HomeMy WebLinkAbout20181597 Ver 1_B-4438_CE_Checklist_Final_Signed_12112017_20181206Type I Ground Disturbing Categorical Exclusion Action Classification
Form
STIP Project No.
WBS Element
Federal Project No.
B-4438
38365.1.2
BRSTP-211 (18
Federal funding will be limited to planning and environmental studies only. Right of Way
and Construction will be funded entirely through the North Carolina Highway Trust Fund
— Bridge Replacement Program.
A. Project Description:
STIP project B-4438 proposes to replace Bridge No. 47 on new location (to the
east of existing) while maintaining traffic on the existing bridge during construction.
Bridge No. 47 is located on Green Swamp Road (NC 211) over Bear Pen Island
Swamp in Brunswick County (see Figure 1). The bridge is located approximately 9
miles north of the community of Supply and 13 miles south of the town of Bolton.
The land immediately surrounding the bridge is rural in nature with Juniper Creek
Black Bear Sanctuary, part of the Juniper Creek Game Lands, abutting the bridge
on the west. NC 211 carries a high volume of heavy logging trucks and is a
designated hurricane evacuation route for Brunswick County beaches and heavily
traveled summer seasonal visitor route to the beaches.
The existing bridge is 53 feet long and 25 feet wide, carrying two lanes of traffic.
The replacement structure will be a two span bridge approximately 105 feet long,
with two 12-foot lanes and 3-foot shoulders. The bridge length is based on
preliminary design information and is set by hydraulic requirements. The roadway
grade of the new structure will be raised approximately 3 feet from that of the
existing structure. The total length of the project is approximately 2,095 feet.
The approach roadway will extend approximately 995 feet from the west end of the
new bridge and 995 feet from the east end of the new bridge. The approaches will
be widened to include a 24-foot pavement width, providing two 12-foot lanes.
Grass shoulder width will vary from 8 to 11 feet. The roadway is classified as a
Major collector and will be designed to AASHTO standards with a design speed of
60 mph.
B. Description of Need and Purpose:
NCDOT Bridge Management Unit records indicate Bridge No. 47 has a sufficiency rating
of 5 out of a possible 100 for a new structure.
Bridge No. 47 was built in 1954 and is structurally deficient due to a substructure
condition rated at 4 out of 9. The appraisal of the structural evaluation and deck
geometry was rated at 3 out of 9, which also classifies Bridge No. 47 as functionally
obsolete.
The substructure of Bridge No. 47 is composed of reinforced concrete and timber
elements that are sixty three years old. Timber components have 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 elements are
damaged or prematurely deteriorated. However, past a certain degree of deterioration,
most timber elements become impractical to maintain and upon eligibility are
programmed for replacement. All timber components are experiencing an increasing
degree of deterioration that can no longer be addressed by reasonable maintenance
activities; therefore the bridge is approaching the end of its useful life.
Bridge No. 47's superstructure is also composed of timber and reinforced concrete
components. These components are experiencing an increasing degree of
deterioration that can no longer be addressed by reasonable maintenance
activities. Both the east and west approaches of the bridge are cracked with
settlement. Longitudinal cracks are prevalent both to the right and left of the center
line. Replacement of the bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
C. Cateaorical Exclusion Action Classification:
� TYPE I A
D. Proposed Improvements
28. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of
grade separation to replace the existing at grade railroad crossing, if the actions
meet the constraints in 23 CFR 771.117e (1-6).
E. Special Project Information:
Schedule: Right of Way (ROW) is scheduled for January 2018 and construction is
scheduled for January 2019.
Costs: Costs are based on 2017 pricing.
Construction costs $1,800,000
ROW costs $ 17,440
Utilitv costs $ 23,346
Total $ 1,840,786
Alternatives:
No Build — The no build alternative would result in eventually closing the road
which is unacceptable given the volume of traffic served by NC 211.
Rehabilitation — Bridge No. 47 was constructed in 1954 and the timber materials
within the bridge are reaching the end of their average useful life span of 50 years.
Rehabilitation would require replacing the timber components which would
constitute effectively replacing the bridge.
Off-site Detour — An off-site detour alternative is not feasible given the limited
connectivity to other major routes in the project vicinity (off-site detour is 30 miles
long).
On-site Detour — On-site detour alternatives were eliminated following a field site
visit with environmental agencies. The construction of a temporary detour alignment
would require approximately the same impacts as a new location alignment and
would likely increase project costs and construction timeframe.
New Alignment (Preferred) — The new alignment alternative proposes to construct
a new bridge east of the existing alignment. The existing bridge will be used to
maintain traffic on NC 211 during construction of the new alignment bridge and
approaches. The existing bridge and approaches will be removed once traffic is
shifted to the new alignment section. A new alignment alternative to the west was
not evaluated due to potential impacts to the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC), Juniper Creek Game Lands, Black Bear Sanctuary. Roadway typical
section is illustrated on project plan sheets (see attached Project Plans)
F
NCDOT Division 3 concurs that this is the preferred alternative.
Traffic:
Base Year (2015)
Future (2040)
TT-STs
Duals
- 1,700 vpd
- 3,000 vpd
- 9%
- 6%
There is a crash history at this bridge; nine crashes in five years. Two vehicles were
reported to have struck the bridge.
NC 211 functions as a designated preliminary hurricane evacuation route in
Brunswick County.
Access:
There is one access road (Little Loop Road) that provides access to silvicultural
land, which is actively logged. This land is located on the east side of the project
study area. Access to Little Loop Road may be temporarily impacted during bridge
construction (see attached aerial map). Since access may be only slightly modified
for a short duration of time during construction, substantial disruption to traffic
maintenance during construction is not anticipated.
Public Involvement:
Landowner notification letters were sent to potentially impacted property owners
within the project study area. No responses from our notification were received.
Based on the lack of response, it was determined that any additional public
involvement (newsletters or meetings) activities would take place closer to the
project construction let date.
Because notable Spanish-speaking populations requiring language assistance are
located within the project study area, the NCDOT Public Involvement Unit should
be consulted to determine appropriate measures assuring meaningful public
involvement to satisfy the requirements of Executive Order 12898.
ect Imqact Criteria Checklists:
Tvpe I& II - Ground Disturbinq Actions Yes No
FHWA APPROVAL ACTIVITIES THRESHOLD CRITERIA
(FHWA Siqnature Required if "Yes" Selected� X
If the proposed improvement (identified above in Sections C& D) is a:
• Type I Action for #s 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, &/or 30; &/or
• Type II Action
then answer the threshold criteria questions (below) and questions 8- 31 for ground disturbing actions.
In addition, if an of questions 1-7 are marked " es" then the CE will require FHWA approval.
� Does the project require formal consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife � �
Service (USFWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)?
2 Does the project result in impacts subject to the conditions of the Bald and � �
Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA)?
3 Does the project generate substantial controversy or public opposition, for any � �
reason, following appropriate public involvement?
4 Does the project cause disproportionately high and adverse impacts relative to � �
low-income and/or minority populations?
5 Does the project involve a residential or commercial displacement, or a � �
substantial amount of right of way acquisition?
6 Does the project require an Individual Section 4(f) approval? ❑ Q
Does the project include adverse effects that cannot be resolved with a
7 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) under Section 106 of the National Historic � �
Preservation Act (NHPA) or have an adverse effect on a National Historic
Landmark NHL ?
