19980261 Ver 1_Complete File_19980331

I
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
4 •
NC ENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
October 1, 1998
Greene County
DWQ Project # 98-0261
T.I.P. No. R-0525D
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification
Mr. William Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27611
Dear Mr. Gilmore:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions, to place fill and
conduct mechanized clearing in 1.28 acres of wetlands and 52.5 linear feet of waters for
the purpose of constructing an interchange at the intersection of US 264 and SR 1311 in
Greene County, as you described in your applications dated March 31 and September 4,
1998. After reviewing your application, we have decided that this fill is covered by
General Water Quality Certification Number 3197. This certification allows you to use
Nationwide Permit Number 23 when the Corps of Engineers issues it. In addition, you
should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project
including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Non-Discharge and Water
Supply Watershed regulations. This approval will expire when the accompanying 404
permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your
application except as modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and
you may be required to send us a new application for a new certification. If the property is
sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and is
thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. As wetland impacts for this project
exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation is required as described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506
(h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additional conditions listed below.
Division of Water Quality - Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer - 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
T
October 1, 1998
Green County
DWQ Project # 98-0261
T.I.P. No. R-0525D
We understand that you have chosen to use the DOT's Gurley Mitigation Site in order
to compensate for these impacts to wetlands. This shall include 1.48 acres of riverine
wetlands restoration and 1.08 acres of non-riverine restoration.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an
adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter.
To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final and binding
unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of
the Clean Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Dorney at 919-733-
1786.
Attachment
Sincer ,
r owar , r.
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Raleigh DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
980261.1tr

,,jam „. STAT£
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPAUMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201. RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TOLSON
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
September 4, 1998
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Field Office
P.O. Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889
ATTENTION: Mr. Mike Bell
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir.
SUBJECT: Green County, Addition of an interchange at the intersection of US 264
and SR 1111. TIP No. R-05251), State Project No. 8.T221002, Federal
Aid Project No. F-38-1(63).
The North Carolina Department Transportation proposes to construct a diamond
interchange at the existing intersection of US 264 and SR 13 11 (Dildy Road). An
overpass will be constructed to carry SR 131 1 over US 264. Improvements will be made
almost entirely in the existing right-of-way. Jurisdictional wetland impacts total 0.74
acres of riverine wetlands and 0.54 acres of non-riverine wetlands. The total impacts of
1.28 acres are an increase of 0.283 acres over the total in the original application. The
new total reflects impacts due to mechanized land clearing being included as permanent
impacts. Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters total 52.5 linear feet. The North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) submitted an application for a
Nationwide Permit Number 23 on March 31, 1998. Drawings for impacts to waters of
the United States, as well as the wetland delineation report, were included in the
referenced permit application.
On June 5, 1998 the NCDOT proposed to mitigate for the aforementioned impacts at the
Gurley mitigation site in Green County. Please find attached a drawing of the mitigation
areas depicting the boundaries and location of the proposed mitigation site. Thank you
for your continued review of this project.
0
r
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Mr. Lindsey
Riddick at [phone], extension 315.
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ
Mr. Whit Webb, P. E., Program Development Branch
Mr. R. L. Hill, P.E., State Highway Engineer - Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P. F,., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. William J. Rogers, P. E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P. E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. C. E. Lassiter. Jr., P. E., Division 2 Engineer
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
6?
m
0
c
0
4
®®

c
0
0
a?
a>
4
® 0 fq

M?

R
a?

4
O
y.

+ ?l
\ I --i
L )-
W
? a
c
co
ti
?_
z
a
0

Q
z
X
z
Qz:
O
O
L
O
C

cc:
nC -?
W CQ
U
C
-C 4-
C ?
C _ZD
U ?
I
C C
O ?
? U
? C
C
O ? O
C C °?
W
>O -
I I
7
... SfARo \n? v
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 E. NORRIS TOLSON
GOVERNOR SWRETARY
September 4, 1998
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fk
Was
hington Field Office P.O. Box 1000 Washington. NC 27889 (1 Inl
wETLMITI'GROUP
ATTENTION: Mr. Mike Bell K!%+TER UAUTY SECTION
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
SUBJECT: Green County, Addition of an interchange at the intersection of US 264
and SR 131 1. TIP No. R-0525D. State Project No. 8.'1'221002. Federal
Aid Project No. F-38-1(63).
The North Carolina Department Transportation proposes to construct a diamond
interchange at the existing intersection of US 264 and SR 131 1 (Dildy Road). An
overpass will be constructed to carry SR 131 1 over US 264. Improvements will be made
almost entirely in the existing right-of-way. Jurisdictional wetland impacts total 0.74
acres of riverine wetlands and 0.54 acres of non-riverine wetlands. The total impacts of
1.28 acres are an increase of 0.283 acres over the total in the original application. The
new total reflects impacts due to mechanized land clearing being included as permanent
impacts. Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters total 52.5 linear feet. The North
Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) submitted an applicatiun for a
Nationwide Permit Number 23 on March 31, 1998. Drawings for impacts to waters of
the United States, as well as the wetland delineation report, were included in the
referenced permit application.
On June 5, 1998 the NCDOT proposed to mitigate for the aforementioned impacts at the
Gurley mitigation site in Green County. Please find attached a drawing of the mitigation
areas depicting the boundaries and location of the proposed mitigation site. Thank you
for your continued review of this project.
t-79 5(-(
1.`-l V OF
0
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Mr. Lindsey
Riddick at [phone], extension 315.
Sincerely,
William D. Gilmore, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, DWQ
Mr. Whit Webb, P. E., Program Development Branch
Mr. R. L. Hill, P.E.. State Highway Engineer - Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P. E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. William J. Rogers, P. E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P. E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. C. E. Lassiter, Jr., P. E.. Division 2 Engineer
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
f
Q)
0
b
o,
Z-
U
O
L 6
? nl
j
? CJT.
Q3 Q
a
O ?
0
N
U
1 c) ?
Q N N
Ln ?
O?
' n
b
1
W
`C
U
C L
W
C c b
•? C
a o
cr j
®®

•
•t
4t
•
i
i?
J
Iii ~
W
Q
O
? a
i ?
Q
0
J
a
O
O
O
aC
C --?
U
C L
Q?
C ?
Lt-I
CJ2
C
? C
O
c
C C
O U
O U
? C
C
Q? Q? O
C C
O O ?
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
e??
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor NC ENR
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
April 14, 1998
Mr. David Robinson
NC DOT
Planning and Environmental Branch
PO Box 25201
Raleigh NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Robinson:
Re: Widening of US 264/SR 1311 Interchange
Greene County
DWQ # 980261
The Division of Water Quality has reviewed your submittal for a 404 permit for
an interchange at SR on US 264 in Greene County. Your application was not complete
since no mitigation plan was included as required since total impacts at this location now
exceed one acre. Please provide information regarding your mitigation plans use of the
Wetlands Restoration Program is acceptable to DWQ. This information is needed by
DWQ in order for us to decide whether this modification is practicable.
Cyndi Bell can be reached at 733-1786 if you have any question. Until this
information is received, I will request (by copy of this letter) that the Corps of Engineers
place this project on hold. Also, the project will be placed on hold for our processing due
to incomplete information (15A NCAC 2H.0507(a)(4)).
Sincerely,
J R. Dorney
ater Quality Ce Vication Program
cc: Washington DWQ Regional Office
Wilmington District of Corps of Engineers
Washington Field Office Corps of Engineers
John Dorney
Central Files
Cyndi Bell 980261.hld
Division of Water Quality • Non-Discharge Branch
4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 9 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper
4
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES li. HUN]- JR. P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
Gl)VI RNl1R
March 31, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Field Office
P. O. Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889
ATTENTION: Mr. Mike Bell
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
t ?, MPS 3
?`- WETLANDS GROUP
i TFFt UAIIS?TION.?---
E. NORRIs Too SON
SECUTARY
SUBJECT: Green County, Addition of anDState ' erchange at the intersection of US 264
and SR 1311, TIP No. R-052 Project No. 8.T221002, Federal
Aid Project No. F-38-1(63).
Attached for your information is a copy of the Categorical Exclusion for the subject
project. The North Carolina Department Transportation proposes to construct a diamond
interchange at the existing intersection of US 264 and SR 1311 (Dildy Road). An
overpass will be constructed to carry SR 1311 over US 264. Improvements will be made
almost entirely in the existing right-of-way. Jurisdictional wetland impacts total
0.997 acres (0.404 ha) of permanent till in wetlands. Temporary impacts from
mechanized clearing total 0.281 acres (0.114 ha). Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters
total 52.5 linear feet. Drawings for impacts to waters of the United States, as well as the
wetland delineation report, are included for reference.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a "Categorical
Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not anticipate
requesting an individual permit but propose to proceed under a Nationwide Permit in
accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B-23) issued December 13, 1996, by the
Corps of Engineers. The provisions of Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these
regulations will be followed in the construction of the project.
0
We anticipate that 401 General Water Quality Certification No. 3107 will apply to this
project, and are providing one copy of the CE document to the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their
review.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Mr. Lindsey
Riddick at [phone] ext. 315.
Sincerely,
Franklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/lr
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, DWQ
Mr. David Cox, WRC
Mr. W. J. Rogers, P. E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P. E., Program Development Branch
Mr. R. L. Hill, P .E., State Highway Engineer - Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P. E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. C. E. Lassiter, Jr., P. E., Division 2 Engineer
r, nn.
?t Rli?' 98 r?61A 1
P! rf,ts 1 H \ Se'L / '?/+ I Ha Sell `/
le:..ue n 7 " i64 IY?/ III Gold 175 J «
Pilal 1 . / II P,mcerdl! POrnt ` _,?`
95 f ;S 54 7 ® *\r harDS0U1 4J Tarhor7 I" ? ' !v I a2 r3 tt!cSS?* Wllhamstort
E Wekehel I 7 Shnhope 15 3 v ?. I u ??? ,54 lam",
Litard f q 5 ' ` 1 I ti Coneto tS¦ na f -
Llc 1 541 c-l" 5 10 7 t 258: RI a T
1 1 ehu d S /' 251 f M ?«,m Elm City Town t Plnetopf 11 12 5 Bethel I fore
58 Creek
f p 5/B 1 Blase 1 ? ?'' " 1` 2 1 „ " .u r n
tocM " a1 iy 5 * ' Wdhankf ,l 2 I3 ? a" a ?.,
Wen ell 19 ,? ) Slim 7u ?' 12 171 7 CnsD / 1 " a .`? .; ut
Rock Alf vs I + " Macclesfield
dR T IISOn n PROJECT II y "
on,rd Archer n 5 7 Croilroi?s r ?.1A _ 2 1 ] 1 ? ? -- + ?
1.00111e 7 1 /2 5 I? S S Q N r , fountain Bruce 5.
+I tayto l u5am Sarrat >joddy 171 43 3- - Mylu d
% 19 " 5 Z 30l nbnc?o?/// 9Black Cree11?" 9 " 254 Z / 1ti ek 5
L` T 9 O iM?l?m ?I StantonSDUf N5 171 ell Aft lrUf p
70B Baehr e 1 5 df -' walstonoure Farmvl ' m son tWashingtr
Micro _' 7 5 III 6 -' 1 ~
(i Dn < II Scale of Mlles Eureka - 10 i? 13 764A P T uny
58 e
% lone 1 Wlntervil II Uwmrty B ?E -.A
o s is 20 30 9 G E 2 ' E Rountree . Jack ? I 6 P?
10 20 30 40 48 !town I
uA s q sury Or D ?Ay den Shelmerd`ne
Scala of Kilometers aulston 13 Snow H111 1 mond,W4/ 1 Z H \
One Inch equals appronmatery 13 miles and approximately 71 kilometers. + l 16 " 5 ?" ooker n 1e I v D 8 , "5 f \I
` 1 r _ x ro1ds b0f0 s 23 \\ Calico x Wdmar ?.
Rosewood 7 -
\ a wl _.. le3°^ \ u58 Gnltpn 43 ID 17 `o¦Crossroads
•-( N
y /.
? ' Lrrrt<
PROJECT
o t:4,
10 C,
26
b
91 !, ^
J w \
1. b 1
J }1
1..0
/ 1 10
0
91 ! rr Cr
k 3i f1? 0 1 a ?
S U, 1 !j 7
\ 28 1s
? 11?! ? l 1 r . ? 1314
\ 31li I11! 9 3 PAS 17,f
s12a r s 1311 .1 ,
Liu •e = .1 1
WAlr ^ w \ 70 c
555... caadwa xw wemwesre¦N roe. . 19 1 i I Ua7 Ulf
q APPr.'.O .j'>•.'S 1717 ¦ANw L i?,1\ `??
uli ;r" -142 a
7 a I f 'f. 5'
1229
7375' je 11U ?, I701 1 I 1 31L 75.73'
r ?
I r+ <1131 , 7 1770 L~ b - 1.7 1101
/
A y 7 1349 IIQl
. / 9 Ltu ^ 3l1 1? L \??
V 113A - a b
Totaemode:? ??. ? ? io I Islt
1.9 -1 -0
? , 311 vI 3? I.0 I.I ?
a ice. x <
127; 1l! 333
1 311 Run ? b 13" sip
• .t. 7 5
Undel1 • 7 t 1e ? !2 121L I)J? 1a -e
a b UrMN rM". _ 11_ r.0 1 i t •e
1Z
y,yQ 10 1?Q lu y L0 'i'tl 1 7, Chapel
r. Sol i
1 0 1 1 3 a MILES !1"1? 1t3; 3 / U31 Ga¦lorio • 7 T111
.7 I c 11 7 33a
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
VICINITY GREENE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.T221002 (R-0525D)
MAPS INTERCHANGE AT SR 1511
(DILDY RD.) AND US 264.
SHEET / OF/2_
d W
ww
cr
0cr
a
3
w w
w
F-
W 4
O W
LU
w I
}? $
m
S w
z
O w
X_ 1_
O N
N
cl?
/ ppol
I ?
Z(n
oa: I
D X = LAJ
O \ a ?
\
N LE co
~ \
J \ I ?
3 \ I ??
LL \ I
Z \ ? I I
o '.\ ? r I
8
5

