19941093 Ver 1_Complete File_19941129

??uc,6 NAP 7g]

ZAI?
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B, Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A, Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
E3 EHNR
July 13, 1995
Wake County
DEM Project # 941093
TIP # U-2582
Project # 8.2402801
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Mr. Barney O'Quinn
Planning and Environmental Branch
NC DOT
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N. C. 27626-0535
Dear Mr. O'Quinn:
FILE COPY
You have our approval to place fill material in 0.30 acres of wetlands and 0.90 acres of waters
for the purpose of extending Edwards Mill Road (SR 3009) from Trinity Road (SR 1656) to North of
Wade Avenue, as you described in your application dated 16 November 1994. After reviewing your
application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number
2671. This certification allows you to use Nationwide Permit Number 26 when it is issued by the
Corps of Engineers.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If
you change your project, you must notify us and you ma% be required to send us a new application.
For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and the
additional ones listed below.
Additional Conditions:
1) DOT shall stockpile boulders and gravel from the existing stream to be used in
the relocated stream. Boulders may be supplemented if a suitable quantity is
not removed from the existing stream.
2) DOT shall install 7-10 riffles using boulders in the relocated stream. Each
riffle shall be at least 3 feet long and the width of the stream. Immediately
upstream of the riffle, DOT shall backfill the gravel for a distance of 15 feet.
3) DOT shall revegetate the steam banks and berm with at least 2 of the
following species on 10 foot centers:
Black Willow
River Birch
Sweet Gum
Sycamore
Red Maple
(Salix nigra)
(Betula nigra)
(Liquidamber styraciflua)
(Plantanus occidentalis)
(Acer rubrum)
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
50% recycled/ 1096 post-consumer paper
4) At least 5 days before water is diverted into the relocated stream, David Cox
(WRC) at 528-9986 and Eric Galamb (DEM) at 733-1786 shall be invited to
inspect the project.
5) DOT shall design the culvert extension at site 4 to eliminate the "perched"
situation that currently exists. A weir or similar structure shall be constructed
to divert all water through a single barrel of the double barrel box culvert
during normal low flow conditions.
In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with
your project.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory
hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing,
send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the
Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 276 1 1-7447. This certification and
its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Environmental Management under Section 401
of the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-1786.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Raleigh DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
Sin ely,
r oq6orr I,,J r. P
9410931tr
..
UIG`1
61 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF 1P.ANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT I II
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
November 16, 1994 RECEIVED
NOV 2 9 19ge
Water Quality Planning E"""MENTALSCIEIrrn
Division of Environmental Management
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
ATTN: Mr. John Dorney
SUBJECT: Wake County, Edwards Mill Road Extension (SR 3009) from
Trinity Road (SR 1656) to North of Wade Avenue
TIP No. U-2582A, Project No. 8.2402801.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to
extend Edwards Mill Road (SR 3009) from Trinity Road (SR 1656) to
North of Wade Avenue in Wake County. All wetland impacts related
to this project are authorized under Corps of Engineers Nationwide
Permit 26 (Above Headwaters). The impacts to wetlands at each
impact site are less than one acre in size, and therefore do not
require Corps of Engineers notification according to the
"Notification" general condition of 33 CFR 330.6(C13). However,
out of five identified wetland impact sites, two sites (Sites 2
and 4) involve impacts to Waters of the U.S. which are greater
than one third of an acre, and therefore will require notification
to the Division of Environmental Management.
The impacts at site 2 involves the loss of 0.21 acres of open
water habitat and 0.30 acres of wetland habitat. The impacts at
site 4 involves the loss of 0.69 acres of open water habitat.
With the above information in mind, NCDOT requests that the
subject project be authorized under General Water Quality
Certification 2671. Included for your information are a site map
and set of drawings showing the proposed work at each site, as
well as a pre-discharge notification application. A copy of this
pre-discharge notification is being supplied to the Corps of
Engineers for informational purposes only.
Mot

If you have any questions concerning this application, please
contact Mr. Doug Huggett of NCDOT's Environmental Unit at (919)
733-3141.
Sincerely, ?- --?
B. 0' uin P. E.
Assistant Branch Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
BJO/dvh
Attachment
cc: District Engineer, COE-Wilmington
Mr. Ken Jolly, COE-Raleigh
Mr. Kelly Barger, P.E., Project Management Unit
Mr. Don Morton, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. A.L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. John Smith, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. W.D. Johnson, Roadside Environmental
Mr. G.R. Shirley, Jr., P.E., Division 5 Engineer
Mr. David Robinson, P.E., Planning and Environmental
Mr. Brian Yamamoto, Planning and Environmental
Site Station Above/Below Total Impact Waters Wetland
Headwaters (AC) (AC) (AC)
2 26+500-L- Above 0.51 0.21 0.30
4 638+00-Y2- Above 0.69 0.69 0.00
48+60 -L-
DEM ID- WQC 2671
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Permit #):
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLANNING
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
P.O. Box 1890 AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 P.O. Boy 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
PLEASE PRINT.
1. Owners Name: North Carolina Department of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. Owners Address: P. 0. box 25201; Raleigh, NC 27611
3. Owners Phone Number (Home):
(Work): [phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number:
B. J. O'Quinn, P.E.
Assistant Manager
5. Location of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County:
Nearest Town or City: Raleigh

Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Edwards Mill Road Extension co (3009) from
Trinity Road (SR 1656) to just north of Wade Avenue
6. Name of Closest Stream/River: _
7. River Basin: Neuse River
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS H? YES [ ] NO [X]
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [ ] NO LX ]
If yes, explain
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
Less than 2 acres
11. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
ACTION ID:
Wake
Filled: Site 2 = .51; Site 4 = .69
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted: Site 2 = .51; Site 4 = 0.69 acr3s
Richland Creek
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/2" X 11" drawings orily):
Extension of Edwards Mill Road from Trinity Road (SR 1656) to north of Wade Avenue.
13. Purpose of proposed work: Public Transportation
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measuref
taken to minimize wetland impacts. New location road required the crossing of several sma1
streams which can not be avoided.
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed or proposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES[ ] NO [X ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [ ] NO[X]
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property. See enclosed sheets
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project. N/ A
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line. N/A
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy. N/A
E. What is land use of surrounding property? Wooded
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? N/A

17 1,4
111111 ?, ? e..? cln..
:CI \
(u,.n,ICn , i
Apex
40.u?aJriA??
?B ICY. ?•?_ ?'?,???'`+. ' '
E II.?„/y ?j,l
1 10
01
.,,r.:?_,A
-tW 111..- .
?, 'l?alelgh_f
SITE
77? G
.It

N . ?
C. STAT E
UNIV. FOREST. ?.

a 1664 u'.

1J
' ? . 16'67
?•

J
•.1 I •'
1
:l .
?- I •1
w
1775 a?
:i
1 6"
Gravel Road 6
PROJECT LIMIT-
?...'• ..
i
mod/ ? ` ' •'.'•.

1775

I
177A
E AvE, C
-,. .25
1 F
P:
PROJECT LIMIT

Carter-Finley
Stadium
TkINITy RD. (SR 1656)
1658
a I
j o
N
1774
.2!J To e
NOP.TH CAROLINA DEPART?rfE`,'T OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION' OF HIGHWAYS
PLA-'v'NNG A.ND E\Z'IRONNIE.'v AL
BRANCH
EDWARDS MILL ROAD (SR 3009) EXTENSION
FROM TRINITY ROAD (SR 1656)
TO DURALEIGH ROAD (SR 1664)
WAKE COUNTY
U-2582 A
0 feet 1000
r Figure '-
A

\ S ?4.i1
\ r
t{aOUS
I \ '
I w \ '?_ •tt i??
cr7 \ \•.? tom, i? C), TC
rz?
??.. r-•!_ _ ?r ? t?f?, ?tf.?c,•3 t
\ tc,005
\\ { \\? Z @ 8 x g R C it ?` _ -_?
f.?
qpljjjj?
Z1 1 l
\\,
Ju
WOODS
Nl\
SHEET-3/8

J
SHEET 5,G
4
.Y

Y f,
CO r
r1 ?
_ y
51ATE 6:
I?

{
r'A: ?
SHEET G-18 '- -

-=arcs r0 sH Er
Vol @7'x8' RCBC
/?S spy 'a. 05,. I 1 I. I `? 48+6
6s I I O-L-
+
AIA
??? ` _ ? ? ;y, by • ' ;1• '.,. ?
s/o :7: 9 ?a
69
?•.
ILLY
` ??? ( •I1?rv?!-L ,cf1, ljSES 0 I.;

O

'7u-^ C _ - -

L / j•w/:'?e /
s
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr_ Governor p E H N FI
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
A, Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
July 14, 1995
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorn 1V
Monica Swihart
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: FONSI for Edwards Mill Road Extension
Wake County
State Project DOT No. 8.2402801, TIP # U-2582
EHNR # 95-0946, DEM # 10992
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact waters of the state including wetlands.
The subject project may impact 1.20 acres of waters including wetland. DEM offers
these comments based on the FONSI document:
A) DOT coordinated with DEM on this project, and afield visit was made on July
12, 1995. DOT agreed to several conditions to minimize impacts with the
relocation of Armory Branch. All conditions will be placed in the 401
Certification. Therefore, DEM concurs with the FONSI.
DOT is reminded that the 401 Certification could be denied unless water quality
concerns are satisfied. Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to
Eric Galamb (733-1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Raleigh COE
edwards.fon
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
WATER WALITY PLANNING Fax:[phone]
` lnertt'ot E1WNaMner!t; :NNit?h, a1K1 Natmll ROMUroes
Office of Lspivu IV0.0W.Intergovemmentol Affairs
Prol"I Review Form
Project Number County: 1' Date:

X(,?-/_A 1'& 9, IAA -M
TWO prohot is balnp reviewed as Indicated below:
OfibelPfwne ions Office Area
Regional
D Aehevllle
? Fayettwille
? Mooresville
? Raleigh
Washington
43Wllminpton
tiYlnatfxtsalem
OAn Rib Areas
OAIr !
O Watei
OQfou star
O Land usety Engirwbr
pt?ea lonw Consultant
0 IMonsoment consultant
a
PWSi
Manager bign-omReolon:
Romnas (dteclt all appgcab{e)
r
Date:
It
Jul 7 195 1020 P.01/01
Project located in 7th floor library -
Date Response ue (firm deadline):
7,11 /I,-
? Boll and fit
? coastal M
D Water Ras
VwIldlife
D Forest no
Dlabd Res
O pants and
66
In-House
VVMt, 0.3 -0t-0;;L
©Marine Fisheries
Q Water Planning
? Fnvironmenial Health
[]Solid Waste Management
? Radiation Protection
? Dav10 Foster
? Other (specify)

1 In-House
RagWW Office response to be pomp and completed by Regional Manager.
? No ogecnon to project as proposed;
? No Comment
0 insufflolent infomlatlon to oom?ft review
?i
? Approve
? Perma(sl needed 0ermit files ha FO been ?WKOM
? RecoMmstitlee for further. devel pment•W111h reoommendations for D
atrenowAng (corn Ments. attac - --
O R.oort spded for. rated b 4mwt: it spec{? resubst :• .. -41110 brand
r4 ags
funding w
,charWer incorp0 Y
attschedfauth0rtty(le6) oltso) ! 9?t
NMNN TO.
Melba MCGOO
ri.1Dr
>uee RevieWer complete Individual reaponee.
renommended for further development for reasons
ad In attached comments (authority(les) cited)
] Applicant has been Contacted
] Applicant has not been contacted
out Controvefrsial (comments attached)
sistency. Statement needed (comments attached)
siatency Statofnsnt not needed
08 must be required under the provisions of
mom 71871 net P""
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITT L SLIP ATC
D6Za QS
TO:
A I A6A djAm.. REP. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.

FR REP. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
.
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ML ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? POR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:

Raleigh
Wake County
SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road)
From SR 1656 (Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road)
Federal-Aid Project Number STP-3009(1)
State Project Number 8.2402801
T.I.P. Project Number U-2582
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
and
FINAL SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
and
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Submitted Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)
and 23 U.S.C. 128 (A)
L
Date H. Franklin Vic > P. E. Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
/Z
Da e ,jV c L. G P. E.
vi on Administrator, FHWA
e/,
Date Zegil n Larson, P. E.
onaAdministrator, FHWA
Raleigh
Wake County
SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road)
From SR 1656 (Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road)
Federal-Aid Project Number STP-3009(1)
State Project Number 8.2402801
T.I.P. Project Number U-2582
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
and
FINAL SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
Document Prepared in the Planning and Environmental Branch By:
1. Z., ' L ?'_
Brian F. Yamam96
Project Planning Engineer
XUJA9.4i449&72..,e,
Linwood
Stone
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
Ric char B. Davis, P"
., Ass istan
Planning and Environmental Branch
,,q1t1liff.- „
en,
rs ?.•?oEESS/
y
4 SIAM
Manager 6944
??. FNC E! ; CD
I Nt. d?
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE RECOMMENDED ACTION ...................... 1
II. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS .................................. 1
III. NEED FOR ACTION ............................................ 3
IV. CIRCULATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT .................... 3
V. COMMENTS RECEIVED ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT .............. 4
A. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.. .................... 4
B. N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission........ ...... . 5
C. N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources - Division of Environmental Management...... 6
D. N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources - Division of Forest Resources .............. 7
E. N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources - Raleigh Regional Office... .... ....... .. 8
F. N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources - Division of Land Resources ................ 8
G. N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources - Public Water Supply Section ............... 9
VI. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING ................ 9
VII. REVISIONS AND ADDITIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT.... 14
A. Stream Rechannelization ............................... 14
B. Access Control. .... . ......... ................... 15
C. Thoroughfare Plan and Route Function .................. 15
D. Project Terminals ..................................... 15
E. Paved Shoulders ....................................... 16
F. Greenways............................................. 16
G. Public Transportation Alternative.. ................. 16
H. Evaluation of Construction Alternatives ............... 17
I. Relocation Impacts .................................... 17
J. Floodplain Involvement ................................ 17
K. Hazardous Waste ....................................... 17
L. Air Quality ........................................... 18
M. Wetland Findings ...................................... 18
N. Capacity Analysis .................................... 19
VIII. FINAL SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION .............................. 19
A. Description of Proposed Action ........................ 19
B. Description of Section 4(f) Resource .................. 19
C. Impacts to Section 4(f) Property ...................... 20
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
D. Avoidance Alternatives ................................ 21
1. Realignment East of the Proposed Alignment....... 21
2. Realignment West of the Proposed Alignment....... 21
3. "Do Nothing" Alternative ......................... 21
E. Measures to Minimize Harm ............................. 22
F. Mitigation Measures ................................... 23
G. Coordination...... ........... .................... 23
H. Department of Interior Coordination ................... 23
1. Conclusion ............................................ 24
IX. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ................. 24
Maps and Illustrations
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Figure 2A - Section A Recommended Cross Section
Figure 2B - Section B Recommended Cross Section
Figure 2C - Proposed Interchange Configuration
Figure 3 - Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan
Figure 4 - Aerial Mosaic
Appendix
A. Agency Comments
B. Newspaper Articles
Raleigh
Wake County
SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road)
From SR 1656 (Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road)
Federal-Aid Project Number STP-3009(1)
State Project Number 8.2402801
T.I.P. Project Number U-2582
I. DESCRIPTION OF RECOMMENDED ACTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of
Highways, proposes a highway improvement project for the Edwards Mill Road
corridor in northwestern Raleigh between SR 1656 (Trinity Road) and
SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road). The project calls for constructing a multilane
facility on new location. The project is scheduled to be constructed in
two sections. See Figure 1 for a vicinity map showing the sections.
Section A is located between SR 1656 (Trinity Road) and SR 1728 (Wade
Avenue), and traverses 0.6 mile of new location. Under Section A, it is
recommended the proposed multilane facility consist of a five-lane
shoulder section. An interchange is recommended where the proposed
extension of Edwards Mill Road crosses Wade Avenue. Since the proposed
Edwards Mill Road/Wade Avenue interchange will operate in a system that
includes the I-40 interchange to the west and the Blue Ridge Road
interchange to the east, auxiliary ramp lanes will be constructed on Wade
Avenue as a part of Section A improvements. Section B of the project is
located between Wade Avenue and SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road) and traverses 1.4
miles of new location. Alignment 1 of Section B is the recommended
alignment as indicated on Figure 1. Under Section B, a four-lane median
divided cross section is recommended. See Figures 2A and 2B for sketches
of the typical cross sections for the project. See Figure 2C for a sketch
of the recommended interchange configuration.
The project is included in the 1995-2001 North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Right of
way acquisition and construction or Section A o the project are
scheduled to begin in 1995. Beginning right of way acquisition and
construction schedules for Section B have not been specified. The TIP
includes a total funding of $14,700,000 including $200,000 for Section A
right of way acquisition, $4,000,000 for Section A construction, and
$10,300,000 for Section B right of way and construction. The total
projected cost for both sections of the proposed Edwards Mill Road
Extension is $20,500,000 including $6,600,000 for right of way (includes
$120,000 for utilities) and $13,900,000 for construction.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
It is anticipated the proposed highway construction can be performed
under a Department of the Army Nationwide Permit for wetlands that are
isolated and/or above headwaters (annual flow less than 5 cfs) in
accordance with 33 CFR 330.5(a)(26). A state Section 401 General Water
Quality Certification issued through the N. C. Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources - Division of Environmental Management will
also be required.
2
Appropriate consultation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission will be required for proposed rechannel ization in Richland
Creek and Armory Tributary to Richland Creek before a Nationwide Permit
can be issued. Relocated streams will be designed to have similar
characteristics (depth, width, and substrate) as the original stream.
This includes reestablishing streamside vegetation.
Any modifications to the established 100-year floodplain and floodway
will be coordinated with the City of Raleigh and Wake County by the North
Carolina Department of Transportation through a conditional letter of
floodplain map revision. The City of Raleigh will, in turn, submit the
conditional letter of floodplain map revision to the Federal Emergency
Management Administration.
The NCDOT will coordinate with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and
the N. C. Division of Environmental Management to avoid or minimize
impacts to the 1.5-2.0 acre wetland identified south of SR 1667 by
shifting the recommended alignment to the east.
Any open burning associated with the subject proposal will be in
compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0520.
Demolition or renovations of structures containing asbestos material
will be in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0525.
The North Carolina Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior to
construction regarding the relocation of survey markers.
Several features will be incorporated into the design of the project
to help minimize the impact and mitigate the effect of the proposed
project on the Loblolly Trail. These commitments are as follows:
(1) The NCDOT will provide a 12' x 8' reinforced concrete box
culvert to accommodate the Loblolly Trail underneath the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension approximately 0.2 mile
south of the proposed interchange at Wade Avenue.
(2) The NCDOT will provide electrical conduit (size to be specified
by the City of Raleigh) in the proposed culvert for lighting.
(3) The NCDOT will rebuild and relocate the Loblolly Trail on the
west side of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension up to the
Wade Avenue culvert crossing. The cleared width of the trail
will be 8 feet and the footpath width within the cleared trail
will be 6 feet. The 8-foot cleared trail width will consist of
4 inches of ABC over compacted subgrade. The 6-foot path width
will consist of 2 inches of bark chips.
(4) The NCDOT will provide electrical conduit (size to be specified
by the City of Raleigh) in proposed extended sections of the
existing double barrel 8' x 8' reinforced concrete box culvert
underneath Wade Avenue. Appropriate measures will be taken to
dry one of the barrels to accommodate trail users.
III. NEED FOR ACTION
The proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road will be a major link
between Wade Avenue and US 70. Although the proposed Edwards Mill Road
extension will provide some relief to the congested Blue Ridge Road
corridor, its primary purpose is to provide land access to the area
surrounded by I-40, Wade Avenue, and I-440 (Raleigh Beltline) that will
eventually contain a major sports and entertainment arena south of Wade
Avenue and a state government office complex north of Wade Avenue. The
mutually adopted Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan calls for
Edwards Mill Road to eventually be extended south of the proposed southern
project limit at Trinity Road to Hillsborough Street (SR 3007). Other
routes that will provide access to and bypasses of the area are on the
mutually approved Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan. The
proposed improvements are in conformance with the thoroughfare plan and
will be a step towards its implementation. See Figure 3 for a portion of
the Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan for this project.
IV. CIRCULATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The environmental assessment (EA) and draft Section 4(f) evaluation
was circulated among the following federal, state, and local agencies and
officials:
*U. S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington District
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency - Atlanta
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Atlanta
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Asheville
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
*U. S. Department of the Interior - Washington, D. C.
*N. C. State Clearinghouse
*N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
*N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and
Division of Environmental Management
*N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and
Division of Forest Resources
*N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and
Raleigh Regional Office
*N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and
Division of Land Resources
*N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and
Public Water Supply Section
Triangle J Council of Governments
Wake County Commissioners
City of Raleigh
Natural Resources -
Natural Resources -
Natural Resources -
Natural Resources -
Natural Resources -
Written comments were received from the agencies denoted with an
asterisk (*). Copies of the comments received are included in Appendix A.
V. COMMENTS RECEIVED ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Comment:
"A certification will be required indicating that new and
modified structures will not cause any rise in the 100-year natural
water surface elevations. If changes in the floodway are required,
as indicated on page 37 of the Environmental Assessment (EA), these
changes should be coordinated with the city for modification to the
flood insurance map and report. We also suggest coordination with
the city for compliance with their flood plain ordinance."
Response:
The most current project plans indicate proposed construction
activities in Richland Creek and Armory Tributary to Richland Creek
will require modifications to the established 100-year floodplain and
floodway. The proposed modifications will be within state-owned
right of way where no residences or businesses are located. No
difficulties in obtaining approval are anticipated. A conditional
letter of floodplain map revision will be provided to the City of
Raleigh and Wake County by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation. The City of Raleigh will, in turn, submit the
conditional letter of floodplain map revision to the Federal
Emergency Management Administration.
Comment:
"...a field review of the project indicated the presence of
significant, high quality wetlands immediately east of the pond
located south of Forest View Drive (SR 1667). Based upon our review
of the subject document and field investigations, without benefit of
the specific location of the proposed alternatives, impacts to
wetlands can be minimized and/or avoided by shifting the proposed
corridor further to the east or to utilize an alternate route which
bypasses the pond on the western side."
Response:
An on-site meeting was held on March 8, 1995 at the identified
wetland site that included biologists and planning engineers from the
NCDOT and a biologist from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. The
wetland site was originally believed to be outside of the project
right of way limits and is not mentioned in the Environmental
Assessment or the Natural Resources Technical Report for the project.
The site is estimated to be between 1.5 and 2.0 acres in size and is
associated with an unnamed tributary to Richland Creek that feeds the
small pond just south of SR 1667. It has a N. C. Division of
Environmental Management wetland rating of 72 (out of a possible
100).
5
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) classification of this
site is Palustrine Forested Broad-leaved Deciduous Seasonally Flooded
(PF01C). The relatively open canopy is dominated by sweetgum
(Liquidamber styraciflua), red maple Acer rubrum and loblolly pine
Pinus taeda . Red maple and sweetgum also occur as understory
species. Shrubs are sparse to non-existent with privet (Ligustrum
sp.) occurring rarely. Giant cane (Arundinaria i antea is the
ominant vegetation in the shrub stratum, forming dense mats in some
areas. Japanese grass (Microstegium sp.), violet Viola sp.), and
buttercup (Rannunculus spy are sparse in some areas and common in
others.
It is anticipated that between 0.3 and 0.5 acre of this wetland
may be impacted by the alignment recommended in the Environmental
Assessment. The area of this wetland which is anticipated to be
within the proposed right of way limits is impacted periodically by
livestock grazing. The stream channel runs through this section of
the wetland. The presence of coarse sand and sparse ground cover
suggests that this area periodically experiences heavy flow.
Vegetation in this area is mainly limited to canopy species, Japanese
grass and violet.
Avoiding the wetland by shifting the alignment west of the
alignment recommended in the Environmental Assessment would impact a
greater amount of higher quality jurisdictional wetland within the
same system. Shifting the alignment west of the entire wetland
system would require filling the pond.
Shifting the proposed roadway east of the alignment recommended
in the Environmental Assessment to avoid the wetland will likely
cause the relocation of at least one additional family on Forest View
Drive. The NCDOT believes that impacts on the wetland can be reduced
by shifting the recommended alignment slightly to the east without
relocating the residence on Forest View Drive. A field delineation
of the wetland will be conducted after functional roadway design
plans in this area are completed.
B. N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
Comment:
"...we are concerned that no control of access is proposed along
this project. Any improvements to traffic flow that this project
provides will likely deteriorate as the surrounding land develops."
Response:
Since the Environmental Assessment for the project was approved,
the type of access control to be provided along the Edwards Mill Road
extension has been changed to partial access control. Access in the
interchange area will be fully controlled. In Section A of the
project, each property owner will have one access to the Edwards Mill
Road extension. In Section B of the project, access will only be
allowed at existing and proposed major street crossings.
Comment:
C.
....we do ask that NCDOT use Best Management Practices and
further minimize wetland impacts where possible."
Response:
As recommended on page 31 of the Environmental Assessment for
the project, Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be implemented
during the planning, design, and construction phases of the project
to reduce potential for adverse water quality impacts. All
practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands including alignment
selection and minor alignment shifts have been taken.
N. C. Department of Environment Health and Natural Resources -
Division of Environmental Management
Comment:
"The document states that a 54-foot median will be utilized.
Why is a 54-foot median proposed instead of the standard 46-foot
median? What would be the wetland impacts if the median was reduced
to 46 feet?"
Response:
As a result of the rapid growth and changeable nature of the
northwest Raleigh metropolitan area, the NCDOT is preparing for the
possibility of adding additional lanes to Section B of the project if
traffic volumes warrant it in the future. The proposed 54-foot
median allows the NCDOT to add two 12-foot travel lanes to the
facility within the median and still maintain a 30-foot median
(sufficient for providing dual left turns at intersections) between
the travelways.
Since a 54-foot median is proposed only in Section B of the
proposed project, the 0.1 acre of wetland that occurs in Section A of
the proposed project is unaffected by reducing the width of the
median to 46 feet. The wetland impacts in Section B of the project
located just east of the small pond south of Forest View Drive
(SR 1667) will be avoided or minimized by appropriate alignment
shifts.
Comment:
"Wetlands are present in Section A, but DOT did not study an
avoidance alternative in this section. Is there an avoidance
alternative that can be studied?"
Response:
D.
Since the Environmental Assessment for the project was approved,
Section A of the project has been reevaluated for the presence of
jurisdictional wetlands by an NCDOT biologist and a representative of
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. The area originally identified as
a jurisdictional wetland in Section A of the proposed project
(associated with the outflow of a small pond located just west of the
proposed roadway centerline) does not qualify as a wetland under the
1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual". However,
another jurisdictional wetland site was identified just south of the
proposed crossing at Richland Creek and west of the proposed roadway
centerline.
americana green ash %Fraxinus enns lvanica river birch ula
ni ra ye low poplar irler endron ti i era red maple ru rum sweetgum Li uam st raciflua and swamp chestnut oa
uercus michau?tr The mi canopy contains American holly Ilex
o aca ironwoo caroliniano box elder Acer ne un o
an pawpaw Asi. Shrubs -include the spice bush Lin era
benzoin etterbus Leucothoe poison ivy (Toxicoden ron
ra icans and Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica).
The wetland is associated with Richland Creek and has a N. C.
Division of Environmental Management Wetland Rating of 65 (out of a
possible 100). The canopy is dominated by American elm Ulmus
There is no practicable alternative to filling the approximate
0.3 acre of jurisdictional wetland. If the alignment was shifted
east of the recommended alignment to avoid the wetland area,
additional relocation of Richland Creek will occur. As well, any
wetlands along the fringes of Richland Creek will be filled.
Shifting the roadway to the west would impact a similar amount of
jurisdictional wetland within the same system.
N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources -
Division of Forest Resources
Comment:
"The Right of
merchantable trees
permit construction
Response:
Way Contractor should make efforts to salvage
for pulpwood and sawtimber that have to be cut to
activities".
The NCDOT's general contract for right of way clearing provides
the opportunity for contractors to market saleable trees.
Comment:
"Trees outside of construction limits should be protected."
8
Response:
The only trees outside of the construction limits that will be
cut are those within the highway right of way that must be removed
for safety clearing.
E. N. C. Department of Environment Health and Natural Resources -
Raleigh Regional Office
Comment:
"Any open burning associated with the subject proposal must be
in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0520."
Response:
As stated on page 51 of the Environmental Assessment for the
project, any burning will be accomplished in accordance with
applicable local laws, ordinances, or regulations of the North
Carolina State Implementation Plan for air quality in compliance with
15A NCAC 2D.0520.
Comment:
Demolition or renovations of structures containing asbestos
material must be in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0525, which requires
notification and removal prior to demolition.
Response:
Structures within the proposed project construction limits with
the potential to contain asbestos material will be identified prior
to demolition. The Asbestos Control Group will be notified
concerning asbestos material and demolition of structures will be
performed in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0525.
F. N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources -
Division of Land Resources
Comment:
"This project will impact 2 geodetic survey markers. The N. C.
Geodetic Survey should be contacted prior to construction..."
Response:
As stated on page 5 of the Environmental Assessment for the
project, the North Carolina Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior
to construction regarding the relocation of survey markers.
Comment:
"The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this
project should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under
the erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways
from the North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission."
Response:
The erosion and sedimentation control plan for this project will
be prepared under the erosion control program delegation from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
G. N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources -
Public Water Supply Section
Comment:
"(the Public Transportation Alternative) section of the document
offers several alternatives to increased road construction
accommodating single occupancy vehicles (SOV's). It also states that
these alternatives will not meet the total traffic carrying needs of
the proposed project in the studied corridor. A more detailed
analysis must be provided documenting why public transportation and
other transportation alternatives will not meet the transportation
needs."
Response:
Beginning on page 48 of the Environmental Assessment for the
project, the Transportation Management section provides a detailed
explanation of why public and other transportation alternatives will
not meet the total transportation needs of the area. The analysis
provided in this section of the document includes travel demand
reduction strategies, operational management strategies, and
alternative transportation modes in the project area. It was
determined that these strategies do not eliminate the need for
additional SOV capacity in the Edwards Mill Road corridor.
VI. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING PUBLIC HEARING
Following completion of the Environmental Assessment, an open house
public hearing was held on January 17, 1995 in the L. R. Harrill Youth
Center at the N. C. State Fairgrounds. The hearing was well attended by
citizens, City of Raleigh officials, and representatives of the NCDOT.
Public Hearing attendants were given an opportunity to submit verbal and
written comments. The hearing received both local television and
newspaper coverage. See Appendix B for newspaper coverage of the project.
The following comments represent those most frequently stated by
attendants of the public hearing:
10
Comment:
"The Loblolly Trail currently crosses beneath Wade Avenue
through a box culvert. That crossing was an attempt to retrofit a
greenway through a box culvert already in place. The current culvert
crossing is unsatisfactory to most users based on feedback we have
received ...The culvert was not designed for pedestrian use and
remains wet almost all of the time."
Response:
The N. C. Department of Transportation has coordinated efforts
to rebuild a portion of the Loblolly Trail effected by the proposed
extension of Edwards Mill Road with the City of Raleigh as part of
the requirements of Section 4(f) of the 1966 D.O.T. Act. In
compliance with the City's requests, the NCDOT has agreed to:
(1) Provide a 12'x 8' reinforced concrete box culvert to accommodate
the Loblolly Trail underneath the proposed Edwards Mill Road
extension just north of Richland Creek.
(2) Provide electrical conduit for lighting in the proposed
pedestrian culvert.
(3) Rebuild and relocate the Loblolly Trail on the west side of the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension up to the Wade Avenue
culvert crossing. The relocated portion of the trail will be
built to the specifications of the City of Raleigh.
(4) Provide electrical conduit (size to be specified by the City of
Raleigh) in the proposed extended sections of the existing
double barrel 8'x 8' reinforced concrete box culvert underneath
Wade Avenue.
The N. C. Department of Transportation will construct a divider
and a concrete ramp leading into one barrel of the extended culvert
that will carry the Loblolly Trail underneath Wade Avenue. The
divider will keep the barrel accommodating the trail dry during
normal flow periods. The City of Raleigh anticipates lighting the
culvert in the future to create an inviting passage for trail users.
Comment:
"As the state government complex develops between Blue Ridge
Road and the Edwards Mill Road extension, we foresee the need for a
greenway corridor connecting this area to the existing Loblolly
Trail."
Response:
The NCDOT's greenway policy, adopted in January, 1994, calls for
project planning reports to address the existence of locally adopted
greenways segment plans which may affect proposed highway corridors.
11
The policy also states that it is the responsibility of the locality
to notify the NCDOT of adopted greenways plans or changes to previous
plans through its current local transportation plan, as well as its
implementation programs.
Where local greenways plans have not been formally adopted or
certain portions of the greenways plans have not been adopted, the
NCDOT may note this greenway planning activity but is not required to
make provisions for a greenway in these areas.
Extensive checks were conducted by the NCDOT with City of
Raleigh Parks and Recreation officials to determine whether greenways
either exist or are proposed north of Wade Avenue along Armory
Tributary to Richland Creek. No existing or proposed greenways along
Armory Tributary to Richland Creek have been located. Documents
searched include the Capital Area Greenwa s Master Plan The Raleigh
Comprehensive Plan, the Raleigh Capital Area Metropolitan Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan the Capita Area Greenway Trail System Maps, and the
Blue Ridge Road Area Master Plan.
It is the policy of the NCDOT to consider funding for greenway
crossings, and other appropriate greenway elements only if the
locality guarantees the construction of and connection with other
greenway segments. Since the aforementioned future greenway has not
been included in the City of Raleigh's capital improvements program,
it is the position of the NCDOT that a greenway crossing north of
Wade Avenue is not necessary for this project.
Comment:
"(we support) the Edwards Mill Road extension as an alternative
to the proposed Duraleigh Road Connector alignments 1, 2, 3, or 4
that would have gone through the Richland Creek Corridor between
Umstead State Park and Schenck Forest. As such, we want the Edwards
Mill Road extension to be constructed to best meet the needs of users
for easy access and efficient flow of traffic ...We truly believe that
the currently proposed design for the Edwards Mill Road extension can
be enhanced to carry future traffic envisioned by NCDOT for the
proposed Duraleigh Road Connector..."
Response:
The proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road and the Duraleigh
Road Connector are both on the Greater Raleigh Urban Area
Thoroughfare Plan mutually adopted by the State of North Carolina and
the City of Raleigh in 1991 and updated yearly. Both projects are
also included in the 1995-2001 North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
While both projects will provide some relief to the congested Blue
Ridge Road corridor, each project will perform separate, unique
functions. The proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road will provide
land access to the area surrounded by I-40, Wade Avenue, and I-440
(Raleigh Beltline) while the Duraleigh Road Connector will serve as a
bypass of this area. Some of the facilities that will eventually be
12
served by the Edwards Mill Road extension include a football stadium,
a multi-use arena, and a large state government office complex. The
NCDOT maintains that the independent functions that will be served by
the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension and the proposed Duraleigh
Road Connector will be compromised if the two functions are combined
along one route.
Comment:
"There should be a grade separation between Edwards Mill Road
extension and Reedy Creek Park Road (SR 1775) with no access at Reedy
Creek Park Road from southbound Edwards Mill Road extension or to
northbound Edwards Mill Road extension traffic."
Response:
It is anticipated that Reedy Creek Park Road will provide access
to the proposed state government office complex in the future. Since
access to the Edwards Mill Road extension will not be provided by
direct driveway connection, the NCDOT recommends providing access to
the Edwards Mill Road extension at the proposed at-grade intersection
with Reedy Creek Park Road.
Comment:
"(the NCDOT should) study the complete thoroughfare plan which
includes Edwards Mill Road extension to NC 54 before construction of
any section of Edwards Mill Road extension... The proper vision for
Edwards Mill Road extension needs to be consistent with road
designation and traffic needs - this includes an extension to Highway
54. "
Response:
The proposed project calls for the extension of Edwards Mill
Road from Duraleigh Road to Trinity Road on new location. The
project terminals encompasses the limits of proposed developments
north of Trinity Road to the existing shopping and professional area
at Duraleigh Road. The Edwards Mill Road extension will eventually
serve Carter-Finley stadium, the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex multi-use arena, a state government office
complex, and a proposed high school. Development north of Trinity
Road is anticipated to occur prior to development south of Trinity
Road. Since a specific development plan does not exist for the area
south of Trinity Road, the logical southern project terminal for the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension is at Trinity Road. There are
no known areas of environmental concern south of Trinity Road that
will limit the alternatives that can be studied for extending Edwards
Mill Road south to Hillsborough Street (SR 3007) in the future as
indicated on the Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan. The
proposed north project terminal at Duraleigh Road will connect the
existing portion of Edwards Mill Road with the new location portion
and connect US 70 with Wade Avenue.
13
As proposed, the project will serve existing and impending
development between Trinity Road and Duraleigh Road. Although it is
anticipated the proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road will provide
some relief to the congested Blue Ridge Road corridor, it is not
meant to serve as a bypass of the area. Other routes that are
included on the thoroughfare plan are intended to bypass the area
that will be accessed from the proposed project.
Comment:
"Improve the interchange at Wade Avenue and Edwards Mill Road
extension such that traffic movement between Wade Avenue and Edwards
Mill Road are facilitated, including the high traffic burden times
before and after events at the Sports and Entertainment Center
complex."
Response:
The interchange recommended in the Environmental Assessment for
the project was designed to accommodate year 2018 projected traffic
at a level of service C. As explained on page 7 of the Environmental
Assessment, level of service C is characterized by stable operation
with drivers occasionally having to wait through more than one red
indication. Because of the changeable nature of the northwest
Raleigh area, the interchange has been designed so that its capacity
can be expanded with minimal additional construction on Wade Avenue
if traffic volumes warrant it in the future.
Comment:
"Mass transit alternatives should ...be seriously considered for
future planning options."
Response:
See response to similar comment from NCDEHNR - Public Water
Supply Section on page 7 of this document.
Comment:
"Are there any plans to widen Trinity Road (SR 1656) west from
Gate D at Carter-Finley Stadium so as not to create a serious traffic
jam?"
Response:
The NCDOT plans to widen Trinity Road on the north side from
Gate D at Carter Finley Stadium to its intersection with the Edwards
Mill Road extension. Traffic that has, in the past, been routed west
on Trinity Road will have the option of accessing Wade Avenue from
the Edwards Mill Road extension. From Wade Avenue, drivers can
choose to continue west on I-40 or to go south on I-440. In this
manner, the traffic burden on Trinity Road between the proposed
intersection with the Edwards Mill Road extension and NC 54 can be
reduced during event times.
14
Comment:
"(Section B) of the Edwards Mill Road extension should be built
before (Section A). We need to alleviate traffic on Blue Ridge Road
before we provide access to a sports complex."
Response:
The Division of Highways does not have enough funds allocated to
construct both sections of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension
simultaneously. Construction of the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex arena site is currently underway. Since
completion of the arena is imminent, the Division of Highways
recommends constructing Section A of the proposed Edwards Mill Road
extension, along with an interchange at Wade Avenue, before
constructing Section B of the project. Construction of the proposed
state government office complex to be located in Section B of the
corridor will not begin until well after development south of Wade
Avenue has occurred.
Comment:
"Why are there no bike lanes (recommended) on Section A (of the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension)?"
Response:
Since curb and gutter is not recommended along Section A of the
project, 4-foot paved shoulders are recommended in lieu of widened
travel lanes that will accommodate bicyclists. See Figure 2A for a
sketch of the recommended cross section in Section A.
Comment:
"Please provide a median cross over at the intersection of
Forest View Drive and the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension."
Response:
As design studies progress, the intersection of Forest View
Drive and the Edwards Mill Road extension will be considered for a
median cut.
VII. REVISIONS AND ADDITIONS TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. Stream Rechannelization
Since completion of the Environmental Assessment for the proposed
project, further design work has been completed for Section A of the
extension. The length of proposed rechannelization in Richland Creek is
estimated to be approximately 325 feet. The amount of stream
rechannel ization required in Armory Tributary to Richland Creek is
estimated to be approximately 800 feet.
15
B. Access Control
Since the Environmental Assessment for the project was approved, the
type of access control to be provided along the Edwards Mill Road
extension has been changed to partial access control. Access in the
interchange area will be fully controlled. In Section A of the project,
each property owner will have one access to the Edwards Mill Road
extension. In Section B of the project, access to the proposed extension
will only be allowed at existing and proposed major street crossings.
C. Thoroughfare Plan and Route Function
Section II. C. of the Environmental Assessment for the project has
been revised as follows:
The proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road from Trinity Road
(SR 1656) to Duraleigh Road (SR 1664) is in conformance with the Greater
Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan (mutually adopted in 1991). See
Figure 3 for a the portion of the Thoroughfare Plan in the project area.
The Edwards Mill Road extension will provide access to the area surrounded
by I-40, Wade Avenue, and I-440 (Raleigh Beltline). Some of the
facilities that will eventually be served by the Edwards Mill Road
extension within the project terminals include a football stadium, a
multi-use arena, and a large state government office complex. A future
improvement included on the thoroughfare plan is the further extension of
Edwards Mill Road on new location south of Trinity Road to Hillsborough
Street (SR 3007). The 1995-2001 NCDOT Trans ortation II rovement Program
calls for widening the existing section o Edwards Mill Road rt-h of
Duraleigh Road.
As discussed above, the project will provide access to land in the
area. Access will be allowed at major street crossings. The proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension is anticipated to function as an urban minor
arterial according to the Functional Classification Plan. Based on the
function of the proposed extension, it has been determined that the
project is not a major metropolitan Transportation Investment as defined
in 23 CFR 450.318.
Although it is anticipated the proposed extension of Edwards Mill
Road will provide some relief to the congested Blue Ridge Road corridor,
it is not meant to serve as a bypass of this area. Other routes that are
included on the thoroughfare plan are intended to bypass the area that
will be accessed from the proposed project.
D. Project Terminals
Since the primary function of the proposed Edwards Mill Road
extension is to provide access to existing and proposed development in the
area, the south project terminal at Trinity Road and the north project
terminal at Duraleigh Road were chosen in concert with local development
initiatives. The project terminals encompass the limits of proposed
development north of Trinity Road to the existing shopping and
professional area at Duraleigh Road. The Edwards Mill Road extension will
eventually serve Carter-Finley stadium, the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex multi-use arena, a state government office complex,
16
and a proposed high school. Development north of Trinity Road is
anticipated to occur prior to development south of Trinity Road. Since a
specific development plan does not exist for the area south of Trinity
Road, the logical southern project terminal for the proposed Edwards Mill
Road extension is at Trinity Road. There are no known areas of
environmental concern south of Trinity Road that will limit the
alternatives that can be studied for extending Edwards Mill Road south to
Hillsborough Street (SR 3007) in the future as indicated on the Greater
Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan. The proposed north project terminal
at Duraleigh Road will connect the existing portion of Edwards Mill Road
with the new location portion and connect US 70 with Wade Avenue.
As proposed, the project will serve existing and impending
development between Trinity Road and Duraleigh Road. Although it is
anticipated the proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road will provide some
relief to the congested Blue Ridge Road corridor, it is not meant to serve
as a bypass of the area. Other routes that are included on the
thoroughfare plan are intended to bypass the area that will be accessed
from the proposed project.
E. Paved Shoulders
The Environmental Assessment for the project indicated that 10-foot
shoulders would be provided in Section A of the project between Trinity
Road (SR 1656) and Wade Avenue (SR 1728). Since the EA was approved, the
recommendation to provide 10-foot paved shoulders in Section A has been
changed to 4-foot paved shoulders. The proposed 4-foot paved shoulders
are adequate to accommodate bicyclists.
F. Greenways
Section I. B. 11. of the Environmental Assessment for the project
described the proposed project as having no adverse impact to the Reedy
Creek Greenway. Under the alignment recommended in the Environmental
Assessment, no impacts to the Reedy Creek Greenway are anticipated. Both
of the other studied alignment alternatives in Section B of the project
would likely impact the Reedy Creek Greenway. See Figure 4 for location
of greenway.
G. Public Transportation Alternative
Section III. B. of the Environmental Assessment for the project
provides a discussion of existing and proposed public transportation
alternatives, but does not evaluate them for the proposed project. It
should be noted that the Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan
(mutually adopted by the City of Raleigh and the State of North Carolina)
includes both highway improvements and transit service.
The City of Raleigh, in cooperation with the Triangle Transit
Authority, provides alternative modes of transportation to commuters which
are designed to reduce vehicular trips in the city. An ultimate goal of
4% reduction in internal auto trips has been targeted by the City of
Raleigh. The State of North Carolina and the City of Raleigh have
considered the potential benefits of public transportation within the
Edwards Mill Road corridor and both agree that additional single occupancy
17
vehicle (SOV) capacity is warranted. The Blue Ridge Road corridor is
already experiencing peak hour congestion, and the additional SOV's that
w 11 be attracted to facilities such as the North Carolina Sports and
En'Lertainment Complex arena, Carter-Finley Stadium, the North Carolina
State Fairgrounds, and the proposed state government office complex will
exceed the capacity provided by Blue Ridge Road.
H. Evaluation of Construction Alternatives
Section IV. A. 2. of the Environmental Assessment evaluates three
alignment alternatives for Section B of the project between Wade Avenue
and Duraleigh Road. It states that alignments 2 and 3 will require
filling a pond located south of Forest View Drive (SR 1667). While it may
appear that the centerlines for alignments 1 and 2 in Section B avoid
impacting the pond, construction fill in this area will likely cause
partial or total fill of the pond.
I. Relocation Impacts
Section V. A. 3. of the Environmental Assessment states that the Last
Resort Housing program will likely not be necessary along the project,
since there appear to be adequate opportunities for relocation within the
area. This statement does not rule out the possibility for the Last Resort
Housing program to be implemented, if comparable replacement housing is
not available within the displacee's financial means.
J. Floodplain Involvement
The most current project plans indicate proposed construction
activities in Richland Creek and Armory Tributary to Richland Creek will
require modifications to the established 100-year floodplain and floodway.
The proposed modifications will be within state-owned right of way where
no businesses or residences are located. No difficulties in obtaining
approval are anticipated. A conditional letter of floodplain map revision
will be provided to the City of Raleigh and Wake County by the North
Carolina Department of Transportation. The City of Raleigh will, in turn,
submit the conditional letter of floodplain map revision to the Federal
Emergency Management Administration.
K. Hazardous Waste
Since the potential for future liability with regards to purchasing
or owning contaminated right of way was identified in the Environmental
Assessment, additional analysis of the groundwater flow conditions in the
vicinity of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension and the North
Carolina State University superfund site has been performed. Given the
distance from the superfund site to the proposed project, the analysis
indicates the time required for contaminants to reach the project drainage
system is 190 years.
No changes to either the proposed project alignment or the
construction schedule are recommended.
18
L. Air Quality
Section V. C. 11 of the Environmental Assessment for the proposed
project has been updated. The third paragraph on page 47 of the EA is
revised as follows:
The project is located in Wake County, which is within the
Raleigh-Durham nonattainment area for ozone (03) and carbon monoxide (CO)
as defined by the EPA. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA)
designated this area as a "moderate" nonattainment area for 03 and CO.
However, due to improved monitoring data,this area was redesignated as
"maintenance" for 03 on June 17, 1994. Section 176(c) of the CAAA
requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to the
intent of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). The current
SIP does not contain any transportation control measures for Wake County.
The Capital Area Transportation Plan (TP) and the 1995 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) have been determined to conform to the intent of
the SIP. The MPO approval dates for the TP and the TIP are May, 1992 and
October 24, 1994, respectively. The USDOT approval date of the TIP is
February 24, 1995. The current conformity determination is consistent
with the final conformity rule found in 40 CFR Part 51. There has been no
significant change in the project's design concept or scope, as used in
the conformity analyses.
M. Wetland Findings
Executive Order 11990 requires appropriate documentation to show that
there is no practicable alternative to proposed construction and that the
proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to
wetlands. Sections A and B of the proposed project will impact an
approximate total 0.8 acre of jurisdictional wetland. No practicable
alternative to the wetland taking exists because:
1. The no-build alternative would not allow adequate access to the
area that is the proposed location of the North Carolina Sports
and Entertainment Complex and a large state government office
complex.
2. The public transportation alternative would not accommodate the
need for additional SOV access to existing and proposed
facilities.
3. Shifting the proposed alignment to avoid wetland sites in
Sections A and B would result in greater impacts to wetlands,
more stream relocation along Richland Creek, or a greater number
of residential relocatees.
NCDOT is incorporating with this project all practicable measures to
minimize harm to wetlands including:
1. The application of Best Management Practices in the construction
of this project to insure that the amount of impacted wetland
will be minimized.
19
2. A slight shift of the recommended alignment in Section B to
minimize adverse impacts to the wetland identified south of
Forest View Drive without causing the relocation of additional
families.
Based on the above considerations, it is determined that there is no
practicable alternative to the proposed construction in wetlands and that
the proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to
wetlands which may result from such use.
N. Capacity Analysis
The following addition has been made to the Section II. B. of the
Environmental Assessment for the project:
Traffic projections were performed along Blue Ridge Road and
Duraleigh Road for the "no-build" alternative as well as the Edwards
Mill Road extension construction alternative for the years 2001 and
2018. According to NCDOT's projections, the amount of traffic on
Ebenezer Church Road (SR 1649) will not be affected by constructing
the proposed project.
VIII. FINAL SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
A. Description of Proposed Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of
Highways, proposes to extend SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Road) on new location
between SR 1656 (Trinity Road) and SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road). For funding
purposes, the project is divided into two sections. Under Section A, it
is recommended the proposed multilane facility consist of a five-lane
shoulder section with a reversible lanesystem from Trinity Road to
SR 1728 (Wade Avenue), a distance of 0.6 mile. An interchange is
recommended where the proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road crosses Wade
Avenue as part of Section A. Under Section B, a four-lane median divided
section is recommended from Wade Avenue to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), a
distance of 1.4 miles.
Specific details of the proposed action are contained within the
Environmental Assessment and in Section I. of this document.
B. Description of Section 4(f) Resource
The Capital Area Greenway is a system of public recreational trails
which allow activities such as walking, jogging, biking, hiking, fishing,
picnicking, and other outdoor activities. The trails connect several of
Raleigh's parks and compliment recreational activities at the parks.
Walnut and Crabtree creeks, their tributaries, and the Neuse River are
among the major ecological features located on the Capital Area Greenway.
The City of Raleigh's greenway system has brought national
recognition to the city. The Capital Area Greenway system has emerged as
a shaping force in both city recreation policy and zoning administration
policy and law. Raleigh's greenways shape its urban form and improve the
quality of life both for residents and visitors to the city.
20
The Capital Area Greenway became reality in March, 1974 after the
City of Raleigh became concerned about rapid growth and urbanization. The
city responded with a greenway master plan which permitted urban
development while retaining Raleigh's characteristic natural beauty. The
idea has developed into a system of trails 34 miles long that encompasses
over 1200 acres. The system is continually growing as a result of private
donations and city procurement.
There are currently 22 trails on the Capital Area Greenway system.
The Loblolly Trail is located in west Raleigh and is the longest trail (6
miles) on the greenway system. The Loblolly Trail begins near
Carter-Finley Stadium on Trinity Road (SR 1656) and continues northwest to
Ebenezer Church Road (SR 1649). It is the Loblolly Trail portion of the
Capital Area Greenway system, which will be crossed by the proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension, that is the subject of the proposed project's
Section 4(f) involvement.
Section 4(f) of the 1966 D.O.T. Act protects the use and function of
publicly owned parks, recreation areas, wildlife/waterfowl refuges, and
historic properties. A transportation plan can only use land from a
Section 4(f) resource when there are no other feasible or prudent
alternatives, and when the planning minimizes all possible harm to the
resource. All possible planning to minimize harm is determined through
consultation with the official of the agency owning or administering the
land.
C. Impacts to Section 4(f) Property
Construction activities for the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Arena have obliterated the Loblolly Trail east of the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension and south of Wade Avenue. The
section of the Loblolly Trail impacted by arena construction will be
relocated on arena property east of its present alignment. In addition,
N. C. State University will provide an area for parking just north of
Trinity Road at the entrance to the Loblolly Trail.
The proposed right of way for the Edwards Mill Road extension is
adjacent to the limits of the North Carolina Sports and Entertainment
arena property. As a result, the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension and
interchange with Wade Avenue is anticipated to cross the existing portion
of the Loblolly Trail approximately 0.1 mile south of Wade Avenue near the
proposed interchange. The current trail alignment crosses under Wade
Avenue through a double barrel 8' x 8' reinforced concrete box culvert,
which also carries Richland Creek. It then traverses northwest towards
SR 1775 (Reedy Creek Park Road). North of the interchange, the Loblolly
Trail will be outside of the project impact area. See Figure 4 for the
current alignment of the Loblolly Trail in the project area.
21
D. Avoidance Alternatives
1. Realignment East of the PrODOsed Alianment
Realigning Section A of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension
east of the recommended alignment was investigated in the preliminary
stage of the project study. Major features in Section A of the
project include the Loblolly Trail, the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex arena site, Carter-Finley Stadium, and the
proposed Cardinal Gibbons High School site.
Projected traffic volumes along the Edwards Mill Road extension
and Wade Avenue emphasized the need to provide an interchange where
the proposed extension intersects Wade Avenue. Interchanges on Wade
Avenue already exist at I-40 west of the proposed extension and at
Blue Ridge Road east of the proposed extension. The proposed
location of the Wade Avenue/Edwards Mill Road interchange was chosen
considering the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) urban interchange design standards,
which suggest a minimum spacing of approximately 1.0 mile between
interchanges in urban areas. Avoiding the Loblolly Trail by moving
the interchange to the east would compromise the AASHTO suggested
interchange spacing design standards. In addition, relocating the
interchange to the east to avoid impacts to the Loblolly trail cannot
be achieved without severely impacting the proposed sports arena that
the road is intended to serve and encroaching on a superfund
hazardous waste site located south of Wade Avenue near the proposed
arena (See Section V. C. 8. of the Environmental Assessment for
information on the superfund site). Since the existing Loblolly
Trail alignment is within the proposed interchange area, impacts to
the trail cannot be avoided by shifting the remainder of the proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension alignment to the east.
2. Realignment West of the Proposed Alignment
Realigning Section A of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension
west of the recommended alignment was also investigated in the
preliminary stage of the project study. Since the Loblolly Trail
parallels Wade Avenue on the north side all the way to its existing
interchange at I-40, relocating the proposed Edwards Mill Road
extension west of the proposed alignment will not avoid impacts to
the trail. In addition, relocating the road further to the west
would render it unserviceable to the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex arena and compromise the function of the
existing I-40 interchange.
3. "Do Nothing" Alternative
The "do nothing" alternative has been considered during the
development of this project. Because there are both advantages and
disadvantages associated with almost any major highway project, it is
important to give consideration to the option of not constructing the
22
project. Some of the advantages of the project include enhanced
access to future development, enhanced traffic carrying capability,
improved mobility for emergency vehicles, and a decreased expenditure
of time and money by motorists.
Some disadvantages of building the project include impacts to
the Loblolly Trail, expenditure of funds, the acquisition of
additional right of way resulting in the displacement of families and
non-profit structures, the taking of wetland and forest resources,
and an increase in noise.
Failure to build the road would preclude the development of the
Sports and Entertainment Complex and land north of Wade Avenue and do
nothing to alleviate congestion on Blue Ridge Road and Duraleigh Road
between existing Edwards Mill Road and Wade Avenue. For these
combined reasons, the "do nothing" alternative is not recommended.
E. Measures to Minimize Harm
Three alternatives to minimize harm to the Loblolly Trail were
discussed with the City of Raleigh including providing a pedestrian
culvert where the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension crosses the
existing trail alignment approximately 0.1 mile south of Wade Avenue,
providing a pedestrian culvert approximately 0.2 mile south of the
proposed Edwards Mill Road/Wade Avenue interchange and rebuilding the
trail west of the extension, and providing trail parking north of the
proposed interchange.
Shortening the trail and providing parking north of the proposed
interchange was eliminated as an alternative to minimize trail impacts
after N. C. State University's plans to provide trail parking north of
Trinity Road on arena property were revealed. Since N. C. State
University is planning to mitigate impacts of arena construction on the
Loblolly Trail by relocating the trail on arena property east of its
present alignment and providing parking for trail users, providing
additional parking north of the interchange was ruled out as a method of
minimizing impacts to the trai,l.
Providing a pedestrian culvert to cross underneath the proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension was explored as a method of minimizing impacts
to the trail. Two locations for the culvert were discussed with City of
Raleigh officials: (1) culvert on existing trail location approximately
0.1 mile south of Wade Avenue, (2) culvert located approximately 0.2 mile
south of Wade Avenue. Since the recommended extension is anticipated to
be in a cut section where it crosses the existing Loblolly Trail
alignment, trail users would be forced to traverse the steep cut slopes if
a pedestrian culvert were provided along the existing trail alignment.
The City of Raleigh stated a preference for a pedestrian culvert located
approximately 0.2 mile south of the proposed interchange near Richland
Creek. The proposed Edwards Mill Road extension is anticipated to be on a
fill section in this location.
23
Since the City of Raleigh prefers a pedestrian culvert located
approximately 0.2 mile south of the interchange to minimize impacts to the
trail, the NCDOT recommends providing a culvert in that location and
rebuilding and relocating the trail west of the proposed extension to the
Wade Avenue culvert crossing.
Mitiqation Measures
Several features will be incorporated into the design of the project
to help minimize the impact and mitigate the effect of the proposed
project on the Loblolly Trail. These commitments are as follows:
(1) The NCDOT will provide a 12' X 8' reinforced concrete box
culvert to accommodate the Loblolly Trail underneath the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension approximately 0.2 mile
south of the proposed interchange at Wade Avenue.
(2) The NCDOT will provide electrical conduit (size to be specified
by the City of Raleigh) in the proposed culvert for lighting.
(3) The NCDOT will rebuild and relocate the Loblolly Trail on the
west side of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension up to the
Wade Avenue culvert crossing. The cleared width of the trail
will be 8 feet and the footpath width within the cleared trail
will be 6 feet. The 8-foot cleared trail width will consist of
4 inches of ABC over compacted subgrade. The 6-foot path width
will consist of 2 inches of bark chips.
(4) The NCDOT will provide electrical conduit (size to be specified
by the City of Raleigh) in proposed extended sections of the
existing double barrel 8' X 8' reinforced concrete box culvert
underneath Wade Avenue. Appropriate measures will be taken to
dry one of the barrels to accommodate trail users.
G. Coordination
The project has been coordinated with the City of Raleigh through
early project scoping meetings and subsequent meetings to discuss
potential impacts to the Loblolly Trail. The City of Raleigh has
concurred with measures proposed by the NCDOT to mitigate adverse impacts
to the Loblolly Trail portion of the Capital Area Greenway. Corres-
pondence from the City of Raleigh is included on pages A-12 and A-13 in
Appendix A.
H. Department of Interior Coordination
A copy of the Environmental Assessment and Draft Section 4(f)
Evaluation was provided to the U. S. Department of the Interior (USDOI).
The USDOI's response to their review of that document is included in the
Appendix. The USDOI concurred that there are no feasible and prudent
alternatives to avoid Section 4(f) involvement with the Capital Area
Greenway. They also concurred that all means to minimize harm have been
considered. See page A-14 in Appendix A for USDOI's comments on the
Section 4(f) resource.
24
I. Conclusion
Based on the above consideration, there is no feasible and prudent
alternative to the use of the Capital Area Greenway. The proposed project
includes all possible planning to minimize harm to this greenway.
IX. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the proposed project documented in the
Environmental Assessment and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation, and upon
comments received from federal, state, and local agencies and the public,
it is the finding of the North Carolina Department of Transportation that
this project will not have a significant adverse impact upon the human or
natural environment. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will
not be required.
BFY/plr
FIGURES
• 0 2 1X3 b "-.... o n b„?,,;?;;,.•• Y
S 7-`
?• rI r) f';
00
c•,. ?.
.? ?''' ' h
0.
-o
z
J
1 ¦
1 ¦
1
¦
1 ,
1 ¦
c c
E E
E E
O Q
U U
m a)
a cc
Q m
o o
E
w w C_.
CS)
Cl) co Q
G
z
? P QZ. B
Nbe?n ? ^
?I P
? N
?I N
co
N
o z ?
z N N
W .,
X in
rl
co w?.- w
Q
av?iN
°
A G v .. O
dz?W thpQZ
_
ar.x NOcp 'Co"
QEak. O ?= V 'Cr'),
u067 cc2Lu j ?
LL z A P. CA N p 0
jr
w
r
"yY
i
PAZ q .
?w ?4
W
E-- ?
EO
Lf)
•o
H
U
•i . w