If any of questions 8 through 31 are marked "yes" then additional information will be required for those
questions in Section G.
Other Considerations Yes No
Does the project result in a finding of "may affect not likely to adversely affecY'
8 or less for listed species, or designated critical habitat under Section 7 of the Q ❑
Endangered Species Act (ESA)?
9 Does the project impact anadromous fish? ❑ ❑X
Does the project impact waters classified as Outstanding Resource Water
10 �ORW), High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supply Watershed Critical Areas, � �
303(d) listed impaired water bodies, buffer rules, or Submerged Aquatic
Ve etation SAV ?
11 Does the project impact waters of the United States in any of the designated � �
mountain trout streams?
12 Does the project require a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Individual � �
Section 404 Permit?
13 Will the project require an easement from a Federal Energy Regulatory � �
Commission FERC licensed facilit ?
Does the project include a Section 106 of the NHPA effects determination
14 other than a no effect, including archaeological remains? Are there project ❑ ❑x
commitments identified?
15 Does the project involve hazardous materials and landfills? ❑ Q
Does the project require work encroaching and adversely affecting a
16 regulatory floodway or work affecting the base floodplain (100-year flood) � �
elevations of a water course or lake, pursuant to Executive Order 11988 and
23 CFR 650 sub art A?
Is the project in a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) county and � �
17 substantially affects the coastal zone and/or any Area of Environmental
Concern (AEC)?
18 Does the project require a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) permit? ❑ ❑X
Other Considerations (continued� Yes No
� g Does the project involve construction activities in, across, or adjacent to a � �
desi nated Wild and Scenic River present within the pro'ect area?
20 Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) resources? ❑ Q
21 Does the project impact federal lands (e.g. U.S. Forest Service (USFS), � �
USFWS, etc. or Tribal Lands?
22 Does the project involve any changes in access control? ❑ Q
23 Does the project have a permanent adverse effect on local traffic patterns or � �
communit cohesiveness?
24 Will maintenance of traffic cause substantial disruption? ❑ Q
Is the project inconsistent with the STIP or the Metropolitan Planning
25 Organization's (MPO's) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) (where ❑ ❑X
a licable ?
Does the project require the acquisition of lands under the protection of
Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act, the Federal Aid in Fish
26 Restoration Act, the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, Tennessee Valley � �
Authority (TVA), Tribal Lands, or other unique areas or special lands that were
acquired in fee or easement with public-use money and have deed restrictions
or covenants on the ro ert ?
27 Does the project involve Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) � �
bu out ro erties under the Hazard Miti ation Grant Pro ram HMGP ?
28 Does the project include a de minimis or programmatic Section 4(f)? ❑ Q
29 Is the project considered a Type I under the NCDOT's Noise Policy? ❑ ❑X
30 Is there prime or important farmland soil impacted by this project as defined by � �
the Farmland Protection Polic Act FPPA ?
31 Are there other issues that arose during the project development process that � �
affected the pro'ect decision?
G. Additional Documentation as Required from Section F
Question 8 — Endangered Species
Northern Long-eared Bat:
The US Fish and Wildlife Service 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 NLEB for the NCDOT program is "May Effect, Likely
to Adversely AffecY'. 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 federal nexus in Divisions 1-8, which includes Brunswick
County, where STIP project B-4438 is located.
Red-cockaded woodpecker:
Habitat Description: The red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) typically occupies open,
mature stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine, for foraging and
nesting/roosting habitat. The RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in
living pine trees, aged 60 years or older, and which are contiguous with pine stands
at least 30 years of age to provide foraging habitat. The foraging range of the RCW
is normally no more than 0.5 miles.
Biological Conclusion: May Affect — Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Suitable habitat for the red-cockaded woodpecker exists in the study area and
adjacent to the study area. Forests in the study area are mostly comprised of a
closed hardwood canopy but significant areas of pine savanna with a few mature
trees are located within the study area and immediately adjacent to the study area. A
half-mile survey was conducted 01/05/15 and no individuals or cavities were
observed. A review of NCNHP records, updated January 2015, indicates no known
RCW occurrence within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Cooley's meadowrue:
Habitat Description: Cooley's meadowrue, documented in the Pine Savanna natural
community, occurs in circumneutral soils in sunny, moist to wet grass-sedge bogs,
wet-pine savannas over calcareous clays, and savannah-like areas, often at the
ecotones of intermittent drainages or non-riverine swamp forests. This rhizomatous
perennial herb is also found along plowed firebreaks, roadside ditches and rights-of-
way, forest clearings dominated by grass or sedge, and power line or utility rights-of-
way. The species requires some type of disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, periodic
fire) to maintain its open habitat. The plant typically occurs on slightly acidic (pH 5.8-
6.6) soils that are loamy fine sand, sandy loam, or fine sandy loam; at least
seasonally moist or saturated; and mapped as Foreston, Grifton, Muckalee,
Torhunta, or Woodington series.
Biological Conclusion: May Affect — Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Suitable habitat for Cooley's meadowrue is present in the study area along roadside
shoulders and utility easements. A survey for rough-leaf loosestrife was conducted
during the growing season and no individuals were found.
Rough-leaf loosestrife:
Habitat Description: Rough-leaved loosestrife, endemic to the Coastal Plain and Sandhills
of North and South Carolina, generally occurs in the ecotones or edges between
longleaf pine uplands and pond pine pocosins in dense shrub and vine growth on
moist to seasonally saturated sands and on shallow organic soils overlaying sand
(spodosolic soils). Occurrences are found in such disturbed habitats as roadside
depressions, maintained power and utility line rights-of-way, firebreaks, and trails.
The species prefers full sunlight, is shade intolerant, and requires areas of
disturbance (e.g., clearing, mowing, and periodic burning) where the overstory is
minimal. It can, however, persist vegetatively for many years in overgrown, fire-
suppressed areas. Blaney, Gilead, Johnston, Kalmia, Leon, Mandarin, Murville,
Torhunta, and Vaucluse are some of the soil series that the plant occurs on.
Biological Conclusion: May Affect — Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Suitable habitat for rough-leaf loosestrife is present in the study area along roadside
shoulders and utility easements. A survey for rough-leaf loosestrife was conducted
during the growing season and no individuals were found.
Question 16 — FEMA Co-ordination
The Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program (FMP), to
determine status of project 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).
Question 30 — Prime or Important Farmland Soil
A preliminary screening of farmland conversion impacts in the project area has been
completed (NRCS Form AD-1006 for point projects, Part VI only) as part of the
Community Impact Assessment (April 2015), and a total score of 71 out of 160 points was
calculated for the B-4438 project site. Since the total site assessment score exceeds the
60-point threshold established by NRCS, notable project impacts to eligible soils are
anticipated. All alternatives studied are anticipated to have approximately the same impact
to eligible soils.
H. Proiect Commitments
See Attached Project Commitments Greensheet
I. Cateqorical Exclusion Approval
STIP Project No.
WBS Element
Federal Project No.