X10
? V
? I
=1
oZ
IJH
I
a
I
I i
rr ; w
I ?
z
w m

:I O 3
wl vi
w
ml
a VI ?
?

\
l ?Q r:
?
I
?l g W
\ ? I l

z
0
F

O
?

3
?

F
?
.n

?
CI
F

o
F CT.

Z
?
>

-
C't

U
Q ?

z

G
F ?

c

A
a -
z

I? ? N
I ? N
w
I
n ~
I 0
/wI
O
O
I
I a N
I
I
it
it 3
i
I
? m
A
z
d
a
E-
w
r o
o w
N
m `w 2
? F Z
? .. a w
D rs. 'o J
cn n W ?n z
w w U ;,?
0 o w o e?
C Q N A U

? w

U

N

O
0

' z
wee I n
m a ? ? rl a, z z ? ?
=rt F
r
00
z c
cl-
g ?\ O 3 ::.W *f C
?° ? Ng3 9 z W ? 04
d p O F D
U O W Z W
cr $ Z v?
U.1 a I ?q.20
3
z z
F
N i I o ?, a
I f I ; z
I s I I o c? o?
I z za z
m :I I I D D vii G U
I I I
00<
Z I? ? ? I
I I ? ? ?I
3C 3:
V;
?y
3 I ? 3 ?
I
W.
I W I
3 ?I I EZ
e s i I C\j
P ? r
o O , ? ? ? 3 ?1. ( I
t Q._ ?-- I? I O
.??r4J- ? I e? ? s
sac sat C`
O
C')
J
w E
M
W -
Z
C-D +
W
m -
Q
V)

Q
E
m
M
Q
w
z
w
co
O
M
co 140 mot' N
N N N N
1
0-01 NI
? I
NI
of
+I
v I
I
I °o
i '
I
I
I
I
I
I o
a
I ?
I ?
z
I ?
I N
x
I w
w I
°
I
Cr
I
° I
w
N I
0
o
? I
? I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
00
N N
N
N
N
O
00
O
1-O
O
O
N
+
O
O
co
+
z
0
H o

x ?
z ?

V CI
z

F
LT.

A
I'-

q
z

c
°

w

CI

ti
?

W

z
z
'C
^

a
o
z
n
a
Al
w
a
U w
„
a
cA
?
U

z

N

o w

o ?

-? N
O O

Ln G:
z
0
rr M
O CO ?O N
M N N N N O 3 E- z n
+ Z c: c? D
I Ln Z Q z
I w ?' N
I F o z ?; z o --
I o z
O
? ? O E-o w
I O U c a z .. W
,o z
? I +
am o I
' a I
oLn I u
z?.o z a
W ?, I ?
U? I
a w I vn O
"' I w +
?rn
I a
W I 3 N
N
w I J
I U zzw
m o
°
U O
00
t? I °G N T
+
ch I Cpl k?
+ I X d
E
I N ?
o I @? CD
Q I CN +
0 o I LO z ?
vwi LO I N_ U
N a
° o I Z
CL ?I
+ I Q) N
?I
I 00
O co O mot' N +
M N N N N O O
z
0
~ ' M
O
Y W O N
C
) N N N N O
co O F
oe + x
?? z
Q .,
c
CD z
.?

v

o
z

N
o ,r
,
I o
N I + Q z z a O
I o z w
w = ? ?
- I ° u
r

W
o I
O
U 0 w
Q. Z
I
I +
w
°
z
I
CD
I o

E N
I o
W N x
w I
+
w? O I
c/) r p
coo 0? E- I o O
?
Z o
w + cr- ,- I o
o +
E
a M E I o
I +
w a
o
° a
?d
Ln ' o
cn °
M r.
° I (D co °
N

°
o ? +
I = °
co U w + O
(
O N a °° +
~
m ?
M c
n i w

+ z J
Zc~n
--- v) CO w
cc

i
O
O
+
'O
I z ?

CV (D rT.

IC)u o
N
I+°
i- O
= 00
+
O
M 00
N ?O
N V.) ?-
i Z N N
N O O

m L
z
0
N cv p DO .p ?T 'C n ^"
? a
00 ao I a s z •, ?
c? H
w r1 w -
teUn a( o N I z 9 z N
z o o o I ?- o z '" z o 0
W 0 r") ? 4 ? 0 0 z w ? .? W
o f ?- a o? W ? G ?
_ ? I O ? O F' O ri
i z
Z ad
w I V
I o
N
m
I ?
\ I ? H
z a
0
a O 0 c
o
a r- r-
CL u
CL --
i ?
0 o I
N I O ?,
= w I
u +
o + LT;
F- I d
LL-
LL.j
J ;:? I a°
in L' o
t
v Z CD
"U z
a_ u o I CD cx_ ? ? ? I o of
N NO
w
I + i ?
vi + I c,•)
M J
z - I p N
c? a E I
w E- ao z I
co N N
I
N O co
?O O
N
M co N N O
z
0
o ?n o o d " lit
I'r1 N ? N I'r1 F ? t1l ? ^D
z y 0 c? e; z
•? U $ ?, N
l w
a N O w? v C c:.
? ? w z w? ? x O
I o a ? ? w C?
N w
o c ? zo w
U a ? y
r z ?'
a
z
a
F
w
?n
I^ I G
Q ? O
- ? o
I
i
r
z ?
O U
F
w I o ? ?
LLJ I N L
? I
I
o N j 0 0
Lni
N N
((1?
?J
I
O
O

In O
M M N
L
L
F
In 0 Ln
r) M N
0
Ln
0
17
0
rn
0
N
0
0
z

E"' O M
O 3 F z v' `?'
c

Q E- Q
x
U -Y;z
?'
CK
F GL
O w ??
?, w
v o
z z
x

? ?
U a z
z
°
z
W
a
°
:v
m
N_
r
-n
rr
0
z
a °
0
w
w
N_ U
O w
x ?
Ln L-n
0 0
Ln L1?
N N
PROPERTY (OWNERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES
O W. S. WARREN RT. 2, BOX 145
WALSTONBURG, N.C.
27888
O3 IRIS DIXON BROTHERS P.O. BOX 774
C/O DR. MICHAEL DIXON FARMVILLE, N.C.
27828
N. C. DEPT.OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GREENE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.T221002 (R-0525D)
INTERCHANGE AT SR 1311
(DILDY RD.) AND US 264.
SHEET// OF / Z
SUN1INilARY
SITE DISTURBED
WETLANDS MECHANIZED
CLEARING IMPACTS TO
SURFACE WATERS FILL IN
SURFACE WATERS
A 0.07ha 0.04ha 10.5m 54.8m 3
B 0.004ha 0.004ha
C NO IMPACTS
E 0.13ha 0.06ha 5.5m 67.9m3
F 0.2ha O.Olha

TOTALS 0.404ha 0.114ha 16m 122.7m3
Wetlands / 401 Tracking x ?'
Facility Name NC DOT - US 264- FARMVILLE CONNECTOR ( ..
Project Number 95 1165
Project Type purpose of road County GREENE
Location County2 PITT

Recvd From DOT J COE ID # 199201491 Region Washington
Received Date'Navember 1,1995) COE Susp Date ; Reg. Contact
Sent to Region Date DCM Susp Date
Rcvd Region Date- - ---? TIP Number R-525E Mitigation ? N
401 ate Noveanher ], 1.995
)
More Info Requested J
Final Actio -ISSUE.-.- More Info Received

?_.).% . S.C„,
Certifies#e3 r :?* -?. - .: ? - r F } .t -
Stream t,,}. , A?' 1. u
Permit, Y s Wetland a Wetland
Cert # Stream Class Wetland Acres Acres Feet ? F

R
A
R
A
Cl
.
Type Type Impact eq.
eq.
ppr.
ass
Index Prlm
, Supp.
CE23 3026 HWF, "O Y ON 32 27-86-26-1. SWNSW 030407 riparian 0.10 co

Total for A ?g 0;1n

"?(
r r., ,Y 'Mitigation
x?
Wetland Wetland Completion , -
MitigationType Type Class Acres Feet s Date
?? Total Mitigation:
TRIAGE CHECKLIST
Project Name: N C-0 0? U S °? ?41 5? _ ???
Project Number: ? d 0?4
County: ? ?eelia_-
The attached project has been sent to you for review for the following reasons.. Please consider whether a
site visit is needed to determine the impacts. Particular attention should focus on the below checked items.
Please feel free to call the central office staff member assigned to your region if you need assistance.
Stream length impacted.
Stream determination (i.e. intermittent or perennial, or any channel present).
- Wetland impact and distance to blue-line surface waters on USGS topo map.
- Minimization/avoidance options.
NW 14. (is access to highground or wetlands)?
Neuse buffer rules.
Pond (water) fill (i.e. is the pond drained or holding water)?
Pond creation (i.e. in uplands, in a drained channel, or in wetlands). Please locate streams and
channels (if any) so that the central office can determine.
Mitigation ratios.
Stormwater pond placed in wetlands.
Ditching in wetlands.
Is the applicant's proposed stream/wetland mitigation site available and viable?
Applicant/consultant has a history of non-compliance (check drawings and application for
accuracy).
Has project been split from previous work to avoid mitigation requirements?
Consistent with pre-application meetings?
JeL-? Cumulative impact concerns.
OTHER: (Vrre,% . 19,2 _ ? 5? = 0 = ?) (V? t ? ?'???-1 d?
i

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNI JR. 11.0. 130X25201. RLALEIGIi, N.C. Z7b11-5201
(JOVERNC)R
March 31, 1998
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Field Office
P. O. Box 1000
Washington, North Carolina 27889
ATTENTION: Mr. Mike Bell
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
;
E. NoRRts TOLSON
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Green County, Addition of an interchange at the intersection of US 264
and SR 1311, TIP No. R-0525D, State Project No. 8.T221002, Federal
Aid Project No. F-38-1(63).
Attached for your information is a copy of the Categorical Exclusion for the subject
project. The North Carolina Department Transportation proposes to construct a diamond
interchange at the existing intersection of US 264 and SR 1311 (Dildy Road). An
overpass will be constructed to carry SR 1311 over US 264. Improvements will be made
almost entirely in the existing right-of-way. Jurisdictional wetland impacts total
0.997 acres (0.404 ha) of permanent fill in wetlands. Temporary impacts from
mechanized clearing total 0.281 acres (0.114 ha). Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters
total 52.5 linear feet. Drawings for impacts to waters of the United States, as well as the
wetland delineation report, are included for reference.
The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a "Categorical
Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b). Therefore, we do not anticipate
requesting an individual permit but propose to proceed under a Nationwide Permit in
accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix A (B-23) issued December 13, 1996, by the
Corps of Engineers. The provisions of Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) of these
regulations will be followed in the construction of the project.
9
VI
We anticipate that 401 General Water Quality Certification No. 3107 will apply to this
project, and are providing one copy of the CE document to the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, for their
review.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, please contact Mr. Lindsey
Riddick at [phone] ext. 315.
Sincerely, . / I
. Franklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/lr
cc: Mr. David Franklin, COE, Wilmington
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, DWQ
Mr. David Cox, WRC
Mr. W. J. Rogers, P. E., Structure Design
Mr. Whit Webb, P. E., Program Development Branch
Mr. R. L. Hill, P .E., State Highway Engineer - Design
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Tom Shearin, P. E., State Roadway Design Engineer
Mr. C. E. Lassiter, Jr., P. E., Division 2 Engineer

