The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20161131 Ver 1_B-5345 CE 11-12-15 FINAL_20161201Guilford County Bridge No. 456 on SR 2136 {Fleming Raad} over Brush Creek Federal Aid Praject No. BRSTP-2136{5) W,B. S.1'�o. 46059.1.1 T.Y.P. No. B-5345 �ATEGORICAL EXCLUSI{�N i7NITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIQhT FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMTI�ISTKATiON AN� NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP�RTATIQN DIVISIOI�T OF HIGHWAYS � r y � %/� `� A �,�Richard W. Hancock, PE �� f��anager, Project Develop�nent & EnvironmentaI t�nalysis Unit �i�� r� DATE o� �� .�.� � John F, Sullivan, III, Divisir�n Administrator Federal Highway �1ct�ninistration Guilford County Bridge No. 456 on SR 2136 (Fleming Road) over Brush Creek Federal Aid Projeet No. SRSTP-2136(5) `W,F.S. No. 46Q59.1.1 T.I.P. No. B�5345 �, �- -• �e� ,•`'��,Q�� E S��(��. 2 q¢� � y, Q3�9E 74 �� r, � `s� �'�G E��`' �kr�: �N �'••�N , . �...�i��a CATEGORICAL EXCLUSYON November 2D 15 Dacumentatian Prepared By. � � Kimley-Horn and AssQciates, Inc. 3001 lAles�an Parl�.way Cary, Nor%h Carolina 27513 �� i11��i��5 Aaron M. Heustess, PE DAT� Project PIanning Engineer For the North Carolina Department of Transportation ' ��.. , N�t�1 LOG�f17�Tt Project Planning Engineer f ` In everly G. R ' san Projeet Devel ment Group Supervisor 1 � I � /� D E PROJECT COMMITMENTS Guilford County Bridge No. 456 on SR 2136 (Fleming Road) over Brush Creek Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-2136(5) WBS No. 46059.1.1 TIP Project No. B-5345 All standard procedures and measures, including NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters, Guidelines for Best Management Practices for Bridge Demolition and Removal, will be implemented, as applicable, to avoid or minimize environmental impacts. The following special commitments have been agreed to by NCDOT: Commitments Developed through Project Development and Design Hvdraulic Unit — FEMA Coordination The Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program (FMP) to determine the status of the proj ect with regard to applicability of NCDOT' S Memorandum of Agreement, or approval of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of Map Revision (LOMR). NCDOT Division 7 Construction — FEMA This project involves construction activities on or adjacent to FEMA-regulated stream(s). Therefore, the Division shall submit sealed as-built construction plans to the Hydraulics Unit upon completion of project construction, certifying that the drainage structure(s) and roadway embankment that are located within the 100-year floodplain were built as shown in the construction plans, both horizontally and vertically. NCDOT Division 7 Construction — Onsite Detour This project involves construction of a temporary onsite detour. Once the onsite detour is no longer required, the Division shall remove the temporary bridge and approach roadway used for the onsite detour. The area occupied by the temporary onsite detour shall be restored. Hvdraulic Unit, Natural Environment Section — Buffer Rules This project is in the Jordan Lake Watershed and will adhere to the associated Buffer Rules. Proiect Development and Environmental Analvsis Unit — Natural Environment Section The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has developed a programmatic biological opinion (PBO) in conjunction with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and NCDOT for the northern long-eared bat (NLEB) (Myotis septentrionalis) in eastern North Carolina. The PBO covers the entire NCDOT program in Divisions 1-8, including all NCDOT projects and activities. The programmatic determination for B-5345 Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 2 November 12, 2015 PROJECT COMMITMENTS NLEB for the NCDOT program is May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect. The PBO provides incidental take coverage for NLEB and will ensure compliance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for five years for all NCDOT projects with a federal nexus in Divisions 1-8, which includes Guilford County, where B-5345 is located. This level of incidental take is authorized from the effective date of a final listing determination through Apri130, 2020. B-5345 Categorical Exclusion Page 2 of 2 November 12, 2015 Guilford County Bridge No. 456 on SR 2136 (Fleming Road) over Brush Creek Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-2136(5) W.B.S. No. 46059.1.1 T.I.P. No. B-5345 INTRODUCTION: Bridge No. 456 is included in the current North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion." I. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT NCDOT Bridge Management Unit 2015 records indicate Bridge No. 456 has a sufficiency rating of 53.94 out of a possible 100 far a new structure. The bridge is considered functionally obsolete according to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) standards. The 2013 records reported a sufficiency rating of 22 out of 100, which FHWA defines as a structurally deficient and functionally obsolete bridge. The increase in the sufficiency rating has been investigated and determined to be correct. The increased rating is due to a change in the definition of temporary shoring, which removes the temporary status of the crutch bents. According to the NCDOT Bridge Management Unit, the crutch bents cause narrowing of the waterway and likely present drift issues during times of higher water flow. Therefore, they believe it is appropriate to keep the bridge on the replacement list despite the increased sufficiency rating. Bridge No. 456 has a fifty-three year old timber substructure which has a typical life expectancy between 40 to 50 years due to the natural deterioration rate of wood. Rehabilitation of a timber structure is generally practical only when a few members are damaged or prematurely deteriorated. However, past a certain degree of deterioration, timber structures become impractical to maintain and upon eligibility are programmed for replacement. Bridge No. 456 is approaching the end of its useful life. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS The project is located on SR 2136 (Fleming Road) just northwest of the City of Greensboro, approximately four miles south of the Town of Summerfield (see Figure 1). Land uses surrounding the project are large tracts of forest to the north and east and medium-density residential neighborhoods to the south and west (see Figure 2). SR 2136 (Fleming Road) is classified as a rural local route in the Statewide Functional Classification System. It is not a National Highway System route. In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 2136 (Fleming Road) has a 24-foot pavement width with 2- foot grass shoulders. The roadway grade is in a sag vertical curve through the project area. The B-5345 Categorical Exclusion existing bridge is on a tangent. The roadway is situated approximately 15 feet above the creek bed. Bridge No. 456 is a three-span structure that consists of an asphalt overlay on a corrugated steel deck on steel I-beams. It is supported by end bents made of steel cap and pile and interior bents made of timber cap and pile that are reinforced with crutch bents. The existing bridge was constructed in 1962. The overall length of the structure is 76 feet. The clear roadway width is 24.0 feet. The posted weight limit on this bridge is 22 tons for single vehicles and 30 tons for truck tractor semi-trailers (TTSTs). There are no utilities attached to the existing structure. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) has a stream gauging station located at the north end of the existing structure. Overhead high tension transmission power lines cross SR 2136 (Fleming Road) approximately 350' south of the existing bridge. Sanitary sewer (City of Greensboro) crosses SR 2136 (Fleming Road) south of the existing bridge. There is an existing water line (City of Greensboro) located along the western shoulder of SR 2136 (Fleming Road). Bellsouth fiber optic markers and Piedmont Natural Gas lines are located along the eastern shoulder of SR 2136 (Fleming Road). The current traffic volume of 5,700 vehicles per day (VPD) is expected to increase to 9,900 VPD by the year 2040. The projected volume includes one percent truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) and two percent dual-tired (DT) vehicles. The posted speed limit is 45 miles per hour in the project area. Eighteen school buses cross the bridge on their morning and afternoon routes daily. There were two crashes reported in the vicinity of Bridge No. 456 during a recent three-year period (December 1, 2008 to November 30, 2011). Neither of the two accidents were associated with the alignment or geometry of the bridge or its approach roadway. This section of SR 2136 (Fleming Road) is designated as a bicycle/pedestrian facility by the City of Greensboro in accordance with the Greensboro Urban Area Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenway Master Plan (October 2006) and the Greensboro Urban Area 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan (2003). The existing bridge does not have any bicycle or pedestrian accommodations. However, permanent bicycle/pedestrian facilities will be included with this project. III. ALTERNATIVES A. Preferred Alternative Bridge No. 456 will be replaced on the existing alignment while traffic is maintained on a temporary two lane onsite detour alignment to the east side (see Figures 3-5). The permanent replacement structure will be a bridge approximately 85 feet long providing a minimum 33'-6" clear deck width with a concrete overlay. The bridge will include two 12- foot lanes and 4'-9" shoulders. The bridge length is based on preliminary design information B-5345 Categorical Exclusion and is set by hydraulic requirements. The roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately the same as the existing structure. The approach roadway will extend approximately 330 feet from the south end of the new bridge and 325 feet from the north end of the new bridge. The approaches will include a 24- foot pavement width providing two 12-foot lanes. Six-foot shoulders (four-foot paved and two-foot grass) will be provided on each side. Where guardrail is included 9-foot shoulders will be provided. The roadway will be designed as a Rural Local using Sub-Regional Tier Guidelines with a 50 mile per hour design speed. A design exception for sag vertical curve and associated nighttime stop sight distance will be required. The total length of the onsite detour alignment is 754 feet. The detour alignment will utilize a temporary 65 foot long 28' foot wide bridge carrying two 12-foot wide lanes of traffic. Although the environmental impacts are higher for the replace in-place with an onsite detour alternative compared with an offsite detour alternative, the almost 5 mile offsite detour would significantly impact the school buses and vehicular traffic utilizing SR 2136 (Fleming Road). Given the use of SR 2136 (Fleming Road) by school buses and emergency vehicles, the delay created by the detour is undesirable. NCDOT Division 7 concurs that the preferred alternative is a replace in-place with an onsite detour. B. Alternatives Eliminated from Further Consideration The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not acceptable due to the traffic service provided by SR 2136 (Fleming Road). "Rehabilitation" of the existing bridge is not practical due to its age and deteriorated condition. Bridge No. 456 has a sufficiency rating of 53.94 out of a possible 100 for a new structure, and the bridge is considered functionally obsolete. Bridge No. 456 is approaching the end of its useful life. Staged Construction is not possible with replacement of this bridge because the structure of the existing two-lane bridge does not provide opportunity to replace in-place only one lane at a time. Alternative 1 was eliminated due to the length of its offsite detour and the associated impacts on school bus and vehicular traffic. Alternative 3 was eliminated due to the cost to upgrade SR 3227 (Brass Eagle Loop Road) to a suitable detour route. B-5345 Categorical Exclusion IV. ESTIMATED COSTS The estimated functional design costs, based on 2014 prices, are listed in Table 1: Table 1. Pro'ect Cost Estimates Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Offsite Detour Onsite Detour Detour (Preferred) on SR 3227 Structure $ 345,000 $ 345,000 $ 345,000 RoadwayApproaches 156,830 364,690 457,122 Detour Structure and Approaches - 0- 142,150 232,800 Structure Removal 27,000 27,000 27,000 Misc. & Mob. 141,170 266,160 317,078 Eng. & Contingencies 105,000 180,000 221,000 Total Construction Cost $775,000 $ 1,325,000 $ 1,600,000 Ri ht-of-wa Costs - $20,000 - Ri ht-of-wa Utilit Costs - $172,192 - Total Project Cost $775,000 $1,517,192 $1,600,000 V. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Natural resources in the project study area were reviewed in the field in March 2012 and documented in a Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) (June 2012), incorporated by reference. This section includes a summary of the existing conditions, as well as the potential environmental impacts of the alternatives. A full version of the NRTR can be viewed at the Project Development & Environmental Analysis Unit located at Century Center Bldg. A, 1000 Birch Ridge Drive, Raleigh, NC. Physical Characteristics Water Resources Water resources in the study area are part of the Cape Fear River Basin [United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit 03030002]. Two streams were identified in the study area — Brush Creek [NC Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) Index Number 16-11- 4-(1) and an unnamed tributary (UT) to Brush Creek. Brush Creek (Assessment Unit No. 16- 11-4-[1]a3 is listed in the 2014 303(d) List of Impaired Waters for North Carolina. It is listed for Fair Benthos and Fish Communities and Fish Tissue Mercury. Table 2. Water Resources Stream Map Best Bank Bankfull Water Channel Flow Clarity Name ID Usage Height Width Depth Substrate Class. (ft) (ft) (in) Brush Creek SA WS-III; 3-4 25 6-15 Sand Slow Clear NSW UT to Brush SB WS-III; 1 3 4-12 Silt, Sand Slow Turbid Creek NSW B-5345 Categorical Exclusion 4 Biotic Resources Terrestrial communities in the study area can be classified as Maintained/Disturbed, Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest, or Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest. Detailed descriptions of these community types and species observed in the study area can be found in the NRTR. Table 3. Terrestrial Communities Community Coverage acres Maintained/Disturbed 4.6 Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest 1.1 Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 1.1 Total 6.8 Jurisdictional Topics Surface Waters and Wetlands Two jurisdictional streams were identiiied within the project study area. NCDWR and US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) stream identification forms are contained in the NRTR. The physical characteristics and water quality designation of these streams are detailed above. These streams have been designated as warm water streams for the purposes of stream mitigation. Table 4. Stream Summa Map ID Length (ft) Classification SA 240 Perennial SB 34 Internuttent Total 274 Compensatory Mitigation Required Yes No River Basin Buffer Subj ect Subi ect Four jurisdictional wetlands were identified within the study area. Wetland classification and quality rating data are presented in the following table. All wetlands in the study area are within the Cape Fear River basin. USACE wetland delineation forms and NCDWR wetland rating forms for each site are contained in the NRTR. All wetland sites are located within the Piedmont/Low Mountain Alluvial Forest community. B-5345 Categorical Exclusion Table 5. Wetland Su Map ID WA WB WC WD NCWAM Classification Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bottomland Hardwood Forest Bottomland Hardwood Forest Permits Hydrologic NCDWR Classi�cation Wetland Riparian 35 Riparian 35 Riparian 38 Riparian � 26 Total Area (acres) 0.18 0.13 0.02 0.08 0.41 The proposed project has been designated as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) for the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation. As a result of limited environmental impacts, a Nationwide Permit (NWP) 23 will likely be applicable. A NWP No. 33 may also apply for temporary construction activities such as stream dewatering, work bridges, or temporary causeways that are often used during bridge construction or rehabilitation. The USACE holds the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project construction. If a Section 404 permit is required, then a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWR will be needed. Federally Protected Species As of March 25, 2015, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists one federally protected species for Guilford County. A brief description of this species' habitat requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the current best available information as per referenced literature and/or USFWS. Table 6. Federa Scientific Name � Isotria medeoloides T=Threatened Protected Small Whorled Pogonia Common Name Small whorled Federal Habitat Biological Status Present Conclusion T No No Effect Habitat Requirements: The small whorled pogonia occurs in young as well as maturing (second to third successional growth) mixed-deciduous or mixed-deciduous/coniferous forests. It does not appear to exhibit strong affinities for a particular aspect, soil type, or underlying geologic substrate. In North Carolina, the perennial orchid is typically found in open, dry deciduous woods and is often associated with white pine and rhododendron. The species may also be found on dry, rocky, wooded slopes; moist slopes; ravines lacking stream channels; or slope bases near braided channels of vernal streams. The orchid, often limited by shade, requires small light gaps or canopy breaks, and typically grows under canopies that are relatively open or near features like logging roads or streams that create long- persisting breaks in the forest canopy. B-5345 Categorical Exclusion Biological Conclusion: No Effect. Suitable habitat for small whorled pogonia is not present in the study area. The Mesic Mixed Hardwood Farest does not appear to include suitable persistent breaks. A review of North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) records on September 14, 2015 indicated no known occurrences within 1.0 miles of the study area. Northern long-eared bat The USFWS designated the northern long-eared bat (NLEB) (Myotis septentrionalis) as a threatened species effective May 4, 2015. The USFWS has developed a programmatic biological opinion (PBO) in conjunction with the FHWA, the USACE, and NCDOT for the NLEB in eastern North Carolina. The PBO covers the entire NCDOT program in Divisions 1-8, including all NCDOT projects and activities. The programmatic determination for NLEB far the NCDOT program is May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect. The PBO provides incidental take coverage for NLEB and will ensure compliance with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for five years for all NCDOT projects with a federal nexus in Divisions 1-8, which includes Guilford County, where B-5345 is located. Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open water. A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-mile radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on Apri13, 2012 using 2010 color aerials. Lake Higgins (a water body large enough and sufficiently open to be considered a potential feeding source) was identified within this search radius. A survey of the project study area and the area within 660 feet of the project limits was conducted on April 10, 2012. No bald eagle nests were observed within this search polygon. A review of the NCNHP database on September 14, 2015 revealed no known occurrences of this species within 1.0 mile of the project study area. Due to the lack of observed nests or known occurrences and minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined that this project will not affect this species. VL HUMAN ENVIRONMENT Section 106 Compliance Guidelines This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at Title 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 afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings. B-5345 Categorical Exclusion 7 Historic Architecture NCDOT — Human Environment Section, under the provisions of a Programmatic Agreement with FHWA, NCDOT, Historic Preservation Office (HPO), Office of State Archaeology (OSA) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (effective July 1, 2009), reviewed the proposed project and determined that no historic properties are located within the project's area of potential effect and that no surveys are required (see form dated January 4, 2012 in the Appendix). Archaeology NCDOT — Human Environment Section, under the provisions of a Programmatic Agreement with FHWA, NCDOT, HPO, OSA and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (effective July 1, 2009), reviewed the proposed project and determined that no prehistoric or historic properties are located within the project's area of potential effects and that no surveys are required (see form dated January 10, 2012 in the Appendix). Community Impacts No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition will be limited. No relocations will result from implementation of the proposed alternative. There are no public facilities in the project area, and therefore no effect on public facilities or services is expected. The project is not expected to affect social, economic, or religious opportunities in the area. 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. The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to consider the potential impact to prime farmland of all land acquisition and construction projects. Because there are soils classified as prime, unique, or having state or local importance in the vicinity of the project, the project will affect farmland acreage within these classifications. A preliminary screening with the AD 1006 form resulted in a score of 16 points out of 160. A preliminary score of less than 60 cannot result in a notable impact on protected farmland soils. The project will not have a disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effect on any minority or low-income population. Noise & Air Quality This project is an air quality neutral project in accordance with 40 CFR 93.126. It is not required to be included in the regional emissions analysis (if applicable) and project level CO or PM2.5 analyses are not required. This project will not result in any meaningful changes in B-5345 Categorical Exclusion 8 traffic volumes, vehicle mix, location of the existing facility, or any other factor that would cause an increase in emissions impacts relative to the no-build alternative. Therefore, FHWA has determined that this project will generate minimal air quality impacts for Clean Air Act criteria pollutants and has not been linked with any special mobile source air toxics (MSAT) concerns. Consequently, this effort is exempt from analysis for MSATs. Any burning of vegetation shall be performed in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Noise levels may increase during project construction; however, these impacts are not expected to be substantial considering the relatively short-term nature of construction noise and the limitation of construction to daytime hours. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby natural elements and man-made structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of intrusive construction noise. This project has been determined to be a Type III Noise Project and therefore, no traffic noise analysis is required to meet the requirements of 23 CFR 772. VII. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations. The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human environment with the use of the current NCDOT standards and specifications. The proposed project will not require right-of-way acquisition or permanent easement from any land protected under Section 4(� of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, and will not constitute a use of any Section 4(� lands. The Health and Environmental Risk Assessment provided that the closest groundwater contamination incident was at Cardinal Country Club at 5700 Cardinal Way. The incident is approximately 1,830 feet upgradient from the proposed bridge replacement and should not affect, nor be affected by, the proposed bridge replacement. The incident was remediated and closed on June 24, 2002. An examination of local, state, and federal regulatory records by the GeoEnvironmental Section revealed no sites with a Recognized Environmental Concern (REC) within the project limits. RECs are most commonly underground storage tanks, dry cleaning solvents, landfills and hazardous waste disposal areas. Guilford County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program. There are no practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area. Any shift in alignment will result in an impact area of about the same magnitude. The proposed project is not anticipated to increase the level or extent of upstream flood potential. B-5345 Categorical Exclusion VIII. COORDINATION & AGENCY COMMENTS NCDOT has sought input from the following agencies as a part of the project development: Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), N.0 Wildlife Resource Commission, N.C. Division of Parks and Recreation, Piedmont Triad Council of Governments, County of Guilford, and the City of Greensboro. The only project specific comment received was from Guildford County Schools. They expressed concern about the offsite detour alternatives due to increased bus route times and the safety of buses traveling on narrow detour routes. Response: The onsite detour alternative is being proposed. General responses from the EPA and USFWS are included in the Appendix. IX. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT A letter was sent by the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit to all property owners affected directly by this project on February 23, 2012. Property owners were invited to comment. No comments have been received to date. There is not substantial controversy on social, economic, or environmental grounds concerning the project. X. CONCLUSION On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental impacts will result from implementation of the project. The project is therefore considered to be a federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope and lack of substantial environmental consequences. B-5345 Categorical Exclusion 10 Figures B-5345 Categorical Exclusion � Project B-5345 City of Greensboro Town of Summerfield ❑ City of Greensboro Guilford County Figure 1 Project Location Bridge No. 456 on SR 2136 (Fleming Rd) over Brush Creek Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-2136(5) W.B.S. No. 46059.1.1 NCDOT Project B-5345 . , .