E :y
rn rn Z Z PQ
y?
?

0
En
W
r-1
P4
U)

H
z
F4 J
H

wK
Y
w ?\
a
C
I Y .' ?2
y ct
w .?
$ ` M
r _ c t
Y
1 ? -1 I
\ Y ` nt 2 T
I n C_
s .O " 1
C
tingtlnol IunoV4 AMo11
\ HOPE PD' ' FO
EVI
4 ? N
Ny ?
<

3
a
!?
W ICK PO ?O .R J Hilt. ;S.li
--
?
I? O
r
i os
f1. Z a o•4 V
R?
U
y
p
r i 1<y CXEECM
t u
)?vM
r u j t h'I RD QV
t
S[ O
O
T
SA
rI r TARP ,? EP
of
W` O?)B u
?
YAL
a
g ?`?i^ I , RU
? w
R
Od
R'
a
ARNE
' ?
O N >
t
r
?
J.
{L =
? N i n.
P ? ? .•'? nA ?H v
5i S yo
E KS ? IIIW It
Y
fD?IW M
h
?3EISSY7 > N S v• U t Y -
' ?
a ? od r
_ WoDO otl MI
Od ... `LE" 6 E O i 1
i

E o (I?? ??
O l_.I
XIW DY)7
1
u /
0
SI fd? i f D TR.? Z z d ;? a. ry
.O
\
? ¢
1M y
? z
O

? ? pd
o
d
r
w
l i
? Z ._ ¦ z d .- a S
y °
t v
<
` b
d d ? D a
V

....
a
PD.
N
DU AE ? ?
0 O
•
?

Ei ti
W
l
,? IRANVy J
CH ICM i`

Q O
? ??A. P H t V rt 'r'?.Y /y
?
od o Ir.
o
0
V F ?v ORtAP NSjMI
O
tl

•Il H
'v 1H3
JS
f
f
% ; P V
14d1!V'Ilul nou IIIH ROO IIIH ROO Eauld uwglnoS

z z
O O
Fn
z U
W W
x
W ?
Z uj
O o
o? o ?
-J W U
o W
? z C/)
C/) W
o ?
Q O
'S U
o w
W OC
8
Q
W

0
J
N

Q W
cc
Q D
C)
LL
Lo
0
W
d
d

cr
w
MM

r

--
>
- cn w
Z
g N

O

I C/)
w

d
w
w
J
C
U

w
I ? m
Z z V
o Q L

w
w
i

O
Q t
3 L
I
11
Q
o
J
J w
0 U
w
N
Z /
V) ?l

rn
V/ w

i

N t
?
E

O T

O
UJ

c
w lU
z
?

i
? } r
v
m

? w
a
x
w
I
J
?cz
? CM
cz
O ?J L
O
1
J
1
r
z
z
o
? Q
z

uu LL
o z
0 0

10
LLJ

? z

o =
c U
Q
W
z
w
i
I
?lJ
/
SC 1G-40.07
15

I I
I ?
I I
I I
i i tit
I
II I
II I
I I _
I I h t't
I
?
I
t
1
Iv
1
1\
\U
\ v
N
U
N
W
C? .
0
L1..
0
C\j
T
U)
I..
? c
z
Q
L.Li
L 3 4p w
r 2p 26a8 ? - ?' .. -
Pr 17.67.53 + 1 ?/
PT 14 ` a
_ I I
pC1.1 ,?u? I 6 5 `?
I
I I J
o;
7? I lylt
11-55
/ N
? C At Q
I?
----- I I a /" r
I I I ? zb,?
I II. 1
I II? \
' ` •38.47 L
h
L -'' W?
<
0 '?, ' +? Q???;
cr ?, - V
cn l y l E°- W
3 ? IIII ?
?, I I , I
RD.
dS 70 R1 E -
%
II - ?
° ? RA 1G . L
U-2582
PROJECT AVE, 1 `
LIMITS ---W ? -
°s J I l
ABY R p
NC' S4
( s
< 1 EX
? M ERN B? ? k ..- -
LEA
CEDON IA PD • , w}?
LEGFmQ
Q? THOROUGHFARES EXISTING PROPOSED GREATER RALEIGH
FREEWAYS MENNEN ¦ENEM
MAJOR --? URBAN AREA
MINOR ----- ??= THOROUGHFARE
INTERCHANGE tl _ PLAN
NNY RO GRADE SEPARATION
(SR 9)
-
1
Jq 1l 1 PENNY D. - SCALE. V=6000' FIGURE 3
APPENDIX A
to;
?J
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS .'" . ?:?? •r
50
"
P.o. BOX 1890
LrV WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890 REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
January 17, 1995
'Mil 2 C 599
DIVISIGN OF ?`.
`0 HIGHWi-.v1;
Planning Division
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
This is in response to your letter of November 18, 1994, requesting our
comments on the "Federal Environmental Assessment and Draft Section 4(f)
Evaluation for SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road), from SR 1656 (Trinity
Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), Raleigh, Wake County, Federal-Aid Project
Number STP-3009(1), State Project Number 8.2402801, T.I.P. Project Number
U-2582" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199500687).
Our comments involve impacts to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' projects,
flood plains, and other jurisdictional resources, primarily waters and
wetlands. The proposed roadway does not cross any Corps-constructed flood
control or navigation project. Enclosed are our comments on the other issues.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can be of
further assistance, please contact us.
Sincerely,
/Mjzj? 1?
Wilbert V. Paynes
Acting Chief, Planning Division
Enclosure
P,-jc A-1 , fr
January 17, 1995
Page 1 of 1
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, WILMINGTON DISTRICT, COMMENTS ON:
"Federal Environmental Assessment and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation for
SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road), from SR 1656 (Trinity Road) to
SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), Raleigh, Wake County, Federal-Aid Project Number
STP-3009(1), State Project Number 8.2402801, T.I.P. Project Number U-2582"
(Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199500687)
1. FLOOD PLAINS: POC - Bobby L. Willis.-Plan Formulation and Flood Plain
Services Branch, at [phone]
This proposed project is located in the jurisdiction of the city of
Raleigh, which participates in the National Flood Insurance Program. From a
review of the March 1992 Wake County, North Carolina, and Incorporated Areas
Flood Insurance Study Rate Map, it appears that the roadway improvements would
cross Richland Creek and Armory Tributary, both detail study streams with 100-
year flood elevations determined and a floodway defined. A certification will
be required indicating that new and modified structures will not cause any
rise in the 100-year natural water surface elevations. If changes in the
floodway are required, as indicated on page 37 of the Environmental Assessment
(EA), these changes should be coordinated with the city for modification to
the flood insurance map and report. We also suggest coordination with the
city for compliance with their flood plain ordinance.
2. WATERS AND WETLANDS: POC - Amy Ohlberg. Raleigh Field Office, Regulatory
Branch, at [phone]. Extension 26
Review of the project indicates that the proposed work will involve the
discharge of excavated or fill material into waters and/or wetlands located
above the headwaters of Richland Creek and its tributaries. Please note that
our office has already authorized 1.20 acres of jurisdictional impacts to
waters and wetlands in this drainage basin for construction of the project
from Trinity Road to Wade Avenue-and the associated interchange.
Based on the project corridor indicated in the environmental assessment,
this office generally concurs with the use of applicable nationwide permits
for the remaining jurisdictional crossings as suggested in the report. Please
note, however, that a field review of the project indicated the presence of
significant, high quality wetlands immediately east of the pond located south
of Forest View Drive (SR 1667). Based upon our review of the subject document
and field investigations, without benefit of the specific location of the
proposed alternatives, impacts to wetlands can be minimized and/or avoided by
shifting the preferred corridor further to the east or to utilize an alternate
route which bypasses the pond on the western side. This issue can be
addressed more definitively when the corridor is accurately identified in the
field. The applicability of Nationwide Permit Nos. 14 and/or 26 required for
the project will be reviewed when specific construction plans are submitted.
P1ezse contact Ms. Ohlberg if you have any questions related to Department
of the Army permits.
A-2
FM208 t D u
JAN 3 1995 L ,
01-03-95
i PROJECT MANAGEMENT
y
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116 WEST JONES STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENT
MAILED TO FROM
NC DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
WHIT WEBB
PROGRAM DEV. BRANCH
TRANSPORTATION BLDG./INTER-OFF
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1 k-
ENV. ASSESS. - PROPOSED EXTENSION OF SR 3009 (EDWARDS MILL RD*)* ? w
FROM SR 1656 (TRINITY RD.) TO SR 1664 (DURALEIGH RD.) IN RALEIGH
T.I.P• #U-2582
SAI NO 9SE42200339 PROGRAM TITLE - ENV. ASSESS.
THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. AS A RESULT OF THE REVIEW THE FOLLOWING
IS SUBMITTED ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY OUESTIONS• PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone].
AEI
0
C•C• REGION J 'JAN 0 5 1995
ji JAN -3w I Im
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT UNIT
MRS. CHRYS BAGGETT
DIRECTOR
N C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
A-3
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources AT •
Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
49
?71?
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary IDI=HN R
Henry M. Lancaster II, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 95-0339 EA SR 3009 Extension, Edwards Mill Road,
Wake County
DATE: December 22, 1994
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the proposed project.
The attached comments reflect specific concerns of. our
divisions that should be recognized by the applicant. The
applicant is encouraged to work with our commenting divisions
throughout the planning of this project.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
attachments
?\ .\.
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North C-limn 2761 1-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal CCportun; y -; firma"ve Acrion E A-4 ?r ro-o recyc!ec/ 10% post-consumer pc;:er
NI.WkL. HL" ,r HLLS LAKL
1EL:919-528-9839 Dec 21'91 12:03 No.001 F.0
F? North Carolina Wildlife Resources Conu-nission Fi
312 N. Sulisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Office of Policy Development, DEHNR
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project Coordina.
Habitat Conservation Prograc ', ? e
DATE: December 21, 1994
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) Environmental Assessment (EA) for SR 3009
Extension (Edwards Mill Road), from SR 1656
(Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road) in
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina, TIP No.
U-2582, SCH Project No. 95-0339.
Staff biologists of the N. C. Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the subject EA and are
familiar with habitat values in the project area. The
purpose of this review was to assess project impacts to fish
and wildlife resources. Our comments are provided in
accordance with certain provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)) and the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16
U.S.C. 661-667d).
The proposed project involves constructing a multi-lane
facility on new location between SR 1656 and SR 1664,
approximately 2 miles. The recommended cross section
consists of a five-lane shoulder section from the southern
terminus to Wade Avenue and a four-lane median divided
facility from Wade Avenue to Duraleigh Road. Wildlife
habitat losses include approximately 24.5 acres of forested
lands and 0.1 acres of wetlands.
We feel that the EA adequately addresses our concerns
regarding wildlife and fishery resources in-the project
area. However, we are concerned that no control of access
is proposed along this project. Any improvements to traffic
A-5
ivl.WKl. hCr r riLLS LHKi I tL : y19-sz -aura Dec 21 ' u4 12 :03 No .001 P .0-
Memo Page 2 December 21, 1994
flow that this project provides will likely deteriorate as
the surrounding land develops. We support NCDOT in the
decision to provide only one median break in section B
because this may discourage strip development on this
section.
Since NCDOT has chosen alignments which avoid higher
quality wetlands, minimized impacts to the greenways along
the project, and has made a commitment to coordinate stream
channel relocation with the resource agencies, we will at
this time concur with the findings of this EA and anticipate
concurrence with the subsequent Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) for this project. However, we do ask that
NCDOT use Best Management Practices and further minimize
wetland impacts where possible.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EA.
If we can be of any further assistance please call me at
[phone].
CC: Wayne Jones, District 3 Fisheries Biologist
Mike Scruggs, District 3 Wildlife Biologist
David Dell, U.S. Fish and wildlife Service, Raleigh
A-6
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
•
Health and Natural Resources A 4 70
'I'A
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor FE
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary ? H N F=1
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 21, 1994
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dome5?
From: Eric Galam
Subject: EA for SR 306 Extension (Edwards Mill Road)
Wake County
State Project DOT No. 8.2402801, TIP # U-2582
EHNR # 95-0339, DEM # 10794
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Duality Certification for activities which impact waters of the state including wetland.
The subject project may impact 0.69 acres of waters including wetland.
The document states that a 54 foot median will be utilized. Why is a 54 foot median
proposed instead of the standard 46 foot median? What would be the wetland
impacts If the median was reduced to 46 feet?
Wetlands are present in Section A but DOT did not study an avoidance alternative in
this Section. is there an avoidance alternative that can be studied?
DEM has received a 401 Certification application. The project sponsor should note
that DEM cannot issue the 401 Certification until the FONSI or ROD has been issued
by the State Clearinghouse (NCAC 15A:, 01 C .0402).
DOT is reminded that the 401 Certification could be denied unless water quality
concems are satisfied. Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to
Eric Galamb (733-1786) In DEM's Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Monica Swihart
edward.ea
P.O.6ox 29535, Raleigh, Ncrth Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Ecual Opccrtunity Affirmative Acticn E A-7 • 5C% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Forest Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Stanford M. Adams, Director
Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Old US 70 West
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
December 7, 1994
MEMORANDUM
I
0 Ar
n EHNR
5iS
TO: Melba McGee, Policy Development
FROM: Don H. Robbins, Staff Forester Ole
SUBJECT: DOT EA for Raleigh, SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road) on New Location
in Wake County
PROJECT # 95-0339 and TIP # U-2582
DUE DATE: 12-15-94
We have reviewed the above subject DOT document and have the following comments:
1. This project is close to N. C. State University forest, but appears far enough away so as
not to cause any impacts to it.
2. This project will impact a total of 24.5 acres of other forest land.
3. The ROW contractor should make efforts to salvage merchantable trees for pulpwood and
sawtimber that have to be cut to permit construction activities.
4. Trees outside of construction limits should be protected.
5. The loblolly trail greenway will be impacted and the document addresses this.
6. No further comments at this time.
PC: Derryl Walden, Fred White, Warren Boyette - CO
Albert Coley - Wake County
File
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Fmplover 5f]% reevcled/ 1cr% post-Consumer paper
A-8
Depaltment of
Pro'ect NuMbe Date:
- I
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS 15Z? -/,:57-
After review of this project It has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Questions regarding these peffnits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
All applications. Information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same
Time
Regional Office. Normal Process
(Statutory time
PERMITS
permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment
facilities. sewer system extensions, & "war
systems not discharging into State 3Urf&C@ waters.
NPOES - Permit to discharge into surface water andlor
I peffnil to operate and construct wastewater facilities
discharging into state surface waters.
Vilater Use Permit
Wall Construction Permit
_4?? ge and Fill Permit
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement
facilities andlor Emission Sources as Per 15A NCAC 211
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0520.
Demolition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with 15A
NCAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal
prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMEN
Application go days before begin construction or award of
construction contracts On-site inspection. posl-application
technical conference usual
Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection.
Pre-application conference usual. Additionally. obtain permit to
construct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPOES Reply
time. 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
p*rmil-whichevef is later.
pre.application technical conference usually necessary
Complete application must be received and Permit issued
prior to the installation of a well.
Application COPY must be Served on each adjacent riparian propeny
owner. On-site Inspection. Pire-application conference usual. Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Depariment of
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
NIA
NIA
limit)
30 days
(90 days)
90-120 days
(NiAl,
'01
1
[3 Complex Source Permit required under 15A NCAC 2D.0600.
A Ct 0 7 3: u3t
ad eir 11A NCAC 2DX
pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land d
1, be .vl A e.
Com 'ex Source P rm't ' quit und isturbing activity. An erosion & sedimenlailt
7 -'1 ito PL luired if one 0, More acres tofit)?
Sed in t n . ollu I.. Coril '01 A. of 1 973
The Seltlimmilationn flut.,. n' f -
controll plan will be required If one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality SeCt.) at least 30
b
I a R tio ? must
da s before beoinning activity. A fee of SW lot the first acre and S20 00 for each additional acre or Can must accomoany the plan
0 Or the
,nn,n
1 ill - r
im
The Sedimentation ?ollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance:
Mining Permit
North Carolina Burning Permit
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit .22
iCaunties in coastal N.C. with Organic Soils
oil Refining Facilities
On-site 'nspection usual. Surely bond liled with EHNR. Bond amount
varies with type mine and number Of acres Of Affeclec: land Any area
mined greater than Ong acrc must be permilled. The appropriate bond
must be received be,,Org the O@fmli can be issued.
permit
On-site Inst-ction by N.C. Division Forest Resourcez it
exco'ecis A days
On-st%* irls;*ction by N.D. Division Forest Resourcas required "it more
than 11-,re orres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections
should be requested di least tan days before actell bum is Planned. ..
WA
30 days
INIA)
7 days
115 days)
55 (says
190 dayll)
60 dSYS
(W days)
60 days
(W days)
20 days
(30 davsi
f30 days)
30 days
160 days)
i day
(N;Al
I day
(N'Al
90-120 days
(NtA)
if permit required. Wli4i?-iop W days befold "gin Construction. 30 days
APPlIC111111 Must hire N.C. quailfied engineer to: prepare plans.
inspect cuilsniclion. ceirtil,l, construction is =:or-sing to EHNR &OPfOV'
on Safety P-tmit 00 plans. Njay 41so require permit under nociliquito Control Program. And (60 days)
s 4t,,4 p*rmli from Corps-ol Engineers. An Inspe--tion of site is neces.
zary to veily Hazard C;iassification. A minimum fee of $200.00 must ac-
Company the APPlIC311ine.. An additional processing fee based on a
E:::1oefc@n1--e W in@ total I
ft lie Continued on reveise
A-9
I
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Division of Land Resources
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS
W1111am W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
Project Number: County: ` Lam. = I Z
ECEVIEn E c 02 1994 ?I
BY
a ner
Director
Project Name: G'S 3 ?j
Geodetic Survey
c/ This project will impact geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
survey should be'contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box 27687,
.Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Geodetic Survey office at [phone].
Reviewer Date
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
• No comment
This projecit will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if more
than one (1) acre will be disturbed.
If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of the erosion and sedimentation control plan.
If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water
Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
increased design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control commission.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Land Quality Section at [phone].
?4 ?Li/" '-, 2 - 1??/C619¢
Reviewer Date
P.O. Box 17687 • R i elgh. N.C. A-10 87 • Telephone [phone]
Pn Equal Oppominuy?.....,.sCveAcdon Employer
Clearinghouse Project No. 95-0339
Wake County
December 9, 1994
B. public Transportation Alternative
This section of the document offers several alternatives to increased road construction accommodating single
occupancy vehicles (SOV). It also states that these: alternatives will not meet the total traffic carrying needs of
the proposed project in the studied corridor. A more detailed analysis must provided documenting why public
and other transportation alternatives will not meet the transportation needs.

Paul B. Clark
Envirotunental Engineer
Water Quality Compliance Branch
Public Water Supply Section
Division of Environmental Health
Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resource
A-11
City Of (Raleigh
5Vorth Caarolina
October 27, 1994
Brian F. Yamamoto
Project Planning Engineer
State of North Carolina
Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27602
Dear Mr. Yamamoto:
Subject: SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road), from SR 1656
(Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), Raleigh, Wake
County, Federal-Aid project No. STP-3009(1), State Project No.
8.2402801, TIP No. U-2582.
The following response is provided to address the issues of
compliance under Section 4(f) of the 1966 D.O.T. Act.
The Loblolly Trail has met the recreational needs of trail users
in west Raleigh for many years. The City of Raleigh and the
State of North Carolina (NCSU) entered into an agreement through
a lease to "provide a pedestrian trail through the scenic,
wooded and natural property of the Grantor, to which trail all
members of the public would have access." The goal of this
trail as stated in the original lease agreement was to create a
pedestrian trail linking West Raleigh with Umstead Park and
provide a desirable recreation facility and a valuable extension
of the Grantees Capital Area Greenway. The Loblolly Trail
continues to be an important part of the greenway opportunities
in Raleigh and Wake County and provides access to a number of
public lands. The Loblolly Trail is also part of a "regional
trail" network that links greenways in Raleigh, Cary, Lake
Crabtree County Park, Umstead State Park, and The Carl Alwin
Schenck Forest together.
The City of Raleigh is pleased to work with the State to
continue the effectiveness of the Loblolly Trail. To insure the
Loblolly Trail functions effectively the following requirements
should be provided for in the implementation of the SR 3009
Extension project:
Provide a 12 foot wide by 8 foot high reinforced
concrete box culvert to accommodate the Loblolly Trail
7FFICES • 2=2 WEST HPRGETT STREET • P0.' A -+ 2 30X 390 • RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602
underneath the proposed Edwards Mill Road Extension
just north of Richland Creek. The elevation of the
bottom of the culvert should be established to provide
a "dry" condition at low creek flows.
2. Provide electrical conduit (size to be specified by
the City of Raleigh) in the proposed pedestrian
culvert.
3. Rebuild and relocate the Loblolly Trail on the west
side of the proposed Edwards Mill Road Extension up to
the Wade Avenue culvert crossing.
4. Provide electrical conduit (size to be specified by
the City of Raleigh) in the proposed extended sections
of the existing double barrel 8' X 8' reinforced
concrete box culvert underneath Wade Avenue.
I understand that these conditions are consistent with previous
discussions between yourself and City staff.
;Sincerely,
Bento , Jr., City Manager
A-13
? E
ER-94/919
Mr. Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1442
Dear Mr. Graf:
FEB 7
1995 22?
G E !
FEB 1 3 1995
DIVISIGN OF
HIGHWAYS
FiVORO
1
This responds to the request for the Department of the Interior's
comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment/Section 4(f)
Evaluation for the SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road, from SR
1656 (Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), Wake County, North
Carolina.
We concur that there are no feasible and prudent alternatives to
avoid the Section 4(f) involvement with the Capital Area Greenway.
We also concur that all means to minimize harm have been
considered.
The Department of the Interior has no objection to Section 4(f)
approval of this project by the Department of Transportation.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments.
Sincerely,
Willie R. Tay r
Director, Office of Environmental
Policy and Compliance
cc: Mr. L. J. Ward, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
.Department.of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North.Carolina 27611-5201
United States Department of the Interior/Q.
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240
A-14
APPENDIX B
NOTICE OF AN OPEN HOUSE PUBLIC HEARING
FOR PROPOSED EXTENSION OF_
EDWARDS MILL ROAD (SR 3009)
FROM DURALEIGH ROAD (SR 1664)
TO TRINITY ROAD (SR 1656)
Project 8.2402801 U-2582 Wake County
a
The North Carolina Department of Transportation will hold
the above open house public hearing on Tuesday, January
17, 1995 between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. in
the L.R. Harrill Youth Center located inside the N.C. State
Fairgrounds (Gate 6) on Youth Center Road. Interested
individuals may attend this hearing at their convenience
between the above stated hours. Division of Highways per-
sonnel will be available to provide information, answer
questions, and take comments regarding this project.
It is' proposed to construct a multi-lane roadway on new
location between Trinity Road and Duraleigh Road. A five-
lane shoulder section is proposed from Trinity Road to
Wade Avenue (1-40). A diamond interchange is proposed
to carry Wade Avenue over the new road. From Wade Ave=
nue to Duraleigh Road,.a four-lane median divided facility
is proposed. Additional right of way and the relocation of
homes and businesses. will be required for this project.
A map setting forth the location and design and a copy of
the Environmental Assessment are available for public
review at Century Center, Roadway Design Unit, 1020
Birch Ridge Drive, Raleigh. A copy of these documents will
be available in the North Carolina Department of Transpor-
tation's District Office located at 4009 District Drive in
Raleigh on January 5, 1995. This office is located off Blue
Ridge Road approximately one-half mile north of the N.C.
State Fairgrounds.
Anyone desiring additional information may write to Mr.
L. L: Hendricks, P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611 or tel-
ephone [phone].
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services for disabled
persons who wish to participate in the hearing. To receive
special services, please call Mr. Hendricks at the above
number to give adequate notice,. prior to the. date of the
hearing.
B-1
TnN*m&i)mnu _ :: GOiI'IMUNITY NEWS 3B
SATURDAY, JANUARY 21, "5
State plans 5-lane road.to fairgrounds area.

The Edwards Mill Road
Extension in West Raleigh Is
designed to relieve traffic
during the State Fair and
around Carter-Finley
Stadium.
BY STEPHEN HOAR
rlkr wem
ltALBGH - A new five-lane drive-
way for Carter-Finley Stadium,
the State Fairgrounds and N.C.
State University's coming enter-
tainment and sports arena could
be ready by the fail of ttta7.
The state plans to award s
contract fhb spring to build a
thoroughfare nearly one mite long
connecting Trinity Road to Wade
Avenue Extension. The new road
will be the first phase of ¦
3.2-miledong link between Ed-
wards MW Road and Trinity Road
that will be called Edwards Mill
Road Extension.
Phase One will help can and
trucks get from the stadium, the
fairgrounds and the arena to
Wade Avenue Extension, a four-
lane limited-access road that
leads westward to Interstate 40
and eastward to the Raleigh Bell-
line. The new road should elimi.
note some of the annual fall
traffic jams when the stadium and
the fairgrounds are being used at
the same time.
The road will have "reversible
lanes" to move traffic rapidly Into
the fairgrounds area before an
event and out of the area after-
ward. Electronic arrows above
the roadway, indicating which
direction traffic should flow, will
be controlled from an observation
point high up in the arena.
The second phase of the protect,
a four-lone parkway from Wade
Avenue Extension to Edwards
MITI Road, is scheduled for con-
struction after the turn or the
century. The parkway, which will
cut through agricultural land
owned by NCSU, irtil have a wide
grassy median and on intersec-
B-2
tion with Reedy,Creek Road.
Nearly TB people turned out for
a public bearing on the $20 million
protect this week. Most wen
interested In the project's second
phase, which will displace two
houses on take Drive off Blue
Ridge Road, a short distance
south of Edwards Mill Road.
Twenty-eight acres of Single*
family lots on both sides of Lake
Drive have been owned by the late
6lacon Harrison and his descen-
dants since I932. The extension
will cut the neighborhood in half,
although a break in the median
and perhaps a stoplight would be
considered by the state.
"Tbey're afire bustin' up a
whole family if they put it through
there," said Carey Watkins. Part
of the Harrison family, at the
hearing. Watkins lives III Costs
but owns a house on Lake Drive.
The transportation department is
studying two alternative routes
that would awing west of Lake
Drive, although a straight road is
preferred by design engineers.
Transportation officials say Ed-
wards Mill Road Extension will
relieve traffic congestion on It
Ridge Road and • new route to
Mile suburban dwellers. The
state plans to improve Edwards
Mill Road and Duraleigh Road
before the second phase of the
extension is built.
,.THE NEFS &OBSERVER
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7,1995
PARK CONSERVATIONISTS STILL OBJECT TO OTHER ROUTE, ,
Umstead
group. will
back road
BY STEPHAr HOAR
$TY Help
PA IISH - The environmental
coalition that ance persuaded
state officials to shelve a toad to
protect Umstead State Part will
publicly endorse the construction
of a major new road about 2 miles
away.
But tonight's planned endorse-
ment before the Raleigh City
Council offers a trade-off: The
coalition will call for lunges in
design and function so that the
Edwards Mill Road extension
could eliminate the need to build
the Duraldgh Road connector the
group fought off to the Ims.
The Umstead Coalition, a group
of 15 environmental and conserve.
tionist organizations, wants fur.
tber duly of the Edwards Kill
extension's interchange with
Wade Avenue near Carter-Finley
Stadium.. .. ,
..We view this as an alternative
to the proposed Duralsigh --
tar" says Jean Spooner, who
heads the coalition. For @ pie,
she says. Wads Avenue's crasiag
with the extension needs a com-
plex and expansive interchange,
not the pimple diamond configure-
tion to the current plans. An
Interchange with several bridges,
she says could beadle mom traf.
fie and prevent badmpa an Wade
Avenue wsaMard twvard low-
state do.
State tr&aspaetatln tenogia
my the Edwarb Mill Resdaxten
Sion, r chnseotiy designed, would
ralleve coagadiao an Slue Ridge someday n a second lint between
and US. fi and ISO + ,
between U.S. and 1.0. would
.
also improve access to Carter-
Finley Stadium, the State Fair. The coalition also calls for
improvements to Loblolly Trail; a
grounds and N.C. State Univerd-
ty's planned entartainment and dry greemray, abet it Dow pass. .
es sede
W
d
A

sports areas. r
a
e
venue Extensba.

hopes to take bide on
the 7 be to Phan of the extension
pen Hendricks, a public bearing
this spring, whlab should allow offfor the transportation de
completion by fall IN 7.
v adnent? says the design chang- ;
es outlined by the Umstead Call- i
But state engineers do ant an tion could cost at lent 52 million
Edwards MW Road extension as a mom than the $10 Million to $12
substitute for a Duralelgh Road million now allocated for the
connector, running parallel athopt
two miles to the west and
ntlo r'oad's first phase. The coalition's
iden will be co
id
d
h
a
g
off a career of Umdesd Park. ns
ere
,
e says,
but the date doesn't have the
They say B wopld still be ended money to psTfor them now.
B-3
I PORTANT,
To ') /v
Date Time
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
of
Phone
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
Message C ko?,. II
-? L-.
1 t _ed ,4 l,. L)upt. or Lim roil men I, hiealln, ano IVawral HeSOUrces
t?n
NCWRC,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone]
A
FAX COVER -
Falls Lake Office
Data 7- 1.3 Z25:-
Number of pages indudtng cover sheet
To: _
. U7-d ?or
Phone
Fox Phone
cc:
Jul 13'95 11:11 No.002 P.01
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Habitat Conservation Program
P_O_ Pox 798
Northside, NC 27564
y
From Phone [phone]
Fax Phone [phone]
NCWRC.HCP.FALLS LAKE

TEL : 919-52x3-9839 Ju 1 13 'Y-5 11:11 No.1"302 P.02
0 Forth Carolina Wildlife Resources CoMMAission ICI
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina Z7604-1188,919-733-3391
Charles R. Futlwood, E=utive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: John Dornoy, Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
FR[.?11At nnx4d Cox, itighwny twat ConalinaMr
Habitat rnn.vrv„linn Pmemm .?
DATE: July 13, 1995
SUBJECT: North Carolina DapWment of Transportation (NCDOT) request for 401 Water
Quality CurtifluWiun fur 0tv FAlwards Mill Ruud nxtdmiun iu Walw Cuwdy, Nuttli
Carolina. TIP No. U-2582A, DEM Project No. 941093.
Staff biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission have reviewed
the subject application for 401 Water Quality Certification with respect to anticipated project
impacts on aquatic habitats. Our comments are provided in accordance with certain provisions
of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 slat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et neq.), and
section 401(b) of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (as amended), and North Carolina General Statues
(G.S. 113-131 at seq.).
The, WrWT rmrna w to ennonset n multi-lane madway on new ineatinn fmm Trinity
Road to north of Wade Avenue. Project length is approximately 2.0 miles. The project will
impact 1.2 acres of waters and wetlands.
We feel that NCDOT has avoided and minimized wetland impacts to the maximum
extent practicable. A site visit was held on July 12, 1995 to coordinate stream channel
relocations with NCWRC and DEM staff.
After reviewing the permit drawings and inspecting the stream segments to be impacted
NCWRC, DEM, and NCDOT planning and environmental and hydraulics staff agreed the
following stream relocation measures would be included as conditions of the "401" Water
Quality Certification:
NCWRC,HCP,FALLS LAKE TEL:[phone] Jul 13'95 11:12 No.002 P.03
A Manonmdum 2 July 13, 1995
1. NCDOT shall design the culvert extension at site 4 to eliminate the "perched"
aitimttnn that eu mnily exixlx. A weir or similar xlnactlna xhmll ho vein.- nletexi to
divert all venter through r xinsle barrel afthe davble--sorrel bem culvert.
2. NCDOT v, Il, Wl,l,atAus Allall 10111,111 V.%66UN lvav01 bud 4114tOlial a1,a its a, 111wh a,
possible existing boulders to use in the relocated stream segments.
3. NCDOT or its contractors shall install 7 to 10 riffles constructed of boulders of
suIIlclent size to preclude movement in normal flood events. Riffles should be at
least 3 feet in length and wide enough to completely span the stream bed.
LUMCdlately epatM61n Of the riiBle an area at least 18 &Ct in length slsaulrl be hank
filled with the salvaged gravel to stabilize the riffle. Immediately down stream of the
rillle a shallow depression should be created to remble the natural "splash pool"
found down stream of riffle areas.
4. NCWI' shall revegetate the stream banks with 2 or more of the following species:
Black willow (Salix nigra)
River birch (Berada nlgra)
Swcct gum (LiquMunbar styraci/lua)
syacamorc (Plulanus uc:c-iclan(alis)
Red maple (Ater rubrum)
'frees should be planned on no less than 10 fbot centers.
5. 1r site visit should he held at least before water is diverted into the relocated stream
channel. NC WRC staff and DEM staff should be present.
With the. "401" permit m ennditinned. we.. will rln nNrrt to thin pnc rrt
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this application. If we can be of any
flrrrher avebarsncc pleaxe call ijavld Cox, nIghway rmject t mrdlnamr at (y i v) )zn-vanal.
Co. Waync Joncs, District 3 Fishorics Biologist
Mike Scruggs, District 3 Wildlife Biologist
Randy Wilson, Nangame/Lndangerod Spooica Prvgram Mgr.
Eric Alsmeyer, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh
wU ? 1''he
,'`?\?FRF p T
U
Dept ?,
of
F0?/ro/' S,fgne? \
ana
?? ?ar4?a? Re
p';or S?4rQes
Pdo R
P`Ype„ _
w/
ex s
Co "JAL
vet/?/

c-?- a4J- S°
1 iw `!' ?H'T' ?Ohtl L77 ?'O CLLC
? ?r sue' s7???? ?
JIV
AW 3
?iu,QD bask ? ??.?/ f?of a
0? ?D-?A? tGSnirn 3?
I?
w ???
ec? C Tt r?C1 ?f I
C ?Ce? ?U ??Ml
t4 loo 5 &V?? ?4N \?? V) ? d A j l,.i'k

%?? lax
?j 733- i 7T6
??fj
IS? ?gGGvtS I,
• I„I?c?( I ??1I'Cw1
10, Ow r? to STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
I P? DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 16, 1994
Water Quality Planning
Division of Environmental Management
NC Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535
ATTN: Mr. John Dorney

R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
RECEIVED
NOV 7 9 11,1.114
ENVINONp?y?rnc. °.;K?,- .
SUBJECT: Wake County, Edwards Mill Road Extension (SR 3009) from
Trinity Road (SR 1656) to North of Wade Avenue
TIP No. U-2582A, Project No. 8.2402801.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to
extend Edwards Mill Road (SR 3009) from Trinity Road (SR 1656) to
North of Wade Avenue in Wake County. All wetland impacts related
to this project are authorized under Corps of Engineers Nationwide
Permit 26 (Above Headwaters). The impacts to wetlands at each
impact site are less than one acre in size, and therefore do not
require Corps of Engineers notification according to the
"Notification" general condition of 33 CFR 330.6(C13). However,
out of five identified wetland impact sites, two sites (Sites 2
and 4) involve impacts to Waters of the U.S. which are greater
than one third of an acre, and therefore will require notification
to the Division of Environmental Management.
The impacts at site 2 involves the loss of 0.21 acres of open
water habitat and 0.30 acres of wetland habitat. The impacts at
site 4 involves the loss of 0.69 acres of open water habitat.
With the above information in mind, NCDOT requests that the
subject project be authorized under General Water Quality
Certification 2671. Included for your information are a site map
and set of drawings showing the proposed work at each site, as
well as a pre-discharge notification application. A copy of this
pre-discharge notification is being supplied to the Corps of
Engineers for informational purposes only.
lf
If you have any questions concerning this application, please
contact Mr. Doug Huggett of NCDOT's Environmental Unit at (919)
733-3141.
Sincerely, ^- -?
B. 0' uin P. E.
Assistant Branch Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
BJO/dvh
Attachment
cc: District Engineer, COE-Wilmington
Mr. Ken Jolly, COE-Raleigh
Mr. Kelly Barger, P.E., Project Management Unit
Mr. Don Morton, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. A.L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr. John Smith, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. W.D. Johnson, Roadside Environmental
Mr. G.R. Shirley, Jr., P.E., Division 5 Engineer
Mr. David Robinson, P.E., Planning and Environmental
Mr. Brian Yamamoto, Planning and Environmental
Site Station Above/Below Total Impact Waters Wetland
Headwaters (AC) (AC) (AC)
2 26+500-L- Above 0.51 0.21 0.30
4 638+00-Y2- Above 0.69 0.69 0.00
48+60 -L-
DEM ID: WQC 2671
ACTION ID:
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Permit #):
JOINT FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLANNING
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NC DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH,
P.O. Box 1890 AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 P.O. Box 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR. JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS.
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
PLEASE PRINT.
1. Owners Name
North Carolina Department of Transportation; Planning & Environmental Branch
2. Owners Address: P. 0. box 25201; Raleigh, NC 27611
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): -- (Work):
[phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number:
B. J. O'Quinn, P.E.
Assistant Manager
5. Location of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County:
nearest Town or City: Raleigh
Wake
'specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Edwards Mill Road Extension (SR 3009) from
Trinity Road (SR 1656) to just north of Wade Avenue
ti. Name of Closest Stream/River: -
1. River Basin: Neuse River
3. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS II? YES [ J NO [X]
?. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [ ] NO [X ]
If yes, explain.
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
Less than 2 acres
11. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled: Site 2 = .51; Site 4 = .69
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Richland Creek
Total Impacted: Site 2 = .51; Site 4 = 0.69 acr3s
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/2" X 11" drawings only):
Extension of Edwards Mill Road from Trinity Road (SR 1656) to north of Wade Avenue.
13. Purpose of proposed work: Public Transportation
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measure
taken to minimize wetland impacts. New location road required the crossing of several small
streams which can not be avoided.
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed or proposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES[ ] NO [X ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [ ] NO [X ]
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property. See enclosed sheets
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project. N/ A
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line. N/A
D. If a stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy. N/A
E. What is land use of surrounding property? Wooded
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? N/A

/
rr, ,.n?lOn
1
1 ?
Apex

-- 7-
? ` ? Youn
1 IA ,
e'f?oreslT ? '"•
0 . k C,0,

10 y
?• G

II /
10 aol
101 ? .
all eighr
Krxf7.10 ,,<
,.. ' Garne
SITE ?r , Aen ,M1: I

16

?`
a 16 6 4
? U'.

