U-4410D

Department of Environment and Natural Resources ??N 0?
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs "?ti?Fti ?6-
Project Review Form sgNOSgrFR^ BOOS
Project Number: C-MW. Due Received:
=own w _ JLLJ t? S-?`
his project is being reviewed as indicated below: `
Regional Office
Regional Office Area
!A Air
'o Soil & Water
o Asheville
.% N
o. Fayetteville
In-House Review
o Coastal Management
:i7 Water
Date Response Due (BWJ, d c)
19 -of- NPcy
Cs? a
o Marine Fisheries
o Mooresville 10 Groundwater P'Vi(tldlife o Water Resources
:o"Ralei Oland Quality Engineer 9 o Environmental Health
o Washington o Recreational Consultant 'o Forest Resources o Solid Waste Mgmt
ciWilmington
o Winston-Salem
o Land Resources' o Radiation Protection
1Q Parks & Recreation o Other
Vl?ater Quality
o ?,.• - `?
o Groundwater
Manager Sign-OfURegion:
Response (check all applicable)
Date:
In-House Reviewer/Agency:
o No objection to project as proposed.
o No Comment
itu+: ,::i" .1. '.+_;? f S?_?,.. .j i?:"n?.... Y. Lr..cl t ?,.?-- .at ...,. .wfa, ., __ ;?. :: h. SMi...s ... .,, .,? .. .,.a _. ?•i ...,. ,?..wa .?.. ..:lai ,..,.,1?'?
xSY}.ry? t ± I S /.5 +' S t ? 'N ?'+ t
Z,,iJ": 1 Z? ba
? Yt Y_ P

RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
-z
a`

17 Air Quality
/Qliti
1

I

LOUIS STEPHENS DRIVE EXTENSION
AND HOPSON ROAD REALIGNMENT AND EXTEI ?.t104
4
DURHAM AND WAKE COUNTIES ?o
STATE PROJECT NO. 35021.2.1 2?'y
T.I.P. PROJECT No. U-441 O D
RESEARCH TRIANGLE FOUNDATION PROJECT Nos. 6 AND 7
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

SUBMITTED BY THE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AND RESEARCH TRIANGLE FOUNDATION OF NORTH CAROLINA
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
For further information contact:
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
[phone]
Date of Approval
UregorW. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation

1 .0 TYPE OF ACTI ON
' This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Administrative Action,
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
' The NCDOT has determined that this project will have no significant impact on the human or
natural environment. This FONSI is based on the Environmental Assessment, which has been
independently evaluated and determined to adequately and accurately discuss the environmental
' issues and impacts of the proposed project. The Environmental Assessment provides sufficient
evidence and analysis for determining that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required
for the proposed project. The NCDOT takes full responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and
content of the Environmental Assessment.

F1

' Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
2.1 PROJECT SUMMARY
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Research Triangle
Foundation (RTF) propose to extend Louis Stephens Drive (SR 2500) from the intersection of
Development Drive (SR 3093) to Hopson Road (SR 1978) and realign and extend Hopson Road
from Louis Stephens Drive to NC 55 (see Figure 1). The extension of Louis Stephens Drive will
be let to contract by RTF, and the extension of Hopson Road to NC 55 will be let to contract by
the NCDOT. The project is included in the 2004-2010 NCDOT Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) as project number U-4410 D. The total project length is approximately 1.5 miles.
The proposed project is located in Durham and Wake Counties, in Research Triangle Park
(RTP), North Carolina.
Connecting Hopson Road to NC 55 and extending Louis Stephens Drive to Hopson Road will
provide alternate travel routes for RTP commuters and residents in the project area. The
proposed action will create access to sites available for research and development in southern
RTP and facilitate development of these sites. The proposed road improvements will conduct
future traffic that would otherwise be assigned to existing roadways, which may minimize the
rate at which increases in traffic will result in lower level of service on existing facilities.
Construction of the proposed project will occur in two phases. Construction on the extension
of Louis Stephens Drive is planned for completion in late 2006. This will include construction
of the intersection at Hopson Road, with Hopson Road stubbed-out on the west side of the
intersection. Hopson Road will be extended to NC 55 when the Research Triangle Foundation
sells a site adjacent to the proposed road. The estimated completion date for the extension of
Hopson Road to NC 55 is late 2006 or early 2007.
2.2 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Three alternatives were evaluated in the Environmental Assessment: No-Build, Louis Stephens
Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with At-Grade Rail Crossing, and Louis
Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with Grade-Separated Rail Crossing.
The Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with At-Grade Rail
Crossing is the Preferred Alternative. This alternative was selected as the Preferred Alternative
for the following reasons:
¦ Only two trains per day traveling at 10 mph use the rail corridor in the project area,
making conflicts between trains and motor vehicles improbable;
¦ The relocated at-grade crossing will result in improved safety over its present location;
¦ The cost savings associated with this alternative is $1,200,000; and
¦ Access to adjoining properties will be maintained.

2 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
r• ? ? r . r r r r ri r? r? ?¦ r? r? ?¦ ar r i 1
I , XB B 150
IUUUULI -1 ---
ENGLISH -E
11
J J I
- A
/f I I'n 1( Rites ? A '`
J. ? SFARCN ni
S 1RIANGIF ! ?. I?,
` PARR ,
END PROJECT
LOUIS STEPHENS
STA 139+00
AfnAHDER DRPR Av«M.,f, `
?x
t RFSfARCN R WGE FODNW,RN+ \ +
1 ?
?ul;c Po::?r
Y
R
a M? HI IN,
,m a
Ln F a
c fr
in
V ,,o
Z a i L MD NI FGN MfT f IND
? f?zfARa .T?.?-F w?DATwN
VICINITY MAP (DDE ED -.1
END PROJECT
HOPSON ROAD
STA 244+03.59
D o
' Hopson Roams,
TRW+DLI EDMNDATIDK ENERGY
- - N-- WALL
,I
WINVIICH ,RMHG?f f0UNDAT- DURDMAI CONY WR-m CLUB RK
J G . ? // r
BEGIN PR JECT
HOPSON OAD
STA 200+00 I-GN NAN LL O""°""°"
R?LLDAL? OID?LL /
RUM EIlB1 MDCN4L /
?? CAROL IAREEE WORDUA: ,B!
4` ? 1
1RYNDLL RR,OC COAVANY
X t
oc
V
maAROI Tw?c,t Na.mATwN i.?_.? u, TcRRrAX Nx.oATNx?
1r
?p? F i I 2?.1
RFSFMCN 1RUKGlE POUHDADOK
-•-y-•-------•-•---•---•---•- - , a\
----------- A?E=za?g \ ------- - ---`--------------------
/ ?,
MADHE.UENL„ IN,ERNADONAL MC
BEGIN PROJECT
LOUIS STEPHENS
STA 85+00
a PROPOSED PROJECT
NCDOT TIP NO. U-4410D
Durharr?Wake County, North Carolina
LEGEND
ET-1 INO RIGHT DE W
F- PROPOSED RIGHT Of wwY

77 EA Sf ME Ni

S
L
STIHG ROADWAY
fXI
EXISTING ROADWAY TO RE REMOVED
PROPOSED ROADWAY
DJJ7i. FUTURE RO Aw Y
O TEMPORARY ROADWAY /DETOURS
l PROPOSED ISLAND, CURB AND GUTTER
0 WETLANDS
--,. PD"DS
"- STREAMS
O RAILROAD RIGHT Of WAY
O UTILITY EASEMENT
PROPERTY LINES
.--- COUNTY LIKE
GUSN SCwtF
Figure No.
1
IINWWWWLSreek Rood
' The at-grade railroad crossing alternative relocates the current crossing on South Alston Avenue
approximately 1,764 feet south to Hopson Road between Louis Stephens Drive and South
Alston Avenue. The existing South Alston Avenue crossing is located between two curves in
' the road and at a curve in the railroad tracks, diminishing sight distance for trains and vehicles
approaching from both directions. The relocated at-grade crossing would be situated at a straight
section of track and along a straight section of roadway, improving safety. A railroad signal and
' gates similar to those used at the present crossing would be used at the new location.
I

I

Louis Stephens Drive is proposed as a four-lane, two-way divided facility with four-foot paved
shoulder sections, a 34-foot raised curb median and 12-foot travel lanes (see Figure 2). These
improvements will be implemented in two construction phases, with two lanes paved and two
lanes graded until future traffic warrants full service on the proposed facility. Hopson Road is
designated to become a four-lane, two-way facility with shoulder section and raised curb median
(see Figure 3). The 12-foot lanes will have four-foot paved shoulders and a 16-foot raised
median. The anticipated posted speed for both roads is 45 mph.
Louis Stephens Drive will be on a 200-foot right-of-way and Hopson Road will be on a 150-foot
right-of-way. Research Triangle Foundation will convey allright-of-way it owns or controls
needed for the project. The NCDOT will acquire right-of-way not owned by RTF. Total
permanent right-of-way requirements for the overall project are 31.02 acres. Permanent
drainage easement requirements for the project total 3.61 acres.
' Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005
_ c

tV

o 142
?.

ao 20
00 00
- F
? ry

f ( W
1 7
N;

'1 O Q
F

O Z
Oa
F
0
?Na
o-JV
O
O d p
Y Z D Z
L
W O
> y
CL
00

W
0
7> C
A I H
ZU.
1
O C

U
W
1 LU
Ln- ?... z m
O W a

O 1 N Z
1 u
°

1
OO 1 1 O o V
-
V

A

'
?r
J
I i
?

i
Na

s
1
V N

1 ]?
1 1 oz
1 1 W
H
1
p,
?1 1 00

n 1 1 OW
Z i 1 C D
1 1 4
1 i n' ?
1 1 ?
1
1
1 1 r
1
1 1
1 ?
1
1
1 1
1
I
f H
p ? 1

Y i ?
1
1
1
1

a
3 Z
0-
22

l7
0

I?
8 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact

' 3.a SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS
' Durham and Wake Counties
SR 2500 (Louis Stephens Drive) Extension
from SR 3093 (Development Drive) to SR 1978'(Hopson -Road,
' and SR 1978 (Hopson Road) Realignment and Extension
State Project No. 35021.2.1,
T.I.P. Project No. U-4410 D

' PROJECT COMMITMENTS
In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit No. 14 Conditions, the General Nationwide
' Permit Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency
Conditions, NCDOT's Guidelines for Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters, General Certification Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of Certification, the
following special commitments have been agreed to by the NCDOT:
' Pre-Construction Commitments
Division of Highways- Contract Services. Right-of-Wav Branch
The Contractor will be required to provide coverage for all work to be performed on CSX right-
of-way per Insurance Special Provisions - CSX Transportation, Inc:

' Document Date: 4/27/2005
L
i
D
E
t
i
h
S
i
on
ou
ve
x
ens
s
tep
ens
r
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 9

' 4.0 SUMMARY OF BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE
ENVIRONMENTL IMPACTS

1

1

After review of the analysis of alternatives in the Environmental Assessment, it has been
determined that the Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with At-
Grade Rail Crossing is the least environmentally damaging, most practicable alternative.
Wetlands and Surface Waters
Three small wetlands were identified in the project corridor during February 2003; however
these wetlands are either non-jurisdictional or avoided by the project.
The United States Army Corps of Engineers issued Nationwide Permit 14 for the 91-acre
project area located between Hopson Road and Davis Drive in Research Triangle Park on July
31, 2003. The permit was reauthorized on February 2, 2005 (see Appendix A). The permit
authorizes 1,042 linear feet of stream channel impacts. Proposed Louis Stephens Drive will cross
Long Branch and an unnamed tributary to Northeast Creek. The proposed project will pipe the
streams under the road. Approximately 650 feet of stream channel will be impacted.
Temporary, short-term impacts to water quality from construction-related activities include
increased sedimentation and turbidity. Additional temporary, but more long-term construction
related impacts to water resources include substrate destabilization, bank erosion, increased
turbidity, altered flow rates, and possible temperature fluctuations within the channel due to
removal of streamside vegetation.
Vegetation and Wildlife
Impacts to terrestrial vegetative communities consist of approximately 3.1 acres of alluvial forest;
60.2 acres of mixed hardwood forest; and 12.5 acres of man-dominated (maintained utility
easement) areas. These impact estimates are based on a 400-foot wide study corridor along Louis
Stephens Drive and a 300-foot wide study corridor along the Hopson Road realignment.
Permanent impacts depend on final roadway design but are expected to be less based on the
200-foot right-of-way for Louis Stephens Drive and the 150-foot right-of-way for Hopson
Road.
Fluctuation in populations of animal species which utilize terrestrial areas is anticipated during
the course of construction. Slow-moving, burrowing, and subterranean organisms will be
directly impacted by construction activities, while mobile organisms will be displaced to adjacent
communities. Impacts will be temporary in nature and population levels can be expected to
return to pre-construction conditions once work is complete.
Cultural Resources
There are no known structures of historical or architectural importance located within the
project area. There are no known archaeological sites within the project area.
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 11
Air Quality and Noise
The proposed project does not result in air quality or noise impacts.
Community
The proposed project will not specifically harm or disproportionately affect any social group.
The project area is predominantly comprised of commercial properties. There will be no impacts
related to neighborhood cohesion and no relocations of homes or businesses will be necessary.
The proposed project will improve accessibility to, and in, southern RTP. Current employees of
RTP businesses, area residents, and emergency service providers may benefit from the increased
access that the project will provide.
Threatened and Endangered Species
Biological conclusions of No Effect have been rendered for all protected species studied except
two: N ichaux's sumac and smooth coneflower. Pedestrian surveys in the project area were
completed for these species in November 2002 and June 2003. No specimens of N ichaux's
sumac or smooth coneflower were located, and a biological conclusion of Not Likely to Adversely
Affect was rendered for both species. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service provided
written concurrence with the biological conclusions in a letter dated July 29, 2003 (see Appendix
A).
Cumulative Impacts
The potential for project-induced land use changes for research development is high. It is likely
under both the Build and No-Build Alternatives that the available developable land in the
project area would, at some point in the future, convert to research-type facility use. However,
the proposed project makes the available locations more easily accessible and attractive from a
development standpoint. Development that occurs because of the proposed project is expected
to result in positive socioeconomic impacts such as increased tax base and new employment
possibilities.
Resources sensitive to potential indirect and cumulative effects of the proposed project include
the surface waters of Long Branch and the UT to Northeast Creek. Standards for WS-IV Water
Supply Watersheds and Nutrient Sensitive Waters apply to development in the project area.
Durham and Wake Counties implement land use and development controls designed to control
densities and provide for stream protection buffers through measures such as erosion control
and stormwater runoff control.
The proposed project is located in an area designated for business development in the Research
Triangle Park. Proximity to urban employment centers, planned extension of utilities, proximity
to housing, and easy access to major transportation corridors, contribute to the project's
potential to induce and influence growth and development. Land use controls and regulations
are in place that, if properly enforced, can minimize and/or avoid potential indirect and
cumulative impacts to water quality.
12 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact

5.0 COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
The Environmental Assessment for this project was approved by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation on January 31, 2005.
5.1 CIRCULATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The approved Environmental Assessment was circulated to the following federal, state, and local
agencies for review and comments:
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
• U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
• Wake County
• Research Triangle Foundation
• N.C. Department of Transportation Program Development and Division 5
Opportunity for a public hearing was advertised in the Durham Herald and Raleigh News and
Observer on February 3, 2005 and February 10, 2005. Notification of the opportunity to
request a hearing was also sent to property owners. No requests for a hearing were received.
' Copies of the document and/or notification that the Environmental Assessment was available
for review were also sent to the State Clearinghouse, special interest groups, and newspapers.

5.2 COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Comments received on the Environmental Assessment are included in Appendix A. Comments
were received from the following agencies:
• North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), Division
of Water Quality
• NCDENR, Division of Environmental Health
• NCDENR, Raleigh Regional Office
• North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources (no comment)
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality (L)WQ
Fourteen comments were received from the Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ).
Representatives from firms working on the proposed project met with Nicole Thomson of the
NCDWQ on April 26, 2005 to discuss her comments on the Environmental Assessment. At the
conclusion of the meeting, Ms. Thomson indicated that all issues raised in her comments were
satisfactorily addressed. A memorandum summarizing the meeting and an addendum to the
original comments from NCDWQ are included in Appendix A.
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/28/2005 13
NCDENR Division of Environmental Health
Comment: The relocation of the 2,100-foot waterline discussed on pages 2-10 and 3-5 must
be submitted for approval by the Plan Review - Technical Services Branch.
Response: Existing utilities will not be relocated. The information provided in the
Environmental Assessment regarding utility relocations was dated and should
have been omitted from the final document. This will be noted in Section 6.0
below, "Revisions to the Environmental Assessment."
NCDENR. Raleigh Regional Office
Comment: Permit and approvals that may need to be obtained from NCDENR in order for
this project to comply with North Carolina Law were identified.
Response: Requirements are noted.
14 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/28/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact

J

6.0 REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Sections 2.2.1, 2.2.2, and 2.3.7 in the Environmental Assessment state that the existing railroad
crossing on South Alston Avenue will be relocated "approximately 225 feet" south to Hopson
Road between Louis Stephens Drive and South Alston Avenue. The statements should read
"approximately 1,764 feet."
Sections 2.3.9 and 3.1.3 in the Environmental Assessment state that "Outside of RTF property,
the NCDOT will relocate existing utilities as needed. Approximately 2,100 feet of water line and
900 feet of sewer line are expected to be relocated." These statements should be omitted from
the document. Utility relocations are not anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
I The wetland identified on plan sheet RFT6-6 in Appendix C of the Environmental Assessment
did not meet wetland criteria and should not have been shown on the plans as such.

' Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 15

7.0 BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the proposed project documented in the Environmental Assessment, and
upon comments received from federal, state and local agencies and the public, it is the finding of
the North Carolina Department of Transportation that this project will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the human or natural environment.
The recommended alternative for the proposed project is not controversial from an
environmental standpoint. No significant impact to natural, ecological, cultural, or scenic
resources are expected. The proposed project is consistent with local plans and will not disrupt
any communities. These conclusions are based on a thorough analysis of the environmental
impacts described in the Environmental Assessment.
Based on this evaluation, it has been determined a Finding of No Significant Impact is applicable
for this project. Therefore, neither an Environmental Impact Statement nor further
environmental analysis is required.
I
16 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
I

k

C
r

11

APPENDIX A - AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
REFERENCED IN THE FONSI
' Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 17

C

f

18 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension 1
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
' U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID: 200120436 200120437 County: Durham & Wake
' GENERAL PERMIT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner: Research Triangle Foundation
Attn: Elizabeth Rooks
Mailing Address: Post Office Bog 12255
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709 Telephone No.: [phone]
Authorized Agent: Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Kevin Martin
' Mailing Address: 11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 Telephone No.: [phone]
' Location of property (road name/number, town, etc.): The project site is approximately 91 acres in size and is located
between Hopson Road (SR 1978) and Davis Drive (SR 1999) in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Site Coordinates: 35.8534 °N 78.8876 °W USGS Quad: Green Level
Waterway: Kit Creek and Long Branch River Basin: Cape Fear HUC: 03030002
Description of projects area and activity (see page 2 for a summary of authorized impacts): This permit authorizes
mechanized landclearing,'excavati.on, installation of culverts, and the placement of fill associated with the
construction of Louis Stephens Drive. Permanent impacts to wetlands and waters authorized by this permit total
1,042 linear feet of stream channel (768 linear feet of important channel).
Applicable Law: ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
? Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Nationwide or Regional General Permit Number(s): 14 14
' Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the attached
conditions and your submitted plans. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation from your submitted plans may subject the
permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate legal action.
This verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below unless the nationwide authorization is modified,
suspended or revoked. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide permit authorization is reissued and/or
modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below, provided it complies with all requirements of
the modified nationwide permit. If the nationwide permit authorization expires or is suspended, revoked, or is modified, such that the
' activity would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit,'activities which have commenced (i.e., are
under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit, will remain authorized provided the
activity is completed within twelve months of the date of the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend or revoke the authorization.
' Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality Certification. You
should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone [phone]) to determine Section 401 requirements.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA),
prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.
This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal,
State or local approvals/permits.
If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of Engineers regulatory
program, please'contact Todd Tugwell at telephone [phone], ext 26.
Corps Regulatory Official Date: 02/02/2005 Verification Expiration Date: 02/02/2007
' Copy Furnished:
' Page 1 of 2
Determination of Jurisdiction:

? Based on preliminary information, there appear to be waters-of the US including wetlands within the above described project area. '
This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process
(Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
? There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
®. There are waters of the US and/or wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
? The jurisdictional areas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous action. Please reference the
jurisdictional determination issued on (Action ID: ).
Basis of Jurisdictional Determination: The project site contains tributaries to Long Branch and Kit Creek, which flow into
Northeast Creek, a tributary to theCape Fear River, a navigable waterway.
Corps Regulatory Official Date: 02/0212005 Determination Expiration Date: 02/02/2010
Summary Of Authorized Impacts and Required Mitigation
Action ID NWP / GP Open Water (ac) Wetland ac U ' ortant Steam Important Stream
# # Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent
200120436 14 274 492
200120437 14 276

hn act Totals 0 0 0 0 0 274 0 768
Total Loss of Waters of the U.S. (ac) 0 Total Loss of Waters of the U.S. (h) 1042
Required Wetland Mitigation (ac) 0 Required Stream Mitigation f) 768 Permittee
Additional Remarks and/or Special Permit Conditions:
1. Please note that this permit verification reauthorizes proposed impacts as previously authorized by nationwide
permit on March 3, 2001 and again on July 31, 2003, with no changes to the proposed plans.
2. All Special Conditions included in the original permit verification have been completed: Mitigation for 768
linear feet of stream channel impacts associated with this permit was provided at the Mt. Vernon Springs
Mitigation Site, which has been completed and is currently being monitored, in accordance with the original
permit application dated January 17, 2001.
Page 2 of 2

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Feld Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh. North Carolina 27636-3726
July 29, 2003
Ms. Cindy Carr
Mulkey, Inc
P.O. Box 33127
Raleigh, NC 27636
Dear Ms. Carr:
•? v
This letter is in response to your letter of July 10, 2003 which provided the. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological conclusion of Mulkey, Inc. that the proposed
extension of Louis Stephens Drive from the intersection of Development Drive to Hopson Road
and the realignment and extension of Hopson Road to NC 55 in`Durham and Wake Counties,
North Carolina, is not likely to adversely affect the federally protected smooth coneflower
(Echinacea laevigata) or Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauzii). These comments are provided in
accordance with-section 7 of the Endangered Species..Act (SSA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543).
During a July 28, 2003 telephone conversation between you and Mr. Gary Jordan, it was revealed
that there is no federal funding for this project. However, a permit is-required from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Section 7 of the ESA requires that consultation occur
between the federal action agency and the Service. Since the Federal Highway Administration is
not involved in this project, the USACE becomes the federal action agency. However, you stated
in the July 28 phone conversation that the USACE permit(s) have already been obtained.
1 Based on the negative results of the surveys, and on additional information provided via
telephone, the Service supports the conclusion that the project is not likely to adversely affect
either the smooth coneflower orMichaux's sumac. For future consultation correspondence,.the
1 Service recommends that biographical information on the field researchers doing the surveys be
included to allow the Service to validate the qualifications of those conducting surveys.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions
regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
' Sincerely,
1
Garland B. Pardue, Ph.D.
' Ecological Services Supervisor

cc: Eric Alsmeyer, USACE, Raleigh, NC
David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington, NC
W
•@ar.m
North Carolina
Department of Administration
' Michael F. Easley, Governor Gwynn T. Swinson, Secretary
April 19, 2005
' Mr. Omar Sultan
N.C. Department of Transportation
Program Development
MSC 1534
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Sultan:
Re: SCH File # 05-E-4220-0266; EA; Proposed project is for Louis Stephens Drive Extension and
Hopson Road Realignment and Extension in Wake County: U-4410D
The above referenced environmental information has been reviewed through the State Clearinghouse
under the provisions of the North Carolina Environinen>_al Policy Act.
Attached to this letter are comments made by Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (DEHNR) in the course of this review. These comments should be addressed in the Finding
' of No Significant Impact (FONSI) document.
' Best regards.
Sincerely,
r
Ms. Chrys Baggett
' Environmental Policy Act Coordinator
Attachments
' cc: Region J
Vailin Address: Telephone: [phone] Location Address:
1301 ?iail Service Center Fax (919)73,-9571 l l G Vest Jones Street
Raleigh. NC 27699-1 '0 1 State Courier #:1-01-00 Raleigh. North Carolina
e-mail ChrT.s.l3aggetr'wncmail. net
An Equal Oppornu+in::{(firma re Action Employer
Air
v
.
NR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee/
Environmental Review Coordinator
SUBJECT: 05-0266 EA Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road
Realignment and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties
DATE: April 12, 2005
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources has reviewed the
proposed information. The attached comments are for the applicant's
information.
Thank you for the opportunity to review.

Attachments
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
y
ARA-State of North Carolina Reviewing Office:
INCDENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources r
Project Numbedlr Due Date:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
' After review 6f this project it has been determined that the DENR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this project
to comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of this form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Regional Office.

PERMITS
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Normal Process Time
(Statutory Time Limit)
0 Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of construction 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions & sewer systems contracts. On-site inspection. Post-application technical conference usual. (90 days)
not discharging into state surface waters.
NPDES-permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection preapplication
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to construct wastewater treatment 90 -120 days
discharging into state surface waters. facility-granted after NPDES. Reply time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue (N/A)
of NPDES permit-whichever is later.
0I Water Use Permit I Preapplication technical conference usually necessary 30 days
(N/A)

C]
Well Construction Permit
Complete application must be received and permit issued prior to the 7 days
I installation of a well. (15 days)
C] Dredge and Fill Permit Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property owner. 55 days
On-site inspecrion. Preapplication conference usual. Filling may require Easement (90 days)
- to Fill from N.C. Department of Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15 A NCAC N/A 60 days
(2Q.0100, 2Q.0300, 2H.0600)
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15 A NCAC 2D.1900
® Demolition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with
0 days
15 A NCAC 2D.1110 (a) (1) which requires notification N/A (990 days)
and removal prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos
Control Group 919-733-0820.
0 I Complex Source Permit required under 15 A NCAC
2D.0800
C1 The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion & sedimentation 20 days
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Section) at least 30 (30 days)
days before beginning activity. A fee of $50 for the first acre or any part of an acre.
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referenced Local Ordinance. I 30 days
Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with NCDOTs approved program. Particular attention should be
given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well as stable stormwater conveyances and outlets.
Mining Permit On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DENR. Bond amount varies with
type mine and number of acres of affected land. Any are mined greater than 30 days
one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond must be received before (60 days)
the permit can be issued.
North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources if permit exceeds 4 days 1 day
(N/A)
0 Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit-22 counties On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources required "if more than five 1 day
in coastal I.C.with organic soils. acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections should be requested (N/A)
at least ten days before actual burn is planned.'

I? i
Oil Refining Facilities
N/A
90 - 120 days
(N/A)

1

I

? + Dam Safety Permit
PERMITS
? I Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well
? I Geophysical Exploration Permit
? I State Lakes Construction Permit
i
0 401 Water Quality Certification
? CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
? CAMA Permit for MINOR development
P5ECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction. Applicant
must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans, inspect construction, certify
construction is according to DENR approved plans. May also require permit under
mosquito control program, and a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers.
An inspection of site is necessary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum
fee of $200.00 must accompany the application. An additional processing fee
based on a percentage or the total project cost will be required upon completion.
File surety bond of $5,000 with DENR running to State of N.C. conditional that any.
well opened by drill operator shall, upon abandonment, be plugged according
to DENR rules and regulations.
JAPPlication plication filed with DENR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit. Application
etter. No standard application form.
fees based on structure size is charged. Must include descriptions
rawings of structure & proof of owip of riparian properly.
N/A
0.00 fee must accompany application
00 fee must accompany application
? I Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monument needs to be moved or destroyed, please notify:
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687 Raleigh, N.C 27611
? Abandonment of any wells, if required must be in accordance with Title I SA. Subchapter 2C.0100.
? Notification of the proper regional office is requested if "orphan' underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during any excavation operation.
? Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal Sto'mwater Rules) is required.
* Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority)
Normal Process Time
(StatutoryTime Limit)
30 days
(60 days)
10 days
(N/A)
10 days
(N/A)
15 - 20 days
(N/A)
55 days
(130 days)
60 days
(130 days)
22 days
(25 days)
45 days
REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below-
r_1 Asheville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, N.C. 28801
[phone]
? Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, N.C. 28301
[phone]
? Mooresville Regional Office
919 North Main Street
Mooresville, N.C. 28115
[phone]
Raleigh Regional Office
800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C.27611
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, N.C.27889
[phone]
? Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, N.C.28405
[phone]
? Winston-Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, N.C. 27107
[phone]

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
Project Number
05-0266
County
Wake
Proposed project is for Louis Stephens
Dr Extension and Hopson Rd Realignment
& Extension in Wake County: U-4410D
Project Name NC DOT Type of Project
? The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all water system
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the
award of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C
.0300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919)
733-2321.
? This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must comply
with state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the
applicant should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
? If this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend. closure of feet of
adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish
sanitation program, the applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Section at (252)
726-6827.
? The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding
' problem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the
applicant should contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated
' structures, a extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent., areas. For information concerning rodent control,

' contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at
[phone].
? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their
requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A. 1900 et.
sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods,
contact the On-Site Wastewater Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding the
sanitary facilities required for this project.
? If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water
Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27699-1634, [phone].
X
? For Regional and Central Office comments, see the reverse side of this form.
' Jim McRight PWS 03-17-05

Reviewer
Section/Branch
Date
I S:\Pws\Angela W\Clearinghouse\Review Response Pgs 1 and 2 for input.doc
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND Project Number
NATURAL RESOURCES 05-0266
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH County
Wake
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
NC DOT Proposed project is for Louis Stephens Dr
Project Name Type of Project
Extension and Hopson Rd. Realignment
Comments provided by: & Extension in wage county: u4410D
? Regional Program Person
[j Regional Supervisor for Public Water Supply Section
? Central Office program person
Name: Michael Douglas-Raleigh RO Date: 3-17-05
Telephone number:
Proaram within Division of Environmental Health:
Public Water Supply
? Other, Name of Program:
Response (check all applicable):
? No objection to project as proposed
71 No comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Comments attached
E--__S"ee comments below
?-
,C S C c,c SS ?c cN? Z - ??? J -5
Uk 4'e a 'rv
Retum to:
Public Water Supply Section
Environmental Review Coordinator
for the
Division of Environmental Health
C
ti

NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION r ;
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
' STATE NUMBER: 05-E-4220-0266 F02
DATE RECEIVED: 03/09/2005
AGENCY RESPONSE: 04/13/2005
REVIEW CLOSED: 04/18/2005
MS RENEE GLEDHILL-EARLEY
' CLEARINGHOUSE COORD
DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES
ARCHIVES-HISTORY BLDG - MSC 4617 (;A pS ±
RALEIGH NC
REVIEW DISTRIBUTION ?La25216 (?k"
`l 3
CC&PS - DEM, NFIP ,1' j?J U ? S?
DENR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS ,? `?'??oOS J?1? '
DEPT OF AGRICULTURE i 3J
DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES m ?s•C ? 5 111
DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION ??`c;9cp L
TRIANGLE J COG f?
PROJECT INFORMATION
APPLICANT: N.C. Department of Transportation cly
• W R'W
TYPE: State Environmental Policy Act
ERD: Environmental Assessment
DESC: Proposed project is for Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment
and Extension in Wake County: U-4410D
5
The attached project has been submitted to the N'. C. State Clearinghouse for
' intergovernmental review. Please review and submit your response by the above
indicated date to 1301 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-1301.
If additional review time is needed, please contact this office at [phone].
AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED:
NO COMMENT
' CO TS ATTACHED
SIGNED BY: -;., .
DATE : ';
APR-11-2005 12:30 FROM:DWQ-WETLANDS 9197336893
o? WAr?gQ?
_co r
to
TO:97153060
MiChaer F. Essfsy, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
April 11, 2005
N E-LMORANDUM
To, Melba McGee
Through: John Hennessyq?
From: Nicole Thomson 9_0
Subject: Comments on the Environmental Assessment"related to the Louis Stephens Drive Extension and
Hopson Road Realignment and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties, Sate Project No.
35021.2.1, TIP U-4410 D, DENR Project Number 05-0266.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the
issuancc of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. It is our understanding that the project as presented will result in impacts to jurisdictional wed ands and
streams. The DWQ offers the following comments based on review of the aforementioned document:
A) According to the document, in March of 2001 the NCDWQ issued a waiver of 401 Water Quality
Certification. for DWQ Project No. 01-0053. A total of 1,062 linear feet of stream impacts were authorized
under that waiver for the Louis Stephens Drive and South Loop Road project. NCDOT is respectfully
reminded that only those impacts were authorized under the original 401 Water Quality Certification as
described in th.e original application dated received January 18, 2001. Any new impacts and construction
activities beyond those listed in the original application will require a new 401 Water Quality Application
submittal. Rcvicw of the document shows that there will be new impacts to streams and'wetlands for the
proposed project, thus an application for a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required.
B) According to the document, three small, forest wetlands were delineated in the project area. Two of the
wetlands were determined to be either isolated (.,r not under US Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H, Section .1300, NCDOT is respectfully reminded that a NCDWQ staff member
will need to verify the presence or absence of any isolated wetlands. Furthermore, should isolated wetlands
he impacted due to construction activities, a State General Permit for Impacts to Isolated Wetlands and
Isolated Waters will be required.
C) The document does not present any mapping chat chows the location of wetlands and streams. Tn addition.
the document does not give any specified amount of anticipated impacts to wetlands and strea ins. Until the
DWQ has a map that clearly displays till the wetlands. streams, and other surface waters located in the
project, with the proposed project superimposed onto those resources, we cannot agree that appropriate
avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project. As such, issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification for this project could be delayed until the information is provided to the DWQ for review, and
we are convinced that all appropriate avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project.
D) After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will, need to demonstrate the avoidance and
minimization Of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. Furthermore, wetland
mitigation may be required for this project
1 vithCanplina
rransporto0on Penitlfig Unit ?Qi1[C?lt/
1550'Aall Service Centor, Ralelgh. North Carolina 27699.1550
2:21 Crabires Boulevard, Sulte 250, Raleigh, North Carofina 27604
Phase: 919-733-1726! FAX 919`733-6693 / Internet httoJ/h2o.enr.sta?e.nC. u;/n?±retlands
P.3/5
r_
L
An Equal OppommtylAflrrnatlve Acdon Employer - 50% R-e ycled110'.t Post Consumer Pmer
APP,-11-2005 12:31 FROM:DWQ-WETLANDS 9197336893 TC:97153060 P:4-15

i E) In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6)
mitigation will be required for cumulative impacts of greater than 15-0 linear .feet to any single perennial
stream. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace
appropriate lost functions and values- In accordance with the Euvironmentid Management Commission's
Rules 115A NCAC 213.0506 (h)(3) }, the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as
stream mitigation.
' F) As part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application process, NC DOT is F. espectfully reminded to
include speeific,s for both onsite and offsite mitigation plans. If mitigation is required, it is preferable to
present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environtneutal documentation. While
NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted that for projects regui.ciug
mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required in conjunction. with the issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification.
G) Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should include an
itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with corresponding mapping.
An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated.as a result of this project is required. The
type and detail of analysis should conform. to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the assessment of
secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004. We understand that you have agreed to make this
study a part of your 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
1) NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not limited to, bridging, fill, excavation
and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included in the final impact
calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts, temporary or otherwise, also need to
be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
3) Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we realize
that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts should be
' countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover, in areas where
high quality wetlands or streams are impacted. a bridge may prove preferable. When applicable, DOT
should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable.
K) Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in. wetlands.
I L) Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to wetlands in
borrowlwasm areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed methods for.
' stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to discharge dircutly into
streams or. surface waters.
N) Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams
may require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water
Quality Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory
protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are
' lost. k'inal permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and
written concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on
appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum. extent practical,
the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation
' plans wbere appropriate.

APR-11-2005 12:31 FROM:DWO-WETLANDS 9197336893 TO:97153060 P:5/5
Tho .NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project Should you have any questions or
require any additional information, please contact Nicole Thomson at [phone].
cc: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Engineers. Raleigh Ficld Office
Mr, Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Central Files
File Copy
CAComspondwe d2005 EA, EIS, FONS1\tj.441 OMEnviroatmeallil Assessment Apr 05

MEMORANDUM
MULKEY
ENGINEERS St C[DNSL---7!A.14TS
TO: Nicole Thomson, NC Division of Water Quality
FROM: Liz Kovasckitz, Mulkey Engineers & Consultants

11

L
DATE: April 27, 2005
SUBJECT: NCDOT TIP Project No. U-4410 D Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson
Road Realignment and Extension, Research Triangle Foundation Project RTF-7
On April 26, 2005 we met to discuss the comments submitted by the Division of Water on the
Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for the subject project. At the conclusion of our meeting
you indicated that all issues raised in your April 11, 2005 letter to Melba McGee were satisfactorily
addressed during our meeting. The purpose of this memo is to document our responses to DWQ
comments on the EA and/or provide reference as to why responses are unnecessary as discussed in
our meeting.
Comment A: After reviewing the proposed plans, previous permit submittals, and meetings that have
occurred in the past, it was agreed that no additional DWQ permits are required for the project. Per
your request, we are attaching a copy of the correspondence documenting S&EC's site meeting with
Todd Tugwell of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) where he confirmed S&EC's
delineation and isolated wetland determinations (see attached S&EC correspondence dated
2/24/04).
Comment B: The three wetlands discussed in the EA are shown in the S&EC correspondence
referenced in item A above. One wetland was determined to be isolated (inset 1), and since the
project impacted less than 0.1 acre of isolated wetland, did not require authorization from DWQ.
However, as a courtesy S&EC did notify DWQ of our client's intention to impact this area (see
attached S&EC correspondence to John Dorney of DWQ dated 5/28/04). One wetland was
determined not to meet wetland criteria due to lack of hydric soils (inset 2). The third is avoided by
the project (inset 3).
The plans included in Appendix C of the EA show a wetland on sheet RTF 6-6. This wetland was
determined not to meet wetland criteria and should have been removed from the plans. The wetland
shown on plan sheet RTF6-10 is an isolated wetland that occurs in a power line easement outside of
the project area.
Comment M: Since the project is in the Cape Fear River Basin and not the Neuse River Basin, we
agreed that direct discharges of stormwater are not prohibited and therefore no additional response is
required to this item.
Because no further authorization is required from DWQ, we agreed that the remaining comments do
not require responses.
MULKEY INC. 6750 TRYON ROAD CARY, NC 2751 1 PO BOX 331 27 RALEIGH, NC 27636 PH: 91 9-851-1912 FAX: [phone] WWW.MULKEYINC.COM
th
As requested in the meeting, we are providing the DWQ project number for the Mount Vernon '
Springs mitigation site, the design for which was reviewed and approved by DWQ. The number is
DWQ # 01-1206. The mitigation site has been constructed per the approved plan. The site is being
used to provide DWQ and USACE required mitigation for this project and for a lake project at
Research Triangle Park.
Thank you very much for meeting with us so quickly and agreeing to respond promptly to this memo
in order to resolve this matter. We apologize that the information was not presented as clearly as it
could have been, but as you have seen, it is a fairly unique and complex situation. If you have any
questions, please call me at [phone]. My email address is lkovasckitz mulkeyinc.com and my
fax number is [phone].
cc: Kevin Martin, S&EC
Vince Rhea, NCDOT
Liz Rooks, RTF
Don Morton, Mulkey
Cindy Carr, Mulkey
2001109.01 file
2
1"IrR-{LV LVVJ LZ. 11 1 1\V, .. V?V ?\V . u x ....rv rr.r . w???r?

of WAT?q
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of ErMronrnent and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality

April 2S, 2005
MEMORANDUM
' To: Melba McGee
From. Nicole Thomson
' Subject: Addendum to Comments on the Environmental Assessment related to the Louis Stephens Drive
Extension and Hopson Road Realianmeat and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties, Sate
Project No. 35021.2.1, TIP U-4410 b, DENR Project Number 05-0246.
' This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the
issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. After meeting with Liz Kovasekitz and Cindy Carr of Mulkey Engineers & Consultants and Kevin Martin
of S&EC on April 26, 2005, it is our understanding that the project as presented will result in no impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands and streams. The DWQ offers the following comments based on review of the
aforementioned document and subsequent meeting:
' A) According to the document, in March of 2001 the NCDWQ issued a waiver of 401 Water Quality
Certification for AWQ Project No. 01-0053. A total of 1,062 linear feet of stream impactrs were authorized
under that waiver for the Louis Stephens Drive and South Loop Road project. NCDOT is respectfully
' reminded that only those impacts were authorized under the original 401 Water Quality Certification as
described in the original application dated received January 19, 2001. Any new impacts and construction
activities beyond thase listed is the original application will require a new 401 Water Quality Application
submittal. Review of the document shows that there will be new impacts to streams and wetlands for the
' proposed project, thus an application for a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required.
A meeting with Liz Xovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
' USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
' 13) According to the document, three small forest wetlands were delineated in the project area. Two of the
wetlands were determined to be either isolated or not under US Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H, Section .1300, NCDOT is respectfully reminded that a NCDWQ staff member
will need to verify the presence or absence of any isolated wetlands. Furthermore, should isolated wetlands
be impacted due to construction activities, a State General Permit for Impacts to Isolated Wetlands and
Isolated Waters will be required.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitr., Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated that
i
d
d
re
not requ
i
impacts to the one isolated wetland on the project would be less tban 0.1 acres and therefore
authorisation from DWQ, per correspondence from John Domey dated May 28, 2004. In addition, 2
wetlands on the project were determined to not meet wetland criteria. a third wetland is avoided completely
by the project and the final wetland is an, isolated wetland that occurs outside of the project area. Since the
impacts to the isolated wetland will be less than 0.1 acres. no State General Permit for Impacts to Isolated
Wetlands and Isolated Waters will be required. In addition, as there are no additional wetland impacts, no
' 401 Water Quality Certification is required.
?°rhCurvI-
Transportation Permgfing Unit +' 'd?l[r 1116
' 1650 Mall Sarvka Center. Ralalgh. North Carolina 27689.1650
2321 Crabtre9 Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Cdrorma 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone]! Internet httnJ/h2o.enr.state.ne.ustnewedands
I An Equal OpporhmItylAMrmative Action Employer-50% pacyclee1110%Post Consumer Paper
WK-e-d-r-'UM 14:1d hKUM: UWU-Wt 1 LHNU5 919 f33bb"zU
I U: y1i511J1U P: 3/5
C) The document does not present any mapping that shows the location of wetlands and streams. In addition,
the document does not give any specified amount of anticipated impacts to wetlands and streams. Until the
DWQ has a map that clearly displays all the wetlands, strearns, and otber surface waters located im tba
project, with the proposed project superimposed onto those resources, we cannot agree that appropriate
avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project. As such, issuance of the 401 Water' Quality
Certification for this project could be delayed until ft information is provided to the DWQ for review, and
we are convinced that all appropriate avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project.
A meeting with Liz Kovascldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovemcntiored project would not result In, any additional bmpacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
D) After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Qualify
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance and
minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. Furthermore, wetland
mitigation may be required for this project.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz. Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated tb rougb
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Doivey of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result i? any additional impacts to wetlands, therefore
satisfying the reed to demonstrate avoidance and minimization of impacts- In addition, ae there are no new
additional impacts to wetlands, no additional wetland mitigation will be required for this project.
E) In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6) },.
mitigation will be required for cumulative impacts of greater than 1501inear feet to any single perennial
stream. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace
appropriate lost functions and values- In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's
Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3) ), the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available fbr use as
stream mitigation.
A meeting with Viz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005. demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell, of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to streams, therefore
no additional stream mitigation will be required for this project.
.T.) As, part of, the 401 Water Quality Certification Application proccm, NC DOT is respectfully reminded to
include specifics for both onsite and offsife mitigation plans. If mitigatiori is required, it is preferable to
present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with th6 environmental documentation. While
NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted that for projects requiring
mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required in conjunction with the issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification.
A meeting with Liz Kovascldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovemelntioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no additional n itigation is required. Furthermore, the Mount Vernon Springs
Mitigation site (DWQ No. 01-1206) was reviewed ajad approved by DWQ for previous impacts to prior
phases of this project. The required mitigation site has been constructed per the approved plan.
' C3 Futurc documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification APplication should include an
itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with contsponding mapping.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
H} An analysis of cumulative and secondary impact-. anticipated as a result of this pra ject is required. The
type and detail of analysis should conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the assessraeut of
secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004. We understand that you have agreed to make this
study a part of your 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
' A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USA.COB that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
)) NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not limited to, bridging, fill, excavation
and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included in the final impact
' calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts, temporary or otherwise, also need to
be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
' A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
J) Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we realize
that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts should be
countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover, in areas where
high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove preferable. When applicable, DOT
should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable.
' A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would rot result in any additional impacts to streams and
' therefore, no bridges or culverts are necessary.
K) Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
' A matting with Liz Kovasekit7. Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USA.COE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands.
L) Borrow1waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to wetlands in
borrowlwasstc areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26. 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both Tohn Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands.

Ht'FK-dU-dUUt> 14:16 t-HUM: UWU-Wk:I L_HNUS 'J17 r-%5bU'J6 I U: 7GJ11'ylti r: Yb
The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed methods for
stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to discharge directly into
streams or surface waters.
A meeting with Liz Kovaseldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 pointed out that this
project is within the Cape Fear River Basin and not the Neuse River Basin, therefore the direct discharge of
stormwater to streams or surface waters is not prohibited.
N) Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams
may require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water
Quality Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory
protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are
lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal, of a format application by the NCDOT and
written concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on
appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical,
the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation
plans where appropriate.
A mrcting with Liz Kova el itz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Donpey of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell. of
USACOE that the aboveram ioned project would not result i? any additional impacts to wodan& or
streams and therefore, no Individual Permit from the Corps An' ineers or 401 Water Quality Certification
would be required.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project- Should you have any questions or
roquirc any additional inforrhation, please contact Nicole Thomson at [phone].
cc: b&. Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Field Of im
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
lift. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Kevin Martin, S&EC, I ID1 Raven Ridge Rd, Raleigh, NC 27614
Xr.. Elizabeth Kovasclcitz, AICP, Planning Group Manager. 6750 Tryon Rd, Cary, NC 27511
Ms. Cindy Carr, Natural Resources Project Manager, 45750 Tryon Rd, Cary, NC 27511
Mr. Mince Rhea, PE, NCDOT FDEA
Ms. Gail Grimes, Pi:. NCDOT PDEA
Central Files
File Copy
ClCortrspondcacc%2005 AA, EIS, MNS11U441OD\ft iroatmcntal'As%cssmcnt Addendum Apr 05

L

MEMORANDUM
MULE
ENGINEERS &'S UVrAN
?Q o
o
s
TO: Nicole Thomson, NC Division of Water Quality
FROM: Liz Kovasckitz, Mulkey Engineers & Consultants
DATE: April 27, 2005
SUBJECT: NCDOT TIP Project No. U-4410 D Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson
Road Realignment and Extension, Research Triangle Foundation Project RTF-7
On April 26, 2005 we met to discuss the comments submitted by the Division of Water on the
Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for the subject project. At the conclusion of our meeting
you indicated that all issues raised in your April 11, 2005 letter to Melba McGee were satisfactorily
addressed during our meeting. The purpose of this memo is to document our responses to DWQ
comments on the EA and/or provide reference as to why responses are unnecessary as discussed in
our meeting.
Comment A: After reviewing the proposed plans, previous permit submittals, and meetings that have
occurred in the past, it was agreed that no additional DWQ permits are required for the project. Per
your request, we are attaching a copy of the correspondence documenting S&EC's site meeting with
Todd Tugwell of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) where he confirmed S&EC's
delineation and isolated wetland determinations (see attached S&EC correspondence dated
2/24/04).
Comment B: The three wetlands discussed in the EA are shown in the S&EC correspondence
referenced in item A above. One wetland was determined to be isolated (inset 1), and since the
project impacted less than 0.1 acre of isolated wetland, did not require authorization from DWQ.
However, as a courtesy S&EC did notify DWQ of our client's intention to impact this area (see
attached S&EC correspondence to John Dorney of DWQ dated 5/28/04). One wetland was
determined not to meet wetland criteria due to lack of hydric soils (inset 2). The third is avoided by
the project (inset 3).
The plans included in Appendix C of the EA show a wetland on sheet RTF 6-6. This wetland was
determined not to meet wetland criteria and should have been removed from the plans. The wetland
shown on plan sheet RTF6-10 is an isolated wetland that occurs in a power line easement outside of
the project area.
Comment M: Since the project is in the Cape Fear River Basin and not the Neuse River Basin, we
agreed that direct discharges of stormwater are not prohibited and therefore no additional response is
required to this item.
Because no further authorization is required from DWQ, we agreed that the remaining comments do
not require responses.
MULKEY INC. 6750 TRYON ROAD CARY. NO 27511 PO BOX 33127 RALEIGH. NO 27636 PH: 919-651-1912 FAX: [phone] WWW.MULKEYINC.COM
As requested in the meeting, we are providing the DWQ project number for the Mount Vernon
Springs mitigation site, the design for which was reviewed and approved by DWQ. The number is
DWQ # 01-1206. The mitigation site has been constructed per the approved plan. The site is being
used to provide DWQ and USACE required mitigation for this project and for a lake project at
Research Triangle Park.
Thank you very much for meeting with us so quickly and agreeing to respond promptly to this memo
in order to resolve this matter. We apologize that the information was not presented as clearly as it
could have been, but as you have seen, it is a fairly unique and complex situation. If you have any
questions, please call me at [phone]. My email address is lkovasckitzQmulkeyinc.com and my
fax number is [phone].
cc: Kevin Martin, S&EC
Vince Rhea, NCDOT
Liz Rooks, RTF
Don Morton, Mulkey
Cindy Carr, Mulkey
2001109.01 file
2

--a-----m.®a.0o m®a. .mosoo?c
RTF
Attention: Ms. Liz Rooks
2 Hanes Drive
PO Box 12255
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27709
/er?_
1yiC
February 24, 2004
S&EC Project # 1625. WO
Barbra Mulkey Engineering
Attention: Cindy Carr
7504 E. Independence Blvd
Suite 101
Charlotte, N.C. 28227
Re: USACE Wetland Delineation Verification Meeting for the property known as the Hopson
Road Realignment Site, Durham County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Rooks:
On February 11, 2004, Mr. Todd Tugwell of the USAGE, and I reviewed the streams and
wetlands on the property. Mr. Tugwell determined that the stream shown on Inset 3 is perennial.
Mr. Tugwell also determined that the marginal wetland areas depicted on Inset 1 and 2 are not
jurisdictional (see attached maps) due to the lack of hydric soils. The linear wetland on-site
(flagged with flag numbers 100-107) was determined to be isolated. These determinations should
be reflected in the impact maps prepared for the permit submittal.
Additional Services
If you choose to have us perform additional work, we can assist you with notification to the
USACE and DWQ regarding impacts to wetlands and permitting issues, if required. This
additional work can be completed at our hourly rates or a proposal can be generated. Please
advise.
Please call if you need further explanation.
Sincerely,
Sean Clark
Attachments: 1) Corrections to Wetland Map
2) Insets 1-3
C: Todd Tugwell, USACE
Charlotte Office: Greensboro Office:. Hickory Office:
236 LePhillip Court, Suite C 3817-E Lawndale Drive 622 Coon Mountain Lane
Concord, NC 28025 Greensboro, NC 27455 Taylorsville, NC 28681
Phone: [phone] Phone: [phone] Phone: [phone]
Fax.: [phone] Fax: [phone] Far.: [phone]
xawrl
ww"M
1o7
?vl

'ioo-
?'00-
%60100

t3
,
,--,Lee Rum Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
EM 11010 Raven Ridge Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Project: Hopson Road Realirnment / 5&EC Project # 1625
U
Q
ti
L_
T
7
Z
G
L
C
C

?
U
Vy
?
A O
u

U
vQi E
a
9
u
c
C
°u y h

E d
L r
e E
L GL]
U
I
=
°
?

?

U
E
E a
?
E E

`
C
o V

?
9
d
C
„d+

u

.? y .?
?
C
n

F
fi
O
7

Z
Q

.?
LFsl C
COl
,

E

N
° Q
GT]
Q

E
Q

fr]
F
O N C
fr]
F
O Q
Q
0
U

Z
R• O

Q
a
a ? =
a a

„ c

n
¢

n °
°
m
n
c „ ? l

Preliminary Wetland Approximation
Suitable for Preliminary Planning Only
S&EC reserves the right to modify this map based on more fieldwork PV s?y l y® SCALE
surveyed delineations and any other additional information.
Approximations were mapped using topographic maps and ground trulhing.
If these areas are to be used, they must be app-ed and
Permitted by the U.S. Army Corps or Engineers.
P?
I-si S E 7 Z
mS.1
Soery
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Project: Hopson Road Realignment / S&EC Project 0 1625
Preliminary Wetland Approximation
Suitable for Preliminary Planning Only
S&EC reserves the right to modify this map based on more field,vork,
surveyed delineations and any other additional information.
Approximations were mapped using topographic maps and ground Uuthing.
If these areas are to be used, they must be approved and
Permitted by the U.S. Army Corps or Engineers.
kbA?&
eitAp,
-000 Of $10 00CLO
00T (tys
S4

LEGEND:
I--,f= WATERS OF THE U.S. fix, intermittent streams; must be confirmed by the USACE]
r ,` =WATERS OF THE U.S. [i.e, perennial streams; must be confirmed by the USACE]
?Z= MARGINAL WATERS OF THE U.S. [i.e., ephemeral/intermittent streams; must be confirmed by the USACE
=JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS [must be confirmed by the USACE)
/1 = MARGINAL WETLANDS Imust be confirmed by the USACE]
= BOUNDARY OF EVALUATED AREA
0 Noy 7.0 SCALE
Ii?s s? 7' 3

2oa8 ? ?2
.^ s 9 l???l
ntyo? ,
Z12 :"t
a
IN
4 uol s?P sc-?.*..
w
U
Q
h
v
r
T
.n
u
c
L
e
0
? u
U
ay U
,O to E
a, ? E
a a
T u
d a y fr]
E a U
L W
c. E
o W
a u a,,,Li s 4
h
E a, a
E E E ? ?
y E y ? v
a a, E
h L u a L
a ? w
c a F Z
d d Q E F
L-1 fs1 ??•. -? F ?
Q
F o > o
v. L.
O O F , C
C W Z U Z Q
Q Q Q C i
O
M. Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
IM Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Project: Hopson Road Realignment / S&EC Project @ 1625
Preliminary Wetland Approximation
Suitable for Preliminary Planning Only
S&EC reserves the right to modify this map based on more fieldwork,
surveyed delineations and any other additional information.
Approximations were mapped using topographic maps and ground tmthing.
If these areas are to be used, they must be approved and
Permitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
• Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road, Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
Project: Hopson Road Realignment I S&EC Project ti 1625
Preliminary Wetland Approximation
Suitable for Preliminary Planning Only
Si reserves the right to modify this map based on more fieldwork,
surveyed delineations and any other additional information.
Approximations were mapped using topographic maps and ground truthing.
If these areas are to be used, they must be approved and
Permitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
i I. I JAL

l
? lr {,}r
to
See Inset I ONLY WC-TtArs! D
[
Ttw% CXJ10'rl
LEGEND:
= WATERS OF THE U.S. [i.e., intermittent streams; must be confirmed by the U ;e1A X02Xj?S CA I'D h U.?•?.
1 U?[
? • .vim
WATERS OF THE U.S. [i.e., perennial streams; must be confirmed by the USA
J =MARGINAL WATERS OF THE U.S. [i.e., ephemeral/intermittent streams; mu 1;AJ
?•? uueli
?j =JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS [must be confirmed by the USACE) (J
=MARGINAL WETLANDS [must be confirmed by the USACE]
= BOUNDARY OF EVALUATED AREA !4; "-
FAIJ lol 11 9. 4
I LLJ
I M "
ryl ??
.? t

r?e•?f ?9
? F
` e
w,,rr
M

f
o
..+MrMr ? .
•,?,,,.•"' .! ? .fir i
Ilk
'Mrs
b
t+' "V f
?
.'M!a

SFr ?qy ??
:.? ? ?A PG S V p
PERMITTED AND DELINEATED r
e r;3?c?'asr ' ?;• ?', +' ?Cy
WWWIWIWWIWWIWWIIWW DELINEATED
v
NOT DELINEATED YET
See Inset 3
AI
END
ROAD XIS1
See Inset 2

O HAA •-
o° M ?rt i +
11 ??jj•• r '4•.t yy?o(s?
y f ' ??? ?•1 7
%
.-?- „r` . ?ti.
2--
0--co 11 ;
? k
CON
%.0 r
A E??CS-SO?' O TION
+F,j(2I J ..,
. ,4
or
r
01
o \\1U t r`?`?'.
i I
Jrr J? 7
? X11&
?'"..ss„?+' 111
f r._
I
4i
1tFt y??`
11 ?1? t
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 " = 500'
500 0 500 1000 ,
AC
9
-#E Ll XIS'fl
A M

_. .i ,
Wetland Delineation Performed By: Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
[phone]
Project/Site: Hopson Road Realignment Site / S&EC Project # 1625. WO Plot ID: Marginal area
SOILS
Map Unit Name Drainage Class: Moderately Well Drained
(Series and Phase): White Store Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Vertic hapludult Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Color Mottle Texture, Concretions,
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 A 10YR 6/3 10YR 5/8 Common,
fine,distinct Clay Loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_ Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_ Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
- Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_ Gieyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: The soils do not meet the criteria for hydric soil.
WETLANDS DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? X Yes No Is this sampling point within a wetland?
Wetland Hydrology Present? X Yes No Yes X No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes X No
-Remarks: Due to a lack of hydric soil, this area does not meet the criteria for a jurisdictional wetland.
IL- .1
Wetland Delineation Performed By: Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27614
[phone]
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Hopson Road Realignment Site / S&EC Project # 1625. WO Date: 2/16/04
Applicant/Owner: Research Triangle Institute County: Durham
Investigator: SC State: N.C.
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? X Yes No Community ID: Bottomland Forest
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? Yes X No Transect ID:
Is the area a potential Problem Area? Yes X No Plot ID: _ Marginal Area
If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambarstyraciflua Tree FAC+ 9.
2. Acer rubrum Tree FAC 10.
3. Acer rubrum Sapling FAC 11.
4. Pinus taeda Tree FAC 12.
5. Toxidrum radicans Vine FAC 13.
6. Lonicera japonica Vine FAC- 14.
7. Smilax rotundifolia Vine FAC 15.
8. Eulalla viminea Herb. FAC+ 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC
(excluding FAC-): 88%
Remarks: The vegetation meets the criteria ( ? 50% or more OBL, FAG or FACW) for hydrophytic vegetation.
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
X No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Sediment Deposits
X Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Field Observations: Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Depth of Surface Water: N/A (in.) Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
Depth to Free Water in Pit: > 12 (in.) FAC-Neutral Test
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 12 (in.)
Remarks: There are sufficient field indicators present to indicate wetland hydrology.
?4 tpa Soil & Environmental Co ili tit , PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road • Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 • Phone: (919) 846-??? I)Fax. [phone]
www.SandEC.com RB,QgN
Cy
May 28, 2004
S&EC Project #1625.W0
NCDENR-DWQ
Attn: Mr. John Dorney
2321 Crabtree Blvd
Parkview Building
Raleigh, NC 27604
RE: Louis Stephens Drive extension & Hopson Road realignment
Research Triangle Park, Durham County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Dorney:
On behalf of the Research Triangle Institute, we submit this courtesy notification to
inform you of the applicant's intent to impact 173.3 square feet (less than 0.01 acre) of an
isolated linear wetland in order to realign Hopson Road. Attached, please find a
completed Pre-Construction Notification, Agent Authorization Form, and other items as
described below.
The proposed project will extend Louis Stephens Dr. North to Hopson Road, and realign
Hopson Road, to accommodate commuter traffic. The project is at the intersection of
Hopson and Louis Stephens Dr. From I-40, take exit 278 and turn south onto NC 55.
Turn Left (East/Northeast) onto T.W. Alexander Dr., then Right (South) onto Hopson Rd.
The applicant pursued several means to minimize, or where possible eliminate, impacts to
wetlands and jurisdictional features. A Natural Resources Technical Report prepared by
another consultant, and a detailed wetland delineation conducted by S&EC, enabled the
applicant to avoid impacts to jurisdictional waters. As a result, the applicant does not
require a permit for the proposed activities.
Sincerely,

Sean Clark
Environmental Scientist
Attachments: PCN
Agent Authorization Form
Impact maps & tables (4 pages)
Charlotte Office: Greensboro Office: Hickory Office:
236 LePhillip Court, Suite C 3817-E Lawndale Drive 622 Coon Mountain Lane
Concord, NC 28025 Greensboro, NC 27455 Taylorsville, NC 28681
Phone: [phone] Phone: [phone] Phone [phone]
J
Office Use Only:
USACE Action ID No.
DWQ No.
(If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or
1. Processing
A_
0
4r
0
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
? Section 404 Permit ? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
? 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: None; courtesy notification
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here: ?
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Ms. Liz Rooks
Mailing Address: Research Triangle Foundation
2 Hanes Dr.
P.O. Box 12255
Research Triangle Park NC 27709
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address:
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Sean Clark
Company Affiliation: Soil & Environmental Consultants PA
Mailing Address: 11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh NC 27614
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: SClark SandEC com
Page 1 of 8
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
project will extend Louis Stephens Dr. North to Hopson Road, and realign Hopson Road, to
better accommodate commuter traffic.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The project is needed to better accommodate
commuter traffic and reduce traffic flow problems in the area.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
The areas in and around the proposed routes were reviewed by Mr. Todd Tugwell of the
USACE During this site meeting the area with the proposed impacts was determined to be
isolated No other 401/404 permits have been issued in this area for the proposed activities.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
The applicant does not anticipate requesting additional permits to complete the proposed project.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
Page 3 of 8
NA I NA I NA I NA I NA
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): NA
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): NA
Size of watershed draining to pond: NA Expected pond surface area: NA
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The applicant moved an earlier proposed alignment of Hopson Road to use existing culverts
and crossings eliminating impacts do to the realigpment. Extending Louis Stephens Drive will
ease traffic tie-ups The applicant has provided sound environmental stewardship since the
inception of Research Triangle Park and the drastically minimized impact to an isolated wetland
and the complete avoidance of impacts to a perennial stream displays the same sort of
conscientious effort.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
Page 5 of 8
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No ?
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
X. Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ? No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* Impact
(square feet) Multiplier Required
Mitigation
1 NA 3 NA
2 NA 1.5 NA
Total NA
* Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular trom near bank or cnannei; tone Z extenas an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Page 7 of 8
08/01/2001 14:06 9198469467 S&EC PAGE 02
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT I OMB APPROVAL NO. 0710-003
(33 CFR 326) Expires October 1996
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 6 hours per response, including the time for reviewing Instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send
comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of Information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to
Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directories of Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, suite
1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302= and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0710-0003), Washington, DC 20503.
Please DO NOT RETURN your form to either of those addressee. Completed applications must be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction
over the location of the proposed sctivity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authority: 33 USC 401, Section 10, 1413, Section 404. Principal Purpose: These laws required permits authorizing activities in, or affecting,
navigable waters of the United States, the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, and the transportation of dredged
material for the purpose of dumping It Into ocean waters. Routine Uses: Information provided on this from will be used In evaluating the application for
a permit. Disclosure: Disclosure of requested Information is voluntary. If information Is not provided, however, the permit application cannot be
processed not can a permit he Issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and Instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned,
9UMS I TfiRU 4 TO BE FN L60 BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO, 2_ FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETED
BELOW TO BE
5. APPLICANT'S NAME
Research Triangle Foundation of North Carolinz
6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS
P.O. Box 12255
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
8. AUTHORIZED AGENT'S NAME AND TITLE (anagenrismtrsqufreo)
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
11010 Raven Ridge Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27614
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE 10. AGENT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE
a.-? aT-Reelde?res
b. Business Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] b, Business Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
1 1 • STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize, Soil & Environmental Consultants. PA to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon
request, supplemental information in support of this permit application.
4/. 404")
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE Iseein rLcdons)
Research Triangle Park South Parcel Lake W5
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN ptaPp)roaars) UT of Kit Creek and 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS orepNicadel
Kit Creek NIA See attached USGS
15. LOCATION OF THE PROJECT
COUNTY Wake STATE NC
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN, 4500 inatnlotlonsl
see attached USGS topo
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
See attached USGS topo
North and East of Louis Stephens Drive, South of Kit Creek Road
08/01/2001 14:06 9198469467 S&EC PAGE 03
ENG_ FORM 4346, Feb 94 EDITION OF SEPT 91 IS OBSOLETE
(Pro onent: CECW-OR)
18. Nature of Activity 10eaorfovan ofaroiec4 Wfude e/1 te2tures! Construction of a Lake in a large Master Planned Commercial Development (See attached
letter from Research Triangle Foundation for more detailed information).
19. Project Purpose towrtbe the reason orpurpwa er the pro/wc? *4§e inwtrvcdon#1
To complete original master plan of project as per longstanding plan (See attached letter from Research Triangle Foundation)-
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
construction of a lake via typical construction methods.
21. Type(s) of material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards
N/A (See plans)
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see imvt tmm)
5.35 acres wetlands filled and 0.88 flooded, 429' important stream filled and 6187' flooded, 645' unimportant stream filled and 2697' flooded (See
attached S&EC PA letter for more detailed information)
23. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yea No X IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody llf more than can be entered here,
please attach a supplemental list).
Please see attached list
25. List of Other Certifications or Approvals/Denials Received from other Federal, State or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL" IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
;her V royals (e.g. 401 Water Quality Certification, Dom Safety Permit, etc.) are in progress or are pending outcome of
t is eppl cation.
Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building and flood plain permits,
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described In this application. I certify that the information in this
application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the
duly authorized agent of the applicant.
'5X'5 6 W'-e' 40///0/ . C tl? 0 / -(? t
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement In block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or oovers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or
fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more then five years or both.
F
IMULKE"Y
ENGINEERS & CONSUL-rA?NTS
PREPARED FOR CINDY CARR
MAY ? 4 ?%/ U
,nom.
°•??n.?ATF?rS?; .
"INCH
PLAN VIEW
SITE MAP
(NOT TO SCALE)
RTF 6 & 7
WARE/r' DURHAM COUNTY
PROJECT: 5.2661601 (R-2246C)
WIDENING LOUIS STEPHENS DRIVE
FROM DEVELOPMENT DRIVE
TO NORTH OF HOPSON ROAD
SHEET ` OF // 3/23104
LL?
,; I z
' Q
` I F--
` ,t
I
I
O 1
Ltd 1
'
O
LLJ i
,
1 ? 1
1
N
J Y
>. I I W
a- w
u
N i Q
W
, ?1 T
1 i
1
i : I 1
L-L I j.
y
I 1
n
- _ I 1 _

LLJ

i I
, p
i
-`
Z
0
11

U.
I
' u
,
N •.

? 1. . 1

o W

> 111

®
H
z 0 z
? z

CA
?
nnR ?

Ix
UK°' ® 3 cti

d
t'

'
us

v

I I ?,
------ --- - ---------
----- -- ?' I INI1S?
i i
I I ? Eq
I I ?P
Z z
I I t o I z
N I ?? c4 c H
I I
' I I
i
L-L
w , .... I ? W ct
I i s' 3??r .
I ILn
I N I c ;'
I i
I I ,
I I
o zt
----------? - ?" li I I I ;
i I I I ?I
- WEB
-7A I I a
I I
Vo
I
I
LL;' I i
i I S661 c?S
I
, I
I I
?, I I I
i
Impact Type Square Feet Linear Feet
Location (CH & WL) (CH Only)
Site 1 CH 0 0
Site 2 JW 173.4
CH = Channel, JW = Jurisdictional Wetland
F ?G?f ?7
?0, WATF9P
'p G
C? r
o ?
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality

July 13, 2005
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
From: Christina Breen
Subject: Comments on the Finding of No Significant Impact related to the Louis Stephens Drive Extension
and Hopson Road Realignment and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties, Sate Project No.
35021.2.1, TIP U-4410 D, DENR Project Number 05-0266.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the
issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. After meeting with Liz Kovasckitz and Cindy Carr of Mulkey Engineers & Consultants and Kevin Martin
of S&EC on April 26, 2005, it is our understanding that the project as presented will result in no impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands and streams. It was demonstrated that impacts to the one isolated wetland on the project
would be less than 0.1 acres and therefore did not require authorization from DWQ, per correspondence from John
Dorney dated May 28, 2004. In addition, 2 wetlands on the project were determined to not meet wetland criteria, a
third wetland is avoided completely by the project and the final wetland is an isolated wetland that occurs outside of
the project area. Since the impacts to the isolated wetland will be less`,than 0.1 acres, no State General Permit for
Impacts to Isolated Wetlands and Isolated Waters will be required. In addition, as there are no additional wetland
impacts, no 401 Water Quality Certification is required.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any questions or
require any additional information, please contact Christina Breen at [phone].
cc: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Field Office
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Central Files
File Copy
C:\Correspondence\2005 EA, EIS, FONSI\U-4410D\FonsiJuly 05
Carolina
Noe
;
turall;
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699 1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
P
S-
I cj&'?, ??F-
1 LOUIS STEPHENS DRIVE EXTENSION
DURH AND WAKE COUNTIES
STATE PROJECT NO. 35021.2.1
T.I.P. PROJECT NO. U-441 O D
RESEARCH TRIANGLE FOUNDATION PROJECT NOS. 6 AND 7
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

I

i

AND HOPSON ROAD REALIGNMENT AND EXTENSION
SUBMITTED BY THE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AND RESEARCH TRIANGLE FOUNDATION OF NORTH CAROLINA
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
For further information contact:
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
[phone]
4-A o 6
' Date of Approval rego Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis BrD??
North Carolina Department of Transportation ?5 0y,2
1 1
JUL 1, 1 zoos
' DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCN
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
LOUIS STEPHENS DRIVE EXTENSION
AND HOPSON ROAD REALIGNMENT AND EXTENS113N
DURHAM AND WAKE COUNTIES
STATE PROJECT No. 35021.2.1
T.I.P. PROJECT No. U-4410 D
RESEARCH TRIANGLE FOUNDATION PROJECT Nos. 6 AND 7
APRIL 2005
DOCUMENTATION PREPARED BY:
MULKEY ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS
°"t ZS ®5
Date Liz Kgvlasckitz, AICP 1,J
Transportation Planning Group Manager v
n m r- 9'p
%
6,11
S
Date on Morton P.E. SEAS Fa
41
' 4456 u
Vice President, Raleigh Branch Office
®oee®1j/?Q TO-
®® 0?Q09ei9oB, ?Q'
L) R
DOCUMENT PREPARED FOR:
North Carolina Department of Tr isportation / v
"/ /t?c
ate Vincent J. e , P.
Project Ma ger
Louis Stephens Drive Extension
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
Document Date: 4/27/2005 iii
Date Printed: 4/27/2005
A
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS

C!

1.0 Type of Action ..........................................................................................................1
2.0 Description of Proposed Action ...............................................................................2
2.1 Project Summary ............................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Preferred Alternative ........................................................................................................ 2
3.0 Summary of Special Project Commitments .............................................................9
4.0 Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Environmentl Impacts .................................11
5.0 Coordination and Comments ................................................................................13
5.1 Circulation of the Environmental Assessment ..........................................................13
5.2 Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment .........................................13
6.0 Revisions to the Environmental Assessment ........................................................15
7.0 Basis for Finding of No Significant Impact ..........................................................16
Appendix A - Agency Correspondence Referenced in the FONSI ............................17
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Proposed Project ................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 2. Louis Stephens Drive Typical Section ............................................................................. 6
Figure 3. Hopson Road Typical Section .......................................................................................... 7
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005 v
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005
1
i
i
vi Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension '
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact

1 .0 TYPE OF ACTT ON
' This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Administrative Action,
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
' The NCDOT has determined that this project will have no significant impact on the human or
natural environment. This FONSI is based on the Environmental Assessment, which has been
independently evaluated and determined to adequately and accurately discuss the environmental
' issues and impacts of the proposed project. The Environmental Assessment provides sufficient
evidence and analysis for determining that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required

' for the proposed project. The NCDOT takes full responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and
content of the Environmental Assessment
.

' Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
2.1 PROJECT SUMMARY
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Research Triangle
Foundation (RTF) propose to extend Louis Stephens Drive (SR 2500) from the intersection of
Development Drive (SR 3093) to Hopson Road (SR 1978) and realign and extend Hopson Road
from Louis Stephens Drive to NC 55 (see Figure 1). The extension of Louis Stephens Drive will
be let to contract by RTF, and the extension of Hopson Road to NC 55 will be let to contract by
the NCDOT. The project is included in the 2004-2010 NCDOT Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) as project number U-4410 D. The total project length is approximately 1.5 miles.
The proposed project is located in Durham and Wake Counties, in Research Triangle Park
(RTP), North Carolina.
Connecting Hopson Road to NC 55 and extending Louis Stephens Drive to Hopson Road will
provide alternate travel routes for RTP commuters and residents in the project area. The
proposed action will create access to sites available for research and development in southern
RTP and facilitate development of these sites. The proposed road improvements will conduct
future traffic that would otherwise be assigned to existing roadways, which may minimize the
rate at which increases in traffic will result in lower level of service on existing facilities.
Construction of the proposed project will occur in two phases. Construction on the extension
of Louis Stephens Drive is planned for completion in late 2006. This will include construction
of the intersection at Hopson Road, with Hopson Road stubbed-out on the west side of the
intersection. Hopson Road will be extended to NC 55 when the Research Triangle Foundation
sells a site adjacent to the proposed road. The estimated completion date for the extension of
Hopson Road to NC 55 is late 2006 or early 2007.
2.2 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Three alternatives were evaluated in the Environmental Assessment: No-Build, Louis Stephens
Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with At-Grade Rail Crossing, and Louis
Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with Grade-Separated Rail Crossing.
The Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with At-Grade Rail
Crossing is the Preferred Alternative. This alternative was selected as the Preferred Alternative
for the following reasons:
¦ Only two trains per day traveling at 10 mph use the rail corridor in the project area,
making conflicts between trains and motor vehicles improbable;
¦ The relocated at-grade crossing will result in improved safety over its present location;
¦ The cost savings associated with this alternative is $1,200,000; and
¦ Access to adjoining properties will be maintained.
2 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
a ?
t 5,
zG ?
N
WQF
J
s
s
s
0
S
8
Oad+
cl..Z Z
Ov t
ZC e
`
W =NQ
L
a
o°
Y
m
ml
U
Y
a .3
R
6
Z
r
rn
O
C_
O
? O
oU
4L
O:3 Z
w
cl
to Q
O~
2 m
00-101
L.
U
Z
0
L
7
D

The at-grade railroad crossing alternative relocates the current crossing on South Alston Avenue
approximately 1,764 feet south to Hopson Road between Louis Stephens Drive and South
Alston Avenue. The existing South Alston Avenue crossing is located between two curves in
the road and at a curve in the railroad tracks, diminishing sight distance for trains and vehicles
approaching from both directions. The relocated at-grade crossing would be situated at a straight
section of track and along a straight section of roadway, improving safety. A railroad signal and
' gates similar to those used at the present crossing would be used at the new location.

C

C

Louis Stephens Drive is proposed as a four-lane, two-way divided facility with four-foot paved
shoulder sections, a 34-foot raised curb median and 12-foot travel lanes (see Figure 2). These
improvements will be implemented in two construction phases, with two lanes paved and two
lanes graded until future traffic warrants full service on the proposed facility. Hopson Road is
designated to become a four-lane, two-way facility with shoulder section and raised curb median
(see Figure 3). The 12-foot lanes will have four-foot paved shoulders and a 16-foot raised
median. The anticipated posted speed for both roads is 45 mph.
Louis Stephens Drive will be on a 200-foot right-of-way and Hopson Road will be on a 150-foot
right-of-way. Research Triangle Foundation will convey all right-of-way it owns or controls
needed for the project. The NCDOT will acquire right-of-way not owned by RTF. Total
permanent right-of-way requirements for the overall project are 31.02 acres. Permanent
drainage easement requirements for the project total 3.61 acres.
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005
. c

N

0 o-

f
LL

a °o 1
0
oc?
00
' e

? 1
1 J
e.3 H .

• O Q
r
9
O Z
Oa
F. C
n u O
N p
C --1 V
a
2 jVs

v
o
0
LLz ia
??Z
Wo
2:w
p0
W
Z! C
NS
1 W
I W
CL Q
V
o
d E?
N
LU ~
I V7o F. Z
O a
L') -7
GZ 1,
9O I 1 D
0- 1 1 00
I O
r V W
z
?

1? 1 Jr
J
r

Z v
ia

h s
1 _ r
L 1 d0
1 5p

O
1 1 oz
1 1 W
//^ 1 N d
O O
1 1 OW
Z ; 1 C
?
1
< 1
1 1 C
C

1 1 N
1 1
W 1 y2
1 ?
1 1

1 1
1
1 IV
f O ? 1
l i
t ?
1
1
1

Z O
Z_Z
00
C o
'
-

0

I

F
I

I

Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension '
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact '
¦

3.0 SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Durham and Wake Counties
SR 2500 (Louis Stephens Drive) Extension

' from SR 3093 (Development` Drive) to SR 1978 (Hopson Road,
and SR 1978 (Hopson Road) Realignment and Extension
State Project No. 35021.2.1
T.I.P. Project No. U-4410 D
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit No. 14 Conditions, the General Nationwide"
' Permit Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions,, Regional Conditions, State Consistency
Conditions, NCDOT's Guidelines for Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters, `General Certification Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of Certification, the
' following special commitments have been agreed to by the NCDOT:
i
m
i
s
P
n
C
C
ent
on
omm
t
re-
struct
o
' Division of Highways - Contract Services, Right-of-Way Branch
The Contractor will be required to provide coverage for all work to be performed on CSZ tight-
of-way per Insurance Special Provisions - CSY Transportation, Inc.

1

D
ocument Date: 4/27/2005
Louis Stephens Drive Extension
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date' Printed: 4/27/2005

4.0 SUMMARY OF BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE
I
1

ENVIRONMENTL IMPACTS
After review of the analysis of alternatives in the Environmental Assessment, it has been
determined that the Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with At-
Grade Rail Crossing is the least environmentally damaging, most practicable alternative.
Wetlands and Surface Waters
Three small wetlands were identified in the project corridor during February 2003; however
these wetlands are either non-jurisdictional or avoided by the project.
The United States Army Corps of Engineers issued Nationwide Permit 14 for the 91-acre
project area located between Hopson Road and Davis Drive in Research Triangle Park on July
31, 2003. The permit was reauthorized on February 2, 2005 (see Appendix A). The permit
authorizes 1,042 linear feet of stream channel impacts. Proposed Louis Stephens Drive will cross
Long Branch and an unnamed tributary to Northeast Creek. The proposed project will pipe the
streams under the road. Approximately 650 feet of stream channel will be impacted.
Temporary, short-term impacts to water quality from construction-related activities include
increased sedimentation and turbidity. Additional temporary, but more long-term construction
related impacts to water resources include substrate destabilization, bank erosion, increased
turbidity, altered flow rates, and possible temperature fluctuations within the channel due to
removal of streamside vegetation.
Vegetation and Wildlife
Impacts to terrestrial vegetative communities consist of approximately 3.1 acres of alluvial forest;
60.2 acres of mixed hardwood forest; and 12.5 acres of man-dominated (maintained utility
easement) areas. These impact estimates are based on a 400-foot wide study corridor along Louis
Stephens Drive and a 300-foot wide study corridor along the Hopson Road realignment.
Permanent impacts depend on final roadway design but are expected to be less based on the
200-foot right-of-way for Louis Stephens Drive and the 150-foot right-of-way for Hopson
Road.
Fluctuation in populations of animal species which utilize terrestrial areas is anticipated during
the course of construction. Slow-moving, burrowing, and subterranean organisms will be
directly impacted by construction activities, while mobile organisms will be displaced to adjacent
communities. Impacts will be temporary in nature and population levels can be expected to
return to pre-construction conditions once work is complete.
Cultural Resources
There are no known structures of historical or architectural importance located within the
project area. There are no known archaeological sites within the project area.
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 11
Air Quality and Noise
The proposed project does not result in air quality or noise impacts.
Community
The proposed project will not specifically harm or disproportionately affect any social group.
The project area is predominantly comprised of commercial properties. There will be no impacts
related to neighborhood cohesion and no relocations of homes or businesses will be necessary.
The proposed project will improve accessibility to, and in, southern RTP. Current employees of
RTP businesses, area residents, and emergency service providers may benefit from the increased
access that the project will provide.
Threatened and Endangered Species
Biological conclusions of No Effect have been rendered for all protected species studied except
two: N ichaux's sumac and smooth coneflower. Pedestrian surveys in the project area were
completed for these species in November 2002 and June 2003. No specimens of N ichaux's
sumac or smooth coneflower were located, and a biological conclusion of Not Likely to Adversely
Affect was rendered for both species. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service provided
written concurrence with the biological conclusions in a letter dated July 29, 2003 (see Appendix
A).
Cumulative Impacts
The potential for project-induced land use changes for research development is high. It is likely
under both the Build and No-Build Alternatives that the available developable land in the
project area would, at some point in the future, convert to research-type facility use. However,
the proposed project makes the available locations more easily accessible and attractive from a
development standpoint. Development that occurs because of the proposed project is expected
to result in positive socioeconomic impacts such as increased tax base and new employment
possibilities.
Resources sensitive to potential indirect and cumulative effects of the proposed project include
the surface waters of Long Branch and the UT to Northeast Creek. Standards for WS-IV Water
Supply Watersheds and Nutrient Sensitive Waters apply to development in the project area.
Durham and Wake Counties implement land use and development controls designed to control
densities and provide for stream protection buffers through measures such as erosion control
and stormwater runoff control.
The proposed project is located in an area designated for business development in the Research
Triangle Park. Proximity to urban employment centers, planned extension of utilities, proximity
to housing, and easy access to major transportation corridors, contribute to the project's
potential to induce and influence growth and development. Land use controls and regulations
are in place that, if properly enforced, can minimize and/or avoid potential indirect and
cumulative impacts to water quality.
12 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
i
i

5.0 COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
The Environmental Assessment for this project was approved by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation on January 31, 2005.
5.1 CIRCULATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The approved Environmental Assessment was circulated to the following federal, state, and local
agencies for review and comments:
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
• U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
• Wake County
• Research Triangle Foundation
• N.C. Department of Transportation Program Development and Division 5
Opportunity for a public hearing was advertised in the Durham Herald and Raleigh News and
Observer on February 3, 2005 and February 10, 2005. Notification of the opportunity to
request a hearing was also sent to property owners. No requests for a hearing were received.
Copies of the document and/or notification that the Environmental Assessment was available
for review were also sent to the State Clearinghouse, special interest groups, and newspapers.
5.2 COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Comments received on the Environmental Assessment are included in Appendix A. Comments
were received from the following agencies:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), Division
of Water Quality
• NCDENR, Division of Environmental Health
• NCDENR, Raleigh Regional Office
• North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources (no comment)
NCDENR. Division of Water Ou" (DWQ
Fourteen comments were received from the Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ).
Representatives from firms working on the proposed project met with Nicole Thomson of the
NCDWQ on April 26, 2005 to discuss her comments on the Environmental Assessment. At the
conclusion of the meeting, Ms. Thomson indicated that all issues raised in her comments were
satisfactorily addressed. A memorandum summarizing the meeting and an addendum to the
original comments from NCDWQ are included in Appendix A.
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date printed: 4/28/2005 13
NCDENR Division of Environmental Health '
Comment: The relocation of the 2,100-foot waterline discussed on pages 2-10 and 3-5 must
be submitted for approval by the Plan Review - Technical Services Branch. '
Response: Existing utilities will not be relocated. The information provided in the
Environmental Assessment regarding utility relocations was dated and should
have been omitted from the final document. This will be noted in Section 6.0
below, "Revisions to the Environmental Assessment."

NCDENR Raleigh Regional Office
Comment: Permit and approvals that may need to be obtained from NCDENR in order for '
this project to comply with North Carolina Law were identified.
Response: Requirements are noted. '

I

1

Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension '
14
Date Printed: 4/28/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
1
6.O REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Sections 2.2.1, 2.2.2, and 2.3.7 in the Environmental Assessment state that the existing railroad
crossing on South Alston Avenue will be relocated "approximately 225 feet" south to Hopson
Road between Louis Stephens Drive and South Alston Avenue. The statements should read
"approximately 1,764 feet."
Sections 2.3.9 and 3.1.3 in the Environmental Assessment state that "Outside of RTF property,
the NCDOT will relocate existing utilities as needed. Approximately 2,100 feet of water line and
900 feet of sewer line are expected to be relocated." These statements should be omitted from
the document. Utility relocations are not anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
' The wetland identified on plan sheet RFT6-6 in Appendix C of the Environmental Assessment
did not meet wetland criteria and should not have been shown on the plans as such.

I

i
7
1

Louis Ste hens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 15
r
7.0 BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the proposed project documented in the Environmental Assessment, and
upon comments received from federal, state and local agencies and the public, it is the finding of
the North Carolina Department of Transportation that this project will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the human or natural environment.
The recommended alternative for the proposed project is not controversial from an
environmental standpoint. No significant impact to natural, ecological, cultural, or scenic
resources are expected. The proposed project is consistent with local plans and will not disrupt
any communities. These conclusions are based on a thorough analysis of the environmental
impacts described in the Environmental Assessment.
Based on this evaluation, it has been determined a Finding of No Significant Impact is applicable
for this project. Therefore, neither an Environmental Impact Statement nor further
environmental analysis is required.
16 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact

1
1
APPENDIX A - AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
REFERENCED IN THE FONSI
' Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 17

I

Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension '
18
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
' Action ID: 200120436 200120437 County: Durham & Wake
' GENERAL PERNUT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner: Research Triangle Foundation
' Attn: Elizabeth Rooks
Mailing Address: Post Office Bog 12255
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709 Telephone No.: [phone]
Authorized Agent: Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Kevin Martin
' Mailing Address: 11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 Telephone No.: [phone]
' Location of property (road name/number, town, etc.): The project site is approximately 91 acres in size and is located
between Hopson Road (SR 1978) and Davis Drive (SR 1999) in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Site Coordinates: 35.8534 °N 78.8876 °W USGS Quad: Green Level
Waterway: Kit Creek and Long Branch River Basin: Cape Fear HUC: 03030002
' Description of projects area and activity (see page 2 for a summary of authorized impacts): This permit authorizes
mechanized landclearing,'excavation, installation of culverts, and the placement of fill associated with the
construction of Louis Stephens Drive. Permanent impacts to wetlands and waters authorized by this permit total
' 1,042 linear feet of stream channel (768 linear feet of important channel).
Applicable Law: ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
' ? Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Nationwide or Regional General Permit Number(s): 14 14
' Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the attached
conditions and your submitted plans. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation from your submitted plans may subject the
permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate legal action.
This verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below unless the nationwide authorization is modified,
' suspended or revoked. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide permit authorization is reissued and/or
modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below, provided it complies with all requirements of
the modified nationwide permit. If the nationwide permit authorization expires or is suspended, revoked, or is modified, such that the
activity would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit,'activities which have commenced (i.e., are
under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit, will remain authorized provided the
activity is completed within twelve months of the date of the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend or revoke the authorization.
' Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality Certification. You
should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone [phone]) to determine Section 401 requirements.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA),
' prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.
This Department of the Army verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal,
State or local approvals/permits.
' If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of Engineers regulatory
program, please'contact Todd Tugwell at telephone [phone], ext 26.
Corps Regulatory Official Date: 02102/2005 Verification Expiration Date: 02102/2007
' Copy Furnished:
' Page 1 of 2
Determination of Jurisdiction:
? Based on preliminary information, there appear to be waters of the US including wetlands within the above described project area. '
This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process
(Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
? There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of '
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
Z. There are waters of the US and/or wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
? The jurisdictional areas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous action. Please reference the
jurisdictional determination issued on (Action ID: ).
Basis of Jurisdictional Determination: The project site contains tributaries to Long Branch and Kit Creek, which flow into
Northeast Creek, a tributary to theCape Fear River, a navigable waterway.
Corps Regulatory Official Date: 02/02/2005 Determination Expiration Date: 02102/2010
Summary f Authorized Impacts and Required Mitigation
Action ID NWP / GP Open Water (ac) Wetland (ac) U " ortant Steam Important Stream
# # Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent Temporary Permanent
200120436 14 274 492
200120437 14 276

hn act Totals 0 0 0 0 0 274 0 768
Total Loss of Waters of the U.S. (ac) 0 Total Loss of Waters of the U.S. (h) 1042
Re aired Wetland Mitigation ac 0 Required Stream Mitigation f) 768 Permittee
Additional Remarks and/or Special Permit Conditions:
1. Please note that this permit verification reauthorizes proposed impacts as previously authorized by nationwide
permit on March 3, 2001 and again on July 31, 2003, with no changes to the proposed plans.
2. All Special Conditions included is the original permit verification have been completed: Mitigation for 768
linear feet of stream channel impacts associated with this permit was provided at the Mt. Vernon Springs
Mitigation Site, which has been completed and is currently being monitored, in accordance with the original
permit application dated January 17, 2001.
Page 2 of 2

7

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh. North Carolina 27636.3726
July 29, 2003
Ms. Cindy Carr
Mulkey, Inc
P.O. Box 33127
Raleigh, NC 27636
Dear Ms. Carr:
•? v
This letter is in response to your letter of July 10, 2003 which provided the. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological conclusion of Mulkey, Inc. that the proposed
extension of Louis Stephens Drive from the intersection of Development Drive to Hopson Road
and the realignment and extension of Hopson Road to NC 55 in`Durham and Wake Counties,
North Carolina, is not likely to adversely affect the federally protected smooth coneflower
(Echinacea laevigata) or Michaux's sumac (Rhus michazWz). These comments are provided in
accordance with'section 7 of the Endangered Species:Act (ES.A) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543).
During a July 28, 2003 telephone conversation between you and Mr. Gary Jordan, it was revealed
that there is no federal funding for this project. However, a permit is-required from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Section 7 of the ESA requires that consultation occur
between the federal action agency and the Service. Since the Federal Highway Administration is
not involved in this project, the USACE becomes the federal action agency. However, you stated
in the July 28 phone conversation that the USACE permit(s) have already been obtained.
Based on the negative results of the surveys, and on additional information provided via
telephone, the Service supports the conclusion that the project is not likely to adversely affect
either the smooth coneflower or Michaux's sumac. For future consultation correspondence, :the
Service recommends that biographical information on the field researchers doing the surveys be
included to allow the Service to validate the qualifications of those conducting surveys.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions
regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
Sincerely,
Garland B. Pardue, Ph.D.
Ecological Services Supervisor
cc: Eric Alsmeyer, USACE, Raleigh, NC
David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington, NC
' ` O,,.SG7Fs`
1
C LT _
1 •Gp??
North Carolina
Department of Administration
Michael F. Easley, Governor
' Mr. Omar Sultan
N.C. Department of Transportation
t Program Development
MSC 1534
' Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Sultan:
The above referenced environmental information has been reviewed through the State Clearinghouse
under the provisions of the North Carolina Envirolunental Policy Act.
Gwynn T. Swinson, Secretary
' Re: SCH File # 05-E-4220-0266; EA; Proposed project is for Louis Stephens Drive Extension and
Hopson Road Realignment and Extension in Wake County: U-4410D

Attached to this letter are comments made by Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (DEHNR) in the course of this review. These comments should be addressed in the Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) document.
' Best regards.
Attachments

cc: Region J
April 19, 2005
5
Sincerely,
Ms. Chrys Baggett
Environmental Policy Act Coordinator
dlailin; Address: Telephone: [phone]
1301 Nlail Service Center Fax [phone]
Raleigh. NC 27699-1301 State Courier-=-01-00
e-mail Chrvs.6ttggerr'uvtcnrail.net
An Equal Opportnnit X: l ttrmarive.-tction Employer
Location Address:
I t6 Vest Jones Street
Raleieh. North Carolina
AGA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM. Melba McGeer
Environmental Review Coordinator
SUBJECT: 05-0266 EA Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road
Realignment and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties
DATE: April 12, 2005
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources has reviewed the
proposed information. The attached comments are for the applicant's
information.
Thank you for the opportunity to review.
Attachments
1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
i
AMA I
State of North Carolina
INCDENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources
?tY14 (,/ 0,
Reviewing Office:
Project Number: - ? -02 f:, (i Due Date:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
After review 6f this project it has been determined that the DENR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this project
to comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of this form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Regional Office.

PERMITS
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Normal Process Time
(Statutory Time Limit)
Q Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of construction 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions & sewer systems contracts. On-site Inspection. Post-application technical conference usual. (90 days)
not discharging into state surface waters.
NPDES-permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application ISO days before begin activity. On-site inspection preapplication
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to construct wastewater treatment 90 -120 days
discharging into state surface waters. facility-granted after NPDES. Reply time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue (N/A)
of NPDES permit-whichever is later.
I Water Use Permit I Preapplication technical conference usually necessary 30 days
(N/A)
0 Well Construction Permit Complete application must be received and permit issued prior to the I 7 days
installation of a well. (15 days)
Dredge and Fill Permit Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property owner. 55 days
On-site insoe^.ion. Preapplication conference usual. Filling may require Easement (90 days)
- to Fill from N.C.Department of Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15 A NCAC N/A 60 days
(2Q.0100, 2Q.0300, 2H.0600)
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15 A NCAC 2D.1900
® Demolition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with
60 days
15 A NCAC 2D.1110 (a) (1) which requires notification N/A (90 days)
and removal prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos
Control Group 919-733-0820.
Complex Source Permit required under 15 A NCAC
2D.0800
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion & sedimentation 20 days
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Section) at least 30 (30 days)
days before beginning activity. A fee of $50 for the first acre or any part of an acre.
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referenced Local Ordinance. I 30 days
Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with NCDOT's approved program. Particular attention should be
given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well as stable stormwater conveyances and outlets.
Mining Permit On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DENR. Bond amount varies with
type mine and number of acres of affected land. Any are mined greater than 30 days
one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond must be received before (60 days)
the permit can be issued.
North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources if permit exceeds 4 days 1 day
(N/A)
Soecial Ground Clearance Burning Permit-22 counties On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources required "if more than five 1 day
in coastal N.C.with organic soils. acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections should be requested (N/A)
at least ten days before actual burn is planned.'
? I Oil Refinina Facilities N/A 90 - 120 days
? I Dam Safety Permit
PERMITS
? Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well
? I Geophysical Exploration Permit
? I State Lakes Construction Permit
401 Water Quality Certification
? I CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
? I CAMA Permit for MINOR development
.1'ECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction. Applicant
must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans, inspect construction, certify
construction is according to DENR approved plans. May also require permit under
mosquito control program, and a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers.
An inspection of site is necessary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum
fee of $200.00 must accompany the application. An additional processing fee
based on a percentage or the total project cost will be required upon completion.
File surety bond of $5,000 with DENR running to State of N.C. conditional that any.
well opened by drill operator shall, upon abandonment, be plugged according
to DENR rules and regulations.
Application filed with DENR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit. Application
by letter. No standard application form.
Application fees based on structure size is charged. Must include descriptions
& drawings of structure & proof of ownership of riparian property.
N/A
--------------
$250.00 fee must accompany application
$50.00 fee must accompany application
? I Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monument needs to be moved or destroyed, please notify-
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687 Raleigh, N.C. 27611
CJ Abandonment of any wells, if required must be in accordance with Title 15A. Subchapter 2C.0100.
? Notification of the proper regional office is requested if 'orphan" underground storage tanks (LISTS) are discovered during any excavation operation.
? Compliance with 1 SA NCAC 2H 1,000 (Coastal Stormwater Rules) is required.
* I Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority)
Normal Processlime
Statutory Time Limiri
30 days
(60 days)
10 days
(N/A)
10 days
(N/A)
i5-20 days
(N/A)
55 days
(130 days)
60 days
(130 days)
22 days
(25 days)
4S days
(N/A)

REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below_
? Asheville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, N.C. 28801
[phone]
? FayettevilieRegonalOffice-
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, N.C. 28301
[phone]
? Mooresville Regional Office
919 North Main Street
Mooresville, N.C. 28115
[phone]
Raleigh Regional Office
800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C.27611
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, N.C.27889
[phone]
? Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, N.C.28405
[phone] _
? Winston-Salem Regional Office
585 Waughtown Street
Winston-Salem, N.C.27107
[phone]
i?

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
Protect Number
05-0266
County
Wake
Proposed project is for Louis Stephens
Dr Extension and Hopson Rd Realignment
& Extension in Wake County: U-4410D
Project Name NC DOT Type of Project
? The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all water system
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the
award of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C
.0300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919)
733-2321.
? This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must comply
with state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the
applicant should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
? If this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend.closure of feet of
adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish
sanitation program, the applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Section at (252)
726-6827.
? The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding
' problem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the
applicant should contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated
structures, a extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent., areas. For information concerning rodent control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at
[phone].
? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their
requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A. 1900 et.
sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods,
contact the On-Site Wastewater Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding the
sanitary facilities required for this project.

1
? If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water
Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27699-1634, [phone].
X
? For Regional and Central Office comments, see the reverse side of this form.
Jim McRight PWS 03-17-05
Reviewer
Section/Branch
Date
I S:\Pws\Angela W\Clearinghouse\Review Response Pgs 1 and 2 for input.doc

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURALRESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
Project Number
05-0266
County
Wake
NC DOT Proposed project is for Louis Stephens Dr
Project Name Type of Project
Extension and Hopson Rd. Realignment
Comments provided by: & Extension in Wake County: U-4410D
? Regional Program Person
Regional Supervisor for Public Water Supply Section
? Central Office program person
Name: Michael Douglas-Raleigh RO
Telephone number:
Proaram within Division of Environmental Health:
Public Water Supply
F-1 Other, Name of Program:
Response (check all applicable):
El No objection to project as proposed
No comment
F-I Insufficient information to complete review
F-I Comments attached
?e comments below
;cs c{.css ?? z--ICS D-5 YKu s?
Return to:
Public Water Supply Section
Environmental Review Coordinator
for the
Division of Environmental Health
Date: C
3-17-0?
-
1

1
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
{r?iT - - 1a..ti
STATE NUMBER: 05-E-4220-0266 F02
DATE RECEIVED: 03/09/2005
AGENCY RESPONSE: 04/13/2005
REVIEW CLOSED: 04/18/2005
MS RENEE GLEDHILL-EARLEY
CLEARINGHOUSE COORD
DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES
ARCHIVES-HISTORY BLDG - MSC 4617
RALEIGH NC
REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
CC&PS - DEM, NFIP
DENR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES
DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRIANGLE J COG

0'1006

4s 4,

0c, 0,4,k (mss
?v 1
5
- Y.
PROJECT INFORMATION _:6 >-"
APPLICANT: N.C. Department of Transportation w? cly
TYPE: State Environmental Policy Act
ERD: Environmental Assessment
DESC: Proposed project is for Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment
and Extension in Wake County: U-4410D
The attached project has been submitted to the N'. C. State Clearinghouse for
intergovernmental review. Please review and submit your response by the above
indicated date to 1301 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-1301.
If additional review time is needed, please contact this office at [phone].
1
1
AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED:
NO COMMENT
CO TS ATTACHED
SIGNED BY: At DATE: '.?

APR-11-2005 12:30 FROM:DWQ-WETLANDS 9197336993
`? r
Q <
TO:97153060
Mlohaal F, Fasley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
April 11, 2005
LE Qt IORANDUM
To. Melba McGee
Through: John Hennessyq?
From: Nicole Thomson q-qA
Subject: Comments on the Envirortmcrrtal Assessmentrelated to the Louis Stephens Drive Extension and
Hopson Road Realignment and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties, Sate Project No.
35021.2.1, TIP U-4410 D, DENR Project Number 05-0266.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the
issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. It is our understanding that the project as presented will result in impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and
streams. The DWQ offers the following comments based on review of the aforementioned document:
A) According to the document, in March of 2001 the NCDWQ issued a waiver of 401 Water. Quality
Certification for DWQ Project No. 01-0053. A total of 1,062 linear feet of stream impacts were authorized
under that waiver for the Louis Stephens Drive and South Loop Road project. NCDOT is respectfully
rez'ded that only those impacts were authorized under the original 401 Water Quality Certification as
described in thee original application dated received January 18, 2001. Any new impacts and construction
activities beyond those listed in the original application will require a new 401 Water Quality Application
submittal. Review of the document shows that there will be new impacts to streams and'wetlands for the
proposed project, thus an application for a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required.
R) According to the document, three small forest wetlands were delineated in the project area. Two of the
wetlands were determined to be either isolated or not under US Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H, Section .1300, NCDOT is respectfully reminded that a NCDWQ staff member
will need to verify the presence or absence of any isolated wetlands. Furthermore, should isolated wetlands
be impacted due to construction activities, a State General Permit for Impacts to Isolated Wetlands and
Isolated Waters will be required.
C) The document does not present any mapping rhat.dhows the location of wetlands and streams. Tn addition.
the document does not give any specified amount of anticipated impacts to wetlands and str==. Until the
DWQ has a map that clearly displays all the wetlands. streams, and other surface waters located in the
project, with the proposed project superimposed onto those resources, we cannot agree that appropriate
avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project. As such, issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification for this project could be. delayed until the information is provided to the DWQ for review, and
we are convinced that all appropriate avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project.
D) After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401. Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will. need to demonstrate the avoidance and
minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. Furthermore, wetland
mitigation may be required for this project
1 uithCarttlina
Transportation Permitting Unit ?111i1("ey
1550 M, ail Service Cantor, Raleigh. North Carolina 27699.1650
2:21 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, Nora) Carorma 27604
Phone: [phone] / PAX 919-733-6893 / Internet httDV/h2o.enr.state.no.us/r_vetliindq
P: 3/5 1
1
An 0.uial OppomnhflAMrmnttv9 ACtfon Employer - 50 ie Aerycledll o°.t Post Coruumer der

APP.-11-2005 12:31 FROM:DWO-WETLANDS 9197336893
TO:97153060
E) In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (15A NCAC 2110506(b)(6) ,
mitigation will be required for cumulative impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to an single }
any perennial
stream. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace
appropriate lost functions and values- In accordance with the Environmenud Management Commission's
Rules 115A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3)], the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Prouram may be available for use as
stream mitigation.
' F) As part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application process, INC. DOT is respectfully reminded to
include specifics for, both onsite and offsite mitigation plans. If mitigation is required, it is preferable to
' present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental documentation. While
NCDWQ realizes that this may n.ot always be practical, it should be noted that for projects requiting
mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required in conjunction with the issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification.
G) Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should include an
itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with corresponding mapping.
' 1) An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated. as a result of this project is required. The
type and detail of analysis should conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the assessment of
secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004. We understand that you have agreed to make this
study a part of your 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
1) NC DOT is iespectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not Iimitcd to, bridging, fill, excavation
and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included in the final impact
calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts, temporary or otherwise, also need to
be included az part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
J) Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we realize
that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts should be
countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover, in areas where
high quality wetlands or streams are impacted. a bridge may prove preferable. When applicable, DOT
should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable.
K) Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in. wetlands.
' T) Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
' M) The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed method,,; fo7
stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to discharge directly into
streams or surface waters.
' N) Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams
may require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of Eugdneers and corresponding 401 Water
Quality Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory
protection of water quality to enure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or. stream uses are
lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and
written concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on
appropriate avoidance and minirni ation of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum, extent practical,
the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation
plans wbere appropriate.

P: 4/5

APR-11-2005 12:31 FROM:DWO-WETLANDS 9197336893 TO:97153060 P:5/5
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project" Should you have any questions or
require any additional information, please contact Nicole Thomson at [phone].
cc: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Engineers. Raleigh Ficld Office
Mr, Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Central Films
File Copy
C:1C0msp0ndnncd2005 EA, EIS, FUNSRU-441411Enviroatoleat: l Assessment Apr 05
I

I

I
s

I
I

1
I
I

1
NNW
MULKEY
ZNGINcERS & :;0VSU-7ANTS
MEMORANDUM
TO: Nicole Thomson, NC Division of Water Quality
FROM: Liz Kovasckitz, Mulkey Engineers & Consultants
DATE: April 27, 2005
SUBJECT: NCDOT TIP Project No. U-4410 D Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson
Road Realignment and Extension, Research Triangle Foundation Project RTF-7
On April 26, 2005 we met to discuss the comments submitted by the Division of Water on the
Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for the subject project. At the conclusion of our meeting
you indicated that all issues raised in your April 11, 2005 letter to Melba McGee were satisfactorily
addressed during our meeting. The purpose of this memo is to document our responses to DWQ
comments on the EA and/or provide reference as to why responses are unnecessary as discussed in
our meeting.
Comment A: After reviewing the proposed plans, previous permit submittals, and meetings that have
occurred in the past, it was agreed that no additional DWQ permits are required for the project Per
your request, we are attaching a copy of the correspondence documenting S&EC's site meeting with
Todd Tugwell of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) where he confirmed S&EC's
delineation and isolated wetland determinations (see attached S&EC correspondence dated
2/24/04).
Comment B: The three wetlands discussed in the EA are shown in the S&EC correspondence
referenced in item A above. One wetland was determined to be isolated (inset 1), and since the
project impacted less than 0.1 acre of isolated wetland, did not require authorization from DWQ.
However, as a courtesy S&EC did notify DWQ of our client's intention to impact this area (see
attached S&EC correspondence to John Dorney of D``C/Q dated 5/28/04). One wetland was
determined not to meet wetland criteria due to lack of hydric soils (inset 2). The third is avoided by
the project (inset 3).
The plans included in Appendix C of the EA show a wetland on sheet RTF 6-6. This wetland was
determined not to meet wetland criteria and should have been removed from the plans. The wetland
shown on plan sheet RTF6-10 is an isolated wetland that occurs in a power line easement outside of
the project area.
Comment M: Since the project is in the Cape Fear River Basin and not the Neuse River Basin, we
agreed that direct discharges of stormwater are not prohibited and therefore no additional response is
required to this item.
Because no further authorization is required from DWQ, we agreed that the remaining comments do
not require responses.
MULKEY INC. 6750 TRYON ROAD CARY, NC 2751 1 PO BOX 331 27 RALEIGH, NC 27636 PH: 91 9-851-1 912 FAX: [phone] B WWW.MULKEYINC.CDM
L

As requested in the meeting, we are providing the DWQ project number for the Mount Vernon '
Springs mitigation site, the design for which was reviewed and approved by DWQ. The number is
DWQ # 01-1206. The mitigation site has been constructed per the approved plan. The site is being
used to provide DWQ and USACE required mitigation for this project and for a lake project at
Research Triangle Park.
Thank you very much for meeting with us so quickly and agreeing to respond promptly to this memo
in order to resolve this matter. We apologize that the information was not presented as clearly as it
could have been, but as you have seen, it is a fairly unique and complex situation. If you have any
questions, please call me at [phone]. My email address is lkovasckitz mulkeN-inc.com and my
n M (919) Martin, 851-1918.
S&EC
Vince Rhea, NCDOT
Liz Rooks, RTF
Don Morton, Mulkey
Cindy Carr, Mulkey '
2001109.01 file
fcc:ax number Kevin is
P9r R-"V -"V i- - 1L I -.1 - - --- vvv...--

OF WAr49
`Qt* PG
a ?
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Wiliam G. Ross Jr„ Secretary
North Carolina Dapariment of Wironmerit and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality

MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
From. Nicole Thomson
April 28, 2005
Subject.- A,ddeladum to Comments on the Environmental Assessment related to the Louis Stephens Drive
Extension and Hopson Road Realignment and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties, Sate
Project No. 35021.2.1, TIP U-4410 D, DENR Project Number 05-0266.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the
issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. After meeting with Liz Kovasekitz and Cindy Carr of Mulkey Engineers & Consultants and Kevin Martin
of S&EC on April 26, 2005, it is our understanding that the project as presented will result in no impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands and streams. The DWQ offers the following comments based on review of the
afaxementioncd document and subsequent meeting:
A) According to the document, in March of 2001 the NCDWQ issued a waiver of 401 Water Quality
Certification for DWQ Project No. 01-0053. A total of 1,062 linear feet of stream impacts were authorized
under that waiver for the Louts Stephens Drive and South Loop Road project. NCDOT is respectfully
reminded that only those impaetc were authorized under the original 401 Water Quality Certification as
described i-D the original application dated received January 18, 2001. Any new impacts and construction
activities beyond those listed in the original application will require a new 401 Water Quality Application
submittal. Review of the document shows that there will be new impacts to streams and wetlands for the
proposed project, thus an application for a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required.
A meeting with JAz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovemertti.oned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
13) According to the document, three small forest wetlands were delineated is the project area. Two of the
wetlands were determined to be either isolated or not under US Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H, Section .1300, NCDOT is respectfully rerruoded that a NCDWQ staff member
will need to verify the presence or absence of any isolated wetlands. Furthermore, should isolated wetlands
be impacted due to construction activities, a State General Permit for Impacts to Isolated Wetlands and
Isolated Waters will be required.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitr., Cindy Carr and Kevin Markin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated that
i
f
did
d
h
re
not requ
ere
ore
t
impacts to the one isolated wetland on the project would be less than 0.1 acres an
authorization from DWQ, per correspondence from John Dorney dated May 28, 2004. In addition, 2
wetlands on the project were determined to not meet wetland criteria. a. third wetland is avoided completely
by the project and the final wetland is an isolated wetland that occurs outside of the project area. Since the
impacts to the isolated wetland will be less than 0.1 acres, no State General Permit for Impacts to Isolated
Wetlands and Isolated Waters will be required. Tn addition, as there are no additional wetland impacts, no
401 Water Quality Certification is required.
hCrw/li`a
Yranspofttlon Permitting Unit glrA :?
' 1650 Mall Service Center, Raislgh, North Carolina 27899.1 s5o
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carorma 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX [phone] intemet, httpJlh2c.enr.state.ne.uslnewedands
I An Equal OpportunitylAtflrmatlva Action Employer -SV. Aacpciedltoy Post Consumer Paper
FPH-28-2005 14:12 FROM:DWQ-WETLRNDS 9197336893 T0:98511918 P:3/5
C) The document does not present any mapping that shows the location of wetlands and streams. In addition,
the document does not give any specified amount of anticipated impacts to wetlands and streams. Until the
DWQ has a map that clearly displays all the wetlands, streams, and other surface waters located in the
project, with the proposed project superimposed onto those resources, we cannot agree that appropriate
avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project. As such, issuance of the 401 Water' Quality
Certification for this project could be delayed until the information is provided to the DWQ far review, and
we are convinced that all appropriate avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project.
A meeting with Liz Kovascldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Watei: Quality Cciti6cation would be required.
D) After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance and
minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. Furthermore, wetland
mitigation may be required for this project.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Doi-vey of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwcll of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result its, any additional impacts to wetlands, therefore
satisfying the reed to demonstrate avoidance and minlm+zatioil of impacts. In addition, as there are no new
additional impacts to wetlands, no additional wetland mitigation will be required for this project.
E) In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules { I5A NCAC 21L0506(b)(6)},.
mitigation will be required for cumulative impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perermial
stream. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace
appropriate lost functions and values. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's
Rules {15A NCAC 2):1.0506 (h)(3) 1, the NC Ecosystem Enhancement program may be available fbT use as
stream mitigation. .
A meeting with •I.iz Kovascldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005. demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to streams, therefore
no additional stream mitigation will be required for this project.
F) As part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application process, NC DOT is respectfully reminded to
include specifics for both onsitc and offsite mitigation plans. If mitigation is required, it is preferable to
present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the envirrnamental doeumentation. While
NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted that for projects requiring
mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required in conjunction with the issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification.
A meeting with Liz Kovascldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Domey of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and there ore, no additional ri itigation is required. Furthermore, the Mount Vernon Springs
Mitigation site (DWQ No. 01-1206) was reviewed ai id approved by DWQ for previous impacts to prior
phases of this project. The required mitigation site, has boon constructed per the approved plan.
G) Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should include an
itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with corresponding mapping.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26,20D5 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both Sohn Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
H) An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated as a result of this project is required. The
type and detail of analysis should conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the assessment of
secondary and cumulative impacts datod April 10, 2004. We understand that you have agreed to make this
study a part of your 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Can: and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2405 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ And Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioncd project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and thcrefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be req%*ed.
NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not limited to, bridging, fill, excavation
and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included in the final impact
calculations. These impacts, in addition to any constnbcdoTM impacts, temporary or otherwise, also need to
be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin, Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Domey of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
J) Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However., we realize
that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts should be
countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover, in areas where
high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove preferable. When applicable, DOT
should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable.
A meeting with Liz Kovasekitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to Str alms and
therefore, no bridges or culverts are necessary.
K) Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
A meeting with Liz KovasckitT. Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John I3orney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands.
L) Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to wetlands in
borrowlwastc areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26.2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands.
i-IPR- i-?t?1?5 14: 13 FRUM: DWQ-WLTL. A-&i y1y (33bb"J.5 I U:'JUDII71ti V : 5/5
The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed methods for
stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to discharge directly into
streams or surface waters.
A meeting with Liz Kovaseldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 pointed out that this
project is within the Cape Fear River Basin and not•the Neuse River Basin, therefore the direct discharge of
stormwater to streams or surface waters is not probibited.
N) Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams
may require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water
Quality Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory
protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are
lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and
written concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on
appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical,
the development of an acceptable stormwater management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation
plans where appropriate.
A meeting with Liz Kovascldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Markin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated tbrough
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Doiney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result i? any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no Individual Permit from the Corps of Engineers or 401 Water Quality Certification
would be required.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any questions or
royuire any additional information, please contact Nicole Thomson at [phone].
cc: I &- Eric Als7meyer, US Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Field Office
Mr. Crary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Kevin Martin, S&EC, 1101 Raven Ridge Rd, Raleigh, NC 27614
Kr.. Elizabeth Kovaseldtz, AMP, Planning Group Manager. 6750 Tryon Rd, Cary, NC 27511
Ms. Cindy Catr, Natural Resources Project Manager, 6750 Tryon Rd, Cary, NC 27511
Mr. Vince Rhea, PE, NCDOT F'DEA
Ms. Gail Grimes, PZ NCDOT PDEA
Central Files
File Copy
CACotrtspondcaccV005 EA, W, MN$hU-44101?,&MroaW=tat' Assmm=t Addendemt Apr 05

C
w

H

C

'A '
LOUIS STEPHENS DRIVE EXTENSION
AND HOPSON ROAD/REALIGNMENT AND EXTENSION
DURH AND WAKE COUNTIES
STATE PROJECT NO. 3502 1.2.1
T.I.P. PROJECT No. U-441 O D
RESEARCH TRIANGLE FOUNDATION PROJECT NOS. 6 AND 7
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
SUBMITTED BY THE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AND RESEARCH TRIANGLE FOUNDATION OF NORTH CAROLINA
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
For further information contact:
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
[phone]
Date of Approval
XJregory'--yThorpe, Ph.D., Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Br cam,
North Carolina Department of Transportation
JUL ZoDS
OE* - WATER QUALIT-y
WET[A D
S AND STORMWATE BRANCH

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
LOUIS STEPHENS DRIVE EXTENSION
AND HOPSON ROAD REALIGNMENT AND EXTENSION
DURHAM AND WAKE COUNTIES
STATE PROJECT NO. 36021.2.1
l T.I.P. PROJECT NO. U-4410 D
l RESEARCH TRIANGLE FOUNDATION PROJECT NOS. 6 AND 7
APRIL 2005

DOCUMENTATION PREPARED By,
MULKEY ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS
-4Zia 05
Date Liz I asckitz, AICP
Transportation Planning Group Manager
a Zy a S? G?
Date :;Z on Morton, P.E.
Vice President, Raleigh Branch Office
06U'Jd20 •s?
SEAS.
4466
G? V

DOCUMENT PREPARED FOR*
North Carolina Department of Tr sportation /
Z11,7- '?/ /z?c
ate lVincent J. Rye/, P. .
Project Ma ger
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005 iii
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Type of Action ..........................................................................................................1
2.0 Description of Proposed Action ....................................................................,..........2
2.1 Project Summary ............................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Preferred Alternative ........................................................................................................ 2
3.0 Summary of Special Project Commitments .............................................................9
4.0 Summary of Beneficial and Adverse Environmentl Impacts .................................11
5.0 Coordination and Comments ................................................................................13
5.1 Circulation of the Environmental Assessment ..........................................................13
5.2 Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment .........................................13
6.0 Revisions to the Environmental Assessment ....::..................................................15
7.0 Basis for Finding of No Significant Impact ........................................................16
Appendix A - Agency Correspondence Referenced in the FONSI ............................17
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Proposed Project ................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 2. Louis Stephens Drive Typical Section ............................................................................. 6
Figure 3. Hopson Road Typical Section .......................................................................................... 7
J
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005 v
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005
7
1 1 .0 TYPE OF ACTT ON
This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Administrative Action,
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
The NCDOT has determined that this project will have no significant impact on the human or
natural environment. This FONSI is based on the Environmental Assessment, which has been
independently evaluated and determined to adequately and accurately discuss the environmental
issues and impacts of the proposed project. The Environmental Assessment provides sufficient
evidence and analysis for determining that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required
for the proposed project. The NCDOT takes full responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and
content of the Environmental Assessment.

J
J
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 1
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
2.1 PROJECT SUMMARY
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Research Triangle
Foundation (RTF) propose to extend Louis Stephens Drive (SR 2500) from the intersection of
Development Drive (SR 3093) to Hopson Road (SR 1978) and realign and extend Hopson Road
from Louis Stephens Drive to NC 55 (see Figure 1). The extension of Louis Stephens Drive will
be let to contract by RTF, and the extension of Hopson Road to NC 55 will be let to contract by
the NCDOT. The project is included in the 2004-2010 NCDOT Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) as project number U-4410 D. The total project length is approximately 1.5 miles.
The proposed project is located in Durham and Wake Counties, in Research Triangle Park
(RTP), North Carolina.
Connecting Hopson Road to NC 55 and extending Louis Stephens Drive to Hopson Road will
provide alternate travel routes for RTP commuters and residents in the project area. The
proposed action will create access to sites available for research and development in southern
RTP and facilitate development of these sites. The proposed road improvements will conduct
future traffic that would otherwise be assigned to existing roadways, which may minimize the
rate at which increases in traffic will result in lower level of service on existing facilities.
Construction of the proposed project will occur in two phases. Construction on the extension
of Louis Stephens Drive is planned for completion in late 2006. This will include construction
of the intersection at Hopson Road, with Hopson Road stubbed-out on the west side of the
intersection. Hopson Road will be extended to NC 55 when the Research Triangle Foundation
sells a site adjacent to the proposed road. The estimated completion date for the extension of
Hopson Road to NC 55 is late 2006 or early 2007.
2.2 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Three alternatives were evaluated in the Environmental Assessment: No-Build, Louis Stephens
Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with At-Grade Rail Crossing, and Louis
Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with Grade-Separated Rail Crossing.
The Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with At-Grade Rail
Crossing is the Preferred Alternative. This alternative was selected as the Preferred Alternative
for the following reasons:
¦ Only two trains per day traveling at 10 mph use the rail corridor in the project area,
making conflicts between trains and motor vehicles improbable;
¦ The relocated at-grade crossing will result in improved safety over its present location;
¦ The cost savings associated with this alternative is $1,200,000; and
¦ Access to adjoining properties will be maintained.
2 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact

1, ' " D "N' -
bohod?L
ENGLISH SCALE
END PROJECT
LOUIS STEPHENS
STA 139+00
ALERANDB, owe ARSOLNlE3
EEEFAEOI TG NDIS FOU`XM- I;
1 Duke Power
Y
P
AWC NIIINC?A1EUu
m
En or
V ?y h
rx MITEOI AIETAIS RVD Y
Z U
mFAROI TRIAIIOIe NJIRRMIION ??
EEdN?EIN6 WAD.
ML
.? ?N -A.
EIlLL IRler E[YRI IIETR,A?DE WALL ,I+
RA 1 {+ NSGIIOI TMMINE EWNMTIOH
BEGIN PR JECT
HOPSON OAD
CTA Mn nn RESNROI TwN FOUNNATXN
TRMNOU REIDE wAVAHr
?y
OJ
,?I V
?R ttsTAROE vEAPIEIE ra1ROAT,oH
IRSFAR.1 l1EAI1GlR tOIRDA1gN
MADNEOIIDI01 MBNMIDINL NC
IRMAAGI TwwG,R N%MMTION
BEGIN PROJECT
LOUIS STEPHENS
STA 85+00
RFSWpI TRANGIE FOUND -
Kit VICINITY MAP (not to su

USA
USA
END PROJECT
HOPSON ROAD
STA 244+03.59
Hopson Road TO mw
M
TBNI.1! IOYNDAiION ENERGY,
Roa o11Re W WER CO. fA1MDHf
-era- DE aT w Fn
NIPEMM COU+1Y waalre aEIE ND
Xmimmo I THANGIE FDINGM R
LEGEND
® E%ISTING RIGHT OF WAY
® PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY
t? ALL EASEMENTS
O E%ISTING ROADWAY
O EXISTING ROADWAY TO BE REMOTE.
Q PROPOSED ROADWAY
FUTURE ROADWAY
® TEMPORARY ROADWAY /DETOURS
PROPOSED ISLAND. CURB ANDGUTTER
r---1 WETLANDS
PONDS
STREAMS
O RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY
O UTILITY EASEMENT
PROPERTY LINES
COUNTY LINE
1>D TS D lw aoD
' - EHGUSN SGIE
PROPOSED PROJECT Figure No.
NCDOT TIP NO. U-4410D
Durham/Wake County, North Carolina
4
6
Air Quality and Noise
The proposed project does not result in air quality or noise impacts.
Community
The proposed project will not specifically harm or disproportionately affect any social group.
The project area is predominantly comprised of commercial properties. There will be no impacts
related to neighborhood cohesion and no relocations of homes or businesses will be necessary.
The proposed project will improve accessibility to, and in, southern RTP. Current employees of
RTP businesses, area residents, and emergency service providers may benefit from the increased
access that the project will provide.
Threatened and Endangered Species
Biological conclusions of No Effect have been rendered for all protected species studied except
two: NVlichaux's sumac and smooth coneflower. Pedestrian surveys in the project area were
completed for these species in November 2002 and June 2003. No specimens of N ichaux's
sumac or smooth coneflower were located, and a biological conclusion of Not likely to Adversely
Affect was rendered for both species. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service provided
written concurrence with the biological conclusions in, \a letter dated July 29, 2003 (see Appendix
A).
Cumulative Impacts
The potential for project-induced land use changes for research development is high. It is likely
under both the Build and No-Build Alternatives that the available developable land in the
project area would, at some point in the future, convert to research-type facility use. However,
the proposed project makes the available locations more easily accessible and attractive from a
development standpoint. Development that occurs because of the proposed project is expected
to result in positive socioeconomic impacts such as increased tax base and new employment
possibilities.
Resources sensitive to potential indirect and cumulative effects of the proposed project include
the surface waters of Long Branch and the UT to Northeast Creek. Standards for WS-IV Water
Supply Watersheds and Nutrient Sensitive Waters apply to development in the project area.
j Durham and Wake Counties implement land use and development controls designed to control
densities and provide for stream protection buffers through measures such as erosion control
and stormwater runoff control.
The proposed. project is located in an area designated for business development in the Research
Triangle Park. Proximity to urban employment centers, planned extension of utilities, proximity
to housing, and easy access to major transportation corridors, contribute to the project's
potential to induce and influence growth and development. Land use controls and regulations
are in place that, if properly enforced, can minimize and/or avoid potential indirect and
cumulative impacts to water quality.
12 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
1
.0 COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
5
The Environmental Assessment for this project was approved by the North Carolina
Department of Transportation on January 31, 2005.
5.1 CIRCULATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The approved Environmental Assessment was circulated to the following federal, state, and local
agencies for review and comments:
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
• Wake County
• Research Triangle Foundation
0 N.C. Department of Transportation Program Development and Division 5
Opportunity for a public hearing was advertised in the Durham Herald and Raleigh News and
Observer on February 3, 2005 and February 10, 2005. Ni tification of the opportunity to
request a hearing was also sent io property owners. No requests for a hearing were received.
Copies of the document and/or notification that the Environmental Assessment was available
for review were also sent to the State Clearinghouse, special interest groups, and newspapers.
5.2 COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Comments received on the Environmental Assessment are included in Appendix A. Comments
were received from the following agencies:
• North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR), Division
of Water Quality
• NCDENR, Division of Environmental Health
• NCDENR, Raleigh Regional Office
• North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources (no comment)
NCDENR, Division of Water Quality (DWO)
Fourteen comments were received from the Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ).
Representatives from firms working on the proposed project met with Nicole Thomson of the
NCDWQ on April 26, 2005 to discuss her comments on the Environmental Assessment. At the
conclusion of the meeting, Ms. Thomson indicated that all issues raised in her comments were
satisfactorily addressed. A memorandum summarizing the meeting and an addendum to the
original comments from NCDWQ are included in Appendix A.
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/28/2005 13
i
NCDENR Division of Environmental Health
Comment: The relocation of the 2,100-foot waterline discussed on pages 2-10 and 3-5 must
be submitted for approval by the Plan Review - Technical Services Branch.
Response: Existing utilities will not be relocated. The information provided in the
Environmental Assessment regarding utility relocations was dated and should
have been omitted from the final document. This will be noted in Section 6.0
below, "Revisions to the Environmental Assessment"
NCDENR. Raleigh Regional Office
Comment: Permit and approvals that may need to be obtained from NCDENR in order for
this project to comply with North Carolina Law were identified.
Response: Requirements are noted.
14 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/28/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
i
1
6.0 REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Sections 2.2.1, 2.2.2, and 2.3.7 in the Environmental Assessment state that the existing railroad
crossing on South Alston Avenue will be relocated "approximately 225 feet" south to Hopson
Road between Louis Stephens Drive and South Alston Avenue. The statements should read
"approximately 1,764 feet."
Sections 2.3.9 and 3.1.3 in the Environmental Assessment state that "Outside of RTF property,
the NCDOT will relocate existing utilities as needed. Approximately 2,100 feet of water line and
900 feet of sewer line are expected to be relocated." These statements should be omitted from
the document. Utility relocations are not anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
The wetland identified on plan sheet RFT6-6 in Appendix C of the Environmental Assessment
did not meet wetland criteria and should not have been shown on the plans as such.
H
1
s

Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 15
7.0 BASIS FOR,, FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the proposed project documented in the Environmental Assessment, and
upon comments received from federal, state and local agencies and the public, it is the finding of
the North Carolina Department of Transportation that this project will not have a significant
adverse impact upon the human or natural.environment.
The recommended alternative for the proposed project is not controversial from an
environmental standpoint. No significant impact to natural, ecological, cultural, or scenic
resources are expected. The proposed project is consistent with local plans and will not disrupt
any communities. These conclusions are based on a thorough analysis of the environmental
impacts described in the Environmental Assessment.
Based on this evaluation, it has been determined a Finding of No Significant Impact is applicable
for this project. Therefore, neither an Environmental Impact Statement not further
environmental analysis is required.

16 Document Date: 4/27/2005 Louis Stephens Drive Extension
Date Printed: 4/27/2005 U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact
i
APPENDIX A - AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
REFERENCED IN THE FONSI

a
a
a
a
a

Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 17
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action ID: 200120436 200120437
County: Durham & Wake
GENERAL PERNUT (REGIONAL AND NATIONWIDE) VERIFICATION
Property Owner: Research Triangle Foundation
. Attn: Elizabeth Rooks
Mailing Address: Post Office Box 12255
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709 Telephone No.: [phone]
Authorized Agent: Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Kevin Martin
Mailing Address: 11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 Telephone No.: [phone]
Location of property (road name/number, town, etc.): The project site is approximately 91 acres in size and is located
between Hopson Road (SR 1978) and Davis Drive (SR 1999) in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Site Coordinates: 35.8534 °N 78.8876 °W USGS Quad: Green Level
Waterway: Kit Creek and Long Branch River Basin: Cape Fear HUC: 03030002
Description of projects area and activity (see page 2 for a summary of authorized impacts): This permit authorizes
mechanized landclearm.g,'excavation, installation of culverts, and th? placement of fill associated with the
construction of Louis Stephens Drive. Permanent impacts to wetlands and waters authorized by this permit total
1,042 linear feet of stream channel (768 linear feet of important channel).
Applicable Law: ® Section 404 (Clean Water Act, 33 USC 1344)
? Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act, 33 USC 403)
Authorization: Nationwide or Regional General Permit Number(s): 14 14
Your work is authorized by the above referenced permit provided it is accomplished in strict accordance with the attached
conditions and your submitted plans. Any violation of the attached conditions or deviation from your submitted plans may subject the
permittee to a stop work order, a restoration order and/or appropriate legal action
This verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below unless the nationwide authorization is modified,
suspended or revoked. If, prior to the expiration date identified below, the nationwide permit authorization is reissued and/or
modified, this verification will remain valid until the expiration date identified below, provided it complies with all requirements of
the modified nationwide permit. If the nationwide permit authorization expires or is suspended, revoked, or is modified, such that the
activity would no longer comply with the terms and conditions of the nationwide permit, 'activities which have commenced (i.e., are
under construction) or are under contract to commence in reliance upon the nationwide permit, will remain authorized provided the
activity is completed within twelve months of the date of the nationwide permit's expiration, modification or revocation, unless
discretionary authority has been exercised on a case-by-case basis to modify, suspend or revoke the authorization.
Activities subject to Section 404 (as indicated above) may also require an individual Section 401 Water Quality Certification. You
should contact the NC Division of Water Quality (telephone [phone]) to determine Section 401 requirements.
For activities occurring within the twenty coastal counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA),
11 prior to beginning work you must contact the N.C. Division of Coastal Management.
?l This Department of the Amory verification does not relieve the permittee of the responsibility to obtain any other required Federal,
State or local approvals/permits.
-? If there are any questions regarding this verification, any of the conditions of the Permit, or the Corps of Engineers regulatory
program, please'contact Todd Tugwell at telephone [phone], ext 26.
Corps Regulatory Official Date: 02/02/2005 Verification Expiration Date: 02/02/2007
Copy Furnished:
Page 1 of 2
Determination of Jurisdiction:
? Based on preliminary information, there appear to be waters-of the US including wetlands within the above described project art
This preliminary determination is not an appealable action under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process
(Reference 33 CFR Part 331).
? There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
There are waters of the US and/or wetlands within the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of Sectioi
404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published regulations, this
determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
? The jurisdictional areas within the above described project area have been identified under a previous action. Please reference t]
jurisdictional determination issued on (Action ID: )•
Basis of Jurisdictional Determination: The project site contains tributaries to Long Branch and Kit Creek, which flow into
Northeast Creek, a tributary to theCape Fear River, a navigable waterway.
Corps Regulatory
iarv 9f Authorized
Action ID NWP / GP open Water ac
# # Temporary Permanent Tempt
200120436 14
200120437 14
Impact Totals 0 0 0
Total Loss of Waters of the U.S. ac} 0
Reauired Wetland Mitigation (ac) 1 0
Date: 02/02/2005 Determination Expiration Date: 02/02/20.
and
i ac U ' ortant Steam
Permanent Temporary Permanent
274
nred Stream Mitigation (I) Stream ]f
0 1 0 1 27"
Total Loss of Waters of the U.S.
Permane
492
276
0 768
1042
768 Permittee
Additional Remarks and/or Special Permit Conditions:
1. Please note that this permit verification reauthorizes proposed impacts as previously authorized by nationwit
permit on March 3, 2001 and again on July 31, 2003, with no changes to the proposed plans.
2. All Special Conditions included in the original permit verification have been completed: Mitigation for 768
linear feet of stream channel impacts associated with this permit was provided at the Mt. Vernon Springs
Mitigation Site, which has been completed and is currently being monitored, in accordance with the original
permit application dated January 17, 2001.
Page 2 of 2

J
n

a
J
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh. North Carolina 27636-3726
July 29, 2003
Ms. Cindy Carr
Mulkey, Inc
P.O. Box 33127
Raleigh, NC 27636
Dear Ms. Carr:

This letter is in response to your letter of July 10, 2003 which provided the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological conclusion of Mulkey, Inc. that the proposed
extension of Louis Stephens Drive from the intersection of Development Drive to Hopson Road
and the realignment and extension of Hopson Road1to NC 55 in`Durham and Wake Counties,
North Carolina, is not likely to adversely affect the federally protected smooth coneflower
(Echinacea Zaevigata) or N ichaux's sumac (Rhus midazvdz). These comments are provided in
accordance with'section 7 of the Endangered Species. ,ct (ES.A) of 1973, as amended (16 U. S.C.
1531-1543).
During a July 28, 2003 telephone conversation between you and Mr. Gary Jordan, it was revealed
that there is no federal funding for this project However, a permit is-required from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (LJSACE). Section 7 of the ESA requires that consultation. occur
between the federal action agency and the Service. Since the Federal Highway Administration is
not involved in this project, the USACE becomes the federal action agency. However, you stated
in the July 2 8 phone conversation that the USACE permit(s) have already been obtained.
Based on the negative results of the surveys, and on additional information provided via
telephone, the Service supports the conclusion that the project is not likely to adversely affect
either the smooth coneflower or Michaux's sumac. For future consultation correspondence,.the
„ Service recommends that biographical information on the field researchers doing the surveys be
included to allow the Service to validate the qualifications of those conducting -surveys. -
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions
regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext. 32).
Sincerely,
ll
Garland B. Pardue, Ph.D.
Ecological Services Supervisor
' .? surre
North Carolina
Department of Administration
Michael F. Easley, Governor
April 19, 2005
Mr. Omar Sultan
N.C. Department of Transportation
Program Development
MSC 1534
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Sultan:
Gwynn T. Swinson, Secretary
Re: SCH File # 05-E-4220-0266; EA; Proposed project is for Ipuis Stephens Drive Extension and
Hopson Road Realignment and Extension in Wake County:,,U-4410D
The above referenced environmental information has been reviewed through the State Clearinghouse
under the provisions of the North Caroling Envirolunental Policy Act.'
Attached to this letter are comments made by Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (DEHNR) in the course of this review. These comments should be addressed in the Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI) document.
Best regards.

Sincerely,
Ms. Chrys Baggett
Environmental Policy Act Coordinator
Attachments
cc: Region J
:lfailing Address: Telephone: [phone] Location Address:
1301 b9ail Service Center Fax [phone] West Jones Street
Raleieh. NC 27690-1301 State Courier # i-0 1-00 Raleigh. North Carolina
e-mail Clu},.r.Bag;etr'mncmniLnet
An Equal Opportrarittv:{ finnarire.action Employer
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee
Environmental Review Coordinator
SUBJECT: 05-0266 EA Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road
Realignment and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties
DATE: April 12, 2005
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources has reviewed the
proposed information. The attached comments are for the applicant's
information.
Thank you for the opportunity to review.
5
Attachments
1601 Mail.Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
GM a? y
_ State of North Carolina Reviewing Office:
JNCDENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources p
Project Number: ? Due Date:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
After review of this project it has been determined that the DENR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this project
to comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of this form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Regional Office.
J
J
J

PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS Normal Process Time
(Statutory Time Limit)
C] Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of construction 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions & sewer systems. contracts. On-site inspection. Post-application technical conference usual. (90 days)
not discharging into state surface waters.
0 NPDES-permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection preapplication
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to construct wastewater treatment 90 -120 days
discharging into state surface waters. facility-granted after NPDES. Reply time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue (N/A)
of NPDES permit-whichever is later.
Water Use Permit Preapplication technical conference usually necessary 30 days
1 (N/A)
0 Well Construction Permit Complete application must be received and permit issued prior to the 7 days
I installation of a well. (15 days)
0 Dredge and Fill Permit Application copy must be served on"each adjacent riparian property owner. d

On-site inspection. Preapplication conference usual. Filling may require Easement SS
ays
- to Fill from N.C.Department of Admini$tration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit (90 days)
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15 A NCAC N/A ` 60 days
(2Q.0100, 2Q.0300, 2H.0600)
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15 A NCAC 2D.1900
® Demolition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with
60 days
15 A NCAC 2D.1110 (a) (1) which requires notification N/A (90 days)
and removal prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos
Control Group 919-733-0820.
Cl Complex Source Permit required under 15 A NCAC
2D.08D0
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion & sedimentation 20 days
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Section) at least 30 (30 days)
days before beginning activity. A fee of $50 for the first acre or any part of an acre.
Q The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referenced Local Ordinance. I 30 days
Sedimentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with NCDOTs approved program. Particular attention should be
given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well as stable stormwater conveyances and outlets.
Q Mining Permit On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DENR. Bond amount varies with
type mine and number of acres of affected land. Any are mined greater than 30 days
one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond must be received before (60 days)
the permit can be issued
North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources if permit exceeds 4 days 1 day
(N/A)
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit-22 counties On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources required "if more than five 1 day
in coastal N.Cwith organic soils. acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections should be requested (N/A)
at least ten days before actual burn is planned.'
i
Oil Rennin Facilities
N/A T
90 - 120 days
(N/A}
Q I Dam SafetyPermit
MKIVII 13
? ( Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well
? I Geophysical Exploration Permit
Q I State Lakes Construction Permit
i
© 401 Water Quality Certification
Q CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
Q1 LAMA Permit for MINOR development
s•t-ECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction. Applicant
must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans, Inspect construction, certify
construction is according to DENR approved plans. May also require permit under
mosquito control program, and a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers.
An inspection of site is necessary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum
fee of $200.00 must accompany the application. An additional processing fee
based on a percentage or the total project cost will be required upon completion.
File surety bond of $5,000 with DENR running to State of N.C. conditional that any.
well opened by drill operator shall, upon abandonment, be plugged according
to DENR rules and regulations.
Application filed with DENR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit. Application
by letter. No standard application form.
Application fees based on structure size is charged. Must include descriptions
& drawings of structure & proof of ownership of riparian property.
N/A
$250.00 fee must accompany application
$50.00 fee must accompany application
Q I Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monument needs to be moved or destroyed, please noti fy.
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687 Raleigh, N.C 27611
Normal Process'
Statutory lime L
30 days
(60 days)
10 days
(N/A)
10 days
(N/A)
15 - 20 days
(N/A)
55 days
(130 days)
60 days
(130 days)
22 days
(25 days)

IL u, any wens, it required must be in accordance with Tide I SA. Subchapter 2C.0100.

,.vuacauon or me proper regional office is requested if 'orphan' underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during any excavation operation.
Ell Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal Stormwater Rules) is required.
* I Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority)

45 days
(N/A)
REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below

? Asheville Regional Office
59 Woodf n Place
? Mooresville Regional office .

El Wilmington Regional office

Asheville, N.C. 28801 919 North Main street
Mooresville
N
C
28115 127 Cardinal Drive Extension
[phone] ,
.
.
[phone] Wilmington, N.C. 28405
[phone]
r
? Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street
Suite 714 Raleigh Regional Office ?° r !
C3 Winston-Salem Regional Office '
,
Fayetteville, N.C. 28301 800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N.C
27611 585 Waughtown Street
[phone] .
[phone] Winston-Salem, N.C. 27107
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mail
Washington, N.C.27889 /
[phone]
e
J

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
r t Number
6
County
Wake
Proposed project is for Louis Stephens
Dr Extension and Hopson Rd Realignment
& Extension in Wake County; U-4410D
Project Name NC DOT Type of Project
? The applicant should be advised that plans and specifications for all water system
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the
award of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C
.0300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919)
733-2321.
? This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must comply
with state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the
applicant should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
? If this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend. closure of feet of
adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish
sanitation program, the applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Section at (252)
726-6827. \
? The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding
problem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the
applicant should contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated
structures, a extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent, areas. For information concerning rodent control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at
[phone].
? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their
requirements for septic tank installations' (as required under 15A NCAC 18A. 1900 et.
sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods,
contact the On-Site Wastewater Section at [phone].
? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding the
sanitary facilities required for this project.
? If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water
Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27699-1634, [phone].
X
? For Regional and Central Office comments, see the reverse side of this form.
Jim McRight PWS 03-17-05
Reviewer Section/Branch Date
S:\Pws\Angela W\Clearinghouse\Review Response Pgs 1 and 2 for input.doc
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND Project 66 umber
NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH County
Wake
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
NC DOT Proposed project is for Louis Stephens Dr
Project Name Type of Project
Extension and Hopson Rd. Realignment
Comments provided by: & Extension in Sake County: U4410D
? Regional Program Person
EX Regional Supervisor for Public Water Supply Section
? Central Office program person _ :. Michael Douglas-Raleigh RO Date: 3-17-05 -
Name.
Telephone number: - / ' -7 G
Program within Division of Environmental Health:
f-I Public Water Supply
? Other, Narne of Program:
Response (check all applicable):
? No objection to project as proposed
No comment
insufficient information to complete review
Comments attached
?e comments below
2t (00
Return to:
Public Water Supply Section
Environmental Review Coordinator
for the
Division of Environmental Health

?l

NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
MS RENEE GLEDHILL-EARLEY
CLEARINGHOUSE COORD
DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES
ARCHIVES-HISTORY BLDG - MSC 4617
RALEIGH NC
REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
CC&PS - DEM, NFIP
DENR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES
DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRIANGLE J COG
;Ilk
STATE NUMBER: 05-E-4220-0266 F02
DATE RECEIVED: 03/09/2005
AGENCY RESPONSE: 04/13/2005
REVIEW CLOSED: 04/18/2005

et CL5
F/j/? GJ
¶ PROJECT INFORMATION 4 0 n
JI11 APPLICANT: N.C. Department of Transportation . CJ-
TYPE: State Environmental Policy Act
ERD: Environmental Assessment
DESC: Proposed project is for Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment
n and Extension in Wake County: U-4410D
rt The attached project has been submitted to the N'. C. State Clearinghouse for
11 intergovernmental review. Please review and submit your response by the above
indicated date to 1301 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-1301.
If additional review time is needed, please contact this office at [phone].
AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED:
M NO COMMENT
CO TS ATTACHED
SIGNED BY: rR.
DATE: 3',? D>

APR-11-2005 12:30 FROM:DWQ-WETLANDS 9197336893 TO:97153060 P:3/5
:o? \NA r
ot ?R4t;
r
1? T
April 11, 2005
NEMORe1NDUM
To. Melba McGee
',Through: John Hennessy9??11 -
From: Nicole Thomson
Subject: Comments on the Environmcrital As:;wsment'Telated to the Louis Stephens Drive Extension and
Hopson Road Realignment and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties. Sate Project No.
35021.2.1, TIP U-4410 D, DENR Project Number 05-0266.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the
issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. It is our understanding that the project as presented will-result in impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and
streams. The DWQ offers the following comments based on review` of the aforementioned document:
A) According to the document, in March of 2001 the NCDWQ..1ssued a waiver of 401 Water. Quality
Certification for DWQ Project No. 01-0053. A total of 1,062 linear feet of stream impacts were authorized
under that waiver for the .Louis Stephens Drive and South Loop Road project. NCDOT is respectfully
reminded that only those impacts were authorized under the original 401 Water Quality Certification as.
described in the original application dated received January 18, 2001. Any new impacts and construction
activities beyond those listed in the original application will require a new 401 Water Quality Application
submittal. Rcvicw of the document shows that there will be new impacts to streams and'wetlands for the
proposed. project, thus an application for a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required.
B) According to the document, three small, forest wetlands were delineated in the project area. Two of the
wetlands were determined to be either isolated or not under US Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.., Section .1300, NCDOT is respectfully reminded that a NCDWQ staff member
will need to verify the presence or absence of any isolated wetlands. Furthermore, should isolated wetlands
be impacted due to construction activities, a State General Permit for Impacts to Isolated Wetlands and
Isolated Waters will be required.
C) The document does not present any mapping chat shrews the location of wetlands and streams. Tn addition.
the document does not give any specified amount of anticipated impacts to wetlands and streams. Until the
DWQ has a map that clearly displays all the wetlands, streams, and other surface waters located in the
project, with the proposed project super..imposed onto those resources, we cannot agrcc that appropriate
avoidance and mirurnization has occurred for this project. As such, issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification for this project could be delayed until the information is provided to the DWQ for review, and
we are convinced that all appropriate avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project.
D) After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is respectfully reminded tbatthey will rieed to demonstrate the avoidance and
minimization cif impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. Furthermore, wetland
mitigation may be required for this project
1 vrihC;am]ina
TranWrtallon Peraftig Unit ?1Qi1(Clll tf
1550 ;Aall Service Centor, Flalelgh. North Carolina 27699.1650
= Crabirea Boulward, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Unorma 27504
Phone: 919.733-M6 / FAX [phone] Internet httpJlh2o.enr..-tate.n?r9_vEe lea
IZ.
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Kllmek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
An Equal OpportimtylAMrrnatlve Acdon Employer - 50;16 Recycledll0°/6 Post Consumer der
APP711-2005 12:31 FROM:DWQ-WETLANDS 9197336893 T0:97153060 P:4-15
E) In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6) },
midgation will be required for cumulative impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial
stream. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace
appropriate lost functions and values. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's
Rules { 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3) ), the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as
stream mitigation. .
F)' As part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application process, INC DOT is respectfully reminded to
include specifics for bout onsite and offsite mitigation plans. If mitigation is required, it is preferable to
present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the enviromneotal documentation. While
`iCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted that for projects requiring
mitiption, appropriate mitigation plans will be required in conjunction with the issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification.
G) Fume documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should include an
itemized listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with corresponding mapping.
1) An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated. as a result of this project is required. The
type and detail of analysis should conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the assessment of
secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004. We unders4and that you have agreed to make this
study a part of your 401 Water Quality Certification Application \\
1) NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not Iitiuted to, bridging, fill, excavation
and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included in the final impact
calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts, temporary or otherwise, also need to
be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
1) Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we realize
that economic considerations often, require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts should be
countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover, in areas where
high quality wetlands or streams are impacted; a bridge may prove preferable. When applicable, DOT
should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable.
K) Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in. wetlands.
T) Bormwlwaste area,,- should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
M) The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed methods for
stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater should not be permitted to discharge diro tly into
streams or surface waters.
N) Based on the information presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams
may require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of EuEdneers and corresponding 401 Water
Quality Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory
protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or. stream uses are
lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and
written concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on
appropriate avoidance and minlrni ation of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum. extent practical,
the development of an acecptabie stormwater management plaxi, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation
plans where appropriate.
APR-11-2005 12:31 FROM:DWO-WETLANDS 9197336893
• T0:97153060 P; 5,5
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project- Should
require any additional information, please contact Nicole Thomson at (919) 715-34:15, You have any questions or
cc: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, US Army Corps of Eno news. Raleigh Ficld Office
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Central Film
File Copy
Q\C4nzp0n&nccd2005 EA, EIS. F0NSI\U-4410MBnviroatmedt,-d Assessment Apr 05

3)1 1 ?
^I 1
ME ULKEY
NGiN=ERS & CONSULTANTS
MEMORANDUM
TO: Nicole Thomson, NC Division of Water Quality
FROM: Liz Kovasckitz, Mulkey Engineers & Consultants
DATE: April 27, 2005
SUBJECT: NCDOT TIP Project No. U-4410 D Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson
Road Realignment and Extension, Research Triangle Foundation Project RTF-7
j On April 26, 2005 we met to discuss the comments submitted by the Division of Water on the
Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for the subject project. At the conclusion of our meeting
you indicated that all issues raised in your April 11, 2005 letter to Melba McGee were satisfactorily
addressed during our meeting. The purpose of this memo is to document our responses to DWQ
comments on the EA and/or provide reference as to why responses are unnecessary as discussed in
our meeting. \
Comment A: After reviewing the proposed plans, previous pern?[t submittals, and meetings that have
occurred in the past, it was agreed that no additional DWQ permits are required for the project. Per
your request, we are attaching a copy of the correspondence documenting S&EC's site meeting with
:a Todd Tugwell of the US Army Corps of Engineers (LJSACE) where he confirmed S&EC's
delineation and isolated wetland determinations (see attached S&EC correspondence dated
2/24/04).
Comment B: The three wetlands discussed in the EA are shown in the S&EC correspondence
referenced in item A above. One wetland was determined to be isolated (inset 1), and since the
project impacted less than 0.1 acre of isolated wetland, did not require authorization from DWQ.
" However, as a courtesy S&EC did notify DWQ of our client's intention to impact this area (see
attached S&EC correspondence to John Dorney of DWQ dated 5/28/04). One wetland was
determined not to meet wetland criteria due to lack of hydric soils (inset 2). The third is avoided by
the project (inset 3).
The plans included in Appendix C of the EA show a wetland on sheet RTF 6-6. This wedand was
?. determined not to meet wetland criteria and should have been removed from the plans. The wetland
shown on plan sheet RTF6-10 is an isolated wetland that occurs in a power line easement outside of
the project area.
Comment M: Since the project is in the Cape Fear River Basin and not the Neuse River Basin, we
agreed that direct discharges of stormwater are not prohibited and therefore no additional response is
required to this item.
Because no further authorization is required from DWQ, we agreed that the remaining comments do
not require responses.
MULKEY INC. 6750 TRYON ROAD CARY. NC 2751 1 PC BOX 33127 RALEIGH. NC 27636 PH: 919-851-1912 FAX: [phone] WWW.MULKEYINC.COM
0 1 .
1
As requested in the meeting, we are providing the DWQ project number for the Mount Vernon
Springs mitigation site, the design for which was reviewed and approved by DWQ. The number is
DWQ # 01-1206. The mitigation site has been constructed per the approved plan. The site is being
used to provide DWQ and USACE required mitigation for this project and for a lake project at
Research Triangle Park.
Thank you very much for meeting with us so quickly and agreeing to respond promptly to this memo
in order to resolve this matter. We apologize that the information was not presented as clearly as it
could have been, but as you have seen, it is a fairly unique and complex situation. If you have any
questions, please call me at [phone]. My email address is Ikovasckitz c mulke? inc.com and my
fax number is [phone].
cc: Kevin Martin, S&EC
Vince Rhea, NCDOT
Liz Rooks, RTF
Don Morton, Mulkey
Cindy Carr, Mulkey
2001109.01 file
# t .
Ht'K-c:U-e.WM 19:11 rKUr1: UWU-tom 1 LFT4US y1y (SSbEiJ3 I U: 98511918 P: 2/5
of WA`?21 • WOW F. Easley, Governor
Wiliam G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
? Division of Water Quality
April 28, 2005
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
ti
From., Nicole Thomson
Subject- Addendum to Comments on the Environmental Assessment related to the Louis Stephens Drive
Extension and Hopson Road Realignment and Extension in Durham and Wake Counties, Sate
Project No. 35021.2.1, TIP U-4410 D, DENR Project Nurnber 05-0266.
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the
issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. After meeting with Liz Kovasekitz and Cindy Carr of Mulkey Engineers & Consultants and Kevin Martin
of S&BC on April 26, 2005, it is our understanding that the project as presented will result in no impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands and streams. The DWQ offers the following comments based on review of the
afoxemeutioned document and subsequent meeting:
A.) According to the document, in March of 2001 the NCDWQ issued, a waiver of 401 Water Quality
Certification for DWQ Project No. 01-0053. A total of 1,062 linca? feet of stream impacts were authorized
under that waiver for the Louis Stephens Drive and South Loop Road project. NCDOT is respectfully
reminded that only those impacts were authorized under the original 401 Water Quality Certifiication as
described in the original application dated received January 18, 2001. Any new impacts and construction
activities beyond those listed in the original application will require a new 401 Water Quality Application
submittal. Review of the document shows that there will be new impacts to streams and wetlands for the
proposed project, thus an application for a 401 Water Quality Certification will be required.
A meeting with Liz Kovmckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous perrWt submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
B) According to the document, three small forest wetlands were delineated in the project area. Two of the
wetlands were determined to be either isolated or not under US Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H, Section .1300, NCDOT is respectfully mi loded that a NCDWQ staff member
will need to verify the presence or absence of arty isolated wetlands. Furthermore, should isolated wetlands
be impacted due to construction activities, a State General Permit for Impacts to Isolated Wetlands and -
Isolated Waters will be required.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated that
impacts to the one isolated wetland on the project would be 1e.?5 than 0.1 acres and therefore did not require
authorization from DWQ, per correspondence from John Dorney dated May 28, 2004, In addition, 2
wetlands on the project were determined to not meet wetland criteria. a third wetland is avoided completely
by the project and the final wetland is an isolated wetland that occurs outside of the project area. Since the
impacts to the isolated wetland will be less than 0.1 acres. no State General Permit for Impacts to Isolated
Wetlands and Isolated Waters will be required. In addition, as there are no additional wetland impacts, no
401 Water Quality Certification is required.
*N4 "no o hCarsa?l?ippa
TranspoRotbn permitting Unit ,11 1ZlrQUJ,/
1650 Mall Sarrtdca Canter, Ralalgh, North Carolina 27689.1550
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Caroft 27604
Phone: [phone]) FAX 919-733-M I Internet httaJ/h2o.enr.state.nc.usfnewetlands
Art Equal OpportunllylAMrrmaatlva Action Employer -SWo Aaeydedl10% Post Consumer Paper
'' APR-28-2005 14:12 FROM:DWQ-WETLR4DS 9197336893 70:96511918 r:3'D
C) The document does not present any mapping that shows the location of wetlands and streams. In addition,
the document does not give any specified amount of anticipated impacts to wetlands and streams. Until the
DWQ has a map that clearly displays all the wetlands, streams, and otber surface waters located iu the
project, with the proposed project superimposed onto those resources, we cannot agree that appropriate
avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project. As such, issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification for this project could be delayed until the information is provided to the DWQ for review, and
we no convinced that all appropriate avoidance and minimization has occurred for this project.
A meeting with Liz Ii ovaseldtz, Cindy Carer and Kevin Martin On Apn7 26,2W5 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
U5ACOS that the abovemcntimned project would not result in any additional i mPwts to wettands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
D) After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT is>;espectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance and
minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical. Furthermore, wetland
mitigation may be required for dais project.
A meeting with x iz Kovasoldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Matin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated tluougb
previous permit submittals and meetings with both Jobn N+ mey of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwcll of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not resuli\i`n, any additional impacts to wetlands, therefore
satisfying the need to demonstrate avoidance and minimizatioh of impacts. zr, addition, a.? there are no new
additional impacts to wetlands, no additional wetland mitigation will be required for this project.
E) In accordance with the Euvironmental Management Commtimion's Rules { 15A NCAC 2H.Q506(b)(6) },.
mitigation will be required for cumulative impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial
stream., In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace
appropriate lost functions and values. In accordance with the Environmental Management CoAwnission's
Rules { 15A NCAC M0506 (h)(3) }, the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available fur use as
stream mitigation.
A meeting with -l;.ia Kovaseldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005. demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugweil of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to streams, therefore
no additional stream mitigation will be required for this project.
p) As part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application process, NC DOT is respectfully reminded to
include specifics for both onsitc and ofEsife mitigation plans. if mitigation is required, it is preferable to
present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with th6 euvirortmental documentation. While
NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted that for projects requiring
mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required in conjunction with the issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Ceatificatiou,
A meeting with Liz K.ovaseldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated f b
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd gwell
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no additional mitigation is required. Pktrthermore, the Mount Vernon Springs
lviitigation site (DWQ No. 01-1206) was reviewed also approved by DWQ for previous impacts to prior
phases of this project. The required mitigation site has been constructed per the approved plan.
I 1
Iv/t-CO-G,JCJJ lZ • 1G r" ICUI i • uwut-rvc I urn ru,7 717 1 JJ007J I U 0 70.711710
(1) Future documentation, including the 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should include an
itemized listing of the proposed wetland and streams impacts with corresponding mapping.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both Tohn Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOL that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
H} An analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated as a result of this project is required. The
type and detail of analysis should conform to the NC Division of Water Quality Policy on the assessment of
secondary and cumulative impacts dated April 10, 2004. We understand that you have agreed to make this
study a part of your 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meeth4s with both John Dorney of NC DWQ And Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
)r) NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including bu4 not limited to, bridging, fill, excavation
and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included in the final impact
calculations. These impacts, in addition to any construction iwpa6s, temporary or otherwise, also need to
be Included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John homey of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovenventioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no 401 Water Quality Certification would be required.
J) Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we realize
that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts should be
countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover, in areas where
high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove preferable. When applicable, DOT
should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the :maximum extent practicable.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to streams and
therefore, no bridges or culverts are necessary.
K) Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands.
A meeting with Liz Kovasekitz. Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USA.COE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands.
L) Sorrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable. Imparts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation.
A meeting with Liz Kovasckitz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26.2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both Tohn Dorney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result in any additional impacts to wetlands,
I ? 1 a
APR-213-2005 14:13 FROM: DWQ-WETLRNU5 `)19 r wry i u: 70211710 r .
Io The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed methods for
stormwater management More spocificalIy, Starmwater should not be permitted m discharge directly into
streams or surface wat em.
A meeting with Liz Kovaseldtz, Cindy Carr and Kevin Martin on April 26,2o05 pointed out that this
project is within the Cape Fear River Basic and not the Neuse River Basin, therefore the direct discharge of
stormwater to streams or surface waters is not pmbibited.
N) Based on the ifnf matidn presented in the document, the magnitude of impacts to wetlands and streams
may require an Individual Permit application to the Corps of Engineers and corresponding 401 Water
Quality Certification. Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Cextification requires satisfactory
protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are
lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and
written concurrence from the NCDWQ. Ploaso be aware that any approval will be contingent on
appropriate avoidance and mirtimization of wetland and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical;
the development of an acceptable stnrmwatw management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation
plans whero appropriate.
A meeting with Liz Kovasck itz, Cindy Cafe and Kevin n on April 26, 2005 demonstrated through
previous permit submittals and meetings with both John Doiney of NC DWQ and Todd Tugwell of
USACOE that the abovementioned project would not result i? any additional impacts to wetlands or
streams and therefore, no Individual Permit from the Corps of Fngiuneers or 401 Water Quality Certification
would bo rcgdmd.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project. Should you have any questions or
require any additional inforrhatiion, please contact Nicole Thomson at [phone].
cc: Mr. Eric ,Alsmeyez, US Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh Field OfSce
Mr. Gary Jordan, USFWS
Mr. Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Mr. Kevin Martin, S&EC, 1101 Raven Ridge Rd, RWei-gh, NC 27614
K%. Elizabeth Kovasekitz, AMP, Planning Group Manager. 6750 Tryon'Rd, Cary, NC 27511
Ms. Cindy Carr, Natural Resources Project Manager, 6750 Tryon Rd, Cary, NC 27511
1 &. Vince Rhea, PE, NCDOT FDEA
Ms. Gail Grimes, PE, NCDOT PDEA
Central Files
File Copy
C:ICarrespondcocc\= RA, W, PONS15U441QTJWaMroxkin=t81'Ass=mnnent Addendum Apr 05

The at-grade railroad crossing alternative relocates the current crossing on South Alston Avenue
approximately 1,764 feet south to Hopson Road between Louis Stephens Drive and South
Alston Avenue. The existing South Alston Avenue crossing is located between two curves in
the road and at a curve in the railroad tracks, diminishing sight distance for trains and vehicles
approaching from both directions. The relocated at-grade crossing would be situated at a straight
section of track and along a straight section of roadway, improving safety. A railroad signal and
gates similar to those used at the present crossing would be used at the new location.
Louis Stephens Drive is proposed as a four-lane, two-way divided facility with four-foot paved
shoulder sections, a 34-foot raised curb median and 12-foot travel lanes (see Figure 2). These
improvements will be implemented in two construction phases, with two lanes paved and two
lanes graded until future traffic warrants full service on the proposed facility. Hopson Road is
designated to become a four-lane, two-way facility with shoulder section and raised curb median
(see Figure 3). The 12-foot lanes will have four-foot paved shoulders and a 16-foot raised
median. The anticipated posted speed for both roads is 45 mph.
A Louis Stephens Drive will be on a 200-foot right-of-way and Hopson Road will be on a 150-foot
right-of-way. Research Triangle Foundation will convey all right-of-way it owns or controls
J needed for the project. The NCDOT will acquire right-of-way not owned by RTF. Total
permanent right-of-way requirements for the overall project are 31.02 acres. Permanent
drainage easement requirements for the project total 3.61`,acres.
a
J
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
- U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 5
1
i,
. ? - Z --

-1

3.0 SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Durham and Wake Counties
SR 2500 (Louis Stephens Drive) Extension
from SR 3093 (Development Drive) to SR 1978 (Hopson Road,
and SR 1978 (Hopson Road) Realignment and Extension
State Project No. 35021.2.1
T.I.P. Project No. U-4410 D
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
In addition to the standard Nationwide Permit No. 14 Conditions, the General Nationwide
Permit Conditions, Section 404 Only Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency
Conditions, NCDOT's Guidelines for Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters, General Certification Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of Certification, the
following special commitments have been agreed to by the NCDOT:
Pre-Construction Commitments
Division of Hi_,ghways - Contract Services, Right-of-Wav Branch
The Contractor will be required to provide coverage for all work to be performed on CSZ right-
of-way per Insurance Special Provisions - CSZ Transportation, Inc.
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 9
e
4.0 SUMMARY OF BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE
ENVIRONMENTL IMPACTS
u
1

J
a
a
After review of the analysis of alternatives in the Environmental Assessment, it has been
determined that the Louis Stephens Drive Extension and Hopson Road Realignment with At-
Grade Rail Crossing is the least environmentally damaging, most practicable alternative.
Wetlands and Surface Waters
Three small wetlands were identified in the project corridor during February 2003; however
these wetlands are either non-jurisdictional or avoided by the project.
The United States Army Corps of Engineers issued Nationwide Permit 14 for the 91-acre
project area located between Hopson Road and Davis Drive in. Research Triangle Park on July
31, 2003. The permit was reauthorized on February 2, 2005 (see Appendix A). The permit
authorizes 1,042 linear feet of stream channel impacts. Proposed Louis Stephens Drive will cross
Long Branch and an unnamed tributary to Northeast Creek. The proposed project will pipe the
streams under the road. Approximately 650 feet of stream channel will be impacted.
Temporary, short-term impacts to water quality from construction-related activities include
increased sedimentation and turbidity. Additional temporary, but more long-term construction
related impacts to water resources include substrate destibilization, bank erosion, increased
turbidity, altered flow rates, and possible temperature fluctuations within the channel due to
removal of streamside vegetation.
Vegetation and Wildlife
Impacts to terrestrial vegetative communities consist of approximately 3.1 acres of alluvial forest;
60.2 acres of mixed hardwood forest; and 12.5 acres of man-dominated (maintained utility
easement) areas. These impact estimates are based on a 400-foot wide study corridor along Louis
Stephens Drive and a 300-foot wide study corridor along the Hopson Road realignment.
Permanent impacts depend on final roadway design but are expected to be less based on the
200-foot right-of-way for Louis Stephens Drive and the 150-foot right-of-way for Hopson
Road.
Fluctuation in populations of animal species which utilize terrestrial areas is anticipated during
the course of construction. Slow-moving, burrowing, and subterranean organisms will be
directly impacted by construction activities, while mobile organisms will be displaced to adjacent
communities. Impacts will be temporary in nature and population levels can be expected to
return to pre-construction conditions once work is complete.
Cultural Resources
There are no known structures of historical or architectural importance located within the
project area. There are no known archaeological sites within the project area.
Louis Stephens Drive Extension Document Date: 4/27/2005
U-4410 D Finding of No Significant Impact Date Printed: 4/27/2005 11