- . . ; � ��t,� � . `� . ,"+a � , •� � � �f . % � . . � i� . .,� � ,� � � �' " , ", . . . . p . � . s � . � , �+ ��►�. 'ti' � � y ' �'� � , �` '.I�, �. � � r� _ � � " �1j ��, N •�t�'•:.r."`1� "� . 4w�� +�t,, �I},� �1'�'� �a� �� . �� * � R . � . � . ^4; . � � ' ,�},. ` ` 1y ��'Sp�T'.° r ' l..�' � � '�` ' � + + � ^ �, •��,�,. � ' „ ��` � �� ., .. * �i � i� ` �� s�`. � '� �� ♦ �1�, � �"' R � ' � � �•�� ` �'-� �� .�_ �r ' ;��?�: �,� r• _ r w� �, ' � �. . . �� .. �r �. �y - � �"'.a� � ��lt t r� �.• � � �.�I �. �� ; � �,. . ." "` • _ '." � , � 'i � { _ �� i .�� ' ., � � \ �. ��,'�+°y�t�r ; � � .'°!'� - ,�''` �"�; .eti� ' �� l j ` ,j �'�Iyy � � t „ �#'. 'C � k ' �� a � � � ,�} iC,�� • � � �+�, ° : . �''` , � '�:''^�v 'y , ` ' i �, � ,� *�' '.Iv'+ �'t 1. ��r . T"� � '�, . �' �� "- .r � ►; �. ,� �� 1 3 . � ", � �� . +� �'7g . � �' ' ��,�s,,A��` , . ' 3,+ `�� w• ��1 � � � �1 �,.� � ," . �'�� , ,p �� ,�, . �'�,�,f, ,� ;� ,.. �c�F,� ;,�'�` , ,�, � ✓ � S `� ' '.`'4'' �a .*Y , 'T �• r � ��' �.��, �� A' �'� s .� �; � i . _ � � 4 ,�y 1,_ � �,�'+�' � a,� .��y��,1' � i �4; - }��,,;'�+s� �i �, �f � � , iti�� ,1.. cQ�c �i'; 7 w, � � / +r �Z., i� � i � *� ,� � ' �" � � � 'k t � : G.� � �'� .� � � ^ �` j �� Si• �- " ,+, -� 2136 . w �� t� , ` �" 3' � ; s�,p� ,,rj�� , � y �r . ; � . 'R �, "T : ,� �k �'., , �" . ��<p I ; �� 1� r,�. � •��t��. �y -.L �' ��0�' ,�a ✓ ".�,- -rt ,� T�,�'� �1, ,��•y; �� , � ry� l��. � � ��"�� ,. �r � :�� + � 1[ � { y � '�� !� . '-�'� ' °�. �� -�r. .;.�7�� ` _ ' y'� �. '�!{,. � f. �y ;.�� - � �.�� .. ��i.� �t � ''i, �� i� � ��a: ^} �� .�� i� . �.•� �Ir � '.�� ♦ Lp��T V� �� .�. *� �, � � � ; ,�+; ,; f, ; 3 � � .- �► � A��7� w �` � �. ;� �, Q, `. '�� r� � ,a; � . w �, � � � ��` �� 4�^�, �' � '�� , �� ° y r �, " . k� ' ,�� ' �1• • } �4, ` � • � ,�!��.� r �1�. �1� � �� i' "r�, �w � �� •� . 'v. `! ;��• '� + � �� -7� ?'�,, �, +� � > �. � '�,} �. �� -�` � r„ . �, �� ,, t �`� � .� � y'�, t � 3 a � o ° '� } �a '� - , v � �� , ��'�`A f �� ,c '�1► , y�F� �, � ,1�. ;�� .�. ��" `r �� ,s �► f "`'�F'� i��'�� -�. � � �� ,p� ,� � . . � � . xk . � '� �a�� , � �� YY �°, ; '';'r ' .r � . � �1,�'!�� a � �'->� ;K f'� k + y, �"' ` G`�; � , / �� ,� ^� , t� � f�; � �ji h ,.."11�.�, � ��l.♦�, yy ,1 r;.��f..��"��,. ta } � * ._.�.� �� '�1 � �. � ��i �` ��#� YF �Y,, p'' a . r•, �� • � r.��. � �`a "_(,� '• ` � `�'�� , I��•.�t'�� 3,C�, ��`�1�'��'S� �� `�� x��, h 1 �� `.��!�'-►�. � 'I�/� '.a . 1� ` �f "�/' .�(��. � �� '� r �!S �t� �+►�y�r; � „ � . � � ,� ; •3�� •� �fi , . - '�' . . ` ',t"' �� r•- • �- — I � � ;� I�// t . � � � � -� 9 `,r��tv � ��i� - , �. � � �� ^ � j � /� • � � ! � �F �a r ' f �,� r �. �. ` � •�,,`"�;' � �y, �l ��' 1�.�:� j� y�" ��,c ,,1 ��'�� , • � ��1 , �� a � !1 '�k,- * _ �� •� �: • ° �'�+' �. *` •� • �' '�t� �� +� ``�� r � � r � 1� . � ;� - � 1�� ; �,1I �� . � i^�+ � r r � �? � � � . :,�,� �� r �' � 2136 _ , � •. F�� Y�. � t ' . � ,� "�„ -,,��,� f� `,1 , � � . � '� � �!' � �r � �' � 's�: � � � , . �, � , ,�r. � � e�� .►��, �t� , ��- , , t � � 4 ��, i � �' 'x' �� '� a ,�, �_ :�,'�. ;�'''.�;� �° �� ,� � :�' ; 7.., �"'►�' "1 � ; !� �; `'`� � �� #'* �,�. >1� ��" �"�, �. , t �"+1. ,�` �Y; �'y .� �� '�.�',�� ry �f �''` , '� t;,�»� � �' ; ��,�,� :.� � , �, n. � � . , � , , , _ .> . J�� j/, ,,�.�� : �r� �� "i .�� .',� ,�� A� � ��. �,.� � ^ � r ��' �� . � "y��' ��_ • �i '�� t - . ,�:� � Project B-5345 �I 500-Year Floodplain '�"�, � d* � � � � . �e, �( +, .� �.• � t- � Stream � 100-Year Floodplain �� Feet � Floodway ',�� Y 0 500 1,000 _. . � � .� , Figure 2 Study Area Bridge No. 456 on SR 2136 (Fleming Road) over Brush Creek Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-2136(5) W.B.S. No. 46059.1.1 NCDOT Project B-5345 . � p;•� r � -�� S �.. '� � � � v � � 1 ` �C, � - ��• r •�p-A�}� � '�� ,�,,y,'�, � �� r ,rn. � i..: \ � � W � t � I Y .�' � " r��'�;, .� ° �y, . �o F N r w , f 1' � `�° ;� � �j . . � � F 4 `Y� �,� _ � . ., ` �� . `_ `�y. „�'� ,. , l �.G ` , �+... r� ��: �.�. .�\�� . � + �v �` �.} a�%. � ' ,\ ``', a '�.. I `• �� ' f•, � �~y `y�� .• �}��`' {• w" ' � ,��. � � \ • . � ��t � �`` ��- %''�� \ •I� � R.� �`��I � • �',� . �' �.w.� Ax�.'� b � _ � ';,34, 'q' � ,, - � �' ' '� ' �" K'� • ,� .� . . JQ� � � ��' •'1' 4a` �.�r ti \ `� �4 `j�'. /' t� � ' .i�`�' � YG, .� � . y�ti � ,�1 ��r � ' � x �'�� . r"�;"• ' �� .�y:� ' • yM'� j�r : � ,� ., � � ?� i ' Y �� . �-�i � � � , "°( �a. �� .t . �� ,�*' � � { _.`�� w � � �� ' 'r ,S � . � ^�a� �� } a�l�'i'? � , •� ;''* ' ` .. . � . t ��,C� ' `t, T 1�'- .. •. �` L;,�� '�:i�`��`}•:�, � �t . � . 's'..• .. � a�! , �{ G�A , ` ! �' ` ti • ,�``� Z; t' ` . ' ': :'�"' "' �� '� 1 � , ��,r`- +w l _ � � I 2136 `► A, ' � - .°� � . � • �._�i a'�',a�-�. �' ` . w�� `� • J �, co� �*: . ;, '�.�^' � � ' , is , . �� •{ � ��ji} � :,y�� ` � .K,�^,�,�y, _ � � , -� , � . �. S �,. �n, � • �, �O� - t�i�� ;� � ��'� � ♦�' ' 1� R � 4 ^ ` • . + �., • �w Q' Y �J' �J; �i ; tP ' �. 'e � �' , r� - �. � _ 1� -,�- ��'. , , a c � u S� _ � - r , . ""� '� ,d ' �.� �i e � � � , �y�'ry! .� 9'`y/ t '� . * ; w' ° r r •��. e' 't'. N ..,, Y ` "\`; " �' r�.1f� � ti -j"T= t' Y ,�-• . - �' . �' ��p � _l'� ' � 1r� � T�4Z� , �' . �� ,•� `` ~��4 . ' ' M '�^ W' � ► .�� +�ii� , . � y� :"�'l . , J � �t �. b � : . ''i� �' at• , . 'ix ! �r � � � ,,. j ,, ` , • . .�• .�, '[. yi► �� '°� r:a � i� .�r,�i�` ;,, �� ,,.u� �� _ � 4 �� \ . 1 • 1 l� `�� 1 \ �! � � � • ]��. ��- �•`� �:\ A.•• �' ' ' - � � � � � ��. `�, � W r.� �,� � � �.Te porar,y Bridge L�ocation �;�,� � ,,�- � � ,. �,;�A �� . � , _ . , . , � � .� ��r� ` . * �.� � _,, �,��, �' � • . � `'' ,E�, K '� +��,� � �:. i. � �+ � ;�t: � ..� � .:� �. .vl, . ! �+ ;�r � � , � '' � ; . . . 4 *,�� _, _ � . . . . „ - ._�# _V �M.�, . . �'�1 -_ 'y � ��4a. _., �.w�y�, �. t ��" .�'�1"�J .� �P.. '�?� . �+'�1t,�,�- .��.. �l ��e��'�' �"� .. �� e� . M �"ti ,�` �� -,,.I�W�'.� .h�� • ��J �i,� � f . . y ' q..,�� . ��'-I �i_�T r�' .✓�i i��4 i �. � �\i. I.. � � ��+�,, � :LL � `�% 2136 ��++'" irt 't ; � � �. �C' ,�, * �, a;+ ��. - r• �y � e . * i,� ' 'r �'r!' ^f �,;' r� F ` �, + �'� 4 � •�� ', � � �� '��l� � `y: r {'� � �Ly 4 r � � fi "�j '!�� ,Mj� �i �. 1� •,Lt� . ..}', . , 0. '�ti: j_�. �1�, �'� ,C' 1 ��i�, � • �' �� t '�, a ��' z�`'� .� �y� „ � �. �� i *}�i.� \ ` . N �� ` R {+� � 1», 1�� ! ?' ,`�a >� �;` •... `a1- 'S , el►' - S -a� `ik. � +�� `' -.� 3 ��1�•. .'�' �� , ''� h \i�^ � h r _ ,.�, �r� � � "T � � 's� "f+ �•. . '� �1��t .�,. t��' � ' �e � '� ' � +� � Y � �� • ' �, , } , + � \;`'� ��' , • � 'r� ` . .