RILE erJ 98 ! ?? t * y, '1•( 4 -?..,x ,tart as 1? • ri I ,\
, Riley -1
Pe tees h ? e1 1 Ne sell
Iesv?lle r 6 91 64 III Gold Izs
pool r/ r ,®> .4 Princeville Point
4z j? tc5 ;
% \ 64 , + larhor
®? 3 ,r` halo3b 43 2 8 e ,? ?t ( -T'- •Wdllamstort
E Wake
hel Stanhope / I I 5 33 "r ?. 1 I3 x _ Ilamesi
Lizard r ' I 1 Coneto tsR 5. ??,_;
Lich r 5?7 6 Sal cw?rrr y/ 10 I 2 q 2 258 6 arme r ll T 0
Zee, EIm CIt i//I'A?? Peet s r
r M?rwm y rl town 2 I /2 5 r Bethel
y 1 ehu one) 261 , ,( 68 Creak ` 3 6 P 9
rte```??? O 648 Iddlese 1 aaa a I 2
ti
Wdbmks roer ,
tock? 6 ai eY 5 7 ,! 2 13 /f ? ad c
Wen
ell t 39 \ t i Sim 7M ??1 42 12a 2 Crisp
Rock ALT N ? 4 Macclesfield
" r r i 21 ' I?S011 6 PROJECT Il is
2 i 2 ucMhorq \ 2 4 I ' o
mo?rtdv Archer 6 rostrOaCCS r ..'i? 7 -- ce I- " .
pr
1 Bru s, 3 3 i1
' Lodge 7 1 1 6 I ?I S S Cs Fountain
+Ciayto \ I u Sam t araroq noddy In 43 r e d
` ,k y
39 9 , 7 301 nborCu}ill 981ack Cree1)\ S ? 9 6 264 2 r dti 6
$ T v o N M'cm 111 Stantonshur Ns 121 • enArtFur
108 J Bailey = I 1 s ?)- - - Walstonoml Farmvl s 3} m son ` p r Washiner
r>?j Micro _' S III 6 - G -?.
Qon s Eureka ;p zie 13 :eiA P , 3 I T ' y
Scale Of Miles 1 kit but'
% II Jwinlty 8 E
4 Wmterville `
Dix o s s 20 30 9 G E 7 ' E ountree ?acM ?\ -
_ 1 • y 2 6 P?
J 10 20 30 40 48 'town .2 aury 01 ,n l9 Ryden Shelmerd`no
Sale of Kilometers aulston 13 Sno dl s °nOt?;L I 4 7
' One Inch equals approximately 13 codes and approximately 21 kJometen. 16 9 poker n e v 0 8 h r ,
010- + l 6 3 23 Calico x /I
(!Oldtrsoro . Wllmar
'?E;'f
9 Rosewoo? _ Lion 258 Gritton /3 I0 \ Co. Crossroads:
N

? Lil2le
v_

J k PROJECT
1101
,10a
'o
1. 1
v le
e
91
1
ti 32e l

] J tie
' l13M
? 1.0 1 10

S u1 , s

\ 7.a I 1.f
I?V 'I 1
. ` N11
1
17Q
S e I 1? 9 7 FAs .
It,r
' 'S .? _ ?• 121 : 1.3
Y ° 2
9'
1
:I 7
WALSTONIll ^ -193 \ ro
Q, CARd.IA •M Noirh_FSRRN POP. 191 1 ?' X11 C
S't
•
'
??

S
Appee
.
.
S Ill] L ii11]?`
\

t 111E le r y
'
'
^
• ' I
31 35' 317 JS
]S
1
r 1
I 'S I)70 1Y a 1'2 1:01

1
]71
-
a
1N Z 11111 \o•
7
?1 n ill]
v
11]1
Tob•
? •~
!0 ti I !lt
AD 1w
,
1
9 Y
X73 is
~
,
.
? .
n. 's
e . Lt i
3 '171 91 31Z
1.1
'137. 113S
1
s 1.0
.,?. Yn ' 7 I • U19
~
7 ... 7
hind; ll
'S
reR
1 A
u
a
123L Imo.
Ill 531!
'
,
a
I e r.o
, 10 1 . 1'0
3.9.
'? _ 1317
1 Tywn
SCALE 'r' •y 1391 l'4"pal
In
0 1 7 1 4 RULES i
i7.
'13 - 1
. 127E CORrMO ! r
7 171 is
a
.7 0 7 1U4

N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
VICINITY GREENE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.T221002 (R-0525D)
MAPS INTE
RCHANGE AT SR 1311
(DILDY RD.) AND US 264.
SHEET / OF / 2
?n
y ?,L
Z
r
?vi
W a ? O ?
N„ \
I N¦ I ??
w
o
3 I
1
r? w
yy o }? Ln
f. mO w ?_I
Zm
o w
x r-
1
b
I ? os
\ 3.
-01
k I
I ?
\ ?a9 GP ?g?i?
o I. $ 8
N co
?3 \ I ?" BFI /
o \ I 1
r\ ? I r I I
a,
I ?
z m
LL)
?I V O N
W ?
m I ?
Il of N
w :o
3
?N
\ ? I I
5 \
_y \
I. w
Ip m
I?
la
I w
I
W
0
co
Z
0
0
X_
O
3
m
-1 3
m?
W m

z
0

F

c Q

?r

? w

w

4 ?

z
0

r'
c w

w

0
z
a
w
a o
N
z w z
z
UJ
0 o w O t
G c A U
e?
w
.a
U
0
If
z
I G F c
d °
wee I ° co ++I
z .. .?
_ V) vi
~\ 00 F H 9 w .^.
d
o z r o
I w
UU O 3
cf)
¢d o Q ? z" w
f U Z v
U I Al
w a, I 14'20
N
I 3
I ?
? I A
co
r I a
I ? ?? ? I I F?" H a
I? I I o o w o
z z x z
?I I x l a c c u
? I I
?I I ?- X I
?I
_ I
3 I ? y 3
I N ? 1
I w I
I w
C ? I to I ??
I W
? 3? I x v
? I
C\j
3
N
sat ! sac
c)

z
0
O W N F C4 ?
C'') N N N N O x •?' ?„ o c?
00
+
N I `rZr? U c z N
C) F Q
?! I z F z° o
c l o z .? x
? + I ? cn C7 W x D
J " I W, O F' C cFrl
w E I a G Q x z •• w
u O
_ 'o Z x
w
F-j CD r I CD +
LO
z Q. I ?-
"+ I
w
m,- I
a I
N I
I
I o
I o
I a
rr,
I CD
I z o
I X
Lli CD
? w N
E ° +
a? cr- I
N ?- ° I
z ,r, o w
w+ o
CC rn i v .Wa
a I 00 J U
n I + `n
O U
N
I ? a
i ?
0
I N
I
i ?
co
co O W +
M N N N N O O
L
z
0
rr M
14
M N N N N O C ,C a„ o ?'
co O 3 F z
I Ems., p w F= C? ,.
0
w ? ? F o w
I O U C a z .. w
I NO Z
? I +
a m w
0
w' a I
(-D I
0 I U
z z
+ I ?
w
Ln (f)
a w V) O
?-
cn I w M +
)--
a U?
I
w I ?N
N
`" I rr w
I U zzw
m
co u O
N r
rE +
cn I N
X
+ I d
E
I
I c.;
? w
o I O U
I (v
: +
C7
? \ I LO z Q'
N tc I N_ v
O O I ?'
N a a
0
+I O
v N
I
I co
O co N +
N O O
c'7 N N N
z
0
r '? M
O co ?O
F
M N N CN N O e ?, o ca
co o a F ? ? ?
+ 2. z
I ° NO ?' o N
o I o c.

N
+
o
z w
w
z
a
o
N
W
' `r!
r i Q ? 0
4 w ?

Ld I O U A Z Q
a NO
I
+
W
?
I
?
J ° z o

C)
I
n
ul
I o
W N wW x
W I
+
Wi O I
vi r o I
o ao ?
I O

d.
zo
w + O
CD +

M
I O
Q Ln
M I +
Ul r? Iw ?
Ip°o o a
Ln ' c-? O
o
M cn
c Lc) O I= -J o D
(-o U "' + O
t? a - I t= a N
o V) o +
I
+
M m z w 'O
_
+
?-
I r?
Ld Z N
--? cn CO w I w

ca W

..a

I
O

'O z
I ?
U
I° w N

IN O
w
I LU
I o N
00
I+o
F- O
co
O QO ¢
-RT
N
+

M
N
N
i ZN O O

m
z
o _
`~ M
C'7 n- C'7 N N N F-' e k c?
00 ? v
, w co
w r z q c
O V) M =° O GL O w ?c y O
u+ I O z w
_ V-) I C > q w Foc Lj I (? ? G. Z ? ?
CL-
ce I z
zz ?` I CL.
I.U I U
I C)
4tr O
N
+
m
I ?
y O
N X'\
F w
w °z a
0
c 00 dal c
o ?
Lli
V) \X
r-
CL
o u
I ?
0 o I
N I O
.00
u o +
o +
;:? I a°
cv z u
u t o C) z Q
"' I o° o O U
O N E
?O
?? I + O
Z
N + F--
M J I (Y)
z- I N
G< E I
co N N z I
I
C1I O 00 O O
C'7 m N C,I N
z
O
°
Cn .n M R
p Q
N I --i
I Q ? ? C
z
I
a ? O Z F- z o Q
w I w ? e;
a
? w
N ° o ° z° w
\ u a ? y
r z ?'
ti o
z
a
F
/ w
i O 3
O
? F
cn
I D
` I n
w
F
w
i o I'X
I
I
I ?
I
a
z ?
O U
N F
I ?
w I
1' o
I N Ln
V
I
Ln
cv I 0 0
r
? ?n
N N
z
o
M M N Ln C
,, O Nr
CA CA
z v Nc
? x Q a z N
r: " cL
I p z ? zc O
z w i~ ? ? o
;• ? w ? q ;x ? F.
I U a z W
I A
I z
o ?
I M a
I
I
I °
r
I?
z o ? a
I N
I
U-
LLJ
v ?
C?
O I ? ?
z
Q O U
? x
o LC)
UI) o o 0
M M N
In ?
N N
r
PROPERTY 0WANERS
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
PARCEL NO. NAMES ADDRESSES
O W. S. WARREN RT. 2, BOX 145
WALSTONBURG, N.C.
27888
O3 IRIS DIXON BROTHERS P.O. BOX 774
C/O DR. MICHAEL DIXON FARMVILLE, N.C.
27828
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GREENE COUNTY
PROJECT: 8.T221002 (R-0525D)
INTERCHANGE AT SR 1311
(DILDY RD.) AND US 264.
SHEET // OF / Z

SUMMARY
SITE DISTURBED
WETLANDS MECHANIZED
CLEARING IMPACTS TO
SURFACE WATERS FILL IN
SURFACE WATERS
A 0.07ha 0.04ha 10.5m 54.8m3
B 0.004ha 0.004ha
C NO IMPACTS
E 0.13ha 0.06ha 5.5m 67.9m3
F 0.2ha O.Olha
TOTALS 10.404ha ? 0.114ha I 16m I 122.7m3
N. C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTAI
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GREENE COUNTY
PROJECT: 87221002 (R-0525D
INTERCHANGE AT SR 1311
(DILDY RD.) AND US 264.
SHEET /2 OF /2
US 264 Interchange
at SR 1311 (Dildy Road)
Greene County
F. A. Project No. F-38-1(63)
?'??1 to Project No. 8.T221002
T.I.P. No. R-525 D

