U2804

DWQ NCWRP 919 733 5321 02/22 100 11:16 N0.320 02/02
NORTH CAROLINA ]DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 22, 2000
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer:
Subject: NCDOT Project #U-2804B
Wake County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North
Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is willing to accept
payment from the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) for stream impacts associated with the subject project in
accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding between the
NCVVR.P and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Based on information
supplied by the NCDOT in a letter dated January 7, 2000, 920 linear
feet of stream restoration is required to satisfy the compensatory
mitigation requirements for this project. As requested by NCDOT, the
NCWRP will provide the required restoration within Cataloging Unit
030020201 of the Neuse River basin.
If you have any questions or need additional information I can
be reached at 919-733-5219.
Sincerely,
Ronald E. F 'ell
Program Manager
Wetlands Restoration Program
cc: John Hennessy, Wetlands/401 Unit
Alice Gordon, NCDOT
WETLANDS RIMBTORATION PROGRAM
1619 MAIL SERV1C4 CcNY6R. RA6E19H. NC 27699-1819
website: h2o.ennstate.nc.us PHONE 919.733.rage FAX [phone]
AN EQvAL OPPORTUNITY / APPIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 30% R6CYCLE9)/10% POSIT-CONSUMER PAPER
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, , Secretary
C) E H N F1
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
From: Eric GalambA
June 25, 1996
Subject: FONSI for SR 1652 Improvements
Wake County
State Project DOT No. 8.2403701, TIP # U-2804
E H N R # 96-0751
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 of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that no wetlands will be impacted. The following
comments are based on the document review:
A) DEM requests that DOT coordinate the stream relocation with the Wildlife
Resources Commission.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of a FONSI by DEM would not preclude the denial
of a 401 Certification upon application if wetland and water impacts have not been
avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
sr1652.fon
cc: Eric Alsmeyer, Raleigh COE
Eddie McFalls, DOT
Alan Clark
John Dorney
FAXED
JUN 2 51996
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
U
I Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form
Project Number: County: Date:
I ( -, Dr- 1 57,
? Project located in 7th floor library
Date Response Due (firm deadline):
MAY 2 a 19961
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All RIO Areas ? Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
? Fayetteville I<Air ? Coastal Management ? Water Planning
Water ? Water Resources El Environmental Health
El Mooresville
Groundwater
?W'Wildlife ?Solid Waste Management
Raleigh Land Quality Engineer ? Forest Resources ? Radiation Protection
? Washington ? Recreational Consultant ? Land Resources ? David Foster
? Coastal management Consultant IlParks and RgcreaLion El Other (specify)
? Wilmington
? Others
vironmental Managem t
? Winston-Salem
PWS

Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient 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
attachedlauthority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) 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 Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
PS-104
V
Cary
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue)
From NC 54 (Maynard Road) to I-40
Wake County
Federal Aid Project STP-1652(1)
State Project 8.2403701
TIP Project U-2804
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Submitted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)
Approved:
¢30-96 ?V,
DATE ?o? H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
DATE is s L. , P.E.
/ Division Administrator, FHWA
Cary
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue)
From NC 54 (Maynard Road) to 1-40
Wake County
Federal Aid Project STP-1652(1)
State Project 8.2403701
TIP Project U-2804
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT RAPACT
APRIL, 1996
Documentation Prepared in the Planning and Environmental Branch By:
3. `x-36
Edward B. McFalls
Project Planning Engineer
W" n Stroud Q? q?•;
'Profect Planning Unit F : ;id
: SEA L
6976 c
V T-3 0 ••.... • ?4`
??"i %
Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Manager V.
Planning and Environmental Branch
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGF
I. TYPE OF ACTION 1
II. SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS 1
A. Bicycle Accommodations 1
1
Access to William B. Umstead State Park
B
.
C. Sidewalks I
2
D. Street Lighting 2
E. Best Management Practices 2
F. Permits
III. PROJECT STATUS AND SCHEDULE 3
IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION 4
V SUMMARY OF BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE
.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 4
VI REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 5
Elimination of TIP Project U-2804 A
A 5
.
B. Traffic Data Update 6
6
C. Intersection Improvements
1. Weston Parkway / Richard Drive 6
2. Cary Parkway 6
7
3. Reedy Creek Road
4. Homestead Drive and Melody Lane 7
VIII. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS 7
Circulation of the Environmental Assessment
A 7
.
Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment
B
.
C. Public Hearing 9
14
D. Post-hearing Coordination
IX. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 14
FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2A Traffic Data: 1996
Figure 2B Traffic Data: 2016
Figure 3 Proposed Realignment of Richard Drive
Figure 4 Proposed Realignment of Cary Parkway
TABLES
Table 1 1996-2002 TIP Funding and Schedules 3
Cary
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue)
From NC 54 (Maynard Road) to I-40
Wake County
Federal Aid Project STP-1652(1)
State Project 8.2403701
TIP Project U-2804
I. Type of Action
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administrative action, Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
The FHWA has determined this project will not have any significant impact on the
human environment. This FONSI is based on the Environmental Assessment, which has
been independently evaluated by the FHWA and determined to adequately and accurately
discuss the environmental issues and impacts of the proposed project. The Environmental
Assessment provides sufficient evidence and analyses for determining that an
Environmental Impact Statement is not required. The FHWA takes full responsibility for
the accuracy, scope, and content of the Environmental Assessment.
II. Summary of Special Project Commitments
A. Bicycle Accommodations
The outside through lanes of SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue), from NC 54 (Maynard
Road) to just north of the I-40 interchange, are proposed to be 4.2 m (14 feet) wide, the
AASHTO recommended minimum width for lanes shared by motorists and bicyclists.
These wide outside lanes are included in the typical sections provided as Figure 3 in the
Environmental Assessment. Drainage inlet grates along the proposed project will be
designed to meet the NCDOT Bicycle Unit's safety standards. Please note that this
additional width will not be striped or signed as a bicycle lane.
B. Access to William B. Umstead State Park
William B. Umstead State Park is located just north of Harrison Avenue's
interchange with I-40. The proposed project will not have any direct effect on the park.
Indirect impacts will be avoided by maintaining access to William B. Umstead State Park
during project construction.
C. Sidewalks
Existing sidewalks along Harrison Avenue will be replaced as a part of the
proposed project. In addition, new sidewalks will be constructed along one side of
Harrison Avenue from NC 54 (Maynard Road) to I-40. The North Carolina Department
of Transportation will provide sixty percent of the funds needed to construct new sidewalk
along one side of SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) between NC 54 (Maynard Road) and I-40.
The estimated cost of this new sidewalk, $ 222,864, is 3.4 % of the total project
construction cost; the NCDOT's share is estimated to be $ 133,718, which is 60 % of the
sidewalk cost and 2.0 % of the total project construction cost. In order for NCDOT to
construct new sidewalks along one side of Harrison Avenue, it is estimated that the Town
of Cary would need to contribute $ 89,146.
D. Street Lighting
During the planning process, the Town of Cary requested that the North Carolina
Department of Transportation consider the installation of street lighting along the
proposed project. The North Carolina Department of Transportation does not normally
participate in the funding of street lighting along facilities like Harrison Avenue. The
Town of Cary would be responsible for the cost of installing, operating, and maintaining
the street lighting. If the Town desires lighting to be installed during the construction of
this project, a formal request for street lighting should be made to the utility company
approximately twenty weeks prior to the let date of the project. This will allow the utility
company to include the street lighting on their utility plans that will then be submitted with
an encroachment application to the Right of Way Branch of the North Carolina
Department of Transportation.
E. Best Management Practices
The North Carolina Department of Transportation's Best Management Practices
for the Protection of Surface Waters and Sediment Control Guidelines will be strictly
enforced during the construction stage of the project.
F. Permits
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (14) is likely to be applicable at ditch and
stream crossings found in the project study area. This permit authorizes construction
provided the following conditions are met:
(1) the width of the fill is limited to the minimum necessary for the actual crossing;
(2) the fill placed in Water of the United States is limited to a filled area of no more than
0.1 hectares (1/3 acre);
(3) no more than a total of 61 m (200 linear ft) of the fill for the roadway can occur in
special aquatic sites, including wetlands;
(4) the crossing is culverted, bridged or otherwise designed to prevent the restriction of,
and to withstand, expected high flows and tidal flows and movement of aquatic
organisms, and;
(5) the crossing, including all attendant features, both temporary and permanent, is part of
a single and complete project for crossing of a Water of the United States.
2
However, the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers has requested an opportunity to
review the final plans for a project-specific determination of Department of the Army permit
requirements. NCDOT will forward the final plans for the proposed project to the
Regulatory Branch of the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers for their review.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401
Water Quality General Certification is also required. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires that the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or
licensed activity that may result in a discharge into waters of the United States. The
issuance of a 401 permit from DEM is a prerequisite to issuance of Section 404 Permit.
No wetland mitigation is required; no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands will occur
from project construction.
III. Project Status and Schedule
The proposed project is included in the 1996-2002 NCDOT Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). The 1996-2002 TIP includes $ 3,510,000 for right of way
acquisition, which is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1996, and $ 6,500,000 for
construction, which is also scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1996. Thus, the TIP includes
a total funding of $ 10,010,000 for the proposed project.
The proposed project was originally divided into three segments: TIP Projects
U-2804 A, U-2804 B, and U-2804 C. After the environmental assessment was completed,
the North Carolina Department of Transportation eliminated TIP Project U-2804 A from
the Transportation Improvement Program. TIP Project U-2804 A included
improvements to SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54
(Maynard Road) (1.28 km, 0.8 mile). TIP Project U-2804 B includes the improvements
to SR 1652 between NC 54 (Maynard Road) and Weston Parkway (2.88 km, 1.8 miles).
TIP Project U-2804 C includes improvements between Weston Parkway and I-40 (0.96
km, 0.6 mile). The 1996-2002 Transportation Improvement Program funding and
schedules for segments B and C are included in Table 1.
TABLE 1. 1996-2002 TIP FUNDING AND SCHEDULES
PROJECT SEGMENT RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION
U-2804 A $2,350,000 S 900,000
U-2804 R S 910,000 in FY 1998 S 2,500,000 in FY 2000
U-2804 C' S 250,000 in FY 1996 S 3,100,000 in FY 1996
TOTAL TIP FUNDING S3,510,000 $6,500,000
'Note: As explained in Section VI.A., & m M A has bees eliminated from the project
3
IV. Description of Proposed Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to symmetrically
widen SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) to a multilane curb and gutter facility from NC 54
(Maynard Road) to I-40 (a vicinity map is included as Figure 1). Between NC 54
(Maynard Road) and SR 1650 (Reedy Creek Road), a four-lane divided curb and gutter
facility with a 4.9 m (16-foot) wide raised, grassed median is proposed. Between SR 1650
(Reedy Creek Road) and Weston Parkway, a five-lane curb and gutter facility with a
continuous left turn lane is proposed. From Weston Parkway to I-40, a seven-lane curb
and gutter facility, including two through lanes in each direction, a center turn lane, and an
exclusive right turn lane in each direction, is proposed. The proposed typical sections will
provide 4.2 m (14-foot) wide outside lanes to accommodate bicycle traffic. The proposed
project will also improve Harrison Avenue's interchange with I-40. In addition, a closed
loop traffic signal system is proposed for Harrison Avenue. The project is located within
the town limits of Cary in Wake County and is approximately 4.2 km (2.6 miles) in length.
V. Summaa of Beneficial and Adverse Environmental Impacts
The proposed improvements to SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) will benefit the region
and local community by providing safer and more efficient travel through the area. The
increased traffic carrying capacity of the facility will make homes, businesses, and schools
more accessible to local traffic. The improved facility will also enhance the Town of
Cary's access to I40, making commutes to and from Cary faster and safer.
The proposed project will require minor amounts of right of way and temporary
and permanent easements along Harrison Avenue. However, the proposed project is not
anticipated to require the relocation of any homes or businesses. No wetlands, federally
protected species, archaeological sites, or historic architectural resources are anticipated
to be impacted by the proposed project. A summary of anticipated impacts to water
resources in the project area is discussed below.
Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States," as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CRF) Part 328.3.
Wetlands, defined in 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 under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated
conditions. Any action that proposes to place fill into these areas falls under the jurisdiction
of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1344).
Jurisdictional wetland determinations were performed utilizing delineation criteria
prescribed in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual" (Environmental
Laboratory, 1987). Criteria to delineate wetland sites includes evidence of hydric soils,
4
hydrophytic vegetation, and hydrology. No wetland sites will be impacted by the
proposed project.
In the environmental assessment, several water resources were identified in the
.'3
study area. The proposed project crosses two unnamed, intermittent tributaries to Black
Creek (Class C NSW) and an unnamed, intermittent tributary to Crabtree Creek (Class B
NSW). A small pond located just southeast of Harrison Avenue's intersection with
Wyatt's Pond Lane was also identified in the environmental assessment. No fill is 4
anticipated to be placed in waters of the United States; however, % channel ,
read went will be required at t , two unnamed t itt+ent: tr utanes to Black Creek.
The ctossmg at the Black Creek tributary, which is located approximately 50 m (164 feet) .F
south of Dynasty Drive, is anticipated to require only minor channel improvements at the
.pro.posed,extensior? ofEt? culvert. The crossing
inlet and outlet, ends * iMp
at thelcri utcch is located approximately 80 m (262 feet) south of
Wyatt's Pond Lane, w,rutre:satne=cllael realignments In order to accommodate the
extension of the existing culvert, up to 110 m (360 feet) of the intermittent stream's 1 m
(3-foot) wide and 0.6 m (2-foot) deep channel will be realigned. The stream is above ,
headwaters.
In addition to these impacts, project construction may impact water resources.
Construction-related impacts include reduced water quality, increased sedimentation, toxic
runoff, alterations of the water level due to interruptions or additions to water flow, and
the destruction of natural substrate due to ;inseam channel relocation. Reduced water
quality could include changes in turbidity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and nutrient
limitation. In order to minimize impacts to water resources in the study area, NCDOT's
Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and Sediment Control
Guidelines will be strictly enforced during the construction stage of the project.
VI. Revisions to the Environmental Assessment
A. Elimination of TIP Project U-2804 A
The proposed project was originally divided into three segments: TIP Projects
U-2804 A, U-2804 B, and U-2804 C. After the environmental assessment was completed,
the North Carolina Department of Transportation eliminated TIP Project U-2804 A from
the Transportation Improvement Program. TIP Project U-2804 A included improvements
to SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road).
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard
Road), the section of roadway that was to have been improved by TIP Project U-2804 A,
is currently a four-lane curb and gutter facility (14.6 m or 48-foot face to face width) with
19.8 m (65 feet) of right of way. The area is dominated by residential development, much
of which is located immediately adjacent to the existing right of way. Under TIP Project
U-2804 A, a center left turn lane to serve both directions of travel, additional outside lane
width to accommodate bicycle traffic, and standard 2.4 m (8-foot) berms would have been
constructed along this 0.8 mile (1.3 km) segment of Harrison Avenue. The estimated right
of way and construction costs for these improvements were estimated to be $ 2,347,300
and $ 1,106,688, respectively. Thus, TIP Project U-2804 A was anticipated to cost
$3,453,988, a large expenditure for the improvements that the project would provide. In
5
addition to the high cost, the improvements proposed under TIP Project U-2804 A would
have required the relocation of thirteen residences along Harrison Avenue. Based on
these considerations, TIP Project U-2804 A was eliminated from the 1996-2002
Transportation Improvement Program.
B. Traffic Data Update
After completion of the Environmental Assessment, traffic data for the project was
updated to reflect the MCI and Embassy Suites developments proposed along the Weston
Parkway corridor. In order to reflect these new developments, the traffic growth rates
were increased. In the year 1996, traffic volumes are anticipated to vary from 34,080
vehicles per day (just south of the I-40 interchange) to 13,710 vehicles per day (south of
NC 54). In the year 2016, traffic volumes are anticipated to vary from 46,013 vehicles per
day (south of I-40) to 20,342 vehicles per day (just south of NC 54). Updated traffic data
is included as Figures 2A and 2B of this report.
C. Intersection Improvements
1. Weston Parkway / Richard Drive
SR 3005 (Richard Drive) is anticipated to be reaiigned to intersect
Harrison Avenue across from Weston Parkway (see Figure 3). Currently, SR
3005 (Richard Drive) intersects Harrison Avenue approximately 45 m (148 feet)
south of Weston Parkway, and traffic turning left onto and off of Richard Drive
conflicts with northbound traffic on Harrison Avenue turning left onto Weston
Parkway. Realignment of the intersection will remove these traffic conflicts
without limiting access to Richard Drive. Although the realignment will require
the acquisition of right of way, it is not anticipated to relocate any residences or
businesses. Richard Drive is located in an urban area that is not in the immediate
vicinity of any streams. Therefore, the proposed realignment is not anticipated to
have an adverse effect on the environment. This intersection improvement was not
described in the environmental assessment or presented at the public hearing but
will be incorporated into the final design of the proposed project.
2. Cary Pazkwav_
In order to facilitate the construction of the proposed Cary Academy
School on the east side of Harrison Avenue between Appletree Lane and Reedy
Creek Church Road, approximately 100 m (328 feet) of Cary Parkway will be
realigned. Cary Parkway will be realigned to intersect Harrison Avenue
approximately 12.2 m (40 feet) south of the existing Cary Parkway / Harrison
Avenue intersection. The proposed realignment is shown on Figure 4. This
realignment is not anticipated to require the relocation of any homes or businesses.
Since this intersection is located in an urban area and is not in the immediate
vicinity of any stream crossings, the realignment is not anticipated to have an
6
adverse effect on the environment. This intersection improvement was not
described in the environmental assessment or presented at the public hearing but
will be incorporated into the final design of the proposed project.
3. Reedv Creek Road
A traffic signal will be installed at the intersection of Reedy Creek Road
and Harrison Avenue. This intersection improvement was presented at the public
hearing, but was not included in the environmental assessment.
4. Homestead Road and Melody Lane
The intersection improvements at Melody Lane and Homestead Drive
presented at the public hearing are anticipated to be modified. At the hearing, the
4.9 m (16-foot) wide median proposed between Maynard Road and Reedy Creek
Road had a median opening at Melody Lane, but did not have a median opening at
Homestead Drive. In order to better accommodate traffic movements, a median
opening will be constructed at Homestead Drive which will allow motorists full
access to this neighborhood. In order to accommodate the median opening at
Homestead Drive, the median opening at Melody Lane will be removed. The
removal of this median opening will make the Melody Lane intersection a right-in
and right-out access. Melody Lane residents will still have full access to their
homes via Reedy Creek Road.
VIII. Coordination and Comments
A Circulation of the Environmental Assessment
The environmental assessment for the proposed project was approved by the
North Carolina Department of Transportation on October 27, 1995, and by the Federal
Highway Administration on October 31, 1995. The approved environmental asses,rrent
was circulated for review and comments to the federal, state, and local agencies listed
below. An asterisk (*) indicates that a written response was received from the agency or
municipality. Copies of the correspondence received are included in the Appendix of this
document (see pages A-1 through A-5). Specific comments included in this
correspondence are addressed in Section VIII.B. of this report.
Town of Cary
Wake County Commissioners
Triangle 7 Council of Governments
North Carolina Department of Administration -- State Clearinghouse*
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources*
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources:
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission*
Division of Parks and Recreation
7
Division of Environmental Management*
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers -- Raleigh*
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers -- Wilmington
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency -- Atlanta
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service -- Atlanta
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service -- Raleigh
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment
1. Comments from the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources - Division of Environmental Management
Comment 1: "The document states that no wetlands will be impacted but there
will be an unknown amount of waters... impacted ...... "The Division of
Environmental Management requests that NCDOT quantify the impacts to
waters."
Response 1: The proposed project is not anticipated to require any fill in waters
of the United States. A summary of the project's anticipated impacts to water
resources in the project vicinity is included in Section V. of this report.
Comment 2: "The Division of Environmental Management requests that NCDOT
commit to high quality soil and erosion control measures for Crabtree Creek and
its tributaries to protect the body contact (Class B) existing uses.
Response 2: NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters and Sediment Control Guidelines will be strictly enforced during the
construction stage of the project. Neither High Quality Waters, Water Supplies,
nor Outstanding Resource Waters occur within 1.6 km (1 mile) of the proposed
project, therefore, high quality erosion control measures are not anticipated to be
used.
2. Comments from the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources - North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Comment: "NCDOT should continue efforts to minimize impacts to stream
channels and should employ NCDOT Best Management Practices to protect off-
site resources. Stream channel modifications should be performed using state-of-
the-art stream relocation techniques."
Response: NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters and Sediment Control Guidelines will be strictly enforced during the
construction stage of the project. Stream channel modifications required by the
proposed project will be in accordance with NCDOT's Guidelines for Drainage
Studies and Hydraulic Design.
8
3. Comments from the Department of the Army Corps of Engineers
Comment: "When final plans are completed, including the extent and location of
any work within waters of the United States and wetlands, our Regulatory Branch
would appreciate the opportunity to review these plans for a project-specific
determination of Department of Army permit requirements. It is possible, if the
impacts from the proposed project are minor, that the work could be authorized
under one or more nationwide or regional general permits."
Response: NCDOT will forward the final plans for the proposed project to the
Regulatory Branch of the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers for their
review. This will enable the Corps of Engineers to determine project-specific
permit requirements.
C. Public Hearing
Following the completion of the environmental assessment, a public hearing for the
proposed project was held on February 20, 1996 in the Cary Town Council Chambers. A
copy of the news release for the hearing is included in the Appendix (see pages A-6 and
A-7). The purpose of the hearing was to solicit public comments on the proposed
widening project. The hearing was opened with a brief overview of the proposed project
and NCDOT right of way acquisition procedures. Citizens were then encouraged to
comment either at the hearing or by mailing in comments sheets which were distributed as
a part of the project handout. A copy of the handout is included in the Appendix (see
pages A-8 through A-13). Two articles about the public hearing were printed in the Cary
News and are included on pages A-14 and A-15 of the Appendix. A summary of the
comments received at the public hearing and responses to those comments is included
below.
Comment: Several citizens expressed their concern that the proposed 16-foot
wide median along Harrison Avenue would limit access to Homestead Drive, since
the public hearing map did not show a proposed median crossover at that location.
The proposed median would require motorists accessing the neighborhood to
make U-turns on Harrison Avenue.
Response: The North Carolina Department of Transportation has determined that
the proposed median between Maynard Road and Reedy Creek Road should
include a median crossover at Homestead Drive. In order to accommodate this
median opening, however, the median opening at Melody Lane will be removed.
Melody Lane will become a right-in and right-out access. Since Melody Lane
intersects Reedy Creek Road, Melody Lane residents will still have full access to
9
Harrison Avenue. In fact, closing the median opening at Melody Lane will bring
more traffic under the control of the proposed signal at Reedy Creek Road. This
project revision is addressed in Section VI.C. of this report.
Comment: Several citizens expressed concern that the widening proposal
presented at the public hearing did not adequately address the conflicting traffic
movements at Harrison Avenue's intersections with Weston Parkway and SR 3005
(Richard Drive). The public hearing map showed a proposed monolithic island
that would prevent traffic from turning left onto or out of SR 3005 (Richard
Drive).
Response: As described in Section VI.C.1. of this report, SR 3005 (Richard
Drive) will be realigned to intersect Harrison Avenue across from Weston Parkway
(see Figure 3). This realignment will bring Richard Drive under the control of the
traffic signal located at Weston Parkway.
Comment: Several citizens requested that the North Carolina Department of
Transportation install the proposed traffic signals at Cary Parkway and Reedy
Creek Road within the next year.
Response: New traffic signals are proposed at both Cary Parkway and Reedy
Creek Road. These traffic signals are located on Section B of the proposed
project which is currently funded for construction in fiscal year 1998. Several
citizens requested that the proposed signals be installed prior to project
construction. This request has been forwarded to the Traffic Engineering Branch
and the Division Office of NCDOT for their consideration.
Comment: Several citizens at the public hearing expressed concern about
traveling speeds on Harrison Avenue. Citizens requested that the speed limit on
Harrison Avenue be reduced to 35 mph.
Response: NCDOT and the Town of Cary will consider reducing the speed limit
to 35 mph. Generally, municipalities request NCDOT to adjust speed limits within
their municipal limits.
Comment: Several citizens are concerned about truck traffic along Harrison
Avenue, especially in the vicinity of the steep grades near Dynasty Drive and
Wyatt's Pond Lane. Citizens would like to see trucks routed along SR 1650
(Reedy Creek Road).
Response: The citizens' concerns about truck routing in the project vicinity will
be forwarded to the Town of Cary for their consideration. If the Town of Cary
chooses, they can request NCDOT to reroute some of the trucks through the area.
Many of the trucks on Harrison Avenue, however, have destinations located along
the roadway and will continue to use the facility.
10
Comment: Several citizens asked about bicycle accommodations along the
proposed project. A few citizens asked whether or not a separate two-way bicycle
trail was going to be provided, and some asked if separate bicycle lanes were being
considered.
Response: Because of the high traffic volumes on Harrison Avenue, additional
lane width is proposed to accommodate bicycle traffic. The outside through lanes
of Harrison Avenue, from NC 54 (Maynard Road) to just north of the I-40
interchange, are proposed to be 4.2 m (14 feet) wide. The additional width will
enable vehicles to pass bicyclists without moving into the next lane of traffic. The
additional width increases the clearance between bicyclists and motorists. This
additional width will not be designated as a separate bicycle lane or as a bicycle
route.
A separate two-way bicycle trail was not considered as a part of this project.
Two-way bicycle lanes on one side of the roadway are unacceptable because they
promote riding against the flow of motor vehicle traffic. Wrong-way riding is a
major cause of bicycle accidents and violates the rules of the road stated in the
Motor Vehicle Laws of North Carolina.
Comment: Several citizens commented on the typical sections along the proposed
project. Some citizens were in favor of the construction of a raised, grassed
median, and others opposed it.
Response: When planning for TIP Project U-2804 began, Harrison Avenue was
anticipated to be widened to a five-lane undivided facility. Thus, no median was
anticipated to be constructed along the proposed project. During the planning
process, NCDOT coordinated the proposed project with the Traffic Engineering
Branch and with the Town of Cary. The Town of Cary requested that a median be
included in the proposed project. This median would serve three purposes:
enhance safety by providing separation between traffic traveling in opposite
directions, control turning movements along the roadway, and provide an area that
could be landscaped to visually enhance the facility. An obvious drawback to
constructing a median is the resulting change in access to adjacent properties.
NCDOT tried to meet the Town of Cary's request by proposing a median along
Harrison Avenue between Maynard Road and Reedy Creek Road. The number of
driveways and intersecting streets along this section of Harrison Avenue is low,
and access to adjacent properties will remain relatively unchanged, especially since
the project has been revised to include a median opening Homestead Drive (see
Section VI.C.4.). Wyatt's Pond Lane will not have a median opening which will
eliminate left turning traffic at this intersection. These motorists, however, will be
able to use the signalized Dynasty Drive intersection to make left turns.
11
North of Reedy Creek Road, the number of driveways and intersecting streets
increases. In order to maintain access to adjacent properties, a median was not
proposed along this section of Harrison Avenue.
Comment: Several citizens commented that sidewalks should be constructed
along both sides of Harrison Avenue as a part of TIP Project U-2804.
Response: Existing sidewalks along Harrison Avenue will be replaced as a part of
the proposed project. In addition, new sidewalks will be constructed along the
facility. During the planning process, the Town of Cary demonstrated to NCDOT
that pedestrian facilities are needed along Harrison Avenue. Due to funding
restrictions, however, NCDOT will only participate in the funding of sidewalks
along one side of the roadway. NCDOT will provide sixty percent of the funds
needed to construct sidewalks along the east side of Harrison Avenue between
NC 54 (Maynard Road) and I40. The Town of Cary is anticipated to provide the
remaining forty percent of the funds to construct this sidewalk. In addition, the
Town of Cary is currently considering funding the entire cost of providing
sidewalk on the west side of Harrison Avenue between NC 54 (Maynard Road)
and I40. Thus, if the Town of Cary is able to provide the funding that they
anticipate, sidewalks will be constructed along both sides of Harrison Avenue.
Comment: A few citizens requested that noise walls be constructed along the
proposed project.
Response: 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. Since Harrison Avenue has no control of access and
intersecting driveways would create numerous breaks, noise barriers would be
relatively ineffective. As a result, it would be economically unreasonable to
construct a barrier for a small noise reduction. Noise walls are constructed when
their cost per benefited receptor is $ 25,000 or less. Safety at access openings due
to restricted sight distance is also a concern. Furthermore, to provide a sufficient
reduction, a barrier's length would normally be eight times the distance from the
barrier to the receptor. For example, a receptor located 15 m (50 feet) from the
barrier would normally require a barrier 120 m (400 feet) long. An access opening
of 12 m (40 feet) (10 percent of the area) would limit its noise reduction to
approximately 4 dBA. For these reasons, noise barriers are not recommended as a
part of this project. Additional information on noise levels along Harrison Avenue
are included in the environmental assessment for the proposed project.
Comment: Several citizens questioned the phasing of the proposed project.
Those citizens would like to see the section of Harrison Avenue between Maynard
Road and Weston Parkway widened before the section of Harrison Avenue
between Weston Parkway and I-40.
12
Response: The current right of way and construction schedules are included in
Section III. of this report. As several citizens noted, the improvements to Harrison
Avenue between Weston Parkway and 140 are scheduled to begin before the
improvements to Harrison Avenue between Maynard Road and Weston Parkway.
The current project schedule will help to alleviate the traffic congestion at the I-40
interchange, as soon as possible. In addition, bridge construction generally takes
longer to complete than roadway widening. Thus, the time delay between the
completion of the first segment of Harrison Avenue and the construction of the
second segment is not as long as it appears in the current schedule.
Comment: Some citizens want TIP Project U-2804 A to be constructed. TIP
Project U-2804 A, which includes improvements to Harrison Avenue between
Chapel Hill Road and Maynard Road, was eliminated from the proposed project
prior to the public hearing.
Response: NCDOT and the Town of Cary decided to eliminate the improvements
to Harrison Avenue between Chapel Dill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road) from
the proposed project. The elimination of TIP Project U-2804 A is discussed in
Section VI.A. of this report.
Comment: Many citizens requested that a loop be constructed at Harrison
Avenue's interchange with I40. This loop would eliminate the conflict between
left turning vehicles at the westbound I40 ramp terminal.
Response: As a part of Project U-2804, the westbound I40 entrance and exit
ramps will be widened to two lanes in order to accommodate dual left turn lanes
off of and onto Harrison Avenue. As explained in the environmental assessment,
an alternative which would provide a loop in the northwest quadrant of the I40 /
Harrison Avenue interchange was considered in the planning process. This loop
would serve traffic moving from westbound I40 to southbound Harrison Avenue
and would eliminate the left-turn conflict at the existing ramp terminal traffic
signal. This alternative, however, would have substantial right of way impacts on
the Wake Stone Corporation quarry and would greatly increase right of way costs.
The recommended improvements to the interchange will be made predominantly
within the existing right of w4y and are anticipated to provide an adequate level of
service in the design year.
Comment: A few citizens commented that other roadway projects in the area
should be completed prior to the widening of Harrison Avenue. These citizens feel
that Harrison Avenue would not need widening if NC 54 and NC 55 were widened
and the outer loop and Cary Parkway were completed.
Response: The 1996-2002 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)
includes the construction of the outer loop, construction of additional segments of
Cary Parkway, widening along several segments of NC 55, and widening NC 54
13
from Maynard Road to SR 1655 (Trinity Road). Even with the construction of
these projects, NCDOT's traffic models forecast enough traffic on Harrison
Avenue to warrant the current widening project. Harrison Avenue is currently and
will remain the Town's primary northern access to I-40.
D. Post-hearing Coordination
Since the public hearing was held on February 20, 1996, a community group
known as Cary Beyond 2000 has contacted NCDOT. Cary Beyond 2000 is currently
developing landscape and public art concepts for roadways that are considered entrances
to the town. Harrison Avenue is among the roadways that the group would like to
enhance with landscaping and sculpture. On March 23, 1996, Cary Beyond 2000 held a
planning charette to discuss their landscaping ideas. Cary Beyond 2000 plans to submit
their ideas to the Cary Town Council and to NCDOT, pending Town Council approval.
Most of the members of Cary Beyond 2000 envision Harrison Avenue landscaped
with trees and shrubs along both sides of the roadway and within a raised grassed median.
Since the group is interested in providing a gateway to Cary, their landscaping and ideas
focused on Harrison Avenue's interchange with I-40 and Harrison Avenue between
Weston Parkway and I-40. Currently, a raised median is not proposed for Harrison
Avenue between Weston Parkway and I-40; instead, a seven-lane, undivided curb and
gutter facility, which includes exclusive right turn lanes in each direction, is proposed.
Landscaping within the I-40 interchange, however, is feasible. Other items that Cary
Beyond 2000 is anticipated to include in their master plan are providing traffic signals on
mast arms and the installation of street lighting.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation will consider these items once
they are requested by the Town of Cary. Project costs, project schedules, impacts to
adjacent properties, and design concerns will be evaluated prior to any design change
approvals.
IX. Basis for Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon a study of the impacts of the proposed project as documented in the
Environmental Assessment and upon comments received from federal, state, and local
agencies and from citizens, it is the finding of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration that the project will not have a
significant impact on the quality of the human or natural environment. The project is not
controversial from an environmental standpoint. No significant impacts to natural,
ecological, cultural, or scenic resources are expected. No known Section 4(f) properties
are involved, no wetlands are impacted, no residences or businesses are anticipated to be
relocated, no significant impact on air or water quality is expected, and no effects on
federally listed threatened and endangered species are anticipated. The proposed project
is consistent with local plans and will not disrupt any communities. In view of the above
14
evaluation, it has been determined a Finding of No Significant Impact is applicable for this
project. Neither an Environmental Impact Statement nor further environmental analysis
will be required.
EBWplr
15
\ S
p+es
/ 17
/ 641
Ape
i
n,u
/
10
Itus ? 'RolesrUli\,,

55 '/;
I=
?i
t;+.e
ev is
4K:w4S.:;..
Y
'f?
:C ., bIR •?? ?O?
17M t
BEGIN PROJECT
+wica:
NC 54
NNARD RD. "
s:-
?1 ?tiL 1'?
CTv
CJ?R?
u 1011
_?Ot.21,763
WILLIAM B. UMSTEAD
STATE PARK
END PROJECT
...4.:ii::. .. _
m,
a
O
ma
Is .w a o „ nu
iaz mss.
NC 54 ---
w~ \ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
I = DIVISION OFFUGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
' ORTR1
.v}:f ? ICE' 3 3 1 MAP
:$n'9
wM CARY
SR 1652 (HARRISON AVE.)
? FROM NC 54 (MAYNARD ROAD) TO 1.40
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U•2904
APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1"= OS MILES FIGURE I
L•ir it t3L1tVL A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
43!.71 ss 173
e
4,340
`260
230 9 nn
2380 68
430
920 DYNASTY DRIVE
0
J
CO
ti
A
O
52 461 ° 619 0880 » 0 1 S?NC 54 MAYNARD ROAD
Ic t `21
11960 1670
11601 ,
2
a
0
H
H
W
N
in
%0
rq
a:
0
r
4

0
E e
a
0
v
LEGEND
NOT TO SCALE
0
- 11 Ri 37 ?
) 450 , • m `2660
CHAPEL HILL ROAD 99 7630 n E? so
00 I?O.rq)
1820 (3270 13560
a
? o
n ?
g co
O .-4
o
0000 = vpd
DHV = Design Hourly Volume (%)
D - Directional (%) .
Direction of D
0.11 Dual Trucks, TTST (%)
arr/pm AM or PM Peak
r, 0- b- "
DHV a-11 D
of MOB
t
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
= DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
TRAFFIC DATA: 1996
CARY
SR 1652 (HARRISON AVE.)
FROM NC 54 (MAYNARD ROAD) TO I-40
wAu COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2804
Sheet 1 of 2 NO SCALE FIGURE 2A
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA
1996 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
SR 1652 HARRISON AVENUE
SHOPPING CENTER
ENTRANCE
? dI9?
J sy .
4050,
WESTON PARKWAY 8280 66?
9 P 751620 / y''o
ti
h
V
n
F C o
a v a
.i ^
N
N
P
I-40
10 Ip) ?
900
g90
6p ? 8500 ,.800
7910 y
ro 9030
0
0 600 00
.? m
0
CO
790
HARRISON OAKS BLVD. ?y0? 91p0 9920
>
??i 1p byti'Z? - ?o yg
8? ?2o4ti Foy
5 y8`000 260) 3p990 10 `ti.
.?0 x2670
fA0 1290
4
G
' 0SAS CAMPUS DRIVE
do
LEGEND
11E pm ?Z11) 65 1920
CARY PARKWAY 2860 0
0
940 rv
N
ti
OJ /
tiy? tip/ \ 4200
.1 250 io
soh o
yi SR 1650 REEDY CREEK ROAD
y9 '
04 0 ?i
b
n
ti
„O
220 n?
it E pm
(ile: _ 'Y r 320
Z 30
460
210
n°
• 4 0
740 WYATT'S POND LANE
410
0
a
w
m
.r
MATCHLINE A
0000 = vpd
DHV Design Hourly Volume (46)
D = Directional (%)
-> Direction of D
92.11 Dual Trucks, TTST (%)
an-/pm AM or PM Peak
n '"yao
DHV a''1 D
NOT TO SCALE
11
\p9
c
1aR771
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
= DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
Q?OFTR
TRAFFIC DATA. 1996
CARY
SR 1652 aLA.MSON AVE.)
FROM NC 54 (MAYNARD ROAD) TO I-40
WAKE COUNTY
71P PROJECT U-2804
I Sheet 2 of 2 NO SCALE FIGURE 2A
MATCH LINE A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
9 53?' .55 212 J p C, lay, NORTH CAROLINA
ti 2016 AVERAGE D AILS' TRAFFIC
IN z89j? J 3' ?8 B ?? SR 1652 I-LAMSON AVENUE
lV !' (.OJ 65
o Sap
DYNASTY DR.
w
w 4563 11 1 5 0.21 55
s2 7018 ' 9782 I NC 54 MAYNARD ROAD
17040
18827 -1 ( (2695
2027
NOT TO SCALE
LEGEND
0000 = vpd
DHV - Design Hourly Volume (%)
D = Directional (%)
-> Direction of D
an Dual Trucks, TTST
(9'0)
am/pm AM ' or PM Peak
n m ?o
DHV ad1 D
N
.r
M
O
Ea ?.
n
pm N
9 . 12.1 "- SS
CHAPEL HILL ROAD 15087 825, _3372
9 m
(2.1) 50
19701 (1' 19510 ?.
3378
P
O Q
N V ?
0
N. HARRISON AVE.
?OOf nONTh
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
o PLANNLNGANDENVIRONMENTALBRANCH
9
P?
\`\?M•OF TPAH5Q0
TRAFFIC DATA. 2016
CARY
SR 1652 (HARRISON AVENUE)
FROM NC 54 O.W-N ARD RD.) TO 1-40
WAU COUN N
TIP PROJECT U-2804
SCALE SHEET 1 OF 2
B
A
N
?h
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA I - ao
/0
2016 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC iQ ?? ?`?98,? 9 F Pm 100
SR 1652 HARRISON AVENUE a
ao --10468 473
SHOPPING CENTER
B ?
909
ss.
s?s8?
WESTON PARKWAY 1j297 1161
8 (prn b05987) ry?04?
O
?O

10 E PR+ 60
(2,l)
CARY PARKWAY
11893
pm 203
it -
(2.11 65
577 °
285
b
f ;
a M
V N
6570)
n°
1-41'?-'p
N
5323, N
'I717
0 9985 0
jJ338
U L
3 ° 475 I N
cn I
N 32
. o ( 6 c
o ?
Py?. /o 12570
O? 4 pm 100
4> 5
'PIT
3
g0748 ?5 \ 1
(4112
0 2382' ?s
3 SAS
f
LEGEND
oiry
tip

d-
??
la10 o
'
i
REEDY CREEK RD.
B c
0
/eye 470
C2'1
88 70
1123 WYATTS POND LN
?68
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
MATCH LINE A
0000 = vpa
DHV = Design Hourly Volume
.D = Directional (%)
Direction of D
a n Dual Trucks, TTST No)
am/pm AM or PM Peak
n --=-w- eo
DHV a•" D
NOT TO SCALE
,b NORTh ,'
/I', 9q ?\ \ NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
I.y V TRANSPORTATION
DINISIONI OF HIGHWAYS
9 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
It
OFTRANS??
TRAFFIC DATA. 2016
CARY
SR 1652 alARRISON AVE, NEl
FROM NC 54 (MAYN ARD RD.) TO I-40
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2804
NO SCALE SHEET 2 OF 2 FIGURE 21
,, .?
'':?,.
`+?'
X
Syr
??:
'`I
;? ? .
.,
.? ??, O ? j
tse
?: ?°?