':

.55 Q}
?
t
16'67

Lu
v 1775 I
:a '?.

1664 `?'
N . C. STAT E
.UNIV. FOREST. .
i
Gravel Road
PROJECT LIMIT-

TRINITY
RD. (SR 1656)
1658
Z)
1775.
r'
sr ? )?
z I
0
• j o
1772 1774
ODE AVg C .2,0
?. 25

/ PROJECT LIMIT
Carter-Finley
, Stadium
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTNfEN'r OF
TRANSPORTATION
R DIVISION' OF HIGHWAYS
A PLA_N_'4I!NG AMID EN-VIRONMEN fAL
?c??? BRA-140H
EDWARDS MILL ROAD (SR 3009) EXTENSION
FROM TRINITY ROAD (SR 1656)
TO DURALEIGH ROAD (SR 1664)
WAKE COUNTY
U-2582 A
0 feet 1000
, I I Figure

SITE #¢
11B
Y ;SRC #3
SIl'E# 2-
0
i
A
i
5

p? ?J c
0. ?
0-10
\o p. 0 a ,
-0?
SITE #1

-) 1 I L. lr 1 4L-/&
t
i?
WOODS
'Ito
i r---r_ ?l?(?.?t?f?i`???,+• ??,`,}-!•1?;` ? -tit., tt c;,s_.?.,_i?;,,.;,,• ?;r SITE 2
X8 C C,/'
20
;j7 /o/
?n.,, ;z t
\ Cg , ? t
\1'' Z9
1- Fes- •--__?-•• \ w --J ?,? , . ? .
SHEET- 3/g '

f, _

SHEET 5/c

S ITE J
.tT
:Z:?
UJT
\ T4'G`
%i • X013.:. l1 A
fl'? is
47-
SHEET 618 •

1 _UA! CH TO SHEET 7
• ? ? :. ?{> 'f ,. `? ?? !-? ,f tel.
2@7'x8' RCBC
??s s?5 a 5 r I
r .: I
,4; •y? •, ? I I A 1
`% •r rte'=/ 7 ''? i.
ri' •. ? ?, la r I I I I ? 1•
"to 41 Z'
1057 S,-rjp
zz)
-- ?
77
II:I f?y:J% ? 1`?• ?I r ?1 1 I _ ? ?- ..74 .,117 ? •? ??
- (??, ?? gl ?? ?' ; ??jyv•r, r• _ . cb??,'i ?J.scs-oRcr "'?-o?'• ? - ? -- - ?1:
?g ti i
Cyr... - I I I ?, ki. F Flo ?. ?L 35 , •?
!' tirM-'~?\ Y`;?:1 r V1% ? r ? .IGI•.L ? ?? :.{1'X1 •?????
J ?L=.IJ ,'?115?'rt •i. I IV 'J _ ?'j??Jl ? '-to .v 'C? ?. %.... .? .? - .?-
17

0

-? ? SHEET 7
C

Jll
a
c? 7
r

r

CNAr..,yEL
LV uY •.;\ 1
/Tf
•s
r?
.rX
I U'?
QL-
G ,
1
`ice
?I

I S b

d ?,

R PLY1o
(DAMWTIMOR
DEPARTMINY OIL THE ARUV
WN AIN "m OIRT1rCT. com oR omsems
P.O. Box Im
VALMINGU N. NOFffH GNMUNAZ84WI090
December 16, 1994
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199500687 and Nationwide permit Number 26
isolated Waters)
Mr. K. Franklin Vick, P.M., Manager
Planning and suvironmtental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
P.o. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 21611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
DEC 21
DIVISION OF
HIGHWAYS
Reference your.application of November 14, 1994, for Dapartmont of the
Army authorization to discharge fill material within waters of the United
states associated with construction or the proposed 6dwarda Niil Road (s.R.
3009) extension and the associated interchange, from s.R. 1656 (Trinity Road)
to Made Avenue, in Raleigh, Make county, North Carolina (TIP a ototaisotA1.20
State Project No. 8.2402801). The proposed work will a impact of wetlands, located
0.0
acres of waters of the United Staters, including
adjacent to, and above the headwaters of, Richland Creek and unnamed
tributaries to Richland Creek.
For the purposes of the Corps of pnngineerrs 6, Regulatory in Program, Title
33, Code of ]federal Regulations (C*R), published the roderal
Register on November 22, 1991, lists nationwide permits. Authorization was
provided, pursuant to section 404 of the Clean Water Act, for discharges of
dredged or fill material into headwaters and isolated watosd•
Your work, causing the loss of 1.20 acres of waters of the united
states, is authorized by this nationw`M permit provided it is accomplished in
atrict accordance with the enclosed conditions and provided you receive a
section 401 water quality certification from the North Carolina Division or
Environmental Management. You should contact Mr. John Dorney, telephone (919)
733-1706, regarding grater quality certification. This nationwide permit does
not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain other required State or local
approvals.
This verification will be valid for two years from the date of this
letter unless the nationwide authorization is modified, reissued or revoked.
This verification will remain valid for the two years if, during that period,
the nationwide permit authorization is reissued without modification or the
activity complies with any subsequent modification. it during the two years,
the nationwide permit authorization expires or is suspendedri theet?kiraad is
modified, such that th activity would no longer complly
conditions of the nationwide permit, activities which have Commenced or are
under contract to commence, in reliance upon the nationwide permit, will
remain authorized. This in provided theattivityiis coommple?df ithin twelve
months of the date of the nationwide p :p
revocation.
ar*W a is awe w-
4
_..^ zed zLEtt ON T-)1 :U1 UG;G? S6.-L0-Tlf
A

-2-
Questions or aou?ents may be addressed to Ift- Eric Alsmeyer of my
Raleigh field office regulatory staff, Ot telephone [phone], extension
23.
I
sincerely,
ranch
Enclosure
copies rurniahed (without eneloeure):
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality section
Division of Enviromental Mgmt. North
Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
£0d &24 :ON -Dl :QI e0o9z Im s6.-
« .
1
GIMRAL CONDITIONS
1. 'Navigation. No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on
navigation.
2. Proper Maintenance. Any structure or fill authorized shall be properly
maintained, including maintenance to ensure public satety.
3. Erosion and Siltation Controls. Appropriate erosion and siltation
controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during
construction, and all exposed soil and other fills not be permanently
stabilised at the earliest practiable date.
4. Aquatic Life Movements. No activity may subetaabltUy disrupt the
movement of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the materbody,
including those species which normally migrate through the area, unless the
activity's primary purpose is to impound water.
5. Equipment. Heavy equipment worsting in wetlands must be placed on mats or
other measures coat be taken to minimize soil disturbance.
6. Regional, and Cast-by-Case Conditions. The activity must comply with any
regional conditions which may have been added by the Division Engineer and any
ease specific conditions added by the Corps.
7. Wild and Scenic Rivers. No activity may occur in a component of the
National Wild and Scenic River System; or in a river officially designated by
Congress as a "study river" for possible inclusion in the system, while the
river is in an official study status. Information on Wild and Scenic Rivera
may be obtained from the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service.
8. Tribal Rights. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal
rights, including, but not limited to, reserved water rights and treaty
fishing and hunting rights-
9. Water Quality Certification. In certain states, an individual State
water quality certifioation must be obtained or waived.
10. Coastal Zone Management. In certain states, an individual state coastal
zone management consistency concurrence must be obtained or waived.
it. Endangered Speolee. No nativity is authorized under any MF which is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered
species or a speoiea proposed for such designation, as identified under the
Federal Endangered Species Act, or which is likely to destroy or #Aversely
modify the eribioal habitat of such species. Non-rederal permittees shall
notify the District Engineer if any listed species or critical habitat might
be affected or is in the vicinity of the project and shall not begin work on
the activity until notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of
CLT-GCWN
170d 61,E# :ON X31 :aI ee:9i i4iu S6.-Lo--Fv

-2-
the Endangered Species Act have been satisfied and that the activity is
authorized. Information on the location of threatened and endangered species
can be obtained from the U.S. fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
fisheries 3ervioe.
12. Historic Properties. No activity which may affect Risterie Properties
listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places
is authorized, until the District Engineer hag complied with the provisions or
33 CF'R 329, Appendix C. The prospective permittee aunt notify the District
Engineer if the authorized activity may affect vV historic properties listed,
determined to be eligible, or which the prospective permittee his reason* to
believe may be eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic
Places, and shall not begin the activity until notified by the District
gngineer that the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act have
been Satisfied and that the activity is authorized. Information on the
location and existence of historic resources can be obtained from the State
Historio Preservation Office and the National Register of Historic Places (see
33 OR 330.4(8)).
13. Notification.
a. Where required by the terms of the NWP, the prospective permittee must
notify the District Engineer as early as possible and shall not begin the
activity:
(1) until notified by the District Engineer that the activity may
proceed under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the District or
Division Engineer; or
(2) it notified by the District or Division Engineer that an
individual permit is required; or
(3) Unless 30 days have passed from the District Engineer's receipt
of the notification and the prospective peraittee has not received notice from
the District or Division Rngineer. Subsequently, the permittee's right to
proceed under the NWP may be modified, suspended or revoked only in aaeordanoe
with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2).
b. The notification must be in writing and include the following
information and any required fees:
(1) Vame, address and belephone number of the prospeotive peraittee;
(2) Location of the proposed project;
(3) Brief description of the proposed project; the project's purpose;
direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would Gauge: any
SOd ZLE# :ON -131 :QI io:9i I?u S6.-Lo-Tw _

-3-
other W!(a), regional general perdit(o) or individual permit(s) used or
intended to be used to authors:e any part of the proposed PvOJ00h or related
activity;
(4) Where required by the terms of the Mip. a delineation of affected
special aquatic sitter including wetlands; and
(5) A statement that the prospective peralttee has contacted;
( The tt1.S regarding the presence of spy Federally listed
(or proposed for fisting) ) endangered dig 04tened
in the permit area that maybe affected the Propsed ?eoies or eritial habitat
available information provided by thoagencies. (The p J°°tf and any
may contact Corps District Offices for OSltHd/ S pr gmtlve permittee
critical habitat.) Agency 000taots and list of
(b) The 3HP0 regarding the presence of any historic properties in
the permit area thatmay be a£Peoted by the proposed project; :and the
available information, it any provided by that agency.
14• Water Supply Intakes. No d1satur
in the proximity of a public water supply of intake or fill material may Occur
repair of the Public water supply Intake struetursecor adjacenthbAnrs?ge is
stabilisation.
15• shellfish Production. No dtacharge of dredged or fill
aaterisl
in areas of oonoentrated ahelifish Production, u?tleea the d may occur
directly related to a shellfish harvest activity authorized??ge is
permit. by nationwide
16. Suitable Material. No discharge of dr
Of unsuitable material (e, .edged or fill material pay consist
(Uncharged must be free rpm toxichpal utants In toxic amounts.and Material
17. Mitigation. Discharges of dred ed or
United States g fill aaterial Into waters of the
at the StatesEMus th(i intmoced or avoided to the emxidum extent practicable
sitter unless the District gngigeer has approved
a compensation altl4ation plan for the apeoifio regulated activity.
1S. 44%ming Areab. Discharges is aparnin
ant be avoided to the uxImp m extent •es during spawning A vtb
Draat oab.is.
19. obstructions of !(igh Plow. To the
diaoharges must not ftx,== extent praotlea ler
expected high flows or restrict or
relooation of the wetor (unl
purpose of the till is to i the e of aocmai or
ess the pessary
mpound waters).
90d ZLE#
:ON -BI
:QI i0:9i Iiw S6.-L@- rw -
MATxQRQMR CONDITIONS
a. The discharge does not cause the loss of more than 10 acres of waters
of the u.s. tar the purpose of this nationwide permit, the acreage of .lose of
waters of the U.S. includes the tilled area plus raters of the U.S. that are
adversely affected by flooding, excavation, or drainage as a result of the
projeat.
b. A 30-day notification to the District Bagi=Or (DS) is required it
the discharge would cause the loss of water of the V.S. greater than one acre.
For discharges in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, the notifications
must include a delineation of affected special aquatic sites including
wetlands.
a. The dd.sabarge, including all attendant features, both temporary and
permanent, is part of a single and complete projeot.
STATZ CQNaraTZHcr COIiDmom
a. All till material authorized by this permit must be obtained from an
upland source.
b. Use of this nationwide permit for waste disposal facilities is not
authorized.
o_ it the proposed activity is within the North Carolina Coastal Area
and the activity will result in the lose of Ovate" of the united states
greater than 1/3 of ?a care, the applivant must receive written aonamrrence
from the north Carolina Division of Coastal Maaagecneat (NCDCM) that the
activity is Consistent with the North Carolina Coastal Mmsement Program.
d. Should, all or part of a proposed activity be located within an Area
of Environmental Concern (AEC) as designated by the North carolina Coastal.
Resources Commission, a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permit is required
from the north Carolina Division of Coastal Mana!ISM, (NCDCM). Sbmdd an
activity within Or potentially affecting an AEC osed by a Feds"I
agency, a consistency determination pursuant td 92C must be provided to
the NCO M at bast go days before the onset of the proposed activity.
(?ffi WAL CW"VICATTM CMTPIONS
a. aensral certification is de44e4 for fills greeter than ant area in
8A, trout, gW. OIW, NS_2 and wa-it watersheds. amoral aertification is
1eau*4 for all other waters for fills of not more than 10 acres and in those
watersheds specified abort got fills of not more that one care.
b. Proposed fill or substantial modification of greater than one-third
of an acre of such waters, including wetlands, requires a written concurrence
from the Borth Carolina Division of Invironmental Management JUM M).
a. Rstablisbed sediment an$ erosion control Practices will be utilised
to prevent violations of the appropriate turbidity water auality standard (10
rmi s in streams and rivers not designated as trout Maters by the Varth
Carolina Division of zovis+ommantal Management MCDEM). 23 IrM# s in all
saltwater classes and all lakes and reservoirs and 10 WM's in trout wsteral_
c17-4t
Lod ZLE#t :ON -131 :QI Z9:9T IM S6,-LO-_W

-2•
d. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming
into contact With waters of the State until the aonarete hes Agrdited.
e. Additional site-specific Conditions may be added to this
Certification in order to ensure 06Mliance with all a?ppliaaible water quality
and affluent standards.
!. Conewrrence from the Worth Carolina Division of Znvircn tal
Management (MCD8M) thab this Certification applies to an individual project
shall wTive throe years from the data of the cover letter from the VWIM.
80d aE# : ON -131 : Q I £0 s 9 T I ?u S6 -Lo-,1nr
y d ?a STAT(' o
? 'rte 1b h???
•4k W.n, ??? "
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
February 2, 1993
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: /John Dorney .'!??
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: Water Quality Checklist for EA/EIS Documents
SR 3009 Extension From SR 1656 to SR 1664
Wake County
TIP #U-2582
EHNR # 93-0569. DEM # 7972
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental Management requests that
the following topics be discussed in the EA/EIS documents:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The stream
classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelization/re locations. If the original
stream banks were vegetated, it is requested that the channelized/relocated
stream banks be revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests that these catch
basins be placed at all water supply stream crossings. Identify the responsible
party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion control measures are not placed in
wetlands.
P.U Box 276$7, Relcigh, North Carolina ?7611 7687 Telephone [phone] Fax A' 919-733-0513
An Equal Oppormnity AI(inmative Action En,ploYcr
AFM
G. Wetland Impacts
i) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and delineating
jurisdictional wetlands.
ii) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
iii) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
iv) Mitigation measures to compensate for habitat losses.
v) Wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
vi) Quality of wetlands impacted.
vii) Total wetland impacts.
viii) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from DEM.
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Prior to the approval of any borrow
source in a wetland, the contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as possible? Why not
(if applicable)?
J. Please provide a detailed discussion for mass-transit as an option.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required for this project.
Applications requesting coverage under our General Certification 14 or General Permit
31 (with wetland impact) will require written concurrence. Please be aware that 401
Certification may be denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized
to the maximum extent practicable.
sr3009.sco
cc: Eric Galamb
Monica Swihart

Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Project located in 7th floor library
Division of Planning and Assessment
Project Review Form
Project Number: County: Date: Date Response Due (firm deadline)
C' -p L,J,11?_??? 4 -2, ? ? ' IT3
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All R/O Areas Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
? Fayetteville Air Coastal Management ater Planning

El Mooresville Water ? Water Resources r onmental Health
;ni

Raleigh Groundwater

Land Quality Engineer W
o lid Waste Management
V ildlife
Forest Resources ? Radiation Protection
Washington Recreational Consultant
? C
t
l M
C Land Resources ? David Foster

? Wilmin
ton oas
a
anagement
onsultant Parks and Recreation ? Other (specify)
g ?Others nvironmental Management
El Winston-Salem +

:JAN 12 1993
Manager Sign-Off/Region: WATER QUALITY Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
SECTION
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficlent Information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attached/authority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated In attached comments (authority(fes) cited)
?Applicant has been contacted
?Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Other (specify and attach comments)
RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
, Division of Planning and Assessment by Due Dale shown.
w ..
''T e.. a.a arm
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPART MENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G MARTIN
GOVERNOR
January 4, 1993
THOMAS J. HARW LSON
SECRETARY
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR. P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRAI OR
MEMORANDUM TO: Mrs. Chrys Baggett, Director
State Clearinghouse
Dept. of Administration
FROM: L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
f4t'Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Road) Extension, From SR 1656
(Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), Raleigh, Wake
County, Federal-Aid Project No. STP-3009(1), State
Project No. 8.2402801, TIP No. U-2582
The Planning and Environmental Branch of the Division of Highways has
begun studying the proposed improvements to SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Road).
The project is included in the 1993-1999 North Carolina Transportation
Improvement Program and is scheduled for right of way in fiscal year 1994 and
construction in fiscal year 1995.
The proposed project begins on SR 1656 (Trinity Road) approximately 0.6
mile west of SR 1658 (Youth Center Drive) and extends north on new location
to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road). The TIP calls for constructing a multilane
facility on new location.
Three alternative cross sections are currently being studied including a
5-lane curb and gutter section, a 4-lane divided curb and gutter section, and
a 6-lane divided curb and gutter section. It is anticipated the 5-lane
section can be contained within an 80-foot right of way width plus
construction easements, and both median divided sections can be contained
within a 130-foot right of way plus construction easements.
Current plans call ror the project to be constructed in two phases.
Phase 1, from Trinity Road to Wade Avenue (SR 1775), consists of one
alternative and includes an interchange at Wade Avenue. Phase 2, from Wade
Avenue to Duraleigh Road, consists of three alignment alternatives as shown
on the attached vicinity map. No right of way acquisition or construction
schedules have been developed for Phase 2 at this time.
An Equal OpoorturutylAffirmative Action Employer
January 4, 1993
Page 2
We would appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful
in evaluating potential environmental impacts of the project. If applicable,
please identify any permits or approvals which may be required by your
agency. Your comments will be used in the preparation of a document
evaluating environmental impacts of the project. It is desirable that your
agency respond by OMOM90 1993 so that your comments can be used in the
preparation of this document.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact
Mr. Brian F. Yamamoto, Project Planning Engineer, of this Branch at
[phone].
LJW/plr
Attachment
C. tj
0 1-
\? r
14 ? ----- -- --- J
?00 U "y `t? I'.'•'.'•',.' tt? U to
t I .'•'.'•' ''.
10 .40
#SSSSj SAYS
At
G4 ` ?? q ' •
IT

¦
¦ r
r
r ¦
r ?
b
C7
W
a
r-i N r-I N M

41 4?
{

•
?
:
:
cry ? 1.
,
.
;

z z Q
'•
y' ?
?P
.

U-
o p
Z

In X ? ?O
Lll r r`
O
W Q o N (n O

Q 5
¢Z:7

ppQ 0
W
O U
?aH]:? 0 z
Q Q
?O
00
OE¢••c= ¢?
0 it
V N N
l
w
C7 Q ? ? ui a
?azx
0
x
7 0--?

CC ZwQ
cn
- ?
U
o a 5 a -j CC 3 0
zE cram ???
0
r
t CC cl
2 LL I-
a
w

a7
!n
•o
?o
In
?n
E-I
/
w
Iingtlnol IunOW APON
\ ,+ MOP( NO - I e
4 C
=
??
W ?, l •- -
F
o Y ;s
1rJ ? a vl!
I
a
O 5y1-?`IG' tV P?'
y r .- ?a
IV Sf 0 ?!"M
:Al1AlY
1
P
?` (•.f
?
,
s
/
?
..
)d ?
(Alit Of k "1C
1A P()
R/
4
-?Y:
PH[N o
f6,r{ • ?s l,4C?
j 'o

O
LAIN - 1 I l?r
^ Or`71? 1! N v
OT T
'
'
// } J(:J ? 1
`f oa?
•"'yam -`
1
?
?.
,\
I,k.•? ?
'If '-I _ _
T
•
T
?
0 °O .
.)
I
- CP

