19920771 Ver al_Complete File_20100726

owl,&
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO December 7, 1992
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199300300 and Nationwide Permit No. 23
(Approved Categorical Exclusions)
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
ATTN: L. Jack Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Mr. Ward:
D [ GL [1W
S
Reference your application of October 19, 1992, for Department of the Army
authorization to discharge fill material within less than one acre of waters
of the United States, causing impacts to Mine Creek and adjacent wetlands,
for the widening of the existing S.R. 1819 (Lynn Road), from S.R. 1820 to
S.R. 1005, in Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina (TIP Project U-2919).
For the purposes of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program,
Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 330.6, published in the
Federal Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits.
Authorization, pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899
and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, was provided for activities
undertaken, assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or
in part, by another Federal agency or department where that agency or
department has determined, pursuant to the CEQ Regulation for the Implementing
the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, that the
activity, work or discharge is categorically excluded from enviroturw,ntal
documentation because it is included within a category of actions which
neither individually nor cumulatively have a significant effect or, the human
environment, and the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished
notice of the agency's or department's application for the categorical
exclusion and concurs with that determination.
Your work is authorized by this nationwide permit provided it is
accomplished in strict accordance with the enclosed conditions. This
nationwide permit does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtai,l any
required State or local approval.
d ."f* .
-2-
This verification will be valid for 2 years from the date of this letter
unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued, or revoked. Also,
this verification will remain valid for the 2 years if, during that period,
the nationwide permit authorization is reissued without modification or the
activity complies with any subsequent modification of the nationwide permit
authorization. If during the 2 years, the nationwide permit authorization
expires or is suspended or revoked, or is modified, such that the activity
would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit,
activities which have commenced (i.e., are under construction) or are under
contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit will remain
authorized provided the activity is completed within 12 months of the date of
the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify,
suspend, or revoke the authorization.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, Raleigh
Regulatory Field Office, at telephone [phone], extension 23.
Sincerely,
G. Wayne Wright
Chief, Regulatory Branch
Enclosure
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. Mike Coughlin
Environmental Engineer
Wake County Community
Development Services
Post Office Box 550
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water j2l?'ality Section
Div ion of Environmental Management
N th Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
?s
STATt
YW? ?i1
FvA/ ?An ??iiM
??'W WNM ?'YV `tw
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
October 19, 1992
District Engineer
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
?6 Ddb ??
III OCT 23 IV
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Subject: Lynn Road (SR 1819), from Lead Mine Road (SR 1820) to Six Forks
Road (SR 1005), Wake County, TIP Project U-2919, State Project
8.2402701, FA Project STP-1827(1)
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning report for the
subject project. The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Adminis-
tration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose to
proceed under a Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A
(B-23) issued November 22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineers. The provisions of
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these regulations will be followed in the
construction of the project.
We anticipate that a permit will be required from the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources for this project.
DOT will apply directly to DEHNR for that permit when plans have been
developed.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at
733-3141.
LJW/plr
Attachment
cc: Mr. John
Mr. John
Mr. C. W.
Mr. J. T.
Mr. A. L.
Mr. L. E.
Sincerely,
?#W..Q^CL OM
L. ."Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Parker, Permit Coordinator, w/report
Dorney, Environmental Management, w/report
Leggett, P. E.
Peacock, Jr., P. E.
Hankins, Jr., P. E.
Stegall, P. E.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Lynn Road (SR 1819)
from Lead Mine Road (SR 1820)
to Six Forks Road (SR 1005).
Wake County
TIP Project U-2919
State Project 8.2402701
FA Project STP-1827(1)