� �'''� � .. '`k t .. �� \ ..IR �''' ; � y � ,V�i`ti. �-' ��Si��. y�U{ . fM. .�'�' t .y, `�',� - ' . 3C . 1�' tf. t � � 1 � � . , "l 1 t . r� `' .-r � i.�y� �� r`S t f,`�r "�j .. �'. A�• � ��. .r�+ { "� � - , � ,�} ��a� }`. r , i C`. � �.. i�., . .. \..` ,; ., r� , �., ,�' � .r " � * Y'�, ��j. ��I�� , 'M � �v� - � �� ' �` .� .`i ,t� ;�.' ., �� t�' Feet " �"��.; ;��. . �'��\��s�� . ` ' �`' ' 0 150 300 > -, .. � ,. o� �"T+� � Proposed Approach Slab Figure 3 �� Roadway Design . Proposed Edge of Travel gridge No. 456 on SR 2136 (Fleming Road) over Brush Creek � � Proposed Paved Shoulder Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-2136(5) �9''� � W.B.S. No. 46059.1.1 �N'� °� �'"�'S Proposed Roadway Bridge NCDOT Project B-5345 � -L- �SR Z13fij FLENII�J(; RD r' -3` � I 4'-9' z-e� METAL RAJL Wf7'H PARAPET Roadway Typical Section r� � � -L- FLEMI�IG RC3AD �5R �13G] .�3, _6. GRADE ��' _ I � �'-9" � !I Ii � . �� 36' r� BQx BE�aM UN�7"S � 3"—C]"CTS BridgeTypical Section 2-�3aR METAL RAfL Wlil-i' PARAPET Figure 4 Typical Sections Bridge No. 456 on SR 2136 (Fleming Road) over Brush Creek Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-2136(5) W.B.S. No. 46059.1.1 NCDOT Project B-5345 � _ � :`� �,.��x � �; : .. . � �i ti+ x �� +i, G�'�' , � . �,1 � F { + �k � � � � `�1 ¢�I' p�'� �^�..,.�„�' -. �.{ � 1 � J �, � ;,� ;r' ` `�, ,4 , � y1 a'�C� � s �" :� `y' ; �t � � ;� , � � . - h�S�i , �'i ��'� _i�,' ' � � � �a�� _ . � A�` � ; � ��;�� i.�- ..' ». ` _ � rt�� _ �'� - _ _ -,: ,,., _ .�_ _ . -. =�-�_ --_ —�, � "� ,. _ _ _ ��+ �,�' . . - �..- -; , � - ,r:� �, ;��= rr,: " °-�� -�� i � 4 �4 �;, q- l� . � sE .� r� Y ' � F.t}. , °� f.� .. � SR 2136 (Fleming Road) Approach Roadway Looking North � i. . � � . .Y�.i,_� �. . „� � - •e � - p +'� `► SR 2136 (Fleming Road) Bridge Approach Looking North Y w :, s . �� t, �;� �,; �._�_._ �, ;�. �- '�'� �� E r x .i► •� �"'�Itfi�t��'��.a �� ivry.� ' , +ai: F'i�, -"T�'_ _ r .i ' L �� '� ;�� i�.'�k i �,,�" ��'�'' �F . .. . . ��aS �'.�'x �- ,, . .' _ .�.:a� . �F, Y�rx 'l .��, .,��. � � SR 2136 (Fleming Road) Bridge Substructure Lookina North � a Fi �� rA h/ � �� f "' � �i r�� ., 't i �. t �- , � y t� " ��y �� 1,._ . \ f _ f h V �1 �f � � t �`�✓� y��l+ � �� Hi � �� a� {{ �� f,�,,� � ' � ��: ��°' �,�� I �, _. j� 1 .- � 'h1'... '. � _�� .� _ � � ;-� �_ � �.._ ,�- .y.' :sk .. , _ �_ _ � �. �. � � �*=;-,:, . �A �� ,i� � ��' �.. SR 2136 (Fleming Road) Approach Roadway Looking South SR 2136 (Fleming Road) Bridge Approach Looking South , ,� . ,_, �`"� � `��-� � `� , . � � r G ..� � ,. I 'I y , Yf; �p A. �� 'f' ��,r�, . � � r�� ,+ �� ' ' } ' �c I �� i ��%}� d�� P ��l 1 r, �� "� ; ��j � �� I I I �w�' � rat �` ? '� � '�� r, � 4�;. k ��x � �' ' ir ° �'�: � �� I' . .,t�• _ - . - �.� . . . .- , .r ,i SR 2136 (Fleming Road) Bridge Lookina North Figure 5 PIIOtOS Bridge No. 456 on SR 2136 (Fleming Road) over Brush Creek Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-2136(5) W.B.S. No. 46059.1.1 NCDOT Project B-5345 Appendix B-5345 Categorical Exclusion NO SUR�EY REQUIRED FQRM PRdJECT IliTFORMATION Praject No: AjBS No: $-5345 4b059.1.I Gaunt}�: Document. ProjectTrackingNa. (l�ternal Use) __.. �._»_�..._ i ,---1i-12-Q026 � _ � Guilford PC� or CE F.A. No: BRSTP-2136{Sj Funding: ❑ State � Fe�leral Federal {U�'�10E) Pet�nitRequired? ❑ Yes ❑ No Permit Type: Unknown Project Descraption: Replacement of Bridge No. 456 an SR �l 36 (Fleining Road) over Brush C�eek, presumably in kind with off-site detours although a c�etour route is unknawn at this time, lUlinor ditch- line irrrpacts may be expected. Area of Potential Effects (APE} has been drawn as a 20(i fi. corridor, measuring appro�cimately 1,500 ft. 1ong. Permit information is unknown at this time. The bridge was built in 1953 and is eansidered to he structurally deficient. SUMMARY OF CiTLT[]RAL RESOURCES REViEW Brdef deseription of review rxctivitaes, results af revfew, and conclusions: A map review and site file search was conducted at the Offtce of State Arcliaeology (OSA} on Friday, Ianuary 6, 2012. A eomprehensive archaeological survey at tius particular l�ridge location nas ne�er baen conducted, and nQ archaeological sit�es have been recorded within one�half (1f2) mile afthe propased project. Digital capies of HPO's maps (Si�mnlerfield Quadrangle) as well as the HPC�VVEB GI9 Serviee (htt}s://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/} were reviewed c�n Tuesday, January 10, 2012. There are na known historic archite�tural resatuces loeated within the project area that may have intact archaeological deposits within the footprint ofthe proposed project. Tn additian, tc�pog�-aphic maps, histaric maps (NCMaps website}, USDA soil survey maps, and aerial photographs were utilized and inspected to gauge environmental factors that may have contributed to historic ar prehistoric settlernent wi#lun the project limits, and to assess the level af modern, slope, agricultural, hydrologicaI, and other erosive-type disturbances within anc� surraunding the archaeological APE. Braef Explara�tion of wh}� the rzuailc�hle inf�rmatio�a provides a reliable basis for reqsanably predicting that there are no unide�tifze� histr�ric properties an the APE: This is a Federally-funded projeet; the need for a Federal permit and/ar easements is unknown at this time. The dimensions ofthe APE suggest that project activities could fa11 outside the exisfing ROW (i.e. 60 ft.). The ,RPE primarily consists of sloped, eroded spils (e.g. Madis�n cIay loam [McE2], 1 S-2S pexc�nt slopes, eroded9 Madison clay loam [McC2j, 6-1Q percent slopes, eroded; Madison clay loam [McB2], 2 ta 6 percent slopes, eroded) adjaeent ta the floc�dpIaain c�f Brush Creek, which consists of Ghewcla sandy loam [Ch]. Although not listed as a frequently flooded soil type, it has 6een mapped as a fload hazard. The Z-ft contours an the attached map suggest that a portion of the current roadbed was constructed on an elevated, man-made landform thereby shortening the overall length of the current bridge spanni.ng Brush Creek. During the environrraental permit review process, the Offi�e of Staie Archaeology (OSA) deemad a similar sectian of Brush Creek just south of the current project as a low probability area for containing intact archaeological sites (ER 9�-8456j. In addition, all housing cievelopments surrounding the project area were �leared by OSA back in the late 19$Os {ER 89-79$7, ER 89-8541, ER S$-82$$, and ER 88-7732}. Based on the eroded soil conditions and flood hazard mapping, the APE for the propased project is considered to have 1ow potential for containing intact "Nu Se�rvey 12equired" jorm j�a-Minor Transparl2linn Projecls os �,]vRliJied in ihe 10C17 Progrmnrymtic ARreemen�. NCDOT �3rchasaln�! &Hi,ciaric.4rchuecfure Gro��ps a�'�:h�ieolr�gical nnater-ia�s. TI3ez�eforc, ar� arcl�aecal��;ic�tl suz��ey is not rec«t�lrnended. �-[o��eWer, if�esi��1 pPans cF�an�e, �r �re i��ade �Vail��ie, �rior ko cnitsti�uction ti�e�� at�ciitir�it31 cs�ns��lt�atior� may� t�e req�ii��ct1. �-1s c�zrr°erltly ��rt�pos�cl, ��s �i�i��c rcplaeezi�e��t ��ject is unlikel}� ta �ifFcct arty signi#ic�int Nl�I-�P- eli�ib�e �irchae�lo�ica� resc��u�ces. iJn 1'trrthe�- �trc}�aeala�ical ��rk is recotnmenaed. SUgPf]RT D(1CL]MEN'TATIf)I�t 5ee atk�iche�l: � M�i��(s} Q�7t�euin�as St�rvey Ini� ❑ Plto�ocr�py r��Cr��ir�ty Siu'vey N�ts:s � 1'Itotas OCarrespc»>clence �'IN�7ING 1�Y NC'1)[)T CULTL]`RAL T�iES[?URCE� �'R[}�`ESSIONAL - NC) :�LJRVEY I�I: L1IC�Ef� ' Arcliaecaac��y ' Historic Architecfure �Circle CJne) �--- � � �".1,{, ��n�«�y zo, �n�� tV('I]f)"t� C;�G�tcir�il Kesourccs Spe�ia�`ist Qate � �^„ 4 ''_�.,'�, �t. � �"� 1 , ir� ; .