U-2811_complete file

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 276363726
October 19, 2004
Ms. Gail Grimes, P.E.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Ms. Grimes:
This letter is in response to your request for comments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
on the potential environmental impacts of the proposed widening of SR 1219 (Ireland Drive) from US
401 (Raeford Road) south to SR 1141 (Cumberland Road) to a multi-lane facility in Cumberland County,
North Carolina (TIP No. U-2811). These comments provide scoping information in accordance with
provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
Due to the highly urbanized nature of the project study area, the Service believes that effects to fish and
wildlife resources should be minimal. The Service recommends the following general conservation
measures to avoid or minimize environmental impacts to fish and wildlife resources:
1. Wetland and forest impacts should be avoided and minimized to the maximal extent practical.
Areas exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological value important to the watershed or region
should be avoided. Highway shoulder and median widths should be reduced through wetland
areas;
2. Crossings of streams and associated wetland systems should use existing crossings and/or occur
on a bridge structure wherever feasible. Where bridging is not feasible, culvert structures that
maintain natural water flow and hydraulic regimes without scouring or impeding fish and wildlife
passage should be employed;
3. Bridges and approaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in damming or
constriction of the channel or flood plain. To the extent possible, piers and bents should be
placed outside the bank-full width of the stream. If spanning the flood plain is not feasible,
culverts should be installed in the flood plain portion of the approach to restore some of the
hydrological functions of the flood plain and reduce high velocities of flood waters within the
affected area;
4. Bridge designs should include provisions for roadbed and deck drainage to flow through a
vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer should be large enough to
alleviate any potential effects from run-off of storm water and pollutants;
5. Off-site detours should be used rather than construction of temporary, on-site bridges. For
projects requiring an on-site detour in wetlands or open water, such detours should be aligned
along the side of the existing structure which has the. least and/or least quality of fish and wildlife
habitat. At the completion of construction, the detour area should be entirely removed and the
impacted areas be planted with appropriate vegetation, including trees if necessary;
6. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, a plan for compensatory mitigation to
offset unavoidable impacts should be provided early in the planning process. Opportunities to
protect mitigation areas in perpetuity via conservation easements, land trusts or by other means
should be explored at the outset;
7. Best Management Practices (BMP) for Protection of Surface Waters should be implemented; and
8. Activities within designated riparian buffers should be avoided or minimized.
Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act requires that all federal action agencies (or their designated
non-federal representatives), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized,
funded, or carried out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any
federally-listed threatened or endangered species. A biological assessment/evaluation may be prepared to
fulfill the section 7(a)(2) requirement and will expedite the consultation process. To assist you, a county-
by-county list of federally protected species known to occur in North Carolina and information on their
life histories and habitats can be found on our web page at http://nc-es.fws.gov/es/countyfr.html .
Although the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database does not indicate any known
occurrences of listed species near the project vicinity, use of the NCNHP data should not be substituted
for actual field surveys if suitable habitat occurs near the project site. The NCNHP database only
indicates the presence of known occurrences of listed species and does not necessarily mean that such
species are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. If suitable habitat
occurs within the project vicinity for any listed species, surveys should be conducted to determine
presence or absence of the species.
If you determine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely to
adversely affect) a listed species, you should notify this office with your determination, the results of your
surveys, survey methodologies, and an analysis of the effects of the action on listed species, including
consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, before conducting any activities that might affect
the species. If you determine that the proposed action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse,
direct or indirect effect) on listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concurrence.
We reserve the right to review any federal permits that may be required for this project, at the public
notice stage. Therefore, it is important. that resource agency coordination occur early in the planning
process in order to resolve any conflicts that may arise and minimize delays in project implementation. In
addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the environmental documentation for this project
include the following in sufficient detail to facilitate a thorough review of the action:
1. A clearly defined and detailed purpose and need for the proposed project, supported by
tabular data, if available, and including a discussion of the project's independent utility;
2. A description of the proposed action with an analysis of all alternatives being considered,
including the upgrading of existing roads and a "no action" alternative;
A description of the fish and wildlife resources, and their habitats, within the project impact area
that may be directly or indirectly affected;
4. The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted by
filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of wetland impact should be
differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI). Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987 Coms
of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers;
5. The anticipated environmental impacts, both temporary and permanent, that would be likely to
occur as a direct result of the proposed project. The assessment should also include the extent to
which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to natural resources, and how this
and similar projects contribute to cumulative adverse effects;
6. Design features and construction techniques which would be employed to avoid or minimize
impacts to fish and wildlife resources, both direct and indirect, and including fragmentation and
direct loss of habitat;
7. Design features, construction techniques, or any other mitigation measures which would be
employed at wetland crossings and stream channel relocations to avoid or minimize impacts to
waters of the US; and,
8. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, project planning should include a
compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting the unavoidable impacts.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please continue to advise us during
the progression of the planning process, including your official determination of the
impacts of this project. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan
at [phone], ext. 32.
nc i
Pete inEcological Services Supervisor
cc: Richard Spencer, USACE, Wilmington, NC
Beth Barnes, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
November 17, 2004
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ms. Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator
NCDENR Office of Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
FROM: Beth Haines Barnes, NCDOT Coordinator 06
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheets for Improvements o SR 1219 (Ireland Drive) from US 401
(Raeford Road) south to SR 1141 (Cumberland Road) in Cumberland County,
Project Number: 05-0120
WSB Element No.36598.1.1
TIP Project U-2811
Division: 06.
In reply to your correspondence dated October 6, 2004 in which you requested comments for the above
referenced project, preliminary analysis of the project indicates that Buckhead Creek and its unnamed
tributaries lie within the project area. These features are classified as class C waters. The Division of
Water Quality offers these comments:
Environmental Documentation
1. Any environmental documents pertaining to this project should provide a detailed and itemized
presentation of the proposed impacts to wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping. There
should be a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is required, it is
preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental
documentation. While the NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted
that for projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of
a 401 Water Quality Certification.
2. The environmental documents should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed
project's impacts to wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping as well as the cumulative and
secondary impacts anticipated as a result of this project in relation to the proposed Ireland Drive
project.
3. Within the Cape Fear Basin, urban stormwater runoff is a major concern. Stormwater should be
designed to flow into buffer areas or retention basins rather than routed directly into streams.
401 Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 One
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 NorthCarohna
Phone: [phone] / FAX [phone] / Internet: htro://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwettands An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper Nahmally
Scoping Comments U-2811
Page 2
November 17, 2004
5. Borrow/waste areas should not be located in wetlands. It is likely that compensatory mitigation will
be required if wetlands are impacted by waste or borrow as well as utility relocations.
6. The DWQ requests that DOT adhere to North Carolina regulations entitled, "Design Standards in
Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0124) and use Best Management Practices for the
Protection of Surface Waters (March 1997) specifically using all applicable preventive and control
measures during the design, construction and maintenance of this project. These measures should be
implemented prior to any ground-disturbing activities to minimize impacts to downstream aquatic
resources.
7. Wetland delineation should be performed prior to permit application. Wetland and stream impacts
should be avoided to the maximum extent practical. If this is not possible, alternatives that minimize
wetland impacts should be chosen. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules { 15A NCAC
2H.0506(b)(6) 1, mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single
perennial stream. In the event that mitigation becomes required, the mitigation plan should be
designed to replace appropriate lost functions and values. ?Onsite mitigation is preferable, however,
the NC Ecological Enhancement Program (EEP) is availablo,for use as compensatory mitigation.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water
Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality
standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please contact Beth Haines Barnes at [phone].
pc: Richard Spencer, USACE Wilmington Field Office
Gary Jordan, USFWS
Travis Wilson, NCWRC
Chris Militscher, USEPA Region IV, Raleigh Field Office
Central Files
File Copy
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form
Project Number.
/? -- 2l?
W D County:
C Date Reoeived:
?2g Date Response Due (firm deadline):

