20190506 Ver 1_2016-10-03_B-5349 CE Final - FHWA Approved_20190418

Alamance County
Bridge No. 173 on SR 1149 (Hufi'man Mill Road)
over Back Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1149{1Q)
W.B.S. No. 46063.�.1
T.I.P. No. B�5349
CATEGQRICAL EXCLUSION
UNITED STATES DEI�ARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATI�N
i'EDERAL HEGHWAY ADMINISTRAT[ON
AND
NORTH CAROLINA DEFARTML�NT OF TRANSPORTATION
DiVISION OF HIGHWAYS
� �0
AT � rrick Weaver, P�-- Manager of the Progratns Management 4ffce
Transportalion Prograrn Management
,� 3 f P �
A E �� Jn F. Su i�an, I[I, P- Di�ision ministratar
Federal Highway Administration

Alamance County
Bridge No. 173 on SR 1149 (Huffman Mill Road)
over Back Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1149(10}
W.B.S. No. 46063.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-5349
CATEGOR[CAL EXC[,USION
\`�`��1~��r�o ���/
���0¢ '4�gs � �� �'�.
I
��.4.0 �y. y�
�
� q :
� ; SEAL �'.
� • Q16067 . —
.. . .
�
'%�4�:�;Q! �tE;�¢'�Q- ����
/�����tii� �t�`�`��.
Z� 2dIG
DA E
Documsntation Prepared by
H. W. L,achner, Inc. by:
Brian D. Dehler, PE
Sr. Project Manager
For NCDOT Project Developrrtent & Envirnnrnental Analysis Unit
% �v ahR��
DAT Ka eu S. Reynold
Project Development �ngineer
Project Development Section — Western Region

PROJECT COMMITMENTS:
Alamance County
Bridge No. 173 on SR 1149 (Huffman Mill Road) over Back Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1149(10); W.B.S. No. 46063.1.1; T.LP. No. B-5349
Division 7 Construction, Resident En�ineer's Office
In order to have time to adequately adjust school bus routes, the Alamance-Burlington School System,
Transportation Services Department, will be contacted by calling [phone], at least one month prior to
shifting traffic to the onsite detour.
Hydraulics Unit
The NCDOT Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program (FMP), to determine
status of project with regard to applicability of the NCDOT Memorandum of Agreement, or approval of a
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
Division 7 Construction
This project involves construction activities on, or adjacent to, FEMA-regulated stream. Therefore, the Division
shall submit sealed, as-built construction plans to the NCDOT Hydraulics Unit, upon completion of project
construction. These plans will certify that the drainage structure(s) and the roadway embankments located
within the 100-year floodplain, were built as shown in the construction plans, both horizontally and vertically.
Best Management Practices will be implemented during construction to manage invasive plant species.
Heavy Equipment should be operated from the bank, rather than in stream channels, in order to minimize
sedimentation, and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams.
Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. Riparian
vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of the growing season
following completion of construction.
Any burning of vegetation shall be performed in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the
North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP), for air quality compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
Hvdraulics Unit, Natural Environment Section, and Roadside Environmental Section
The Jordan Lake Watershed Buffer Rules apply to this project. Also, the best usage classification of Back
Creek is listed as WS-V; NSW, therefore, sedimentation and erosion control measures shall adhere to Design
Standards in Sensitive Watersheds.
All Desi�n Groups/Division Resident Construction En�ineer
Following a traffic shift to the new replacement structure, the onsite detour will be removed and the area will be
restored to its pre-construction condition.
When concrete is used during construction, a dry work area shall be maintained to prevent direct contact
between curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete shall not be
discharged to surface waters, due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and fish kills.
A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the stream underneath the
bridge.
Road design plans shall provide for the treatment of the storm water runoff, through best management practices,
as detailed in the most recent version of NCDWR's Stormwater Best Management Practices.
B-5349 Page 1 of 1
September 2016

Alamance County
Bridge No. 173 on SR 1149 (Huffman Mill Road)
over Back Creek
Federal Aid Project No. BRZ-1149(10)
W.B.S. No. 46063.1.1
T.I.P. No. B-5349
INTRODUCTION: Replacement of Bridge No. 173 is included in the latest approved North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) State Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP). The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial environmental impacts are
anticipated. The project is classified as a Federal "Categorical Exclusion."
I. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT
The NCDOT Bridge Management Unit records indicate that Bridge No. 173 has a sufficiency
rating of 11.2 out of a possible 100, compared to a new structure. The bridge is considered
structurally deficient due to its age, type of service, a superstructure condition of "4," a
substructure condition of "3," and a structural evaluation of "3," according to Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) standards. Bridge No. 173 is also considered to be
"functionally obsolete," due to its age, a structural evaluation of "2," and a deck geometry
rating of "2."
Bridge No. 173 was originally constructed in 1960, and is approaching the end of its useful
life. The typical bridge life-expectancy is between 40 to 50 years. Beyond a certain degree of
deterioration, timber, steel, and concrete bridges become impractical to maintain, and upon
eligibility, are programmed for replacement.
Components of this steel and timber bridge have experienced an increasing degree of
deterioration, which can no longer be addressed by maintenance activities. The posted weight
limit on the bridge is 26 tons for single vehicles, and the legal limit for truck-tractor semi-
trailers (TTST). The 56 year-old bridge is approaching the end of its useful life, and
replacement of Bridge No. 173 will result in safer traffic operations along SR 1149 (Huffinan
Mi11 Road).
B-5349 CE 1 September 2016

II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located in southwest Burlington, roughly one mile south of I-85/I-40, and
halfway between Lake Mackintosh and SR 1213 (Grand Oaks Boulevard). (See Figure 1)
Land use adjacent to the bridge is a quarry in the northeast quadrant, and wooded areas in the
remaining quadrants. SR 1149 (Huffinan Mill Road) is one of the few connections across
Lake Mackintosh, and it connects eastern Guilford County with Burlington. Destinations in
southern Burlington via Huffman Mill Road and Bridge No. 173 include, Alamance Regional
Medical Center, and several business and commercial centers.
SR 1149 (Huffinan Mill Road) is classified as a minor collector in the Statewide Functional
Classification System, but this road is not a National Highway System Route.
In the vicinity of Bridge No. 173, SR 1149 (Huffman Mill Road) has a 25-foot pavement
width, with 5-foot grass shoulders. (See Figure 3) The roadway grade is in a sag vertical curve
through the project area, with a low point approximately 70 feet east of the bridge. The
existing bridge is located in a tangent section of roadway, and crosses Back Creek at a skew
angle that is near 90 degrees. The roadway is situated approximately 15 feet above the creek
bed.
Bridge No. 173 is a six-span structure, which consists of a timber deck with a 4-inch asphalt
wearing surface on steel I-beams. The bridge abutments are composed of timber caps and
piles. Interior Bents 2 and 4 are comprised of timber caps and piles, while Bent Nos. 1, 3, and
5 are built as steel caps and piles. The existing bridge was constructed in 1960. (See Figure
4) The length of the structure is approximately 121 feet, with a clear roadway width of 24
feet, 7 inches. The posted weight limit on the bridge is signed as 26 tons for single vehicles,
and a"legal gross weight" for truck-tractor semi-trailers (TTST).
There are no utilities attached to the existing structure, but there is evidence of overhead
utilities, water lines, and sewer lines routed along the southern side of SR 1149 (Huffman Mill
Road).
The traffic volume of 3,300 vehicles per day (VPD) is expected to increase to 4,200 VPD, by
the design year (2035). The projected traffic volumes include one percent truck-tractor semi-
trailer (TTST) and four percent dual-tired vehicles (DT). The posted speed limit is 45 miles
per hour (mph) in the project area. There are two school buses that cross the bridge daily, on
their morning and afternoon routes.
The Traffic Safety Unit has evaluated a recent five-year period, and found records of two
accidents occurring near Bridge No. 173. One accident involved a fixed object, while the
other involved an animal. These accidents were reported as property damage only, with no
injuries or fatalities. Neither of these two accidents were associated with the alignment or
geometry of the bridge, or its approach roadway.
B-5349 CE 2 September 2016

SR 1149 (Huffman Mill Road), through the project area, is on a route identified as an existing
bicycle facility in the Burlington-Graham Metropolitan Planning Organization (BGMPO)
Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP). Additionally, the Burlington Pedestrian Master
Plan (2012) recommends the addition of sidewalks on SR 1149 (Huffinan Mill Road), from
the intersection of SR 1226 (University Drive) and SR 1213 (Grand Oaks Blvd.) to Lake
Mackintosh Park and Marina.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Preferred Alternative
Bridge No. 173 will be replaced on the existing alignment, while traffic is maintained on a
temporary, two-lane, onsite detour alignment to the north side of SR 1149 (Huffman Mill
Road). (See Figures 2 and 2A)
The permanent replacement structure will be a bridge approximately 130 feet long, providing
a minimum 33-foot, 6-inch clear roadway width. The bridge will include two 12-foot lanes, 4-
foot, 9-inch offsets, and bicycle safe railings. The bridge length is based on preliminary
design information, and is set by hydraulic requirements. The roadway grade of the new
structure will be approximately the same as the existing structure.
The approach roadway will extend approximately 220 feet from the east end of the new
bridge, and 200 feet from the west end of the new bridge. The approaches will be widened to
include a 32-foot pavement width, providing two 12-foot lanes and 4-foot, full depth, paved
shoulders. Six-foot shoulders, 4-foot paved and 2-foot turf, will be provided on each side of
the proposed bridge approaches. An additional three feet of earthen shoulder, for a total of 9
feet of shoulder, will be provided where guardrail is included. The roadway will be designed
as a minor collector, using Sub-Regional Tier Guidelines, with a 50 mile-per-hour design
speed.
The total length of the onsite detour alignment is 990 feet. The detour alignment will utilize a
temporary 125-foot long, 30-foot wide bridge, providing a 26-foot clear roadway width (two,
11-foot lanes, with 2-foot offsets). Although the cost and environmental impacts are higher
with an onsite detour, than with a replace-in-place structure, concerns regarding public safety
warrant the maintenance of traffic, onsite, in this location.
NCDOT Division 7 staff concurs with the selection of the preferred bridge replacement
alternative.
B-5349 CE 3 September 2016

B. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration
The "No Build" alternative will eventually necessitate closure of the bridge. Closing Bridge
No. 173 is not acceptable due to the traffic service provided to this section of Alamance
County, by SR 1149 (Huffman Mill Road).
The existing bridge was constructed in 1960, and the timber and steel materials within the
bridge are reaching the end of their useful lives. Rehabilitation of this structure, would require
replacing the timber and steel components, which would effectively replace the entire bridge.
Staged construction is not feasible for this bridge replacement, because superstructure and
substructure configurations will not support the removal of a portion of the bridge, and
maintenance of traffic on the remaining portion, at the same time.
Given that the current alignment of SR 1149 (Huffman Mill Road) is acceptable, a different
alignment was not considered as a viable alternative.
IV. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs based on 2016 construction prices, are as follows:
Table 1: Estimated Costs
DESCRIPTION COST
Structure $ 379,000
Roadway Approaches $ 213,000
Detour Structure and Approaches $ 345,000
Structure Removal $ 47,000
Miscellaneous & Mobilization $ 248,000
Engineering & Contingencies $ 168,000
Total Construction Cost $ 1,400,000
Right-of-Way Costs $ 81,000
Utility Relocation Costs $ 186,000
Total Project Cost $ 1,667,000
B-5349 CE 4 September 2016

V. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Physical Characteristics
The study area lies in the piedmont physiographic region of North Carolina. Topography in
the project vicinity is comprised of gently rolling to hilly landscapes. Elevations in the study
area range from 520 to 590 feet above sea level. Land use in the project vicinity consists
primarily of forested areas and industrial areas (aggregate quarry).
Water Resources
Water resources in the study area are part of the Cape Fear River Basin (United States
Geological Survey [USGS] Hydrologic Unit 03030002). Three streams (two Perennial and
one Intermittent — refer to Table 5) were identified in the study area. (Table 2) The physical
characteristics of these streams are provided in Table 3. Please note that the creek crossing at
Bridge No. 173 in Alamance County, was surveyed for this document, however a name
discrepancy occurred during the drafting of the B-5349 NRTR.
Table 2: Water Resources in the Studv Area
Stream Name
Back Creek*
UT 1 to Back Creek*
:
NCDWR
16-19-5
16-1(b)
Best Usage
WS-V; NSW
WS-V; NSW
UT 2 to Back Creek* SC 16-1(b) WS-V; NSW
* The B-5349 NRTR, dated June 2013, lists the creek name as Little Alamance Creek, instead of Back Creek.
Table 3: Ph
Map ID
Back Creek*
SB
SC
�al Characteristics of Water Resources in the S
Bank Bankfull Water Channel
Height Width Depth
. _ , . _ _ _ , Substrate
5 30
4 7
3 4
12
3
3
Sand, gravel, cobble
Cobble, bedrock
Sand, gravel, cobble
Area
Velocity Clarity
Fast Slightly
Turbid
Slow Clear
Slow I Clear
* The B-5349 NRTR, dated June 2013, lists the creek name as Little Alamance Creek, instead of Back Creek.
There are no designated, anadromous fish waters or Primary Nursery Area (PNA) waters,
present in the study area. There are no designated High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding
Resource Water (ORW), or water supply watersheds (WS-1 or WS-11), within 1.0 mile
downstream of the study area. The streams within the project study area are not identified on
the North Carolina 2014 Final 303(d) list of impaired waters, nor do they drain to any 303(d)
waters within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Map ID
Little Alamance Creek
B-5349 CE 5 September 2016

No fish monitoring data or benthic monitoring data is available for any streams in the study
area, or within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Biotic Resources
Terrestrial Communities
Three terrestrial communities were identified in the study area: maintained/disturbed, mesic
mixed hardwood forest (piedmont subtype), and pine forest. A brief description of each
community type follows.
Maintained/Disturbed
Maintained/disturbed communities make up a majority of the study area, including roadside
shoulders, mowed lawns, landscaped commercial/industrial areas, and gas pipeline easements.
Terrestrial areas in the easternmost portion of the project study area are managed by Martin
Marietta Materials, for quarry operations and aggregate material storage. The vegetation
observed in this community type is comprised of early, seasonal canopy species, such as sweet
gum and red maple. Low growing grasses, shrubs, and herbs present in this community
include fescue, multiflora rose, and broomsedge. Vines present in this community include
blackberry, Japanese honeysuckle, and greenbriar.
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont subtype)
The mesic mixed hardwood forest communities are located along the moderate slopes, in the
project study area and along Back Creek. Dominant overstory species in this community
include American beech, sweetgum, green ash, American elm, sycamore, tulip poplar, and red
maple. Species in the understory consist of American holly, red cedar, American beech, red
maple, red oak, and Chinese privet. Herbaceous and vine species observed in this community
were limited to Christmas fern and greenbriar.
Pine Forest
Loblolly pine stands are present in the study area on higher elevation hillslopes, that may have
been previously disturbed areas. Canopy species observed included loblolly pine and red
cedar. The understory consisted of Chinese privet and red cedar. No herbaceous species were
present in this community. Vines in this community were limited to Japanese honeysuckle
and poison ivy.
Terrestrial Community Impacts
Terrestrial communities in the study area may be impacted by project construction, as a result
of grading and paving activities. Community data is presented in the context of total coverage
of each type and estimated impacts, within the study area. (Table 4)
B-5349 CE 6 September 2016

Table 4: Terrestrial Community Impacts in the Study Area
Coverage Temporary Permanent
Community �a�.� Impacts Impacts
c. c.
Maintained/Disturbed 3.80 0.00 0.0
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont 2.50 1.28 0.11
Subt e
Pine Forest 0.50 0.00 0.00
Total 6.80 1.28 0.11
Terrestrial Wildlife
Terrestrial wildlife communities in the study area are comprised of both natural and disturbed
habitats, that may support a diversity of wildlife species. Those species actually observed are
indicated with (*). Mammal species that commonly exploit the open habitats, forested areas,
and stream corridors within the study area, include the eastern chipmunk, common mouse,
*gray squirrel, eastern cottontail, raccoon, Virginia opossum, coyote, and *white- tailed deer.
Birds that commonly use forest and forest edge habitats include the *red- shouldered hawk,
*American crow, eastern meadowlark, yellow-bellied sapsucker, *pileated woodpecker,
Carolina chickadee, mourning dove, and tufted titmouse. Reptile and amphibian species that
may use terrestrial communities located in the study area include, the corn snake, black rat
snake, black racer, eastern box turtle, American toad, eastern fence lizard, northern dusky
salamander, and five-lined skink.
Aquatic Communities
Aquatic communities in the study area consist of both perennial and intermittent piedmont
streams. Back Creek, the large perennial stream in the study area, could support shiners,
sunfish, snapping turtle, Asiatic clams, crayf'ish, mayflies, and caddisflies. The perennial
stream SB, and the intermittent stream SC in the study area, are relatively small in size and
would support aquatic communities of spring peeper, snapping turtle, and crayfish.
Invasive Species
Three species from the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North Carolina were found to
occur in the study area. The species identified were multiflora rose (Threat), Chinese privet
(Threat) and Japanese honeysuckle (Moderate Threat). NCDOT will manage invasive plant
species as appropriate.
B-5349 CE 7 September 2016

JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Three jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area. All jurisdictional streams in the
study area have been designated as warm water streams for the purposes of stream mitigation.
(Table 5) Estimates for stream impacts are shown in Table 6. Final impacts will be
determined when designs are complete and the permit package has been approved.
Table 5: Jurisdictional Characteristics of Water Resources in the Study Area
Map ID
Back Creek*
SB
SC
Total
Length Classification
(ft.)
233 Perennial
213 Perennial
421 Intermittent
867
Compensatory Mitigation �ver Basin Buffer
Required
Yes
Yes
Yes (1:1)**
Subj ect
Not Subject
Not Subject
* The B-5349 NRTR dated June 2013, lists the creek name as Little Alamance Creek, instead of
Back Creek.
** Mitigation ratio determined based upon USACE/NCDWR field review on June 5, 2013.
Table 6: Stream Impacts
Map ID* Stream Name Im Fct Comment
Little Alamance Creek Back Creek** 100 Temporary
SB Unnamed tributary 152 Temporary
SC Unnamed tributary 0 Outside of construction limits
* Please refer to Figure 3 for the Map ID.
** The B-5349 NRTR, dated June 2013, lists the creek name as Little Alamance Creek, instead of
Back Creek.
No jurisdictional wetlands were identified in the study area.
PERMITS
The proposed project has been designated as a Categorical Exclusion (CE), for the purposes of
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation. As a result, a Nationwide Permit
(NWP) 23 will likely be applicable. A NWP 33 may also apply for temporary construction
activities, such as stream dewatering, work bridges, or temporary causeways, that are often
used during bridge construction or rehabilitation. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
holds the final discretion as to which permit will be required to authorize project construction.
B-5349 CE 8 September 2016

If a Section 404 permit is required, then a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC)
from the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR), will be needed.
Construction Moratoria
No construction moratoria apply to any waters, in the study area. In a letter dated April 10,
2013, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission did not request a moratorium.
North Carolina River Basin Buffer Rules
Streamside riparian zones within the study area are protected under provisions of the Jordan
Lake Water Supply Watershed Buffer Rules, administered by NCDWR. Table 5 indicates
which streams are subject to the buffer protection rule. Streams that are mapped on either the
USGS topographic map or the NRCS soil survey map within this watershed, are subject to the
Jordan Lake Water Supply Watershed Buffer Rules. Streams SB and SC are not subject to
these rules, because they do not appear on either map. Potential impacts to protected stream
buffers are shown in Table 7, below. Final impacts will be determined once design plans have
been completed.
Table 7: Buffer Im acts
Reason for Zone 1 Impact Zone 2 Impact
Map ID* Stream Name Impact Temp.** / Perm. Temp.** / Perm.
Little Alamance Creek Back Creek Cut/Fill 5,800 / 30 4,000 / 300
* Please refer to Figure 3 for the Map ID.
** These cut/fill areas are associated with the onsite detour and are considered to be temporary.
Following a traffic shift to the new replacement structure, the onsite detour will be removed and
the area will be restored to its pre-construction condition. Riparian vegetation must be
reestablished within the construction limits of the onsite detour by the end of the growing season,
following completion of construction.
Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters
There are no jurisdictional streams in the project area, designated by the USACE as a
Navigable Water, under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act.
Mitigation
The NCDOT will attempt to avoid and minimize impacts to streams to the greatest extent
practicable during final design.
Compensatory Mitigation of Impacts
The NCDOT will investigate potential, on-site stream mitigation opportunities. If on-site
mitigation is not feasible, mitigation will be provided by North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP).
B-5349 CE 9 September 2016

Federally Protected Species
As of August 2, 2016, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has not listed any
federally protected species for Alamance County. The listing was last updated by USFWS on
September 22, 2010. (See www.fws.gov/raleigh/species/cntylist/alamance.html)
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 STIP program
in Divisions 1-8, including all NCDOT projects and activities. The programmatic
determination for NLEB for the NCDOT STIP program is "May Affect, Likely to Adversely
Affect." The PBO provides incidental take coverage for NLEB, and will ensure compliance
with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for five years, for all NCDOT projects with a
federal nexus in Divisions 1-8, which includes Alamance County, where B-5349 is located.
This level of incidental take is authorized from the effective date of a final listing
determination, through Apri130, 2020.
Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest, in proximity to large bodies of
open water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within
1.0 mile of open water.
A desktop-GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13-mile
radius (lA mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on May 23, 2013, using
2010 color aerials. Lake Mackintosh is located approximately 0.4 miles south of the project
study area. Surveys were conducted by Kimley-Horn Associates (KHA) biologists throughout
areas of suitable nesting habitat, on March 21, 2013. No bald eagles or nesting sites were
observed. Suitable nesting trees were observed to be sparse within the study area, and within
660 feet of the study area. A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
(NCNHP) database, updated Apri12013, revealed no known occurrences of this species within
1.0 mile of the project study area. Due to the results of the survey, lack of known occurrences,
and minimal impact anticipated for this project, it has been determined that this project will
not affect the Bald Eagle.
VI. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
Section 106 Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at Title 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106
B-5349 CE 10 September 2016

requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings (federally
funded, licensed, or permitted), on properties included in or eligible for inclusion, in the
National Register of Historic Places, and to afford the Advisory Council a reasonable
opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
Historic Architecture
The NCDOT Human Environment Section, under the provisions of a Programmatic
Agreement with the FHWA, the NCDOT, the Historic Preservation Office (HPO), the
Office of Sate Archaeology (OSA), and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
(effective July 1, 2009), reviewed the proposed project and determined that no surveys
are required. (See form dated December 9, 2015)
Archaeology
The NCDOT Human Environment Section, under the provisions of a Programmatic
Agreement with FHWA, NCDOT, HPO, OSA, and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (effective July 1, 2009), reviewed the proposed project and determined
that no archaeological surveys are required. (See form dated June 17, 2016)
Community Impacts
No adverse impact on families or communities within the proposed project limits, is
anticipated. B-5349 right-of-way acquisition will be limited. No relocatees are expected, with
implementation of the proposed project alternative.
No adverse effect on public facilities or services is expected, due to the construction of B-
5349. The project is not expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious
opportunities in the area.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation in
Alamance County. No change in land use is expected to result from the construction of B-
5349.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies, or their representatives, to
consider the potential impacts to prime farmland from all land acquisition and construction
projects. All B-5349 project construction will occur near the existing alignment. There are no
known soils classified as prime, unique, or having state or local importance, in the vicinity of
the project. Therefore, B-5349 will not involve the direct conversion of farmland acreage
within these classifications.
The construction of B-5349 will not have a disproportionately high and adverse human health
and environmental effect on any minority or low-income population.
B-5349 CE 11 September 2016