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
And
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
a
0
APPROVED:
9 a 9z
Date L. J. Ward, P. E., Mana r
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Dat Z INil s L.` Gra
+?c 5ivisio Administrator, FHWA
Lynn Road (SR 1819)
from Lead Mine Road (SR 1820)
to Six Forks Road (SR 1005).
Wake County
TIP Project U-2919
State Project 8.2402701
FA Project STP-1827(1)
A
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
6
William T. Goodwin Jr.
Transportation Engineer
Linwood Stone
Project Pl,anning Engineer, Unit O ad
H.?Fanklin Vick, P.E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Lynn Road (SR 1819)
from Lead Mine Road (SR 1820)
to Six Forks Road (SR 1005).
Wake County
TIP Project U-2919
State Project 8.2402701
FA Project STP-1827(1)
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project consists of widening Lynn Road (SR 1819) to a
five lane, 59 foot curb to curb, curb and gutter section from Lead Mine
Road (SR 1820) to Six Forks Road (SR 1005) (see Figure 1). At the
intersections of Lynn Road with Lead Mine and Six Forks Roads the typical
section will be increased to 76 feet face of curb to face of curb to allow
additional turn lanes (see Figures 2 and 3).
The pavement will be marked for 5 lanes, two travel lanes in each
direction with a center left turn lane except at the intersections with
Lead Mine Road and Six Forks Road. At these intersections the pavement
will be marked for 6 lanes, two travel lanes in each direction with a
center left turn lane and an exclusive right turn lane.
The proposed project also includes minor improvements to Lead Mine
Road. Both approaches of Lead Mine will be widened to accommodate
exclusive right turn lanes. On the northbound approach these improvements
will extend to Shadyside Drive to provide tapers and storage for right
turning vehicles.
An eight foot asphalt path will be provided on the north side of Lynn
Road from Lead Mine Road to Six Forks Road. This path will be for use by
both pedestrians and bicyclists. On the south side of Lynn Road a
concrete sidewalk will be provided from Lead Mine Road to Six Forks Road.
Included with the improvements noted above is the replacement of
bridge no. 98 over Mine Creek. A separate categorical exclusion (CE) and
4(f) evaluation were completed on this bridge replacement in 1989. That
document is included in its entirety in Appendix A. Information in that
CE and 4(f) evaluation are still valid and applicable to this project.
The CE for the bridge replacement project had a total project length
of approximately 0.4 mile. The expanded project limits for this project
are approximately 1.8 miles, with approximately 0.7 mile additional
project area on each side of the bridge replacement site.
The project is included in the North Carolina Department of
Transportation's 1993-1999 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Right
of way was acquired by the City of Raleigh. Construction is will to begin
in fiscal year 1993.
The cost estimate included in the 1993-1999 TIP is $7,000,000. This
estimate includes $4,200,000 spent in prior years, and $2,800,000 for
construction.
2
All right of way required for this project was purchased by the City
of Raleigh prior to NCDOT involvement in the project. Applicable FHWA
acquisition procedures and guidelines were followed. A total of 74
parcels, including 6 city owned parcels were involved. The total cost of
this right of way was approximately $850,000. No residences or businesses
were relocated due to the acquisition of this right of way.
II. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The subject portion of Lynn Road is a two lane, 22 foot pavement,
shoulder section with a minimum of 5 foot grass shoulders.
At the intersection of Lynn Road and Lead Mine Road, Lynn Road has
channelized right turn lanes for both east and westbound traffic. Left
turn lanes are also provided with a protected left signal phase. Lead Mine
Road has left turn lanes for both north and southbound traffic, with right
turns sharing the through lane. South of Lynn Road, Lead Mine Road is a 24
foot, two lane, shoulder section with a minimum of 5 foot grassed
shoulders. North of Lynn Road, Lead Mine Road is a 19 foot, two lane,
shoulder section with a minimum of 5 foot grassed shoulders.
At the intersection of Lynn Road and Six Forks Road, Lynn Road is a
four lane curb and gutter facility west of Six Forks. Spring Forest Road,
which intersects Six Forks at the same location, is a five lane curb and
gutter facility east of Six Forks. Eastbound lanes include an exclusive
left turn lane, a through lane, and a shared right-through lane. Westbound
lanes include an exclusive left turn lane, a through lane, and an
exclusive right turn lane. Six Forks Road is a five lane, 64 foot curb to
curb, curb and gutter section both north and south of Lynn Road.
Southbound right turns are channelized from Six Forks onto Lynn.
Existing traffic signals at both of these intersections will be
retained and upgraded as needed.
Lynn Road is classified as an urban minor arterial in the Statewide
Functional Classification System. Lynn Road is also classified as a major
thoroughfare on the Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan.
III. PROJECT BENEFITS
The subject project will increase the traffic carrying capacity of
this segment of Lynn Road. The operational safety of this segment will
also be enhanced by the addition of a continuous left turn lane. Due to
the number of city streets and driveways along this segment, large numbers
of left turn movements will be removed from the travel lanes and provided
with a place to wait, out of the flow of traffic, for a gap in opposing
traffic.
This project will complete another segment of the Lynn Road widening
undertaken by the City of Raleigh and NCDOT. When all segments are
completed Lynn Road will be a five lane facility from US 70, west of
Raleigh, to Spring Forest Road, at Six Forks Road. This facility will
provide a much needed east-west thoroughfare in north Raleigh.
The existing two lane roadway is used by approximately 11,000
vehicles per day. This facility is currently operating at level of
service (LOS) E. After the proposed improvements are completed the
facility will be operating at LOS B. By the design year traffic volumes
will have increased to 28,000 vehicles per day. The proposed facility
will again be operating at LOS D, and further improvements will have to be
evaluated.
Included in the proposed improvements will be several shifts in the
proposed alignment to eliminate sharp curves and improve the overall
design of the facility. The most extreme of these alignment shifts will
occur in the areas of Gloucester Drive, Old Providence Court, and west of
the bridge over Mine Creek. West of Olde Providence Court a curve in
excess of 16 degrees will be replaced by a 6 degree 45 minute curve. At
Gloucester Drive a curve in excess of 19 degrees will be replaced by a 6
degree 45 minute curve. Just west of the bridge over Mine Creek an 8
degree curve will be replaced by a 6 degree 45 minute curve. This shift
will aid in the construction of the new bridge as well as improve the
alignment.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
Large portions of the environmental evaluation presented in the
categorical exclusion for the bridge over Mine Creek are valid for the
expanded project limits covered by this document. See section VI.
beginning on page 5 of Appendix A for discussions of areas of
environmental concern not mentioned in the following sections.
A. Cultural Resources
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance
with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires that
if a federally funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect on a
property listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be given an
opportunity to comment.
A staff architectural historian from NCDOT surveyed the area of
potential effect (APE) on September 9, 1992. No properties over fifty
years old were found.
A copy of this report will be sent to SHPO for their review and
concurrence.
Potential archaeological resources would most likely be located in
the immediate vicinity of Mine Creek. The vicinity of Mine Creek was
reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) for the
4
previously documented bridge replacement project that is incorporated into
this project. See section VI. H. on page 18 of Appendix A for the SHPO's
evaluation on the Mine Creek area. Due to the urban and developed nature
of the project area it is unlikely that any previously undiscovered
archaeological sites will be affected by the proposed project.
B. Biological Impacts
Endangered Species
Of the five federally protected species listed for Wake County by the
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), habitats within the project study
area were unsuitable for all but two species, dwarf wedge mussel and
Michaux' sumac. A previous study in 1991 ruled out the presence of the
dwarf wedge mussel and a September 10, 1992 field survey for Michaux'
sumac similarly confirmed that no impacts to this species would occur. No
federally protected species will be impacted by the proposed action.
As of August 28, 1992 the USFWS lists five federally protected
species for Wake County.
Table 1. Federally Protected Species in Wake County
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Haliaeetus leucoce halus
Picoi es orea is
Verm`-vi ora ac manii
A a? smi F r?tarodon
R us mic auxii
COMMON NAME STATUS
bald eagle E
red-cockaded woodpecker E
Bachman's warbler E
dwarf-wedge mussel E
Michaux' sumac E
"E" denotes Endangered (a taxon that is threatened with extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range).
Bald Eagle
Federally Endangered
This federally protected raptor is found throughout the US and
northward to the Arctic. Nesting in the southeast is predominantly
limited to Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and South Carolina, although
nesting pairs have been observed in North Carolina. The bald eagle is
principally riparian, living along the margins of large rivers, lakes and
coastal water bodies where they feed predominantly on fish. Nesting areas
need to be adjacent to open water so that the bird(s) can forage within a
watchful distance of the aerie.
No such habitat occurs in the vicinity of the study area. No impacts
will occur to this species from project construction.
5
Red-cockaded Woodpecker Federally Endangered
The red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) requires forested stands of pine or
pine-hardwood, in which the pine constitutes more than 50 % of the stand.
Suitable foraging pines must be at least 30 years old; nesting trees must
be at least 60 years old. Suitable foraging habitat must be located
within 0.5 mile of the colony site and not separated from other suitable
foraging areas by more than 330 feet of non-suitable habitat.
No suitable habitat is available in the study area for this species.
No impacts to the red-cockaded woodpecker will occur from the proposed
action.
Bachman's Warbler Federally Endangered
The range of this bird includes the southeastern US during the
breeding season and western Cuba and the Isle of Pines in the winter. The
bird is 10-11.25 cm long. The male is olive green above with yellow face
and underparts; black throat and crown patches. Female lacks black
throat. Historic records indicate the warbler nested in low, wet hardwood
forests. Openings in the forest canopy, covered with dense thickets of
cane, palmetto, blackberry, gallberry and other shrubs.
No suitable habitat exists in the study area. No impacts to this
bird will occur.
Dwarf-wedge Mussel Federally Endangered
The dwarf wedge mussel, Alasmidonta heterodon, formerly ranged from
New England to the Neuse River watershed in TFCarolina. Declines in
water quality and habitat have eliminated it from all but a few sites in
New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maryland and North Carolina. The species
has been recorded in the Little River and Middle Creek and the potential
exists for it to be found throughout the Neuse River watershed, including
drainages in Wake County. The deterioration of water quality in portions
of the Neuse River watershed and introduction of the Asiatic clam
(Corbicula fluminea) into tributary streams is placing increased pressure
on t- iii ganism.
Reports indicate the species prefers areas of deep runs with coarse
sands; however, other habitats noted include bottoms of gravel or mud,
among submersed aquatic plants and near the stream banks underneath
overhanging tree limbs. Study area stream(s) are intermittent.
Lead Mine Creek is crossed by the project near the western terminus
of the proposed widening. Lead Mine Creek was surveyed for the dwarf
wedge and other mussels in September 1991 by John Alderman, biologist with
the NC Wildlife Resources Commission. No specimens were found during an
in-stream survey which included visual and tactile searches. It can be
concluded that this action is not likely to affect the species or its
critical habitat.
6
Michaux' Sumac
Federally Endangered
A rhizomatous shrub, consisting of erect, aboveground stems which are
densely pubescent and grow to 0.4 meter long. Flowering in this dioecious
species occurs in June. The small greenish-yellow to white flowers are
borne in dense, erect, terminal clusters. The plant is often found in
sandy or rocky soils in open woods, where some disturbance has occurred in
the past which preserves the open habitat.
This plant is known from approximately 15 populations in seven North
Carolina counties, including Wake County. Marginally suitable habitat was
observed along roadside shoulders and at the open interfaces between
forest canopy and disturbed sites. These areas were carefully surveyed on
a plant-by-plant basis and no specimens of this species were found. The
proposed action is not likely to affect the species or its critical
habitat.
See section VI. B. beginning on page 5 of Appendix A for further
discussion of Biological Impacts.
C. Air Quality
The project is located within the Eastern Piedmont Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality of Wake County has recently been
designated as a nonattainment area for carbon monoxide and ozone.
However, the current State Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any
transportation control measures (TCM) for Wake County. This project is
included in the (1988) Thoroughfare Plan and the (1992) Transportation
Improvement Program for the Greater Raleigh Urban Area. Both the
thoroughfare plan for the City of Raleigh and Transportation Improvement
Program have been determined to conform to the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments and the Interim Conformity Guidance dated June 7, 1991.
Therefore, the project is considered to be in conformance to the SIP.
If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be done in
accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North
Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This
evaluation completes the assessment requirements of Title 23, Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 770 (air quality) and no additional reports are
required.
See section VI. F. beginning on page 12 of Appendix A for further
discussion of Air Quality issues.
D. Noise
The majority of the land use along the project is residential. A
"worst case" scenario was used dealing with traffic noise predictions.
Residences in the immediate area of the project are predicted to
experience noise levels that approach or exceed the 67 dBA FHWA Noise
Abatement Criteria (NAC) for the Design Year. Many of these residences
already approach or exceed the FHWA NAC. The 67 dBA contour for the
existing facility and existing traffic is approximately 73' from the
7
centerline of the existing roadway. The 67 dBA contour for the Design
Year is approximately 158' from the centerline of the proposed facility.
This information should assist local authorities in exercising land use
control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway in
local jurisdiction. Also, it can help prevent further development of
incompatible activities and land uses. The uncontrolled right-of-way
feature and the numerous access points of the proposed roadway,
effectively negate the application of noise abatement for this project.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be
temporary. This evaluation completes the assessment requirements of Title
23, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772 (highway traffic noise) and no
additional reports are required.
See section VI. G. beginning on page 14 of Appendix A for further
discussion of Noise issues.
E. Public Involvement
The City of Raleigh held a corridor public meeting on the subject
project on February 16, 1989 at the Lynn Road Elementary School. All
property owners along the project were notified by letter of this meeting.
Approximately 25 people attended this meeting which was conducted by the
design consultants hired to design the project. Most of people in
attendance were in support of the project, especially the pathway proposed
for the north side of the roadway. Most questions raised were relatively
simple and related to specific property owner situations.
The City of Raleigh held a preliminary design public meeting on the
subject project on October 24, 1989 at the Lynn Road Elementary School.
All property owners along the project were notified by letter of this
meeting. Approximately 10 people attended this meeting which was
conducted by the City Engineer's Office. Of the few people in attendance
two were opposed to the project due to the impacts to their properties.
V. 4 (f) INVOLVEMENT
All information presented in the 4(f) evaluation signed in May 1989
is still valid and correct. No design changes affecting the 4(f) property
have been implemented since the completion of the 4(f) evaluation. The
conclusions and applicability criteria remain valid. Therefore, the 4(f)
findings still stand.
VI. CONCLUSION
The improvements included in this project are to be made mostly
within previously acquired right of way and are not anticipated to result
in significant impacts to the existing human or natural environment. This
action is considered to be a "categorical exclusion" as defined by the
Federal Highway Administration's environmental guidelines (23 CFR
771.117).
No exceptions to applicable NCDOT and FHWA construction standards are
required.
WTG/plr
a. i
\1
PROJECTc7"LIMITS- F"::..
50
WO"i Forest
1
Falls, ?aZ 1
q $1 ArFm
Rolesville I
1 %
EWSkefiel
Lund Lick,
1
? V -hllp
IlK
vn
M 'i I 7 lU I/
gg
Id C
r 6- Y J YI C!
P
64
Apes
r III Nh 3 ?.

r 6 Mccull r
IgMM1Y so(mgs I 3 9 6
un. q v
''G?fwpwyVarin Willow springs '
/
55 9
/
(a
Nora ak
?? s H
C r ARAN
1
! ?T
yJ
k r?
W
Y I^[`
u
9
1 mcEWOQD
-?10 ?1rrG.?/ / aVJ
PROJECT LIMITS
IH ' y SAHOERSOH
\ i NIOH
s k ? , ors ?,,??? " iN ooeLs
gq?
y Villa
!test ut Hills A-

.. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
FIG. 1
RALEIGH, LYNN ROAD (SR 1819)
FROM LEAD MINE ROAD (SR 1820)
TO SIX FORKS ROAD (SR 1005)
WAKE COUNTY
U-2919
CL3
O?
a?
0
0I
f
W
O
A
•
I
40
o
1 _j
O J ?
- Q .
3 m
o =
in ~
0
if) U)
of
O
W F
O t =
I ¢ O
o n
of
I
O
t
s
0
1 '
O
2
Z
_O
U
w
(n
J
Q
U
a
r
m
w
D
c?
m
m
m
U
-I
N
H
Q
a
?- w
J o
Q CO)
2
CL =
N F
Q ?
CD Z
Q 0
Ir a.
W
Z X
o li
d x
W
J M
H ?
Q Q
Q Q
Z Z
O (V