,,. SU$ o
Otw ??
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
December 20, 1995
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Harrison Avenue from NC 54 to 1-40,
Wake County, U-2804, Federal Aid
Project STP-1652(1), State Project
8.2403701, 96-E-4220-0397
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
We have received the Environmental Assessment (EA) concerning the above project
from the State Clearinghouse.
In terms of historic architectural resources, we were not consulted regarding the
National Register eligibility of the Sorrow-Breeze House (WA 883). We have
reviewed our survey file for this property, and concur with your determination that
it is not eligible for the National Register because it is an average example of the
common bungalow house type. Thus, we believe the EA adequately addresses our
concerns regarding historic architectural resources, as well as archaeological.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act 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
N. Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett
A-1
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 q <R
1Nk- LCr I MA'I114
r Cll.. I'ww-:J I -
U r=
i
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission f
312 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188,919-733-3391
Charles R. Fanwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Office of Legislative and intergovernmental "If-fairs, DEHNR
FROM; David Cox, Highway Project Coordirat r ? Habitat Conservation Program
DATEi December 27, 1995
SUBJECT; North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCI)OT)
Environmental Assessment (EA) for SR1652 (Harrison
Avenue), from Chapel Hill Road to 1.40 in Cary, Wake
County, North- Carolina. TIP No. U-2804, SCIi Project
No. 96-0397.
Staff biologists with the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
have reviewed the subject EA and are familiar with habitat values
in the project area. The purpose of this review was to assess
prcject impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Gur co=e.-.-.s 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).
NCDOT proposes to symmetrically widen SR 1652 to a multi-lane
curb and gutter facility from Chapel Hill Road to I-40. The
project length is approximately 3.4 miles. Wetland and waters
impacts are associated with culvert extensions and minor stream
channel modifications and will likely be covered under nationwide
1404" permits.
A-2
NC DEFT ALPIIN Fax :-ii-J-7 r 1 r a
Memo 2 December 27, 1995
The EA provides an adequate discussion of anticipated impacts
to fish and wildlife resources in the project area. Due to the
developed nature of the project area and the decision to widen an
existing roadway, we feel that impacts to natural rescuices will
be minimal.
We will concur with the EA for this project and anticipate
our concurrence with. the Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI). NCDOT should continue efforts to mir_imize impacts to
stream channels and should employ NCDOT Best Management Practices
to protect off-site resources. Stream channel modifications
should be performed using state-of-the-art stream relocation
techniques.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EA. If we
can by of any further assistance please call me a: (7i5) 52e-
9886.
cc: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh
• i.6.li
W ? 1 'eab
A-3
5`?ofie af,:Noti Ca C
Deoartment.:at=Envi
Health anc VN,dtUra( R
Division of Environmental
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secreta
A. Preston Howard. Jr., P.E., I
If ??
?a
e ant
p
MEK40RANQUM
To: Melba McGee

Through: i
John Dom
From: Eric Galamb I
1
Subject: Improver
EA for Opt 1
Wake County
Stafe,Pt eci DOT No. 8,
E HNR *?6-0397, DEM
19, -1995
11136

TIP ;{# U-2804
The sAect.ddcun-*nt•.has been revie? ed by this office. The Division of
.Environrmentat Manaoement. is•tespon bie tor the issuance otthe Section 401 Water
Quality Ce..rt fica 6n, for:activittes which Impact of- waters of the; state including
wetlands. The docurnent.states that no wetlands will be-Impacted but there will be an
unknown amount of waters will be Itr> ated The following comments are based on
the document review: ;
A) DEM requests that.DOT quanti the impacts to waters.
S} DEM. requests that-.DOT .oomm t to. high quality soli. and ;erosion control
measures for. Crabtree Creek an -its tnbutarles to protect the body contact -
- (Class 8j. existing 'uses.- _ i
Ind®.d?that endo----- t _ EA:bYDEM would not.preclude the denial of
DOTis-rem
a 401 CertHicatiton upon application if : wetland and water impacts have not been
avoided and minimized to the maximu extent practicable.
Questions regarding. the 401 CertifiC
1786) In DENI's Water Quality Envin
sr1652.ea
cc: Eric Als' meyer,"Raleigh COS
Eddie WFalls,- DOT
Monica Swihart
should be directed to. Eric Galamb (733-
ntal Sciences Branch.
P.O. BOX 29636, RdatunttY Alflrmative Action 6np ss
An dal ?PC?
A-a•
i
Tilephone 919-733 7015 FAX [phone]
50% recycled/ 10% pout-consumer paper
i

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
Regulatory Branch
Action ID. 199601876
January 2, 1996
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
50'
GEI VET
J?? `gQU Z
HAG' ter'
ENVIRd??
Dear Mr. Vick:
Reference is made to your letter of November 22, 1995, soliciting comments
on the Federal Environmental Assessment for the proposed widening of S.R. 1652
(Harrison Ave.), from Chapel Hill Road to I-40, near Cary, Wake County, North
Carolina (Federal Aid Project STP-1652(1), NCDOT TIP No. U-2804)
Our review of the project indicates that the proposed work may involve the
discharge of excavated or fill material into waters and/or wetlands. Affected
water bodies include two unnamed tributaries to Black Creek, above headwaters,
and an unnamed tributary to Crabtree Creek, above headwaters.
Prior Department of the Army permit authorization, pursuant to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for the discharge
of excavated or fill material into waters and/or wetlands in conjunction with
this project, including the disposal of construction debris. Under our
mitigation policy, impacts to wetlands should first be avoided or minimized. We
will then consider compensation or mitigation for unavoidable impacts. When
final plans are completed, including the extent and location of any work within
waters of the United States and wetlands, our Regulatory Branch would appreciate
the opportunity to review these plans for a project-specific determination of
Department of the Army permit requirements. It is possible, if the impacts from
the proposed project are minor, that the work could be authorized under one or
more nationwide or regional general permits.
Questions or comments pertaining to permits may be directed to Mr. Eric
Alsmeyer, of the Raleigh Field Office regulatory staff, at
telephone [phone], extension 23.
ERIC C. ALSMEYER
Regulatory Project Manager
A-5
J
)AmEs B. HUNT ]R
GOVERNOR
?.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TIkNSPORTATION
PO. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C 27611-5201
February 2, 1995
MEMORANDUM
GARLAND B. GARRM JR.
SECRETARY
TO: . - Secretary Garland B. Garrett, Jr.
FROM: L. L. Hendricks I.3'• `A
Public Hearing Officer
Citizens Participation Unit
?G E 1 v?
FEB 0. 5 1955
C: -
SUBJECT: Notice of a Public Hearing on the Proposed Widening of Noll ?'? "lam
Avenue (SR 1652) from south of Maynard Road (SR 1747) to north of 1-40
The following Notice is furnished for your information:
U-2804:
LLH:ds
cc: Mr. Charles Edward Grady, Board of Transportation Member
Ms. Juanita D. Shearer-Swink, ASLA, Board of Transportation Member
Mr. Thomas Darden, Board of Transportation Member
Mr. Larry R. Goode, P.E., Ph.D.
Mr. J. D. Goins, P.E.
Mr. B. G. Jenkins, Jr., P.E.
Mr. J. B. Williamson, Jr.
Mr. D. R. Morton, P.E.
Mr. C. W. Leggett, P.E.
Mr. L. IC Barger, P.E.
'Mr. D. E. Burwell, Jr., P.E.
Mr. H. F. Vick, P.E.
Mr. G. T. Shearin, P.E.
Mr. W. R. Brown, P.E.
Mr. J. M. Lynch, P.E.
Mr. Bob Pearson, P.E.
Mr. Robert Mathes
Mr. Danny Rogers
Ms. Pauline Wright
Mr. Everett Ward
Mr. Ron Poole, P.E., Ph.D.
Mr. Carl Parker, Right of Way Agent
FHWA
A-6
The project proposes to symmetrically widen North Harrison Avenue -
from approximately 600 feet south of the Maynard Road Intersection to
approximately 1000 feet north of I-40 - to a multi-lane curb and gutter
roadway.

NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE PROPOSED WIDENING OF NORTH HARRISON AVENUE (SR 1652)
FROM SOUTH OF MAYNARD ROAD (SR 1747) TO NORTH OF I-40
Project 6.2403701 U-2804 Wake County
The North Carolina Department of Transportation will
hold the above public hearing on Tuesday, February 20, 1996
at 7:00 p.m. in the Cary Town Council Chambers located at 316
North Academy Street in Cary.
The hearing will consist of an explanation of the
proposed design and right of way requirements/procedures.
The hearing will be open to those present for statements,
questions, comments, and/or submittal of material pertaining
to the proposed project. Additional material may be
submitted for a period of 10 days from the date of the
hearing to: L. L. Hendricks, NCDOT, Citizens Participation
Unit,' P. O. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611.
The project proposes to symmetrically widen North
Harrison Avenue - from approximately 600 feet south of the
Maynard Road Intersection to approximately 1000 feet north of
I-40 - to a multilane curb and gutter roadway. A four-lane
divided curb and gutter facility with a raised median is
proposed from Maynard Road to Reedy Creek Road; a five-lane
roadway with curb and gutter is-proposed from Reedy Creek
Road to Weston Parkway; and a seven-lane section with curb
and gutter is proposed from Weston Parkway to I-40. Outside
lanes throughout the project will be designed to accommodate
bicycle traffic. The project will also improve North
Harrison Avenue's interchange with I-40.
A map setting forth the location and design and.a copy
of the environmental document - Environmental Assessment -
are available for public review in the Town of Cary's
Engineering Department located 316 North Academy Street
(Building B) in Cary.
Representatives of the Department of Transportation will
be available to discuss the proposed project with those
attending the public hearing. Anyone desiring additional
information may contact Mr. Hendricks at the above mailing
address or by telephone at [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.
A-7
NORTH
HARRISON
AVENUE
FROM MAYNARD ROAD
TO NORTH OF I-40
PROJECT 8.2403701
TIP NO. U-2804
WAKE COUNTY
COMBINED PUBLIC HEARING
CARY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
FEBRUARY 20, 1996
-8
PURPOSE OF PROJECT
The proposed widening/improvements of North Harrison Avenue (SR 1652)
will provide safer and more efficient travel through the area. The
increased capacity of the roadway will make homes, businesses, and
schools more accessible to local traffic. The improved facility will
also enhance the Town of Cary's access to I-40.
PURPOSE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Tonight's hearing is one step in the Department of Transportation's
procedure for making you, the public, a part of the planning process.
The Department of Transportation is soliciting your views on the proposed
widening/improvements of North Harrison Avenue from Maynard Road to I-40.
The Department of Transportation's views on the above project are set
forth in the environmental document - Environmental Assessment. A copy
of this report is available for review in the Town of Cary's Engineering
Department located at 316 North Academy Street in Cary.
YOUR
Now that the opportunity is here, you
your comments and/or questions a part
Transcript. This may be done by havii
them on the comment sheet and leaving
submitting them in writing during the
Hearing.
are urged to participate by making
of the Official Public Hearing
ig them recorded tonight, writing
it in the designated location or by
10 days following the Public
Those wishing to submit written material may do so to:
Mr. L. L. Hendricks
Public Hearing Officer
Division of Highways
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Everyone present is urged to participate in the proceedings. It is
important, however, that THE OPINIONS OF ALL INDIVIDUALS BE RESPECTED
REGARDLESS OF HOW DIVERGENT THEY MAY BE FROM YOUR OWN. Accordingly,
debates, as such, are out of place at public hearings. Also, the public
hearing is not to be used as a POPULAR REFERENDUM to determine the
alignment and design by a majority vote of those present.
WHAT IS DONE WITH THE INPUT?
All input received through the public involvement process will be
reviewed and considered by the Administrative and Engineering staffs of
the Division of Highways for recommendations prior to final decisions
being made.
A-9
LIP AOMMATEWALE 1•-OSMILES .
A-l0
PROJECT INFORMATION
Length 2.6 Miles (4.2 Kilometers)
Typical Section MAYNARD ROAD TO REEDY CREEK ROAD
4-Lanes - Raised Island - Curb & Gutter
REEDY CREEK ROAD TO WESTON PARKWAY
5-Lanes - Curb & Gutter
WESTON PARKWAY TO I-40
7-Lanes - Curb & Gutter
Right of Way Variable - 30.5 Meters to 38.5 Meters + Easements
100 Feet to 125 Feet + Easements
Relocatees Residences - 0
Businesses - 0
Non-Profit - 0
Estimated Cost
MAYNARD ROAD TO WESTON PARKWAY
Right of Way: $ 907,500
Construction: 3,091,928
TOTAL $3,999,428
WESTON PARKWAY TO I-40
Right of Way: $ 248,000
Construction: 3,462,344
TOTAL $3,710,344
Tentative Schedule :
MAYNARD ROAD TO WESTON PARKWAY
Right of Way: December, 1997
Construction: January, 2000
WESTON PARKWAY TO I-40
Right of Way: March, 1996
Construction: September, 1996
STATE-FEDERAL RELATIONSHIP
This proposed project is a Federal-Aid Highway Project and thus will be
constructed under the State-Federal Aid Highway Program. Financing of
this project will be 80% Federal Funds and 20% State Funds. The Board of
Transportation is responsible for the selection and scheduling of
projects on the Federal Aid System, their location, design, and
construction. The Board is responsible for 100% of the project's
maintenance cost after construction. The Federal Highway Administration
is responsible for the review and approval of the previously mentioned
activities to ensure that each Federal Aid Project is designed.,
constructed, and maintained to Federal Aid Standards.
A-11.
N
z
O
H
H
u
w
N
u
H
a
E4
a
Al
H
?o
a
uw
Hu
3Q .
W W
A a ?-?-
>O
?HH
W µq ..
zoo
a

09
A4
CA
to
0
a
O
C4 •S
W4 P,
w>1
E-4 4
c?
pwq w
O
uW .
H?
E c-4j-
W
O
a
Wm
$a
• HQ
v
wA
°a
a
A-12
tot
n
ta
( T.
? R
? N
? o
a
w
E-1
&a n
0
?a
i
H
v
W H
H m
2c 4
W
Pf
zz
E
W ~
0
a
a°
a

COMMENT SHEET
Widening/Improvements of North Harrison Avenue (SR 1652)
From Maynard Road (SR 1747) to I-40
February 20, 1996
U-2804 Wake County Project 8.2403701
ADDRESS:
COMMENTS AND/OR QUESTIONS:
Comments may be mailed to:
L. L. Hendricks, Public Hearing Officer
N. C. Department of Transportation, Division of Highways
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Telephone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
A-13

faom 2A
that realignment was "good -alter- Avenue at another dead end stree
native" that was under serious con- Homestead Drive residents hay

sideratton.
•
similar concerns about the medial
_
• Richard
The. realignment . of , But they maybe geta boost fror.

•- • •
••
•
• certain-
and Weston Par6ray
Drive
Melody Drive homeowners•neal
`
?` •
_ ?
'•"y ''"''? is of tobe'somethingthat Will who would like their own connec
`
..
C • A be looked-at-very strongly, he said lion to Harrison Avenue elicninatic

" in a telephone hiterview.

resum-
d -Drive
h
-Ri
"They don t want traffic gb,.,ini
d
h
'
,;., t•>. •
.` 'k
..., .
• p
ar
c
Shifting
ably would mean taking much of a ;
oo
their neighbor
through
addirig that Melod.,
-Hendricks said
,
f ?. gyp .... , :...' property- owner's Yard at the corner
'
- ,
Drive homeowners ap arenth.
.and Harrison
Drive
of • Richard
' would be content to use Reedl
'
' c•• :.. ::
>..• Avenue.
"Ve think wd can-do it without

" Creek Road.
Engineers had 'desiQneii. the
Sr *am
J
:?°"? Hendricks said,
getting his hause,
dding that the roan had-signed the
;
median crossing at Melody Drive tt
.
state.imaasporfiatiozi a s'are : a
petition against the median.
petition align with a street stub on the other
9. ciumges: iu. *J?e filoith:. •F irther south ' on Harrison side of Harrison Avenue.
.:
?imapravaacte?s,fei??ogew7va.hye , -
ii
cA?e'
ta
l
Tb
:
s
`
t
?ge
s
c
?
e
°ce?

•;.Dr?s?ops;are;.fiiee?ythis month,..
The
state Depatfimertt 'of
1Yaaspe?rcation-feld a.7AV&b*, ::
ing lit :Fsebrueiy.:0a .die7.2:m?lion.
:aidenaig.of crisoa:Aveeae?i i
}: Road:nintt+ward:ttaci?:gh'
the bridge over interstate 40: '
r -Work oai Ze'.1u3dge is sShed e
c oa me :aegmftt:
r
11Qa?afd. d -•,Westonr
•
q, ...
Parkway is.? tt4?
t0 t.+
$Ogtb ? '
amiss rl7SOD It 1118 _ lt:'?
.. TtIL'31ALV,l..DTlVQ rl'eSld : b?oe, ,:
sent a• pietition, t4, is reconsWpr'
' Ali?ut .t? ? are b
wbiclk neat
SAS t*te: qr.
Jac?ge:lmand,: ,R3cd?i'' i}z iV e
i res• e l vvee the .
A-14 -
3-13-1996 2:4SA1.1 FROM JACKIE LARSON 919 677 0163
P. 2

neon
Make changes on North. Harrison
I&e may big bureaucracies, the
state Department of Transportation
has a sometimes well-deserved repu-
tation for ignoring the needs and wish.
es of the average citizen.
-Case in point (and DOT was joined in
its arrogance by several local elected
"Metal lll53t' padple wfm'apot e'ticbi?
the issue last year were against the
connector But now it's apparently
going io be built
But-now the DOT-has a chance to
atone - If only a little bit - for its sins
against the average Joe by making
some slight modifications to plans for a
$7.7 million .°^denintl
Harrison
ep ednewJan. es,whichalabe
added from Maynard Road northward
all the way to interstate 40, should
make it easier to travel Cory's main
northern corridor. And anyone who has
ever been caught In the crush of cats
trying to exit Reedy Creek Road into
the northbound lane every morning
can certainly appreciate the projeeft
°oals.
Plus, with Cary growing ever tittle,
I traffic on North Harrison is only going
to get worse,
But, as is often the case, some e.,dst-
in% residents were ignored in M -P _M ms
version of DOT's plan,
As Richard Drive resident Jackie
Almand said: `Rt seems like they're
accommodating everybody going in
and out of Cary, but not axouunodat-
ing people who live on North Harrison
Avenue."
like something that should be dotle._
Another good change.to the widening
plan, and one which is barked by resi.
dents o? & .couple of other side streets
off North. Harrison, would be to shift a
proposed.median crossing from the
::•Wpartigtiaq:a [otrp of:kl taltiitie9 '.Mfko'.I)t'ive to Homestead Drive.
'
iriconvenienced.Tile plan shows a
HomesteadDdo would face the sam-
b
i
h
median that. would :split ' Tfottb pro
?em w
t
the median as those c
Harrison right -past its intersection Richard Drive. Meanwhile,. Melod,
with their toad: This'wouid keep them Drive is shown to have a the Ran cross.
from turning, lefty either an leaving ing, but the homeowners:there appar-
Richard Drive or.wben returnine
- entry-would rather get rid of their
me. lns e8 , one
yw utd
lio
ed to•

entrance onto North Harrison dropped
execs at -9119 = and often . to stcp.tbrougb trallic. Sounds like the
?! danRet ous?JtM soewhere
m qtr-Wbial Win-Win situation to us.

else on North Hanson each t
ime. ..
In general, the Norib Harrison'
FSYtrma' eile is a possible soli- wideningpiana sounds good- just the.
lion to the problem, one that was sug "thing to handle the incressing traffic,
Bested by some of the Richard Drive
residew& That would be to shift their that all these newcomers are brio ft.
street's Intersection with Notch But such lens also shouldbe cat etldly
Harrison slightly northward, aligning it

ith W :balanced with the needs of ose W
.
h7W Paying
w
eston Parkway, which has "all'
blown intersection complete with traf• ,the WlY or suefi ioa
3 pr?roiectrogect?s _-"
-
fir-fight. ?
The ins desired by die
he resi-
DOT says it wilt look at the idea dents of these side streets along North
As, long as this realignment can lie 'Harrison aredt particularly radical,
accomplished without creatin; worse and indeed could be. looked upon as
problems (such
as destroymg the simpIi' fine-tuning the Dlan :It wrn,1,i 1,P
•
r,n.ww..r lL- -J. -
A-15

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources LT•
•
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor C) C F1
Jonathan B. Howes, , Secretary C
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 19, 1995
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: John DornEp\
From: Eric GalambO
Subject: EA for SR 1652 Improvements
Wake County
State Project DOT No. 8.2403701, TIP # U-2804
EHNR # 96-0397, DEM # 11136
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 of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that no wetlands will be impacted but there will be an
unknown amount of waters will be impacted. The following comments are based on
the document review:
A) DEM requests that DOT quantify the impacts to waters.
B) DEM requests that DOT commit to high quality soil and erosion control
measures for Crabtree Creek and its tributaries to protect the body contact
(Class B) existing uses.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of
a 401 Certification upon application if wetland and water impacts have not been
avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
sr1652.ea
cc: Eric Alsmeyer, Raleigh COE
Eddie McFalls, DOT
Monica Swihart
FAXED
DEC 1 91995
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
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form
? Project located in 7th floor library
1113
N b Co nt : Date: Date Response Due (firm deadline).
Proiect um er: u y.
e-- 3 C 2?
? r FD
DFf,
?WYASw
9951
NvrRaN
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
El Air ? Coastal Management El Water Planning
El Fayetteville
? Water
? Water Resources ? Environmental Health
? Mooresville ?Groundwater Wildlife ?Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer Forest Resources ? Radiation Protection
hi
? W
t ? Recreational Consultant ? Land Resources ? David Foster
ng
on
as ? Coastal Management Consultant arks and Recreation ? Other (specify)
? Wilmington ?Others E vironmental Management
? Winston-Salem PWS Monica Swihart
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient 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
attachedlauthority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) 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
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
PS-toe
Cary
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue)
From Chapel Hill Road to I-40
Wake County
Federal Aid Project STP-1652(1)
State Project 8.2403701
TIP Project U-2804
v
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Alk,
Approved:
10-27-95 C??' Y/. 0
DATE ,;r H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
l.(- 3/ S- , -C
L. af, P.E.
DATE Nich -s-L-.-
Division Administrator, Ft;WA
Cary
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue)
From Chapel Hill Road to I-40
Wake County
Federal Aid Project STP-1652(] )
State Project 8.2403701
TIP Project U-2804
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
OCTOBER, 1995
Documentation Prepared in the Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Edward B. McFalls
Project Planning Engineer
?0?•••pEES?%p ?4,
J. ils Stroud
Prod t Planning Unit Head SEAL
1 6976
Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Manager ''•.,,??`fossilsO ??.
Planning and Environmental Branch
Administrative Action
Environmental Assessment
Prepared by the
Planning and Environmental Branch
of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation
in Consultation with the
Federal Highway Administration
I . Type of Action
This is a Federal Highway Administration Action, Environmental Assessment.
2. Additional Information
The following persons can be contacted for additional information concerning this
proposal and statement:
Mr. Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Telephone: [phone]
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Transportation Building
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Telephone: [phone]
Actions Required by Other Agencies
A United States Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit 33 CFR
330.5(a)(14) is anticipated to be applicable for the proposed project.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management Section 401 Water
Quality General Certification is also required. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires that the state issue or deny water quality certification for any federally permitted
or licensed activity that may result in a discharge into waters of the United States.
4. Description of the Proposed Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to symmetrically
widen SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) to a multilane curb and gutter facility from Chapel Hill
Road to I-40. Between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road) and between SR
1650 (Reedy Creek Road) and Weston Parkway, a five-lane curb and gutter facility with a
continuous left turn lane is proposed. Between NC 54 (Maynard Road) and SR 1650
(Reedy Creek Road), a four-lane divided curb and gutter facility with a 4.9 m (16-foot)
wide raised median is proposed. From Weston Parkway to I-40, a seven-lane curb and
gutter facility, including an exclusive right-turn lane in each direction, is proposed. The
proposed typical sections will provide 4.2 in (14-foot) wide outside lanes to accommodate
bicycle traffic. The proposed project includes a closed loop traffic signal system and will
also improve Harrison Avenue's interchange with I-40. The project is located within the
town limits of Cary in Wake County and is approximately 5.5 km (3.4 miles) in length.
The project's location is shown on the vicinity map included as Figure 1. The proposed
improvements to Harrison Avenue are described in more detail in Section II. of this report
and are shown in Figure 2.
5. Summarv of Beneficial and Adverse Environmental Impacts
The proposed improvements to SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) will benefit the region
and local community by providing safer and more efficient travel through the area. The
increased traffic carrying capacity of the facility will make homes, businesses, and schools
more accessible to local traffic. The improved facility will also enhance the Town of
Cary's access to I-40, making commutes to and from Cary faster and safer.
The proposed project will require the acquisition of approximately 3.0 ha (7.4
acres) of additional right of way and is anticipated to require the relocation of thirteen
residences. No wetlands, federally protected species, archaeological sites, or historic
architectural resources are anticipated to be impacted by the proposed project. The
proposed project in not anticipated to have a significant detrimental effect on the quality of
the human environment.
6. Alternatives Considered
Three alternatives to widen Harrison Avenue to a multilane curb and gutter facility
were studied: symmetrical widening, east-side widening, and west-side widening.
Symmetrical widening is recommended for the entire project length.
The proposed widening project also includes the improvement of the I-40
interchange. Widening the two westbound interchange ramps to accommodate two lanes
of traffic is proposed. Two other interchange alternatives, which utilized loops in the
northeast and northwest quadrants, were considered but are not recommended.
In addition to the above design alternatives, postponement of the proposed action,
a "Do Nothing" alternative, and alternative modes of transportation were considered, but
are not recommended. Additional information on the alternatives studied is included in
Section III. of this report.
7. FederalState and Local Agencies Contacted at the Beginning of this Study
The following municipalities and agencies were contacted for information relating
to the widening of Harrison Avenue. Asterisks denote agencies which submitted written
comments.
Town of Cary *
Wake County Commissioners
Wake County Schools
Triangle J Council of Governments
N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources:
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh Regional Office *
Division of Environmental Health
Division of Land Resources *
N.C. Department of Public Instruction
N.C. Department of Administration -- State Clearinghouse
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers -- Raleigh
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers -- Wilmington
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency -- Atlanta
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service -- Raleigh
8. Special Project Commitments
a. Bicvcle Accommodations
The outside through lanes of Harrison Avenue, from Chapel Hill Road to
just north of the I-40 interchange, are proposed to be 4.2 m (14 feet) wide, the
AASHTO recommended minimum width for lanes shared by motorists and
bicyclists. These wide outside lanes are included in the typical sections provided in
Figure 3. Drainage inlet grates along the proposed project will be designed to
meet the NCDOT Bicycle Unit's safety standards. Please note that this additional
width will not be striped or signed as a bicycle lane.
b. Access to William B. Umstead State Park
William B. Umstead State Park is located just north of Harrison Avenue's
interchange with I-40. The proposed project is not anticipated to have any direct
effect on the park. Indirect impacts will be avoided by maintaining access to
William B. Umstead State Park during project construction.
C. Sidewalks
Existing sidewalks along Harrison Avenue will be replaced as a part of the
proposed project.
The Town of Cary requested the North Carolina Department of
Transportation to consider the construction of additional sidewalks along both
sides of Harrison Avenue. This request is currently being evaluated.
d. Street Liphtin
The Town of Cary is interested in the installation of street lighting along
Harrison Avenue as a part of the subject project. The North Carolina Department
of Transportation's policies do not normally include participation in the cost of
lights along facilities like Harrison Avenue. The Town of Cary would be
responsible for the cost of installing street lighting. In addition, Cary would be
responsible for maintaining street lighting and for purchasing power for the lighting
utility. The Town of Cary should make a formal request to the utility company for
street lighting. The utility company should then submit lighting plans and an
encroachment application for approval by the Right of Way Branch of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation.
9. Anticipated Desisn Exceptions
A design exception is needed in order to retain the existing vertical clearance of
Bridge Number 138 over I-40. Bridge Number 138 has only 4.8 in (15.75 feet) of vertical
clearance over 1-40. The minimum clearance for bridges to remain in place over
interstates, according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) Standards, is 4.9 in (16 feet). No accidents involving vehicles
striking the bridge were reported between January 1, 1992 and April 30, 1995.
10. Basis for Environmental Assessment
On the basis of planning and environmental studies, it is anticipated this project
will not have a significant detrimental effect on the quality of the human environment. The
proposed project will cause no significant changes in route classification and land use and
is not controversial in nature. The project has been reviewed by federal, state, and local
agencies, and no objections have been raised. Moreover, no mayor objections to the
project were voiced at the Citizens Informational Workshop held on August 30, 1994.
For these reasons, an Environmental Assessment is applicable to the project.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. General Description of the Project 1
B. Project Status and Historical Resume 1
C. Existing Conditions 2
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied 2
2. Route Classification 2
3. Existing Typical Section 2
4. Existing Right of Way 3
5. Access Control 3
6. Speed Limits 3
7. Bridges and Drainage Structures 3
8. Traffic Data 3
9. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature 4
10. Intersecting Roadways 4
11. Degree of Roadside Interference 5
12. Railroad Crossings 5
13. School Bus Data 5
14. Airports 5
15. Geodetic Markers 5
D. Capacity Analysis 5
1. Mainline Analysis 5
2. Intersection Analyses 6
3. Mainline 1-40 Analysis 7
E. Accident Analysis 7
F. Project Termini 8
G. Thoroughfare Plan 8
H. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community 9
I. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the Area 9
II. Proposed Improvements 9
A. General Description 9
B. Length of the Proposed Project 9
C. Proposed Typical Section 9
D. Design Speed 10
E. Right of Way 10
F. Access Control 11
G. Intersection / Interchange Treatments 11
1. 1-40 Interchange 11
2. At-Grade Intersections 11
3. Closed Loop Traffic Signal System 12
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
PAGE
III.
IV
H. Bridges and Drainage Structures 12
I. Special Permits Required 13
J. Changes in the State Highway System 13
K. Bicycle Accommodations 13
L. Sidewalks 14
M. Street Lighting 14
N. Landscaping 14
0. Noise Barriers 15
P. Degree of Utility Conflicts 15
Q. Cost Estimates 15
R. Anticipated Design Exceptions 15
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION 15
A. Recommended Improvements 15
B. Design Alternatives 16
1. Widening Alternatives 16
2. Alternative Interchange Designs 16
C. Postponement of the Proposed Action 17
D. "Do Nothing" Alternative 17
E. Alternative Modes of Transportation. 17
1. Bus Service 17
2. Carpool / Vanpool Programs 17
SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 17
A. Social Effects 17
1. Land Use 17
a. Existing Land Use 17
b. Existing Zoning 18
C. Proposed Land Use 18
d. Project Compatibility with Local Plans 19
2. Neighborhood Characteristics 19
3. Relocatees 19
4. Public Facilities 20
5. Historic and Cultural Resources 20
a. Architectural / Historical Resources 20
b. Archaeological Resources 22
B. Section 4(f) Properties 22
C. Economic Effects 23
D. Environmental Effects 23
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
PAGE
1. Biological Resources 23
a. Terrestrial Communities 23
b. Aquatic Communities 24
C. Anticipated Impacts: Biotic Resources 26
d. Rare and Protected Species 27
2. Soils 31
3. Surface Waters and Wetlands 32
4. Permits 32
5. Flood Hazard Evaluation 33
6. Water Resources 33
a. Stream Characteristics 34
b. Best Usage Classification 34
C. Water Quality 34
d. Anticipated Impacts: Water Resources 35
7. Farmland 35
8. Highway Traffic Noise / Construction Noise Analysis 35
a. Characteristics of Noise 36
b. Noise Abatement Criteria 37
c. Ambient Noise Levels 37
d. Future Noise Levels 37
e. Traffic Noise Impact Analysis 39
f. "Do Nothing" Alternative 40
g. Construction Noise 40
h. Summary 40
9. Air Quality Analysis 40
10. Stream Modification 43
11. Hazardous Materials 43
12. Geotechnical Impacts 44
13. Construction Impacts 44
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION 46
A. Comments Received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies 46
B. Citizens Informational Workshop 46
C. Publi c Hearing 47
FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Aerial Mosaic
Figure 3 Proposed Typical Sections
Figure 4A Traffic Data: 1996
Figure 4B Traffic Data: 2016
Figure 5 Thoroughfare Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT.)
PAGE
Figure 6 Other TIP Projects in the Area
Figure 7 100-Year Floodplain: Black Creek Tributary 50 m south of
Dynasty Drive
Figure 8 100-Year Floodplain: Black Creek Tributary 80 m south of
Wyatt's Pond Lane
Figure 9 Proposed Signalized Intersection Configurations
TABLES
Table 1 1996-2002 TIP Funding and Schedules 2
Table 2 Levels of Service on Harrison Avenue 6
Table 3 Levels of Service for Signalized Intersections 6
Table 4 Accident Rate Summary 7
Table 5 Project Costs 15
Table 6 Alternative Cost and Relocatee Comparison 16
Table 7 Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Resources 26
Table 8 Federally Protected Species 27
Table 9 Federal Candidate / NC Protected Species for
County 31
Table 10 Prominent Soils in the Project Area 32
Table 11 Worst Case Air Quality Scenario 42
APPENDICES
Appendix A Relocation Report
Appendix B Discussion of the Division of Highways Relocation Program
Appendix C Comments Received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies
Appendix D Citizens Informational Workshop Information
Appendix E Traffic Noise Analysis Tables
Cary
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue)
From Chapel Hill Road to I-40
Wake County
Federal Aid Project STP-1652(1)
State Project 8.2403701
TIP Project U-2804
L NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. General Description of the Proiect
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to symmetrically
widen SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) to a multilane curb and gutter facility from Chapel Hill
Road to I-40. Between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road) and between
SR 1650 (Reedy Creek Road) and Weston Parkway, a five-lane curb and gutter facility
with a continuous left turn lane is proposed. Between NC 54 (Maynard Road) and
SR 1650 (Reedy Creek Road), a four-lane divided curb and gutter facility with a 4.9 m
(16-foot) wide raised median is proposed. From Weston Parkway to I40, a seven-lane
curb and gutter facility, including an exclusive right-turn lane in each direction, is
proposed. The proposed typical sections will provide 4.2 m (14-foot) wide outside lanes
to accommodate bicycle traffic. The proposed project will also improve Harrison
Avenue's interchange with I40. A closed loop traffic signal system is proposed for
Harrison Avenue. The project is located within the town limits of Cary in Wake County
and is approximately 5.5 km (3.4 miles) in length. The project's location is shown on the
vicinity map included as Figure 1. The proposed improvements to Harrison Avenue are
described in more detail in subsequent sections of this report and are shown in Figure 2.
The proposed project will require approximately 3.0 ha (7.4 acres) of additional
right of way and is anticipated to require the relocation of thirteen residences. No
wetlands, federally protected species, archaeological sites, or historic architectural
resources are anticipated to be impacted by the proposed project.
The proposed project has been divided into three segments: TIP Projects U-2804
A, U-2804 B, and U-2804 C. TIP Project U-2804 A includes the improvements to SR
1652 (Harrison Avenue) between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road). TIP
Project U-2804 B includes the improvements to SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) between
NC 54 and Weston Parkway. TIP Project U-2804 C includes improvements between
Weston Parkway and the I40 interchange.
B. Project Status and Historical Resume
The proposed project is included in the 1996-2002 NCDOT Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). The 1996-2002 TIP includes $ 3,510,000 for right of way
acquisition, which is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1996, and $ 6,500,000 for
construction, which is also scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1996. Thus, the TIP includes
a total funding of $ 10,010,000 for the proposed project. The 1996-2002 Transportation
Improvement Program funding and schedules for the project segments (as described in
Section I. A.) are included in Table 1.
Construction and right of way cost estimates for the project were updated during
the planning process. The current right of way cost estimate is $ 3,502,800. The
construction cost estimate is $ 7,660,960. The total estimated cost of the proposed
project is $ 11,163,760, which is $ 1,153,760 more than the amount appropriated in the
TIP.
TABLE 1. 1996-2002 TIP FUNDING AND SCHEDULES
PROJECT SEGMENT RIGHT OF WAY CONSTRUCTION
U-2804 A $ 2,350.000 in Post Years * S 900,000 in post Years'
U-2804 B $ 910.000 in FY 1998 $ 2,500.000 in FY 2000
U-2804 C $ 250,000 in FY 1996 $ 3,100,000 in FY 1996
TOTAL TIP FUNDING $ 3.510.000 $ 6,500.000
*Note: Post year projects are projects which are not currently funded within the years scheduled in the TIP. However, the TIP is
update each year, and, as funds become available, post year projects may be funded.
C. Existing Conditions
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied
Planning and environmental studies were conducted on SR 1652 (Harrison
Avenue) from Chapel Hill Road to I40, a length of 5.5 km (3.4 miles).
2. Route Classification
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) is classified as an urban minor arterial in the
statewide functional classification system.
3. Existing Typical Section
The typical section of the existing roadway varies along the length of the
project. Between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road), SR 1652
(Harrison Avenue) is a four-lane curb and gutter facility with a 4.6 m (48-foot) wide
travelway (width between curb faces).
From NC 54 (Maynard Road) to Weston Parkway, SR 1652 (Harrison.
Avenue) is a two lane road with a 2.3 m (24-foot) travelway. Intersection
approaches at Maynard Road, Appletree Drive, Cary Parkway, Reedy Creek Road,
Pralrieview Drive, Dynasty Drive, and Weston Parkway have been widened to
provide left turn lanes.
Between Weston Parkway and I40, SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) is a
multilane curb and gutter facility with two through lanes in each direction, a
continuous left turn lane, and exclusive right-turn lanes at Weston Parkway, SAS
Campus Drive, Harrison Oaks Boulevard, and the entrances to the Harrison Square
shopping center.
Through the I-40 interchange, SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) has two 3.6 m
(12-foot) lanes. The roadway is carried over the interstate on a two-lane bridge
with a 10.4 m (34-foot) clear roadway width.
4. Existing Right of Wa
The existing right of way width on SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) varies from
19.8 m (65 feet) to 36.6 in (120 feet). Between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54
(Maynard Road), the North Carolina Department of Transportation owns 19.8 in
(65 feet) of right of way, 10.7 in (35 feet) west of the roadway centerline and 9.1 in
(30 feet) east of the roadway centerline.
From NC 54 (Maynard Road) north to SR 1719 (Reedy Creek Church
Road), the existing right of way is 30.5 in (100 feet) wide and is symmetrical about
the existing centerline of SR 1652.
Between SR 1719 (Reedy Creek Church Road) and I-40, SR 1652 (Harrison
Avenue) is located on a 36.6 m (120 foot) wide right of way. The right of way is
symmetric about the centerline of the roadway.
5. Access Control
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) has no access control except at its interchange
with I-40. The North Carolina Department of Transportation has full access control
at the interchange (see Figure 2).
6. Speed Limits
The speed limit on SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) is 72 km/h (45 mph).
7. Bridges and Drainage Structures
Three structures are located on SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) within the
project limits.
Bridge Number 138 carries two lanes of traffic over I-40 on 10.4 m (34 feet)
of clear roadway width. The existing structure is a continuous span bridge 90 m
(295 feet) in length. The minimum vertical clearance under the bridge is 4.8 m
(15.75 feet) and the minimum horizontal clearance of each span across traffic is 24.7
m (81 feet). The sufficiency rating for the bridge is 88.5 out of a possible 100 points.
The bridge was constructed in 1969 and has an estimated remaining life of 21 years.
A 7' X 10' reinforced concrete box culvert to accommodate a tributary to
Black Creek is located approximately 50 m (164 feet) south of Dynasty Drive.
A 12' X 4' reinforced concrete box culvert to accommodate a minor
stream which carries overflow from a small pond east of Harrison Avenue is
located approximately 80 m (262 feet) south of Wyatt's Pond Lane.
8. Traffic Data
In 1996, the anticipated construction year, the average daily traffic along
the proposed project is anticipated to vary from 34,080 vehicles per day (just south
of the I-40 interchange) to 13,710 vehicles per day (between Chapel Hill Road and
NC 54). In 2016, the average daily traffic along this section of SR 1652 is
anticipated to vary from 44,850 vehicles per day (just south of the I-40
interchange) to 19,790 vehicles per day (between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54).
Projected traffic volumes for the years 1996 and 2016 are shown in Figures 4A
and 4B, respectively. Truck percentages, directional distribution, and the design
hour factor for each segment of Harrison Avenue are also shown.
9. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) traverses rolling terrain. For the most par"
sight distance is not limited by horizontal and vertical curves.
10. Intersecting Roadway
Except for the interchange at I-40, all intersections along SR 1652
(Harrison Avenue) are at-grade.
The intersections of SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) with Chapel Hill Road,
NC 54 (Maynard Road), Dynasty Drive, Weston Parkway, the entrance to
Harrison Square, SAS Campus Drive, and the westbound I-40 ramp terminal are
signalized. The remaining intersections along Harrison Avenue are stop sign
controlled.
Left turn lanes have been constructed on SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) at
each of the signalized intersections. Left turn lanes have also been constructed on
Harrison Avenue at the following unsignalized intersections: SR 1650 (Reedy
Creek Road), Livingstone Drive, Cary Parkway, SR 1719 (Reedy Creek Church
Road), SR 3005 (Richard Drive), and Harrison Oaks Boulevard. A left turn lane
has also been constructed to serve several businesses located just south of NC 54
(Maynard Road).
Exclusive right turn lanes have been constructed on northbound Harrison
Avenue at the following intersections: NC 54 (Maynard Road), SR 1719 (Ready
Creek Church Road), SAS Campus Drive, and the eastbound I40 entrance ramp.
Exclusive right turn lanes have been constructed on southbound Harrison Avenue
at the following intersections: Harrison Oaks Boulevard, the entrance to Harrison
Square, and Weston Parkway.
NC 54 (Maynard Road), Dynasty Drive, Cary Parkway, SR 1719 (Reedy
Creek Church Road), Weston Parkway, the entrance to the Harrison Square
shopping center, Harrison Oaks Boulevard, SAS Campus Drive, and the eastbound
I-40 exit ramp all have multilane approaches at their intersections with Harrison
Avenue. Maynard Road has a through lane, a left turn lane and a through-right
lane on each approach. Dynasty Drive, SAS Campus Drive, the entrance to
Harrison Square, and the eastbound I40 exit ramp all have a left turn lane and a
through-right lane on each of their approaches. Cary Parkway, Reedy Creek
Church Road, Weston Parkway, and Harrison Oaks Boulevard each have one left-
turn lane and one right-turn lane. All other roadways which intersect Harrison
Avenue have one-lane approaches.
All of the I40 interchange ramps are all single-lane ramps. The eastbound
I40 exit ramp mentioned above widens in the immediate vicinity of its intersection
with Harrison Avenue.
4
11. Degree of Roadside Interference
Roadside interference is moderate along Harrison Avenue. Several
roadways and driveways intersect SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue).
12. Railroad Crossings
Within the project limits, SR 1652. (Harrison Avenue) does not cross any
railroads.
13. School Bus Data
Fifteen school buses use SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) between Chapel Hill
Road and I40 twice daily. The proposed project, however, is not anticipated to
adversely affect school bus traffic.
14. Airports
Raleigh-Durham International Airport is located approximately 4.8 km (3
miles) northwest of the 1-40 / Harrison Avenue interchange. The proposed project
is not anticipated to affect the airport
15. Geodetic Markers
No geodetic markers are located in the vicinity of the proposed project.
D. Capacity AnWysis
The traffic carrying capacity of a roadway is described with a level of service
rating, a qualitative measure of the roadway's operational conditions and how these
conditions are perceived by motorists. Level of service is determined using conditions
such as speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, convenience, and
safety. Six levels of service are defined and are assigned letter designations from A to F.
Level of service A represents the best operating conditions, and level of service F
represents the worst operating conditions.
Using the traffic data described in Section 1. C. 8. and included in Figures 4A and
4B, capacity analyses for the years 1996 and 2016 were performed for SR 1652 (Harrison
Avenue). These capacity analyses were done using both the existing and proposed lane
configurations.
1. Mainline Analysis
Mainline capacity analyses were performed for Harrison Avenue. The
results of these analyses are summarized in Table 2.
TABLE 2. LEVELS OF SERVICE ON HARRISON AVENUE
SEGMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
1996 2016 1996 2016
Chapel Hill Road TO
MAYNARD ROAD B B A 13
MAYNARD ROAD TO
DYNASTY DRIVE E F B C
DYNASTY DRIVE TO CARY
PARKWAY E F B C
CARY PARKWAY TO
WESTON PARKWAY F F C D
WESTON PARKWAY TO 140 D E D I
These results illustrate that the proposed project will improve the level of
service on Harrison Avenue. Much of Harrison Avenue will operate at level of
service F by the design year 2016 if the proposed improvements are not made.
With the proposed improvements, the facility will operate between levels of service
B and E in the design year.
2. Intersection Analyses
Capacity analyses were also performed for the major intersections along
the project. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 3.
TABLE 3. LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS
INTERSECTING EXISTING CONDMONS WITH THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
ROAD 1996 2016 1996 2016
Chapel Hill Road D E B C
MAYNARD ROAD D F B C
DYNASTY DRIVE E F B C
WESTON PARKWAY B E B E
SHOPPING CENTER
ENTRANCE B F B D
SAS CAMPUS DRIVE D F C D
WESTBOUND 140
RAMP TERMINAL F F C D
As indicated by the increase in the levels of service, the proposed project
will improve the intersections along Harrison Avenue. Without the proposed
improvements, the levels of service of the intersections along Harrison Avenue
vary from E to F in the design year. With the proposed improvements, the levels
of service of the intersections vary from C to E in the design year.
The proposed closed loop traffic signal system will further enhance the
traffic carrying capacity of Harrison Avenue. This system will be traffic responsive
and will help optimize traffic flow along Harrison Avenue.
3. Mainline I-40 Analysis
The average daily traffic volume on I-40 in the year 1996 is predicted to
range from 110,900 vehicles per day (vpd) east of Harrison Avenue to 107,900
vpd west of Harrison Avenue. In the year 2016, the average daily traffic volume
on I-40 is predicted to range from 126,900 vpd east of Harrison Avenue to
123,700 vpd west of Harrison Avenue. In 1996, the existing six-lane divided
facility is anticipated to operate at level of service F. In 2016, the facility will
continue to operate at level of service F, unless improvements are made to the I40
corridor.
Currently, an I-40 widening project (I-2204) is included in the
Transportation Improvement Program (see Section I. I. of this report). TIP
Project I-2204 calls for the widening of I-40 from the Durham Freeway (NC 147)
to Wade Avenue west of Raleigh to an eight lane facility. TIP Project I-2204 is
shown as an "identified future need" in the 1996-2002 NCDOT Transportation
Improvement Program. Because of the high traffic volumes on I-40, however, the
facility is still anticipated to operate at level of service F in the year 2016, even if
TIP Project I-2204 were constructed.
E. Accident Analysis
An accident study for SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) was conducted by the Accident
Studies Section of the Traffic Engineering Branch of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation for the time period from May 1, 1991 to April 30, 1995. A summary of
the accident rates (in number of accidents per 100 million vehicle miles) is presented in
Table 4. The existing facility consists of several typical sections (see Section. I. C. 3. of
this report). Table 4 presents the accident rates for Harrison Avenue for each typical
section. Table 4 also presents the average statewide accident rates for two-lane and
multilane undivided urban secondary routes.
TABLE 4. ACCIDENT RATE SUMMARY
Accident Rate Along Harrison Avenue Average Statewide Rates
Type Chapel Hill Road to
NC 54
(4-lane undivided)
(ACC/100MVM)' NC 54 to Weston
Parkway (2 Ian-)
(ACC/100MVM Weston Parkway to
I-40 (5-lane)
(ACC/100MVM)' Two-lane urban
secondary roads
(ACC/100MVM)' 44 lane undivided
secondary roads
(ACC/100MVM)'
Total 727 206 966 317.3 347.5
Fatal 0 0 12 1.1 0.8
Non-fatal injury 291 87 290 133.3 138.5
Wet 118 48 85 67.0 84.0
Night 146 52 217 64.0 68.7
ACC/100MVM = Accidents per 100 million vehicle miles
A total of 211 accidents were reported on SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) between
Chapel Hill Road and I-40 during the study period. One of these accidents was fatal.
Between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road), SR 1652 (Harrison
Avenue) is a four-lane undivided roadway. The total accident rate on this section of SR
1652 (Harrison Avenue) (727 ACC / 100MVM) is over twice the statewide average
accident rate for urban undivided secondary routes with four or more lanes (347.5 ACC /
I00MVM). Eighty accidents (no fatalities) were reported along this section of SR 1652
(Harrison Avenue).
Between NC 54 (Maynard Road) and Weston Parkway, SR 1652 (Harrison
Avenue).is a two lane roadway. The total accident rate on this section of SR 1652
(Harrison Avenue) (206 ACC / 100MVM) is lower than the statewide average accident
rate for urban two-lane secondary routes (317.3 ACC / 100MVM). Fifty one accidents
(no fatalities) were reported along this section of SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue).
Between Weston Parkway and I40, SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) is a multilane
facility. The total accident rate on this section of SR 1652 (966 ACC / 100 MVM) is over
twice the statewide average for urban undivided secondary routes with four or more lanes
(347.5 ACC / 100 MVM). Eighty accidents (one fatality) were reported along this section
of Harrison Avenue.
Accidents on I-40 in the vicinity of Bridge Number 138, the structure that carries
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) over the interstate, were also studied. No accidents involving
vehicles striking the bottom of the bridge were reported between January 1, 1992 and
April 30, 1995.
Accidents involving rearend collisions with slowing or stopped vehicles accounted
for 42 percent of the accidents on Harrison Avenue. Seventeen percent of the accidents
involved left-turning vehicles, and eleven percent of the accidents were angle collisions.
One head-on accident was reported along this section of Harrison Avenue.
The increases in capacity that will result from the proposed improvements will
reduce the queuing of traffic. The proposed continuous left turn lane and the proposed
exclusive right turn lanes between Weston Parkway and I-40 will remove slower turning
traffic from the path of through traffic. These improvements will enhance safety along; the
project.
F. Proiect Termini
The southern terminal of the proposed project is the intersection of SR 1652
(Harrison Avenue) and Chapel Hill Road. South of this terminal, Harrison Avenue is a
four-lane curb and gutter facility with 14.6 m (48 feet) between its curb faces.
The northern terminal of the proposed project is just north of Harrison Avenue's
interchange with I40.
G. Thoroughfare Plan
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) is shown as a major thoroughfare on the Wake
County Thoroughfare Plan, which was approved by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation on August 14, 1992. A copy of the thoroughfare plan is included as
Figure 5.
H. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community
The proposed improvements to SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) will benefit the region
and local community by providing safer and more efficient travel through the area. The
increased capacity of the facility will make homes, businesses, and schools more accessible
to local traffic. The improved facility will also enhance the Town of Cary's access to I-40,
making it easier for commutes to and from Cary.
Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the Area
TIP Project I-2204 calls for the widening of I40 to eight lanes from NC 147
(Durham Freeway) in Research Triangle Park to the Bradshaw Freeway at Wade Avenue
west of Raleigh. This widening project is an "identified future need" and is not scheduled
for right of way acquisition or construction in the 1996-2002 Transportation Improvement
Program.
As a part of TIP Project U-2804, the existing structure over I-40 will be
rehabilitated and widened to accommodate five lanes. The existing horizontal clearance
under the bridge over I-40, 25 m (81 feet) in each direction, will accommodate the eight
lane facility proposed under TIP Project I-2204.
II. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
A. General Descrimion
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to symmetrically
widen.SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) to a multilane curb and gutter facility from Chapel Hill
Road to I-40. Between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road) and between
SR 1650 (Reedy Creek Road) and Weston Parkway, a five-lane curb and gutter facility
with a continuous left turn lane is proposed. Between NC 54 (Maynard Road) and
SR 1650 (Reedy Creek Road), a four-lane divided curb and gutter facility with a 4.9 m
(16-foot) wide raised median is proposed. From Weston Parkway to I-40, a seven-lane
curb and gutter facility, including an exclusive right turn lane in each direction, is
proposed. The proposed typical sections will provide 4.2 m (14-foot) wide outside lanes
to accommodate bicycle traffic. The proposed project includes a closed loop traffic signal
system and will also improve Harrison Avenue's interchange with I40. The project is
located within the town limits of Cary in Wake County and is approximately 5.5 km (3.4
miles) in length. The project's location is shown on the vicinity map included as Figure 1.
The proposed improvements to Harrison Avenue are described in more detail in
subsequent sections of this report and are shown in Figure 2.
B. Length of the Proposed Project
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) will be widened from Chapel Hill Road to I-40, a
length of 5.5 km (3.4 miles).
C. Proposed Typical Section
Between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road) (0.8 mile), SR 1652
(Harrison Avenue) will be widened symmetrically to a five-lane curb and gutter facility.
20.7 m (68 feet) will be provided between the curb faces in order to accommodate three
3.6 m (12-foot) interior lanes and two 4.2 m (14-foot) outside lanes. The wide outside
lanes are recommended to better accommodate bicycle traffic. Figure 3 details this typical
section (see Typical Section 1).

