19950858 Ver 1_Complete File_19971212

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources •
Division of Water Quality

James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary p E H N F=?L
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 12, 1997
Alamance County
DWQProject #950858
TIP No. B-2501
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Mr. Frank Vick
NC DOT
PO Box 25201
Raleigh NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to
fill in 0.10 acres of waters for the purpose of bridge replacement at Big Alamance Creek, as you
described in your application dated November 7, 1997. After reviewing your application, we have
decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Numbers 3127 and 3107.
This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Numbers 6 and 23 when it is issued by the
Corps of Engineers. In addition, you should ger any other federal, state or local permits before
you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control,
Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will
expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless otherwise specified in the
General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application
except as modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be
required to send us a new application. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future)
exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506
(h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additional conditions listed below.
1. DOT shall follow guidance provided by DWQ in our 27 May 1997 letter for minimizing
damage to aquatic resources until a final policy is developed in conjunction with DOT.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an
adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask
for a hearing, send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina
General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-
7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the
Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
PPr y,
op How ard, Jr. P.E.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Winston-Salem DWQ Regional Office
Central Files
950858.1tr
Division of Water Quality • Non-Discharge Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer • 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper

wn,

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMEs B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 2S201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-S201 SECRETARY

November 7, 1997

Regulatory Branch
US Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Field Office R,y Apo'
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890 2l r 9-~~

ATTENTION: Mr. Michael D. Smith, P.W.S.
Assistant Branch Chief

Dear Sir:

Subject: Alamance County, Replacement of Bridge No. 12 over Big Alamance Creek
on North Carolina 62, Federal Aid Project No. BRSTP-62(1), State Aid
Project No. 8.147070 1, T.I.P. No. B-2501, Action I.D. 19950100.

The Corps of Engineers (COE) issued a Section 404 Nationwide Permit 23 for
the subject project on August 28, 1995. This permit expired on January 21, 1997. The
replacement of Bridge No. 12 over Big Alamance Creek on NC 62 is not scheduled to be let
to construction until December 1997. Consequently, the Department of Transportation
(DOT) needs to renew authorization for this work.

Information regarding the project description has not changed since the distribution of
the Categorical Exclusion in a letter dated August 16, 1995 and notification of a design
change on February 16, 1996. The bridge will be replaced on new location west of the
existing structure. The NCDOT will maintain traffic using the existing structure as an
on-site detour during construction.

The DOT requests that the COE reauthorize this dge r lacement project in
Alamance County under a Section 404 Nationwide Pe lit 23. Re ssuance of 401 Water
uality is also req ested.
Quality Certification by the Division of Water Quality,*

2

If you have any questions or need additional information please call Ms. Alice N.
Gordon at 733-7844 Ext. 307.

Sincerely,

Y

H. Franklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch

HFV/pct

cc: Mr. Ken Jolly, Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Field Office
Mr. John Dorney, NCDEHNR, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Whit Webb, P.E., Program Development Branch
Mr. R. L. Hill, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. William J. Rogers, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Ms. Stacy Y. Baldwin, P.E., P & E Project Planning Engineer
Mr. J. W. Watkins, P.E., Division 7 Engineer

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr_ Governor E H N R
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E„ Director September 18, 1995

Alamance County
DEM Project # 95885
State Project # 8.1470701
TIP # B-2501

APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification

Mr. Franklin Vick
Planning and Environmental Branch
NC DOT
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-5201 FILE C
Dear Mr. Vick:

You have our approval to place fill material in waters for the purpose of replacing bridge No. 12
over Big Alamance Creek on NC 62, as you described in your application dated 16 August 1995.
After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality
Certification Number 3027. This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 6 when it
is issued by the Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If
you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application.
For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification. In
addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your
project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing,
send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the
Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and
its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Environmental Management under Section 401
of the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
Sincerely,

W.Ston H ar , Jr. P. .

Attachment

cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Winston-Salem DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Domey
Central Files 95885.ltr

P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

Fllr~ 95~ S
2 2 i~,95

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

DEPARTMENT OF TP ANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C 27611-5201 SECRETARY

August 16, 1995

401 ISSUED

Regulatory Branch
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers - -
Wilmington Field Office
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
Dear Sir:

SUBJECT: Alamance County, Replacement of Bridge No. 12 over Big Alamance
Creek on NC 62, Federal Aid Project BRSTP-62(1), State Project
8.1470701, T.I.P. No, B-2501.
Please find enclosed three copies of the project planning report for the
above referenced project. The project involves the replacement of the bridge
at a new location west of the existing structure. NCDOT will maintain
traffic using the existing structure as an on-site detour during the
construction. No wetland plant communities will be affected by this project.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as
a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we
do not anticipate requesting an individual permit, but proposed to proceed
under a Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR Appendix A (B-23). The
provisions of Section 330.4 and Appendix A(C) of these regulations will be
followed in the construction of the project.
It is anticipated that foundation investigations will be required that
will include test borings in soil and/or rock for in-site testing as well as
obtaining samples for laboratory testing. These activities will require
authorization under Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR.Appendix
A(B-6) for survey activities and will not require further notification.
We anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2745 (Categorical
Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are providing one copy of the CE
document to the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management, for their review.

August 16, -1995
Page 2

If you have any questions or need additional information please call
Ms. Alice N. Gordon at 733-3141 Ext. 314.
Sincerely,

ck, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/rfm

cc: W/attachment
COE Raleigh Field Office
Mr. John Dorney, NCDEHNR, DEM
Mr. Kelly Barger, P. E., Program Development Branch
Mr. Don Morton, P. E., Highway Design Branch - - -
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P. E., Hydraulics Unit.
Mr. John L. Smith, Jr., P. E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P. E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W. F. Rosser, P. E., Division 6 Engineer

? v .c .

Alamance County
NC 62
Bridge No. 12 Over Big Alamance Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRSTP-62(1)
State Project 8.1470701
T.I.P. No. B-2501

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

AND

N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

APPROVED:

2
S
DATt H. Franklin ick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT

21,19-,5 , - - 0'~'c
DATE icholas L. Gr f, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA

Alamance County
NC 62
Bridge No. 12 Over Big Alamance Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRSTP-62(1)
State Project 8.1470701
T.I.P. No. B-2501

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

February, 1995

Documentation Prepared By
JBM Engineers and Planners
•~~ESS1p~4~w9:
e
~ f~ C ( AL
Ke th W. Smith, P.E. ! ! 320
Project Manager =~`r, k Ee~~••'

for North Carolina Department of Transportation

Q
z xg&~~
J. A. Bissett, Jr., P.E., U t ead
Consultant Engineering Unit

Stacy Y. Bald 'n
Project Manager
Consultant Engineering Unit

tAlamance County

NC 62
Bridge No. 12 Over Big Alamance Creek
Federal-Aid Project BRSTP-62(1)
State Project 8.1470701
T.I.P. No. B-2501

Bridge No. 12 is included in the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program. The location
is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. The project is
classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion".

I. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS

All standard procedures and measures, including Best Management Practices, will be
implemented to avoid or minimize environmental impacts. No special or unique
environmental commitments are necessary.

A new sewer line that will parallel the north bank of Big Alamance Creek is currently in
the design phase for the City of Burlington. The new line traverses the entire width of the
proposed bridge project. During final design of the B-2501 project, coordination with the
City and its consultant will be essential to avoid conflicts between the two projects.

Prior to project construction, NCDOT will remove the containerized waste that is being
stored in the wastewater treatment facility on the Tiger Ventures site adjacent to the
southwest corner of the existing bridge.