A 3? ? CC
Noy
o
<oz
l
?F"L <O g
O¢Q0?
.
Zz
OEa°,G4d
O
5
0 cc W 0)
ZZ N

fn w
?
Y3

-
0
i
ao_ v
l ?
Jp a

z aa.m
° tt??JK
?
iz
ja
X000
CL3
O?
M
am

a3
O
a?
Z
1
O
0
0

Y W
J
3 y
O ?
U) 0
I o
,n y
cr
w
H
H
O
m
m
v
so
N
CL3
o?
x
aK
x
H'
Q
a
H W
J O
a y
x
a x
y F-
aIx
0
m z
y
N W
O V
Z p D
Z c cr
O CL W y
H Q Z Y
U
W Z 0 y O a
?- w x
J U J Fn
Q W
U ou:) Q
a W a
>- t --
Z
4.
0 .a M

O
W <?
N MOM

?

oaw r
°CU+cc coi?
? o C) ui
UR6LZ
m
1 >j M

3
=l {z
0
1a
zz aoa haxs
Q?O
Appendix A
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
AND
SECTION 4(li) EVALUATION & STATEMENT
Wake County
Bridge No. 98 on SR 1819
(Lynn Road)
over Mine Creek in Raleigh
•

U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
and
N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Division of Highways
and
City of Raleigh
North Carolina
---- - ----------- ----- --------------------
Date Dempsey E. Benton, Jr.
City Manager, City, of aleigh
Date J me. M. Greenhill
any er of Planning & Research Branch, NCDOT
- 5 -8 - 8 9 ?"? r
-------------- ----- -? -------------------------
Date ?? Kenneth Bellamy
Division Administrator, FHWA
WAKE COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 98
ON SR 1819 (LYNN ROAD)
OVER MINE CREEK
IN RALEIGH
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
AND
SECTION 4(F) STATEMENT
MAY, 1989
Documentation Prepared By
Frank Coleman & Associates, Inc.
,,%1,f felt"!
Ro/
o •? ?Y
SEAL
?._ J. K. Bij-rleson, P.E.
Project Planning Engineer `;";?;`:,Z?'/?i(.?•
WAKE COUNTY BRIDGE NO. 98
ON SR 1819 (LYNN ROAD)
OVER MINE CREEK
IN RALEIGH, N.C.
The City of Raleigh is currently involved in the planning
and design of Lynn Road (SR 1819 and SR 1827) from Ray Road (SR
1826) to Six Forks Road (SR 1005) which will widen the existing
two-lane, two-way facility to provide two through lanes in each
direction with separate turn lanes at appropriate locations.
Wake County Bridge No. 98 is located within the project and will
require widening to accommodate the addit-ional lanes (See Figure
1). The existing structure qualifies for replacement with
Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Funds due to the structural
deficiency of this crossing that is posted for limited weight
capacity. Therefore, the existing structure is proposed to be
replaced as a Federal-Aid project which will provide a new
crossing that is both capable of accommodating all legal loads
and sufficiently wide enough to accommodate the additional
lanes. This report is to document the project development
process and is consistent with the directives of the National
Environmental Policy Act so that this replacement may obtain
Federal approval. As presented herein, the proposed replacement
will not induce significant foreseeable alterations to the
existing environment and therefore is classified as a Federal
"categorical exclusion."
I. Summary of Recommendations
The existing structure is recommended to be replaced south
(downstream) of the existing location (see Figure 2) with a new
73-foot rail to rail width structure to provide five 11-foot
travel lanes with a sidewalk and a multi-purpose pathway (see
Figure 3). The required structure length is approximately 200
feet. The approaches to the crossing should also be widened to
provide a 59-foot face to face curb and gutter section with a
sidewalk on the southern berm and a multi-use pathway for
pedestrians and bicyclists on the northern berm. The estimated
cost of this replacement in 1989 dollars is $2,625,000.
II. Existing Conditions
Wake County Bridge No. 98 is a six span concrete and timber
structure which carries Secondary Road (SR) 1819 over Mine Creek
(see Figure 1 for location). The overall length of the existing
structure is 105 feet. The structure was originally built in
1956 by State Forces. The floor is constructed of concrete, and
the joists, caps and piles are constructed with treated timber
(see Figure 4). The crossing has a 24-foot clear roadway width
with no sidewalks. Currently this crossing is posted for weight
limits of 20 tons for single vehicles and 24 tons for truck
tractor semitrailers. The current sufficiency rating of this
crossing is 37.4 on a scale of 100.
SR 1819, locally known as Lynn Road is a two-lane, two-way
route with a 22-foot pavement width and 5-foot soil shoulders on
each side. The City of Raleigh is currently planning to widen
Lynn Road to a 5-lane curb and gutter facility with 10 to
13-foot berm widths in the project vicinity. This widening will
include a sidewalk and a multi-use pathway on either berm to
provide access to the Capital Area Greenway which parallels Mine
Creek at the bridge. The greenway trail crosses beneath Lynn
Road at the existing bridge and is further discussed in the
Section 4(f) Evaluation section of this document.
The current (1989) average daily traffic on SR 1819 at the
crossing is 11,000 vehicles per day. This volume is anticipated
to increase to 28,000 vehicles per day by the year 2010. Dual
tired trucks are anticipated to produce 5 percent (1400 daily)
of the future traffic while truck tractor semitrailers and buses
are expected to produce 2 percent (550 daily). The design hour
vehicle concentration is 10 percent of the average daily
traffic. No accidents have been reported on the route in the
vicinity of the crossing since January 1985. At least
thirty-six school buses cross the subject bridge each school
day.
SR 1819 is part of the Federal-Aid Urban System designated
as FAU 5828 and classified as an urban minor arterial in the
Statewide Functional Classification System. Located within the
city limits of Raleigh, this route is also classified as a major
thoroughfare on the Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare
Plan.
Development in the immediate vicinity of the crossing is
residential. The area is currently zoned Residential-10 which
allows multi-family dwellings at a density of 10 units per acre.
III. Alternatives Considered
Several alternatives have been developed and studied for
the replacement of the subject crossing. The typical section
(see Figure 3) for the replacement requires 5 eleven-foot lanes
with curb and gutter to match the proposed cross section of the
City's proposed improvements to the route on both ends of this
project. A sidewalk is recommended on the south side of the
roadway and a multi-purpose pathway is planned for the north
side of the roadway to provide access to the Capital Area
Greenway which parallels Mine Creek beneath the crossing. The
approach length for each of the considered alternatives is based
on the distance to tie the approaches back into the existing
roadway.
The new alignments should accommodate a 50 mile per hour
(mph) design speed to match the planned improvements to other
2
portions of Lynn Road. Traffic service should be maintained
throughout the construction of the project to avoid the
necessity of detouring the current traffic volume of 11,000
vehicles daily (including school buses, fire fighting, and
rescue vehicles).
Any replacement of the existing crossing will require
improvement to the existing 10 percent grade on the eastern
approach to the crossing. The maximum grade for a 40 mph design
speed on an urban arterial is 8 percent in rolling terrain. The
desirable 50 mph design speed maximum grade is 7 percent for an
urban arterial in rolling terrain. Therefore, each of the
considered alignments will raise the elevation of the crossing
approximately 19 feet to reduce the grade and improve the design
speed.
The replacement bridge design was considered to accommodate
the flow of Mine Creek and the passage of the Capitol Area
Greenway beneath the route. The safety, convenience, and cost
of the completed project were considered for each alternative
along with the damages to the adjacent property and environment
resulting from the project construction. The following is a
brief description of the considered alternative alignments
including the consequences of their implementation:
Alternate 1 -Locates the replacement crossing over the
existing location on the existing horizontal alignment with an
improved vertical alignment. This alternative provides a design
speed less than 50 miles per hour (mph) which does not comply
with plans for the remainder of the route. This alternative is
approximately 1620 feet in length including the replacement
bridge.
An existing location replacement would result in closure of
the route during the construction of the crossing with necessary
detour routes to accommodate existing traffic. The necessary
right of way and slope easements would require relocation of
seven to ten residences northwest of the crossing for the
widened roadway: An existing cemetery immediately northwest of
the Bent Creek Drive intersection would also require relocation
and an existing retaining wall southeast of the crossing will
• require replacement if this alignment is constructed.
Alternate 2 locates the replacement crossing immediately
south of the existing location with an improved vertical
alignment. This horizontal alignment allows traffic service to
be maintained at the site during construction. The necessary
right of way and slope easements for the widened facility would
not require relocation of any residences. However, this
horizontal alignment contains the same 79-30' curve as the
existing alignment which provides less than the desirable 50 mph
design speed employed on the other portions of the improved
3

route. This alig
cemetery mentioned
southeast of the
result in some loss
wall. The total
1670 feet.
nment will also require relocation of the
above as well as the existing retaining wall
crossing. The relocation of this wall will
of the existing parking area adjacent to the
length of this alternative is approximately
Alternate 3 locates the replacement crossing over the
existing location on a 60-45' curve with an improved vertical
alignment which provides a 50 mph design speed to be consistent
with the remaining portions of the route design. This alignment
over the existing location requires closure of the crossing
during construction, relocation of the cemetery and at least 17
residences for right of way and slope easements, and
reconstruction of the existing retaining wall mentioned above.
The total length of this alternative is 1720 feet.
Alternate 4 (recommended) locates the replacement crossing
south of the existing location on a 60-45' curve with improved
vertical alignment to provide the desirable 50 mph design speed
without closure of the route (see Figure 2). This alignment
does not require the relocation of the cemetery or any
residences but does require the relocation and extension of the
existing retaining wall southeast of the existing bridge which
will result in the loss of adjacent parking area. The total
length of this alternative is 2,100 feet.
IV. Estimated Costs

