ~~I na i2 a3
J
-L- POT STA 18+45.00.00 BEGIN CONSTRUCTION
BEGIN TIP PROJECT 8-4299
-L- POT STA 26+00.00 END CONSTRUCTION 8-4249
STA 25+25.00 END TIP PROJECT 8-4299
:~
/~~
-,
.~, ~~ ~ -~
ro ;~~
O

PROJECT LENGTH
LENGTH ROADWAY TIP PROJECT B-4299
LENGTH STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT B-4299
TOTAL LENGTH OF TIP PROJECT B-4299
Plan Prcprted u de o~ of
^ RAMEY~I

= O.llb,mi ..-..,.
- r.~.e,b
= 0
013 mi frt ~ x~ c~l.° ~nm„yoPw,;q°
. 1°Pf STANDMp SPEClFICATlONS
= 0.129 mi RlGlff OF WAY DATE: N.C.D.O.T. CONTACT:
FEBRUARY 18,2005 MALCOIM WATSON
PROIECi DESIGN ENGINEER
LETTJNG DATE: ROADWAY DESIGN
DECEMBER 19, 2006
rtere PwiaT evooen w veer -mr.u
.C. B-4299 1 W~
rtea wxw _ rwP*xva een.gvu
HYDRAUI„T+GS„~'NGINEER
r~P~`HESS~"~v ~'•
SEAL
a; aaa2 ~-
'vo `~~'Irai~Q~~ag'
''%„~EOri `e~ o••
8/CNAAU 1EON 90!!A'G13>t!R PE
SEAL
27111
SUBMITTAL:
90% PLANS
TRAN~ITE CONSULTING
ENGINff AS, INCO tPORA IEO
1300 Poddo,k Dnn, 5viie G-10
galeiq~, N.C. p7609
DIf7SI0N OF HIGHWAYS
STATE OF NORT7I CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATI01

,.
i '
,~
.,
4
*S.U.E = SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEER
ROADS ~ ~ RELATED ITEMS
Edge of Pavement . .......:........ - -
Curb------------------------- - -
Prop. Slope Stakes Cut _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _
Prop. Slope Stakes Fill _ __ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ c _ _
Prop. Woven Wire Fence ......... . . .. ~~
Prop. Chain Link Fence __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ ~~
Prop. Barbed Wire Fence _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ ~~
Prop. Wheelchair Ramp _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Curb Cut for Future Wheelchair. Ramp - - - - cF
Exist. Guardrail .................. ~ ~.~
Prop. Guardrail ___________________ _ ,
Equality Symbol ------------------ ~
Pavement Removal_________________
RIGHT OF WAY
Baseline Control Point .... . .... . ....
Existing Right of Way Marker _ _ .... _ . _ _ . ~
Exist. Right of Way Line v~Marker .... _ _ . _ - / -
Prop. Right of Way Une with Proposed
RNV Marker (Iron Pin 8 Cap) ..... _ . _ .
Prop. Right of Way line with Proposed
(Concrete or Granite) RNV Marker _ _ _ ... .
Exist. Control of Access Line ..... _ _ .. _ _ .~ A~

Prop. Control of Access Line ... _ ... _ _ ..

Exist. Easement Line ..... . . . . . . ..... _ __E_
Prop. Temp. Construction Easement Une .. _ . _ E
Prop. Temp. Drainage Easement Line . _ _ _ _ ,~
Prop. Perm. Drainage Easement Line _ _ _ . _ . _ ,~
HYDROLOGY
Stream or Body of Water ........ _ . _ _
River Basin Buffer__________________
Flow Arrow---------------------
Disappearing Stream_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _
Sprin9------------------------
Swamp Marsh____________________
Shoreline________________________
Falls,Rapids_____________________
Prop Lateral, Tail, Head Ditches _ .. _ _ . _ _ _
STRUCTURES
FBB
_ __ -~
}-
C~~
~°~A~~ ®~ N®I$~~[ C~1~®LIN~
~IVI~I®N ~F 1~I~1~~A1~~
CONVENTIONAL SYMBOLS
MINOR
Head & End Wall _ . _ _
Pipe Culvert _ _ ... _ .. .
Footbridge ....... _ _ . .
Drainage Boxes_ _ ..... .
Paved Ditch Gutter .. _ .
UTILITIES
Recorded Water Line _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ -w.-w-
Ce,~\ Designated Wafer Line (S.U.E.*) _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _w___w-
,=-; SaniiarySewer___________________ -ss~s-
~ _ _ _ ~ Recorded Sanitary Sewer Force Main .. _ _ -sss-FSS-
ca Designated Sanitary Sewer Force Main(S.U.E.*)-FSS-FSS-
__. Recorded Gas line _______________
--~--o-
Designated Gas line (S.U.E.*) _ _ _ .. _ ... _ ~_ ~_ _
Storm Sewer____________________ ~-s-
Recorded Power Line . . . .. . . . . . . ... . ~,~
- Exist. Pole . ..... . . . . . . . . . . .... . . • -
Exist.PowerPole ................... + Designated Power Line (S.U.E.*) ....... _ _ _
-"--' -
Prop. Power Pole _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ ____ b Recorded Telephone Cable . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _
-T-T-
Exist. Telephone Pole_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ .~ Designated Telephone Cable (S.U.E.*)
_ - - _ T- T-
Prop. Telephone Pole _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ o Recorded IJ~G Telephone Conduit _ _ ..

Exist. Joint Use Pole _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
~
Desi noted l6G Tele hone Conduit S.U.E.*
9 P ( ) Tc-TC-

T

Prop. Joint Use _Pole- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
~ c--rc- -

Telephone Pedestal________________
~ Unknown Utility (S.U.E.*) _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _

-ruT~-tun-
USG Telephone Cable Hand Hold _ _ . _ ... ~ Recorded Television Cable ......... _ . -rr-Tr-
Cable TV Pedestal _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ © Designated Television Cable (S.U.E.*) _ _ .. __T~__T~__
USG TV Cable Hand Hold. _ .. _ .... _ .. ~ Recorded Fiber Optia Cable . _ _ ... _ _ _ -FO-FO-
l~G Power Cable Hand Hold _ _ .. _ _ _ .. _ „„ Designated Fiber Optia Cable (S.U.E.*) -
--

Hydrant_________ ___ ___ _________
O . - -
Exist. Water Meter _ ..___.________ __
FO
FO
~
Satellite,Dish_____________________ ~ WG Test Hole(S.U.E.*)___._._.___.__
m
Exist. Water Valve------------------ ~
Sewer Clean Out .. . .... . .. . . . .... . 0 Abandoned According to l6G Record _ _ _ .. .TTUN
~-
_~-
'-
- Light Pole----------------------- l~
- H-Frame Pole____________________ ~---a
- Gas Meter ..:...................
.
___________________ ©
Telephone Booth__________________ ~
Cellular Telephone Tower_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~,
Water Manhole___________________ ~

Power Line Tower__________________
Pole withBase ................... p
- Gas Valve ______________________

Telephone Manhole _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _. ~
Power Transformer_________________ 0
Sanitary Sewer Manhole .. . . . . ... . ....