-TANDS GROUP
? '! UAHTY SFCTiON
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
and
N.C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
APPROVED:
8
a H. Franklin Vick, P. E-, Is, anager
planning and Environmental Branch
Date Nicholas Graf, P. E.
Federal Highway Administration
US 264 Interchange
at SR 1311 (Dildy Road)
Greene County
F. A. Project No. F-38-1(63)
State Project No. 8.T221002
T.I.P. No. R-525 D
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
August 1997
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
rrick G. Weav r
Project Planning Engineer
Teresa A. Hart
Project Planning Unit Head
Richard B. Davis, P. E., Asst. Manal
Planning and Environmental Branch
.;'?C.. l.Ni1 p???•11
?1????ESSIpNq 9
SE 44 ?
g = =
G
kD01118;a`o ?
US 264 Interchange
at SR 1311 (Dildy Road)
Greene County
F. A. Project No. F-38-1(63)
State Project No. 8.T221002
T.I.P. No. R-525 D
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENT'S
1. The North Carolina Department of Transportation will use Best Management
Practices, to avoid and/or minimize non- point source discharges of toxic and
harmful materials. This will substantially minimize sediment-related impacts to
area streams.
2. Prior to the approval of any borrow source developed for use on this project, the
contractor shall obtain a certification from the N. C. Cultural Resources certifying
that the removal of material from the borrow source will have no effect on any
known district, site, building, structure, or object that is included or eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. A copy of this certification
shall be furnished to the Engineer prior to performing any work on the proposed
borrow source.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I.
..............................
STATUS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
.....
.................••••• I
A.
..................................................
General Description ..... .......••""""""""" I
B. Historical Resume .......................................................... ........................... 1
II. EXIS TING CONDITIONS ........................................................ ........................... I
A. Roadways ....................................................................... ...........................1
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied .............................................1
Route Classification ...................................................................... 2
2
.
Existing Cross Section .....................................
3 ............................ 2
.
Existing Right of Way ......................................
4 ............................ 2
.
5. Speed Limit .......................................................
Access Control ..................................................
6 ............................ 2
............................2
.
7. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control .....
8. Service Roads ....................................................
Railroad Crossings ............................................
9 ............................ 2
............................ 3
............................3
.
10. Utilities .............................................................. ............................3
B. Structures ...................................................................... ............................ 3
1. Bridges .............................................................
2. Drainage Structures .......................................... ........................ 3
............................. 3
C.
D. Traffic Volumes ...........................................................
Accident Analysis ........................................................ .............................3
............................. 3
111. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ............................ .............................4
A osed Improvements ...............................................
Pro ............................. 4
.
B p
Construction Detour .................................................... .............................. 4
.
C.
D.
E.
F. Hydraulics and Drainage Structures ...........................
Access Control ............................................................

......................................
Bikeways ...............................
Estimated Costs ........................................................... .............................. 4
.............................. 4
..........................4
....
.............................. 5
.....................
T .............................. 5
IV. PU ..................................
RPOSE OF PROJEC
TABLE OF CONTENTS
V.
V1.
PAGE
ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION .................................................... .................... 5
A. Recommended Alternative ....................................................
B. "Do Nothing„ Alternative .....................................................
C. Alternative Modes of Transportation .................................... .................... 5
....................
.................... 6
EFFECTS TO THE ENVIRONMENTS .......................................... .................... 6
A. Land Use .............................................................................. ..................... 6
1. Local Planning Activities/Existing Zoning ................................... 6
2. Existing Land Use ......................................................................... 6
3. Future Land Use ............................................................................ 6
4. Farmland ....................................................................................... 6

..........................................
B. Historic and Cultural Resources
...
...........••••"' 6
Historic Architectural Resources .............................
1 ..................... 7
.
2. Archaeological Resources ........................................ ..................... 7
C. Natural Resources ............................................................... ...................... 7
1. Methodology ...........................................................

2. Topography and Soils .............................................
3. Water Resources ..................................................... ...................... 7
8
......................
...................... 9
a. Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters ...................... 9
Best Usage Classification ...............................................10
b
.
i 10
ty
Water Qual
d. Summary of Anticipated Impacts ................................... 11

....................................................
4. Biotic Resources ......12
...............
a. Terrestrial Communities ............................
uatic Communities ................................
A
b .....................13
.....................15
q
.
C. Summary of Anticipated Impacts .............. .....................16
5. Special Topics .............................................................................17