During design and construction of the project, NCDOT will coordinate with the City of
Burlington and the Village of Alamance for protection or relocation of an existing water
meter vault located at the northwest corner of the existing bridge and an existing eight-
inch ductile iron underground waterline that runs through the project along the western
shoulder of NC 62 (Attachment E). NCDOT will also coordinate with Piedmont Natural
Gas Co., during design and construction of the project, for protection or relocation of an
existing six-inch underground steel gas line that runs through the project along the western
shoulder NC 62 (Attachment F).

II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Bridge No. 12 will be replaced at a new location as shown by Alternative 1 in Figure 2.
The recommended replacement structure consists of a bridge 220 feet long and 30 feet
wide. This structure will provide two 12-foot travel lanes with three-foot shoulders on
each side.

1

t

The roadway grade of the new structure will be approximately the same as the existing
grade at this location.

The existing roadway will be widened to provide two 12-foot travel lanes with eight-foot
usable shoulders, of which four feet will be paved, throughout the project limits.

The existing structure will be used to maintain traffic during the construction period.

Removal of one building at the southwest corner of the existing bridge will be required for
construction of Alternative 1. The building, which is currently vacant, was formerly used
for business purposes.

Estimated cost, based on current prices, is $989,500. The estimated cost of the project, as
shown in the 1995-2001 Transportation Improvement Program, is $1,540,000,
($1,300,000-construction; $240,000-ROW).

III. EXISTING CONDITIONS

The project is located in the west-central portion of Alamance County, at the northern
corporate limits of the Town of Alamance (see Figure 1). Development in the area is
suburban in nature.

NC 62 is classified as a rural major collector in the Statewide Functional Classification
System and is a Federal Aid Highway. This route is designated as a major thoroughfare in
the Alamance County Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan-1975.
In the vicinity of the bridge, NC 62 has a 22-foot pavement width with five-foot shoulders
(see Figures 3 and 4). The roadway grade slopes downward from the north, is fairly flat
across the bridge, then slopes slightly upward toward the south. The existing bridge is
located on a tangent which extends approximately 250 feet north and 50 feet south from

the structure. Curves of approximately seven degrees are located along each of the
approach sections. The roadway is situated approximately 36 feet above the creek bed.
The current traffic volume of 6,200 VPD is expected to increase to 12,200 VPD by the
year 2015. The projected volume includes 2% truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) and 3%
dual-tired vehicles (DT). The posted speed limit is 30 mph in the project area.

The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was constructed in 1936. Bridge No. 12 is a 4-span
structure that consists of a concrete deck on reinforced concrete girders. The substructure
is comprised of reinforced concrete spill through abutments and post and web piers.

The overall length of the structure is 209 feet. The clear roadway width is 24.0 feet.
Presently, there is no posted weight limit on this bridge.
Bridge No. 12 has a sufficiency rating of 45, compared to a rating of 100 for a new
structure. The existing bridge is considered structurally deficient.

2

There are no utilities attached to the existing structure. However, overhead power lines
cross the existing road and parallel the existing bridge on the east side. Underground
utilities that run through the project include an eight-inch ductile iron waterline and a six-
inch steel gas line, both of which run along the western shoulder of NC 62. A meter vault
for the waterline is located at the northwest corner of the existing bridge. At Big
Alamance Creek, both utilities pass under the creekbed aproximately 45 feet west of the
centerline of the existing bridge. Additionally, an existing underground sewer line, which
parallels the south bank of Big Alamance Creek, crosses under the existing bridge.

Fifteen accidents have been reported in the vicinity of Bridge No. 12 during the period
from May, 1989 to April, 1992. Nine of the accidents occurred at nearby intersections
and only one accident occurred on the bridge. Neither geometric features of the roadway
alignment nor physical features of the existing structure are considered as factors
contributing to any of the fifteen accidents.
Four school buses cross the studied bridge daily.

IV. ALTERNATIVES

Two alternatives for replacing Bridge No. 12 were studied. Each alternative consists of a
bridge 220 feet long and 30 feet wide. This structure width will accommodate two 12-
foot lanes with three-foot shoulders on each side (see Figure 5). The approach roadway
will consist of a 24-foot wide travelway with eight-foot usable shoulders, of which four
feet will be paved, on each side. Typical sections of the proposed structures and approach
roadway are included as Figure 4 and Figure 5.

The alternatives studied are shown on Figure 2 and are as follows:

Alternative 1 (Recommended) - involves replacement of the bridge on new location west

of the existing structure. Improvements to the alignment on the bridge approaches include
approximately 900 feet to the north and 550 feet to the south. Removal of one vacant
building, formerly used for business purposes, will be required. The design speed for this
alternative is 40 mph. The existing structure will serve as an on-site detour structure
during the construction period. This alternative is recommended due to the improved
horizontal and vertical alignments provided and the lower estimated construction cost.

Alternative 2 - involves replacement of the structure along the existing roadway alignment.
A temporary on-site detour will be provided during the construction period immediately
east of the existing structure. The temporary detour will consist of a bridge 120 feet long
and 26 feet wide, located about 40 feet east of the existing structure. A design speed of
30 mph will be provided by this alternative. This alternative is not recommended since it
does not improve the existing roadway alignment and due to its higher construction costs.

The "do-nothing" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. This is not
acceptable due to the traffic service provided by NC 62.

3

1

The Division Office concurs that traffic be maintained on-site instead of closing the road
during construction because of the traffic volumes using NC 62 and the excessive length
of additional travel that will be required with an off-site detour.

The Alamance County Associate Superintendent of Schools and the Director of
Emergency Services indicate that maintenance of traffic on-site during the construction
period is preferable.

Rehabilitation of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and deteriorated condition.

V. ESTIMATED COST

The estimated costs for the two alternatives are as follows:

(Recommended)
Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Structure $ 330,000 $ 330,000
Roadway Approaches 291,920 236,370
Detour Structure & Approaches 202,550
Structure Removal 25,080 25,080
Engineering & Contingencies 103,000 131,000
Right-of-Way/Construction Easements/Utilities 239,500 100,000
Total $ 989,500 $1,025,000

VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS

Bridge No. 12 will be replaced at a new location, as shown by Alternative 1 in Figure 2,
with a new structure having a length of approximately 220 feet. Improvements to the
existing approaches will be necessary for a distance of about 900 feet north of the
replacement structure and 550 feet south of the new bridge. The Division Engineer
concurs with this recommended alternative (see Attachment A).

A 24-foot pavement width with eight-foot usable shoulders on each side, of which four
feet will be paved, will be provided on the approaches (see Figure 4). A 30-foot clear
width is recommended on the replacement structure in accordance with the current
NCDOT Bridge Policy. This will provide two 12-foot lanes with three-foot shoulders
across the structure. NC 62 is classified as a rural major collector; therefore, criteria for a
rural major collector was used for the bridge replacement. The design speed is 40 mph.

During the construction period, maintenance of traffic at the existing bridge is necessary.
Otherwise, traffic will have to be detoured along existing secondary roads. This detour

4

i

route is considered unacceptable due to the traffic volumes using NC 62 and the excessive
length of additional travel required.

Based on a preliminary hydraulic analysis, the new structure is recommended to have a
length of approximately 220 feet. The bridge will have a 0.3% minimum slope in order to
facilitate drainage. Also, the bottom elevation of the superstructure will be no lower than
that of the existing structure so that there will be no increase to the existing 100-year
floodplain elevation. It is anticipated that the elevation of the new structure will be
approximately the same as the existing bridge. The length and height of the new structure
may be increased or decreased as necessary to accommodate peak flows as determined by
further hydrologic studies.
VII. NATURAL RESOURCES

A biologist visited the project site on January 18, 1993 to verify documented information
and gather field data for a thorough assessment of potential impacts that could be incurred
by a proposed bridge replacement project.