Prepared By:
�a/�1/�.���
Date
Prepared For:
Reviewed 6y:
1ti �� d
at
�
�
B-4438
38365.1.2
BRSTP-211 (18)
��� �
Julie FI ch-Pate,
Moffatt & Nichol
�-- i��,
LEED AP
NCDOT F'raj��t Deliv�ry Team
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Ro�'bert Deaton, Project Development Engineer
Project Delivery Team
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Approved
Certified
...12'��' f�
Date
• If Type I(Non-Ground Disturbing) Categorical Exclusion
\A/ITr1 an al'1C�/GP !1T S�rll1}� T!'1 ni icc�Tinn <
•r�u� �w�� ui.v •v� v� v av Muv a�v�� v.
• If Type I or Type I1 (Ground Disturbing} Categorical
Exclusions with an answer of "no" to all of the threshold
questions (1 through 7� of Section F.
• If Type I(Non-Ground Disturbing) Categorical Exclusion
with an answer of "yes" to question 3.
• If Type I or Type II (Ground Disturbing) Categorical
Exclusions with an answer of "yes" to any of the
threshold questions (1 through 7) of Section F.
•!f classified as Type III Categorical Exclusion.
.
Brian Yamamoto, PF,,,�eputy Team Lead
Project Delivery Group
North Carolina Department of Transportation
FHWA Approved: For Projects Certified by NCDOT (above), FHWA signature
required.
N/A
Date John F. Sullivan, III, PE, Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Proposed Replacement of
Bridge Number 47
On NC 211 Over Bear Pen Island Swamp
Brunswick County, North Carolina
Federal Aid Project No. BRST-211 (18)
WBS No. 38365.1.2
TIP Project No. B-4438
Hydraulics Unit - FEMA Coordination
The Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program (FMP) to
determine the status of the project with regard to applicability of NCDOT's
Memorandum of Agreement with FMP (dated Apri122, 2013, modified February 5,
2015), or approval of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent
final Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
Division 3 Construction
This project involves construction activities on or adjacent to FEMA-regulated steam(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.
Categorical Exclusion Page 1 of 1
Green Sheet
December 2017
� Brunswic
County
����
�
Surface Water
�-----�
L__ _ �County Boundary
Municipal Boundary
� Airport
�
�N
,� i ; .-- � , - `��_
�" �o�° �t.
y�,� .
,5-4438
��-�:
1.25 2.5
Resource: NCDOT GIS, NCDENR DWQ.
Miles
�w=� •+ ,�[ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION
� �# DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENTAND
��.:�o- ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS UNIT
BRUNSWICK COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 47 ON NC 211
OVER BRANCH OF JUNIPER CREEK
B-4438
WBS No. 38365.1.2
FIGURE 1 VICINITY
C
�
C
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
Q
�
�
�,
�
��
�
�
m
,
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
0
�
�
�
�
�
�
m
,
0
0
Q
�
�
�
�
��
o�
N�
��
��
��
�
-ALT 2 -
Pl Sta l5 +23.38 Pl Sta 20 �20.2/ Pl Sta 23+92.82
0= 4° 3/' 23.2" �LT I �= 4° 3/' 23.2" l RT l 0= 4° 3/' 23.2" �RT l
D= 0° 37' 22.0" D= l° 4/' 24.5" D= l° 4/' 24.5"
L= 726.28' L= 267.62' L= 267.62'
T= 363.33' T= 133.88' T= 133.88'
R= 9,200.00' R= 3,390.00' R= 3,390.00'
SE = NC SE _ .04 SE _ .04
DS = 60 mph DS = 60 mph DS = 60 mph
lNC = N/A lNC = 27.75' lNC = 27.75'
O
r
� o
� o
� �
+ +
rn �
�
0 0
� �
O �
� �
� N
� J
Q �
i
— 2
1�E LI 1�ME1�l T— 1� R TH
M 11�1 T 11� T FFI 1�l E�!�l T
•
�
�
�
�
� c �
� � �
� � �
rn �� �
� �o �
� o �
� -o � � � =
� �
� o \ \'
� �
�� � � ,
�
� � � � �
� �
` �
�
� � ��'
� �- � � �
�
� �
,� � �
� � �� ��
� ,
� �
� ,
�
�
�
�
+
�
0
�
�
�
�
I
N
Q
I
��� �^
`
�� ���
�� o
�o
�j
0
N
FOR —ALT2— PROFILE SEE SHEET 8
� BRIDGE APPROACH SLAB
50 25 0 50 100
�
—ALT 2 — P� Sta. 22 +58.95 �
—ALT 2 — PT Sta. 2/ +53.95
, ',
,
\ -� , 'NLB- -
j � \ � ' _ � - - - - - - - - - -
_ - - - _ � � �
_ , _ _
, , - _ -
- . : _, ti -,; :R , . . - , -
-� � � � ���� -
, _
_ _� , ` � �� � � �
,
-- --- _ : _ _. _ ,, _ - - � _
- -
- --- - --
� --- ---- -------- --- -- _
�
- --- -- -- ----
� ,; , � � ,,
� �� �, 5 /� ��� F �
------- -- -- ---- F 1 � —_��� � i
- - - - m r
-_ ,— - --- --- \ � - � �
,___---- --------,
- - ---- ------------ - -- --- - -- -- - -- --- -- --- --- -- �
----- - -
, . _ . . � �- 7
, > ,- „ , , >- ,- � - � - �: � . -- - -
-- - , B� 5
- - = - - - T-- - V� = - - - -
,
_ - - � � , `_ - - _ - -� - - -- - �� �
- . � V -
- _ � _`s , � �
� �-� � �� ��; . � < � .,�,, �� ' ,�-r �, �� � _,�, _,�y���� ��� ���_ G U 3 0 TL 3 � � � �TYPE B 7 � �
1 � �
� �� � , _. , � �' � � / � � � � � � � � � � �_ � �- --�� � � � � � � � � �„ � � � -, _ �� , . �$�l ,
25' LT&RT � � �-�� — = a�M - - -- - - - - - - e�M - - - - - - - - - - i � � _ - - - --� I
� \ � - - - - - - - I
_ - ,
�-p�� i ` �' ��' 3 ��'��� �� �
� —�-
FTAPER = ___-- `, N _ o� o_~--� M -- - a�M- ---- S .3�
----- o � � — —
.� , _-
NC 2/l fGREEN SWAMP ROAD) ° I S 43° 58'T 59.��� E
�
�
' �
� %� � � (.%)
/�
W
- --- �I
�
� � � O
, `-
>��� F �— 0
N _' � � 1 �
i � ..
TYP B�77� � � �
N
,
59.0' � �
n1 � � - - - - - - -
- - - - - � - - -- -� -
-p - - - - -- —�_ -- � -i - -
_ _ - -- ----- 77 � TYP�
---- �--
N --\ ��' 8:1 � GRAU 350 TL-3 F TYPE B E-77 �
.
_ /- O - - - - — —_� F � - - - - - - - - __ !
-- - --- --- - - ---- __---- - --
_— - - - � � -�
-- -
�. ------ C C o 27' - ---------
_ _ - - - - - -
� - ------ -_-- -- -
+ TYP _ ` �:; - - w�
�,, _. �, F ��
F
����� �, • � _s_ - _ � - � � `� � � � � - �, -
- - . _.