Storm Sewer Manhole . . ..... . . . . . . . End oflnformation__._._..____.___. car.
Power Manhole
Os
---- Tank; Water, Gas, Orl_______________ O
--"~""- Water Tank With Legs_______________
Traffic Signal Junction Box _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ .. ~
~ qar
MAJOR
Bridge, Tunnel, or Box Culvert _ _ - - - - _ - Ccowc
Bridge Wing Wall, Head Wall
and End Wall ----------------- ,cowcwwC
Fiber Optic Splice Box . . .. . . .... . . . . . p
Television or Radio Tower _ _ . _ _ _ _ ... _ -
Utility Power Une Connects to Traffic
.I Signal Lines Cut Into the Pavement _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __,~~
BOUNDARIES £~ PROPERTIES
State line --------------------- ------
CountyLine---------------------
-----
Township Line ................... __-__
City Line----------------------- -----
Reservation Line ... . . ... . . ......... . - _ _ _ - _
Property Line .....................
Property Line Symbol________________ R
Exist.lron Pin .................... ~ .
Property Comer ................... - ~.
PropertyMonument_________________
Property Number__________________
ParcelNumber .................... 123
8
Fence line_____________________. _x-x-x-

Existing Wetland Boundaries _ _ _ .. _ _ _ .. _ ww a isew
-w~B_._
High Quality Wetland Boundary. _ _ . _ _ _ . -HO w~s-
Medium Quality Wetland Boundaries _ _ _ _ _ -,~ wcB-
Low Quality Wetland Boundaries. - _ . _ .. _ -io w~B-
Proposed Wetland Boundaries_ _ _ _ _ . _ . - _ -wee-_
Existing Endangered Animal Boundaries _ ~... - roe -
Existing Endangered Plant Boundaries . _ _ _ _ -EPB -_
BUILDINGS F~ OTHER CULTURE
Buildings --------- --------------
foundations ..... . . .. . .... . .. . . . .
Area Outline ______ ______________ ~~
Gate ------
----- ----------- -- ~
Gas Pump Vent or WG Tank Cap _ _ _ _ o
Church ---------- --------------
School---------- --------------
Park------------ ------------- _ ~
Cemetery--------- -------------- - 7
r
Dam------------ --------------
Sign------------ ----------- -- o

Well------------ s
-------------- o
Small Mine _
________ _________
___ x
Swimming Pool
TOPOGRAPHY
Loose Surface ___________________
Hard Surface ____________________
Change in Road Surface ____________ _________
Curb-------------------------
RightofWaySymbol _______________ Riw
Guard Post -------------------- ocP
PovedWalk -------------------- ~----
Bridge ------------------------ ~-----f
Box Culvert or Tunnel _ _ _ .. _
Ferry ------- ----------------
Culvert -----------------------
Footbridge----------------------
Trail,Footpath ___________________ ~,
_.._- -
LightHouse ------------ -------
VEGETATION
Single Tree_____________________ ~
Single Shrub ____________________ o
Hedge ------------------------ -----„~,
W d L'
oos me---------------------- .~,.,,r,n
Orchard ----------------------- f~4{~44Q
Vineyard -
--------------
------ -- ~F+¢TaaoJ
RAILROADS
Standard Gauge . _ .. _
RR Signo) Milepost
Switch
a
~~, u
O
RAMEV KEMP & ASSOCIATES, INC.
~TkWSPORTATION Efk
_ _ swnM{.i. 3~T

r
~~
-, ~
M
4
SURVEY C011~TROL SHEET B-4299
- °"~~
Ncoor srAre>x e/z99a
wcAllzco r9atcr coa+aeAr9s
N 70919&3909
E x02929.9206
To ~C,1~R
N0001 9TAr10N 99299-I
LOCAL12E0 P90JECT COORONITES
N 7pI97.7370
E 2102669.95W
DATUM DESCRIPTION
THE LOCALIZED COORDINATE SYSTEM DEYELA°ED F04 THIS PROJECT
/S BASED ON THE STATE PLANE LiXNtDINATES ESTABLISHED BY
xr,~r FOA YONIIYENT ~Ba29g 1 °
WITH NAD 1LN7J/95 STATE PUNE GRID CLORDINATES OF
htRTHING. 7 fO1N1JJ30'/fl FAST ING: 2102G69951p/11
THE A'ERb;E NIIBINED GRID FA;70R USED DN THIS PIDJECT
(GROUND TD GRIDI IS: Q99991~G
THE ML. LAMBERT GRLD BEA9ING AND
LOCA.IZED IENfI1(M7N C•ACI/ND DISTANCE FAOY
"B4~J I' TO -L• STATION 18~OOD0 IS
N 25'11'03.12" W 1,lifld
NL LINEAB DlYENSICNS ARf LOCALIIED tg4IZCNTA! DISTANCES
VERY 1CAL DATUM USED 15 NND 8B
-L- POT STA 26+00.00 END CONSTRUCTION n~9oo
1 IR
,~
n
f
r0 ~~.
BL
POINT DESC. NORTH EAST ELEVATION L STATION OFFSET NOTES:
101 0-4299 BL~101 710560.4520 2102452.0310 299.35 le•se.97 zs.e3 Ls THE CONTROL DATA FOR THIS PROJECT CAN BE FOUND ELECTRONICALLY BY SELECTING
102 B-4299 BL-102 711350.3960 2102152.0460 268.75 19.05.03 27.12 Ri PROJECT CONTROL DATA AT:
103 8-4299 BL~103
104 64299 BL-104 711650.3210
712186.4690 2702025.5160
2101995.3020 266.65
275.70 22.30.92
21.67.93 11.13 Li
15.4e LT
HTTP:\WWW.DOH.DOT.STATE.NC.USPRECONSTRUCTiHIGHWAY/LOCATIONiPROJECT
105 84299 BL-105 712575.4390 2102010.3250 299,69 ~ 31.54.91 24,7] RT THE FILES TO BE FOUND ARE AS FOLLOWS
B4299 LS CONTROL 041I15.TX1'
• • • •' •' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
75
203 ELEVATION 264 • • • • • • • • • • • • SITE CALIBRATION INFORMATION HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED FOR THIS PROJECT.
.
N 711630 ~ Hazels ~ ~ , IF FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, PLEASE CONTACT THE LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT.
L STATION 16.55 14 LEFT
R/R SPIKE W 42' SHEET GUN '
®INDICATES GEODETIC CONTROL MONUMENTS USED OR SET FOR HORIZONTAL PROJECT CONTROL
••••••••••••^•••••••••••••• •••••^••^• BY THE NCDOT LOCATION AND SURVEYS UNIT.
• • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • PROJECT CONTROL ESTABLISHED USING GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM.
204 ELEVATION 269.46
N 712260 E 2101960
L STATION 22.72 70 LEFT
R/R SPIKE ~IN 14• svEEr cuN NOTE: DRAWING NOT TO SCALE
LOCAUgD PROTECT COORDINATES
8.2406101 (NIBS 33636.1.1)
N 711243.6522 ~~
E 2102171.3586

. ,

MATCH LINE A
4'
'~Mqk I~ er. ~ zr, ~ tr.
4:ti
T u
~ -L- (SR 1006)
i
12' I
~^
• VARIES 12'-6'
i
r GRADE
i / POINT
MATCH LINE A TYPICAL SECTION N0. 1
NOTE:
FEATHER TO EXISTING PAVEMENT FROM
-L- STA. 18+45.00 TO STA. 18+70.00 AND
FROM -L- STA. 25+00.00 TO STA. 25+25.00
MATCH LINE A ~ -L- (SR 1006
W/ GUARDR~
4'-0' ,
LIL
z~ I ~ I er.,_I
.-. 2,
/Mq4.
u T
USE TYPICAL SECTION N0.1
-L- STA. 18+70.00 TO STA. 19+20.70
. -L- STA. 19+20.70 TO STA. 20+00.00
-L- STA. 24+50.00 TO STA. 25+00.00
I
B' 8' 12' 12 '
13'
• VAR. W/ GUARDRAIL
6'-0'
i
VARIES CI 1 CI VARIES
0' - 4' ~ DI 0' - 4'
FDPS GRADE ~ FDPS
POINT 1 I
~~Mq4, 8X Zr. `zz ~ ~ z•.~ z, B
4d
T
T EI DI
EI
GRADE TO 10.5, GRADE TO
THIS LINE THIS LINE
MATCH LINE A
~k,
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
C1 PROP. APPROX. 2 1 /2' ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE, TYPE 59.58, AT AN
AVERAGE RATE OF 140 LBS. PER SO. YD. IN EACH OF TWO LAYERS.
Dl PROP. APPROX. 3" ASPHALT CONCRETE INTERMEDIATE COURSE,
TYPE 119.OB, AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 342 LBS. PER SO. YD.
E1 PROP. APPROX. 5" ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE COURSE, TYPE B25.OB, AT AN
AVERAGE RATE Of 570 LBS. PER SQ. YD.
R 48" EXPRESSWAY GUTTER
T EARTH MATERIAL
U EXISTING PAVEMENT.
-L-
I
41'- ID• F-F
I'-T J g'-1 I' 12' I Ip 8'- I I'
1 i
IS PRESTRESSED CONCRETE BOX BEAM UNITS = 45'
BOX BEAM DETAIL
II~Tnu II\Ir •
USE TYPICAL SECTION N0.2
TYPICAL SECTION N0. 2• ' _L- STA. 20+00.00 TO STA. 21+94.29
-L- STA. 21+94.29 TO 22+35.00 (BEGIN BRIDGE)
-L- STA. 23+05.00 (END BRIDGE) TO STA. 24+50.00
USE THIS SECTION
-L- STA. 19+51.10 TO STA. 20+45.00
~7.
^ RAMEYKEMPBASSOCIATES,INC.
ATXRf