�'f' , �� t � h +' � q ,/� _ , • . "� l L..� � `. ` . - � ' d " .F! . .. _ \ �� _ � �,� • � p 3.: 17 � - r' f I P$ ✓, ! ._..�'4.,/" �' p,�� ]� ..' .: �% ': . '�' +�" _ � � , y , jf . � � r ��k r � . �tl{ t � vy��iS xTi# � ��5� ' 4'ti:�.� '� � FJ`r� •. °�,` " ' �. �. �rti' . ".�"' � ,k ` x � � w �_' �F, : i � � � � . �._., ��._ ... $� � `� � r. . �' p 7 1 �l • r `•�- � a "S 'f � + S �� r"�� .. . � �-�f • � , .. . . ., p j yyj I� . // / *� � -,..._w�' .. .. T , jf 1 � � li'>. i � _ if , � 5 , � ^ ,� 4 � I 4�i4 . . �+� . "' 4 �. � k ° . _ x `,� .' } -_'� y� . y= .'' � � '" ' � C. , • � �� . ` : ' ..� . � s � ` � s.,..- L, \� '+, '�s� � ` IY '� ._ �,` � . . ,' , }Y � h ' �:;: � � i�4 � � � � � ... .. �r � ', � � I k, . '� f E ,�Y1 (��` `�'JK� `��;,� # ., y i4��,��Jl�h,;� � y4 " �'.� ��;- �0. �ir�,., � � �!r i a� '� i „ ?t �' .1. �j � '�� „��'�. �`'�� 44 ` ��' . , �'r 4 �. r 4 4�, ,}�p 1 , � j�y� « ,'�'�u ...p i�^1.' i. :f : i '' 4 , '� � � 7 •,s I'� . �i e, ^�� *",� � - � �y' ty J� I � �. Bf �� '�,'`�, ' g1� . � s S .� i e jfE ��r t� � r ,, / _ �� 1 �� __..''1 � ' ' "�� f � e �,'4k��. �7' d� ��"� .-�' I ,# , � ,. �, { ! , . . � � � '�. f �.r."' f,'` - } F f { ��;1Y ,.'R-.. ��.. -° fP�i .-g . . . _��'y � tk� ,.� �`�.z$� �L.. ,a'1, _.�-., � -- - �'� , � �°�.,� ` .ryj ' + ...u. . �t �.�^� , r{ � -.•�►''f �r'}., l � '-. . � ' t �, /,,-� ,� 4 �._.,�'� � ' � , f ` ,�- ; � ''�� ,='' �i � ,�', _°p�� ' I �` %„j ; _ � . , / -v, . \ � Y _ 3 w I `"(�� r � r' - �, � . . .`-"�7' y ' - s � A � k �, r � J '"ti. � ys r* i � - �.... �L - .�. ��r �.:� .�� t � ' � ♦ f•'1 � �� f � _ �' a , � � a a ,, .�.. ¢�+' ,�'i � ,' • ' � � ' r i ':, d} , i ':., ° - t p! M f r/ -�. � � � r � . � �' 4 � 1 � ", � k �-, w � ; d�� /� � F{( � . • i . r � �L ; � f '+ ' �� .M1 � , � p. ' ' h � .. i° " q � ` � ie � �� •.4 }�. ,� � R��: +.' �I.,ra�.k�„� .. k..^lp �f� tr� ..y � � ` � � �"�{ � `� � ' � � f# -'r ,'� , ; � ` � . . � . �� r F f . .t � ; � , �R l f . �� 4� �L � �� k,��i.r . � - ! . 4 : `j ,� 7 ��.i' . . - 3 � . F I , . f 4'+w,.. � � - . f �_ � i° i } i �:.: ^w� `ti �: I i �� `.�. � { �. � � f , . ' � k ; i .j �. . C:t ��'�i. . �! � . Ss �'s � � s __ .. '' I 1' . � ,F. ,,) ��t t �'� •+- ' ` � r � r' , '- t ■ � � �� .�t' � : ' ` ,' i`` � a ` r � „ �4"� { 1 ti ; i s r �. � � �v., E . � : � . �' � � s � E ,� •��,,� ,� ,� f � �� y� �. �„ � �'� a �,r' ,ri d r`, - �- � ; . �:� r, : •, 4 -� :.f..' t' .!�" '. ., �,,,..� . . � �� !� �� rr. ` . , �* � � p _ ' ,� � , .. , �� ;:�p:d' ,,. * � ` ,. '` �' � r-._ Pi��rc l:� �Sudtlr��ee��iel�1, iJC �IJ�SC�:� 1�)C�� CRe�v1994],). _ "',�'n .4u��rp lteE��r�rrd ",1nlvai Jrfr hlirrr�r• 1 i•ui�.s�xirlri�rrrn� l� ru�ec�s �a.� (1��r�1 i Jied rii IHc ?!1l1- f 7u��•unrrrrrra r: l,pr�re•�nr•n7. ��V777F)Y'Arc•lrac•ufa�p r� ff�:r+nz•ie.irrl�ixrrls�rr t�rr��c N(} SURVE'Sc' itEQUIRED F4RM PRD.IECT IN��RMATION' Prvject Nv. was Np.� 8-5345 46�59.1.i � (}�lYll�; L7ocunzent.• Prt�ecr 7'racking No. (in�ernal Clse) �v �Y��Q�Z� � i .� J [�TLli��flCC� PCE F..�. No: BRSTP-Z l36(5) Fur�dir�g: ❑ Statc Federal (�J�SACE} Perr�iit Required� � Yes ❑ No Pernrrf Type. Project l?escri�rtian.• Replace Bridge No. 45�i on SR 213d a�+er Brush Creek. SUMMARY �F CULTURAL ltESUURCES REVIEW � Fedcral �3rref descr[ptiora ojrev�ew activ�ties, resulds af revi��v, c�r�d conc�lusio�rs: 2eview af HP() qu�d �na.ps, relevant backgro€ind reports, histc�ric designatians rc�ster, and indexes was undertaken on January 4, 20 ! 2. B€�sed on this re�iew, there were no existing NR, SI., �.D, DE, or SS properties in the Area afPotential Effscts. Guilfard Caunty GTS mapping including aerial photogr�phy and tax i�formation revealed no structures within th+e APE greater than SO years old. No properties in the APE of this project are eligi6te for Nation�l Register listing. ,t3rief Explanation af'why the auailable informatiorr provid�es d reriahle l�asis far reasonattly predicting that there are no uniderrtrfred hi.stc�ric prapercies rn the.4PE: Guilford County GIS tax ciata show na parceis with structures in the AQ�, of this project greater thara fifty years csld. NQ structures eligible for listing irt #he l�+iational Rcgister werc identified near the APE of this prrject. HPQWEB GTS S�rvice, 11SGS tr�pographic fnapping, ar�d Gaogle Streefiriew provide reliable informatian regarding fhe str�ectures in the E1PE. These co�nbined utilities are considered vatid far the purposes ofdeterminit�g t�c Iikclihaad o£historic resgurces being present. ST,JPI'OR.T llOCUMENTAT��DIV See attached: Maps �'YNDI1tifG BY 1'�TCD(]T CULTURAL it�:S(JURCES PRQFESSIUNAL N�3 SURu�Y RE�UTR�D NCDOT Cultura� �esourc�es Specialist "Nn Surv�� lteytured" fnrn+ jor Alrnvr lranspwltxmn Prns�cta ua �,?uufifted �n ihe 1647 pm�run�mai�r Agrrenit�m. Nt:lX?T Arclrueafngy c� Ptesroric.4rchiracrure (imups Date �� Walieii, iiiacy A Fuorn: Sen�l: To: Suhjecil: Chui� N ilil��aher <ti ili•I:�aher.Chri9Cleqamail.ep�.g�av: Tiiesd��, �Ipril 03, 3012 7:97 �IN 1!� alte r, lra cy AI B-534! 81 A-93 9a Traay: EPEI f as reviev►ed the 9tart o�l st�ul}� inlormatian for A-5��I9, A riclg�e Plo. �I99 in Gl�iillord Clounty & B-9352, Bridge Plo. 131 in Rockingram Cla�inty replaaement projeats ancl v�e have no identif�ed en�iironmenfal concern9. Trank}�a�i br the o ppa r�t in ity to ci a rn r� ent. Cf ris topher �I. Mi[itscf er, REI4 , QHN M LJSEPAIMerg�erTearn Representativ� 919-858-4206 {Raleig�f afFce) 404-562-9512 (pltlan ta ) United States Department, o�' the Interior T'ISH AND WTLDLIFE SERVICE. 