The investigation examined the vegetation surrounding the highway bridge in order to 1)
search for State and Federally protected plants and animal species; 2) search for unique or
prime-quality communities; 3) describe the current vegetation and wildlife habitats; 4)
identify wetlands; and 5) provide information to assess (and minimize adverse)
environmental effects of the proposed bridge replacement.

Biotic Communities

Plant Communities

Several natural plant communities occur within the study area, a riparian Alluvial Forest
associated with Big Alamance Creek and Basic Mesic Forest. The riparian area
immediately adjacent to Big Alamance Creek varies in width and steeply grades into the
basic mesic forest community on the north side of the creek.

The riparian vegetation associated with Big Alamance Creek is typical of an intermittently
flooded floodplain terrace consisting of flood tolerant species including sycamore
(Platanus occidentalis), red maple (Acer rubrum), river birch (Betula nigra), hickory
(Cwya sp.), sweetgum (Liquidambar styracifZua), blackberry (Rubus sp.), and
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica). The floodplain terrace has been greatly disturbed along
the south side of the stream but has remained undisturbed along the northern side. This
alluvial community is present on both sides of the existing bridge but is most extensive to
the west, or upstream from the existing bridge. This plant community grades upslope to
the man-dominated on the south side of Big Alamance Creek and to a basic mesic forest
on the north side of the Creek.

The area to the south of the Creek and existing bridge is residential. The plant community
is man-dominate and is cleared, mowed, and maintained as lawns. Fescue (Festuca sp.)
~rY

5

a
t

is dominant with some encroachment of plantain (Plantago sp.), clover (Trifolium sp.),
and dandelion (Taraxacum sp.).

On the north side of Big Alamance Creek and the existing bridge structure, the vegetation
is relatively undisturbed, with the exception of a residential site on the northeast quadrant
of the project. Also, there is an abandoned road bed within the northwest quadrant,
presently overgrown with vegetation. Dominant plant species in this basic mesic forest
community (Piedmont subtype) include southern red oak (Quercus falcata), red oak (Q.
rubra), white oak (Q. alba), red maple (Acer rubrum), beech (Fagus grandifolia), and
sweetgum (Liquidambar styracj7ua). Other species observed include American elm
(Mmus americana), redbud (Cercis canadensis), scrub pine (Pines virginiana), and
loblolly pine (P. taeda). Due to the seasonality of the project field investigation, many of
the plant species were dormant.

Wildlife (General)

Riparian communities are valuable habitat for reptiles and amphibians. Amphibians in
particular are highly water dependent for completion of larval stages in their life cycle and
some species are totally aquatic.

Reptiles and amphibians likely to occur in the project vicinity include eastern box turtle
(Terrapene carolina), ground skink (Scincella lateralis), five-lined skink (Eumeces
fasciatus), broadhead skink (E. laticeps), water snake (Nerodia sipedon), eastern garter
snake (Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis), northern redbelly snake (Storeria occipitomaculata
occipitomaculata), copperhead (Agkistron contortrix mokasen), red-spotted newt
(Notophthalmus viridescens viridescens), white-spotted slimy salamander (Plethodon
cylindraceus), American toad (Bufo americanus), spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer
crucifer), leopard frog (Rana utricularia), and green frog (R. clamitans).

The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission reports that Big Alamance Creek is a
typical Piedmont warmwater stream fishery and habitat quality in the project area is
relatively high. Fish species likely to inhabit Big Alamance Creek include various chubs
(Nocomis sp., and Semotilus sp.), shiners (Notropis sp.), bullheads (Ictalurus sp.),
margined madtom (Noturus insignis), sunfish (Lepomis sp.), largemouth bass
(Micropterus salmoides), and darters (Etheostoma sp. and Percina sp.). The North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission recommends a full span of the creek and
adjacent floodplain of at least the length of the existing bridge, in order to maintain
connective habitat for movement of wildlife species.

Riparian corridors also act as natural passageways for mammals. They also serve as
refuges for mammals forced from more disturbed upland sites. Mammals likely to inhabit
the area include opposum (Didelphis marsupialis), shorttail shrew (Blarina brevicauda),
bats (LcWurus sp. and Myotis sp.), raccoon (Procyon lotor), chipmunk (Tamias striatus),
eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), mice (Peromyscus sp.), rice rat (Oryzomys

6

palustris), meadow vole (Microtus penns)lvanicus), and cottontail (Sylvilagus
floridanus).

Birds likely to inhabit the study area include the mourning dove (Zenaida macroura),
downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), bluejay (Cyanocitta cristata), tufted titmouse
(Parus bicolor), wood thrush (Hylocichla mustelina), cedar waxwing (Bombycilla
cedrorum), house sparrow (Passer domesticus), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia),
cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), and rufous sided towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus).

Physical Resources

Soil

Soil series found in the vicinity of the proposed project include:

SOIL SERIES CLASSIFICATION HYDRIC INCLUSION
Enon loam, eroded, Non-hydric none
strongly sloping phase
Wilkes soils, moderately Non-hydric none
steep phases
Enon loam, eroded, Non-hydric none
sloping phase

The Enon series consists of soils that are moderately well drained, developed from the
products of rocks that were mostly mafic but partly felsic. They are widely distributed
throughout the county but their total acreage is not large. The eroded loams have had the
original surface soil removed by erosion. The strongly sloping phase consists of soils on a
10 to 15 percent slope, while those of the sloping phase are on a 6 to 10 percent slope.
Both Enon loam soils found within the project area are classified as statewide important
soils.

The Wilkes series consists of excessively drained soils that occupy the steepest slopes on
the hilly uplands. They occur mostly in the central, eastern and northern parts of the
county, and are derived from a mixture of weathered felsic and mafic crystalline rock. The
moderately steep phases consist of soils on a 15 to 25 percent slope. This soil is not
classified as prime, unique or important soils.

Water

This bridge replacement project spans Big Alamance Creek, a tributary to the Haw River,
contained within the Cape Fear River basin.

Big Alamance Creek has a "best usage" classification of "C NSW". Class C designates
waters suitable for secondary recreation, aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing,

7

wildlife and agriculture. The supplemental classification of NSW (Nutrient Sensitive
Waters) indicates waters needing additional nutrient management (particularly fertilizer
run-off) due to their being subject to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic
vegetation.

The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), managed by the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources, Division of
Environmental Management, addresses the long term trends in water quality at fixed
monitoring sites by the use of benthic macroinvertebrates. These organisms are sensitive
to very subtle changes in water quality. Sampling efforts in July, 1986 in Big Alamance
Creek near Bellemont received a bioclassification of "Good-Fair". This sampling station is
located approximately 3 miles downstream from the proposed project area. The
Burlington (south) wastewater treatment plant is permitted to discharge 9.5 million gallons
per day (MGD) into Big Alamance Creek. This discharge point is located near the mouth
of Big Alamance Creek into the Haw River, about 7 miles downstream from the project
site.

Table 1 describes the stream characteristics of Big Alamance Creek observed in the
vicinity of the proposed bridge replacement project.

TABLE 1

Observation Point U stream 100 ft. Existing Crossing Downstream 100 ft.
Substrate Boulder, cobble, sand
Current Flow Strong - Normal
Channel Width ft.) 50-65 50-65 50-70
Bank Height (ft. 10-12 10-12 15
Water Depth (ft.) 2-4 3-5 3-6
Water Color Clear Clear Clear
Water Odor None
A vatic Vegetation None
Adjacent Vegetation Hardwood fringe - sycamore, maple, birch
Wetlands Bank to Bank
The general gradient of Big Alamance Creek is moderate and riffle-pool ratios are evenly
distributed through the project area. Though some flats are developed behind the riffle
areas, sediment loads will, for the most part, be carried downstream from the project site.
The stream banks are steep and high enough to contain storm surges; therefore,
overtopping floods will be minimal.