Between NC 54 (Maynard Road) and SR 1650 (Reedy Creek Road) (1.0 mile),
Harrison Avenue will be widened symmetrically to a four-lane divided curb and gutter
facility with a 4.9 m (16-foot) wide raised median. Each travelway will measure 8.8 m (29
feet) between curb faces. A 3.6 m (12-foot) wide inside lane and a 4.2 m (14-foot) wide
outside lane will be provided in each direction. Left turn lanes and median crossovers will
be provided at Maynard Road, Dynasty Drive, and Wyatt's Pond Lane. No other median
openings are proposed along this section of Harrison Avenue. This design is included in
Figure 3 (see Typical Section 2). The proposed median will control turning movements in
the area and improve the movement of through traffic.
Between SR 1650 (Reedy Creek Road) and Weston Parkway (0.8 mile), Harrison
Avenue will be widened symmetrically to the same five-lane curb and gutter typical section
proposed for Harrison Avenue between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road)
(see Typical Section 1 in Figure 3).
Between Weston Parkway and I-40 (0.8 mile), no additional through lanes are
proposed for Harrison Avenue. In this area, Harrison Avenue will be widened in order to
provide two through lanes in each direction, a continuous left turn lane, and a continuous
right turn lane in each direction. This widening will be'done symmetrically. The outside
through lanes along this section of the project will be 4.2 m (14 feet) wide to
accommodate bicycle traffic. The proposed northbound right turn lane will end at the
eastbound I-40 entrance ramp. The proposed southbound right turn lane will end at
Weston Parkway. This typical section is shown in Figure 3 as Typical Section 3.
The structure over 1-40 (Bridge Number 138) will be widened to accommodate
five lanes. The bridge will have 22 m (72 feet) of clear roadway width, enough to carry
two southbound through lanes, one northbound through lane, and two northbound left
turn lanes across I40, as well as a 1.2 m (4-foot) wide monolithic island separating
northbound and southbound traffic. The structure over I-40 will also include 1.5 m (5-
foot) sidewalks on each side of the travelway.
D. Design Speed
The proposed design speed for the project is 80 km/h (50 mph).
E. Right of Way
The proposed project is anticipated to require approximately 3.0 ha (7.4 acres) of
additional right of way to accommodate the proposed improvements.
Between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road), approximately 4.6 m (15
feet) of additional right of way will be needed on the west side of SR 1652 (Harrison
Avenue) and approximately 6.1 m (20 feet) of additional right of way will be needed on
the east side of SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue). The new right of way width between Chapel
Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road) will be approximately 30.5 m (100 feet).
Between NC 54 (Maynard Road) and SR 1719 (Reedy Creek Road),
approximately 2.3 m (7.5 feet) of additional right of way will be needed on each side of
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue). The new right of way width between NC 54 (Maynard
Road) and SR 1719 (Reedy Creek Church Road) will be approximately 35 m (115 feet).
No new right of way is needed between SR 1719 (Reedy Creek Road) and Weston
Parkway; the existing 36.6 m (120-foot) right of way is enough to accommodate the
proposed improvements to this section of Harrison Avenue.
10
Between Weston Parkway and I-40, approximately 7.5 feet of additional right of
way will be needed on each side of SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue). The new right of way
width between Weston Parkway and I-40 will be approximately 41 in (135 feet).
No additional right of way is anticipated to be needed to widen the westbound I-40
entrance and exit ramps to two lanes (see Section II. G. 1. of this report).
F. Access Control
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) has no control of access except at its interchange with
I-40, which is fully controlled. No changes in access control are proposed as a part of this
project.
G. Intersection/ Interchange Treatments
1. I-40 Interchange
In order to improve the level of service of the I-40 / Harrison Avenue
interchange, dual left turn lanes are proposed to be constructed on Harrison
Avenue to serve northbound traffic turning left onto the westbound I-40 entrance
ramp. This ramp will be widened a full lane width for its entire length. The
westbound I-40 exit ramp'will also be widened to accommodate dual left turn
lanes which will serve traffic turning onto southbound Harrison Avenue.
In order to accommodate the dual left-turning traffic at the westbound I-40
ramp terminal, the structure over I-40 is proposed to be rehabilitated and widened
to five lanes. The widened structure is proposed to have 22 in (72 feet) of clear
roadway width which will accommodate the northbound dual left turn lanes,
provide two southbound lanes to receive the two lanes of left-turning traffic
coming from the westbound 1-40 exit ramp, and provide one exclusive northbound
through lane. The outside lanes on the structure will be 4.2 in (14 feet) wide to
accommodate bicycle traffic. The exclusive northbound through lane will separate
the trucks which travel north through the interchange to the Wake Stone
Corporation from the left-turning traffic. It will also serve vehicles bound for
William B. Umstead State Park. The structure over I40 will also have 1.5 in (5
feet) of additional width on both sides of the travelway to accommodate proposed
sidewalk. A 42-inch high three-bar handrail is proposed.
No configuration changes are currently proposed for the eastbound I-40
ramp terminal.
2. At-Grade Intersections
Several intersections will be modified or improved by the proposed project.
These improvements are described below.
The intersection of Harrison Avenue and NC 54 (Maynard Road) will be
improved by the construction of a second left turn lane on eastbound Maynard
Road. Also, an exclusive right turn lane will be constructed on westbound
Maynard Road.
The intersection of Harrison Avenue and Melody Lane will be modified as
a result of the proposed project. A median opening is not proposed at Melody
Lane. This intersection will have only right-in / right-out access.
11
Harrison Avenue's intersection with Cary Parkway will be improved by the
addition of a proposed traffic signal. This signal will be incorporated into the
proposed closed loop traffic signal system. Double left turn lanes will be provided
on northbound Harrison Avenue to serve traffic turning onto Cary Parkway. In
addition, providing double left turn lanes on eastbound Cary Parkway will be
considered during final design.
Harrison Avenue's intersection with Weston Parkway will be improved by
the construction of double left turn lanes to serve traffic moving from northbound
Harrison Avenue to Weston Parkway. Double left turning lanes will also be
constructed on eastbound Weston Parkway.
The westbound ramp terminal of Harrison Avenue's interchange with I-40
will also be improved. Dual left turn lanes will be constructed to serve traffic
moving from northbound Harrison Avenue to westbound I-40. Dual left turn lanes
will also be constructed to serve as traffic moving from westbound I-40 to
southbound Harrison Avenue.
The proposed intersection configuration for each signalized intersection is
shown in Figure 9.
Closed Loop Traffic Signal System
A closed loop traffic signal system is proposed for SR 1652 (Harrison
Avenue). This traffic signal system will coordinate the traffic signals along the
project and will allow traffic to proceed through the area with fewer delays. The
signals to be incorporated into the closed loop system are located at the Harrison
Avenue intersections listed below:
Chapel Hill Road
NC 54 (Maynard Road)
Dynasty Drive
Cary Parkway (new signal proposed as a part of this project)
Weston Parkway
Entrance to Harrison Square Shopping Center
SAS Campus Drive
Westbound I-40 Ramp Terminal
These signal locations are shown on Figure 2.
H. Bridges and Drainage Structures
Three structures are located on SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) within the project
limits.
The structure over I40, Bridge Number 138, will be widened to accommodate five
lanes. The bridge will have 22 m (72 feet) of clear roadway width, enough to carry two
southbound through lanes, one northbound through lane, and two northbound left turn lanes
across I-40, and a 1.2 m (4-foot) wide monolithic island to separate northbound and
southbound vehicles. The outside lanes on the structure will be 4.2 m (14 feet) wide to
accommodate bicycle traffic. The proposed structure will also provide 1.5 m (5 feet)
sidewalks. A 42-inch high (1.07 m) three-bar handrail will be installed on each side of the
widened structure.
12
The minimum vertical clearance under Bridge Number 138 is 4.8 m (15.75 feet) and
the minimum horizontal clearance is 24.7 m (81 feet). Bridges over interstates must have at
least 4.9 m (16 feet) of vertical clearance, according to AASHTO standards, thus, a design
exception will be required to retain the existing vertical clearance (see Section II. R.). TIP
Project I-2204 calls for widening I-40 to eight lanes (see Section I. I. of this report); the
existing horizontal clearance of the structure is adequate for this widening. If, in the future,
a decision is made to widen I-40 to ten lanes (five in each direction), a design exception will
be required to allow for narrow shoulder widths under the bridge. Combined, standard
outside and inside shoulders would require 6.7 m (22 feet) of width; with five lanes in each
direction, only 5.5 m (18 feet) would be available for inside and outside shoulders under the
existing bridge.
The 7' X 10' reinforced concrete box culvert that accommodates the tributary to
Black Creek and is located approximately 50 m (164 feet) south of Dynasty Drive will be
extended symmetrically. This extension is anticipated to require only minor channel
improvements at the inlet and outlet ends of the culvert.
The 12' X 4' reinforced concrete box culvert that accommodates a minor stream
which carries overflow from a small pond east of Harrison Avenue and is located
approximately 80 m (262 feet) south of Wyatt's Pond Lane will also be extended
symmetrically. This extension will require some channel realignment. In order to
accommodate the extension of the culvert, up to 50 m (160 feet) of the intermittent
stream's 1 m (3-foot) wide and 0.6 m (2-foot) deep channel will be realigned. The stream
is above headwaters.
I. Special Permits Required
The project is anticipated to be constructed under Corps of Engineers' Nationwide
Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a)(14).
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401
Water Quality General Certification is also required. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires that the state issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or
licensed activity that may result in a discharge into waters of the United States. The
issuance of a 401 permit from DEM is a prerequisite to issuance of Section 404 Permit.
Changes in the State Highway System
No changes to the state highway system are proposed as a part of the project.
K. Bicycle Accommodations
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) is considered by the Town of Cary to be a primary
roadway for bicycle travel. It is the main route between the Town of Cary and William B.
Umstead State Park. Harrison Avenue is also listed in Incidental Bicycle Section of the
1996-2002 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program as needing additional lane
width for bicycle safety.
Because of the high traffic volumes on Harrison Avenue, additional lane width is
proposed to safely accommodate bicycle traffic. The outside through lanes of Harrison
Avenue, from Chapel Hill Road to just north of the I-40 interchange, are proposed to be
13
4.2 m (14 feet) wide, the AASHTO recommended minimum width for lanes shared by
motorists and bicyclists. These wide outside lanes are included in the typical sections
presented in Figure 3. Please note that this additional width will not be striped or signed
as a bicycle lane.
The structure over I-40 will also have wide outside lanes to accommodate
bicyclists. A 1.067 m (42-inch) high three-bar handrail will also be provided on the
bridge. A 1.372 m (54-inch) high bridgerail is not proposed since the proposed 1.5 m (5
feet) sidewalks separate the travelway from the bridgerail.
L. Sidewalks
Existing sidewalks along Harrison Avenue will be replaced as a part of the
proposed project. Existing sidewalks along Harrison Avenue are described below:
500 m (1640 feet) of sidewalk is located on the east side of Harrison
Avenue between Richard Drive and SAS Campus Drive.
2. 250 m (820 feet) of sidewalk is located on the west side of Harrison
Avenue between the right-in / right-out access to the Harrison Square
shopping center and Harrison Oaks Boulevard.
3. 150 m (492 feet) of sidewalk is located on the west side of Harrison
Avenue between Livingstone Drive and Cary Parkway.
4. 40 m (131 feet) of sidewalk is located on the west side of Harrison
Avenue, just north of Maynard Road.
In order to eliminate a hazard to pedestrians, the proposed widening of the bridge
over I-40 will include enough width to accommodate 1.5 m (5-foot) sidewalks on each
side.
The Town of Cary has requested that the North Carolina Department of
Transportation consider the construction of sidewalks along both sides of Harrison
Avenue through out the project in addition to replacing the existing sidewalks. This
request is currently being evaluated. It is anticipated that the new sidewalks along both
sides of Harrison Avenue would cost $539,040. Under the current pedestrian policy, the
North Carolina Department of Transportation will participate in funding new sidewalk
construction if the local municipality demonstrates to NCDOT that sidewalks are
warranted.
M. Street Lighting
The Town of Cary is interested in the installation of street lighting along Harrison
Avenue as a part of the subject project. The North Carolina Department of
Transportation's policies do not normally include participation in the cost of lights along
facilities like Harrison Avenue. The Town of Cary would be responsible for the cost of
installing street lighting. In addition, Cary would be responsible for maintaining street
lighting and for purchasing power for the lighting utility. The Town of Cary should make
a formal request to the utility company for street lighting. The utility company should
then submit lighting plans and an encroachment application for approval by the Right of
Way Branch of the North Carolina Department of Transportation.
14
N. Landscaping
Landscaping and erosion control plans will be developed by the Roadside
Environmental Unit of the North Carolina Department of Transportation during final
design of the proposed project.
0. Noise Barriers
No noise barriers are proposed for this project.
P. Degree of Utility Conflicts
The proposed project is anticipated to have a high impact on utilities.
Communication, power, water, and sewer lines will be affected by the proposed project.
Q. Cost Estimates
Current right of way and construction cost estimates for the proposed project are
presented in Table 5. The proposed project has been divided into three segments, as
described in Section I. A.
TABLE 5. PROJECT COSTS
U-2804 A
Chapel Hill Road to
NC 54 U-2804 B
NC 54 to Weston
Parkway U-2804 C
Weston Parkway
to 140 TOTAL COST
CONSTRUCTION $ 1.106,688 $ 3,091,928 $ 3,462,344 $ 7,660,960
RIGHT OF WAY $ 2.347.300 $ 907,500 $ 248,000 $ 3,502,800
TOTAL COST $ 3.453.988 $ 3.999,428 $ 3.710.344 $ 11,163,760
Comparing these estimates with Table 1 shows that current cost estimate for the
project is $1,153,760 more than the amount appropriated in the TIP. The construction of
additional sidewalks would require an additional $539,040 (see Section II. L.).
R. Anticipated Design Exceptions
A design exception is needed in order to retain the existing vertical clearance of
Bridge Number 138 over I40. Bridge Number 138, as described in Section I. C. 7. of this
report, has only 4.8 in (15.75 feet) of vertical clearance over I40. The minimum
clearance for bridges to remain in place over interstates, according to AASHTO, is 4.9 in
(16 feet). No accidents involving vehicles on I-40 striking the bridge were reported
between January 1, 1992 and April 30, 1995.
III. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Recommended Improvements
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to symmetrically
widen SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) to a multilane curb and gutter facility from Chapel Hill
Road to I-40. Between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road) and between
SR 1650 (Reedy Creek Road) and Weston Parkway, a five-lane curb and gutter facility
15
with a continuous left turn lane is proposed. Between NC 54 (Maynard Road) and
SR 1650 (Reedy Creek Road), a four-lane divided curb and gutter facility with an 4.9 in
(16-foot) wide raised median is proposed. From Weston Parkway to I-40, a seven-lane
curb and gutter facility including an exclusive right-turn lane in each direction, is
proposed. The proposed typical sections will provide 4.2 in (14-foot) wide outside lanes
to accommodate bicycle traffic. The proposed project includes a closed loop traffic signal
system and will also improve Harrison Avenue's interchange with I-40. The project is
located within the town limits of Cary in Wake County and is approximately 5.5 km (3.4
miles) in length. The project's location is shown on the vicinity map included as Figure 1.
The proposed improvements to Harrison Avenue are described in more detail in Section
II. of this report and are shown in Figure 2.
B. Design Alternatives
Widening Alternatives
Three alternatives to widen Harrison Avenue to a multilane curb and gutter
facility with 4.2 m (14-foot) wide outside lanes to accommodate bicycle traffic
were studied: symmetrical widening, east-side widening, and west-side widening.
Cost estimates and the estimated number of relocations for each of these
alternatives are presented below:
TABLE 6. ALTERNATIVE COST AND RELOCATEE COMPARISON
TOTAL COST RELOCATIONS
SYMMETRICAL WIDENING (recommended) $11,163.760 13
EAST-SIDE WIDENING $11.463,500 17
WEST-SIDE WIDENING $11,663,100 14
As illustrated in Table 6, symmetrical widening minimizes the project's cost
and the number of relocatees. Thus, widening Harrison Avenue symmetrically is
recommended.
2. Alternative Interchange Designs
Two alternatives to the proposed interchange design were considered
during the project planning process. The first of these alternatives would have
constructed a loop in the northeast quadrant of the I-40 / Harrison Avenue
interchange that would serve traffic moving from northbound Harrison Avenue to
westbound I-40. Under this alternative the ramp in the northwest quadrant would
be removed. Anticipated right of way impacts would likely make this alternative
cost prohibitive. The second of these alternatives would provide a loop in the
northwest quadrant of the 1-40 / Harrison Avenue interchange. This loop would
have served traffic moving from westbound I-40 to southbound Harrison Avenue.
Anticipated right of way impacts to the Wake Stone Corporation quarry would
likely make this alternative cost prohibitive. In addition, the proposed
improvements are anticipated to adequately accommodate interchange traffic. For
these reasons, neither alternative interchange design is recommended.
16
C. Postponement of the Proposed Action
Postponement of the proposed project would result in a continuing deterioration of
traffic conditions and safety along SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue). The current traffic
carrying capacity of the existing roadway is already inadequate, and traffic operation will
continue to deteriorate as traffic volumes increase. Postponing the project would only
intensify the traffic problems in the area. Therefore, postponement of the proposed action
is not recommended.
D. "Do Nothing" Alternative
Although this alternative would avoid the limited adverse environmental impacts
that are anticipated to result from the project, there would be no positive effect on the
traffic capacity and safety of the highway. Therefore, this alternative is not recommended.
E. Alternative Modes of Transportation
The proposed project incorporates bicycle and pedestrian accommodations. Other
alternative modes of transportation in the area are discussed below.
1. Bus Service
The Town of Cary does not have a public bus service.
2. Carpool / Vanpool Programs
The Triangle Transit Authority operates a computer-aided carpool and
vanpool service for Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, and the surrounding area. The
vanpool service includes a route along Harrison Avenue. Although this service is
available, traffic volumes along Harrison Avenue still warrant the proposed
widening project.
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Social Effects
Land Use
The proposed project is located within the municipal limits of the Town of
Cary. The town has an active planning program; the 1989 Comprehensive Growth
Plan serves as the town's primary policy guidance document on land use and
development. The town also enforces a zoning ordinance and subdivision
regulations.
a. Existing Land Use
Harrison Avenue serves as an important arterial in a suburban section
of the Town of Cary. The rapidly developing area is characterized by strong
residential development, with supporting commercial uses constructed at key
intersections along the roadway within the last decade.
17
A variety of land uses exists at the project's northern terminus at
I-40. Immediately north of I-40 is the Wake Stone Corporation's Triangle
quarry, which generates a significant amount of daily truck traffic.
Approximately 0.15 mile north of the I-40 westbound ramps is the Reedy
Creek entrance to the William B. Umstead State Park. Just south of I-40,
commercial uses, professional offices, and one corporation, the SAS
Institute, are accessed from Harrison Avenue. Weston Parkway, which
intersects Harrison Avenue, is the collector road through the mixed-use
Weston planned unit development.
Residential development dominates the area adjacent to Harrison
Avenue south of Weston Parkway. Large lot single family homes, Reedy
Creek Baptist Church, and a Town of Cary Fire Station front the roadway
between Weston Parkway and Cary Parkway. South of Reedy Creek Road,
Harrison Avenue provides access to a number of residential subdivisions,
condominium developments, and apartment complexes.
Another commercial node exists at the intersection of Harrison
Avenue and Maynard Road, including a small shopping center with a grocery
store, several banks, and professional offices. An apartment complex its
currently under construction in the northwest quadrant of the intersection.
South of Maynard Road to Chapel Hill Road, single family residences again
front the roadway, many located extremely near the existing right of way
limits.
b. Existine Zonin
Zoning districts throughout the project area consistent with either the
land use designations of the Comprehensive Growth Plan or the existing land
uses. Many of the residential areas are contained within planned unit
development districts, which permit a variety of development densities
within the district.
C. Provosed Land Use
According to Cary's 1989 Comprehensive Growth Plan, Harrison
Avenue will continue to provide access to a wide variety of land uses.
Office and institutional uses are planned for the land immediately south of I-
40, on both sides of Harrison Avenue. As previously noted, much of this
development has already taken place, including the SAS Institute corporate
campus.
Residential development will continue on both sides of Harrison
Avenue south of Weston Parkway to near Maynard Road. Exceptions to the
residential classification for this area occur just north of Maynard Road.
This includes undeveloped land north of Maynard Road, which has been
designated for office, institutional, and industrial land uses. Land in the
northeast quadrant of Harrison Avenue and Maynard Road is designated for
commercial development.
South of Maynard Road, little undeveloped land remains. While
much of the area is used for residential purposes, commercial development
has occurred along Harrison Avenue at Maynard Road. No large scale
redevelopment of the area between Maynard Road and Chapel Hill Road is
18
called for in the Comprehensive Growth Plan, although the plan does
designate some change to office and institutional uses at the intersection of
Chapel Hill Road and Harrison Avenue.
d. Project Compatibility with Local Plans
The widening of Harrison Avenue will alleviate traffic congestion and
enhance growth in the area. No existing or planned parks or greenways will
be affected by the proposed improvements to Harrison Avenue.
2. Neiehborhood Characteristics
The proposed project is located in the Town of Cary in Wake County.
Wake County is in the east central section of the state and is bounded by Johnston,
Harnett, Chatham, Durham, Granville, and Franklin Counties. In 1992, Wake
County had a total population of 459,982. In 1990, Wake County had a population
density of 507.7 persons per square mile. In 1990, the county had a total white
population of 324,011 and a non-white population of 99,369.
The Town of Cary's current population is 43,858. The proposed widening
project is located in a rapidly growing urbanized area. The proposed widening
begins at Chapel Hill Road where there are commercial establishments such as a
Credit Union, Grocery Boy, Jr., and a Federal Bank Credit Union. Just north of the
Chapel Hill Road intersection, the neighborhood consists predominantly of
residential development. Some of the residential structures are in close proximity to
the existing highway facility. Many of the homes and entrances leading to
subdivisions along Harrison Avenue are buffered by trees and shrubberies lining the
fronts of the properties.
Just south of Maynard Road (NC 54), the neighborhood changes from
residential to commercial. North of Maynard Road (NC 54), the proposed project
crosses through a wooded area with little development. South of Livingstone Drive,
development includes multi-family dwellings which are set back from the existing
highway. A Town of Cary Fire Station is located just north of Livingstone Drive.
Between Livingstone Drive and Weston Parkway, commercial and institutional
development are a little more prevalent, and, in most cases, are set back from the
existing roadway. From Weston Parkway to the I40 interchange, the neighborhood
consists of commercial and institutional development. SAS is located in this
vicinity.
3. Relocatees
Thirteen residential relocations are anticipated as a result of this project.
All of these relocatees are located between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard
Road). No businesses are anticipated to be relocated as a part of the proposed
project. A relocation report is included on page A-1 of Appendix A. It is the
policy of the North Carolina Department of Transportation to ensure that
comparable replacement housing will be available prior to construction of state and
federally assisted projects. The North Carolina Department of Transportation has
the following three programs to minimize the inconvenience of relocation:
a. Relocation Assistance
b. Relocation Moving Payments, and
C. Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement
19
Further discussion of the NCDOT Relocation Programs is included on.
pages B-1 and B-2 in Appendix B of this report.
Of the thirteen residential relocatees anticipated to result from the
proposed widening, two are minorities. No low-income relocatees are anticipated.
The proposed widening project is not anticipated to disproportionately impact any
minority or low-income communities.
Public Facilities
Public facilities located adjacent to the proposed project include a Town of
Cary fire station and the Jordan Hall Arts Center. The fire station is located west
of Harrison Avenue, just south of Cary Parkway. The Jordan Hall Arts Center is
located east of Harrison Avenue, approximately 250 m (820 feet) south of
Maynard Road.
Other public facilities located in the general vicinity of the proposed
project, but not directly adjacent to it, include William B. Umstead State Park (just
north of the I40 interchange) and the Black Creek Greenway, which parallels SR
1652 (Harrison Avenue) west of the proposed project.
The proposed project is not anticipated to have any adverse effects on
public facilities located in the area.
Historic and Cultural Resources
a. Architectural/Historical Resources
The proposed project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and Section
4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended. A
survey of the project area for architectural and historical resources was
conducted, and the results were compiled to document compliance with
these laws.
The survey for architectural and historical resources was conducted
by the North Carolina Department of Transportation in accordance with
the requirements of FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640.8A; the Secretary
of Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological and Historic
Preservation; 36 CFR Part 800; 36 CFR Part 60; and Phase II (Abridged)
Survey Procedures for Historic Architectural Resources by the North
Carolina Department of Transportation.
A comprehensive survey of Wake County was conducted between
1988 and 1991. Both the National Register of Historic Places and the
State Study Lists have been consulted, and one known Study List property
was recorded, the William B. Umstead State Park. During a meeting held
on March 24, 1994, the State Historic Preservation Office provided a list of
previously surveyed properties located in the general project area: the
John H. McGhee House, the Will Sorrell House, the John Wesley Booth
house, and the P.A. Sorrell House. The John Wesley Booth house is not
considered to be within the project's area of potential effect. The other
properties listed by the State Historic Preservation Office are considered to
be within the project's area of potential effect and are addressed in this
20
document. Another building over fifty years of age, the Sorrow-Breeze
House, was located during a site visit on May 5, 1994 by a North Carolina
Department of Transportation staff architectural historian. The eligibility
of each property over fifty years old within the area of potential effect is
discussed below.
William B. Umstead State Park
William B. Umstead State Park was developed in the mid to late
1930s by the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). The park occupies over
2146 ha (5300 ac) of land situated between I-40 and US 70. The park is
the only CCC-created park in Wake County. The park was placed on the
State Study List on April 14, 1994. William B. Umstead State Park is
considered to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places.
The John H. McGhee House
The John H. McGhee House is a late nineteenth century, two story,
frame, single-pile, gable-roofed house with 2/2 and 6/6 windows. Other
features of the house include two interior brick chimneys and a brick
pier/infill foundation. Attached to the back of the building is a one-and-
one-half story, frame, gable-roofed ell. Numerous early twentieth century
frame outbuildings are located to the north and west of the building. The
house does not appear to be eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places due to integrity-reducing alterations such as modern porch
posts, asbestos siding, and an enclosed rear porch.
The Will Sorrell House
The Will Sorrell House, which is located on the west side of
Harrison Avenue, is a one-and-one-half story, frame, gable-roofed dwelling
with an original engaged rear shed. Built sometime in the mid-nineteenth
century, the house has two gable end brick and stone chimneys, flush
eaves, and weatherboard siding. The porch has been altered in recent
years, and the interior has been changed substantially -- historic walls and
ceilings have been removed or covered. The house does not appear to be
eligible for listing in the National Register. Its integrity of design has been
diminished, and it lacks the special historical or architectural significance
necessary for listing in the National Register.
The P. A. Sorrell House
The P. A. Sorrell House is a one story, frame, Greek Revival house
with a characteristically low pitched hip roof. Unfortunately, this is the
only feature that remains in this heavily altered dwelling. Some modern
changes include the addition of wide synthetic siding, a picture window,
and sash windows. The house does not appear to be eligible for listing in
the National Register. Its integrity of design, materials, workmanship, and
feeling have been destroyed by alterations.
21
The Sorrow-Breeze House
The Sorrow-Breeze House is located near the south end of the
proposed project. The house is a single story, frame, gable front bungalow
with craftsman style elements such as exposed roof rafters, 8/1 windows,
and tapered porch posts on brick piers. The house is covered with
weatherboard siding, has two interior brick chimneys, a brick foundation
wall, and an enclosed rear porch. Although the second owner has been in
the house for over fifty years and has meticulously maintained the property,
the house is not a particularly significant example of a bungalow. It is not
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.
Conclusions
The State Historic Preservation Officer concurred that the John H.
McGhee House, the Will Sorrell House, and the P.A. Sorrell House are not
eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places in his letter
dated July 11, 1994. He also concurred that William B. Umstead State
Park is eligible. This letter is included on page C-8 of Appendix C.
The State Historic Preservation Officer's July, 1994 letter does not
discuss the Sorrow-Breeze House. The State Historic Preservation Office
did not include the house in its listing of houses to study along the
proposed project. However, since the Sorrow-Breeze House is over fifty
years old, it was included in planning and environmental studies. The
Sorrow-Breeze House is not considered to be eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places.
Access to William B. Umstead State Park will be maintained
throughout the construction of TIP Project U-2804. Right of way will not
be acquired from the park and no construction is proposed directly adjacent
to it. Thus, the proposed project will have no effect on William B.
Umstead State Park. The State Historic Preservation Officer concurred
that the proposed project will have no effect on William B. Umstead State
Park. This concurrence is included on page C-1 of Appendix C.
b. Archaeological Resources
An archaeological survey of the project area was not recommended
by the State Historic Preservation Office because most of the area adjacent
to Harrison Avenue is developed and disturbed. An archaeological survey of
the project area was not performed. No impacts to significant archaeological
resources are anticipated as a result of the project.
B. Section 4(f) Properties
William B. Umstead State Park is located just north of Harrison Avenue's
interchange with I40. The proposed project is not anticipated to have any direct
effect on the park. No right of way will be acquired from the park and no
construction is proposed directly adjacent to the park. Indirect impacts will be
avoided by maintaining access to William B. Umstead State Park during project
construction.
22
No other parks, recreation areas, wildlife / waterfowl refuges, or historic
sites are located in the vicinity of the proposed project.
C. Economic Effects
During the month of April, 1994, Wake County had a labor force of 281,920. Out
of this labor force, the State Employment Commission indicated that 274,690 persons were
gainfully employed. This left an unemployment total of 7230 persons, a 2.6 percent
unemployment rate.
Harrison Avenue is a major route into the Town of Cary. Moreover, Harrison
Avenue serves several commercial establishments and industrial institutions. Improving
Harrison Avenue will enhance the business community by providing increased visibility and
accessibility.
D. Environmental Effects
Biological Resources
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. This section
describes those ecosystems encountered in the study area, as well as, the
relationships between fauna and flora within these ecosystems. Composition and
distribution of biotic communities throughout the project area are reflective of
topography, hydrologic influences and past and present land uses in the study area.
Descriptions of the terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant
community classifications. Dominant flora and fauna observed, or likely to occur, in
each community are described and discussed.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are provided
for each animal and plant species described. Subsequent references to the same
organism will include the common name only.
a. Terrestrial Communities
Two terrestrial communities were identified in the project study area.
These communities are the Man Dominated Community and the Secondary
Forest Community. Community boundaries are frequently ill-defined;
contiguous communities generally merge without any transition zone
between them. Many faunal species are highly adaptive and may populate
the entire range of terrestrial communities discussed.
Man Dominated Community
The man dominated community occurs along the roadside shoulders
and powerline rights-of-way in the study area. The composition of this
community is highly variable and includes maintained lawns and cutovers.
Common species found in this community include: fescue (Festuca sp.),
plantain (Plantago spp.), catbriar (Smilax sp.), grape (Vitis sp.), honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), blackberry (Rubes sp.), giant cane (Armidinaria
gigantea), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), dog fennel (Eupatorium
capillifolium), hay-scented fern (Deiiiistaedtia putictilobula), sensitive
partridgepea (Cassia iiictitaiis), trumpet vine (Campsis radicw?s), and
winged sumac (Rhos copalliiia). This community also contains sapling size
23
trees of several species found in adjacent woodlands, including loblolly pine
(Pines taeda), tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), red cedar (Juniperis
virginiana), and red maple (Ater rubrum).
The variable habitats that this community offers allows certain animal
species to flourish. Those species which flourish are often species which are
highly adaptable or those which do not have specific habitat requirements,
such as American toad (Bufo americans), five-lined skink (Eumeces
fasciatus), black racer (Coluber constrictor), blue grosbeak (Guiraca
caerulea), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), white-tailed deer
(Odocoileus virginianus), and eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridaims).
Animal species found in this community are also likely to be found utilizing
habitats found in other communities in the study area.
Secondarv Forest Communit
Secondary forest communities result from past clearing and
regrowth. In the study area the species composition is controlled by the
mesic conditions present and the amount of time that has passed since the
land was cleared. The first species to form a canopy in these communities is
typically fast growing species such as loblolly pine (Pins taeda) with a
dense understory of hardwood species such as sweet gum (Liquidambar
styracjua), tulip poplar, red maple, dogwood (Corns florida), and white
oak (Quercus alba). As the forest ages the understory species shade out and
replace individual trees in the pine dominated canopy, leading to a climax
community that has a canopy composed exclusively of white oak and other
hardwood species. The groundcover in this community is consistent
throughout the different successional stages found in the study area. Typical
groundcover species include: christmas fern (Polystichum acrostichoides),
southern lady fern (Athyrium asplenioides), pipsissewa (Chimaphila
maculata), and microstegium (Microstegium vimineum).
Forested communities provide cover and food sources that are
unavailable in other communities in the study area. Common species that are
likely to be found utilizing habitats available in forested communities include:
slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus), redback salamander (P. cinereus),
Fowlees toad (Bufo woodhousei), eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolnur),
ground skink (Scincella lateralis), red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes
carohnits), white-breasted nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis), hooded warbler
(Wllsonia citrina), black- and-white warbler (Miniotilta varia), eastern
chipmunk (Tamias striatus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray squirrel (Sciurus
carolinsis), and gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus). Animal species found
in this community are also likely to be found utilizing habitats found in other
communities in the study area.
b. Aquatic Communities
Streams that cross the proposed project provide a habitat necessary
for many aquatic and semiaquatic species to propagate and survive. Factors
such as water quality, length of inundation, water flow rate, and substrate
composition control the number and diversity of species that can utilize the
habitats provided. The terrestrial communities adjacent to the stream
channel also greatly influence aquatic community composition.
24
Intermittent Stream Communities
Intermittent streams often experience interruption of flow during dry
spells. Periods of flow interruption are generally seasonal, with the summer
months being dryer than the winter. During dry spells streams retain water
in shallow pools along their course. It is these pools which are influenced in
size and depth by climatological events that provide habitat for a great
diversity of aquatic and semiaquatic species. A higher diversity of species
can be found in streams which have a dense canopy of trees and shrubs.
Despite the dry conditions present during the warmer months of the
year, many species are adapted to living in this environment. These species
are those that complete their life cycle quickly or form cysts that are better
able to withstand the periods of desiccation. Species likely to occur in the
habitats provided by small intermittent streams include benthic invertebrates
such as rotifers (Rotifera), flatworms (Platyhelminthes), roundworms
(Nematoda), as well as insect larvae, crayfish, and snails. Many higher
animals such as amphibians and reptiles also rely on these intermittent
streams for reproduction and as a source of food and water. Some common
vertebrates likely to utilize habitats provided by intermittent streams include:
three-lined salamander (Eurycea guttolineata), two-lined salamander (E.
bislineata), pickerel frog (Rana palustris), oak toad (Bufo quercicus), and
northern water snake (Neroidia sipedon). A variety of the mammals found in
the terrestrial communities in the study area may forage in intermittent
streams.
A few species of shiners (Notropis spp.) and sunfish (Centrachidae)
may be found inhabiting the larger pools in these streams during periods of
inundation.
Black Creek Community
The Black Creek tributary is a slow meandering stream with
alternating deep pools and shallow riffle zones. Even though this stream
flows through an urbanized area much of the streamside canopy is still intact.
A wide variety of animals are likely to be found in the diverse habitats
associated with this stream. Species likely to occur in the Black Creek
tributary include: crayfish (Cambarus sp.), eastern newt (Notophthalmus
viridescens), pickeral frog (Rana palustris), northern watersnake (Nerodia
sipedon), and fish species such as creek chubsucker (Erimyzon oblongus),
shiners (Notropis sp.), pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayamis), redfin pickerel
(Esox americanus), American eel (Anguilla rostrata), large mouth bass
(Micropterus salmoides), and bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus).
Pond Community
The pond located southeast of the intersection of Harrison Avenue
and Wyatt's Pond Lane provides habitats for many of the species found in
other aquatic environments, as well as some species not found in streams in
the study area. Animal species that are likely to occur in the pond are: insect
larvae (Insecta), painted turtle (Chrysemys picta), mallard (Anas
platyrhynchos), great egret (Casmerodhis albus), and beaver (Castor
canadensis). ,
25
C. Anticipated Impacts: Biotic Resources
Construction of the subject project will have various impacts oil the
biotic resources described. Any construction related activities in or near
these resources have the potential to impact biological functions. This
section quantifies and qualifies impacts to the natural resources in terms of
area impacted and ecosystems affected. Temporary and permanent impacts
are considered here as well.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the relative
abundance of each community present in the study area. Project
construction will result in clearing and degradation of portions of these
communities. Table 7 summarizes potential quantitative losses to these
biotic communities resulting from project construction. Estimated impacts
are derived using the entire right of way width. Usually, project construction
does not require the entire right of way; therefore, actual impacts may be
considerably less.
TABLE 7. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO BIOTIC RESOURCES
Community Alt.I Symmetrical Widening
(recommended) Alt. 2 East-Side Widening Alt. 3 West-Side Widening
Man-dominated 13.4 (33.0) 13.3 (32.9) 14.3 (35.3)
Secondary Forest 11.3 (27.9) 12.3 (30.3) 11.1 (27.3)
Total Impacts 24.7 (60.9) 25.6 (63.2) 25.4 (62.6)
Note: Areas cited are in hectares (acres)
The construction of the proposed project will result in the permanent
conversion of secondary forested community into a man dominated
community. Some portions of the man dominated community will be
permanently lost to impervious surfaces, and other portions will be impacted
temporarily. Impacts to man dominated communities are generally less
objectionable than impacts to forested communities. Therefore, impacts to
forested communities will be minimized whenever possible. Impacts to the
canopy of streams in the study area will also be minimized whenever
possible.
Potential impacts to the aquatic environment are those that act to
decrease water quality and include increased sedimentation, nutrient runoff,
changes in water temperature and dissolved oxygen, and toxic runoff fi-om
construction related erosion.
Organisms that utilize habitats provided by these streams can be
affected by changes in water quality. Toxic runoff resulting from fuel and
other chemical pollutants leaking from construction machinery and
automotive debris from increased traffic flow. Additional chemical pollutants
can bond to soils and enter streams with runoff sediments. Nutrient runoff
occurs from the use of chemical fertilizers in roadside landscaping and can
cause algal blooms, which can lower dissolved oxygen in the sediments and
water column. These factors act to decrease successful reproduction in
26
individual species and decrease the species diversity of the community.
Higher vertebrates which utilize these streams to forage are affected through
biomagnification of pollutants and the loss of potential prey species.
The loss of the streamside canopy along many streams in the study
area will adversely affect organisms inhabiting those streams by increasing
the water temperature, decreasing dissolved oxygen, increasing
sedimentation, and causing stream bank destabilization. These impacts will
be minimized by minimizing clearing at those sites and implementing
sediment control measures.