Waters of the United States .............................................17
a.
b. Rare and Protected Species ............................................. 21
TABLE OF CONTENTS
D. Traffic Noise and Air Quality
E. Geodetic Markers...........
VII. CONCLUSIONS .................
PAGE
.................. 23
.................. 23
............................................ 23
APPENDIX
US 264 Interchange
at SR 1311 (Dildy Road)
Greene County
F. A. Project No. F-38-1(63)
State Project No. 8.T221002
T.I.P. No. R-525 D
I. STATUS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways,
proposes to construct an interchange on US 264, in Greene County (see Appendix A,
Figure 1). The proposed interchange will be the diamond-type, and will be constructed at
the existing intersection of US 264 and SR 1311 (Dildy Road) (see Appendix A, Figure
2). A Bridge will be constructed at this location to carry SR 1311 over US 264.
The improvements included in this project will be made almost entirely within the
existing right of way and are not anticipated to result in substantial impacts on the
existing human and natural environment. This project will cause no significant changes
in route classification and land use, and is not controversial in nature. Therefore, it is
concluded that a Categorical Exclusion is applicable.
B. Historical Resume
This project is included in the 1998-2004 Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP), with right-of-way scheduled to begin in Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 1997 and
construction scheduled to begin in FFY 1998. The estimated project cost in the 1998-
2004 TIP is $3,800,000. The current cost estimate for the project is $3,850,000.
IL EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Roadways
1. Len th of Roadway Section Studied
At the intersection of US 264 and SR 1311, the length of the studied
section along US 264 is approximately 1.6 km (1.0 mile). Along SR 1311 (Dildy
Road) the length of the studied section is approximately 0.8 km (0.5 mile).
2. Route Classification
US 264 is classified as an Other Principal Arterial on the functional
classification system. SR 1311 is classified as a Minor Collector.
3. Existing Cross Section
The studied section of US 264 is a 4-lane, median divided roadway. The
existing cross section consists of two through lanes in each direction, consisting of
7.2 meters (24 feet) of pavement and a 14.0 meter (46 foot) width median. This
section has inside paved shoulders which range in width from 0.5 meters (1.6 feet)
to 0.6 meters (2 feet) and outside shoulders which range in width from 0.5 meters
(1.6 feet) to 0.8 meters (2.6 feet). At the intersection of SR 1311, US 264 widens
to 4 lanes (14.4 meters (48 feet) of pavement) in each direction. These additional
lanes provide for exclusive left and right turn lanes.
SR 1311 is a 2-lane roadway with 3.6-meter (12-foot) travel lanes and 0.3-
meter (1- foot) paved shoulders in both directions. At the intersection with US
264, the pavement width is 10.8 meters (36 feet). The additional width
accommodates the concrete islands and allows turning movements at the
intersection (see Appendix A, Figure 2).
4. Existing Right of Way
The existing right-of-way width along the majority of US 264 is 91.5
meters (300 feet), except where the roadway intersects SR 1311. At the
US 264/SR 1311 intersection the right-of-way widths are 330.0 meters (1080
feet). This right-of-way width was acquired previously to accommodate the
proposed interchange. The right of way width along SR 1311 is 18.2 meters
(60 feet)(see Appendix A, Figure 2).
5. weed Limit
The posted speed limit on both US 264 and SR 1311 is 90 kph (55 mph).
6. Access Control
in the project area US 264 has partially controlled access, with access
permitted only at the intersection of SR 1311. The only control of access along
SR 1311 is in the area with its intersection with US 264.
7. Intersection Treatment and Twe of Control
The US 264/SR 1311 intersection is at-grade and stop sign controlled with
flashing warning lights.
Service Roads
There are no service roads in the project area.
9. Railroad Crossings
There are no railroad crossing in the project area.
10. Utilities
The utility impact along this project is considered to be low.
B. Structures
1. Bridges
There are no existing bridges in the project area.
2. Drainage Structures
There is one drainage structure, which is located on Thompson Swamp, in
the proposed project area. The existing drainage structure, located on SR 1311
approximately 400 in (1300 ft.) south of US 264, is a double barrel 2.4 in x 2.7 in
(8.0 ft. x 9.0 ft.) reinforced concrete box culvert (RCBC).
C. Traffic Volumes
At the intersection of US 264 and SR 1311, the 1996 traffic volumes on US 264
range from 10,900 vehicles per day (vpd) west of SR 1311 to 11,300 vpd east of
SR 1311. The 1996 traffic volumes on SR 1311 range from 800 vpd north of US 264 to
1600 vpd south of US 264. The projected traffic volumes for 2020 at these locations
range from 22,300 vpd to 22,500 vpd on US 264, and from 1600 vpd to 2700 vpd on
SR 1311, respectively.
D. Accident Analysis
A total of 4 accidents were recorded at the SR 1311 intersection during the
analysis period. Twenty five (25) percent of these accidents involved left-turn
movements and 75 percent were angle accidents. The estimated property damage
resulting from these accidents was $27,950.00. The proposed interchange will reduce the
potential for these types of accidents by separating the major traffic movement on US 64
from the traffic conflicts involved in each of these accidents.
4
III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
A. Proposed Improvements
This project is included in the 1998-2004 Transportation Improvement Program
and proposes to construct a diamond-type interchange on US 264 in Greene County (see
Appendix A, Figure 1). It is recommended the existing at grade intersection be converted
to a diamond-type interchange, being constructed at the existing intersection of US 264
and SR 1311 (Dildy Road). The improvements included in this project will be primarily
made within the existing right of way, which was acquired in the early 1980's as part of
TIP Project R-525.
US 264 will continue to be a four-lane divided expressway with 3.6 meters (24.0
feet) of pavement and a 14-meter (46-foot) grassed median through the interchange area.
The exclusive left turn lanes, right turn lanes, and the crossover will all be removed as a
part of this project. A bridge will be constructed to carry SR 1311 over US 264. At the
proposed US 264/SR 1311 interchange, SR 1311 will remain a two lane roadway through
the interchange area.
B. Construction Detour
Construction of the proposed interchange will require an off-site detour. Traffic
within the project limits on SR 1311 will be temporarily rerouted west of the proposed
interchange to SR 1308.
C. Hydraulics and Drainage Structures
one reinforced concrete box culvert (RCBC) is expected to be extended as a part
of this project. This drainage structure, located on SR 1311 approximately 400 in
(1300 ft.) south of US 264, is proposed to be extended at both ends for the purpose of
raising the grade of SR 1311 as part of the interchange construction. The inflow (eastern
end) of the culvert is to be extended by approximately 4.5 meters (14.8 feet) and the
outflow (western end) of the culvert is to be extended by approximately 4.5 meters
(14.8 feet).
D. Access Control
With the completion of the proposed interchange, a full control of access will
exist along US 264 through the project area.
E. Bikeways
There is no need for special accommodations for bicycles along this project.
F. Estimated Costs
Construction $3,800,000*
Right-of-Way $ 50,000**
Total Cost $3,850,000
*Includes engineering and contingencies.
**Includes right-of-way acquisition & utility costs.
IV. PURPOSE OF PROJECT
The purpose of this project is to complete the original plans and intent of TIP
Project R-525 for this section of US 264. The majority of the right of way for the
proposed interchange was acquired as part of TIP Project R-525 in the early 1980's.
Creating a full control of access along this section of US 264 will improve the capacity
and safety of both US 264 and SR 1311 (Dildy Road).
V. ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION
A. Recommended Alternative
The recommended alternative is to build a full diamond-type interchange at the
existing intersection of US 264 and SR 1311, (see Appendix A, Figure 2). The proposed
interchange will be constructed primarily within existing right of way purchased as part
of TIP Project R-525. Some additional right of way may be required around drainage
structures. This project will complete the original plans along this section of US 264.
The estimated cost of this alternative is $3,850,000. No other construction alternatives
were studied. The recommended improvement is considered to be the most feasible
means of eliminating the existing at-grade intersection while maintaining full access to
the area.
B. "Do Nothing" Alternative
The construction of the proposed interchange would complete the original TIP
Project R-525, making US 264 a controlled access freeway along this section. The
current accident rate at the intersection will only get worse as the traffic increases in the
future. Therefore the "do nothing" alternative is not considered reasonable or feasible
and is not recommended.
C. Alternative Modes of Transportation
No alternative modes of transportation were considered to be practical. Highway
transportation is the dominant mode of transportation in the project area, and alternate
modes of transportation are not available or planned.
VI. EFFECTS TO THE ENVIRONMENT
A. Land Use
1. Local Planning Activities / Existing Zoning
The proposed project is located in the jurisdiction of Greene County. The
County has not adopted a land use plan or any zoning ordinances.
2. Existing Land Use
The project area is primarily rural and composed of wooded, undeveloped
tracts with scattered agricultural and residential land uses.
3. Future Land Use
The project area is not anticipated to experience significant development
pressure. Agricultural uses are the expected primary land use.
4. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal agencies
or their representatives to consider the impacts of land acquisition and
construction projects on prime and important farmland soils. Land which
supports urban development or has been committed to non-agricultural uses is
exempt from the requirements of the Act. The proposed improvements will be
constructed on land previously converted to highway right-of-way. No additional
permanent conversion of land will occur as a result of this project. Therefore, the
project is exempt from further consideration of impacts to farmland soils.
B. Historic and Cultural Resources
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation's Regulations for compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR
Part 800. Section 106 requires that if a federally funded, licensed, or permitted project
has an effect on a property listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places, Advisory Council on Historic Places be given an opportunity to comment. It is
also subject to compliance with Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of
1966, as amended.
1. Historic Architectural Resources
The SHPO has conducted a search of there files and are aware of no
structures of historical or architectural importance located in the proposed project
area. Therefore, the SHPO recommended that no historic resources surveys be
conducted for this project.
2. Archaeological Resources
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area.
Based on the SHPO's present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any
archaeological resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National
Register of Historic Places will be affected by the project construction. Therefore,
the SHPO recommended that no archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project (see Appendix B).
C. Natural Resources
1. Methodology
Research was conducted prior to field investigations. Published resource
information pertaining to the project area was gathered and reviewed. Resources
utilized in this preliminary investigation of the project area include:
Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle maps (Walstonburg)
NCDOT aerial photographs of the project area (1:3000)
USDA, Soil Survey of Greene County, North Carolina (1980).
NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis Environmental Sensitivity
Base Map of Greene County (1995)
National Wetland Inventory Map (Walstonburg)
Water resource information was obtained from publications of the
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (DEHNR, 1993).
Information concerning the occurrence of federal and state protected species in the
study area was obtained from the FWS list of protected and candidate species
(23 August 1996) and from the N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP)
database of rare species and unique habitats. NCNHP files were reviewed for
documented sightings of state or federally listed species and locations of
significant natural areas.
8
General field surveys were conducted along the proposed alignment by
NCDOT Environmental Biologists Matt Smith and Dale Suiter on 17 March
1997. Water resources were identified and their physical characteristics were
recorded. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were also identified and
described. Terrestrial community classifications generally follow Schafale and
Weakley (1990) where possible, and plant taxonomy follows Radford, et al.
(1968). Animal taxonomy follows Martof, et al. (1980), Menhenick (1991),
Potter, et al. (1980), and Webster, et al. (1985). Vegetative communities were
mapped utilizing aerial photography of the project site. Predictions regarding
wildlife community composition involved general qualitative habitat assessment
based on existing vegetative communities. Wildlife identification involved using
a variety of observation techniques: qualitative habitat assessment based on
vegetative communities, active searching, and identifying characteristic signs of
wildlife (sounds, scat, tracks and burrows). Cursory surveys of aquatic organisms
were conducted using a hand held dip net; tactile searches for benthic organisms
were administered as well. Organisms captured during these searches were
identified and then released.
Jurisdictional wetlands, if present, were identified and evaluated based on
criteria established in the "Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual"
(Environment Laboratory, 1987) and "Guidance for Rating the Values of
Wetlands in North Carolina" (Division of Environmental Management, 1995).
Wetlands were classified based on the classification scheme of Cowardin, et al.
(1979).
2. Tonoaranhv and Soils
Greene County lies in the Coastal Plain physiographic province of North
Carolina. The topography of Greene County is nearly level with short slopes
along the many small streams. Topography in the vicinity of the study area is
nearly level with broad flood plains along streams. Project elevations are
approximately 24 m (79 ft) above mean sea level. Parent material for soils in
Greene County is unconsolidated rock material, sand, silt, and clay.
Agriculture is the basis of the economy in Greene County, with tobacco
being the most important crop. Other important crops are corn and soybeans.
Hog farming has become increasingly important during the last decade.
Soils located in the project area are of the Norfolk-Goldsboro and Bibb-
Johnston-Kenansville-Lumbee Associations. An inventory of the specific soil
types which occur in the project area can be found in Table 2. A brief description
of each soil type is also provided.
Table 2. Soil map units occurring in the project area.
Map Unit Symbol Specific Mapping Unit % Slope Site Index- Erosion hazard
BB Bibb loam, frequently flooded 0-1 90 slight
Jo Johns sandy loam 0-2 86 slight
Lu Lumbee sandy loam >1 94 slight
Note: describes the potential for future erosion, inherent in the soil itself, in inadequately protected
areas. Based on tons of soil lost/acre/year.
2 the expected average height (ft) of dominant trees in an even aged stand at 50 years of age
(loblolly pine).
• Bibb loam, frequently flooded is a poorly drained soil found on flood
plains. This soil is frequently flooded for brief periods, surface runoff is very
slow, and permeability is moderate. This soil is listed as a hydric soil.
• Johns sandy loam is a somewhat poorly drained to well drained soil
located on stream terraces. Surface runoff on this soil is slow and permeability
is moderate.
• Lumbee sandy loam is a poorly drained soil that occurs in smooth flat
areas on stream terraces. This soil experiences slow or ponded surface runoff
and has moderate permeability.
3. Water Resources
This section contains information concerning surface water resources
likely to be impacted by the proposed project. Water resource assessments
include the physical characteristics, best usage standards, and water quality
aspects of the water resources, along with their relationship to major regional
drainage systems. Probable impacts to surface water resources are also discussed,
as are means to minimize impacts.
a. Physical Characteristics of Surface Waters
Water resources located within the study area are located in the
Inner Coastal Plain subbasin (030407) of the Neuse River Drainage Basin.
SR 1311 crosses one perennial stream. The proposed action will not result
in the construction of any new stream crossings. It will necessitate the
widening of the two existing culvert crossings to accommodate the new
facility.
Thompson Swamp originates west of SR 1310 and flows northeast
to its confluence with Little Contentea Creek in Pitt County. Thompson
Swamp is a Coastal Plain blackwater bottomland. The channel is 9 m
(30 R) wide as it crosses SR 1311 and the depth could not be determined at
the time of the site visit. Broadly sloping banks and frequent overbank
flooding is evident at the site. Semipermanent pools are interspersed
to
throughout the surrounding bottomland. Stream substrate is composed of
silt and sand. Banks are densely vegetated and an extensive riparian
canopy is present.
b. Best Usage Classification
Streams have been assigned a best usage classification by the
Division of Water Quality (DWQ), formerly Division of Environmental
Management (DEM), which reflects water quality conditions and potential
resource usage. Thompson Swamp (DEM Index No. 27-86-26-1.5-1) is
classified as "C Sw NSW' (10/21/92). Class C waters are defined as
suitable for aquatic life propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife,
secondary recreation, and agriculture. The supplemental classification Sw
(Swamp water) includes waters which have low velocities and other
natural characteristics which are different from adjacent streams. NSW
(Nutrient Sensitive Waters) is a supplemental classification that refers to
waters which require limitations on nutrient inputs. No waters classified
as High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or WS-II) or
Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of
project study area.
C. Water Quality
This section describes the water quality of the water resources
within the project area. Potential sediment loads and toxin concentrations
of these waters from both point sources and nonpoint sources are
evaluated. Water quality assessments are made based on published
resource information and existing general watershed characteristics. These
data provide insight into the value of water resources within the project
area to meet human needs and to provide habitat for aquatic organisms.
General Watershed Characteristics
Sedimentation and stormwater runoff from land clearing activities
and agriculture are likely to be the primary sources of water quality
degradation to Thompson Swamp in the project vicinity. Runoff from
agricultural fields is known to contain high levels of oxygen depleting
organic compounds (pesticides, fertilizer) and high levels of potentially
harmful bacteria (E. coli, fecal coliforms). Runoff from land clearing
activities is primarily composed of sediment but is also likely to include
pesticide residue, fertilizer, and petroleum products. These types of runoff
are classified as nonpoint source and are difficult to quantify and
determine an exact source.
II
Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN),
managed by the DWQ, is part of an ongoing ambient water quality
monitoring program which addresses long term trends in water quality.
The program monitors ambient water quality by sampling at fixed sites for
selected benthic macroinvertebrates organisms, which are sensitive to
water quality conditions. Samples are evaluated on the number of taxa
present of intolerant groups [Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, Trichoptera
(EPT)] and assigned a taxa richness value. Samples are also assigned a
biotic index value that summarizes tolerance data for all species in each
collection. The biotic index and taxa richness values primarily reflect the
effects of chemical pollution and are a poor measure of the effects of such
physical pollutants as sediment. BMAN data is currently unavailable for
the project vicinity.
Point Source Dischargers
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are
permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) program administered by the DWQ. All dischargers are
required to register for a permit.
The DEM NPDES report lists one permitted discharger in the
project vicinity, Waltonsburg WWTP (Permit # NC0020362). The
discharge site is located on Thompson Swamp 0.2 km (0.1 mi ) upstream
of SR 1311. Waltonsburg WWTP is permitted to discharge up to 0.14
MGD of treated effluent.
d. Su_rnmga of Anticipated Imps
Aquatic communities are sensitive to any changes in the
environment. Any action which affects water quality can have an adverse
affect on aquatic organisms. Although these actions may be temporary
during the construction phase of the project, environmental impacts from
these processes may be long term or irreversible. Sources of aquatic
impacts associated with project construction include: the extension of
pipes and culverts, streambank vegetation removal, grading, and pavement
installation.
The following impacts to surface water resources are likely to
result from project construction:
12
• Increased sedimentation and siltation from construction and/or erosion.
• Changes in light incidence and water clarity due to increased
sedimentation and vegetation removal.
• Alteration of water levels and flows due to interruptions and/or
additions to surface and ground water flow from construction.
• Changes in water temperature due to vegetation removal.
• Increased nutrient loading during construction via runoff from exposed
areas.
• Increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff,
construction, and toxic spills.
• Increased potential for release of toxic compounds such as fuel and oil
from construction equipment and other vehicles.
• Alteration of stream discharge due to silt loading and changes in
surface and groundwater drainage patterns.
In order to minimize potential impacts to water resources in the
project area, NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of
Surface Waters should be enforced during the construction phase of the
project.
Anadromous fish are a valuable resource and their migration must
not be adversely impacted. The proposed project is located in the Coastal
Plain and is therefore subject to the guidelines defined in NCDOT's
Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage. These
guidelines detail recommendations that allow for construction that will not
impede the migration of anadromous fish species including, minimization
of instream activities during the spring migration period.
4. Biotic Resources
Biotic resources include terrestrial and aquatic communities. This section
describes the biotic communities encountered in the project area, as well as the
relationships between fauna and flora within these communities. The composition
and distribution of biotic communities throughout the project area are reflective of
topography, soils, hydrology, and past and present land uses. Descriptions of the
terrestrial systems are presented in the context of plant community classifications.
These classifications follow Schafale and Weakley (1990) where possible.
Representative animal species which are likely to occur in these habitats (based on
published range distributions) are also cited.
13
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are
provided for each animal and plant species listed. Subsequent references to the
same organism refer to the common name only. Fauna observed during the site
visit are denoted in the text with an asterisk (*).
a. Terrestrial Communities
Three distinct terrestrial communities were identified within the
project area: Disturbed Community, Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest, and
Bottomland Hardwood Forest. Community boundaries are frequently
ill-defined due to disturbance; contiguous communities often merge
without distinct boundaries between them. Thus, some areas may contain
characteristics of more than one community.
Disturbed Community
The disturbed community in the study area is composed of
roadsides, agricultural fields, roadside ditches, and waste areas. Roadside