Noise & Air Quality
B-5349 is an air quality neutral project in accordance with 40 CFR 93.126. It is not required
to be included in the regional emissions analysis (if applicable), and project level CO or
PM2.5 analyses are not required. This project will not result in any meaningful changes in
traffic volumes, vehicle mix, location of the existing facility, or any other factor that would
cause an increase in emissions impacts, relative to the no-build alternative. Therefore, FHWA
has determined that this project will generate minimal air quality impacts for Clean Air Act
criteria pollutants, and has not been linked with any special MSAT concerns. Consequently,
this effort is exempt from analysis for MSATs. Any burning of vegetation shall be performed
in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP), for air quality compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
Noise levels may increase during B-5349 project construction; however, these impacts are not
expected to be substantial, considering the relatively short-term nature of construction noise
and the limitation of construction to daytime hours. The transmission-loss characteristics of
nearby natural elements and man-made structures, are believed to be sufficient to moderate the
effects of intrusive construction noise.
VII. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The construction of B-5349 is expected to have an overall positive impact in Alamance
County. The replacement of this inadequate bridge, will result in safer traffic operations along
SR 1149 (Huffman Mill Road).
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or natural
environment, with the use of the current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The proposed project will not require right-of-way acquisition or easement from any land,
protected under Section 4(� of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966.
An examination of local, state, and federal regulatory records by the GeoEnvironmental
Section revealed no sites with a Recognized Environmental Concern (REC), within the B-
5349 project limits. RECs are most commonly underground storage tanks, dry cleaning
solvents, landfills, and hazardous waste disposal areas.
Alamance County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program. There are no
practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area. Any shift in the existing alignment to a
new alignment alternative, either upstream or downstream, will result in a floodplain impact
area similar to that of the existing alignment alternative. The proposed project is not
anticipated to increase the level or extent of upstream flood potential.
B-5349 CE 12 September 2016

FHWA has determined that a U.S. Coast Guard Permit is not required for this project.
VIII. COORDINATION & AGENCY COMMENTS
NCDOT has sought input from the following agencies as a part of the project development:
Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and N.C. Division of Parks & Recreation.
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service provided a request that they prefer any replacement
structure to be a spanning structure.
Response: NCDOT will be replacing the existing structure with a new bridge.
The N.C. Wildlife Resource Commission provided a request that they prefer any replacement
structure to be a spanning structure.
Response: NCDOT will be replacing the existing bridge with a new bridge.
The N.C. Division of Water Resources (NCDWR, formerly NCDWQ) requests the following
environmental issues for the proposed B-5349 project construction:
1. Back Creek is class WSV; NSW waters of the State. NCDWR is very concerned with
sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. NCDWR
recommends that highly protective sediment and erosion control BMPs be
implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to Back Creek. NCDWQ requests
that road design plans provide treatment of the storm water runoff, through best
management practices, as detailed in the most recent version of NCDWR's
Stormwater Best Management Practices.
Response: NCDOT will comply with all storm water requirements through the Post-
Construction Storm Water Program under the Department NPDES Storm Water
Permit (NCS000250).
2. B-5349 is within the Jordan Lake Basin. Riparian buffer impacts shall be avoided and
minimized to the greatest extent possible pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0267. New
development activities located in the protected 50-foot wide riparian areas within the
basin, shall be limited to "uses" identified within, and constructed in accordance with
ISA NCAC 2B .0267. Buffer mitigation may be required for buffer impacts resulting
from activities classified as "allowable with mitigation," within the "Table of Uses"
section of the Buffer Rules or require a variance under the Buffer Rules. A buffer
mitigation plan, including use of the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program, must be
provided to NCDWR prior to approval of the Water Quality Certification.
B-5349 CE 13 September 2016

Response: The project will adhere to the Jordan Lake Buffer Rules.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, N.C.
Division of Parks & Recreation, and State Historic Preservation Office had no special
concerns for this project.
IX. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A letter, dated February 7, 2013, was sent to local residents. No comments have been
received, to date. Based on the lack of responses to the B-5349 letter, a project design public
meeting was determined to be unnecessary.
X. CONCLUSION
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental
impacts will result from construction of the project, B-5349. The project therefore, is
considered to be a federal "Categarical Exclusion," due to its limited scope and lack of
substantial environmental impacts.
B-5349 CE 14 September 2016

_ , .�
.1u��.
1: 1,',�1
31 �'�ti
�i'�r
i,� ��
.. �' 1
1 .l w
NCIRtH CAROLlNA DEPART4lENT C7F
TRANSPORTAT[QPP
I)IVISION UF HIGIIWAYS
PRl�1�CT DEVELaPMENT BG
EtVVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS UNIT
ALAMA.1iCE COUNTY
REeL,acE Bwncr No. l73 orr SR l l49
�VER BACK CREEK
B-5349
F6gure 1

aa �w �z
z
�_ �� ��
° F2 R';
Co
z � = i � z �
w��o os�=
Gm�;� z8�s
i
zQz�+s�'ws id
3m O
� � ��
� ��l
I
/ �
/ '
/ ',
�;
f02t+91'ol5 �d %�-
s
-- _— J � ��
i/� i a�
i � ��
i �
-,:—?` *��;' F
.` �
cii Jf'/�`� � �/ -
.
�5� � �K ca
, ,�r ;s/�j�
sNoisinaa
I
s I
i I,
�r� ��
�
N
W
�
�
c7
LL

_ z� z
�� �� ��
w= a¢
� Q o �� z �
w��" os�=
Gm�;� z8�a
\
�t�
MQ'"' y�o9'� V�'1
N"� � p W W
0
v�u u u � pu
CQ0��2VWi¢
ti
�hti
�PI� ��l
NM�Q����
�C�fOy�j�Qh
�III1�11�1��11
a40��¢v�"i�
�
¢
4ti
q8�
� �a������
�n40� Q�-
o���
�nu u u"u
a4o���vWi�
0
�
�,4ti
�gM
h�trh��Q^
p���P
1/� p II �� II II �� pII
aQOJ1��IWi1C
�
pN�
^1 a
��tr��4p^
_ ��� �
����� ��������
aao��¢v�",�
sNoisinaa
�

. i i a r� y�-, .�r .
y_A .r
•�, - r
.�, � ��., � ; � - .�. � - � �
� � �'� �
t �� r., �''' ',�' - ;�� " s,
.��� '�� T ' � J
' � ��
' ',� 4�� �S' ,., ,� .,w, '�` . �� � •�. �' �` �
�,� TMP' ! ! t .x= �x�. � � .
r- i � � w I • � `�` � ';, �1
I �'
Y��`` �� ~ !. � ` � � ��
1 ` •�� ��� � � 4 f .-� � � / �
A� 6 �,5� � � ^� � � � � � �S ti� �,'�A
. f�.� �.���r �-��.`tit��� ^ � J ,�'? t • ��.
° � , ,� \ 'y �j J:L � .a�,� �*, �i �
,��r � �t.; ' �r�` .
�'� `� � � � F y ' , ��"
,� '� � ,�-�_. .► . : i h
� �k " � "�, s r • �
� . �, - � % , �
���; ,a ��`.���r� ' _ •; . ;
� �; � ;.,.� � �: ;;
�
��� ,�, �. � � ,
�f-�,. ;.. . ����� �;� �r " � � �/ - ; r
��� 't "+`� • r"� AA [ Y ��� _ r � ' --�. i�' � " " 'f-' - `�i '� t, • f�'
� � �, � , ' . ��� , F�►'
- -• wa,� ' �l `•. , ��a�� . ,SfR� � .
. ,� Z 4 4. � �� � j .. �f`' _. �� ;l..
9� �� ~` � ;d � �5 . i r. �
t1t � -� �i w .,� : ��'i �
y ~ '`�l � � ~ .. f J fi � � � ' i '
,� � � `FL "� °
� _:�-���.� 'v'�
-� ���t � �.�:�� � r } - � . . . -
,�.��. :} � ,�y+1: -
�i � -� � : L�ti � 'Ey� 4 • �"� � .
• � � � � " J c �—� 3 C�' �,
� _ ��� �, � -�•,l �.
. � �+I`� -r `-.`�� �, j : ':!f 'C, r�/:
y �� t, 15 �^�' ' � f�' ��. , � .�•" '++ � , >
� �b���F'� r `_ •1 .-.L �. ,�j,0 { • {C+ hF� /�11
v y, .P�` '4ex � � �ir. ���-�. S.
' �i �.,, � �� T '�� a � I +�' . � �^t,' k ' +'
`�` - �. * �(' -_ .. , �� '•. -"�:-'�7`� r, s.�4 .� t}� . �
��.[! i .eM }'' R-,;. � ' 1 �
� �: �. , y� . F'�j i ,111'� �' � h. r . ��.. :� , 4�; ; . ` �'d',l ` � ` � i , �
'�` y� yi�c � � �U ��;'t '� '�L .�1 � i �, 'i�J� . -
r5. "`R� 5��` hr• ry. .,Y� '.� .i'LI_Y' f �,y�, �' �'..SY � -s1r:-
R.��'_ 4,j .Sl�` ��c `1� i i.�" A i�`N P�A ' ..� .Y � .ti �'t
• � # `, -�� � { � , .
�t� .' � . C ,`� . ' � � 4 �ip,� ,.: c �-'Y��. . . � � i.: �•. �� �� f - .
w t . � 4' ,�1�y..' _ . T 1� ` . � � Y1 '�l�dj
���a �, ��r �w{i �4 . . . �' 4 ���4
!cRu ,t �,�v ���� f .,:jF` �,,� 4� �' �l ti ��. �"�' '
'R � � .
c i , , p� �` � �' C;� rt �{1• '
` tn T�. c� a. d.. ����.
��\.- yl A f - 4� /;r�,� .� �Y A� '� .Qi-� .y
�.-. ' � � � S'�I �`�y 4} • : 4
��. �*� _ _ .`
��� � r ? !. � µ k N'i �' K � �, �`�_ i,'t' ~� : ' � ,�.�
� ��. * � . � t � .: ` r s.'.
.i. ��y�� � �ti:+it�
� a` 1^ya�s ` ', �' ` 4 1t �i
\�� `� , A .� �� a�� �� , '�~ �li`R � {� +� �.
�. 'S� y, � � �� � � �I! , A'��� . ���yr � . �,.T k Fj .
Y�. ,�I� - ' \ �5 ��fv,. } y1� ��''..� �� . �1� .
�. t} �Y, , . f��. . �� . -.�;����. . . b"
Legend �'� � ��`J '�`� � � ;• �:r � ; ` *'�'' �+� 1 �
,���,� �7 . ( ' y �„C �y. �� �� ' ,�}� ' .
y r^ • 4' '
Jurisdietional Stre�m ' { � �,�� ;�`'�. r �k� , ^� � , '
� �' � � ,_ �
{� z
�Praject Study Area �^'., �; I� `� • �, ;�
:�� -,� .
�,
. .�
��: 3
' SA'•.�+.�a A . b.. . .. � " .
�.�' � 1 , - �, . �;T�, . � . Ay ' � . ..
� '; /`�! L '� • �y � � - �� � .� . .
o � oo �oa saa 40Q Feet w�E •. � � .�,, , �,�� � �� .� ° °�� ��
� � � _ . _ . 4 �,�� hL4�(y �'� � . _ . .
�T� � S � � �r �� ► � �' 1''�I`� i. ♦ 1� �.. , . �.. �! r .
y ' r3.�� � ,s. �. �
- _ . � .�'�:��n Y �0,� 4 �`�'- \ ,l � }�� � S `
'k�, �� �. �. , 4 .' t , �l�t `�.�1i1 .
:, •�, , : .
i GF KQRTH C9<j.
,��w ��= North Carolina Figure 3: Jurisdictional Features Map
� �='� Department �iP Pro�ect: B-5349
�; °� of Bridge #173 on SR1149 over Littfe Alamance Creek
\g�"�°F��MS°�F� Transportat�on Alamance County, North Carolina
CORRECTION: Map ID for Little Alamance Creek should read Back Creek