' ~ .

i
q' +/-_
(Ex- is
Pav'd
Shld)
-DET- (US 401)
12' +/- ~ 12' +/-
~~
I
EXISTING
SUPER ELEVATION
U
PAVEMENT SCHEDULE
C PROP. APPROX.1 12' ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE, TYPE 59.SC, AT AN
AVERAGE RATE OF 168 LBS. PER SQ. YD.
Cl PROP. APPROK 3' ASPHALT CONCRETE SURfACE COURSE, TYPE 59.SC, AT AN
AVERAGE RATE OF 168 LBS. PER SQ. YD. IN EACH OF TWO LAYERS.
DI PROP. APPROX. 4' ASPHALT CONCRETE INTERMEDIATE COURSE,
TYPE 119.OC, AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 456 LBS. PER SO. YD.
~ PROP. APPROK 712' ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE COURSE, TYPE B25.OC, AT AN
AVERAGE RATE Of 855 L85.PER SO. YD.
T EARTH MATERIAL
U E%ISTING PAVEMENT.
~Q~F,SSIpti(yr
' SEAL
• 21111
4i'FNCIN4.~Q`~~
• Existing Left Turn Lane and Shoulders
to be Milled Approximotely III/Z .
Varies 2' - 12'
sting Turn Lor
Edge of
Trovel
TYPICAL SECTION N0. 3
Vorie5
1' - 6.5' ~
2'-0'
FDPS
AR
4'-0'
141/ ' ~ v DI EI T /.~
2 ~
w
Edge of Grade To
Pavement This Line
USE TYPICAL SECTION N0.3
-DET- STA. 11+72,00 TO STA. 17+02.00
SXEEf ~.
2-A
Mart oESwrr
BK,NEER
RAMEV KEMP BASSOCIATE$ INC. I
~ n~ ~ .

PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE
DETAIL
PLAN VIEW
--
v
Pipe or
Ou-
Square
Scour E
(Rip RaG
basin n
for clot
SECTION A-A
Fj~~
Pipe or Ditch
Outlet
PSRM
rD
Liner: Class ~ Rip Rap ~ ~---g-•~
with Filter Fabric
I.Oft J
tuck
evel and flush
aural ground.
LOCATION (AT OUTLET)
Sta 23+42 -L- (Lt)
Sta ?_3+75 -L- (Rt)
g 5.0 f t
D 2.0 f t
W 5.0 ft
d 0.5 f t

Natural
Ground
[~ RAMEYKEMPBASSOCIATES,INC.
TIUN~RE CONSoI.iNG ~~~
~e.s.. c~~i se.'c. a .: nri~.
r:P, a isa

SUMMARY OF QUANTITIES
[~ RAMEY KEMP & ASSOCIATES, INC.
TRANSPORTATION EN~INEER5
X928-~ WnE, xil hlw
Raey~, Rorln Cvarw 21508
919-522-5115 la. 919-018-5~~6 lo. - .....wn

~a ~ ~ ' ~ ~ } } ~ }

P
u
r ~
u
W N
u
~
O
O
'~
'~ ~ (
~~ y
~

+ , t
n
+
+
4
+
+
+
+
u
+~ ~
t
~' Z q
M
V :
N N ~ ~ W O N w to ~~
'a '~ '~ ,'~ '~ ~ H 1 y y IOGTION )LT,RT, OR Cl)
•o m u ~ FROM
STRUCTURE NO.
•~ ~ ' ' TO
w m

a N
'O
g
TOF ELEVATION
°u
P -
O u
~' a
OmD INVERT ELEVATION
~ ~ •" INVERT ELEVATION
P m
SLOFE CRITIGL
Z
2:
On
O•

~ ~ ~ ~ m~ >E~a~
~

P
+~
~
Y fNi, ~ 'J
~ (
Q •
3
3i $ u u g
c g 8 ~ ~ t IRE
$~~R
l
N N ~~
+ + u +
v w

g u

g

t
Q
~ ~ ~
O
Q FiFi
~'
:~ ~1 ~Ay
~'1 ~ H y
S

LY ~P

8 B
V {N~
o
W
N
8 o Y;' p
O y
~
O Q

g a ~ ~~

.061 ti
•.061 '; ~ N o~
+ +
.069 at u°, in
.061 ~ g g ~
N
z~
~I1
.079 Q ~ ~ ~ ~ + ~ ~ '~
.D79 O ~ y s s~
a ~" O
s
.109
~, ~ .... 0~~2!
(11~'~I r
.109 ~ ~ -
O
V 4r W tr u p
15' SIDE DRAIN PIPE ,+,
18' SIDE DRAIN PIPE q
21' SIDF DRAIN PIPE v~v v "' p
u ~ ~
R.C.P. ~ Z2j~ d ZZ O ~ a
C.S.P. '" ~ ~ 4 ~ vJ N
a
PER EACH )0' TMRU S.0') FORUDRAINAGE 0.+~
STRUCTURES
5.0' TMRU 10.0' > ~ ~ C Q
~ Z • TOTAL L.F. fOR PAY ~ ~ /Yi
10.0' AND ABOVE m O AANTITY SHALL BE COL. }"
~.S X COL'E') !1 E
C.B. STD. 810.01 OR STD, 840.02 O m +
~ ~ p
~ ~~
~ ~~~ b ~~
~~ y ~ ~
TRAFFIC BEARING DROP INLET STD. 810.5 ~ ~ y~N~
V y N• N p N I O
M.D.I. FRAME WITH iW0 GRATES STD. 860.]9 ~r. ~ y ~ ~ a GGG
CONCRETE DROP INIET STD. BI0.11 fp =
a nP O L
`L r ~ N I r y
DRO- INIET FRAME 6 COVER STD. 810.16 ^) u, m ~ >~
PREFORMED SCOUR HOLE )SEE SHEET 2-B) `~yyl N g n
b II N II ~
2GI /TRAFFIC BFARING JUNCTION BOX )SEE SHEET 2-IQ ~ ~O O
NUOgQZ sy' 4~
M.D.I. TYPE 'A' STD. 810.17 OR 810.26 ~ ? ~ g q 1~, t~ ~
M.D.I. FRAME VUTWO GRATES STD. 810.21 ~ 5 S
PIPE RFMOVAI
CORR. STEEL ELROWS NO. 6 SIZE )BIRJMINOUS COATED)
'i 'ym ; m ~ ~ O Z A
L ~ I O O r p m