3
O l? ., d n r Lc
fir P Y.I `area
1 ° fjti
0
I
V? N I?l 1"I ` r II''I,r\I. PO V!Y :;1 y,
- O1N VZ ? ?V .1TT ,I ???

I/odnV IWI IION w" P4140 lol I4•49 tauld On41nuy -
4 Y
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr„ P.E., Director
December 21, 1994
MEMORANDUM
Nola
1:3 FE F=1
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorneyyl7p
From: Eric Galam?T
Subject: EA for SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road)
Wake County
State Project DOT No. 8.2402801, TIP # U-2582
EHNR # 95-0339, DEM # 10794
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact waters of the state including wetland.
The subject project may impact 0.69 acres of waters including wetland.
The document states that a 54 foot median will be utilized. Why is a 54 foot median
Proposed instead of the standard 46 foot median? What would be the wetland
impacts if the median was reduced to 46 feet?
Wetlands are present in Section A but DOT did not study an avoidance alternative in
this Section. Is there an avoidance alternative that can be studied?
DEM has received a 401 Certification application. The project sponsor should note
that DEM cannot issue the 401 Certification until the FONSI or ROD has been issued
by the State Clearinghouse (NCAC 15A: 01 C .0402).
DOT is reminded that the 401 Certification could be denied unless water quality
concerns are satisfied. Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to
Eric Galamb (733-1786) in DEM's Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Monica Swihart
edward.ea
r
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
*4
Raleigh
Wake County
SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road)
From SR 1656 (Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road)
Federal-Aid Project Number STP-3009(1)
State Project Number 8.2402801
T.I.P. Project Number U-2582
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
and
DRAFT SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
and
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Submitted Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)
and 23 U.S.C. 128 (A)
?'
'Date H. Fran in Vick, P. E., Manager
L
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
D to , as L. ra .
' 3W"
1 Di sion Administrator, FHWA
Raleigh
Wake County
SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road)
From SR 1656 (Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road)
Federal-Aid Project Number STP-3009(1)
State Project Number 8.2402801
T.I.P. Project Number U-2582
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
and
DRAFT SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
Documentation Prepared in the Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Brian F. Yam oto
Project Pla ing Engineer
Linwood Stone
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
i
Richard B. Davis, P. E., Assistan
Planning and Environmental Branch
'OVA
.,*CARz N, *
p?,SEAL
's 6944
SUMMARY
1. Type of Action
This is a Federal Highway Administration Action, Environmental
Assessment.
2. Description of Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of
Highways, proposes to construct a multilane facility on new location
between SR 1656 (Trinity Road) and SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), a distance of
2.0 miles (See Figure 1 for project location). The recommended cross
section consists of a 5-lane shoulder section with reversible lane signal
system from the south project limit to Wade Avenue. A compressed diamond
interchange is proposed to carry Wade Avenue over the proposed facility.
From Wade Avenue to the north project limit at Duraleigh Road, a 4-lane
median divided expressway gutter facility is recommended. See Figures 2A
and 2B for sketches of the typical cross sections.
The total estimated cost of the project is $20,500,000. This
includes $13,900,000 for construction and $6,600,000 for right of way and
utilities.
3. Environmental Impacts
The proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road will be a major link
between Wade Avenue and US 10 and will provide land access to the area
surrounded by I-40, Wade Avenue, and I-440 (the Raleigh Beltline). One
major facility already under construction that will require access from
the proposed extension is the North Carolina Sports and Entertainment
Complex arena located south of Wade Avenue. The proposed extension will
help reduce travel times through the area and provide relief to the
already congested Blue Ridge Road corridor.
There are no structures either listed on or eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places within the area of potential effect for the
project. Likewise, there are no archaeological sites either listed on or
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places within the proposed
project limits.
No impacts to federally protected species as listed by the U. S. Fish
and Wildlife Service for Wake County are anticipated as a result of the
recommended action.
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW), WS-I, or WS-II are located within the study area or
within 1 mile downstream; therefore, "High Quality Water" sedimentation
and erosion control is not required. Surface water impacts are
anticipated at two ponds and within Richland Creek near the proposed
Edwards Mill Road/Wade Avenue interchange. The extent of rechannelization
within Richland Creek will be determined as hydraulic design continues.
Appropriate consultation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission will be required after the
amount of rechannel ization is determined. It is anticipated impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands will be less than 0.1 acre. Negative impacts of
the proposed improvements include the displacement of two (2) families and
one (1) heavy equipment storage garage. The Division of Highways offers
relocation assistance to help minimize the effects of displacement.
Constructing the project will result in four receptors experiencing noise
levels above the standard abatement criteria. The predicted noise
increase is expected to range from +16 to +21 dBA. Since access to the
facility is uncontrolled, no traffic noise abatement measures are
proposed.
Impacts to terrestrial communities are anticipated to be
approximately 53 acres. Impacts to aquatic communities include filling
two ponds and relocating a portion of Richland Creek.
Improved access to the land along the Edwards Mill Road extension
corridor could increase pressure to further develop the area. The
potential increase in urbanization resulting from project construction can
be managed through the application of desired land use controls and zoning
regulations.
4. Special Permits Required
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a)26 is likely to be applicable for
anticipated impacts to jurisdictional wetlands along the project. This
type of permit applies to wetlands that are isolated and/or above
headwaters (annual flow less than 5 cfs). Final permit decisions rest
with the Corps of Engineers. A Section 401 General Water Quality
Certification is required for any activity which may result in a discharge
and for which a federal permit is required. State permits are issued
through the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources - Division of Environmental Management.
5. Alternatives Considered
The alternatives considered for this project consist of several
construction alternatives, a public transportation alternative, and the
"no-build" alternative. For discussion purposes, the construction
alternatives have been divided into Section A (from Trinity Road to Wade
Avenue) and Section B (from Wade Avenue to Duraleigh Road). See Figure 1
for a breakdown of the project sections. Section A consists of one
alignment alternative and two cross section alternatives. The two cross
sections considered for Section A include a 5-lane shoulder section
(recommended) and a 6-lane median divided cross section. Section B
consists of three alignment alternatives and two cross section
alternatives. The studied cross section alternatives consist of a 4-lane
median divided section (recommended) and a 5-lane curb and gutter section.
ii
6. Coordination
Federal, state, regional, and local agencies were consulted during
the preparation of this environmental assessment. The agencies and the
public offered verbal and written comments at an informational workshop.
7. Actions Required by Other Federal Agencies
Based on information currently available, no actions from other
federal agencies are required.
8. Special Project Commitments
a. If the total length of stream rechannelization in Richland Creek
exceeds 100 feet, or is greater than 50 feet on one side,
consultation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission will be required.
Relocated streams will be designed to have similar
characteristics (depth, width, and substrate) as the original
stream. This also includes reestablishing streamside
vegetation.
b. The NCDOT will provide a 12' X 8' reinforced concrete box
culvert to accommodate the Loblolly Trail underneath the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension approximately 0.2 mile
south of the proposed interchange at Wade Avenue.
C. The NCDOT will provide electrical conduit (size to be specified
by the City of Raleigh) in the proposed culvert for lighting.
d. The NCDOT will rebuild and relocate the Loblolly Trail on the
west side of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension up to the
Wade Avenue culvert crossing.
e. The NCDOT will provide electrical conduit (size to be specified
by the City of Raleigh) in proposed extended sections of the
existing double barrel 8' X 8' reinforced concrete box culvert
underneath Wade Avenue.
f. Potential for encounters with contaminated groundwater near the
proposed interchange will be identified and monitored as design
progresses.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
Summary ...................................................... i
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ...................... 1
A. General Description of Project ..................... 1
B. Recommended Improvements ........................... 1
1. Length of Project .............................. 1
2. Cross Sections ................................. 1
3. Right of Way ................................. 2
4. Access Control ................................. 2
5. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control ..... 2
6. Design Speed and Speed Limit ................... 3
7. Bridges ........................................ 3
8. Interchange ................................. 3
9. Drainage Structures ............................ 4
10. Railroads ...................................... 4
11. Greenways ...................................... 4
12. Parking ........................................ 5
13. Sidewalks ...................................... 5
14. Bicycles ....................................... 5
15. Monuments ...................................... 5
16. Cost Estimates ................................. 5
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............................ 5
A. Characteristics of the Existing Facility ............ 5
1. Existing Cross Section ......................... 5
2. Sidewalks ..................................... 6
3. Right of Way ... ... . ... . .. ............. 6
4. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control ......... 6
5. Speed Zones .................................. 6
6. Hydrologic Structures .......................... 6
7. Utilities . .................................... 7
8. School Bus Data ................................ 7
B. Projected Traffic Volumes and Capacity .............. 7
C. Thoroughfare Plan and Route Function ................. 9
III. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ..... 9
A. Construction Alternatives ........................... 9
1. Section A ...................................... 9
a. Alignment 1 (recommended) ............. 9
b. Cross Section 1 (recommended) ............. 10
c. Cross Section 2 ........................... 10
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
2. Section B ...................................... 10
a. Alignment 1 (recommended) ................. 10
b. Alignment 2 ............................... 11
C. Alignment 3 . .............. 11
d. Cross Section1 (recommended) ............. 11
e. Cross Section 2 ........................... 11
B. Public Transportation Alternative ................... 12
C. "Do Nothing" Alternative ............................ 13
IV. EVALUATION OF CONSTRUCTION ALTERNATIVES .................. 14
A. Alignment Considerations ............................ 14
1. Section A ...................................... 14
2. Section B ...................................... 14
B. Cross Section Considerations ........................ 15
1. Section A ...................................... 15
2. Section B ...................................... 15
V. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS .............. 16
A. Social Effects ...................................... 16
1. Land Use ....................................... 16
a. Scope of Local Planning Activities ........ 16
b. Existing Land Use ......................... 16
C. Existing Zoning ........................... 17
d. Future Land Use .. ............. ........ 17
e. Relationship of Project with Local
Land Use Plans ....................... 18
2. Neighborhood Analysis .......................... 18
3. Relocation Impacts ... .................... 18
4. Public and Private Facilities .................. 20
5. Cultural Resources ............................. 21
a. Architectural/Historic Resources .......... 21
b. Archaeological Resources .................. 21
B. Economic Effects .................................... 22
C. Env ironmental Effects ............................... 23
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. Biotic Resources ............................... 23
a. Terrestrial Communities ................... 23
b. Aquatic Communities ....................... 28
2. Threatened and Endangered Species .............. 31
a. Federally Protected Species .. ..... 32
b. Federal Candidate and State Protected
Species .............................. 33
3. Surface Water and Water Quality ................ 35
4. Wetlands ....................................... 36
5. Permits ........................................ 37
6. Floodplain Involvement ......................... 37
7. Soils and Geology .............................. 38
8. Hazardous Waste ................................ 38
9. Farmland ..................................... 38
10. Traffic Noise .................................. 39
11. Air Quality .................................... 45
12. Transportation Management ...................... 48
13. Construction Impacts ........................... 50
14. Secondary Impacts .............................. 52
VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ................................ 52
A. Government Response ................................. 52
B. Public Response ..................................... 53
VII. DRAFT SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION ............................ 53
A. Description of Proposed Action ...................... 53
53
B. Description of Section 4(f) Resource ............... 53
C. Impacts to Section 4(f) Property .................... 54
D. Avoidance Alternatives .............................. 55
• 1. Realignment East of the Proposed Alignment ..... 55
2. Realignment West of the Proposed Alignment ..... 55
3. "Do Nothing" Alternative ....................... 55
E. Measures to Minimize Harm ........................... 56
F. Mitigation Measures ................................. 57
G. Coordination ........................................ 57
VIII. BASIS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ....................... 57
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLES
Table 1 - Intersection Capacity Analysis .......................
Table 2 - Terrestrial Community Impacts ........................
Table 3 - Federally Protected Species ..........................
Table 4 - Federal Candidate Species ............................
Table 5 - Noise Abatement Criteria . .......................
Table 6 - FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria Summary ................
Table 7 - One Hour CO Concentrations ...........................
FIGURES
Figure 1
Figure 2A
Figure 2B
Figure 3
Figure 4A
Figure 4B
Figure 4C
Figure 4D
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8A
Figure 8B
Figure 8C
Figure 8D
- Vicinity Map
- Section A Recommended Cross Section
- Section B Recommended Cross Section
- Aerial Mosaic with Proposed Right of Way Limits
- Trinity Road/Edwards Mill Road Intersection
Configuration
- Southernmost Wade Avenue Ramp Terminals
- Northernmost Wade Avenue Ramp Terminals
- Duraleigh Road/Edwards Mill Road Intersection
Configuration
- Proposed Interchange Configuration
- Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan
- 100-year Floodplain and Floodway
- Year 1992 Average Daily Traffic Volumes
- Year 1996 Estimated Average Daily Traffic Volumes
- Year 2001 Estimated Average Daily Traffic Volumes
- Year 2018 Estimated Average Daily Traffic Volumes
PAGE
8
28
32
34
40
42
47
APPENDIX
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. General Description of Project
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes a
highway improvement project for the Edwards Mill Road corridor in
northwestern Wake County between SR 1656 (Trinity Road) and SR 1664
(Duraleigh Road). The project calls for constructing a multilane facility
on new location. The project is scheduled to be constructed in two
sections. See Figure 1 for a vicinity map showing the sections. Section
A is located between SR 1656 (Trinity Road) and SR 1728 (Wade Avenue), a
distance of 0.6 mile. Under Section A, it is recommended the proposed
multilane facility consist of a five-lane shoulder section. An
interchange is recommended where the proposed extension of Edwards Mill
Road crosses Wade Avenue as part of proposed Section A construction.
Since the proposed Edwards Mill Road/Wade Avenue interchange will operate
in a system that includes the I-40 interchange to the west and the Blue
Ridge Road interchange to the east, auxiliary ramp lanes will be
constructed on Wade Avenue as a part of Section A improvements. Section B
is located between Wade Avenue and SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), a distance of
1.4 miles. Under Section B, a four-lane median divided section is
recommended. A median opening is recommended at SR 1775 (Reedy Creek
Road) to accommodate existing and planned development in the area.
The subject project is included in the 1995-2001 North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP). Right of way acquisition and construction or Section A are
scheduled to begin in 1994 and 1995, respectively. Beginning right of way
acquisition and construction schedules for Section B have not been set.
The TIP includes a total funding of $14,700,000 including $200,000 for
Section A right of way acquisition, $4,000,000 for Section A construction,
and $10,300,000 for Section B right of way and construction. The total
projected cost for both sections of the proposed extension of Edwards Mill
Road is $20,500,000 including $6,600,000 for right of way (includes
$120,000 for utilities) and $13,900,000 for construction.
B. Recommended Improvements
1. Length of Project
The length of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension is 2.0
miles.
2. Cross Sections
Two different roadway cross sections are recommended to serve
the varying projected traffic needs within the studied Edwards Mill
Road extension corridor. From the south project limit at SR 1656
(Trinity Road) to approximately 0.1 mile north of SR 1728 (Wade
Avenue), a five-lane shoulder section is proposed. Each travel lane
will be 12 feet wide. It is recommended 10-foot full depth paved
shoulders be provided on each side of the facility. See Figure 2A
for a sketch of the typical section for Section A.
2
From 0.1 mile north of Wade Avenue to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road),
a four-lane divided facility is proposed. Each travelway will be
28 feet wide from the inside edge of pavement to the beginning of the
4-foot expressway gutter. Each travelway will contain two 12-foot
travel lanes and one 4-foot bicycle lane. A 10-foot berm will be
provided on each side of the facility. A 54-foot grassed median will
separate the two travelways. See Figure 2B for a typical section for
Section B.
3. Right of Way
The proposed right of way width will vary from approximately
115 feet to 375 feet through the corridor. See Figure 3 for an
aerial mosaic showing the proposed right of way limits. Some
additional right of way or easements may be needed to accommodate the
Edwards Mill Road/Wade Avenue interchange and proposed intersections
with Trinity Road, the Sports and Entertainment Complex, and
Duraleigh Road. Temporary drainage and construction easements will
be required in some areas within the project limits.
4. Access Control
No control of access is recommended along the proposed project;
however, only one median opening along Section B at Reedy Creek Road
is anticipated.
5. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control
All intersections along the project will be constructed at grade
except at Wade Avenue, where an interchange will be provided.
Traffic signals are recommended at SR 1656 (Trinity Road), the
southernmost Wade Avenue interchange ramps, the northernmost Wade
Avenue interchange ramps, and SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road). If the area
develops as shown on the Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare
Plan, an additional signal may be needed at SR 1775 (Reedy Creek
Road).
The recommended lane treatment for each proposed signalized
intersection is as follows (See Figures 4A, 4B, 4C, and 4D for
sketches of each intersection treatment):
Trinity Road
One left-turn lane and one right-turn lane are recommended on
the southbound Edwards Mill Road approach to the intersection. One
thru and left-turn lane is recommended on the eastbound Trinity Road
approach to the intersection. One thru and right-turn lane is
recommended on the westbound Trinity Road approach to the
intersection.
Southern Wade Avenue Ramp Terminals
Two thru lanes and a thru and right-turn lane will be provided
on the northbound approach to the southern Wade Avenue interchange
ramps. Two thru lanes and one left-turn lane are recommended on the
southbound approach to the southern Wade Avenue interchange ramps.
The eastbound Wade Avenue interchange ramp approaching the Edwards
Mill Road extension will contain a channelized dual left-turn lane
and one channelized right-turn lane.
Northern Wade Avenue Ramp Terminals
Two thru lanes and one left-turn lane will be provided on the
northbound approach to the northern Wade Avenue interchange ramps.
Two thru lanes and one thru and right-turn lane are recommended on
the southbound Edwards Mill Road approach to the northern interchange
ramps. The westbound Wade Avenue interchange ramp approaching the
Edwards Mill Road extension will contain one channelized right-turn
lane and one channelized dual left-turn lane.
Duraleigh Road
Two left-turn lanes, two thru lanes, and one right-turn lane are
recommended on both the northbound and southbound Edwards Mill Road
approaches to the intersection. One left-turn lane, two thru lanes,
and one right-turn lane are recommended on both the eastbound and
westbound Duraleigh Road approaches to the intersection.
6. Design Speed and Speed Limit
The proposed project will have a minimum design speed of 50
miles per hour (mph). The anticipated posted speed limit is 45 mph.
7. Bridges
Two new bridges will be provided on Wade Avenue to carry traffic
over the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension. The recommended
structures will each be 40 feet wide and will contain two 12-foot
travel lanes, a 10-foot outside shoulder, and a 6-foot inside
shoulder. It is anticipated the dual structures will each be
approximately 210 feet long.
8. Interchange
An interchange will be provided where the proposed Edwards Mill
Road extension crosses under Wade Avenue. The interchange proposed
is a compressed diamond. See Figure 5 for a graphical representation
of the interchange. It is anticipated both ramp terminals will be
signalized to obtain an acceptable level of service. The recommended
lane assignments for the interchange are described in Section I.B.S.
of this report.
4
9. Drainage Structures
The proposed project involves four streams. In Section A of the
project, the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension crosses Richland
Creek approximately 0.6 mile south of Wade Avenue. The recommended
drainage structure at this crossing is a double barrel 8' x 8'
reinforced concrete box culvert. In addition, the existing arch pipe
that carries Richland Creek under Trinity Road will be replaced by a
double barrel 8' x 8' reinforced concrete box culvert. As a part of
the proposed interchange at Wade Avenue, the existing 300-foot long
8' x 8' reinforced concrete box culvert that carries Richland Creek
underneath Wade Avenue will be extended to accommodate the proposed
interchange ramps. An existing 7' x 6' reinforced concrete box
culvert will be extended to accommodate an unnamed tributary to
Richland Creek in the interchange area. In Section B of the project,
the Edwards Mill Road extension crosses Armory Tributary to Richland
Creek approximately 0.6 mile north of Wade Avenue. The recommended
drainage structure for this stream crossing is a double barrel 7'x 8'
reinforced concrete box culvert. The third drainage crossing occurs
where the Edwards Mill Road extension crosses Tysonville Tributary to
Richland Creek approximately 0.4 mile north of Reedy Creek Road. The
recommended drainage structure for this stream crossing is a double
barrel 10'x 5' reinforced concrete box culvert. The structures
within the flood plains will be designed to avoid a significant
increase in upstream flooding or an increase greater than a 1.0-foot
floodway surcharge.
10. Railroads
No railroads cross within or adjacent to the project limits.
11. Greenways
The Capital Area Greenway is a system of public recreational
trails which provide for activities such as walking, jogging, biking,
hiking, fishing, and picnicking. The trails connect several of
Raleigh's parks and compliment the recreational activities at the
parks. A major goal of the Greenway Program is to establish a closed
network of interconnected trails.
Two greenways administered by the City of Raleigh are located
within the project area. One is located along Reedy Creek in
Section B of the project, and the other, Loblolly Trail, follows
Richland Creek. The Loblolly Trail greenway will be relocated by
North Carolina State University near its southern terminus at Trinity
Road (SR 1656) in conjunction with the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex arena construction. It is anticipated the
Edwards Mill Road extension will cross the Loblolly Trail greenway in
Section A south of Wade Avenue near the proposed arena. Appropriate
provisions to accommodate the greenway will be provided as described
in Section VII of this report. No adverse impacts to the Reedy Creek
greenway are anticipated by the recommended construction in
Section B.
12. Parking
Parking is not currently permitted along the existing section of
Edwards Mill Road and will not be permitted along the proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension.
13. Sidewalks
Any existing sidewalks that are disturbed during project
construction will be replaced. No other sidewalks are proposed as a
part of this project; however, a 10-foot berm will be provided on
both sides of the proposed extension along Section B of the project
where a sidewalk can be provided in the future.
14. Bicycles
As part of Section A construction between Trinity Road and Wade
Avenue, 10-foot paved shoulders will be provided that can accommodate
cyclists. For Section B, between Wade Avenue and Duraleigh Road,
16-foot outside lanes will be provided on both sides of the proposed
facility. The outside 4 feet will be striped for bicycle use.
15. Monuments
Two geodetic survey markers are located in the project area. If
the monuments need to be moved or destroyed, the North Carolina
Geodetic Survey will be notified prior to any construction activities
(See Appendix page A-13 for address and phone number).
16. Cost Estimates
The total estimated cost for the proposed extension of Edwards
Mill Road is $20,500,000 including $10,900,000 for Section A
construction, $3,000,000 for Section B construction, and $6,600,000
for Section A and B right of way costs.
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project is to be built entirely on new location. Below
is a description of existing Edwards Mill Road north of Duraleigh Road.
A. Characteristics of the Existing Facility
1. Existing Cross Section
The cross section along existing Edwards Mill Road is variable
from Duraleigh Road to Creedmoor Road at Glenwood Avenue (1.4 miles
north of the north project limit), but generally consists of two
lanes with 6 to 20-foot wide usable grass shoulders. A center
turning lane exists at several intersections along the existing road
to allow access to adjacent development. From the north project
6
limit to John Humpheries Wynd (0.2 mile), Edwards Mill Road widens to
four lanes to accommodate turning movements onto Duraleigh Road as
well as movements into Olde Raleigh Village shopping center and the
Kaiser Permanente medical facility.
2. Sidewalks
From the Edwards Mill
approximately 0.2 mile north
Road, a 5-foot wide sidewalk
exists on both sides of the i
intersection with Creedmoor
exist along the Edwards Mill
and Crabtree Valley Mall.
Road/Duraleigh Road intersection to
of the intersection on Edwards Mill
set behind a curb and gutter section
^oad. From John Humpheries Wynd to its
Road at Glenwood Avenue, no sidewalks
Road corridor except at Kiddshill Plaza
3. Right of Way
The existing cross section is contained within claimed right of
way limits that vary according to the maintained ditch line on each
side of the road. Near the Duraleigh Road/Edwards Mill Road
intersection, the limits of existing right of way are approximately
100 feet. The right of way width along the remaining existing
portion of Edwards Mill Road is approximately 60 feet.
4. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control
The following roads intersect Edwards Mill Road at grade and are
stop sign controlled unless otherwise noted:
John Humphries Wynd
SR 1668 (Laurel Hills Road)
Blueberry Drive
Marietta Court
SR 3031 (Carriage Road)
SR 2200 (Glen Eden Drive) Signalized
SR 1701 (Pine Road)
SR 4000 (Glen Laurel Road)
Mill Village Drive
5. Speed Zones
The posted speed limit along the route is 45 mph. Between
SR 4000 (Glen Laurel Road) and Mill Village Drive near Helen Stough
Elementary School, the posted speed limit is reduced to 25 mph
between 7:30 A. M. and 9:00 A. M. and between 2:00 P. M. and
3:30 P. M. Monday through Friday.
6. Hydrologic Structures
Mostly small drainage structures, such as pipes, are currently
used to accommodate runoff. There is one bridge built in 1973
(156 feet long and 90 feet wide) across Crabtree Creek. The bridge
has a sufficiency rating of 77.8 out of a possible 100.0.
7. Utilities
All major utilities (electric, water, sanitary sewer,
telecommunications, and natural gas) are located on the Edwards Mill
Road corridor and will be accommodated during and after construction
of the Edwards Mill Road extension. Utility conflicts are
anticipated to be low.
8. School Bus Data
Approximately twenty daily trips are made by school buses along
Edwards Mill Road.
B. Pro.iected Traffic Volumes and Cagacit
The 1992 average daily traffic (ADT) volumes for the existing Blue
Ridge Road/Duraleigh Road corridor range from a low of 19,800 vehicles per
day (vpd) near Edwards Mill Road to a high 40,000 vpd at the Wade
Avenue/Blue Ridge Road interchange. These volumes are predicted to
increase to 25,600 vpd and 52,200 vpd respectively by the year 2001
without the proposed improvement. By the year 2018, these volumes are
predicted to increase to 36,000 vpd and 73,000 vpd respectively and
include 1% truck tractor semi-trailer (TTST), 3% dual tired trucks (DUAL),
and a design hour volume (DHV) of 10%.
With construction of the proposed project, the highest projected
traffic volume for the year 2018 in the Blue Ridge Road/Duraleigh Road
corridor is 55,200 vpd at the Wade Avenue/Blue Ridge Road interchange.
The highest volume on the proposed Edwards Mill Road Extension is
13,400 vpd at the proposed Edwards Mill Road/Wade Avenue interchange.
These volumes include 1% TTST and 3% DUAL along existing Blue Ridge Road
and 3% TTST and 5% DUAL along the proposed project. Both roads have a DHV
of 10%.
The traffic carrying capacity of a facility such as the proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension, which is located in a suburban area and has
signalized intersections spaced less than 1 mile apart, is generally
determined by the ability of the signalized intersections to accommodate
the traffic. This ability is described by levels of service which range
from A through F. Level of service A, the highest level of service, is
characterized by very low delay in which most vehicles do not stop at all.
In level B, traffic operation is stable, but more vehicles are stopping
and causing higher levels of delay. Level of service C is characterized
by stable operation, with drivers occasionally having to wait through more
than one red indication. Most drivers feel somewhat restricted in these
circumstances. At level of service D, the influence of congestion becomes
more noticeable. Delays to approaching vehicles may be substantial during
short periods of the peak hour. Level of service E is considered to be
the limit of acceptable delay and represents the theoretical capacity of
the facility. Level of service F represents over saturated or jammed
conditions which are considered unacceptable to most drivers.
8
The existing Blue Ridge Road/Duraleigh Road corridor is currently
experiencing peak hour congestion at major intersections along the route.
The proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road will reduce the demand volumes
along Blue Ridge Road/Duraleigh Road and improve the overall capacity
along the route.
Intersection capacities along the proposed Edwards Mill Road
extension were analyzed for the proposed Section A construction year 1996,
the anticipated Section B construction year 2001, and the design year
2018. The traffic movements were based on projected design hour volumes
and a posted speed limit of 45 mph. The proposed traffic signals at the
interchange ramps were analyzed as a system. The proposed signalized
intersections at Trinity Road and at Duraleigh Road were analyzed as
isolated intersections.
The 1996, 2001, and 2018 levels of service for each of the proposed
signalized intersections are listed below in Table 1.
TABLE 1
Intersection Capacity
Analysis
Level of Service
Intersection 1996 001 2018
With Edwards Mill Road
Extension LOS LOS LOS
Trinity Road A B B
Southernmost Wade
Avenue Ramp C C C
Terminals
Northernmost Wade
Avenue Ramp C C C
Terminals
Duraleigh Road N/A C D
Upon completion of Section B of the project, the Edwards Mill Road
Extension is expected to initially operate at a level of service C or
better and at level D or better by the end of the planning period. During
time periods when events are being held at the proposed Sports and
Entertainment Complex, the predicted level of service will deteriorate.
9
Given the heavy anticipated traffic volumes during event hours, other
alternatives besides lane additions should be considered to improve
mobility and access to these areas. See Section III. D. for a discussion
of existing and proposed alternative transportation options in this
corridor.
C. Thoroughfare Plan and Route Function
Edwards Mill Road is designated a major thoroughfare in the Greater
Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan (mutually adopted in 1991) and
functions as an urban minor arterial according to the Functional
Classification Plan. The proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road will be
a major link between Wade Avenue and US 70 and will also provide land
access to the area surrounded by I-40, Wade Avenue, and I-440 (Raleigh
Beltline). One major facility which will require access from the proposed
extension is the Sports and Entertainment Complex to be located south of
Wade Avenue. The Edwards Mill Road extension will not function as a bypass
to this area, but is part of an overall plan to provide access to this
area. Other routes that will provide access to and bypasses of the area
are on the Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan. The proposed
improvements are in conformance with the thoroughfare plan and will be a
step towards its implementation. See Figure 6 for a copy of a portion of
the Greater Raleigh Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan for the project area.
III. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
The alternatives considered for this project consist of several
construction alternatives, a public transportation alternative, and the
"no-build" alternative. For discussion purposes, the construction
alternatives have been divided into Section A (from Trinity Road to Wade
Avenue) and Section B (from Wade Avenue to Duraleigh Road). See Figure 1
for a breakdown of the project sections. Section A consists of one
alignment alternative and two cross section alternatives. Section B
consists of three alignment alternatives and two cross section
alternatives.
A. Construction Alternatives
1. Section A
a. Alignment 1 (recommended)
Alignment 1 begins on Trinity Road approximately 0.3 mile
east of SR 1657 (Nowell Road) and extends north on new location
to Wade Avenue west of the proposed Sports and Entertainment
arena site. An interchange is proposed where the Edwards Mill
Road extension crosses underneath Wade Avenue. The alignment
recommended for Section A has been coordinated with officials
from N. C. State University, the City of Raleigh, and the
Catholic Diocese, who currently own or administrate all of the
land in this section of the proposed project. No displacements
are anticipated along the recommended alignment for Section A.
10
b. Cross Section 1 (recommended)
A five-lane curb and gutter section is recommended for
Section A of the proposed project. It is anticipated a
five-lane cross section can be contained within 375 feet of
right of way plus construction easements. At the proposed
interchange, the anticipated right of way width increases to
approximately 1000 feet.
In order for a five-lane section to accommodate proposed
traffic volumes during arena and stadium event times, a
reversible lane system is needed. One option would be to
provide three lanes inbound from the Wade Avenue interchange and
two lanes outbound from the south before the event and reversed
after the event.
During sell out events or multiple events, another option
would be to provide four lanes inbound and one lane outbound
before the event in order to process larger volumes of traffic
in a reasonable time frame. The transit access could be
improved by designating one of these lanes as transit only. The
total estimated cost along Section A for cross section 1 is
$10,920,000 including $10,400,000 for construction, $500,000 for
the reversible lane system, and $20,000 for right of way.
C. Cross Section 2
A six-lane, 30-foot median shoulder section was also
studied for Section A of the project. It is anticipated this
cross section can be contained within 375 feet of right of way.
At the proposed interchange, the needed right of way width
increases to approximately 1000 feet. Full depth pavement is
recommended on the proposed 10-foot paved shoulders to allow
traffic movements on the roadway shoulders during arena and
stadium event times. The total estimated cost along Section A
for cross section 2 is $11,620,000 including $11,600,000 for
construction and $20,000 for right of way.
2. Section B
a. Alignment 1 (recommended)
Alignment 1 of Section B extends northeast on new location
from the Wade Avenue interchange to Duraleigh Road, a distance
of 1.4 miles. It crosses Reedy Creek Park Road (SR 1775)
approximately 0.1 mile west of the NCDEHNR-DEM Air/Water Quality
Chemical Laboratory and passes east of a pond as it crosses
Forest View Drive (SR 1667). See Figure 3 for an aerial mosaic
showing Alignment 1 of Section B. It is anticipated two
residences and one heavy equipment storage garage will be
relocated along Alignment 1.
11
b. Alignment 2
Alignment 2 extends northeast from the proposed Wade Avenue
interchange on new location, curving east of Alignment 1 between
Wade Avenue and Reedy Creek Road. At Reedy Creek Road,
Alignment 2 intersects Alignment 1 and continues west of
Alignment 1. Near the west terminal of SR 1667 (Forest View
Drive), Alignment 2 curves to the east until it ties in with
existing Edwards Mill Road at the Duraleigh Road intersection.
See Figure 3 for an aerial mosaic showing Alignment 2 of Section
B. Two residences and one equine (horse) isolation stable will
be relocated along Alignment 2.
C. Alignment 3
From the proposed Wade Avenue interchange, Alignment 3
continues on new location along a centerline identical to
Alignment 1 for approximately 0.4 mile. Alignment 3 then bears
west of Alignment 1 and joins Alignment 2 near the west terminus
of SR 1667 (Forest View Drive). Alignment 3 then curves to the
east until it ties in to existing Edwards Mill Road at Duraleigh
Road. See Figure 3 for an aerial mosaic showing Alignment 3 of
Section B. One residence will be relocated along Alignment 3.
d. Cross Section 1 (recommended)
A four-lane, 54-foot median section with expressway gutter
is recommended for Section B. It is anticipated the recommended
cross section can be contained within 200 feet of right of way
plus construction easements. A four-lane section is recommended
in lieu of a six-lane section because it can accommodate
projected traffic volumes through the design year 2018. The
provision of a 54-foot median allows flexibility to add travel
lanes to the facility within the median as the area further
develops. The installation of a median divider reduces the
likelihood of rear-end, angle, and head-on collisions between
vehicles. In addition, a median divider can be used to
discourage new strip commercial development and preserve the
traffic movement function of the roadway. Expressway gutter is
recommended to set the right of way width and to transition
between the recommended shoulder section in Section A south of
Wade Avenue and the existing curb and gutter section on Edwards
Mill Road north of Section B. The total cost of this cross
section along the recommended alignment of Section B is
$9,580,000 including $3,000,000 for construction and $6,580,000
for right of way.
e. Cross Section 2
A five-lane curb and gutter section was also studied for
Section B of the proposed project. It is anticipated a
five-lane cross section can be contained within the same
12
right of way width as the recommended cross section. The total
estimated cost for cross section 2 along the recommended
alignment for Section B is $9,180,000 including $2,600,000 for
construction and $6,580,000 for right of way.
B. Public Transportation Alternative
Selective use of public transportation can enhance the effectiveness
of the proposed project, but it will not meet the total traffic carrying
needs in the studied corridor. The proposed highway construction will
improve opportunities for using public transportation alternatives. Plans
prepared by the State of North Carolina and the cities of the Research
Triangle Region call for the selective use of transit to play an
increasingly important role in providing mobility to local residents,
particularly as the area continues to develop.
Current public transportation services include the following:
Capital Area Transit (CAT) - CAT provides regular, fixed-route, demand-
responsive, an i capped-access i bl e transit service approximately
18 hours each weekday, with more service during rush hours, and less
service at other times and on weekends. CAT does not serve the
Edwards Mill Road corridor directly, but Route #4 (Rex Hospital)
serves the northern section of the corridor including Blue Ridge Road
between Crabtree Valley and Rex Hospital.
Tri-A-Ride Regional Ridesharin Program - Tri-A-Ride, currently operated
by the Triangle Transit Authority (TTA), offers free computerized
car/van pool matching services and vanpool start-up assistance and
also leases vans for vanpools. Tri-A-Ride currently has over 6000
names in its car/van pool matching data base. The number of vans
leased by Tri-A-Ride is 24. The number of vans that serve the
downtown Raleigh area from outlying areas is 10. The rest of the
vans serve the Durham-Chapel Hill area.
West Raleigh Park-and-Ride Lot - A 238-space park-and-ride lot has been
constructed near the northwest quadrant of the Blue Ridge Road/Wade
Avenue interchange to serve eastbound and westbound I-40 traffic.
Although the lot is not being heavily used currently, it is
anticipated the number of users will increase.
County Coordinated Transportation Service (WCCTS) -WCCTS provides
pu6Tic transportation services Monday through Friday from 6:00 A. M.
to 6:00 P. M., all year, to eligible clients. WCCTS provides human,
health, and nutrition site transportation services to the elderly
and/or transportation disadvantaged citizens of Wake County. This
service includes trips for employment, social, recreational, medical,
shopping, day-care, human service, and other purposes.
Accessible Raleigh Transportation (ART) - ART provides public
transportation services to the physically disabled that are not
associated with social services under the WCCTS program. ART
services any location within the Raleigh city limits and is totally
funded by city taxes.
13
Re Tonal Bus Service - The Triangle Transit Authority offers fixed-rate,
ixe -route, andicapped-accessible, regional bus service to Raleigh,
Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary, Research Triangle Park, and Raleigh-Durham
International Airport. The buses operate for approximately 5 hours
each weekday during the morning and afternoon peak traffic hours.
The regional bus service does not serve Edwards Mill Road directly,
but the Red Line serves Wade Avenue and Blue Ridge Road near the
project corridor, and the Orange Line serves Pleasant Valley Road and
Millbrook Road north of the project corridor.
Other Services - There are other public transportation services available
directly and indirectly to the Project U-2582 corridor. These
services include taxi-cabs, limousines, airport/hotel shuttles,
inter-city scheduled bus services, charter bus services, human
service agencies, and others.
Contemplated longer term public transportation improvements include
the following:
People Mover - North Carolina State University contracted the firm of
Douglas and Douglas to evaluate the feasibility of a People Mover
connecting the existing main campus with the new Centennial Campus
development. The study indicated a need for the People Mover system
as early as 1995, when projected daily ridership approaches 15,000
trips per day. If constructed, the People Mover could eventually
reach as far west as the State Fairgrounds near the southern project
limit.
Regional Fixed Guideway S stem - The Triangle Transit Authority is
starting Phase III o a our phase study on fixed guideway systems
for the Triangle Region. The term "fixed guideway system"
encompasses a range of public transit options including priority bus
lanes, light rail transit, rail bus, heavy rail transit, commuter
rail, and people mover systems. Currently, the Triangle Transit
Authority is exploring various combinations of the land use and
transit options available to determine which choice would best serve
the needs of area residents and businesses. If a combination emerges
that is both desirable and feasible, Phase IV will refine the plan,
designate locations for station areas, identify the connecting
corridors, and prepare more detailed options for financing the
project. The fixed guideway system will likely service the N. C.
State Fairgrounds and the North Carolina Sports and Entertainment
Complex.
C. "Do Nothing" Alternative
The "do nothing" alternative has been considered during the
development of this project. Because there are both advantages and
disadvantages associated with almost any major highway project, it is
important to give consideration to the option. of not constructing the
project. Some of the advantages of the project include enhanced traffic
carrying capability, enhanced access to future development, improved
mobility for emergency vehicles, and a decreased expenditure of time and
money by motorists.
14
Some disadvantages of building the project include expenditure of
funds, the acquisition of additional right of way resulting in the
displacement of families and non-profit structures, the taking of wetland
and forest resources, and an increase in noise.
A critical need to relieve congestion on Blue Ridge Road and
Duraleigh Road between Edwards Mill Road and Wade Avenue exists.
Furthermore, failure to build the road would preclude the development of
the Sports and Entertainment Complex and land north of Wade Avenue. For
these combined reasons, the "do nothing" alternative is not recommended.
IV. EVALUATION OF CONSTRUCTION ALTERNATIVES
A. Alignment Considerations
1. Section A
Only one alignment was considered feasible for Section A of the
project due to existing and proposed development in the area. A
series of meetings was held that involved representatives from N. C.
State University, the Catholic Diocese, and the City of Raleigh. The
recommended alignment for Section A was carefully planned to
accommodate the North Carolina Sports and Entertainment arena on the
east side of the proposed alignment, future plans of the Catholic
Diocese on the west side of the proposed alignment, and the Capital
Area Greenway system's Loblolly Trail that is crossed by the proposed
alignment.
The recommended alignment for Section A does not require any
relocatees and does not have substantial adverse environmental
impacts.
2. Section B
Three alignment alternatives were evaluated for Section B of the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension as described in Section III.A.2.
of this report. Alignment 1 is the recommended alignment for the
following reasons:
(1) Alignment 1 impacts the least acreage of natural
terrestrial communities of the studied alignments.
(2) Alignment 1 avoids impacting (filling) a pond near SR 1667.
(3) Alignment 1 avoids impacts to the Capital Area Greenway
near SR 1667.
(4) Alignment 1 avoids impacting a small wetland site
associated with the pond near SR 1667.
(5) Alignment 1 is the shortest of the studied alignments along
Section B.
15
(6) Alignment 1 has straight, rather than curved, approaches to
the Wade Avenue interchange and the Duraleigh Road/Edwards
Mill Road intersection.
Alignments 2 and 3 will require relocating one less residence
than the recommended alignment; however, they will both require
disturbance of an additional segment of the Capital Area Greenway and
filling a pond near SR 1661. The recommended alignment (Alignment 1)
does not take any land from the segment of the Capital Area Greenway
located Reedy Creek; nor does it disturb or impact the greenway.
Disturbance to the Capital Area Greenway requires compliance with
Section 4(f) of the D.O.T. Act of 1966.
B. Cross Section Considerations
1. Section A
Two cross section alternatives were evaluated for Section A of
the proposed project including a 5-lane curb and gutter cross section
(Cross Section 1) and a 6-lane median divided section (Cross Section
2). Cross section 1 is the recommended cross section for the
following reasons:
(1) The recommended 5-lane shoulder section with reversible
lane system will adequately accommodate projected traffic
during both non-event and event times at the Sports and
Entertainment arena. Providing 10-foot paved outside
shoulders in lieu of concrete gutter allows traffic to
travel on the shoulders during event times, if necessary.
(2) Recommended 10-foot paved shoulders will accommodate
bicyclists in Section A.
(3) The recommended cross section is less expensive than the
studied 6-lane median divided cross section.
(4) The recommended reversible lane system provides flexibility
to specialize lane functions during sellout versus
non-sellout events at the proposed arena.
2. Sect=
Two cross section alternatives were evaluated for Section B of
the proposed project including a 4-lane median divided section (Cross
Section 1) and a 5-lane curb and gutter cross section (Cross Section
2). Cross section 1 is the recommended cross section for the
following reasons:
(1) The 4-lane, 54-foot median section proposed for Section B
will accommodate projected traffic volumes along the
Edwards Mill Road extension between Wade Avenue and
Duraleigh Road.
(2) The 54-foot median provides space to widen the Edwards Mill
Road extension in the future within the median area.
16
(3) The recommended expressway gutter provides an appropriate
transition between the urban curb and gutter facility that
exists north of Duraleigh Road and the shoulder section
recommended south of Wade Avenue.
(4) Provision of a median enhances the safety of the facility
for motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians.
(5) Provision of a median divider discourages "strip" style
development and helps preserve the traffic carrying
function of the proposed facility.
Although the studied cross sections provide similar traffic
capacities, the five-lane curb and gutter section does not allow
flexibility to increase traffic capacity without expanding the
pavement width outside of the curb limits or extending the reversible
lane system to the Edwards Mill Road/Duraleigh Road intersection.
V. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Social Effects
1. Land Use
a. Scooe of Local Plannina Activities
The project is located within the City of Raleigh municipal
limits. Vision 2020: The Raleigh Comprehensive Plan provides an
inclusive escription o the City's long range policies for land
use and development. Adopted in 1989, the document contains a
series of "small area plans" which provide information on
proposed public facilities, including parks, utilities, and
thoroughfares. In addition, the plan describes the type and
intensity of development planned for each portion of the study
area.
The City also enforces a zoning ordinance, which is based
on the Vision 2020 plan, as well as subdivision regulations.
The City is also currently implementing a greenways master plan
(See Section I. B. 11. of this report for a detailed discussion
of greenways in the project area). Raleigh has adopted a
Thoroughfare Plan developed jointly with Wake County,
Morrisville, and Cary (See Figure 6 for the Greater Raleigh
Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan in the project area).
b. Existing Land Use
The immediate project area is generally undeveloped,
although it is located in the vicinity of several intensive land
uses, including Carter-Finley Stadium near its southern
terminus, and the Olde Raleigh Village Shopping Center and
17
Kaiser Permanente medical offices at its northern terminus. The
alignments cross a portion of the North Carolina State
University Agricultural Center in the vicinity of Reedy Creek
Park Road (SR 1775) and Wade Avenue (SR 1728). The remainder of
the project area is comprised of woodlands and pastures.
Currently, construction of a sporting arena, called the
North Carolina Sports and Entertainment Complex arena, by the
State of North Carolina is underway south of Wade Avenue, just
east of the site of the proposed Edwards Mill Road Extension.
The arena will be a part of the proposed North Carolina Sports
and Entertainment Complex.
Two greenways administered by the City of Raleigh are
located within the project area. One is located along Reedy
Creek, and the other, Loblolly Trail, follows Richland Creek.
The Loblolly Trail greenway will be relocated by North Carolina
State University near its southern terminus at Trinity Road
(SR 1656). It is anticipated the Edwards Mill Road Extension
will cross the Loblolly Trail greenway south of Wade Avenue near
the proposed North Carolina Sports and Entertainment Complex.
Appropriate provisions to accommodate the greenway will be
provided as described in Section VII. of this report.
C. Existing Zoning
Zoning districts in the project area vary widely in the
uses they permit. The land at each end of the project is zoned
for Office and Institutional uses. Some low and medium density
residential zoning districts are also located along Duraleigh
Road (SR 1664) and along Forest View Drive (SR 1667). The land
along Reedy Creek Park Road is zoned Agricultural Productive.
d. Future Land Use
The project area is addressed in the "Northwest District
Plan," a sub-section of Raleigh's Vision 2020 comprehensive
plan. According to the plan, the Northwest istrict is second
only to Raleigh's North District in its rate of residential
growth. The City projects the area's growth rate at three to
five percent annually through the year 2010. The area's total
employment is expected to increase from 16,300 (1988) to 41,300
jobs in 2020.
The Edwards Mill Road extension is shown as a proposed
arterial in the plan. The plan indicates that the area
surrounding the proposed alignment is expected to become the
only significant employment center within the Northwest
District.
A portion of the project area is owned by the State of
North Carolina, administered by North Carolina State University.
The North Carolina Department of Administration developed a plan
for that portion of the project area in 1989, titled the Blue
18
Ridge Master Plan. The plan indicates that much of the
undeveloped land within the project area will be used for an
expansion of the North Carolina National Guard facility, the
North Carolina Museum of Art, and the North Carolina Department
of Agriculture. The Edwards Mill Road extension and the two
previously mentioned greenways are incorporated in the plan.
e. Relationship of Project with Local Land Use Plans
The proposed project is an element of the Greater Raleigh
Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan. It will provide access to land
which is expected to serve western Raleigh as an important
employment center, as well as the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex under construction. Therefore, the
project is compatible with local long range plans.
2. Neighborhood Analysis
The Edwards Mill Road extension corridor consists mostly of
woodlands and pastureland. The only residential areas that will be
directly impacted by project construction are located near the north
project terminal where the recommended alignment crosses Forest View
Drive (SR 1667) and ties in with existing Edwards Mill Road (SR 3009)
at Duraleigh Road (SR 1664). Although the population density is not
high along the Edwards Mill Road extension corridor, many residents
are lifelong residents witnessing the urbanization of Duraleigh and
Edwards Mill roads.
3. Relocation Impacts
Based on preliminary designs, it is anticipated that the
recommended alternative will impact two (2) residences and one (1)
heavy equipment storage garage north of Wade Avenue. The Division of
Highways offers a Relocation Assistance Program to help minimize the
effects of displacement on families. The occupants of the affected
residences may qualify for aid under one or more of the NCDOT
relocation programs.
It is the policy of the NCDOT to ensure that comparable
replacement housing will be available prior to construction of state
and federally-assisted projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina
Board of Transportation has the following three programs to minimize
the inconvenience of relocation:
*Relocation Assistance
*Relocation Moving Payments
*Relocation Replacement Housing
Payments or Rent Supplement
The Relocation Assistance Program provides experienced NCDOT
staff to assist displacees with information such as availability and
prices of homes, apartments, or businesses for sale or rent and
financing or other housing programs. The Relocation Moving Payments
Program, in general, provides for payment of actual moving expenses
19
encountered in relocation. Where displacement will force an owner or
tenant to purchase or rent property of higher cost or to lose a
favorable financing arrangement (in cases of ownership), the
Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement Program
will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and qualify
and up to $5,250 to tenants who are eligible and qualify.
The relocation program for the proposed action will be conducted
in accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646), and
the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5 through
133-18). The program is designed to provide assistance to displaced
persons in relocating to a replacement site in which to live or do
business. At least one relocation officer is assigned to each
highway project for this purpose.
The relocation officer will determine the needs of displaced
families, individuals, businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm
operations for relocation advisory services without regard to race,
color, religion, sex, or national origin. The NCDOT will schedule
its work to allow ample time, prior to displacement, for negotiations
and possession of replacement housing which meets decent, safe, and
sanitary standards. The displacees are given at least a 90-day
written notice after NCDOT purchases the property. Relocation of
displaced persons will be offered in areas not generally less
desirable in regard to public utilities and commercial facilities.
Rent and sale prices of replacement property will be within financial
means of the families and individuals displaced and will be
reasonably accessible to their places of employment. The relocation
officer will also assist owners of displaced businesses, non-profit
organizations, and farm operations in searching for and moving to
replacement property.
All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced
will receive an explanation regarding all available options, such as
(1) purchase of replacement housing, (2) rental of replacement
housing, either private or public, or (3) moving existing
owner-occupant housing to another site (if possible). The relocation
officer will also supply information concerning other state or
federal programs offering assistance to displaced persons and will
provide other advisory services as needed in order to minimize
hardships to displaced persons in adjusting to a new location.
The Moving Expense Payments Program is designed to compensate
the displacee for the costs of moving personal property from homes,
businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations acquired
for a highway project. Under the Replacement Program for Owners,
NCDOT will participate in reasonable incidental purchase payments for
replacement dwellings such as attorney's fees, surveys, appraisals,
and other closing costs and, if applicable, make a payment for any
increased interest expenses for replacement dwellings. Reimbursement
to owner-occupants for replacement housing payments, increased
interest payments, and incidental purchase expenses may not exceed
$22,500 (combined total), except under the Last Resort Housing
provision.
20
A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to
exceed $5,250, to rent a replacement dwelling or to make a down
payment, including incidental expenses, on the purchase of a
replacement dwelling. The down payment is based upon what the state
determines is required when the rent supplement exceeds $5,250.
It is the policy of the state that no person will be displaced
by the NCDOT's state or federally-assisted construction projects
unless and until comparable replacement housing has been offered or
provided for each displacee within a reasonable period of time prior
to displacement. No relocation payment received will be considered
as income for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 or
for the purposes of determining eligibility or the extent of
eligibility of any person for assistance under the Social Security
Act or any other federal law.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable
replacement housing is not available, or when it is unavailable
within the displacee's financial means, and the replacement payment
exceeds the federal/state legal limitation. The purpose of the
program is to allow broad latitudes in methods of implementation by
the state so that decent, safe, and sanitary replacement housing can
be provided. It is not felt that this program will be necessary on
the project, since there appear to be adequate opportunities for
relocation within the area.
4. Public and Private Facilities
Two privately owned facilities are located at the north project
terminal: the Olde Raleigh Village Shopping Center and the Kaiser
Permanente medical offices. Most of the facilities located along or
near the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension corridor are public
facilities owned by the State of North Carolina or the City of
Raleigh including the Loblolly Trail greenway, the Reedy Creek
greenway, the N. C. State University College of Agriculture and Life
Sciences beef cattle pasture land, the North Carolina Division of
Environmental Management Air and Water Quality Chemical Lab, and the
North Carolina National Guard Complex.
N. C. State Fairgrounds
In addition to these facilities, the N. C. State Fairgrounds are
located on the south side of Trinity Road (SR 1656) near Carter-
Finley Stadium. There are currently 30 primary buildings at the
Fairgrounds and approximately 5,600 on-site parking spaces. When the
North Carolina State Fair is operating, nearly 17,100 spaces are
used, including 8,100 spaces at Carter-Finley Stadium. The proposed
project will not require any right of way from the N. C. State
Fairgrounds.
Carter-Finley Stadium
Carter-Finley Stadium is located on the north side of Trinity
Road east of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension and serves as
the site for all of North Carolina State University's home football
games. Other spectator events are periodically held at the stadium.
21
Currently, Carter-Finley Stadium has seating for approximately 53,000
spectators. The University has a phased plan for expanding the
stadium to approximately 65,000 seats. The proposed project will not
affect any parking spaces at Carter-Finley Stadium.
North Carolina Sports and Entertainment Complex Arena
Construction has begun on this major sporting and events arena
sited northwest of Carter-Finley Stadium and east of the proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension. The facility will seat approximately
23,000 spectators and will be surrounded by nearly 4,700 paved
parking spaces. It will contain numerous concession areas, 15
restrooms, locker and training rooms, press facilities, hospitality
suites, information and ticketing centers, and a novelty shop.
5. Cultural Resources
a. Architectural/Historic 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 in or eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
be given an opportunity to comment. The project is also subject
to compliance with Section 4(f) of the Department of
Transportation Act of 1966, as amended.
Pursuant to 39 CFR Part 800.4, the National Register of
Historic Places and the State Study Lists have been consulted,
and no known properties were recorded. The area of potential
effect (APE) of the project was reviewed in the field on
January 28, 1993. No properties over fifty years old were
found. In a letter dated September 14, 1993, the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) concurred with the Division of
Highways determination that no National Register listed or
eligible architectural properties are in the area of potential
effect. A copy of the SHPO letter is included on page A-24 in
the Appendix. Since there are no properties either listed in or
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places
in the area of potential effect of this undertaking, no further
compliance with either Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 or with Section 4(f) of the Department
of Transportation Act of 1966 is required for historic
structures.
b. Archaeological Resources
An archaeological survey of the proposed construction area
was conducted between March 10 and March 18, 1993. The survey
yielded three prehistoric and two historic archaeological sites,
which were located and recorded. The prehistoric sites,
22
31Wa1151, 31Wa1152, and 31Wa1153, are lithic scatters with low
information potential. The historic sites, 31Wa1154 and
31Wa1155, are a graphite mine and a surface scatter of early
twentieth century institutional materials. Both of the historic
sites are considered to have low potential to yield important
information about the history of Wake County, and therefore are
not historically or archaeologically significant. No evidence
was recovered which would justify inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places of any site within the project area.
No further work is recommended for the five identified sites.
In a letter dated September 14, 1993, the SHPO concurred
with the Division of Highway's determination that none of the
sites identified are eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places, and no additional archaeological
investigation is warranted for the project. Since there are no
sites either listed in or eligible for the National Register, no
further compliance with Section 106 is required.
B. Economic Effects
According to recent statistics, Wake County has a civilian labor
force of 277,920. Out of this total, 271,740 persons are gainfully
employed. Only 6,180 members (2.2%) of the labor force in Wake County were
unemployed as of March, 1994. The proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road
will decrease traffic congestion along Blue Ridge Road (SR 1670) and will
provide access to existing and planned public facilities. Economic
benefits to the area will be reflected in reduced travel times and
operating expenses. Access between northwest Raleigh and Interstate 40, a
major east-west route in North Carolina and a primary route to the
Research Triangle Park and the Statistical Analysis Systems (SAS) campus,
will be improved.
The economic climate of Raleigh is strongly influenced by the
Research Triangle Park, the nations largest planned research park. The
6,650 acre park is home to over 50 leading corporations engaged in
research and development activities. These corporations employ over
32,000 persons and have an annual payroll in excess of $1 billion. Many
of these employees live in northern Wake County and commute to the
Research Triangle Park along I-40.
The SAS campus encompasses 200 acres on the north side of Cary. Many
of its 1900 employees live in Raleigh and commute to the campus, which is
located adjacent to I-40 at Harrison Avenue.
As the Research Triangle Park and the SAS campus develop, and the
demand for employees increases, the need for improved routes between I-40
and northwest Raleigh will increase.
23
C. Environmental Effects
1. Biotic Resources
The following section describes the ecosystems encountered and
the relationships between vegetative and faunal components within
both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Descriptions of the
terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community
classifications.
Representative animal species which are likely to occur in these
habitats are cited, along with brief descriptions of their respective
"roles" within that community. Animals that were observed during
site visit are denoted by an asterisk (*). Sightings of spoor
evidence are equated with sightings of individuals. Scientific
nomenclature and common names, when applicable, are used for plant
and animal species described. Subsequent references to the same
organism will include the common name only.
a. Terrestrial Communities
Five distinct terrestrial community types were identified
in the project impact zone, however, there is always some degree
of overlap between communities. Community composition is
reflective of the physiography, topography, and current and
prior land uses of the area. Numerous terrestrial animals are
highly adaptive and populate a variety of habitats, therefore
many of the species mentioned may occur in any number of the
different community types described.
Maintained Communities
Maintained Communities are land parcels in which the
vegetation is kept in a low-growing, non-successional state, by
grazing and/or mowing. These communities include pastures,
powerlines, and roadside shoulders and medians. Pastures are
the dominant landscape feature in the project area. These are
owned and managed largely by North Carolina State University.
Various grasses (Poaceae), primarily fescues (Festuca spp.),
populate the pastures, along with a few other herbaceous
species, including dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), red clover
(Trifolium pratense), and wild onion A iu1- cana?ense).
Roadside shoulders of project area roadways and the grass
median of SR 1728 (Wade Avenue) are dominated largely by fescue
and low-growing herbaceous plants such as dandelion, red clover,
wild onion, henbit (Lamium am lexicaule), chickweed (Stellaria
media), and nightsha a olanum sp. . Small shrubs an wee y
vegetation occur at the edges of the cleared roadsides and
forested communities. Common species found here include winged
sumac (Rhus co allina), pokeweed (Ph tolacca americans),
milkweed (Asc a ias sp.), blackberry Ru us spp. , an sericea
(Lespedeza cuneata .
24
The open, relatively nonstratified nature of the maintained
communities limits the number of resident vertebrate fauna.
Small mammals such as least shrew (Cryptotis parva)* and house
mouse (Mus musculus)* occupy open grassy areas and roadside
environments. Teir diminutive size enables them to seek cover
and nest sites in the grassy vegetation. A least shrew nest of
approximately 10 individuals was observed underneath a fallen
traffic sign along Wade Avenue. Several mice were observed in
pastures crossed by the alignment. Small mammals such as these
are preferred prey items of raptors such as red-tailed hawk
(Buteo 'amacensis)*, which soar over open areas to spot their
prey. Two red-tailed hawks were observed roosting in a tree
bordering one of the pasture fields. A Cooper's hawk (Accipiter
co?erii)* was also observed near pond #3 (see Section V. C. 1.
bb ffor a description of the pond) at the edge of an agriculture
field and a forested tract. Because of recent declining
populations, the Cooper's hawk is listed as a State Protected
species of Special Concern (SC).
The eastern meadowlark (Sturnella magna)* and eastern
bluebird (Sialia sia_r lias)* are ot-bier-ie residents which were
observed uuring site visits. Meadowlarks nest in grassy
depressions, while the bluebird constructs nests out of grass or
pine needles, in fence post or bordering tree cavities, and also
bird boxes. Both species are highly insectivorous, but may also
consume fruits and berries.
Several other animals, particularly birds, which reside in
bordering forested habitats, will frequent pasture and roadside
environments to forage on invertebrates, seeds, and berries.
Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis)*, northern cardinal
(Cardinalis cardinalis *, Ameri a robin (Turdus mi ratorius)*,
Carolina wren T r of orus ludovicianus)* and white-throated
sparrow (Zonotric is a ico is * are some of the many birds
which may feed in these habitats. Snakes such as the black
racer (Coluber constrictor) and eastern garter snake (Thamno his
sirtalis may venture into these habitats to feed on insects and
sma mammals. The eastern cottontail (S lvila us floridanus)*
is another common visitor of fields an other open areas.
Virginia opossum (Didel his v?irQiniana)* and raccoon (Procyon
lotor)* frequently forage nocturnally in these habitats, or
travel along roadways between habitats. These animals are often
roadkill victims. Consequently roadkills attract a large number
of scavenger species, including turkey vulture (Cathartes aura)*
and common crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos)*, as we as omestic
dogs and cats.
Pine/Hardwood Upland Forest
This is the most abundant forested habitat within the
project area, occurring on upland plains and slopes. Loblolly
pine (Pinus taeda) comprises over 500 of the mature canopy.
Sweet gum Ligr uambar styraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum),
25
white oak ( uercuuss alba), black oak (Q velutina), and American
beech (Fa us gra dam) comprise the remainder of the canopy.
The mid-canopy is sparsely populated with American holly (Ilex
opaca), flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), black cherry (Prunus
serotina), and younger red map f and sweet gum. Wax myrtle -
MMric_a cerifera) occurs as a shrub, scattered throughout, as is
strawberry ?usi (Euon mus americanus), which is most abundant on
slopes. Due to t e season o the survey, the herbaceous
component of this community could not be adequately surveyed.
Heartleaf (Hexastylis sp.), crane-fly orchard (Ti ulari?a
discolor), pipsissewa (Chima hhil?a maculata), ebony spleenwort
Aspl?en'?ium lat neuron), and christm? aern (Pol stichum
acrostichoi es were abundant. Running-Pine Lrcco odium
a e i orme occurs in dense patches scattered one upland
pans o this habitat. Yellow-root (Xanthorhiza sim licissima)
is common on the slopes, grading down to Ric and ree Green
brier (Smilax spp.), trumpet vine (Cam psis radicans), and poison
ivy (Toxi ocTendron radicans) are present, c im ing on trees.
The diversity and abundance of the faunal component of this
community is limited due to habitat reduction and fragmentation,
which are consequences of surrounding development and
agricultural operations. Representative fauna from all the
terrestrial vertebrate classes were observed in this community
during field investigations. Birds (Aves) were the most
abundant and conspicuous group of animals observed throughout
the forested areas. The forest canopy attracts an abundance of
wood-boring and defoliating insects, which provide forage for
birds, such as downy woodpecker (Picoides ubescens)*,
red-bellied woodpecker (Melaner es caro inus *, ye ow-bellied
sapsucker (Sph?rapicus varius *, pi eate woodpecker (Dr oco us
pilea?tus)*,- ruby-crowned inglet (Regulus calendu a *,
golden-crowned kinglet (R. sa?trapaa)*, brown creeper erthia
a caeru ??er
familiaris)*, blue-gray gnatcatch (Polao til pine
ye ow-rumped warbler (Dendroica c -
(Dendroica in?us), and white-_breastenuthatch (Sitta
caro inensis)?• Many of these species, along with tubed
titmouse Parus bicolor)*, solitary vireo (Vireo solitarius),
gray catbirF TDumeteMa carolinensis), pine s sfcin Car ue is
ip nus)*, American goldfinch tristis)*, and northern
cardinal, will also consume a large amount of fruits, seeds and
new shoots of trees, shrubs and vines.
A great horned owl (Bubo vir inianus)*, was observed during
site visit. Rodents, frogs, insects an small birds are the
primary prey items of this top predator. Other species of owls
(family Strigidae) and hawks (family Accipitridae) may also be
top predators of the community.
Other vertebrate species which utilize the canopy component
of this community include: the grey squirrel (Sciurus
carolinensis)*, Virginia opossum, eastern fence -Tizard
ce oporus undulatus)*, and grey treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis or
26
H. verssiicolor). Bats are also important components of forested
communitie _s. The evening bat (N ctic?eius humeralis) and the
eastern pipistrelle (Pi istrellus subflavus) are two of the more
common species occurring in the Piedmont. Roosting for these
species usually takes place in hollow trees, or crevices under
tree bark.
Many animals which occupy the forest floor are fossorial
(living in burrows), such as worm snake (Carho his amoenus)*,
eastern mole (Scalo us aquaticus), and woodland vole Microtus
inetorum). Earthworms, beet?les, ants and other inverte- r