This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville Air XSoil & Water ? Marine Fisheries
)II.Fayetteville Water ? Coastal Management
11 Mooresville Groundwater Wildlife ? Water Resources
?Ali s 1?JD I?
? Raleigh Land Quality Engineer t
Environmental Health
? Washington ? Recreational Consultant )(Forest Resources ? Solid Waste Mgmt
? Wilmington ? Land Resources ? Radiation Protection
? Winston-Salem Parks & Recreation ? Other
Water Quality To.
" e
? Groundwater
? Air Quality
Manager Sign4XURegion: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
? No objection to project as proposed.
? No Comment
17 Insufficient information to complete review
? Other (specify or attach comments)
E F. 12 0 W Pm D
NOV 0 2 2004
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLAN%S AND STORMWWATER BRANCH
Kr-1 v KN IV:
Melba McGee
Environmental Coordinator -
Office of Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
' ? ??0111213.14 iS,6l,
OCT
2004
U' DELVED
?tJ1 W Q% ,
Cr' A c
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDo TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
October 6, 2004
MEMORANDUM TO: Ms. Chrys Baggett, Director
State Clearinghouse
Department of Administration
FROM: Gail Grimes, P.E., Assistant Maw
NCDOT - PD&EA Branch
SUBJECT: Request for Comments for Environmental and Engineering Studies
Related to Improvements to SR 1219 (Ireland Drive) from US 401
(Raeford Road) south to SR 1141 (Cumberland Road) in
Cumberland County, North Carolina, VNBS Project No. 36598.1.1,
TIP Project No. U-2811
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has retained the firm of URS
Corporation - North Carolina (URS) to prepare environmental documentation and engineering
studies for the proposed improvements to the approximate 2.1-mile widening of SR 1'2109
(Ireland Drive) in Fayetteville, North Carolina.
Study Area Characteristics
The project is located on the western side of the City of Fayetteville in Cumberland County,
North Carolina (See Figures I and 2 for general location). The study area is comprised of an
approximate 300-foot wide study corridor centered on existing Ireland Drive. The project study
area falls within the municipal planning limits of the City of Fayetteville. The study area is zoned
low density urban with multiple single-family residences, multi-family complexes, five (5)
churches, and five (5) schools all located along Ireland Drive. Commercial development is
positioned mainly at the north and south ends of Ireland Drive at the intersections with US 401
(Raeford Road) and SR 1141 (Cumberland Road) (See Figure 3 for boundaries of the study
area).
Project Description
The proposed action is the improvement of existing SR 1219 (Ireland Drive) located in the City
of Fayetteville. The project is designated in the 2004-2010 NCDOT Transportation Improvement
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENTANO ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER WEBSITE: WWW.NCDOT.ORG RALEIGH NC
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
. WP -,,
2
Program (TIP) as TIP No. U-2811 and described as "SR 1219 (Ireland Drive), SR 1141
(Cumberland Road) to US 401 (Raeford Road). Widen to multi-lanes."
The goal of the study is to identify solutions to improve the operations of the transportation
system associated with existing Ireland Drive while limiting impacts to the human and natural
environment components of the corridor.
Proposed Need and Purpose
NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION
The primary needs for the proposed action include the following:
• Existing deficiencies in traffic operations, levels of service (LOS) and safety,
• Inadequate accessibility and efficiency of the study area roadway network; and
• Increased projected population volumes will exasperate each issue if a solution is not
applied.
PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The purpose of the proposed action includes the following objectives:
• Improve traffic operations, levels of service (LOS), and safety in the vicinity of existing
SR 1219 (Ireland Drive), and associated intersections with US 401 (Raeford Road) and
SR 1411 (Cumberland Road).
Needs Addressed: Existing Ireland Drive is primarily a two-way, two lane paved roadway
with limited curb and gutter facilities and temporary sidewalks. Significant institutional
development including five (5) schools and five (5) churches creates bottleneck conditions
during AM and PM peaks along the corridor. These deficiencies cause significant travel
delay, increase potential for accidents, and contribute to the inefficient operation of motor
vehicles. Future needs and projected LOS are also deficient and therefore will cause
increased travel delay, increased potential for accidents, and contribute to the inefficient
operation of motor vehicles. A temporary sidewalk has been recently added; however,
permanent solutions including long-term sidewalks and appropriate markings/signage will
benefit local users.
• Improve local traffic conditions flowing through the existing corridor.
Needs Addressed: Projected increases in traffic volumes will increasingly diminish this
important urban connector's ability to function; thus, impeding the efficiency of the overall
transportation system. A study completed in 1992 predicted the average daily traffic (ADT)
volumes on Ireland Drive in the Year 2012 to be 16,000 vehicles per day (VPD). Data
collected for the Year 2000 already depict existing traffic volumes approaching 15,000 VPD.