B-5349
Bridge No. 173 on SR 1149 (Huffman Mill Road) over Back Creek
Eastbound Approach
South Face of Bridge No. 173
Figure 4
B-5349

United States l.�ep�rtmer�t of the lnteria�
FISH AND WtLDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33"126
Raleigff. North Caroli��a 27b3b-3726
Jarruary $, 2013
Gregory 1V1. Blakeney
North Carolina Department of Transpartation
Project �7eveloprnent and Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Mr. Blakeney:
This ietter is in respanse to your request for conunents from the LT.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Servicej
or1 the potential environmental effects of the praposed replacement of the follawing hridges. Tl�ese
comments provide information in accordance with provisions afthe National Environmental Policy Act
(42 CJ.S.C. 4332{2)(c)) and Section 7 ofthe Endangered S�ecies Act of 1973, as amendec� (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543).
B-53�5, Replace Bndge Na. 3 over an unnamed creek on SR 1529, Alamance County
$-5347, Replace Bndge No. 17D over a�rang of Alamance Creek on SR 1212, Alamanc� Caunty
�-5349; Replxce B�idge No. 173 oti�er I,ittle Alamance Creek on SR 11A�9, Alan�.ance County
B-535d, Replace Bridge No. 44 avex Jt�rdan's Creek on SR 17b8, Alamance �ounty
The Se.ivic� does not have any speei�c concerns for these projecta. We recomr�end the following general
conservatian measures to avoid ar minimize irripa�ts to fish and �vildlife resources:
1. Wetland, forest an�3 desi�nated riparian buffer impacts should b� avoided and minitt�ized to the
maximum extent pr�ctical;
2. If Unavoidabte ��jetland or stream impacts are proposed, a plan for cnmpensatory mitigation to
offset una��Qidable impacts should be provided early in the plan�aing process;
3. Off-site deiou�rs st�ould be used rather than construc#ion of temporary, on-site brid�es. For
projects requinng an on-site detour in ��retlands or open watez, such detours should be aIi��ed
along the side of the existing structure wE�ieh has the least a�zdlor least quality ot fish and wildlife
habitat. At the completion oFconstn�ctian, the detour area should be entirely removed and t1�ue
iinpacted areas be replanted �vsth appropriate �ree species;
4. In sn•eams uttlized by anadromo�s fish, the NCD+�T policy entitled "5tream Crossin� Guidelines
for Ar►adromous Fisi3 Passage" should be ii��plemented;
New Uridges shauld be loi�g enou�h to allow far suf�cieni wildlife passage alos�g sn�eam
corridors,
6. On each side of the stream bank undenzeath brid�e:s, at least 1Q feet of the bank should remain
clear of riprap;

7. "Best Management Practices (BMP) for Construction and Maintenance Activities" should be
implemented;
$. Bridge designs shoutd inclUde provisions for raadbed and deck drainage to flow through a
vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer should be large enough to
alleviate any potential effects from run-aff of storm water and pflllutants;
9. Bridge designs should nat alter the natural stream and stream-bank morphology or impede fish
passage. To the extent possible, piers and bents should be placed outside the bank-full width of
the stream; and
10. Bridges and approaches should be desi�ed to avoid any fill that will result in damnung or
constriction of the channel or flood plain. If spannir�g the flood plain is not �'easible, culverts
shouId be installed in the flood plain portion of the approach to restore sorne af the hydrological
functions of the fIvod plain and reduce high velocities of flood waters within the affected area.
Section 7(a)(2) af the Endangered 5pecies Act requires that all federal action agencies (or their designated
non-federal representatives), in consultation with the Service, insure that any actian federally authorized,
funded, or cartied out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any federalty
threatened or endangered species. To assist you, a county-by-county list nf federally pxotected species
Imown to occur in North Caralina and information on their life histories and habitats can be found on oux
web page at http://www.fws.�ov/nc-es/es/countvfr.html .
Although the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNIIP) database does not indicate any known
occuirences of lzsted species near the proj ect vicinity, use af the NCNHP data should not be sfubstituted
for actual field surveys if suitable habitat occurs near the project site. The NCNHP database only
indicates the presence of lrnown occurrences of listed species and does not n.ecessarily mean that such
sgecies ar� not preaent. It may simply tnean that the area has not been surveyed. If suitable habitat
occurs within the project vicinity for any tisted species, surveys should be conducted to deternune
presence or absence of the species.
If yau determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e. Iikely to ad�ersely affect or nat likely to
adversely affect) a listed species, you shouid notify this office with your determination, the resuIts of your
surveys, svrvey methodologies and an analysis of the effects of the action on listed species, including
consideration af direct, indirect and curnulative effects, befnre conducting any activities that might affect
the species. If you c�etermine that the proposed action will have no effect (i.e. no bene�ciat or adverse,
direct or indirect effect) on listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comrnent on these prajects. If you have any questions
regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at (919} 856-4520, ext. 32.
Sincerely,
�
�` Pete Benj amin
Field Supervisor

1=I North Carolina Wildlife ReSaurces Commission �I
Gordo�a Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TU Rachelle Beauregard
NCDC7T, PDE�-NCS
FRC}M: Travis V4'ilson, Highwa_y Project Cc�ordinator
Habitat Cc�nservation Pro�ram
DATE: April lf}, 2013
SUBJECT: Bridge Replacements
Bialogists with the i�.1. C. Wi[dlife T�es�urces Commission (NCWRG) have revieweci the
informati�n providec� and have the followir�g preliminary comn-�ents on t}�e subject �aroject. Our
conriments are provi�ec� in accordance with �rovisior�s of the Natianal Environi�nental Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wilcflife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 4Q1, as amended; 16
[J.S.C. 661-667d).
Our �tandard reeommendations far bridge replacement projects of this scope are as
follows:
i. We generally �refer spanajing structi�re_s, Spanning structures usually do not require
wc�rk within the stream and da not require strear►� channel realignment. The harizflntaf
and vertical clearatices pravided by hridges allows for human and wildlife passage
ber�eath the str-ucture, does not block fish passage, and does not block navigation by
canoeists and boaters.
2. Bridge deck drains shou[d not discharge diree.t]y inta rthe strea�n.
3. Live ec�ncrete should not be allowed to contact the water in ar enterin,� inta the streatn.
4. 1#�possible, bric�g� sup}�orts (bents) should not be placed in the siream.
5. If tem�orary access roads ar detours are cortstr�cted, they shoul� be removed back to
c�rigina! ground elevations immediately upon the cornpletion of the project. Dist�ar�,ed
areas shauld be seedec� or rnulched to stabiii�e the sail anei native tree species should
be planted with a spaci�g af not ma►-e than 10'x10'. Ifpossible, when using tem�aorary
Mailing Address: Division of Fnl�nd l�isheries • 1721 Mail Sc.rvice Center • Raleigi�, NC 27699-t72�
Telephone: (9 i 9) 707-0220 • Fax: (9 i 9) 707-002$
�
9I �� ��

Bridge Memo Page 2 April ] 0, 2013
structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain
saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other nnechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and
root tnat intact, allows the area to re�egetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil.
6. A clear bank (riprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the
steam underneath the bridge.
7. In trout waters, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission reviews all U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers nationwide and generai `404' permits. We ha�e the option of
reques�ing additional measures to protect trout and trout habitat and we can
recommend that the project require an individual `404' perrait.
8. In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist should be
notified. Special measures to protect these sensitive species may be required.
NCDOT should also contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for information an
requirements of the Endangered Species Act as it relates to the praject.
9. In streams that are used by anadromous iish, the NCDOT official policy entitled
"Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12, 1997}" should
be foliowed.
10. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect ayuatic resources
must be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be
maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events.
I 1. Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of ground disturbing act�vities to provide long-term erosion cantrol.
12. All work in or adjacent ta stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area.
Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other di�+ersion structures should be used where
possible to prevent excavation in flowing water.
13. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in
order tn minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introdvcing other
pollutants into streams.
I4. Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fi11(causeways}, and
should be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
construction is completed.
I5. During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected �aily and
maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic rnaterials.
If corrugated metal pipe arches, reinforced concrete pipes, or concrete box culverts are
used:
I. The culverk must be designed to allow for aquatic li% and fish passage. Generally, the
culvert or pipe invect should be buried at least 1 foot belor�v the natural streambed
(measured from the natural thalweg depth}. If multiple barrels are required, barrels
other than the base flow barrel(s) should be placed on or near stream bankfull or
floodplain bench ele�ation {similar to Lyonsfield design}. These should be

Bridge Memo Page 3 April 3 0, 20I3
reconnected to floadplain benches as appropriate. This may be accomplished by
utilizing sills on the upstream and downstream ends to restrict or divert �ow to the
base fIow barrel(s). Silled barrels shoutd be filled with sediment so as not to cause
noxious or mosquito breeding conditions. Sufficient water depth should be provided
in the base flow barrel(s) during law flows to accornmodate fish movement. If
culverts are longer than 40-50 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles shoald be
installed in a manner that mimics existing stream pattern. This should enhance
aquatic life passage: 1) by depositing sediments in the baa-rel, 2) by maintaining
channel depth and flow reginaes, and 3) by providing resting pIaces for fish and other
aq�atic organisms. In essence, base flow barrel(s) shouId pravide a continuum of
water depth and channel width withavt substantial modifications of velocity.
2. If multiple pipes or cells are used, at least one pipe or box shou�d be designed to
rerrtain dry during normal flows to allow for wildlife passage.
3. Cutverts or pipes should be situated along the existing channel alignment whenever
possible to avoid channel realignment. Widening the stream channel must be avoided.
Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of structures typically decreases
water velocity causing sediment deposition that requires inereased maintenance and
disrupts ayUatic life passage.
4. Riprap shouId not be placed in the active tha(weg channel or placed in the streatnbed
in a manner that precludes aquatic life passage. Biaengineering boulders or structures
should be professionally designed, sized, and instalted.
In nnost cases, we prefer the replacement af the existing structure at the same location
with road closure. If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour shouid be designed and
located to avoid wetland impacts, minimize the need for clearing and to avoic� destabilizing
stream banics. If the structure will be an a new alignment, the old structure shoulc! be removed
and the appraach filIs removed from the 100-year floodplain. Approach filIs should be removed
c�own to the natural ground elevation. Ti�e area shoutd be stabilized with grass and p�anted with
native tree species. If the area reclairrzed was previously wetlands, NCDOT should restore the
area to wettands. If successful, the site may be utilized as mitigation for the subject project or
other projects in the watershed.
Pz-oject speciiic comments:
B-4550, Hoke County, replace bridge No. 41 and 42 on SR 1432 over Rockfish Creek: We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
B-4729, Chatham County, replace bridge No. 3Q6 on SR 13a3 o�er North Prong Rocky River:
We recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
B-4802, Rockingham County, replace bridge No. 18 on SR 1002 over the Haw River: We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard reeommendations apply.
B-4805, Rockingham CoUnty, replace bridge No. 9 on SR 2406 over prong of Troublesonne
Creek: We recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.