are the major constituents of their diets. Other animals
utilize the abundant litter layer (leaves and fallen branches),
for cover. The American toad (Bufo americanus), eastern box
turtle (Terra ene carolina)*, limy saman3er (Plethodon
lutinosus *, an ground slink (Scincella lateralis occupy a
variety o forested community types.
Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest
Small tracts of this community type occur at the northern
end of the project area, on moderate to steep slopes, grading
into alluvial streamside forests. The canopy is relatively
dense and mature, however gaps of younger trees occur. White
oak and mockernut hickory (Cara tomentosa) are the dominant
canopy trees. Other less abun ant species comprising the canopy,
include black oak, red oak ( rubra), yellow poplar
(Liriodendron tulli ife?ra), and Tobloll y pine. Red maple,
flowering dogwood, sourwood (Ox dendrum arborem), and American
holly constitute the moderate to dense understory. Few
herbaceous species occur, however these are very abundant,
including heartleaf, crane-fly orchid, rattlesnake plantain
(Goon dyer pu?bescens), and pipsissewa. Woody vines such as
poison ivy,, greenbrier, and grape (Vitis spp.) are also present.
The faunal composition of this community is similar to the
community described earlier. Some animals, including eastern
chipmunk (Tamias striatus)*, white-tailed deer (Odocoileus
vir inianus *, and-hairy woodpecker (Picoides villosus * were
observe only in this community type, owever tare not
restricted to this habitat.
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
This community type occurs on
Creek and its tributaries. Much
experiences occasional flooding.
wetland of this community type may
alignment (See Section V. C. 4. f
areas).
the floodplains of Richland
of this community type
One small jurisdictional
be impacted by the proposed
or descriptions of wetland
River birch (Betula ni ra), American elm (Ulmus americana),
yellow poplar, green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica , -and-b ac erry
(Celtis laevigata) are the ominate canopy species, with
27
chestnut oak (uercus michauxii), sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis), sweetgum, an re maple present to 'sser
extent. the understory is generally sparse, consisting of
American holly, ironwood (Carpinus caro1? iniana), red maple,
boxelder (Acer ne undo), and pawpaw (Asimna triloba Shrubs
are also genera y sparse and include strawberry ush, spicebush
(Lindera benzoin), fetter bush (Leucothoe recurva), and silky
dogwood (Cornus ammonum).
Faunal composition of low moist forests generally differs
from the other types of forested habitats occuring in the
project area. A few species which prefer forested bottomlands
such as this, include the barred owl (Strix varia), swamp
sparrow MMelosiza eor iana), and nortFern parua (Paru
americana). The Alluvia forest is periodically floode , and
thus animals, particularly those occupying the forest floor, are
adapted to occasional inundation. Species such as the marbled
salamander _a _o1acuumm) often reside under logs and stones
near streambanks.Ambystom Many of the faunal residents of the
found adjacent n the
stream community, such as frogs and snakes may
forest near the stream at various times. These species are
discussed in the aquatic community description.
Young Growth Pine Plantation
This small loblolly pine plantation is of uniform age
(<20 yrs) and size. The trees are planted densely and few other
tree species occur. Understory and shrub strata are mostly
lacking. Vines such as green brier and poison ivy are present
and crane-fly orchid is an abundant ground cover species.
Faunal species which utilize the other forested communities
in the project area, particularly the Mixed Pine/Hardwood Upland
Forest, may also be found here, but in smaller numbers and
diversity. The overall quality of wildlife habitat in even-aged
monocultured forests is low compared to more diverse forested
habitats.
Anticipated Impacts to Terrestrial Commnities
Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of the five terrestrial community types
described. The estimated loss to these communities is listed in
Table 2. It should be noted that estimated impacts were derived
using the entire proposed right of way. Project construction
often does not require the entire right of way and actual
impacts may be less.
28
TABLE 2
Summary of Anticipated Terrestrial Community Impacts (acres)
COMMUNITY TYPE
Maintained
AREA IMPACTED
28.5
Pine/Hardwood Upland Forest 11.4
Mesic Oak/Hickory Forest 0.0
Alluvial Forest
8.2
Young Pine Plantation Community 4.9
TOTAL TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITY IMPACTS 53.0
The plant communities found along the alignment serve as
shelter, nesting, and foraging habitat for numerous species of
wildlife. Loss of habitat is likely to reduce the number of
faunal organisms, and concentrate them into a smaller area,
which causes some species to become more susceptible to disease,
predation, and starvation. Habitat fragmentation will also
result from roadway construction on new location. The new
roadway will dissect the existing forested tracts, creating a
barrier between the two separated parcels. Not only does this
loss of habitat and fragmentation result in losses to faunal
populations, but changes in community dynamics are also likely.
In fragmenting the forest, more ecotone habitat is created.
Species which thrive on community edges will increase, while
species which require larger, undisturbed tracts will decrease
or disappear as a result of competitive interactions.
Individual mortalities are likely to occur to animals
closely associated with the ground (snakes, small mammals,
etc.), because of construction machinery used during clearing
and grading activities. Mobile species will be displaced during
construction activity. These animals may return to the area
following construction, however, the amount of forested habitat,
which has already been abated by agricultural clearing, will be
reduced even further.
b. Aquatic Communities
Two aquatic community types (Small Piedmont Stream, and
Small Pond) will be impacted by the proposed action. Several
stream crossings occur in the alignment, and two ponds will also
29
be impacted. Faunal composition of the aquatic communities is
reflective of the physical characteristics of the water body.
The community structure is also greatly influenced by adjacent
terrestrial communities.
Small Piedmont Stream
Research has shown that a large amount of food chain energy
of stream communities is derived from allochthonous (produced
outside of stream ecosystem) sources, in the form of terrestrial
detritus. Rocks, fallen debris (logs, sticks etc), and low
velocity areas in the stream trap or retain detritus within the
stream. The detritus is then decomposed by heterotrophic
microorganisms, such as bacteria, and consumed by macroinverte-
brates, such as aquatic insects. Decomposers and primary
consumers are, in turn, consumed by larger organisms. The
amount of allochthonous energy input within a stream varies
seasonally.
Autochthonous (produced within the stream ecosystem) energy
sources include planktonic and benthic micro and macro algae as
well as aquatic vascular vegetation. Algal growth is excessive
in these streams, a sign of nutrient overload. Eutrophication
can be very detrimental to aquatic organisms, particularly
during developmental stages, because of depleted oxygen levels,
and toxins produced by the algae.
Aquatic invertebrates are a major component of stream
ecosystems, as primary and secondary consumers, and as prey
items for organisms higher in the food chain. Aquatic insects
and larvae, as well as crayfish (Family Cambaridae)* are
prevalent in the project area streams.
Because of the small sizes and shallow depths of these
streams, fish diversity is limited. The swallowtail shiner
(Notro is rocne)*, which feeds on very small invertebrates and
b uegill Lepomis macrochirus)*, which consumes larger prey
(small crayfish, insects etc were the only species observed.
Other consumers in this ecosystem include salamanders, frogs,
and snakes. Two salamander species, northern dusky
(Desmo nathus fuscus)* and three-lined salamander (Eur cea
utto ineat a *,-_a_n_F three frog species; green frog Rana
c amitans *, pickeral frog (R. alustris)* and bullfrog E.
Cates eiana)* were observed w thin t e streambed. Snakes 1F ch
may a present in these streams include northern watersnake
(Nerodia sipedon) and eastern ribbon snake (Thamnophis
sauritus).
Animals such as the belted kingfisher (Me acer le alcyon,),
muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus)*, and raccoon, which reside outside
of the stream, are also important components of the aquatic
ecosystem. The belted kingfisher feeds mainly on small fish and
crustaceans, the muskrat consumes primarily aquatic vegetation,
30
and occasionally shellfish. Raccoons feed on a wide variety of
food items, and will often feed in shallow streams on aquatic
organisms., Both the muskrat and belted kingfisher construct
intricate burrows in streambanks, used for nesting purposes.
Small Pond
Three ponds will be impacted by the proposed project.
Although the pond (#1) between Trinity Road and Wade Avenue is
seriously degraded, community structure is likely to be similar
for all ponds. In small, warm water ponds such as these, light
is a major factor affecting fish distribution. Since waters of
this type environment are generally turbid, most aquatic plant
growth is in shallow water. Beds of aquatic vegetation increase
both habitat complexity and abundance of invertebrates (food
items), thus fish species and numbers tend to be highest in
shallow waters. Fish likely to occur in these areas include
eastern mosquito fish (Gambusia affins)*, pumpkinseed (L?ePomis
ibbosus)bluegill, crappie (Pomxis sp.), golden s ih`ner
Notemiaonus cr soleucas), and i e predatory largemouth bass
(Micro terus sa moi es *. Ponds #2 and #3 are deeper than the
other pond. Catfish Ictalurus sp.) and detrital feeders such as
common carp (Uprinu-s car pio may occur in the deeper areas of
these ponds. These species do not have to rely on vision for
prey capture. None of the fish species occurring in the ponds
are exclusively adapted to pond communities, and are thus
dependent on streams for dispersal and continuation of the
species.
Several other animals are likely inhabitants of the ponds,
including; bullfrog, pickeral frog, snapping turtle (Chel dra
sseer en?tina), northern water snake, crayfish, and muskrat, t e
burrows of which were observed along the pond banks leading into
the water. Birds such as the belted kingfisher, green heron
(Butorides striatus), and the great blue heron (Ardea
hero ias *, 71el-yolay major roles in the pond ecosystem. The
mayor portion of their diet consists of small fish and aquatic
invertebrates. Wood ducks (Aix sponsa)* and mallards (Anas
plat rhynchos)*, along with domesticated muscovy ducks ( airina
moschata)*, and greylag geese (Anser anser)* were present n
pond. A small flock of Canada geese Branta canadensis)* was
seen overhead. Plant material is the pri a y o0 o these
waterfowl, with aquatic insects also constituting a small amount
of their diets.
Anticipated Impacts to Aquatic Communities
The aquatic communities associated with two of the small
ponds will be eliminated by the proposed filling. Anticipated
impacts to the stream communities can be attributed to
construction related habitat disturbance and sedimentation.
Although disturbance and sedimentation may be temporary
processes during the construction phase of this project,
environmental impacts from these processes may be long-lived or
irreversible.
31
The aquatic environment serves as a major food source for
many terrestrial organisms such as raccoons, various species of
snakes, birds, turtles, and amphibians. It also serves as a
means of predator avoidance for amphibians (frogs and
salamanders), reptiles (snakes and turtles), and mammals
(muskrat and mink).
Benthic non-mobile organisms, such as filter and deposit
feeders, and macro and micro alga, are particularly sensitive to
construction activities such as dredging, filling, pile driving
operations, and slope stabilization. These construction
activities physically disturb the substrate, resulting in loss
of sessile benthic organisms. Many of these aquatic organisms
are slow to recover, or repopulate an area, because they require
a stabilized substrate for attachment. Substrate stability may
take a long time to develop, therefore, changes in community
composition will occur.
Light penetration, essential for photosynthetic species,
the primary producers in the food chain, will be reduced as a
result of siltation. Clogging of feeding apparatii of
suspension feeders and burial of newly settled larvae of these
organisms, are other effects of siltation. These species are
often primary consumers in the food chain, and are a major step
in the aquatic food web. Impacts to these organisms may directly
effect organisms higher in the food chain, such as fish,
amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals.
Mobile aquatic organisms may escape some of the effects of
siltation, however gills of fish, crustaceans, and larval
amphibian and insect forms can become clogged and dysfunctional
as a result of sedimentation. Spawning habitats for these
mobile species may become filled with sediment, diminishing
reproductive success and inevitably reducing populations.
Habitat disturbance and sedimentation are extremely
detrimental to aquatic ecosystems. Best Management Practices
(BMP's) for protection of surface waters must be strictly
adhered to ensure the biological integrity of the water bodies
impacted by this project.
Additionally, if measures are not taken to reduce the
amount of probable increased concentrations of toxic compounds
(gasoline, oil, etc.) in the stream, coming from construction
related machinery and road paving activities, mortalities to
numerous types of aquatic organisms are likely.
2. Threatened and Endangered Species
Federal law requires that any action which has the potential to
have a detrimental impact to the survival and well being of any
species classified as federally protected is subject to review by the
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or the National Marine
32
Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the provisions of the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. Endangered species
receive additional protection under separate state statutes. In
North Carolina, protection of plant species falls under N. C.
General statutes (G. S.) 106-202.12 to 106-202.19 of 1979.
Wildlife protection falls under G. S. 113-331 to 113-337 of
1987.
a. Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), and
Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended. As of December 20, 1993 the USFWS lists five
federally protected species for Wake County. These species are
listed in Table 3.
TABLE 3
Federally Protected Species Listed for Wake County
Common Name
Bald Eagle
Red-cockaded woodpecker
Bachman's warbler
Dwarf wedge mussel
Michaux's sumac
Scientific Name
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Picoides borealis
Vermivora bachmanii
Alasmidonta heterodon
Rhus michauxii
Status
E or Endangered: A taxon which is threatened with extinction
throughout all its range.
The project area was surveyed for habitat and individual
specimens of each federally protected species. A discussion of
each species is included in the U-2582 Natural Resources
Technical Report which was complete in March, 1994. No impacts
to the aFd eagle are anticipated as a result of the proposed
project. The study area does not support suitable habitat for
the bald eagle. Eagles nest close (within 0.5 miles) to large
expanses of water in the largest living tree in the span. No
large bodies of water are located within the project area.
33
No impacts to the red-cockaded woodpecker are anticipated
as a result of the proposed project. The Pine/Hardwood Upland
forest offers suitable habitat within the project area, as does
the mature loblolly pine forest (Carl Alwin Schenck Memorial
Forest), located off of Reedy Creek Road (SR 1775) within 0.5
mile of the project boundaries. These areas were surveyed using
methods described in Henery (1989) in November, 1993. No
evidence of red-cockaded woodpeckers inhabiting these areas was
found.
No impacts to Bachman's warbler are anticipated as a result
of the proposed project. Bachman's warblers nest during late
spring in low, wet forested areas. They usually select areas
with an amount of permanent water. There is a preference for
hardwood forest containing sweet gum, oak, and black gum with
openings in the forest canopy filled with dense thickets of
cane, blackberry, and other vines and shrubs. No suitable
habitat for this species occurs in the project area.
No impacts to the dwarf-wedged mussel are anticipated as a
result of the proposed project. The dwarf-wedged mussel is
sensitive to agricultural, domestic, and industrial pollutants
and is usually found in a stable silt free streambed with well
oxygenated water, however recent population discoveries have
been made in swamp habitats. In-stream surveys of Richland
Creek and the other tributaries crossed by the proposed
alignment revealed no signs of mussel fauna.
No impacts to Michaux's sumac are anticipated as a result
of the proposed project. Suitable habitat for this species is
found along many of the existing roadways in the project area,
particularly along Wade Avenue (SR 1728). Habitat is also found
at woodland borders, open fields, and roadways. Plant-by-plant
surveys for this species were conducted in these areas on
November 9, 1993. No individuals were observed.
b. Federal Candidate and State Protected Species
There are ten federal candidate (C2) species listed for
Wake County (See Table 4). Candidate 2 (C2) species are defined
as taxa for which there is some evidence of vulnerability, but
for which there is not enough data to warrant' a listing of
Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered, or Proposed
Threatened at this time.
The North Carolina status of these species is also listed
in Table 4. Plants or animals with state designations of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC), are
given protection by the State Endangered Species Act and the
N. C. Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979,
administered and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission and the North Carolina Department of
Agriculture.
34
These species are listed here for information purposes
since their status classifications may change in the future.
Surveys for these species were not conducted during site visits,
nor were any of these species observed.
TABLE 4
Federal Candidate Species Listed in Wake County
NC Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Status
Southeastern bat Myotis austroriparius Y SC
Bachman's sparrow Aimophila aestivalis Y SC
Neuse slabshell Elliptio judithae N E
Yellow lance Elli tio lanceolata N T
Atlantic pigtoe Fusconaia masoni N T
Green floater Lasmigona subviridis N E
Nestronia Nestronia umbellula N T
Sweet pinesap Monotropis odorata Y C
Carolina trillium Trillium pusillum N E
var. pusi ull m
Diana fritillary Speyeria diana Y SR
butterfly
NC Status: SC, T, E, denote Special Concern, Threatened, Endangered,
respectively. SR and C denote Significantly Rare and Candidate,
which are not protected by state laws.
A search of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
data base of rare plants and animals resulted in no records of
state or federally protected species in the project area. A
Cooper's hawk Acci iter coo erii which is designated SC, was
observed during site visits.
35
3. Surface Water and Water Oualit
The project is located in the Neuse River drainage basin and
crosses Richland Creek and four unnamed tributaries of Richland
Creek. All of the streams can be classified as small Piedmont
streams. Three small unnamed ponds will also be impacted by the
proposed project.
Richland Creek originates approximately 1.5 miles south of Wade
Avenue and flows north into Crabtree Creek approximately 3 miles
north of Wade Avenue. Richland Creek is approximately 12 feet wide
and varies in depth from 6 inches to 2 feet. The substrate is
characterized as bedrock overlain with a mixture of coarse sand,
silt, cobble, and stone. The flow rate was moderate during site
visits. The stream dimensions and characteristics are similar at all
proposed crossings of Richland Creek. The stream is heavily
sedimented and excessive algal growth suggests an overload of
nutrients, most likely the result of agricultural runoff. The
unnamed tributaries of Richland Creek which are likely to be impacted
are slightly smaller, but have similar physical characteristics.
One of the three ponds (Pond #1) is located in a forested area
between Trinity Road (SR 1656) and Wade Avenue (SR 1728). This pond
comprises an area approximately 300 x 200 feet. It is relatively
shallow (less than 5 feet deep) and drains into Richland Creek. The
pond is highly polluted. Trash, appliances, an engine block, and
many other items have been dumped into and around the pond.
Eutrophication is evident in Pond #1. It is anticipated this pond
will be filled during project construction.
Another pond (Pond #2) is located approximately 200 feet south
of the proposed intersection with Wade Avenue and drains into
Richland Creek. Pond #2 comprises an area approximately 400 x 200
feet. It is approximately 10 feet deep in the center. It is
anticipated this pond will be filled during project construction.
The third pond (Pond #3) is located at the west end of Forest
View Drive (SR 1667) near a small residential development. The pond
comprises an area of approximately 300 x 600 feet. It is estimated
to be approximately 8 feet deep. A small, unnamed tributary of
Richland Creek forms this impoundment. It is anticipated the pond
will remain in place under the recommended alternative.
The waters of Richland Creek, the unnamed tributaries, and the
unnamed impoundments impacted by the proposed project carry a best
usage classification of C NSW, as assigned by the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Class C
designates waters suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival,
fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. The
supplemental classification NSW denotes Nutrient Sensitive Waters,
which require limitations on nutrient inputs.
36
No waters classified as High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding
Resource Waters (ORW), WS-I, or WS-II are located within the study
area or within 1 mile downstream; therefore, "High Quality Water'
sedimentation and erosion control is not required.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN), assesses
water quality by sampling for selected benthic macroinvertebrate
organisms. The species richness and overall biomass are reflections
of water quality. Richland Creek was given a biodiversity rating of
"Fair" in 1991 approximately 2 miles downstream of the proposed
crossing.
The Division of Environmental Management National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) report lists no permitted
discharge sources into Richland Creek or any other water resource
within the project boundaries. To reduce potential for impacts on
water resources, non-point sediment sources will be identified and
efforts made to control sediment runoff.
In addition to filling two ponds in the area, potential impacts
to water resources include decreases in dissolved oxygen in streams
and changes in water temperature. These impacts are caused by
removing portions of the existing streamside canopy and removing or
burying aquatic vegetation. Sedimentation or substrate disturbance
occurring during project construction can significantly reduce water
clarity. Culvert placement often causes stream flow restrictions
during construction and channelization after construction.
It is anticipated Richland Creek will be rechannelized at the
proposed Wade Avenue/Edwards Mill Road interchange. If the total
length of stream relocation is greater than 100 feet, or greater than
50 feet on one side, consultation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission will be
required. Relocated streams will be designed to have similar
characteristics (depth, width, and substrate) as the original stream.
This also includes reestablishing streamside vegetation.
4. Wetlands
The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for regulating
activities in "waters of the United States.' Any action that
proposes to impact "waters of the United States" falls under the
jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers, and a federal permit is
required. Generally, "waters of the United States" is defined as
navigable waters, their tributaries, and associated wetlands and is
subdivided into "wetlands" and "surface waters."
Jurisdictional wetlands, as defined by 33 CFR 328.3, are those
areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically
adapted to life in saturated conditions. Criteria for wetland
determinations are described in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland
37
Delineation Manual" (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). Any action
that proposes to place fill in these areas falls under the
jurisdiction of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers under the
provisions of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Surface waters and
wetlands are subsets of "waters of the United States."
The recommended alignment and cross sections will primarily
impact surface waters. A total seven stream crossings and filling
two ponds are anticipated from proposed construction of the Edwards
Mill Road extension.
Two small jurisdictional wetland sites (less than 0.1 acre) were
located during field investigations associated with the outflow from
Ponds #1 and #3, respectively. They are classified as Palustrine
Forested, Deciduous, Temporarily Flooded (PF01A) wetlands. The ponds
are the hydrological sources for these sites, which have remained
flooded for intervals sufficient to produce hydric conditions. It is
anticipated the hydrology of the wetland site associated with Pond #1
will be affected by filling the pond. Under the recommended
alternative, the wetland site associated with Pond #3 will not be
impacted. Total wetland impacts will be less than 0.1 acre.
5. Permits
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a)26 is likely to be applicable
for anticipated impacts to jurisdictional wetlands along the project.
This type of permit applies to wetlands that are isolated and/or
above headwaters (annual flow less than 5 cfs). No notification to
the Corps of Engineers is likely to be required because total wetland
fill is anticipated to be less than 1 acre. Generally, no
compensatory mitigation is required under a Nationwide Permit
according to the 1989 Memorandum of Agreement between the
Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army;
however, final permit decisions rest with the Corps of Engineers.
A Section 401 General Water Quality Certification is required
for any activity which may result in a discharge and for which a
federal permit is required. State permits are issued through the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources - Division of Environmental Management.
6. Floodplain Involvement
The City of Raleigh participates in the National Flood Insurance
Regular Program. Richland Creek and Armory Tributary to Richland
Creek are included in the detailed flood study. Figure 7 delineates
the limits of the established 100-year floodplain and floodway in the
project area. Preliminary analysis indicates that proposed crossings
at Richland Creek and Armory Tributary to Richland Creek will
encroach into the delineated floodway and will require floodway
modifications. It is not anticipated any residences or businesses
will be impacted by floodplain modifications.
38
7. Soils and Geolo
The proposed project area lies wholly within the Piedmont
Physiographic Province of North Carolina. It is characterized by
well-rounded hills and long rolling ridges. The elevation of the
project area ranges from 350 to 450 feet above mean sea level (MSL).
The project lies within the western boundary of a portion of the
Carolina Slate Belt (North Carolina Geological Survey, 1991) known as
the Raleigh Belt. The proposed corridor is underlain by moderately
to highly metamorphosed rocks consisting of mica schist and mica
gneiss. Residual soil types on the project are slightly to highly
micaceous clays and silts (A-7, A-4, A-5). High embankments
constructed from these soils may have stability problems due to the
high moisture content.
The soils in the project area are in the Felsic Crystalline
System. The soils of the broad uplands located in the project area
are predominantly gravelly sandy loams of the Cecil Series. Highly
erodible Lloyd Series loams and sandy Appling Series loams occur on
the steep slopes in the area. The alluvial soils of the floodplains
of Richland Creek and associated tributaries are well-drained fine
sandy loams of the Congaree Series with some poorly-drained fine
loams of the Chewacla Series. Both of these floodplain soil types
may have hydric inclusions of Wehadkee Soils.
8. Hazardous Waste
A hazardous waste "superfund" site is located between 1,500 and
2,000 feet southeast of the proposed interchange with Wade Avenue.
The 1.5 acre tract is a North Carolina State University waste storage
area. Designated Lot 86, it was used by the university as a dumping
ground for solvents, pesticides, heavy metals, and animal carcasses
between 1969 and 1980. A contaminated groundwater plume is migrating
toward the proposed Wade Avenue interchange location. In 1984, the
site was put on the Environmental Protection Agency's Superfund
National Priorities list. Remediation investigations are set to
occur and are projected to take two years to complete. This work
will help determine appropriate cleanup activities necessary for the
site.
Based upon preliminary design plans, it does not appear the
contaminant plume will affect the interchange; however, potential for
encounters with contaminated groundwater during construction will be
identified and monitored as design progresses.
A North Carolina State University Agricultural Research Unit is
located west of the proposed alignment's intersection with Reedy
Creek Park Road (SR 1775). Three above ground fuel tanks are located
at this facility.
9. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal
agencies or their representatives to consider the impact of land
acquisition and construction projects on prime and important farmland
39
soils. Land which has been designated for development by local
governmental jurisdiction is exempt from the requirements of the Act.
According to the City of Raleigh's comprehensive plan, the project
area is expected to be developed as an employment center by the year
2010. Since the project area has already been committed to urban
development, no further consideration of farmland impacts is
required.
10. Traffic Noise
Noise is basically defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted
from many sources including airplanes, factories, railroads, power
generation plants, and highway vehicles. Highway noise, or traffic
noise, is usually a composite of noises from engine exhaust, drive
train, and tire-roadway interaction.
The magnitude of noise is usually described by its sound
pressure. Since the range of sound pressure varies greatly, a
logarithmic scale is used to relate sound pressures to some common
reference level, usually the decibel (0). Sound pressures described
in decibels are called sound pressure levels and are often defined in
terms of frequency weighted scales (A, B, C, or D).
The weighted-A scale is used almost exclusively in vehicle noise
measurements because it places most emphasis on the frequency range
to which the human ear is most sensitive (1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound
levels measured using A-weighting are often expressed as dBA.
Most individuals in urbanized areas are exposed to fairly high
noise levels from many sources as they go about their daily
activities. The degree of disturbance or annoyance of unwanted sound
depends essentially on three things: 1) the amount and nature of the
intruding noise, 2) the relationship between the background noise and
the intruding noise, and 3) the type of activity occurring where the
noise is heard.
It is important to note that individuals have different hearing
sensitivity to noise. Loud noises bother some more than others and
some individuals become aroused to anger if an unwanted noise
persists. The time patterns of noise also enter into an individual's
judgement of whether or not a noise is objectionable. For example,
noises occurring during sleeping hours are usually considered to be
much more objectionable than the same noises in the daytime.
Individuals tend to judge the annoyance of an unwanted noise in
terms of its relationship to noise from other sources (background
noise). The blowing of a car horn at night when background noise
levels are approximately 45 dBA would generally be much more
objectionable than the blowing of a car horn in the afternoon when
background noises might be 55 dBA.
The interference of noise with activities of individuals is
related to the degree of disturbance of unwanted sound. In a 60 dBA
environment, normal conversation would be possible while sleep might
40
be difficult. Work activities requiring high levels of concentration
may be interrupted by loud noises while activities requiring manual
effort may not be interrupted to the same degree.
Over a period of time, individuals tend to accept the noises
which intrude into their lives, particularly if the noises occur at
predicted intervals and are expected. Attempts have been made to
regulate many of these types of noises including airplane noises,
factory noise, railroad noise, and highway traffic noise. In
relation to highway traffic noise, methods of analysis and control
have developed rapidly over the past few years.
In order to determine if highway noise levels are compatible
with various land uses, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has
developed noise abatement criteria and procedures to be used in the
planning and design of highways. These abatement criteria and
procedures are set forth in Title 23 CFR, Part 772. A summary of the
noise abatement criteria for various land uses is presented in Table
5. The equivalent sound level (Leq) 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.
TABLE 5
Noise Abatement Criteria
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Activity
Category Leg(h) Description of Activity Category
Source:
A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of
extraordinary significance and serve an
(Exterior) 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, play-
grounds, active sports arenas, parks,
(Exterior) residences, motels, hotels, schools,
churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities
(Exterior) not included in categories A or B above.
D ---- Undeveloped lands
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting
rooms, schools, churches, libraries,
(Interior) hospitals, and auditoriums.
Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 772, U. S.
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration
41
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the
project to determine the existing background noise levels. The
purpose of this noise level information was to quantify the existing
acoustic environment and to provide a base for assessing the impact
of noise level increases. The noise levels were recorded for a
20-minute period during anticipated peak traffic noise periods. The
measured ambient Leq noise levels, as measured at 50 feet from the
center of the nearest travel lane, were 66 dBA at Site 1 (located 0.2
mile east of Edwards Mill Road on Blue Ridge Road), 72 dBA at Site 2
(located 0.2 mile west of Carter-Finley Stadium Gate F on Wade
Avenue), and 67 dBA at Site 3 (located 0.1 mile west of Carter Finley
Stadium Gate D on Trinity Road).
The existing roadway and traffic conditions were used with the
most current traffic noise prediction model in order to calculate
existing noise levels for comparison with noise levels actually
measured. The calculated existing noise levels were within 1.2 to
5.4 dBA of the measured noise levels for all of the locations for
which noise measurements were obtained. Differences in dBA levels
are attributed to "bunching" of vehicles, low traffic volumes, and
actual vehicle speeds versus the computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles
and single vehicle speed.
Predicting highway traffic noise is a complicated procedure. In
general, the traffic noise is composed of a large number of variables
which describe different cars driving at different speeds through a
continual changing highway configuration and surrounding terrain. To
assess traffic noise, certain assumptions and simplifications must be
made.
The procedure used to predict future noise levels in this study
was the Noise Barrier Cost Reduction Procedure, STAMINA 2.0 and
OPTIMA (revised March, 1983). The BCR (Barrier Cost Reduction)
procedure is based upon the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction
Model (FHWA-RD-17-108). The BCR traffic noise prediction model uses
the number and type of vehicles on the planned roadway, their speeds,
the physical characteristics of the road, receptor location and
height, and, if applicable, barrier type, barrier ground elevation,
and barrier top elevation.
Preliminary design plans were used for this noise analysis. The
proposed project is to construct a 5-lane shoulder facility in
Section A and a 4-lane divided facility with a grassed median in
Section B. The proposed roadway was modeled assuming no special noise
abatement measures would be incorporated. Only those existing
natural or man-made barriers were considered. The roadway sections
and proposed intersections were assumed to be flat and at-grade.
Thus, this analysis represents "worst-case" topographic conditions.
The noise predictions made in this report are highway-related noise
predictions for the traffic conditions during the year being
analyzed.
The Stamina 2.0 computer model was utilized to enable the
determination of the number of land uses (by type) which, during the
peak hour in the design year 2018, would be exposed to noise levels
42
approaching or exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and those
land uses predicted to expect a substantial noise increase. The
basic approach was to select receptor locations such as 25, 50, 100,
200, 400, 800, and 1600 feet from the center of the near traffic lane
(adaptable to both sides of the roadway). The locations of these
receptors were determined by the change in projected traffic volumes
along the proposed project. The result of this procedure was a grid
of receptor points along the project. Using this grid, noise levels
were calculated for each identified receptor.
The Leq traffic noise exposures associated with this project are
listed in Table N4 on page A-42 in the Appendix. This table contains
a listing of all receptors in close proximity to the project, their
ambient and predicted noise levels, and the estimated noise level
increase for each.
The total numbers of impacted receptors, whether by approaching
or exceeding the noise abatement criteria or by a substantial
increase in exterior noise levels for each phase and/or alternative
is listed in Table 6. Other information included in Table 6 is the
maximum extent of the 72 and 67 dBA noise level contours. This
information should assist local authorities in exercising land use
control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway
in local jurisdiction and to prevent further development of
incompatible activities and land uses.
TABLE 6
FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria Summary
Maximum Predicted Maximum Approximate Number
Leq Noise Levels Contour of Impacted
in dBA Distances Receptors
Description 50' 100' 200' 72 dBA 67 dBA A B C D E
Section A
Trinity Road 68 64 58 <25' 101' NO RECEPTORS IN
to Wade Avenue THIS SECTION
Section B (A1.1)
Wade Avenue to 68 64 58 <25' 107' 0 5 1 0 0
Duraleigh Road
Section B (A1.2)
Wade Avenue to 68 64 58 <25' 107' 0 3 1 0 0
Duraleigh Road
Section B (A1.3)
Wade Avenue to 68 64 58 <25' 107' 0 1 0 0 0
Duraleigh Road
NOTES: 1. 50', 100', and 200' distances are measured from center of
nearest travel lane.
2. 72 dBA and 67 dBA contour distances are measured from
center of proposed roadway.
43
Predicted noise level increases for this project are anticipated
to increase a maximum of 21 dBA. Substantial increases are common on
new location projects like the Edwards Mill Road extension because
there is little or no highway traffic noise in their acoustic
environments. When real-life noises are heard, level changes of 2-3
dBA are barely perceptible. A 5 dBA change is more readily
noticeable and a 10 dBA change is judged by most people as a doubling
or a halving of the loudness of the sound. Traffic noise impacts
occur when the predicted traffic noise levels either (a) approach or
exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria (with "approach" meaning
within 1 dBA of the Noise Abatement Criteria Value listed in
Table 5), or (b) substantially exceed the existing noise levels, as
defined below:
EXISTING Leg(h) INCREASE
< 50 > 15
> 50 > 10
Abatement measures such as altering the proposed alignment is
normally reasonable along areas of relocation. Selecting alternative
alignments for noise abatement purposes involves proper consideration
of noise impacts, engineering parameters, and environmental
parameters. For noise abatement, horizontal alignment selection is
primarily a matter of siting the roadway at a sufficient distance
from noise sensitive areas. The proposed alternatives for the
project were developed to minimize environmental impacts and maximize
engineering functionality. Hence, further alteration of the studied
horizontal alignments is not reasonable or feasible from a planning
and design standpoint.
Changing the vertical alignment is sometimes effective in
limiting noise impacts of certain highway facilities. For the
proposed project, design constraints associated with the planned
intersecting network of roadways preclude changing the vertical
alignment of the Edwards Mill Road extension.
Traffic system management measures which limit vehicle type,
speed, volume and time of operations are often effective noise
abatement measures. For this project, traffic management measures
will be in effect associated with the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex.
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels can
often be applied with a measurable degree of success by the
application of solid mass, attenuable measures to effectively
defract, absorb, and reflect highway traffic noise emissions. Solid
mass, attenuable measures may include earthen berms or artificial
abatement walls. These mitigating measures may not be feasible or
reasonable in all cases, particularly for receptors with frontage on
primary or secondary roads which cross the project. The noise levels
may not be reduced to within the recommended noise abatement criteria
and/or below a "substantial noise level increase."
44
For a noise barrier to provide sufficient noise reduction, it
must be high enough and long enough to shield the receptor from
significant sections of the highway. Access openings in the barrier
severely reduce the noise reduction provided by the barrier. It is
economically unreasonable to construct a barrier for a small noise
reduction. To provide an acceptable reduction in highway traffic
noise, the barrier length would normally be eight (8) times the
distance from the barrier to the receptor. For example, a receptor
located 50 feet from the proposed barrier would require a barrier 400
feet long. An access opening of 40 feet (10 percent of the area)
would limit its noise reduction to approximately 4 dBA (FUNDAMENTALS
AND ABATEMENT OF HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE, Report No.
FHWA-HHI-HEV-73-7976-1, USDOT, chapter 5, section 3.2, page 5-27).
Reduced sight distance at access openings (driveways, crossing
streets, etc.) becomes a safety concern. In addition, businesses,
churches, and other related establishments located along a particular
highway normally require accessibility and high visibility. Solid
mass, attenuable measures for traffic noise abatement would tend to
disallow these two qualities.
Except at the interchange of the Edwards Mill Road extension and
Wade Avenue (SR 1728), no control of access will be maintained along
the recommended alternative. Most commercial establishments and
residences will have direct driveway connections to the proposed
roadway. All intersections are proposed to be at-grade and would
require access openings in any proposed noise barrier. Based on the
limited benefits of noise barriers along roads like the Edwards Mill
Road extension with no access control and at-grade intersections, no
physical abatement measures are recommended for this project.
The traffic noise impacts for the "do-nothing" alternative were
also considered. If the traffic currently using the network of roads
in the project area should double, the future traffic noise levels
would only increase approximately 3 dBA. This small increase in the
present noise level would be barely noticeable to the people working
and living in the area.
The major construction elements of this project are expected to
be earth removal, hauling, grading, and paving. General construction
noise impacts, such as temporary speech interference for passersby
and those individuals living or working near the project, can be
expected particularly from paving operations and from the earth
moving equipment during grading operations. Construction noise
impacts are expected to be minimal along the Edward's Mill Road
Extension, since, for the most part, the project traverses through
low-density areas. In the section intersecting with Forest View
Drive (SR 1667), construction noise impacts are expected to be more
substantial due to the project's close proximity to existing housing.
However, considering the relatively short-term nature of construction
noise and the limitation of performing construction activities during
daytime hours, these impacts are not expected to be substantial. The
transmission loss characteristics of nearby natural elements and
man-made structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the
effects of intrusive construction noise.
45
Based on these preliminary studies, traffic noise abatement is
not feasible or reasonable and no noise abatement measures are
proposed. This evaluation completes the highway traffic noise
requirements of Title 23 CFR, Part 772, and unless a major project
change develops, no additional reports are required for this project.
11. Air Quality
Emissions from industrial and internal combustion engines are
the most prevalent sources of air pollution. Other sources of common
outdoor air pollution are solid waste disposal, forest fires, and
other types of burning. The impact resulting from constructing a new
highway or improving an existing highway can range from intensifying
existing air pollution problems to improving the ambient air
conditions. Motor vehicles are known to emit carbon monoxide (CO),
nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matter, sulfur
dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb) (listed in order of decreasing emission
rate). Automobiles are the main source of carbon monoxide in the
project area. Most of the analyses for this project concentrate on
determining expected carbon monoxide levels in the vicinity of the
project due to traffic flow.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor
near a highway, two concentration components must be determined:
local and background. The local component is the result of 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 the result of 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 Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR). 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).
Automobiles are generally regarded as sources of hydrocarbons
and nitrogen oxides. Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides emitted from
cars are carried into the atmosphere, where they react with sunlight
to form ozone and nitrogen dioxide. Area-wide automotive emissions
of HC and NO are expected to decrease in the future due to the
continued installation and maintenance of pollution control devices
on new cars. As a result, ambient ozone and nitrogen dioxide levels
will decrease.
The photochemical reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide
require several hours to occur. For this reason, the peak levels of
ozone generally occur 10 to 20 kilometers downwind of the source of
hydrocarbon emissions. Urban areas as a whole are regarded as
sources of hydrocarbons, not individual streets and highways. The
emissions of all sources in an urban area mix together in the
46
atmosphere, and in the presence of sunlight, the mixture reacts to
form ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and other photochemical oxidants. The
best example of this type of air pollution is the smog which forms in
Los Angeles, California.
Generally, automobiles are not regarded as significant sources
of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Nationwide, highway
sources account for less than seven percent of particulate matter
emissions and less than two percent of sulfur dioxide emissions.
Particulate matter and sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the
result of non-highway sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, and
agricultural). Because emissions of particulate matter and sulfur
dioxide from cars are very low, there is no reason to suspect that
traffic on the project will cause air quality standards for
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide to be exceeded.
Automobiles without catalytic converters can burn "regular"
gasoline. One of the by-products of burning "regular" gasoline is
lead, which is added by refineries to increase the octane rating of
the fuel. Newer cars with catalytic converters burn unleaded
gasoline that eliminates lead emissions. Also, the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has required the reduction in
the lead content of leaded gasolines. The overall average lead
content of gasoline in 1974 was 2 grams per gallon. By 1989, this
composite average had dropped to 0.01 grams per gallon.
It is anticipated lead emissions from automobiles will decrease
as more cars use unleaded fuels and as the lead content of leaded
gasoline is reduced. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 make the
sale, supply, or transport of leaded gasoline or lead additives
unlawful after December 31, 1995. As a result, it is not expected
traffic on the proposed project will cause the NAAQS for lead to be
exceeded.
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine
future CO concentrations resulting from the proposed highway
improvements. "CAL3QHC - A Modeling Methodology For Predicting
Pollutant Concentrations Near Roadway Intersections" was used to
predict the CO concentration at the nearest sensitive receptor to the
project.
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 "worst
case" meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are based on
the annual average daily traffic projections. Carbon monoxide
vehicle emission factors were calculated for the design year 2018,
the anticipated completion year 2001, and five years after completion
(2006) using the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission Factors" and
the MOBILE4.1 mobile source emissions computer model.
The background CO concentration for the project area was
estimated to be 1.9 parts per million (ppm). Consultation with the
Air Quality Section, Division of Environmental Management (DEM),
47
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.9 ppm is
suitable for most suburban areas.
The worst-case air quality receptors were determined to be
located at the proposed intersection of Edward's Mill Road Extension
(SR 3009) and Duraleigh Road (SR 1664). Since the proposed roadway
is a relocation project, and no available intersection traffic data
exists for the no-build design year, only a Build Alternative is
analyzed. The predicted 1-hour average CO concentrations for the
evaluation years of 2001, 2006, and 2018 for the worst-case air
quality scenario are shown in the following table.
TABLE 7
1-Hour CO Concentration
(ppm)
Receptor 2001 2006 2018
R12 (Residence) 5.2 4.7 5.5
R13 (Residence) 3.9 3.7 4.1
Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS
(maximum permitted for 1-hour averaging period = 35 ppm; 8-hour
average period = 9 ppm) indicates no violation of these standards.
Since the results of the worst-case 1-hour CO analysis is less than 9
ppm, it can be concluded that the 8-hour CO level does not exceed the
standard. See pages A-35 through A-37 in the Appendix for input data
and output concerning air quality.
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality
of the Raleigh Regional Office of the N.C. Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources. Wake County has been designated as a
moderate nonattainment area for Carbon Monoxide (CO) and Ozone (0 ).
The attainment date is December 31, 1995 for (CO) and/or November 315,
1996 for 0 . The current State Implementation Plan (SIP) does not
contain Q transportation control measures (TCM) for Wake County.
The Raleigh Urbanized Area Thoroughfare Plan (TP) and Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) have been determined to be in conformity
with the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and the Interim Conformity
Guidance dated June 7, 1991 on the dates of November 15, 1991 and
September 30, 1992, respectively. There have been no significant
changes in the project's design concept and scope, as used in the
conformity analyses.
During project construction, all materials resulting from
clearing and grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed
from the project, burned or otherwise disposed of by the contractor.
Any burning will be done in accordance with applicable local laws,
48
ordinances, and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality
in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure
burning will be done at the greatest distance practicable from
dwellings and not when atmospheric conditions are such as to create a
hazard to the public. Burning will be performed under constant
surveillance. Measures will be taken in allaying the dust generated
by construction when the control of dust is necessary for the
protection and comfort of motorists or area residents. This
evaluation completes the assessment requirements for air quality of
the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and the NEPA process, and no
additional reports are necessary.
12. Transportation Management
In Transportation Management Areas (TMA) designated as
non-attainment for air quality, the 1991 Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) places restrictions on
federally funded projects that increase capacity for single occupancy
vehicles (SOV). Section 1024(a) of ISTEA states that projects which
increase SOV capacity in TMA's classified as non-attainment areas
must be part of an approved Congestion Management System.
North Carolina is currently developing its Congestion Management
System (CMS). A working plan for North Carolina's CMS will be in
place by October 1, 1995. Prior to implementation of the CMS,
projects that improve SOV capacity in non-attainment areas will be
analyzed to determine if travel demand reduction and operational
management strategies can be used to reduce SOV demand.
Raleigh is classified as amoderate non-attainment area for
carbon monoxide and ozone. Constructing the Edwards Mill Road
extension will increase the capacity for SOV use. The following is
an analysis of travel demand reduction strategies, operational
management strategies, and alternative transportation modes that have
been considered as part of the proposed project.
Travel Demand Reduction Strategies:
The following travel demand reduction strategies were considered
for this project:
1. Staggering work hours at local businesses
2. Growth Management
3. Road Use Pricing
Staggered work hours, flex-time, or modified work weeks can be
implemented on a corridor level if large employers along the corridor
cause congestion at their entrances or exits. These applications
would reduce spot congestion at entrances and exits to large
employers (those employers attracting enough trips to cause
congestion); however, there are no such employers along this project.
49
Growth management involves public policies to regulate
development so that trip generation follows a desired pattern. Road
pricing involves charging motorists a "price" associated with their
use of a particular facility. Growth management and road use pricing
are not considered feasible options because they involve area-wide
policies rather than policies applicable to discrete corridors.
Because SOV reduction strategies are not considered appropriate
for this corridor, additional SOV capacity is warranted and will be
provided by extending Edwards Mill Road (SR 3009).
Consideration of Alternative Transportation Modes:
The City of Raleigh and the North Carolina Department of
Transportation have adopted a thoroughfare plan designed to provide
Raleigh with an efficient transportation network. The thoroughfare
plan includes both highway improvements and transit service.
Extending Edwards Mill Road under project U-2582 is a part of
Raleigh's thoroughfare plan and will be a step towards its
implementation.
The City of Raleigh, in cooperation with the Triangle Transit
Authority, has alternative modes of transportation available to
commuters which are designed to reduce vehicular trips in the city.
An ultimate goal of 4% reduction in internal auto trips has been
targeted by the City of Raleigh. These programs are outlined below.
A thorough discussion of alternative transportation options for the
corridor appears in Section III. B. of this report.
Bus Service
In 1989, it was estimated 10,000 riders per day used Raleigh's
public transit service. This represented 1.2% of Raleigh's internal
trips. Raleigh is seeking to increase ridership on its transit
service with a target goal of 43,000 riders per day. Increased
advertisement and connector vans are being used to increase
ridership. Connector service involves the use of smaller transit
vehicles to board passengers at their residences. Bus service has
been improved by the City of Raleigh's computerized traffic signal
system, which reduces stopped delay for both buses and automobiles at
signalized intersections.
CAT (Capital Area Transit Bus Service) does not serve the
Edwards Mill Road corridor directly, but Route #4 (Rex Hospital)
serves the northern section of the corridor including Blue Ridge Road
between Crabtree Valley and Rex Hospital. The City of Raleigh
anticipates studying the feasibility of providing bus service along
this corridor in the future. At this time, provision of bus turnouts
is not considered useful for transit operations along this new
corridor; therefore, no bus turnouts are proposed. This has been
coordinated with the City of Raleigh's Transit Administrator.
50
Carpool/Vanpool Programs
The Triangle Transit Authority operates a computer-aided carpool
and vanpool service for Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill. The
Triangle Transit Authority currently has over 6000 names in its
car/van pool matching data base. The number of vans leased by
Tri-A-Ride is 24.
A 238-space park-and-ride lot has been constructed near the
northwest quadrant of the Blue Ridge Road/Wade Avenue interchange to
serve eastbound and westbound I-40 traffic. Although the lot is not
being heavily used currently, it is anticipated the number of users
will increase. This lot will provide adequate service to the Edwards
Mill Road extension corridor.
Bicycle Use
As part of Section A construction between Trinity Road and Wade
Avenue, 10-foot paved shoulders will be provided that can accommodate
cyclists. For Section B between Wade Avenue and Duraleigh Road,
16-foot outside lanes will be provided on both sides of the proposed
facility. Cyclists can utilize the wide outside lanes to "share the
road" with automobiles and trucks.
Congestion Management Strategies:
Progressive signal timing will likely be considered after
Section B of the project (from Wade Avenue to Duraleigh Road) is
constructed. It is anticipated six signalized intersections will be
provided as both sections of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension
are implemented. Progressive signal timing can be used to aid traffic
flow along the Edwards Mill Road extension.
Ramp metering and High Occupancy Vehicle lanes are not
appropriate as congestion management strategies since no control of
access beyond the Wade Avenue/Edwards Mill Road interchange area is
proposed.
Consistency with ISTEA:
ISTEA requirements, as amended in 23 USC 134, for the Raleigh
TMA have been reviewed as previously described. Project U-2582 is a
part of Raleigh's approved thoroughfare plan. Travel demand
reduction strategies, operational management strategies, and
alternative transportation modes have been analyzed along the Edwards
Mill Road extension corridor to determine if these strategies could
eliminate the need for additional SOV capacity.
13. Construction Impacts
Environmental impacts associated with highway construction are
generally of short term duration. To minimize potential adverse
effects caused by construction, the following measures, along with
those already mentioned, will be enforced during the construction
phase:
51
a. Waste and debris will be disposed of in areas outside of
the right of way and provided by the contractor, unless
otherwise required by the plans or Special Provisions or
unless disposal within the right of way is permitted by the
Engineer. Disposal of waste and debris in active public
waste or disposal areas will not be permitted without prior
approval by the Engineer. Such approval will not be
permitted when, in the opinion of the Engineer, it will
result in excessive siltation or pollution.
b. Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained insofar as
possible to alleviate breeding areas for mosquitoes.
C. An extensive rodent control program will be established if
structures are to be removed or demolished.
d. Care will be taken not to block existing drainage ditches.
e. The contractor will prepare a work schedule that minimizes
possible damage to or rupture of the water lines and
interruption of water service. The contractor will consult
appropriate water system officials in preparing this
schedule.
f. During construction of the proposed project, all materials
resulting from clearing and grubbing, demolition, or other
operations will be removed from the project, burned, or
otherwise disposed of by the contractor. Any burning will
be accomplished in accordance with applicable local laws,
ordinances, or regulations of the North Carolina SIP for
air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will
be taken to insure burning will be done at the greatest
distance practicable from dwellings and not when
atmospheric conditions are such as to create a hazard to
the public. Burning will be performed under constant
surveillance.
g. Measures will be taken in allaying the dust generated by
construction when the control of dust is necessary for the
protection and comfort of motorists or area residents.
h. An erosion control schedule will be devised by the
contractor before work is started. The schedule will show
the time relationship between phases of the work which must
be coordinated to reduce erosion and shall describe
construction practices and temporary erosion control
measures which will be used to minimize erosion. In
conjunction with the erosion control schedule, the
contractor will be required to follow those provisions of
the plans and specifications which pertain to erosion and
siltation. Temporary erosion control measures such as the
use of berms, dikes, dams, silt basins, etc. will be used
as needed.
52
i. Prior to the approval of any borrow source developed for
use on this project, the contractor shall obtain a
certification from the State Department of Cultural
Resources certifying that the removal of material from the
borrow source will have no effect on any known district,
site, building, structure, or object that is included or
eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic
Places. A copy of this certification shall be furnished to
the Engineer prior to performing any work on the proposed
borrow source.
j. Traffic service in the immediate project area may be
subjected to brief disruption during construction of the
project. Efforts will be made to insure that the
transportation needs of the public are met both during and
after construction.
k. The North Carolina Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior
to construction regarding the relocation of survey markers.
14. Secondary Impacts
The proposed action could induce environmental effects that are
indirectly attributable to implementing the proposed action. Such
impacts include increasing the overall development potential of
existing land uses. As discussed in Section V. A. 1. of this
document, the City of Raleigh and the State of North Carolina have
organized plans to direct development in this corridor. Improved
access could sustain intense development pressure and encourage
rezoning requests for higher density land uses.
Other secondary impacts include the use of biologically
productive land. As the corridor continues to urbanize, more natural
areas are removed from biologically productive uses. Such
alterations could have a negative impact on animal habitats.
VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Government Response
During this planning study, comments were requested from the
following federal, state, and local agencies. Written comments were
received from agencies noted with an asterisk (*). Copies of the comments
received are included in the Appendix.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington District
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency - Atlanta
Federal Emergency Management Administration - Atlanta
*U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh and Asheville
U. S. Geological Survey - Raleigh
*N. C. State Clearinghouse
*N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
53
N. C. Department of Human Resources
N. C. Department of Public Instruction
Triangle J. Council of Governments
Wake County Commissioner
City of Raleigh
Several meetings were held that included officials from N. C. State
University, the State Property Office, the City of Raleigh, and the North
Carolina Department of Agriculture to discuss planning and design aspects
of the project. The resulting preliminary plans for the proposed facility
address many major concerns of the land administrators in the project
area.
B. Public Response
In addition to written requests for input from appropriate agencies
and governmental bodies, an informal citizens' informational workshop was
held on December 8, 1992 at the Highway Patrol Troop C Headquarters to
discuss the subject road extension. The NCDOT Public Affairs Division
advertised the meeting in the major local media prior to its being held
and the meeting was covered by WRDU-FM. Nine persons attended the
informal gathering in addition to representatives from NCDOT. Alternative
alignments and cross sections were presented to the public for discussion.
In general, no alternative alignment was strongly favored over another.
Two of the citizens were interested in alternative forms of transportation
in the corridor including mass transit and bicycles.
VII. DRAFT SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
A. Description of Proposed Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of
Highways, proposes to extend SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Road) on new location
between SR 1656 (Trinity Road) and SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road). For funding
purposes, the project is divided into two sections. Under Section A, it
is recommended the proposed multilane facility consist of a five-lane
shoulder section with a reversible lane system from Trinity Road to
SR 1728 (Wade Avenue), a distance of 0.6 mile. An interchange is
recommended where the proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road crosses Wade
Avenue as part of Section A. Under Section B, a four-lane median divided
section is recommended from Wade Avenue to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), a
distance of 1.4 miles.
Specific details of the proposed action are contained within the
Environmental Assessment.
B. Description of Section 4(f) Resource
The Capital Area Greenway is a system of public recreational trails
which allow activities such as walking, jogging, biking, hiking, fishing,
picnicking, and other outdoor activities. The trails connect several of
Raleigh s parks and compliment recreational activities at the parks.
Walnut and Crabtree creeks, their tributaries, and the Neuse River are
among the major ecological features located on the Capital Area Greenway.
54
The City of Raleigh's greenway system has brought national
recognition to the city. The Capital Area Greenway system has emerged as
a shaping force in both city recreation policy and zoning administration
policy and law. Raleigh's greenways shape its urban form and improve the
quality of life both for residents and visitors to the city.
The Capital Area Greenway became reality in March, 1974 after the
City of Raleigh became concerned about rapid growth and urbanization. The
city responded with a greenway master plan which permitted urban
development while retaining Raleigh's characteristic natural beauty. The
idea has developed into a system of trails 34 miles long that encompasses
over 1200 acres. The system is continually growing as a result of private
donations and city procurement.
There are currently 22 trails on the Capital Area Greenway system.
The Loblolly Trail is located in west Raleigh and is the longest trail (6
miles) on the greenway system. The Loblolly Trail begins near
Carter-Finley Stadium on Trinity Road (SR 1656) and continues northwest to
Ebenezer Church Road (SR 1649). It is the Loblolly Trail portion of the
Capital Area Greenway system, which will be crossed by the proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension, that is the subject of the proposed project's
Section 4(f) involvement.
Section 4(f) of the 1966 D.O.T. Act protects the use and function of
publicly owned parks, recreation areas, wildlife/waterfowl refuges, and
historic properties. A transportation plan can only use land from a
Section 4(f) resource when there are no other feasible or prudent
alternatives, and when the planning minimizes all possible harm to the
resource. All possible planning to minimize harm is determined through
consultation with the official of the agency owning or administering the
land.
C. Impacts to Section 4(f) Property
Construction activities for the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Arena have obliterated the Loblolly Trail east of the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension and south of Wade Avenue. The
section of the Loblolly Trail impacted by arena construction will be
relocated on arena property east of its present alignment. In addition,
N. C. State University will provide an area for parking just north of
Trinity Road at the entrance to the Loblolly Trail.
The proposed right of way for the Edwards Mill Road extension is
adjacent to the limits of the North Carolina Sports and Entertainment
arena property. As a result, the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension and
interchange with Wade Avenue is anticipated to cross the existing portion
of the Loblolly Trail approximately 0.1 mile south of Wade Avenue near the
proposed interchange. The current trail alignment crosses under Wade
Avenue through a double barrel 8' x 8' reinforced concrete box culvert,
which also carries Richland Creek. It then traverses northwest towards SR
1775 (Reedy Creek Park Road). North of the interchange, the Loblolly
Trail will be outside of the project impact area. See Figure 3 for the
current alignment of the Loblolly Trail in the project area.
55
D. Avoidance Alternatives
1. Realignment East of the Proposed Alignment
Realigning Section A of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension
east of the recommended alignment was investigated in the preliminary
stage of the project study. Major features in Section A of the
project include the Loblolly Trail, the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex arena site, Carter-Finley Stadium, and the
proposed Cardinal Gibbons High School site.
Projected traffic volumes along the Edwards Mill Road extension
and Wade Avenue emphasized the need to provide an interchange where
the proposed extension intersects Wade Avenue. Interchanges on Wade
Avenue already exist at I-40 west of the proposed extension and at
Blue Ridge Road east of the proposed extension. The proposed
location of the Wade Avenue/Edwards Mill Road interchange was chosen
considering the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) urban interchange design standards,
which suggest a winia spacing of approximately 1.0 mile between
interchanges in urban areas. Avoiding the Loblolly Trail by moving
the interchange to the east would compromise the AASHTO suggested
interchange spacing design standards. In addition, relocating the
interchange to the east to avoid impacts to the Loblolly trail cannot
be achieved without severely impacting the proposed sports arena that
the road is intended to serve and encroaching on a superfund
hazardous waste site located south of Wade Avenue near the proposed
arena (See Section V. C. 8. of the Environmental Assessment for
information on the superfund site). Since the existing Loblolly
Trail alignment is within the proposed interchange area, impacts to
the trail cannot be avoided by shifting the remainder of the proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension alignment to the east.
2. Realignment West of the Proposed Alignment
Realigning Section A of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension
west of the recommended alignment was also investigated in the
preliminary stage of the project study. Since the Loblolly Trail
parallels Wade Avenue on the north side all the way to its existing
interchange at I-40, relocating the proposed Edwards Mill Road
extension west of the proposed alignment will not avoid impacts to
the trail. In addition, relocating the road further to the west
would render it unserviceable to the North Carolina Sports and
Entertainment Complex arena and compromise the function of the
existing I-40 interchange.
3. "Do Nothing" Alternative
The "do nothing" alternative has been considered during the
development of this project. Because there are both advantages and
disadvantages associated with almost any major highway project, it is
important to give consideration to the option of not constructing the
project. Some of the advantages of the project include enhanced
56
traffic carrying capability, enhanced access to future development,
improved mobility for emergency vehicles, and a decreased expenditure
of time and money by motorists.
Some disadvantages of building the project include impacts to
the Loblolly Trail, expenditure of funds, the acquisition of
additional right of way resulting in the displacement of families and
non-profit structures, the taking of wetland and forest resources,
and an increase in noise.
A critical need to relieve congestion on Blue Ridge Road and
Duraleigh Road between existing Edwards Mill Road and Wade Avenue
exists. Furthermore, failure to build the road would preclude the
development of the Sports and Entertainment Complex and land north of
Wade Avenue. For these combined reasons, the "do nothing"
alternative is not recommended.
E. Measures to Minimize Harm
Three alternatives to minimize harm to the Loblolly Trail were
discussed with the City of Raleigh including providing a pedestrian
culvert where the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension crosses the
existing trail alignment approximately 0.1 mile south of Wade Avenue,
providing a pedestrian culvert approximately 0.2 mile south of the
proposed Edwards Mill Road/Wade Avenue interchange and rebuilding the
trail west of the extension, and providing trail parking north of the
proposed interchange.
Shortening the trail and providing parking north of the proposed
interchange was eliminated as an alternative to minimize` trail impacts
after N. C. State University's plans to provide trail parking north of
Trinity Road on arena property were revealed. Since N. C. State
University is planning to mitigate impacts of arena construction on the
Loblolly Trail by relocating the trail on arena property east of its
present alignment and providing parking for trail users, providing
additional parking north of the interchange was ruled out as a method of
minimizing impacts to the trail.
Providing a pedestrian culvert to cross underneath the proposed
Edwards Mill Road extension was explored as a method of minimizing impacts
to the trail. Two locations for the culvert were discussed with City of
Raleigh officials: (1) culvert on existing trail location approximately
0.1 mile south of Wade Avenue, (2) culvert located approximately 0.2 mile
south of Wade. Avenue. Since the recommended extension is anticipated to
be in a cut section where it crosses the existing Loblolly Trail
alignment, trail users would be forced to traverse the steep cut slopes if
a pedestrian culvert were provided along the existing trail alignment.
The City of Raleigh stated a preference for a pedestrian culvert located
approximately 0.2 mile south of the proposed interchange near Richland
Creek. The proposed Edwards Mill Road extension is anticipated to be on a
fill section in this location.
57
Since the City of Raleigh prefers a pedestrian culvert located
approximately 0.2 mile south of the interchange to minimize impacts to the
trail, the NCDOT recommends providing a culvert in that location and
rebuilding and relocating the trail west of the proposed extension to the
Wade Avenue culvert crossing.
F. Mitigation Measures
Several features will be incorporated into the design of the project
to help minimize the impact and mitigate the effect of the proposed
project on the Loblolly Trail. These commitments are as follows:
(1) The NCDOT will provide a 12' X 8' reinforced concrete box
culvert to accommodate the Loblolly Trail underneath the
proposed Edwards Mill Road extension approximately 0.2 mile
south of the proposed interchange at Wade Avenue.
(2) The NCDOT will provide electrical conduit (size to be specified
by the City of Raleigh) in the proposed culvert for lighting.
(3) The NCDOT will rebuild and relocate the Loblolly Trail on the
west side of the proposed Edwards Mill Road extension up to the
Wade Avenue culvert crossing.
(4) The NCDOT will provide electrical conduit (size to be specified
by the City of Raleigh) in proposed extended sections of the
existing double barrel 8' X 8' reinforced concrete box culvert
underneath Wade Avenue.
G. Coordination
The project has been coordinated with the City of Raleigh through
early project scoping meetings and subsequent meetings to discuss
potential impacts to the Loblolly Trail. The City of Raleigh has
concurred with measures proposed by the NCDOT to mitigate adverse impacts
to the Loblolly Trail portion of the Capital Area Greenway.
Correspondence from the City of Raleigh is included on page A-44 in the
Appendix.
VIII. BASIS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
On the basis of planning and environmental studies conducted for this
project, it is determined the proposed project will not have significant
adverse effects upon the human or natural environment. Therefore, an
Environmental Assessment is applicable for this project.
BFY/plr
10
4,06
AC)
fa VAJrrnY'r??: i r