4
The following are estimated costs for each of the
considered alternatives in 1989 dollars.
Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4
(Recommended)
Approaches $ 940,000 $ 970,000 $ 995,000 $1,290,000
Structure 836,000 836,000 836,000 836,000
Mobilization 85,000 85,000 85,000 85,000
Engineering 287,000 289,000 292,000 315,000
ht of Way
Ri 000
608 79,000 1,3781500 99,000
g 1
TOTAL $2,756,000 $2,259,000 $3,586,500 $2,625,000
4
V. Conclusions and Recommendations
Alternate 4 is the recommended alternate for the
replacement of this crossing. This location and alignment
minimizes additional right of way while allowing maintenance of
traffic service during construction, meeting the desirable 50
mph design speed criteria, and requiring no relocation of
residences or the cemetery at Bent Creek Drive. Replacement
with a bridge is recommended to minimize damage to the natural
environment and to provide a safe and convenient passage beneath
Lynn Road for pedestrians and maintenance vehicles on the
Capital Area Greenway.
The new bridge is recommended to be of sufficient length
and elevation to provide a minimum 10-foot horizontal and
12-foot vertical clearance for the greenway beneath the roadway
(See Figure 8). The elevation of the greenway trail should be
at least as high as the adjacent segments to prevent flooding
during high water. The maximum grade on the greenway trail
under the bridge will not exceed 5 percent.
VI. Environmental Evaluation
A. General
The proposed replacement will have no significant
foreseeable adverse effects on the quality of the human or
natural environment with the use of current City and State
standards and specifications. Therefore, this project is
classified as a categorical exclusion. No families or
businesses will be displaced by the proposed project.
B. Ecological Evaluation
In general, the Lynn Road corridor is a highly developed
suburban area exhibiting few residual natural areas. Proximity
to commercial and residential properties drastically affects the
potential of the study corridor to sustain natural communities.
The following sections discuss the physical, water, wetland,
vegetation, and wildlife characteristics of the project area and
are followed by an assessment of expected impacts on these
• resources by the proposed project.
1) Physiography
The study area lies completely within the Piedmont
physiographic province, composed largely of metamorphic rocks,
generally mica gneiss and hornblende gneiss that have been
intruded by granite containing large amounts of milky quartz.
These deeply weathered parent materials, dating from
Pre-Cambrian times, have eroded naturally for millions of years,
5
producing a mature, rolling topography, highly dissected by
dendritic-pattern drainages. The maximum elevation within the
project limits is about 320 feet above sea level near the
intersection of Lynn Road and Bent Creek Drive, whereas the
minimum elevation, about 270 feet, occurs where Lynn Road
crosses Mine Creek. Since drainage patterns in the area are
well-developed, poorly or imperfectly drained soils are
generally limited to a small area immediately adjacent to the
creek. Regional drainage flows southeasterly from Crabtree
Creek, to the Neuse River, and into Pamlico Sound.
2) Water Resources
Mine Creek flows south to Crabtree Creek in a well defined
channel through a palustrine system. The riparian zone includes
some remnant forest along the fringes of suburban residential
areas. The stream bed has mud bottoms and shows evidence of
siltation from past agricultural and more recent development
activities in surrounding upland areas.
Mine Creek is classified as Class "C" waters capable of
supporting fish propagation and agricultural uses but unfit for
sources of water for human consumption or contact recreation.
Regardless of the classification, road runoff, other pollutants,
scouring, and siltation have degraded aquatic habitats to a
considerable degree in this area of the Crabtree watershed.
Fish populations are not abundant.
Fish species potentially found in this vicinity include
Tadpole Madtom (Noturus gyrinus), Carp (Cyprinus carpi.o),
Rosyside Dace (Clinostomus funduloides), Satinfin Shiner
(Notropis analostamus), Tessellated Darter (Etheostoma
olmstedi), Glossy Darter (Etheostoma vitreum), Shield Darter
(Percina peltata), and Sunfishes (Leponis sp.). Because of
species size or prevailing aquatic conditions, the following are
potential but less likely inhabitants of streams in the
vicinity: Creek Chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), Creek
Chubsucker (Erimyzon oblongus), Golden Shiner (Notemigonus
crysoleucas), Spottail Shiner (Notropis hudsonius), Spotted
Sucker (Minytrema melanops), Yellow bullhead (Ictalurus
natalis), Brown Bullhead (Ictalurus nebulosus), and Pirate Perch
(Aphredoderus sayanus). Several of these latter species require
heavy vegetation, which is largely missing from this stream, or
the fish are intolerant of silty, turbid, or polluted water.
According to Natural Heritage records, in this vicinity in
1951 the mollusk Villosa constricta was found in Hare Snipe
Creek (6.25 miles northwest of Raleigh), which flows through a
valley approximately 3 miles west of Mine Creek. No current
evidence of mollusks was observed in Mine Creek. Moreover,
prevailing conditions in the creek suggest that mussels, which
6
are highly sensitive to high silt loads and sedimentation, if
they did occupy Mine Creek in 1951, do not remain, given the
changes in this stream over the intervening 38 years.
3) Wetland Determination
Coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
identified wetland conditions adjacent to Mine Creek. Mine
Creek's floodplain narrows at its juncture with Lynn Road.
Wetland conditions exist beneath the existing bridge and
adjacent to the sewer line and Greenway corridors which have
been developed in the riparian zone.
At Mine Creek, the area exhibiting wetland characteristics
is principally Branch Bottomland. Even though this Branch
Bottomland is above headwaters, some of this area qualifies as
wetlands since: (1) a preponderance of the vegetation is
adapted to surviving in water-saturated soil, (2) the soil
belongs to an Aquic Fragiudults subgroup, and (3) water often
occurs near the soil surface.
4) Vegetation
Hardwood forest with an admixture of pines originally
covered the general study area; later the land was largely
cleared, extensively farmed, and ultimately abandoned to revert
to forest. Today, most of this second forest has been replaced
with suburban development. However remnant forests still occur
in scattered woodlots, ranging in size from fractions of an acre
to several acres. The current forest in the study area contains
3 forest types: Pine-Sweetgum, Yellow-poplar, and Branch
Bottomland. These forest types are described below.
Pine-Sweetgum. The Pine-Sweetgum forest type predominates
the forested uplands. It occurs on either Cecil or Appling
soils, with average or below average productivity. A
well-developed upper canopy characterizes this type, composed
almost exclusively of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), although
shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) and sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciflua) occasionally reach the upper canopy. The dominance
of loblolly pine varies from 90 to 110 sq ft per acre, but
y associated species contribute an additional 5 to 25 sq ft per
acre. Not surprisingly, the largest trees within this type are
generally loblolly pines, ranging from 12 to 14-in diameter
« (dbh), although several large yellow-poplar (Liriodendron
tulipifera) were also observed.
In the lower canopy, a large number of scattered associates
occur, including red maple (Acer rubrum), eastern redcedar
(Juniperus virginiana), black cherry (Prunus serotina), blackgum
(Nyssa sylvatica), black oak ( uerus velutina), serviceberry
7
(Amelanchier arborea), southern red oak (Quercus falcata),
flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), post oak (Quercus stellata),
winged elm (Ulmus alata), persimmon (Diospyros virginiana),
yellow-poplar, American beech (Fagus grandif_olia), and American
holly (Ilex o_paca). The shrub layer contains sparkleberry
(Vaccinium arboreum), deerberry (Vaccinium stamineum), autumn
olive (Elaeagnus Lnbellata), fringetree (Chionanthus
virginicus), and blackhaw (Viburnum prunifolium). A generally
sparse vine-herb layer occurs, containing Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), greenbrier (Smilax sp.), poison-ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans), yellow jessamine (Gelsemium
sempervirens), muscadine (Vitis rotundifolia), trumpet creeper
(j sis radicans), spotted wintergreen (Chimaphila maculata),
• milkweed (Asclepias variegata), running-pine (Lycopodium
flabelliforme), ebony spleenwort (Asplenium platyneuron),
Christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides), tick-trefoil
(Desmodium nudiflorum), and Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus
quinquefolia).
Yellow-poplar. The Yellow-poplar forest type develops on
above average quality soils that are moist, but well-drained.
It occurs largely in an area along the south side of Lynn Road,
east of North Hills Drive. Yellow-poplar predominates the
overstory, occupying 50 to 60 percent of the basal area.
Associate species that can be nearly as dominant in selected
areas include northern red oak (Quercus rubra), red maple,
pignut hickory, red hickory, black oak, white oak, mockernut
hickory, sweetgum, and black cherry. A lower canopy, containing
American holly, flowering dogwood, sourwood, eastern redcedar,
American hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana), and redbud (Cercis
canadensis) also occurs. The shrub layer contains possumhaw,
strawberry bush, American hazel (Corylus americana), and Chinese
privet, whereas the sparse vine-herb layer includes, muscadine,
crossvine (Anisostichus capreolata), greenbrier, Christmas fern,
puttyroot (Aplectrum hyemale1, and especially Japanese
honeysuckle.
Total stand basal area varies from 100 to 130 sq ft per
acre, and the largest trees, generally of good-quality and
measuring about 14-in dbh, are typically yellow-poplar.
Discarded trash, including stoves, is present in the stand,
considerably reducing aesthetic quality.
Branch Bottomland. The narrow Branch Bottomland,
surrounding Mine Creek occurs on Colfax soils. The vegetation
" surrounding Mine Creek typifies mid-successional Branch
Bottomland forest, where the overstory contains bitternut
hickory (Carya cordiformis), yellow-poplar, sweetgum, American
elm (Ulmus americana), northern red oak, river birch (Betula
nigra), and sycamore (Platanus occidentalis). The understory
shrub layer contains American hornbeam, flowering dogwood,
8
spicebush (Lindera benzoin), elderberry (Sambucus canadensis),
silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), smooth alder (Alnus serrulata),
possumhaw, pinxterflower (Rhododendron nudiflorum), blackhaw
holly (Ilex decidua), strawberry bush (Euonymus americanus),
American hazel, and yellow-root (Xanthorhiza simplicissima_).
The understory vine-herb layer includes greenbrier, giant cane
(Arundinaria gigantea), goldenrod (Solidago sp.), Christmas
fern, puttyroot, rattlesnake fern (Botrychium virginianum), fall
panicum (Panicum sp.), Virginia creeper, cross-vine, muscadine,
poison-ivy, enchanter's nightshade (Circaea lutetiana spp.
canadensis), snakeroot (Sanicula smallii), bedstraw (Galium
sp.), aster (Aster sp.), violet (Viola sp.), and bluestem
goldenrod (Solidago caesia).
Along the west side of the creek, the bottomland has been
highly degraded recently by sewerline construction, that removed
essentially all vegetation within the right-of-way. Following
construction the right-of-way was stabilized by planting various
grasses. Areas immediately adjacent to the right-of-way were
also impacted by vehicle traffic and selective cutting, and
these areas have regenerated by stump and root coppice of
residual species and by seeds of the following species: tall
goldenrod (Solidago altissima), false nettle (Boehmeria
cylindrica), common blackberry (Rubus argutus), common ragweed
(Ambrosia artemisiifolia), flatsedge (Cyperus sp.), multiflora
rose (Rosa m_ultiflora), dog-fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium),
begger ticks (Bidens frondosa), pokeweed (Phytolacca americana),
white mulberry (Morus alba), evening primrose (Oenothera
biennis), and wingstem (Verbesina occidentalis).