3
Human Environment
Local citizenry and their respective environs situated along existing Ireland Drive are well
established and cohesive in nature. Several of the neighborhoods were built in the 1960s with
later generations of the original families still in residence, and all have developed extensive
networks over the years to local facilities such as churches, schools, shopping and parks. Many of
these small neighborhoods are also dominated by low income and/or minority residents. This
project will be developed in accordance with Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended.
Cultural Resources
Historical
Within the project study area there are no structures or properties listed on the National Register
of Historic Places and previous surveys do not show any unlisted historic architectural resources.
Architectural
The project study area is located in a densely developed area which has suffered from
disturbances over the years. A review of state records indicates one recorded site approximately
1,100 meters east of the existing intersection of Ireland Drive and US 401. However, this site if
determined eligible, should not be impacted by any construction activities.
Natural Features
The project study area is located within the Upper Cape Fear River Basin and the majority of the
study area has been previously developed. Preliminary investigations did not document any
protected species occurrences or unique habitat within the study area. Natural features in and/or
adjacent to the project study area include several small wetland features associated with unnamed
tributaries to Buckhead Creek, Buckhead Creek itself, and Buckhead Lake. Riparian buffer rules
are not in effect for this basin; however, are expected before the end of the current study and will
be followed accordingly. The Buckhead system drains the majority of the study area to the south,
eventually reaching the Cape Fear River.
Schedules
This letter constitutes solicitation for scoping comments related to the described project. Please
respond concerning any beneficial or adverse impacts of the proposed project relating to the
interest of your agency to allow the impacts to be fully studied. If applicable, please identify any
permits or approvals that may be required by your agency.