! 1
N,
I

W
a

Q m 4-1 4J J-)
z z ai a?i a
O
H
U O
H
U
?
t7l F
q
01 E
?•
M

Q a a
A;p
ti
I0"r
4t?, 'il'
= 4*
.4P

W
?

Z Z PQ
.•:.'?
?

•. 0Z' U
?Yb'?`yn v. 0
Q
U ?n
? N

'
N

. "14
••?•w?r
i
j i

in

H ?

;94* 44
C
zJ
HI
Iwloflnol lunow A%"m
1 II
`• W •wi n? \•?
"' O J
OC
Y `
ITT,
c<
A ?: ?e° SS a1\
g \ ?LyI HOPE
PO 4?
y
?L
10
u I"
u
wICF
p
+I. D
i
*
r y
`
o
!f =

RU
Q
RL(cn
tl
V
'?
?

tf
O
O K ,P
yM i o t „i, i
S[ O
Of SA (q,
?•/ ] pt ?P
V?` )e
JAL? 8
TAP t
!
w,
'
?/i.N
?L ? <ii V i ?? YV
I a

a
?f • :? M EI GAAn[R
,n iy = t Mr N o

P oL / • W Inn I a'
? - --
SS
i3
\F J N
OY D
S KS y)?IfSYI
AJC ,., •'a • n IV /SY
I
Ail
0
Nln OY)1 do t H u ;
kill JJJ n ?
?
O OL a ? I i s o ' R
?
? ?
?v IVY7 ?
Y'
? f
l
' ?
ilt.
u ±
1 ?Yti
s V
t
A
i
b, 'd s hyn is .:
- V 7!111 + I?;I •?
a
DU A` N PO 4 • • i
4` Y _
0
VP`Pt1 P Y PP O r ? f?ti 1
P
W
t!b _ N ?
(, U ? `Vb Ir?NI OPO Oy y JNI
1N7 I?I
y
Al II
JS

•____.. ,.-, ,.vim „i.. •_-_? ,,.?,- ?.. . •.Itl .•.eyl„v?
Z
O
r ?-
? ?
" r1O?
U-1

ONMN K x
to
to
w ,- r
O
114 CC
q;t?•?l. M?O?
aHxP? ?OOOco
W
OE?w?
?OC7 ??
UN
W=
"ao x
U)
v CC zWd
o.' ru?
z
H
0 -j
3.
IC
Z carom NDo

•. a7
Q O

o;R
'f
z z
0 0
U
Z U
w w

x
w
?
Q
o
Q ? z W -j
0
U
-
,

C)

U zn
I-
Cl)

0
w w N
t0
2 z vJ
C l) W
p 2
aC 2
Q 0
? U
p w
w cr.

N
T
I
N
T
W
D
J
co
0
W
0
J
O
0
W
Q
d
L V
w
rr
0
LL

Z Z
0 0
Z U
W W
I- U)
X
W U)
U)
O O
Q
O °C
? U
J ?
W
_ p
2z
V ! ui
p M
oC 2
QO
U
W
W
co

Z 3
LL
O °
?--
U o
W NN
(1)
C
ce.
if)
N
T
N ?
N T
Q f
b
T
cr
w
f--
? S
C'3
a U"
Z
?"?rl
W J
d ?
J
\1 i
W
Z
c
J
un
\ w
a
X
w
m
N
W
C)
LL

sR
,1y ..
1 f `
c y ei
4T ?a
;.t

y
EDWARDS MILL ROAD/TRINITY ROAD
INTERSECTION CONFIGURATION
Ill

----------- -----------
TRINITY ROAD
FIGURE 4A
EDWARDS MILL ROAD/WADE AVENUE
SOUTHERN RAMP TERMINALS

EDWARDS MILL ROAD
FIGURE 4B
. 00
y
EDWARDS MILL ROAD/WADE AVENUE
NORTHERN RAMP TERMINALS

EDWARDS MILL ROAD
'r
00
FIGURE 4C
y EDWARDS MILL ROAD/DU RALEI G H ROAD
INTERSECTION CONFIGURATION
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
1 I
1 I
I 1
1 I
I I
1 I
1
i
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DURALEIGH ROAD

r
\ 71
EDWARDS MILL ROAD
1
1
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
1

FIGURE 4D
V
PROPOSED INTERCHANGE CONFIGURATION
EDWARDS MILL ROAD UNDER WADE AVE.
I 1
?
I I ?
I I ?
F1
I I ?
1 ?
I 1 ?
I I '
1 ? 1 1
1 1 I 1

WADE AVENUE

1 I I I
I 1 I 1
1 ? 1

1
n 1 1
I 1 1
1
,,

1 1 1
1 1 I
1 1 1
EDWARDS MILL ROAD
FIGURE 5
-------------
l - 1
_._ _ dS R&;
F _ - - - _
'F D.
X40 .. ._ _ ` y T ff O
RA IG
PKWY. II / Q f ` t
U-2582 - - n
PROJECT I \ X AVE.
_ -?
LIMITS ---W ?- ? -
m
- ARY p
r ? dV
4,
r NC f4
! - _ bg +y
I S d - -
00.
EX = III
W ERN BE
-RALE
r '•?F•? -
N Q ACEDDNIA 0.D-
I.FGFm
Q? THOROUGHFARES EXISTING P P GREATER RALEIGH
?+ FREEWAYS MEESE
MAJOR -- ----- URBAN AREA
\i MINOR ----- y?? THOROUGHFARE
A. INTERCHANGE 0 PLAN
NNY RD _ row. GRADE SEPARATION
(Sn 79) =
• sq fj ; I PENNY D. / r.?_
_ SCALE: 1"=6000' FIGURE 6
s
FLOODPLAIN MAP \?/r
Richland
Creek
\"? ?• ? )?f PROJECT
J LIMIT
II
?, I

100-year floodplain
? •
?, LIMIT OF
? DETAI LED
\•\ , tp? STUI Y
41
N P
RM79
A • Armory 0
-? f • Tributary
to
? Richland
/ ?, lu Creek
U_
¦
1656
G _
TRINITy_.J(.
_C R
PROJECT
LIMIT ?IIC
_ 11661
rr

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
EDWARDS MILL ROAD (SR 3009) EXTENSION
FROM TRINITY ROAD (SR 1656)
TO DURALEIGH ROAD (SR 1664)
WAKE COUNTY
U - 2582
0 feet 1000 FIG. 7

N }
00 ?-
tn Z m
N = r"
O
U m
W
W IL
Q
3
M
K
r-
M
M
d
O
tr
cc
O
O

cc
U O

LL z
d O
Q

~ z

J C3 LLJ
W

O Q Q W

Lf) W Z D
N a D 4
I Q =
0
z
W J
"? J
Q
?
N

rn
r c
y
0
W
Q1
a
b
O
IT
M II II M
1
n
N
N
n
N
N
w
W :)
Z
>Q
Q
J
-1
C)
? a
11.14e cr 0
Q
w
G66
Q O 89
Q
co
LU
T-
LL
?
O b??
E?
m w
to

.- rp

N

,
C7

0 0
r- Q Q

n
co
J
N m
I'f
^ M
^
I
M i
M
m to
L O
O
b O N
w
M^ N r-a Z
O ` 0
- m
FN
? •- m a
C*j w F-
M O b Q
.r -? b N -?
M -i
m? irn
L b
m Z
n F w 0
L ?- 0 a

1r _cc
N to
b

N ac
b N w 0
°° 1 I 1 '? ^ w o
.
r
N a U cr
?
¢
.--? NNN w
w a
cc
^ ^

rn! im
W
O Ur
m °' o 0
U 0 .J I ? Q
'- / W
1-- 0 D
(n CC J
0 O ^ m

N N
t(f ? N
a .-

-, 1
wf ^w to
to
N
N
r-

;zli?
Or
N N
V
1
-? 1 r
^ ? b b
N ?-

O)
Y1 N

-
0
? ? 1
o
to J

to ? .-
l
r l?
. to
b
N
N
N >- C')
00 0)
.n Z m
N ? ?-
o
U [0
llJ w
Y LL
>Q
7
-t
N
rn
a
O
d'
Q
O
0

_U O
U
?- z
U.
Q O

N

N ~
J
Q

W
Q
cr

w
W
CL
Z

=
z

ti w
X
W

cc

_j
cJ
i
W
0

0
W
0
m

0
wiIlfion
w
wZ)
0 Z
3>
Q
N
O?
m
N
m
00
w

J ?y•
c.
J

O
a

69 /?
f
Q r
C
b
9
O

?
s
w ? ?? .
` L
a

J s
~
Q
o _jI ss
rr W ss--

D .,

s?
Lo w
_
rf N N
O
0 Ur
O 0

- ? 0
w
1r
? O J

m to
W
0 0
N N

? LL1
l7 N Z
w in

N
N
[? n

h O
J
1 l7 : m
- <
w
1r
t
Y
~

C1 N o
Q
w N J
? f
N N
L ti
0
' z
Nw FM r W O
a
o

w 1.
0
N
? ?
N N
t0 L ly X
P, N N W O
N I ~_ 0
N
F in cc

co Y
N -,i r 0?
?- - a to N W QQ
0? ^N ?
N1 iN
W

? n r Q ?

W
_ 0
In Ol w M
O '' N C13
^

? i
N N
v L^

r N -? j r

co
VIA
(D

N CN

m V
N
N

\\ `

N ? K

L0
N
W
1-
cr.
w LLI
o 1 > O
OwN

a •? ?«
?-
-N
(D
N
r '- J

Z W to
z 1w- w
Z
LL,
° --r

to -•

N
1D w

?w
U
V
o
U
N
M w v
w U Q
U
N

LO
f- O 0
m n
I l N N ,?.
N ly
Z Q ,?
`
CL ? Off' !? -} N ' 'r
{- r N M
N _^
XIN-
N
mj i
.- r N
_ N ?t
e! 1?
N >- (1)
00 to Z 01
N = r
00
U m
w u.
d
n
n
r
n
n
h
lz
0

_
a
F
U
_
cr-
LL 0
L- U
a Z
0

J •-• Z
W

W ~
N D W
C
O 0
to W Z 0
N C7 ?
1 a = 0
CC
Z
LLI -j
`'. J

a ?

o

o 0
N
Q
3

W
M
n
cli
W
W Z)
7_
Q
Q
O
N
M
0
N
M
w
H ?
W W
O ~ >
z Fr
0: w 0
O
U
}
m m ? O
0
H

U
00
J w
_J Cr

9IC / Q C)

(7 \ 9`l b
a? 0
./
/ Oh.
b
W
Q
0 9Z
! ?
`
69

6.9
sb 7 =?`
s
ba. `Zl
?
al
iM W
N
umi
CC O
CC <
W
w :
:)
W in J

J O) M m
J M M
W z ! i
cc 0 40
Q 111
CD 0) m

1
J
_ n

L
W Q O in n N w
W
- l
J
1 ?- m
M ^ O J
tD Q
=`
n w x
Y ~
Coco 3

a?

4 t
N N
NI ?N ?W
+ OD ^ z
w 0

-+ O
1r _0:

I, ao

?
L m
N
N
M L N Y
to
In m

?- M

to a
L O
.raD N
W 0
fl.
1
-
N ) r r ^ W Q
0) to r- C-4
to .- ¢ ao a

N N
W
n ?
I- to
O
! 1 V 0 N .1 j FE Q
? m Q
~ W?
O rI 1
W CC
C-i *to
m
r ?
II
Nt iN
M O N

?n M Y1 n
M y.
+I I
1 N
N m
` ?-

° n? , to
in
to
ro
N
o
M

1 m

N`
i~ C"
"
W1
1? 0
M

?n \ a
N N A

V7 it

N N o to
?n .-

a 1 m
r
La
M M 0
N
-- N J
Q
N

-
r?
.r

N

•-

n
W
Z
Z F- W
MJ w Z U co w
N '1 1 r m
N Z W U
U Q l 1
to i to
N -`' to m •r w
U
W
ml m
i
N N
1
L ^ M
M M

n
ro
N t7
-
N l M
y ' ry f) N N
N

N ?- f7
? F' VI
tnZm
N D r-
o
U [D
W w
Y LL.
Q
r

0

U
_ 0
?- U
?-
z
cc 0
J- cn
_ Z

J D
F-
W

N W
O
D Z
to LU
N
00

cc
z
W '. J
Q c
G
w

o ac
N

w
O
Q
m0
2 ~
C7 w
z
J Z
Qq0
O U
OD f r

h
Nnh
?n

N? -Jir

V)
N
O/
b .' \
N n
N
b \
N
h
0 0? /1 f
C7 N /
W
0
.T

N W)
N
N
W w
O Z
Q}?Z
Q
n
C7
n
O
w
w w
o?->
CLzR
aC °
o u
U
H_ O
?a
tr a:
0
00
LJJ

FO! 1 JJ_
60[

C7 Cc, O'> 6e
W°
C O / ss L
9
-
`
- 9
a: rr
d zJ 6
f-S
?
Z) SS ,
el
ez
s9
s? r

m N C7
o
l_ ac Q
w

b w
!7 O J
J `r co

OD
OD
?w w T
O / li
CC
Q 0
w n n
Q
o ry O N N

[ ?
/ CO
_j
^
a
w ? Ya n L
MNN n w

0
m a

'" - 00 W F-
m_., w nn r Q
O M J
N

N N
V N L::
W N N
N .- N Z
N w °
cc 0
i r m a
cc
N =
n --
N

of 10 j
N
N W L„
010
^ N cm
`-m
ao
?-? N b
N N
° Y
W O
-' ^
? !- to ?
r ! ° c O
r U CC
h r? N -J h b N 1 i t ° °
-?
b n 0 0 co, ° -? b OD in w Q
Q
P1 t7
N N (4 w
.
h r

i
cm N
w

-10 C9
F N O O
bnl i to n r j ir- Q
a:
- w 0
--^- , 1 D
N ow J
Q W N N m

I i
N N
of n
l7 M N mN
! N in
N !
N
r N

m
N
b/
/r N K \\ y°) n/

r N N
N
n
t D
o I

N h

f0
f") N O

b - N 'A
N P1 N
li t,

LN
b OI O
N . N

N N

N -? O OI .r
O

L
V) O N
N •- N

N
(y
N
01
01
h ^
N b
?- l7
_
.-
m
-?
in n
b
t9
J
acrco
UJ U)
w Z U
w
w U a
U
m cm
f7 1f1
b N
N in
NliN
O\ W
n i I n
1
N N
N O/ N
r

m
b OI
wJ I I
?- t to
Y N ?
N
Nlicm
I nr
NT OF h E
yw?
MDEIN?
o??P?M r?yp United States Department of the Interior AMD=
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
?'9RCH a A Raleigh Field Office ¦
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
March 9, 1993
1993
Mr. L.J. Ward, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch T?;>
r
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina
27611-5201
Attention: Brian F. Yamamoto
Dear Mr. Ward:
Reference is made to your January 4, 1993, request for potential
environmental impacts associated with the proposed extension of SR
3009 (Edwards Mill Road) along a new route between SR 1656 (Trinity
Road) and SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road) in Raleigh, Wake County, North
Carolina (TIP Number U-2582). The Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) makes the following recommendations in accordance with
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended;
16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.), and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
The proposed improvements may adversely affect wetlands along the
new highway. As you are aware, review by the Wilmington District,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be required to determine the
presence and extent of wetlands along the proposed route. Areas of
concern to the Service include potential impacts to marshes, scrub-
shrub, and forested wetlands. Such wetlands are of high fish and
wildlife habitat value, and perform important water quality and
land stabilization functions. If wetlands are likely to be
affected, the Service will recommend the use of alternatives that
avoid wetland impacts. These may include alternatives along
different alignments, the use of bridges instead of culverts, or
special construction techniques. In addition, the proposed road
extension crosses a significant portion of the remaining open space
in the Raleigh and Cary vicinity. It is likely to have significant
adverse affects on upland forests, scrub-shrub, pastures, and other
fallow lands that are of high habitat value to resident and
migratory waterfowl, hawks and owls, songbirds, and wading birds.
These habitats are especially valuable because so much of the
nearby areas have been urbanized. Unavoidable wetland impacts
should be reduced, and the fish and wildlife habitat value of
affected wetlands should be replaced with suitable mitigation.
A-1
The attached list identifies the Federally-listed endangered and
threatened species as well as candidate species that are known to
occur in Wake County. Your environmental analysis should address
all possible impacts to these species and their habitats. The
analysis should consider direct affects, as well as secondary,
indirect impacts that may result from altered drainage patterns,
stream blockages, construction-related turbidity, induced
development along new highway alignments, or any other effects. If
any threatened, endangered, or candidate species may be affected,
further coordination with this office is nesssary.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project.
If you have any questions, please contact David Dell, Permits
Coordinator for this office (919/856-4520).
Sincerely,
UQA
L.K. Mike Gantt
Supervisor
A-2
REVISED JANUARY 11, 1993
Wake County
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) - E
Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) - E
Michaux's sumac ( hus michauxii) - E
Dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) - E
Bachman's warbler (Vermivora bachmanii) - E
There are species which, although not now listed or officially proposed for
listing as endangered or threatened, are under status review by the Service.
These "Candidate" (C1 and C2) species are not legally protected under the
Act, and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7,
until they are formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered. We
are providing the below list of candidate species which may occur within the
project area for the purpose of giving you advance notification. These
species may be listed in the future, at which time they will be protected
under the Act. In the meantime, we would appreciate anything you might do
for them.
Bachman's warbler (Vermivora bachmanii) - C2
Bachman's sparrow (Aimophila aestivalis) - C2*
Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula) - C2
Carolina trillium (Trillium pusillum var. pusillum) - C2
Southeastern bat (Mvotis austroriparius) - C2
Loggerhead shrike (Lan us ludovicianus) - C2
Yellow lance (mussel) (Ellintio lanceolate) - C2
Atlantic pigtoe (mussel) (Fusconaia masoni) - C2
Diana fritillary butterfly (Speveria diana) - C2
Green floater (Lasmiaona subviridis) - C2
Neuse slabshell (Elliptio iudithae) - C2
*hWicates no specimen in at least 20 years from this county.
A-3
FM206
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRA
116. WEST JONES STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT
MAILED TO:
NC DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
L.J. WARD
PLANN- E ENV. BRANCH
HIGHWAY BLDG-/INTER-OFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
FROM:
?DUS E ?,.
I N
7603-8003
'JAN 13 1993
2 DIVISION OF
?? ..
Y''RONW-
MS- JEANETTE FURNEY
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
SCOPING - PROPOSED EXTENSION OF SR 3009 (EDWARDS MILL RD-)r FROM
SR 1656 (TRINITY RD-) TO SR 1664 (DURALEIGH RD-) IN RALEIGH
T-I-P- #U-2582
TYPE - SCDPING
THE N-C- STATE CLEARINGHOUSE HAS RECEIVED THE ABOVE PROJECT FOR
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW- THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED STATE
APPLICATION NUMBER 93E42200569- PLEASE USE THIS NUMBER WITH ALL
INQUIRIES OR CORRESPONDENCE WITH THIS OFFICE*
REVIEW OF THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE COMPLETED ON OR BEFORE 03/05/93-
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL [phone]-
A-4
?/
?NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
FMk08 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116 WEST JONES STREET
03-08-93 RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27 ZZ I
> ?.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS a? Q 9.Iggy
T
MAILED TO: FROM: OIVISIC!,4 pF Q2V
? HIGHWAYS
0Q
G fiIGHW? p?
NC DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION MRS. CHRYS BAG H
L.J. WARD DIRECTOR
PLANN• E ENV. BRANCH N C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
HIGHWAY BLDG./INTER-OFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
SCOPING - PROPOSED EXTENSION OF SR 3009 (EDWARDS MILL RD.)v FROM
SR 1656 (TRINITY RD*) TO SR 2664 (DURALEIGH RD.) IN RALEIGH
T.I.P. #U-2582
SAI NO 93E42200569 PROGRAM TITLE - SCOPING

THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. AS A RESULT OF THE REVIEW THE FOLLOWING
IS SUBMITTED: ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone].
C.C• REGION J
A-5
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
REVIEW CISTRIBUTION STATE NUMBER 93-E-4220-0569
DEPT OF
DEPT OF
DEPT OF
DEPT OF
DEPT OF
STATE P
AGRICULTURE
CUL RESOURCES
E H N .?
T _ ON
CCEPS - NFP
LANNING REGION J
DATE RECEIVED
01 06 93
FC2
DOA- P4v*4.2 y ESe4.v
STATE AGENCY RESPONSE DUE 03 03 93
LOCAL RESPONSE DUE 03 02 93
REVIEW CLOSED 03 05 93
PROJECT
APPL: NC DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
CFDAW: 00002 12001
DESC: SCOPING - PROPOSED EXTENSION OF SR 3009 (EDWARDS MILL RD.), FROM
SR 1656 (TINITY RD.) TO SR 1664 (DURALEIGH RD.) IN RALEIGH
T.I.P. #U-2582
CROSS-REFERENCE NUMBER:
REVIEW THE ATTACHED PROJECT. SUBMIT YOUR RESPONSE BY THE ABOVE INDICATED
DATE. IF ADDITIONAL REVIEW TIME IS NEEDED CONTACT THIS OFFICE.
----------------------------------------------------
AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED
( ) NO COMMENT
(k) COMMENTS *+T- /,(4W
Q,2//r7l/-
SIGNED BY: ,t'" - State Property Office
DATE: I
/rr/t ittG?xtirKU-,,Q Y?az? l?or dw
NCSIl?-?-
?4&
.?1 S ?aGctiw? . A-6
X15 ,b11 j?
STATE
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee it4"* -
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 93-0569 - SR 3009 Extension from SR 1656
to SR 1664, Wake County
DATE: February 17, 1993
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the proposed project. The attached comments are a
result of this review. More specific comments will be provided
during the environmental review process.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond. If, during the
preparation of the environmental document, additional information
is needed, the applicant is encouraged to notify our respective
divisions.

MM: bb
Attachments
CC: David Foster
P.O. Boa 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611.7687 Telephone [phone] Fax X 919-733-0513
An Equal Opportunit A -7 ction Employer
d ,? STA7Z
T I ? 7
ti i r A
rn. a
w 't
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Res
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
February 2, 1993
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: /&J"o-hn Dorney
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: Water Quality Checklist for EA/EIS Documents
SR 3009 Extension From SR 1656 to SR 1664
Wake County
TIP #U-2582
EHNR # 93-0569. DEM # 7972
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental Management requests that
the following topics be discussed in the EA/EIS documents:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The stream
classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelization/relocations. If the original
stream banks were vegetated, it is requested that the chan ne lized/re located
stream banks be revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests that these catch
basins be placed at all water supply stream crossings. Identify the responsible
party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion control measures are not placed in
wetlands.
P.O. h<)x 27687, Polcigh, Norh Carolina 27611.7687 Ttlcplx,nc 919.733.49!;4 Fax [phone]
An Equal OpM.mun A-8 k-pun rmpluYcr
G.
H.
J
Wetland Impacts
i) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and delineating
jurisdictional wetlands.
ii) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
iii) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
iv) Mitigation measures to compensate for habitat losses.
v) Wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
vi) Quality of wetlands impacted.
vii) Total wetland impacts.
viii) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from DEM.
Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Prior to the approval of any borrow
source in a wetland, the contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as possible? Why not
(if applicable)?
Please provide a detailed discussion for mass-transit as an option.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required for this project.
Applications requesting coverage under our General Certification 14 or General Permit
31 (with wetland impact) will require written concurrence. Please be aware that 401
Certification may be denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized
to the maximum extent practicable.
sr3009.sco
cc: Eric Galamb
Monica Swihart
f

_ ._
1 ?
J
A-9

Ar.
.,tY Oww •'.'?•.
State of North Carolina
Department of En-vironment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
January 19, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
(j G I
FROM: David Harrison
SUBJECT: Edwards Mill Road Extension
Project No. 93-0569
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
The proposal is for a new roadway which would extend from
Duraleigh Road (SR 1664) to Trinity Road (SR 1656). The
Environmental Assessment should identify any unique, prime, or
important farmlands that would be impacted by the project. A
wetlands evaluation should be included.
,?
• t.l ?
3 r.
h'.
1
'C -
DH/tl
A-10
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 2/611-7687 lelephone 919.733-4984 Far X 919.733-0513
State of North Carolina Reviewing Office:
Der- irtment of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS Pro ecI Number: Due Date:
4.3-D,6-LS __1) -i/
Alter review of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Questions re arding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
g
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same
Normal Prc-ess
Regional Office. Time
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS (statutory me
limit)
Permit to construct d operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of 30 days
? facilities, sewer system extensions, b sewer construction contracts On-site inspection. Post-application
systems not discharging into state surface waters. technical conference usual (90 days
NPD'ES • permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection. 90.120 da,s
? permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities Pre-application conference usual. Additionally. obtain permit to
Reply
ranted after NPDES
tment facilit
-
r tr
t
INIAI
discharging into state surface waters. .
y
g
ea
construct wastewa
e
time. 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-whichever is later.
30 days
? Water Use Permit Pre-application technical conference usually necessary
(N/Ai
7 days
? Well Construction Permit Complete application must be received and permit issued
prior to the installation of a well.
(15 days,
Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property 55 days
? Dredge and Fill Permit owner. On-site inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of (90 days•
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
? Permit to construct d operate Air Pollution Abatement _
N A 60 da, s
(90 da,s
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21H.06
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0520.
Demolition or renovations of structures containing
r'
asbestos material must be in compliance with 15A '*• 60 dais
NCAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal N•A
prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group
919.733.0820. (90 cia: si
? Complex Source Permit required under 15A NCAC 2D.0800.
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion 6 sedimentatro
? control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land ouality Sect.) at least 30 20 day s
days before be immn activity. A fee of S30 for the first acre and 520.00 for each additional acre or art must accompany the plan 130 da%s
? The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance: 130 days/
On-site inspection usual Surety bond filed with EHNR. Bond amount
? Mining Permit varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land Any area 30 days
mined greater than one acre must be permited. The appropriate bond 160 days)
must be received before the permit can be issued.
? North Carolina Burning permit On-site Inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit 1 day
exceeds 4 days (NIA,
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit • 22 On-site inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required -if more 1 da:,
? counties in coastal N.C. with organic soils than live acres of ground clearing activities are Involved. Inspections (NIA
should be requested at least ten days before actual burn is planned."
90.120 ca/s
? Oil Refining Facilities NrA (NIA
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction.
Applicant must hire N C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans. 30 da. s
? Dam Safety Permit inspect construction. certify construction is according to EHNR approv•
ed plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. And (60 da, s.
a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers. An inspection of site is neces•
sary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of $200.00 must ac-
company the application. An additional processing fee based on a
percentage or the total pro ect cost will be required upon completion
?anr A-11 Continued on reverse
Norm
:7-P _,c?I?•
t I
C
C

C
C
C
?
?
a
w

PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS Istat^?•,./ time
limit)
File surety bond of 55,000 with EHNR running to Slate of N.C. 10 days
Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well conditional that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon (NIA)
abandonment, be plugged according to EHNR rules and regulations.
Geophysical Exploration Permit Application filed with EHNR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit 10 days
Application by letter. No standard application form. (NIA)
State Lakes Construction Permit Application fee based on structure size is charged. Must include 15.20 days
descriptions 3 drawings of structure 8 proof of ownership (NIA)
of riparian property.

401 Water Quality Certification
NIA 60 days
(130 days)

CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
5250.00 fee muss accompany application 55 days
(150 days)

CAMA Permit for MINOR development
550.00 fee must accompany application 22 days
(25 days)
Several geodetic monuments are located In or near the project area. It any monuments need to be moved or destroyed. please notify:
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687• Raleigh. N.C. 27611
Abandonment of any wells, if required, must be in accordance with Title 15A, Subchapter 2C.0100.
Notification of the proper regional office is requested if "orphan" underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during any excavation operation.
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H.1000 (Coastal Stormwater Rules) Is required. 45 days
(NIA)
Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority):
/-LL:) r !;? Cp{?L(Lr c.r >?2c•z+/7{?,^: c
00 7--'f LJA0-- 1ht*4V77--t
V1/tf `lb U$S/b? 7grir'v Ocl AVL_QlJ&V-,C A4444 ,E,'?q-
C0?7pc L. S ., I?1M1o ??i,PPi d G O ? V /cb7 5•?.g7?/ut.?.?T- z?, fiC.,E.(/1??1:
S?=
.
LDf S Tv ,?F/ rd?r; b p?/f?7o,?+Ll`j/ J9`l`4'O 1?!??Go•L'?jsr ? t?/?,EIZ..
? J L
S75(}8?
)
S'tURH.. 1?e2-R??f JliWO fi
JnYajt, c17-447-3 A,
REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
? Asheville Regional Office ? Fayetteville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Asheville, NC 28801 Fayetteville, NC 28301
[phone] [phone]
? Mooresville Regional Office
919 North Main Street, P.O. Box 950
Mooresville, NC 28115
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
1424 Carolina Avenue
Washington, NC 27889
[phone]
? Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
[phone]
? Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
[phone]
? Winston•Salet - 'lice
8025 North P A-12
Suite 100
Winston-Salem, INC 27106
[phone]
.r z-4
?d

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources -
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Charles H. Gardner
Wlillam W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary / Dlrector
Project Number: Ct County:
Project Name:
Geodetic Survey
This project will impact -_> geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
Survey should be contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the
7t ly«?.-y Geodetic Survey office at [phone].
<<
Revieweii/ Date
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
No comment
This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if more
than one (1) acre will be-,disturbed.
? If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of the erosion and sedimentation control plan.
If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water
Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
increased design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
other (comments attached)
For?more information contact the Land Quality Section at [phone].
?T/ I ? 01/Z1 /93
Reviewer Date
P.O. Box 27687 • Raleigh, N.C.: A-13 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunk, _.go ,,auvc r,cdon Employer
lk,
1 \'V• - ` to CCff,'?p coN•.oL a .toot futiL-?? dt .?l .\
rlt• 1g .Lr.Ntt cON,moL '4 r•t• o..
i1j1 .i ' •• ?Ji?li . "tt' V ?j''Ir,, f
ruff .h? •/ ,r1G•'r +pti j.•?.•ti °V°*y p, 't . •r 4 (/'(l ,Is -at
L•.¦t,tt• /[v M01 p ratio .•ta' /./gyp.. p oN?}
•?„LC ?3 `?1,} i0 Kel•iyM?" nN[co[ft as .c- LP~?"•t` • - v y4 <'prr L • L
.. AirpWl • •LVY
Malllf.'? ? 70 L,It0•m .ha• /C..r,i •.
NO.woo0 7
0111W[Lt pbv[} OLO1e1 •wr[S
[eNti;• rq ' t• Ira /
POP. 741 :w
ta. / \ ) r•4' '' Sj look /•Kl 111•mur IT / J•o??•• }-r /. G,b 11.1
r.u O (. t • i
n• ... (J 11MN V[[
1. •pOf J\• wOOYYL •N. C CLUB Ni0 ••4lw ?i?re71[OI .t.
Ci \1/11. 0 • NOON +.
"a O"OOOIG 10.1'4.
c! .6 WILLIAM 6. •""C •,[r C•?I • t?'s\ ••{•} rr'
r`J Ilr•yr .tsQi."c
.. •,N.r IRfD••ml •r 'r
UMSTEAD yid / 1 1 LL7. L•tn mY. \ -
STATE) 77 ±?/ J "corL a° .,,,LO•?l'L \ rlrr[•s4 r` .. w•oYN4
set ` MRK „• '; , '?t?• G LU foW
IIN I ) „I Y +f • t 11 TOIL /,? /? t(B /<
C711[ ?•? ti. + 1 I ?, I at V 1 i Imllt CC Itew•v(
J $1.41 C '???L J [t.w .COY/[ d° io[:[ •cf to+[•.
! ,• / w. to • • `11i / ? l.: 'l • . ? .• as J0a
r.1[ , +a yX, 7.,, e ` 'ieu?Lt I:iPY`•`?rdp ?« uy N'.c.Y. r"}
\ r•tr 10 : ys co[:•L ' rculoN \- t,11M'Y - KltOl OT r° ; :o q ILl(X• [• \ 4'4a
J.. • rY 1
m r't? t ?r w•tw .../i i
-'4y •IY,N 15.. J tort •v[N 1.
L 'J J+:?'. c a• l, L/1
r;? ar C a +/;i.lRi 70 wpp[•a Nt.raN +r / P
r, f` Olo.e•OIO.? /0 may. :}? • 104 plllul .' /
. ?w?rb•?pr \ ' ri/ li [ ri KESi p..LtwN YLL•a[ "ir'[vCA i \ L1N•o ywlo• trwr
ozolp
r•wf. ?1rL?Yperrs. w YlLltu ro1rY(u/t t gY Yr
a ?
7 sNtv Nroll : 1
1,41 Q' aY ,yq?,J"?•?, P` - .•. ..
? ' C• Mla ' 114X1•\ Y t S ., /tl.•N. /NCLLI
lalrll r! wb•/IMO (IrMC •; air N
C .. ?•: .{` % .• NMO Qr J ,, A ••A colt rBt.e7 (ooe t :?:1° NI YIC •.
r t ar rwsoN ,' - rr •p "oet"Yooo 5 r•ot ,o°?.ua??
"u3t a f •" ° .wort imA"ollNr
X,4.17 .,, N•OI/r•C. •1/AOt} rOl[;;?': w.? 'l•BOON ra 1 ' \' N•Yw
A• 1 f0 look°t••L1 01. •rRill?lipo[pN?++•?•?o? +a ???ti? a1?t at• rwLroedl
..:'.; :... TrOr•:??O((" • .p M•/Yet1 pCeQIJn /[Lr ?(1
•/:ii', r 1011 y(Nr ,/ / .T W1, r L I C
.: ?•r.pYrfOr 11Y1 •ey4. rp l• •D{ •LL I`T COa '. JOa r?4w ' f J[•L[Ww7??},I ?•
CL.?lON },NI' 1 }(- t _ \TJ souc. + TILL MOpmt /p???,r••t 'K
s \ r L
I"a IMr[ A
'• 1 lI[mC L - ) l1D? a,
'? •[ }mua to ? i u•!? a to Cos -
.. f rl• , •w: 1Y1 L?7 od ;• 00"X1 .. vOr7 I 717 a 9 Lt CT •
(NIII?L J CCC+•• /' 74 Be10`.c too, •NITr WN.OI
-?L? ..r.' \' ?? GN•r[\ ?- I e•010 Y•fI 116/•"GM [l' YprT /,a KNCe•L ONty •.
nU [a fi a'olcnca
101lYp1[ w v • a•?.•oN
a,Y?°• . ,: '? p?.ura"la7 \' / Pa ° o++ ?°' oll,a«a'`[t{Nto'N1 \ ?'i riIfw•.
r . •• L.•IIY+ +r arty \ G?'tt+ Nrl: 71et'.; ?•t
aJ 1 a}t F? nlL l'wn / m E. AttD \ ?.•?1??ra," wall.
?( D. e J4
ll?\\ /UH!1'SLJ. loo) L? It ?•l rs .,ti •t ?ISIN?rto
I .. 't.11/10 1'".1 Le( • / 1?rCti NY0004 I/ °•0 _ rlsrcN GeLLr00d.
AIDY •', •U/:.pN" 7449 •(I . ? IK1J frl.(r.f,N ' ?eY C•r
:L _•lt" •I.,"s I? (?Lf/(1 rllul.y I.U •\ l?7LLT0) 1 w,1i
.ol.? ? LAKE 1 ha wn "s NoLa• ?u,•II,
ro' Lw[c• RALEIGH \ .•0.`0 / / . ?r* w.: •? =Opt
` j •. - . ?[Iw(tN p r . iL+i/ Jr 1 to -i.7.s +4. asDOo
• i,
I to,
t «•t,s ?? ... , - ?? T0` N? RALEIGH\
..,u 0
1235 °
tai : aA _??
o.
For, 150 -.: ( .rJ
? c:?•:us ul/,f
? " ? ?r ? 4/w C(Ir •:v
' 7.N ?`.:?...,., w«t Lte ?; •(, » \r * ? wn . Nli*t" ?
.oN t
r 4 Lr ?
.. , '.,?• 1011 /4 aDN y Y•tL
Jo s
IT ( n
1/ \, j. ttilTi?d•n Gle.. ,a/ p•o
qA L
• ?r"lt'erf J 74.7 f MOBIL( [a :moss
u?B ??NUIT rar.•r. ?e Ioof uu,e(( •rwu•.
\? ' IL?1 •?.. 7D Vjs ...af .13.. •? e•!
"AT I,eso .10 In .?wIT• .`'t `k.•, '• L w .\'EL'SEOCAy'>•,,
.omttht r6, D., o i1.nu ?:.•»• is \Y _ ?"`yyt' `?/ •c
1'IIEKLL'N ?? rMr 3 . „C?:,• uL,ara7 LAKE
rol. ?+ su:•suq -,yti: "cat Y•.,aaa 1
V.
a 4 ° y ut
W
r 5 / u?,Rll _•i•Y••,• 1 AWMYN YpL[
f C.•it• (••t ?NM
\\ // ( J a::. •r TOY •?•p!q[ JJ10\•ICe•. 1
.. IYtn 01. , '.:¦Aa.,::r •u A.P. [ ?` /MCN 4
,a}c•o ..e ,)? ,ft ?,nt_`)1 :,. -1'4 syNr? ---wlp r ('} a?OM[
•r•YC Ira/ / JV •a? 'a lot /?'• 's -? 'b? 'r[71 ,Nw'.L 1;
,. Ilo°a r•`;,: ,(.JV •v qtf ,a c "( }s ?ti N `•woo7,??=b anl?.eott
+y r y r 1 1 `'..... \T,?f ? 71•I \ 100 ."s
0[? ?COw \
AAA
t ,"G Ola 1 Ail A YYY ` } ,n • laf also
N.C 71 ?OOII[ s
C / Nwf.
eY.O Y, • i^•''.IKE ° L+«uesoe? ?.r wsall Bwt A• o•o ? ?.; '4 • ? % ,•
10.07 ?••..
.176.
,. y'a. id•U, •, 7 WnddL
+iI1N1•f \ .(r17 1.0\
o• ' 10. K1ry.4.N..
YOedl DmA Trfs i ? S8 1•' •i? .N, • ky( / 7X1 7o•a Amami"
Wool. [ rvY• •,•vol :":',:, •'' •rt •r/i N ? u+?? Yql s.o?t• 7Me / •.../"`
1007
0 0 ...YKI/1( ???/ ••1 Iq•D
YO" 1 ``a N.c Oa
•a Oily lj1 ti
74.4 as I [ 41so Ir Lf I /. / Yc toa '.Y.
•r 4711 . - v;: tyer f[vlYrV 5 ? _ ••f otiol
\
w•vt. Iil00VG[•1C1 euw [• w[I iff! p/•
}7.7 t J
•af \ It NO V? a.''a •L ./'
' S `Rif AY N[ I it !p
• Ina •a r 1.A f ?J7? ' • aa} •t Awney ol" N•••r o wptJ r
ou••ft p a De0 77Di ? ti p rl + 1} . /..4KE
.
VJ •vte l{• a 7704 • KB ALI'. 1 y"wl (JIl 100/ MYRA
as
?b
0 / ? •': 15)3 f 1110 ?•} 1771 . J Y s•l
3703- rC 110 4 ^ ,a / IOOI
ruNl.lm M.tt wlln el Dl 7707
am
Iola # / w1M? }sit 7Do L? M?0 •7111 L a.. I
740. 11 1107 ? v'i
' 1' J If011Li `t? fff
v . °•o /I.1 wOODr•I
/J t li[e } f 740^.0 f°&/ l •fs \Jr r 740" 'L• '' l.J
.:? , 1 0t? 171 n77•.4•m"tN / N W:I - / 1 r itr ^SLWN"•II
I \ 7' ... •/...._-?
.0 1771 / •t
7i's lwpr(t N1 t [• LB 1 •. VLw000Y•r • a nit r n ( /?
uo: Y• u7f 41ao ^ y?_ an 7 °r
t Isis
.1 7711
NI MDQrno\
1 'l `MI. 11•nlgn CA. cost
00 m. -•.?,? Tt •7
en Ml _ .(w/(TN 77 .s 1, 1n.
7171 1 \J ? •? • ?- ?
PROJECT REVIEW
PROJECT NUMBER 93-0569
WAKE COUNTY

y

Existing water mains and public water supply wells may be
affected depending on the location of the road widening and
possible changes in drainage features. Appropriate water
system officials should be contacted.
William Barlow
Public Water Supply Section
Division of Environmental Health
A-15
Forestry
.`
r
1AL?, ! -; t
A;N'N l Yt S A R Y
State of North Carolina
N.C. - Where it all began
` Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Forest Resources
512'North Salisbury Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Stanford M. Adams
James B. Hunt, Governor
Jonathan Hovkcs,Sccrctary Griffiths Forestry Center Director
2411 Garner Road
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
January 19, 1993
To WM) AMniTM
TO: Melba McGee, Environmental Assessment Unit
FROM: Don H. Robbins, Staff Forester W?e
SUBJECT: DOT EA Scoping for SR 3009 Extension from SR 1656 to SR 1664 on New
Location in Wake County (TIP #U-2582)
PROJECT #93-0569
DUE DATE: 2-11-93
To better determine the impact to forestry in the area of the proposed
project, the Environmental Assessment should contain the following
information concerning the proposed alternative routes and for the possible
right-of-way purchases for the project:
1. The total forest land acreage by types that would be taken out of
forest production as a result of new right-of-way purchases.
2. The productivity of the forest soils as indicated by the soil
series, that would be involved within the proposed right-of-way.
3. The impact upon existing greenways within the area of the proposed
project.
4. The provisions that the contractor will take to sell any
merchantable timber that is to be removed. This practice is
encouraged to minimize the need for piling and burning during
construction. If any burning is needed, the contractor should
comply with all laws and regulations pertaining to debris burning.
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North r.-iin. )7A,1.7687 Telephone [phone]
An Fnual Onnnm '_16 Arrinn Fmnlrnrr
Page 2
5. The provisions that the contractor will take during the construction
phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation and construction damage to
forest land outside the right-of-way and construction limits. Trees
outside the construction limits should be protected from
construction activities to avoid:
a. Skinning of tree trunks by machinery.
b. Soil compaction and root exposure or injury by heavy equipment.
C. Adding layers of fill dirt over the root systems of trees, a
practice that impairs root aeration.
d. Accidental spilling of petroleum products or other damaging
substances over the root systems of trees.
We would hope that a route could be chosen that would have the least impact to
forest and related resources in that area.
DHR:la
pc: Warren Boyette -CO
File

A-17
AY,
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
FROM : fog Dennis Stewart, Manager
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: February 11, 1993
SUBJECT: Request for information from the N. C. Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) regarding fish and
wildlife concerns for SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Road)
Extension, from SR 1656 (Trinity Road) to SR 1664
(Duraleigh Road), Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina,
TIP No. U-2582, SCH Project No. 93-0569.
This memorandum responds to a request from Mr. L. J. Ward of
the NCDOT for our concerns regarding impacts on fish and wildlife
resources resulting from the subject project. The N. C. Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC) has reviewed the proposed
improvements, and our comments are provided in accordance with
provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(c)) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat.
401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The proposed work involves construction of a multi-lane
facility on new alignment, to be completed in two phases. Upland
habitat in the project area consists of patches of mature
pine/hardwood forest among extensive areas of cleared and/or
developed land. Wade Avenue (SR 1775) and several smaller roads
cross the project area, and sewer and power lines produce
additional cleared corridors. Wetland habitat consists of small
tributaries to Richland Creek and associated floodplains, as well
as an assortment of ponds.
The first phase of the project, from Trinity Road to Wade
Avenue, involves only one alignment alternative. The diagram
enclosed with the scoping letter and the surveyed line on the
project site indicate extensive longitudinal encroachment on the
A-18
"Memo Page 2 February 11, 1993
stream in the southern portion of the project area. The NCWRC
recommends that the southern end of the corridor be shifted
slightly to the west to minimize impacts on this stream and
associated wetlands. The stream crossing should be as near
perpendicular as is practicable within highway design
constraints, and channel relocation should be avoided. A series
of small ponds is crossed by the proposed corridor and will
probably require mitigation, since the area cannot be completely
avoided.
The second phase of the project, north of Wade Avenue,
involves three alignment alternatives, two of which would
apparently eliminate a large pond at the western end of SR 1667.
Since this pond is providing multiple water quality benefits to
the area, including retention of stormwater, sediments and
pollutants which would otherwise enter Richland Creek, the NCWRC
will likely prefer Alternative 1, which avoids the pond site.
Alternative 1 also appears to parallel an existing power line
corridor and may minimize additional fragmentation of upland
forest habitat. These recommendations are based on preliminary
observation of the study area, however, and final recommendations
on corridor selection will depend on information presented in the
environmental document.
Of the three proposed alternative cross sections, the NCWRC
recommends the five-lane facility over the two divided highway
options due to its narrower right-of-way requirements. If a
wider facility is required, the additional right-of-way should be
placed so as to minimize additional wetland loss in the vicinity
of aquatic systems. Hydrologic crossings should minimize culvert
length and retain natural stream channel characteristics as much
as possible. Clearing of vegetation along streambanks and
placement of rip-rap within permanent stream channels should be
minimized. Stream crossing structures should be of sufficient
size to allow wildlife passage beneath the new roadway. The
NCWRC also recommends that the NCDOT design this facility with
partial access control to minimize secondary development impacts
and preserve project benefits to local traffic flow.
Recent NCDOT environmental documents have typically
addressed most environmental concerns for projects of this scope.
For purposes of reference, our informational needs are listed
below:
1. Description of fishery and wildlife resources within
the project area, including a listing of federally or
state designated threatened, endangered, or special
concern species. When practicable, potential borrow
areas to be used for project construction should be
included in the inventories. A listing of designated
plant species can be developed through consultation
with:
A-19
Memo Page 3 February 11, 1993
The Natural Heritage Program
N. C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
and,
Cecil C. Frost, Coordinator
NCDA Plant Conservation Program ?'
P. O. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
In addition, the NCWRC's Nongame and Endangered Species
Program maintains databases for locations of vertebrate
wildlife species. While there is no charge for the
list, a service charge for computer time is involved.
Additional information may be obtained from:
Randy Wilson, Manager
Nongame and Endangered Species Program
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, N. C. 27604-1188
[phone].
2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by the
project. The need for channelizing or relocating
portions of streams crossed and the extent of such
activities.
3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreages impacted by
the project. Wetland acreages should include all
project-related areas that may undergo hydrologic
change as a result of ditching, other drainage, or
filling for project construction. Wetland
identification may be accomplished through coordination
with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). If the
COE is not consulted, the person delineating wetlands
should be identified and criteria listed.
4. Cover type maps showing acreages of upland wildlife
habitat impacted by the proposed project. Potential
borrow sites should be included.
5. The extent to which the project will result in loss,
degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife habitat
(wetlands or uplands).
6. Mitigation for avoiding, minimizing or compensating for
direct and indirect degradation in habitat quality as
well as quantitative losses.
A-20
Memo
Page 4 February 11, 1993
7. A cumulative impact assessment section which analyzes
the environmental effects of highway construction and
quantifies the contribution of this individual project
to environmental degradation.
8. A discussion of the probable impacts on natural
resources which will result from secondary development
facilitated by the new road construction. These
indirect impacts have often been ignored in NCDOT
documents, although the possible economic benefits of
subsequent development are frequently cited as
justification for highway construction. The NCWRC
recommends that this and future documents provide a
balanced treatment of secondary development impacts,
particularly when construction on new alignment is
proposed.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the early
planning stages for this project. If we can further assist your
office, please call David Yow, Highway Project Coordinator, at
[phone].
DLS/DLY
cc Mike Scruggs, District 3 Wildlife Biologist
Wayne Jones, District 3 Fisheries Biologist
Randy Wilson, Nongame/Endangered Species Program Mgr.
David Yow, Highway Project Coordinator

A-21
DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
FEBRUARY 15, 1993
MEMORANDi1M
TO: Melba McGee
THROUGH: Steve Hall
FROM: Marshall Ellis M,G-

SUBJECT: SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Road) Extension, From SR 1656
(Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), Raleigh, Wake
County, Federal-Aid Project No. STP-3009(1), State
Project No. 8.2402801, TIP No. U-2582.
The Division of Parks and Recreation has reviewed NCDOT's scoping
letter requesting information on potential environmental impacts
arising from the proposed Edwards Mill Road Extension project and
has the following comments:
1) This project does not pass through any state parks or
Registered Natural Heritage Areas, and the Natural Heritage Program
has no records of threatened or endangered species in the immediate
vicinity of this project.
2) Although this alternative appears to be more desirable than the
previously proposed Duraleigh Road Connector, the Division is
concerned over this project's potential to increase traffic levels
on nearby Ebenezer Church Road. Approximately 1.5 miles of William
B. Umstead State Park's bridle trail system currently uses Ebenezer
Church Road. If NCDOT anticipates vehicular use of Ebenezer Church
Road to increase as a consequence of the Edwards Mills Road
Extension, then we would like to see provisions made to reduce
speed limits and truck traffic on Ebenezer Church Road.
3) The Loblolly Trail exits William B. Umstead State Park at its
southern boundary and proceeds 6 miles to Carter-Finley Stadium via
the Richland Creek Greenway. The planning maps included with the
scoping letter contain insufficient detail to know if this project
will affect this trail. If the road corridor affects this trail or
the Richland Creek Greenway, then safe trail crossings will need to
be incorporated into the roadway design.
A-22

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
March 10, 1993
- ?
and History
Lr., Director
MEMORANDUM
MAR 1 5 1993
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
%
Planning and Environmental Branch ZZ
Division of Highways DIVISION OF
Department of Ztam sportation HIGHWAYS P?
FN14RON ?
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State istoric Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Road) Extension from SR 1656 (Old
Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), Raleigh, Wake
County, U-2582, STP-3009(1), 8.2402801, CH 93-E-
4220-0569
We have received information concerning the above project from the State Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following
structures of historical or architectural importance within the general area of the project:
Harrison Family Houses. 4100 Block Forestview Road, Raleigh.
Mt. Olivet Baptist Church Cemetery. South side of Shenck Forest on State Farm
Road, Raleigh.
House. North side of SR 1656, 0.3 mile west of the junction with SR 1664,
Raleigh.
None of the above properties have been evaluated for National Register eligibility.
There are no recorded archaeological sites within the proposed project area. It is likely,
however, that as yet unrecorded sites will be affected by the proposed road. As soon as
they are available, please forward maps indicating the selected alternate so we can
complete our review and recommend any necessary archaeological investigations.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the
above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: State Clearinghouse
B. Church
T. Padgett
109 East Jones ~ -23 xW Carolina 27601-2807 eC9