shoulders and agricultural fields are maintained in an early successional
state through seeding, mowing and herbicide application. Common
species include: Carolina geranium (Geranium maculatum), yellow wood
sorrel (Oxalis stricta), English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), wild lettuce
(Lactuca canadensis), ragwort (Senicio tomentosus), hawkweed
(Hieracium sp.), and Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon). Less frequently
maintained portions of this community have been colonized by species
such as, broom sedge (Andropogon virginica), Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica), panic grass (Panicum sp.), blackberry (Rubus
aurgutus), goldenrod (Solidago spp.), and lespedeza (Lespedeza sp.).
Occasional loblolly?pines (Pinus taeda) were observed in this community.
The fauna found in this community are generally highly adaptive
and extremely hardy. The greatest potential for diversity is found among
the insects, many of which meet the previously mentioned requirements.
Grasses and flowering herbs are an excellent food source for grasshoppers
(Orthoptera), bees (Hymenoptera), dragonflies (Odonata), and butterflies
and moths (Lepidoptem). Specifically the pearl crescent (Phycoides
tharos), silver-spotted skipper (Epargyreus clarus), golden northern
bumble bee (Bombus fervidus), and striped blister beetle (Epicauta vittata)
are common in this community. Other animals that utilize this community
include those that are residents of agricultural fields such as, eastern garter
snake (Thamnophis sirtalis), six-lined racerunner (Cnemidophorus
sexlineatus), Fowler's toad (Bufo woodhousei), eastern mole (Scalopus
aquaticus), southern short-tailed shrew (Blarina carolinensis), and eastern
harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys humulis). Larger vertebrates will also
forage in disturbed communities, often times seeking shelter in the
14
adjacent forested communities. Typical species include: raccoon (Procyon
lotor), turkey vulture (Cathartes aura), Virginia opossum (Didelphis
virginianus), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), and song sparrow
(Melospiza melodia).
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
This community is found throughout the study area and grades into
the bottomland hardwood forest associated with Thompson Swamp. The
canopy is well developed and composed of loblolly pine, white oak
(Quercus albs), red maple (Acer rubrum), river birch (Betula nigra),
willow oak (Q. phellos), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), sycamore
(Platanus occidentalis), and tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera). A
dense understory is present intertwined with greenbrier (Smilax spp.),
yellow jessamine (Gelsemium sempervirens), and grape (Vitis sp.). Trees
in the understory include: horse sugar (Symplocus tinctoria), American
holly (Ilex opaca), sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum), ironwood
(Carpinus caroliniana), American beech (Fagus grandifolia), titi (Cyrilla
racemiflora), wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera), sweet bay (Magnolia
virginiana), and blueberry (Faccinium sp.). The herbaceous portion of
this community is sparse and includes: giant cane (Arundinaria gigantea),
netted chain fern (Woodwardia areolata), and resurrection fern
(Polypodium polypodioides).
Forested communities generally offer a wider range of
opportunities for animals than do disturbed communities. The wide range
of opportunities translates into a diverse assemblage of species. Species
such as wood thrush (Hylocichla mustelina), southeastern shrew (Sorex
longirostris), ground skink (Scincella lateralis), and eastern box turtle
(Terrapene carolina) can be seen foraging on the forest floor for insect
larvae and worms. Canopy trees provide shelter for upland chorus frog
(Pseudacris triseriata), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), Carolina
chickadee (Pares carolinensis), yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia), and
Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus). Burrows for larger mammals
such as bobcat (Fells rufus) and gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) are
often observed in slope forests.
Bottomland Hardwood Forest
The Bottomland Hardwood Forest is located on the banks of
Thompson Swamp. The canopy composed of red maple, black gum
(Nyssa sylvatica), swamp chestnut oak (Q. michauxii), and sweet gum.
The dense understory and shrub layer is dominated by privet (Ligustrum
sinsense), sugar maple (Acer floridanum), silverling (Bacharis
halimifolia). The edges of this community receive near full sunlight and
15
contain a diverse assemblage of herbaceous species including cattails
(Typha latifolia), meadow beauty (Rhexia sp.), wool grass (Cvperus sp.),
sedges (Carex spp.), soft rush (Juncus effusus), and Asian dayflower
(Murdannia keisak).
The dense nature of this community provides excellent shelter and
additional foraging opportunities for species found in adjacent
communities. Habitat is also available for woodland species that prefer
upland environments. Red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus)
can be found on canopy trees foraging for insects. Also, lepidoptera such
as wood nymph (Cercyonis pegala) and pink-spotted hawk moth (Agrius
cingulatus) feed in the understory of this community. Many small
vertebrates thrive in the dense vine layer and deep leaf litter found on the
forest floor. Species such as salamanders (Plethodon spp.), southeastern
shrew (Sorex longirostris), and various mice (Peromyscus spp.) tunnel in
the leaf litter to forage. White-tailed deer and gray fox (Urocyon
cinereoargenteus) are common large vertebrates in these habitats.
b. Aquatic Communities
Community composition of the aquatic communities is reflective
of the physical characteristics of the water body and the condition of the
water resource. Terrestrial communities adjacent to water resources also
greatly influence aquatic community composition and structure.
Thompson Swamp is a coastal plain bottomland hardwood black
water swamp. This community is characterized by extremely slow flow
and low water clarity. Aquatic habitats found within this community are
the stream channels, semi-permanent pools, and permanently inundated
pools. An extensive riparian canopy exists throughout this community,
canopy composition is described in terrestrial communities. Hydrophytic
herbs can be found to a varying degree in pools and open areas along the
stream bank. Common species include: knotweed (Polygonium sp.) and
alligator weed (Alternanthera philoxoides). Fauna in this community
generally utilize all habitats during some part of the year. Species adapted
to periodic flooding events are found in the highest numbers. Common
piscine species include: redfin pickerel (Esox americanus), bluespotted
sunfish (Emneacanthus gloriosus), and longnose gar (Lepisosteus osseus).
Aquatic organisms commonly found in semipermanently flooded
bottomlands include; bowfin (Amia calva), eastern mudminnow (Umbra
pygmaea), and eastern mosquito fish (Gambusia holbrooki). This
community also supports nonpiscine species such as snapping turtle
(Chelydra serpentina) and brown water snake (Nerodia taxispilota).
Piscivorous birds such as belted kingfisher (Megaceryle alycon) perch on
low hanging branches in the riparian canopy and prey on small fish.
16
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Construction of the proposed project will have various impacts on
the biotic resources described. Any construction related activities in or
near these resources have the potential to impact biological functions.
This section quantifies and qualifies potential impacts to the natural
communities within the project area in terms of the area impacted and the
organisms affected. Temporary and permanent impacts are considered
here as well, along with recommendations to minimize or eliminate
impacts.
Terrestrial
Impacts to terrestrial communities will result from project
construction due to the clearing and paving of portions of the project area,
and thus the loss of habitat area. Table 3 summarizes potential losses to
these communities, resulting from project construction. Calculated
impacts to terrestrial communities reflect the relative abundance of each
community present in the study area. Estimated impacts are derived based
on the entire proposed right-of-way area. However, project construction
often does not require the entire right-of-way; therefore, actual impacts
may be considerably less.
Table 3. Estimated area impacts to terrestrial communities.
Impacted Area ha (ac)
Disturbed Community 6.4(16)
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 4.5(11)
Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.14 (0.34)
11
The projected loss of habitat resulting from project construction
will have a minimal impact on populations of native fauna and flora.
Construction will impact the disturbed community and forested
communities in near equal proportions. Plants and animals found in this
community are generally common throughout North Carolina and are well
adapted to persisting in disturbed areas. Animals temporarily displaced by
construction activities should repopulate areas of suitable habitat
following project completion. Portions of the forested communities
impacted by project construction will result in a reduction in the amount of
suitable habitat available for interior species and increasing opportunities
for edge species. If forested tracts become too small in area interior
species will not repopulate.
17
In order to minimize impacts to natural communities in the project
vicinity it is recommended that widening be conducted so as to avoid
impacts to the forested communities to the extent possible and that all
cleared areas along roadways be revegetated immediately following
project completion.
Aquatic
It is anticipated that permanent and temporary impacts to aquatic
communities will occur from increased sedimentation, increased light
penetration and loss of habitat. Sedimentation covers benthic organisms,
inhibiting their ability to feed and obtain oxygen. Filter feeders may be
covered by excessive sedimentation, thus preventing their ability to feed.
Increased sediment loads and suspended particulates in the water column
can lead to the smothering of fish eggs, reduced depth of light penetration
in the water column, reduction of dissolved oxygen and alterations in
water temperature. Increased light penetration from the removal of
streamside vegetation may also increase water temperatures.
In order to minimize impacts to aquatic communities in the project
area it is recommended that instream construction be avoided wherever
possible and that stream banks be revegetated with natural vegetation
immediately following project completion.
Special Topics
This section provides inventories and impact analyses pertinent to two
significant regulatory issues: Waters of the United States and rare and protected
species. These issues retain particular significance because of federal and state
mandates which regulate their protection. This section deals specifically with the
construction. impact analyses required to satisfy regulatory authority prior to
project
a. Waters of the United States
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category of
"Waters of the United States," as defined in Section 33 of the Code of
Federal Register (CRF) Part 328.3. Any action that proposes to dredge or
place fill material into surface waters or wetlands falls under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). Surface waters include all
standing or flowing waters which have commercial or recreational value to
the public. Wetlands are identified based on the presence of hydric soils,
hydrophytic vegetation, and saturated or flooded conditions during all or
part of the growing season.
18
Characteristics of Wetlands and Surface Waters
Criteria to delineate jurisdictional wetlands include evidence of
hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation and hydrology. Three wetland sites
are identified in the study area. Information concerning the areas of these
wetlands potentially impacted by project construction is found in Table 5.
Wetland D is located in the southeast quadrant of the proposed
interchange. The Cowardin classification for this site is Palustrine
Forested Deciduous Seasonally flooded (PF06C). The canopy is
composed of loblolly pine, sweet gum, water oak, and red maple. The
understory contains saplings of canopy trees titi and horse sugar.
Hydrological indicators were saturated soils and free water at 15 cm (6 in).
Soils were examined at this site and determined to have low chroma
values (10YR 2/1; IOYR 511).
Wetland F is located in the southwest quadrant of the proposed
interchange. The Cowardin classification for this site is Palustrine
Forested Deciduous Seasonally flooded (PF06C). The canopy is
composed of loblolly pine, willow oak, sweetgum, and red maple. The
shrub layer contains species found in the canopy, giant cane, and horse
sugar. A herbaceous layer with greenbrier and netted chain fern is also
present. Hydrological indicators are surface saturation and oxidized root
channels. Soils were examined at this site and determined to have low
chrome values (1 OYR 4/ 1; l OYR 6/1).
Wetlands A, B and E are located in the Bottomland Hardwood
Forest Community along both sides of SR 1311. The Cowardin
classification for this site is Palustrine Forested Broad Leaved Deciduous
Seasonally flooded (PFOIQ. Community structure and composition are
described in the Aquatics section. Hydrological indicators at this site are:
inundation, saturated soils, water marks, drainage patterns, and drift lines.
Soils were examined at this site and determined to have low chroma
values (2.5Y 2.5/1).
Table 4. Anticipated Impacts to Wetlands.
Ana impacted hectares (acres)
Community
Wetland A Wetland B Wetland D Wetland E Wetland F
Disturbed Community
- - -
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 1.17(2.9) 0.2(0.5)
- - 0.2 (0.5) --
Bottomland Hardwood Forest 0.12 (0.3) 0.01 (0.02)
TOtal: 0.12 (0.3) 0.01 (0.02) 1.17 (2.9) 0.2 (0.5) 0.2(0.5)
19
Anticipated wetland impacts were determined using preliminary
roadway plans. Therefore the Actual wetland impacts shown should be
very accurate. These impact estimates include only those wetland areas
directly disturbed by construction within the right-of-way, additional
wetland areas might be indirectly affected due to changes in water levels
and siltation from construction activities. Impacts to wetlands will be
avoided wherever practical. Approximately 0.4 Ha (1.0 acres) of Wetland
D will remain within the gore area of the eastbound ramp and
approximately 0.7 Ha (1.7 acres) of Wetland F will remain within the gore
area of the eastbound exit ramp.
Impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are calculated based on the
linear feet of the stream that is located within the proposed right-of-way.
Physical aspects of surface waters are described in characteristics of
surface water. Approximately 100 linear feet of Thompson Swamp are
located within the proposed right-of-way.
Permits
impacts to jurisdictional surface waters are anticipated from the
proposed project. As a result, construction activities will require permits
and certifications from various regulatory agencies in charge of protecting
the water quality of public water resources
A Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5(a) (23) is likely to be
applicable for all impacts to Waters of the United States resulting from the
proposed project. This permit authorizes activities undertaken, assisted,
authorized, regulated, funded or financed in whole, or part, by another
Federal agency or department where that agency or department has
determined the pursuant to the council on environmental quality regulation
for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental
Policy Act:
• (1) that the activity, work, or discharge is categorically excluded from
environmental documentation because it is included within a category
of actions which neither individually nor cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment, and;
• (2) that the office of the Chief of Engineers has been furnished notice
of the agency' or department's application for the categorical exclusion
and concurs with that determination.
This project will also require a 401 Water Quality Certification
from the DWQ prior to the issuance of the Nationwide Permit. Section 401
of the Clean Water Act requires that the state issue or deny water
20
certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may result
in a discharge to Waters of the United States. Section 401 Certification
allows surface waters to be temporarily impacted for the duration of the
construction or other land manipulation. The issuance of a 401 permit
from the DWQ is a prerequisite to issuance of a Section 404 permit.
Avoidance, Minimization, Mitigation
The COE has adopted through the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) a wetland mitigation policy which embraces the concept of
"no net loss of wetlands" and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to
restore and maintain the chemical, biological and physical integrity of
Waters of he United States, specifically wetlands. Mitigation of wetland
impacts has been defined by the CEQ to include: avoiding impacts (to
wetlands), minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, reducing impacts over
time and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). Each of these three
aspects (avoidance, minimization and compensatory mitigation) must be
considered sequentially.
Avoidance mitigation examines all appropriate and practicable
possibilities of averting impacts to Waters of the United States. According
to a 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE, in determining "appropriate and
practicable" measures to offset unavoidable impacts, such measures should
be appropriate to the scope and degree of those impacts and practicable in
terms of cost, existing technology and logistics in light of overall project
purposes.
Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and
practicable steps to reduce the adverse impacts to Waters of the United
States. Implementation of these steps will be required through project
modifications and permit conditions. Minimization typically focuses on
decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction to
median widths, ROW widths, and/or fill slopes.
As a part of this project specific steps to minimize wetland impacts
were taken. The fill slopes along the eastbound entry ramp were changed
to a 2:1 slope grade. This change in the slope grade reduces the overall
footprint of the roadway by moving the slope stake lines closer to the
roadway. The starting point of the grade along Dildy Road was moved
closer to US 264. This steepens the grade that vehicles will climb to cross
US 264, however it reduces the amount of fill required over the culvert at
the stream crossing.
it
Compensatory mitigation in not normally considered until
anticipated impacts to Waters of the United States have been avoided and
minimized to the maximum extent possible. It is recognized that "no net
loss of wetlands" functions and values may not be achieved in each and
every permit action. Appropriate and practicable compensatory mitigation
is required for unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all
appropriate and practicable minimization has been required.
Compensatory actions often include restoration, creation and enhancement
of Water of the United States, specifically wetlands. Such actions should
be undertaken in areas adjacent to or contiguous to the discharge site.
b. Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the
process of decline either due to natural forces or their inability to coexist
with human development. Federal law (under the provisions of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires that any action,
likely to adversely affect a species classified as federally-protected, be
subject to review by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).
Other species may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
Federally-Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), and Proposed Threatened
(PT) are protected under the provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of May 2,1997, the
FWS lists one federally protected species for Greene County: red-
cockaded woodpecker icoides borealis).
The FWS has classified the red-cockaded woodpecker as
Endangered. This Classification denotes a species that is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A brief
description of the red-cockaded woodpecker's characteristics and habitat
requirements follows. After the description a biological conclusion is also
found. The conclusion address's potential impacts to each species from
project construction.
Picoidgs borealis (red-cockaded woodpecker) E
The adult red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW) has a plumage that is
entirely black and white except for small red streaks on the sides of the
nape in the male. The back of the RCW is black and white with horizontal
22
stripes. The breast and underside of this woodpecker are white with
streaked flanks. The RCW has a large white cheek patch surrounded by
the black cap, nape, and throat.
The RCW uses open old growth stands of southern pines,
particularly longleaf pine for foraging and nesting habitat. A forested
stand must contain at least 50% pine, lack a thick understory, and be
contiguous with other stands to be appropriate habitat for the RCW. These
birds nest exclusively in trees that are >60 years old and are contiguous
with pine stands at least 30 years of age. The foraging range of the RCW is
up to 200.0 ha (500.0 ac). This acreage must be contiguous with suitable
nesting sites.
These woodpeckers nest exclusively in living pine trees and
usually in trees that are infected with the fungus that causes red-heart
disease. Cavities are located in colonies from 3.6-30.3 in (12.0-100.0 ft)
above the ground and average 9.1- 15.7 in (30.0-50.0 ft) high. They can
be identified by a large incrustation of running sap that surrounds the tree.
The RCW lays its eggs in April, May, and June; the eggs hatch
approximately 38 days later.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
A review of the NCNB? database for rare species and unique
habitats was performed. This research revealed no documented
occurrence of RCW within 1.6 km (1.0 mi) of the project area. The
project study area was visited by NCDOT Biologists Teryn Smith and
Chris Murray on 15 July 1997.
Habitat for the red-cockaded woodpecker does not exist in the
project study area. The forested tracts of land exhibit a well-developed
canopy; however, loblolly pine trees comprise less than 15% of the canopy
in these communities. Additionally, land within 0.8 km (0.5 mile) of the
project did not contain 50% or more pine. Impacts to RCW will not occur
from project construction.
Federal Species of Concern and State Listed Species
Federal species of concern are not afforded federal protection
under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject to any of its
provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed
as Threatened or Endangered. However, the status of these species is
subject to change, and so should be included for consideration. Federal
Species of Concern (FSC) are defined as a species which is under
consideration for listing for which there is insufficient information to
23
support listing. In addition, organisms which are listed as Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and Animal Species are afforded state
protection under the NC State Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979. There are no federal species of
concern listed for Greene County.
E. Traffic Noise and Air Ouali
The project is located in Greene County which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Because the project is
located in an attainment area, 40 CFR Part 51 is not applicable. This project is not
anticipated to create any adverse effect on air quality of this attainment area.
The project proposes to construct an interchange to carry SR 1311 traffic over
US 264. The existing exclusive left turn lanes, right turn lanes, and crossover will all be
removed as a part of this project. No additional through lanes are planned for US 264 or
SR 1311. All construction is planned within the existing right-of-way. The project will
not substantially change traffic volumes in the vicinity of the project. Based on past
project experience, the project's impact on noise and air quality will be insignificant.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be temporary. If
vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with
applicable local laws and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in
compliance with 15 NCAC 213.0520. This evaluation completes the assessment
requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air quality (1990
CAAA and NEPA) and no additional reports are required.
F. Geodetic Markers
No geodetic survey markers will be impacted by this project.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the assessment of environmental impacts included in this document, it
has been determined that the proposed improvements will have no significant adverse
impact on the environment.
APPENDIX A
N
,