During the field investigation, no threatened, endangered,
or significantly rare plant species were observed. In addition,
records of the Natural Heritage Program of North Carolina do not
report the occurrence of any threatened, endangered, or
significantly rare plant along Lynn Road. Field investigators
did not note any unique conditions or prime habitats.
5) Wildlife
The Lynn Road Corridor, already heavily developed with
residences and some commercial properties, affords wildlife few
sanctuaries. The species likely to inhabit the area must be
tolerant of traffic noise, encounters with people, and related
site disturbances. Avian species and gray squirrels (Sciurus
carolinensis) are obviously favored under such conditions,
although it is possible for other small mammals -- such as
rabbits (Sylvilagus sp.), raccoons (Procyon lotor), and
oppossums (Didelphis virginiana) -- to survive in the remnant
forest, open areas, and narrow riparian zones. Reptilian and
amphibian populations also occur here, mostly in proximity to
the water sources. dhite-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus)
9
are unlikely permanent inhabitants of the area but may traverse
this vicinity and have been known to browse in residential areas
throughout suburbs of north and west Raleigh.

Avian species often found in such roadside corridors
include the American Robin (Turdus migratorius), Carolina
Chickadee (Parus carolinensis), Mourning Dove (Zenaida
macroura), Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), Brown Thrasher
(Toxostoma rufum), Mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), Common
Flicker (Colaptes auratus), Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata),
Tufted Titmouse (Parus bicolor), Rufus-sided Towhee (Pipilo
erythrophthalamus), Common Grackle (Quiscalus quiscula),
Chipping Sparrow (Spizella passerina), House Sparrow (Passer
domesticus), Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodica), Common Crow
(Corvus brachyrhynchos), indigo Bunting (Passerina cyanea),
Brown-headed Nuthatch (Sitta pusilla), and White-breasted
Nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis).
No evidence of any endangered or threatened wildlife
species has been found, and no evidence exists to suggest that
such species are likely to inhabit the vicinity in the future.
6) Impacts
Probably the single greatest impact of the proposed project
will be the removal of remnant forest along the road and the
further urbanization of the study area. Currently, the general
character of the area is semi-suburban, since development is
partially screened from Lynn Road by narrow strips of remnant
forest. Road widening will eliminate some of these roadside
trees, changing the general character from semi-suburban to
suburban.
The proposed project will remove less than one acre of
Branch Bottomland (or wetland) forest, replacing it with fill
material and impervious surface cover. Increased runoff from
upland areas will increase the volume of water that must be
accommodated by wetlands at a time when wetland acreage will be
slightly reduced, owing to road fill material. By using proper
construction techniques, however, these slightly greater inputs
can be accommodated. The project will reduce local populations
of Branch Bottomland plants. Although acreage and population
losses caused by the proposed project are small, they
nevertheless contribute to regional losses. No adverse effects
are expected from the project, since; (1) the project area lies
above headwaters of the creek, (2) regional plant populations of
Branch Bottomland species are adequate, (3) no threatened,
endangered, or significantly rare species were observed, and (4)
the bottomland is not considered prime habitat. Mine Creek has
already been heavily degraded by sewerline construction.
10
Application to the Corps of Engineers of the U.S.
Department of the Army for an individual Section 404 permit will
not be necessary. Nationwide Section 404 Permit provisions of
33 CFR 330.5(a)(23) (Interim Final Rule for Regulatory programs)
are considered applicable since FHWA is processing the project
as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR
771.115(b). The conditions and management practices of Section
330.5(b) and 330.6 will be followed.
Wildlife populations should suffer relatively little from
+ this project, given that the species inhabiting the Lynn Road
corridor have already been limited to those essentially tolerant
of human intrusion and habitat disturbance. No critical
habitats will be affected by the proposed project. The roadside
where the widening will occur harbors relatively few birds,
reptiles, amphibians, and mammals except those in transition to
other habitat.
It will obviously be more difficult for terrestrial species
to traverse a wider highway corridor, but the heavy traffic on
Lynn Road makes such movement problematic in any case. A bridge
at Mine Creek will minimize danger to migrating wildlife.
C. Water Quality
Care will be taken that the proposed project will be
consistent with the Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973.
Particular attention will be given to proper ditch and
streambank stabilization. Stringent soil erosion control plans
will be developed and soil erosion devices such as silt fences
will be properly placed and maintained during project
construction. Sedimentation and erosion control plans for the
proposed project will require approval by the NC Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development, Division of Land
Resources prior to construction. (See Appendix A-1).
D. Floodplain
Executive order 11988 (Floodplain Management) requires
involved federal agencies "...to avoid to the extent possible
the long and short-term impacts associated with the occupancy
and modification of floodplain and to avoid direct or indirect
support of new construction whenever there is a practicable
alternative." Since there are no practicable alternatives to
crossing Mine Creek floodplain, involvement with its floodplain
cannot be avoided from a practical standpoint. It also should
be noted that the existing natural floodplain has already been
encroached upon in the area by developments and existing
roadways.
11
The project should have no significant effect on the flood
levels. Wake County is a participant in the Federal Flood
Insurance regular program. Figure 5 depicts the limits of the
floodplain which is contained in the flood insurance study.
E. Farmland
Since the entire project limits fall within the City of
Raleigh's Zoning Jurisdiction Limits, no prime farmlands will be
affected and the project is exempt from the provisions of the
Farmland Protection Policy Act. No acerage currently used as
farmland will be taken for the proposed right of way.
F. Air Quality
Air pollution is the result of industrial emissions and
emissions from internal combustion engines. The impact
resulting from the construction of a new highway or the
improvements of an existing highway can range from aggravating
existing air pollution problems to improving the ambient air
conditions. Motor vehicles are known to emit carbon monoxide
(CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydro-carbons (HC), particulate
matter, sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb) (listed in order of
decreasing emission rate).
The primary pollutant emitted from automobiles is carbon
monoxide. Automobiles are considered to be the major source of
CO in the project area. For this reason, the analysis presented
is concerned with determining expected carbon monoxide levels in
the vicinity of the project.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a
receptor near a highway, two concentration components must be
used: local and background. The local component is due to CO
emissions from cars operating on highways in the near vicinity
(i.e., distances within 100 meters) of the receptor location.
The background component is due to CO emissions from cars
operating on streets further from the receptor location.
In this study, the local component was determined using
line source computer modeling and the background component was
determined by the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development (NCDNRCD). These two concentration
components were determined separately, then added together to
determine the ambient CO concentration for comparison to the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
The background carbon monoxide concentrations for the
project area were estimated to be 2.0 parts per million-(ppm).
Consultation with the Division of Environmental Management Air
Quality Section of the North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development indicated that an ambient
12
carbon monoxide concentration of 2.0 ppm is suitable for this
location.
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to
determine future carbon monoxide concentrations resulting from
the proposed highway improvements. "Caline 3 - A Versatile
Dispersion Model For Predicting Air Pollutant Levels Near
Highways and Arterial Streets" was used to predict the carbon
monoxide concentration at the closest receptor.
Inputs into the mathematical model to estimate hourly CO
concentrations consisted of a level roadway under normal
conditions with predicted traffic volumes, vehicle emission
factors, and meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are
based on the annual average daily traffic projections. The
modeling analysis was performed for a worse case condition using
winds blowing almost parallel to the roadway. Carbon monoxide
vehicle emission factors were calculated using MOBILE 3.computer
software. MOBILE 3 provides predictions of vehicular emissions
(carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxide) depending on
various ambient, vehicle usage, and local conditions such as
temperature and speed. The recommended MOBILE 3 input
parameters supplied by the NCDNRCD were applied to the program
to estimate the emission rates for the current and design
calendar years. These emission rates are in turn, input to the
aforementioned Caline 3 computer program to determine future
carbon monoxide concentrations resulting from the proposed
improvements.
Receptor No. 1 (a pedestrian on the crossing) was
determined to be the closest receptor to Lynn Road and was used
in this analysis as a worst case situation. The 1990 and 2000
traffic volumes with worst case conditions could result in a
maximum one hour CO concentration of 3.2 ppm for 1990 and 4.4
ppm for 2010. Comparison of the predicted carbon monoxide
concentration with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(maximum 1 hour-35 ppm; 8 hour average - 9 ppm) indicates no
violation of these standards.
Using receptor No. 1 as the closest receptor, the
consequences of not building the project ("no-build") could
result in a maximum one hour CO concentration of 3.5 ppm for
1990 and 5.1 ppm for 2010. The input consisted of the same
assumptions as was used for the proposed project except that the
width of the existing roadway was used. Comparison of the
predicted carbon monoxide concentration for the "no-build"
alternative with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(maximum 1 hour - 35 ppm; 8 hour average - 9 ppm) also indicates
no violation of these standards.
The predicted CO concentrations are summarized in the
following table:
13
ALTERNATIVE
ONE HOUR
CO CONCENTRATIONS (ppm)
1990 ADT 2010 ADT
No-build 3.5 5.1
Proposed Improvement 3.2 4.4
The project is located within the Eastern Piedmont Air
Quality Control Region. The ambient air quality for Wake County
is currently being reviewed by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the North Carolina Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development pertaining to its status as
an attainment area for CO. The area under study is primarily
the central business district of Raleigh. Since this project is
located outside this area of study and the State Implementation
Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control measures
for this location, the conformity procedures for 23 CFR 770 do
not apply.
If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall
be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations
of the North Carolina State Implementation Plan for air quality
in compliance with 15 NCAC 2.D. 0520.
G. Noise
Traffic is exposed to restrictive operating conditions at
the project site. The proposed Federal-Aid project will relieve
these conditions but will also result in increased
traffic-related noise levels. The project as planned will
require physical alteration of an existing highway that will
alter the existing horizontal and vertical alignment and
increase the number of through-traffic lanes. Therefore, this
project is considered a Type I Project by definition, and the
procedures of the Federal-Aid Highway Program Manual (FHPM)
7-7-3 apply to this improvement. These procedures require the
analysis of the expected noise impacts of the improvement.
The noise levels were measured in the field and analyzed
using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Noise Prediction
Model computer program (STAMINA 2.0/OPTIMA). The noise levels
are reported in terms of the Equivalent Sound Level (Leq). By
definition, the Equivalent Sound Level is the level of constant
sound which, in a given situation and time period has the same
energy as does time varying sound. In other words, the
fluctuating sound levels of traffic noise are represented in
terms of a steady noise level with the same energy content.
Field ambient noise measurements were taken at the site at
several distances from the nearest travel lane. These
measurements were compared to the calculated Leq noise level
14
predictions provided by the STAMINA 2.0 computer program to
verify the computer modeling. The computer model results vs.
the actual measurement results are listed below:
Leg (dBA)
Distance from Computer Field
Nearest Lane (ft.) Prediction Measurement
50 66.2 66.6
Y 100 61.1 62.4
200 58.4 58.5
The computer model predictions closely resemble the actual
field measurements. Therefore, no adjustments were made to the
model results to account for local conditions.
The FHPM 7-7-3 defines traffic noise impacts as "impacts
which occur when the predicted traffic noise levels approach or
exceed the design noise levels, or when the predicted traffic
noise levels substantially exceed the existing noise levels.
This definition of traffic noise impacts reflects the FHWA
position that impacts can occur under two separate conditions:
a. When the proposed project will result in an
unacceptably high noise environment (absolute level).
b. When the proposed project will substantially increase
the existing noise environment (> 15dBA).
To determine when a project will result in an unacceptably
high noise environment, the FHWA has established noise abatement
criteria based on land use or activity category. These design
noise levels are listed in Table 1, NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA,
and are considered to be maximum acceptable limits for probable
Leq traffic noise levels. For the subject project affecting
only residential receivers, only two of the activity category
criterion can be applied. The Category B criterion is an
exterior condition applied to residences, parks and, in some
cases, to institutional land usage. Criterion E is an interior
condition which applies to noise sensitive activities located
indoors such as in churches, schools, and hospitals. The
primary consideration should be given to exterior areas in noise
impact determinations. Interior criterion are used only in
situations where no exterior activities are to be affected.
Therefore, Category B, the 67 dBA exterior noise abatement
criteria would apply to the proposed project.
15
TABLE I
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)