8

Jurisdictional Topics

Wetlands

No wetland plant communities will be affected by this project. The stream banks are steep
and well drained and wetland hydrology does not occur in the adjacent communities.

Protected Species

Under federal law, any federal action which is likely to result in a negative impact to plants
and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed
Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) is subject to review by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) under one or more provisions of the Endangered Species Act of
1973. In the case of state-funded actions, where federal wetland permits are likely to be
required, for example, the FWS can require consultation to insure that the proposed action
does not jeopardize any endangered, threatened or protected species. Even in the absence
of federal actions, the FWS has the power, through provisions of Section 9 of the
Endangered Species Act, to exercise jurisdiction on behalf of a protected plant or animal.
The FWS and other wildlife resource agencies also exercise jurisdiction in this resource
area in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended;
16 USC 661 et seq). North Carolina laws are also designed to protect certain plants and
animals where statewide populations are in decline. Plants or animals with state
designations of Endangered (E), Threatened (T) or Special Concern (SC) are granted
protection by the State Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979. These Acts are administered and enforced by the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the NC Department of Agriculture.

The FWS and the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NHP) were consulted to
identify the potential for occurrences of protected species in the project study area.

Federally Listed Species:

Information from the FWS dated September 20, 1993, (and reconfirmed via telephone on
January 30, 1995), indicates that there are no federally-protected species listed for
Alamance County.

The FWS did, however, identify sweet pinesap (Monotropsis odorata) as a candidate
species, (a species that is currently under status review), that may occur in the project
study area.

State Listed Species:

The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program indicated that there are no state protected
species within the project study area.

9

Impacts

The preferred alternative consists of replacement of the structure at a new location,
immediately upstream from the existing bridge. The existing bridge will be used to
maintain traffic during the construction period.

Construction of the new bridge and approach roadways will impact the ecological
community. Portions of the riparian and upland hardwood communities will be destroyed
by land clearing, excavation, filling, draining and paving. As a result, these communities
will be altered and, consequently, the habitat quality lessened to some degree. During
construction, efforts will be made to minimize impacts to the riparian and hardwood
forest communities.

Approximately 0.1 acre of riparian habitat and 0.5 acre of upland forest will be impacted
by the new construction. These losses are relatively small compared to the amount of
similar habitats that are found in the region.

Impacts due to the proposed project will mainly affect aquatic organisms. Dredging,
filling, pile-driving operations, slope stabilization, and land clearing are construction
activities which can result in the direct loss of benthic organisms due to an increase in silt
load. The removal of benthic organisms reduces the potential food supply for fish and
other vertebrates.

Project construction may result in a number of impacts to Big Alamance Creek.
Construction of the new bridge structure could create short-term increases in siltation and
sedimentation in Big Alamance Creek. Fill material placement for the approach roadway
may enter the stream, and construction of the proposed structure could result in increased
turbidity both on-site and downstream of the project area. Other impacts might include
alterations to water levels and flow due to interruptions or additions to surface and/or
groundwater flow; increased concentration of toxic compounds from construction, and
reductions to sensitive invertebrate species due to alterations in water clarity and light-
incidence resulting from increased turbity. However, these potential impacts are
avoidable. Appropriate measures, consistent with Best Management Practices, will be
implemented during the term of the project to minimize, control and/or contain the
potential impacts.

Unique and/or Prime-Quality Habitat:

The Alluvial Forest community is not uncommon but few examples remain intact. The
Basic Mesic Forest community is relatively rare but because of its occurrence on steeper
slopes it has escaped the development pressures that have taken place in most other
upland communities.

Big Alamance Creek is not a designated wild or scenic river.

10

Permit Coordination

In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C.O.E.
1344), a permit will be required from the Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged
or fill material into "Waters of the United States".

Since the subject project is classified as a Categorical Exclusion, it is likely that this
project will be subject to the Nationwide Permit Provisions of 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 23. This
permit authorizes any activities, work and discharges undertaken, assisted, authorized,
regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part, 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 or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the environment. However, final permit decisions are left to the
discretionary authority of the United States Army Corps of Engineers.

Foundation investigations will be required on this project. The investigation will include
test borings in soil and/or rock for in-site testing as well as obtaining samples for
laboratory testing. This may require test borings in streams and/or wetlands. These
activities will require authorization under Nationwide Permit No. 6.

A 401 Water Quality Certification, administered through the N.C. Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources, will also be required. This certificate is
issued for any activity which may result in a discharge into waters for which a federal
permit is required.

Compensatory mitigation is not required under a Nationwide permit. Erosion and
sedimentation control measures will be strictly enforced during construction activities to
minimize unnecessary impacts to stream and wetland ecosystems. Best Management
Practices will also be implemented.

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of an inadequate
bridge will result in safer traffic operations.

The project is considered to be a Federal "Categorical Exclusion" due to its limited scope
and insignificant environmental consequences.

The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or
natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.

The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.

11

i

No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. Right-of-way acquisition
will be limited, however removal of a vacant business property will be required. No
relocatees are expected with implementation of the proposed alternative.

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 proposed project will not require right of way acquisition or easements from publicly
owned recreational land, as described in Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation
Act of 1966.

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 that if a federally funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect
on a property listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the
Advisory Council on Historic preservation be given the opportunity to comment. It is also
subject to compliance with Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966,
as amended.

To comply with those requirements, NCDOT prepared a "Historic Architectural
Resources Phase 1 Survey Report" for the subject project for submittal to the North
Carolina State Historic Preservation Office. This report identified five properties over
fifty years old within the Area of Potential Effect (APE) and confirmed the existence of
Alamance Mill Village adjacent to the south end of the project. The APE, as determined
by the Department, is depicted in Figure 6. The "Historic Architectural Survey Report"
concluded that there are no buildings, structures, objects or districts listed on or eligible
for the National Register of Historic Places that will be affected by the project.

In correspondence dated September 14, 1993 (Attachment B), the Deputy State Historic
Preservation Officer indicates concurrence that no National Register-listed or eligible
properties are located within the area of potential effect.

Since there are no properties either listed on or eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places within the APE, no further compliance with Section 106 is required with
respect to historic properties.

In response to a scoping letter from the North Carolina Department of Transportation, the
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, in his memorandum of January 26, 1993,
(Attachment D), requested additional plans if the proposed detours were on new location.
Depending on the locations of the detours, archaeological work might be recommended.

This project has been coordinated with the U. S. Soil Conservation Service. 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. A

12

Form AD-1006 was completed by the Soil Conservation Service (see Attachment C). The
SCS determined that Alternative 1 will not impact any prime or unique soils; however,
0.43 acres of statewide and local important soils will be impacted. The SCS also indicated
that the farmland soils impacted by Alternative 1 have a relative value of 28 on a 100 point
scale. The total site assessment value is 53 on a scale of 260 points.

The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Winston-Salem Regional
Office of the N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. The
ambient air quality for Alamance County has been determined to be in compliance with the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This project is not anticipated to create any
adverse effect on the air quality of this attainment area.

This project will not substantially increase traffic volumes. Therefore, the impact on noise
levels and air quality will be insignificant. Noise levels could increase during construction
but will be temporary. If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be done in
accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North Carolina State
Implementation Plans for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.

This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for noise analysis of Title 23, Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 772 and for air quality of the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments and the National Environmental Policy Act.