4
If you have questions or comments concerning this project, please address those to:
Ms. Gail Grimes, P.E., Assistant Manager
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Thank you for your cooperation.
KSL/plr
Attachments
T
HARNETT
N
0°
Cn
nden
IMOORE
Spring
„r r
r P
? N
i s
t
PROJECT LOCATION E=ayetteville
IHOKE

f
Autryvil
Hope
M'Is s9, r--V
.n. 'o
111
I `Ni
9a SR -7
Paxton
Lumber Bridge
BE ON
CUM6BERLAND
Rennert Saint Pauls ,.
v, N
0 2.5 5 7.5 10
Miles
Toe Data
ESRI Sources: GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION
ESR
URS Corporation - North Carolina US Census Bureau Ireland Drive Widening Figure 1
1600 Perimeter Park Drive NCNHP TIP No. U-2811
Morrisville NC 27560 FEMA Cumberland County, North Carolina
Wad

?r xv
raw fie
lit
06
- 401r 5 Raeford Rd
FCiy? r? ? r
r
Ireland Drive ? °"' sot
1
et
,
v
mTN]
? tteville Ronal/ Grannis I Faye
A?IA -dill

0 0.75 1.5 225 3
Miles
PROJECT LOCATION
Ireland Drive Widening Figure 2
TIP No. U-2811
Cumberland County, North Carolina

Ireland Dr TIP U-2811

r Flood Hazard
School
, Minimal
Road Moderate
M 100 Year Flood
? T&E Occurrences
V Muni Boundary
Airport
Ew Data Sources:

? ESRI
URS Corporation - North Carolina US Census Bureau
Iro- ?_ -- -- -- - NCNPP

y k u rM v4' S ti:
t? ? °t 1 _ ?,e ? wr w? F
r
r'.
L a n
h V4
Wei' J r"?}k S } sti
I-A
if At
? -
4TS
` ;{3 v yr
•..r, { Y4yna 0 l,? ? 'A ? ANN ??.
1*9
Iv.
I_r
y p
4- '4
W. vo?
r* Wyk , ??'?° +i?
1_;Z404
4?6 ,L ?-? 1 tea. ,•° x y ,x'`
VI,
tip,
L ! ? k
1. )
c..
1 AA
r
? p q f yyn k1.
s*
$:
m $'r x v;
T a,'s-
D
PN Zx3 .?,,w ;r'YC+' ?4;,.?.-i.{J,.3 .aS •, 3 eM?1: _ f'3?_;
i v , l
'r ek
s y D ?l.r?
A ??z z o n ;.'
44
Y ,
9 a a ?K
OD z-, m m 46
C 'Z
'^ 0, 4f/1 BUSINESS "
0 rrt 5 _ -
A Z .. ..