Activity
Category Lett (h) Description of Activity Category
A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet
(Exterior) are of extraordinary significance
and serve an important public need
and where the preservation of
those qualities is essential if
the area is to continue to serve
its intended purpose.
B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas,
(Exterior) playgrounds, active sports areas,
parks, residences, motels, hotels,
schools, churches, libraries, and
hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or
(Exterior) activities not included in
Categories A or B above.
D -- Undeveloped lands
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels,
(Interior) public meeting rooms, schools,
churches, libraries, hospitals,
and auditoriums.
A comparison of the existing traffic vs. future anticipated
traffic results in a 3.9 dBA increase in noise due to the
additional traffic only. When both the additional traffic and
the relocation of traffic lanes were considered in the vicinity
of the project, the predicted noise level increase, between 1989
and 2010, for existing residential receivers ranged from 3-5
dBA. Generally, a 3 dBA change in noise levels is barely
perceptible whereas a 10 dBA increase represents a doubling of
the noise intensity or perceived loudness. No receptors along
the project are expected to receive a noise increase of 10 dBA
or greater. Therefore, the proposed project will not
substantially increase the existing noise environment.
Even though the proposed project will not substantially
increase the existing noise environment, all 42 of the current
receivers on the north side of Lynn Road, approach (within 2
16
dBA) or exceed the 67 dBA exterior noise abatement criteria for
residences in design year 2010. However, even for the
"no-build" alternative under design year LOS C traffic
conditions, five of these residences approach or exceed the same
criteria. All of the receivers which approach or exceed the
FHWA exterior noise abatement criteria for design year traffic
are condominiums. Exterior noise levels normally have less
impact on condominium and apartment residents than on single
family residents which have a greater potential for outdoor
activity. It should also be noted that all of these units are
air-conditioned which provides substantial noise level
shielding.
Although consideration for noise abatement can be applied
to receivers with predicted noise levels approaching or
exceeding the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria, traffic noise
abatement measures do not appear to be feasible for this
project. The project will contain no control of access and the
possibility of acquiring additional right of way for noise
abatement is limited due to the extent and proximity of the
development. Therefore, no traffic noise abatement measures are
proposed for this project.
Future residential receivers that locate within the 67 dBA
noise level contour would be expected to experience traffic
noise levels above FHWA noise abatement criteria. The 67 dBA
noise level contour location can be useful to local officials in
exercising land use controls over the remaining undeveloped
lands and land uses adjacent to the roadway. It can also be
used to prevent further development or incompatible activities
and land uses. The distance to the 67 dBA noise level contour
from the centerline of the proposed Lynn Road is predicted to be
106 feet.
The effects of temporarily increased noise levels during
construction were considered as directed by Paragraph 13 of the
FHPM 7-7-3. Although noise impacts during project construction
are- of short duration, the high noise levels of combustion
engine powered equipment, usually the diesel, are expected to be
the main contributor to the sound levels from highway
construction equipment activity. Peak noise levels from highway
construction as measured at a distance of 50 feet may vary from
70 dBA to 100 dBA. This includes earth moving equipment,
concrete pumps and mixers, erection equipment, saws, and
vibration equipment. Manufacturers of construction equipment
began to implement source control measures in response to the
General Services Administration (GSA) Construction Equipment
Noise Standards which became effective July 1, 1972, and which
were made more restrictive on January 1, 1975.
At this stage of the project no construction noise impacts
can be identified. The major construction elements of this
17
project are expected to be earth removal, hauling, grading, and
paving. General construction noise impacts such as temporary
speech interference for passerbys and those individuals living
and working near the project can be expected particularly from
earth moving equipment during grading operations. Overall,
construction noise impacts are expected to be minimal since
construction noise is relatively short in duration and generally
restricted to daytime hours. For those structures closest to
the project, transmission loss characteristics over distance is
r believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of intrusive
construction noise.
This evaluation completes the noise assessment requirements
for this project. No additional reports are required.
H. Cultural Resources
The proposed project has been coordinated with the North
Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.
The SHPO has conducted a review of the project and located no
known properties of architectural, historic, or archaeological
significance which would be affected by the project (see
Appendix A-2). Therefore, this project should have no affect on
significant cultural resources. The SHPO will have another
opportunity to review and comment on this document.
I. Social and Economic
The social and economic impacts of the proposed project are
principally beneficial in nature. Widening the route to the
proposed cross section will result in some loss of land from the
local tax base that will be needed for permanent right-of-way.
However, this taking is unavoidable and if delayed, the
additional tax revenues generated by these lands will be more
than offset by the increased costs of construction and land
acquisition in the future.
The beneficial impacts of the proposed project are the
resulting increase in land value due to the improved access, the
increase in safety for vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian users of
this route and the aesthetic improvement of linking together the
various existing cross sections into a continuous uniform
design. The proposed widening will also provide safe and easy
access to the recreation facilities provided along the Capital
Area Greenway and more cohesion between the various
neighborhoods along the route through this improved access.
No families or businesses will be relocated by the proposed
improvements. Parklands are discussed in Section VII, Section
4(f) Evaluation. (pg. 19)
18
VII. Section 4(F) Evaluation and Statement
A. Introduction
The subject project involves the replacement of Wake County
Bridge No. 98 on SR 1819, Lynn Road over Mine Creek. The
existing structure crosses the Capital Area Greenway trail which
is recreation lands managed by the City of Raleigh Parks
Department. The proposed replacement of this structure must
also cross the Capital Area Greenway. As the proposed
replacement is anticipated to be constructed with funds from the
Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program, and this project will
involve a taking of public recreation lands for highway use, it
is necessary that this project comply with the requirements of
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act and Section
138 of the Highway Act as amended. These requirements are
designed to insure that special efforts are made "to preserve
the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and
recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic
sites."
Since the proposed project will improve an existing highway
and use minor amounts of public park or recreational land, a
programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation should satisfy the
requirements of Section 4(f) for this project. A programmatic
Section 4(f) evaluation must document that a project meets the
applicability criteria and that the proper procedures of a
programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation are followed. Therefore,
the purpose of this programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation
document is to determine that the project meets the
applicability criteria and to document the project file clearly
identifying the basis for the determinations and assurances set
forth in the programmatic Section 4(f) approval procedures.
B. Description of Public Park Resource
The trail along the Capitol Area Greenway which crosses
beneath Lynn Road is a very small segment of a system of trails
providing an alternative to the streets for pedestrians and
bicyclist throughout the City of Raleigh. The concept of this
Greenway System was formalized in a 1973 resolution from the
Raleigh City Council that supported the development of Greenway
corridors throughout the City for recreational use, assuring
that lands which should not be developed for environmental
reasons are given a full and productive use. The concept was to
develop a system of interconnecting trails along the Greenways
that lay along creeks and streams within the City for use by
pedestrians and bicyclists. Among the benefits perceived by the
originators were the preservation of natural attributes,
improvements in recreational opportunities, flood control,
19
preservation of local flora and fauna, control of soil erosion
and stream siltation, and preservation of a wildlife habitat.
The system was recognized as providing a means for city dwellers
to have a closer relationship with nature as well as
establishing connecting links to Raleigh's parks system.
The Greenway was to be a linear open space left primarily
in its natural state except for the introduction of a connector
system of trails for use by pedestrians and bicyclists. Each
segment of the Greenway was to be handled differently because
v its function might be different. The Greenway was not to be a
substitute for parks which supply active recreation, ball
fields, tennis courts, public facilities, playgrounds and
community centers. Instead, it was to be a system of passive
recreation, with unstructured activities where people were to be
free to enjoy themselves in a natural setting. The Greenway
trails would become the lines connecting the parks and making
them more accessible to all neighborhoods. The goal expressed
early by City officials was to attain 200 miles of paved
Greenway trails by the year 2000. Over twenty-six miles of
trails currently exist within the system.
The trail that runs beneath Lynn Road at the proposed
project site is called the Upper Leadmine Trail (see Figure 6).
This trail is a minor corridor in the greenway system which is
based on a natural order or hierarchy of streams in the region.
In the project vicinity, the trail is currently unpaved and
exists on an easement. The City is currently paving this trail
along the west side of Leadmine (Mine) Creek. The plans for
paving this trail at the project site have been temporarily
suspended so that the proposed project plans can be incorporated
into the overall trail improvement.
C.
Avoidance Alternatives
Several possible alternatives have been evaluated that
avoid any use of the public recreation lands. These avoidance
alternatives include no-build, improvement without using public
recreation lands, and improvement on a new location without
using public recreation lands. A discussion of each of these
avoidance alternatives follows:
1. Do-Nothing Alternative - This alternative would not
replace the deficient crossing. If the existing crossing is not
eventually replaced, this section of Lynn Road will ultimately
be closed when the crossing can no longer safely accommodate
traffic. Such a closure would have a very undesirable effect on
traffic operations in the area including increased travel
distances and travel times for both school buses and emergency
vehicles that currently depend on this crossing for access.
20
2. Improvement without using public recreation lands - Two
alternatives, rehabilitation and replacement in kind at the
existing location could provide improvements without using
public lands. Neither of these alternatives would provide the
proposed wider facility to match other planned improvements in
the area. This would result in an undesirable "bottleneck" at
the crossing. In addition, neither of these alternatives would
improve the undesirable design speed at the crossing. No
additional width or vertical clearance would be provided for the
greenway which is currently restricted beneath this crossing.
Finally, either of these alternatives would require the
undesirable closure or interruption of full traffic service at
the crossing while the improvements were implemented.
3. Improvement on a new location without using public
recreation lands - Since the greenway follows Mine Creek in the
area of the crossing, no such alternative exists for replacement
of this crossing that would avoid park lands. The greenway
currently exists for more than one-mile north and south of the
current crossing (see Figure 6). A replacement outside of this
corridor would not be in the scope of a bridge replacement
project.
D. Alternatives that Impact Park Lands
The following are the primary alternatives considered for
the replacement of Wake County Bridge No. 98 with a new 5-lane
crossing that will require use of the greenway easement to
construct the project.
Alternate 1 locates the replacement crossing at the
existing location on the existing horizontal alignment. This
alternative with an improved vertical alignment, provides a
design speed less than 50 miles per hour (mph) which does not
comply with the design speed for the remainder of the route.
This alternative would also result in closure of the route
during the construction of the crossing with detour routes to
accommodate existing traffic. The necessary right of way and
slope easements would require relocation of seven to ten
residences northwest of the crossing for the widened roadway.
• Alternate 2 locates the replacement crossing immediately
south of the existing location with an improved vertical
alignment. The horizontal alignment allows traffic service to
be maintained at the site during construction and the necessary
right of way and slope easements for the widened facility would
not require relocation of any residences. However, this
horizontal alignment contains the same 7°-30' curve as the
existing crossing which provides less than the desirable 50 mph
design speed employed on the other portions of the route.
21
Alternate 3 locates the replacement crossing at the
existing location on a 6°-45' curve with an improved vertical
alignment which provides a 50 mph design speed to be consistent
with the remaining portions of the route design. This alignment
requires closure of the crossing during construction and
relocation of at least 17 residences for right of way and slope
easements.
Alternate 4 locates the replacement crossing south of the
existing location on a 60-45' curve with improved vertical
alignment to provide the desirable 50 mph design speed without
closure of the route. This alignment does not require the
relocation of any residences.
E. Impacts to Park Lands
All of the alternatives considered that involve public
recreation lands have similar impacts to the Capital Area
Greenway. The principal adverse effect is the loss of the
natural vegetation along the greenway in the immediate area of
the crossing. Another adverse effect will be a slight loss of
natural light under the wider replacement structure. The
project will require use of the greenway lands for construction
but will not impair the use of these lands for the Greenway
trail. The recommended alternative requires the use of
approximately 0.65 acres of greenway for project construction.
The remaining impacts to the Capital Area Greenway will be
positive in nature. The grade of the trail will be improved to
allow more convenient access for handicapped users. Beneath the
proposed replacement crossing, the trail will have increased
horizontal and vertical clearance to allow the passage of
vehicles that need access to the trail for emergencies and
maintenance (See Figure 8). This increased clearance will
eliminate the current need for two driveways to the trail from
both the north and south sides of Lynn Road for such vehicles.
With the increased clearance, one driveway from the south side
of Lynn Road will provide safe access for these vehicles to both
the north and south ends of the greenway trail.
F