An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Management, Groundwater Section and the
North Carolina Department of Human Resources, Solid Waste Management Section
revealed no underground storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area.
However, an above ground liquid nitrogen tank was observed on a property in the
immediate vicinity of the project. Also, discussions with a nearby business employee
indicated that a shed adjacent to the southwest corner of the existing bridge had been used
for storage of a variety of materials, potentially hazardous in nature. As a result of these
statements, the Department conducted a Preliminary Site Assessment to determine the
extent, if any, of site contamination. The results of the Preliminary Site Assessment
(PSA), which is on file with the Department's Geotechnical Unit, indicates that soil
samples taken from the site (known as the Tiger Ventures Property) contained trace levels
of lead and herbicides which were well below NCDEHNR, Division of Environmental
Management Guidelines. The PSA recommended that NCDOT remove the containerized
waste currently being stored at the site. The results of the PSA concluded that no
additional site work is required.

Alamance County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. The
approximate 100-year floodplain in the project area is shown in Figure 7. The amount of
floodplain area to be affected is not considered to be significant.

13

There are no practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area. Any shift in alignment
will result in a crossing of about the same magnitude. All reasonable measures will be
taken to minimize any possible harm.

In the vicinity of the project, there are no structures within the limits of the 100-year
floodplain.

On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious adverse environmental
effects will result from implementation of the project.

14

`1x1, \ N
.30 \ ' \ \
1194 _
OD \ - EXTENSION
.M1
't5 1309 .07' Burlington
1151 O1 .De Airport
it"
4KE .\0
BRIDGE NO. 12 _ t yIY\~
„48
1147
16 9
o ~
1
O
1118
320
I I4S ??I
20
'u 1177
1159
i~.• 1174 N?~,~,
.13 N-i:.,::.:n?C .......:•!i'7 1171 - -
St. PWiS Ch ? 11? 1 Buslingi
1159 ;y so 5 Res. Union
y c~ ,»a ,??j, Itamahs 6 tl 0 Q 3 4
ze ee 2 49
?~i a? 87 Gte 1 7
6s
'~Qj,;?~? ton aven _ urn Qn
1e ` -Mebane
70
1113 1130 1 1 *1 1 119
Alai 5 nC Graha
Aloman< S s le
orrT-~ 87 --54
~ALAMANCE
sl v Ile 18 t xapahaW
149 Snow Camp Eli
lllUlll
i,~ llllllll
lull!!?ll/lll/ll/
?llllllllll
Ill?lllllll/
i
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
r
~F4r of ~~4°e BRANCH
ALAMANCE COUNTY
NC 62
BRIDGE NO. 12 OVER
BIG ALAMANCE CREEK
B-2501
FIGURE 1

,7V7 g 7
777-7 a & t --7w
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
M~N s;' \ TRANSPORTATION
M DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
~,:,p" ~ 1`F x -'''4<e,~7, :.a ;,e k, Y •6` xy r~ n~'e,:~.~.? a::. ~5a„ x,~,'.' Y-:, ~xx1 ~ s ~ ~ t
LP ( a PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
' {j L c x., x , a rail's+.~ car,, a l '~4 5 t fn. ,~y x 5 t y §xg k sr~ . "j iF` `ov'
C ~I rv a h_ G F z Yt x Of ~1~~5 BRANCH
ALAMANCE COUNTY
. y > '~'r.a s
ff,
fa NC 62
T %
BRIDGE NO. 12 OVER

BIG ALAMANCE CREEK
0
{L i ~t Mt
02501
3 P' a e} a y M W t t
M 2 e' v r 4X
a ~ s .r^ a A FEET 100
v-~...
e N. ~s, , :Y, - as.. ,..4,:.. r, :.x , t, ~ "•,g~`.-' an;w 77
r ^
, two
a. ;
,q
it, Lvov k
sa:.., ..<4w , r an$- zr r> s"F„^ st :r ~lP a-,
.,..v. ".r5
r r. •z., F,.... s
H , .t 'it~vF
,
+T
a
'
fix' r H p, k m ,
z 3`a,. b..
roa

'
?a.Y{
r~~w- A;S.r i,'hy, 4~• _a"'" %i .t F y: a,Y' t ~ ~ . 1 i 4 X ~
.s ~1••. 6 4°' z:.r-0!.
SOV
. , ,
pug .1; 1,
y
~..,,t , y
. -VA
ALTERNATIVE 2a:
„r
a w,
a ,
Z lows, 4 IRS
10
r'
' s
,;Z s> ,ay •"quo , d i
ze,
0. "34
Mww
/~~~~I • + ia,
h~ rx '
a
I ALTERNATIVE 1
,
„
,
II"
"
a
(REC0 M M E N DED)
Hof I,~/r #
01
r,
mill
Al W
lap
.r=r~,,. T a.. tidd,
r
116"
Any Vq
' a^ q'xk:• d`yP ' 8 a, rs~ a.+, . % ti- M~ .,rl
, . -
:~trr 0-"~~~>g re.
e,
.
TEMPORARY DETOUR
moo
k
, rCr 5 P
Isis A a n Is
,
I
-1151 4110 ,l., A
-2, All
c. „ . aw ~
memo
I*4jII~
ton 40~
i'
xk ;

s N,.
took
" T
Ilk
•
6
p'yx 4„ba
~:q FIGURE 2

- - NC 62
AMaNCE CO.
NO. 1 2
2 50 1
low "I ;
x
,g
01
Ir.
3 ID'E tic wit al

a

_ _ _ _ _ , , w etc

era " L'PS j
SOUTH APPROACH
x
oa g
' ~ KING NORTH
k~

- ~ ;.zee

ms'sc; a ,a

adY4¢ yep - ~ $;~d

3
30
_RTH APPROACH

~ F ~

.

TS PS LW LW PS TS

TYPICAL APPROACH SECTION
(EXISTING)

TS PS LW L LW PS TS

TYPICAL APPROACH SECTION
~ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
(PROPOSED)
t TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
Key. Existina Proposed ,F !",5t BRANCH
LW = Lane Width ill 12' ALAMANCE COUNTY
62
PS = Paved Shoulder of 4' NC
BRIDGE NO. . 12 OVER
TS = Turf Shoulder 5' 4' * BIG ALAMANCE CREEK
B-2501
Add 3' Where Guardrail is Warranted
FIGURE 4

X-0" 12'-0" 12'-0" X-0"
shoulder lane %idth lane %idth shoulder

'/4 in/ft Y4 in/ft

TYPICAL SECTION ON STRUCTURE

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
Functional Classification: Rural Major Collector 18it BRANCH

Average Daily Traffic ALAMANCE COUNTY
1992 = 6200 vpd NC 62
1995 = 6800 vpd BRIDGE NO. 12 OVER
2015 = 12200 vpd BIG ALAMANCE CREEK
B-2501