1�aleigh Field Office Post Office Bc�z 33726 Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726 1Vlarch �3, 2012 Txacy A. �+Valter North Caralzna Department of Transportation Bridge Project Development Section 1548 Mail Service Center R.aleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548 I}ear Mr. Walter: This letter i5 in respanse to your request for cornments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service {Service} on the potential environmental effects of the proposetl replacement of Bridge No. 456 on SR 2136 over Brush Creek, GuiIford County, North Carolina (TIP ItiTo. B-5345). These cornrzients provide infarma1ian in accardauce witli pravisions of the Natioaaal Environmental Policy Act {42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)} anrl Sectifln 7 ofthe Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U,�.G. 1531-1543). For bridge replacement proj�cts, the Service recamriaends the Following general conservation rn�easures to avaid or minimize innpacts to fish and wildlife r�sources: 1, Wetland, forest and designated riparian buffer impacts shonid be avoided and minimi�ed to the maximum extent practical; 2. If uuavoidable wetland or sixeam irnpacts are propased, a plan for compensatory mitigation to affset unayoidable impacts should be pzovided early in the planning pro�ess; 3. Off-site detours should be used rather than construction of ternporary, on-site bridges. For prcrjects requiring an on-site detour in wetlands or open water, such detours should be aligned �►]ong the side of the existing structure which� has the least antilor least quality af fish and wildlife habitat. At the campletian of construction, the detour area should be entirely removed and the impacted areas be replanted with appropriate tree species; �. In streams utilized by an.adromous fish, the NCDOT palicy entitled "Stream Crossing E"xuidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage" should be irnplemented, 5. New bridges should be long ez�augh to allow far sufficient wildlife passage alvng strearn comdors, 6. On each side af the stream bank underneath bridges, at least 10 feet of the bank should r�main clear of riprap; 7. "Best Management Practices {BMP) for Constructian and Maintenance Activities" should be implennented; 8. Bridge designs should include pro�isions for roadbed and deck drainage to flow through a vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer shauld k�e large enough to alleviate any potential effects from run-aff of storm wat�r and pollutants; 9. Bridge designs should not alter the natural stream and stream-bank moz�pholagy or impede fish passage. To the extent possible, piers and bents should be placed autside the bank-full width of the stream; and 10. Bridges and appraaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in damming or cons#rietion of the channel or #lood plain. If spanning the flood plain is nat feasible, culverts should be installed in the flood plain portion af the approach to restare some of the hydralogical functions of the flaad plain and reduce high velocities of flood waters within the affected area. Section 7�a)(2) of the Endangered Speeies Act requires that all federal action agencies (or tbeir desig,nated non-federal representatives), in consultation with the �ervice, insure that any action federally autharized, funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence af any federally threatened or endangered species. To assist yau, a county-by-county list af federally protected species knawn to occur in North Carolina and information on their life histories and habitats can be found on our web page at htlp:/Iwvvw.fws.�ov/nc-es/es/cauntyfr.html . Although the North Carolina Natural Heritage Pragram (NCNHP) database does not indicate any known occurrences of listed species near the project vicinity, use of the NGNHP data should not be substituted fox actual field surveys if suitable habitat occurs near the praject site. The NCNHP database only indicates the presence af lrnown accurrences of listed species and does not necessarily mean that such species are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. If suitabl� habitat occurs within the project vicinity for aiay listed species, surveys should he conducted to deterrnine presence ar absen.ce of the speci�s. If you determine that the propased action rnay affect (i.e. likely to adversely affect or not Iikely to adver�ely affect) a listed species, you 51�ou1d notify this office with your determinatian, the results of your surveys, survey methodologies and an analysis of th� effects c�f the actiaza on listed species, including consideration of direct, indireet and cumulative effeots, before canducting any activities that rnight affect the species. If you deternvne that the praposed acrian will have no effect (i.e. no beneficial or �dverse, direct or indirect effect) on Iisted species, then you are not required to cantact our office for concurrence. The Serviee appreciates the opportunity to comment an this praject. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at (919) 85b-4520, ext. 32. Sincerely, � Pete Benjamin Field Supervisor Guilford Counit�r Sehools May 2, 2012 Tnacy A. Wa11e�i Br.idga Pnojec�l Hlanning Hngi�ear NC Departrr en�l Clil 7ran9i��ortalion Aroject Dev�elopnien�l and Envii onmental Aralysiai Unid 1548 Mail Sarvice Claritar Raleigh, NC 27699-] �48 Dea�i T�acy Wa11e�r Subjeat: STIA Phio'lec�l No. B-934�-Replaaamen� ofBridga No. 456 oni SR 2136 Ouen B�u�i�l Creield iri Gui�ibrd Clounty The a�osiing of Bnidga No. �I `I6 ;�Hlaming Rd; wou d affecl np'I only o�i buseai that hava s�loXl s ui tk��i area, bU�l busies t�a1 usa thiai road io ge71 frozri Bryan B�vd to Alea�an t Rldga Rc anc v ae uen<ia. Buaias wou d hava ta deto�i as miuch asi 4.7`I xni�es on�e vHay if th'9 bridge and t�e 9eclioru a� �oac is closad. Wa hava ] 8 bu9es u; inig tY�e br.ic ga al la asi twfce a day and tl- ena a��e also bus 9�lops in tl� e rieigtlbai�iooc �las1 Cr�tal Ilal� e wtlerai we would hav�e to miake detowi rouie9 to pick up studenols. 'Ilia da laur tfma fon al� buse9 affecied could adc ] 0 a�innxle� to eaatl bu�i runi. We cou] d Flo�isibly use Blra:is Hagle Rd ai a dalour whicH wou d take the bu9lasai than .:I of a rnii�a offltha bu:i roule wi�ltl a d e�lour tiff e of,ju:rl a minu�le or two. The mai n aonaern�i wit� travaling oni tk'�i raad aroe tbat i�l i�i n�o�l very wide aryd iil is a dirt noad. We vuould ha�e io c e�l ermine if bu�ieai a ould siafa ly pa:is by eaah a th e' oru thi� road wit1� ou l goinig oni t1� e�houl den, We apFpiecia�le you cor.i�lc'ling u9 abou'I our ti ansportatiori con�cems and l am ��o�ii�liva tha t witl� adequate plannir�g an d prepanaliori lime wa a ould �ie�bute bu9ies 10 accomrnioc ate yoi�r naeds. lf you r.i�eed any addilianal informationi ragarding tY e eff�at9 of thi s bnidga closinig on our busesi, please �eel fraa la aontaat ma at (�336; 3 70-$OSS on by emiail a l masweeb(a��asn�c.comi. Sin�a ara �y, �� Beatrice Mc weeney TIMS Coondinrata n Guil�o��d Coun�ty Scboo]s 9TRIVINGI, ACHIBVINGI, FJdCEI.111NG1. 131 Frank inBh�d. Greeosl ara, Na 77�lill 1 13l1.37U.8f24