Bridge Memo Page 4 April 10, 2013
B-4b24, Rockingham County, replace bridge No. 80 on SR 1924 over Wolf Island Creek: The
potential exist for Roanoke logperch (Percina rex: state E, federal E) to be found at this site.
NCDOT should coordinate with NCWRC and USFWS in conducting a survey to determine the
presence or absence of this species. We recommend replacing this bridge with a bri�ge.
Standard recommendations apply.
B-4662, Wake County, replace bridge No. 196 on 5R 2308 o�er Moccasin Creek: We
recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge. StandarcE recommendatians apply.
B-4$2$, Vance County, replace bridge No. 56 on SR 1526 �ver Sandy Creek: We recorr�mend
replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
B-4831, Wake County, replace bridge No. 371 on SR 1152 over White Oak Creek: Harris Game
Land is located within the project study area, DOT snould coordinate closely during the design
and construction of this project to avoid and minimize impacts to this area. We recommend
replacing this bridge wiih a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
B-4794, Randolph County, repIace bridge No. 18 on SR 11 d7 over Bettie McGees Creek: This
portion of Bettie McGees Creek is designated as Significant Aqnatic Habitat hy tl�e NC Naiural
Heritage Program. O�r records aIso indicate the poten�ial for listed species to be present within
the project area, including: Carolina creekshell ( Villosa vaughaniana: state E, FSC), Notched
rainbow (Villosa constricta: state SC}, and Eastern creekshell ( Villosa delumbis: state SR).
We recomznend NCDOT follow the Design Standards for Sensitive Watersheds during the
design and construction of ti�is project. We recommend replacing this bridge with a bridge.
Standard recomrnendations apply.
B-5322, Person County, replace bridge No. 51 on SR 1343 o�er Richland Creek: We recommend
replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.
B-S323, Granville County, replace bridge No. I43 on SR � 442 over Johnston Creek: We
recomm.end replacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recammendations apply.
B-532b, Wake County, replace briclge No. 247 on SR 2555 over White Oak Creek: We
recozn�znend replacing this bridge with a bric�ge. Standard recommendations apply.
B-532$, Franklin County, replace bridge No. 129 on SR 1406 o�er Sandy Creelt: This portion of
Sandy Creek is deszgnated as Signi�cant Aquatic Ha6itat by the NC Naturat Heritage Prograrn.
Our records also indicate the potential far listed species to be present within the project area,
including: Carolina creekshell Notched rainbow {Yillosa constricta: state SC), Atlantic pigtoe
(Fusconaza masoni: staxe E, FSC), and Creeper (Strophitus undulatus: state T). We recommend
NCDOT follow the Design Standards for Sensiti�e Watersheds during the design and
construction of this project. We recomnrtend replacing this bridge wi#h a bridge. Standard
recommendatians apply.
B-534b, Alamance County, replace bridge No. 3 an SR 1529 UT: We recommend replacing this
bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendations apply.

Bridge Memo Page S Aprit 10, 2013
B-5347, Alaanance C+�unty, replace bridge 1`Jc7. 170 on SR 1212 c�ver prong of tllamar►ce Creek;
We recc�mmenc� re�Eacing this bridg� with a bridge. 5tai�cfard recoinnaendations apply.
B-53�8, Orange County, replace bridge N�. �S on SR i 005 over Phil's Creek: We rec�mmenc!
replacing thi� bricf�e with a k�ridge. Stan�arti recommendations apply.
;B-5349, Alamance County, replace bridge No. l73 c�n SR 1149 «ver Little tilamance Creek: We
recc�ra�mend re�lacing this bridge vrith a I�ridge. Standard recom��endatic�ns ap�ly.
8-5;50, A.lamance County, re�Eace bri+�ge No. 44 on SR 1768 over Jordan's Creek: We
rec�rnmend rep[acing this brir�ge 4�vith � hridge. fitandard reco�inendations apply.
B-5351, Ciuilf�rd Counry, replace k�ridge Nc�. 2�2 on US29iL1S70/I-85 Biisiness over the Deep
River: We recommend re�lacGng this bridge witf� Ei bridge. Standar� recornmendations apply.
B-�353, Guilford Coui�ty, re�la�e bric�ge No. I47 on US291U� 701I-$5 Business over US 311:
We �-ecomm�nd repiacing this bridge with a bridge. Standard recommendatio��s appiy.
Ii-5354, Gui[ford County, replace bridge No. 360 on SR 4771 over LTS 29: V4'� rec�m�nend
repincing this Mridge with a brid�e. Sta��dard recammendations apply.
I�-5362, Montgc�mery Co�nty, rep[ace bridge I�1o. 53 on NC `�3 c�ver Dro���ning Creek: This
portaon of Drownir�g Creek is designated as Si�;nifican� Aquatic Habitat by the NC Natural
Herita�e Pragram. We recommersd NCDOT follow the Design Standards for Sensotive
Watersheds during the desi�n an� construetion ofthis �roject. V4�e rec�mmend replacing this
brid�;e with a bridge. Standard recomn�endations ap�l�.
If you r�ced further assistance or infr�rmation on P�CWRC cQncerns regardin� bricl�;e
replacements, please contact me at {919} 7()7-(�370. Than� you fc,r the c�ppartunity t� review and
corr�ment an this �roject.

Pat f�lcCrory
Gavernor
���
+.�,•�� �
��Q���
North Cara�ina �epartment of Er�vironmer�� and I�atura� Res�urces
DiviSion of Wafer Quality
Charfes Wakild, P. E. John E. Sicvar�a. III
Director Secretary
Febrr�ary � l, 2013
MEI�ZORANDUM
To
From
Gregory� M. $lakeney, N�CDOT Bridge Project Developanent Secttc�n
�lmy Euliss, NC Division of Water (�uality, Offace
Subject: Scapdng corr�nnents r�n propc�sed iinpravements to Bridge nos. 3('T'IP �10. B-5346), 170 (TIP No,
5-5347j, 173 (�5349) and 44 (TIP �la. �3535�) in Alamance C�unty.
Reference your cc�rrespoandence dated December 27, 2013 in whiGh you requested corr�ments for the
referenced prajeci. Preiimirt�ry analysis of the nroject reveals the potential for m�alti�le imJ�accs to
strean�s and j�r�sdictioi��.l �vetlands in the project area.
Further investi�ations at a higher resolutian should be �indertaken to verify the �resene�. of other streams
and/orjurisc�ictional ��etiands in the area. In the event tfiat ar�y jurisdiet�ona) areas are identified, khe
Division c�f Water Quality requesfis that NCDC�T consider the fc�llowiiag eravironrnental iss�res for the
pr�posed projects:
B-�346: Bridge No. 3 over D Creek over on SR I529 in Alamance Countv
*Pc�tential impacts to I7ry Creek (WSV;NSW)
1. Dry� Creek are c]ass WSV; NSW u-aters ofthe State. NCDWQ is very concerned with sedi�r�en�
a��d erasic�n impacts that could result from this project. NCDWQ recommends that highly
protective sediment and erosion co»tro] BMPs be implemented to reduc.e the risk of nutrient
run�ff to Liry Creek. NCDVb�Q 1-equests thai r�ad desagn pCans provide treatincnt of the storm
water runoff throu�h t3est management practices as detailecl in 1��e mc�st recent version of
NCDWQ's Starn�wcrter Best 1lflarrage�nem Prerctices.
2. Th'rs prQject is within the ]ordan Lake Basin. R.iparian buffer impacts shall be avoided ar�d
�nircimized to the greatest extent �ossible pursuant to 15� NC.AC 2B .0267. I'vew �'evelopment
activities located in t�e pr�tected SU-foat wide riparian are�s tivithin the 6asii� shal] be lirnited to
"uses" identi�ed within and canstructed in accc��-dance with 15A N�.AC 2B .[�2b7. $uffer
rnitigatian ma}! be required fnr buf�er impacts resulting from activities classif�ed as "aliowable
with miti�ati�n" wiahin tlle "T'able of Uses" section of� t�e Buff�r Rules or ret7uire a variancc
under the Buffer Rules. A buffer mitigation plan, iracl�ding use of the NC Ec�system
Enhancement F'rogram, must be prc�vided to NCI]WQ prior to appraval c�f the Water C2uality
Ce�-tifii�tion. Buffer mitigation may be required for buffer impacts resulting frc�m activities
ciassifiecl as "all�wable witla mitigation" within t�e "7'able of L1ses" section of tli� Buf%t- Ru[es
E�r require a varianc.e under the Buff�r REEIes. A buffer mitigaiion pian, �ncluding use of ihe NC
Ecosystem F,nhancement Probram, must be provided to NCDWQ prior tc� �ppraval of th� Water
Quality Certifeatian.
Teanspo�tation and Permitt�ng Uni[
i65� Mail 5erric� �enier, Raleigh, 11erth CaroGrEa �7599-1617
Loeatian 512 N 5alisbury S�. Raleigh, ,NoRh Caralina 276�4
Phone: 919-8�7-63��' FAX 91�-8[7;-6488
lnternet: www.ncwaterquality.arq
� f?i
Nor�hCal-oli��a
�i�ltlfl'11���
A�i Fqu21 Oppon�ni[y'; A�rmali:e ri hcn Em�lnyfr

B-5347- Brid�e No 170 aver an Unnarned Tributary to Bi Alamance Creek on SR 1212 in Alamance
Coun
*Potential impacts to an Unnamed Tributary to Big Alamance Creek (WSV;NSW; 3�3d Fair
Bioclassification-Ecological and Biolagical Integrity)
1. Big Alamance Creek and its unnamed tributaries are class WSV; N5W waters of the Sta#e.
NCDWQ is very concerned with sediment and erasion impacts that could result from this project.
NCDWQ recommends that highly protective sedzznent and erosion cantrol BMPs be implemented
to reduce the risk of nutrient runoffto Big A(amance Creek and its unnamed tributaries. NCDWQ
requests tt►at road design plans provide treatment of the storm water runoff through best
management practices as detailed in the most recent version of NCDOT's Stormwater Best
Management Practices.
2. Big Alamance Creek and its unnatned tributaries are class WSV; NSW; 303(d) waters of the State.
Big Alamance Craek and its unnamed tributaries Creek is on the 303{d) list for impaired use for
aquatic life due to fair bioclassifcation. NCDWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion
impacts that could result from this project. NCDWQ recommends that the most protective
sediment and erosiota control BMPs be implennented in accordance with Design Standards in
Sensitive Watersheds {15A NCAC 04B .0124} to reduce the risk of further impairment to Big
Alamance Creek and its unnamed tributaries. NCDWQ requests that road design plans provide
treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the most
recent version of NCDOT's Starmwater Best Management Practices.
3. T1ais project is within the Jordan L,ake Basin. Riparian buffer impacts shaIl be avoided and
minimized to the greatest extent possible pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0267. New deve(opment
activities located in the pratected 50-foot wide riparian areas within the basin shall be limited to
"uses" identified within and constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B A267. Buffer
mitigation may be required for buffer impacts resulting from activities classified as "allowable
with mitigation" within the "Table of Uses" section of tlae Buffer Rules or reyuire a variance under
the Buffer Rules. A buffer mitigation plan, including use of the NC Ecosystem Enhancement
Pragram, must be provided to NCDWQ prior to approval of the Water Quaiity Certz�cation.
Buffer mitigation may be required for buffer impacts resulting from activities classified as
"allowable with mitigation" within the "Table of Uses" section of the Buffer Rules or require a
variance under the Buffer Rules. A bttffer mitigation plan, including use of the NC Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, must be provided to NCDWQ prior to approval of the Water Quality
Certification.
B-5349: Brid e No. 173 over Back Creek Little Creek on SR 1149 in Alamance Coun
*Potential impacts to Back Creek (Little Creek} (WSV;NSW)
1. Back Creek (Little Creek) are class WSV; NSW waters of the State. NCDWQ is very concerned
with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this project. NCDWQ recommends that
highiy protective sediment and erosion cantrol BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient
runaff to Back Creek (Little Creek). NCDWQ requests that road design plans provide treatment of
the storm watar runoff through best management practices as detailed in the most recent version of
NCDOT's Stormwater Best Management Practrces.
2. This project is within the Jordan Lake Basin. Riparian buffer impacts shall be avoided and
minimized to the greatest extent possible pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0267. New development
activities located in the protected 50-foot wide riparian areas within the basin shall be limited to
"uses" identified within and constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B .0267. Buffer
mitigation may be required for buffer impacts resulting from activities classified as "allowable
with mitigation" within the "Table of Uses" section of the Buffer Rules or require a variance under
the Buffer Rules. A buffer mitigation plan, including use of the NC Ecosystem Enhancement
Program, must be pravided to NCDWQ prior to approval of the Water Quality Certi�cation.
Buffer mitigation may be required for buffer impacts resulting from activities classified as
"allowable with mitigation" within t1�e "Table of Uses" section of the Buffer RuIes or require a
variance under the Buffer Rules. A buffer mitigation plan, including use of the NC Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, must be provided to NCDWQ prior to approval of the Water Quality
Certification.