FIGURE 5

I 11
I 14 I
-k 5 t Wy - . ' F7°` a e i .i 4 a°n , , Z `
,r '
'a4' ry a€. a k ,y 'a^4 r °.F ag'(<. sa'cr$ '48` 2"-#~:4 Sa z S a4 t f-'k ~a' e.P` f:;a,:
a i ,a br.,, .~,a ~'B .aa a"' '~s, 4~ n25b , < ~ ,aa' i i. i,.. e'1:I.
,J~~ , , - . 44",
S 28~D • J 3 rt~'~°'A:w ?n .~'A' h fie.
F al b' b d+°e 's` y e 8 ~ : 3 "4 'a* e aft x t ~ , 9 f3
p, g 4 a ~a ?
P n~ ~`r °a , t* ? y a 4 i ` ° N +fi K tt L ' r - i
W
t ; , tea., ~t ~K e # s 5 ky A + ' F~ k n ~t°Y ~,g, ar 'r a~{, 11
11 I' -C -W I"' , d:y ~y °W .fr' A x c 4a .'^a `y `,Y ,I-, !01 I }s, ;•.x-j _
.a. x 1 v - y i k. ; a, i b
a,° ,,'K
0 &f,c E [ r'r y~`m tF.,t t b-`L€G S F y.R~ h ,a,, -N yi„
I - 1, .11 i" Fz ' 4 , , a s , a„ Y~ f x.. , 'a r = . , a a 1, r. - r.,`
1, C, a x+fi~*1 'tv ~ x ~ s.Ya , ~Y., ; 4r
a, '+'a g%a r'W a4 'L'.; d yy: ~y $'a, a, 1V it. r. F ' ''e~:.`~z a` <H, '4F' 2('g: a,'„~~`"s p
"I I
' 1 E .R.3 'i. , It, t y~. ° .Y d t- q
, ~ , ~ " ,
°R t "f. °g 'r. . 7E asvY = ~`k$ s'^,".-~, ?,t ~ Y. y ~ , y..,~~'a,'wa ni.r ~ a,4k"a° a,=`'. ,r>E`,_
, 5 .W a' s a. ° - F•`'s €..?sa: :,r g t :a , " tsr to
S ,."rat" a 3 a t # " . <a a t° ~ E rv %
+;a:.„;,: ?fig "a. s "q 9. ,z+Yj ' .sa.a t ",,2' r. 'a,~ s' n1.~,.r, ~I I le i, `ya'"' sx",.7' + + b.~ ~p #':c ~a.. `A.4.,'`i~'.,' €/'X. I'll, ..aA a r a"~^ y 11 ? S?' F
III j w 3F€ , > r 4., J z@ g,.},. i Er * t 'r .A>-r a?-',d f y „may:,.
, v ~ `I e As.. u' 4 ~ .
11 I..
-11 ? , , a @. ! , A ae> ;,yy ~Ti6..l° b a'a ;+~g 4°." aL,S," ' .,`F a s °a
11
I'll 11~
14 " 11, l ,z a ; s„ " dC°l` r A.A a'..~r s " # £ g y ° 7{ r`~ v € ' :
i.11 t } ,I r 3 .4' s e s t, , 4 , t D W ~ r r" t~," x fJ, y

I I,
[Y, ~Ir, II .i, k.3• Lam,"'c >;~a,.` 'I %a t: x,-:j,rg- a .s"x .°a'
I 1,
~ vv 4 ~"s` s .c `x V a 'i a.~ a? ~ , ' TdS. t s , s y I 3
0, 'A 11, ,
- -4 11 J3 "tl r? tea! L 'L ° ; 11 a g4 $b y, a -a+R;.u. k. 3 3 ,E ;
I 11 *~a z:~~e r g 5 ~r Z, 4 ~ae°a~" dye r.d 1 i
x ''s'e. , > a; t "a i \ t ,g u. a 'sx Y 3 ~g a'
i ' a s ra t o-x. ! r it a J V.
" , v,,~, ~ 3', , 'L 11 a 4 N
,;ter € x , ° t ,t.z ~'%i%€ k y, a e ~a .-~5 z ;~ru' ~s 7
I I 1 '1g$1 " ,w I I I , " , , , , I 11,~ ,I , V, , I ~ , I, . , 11 ~I, I . 4, - , , . I " I
, 1-1i
4... - a; Y, A* t s a t ,I_ I { a, ate , y , x:A: } 4, !w ,a+.. a^~ ,k'Y f t d.~. , a 3 ,t y~z tc r e, ,
gF; aK}:' i/ y e -"s r z s r z`e?'p`Y° P is's<r,:;+t :P°' 3, a
a s } o y"' Z i s dg .x a~ a 4 L` ° sa: ii 1E
, ll~-,`I
i / ! a '-I ro r
F ` ' k ! i_
t r, a~ „i `I~j r m `w r q t r 's o,,, Ne
' t^ , I 11 ~5 1 1
..'r "J1o' s v d,a. t,'*, e
b .F~ a is yg `~s Vi11 , i:
r a 9 ' r ra J a `t s, . a r'+ 4, .a ° e A, a vy ,aa x ' ''y ° .
F~a t ~ s7;;, , r.::: a , s p ' ' - 7 : $ % txr- v:;..,, 9,, ° xaa,
~.i " 1,°', °'.aa fir.,r y,4 s: rP a e 'a as S ,k ~ PCB ~,q t`, j'a`i A.', n-?z_
} , d 1,' s 3 h 'was' .ep, a .a. ~ e 5 s d <c:
` ~,,~3 b,:>& f >r 1 a
a ; 'N ~
S: t ' : 'exy O 11 . i,, , ~~'I,. ,F, c v, I ',~4 ra
~-a
.
f z ss ~+'e }'.fie 3
' a ~t,' f y r~,. s, JaP k.. Ni s ' 4' a , a s`
? 4.;' 4 e..,r iz a ,,.rr .:'d ,m-6 - z ,1:11,,1;
.;q xr,$ r° ^xsk-'e' x=` a, kJ w`r;
.a ~.r'~ 4 a~; y k a :t d' E 1'aa s ,oL s,: J ,zww , , " 1, ,
, 4 x t 'a`<?
is - $ Slap. 1°~r s ' x 9%'y F• 7 P{~ 3° s .a 7 1Z 0, ~ I " t I , . , 11 , , , f, , , - I , , , "'i"kIlo 114 I 11 , ,:1 - IM - ,
ti$a .r ~~y, ? x a«~ r Ill I , -t %s ;.I1 ".1 F i~,l A fae$ly < rg° ° + y=, °aa x•x 'G ,'I;y e~ $tiG
Y 'f ' >a .;•sf ~ V. a TTi s x b a e`,, 'v
? - ' O' z %i a
11 " , e+ ak j, g~f d,,f e ` RA 'sH
A ~ ` 6 ' , j $ *~a x~ l A icy ! a
a ~ z T~ i ° : ;1 Y ~ 0-, , , -1 I,, I 11 11 11 .
w ~ % ..ea r. x z . ',k' 's ,!'"'~a3 „ rte, kx.a.~.: t — d ' )~6'I':? r r `X ...e x s I k ~ - ~ } , .M" s,.r a°ae,*5,3; .:X;. ~y e'te. ,d z "'n .s{&: "3 .rA ,x:' ,&a. as gr 8,,,<', 11 1, eas `,r. a '°xa r-''.~". ' d;'; ~a `~'Y r'g«,€°~rw~ ~`;y s
v},, , I
. "Al "r ,e' S ! .ez` .;Try ,r 11 I W_s`~ ,.x~•a"' Z7 J s aiF ..4s
' a . x ~.t l~ 'Aw ` r~'r~ 6 m
a S # has,a r 2-a- s?7
.P ,3. -~v ,J~r .j ':-P5,r a e",. :s ~ f,; R, `r,?,R, r `
" ° 4'v d r r.?~. peas ax Fay'r~wvx f s' «..f"fi' d z
r :
11, A P yj 'at ! asr, ~t - 3. « a° ,a .ir ` i
.a,,. s a ax: "~"e'kr s'''~ ? = 3~ F° 4~, ' a,.... s'$11
,
s. 1.bk krF: r' : .e'"'.' t n s s r: te,e x,qm a3 4 w ,r g' ~
.1 i f~ ° .F,: it t s1.5,. Is' r'~ I'll 11 , - f `fa D
S s, g,~~ a . ~4 y''ss4~~ Lr `s ' 'X. e y°s,'~ ` t<..p;' x bbr KrY '5,, ,
pZ' I. ..r 'r `sw` • I 'V zs d..r' as'' a i fr a
-.1VI I r
° s' i a; gg ! e 4 rs,'R a+ .a , `
' ':,B 'r; -;;EE ~sS x # " ' ,4, s rni' , 11 `.:.11.1 r„ice,. : ,,a ~.1r'".T ; 'die, r'•' " 'fig<,4` S E ;t~`t•T, a' ; 11 ~y 8 Z!; ` .k ~b ~+A 4 A `tt m5rsa
r ~ . a s sa; r , ~
k: s -::r :~r-' w,, . „ .Ax I, 1`'r;. r * m 'j, - t„. t,., +'`s.~ ,,..,c a e' / r,
s>e.;,b z 8 . t, ,s - s ..a o^'.' ' „I°.Q•.>- s. a' ~~g , ~~,P II, ir,~ f? 5- '$'gr". *•a s r,. l~, Rr' g.. . a 7 e ; 's k 3».e g& .,y
o f _ ax ?k a~ r. j ' ,p,'' ,T y
` 1
'~rsy' , d~ , ~it r3 9~; U d >,'x ' j ° ~ d s Pt' ' I t~ 1 , i.• a' r,a
4; _ ci n~ sa,is a's #s` a .r ;a
? t` r< e L, ' ' °9' a e " x _.a" f`, 1`` I' b Qdx.x' Y; g , 11 11 I
e 4.r r g~ Paz
1-1 ° yea 4:" s '•.'-fit , a
s .a, e ' ie a % Al, ;:a+ q('t
,q, - • { `1a,,: a s k .u '.4 g , ' . ym aa da °St.' a k.a F> ~q -r d..6... t a
r. ~i F y ~ ~ iN ' jj y fi ~J' a s a s ~ ; ,
Fy `TT 3z'~ IS a~ , F xr, ~`3? TTTTT_,.3'L. { t Q,l- , L.4„Yt v,, " g`F : a k" a 'a < ~`.R~ A,, a' i ,
,P'~ c.a ejf ` {a,y: S Y;,P P`A 3 a i s r ? !
1. I
~ r~ , 1,+ ' 1 .r . , , t?~' E y ag "a 'P a>,':i ,,.6+ 4° ,~,a " 's'.. r .r a.' n ,r,,•-, I- 4 11
t ? 7D <p 3 x, 3 ~I d• 5N.!~ "w~ s a;. e`66' w % 'y
11, I 11 I , , , .
.?z r•' s., a^ 9 P e^',, .p' l~ F #s° ,y. 3 se?•~y °,q«.'A
I 11 ?a' , r a .aE y bt. 'i1 J~~, 3>? yf", a, s
" -11 , I I , , "'II Z , , - N 40
'>s, k :x p ',z,+~'. #Li 3r „ mss` ,4,~'.? ` 1`1
' i a n ~ `a w-q. , , a~' r,a - s y'a': a'.,a» S .i;r ~;'."1 s I ~
„ ~~:.T r, ,R%' y'aOw" ~1 a$, ''xY * Es t<is a1 r°r w w,- r 1f 11 - I,' 46 ,~z I I , III ..-"1'.,' ea ,k ,d' 3~ Tom" a , ,r`I'll I ` 4€eP£~ 'H 'hit' k `9 °
! cr . ~ 1
* , , - I , 4 Y''r d F
% e
11 I 3umr ' t s~ 'aa t to 1 s
- ;3 vF~~'
II
3 # ~0 d' ° e ° y p<
,11 , W, ~ , 4, ~ - i**t -i' 1', , ii, ~ , , I e * "
t' 10 fff a x j5 ~ ~ s'.p . '.:;s y a a.a~.
g!
.Yg ~ ` ` r r °~Pa ~ i a rF Q b a d` ~ - I t ~,t . O D ~-I o
g
w . k,~, ,e - JI at'.' f .a a a~*` x 'S-'.. Q ,g' g ''s 's, - ~7
I ~ ~ % >$a 41 cad h'iI r£ ? x i.;a a 'i y_ Yyy a'' xa . D Z C/) x
,111 12,11 ~ i F
%
D m
I _4 - I- r+ §
4`° t o tk ~ m NDOZnn Y
y~:'
I0 a vYf °i;. gs~ A + z T a '21 a o
A-; O
s>;s ` I¦ ~.,r {"xY` .s~%.Y',.,,daa.,~;xd F ,~.'a y'- T N Q d dry
i , , awl- ~ x 1 I ,'I i C~ C) C m n 0 2
Pf If s' ~ k;°x'' 'z ~ , ~w +,a € 0r, s r `a`x a -J L< i O ~7 z Z x
I~ ! ' r m 4 , i a z .i O rmil m - C C7
; ,
I 1, 1, , , 47
i.:. f' V~ 41 1 / a ; 4 ''i'F4S $ `6 f A ? - 'iY' °T~ , 4 * _ to S , T~ a
,f~ I - ~ ; ) ~ , 1,~' r,