� -� ���-
- -
, ,� _ , _ ,� -
� � �` � � � ` � �-
' , , � �,
- - _, - - -- , ,_ - - - - �
� / -eiM_ J
` - , _,
� � _� -� � � � � � � �, �
/ \
� � � ��- � � ✓ ��
� _e�M— — �
BEGIN T lP PROJECT B-4438
—ALT 2 — ST Ao l2 +OOo00
ANTICIPATED DESIGN
REGIONAL TIER
DESIGN STAN DARDS =
DESIGN SPEED
ADT 2015
ADT 2040
K
D
D UAL
TTST
MIN. RADIUS
Nti�X. G RAD E
K sag
K c rest
S E Nti�X.
CLASSIFICATION
TERRAIN
DESIGN EXCEPTION
DATA
AAS HTO
= 60 MPH
= 1700
= 3000
= 9%
= 55%
= 6%
= 9%
= 1330'
= 5%
= 136
= 151
= 0.06
= MAJOR COLLECTOR
= LEVEL
= wA
VAR. SLOPE
SEE X-SECTIONS
�
�
3 ;1
8'
11'
W/GR
08
� -ALT2-
12' ! 12'
, OZ
:
12'
GRADE
POI NT
02 , 08
4:�
ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION
VAR. SLOPE
3�1 SEE X-SECTIONS
6:1
3'
3'
��B- -� � - -- - - � V
� � - _ -- I�
� � �-- �_,�, _ �. J
� _�-���r Q
_ - I� _
�
� -
ZQ
�y', y,,- �
�, �,
�a � J
� J �' ,' �
� ' �,
v
�,
`�� .�
5,-
,
��
� ��� �
� Q
�
�- -
�� -
)
�.
��- �
��
��IN�B� -� -� �- �
�
�
` i�c �- � - � e�M � - � - � - �
BEGIN BRIDGE �
—ALT 2 — ST Aa 2/ +54,00 +/ —
/�� �,,e
, �
_.� �, / �. _
END BRIDGE
—ALT 2 — ST Ao 22 +59000 +/ —
� -ALT2-
�n' r.i F�R Rnnnwnv
BRIDGE TYPICAL SECTION
C
�
�
�
FOR -ALT2- PROFILE SEE SHEET 8
� BRIDGE APPROACH SLAB
�
�
�
�
Z
U
�
�
C�`
C
O
�
�
�
Q
�
�
� � � ��
�����
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
Q
�
�
L
�
�
�
�
m
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
3
�
�
0
�
�
�
�
�
�
m
�
0
0
Q
�
,
�
��
o�
N�
��
��
��
�
�
J
Q
�
�
Z
v
�
Q
�
BR 1� I
— 2
-ALT 2 -
Pl Sto 23+92.82 Pl Sto 28+89.89
p= 4° 3/' 23.2" �RT> �= 4° 3/' 23.2" �LT)
D= l° 4/' 24.5" D= 0° 37' 22.0"
L = 267.62' L = 726.28'
T = 133.88' T = 363.33'
R = 3,390.00' R = 9,200.00'
SE _ .04 SE = NC
DS = 60 mph DS = 60 mph
lNC = 27.75' lNC = N/A
— 1�l R TH
1� E�!�l T
•
$►
E _
11'
W/GR
VAR. SLOPE
SEE X-SECTIONS
�
3'•�
,:
� -ALT2-
12' � 12'
:
1�1E LI 1�ME1�l T
M I1�T 11� T FFl
12'
3'
i
�
I
� GRADE
� POI NT
�
, 02 � 02 , 08
� 4:�
ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION
%
b :�
VAR. SLOPE
SEE X-SECTIONS
� -ALT2-
30' CLEAR ROADWAY
12' � 12'
I
I
� GRADE
� POI NT
�
02 � 02
,
BRIDGE TYPICAL SECTION
�-�o ti
�
�`� c�'i
ti�o
�o
Ij
NC 2H IGREEN SWAMP ROADJ
ANTICIPATED DESIGN
REGIONAL TIER
DESIGN STANDARDS =
DESIGN SPEED
ADT 2 015
ADT 2 040
K
D
D UAL
TTST
MIN. RADIUS
MAX. G RAD E
3' K sa g
K c rest
S E Nti�X.
CLASSIFICATION
TERRAIN
DESIGN EXCEPTION
�_�_1
AASHTO
= 60 MPH
= 1700
= 3000
= 9%
= 55%
= 6%
= 9%
= 1330'
= 5%
= 136
= 151
= 0.06
= MAJOR COLLECTOR
= LEVE L
= wA
� _ �
�
�
�
�
�
s
�
Q
�
L
�
�
�
�
m
/
LL
/
�
�
3
�
�
O
�
/
�
C�
�
�
m
/
�
0
Q
U
/
�
��
o�
��
��
��
��
� � � � PROJECT REFERENCE NO. SHEET NO.
r I I �� I
�
� � ���� ���� �� � ���� ���� ���� B-4438 8
�
� I ROADWAY DESIGN HYDRAULICS
� ENGINEER ENGINEER
I I i �
���I �����sll's �' ��e� i\I �
d➢� IV�'J[° �J�E 1F�1[8 % VV t�1��Ud�d'JCI�N
� � —A�T2— ,
o � _______ _ ___ _ ______.__ _ ___ __
_.___ __.__ _ __ _ __
______.__ _._.___
___ ____ __ ___ __ _ ___
__ ____� �
o �
0
o �
+ i,i�
N I DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
� UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
N � , '
l . , . . . . . ,", 4700 FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD. SUITE 300
I�
m o f f a t t& n i c h o I RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27609
PE F-0105
� (919)781-4626 VOICE (919/ 781-4869 FAX
� � Pl = 15+50.00 Pl = 17+50.00 � � ,
� �v EL = 64.77' EL = 63.75' , � .
�� i I VC __ l40' , C= l80' END BRIDGE
�� �, �, ' K-_ l73 � K= 222 __ -ALT2- STA 22+59 +/- _._ ._
c� ,� DS - 60 mph
DS = 75 mph BEGIN BRIDGE
�W � � I �� ��
W J i i
� � � � � � � -ALT 2 - STA 2/ +54 +/ - �
m W l +l .300 I % � -��0.5/ % I � +10.
_
— — — -- — — ---- — — ---- — — ---- — ---- — — 1'� . t8 °o— —1 �:.�6 ��--� �� I -- -- �'
_
�
--- � — � �. �. : .
— _ _ _ � :
� _ .._'__�"-.-- — ---- — � �-j— �I,�✓-;►.►���.;
�� �, I ' I I
_
- . _: I f : __ � _ � -
� �
I � � I � � �
I I I I
� � � a� . _ . .
� � �
I I i� ii
i ii _ . _
:
___-__-- --------- — —�---� — ---_I'_
ii i li li
-- ____---- —______- ------ -----___— ___----- ____--- ____---- --- � ---___ _--- � ------- � � --- ----- ---- --- _------ FOR -ALT2- PLAN SEE SHEET 6
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
�
` _
. —A�T2— - � � � .
� �� ��� ��
_ o ��
� �
_ �
� �
, -
� _ _ _
� -
: _ � ��� ���� -�� ���� �
�� Pl = 24+00.00 _�-, _ _-, _-_, _- _- � � � _ � , , , , , , , .