B-535d: Briclee No. 44 over Jordan's Creek on 5R 1768 in Alamance Count�
*Poten�ial impacts to 7ordan's Creek (WSII;HQW;NSW)
1. Review of the project reveais the presence of st�rface waters classified as WSII; Hzgh Quality
Waters of the State in the projec# study area. This is one af the highest cIassifications for water
quality. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H . I Q06 and 1 SA NCAC 2B .0224, NCDOT will be required to
abtain a State Stormwater Permit prior to construction except in North Carolina's twenty coastal
counties.
Jordan's Creek are class WSV; NSW waters ofthe 5tate. NCDWQ is very concerned with
sediment and erosion impacts that coald result from this project. NCDWQ recommends that
highly protecti�e sediment and erosion control BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient
runoffto Jordan's Creek. NCDWQ requests that road design plans provide treatment of the storm
water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the most recent version of
NCDOT's Stormwater Best Management Practices.
This project is witl�in the Jordan Lake Basin. Riparian buffer impacts shali be avoided and
minimized to the greatest extent possible pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B .0267. New development
activities located in the protected SU-foot wide riparian areas within the basin shall be limited to
"uses" identified within a.r►d constructed in accordance with 15A NCAC 2B .0257. Buffer
mitigation may be required for buffer impacts resutting from activities ciassified as "allowable
with mitigation" within the "Table of Uses" section of the Buffer Rules or require a variance under
the Buffer Rules. A buffer mitigation pIan, including use of the NC Ecosystem Enhancement
Program, must be provided to NCDWQ prior to approval of the Water QuaZity Certification.
Buffer mitigation may be required for buf�er impacts resuiting from activities classified as
"allowable with mitigatian" within the "Table of Uses" section of the Buffer Ruies or require a
variance under the Buffer Rules. A bufFer mitigation plan, including use of the NC Ecosystem
Enhancement Program, must be proaided to NCDWQ prior to appro�al oithe Water Quatity
Certifcation.
General Project Comments:
1. The environmental document shauld provide a detailed and iternized presentation of the proposed
impacts to wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping. [f mitigation is necessary as
required by 15A NCAC 2H.4546{h), it is preferable to present a conceptuat (if not finalized)
mitigation plan with the environmental documentation. Appropriate mitigation plans wiIl be
required prior to issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification.
2. Environmentai impact statement alternati�es shall consider design criteria that reduce the impacts to
streams and wetlands from storm water n.�naff These alternaiives shall include road designs that
alIaw for treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the
most recent version of NCDOT's Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual, such as grassed
swales, buffer areas, preformed scour holes, retention basins, etc.
After the selection of the preferred atternative and prior to an issuance of the 40i Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance
and minirr�ization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the rz�axirnum extent practical. In
accordance w'rth the Environtnental Management Commission's Rules { 15A NCAC 2H.0506(h}�,
mitigation will he required for impacts af greater tha� 1 acre to wetlands. In the event that
mitigation is required, the mitigation pIan shall be designed to replace appropriate lost iunctions and
values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Progrann may be available for use as wetland mitigation.
4. In accordance wit� the EnvironrrtentaI Management Commission's Rules {i5A NCAC
2H.0506(h)}, mitigation wi�l be required for impacts of greater than 1501inear feet to any single
stream. Tn the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan shall be designed to replace

apprapriate lost functions and values. The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available
for use as stream mitigation.
5. Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, shall continue to
inciude an itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream iinpacts with corresponding
mappmg.
6. NCDWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this praject.
NCDOT shall address these concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to the
aquatic environments and any mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts.
7. An analysis of cumulative arad secoradary impacts anticipated as a result of this project is required.
TIae type and detail of analysis shall conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the
assessment of secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004.
8. NCD�T is respectfully reminded that ail impacts, including but nat liznited to, bridging, fill,
exca�ation and clearing, and rip rap ta jurisdictiortai wetlands, sh�eams, and riparian buffers need to
be included in the final impact calculations. These impacts, in adc�ition to any construction impacts,
temparary or otherwise, also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Qaality Certification
Application.
Where streams sr►ust be crossed, NCDWQ prefers bridges be used in Iieu of culverts. Howe�er, we
realize that economic cansiderations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that
culverts shovld be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms.
Moreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove
preferable. When applicable, NCDOT shoutd not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the
maximum extent practicable.
10. Whenever possible, NCDWQ prefers spanning structures. Spanning structures usually do not
reguire work within the stream or grubbing of the strearr►banks and do not require streatn channel
realignment. The horizontal and vertical clearances providecE by bridges shall allow for human and
wildlife passage beneath the structure. Fish passage and navigation by canoeists and boaters shall
not be blocked. Bridge supports (bents} should not be placed in the stream when possibte.
11. Bridge deck drains shall not discharge d'uectly into the stream. Stormwater shall be directed across
the bridge and pre-treated through site-apprapriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour holes,
vegetat�d buffers, etc.) before entering the stream. Please refer to the most current version of
NCDOT's Stormwater Best Management Practices.
12. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands or streams.
i3. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the m�imum extent practical. Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas will need to be presented in the 401 Water Quality Certi�cation and could
precipiiate compensatory mitigation.
14. The 401 Water Quality Certif cation application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for starmwater management. More specifically, stormwater shall not be per�nitted to
discharge directiy into streams or surface waters.

15. Based an the information presented in the documer►t, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and
streams may require a Nationwide Permit (NW} application to the Carps of Engineers and
corresponding 40l Water Quality Certification. Piease be advised that a 401 Water Quality
Certification reyuires satisfactory protectian of water quality to ensure ti�at water quality standards
are met and no wetland or streazn uses are lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal
of a formal application by the NCDOT and written concurrence from NCDWQ. Please be aware
that a�ny approval will be contingent on appropriate avoidance and minimization ofwetland and
stream impacts to the maximum extent practical, the development of an acceptab�e stormwater
management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
16. If concrete is used daring construction, a dry work area shali be maintained to prevent direct contact
between curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete shail
not be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for ele�ated pH and possible ayuatic life and
fish kil(s.
17. If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction
contours and elevations. Disturbed areas shall be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
appropriate native woody species shall be planted. When using temporary structures the area shall
be cleared but not grubbed. Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, ar other
mechanized equipment and leaving the stumps and root mat intact altows the area to re-vegetate
naturaily �nd minimizes soil disturbance.
18. Unless o�terwise authorized, placement of cuIverts and other structures in waters and streams shall
be placed belaw the elevation of the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater
than 48 inches, and 20 percent of the culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48
inc�es, to allow low flaw passage ofwater and aquatic life. Design and placement of culverts and
other structures including temporary erosion control measures shall not be conducted in a manner
that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds or banks, adjacent to or upstream and
down stream of the above structures. The applicant is required to provide �vidence that the
equilibrium is being maintained if requested in writing by NCDWQ. If ti�is condition is unable to
be met due to bedrock or other limiting features encountered auring construction, please contact
NCDWQ for guidance on how to proceed and to determine whether or nat a permit modification
witl be required.
19. If multiple pipes or barrels are required, they shail be designed to mimic natural stream cross section
as ctosely as possible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation, floodplain benches, and/or
sills may be required where ap�rropriate. Widening the stream channe! should be avoided. Stream
channel widening a# the inlet or outlet end of structures typicalIy decreases water velocity causing
sediment deposition that reyuires increased maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage.
20. If foundation test barings are necessary; it shall be noted in the document. Geotechnical work is
approved under Genera1401 Certification Number 388/Nationwide Permit No. 6 far Survey
Activities.
21. Sediment and erosion controI measares suf�cient to protect water resources must be implemented
and maintained in accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion
Contro! Planning and Design Manual and the most recent version of NC5000250.
22. AII work in or adjacent to stream waters shali be conducted in a dry work area. Approved BMP
measures from the most current �ersion of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance Activities

manual such as sa.ndbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other diversion structures shall be used to
prevent excavation in flowing water.
23. While the use of National Wetland Inventory {NWI) maps, NC Coastal Region Evaluation of
Wetland Significance (NC-CREWS} Fnaps and soil survey maps are useful tools, t}�eir inherent
inaccuracies require that qualified personnel perforrr► onsite wetland delinea#ions prior to permit
approval.
24. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in strearn channels in order to
mir�imize sedimentation and reduce the lilcelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This
equipment shall 6e inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters fram
leaking fuels, lubricants, hydrauIic fiuids, ar other toxic materials.
25. Riprap shali not be placed in �h� active thalweg channe! or pIaced in the streambed in a manner that
precludes aquatic iife passage. Bioengineering boulders or structures should be properly desigmed,
sized and installed.
26. Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible.
Riparian vegetation must be reestablisk►ed within the canstruction limits of the project by the end of
the growing season following completion of construction.
Thank you for rec�uesting our input at this time. NCDOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certiftcation requires that appropriate tneasures be instituted to ensure that water quality
staz�dards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions ar require
additional information, please contact at (___) � or
@ncdenr.gov.
cc: , US Army Corps of Engineers, Field Office (electronio cnp� only)
, Federal Highway Administration
, PE, Division Engineer {i£applicable}
, Division _ Environmental Officer (if applicable}
, Environmental Protection Agency (electronic copy nnly)
, NC Wildlife Resources Commissian (electronic copy only)
, Division of CoastaI Management (etectronic copy only} (sf applicable}
, Ecosystem Enhancement Program (if applicable)
, NCDWQ Regional Office {or Central Offce if sent from the Regions)
File Copy

Praject TrackingNo. (Intetytal Use)
15-11-0043
.�..��.____,��
;�GA► ��t ,�
-� �: �'
��. ; ��� � �� �
Project No:
WBS No. :
Fer� Aid No:
Federal
HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
NO SURVEY REQUIRED FQRM
This farm only pertains to Histaric Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It
is not valid for Archaeological Resources. Yau rnust consult separately with the
Archaeology Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
B-S349 County: Alamance
46063.1.1 Document CE
T e:
BRZ-1149(10) Funrling: ❑ State � Federal
� Yes ❑ No Permit NW, NW33, potentially 401
Tvnets): and 404 WQ certifications
Project Description :
Replacement of Bridge No. 173 on SR 1149 {Huffman Milt Road) aver Back Creek. Project
length is 0.2 miles {1,055 feet). The right-of-way will remain the same. The project will be
maintaining two 12-foot lanes and adding paved and earthen shoulders. A temporary bridge will
be required during the replacement of Bridge No. 173.
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
Descriptian of review activities, results, nnd conclusions:
Review of HPO quad maps, HPOweb GIS mapping, historic designations roster, and indexes
was conducted on 12/8/15. Based on this review, there are no existing NR, SL, DE, LD or SS
properties in the Area of Potential Effects (APE). Built in 1960, Bridge No. 173 is not eligible
for listing to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) according to the North Carolina
Historic Bridge Tnventory. There are no other properties that fall into the APE over the age of
fifty years old, which is roughly defined as 250 feet from each end of the bridge and 50 feet on
either side of the bridge and consisting of mainly wooded axeas. Therefore, because there are no
potential historic resources within the APE, a survey will not be required for this project.
W/ev the availa6le information provides a reliable hasis 1'or reasona6dv predictin� t{iat_t/tere
are no unir�entifred si�ni�cRnt {ristoric �rrcliitectural or landscane resources in tlee project
area:
HPO quad maps, HPOweb GIS mapping, Google Street View, Google maps and Alamance
County property records are considered valid tools for the purpases of deterrnining the likelihood
of historic resources being present. A survey is not required far this project.
Histaric Archifecrure mrd La�idscape.r NO ti1JHV1iY kl:OClllU;Dforvn forMiiror 7}misporla(ion Prajecls ns Or�nlrfeed in the Z007 Programnm�ic Agreement.
Page 1 of 2

SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
�Map(s) ❑Previous �uivey Info. ❑Photos ❑Correspondence ❑Design Plans
FIND�NG BY NCllOT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
Histo��ic Architecture and Landscapes -- NO SURVEY REQUIRED
I�.�����.
NCDO`�' Ar#�hitectural Histarian Date
Hislol'ic ArcAileclt�re �urd Lun�Lsc�rpc.c h'O SU1Z 1 F Y I21i Uil!lZlil) ft>rm jor �ilixnr Tr�u�.tiporin7Tnr+ f'rnjccrs u.ti Oteufifrri! in 1he )U0' 1'rngremirr�nlie ,4green�<'n7.
Page 2 of 2

�- I� . �
- � „i �
r
,�'i
�l 1 . ! -�. 4 1
i t f �`�. �� , � i
�
�; :. ,. . _.:. � ; _3 .: _. .
�
F O4 Hrprrr rq
NOR�II �ARULINA DL-I'AR I�\iF:iJ-I� 4k=
t� � 9Q1.
G� :;,� TRANSf"Ofd�AT1[7N
o �s�� �11'i510N O€� EiICi1114AYS
P9_�✓�� hRt)Ilil'i�I.VI:Li�PMINTcI
�'i.�, q�fi' LNVIRONM1iI:NTAL:lNAI.l'SISUNiI
:._�4toripr�e±:£ �
.ALA61e\NCE CGIU:ti'C!'
R�r�,ncE I3aiocE N�. 173 0�� SFi 1149
Q1'1,R I3ACK �REGK
B-5349
f"igure 1
_ .. �`:
,_.,._� 3�

December 8, 20�5
NR Poinis
# NR Individual Listing
r �fR Listing, Gone
� IVRH� Center Faint
NR Boundaries
� f�ationa] Register Boundary
� Boundary af DestroyedlRemoved NR Listing
1:4, 514
0 0.0375 fl.d75 0.15 mi
b d,05 (}.'f 0.2 km
Source� Esr� pig�ii�lGbbe, GeoEye, EaRhstar Geographics, CNESlAirtrus
0.S, US6A, USGS, AEX, Ge�tmapping, Aemgrid, IGN, IG�P, swisstnpa, and
HPC�web, Alamance Counfiy

Project Tracking No.:
15-11-0043
NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
-oa�'�� ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES �
+�^ �.:�:.$.a.t.�� _. �_.�. �
`" PRESENT FORM �
�� p� �: sq ! ._:
'` 4„q ��°_ .�-� ' This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not �.•...�
��`�"' � valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the � d
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No.
B-5349
County:
Document:
Alamance
WBS No
F.A. No.
46063.1.1
BRZ-1149(10)
Federal Permit Required?
CE
Funding: ❑ State � Federal
� Yes ❑ No Permit Type: Unknown NWP
Project Description:
NCDOT intends to replace Bridge No. 173 on SR 1149, Huffman Mill Road, over Back Creek.
According to preliminary planning provided along with the Cultural Resources Review request, the
proposed project measures over 1056 feet (more than 322 meters) in length. While the proposed bridge
replacement are expected to be constructed largely within existing right-of-way (ROW), along the
existing alignment, and in the same location as the existing bridge, permanent easements and a temporary
detour to the north are also expected. As a result of these additional areas, outside existing ROW, the
proposed Area of Potential Effects (APE) is estimated to encompass approximately 2.68 acres (nearly
1.09 hectares).
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 or eligible ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
present within the project's area of potential effects. (Attach any notes or documents
as needed)
❑ No subsurface archaeological investigations were 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.
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
As noted on the Archaeological Survey Required form for this project (dated January 13, 2016), a review
of the maps and files archived at the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology was conducted on
December 3, 2015. While no previously identified archaeological sites were recorded within the
proposed APE for the current project, a number of archaeological sites are recorded along Alamance
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT"
form for the Amended Mdnor Transportation Projects as Qua[ified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
1 of 6

Project Tracking No.:
15-11-0043
Creek in similar settings to those attributed to the current project (i.e. 31Am110, 31Am111, 31Am115,
31Am116, 31Am117, 31Am118). While the soils information obtained from the Natural Resources
Conservation Service Web Soil Survey indicated that the project area is dominated by steeply sloped,
moderately eroded, and gullied landforms, a reconnaissance investigation to determine the potential for
intact archaeological remains was deemed prudent given the large number of archaeological sites
recorded in the region.
On May 20, 2016, NCDOT archaeologists, Shane Petersen and Brian Overton, conducted a
reconnaissance investigation and limited archaeological survey of the proposed APE. A surface
inspection of the entire APE, as defined by the preliminary design available at the time, was conducted.
As expected for aerial photography of the proj ect area, portions of the proposed APE on the northeast side
of Bridge No. 173 and Back Creek have been severely disturbed by landscape alterations associated with
SR 1149 and the development of the gravel operation to the north of the bridge. To the south and
southwest of Bridge No. 173, along the south side of Huffman Mill Road, a cut-bank and utilities
easement dominate that portion of the APE. Portions of the APE along the north side of the road tend to
be dramatically sloped with exposed outcroppings of rock and a few "floating" boulders. Further to the
northwest of ROW, the area slopes down into a gully. This gully is separated from ROW by a chain-link
fence.
For the most part, none of the areas observed during the archaeological reconnaissance were appropriate
for subsurface testing. Steep slopes and disturbed landforms are characteristics that dominate the vast
majority of the proposed APE. Such areas are unlikely to possess archaeological resources that retain the
ability to convey their signiiicance. The exception to this generalization was a small break in the slope
observed to the north of SR 1149, between the chain-link fence and existing ROW. A single subsurface
test was excavated in this area. The shallow soil profile was observed as follows: 0-10 centimeters,
10YR4/2, dark grayish brown, clay loam; 10-18 centimeters, 10YR6/4, light yellowish brown, coarse
sandy loam with gravel. The shovel test pit was terminated at this depth due to the dense gravels
encountered. No cultural material was observed in the soil matrix and the profile was interpreted as
evidence of an organic soil developing on top of colluvium.
No further archaeological investigations are required for the project within the APE currently proposed.
The project should be considered to be compliant with Section 106 and NCGS 121-12(a) for
archaeological resources. In the very unlikely event that archaeological materials are encountered as the
project moves forward, all activities in the area of the archaeological remains should cease immediately
and this office should be contacted. If the project expands beyond the APE as currently defined, further
consultation will be required.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: � Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info
Signed:
. �
� �is-
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
� Photos ❑Correspondence
June 17, 2016
Date
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT"
form for the Amended Mdnor Transportation Projects as Qua[ified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
2 of 6

Project Tr«clzirlg No.:
15-11-0043
��;. -�;l,,�s�,,,,,,.�,�, '� `��'� � -- N�` q,s� � ��' �
� . �- � �
�, � � _ �
z� �,,,,�� '' � / y �, _ ,� y _ .
�
,� �` � ' � . _- � . fa` � r �. . Y .i� ��
` sA'. � <
1 I Y a � � � . _.. _— = � �•"r"_ � _�' .:.� . _ � [ . �; � - �
°byp:-�.�' �„ � .., . �' -. w_ �- �.
� . ��,.r - .�-,r�- �';'�+ ' r� �
yf�,�... ' _ .A'� r �: F` �� �= i .
.. . a�! �_ ,:�.x - � � ,� ': �^ __�-: Y`
* ';�k" �' ' \ '
4 4' y � 1
�� +i�, � � _ �, �"
f�, , e � / �' f ��'a�
� � ��� �� I v t' . _ �r � � � '',�$` ; �+
r,^.i . .���� ' �. _ . i ;•���.: � �.a�.-,_��. -,`.,:'.����..'�.
��,; n ���_ , . . - _� � . ..
�� ,��` �`�'� � . _ � . �,�: ` �r
� � �,��� ., .�,,,�.�; ;�
�k �'� �" � . .� r �. �,.�
", r $',.��� � �'�`, V�`i4;; , � ��'/ ' � °t� � ' r,r .'' ,
,�y��s' ��'4` _ N' � `� ,��k f��
�1� �� ,�l =� ,� �' �-y�"� - - �",�Y��'� �, � �
i , +
% 9!� �� n�! � �"� � �"� �' �� ��r ��, "' r ` �t��� _�'
q� � ': � n� � � ^'k �Y� `�� t�r�' .. .:,� � .: a� � �, � ��y, �+� �� :_ .✓��,�'�
��t..����' ��p �`R�,� �-,�,�1� � . *����4 �a � � �1` y�,^�������L �����Y 'i �,x�'� q, � *.`�
t i V> � � t d
� y -� as�t `�` � `���� . _, ,�,� �. �7 �`�. _ . i/' }}.,. . � � �
.�1� (F
�'r *i � �` f . . �' -� �, ��'�¢��� �-�� fl�':� � �, �4�s� �,a�' � ��Y p . *���
�1
s ;�; u � a 1 t4 � ' ,L, .r . � kr � y���. �� � �.. ' ..
��` � G � �° t" 3 �F' " g, �i" ��� �1
d �,.�*.� � i ta� �'� �;~ .� ,a �ac-,. _,.�
l i
s%��r�k- �r7 �" y ���� �'���14e� ��� ���- � 5�� �`� ��`�• ��''k'���` � ~� :,� �-�'1V ��"rc-_-
h y5� � u�.
� "�l.a ��.�i ;: A f �e� ,'I '�{�� '-+, ,�p • �- . ' ?� �[ ''�,�� � w'�� _
,� j �y. :� �,���w u� � r � `�' U � � � + 7 ' ti � "'� � � 'iN? � ��. , � ,,r `�" �: "� '�� ; �
.Y,,. e 64
(.� ti 6 Y—d _�y . � �. _ ry� � � '0 _'I �� �'
k � �_,�(y+,''4� , � �,
�` 4µi, Si6a*`a4 ��, ,�'. � � t T '�,� ,� '1 � �� �`- �� J"� . ro. ��tr i `� � x`�`� �, � t,�� �� �
� � � k y� � �J� A. ' °� ' x � - 4� �
+. ''�3 �-� �, iF�'� b�ie-�t'7�'�",ii,; � � : •�,�,$•��'`�'-� � � �'
.�i,d� - � � ti . 7y! �'�� ��� f . � ,�"�� a _. �.:, t� �`<`'`� i '� F.
c �S '1 �y�;'."! � � �' � q � `f°'� �$, � � ti, . `� �k, s,Y; a',., ��� � � �g, � .
i' �r ,R7 - _ ,�.�. f'r � �� � -�'s-"2� � {� .�s 6� x �'[Z ri�, � y
��4 i }�i' ..� ������� ` S �� .�� Y�� �,� � � .,:y+ :r_ ��','�yA�i � k�et � � � � � m� �
� � ��e �, a.�� �F'�-�r'`� ��, `�; �� x � ��� q'�� a ,� rV . � �,�F�dr� ��h,;� .�ti
�� � �� �i �'! d+ � �r � � �,.� '� . � ��� �'� '�� � h . � $ V £ o
3 ��
. � °����'0�� � �r� i"� �s � � ��' ��� �,� girµ�" �. a' �'' �, � , l` 4 ;.aS'� '�
�° y� w � � � �� ���'��� µ� ���� �h� �� .;!��:�. , � j �'
�rt. � e3 a � � t d',:�_ �i q �, t 6 � ''� .4. '� � �o
;'' � � ' ��t'ra�f� �; i E,.�, �:,rF ;,:�` L*l= 4''� ¢ � r �
�f' � ,,y�� � l' �" � Y t -� �� � A e � "� .+� �` ��'A �:
,'
� �
�� ��� F .����' '}y` �'���.��h•�''�� `4i• �t� -�s`4 � ,{',' ;$ Fl.St � �• - ra � � . �
' �?s.�• ..,�� 'R�` h �:� t�. • r �Y � + '�r v'�' : Y"� �� - � }4 � t ` •, �, +1
+.y.1� ,� s- � 4� �`�,,y�� .a��-j y ��! :. ��N�,S,� y(� �' ��+fi'� . � t�S� y � � .a �, ,cu; � i r a•:
i""�]���J '��8 ���.r�.: I . ��'�7Y'� �� � . �F �J�E -, �l a',�'k 1 4 � .. � � �uW '�� f�=*�t�;�.
��+�������� ,•ib�4h����C ����'Se�Y W�ti'��� �-�t �y�.� � ,��°� ,._ ay�� J ,.'e ���.. �<�''b�
,�,�+• "� �'' ti � � � � � � � �� „tr�`. �i � �� P � �� � ,,,�q �,.,
�� �T � ' �,` y� ly �, � � ,� q..._ �, r.', �'� N.�# � . 1 �. � �zY
a
'�. 4 �' q�}
� �'4� �+ �, � M a �� y 1'yr. �s�`� �j�" `�,� �+h � � , � � t. I ; ��' �. q� p Q5 lu a � _,
q �� 7� Y'p � r l t 4: � : .. �k -• �-
1, �% �. ~d,J .�' �a � ' ,s '�$' •E � ;s �9�' � � y� ,, ,S, � ,� x.. � d "� � � i J`'1„,�, � ,. d �� �,��.�,'�� .
'1�". � '�.� i Y�f r.�Y s� � w'A�„ :? �'k e'�:� � �. � l � � _. 1 �I ,� ? ` ^� d l , y� ,� � � de�y+:
'� � +, J� ��`F: y p I�} �y �1 �'1 i.�� � .� � � ; ^4y i �1� ��� � � � � 1� vr 'Vy � ! �4 � �� �.
� y � ��� ,, e � .g ."`�, � y� ytP1 t � ''w. %�i t +.n..� � * � '��,�(�Y� � 115.
ye � �i,��� ^ir '�! V s �k � �; E, F-� 41� 1' �' 4y � �l�»"
� C N �t::. ' ;� y. � �, `�r rh ti . � '�.iw T± � v y �� � ..� 1 �1"' 8}�� . L 'FT� f"� ��' r '�,til +�� Y� "'
?t+�� "� � i. o � � � �'�� � y� +� � �'� 1 '��.� '� . `� ��'� � .a � .i
A � �� F.� ' 1. �'k � c � I� � ..-+�� t �'� L �� �� �'��f��� x �as� ���' . �� �'���y �'� Q� :
+ ,{� t � fi {r '���d 9., q w � � , � .,'1P �, a": � � �
'� \T � A � ' b �'� �' � �+t4 � ' f /, � � �'i��..
} t' �� .�' r' N^� ry� �t �`:. � �% '��o.`��`� r�'�Mfy��,W��l. ;� � ;i y� �` � �`�.��� '4 � rs... .�y� A �'�" � ( �
� i'�"�� �,i V� �� Y �yt�S'.:��� i�r� M i'',+ .�, �:p'x•c 'M..'� r� y 'Y �r � r�. � �ym�i14 , .
� �4 2 ', � i ,iy �y � � � 3 iS ��si ,� �� F�j � ,i, �i t� �y y�t M1 "� '£ � p �.�5.- �.. �L� ' �
'��'� y u �a ` i C � t�i'' �'� ��' r:. ��Y �Fi f,��s��,,` '"�,�"'!� � X y` � � � ���§� '�„�1
��r',��Sc '� � �'{ �' � s �' ' r "«':� I f i t�� r t� ..�e
�� �� ���^�I�1 yi a - k e��.l.�' � i �.*�� '"�,� j tl> 4�.a�:':,7��wjY'� `.��'�4 1 �' � 1�4o-���4 I- �.,��g1i�, - � -
? kE�-,�'� ,�i'� ' � L..�..� , �,. . __ ,,,,�,� � t �: a : i � � ; � � " . � QY ..
10f1 2�0 4�0 Fe�C I�.' �� '+' �� b e '�� ��'° } j y��� w��
� � � �, �:: � , �_� � �� .� � : �� -
w ; �;':,� ",�:Y� N �:i � , �,' is�'� ,i _, � qa'-. , � „ _
Aerial photograph and 2-foot contour inap illustrating the location of the excavatcd sLibsurfacc
test (yellow mark) within the proposed APE (red lines) for the replacement of Bridge No. 173 on
SR 1149, Huffman Mill Road.
"NO NATLONAL REGISTER ELlGIBL6 OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PIt6SENT"
Jorm %r [Me Amended Miraor Trun.rprnTatiori Pi�ojecLs as QualiJled ia the 2007 Pro��anima[ic Agreernen[.
3 of 6