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
September 14, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Edward Mill Road Extension from Old Trinity Road
to Duraleigh Road, Raleigh, Wake County, U-2582,
8.2402801, STP-3001(1), ER 94-7199
Dear Mr. Graf:
0
UP 16 1993
U
DIVISION oc ., ?
HIGHWA`( ,
?JRON?? ?'
Thank you for your letter of August 4, 1993, transmitting the archaeological
survey report by Deborah Joy of the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) concerning the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, we concur that the following properties are not eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places under Criterion D:
31 WA1151, 31 WA1152, 31 WA1153, 31 WA1154* and 31 WA1155* *
None of these sites contain sufficient integrity nor any important information
which would qualify them for inclusion in the National Register.
In general the report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of
the Interior. We recommend that no additional archaeological investigation be
conducted in connection with this project as currently proposed.
Archaeologists for NCDOT should note that archaeological investigations should
not be conducted on state lands, such as the NCSU research farm, without an
Archaeological Resources Protection Act permit obtained pursuant to North
Carolina General Statutes Chapter 70 Article, 2.
We have reviewed the architectural resources survey report prepared by NCDOT
for the above project and understand that no properties over fifty years of age are
in the area of potential effect. Based upon the information provided, we concur
with the Federal Highway Administration's determination that no National Register-
listed or eligible architectural properties are in the area of potential effect.
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
109 East Jon A-24, North Carolina 27601-2807
Nicholas L. Graf
September 14, 1993, Page 2
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Since,rely,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw?
cc: "L. J. Ward
B. Church
T. Padgett
A-25

North Carolina State University
Facilities
Office of Finance and Business
Real Estate
Box 7230, Raleigh, North Carolina 27895-7230
Tel (919) 515-x235 FAX [phone]
December 4, 1992
Mr. Brian F. Yamamoto
Transportation Engineer
Planning & Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
Re: Edwards Mill Road Extension
Dear Mr. Yamamoto :
a D ?C 0 9 15°? :- {
The location of the proposed Edwards Mill Road Extension north of
Wade Avenue is of importance to North Carolina State University.
The positioning of this road must take into consideration its potential
impact on programs within the College of Agriculture and Life
Sciences and the College of Forest Resources. For both colleges,
placement of this road as far to the east as possible would minimize
its impact on existing programs for teaching and research.
Of particular concern to the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
are the buildings north of Reedy Creek Road which support the beef
cattle teaching and research programs. These facilities are necessary
to these programs and cannot be separated from the pasture land by
a highly-used divided highway as proposed with Alternative 3.
The pasture land south of Reedy Creek Road and west of Edwards
Mill will serve a dual purpose. It is required to support the beef
cattle teaching herds. Without this pasturage the programs would
have to be relocated to areas that are less convenient for our
teaching and research activities. Proximity to campus for these
programs is extremely important. This pasture land will also act as a
buffer for Schenck Forest, a valuable resource for the College of
Forest Resources in meeting its objectives for teaching, research, and
demonstration.
A combination of Alternatives 1 and 2 would be the most beneficial
and have the least negative impact on the University. This would
include the more eastern route for Edwards Mill Road between Wade
Avenue and Reedy Creek Road from Alternative 2 combined with the
direct route of Edwards Mill Road Extension shown on Alternative 1
from Reedy Creek. Road north to the intersection of Duraleigh
Road/Edwards Mill Road.
North Carolina State University is a land-grant . A. -2 6 ituent institution of The University of North Carolina.
Mr. Brian F. Yamamoto
Page Two
December 4, 1992
The University is appreciative of the efforts that are being made by
the Department of Transportation on this project.
Sinly
oW. H rrell
Director, Real Estate
and Transportation
cc: Dean Durward Bateman
Dean Larry Tombaugh
Edwin Harris
Charles Leffler
Dave Cochrane
A-27
• J ` G V
CITIZENS' INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP __ :fAN_ 2 5-19%1
?.
1831 Blue Ridge Road
Troop C Headquarters Y I511V151CN
a..
December 8, 1992 F . #1Gt?li/VAYS P?
?N?7RONt??
COMMENT SHEET
Proposed extension of SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Road) from SR 1656
(Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road) in Raleigh, Wake County,
Transportation Improvement Program Project No. U-2582
NAME: Maurice A. Weaver
North Carolina Department of Agriculture
ADDRESS: 2 West Edenton Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
COMMENTS: The Department of Agriculture has been assigned state-owned
property north of Reedy Creek Park Road and east of the proposed alignment
for the Edwards Mill Road extension as the site for future development.
Planned projects include a new agronomics laboratory (spring 1993 starting
date) and yet to be funded motor fuels laboratory, plait industry facility,
veterinary offices and laboratory and natural sciences interpretive center.
Ultra sensitive laboratory instruments can be adversely affected by vibrations
from highway traffic. Consequently, the Department of Agriculture would favor
the most westwardly alignment possible. Given the three alternative;,number
three would be the most desirable. Alternatives one or two, however, would
be acceptable. The Department of Agriculture is vehemently opposed to any
alignment east of the proposed alternative number one.
STATEMENTS RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED SR 3009 EXTENSION MAY ALSO BE MAILED
TO MR. L. J. WARD, P. E., MANAGER OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH,
POST OFFICE BOX 25201, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 21611
A-28
James G. Martin, Governor Thomas J. Harrelson, Secretary
North Carolina
Department of Transportation
Release: Immediate Date: Dec. 4, 1992
Contact: Lara Ellington [phone] Distribution: 92
Release No: 413
INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP SET FOR EXTENSION OF EDWARDS MILL ROAD
RALEIGH -- The N.C. Department of Transportation will hold a citizens'
informational workshop on Tuesday, December 8, 1992, to discuss the
proposed extension of Edwards Mill Road.
The workshop will be held from 3:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. in the Highway
Patrol Training Center, Troop C Headquarters, located at 1831 Blue Ridge
Road, Raleigh.
The proposed project would construct a multi-lane facility on a new
location from Trinity Road to Duraleigh Road and is included in the
1993-1999 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program. Right-of-way
acquisition and construction are scheduled to begin in fiscal years 1994
and 1995 respectively.
The purpose of this workshop is to allow public input in the early
planning stages of the project. Representatives from the Division of
Highways will be available to answer questions and receive comments from
the public that will be used in the preparation of an environmental
document for the project.
Questions, statements or comments concerning the project may be
submitted to L.J. Ward, P.E., manager of Planning and Environmental
Branch, Division of Highways, N.C. Department of Transportation, P.O. Bo:
25201, Raleigh, N.C. 27611.
For more information, contact Brian Yamamoto, project planning
engineer, [phone].
NCDOT will provide reasonable accommodations, auxiliary aids and
services for any qualified disabled person interested in attending any
public hearings or scheduled meetings. Please call the Planning and
Environmental Branch at [phone] to request accommodations for you
disability.
**NCDOT**
Public Affairs Division NC DOTLINE Rubie Britt Height
P. O. Box 25201, Raleigh, N. C. 27611 1-800-526.2368 Director of Public Affairs
[phone] Media Information Updates
FAX: [phone]
An E4.W o....,.-,..,/AfA-live Action Employer
A-29
****** -JOURNAL- ****** DATE DEC-04-1992 ***** TIME 08:41 ********
NO. COM PAGES DURATION X/R IDENTIFICATION DATE TIME DIAGNOSTIC
32 OK 02 00:01' 14 XMT T 89196384664 DEC-01 06:19 840440ACOSOO
01 495 05 00:02' 37 RCV 919 733 1192 DEC-01 10:25 0502402C2800
02 OK 07 00:02' 35 RCV 919 840 0645 DEC-01 11:00 0522903C7820
03 420 00 00:00' 41 RCV -------- DEC-01 13:32 010200000000
04 OK 03 00:01' 46 RCV GROUP3 DEC-01 13:33 010240202800
05 OK 02 00:011 19 XMT T 82026245836 DEC-01 14:59 8004402000OO
06 OK 01 00:00' 43 XMT NEWS OBSEVER DEC-01 18:09 840440AC2800
07 OK 02 00:02' 42 RCV 919 334 3637 DEC-02 10:40 0522903C7820
08 OK 02 00:01' 39 RCV DEC-02 12:39 050240RCOSOO
09 OK 01 00:00' 40 XMT GOV'S PRESS DEC-02 15:10 840440AC2800
10 OK 03 00:01' 47 XMT T 87045419930 DEC-02 15:51 8404402C2800
11 OK 01 00:00' 26 XMT T 30604 DEC-03 08:35 6424903C7820
12 OK 03 00:011 51 RCV 214 328+8872 DEC-03 09:43 0522802C7800
13 OK 02 00:01' 24 RCV 9197794678 DEC-03 10:34 050240AC2800
14 OK 02 00:01' 21 RCV DEC-03 10:57 0502402C2800
15 OK 03 00:01' 49 RCV DEC-03 12:47 0502402C2800
16 420 00 00:00' 40 RCV -------- DEC-03 13:03 010200000000
17 OK 03 00:01' 55 RCV DEC-03 13:15 0502402C2800
18 OK 03 00:01' 24 XMT T 87043940370 DEC-03 15:31 840450AC7820
19 OK 04 00:01' 12 RCV 7336948 DEC-03 15:51 0522903C7820
20 OK 02 00:00' 54 XMT T 87042655408 DEC-03 15:56 B4045OAC7820
21 OK 04 00:02' 12 XMT T 89192292463 DEC-03 15:58 840440ACOBOO
22 OK 02 00:01' 05 XMT T 87045419930 DEC-03 16:07 8404402C2800
23 407 00 00:00' 56 XMT NEWS OBSEVER DEC-04 08:28 840440AC2800
'
24 OK 01 00:01 02 XMT T L1T 98768578 DEC-04 08:31 840440ACOSOO
25 OK 01 00:00' 46 XMT T -D U 98762929 DEC-04 08:32 800450AC7820
26 OK 01 00:00' 47 XMT T Alt 0" 98294529 DEC-04 08:33 640440AC2800
27 OK 01 00:00' 49 XMT T WR14L-Q+1iF8906146 DEC-04 08:35 8404502C7820
28 OK 01 00:00' 46 XMT T W p r P 97906457 DEC-04 08:36 800450AC7820
29 OK 01 00:00' 52 XMT T .j, dspo?dm E95527564 DEC-04 08:38 8004402COBOO
30 OK 01 00:00' 45 XMT T WZZ J 97839493 DEC-04 08:39 800450AC7820
31 OK 01 00:00' 47 XMT T V L17- 98517219 DEC-04 08:40 640450AC7820
lino cvre/Q 1*ed5 y r
IoM oHdV ?
?` ?n? fur I'L??°ak- ?'•
-NC DOT PUBLIC AFFAIRS -
*********************************************************** - 919 733 9980- ***********
A-30
R E L O C A T I o N REPORT North Carolina Department of Transportation-
X E.I.S. __,CORRIDOR __DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROJECT: 8.2402801 COUNTY: Wake _ Alternate , I of I Alternate
I.D. NO.: U-2582 F.A. PROJECT: STP-3009(1) (of Phase 1)
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: SR 3009 Edwards Mill Rd. Extension from SR 1656 (Trinity Rd.) to
SR 1664 (Duraleigh Rd.). Raleigh
EST IMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacee
Owners
Tenants
Total Minor-
ities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP
Individuals
Families 0 0 0 0
Businesses 0 0 0 0 VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
Non-Profit 0 0 0 0 0-20M $ 0-150 0-20M $ 0-150
ANSWER ALL QUEST IONS 20-40M 150-250 20-40M 150-250
YES NO EXPLAIN ALL -YES" ANSWERS 40-70M 250-400 40-70M 250-400
1. Will special relocation 70-100 400-600 70-100 400-600
i
b
serv
ces
e necessary
2. Will schools or churches be
ff
t
t
d b
di
l
100 UP
600 UP
100 UP
600 UP i
a
ec
acemen
e
y
sp
3. Will business services still
b
ft
il
bl TOTAL
e ava
er project
a
e a
4. Will any business be dis- REMARKS (Respond by Number)
placed. If so, indicate size
type, estimated number of
l
i
i
i N
i
t f
Ph
1
emp
oyees, m
nor
es, etc.
t ve repor
or
egat
ase
.
5. Will relocation cause a
h
i
h
ous
ng s
ortage
6. Source for available hous-
i
(li
t)
ng
s
7. Will additional housing
b
d
d --- ?-=""
"=
programs
e nee
e
8. Should Last Resort Housing
b
id
d
e cons
ere
9. Are there large, disabled,
ld
l
t
f
ili
er
e
y, e
c.
am
es
ANSWER THESE ALSO FOR DESIGN

10. W i l l public housing be
d
d f
t
j
nee
e
or pro
ec
11. Is public housing avail-
bl d
a
e
12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate DSS housing available
iod
i
l
ti
d
on per
ur
ng re
oca
13. Will there be a problem of
housing within financial FEB 4 ???
ns ?
mea
14. Are suitable business sites
t source)
il
bl
(li .
2?? pIVISIGF,y,j Q?

HIGH?h Q.
?
C
ava
a
e
s
15. Number months estimated to ??NVIRON
complete RELOCATION
J
L-

_f ?-
YY? d 1 VY1 ?S/ - //`7
' ` ` C/? ?
-8-94
Relocation Ag nt Date Approved Date
Form 15.4 Revised 5/90 Original & 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
A-'31 2 Copy: Area Relocation File
R E LLIC A T I ON REPORT North Carolina Department of Transportation
X E.I.S. __CORRIDOR __DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROJECT: 8.2402801 COUNTY: Wake _ Alternate _1of _3 Alternate
I.D. NO.: 0-2582 F.A. PROJECT: STP-3009(1 ) (of Phase 2)
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: SR 3009 Edwards Mill Rd. Extension from SR 1656 (Trinity Rd.) to
SR 1664 (Duraleigh Rd.). Raleigh _-
EST IMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacee
Owners
Tenants
Total Minor-
ities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP
Individuals ?
Families 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1
Businesses 0 0 0 0 VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent -j
Non-Profit 1 0 1 0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 0 0-20M $ 0-150
ANSWER ALL QUEST IONS 20-40M 0 150-250 0 20-40M 150-250
YES NO EXPLAIN ALL 'YES' ANSWERS 40-70M 0 250-400 0 40-70M N/A 250-400 N/A
X 1. Will special relocation 70-100 1 400-600 0 70-100 400-600
i
b

X serv
ces
e necessary
2. Will schools or churches be
ff
t
d b
di
l
100 UP
1
600 UP
0
100 UP
600 UP
a
ec
e
sp
acement
y
x 3. Will business services still
b
il
bl
f TOTAL 2 0 Sce. i .•,Ser-
Aq?

X e ava
a
e a
ter project
4. Will any business be dis-
placed. If so, indicate size
REMARKS (Respond by Number) ?' s=
"".`?? ?-S? ??••
type, estimated number of 2. The non-profit displacee would be N.C. State
l
i
i
i i
t
h
i
it
Th
b
ildi
i
emp
oyees, m
nor
t
es, etc. eavy equ
pmen
vers
y.
e
u
ng
s a
Un
X 5. Will relocation cause a storage garage, which could possibly be moved.
h
i
h d b
t
t
hi
lt
t
ld
h
ous
ng s
ortage owne
y
rac
s a
erna
e wou
sever a
uge
T
X 6. Source for available hous- NCSU, used for agricultural and animal research.
(1 i
i
t )
ng
s
X 7. Will additional housing 3. No impact on business community.
b
d
d
programs
e nee
e
X B. Should Last Resort Housing 6. MLS. There are hundreds of houses available in
b
id
d es and in
t
ll ti
th
t
R
h
l
i
e cons
ere m
e wes
ern
a
e
area a
a
g
X 9. Are there large, disabled, nearly all (but the lowest) price ranges.
ld
l
t
f
ili
er
am
e
y, e
c.
es
ANSWER THESE ALSO FOR DESIGN ed on cost method
b
P
ibl
If
i
l
8
,
appra
s are
as
oss
y.
sa
.
X 10. Will public housing be it often means the comparables are much higher tha
d
d f
j
t in Last Resort
the a
r
is
l
ometime
res
ltin
or pro
nee
e
ec pp
, s
g
a
a
s
u
X il. Is public housing avail- payments. (One house has a tennis court).
bl
a
e
X 12. Is it felt there will be ad- 11. Public housing is available, but not appropriate f
equate DSS housing available these two displacees.
n
i
l
ti
i
d
d
per
ur
ng re
oca
o
o
X 13. Will there be a problem of 12. See #6.
housing within financial
See #8
13
means .
.
NA 14. Are suitable business sites
il
bl
(list source)
ava
e
a
X 15. Number months estimated to
complete RELOCATION 6
?-8-94
Relocation Agent Date Approved Date
Form 15.4 Revised 5/90 Original & 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
A-32 2 Copy: Area Relocation File
,
R E L-O CA T I ON REPORT North Carolina Department of Transportation
_.X_ E.I.S. ___,-CORRIDOR __DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROJECT: 8.2402801 COUNTY: Wake Alternate
_ 2_ of 3_ Alternate
I.D. NO.: 1-?S8? F.A. PROJECT: STP-3009(1) Phase 2
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: SR 3009 Edwards Mill Rd Extension from R 1656 (Trinity Rd.) to
SR 1AA4 (fhiraleiah Rri_ ). Ralainh
ES TIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacee
Owners
Tenants
Total Minor-
ities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP
Individuals
Families 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Businesses 0 0 0 0 VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
Non-Profit 1 0 1 0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 0 0-20M $ 0-150
ANSWER ALL QUEST IONS 20-40M 0 150-250 0 20-40M 150-250
YES NO EXPLAIN ALL "YES" ANSWERS 40-70M 0 250-400 0 40-70M N/A 250-400 N/A
X 1. Will special relocation 70-100 0 400-600 0 70-100 400-600

X services be necessary
2. Will schools or churches be
ff
100 UP
1
600 UP
0
100 UP
600 UP

X a
ected by displacement
3. Will business services still
b
TOTAL
1
0
S e

0'
5
-It
X e available after project
4. Will any business be dis- REMARKS (Respond by Number)
placed. If so, indicate size
type, estimated number of .VsS
2. The non-profit displacee would be N.C. State
l

X emp
oyees, minorities, etc.
5. Will relocation cause a
h
i University. The building is an equine (horse)
isolation stable. This alternate would sever a
ous
ng shortage huge tract owned by NCSU, used for agricultural
X 6. Source for available hous- and animal research.
i
li
ng (
st )
X 7. Will additional housing 3. No impact on business community.

programs be needed
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing
b
id 6. MLS. There are hundreds of houses available in

X e cons
ered
9. Are there large, disabled,
ld
l the western Raleigh area at all times and in
nearly all (but the lowest) price ranges.
e
er
y, etc. families
ANSWER
E
TH
SE ALSO FORDESIGN B. Possibly. If appraisals are based on cost method

X
10. Will public housing be
d
d f ,
it often means the comparables are much higher than

X nee
e
or project
11. Is public housing avail-
bl the appraisal, sometimes resulting in Last Resort
payments. (One house has a tennis court).
a
e
X 12. Is it felt there will be ad- 11. Public housing is available, but not appropriate fo
equate DSS housing available these two displacees.
d
i
l
i
i
ur
ng re
ocat
on per
od
X 13. Will there be a problem of 12. See #6.
housing within financial

means 13. See #8.
NA 14. Are suitable business sites
il
bl
(li
ava
a
e
st source)
X 15. Number months estimated to
complete RELOCATION 6

s«
Relocation A ent
Form 15.4 Revised 5/90
2-8-94
Date Approved Date
Original & 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
A-33 2 Copy: Area Relocation File
R E Lo C A T I ON REPORT North Carolina Department of Transportation
, X E.I.S. __CORRIDOR __DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROJECT: 8.2402801 COUNTY: Wake Alternate
_ 3_ of _I Alternate
I.D. NO.: uu-?58? F.A. PROJECT: STP-3009(1) Phase 2
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: SR 3nn9 Edwards Mill Rd Extension from SR 1656 (Trinity Rd.) to
SR 1664 (nura1pinh PH )_ Ra1Pinh
ES TIMATED DISPLACEES
J

INCOME LEVEL
E
Type of
Displacee
Owners
Tenants
Total Minor-
it, es
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP '
i
Individuals
Families 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
Businesses 0 0 0 0 VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
Farms 0

E 0 0 0
1
1 Owners
Tenants
For Sale
For Rent
Non-Profit 0 0 0 0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 0 0-20M $ 0-150
ANSWER ALL QUESTI ONS 20-40M 0 150-250 0 20-40M 150-250
IYES NO EXPLAIN ALL 'YES" ANSWERS 40-70M 0 250-400 0 40-70M N/A 250-400 N/A
X 1. Will special relocation 70-100 0 400-600 0 70-100 400-600

X services be necessary
2. Will schools or churches be
ff
100 UP
1
600 UP
0
100 UP
600 UP

x a
ected by displacement
3. Will business services still
b
TOTAL
1
0
Se a
i?...
?Jy-
c

X e available after project
4. Will any business be dis-
placed. If so, indicate size
REMARKS (Respond by Number)
U
czva;l?z?/e DS1 .?ious?7y
type, estimated number of 3. No impact on business community.

employees, minorities, etc.
X 5. Will relocation cause a
h 6. MLS. There are hundreds of houses available in

x ousing shortage
6. Source for available hous-
i
li the western Raleigh area at all times and in
nearly all (but the lowest) price ranges.
ng (
st)
X 7. Will additional housing 8. Possibly. If appraisals are based on cost method,
b

x programs
e needed
B. Should Last Resort Housing
b
i it often means the comparables are much higher tha
the appraisal, sometimes resulting in Last Resort

X e cons
dered
9. Are there large, disabled, payments. (One house has a tennis court).
ld
l
f
e
er
y, etc.
amilies 11. Public housing is available, but not appropriate
ANSWER
THESE ALSO FOR DESIGN for these two displacees.
X 10. Will public housing be
d
d f
nee
e
or project 12. See #6.
X 11. Is public housing avail-
bl
a
e 13. See #8.
X 12. Is it felt there will be ad-
equate DSS housing available
d
i
l
ti
i
d
ur
ng re
oca
on per
o
x 13. Will there be a problem of
housing within financial

means
NA 14. Are suitable business sites
il
bl
)
(li
t
ava
a
e
source
s
X 15. Number months estimated to
complete RELOCATION 6
• 0-L, 2-8-94 L;.?-
Relocation Agent Date Approved Date
Form 15.4 Revised 5/90 Original & 1 Copy: State Relocation Agent
A-34 2 Copy: Area Relocation File

TABLE Al
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION PAGE 1
JOB: U-2582 / DURALEIGH RD. A EDWARD'S MILL RUN: DURAL./EDWARD'S - YEAR 2001 BUILD
DATE: 07/14/1993 TIME: 15:01:01.35
' SITE A METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
----°-------------------
-

Vs - .0 CM/S -
VD - ----
.0 CM/S ZO
- 108. CM
U - 1.0 M/S CLAS - 5 (E) ATIM - 60. MINUTES M M - 400. M AMB - 1 .9 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION * LINK COORDINATES (M) * LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF B W V/C QUEUE

--------------------- •
--- " X1 Yl X2 Y2 •
" (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
-
--

1. EDWDS NB APPR --
" --------
9.1 -------------
-304.8 ---------
9.1 --------
--
.0 • --------
305. -----------
360. AG ------
810. --------
4.3 -----
.0 -----
17.1 ----- -
---
-
2. EDWDS NB QUEUE • 9.1 -12.8 9.1 -40.9 • 26. 180. AG 977. 100.0 .0 11.0 .75 4.7
3. EDWDS NBLT QUEUE • .0 -12.8 .0 -185.5 * 173. 180. AG 429. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.07 28.8
4. EDWDS NB DEP " 9.1 .0 9.1 304.8 * 305. 360. AG 900. 3.7 .0 17.1
5. EDWDS SE APPR • -9.1 304.8 -9.1 .0 • 305. 180. AG 780. 4.3 .0 17.1
6. EDWDS SB QUEUE * -9.1 12.8 -9.1 87.8 • 75. 360. AG 1017. 100.0 .0 11.0 1.06 12.5
7. EMS SBLT QUEUE • .0 12.8 .0 210.5 • 198. 360. AG 449. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.11 33.0
8. EDWDS SB DEP " -9.1 .0 -9.1 -304.8 " 305. 180. AG 930. 3.7 .0 17.1
9. DURAL EB APPR " -304.8 -5.5 .0 -5.5 * 305. 90. AG 1280. 4.3 .0 13.4
10. DURAL EB QUEUE • -18.3 -5.5 -74.9 -5.5 * 57. 270. AG 661. 100.0 .0 7.3 .79 9.4
11. DURAL EBLT QUEUE • -18.3 .0 -38.9 .0 " 21. 270. AG 494. 100.0 .0 3.7 .60 3.4
12. DURAL EB DEP • .0 -5.5 304.8 -5.5 " 305. 90. AG 1090. 3.7 .0 13.4
13. DURAL WB APPR • 304.8 5.5 .0 5.5 • 305. 270. AG 1210. 4.3 .0 13.4
14. DURAL WB QUEUE • 18.3 5.5 56.6 5.5 • 38. 90. AG 691. 100.0 .0 7.3 .60 6.4
15. DURAL WBLT QUEUE • 18.3 .0 773.1 .0 • 755. 90. AG 508. 100.0 .0 3.7 2.22 125.6
16. DURAL WD DEP • .0 5.5 -304.8 5.5 * 305. 270. AG 1160. 3.7 .0 13.4
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
------------------
" COORDINATES (M) •
RECEPTOR " X Y Z
------------------------"-------------------------------------•
1. REC 12 (SW CORNER) • -19.8 -61.0 1.8
2. REC 13 (BE CORNER) * 79.2 -62.5 1.8 •
MODEL RESULTS
-------------
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND • CONCENTRATION
ANGLE • (PPM)
(DEGR)• REC1 REC2
------•------------
MAX • 5.2 3.9
DEGR. • 41 325
A-35
TABLE A2
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION PAGE 2
JOBS U-2582 / DURALEIGH RD. i EDWARD'S MILL RUN: DVRAL./EDWARD'S - YEAR 2006 BUILD
DATES 07/13/1993 TIME: 14:24:25.59
SITE i METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
--------------° ---------------
VS - .0 CM/8 VD - .0 CM/S 20 - 108. CM
U - 1.0 M/S CLAS - 5 (E) ATIM - 60. MINUTES MIXH - 400. M AMB - 1.9 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
LINK DESCRIPTION • LINK COORDINATES (M) • LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE

---------------------- •
-- "- X1
-
-
-
---- Y1
---
- X2 Y2 *
" (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M)
- (VEH)

1. EDWDS NB APPR
• -
-
-
9.1 --
-
---
-304.8 ----------
9.1 ---------
--
.0 " --------
305. °°-------
360. AG ---------------
907. 3.5 -------
------
.0 17.1 --------
2. EDWDS NS QUEUE • 9.1 -12.8 9.1 -42.5 * 30. 180. AG 837. 100.0 .0 11.0 .80 4.9
3. EDWDS MELT QUEUE • .0 -12.6 .0 -231.7 • 219. 180. AG 368. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.11 36.5
4. EDWDS NB DEP " 9.1 .0 9.1 304.8 " 305. 360. AG 900. 3.1 .0 17.1
S. EDWDS SB APPR • -9.1 304.8 -9.1 .0 * 305. 180. AG 780. 3.5 .0 17.1
6. EDWDB BB QUEUE " -9.1 12.8 -9.1 133.8 * 121. 360. AG 870. 100.0 .0 11.0 1.15 20.2
7. EDWDS BELT QUEUE * .0 12.8 .0 256.6 " 244. 360. AG 385. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.16 40.6
8. EDWDS 8B DEP " -9.1 .0 -9.1 -304.8 • 305. 180. AG 930. 3.1 .0 17.1
9. DURAL ES APPR • -304.8 -5.5 .0 -5.5 " 305. 90. AG 1280. 3.5 .0 13.4
10. DURAL EB QUEUE " -18.3 -5.5 -76.6 -5.5 * 58. 270. AG 569. 100.0 .0 7.3 .81 9.7
11. DURAL EDIT QUEUE • -18.3 .0 -38.9 .0 • 21. 270. AG 418. 100.0 .0 3.7 .60 3.4
12. DURAL EB DEP • .0 -5.5 304.8 -5.5 * 305. 90. AG 1090. 3.1 .0 13.4
13. DURAL WB APPR • 304.8 5.5 .0 5.5 * 305. 270. AG 1210. 3.5 .0 13.4
14. DURAL WE QUEUE • 16.3 5.5 57.5 5.5 • 39. 90. AG 594. 100.0 .0 7.3 .61 6.5
15. DURAL WBLT QUEUE • 18.3 .0 773.1 .0 * 755. 90. AG 431. 100.0 .0 3.7 2.22 125.8
16. DURAL WB DEP • .0 5.5 -304.8 5.5 • 305. 270. AG 1160. 3.1 .0 13.4
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
* COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR * X Y Z
------------------------•°°---------------------------------•
1. REC 12 (SW CORNER) " -19.8 -61.0 1.8 •
2. REC 13 (SE CORNER) • 79.2 -62.5 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND • CONCENTRATION
ANGLE • (PPM)
(DEGR)* REC1 REC2
------*------------
MAX * 4.7 3.7
DEGR. * 46 327

A-36
TABLE A3
CAL3QBC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION PAGE 3
JOB: U-2582 / DURALEIGH RD. i EDWARD'S MILL RUN: DURAL./EDWARD'S - YEAR 2018 BUILD
DATE: 07/13/1993 TIME: 15:26:47.83
SITE i METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
-------------------------------
VS . .0 CM/S VD . .0 CM/s
U,- 1.0 M/S CLAS - 5 (E)
LINK VARIABLES
--------------
ZO - 108. CM
ATIM - 60. MINUTES MrXB - 400. M AMB - 1.9 PPM
LINK DESCRIPTION " LINK COORDINATES (M) ' LENGTH BRO TYPE VPB EP B W V/C QUEUE

---------------------- • X1
--•----------- Y1
---------- X2
---------- Y2 *
---------"-- (M)
--------- (DEG)
---------- (G/MI)
-------------- (M) (M) (VES)
-----------------------
1. EDWDS NB APPR * 9.1 -304.8 9.1 .0 * 305. 360. AG 1160. 3.4 .0 17.1
2. EDWDS NB QUEUE • 9.1 -12.8 9.1 -129.9 ' 117. 180. AG 778. 100.0 .0 11.0 1.08 19.5
3. EDWDS NBLT QUEUE • .0 -12.8 .0 -790.5 • 778. 180. AG 342. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.52 129.6
4. EDWDS NB DEP • 9.1 .0 9.1 304.8 * 305. 360. AG 1260. 2.9 .0 17.1
5. EDWDS BB APPR * -9.1 304.8 -9.1 .0 " 305. 180. AG 1090. 3.4 .0 17.1
6. EDWDS SB QUEUE * -9.1 12.8 -9.1 346.8 • 334. 360. AG 809. 100.0 .0 11.0 1.50 55.7
7. EDWDS SBLT QUEUE ' .0 12.8 .0 689.6 " 677. 360. AG 358. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.53 112.8
S. EDWDS SB DEP • -9.1 .0 -9.1 -304.8 " 305. 180. AG 1330. 2.9 .0 17.1
9. DURAL EB APPR • -304.8 -5.5 .0 -5.5 • 305. 90. AG 1800. 3.4 .0 13.4
10. DURAL KB QUEUE • -18.3 -5.5 -371.3 -5.5 " 353. 270. AG 527. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.11 58.8
11. DURAL EBLT QUEUE ' -18.3 .0 -54.8 .0 ' 37. 270. AG 393. 100.0 .0 3.7 .89 6.1
12. DURAL EB DEP • .0 -5.5 304.8 -5.5 " 305. 90. AG 1520. 2.9 .0 13.4
13. DURAL WE APPR ' 304.8 5.5 .0 5.5 * 305. 270. AG 1690. 3.4 .0 13.4
14. DURAL WB QUEUE " 18.3 5.5 369.3 5.5 • 351. 90. AG 550. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.12 58.5
15. DURAL WBLT QUEUE * 18.3 .0 61.0 .0 * 43. 90. AG 405. 100.0 .0 3.7 1.00 7.1
16. DURAL WB DEP • .0 5.5 -304.8 5.5 " 305. 270. AG 1630. 2.9 .0 13.4
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
------------------
" COORDINATES (M) •
RECEPTOR * X Y Z •
------------------------ "--------------- -------------------------------------
1. REC 12 (SW CORNER) • -19.8 -61.0 1.6 •
2. REC 13 (8E CORNER) " 79.2 -62.5 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
-------------
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.-360.
WIND • CONCENTRATION
ANGLE • (PPM)
(DIOR)* REC1 REC2
------ *------------
MRX * 5.5 4.1
DEGR. • 6 331
A-37
FIGURE N1
PROJECT LOCATION
Edward's Mill Road Extension (SR,3009), from
Trinity Road (SR 1656) to Duraleigh Road (SR 1664),
Raleigh, Wake County, Project # 8.2402801, TIP # U-2582
A--38
FIGURE N2
AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENT SITES
Edward's Mill Road Extension (SR 3009), from
Trinity Road (SR 1656) to.Duraleigh Road (SR 1664),
Raleigh, Wake County, Pro3ect # 8.2402801, TIP # U-2582
.Q AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENTS SITES
A-39
TABLE Nl
HEARING: SOUNDS BOMBARDING US DAILY
140 Shotgun blast, jet 100 ft away at takeoff PAIN
Motor test chamber HUMAN EAR PAIN THRESHOLD
130

Firecrackers
120 Severe thunder, pneumatic jackhammer
Hockey crowd
Amplified rock music UNCampwaABLY LOUD
110

Textile loom
100 Subway train, elevated train, farm tractor
Power lawn mower, newspaper press
Heavy city traffic, noisy factory LOUD
90

D Diesel truck 40 mph 50 ft. away
E SO Crowded restaurant, garbage disposal
C Average factory, vacuum cleaner
I Passenger car 50 mph 50 ft. away MODERATELY LOUD
70
B
E Quiet typewriter
L 60 Singing birds, window air-conditioner
e Quiet automobile
Normal conversation, average office QUIET
50

Household refrigerator
Quiet office VERY QUIET
40

Average home
30 Dripping faucet
Whisper 5 fast away
20 Light rainfall, rustle of leaves
AVERAGE PERSON'S THRESHOLD OF BEARING
Whisper JUST AUDIBLE
10

0 THRESHOLD FOR ACUTE HEARING
Sources: World Book, Rand McNally Atlas of the Human Body,
Encyclopedia Americana, "Industrial Noise and Hearing
Conversation" by J. B. Olishifski and E. R. Harford
(Researched by N. Jane Hunt and published in the Chicago
Tribune in an illustrated graphic by Tom Heins.)

A-40
c
TABLE N3
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
(Leq)
SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Rd. Extension), Wake Co.,
From Trinity Rd. (SR 1656) to Duraleigh Rd. (SR 1664),
TIP # U-2582, State Project # 8.2402801
NOISE
LEVEL
SITE LOCATION DESCRIPTION dBA
1. SR 1664 (Blue Ridge Rd.) .17 Mile Grassy 66
East of SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Rd.)
2. Wade Ave., .2 Mile West of Gate F Grassy 72
Entrance
3. Trinity Rd., .1 Mile West of Weedon Grassy 67
Drive at Gate D Entrance
Note: The ambient noise level sites were measured at 50 feet from the
center of the nearest lane of traffic.
A-4.1
TABLE N4
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Rd. Extension), Wake Co.,
From Trinity Rd. (8R 1656) to Duralsigh Rd. (SR 1664),
TIP f U-2582, State Project / 8.2402801
AMBIENT NEAREST NOISE
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEVEL
ID 4 LAND USE CATEGORY NAME DISTANCE(ft) LEVEL NAME DIBTANCE(ft) -L- -Y- MAXIMUM INCREASE
Phase 1 - From Trinity Rd. to Wade Ave. (* No receptors in this section)
Phase 2 - Alt. 4 1 From Wade Ave. to Duralsigh Rd.
1 Residence B SR 1728 600 L 51 SR 1664 520 L 50.0 53.2 54 + 3
2 Business C SR 1775 315 R 50 to 385 R 53.3 50.6 55 + 5
3 Business C 11 45 L 50 " 70 L 70.9 61.8 * 71 *+21
4 Residence B SR 1667 100 R 50 " 75 L 70.2 - * 70 *+20
5 Residence B ^ 70 R 50 " 100 R 67.7 - * 67 *+17
6 Residence B of 140 R 50 " 350 R 54.4 - 54 + 4
7 Residence B to 255 R 50 It 435 R 51.9 - 51 + 1
12 Residence B SR 1664 200 L 56 " 65 L 71.7 62.4 * 72 *+16
13 Residence B " 205 L 56 " 260 R 57.9 63.1 64 + 8
14 Residence B " 150 L 59 " 575 L 50.0 65.1 65 + 6
15 Residence B " 100 L 62 " 700 L 50.0 68.6 * 68 + 6
16 Residence B to 70 L 65 " 825 L 50.0 71.4 * 71 + 6
Phase 2 - Alt. # 2 From Wade Ave, to Duralsigh Rd.
1 Residence B SR 1728 600 L 51 SR 1664 520 L 50.0 53.2 54 + 3
2 Business C SR 1775 315 R SO to 365 R 53.9 51.4 55 + 5
3 Business C " 45 L 50 to 70 L 70.9 61.8 * 71 *+21
4 Residence B SR 1667 100 R 50 " 650 R - - 50 0
12 Residence B SR 1664 200 L 56 " 65 L 71.7 62.4 It 72 *+16
13 Residence B " 205 R 56 " 250 R 57.9 63.1 64 + 8
14 Residence a to 150 L 59 to 575 L 50.0 55.1 65 + 6
15 Residence B " 100 L 62 " 700 L 50.0 68.6 * 68 + 6
16 Residence B " 70 L 65 It 825 L 50.0 71.4 * 71 + 6
Phase 2 - Alt. / 3 From Wade Ave, to Duralsigh Rd.
1 Residence B SR 1728 600 L 51 SR 1664 520 L 50.0 53.2 54 + 3
12 Residence B SR 1664 200 L 56 of 65 L 71.7 62.4 * 72 *+16
13 Residence a of 205 L 56 of 260 R 57.9 63.1 64 + 8
NOTE: Distances are from center of the existing or proposed roadways. -L--> Proposed roadway's noise level contribution.
All noise levels are hourly A-weighted noise levels. -Y--> Noise level from other contributing roadways.
Category E noise levels shown as exterior/interior (58/48). * ?> Traffic noise impact (per 23 CFR Part 772).
A-4-2

l
a
TABLE N5
FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Rd. Extension), Wake Co., From Trinity Rd. (SR 1656) to
Duralsigh Rd. (SR 1664), TIP f U-2582, State Project 18.2402801
Maximum Predicted Contour Approximate Number of Impacted
Leq Noise Levels, Distances Receptors According to
dBA (Maximum) Title 23 CPR Part 772
Description 50' 100, 200' 72 dBA 67 dBA A B C D E
Phase 1
Trinity Rd. to Wade Ave. 68 64 58 <25' 101, * No receptors in this section
Phase 2 - Alternate R 1
Wade Ave. to Duraleigh Rd. 68 64 56 <25' 1071 0 5 1 0 0
Phase 2 - Alternate / 2
Wade Ave. to Duraleigh Rd. 68 64 58 <25' 107' 0 3 1 0 0
Phase 3 - Alternate f 3
Wade Ave. to Duraleigh Rd. 68 64 58 <25' 107' 0 1 0 0 0
NOTES - 1. 501, 1001, and 200' distances are measured from center of nearest travel lane.
2. 72 dBA and 67 dBA contour distances are measured from center of proposed roadway.
TABLE N6
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASE SUMMARY
SR 3009 (Edwards Mill Rd. Extension), Wake Co., From Trinity Rd. (SR 1656) to
Duralsigh Rd. (SR 1664), TIP I U-2582, state Project M 8.2402601
Receptor Exterior Noise Level Increases Noise Level
Increases
Section <.0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11-12 13-14 15-16 17-16 19-20 21-22 23-24 >- 25 >• 15 dBA
Phase # 1
Trinity Rd. to Wade Ave. • No receptors in this section. 0
Phase A 2 - Alternative 1
Wade Ave. to Duraleigh Rd. 0 1 2 4 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 4
Phase # 2 - Alternative 2
Wade Ave. to Duralsigh Rd. 1 0 1 4 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2
Phase f 3 - Alternative 3
Wade Ave. to Duralsigh Rd. 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
A-43
City Of 6Raleigh
North GJarolina
October 27, 1994
Brian F. Yamamoto
Project Planning Engineer
State of North Carolina
Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27602
Dear Mr. Yamamoto:
Subject: SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road), from SR 1656
(Trinity Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), Raleigh, Wake
County, Federal-Aid project No. STP-3009(1), State Project No.
8.2402801, TIP No. U-2582.
The following response is provided z?o address the issues of
compliance under Section 4(f) of the 1966 D.O.T. Act.
The Loblolly Trail has met the recreational needs of trail users
in west Raleigh for many years. The' City of Raleigh and the
State of North Carolina (NCSU) entered into an agreement through
a lease to "provide a pedestrian trail through the scenic,
wooded and natural property of the Grantor, to which trail all
members of the public would have access.' The' goal of this
trail as stated in the original lease agreement was to create a
pedestrian trail linking West Raleigh with Umstead Park and
provide a desirable recreation facility and a valuable extension
of the Grantees Capital Area Greenway. The Loblolly Trail
continues to be an important part of the greenway opportunities
in Raleigh and Wake County and provides access to a number of
public lands. The Loblolly Trail is also part of a "regional
trail" network that links greenways in Raleigh, Cary, Lake
Crabtree County Park, Umstead State Park, and The Carl Alwin
Schenck Forest together.
The City of Raleigh is pleased to work with the State to
continue the effectiveness of the Loblolly Trail. To insure the
Loblolly Trail functions effectively the following requirements
should be provided for in the implementation of the SR 3009
Extension project:
Provide a 12 foot wide by 8 foot high reinforced
concrete box culvert to accommodate the Loblolly Trail
OFFICES • 222 WEST HARGETT STREET. A-44 :)X 590• RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602
Recyclea raper
underneath the proposed Edwards Mill Road Extension
just north of Richland Creek. The elevation of the
bottom of the culvert should be established to provide
a "dry" condition at low creek flows.
2. Provide electrical conduit (size to be specified by
the City of Raleigh) in the proposed pedestrian
culvert.
3. Rebuild and relocate the Loblolly Trail on the west
side of the proposed Edwards Mill Road Extension up to
the Wade Avenue culvert crossing.
4 4. Provide electrical conduit (size to be specified by
the City of Raleigh) in the proposed extended sections
of the existing double barrel 8' X 8' reinforced
concrete box culvert underneath Wade Avenue.
I understand that these conditions are consistent with previous
discussions between yourself and City staff.
Sincerely,
E. Bento, Jr., City Manager
I
i
A-45
STA4
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUN I-, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 18, 1994
Mr. Eric Galamb
DEHNR - Div. of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1148
Dear Mr. Galamb:
R. SAMUEL FINN I I I I
SPCR11ARY
SUBJECT: Federal Environmental Assessment and Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation
for SR 3009 Extension (Edwards Mill Road), From SR 1656 (Trinity
Road) to SR 1664 (Duraleigh Road), Raleigh, Wake County,
Federal-Aid Project Number STP-3009(1), State Project Number
8.2402801, T.I.P. Project Number U-2582
Attached is a copy of the Environmental Assessment and the Natural
Resources Technical Report for the subject proposed highway improvement. It
is anticipated this project will be processed with a "Finding of No
Significant Impact"; however, should comments received on the Environmental
Assessment or at the public hearing demonstrate a need for preparing a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement you will be contacted as part of our scoping
process.
Copies of this Assessment are being submitted to the State
Clearinghouse, areawide planning agencies, and the counties, towns, and
cities involved.
Permit review agencies should note it is anticipated Federal Permits
will be required as discussed in the report.
Any comment you have concerning the Environmental Assessment should be
forwarded to:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Division of Highways
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Your comments should be received by December 21, 1994. If no comments
are received by that date we will assume you have none. If you desire a copy
of the "Finding of No Significant Impact," please so indicate.
??wN???h> Sincerely,
-g, JJzjMM
r?Z H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
HFV/pl rPlanning and Environmental Branch
CEO,

.?Ws.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. 1R SAM HUNT
GOVERNOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS SECRETARY
P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.G 27611-5201
March 25, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Linwood Stone, Unit Head
Project Planning Unit
ATTENTION: Brian Yamamoto, Project Manager
FROM: Tim W. Savidge, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
SUBJECT: Natural Resources Technical Report for
Proposed Edwards Mill Road Extension
(SR 3009), from Trinity Road (SR 1656)
to Duraleigh Road (SR1664), Raleigh,
Wake County, Federal Aid # STP-3009(1),
State Project # 8.2402801, TIP # U-2582
The attached Natural Resources Technical Report provides
inventories and descriptions of natural resources within the
project area, and estimations of impacts-likely to occur to
these resources as a result of project construction.
Pertinent information on wetlands and federally protected
species is also provided. An Executive Summary of this
report is included. The Executive Summary provides a concise
condensation of the Natural Resources Technical Report. It
is requested that the Natural Resources Technical Report be
submitted in its entirety along with the EA to the reviewing
natural resource agencies. Please contact me if you have any
questions, or need this copied onto disc format.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D
M. Randall Turner, Environmental Supervisor
File U-2582
- CD!
VS?
AM
Edwards Mill Road Extension
From Trinity Road
To Duraleigh Road
Fake County
TIP No. U-2582
F.A. Project No. STP-3009(1)
State Project No. 8.2402801
Natural Resources Technical Report
U-2582
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT
TIM SAVIDGE, ENVIRONMENTAL BIOLOGIST
March 25, 1994
-.w
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ...........................................1
1.1 Project Description ..............................1
1.2 Purpose ..........................................1
1.3 Project Area .....................................1
1.4 Physiography and Soils ...........................2
1.5 Methodology ......................................2
2.0 Water Resources ........................................2
2.1 Waters Impacted ..................................3
2.1.1 Water Body Characteristics ...............3
2.1.2 Best Usage Classification ................4
2.1.3 Water Quality ............................4
2.2 Anticipated Impacts: Water Resources .............4
3.0 Biotic Resources ......................................5
3.1 Terrest rial Communities ......................... .5
3.1.1 Maintained Communities ................... .5
3.1.2 Pine/Hardwood Upland Forest .............. .7
3.1.3 Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest ................. .8
3.1.4 Piedmont Alluvial Forest ................. .9
3.1.5 Young Growth Pine Plantation ............. .9
3.2 Aquatic Communities ............................. 10
3.2.1 Small Piedmont Stream .................... 10
3.2.2 Small Pond ............................... 11
3.3 Anticip ated Impacts: Biotic Communities......... 12
3.3.1 Terrestrial Community Impacts ............ 12
3.3.2 Aquatic Community Impacts ................ 13
4.0 Special Topics .......................................14
4.1 Waters of the United States .....................14
4.1.1 Permits .................................15
4.1.2 Mitigation ..............................15
4.2 Rare and Protected Species ......................15
4.2.1 Federally Protected ...................... 15
4.2.2 Federal Candidate and State Protected
Species ..................19
5.0 References ............................................21
Appendix A: Glossary of Terms .............................22
Appendix B: Species Observed List .........................24
1.0 INTRODUCTION
wing Natural Resource Technical Report is
assist in the preparation of an Environmental
'A) for this project. This report inventories
resources occurring within the project area and
environmental concerns which must be addressed in
ng stages of this project.
ect Description
project begins at Trinity Road (SR 1656) and
northward on new alignment through Wade Avenue (SR
edy Creek Road (SR1775), tying into Edwards Mill
3009) (Fig. 1). Project length is 5.8 km (3.6
Three different cross sections are being studied.
lude a five-lane curb and gutter facility, a four-
ded curb and gutter facility and a six-lane divided
gutter facility. Right of way limits are 80 ft with
easements for the 5-lane facility and 130 feet with easments
for the two divided facilities.
Construction of this project will be carried out in two
phases (Fig. 2). Phase 1 calls for construction on the
alignment south of Wade Avenue, including the interchange at
Trinity Road/Wade Avenue. Wade Avenue will be shifted to the
north 30 m (100 ft) to accomadate the interchange and
auxiliary lanes, which are also proposed along exisiting Wade
Avenue from project intersection to I-40/Wade Avenue
interchange. ROW limits for the interchange are variable,
extending from 183 m (600 ft) at the apex of the interchange,
down to 40 m (230 ft) along the auxiliary lanes. The ROW for
the auxiliary lanes includes the shift to the north. Three
alternative alignments (delimited on the aerial mosaic) are
.being studied for Phase 2 construction (north of Wade
-Avenue).
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this document is to describe and
inventory the natural resources identified within the project
vicinity and estimate potential impacts to these resources.
Recommendations are made for measures which will minimize
resource impacts. These descriptions and estimates are
relevant only in the context of existing design concepts. If
preliminary design parameters change, additional field
investigation may be necessary.
1.3 Project Area
The proposed project occurs near the western limits of
the city of Raleigh, in Wake County. Much of the land
impacted is being used for North Carolina State University
(NCSU) agricultural research. The remainder of the land to
be impacted is predominately small, forested tracts.
1.4 Physiography and Soils
The majority of Wake County, including the project are
is in the eastern/central Piedmont Physiographic Proving
and is characterized as having extremely variable topog:
ranging from broad, gently sloping uplands to steeply slopir
ridges. The project area exhibits these wide topographic
ranges, but is predominately gently sloping. The elevation
of the area ranges from 110-140 m (350-450 ft) above mean se:
level (amsl).
The soils of the area are in the Felsic Crystalline
System, which have a bedrock of granite, granite gneiss, mica
gneiss and mica schist. The soils of the broad uplands are
predominately gravelly sandy loams (Cecil Series). Highly
erodable loams (Lloyd Series) and sandy loams (Appling
Series) occur on the steep slopes, and the alluvial soils of
the floodplains of Richlands Creek and associated tributaries
are predominately well-drained fine sandy loams (Congaree
Series), with some poorly-drained fine loam (Chewacla
Series). Both of these floodplain soil types may have hydric
inclusions of Wehadkee Soils.
1.5 Methodology
Preliminary resource information was gathered and
reviewed prior to site visits. Information sources include;
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle map (Raleigh West),
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soils Map of Wake County,
NCDOT aerial photographs of project area (1:4800), North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) water
quality classifications for the Neuse River Basin, Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) list of protected species and N.C.
Natural Heritage Program (NC-NHP) database of uncommon and
protected species and unique habitats.
Field surveys were conducted by NCDOT biologist Tim
Savidge along the proposed project alignment on November 09,
and 23-24, 1993. Other environmental staff biologists who
participated in the field investigations at various times
include Hal Bain and Phillip Todd. Plant communities were
identified and recorded. Wildlife was identified using a
number of observation techniques: active searching and
capture, visual observations (binocular), and recording the
identifying signs of wildlife (sounds, tracks and burrows).
Cursory surveys of aquatic communities were accomplished
using a hand held dip net. Organisms captured were
identified and then released.
2.0 WATER RESOURCES
This section describes physical characteristics, Best
2
.<
• WI'• •••I''' .. rte.
1• 0;

C'.
r:•
LU
NNftn
hl Q
N kt
N
CO
'•Ail
C)
z
0 o
z
w
P4 -le ? FCC X'n
Q CD U)
a O W ? p a a Z
F
0QxP NLO0 0
H C. ? p ? U a
D40 Ej W?wa
CL, cc
L z AP,m
Aap
CC U-
I o
w
co
H
,a
'H
U
W
FD
:.•? _ O
as

i
In
w
r1
lYi I
a9l
z
H
?I
0
Cl
O
CD
(DO
1(?
LL.
O
K
s
m v ?
I wlw ? `
I V ? y? ??N • 1 ,.\
?L F W
N a° ? r S{, .n
i ° F ^~ i• $ M O
;w;oo _
c? f
omgflnol lunoW Ayooy -

t
d --
\ ,R HOPE RO' / eo'
9 NC , s ? o
Y \ i ?
a
A
'Y WICK RD \ - ?b k SOAr
_
od rc
_ d.r
x
0
z V
S)bO ; II U 0 no
F _. ,-•-
0').Y yM =? a
O
F
v
i9
'
.
S
f Atl. DF J O4)b 4 k i[ _ ,pf'O SA R?.
JAR Y?
O
d i V t R%
N
o
.f
R'
C1t?
r
J_
I
•. OA RI
IN k
'? I
I 0 Y
'.
, In N
N
5?{, LJ r ¦ ? 11? hh I a
I f
1?