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters and Sedimentation Control Guidelines will be strictly enforced during
the construction stage of the project to minimize impacts to aquatic and
semiaquatic organisms.
d. Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the
process of decline either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist
with man. Federal law (under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended) requires that any action, likely to adversely a species
classified as federally-protected, be subject to review by the Fish and Wildlife
(FWS). Other species may receive additional protection under separate state
laws.
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 March, 1995, the FWS lists the
following federally-protected species for Wake County (see Table 8). A
brief description of each species characteristics and habitat follows.
TABLE 8. FEDERALLY-PROTECTED SPECIES
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Alasmidonta heterodon dwarf wedge mussel E
Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle E
Picoides borealis red-cockaded woodpecker E
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E
Note: °E" denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened with extinction throughout all
or a significant portion of its range).
Dwarf Wedge Mussel
Alasmidonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel) E
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 3/14/90
Distribution in N.C.: Franklin, Granville, Halifax, Johnston, Nash,
Vance, Wake, Warren, and Wilson Counties
27
The dwarf wedge mussel is a small mussel having a distinguishable
shell noted by two lateral teeth on the right half and one on the left half-. The
periostracum (outer shell) is olive green to dark brown in color and the nacre
(inner shell) is bluish to silvery white.
Known populations of the dwarf wedge mussel in North Carolina are
found in the Neuse River Basin and the Tar River Basin. This mussel is
sensitive to agricultural, domestic, and industrial pollutants and requires a
stable silt free streambed with well oxygenated water to survive.
The Black Creek tributary was surveyed for the presence of naiades
(mussels) on August 18, 1994. Survey methods included visual and tactile
searches within the stream and examination of stream banks for the presence
of shell middens.
No evidence of mussel populations were found in this tributary to
Black Creek.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Given the survey results, it can be concluded that the Black Creek
tributary does not support dwarf wedge mussel populations; thus, no impacts
to this species will result from project construction.
Bald Eagle
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (bald eagle) E
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 3/11/67
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Brunswick, Carteret,
Chatham, Chowan, Craven, Dare, Durham, Guilford, Hyde,
Montgomery, New Hanover, Northhampton, Periquimans,
Richmond, Stanly, Vance, Wake, and Washington Counties
Adult bald eagles can be identified by their large white head and short
white tail. The body plumage is dark-brown to chocolate-brown in color. In
flight bald eagles can be identified by their flat wing soar.
Eagle nests are found in close proximity to water (within a half mile)
with a clear flight path to the water, in the largest living tree in an area, and
having an open view of the surrounding land. Human disturbance can cause
an eagle to abandon otherwise suitable habitat. The breeding season for the
bald eagle begins in December or January. Fish are the major food source
for bald eagles. Other sources include coots, herons, and wounded ducks.
Food may be live or carrion.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Suitable nesting habitat for the bald eagle is not found associated
with streams or ponds in the study area. Therefore, no impacts to the bald
eagle will result from the construction of the proposed project.
28
Red-cockaded Woodpecker
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) E
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen, Brunswick,
Camden, Carteret, Chatham, Columbus, Craven,
Cumberland, Dare, Duplin, Forsyth, Gates, Halifax, Harnett,
Hertford, Hoke, Hyde, Johnston, Jones, Lee, Lenoir,
Montgomery, Moore, Nash, New Hanover, Northhampton,
Onslow, Orange, Pamlico, Pender, Peryuimans, Pitt,
Richmond, Robeson, Sampson, Scotland, Tyrrell, Wake,
Wayne, and Wilson Counties
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that is
entirely black and white, except for small red streaks on the sides of the nape
in the male. The back of the RCW is black and white with horizontal stripes.
The breast and underside of this woodpecker are white with streaked flanks.
The RCW has a large white cheek patch surrounded by the black cap, nape,
and throat.
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and nesting habitat.
A forested stand must contain at least 50% pine, lack a thick understory, and
be contiguous with other stands to be appropriate habitat for the RCW.
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 up to 200 hectares (500 acres). 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 3.6-30.3 m (12-100 ft) above the ground and
average 9.1-15.7 m (30-50 ft) high. They can be identified by a large
incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree. The RCW lays its eggs
in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch approximately 38 days later.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Pine stands found in the study area do not support trees of sufficient
age to provide suitable habitat for the red-cockaded woodpecker. No effects
to this species will result from the construction of the proposed project.
Michaux's Sumac
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac) E
Plant Family: Anacardiaceae
Federally Listed: September 28, 1989
Flowers Present: June
Distribution in N.C.: Columbus, Davie, Durham, Franklin, Hoke,
Lincoln, Moore, Orange, Richmond, Robeson, Scotland,
Wake, and Wilson Counties
29
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizomatous shrub. The
bases of the leaves are rounded and their edges are simply or doubly serrate.
The flowers of Michaux's sumac are greenish to white in color. Fruits,
which develop from August to September on female plants, are a red densely
short-pubescent drupe. This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods.
Michaux's sumac is dependent on some sort of disturbance to maintain the
openness of its habitat. It usually grows in association with basic soils and
occurs on sand or sandy loams. Michaux's sumac grows only in open habitat
where it can get full sunlight. Michaux's sumac does not compete well with
other species, such as Japanese honeysuckle, with which it is often
associated.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
A plant-by-plant survey was conducted in all suitable habitat for
Michaux's sumac in the study area. No individuals of Michaux's sumac were
identified as occurring in the study area. Therefore, no effects to this
federally protected species will result from the construction of the proposed
project.
Federal Candidate and State Protected Species
There are ten federal candidate (C2) species listed for Wake County.
Federal Candidate species are not afforded federal protection under the
Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions,
including Section 7, until they are formally listed as Threatened or
Endangered. Candidate 2 (C2) species are defined as organisms which are
vulnerable to extinction although no sufficient data currently exist to warrant
a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed Endangered, or Proposed
Threatened. Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (T),
or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina Heritage Program list of
Rare Plant and Animal species are afforded state protection under the State
Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant Protection and
Conservation Act of 1979.
Table 9 lists federal candidate species, the species state status (if
afforded state protection), and the existence of suitable habitat for each
species in the study area. This species list is provided for information
purposes, as the status of these species may be upgraded in the future.
30
TABLE 9. FEDERAL CANDIDATE / NC PROTECTED SPECIES
FOR WAKE COUNTY
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME NC STATUS HABITAT
M otis austrorianus southeastern bat SC Yes
Aimophila aestivalis' Bachman's sparrow SC No
Elliptio judithae Neuse slabshell E No
Elliptio lanceolata yellow lance T No
Fusconaia mason Atlantic pigtoe T No
Lasmigona subviridis green floater E No
Speyeria diana Diana fritillary butterfly - No
Monotropsis odorata sweet pinesap - Yes
Nestronia umbellula nestrona - Yes
Trillium pusillum
var. pusillum Carolina trillium E No
NOTE: Species not afforded slate protection but listed as Federal Candidate.
Indicates no specimen from that county in at least 20 years.
Surveys for these species were not conducted during the site visit,
nor were any of these species observed. A review of the data base of the
N.C. Natural Heritage Program rare species and unique habitats revealed no
records of North Carolina rare and/or protected species in or near the
project study area.
2. Soils
Soil resources which occur in the study area are discussed below. Soils and
availability of water directly influence composition and distribution of flora and
fauna in any biotic community.
Wake County lies in the Piedmont Physiographic Providence. The
topography of the study area is characterized by rolling hills and rocky clay soils.
Elevations in the study area are range from 107 m (350 ft) to 152 m (500 ft) above
mean sea level.
Soils found in the study area are well drained to poorly drained and occur on
gentle to steep slopes. Some map units are hydric soils and others may contain
inclusions of hydric soils. An inventory of the dominant soil units which occur in the
project area can be found in Table 10.
31
TABLE 10. PROMINENT SOILS IN THE PROJECT AREA
MAP LINIT SYMBOL SPECIFIC MAPPING UNIT PERCENT SLOPE HYDRIC CLASSIFICATION
AgB Appling Sandy Loam 2-6 -
AgB2 Appling Gravelly Sandy Loam eroded 2-6 -
AgC Appling Gravelly Sandy Loam. eroded 6-10 -
AgC2 Appling Gravelly Sandy Loam 6-10 -
CeD Cecil Sandy Loans 10-15 -
CeF Cecil Sandy Loam 1545 -
CgB2 Cecil Gravelly Sandv Loam 2-6 -
CgC2 Cecil Gravelly Sandy Loam 6-10 -
Cn Colfax Sandy Loam 0-6 -
EnB2 Enon Fine Sandy Loam 2-6 -
EnD2 Enon Fine Sandy Loam, eroded 10-15 -
EnC2 Enon Fine Sandy Loam eroded 6-10 -
Gu Gullied Land - -
Me Mamachic Soils 0-4 hydric inclusions
WwF Wilkes Soils 2045 -
Wy Worsham Sandy Loam 04 hydric
3. Surface Waters and Wetlands
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the
United States,". as defined in Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CRF) Part
328.3. Wetlands, defined in 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 under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation
typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any action that proposes to place
fill into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).
Jurisdictional wetland determinations were performed utilizing delineation
criteria prescribed in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Determination Manual"
(Environment Laboratory, 1987). Criteria to delineate wetland sites includes
evidence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and hydrology. No wetland sites
were identified in the study area.
4. Permits
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (14) is likely to be applicable at ditch
and stream crossings found in the project study area. This permit authorizes
construction provided the following conditions are met:
(1) the width of the fill is limited to the minimum necessary for the actual
crossing;
(2) the fill placed in Water of the United States is limited to a filled area of no
more than 0.1 hectares (1/3 acre);
32
(3) no more than a total of 61 m (200 linear ft) of the fill for the roadway can
occur in special aquatic sites, including wetlands;
(4) the crossing is culverted, bridged or otherwise designed to prevent the
restriction of, and to withstand, expected high flows and tidal flows and
movement of aquatic organisms, and;
(5) the crossing, including all attendant features, both temporary and permanent,
is part of a single and complete project for crossing of a Water of the United
States.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section
401 Water Quality General Certification is also required. Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act requires that the state issue or deny water certification for any federally
permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge into waters of the United
States. The issuance of a 401 permit from DEM is a prerequisite to issuance of
Section 404 Permit.
Mitigation
No mitigation is required; no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands will occur
from project construction.
5. Flood Hazard Evaluation
Wake County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular
Program. The crossing at the Black Creek tributary approximately 50 m (164 feet)
south of Dynasty Drive is in a flood hazard zone and is included in a detailed flood
study, having an established 100-year floodplain and floodway with corresponding
established water surface elevations. A copy of the Flood Insurance Rate Map
which includes the established limits of the 100-year floodplain and floodway in the
vicinity of the Black Creek tributary is included as Figure 7.
The minor stream crossing, located approximately 24 m (80 feet) north of
the Black Creek tributary, is not in a designated flood hazard area. The
approximate 100-year floodplain limits in the vicinity of this stream crossing are
shown in Figure 8.
The floodplains impacted by the project are in a moderately developed
residential area. From field review, no buildings in the area were found with floor
elevations below the 100-year flood level. The proposed roadway widening and
culvert extensions will not have an adverse impact on the existing floodplain areas
and will not substantially increase the existing flood hazards.
6. Water Resources
This section contains information concerning those water resources likely to
be impacted by the project. Water resource information encompasses physical
aspects of the resource, its relationship to major water systems, Best Usage
Standards, and water quality of the resources. Probable impacts to these water
bodies are also discussed, as are means to minimize impacts.
33
a. Stream Characteristics
The proposed project is located in the Neuse River Basin and crossi:s
two unnamed tributaries to Black Creek and an unnamed tributary to
Crabtree Creek.
The unnamed tributaries located in the study area are all intermittent
streams. These streams are narrow with deeply eroded channels that flow
over substrate composed of small rocks or bedrock. During dry months
these streams may experience periods of no flow.
The first Black Creek tributary crosses the study area by way of a
double barrel box culvert located just south of Dynasty Drive. This stream is
approximately (10 ft) wide and ranges in depth from less than 0.3 m (1 ft) to
0.9 m (3 ft). The substrate in the stream is mostly sand with clay sediments
and gravel in the infrequent riffle zones. High turbidity was observed in the
stream during the recent site visit, which may only be the result of recent
heavy rainfall.
The pond found in the study area is a man made impoundment of thy-,
second tributary to Black Creek. Water depths in the pond range from less
than 0.3 m (1 ft) to over 1.5 m (5 ft) deep. The substrate of the pond is clay
and the ponds water quality is degraded by nutrient runoff from surrounding
developments.
The unnamed tributary to Crabtree Creek is crossed by the
westbound I40 entrance ramp approximately 61 m (200 feet) west of the
ramp's intersection with Harrison Avenue.
b. Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the
Division of Environmental Management (DEM). Unnamed streams carry
the same best usage classification as streams to which they are tributaries.
The best usage classification for Black Creek and its tributaries is Class C
NSW, and the best usage classification for Crabtree Creek and its tributarie:
is Class B NSW. Class B waters are defined as suitable for primary
recreation and any other usage specified by the "C" classification. Class C
waters are defined as suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival,
fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation, and agriculture. Nutrient Sensitive
Waters (NSW) refers to waters which require limitations on nutrient inputs.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-1 or WS-
II), nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 km (l mile)
of project study area.
C. Water uWJV
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is
managed by DEM and is part of an ongoing ambient water quality
monitoring program that addresses long term trends in water quality. The
program assesses water quality by sampling for selected benthic
macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring sites. Macroinvertebrates
34
are sensitive to very subtle changes in water quality; thus, the species
richness and overall biomass are reflections of water quality. Specific data is
not available for streams in the study area.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are
permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) program. Any discharger is required to register for a permit. The
NPDES lists no dischargers for streams in the vicinity of the proposed
project.
d. Anticipated Impacts: Water Resources
The construction of the proposed project will necessitate the
extension of the culverts at the Black Creek tributaries. In addition, the
proposed widening of the westbound 1-40 entrance ramp is anticipated to
have construction-related impacts on the unnamed tributary to Crabtree
Creek which is crossed by the I-40 entrance ramp located approximately
61 m (200 feet) west of Harrison Avenue.
Construction-related impacts include reduced water quality,
increased sedimentation, toxic runoff, alterations of the water level due to
interruptions or additions to water flow, and the destruction of natural
substrate due to stream channel relocation. Reduced water quality could
include changes in turbidity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and nutrient
limitation. In order to minimize impacts to water resources in the study area,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters
and Sediment Control Guidelines will be strictly enforced during the
construction stage of the project.
7. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal agencies to
consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on prime and
important farmland soils, as designated by the United States Soil Conservation
Service. Farmland soils located in an urbanized area or in an area committed to
urban development by the local governing body are exempt from the requirements
of the Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981. The proposed widening of Harrison
Avenue is located in an intensely urbanized area. Although some vacant land
remains in some areas, this land is slated for residential, commercial, or industrial
development. Therefore, no further consideration of potential impacts to farmland
is required.
8. Highwav Traffic Noise / Construction Noise Analysis
This analysis was performed to determine the effect of the proposed widening of
SR 1652, Harrison Avenue, in Wake County on noise levels in the immediate project area.
This investigation includes an inventory of existing noise sensitive land uses and a field
survey of ambient (existing) noise levels in the study area. It also includes a comparison of
the predicted noise levels and the ambient noise levels to determine if traffic noise impacts
can be expected resulting from the proposed project. Traffic noise impacts are determined
from the current procedures for the abatement of highway traffic noise and construction
noise, appearing as Part 772 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations. If traffic noise
impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of alternative noise abatement measures
for reducing or eliminating the noise impacts must be considered.
35
a. Characteristics of 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 (dB). 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 decibel scale is used almost exclusively in vehicle noise
measurements because it places the most emphasis on the frequency range tc which
the human ear is most sensitive (1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound levels measured using a
weighted-A decibel scale are often expressed as dBA. Throughout this report, all
noise levels will be expressed in dBA's. Several examples of noise pressure levels in
dBA are listed in Table N1 on page E-1 of Appendix E.
Review of Table N 1 indicates that most individuals in urbanized area ; 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.
3) The type of activity occurring where the noise is heard.
In considering the first of these three factors, it is important to note that
individuals have different sensitivity to noise. Loud noises bother some mor-. than
others, and some individuals become irate if an unwanted noise persists. The time
patterns of noise also enter into an individual's judgement of whether or not a noise
is offensive. For example, noises occurring during sleeping hours are usually
considered to be more offensive than the same noises in the daytime.
With regard to the second factor, individuals tend to judge the anno) ance 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 more objectionable than the
blowing of a car horn in the afternoon when background noises might be 5' dBA.
The third factor is related to the interference of noise with activities of
individuals. In a 60 dBA environment, normal conversation would be possible while
sleep might 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.
36
Over time, particularly if the noises occur at predicted intervals and are
expected, individuals tend to accept the noises which intrude into their lives.
Attempts have been made to regulate many of these types of noises including
airplane noise, 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.
b. Noise Abatement Criteria
In order to determine whether highway noise levels are or are not compatible
with various land uses, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has developed
noise abatement criteria (NAC) and procedures to be used in the planning and
design of highways. These abatement criteria and procedures are set forth in the
aforementioned Federal reference (Title 23 CFR Part 772). A summary of the noise
abatement criteria for various land uses is presented in Table N2 on page E-2 of
Appendix E. The Leq, or equivalent sound level, is the level of constant sound
which, in a given situation and time period, has the same energy as does time
varying sound. In other words, the fluctuating sound levels of traffic noise are
represented in terms of a steady noise level with the same energy content.
C. Ambient Noise Levels
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 existing Leq noise level along
Harrison Avenue as measured at 15 meters from the roadway ranged from 62.0 to
71.2 dBA. The ambient measurement sites and measured exterior Leq noise levels
are presented in Figure N2 and Table N3 on pages E-3 and E-4 of Appendix E.
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 1.6 to 4.0 dBA of the measured noise levels. Differences in dBA levels
can be attributed to "bunching" of vehicles, low traffic volumes, and actual vehicle
speeds versus the computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles and single vehicular speed.
d. Future Noise Levels
In general, the traffic situation 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. Due to the complexity of
the problem, certain assumptions and simplifications must be made to predict
highway traffic noise.
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-77-108). 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 (curves, hills,
depressed, elevated, etc.), receptor location and height, and, if applicable, barrier
type, barrier ground elevation, and barrier top elevation.
37
In this regard, it is to be noted that only preliminary design was available for
use in this noise analysis. Only those existing natural or man-made barriers were
included in setting up the model. The roadway sections and proposed. intersections
were assumed to be flat and at-grade. Thus, this analysis represents the "worst-case"
topographical conditions. The noise predictions made in this report are highway-
related noise predictions for the traffic conditions during the year being analyzed.
Peak hour design and level-of-service (LOS) C volumes were compared, and
the volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions were used with the proposed posted
speed limits. Hence, during all other time periods, the noise levels will be no greater
than those indicated in this report.
The STAMINA 2.0 computer model was utilized in order to deternnne the
number of land uses (by type) which will be impacted during the peak hour of the
design year 2016. A land use is considered to be impacted when exposed to noise
levels approaching or exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and/or
predicted to sustain a substantial noise increase. The basic approach was to select
receptor locations such as 7.5, 15, 30, 60, 120, 240, and 480 meters from the center
of the near traffic lane (adaptable to both sides of the roadway). The locati ans of
these receptors were determined by the changes in projected traffic volume;; and/or
the posted speed limits 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-A beginning on page E-5 of Appendix E. Information included in these
tables consists of listings of all receptors in close proximity to the project, their
ambient and predicted noise levels, and the estimated noise level increase for each.
The maximum number of receptors in each activity category that are
predicted to become impacted by future traffic noise under Title 23 CFR Put 772 is
shown in Table N5-A on page E-10 of Appendix E.. These are noted in terms of
those receptors expected to experience traffic noise impacts by approachin€; or
exceeding the FHWA NAC. Forty-two receptors, all in activity category B (activity
category B includes the exteriors of places such as picnic areas, recreation areas,
playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools,
churches, libraries, and hospitals), are anticipated to be impacted by future traffic
noise. Other information included in Table N5-A is the maximum extent of'the 72
and 67 dBA noise level contours. This information can assist local authorities in
exercising land use control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent t o the
roadway within local jurisdiction. For example, with the proper information on
noise,.the local authorities can prevent further development of incompatible:
activities and land uses with the predicted noise levels of an adjacent highway.
Table N6-A on page E-11 of Appendix E indicates the exterior traffic noise
level increases for the identified receptors in each roadway section. Predicted noise
level increases for this project range up to +10 dBA. When real-life noises are
heard, it is possible to barely detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5 DA
change is more readily noticeable. A 10 dBA change is judged by most people as a
doubling or a halving of the loudness of the sound.
38
e. Traffic Noise Impact Anal mis
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 Table N2 value), or [b] substantially exceed the existing noise
levels. The NCDOT definition of substantial increase is shown in the lower portion
of Table N2 (page E-2 of Appendix E). Consideration for noise abatement
measures must be given to receptors which fall in either category. Possible noise
abatement measures are discussed below.
Hiahwav Alignment
Highway alignment selection involves the horizontal or vertical orientation
of the proposed improvements in such a way as to minimize impacts and costs. The
selection of alternative alignments for noise abatement purposes must consider the
balance between noise impacts and other engineering 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. Since the proposed
project calls for widening an existing roadway, the existing alignment cannot be
adjusted to lower noise impacts without increased project costs and environmental
impacts.
Traffic Svstem Management Measures
Traffic management measures which limit vehicle type, speed, volume, and
time of operations are often effective noise abatement measures. For this project,
traffic management measures are not considered appropriate for noise abatement
due to their effect on the capacity and level-of-service on the proposed roadway.
Noise Barriers
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 diffract, absorb, and reflect highway traffic noise
emissions. Solid mass, attenuable measures may include earth berms or artificial
abatement walls.
The project will maintain control of access only in the immediate vicinity of
I40, meaning most commercial establishments and residences will have direct
access connections to the proposed roadway and all intersections will adjoin the
project at grade.
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 then becomes economically unreasonable to construct a
barrier for a small noise reduction. Noise walls are constructed when their cost per
benefited receptor is $ 25,000 or less. Safety at access openings (driveways,
crossing streets, etc.) due to restricted sight distance is also a concern.
Furthermore, to provide a sufficient reduction, a barrier's length would normally be
8 times the distance from the barrier to the receptor. For example, a receptor
located 15 meters from the barrier would normally require a barrier 120 meters long.
An access opening of 12 meters (10 percent of the area) would limit its noise
39
reduction to approximately 4 dBA (FUNDAMENTAL AND ABATEMENT OF
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE, Report No. FlWA-HHI-HEV-73-7976-1,
USDOT, chapter 5, section 3.2, page 5-27).
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, and, thus, would not be acceptable abatement measures in this case.
"Do Nothing" Alternative
The traffic noise impacts for the "do nothing" or "no-build" 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 apprc ximately
3 dBA. This small increase in the present noise level would be barely noticeable to
the people working and living in the area.
g. Construction Noise
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 passers-by 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. However, considering the
relatively short-term nature of construction noise and the limitation of construction
to 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.
h. Summary
Based on these preliminary studies, traffic noise abatement is not
recommended, and no noise abatement measures are proposed. This evaluat ion
completes the highway traffic noise requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772, and
unless a major project change develops, no additional noise reports will be submitted
for this project.
Air Quality Analysis
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from industrial and
internal combustion engines are the most prevalent sources. Other origins of
common outdoor air pollution are solid waste disposal and any form of fire. The
impact resulting from highway construction ranges from intensifying existing air
pollution problems to improving the ambient air conditions. The traffic is the center
of concern when determining the impact of a new highway facility or the
improvement of an old highway facility. Motor vehicles emit carbon monoxide
(CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide
(SO2), and lead (Pb) (listed in order of decreasing emission rate). Automobiles are
considered to be the major source of CO in the project area. For this reason, most
of the analysis presented is concerned with determining expected carbon monoxide
levels in the vicinity of the project due to traffic flow.
40
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration for the receptor closest to the
highway project, two concentration components must be used: local and background. The
local concentration is defined as the CO emissions from cars operating on highways in the
near vicinity (i.e., distances within 100 meters) of the receptor location. The background
concentration is defined by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources as "the concentration of a pollutant at a point that is the result of
emissions outside the local vicinity; that is, the concentration at the upwind edge of the local
sources."
In this study, the local concentration was determined by the NCDOT Traffic
Noise/Air Quality Staff using line source computer modeling and the background
concentration was obtained from the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR). Once the two concentration components were
resolved, they were added together to determine the ambient CO concentration for the
receptor in question and to compare to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)•
Automobiles are 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. Hence, the ambient
ozone and nitrogen dioxide levels in the atmosphere should continue to decrease as a result
of the improvements on automobile emissions. 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
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.
Automobiles are not regarded as significant sources of particulate matter and sulfur
dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources account for less than 7 percent of particulate matter
emissions and less than 2 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 automobiles 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. The burning of
regular gasoline emits lead as a result of regular gasoline containing tetraethyl lead which is
added by refineries to increase the octane rating of the fuel. Newer cars with catalytic
converters burn unleaded gasoline eliminating 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. In the
future, lead emissions are expected to 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. Because of these reasons, it is not expected that traffic on the proposed project
will cause the NAAQS for lead to be exceeded.
41
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 for each of the sensitive receptors
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, mission
factors, and worst-case meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are based on the
annual average daily traffic projections. The traffic volume used for the CAL3QHC model
was the highest volume within the project limits. Carbon monoxide vehicle emission factors
were calculated for the construction year (1996), five years after the construction year
(2001), and the design year of 2016 using the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission
Factors" and the MOBILE5A 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, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.9 ppm is suitable for most suburban/rural
areas.
The worst-case air quality scenario was determined to be located at the intersection
of Harrison Avenue and the SAS Institute. The predicted one-hour CO concentrat ions for
the evaluation build and no-build years of 1996, 2001, and 2016 for the worst-case air
quality scenario are shown in the following table.
TABLE 11. WORST CASE AIR QUALITY SCENARIO
ONE-HOUR CO CONCENTRATION (PPM)
BULD NO - BUILD
RECEPTORS 1996 2001 2016 1996 2001 2016
R-112
(NW CORNER) 4.3 3.9 4.5 6.4 6.0 5.9
R-110
(SW CORNER) 5.1 4.7 5.1 7.3 6.7 6.4
R-114
(SE CORNER) 3.5 3.4 3.9 5.3 4.7 4.5
R-111
(NE CORNER) 4.0 3.8 5.0 7.3 6.3 5.9
Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS (maximum
permitted for 1-hour averaging period = 3 5 ppm; 8-hour averaging 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 Tables Al -A6 on pages F-1 through F-6 of Appendix F for input data
and output.
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 E?A. The
1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) designated these areas as "moderate"
nonattainment areas for 03 and CO. However, due to improved monitoring data, these
42
areas were 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 1995 Transportation
Improvement Program has been determined to conform to the intent of the SIP. The MPO
approval date for the Capital Area 1995 Transportation Improvement Program is October
25, 1994. The USDOT approval date of the Capital Area 1995 Transportation
Improvement Program is February 24, 1995. The current conformity determination is
consistent with the final conformity rule found in 40 CFR Part 51. There have been no
significant changes in the project's design concept or scope, as used in the conformity
analyses.
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 done in accordance with
applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air
quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure that burning
will be done at the greatest practical distance from dwellings and not when atmospheric
conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public. Burning will only be utilized under
constant surveillance. Also during construction, measures will be taken to reduce 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.
10. Stream Modification
The crossing at the Black Creek tributary located approximately 50 m (164
feet) south of Dynasty Drive is anticipated to require only minor channel
improvements at the inlet and outlet ends to accommodate the extension of the
culvert.
The small stream crossing just north of the Black Creek tributary, located
approximately 80 m (262 feet) south of Wyatt's Pond Lane, will require some
channel realignment. In order to accommodate the extension of the existing
culvert, up to 50 m (160 feet) of the intermittent stream's 1 m (3-foot) wide and
0.6 m (2-foot) deep channel will be realigned. The stream is above headwaters.
11. Hazardous Materials
A reconnaissance survey was conducted to locate and identify underground
storage tanks hazardous materials sites within the project corridor. Three sites
have underground storage tanks within the project corridor.
Three underground storage tanks are located at The Pantry, which is in the
northeast quadrant of the Harrison Avenue / Maynard Road intersection. Each of
these tanks has a capacity of 37,879 liters and is believed to have been in use for
approximately four years. The tanks are located approximately 48 m from the
existing roadway.
A second underground storage tank site, Phillips 66, is located west of
Harrison Avenue near the I-40 interchange. This facility has been in operation
since 1991. Three underground storage tanks are present. All three tanks contain
gasoline and are located 61 m from the centerline of the existing roadway.
43
The third underground storage tank site, Grocery Boy, Jr., is located in the
southeast quadrant of the Harrison Avenue / Chapel Hill Road intersection. Three
tanks were installed in 1986 and are located approximately 1 I in from the
centerline of Harrison Avenue. Research for potentially contaminated properties
revealed that approximately 1894 liters of gasoline leaked from these underground
storage tanks. According to Division of Environmental Management files, traces
of dissolved hydrocarbons were found in the monitoring wells. The owners of the
site, however, have taken corrective action, and the site is currently under .
remediation.
No landfills, dumpsites, or other sources of contamination exist along the
project corridor. During final design, efforts will be made to avoid the
underground storage tanks.
12. Geotechnical Impacts
The project is located in northwestern Wake County in the Piedmont
Topographic Province. The area is gently rolling with no hill standing out
prominently above the general land surface. The relief is influenced by Reedy
Creek and its tributaries with a difference in elevation ranging from 15 to 30
meters. The project corridor is well-drained due to the gradual rise and fall of the
terrain.
The project area is underlain by granite, gneiss, and schist. These bed
rocks of complex interlayered and interfingered sequences of high and low grade
metamorphic rocks are located east of the Jonesboro Fault in Wake County. The
soils in the area are well-drained.
13. Construction Impacts
In order to minimize potential adverse effects caused by construction, the
following measures, along with those already mentioned, will be enforced during
the construction of the proposed project:
a. All possible measures will be taken to ensure that the public's
health and safety will not be compromised during the movement of any
materials to and from construction sites along the project and that any
inconveniences imposed on the public will be kept to a minimum.
b. Dust control will be exercised at all times to prevent endangering
the safety and general welfare of the public and to prevent diminishing the
value, utility, or appearance of any public or private property.
C. The contractor shall be required to observe and comply with all
laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees, including those of the
North Carolina State Board of Health, regarding the disposal of solid
waste. All solid waste will be disposed of in accordance with the Standard
Specifications of the Division of Highways. These specifications have been
reviewed and approved by the Solid Waste Vector Control Section of the
Division of Health Services, North Carolina Department of Human
Resources.
44
d. 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.
e. The construction of the project is not expected to cause any serious
disruptions in service to any of the utilities serving the area. Before
construction is started, a preconstruction conference involving the
contractor, pertinent local officials, and the Division of Highways will be
held to discuss various construction procedures, including a discussion of
precautionary steps to be taken during the time of construction that will
minimize interruption of utility services.
f. Prior to construction, a determination will be made regarding the
need to relocate or adjust any existing utilities in the project area. A
determination as to whether the North Carolina Department of
Transportation or the utility owner will be responsible for this work will be
made at that time.
g. 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 done in accordance with applicable local
laws and ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan for Air Quality. Care will be taken to ensure 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.
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. These contract provisions are in accordance with the strict
erosion control measures as outlined in the Department of Transportation's
FHPM 6-7-3-1. Temporary erosion control measures such as the use of
berms, dikes, dams, silt basins, etc. will be used as needed.
i. Prior to the approval of any borrow source developed for use on
this project, the contractor shall obtain a certification from the North
Carolina 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 in
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 site.
45
j. Traffic service in the immediate project area may be subjected to
brief disruption during construction of the project. Every effort will be
made to ensure that the transportation needs of the public will be met both
during and after construction.
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Comments Received from Federal, State, and Local Agencies
The proposed project has been coordinated with appropriate federal, state, and
local municipalities and agencies. Comments were requested from the municipalities and
agencies listed below. Asterisks denote that written responses were received and are
included in Appendix C.
Town of Cary *
Wake County Commissioners
Wake County Schools
Triangle J Council of Governments
N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources:
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Division of Environmental Management
Raleigh Regional Office *
Division of Environmental Health
Division of Land Resources *
N.C. Department of Public Instruction
N.C. Department of Administration -- State Clearinghouse
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers -- Raleigh
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers -- Wilmington
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency -- Atlanta
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service -- Raleigh *
B. Citizens Informational Workshoo
A Citizens Informational Workshop was held on August 30, 1994 in the Page
Walker Hotel in Cary. The purpose of the workshop was to present the proposed
improvements to the community and solicit comments and input from local citizens.
Approximately 120 citizens attended the workshop, which was advertised in the Raleigh
News and Observer and The Cary News. The news release for the workshop is included
in Appendix D as page D-1. Each attendee was given the opportunity to review aerial
photographs showing the proposed improvements to SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) and ask
questions and make comments. In addition, handouts were available to all meeting
attendees. These handouts, which are included as pages D-2 through D-10 in Appendix
D, included a description of the project, a cost estimate for the project, current project
schedules, and a comment sheet which could be completed and returned to the North
Carolina Department of Transportation.
Comments received on the proposed improvements were generally favorable.
Most citizens recognized the need for the proposed widening project. Citizens did have
several concerns, however.
46
Several citizens questioned the need for widening the existing four-lane facility
between Chapel Hill Road and NC 54 (Maynard Road). Residences in this area are
extremely close to the existing roadway, and several would be relocated as a result of the
proposed widening. Several citizens commented that they felt that the recent opening of
Maynard Road would alleviate traffic on this section of Harrison Avenue. Traffic volumes
for the project, however, were developed based upon Maynard Road being open. Traffic
on this section of Harrison Avenue is anticipated to increase, as discussed in Section I. C.
8. of this document. This section of Harrison Avenue has a high number of rear-end
accidents because it does not have a left turn lane. The construction of the proposed left
turn lane will help alleviate the accident problem. Several citizens between Chapel Hill
Road and Maynard Road recognized the benefits of the construction of the left turn lane
to reduce accidents and to aid them in turning into their streets and driveways.
Most citizens were in favor of the widening of Harrison Avenue between Maynard
Road and 1-40. Citizens recognized that this section of Harrison Avenue must be widened
to accommodate steadily increasing traffic volumes in the area. Citizens felt that the
section of Harrison Avenue between Maynard Road and Weston Parkway should be
widened at the same time or before the section between Weston Parkway and I-40.
Several citizens strongly favored the construction of additional lane width for
bicycle traffic and the construction of sidewalks. They felt this would enhance the
residential character of the neighborhood and would accommodate existing and
anticipated pedestrian and bicycle traffic generated by the diversity of the development in
the area.
C. Public Hearin
A public hearing will be held following the completion of this report to provide
more information on the proposed project to local citizens and to gather additional input.
EBM/plr
47

