20090454 Ver 1_More Info Received_20090602

Gregory, Sonia Dom! L? SC'/
From: Ward, Garcy
Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 9:26 AM
To: Gregory, Sonia
Subject: FW: B-5129E, Bridge No. 42 in Pamlico County, NC304 Bridges Revised PCN Pages
Attachments: REV_B5129E_PCN_pages_page7_PlanSheet9_buffers.pdf
Importance: High
E-mail correspondence to and form this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.
From: Cindy Carr [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 3:39 PM
To: Ward, Garcy
Cc: Johnson, Jay B
Subject: B-5129E, Bridge No. 42 in Pamlico County, NC304 Bridges Revised PCN Pages
Importance: High
Garcy
Attached are the revised PCN pages for Bridge No. 42 as requested:
B-5129E (Bridge No. 4J2: Page 5, revised Section 2 to represent previously revised wetland
impacts submitted to Stephen Lane, NCDCM
Page 5, revised Section 3 to remove S3 stream impacts as reflected on
revised plan sheets previously submitted
Plan Sheet 9 of 10, buffer impacts, with hand-drawn revisions at adjacent
canal
I did not make any buffer impact changes because the area you refer to in your email message below
is a CAMA wetland. Please call me if you have any questions or concerns.
Cindy Carr
Senior Scientist
Mulkey Engineers & Consultants
P.O. Box 33127
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3127
919-858-1871 (direct)
919-851-1.918 (fax)
Mulkey... helping you transform everyday challenges into everyday achievements.
http://www.mulkeyinc.com
From: Ward, Garcy [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 4:05 PM
To: Cindy Carr
Cc: Johnson, Jay B; Sutton, Michael W
Subject: RE: B-5129E, Bridge No. 42 in Pamlico County, NC304 Bridges CAMA Permit Drawing revisions
Hey Cindy,
Thanks for sending the revised plans. In addition, I also need the revised impact tables in the PCN (pp 5-
7). I've issued the 401 and BA for 5129 C and D, so I only need this information for the other 3 bridges.
Also, for bridge 42 - B5129E -the canal on the SE side of the road has been determined to be subject to
the buffer rules and should have the 50' buffer and any impacts shown on the plan sheets. In this
situation, the buffers on the canal and those on Gale Cr have an area where they overlap and the
impacts in this area don't need to be counted twice. There did however, appear to be some fill in the
canal buffer outside of the buffers off the creek. These impacts would need to be counted in the buffer
totals. If you have any questions, feel free to give me a call. Thanks - Garcy
E-mail correspondence to and form this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
From: Cindy Carr [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 11:44 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Caldwell. Betty A; Johnson, Jay B; Wendee Smith
Subject: B-5129E, Bridge No. 42 in Pamlico County, NC304 Bridges CAMA Permit Drawing revisions
Importance: High
Garcy,
Attached are the revised pages for the CAMA/404/401 permit package on Bridge No. 42, B-
5129E. These revisions reflect the comments from Stephen Lane, DCM as noted in the email
forwarded to me on May 6 and my telephone conversation with him on May 14. The
revisions include the following items:
• Revised MP-5, page 3 of 4 which contains Section 3 items (e), (f), and (g) - 8.5 x 11
sized
• Revised Stream and Wetland Impacts plan view, which contains reduced 404/CAMA
wetland impacts revised by design modifications and WLB correction - 8.5 x 11 sized
• Revised Profile plan view, which contains shading at excavation areas - 8.5 x 11 sized
Per Stephen's request, I am providing only the sheets with revisions and have initialed and
dated the bottom corner to indicate the sheet contains changes from the original submittal.
I will be sending you revised pages for the other bridge sites by separate email. If you have
any questions or concerns, please call me.
Cindy Carr
Senior Scientist
Mulkey Engineers & Consultants
P.O. Box 33127
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3127
919-858-1871 (direct)
919-851-1918 (fax)
Mulkey... helping you transform everyday challenges into everyday achievements.
http://www.mulkeyinc.com
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
® Wetlands ® Streams - tributaries ® Buffers
® Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number- Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ®P ? T Roadway fill, riprap Tidal Freshwater
Marsh ? Yes
®No ® Corps
? DWQ 0.002
(83 square feet)
W2 ®P ? T Roadway fill, riprap Tidal Freshwater
Marsh ? Yes
® No ® Corps
? DWQ 0.003
(127 sq. ft.)
W3 ®P ? T Roadway fill, riprap Tidal Freshwater
Marsh ? Yes
® No ® Corps
? DWQ 0.001
(8 sq. ft.)
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? PEI T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
1
0.005
(218 sq.ft.)
2h. Comments: B-5129E, Bridge No. 42: All impacts are to CAMA wetlands for fill placement at new bridge end bent
locations and are necessary for guard rail installation.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ®P ? T Fill (bridge end
bent) Gale Creek ® PER
? INT ® Corps
® DWQ 85 11
S2 ® P ? T Fill (bridge end Gale Creek ® PER ® Corps 85 3
bent) ? INT ® DWQ
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
? PER ? Corps
S4 ? P ? T ? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps

- ? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T 7 ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 14
3i. Comments:
Stream impacts include placement of riprap along the stream bank for stabilization at the new end bent locations and are as
follows: St: 118 sq.ft. S2: 93 sq.ft. -
Page 5 of 11
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
'5-5q9
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
® Neuse ?Tor-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number- Reason Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) for Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
orTemporary T impact required?
B1 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B2 ?P?T ?Yes
? No
B3 ®P ? T Fillr?prap Gale Creek ® Nos 501 428
6h. Total buffer impacts 501 428
6i. Comments:
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
I a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Avoidance Measures: Existing roadway and bridge alignment will be maintained during staged construction and an on-site
detour will avoid need for a temporary detour bridge by using a portion of the existing bridge to maintain traffic flow. The new
structure will be constructed using precast concrete components which avoids potential impacts from live concrete. During
demolition, components of the existing bridge will not be dropped in the water. Sediment curtains will be used around relic
wood piles to prevent sediment from entering the water column.
Minimization Measures: Wetland impacts have been minimized to the extent feasible, with impacts occurring only where new
location of bridge bents and piers are required to support the structure and installation of safety guard rails. Existing roadway
and bridge alignment have been maintained to minimize impacts.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Use of the existing roadway to maintain traffic on-site during construction of the new bridge. Use of existing roadway to
operate construction equipment; no equipment will enter wetlands or waters. Use of precast concrete bridge components
avoid use of live concrete.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ?-Yes ® No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWO ? Corps
? Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project? ? Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
A- 61a 9 E
Page 7 of 11
PCN F%m/- Version 1.3 December 10, 08 Version
?? DENOBUFFTESEIR MP 20tACTJES1TO
OT
L IM DENOTES III ZUNI, TD
BUFFER ZONE 2
xJ3i77 FILL REMOVAL
MIETTHOD 11 CLEARING
NOTE: GALE CREEK IS A BLUE LING
STREAM AS SHOWN ON THE
VANDEMERE USGS QUAD MAP
BI
"'194" 7?01' FILL REMO\0L \ n
?FIiI RLMOI 1?
W
Z_
J
_L
U
1-
Q
_- J

EXISTING BRIDGE:
P
6'
l'
'
'
'-
' p_S
CU
'
S
ANS: 1916
: 191
-i
: 1916
-6
8
:
'
'
'
'
' ' B?
'?
1916
-911917
; 1917
-6
-2 L
-.
LENGTH: ICI'-6'
' pp
WIDTH: 28
CLEAR ROADWAY .., ryl
TIMBER CAPS, PILES. AND JOISTS
1'•=
-
?j? zyV
CROWN TO BED: 7' °
WATER DEPTH: 3'
P13OP05ED BRIDGE:
21'CONCRETE CORED SLAB
WIDTH: 33' CLEAR ROADWAY
LENGTH: 1930'; Ip50': I00'
NO DECK DRAINS ALLOWED
B4 _ ";E
.
8ZI IYPACI r 0 bf 7B
PILL REMOVAI. = 0 Gf
8Z2 IM?ACF r 0 s.
FILL REMOVAL _O?If
PLAN VIEW IFOR PERMITTING ONLY
SCALE: 1" :50' LNOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ZONE IBUFFFR IMPACTS ZONE 2 BUFFER IMPACTS
BI j 0_SOUARE FEET AREA I 0 SQUARE FEET
82 -.0 SQUARE FEc AREA 2--0 S_OUARE FEET
B3 501 SO DARE FEET AREA 3 42H SQUARE FEET
84 0 SQUARE FEET AR=4-6 QUARE FEET
TOTAL 501 SQUARE FEET TOTAL____ 1 SGUARE FEETI
0.012 ACRES O.OD ACRES

2, ? to
6J4 N, 1
?O
W
a ? Z
^Yl _J
A4nc s?vLt 7 cfto
x
r?
h
-0lE
f • ?o1j,
0
°U+go
NCDO ll
DIVISION OF HIGHTVAYS
PAMLICO COUNTY
PROJECT: B-5129E
REPLACE BRIDGE R42
ON INC 304 OVER
GALE, CREEK
SHEET 7 OF /0 3-3-09
'p4W 51ai/g9 1&-j1tSED