The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutr-2501b' o > > e ? = O O O o ? m T N Cl) Cn v X ? C» ? ? fall N [v N V v y N O m IV oz a o ? s ? ?' N d fn a ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. 9600-G Southern Pine Blvd. Charlotte, NC 28273 704-523-7225 704-996-4799 MOBILE 704-523-7226 FAX www.esinc.cc Paul Petitgout Vice President ppetitgout@esinc.cc 0 ------ 'I j ??.q-?EaCG'? Co f"v?4- 9r?-s?3? rQ? ----- - -- = - - - ------------ --- -- - _...... _ -- - -- x -Akwtc -- -- a ah U _f w_ -51 _. - - - - ----- - ,.__? ( - _ s - 5 -- -3 2 q1o /z/ r -- - - -- --- inl 4-9 - - s - ° ' -- _ - - - - - ---- - 1 7' wt?? i l I . Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director Division of Water Quality Division of Water Quality Department of Environmental and Natural Resources 401 Oversight/Express Permit, Program Development and Transportation Permitting Units Street Address: 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250 Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 Mailing Address: 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Contact Information: Phone #: 919-733-1786 Fax #: 919-733-6893 Fax To: J-jm Sm;44-i \ Fax #: -log.. 64, a. low. Company: Q K 4= Number of pages including cover sheet: 2 Notes or special instructions: Date: 11-15-04 401 0versightlExpress Unit l? 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Phone: 919-733-1786 / FAX 919-733.6893 / Internet: http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands o Carolina ?tura!! An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper R .. ?- .' ?: v nllcheel P. eulry, Go.mae Willivm0. Bev Ir., Spry NMi GroliuAwlmmr of rnvimomme sd Na1w.J imounv P- 'c wi,w l0i?opi rF. oionar Oiviuun d walee Q,,,I;q Division of Water Quality Department of Environmental and Natural Resources 401 Oversight/Express Permit, Program Development and Transportation Permitting Units Street Address: 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250 Raleigh, NC 276042260 Mailing Address: 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Contact Information: Phone N: 919-733-1786 Fax d: 919-733-6893 Fax To: T,- S.1,:-I1+ Fax*: 568. to2.} Company: QRa- Date:. 11- 15-Di Number of pages including cover sheet: 2 Notes or special instructions: Sm. 111e sign- ?n 6tne.e4- q5 ' xw ksed i?-? 1930Nai Send Comr.R&th,NOTComo2799.1050 2L1 GaE9e.aeukwM, ae1 M. Raiigq WM C-1-27e04 ft- nM33-1106 f FAX 91917M3 K!V? h9p;//hT.m M.wn1.?.rh,ed. Anfgwl0ppomni[pAftmdMAOm Ep"r-SMApw/SOto%PonCm wPapa •••(M11IwSNKH1 Mawfiooa ZNSOSH 30 BJKd lsHaa NplclCyrp{ipt 310 : sslins3H w0a : Mow 11TZ.00 : aKIs aEsdVTS 8T:60 ST AON : HKIZ 111VIS Z/z : SSOEfd VZOT899VOLT6 : SNOHd £689££L6T6 'I8Z SQNEi T,T 7M-aMa aKVN 6T:60 NOW V00Z-STAON BZKa NOIRMN00 ONIMS 4 M 5TH' 4 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MICHAEL F. EASLEY GOVERNOR MEMORANDUM TO: Beth Barnes, NCDENR-DWQ Felix Davila., FHWA Gary Jordan, USFWS Sarah McBride, NCDCR-SHPO Chris Mihtscher, EPA Richard Spencer, USACE Travis Wilson, NCWRC LYNDo TIrPETT SECRETARY D NOV G Z?IO? WEn,QiAto DENR - WA.rg? G?UALfI ' FROM: Kristina Solberg, PE NCDOT Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch SUBJECT: US 11 Rockingham Bypass, Richmond County, Federal Aid No. NHF-1(1), State Project No. 8.T580501, WBS No. 34437.1.1, T.I.P. No. R-2501 DATE: November 1, 2004 Attached for your files is the draft handout, including maps, for the Concurrence Points 2A/4A Merger field meeting on November 10, 2004 for the US 1 Rockingham Bypass/Widening from Sandhill Road (SR 1971) to Marston Road (SR 1001) in Richmond County. We will plan to meet in the parking lot of the North Carolina Speedway at 10:00 AM prior to visiting the project site. Project Team Members should confirm their attendance with me either by email or phone by end of day, Friday, November 51h. Team members should also plan on bringing a field lunch. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at (919) 733-7844, extension 310. Attachment cc: Derrick Weaver, NCDOT-PDEA Drew Joyner, NCDOT- TIP Program Manager Richard L. Modhn, Qk4 file 94600P2 • US 1 Rockingham Bypass From Sandhill Road (SR 1971) to Marston Road (SR 1001) Richmond County, North Carolina Federal-Aid Project No. NHF-1(1) State Project No. 8.T580501 WBS No. 34437.1.1 TIP No. R-2501 NEPA/SECTION 404 MERGER 01 PROCESS CONCURRENCE POINT 2A/4A MEETING Prepared for: North Carolina Department of Transportation Prepared by: QK4 7520 East Independence Blvd. Suite 120 Charlotte, North Carolina 28227 November 2004 • TABLE OF CONTENTS US 1 From Sandhill Road (SR 1971) to Marston Road (SR 1001) NEPA/Section 404 Merger 01 Process Concurrence Points 2A/4A Meeting Chapter 1. Introduction 2. Purpose of Meeting 3. Project History. 4. Selection of LEDPA 5. Bridging and Alignment Review (Concurrence Point 2A) 6. Avoidance and Minimization (Concurrence Point 4A) 7. Archaeological Resources 8. Threatened and Endangered Species List of Tables 1. Table la- Jurisdictional Waters/Stream Impacts 2. Table lb - Jurisdictional Waters/Pond Impacts 3. Table 2 - Jurisdictional Wetland Impacts 4. Archaeological Impacts 5. Threatened and Endangered Species List of Figures 1. Figure 1: Project Location Map 2. Figures IA -1H: Jurisdictional Areas (Aerial Photographs showing corridor, preliminary design, wetlands, streams and ponds). Project Correspondence 1. Letter from US Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers (Wilmington District) dated November 23, 1998. US 1 From Sandhill Road (SR 1971) to Marston Road (SR 1001) Richmond County Federal-Aid Project No. NHF-1(1) State Project No. 8.T580501 WBS No. 34437.1.1 TIP Project No. R-2501 NEPA/Section 404 Merger 01 Process Concurrence Points 2AAA Meeting 1. Introduction The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Wilmington District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) have established procedures to integrate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act for those surface transportation projects on new location and/or those projects that will require an Individual Section 404 permit. As shown in Figure 1, the proposed US 1 project consists of the relocation and widening of US 1 in Richmond County from Sandhill Road (SR 1971) south of Rockingham to Marston Road (SR 1001) north of Rockingham, a distance of approximately 19.2 miles. In the future, the segment of the R-2501 project along US 1 from the US 74 Bypass southward into South Carolina will be designated as I-73. The proposed project from Sandhill Road (SR 1971) to Fox Road (SR 1606) north of Rockingham will consist of a four-lane divided freeway with full access control. Interchanges for this section of the project are being planned at the US 74 Bypass, Airport Road (SR 1966) and US 74 Business. From north of Fox Road (SR 1606) to the project terminus at Marston Road (SR 1001), the project will consist of widening the existing roadway as a five-lane section. 2. Purpose of Meeting The purpose of the meeting is for the Merger Team to discuss issues pertaining to Concurrence Point 2A (Bridging Decisions) and 4A (Avoidance and Minimization) so that concurrence can be reached. The issues being reviewed at this meeting include: • Possible bridge locations • Impacts to jurisdictional areas (streams, wetlands and other surface waters), threatened and endangered species and cultural resources • Avoidance and minimization 1 PROJECT IACATION iv N ,TS. ORM 2 v ELLERBE dF? RICHMOND COUNTY 0 MA BLEWETT Ac SCOTLAND FALLS LAKE COUNTY ................... OCKINGHA SVILLE 177 74 74 ANSON HA COUNTY 1 S?UTN CAROLINA Figure 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP US 1, TIP NO. R-2501 RICHMOND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA A Field Review Meeting to review the impacts to jurisdictional areas for the US 1 Rockingham Bypass is scheduled for November 10, 2004. 3. Project History Concurrence on the purpose and need for the project (Concurrence Point 1) was provided in the NCDOT memorandum dated October 2, 1997 entitled, "Integration of the Section 404 and NEPA Process - A Team Approach for Transportation Projects in North Carolina." A letter dated November 23, 1998 from the U.S. Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers (Wilmington District) reaffirmed their concurrence on the purpose and need for the US 1 project (see attached letter). In February 1997, the Phase I Route Location and Environmental Study for the US 1 Rockingham Bypass was completed. The purpose of the Phase I study was to provide sufficient documentation in terms of social and environmental impacts to allow the selection of those alternatives that could be considered both reasonable and feasible for construction of the proposed action. A Project Team meeting was held on September 16, 1998 to discuss refinement of the reasonable and feasible alternatives presented in the Phase I document. As a result of this meeting, Corridor Segments M and N were eliminated because of their potential adverse environmental impacts and as a result of NCDOT's decision to reconsider widening of existing US 1 from its northern project terminus south to a point where a logical connection could be made to a four-lane controlled access facility on new location. Corridor Segment B was eliminated due to environmental justice concerns. The elimination of these corridors resulted in four remaining build alternatives identified as "reasonable and feasible" from the original twenty-seven alternatives. These alternatives (Alternate 7, 14, 21 and 24) were presented and evaluated in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). The DEIS, which was approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on June 30, 1999, evaluated three basic alternatives in detail: the No-Build alternative, the "Improve Existing Facilities" alternative, and the Bypass alternative. The Bypass alternative consisted of three primary corridors located between Rockingham and Hamlet with several crossover corridors. Following detailed evaluations, the "Improve Existing Facilities" alternative, the No-Build alternative and twenty-three bypass alternatives were 3 eliminated from further consideration. Four (4) bypass alternatives (Alternates 7, 14, 21 and 24) were identified as final build alternates and were further evaluated in the DEIS. 4. Selection of LEDPA Following review of the detailed studies for the No-Build Alternative, the Improve Existing Facilities alternative, and the four build alternates presented in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and a formal Corridor Public Hearing, the Section 404/NEPA Merger Project Team concurred on February 15, 2001 with the "alternatives to be studied in detail" in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Concurrence Point No. 2) and that Alternative No. 21 was the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) for the US 1 project (Concurrence Point No. 3). Alternative No. 21 includes the construction of a four-lane divided freeway on new location along the route described below. Alternative Corridor 21 begins south of Rockingham near Sandhill Road (SR 1971) then follows a route north of the Loch Haven Golf Course, continues south of the Rockingham- Hamlet Airport, crosses US 74 Business east of Pineleigh Avenue (SR 1670) and continues northeast, connecting back to existing US 1 near Fox Road (SR 1606). From north of Fox Road (SR 1606) to the project terminus at Marston Road (SR 100 1) the project will consist of widening the existing roadway to a five-lane section. Interchanges are planned at the US 74 Bypass, Airport Road (SR 1966) and at US 74 Business. Grade separations are planned at Sandhill Road (SR 1971), Hamer Mill Road (SR 1105), Hylan Avenue (SR 1901), Wiregrass Road (SR 1640) and County Home Road (SR 1624). At-grade intersections are planned at existing US 1 South, existing US 1 North, Fox Road (SR 1606), Cognac Road (SR 1605), NC 177 and Beaverdam Church Road (SR 1486). 5. Bridging and Alignment Review (Concurrence Point 2A) Concurrence Point 2A for the US 1 Rockingham Bypass consists of the identification of potential impacts to jurisdictional areas including streams, wetlands and other surface waters based on the preliminary design within the LEDPA. Concurrence Point 2A also 4 includes a discussion of NCDOT hydraulic requirements and potential bridging locations being proposed at major stream crossings and wetland areas. Based on the preliminary design of the project, an impact analysis was conducted to determine the amount of each jurisdictional area or resource that would be impacted by construction of the project. These areas have been surveyed and mapped using GPS and are shown in Figures lA - 1H. These figures are large-scale aerial maps that depict the locations of wetlands, streams and ponds along with the proposed roadway alignment within the LEDPA corridor. Table la (Jurisdictional Waters/Stream Impacts) presents the following information for each delineated and field verified stream within the project corridor: • Site ID = Location ID for each jurisdictional streams as shown in Figures IA- 1H. • Characteristics = Stream description. • Sub-basin = Number of the sub-basin that the stream lies within. For this project, the streams are part of the Yadkin/Pee Dee River Basin. • Stream Index Number = NC Division of Water Quality's (DWQ) Unique Index Number for each jurisdictional stream in the state. • Best Usage Classification = Current surface water classification by DWQ. Classifications are designed to protect water quality, fish and wildlife, the free flowing nature of a stream or river, or other special characteristics. • Perennial/Intermittent = Type of stream. • Approximate Width = Average width of the stream at the location of the proposed project crossing. • NCDWQ Rating = The total points scored on a jurisdictional wetland using the Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina. The NCDWQ rating method was not in use when the field work was 5 completed for this project. Field investigations were conducted within the study corridors between July 1997 and March 1998. Total Linear Feet of Stream within the Corridor = Total linear feet of stream within the project corridor. • Linear Feet Impacted within Slope Stakes = Total linear feet of stream within the cut/fill lines of the project's limits of construction. • Linear Feet Impacted 10 feet Outside Stakes (not including inside stakes) = Total linear feet of stream within 10 feet outside the slope stakes, used to estimate mechanized clearing. • Total Linear Feet Impacted (Stakes + 10 feet) = Total linear feet of stream includes both area inside the slope stakes as well as 10 feet outside the slope stakes. • Total Linear Feet Avoided/Minimized within Corridor = Total linear feet of stream within the corridor minus the total linear feet of surface water impacted (slope stakes + 10 feet). • Percent Stream Avoided/Minimized in Corridor = Linear feet of stream avoided or minimized within corridor divided by the total linear feet of stream within the corridor. As shown in Table la, assuming the impact area is defined as the slope stakes plus 10- foot clearing area, the project will impact approximately 5,626.80 linear feet of streams. Overall, the proposed project avoids approximately 75.2 percent of the streams in the corridor. Table lb (Jurisdictional Waters/Pond Impacts) presents the following information for each delineated and field verified pond within the project corridor: • Site ID = Location ID for each jurisdictional pond as shown in Figures IA -1H. 6 • Sub-basin = Number of the sub-basin that the jurisdictional waters (ponds) lies within. This project lies within the Yadkin/Pee Dee River Basin. • Community Type = Description of the community type. • Total Acreage within the Corridor = Total acreage of jurisdictional waters (ponds) within the project corridor. • Acreage Impacted within Slope Stakes = Total acreage of ponds within the cut/fill lines of the project's limits of construction. • Acreage Impacted 10 feet Outside Stakes (not including inside stakes) = Total acreage of ponds within 10 feet outside the slope stakes, used to estimate mechanized clearing. • Total Acreage Impacted (Stakes + 10 feet) = Total acreage of ponds includes both area inside the slope stakes as well as 10 feet outside the slope stakes. • Total Acreage Avoided/Minimized within Corridor = Total acreage of pond within the corridor minus the total acreage of surface water impacted (slope stakes + 10 feet). • Percent of Jurisdictional Waters (Ponds) Avoided/Minimized in Corridor = Acreage of jurisdictional waters (ponds) avoided or minimized within corridor divided by the total acreage of ponds within the corridor. Table lb shows that of a total of 36.2 acres of jurisdictional ponds located within the project corridor, only 5.47 acres or 15.1 percent will be impacted by the project. Table 2 (Jurisdictional Wetland Impacts) presents the following information for each delineated and field verified jurisdictional wetland within the project corridor: • Site ID = Location ID for each jurisdictional wetland as shown in Figures lA -1H. 7 • Sub-basin = Number of the sub-basin that the wetland lies within. This project lies within the Yadkin/Pee Dee River Basin. • Cowardin Classification = Type of jurisdictional wetland, where PFO is Palustrine, Forested; PSS is Palustrine, Scrub-Shrub; PUB is Palustrine, Unconsolidated Bottom; PEM is Palustrine, Emergent. • Community Type = Description of the wetland community type. • Isolated/Contiguous Wetlands = Pertains to the permitting of discharges into wetlands. • Riverine/Non-riverine = Jurisdictional wetland classification. • NCDWQ Rating = The total points scored on a jurisdictional wetland using the Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina. The NCDWQ rating method was not in use when the field work was completed for this project. • Total Acreage within the Corridor = Total acreage of jurisdictional waters (wetlands) within the project corridor. • Acreage Impacted within Slope Stakes = Total acreage of wetlands within the cut/fill lines of the project's limits of construction. • Acreage Impacted 10 feet Outside Stakes (not including inside stakes) = Total acreage of wetlands within 10 feet outside the slope stakes, used to estimate mechanized clearing. • Total Acreage Impacted (Stakes + 10 feet) = Total acreage of wetlands includes both area inside the slope stakes as well as 10 feet outside the slope stakes. • Total Acreage Avoided/Minimized within Corridor = Total acreage of wetlands within the corridor minus the total acreage of wetlands impacted (slope stakes + 10 feet). • Percent of Jurisdictional Waters (Wetlands) Avoided/Minimized in Corridor = Acreage of jurisdictional waters (wetlands) avoided or minimized within corridor divided by the total acreage of wetlands within the corridor. 8 Table 2 shows that 48.87 acres of jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted by the project. This means that for a total of 247.69 acres of jurisdictional wetlands in the project corridor, approximately 198.82 acres or 80.3 percent of the wetlands will be avoided. The project corridor is approximately 1000 feet wide except for those areas where the corridor was either expanded to account for interchange locations or where preliminary alternatives crossed. 6. Avoidance and Minimization (Concurrence Point 4A) The purpose of Concurrence Point 4A is to review the preliminary design for the LEDPA and discuss issues such as minor shifts in horizontal and vertical alignment, slopes and construction techniques. Avoidance and minimization has been incorporated into the preliminary design of the project through careful placement of the right of way within the corridor limits using such factors as design criteria adherence, avoidance of community features and facilities, avoidance/minimization of impacts to endangered species and avoidance/minimization of impacts on historic resources. 7. Archaeological Resources Table 3 presents a summary of the archaeological resource sites found within the project corridor. This information was based on the Archaeological Survey Report prepared by the Wake Forest University Archeology Laboratories in December 2001. This report resulted in the identification and assessment of 55 potential sites located within or near the LEDPA. Forty-eight of the sites were found to lack archaeological significance; however, three of these sites were recommended for further consideration. One site contains a historic era family cemetery while another site was interpreted as a survey boundary marker but could be a grave marker. Both of these sites are recommended for documentation and moved if impacted by the project. The third site was recommended for further evaluation but the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has determined that this site does not require further work. Three of the remaining 7 sites are located well outside the project limits and were not assessed. Therefore, no further action is required. Four prehistoric sites located within or near the preferred alignment were determined to be archaeologically significant. It is recommended that these sites be avoided and preserved if possible. If these sites are 9 unavoidable, it is recommended that the impacts to the sites be mitigated by conducting data recovery excavations prior to any ground disturbing activities. 8. Threatened and Endangered Species In Table 4 are those federally protected species listed for Richmond County that may occur within the preferred alignment. 10 R O a? E N E? d y ? t0 Q ? T ?) m B E 3M D) ? C C Y O 0 r O V ? H r 7 a E $ m E c , E o y? ' 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 0 o ° e o a e o i c 9 0 n n m c n t(I O O n (.j o O O O O O Cl) M p o p M V m U a m m n m N M O O r m C a ? a N ` o a LO m C O CD n CD O) co O o M N 0) O n n v n m m N n n M ui m co h q C 9 N M N M ( 0 O M O r to F '? 3 a Q m LL Y C N - O cp (D O ? (D O O O O `f ? a u' (tl O C6 C0 'n n cni O o ? (n O o O o O 0 r o N D) m O O o O O o (D O v o o ?- 6 O r p v a a .-. W Y C O n N 0 N ( 0 N M 0 N O O O co N O O O O M Q C o. n o (n N O O O O N (MO O O (0 O rL .C m O q C W 0 U c N ; q M (0 ` 9 ° y V V O O M v O O O O O O m ((pp (O O O N co n y u J C o M ( M O N v O O O N m O O O O M M co E N LL 9 m e O LO rl? i n v m0 OD 0 (0 n Cl) (0 O M N O m (D '7 v n (p p) n v O j V Q v T Oi t0 ? co N N ((DD R M p (p n .R L & co N N ( 0 co N N ? M N w O F- ; ?+ Q z < < < < < Q Q < < Q < Q Q U z z z z z z z z z Z Z Z Z z L 9 00 O O O O O O O O O p p O ^ X Z-' O ?+ ?- ' l0 O N O 6 O ' O to O O ' N O uj N o y p O N O p (O o ci O O o O O O O O O O C5 c W m N m W d m d m N me 0 N i0 m N i0 m !0 m E ?' m E € m€ m m E E m E c m m m c m c m m y `m y d m y `m `m `m m o_c a c (L c c ac a a ac c ac a m 2 ,o R ?c_ U U U U U U U U U U U U U U Yl y m ? m U x •m0 N N N N N M E (n °v (n pv ("? ' M °v (? ' a o C) q 0 v 0 v 0 M '" r m Z M T (+) M T M m m M M co ? M ao o) M ? co m c •?-y (0 (0 (0 (0 (0 (D (0 (O (O (0 fD (0 (0 (0 O O O O 4 O O O O O r- n O O co fA O o O O O O o o O M O M O 0 O 0 O y W C C C a c c c O m C m y c O m a w C O C C m C O d D: O L 2 O N d m d° m C acv CL ? 'C O C _ p C . O N ? O '> N m C d o a C O.o a ? D_ a a C N do l` a d a s 0 a (y 'O m t C c o . y a C Z ?o N N?o N E 0.0 - O 2 (n m m m at u O om O C oo m ca O a O ocaa o O oom O 3 0 2 E O r oa a O m dO o a E a• C U l0 O oc o .o m ate. m Ana a3 o.c c m m ._ o.y . _ ._y c - Q_ L a CL A a 10 y f0 m N U 3 0 m a m c C y m m C y m ? C N m c E U d w 3 m 3 6_0 3 n m ? 0 0 m m y m m L rS m Y ) C m m m L N tmn J m W L o m C m y C 4) O m 0 N N . rS 3 3 3 g ? 3 a c 3 a? 3 3? ; m?? 3 ? c a 0 E .y. m .y.. m Y ID m y r ? d N y O y o Y d y o E L c t c Z 0)Y (p m O)Y m m a Y m m m Y y ? m m Y d m m Y 0. m E Y 4 m E y m U y Ey O m r O '2 U m m I .. O m E M m U m m` .. m m M m o m U w m O m O m c 0 O m m C n LL y (y i o oU 5 L) 2 pU o 0 oU pU E oU ?mm ?cO1U °c0 N F I- O N , 5 F M H F D o O m M F o 0 F- o m V) _ d O E (n N M M m (n (n U) (n O V) . V) N V) M OD (q U) C In EN E S d N ?- m N a ?m w E L am c C Y o U y ? N E $ E ` O c v o 0 R 0 e o e o c m V o0 00 °° $ m rn m O o v c m o •- a > N 0 tL o L m C L C r O Q co N O O N O O M O M M 2 O ,,,? j U m O g O ? c00 of ? ?a d o a '- y r ° M M ° u i Q 'S 3 ° F - v ¢ u d C N+ J a o O O O O O O O O N ri r O O _ y s ? y 0 C O O O O p° a E 0 m a ? a m m ? ^ d c °o? 0 0 0 o tO ? o E a o 0 0 0 ? o m L r d ° O O O N ° p e0 a d U c ? LL 3 x d 0 N p O O O O O O O O M aJ m in CR J 6 0 E vi O LL 9 m E O co M O O M t 0 C A fp co Ct 0 N 1 n ' M p Q ?+ ? ? Q Z Q Z Q Q 2 Q Z Q Q ? U Z Z Z z r v ^ x- O o N O 0 o N O 0 0 O 0 0 N O 0 0 O 0 ° o N O o CL a a ,? at m m mm mace y o€ E d m E ` m€ aciE m m m m m m `m m . m CL a o_ a c a c a c e cm _ 03 9) (n co 1 N H 03 9) (n co ? NO 7 C K m ?a E 7 T o? m d °''' 9 M 9 9 0 Z M of M M > M 6 P7 (`7 M M c N a .c w m ? o 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 co o 0 co aJ q m 0 co q 0 ?o o r 0 n U `o '(p N C m O V c C N t C m N c c .N m O ? c .? d c .? O O -6 'o C y m` .? C l0 N canes a °E O co w, 0dc . D L o°E 'O C o$ . N C C V ._. O m °o OILz O. ... O c m . . E -'p W V 2 O Q. G N m C L y p N V Ri a1 m c E -umm c C !am C E m M C mm C m ?a U-0 m c mm V 3a'c m U 3 co e 3m m mm 3 ca 3 a?10? 3 m 3 m W c c c U U m U Z N s m W Y m Y cam L Y m L Y m U t Y E tim EL L`m Um Um V T C) 8(j U QLj y > > 7 F- 7 0 U D U ?O a] I? O L N co c O co W y O y w O O N .? m m m n m m 3c' 3 o d m m m ? N Q j m U1 N c ? m ? a N O v ? m p1 w m O a (moo m 3 m ? m (? m m 3 < mm m a m C O O CL m m a 00 0 x 0 3 C 0 O O O O O O O O O O y 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 =i ' C, a a a a a s a s m O w co V m (r A W N D o O O O o O O O O O m w w w w w w w w W w c V O O O V O V O O O o, d W O) O) O1 a) O W D) Q) Of N c c ? K C C C C C C C C C C m W w w W w m w 03 co O f o O -+ -? ,p O W A ? N ? 7 d O w bt O> w W co O (n N Oo co co cn N D) N N N O IQ m 3 o v > O O O O O O O O N m n O O O O O O t N m y O S O a m m m m £ m N n m ? ? 3 o m 0 0 0 o p O O O 0 o m x1° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 0 O 0 rn o 0 0 o 0 m o a m w n m m_ 0 ? o O O O O O O O O N _ m + n a m O O O O O O O O O O O O rn N w w N io O O a V y d ? m m m O O O s i A O W A .... p N 7 m m n? w W N O N co A O N D 0 3 0 3 ? . _ . a 3 c . ( o '? N m m CL O m CL m N. ? o ` o 0 0 0 0 0 o (0 PO 0, O ° ? n a ° a a O A O o O O O o C O N O _ G 3 a o ° 0 0 e e 0 0 o O» 3 0 N d m - CL f m N C y ? y O C1 M W O 7 ? Cf 01 ? ?+ W m CD -a O O O N 3 a N? v, d oC, zt 5r ` ?? O 2 9999 X 0 3? i° m a«« W ? p ? ?rtIN? n= 3, $m F? op?° 3? sm a? m a w m ? u 3 W ? c c Ww ° F -d m'm n o O T m m^ c W S Np W 9 F n 33 ? F F p?pO m? N ? m- C o 0 m3 3v+B? W F?o3 n Ns'?`" a - 'n 30 3 O 3 3 - WF W a4 m nii.+ ? o F N° n _ F ? ?a ? IFI el ?!F! I+ .19 Ff "'+ niw I? ?N ? ?N O N .F ? F? S?N NF ?? F ? ?F ? ? f ? f F F N S I ?'f ?o w I F . „ E 6 6 ?o 66 6 6 66 o l o +j o j +j ? 16 it? 0 o 6 O `6 0 6b 6 p 6 6 o 66 0 o 66 p 66 O o 66 p 66 6 j p 6 a 6 0 I O 6 o o o a b b N m { { rnIi o o ' 1b 4 - i ! m m w o.N rnrn n m m m a, a+ m m m m n m m i i o 9;9 O O 9 O 9 TO y 99 O O 9 C 9 N m 99 NN v, m 99 TT O O 9 N! w? 9 0 I? 99f IT 10 01 9 T 0109 m 9 09 mm I9 '0 9 N N 29 NN w m 99 NT N 0 9 O 99 N i m 99 TT 0 . 99 0 0 99 0 0 9 9 TT 0 0 99 TT 0 0 99 30 9 0 9 0 9 O ? 0 N N T 0 9 0 O 9 T 99 99 a ua N I ? I I I , N y 0 ? I 0 0 0 0 ?_ 3? F n d u 9 V 3; m ; m ?q I ? 3 a m ylf,? m Im IN ?m N [ - m ? N m m O S m O a o Sq ( f ? l? . m N $ N R pi p s N N i m' N o 2 m m 5 N D7 y Gpi o N 2 N A y m ' p2 n u O 2- N O ? N o d 0 2 vl? 3 ina p3 y a o oo vv ?? 3, 33 b ?9 3?3 3 m.3 33 3. 3 3 my R 33 33 333 3 3^F 33 3P 3 . 3 N 33 . 4 3 .T 3 3 3F '>O lm v d q cm ?3 @ = y? ?@ 'Lo' w nl? l°°? 2 n o lw mm ?? a T u21 ?n 3K nT T O '. ,; a c T : g nc y 2' > ?m ° y . g N y N N N m y y 9 9!,_{ 9 9 9 9 9 y a y 9 9 9 9 9 + ^ S S WS 2 E m 2 P m S S p 3 n y ? nn_ _ _ 32, ? ? 22 I n II cJ s j? ? n Q N i 8 f x 00 0 o 1' O O -?-_ - IO 0 00 00 0 0 00 00 000 0 00 0 00 _o O O 0 0 ! 00 00 a_ ` j`lo i aa la ? o I F -- 3? 0 Le o o $ ? I a 9I? m A A m A A m n 0 Ap m A 0 > p .T. 00 > A? 00 > > A Z 0 >> ?xI? oIp` Ap DA oo A?A `? JJ I?I 6 ? o p A A Z AA p ; o U 9 A m a p A D o p A D AA < m AA '< o? > ' > A _ o ? A o A _ A A _ a p o A > _ 0 > A 0 p Z 0 A p ye al 3 , m m n' D Ip ? l N+I° ° ( o ? I0 N ` d u A I ° NON I ? wt I o w ? I i N N m n a ? ? W pIp o o i eo ° o ? ? p ip ° w 3 s s a h ? +° I°o z , s o . F ? ?0 0 o 00 1. 0. o lOi N 0 ° w S O 8 8 8 c 8 A I T $ R cp p aD o o c o p p ° w 0 00 018o ?lo lSio ol S S o $ N mB Nw oS o 8 w o o - ? S o > 8 ?wk G I II I t s. + ? i ( I I ( ? o ??m th N p l? o IO p a N o I a W E_ w' ailu°° ?u',im f^'wm ?+?o ?+ °o o N ml a ii N p ? ? N p f?`? 33$ Nlo m W , 8... .0 ° `b' L aj p o A` ? a p .T° el i'R a° 2. 0? a, A v as ?' a p g ; X b i' I8 ? i I i J i i o q C C r ? A O IL 7 p = d d N d ? w a N Av N n r Table 3 - Archaeological Impacts USt Rockingham Bypass (R-2501) from Sandhill Road (SR 1971) to Marston Road (SR 1001) $tat&SfteNo< USGS Quad Resource Type Inside Gorridot Recommendatlon 31RH357 Diggs prehistoric yes no further work 31RH358 & 358" Diggs prehistoric + historic: historic is Covington- Wall house & farm yes no further work 31RH359 & 359" Diggs prehistoric + historic yes no further work 1 RH360 & 360- iggs prehistoric+ historic: historic is Cameron plantation site (house, cemetery, dairy complex) es no further archaeological work; cemetery should be avoided or moved in accordance with NCGS 66 31RH361 Diggs prehistoric yes no further work 31RH362 & 362•• Diggs prehistoric + historic: histodc component is 20th cent. Cotton gin yes no further work 31RH363 & 363 •• Diggs prehistoric + historic yes no further work 31RH364 Diggs prehistoric yes no further work 31 RH365 Diggs prehistoric yes no further work 31 RH366 Diggs prehistoric no no further work 31RH367'• Diggs historic (old house) yes no further work 31RH368 Diggs prehistoric yes no further work 31 RH369 & 369•• Diggs prehistoric + historic no further work 31 RH370&370" Diggs prehistoric + historic no further work 31RH371&371•• Diggs prehistoric + historic I no further work 31RH372 Diggs prehistoric no further work 31RH373 & 373 Diggs prehistoric + historic no further work 31RH374 Diggs prehistoric no no further work 31 RH375 & 375•• Diggs prehistoric - historic yes no further work 31RH376 Diggs prehistoric yes avoidance or data recovery 31RH377 Diggs prehistoric yes no further work 31 RH378 & 378 Rockingham prehistoric+ historic yes no further work 31RH379 Rockingham prehistoric yes no further work 31 RH380 & 380 Rockingham prehistoric+ historic yes no further work 31RH381 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31RH382 & 382° Hamlet prehistoric+ historic yes no further work 31 RH383 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31 RH384 Rockingham prehistoric yes no further work 31RH385 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31RH386 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31RH387 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31RH388 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work as result of highway project 31RH389 Hamlet prehistoric no no further work as result of highway project 31RH390 Hamlet prehistoric no no further work 31RH391 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31RH392 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31 RH393 Hamlet prehistoric no no further work 31 RH394 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31 RH395 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31RH396 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31RH397 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31 Rh398 & 398° Hamlet prehistoric+ historic yes no further work 31RH399&399•• Hamlet prehistoric + historic yes no further work 31RH400 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31RH401 Hamlet prehistoric yes avoidance or data recovery 31RH402 Hamlet prehistodc yes no further work 31 RH403 Hamlet prehistoric yes avoidance or data recovery 31RH404 & 404•• Hamlet prehistoric + historic yes no further work 31RH405 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31RH406 Hamlet prehistoric yes no further work 31 RH407•• Hamlet historic (McRae house and farm) - yes No further archaeological investigation, but avoidance of farmstead or reassessment of historical significance 31 RH408 Diggs prehistoric yes avoidance or data recovery 31RH409 Diggs prehistoric yes no further work 31RH410•• Diggs historic yes no further work 1 RH411•• iggs istoric o No work recommended as result of highway project. Additional documentation and archaeological testing needed,. Could be birthplace of former North Carolina Governor Cameron Morrison '- Sites 31 RH388, 31 R11389, and 31 RH411 are outside the project corridor and were not fully assessed. These sites appear to have potential for intact subsurface deposits and are recommended for additional testing. Table 3- Archaeological Impacts.xls NN1 I.I. a N O a E s V O w r O O ea CLc L- •o L 1 .? U v s C ? O i Z O3 N O O U .O .0 d C O u) E 0 s c T = N N O d CL co V O L- a. i d M O U- d cu H > cn a i ? U 3 a a CU O p >' N a3 40-- (Q cn = y a) c c 0 :E (D < Vi c c a a in p E Q) 4-- >, a) 4) U a) () - U a" cu p w L y 3 T C N C ? a) if N p N (D x y O a) u? v> O V) O N c N (0 Q O O p 0 . Q N t a) E O c co w _rn m > ca L N a) N aD m " Q C o Z c D O ? w L >. T w :3 :3 3 .2:10 V) C ? Z p - ma) m o m a > a > Oo U c o Z E c c > co a "D i w m (D > C o a 3 0 O 0 p s Z a L O Z y O O a) a) L c O o : .L a EOUCn mv,c a "o `oo U L co r- N N O) as M y N O N V a O a U O c (D N T 0 0 ? co ?a O a) CD a)CD C := > ? i ti a U N rn> o c y m a in O p O- a p U 3 3 .L c N d y a) = p w .- • 0 ? N N i O > U •- N ` X L_ . w 3 3 i a cm v ai m c n y o 3 cu t n o t x o 3 3 Q co :3 (D O w m L ?? 0 N o m 0 cCc = . c 0-aa a E> X a'c X arc o In N m c " m v IC6 ;a a? w° a) a) a) (D 0 • o 9Z cc (a w a cc m ° 3 me Fu = L 0 so so ca .. fn c cc O U N 0 N= 0 y T a) T mono a0c0 cn to iu=i cn L = L W w W W W U) LL L ? •X m co C ca m m (D a co '- cc cc Go U U Q v h ? m O O Z Z N CL o c c v -CU O c U 0 N v i O w: E Cu m O y 3 ca Q cu O a) 4 E D =? aai8 a a)`y° U to f s a ? Y E (D L CD - L O > - c ca - cc Q) N U 'n c) . . C w 7 . U a) - cri O 'a c > o a3 1 ? 1 C6 U N U L f6 U U ?, j ° 9- . m 4? Of - U) 0 cn -- a X C6 U m la. E co a) •U a) CL Cl) W H d• a) (Q H DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WILMINGTON. DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX 1890 WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890 IN REPLY FiEFOTO November 23, 1998 Regulatory Division R-2501 Rockingham Bypass field review meeting - Nov. 10th Subject: R-2501 Rockingham Bypass field review meeting - Nov. 10th From: "Kristina Solberg, P.E." <ksolberg @dot. state.nc.us> Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 16:58:21 -0400 To: Richard Spender <richard.k. spencer@ saw02.usace.army.mil>, felix <fdavila@nc.fhwa.dot.gov>, Sarah Mcbride <Sarah.Mcbride@ncmail.net>, Travis Wilson <wilsontw@mail.wildlife.state.nc.us>, garyjordan@fws.gov, Chris Militscher <militscher.chris@epa.gov>, Chris Militscher <cmilitscher@ dot. state.nc.us>, Beth Barnes <beth.bames@ncmail.net>, Derrick Weaver <dweaver @dot. state.nc.us>, Drew Joyner <djoyner@dot.state.nc.us> CC: "Smith, Jim" <jimsmith@gk4.com>, "Modlin, Richard" <rmodlin@gk4.com> Hi, Please reserve Wednesday, November 10th for a field review meeting for TIP project R-2501, the Rockingham Bypass. Merger packets will be mailed to you in a couple of weeks. The purpose of this field review is to give the merger team members an opportunity to look at any areas of concern in the field before the Concurrence Point 2A/4A meeting in January. Thank you, Kristina Solberg Kristina Solberg, P.E. <ksolberg @ dot.state.nc.us> Project Development Engineer Project Development & Environmental Analysis 1 of 1 10/11/2004 10:56 AM