w

BRIDGE NO. 12

100 YEAR FLOOD LIMIT ~

m
511 r

2
cl,
Dames' J?i

ZONE X
512 t v'r~ P
ZONE AE C,

Q 509
ZONE Xn.'4 ZONE X

R M 1 !
/ COUNCI~/yA" !9 ZONE AE
ZONE X ZONE AE DRIVE tiF
508
11k 513
F' r
0 N E X ~181N ROAD
ZONE X
N
co
ZONE X U
Z
soen NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
er nBRANCH
ALAMANCE COUNTY
NC 62
BRIDGE NO. 12 OVER
BIG ALAMANCE CREEK
' I B-2501
FIGURE 7
i

„a SfNEo

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS SAM HUNT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY

P. O. Box 14996
Greensboro, NC 27415-4996
July 9, 1993

Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Division of Highways
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Ward:

This has reference to the report prepared by CRS Sirrine
Engineers, Inc. for replacement of Bridge No. 12 on NC 62
over Big Alamance Creek, Alamance County, TIP No. B-2501.
After careful review, we concur in the recommended Alternate
No. 1.
There is a major gas line and other utilities located on the
west side of the existing bridge which will be in conflict
with the recommended alignment.
Sincerely,

. W. Watkins, P.E.
DIVISION ENGINEER

JWW/dj ,

cc: Mr. Kenneth W. Smith

ATTACHMENT A

~yn ,3

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources

James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director

September 14, 1993 E I
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator -L
Federal Highway Administration 1 6 W93
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue y 2
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442 DIVISICNOF
HlGH}:1r'AYS
Re: Historic Architectural Resources Phase I Surveys
Report for Replacement of Bridge No. 12 over Big
Alamance Creek on NC 62, Alamance County, B-
2501, BRSTP-62(1), ER 94-7279
Dear Mr. Graf:
Thank you for your letter of August 18, 1993, transmitting the historic structures
survey report by Katherine Houston for the North Carolina Department of
Transportation concerning the above project.

For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act; we concur that the following properties are not eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places:
One-story Frame House. The house has undergone numerous character-
altering changes.

Bridge No. 12 over Alamance Creek on NC 62. The bridge is a poor
example of a type prevalent throughout the state.
Alamance Mill Village. Overall the mill village does not retain sufficient
architectural integrity since the mill itself and much of the mill housing have
undergone numerous character-altering changes.

Thus, based upon the documentation provided in the report, we concur with the
Federal Highway Administration's determination that no National Register-listed or
eligible properties are in the area of potential effect for the project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.