EL = 65.70' _ _ <o, _�
VC = l80' Pl = 28+70.00 - - - - - -
�
K=/99 a� -
- DS = 65 m h-- EL = 62.86' __ � �, - -
p VC - l80'
i �i �i = Q �
K /99
�' W
� i � � DS = 70 mph - ��
_ � _ ��
�� ,; - -
� (+10. � 000 ° �- 0.60 3% � � � �
--- -- - --___��___— _
.._, ...,.* — — —
: _ _� — — �-. -- � — � =�0. 053 0 � l +) .300 � % — — — — — — -
—
--
_
, � �`r� i _ � � �
�- �^ �„��� ��'`l �� � i i I i i i
.
.
II
II _ . . . . — — - . . . . . _ _ . —. . . . —. --. . — . . . . . — . —. . .
— — — — — -- -- --- — — -- — — — — — -- --- — — — — --
I I
_ . . —. — — . . . . — . — . . . —. — . — . . . —. — . — . . _
IIII
�
FOR -ALT 2- PLAN SEE SHEET 7
�
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
o��� ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES R� �''�
$a�. �--..
'�Q� �� � ��` '` PRESENT OR AFFECTED FORM �`�� � a
_�� p�; �.� �q ss �
'� o�°. '�' This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not �„•...,:. ,a
��;.� valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the � 4
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No.
WBS No:
F.A. No:
B-4438
County.•
Document.•
Brunswick
38365.1.2
N/A
Federal Permit Required?
Minimum Criteria Sheet or PCE
Funding.• � State ❑ Federal
� Yes ❑ No Permit Type: NWP
Project Description:
The NCDOT proposes to replace Bridge No. 47 on NC 211 over Bear Pen Islands Swamp in Brunswick
County. As defined by the NCDOT, the Area of Potential Effects (APE) for archaeology measures
approximately 1,400 feet (426.72 m) long (centered on the mid point of the existing bridge). The corridor
is approximately 200 feet (91.44 m) wide, extending 100 feet (30.48 m) on each side of the centerline of
the roadway/bridge.
SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Archaeology Group reviewed
the subject project and determined:
� There are no National Register listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES within the project's
area of potential effects.
❑ No subsurface archaeological investigations are required for this project.
� Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources
considered eligible for the National Register.
❑ All identified archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all
compliance for archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has been completed for this project.
� There are no National Register Eligible or Listed ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES present
or affected by this project. (Attach any notes or documents as needec�
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED "
form far Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
1 of 13
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
RECOMMENDATION
An archaeological survey and evaluation of the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 47 on NC 211 over
Bear Pen Islands Swamp in Brunswick County was conducted on April 14, 2015 by Terri Russ and Laura
Griesmer of Environmental Services, Inc. (ESI). As a result of the investigations, no archaeological sites
were located within the project's APE. No further archaeological investigations are needed for this
project. I concur with this recommendation as the proposed bridge replacement project will not impact
significant archaeological resources. If the project expands and impacts subsurface areas beyond the
defined APE, further archaeological consultations will be necessary.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: � Map(s)
Other:
Signed: �
I ��
,
❑ Previous Survey Info
� Photos ❑Correspondence
�G�
27, 2015
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
Date
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED "
form far Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
2of13
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
ESI conducted an intensive archaeological survey for the replacement of Bridge No. 47 on NC 211 over
Bear Pen Islands Swamp in Brunswick County, North Carolina (Figures 1 and 2). As defined by the
NCDOT, the survey area (Area of Potential Effects [APE]) for archaeology measures approximately
1,400 feet (426.72 m) long (centered on the mid-point of the existing bridge). The corridor is
approximately 200 feet (91.44 m) wide, extending 100 feet (30.48 m) on each side of the centerline of the
roadway/bridge. A portion of the APE is located on State-owned property (Juniper Creek Game Land,
managed by the Wildlife Resources Commission). As such, a State Archaeological Resources Protection
Act (ARPA) permit was obtained prior to initiation of fieldwork (ARPA Pernut #116).
Background Summary
A map review and site file search conducted by NCDOT on 9 February 2015 revealed that no
comprehensive archaeological survey of this bridge has been conducted; however, one previously
recorded archaeological site has been identified within a one-half mile radius of the APE. Site 31BW380
is located outside of the APE on the southeast side of Bear Pen Islands Swamp. The site, identified in
1980 by Coastal Zone Resources, was recorded as a surface scatter of prehistoric ceramics within a
previously clearcut and gaded area on the southeast side of the swamp. A search of the North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Office online database (HPOWEB GIS Service) revealed no previously
recorded historic architectural resources within the APE that have the potential to yield intact
archaeological deposits.
Topographic maps, aerial photography, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) soil survey
maps, and historic maps were examined for information on natural or cultural factors that might have
affected site locations or preservation. Earlier maps of the vicinity, including the 1910 county map, c.
1930-43 Rural Delivery Route map, and 1930 County Road Survey do not appear to show a road in this
area at all (Figures 3�). Although the current bridge was constructed in 1954, the 1962 highway map of
Brunswick County (Figure 5) is the earliest clear depiction of the current road alignment and bridge. No
structures in the vicinity of the APE are depicted on any of these maps.
Environmental Setting
The APE is located within the Lower Coastal Plain physiographic region and consists of the floodplain
and adjacent T1 terraces of Bear Pen Islands Swamp. NC 211 (Green Swamp Road NW) crosses Bear
Pen Islands Swamp roughly northwest to southeast. Bear Pen Island Swamp drains southeast into Juniper
Creek, eventually flowing into the Waccamaw River within the Lumber River Basin.
Map units (soil series) are named for the major soil or soils within the unit, but may have minor
inclusions of other soils (NRCS 2014). The floodplain of the APE is mapped as Dorovan muck, a very
poorly drained, frequently flooded soil series (Table 1). The adjacent terrace on either side of the
floodplain is mapped as Foreston loamy fine sand, a moderately well drained, nearly level soil series
encountered on flats and broad interstream divides.
Table 1: Project Area Soils
Soil Name Code Slope Drainage Landform
Dorovan muck Do —% Very Poorly Floodplains
Foreston loamy fine sand Fo —% Moderately Well Flats, Broad interstream
divides on marine terraces
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED "
form far Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
3of13
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
The current archaeological investigation included pedestrian (visual) inspection and shovel testing within
the APE. Photographs of the project area are shown as Figures C�14. A systematic visual inspection of
the APE was undertaken to search for surface artifacts, above-ground resources, or other signs of cultural
activity. A total of eight shovel tests were excavated during the current investigation (see Figure 2 for
shovel test locations). The APE was divided into four quadrants (e.g., northeast, southeast) based roughly
on their locations relative to the bridge. Each quadrant of the APE is described below.
The northwestern quadrant of the APE consisted of a clearcut powerline corridor and adjacent field of
scrub pine and vegetation. A wide drainage ditch runs along the side of the existing road (NC 211). The
portion of this quadrant south of Little Loop Road was very poorly drained and was surrounded by
drainage ditches. Shovel testing was limited to the area north of Little Loop Road, which appeared to be
fairly dry and was mapped as containing Foreston loamy iine sand, a moderately well drained soil series.
Three shovel tests were excavated in this quadrant of the APE (STs 1-3). ST 1 encountered disturbed
soils, likely resulting from timber harvesting or the maintenance and grading of Little Loop Road.