Z .
m
~~~ ~
O
O
O~y
nTi O ~
s
s
S
OsY-~~

~~ ~
$
o
ZZ
o~
x .
i
~ g
al =~
~~
~~~
a
~~
~pr5r
F ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ..
oo~~
~~~~
~~~~
~~m<
~~
~~~®
~~~~
~~~
~~
~ ~
s

'
s g
yO yp yO
~ }
t > ~
~ N
v

°o
~ N
~ „
r
g u
V N N '<
L
b
O
'y
C ~'
"C y
VI
v~
C \-/
z®
z
®~
^x_ x
4/
-~
~®
~z
x ~
o
y
A ~
~ y
~ g
~ ~ 1~n
~

r }
t

~

' ~

~
~ "o

~
N ~~

w~
g
+ ~}

u
8v N

a ~
8
•
N +
~' g
`-
~
g
Y ~.
L 2 ~'
E
333333$000000
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~
~~
S a m m ~ c ~ ~ o ~~
E
i i 8
~
~~
C
y
J

REVISIONS
5-8.06
-ADDRION OF pGHi -O~WAY FlIOPBRY TIES
yELTgt R CREr IEFS
D8. Nr26 PG. 310
N2n95'37'N ~ .....
EE aoe' d ROBERT RAY,JR,
i6 o NA DJ1.2924 PG TI
,__ _._~ ^
m SK'09'26'E ~ II-
G.F,IgRTON,ET Ux n6z6' _ Ip~
EVELYN Y, ODO^ i---'- mdc ~'~'
0 D.B.IS33 PG 200 ~
Irtu D,B. BpiT RG 551 wCON LED EYUtS 6 PEARIENE T. "" I ~ o I i
EVAMS REVOCABLE LIVBG TRUST
N > DJL 93]2 PG. 855 (~ aaa I I ~
66,.~ ~+
~ P249Y13^N f~ " LI ~ ~ ~ "
I

liJ'. M8Nid1 ,ET IA
OJI.15A 10.200
~X =~
IXMC
~~ I o
~ I Po°` I ~ I~
.~ I L.,_,_, ~ X
1~ `L\ °~ /
~.bi'
~~ 0E0ROE Yt)i~~ Tp1,
p D.B.166 TpPG112
I I /~~) 111.10' ~ IR I ,~~\I I ESf.M SYff.
I^ ~ . / ~ Nz4'32"r]'P BRAOLE~IAS1~ I~ I O `.. ..,.
1 a 40.00' O
I a~ v
1v 0 wu ~
E =i,~ ~ m 15 6~ ~~~- ~~ ~ i
ly I 16• o« ~ ~? ° ~ I ~ r~rwa'
~ PIa. ~ ~
I`$ ~ 19R pr
JFiRRY LA1REMlE C4AfS
I~ DJL 8111 PG p7 ~ r>pEp' i ~( „~
AETM _
• ~"~ / f~
.43.22 ~ ~~ g
I~j y~ ~ r
~~ 7e• ac, ' m _ ~ pFSA~ ~ ~
1 ~ ~~
.- _ ~~ i
~~~~55.Sw 1 69
~~~24~~~ IP~ T EX.R/IY 1S
~- / \ ~ (a~wa ~ I
~~ E,P T ~, a~~ ~d~ur Q BEGIN CONST •
I fl BEG PROJE T B-4299 0
1 ~ ~? -L- POT $TA !8+45.00 R
10(05 I I
- I 1 Et1-102 PING 13+37.80 = ~
- I I -L- 19+05.03 2TJ2 RT N
O
JOIN IEtRY BATTL +
0.8.2009 P0.2i9 ~
I\ -L-
I I
I R
I ~lh

-L- STA
-L- STa22+11.06 ~ -L- STa23+
SKETCH SHOWING ROADWAY
IN RELATION TO STRUCTURE
ll
a
I'
I~
lal
t~f
v,l
II
~I
I 1 1
11
Aa24+Op fo 25+70 Lr
STa20+75 fa 21+j5 Lr.
~~
LL=~L
N000$
O
RICHARD DFJN ABERNATNY,ET Ux
D.B. TIT2 RC. 666
E1v
put RICHARD YYERS.Ei Ux
DJ{.2692 PG.513
DETAIL 2
LArERac eAsE arcH
r xa ro kmel ~ D ~
xanra
Gro
nd
°
a g% Fnr ~ '
s
n
u
,dy j
0 g
a I
B~ ~ M120 = ID Ft.
o = 5.0 Fr.
B = 9D FG '
sra22+a~ ro 22+95 Lr
rEteRlrlce llo.
-4299
MV BHEEf N0.
o°PSN CARp~~ 4
~~~'FESSIp' ~?4
SEAL
27171
~`FNCINE`v~°F
~' ThEW B. C~.r
61QT N0.
4
d•I~td CARP °4•,,
7 P li
~°•'FESSrp'+tir~'c
SEAL : ~
' 18442 =
Q•:
°9~ F~GINE~P~~~~r;
'rfnnunu••

1

m

pp
~ m ~
~(h h r
(a'1
m
N
(
;;`yr yyyyyy
i ~ 6 `
W
o w !
~
~ W ^
~( Z S
A
tl d W~
t ~{1~
w
l I 8d
i ~o
I ~
I I L
i~l
~b' 3
' 1~!
I.1 f _I 1
~ I
o.i6
~ ~ ~
I g • 204 ~
B STA
=22+72
47
~ .
.
1
'
1 100
LT.

~~
I
I I V.=284.46' /'
~'
'
ro
` ~ t I ~
ros
(pl
2t 1
-,
..;1 I $! .