' 17
Ape
? I
Ihlll
1
w
I
.°"J Ile

e i
ketlel 1
I[k ?

!ie
spit
]P!L \
/. 1)Y
WII.LIAM B. UMSTEAD
STATEPARK
".`r. END PROJECT

'..
??
.t,•::;:! Viii";F.:i
Gi/ ?`z

.y
?w
lZ1L
O
ka',
r
Il11
BEGIN PROJECT
NC 54
kYNARD RD. "
a<
?•U toll URA
'rON 21,763
54 L
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
• TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
(R 7RAK°'
VICINITY MAP
CARY
SR 1652 aWWSON AVE.)
FROM CHAPEL.11ILCROAD TO 1.40
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2804
APPROXIMATE SCALE: 11 - OS MILES FIGURE I
,\
# , 9.?;-mac Y?
c ?
?4 ?

P. -
n

?i

??.
30.5 m (100-foot) to 36.6 m (120-foot)
Proposed Right of Way * 2.4 in
2.4 m
(8 feet) (8 feet)
10.2 m 10.2 m
(34 feet) (34 feet)
0.15 m 0.15 m
(0.5 feet). (0.5 feet)
9.6 m 9.6 m
(.32. feet) (32 feet)
VAR.
2.4 m
(8 feet)
TYPICAL SECTION 1
PROPOSED FIVE-LANE CURB AND GUTTER TYPICAL SECTION
8.4 m
-'(28 feet)
7.8 m
126 feet)
0.15 m 0.15 m
(0.5 feet) (0.5 feet)
4.
TYPICAL SECTION 2
PROPOSED FOUR-LANE DIVIDED TYPICAL SECTION
8.4 m
7:8 m
(26. feet)
0.15 m 0.15 m
.5 feet) (0.5 fee
35.1 m (115-foot)
Proposed Right of Way
2.4 m . `2.4 m i
(8 feet) (8 feet)
2.1 m 2.1 m
(7 feet) (7 feet)',
_ 41.2 m (135-foot)
Proposed Right of Way
2.4 m
8 feet)
2.4 m
(8 feet) 13.8 m
(46 f13.8 meet) (46 feet)
0.15 m 0.15 m
(0.5 feet) (0.5 feet).
13.2 m 13.2 m
-- SAP r 90
L
(44 feet) (44 feet)
i
TYPICAL SECTION 3
PROPOSED SEVEN-LANE CURB AND GUTTER TYPICAL SECTION
* Between Chapel Hill Road and
NC 54 (Maynard Road), a 30.5 m (100-foot)
right of way is proposed to accommodate
this typical section. Between SR 1719
(Reedy Creek Church Road) and Weston
Parkway, this typical section will be
accommodated by the existing 36.6 m (120-foot)
right of way.
2.4"m
(8 feet)
!?R_i
PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTIONS
CARY
SR 1652 (HARR)SON AVE)
FROM CHAPEL HILL ROAD TO 1-40
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2804
NO SCALE FIGURE 3
P1A1.'C:riL11V1!: A
-----------------
k,71 33 O
g3g0 173 ?o
W `260
I ~ 230 9
rt 2380 f2j1 ad
430
920 DYNASTY DRIVE
Joo
>c?
O
2ss0 » 57
o'" sz 461 6190 01 1 NC 54 MAYNARD ROAD
t0 r 10740
11960 11601 i 1670
W

a
• z '
0

H

N
Ln
%o

a
to
.. e
0
n

M E o

Ir-
a

0
Il- J7 n
CHAPELH_ ILL ROAD I 8.1.0.6) 450J' 0 `2660
9900 .7630
s0
(a. 1,0*0
18201 r3270 13560
O
? lp
co
3 ?
9 ?
J
e
LEGEND
0000 = vpd
DHV = Design Hourly Volume (%)
D = Directional (%)
-> Direction of D
an Dual Trucks, TTST (%)
om/pm AM -or PM Peak
DHV R•' ?D ,
NOT TO SCALE
?t
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIMION OF HIGHWAYS
°y PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
OFTRAHS
TRAFFIC DATA: 1996
CARY
SR 1652 (HARRISON AVE.)
FROM CHAPM FALL ROAD TO 140
WAKE COUNTY
71P PROJECT U-2804
Sheet 1 of 211 NO SCALE FIGURE 4A
I-40
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA !° -
1996 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
SR 1652 HARRISON AVENUE
--- --- --- - - 6o
oSHOPPING CENTER
ENTRANCE I
? dj9)
J
4050,
8280 _665
WESTON PARKWAY
J
9 P7 1620
H
•o
E c o
In
co
Cq
P
ti^he
850.0 590
800
7910
ao
9
O 600
• ry
O
CO
790
4Ai2RISON OAKS 9 0
_. BLVD, I O AO -
' .e ?ti5. 91
1o y6h1, ?A gr)
1po
260 t'29¢ ?pp5\
8000
u so 90 NO
fq0 1290 0(2670
G
04? SAS_ CAMPUS DRIVE!
•J
0O
11 < Pm
?211? 65 1920)
GARY PARKWAY
2860
0
940 rv
• .. l' ? py0
ti~
C 4
OJ r
,ygO tip! 14200
$ ?"1
250 /O
0
?? ry9o % SR 1650 REEDY CREEK ROAD
F °• ,O
q
. ti
„o
Pn, 220
IIE? 1r?
Zi11 30 'y•1
320
460 11., M 73
210 _
n ?10 740 iVYATT'S_POND_LANE
e
a .
0
v
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
•MATCHLINE A.
o ..
N
00
at
1?
\pc
LEGEND
0000 vpd
DHV a Design Hourly Volume (*A)
D Directional (%) .
31 Direction of D
92.11 Dual Trucks, TTST r/.)
on?pm AM or PM Peak
P.
DHV R''1 wD
NOT TO SCALE
OF 1tOrtT7?
4t'
?v NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
e
TRANSPORTATION
= DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
TRAFFIC DATA. 1996
CARY
SR 1652 MARR.ISON AVE.)
FROM C1MP1 FMJ ROAD T01.40 f
WAKE COUNTY
71P PROJECT U-2804
Sheet 2 of 27 NO SCALE FIGURE 4A I
MATCHUNE A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
12 \ O
J is 2040 ti
5320 `J evv 340
? 1 e •\apoy
_ 2900) 370
530 n• ; ss
' - 2-40 DYNASTY DRIVE'
F O• y
4 y, b
N
e .
O
N
4310 tit SS
685oJ t, OS °.2i NC 54 MAYNARD ROAD
s 1<- 4 n + '78u - --- - -
20000 2030, r270o
z
0
• vJ
H

N
1n

Ri

v
N
O
01 ?
1? N
01 O
N ?.

0
CHAPEL HQL ROAD ?4oJ `3610
2498p 12270 .9
2970 460 29340
p,
O
3 n
O ~
N. HARRISON AVE.
LEGEND
0000 = vpd
DHV = Design Hourly Volume (%)
D = Directional (%)
-? Direction of D
PA Dual Trucks, TTST (%)
orr?pm AM or PM Peak
11 p- , 60
DHV a•u D
NOT TO SCALE
? NCRI}r
lF'
g NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
• TRANSPORTATION
e s DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
OF'M
TRAFFIC DATA: 2016
CARY
SR 1652 OUMSON AVE.)
- FROM CRAPEL M, ROgp Tp 140 '
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2804
Sheet 1 of 21 NO SCALE FIGURE 4B
CARY, NORTH CAROLINA
2016 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
SR 1652 HARRISON AVENUE j
SHOPPING CENTER
ENTRANCE
60
A
S*
• 5260,
WESTON PARKWAY' 13050 928?
8`603770. f^ao.
o
v
h
C O
ct o n
? N
M
m
101E ? 60
CARY PARKWAY
10480
0
0
b _615?j
0 '^
N
1-4V
!0
j?d)00 0
l
6o 10500 4?0 720
.+? 9990
0
' ° 1134 0
600 0
N
,F'o1 630
HARRISON OAKS.BLVD. 0$
y`L a4t 5
• ro:. a
os 11604y yO?\
0
9260 540 3q ?0 6? \'L
•1 so<+4360
f6p 2130
3ti ?o as
QO
0 ?1 SAS CAMPUS DRIVE'
s
O
(6200
O
1210
s
SR 1650 REEDY CREEK ROAD
¢ vy co
0 e?
o• o
O` p
ti
b
. e.
• 11 p,n 200 hry0
C?1 I ?/ ryp 470
580 90 11 p
? 70
290)
1120 WYATT'S POND LANE
570 -
v
y O
a? N
h Ln
h.
N
a
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
MATCHLINE A
LEGEND
0000 - vpd
DHV = Design Hourly Volume (%)
D - Directional (%)
--? Direction of D
rl.n Dual Trucks, TTST (%)
an-/pm AM or PM Peak
11 -IM -3- 60
DHV a'1j D
NOT TO SCALE
00
? Konn, ?
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
'v PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
?F
'1'TpF 7R
TRAFFIC DATA: 2016
CARY
SR 1652 (HARRISON AVE.)
FROM CHAPEL HILL ROAD TO I 40
wAU COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2804
Sheet 2 of 21. NO SCALE FIGURE 4B
?` !in ttXtO d?fpM IEVE qn in .
• P•b
PO ftftkft
1
_ sir r,.fi n
CO) lw
/ V a APEXLODP {•,?/ • ??
'i _ n 3 • ?= ti
r
qy? ?rya ••' •
Z -1c 30
P? • M ? qtX r a ..•}
ic ss f3vrAs O • ? h
2 J. •
• f
Y 'N
1
•? •• o ONO ••• '? •••• t age- •
p 'o
•
Jot.
.
gn,JO, . i XIDARE IAIW
r \ 1 ' ?A/UII •
$ ?iy N e /\ tfF ? F
Z • • ••••s? S,yl• •'
an 1"4 1
• c• f
one,
`
• • r C?
jy, •
O
ase, •
a ?Z • E
.00
?, s*
.. ••••..
aka, • Pc

?rn '• • (Ak : ? 9 NI So f 1 .,( ? 00 p _. e

H,NIr.
? •
• M11EElEq q ??
? < h
..?.yy
? ? N 9
0 •
••
_ d
'S

46
& a
An

° it 09
?j
• ?`JWw•r

ASE
OBEnLM rd,

v

??,?

n0 Sq t3?0

n
. ¦ f?
l'- f.
d PPN3FR
7
- SRI

!L b

l
?
E
?
-
°
r 00

?M b • LI ?
s
Y ,I
O
-•rJ
los

•!
f

?
q
COF
l
? 3(
¦ '? _ \ j? QOM
'T CCLL if
,. OMEI011 .. tET S1 nU

t
•
? o ?• J; , ••
A A
N
v
pt
o
m
S
?O
i
»S
slsll Q> ? MO01t ? n r?2 .• 1 4. g t•
r71 CAPITAL
?.? 1 y/ , .1,.
>
s o

M

i
m

a

a ?
z
? ?
• ¦ m
.0

M z
o

0 o
m
c
is
1 3

0
;

0O
c
Z z

O >

:
>
M f-
3 '
m
!
• y
J?
asc In IV 0
co O
PIP
w
?
-n
n
? ? ? 8 Z C m
Z

x 2
?F
% Z 1 J41
r.. s ...
46
?I n "42
s
r ?
sees
N V ? ? 1
7 •
POP - " . •
v 6R lotp qq,? • •
r I ? •
od ? f_ c1. f • ,•??
Ilrkah ? '?
x
IWrrA.
At I:-
* w Q
yj
E $ ?,?" g ? plVtp 2
RD +
OU 31 UrTLX
J?
s I
3 n y yr??'''
' ..• ? Mlri r ,17
I
r

? u

NC 54 g
r•As

.....:.::::.:.
t :. > : e? t`a• 'te'a" •• u`, u3
NC 54
54 : MAYNARD RD.
011,
BEGIN TIP
PROJECT U-2804
CW
rot,,21,763
*mw case :
STAR OAK

END TIP
`c• -PROJECT U-2804 '

5s:i vim.:.......:.
tiff :::•::` `:'''??.. ...?,

a
TIP PROJECT I-2204
O
!2? • rs i
1 .]pp1 uu• ]LK .I7
-7a .n a o ]7?1.
riv 4c?n w
?::•„?,:::, NC54 - -
? ??e NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
r c ; DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
F?
?>r oFrn
JAIf
OTHER TIP PROJECTS IN THE AREA
< n'M,. /.g..?? CARY
IN SR 1652 (HARRISON AVE.)
-FROM CHAPEL HILL ROAD TO 1110
• a WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2804
APPROXIMATE SCALE: I"=0.5 MILES FIGURE 6
3?
A
LU1Vt At -
C:i
P 314 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
•00 0 .00
ZONE X.
.
3?s LEGEND
3l? INOW 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
LIMITS OF 100-YEAR FLOODWAY
378
321
NE AE
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM
FIRM
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
WAKi COUNTY,
NOIZITI CAROLINA AND
INCORPORATED AREAS
PANEL 311 OF 810
ISEE MAP INDEX FOn JANE ES NOT P111NTE U1
CONTAINS:
COMMUNIrT NUMBER PANEL SUFER
CART, TOWN OF 170238 031t E
PANEL LOCATION
.I
U
"Aw Fit CORPORA
r
VE
0 313? ZO
NE X 338
ZONE
\ Town. of Carv w? 914r,??- .~ MAP NUMBER:
lip, 3118300311 E
370238 EFFECTIVE DATE:
SR 3 0_4.6 ,. MARCH 3, 1991
Town OA C Fedent Emttgency hfanagemenE Agency t
.L._/ ary
a`
?3ZONE AE
a
343 _ tt 1
Extraterritorial Ai`d&c"
370238
N
Off`
OZONE X .."'SR 1766
. MELODY LANE
lack Creek Triburars A*
(Basin 18. Stream 1l)
L_, ,_COR_ P TE
ZONE X --40
346
348-1
ZONE X 4
349•
350
nJI 35:
1
ZONE X 7 _ y?h

? ? µ0E1T7F
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN
(Black Creek Tributary
50 m south ofDynasty Drive)
,R 1652 (HARRISON AVE.)
FROM CHAPEL HILL ROAD TO 140
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2804
FIGURE 7

°z
4h6.
n
d
A.
L

H
°z
ro
a

u
cop)
o n
0

z
O ?a?da3o • aT o
? 'aT
T
O
A
S
oa
? ti ? ? ?'9noN . d??
?? ? zd z
O r r7 y O
c1 0
z°
NgaCC
pLT1 ?C7 C?10 ?0
r
oxyvb
?nH
ITJ
y
O
? x
I --,?
°z
0?
b H
00
O
n
°z
x
x
°
z -?
-'-? wNH0rt z
rrwv000
- -?? rr n fD rt m
?m Harm
C H
N rr m s'M m?
?m
dnr•rtnN
rt m N d• r•
n r•N u~i a'w
N N.7 r, ED
0 .7 E0g .':3 rF m
rr0prhr- $
P- & (D H pi
mNN r•
H 0Q m
rr rt W r1 m
O ::r O " H
H :3 P) 0
9: Mm
aaoa
w• ?
:r m
rt
°z
C17
-d?

Ifvv
rx
F
r
0

b
?A4

"q) t1vol
G
9
? \ 1
APPENDIX B
DISCUSSION OF THE DIVISION OF
HIGHWAYS RELOCATION PROGRAM
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS 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 minimizi the
inconvenience of relocation:
* Relocation Assistance,
* Relocation Moving Payments, and
* Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement.
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff will be
available-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 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 arrange-
ment (in cases of ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments
or nent Supplement' Prygrar-i will i compensate up to .022,500 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/or the
North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5 through 133-18). The
program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in reloca-
ting 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 assistance 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 %r-
chases 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 the 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
B-1
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 dis-
placee 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.
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, includ-
ing incidental expenses, on the purchase of a replacement dweii-ing. The
down payment is based upon what the state determines is required when the
rent supplement exceeds $5250.
It is a 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 finan-
cial 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 san?tary
replacement housing can be provided.
B-2
APPENDIX C
COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM FEDERAL, STATE,
AND LOCAL AGENCIES
TIP # . to. -I.seq - Federal Aid # sTt'
CONCURRENCE FORM
FOR
ASSESSI-IENT OF EFFECTS
County %4Ay-E
Brief Project Description
tiR. lGri2 / I?At=iZiss?l AVErJUE? SRAM t"1a 54 To L•4a
.On JuutE 115 t°t'ls , representatives of the
? North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHwA)
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Other
reviewed the-subject project -and agreed
there are no effects on the National Register-listed property within the project's area of potential
effect and listed on the reverse.
there are no effects on the National Register-eligible properties located within the project's area
of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
there is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties within the. project's area of
potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s) are listed on the reverse.
there is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties within the project's area of
potential effect. The properry/properties and effect(s) are listed on the reverse.
Signed:
n Nh? » 1'1'f S
Date

(over)
C-1
h1Ae.E.
TIP # U• eoo4 Federal Aid # gTP- 1052 0) County
Properties within area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is National
Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
WILAAMI >• tuwlhreAD C,-rATF, pA.Q.V- (VE)
Properties within area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status (NR or DE)
and describe effect.

Initialed: NCDOT?FHwA = SHPO
C-2
Town of Cary
North Carolina
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
June 1, 1994
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E.
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
JUN 0 3
z
y D!VISIC`V OF ?;.
HlGH?ygys 6Q`?
Subject: Cary, Harrison Avenue (SR 1652), From NC 54 to ,
I-40, Wake County, Federal A Project. No.
STP-1652 (1), State Project No. 8.2403701, TIP
Project No. U-2804
Dear Mr. Vick:
I am writing this letter in response to your letter
dated May 13, 1994 which was addressed to the Honorable Koka
E. Booth, Mayor of Cary. Your letter pertained to the
planning.document associated with widening North Harrison
Avenue between Chapel Hill Road (NC 54) and I-40.
The.Town of Cary is not aware of any negative potential
environmental impacts associated with the North Harrison
Avenue Widening Project. In fact, due to traffic
congestion, I am sure that the project would result in
improved air quality due to vehicular congestion along the
current two (2) lane section. Additionally, safety would be
improved by providing additional lanes, including left turn
lanes. The Town is aware that the N.C. Department of
Transportation will be studying three (3) alternatives for
widening North Harrison Avenue consisting of symmetrical
widening, east-side widening, and west-side widening. The
widening and additional right of way along the existing
alignment will likely result in relocations depending upon
the alternative selected. However, the Town is pleased that
the N.C. Department of Transportation is studying
alternatives other than only symmetrical widening to lessen
the impact which in itself would obviously create obstacles
for adjacent properties on both sides.
In your letter, you requested that the Town identify
any permits or approvals which may be required as a part of
this project. I am unaware of any Town permits or approvals
which would be required by the Town of Cary specifically.
The Town would be involved in utility relocations-of water
and sanitary sewer which may encroach within the right of
way. Additionally, the Town would like to be involved in
the project regarding the potential for including sidewalk
along the roadway. This action would require consideration
by the Town Council and budgeting of funds by the Town if
this were approved. Additionally, the Town is extremely
i
316 North Academy Street P.O. &-C-3' Cary, North Carolina 27512-1147 REMLED
PAPER
(919) 4694000 An Equal Opportunity Employer (919) 4694306 Fax
Mr. Frank Vick
June 1, 1994
Page 2
interested in the State's Pedestrian Policy Guidelines and
await receipt of this information in order to begin the
process of documenting the need for pedestrian facilities.
Additionally, the Town appreciates the consideration by the
State of including wider outside lanes for bicycle traffic
considering this route and the access for commuter
bicyclists, as well as access from the Town to Lake Crabtree
Park, the Black Creek Greenway, and the Reedy Creek portion
r
of Umstead Park.
I trust that this letter responds to your request for
information from the Town of Cary. Should you have any. -
additional information which may be necessary from the Town,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sin er y,
S. Douglas Spell, E.
F Town Engineer
SDS/ba
cc: James L. Westbrook, Jr., Town Manager
William B. Coleman, Jr., Assistant Town Manager
102515

C-4

t?ENT oa >y
p F TAKE ?
PRIDE
yn
United States Department of the Interior AWERHA??
o`?P
9
s FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
?•?RCI4 ?e?? Ecological Services
\ Post Office Box 33726
\
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
?a
G July 8, 1994 E

i
' Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
ironmental Branch
d E
i

;_;
nv
ng an
Plann .
Z
t Division of Highways
ortation
ns
f T 2 p(VIV nF
2
p
ra
N.C. Department o C HK3HWA`•
Post Office Box 25201
ry' '
1,?,J_ -,`_,?.?
.27511-5201
Raleigh, ?.vrt;: Car:.lia._- Y}{G`
.- Attention: Eddie McFalls-- - - -

Subject: Scoping Comments Harrison Avenue (SR 1652) from NC
U-28045
54 to I-40, Wake County, TIP Project No..
`
Dear Mr. Vick:
R
Thank you for your letter of May 13, 1994, requesting comments
on the subject project. These comments are provided.-.in
accordance with provisions of 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 Servicels review of any environmental document would be
greatly facilitated if it contained the following information:
1) A description of the fishery and wildlife resources
within existing and required additional right-of-way
and any areas, such as borrow areas, which may be
a??.c.._ ?d direct-l", or indirectly Eby the proposed
?_?? ..re....j - - -
improvements.
2) Acreage of branches, creeks, streams, rivers or
wetlands to be filled.
3) Linear feet of any water courses relocated.
4) Acreage of upland habitats, by cover type, which,..would
be eliminated.
5) Techniques which will be employed for designing and
constructing any relocated stream channels or for
creating replacement wetlands.
C-5
-...... _......
.
6) Mitigation measures which will be employed to avoid,
eliminate, reduce or compensate for habitat value
losses associated with any of the proposed activity.
7). Assessments of the expected secondary and cumulative
impacts of the proposed project on fish and wildlife
resources.
8) An assessment of potential impacts to Federally-listed
species.
The attached revised listing for Wake County identifies thg
Federally-listed endangered (E) and/or threatened (T) and/or
Candidate_(C) species which may occur in*the area of influence j
of this action. The legal responsibilities of the U.S.
Department of Transportation, the Federal agency involved in
this project, under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as-amended, were detailed in material sent to your office
previously. If you require another. copy of this material,
please contact us at 919/856-4520.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments to you
and encourage your consideration of them. Please continue to
advise us of the progress of this project.
t .
Sincerely,
Tom Augs?urger
Acting Supervisor
Attachment

C=6
REVISED MARCH 30, 1994
Wake County
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) - E
Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) - E
Bachman's warbler (Vermivora bachmanii) - E
Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii) -'.E
.Dwarf wedge mussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) - 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
tor them.
Bachman's sparrow - (Aimophila aestivalis) - C2* - :-.--
Southeastern bat (MVotis austroriparius) - C2
Diana fritillary butterfly (Speveria diana) - C2
Green floater (Lasmiaona subviridis) - C2
Yellow lance (mussel) (Ellintio lanceolate) - C2
Neuse slabshell (Elliptio iudithae) - C2
Atlantic pigtoe (mussel) (Fusconaia masoni) - C2
Nestronia.(Nestronia umbellula) - C2
Carolina trillium (Trillium pusillum var. pusillum) -:C2
Sweet pinesap (Monotropsis.odorata) - C2
*Indicates no specimen..in at least 20 years from this county.
' North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr, Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
July 11, 1994
MEMORANDUM ?C' E FV '?rJ
?.
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Higl1ways
Department of Tr portation. , 31944 z
FROM: David Brook Lm?y ,rt ?, .
Deputy Stat i is Preservation Officer ????:> G 1
SUBJECT: Widening SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) from NC 54 to ?FNir,; •"
1-40, Cary, Wake County, U-2804,8.2403701, STP-
1652(1), 94-E-4220-0881
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:
William B. Umstead State Park (WA721). Between 1-40 and US 70, north of
Cary.
John H. McGhee House (WA733). West side of SR 1652, 0.1 mile north of
the junction with SR 1719.
Will Sorrell House (WA734). West side of SR 1652, just north of junction
with SR 1710.
John Wesley Booth House (WA737). South side of SR 1719, 0.1 mile east
of junction with SR 1652.
P. A. Sorrell House (WA738). Northwest side of SR 1652, 0.1 mile
northeast of junction with SR 1650.
...
We believe that the William B. Umstead State Park is eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places under Criterion A for its association with the Civilian
Conservation Corps, and Criterion C for its architecture and landscape
architecture. Also, we believe that the latter four properties are not eligible for
listing in the National Register. The P. A. Sorrell House has undergone numerous
character-altering changes and the John H. McGhee House, Will Sorrell House,
C-8
209 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

r

H. F. Vick
July 11, 1994, Page 2
and John W. Booth House appear to have little historical or architectural
significance.
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
Nicholas Graf
-B. Church
I

C-9
?m
FM208
07-11-94
NORTH[ CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116-WEST JONES STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003
.INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW'COMMENTS
MAILED TO: FROM:
N.C.=DEPT. DF'•TRANSPORTATION MRS. CHRYS BAGGETT
H. FRANKLIN VICK DIRECTOR
PLANNING 8 ENV. BRANCH N.C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
HIGHWAY BLDG./INTER-OFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
SCOPING - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO HARRISON.AVENUE- FROM NC 54
TO •I-40* CARY, NC TIP *U-2804
SAI NO 94£42200881 PROGRAM TITLE - SLOPING
THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED-TO-THE'NORTH CAROLINA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. AS ARESULT OF THE' REVIEW THE FOLLOWING
IS SUBMITTED: ( )-NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X ).COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE=ANY QUESTIONSP PLEASE'CALL THIS OFFICE [phone]

C.C. REGION",J _ y '04 -4 01 ?. '
e?vrgON

C-10
NCW°C,-HCP . FALLS LAKE
TEL:[phone] Jun 20'94 8:51 No. 001 r.U?
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 0-
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullv=d, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Melba McGee
Office of Policy Development, DEHNR
David Cox, Highway.Projects C or-dinat
Habitat Conservation Progra
June 20, 1994
SUBJECT: Request for information from the N.• C. Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) regarding fish and
wildlife concerns for Harrison Avenue (SR 1652), .
from NC 54 to I-40 in Cary, Wake County, North
Carolina, TIP No. U-2804, SCH Project No. 94-0881.
This memorandum responds to a request from Mr. H.
Franklin Vick of the NCDOT for our concerns regarding
impacts on fish and wildlife resources resulting from the
subject project. Biologists on the staff of the N. C.
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have 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).
This project is in an urban setting with little
remaining wildlife habitat. The project does cross two
streams, Black Creek"and an unnamed tributary. Although
these streams are somewhat degraded by near by development,
they are tributaries of Crabtree Creek which contains
populations of freshwater mussels. We recommend that NCDOT
use Best Management Practices to prevent further degradation
of these streams and to protect down-stream resources. Also
any culvert extensions which require channel alterations
should be done using the Voluntary stream Relocation
Guidelines.
In addition to any specific concerns or
recommendations, to help facilitate document preparation and
C-11
7 7
Memo Page 2 June 20, 1994
the review process, our general informational needs are
outlined 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. 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:
The Natural-Heritage Program
N. C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. 0. Box 27687
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
and,
Cecil C. Frost', Coordinator
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. 0. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
in addition, the NCWRC's Nongame and Endangered
Specie; 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 Section
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, N. C. 27604-1168
[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 undergq,
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 (COB). If the COE is not consulted, the
c-12
Memo Page 3 June 20, 1994
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.
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 improved road
access.
9. If construction of this facility is to be
coordinated with other state, municipal, or
private development projects, a description of
these projects should be included in the
environmental document, and all project sponsors
should be identified.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the
early planning stages for this project. If we can further
assist your office, please contact David Cox, Highway
Project Coordinator, at [phone].
CC: Mike Scruggs, District 3 Wildlife Biologist
Wayne Jones, District 3 Fisheries Biologist
Randy Wilson, Nongame/Endangered Species Program Mgr.
David Dell, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Raleigh
1"
C-13
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
X?EHNR
June 20, 1994
TO: Melba McGee, Office of Policy Development
FROM: Monica Swiharf,-Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #94-0881; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements to SR 1652, Cary, TIP No. U-2804
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. 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 and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North CaoGna 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
C-14

Melba McGee
June 20, 1994
Page.2
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to-approval of any borrow/waste site in.a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. To what extent can traffic congestion management. techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
K. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same watershed
is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
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 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.
10625er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb

C-15
State of North Carolina Ilevtewing in -t: GH REGiONAL Ut rl6r_ I
?`
s
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resource
D
t
:
D
a
e
ue
Project Number
pro
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
en determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in
b
e
After review of this project it has
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law
d .
the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
t
o
Ouestions regarding these permits should be addresse
Norm
s relative to these plans and permits are available from the same
li
P
'o
ne
All applications, information and guide 7-
e
Regional Office. !stat
ICATION PROCEDURES or REOUIREMENTS
PERMITS
SPECIAL APPL
in construction or award of
Application 90 days before beg 30 days
Construct a operate wastewater treatment
Permit
construction contracts On-site inspection. Post-application tg0 eays?
.
O
facilities. sewer system extensions, d sewer technical conference usual
systems not discharging into state surface waters.
i
90•(20 days
NPDES • permit to discharge into surface water andlor Application 90 days before begin activion811On-site inspe (ion.
Pro-a conference
l
R {NIAI
permit operate and construct wastewater facilities y }
ep
nstruct wastewater treatment facifitygranted after NPDES
co
dischargi ging into state surface waters.
D time 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-whichever is later.
30 days
Pre-application technical conference usually necessary (NIA)

Water Use Permit
01
7 days
- on of s weeeeived and permit issued
la
s
p
t (15 days)
01 Well Construction Permit ti
al
pp orto
in
the
Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian properly

lication conference usual. Filling
55 days

Dredge and Fill Permit owner. On-site inspection. Pre-app
require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of
a 190 days!
a m
y
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
f0 days
permit to construct 1. operate Air Pollution Abatement

NIA
l90 days)
Q
facilities andfor Emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21H.060 1
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
t be in compliance with 15A NCAC 20.0520.
mus
Demolition or renovations of structures containing
60 days
asbestos material must be in compliance with 15A
ires notification and removal NIA
NCAC 2D.0525 which requ
Contact Asbestos Control Group {9o days)
prior to demolition.
919.733.0820.
0 Complex Source Permit required under 15A NCAC 20.0(!00• land disturbing activity. An erosion d ttedimentatro
The Seuimt,aiation Pollution Control Act of 197$ must be properly addressed for any tonal Otfice (Lantl Duality Sect.1 at least 30

r more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Reg
t must accomoanv the plan 20 days
t30 davsi
ri control plan will be required if one o
A fee of $30 for the first acre and 520.00 for each additional acre or Dar ? tlays!
da s before be innin activity.
f 1973 must be a ddressed with respect to the refenanced Local Ordinance:
r"1 The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act o
Bond amount
HNR
1J .
On-site :nspection usual. surety bond filed witn E
of acres of affectee land Any area 30 days

Mining Permit varies with type mine and number
mined greater than one acre must be permited. The appropriate bond 30 days!
must be received before the permit can be issued. day
1 da
On-she inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit y
North Carolina Burning permit exceecs 4 days
• • •

Special Ground Gearsnce Burning Permit • 22 On-site inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required "it more

n rye acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections
h
:' t day
I day
_- a &4nties in coastal N.C. with organic soils a
t
should be requested id least ten days before actual burn is planned
90.120 days
' t.
INIAI
?
Oil Refining Facilities NIA .,?
If permit required. a0plic:don 60 days before bagir construction.
ineer to: prepare ans.
n
lifi
d 30 days
' g
e
e
Applicant must hire N.C. Qua
inspect C4ZSCriiMlon. cattily construction is =ording to EHNR aoprov-
ito control program. And (60 tlays)
0
U Dam Safety petrriit eo plans. May also require permit under n"Qu
om Corps o Engineers. An inspection of site is neces-
i
f
r
t
a 40A perm
t sc-
ve.ify Hazard Uassificattion
WOs d mus
t
m
im.urn
f a
^ A
o
rary
n a
lee
n
i
f
r
PERMITS
Peril to dri:: *k,ALL a-rr Oil Or gas well
Geophysical exploration Permit
State Lakes Construction Permit
01 4o1 Water oualily Certification
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
File surety bond of $5.000 with ENNR running to State of N.C.
conditional that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon -
abandonment, be plugged according to ENNR rules and regulations.
Application filed with iHNR at least 1o days prior to issue of permit
Application by letter. No standard application for.
Application fee based on structure size is charged. Must include
descriptions & drawings of structure b proof of ownership
of riparian property.
NIA
5250.00 fee must accompany application
* ? CAMA Permit for MINOR development 550.00 fee must accompany apPlication
r- Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the proiect area. If any monuments need to be moved or destroyed. please noufy:
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.
(statutory time
limit)
10 days
(NIA)
10 days
(NIA)
15.20 days
(NIA)
.60 days
(130 days)
55 days
(150 days)
22 days
(25 days)
Notification of the proper regional office is requested if "oiphan" underground storage tanks (LISTS) are discovered during any excavation operation
45 days
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2M.1000 (Coastal Slorwater Rules) is required. (NIA)
• Other Com/m?ents (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to Cite comment authority):
(?5 : SfOI? r?`'O LJ?b'ru,1 G?N?a? r+?.usc ?'ik' /?/,?4'OD/LFc'SS.f.?? tom! ?1-Orbv?L w/17!
DO I S ?+?i??'Jr"`? At:oC•f-?""t [+`( ?/?attw•K? ????y Or?3l6N? Srf b/.?F...Ir
??,,,r. ?t1tt?;bs wvsT ? rMr?i?3S6r•/? t=a,?- ice: PrL'?'t/....i%,?E/c ?S ??'
t. Al-+D -Ot?zv!!??!N? .?k'L7??.• i ? ? wbz.? ?S pi?'3 r?.l ?'a- ???t? S?r??--
"D(1rv1.N G .)1.0•: ? h`r'D C? ?(V &.'?7.+W c..t3.
REGIONAL OFFICES
Ouestions.1pgarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
Asheville Regional Office ? Fayetteville Regional Office
Suite 714 Wachovia Building
59 Woodfin Place Fayetteville, NC 28301
Asheville. NC 28801 [phone] .
(AM) 251.6208

? Mooresville Regional Office
Raleigh Regional Office
?
uite
Barrett Drive 101
3800
North Main Street, P.O. Box 950
919 Raleigh, NC 2760
Mo
Mooresville; NC 28115 . ,
[phone] .;?>. ?:- ,
[phone] _

Regional Office
Wilmington
?
Washington Regional Office Ytcnsion
127 Cardinal Drive E
Avenue
arolina
,C
1
. Wilmington, NC 28405.
s
27889
NC
hington.
Was [phone]
.4919) 9466481 ...:
Winston-Salem Regional Office
8025 North Point Blvd.
Suite 100 " :.- •
Winston-Salem. NC 27106
[phone]. ' .
C-17
Count,/
Later-Agency Project Review Response
.?
Project Nan:: Type of Project 6a,
r--? The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all water system
?--J improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to- the award
of a contract or the initiation of construction (as requ::ed by 15A NCAC 1SC.0300 cc. seq.).
For information, contact the Public Water-Supply Se_tion, [phone].
r--? This project will be classified as a non-community pubic water supply and must comply with
?--? state and federal drinking water monitoring requireme ts. For more information the applicant
should contact the Public Water Supple Section, (915') 33-2321.
r--, If this project is corscrscted as proposes; we will recc?v 6din c the shellfi-ski san.cac?on adjacent
?-! waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information
m, the applicant show c contact the Shellfish Sanitat: r_ Branch ac (919) 726-681-7.
r- The spoil disposal arei(s' ) proposed fort ais project May p:educe a mosquito bret&ng-problem.
?--= For information conce:Wing appropriate mosquito :;,?trol measures, the applicant-should:
contact the Public Health Pest Managernent Section ;919) 726-8970.
r--- The applicanc should be advised chi: prior to -he ie-:ova1 or deir_olitior, of dilapidated
?- structures, an extensive rodent concrci program mz be necessary in order :o prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent areas. The :fc:, iauon .concerning rodent- control,
contact the local heaaa department o: the Public H__i:a Pest Mani;ement.Secc;on-.at (919)
733-6407.
?--- The applicant should be advised to contact the loci'health department :ega_ding their
?-= requirements for set)E c tank installaticns (as require- °unader 15A NCAC 18A..1900 et. seq.).
For information concerning septic tank and other o--site waste disposal mechcds, contact the
On-Site Wastewater Section at (919) ."33-2895.
r-- The applicant should be advised to contract the local .ealth department regarding the sanitary
?---= facilities required for this project.
If existing water liras will be reloc- ed during the construction, plans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the --!vision of En .•cronmental Health, Public Water Supply
Section, Plan Revic Branch, 13 30 Sc. Mary's Street. Raleigh, North Carolina. [phone].
- evlewer Sec6cn/Branch race
C-18

A

.+
.'tea `... •''
_ 0011
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources ??9?
Division of Land Resources
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Charles H. Gardner
Wiliam W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Project Number: -C,0. i County: !,`?,c'L=
Project Name: G }'?'l
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.
L--'_'__ "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 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].
Aar z5/z& Z&
Reviewer Date
P.O. Box 27687 • Melgh, N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Atfirmadve Action Employer
C-19
APPENDIX D
CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP INFORMATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. PUBLIC AFFAIRS DIVISION R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GOVERNOR PO. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C 27611-5201 SECRETARY
RELEASE: IMMEDIATE DATE: AUGUST 17,1994
CONTACT: KEVIN C. JONES DISTRIBUTION: 92
RELEASE NO: 327
NCDOT TO HOLD INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP ON THE PROPOSED WIDENING
OF HARRISON AVENUE
RALEIGH -- The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) will hold a citizen's
informational workshop August 30 on the proposed widening of Harrison Avenue (S.R. 1652)
from N.C. 54 (Chapel Hill Road) to I-40 in Wake County.
The open house workshop will be. held between 4:30 p.m. and 8 p.m. in the Page-Walker
Hotel,at 316 North Academy Street in Cary. The hotel is near the Cary Town Hall. All interested
individuals may attend at their convenience.
NCDOT personnel will be able to provide information, answer questions and take
comments regarding the project. be a of the
The purpose of the workshop is to provide the public an opportunity to part
planning for the project. The information gathered will be included in the Environmental
Document, that is prepared for the project.
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services for disabled persons who wish to
participate in the hearing to comply with the American Disabilities Act (ADA). To receive special
services, please contact Eddie McFalls (Planning & Environmental) P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh,
N.C. 27611 or call [phone] to give adequate notice prior to the date of the workshop.
The North Carolina Board of Transportation members for this area are Charles Grady,
Juanita Shearer-Swink and Robert J. Burford, all from Raleigh.

D-1 PHONE [phone] AfTk
BE TSY WARREN HARRISON FAX [phone]
DIRECTOR.OF PUBLICAFFAIRS
North Carolina Department of ZYansportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
WIDENING OF HARRISON AVENUE (SR 1652)
FROM NC 54 TO 1- 40
. CARY
WAKE COUNTY
T. I. P. NUMBER U - 2804
AUGUST 30; 1994

' r
Citizens Informational Worksho
D-2
CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
WIDENING OF HARRISON AVENUE (SR 1652)
FROM NC 54 (CHAPEL HILL ROAD) TO I-40
CARY, WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2804
Purpose of the Citizens Informational Workshop
The purpose of the citizens informational workshop is to
involve the public in the project planning process. If you
have comments or suggestions about the proposed improvements
described in this handout, please let a representative of the
North Carolina Department of Transportation know. A comment
sheet is provided for you to write down your questions or
concerns so that we can keep a record of and fully consider
your ideas, comments, and suggestions.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation realizes
individuals living close to a proposed project want to be
informed of the possible effects of the project on their
homes and businesses. However, exact information is not
available at this stage of the planning process. Additional
design work is necessary before the actual right of way
limits can be established. More detailed information will be
available at a later date.
Written comments on this project may be left with North
Carolina Department of Transportation representatives at the
citizens informational workshop or submitted through the
mail. If additional information is needed or you would like
to submit comments after the citizens informational workshop,
please address your requests and comments to:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Description and Purpose of the Project
The North Carolina Department of Transportation's
1995-2001 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) proposes
to widen Harrison Avenue (SR 1652) in Cary from NC 54 to
I-40 (see Fig. 1). This 3.4 mile (5.5 km) long section of
Harrison Avenue functions as a minor urban arterial. The
purpose of the proposed project is to increase the traffic
carrying capacity of the facility and thereby reduce the
travel times of motorists using the facility.
D-3
Project Schedules and Costs
The widening of Harrison Avenue has been divided into
three segments: TIP Project U-2804 A, TIP Project U-2804 B,
and TIP Project U-2804 C. TIP Project U-2804 A extends from
NC 54 to Maynard Road. TIP Project U-2804 B will improve
Harrison Avenue between Maynard Road and Weston Parkway.
TIP Project U-2804 C begins at Weston Parkway and continues
through the I-40 interchange. The schedules and estimated
costs for each segment are summarized in the following
tables:
TABLE 1. Transportation Improvement Program Schedules
Segment Right of Way Construction
Acquisition
U-2804 A PY PY
U-2804 B 1998 2000
U-2804 C 1995 1996
* "PY" represents "post year" and means that funding is not
currently set up in the TIP. However, the TIP is updated
each year, and, as funds become available, post year
projects such as U-2804 A may be funded.
TABLE 2. Current Cost Estimates for TIP Project U-2804
Segment Right of Way Construction Total Project
Acquisition Segment Cost
U-2804 A $ 600,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 2,400,000
U-2804 B $ 2,000,000 $ 4,600,000 $ 6,600,000
U-2804 C $ 700,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 2,500,000
SUBTOTALS $ 3,300,000 $ 8,200,000
TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 11,500,000
Current Status
Currently, planning and environmental studies for
widening and improving Harrison Avenue are in progress. The
environmental assessment is scheduled to be completed in
January, 1995. A public hearing for the project will be held
in the spring of 1995. The improvements currently under
investigation are described in the next paragraphs.

D-4
Proposed Improvements to Harrison Avenue
Between NC 54 and I-40, existing Harrison Avenue will be
widened to a five-lane curb and gutter facility (see Fig. 2).
The construction of additional turning lanes at intersections
with heavy traffic will also be investigated throughout the
project.
Three methods for widening Harrison Avenue are being
studied in order to provide the most cost-effective design ,
while minimizing impacts on the social, economic, and natural
environment: symmetrical widening, east-side widening, and
west-side widening. It is likely that a combination of these
alternatives will be selected as the recommended alternative.
In order to further enhance the traffic carrying
capacity of Harrison Avenue, the incorporation of the
existing traffic signals and a proposed signal at the Cary
Parkway into a new closed loop traffic signal system is being
investigated.
The construction of sidewalks and wider outside travel
lanes to accommodate bicycle traffic along Harrison Avenue
are also being studied.
Proposed Improvements to the Harrison Avenue/I-40 Interchange
Improvements to Harrison Avenue's interchange with I-40
are also being investigated. Currently, the North Carolina
Department of Transportation plans to either widen or replace
the existing structure over I-40 so that five lanes of
traffic can be carried over I-40. This will enable double
left turning lanes to be used by traffic turning onto the
westbound I-40 on-ramp from northbound Harrison Avenue and
onto southbound Harrison Avenue from the westbound I-40
off-ramp. The westbound I-40 on-ramp and the westbound I-40
exit ramp will both have to be widened to two lanes to
accomodate the double left turns.
Anticipated Right of WaY Impacts
The existing right of way along Harrison Avenue varies
in width from 65 feet to 120 feet. The widening project will
require additional right of way and will likely require the
relocation of residences in areas along the project.
However, until both environmental studies and preliminary
design are completed, specific right of way impacts to
individual properties cannot be determined. Anticipated
impacts to individual properties will be presented at the
public hearing to be held in the spring of 1995.
EBM
D-5
COMMENT SHEET
CARY
PROPOSED WIDENING OF HARRISON AVENUE (SR 1652)
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT U-2804
WAKE COUNTY
AUGUST 30, 1994
(You do not have to answer all the questions on these
sheets, but please take the time to give us your.
comments and concerns regarding this project. Please
continue any responses on the back of this sheet.)
NAME:
ADDRESS:
commENTS, CONCERNS AND/OR QUESTIONS REGARDING PROJECT U-2804:
WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS ON THE
FOLLOWING PAGES.
D-6
WAS THE PROJECT ADEQUATELY EXPLAINED TO YOU? WERE
NCDOT REPRESENTATIVES UNDERSTANDABLE AND CLEAR IN THEIR
EXPLANATIONS? PLEASE EXPLAIN.
WERE DISPLAY MAPS EASY TO READ AND UNDERSTAND?
PLEASE EXPLAIN.
WERE NCDOT REPRESENTATIVES COURTEOUS AND HELPFUL?
PLEASE EXPLAIN.
HOW MIGHT WE BETTER PRESENT PROPOSED PROJECTS AND ADDRESS
CITIZEN'S CONCERNS IN FUTURE INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOPS?
HOW DID YOU HEAR ABOUT THIS MEETING TODAY?
DO YOU FEEL THE MEETING WAS ADEQUATELY PUBLICIZED?
PLEASE EXPLAIN.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS:
THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS RELATE TO TRANSPORTATION IN YOUR AREA
AND NORTH CAROLINA IN GENERAL.
WHAT IS YOUR AREA'S MOST PRESSING TRANSPORTATION NEED?
WHAT IS NORTH CAROLINA'S MOST PRESSING TRANSPORTATION NEED?
D-7
HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CONDITION OF THE ROADS IN YOUR AREA?
GOOD FAIR POOR
WHY?
WHAT ROAD IN YOUR AREA NEEDS THE MOST IMPROVEMENT? WHY?_
HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CONDITION OF THE ROADS IN NORTH
CAROLINA? GOOD FAIR POOR
WHY?
WHAT ROAD IN NORTH CAROLINA NEEDS THE MOST IMPROVEMENT? WHY?
DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS REGARDING ANY
TRANSPORTATION RELATED SUBJECT?
Additional continents can be sent to Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E.,
Manager of the Planning and Environmental Branch, North
Carolina Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 25201,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611.
D-8
i64
Ape
Mn
1

so --

i

Imm cm .
APR P*M

® -?
'6..
END PROJECT
1
O
I
4
BEGIN PROJECT
IS
M U, tY
IL-y21,763
MCI'
D-9
q ?
vu.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
SR 1652 (HARRISON AVENUE)
FROM NC 54 (CHAPEL HILL ROAD)
TO 1- 40
CARY, WAKE COUNTY -
T. L P. PROJECT U - 2804
0 mile 1/2 FIGURE 1
z
0
U
?W w
Z
W
?
m
J Q a
V Z
0
0
-
C/) ?
? = E
X
O
a
O O Q

a I
c
o
C7
AL E
io t
N
et
N
r
E
E
C9
E
I at N
bo N
N
C0
0
E
CIS
?t
m
Cd
E

co
I r N

? m
.Q

E C
?
0
tV
_
+
r.
Z

D-10
? U
C
CD
?
O

Q
0
CD
c CD
ca
Z C C U O
r- H 7 'Q '
C

3m r-
0

ca
O
? 0.
'
" tCD
" m >
? >
a
m Z
0--
,
O L

c 0
°
o c
3 0 o
?-
?0
Q-
cm 0 0m
co
p m
0 U
m
W 0? 0 C Z 7
C C gyp' ? ?
H ca r= 0.0 0mm
r C m 10

0
O'Q mo o ?_
cQ? mo L??3
7E
0 CD
? :2 ? Co
z am 03 omE_
r- r
M m _
? E s
0
-- E Y
y N m
E L 0 !4
U m??
a 04 R: 0
?

W ?
Cc .:. u,
co o
O oc_
m o-0
0 o° H
0 N
- > O 6?
:5 0 E 6

m> C
G O
-0 O
- U
Z
?
Lo .._
° m o
.
3 .
p U 4
U?
i0 A a_
c c
?
O o m to c w 0 C° C
t U? "' ? i6 c U 3 U
m ? ? A eC U ?
t0 C m o 5 O)O
U o ?Z
a° o m E
0
- ?t a,

i
m m 0 U Z

~
c
A C
L
m
Z
A
m
Z m U a° O 0)
0 r C
0 _
7t 4S m'Q E
Z .?
?_E3 ni?i.? ri03

TABLE N1
BEARING: SOUNDS BOMBARDING US DAILY
•

140 Shotgun blast, jet 30 m away at takeoff PAIN
Motor test chamber HUMAN EAR PAIN THRESHOLD
130
Firecrackers
120 Severe thunder, pneumatic jackhammer
Bockey crowd
Amplified rock music UNCOMFORTABLY LOUD
110
Textile loom
100 Subway train, elevated train, farm tractor
Power lawn mower, newspaper Press
Beavy city traffic, noisy factory LOUD
90
D Diesel truck 65 kmph 15 m away
E 80 Crowded restaurant, garbage disposal
C Average factory, vacuum cleaner
I Passenger car 80 kmph 15 m away MODERATELY LOUD
B 70
E Quiet typewriter
L 60 Singing birds, window air-couditlaear
S Quiet automobile
Normal conversation, average office QUIET
SO
Household refrigerator
Quiet office VERY QUIET
40
Average hams
30 Dripping faucet
whisper 1.5 m away
20 Light rainfall, rustle of leaves
AVERAGE pERSOR'S TsEESBOLD OF BEARING
whisper JUST AUDIBLE
10
0 TBRESHOLD FOR ACUTE BEARING
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 R. Jane aunt and published in the Chicago
Tribune in an illustrated graphic by Tom Heinz.)
E-1
TABLE N2
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
Hourly A-weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Activity
Category Leq(h) Description of Activity Category
A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public
(Exterior) need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to
serve its intended purpose.
H 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels,
(Exterior) hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above.
(Exterior)
D -- Undeveloped lands
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and
(Interior) auditoriums.
Source: Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 772, U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration
DEFINITION OF SUBSTAArIAL INCREASE
Hourly A-weighted Sound Level - decibels OBA)
Existing Noise Level Increase in dBA from Existing Noise
in Lsq(h) Levels to Future Noise Levels
< 50 > 15
> 50 > 10
Source: North Carolina Department of Transportation Noise Abatement Guidelines.

E-2

FIGURE N2
AMBIENT MEASUREMENT SITES
SR 1652 Harrison Avenue
County
Fr54 to om .2403701 0 TIP # e U-2804
State Project # 8
0

E-3
TABLE N3
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
(Log)
SR 1652, Harrison Avenue
From NC 54 to North of I-40, Wake County
state project f 8.2403701, TIP i U-2804
SITE
LOCATION
NOISE
LEVEL
DESCRIPTION (dBA)
1. SR 1652, 175 motors south of SR 1747 Grassy 62
2. SR 1652, 560 motors South of SR 1650 Paved 71
3. SR 1652, 50 meters South of SR 1719 Grassy 69
4. SR 1652, 750 meters South of I-40 Grassy 68

I
Notes The ambient noise level situ were measured at 15 motors from
the center of the nearest lane of traffic.
E-4
TABLE N4-A 1/5
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue), Alternative t 1, symmetrical Widening
From NC 54 to North of I-40, Wake County
State Project # 8.2403701 TIP # U-2804
AMBIENT NEA REST NOISE
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEVEL
ID 1 LAND USE CATEGORY
AAA/?AAAA??AA NAME DISTANCE (m)
?AAAAAaaA? LEVEL

s?sa? NAME DISTANCE (m)

A-AAAYRA- -L- -Y- MAXIMN

AA..AAAAAAAA- INCREASE

AASA
Section A
Frain Beginning of Project to NC 54
1 Residence B SR 1652 48.0 R 54 SR 1652 48.0 R - - 61 + 7
2 Business C " 30.0 R 58 n 30.0 R - - 65 + 7
3 Business C " 20.0 L 62 " 20.0 L - - 68 + 6
From NC 54 to Maynard Road (SR 1747)
4 Residence 2 SR 1652 45.0 R 55 SR 1652 45.0 R - - 62 + 7
5 Residence B to 32.0 R 58 M 32.0 R - - .65 + 7
to 0
12 R 64 N 12.0 R -------------------R/W--------------
6
7 Residence
Residence B
B of .
35.0 R 57 of 35.0 R - - 64 + 7
8 Residence B to 37.0 L 57 M 37.0 L - - 63 + 6
9 Residence a to 24.0 L 60 to 24.0 L - - * 67 + 7
10 Residence B It 38.0 L 57 to 38.0 L - - 63 + 6
11 Residence B n 20.0 L 62 N 20.0 L - - * 68 + 6
12 Residence B of 25.0 L 60 to 25.0 L - - * 67 + 7
13 Residence B n 23.0 L 60 w 23.0 L - - * 67 + 7
14 Residence B to 25.0 R 60 " 25.0 R - - * 67 + 7
15 Residence B to 25.0 R 60 to 25.0 R - - It 67 + 7
16 Residence B ° 18.0 R 62 " 18.0 R - - * 59 + 7
17 Residence B ^ 50.0 R 54 to 50.0 R - - 61 + 7
18 Residence B n 18.0 R 62 to 18.0 R - - * 69 + 7
19 Residence a of 20.0 R 62 M 20.0 R - - * 68 + 6
20 Residence B " 25.0 R 60 to 25.0 R - - * 67 + 7
21 Residence B „ 18.0 L 62 a 18.0 L - - It 69 + 7
= It 0
15 L 63 to 15.0 L -------------------R/W--------------
22 Residence B .
23 Residence B of 16.0 L 63 to 16.0 L - - to 70 + 7
24 Residence B to 23.0 R 60 N 23.0 R - - It 67 + 7
• 25 Residence B to 75.0 R 50 It 75.0 R - - 57 + 7
26 Residence B e 80.0 R 49 to 80.0 R - - 56 + 7
27 Residence B ° 25.0 R 60 of 25.0 R - - It 67 + 7
28 Residence B to 30.0 R 58 to 30.0 R - - 65 + 7
NOTE: Distances are from center of the existing or proposed roadways. -L-,> Proposed roadway's noise level contribution.
vels are hourly A-weighted noise levels.
l
i -Y--> Noise level from other contributing roadways.
se
All no e
vels shows
l
i as exterior/interior (58/48). * -> Traffic noise impact (per 23 CFR Part 772).
Category se
E no e
E-5
TABLE N4-A 2/5
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue), Alternative # 1, Symmetrical Widening
From NC 54 to North of I-40, Wake County
state project # 8.2403701 TIP # U-2804
AMBIENT WERREST NOISE
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS , LEVEL
ID # LAND USE CATEGORY NAME DISTANCE (m) LEVEL NATO: DISTANCE (m) -L- -Y- MAXIMUM INCREASE
qq--------- ggNY
ggqqpqqqqqq iiiggqpqqqi iqq ggqYqYYYY .
Section A (Cont'd)
From NC 54 to Maynard Road (SR 1747) (COnt'd)
29 Residence B SR 1652 30.0 R 58 SR 1652 30.0 R - - 65 + 7
30 Residence B IS 30.0 R 58 It 30.0 R - - 65 + 7
31 Residence B It 30.0 R 58 " 30.0 R - - 65 + 7

It 27.0
32 Residence B
L
59
"
27.0
L -
- It 66
+
7
33 Residence B " 20.0 L 62 It 20.0 L - - * 68 + 6
34 Residence B It 28.0 R 59 " 28.0 R - - * 66 + 7
35 Residence B It 55.0 R 53 It 55.0 R - - 60 + 7
36 Residence B " 23.0 R 60 of 23.0 R - - * 67 + 7
Frcm Maynard Road (SR 1747) to Dynasty Drive
37 Residence a SR 1652 24.0 R 60 SR 1652 24.0 R - - *.67 + 7
38 Residence B ° 30.0 L 58 " 30.0 L - - 65 + 7
39 Residence B It 24.0 L 60 It 24.0 L - - * 67 + 7
40 Residence B " 26.0 L 60 ^ 26.0 L - - * 66 + 6
41 Residence B " 31.0 R 58 " 31.0 R - - 65 + 7
42 Residence B " 32.0 R 58 a 32.0 R - - 65 + 7
43 Residence B If 33.0 R 58 " 33.0 R - - 64 t 6
44 Residence B " 33.0 R 58 It 33.0 R - - 64 + 6
45 Residence B It 34.0 R 58 " 34.0 R - - 64 + 6
46 Residence B " 34.0 R 58 " 34.0 R - - 64 + 6
47 Residence B If 34.0 R 58 It 34.0 R - - 64 + 6
48 Residence B " 28.0 L 59 a 28.0 L - - It 66 + 7
49 Residence B " 25.0 L 60 a 25.0 L - - * 67 + 7
50 Residence B It 23.0 L 60 It 23.0 L - - * 67 + 7
51 Business C " 40.0 R 56 w 40.0 R - - 63 + 7
52 Business C It 35.0 L 57 ° 35.0 L - - 64 + 7
53 Business C It 38.0 L 57 " 38.0 L - - 63 + 6
54 Business C It 63.0 L 52 " 63.0 L - - 58 + 6
55 Business C N 53.0 R 54 " 53.0 R - - 60 + 6
56 Business C " 40.0 R 56 „ 40.0 R - - 63 + 7
57 Business C It 32.0 L 58 „ 32.0 L - - 65 + 7
NOTE : Distances are from center of the existing or proposed roadways. -L-i> Propos ed roadway's noise level contribution.
1111 noise levels are hourly A-weighted noise levels. -Y-i> Noise level from other contributing roadways.
wn
h
l as exterior/ interior (58/48). * i> Traffic noise impact (per 23 CFR Part 772).
Category E noise l o
s s
eve
E-6
TABLE N4-A 3/5
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue), Alternative / 1, Symmetrical Widening
From NC 54 to North of I-40, Wake County
State Project t 8.2403701 TIP i U-2804
• AMBIENT NEA REST NOISE
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEVEL
ID t LAND USE CATEGORY
aaaaaaaaaaa NAME DISTANCE (m)

aaao?
?oaaa LEVEL

aaa NAME DISTANCE (m)

aaaaaaaaa -L- -Y- MAXIMUM

aa- --------- INCREASE

aaaa
Section A (Cont'd)
From Maynard Road (SR 17 47) to Dynasty Drive
58 Business C SR 1652 30.0 L 58 SR 1652 30.0 L - - 67 + 9
section B
From Dynasty Drive to Reedy Creek Road
59 Residence B SR 1652 32.0 L 66 'SR 1652 32.0 L - - * 66 0
60 Residence B " 20.0 R 70 It 20.0 R - - * 70 0
61 Residence B " 33.0 R 66 to 33.0 R - - * 66 0
62 Residence 8 " 25.0 R 68 It 25.0 R - - * 68 0
63 'Residence B " 32.0 R 66 It 32.0 R - - * 66 0
64 Residence B If 33.0 L 66 It 33.0 L - - * 66 0
65 Residence B
„
31.0
L
67
It
31.0
L
- - * 67
0
66 Residence 8
25.0
R
68
of
25.0
R
- - * 68
0
67 Residence B " 50.0 R 62 It 50.0 R - - 62 0
68 Residence B " 68.0 R 60 „ 68.0 R - - 59 - 1
69 Residence B It 24.0 R 68 It 24.0 R - - * 69 + 1
70 Residence B of 47.0 R 63 It 47.0 R - - 63 0
71 Residence B It 27.0 R 67 N 27.0 R - - * 68 + 1
72 Residence B It 44.0 R 64 It 44.0 R - - 64 0
73 Residence a It 47.0 L 63 " 47.0 L - - 63 0
74 Residence B It 34.0 R 66 It 34.0 R - - * 66 0
75 Residence B
It
30.0
L
67
It
30.0
L
- - * 67
0
76 Residence e It 58.0 L 61 It 58.0 L - - 61 0
•
77 Residence 8
It
57.0
L
61 n
57.0
L
- - 61
0
78 Residence B It 52.0 L 62 " 52.0 L - - 62 0
79 Residence B " 72.0 L 59 It 72.0 L - - 59 0
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 (56/48). * -> Traffic noise impact (per 23 CFR Part 772).

E-7
TABLE N4-A
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue), Alternative t 1, Symmetrical Widening
From NC 54 to North of I-40, Wake County
State Project i 8.2403701 TIP i U-2804
AMBIENT NEA REST
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADMAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY
ID t LAND USE CATEGORY RAMS DISTANCE ( m) LEVEL NAME DISTANCE (m)

QQtlQOtltltltl-
---
-QQtltl
tl--tl
tli -tltl --tl--tltltltltltl
Section B (COnt'd)
From Reedy Creek Road to Cary Parkway
80 Residence a SR 1652 65.0 L 60 SR 1652 65.0 L
81 Business C " 80.0 L 56 " 80.0 L
82 Residence B ° 43.0 R 64 " 43.0 R

83 Residence
8 "
25.0
R
66
"
25.0
R
84 Residence B " 24.0 R 68 " 24.0 R
85 Residence B " 50.0 R 63 " $0.0 R
Section C
From Cary Parkway to Weston Parkway
86 Residence a SR 1652 31.0 L 65 SR 1652 31.0 L
87 Residence B " 64.0 L 39 ° 64.0 L
88 Residence a " 33.0 L 65 " 33.0 L
89 Church E " 41.0 R WOO " 41.0 R
90 Residence 8 ^ 47.0 L 62 " 47.0 L
91 Residence B " 45.0 L 62 " 45.0 L
92 Residence a ° 22.0 L 68 N 22.0 L
93 Residence a ° 58.0 L 60 " 58.0 L
94 Residence 9 " 45.0 L 62 " 45.0 L
95 Residence B ° 40.0 L 63 ^ 40.0 L
96 Residence B ° 106.0 L 54 ° 106.0 L
97 Residence B " 86.0 R S6 " 86.0 R
98 Residence 8 76.0 R 57 " 76.0 R
99 Residence E " 57.0 R 60 " 57.0 R
100 Residence B ^ 66.0 R 59 " 66.0 R
101 Residence E " 64.0 R 59 ° 64.0 R
4/5
NOISE
PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEVEL
-L- -Y- MAXIMUM j INCREASE
QQQ--tl-QQQQQQ QQOtl
61 + 1
58 0
64 0
_ - * 69 + 1
70 + 2
63 0
_ - • 68 + 3
61 + 2
_ - * 67 + 2
65/40 + 2/+0
64 + 2
64 + 2
70 + 2
- - 62 + 2
- - 64 + 2
_ - • 66 + 3
- - 56 + 2
- - 58 + 2
59 + 2
62 + 2
61 + 2
- - 61 + 2
NOTE: Distances are from center of the existing or proposed roadways. -L--> Proposed roadway's noise level contribution.
-- -Y--> Noise level from other contributing roadways.
All noise levels are hourly 1?-weighted anise levels. r 23 CFR part 772).
8 noise levels shown as exterior/interior (58/48). • -> Traffic noise impact (pe
Category
I
i
E-8
TABLE N4-A 5/5
Leq TRAFFIC NOISE EXPOSURES
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue), Alternative # 1, Symmetrical Widening
From NC 54 to North of I-40, Wake County
State Project / 8.2403701 TIP t U-2804
• AMBIENT NEA REST NOISE
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEV EL
ID i LAND USE CATEGORY
wwtlwwwtlwtltl== NAME DISTANCE (m)
===tltltltlwtlw= LEVEL
=wtl RAMS DISTANCE (m)
rtltlwtltltltltl -L- -Y- MAXIMUM
- - - - =tltlwtlw- INCREASE
wwwtl
Section D
From Weston Parkway to Harrison Oaks Blvd.
102 Residence B SR 1652 59.0 R 59 SR 1652 59.0 R - - 62 + 3
103 Residence B " 44.0 R 62 " 44.0 R - - 65 + 3
104 Residence B " 82.0 R 56 " 82.0 R - - Be + 2
105 Business C " 88.0 R 55 " 88.0 R - - 57 + 2
106 Business C " 48.0 L 61 " 48.0 L - - 64 + 3
107 Business C " 42.0 L 62 " 42.0 L - - 65 + 3
108 Business C " 35.0 L 64 " 35.0 L - - 67 + 3
109 Business C " 37.0 L 64 " 37.0 L - - 66 + 2
From Harrison Oaks Blvd. to SAS
110 Business C SR 1652 40.0 L 63 SR 1652 40.0 L - - 66 + 3
From HAS to End of Project
111 Business C SR 1652 90.0 R 55 SR 1652 90.0 R - - 59 + 4
112 Business C " 50.0 L 61 " 50.0 L - - 65 + 4
113 Business C ^ 42.0 L 62 " 42.0 L - - 67 + 5
s
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).
E-9
TABLE N5-A
FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue)
Alternative f 1, Symmetrical Widening
Frew NC 54 to North of I-40, Wake County
State Project # 8.2403701 TIP 1 U-2604
Maximum Predicted Contour
Leq Noise Levels Distances
dBA (Maximum)
Description 15 m 30 m' 60 m 72 dBA 67 dBA

section A
1. Beginning of Project to NC 54 68 63 58 <16 M 26 M
2. NC 54 to Maynard Road (SR 1747) 67 63 58 <16 M 25 M
3. Maynard Road to Dynasty Drive 69 65 60 416 M 31 M
Section B
4. Dynasty Drive to Reedy Creek Road 69 65 60 <16 M 31 M
5. Reedy Creek Road to Cary Parkway 70 66 60 18 M 34 M
section C
6. Cary Parkway to Weston Parkway 70 66 61 19 M 36 M
Section D
7. Weston Parkway to Harrison Oaks Blvd. 69 65 60 20 M 36 M
8. Harrison Oaks Blvd. to SAS 70 66 60 22 M 38 M
9. SAS to End of Project 71 67 62 26 M 44 M
TOTALS
1/3
Approximate Number of Impacted
Receptors J)ccording to
Title 23 CFR Part 772
A B C D E
0 0 0 0 0
0 24 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0
0 12 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 0
0 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 42 0 0 0
NOTES - 1. 15m, 30m, and 60m distances are measured from center of nearest travel lane.
2. 72 dBA and 67 dBA contour distances are measured from center of proposed roadway.
I
r
E-10
TABLE N6-A 1/3
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASE SUMMARY
SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue)
Alternative # 1, Symmetrical Widening
From NC 54 to North of I-40, Wake County
State Project / 8.2403701 TIP f U-2804
• Receptor Exterior Noise Level Increases Substantial Impacts Due
Noise Level to Both
Section 4=0 1-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 >-25 Increases(1) Criteria(2)
• Section A
1. Beginning to NC 54 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
2. NC 54 to Maynard Rd 0 0 52 0 0 0 0 0 0
3. Maynard Rd to Dynasty Dr 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Section B
4. Dynasty Dr to Needy Creek Rd 19 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5. Reedy Creek Rd to Cary Pkwy 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Section C
6. Cary Pkwy to Weston Pkwy 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Section D
7. Weston Pkwy to Harrison Oaks 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
S. Harrison Oaks to SAS 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
9. SAS to End of Project 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTALS 22 33 56 0 0 0 0 0 0
(1) As defined by only a substantial increase (See bottom of Table N2).
(2) As defined by both criteria in Table N2.
E-11
TABLE Al
CAL3QRC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCO, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2804, Harrison Ave, Wake County RUN: Harrison Ave, (SR 1652) BUILD 1996
DATE: 01/19/1995 TIME: 13:54:58.80
SITE i METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS - .0 CM/S
U - 1.0 M/S
LINK VARIABLES
LINK DESCRIPTION
VD .0 CM/S 20 - 108. CM
CLAS - 5 (E) ATIM - 60. MINUTES MIJ03 - 400. M An - 1.9 PPM

LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF B W WC QUEUE
X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. SR 1652 NB APPR 7.3 -304.8 7.3 .0
2. SR 1652 NB QUE 7.3 -9.1 7.3 -24.7
3. SR 1652 NHLT QUE .0 -9.1 .0 -86.1
4. SR 1652 NB DEP 7.3 .0 7.3 304.8
5. SR 1652 SB APPR -7.3 304.8 -7.3 .0
6. SR 1652 SB QUE -7.3 9.1 -7.3 14.1
7. SR 1652 SBLT QUE .0 9.1 .0 24.7
8. SR 1652 BB DEP -7.3 .0 -7.3 -304.8
9. SAS EB APP -304.8 -3.7 .0 -3.7
10. SAS EB QUE -14.6 -3.7 -17.0 -3.7
11. SAS EB DEP .0 -3.7 304.8 -3.7
12. SAS WS APPR 304.6 3.7 .0 3.7
13. SAS WB QUE 14.6 3.7 33.0 3.7
14. SAS WB DEP .0 3.7 -304.8 3.7
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
4

RECEPTOR OOORDINATES (M)
X Y
Z
1. EEC 112 (NW CORNER) -47.2 30.5 1.8
2. REC 110 (SW CORNER) -36.6 -24.4 1.8
3. REC 114 (SE COMM) 105.2 -36.6 1.8
4. REC 111 (NE COMM) 96.0 27.4 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
305. 360. AG 1383. 15.8 .0 17.1
16. 180. AG 930. 100.0 .0 11.0 .36 2.6
77. 180. AG 1143. 100.0 .0 3.7 **** 12.8
305. 360. AG 1448. 15.6 .0 17.1
305. 180. AG 1448- 15.8 .0 17.1
5. 360. AG 349. 100.0 .0 11.0 .28 .8
16. 360. AG 949. 100.0 .0 3.7 .41 2.6
305. 180. AG 1383. 15.8 .0 17.1
305. 90. AG 30. 15.8 .0 13.4
2. 270. AG 2130. 100.0 .0 7.3 .13 .4
305. 90. AG 169. 15.8 .0 13.4
305. 270. AG 169. 15.8 .0 13.4
18. 90. AG 2130. 100.0 .0 7.3 .87 3.1
305. 270. AG 30. 15.8 .0 13.4
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 1.-360.
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1 REC2 REC3 REC4
MAX 4.3 5.1 3.5 4.0
DEGR. 111 71 287 248
F-1
TABLE A2
CAL3QBC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2804, Harrison Ave, Wake County RUN: Harrison Ave, (SR 1652) BUILD 2001
DATE: 01/19/1995 TIME: 13:55:47.74
SITE i METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS . .0 CM/S
U = 1.0 M/S
LINK DESCRIPTION
VD * .0 CM/S ZO - 108. CM
CLAS - 5 (E) Axim - 60. MINUTES MIRE - 400. M AMB 1.9 PPM
LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EP S w V/C QUEUE
X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. SR 1652 NB APPR 7.3 -304.8 7.3 .0
2. SR 1652 NS QUE 7.3 -9.1 7.3 -27.3
3. SR 1652 HBLT QUE .0 -9.1 .0 -177.0
4. SR 1652 NB DEP 7.3 .0 7.3 304.8
5. SR 1652 SB APPR -7.3 304.8 -7.3 .0
6. SR 1652 SB QUE -7.3 9.1 -7.3 14.9
7. SR 1652 SBLT QUE .0 9.1 .0 27.0
8. SR 1652 88 DEP -7.3 .0 -7.3 -304.8
9. SAS ES APP -304.8 -3.7 .0 -3.7
10. SAS EB QUE -14.6 -3.7 -17.7 -3.7
11. SAS EB DEP .0 -3.7 304.8 -3.7
12. SAS WB APPR 304.8 3.7 .0 3.7
13. SAS WB QUE 14.6 3.7 35.6 3.7
14. SAS WS DEP .0 3.7 -304.8 3.7
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR X Y Z
1. REC 112 (NW CORNER) -47.2 30.5 1.8
2. REC 110 (SW COMM) -36.6 -24.4 1.8
3. REC 114 (SE COMM) 105.2 -36.6 1.8
4. NEC 111 (NE CORNER) 96.0 27.4 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
305. 360. AG 1484. 12.4 .0 17.1
18. 180. AG 787. 100.0 .0 11.0 .40 3.0
168. 180. AG 910. 100.0 .0 3.7 **** 28.0
305. 360. AG 1563. 12.4 .0 17.1
305. 180. AG 1563. 12.4 .0 17.1
6. 360. AG 301. 100.0 .0 11.0 .30 1.0
18. 360. AG 748. 100.0 .0 3.7 .45 3.0
305. 180. AS 1484. 12.4 .0 17.1
305. 90. AG 41. 12.4 .0 13.4
3. 270. AG 1681. 100.0 .0 7.3 .15 .5
305. 90. AG 196. 12.4 .0 13.4
305. 270. AG 196. 12.4 .0 13.4
21. 90. AG 1681. 100.0 .0 7.3 .88 3.5
305. 270. AG 41. 12.4 .0 13.4
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 1.-360.
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1 REC2 REC3 REC4
MAX 3.9 4.7 3.4 3.8
DECK. 106 68 269 249
i

F-2
T
TABLE A3
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2804, Harrison Ave, Wake County RUN: Harrison Ave, (SR 1652) BUILD 2016
DATE: 01/19/1995 TIME: 13:56:43.10
SITE t MtTEOHOLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS . ,0 CM/S VD . .0 CM/S ZO - 108. CM
U - 1.0 M/S CLAS - 5 (E) ATD4 * 60. MINUTES MDD3 - 400. M AMB 1.9 PPM
T.TNK VIRTIAT.V_Q
s
LINK DESCRIPTION LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF B W V/C QUEUE
I X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEC) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. SR 1652 NB APPR 7.3 -304.8 7.3 .0
2. SR 1652 N8 QUE 7.3 -9.1 7.3 -35.7
3. SR 1552 NBLT QUE .0 -9.1 .0 -94.8
4. SR 1652 NB DEP 7.3 .0 7.3 304.8
5. SR 1652 SB APPR -7.3 304.8 -7.3 .0
6. SR 1652 SB QUE -7.3 9.1 -7.3 18.0
7. SR 1652 SBLT QUE .0 9.1 .0 34.0
8. SR 1652 SR DEP -7.3 .0 -7.3 -304.6
9. SAS EB APP -304.8 3.7 .0 -3.7
10. SAS EB QUE -14.6 -3.7 -20.2 -3.7
il. SAS EB DEP .0 -3.7 304.8 -3.7
12. SAS WB APPR 304.8 3.7 .0 3.7
13. SAS WS QUE 14.6 3.7 62.2 3.7
14. SAS WB DEB .0 3.7 -304.8 3.7
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS

RECEPTOR COORDINATES (M)
X Y
Z
1. BEC 112 (NW CORNER) -47.2 30.5 1.8
2. BEC 110 (SW CORNER) -36.6 -24.4 1.8
3. REC 114 (SE CORNER) 105.2 -36.6 1.8
4. DEC 111 (NE COMM) 96.0 27.4 1.8
MDDEL RESULTS
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
305. 360. AG 1785. 10.1 .0 17.1
27. 180. AG 778. 100.0 .0 11.0 .51 4.4
86. 180. AG 778. 100.0 .0 3.7 **** 14.3
305. 360. AG 1906. 10.1 .0 17.1
305. 180. AG 1906. 10.1 .0 17.1
9. 360. AG 319. 100.0 .0 11.0 .38 1.5
25. 360. AG 625. 100.0 .0 3.7 .56 4.1
305. 180. AG 1785. 10.1 .0 17.1
305. 90. AG 74. 10.1 .0 13.4
6. 270. AG 1424. 100.0 .0 7.3 .23 .9
305. 90. AG 278. 10.1 .0 13.4
305. 270. AG 278. 10.1 .0 13.4
48. 90. AG 1424. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.03 7.9
305. 270. AG 74. 10.1 .0 13.4
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 1.-360.
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1 REC2 REC3 REC4
MAX 4.5 5.1 3.9 5.0
DEGR. 109 69 305 248
F-3

TABLE A4
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2804, Harrison Ave, Wake County RUN: Harrison Ave, (SR 1552) NO-BUILD 1996
DATE: 01/19/1995 TIME: 13:57:29.96
SITE i METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS . .0 CM/S VD .0 CM/S ZO - 108. CM
U - 1.0 M/S CLAS - 5 (E) ATIM - 60. MINUTES MIXH - 400. M AMB 1.9 PPM
r.'rWW V1nr1nr.4C

LINK DESCRIPTION I LINE COORDINATES (M) - I LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H w WC QUEUE
X1 Yl X2 Y2 (M) (DEC) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. SR 1652 RB APPR 5.5 -304.8 5.5 .0
2. SR 1652 NB QUE 5.5 -9.1 5.5 -26.6
3. SR 1652 NBLT QUE .0 -9.1 .0 -86.1
4. SR 1652 RB DSP 5.5 .0 5.5 304.8
5. SR 1652 SB APPR -5.5 304.8 -5.5 .0
6. SR 1652 SE QUE -5.5 9.1 -5.5 15.4
7. SR 1652 SBLT QUE .0 9.1 .0 26.6
8. SR 1652 SS DEP -5.5 .0 -5.5 -304.8
9, SAS EB APP -304.8 -3.7 .O -3.7
10. SAS EB QUE -11.0 -3.7 -13.4 -3.7
11. SAS ED DEP .0 -3.7 304.8 -3.7
12. SAS WB APPR 304.8 3.7 .0 3.7
13. SAS wB QUE 11.0 3.7 109.3 3.7
14. SAS WB DEP .0 3.7 -304.8 3.7
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
comwnu= (M)
RECEPTOR X Y Z
1. REC 112 (NW CORNER) -47.2 30.5 1.8
2. REC 110 (SW CORNER) -36.6 .-24.4 1.8
3. REC 114 (SE COMM) 105.2 -36.6 1.8
4. REC 111 (NE CORNER) 96.0 27.4 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
305. 360. AG 1383. 15.8 .0 13.4
17. 180. AG 465. 100.0 .0 7.3 .49 2.9
77. 180. AG 1143. 100.0 .0 3.7 **** 12.8
305. 360. AG 1448. 15.8 .0 13.4
305. 180. AG 1448. 15.8 .0 13.4
6. 360. AG 194. 100.0 .0 7.3 .42 1.0
17. 360. AG 1007. 100.0 .0 3.7 .60 2.9
305. 160. AS 1383. 15.6 .0 13.4
305. 90. AG 30. 15.8 .0 13.4
2. 270. AG 2169. 100.0 .0 7.3 .17 .4
305. 90. AG 169. 15.8 .0 13.4
305. 270. AO 169. 15.8 .0 13.4
98. 90. AG 2169. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.40 16.4
305. 270. AG 30. 15.8 .0 13.4
wnm ANGLE RANGE: 1.-360.
REMARKS : in search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first WIND CONCENTRATION
angle, of the angles with same maximum ANGLE (PPM)
concentrations, is indicated as maximum. (DEGR) REC1 REC2 REC3 REC4
MAX 6.4 7.3 5.3 7.3
DEER. 107 72 310 236
F-4
TABLE A5
CAL3QBC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2804, Harrison Ave, Wake County RUN: Harrison Ave, (SR 1652) NO-BUILD 2001
DATE: 01/19/1995 TIME: 13:56:02.58
SITE a METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS . .0 CM/S
U - 1.0 M/S
LINK VARIABLES
• LINK DESCRIPTION
VD . .0 CM/S So - 108. CK
CLAS • 5 (E) ATLM - 60. MINUTES MnM - 400. M AM ? 1.9 PPM
LINK COORDINATES (M)
X1 Yl X2 Y2
1. SR 1652 NB APPR 5.5 -304.8 5.5 .0
2. SR 1652 KB QUE 5.5 -9.1 5.5 -29.0
3. OR 1652 NBLT QUE .0 -9.1 .0 -177.0
4. SR 1652 PH DEP 5.5 .0 5.5 304.8
5. SR 1652 SB AM -5.5 304.8 -5.5 .0
6. OR 1652 SB QUE -5.5 9.1 -5.5 15.9
7. OR 1652 SBLT QUE .0 9.1 .0 29.5
8. OR 1652 SB DO -5.5 .0 -5.5 -304.8
9. SAS ES App -304.8 -3.7 .0 -3.7
10. SAS EB QUB -11.0 -3.7 -14.2 -3.7
11. SAS ES DEP .0 -3.7 304.8 -3.7
12. SAS WB AM 304.8 3.7 .0 3.7
13. SAS WS QUE 11.0 3.7 155.7 3.7
14. SAS WB DEP .0 3.7 -304.8 3.7
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR I
X Y Z
LENGTH ERG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
(M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
305. 360. AG 1484. 12.4 .0 13.4
20. 180. AG 386. 100.0 .0 7.3 .53 3.3
168. 180. AG 910. 100.0 .0 3.7 **** 28.0
305. 360. AG 1563. 12.4 .0 13.4
305. 180. AG 1563. 12.4 .0 13.4
7. 360. AG 154. 100.0 .0 7.3 .44 1.1
20. 360. AG 794. 100.0 .0 3.7 .65 3.4
305. 180. AG 1484. 12.4 .0 13.4
305. 90. AG 41. 12.4 .0 13.4
3. 270. AG 1727. 100.0 .0 7.3 .23 .5
305. 90. AG 196. 12.4 .0 13.4
305. 270. AG 196. 12.4 .0 13.4
145. 90. AG 1727. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.63 24.1
305. 270. AG 41. 12.4 .0 13.4

1. REC 112 (NW CORNER) -47.2 30.5 1.8
2. REC 110 (SW CORKER) -36.6 -24.4 1.6
3. REC 114 (SE CORKER) 105.2 -36.6 1.8
4. BBC 111 (NE COPPER) 96.0 27.4 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 1.-360.
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to WIND CONCENTRATION
the maximum concentration, only the first ANGLE (PPM)
angle, of the angles with same maximum (DEGH) REC1 REC2 REC3 REC4
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
MAX 6.0 6.7 4.7 6.3
DEGR. 104 73 307 231
F-5
TABLE A6
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2804, Harrison Ave, Wake County RUN: Harrison Ave, (SR 1652) NO-BUILD 2016
DATE: 01/19/1995 TIME: 13:59:00.25
SITE i METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS . .0 CM/S VD .0 CM/S ZO - 108. CM
U - 1.0 M/S CLAS - 5 (E) ATIM - 60. MINUTES MUM - 400. M NO 1.9 PPM
T.TRQ V1T2TAl%r.F_Q

LINK DESCRIPTION LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W WC QUEUE
I X1 Y1 X2 T2 (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. SR 1652 NB APPR 5.5 -304.8 5.5 .0
2. SR 1652 NS QUE 5.5 -9.1 5.5 -39.9
3. SR 1652 NBLT QUE .0 -9.1 .0 -832.9
4. SR 1652 NB DEP 5.5 .0 5.5 304.6
5. SR 1652 SS APPR -5.5 304.8 -5.5 .0
6. SR 1652 SS QUE -5.5 9.1 -5.5 19.5
7. SR 1652 SBLT QUE .0 9.1 .0 40.6
8. SR 1652 BB 00 -5.5 .0 -5.5 -304.8
9. SAS EB APP -304.8 -3.7 .0 -3.7
10. SAS EB QUE -11.0 -3.7 -16.8 -3.7
11. SAS EB DEP .0 -3.7 304.8 -3.7
12. SAS WB APPR 304.8 3.7 .0 3.7
13. SAS WB QUE 11.0 3.7 197.3 3.7
14. SAS WS DEP .0 3.7 -304.8 3.7
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS

RECEPTOR COORDINATES (M)
X Y
Z
1. REC 112 (NW CORNER) -47.2 30.5 1.8 .
2. REC 110 (SW CORNER) -36.6 -24.4 1.8
3. REC 114 (BE COMM) 105.2 -36.6 1.8
4. EEC 111 (NE CORNER) 96.0 27.4 1.6
MODEL RESULTS
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same msxiaum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
305. 360. Ar, 1%ez. 1U.1 v &a. .
31. 180. AG 386. 100.0 .0 7.3 .68 5.1
824. 180. AG 785. 100.0 .0 3.7 **** 137.3
305. 360. AG 1906. 10.1 .0 13.4
305. 180. AG 1906. 10.1 .0 13.4
10. 360. AG 160. 100.0 .0 7.3 .55 1.7
31. 360. AG 672. 100.0 .0 3.7 .82 5.2
305. 180. AG 1785. 10.1 .0 13.4
305. 90. AG 74. 10.1 .0 13.4
6. 270. AG 1463. 100.0 .0 7.3 .32 1.0
305. 90. AG 278. 10.1 .0 13.4
305. 270. AG 278. 10.1 .0 13.4
186. 90. AG 1463. 100.0 .0 7.3 1.54 31.1
305. 270. AG 74. 10.1 .0 13.4
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 1.-360.
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
DEGR) REC1 REC2 REC3 REC4
MAX 5.9 6.4 4.5 5.9
DEGR. 103 73 308 233
F-6

r
RECEIVED
140V 2 91995
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 22, 1995
Mr. Eric Galamb
DEHNR - Div. of Environmental Management
Water Quality Lab
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Dear Mr. Galamb:
GARLAND B. GARRETT JR.
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Federal Environmental Assessment for Cary, SR 1652 (Harrison
Avenue), from Chapel Hill Road to I-40, Wake County, Federal Aid
Project STP-1652(1), State Project 8.2403701, TIP Project U-2804
Attached is a copy of the Environmental Assessment and the Natural
Systems 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 January 11, 1996. 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.
Sincerely,
H. Frank in is ,P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/plr
NO
NO
Proposed Widening of 5R 165? (Harrison Ave)
to a Five Lane Curb and Gutter Facility-
from NC 54 to I-40
Wake County
TIP No. U-2804
State Project No. 8.2405-01
Federal Aid Project No. STP-165:(1)
Natural Resources Technical Report
U-2804
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT
Matt K. Smith. BIOLOGIST
August 15, 1994
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ........................................1
1.1 Project Description ...........................1
1.2 Purpose .......................................1
1.3 Methodoiooy ...................................1
2 0 Physical Resources ..................................3
2.1 Soils ....................... ..................2
2.3 Water Resources ................................3
2.2.1 Stream Characteristics ................3
3.2.2 Best Usa,e Ciassification .............4
2.2.3 Water Quality ..........................
2.3.4 Anticipated In,pacts: Water 2esaurces..4
3.0 Biotic Resources ............. ..................... 5
3.i Terrestrial Communities ........... ............
3.1.1 Man Dominated Community .............. .
3.1.2 Secondarv Forest Community ............ 6
3.2 Aquatic Communities ............................
3.2.1 Intermittent Stream Communities....... .
3.2.2 Stream Communities .................... S
3.2.3 Pond Communities ...................... 5
3.3 Anticipated Impacts: Biotic Resources .......... 8
4.0 Jurisdictional Issues ............................... 10
4.1 Waters of the United States ................... 10
4.1.1 Studv Area Wetlands `
and/or Surface Waters .............. 11
1..1.2 Permits ................................ 11
4.1.3 Mitigation ............................. 13
4.2 Rare and Protected Species ..................... 12
4.2.1 Federally-Protected Species ............. 12
4.2.2 Federal Candidate and
State Listed Species ............... 16
5.0 References ..........................................15
Appendix A: List of Species Observed
.0 INTRODUCTION
The foliov''ng Natural Resources Technical Report is
i'?mitted to assist in the preparation of a Environmental
ssessment (EA) for the proposed project. The project is
located along SR 1652 from NC 54= to _-4V in Wake County,
(.Figure 1).
1.1 Project Description
The.pronosed project call ' s for the widening of SR ih53
from the existing two lane facility to a five-lane curb and
gutter facility from NC 54 to Weston Parkway and t;le widening
of SR 1652 to a seven lane faciiity from ;yeston Parrwa; to I-
0. The interchange at I-410 wi i 1 . improvea kVidenin?;
the bridge to five lanes. the westbound entr nce e1 ;t
ramps wi l l each be widened to two lanes. Tale widen inl of SR
10-53 is divided into? our sect ii-ns A-D and is to proceed in
each section by one of three al`er latii"es. Alternative I
calls for the svmmetrical -?i--iden-ng of Ste. 1653. Alternative 2
cal' is for the widen in? to be. ;.one '?_ imari 1 -v _ to the east 'n
A ternative i CS l S fol" the 'i'i Qen 117g to i)e Gone pr imar i i y- to
file west.
1.2 Pu Dose
The purpose of this technical report is to inventory.
catalog and describe the various natural resources likely to
be impacted by the proposed action. This report also
attempts to identify and est-mate the probable consequences
of the antici-^ated impact to these resources.
Recorimendations are made for measures which will minimize
resource impacts. These descriptions and estimates are
relevant only in the context of existing preliminary design
concepts. If design parameters and criteria change,
additional field investigations will need to be conducted.
1.3 Methodology
Research was conducted prior to field investigations.
Information sources used in this pre-field investigation of
the study area include: U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
quadrangle maps (Cary), National Wetland Inventory (NWI)
Maps, NCDOT aerial photographs of project area (1:2000) and
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil maps of Wake County.
Water resource information was obtained from publications of
the Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
(DEHNR, 1993) and from the NC Center for Geographic
Information and Analysis publication of the Environmental
Sensitivity Base Maps of Wake County. Information concerning
the occurrence of federal and state protected species in the

0^
t r?
IdS7
?i
.p1
I
a
iAOri
12
Z-
.t
1719
s !„
es
1 e s
1,. cu. tot Res t
n4'? 51 R <. o y
10 euse I Rolesnlle I
whams 401
A cane 96
EWakeflel
' .- • , 6 2 MOW t ei+h ?7ar113 Llck?
1
3 4 b I
INS gle 60
K tdale Rock e•
.1
L ? GaMe 47,
Ae ?' 2 Aubur
I: ~ 8
uller
4o'' 2?1
Wlls
J
.I S sOpt ? . pe
__?_?a-..-• 444 .IS ?1 j;2 .? .
`'? ?S 1152 v
1.f32 . J .]441 ,?., 1ZL. 17!9
•••?* 1Z17.•o9 i
.i::f I6 i 0 01 p ? .Oq
... .? 1 ? v ? .. 1241.
-2r
. :u
1l32
IJ IRE CARP
iron; 21,763
1?7
0
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT O
TRANSPORTATION
1 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
SR 1652 (HARRISON AVENUE)
FROM NC 54 (CHAPEL HILL ROAD) TO I - 40
WAKE COUNTY
T. 1. P. NO. U - 2804
- Figure 1

study area was gathered from the Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) list of protected and candidate species and the N.C.
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) database of rare species and
unique habitats.
General -Field surreys were conducted along the proposed
alignment by NCDOT biologist Matt Smith on august 2, 1994.
Plant communities and their associated wildlife were
identified and recorded. Wildlife identification involved
using a variety of observation techniques: active searching
and capture, visual observations (binoculars). identifying
characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scat, tracks and
burrows). Cursory studies for aquatic organisms were
conducted using visual observations; tactile searches for
benthic organisms were administered as well. Organisms
captured during these searches were identified and teen
released. jurisdictional wetland determinations were
performed utilizing delineation criteria prescribed in the
"Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual" (Environment
Laboratory, 1957).
2.0 Physical Resources
Soil and water resources, which occur in the study area.
are discussed below. Soils and availability of water
directly influence composition and distribution of flora and
fauna in any biotic community.
`,Fake County lies in the Piedmont Physiographic
Providence. The topography of the study area is
characterized by rolling hills and rocky clay soils.
Elevations in the study area are range from 107 m (350 ft) to
152 m (500 ft) above mean sea level.
2.1 Soils
_ Soils found in the study area are well drained to poorly
drained and occur on gentle to steep slopes. Some map units
are hydric soils and others may contain inclusions of hydric
soils. An inventory of the dominant soil units which occur
in the project area can be found in Table 1.
Table 1. Prominent Soils in the Project Area
Map Unit Specific Percent Hydric
Symbol Mapping Unit Slope Classification
AgB Appling Sandy Loam 2-6 ---
AgB2 Appling Gravelly Sandy
Loam, eroded 2-6 ---
AgC A.ppling Gravelly Sandy
Loam, eroded 6-10 ---
AgC2 Appling Gravelly Sandy Loam 6-10 ---
Table 1. Continued
Map Unit Specific Percent Hydric
Symbol Mapping Unit Slope Classification
CeD Cecil Sandv Loam, 10-15
---
CeF Cecil Sandy Loam 15-45 ---
CgB2 Cecil Gravelly Sandy Loam 2-6 ---
CgC2 Cecil Gravelly Sandy Loam 6-10 ---
Cn Colfax Sandy Loam 0-6 ---
EnB2 Enon Fine Sandy Loam '-"3 ---
EnD2 Enon Fine Sandy Loam, eroded 10-15 ---
EnC2 Enon fine Sandy Loam. e.coded 6-10 ---
Gu Gullied Land ---
Me Mantachie Soils 0-i hvdric
inclusions
W<<F
Wilkes Soils
20-45
---
W-,r Worsham Sandy Loam 0-4 hydric
2.2 Water Resources
This section contains information concerning those water
resources likely to be impacted by the project. Water
resource information encompasses physical aspects of the
resource, its relationship to major water systems, Best Usage
Standards and water quality of the resources. Probable
impacts to these water bodies are also discussed, as are
means to minimize impacts.
2.2.1 Stream Characteristics
The proposed project is located in the Neuse River
Basin and crosses Black Creek. two unnamed tributaries to
Black Creek, and an unnamed tributary to Crabtree Creek. The
project will also necessitate the placement of fill into a
pond located along the tributary to Black Creek.
Unnamed tributaries located in the study area are all
intermittent streams. These streams are narrow with deeply
eroded channels that flow over substrate composed of small
rocks or bedrock. During dry months these streams may
experience periods of no flow.
Black Creek crosses the study area by way of a double
barrel box culvert located just west of Dynasty Drive. This
stream is approximately (10 ft) wide and ranges in depth from
less than 0.3 m (1 ft) to 0.9 m (3 ft). The substrate in the
stream is mostly sand with clay sediments and gravel in the
infrequent riffle zones. High turbidity was observed in the
stream during the recent site visit, which may only be the
result of recent heavy rainfall.
The pond found in the study area is a man made
impoundment of a tributary to Black Creek. Water depths in
the pond range from less than 0.3 m (1 ft) to over 1.5 m (5
ft) deep. The substrate of the pond is clay and the ponds
water quality is degraded by nutrient runoff from surrounding
developments.
2.2.2 Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage ciassification
by the Division of Environmental Management (DEM). Unnamed
streams carry the same best usage ciassification as streams
to which they are tributaries. The best usage classification
for Black Creek is Class C NSW and the best usage
classification for Crabtree Creek is Class B NSW. Class B
waters are defined as suitable for primary recreation and any
other usage specified by the "C" class-I.fi-cation. Class t'
waters are defined as suitable for aquatic life propagation
and survival, fishing, wildlife, secondary recreation.. and
agriculture. Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) refers to
waters which require limitations on nutrient inputs.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I
or WS-II) nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within
1.6 km (1 mile) of project study area.
2.2.3 Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN)
is managed by DEM and is part of an ongoing ambient water
quality monitoring program which addresses long term trends
in water quality. The program assesses water quality by
sampling for selected Benthic macroinvertebrate organisms at
fixed monitoring sites. Macroinvertebrates are sensitive to
very subtle changes in water quality; thus, the species
richness and overall biomass are reflections of water
quality. Specific data is not available for streams in the
study area.
Point source dischargers located throughout North
Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Any discharger
is required to register for a permit. The NPDES lists no
dischargers for streams in the vicinity of the proposed
project.
2.2.4 Anticipated Impacts: Water Resources
The construction of the proposed project will result in
the following impacts to water resources in the study area.
The placement of 22 m (72 ft) of fill into a pond along
section B of Alternate 1 & 2, the extension of the culvert at
Black Creek in all three alternates, and the placement of
fill in the unnamed tributary to Crabtree Creek from the
construction of the I-40 west exit ramp.
Construction-related impacts include reduced water
auality. increased sedimentation, toxic runoff. alterations
of the water level due to interruptions or additions to water
flow. and the destruction of natural substrate due to stream
channel relocation. Reduced water quality could include
changes in turbidity, temperature. dissolved oxygen, and
nutrient limitation. In order to minimize impacts to water
resources in the study area. NKCDOT's Best Management
Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters and Sediment
Control Guidelines should be strictly enforced during the
construction stage of the project.
3.0 Biotic Resources
Biotic resources include aquatic and terrestrial
ecosystems. This section describes those ecosystems
encountered in the stud:- area, as well as, the relationships
between fauna and flora within these ecosystems. Composition
and distribution of biotic communities throughout the project
area are reflective of topography. hydrologic influences and
past and present land us.es in the study area. Descriptions
of the terrestrial systems are presented,-in the context of
plant community classifications. Dominant flora and fauna
observed, or likely to occur, in each community are described
and discussed.
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when
applicable) are provided for each animal and plant species
described. Subsequent references to the same organism will
include the common name only.
3.1 Terrestrial Communities
Two terrestrial communities were identified in the
project study area. These communities are: Man Dominated and
Secondary Forest Community. Community boundaries are
frequently ill-defined: contiguous communities generally
merge without any transition zone between them. Many faunal
species are highly adaptive and may populate the entire range
of terrestrial communities discussed.
3.1.1 Man Dominated Community
The man dominated community occurs along the roadside
shoulders and powerline rights-of-way in the study area. The
composition of this community is highly variable and includes
maintained lawns and cutovers. Common species found in this
community include: fescue (Festuca sp.), plantain (Planta'o
spp.), catbriar (Smilax sp.), grape (Vitis sp.), honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), blackberry (Rebus sp.), giant cane
G
(Ai-undina.ria. i-antea), dandelion (Taraxacurn officinale), do,..x
fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), hav-scented fern
(Dennstaedtia punctilvbula), sensitive partridgepea (Cassia
nictitans), trumpet vine (C.ampsis ra.dicans), and winged sumac
(Rhus copallina). This community also contains sapling size
trees of several species found in adjacent woodlands,
including, loblolly pine (Pines taeda), tulip poplar
(L.iriodendron tulipifera), red cedar (Juniperis vir'?in.iana),
and red maple (Aces rubrum).
The variable habitats that this community offers allows
certain animal species to flouris:. Those species which
flourish are often species which are highly adaptable or
those which do not have specific habitat requirements. such
as, American toad (Bufv americanus), five-lined skin:-
(Eumeces fasciatus), black racer (Coluber constrictor;. blue
grosbeak (Guir'aca caeruleai, northern cardinal (Cardinal;_,
cardinalis). white-tailed deer ndocoileus vii-i-,-in.L-* anus) and
eastern cottontail (Sylvilaus floridanus). Anima- species
found in this community are.also likely to be found utilizing
habitats found in other communities in the study area.
3.1.2 Secondary Forest Community
Secondary forest communities result from past clearing
and regrowth. In the study area the species composition is
controlled by the mesic 'conditions present and the amount of
time that has passed since the land was cleared. The first
species to form a canopy in these communities is typically
fast growing species such as loblolly pine (-'inus taeda) with
a dense understory of hardwood species such as. sweet gum
(Liquidambar styraciflua), tulip poplar, red mapie, dogwood
(Cornus florida), and white oak (Quercus alba). As the
forest ages the understory species shade out and replace
individual trees in the pine dominated canopy, leading to a
climax community that has a canopy composed exclusively of
white oak and other hardwood species. The groundcover in
this community is consistent throughout the different
successional stages found in the study area. Typical
groundcover species include: christmas fern (Polystichum
acrostichoides), southern lady fern (Athyrium asplenioides),
pipsissewa (Chimaphila maculata), and microstegium
(Microstegium vimineum).
Forested communities provide cover and food sources that
are unavailable in other communities in the study area.
Common species that are likely to be found utilizing habitats
available in forested communities include: slimy salamander
(Plethodon 'lutinosus), redback salamander (P. cinereus),
Fowler's toad (Bufo woodhousei), eastern box turtle
(Terrapene caroling), ground skink (Scincella lateralis),
red-bellied woodpecker (Melanei-pes carolinus), white-breasted
nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis), hooded warbler (Wilsonia
citrina), black-and-white warbler (Miniotilta varia.), eastern
chipmunk (Tamias striatus), raccoon (Procyon lotor), gray
squirrel (Sciuru.s carolinsis), and gray fox (Urocyon
cinereoargenteus). Animal species found in this community,
are also likely to be found utilizing habitats found in other
communities in the study area.
3.2 Aquatic Communities
Streams that cross the proposed project provide a
habitat necessary for many aquatic and semiaquatic species to
propagate and survive. Factors such as water quality„ length
of inundation, water flow rate, and substrate composition
control the number and diversity of :species that can utilize
the habitats provided. The terrestrial communities adjacent
to the stream channel also greatly influence aquatic
community composition.
3.2.1 Intermittent Stream Communities
intermittent streams often eXperience interruption of
flow during dry spells. Periods of flow interruption are
generally- seasonal, with the summer months being dryer than
the winter. During dry spells streams retain water in
shallow pools along their course. Tt is these pools which
are influenced in size and depth by climatological events
that provide habitat for a great diversity of aquatic and
p.
semiaquatic species. A"higher diversity of species can be
found in streams which have a dense canopy of trees and
shrubs.
Despite the dry conditions present during the warmer
months of the year many species are adapted to living in this
environment. These species are those that complete their
life cycle quickly or form cysts that are better able to
withstand the periods of desiccation. Species likely to
occur in the habitats provided by small intermittent streams
include benthic invertebrates such as rotifers (Rotifera),
flatworms ( Pl a tyke linin thes) , roundworms ( Neina toda) , as well
as insect larvae, crayfish, and snails. Many higher animals
such as amphibians and reptiles also rely on these
intermittent streams for reproduction and as a source of food
and water. Some common vertebrates likely to utilize
habitats provided by intermittent streams include: three-
lined salamander (Eurycea guttolinea.te), two-lined salamander
(E. bislinea.ta), pickerel frog (Ra.na palustris), oak toad
(Bufo quercicus), and northern water snake (Neroidia.
sipedon). A variety of the mammals found in the terrestrial
communities in the study area may forage in intermittent
streams.
A few species of shiners (Notropis spp.) and sunfish
(C'entra.chidae) may be found inhabiting the larger pools in
these streams during periods of inundation.
J
3.2.2 Black Creek Community
The Black Creek is a slow meandering stream with
alternating deep pools and shat ow riffle zones. Even though
this stream flows through an urbanized area much of the
streamside canopy is still intact. A wide variety of animals
are likely to be found in the diverse habitats associated
with this stream. Species likely to occur in Black Creek
include: crayfish (Cambartis sp. ), eastern newt (:Votophthalmus
ti-iridescens), pickeral frog (Rana palustris), northern
watersnake (Nerodia sipedon), and fist: species such as. creek
chubsucker (Erimt-zon oblonnus). shiners (.Votropis sp.
pirate perch ( Aphredoderus saYanus), red-fin Pickerel ( Eso-L
americanus). American eel (AnIuiIla rostrata), large mouth
bass (Alicropterus salmoides), and 1)lueg1 1 1 (Lepomis
inacrochirus) .
31 .2.3 Pond Community
The pond located in the study area provides habitats for
many of the species found in other aquatic environments as
well as some species not found in streams in the study area.
Animal species that are. likely to occur in the pond that are:
insect larvae (rnsecta.), painted turtle (Chryseirrys pieta
mallard (Anas platti-rh-vnchos), great egret (Ca.smerodius
albus), and beaver (Castor canadensis.)
3.3 Anticipated Impacts: Biotic Resources
Construction of the subject project will have various.
impacts on the biotic resources described. Any construction
related activities in or near these resources have the
potential to impact biological. functions. This section
quantifies and qualifies impacts to the natural resources in
terms of area impacted and ecosystems affected. Temporary
and permanent impacts are considered here as well.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the
relative abundance of each community present in the study
area. Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of these communities. Table 3
summarizes potential quantitative losses to these biotic
communities, resulting from project construction. Estimated
impacts are derived using the entire right of way width.
Usually, project construction does not require the entire
right of way; therefore, actual impacts may be considerably
less.