Pushpiles of soil, gravel, and asphalt as well as deep ruts and furrows from heavy equipment were noted
in the vicinity. ST 2 encountered 20 centimeters of dark grayish brown sandy loam over 20 centimeters
of olive brown loamy sand. Subsoil was a brownish yellow sandy clay, encountered at 40 centimeters
below ground surface. Soils in ST 3, located near the northeastern edge of the APE, were poorly drained
and consisted of 30 centimeters of dark grayish brown sandy loam over a wet, very dark gray loam.
The southwestern quadrant of the APE consisted of a maintained pine stand that appeared to have been
recently subjected to controlled burning (see Figure 9). Ground cover in this portion of the APE was
limited to low, scrubby vegetation including blueberry, fern, and various grasses. Five shovel tests were
excavated in this portion of the APE (STs 4-8). Shovel Tests ST�7 encountered 20 centimeters of dark
grayish brown loamy fine sand over 25 centimeters of light brown sand. Subsoil was a yellowish brown
to dark yellowish brown sandy clay. Shovel Test ST8 was poorly drained and consisted of 35 centimeters
of very dark gray sandy loam over mottled black and pale brown wet loamy sand.
The remaining portions of the APE (the northeastern and southeastern quadrants) consisted of very poorly
drained floodplain with standing water visible. No shovel testing was conducted in these areas; however,
a systematic visual inspection of the APE was undertaken for surface evidence of historic or prehistoric
cultural activity.
Excavated shovel tests measured 30 centimeters in diameter and were excavated to sterile subsoil,
hydric/saturated soils, the water table, or 75 centimeters below surface (whichever was encountered first).
All soils were excavated by natural levels (soil strata) and screened through a 0.25-inch hardware mesh.
No artifacts were recovered from any of the shovel tests.
Based on the results of the background research and field investigations, no archaeological resources are
located within the APE for Bridge No. 47 in Brunswick County. It is recommended that this project be
allowed to proceed without concern for impacts to significant cultural resources. Should the boundary of
the proposed APE be expanded or moved, additional archaeological investigations may be necessary, as
determined in consultation with the NCDOT and/or SHPO per the Programmatic Agreement.
.��G�yl�u��
Terri Russ
Senior Archaeology Manager
Environmental Services, Inc.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED "
form far Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
4of13
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
REFERENCES CITED
National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
2014 Brunswick County, North Carolina Soil Survey. Natural Resources Conservation Service,
United States Department of Agriculture Web Soil Survey.
http://websoilsurvev.nres.usda.gov/ accessed 18 March 2015.
North Carolina State Highway Commission
1930 Brunswick County, Third District. North Carolina State Highway Commission, Bureau of
Public Roads. On file, North Carolina State Archives, Raleigh.
http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/2072/rec/75 accessed 23 March
2015.
1953 Brunswick County. North Carolina State Highway and Public Warks Commission. On file,
North Carolina State Archives, Raleigh.
http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/7752/rec/82 accessed 23 March
2015.
1962 Brunswick County. North Carolina State Highway Commission, Bureau of Public Roads. On
iile, North Carolina State Archives, Raleigh.. On file, North Carolina State Archives,
Raleigh. http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/ncmaps/id/6491/rec/84
accessed 23 March 2015.
Smith, Charles Henry
1910 Map of Brunswick Counry. On file, North Carolina State Archives, Raleigh.
http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/306/rec/64 accessed 23 March
2015.
United States Bureau of Soils: North Carolina Department of Agriculture
1937 Soil Map, North Carolina, Brunswick County Sheet (1932). On file, North Carolina State
Archives, Raleigh. http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/1141/rec/78
accessed 23 March 2015.
United States Post Office
1930 Rural Delivery Routes, Brunswick County, North Carolina [c.1930-1943J. On file, North
Carolina State Archives, Raleigh.
http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/1805/rec/76 accessed 23 March
2015.
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
1990 Honey Island, N. C., 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED "
form far Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
Sof13
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
Figure 1. Project Location (Honey Island, NC USGS 7.5-Minute Topographic Quadrangle).
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELlGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED"
form for Minor Transportarion Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic ,4greement.
6of13
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
�
1� .
- '. ST3 ,��,�
' �ST2 . . �
STS - �
� �,5T1
» T�•�,-�
sTs.f � '�.'`'�w�
.�� � ¢
fsTS ��
Y �� � �s,'� , '.. �.'.l -�
� a .�.
:� 1y1ij x.,� r �, f`i
�[, �!' � �•Y ST4 a.
G 7' 1i .�`�S,'k ''�-��ir��'� '! i�, � :
�
l�: �'"o� :�' .r+ ,:• ;,.�- � � - . r �
'`` � . A � ;�S' �1" - r�'R�. . ��
`��..;�� t. ���� • " • r
��'��t;�`� � '��� `D � N
��Z �..: �, ti-.�. . { .
� ; . � fN ,�r`;'�,, `P a► • � Q'
�'f .
✓ x.�.s, �.� �,.,� . �.
�� � ''�r .,�,►��, ''- . T . . � .
�1`'� : �"
�'�'..� ��,a�_'Y, f� ��o� y,i "r �
_� "� tir �,-�+j►��'-�,, r ,�,,,',�.� *� �.
� F �'^��',� Vi ' �" - � 1 "• r ° ,w�; �"�"4.,� � j .
� �� r � %�
: ��'�v -f"'< r�.°�` . ',l�� � 1 �`� r,�`` ,}�,�
�*� .� � ' , y � i
['�'F�1` �-. • ; , <= � �, �' ,+i � '�-� j +�,,.•s
� .�"���°� �.► .. '��� { � , �'� - �• J-` Y���r �
�' � � +�
�!: :I '�y i �" �,��' `� ' y {1M + y' 3M..
''� ra y.¢f� ��I Li3t7' �� "� � ,�.�� .'r'r+ . �� R
�a�
Rx � � � � � tiF •,yr� � : ..�`+- �- � r a
� � �"r� R4 �► ! L . rw
•�,, ���.� /�'� '� �s f�;�..Y'.1�� � _.rp.M
��' �,���
�['"�; , rt�,• � „}i, a,+� K�`-
M�h.,� �r ���� r'
�` � ���- �� �..
'? y��!rr�t�!.� �' -tAy�:�� , ��.`�' � f '-3`,�"r
f� y�.t�''����*..i.� ,,�`�, -tie�� `�'�,,�y.�;; r .
d "� ,v� . �zj�
�ir' � � ,s.'+w�e 4 �-y1 r 1r.. '�t,�.,}R "dr'� �+"'� ">�. � �.5�, i
�Y rr�- .,� �r� ���
R
w', �� S! s R���`'�•.�r iay`� �!"+�4,tr' �+�,.�a Y�,d`�9 y
�' .�. .�:.k[, r� '„�''�i�'1� �" iea�`':'� .. ',�+ _' �^'.�
��,-�.�-�• n,.�..� "K ..��t���4�- 'F�� �r�'F.
Y A,.
r' 'yy ! ) T�'a ^ r. . '�"1�R � ,� � � y � ' i , - - � 3, ,,+�Y �, �1F.. �lF �. J►.,
� � � � } � ����5. � .,1.f�' . ��, . _ _,,r. � _ . hlf * � * ,w+ L #� #, �,Y"' ' ., f At h! ` � � .