a ~ 0 ~ \ ~ ~~
I ~ I
~ J ~-
©~ ~ d
rs rc ~ BL-104 PNC 22+0034 , elf I c1P Tp_,y
~ -L- 2T+67.93 15.48~~ ~I~ '~`~GH
/~ ~ ~
- l i/~ ti ~ ~ ~5 ~
/ h
oN ^UWI RAY WCEY,ET Ux al, ~+~s 0
D.e.te16 Puzor
LARRY O ETT~ aN)ODALL
4 3A'6
4a' 0.8.1903 RC. 285
N02'$4'3g•
r50.Op' M
ea
S04'2B'S)f
1 0.00' ~
® DENOTES APPROACH SLAB
SEE SHEET NOE6 FOR PROFILE
SEE SHEETS 5 ~THRU S-
FOR STRUCTURE PLANS
TRANSITS CONSULTING ^RAMEYK@E1P6A950CIATES,INC.
INC P1t17, n(oarouno ^
Nao ~e.dnl vm, sr, a1a
Ed•II•, V,(, 71609
"e ~T
~~
4
a.ss s.u[ x/-X~ ~° I
i;. a.s~ x 1
m= anon I I 40 !` ~/
ss- s,E
°z=ws~r• ! I X
z: iuvo.
°o im`: I I x GF.1gRTON, ET Ul( ~ m
• DJLg19 iM..p9 aN
II
k
I Ix 1
BAI • 203
E5g I S. meW fence ~ al $TI. 16F55.48
Bl- 103 P~~6+6].32 = `/ EiEV.=z6/.TS'
L- 22+ 17J3 LT, I ~ °IUSf 5.4E
aK[R.E 0.40r ~ /'~
SEE U °~ ..asao 6
~ ~ Sw a.q}5
~'= nsor• ELSE I1AE BABAICK IER$
- + ~' /k I ~ ~~ zsab o< D.B 2978 PG. T2
S7
ml \ rAY[ ~0 2-Bd
L
fPY ~9
I m ~ r m~ OQ dam?
p' i
4 '~ END PRp.N
I 1 'I ~ (
~ % -L- Pyl
9 ~- ~ ~~S
18' MN
rtx ~,R( ~ F ~ ~~ "~ rSPmuswvp7a "0p05 ENO C
'- ~v 1_. N•t .~~~ S ~ 1 SEE DETME f -L- n
E~
.1:, . ~
~~~ L
TO 2~ Y ~ ~' ra
a
N
x
v
C
1--..-
-L-
P~ Sta Z0+8685
o= 2r2ar9zrRr1
D = r3aoo~
~ = 284.5r
T = 14393'
R = 763.94
Bmox = 6%
RUNOFF ~ SEE PLANS
DETAIL r
SPECIAL LATERAL w afCH
r x? ro SaJe/
i
~~ L_ a ~ `-Fni
Gram J;, B F1~ SWw
Nrn.O = !,0 Ft.

. ~
REVISIONS
0./N SH
0.0ADWAY DESIGN
SL~2'S5'R ~j-- wpb 1, un9d9y4
/ tp CARp~''%
// o; SEAL
21111
:j
~~ '1i`FNCI N4.~Q~ 4
C~'
•••9•,;~E9 B.
I nnumon•
~~. •F.
I I y N ~' SS
I V
_..-.. i
~.n'
E 9lsro~ rE R52'G'~'E
_ " I, Q ~E
=•,.Np o
,I ° ~
~~'Uo
I CNQO A ,d
` ? I BANISTER PROPERTES -~
I z z Da MT7 PG of m';
I COC PROPERTES,Y: "~° BANKSER PROPERTES
V
I Y SIS9 10 2b $ ° a Yt7 PO qT
d 93] P6 q/1 E '
4m
-OET- '~ POT -DET- Stan+5ppg
PI Sto 15+QB60
D ^ !6'16'41.9'fLTI
0 ^ J57' 052 fP §
POT - T- S%-0+0000 I BEGIN CavS1'RUCTpN EP T ^ ~20r39' PT -O~ET- 5-a 0+1.'i10 't
-L- STa J1+7200 R ^ I,450NOO'
PC-OE'T'T- Sta 13+0122 "';
. a.,:.
f~/
I '
~ ~ Ep ---~ 4~ 55 u~ E
-----
- _.~ __
.. - - _ _ ~i
N 591r 562 E
~J

a
a
a
N
.N
a
x
,1
~' 9
$ -
I
'" /,IL- fplwfE 1ApW5
6Y 0l OR PO$
~ TIC EY 9ST PO 20 ~
v
i I
P
9
o¢a ~~
I ~
I 5y~'~
N
I d ~ R7.LIAY El ADIEK •'
OB6159R]0
~, IY 957 PO 10
1~ ~
P
~~d'. , j ~N'q!
s ~:~~
r . ~.
SXEEf
,.oQ`N CARp~~••.
?~ ` ESSlp'••~
,Q~o~ N'f••.
SEAL
IB442
A~ FNCIN4.~Q`~?
.. (FnA~ .. ~~.,
.- N_
.._ ....... -f~WN -
~p,i ~
-y,, tlpE ay
.,ir/ ~"Y
•s
~ ~ ~ - , Y ~ ,-,~.. ~
~ (,Y
VA~~~'~, \ N ~ ~.• • ~- ..~~ EMD PSRY
f A + ~r
aE'Egvf a '~~_ EMO CONSTRUCTpN "\
~~ ~~ Tai sran+ozoo -GEr-
Sff DfTNI 2-¢ `_,' ~ I~sE a\
x t0 E
-lam ~~
ors c~~
~J.,}
9~
4f \
4~
0
'. aYoE E,~ PITRCu F,SYEpEES ssps
\ my/S PO4 %S~o.
s~
s
~se.
OORTxY ,PAGE
DB 9506 IO E16j ~6~Ss'a.
A\
BANISTER 1995 FIERY
LYYED PIRTEERSRP
006Ylk65
Y 956 PO T
LEGEND
MlWNG AND OVERLAY ~s`~d/e_ \
® ~~
fuu OEPrH PAVEMENT
sECrroN ~

PSRM -PERMANENT SOfL
RElNfORCEO MATTING

TEANSITE CONSULTING
EHGINfEAS, INC09-01 AiEU
II00 /,dde,k O~rv Su I, G-10 o RAMEYKEMP&ASSOCNTES, INC.

R -.InVti1^'4RN9~CIN~AW ~
9o1n9F, N.C. PI649 X11",~,`••µw

Halo w wuES
IY 95i PG 7D

.~
~~-~ ~~ _~
_ PRGJECE REFERENCE NG. SHEET NO.
8-4299 6
: RGAfIWAY DESIGN HYDRMAIGS
` .. .. - ENGINEER ENGINEER
n„ ~ n
_ 9q , " r
.,QQO ~~.,. ; ; 4~~ Ny(.,.
E SEAL ~ SEAL :~°
B.M. •203 ELEV. = 26475 BJI. •204 ELEV. = 289.46 - _ . :. FN 7771 ~ . ~ ~~ 8442 P'::~`
o ~
RR SPIKE /N BASE OF RR SPIKE IN BASE Of ' 9~QTl~p g ~~ , .'~a rfoN~e~`'a'~,
42 SWffT GUM 14' SWEET GUM ,n. ~''"~m„9~9„9"`
30A0' Lr.OF -BL- STA 5+55.48 14,00'LT, OF -BL- STA 22+1247 ~~~~~"~~
.___._.__ __ .. _ --_......_ _-....... _ _ _ 2750'LT.OF -L- STA22+525 _. _._ 38A3'CT.OF -L- STA28+42bI
DlrCH LEGEND
- - - -DITCH GRADE U
BRIDGE HYDRAULIC DATA
_ ... ~ _ _ . _ DESIGN DISCHARGE = 1600 CFS _ _
DESIGN FREQUENCY = 25 YRS _
DESIGN HW ELEVATION = 2659 FT.
.. '_ ._.. ___ BASE DISCHARGE = 1900 CFS _
BASE FREQUENCY = 100 YRS
BASE HW ELEVATION = 266.3 FT
300 OVERTOPPING DISCHARGE = 2300 CFS ` 300
OVERTOPPING FREQUENCY =200+/- YR. ... _ .. _ _ _ _ _ ,..m_.W
OVERTOPPING ELEVATION = 266J5 FT ''
~_ ._ _.__ .. ..>: DATE OF SURVEY 4-20-04 _.__ . _. .
WS ELEVATION = 256T6 FT
290 AT DATE Of SURVEY 290._...
~N. R _ _ _.._ _ _ _...... __ __ _ . _.. __ . _,_ .__ . .
-L- STA S+OODO _
ELEv. - 2TrJr _
280 ~ INCwDIES 25• /~
_~ . _ .. _.A._ _ ..._ _ __ _._. __..~ RESURFAC/NGJ ...._._ _______ _ e,„._
__. ._ N . ._ _ _. _
_ ~ _ ~`
_.~ _._ ... _~ PI. 2D+ooAD ._~ .. ~ .__ _ _ _ a ~ ~. _-~ ~.. _~ RESU ~aSCr~, _ _ _ ~.. .~
_ ._.... , _ Et ~ 2KB18' .. _ N ~ . fl = 2~5A0 . EAD FEATHERING