Measures to Minimize Harm
Few measures to minimize harm are required as a result of
the proposed project as most of the impacts to the trail are
beneficial. The project will require use of the greenway lands
but will not impair the use of these lands for the trail.
Therefore, no replacement lands are necessary as a result of
this project. The existing trail facility that is currently
under construction, will be completed in the vicinity of the
project as part of the proposed replacement. Therefore, no
replacement of facilities are proposed as they will be initially
provided as part of the project.
22
The existing trail grade will be improved as a result of
the project since no grades greater than 5 percent are proposed.
This will provide better access for bicyclists and handicapped
users.
No lighting of the trail is proposed beneath the
replacement structure. No plans currently exist for lighting
the remainder of this trail. A slight loss of natural light
will result beneath the wider structure but increased clearance
and improved grade which will improve the sight distance beneath
the crossing will somewhat offset the loss of natural light.
Lighting along the proposed roadway will also benefit safety of
the trail during evening hours.
G. Coordination
The project has been properly coordinated with the City of
Raleigh Parks and Recreation Department since the early stages
of project development. No federal incumberances have been
identified on the effected public recreation land by either City
or State Parks and Recreation officials. (See Appendix A-3). A
public meeting concerning this project has also been conducted
and the comments concerning the proposed treatment of the trail
have been favorable. The signatures provided herein also
indicate coordination and approval of the proposed project with
appropriate City officials.
H. Evaluation of Feasible and Prudent Alternatives
None of the avoidance alternatives listed above are
considered prudent since they will not adequately accomplish the
objective of improving the overall traffic operations in the
Lynn Road area. The remaining alternatives all require use of
the public recreation lands. Therefore, it is concluded that
there are no prudent alternatives applicable to the project that
will not require the use of public recreation lands to
accomplish the objectives of the project.
I. Conclusion
The considered alternatives that will improve overall
traffic operations in the area will require the use of public
recreation land. All of these alternatives will require
approximately the same amount of these lands due to the
increased width and elevation of the proposed crossing.
Therefore, Alternate 4 was selected as the recommended alignment
for the project to minimize other project impacts such as
maintenance of traffic service during construction and
relocation of area residences. This alignment will provide the
most desirable design for the facility.
23
Approximately 0.65 acres of public lands will be used for
this alignment as shown in Figure 7. Although these lands will
be required for the project construction, their public use as a
trail will not be taken.
J. Applicability
The following seven criteria for applicability of a
programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation are met by the proposed
project:
(1) The proposed project is designed to improve the
existing SR 1819, Lynn Road with an improved design speed and
increased width on essentially the same alignment.
(2) The public recreation land affected by the project, the,
Capital Area Greenway which crosses beneath Lynn Road, is
located on land which is controlled by easement for public use
by the City of Raleigh, Parks and Recreation Department.
(3) The amount and location of the land required for the
replacement of the bridge will not in any way impair the use of
the remaining Capital Area Greenway for its intended purpose
or exceed the size limitations provided in the programmatic
Section 4(f) evaluation. (See Figures 6 and 7).
(4) The proposed project as planned will not impair the use
of the required greenway land for recreation trail purposes.
(5) This assessment is agreed to in writing by both the
City of Raleigh's Parks and Recreation Department and the City
Manager as evidenced by the signatures provided herein.
(6) The public lands used for this project do not involve
lands incumbered with a Federal interest (such as lands
purchased or improved with funds under the Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act).
(7), No full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is
required or being prepared for the proposed project.
K. App
a. City of Raleigh
The City of Raleigh Parks and Recreation Department has
reviewed the proposed project and this document. The following
signature documents the project file that this Programmatic
24
Section 4(f) Evaluation and Statement is approved for the minor
f ub c recreation land as indicated herein.
taking o p -._t
-
1. --- '4
Jack.C. Duncan Date
Director of Parks & Recreation
City of Ra ig
mpsey E. Benton, Date
City Manager
City of Raleigh
b. Federal Highway Administration
The Federal Highway Administration has reviewed this project and
determined that the project meets all applicable criteria set
forth in the programmatic Final Nationwide Section 4(f)
Evaluation and Approval for Federal-aided Highway Projects with
Minor Involvements With Public Parks, Recreation Lands And
Wildlife and Waterfowl Refuges. Therefore, the following
signature documents the project file that this Programmatic
Section 4(f) Evaluation and Statement is approved for the minor
taking of public recreation land as indicated herein.
Appro ed
? s-8-g9
Keno
L. llamy Date
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Approv dr?
25
)lie 11J.o .61 A6'
'OJ )1)7. .It I
lb S7 0! - J? I
.. 7
.16 09 +?)71 7it7 1
71n) 1)7)
]O )]11 .. u 04
1
])O7 _ a )100 !
)l01 ov ub d
)S 7706 0? Os 17 -1 Q.._.
'/! •. 1721 '?l O ?.
,110 790
01 O,/ )!
17 ))O]
770) 7]00
!n ° `? I1 711171
o ]111 ))01 p5 \] 0 1 1
?J I )
111. Oa pe .70 710111
1171 ??'
?11
1
1
l
111/ I
i
I?1o ?
n In>,
AO _
.)° 111103 Ilia _ /
Ill 07 ? _ ?
11)7 ]11] ? / -
]110 ^? '?? -?- Ali
? .r o? ] 11 I !1/
ino °6
?G -O .t1 )? 111)
111 ] ^ 3
a1 ? ? S
11)1 -
`r\/7) j 117 )
30
,]'S .77 151
17]
,Ow 17]
- _ _ nuA.l 11/e
Yy 1
-------------
Y. 1400
\ •I
1
r
Ion.)
PROJECT
LOCATION
]•n1 1) ?
/ I eU )'•11
wl 1007 ?\• r
C ? 1
i
1 - II
11
Wake Co. Bridge No. 98
on SR 1819.
Lynn Road
over mine Creels
Raleigh, N.C.