'�� .l�iy.,�,._ „f , r y _ `.;�'�' ',�, . .�,'+ ., •'� � ��.�., '1��"'-��r -3' �r ' i1� it' �!�4
�,a' ' . �� 7� . V 4'�y�� �+►y �� l��,�u,,,, a._ �,�°�.�'��`�"+.!"� �'� � .w'� w� �_
. ti.. �" 'r 1w ' �� «!"`p . i �.T"" ��� �� , �r�y"6`� .� � rL '�'�-„t�. �clr �ri'
� ��_
�r�a► � .y.��: "S� ,��� �j ��`'J�♦� � -�,��!'�„`��rtR � �""�Y�}y ���`a�a''�+ �-
�V ��♦ � ��T�i• ��}+, � �;_���� al r .���{' �j a�"`�j�"� �, r� y � 4:'I �~rr�I Y�ry
{ �, �� y 'v'. � �. � �: � ^'t IM1�- �� IT' 'F+� • s
. �.� } . �71P , �,► �i. � l '� � � �'-.
�p � w '' 7 r.�► �y ,. ,: � s. . � �-. ••�' s;��F.s� r. • �e4� ✓.j • � r.' �..
�l . {y��'� � � � �"- 1 y' ��� �' � �'
�j'n �e . .'t. Y � _ w ..�y � . �� 'r�� �Ir s�: Y� � . �`'�_ �. ��.� ��►1.-.M%lFI`' ' ,�.Qfjiv►+� ,.�,.�t 1.. �,: ` Je.. ,
n=1�����' . �i�i'�", y ,'t� �'�a � . w� ' 7�- - .�` .
; F��,�,` .��•�`�';+. ti . _ ,d�► • J ; ;r'���,�; � ��``�• _,�y� �. `�'`�`' � ,•Q +..�''� ,
w�%' ' }�' '„It,,'�'ris�, � • Y r , r�r'� �'.�/'�� 'r !�� � ;l ° � � C ,��r ..e � i !* ��' "E,,� �«�'
� !,: �, � �1-�:.;,: �?, �r�i� +,k'��i�• ��,�' ^^ �r.r�;.� ' `+� � ,'�„�* a � ,;r ?* � �`x
• � "��; 'in� • «` �l��,. �� -�•4 ' `�' r ,,, 3• ✓ '�.; �f. r„ . • r
� . ' .�r: � t �*�� � �„ ' ���� �"tk� � � �'� if'rL�' �< f�` �'1� .;'R,� �.A�(^ ��;,, �. � � �� � -
� ` 7"' . � - ,/' . }4 �,. _ � -i � ♦ � t / ,� "#,R�^ a � _
r7-� � -_� � n, � � ,�r,� . R� �•�q� '�'hl ' �y � ,� r�s�� 1'L
; +T F�� yr
���`; �%y�"�l�� �i .%r . *�'�e'�y �,.�.�� ,�x .� �`', ';",�- � :.?r.,` '
ti � �S +ilriR �;:- , s�~.,yri .J"a;:' ` 'i7�} �. ��, �� - �. � h'
� w.L� f. ' ��,. � ` 1 ,�� �r,. ��• ,. -' . s�4►,• _!� "��.�"�h� .� '" .
.e � �` ` �'71P' � "�tK �, .• [' y, ' �»
�A� t� .3' k �.` �,.t -r.. lr� ��� Y'w,�r�"�~ � `' �"'~' ���° "� . � ,
y� , �, i s �'s "t-. � . �. ;� � �'� �
�`;� ', { {. +b�,+„�A3� �� }�4hr �.� ���`" y_l � �..• '� �
1�. ,+*T': Y, �e� � ,�r��+��`�''pJ� {,� `
"f�. . i� �.��� /"� ,. f� ^f_ M 1 ' ��� � * � I .si�:. � �� - �?
_,1 � � ,� ' � F*t�+��` %f MY.'X��j i*S ` � : f � � � �'`� �:
0 Pro�ect Boundary (APE) ri,�. = � yt s e� .^�.e� �
, � �' ''� • � .
r K ..r+V �`I' x �++ *�'� � �,�'� �.- -. 'pF. � '� r"-+�f+j4 �
r Shovel Test Location (Negative) � � T � „t � �,� ,� �'�
� ��x .� � �
t '4�� , ► }r .� v � .t 11c.�`
��,�.p �: �., S�'�, '�I�
o ioo zoo .}��t �; '' 'sL��4 .�,*•a,� ,y"_L..�1i►.��i'.{ ��;..� #_�. �, \
�
5ource�, ESRI worltl base layers; ProjeM Boundary
provided 6y NC�4T
o sci 'm¢r, ihe ���o�at o� dep netl a� ih's �9� e'�¢ �o�
- ��mat�onal purpases o�ly entl was nal prepa tl f , rtd �s �.ot
s���aei¢ ror iegai oi eng.nrer ng p�rposes.
� � !. "1'r� .. .
.�t�.K�, r 7.4 �, � t.� i
'�' ��„�y �
*+.�75l,�C �;���:i,
� , . ����
� fis-;.�.ti. �F ; r'�` ',
�, t . � F�lI�?` =
V � y' /�
6 .. . �a 'V�r,i''"'vii~ Y
+ * �Nf;
� � * � ;Nf�
, �►
„ u";'»�, .
,.rr�
� �
� k' , !'� �
Figure 2. Map of Bridge No. 47 Showing APE and Shovel Test Locations.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELlGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED"
form for Minor Transportarion Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic ,4greement.
7of13
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
��: _�
�
Approximate
� Project Location
_� .. �
. �
�
��
Figure 3. Rural Delivery Routes (c. 1930-1943), Brunswick County
http: //dc. lib. unc. edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncrnaps/id/1805/rec/76
`��
f`
��
��
. •�
z
r
%
�..: :.
-��
Approximate
Project Location
Figure 4. 1930 Brunswick County Road Map.
http: //dc. lib. unc. edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/ncmaps/id/2072/Nec/75
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELlGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED"
form for Minor Transportarion Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic ,4greement.
8of13
,'
�
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
Figure 6. View of Northwestern Quadrant of APE, facing Northwest.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELlGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED"
form for Minor Transportarion Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic ,4greement.
9of13
Figure 5. 1962 Brunswick County Road Map
http: //dc. lib. unc. edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/ncmaps/id/6491 /rec/84
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELlGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED"
form for Minor Transportarion Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic ,4greement.
10 of 13
Figure 7. View of Northwestern Quadrant of APE, facing Southeast.
Figure 8. View of Northwestern Quadrant of APE, facing Northwest from ST2.
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
Fi ure 9. View of Southwestern Quadrant of APE, facin Northwest.
+'�t�t � � : _ ,�1 �;- ihNdh T � � � � � � .
s� ��k � - c �. r �� r
� � ;� �H �t�b nte�.::_' r �i`� J�� y � � � � r r� �'(` r i'�. � ,TM'
� '� � � �`��t,�� � � 4 �i t
� A �� s;,•� �st 4^ � 1 � F� ?��� ��y � ��' � 4 . �
ma-'�. �' <w t%�� G ..h 4�i w F�7�!L4J7a �i3'�� P'�,� Y� x9'� � ° �}
.i 9'`��� 7 Yky�;E, f 1" �� �� A �I �lA F�ll�t� � Y' ~'�� 7' ' }(_ Sj.�•
_� 1 ���== R��'�' rt Y�' ( �i� �i . �°" $ % � 5 � 'i-. �
, -•� � . ^t � � � � 1 � 1` r , = � " pu"'`��. � / _'�+-�r � , .