\_. ..
' ,
.
.. -!~:' .~5'. 4 - - 25+251)0
_ ~ .... ~ _
L STA
. '
TIE ro Ex 270
270 '__ __`,.._ __ : _ _~~ .~..._ ...~ . _...~..__ _ _____.. ___._ _~.._. _ _. '--- _ _..__:' a _ ___...._ >C.'_b? _ _. _ __. _. ' _ .. _..,
~__ _ a~___ _~ _ _.
_- _ ---. _ _ __. _ _ _ ~~w__
_ BEGIN FEATHERING ~ ~3~2~gy__ ~ W = W_ _ ~ ~ ~
_ _
-L- STA18M5~0 ; A3PI22.4-.. ;r ~ ---
TIE: TO Ex/ST..:- _ _ _ .. ,, :.. _ . _ -r-Kt3222Y. r+10,6604Y. _ ~ _
e~.....- _ . _ . _ __. _ . _,_._.~~._ .: _ .._ __~ ~ .. ~ ~~,. _ , _ _ _ x ~ _ _ _ . _ r~...~,.
_ _ ~.. ~ ~ ._ ~ . MArERIa: ro eE ~3~~ ' _ .®
G!H'R Rf I _
` ~ _-L- A 18+ REMOVED lTYPJ ~
I+~?d SLOPE ~ ~ _ .~ IFi-60•J.o- ~ _ _
260 ,
_ _
__.._ ~._.~._ . _ ------ _-_r.__...~~I .._
-I,~~ - I--- .~ _ .
''
~ ~~
` ~- ~/~d5i0PE~~~ r
._.,_ . _ . - - - .. i R
~ a W _ . ~~ ~ ~ w~
En $
~ ¢tii ~ t;~~ t a0
250 a~~p aJ~ m$ ~~ _ ~a~' ~~ a~ 250
_..._ _ .. _._ .._. .._.. ... ..._... _.__ ._~~`V ._. \.~.. .. JN __Q Q~.. _ ... .. _.2 R R .. _.aR .. R R .. .. ._ _... .. .. ...
2R R.._a~.~ 2~R..~RR ~~~_4~ x~~ SEE SHEETS-ITHRUS-
' ~ FOR STRUCTURE PLANS
M ~
c~a~ .,.xa W~~ xa~
~ ._~ _ _ _.._ W _ W_., Q1tnW W-.. _ _ . _. _. __
w
w
240 240
..~. _..a_ _ _ _...._.... __ __._._ _ __. _ ........ _:. _.,__.. _._ _. ...,~:_.._ _. .___. : ____ ..__ _ : _.__._
„~ .
A~ _~ _
»N
,"~~ fFQ4 P[~w.SEE SHE£T NQI1
a
:N _ ... ,...~__ ..:....... .. . .......~.. __.._....r..._`...._ ._ _ ~ .. ,. _. I,._:-... __.. .. _ TRANSITE CONSUETING RAMEYI~MP&ASSOCIATES,INC.
~. .. .., .~;,. ~__~ .. ~.....~_ ~ ~. nN ~eL Of~NL D6_.. .:._,
n~ ~ FNGINEFIS INC~9vre G19 ss•M~w~'•i~al .
Nw 09
MH .
„a 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
~a

DOUG,811I2D05,R:1B42991Roadvrayll(sclb-4299 eadhxrork.x6
. ,
~.
PROD. REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 8.429 X-,
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
NOTE: EMBANKMENT COLUMN INCLUDES BACKFILL FOR UNDERCUT CROSS-SECTION SUMMARY
Station Uncl. E:c. Embt
(cu. yd.) (cu. yd.)
•L-
16+a5.oo o a
19+50.00 80 1
20+00.00 70 2
20+50.00 38 7
21+00.00 33 17
21+50.00 31 27
22+00.00 12 107
22+35.00 BEG. BRIDGE 6 64

23+05.00 END BRIDGE 6 64
23+50.00 11 111
Approximate quantities only. Unclassified Excavation, Borrow
Excavation, Fine Grading, Clearing and Grubbing, and Removal of
Existing Pavement will be paid for at the contract lump sum price for
'Grading'

,~.
. -. FRO1ECf REFERENCE N0. SFIEET N0.
B-4299 X-2
_70. _. _ 60_ 50 40 _ _ _ _30 _ 20 10 ~ ~ -L-: _ 10 _ 20 30 40 _ 50 60 70
280`----------.--__
_
_ .
_
280
_
_,

__ __ _ _ _
2.40% 4.40

270.:.___ .._':_ ..: _ _ .__ ... ~. _
.._ ._ .._..: ~
;_._ }.- .
6__~~ _~M - - .-..._ _ . ~ _ _._: -`
._ ~_._ __.~,
_ . ` . _:. _ ~ 2l
_

EP_
_ -
`,
EP . ______-__T_--

__ _. _ __

__
_ _ _
.._--_ ...._ M _ _ _~

. ,
_ ... ~.
.,
_ _.~.~__..__.r..~ ...~ -~ _.___~ .

._
;:STA. ;.18;50 ~

-
_ _ _ _ _ _

L:
_

__..._ ._.__ _.. ~ _.__ _.

w __ ..

_ _ ~~
_ ~E~. 272.67. .:
_ _ _ _ _._. _. _ _ _...
__ _

_
- _ BEGLN PRQJEG~ 1 $TA 18+45.00:- -
__
280 --
__

. - .- ~_

~:
_,
:- _ _ _ -
_ _ _ _
_
_
_
_ _~
~

- _ _ .~_ _ _ ~ _ - _ m
,_ ~ __

__.__~_
_ _
- --- _
___ _~ . _ .

.___~_r _ _. ..._
. _ . __
_
2l0
~P
~
- _
_ _,_ .

_ ~.
~ - ---

.:.
~
~ STA. 18+00

EP ._ _ - --_
_ _.

a_ _
:EL:• 274.25
~ _

_ _., _ ___
280
.. _ ...
~ ~ _ _.

~
~:
~. __~

,
~~
_~

. .

~

..

._._
.~ _ _-_ .
_ _._,__ ~ e_.._
-.
- .
_.. _ _

i _ _
~

- _~ ,.-..
2T0 _ .. _
_ .._. __. __ _,._.: _ EP _ _ EP _
2l0
_
_
~_ _ _ ~ ,STA. 17.+50
a

a
a
- _
_ ._:. .,
- __ ,....- .. .. _.
-.. _.. ~ ..

._ _ ... ,_ ... -_..,.. -
EL.~275.$4

.. . -_...

, ..._

_....... __ -.. ... ..._ _......_ .... __,.._.
-.... ..
a
a
u
w
x
h~
N~

-
:.

- ~
.. -

-
flM
FN
a -
.. ., .
n
~~
A~
.~
xa
AN
PIA
70 60 50

~
40 30 . ~
20

,..

~
-
10:: a... L- 10
..
20
30 40 50 60 . l0

,

.'

NtOIECf REfERENCE N0. SXEET N0.
8-4299 X-3
l0 60 _. 50_ 90 _ 30 _20 10 .:__ ~ -L- _ 10 ... _. 20 _ _30 40 50 __ GO 70
280
--.._. _. __.__
_ _
280:.
'_ -_G.P. = 268.83 _ _
2~0 _ _ 0
2T
__ 2~- _ _ .. .. ,_:-2.89 % _ _ 4 7
.5 ~
.. . _ _

~ __ _
__
"'
~
__EP
_ EP -"--------------
STA. 20+00..
260
-. __ . _ _ _ ~~. 268.44
_ 260

280 _ _ _.

280
_
.; .: _

r
_ ~~ G.P.
_

69.66 ~: ~

___ _ ,_ .
- _ ..

.... ` '~

~
_ _ ._ ... _ w . ... .__._~_ _ . - _.
:._~.-
__
_ _
270..... .. ~'~ _._ _ ....
_ _..__.. _

- ~
:_.. z, .. _ .-~-_._.~.
z.78 %

.
__~_ .._~ ...~,arcr~_.~xrsr
5.80 i .._

_ MareH~.~xsr--:_ ... ~._ __ ~

,. 270:.
~ ._ ~_ _ ~ -~ - :. _. . _
~ _ _
_
~

EP

_

..

P -- --
- _
_. _ _
_.

4~ 2
,: STA. 19+50
- ~
260 '