Table 3. Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Commun
Alternate 1 ities
Community: Stan Dominated Secondary- Forest Total Impacts
Segment A 4.2 (10.4) 2.1 5.2) 6.3 (15.6)
Segment B 2.0 (4.9) 2.3 (5.71) (10.6)
Segment C ?.? ( 4) 0.6 (1.5) 2.S (6.9)
Segment D 5.0 (12.3) 6.3 (15.5) 11.3 {2?.5)
Total: 13.4 (33.0) 11.3 (27.9) 24.7 (60.9)
Alternate2
Community: Man Dominated Secondary Forest Total Impacts
Segment A 4.4 (10.9) 5.5 (16.3)
Segment B 1.9 (4.7) 2.6 (6.4) 4.5 (11.1)
Segment C 2.1 (5.2) 0.8 (2.0)
Segment D 4.9 (12.1` 6.7 (16.5) 11.6 (2S.6)
Total: 13.3 (32.9) 12.3 (30.3) 25.6 (63.2)
Alternate 3
Community: Man Dominated Secondary Forest rotai Impacts
Segment A 4.4 (10.9) 2.2 (5.4) 6.6 (16.3)
Segment B 2.3 (5.7) 2.2 (5.4) '..5 (11.1)
Segment C 2.4 (5.9) 0.4 (1.0) 2.8 (6.9)
Segment D 5.2 (12.S) 6.3 (15.5) 11.5 (2S.3)
Total: 14.3 (35.3) 11.1 (27.3) 25.4 (62.6)
Note: Values cited are in hectares (acres).
Calculated impacts for segment D include improvements
to the I-40 interchange.
The construction of the proposed project will result in
the permanent conversion of secondary forested community
into a man dominated community. Some portions of the man
dominated community will be permanently lost to impervious
surfaces and other portions will be impacted temporarily.
Impacts to man dominated communities are generally less
objectionable than impacts to forested communities.
Therefore, it is recommended that impacts to forested
communities be minimized whenever possible. Tt is also
recommended that impacts to the canopy of streams in the
study area be minimized whenever possible. The following
grouping of alternates is recommended in order to minimize
impacts to natural resources in the study area: Segment A
Alternate 1, Segment B Alternate 3, Segment C Alternate 3,
Segment D Alternate i.
?C
Potential impacts to the aquatic environment are those
that act to decrease water quality and include increased
sedimentation, nutrient runoff, changes in water temperature
and dissolved oxygen, and toxic runoff from construction
related erosion.
Urganisins that utilize habitats provided by these
streams can be affected by changes in water quality. Toxic
runoff resulting from fuel and other chemical pollutants
leaking from construction machinery and automotive debris
from increased traffic flow. Additional chemi.cai pollutants
can bond to soils and enter streams with runoff sediments.
nutrient runoff occurs from the use of chemical fertilizers
in roadside landscaping and can cause algal blooms which can
lower dissolved o,,-,v-,en in the sediments and water col i,ln.
These factors act to decrease successful reproduction in
individual species and decrease the species diversity of the
community. Higher vertebrates which utilize these streams to
forage are affected through biomagnification of pollutants
and the loss of potential prey species.
The loss of the streamside canopy along many streams in
the study area will adversely affect organisms inhabiting
those streams by increasing the water temperature, decreasing
dissolved oxygen, increasing sedimentatioh, and causing
stream bank destabilization. These impacts can be minimized
by minimizing clearing at those sites, replanting streamside
vegetation, and implementing sediment control measures.
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of
Surface Waters and Sedimentation Control Guidelines should be
strictly enforced during the construction stage of the
project to minimize impacts to aquatic and semiaquatic
organisms.
4.0 Jurisdictional Issues
This section provides descriptions, inventories and
impact analysis pertinent to two important issues--rare and
protected species, and Waters of the United States.
4.1 Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad
category of "Waters of the United States," as defined in
Section 33 of the Code of Federal Register (CRF) Part 328.3.
Wetlands, defined in 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 under
normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation
typically adapted to life in saturated conditions. Any
action that proposes to place fill into these areas falls
under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army- Corps of Engineers
(COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act t.33 U.S.C.
1344).
4.1.1 Study Area Wetlands and/or Surface Waters
Jurisdictional wetland determinations were performed
utilizing delineation criteria prescribed in the "Corps of
Engineers Wetland Determination Manual" (Environment
Laboratory, 19'07). Criteria to delineate wetland sites
includes evidence of'hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation,
and hydrology. .No-wetland sites were identified from the
study area.
4.1.2 Permits
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (14) is likely to be
applicable at most ditch and stream crossings found in the
project study area. This permit authorizes construction
provided the following conditions are met:
(1) the width of the fill is limited to the minimum
necessary for the actual crossing;
(2) the fill placed in-Water of the United States is limited
to a filled area of no more than 0.1 hectares
(1/3 acre);
(3) no more than a total of 61 m (200 linear ft) of the fill
for the roadway can occur in special aquatic sites,
including wetlands;
(4) the crossing is culverted, bridged or otherwise designed
to prevent the restriction of, and to withstand,
expected high flows and tidal flows and movement of
aquatic organisms, and;
(5) the crossing, including all attendant features, both
temporary and permanent, is part of a single and
complete project for crossing of a Water of the United
States.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management
(DEM) Section 401 Water Quality General Certification is also
required. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that
the state issue or deny water certification for any federally
permitted or licensed activity that may result in a discharge
into waters of the United States. The issuance of a 401
permit from DEM is a prerequisite to issuance of Section 404
Permit.
i
This project will require a 401 Water Quality 'General
Certification from the Division of Environmental ?Management
(DE%4) prior to the issuance of the Nationwide permit.
Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state
issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted
or licensed activity that may result in a discharge to the
Waters of the United States.
4.1.3 Mitigation
No mitigation is required, no impacts to jurisdictional
wetlands will occur from project construction.
4.2 Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are
in, the process of decline either clue to natural forces or
their inability to coexist with man. Federal law (under the
provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended)
requires that any action; likely to adversely a species
classified as federally-protected, be subject to review by
the Fish and Wildlife (FWS). Other species may receive
additional protection under separate state laws.
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 July 8, 1994, the FWS lists the
following federally-protected species for Wake County (.Table
5). A brief description of each species characteristics and
habitat follows.
Table 5. Federally-Protected Species
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Alasmidonta heterodon dwarf wedge mussel E
Haliaeetus leucocephalus bald eagle E
Picoides borealis red-cockaded woodpecker E
Vermiyora bachmanii Bachman's warbler E
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E
Note: "E" denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened
with extinction throughout all or a significant
portion of its range).
?3
.91asinidonta heterodon (dwarf wedge mussel; E
Animal Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 3/14/94
Distribution in N.C.: Franklin, Granville, Halifax,
Johnston, Nash, Vance, Wake, Warren. Wilson.
The dwarf wedge mussel is a small mussel having a
distinguishable shell noted by two lateral teeth on the right
half and one on the left half. The periostracum touter
shell) is olive green to dark brown in color and the nacre
(inner shell) is bluish to silvery white.
Known populations of the dwarf wedge mussel in North
Carolina are found in the Neuse River Basin and tie Tar liver
Basin. This mussel is sensitive to agricultural. domestic,
and industrial pollutants and requires a stable silt free
streambed with well oxygenated water to survive.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Surveys Recommended
Black Creek has the potential to provide suitable
habitat for the dwarf wedge mussel. Surveys will be required
in order to determine if the construction of the proposed
project will impact this species.
Haliaeetus leucocepha.lus (bald eagle) E,.
Animal Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 3/11/67
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Brunswick,
Carteret, Chatham, Chowan, Craven, Dare,
Durham, Guilford, Hyde, Nlontgomerv, New
Hanover, Northhampton, Periquimans, Richmond,
Stanley, Vance, Wake, Washington.
Adult bald eagles can be
head and short white tail. The
chocolate-brown in color. In
identified by their flat wing
identified by their large white
body plumage is dark-brown to
flight bald eagles can be
soar.
Eagle nests are found in close proximity to water
(within a half mile) with a clear flight path to the water,
in the largest living tree in an area, and having an open
view of the surrounding land. Human disturbance can cause an
eagle to abandon otherwise suitable habitat. The breeding
season for the bald eagle begins in December or January.
Fish are the major food source for bald eagles. Other
sources include coots, herons, and wounded ducks. Food may
be live or carrion.`;
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Suitable nesting habitat for the bald eagle is not found
associated with streams or ponds in the study area.
lw
Therefore no impacts to the bald eagle will result from the
construction of the proposed project.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) E
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen,
Brunswick, Camden, Carteret, Chatham.
Columbus, Craven, Cumberland, Dare, Duplin,
Forsyth, Gates, Halifax, Harnett. Hertford,
Hoke, Hyde, Johnston, Jones, Lee, Lenoir,
Montgomery, Moore. Nash, New Hanover,
Northhampton, Onslow. Orange, Pamlico,
Pender, Perquimans, Pitt, Richmond. Robeson,
Sampson, Scotland, Tyrrell, Wake, Wayne,
Wilson.
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage
that is entirely- black and white except for small red streaks
on the sides of the nape in the male. The back of the RCW is
black and white with horizontal stripes. The breast and
underside of this woodpecker are white with streaked flanks.
The RCW has a large white cheek patch surrounded by the black
cap, nape, and throat.
The RCW uses open old growth stands,of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine (Pinus Palustris), for foraging
and nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at least
50°13 pine, lack a thick understory, and be contiguous with
other stands to be appropriate habitat for the RCW., 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 up to 200 hectares (500
acres). 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 3.6-30.3 m (12-100 ft) above the ground and average 9.1-
15.7 m (30-50 ft) high. They can be identified by a large
incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree. The RCW
lays its eggs in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch
approximately 38 days later.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Pine stands found in the study area do not support trees
of sufficient age to provide suitable habitat for the red-
cockaded woodpecker. No effects to this species will result
from the construction of the proposed project.
1
Vermicora bachinanii (Bachman's warbler) E
Animal Family: Parulidae
Date Listed: 3/11/67; 12/2/70
Distribution in N.C.: Ware
Bachman's warbler is characterized by a thin bill that
is slightly downcurved and by white undertail coverts. The
male has a yellow forehead, chin. and shoulders. Its crown
and bib are black.
Bachman's warbler has a habitat range extending
throughout the southeastern united States for its breeding
season and into western Cuba and the Isle of Pines for its
wintering season. Bachman's warblers nest in low. wet
forested areas.. The-,,-- usuall,- select areas having a permanent
source of water. These birds prefer nesting in 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.
Nests are found near the ground in undergrowth. These
warblers begin to nest in late March or ear'_y. June.
Bachman's warbler begin to migrate in July.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
Forested stands in the study area meet the habitat
' It
requirements of Bachman'"s warbler. No records of this
species nesting in Wake County are known and the nesting of
the species is thought to be confined to the I'On Swamp area
in South Carolina. The construction of the proposed project
will not impact Bachman's Warbler.
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac) E
Plant Family: Anacardiaceae
Federally Listed: September 28, 1989
Flowers Present: June
Distribution in N.C.: Columbus, Davie, Durham, Franklin,
Hoke. Lincoln, Moore, Orange, Richmond,
Robeson, Scotland, Wake, Wilson.
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizomatous
shrub. The bases of the leaves are rounded and their edges
are simply or doubly serrate. The flowers of Michaux's sumac
are greenish to white in color. Fruits, which develop from
August to September on female plants, are a red densely
short-pubescent drupe.
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods.
Michaux's sumac is dependent on some sort of disturbance to
maintain the openness of its habitat. It usually grows in
association with basic soils and occurs on sand or sandy
loamy. Michaux's sumac grows only in open habitat where it
(-
can get full sunlight. Michaux's sumac does not compete well
with other species, such as Japanese honeysuckle, with which
it is often associated.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect
A plant-by-plant surve_= was conducted in all suitable
habitat for `•4ichaux's sumac in the study area. No
individuals of Michaux's sumac were identified as occurring
in the study area. Therefore, no effects to this federally
protected species will result from the construction of the
proposed project.
4.2.2 Federal Candidate and State Protected Species
There are ten federal candidate (C2) species listed for
Wake Count v. Federal Candidate species are not afforded
federal protection under the Endangered Species Act and are
not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7,
until they are formally listed as Threatened or Endangered.
Candidate 2 (C2) species are defined as organisms which ire
vulnerable to extinction although no sufficient data
currently exist to warrant a listing of Endangered.
Threatened, Proposed Endangered or Proposed Threatened.
Organisms which are listed as Endangered (E), Threatened (`.
or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina Heritage
Program list of Rare Plant and Animal species are afforded
state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and
the North Carolina Plant Protection and Conservation Act of
1979.
Table 6 lists federal candidate species, the species
state status (if afforded state protection.) and the existence
of suitable habitat for each species in the study area. This
species list is provided for information purposes as the
status of these species may be upgraded in the future.
Table 6. Federal Candidate/N.C. Protected Species
for Wake County
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Myotis austroriparius
Aimophila aestivalis*
Elliptio judithae
Elliptio lanceolata
Fusconaia masoni
Lasmioona subviridis'
Speyeria diana.
COMMON NAME NC STATUS HABITAT
southeastern bat SC Yes
Bachman's sparrow SC No
Neuse slabshell E No
yellow lance T No
Atlantic pi-toe T No
green floater E No
Diana fritillary
butterfly -- No
Table 6. Continued
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME NC STATUS HABITAT
Monotropsis odorata sweet pinesap -- Yes
Nestronia umbellula nestronia -- Yes
Trillium pusillum
var. pusillum Carolina trillium E No
NOTE: "- Species not afforded state protection but listed
as Federal Candidate.
"*" Indicates no specimen from that county in at least
?0 years.
Surveys for these species were not conducted during the
site visit, nor were any of these species observed. A review
of the data base of the N.C. .natural Heritage Program rare
species and unique habitats revealed no records of north
Carolina rare and/or protected species in or near the project
,study area.
iJ
5.0 REFERENCES
American Ornithologists' Union. 1953. Check-list of North
American Birds (6th ed.). Lawrence. Kansas. Allen
Press, inc.
Environmental Laboratory. 19S7. "Corns of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual. Tecnnicai report Y-5-1.
U.S. Armv Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Miss.
Lee. D.S.. j. B. Funderbura, Jr. and `1.1. Clark. 1982 .
Distributional Survev of North Carolina Mammals.
Raleigh, North Carolina Museum of Natural History.
LeGrand, Jr., H.E. !993. "Natural Heritage Pro-ram List of
the Rare Animal Species of Nort7 Carolina". `I-orth
Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
Martof, B.S.. W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailev and J.R. Harrison III.
1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and
Virginia. Chapel Hill, The University of North Carolina
Press.
Menhenick, E.F. 1991. The Freshwater Fishes of North
Carolina. N.C. WRC., Raleigh.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1983. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient
Network (BMAN) Water Quality Review 1983-1986.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1991. Biological Assessment of Water Quality
in North Carolina Streams: Benthic Macroinvertebrate
Data Base and Long Tern Changes in Water Quality, 1933-
1990.
NCDEHNR-DEM. 1993. "Classifications and Water Quality
Standards for North Carolina River Basins." Raleigh,
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
NCWRC. 1990. "Endangered Wildlife of North Carolina".
Raleigh, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.
Plant Conservation Program. 1991. "List of North Carolina's
Endangered, Threatened and Candidate Plant Species".
Raleigh, North Carolina Department of Agriculture.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell and R.P. Teulings. 1930. Birds
of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, The University of North
Carolina Press.
Radford. A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1963. Manual of
the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. Chapel Hill, The
University of North Carolina Press.
i\
Schafale. M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of
The Natural Communities of North Carolina. Third
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program.
Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDEHNR.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Soil Conservation Service.
North Carolina Agriculture Experiment Station.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1979, Classifications of
vVetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States..
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.
We at.Iev. A.S. 11)93. "Natural Heritage Program List of the
Rare Plant Species of North Carolina North ','-_.1ina
Natural Heritage Program.
Webster. W.D._ J.T. Parnell and W.C. Bid 1935. Mamma 11 s
of the Carolinas. Virginia an,= 'larvland. Chapel Hill.
The University of Norte: arolina Press.
Appendix A
The following lists of animals include those species
which were observed along the project ali^nment.
Table A. Amphibians
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME
Fowler's toad

Tlable L. Birds
^OM =40?vT NAME SC I ENT I F I C NAME
American robin Turdus migratorius
Carolina cr.ic'.cadee Pa.rus carolinensis
common grackle
northern cardinal Quiscalus quiscula
Cai-dinalis cardinalis
red-eyed vireo Vireo olivaceu.s
Table C. Mammals
COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME
white tailed deer Odocoileus virzinianus
raccoon Procyon lotor

N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
? r
TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
ERIC GAAAMet WOW - bEM
FROM:
M?Fq ?? S
? REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
P
eot
io
ee
w
A? E N
r
?
ri
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER 9UR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:

9 1994
MAY
w???A ?s cRCt

q
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE

O
TO: REF. NO. OR R
OM, BLDG.
6M ! C. Gpr,, OMB Df HN A - DfM
FROM-: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.

tD1>14s M.LF'A VL S PC. A" F4) "A
Aw Es'y#ftpjl4
ACTION
? NOTE AND PILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
.? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
?U{ wJ 1177
?
C
:,
,,
D
? 2 5199 `?1

WEZLA?DS?G SEGZ40?1
,:: WATER vHll
N
Q
D
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF 1PANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
February 23, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager JW S
Planning and Environmental Branch
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheet for Widening SR 1652 (Harrison
Avenue) to a multi-lane facility, from NC 54 to I-40,
Cary, Wake County, State Project No. 8.2403701, Federal
Aid Project No. STP-1652(1), TIP Project No. U-2804
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets for the
subject project (See attached map for project location). The purpose of
these sheets and the related review procedure is to have an early "meeting
of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the project. A scoping meeting for this
project is scheduled for March 24, 1994 at 10:00 A. M. in the Planning and
Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 470). You may provide us with
your comments at the meeting or mail them to us prior to that date.
Thank you for your assistance in this part of our planning process.
If there are any questions about the meeting or the scoping sheets, please
call Eddie McFalls, Project Planning Engineer, at 733-7842. J
EM/plr (.
Attachment ctz 6 ox me d&-It'

PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
TIP # U-2804
Project # 8.2403701
F.A. Project # STP-1652(1)
Division 5
County Wake
Route SR 1652 Harrison Avenue
Date February 22. 1994
Revision Date
Project Development Stage
Programming
Planning X
Design
?? 3
c
C
416M- 'D
_17 1? -VA-b'1
to-"_ of
god (a? 8
94M JI
5
o

Functional Classification Urban Minor Arterial rnr,,u? 11
Length 5.5 km (3.4 miles) J
Purpose of Project: The widening project will enhance the
efficiency and safety of SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue). Additional
lanes will remove slower turning traffic from the through lanes
and increase the capacity of the facility.
Description of project (including specific limits) and major
elements of work: SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) will be widened into
a five-lane, curb and gutter facility between NC 54 and Weston
Parkway (4.5 km, 2.8 miles). The environmental document will
also address the addition of lanes to SR 1652 between Weston
Parkway and the westbound exit ramp of I-40 (1.0 km, 0.6 miles)
and the widening of the bridge and ramps of the I-40
interchange.
Type of environmental document to be prepared: An Environmental
Assessment and a Finding of No Significant Impact will be
prepared for this widening project.
Environmental study schedule:
BEGIN
EA IN PROGRESS
FONSI DEC 1994
COMPLETE
SEP 1994
APR 1995
Will there be special funding participation by municipality,
developers, or other? Yes No X
If yes, by whom and amount : ( $ ) or - ( o )
How and when will this be paid?
Page 2
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Features of Proposed Facility
Type of Facility: Urban Minor Arterial / Major Thoroughfare
Type of Access Control: Full Partial None X
Type of Roadway: Five-lane curb and stutter
Interchanges 1 Grade Separations Stream Crossings 2
Typical Section of Roadway: The typical section proposed
is a five-lane face to face curb and gutter section. The
roadway will have five 3.6 m lanes (11.8 feet). Additional
width for bicycles will also be studied.
Traffic: Current(1993) 17000 vpd
o Trucks
vpd
Design Standards Applicable: AASHTO X 3R
Design. Speed: 50 MPH
Preliminary Resurfacing Design:
Preliminary Pavement Design:
Features of the Existing Facility
Typical Section: Between NC 54 and Maynard Road (1.28 km,
0.8 miles), SR 1652 is a four-lane curb and gutter facility
with a 14.6 m (48-foot) travelway. Between Maynard Road
and Weston Parkway (2.88 km, 1.8 miles), SR 1652 is a two-
lane roadway with a 7.3 m (24-foot) travelway.
Intersection approaches at Maynard Rd., Appletree Dr., Cary
Parkway, Reedy Creek Rd., Prairieview Dr., Dynasty Dr., and
Weston Parkway have been widened to provide left turn
lanes. From Weston Parkway to I-40 (0.96 km, 0.6 miles),
SR 1652 is a multilane curb and gutter section with two
through lanes in each direction with additional right and
left turning lanes at Weston Parkway, Woodfield Dr., and
Harrison Oaks. The bridge over I-40 has a clear bridge
deck width of 34 feet and carries only two lanes of
traffic.
Right of Way: The
18.3 m (60 feet).
of way is 18.3 m
Rd) and is 30.5 m
I-40.
existing right of way width varies from
to 30.5 m (100 feet). The existing right
(60 feet) from NC 54 to SR 1747 (Maynard
(100 feet) from SR 1747 (Maynard Rd) to
Design Year
% DHV
Page 3
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Current Cost Estimate:
Construction Cost (including engineering
and contingencies). . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,000,000
Right of Way Cost (including rel., util.,
and acquisition). . . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,500,000
Force Account Items. . . . . . . . . . . $
Preliminary Engineering. . . . . . . . . . $ 500,000
Total Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 12,000,000
TIP Cost Estimate:
Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,000,000
Right of way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,500,000
Total Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 11,500,000
List any special features, such as railroad involvement, which
could affect cost or schedule of project:
Page 4
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
ITEMS REQUIRED ( ) COMMENTS COST
Estimated Costs of Improvements:
Pavement
X Surface (Widening). . . . . . . . . . $ 1,011,120
Base. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
X Milling & Recycling (Resurfacing) . $ 165,720
Turnouts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Shoulders: Paved. . . . . . . . . . . . $
Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . $
X Earthwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,620 ,590
Subsurface Items: . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
X Subgrade and Stabilization. . . . . . . . . $ 217 ,980
X Drainage (List any special items) . . . . . $ 510 ,200
Sub-Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Structures: Width x Length
X Bridge Rehabilitation 34' x 295' $ 200, 600
New Bridge x $
X Widen Bridge 24' x 295' $ 495, 600
Remove Bridge x $
New Culverts: Size Length $
Fill Ht.
Culvert Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Retaining Walls: Type Ave. Ht. $
Skew
Noise Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Any Other Misc. Structures. . . . . . . .
X Concrete Curb & Gutter. . . . . . . . . . . $ 259, 600
X Concrete Sidewalk . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 21, 280
Guardrail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Fencing: W.W. and/or C.L. $
X Erosion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 68, 100
Landscape .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Lighting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
X Traffic control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 163, 500
Signing: New. . . . . . . . $
Upgrading. . . . . . . . . $
X Traffic Signals: X New . . . . . . . . . $ 30, 000
X Revised . . . . . . . $ 50, 000
RR Signals: New . . . . . . . . . . $
Revised . . . . . . . . $
With or Without Arms. . . . $
If 3R: Drainage Safety Enhancement. $
Roadside Safety Enhancement. $
Realignment for Safety Upgrade $
X Pavement Markings: Paint Thermo X $ 58, 060
Markers X
Delineators . . $
Other (Clearing,grubbing,mobilization,misc) $ 1,123,400
CONTRACT COST (Subtotal): $ 6,015,000
Page 5
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Contingencies & Engineering . . . . . . . . . $ 985,000
PE Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 500 , 000
Force Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Subtotal: $ 7,500,000
Right of Way:
Will contain within Exist Right of Way: Yes No X
Existing Right of Way Width: 18.3 m (601) to 30.5 m (100')
New Right of Way Needed: Width VAR. Est. Cost $ 4,500,000
Easements: Type Width Est. Cost $
Utilities: $
Right of Way Subtotal: $ 4,500,000
Total Estimated Cost (Includes R/W) : $ 12,000,000
Prepared By : EA--d -1-5. 1 K-,e JJ-W-- Date: 2 - Z,--
The above scoping has been reviewed and approved* by:
INIT. DATE INIT. DATE
Highway Design Board of Tran. Member
Roadway Mgr. Program & Policy
Structure Chief Engineer-Precons
Design Services Chief Engineer-Oper
Geotechnical Secondary Roads Off.
Hydraulics Construction Branch
Loc. & Surveys Roadside Environmental
Photogrammetry Maintenance Branch
Prel. Est. Engr. Bridge Maintenance
Planning & Environ. Statewide Planning
Right of Way Division Engineer
R/W Utilities Bicycle Coordinator
Traffic Engineering Program Development
Project Management SHWA
County Manager Dept. of Cult. Res.
City/Municipality Dept. of EH & NR
Others
Scoping Sheet for local officials will be sent to Division
Engineer for handling.
Comments or Remarks:
*If you are not in agreement with proposed project or scoping,
note your proposed revisions in Comments or Remarks Section and
initial and date after comments.
5 1 F
db L t Res. ! c
•? --1 ogle Sr. a«. w 1
70 IU ease 1 Rolesvdle I
"els 'llr - Sinlesh?mns 9 A01 '
mr, rZAr}lP gfi
- ? Aillbr { E14Rkeflel 1 1
'- ?I Lizard Ucki
` w.f? :Morrisvill 3
11
Ns Role 6/P
64t? tdole Rack e•
Apex c r 26arne e`se
AUDUr
;rill 5 11
11 ..:, 1

::. Peet_
40
!?o
r7se

.00 _ PAU ,o, CARD
?OP 21,763
1312
.a,
aoo r±n
S •-.

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
= DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNIN
i?tol G AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
SR 1562 (HARRISON AVENUE)
FROM NO 54 (CHAPEL HILL ROAD) TO 1- 40
WAKE COUNTY
T. I. P. NO. U - 2804
Figure 1
End TIP Project U-2804 ;-

-11
-Lt-a
E Reedy Creek
State Park
C
§4 -, 5 km O

YID

l VAl 4/

7 ?.
?. a
f
?late? ,? ? ?) C
o ? `Y
r?

h°
?,_„?? • f di r
• ? CS ? Iii
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT O
•
_ .C TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
SR 1562 (HARRISON AVENUE) l
FROM NC 54 (CHAPEL HILL ROAD) TO
WAKE COUNTY
T. 1. P. NO. U • 2804
USES . , Cary- ::Scale 1:24000].--
.A
y1, - -
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
May 5, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: Eddie McFalls 69A4
Project Planning Engineer
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Cary, Harrison Avenue (SR 1652), from NC 54 to I-40, Wake
County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-1652(1), State
Project No. 8.2403701, TIP Project No. U-2804
A scoping meeting for the widening of Harrison Avenue (SR 1652) was held
on March 24, 1994 in the Planning and Environmental Branch Conference Room.
The following people attended:
Doug Spell
Eric Galamb
David Cox
Tom Norman
Brian Williford
Larry T. Williford
Parks Icenhour
Jack Matthews
David Smith
Bill Watson
Betty Yancey
Leroy Smith
Ray Moore
Doumit Ishak
Wilson Stroud
Eddie McFalls
GENERAL INFORMATION
Town of Cary Engineering Dept.
Division of Environmental Management
Wildlife Resources Commission
Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation
Hydraulics
Location and Surveys
Location and Surveys
Photogrammetry
Program Development
Program Development
Right of Way
Roadway Design
Structure Design
TEB - Signals and Geometrics
Planning and Environmental
Planning and Environmental
The meeting was opened with a general description of the project. TIP
Project U-2804 will widen SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) to a multilane facility
between NC 54 and I-40. Between NC 54 and Weston Parkway (4.5 km, 2.8 miles),
a five-lane facility will be constructed. From Weston Parkway to I-40 (1 km,
0.6 mile), additional lanes will be added to provide two exclusive through
lanes in each direction, a continuous left turning lane, and a continuous
right turning lane in each direction. The additional lanes will improve the
3-1t I
May 5, 1994
Page 2
traffic carrying capacity and safety of Harrison Avenue. The bridge at the
I-40 interchange will be widened and rehabilitated, unless the associated
costs approach those of bridge replacement or traffic projections show that a
longer bridge will be needed for future I-40 widening.
TIP Project U-2804 has been broken down into three sections along Harrison
Avenue: TIP Project U-2804 A begins at NC 54 and continues to SR 1747
(Maynard Road), TIP Project U-2804 B runs between Maynard Road and Weston
Parkway, and TIP Project U-2804 C is located between Weston Parkway and I-40.
The environmental assessment for this project is scheduled for
completion in September, 1994. The finding of no significant impact will be
completed in April, 1995. Each project section's current production
schedules for right of way and construction are listed below.
Project Section R/W
TIP Project U-2804 A 2-97
TIP Project U-2804 B 1-96
TIP Project U-2804 C 6-96
Construction
4-98
7-97
11-97
Since the scoping meeting, the production schedule for TIP Project
U-2804 C has been advanced. The new right of way date is December 1995.
TIP Project U-2804 C will be let for construction in August 1997.
Surveys for the project are scheduled for completion in June, 1994.
Plan sheets should be available in October, 1994.
Harrison Avenue is classified as an urban minor arterial and is shown a
major thoroughfare on the Wake County Thoroughfare Plan. Presently,
approximately 17000 vpd (this is a weighted average of 1993 ADTs on Harrison)
use the facility. Traffic projections for the years 1998 and 2018 have been
requested and should be available in June, 1994.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The existing facility was discussed. Between NC 54 and Maynard Road,
Harrison Avenue is a four-lane curb and gutter facility with 14.6 m (48 feet)
between its curb faces. Between Maynard Road and Weston Parkway, Harrison
Avenue is a two-lane roadway with a 7.3 m (24-foot) travelway. At Maynard
Rd., Appletree Dr., Cary Parkway, Reedy Creek Rd., Prairieview Dr., Dynasty
Dr., and Weston Parkway, Harrison Avenue has been widened to provide left
turn lanes. From Weston Parkway to I-40, Harrison Avenue is a multilane curb
and gutter section with two through lanes in each direction with additional
right and left turning lanes at Weston Parkway, Woodfield Dr., and Harrison
Oaks.
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
Seven signals are in operation along the project route. Included in the
cost estimate presented in the scoping sheet is the installation of a new
signal at Cary Parkway. Doumit Ishak of Signals and Geometrics has
recommended that a traffic responsive closed loop system be installed so that
May 5, 1994
Page 3
traffic can flow through the area more efficiently. The cost estimate
presented on the scoping sheets included $80,000 for traffic signal work.
Additional costs for installing the proposed closed loop system would
increase the total cost for signals on the project to $159,423.
I-40 INTERCHANGE
Next, the bridge at the I-40 interchange was discussed. The present
structure has vertical clearances of 15' 6" and 15' 11" and carries two lanes
over I-40 on a clear roadway width of 34 feet. Structures over interstate
routes must have 17' of clearance. Hence, if the structure is widened and
rehabilitated, it will also need to be raised. The existing structure has
continuous I-beams. Difficulties in raising this structure will result in
high costs. In order to rehabilitate the structure, a new bridge deck and
new steel would be required. Ray Moore of Structure Design suggested the
bridge be widened symmetrically. The cost for the bridge widening and
rehabilitation included in the feasibility study and the scoping sheets
presented at the meeting is thought to be too low. Moreover, a future
project, TIP Project I-2204, is anticipated to widen I-40 to eight lanes.
When the planning is done on TIP Project I-2204, studies may show that more
than eight lanes would be desirable. If the existing bridge is widened and
rehabilitated now, it may need replacing once I-40 is widened. The length of
the existing bridge at Harrison Avenue will be investigated to determine if
it will be sufficient to accommodate future I-40 widening. The environmental
assessment will investigate bridge rehabilitation as well as bridge
replacement scenarios.
In order to improve the level of service of the I-40 / Harrison Avenue
interchange, double left turning lanes will be constructed on Harrison Avenue
to serve northbound Harrison Avenue traffic turning left onto the westbound
I-40 entrance ramp. This ramp will be widened a full lane width for its
entire length. The westbound exit ramp from I-40 will also have double left
turns for traffic turning south onto Harrison Avenue. In order to
accommodate turning traffic, the bridge over I-40 will need at least four
lanes.
North of I-40, Harrison Avenue serves William B. Umstead State Park and
Wake Stone Corporation. Prior to the scoping meeting, Division 5 noted that
traffic and future expansion north of I-40 is limited by William B. Umstead
State Park. Division commented that a four lane bridge would accommodate the
turning lanes needed to improve the I-40 interchange. Two southbound lanes on
the bridge could accommodate traffic turning onto Harrison Avenue from
westbound I-40, one northbound lane would serve traffic turning left onto the
westbound I-40 entrance ramp exclusively, and the final lane would serve as a
shared through and left lane which would serve traffic proceeding north on
Harrison Avenue and traffic turning left onto the westbound I-40 entrance
ramp. At the scoping meeting, Leroy Smith of Roadway Design cited the high
number of trucks going through the intersection to Wake Stone Corporation and
stated that a five lane bridge with an exclusive northbound through movement
might be more desirable. Once traffic estimates are received, levels of
service will be calculated for both bridge widening and replacement
alternatives, and cost estimates for each will be requested.
May D, 1yfvq
Page 4
Widening the westbound I-40 entrance ramp will impact SR 1790, an access
road which serves Wake Stone Corporation. The sideslopes from the ramp
widening will likely force minor realignment of this road. Retaining walls
will be studied for this situation.
BICYCLE ACCOMMODATIONS
Next, accommodating bicycle traffic on Harrison Avenue was discussed. A
typical section which provides wide outside lanes to accommodate bicycle
traffic will be considered. The feasibility study (December, 1992) proposed
a 68-foot face to face curb and gutter typical section for Harrison Avenue
between NC 54 and Weston Parkway. This typical section would provide 4.2 m
(14-foot) outside lanes for bicycles. It would also be desirable to provide
additional lane width for bicycles between Weston Parkway and I-40. The
outside lanes along this stretch of Harrison Avenue will be used
predominantly by right turning traffic. Tom Norman of the bicycle unit
stated that the MUTCD has pavement markings which guide bicyclists to through
lanes in multi-lane facilities. Since William B. Umstead State Park is
located just north of the bridge over I-40, the bridge should be designed to
accommodate bicycle traffic as well. For bicycle safety, a 54" high, two-bar
rail would be needed. If sidewalk is used on the bridge, however, the need
for high rail may be eliminated.
TOWN OF CARY COMMENTS
Doug Spell of the Town of Cary requested that sidewalks be constructed
on both sides of Harrison Avenue. The Town of Cary will be responsible for
demonstrating the need for sidewalks and that barriers to pedestrian
movements will occur if sidewalks are not constructed. Based upon the
information to be presented by the Town of Cary regarding pedestrian needs,
the NCDOT may participate in the funding of the sidewalks. A municipal
agreement with the Town of Cary would be needed to coordinate the funding of
the sidewalks. A five-foot sidewalk could be provided on an 8-foot berm, and
a four-foot sidewalk could be provided on a 6-foot berm. A copy of the NCDOT
Pedestrian Policy Guidelines will be forwarded to the Town of Cary.
Mr. Spell also mentioned that the town would like street lighting along
the project. If NCDOT installs lighting, Cary will maintain and purchase
power for the lighting utility.
Mr. Spell said that Cary is trying to encourage traffic to use the
Maynard Road Loop (SR 1747). In fact, Cary is trying to have NC 54 rerouted
to use Maynard Road to alleviate traffic congestion through town. in
addition, it is anticipated Harrison Avenue will also be designated as a
truck route between I-40 and Maynard Road.
RIGHT OF WAY CONCERNS
The widening of Harrison Avenue is expected to have relocatee impacts,
especially between NC 54 and Maynard Road. Between NC 54 and Maynard Rd.,
NCDOT only has 65 feet of right of way. The proposed typical section will
require more right of way. In addition, the widening project may make
driveways too steep to access properties.
May 5, 1994
Page 5
The use of retaining walls to minimize relocatees was discussed briefly.
Retaining walls would not help minimize right of way costs along Harrison
Avenue between NC 54 and Maynard Road. In other areas, if high numbers of
relocatees are created by fill slopes (which may be the case in the vicinity
of Dynasty Drive and Wyatt's Pond Lane), retaining walls may be warranted.
HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES
Two culverts will have to be extended in order to widen Harrison Avenue.
A 7' X 10' culvert is located at Black Creek (approximately 50 m south of
Dynasty Drive), and a 12' X 4' culvert is located at an overflow for a pond
located approximately 80 m south of Wyatt's Pond Lane. The Hydraulics Unit
recommended symmetrical lengthening of these culverts.
HISTORIC RESOURCES
Robin Stancil of SHPO was not able to attend the scoping meeting.
However, her comments were presented. An archaeological survey of the
project area was not recommended. Most of the area adjacent to Harrison
Avenue is developed, and there is little chance of impacting any
archaeological sites.
A comprehensive survey of historic architectural resources in Wake
County was done in 1990. Robin has asked NCDOT to determine the eligibility
of four structures in the project vicinity: the John H. McGhee house, the
Will Sorrell house, the John Wesley Booth house, and the P.A. Sorrell house.
Robin stated that William B. Umstead Park is considered eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places.
DEM AND WRC CONCERNS
Eric Galamb from the Division of Environmental Management of the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources described
the water resources in the vicinity of the project. Black Creek and its
tributary are both class C nutrient sensitive waters. Normal erosion control
guidelines should be followed, and if any channel relocations are required,
voluntary stream relocation guidelines should be used.
Five federally protected species are listed for Wake County: the bald
eagle, the red-cockaded woodpecker, Bachman's warbler, the dwarf wedge
mussel, and Michaux's sumac. The environmental assessment will address
potential impacts to each of these species. David Cox of the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission stated that he had no specific concerns about
the project and does not anticipate Black Creek having dwarf wedge mussels.
ALTERNATIVES
Symmetrical, east-side, and west-side widening alternatives will be
considered throughout the project. The project will be broken down into
study segments for purposes of preliminary planning and environmental impact
analysis. Segment termini have been established at existing horizontal curves
May 5, 1994
Page 6
to facilitate possible transitions between symmetrical and asymmetrical
widening alternatives. The Planning and Environmental Branch will coordinate
with Roadway Design to determine acceptable combinations of these three
widening alternatives to minimize environmental impacts.
EBM/plr
cc: Scoping Participants

Z
June 20, 1994
TO: Melba McGee, Office of Policy Development
FROM: Monica Swihart,'Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #94-0881; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements to SR 1652, Cary, TIP No. U-2804
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. 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 and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
I
Melba McGee
June 20, 1994
Page 2
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
K. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same watershed
is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
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 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.
10625er.mem
cc: ,Eric Galamb-
" A
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
F.C+„.1-6 - qAj
TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
Rz1lc. G&LAMB b. E .M .
-
FROM: REF. NO. OR ROOM. BLDG.
+ t?rLM.iNiNb /rdp
?
/rD1?1? MCI'ACLS L?ivYlLONMWT/l?. _
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER 9UR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:

r $! ll
WETLANDS GROUP
WATER UALiTY SECT?t?N_V,_.,?
wry s'STAiFo
?? tlaw+??
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TMNSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
May 13, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
41L Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Cary, Harrison Avenue (SR 1652), from NC 54 to I-40, Wake
County, Federal Aid Project No. STP-1652(1), State
Project No. 8.2403701, TIP Project No. U-2804
The Planning and Environmental Branch of the Division of Highways has
begun studying the proposed improvements to SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) between
NC 54 and I-40. The project is included in the 1994-2000 North Carolina
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and is scheduled in the TIP for
right of way in fiscal year 1997 and construction in fiscal year 1998. We
are working towards sending the project to right of way in fiscal year 1996
and construction in fiscal year 1997.
The subject will widen SR 1652 (Harrison Avenue) to a multi-lane
facility between NC 54 and I-40. Between NC 54 and Weston Parkway, a
five-lane curb and gutter facility will be constructed. Between Weston
Parkway and I-40 the roadway will be widened from five to seven lanes. Three
alternatives for widening Harrison Avenue are being studied: symmetrical
widening, east-side widening, and west-side widening.
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 federally
funded Environmental Assessment. This document will be prepared in
accordance with the Natinal Environmental Policy Act. It is desirable that
your agency respond by July 15, 1994 so that your comments can be used in the
preparation of this document.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Eddie
McFalls, Project Planning Engineer, of this Branch at [phone].
FV/plr
Attachment
.OF
1

0/
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
JAMESB F
GOVERNOR
NT'JR.
._ s
BILL.--HOLMAN
SECF'?ETARY
-KERR?F ?STE\[E
?; D[RECT?7R ?

y
;1yx- tyt? T' P
.g-
y ?
RECEIPT OF PAYMENT
September 18, 2000
Mr. William Gilmore, PE
NC Department of Transportation
Project Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Subject: TIP #:
COE Permit #:
DWQ #:
County:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
U-2804B
199601876
991201
Wake
The North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) received check
number 1058564 in the amount of $ 115,000.00 as payment for the compensatory
mitigation requirements of the subject U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404
permit (Action ID #199601876) and 401 Water Quality Certification (DWQ
#991201) issued to the North Carolina Department of Transportation.
The NCWRP, by acceptance of this payment, acknowledges that the NCWRP
is responsible for the compensatory mitigation requirements associated with Action
ID #199601876; and agrees to provide the compensatory mitigation as specified in
Special Conditions (e) of this permit. As specified, the NCWRP will restore 920
linear feet of stream in Cataloging Unit 03020201 of the Neuse River Basin.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Crystal
Braswell at [phone].
Sincerely,
Rn E. errell,
o ald
4`7
Program Manager
REF/cvb
cc: TZob Ridings
file
Eric Alsmeyer
WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM
1619 MAIL SERVICE CENTER, RALEIGH, NC 27699-1 6 1 9
website: h2o.emstate.nc.us PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SO% RECYCLED/10% POST-CONSUMER PAPER
K ?.
1653
rr `
r 5 1 '
S
1 ?
1 5
R, tuk Res. 1 -
? 91 $1, Rec. Ar
F -brk e IU '.N<use I Rolesnlle i•,?
el0 14 ?Gr'e`Mna 9 401
` c n,^ l?b2rke 96 \
Ewakefiel I Z
-? • • 1 - ' Millbr ?
Lizard Licit k
Morrtsvdl Gi 3
.ism Id d b
Ns on
file o 64P
dale Rock
64
Ste' `` ` „? Ne4
Apex L j
e,- Garne se
ss? O 1 he Aubur
Sill S 1
McCullerll 6 8
nas
_ ?? s 401 2`''
e /
:..•
yay-Varms ill Springs
so
/I I/
Y jj•?:?1\S•:
kr 10 1
CAR17
Tqf--,21,763
!est.
j llln,?H -
M(? 1ffi
O
1

f?
L4s3
cS, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
1011 t?° TRANSPORTATION
su DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
14
BRANCH
ASR 65 (HARRISON AVENUE)
FROM NC 54 (CHAPEL HILL ROAD) TO I - 40
` WAKE COUNTY
•
" T. I. P. NO. U - 2804

_•. Figure°;1'..
- !