L �, .�_ � } � � � 1 ��' �' J ' S.. . � ..
fv� � k�", j�� � � s � ' �
� r�� ,� i +� Q°' i �'�sti��` �M� bi . �{,Sti�.
4 � /' � , - "��' •�,� k �� � � �"d� '�t `!�',�5�^ . >�.' .�
� � m '.� .. � .
, k
'; � R i y' +�{ � r�r . � Wr � '.� r{'. ±iR
' �!�`� " �.2 ��,« e � . .�,' ;�_
� e . �.i tl � r.''a"`�`v %r a i . s ' _�%!
f ` " �
a
�� � �� � � � � ' � f
�� � � ' i , - � � .. � . � .
� // , � �! � �.. �. � � � r � _ '� .� c � �, �.. � f�
�y�.' ��_s y rir;'�z� ��,� . �"��'�^ L� r�r� A.�:.,.y�t,�L_..� ������
�a � ' y`� _ � 1 ' •-'�,�a,.�p�+�`�":�
t .:��, � a2 . �} . _ 'a E . "�o- � �:i
� �k �s��'F,�y� �,rty+�._. I 4 W. . _ .Y
i,a @:��^Mw`i4 ��b.s._a. .y �, �� 1� ,,� . � ;+ �'�'3,
�`� „�"�, `� �,,..- li�- ��.' ,+� a"'-� �r�� �, a .�} �.�� #`'��`���-
�� ' * " 3 r � k
��p .y, r ,�' i � -�. - �"r °'- :�, y �.� ,r� - �• , - , t'
.»� f. u=,r�. � �-.� '. - a.a r 4- 3k ,..� .%� a�� tl
, tta t� � �� �� Fs�l ��!�g�.v�acr � :s. � �a�, ` n .: ,
_ � �
.�. -� 1'' x 4,w � ��.-
� �-� .. a ^ �: � � �
'.7�' r`'�a-. ��'�� 4�e �1�� 3,{.��� �.d� �f -.?�"i.i �: �i �"T a. �..�� ''', �.�-_
e �i � �,�"�f t��` � �_ . :'�51� :.:._ '-�"� ,
�/ s a �'S d
1•", t�cr � ��,i., �','� `%/�f �r'�i�x`��#;`_� .� y+;: t�
, "i� ,�,y:�-•�- - � y✓� � t " i I '�
� ,.�^M1• '°���` ►�/ •.,.d��r.,�' i"� ' �.�1( a�l�'�c ... : \ � I �Y.�h , a � ' �C
��,
Figure 10. View of Northeastern Quadrant of APE, facing East.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELlGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED"
form for Minor Transportarion Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic ,4greement.
11 of 13
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
�st.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELlGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED"
form for Minor Transportarion Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic ,4greement.
12 of 13
Figure 12. View of Northeastern Quadrant of APE, facing East.
Project Tracking No.:
15-02-0012
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELlGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT OR AFFECTED"
form for Minor Transportarion Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic ,4greement.
13 of 13
Figurc 14. Vicw of Bridgc No. 47, facing Northwest.
Froject Tracki�rg No. (f�rterxad Clse)
is-az-oai2
.�
��t�
-R ��t,
"'✓ r�
n
HIST�RIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
Nfl SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
This form only pertains tn Histaric Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It
is not �alid for Archaeolagical Resnurces. You must consult separatety with the
Archaeology Graup.
PRDJECT INFORMATIUN
ProjectlVo: B-4438 County: Brunswick
WBSNo.: 383G5.1.2 Dncument PCE or CE
T e:
�erl. Ard 1Vo: NIA Fur�ding: State Federal
Federal Yes Na Permit
Perrr�it s : T e�s :
Pro'ect Descri lion: Re lacement of Brid e No. 47 an NC 211 over a branch of Juni er Creek.
SUMMARY flF HISTURIC ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPES ItEVIEW
Description nf review activities. results. a�rd cancdusions:
Review of HPD quad maps, HPD GIS infarmation, historic designations roster, and indexes was
undertaken an February S, 2015. Based on this re�iew, there are no existing NR, SL, L�, DE, or SS
properties in the Area af Potential Effects, which is approximately 7flU' from each end of the bridge and
14U' from the centerline each way. There are no structures in the APE based on aeriai imagery and
Gaogle Maps Street View. Bridge No. 47 is nat eligible for Natianal Register Listing based on the
NCDOT Historic Bridge Tn�entory. There are no National Register listed or eligible properties and no
survey is required. If design plans change, aciditional re�iew will be required.
Whv the available info�mation pravides a reliahle brrsis 1'ar reasann6lv nredicting that there
r�re no unidentired signircant historic architectu�al o� laridseape resources in the proiect
area:
HPQ quad maps and GI5 information recording NR, 5L, LD, DE, and SS properties for the Brunswick
County sur�ey and Gaagle Maps are considered valid for the purposes af determining the likelihood of
his#aric resources being present. There are na Natianal Register listed or eligible properties within the
APE and no survey is required.
SUPPORT D�CUMENTATIQN
�Map(s) ❑Previous Sur�ey Info. ❑Photos ❑Correspondence ❑Design Plans
I�1►L1� ��Cli,�'�L�l1lly r_► :ry :1 Y Y�[�I 1�1�1 A: i i.� �1J:7-��►I
Histvric Architecture and Landscapes -- N� SURVEY REQUIRED
� l `�"j �3
NCD�T Architectural Historian
Date
Hisroric Archifecfr+�e upd I.aitd.seppes NO SURYIiY RliQ1JlRlill farm foi• Mi+wr 7Yansparlafrai Yrojecrs as Qiralrfrerl rn Jlre 1007Yrograniaialic Agreanie+u.
Page 1 ❑f 2
r
Brunswick
County
iDetour Rouke
[31 miles}
�������� Alternate Rouge
{2� IT11�BS]
l,lnpa�ed
i
!'Gvunty Boundary
L.__.�.�.J
�Municipal Boundary
��
``�
���
� 1� � ;J ��
r...,�_
�
0 �.� 3 5
�I�ES
Resource: NC�OT GIS. NC�ENR OW+Q,
�,�+�^�� NORTH CARpL1hlADEPARTitiAENT
C7F TRANSPDRTATION
� � QIVISl�N DF HIGHWAYS
PFiOJECT DEVELC}PMENT AND
�«�� �NVIR�NMEiVTALANALY515 UNIT
BRUNS1f+JICK CaL1Ni'Y
BRIDGE NO. 47 [JN NC 211
O11ER BRANCH OF JUNIPER CREEK
[8ear Pen Islands 5wamp}
8-443$
WB5 No. 383fi5.1.2
�IGURE 1 VICINiTY
i
HP(? [:[4.
Ifi.�lc�+-rc:3rrhrfi•r. frrr�' rt�r�l l.rr.qrlcr�qire� :1`fJ.S�i1�l'7iY lffi(Jil'll�fil] Jbre�f Jur '�fir�ut� 7i-r+�v.sf;urfr�freui 1'r�ir�•r1s rr.s !7u«fi/ierlii� �ler. 111f1�?Yr���;ru+urrrufic-.rf,�rectueru.
��t��C � f3� �