Project Tr«clzing No.:
15-11-0043
View of Bridge No. 173 and SR ll 49, Huffman Mill Road (facing southwest).
"NO NATLONAL L2EGLSTER ELIGlBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL S11'ESYLt6SENT"
form %or lhe Amended Alinor TransporTatiori Projert.�� as QualiJfed ira the 2007 R�o��amma[ic A�reement.
4of6
View of ROW along the solitheast side of SR 1149 (faciilg northeast).

Project Tradrrng No.:
15-11-0043
M,,.� �, ,.��j� I ' , � ,, , p. c � ��'yytf �' ;
..' 'yG .. 'Z`� �.� I � � � ' � � #C . -; r' �' 1�� -' � �' �, . J ��. � .+'�- il'
;� � �,1.- , . _��:� � �► ; "�� ,. " • � : . � _ .
, .: a . � . +��.
a. �l � � �, � � . �`` �(� j � . . a W':
7 � , • ��-. �'- , � .% 1 � ��?� y�� � � � , � ;:� ''�' � � � '1�
- �� l � . ��"i,�l ; � �1 ,;""_��Fri`M I ^`T�/� �.. .. �`- ' .�.� T?�/ ;
{ y �' - � / � " �! c � M' �5%lt�.� .ry+�'`q'�'l � J , . �'..`
J 1 '
� . ' �'M+ '��,�,��; .°i�l � . �y/ �. y ➢ :�• �r�,�}�' ,' w , r.
��11{� re i ��� ` v 'y1 �(
� , a � S�� - � � . �� �/ G �"� � .. (r � 1� µ �,.. .
�!7� �`� � � . �" iRor" +� .� y� � �R I� t. �- F. agW!�' f . ' l'�'j.
� '
Lrfi�,� °'s ;� ' � 1 ' �; �
�►' r 1Lv � • r � � y � y
' M, n .' � �i' -. � �''(�J' �µ�� i 1 � �1. ��.� } ' ���� � r
J [ ,�e�1 6 j r
�A i�� ,� ��L �I. -�.I7' '�� � . 1•�� , � ' � � �' � �i
� �'1 �➢�� ��" . � a 7. �M _ �� . ►, �� � � r
� � .'[, ' ..� � .... . . . � ,. . ' , t, f�y+ � :
�,> � �: a �'rti t+r ' ��� -.,,�, -� r - "�"� � , ,� , i �� w� ' v , f ��' r -.: � .
.�T,,� s" tr��f � � 1 �' A'L'� �;l , i. ..�� �t, , ? M1."�'; . � ' y` �� : �
►� �t +s�'�� .:c i� � r ..C� �. : 5. � . �'aq df ; . if• _ �_.
Z � �` ti: , '�•l,i.!' ti .;� ''�.f> i � ��,l�l; . , . � ; 't�� _ <,
� `.r- � s R"'r�y"�'g�i-`�'��.�"3�./a��,�i'. . *- q�
. + � : • /-i'
•�` }_' ' - '' f`' _ ' _ .+:.��` - a �.
// _`' _�• Y_ . `�. .' � ' ' �.
i' �� � �R�1, Y`�` `,���-'+A-�,� � - µ •.� "i' J_� �-r- � --�� - � � r
_ y �� � ��..:R�,e1"�jt; '-t Y4 ' ) � �� - — ++��� ,� . � �".. , \�
� � � a� * t �- � ���_ .
�% . rt• --`;�- . � - � � "� �„��.-y-•�= . �• � 7 � - L� �
`�� '•��,�' ;� 3fi ��►`- ' . ly'?l � ` �.�` � ' � �� �� �i :..�
�^�r i► -�
r s''�� - ; ' i = - ..P, '• � 'S � ` � � �$„ '4. . .a� � � : � 1 . _ t , `
� �. - .. r..�4� �`��� rr . . t� (` ` `� �, �"�� e
� � r +� ' � !!'-. � ��,� � ►� J�'Z'�� ` ,,a . } b�4 �ti ?_�\`-�`,cl�,'�Lt��.'"',�i,- ,
��� �' ���'������� � 'tii� .. � � �' ..•.� t ' `�► � � �' A � �2� � \ � { �R ` F
��ii ` +l. ���k � \ ^`''�'�i+�' �����_ `� 1 `�`J�����. �. i'.����i ,�
F�� ♦P_ � 1 li..� �;' •, ..�%� M' R�.l'_ a�. ���-.�1�• i, y:.a�
Photograph of fence-line outside ROW for SR 1149; note the large boulders at the surface and
gully to the northwest of the fence.
"NO NATLONAL REGISTER ELlGIBL6 OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PIt6SENT"
Jorm %r [Me Amended Miraor Trun.rprnTatiori Pi�ojecLs as QualiJled ia the 2007 Pro��anima[ic Agreernen[.
5 of 6
Photograph of the locatioi7 of the subsurface test (shovel test} on relatively level ground north of
SR 1149 (facing northeast).

Project Trnclzirr� No.:
15-11-0043
� �� �,, `�,` �c��� �, � ` " -
� � �
"`y� "� ;'�' f F. ��`
� �, -
,. ; � � � _ � '_
�` � � x�; � " '� a
�.� �. � _ ,���� ,
�: y
- r � Y � LL �v � � M ': 2k ; j
�. a �i.� ,x. � .
��' i �! ��, � � � �*r.� ,
�. � F
, ��`S '� � ��r� :r, 4,� ` .� '� �
, T. _ � � �, y:� �'.� Yc� y�'� ., ,'.
�� r� . �� ;- _ �� y;.
" � }- � � �:�� c r � �,� ,,;� �' ��� � � �
� r �'�' � �, : a�s ,. �?r.,.f� � � �.
- _ . { ..'yY� 3 :=L �� � •l,�� �k(i� c �`t
- t -�� �'IC�i e��.�'� ;�.-_\�R�It�j' �q
1
.- -- � � „�..� ':��i�i�.�,va �x.l%, .� .-�16;
�' � .N � -d'� i + � ' .
_ . , � � � f�, a a lay, t�..�r � �'�.{ � +h � �� `^ . "` j �� ,
� �i !hr rg ` '� 'x�" !� . . ,t .� „� '
�,.: � ._ . ,��.'-,�'.
�. � T _ � � %'�t� 4 . ,Y . . ���
, . wt 7� , JtF , �, �' '. � h 'S� . � `�y J � �
#�`, � , +!r a'�a� � ��� j ' ,��lt
, . �� �.,�,'�� "1' ` ta "` s.� � �'���i�•��� Y,Vf��a��,� >
[_ � � "� B �.'1 � � ��v �
„ . y � �!' �♦ +tl_ . : � �'.
W : p� v + �' ��� a *� •�,� ����� � �� h �, t ;•`rr�
} �'�l � b'I L r � ` � ^.c" " y � ��� �,�� � rti � � ~ s ! '�
, " �r,��' �'v��� �I►�''� � ' 4 : �►
� - " ' ':A� �, � :. � ,. s,��. � : •� , �.. �e� _;. . , .� . , ,�� �.� i
Photograph of ROW along the southeast side of SR ll49 and the utilities easement (facing
northeast).
"NO NATLONAL L2EGLSTER ELIGlBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGLCAL S11'ESYLt6SENT"
form %or lhe Amended Alinor TransporTatiori Projert.�� as QualiJfed ira the 2007 R�o��amma[ic A�reement.
6of6
Photograph of the access point%farm road southwest of SR 1149 and Bridge No. 173 (facing
south).