109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ~P

ATTACHMENT B

r Thank you for your cooperation- and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincer,

David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw

cc: &C J. Ward
B. Church

ATTACHMENT B

~_.[-•v~v: s::. i;r..:p,;.:err';z•"tti-ax.1v:.•i<. 'C•%.•...'i`YR^F;r~::4.4Y.~y) _ I~:.(."~`~: .%v -:1<.~.: • .:I':.:~~..~ .N. _ - :.a
F TQ P}'.y'. k~"4" „`7x•~..,•r.Min,~-11:~:v:.v;'tti i -'wa•l'w•. ;)'lv. ?T:;Mf.X.i i7 'F' 'ii -i:.
r S V.~. O+Qaft/fwnt ri A~riaiFWftt l7
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
a,. CR-L&Ad 1t.p..r.t 3/24/93
t'AtIT t (To be eonspMte4 by feder•sl /lp+.'+cYl
r o-w a h.ieot fw+nt Ae.ncy {..r.h.e NC 62-Alamance Co-, TIP B-2501 FHWA
U.0 Hi hwa 2 1 anes r A>,. agar Al amance Co., NC
w
ttecrAe" wee
ART
".13oes tt+e alto EonU fN(^u.' +1QW. wtairwide or local' Impgrunt 1Krt+tandl.:'<: = :ila !s?..:: ?!!!a ^.y'~R!::
'•'(lrwo. Mr fPP.4 tloei ;?ot tr.e~;tloru!p.ns'o~ Vwe i«+n j::
f41-1;Z; ICA
ACT".-
K -1
~r•----~ =
ker~4e vNrat w truest tJaer = me Lws+et irce esrr.rwt t?qt L!44 . Y

.
;
- tom'-'-:-•:"' ' :
PART III (To be cornpktod by fydry AP+ncy) h..n.t" •r• t• _
_
Alt. Alt.
A. Tots! Acres To d+ Converted Directly 0 0.86
6. Total Ares To U Converted lndr
C. Total Acres to Vto

td
o SCS afor
/ : + on boll
Y (T br b isi 4 &j
r ART t cA!nP. Y.
"A.' Total A&es r r+of Arsd'ttritaut fsc*Wsnd
i. '-*-Tpt aj Atres?etativid+ AnditDC?f 1mOdant Farmland
`•C: 1•~rittp OtfatinlsKllrlLois*i2YQc>t~DCi1(so+t.llr+itTO13fC_'ltlsd
} D. t..eentste W t Mw+ir~d 1~ Oort').dhd crla+ Mr+rA tarty of U, #f A0416,* WsW4
/lRT Y {To baco!avkr.doy 1.:Lir+d fwksativn Gitxion _c•::;:;;:..::<::::•..?;•:`: •::•:i

fW&i;re. Value Of Fxrwla-.d To U Conywud ISc.k o(070 1DOtDlr+is)
- -
TART VI (To bo week rkf d by fadwsl A oeocy)
w.N.w~n
} Les. la..+.mant p-AWria fThdw@ epewe4 art aytaemad sa 7 CfR SU-S l /rs+r.n
1. Arei,tn Nonurben Us* 15
2. Per itrww In Norurben Use 10
D
2. Pet cot, Of Site Farsrad 20
4. ProUction Prowled By Strn And Local Govtrttrt+atst 20 O
5. Distance From Urban Bulltsrp Am N/A
ti. Distance To Urban Support Seririoas q
7. Size Of P,rownt Farm Unit Cot~ To A 10
!i. Crettion Of Nonfarmsble Fw'rnisnd 25 a
9- Availat>;1 Of Farm Suppotl Serviow 5 :S
10. On-Farm l wesbiwr tr 20 d
11. Etfects Of Convtmiot On Farm Support Seivkm 25
12. Compatibility With Esistl A :cultural Use 10
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTL 160 Zj
PART VII (To be cortsfsl tad br faders( Aoe++cr)
Relative Vales Of Farmland (from Port h 100
otN Site Asse nt root n abo.t or •
loco/
160 Z
sire auesanent
TOTAL POINTS (Total of abore 2 UnwiJ 260 `S 3
Was A lout S,t• Au..a.n...t Usedl
Silt Selected: Date Of Selection Yes 0 No 0
Ilsuon For t:Nscttew:
(S r. /n.in.t[.onr .n nr++n?..et?l 1.rm AO 1006 llPa)
ATTACHMENT C

North Carolina UcIrir•tnrcul,oCCullural Resources

James B. Hunt. Jr., Governor Division of Archives awl History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary William S. Price. Jr., Din:ctor
January 26, 1993

MEMORANDUM

TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Tfamsp - ation
FROM: David Brook C
Deputy State Histonc Preservation Officer

SUBJECT: Replace Bridge No. 12 over Big Alamance Creek on
NC 62, Alamance County, B-2501, ER 93-7960

Thank you for your letter of December 18, 1992, concerning the above project.

We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following
structures of historical or architectural importance within the general area of the
project:
Alamance Mill Village. East and west sides of NC 62, just south of Big
Alamance Creek, Alamance vicinity. A map showing the location is
enclosed. The mill village has not been evaluated for National Register
eligibility.
If there are any other structures (including the bridge itself) more than fifty years
old on or adjacent to the project site, please send us photographs (Polaroid type
snapshots are fine) of each structure. These photographs should be keyed to a
map that clearly shows the site location. Also include a brief statement about the
structure's history and explain which National Register criteria it does or does not
meet.
There are no recorded archaeological sites within the specific project area. Your
memo states that replacement is expected to be at the existing location but plans
for detour structures are unknown. If detours are necessary during bridge
replacement and are not on existing roads, please forward the location of the
proposed detour structure so we can complete our review.

The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.

109 East Joucs Sircct • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601.2807

ATTACHMENT D

L. J. Ward
January 26, 1993, Page 2

Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.

DB:slw ;

Enclosure
cc: Nicholas Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett

bc: 106
Brown/Stancil
-6aggett/Hall
County
RF

ATTAcHM ENT D

r e u . V 7u 1u : G7 CITY OF BUP,L I NGTON FAX [phone] P. 1

t_+ :T•'•,~ l.:l !t:f.li l+!(t.t ~.I ~sli; :+.U • . 7•.. ut

rebruary 8, 1995

Mr. Frank Vick
N.C. Department of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Subject: NC-62 Bridge Replacement - Great Alamance Creek
Project: 3-2501
Dear Mr. Vick:
It has been suggested by Mr. Kenneth Smith, JEM and associates,
that the City of Burlington request to be involved in coordination
of the relaxation of the bridge for the above project. Such
relocation may have an impact on the existing City water line and
meter vault that abuts the west side of the existing bridge. It
would also be helpful if we could receive a copy of the Planning
Report for this project when it is completed.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
truly your ,

/WL
s M. Lau tsen, P.E.
Engines
7m
JML:su
C:" Mr. Kenneth Smith
JBM & Associates
Fax No. 919-233-1641

ATTACHMENT E

,r
Piedmont

NaturalGas
Company
Post Office Box 1758
Burlington, North Carolina 27215

February 8, 1995

Mr. Kenneth W. Smith
J.B.M. Engineers and Planners
4917 Waters Edge Drive, Suite 235
Raleigh, N. C. 27606
RE: T.I.P. #B-2501
NC Hwy 62
Big Alamance Creek
Dear Mr. Smith:

It is our understanding that D.O.T. is in the Design and Planning
phase of the aforementioned project. Please be aware that Piedmont
Natural Gas has a six inch steel gas main installed on a City of
Burlington right-of-way on the west side of the existing bridge.
We would appreciate any considerations in your designs concerning
this gas line and if we can provide any additional information,
please call me at 910-229-2412.

Sincerely,

Jerry D. Cobb
Operations Manager

JDC/cc

ATTACHMENT F