Prank Coleman
t- A--i,l
1"2/88 MILES 0.5J figure 1
171:

f?
I \ Sry . ____, _ _ 1
.I

?
o E,
x
o N
a
L.
GSA
x
qwl "
bA? 'C7 U r,.
'C00 oU
N
r
as aw C'
x
Ez 10,

?a
a
U
j°'0
o 'w o
a
14
a
o?
00

r: 1
W 111, '' rr . /
W 11 ?i W
u1 1 J D
Z w
LLI
Q W
1 i H () ?'
\\ 4 i i cc O
1 v
tJ) 3NIl »3M3S - O
F-- lIVa1 AVMN3 _
LLJ
CL
3NIl H3M3SIIo
_ f O
Lij
\ ,?
?lzj
Z c• ? L
\ rl
?,.,
I

ow
I Z
J
I
o,
N
n W
7 z ?,...
a
0
z
z
r
J
LIO O O W
I I O?-
N ? J
r'
v
O
0
oQ
J
lD
JI -1
O W
Q '?7
J
lD 0
I N
co
f''1
`I
W
0
0
C
CD
°(J
Z
O
1-
U
W
N
J
a
V
d

0
D\ c?
a?

CA
b T
00
0
W ?
r
z
LL
0
0 .c
U , CA
'
o
? o

cil

C` a
C
v
N
Q1 b
O
V
x
C
w

11 f1

Frank Coleman
& Associates

LOOKING
EAST

LOOKING
WEST
GREENWAY
LOOKING
SOUTH
Wake County Bridge No. 98
on SR 1819
Lynn Road
over Mine Creek
Raleigh, North Carolina
2/89
re 41
LEGEND II
i
II loan
ZONE EXPLANATION I II
A AREAS OF 100-YR FLOOD
B AREAS BETWEEN LIMITS, OF
100-YR AND 500-YR FLOOD C>>? \\ = ZONE A6 330
C AREAS OF MINIMAL FLOODING IUI ? U
ZONE B ZONE A18
?ti..ryw.L11 rY. I 1?, NEWTON
ROAD
>q{i 1 329
318' Dam ZONE B ZO Sc
\ W
30
I ? ?},!L i _J1 r1? CCC
ZONE A3
RM66? Tribwarr to
i7pr?k. ;r ,_"a r r Cast Fork
ZONEIB
2 fAli?Ir
88 0L STUART ?C 1 \rrrk _
? West I-urk n/' counT? C
\ L1inr C'ierk 290 307 11
?Q6 ZONE A20\\ 11
ZONE C ?. \M65
ZONE A4 fir. `fly rn East 1-ork0
Aline Creek
V ZONE B
`I
ZONE A
275 ZONE A19 ?? 1519 \
POPO COA ?' ZONE A19 64 PROJECT
LOCATION
?? ? I rREEr
$HILOH
/COURT
rJ_j N
•
I Rond I
tarv to
Creek
I
,p
o
Frank Coleman
,G Associates _
SHETLAND I / °O
COURT ? ?fNC<rFr -?_\
C_f
Oq/
M63 DIXON
-WHIPPOORWILL ZONE C
LANE Q
P INKL
Wake County Bridge No. 98
COU AT RT
on SR 1819
NORTH H L Ynn Road
DRIVE over Mine Creek
Raleigh, North Carolina
U.S. SOIL" Flood Insurance Rate Mali
®CONSERVATIO
/SERVICE DAM 0 1000
_Z:? ,??i 3/89 L FT I Figure 5
I c '?(ti
I ? Y
? 44,-
r ? 11 yW ?
I rtl , ?- i• ? e ,, s ? /
a /
? ? 7 •} I ? ? I ? ? 1 ??? ? x'°14 - I /• ?^?/
° n
TV, ?aJ ?? ? x ?,•? ? V PROJECT
LOCATION
II ?I .? a ?_ •--?. ( - I
? • _ .,y a ??.? f,,.•
' i +e Yy Wake County Bridge No. 98
on SR 1819
;yam \ p Lynn Road
over Mine Creek
?` se Raleigh, North Carolina
Greenway Corridors
-fir r , - ? ? I '" 0 3000
Prat Coleman ,•\ _ ?//, \ 3/89 FT Figure G
k Associates u - -- ------ ----
1 \ -
W ?•
W-
I
v I
I I I ?
00
I rn
z
I o?
I v Cj
d 0000 o U cl In
I a u
ca
> o a
° a? °
I 3
cd
COO
M
- - - ?
LIJ
Nf?iy- W
a ?
I

LLI

W

cn cc
1

SM
- ` 1',•
?
I SS- ?- IIII-
:.
?1

1'
:
.
? \ S rd N
:
:
:
•
L CC Ql
G a-•.
\WI O

I

s
G
L iJ
LLJ

i 0
? N
U .
Lil

o_ .
U)
?J

c
O_
n-
Frank Coleman
r n __._.._..
? V
?y ?
o C q
o L
cn
Lz
? y L L
en?•b ?U?
h
U C

q C L C
c? C •_ O
o
r
?
V
? O ? QI ? V
U > cn?
•
o
y-
1 h J --
rl
UJ
W
U_
c)
LIJ
Z
2
CD
Z
V) LiJ
y X Lil
Ld L1.
O
I--

t c

L1J (Y"
U D
<.( Z
U_ <L
_T_

U
C) U..
LIJ
> y
<L 0
CL --J
.J
<1
O
- O
I--
Q
L1J
L1- C-)
O . -'
V)
V) UJ
- Lil
Ln cY
T U
G

I-
_J Cl
?C 3
.L
? -1
Q

Q O

z I-
W
LU U
cl? C)
C.^ Q
LiJ
I-
O
`T

t.il
J
'L
U
L.')
O
I--
1-
O
7._

'Z
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
. Italeigh Regional Office
James G. Martin, Governor DIVISION OF LAND RESOURCES Larry South, Regional Manager
S. Thomas Rhodes, Secretary
December 28, 1988
4
Frank Coleman and Associates
P.O. Box 311
Raleigh, NC 27602-0311
ATTN: J. Kenneth Burleson, P.E.
RE: Lynn Rd. Bridge Replacement
FC&A No. 88053.01
Wake County
Dear Mr. Burleson:
This is in response to your recent request to our Division
for comments on the subject project.
The proposed project will require prior approval by this
office of a sedimentation and erosion control plan if the land-
disturbing activity will exceed one acre in size. Such a plan must
address timely implemetation and maintenance of sediment control
devices sufficient to prevent sediment loss to Mine Creek and
adjoining properties. Further, particular attention must be given
to proper ditch and streambank stabilization.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project early
in the design stage. Please do not hesitate to contact me regarding
any questions you might have.
Sincerely,
R
Joh L. Holley, Jr., P.E.
Re Tonal Engineer
and Quality Section
cc: Charles Gardner
Stephen Conrad
A-1
3800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 • lclephone 919-733-2314
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Empkryer
.? d "• Si?R
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
M
December 28, 1988
J. Kenneth Burleson, P.E.
Project Manager
Frank Coleman & Associates
P.O. Box 311.
.Raleigh, N.C. 27602-0311.
Re: Replacement of Bridge 98 on SR 1819
(Lynn Road) over Mine Creek, Raleigh,
Wake County, ER 89-7721, CH 89-E-0000-0456
Dear Mr. Burleson:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of December 7, 1988, concerning the above
project.
We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no properties
of architectural., historic, or archaeological significance which would
be affected by the project. 't'herefore, we have no comment on the
project as currently proposed.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Advisory Council on historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at
36 CPR Part 800, and to Executive Order 11593, "Protection and Enhance-
ment of the Cultural Environment."
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact his. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
r
r Sincerely,
- i
David Brook, Deputy State
Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: Clearinghouse
A-2
109 Fast Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
JAN r b ,
1
i
10
•
r
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Division of Parks and Recreation
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor Dr. William W Davis
William W. Cobcy, Jr., Secretary Director
January 13, 1989
Mr. J. Kenneth Burleson
Frank Coleman & Associates
Post Office Box 311
224 Fayetteville Street Mall
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0311
Dear Mr. Burleson:
The Division of Parks and Recreation has reviewed the proposal to
replace Wake County Bridge No. 98 on Lynn Road over Mine Creel:.
Mine Creek (also called Lead Mine Creek) is a proposed greenwav
corridor in the city of Raleigh's Greenway Master Plan. A poor
bridge design at this location could result in a significant
safety problem for hikers and bicyclists using the greenway and
trying to cross Lynn Road. We recommend a bridge design which
will accommodate greenway users under the roadway.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project.
Sincerely,
Carol Tingley
Parks Environmental Analyst
cc: Melba McGee
CT/bep
A-95/3124/ct
A-3
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer