U2420

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, A1VA1
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Environmental Management
MOM
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, , Secretary
p E H N F1
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
November 21, 1995
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: FONSI for Morganton Road from US 15-501 to US 1
Moore County
State Project DOT No. 9.8084034, TIP # U-2420
EHNR # 96-0281, DEM # 11087
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that 0.1 acres of, waters including wetlands will be
impacted.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of a FONSI by DEM would not preclude the denial
of a 401 Certification upon application if wetland or water impacts have not been
avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Monica Swihart
morganto.fon
FAXED
IVUV 211995
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
r
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
? Project located in 7th floor library
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form 1 d 2
Project Number. County: Date: Date Response Due (firm deadline):
?- o lo
6 D /
a N TO
This project is being review 9d as indicated below: 63-44,- 14- -
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area -- In-House Review
? Asheville ? All RIO Areas ? Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
Air ? Coastal Management ? Water Planning
ayetteville Water - ? Water Resources
? Environmental Health
? Mooresville "Groundwater „
Wildlife -' ? Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh - end Quality-Engineer- = Forest Resources ?Radiation Protection -'
Washington ? Recreational Consultant E3 Land Resources '15 David Foster
Coastal Management Consultant ? Parks and Recreation - ?-Other (specify)`
? Wilmington
? Others
Environmental Management
Winston-Salem PWS -' - Monica Swihart
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable) - -
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager. In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? No objection to project as proposed ? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
? No Comment ?Applicant has been contacted
? Insufficient information to complete review ? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Approve ? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked) ? Consistency Statement not needed
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for ? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
strengthening (comments attached) , NEPA and SEPA
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive ? Other (specify and attach comments)
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attachedlauthority(ies) cited)
RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
PS-104
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
f7
t
Southern Pines
Morganton Road (SR 1309)
From Multi-lanes near US 15-501
to US 1 Interchange
Moore County
State Project No. 9.8084034
T.I.P Project No. U-2420
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E.
Planning and Environmental Branch, Manager
N.C. Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
C
S
Datb . Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
•
r
Southern Pines
Morganton Road (SR 1309)
From Multi-lanes near US 15-501
to US 1 Interchange
Moore County
State Project No. 9.8084034
T.I.P Project No. U-2420
STATE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
July, 1995
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Marc L. Hamel
Project Planning Engineer
a. ?a'&
Teresa A. Hart
Project Planning Unit Head
7
Richar B. Davis, P. E. Assista t
Planning and Environmental Branch
1111111111111#
SEAL
6944
G1 Nt
D g. ,
r
r
Southern Pines
Morganton Road (SR 1309)
From Multi-lanes near US 15-501
to US 1 Interchange
Moore County
State Project No. 9.8084034
T.I.P Project No. U-2420
STATE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
1. The North Carolina Department of Transportation will enforce strict
adherence to Best Management Practices, to avoid and/or minimize
erosion and siltation.
2. The North Carolina Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior to
construction regarding the relocation of survey markers along the
project. Two geodetic survey markers will be impacted by the
proposed project.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. TYPE OF ACTION ........................................... 1
II. PROJECT STATUS AND COSTS .................................. 1
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ....................... 1
IV. PERMITS ................................................... 2
V. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS ................................ 2
A. Circulation of the Environmental
Assessment .... . .... ............... 2
B. Comments Received on theEnvironmental
Assessment ..................................... 2
C. Public Hearing ...................................... 6
VI. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ................ 6
VII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT................. 6
FIGURES
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
APPENDIX
Comments Received From Review Agencies
on the Environmental Assessment ..................... A-1
STATE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Prepared by the
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
I. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) State
Finding of No Significant Impact (SFONSI).
The NCDOT has determined this project will not have a significant
impact on the human environment. This SFONSI is based on the State
Environmental Assessment (SEA) which has been evaluated and determined to
adequately and accurately discuss the environmental issues and impacts of
the proposed project. The State Environmental Assessment provides
sufficient evidence and analysis for determining that an Environmental
Impact Statement is not required. The NCDOT takes full responsibility for
the accuracy, scope, and content of the Environmental Assessment.
II. PROJECT STATUS AND COSTS
The proposed improvements to Morganton Road (SR 1309) are included in
the 1996-2002 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
Right-of-Way acquisition is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1995 and
construction is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1997. The current TIP
includes a total funding of $4,760,000 for the project, consisting of
$1,460,000 for right-of-way, and $3,050,000 for construction. This
1.31-mile project has an estimated cost of $2,900,000, including $450,000
for right-of-way, $ 2,200,000 for construction, and $250,000 in prior year
costs.
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), proposes to
improve Morganton Road (SR 1309) from the existing multi-lanes near US
15/501 to the US 1 interchange in Southern Pines (see Figure 1). The
existing two lane facility will be widened in two sections. Section A
(0.95 mile) will be widened to a four-lane divided urban section from US
15/501 to Henley Street, and will have a 16-foot raised grassed median and
curb & gutter. Symmetrical widening is proposed from US 15/501 to the
unnamed tributary to be crossed, transitioning to offset-south for the
remainder to Henley Street. Section B (0.36 mile) will be widened to a
five-lane curb and gutter section from Henley Street to the US 1
interchange. Section B will be improved with one additional lane widened
to the south, two lanes widened to the north.
IV. PERMITS
It is anticipated that the unnamed tributary crossing will be
authorized by Nationwide Permit [33 CFR 330.5] (a) (14). Nationwide #14
allows for minor road crossing fills of non-tidal "Waters of the United
States". Permit conditions applicable to this crossing are met as outlined
in [33 CFR 330.5(b)] and [33 CFR 330.6(a)]. Final permit decisions are the
discretion of the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
A North Carolina Division of Environmental Management Section 401
Water Quality General Certification will be required prior to the issue of
an individual permit.
V. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment
The State Environmental Assessment for this project was approved by
the North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways, on
August 18, 1994. Copies of the approved State Environmental Assessment
were circulated to the following state and local agencies for review and
comments. An asterisk (*) denotes those agencies who responded with
written comments. Copies of the correspondence received are included in
the Appendix of this document.
* U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U. S. Soil Conservation Service
U. S. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
U. S. Bureau of Indian Affairs
U. S. Department of Health and Human Services
U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
U. S. National Park Service
N. C. State Clearinghouse
* N. C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
* Wildlife Resources Commission
* Division of Environmental Health
* Division of Land Resources
Natural Heritage Program
* Division of Environmental Management
* Division of Forest Resources
Pee Dee Council of Governments
Moore County Commissioners
Town of Southern Pines
The Environmental Assessment was also made available to the public.
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment
Written comments on the Environmental Assessment were received from
several agencies. The following are excerpts of the substantive comments
with responses, where appropriate:
1.
2.
3.
U. S. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
a.) Comment: "A certification will be required indicating that
new and modified structures will not cause any rise in the
100-year natural water surface elevations. If changes in the
floodway are required, these changes should be coordinated with
the town for modification to the flood insurance map and report.
We also suggest coordination with the town for compliance with
their flood plain ordinance."
Response: The existing two, 72" CMP's being replaced with a
single 8'x 7' concrete box culvert in this project will reduce
the level of the 100 year water elevation. No changes to the
floodplain are anticipated.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources N.C. DEHNR Division of Environmental Health.
a.) Comment: "Staggered work hours, car-pooling, van-pooling,
and other strategies designed to reduce congestion and diminish
the need for widening roads are not addressed in the
Alternatives section." Also, "This section is not adequate and
should be expanded so that it is clear why public transportation
was not considered a viable alternative."
Response: The NCDOT actively promotes alternative means of
transportation to reduce traffic demand and thus the need for
additional roads or widening. However, these means of
alternative transportation have not been proven to reduce
existing and projected traffic volumes to the point where road
widening can be eliminated. Only in heavily developed
metropolitan areas where parking is limited or prohibitively
expensive, or where severe traffic congestion extends travel
times to excessive lengths, will travelers resort to
alternatives other than automobiles. Studies have shown that in
very few areas of this state can alternative transportation
means draw people away from the use of automobiles. This is
considered in the generation of projected traffic volumes, and
these volumes indicate the need for widening Morganton Road,
even with alternative means of transportation in use.
N.C. DEHNR, Division of Land Resources
a.) Comment: "This project will impact 2 geodetic markers.
N.C. Geodetic Survey should be contacted prior to
construction..."
Response: The project has been coordinated with the N. C.
Geodetic Survey and its office will be contacted prior to
construction of the project.
4
b.) Comment: "The erosion and sedimentation control plan
required for this project should be prepared by the Department
of Transportation under the erosion control program delegation
to the Division of Highways from the North Carolina
Sedimentation Control Commission."
Response: The general requirements concerning erosion and
siltation are covered in article 107-13 of the Standard
Uecifications for Roads and Structures which is entitled
Control of Erosion, Siltation and Pollution." The Division of
Highways will follow the provisions of the Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Program which was developed by the
Division of Highways and approved by the N. C. Sedimentation
Control Commission. This program consists of the rigorous
requirements to minimize erosion and sedimentation contained in
the Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures.
An erosion control schedule will be devised by the contractor
and approved by NCDOT before construction is started. In
conjunction with the erosion control schedule, the contractor
will be required to follow provisions of the plans and
specifications which pertain to erosion and siltation.
4. N.C. DEHNR, Division of Environmental Management
a.) Comment: "The Division of Environmental Management is
responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality
Certification for activities which impact waters of the state
including wetlands. The document states that 0.1 acres of
waters including wetlands will be impacted. DOT is reminded that
endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of a
401 Certification upon application if wetland impacts have not
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable."
Response: NCDOT acknowledges that all practicable measures will
be taken to insure minimization of wetland impacts. NCDOT's
proposal has reduced impacts to wetlands by improving existing
facilities rather than constructing on new location, and by
widening symmetrically over the unnamed tributary affected. Side
slopes have been minimized as much as is practicable to reduce
impacts at this crossing.
5. N.C. DEHNR, Division of Forest Resources
a.) Comment: "We would be in favor of the proposed widening so
long as it would: - a. Improve our entering and leaving our
Southern Pines Fire Tower; b. Reduce our travel time of our fire
control equipment going to wildfires; and c. Not interfere with
our emergency fire control equipment going to fires during the
construction phase."
Response: By widening the existing roadway, increased frequency
and size of gaps in the traffic flow will be experienced. This
will allow easier access onto Morganton Road for firefighting
equipment. Likewise, the improved facilities will reduce travel
times to and from wildfires. Traffic will be maintained on
Morganton Road during the construction phase, and the traffic
control plan will insure that ingress and egress will not be
hampered.
b.) Comment: "...the total forest land acreage that would be
taken out of forest production as a result of new right-of-way
purchases."
Response: The 400 acres of woodlands bordering the project were
clear-cut prior to the start of this project, and have been
identified as a "future development growth area" in Southern
Pines' Land Development Plan. The remaining area containing
stands of trees along the project are cemeteries and the area
surrounding the Southern Pines Fire Tower. At the fire tower,
an additional 15 feet of right-of-way will be required for a
total acreage of approximately 0.2 acres removed from
production.
c. Comment: "The productivity of forest soils as indicated by
the soil series that would be involved within the proposed
right-of-way."
Response: see response as noted under Item 5 (b).
d.) Comment: "The provision that the contractor will take to
sell any merchantable timber that is to be removed."
Response: NCDOT's general contract provisions for right-of-way
clearing provides the opportunity for the contractor to market
merchantable timber to minimize the need for piling and burning
during construction. This contract also includes specifications
to protect trees outside the construction limits.
e.) Comment: "The impact upon existing greenways within the area
of the proposed project."
Response: There are no existing greenways to be affected by
construction of the project.
f.) Comment: "The provision that the contractor will take during
the construction phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation, and
construction damage to forest land outside the right-of-way and
construction limits. Trees outside construction limits should
be protected from construction activities to avoid:
1. Skinning of tree trunks by machinery.
2. Soil compaction and root exposure or injury by
heavy equipment.
3. Adding layers of fill dirt over the root systems
of trees, a practice that impairs root aeration.
4. Accidental spillage of petroleum products or
other damaging substances over the root systems
of trees."
Response: Strict Best Management Practices will be followed
during construction. NCDOT's general contract provisions for
right-of-way clearing includes specifications to protect trees
outside the construction limits.
6. N.C. DEHNR, Division of Environmental Health
a.) Comment: "If existing water lines are to be relocated during
the construction, plans for the water relocation must be
submitted to the DEHNR, Public Water Section..."
Response: NCDOT will give the DEHNR the opportunity to review
the water line relocation construction plans.
7. N. C. DEHNR, Fayetteville Reviewing Office
a.) Comment: "Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0520."
Response: "NCDOT will comply with this law."
C. Public Hearing
Following circulation of the State Environmental Assessment, a public
hearing was held on January 17, 1995 at the National Guard Armory on
Morganton Road (SR 1309). Approximately 5 citizens or representatives
from the Town of Southern Pines attended the public hearing. Two
questions or concerns raised dealt with the proposed typical cross
sections and a median crossover. Both of these concerns were adequately
addressed at the hearing. A transcript of the hearing is on file with the
N.C. Division of Highways.
VI. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
No revisions to the scope or design of the project have occurred
since publication of the Environmental Assessment. The total estimated
cost of the project is $2,900,000, including $450,000 for right of way,
$2,200,000 for construction, and $250,000 in prior year costs.
VII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the impacts of the proposed project as
documented in the Environmental Assessment, and upon comments from
federal, state, and local agencies, it is the finding of the North
Carolina Department of Transportation that the project will not have a
significant impact upon the quality of the human or natural environment.
The project is not controversial from an environmental standpoint. No
significant impacts on natural, ecological, cultural, or scenic resources
are expected. No significant impact on air or water quality or on ambient
noise levels is expected. The project is consistent with local plans and
will not divide or disrupt a community. The project will have no effect
on any historic properties listed in the National Register of Historic
Places. The proposed improvements
threatened or endangered species.
Finding of No Significant Impact
Environmental Impact Statement or
be required.
will have no effect on federally-listed
Therefore, it is determined that a
is applicable for this project. An
further environmental analysis will not

SOUTHERN
PINES
POP. 8,620
1704
PROJEC
17.u
!lil.
I,It
1844
r /
J
• ? voa
d
2073 `\.7110
.04 .V?u J
7103
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
MORGANTON ROAD (SR 1309),
PROM MULTI-LANES NEAR US 16-601
TO US 1 INTERCHANGE,
MOORE COUNTY,
U-2420
0 mile 0.5
1 1 FIG. 1
1293
jv.
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED WIDENING OF
MORGANTON ROAD FROM PINECREST HIGH SCHOOL ROAD TO THE
US 1 INTERCHANGE IN SOUTHERN PINES
Project 9.8084034 U-2420 Moore County
The above public hearing will be held on January 17, 1995
between the hours of 4:30 and 7:30 PM in the National Guard
Armory, Morganton Road, Southern Pines. The public hearing
will be an open forum, drop-in type. Representatives of the
NCDOT will be present to explain the proposed design on an
individual basis with interested persons. Right of Way and
Relocation Assistance personnel will be present to explain
those procedures and to address questions. Means for written
and recorded comments will be provided. Additional written
materials may be submitted for a period of 15 days from the
date of the hearing to:
W. A. Garrett, Jr., P.E., P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611.
The proposed project is the widening of Morganton Road to
four lanes with a 16 foot median from Pinecrest High School
Road to South Henley Street and to a 64 foot, five lane curb
and gutter street from there to the US 1 Interchange. The
interchange will not be a part of the project. The existing
right of way for the divided section is 100 feet and will
require only construction easements. The curb and gutter
section is an existing 60 feet and will require an additional
20 feet of right of way as well as construction easements.
A map of the proposed design and a copy of the State
Environmental Assessment are available for public review at
the NC DOT Division Office, US 11 Aberdeen. Anyone desiring
additional information on the public hearing may contact Mr.
Garrett at the above address or 919/250--4092.
NCDOT will provide reasonable accommodations, auxiliary aids,
and services for any qualified disabled person interested in
attending the public hearing. To request the above, you may
call Mr. Garrett at the above number. Please make the request
as early as possible so necessary arrangements may be made.
lnanc?
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ! G E I V
WILMINGTON DISTR
P.O. BOX ICT, OOF ENGINEERS 50'
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
REPLY TO
A1ONOF January 23, 1995 JAN 2 5 1995
Planning Division 222 DIVISION OF
C¢, HIGHWAYS ?NOPONNIEN•
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
This is in response to your letter of November 28, 1994,
requesting our comments on the "State Environmental Assessment
for Southern Pines, Morganton Road (SR 1309), From Multi-lanes
near US 15-501 to US 1 Interchange, Moore County, State Project
Number 9.8084034, T.I.P. Number U-2420" (Regulatory Branch Action
I.D. No. 19950113).
Our comments involve impacts to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers'
projects, flood plains, and other jurisdictional resources,
primarily waters and wetlands. The proposed roadway does not cross
any Corps-constructed flood control or navigation project. Enclosed
are our comments on the other issues.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we
can be of further assistance, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Wilbert V. Paynes
Acting Chief, Planning Division
Enclosure

Printed on is Recycled Paper
January 23, 1995
Page 1 of 1
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. WILMINGTON DISTRICT. COMMENTS ON:
"State Environmental Assessment for Southern Pines, Morganton Road (SR 1309),
From Multi-lanes near US 15-501 to US 1 Interchange, Moore County, State
Project Number 9.8084034, T.I.P. Number U-2420" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D.
No. 19950113)
1.
The proposed project is located in the jurisdiction: of.the town of
Southern Pines, which participates.in the National Flood Insurance Program.
From a review of Panel 162 of the December 1989 Moore County, North Carolina,
and Incorporated Areas Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and the apparently new
road system as shown on figures 1 and 2 of the Environmental Assessment (EA),
it appears that the roadway improvements would cross Aberdeen Creek Tributary,
a detail study stream with 100-year flood elevations determined and a floodway
defined. A certification will be required indicating that new and modified
structures will not cause any rise in the 100-year natural water surface
elevations. If changes in the floodway are required, these changes should be
coordinated with the town for modification to the flood insurance map and
report. We also suggest coordination with the town for compliance with their
flood plain ordinance.
We wish to note that our comments here differ from those contained in our
August 27, 1992, letter to your office. It appears that either road alignment
changes or possible misnaming of roads as shown on the FIRM may have led to
the earlier incorrect conclusion that no identified flood hazard areas would
be affected. The portion of Morgantown Road which crosses the above mentioned
stream is identified as Pinecrest School Road on the FIRM.
2. WATERS AND WETLANDS: POC - Mike Taylor. Wilmington Field Office.
Regulatory Branch, at (9101 251-4634
Based on the information provided in the Environmental Assessment and a
review of our headwaters maps, we concur that the wetland impacts may be
authorized under Nationwide Permit No. 14 for minor road crossings impacting
less than 1/3 acre of wetlands or under Nationwide Permit No. 26 for work
above the headwaters. The wetlands must be delineated and field approved by
this office prior to your submitting an application for a Department of the
Army Section 404 permit.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on your EA. If you have
any questions related to Department of the Army permits, please contact
Mr. Taylor.
Q
JAN 1 8 1995
I
PROJECT NIANAGEIV.E IT
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
? i
n5
North Carolina
Lent of Adminis
January 17, 1995
Mr. Whitmel Webb
N.C. Department of Transportation
Program Development Branch
Transportation Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-1494
Dear Mr. Webb:
JAN 1 81995
_PROGRAM REVEl.OPr??ENT t!NlT
Katie G. Dorsett, Secretary
RE: SCH File #95-E-4220-0383; Environmental Assessment for the
Proposed Improvements to Morganton Road in Southern Pines
(TIP #U-2420)
The above referenced environmental information has been reviewed
through the State Clearinghouse under the provisions of the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
Attached to this letter are comments made by state/local
agencies in the course of this review. Because of the nature of
the comment(s), it has been determined that you may submit a
Finding of No Significant Impact to the State Clearinghouse for
compliance with the Act. The attached comment(s) should be
taken into consideration in project development.
Best regards.
Sincerely,

Ms. Chrys Baggett, Director
State Clearinghouse
CB:jf
Attachment
cc: Region H
116 West Jones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-8003 • Telephone [phone]
State Courier 51-01-00
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
?bw
"? ? RECEIVE
EHNR D
State of North Carolina ?E: 14 loon
Department of Environment, Health, and Natu al Res
Division of Land Resources LAND nt rA

James Q Martin. Govemor PROJECT =47MN CONXENTS
WlUlam W. Cobey. Jr, Secretary
.Project Number: ? s- 03,f-3 County: -? s
Project Name: ?3
Geodetic Survey
This project will impact geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
Survey should be•contacted prior•to construction at P.O. Box 27687,
.Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]... Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Geodetic Survey office at [phone].
Reviewer Date 22
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
• No comment
This proje9t will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land=disturbing activity if more
than one (1) acre will be disturbed.
If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of the erosion and sedimentation control plan.
If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water
Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
increased design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Land Quality Section at [phone].
i044.114 2??
Reviewer Date
P.O. Box 27687 • Melgh. N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affl=adve Action Employer
J '
State of North Carolina Reviewing Officer
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Project Number. Due Date:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW -PROJECT COMMENTS
I QS 3 Z _ 3 - 967
After review of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Ouestions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the for 4 N
m. ormal Proce;
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Time
Regional Office. (statutory tim
PERMITS
Permit to construct 5 operate wastewater treatment
facilities, sewer system extensions. 5 sewer
systems not discharging into state surface waters.
NPOES • permit to discharge into surface water andlor
? permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities
discharging into state surface waters.
?I Water Use Permit ...
? 1 Well Construction Permit
limit)
30 days
(90 days)
90-120 dayE
IN/A)
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Application 90 days before begin construction or award of
construction contracts On-site inspection. Post-application
technical conference usual
Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection.
Pro-application conference usual. Additionally. obtain permit to
construct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPOES. Reply
time. 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPOES
permit-whichever is later.
Pre•epplication technical conference usually necessary
complete plc a aopst?allation of abe received and permit issued the p well.
Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property
Dredge and Fill Permit owner. On-site inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permit to construct b operate Air Pollution Abatement NIA
facilities andlor Emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21H.
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15A NCAC 20.0520.
Demolition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with 15A NIA
NCAC 20.0525 which requires notification and removal
prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group
Complex Source Permit required under 15A NCAC 20.0800.
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion & sedimentatic
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Ouality Sect.) at least 30
days before be innin activity. A fee of S30 for the first acre and 520.00 for eaCn additional acre or cart must accomoanv the olan
? The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance:
On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with EHNR. Bond amount
varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land. Any area
? Mining Permit mined greater than one acre must be permited. The appropriate bond
must be received before the permit can be issued.
? North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit
exceeds 4 days
^^?I Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit • 22 On•site inspection by N.O. Division Forest Resources required -if more
U counties in coastal N.C. with organic soils than five acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections
should be requested at least ten days before actual burn is planned...
NIA
C3 Oil Refining Facilities
If permit required. application 60 days before begin construction.
Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans.
? Dam Safely Permit inspect construction. certify construction is according to EHNR aoprov
ed plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. And
a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers. An inspection of site is mug sac
sary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of 5200.00
company the application. An additional processing fee based on a
nwreentace or ine total project cost will be required upon completion
Lt?
30 days
INIA)
7 days
(15 days:
55 days
190 days
60 days
190 days
60 day
(g0 day
20 da•.
(30 da
(30 da
30 ca
160 da
1 dz
(N/:
10
IN.
90.12C
IN
30 c
(60 c
Continued on reverse
State of North Carolina IT
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 4 • 0
Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs a
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary pEHN R
Henry M. Lancaster II, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee ??
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 95-0383 EA Morganton Road from US 15-501 to US 1, Moore
County
DATE: January 13, 1995
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources has reviewed the proposed
project. We concur with the findings of this document. We ask that careful consideration be
given to the suggestions provided by the Division of Forest Resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Please continue to coordinate with our divisions as
this project progresses to the permit stages.
Attachments
T@??MC
0 /
?i JM 1 71994
U ?
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Emoloyer 50% recycled/ 10% post-ccnsumer paper
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Health
Public Water Supply Section
I
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Clearinghouse Project No. 95-0383
Moore County
December 22, 1994
V. ALTERNATIVES
A
?EHNF:1
Staggered work hours, car-pooling, van-pooling, and other strategies designed to reduce congestion and diminish
the need for widening roads are not addressed in the ALTERNATIVES section.
C. Public Transportation Alternative
This section is not adequate and should be expanded so that it is clear as to why public transportation was not
considered as a viable alternative.
?? laC?4 L?
Paul B. Clark
Environmental Engineer
Water Quality Compliance Branch
Public Water Supply Section
Division of Environmental Health
Department of Environmental Health and Natural Resources
P.O. Box 29536, Raleigh. North Carolina 27626-0536 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% past-consumer paper
01/11/95 09:56 $`919 733 9959 NC DEN WQ ENVSCI Q004
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management A149A
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary E E H"R
A. Preston Howard, Jr.. P.E..Urector
January 11, 1995
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee

Through: `tom
Monica SwihartY''!
From: Eric Galamb&
Subject: EA for Morganton Road from US 15-501 to US 1
Moore County
State Project DOT No. 9.8084034, TIP # U-2420
EHNR # 95-0383, DEM # 10806
The subject document has been reviewed by this. office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the Issuance of the Section 401 water
Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that 0.1 was of waters including wetlands will be
impacted.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of .
a 401 Certification upon application if wetland impacts have not been avoided and
minimized to the mawmum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
morganto.ea
P.O. Box 24535, Rdeigh. North CQoGna 27626-06M Telephone 91g-733-7015 FAX [phone]
An Equd OPpaiundy Affamatlve Acftan Employer W% recycled/ 10% past-con amm paper
na
94
TO: Melba McGee, Policy Development
FROM: Don H. Robbins, Staff Forester Z,-7?pe
SUBJECT: DOT EA for Proposed Widening of Southern Pines Morganton Road (SR 1309) in
Moore County
PROJECT: #95-0383, #93-0089 and TIP # U-2420
DUE DATE: 1-3-95
We have reviewed the above subject document and have the following comments:
1. Our original scoping comments for this project #93-0089 dated August 13, 1992 are not
found in the EA. Attached find a copy of these comments which we would like added to
the EA. We would have no problem with the widening so long as it would --
a. Improve our entering and leaving our Southern Pines Fire Tower.
b. Reduce our travel time of our fire control equipment leaving Southern Pines
Tower going to wildfires.
C. Not interfere with our emergency fire control equipment going to fires during the
construction phase.
2. This project will impact 15.6 acres of woodland of which most of it is scattered longleaf
pine and scrub oaks on deep sand.
3. We have no further comments at this time.
PC: Warren Boyette - CO
Gene Barnes - D3
Robert Edwards - Moore County
File
I
`' '?"
• Forestry

5':
5 RY
A;K

N. C. - Where it all began
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Forest Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor Stanford M. Adams
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Garner Road
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
August 13, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Environmental Assessment Unit
FROM: Don H. Robbins
Staff Forester
SUBJECT: DOT EA-Scoping for Proposed Widening to Morganton Road (SR 1309)
from US 15-501 to West Broad Street in Southern Pines in Moore
County -
PROJECT #93-0089
DUE DATE 8-27-92
We have reviewed the above subject DOT Scoping Notice and have the following
comments:
1. We would be in favor of the proposed widening so long as it would -
a. Improve our entering and leaving our Southern Pines Fire Tower.
b. Reduce our travel time of our fire control equipment leaving
Southern Pines Tower going to wildfires.
C. Not interfere with our emergency fire control equipment going
to fires during the construction phase.
2. Woodland will be involved and the EA should address the following -
a. The total forest land acreage that would be taken out of forest
production as a result of new right-of-way purchases.
P.O. Box 27687, Ralet0, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
A. Final Onnnm,nirv AFkrmaeive Arrinn Frrmnlnvrr

r.
Page 2
b. The productivity of the forest soils as indicated by the soil
series that would be involved within the proposed right-of-way.
C. The impact upon existing greenways within the area of the
proposed project.
d. The provisions that the contractor will take to sell any
merchantable timber that is to be removed. This practice is
encouraged to minimize the need for piling and burning during
construction. If any burning is needed, the contractor should
comply with all laws and regulations pertaining to debris
burning.
A. The provisions that the. contractor will take during the
construction phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation and
construction damage to forest land outside the right-of-way and
construction limits. Trees outside construction limits should
be protected from construction activities to avoid:
1. Skinning of tree trunks by machinery.
2. Soil compaction and root exposure or injury by heavy
equipment.
3. Adding layers of fill dirt over the root systems of trees,
a practice that impairs root aeration.
4. Accidental spilling of petroleum products or other
damaging substances over the root systems of trees.
DER: la
pc: Warren Boyette - CO
Gene Barnes - District Forester - D3
Robert Edwards - Moore County Ranger
File
RC,HCP,FRLLS LRKE TEL:[phone]
Dec 27'94 11:43 N0.002 P.0
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
312 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919433-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Office of Policy Development, DEHNR
FROM: David Cox, Highway Project C d?}nato
Habitat Conservation Progra/ 6
DATE: December 27, 1994
SUBJECT: North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) Environmental Assessment (EA) for SR 1309
improvements, from multi-lanes near US 15-501 to
the US 1 interchange in Southern Pines, Moore
County, North Carolina, TIP No. U-2420, SCH
Project No. 95-0383.
Staff biologists of the N. C. Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the subject EA and are
familiar with habitat values in the project area. The
purpose of this review was to assess project impacts to fish
and wildlife resources. Our comments are provided in
accordance with certain provisions of the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act (G.S. 113A-1 et seq., as amended; 1
NCAC 25).
The proposed project involves widening existing SR 1309
(Morganton Road) from the existing multi-lanes near US 15-
501 to the US 1 interchange. The cross section outside the
city limits of Southern Pines will be a four-lane curb and
gutter section with a 16-foot raised median. Inside the
city limits a five-lane curb and gutter section is proposed.
The roadway will be constructed on existing alignment with a
asymmetrical widening. The project length is approximately
1.31 miles. Wildlife habitat losses include approximately
15.5 acres of forested lands and 0.1 acres of wetlands.
NC'9RC appreciates that NCDOT has significantly reduced
impacts to wildlife and fishery resources by the decision to
improve existing facilities rather than construction on a
/7,FALLS LAKE TEL-919-528-9839 Dec 27'94 11:44 No.002 P.08 '
Memo Page 2 December 27, 1994
new alignment. Improving existing roadways reduces wildlife
habitat fragmentation, lessens impacts from secondary
development and eliminates new s1tream or wetland crossings.
We feel that the EA adequately addresses our concerns
regarding wildlife and fishery resources in the project
area. Therefore, we will at this time concur with the
findings of this EA and anticipate concurrence with the
subsequent Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for this
project. However, we ask that NCDOT continue efforts to
minimize wetland impacts and use Best Management Practices
to avoid impacts to off-site natural resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this EA.
If we can be of any further assistance please call me at
[phone].
CC* Wayne Chapman, District 6 Fisheries Biologist
Ken Knight, District 6 Wildlife Biologist
:\..i' .;'? . lii•:.,'.; i::..i ?. .i•:, ? ?:? - 323
1.. I. I i V I;.t.li'•titIJ:.!`•! 1 .
V. v
i n° er t\?cney ?:'ojcca l?cview 1',espollsc 0??? ?, __--
R-l3og
!..ype Oi P:0 CLL 5
?ro;r?c;. Nang ?G ??.:-----•--- .
The applicant should be Lcivisect chic Mans and Spe:.i(I , UOlls :o r ail write, s)'SCt
?- itnprove:uetIt- must L-e apj?roved by the D!vislotl. o`'E!Wll'ollrrelltal Hea!Ch pr!oi ca.the acv
of a contract or the inici dhoti o[ COnscruct en (as regt:_-ed by 1SPA NCAC 1SC .4300 et.. se•
For inrorin-Aciotl, Collar-!: the 1'ub!ie \\'/acc- Supply Se_ci.on, (919) 733-246Q.
r---i This-! roject will be. classilied ns a. non-communicy ouc is water supply and must comply a,
state and federal etrin!:ino NVater inonitorul•_ reaulrefole`.cs. For more infol•mac:on the apolic
should contact the Public Water Supply Secuo r1, ?.1. ! 733-2321.
CJe tvill _ reco-hmend closure of Eeec-orr adjar?
1---- .lr this project is conscnlcced as proposed, r r•Y_ .
L ' waters to the han?esc o.' shellrish. For tr1_orlrlatlon re?ardin; the •shellrlsh sanitation pre
L 7
lr1, the applicant shout: contact the Shell s:. Sanlc-.t:Dn Branch ac [phone].
produce a azosCallito breeeing'prcb
r-- Tae spoil-disposal area(s) proposed for this p rojeeL::na
t_J For lnlormacion concerning appropciace mosquito •_-ontrol measures, the applicant•shc
contact the Public F?ealth Pest Management. Section. ac [phone].
1
1 -1 The applicant should be -:6visea, that 'vrt0!' t0 :lle rC nlOval or dernOlltlo:'1 of 611ap C
• be necessa_ ; In c rdcr co - preverir
' structures, an eXtellSiVe r7t:Ci!C COiiCI'O1 y!'OgCa171 iti?-.• r
ThC :-LOrihaClOil. CO!iCeC 1i1? rGdeni:' CO i.
n110CaClOn of CiiC t'Ode^l'S l'C 7C1IaCe11 ?:e??•
collCact tl-_e iOcat heal[ i dcp'artm.-ant or i :C PlivllC :.C'.ICII PPS1: 1\?ailage-hen= r`,eCtl J!'1' :.l
7 33-64.07.
Tlie applicant should be advised co c:;nmc: the local health deparciricn, regarding
r , c ?i/ p( ''J 1
fequ.ll'ernerts for SepC:c c?-!1 1nSC311aC:nrc laS 1F(?tI'rA3 Ulr, der -.J1n L\?.a> ?• 1J.: .
i'O!' 1nf01 rnZ:L0.^. C^nrrrnina crnr r. C 1n!! lflr c rmpr n".-SIl..?. RIaSCe Glsr10S 11 n1ClC1VC1S, CV11Uk
Cn-Si., `,raste?'ate. Sectio l: a1?` ;. -r?S
' ? i. iG(:Cr Rc'nlla'l Cic:;?':.t':tll?tl:. l'C' `r +:^ ''-r'•C
The applicani: sl'lould be aC•?I::c.;i t?. lilt'. Sa
1••_ ....J {'aCtlll'1!:S t'CC,tlt:'c:d Icll' Clll'i li1'0;<:::C
r '
tL f',x I:tlll? VJaICI' Ilnr•; tVtlf i)C ll.ll)t:n;?'.. lllli lil!? iii:: CO11S1:1'lli:rii,Il, ?t.l;l r?1i ill(: %V'.lt
l-:.C:'•:l 1, 1 .. ... n rite:
I -? 1•C.I0CaI'IOl'1 lilust be sltl)IllIUCCI co, th'lit:'-.-cioll o(' Ell- tl_01111-lttll:l1
1 1 _l;:i r-))
i lrnC:Cfl, 1i1`rtSC? i _Itl<ta i\alC.l"a I -!
trill \t.vlt"/
it',CL'lO11 , ? '''
;•;??1-2
r. ':=== .:. Seetioo/]3r:lncli 'Ace
'' ?', x cvtewer
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, , Secretary
? E H N F?
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 11, 1995
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: Monica Swihart
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: EA for Morganton Road from US 15-501 to US 1
Moore County
State Project DOT No. 9.8084034, TIP # U-2420
EHNR # 95-0383, DEM # 10806
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that 0.1 acres of waters including wetlands will be
impacted.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of
a 401 Certification upon application if wetland impacts have not been avoided and
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
morganto.ea
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
Department of Env' n ent, Health, and Natural Resources
c f Policy Development
oject Review Form
Project Number. County: Date:
? Project located in 7th floor library
IP&L-
Date Response Due (firm deadline):

This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office/Phone
? Asheville
Regional Office Area
All R/O Areas
Fayetteville
Mooresville
? Raleigh
? Washington
? Wilmington
? Winston-Salem
Manager Sign-Off/Region:
roundwater
and Quality Engineer
F ecreational Consultant
[] Coastal Management Consultant
Others
Response (check all applicable)
Date:
in-House Review
.6&-
Soil and Water
Coastal Management
? Water Resources
Wildlife
Forest Resources
Land Resources
arks and Recreation
vironmental Management
& 15z_z'
Regional office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Marine Fisheries
C ]Water Planning
V Environmental Health
[]Solid Waste Management
[] Radiation Protection
[] David Foster
[]Other (specify)
In-House Reviewer/Agency:
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
[]Applicant has been contacted
D Applicant has not been contacted
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Approve ? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
[]Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
El Recommended for further development with recommendations for NEPA and SEPA
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive ? Other (specify and attach comments)
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attached/authority(ies) cited) RECEIVE
DEC 1 5 1994
RETURN TO:
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Mcalhn Mr:ree Office of Policy Development
Southern Pines
Morganton Road (SR 1309)
From Multi-lanes near US 15-501
to US 1 Interchange
Moore County
State Project Number 9.8084034
T.I.P. Number U-2420

i
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
N.C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
6116/9 4-
Datb J
. Franklin Vick, P.E., Ma ager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Southern Pines
Morganton Road (SR 1309)
From Multi-lanes near US 15-501
to US 1 Interchange
Moore County
State Project Number 9.8084034
T.I.P. Number U-2420
State Environmental Assessment
August, 1994
Marc Hamel
Project Planning Engineer
Teresa Hart
Project Planning Unit Head
ZN CARO
ZIP
EAlN9?:
Richard B. Davis, P. E, Assistant Manage - 6944
Planning and Environmental Branch
:. ?"V
State Environmental Assessment
Prepared by the
Planning and Environmental Branch
of the Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
SUMMARY
1. Description of Action - The North Carolina Department of
Transportation, Division of Highways, proposes to improve Morganton
Road (SR 1309) in Moore County from the existing multi-lanes near
US 15-501 to the US 1 interchange (see Figure 1 & 2). The proposed
improvement includes widening Morganton Road to a four lane divided
curb and gutter facility with a 16-foot raised grassed median outside
the Southern Pines city limits (Section A). A five-lane 64-foot face
to face of curbs, curb and gutter cross section is proposed inside
the city limits (Section B). No interchange improvements at US 1 are
proposed. The proposed project is approximately 1.31 miles in
length. The current total estimated cost of the project is
$2,900,000. The estimated cost in the 1995-2001 Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) is $4,760,000.
2. Summary of Environmental Impacts - The proposed project will have a
positive overall impact on the area by providing improved access to
the existing and future development along the project corridor, and
by reducing congestion and accident potential on Morganton Road. No
families or businesses will be relocated by the proposed improvement.
The small unnamed tributary crossed b the project may be affected by
erosion and siltation durinc?construction?__ut__these lmpac;t.s will be
minimized by strict adherence to Best Management Practices (BMP's).
The _projec encroaches on acre of- wet (ands stream
crossing. Igo--effects ?o aanimal or plant life are expected, and no
historic sites listed on the National Register will be involved.
Anticipated noise levels along the project are not expected to
require noise abatement measures.
3. Alternatives Considered - Due to the nature of this project and
surrounding development, widening along the existing roadway was
considered the feasible alternative. Therefore, no alternative
corridor alignments were studied. A public transportation
alternative was eliminated since it would not adequately replace the
function of this route. The "Do Nothing" alternative was considered
and rejected because of the need to increase the traffic carrying
capacity, and decrease congestion and accidents along SR 1309.
Due to the projected traffic volumes, a multi-lane facility will be
necessary to accommodate future demand. Turning movements inside the
city limits indicate a need for a 5-lane cross section. The Town of
Southern Pines indicated a strong preference for a four-lane section
with a planted median along the remainder. As turning volumes are
low on this segment, a median section will function acceptably.
4. Coordination - Several Federal, State, and local agencies were
consulted in the preparation of this document. They are listed
below. Responses were received and considered during the preparation
of this assessment by agencies marked with an asterisk.
U. S. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
U. S. Bureau of Indian Affairs
U. S. Department of Health and Human Services
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
U. S. Lands and Minerals
National Park Service
*U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
Department of Housing and Urban Development
*U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U. S. Soil Conservation Service
*N. C. State Clearinghouse
*N. C. Dept. of Cultural Resources
N. C. Dept. of Human Resources
N. C. Dept. of Public Instruction
*Mayor of Southern Pines
Moore County Commissioners
*Pee Dee Council of Governments
5. Actions Required by Other Agencies - It is anticipated that the
proposed improvements will involve approximately 0.1.-acre of wetlands
associated with an unnamed tributary- The constf6ct'i6n, will be
permitted under a Nationwide Permit,'for above beadwaters%,f 11 in
wetlands takings (33 CFR 330.5 (a) :'(14) )``; and ,a 401 Water )Quality
Certification. Due to the limited amoufit 4f infr,ngement,f`itigation
of the disturbed wetland area will be` ._resiri cted to tFi - se of Best
Management Practices (BMP's) in the area `'of impact: "--
6. Commitments - NCDOT will construct a raised grassed median on Section
A of this project as stated in the written agreement with the Town of
Southern Pines. Best management practices will be adhered to during
construction to minimize negative environmental impacts. A sidewalk
will be constructed along the south side of the project, with 20% of
the construction cost being furnished by the town of Southern Pines.
Additionally, mitigation for park lands required for right-of-way is
being pursued and will be addressed in the FONSI for this project.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. TYPE OF ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
A. Purpose of Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
B. Thoroughfare Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
C. Traffic Volumes and Capacity Analysis . . . . . . . . 1
y 1. Projected Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. Capacity Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
D. Anticipated Safety Benefits . . . . . . . . . 3
E. Benefits to State Region and Community . . . . . . . 4
III. EXISTING INVENTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
A. Characteristics of Existing Facility . . . . . . . . 4
1. Length of Roadway Section Studies . . . . . . . 4
2. Pavement Width and Shoulders . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Right-of-Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Sidewalks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Roadside Interference . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Type of Roadside Development . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature . . . . . . . 5
8. Restricted Sight Distance . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9. Structures . . . . . . . . . . . 5
10. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control . . . . . 5
11. Speed Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
12. School Bus Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
IV. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
A. General Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
B. Historical Resume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
C. Proposed Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. General Location . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2. Length of Proposed Project . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. Design Speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Cross Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Right-of-Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Access Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Intersection Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. Interchange Revisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10. Median Crossovers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
11. Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12. Sidewalks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

V.
VI.
13. Bicycle Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
14. Landscaping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
15. Special Permits Required . . . . . . . . . . . 10
16. Project Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
17. Cost Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
ALT ERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
A. Widening on Existing Alignment (Recommended) . . . . 10
B. New Location Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
C. Public Transportation Alternatives . . . . . . . . . 11
D. No-Build Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
SOC IAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS . . . . . 11
A. Social Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Land Use and Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11
a. Status of Local Planning Activities . . . . 11
b. Existing Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
C. Future Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
d. Farmland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2. Relocations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3. Public Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4. Historic and Cultural Resources . . . . . . . . 13
a. Historic Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . 13
b. Archaeological Resources . . . . . . . . . 14
B. Environmental Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2. Physical Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3. Biotic Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4. Special Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
C. Air and Noise Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
1. Air Quality Analysis . . . . . 28
2. Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
APPENDIX
State Environmental Assessment
Prepared by
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
I. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT),
Environmental Assessment. The NCDOT takes full responsibility for the
accuracy, scope, and content of this document.
NCDOT proposes to improve Morganton Road (SR 1309) in Moore County
from the existing multi-lanes near US 15-501 to the US 1 interchange (see
Figures 1 & 2). The proposed project is 1.31 miles in length, and will
widen Morganton Road to a 4-lane divided curb and gutter facility with
16-foot raised grassed median outside the city limits (Section A). A
five-lane, 64-foot, face to face of curbs, curb and gutter cross section
is proposed inside the city limits (Section B). No improvements to the
US 1/Morganton Road interchange are proposed.
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Purpose of Project
The purpose of the proposed project is to improve the existing 2-lane
Morganton Road to increase traffic mobility and safety. This route is
currently used by motorists heading towards Pinehurst from points north
wishing to bypass the heavily congested US 1/US 15-501 intersection area.
Currently, Morganton Road is heavily utilized and this traffic is
projected to increase two-fold by the design year. Therefore,
improvements are immediately warranted to accommodate traffic growth and
insure safety.
B. Thoroughfare Plan
SR 1309 is designated as a major thoroughfare (see Figure 3),
appearing on the mutually adopted 1990 Pinehurst, Aberdeen, and Southern
Pines Thoroughfare Plan. The five lane and four lane cross sections
proposed for this project are both in conformance with this plan. The
construction of this project will be a step toward the implementation of
this plan. The project also appears on the County Functional
Classification System as a Minor Arterial.
C. Traffic Volumes and Capacity Analysis
1. Projected Traffic Volumes
It is anticipated that traffic volumes will range from a low of
24,000 vehicles per day (vpd) east of US 15-501, to a high of
26,400 vpd near US 1 in the year 2020. The estimated 1993 traffic
2
volumes at these locations were approximately 9600 vpd and 10,500 vpd
respectively. Projected traffic volumes along the project, design
hour data, and truck percentages are shown in Figures P-1 through P-6
in the Appendix.
2. Capacity Analysis
The concept of levels of service is defined as a qualitative
measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream,
and their perception by motorists and/or passengers. A
level-of-service definition generally describes these conditions in
terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver,
traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety.
Six levels of service are defined for each type of facility for
which analysis procedures are available. They are given letter
designations, from A to F, with level-of-service A representing the
best operating conditions and level-of-service F the worst. In
general, the various levels-of-service are defined as follows for
uninterrupted flow facilities:
Level-of-service A represents free flow. Individual users are
virtually unaffected by the presence of others in the traffic stream.
Freedom to select desired speeds and to maneuver within the traffic
stream is extremely high. The general level of comfort and
convenience provided to the motorist, passenger, or pedestrian is
excellent.
Level-of-service B is in the range of stable flow, but the
presence of other users in the traffic stream begins to be
noticeable. Freedom to select desired speeds is relatively
unaffected, but there is a slight decline in freedom to maneuver
within the traffic stream from LOS A. The level of comfort and
convenience provided is somewhat less than at LOS A, because the
presence of others in the traffic stream begins to affect individual
behavior.
Level-of-service C is in the range of stable flow, but marks the
beginning of the range of flow in which the operation of individual
users become significantly affected by interactions with others in
the traffic stream. The selection of speed is now affected by the
presence of others, and maneuvering within the traffic stream
requires substantial vigilance on the part of the user. The general
level of comfort and convenience declines noticeably at this level.
Level-of-service D represents high-density, but stable, flow.
Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted, and the driver
and pedestrian experiences a generally poor level of comfort and
convenience. Small increases in traffic will generally cause
operational problems at this level.
3
Level -of-service E represents operating conditions at or near
the capacity level. All speeds are reduced to a low, but relatively
uniform value. Freedom to maneuver in the traffic stream is
extremely difficult, and it is generally accomplished by forcing a
vehicle or pedestrian to "give way" to accommodate such maneuvers.
Comfort and convenience levels are extremely poor, and driver or
pedestrian frustration is generally high. Operations at this level
are usually unstable, because small increases in flow of minor
perturbances within the traffic stream will cause breakdowns.
Level-of-service F is used to define forced or breakdown flow.
This condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approaching a
point exceeds the amount that can traverse the point. Queues form
behind such locations. Operations within the queue are characterized
by stop and go waves, and they are extremely unstable. Vehicles may
progress at reasonable speeds for several hundred feet or more, then
be required to stop in cyclic fashion. Level-of-service F is used to
describe the operating conditions within the queue, as well as the
point of the breakdown. It should be noted, however, that in many
cases operating conditions of vehicles or pedestrians discharged from
the queue may be quite good. Nevertheless, it is the point at which
arrival flow exceeds discharge flow which causes the queue to form,
and level-of-service F is an appropriate designation for such points.
A capacity analysis was performed for both the existing two-lane
highway and the proposed multi-lane facility based upon projected
traffic volumes for the years 1993 a? These analyses indicate
that if no improvements are made; SR 130 , the existing two-lane
facility will operate primarily LOS D in the year 1993 -and F
or worse in the year 2020 durin peak h rs. With a pro ose
multi-lane widening, SR 1309 is expe a to operate t LOS C in he
year 1998 (build out), and primarily at LOS E or bet r in t year
2020.
D. Anticipated Safety Benefits
Table 1 presents a comparison between accident rates along the
project and the statewide rates for all urban secondary routes. The rates
for SR 1309 were obtained from studies conducted between 1987 and 1991.
The average statewide rates were obtained from studies conducted during
the same time period.
4
TABLE 1
Accident Rates
(per 100 million vehicle miles)
Accident Type Rates along SR 1309
Total rate 402.10
Fatal 0.00
Non-fatal Injury 139.05
Nighttime 86.43
Wet conditions 105.22
Average Statewide
Rate, Urban
Secondary routes
(1991-1993)
275.7
1.1
109.9
51.2
59.0
These figures show the rates for all types of accidents along the
project are higher than the corresponding statewide rates (with the
exception of fatal accidents, which is lower).
Twenty four percent of accidents recorded involved angle collisions;
while thirty one percent involved rear-end collisions. The remaining
accidents were spread over a wide variety of types of collisions. It is
anticipated that the proposed improvements, which include providing an
additional travel lane in each direction, with a raised median or turn-
lane, will enhance safety along the project.
The accidents were clustered mainly at intersections. During the
design stage, consideration will be given to enhancing safety and traffic
operation at these locations.
E. Benefits to State, Region, and Community
The improvement of SR 1309 will provide better access, when coupled
with TIP Project #R-2004 (from Southern Pines to Pinehurst). It will also
relieve the congestion at the heavily traveled US INS 15-501 intersection
to the south, by providing an attractive alternative for southbound US 1
traffic heading to Pinehurst.
The improved access to the area, savings in operating costs, reduced
accidents, reduced travel times, and the general improvement in the ease
and convenience of travel will benefit the state and region as well as the
local community.
III. EXISTING INVENTORY
A. Characteristics of Existing Facility
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied
The total length of the project is approximately 1.31 miles.
5
2. Pavement Width and Shoulders
The basic pavement width for the project is 22 feet. The
shoulders are generally 10 feet, unpaved.
3. Right-of-Way
The existing right-of-way width along SR 1309 is 100 feet on
Section A and 60 feet on Section B.
4. Sidewalks
There are no existing sidewalks on the project.
5. Roadside Interference
Roadside interference is light, with few mail boxes and signs.
There are a large number of utility poles along and crossing the
project.
6. Type of Roadside Development
Development along Section A is predominantly logged former
woodlands and a cemetery. A cemetery, ball fields, a National Guard
Armory, and public housing exist along Section B.
7. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature
The horizontal curvature on the project is good, and the road is
constructed through slightly rolling terrain.
8. Restricted Sight Distance
There are no areas where roadway geometry limits sight distance
when traveled at the posted speed.
9. Structures
There are two, 72" corrugated metal drainage pipes carrying the
unnamed tributary under SR 1309, approximately 1500 feet east of
US 15-501.
10. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control
Listing from west to east (see Figure 2), roads intersecting the
project at-grade are as follows:
6
Route/Name
US 15-501
Pinecrest School Road
SR 1927 (Windsong Drive)
SR 1931 (Old Morganton Road)
South Henley Street
Fire Lane Avenue
South Mechanic Street
Holiday Inn (south drive)
US 1 interchange west ramps
11. Speed Zones
Type of Control
Signal
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
The speed limit on the project is 35 mph in the city limits and
45 mph outside city limits.
12. School Bus Data
Twenty six busses (including special education busses) utilize
Morganton Road twice a day during the school year.
IV. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
A. General Description
NCDOT proposes to improve Morganton Road in Southern Pines to a
multi-lane roadway with curb and gutter from the existing multi-lanes near
US 15-501 to the US 1 interchange. The current estimated cost of the
project is $2,900,000. The project is to include widening of SR 1309 to a
four-lane divided, or five-lane facility from the multi-lanes near
US 15-501 to the US 1 interchange (excluding interchange improvements).
This planning study separates the project into two sections (See
Figure 2):
Section Limits Length
(miles)
A from US 15-501 to Henley St. .95
B from Henley St. to US 1 interchange west ramp .36
The total project is approximately 1.31 miles in length. These
improvements will provide a multi-lane link from the US 15-501 commercial
area to US 1, as an alternative to the congested US 1/US 15-501
intersection.
A related project completed in 1993 was the improvement of US 15-501,
under TIP Project #R-2004. This project multi-lanes 15-501 from US 1 to
NC 2 in Pinehurst, including Y-line improvements to SR 1309. These
improvements provide for the five-laning of .19 mile of Morganton Road,
effectively reducing the project length.
B. Historical Resume
The initial project limits were from US 15-501, extended across the
US 1 interchange, and terminating at West Broad Street (SR 2035). Due to
intense public opposition, the project was shortened to delete the section
from US 1 to West Broad Street. Improvements to the US 1/SR 1309
interchange are to be considered under TIP project # U-3324. The widening
of US 15/501 under TIP Project Number R-2004 provided a .19 mile upgrading
of Morganton Road to a five-lane roadway (see Figures 1 and 2).
Morganton Road (SR 1309) in Moore County connects the growing
commercial area on US 15-501 with US 1, and to West Broad Street (SR 2035)
which runs into the Town of Southern Pines. The route is providing an
alternative bypass to the congested US 15-501/US 1 intersection near
Aberdeen.
The 1995-2001 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) calls
for widening the existing two-lane roadway to a multi-lane facility, with
a median where practical. Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin
in Fiscal Year 1995, and construction is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year
1997. The TIP includes a cost estimate of $4,760,000 for the project,
including $1,460,000 for right of way, $3,050,000 for construction, and
$250,000 in prior year planning costs. The current estimated cost of the
recommended improvements is $2,900,000, including $ 450,000 for right of
way costs, $2,200,000 for construction costs, and $250,000 in prior year
costs. The difference between the TIP estimate and the current cost
estimate of the proposed project is $1,860,000.
An Informational Workshop on the project was held in Southern Pines
on July 9, 1992. Local officials support the project, and have entered
into a written agreement with NCDOT to have a median provided where
practical, and will provide the funding to pay for the difference in cost
between a 5-lane and a 4-lane with this median. There was strong public
opposition to the project (the need for the upgrades), specifically any
improvements east of US 1.
C. Proposed Improvements
1. General Location
TIP Project U-2420 is located in southeastern Moore County, and
proposes to upgrade SR 1309 from US 15-501 to US 1 in Southern Pines.
2. Length of Proposed Project
The length of the proposed project is approximately 1.31 miles.
3. Design Speed
The project will be designed for a minimum design speed of
50 MPH. Design speed is a correlation of the physical features of a
highway which influence vehicle operation and reflects the degree of
safety and mobility desired along a highway. Design speed is not to
be interpreted as the recommended or posted speed.
8
4. Cross Section
The proposed project consists of widening SR 1309 as follows:
Section A - Four-lane divided facility with curb and gutter and
a 16-foot raised grassed median. Lanes are to be 12 feet in
width. Symmetrical widening is proposed from the existing.
5-lanes (widened under R-2004) to and across the culvert
carrying an unnamed tributary approximately 1500 feet east of
US 15/501.
From this culvert to the curve west of South Henly Street, all
widening will be completed offset south, to utilize existing
NCDOT right-of-way. Transition will be made at this curve to
widen with two additional lanes to the north side, and one lane
to the south side. This widening will continue in this
configuration to Henley Street.
Section B - Five-lane, 64-foot, face to face of curbs, curb and
gutter facility. Lanes are to be 12 feet in width. From Henley
Street to the west ramp of the US 1/SR 1309 interchange,
widening will be accomplished with an additional two lanes to
the north, and one additional lane to the south. An east-bound
lane-drop will be accomplished onto the south-west interchange
ramp. Likewise, a westbound lane will be added from the ramp in
the north-west quadrant. The center turn lane will be tapered
out to accomplish the transition from five to two lane across
the interchange bridge.
5. Right of Way
The existing right of way width along Morganton Road is
variable. Actual widths are as follows:
Section A - 100-foot right-of-way.
Section B - 60-foot symmetrical existing. 80-foot proposed
(asymmetrically_offset to accommodate above widening).
6. Access Control
No control of access is planned along the project. The
right-of-way at the interchange with US 1 will be modified to
accommodate improvements under-TIP project #U-2324.
7. Intersection Treatment
All existing intersections and interchanges on the project are
to be retained, with the exception of the Pinelawn Cemetery entrance.
This entrance will become a right-in/right-out only due to this
section being improved to a median section, with no median crossover
at this location. There is one existing signal on the route, at
US 15-501 and was previously upgraded. No additional signals are
planned.
9
Accommodation for U-turn movements (for Pinelawn Cemetery) at
SR 1927 should be made in the form of limited pavement widening.
8. Structures
a. Roadway Structures
There is one structure on the project carrying SR 1309
across US.1. It is bridge number 62041, constructed in 1957,
and is 186 feet long and carries two lanes on a roadway width of
28.2 feet. Upgrading is to be addressed in TIP project #U-3324.
b. Drainage Structures
There are 2 existing 72-inch, metal drainage pipes carrying
the unnamed tributary under SR 1309. This structure is located
approximately 250 feet west of SR 1927. It is recommended that
the existing pipes be replaced with a concrete box culvert.
9. Interchange Revisions
No revisions to the US 1 interchange are proposed in this
project. All interchange improvements will be covered by TIP Project
#U-3324.
10. Median Crossovers
Median crossovers will be provided at all major intersections
and at other selected locations in accordance with NCDOT design
standards. Left-turn lanes will be provided at each crossover to
enhance safety and improve traffic operations.
11. Parking
There is no existing parking on the project that would be
affected by the proposed improvements. Parking is not to be provided
for or allowed along the project.
12. Sidewalks
Sidewalks are proposed as part of this project. In accordance
with the NCDOT Pedestrian Policy Guidelines, participation by the
Town of Southern Pines will be 20% of the cost of the sidewalk. The
sidewalk will run the entire length of the project on the south side
of SR 1309.
13. Bicycle Facilities
It was determined by the NCDOT Bicycle Coordinator that no
special accommodations for bicycles is indicated for this project.
14. Landscaping
An urban median-section roadway is being recommended on Section
A to allow for plantings to be installed. However, no special
landscaping material will be provided by NCDOT.
10
15. Special Permits Required
It is anticipated that the project will be authorized under a
Nationwide Permit (33 CFR 330.5)(a)(14), and a 401 Water Quality
Certification be required from the N.C. Department of Environmental,
Health, and Natural Resources.
16. Project Terminals
The western terminal of the project is the multi-lane section of
SR 1309 approximately 1000 feet (.19 mile) east of US 15/501.
The eastern terminal of the project is the west ramp of the
US 1/SR 1309 interchange (see Figure 2).
17. Cost Estimates
Right of Way $ 450,000
Construction $2,200,000
Prior Year Costs $ 250,000
Total $2,900,000
Relocations 0
Construction cost includes engineering and contingencies.
Right-of-way cost includes acquisition and utility costs.
V. ALTERNATIVES
Four alternatives for improving Morganton Road (SR 1309) were
considered in the preparation of this document. A summary of each
alternative is as follows:
A. Widening on Existing Alignment (Recommended) Alternative
This alternative proposed to widen the existing two-lane shoulder
cross section Morganton Road to a multi-lane facility. Proposed cross
sections are as follows:
1. Section A (multi-lanes near US 15-501 to city limits) - a four
lane divided facility with curb and gutter and a 16-foot raised
grassed median is proposed.
2. Section B (city limits to west ramps of US 1/SR 1309
interchange) - A five-lane, 64-foot, face to face of curbs, curb
and gutter facility is proposed.
B. New Location Alternative
This alternative was considered and rejected in the preparation of
this document due to project termini's, surrounding development, cost, and
associated negative environmental impacts.
11
C. Public Transportation Alternative
This alternative was considered, as Moore County provides a public
transit service for its residents. However, due to projected growth, and
ridership projections for transit, this alternative was not seen as a
feasible option.
D. No-Build Alternative
The "no-build" alternative was considered, but rejected since the
project will provide a safe, more efficient route in this area.
VI. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Social Effects
1. Land Use and Planning
a. Status of Local Planning Activities
The proposed improvements are located in the planning and
zoning jurisdiction of the Town of Southern Pines. The Town has
adopted a Land Development Plan, which addresses the goals and
policies toward development in the community. It also enforces
a comprehensive Unified Development Ordinance. The Town has also
adopted a Comprehensive Plan for Recreation, Parks, and
Greenways.
b. Existing Land Use
Land uses vary throughout the project, with concentrations
of commercial uses east of US 1 and at the intersection of
US 15-501 and Morganton Road. A large area of undeveloped land
is located between Pinecrest Plaza and Henley Street, on both
sides of the roadway. Two cemeteries, the Mount Hope Cemetery
and the Pine Lawn Cemetery are accessed from Morganton Road.
The Mount Hope Cemetery, located at the intersection of US 1 and
Morganton Road is owned and operated by the Town of Southern
Pines. Two public housing developments are located on each side
on Morganton Road accessed from South Mechanic Street and Fire
Lane Avenue.
Three recreation sites, Memorial Park, Morganton Road Park,
and the Optimist Field (part of Morganton Road Park) are located
along Morganton Road. Memorial Park is owned by the Moore
County school system, but maintained by the Southern Pines Parks
and Recreation Department through an informal joint use
agreement.
12
The Morganton Road Park is owned and operated by the Town
of Southern Pines. This Park includes both Armory Field and
Optimist Field, as well as other recreational facilities. It
should be noted that the parking lot for the Optimist Field is
located on the site of the former town landfill. The Town had
originally planned to construct soccer fields at the site, but
test borings indicate that the soi1.covering the landfill
deposits is only one and one-half feet thick in some locations.
Morganton Road Park was developed in part with grants from
the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCF). Section 6(f)
of the Act prohibits the conversion of property acquired or
developed with monies from the LWCF to non-recreational purposes
without the approval of the Department of Interior (DOI).
Further, Section 6(f) requires DOI to assure that as a condition
of approval, replacement land of equal value, location, and
utility is provided. Mitigation for lands required for
right-of-way is being pursued and will be addressed in the FONSI
for this project.
C. Future Land Use
According to the Land Development Plan, the approximately
400 acres of recently cleared forest on each side of Morganton
Road is identified as a future growth area where development can
be easily accommodated. More commercial development is
anticipated from US 15-501 to near Henley Street. That area is
zoned PD - Planned Development District, which permits a wide
range and intensity of land uses, from residential to light
industrial. Any new development in this area must be in the
form of a planned development, preferably with mixed land uses.
This policy was established to avoid additional strip commercial
development.
The developed area east of US 1 is designated in the Land
Development Plan and Unified Development Ordinance as a General
Business area. The cemeteries, parks, and the Shaw House site
are designated as Pub lic/Private Conservation areas both in the
Land Development Plan and zoning ordinance.
The Town of Southern Pines Comprehensive Plan for
Recreation, Parks, and Greenways, adopted in 1990,escr ei bs the
planned development of town parks, including the facilities
along Morganton Road. Morganton Road Park consists of 53.6
acres, 40 of which remain undeveloped. The park is currently
divided by both Morganton Road and Henley Street. In addition,
a portion of the parkland is currently leased for
telecommunications towers. In order to consolidate the park
property, the Plan calls for closing Henley Street and extending
Gaines Street to Morganton Road to provide access to the
adjoining neighborhood. The undeveloped parkland west of Henley
Street will ultimately be developed as a major sports complex
including four additional softball fields and three additional
soccer fields, a community center with gym, and a Farmer's
Market.
13
The comprehensive park plan also calls for a pedestrian
facility along Morganton Road to connect Memorial Park, the high
school, and Morganton Road Park. The plan recommends that
Morganton Road be widened to a four lane, median divided
facility to the eastern end of Optimist Field.
d. Farmland
State of North Carolina Executive Order 96, Conservation of
Prime Agricultural and Forest Lands, requires all state agencies
to ensure that their actions will minimize the loss of prime
agricultural lands. Excluded from the policy are all lands
which are developed or committed to development. As discussed
previously, the entire length of proposed project is in an area
either already developed, or committed to development by the
local jurisdiction through its planning activities. Therefore,
further consideration of the impacts to prime agricultural and
forest lands is not required.
2. Relocations
There appears to be no need to relocate any business or
residence to accommodate the project.
3. Public Facilities
No public facilities will be adversely impacted along the
proposed project site. There are two baseball fields on the project,
however they are set back sufficiently to prevent negative impacts.
4. Historic and Cultural Resources
a. Historic Architecture
1. Purpose of Survey and Report
This project is subject to compliance with North
Carolina General Statute 121-12(a) which requires that if a
state action will have an adverse effect upon a property
listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the
North Carolina Historical Commission will be given an
opportunity to comment. This report has been compiled to
comply with the requirements of that statute.
2. Methodology
This survey was conducted by NCDOT and adheres to the
Phase I (Reconnaissance) Survey Procedures for Historic
Architectural Resources by NCDOT.
14
The Town of Southern Pines was comprehensively
surveyed in 1980. The North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) was consulted, and he
identified one Study List property (now a National Register
property) near the general project area. The project area
was surveyed on July 28, 1993 by a NCDOT staff
architectural historian.
3. Summary of Results of Phase I Survey
No properties older than fifty years of age were
identified in the APE.
4. Conclusions
Since no National
located within the APE,
121-12(a) is complete.
Register-listed properties were
compliance with General Statute
b. Archaeological Resources
The State Historic Preservation Office reviewed this
project and recommended that no archaeological survey be
conducted due to the location and scope of the project. It is
unlikely that this project will have any adverse impacts on
significant archaeological resources and therefore no further
investigations are required.
B. Environmental Effects
1. Introduction
An ecological survey was conducted January 7, 1993 to
identify vegetative communities and wildlife species contained
therein. Vegetative communities and wildlife were inventoried
and mapp uring on-site surveys. Wetlands were identified,
using m hods 'n the "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation
Manua l"r'{1987). In-house preparatory work was done prior to the
field Vlsit. he Moore County soil survey, National Wetland
Inventory\OYI) maps, the hydric soils list for Moore County and
USGS "Southern Pines" quadrangle map was studied to identify
potential wetland sites. "Classifications and Water Quality
Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Lumber River Basin"
(N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health and Natural Resources) was
consulted to determine best usage classifications for area water
resources. N. C. Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) and U. S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) files were consulted to
determine if any protected flora or fauna occurs in the project
area.
15
2. Physical Resources
a. Study Area
Subject project lies within and to the west of Southern
Pines, located in Moore County. Moore County is located in the
Coastal Plain physiographic province, within the sandhills.
region of southeastern North Carolina. The relief of the county
is gently sloping to sloping.
b. Topography and Soils
The Sandhills section of North Carolina is a unique part of
the Atlantic Coastal Plain. The sandy sediments support
longleaf pine, turkey oak, wiregrass vegetation over a variable
topography. Gently undulating, sandy, upland divides may slope
down to adjacent major streams in a sequence of differing
elevations. These divides are undulating plains with numerous
depressions, and sandy soils such as Vaucluse and Candor are
major units in these areas. Valley bottoms are nearly level.
Sediments are fluvial and marine in nature, ranging from
arkosic, feldspar rich sands to micaceous compact clays. The
underlying basement rocks are a conglomerate of pebbles and
cobbles.
Table 1. SOIL MAPPING UNITS IN STUDY AREA ,
SOIL SERIES CLASSIFICATION
Candor-Urban Land Complex Non-hydric
2 to 12% slopes
Candor sand Non-hydric
4 to 12% slopes
Ailey loamy sand, Non-hydric
2 to o slopes
Vaucluse loamy sand, Non-hydric
8 to 15% slopes
HYDRIC INCLUSION
C. Water Resources
Subject project intercepts one unnamed tributary located
within the Lumber River drainage basin-- -Tt s presently being
channeled under the existing roadway by double corrugated pipes.
The headwaters of this tributary are located just upstream of
the project area. Downstream of the project area, this
16
tributary is dammed and forms Watson 1eke. Stream width is
approximately 3U-U6-7r5 few across. The substrate is sandy and
the stream is bordered by a riparian fringe.
Vle amed tributary has a "best usage" classification of
C, ce to U. S. Hwy. 15-501 as designated by NC-DEHNR.
C1 gnates waterssuitable for secondary recreation,.
aqpropagation and survival, fishing, wildlife and
agriculture.
The Bethic Macroinvertebrate Ambient NetworI?'(BMAN)?
addresses long term trends in water quality at fixed monitoring
sites by the sampling for selected benthic macroinvertebrates.
These organisms are sensitive to very subtle changes in water
quality. Good water quality is associated with both high taxa
richness values (the number of different types of organisms) and
the presence of many intolerant forms. No data is available for
unnamed tributary.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource
Waters (ORW), nor Water Supplies (WS I, or WS II) will be
impacted by the proposed project, nor are any of these waters
located within one mile of the project area. No National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permits have
been issued within the project area.
d. Water Resource Impacts
Impacts to water resources can have far reaching effects,
both spatially (distance from the initial disturbance) and
temporally (up the food chain). Impacts to water resources
include the following:
- Increased sedimentation from construction and/or erosion.
- Changes in light incidence due to vegetation removal.
- Alterations of water level due to interruptions or
additions to surficial and/or groundwater flow.
Consideration will be given to the use of sediment control
devices such as vegetated berms, or filter basins to ameliorate
the impacts from non-point dischargers.
3. Biotic Resources
a. Plant Communities
Distribution and composition of plant communities
throughout the project area reflect the topographic positioning,
hydrologic influences, and past and present land use practices.
Where applicable, the following community profile descriptions
have been adopted and modified from the NCNHP classification
scheme (Schafale and Weakley 1990).
17
Xeric Sandhill Shrub
Xeric Sandhill Scrub communities occur on coarse, deep,
infertile Candor and Vaucluse sands on upland ridgetops and
slopes in the project area. They are excessively drained and
are low diversity communities, supporting an open canopy of
mature longleaf pine Pinus palustris) with an open to dense
understory of turkey oak uercus laevis). Wire grass Aristida
stricta) is the dominant herb, with patches of trailing arbutus
E i aea repens) encountered occasionally. Broomsedge
(Andropogon virginicus) is prominent along the edges of this
community.
Large blocks of this community type have been logged in the
past, leaving thick stands of longleaf saplings and turkey oaks.
The majority of the predominant wire grass ground layer is
undisturbed. Broomsedge is much more prevalent in these open,
logged areas.
Man Dominated Communities
Residential neighborhoods, commercial establishments, and
cemeteries comprise the Man-dominated communities in the project
area.
Residential and commercial establishments are Man-dominated
lands where man's structures or activities preclude natural
plant succession. Maintained shoulder slopes, grounds and lawns
support turf of centipede as the dominant vegetative component.
Red cedar (Juniperus virginiana) and longleaf pine are common.
Mowing is frequently associated with this community. Because of
routine management practices, this community is considered to
retain only isolated remnants of its native character, providing
little of its initial value as wildlife habitat.
Two cemeteries are located within the project area. Many
longleaf pines and red cedars are present as are introduced
landscape ornamentals. Dogwoods Cornus florida), American
holly Ilex opaca), and nandina Nandina domestica) from lesser
components.
Riparian Fringe (Palustrine, forested, deciduous,
intermittently flooded (PF06F)
A fringe of riparian vegetation is associated with unnamed
tributary. Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera), scattered
loblolly pine and red maple Acer rubrum) form the canopy, with
sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana) black willow Salix nigra), and
redbay Persea borbonia) comprising the understory. The "weedy"
introduced Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) is common.
18
b. Wildlife-Terrestrial
The semi-rural nature of the project area, combined with a
mix of plant community patterns, provide a variety of
opportunities for various forms of wildlife. Forested tracts
have all the necessary components (food, water, protective
coverage) to support a number of small mammals and birds. Mes,ic
woodlands bordering small tributaries also function as travel
corridors for transient species.
Common mammals likely to inhabit the project area include
the white-tale deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and fox squirrel
Sciurus niger).
Avifaunal abundance is typical in the sandhills region of
North Carolina where a patchwork of habitat types is available.
Common passerine species which were sighted or expected to
occur, include the pileated woodpecker.(Dryocopus pileatus),
yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus varius), eastern bluebird
Sialia sialis), Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus), pine
warbler (Dendrolica palmarum) and rufoussided towhee Pi ilo
fuscus).
Eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus), southeastern
five-lined skink Eumeces inexpectatus), worm snake (Carphophis
amoenus), black racer Coluber constrictor), and eastern box
turtle (Terrapene carolina) are but a few reptiles that may be
found in the project area.
Likely amphibians that may occur in the project area
include the pickerel frog Rana palustris), upland chorus frog
(Pseudacris triseriata), northern cricket from Acris
crepitans), slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus), marbled
salamander (Ambystoma opacum), and the three-lined salamander
Eur cea guttolineata).
C. Aquatic Life
The small headwater tributary traversed by the alignment is
intermittent in nature, lacking permanent flow. Limited size
and the ephemeral nature of the water supply restricts the
ability of these systems to maintain viable populations of fish
and macroinvertebrates.
Amphibians, in particular, are highly water-dependent for
completion of larval stages in their life cycle. Some species
are totally aquatic. Spring peeper H la crucifer), bullfrog
Rana catesbeiana) pickerel frog (R. palustris), dwarf
salamander (Desmognathus auriculatus), yellowbelly slider
(Chrysemys scripta), and northern water snake Nerodiea
sipedon), are but a few of the reptiles and amphibians likely to
be found in the project area.
19
d. Impacts to Biotic Resources
Impacts on natural communities are reflective of the
relative abundance of each system present in the study corridor.
Table 2 summarizes potential losses which could result from
roadway development. Calculations are based on right of way
widths of 80 and 100 feet as defined on page 1.
Table 2. ANTICIPATED PLANT COMMUNITY IMPACTS
PLANT COMMUNITY ESTIMATED IMPACTS
Man-dominated Areas 8.7
Xeric Sandhill Scrub 15:-5
Riparian Forest 0.1
Total Acres
Primary impacts will occur to forested communities in the
corridor. These communities will be lost in terms of future
biological production. Resident species will be displaced or
eliminated by construction. Many mobile animals such as deer,
opossums, rodents, and passerine birds are cosmopolitan in
nature, easily adapting to urbanization. However, larger
mammals which seek refuge in large undisturbed areas, may
experience disruptions in mating, feeding or travel patterns as
their habitat range is reduced or fragmented.
New construction in wetland systems will affect aquatic
organisms. Dredging, filling, pile-driving operations, slope
stabilization and land clearing are construction activities,
which can result in the direct loss of benthic organisms due to
an increase in'silt load. The removal of benthic organisms
reduces the potential food supply for fish and other
invertebrates.
Siltation has many adverse impacts on fish and benthos:
decreases the depth of light penetration; inhabiting plant and
algal growth, which is a food source; clogs the filtration
apparatus of filter-feeding benthos and the gills of fish;
buries benthic organisms on the bottom, cutting them off from a
food source; adversely effects preferred benthic substrate; and
spoils downstream spawning beds for fish.
4. Special Topics
a. Jurisdictional Waters of the U. S. Impacts
Surface waters and their associated wetlands fall under the
broad category of "Waters of the United States" as defined in 33
CFR 328.3. The US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) takes
20
jurisdiction over the discharge of dredged or fill material into
these waters as authorized by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act.
Unnamed tributary has 0.1 acre of associated wetlands to
the north of the existing alignment, based on 100 feet of right
of way. Jurisdictional wetlands in the study area are
categorized as Palustrine, forested, deciduous, intermittently
flooded (PF06F) as defined by Cowardin et al (1979). The
wetland community associated with unnamed tributary was
identified in the project corridor on the basis of low soil
chroma values, hydrophytic vegetation and the presence of
hydrology or hydrological indicators, such as stained, matted
vegetation, high water marks on trees, buttressed tree bases and
surface roots.
b. Permit Requirements
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean
i Water Act (33 U.S.C 1344), a permit will be required from the
COE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters
of the United States". Based upon site location and estimated
acreage involved, it is anticipated that the unnamed tributary
crossing will be authorized by Nationwide Permit (33 CFR 330.5)
(a) (14). Nationwide #14 allows for minor road crossing fills
of non-tidal "Waters of the United States", provided that the
fill does not exceed one third acre; less than 200 linear feet
of wetlands, fill does not restrict flows; and the width of
fill is limited to the minimum necessary for the actual
crossing. Permit conditions applicable to this crossing are met
as outlined in [33 CFR 330.5(b)] and [33 CFR 330.6(a)].
However, final permit decisions are left to the discretionary
authority of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).
A 401 Water Quality Certification administered through the
N. C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
will be required. This certificate is issued for any activity
which may result in a discharge into waters for which a federal
permit is required.
C. Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is
permits or General permits are
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
Protection Agency (EPA) and the
authority in these matters rests
not required where Nationwide
authorized, according to the
between the Environmental
COE. Final discretionary
with the COE.
RARE AND PROTECTED SPECIES
The following discussions focus on federal and state
protected species, as well as federal Candidate species, which
are afforded no legal protection.
21
d. Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and
Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended.
Information received from the USFWS reports several
federally Endangered species for Moore County (Table 4) as of
January 7, 1993.
Table 4. FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Moore County
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded Woodpecker E
Notropis mekistocholas Cape Fear shiner E
Lysimachia asperulaefolia Rough-leaved Loosestrife E
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E
Schwalbea americana American chaffseed E
A brief description and habitat requirements for the above
listed species are summarized below.
Notropis mekistocholas (Cape Fear shiner) E
Animal Family: Cyprinidae
Date Listed: 9/26/87
Distribution in N.C.: Chatham, Harnett, Lee, Moore,
Randolph.
The Cape Fear shiner is limited to three populations in
North Carolina. The strongest population of the Cape Fear
shiner is in Chatham and Lee Counties from the Locksville dam
upstream to Rocky River and Bear Creek. Another population is
located above the Rocky River Hydroelectric Dam in Chatham
County, and the third population is found in the Deep River
system in Randolph and Moore Counties.
The Cape Fear shiner is a small, moderately stocky minnow
that rarely exceeds 5 cm in length. Its body is flushed with a
pale silvery yellow, and a black band runs along its sides
(Snelson 1971). The fins are yellowish and somewhat pointed.
The upperlip is black and the lower lip has a black bar along
its margin. It is easily distinguished from other similar
species by having an elongated digestive tract to accommodate
its diet of plant material.
22
Cape Fear shiner habitat occurs in streams with gravel,
cobble, or bounder substrates. It is most often observed
inhabiting slow pools, riffles, and slow runs associated with
water willow beds. Juveniles can be found inhabiting
slackwater, among large rock outcrops and in flooded side
channels and pools.
Biological Conclusion: Subject project crosses an unnamed
intermittent tributary in the Lumber River system with sandy
sediments. No suitable habitat is present for the Cape Fear
shiner. Subject project will not impact the species.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) E
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/10
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen,
Brunswick, Camden, Carteret, Chatham, Columbus,
Craven, Cumberland, Dare, Duplin, Forsyth, Gates,
Halifax, Harnett, Hertford, Hoke, Hyde, Johnston,
Jones, Lee, Lenoir, Montgomery, Moore, Nash, New
Hanover, Northampton, Onslow, Orange, Pamlico, Pender,
Perquimans, Pitt, Richmond, Robeson, Sampson,
Scotland, Tyrrell, Wake, Wayne, Wilson.
The red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) once occurred from New
Jersey to southern Florida and west to eastern Texas. It
occurred inland in Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and
Missouri. Now found only in coastal states of its historic
range and inland in southeastern Oklahoma and southern Arkansas.
In North Carolina moderate populations are found in the
sandhills and in the southern coastal plain are believed to be
relics of former populations.
The adult RCW's plumage is entirely black and white except
for small red streaks on the sides of the nape in the male. The
back is black and white with horizontal stripes and the breast
and underside is white with streaked flanks. There is a large
white cheek patch surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
RCW's use open old growth stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine Pinus palustris), for foraging and
nesting habitat. A forested stand must contain at least 50%
pine, and be contiguous with other stands to be appropriate
habitat for the RCW. These birds nest exclusively in trees that
are > 60 years old and are contiguous with pine stands at least
30 years of age.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees and
usually in trees that are infected with the fungus that causes
red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies from 12-100
ft. above the ground and average 30-50 ft. high. They can be
identified by a large encrustation of running sap that surrounds
the tree. This may be used as a defense against possible
23
predators. A clan of woodpeckers usually consists of one
breeding pair and the offspring from previous years. The eggs
are laid in April, May, and June and hatch 38 days later.
Clutch size is from 3-5 eggs. All members of the clan share in
raising the young. Red-cockaded woodpeckers feed mainly on
insects but may feed on seasonal wild fruits.
Suitable nesting and foraging habitat was identified within
the proposed right-of-way of SR 1390 and it was determined that
clearing for roadway expansion would eliminate narrow strips of
this habitat.
To determine if RCW colonies are present, one-half mile
surveys (from proposed impact areas) were conducted by NCDOT
biologists walking north-south line transects, spaced 50 to 100
yards apart (depending on midstory density). Surveys were
conducted January 25 and 26, 1993, and were concentrated in the
vicinity of Mount Hope Cemetery, South Henley Street, the
intersection of SR 1930 and SR 1931, and Pinelawn Cemetery. No
colony sites were found. A number of active colonies have been
documented west of US 15-501, by Dr. Jay Carter; the closest
foraging circle 62. Cavity trees in foraging circle 62 fall
just outside of the one-half mile survey area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No impacts to the red-cockaded
woodpecker are anticipated from project concentration.
Lysimachia asperulaefolia (rough-leaved loosestrife) E
Plant Family: Primulaceae
Federally Listed: June 12, 1987
Flowers Present: June
Distribution in N. C.: Beaufort, Bladen, Brunswick,
Carteret, Columbus, Cumberland, Hoke, Moore, Onslow,
Pamlico, Pender, Richmond, Scotland.
This plant which is endemic to the coastal plain and
sandhills of North and South Carolina and is currently found in
nine locations in North Carolina and is believed to be
extirpated from South Carolina.
This perennial herb has slender stems that grow to a height
of three to six dm from a rhizome. The whorled leaves encircle
the stem at intervals below the showy yellow flowers, and
usually occur in threes or fours. Flower are borne in terminal
racemes of five petaled flowers. Fruits are present from July
through October.
This species occurs in the ecotones or edges between
longleaf pine uplands and pond pine pocosins (areas of dense
shrub and vine growth usually on a wet, peaty, poorly drained
soil), on moist to seasonally saturated sands and on shallow
organic soils overlaying sand. It has also been found to occur
on deep peat in the low shrub community of large Carolina bays
24
(shallow, elliptical, poorly drained depression of unknown
origins). The areas it occurs in are fire maintained. It is
rarely associated with hardwood stands and prefers acidic soils.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No suitable habitat is present in the
project area for this species. No impact to the rough-leaved
loosestrife will occur from project construction.
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac) E
Plant Family: Anacardiaceae
Federally Listed: September 28, 1989
Flowers Present: June
Distribution in N. C.: Columbus, Davie, Durham, Franklin,
Hoke, Moore, Orange, Richmond, Robeson, Scotland,
Wake, Wilson.
Michaux's sumac was know historically from the inner
coastal plain and lower piedmont of North Carolina, South
Carolina, and Georgia. This species is believed to be
extirpated in South Carolina. It is currently known from only
21 populations in North Carolina and Georgia. In North Carolina
populations of Michaux's sumac still exist in Hoke, Richmond,
Scotland, Franklin, Davie, Robeson, Moore, and Wake Counties.
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizomatous shrub
that grows 0.2 to 1.0 meters in height. The narrowly winged or
wingless rachis supports 9 to 13 sessile, oblong to
oblong-lanceolate leaflets that are each 4 to 9 cm long, 2 to 5
cm wide, acute and acuminate. The bases of the leaves are
rounded and their edges are simply or doubly serrate. It bears
small flowers in a terminal, erect, dense cluster. The flowers
are greenish to white in color. Fruits, which develop from
August to September on female plants, are a red densely
short-pubescent drupe, 5 to 6 mm across.
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods. It is
dependent on some sort of disturbance to maintain the openness
of its habitat. It usually grows in association with basic
soils and occurs on sand or sandy loams. It grows only in open
habitat where it can get full sunlight and it does not compete
well with other species such as Japanese honeysuckle that it is
.often associated with.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Suitable habitat is present along the
full length of the alignment. A plant by plant survey was
conducted January 13, 1993 within the proposed right of way
limits to confirm or refute the presence of this species.
Michaux's sumac has distinct morphological characteristics and
is easily identified this time of year. No individuals were
found. Subject project will not impact this species.
25
Schwalbea americana (American chaffseed) PE
Plant Family: Scrophulariaceae
Federally Listed: October 1991
Flower Present: Late May - early June
Distribution in N.C.: Bladen, Cumberland, Hoke Moore,
Pender, Scotland.
This species is known historically from Alabama,
Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, New
York, Tennessee, and Virginia in which it has been extirpated.
The only confirmed North Carolina population is on Fort Bragg
military base in Hoke County.
The American chaffseed is an erect herb whose stems branch
only at the base (if at all) and grow to a height of 3-8 dm.
The entire plant is pubescent, with upwardly curving hairs. The
narrow leaves are alternate,e lance-shaped to elliptic,
stalkless, and 2 to 5 centimeters long. The leaves are three
veined and become progressively smaller towards the top. It
bears solitary flowers in the axils of the uppermost leaves.
The purplish-yellow flowers are arranged into racemes. The
fruits are a long narrow capsule, enclosed in a loose-fitting
sack-like structure.
This species occurs in open, moist pine flatwoods, fire
maintained savannas, ecotonal areas between peaty wetlands and
open grass-sedge systems. Soils are generally sandy, acidic,
and seasonally moist to dry. Fire is important in the
maintenance of open habitat for the American chaffseed.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Xeric habitat present in the project
area does not provide suitable habitat for this species. No
impacts from project construction are anticipated.
Federal Candidate Species
The USFWS provided information on several Candidate (C)
species that may occur in the area. These are species which are
not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act and are
not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until
they are formally proposed or listed as Threatened or
Endangered. As of January 7, 1993, the following Candidate
species are listed for Moore County. The habitat column
indicates the presence or absence of suitable habitat in the
project area. No surveys were conducted for individual species.
26
Table 5.
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Aimophila aestivalis
Pituophis m. melanoleucus
Gom hus parvidens
carolinus
Amorpha georgiana
georginiana
Eupatorium resinosum
Kalmia cuneata
Lindera subcoriacea
Oxypolis ternata
Conferva pondweed
Rudbeckia heliopsidus
Stylisma p. var.
pickeringii
Pyxidanthera barbulata
var. brevifolia
Solidago verna
Dionaea muscipula
Astragulus michauxii
FEDERAL CANDIDATE SPECIES
Moore County
COMMON NAME
Bachman's sparrow
Northern pine snake
Sandhills clubtail
dragonfly
Georgia leadplant
Pine barrens boneset
White wicky
Bog spicebush
Savanna cowbane
Potamogeton confervoides
Sun-facing coneflower
Pickering's morning glory
Well's sandhill pixie-moss
Spring flowering goldenrod
Venus flytrap
Sandhills milkvetch
HABITAT
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
* Category 2: Taxon for which there is some evidence of vulnerability,
but for which there are not enough data to support listing as endangered
or threatened at this time.
e. State Protected Species
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered
(E), Threatened (T) or Special Concern (SC) are granted
protection by the State Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979, administered and
enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and
the NC Department of Agriculture.
A review of the NC Natural Heritage Program database,
revealed no known occurrences of protected species within the
project area. However, the USFWS provided information on
several Candidate (C) species that occur in Moore County that
may occur in the project corridor. The following state
designations for these species are provided in Table 6.
27
Table 6. STATE-PROTECTED SPECIES
Moore County
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS/RANK.
Aimophila aestivalis Bachman's sparrow SC/S2B, S3N
Pituophis m. melanoleucus. Northern pine snake SC/S3
Eupatorium resinosum Pine barrens boneset E-SC
Kalmia cuneata White wicky E-SC/S2
Lindera subcoriacea Bog spicebush E/S1
Rudbeckia heliopsidus Sn-facing coneflower T/S1
Stylisma p. var.
pickeringii Pickering's morning glory E/S2
Pyxidanthera barbulata
var. brevifolia Well's sandhill pixie-moss E/S2
Solidago verna Spring flowering goldenrod E/S2
NC Rank Designations: S1 = Critically imperiled in North Carolina because
of extreme rarity (5 or fewer occurrences or very few remaining
individuals); S2 = Imperiled in North Carolina because of rarity (6 to 20
occurrences); S3 = Rare or uncommon in NC (21 to 100 occurrences).
Suitable habitat requirements for these species is
summarized below. No surveys were conducted for the species or
suitable habitat.
Bachman's sparrow
Habitat: open long-leaf pine forests, old fields
(Breeding season only)
Northern pine snake
Habitat: dry and sandy woods, mainly in.pine/oak sandhills
Pine barrens boneset
Habitat: seepage bogs, beaver ponds
White wicky
Habitat: pocosins
Bog spicebush
Habitat: streamhead pocosins, white cedar swamps, bogs
Sun-facing coneflower
Habitat: moist pine flatwoods
Pickering's morning glory
Habitat: sandhills
28
Well's sandhills pixie moss
Habitat: sandhills
Spring Flowering Goldenrod
Habitat: dry pinelands
C. Air and Noise Quality
1. Air Quality Analysis
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from
industrial and internal combustion engines are the most prevalent
sources. Other origins of common outdoor air pollution are solid
waste disposal and any form of fire. The impact resulting from
highway construction ranges from intensifying existing air pollution
problems to improving the ambient air conditions. The traffic is the
center of concern when determining the impact of a new highway
facility or the improvement of an old highway facility. Motor
vehicles emit carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons
(HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (SO ), and lead (Pb) (listed
in order of decreasing emission rate). Auto?obiles are considered to
be the major source of CO in the project area. For this reason, most
of the analysis presented is concerned with determining expected
carbon monoxide levels in the vicinity of the project due to traffic
flow.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration for the
receptor closest to the highway project, two concentration components
must be used: local and background. The local concentration is
defined as the CO emissions from cars operating on highways in the
near vicinity (i.e., distances within 100 meters) of the receptor
location. The background concentration is defined by the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources as
"the concentration of a pollutant at a point that is the result of
emissions outside the local vicinity; that is, the concentration at
the upwind edge of the local sources."
In this study, the local concentration was determined by the
NCDOT Traffic Noise/Air Quality Staff using line source computer
modeling and the background concentration was obtained from the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
(NCDEHNR). Once the two concentration components were resolved, they
were added together to determine the ambient CO concentration for the
receptor in question and to compare to the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS).
Automobiles are regarded as sources of hydrocarbons and nitrogen
oxides. Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides emitted from cars are
carried into the atmosphere where they react with sunlight to form
ozone and nitrogen dioxide. Area-wide automotive emissions of HC and
NO are expected to decrease in the future due to the continued
installation and maintenance of pollution control devices on new
cars. Hence, the ambient ozone and nitrogen dioxide levels in the
atmosphere should continue to decrease as a result of the
improvements on automobile emissions.
29
The, photochemical reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide
require several hours to occur. For this reason, the peak levels of
ozone generally occur 10 to 20 kilometers downwind of the source of
hydrocarbon emissions. Urban areas as a whole are regarded as
sources of hydrocarbons, not individual streets and highways. The
emissions of all sources in an urban area mix together in the
atmosphere, and in the presence of sunlight, the mixture reacts to
form ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and other photochemical oxidants. The
best example of this type of air pollution is the smog which forms in
Los Angeles, California.
Automobiles are not regarded as significant sources of
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources
account for less than 7 percent of particulate matter emissions and
less than 2 percent of sulfur dioxide emissions. Particulate matter
and sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the result of
non-highway sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, and agricultural).
Because emissions of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide from
automobiles are very low, there is no reason to suspect that traffic
on the project will cause air quality standards for particulate
matter and sulfur dioxide to be exceeded.
Automobiles without catalytic converters can burn regular
gasoline. The burning of regular gasoline emits lead as a result of
regular gasoline containing tetraethyl lead which is added by
refineries to increase the octane rating of the fuel. Newer cars
with catalytic converters burn unleaded gasoline eliminating lead
emissions. Also, the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has required the reduction in the lead content of leaded
gasolines. The overall average lead content of gasoline in 1974 was
2 grams per gallon. By 1989, this composite average had dropped to
0.01 grams per gallon. In the future, lead emissions are expected to
decrease as more cars use unleaded fuels and as the lead content of
leaded gasoline is reduced. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
make the sale, supply, or transport of leaded gasoline or lead
additives unlawful after December 31, 1995. Because of these
reasons, it is not expected that traffic on the proposed project will
cause the NAAQS for lead to be exceeded.
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine
future CO concentrations resulting from the proposed highway
improvements. "CAL3QHC - A Modeling Methodology For Predicting
Pollutant Concentrations Near Roadway Intersections" was used to
predict the CO concentration at the nearest sensitive receptor to the
project.
Inputs into the mathematical model to estimate hourly CO
concentrations consisted of a level roadway under normal conditions
with predicted traffic volumes, vehicle emission factors, and
worst-case meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are based
on the annual average daily traffic projections. The traffic volume
used for the CAL3QHC model was the highest volume.within any
alternative. Carbon monoxide vehicle emission factors were
30
calculated for the completion year of 1997 and the design year of
2017 using the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission Factors" and
the MOBILE5A mobile source emissions computer model.
The background CO concentration for the project area was
estimated to be 1.9 parts per million (ppm). Consultation with the
Air Quality Section, Division of Environmental Management, North,
Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.9 ppm is suitable for
most suburban/rural areas.
The worst-case air quality receptor was determined to be
receptor #3 at a distance of 135' from the centerline of the roadway.
The "build" one-hour CO concentrations for the nearest sensitive
receptor for the years of 1995 and 2015 are shown in the following
table.
One Hour CO Concentrations (PPM)
Nearest
Sensitive Build No-Build
Receptor 1995 2015 1995 2015
R-3 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.6
Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS
(maximum permitted for 1-hour averaging period = 35 ppm; 8-hour
averaging period = 9 ppm) indicates no violation of these standards.
Since the results of the worst-case 1-hour CO analysis is less than 9
ppm, it can be concluded that the 8-hour CO level does not exceed the
standard. See Tables Al and A2 for input data and output.
The project is located in the Sandhills Air Quality Control
Region. The ambient air quality for Moore County has been determined
to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Since this project is located in an area where the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control
measures, the conformity procedures of Title 23, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Part 770 do not apply to this project.
During construction of the proposed project, all materials
resulting from clearing and grubbing, demolition or other operations
will be removed from the project, burned or otherwise disposed of by
the contractor. Any burning will be done in accordance with
applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North
Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
Care will be taken to insure that burning will be done at the
greatest practical distance from dwellings and not when atmospheric
conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public. Burning
31
will only be utilized under constant surveillance. Also during
construction, measures will be taken to reduce the dust generated by
construction when the control of dust is necessary for the protection
and comfort of motorists or area residents. This evaluation
completes the assessment requirements of Title 23, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Part 770, and no additional reports are required.
2. Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise Analysis
This analysis was performed to determine the effect of the
proposed widening of SR 1309 in Moore County on noise levels in the
immediate project area (Figure N1 in the Appendix). This
investigation includes an inventory of existing noise sensitive land
uses and a field survey of ambient (existing) noise levels in the
study area. It also includes a comparison of the predicted noise
levels and the ambient noise levels to determine if traffic noise
impacts can be expected resulting from the proposed project. Traffic
noise impacts are determined from the current procedures for the
abatement of highway traffic noise and construction noise, appearing
as Part 772 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations. If
traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of
alternative noise abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the
noise impacts must be considered.
a. Characteristics of Noise
Noise is basically defined as unwanted sound. It is
emitted from many sources including airplanes, factories,
railroads, power generation plants, and highway vehicles.
Highway noise, or traffic noise, is usually a composite of
noises from engine exhaust, drive train, and tire-roadway
interaction.
The magnitude of noise is usually described by its sound
pressure. Since the range of sound pressure varies greatly, a
logarithmic scale is used to relate sound pressures to some
common reference level, usually the decibel (0). Sound
pressures described in decibels are called sound pressure levels
and are often defined in terms of frequency weighted scales (A,
B, C, or D).
The weighted-A decibel scale is used almost exclusively in
vehicle noise measurements because it places the most emphasis
on the frequency range to which the human ear is most sensitive
(1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound levels measured using a weighted-A
decibel scale are often expressed as dBA. Throughout this
report, all noise levels will be expressed in dBA's. Several
examples of noise pressure levels in dBA are listed in Table N1
in the Appendix.
Review of Table N1 indicates that most individuals in
urbanized areas are exposed to fairly high noise levels from
many sources as they go about their daily activities. The
degree of disturbance or annoyance of unwanted sound depends
32
essentially on three things: 1) the amount and nature of the
intruding noise, 2) the relationship between the background
noise and the intruding noise, and 3) the type of activity
occurring where the noise is heard.
Over time, particularly if the noises occur at predicted
intervals and are expected, individuals tend to accept the
noises which intrude into their lives. Attempts have been made
to regulate many of these types of noises including airplane
noise, factory noise, railroad noise, and highway traffic noise.
In relation to highway traffic noise, methods of analysis and
control have developed rapidly over the past few years.
b. Noise Abatement Criteria
In order to determine whether highway noise levels are or
are not compatible with various land uses, the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) has developed noise abatement criteria
(NAC) and procedures to be used in the planning and design of
highways. These abatement criteria and procedures are set forth
in the aforementioned Federal reference (Title 23 CFR Part 772).
A summary of the noise abatement criteria for various land uses
is presented in Table N2 in the Appendix. The Leq, or
equivalent sound level, is the level of constant sound which in
a given situation and time period has the same energy as does
time varying sound. In other words, the fluctuating sound
levels of traffic noise are represented in terms of a steady
noise level with the same energy content.
C. Ambient Noise Levels
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of
the project to determine the existing background noise levels.
The purpose of this noise level information was to quantify the
existing acoustic environment and to provide a base for
assessing the impact of noise level increases. The field data
was also used to establish ambient noise levels for residences
and businesses in the vicinity of the project. The existing Leq
noise level along SR 1309 as measured at 50 feet from the
roadway ranged from 61.5 to 65.1 dBA.
The existing roadway and traffic conditions were used with
the most current traffic noise prediction model in order to
calculate existing noise levels for comparison with noise levels
actually measured. The calculated existing noise levels were
within 0.4 and 2.0 dBA of the measured noise levels for the
three locations where noise measurements were obtained.
Differences in dBA levels can be attributed to "bunching" of
vehicles, low traffic volumes, and actual vehicle speeds versus
the computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles and single vehicular
speed.
33
d. Procedure for Predictina Future Noise Levels
In general, the traffic situation is composed of a large
number of variables which describe different cars driving at
different speeds through a continual changing highway
configuration and surrounding terrain. Due to the complexity of
the problem, certain assumptions and simplifications must be.
made to predict highway traffic noise.
The procedure used to predict future noise levels in this
study was the Noise Barrier Cost Reduction Procedure, STAMINA
2.0 and OPTIMA (revised March, 1983). The BCR (Barrier Cost
Reduction) procedure is based upon the FHWA Highway Traffic
Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-17-108). The BCR traffic noise
prediction model uses the number and type of vehicles on the
planned roadway, their speeds, the physical characteristics of
the road (curves, hills, depressed, elevated, etc.), receptor
location and height, and, if applicable, barrier type, barrier
ground elevation, and barrier top elevation.
In this regard, it is to be noted that only preliminary
alignment was available for use in this noise analysis. The
proposed project is to upgrade the existing two lane SR 1309 to
a multi-lane facility from US 15-501 to SR 2035. The proposed
cross section is a four lane divided section with a sixteen foot
raised median from US 15-501 to the Southern Pines city limits,
and a five lane curb and gutter section from the city limits to
the end of project. Only those existing natural or man-made
barriers were included in setting up the model. The roadway
sections and proposed intersections were assumed to be flat and
at-grade. Thus, this analysis represents the "worst-case"
topographical conditions. The noise predictions made in this
report are highway-related noise predictions for the traffic
conditions during the year being analyzed.
Peak hour design and level-of-service (LOS) C volumes were
compared, and the volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions
were used with the proposed posted speed limits. Hence, during
all other time periods, the noise levels will be no greater than
those indicated in this report.
The STAMINA 2.0 computer model was utilized in order to
determine the number of land uses (by type) which would be
impacted during the peak hour of the design year 2015. A land
use is considered to be impacted when exposed to noise levels
approaching or exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria
and/or predicted to sustain a substantial noise increase. The
basic approach was to select receptor locations such as 25, 50,
100, 200, 400, 800, and 1600 feet from the center of the near
traffic lane (adaptable to both sides of the roadway). The
location of these receptors were determined by the changes in
projected traffic volumes and/or the posted speed limits along
the proposed project. The result of this procedure was a grid
of receptor points along the project. Using this grid, noise
levels were calculated for each identified receptor.
34
The maximum number of receptors in each activity category
that are predicted to become impacted by future traffic noise is
shown in Table N4 in the Appendix. These are noted in terms of
those receptors expected to experience traffic noise impacts by
approaching or exceeding the FHWA NAC or by a substantial
increase in exterior noise levels. Under Title 23 CFR Part 772,
there are no impacted receptors within the project limits.
Other information included in Table N4 is the maximum extent of
the 72 and 67 dBA noise level contours. This information should
assist local authorities in exercising land use control over the
remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway within local
jurisdiction. For example, with the proper information on noise,
the local authorities can prevent further development of
incompatible activities and land uses with the predicted noise
levels of an adjacent highway.
Table N5 indicates the exterior traffic noise level
increases for the identified receptors in each roadway section.
Predicted noise level increases for this project range from +2
to +8 dBA. When real-life noises are heard, it is possible to
barely detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5 dBA change is
more readily noticeable. A 10 dBA change is judged by most
people as a doubling or a halving of the loudness of the sound.
e. Traffic Noise Impact Analysis
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic
noise levels either: [a] approach or exceed the FHWA noise
abatement criteria (with "approach" meaning within 1 dBA of the
Table N2 value), or [b] substantially exceed the existing noise
levels. The NCDOT definition of substantial increase is shown
in the lower portion of Table N2. Consideration for noise
abatement measures must be given to receptors which fall in
either category; however, there are no impacted receptors in the
project limits.
Highway Alignment
Highway alignment selection involves the horizontal or
vertical orientation of the proposed improvements in such a way
as to minimize impacts and costs. The selection of alternative
alignments for noise abatement purposes must consider the
balance between noise impacts and other engineering and
environmental parameters. For noise abatement, horizontal
alignment selection is primarily a matter of siting the roadway
at a sufficient distance from noise sensitive areas. Changing
the highway alignment is not a viable alternative for noise
abatement.
35
Traffic System Management Measures
Traffic management measures which limit vehicle type,
speed, volume and time of operations are often effective noise
abatement measures. For this project, traffic management
measures are not considered appropriate for noise abatement due
to their effect on the capacity and level-of-service on the.
proposed roadway.
Noise Barriers
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels
can often be applied with a measurable degree of success by the
application of solid mass, attenuable measures to effectively
diffract, absorb, and reflect highway traffic noise emissions.
Solid mass, attenuable measures may include earth berms or
artificial abatement walls. However, due to the fact that there
are no impacted receptors within this project, no noise
attenuation devices are needed and are not recommended.
f. "Do Nothing" Alternative
The traffic noise impacts for the "do nothing" or
"no-build" alternative were also considered. If the proposed
widening did not occur, no residences would experience traffic
noise impacts by approaching or exceeding the FHWA's NAC. Also,
the receptors could anticipate experiencing an increase in
exterior noise levels in the range of +0 to +6 dBA. As previous
noted, it is barely possible to detect noise level changes of
2-3 dBA. A 5 dBA change in noise levels is more readily
noticed.
9•
Construction Noise
The major construction elements of this project are
expected to be earth removal, hauling, grading, and paving.
General construction noise impacts, such as temporary speech
interference for passers-by and those individuals living or
working near the project, can be expected particularly from
paving operations and from the earth moving equipment during
grading operations. However, considering the relatively
short-term nature of construction noise and the limitation of
construction to daytime hours, these impacts are not expected to
be substantial. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby
natural elements and man-made structures are believed to be
sufficient to moderate the effects of intrusive construction
noise.
36
h. Summary
Based on these preliminary studies, traffic noise abatement
is not warranted. Hence, no noise abatement measures are
proposed. This. evaluation completes the highway traffic noise
requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772, and unless a major
project change develops, no additional noise reports will be
submitted for this project.
MH/wp

`? 1

.a.
1444

i, I=
AU
1204
PROJECT
•I
I
I
I
I
1248
222:
SOUTHERN
PINES
POP. 8,620
J
?G 2975
?a
.9.
j ??
2195
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
)IBRANCH
MORGANTON ROAD (SR 1300),
PROM MULTI-LANES NEAR US 15-601
TO US 1 INTERCHANGE,
MOORE COUNTY,
U-2420
0 mile 0.5
I I I FIG.1

n
,,. ? .
?°
`;f
LLf Z Z <l
Oz LaL:'
I? 9 h w< iY W W W o ai: !
8 LL x? ?m W W < D 5¢;ir
61
Q lA?
iL
C y
z
1
ell
% ^ V
r ' ? 9
I 0 ?'
i N' ? ? ?? ' ?1? r 1
001,
lgona
i"j ?,, ,FIGURE 3

a
v
0
co
co
0
m Z
r O
U
U
I cc
0 0
O
CL
w
a
ti
f-
N
U_
Z r
a
W
H
}
W
J ?}
Z
W
_
0
cn
0
0
c?
H
z
8
a T
O
cr
m
N
O
0
Co
(n T
0
? N
T ?
N
o+ t o
n
m
v tO
W

m N N to
m
m l i
`
ID [? T

i r
N
--?
T
b

co
10 t m
V
m

r M
M

i
cli
to 1
N t
10
M `
M

?l tm
?
I d i a

t r ;

tT ?

m
N _
-~
N T

T ?
O
go t m Q
z
O
N Z
Mm a
in
-?
o
_-
to -, i
in N N
N
O
O
P
_ n
?
_
r r

N r

M
40
N
Q
WW
<¢a
a: J
o
T
O
to
co
N
N T
W
FIGURE P-1
D

T O
e

mZ
1
ul ;LO ~
Z
c
o
°
U U
? h
w
lA
ww ^NN {-L o
a
°O

CC
O Lo
1l.
`-
O

w 1=
co
Q M ?! ?? W -
y T ` T N

°
a ?_n
N
N

4D - CD z
e m-' ^ I O N W
^ N N T
N l7 co
I

O m N

O z
_
N '•--'- T
?
Z
CO Q a - I I r T
Q CD
(/A v T -? co !A
Q
0 T T T
40 w

O
I
Y.
1
T= ^??^
9
i
O 0
>

:n
a

a o °0 1 I

a:
O (0
rn
?N
T
m \
Nr
LLJ
roN
cn m
'lf\
co
t / N to,
?? N ± / m
?
r
^ in `
N/ 1

C'j

\ Al

I
CY 1
C Y,
C-i
T

N m
r\ _w 17
N

m ?

{ T - FIGURE P -2
a a
O
O
K
co
'
O
CD
01 ?
r O
U
W W
00
O
CC W
r
Q
N
cr,
O
cr)
VJ
0
l O
z
1 O
r
U
Q N
U
w
m
r
y
Y
W
J
z 00
W N
Z
N
N
Q
t•
C1
m
Q
y
4 '
0
CC N
w ?
0
O t0
r ?p
y O
D
a a
N I • N
r ? I r
'Q
?
N

r 1
f

--+ m
r N u
o ( # o
n r
N
N N

N Q
?-
t r --
n N
N
N ? ? m
III r
N

r m ?
m r
N
n ` ^ r

N
r
r ;
l

r m t tl N
O r
N • m

O
r
m ?- O
O
,N

N O
O
r +'
N ` 7 N
r I r
O
N
r
N
-?? N tl
K N
N
O
N
N ` r
N
Q
r r 2
0

r
in r

?
0
j l
c
o

h
O h ? O
n
C-i
r T r
a O
L? O
R
2 r m 0
K
r
N
s- 1 1 l7
_j

r ^?
t0
X11
K
N
W W
OD ¢ Q
J
N 17 17
0
O
co
N r
y
FIGURE P-3
a
1
v
O
a
m }
CO
O. Z
a
w
00
CL O
W
6
W
O
C7
Q
Q
Q
o
O
Z
0
Q
0C
L
N rn
7 M
0
N
N 0
O i O ZQ
T 0
Q
0

O m m M m
m
.? I ?? N U
m
_
N
-co r , I
03 Q
N
K
m
o ? _? n r
N? N r y
W
3
M i m
m? m
m ? m

N m m ?-

co
F-

y
- ?-
to n W
Z
CD C ?? N m M W
H M ? m

N L N W
rj N .?- M A 2
co s1 N 0
t r
co M n fn
N N
co
N ?
z
W
N Y
N I{ ? N I
? I

i ?N
\ N

N N

a: N

\

Y/ N
\ Lc? r^
T
m I
0 CO
?
p ~ ?
M? _
`
o ~ M
N N N\ .
-

N N

N M
N r,
m0
CO
Q C)
r
r
L? L N
9)
\ r-- r O
M
M

N
N I
m
m

M

m `?
N
r
M
N N
M I ?
I

FIG URE P- 4
a a
U-2420
(W.O..# 9.8084034)
Moore County
Table 1
Morganton Rd. (SR-1309)
From US 15-501 To Broad St.
Truck Percentages By Route
ROUTE FS

N
1001S. EST.
2000
ADT
VOLUME
IN
100'S EST.
2020
ADT
VOLUME
IN
100'5 TTST
% DUAL
% D
R

$ D
V

%
US 15-501 S.
OF MORGANTON
RD. 228 242 428 2 3 60 10

SR-1905 10 10 20 1 2 60 10
SR-1927 4 4 8 1 2 F;0] 10

SR-1931 10 10 20 1 2 60 10
HARDIN ST. 10 10 22 1 2 60 , 10
HENLEY ST. 14 14 28 1 2 60 10
FIRE LANE 4 4 8 1 2 60 10
MECHANIC ST. 12 12 26 1 2 60 10
SR-1873 34 37 68 1 2 60 10
SR-1872 21 23 39 1 2 60 10
US-1 206 219 391 3 4 60 10

SR-2093 13 13 20 1 2 60 10
FIGURE P-5
U-2420
(W.O. # 9.8084034)
Moore County
Table 1- Continue
Morganton Rd. (SR-1309)
From US 15-501 To Broad St.
Truck Percentages By Route
ROUTE EST. EST. EST. TTST DUAL D D
1998 2000 2020 % % I H
ADT ADT ADT R V
VOLUME VOLUME VOLUME
IN IN IN % %
1001S 100'5 1001S
KENSINGTON 6 6 14 1 2 60 10
ST.
BENNETT ST. 88 94 166 1 2 60 10
MORGANTON 140 148 264 1 2 60 10
RD.(SR-1309)
E. OF
MECHANIC ST.

WEST BROAD 130 136 246 1 2 60 10
ST. S. OF
MORGANTON ST.
FIGURE P-6
TABLE Al
/ C: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
CAL3QH
JOB: U-2420: SR 1309, Moore County RUN: SR 1309, YR-1995, BUILD 45 MPH
DATE: 09/15/1993 TIME: 14:14:51.62
SITE i METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS s .0 CM/S VD .0 CM/S ZO . 108. CM
U = 1.0 M/S CLAS = 5 (E) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIn = 400. M AMID = 1.9 PPM
T TV4 v DTaaT.RR
LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H w V/C QUEUE
LINK DESCRIPTION I . X2 Y2 I (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (14) (VEH)
X1 Y1
1. Far Lane Link
2. Near Lane Link
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
11.0 -804.7 11.0 804.7 I 1609. 360. AG 770. 18.0 .0 13.4
.0 804.7 .0 -804.7 1609. 180. AG 770. 18.0 .0 13.4
COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR X Y Z
1. R 3,135' RT. CL RES -37.5 .0 1.8
JOB: U-2420: SR 1309, Moore County RUN: SR 1309, YR-1995, BUILD 45 MPH
MODEL RESULTS
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
I
/ TABLE A2
,
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2420: SR 1309 Moore County RUN: SR 1309, YR-2015, BUILD 45 MPH
DATE: 09/15/1993 TIME: 14:14:20.15
•i
1
t
?I
a
I!
VS = .0 CM/S
U = 1.0 M/S
LINK VARIABLES
LINK DESCRIPTION
SITE 6 METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VD = .0 CM/S ZO = 108. CM
CLAS = 5 (E) ATIM 60. MINUTES MIXH = 400. M AMB = 1.9 PPM
R
LINK COORDINATES (M)
X1 Y1 X2 Y2
LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
(M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1609. 360. AG 1380. 10.4 .0 13.4
1609. 180. AG 1380. 10.4 .0 13.4
M Count RUN: SR 1309, YR-2015, BUILD 45 MPH
1. Far Lane Link 11.0 -804.7 11.0 804.7
2. Near Lane Link .0 804.7 .0 -804.7
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR X Y Z
1. R 3,135' RT. CL RES -37.5 .0 1.8
JOB: U-2420: SR 1309 oore y
MODEL RESULTS
REMARKS In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.- 20.
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1
MAX 2.5
DEGR. 8
1
TABLE A3
' CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2420: SR 1309 Moore County RUN: SR 1309 YR-1995, NOBUILD 45 MPH
DATE: 09/15/1993 TIME: 14:15:29.74
SITE S METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS = .0 CM/S VD = .0 CM/S ZO 10. CM
* U = 1.0 M/S CLAS = 5 (E) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 400. M AMB = 1.9 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
LINK DESCRIPTION LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. Far Lane Link
2. Near Lane Link
RECEPTOR LOCATION
7.3 -804.7 7.3 804.7 1609. 360. AG 770. 18.0 .0 9.8
.0 804.7 .0 -804.7 1609. 180. AG 770. 18.0 .0 9.8
COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR X Y Z
1. R 3, 135' RT. CL RES -39.3 .0 1.8
JOB: U-2420: SR 1309 Moore County RUN: SR 1309 YR-1995, NOBUILD 45 MPH
MODEL RESULTS
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.- 20.
WIND
ANGLE
(DEGR)
MAX
DEGR.
CONCENTRATION
(PPM)
REM
2.5
5
I`
r
i#
_.
'y
i.
TABLE A4
r
1 CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
1
JOB: U-2420: SR 1309 Moore County RUN: SR 1309 YR-2015, NOBUILD 45 MPH
DATE: 09/15/1993 TIME: 14:15:45.55
SITE 6 METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
t
e
VS . .0 CM/S VD - .0 CM/S ZO - 10. CM
U - 1.0 M/S CLAS - 5 (E) ATIM - 60. MINUTES MIXB - 400. M AMB = 1.9 PPM
LINK DESCRIPTION I LINK COORDINATES (M) I LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. Far Lane Link 3.7 -804.7 3.7 804.7 1609. 360. AG 1380. 10.4 .0 9.8
2. Near Lane Link .0 804.7 .0 -804.7 1609. 180. AG 1380. 10.4 .0 9.8
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
JOB: U-2420: SR 1309 Moore County RUN: SR 1309 YR-2015, NOBUILD 45 MPH
COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR X Y Z
1. R 3, 135' RT. CL RES -39.3 .0 1.8
MODEL RESULTS
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first,
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.- 20.
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1
MAX 2.6
DEGR. 8
4
S
TABLE N1
HEARING: SOUNDS BOMBARDING US DAILY
r
r
Jet 100 ft away at takeoff PAIN
140 Shotgun blast, j HUMAN EAR PAIN THRESHOLD
Motor test chamber
130
Firecrackers
120 Severe thunder, pneumatic Jackhammer
Hockey crowd
Amplified rock music UNCOMFORTABLY LOUD
110
Textile loom
100 Subway train, elevated train, farm tractor
power lawn mower, newspaper Press LO1JD
Heavy city traffic, noisy factory
90
D Diesel truck 40 mph 50 ft. away
E 80 Crowded restaurant, garbage disposal
C Average factory, vacuum cleaner
MODERATELY LAUD
I Passenger car 50 mph 50 ft. away
B 70
E Quiet typewriter
L 60 Singing birds, window air-conditioner
S Quiet automobile QUIET
Normal conversation, average office
50
Household refrigerator VERY QUIET
Quiet office
40
Average home
30 Dripping faucet
Whisper 5 feet away
20 Light rainfall, rustle of leaves
AVERAGE PERSON'S THRESHOLD OF HEARING
NST AUDIBLE
Whisper '
10
THRESHOLD FOR ACUTE HEARING
T
0
Sources. world Book, Rand McNally Atlas of the Human Body,
Encyclopedia Americana, "Industrial Noise and Hearing
Conversation" by J. B. Olishifski and E. R. Harford
(Researched by N. Jane Hunt and published in the Chicago
Tribune in an illustrated graphic by Tom Heinz.)

FIGURE N2 - NOISE MEASUREMENT SITES
SR 1309 (Morganton Road)
From US 15/501 to West Broad Street
TIP # U-2420, State Project # 9.8084034.
Noise Measurment Sites

1= SOUTHERN
PINES ,.
POP. 8,620
?r
afa1
.= END.,
? 2,,.
.,
46,
?l? ya
2014
301
26
m' ' ? ' 2410. G:a''
106

\ ?' . BEGIN

TABLE N2
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Activity
Category Leq(h) Description of Activity Category
A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public
(Exterior) need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to
serve its intended purpose.
e
B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels,
(Exterior) hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above.
(Exterior)
D -- Undeveloped lands
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and
(Interior) auditoriums.
Source: Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 772, U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration
DEFINITION OF SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels ORA)
r
Existing Noise Level increase in dBA from Existing Noise
in Leq(h) Levels to Future Noise Levels
< 50 > 15
> 50 > 10
Source: North Carolina Department of Transportation Noise Abatement Guidelines.
TABLE N3
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
(Leq)
Southern Pines, SR 1309 (Morganton Road) Moore Co.
From US-15/501 to West Broad Street
TIP #U-2420 State Project # 9.8084034
NOISE
LEVEL
SITE LOCATION DESCRIPTION (dBA)
1. SR 1309 (Morganton Road), .07 Mile Grassy 62
East of Pinecrest School Road
2. SR 1309 (Morganton Road), .19 Mile Grassy 64
East of South Henely Street
3. SR 1309 (Morganton Road), .11 Mile Grassy 65
East of SR 2092
4. SR 1309 (Morganton Road), .09 Mile Grassy 61
East of Bennett Street

Note:
The ambient noise level sites were measured at 50 feet from the center
of the nearest lane of traffic.
TABLE N4
• FBWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
SR 1309 (Morganton Road), From US-15/501 to West Broad Street
Southern Pines, Moore County
TIP 4 U-2420 State Project $ 9.8084034
Maximum Predicted Contour Approximate Number of Impacted
Leq Noise Levels Distances Receptors According to
dBA (Maximum) Title 23 CFR Part 772
Description 50' 100' 200' 72 dBA 67 dBA A B C D E
e
1. US-15/501 to South Henely Street 69 65 59 52' 103' 0 0 0 0 0
2. South Henely Street to SR 2092 70 66 60 59• 115, 0 0 0 0 0
3. SR 2092 to Bennett Street 67 63 57 <49' 76' 0 0 0 0 0
4. Bennett Street to West Broad Street 65 61 55 <49, 58' 0 0 0 0 0
NOTES- 1. 501, 100', and 200, distances are measured from center of nearest travel lane.
2. 72 dBA and 67 dBA contour distances are measured from center of proposed roadway.
TABLE N5
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASE SUMMARY
SR 1309 (Morganton Road)
From US-15/501 to West Broad Street, Moore County
TIP $ U-2420 State Project R 9.8084034
Receptor Exterior Noise Level Increases Noise Level
Increases
Section <=0 1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11-12 13-14 15-16 17-18 19-20 21-22 23-24 >= 25 >= 15 dBA
r
1. US-15/501 to South 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
` Henely Street
2. South Henely Street to 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SR 2092
3. SR 2092 to Bennett Street 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
t
t 4. Bennett Street to West 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Broad Street
i
0 1 7 4 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a
C?STAA
J V Of
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
September 21, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation Ali-
Deputy FROM: David Brook / State 4istoric Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Morganton Road (SR 1309) from US 15-501 to West
Broad Street, Southern Pines, Moore County, U-2420,
9.8084034, CH 93-E-4220-0089
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following
structures of historical or architectural importance within the general area of the
project:
Shaw House. Junction of SR 1309 and SR 2035, Southern Pines. The
Shaw House was placed on the state study list on July 8, 1992, because it
appears worthy of further investigation to determine its eligibility for listing
in the National Register of Historic Places.
While we note that the above project is to be state funded, assistance from the
Federal Highway Administration for alterations to the existing US 1 /SR 1309
interchange may require further consultation and compliance with Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act.
Because of the location and topographic situation of the proposed project area, it
is unlikely that any archaeological sites which may be eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places will be affected by the proposed construction.
We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East ones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
L. J. Ward
September 21, 1992, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 91.9/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: k"" State Clearinghouse
B. Church
T. Padgett
Adele Ray, Moore County Historical
Association
^'.7r 3;
?l
ti )
1
M

1
Jye r 41JZ °
M ? A
North Carolina Department of Cultural
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
March 18, 1994
MEMORANDUM.
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of T ansp ation C
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State 'stn ' r ervation Officer
SUBJECT: Widening SR 1309 (Morganton Road) from US 15-
501 to US 1, Southern Pines, Moore County, U-2420,
9.8084034, ER 94-8394
MM 1 f ffift
Thank you for your letter of February 21, 1994, concerning the above project.
We understand that the limits for the project have changed since the May 27,
1992, scoping meeting. Now the project's eastern terminus is US 1 rather than
SR 2035.
We have reviewed the phase I historic architectural resources survey report
prepared by Helen Ross for the North Carolina Department of Transportation. We
concur that no National Register-listed properties are located in the area of
potential effect for the project.
These comments are made in accord with G.S. 121-12(a) and Executive Order
XVI. If you have any questions regarding them, please contact Renee Gledhill-
Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: B. Church

log Fsst Joss Street • Rakigb, NoRh Carolina 27601-2807
E
.
04
August 24, 1992
Robert Panton
Executive Director
Pee Dee Council of
302 Leak Street
:To UT 12 v f __S_0 U t L_ _ r2 ?P_ b2 e_i
140 MEMORIAL PARK COURT
SOUTHERN PINES. NORTH CAROLINA 28387 FAX [phone]
Governments
Rockingham, NC 28379
Dear Bob:
Y J
cc ? ?.:9L
i?
' :. AU G 2 1992
1 j?l
In reference to your letter concerning improvements to Morganton
Road, the Town of Southern Pines is working with the State very
closely on this project. The Town has a desire to have the road
between Pinecrest Plaza and the Town ballfields as a four-lane
median divided facility. We feel that this would allow us
significant landscaping opportunities in the median and give us a
chance to beautify that portion of town.
The Town is waiting on D.O.T. as it completes its traffic counts.
There has been one public meeting held on the project. A
significant amount of feedback was received from the citizens that
they did not want the portion of Morganton between U.S. 1 and Broad
Street to be expanded. There seemed to be more agreement to the
concept of expanding Morganton Road west of U.S. 1. The Town
Council has not formally taken a position on this particular issue.
The concerns related to this particular section of Morganton Road
are based on a desire to protect the Shaw House, which is the
oldest building in Southern Pines, as well as to protect
established trees along the route and businesses.
Bob, that basically describes where we are to date on the project.
If you need any more information, please give me a call at 692-
7021.
Sincerely,
Kyl Sonnenberg
r
To Manager
?.
--- -------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
• WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
. ((
P.O. BOX 1890
?? • -?!i WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
INREKY TO August 27, 1992
Planning Division
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
46
0
ip AUG 281992
"""SION OF 1
HIGHWAYS P
This is in response to your letter dated July 27, 1992, requesting
information to assist in evaluating potential environmental impacts of
"U-2420, Southern Pines, Morganton Road (SR 1309), from US 15-501 to
W. Broad Street (SR 2035), Moore County." The project would consist of
widening the existing roadway to a multi-lane facility with bridge and
culvert extensions or additions as required.
The SR 1309 widening would not cross any U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
constructed flood control or navigation projects.
The proposed project is sited in the town of Southern Pines and its
extraterritorial limits. Southern Pines participates in the Federal Flood
Insurance Program. SR 1309 does not cross a stream with an identified
flood hazard. The roadway widening and extended or added drainage
structures should be designed with no more than a 1.0-foot flood surcharge
above the 100-year flood. Even though the project does not cross a stream
with an identified flood hazard, the project's hydraulic effect should be
coordinated with Southern Pines for compliance with their Flood Plain
Ordinance. Executive Order 11988 should be reviewed and complied with.
Department of the Army permit authorization, pursuant to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for the
discharge of excavated or fill material in waters of the United States or
any adjacent and/or isolated wetlands in conjunction with your proposed
improvements, including disposal of construction debris. On February 6,
1990, the Department of the Army and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) establishing procedures to
determine the type and level of mitigation necessary to comply with the
-2-
Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Under this MOA, "first,
impacts to waters and wetlands should be avoided or minimized through the
selection of the least damaging, practical alternative; second, taking
appropriate and.practical steps to minimize impacts on waters and .
wetlands; and finally, compensating for any remaining unavoidable impacts
to the extent appropriate and practical." When final plans for the
widening of SR 1309 are complete, including the extent and location of
any work within waters of the United States and wetlands, our Regulatory
Branch would appreciate the opportunity to review those plans for a
project-specific determination of Department of the Army permit
requirements. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Jeff
Richter of our Regulatory Branch in Wilmington, North Carolina, at
[phone].
We appreciate the opportunity to provide information for this project.
If we can be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to
contact us.
V cerelyPnnSin re c aunders
Chief, 1 g D ivision

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
November 28, 1994
Mr. Eric Galamb
DEHNR - Div. of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1148
Dear Mr. Galamb:
R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: State Environmental Assessment for Southern Pines, Morganton Road
(SR 1309), From Multi-lanes near US 15-501 to US 1 Interchange,
Moore County, State Project Number 9.8084034, T.I.P. Number U-2420
Attached is a copy of the Environmental Assessment and the Natural
Resources Technical Report for the subject proposed highway improvement. It
is anticipated this project will be processed with a "Finding of No
Significant Impact"; however, should comments received on the Environmental
Assessment or at the public hearing demonstrate a need for preparing a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement you will be contacted as part of our scoping
process.
Copies of this Assessment are being submitted to the State
Clearinghouse, areawide planning agencies, and the counties, towns, and
cities involved.
*Permit review agencies should note it is anticipated Federal Permits
will be required as discussed in the report.
Any comment you have concerning the Environmental Assessment should be
forwarded to:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Division of Highways
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Your comments should be received by January 25, 1995. If no comments
are received by that date we will assume you have none. If you desire a copy
of the "Finding of No Significant Impact," please so indicate.
RECE?ye
DEC p 51994
H FV/ p l r ENV1 toNP4E1vtaL SCuENeES
Sincerely,
14, .?..1..Z4 DM
H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
no
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS SAM HUNT
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
February 12, 1992
MEMORANDUM TO: Richard Davis, P.E., Unit Head
Project Planning Unit
ATTENTION: Marc L. Hamel, Project Planning Engineer
FROM: Janet L. Shipley, Environmental Biologist
Environmental Unit
SUBJECT: Natural Resource Technical Report for Proposed
Widening of Morganton Road (SR 1309), from US
15-501 to W. Broad Street; Moore County; TIP#
U-2420; State Projectn 9.8084034.
The following Natural Resources Technical Report and
Executive Summary have been prepared following a field survey
conducted by Environmental Unit Staff on January 6, 1993. If
I can be of additional help, please let me know.
cc: V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D
M. Randall Turner
Dennis Pipkin, P.E
i
SEA7Z
Y
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TZANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS SAM HUNT
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
Widening of Morganton Road (SR 1309),
from US 15-501 to W. Broad Street
Southern Pines, Moore County
TIP No. U-2420
State Project NO. 9.8084034
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
by
Janet L. Shipley
Biologist
Study Area
Subject project lies within and to the west of Southern
Pines, located in Moore County. Moore County is located in
the Coastal Plain physiographic province, within the
sandhills region of southeastern North Carolina. The relief
of the county is gently sloping to sloping.
Methodology
An ecological survey was conducted January 7, 1993 to
identify vegetative communities and wildlife species
contained within 80 feet of right-of-way within city limits
and 100 feet of right-of-way outside of city limits.
Wetlands were identified, using methods in the "Corps of
Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual" (1987). In-house
preparatory work was done prior to the field visit. The
Moore County soil survey, National Wetland Inventory (NWI)
maps, the hydric soils list for Moore County and USGS
"Southern Pines" quadrangle map was studied to identify
potential wetland sites. "Classifications and Water Quality
Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Lumber River Basin"
(N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health and Natural Resources) was
consulted to determine best usage classifications for area
water resources. N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) and
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) files were consulted
to determine if any protected flora or fauna occurs in the
project area.

Topographv and Soils
The Sandhills section of North Carolina is a unique part
of the Atlantic Coastal Plain. The sandy sediments support
longleaf pine, turkey oak, wiregrass vegetation over a
variable topography. Gently undulating, sandy, upland
divides may slope down to adjacent major streams in a
sequence of differing elevations. Sediments are fluvial and
marine in nature, ranging from arkosic, feldspar rich sands
to micaceous campact clays. The underlying basement rocks
are a conglomerate of pebbles and cobbles.
Table 1.
SOIL SERIES
CLASSIFICATION HYDRIC INCLUSION
Candor-Urban land Complex Non-hydric
2 to 12% slopes
Candor sand,
4 to 12% slopes Non-hydric
Ailey loamy sand,
2 to 8% slopes Non-hydric
Vaucluse loamy sand,
8 to 15% slopes Non-hydric
Water Resources
Subject project intercepts one unnamed tributary located
within the Lumber River drainage basin. It is presently
being channeled under the existing roadway by double
corrugated pipes. The headwaters of this tributary are
located just upstream of the project area. Downstream of the
project area, this tributary is dammed and forms Watson lake.
Stream width is approximately 10 to 15 feet across. The
substrate is sandy and the stream is bordered by a riparian
fringe.
The unnamed tributary has a "best usage" classification
of C, from source to U.S. Hwys. 15 and 501 as designated by
NC-DEHNR. Class C designates waters suitable for secondary
recreation, aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing,
wildlife and agriculture.
Water Resource Impacts
SOIL MAPPING UNITS IN STUDY AREA
Impacts to water resources can have far reaching
effects, both spatially (distance from the initial
disturbance) and temporally (up the food chain). Impacts to
water resources include the following:
- Increased sedimentation from construction and/or erosion.
- Changes in light incidence due to vegetation removal.
- Alterations of water level due to interruptions or
additions to surficial and/or groundwater flow.
Biotic Communities and Impacts
The project area is comprised of three biotic
communities: Xeric Sandhill shrub, man-dominated, and
Riparian Fringe. Table 1 summarizes potential losses which
could result from roadway development. Calculations are based
on right of way widths of 80 and 100 feet as defined under
the Methodology section.
Table 2. ANTICIPATED PLANT COMMUNITY IMPACTS
PLANT COMMUNITY
ESTIMATED IMPACTS
Man-dominated Areas 8.7
Xeric Sandhill Scrub 15.5
Riparian Forest 0.1
Total Acres 24.3
Primary impacts will occur to forested communities in
the corridor which provide a variety of opportunities for
various forms of wildlife. Common mammals likely to inhabit
the project area include the white-tail deer (Odocoileus
virainianus) and fox squirrel (Sciurus nicer).
Common passerine species which were sighted or expected
to occur, include the pileated woodpecker (Drvocopus
pileatus), yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphvrapicus varius),
eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis), Carolina wren (Thrvothorus
ludovicianus), pine warbler (Dendroica palmarum) and rufous-
sided towhee (Pipilo fuscus).
Eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus),
southeastern five-lined skink (Eumeces inexpectatus), worm
snake (Carphophis amoenus), black racer (Coluber
constrictor), and eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina) are
but a few reptiles that may be found in the project area.
Likely amphibians that may occur in the project area
include the pickerel frog (Rana palustris), upland chorus
frog (Pseudacris triseriata), northern cricket frog (Acris
crepitans), slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus), marbled
salamander (Ambvstoma opacum), and the three-lined salamander
(Eurvicea guttolineata).
Jurisdictional Waters of the US Impacts
Jurisdictional.wetlands in the study area are
categorized as Palustrine, forested, deciduous,
intermittently flooded (PF06F) as defined by Cowardin et al
(1979). Unnamed tributary has 0.1 acre of associated
wetlands to the north of the existing alignment.
Permit Requirements
Based upon site location and estimated acreage involved,
it is anticipated that the unnamed tributary crossing will be
authorized by Nationwide Permit (33 CFR 330.5) (a) (14)].
A 401 Water Quality Certification administered through
the N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources will be required. This certificate is issued for
any activity which may result in a discharge into waters for
which a federal permit is required.
Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not required where Nationwide
permits or General permits are authorized, according to the
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE. Final discretionary
authority in these matters rests with the COE.
Federally Protected Species
Information received from the USFWS reports several
federally Endangered species for Moore County (Table 3) as of
January 7, 1993.
Table 3. FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Moore County
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded Woodpecker E
Notropis mekistocholas Cape Fear shiner E
Lysimachia asperulaefolia Rough-leaved Loosestrife E
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E
Schwalbea americana American chaffseed E
Suitable habitat is present in the project area for two
of the five species; the red-cockaded woodpecker and
Michaux's sumac. Survey findings are summarized below.
Red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) E
Suitable nesting and foraging habitat was identified
within the proposed right-of-way of SR 1390 for the red-
cockaded woodpecker and it was determined that clearing for
roadway expansion would eliminate narrow strips of this
habitat. These birds nest exclusively in trees that are > 60
years old and are contiguous with pine stands at least 30
years of age which are used for foraging.
To determine if RCW colonies are present, one-half mile
surveys (from the proposed impact area) were conducted by
NCDOT biologists walking north-south line transects, spaced
50 to 100 yards apart (depending on midstory density).
Surveys were conducted January 25 and 26, 1993 and were
concentrated in the vicinity of mount Hope Cemetery, South
Henley Street, the intersection of SR 1930 and SR 1931, and
Pinelawn Cemetery. No colony sites were found. A number of
active colonies have.been documented west of US 15-501, by
Dr. Jay Carter; the closest foraging-circle to subject
project area is identified as foraging circle 62. Cavity
trees in foraging circle 62 fall just outside of the one-half
mile survey area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No impacts to the red-cockaded
woodpecker are anticipated from project construction.
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac) E
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods. It is
dependent on some sort of disturbance to maintain the openness of
its habitat. It usually grows in association with basic soils and
occurs on sand or sandy loams. It grows only in open habitat
where it can get full sunlight and it does not compete well with
other species such as Japanese honeysuckle that it is often
associated with.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Suitable habitat is present along the full
length of the alignment. A plant by plant survey was conducted
January 13, 1993 within the proposed right of way limits to
confirm or refute the presence of this species. Michaux's sumac
has distinct morphological characteristics and is easily
identified this time of year. No individuals were found. Subject
project will not impact this species.
Widening of Morganton Road (SR 1309),
from US 15-501 to W. Broad Street
Southern Pines, Moore County
TIP No. U-2420
State Project NO. 9.8084034
NATURAL RESOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT
U-2420
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT
JANET L. SHIPLEY
February 1993
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ...........................................1
Project Description ...................................1
Methodology ..........................................1
II. PHYSICAL RESOURCES .....................................1
Study area ............................................1
Topography and Soils ..................................1
Water Resources .......................................2
Physical Resource Impacts .............................3
III. BIOTIC RESOURCES .......................................3
Plant Communities ....................................3
Wildlife .............................................4
Aquatic Life .........................................5
Biotic Resource Impacts ..............................5
IV. SPECIAL TOPICS .........................................6
Jurisdictional Waters of the US Impacts ..............6
Permits ..............................................7
Mitigation ...........................................7
RARE and PROTECTED SPECIES ...........................7
V. REFERENCES ............................................15
APPENDIX A - Natural Resource Agency Comments
I. INTRODUCTION
Project Description
The proposed project calls for multi-laning the existing
two-lane roadway (SR 1309). The proposed widening being
considered is a four-lane divided facility with 16 foot
raised median from US 15-501 to the city limits, and a 5-lane
section from the city limits to W. Broad Street. The study
area is defined by a proposed right of way width of 100 feet
outside the Southern Pines city limits, and 80 feet inside
the city limits. Total project length is 2.3 miles (Fig. 1).
The purpose of this technical report is to describe the
natural systems found within the project area and to document
probable impacts to these systems.
Methodologv
An ecological survey was conducted January 7, 1993 to
identify vegetative communities and wildlife species
contained therein. Vegetative communities and wildlife were
inventoried and mapped during on-site surveys. Wetlands were
identified, using methods in the "Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual" (1987). In-house preparatory work was
done prior to the field visit. The Moore County soil survey,
National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, the hydric soils list
for Moore County and USGS "Southern Pines" quadrangle map was
studied to identify potential wetland sites.
"Classifications and Water Quality Standards Assigned to the
Waters of the Lumber River Basin" (N.C. Dept. of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources) was consulted to determine best
usage classifications for area water resources. N.C.
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) files were consulted to determine if any
protected flora or fauna occurs in the project area.
II. PHYSICAL RESOURCES
Study Area
Subject project lies within and to the west of Southern
Pines, located in Moore County (Fig.l). Moore County is
located in the Coastal Plain physiographic province, within
the sandhills region of southeastern North Carolina. The
relief of the county is gently sloping to sloping.
Topography and Soils
The Sandhills section of North Carolina is a unique part
of the Atlantic Coastal Plain. The sandy sediments support
longleaf pine, turkey oak, wiregrass vegetation over a.
variable topography. Gently undulating, sandy, upland
5 G Westmoore ?,/a ?•••••?•...
'
?????.- -
Hlt al GI ndp?

A Wa Rob s na...
M
pies T 3 arkw0o?\
S 22 1
1
O 5
O R 15
9 +CartAaYe T Sbl \
T
amarcan Hill Crest j L\
I WA Perm )
?
I
Eat r-- ` mes 5
i
-' -1 -- ? 22
- - tastwaod yy ••?
`err was ]J t ass
End s r ?\ 1 r kerrew ?. •••••
r
t 1 lacaso ~Cb- ••••••
• $Vrmes ' anlY \ •••
v?•..
P.netku
World GJI r SOU •••
\ Noll ul 5 `??•••
` e r•.. eldee ?? rr ••' ``
.•
O

divides may slope down to adjacent major streams in a
sequence of differing elevations. These divides are
undulating plains with numerous depressions, and sandy soils
such as Vaucluse and Candor are major units in these areas.
Valley bottoms are nearly level.
Sediments are fluvial and marine irr nature, ranging from
arkosic, feldspar rich sands to micaceous campact clays. The
underlying basement rocks are a conglomerate of pebbles and
cobbles.
Table 1. SOIL MAPPING UNITS IN STUDY AREA
SOIL SERIES CLASSIFICATION HYDRIC INCLUSION
Candor-Urban land Complex Non-hydric
2 to 12% slopes
Candor sand,
4 to 12% slopes Non-hydric
Ailey loamy sand,
2 to 8% slopes Non-hydric
Vaucluse loamy sand,
8 to 15% slopes Non-hydric
Water Resources
Subject project intercepts one unnamed tributary located
within the Lumber River drainage basin. It is presently
being channeled under the existing roadway by double
corrugated pipes. The headwaters of this tributary are
located just upstream of the project area. Downstream of the
project area, this tributary is dammed and forms Watson lake.
Stream width is approximately 10 to 15 feet across. The
substrate is sandy and the stream is bordered by a riparian
fringe.
The unnamed tributary has a "best usage" classification
of C, from source to U.S. Hwys. 15 and 501 as designated by
NC-DEHNR. Class C designates waters suitable for secondary
recreation, aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing,
wildlife and agriculture.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN)
addresses long term trends in water quality at fixed
monitoring sites by the sampling for selected benthic
macroinvertebrates. These organisms are sensitive to very
subtle changes in water quality. Good water quality is
associated with both high taxa richness values (the number of
different types of organisms) and the presence of many
intolerant forms. No data is available for unnamed
tributary.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource
Waters (ORW), nor Water Supplies (WS I, or WS II) will be
impacted by the proposed project, nor are any of these waters
located within one mile of the project area. No National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permits have
been issued within the project area.
Water Resource Impacts
Impacts to water resources can have far reaching
effects, both spatially (distance from the initial
disturbance) and temporally (up the food chain). Impacts to
water resources include the following:
- Increased sedimentation from construction and/or erosion.
- Changes in light incidence due to vegetation removal.
- Alterations of water level due to interruptions or
additions to surficial and/or groundwater flow.
Consideration should be given to the use of sediment
control devices such as vegetated berms, or filter basins to
ameliorate the impacts from non-point dischargers.
III. BIOTIC RESOURCES
Plant Communities
Distribution and composition of plant communities
throughout the project area reflect the topographic
positioning, hydrologic influences, and past and present land
use practices. Where applicable, the following community
profile descriptions have been adopted and modified from the
NCNHP classification scheme (Schafale and Weakley 1990).
Xeric Sandhill Shrub
Xeric Sandhill Scrub communities occur on coarse, deep,
infertile candor and Vaucluse sands on upland ridgetops and
slopes in the project area. They are excessively drained and
are low diversity communities, supporting an open canopy of
mature longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) with an open to dense
understory of turkey oak (Quercus laevis). Wire grass
(Aristida stricta) is the dominant herb, with patches of
trailing arbutus (Epiaaea repens) encountered occasionally.
Broomsedge (Andropogon virgin icus) is prominent along the
edges of this community.
Large blocks of this community type have been logged in
the past, leaving thick stands of longleaf saplings and
turkey oaks. The majority of the predominant wire grass
ground layer is undisturbed. Broomsedge is much more
prevalent in these open, logged areas.
Man Dominated Communites
Residential neighborhoods, commercial establishments,
and cemeteries comprise the man-dominated communities in the
project area.
Residential and commercial establishments are Man-
dominated lands where man's structures or activities preclude
natural plant succession. Maintained shoulder slopes,
grounds and lawns support turf of centipede as the dominant
vegetative component. Red cedar (Juniperus virginiana) and
longleaf pine are common. Mowing is frequently associated
with this community. Because of routine management
practices, this community is considered to retain only
isolated remnants of its native character, providing little
of its initial value as wildlife habitat.
Two cemeteries are located within the project area.
Many longleaf pines and red cedars are present as are
introduced landscape ornamentals. Dogwoods (Cornus florida),
American holly (Ilex opaca), and nandina (Nandina domestica)
form lesser components.
Riparian Fringe (Palustrine, forested, deciduous,
intermittently flooded (PF06F))
A fringe of riparian vegetation is associated with
unnamed tributary. Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera),
scattered loblolly pine and red maple (Acer rubrum) form the
canopy, with sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana) black willow
(Salix nigra), and redbay (Persea borbonia) comprising the
understory. The "weedy" introduced Chinese privet (Ligustrum
sinense) is common.
wildlife-Terrestrial
The semi-rural nature of the project area, combined with
a mix of plant community patterns, provide a variety of
opportunities for various forms of wildlife. Forested tracts
have all the necessary components (food, water, protective
coverage) to support a number of small mammals and birds.
Mesic woodlands bordering small tributaries also function as
travel corridors for transient species. Common mammals
likely to inhabit the project area include the white-tail
deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and fox squirrel (Sciurus
niger).
Avifaunal abundance is typical in the sandhills region
of North Carolina where a patchwork of habitat types is
available. Common passerine species which were sighted or
expected to occur, include the pileated woodpecker (Drvocopus
pileatus), yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphvrapicus _varius),
eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis), Carolina wren (Thrvothorus
ludovicianus), pine warbler (Dendroica palmarum) and rufous-
sided towhee (Pipilo fuscus).
Eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus),
southeastern five-lined skink (Eumeces inexpectatus), worm
snake (Carphophis amoenus), black racer (Coluber
constrictor), and eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina) are
but a few reptiles that maybe found in the project area.
Likely amphibians that may occur in the project area
include the pickerel frog (Rana palustris), upland chorus
frog (Pseudacris triseriata), northern cricket frog (Acres
crepitans), slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus), marbled
salamander (Ambvstoma opacum), and the three-lined salamander
(Eurvicea guttolineata).
Aquatic Life
The small headwater tributary traversed by the alignment
is intermittent in nature, lacking permanent flow. Limited
size and the ephemeral nature of the water supply restricts
the ability of these systems to maintain viable populations
of fish and macroinvertebrates.
Amphibians, in particular, are highly water-dependent
for completion of larval stages in their life cycle. Some
species are totally aquatic. Spring peeper (Hula crucifer)
bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), pickerel frog (R. palustris)
dwarf salamander (Eurvicea guadridigitata), southern dusky
salamander (Desmognathus auriculatus), yellowbelly slider
(Chrysemvs scripta), and northern water snake (Nerodiea
sipedon), are but a few of the reptiles and amphibians likely
to be found in the project area.
Impacts to Biotic Resources
Impacts on natural communities are reflective of the
relative abundance of each system present in the study
corridor. Table 2 summarizes potential losses which could
result from roadway development. Calculations are based on
right of way widths of 80 and 100 feet as defined on page 1.
Table 2. ANTICIPATED PLANT COMMUNITY IMPACTS
PLANT COMMUNITY
Man-dominated Areas
Xeric Sandhill Scrub
Riparian Forest
ESTIMATED IMPACTS
8.7
15.5
0.1
Total Acres 24.3
Primary impacts will occur to forested communities in
the corridor. These communities will be lost in terms of
future biological production. Resident species will be
displaced or eliminated by construction. Many mobile animals
such as deer, opossums, rodents, and passerine birds are
cosmopolitan in nature, easily adapting to urbanization.
However, larger mammals which seek refuge in large
undisturbed areas, may experience disruptions in mating,
feeding or travel patterns as their habitat range is reduced
or fragmented.
New construction in wetland systems will affect aquatic
organisms. Dredging, filling, pile-driving operations, slope
stabilization and land clearing are construction activities,
which can result in the direct loss of benthic organisms due
to an increase in silt load. The removal of benthic
organisms reduces the potential food supply for fish and
other invertebrates.
Siltation has many adverse impacts on fish and benthos:
decreases the depth of light penetration; inhibiting plant
and algal growth, which is a food source; clogs the
filtration apparatus of filter-feeding benthos and the gills
of fish; buries benthic organisms on the bottom, cutting them
off from a food source; adversely effects preferred benthic
substrate; and spoils downstream spawning beds for fish.
IV. SPECIAL TOPICS
Jurisdictional Waters of the US Impacts
Surface waters and their associated wetlands fall under
the broad category of "Waters of the United States" as
defined in 33 CFR 328.3. The US Army Corps of Engineers
(COE) takes jurisdiction over the discharge of dredged or
fill material into these waters as authorized by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act.
Unnamed tributary has 0.1 acre of associated wetlands to
the north of the existing alignment, based on 100 feet of
right of way. Jurisdictional wetlands in the study area are
categorized as Palustrine, forested, deciduous,
intermittently flooded (PF06F) as defined by Cowardin et al
(1979). The wetland community associated with unnamed
tributary was identified in the project corridor (Figure 2)
on the basis of low soil chroma values, hydrophytic
vegetation and the presence of hydrology or hydrological
indicators, such as stained, matted vegetation, high water
marks on trees, buttressed tree bases and surface roots.
Permit Requirements
In accordance with provisions of section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C 1344), a permit will be required
from the COE for the discharge of dredged or fill material
into "Waters of the United States". Based upon site location
and estimated acreage involved, it is anticipated that the
unnamed tributary crossing will be authorized by Nationwide
Permit (33 CFR 330.5) (a) (14)]. Nationwide #14 allows for
minor road crossing fills of non-tidal "Waters of the United
States", provided that the fill does not exceed one third
acre; less than 200 linear feet of wetlands, fill does not
restrict flows; and the width of fill is limited to the
minimum necessary for the actual crossing. Permit conditions
applicable to this crossing are met as outlined in [33 CFR
330.5 (b)] and [33 CFR 330.6 (a)]. However, final permit
decisions are left to the discretionary authority of the
United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).
A 401 Water Quality Certification administered through
the N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources will be required. This certificate is issued for
any activity which may result in a discharge into waters for
which a federal permit is required.
Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not required where Nationwide.
permits or General permits are authorized, according to the
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE. Final discretionary
authority in these matters rests with the COE.
RARE AND PROTECTED SPECIES
The following discussions focus on federal and state
protected species, as well as federal Candidate species,
which are afforded no legal protection.
Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and
Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended.
Information received from the USFWS reports several
federally Endangered species for Moore County (Table 4) as of
January 7, 1993.
Table 4. FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Moore County
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS
Picoides borealis Red-cockaded Woodpecker E
Notropis mekistocholas Cape Fear shiner E
Lvsimachia asperulaefolia Rough-leaved Loosestrife E
Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E
Schwalbea americana American chaffseed E
A brief description and habitat requirements for the
above listed species are summarized below.
Notropis mekistocholas (Cape Fear shiner) E
Animal Family: Cyprinidae
Date Listed: 9/26/87
Distribution in N.C.: Chatham, Harnett, Lee, Moore, Randolph.
The Cape Fear shiner is limited to three populations in North
Carolina. The strongest population of the Cape Fear shiner is in
Chatham and Lee counties from the Locksville dam upstream to Rocky
River and Bear Creek. Another population is located above the
Rocky River Hydroelectric Dam in Chatham County, and the third
population is found in the Deep River system in Randolph and Moore
counties.
The Cape Fear shiner is a small, moderately stocky minnow
that rarely exceeds 5 cm in length. Its body is flushed with a
pale silvery yellow, and a black band runs along its sides
(Snelson 1971). The fins are yellowish and somewhat pointed. The
upperlip is black and the lower lip has a black bar along its
margin. It is easily distinguished from other similar species by
having an elongated digestive tract to accommodate its diet of
plant material.
Cape Fear shiner habitat occurs in streams with gravel,
cobble, or boulder substrates. It is most often observed
inhabiting slow pools, riffles, and slow runs associated with
water willow beds. Juveniles can be found inhabiting slackwater,
among large rock outcrops and in flooded side channels and pools.
Biological Conclusion: Subject project crosses an unnamed
intermittent tributary in the Lumber River system with sandy
sediments. No suitable habitat is present for the Cape Fear
shiner. Subject project will not impact the species.
Picoides borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) E
Animal Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen, Brunswick,
Camden, Carteret, Chatham, Columbus, Craven,
9
Cumberland, Dare, Duplin, Forsyth, Gates, Halifax,
Harnett, Hertford, Hoke, Hyde, Johnston, Jones, Lee,
Lenoir, Montgomery, Moore, Nash, New Hanover,
Northhampton, Onslow, Orange, Pamlico, Pender,
Perquimans, Pitt, Richmond, Robeson, Sampson, Scotland,
Tyrrell, Wake, Wayne, Wilson.
The red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) once occurred from New
Jersey to southern Florida and west to eastern Texas. It occurred
inland in Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Missouri.
Now found only in coastal states of its historic range and inland
in southeastern Oklahoma and southern Arkansas. In North Carolina
moderate populations are found in the sandhills and in the
southern coastal plain. The few populations found in the piedmont
and northern coastal plain are believed to be relics of former
populations.
The adult RCW's plumage is entirely black and white except
for small red streaks on the sides of the nape in the male. The
back is black and white with horizontal stripes and the breast and
underside is white with streaked flanks. There is a large white
cheek patch surrounded by the black cap, nape, and throat.
RCW's use open old growth stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), for foraging and
nesting habitat. A forested stand nust contain at least 50% pine,
and be contiguous with other stands to be appropriate habitat for
the RCW. These birds nest exclusively in trees that are > 60
years old and are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of
age.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pipe trees and
usually in trees that are infected with the fungus that causes
red-heart disease. Cavities are located in colonies from 12-100
ft above the ground and average 30-50 ft high. They can be
identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds
the tree. This may be used as a defense against possible
predators. A clan of woodpeckers usually consists of one
breeding pair and the offspring from previous years. The eggs are
laid in April, May, and June and hatch 38 days later. Clutch size
is from 3 - 5 eggs. All members of the clan share in raising the
young. Red-cockaded woodpeckers feed mainly on insects but may
feed on seasonal wild fruits.
Suitable nesting and foraging habitat was identified within
the proposed right-of-way of SR 1390 and it was determined that
clearing for roadway expansion would eliminate narrow strips of
this habitat.
To determine if RCW colonies are present, one-half mile
surveys (from proposed impact areas) were conducted by NCDOT
biologists walking north-south line transects, spaced 50 to
100 yards apart (depending on midstory density). Surveys
were conducted January 25 and 26, 1993, and were concentrated
10
in the vicinity of Mount Hope Cemetery, South Henley Street,
the intersection of SR 1930 and SR 1931, and Pinelawn
Cemetery. No colony sites were found. A number of active
colonies have been documented west of US 15-501, by Dr. Jay
Carter; the closest foraging circle to this project area is
identified as foraging circle 62. Cavity trees in foraging
circle 62 fall just outside of the one-half mile survey area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No impacts to the red-cockaded
woodpecker are anticipated from project construction.
Lysimachia asperulaefolia (rough-leaved loosestrife) E
Plant Family: Primulaceae
Federally Listed: June 12, 1987
Flowers Present: June
Distribution in N.C.: Beaufort, Bladen, Brunswick, Carteret,
Columbus, Cumberland, Hoke, Moore, Onslow, Pamlico,
Pender, Richmond, Scotland.
This plant which is endemic to the coastal plain and
sandhills of North and South Carolina and is currently found in
nine locations in North Carolina and is believed to be extirpated
from South Carolina.
This perennial herb has slender stems that grow to a height
of three to six dm from a rhizome. The whorled leaves encircle
the stem at intervals below the showy yellow flowers, and usually
occur in threes or fours. Flowers are borne in terminal racemes
of five petaled flowers. Fruits are present from July through
October.
This species occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf
pine uplands and pond pine pocosins (areas of dense shrub and vine
growth usually on a wet, peaty, poorly drained soil), on moist to
seasonally saturated sands and on shallow organic soils overlaying
sand. It has also been found to occur on deep peat in the low
shrub community of large Carolina bays (shallow, elliptical,
poorly drained depressions of unknown origins). The areas it
occurs in are fire maintained. It is rarely associated with
hardwood stands and prefers acidic soils..
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No suitable habitat is present in the
project area for this species. No impacts to the rough-leaved
loosestrife will occur,from project construction.
Rhus michauxii (Michaux's sumac) E
Plant Family: Anacardiaceae
Federally Listed: September 28, 1989
Flowers Present:.June
Distribution in N.C.: Columbus, Davie, Durham, Franklin, Hoke,
Moore, Orange, Richmond, Robeson, Scotland, Wake,
Wilson.
Michaux's sumac was known historically from the inner coastal
plain and lower piedmont of North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Georgia. This species is believed to be extirpated in South
Carolina. It is currently known from only 21 populations in North
Carolina and Georgia. In North Carolina populations of Michaux's
sumac still exist in Hoke, Richmond, Scotland, Franklin, Davie,
Robeson, Moore, and Wake counties.
Michaux's sumac is a densely pubescent rhizomatous shrub that
grows 0.2 to 1.0 meters in height. The narrowly winged or
wingless rachis supports 9 to 13 sessile, oblong to oblong-
lanceolate leaflets that are each 4 to 9cm long, 2 to 5cm wide,
acute and acuminate. The bases of the leaves are rounded and
their edges are simply or doubly serrate. It bears small flowers
in a terminal, erect, dense cluster. The flowers are greenish to
white in color. Fruits, which develop from August to September on
female plants, are a red densely short-pubescent drupe, 5 to 6mm
across.
This plant occurs in rocky or sandy open woods. It is
dependent on some sort of disturbance to maintain the openness of
its habitat. It usually grows in association with basic soils and
occurs on sand or sandy loams. It grows only in open habitat
where it can get full sunlight and it does not compete well with
other.species such as Japanese honeysuckle that it is often
associated with.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Suitable habitat is present along the full
length of the alignment. A plant by plant survey was conducted
January 13, 1993 within the proposed right of way limits to
confirm or refute the presence of this species. Michaux's sumac
has distinct morphological characteristics and is easily
identified this time of year. No individuals were found. Subject
project will not impact this species.
Schwalbea americana (American chaffseed) PE
Plant Family: Scrophulariaceae
Federally Listed: October 1991
Flowers Present: late May - early June
Distribution in N.C.: Bladen, Cumberland, Hoke, Moore, Pender,
Scotland.
This species is known historically from Alabama, Connecticut,
Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Tennessee,
and Virginia in which it has been extirpated. The only confirmed
North Carolina population is on Fort Bragg military base in Hoke
County.
The American chaffseed is an erect herb whose stems branch
only at the base (if at all) and grow to a height of 3-8 dm. The
entire plant is pubescent, with upwardly curving hairs. The
narrow leaves are alternate, lance-shaped to elliptic, stalkless,
and 2 to 5 centimeters long. The leaves are three veined and
become progressively smaller towards the top. It bears solitary
flowers in the axils of the upper most leaves. The purplish-
12
yellow flowers are arranged into racemes. The fruits are a long
narrow capsule, enclosed in a loose-fitting sack-like structure.
This species occurs in open, moist pine flatwoods, fire
maintained savannas, ecotonal areas between peaty wetlands and
open grass-sedge systems. Soils are generally sandy, acidic, and
seasonally moist to dry. Fire is important in the maintenance of
open habitat for the American chaffseed.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: Xeric habitat present in the project area
does not provide suitable habitat for this species. No impacts
from project construction are anticipated.
Federal Candidate Species
The USFWS provided information on several Candidate (C)
species that may occur in the area. These are species which
are not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act
and are not subject to any of its provisions, including
Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as
Threatened or Endangered. As of January 7, 1993, the
following candidate species are listed for Moore County.
The habitat column indicates the presence or absence of
suitable habitat in the project area. No surveys were
conducted for individual species.
Table 5. FEDERAL CANDIDATE SPECIES
Moore County
SCIENTIFIC NAME
Aimophila aestivalis
Pituophis m. melanoleucus
Gomphus parvidens
carolinus
Amorpha georgiana
georgiana
Eupatorium resinosum
Kalmia cuneata
Lindera subcoriacea
Oxvpolis ternata
Conferva pondweed
Rudbeckia heliopsidus
Stvlisma P. var.
pickeringii
Pvxidanthera barbulata
var. brevifolia-
Solidago verna
Dionaea muscipula
Astragulus michauxii
COMMON NAME HABITAT
Bachman's sparrow YES
Northern pine snake YES
Sandhills clubtail YES
dragonfly
Georgia leadplant NO
Pine barrens boneset YES
White wicky NO
Bog spicebush NO
Savanna cowbane NO
Potamogeton confervoides YES
sun-facing coneflower YES
Pickering's morning glory YES
Well's sandhill pixie-moss YES
Spring flowering goldenrod YES
Venus flytrap NO
Sandhills milkvetch YES
*Category 2: Taxon for which there is some evidence of
vulnerability, but for which there are not enough data tc
support listing as endangered or threatened at this time.
13
State Protected Species
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered
(E), Threatened (T) or Special Concern (SC) are granted
protection by the State Endangered Species Act and the NC
Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1979, administered
and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission and the NC Department of Agriculture.
A review of the NC Natural Heritage Program database,
revealed no known occurences of protected species within the
project area. However, the USFWS provided information on
several Candidate (C) species that occur in Moore County that
may occur in the project corridor. The following state
designations for these species are provided in Table 6.
Table 6. STATE-PROTECTED SPECIES
Moore County
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME STATUS/RANK
Aimophila aestivalis Bachman's sparrow SC/S2B,S3N
Pituophis m. melanoleucus Northern pine snake SC/S3
Eupatorium resinosum Pine barrens boneset E/S2
Kalmia cuneata White wicky E-SC/S2
Lindera subcoriacea Bog spicebush E/S1
Rudbeckia heliopsidus sun-facing coneflower T/S1
Stvlisma P. var.
pickeringii Pickering's morning glory E/S2
Pvxidanthera barbulata
var. brevifolia well's sandhill pixie-moss E/S2
Solidago verna spring flowering goldenrod E/S2
NC Rank Designations: S1 = Critically imperiled in North
Carolina because of extreme rarity (5 or fewer occurrences or
very few remaining individuals); S2 = Imperiled in North
Carolina because of rarity (6 to 20 occurrences); S3 = Rare
or uncommon in NC (21 to 100 occurrences.
Suitable habitat requirements for these species is
summarized below. No surveys were conducted for the species
or suitable habitat.
Bachman's sparrow
Habitat: open long-leaf pine forests, old fields
(Breeding season only)
Northern pine snake
Habitat: dry and sandy woods, mainly in pine/oak
sandhills
Pine barrens boneset
Habitat: seepage bogs, beaver ponds
1=
White Wicky
Habitat: pocosins
Bog spicebush
Habitat: streamhead pocosins, white cedar swamps, bogs
sun-facing coneflower
Habitat: moist pine flatwoods
Pickering's morning glory
Habitat: sandhills
Well's sandhills pixie moss
Habitat: sandhills
Spring Flowering Goldenrod
Habitat: dry pinelands

IV. REFERENCES
American Ornithologists' Union. 1983. Checklist of North
American Birds. (6th ed.) Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence,
Kansas. 877p.
Ehrlich, P.E., D.S. Dobkin and D. Wheye. 1988. The Birders
Handbook. A Field Guide to the Natural HIstory of North
American Birds. Simon and Schuster, N.Y., N.Y. 785 p.
Depoe, C.E., J.B. Funderburg, and T.L. Quay. 1961. The
reptiles and amphibians of North Carolina: a preliminary
check-list and bibliography. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc.
77:125-136
Federal Interagency committee for Wetland Delineation. 1987.
Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional
Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and
U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C.
Cooperative Technical Publication. 76 pp.
Godfrey, R.K., J.W. Wooten. 1981. Aquatic and Wetland Plants
of Southeastern United States, Dicotyledons. The University
of Georgia Press, Athens. 933p.
Lee, D.S., Funderburg, J.B. Jr., and M.K. Clark. 1982. A
Distributional Survey of North American Mammals. North
Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh, N.C. 70 p.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Bailey and J.R. Harrison III.
1980. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia.
The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. 264p.
North Carolina Wildlife Resourses Commission. 1974. North
Carolina mammalian species with keys to the orders and
families. N.C. Wildl. Resour. Comm.,Raleigh.
NCDEHNR-DER. 1993. Classifications and water quality
standards assigned to the waters of the Lumber River basin.
Division of Environmental Management, Raleigh, N.C. 34p.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings 1980. Birds of
the Carolinas. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel
Hill. 408 p.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and G.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the
Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. 1183 p.
Scott, S.L. (ed.). 1987. Field Guide to the Birds of North
America. National Geographic Society, Washington, D.C. 464
Smith, R.R., J.B. Funderburg and T.L. Quay. 1960. A
16
checklist of North Carolina mammals. N.C. Wildl. Resour.
Comm., Raleigh.
USDA-SCS 1993. Unpublished Soil survey of Moore County, North
Carolina. U.S. Government Printing office, Wahington, D.C.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell and W.C. Biggs. 1985. Mammals of
the Carolinas. Virginia and Maryland. The University of
North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. 255 p.
sari
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGeeY-
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 92-0089 - Scoping Southern Pines,
Proposed Improvements to Morganton Road
DATE: August 27, 1992
Douglas G. Lewis
Director
Planning and Assessment
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the proposed project. The attached comments are a
result of this review. More specific comments will be provided
during the environmental review process.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond. If, during the
preparation of the environmental document, additional information
is needed, the applicant is encouraged to notify our respective
divisions.
MM: bb
Attachments
cc: David Foster

K). Ros 27657. Raleieh North Cirolina 27011.768 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Oppornutm Attirmativc Action Emplowr
State of North Carolina ull vegan
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources -
Division of Forest Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Stanford M. Adams
Griffiths Forestry Center Director
2411 Garner Road
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
August 13, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Environmental Assessment Unit
FROM: Don H. Robbins
Staff Forester
SUBJECT: DOT EA-Scoping for Proposed Widening to Morganton Road (SR 1309)
from US 15-501 to West Broad Street in Southern Pines in Moore
County
PROJECT
DUE DATE
#93-0089
8-27-92
We have reviewed the above subject DOT Scoping Notice and have the following
comments:
1. We would be in favor of the proposed widening so long as it would -
a. Improve our entering and leaving our Southern Pines Fire Tower.
b. Reduce our travel time of our fire control equipment leaving
Southern Pines Tower going to wildfires.
C. Not interfere with our emergency fire control equipment going
to fires during the construction phase.
2. Woodland will be involved and the EA should address the following -
a. The total forest land acreage that would be taken out of forest
production as a result of new right-of-way purchases.
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh. North Carolina 27611.7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmadve Action Emplover
/Page 2
b. The productivity of the forest soils as indicated by the soil
series that would be involved within the proposed right-of-way.
C. The impact upon existing greenways within the area of the
proposed project.
d. The provisions that the contractor will take to sell any
merchantable timber that is to be removed. This practice is
encouraged to minimize the need for piling and burning during
construction. If any burning is needed, the contractor should
comply with all laws and regulations pertaining to debris
burning.
e. The provisions that the contractor will take during the
construction phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation and
construction damage to forest land outside the right-of-way and
construction limits. Trees outside construction limits should
be protected from construction activities to avoid:
1. Skinning of tree trunks by machinery.
2. Soil compaction and root exposure or injury by heavy
equipment.
3. Adding layers of fill dirt over the root systems of trees,
a practice that impairs root aeration.
4. Accidental spilling of petroleum products or other
damaging substances over the root systems'of trees.
DER: la
pc: Warren Boyette - CO
Gene Barnes - District Forester - D3
Robert Edwards - Moore County Ranger
File

?- 1
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources: -
DiNqision of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor August 14, 1992 A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Acting Director
MEMORANDUM
To: Monica Swihart 4''
Through: John Dorney?
From: Eric Galamb OX
Subject: Water Quality Checklist for EA/EIS/Scoping Documents
Morganton Road Upgrade from US 15-501 to W. Broad Street
Moore County
TIP #U-2420
EHNR # 93-0089, DEM WQ # 6543
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental Management requests that
the following topics be discussed in the EA/EIS/Scoping documents:
A. Will borrow or waste locations be in wetlands?
B. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The stream
classifications should be current.
C. Identify the linear feet of stream channelization/relocations. If the original
stream banks were vegetated, it requested that the channelized/relocated
stream banks be revegetated.
D. Number of stream crossings.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to be employed.
F. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests that these catch
basins be placed at all water supply stream crossings. Identify the responsible
party for maintenance.
G. Please ensure that sediment and erosion control measures are not placed in
wetlands.
REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Ralcigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6205 919/456-1541 704/663-1699 919/571-4700 919/946-6451 919/395-3900 919/596-7007
e
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Wetland Impacts
i) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and delineating
jurisdictional wetlands.
ii) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
iii) Have wetland impacts. been minimized?
iv) Mitigation measures to compensate for habitat losses.
v) Wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
vi) Total wetland impacts.
vii) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from DEM.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required for this project.
Please be aware that 401 Certification may be denied if wetland impacts have not
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Applications
requesting coverage under our General Certification 14 will require written
concurrence.
sr1309.sco
cc: Eric Galamb

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission P,
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 276041188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
FROM: Dennis Stewart, Manager
Habitat Conservation Program
Date: August 21, 1992
SUBJECT: Request for comments on improvements to Morganton Rd.'
(SR 1309) from US-1 to W. Broad Street (SR 2035),
Southern Pines, Moore County, North Carolina, TIP No.
U-2420, SCH Project No. 93-0089.
The N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) has
completed a review of the proposed project and possible impacts
on existing wildlife and fishery resources on the area. A staff
biologist conducted a site inspection on August 20, 1992. Our
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the N. C.
Environmental Policy Act (G.S. 113A-1 et seq., as amended; 1 NCAC
25), and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
This project involves improvements to a suburban
thoroughfare along existing alignment. The NCWRC encourages use
of existing alignment whenever possible and supports the N. C.
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) in its choice of such an
alternative for this project. Our concerns involve the impacts
of highway work on adjacent upland habitat, particularly that of
the red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW), and on wetland and stream
habitat along a small tributary to Watson Lake near the western
project terminus.
The environmental document should include complete
inventories of fisheries and wildlife resources within, adjacent
to, or using the construction corridor, including accurate data
on State and Federally listed rare, threatened, endangered, or
"special concern" species. The NCWRC is aware of well over 100
RCW records for Moore County, and potential habitat areas exist
near the project corridor. Additional information on listed
Memo Page 2 August 21, 1992
species may be obtained from Randy Wilson, Nongame and Endangered
Species Program Manager, at [phone].
Impacts to the Watson Lake tributary are presently occurring
along the study corridor as a result of disposal of spoil -
material in the floodplain at the existing stream crossing.
Sedimentation of this system is also evident on a nearby NCDOT
project site along US 15/501, immediately downstream of the study
corridor. Cumulative impacts of such degradation and limited
success of implementation of Best Management Practices by the
NCDOT and its contractors will be a major factor in NCWRC
evaluation of subsequent permit applications, and the
environmental document should address such concerns in detail for
this project. Acreages of upland and/or wetland habitat impacted
should be listed and mapped by cover type, and the contribution
of this project to the cumulative loss of such habitats should be
assessed. Borrow or fill sites should be included in projections
of habitat impacts, if applicable.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to planning
stages for this project. If we can further assist your office,
please call David Yow, Highway Project Coordinator, at (919) 528-
9887.
cc: Ken Knight, District 6 Wildlife Biologist
Wayne Chapman, District 6 Fisheries Biologist
Randy Wilson, Nongame and Endangered Species Program
Manager
David Yow, Highway Project Coordinator
DLS/DLY/lp

State of North Carolina Reviewing Office:
_,:;?-•'Of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
L
L
L
C
C
L
JE
C
C
C
C
C
L
C
C.
F
? Pro'ect Number: Cl ! ?fjTFRGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW -PROJECT COMMENTS Due Date:
After review of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
ouestions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reversg-of the form.
All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same,-
a.nional Office. Normal Process
r rme
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REOUIREMENTS (statutory time
limit)
Permit to construct 6 operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions, b sewer
J construction contracts On-site inspection. Post-application
systems not discharging into state surface waters. technical conference usual (90 days)
NPDES - permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection. 90-120 days
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities Pre-application conference usual. Additionally. obtain permit to
discharging into state surface waters. construct wastewater treatment facility-granted alter NPDES Reply (NIA)
time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-whichever is later.

Water Use Permit
Pre-application technical conference usually necessary 30 days
(N/A)

Well Construction Permit
Complete application must be received and permit issued 7 days
prior to the installation of a well. (15 days)
Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property 55 days
1 Dredge and Fill Permit owner. On-site inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of (90'days)
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permit to construct 8 operate Air Pollution Abatement
60 days
facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21H.06 NIA (90 days)
1
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15A NCAC 2D.0520. % ?.
Demolition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with 15A 60 days
NCAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal NIA
prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group
919.733-0820.
(90 days)
Complex Source Permit required under 15A NCAC 2D.0800.
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion d sedimenlatro
control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Sect.) at least 30 20 days
days before beginning activity A fee of S30 for the first acre and 520.00 for each additional acre or art must accomoan the plan (30 days)
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect 10 the referrenced Local Ordinance: (30 days)
On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with EHNR. Bond amount
Mining Permit varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land Any area 30 days
mined greater than one acre must be permited. The appropriate bond (60 days)
must be received before the permit can be issued.
North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit 1 day
exceeds 4 days (NIA)
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit - 22 On-site inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required "if more 1 day
counties in coastal N.C. with organic soils than five acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections (N/A)
should be requested at least ten days before actual bum is planned."

Oil Refining Facilities
NIA 90.120 days
(NIA)
II permit required, application 60 days before begin construction.
Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans. - 30 days
Dam Safely Permit in,-,pect construction. certify construction is according to EHNR approv-
ed plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. And (60 days)
a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers An inspection of site is neces.
sary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of 5200.00 must ac-
company the application. An additional processing lee based on a
percentage or the total project cost wlll be required upon completion
PD'0$ Continued or. reverse
Normal Process

PERMITS
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REOUIREMENTS Time
(statutory time
limit)
r- 1
LJ Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well File surety bond of 55,000 with EHNR running to State of N
C
.
.
cond tional that any well opened by drill operator shall
upon
10 days
,
abandonment, be plugged according to EHNR rules and regulations. (NrA)
11
Ll Geophysical Exploration Permit _
A
pplication filed with EHNR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit
APPf cation by letter
No standard
li
10 days

O
State Lakes Construction Permit .
app
cation form.
Application f (NIA)
ee based on structure size is charged. Must include
descriptions d drawings of structure d proof of ownership 15
20 days
of riparian property. (N
(NrA)

401 Water Quality Certification

NIA 60 days

F (130 days)
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
2250.00 tee must accompany application 55 days
(150 tla s)
Y
CAMA Permit for MINOR development 550.00 fee must accompany application 22 days
(25 days)
O Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monuments need to be moved or destroyed, please notify:
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Abandonment of any wells. if required, must be in accordance with Title 15A, Subchapter 2C.0100.
Notification of the proper regional office is requested if -orphan" underground storage tanks (LISTS) are discovered during any excavation operation.
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H.1000 (Coastal Stormwater Rules) is required:
=(Nd ` Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority): Questi

REGIONL OFFICES
ons regarding these permits should be add
esseedto the Regional Offic

? A e marked below.
sheville flegional Office
59 Woodfi R Place
a
ce
? Fayetteville Regional Office
Asheville, NC
28801
Suite 714 Wachovia Building
[phone] Fayetteville, 28301
[phone] 1
? Mooresville Regional Offic
e
919 North Main Street, P.O. Box 950
? Raleigh Regional Office
Mooresville, NC 28115
[phone] 3800
Rale Barrett Drive, Suite 101
Raleigh, 27609
(919) 733.23 2314
? Washington Regional Offi
ce
1424 Carolina Avenue
? Wilmington Regional Office
Washington, NC 27889
127
Cardinal Drive Extension
[phone] Wilmington, NC 28405

? Winston-Salem R
i [phone]
eg
onal Office
8025 North Point Blvd.
Suite 100
Winston-Salem, NC 27106
[phone]
DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
August 25, 1992
J
Memorandum
rte,.
TO: Melba'McGee
FROM: Stephen Hall
SUBJECT: Scoping -- Morganton Road Improvements, Southern Pines
REFERENCE: 93-0089
The Natural Heritage Program database contains records for
several rare species occurring within the vicinity of the
proposed project. A colony of red-cockaded woodpeckers (Picoides
borealis), federally and state-listed as Endangered, has been
observed within the area to the northeast of the intersection of
SR 1309 and 1931. White wicky (Kalmia cuneata), a candidate for
federal listing and state-listed as Endangered, occurs within the
watershed crossed by the project just east of the intersection
with SR 1905. Other species occurring within two miles of the
project include resinous boneset (Eupatorium resinosum), a
candidate for federal listing and state-listed as Endangered,
sandhills pixie moss (Pyxidantherum brevifolia), state-listed as
Endangered, and coastal sedge (Carex exilis), a candidate for
state-listing.
Since several of these species can potentially exist within the
project area itself, we strongly recommend that a biological
survey be conducted along the entire route of the proposed
improvements. This survey should be conducted by qualified
biologists working during the appropriate seasons of the year.

a
fState of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resource,
Division of Land Resources
James G. Martin, Govemor PROJECT REVIEW CommENTs
William W. Cobey, Jr., secretary
Project Number: q
S l county:
Project Name: z U
Geodetic Survey
Charles H. Gardner
Director
This project will impact geodetic survey markers. N. C. Geodetic
Survey should be contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
? This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
Other (comments attached)
11 1 ?1 .3
For more information contact the Geodetic survey office a 4(919733-3853
C, LC
Reviewed' -,
Date
ty,.
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Q`tp,.. ,t,•
No comment
d?•??C Li a??"
This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if more
than one (1) acre will be disturbed.
If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of the erosion and sedimentation control plan.
If any portion of the project is located within a High
Zone Quality. Water
(HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
increased design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
.erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Land Quality Section at [phone].
Reviewer
Date
P.O. Box 27687 • Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
r SWi
State of North Carolina =''?
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
August 10, 1992
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: David Harrison
David W. Sides
Director
SUBJECT: Improvements to Morganton Road (SR 1309), Moore County.
Project No. 93-0089
The proposed improvements will occur along the southwest section
of Southern Pines. The Environmental Assessment should identify
any unique, prime, or important farmlands that would be impacted
by the project. A wetlands evaluation should be included.
Actions that minimize impacts are desired. Local soils
information is available through the Moore Soil and Water
Conservation District [phone]. The District
Conservationist is Barton Roberson.
DH/tl

,•o
yv,
i
PO Box 27687 P-ilcigh. Kurth Carolina 2 :niI 76.47 Tclcphunc 9197,,'302

5?- •s ?''+
A?m ?)CtTr2 o GJ?t1 L?? Lr2
140 MEMORIAL PARK COURT
SOUTHERN PINES. NORTH CAROLINA 28387 FAX [phone]
August 24, 1992
Robert Panton
Executive Director
Pee Dee Council of
302 Leak Street
Governments
Rockingham, NC 28379
Dear Bob:

AL'S 2 1992

In reference to your letter concerning improvements to Morganton
Road, the Town of Southern Pines is working with the State very
closely on this project. The Town has a desire to have the road
between Pinecrest Plaza and the Town ballfields as a four-lane
median divided facility. We feel that this would allow us
significant landscaping opportunities in the median and give us a
chance to beautify that portion of town.
The Town is waiting on D.O.T. as it completes its traffic counts.
There has been one public meeting held on the project. A
significant amount of feedback was received from the citizens that
they did not want the portion of Morganton between U.S. 1 and Broad
Street to be expanded. There seemed to be more agreement to the
concept of expanding Morganton Road west of U.S. 1. The Town
Council has not formally taken a position on this particular issue.
The concerns related to this particular section of Morganton Road
are based on a desire to protect the Shaw House, which is the
oldest building in Southern Pines, as well as to protect
established trees along the route and businesses.
Bob, that basically describes where we are to date on the project.
If you need any more information, please give me a call at 692-
7021.
Sincerely,
Kyl Sonnenberg
T Manager
_ C. " ` _
T3 P,?,zn r?,
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Planning Division
August 27, 1992
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
0
AUG 281992
'-"GSION OF ?
HwAYS P
CSEAF?CN?
This is in response to your letter dated July 27, 1992, requesting
information to assist in evaluating potential environmental impacts of
"U-2420, Southern Pines, Morganton Road (SR 1309), from US 15-501 to
W. Broad Street (SR 2035), Moore County." The project would consist of
widening the existing roadway to a multi-lane facility with bridge and
culvert extensions or additions as required.
The SR 1309 widening would not cross any U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
constructed flood control or navigation projects.
The proposed project is sited in the town of Southern Pines and its
extraterritorial limits. Southern Pines participates in the Federal Flood
Insurance Program. SR 1309 does not cross a stream with an identified
flood hazard. The roadway widening and extended or added drainage
structures should be designed with no more than a 1.0-foot flood surcharge
above the 100-year flood. Even though the project does not cross a stream
with an identified flood hazard, the project's hydraulic effect should be
coordinated with Southern Pines for compliance with their Flood Plain
Ordinance. Executive Order 11988 should be reviewed and complied with.
Department of the Army permit authorization, pursuant to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for the
discharge of excavated or fill material in waters of the United States or
any adjacent and/or isolated wetlands in conjunction with your proposed
improvements, including disposal of construction debris. On February 6,
1990, the Department of the Army and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) establishing procedures to
determine the type and level of mitigation necessary to comply with the
-2-
Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Under this MOA, "first,
impacts to waters and wetlands should be avoided or minimized through the
selection of the least damaging, practical alternative; second, taking'
appropriate and practical steps to minimize impacts on waters and
wetlands; and finally, compensating for any remaining unavoidable impacts
to the extent appropriate and practical." When final plans for the
widening of SR 1309 are complete, including the extent and location of
any wo?-k within waters of the United States and wetlands, uur• Regulatory
Branch would appreciate the opportunity to review those plans for a
project-specific determination of Department of the Army permit
requirements. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Jeff
Richter of our Regulatory Branch in Wilmington, North Carolina, at
[phone].
We appreciate the opportunity to provide information for this project.
If we can be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to
contact us.
Sincerely,
Lawre c Lr
Chief, 1)
Saunders
nning Division
W 6- U
.. RArr
?d rp?0
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor August 14, 1992 A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Acting Dimctor
MEMORANDUM
To: Monica Swihart
Through: John Dornef '(
From: Eric Galamb 0 )
Subject: Water Quality Checklist for EA/EIS/Scoping Documents
Morganton Road Upgrade from US 15-501 to W. Broad Street
Moore County
TIP #U-2420
EHNR # 93-0089, DEM WQ # 6543
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental Management requests that
the following topics be discussed in the EA/EIS/Scoping documents:
A. Will borrow or waste locations be in wetlands?
B. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The stream
classifications should be current.
C. Identify the linear feet of stream channelization/relocations. If the original
stream banks were vegetated, it requested that the channelized/relocated
stream banks be revegetated.
D. Number of stream crossings.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to be employed.
F. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests that these catch
basins be placed at all water supply stream crossings. Identify the responsible
party for maintenance.
G. Please ensure that sediment and erosion control measures are not placed in
wetlands.
REGIONAL OFFICES
Asheville Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/571-4700 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affmnative Action Employer
. ... ?L
H. Wetland Impacts
i) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and delineating
jurisdictional wetlands.
ii) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
iii) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
iv) Mitigation measures to compensate for habitat losses.
v) Wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
vi) Total wetland impacts.
vii) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from DEM.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required for this project.
Please be aware that 401 Certification may be denied if wetland impacts have not
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Applications
requesting coverage under our General Certification 14 will require written
concurrence.
sr1309.sco
cc: Eric Galamb