F KS otl 11 AEI
V ? V J l?l P
N ? 5
?
? l ?`
'
o I?
? Of,
•
OOD pll NI?
N
GC[II'H w F ,r, w
Oy
)Hlh DY)1 / 4? Ps F „?.' u o IR'? ?).,. r .1 1
?
a .,
? 'C4?. i{ D l iR.O u
'
t
? ¢ U
e.
m '
IN
D
S ?
'l1
O
a
?
r
'
O ty
hb0
d
d
a
-
y )Il)b _ 1 IF? t
I
r
11 RO. e • ¦
DII Al O .-. r
•

E k Otl
CII?ICII
.,.kt+ UN "Ill I?y
_W
Q
?
-

C
= M
II '? b
0 NCl F ?., l _ a J ??/W/??11
t. t tiP R? I ti b A'
O
LLI
Ob a IR.I O
:
/
- o
OONIA P $b
b 1113111 u Ir oil
b
?
A'1 4S
-
4
Qi 3

Wd)IV'lltll f10U 11111124840 IIIH 1adn77, fDulJ uloglnos --
O,

Y
UsG.e Standards and water quality aspects of the water
resources likely to be impacted by the proposed project.
Probable impacts to these water bodies are also discussed, as
are means to minimize impacts.
2.1 Waters Impacted
Richland Creek and an unnamed tributary of this creek
are crossed in Phase 1 of the proposed action. All three
alternates of Phase 2 construction cross three unnamed
tributaries of Richland Creek. Richland Creek will also be
crossed at two points, by the proposed interchange with Wade
Avenue. All of the streams in the project area can be
described as small Piedmont streams. Three small unnamed
ponds will also be impacted by the proposed project.
Richland Creek is in the Neuse River drainage basin and
originates approximately 1.5 miles south of Wade Ave.,
flowing in a northerly direction into Crabtree Creek 3 miles
north of Wade Ave.
2.1.1 Water Body Characteristics
Richland Creek is approximately 3.6 m (12 ft) wide, and
varies in depth from 15 mm (6 in) to 60 mm (2 ft). The
substrate is characterized as bedrock overlain with a mixture
of coarse sand, silt, cobble and stone.' Flow rate was
moderate during site visits. Stream dimensions and
characteristics are similar at all crossings. The stream is
heavily sedimented and excessive algal growth suggests
nutrient overloading, most likely the result of agricultural
runoff. The unnamed tributaries of this creek, which will be
impacted, are slightly smaller, but otherwise have similar
physical characteristics. Based on imput from Tony Houser
.(NCDOT Roadway Design), Richland Creek will be crossed with
an 8`x'8 double barrel box culvert, and the existing culvert
at Wade Avenue will be extended. The smaller tributaries
will likely be crossed with pipes, although no design has
been selected at this time.
The first pond (#1) is located in a forested area
between SR 1656 (Trinity Road) and SR 1728 (Wade Ave.) This
pond, approximately 300x200 ft, is relatively shallow (<1.5
m/5 ft) and drains into Richland Creek. The pond is highly
polluted. Trash, appliances, an engine block and many other
items have been dumped into and around the pond.
Eutrophication is also evident. This pond will be eliminated
by project impacts.
Pond # 2, located 60 m (200 ft) southeast of the
proposed intersection with Wade Avenue, also drains into
Richland Creek. The dimensions are approximately 125 m (400
ft) long and 60 m (200) ft wide. Depth is estimated to
exceed 3 m (10 ft) in the center. This pond will also be
Y '
filled by the proposed action.
The third pond (#3) is located at the end of SR 1667
(Forest View Drive) near a small residential development.
The dimensions of the pond are approximately 300x600 ft.
Depth was not able to be determined, but is estimated to be
>2.5 m (8 ft) in the deepest part. A small, unnamed
tributary of Richland Creek forms this impoundment. This
stream is crossed by Alternate 1 upstream of the pond and by
Alternates 2 and 3 downstream. This pond will not be filled
if Alternate 1 is chosen. Part or all of the pond may be
filled with Alternates 2 and 3.
2.1.2 Best Usage Classification
The waters of Richland Creek, the unnamed tributaries
and the unnamed impoundments impacted by the proposed project
carry a best usage classification C NSW, as assigned by the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources (DEHNR), 1993. Class C designates waters suitable
for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife,
secondary recreation and agriculture. The supplemental
classification NSW denotes Nutrient Sensitive Waters, which
require limitations on nutrient inputs. No waters classified
as High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters
(ORW), WS-I, or WS-II, occur within 1.6 km (1 mi) of the
project area.
2.1.3 Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN),
assesses water quality by sampling for selected benthic
Macroinvertebrate organisms. The species richness and overall
biomass are reflections of water quality. Richland Creek was
given a biodiversity rating of "Fair" in 1991, approximately
2 miles downstream of proposed crossing.
The DEM National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) report lists no permitted discharge sources into
Richland Creek, or any other water resource within the
project boundaries..
2.2 Anticipated Impacts: Water Resources
Potential impacts to water resources include total
elimination, decreases of dissolved oxygen, and changes in
temperature. The later two impacts are due to removal of the
streamside canopy and removal./burial of aquatic vegetation.
Sedimentation and substrate disturbance occurring during
construction, can significantly reduce water clarity.
Culvert construction often causes flow restrictions during
construction and channelization once in place, in turn
altering the water level and flow characteristics of the
streams.
a
Stream channel relocation is anticipated for Richland
Creek at the proposed interchange with Wade Avenue. If the
stream relocation is greater than 100 ft or > 50 ft on one
side, or includes meanders, consultation with the FWS and NC
Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) will be required, per the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 USC 661-
667d). Relocated streams will be designed to have similar
characteristics (depth, width, and substrate) as the original
stream. This also includes reestablishment of streamside
vegatation.
3.0 BIOTIC RESOURCES
This section describes the ecosystems encountered and
the relationships between vegetative and faunal components
within terrestrial, and aquatic ecosystems. Descriptions of
the terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant
community classifications.
Representative animal species which are likely to occur
in these habitats are cited, along with brief descriptions of
their respective "roles" within that community. For complete
listings of flora and fauna which occur in Wake county, a
composite of specific references listed in section 5.0 should
be consulted. Animals that were observed during site visit
are denoted by (*) in the text and are'also listed in
Appendix B. Sightings of spoor evidence are equated with
sightings of individuals. Scientific nomenclature and common
names (when applicable) are used for plant and animal species
described. Subsequent references to the same organism will
include the common name only.
3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Five distinct biotic community types were identified in
the project impact zone, however there is always some degree
of overlap between communities. Community composition is
reflective of the physiography, topography and current and
prior land uses of the area. Numerous terrestrial animals
are highly adaptive and populate a variety of habitats,
therefore many of the species mentioned may occur in any
number of the different community types described.
3.1.1 Maintained Communities
Maintained Communities are land parcels in which the
vegetation is kept in a low-growing, non-successional state,
by grazing and/or mowing. These communities include
pastures, powerlines. and roadside shoulders and medians.
Pastures are the dominant landscape feature in the project
area. These are owned and managed largely by NCSU. Various
grasses (Poaceae), primarily fescues (Festuca spp.), populate
the pastures, along with a few other herbaceous species,
5
including dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), red clover
(Trifolium pratense) and wild onion (Allium canadense).
Roadside shoulders of project area roadways and the
grass median of SR 1728 (Wade Ave.) are dominated largely by
fescue and low-growing herbaceous plants such as dandelion,
red clover, wild onion, henbit ( amium amplexicaule),
chickweed (Stellaria media) and nightshade (Solanum sp.).
Small shrubs and weedy vegetation occur at the edges of the
cleared roadsides and forested communities. Common species
found here include winged sumac (Rhus covallina), pokeweed
(Phvtolacca americana), milkweed (Ascleyias sp.), blackberry
(Rubus spp.) and sericea (Lespedeza cuneata).
The open, relatively nonstratified nature of the
maintained communities limits the number of resident
vertebrate fauna. Small mammals such as least shrew
(Crvptotis parva)* and house mouse (Mus musculus)* occupy
open grassy areas and roadside environments. Their dimunitve
size enables them to seek cover and nest sites in the grassy
vegetation. A least shrew nest of at least 10 individuals
was observed underneath a fallen traffic sign along Wade
Avenue. Several mice were observed in pastures crossed by
the alignment. Small mammals such as these are preferred
prey items of raptors such as red-tailed hawk (Bueto
jamacensis)*, which soars over the open areas to spot their
prey. Two red-tailed hawks were observed roosting in a tree
bordering one of the pasture fields. A Cooper's hawk
(Acciviter cooperii)* was also observed near pond #3 at the
edge of an agriculture field and a forested tract. Because
of recent decling populations, the Cooper's hawk is listed as
a State Protected species of Special Concern (SC).
The eastern meadowlark (Sturnella magna)* and eastern
bluebird (Sia is sialias)* are other field residents which
were observed during site visits. Meadowlarks nest in grassy
depressions, while the bluebird constructs nests out of grass
or pine needles, in fence post or bordering tree cavities,
and also bird boxes. Both species are highly insectivorous,
but may also consume fruits and berries.
Several other animals, particularly birds, which reside
in bordering forested habitats, will frequent pasture and
roadside environments to forage on invertebrates, seeds and
berries. Carolina chickadee ( arus carolinensis)*, northern
cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis)*, American robin (Turdus
migratorius)*, Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus)* and
white-throated sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis)* are some of
the many birds which may feed in these habitats. Snakes such
as the black racer (Coluber constrictor) and eastern garter
snake (Thamnophis sirtalis) may venture into these habitats
to feed on insects and small mammals. The eastern cottontail
(SylvilaAus floridanus)* is another common visitor of fields
and other open areas.
6
Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana)* and raccoon
(Procyon lotor)* frequently forage nocturnally in these
habitats, or travel along roadways between habitats. These
animals are often roadkill victims. Consequently roadkills
attract a large number of scavenger species, including turkey
vulture (Cathartes aura)* and common crow (Corvus
brachyrhynchos)*, as well as domestic dogs and cats.
3.1.2 Pine/Hardwood Upland Forest
This is the most abundant forested habitat within the
project area, occurring on upland plains and slopes.
Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda) comprises over 50% of the mature
canopy. Sweet gum (Liauidambar styraciflua), red maple (Acer
rubrum), white oak (Ouercus alba), black oak (Q velutina)
and American beech (Faaus Arandifolia) comprise the remainder
of the canopy. The mid-canopy is sparsely populated with
American holly (Ilex opaca), flowering dogwood (Cornus
florida), black cherry (Prunus serotina) and younger red
maple and sweet gum. Wax myrtle (Mvrica cerifera) occurs as
a shrub, scattered throughout, as is strawberry bush
(Euonvmus americanus), which is most abundant on slopes. Due
to the season of the survey, the herbaceous component of this
community could not be adequately surveyed. Heartleaf
(Hexastylis sp.), crane-fly orchard (Tipularia discolor),
pipsissewa (Chimaphila maculata), ebony spleenwort (Asplenium
Platyneuron) and christmas fern (Polvstichum acros%tichoides)
were abundant. Running-Pine (Lycopodium flabelliforme)
occurs in dense patches scattered on the upland plains of
this habitat. Yellow-root (Xanthorhiza simplicissima) is
common on the slopes, grading down to Richland Creek. Green
brier (Smilax spp.), trumpet vine (Campsis radicans), and
poision ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) are present, climbing on
.trees.
The diversity and abundance of the faunal component of
this community is limited due to habitat reduction and
fragmentation, which are consequences of surrounding
development and agricultural operations. Representative
fauna from all the terrestrial vertebrate classes were
observed in this community during field investigations.
Birds (Ayes) were the most abundant and conspicuous group of
animals observed throughout the forested areas. The forest
canopy attracts an abundance of wood-boring and defoliating
insects, which provide forage for birds, such as downy
woodpecker (Picoides pubes.cens)*, red-bellied woodpecker
(Melanerpes carolinus)*, yellow-bellied sapsucker +
(Sphyrapicus varius)*, pileated woodpecker (Drvocopus
pileatus)*, ruby-crowned kinglet (Regulus calendula)*,
golden-crowned kinglet ( satrapa)*, brown creeper (Certhia
familiaris)*, blue-gray gnatcatcher (Polioptila caerulea),
yellow-rumped warbler (Dendroica coronata)*, pine warbler
(Dendroica Pinus) and white-breasted nuthatch (Sitta
7
carolinensis)*. Many of these species, along with tufted
titmouse (Parus bicolor)*, solitary vireo (Vireo solitarius).
gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis), pine siskin (Carduelis
in nus)*, American goldfinch (C. tristis)* and northern
cardinal, will also consume a large amount of fruits, seeds
and new shoots of trees, shrubs and vines.
A great horned owl (Bubo virRinianus)*, was observed
during site visit. Rodents, frogs, insects and small birds
are the primary prey items of this top predator. Other
species of owls (family Strigidae) and hawks (family
Accipitridae) may also be top predators of the community.
Other vertebrate,species which utilize the canopy
component of this community include: the grey squirrel
(Sciurus carolinensis)*, Virginia opossum, eastern fence
lizard (Sceloporus undulatus)* and grey treefrog (Hula
chrvsoscelis or H. versicolor). Bats are also important
components of forested communities. The evening bat
(Nycticeius humeralis) and the eastern pipistrelle
(Pipistrellus subflavus) are two of the more common species
occurring in the Piedmont. Roosting for these species
usually takes place in hollow trees, or crevices under tree
bark.
Many animals which occupy the forest floor are fossorial
(living in burrows), such as worm snake (Carphophis
amoenus)*-, eastern mole (Scalopus aauaticus), and woodland
vole (Microtus pinetorum). Earthworms, beetles, ants and
other invertebrates are the major constituents of their
diets. Other animals utilize the abundant litter layer
(leaves and fallen branches), for cover. The American toad
(Bufo americanus), eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina)*,
slimy salamander (Plethodon Alutinosus)* and ground skink
(Scincella lateralis) occupy a variety of forested community
types.
3.1.3 Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest
Small tracts of this community type occur at the
northern end of the project area, on moderate to steep
slopes, grading into alluvial streamside forests. The canopy
is relatively dense and mature, however gaps of younger trees
occur. White oak and mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa) are
the dominant canopy trees. Other less abundant species
comprising the canopy, include black oak, red oak (C rubra),
yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) and loblolly pine.
Red maple, flowering dogwood, sourwood (Oxydendrum arborem)
and American holly constitute the moderate to dense
understory. Few herbaceous species occur, however these are
very abundant, including heartleaf, crane-fly orchid,
rattlesnake plantain (Goodyera pubescens), and pipsissewa.
Woody vines such as poison ivy, greenbrier and grape (Vitis
spp.) are also present.
9
The faunal composition of this community is expected to
be similar to the community described earlier. Some animals,
including eastern chipmunk (Tamias striatus)*, white-tailed
deer (Odocoileus virAinianus)* and hairy woodpecker (Picoides
villosus)* were observed only in this community type, however
they are not restricted to this habitat.
3.1.4 Piedmont Alluvial Forest
This community type occurs on the floodplains of
Richland Creek and its tributaries. Much of this community
type experiences occasional flooding. Two small
jurisdictional wetlands of this community type, may be
impacted by the proposed alignment (Section 4.1).
River birch (Betula ni ra), American elm (Ulmus
americana), yellow poplar, green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
and hackberry (Celtis laevigata) are the dominate canopy
species, with chesnut oak (Ouercus michauxii), sycamore
(Platanus occidentalis), sweetgum and red maple present to a
lesser extent. The understory is generally sparse,
consisting of American holly, ironwood (Carpinus
caroliniana), red maple, boxelder (Ater neaundo) and pawpaw
(Asimna triloba). Shrubs are also generally sparse and
include strawberry bush, spicebush (Lindera benzoin), fetter
bush (Leucothoe recurva) and silky dogwood (Corpus ammonum).
Faunal composition of low moist forests generally
differs from the other types of forested habitats occuring in
the project area. A few species which prefer forested
bottomlands such as this, include the barred owl (Strix
varia), swamp sparrow (Melospiza georAiana) and northern
parula (Parula americana). The Alluvial forest is
periodically flooded, and thus animals, particularlly those
occupying the forest floor, are adapted to occasional
inundation. Species such as the marbled salamander
(Ambystoma opacum) often reside under logs and stones near
streambanks. Many of the faunal residents of the adjacent
stream community, such as frogs and snakes may be found in
the forest near the stream at various times. These species
will be discussed in the aquatic community description.
3.1.5 Young Growth Pine Plantation
This small loblolly pine plantation is of uniform age
(<20 yrs) and size. The trees are planted densely and few
other tree species occur. Understory and shrub strata are
mostly lacking. Vines such as green brier and poision ivy
are present and crane-fly orchid is an abundant ground cover
species.
Faunal species which utilize the other forested
communities in the project area, particularly the Mixed
9
Pine/Hardwood Upland Forest, may also be found here, but in
smaller numbers and diversity. The overall quality of
wildlife habitat in even-aged monocultured forests is low
compared to more diverse forested habitats.
3.2 Aquatic Communities
Two aquatic community types (Small Piedmont Stream, and
Small Pond) will be impacted by the proposed action. Several
stream crossings occur in the alignment, and two ponds will
also be impacted. Faunal composition of the aquatic
communities is reflective of the physical characteristics of
the water body. The community structure is also greatly
influenced by adjacent terrestrial communities.
3.2.1 Small Piedmont Stream
Research has shown that a large amount of food chain
energy of stream communities is derived from allochthonous
(produced outside of stream ecosystem) sources, in the form
of terrestrial detritus. Rocks, fallen debris (logs, sticks
etc), and low velocity areas in the stream trap or retain
detritus within the stream. The detritus is then decomposed
by heterotrophic microorganisms, such as bacteria, and
consumed by macroinvertabrates, such as aquatic insects.
Decomposers and primary consumers are, in turn, consumed by
larger organisms. The amount of allochthonous energy input
within a stream varies seasonally.
Autochthonous (produced within the stream ecosystem)
energy sources include planktonic and benthic micro and macro
algae as well as aquatic vascular vegetation. Algal growth
is excessive in these streams, a sure sign of nutrient
overload.. Eutrophication can be very detrimental to aquatic
.organisims, particularly during developmental stages, because
-of depleted oxygen levels, and toxins produced by the algae.
Aquatic invertebrates are a major component of stream
ecosystems, as primary and secondary consumers, and as prey
items for organisims higher in the food chain. Aquatic
insects and larvae, as well as crayfish (Family Cambaridae)*
are prevalent in the project area streams.
Because of the small size and shallow depths of these
streams, fish diversity is limited. The swallowtail shiner
(NotroPis Procne)*, which feeds on very small invertebrates
and bluegill (LePomis macrochirus)*. which consumes larger
prey (small crayfish, insects etc) were the only species
observed. Other consumers in this ecosystem include
salamanders, frogs and snakes. Two salamander species.
northern dusky (Desmognathus fuscus)* and three-lined
salamander (Eurycea Ruttolineata)*, and three frog species;
green frog (Rana clamitans)*, pickeral frog (R. Palustris)*
and bullfrog (R. catesbeiana)* were observed within the
10
streambed. Snakes which may be present in these streams
include northern watersnake (Nerodia sipedon) and eastern
ribbon snake (Thamnophis sauritus).
Animals such as the belted kingfisher (Megaceryle
alcvon), muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus)* and raccoon, which
reside outside of the stream, are also important components
of the aquatic ecosystem. The belted kingfisher feeds mainly
on small fish and crustaceans, the muskrat consumes primarily
aquatic vegatation, and occasionally shellfish. Raccoons
feed on a wide variety of food items, and will often feed in
shallow streams on aquatic organisims. Both the muskrat and
belted kingfisher construct intricate burrows in streambanks,
used for nesting purposes.
3.2.2 Small Pond
Three ponds will be impacted by the proposed project.
Although the pond (#1) between Trinity Road and Wade Avenue
is seriouslly degraded, community structure is likely to be
similar for all ponds. In small, warm water ponds such as
these, light is a major factor affecting fish distribution.
Since waters of this type environment are generally turbid,
most aquatic plant growth is in shallow water. Beds of
aquatic vegetation increase both habitat complexity and
abundance of invertebrates (food items)', thus fish species
and numbers tend to be highest in shallow waters. Fish
likely to occur in these areas include eastern mosquito fish
(Gambusia affins)*, pumpkinseed (Lepomis gibbosus)*,
bluegill, crappie (Pomoxis sp.), golden shiner (Notemigonus
crysoleucas) and the predatory largemouth bass (Micropterus
salmoides)*. Ponds #2 and #3 are deeper than the other pond.
Catfish (Ictalurus sp.) and detrital feeders such as common
carp (Cyprinus carpio) may occur in the deeper areas of these
ponds. These species do not have to rely on vision for prey
capture. None of the fish species occurring in the ponds are
exclusively adapted to pond communities, and are thus
dependent on streams for dispersal and continuation of the
species.
Several other animals are likely inhabitants of the
ponds, including; bullfrog, pickeral frog, snapping turtle
(Chelydra serventina), northern water snake, crayfish and
muskrat, the burrows of which were observed along the pond
banks leading into the water. Birds such as the belted
kingfisher, green heron (Butorides striatus) and the great
blue heron (Ardea herodias)*, likely play major roles in the
pond ecosystem. The major portion of their diet consists of
small fish and aquatic invertebrates. Wood ducks (Aix
sponsa)* and mallards (Anal platyrhynchos)*, along with
domesticated muscovy ducks (Cairina moschata)*, and greylag
geese (Anser anser)* were present in pond #3. A small flock
of Canada geese (Branta canadensis)* was seen overhead.
Plant material is the primary food of these waterfowl. with
aquatic insects also constituting a small amount of their
diets.
3.3 Anticipated Impacts: Biotic Communities
Construction of this project will have various impacts
on the biotic communities described. This section quantifies
and qualifies impacts to these resources in terms of area
impacted (cleared/modified), and ecosystem effects. Temporary
and permanent impacts are considered here.
3.3.1 Terrestrial Community Impacts
Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of the five terrestrial community
types described. The estimated loss to these communities is
listed in Table 1. It should be noted that estimated impacts
were derived using the entire proposed right of way. Project
construction often does not require the entire right of way
and therefore actual impacts may be considerably less.
TABLE 1. ESTIMATED IMPACTS TO TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES
Community
Alt. MC PH OH AF PP
la 5.1 (12.6) 1.4 (3.5) 0.0 (0.0) 0.5 (1.2) 0.4 (1.1)
lb 8.2 (20.3) 2.3 (5.7) 0.0 (0.0) 0.8 (1.9) 0.7 (1.7)
2a 3.8 (9.5) 1.6 (3.9) 0.5 (1.2) 0.8 (1.9) 0.8 (2.0)
2b 6.3 (15.5) 2.5 (6.3) 0.6 (1.6) 1.2 (3.1) 1.3 (3.2)
3a 3.7 (9.2) 1.4 (3.6) 0.8 (1.9) 0.8 (1.9) 0.9 (2.1)
3b 6.0 (14.8) 2.5 (6.3) 1.2 (3.0) 1.2 (3.1) 1.3 (3.2)
I 3.3 (8.2) 2.3 (5.7) 0.0 (0.0) 2.5 (6.3) 1.3 (3.2)
Impacts in hectares (acres) based on: a 24 m (80 ft) ROW, or
b 40 m (130 ft) ROW I denotes Wade Avenue Interchange and
Auxiliary lanes MC, PH, OH, AF and PP denote Maintained,
Pine/Hardwood Upland Forest, Mesic Oak/Hickory Forest,
Alluvial Forest and Young Pine Plantation Communities
respectively
The plant communities found along the project alignment
serve as shelter, nesting and foraging habitat for numerous
species of wildlife. Loss of habitat is likely to reduce the
number of faunal organisms, and concentrate them into a
smaller area, which causes some species to become more
susceptible to disease, predation and starvation. Habitat
fragmentation will also result from roadway construction on
new location. The new roadway will dissect the existing
forested tracts creating a barrier between the two separated
parcels. Not only does this loss of habitat and
fragmentation result in losses to faunal populations, but
1 1)
350 1 `? ? `? ? \ ;•? ,?
IN I. PHASE 1
?,.
PHASE 2
R71,• Alt. 1 ®®®®®®®?®®
Alt. 2-
?? i t'• ?,' /r { Alt 3 ?1?1?1?1¦ ¦1®
Zz,
^• 1? ?- ? `.', 1 x'43-? ?1
!! 1'' i?+^{ .;`?'•"'?///• ?% ?/ % 'rte ., t??
JII' n-•???\?? !!/1 i ?, -------------.f Figure 2. Biotic Communities 14-Maintained Communities
j \? 1 Mes i s Oak Hardwood
'
Young Pine Plantations-.'
i
4.52' Pine/Hardwood Upland
? ? ••( ( ?1 ` t - .J, ' Alluvial Forest
/•./? t1 1 'Q ??R? Waterbodies
??
Wetlands
LEGEND
changes in community dynamics are also likely. In
fragmenting the forest. more ecotone habitat is created.
Species which thrive on community edges will increase, while
species which require larger, undisturbed tracts will
decrease, or dissappear, as a result of competitive
interactions.
Individual mortalities are likely to occur to animals
closely associated with the ground (snakes, small mammals,
etc.), because of construction machinery used during clearing
and grading activities. Mobile species will be displaced
during construction activity. These animals may return to
the area following construction, however the amount of
forested habitat, which has already been abated by
agricultural clearing, will be reduced even further.
3.3.2 Aquatic Community Impacts
The aquatic communities associated with the small ponds
will be eliminated with the proposed filling. Anticipated
impacts to the stream communities can be attributed to
construction related habitat disturbance and sedimentation.
Although disturbance and sedimentation may be temporary
processes during the construction phase of this project,
environmental impacts from these processes may be long-lived
or irreversible.
The aquatic environment serves as a major food source
for many terrestrial organisms such as raccoons, various
species of snakes, birds, turtles and amphibians. It also
serves as a means of predator avoidance for amphibians (frogs
and salamanders), reptiles (snakes and turtles), and mammals
(muskrat and mink).
Benthic non-mobile organisms, such as filter and deposit
feeders, and macro and micro alga, are particularly sensitive
to construction activities such as dredging, filling, pile
driving operations and slope stabilization. These
construction activities physically disturb the substrate,
resulting in loss of sessile benthic organisms. Many of
these aquatic organisms are slow to recover, or repopulate an
area, because they require a stabilized substrate for
attachment. Substrate stability may take a long time to
develop, therefore, changes in community composition will
occur.
Light penetration, essential for photosynthetic species,
the primary producers in the food chain, will be reduced as a
result of siltation. Clogging of feeding apparati of
suspension feeders and burial of newly settled larvae of
these organisms, are other effects of siltation. These
species are often primary consumers in the food chain, and
are a major step in the aquatic food web. Impacts to these
organisms may directly effect organisms higher in the food
13
chain such as fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals.
Mobile aquatic organisms may escape some of the effects
of siltation, however gills of fish, crustaceans and larval
amphibian and insect forms can become clogged and
dysfunctional as a result of sedimentation. Spawning
habitats for these mobile species may become filled with
sediment, diminishing reproductive success and inevitably
reducing populations.
Habitat disturbence and sedimentation are extremely
detrimental to aquatic ecosystems. Best Management Practices
(BMP's) for protection of surface waters, must be strictly
adhered to, to ensure the biological integrity of the water
bodies impacted by this project.
Additionally, if measures are not taken to reduce the
amount of probable increased concentrations of toxic
compounds (gasoline, oil, etc.) in the stream, coming from
construction related machinery and road paving activities,
mortalities to numerous types of aquatic organisms are
likely.
4.0 SPECIAL TOPICS
4.1 Waters of the United States
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad
category of "Waters of the United States" as defined in 33
CFR 328.3, in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (33 U.S. C. 1344). This project will
mainly impact surface waters. A total of seven stream
crossings are included in the preliminary design, and at
least two of the ponds will be filled. Two small
jurisdictional wetland communities will be impacted.
Potential wetland communities were evaluated using the --
criteria specified in the 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual". For an area to be considered a
"wetland", the following three specifications must be meet;
1) presence of hydric soils (low soil chrome values), 2)
presence of hydrophytic vegetation (Appendix A), and 3)
evidence of hydrology, or hydrological indicators, including;
saturated soils, stained, oxidized rhizospheres, matted
vegetation, high water marks on trees, buttressed tree bases
and surface roots.
Two small (<0.1 hectare/0.1 acre) jurisdictional wetland
sites were located during field investigations. These are
associated with the outflow of the pond * 1 and * 3,
respectively (Fig 2). These wetlands are classified as
Palustrine Forested, Deciduous, Temporarily Flooded (PF01A)
as defined by Cowardin et al. (1979). The ponds are the
hydrological source for these sites, which have remained
14
flooded for intervals sufficient to produce hydric
conditions. The wetland site associated with pond #3 lies 20
m (60 ft) outside of the ROW of Alternates 2 and 3. Although
this wetland may not be filled, the hydrology will be
affected by filling of the pond. Total wetland impacts will
be minimal.
4.1.1 Permits
Impacts to Waters of the United States fall under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). A
Nationwide permit 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 26 is likely to be
applicable for the anticipated impacts to the two wetland
sites. This permit applies to wetlands that are isolated,
and/or are above headwaters (annual flow <5cfs). No
notification to the COE is likely to be required, because
total wetland fill is less than 1 acre. Final permit
decisions lie with the Army Corps of Engineers. A North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section
401 (1665) Water Quality General Certification is also
required, prior to issuance of the Nationwide permit.
4.1.2 Mitigation
Projects authorized under Nationwide Permits usually do
not require compensatory mitigation according to the 1989
Memorandum Agreement between the Environmental Protection
Agency and the Department of the Army.
4.2 Rare and Protected Species
Federal law requires that any action, which has the
potential to have a detrimental impact to the survival and
well being of any species classified as federally protected,
.is subject to review by the FWS and/or the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), under the provisions of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. Endangered
species receive additional protection under separate state
statutes. In North Carolina protection of plant species
falls under N.C. General statutes (G.S.) 106-202.12 to 106-
202.19 of 1979. Wildlife protection falls under G.S. 113-331
to 113-337 of 1987.
4.2.1 Federally Protected Species
Plants and Animals with federal classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and
Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
section 7 and section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. As of December 20, 1993 the FWS lists five
federally Endangered species for Wake County (Table 2).
15
Table 2 Federally Protected Species Wake County
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Haliaeetus leucoceahalus
Picoides borealis
Vermivora bachmanii
Alasmidonta heterodon
Rhus michauxii
COMMON NAME STATUS
Bald eagle E
Red-cockaded woodpecker E
Bachman's warbler E
Dwarf wedge mussel E
Michaux's sumac E
E denotes classification of Endangered (appendix A)
Suitable habitat for the red-cockaded
Michaux's sumac occurs in the project area.
descriptions of characteristics and habitat
the listed species is provided below, along
Conclusion concerning potential impacts for
the proposed project.
Haliaeetus leucoceuhalus (bald eagle)
Status E
Family Acciptridae
Listed 3-11-67
woodpecker and
Brief
requirements for
with a Biological
each species by
Theses large predatory birds are found in North America.,.
from Florida to Alaska. The only major'nesting populations in
the southeast occur in Florida; however migrants and rare
nesting pairs do occur in North Carolina. Adults are dark
brown except for the white head and tail. Immatures are brown
and irregularly marked with white until their fourth year.
Eagles nest close (within 0.5 miles) to large expanses
of water in the largest living tree in the span. The nests
are approximately three meters across and as deep.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
No large bodies of water are located within the project
area. Construction of this project will not impact the bald
eagle.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker)
Status: E
Family: Picidae
Listed: 10/13/70
The adult RCW's plumage
except for small red streaks
male. The back is black and
and the breast and underside
There is a large white cheek
cap, nape, and throat.
is entirely black and white
on the sides of the nape in the
white with horizontal stripes
are white with streaked flanks.
patch surrounded by the black
16
RCW's use open old growth stands of southern pines.
particularly longleaf pine for foraging and nesting habitat.
A forested stand must contain at least 50% pine. These birds
nest exclusively in trees that are >60 years old and are
contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age. The
foraging range of the RCW is from up to 202 ha (500 ac), and
this acreage must be contiguous with suitable nesting sites.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees
and usually in trees that are infected with the fungus that
causes red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies
from 3.6-30 m (12-100 ft) above the ground and average 9.1-
15.2 m (30-50 ft) high. They can be identified by a large
incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree, which is
referred to as "candle-sticking". This is arguably used as a
defense against possible predators. A clan of woodpeckers
usually consists of one breeding pair and the offspring from
previous years. The eggs are laid in April, May, and June
and hatch 38 days later. Clutch size is from 3-5 eggs. All
members of the clan share in raising the young. RCWs feed
mainly on insects but may feed on seasonal wild fruits.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The Pine/Hardwood Upland forest offers suitable habitat
within the project area,, as does a mature loblolly pine
forest (Carl Alwin Schneck Memorial Forest), located off of
Reedy Creek Road, within 1/2 mile of project boundaries.
These areas were surveyed using methods described in Henery
(1989) by NCDOT staff biologists on November 23-24, 1993.
This included walking north/south transects in suitable
areas, visually searching for evidence (cavity trees, start
holes etc) of the RCW. Distance between surveyers varied,
depending on understory thickness, in order to acheive 100%
.coverage. No evidence of RCWs inhabiting these areas was
observed. It can be concluded that construction of this
project will have no impact on the RCW.
Vermivora bachmanii (Bachman's warbler) Status: E
Family: Parulidae
Listed: 3/11/67; 12/2/70
Bachman's warbler ranges throughout the southeastern
United States during the breeding season and winters in
western Cuba and the Isle of Pines. The only confirmed
nesting records occurred between 1897 and 1937. Of the 30
observed nests 26 were in Charleston County, South Carolina.
Other nests were in Kentucky, Missouri, and Alabama.
This small warbler has a total length of 12 cm. The
male has a yellow forehead, chin, and shoulders. Its crown
and bib are black. Immature males have less black on their
crown and less yellow on their shoulders, but more white on
the lower belly. Females are generally more drab, with the
17
throat and breast being gray or yellow and the crown gray.
Males and females are both characterized by having a thin
bill that is slightly downcurved and white undertail coverts.
Bachman's warblers nest during late spring, in low, wet,
forested areas. They usually selected areas with an amount
of permanent water. There is a preference for hardwood
forest containing sweet gum, oak, and black gum, with
openings in the forest canopy filled with dense thickets of
cane, blackberry, and other vines and shrubs.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
No suitable habitat for this species occurs in the
project area. The hardwood forests located within the
project area are not classified as "low-wet" hardwood
forests. It can be concluded that project construction will
not impact the Bachman's warbler.
Alasmidonta heterodon (dwarf-wedged mussel)
Status: E
Family: Unionidae
Listed: 3/14/90
Alasmidonta heterodon formerly ranged from the
Petitcodiac River, Canada to the Neuse River, North Carolina.
In North Carolina populations are found in Middle Creek and
the Little River of the Neuse River Basin and in the upper
Tar River and several streams of the Tar River system.
The dwarf-wedged mussel is a small
size from 25mm to 38mm in length. It's
distinguishable by two lateral teeth on
one on the left half. The periostracum
olive green to dark brown in color and
shell) is bluish to silvery white.
mussel ranging in
Shell is
the right half and
(outer shell) is
the nacre (inner
Successful reproduction is dependent on the attachment
of larval mussels to a host fish. It is not known what the
host fish is but evidence suggests that it is either an
anadromous or catadromous species. This mussel is sensitive
to agricultural, domestic, and industrial pollutants and is
usually found in a stable silt free streambed with well
oxygenated water, however recent population discoveries have
been made in swamp habitats.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
In-stream surveys of Richland Creek and the other
tributaries crossed by the proposed alignment revealed no
signs of mussel fauna. It can be concluded that construction
of this project will not impact this species.
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac)
t8
Status E
Family Anacardiaceae
Listed 9-28-89
This small (0.2-1.0 meters), densely pubescent
rhizomatous shrub, occurs in rocky or sandy open woods. It is
dependent on some type of disturbance to maintain the open
nature of the habitat, therefore it may occur along
maintained roadsides and powerlines.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for this species is found along much of
the exisiting roadways in the project area, particularly
along SR 1728 (Wade Avenue). Habitat is also found at
woodland borders to open fields and roadways. Plant-by-plant
surveys for this species were conducted in these areas on
November 09, 1993 by NCDOT Biologist Tim Savidge. No
individuals were observed. It can be concluded that
construction of this project will have no impact on Michaux's
sumac.
4.2.2 Federal Candidate and State Protected Species
There are a total of ten federal candidate (C2)
species listed for Wake county (Table 3). Candidate 2
(C2) species are defined as taxa for which there is some
evidence of vulnerability, but for which there are not enough
data to warrant a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered, or Proposed Threatened at this time.
The North Carolina status of these species is also
listed in Table 3. Plants or animals with state designations
of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC),
are given protection by the State Endangered Species Act and
the N.C. Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979,
administered and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission and the North Carolina Department of
Agriculture.
These species are mentioned here for information
purposes, should they become protected in the future. Surveys
for these species were not conducted during site visits, nor
were any of these species observed.
19
TABLE 3. Federal Candidate Species Wake County
NC
Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Status
Mvotis austroriparius southeastern bat Y SC
Aimophila aestivalis Bachman's sparrow Y SC
Elliptio iudithae Neuse slabshell N E
Elliptio lanceolata yellow lance N T
Fusconaia masoni Atlantic pigtoe N T
Lasmiaona subviridis green floater N E
Nestronia umbellula Nestronia N T
Monotropis odorata sweet pinesap Y C
Trillium pusillum Carolina trillium N E
var. pusillum
Speveria diana
Diana fritillary
Y
SR
butterfly
NC Status: SC, T, E, denote Special Concern, Threatened,
Endangered, respectively. SR and C denote Significantly Rare
and Candidate which are not Protected by state laws.
A search of the NC-NHP data base of rare plants and
animals resulted in no records of state or federally
protected species in the project area, however a Cooper's
hawk (Accipiter cooperii), which is state protected as SC was
observed during site visits.
20
5.0 REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979.
Classifications of wetlands and deepwater habitats of
the United States. Prepared for the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, U.S. Dept. of Int. Washington D.C.
Daniels, R.B., H.J. Kleiss, S.W. Buol, H.J. Byrd and J.A.
Phillips, 1984. Soil Systems in North Carolina. N.C.
Agricultural Research Service, N.C. State Univ. Raleigh
N.C. Bulletin 467.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual, "Technical report Y-87-1, U.S. Army
Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Henry, G.V. 1989. Guidlines for preparation of biological
assessments and evaluations for the red-cockaded
woodpecker. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast
region, Atlanta Ga.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey and J.R. Harrison III.
1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and
Virginia. Chapel Hill, The Univ. N.C. Press.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1993 Classifications and Water Quality Standards
Assigned to Waters of the Neuse River Basin. Raleigh
Dept. of Environment, Health and'Natural Resources.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1991. Biological Assessment of Water Quality in
North Carolina Streams: Benthic Macroinvertabrate Data
Base and Long Term Changes in Water Quality, 1983-1990.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of
the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, The Univ. N.C. Press.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the
Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The Univ. N.C. Press.
Schafale, M. P. and A. S. Weakley. 1990. Classifications of
the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third
Approximation. NC Nat. Heritage Program, Div. of Parks
and Rec., NC Dept. of Envir., Health and Nat. Resources.
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
1984.
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1984.
Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina. N.C.
Agriculture Experiment Station.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of
the Carolinas, Virginia and Maryland. The Univ. N.C.
Press.
21
APPENDIX A
Glossary of Terms
abiotic pertaining to nonliving or physical (air, water,
soil) aspects of an environment.
alluvial sediments deposited by flowing water, as in river
bed floodplain or delta.
allochthonous of foreign origin; transported into an area
from outside of area.
autochthonous formed within the place where it is found.
benthic pertaining to the bottom of a body of water; a
benthic organism lives on or in the bottom substrate.
biotic pertaining to living aspects or specific life
conditions of an environment.
canopy the uppermost layer of vegetation in a plant
community.
carnivore an organism that feeds on animals.
channel an open conduit either naturally or artifically
created which periodically or continuously contains moving
water.
detritus minute particles of decaying organic matter
disturbed community a community that is not in its natural
state. Sources of disturbance include human activity, fire
and wind.
ecosystem a biological community plus its abiotic (nonliving)
environment.
ecotone an intergradation between two biological communities
or associations
Endangered a taxa that is threatened with extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
fauna animals collectively, of a particular region.
flora a treatise describing the plants of a region.
fluvial produced by the action of a river or stream
food chain specific sequence of organisms, including
producer, herbivore, and carnivore, through which energy
and materials move within an ecosystem.
herbivore an animal that consumes plant material.
hydric soil soil that is wet long enough to periodically
produce anaerobic conditions, thereby influencing the
growth of plants.
hydrophytic vegetation plants which grow in water or on a
substrate that is at least periodically deficient in
oxygen as a result of excessive water content.
nocturnal animals that feed or are active at night.
omnivore an animal which feeds on both plant and animal
material.
photosynthesis conversion of radiant energy (sunlight) into
chemical energy (food).
piscivore an animal that feeds primarily on fish.
primary consumer organisms that are the second step in a
community food chain, feeding on the producers.
primary producer organisms capable through photosynthesis to
manufacture their own food through direct capture of light
22
energy: producers compose the first step in a community
food chain.
Proposed Endangered a species that has been formally proposed
as Endangered; species formally proposed receive some
legal protection.
Proposed Threatened a species that has been formally proposed
as Threatened; species formally proposed receive some
legal protection.
sessile an organism which permanently attaches itself to the
substrate.
spoor the track or trail of an animal, particularly a wild
animal.
succession The process of community change through time,
with an orderly sequence of seral stages, the organisims
(plants, animals) of each stage modify the environment,
making it less suitable for themselves, and more suitable
for the next. The end point or climax perpetuates itself.
Threatened a taxa that is likely to become Endangered in the
foreseeable future.
23
APPENDIX B
ORGANISMS OBSERVED DURING SITE VISIT
Class Common name Habitat
Crustacea crayfish(s) ss, p
Osteichthyes bluegill ss
eastern mosquitofish p
largemouth bass
pumpkinseed it
it swallowtail shiner ss
Amphibia bullfrog ss
green frog ss
pickeral frog
it northern dusky salamander
It slimy salamander PH
three-lined salamander "
Reptilia eastern box turtle it
" worm snake It
Aves American crow To
American goldfinch PH
It American robin To
belted kingfisher ss
of brown creeper Fo
91 Carolina chickadee "
" Carolina wren MC
to Cooper's hawk PH,MC
it eastern bluebird MC
eastern meadowlark it
downy woodpecker Fo
to great horned owl PH
hairy woodpecker OH
northern cardinal MC, Fo
It pileated woodpecker Fo
of pine siskin PH
red-bellied woodpecker
red-tailed hawk PH,MC
it ruby crowned kinglet Fo
19 tufted titmouse to
to turkey vulture To
91 white-breasted nuthatch Fo
white-throated sparrow MC, Fo
of yellow bellied sapsucker PH
yellow rumped warbler of
Mammalia eastern chipmunk OH
It grey squirrel Fo
house mouse MC
least shrew
99 Raccoon* ss,rk
Virginia opossum rk
to white-tailed deer OH
24
MC, PH, OH, Fo and To denotes Maintained, Pine/Hardwood
Upland Forest, Mesic Oak/Hickory Forest, Forested (All)
Communities and throughout
ss and p denote small stream and pond
* denotes spoor evidence
rk denotes roadkill

25
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 27, 1994
Mr. Barney O'Quinn
Planning and Environmental Branch
NC DOT
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. O'Quinn:
Ad@bUdNMMdMk
DEHNR
tilt GUri
Subject: 401 Water Quality Certification
Edwards Mill Road extension
Wake County
DEM # 941093,TIP # U-2582A, State # 8.24 02801
On 16 November you wrote to the Division of Environmental
Management (DEM) requesting a 401 Water Quality Certification for your
project to fill wetlands for an extension of Edwards Mill Road from
Trinity Road to north of Wade Avenue in Wake County. We believe that
this project is currently under review by the State Clearinghouse.
DEM cannot issue the 401 Certification until the project has received
a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or Record of Decision (ROD)
from the State Clearinghouse in accordance with (NCAC 15A: 01C .0402).
Therefore, I must hereby place this project on indefinite hold until
the State Clearinghouse has issued the FONSI or ROD. We recommend
that you notify us that the NEPA/SEPA process is complete so we can
reactivate the project. In addition, by copy of this letter, I am
also notifying the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that this project
should be placed on hold.
If you believe that this decision is in error, please call me at
919-733-1786 to discuss the matter.
S' c 1 ,
Jo n R. D me
We lands and Z ratic Plants Group
941093.nct
cc: Raleigh DEM Regional Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District Office
Central Files
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Note for Eric Galamb
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Dorney on Fri, Dec 9, 1994 3:56 PM
Subject: NEPA VS SEPA for Environmental Documents
To: Boyd DeVane; Eric Galamb; Jimmie Overton; Ken Eagleson
All right, give me the final true answer. Can we issue a 401
before NEPA is finalized or does the Dept rule only apply to to
SEPA? Melba says it is for both. I recall that the last word I
heard was that the regulation only applies to SEPA. Please
enlighten us.
Page: 1
Note for Eric Galamb
From: iric Galamb on Wed, Nov 23, 1994 4:19 PM
Subject: DOT road to new NCSU Bball arena
To: Cherri Lee Smith; Eric Galamb; John Dorney
DOT is/has submitted a 401 applic. for Edwards Mill Road
Extension (see subject). Today I received an advance copy of
the EA. Therefore, we cannot issue the 401 until the FONSI is
issued (next year). Please keep your eyes open for this one.
Page: 1