_~.,.__~_ _..v,.,~ ~_ _.-..._.__ _..._. ~

_.._ _ _

_._.v..__ . _.. _..~__._ _._~._
_ .
EL.

_. __.. _ _._~._ ____
269.68

,

~ 260..
_.... ___ .__._.____. __
_
280 _ __ - _ _
280
_ :: .. ; . - - G.P. = 271.31 :.

__ -,

_ ; 2.50 %_.
_.5.30 y ~ ~
.. ..
; .
.
2T0
.
___ _._ .. __. _ _.r.

-
- _ ~_
-

~-
--

_
~

_ EP

_ _
-- __ ___
4~ 2:~ __ _ __-----
_ i EP
~- _
_ _STA.
~9+00
a

a .260. _
_._ _ ;. _

_ . _ _ _ E~ .

__~ _ _ _ _ __ _ .. _..__
_ . 2 7,r . i o

___. _ .. __ _ . _ 260

_ _ ._
_ _ . __. .
a ,_ - _
70 60 50 40 30 20 /0 - ~ -L- 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
a
a
z

.~
J
RROIECf REFERENCE N0. SHEEi N0.
B-4299 X-4
TO 60 _50 _ _ 40 _ 30 _20 _ . l0 ~ . _ _ : ~ -_L} - 10 .. 20 _ 30...........:90 50 , _ _60 l0 .._
TIE TO EXISTING G.P. = 267.70.. _
21~. _ .,DRIVEWAY
. _ _~ .. ._ _
. _ .: _ . _ .
- . _ _ . _ _
2T0
12.~~~ :300 % 3.00
2,
_._ ... ..._ ..
Ep . _. - - _- __ _ C _
----
_

~ i
260._..... _ _ .. - _ _ _ . . \ _ 260
- STA. 21+50 _ _
_E~. 266.88

._.._ ~ .._ .__. -_
__.__ .~_,_~~.._.____. _..__ _ ~ _ _._.__~_~_____m~ ~._._~~______
~.;.._._.....~ _.____. _ _
_ . -___ _
_ .._.~ ..o ~

_.. ~_.~~.__ ~..::
. ~__. _ _.. .... _-- ___ _._. _ _ ___. __.. _._. _
.
__ . _
_..; ~ .. .: ~. END SPECIAL LATERAL DfrCH _

: ..
_.._ :
,
:_ STA:?J±35' Lr. ELEV. = 269.20. .. ~ 'i ' _ .. ' :.
-

2l0
_ ~
G.P.
267.86
TlE TO EXISTING .

~f(].

__ ___ _ ___ _ ____ __... ..._ .. ~ _..._..... . _
_

3.00 .._ ~ DRiV
EWAY ..

,-
3.00
`
__
--

- -
_
---

_ _ -
~2.5:1

___. _.

._n _~.__~_.._ ~_._...~ . ... _ .._ .-._~f~ _w 3;1.~.. ___ _ ___ _

~
I
_ ... _ _~_.

EP

_.r_._ _.. ... _ _ _ __ _~___._ __:. __.. ~ ._
_. _ __

M
_._ .. _ _..n.
:.
264.31:, E.p.

260 . ~ ~
_

~, 260-
_.
STA: 21 +00 _
_ EC: 267.07 _
i BEGIN ..SPECIAL. LATERAL ;DITCH ;, : :: _ : .
280 _STA, 20+75 LT. ELEV. = 264.50 _ _ _ 280
.. G.P. = 268.16_... ..
_
TIE TO EXISTING ~
. ____
~ :.. ~.._.... _._~.._ _-. __.7...._ _.r ._ _ .__
_ _
~
~
~

270
_
, ,DRIVEWAY
_

_
~ .
.
:.m ~ _.
_ _

--__ ~ 12.5:1 ~
-----_

.86 %:

_~
_
30p
__.

_ _ -- _
-- _
---
--_ 2
_ y _
__ ____
--

._EP .

_ . ~ ..__
_ __
--
_.. __ _ .._ . _. . ___ .._ - ----

_, .
~ -
sra, 20+so EP _ -
..
a
a
a
b
e 260 ;
_ -
_ _ .. _

-
- EL.
. .
- ~_-_.

... 267. as

_ _ ._ __ _. _ :260

-
.~ - __..
pp ., .. ..
pb -.- - ..
ha r ..
._. ....
~~
NN
l0 60 : 50 40 _30 20 10 . ~ -L- 10 20 30 :. 40 5Q 60 l0
Nx
,.

. .
. ~
. ~
. •. _. .. ~ FROIECT REFERENCE N0. SMEET N0.
B-4299 X-5
70 _ 60 _ . 50 __4Q . : __ 30 ___20 _ 10 w __~ ~_-L- . _. 10 _ ~_20_.___:--- 30 ~~ _ 90 _ _ 50 _ : _...60 .. _10 ~_.
G.P. = 267.05..
210 _ . .
._
_ _ ___ _
_
._
_. _ __ -. ._ _ _- -- _ ._.
..
210.:
_ .
3.00 % 3.00 %.
21 _~~---- ___

---
-- ~. \ ~?~
~

260 - .
,____._- --
-----------
26~
STA. 23+50.

- _ _ _ ,.
EL. 266.69
_ _
::. . .
. END BRIDLE.:STA..23+05.00 .'
_
..

___~_ . _

~_ , ~n.~ .

._

_.r_. . _._ __._ _-_ _-_

~... __

,
,

_._ _~ _ a__ _
_
_

_
;.,..
.~., _. _._ _. ,_. ._ _._. ~~._ _.. _ _. _ _
.,.~_

... ~...
~.

.,

_ ___ _
_ _ _

_

...
_ . _

. . .

~
_:
__.
,

~ ..
~ G.P. = 287:22 ~ ~~~
_,210 _ ...... _ _ _._. .... _. _ '_ _ _ .:~_ _. _. ~:~_~ _ : _ __. _ ~. _ _ __ :_ .._ - --- - ---. _ ...._ __ _ _ ~_ . 27Q
_._ _
--_

~ ._-,_ _
,. EP _ __

~_
EF
,
~

260
_
_ - _

~ -
~ ,
``260:
:
_.
- - _ _
a ~ _ . _. _ ___ ..
_, . _, .. _ _ ..___.. _- . _.___ . _
. .... ....... :
- ! ~ STA.. 23+00 : `` ' .
'
~
:~
-
_
: :: , .. EL. ':2.66.75: _ . ~ ,

.~
:
_
...._
.
____- _ .~-_.._.
_.
<: ..
.w..__._
_ ... ~ ~
.~ r:
_..~_ ~__~_ _
-: .._ . _. .. . .. ~ , BfGI~N,BRIDGE STA, 22+35.00 _
_ END a~ LATERa~ BASE OrTCH _. _ -

_._..~__..
.__ ._.
_ .. ;, STA 22+45 LT ELEV,=
~..._ ._,.._____.__.-__._,___
__ 258.00.
_,~ -...~ . `
_.._ __~_ -__-__ __ . _
__.~____.. _.-.___~r w_ ~___ .. _ ._
_ ..~ r __ _ __ ._ __ _ _ _

~_.__ .... ___ ___m..

-.
210 G.P. = 267.54 210
_ 3.00 % . _. _
..3.00 _
Z,1
. -_--_
------
2y
-- -
___
-.- ~
~ -
EP- - ----~
26
260
. _ _. ...
a _
, STA. 22+00
258.56. EL. 266.89
Z
"°
BEGlN 4.' LAT ERAL .BASE
.DITCH _ --- ... _ ... _ _ _ _ _ _
A~ STA. 22+00 LT. ELEV. = ,
258.56
.
,. -.
.. .....
/161

..
~.
PM
NM
PN
PN
MM :-
l0 .
60,_
5Q 40

.
:
30 ..' : 20

.. . -.
!0 : ~ -C- 10 20 . 30 40

~ ..
50 60 ; .
TO

. .
. ~
_,
J
-~_~_~~w~~ _ PRO1ECf AEffRENCE N0. SNEET N0.
8-4299 X-6
_ l0 6(1 ~ 50 _ _90 __.- 30 _ _20 ._ _.. _ _ !0 _ . ~ =L- . _ 10 : _ .20 . _ . _ 30 _ 40 : _ 50 _ _60 70
270 END CONSTRUCTION -L- STA. 26+04.00.
.
_ END SPECIAL LATERAL 'V' DITCN _ _ .
_
_
_
STA. 25+70 LT. ELfV. = 266.00 _ _
.
____ --- - - _._- 3i 3:~ EP EP
STA. . 25+50 '~.

260. 265.33
EL.
=.266.50 --
_..
-'----------
END PROJECT....-L- STA. 25+25.00.. _
_; _ _ G. P: = 267:21
2~d
270
_ . 0.83 ~ 4.02..% _ _
...
~ MATCH EXIST

-
---.. MATCH EXIST

_ -

- STA. 2:.5+00

260

-
?
EL.
267.00 ~

. _

_~
- - - - -

260
. _
.. 263.67 ;. _, '; .
r.
G.P. 2b6 94
=

270_m__
.._ _~_~..._.___ . ,. _ ; _ _.:. _ _ . _

. _.
~lD
_ , t.42 % __ 3.00/, .. _ _ ... .

~'
.
EP ~f _

260 ~ --------
-- --

_ `
3~
3i
_ EP ~`
~,_-
~
-_ --
----
-------- _-_~

' 260
STA. 24+5p _
' 262.00 EL. 266.7.3
G: P. = 266.90 ~ .._
2T0 ._ .. _v _ _
3.00 % 3.00 % _

_- _..

____ ~~

iEP

~~
~

~
_ _
~-
- - `
3 EP .

N
a
260 ~.~

_
... ..-.
--

. - .
.. _.. -

..
.-.. _.
~----
--------------_.
260
M

a . ....
.
7
- ._. ... .; .. _
261.1/.
BEGIN SPECIAL LATERAL 'Vt D1TCH STA.
... .. ...

24+00

... . - _ ......... -.... --.. ...... ., _.

a
-..
_. _.. __. STA.24f00 LT. EL, 266.65

p~
M _.
.. _. .. .. ... -
q
M
~ ..
. -. ..
..
-.
RN
JN
Ey .. .
...
~
-
flN

Aa
RM ~0
:~o
60 _ . . ~o
.~0 20
10

r
~ -~- l0
20
30
.~0 50 ~o
~0

r
7
- ' •
M EL. 285.61
a
a
u
w
e
N

..~
.,
.?
.'
•

c
a

N
~ N
M
M
. ~-r~-.-.~HtO1ELT REN3lENCE NO. SHOT NO. "
~_a.ui~ B-4299 X-B
Z0 . ~ 50 : 40 _ . 30 ~0 _ 10 _.._ __ ~ _ =DEI - ..10 . - 20 30 _ . _ 40 _ _ _ 50 _ 60 . ZO___
290 _ . _ . _. _ _ ~ . . _ _ _ - .. . _ ._ OA83
- -- - :0.033 - --- - - - 290
.0.077. L
~ _- -- ~i _
-_- -
_ __ _
_ . ----~ '~- j
\/ _
_ EP

ET
_
EP EP
280
... -_._... _ _.____ ._._._~_ __._
_._._ _ .. _ _
280-
_.

,STA.
13+50
MIl!& Resurfoce t%2" _ _____
_ EL. 288...61 _ _.
290
._

o6s

.OA4

90
_ __ _,_.,
-
_ . 0.062
~_
~---- - _
~
~_
~ - ._ -
_

~ I
EP
280
____ ...._ .... _ _ _ _
_ _. _ ::

_ _ _ _
280
__
Mill& Resurfocel%2" _

EL.
:- -
287.91
290
...__ _ _ _.. ~ _.____._ _, _..______ .a._ . __
_ ___,_._ _ _.._,_ _.~ __:. ~ __ __ .___. _ __ _ _. ___.__
_ _..~ _ _ _

290:
_ _

OA_57
', OA52
-
J OA2

- ._. ,
'~~ EP _ ET Ep EP _. _
280 _
_
_
_
280
STA. 12+50 _ Mi!! & Resurface l%p"
EL. 287.16
30. 40 50 _ 60 70

.=
. ~,
. i
- - ".. -..". .. .. MlOIFCE REffRENCE N0. SHEEf N0.
.. ~ 8-4299 X-9
_70 .. _ _ 60 50 _ _ _ 40v ~ _ . 30 _ 20 _ _ __ J0 ~~~_ ~ -DET. - !0 _ ~_ 20 30 _40 _ 50 _ . 60 _-_ - ZO

- . OA50 , - ,._------ -
290 _:
~~ _
~ 0,~5 ~
`_ ~~ - - -- 290
. _..
.~._ _ , _
. __ ~-- ----`
_
_

\ ~, ~- ,-

_ _ _ ._"~.__~_._._, __ EP_ v
~ _._. ~ ___..~._ _ _ ___
~ _ _~ ET

_ __ - EP..___...~

. P_.
E

..
STA. 15+00

280 ~~ _
_ _ ...._ __ __~ '~~ ~
~ ~EL. ~290.38 ~.
- ~ ~... _ .
_ _ ~ _...
_ ~ 280 .
. - . Mill & Resurfoce !%2'
---

290 -- _

_ _-: _ _ . ~~ . _..a ~ .
_

. ' ~._ .

~
_
, .

t-°=--
____ --
..0.043 .
ter-- ~
~, ~~-- _ _ T
--- -----'
~"~~ 1~

290
\
. _'
_-- -- .
-
~
/" ~
_
~/
_ _. _ _ ..__ EP._
_ - ET _ Ep _ _ Ep. _._

280: EL. Zs9.a6 280
` MHl & Resurface l/2'

_ r.~._,__ _. ~.M

290
____.._ a.._:___._.~_. _~.._n...._W__. _ ~~_ :_,_______.__:______
._._ ,

_._ .._____._..~.._w~.~ _ _ __

__._

~..~___ ~_,_._v.~
~

o~
~
._._.__..-~-_.._._.~. __. _.. __ _ _
OA38
,_.. r
~,._ _.

_.a__._.___ .__..... _.
__ _. __ _._
_- - - - -
290
__._ . _ _. _ ~ . _ __"__~.- ~- Fp._ _. _ _..~ - __ - ET _ _ Ep _ Ep

a STA. `14+0p
_.
a 280
_ EL. 289.2.7
- 280
Mill & Resurface I/2"

Z
~~
„«
„» _.
_.

_
~«
~„

_N

_ _ . _.
_ ,

_
,»
~~
~~
~~
~~
xa
. 70

. ..
60 50 _ 40 JO .:

.
20 _ 10
~ .-DEl- . 10 _ , _
_ 20 3Q . 40

_ _
_ 50 60 ~0_

-..
.;

. ,
. . ... - PAOkCF REFERENCE N0. SHEET N0.
8-4299 X-IO
_ To_... _ : aa__:._.:-_.~o _~ ~ ao_ __ 30 __ 2a _ __-__ra______ ~ -Q~r-_~~_io__ _ _ __2a ; _. 30 _ ~ ~_~o_ 5a _ __ so___~~'____~o ._.
-
___. __ ~__~ _
_ _ _ __
_
__t _ -

A44 _

_ _ ...
.__ ---- _
~

:
290
:

\ 4

o~ _._---
.
~y --
r-
'
'"
_

.
_ __ _..
- . _ .. _ __ _ _.
`.
_ :
_ _ .
_ .______ _._--- _ _ : _
-
_
~
_
~
_____ _ ~_ _ _~-~
_ --

- - .. _

.. ~._ _
_ - _ . 290
_ \ ~ EP _
ET EP El' _ _

STA. 16+50 _ _
280.--- _ _ EL. 29t.2o 28D

_

i ,. _
_ __

_~ MiIJ & Resurface J'/p
_ _

_

_ ... .
-

_. ~ ._ ..

290; - - -

\ -
_.
__

vim.

0~5 0.05

_

~ ~ ~~ ..
~~,045
z _..._

_:
_

__--- .~ ---
--
_ - J ,`. _-__._ ---
_ ._ ~

_

_ 290..
_

~ _
_.
~, ~ f _ _ EP _
ET
EP EP _ _ _

STA.. 16+00 __.
280 EL. 290.93 280
Mill & Resurface I/p"
- _
_. _ _..

290

\

~ _ ---- - -

_ ;. ~ ~-
_.
-
2,

--
_ _. -__ \_ _ .. _ __ . __.., __ _ . ~ ~ _ . _ -- --, ___.. _ _ _ _ . :290
\ `~ _
_ __ _.. __ ET_ EP _ _ ~R
_.. _ _
_ _:
» ..
STA.. t5+50
280
..v

_ ,
EL: 290.75

_.

-

280

_

' ,. ,
MIl1 & Resurface !'/z"
;.
r.._~._~_ - _
b
_. _ .. ,

91M

~a

.~
.w ,. ..
... .,- . .,,

20 IQ ~ -DET )0
.. _. -. .. ,. -

20 30 40
_. .. ...
..

50 . 60 70 .