MS ISI
alatonburS Firmvi,.
`L
1
O (
' Sa \ IA sa 13 -
Mawr
.. I-' o. Mill O"h"osr,
16
6 ooaer
5 )
1
77 I
?c9

306
/ • ? ?
? ?
'^ r,
\ 1306

0
_ b
OJECT AREA
91 1306 PR
J S:
5
f
/ ! 6 .,
1360 S N 1
3'0 \
l

229 308
\'j 3
I _ to
"
/ _ _
1228 - ' - ' 1361 k
1
2.8 131
CD
1228
.9
3 .
7 5 \
?
a

1230 •6
i .
121 4
J
WALSTONKIRG 1303
W."1 ??
1318 \ 264

231 AND NORfMYE51fRN 1303
03 ALT
13
Apple Ay to,
o 1249
• ` •'?
?+ 5
1302
! 1302 \ ,317
;}; 13`7 '
?.. 2.5 ?
1 1303 '. 3'•
1 - s
?

1229 1725.
y~ .._
t 1.2
/ t1` ? Nowell • ° Q 1302
9 Swamp 'v
Ch. / N '312
/ 1232 1249 ' 131 J u

Tabernacle ; :? t22S ) 1237 : +: •
J U
h 1317 Y 1
'?
,Q J
l_ Churc
1240 i
1238 i 91 .
1312
p

LEM
c .
? s 4 1314
- •c.
n : ?? h
,
.. J . 1315
1z3o -
? 6 123
0
to 1314 '?1
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION

g DIVISION OF HIGHWAI'S
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
WEST OF FARMVILLE
US 264, PROPOSED INTERCHANGE
AT DILDY ROAD (SR1311),
GREENE COUNTY,
FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO. F-38-1(63)
STATE PROJECT NO. 87221002.
T.I.P. NO. R-0525D
0 KILOMETERS 4
W, FIGURE 1
f?
APPENDIX B

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER M May 16, 1997
Special Studies and
Flood Plain Services Section
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:

79 say
? F.
`c.
`t
t
c 1007
l
r'
i'
This is in response to your letter of March 12, 1997, requesting our comments on
"Greene County, Interchange on US 264 Bypass at Dildy Road (SR 1311), Federal-Aid
Project F-38-1(63), State Project No. 87221002, TIP R-525D" (Regulatory Branch
Action I.D. No. 199705651).
Our comments involve impacts to flood plains and jurisdictional resources, which
include waters, wetlands, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projects. The proposed
roadway improvements would 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,
I
C. E. Shuford, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
Planning Division
Enclosure
B-1
May 16, 1997
Page 1 of 1
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILMINGTON DISTRICT COMMENTS ON:
"Greene County, Interchange on US 264 Bypass at Dildy Road (SR 1311), Federal-Aid
Project F-38-1(63), State Project No. 87221002, TIP R-525D" (Regulatory Branch
Action I.D. No. 199705651)
1. FLOOD PLAINS: POC Mr. Bobby L Willis, Special Studies and Flood Plain
Services Section, at [phone]
The proposed project is located in Greene County, which participates in the
Emergency Program of the National Flood Insurance Program. Based on a review of
Panel 10 of the January 1983 Greene County Flood Insurance Rate Map, the site is not
shown in an identified flood hazard area. However, from a review of the pertinent
United States Geological Survey topo map of the area ("Walstonburg, NC"), it appears
that the proposed interchange is near Thompson Swamp, a stream of sufficient
drainage area to produce flooding. We suggest that drainage structures be designed
to minimize the impact on upstream water surface elevations.
2. WATERS AND WETLANDS: POC Mr. Bill Biddlecome, Washinciton Field
Office, Reaulatory Branch, at (9191975-1616, Extension 27
An on-site visit was made on April 8, 1997, at which time potential wetlands were
found. All work restricted to existing high ground areas will not require prior Federal
permit authorization. However, 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 within waters of the United States and wetlands.
Specific permit requirements will depend on design of the project, extent of fill work
within streams and wetland areas (dimensions, fill amounts, etc.), construction
methods, and other factors.
At this point in time, construction plans are not available for review. When final
plans are completed, including the extent and location of development within any
waters and wetlands, the North Carolina Department of Transportation should contact
Mr. Biddlecome for a final determination of the Federal permit requirements.
B-2
a
North Carolina
Department of Administration
Katie G. Dorsett, Secretary
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
April 28, 1997
Mr. Frank Vick
N.C. Department of Transportation
Planning and Environmental Branch
Transportation Building
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Vick:
Re: SCH File # 97-E-4220-0570; Scoping Proposed Construction of an Interchange on US 264
Bypass at Dildy Road (SR 1311) in Greene County; TIP #R-525D
The above referenced project has been reviewed through the State Clearinghouse Intergovernmental
Review Process. Attached to this letter are comments made by agencies reviewing this document.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
a'ejv 4(5%2'?-
Mrs. Chrys Baggett, Director
N. C. State Clearinghouse
Attachments
cc: Region P
Melba McGee, DEHNR
??` c E r t{ f~.
&W, zv
116 West Jones Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-8003 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
B-3
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, ffl?WA
Health and Natural Resources 4 10 0
IT
Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs AVA
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary pEH N
Richard E. Rogers, Jr., Acting Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee-V'/
Environmental Review Coordinator
RE: 97-0570 New Interchange on US 264 Bypass at Dildy Road, Greene
County
DATE: April 25, 1997
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources has reviewed the
proposed information. The attached comments are for the applicant's
consideration.
Thank you for the opportunity to review.
attachments
RECEIVED
APR 2 519971
N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
FAX [phone]
P.O. Box 27687. '& *
C
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 r? An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
919-715-4148 __ - • 1 50% recycled/ 10°6 post-consumer paper
B-4
State of North Carolina IT
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Governor C
G
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
April 30, 1997
TO: Melba McGee, DEHNR SEPA Coordinator
FROM: Michelle Suverkrubbe, DWQ SEPA Coordinator /15
RE: Comments on EA #97-0570; WQS# 11589
New Interchange of US 264 Bypass at Dildy Road
Greene County
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) requests that the following topics be
discussed in the EA10S document:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The current stream
classifications and use support ratings for these streams should be included. This
information is available from DWQ through the following contacts:
Liz Kovasckitz - Classifications - 919-733-5083, ext. 572
Carol Metz - Use Support Ratings - 919-733-5083, ext. 562
B . Identify the linear feet of stream channelization/relocations. If the original stream
banks were vegetated, it is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DWQ requests that these catch basins
be placed at all water supply stream crossings. Identify the responsible party for
maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion control measures are not placed in
wetlands.
G . 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.
Employer 50°/9 recycled/ 9o% post-consumer pap 715-5637
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, Equal Opportunity Affirmative North Action Carolina
An B-5
97-0570 DOT Scoping
April 30, 1997
Page 2
vi) Quality of wetlands impacted.
vii) Total wetland impacts. requested from DWQ.
viii) List the 401 General Certification numbers H. Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to the approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the contractor shall
obtain a 401 Certification from DWQ.
1. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as possible? Why not (if
applicable)?
J. Please provide a detailed discussion for mass-transit as an option.
K. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques alleviate the traffic
problems in the study area?
L. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the environmental review. The
mitigation plan may state the following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after wetland impacts have
been avoided and minimized to the maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of mitigation. In-kind
mitigation within the same watershed is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order: restoration, creation, enhancement,
and lastly banking.
DWQ is also concerned about secondary wetland impacts. For DWQ to concur
with an alternative in the mountains or the piedmont, DOT will need to commit to full
control of access to the wetland parcels or DOT to purchase these parcels for wetland
mitigation.
Please note that a 401 Water Quality Certification cannot be issued until the
conditions of NCAC 15A: 01C.0402 (Limitations on Actions During NCEPA Process) are
met. This regulation prevents DWQ from issuing the 401 Certification until a FONSI or
Record of Decision (ROD) has been issued by the Department requiring the document. It is
recommended that if the 401 Certification application is submitted for review prior to the
sign off, the applicant states that the 401 should not be issued until the applicant informs
DWQ that the FONSI or ROD has been signed off by the Department.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be required for this
project. Applications requesting coverage under our General Certification 14 or General
Permit 31 (with wetland impact) will require written concurrence. Please be aware that 401
Certification may be denied if wetland or water impacts have not been avoided and
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Please give Cyndi Bell a call at [phone] if you should have any questions
on these comments.
mis:\970570
cc: Cyndi Bell - DWQ- ESB, Ecological Assessment Group
B-6
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, LT!XA
Health and Natural Resources 4 0
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor p E ?---' N F1
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
C. Dewey Botts, Director
March 21, 1997
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: David Harrison
SUBJECT: Proposed Interchange on US 264 at SR 1311 (Dildy Road) in Greene County.
Project No. 97-0570.
The proposed improvements involve replacing the existing intersection with an overpass
interchange.
If the proposed improvement includes acquisition of additional land, then the Environmental
Assessment should include information on the amount and location of Prime or Important
Farmland that will be impacted. Alternatives that reduce impacts to Prime or Important
Farmland soils are preferred. A listing of these soils in North Carolina is available through the
MLRA Team Leader, North Carolina State Office, Natural Resources Conservation Service,
USDA, 4405 Bland Road, Suite 205, Raleigh, N.C. 27609, [phone].
The Prime Farmland designation is not limited to land currently being cultivated. It is intended
to identify the best soils that can be used as farmland without regard to the present vegetative
cover. Only areas that are already built-up or within city limits are exempted from consideration.
DH/t1
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 60% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
B-7
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 0
Division of Forest Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor p E H N R
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary Stanford M. Adams, Director
Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Old US 70 West
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
April 2, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Office of Legislative Affairs
FROM: Don H. Robbins, Staff Forester ?,4?
SUBJECT: DOT EA Scoping for Improvements for Interchange on US 264 Bypass at Dildy Road in
Greene County
PROJECT #: 97-0570 and TIP # R-525D
DUE DATE: 4-18-97
We have reviewed the above subject scoping document and have the following comments concerning
potential impacts to woodland:
Tyne of Information that we would like to see in this Environmental Document to Address Impacts to
Woodland - The following should be addressed for each alternative or project.
1. The total forest land acreage by types and merchantability aspects that would be taken out of forest
production or removed as a result of new right-of-way purchases, easements, wiga?sew and all
construction activities. Emphasis needs to be directed towards reducing impacts, whenever possible
to the following types of woodland in the following order of priority -
a. High site index productive land that is currently under active forest management.
b. Productive forested wetlands.
c. Lower site index productive land that is currently under active forest management.
d. Unique or unusual forest ecosystems.
e. Un-managed, fully stocked woodland.
f. Un-managed, cutover rural woodland.
g. Urban woodland.
2. The productivity of the forest soils as indicated by the soil series that would be involved within the
proposed project.
3. The impact upon existing greenways within the area of the proposed project.
P. O. Box 29581, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0581 N% C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-733-2162 FAX [phone] ® ® 50% recycle,,/ 10°k post-consumer paper
B-8
4. The provisions that the contractor will take to sell any merchantable timber or woody material that is.
to be removed. Emphasis should be on selling all wood products first, including energy chips. If wood
products cannot be sold, then efforts should be made to haul the material off or run through a tub
grinder and turned into mulch. This practice is encouraged to accomplish the following -
a. Minimize the need for piling and burning debris during construction.
b. To reduce the danger of escaped fires and smoke on nearby highways.
c. Reduce smoke management problems to the traveling public, towns and cities.
Woodland Land Clearing and Open Burning - If any open burning is needed, the contractor should
comply with all laws and regulations pertaining to debris burning. The regulation of open fires are
covered under G.S. 113-60.21 thru 113-60.31 all inclusive. Land clearing contractors should make
particular note of G.S. 113-60.23 High Hazard Counties requiring a special permit from our local
county rangers and 113-60.24 for Open Burning in Non-High Hazard Counties requiring a regular
burning permit from our local burning permit agents.
Greene County is a non-high hazard county and G.S. 113-60.24 would apply. Certain conditions may
exist at the time that would prevent the issuance of this permit. Also there may be other local
requirements such as most cities do not now allow any burning and some counties now have a burning
ordnance that would take precedence.
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 the construction limits should be protected from construction activities to avoid:
a. Skinning of tree trunks by machinery.
b. Soil compaction and root exposure or injury by heavy equipment.
c. Adding layers of fill dirt over the root systems of trees, a practice that impairs root aeration.
d. Accidental spilling of petroleum products or other damaging substances over the root systems of
trees.
If no woodland is to be impacted, then the document needs a clear statement that DQ woodland will be
impacted as a result of the entire project.
Efforts should be made to address the above items and to reduce impacts to woodland. We would hope that
the improvements would have the least impact to forest and related resources in that area.
pc: Mike Thompson, Warren Boyette - CO
Roy Butler - D5
File
2
B-9
` Forth Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 Is'. Salisbury Strcet. Raleigh, North Carolina 27644-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Direczor
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Of-ice of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, DEFNR
FROM,. David Cox, Highway Project C99
ato
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: April 25,1997
SUBJECT: Request for information from the N. C. Department al'Transportation
(N('DOT) regarding fish and wildlife concerns for the new interchange on
US 264 Bypass at Dildy Road (SR 1311), Greene County, North Carolina,
TIP No. R-5251), SCH Project No. 97.0570.
't'his memorandum responds to a request from Mr. H, Franlciin Vick of the
NCUO'1' for our concerns regarding impacts on fish and wildlife resources resulting from
the subject P, inject. Biologists on the staff of the N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) have reviewed the proposed improvements, and our comments are provided in
accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(c)) mid the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Slat. 401, as amended, 16
I I.S.C. 661-6674).
At this time the NCWRC has no specific recommendations or concern: regarding
the subject project. However, to help facilitate doctunent preparation and the review
process. our general inlimnational needs are outlined below:
Description of lishcry and wildlife resources within the project area,
including s listing of federally or state designated threatened, endmigcrcd,
ur xpecittl concern species. Potential borrow areas to be used for project
construction should be included in the inventories. A listing of designated
plant species can be developed through consultation with:
'The Natural Heritage Program
N. C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N C. 27611
[phone]
and,
B-10
Memo 2 April 25, 1997
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. O. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by the project. The need for
channelizing or relocating portions of streams crossed and the extent of
such activities.
3. Cover type maps showing wetland acreages impacted by the project.
Wetland acreages should include all project-related areas that may undergo
hydrologic change as a result of ditching, other drainage, or filling for
project construction, Wetland identification may be accomplished Rough
coordination with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE ). If the COE
is not consulted, the person delineating wetlands should be identified and
criteria listed.
4. Cover type maps showing acreages of upland wildlife habitat impacted by the
proposed project. Potential borrow sites should be included.
5. The extent to which the project will result in loss, degradation, or
fragmentation of wildlife habitat (wetlands or uplands).
6. Mitigation for avoiding, minimizing or compensating for direct and indirect
degrudation in habitat quality as well as quantitative losses.
7. A cumulative impact assessment section which analyzes the environmental
effects of highway construction and quantifies the contribution of this
individual project to environmental degradation.
8. A discussion of the probable impacts on natural resources which will result
from secondary development facilitated by the improved road access.
9. If construction of this facility is to be coordinated with other state, municipal,
or private development projects, a description of these projects should he
included in the environmental document, and all project sponsors should
be identified.
Thank you I'or the opportunity to provide input in the early planning stages for
tlvs project. If we can further assist your office, please contact me at [phone].
cc: Howard I•Tall, U. S. Fish mid Wildlife Service, Raleigh
B-11
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Charles H. Gardner, P.G., P.E.
Director and State Geologist
A ry*
*0)
ED N Fi
PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS
Project Number: 1 7- 0 ?5 70 County: G ?n
Pro j act Name : 415 21v4 /S R 1.3 ?l .Zvi ?r' G?G1 nc? G l 22 1002
Ka, Office of State planning - Geodetic Survev
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 i formation contact the N.C. Office of State
Planning, Geodet Survey ffice at 919/733-3836.
Reviewer Date
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
No comment
This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if
more than one (1) acre will be disturbed.
If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as
part of the erosion and sedimentation control plan.
?? If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality
Water Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental
Management, increased design standards for sediment and erosion
control will apply.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan.required for this
project should be prepared by the Department of Transportation
under the erosion control program delegation to the Division of
Highways from the North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
Other (comments attached)
For more information contact the Land Quality Section at 919/733-4574.
AD ac--a L, at-'2(- 4 W-9 I
Geological Surrey SeEff? ewer Land Quality Section Date Geodetic Survey Section
'
[phone] [phone] [phone]
FAX: [phone] FAX: [phone] FAX: [phone]
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 276' B-12 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Err.,.-, - 50% recycled/ 10% past-consumer paper
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, Pro ect Number "
AND NATURAL RESOURCES 7 - -7
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEAL'T'H C unty
Inter-Agency Project Review Response
Type of Project`
Project Name T (?S l
The -applicant should -be -advised that plans and ..specifications _ for ._all --water system
improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior to the award
of a .contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C .0300 et. seq.).
For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must comply with
state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the applicant
should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
If this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of feet of adjacent
0 waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfiss sanitation progra
m, the applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Branch at [phone].
The spoil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding problem.
0 For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the applicant should
contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated
structures, an extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents t department -adjacent or the Public eHinformation ealth Pest Management concerning Srodent ection at (919)
contact the local health 733-6407.
r? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their
UJ requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A .1900 et. seq.).
For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods, contact the
On-Site Wastewater Section at [phone].
The applicant should be advised to contract the local health department regarding the sanitary
facilities required for this project.
If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, pplans for the water line
relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water SPlan Review Branch, Parker Lincoln Building, Raleigh, North Carolina, (919) 733-
2460.
Reviewer
r-l?tl?IC'S?
Section/Branch
,4 G?
/?7
Date
B-13
DEUNR 3198 (Revised 03/93)
e,w SUltu ?'h
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor Division of Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary Jeffrey J. Crow, Director
April 9, 1997
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportati n
FROM: David Brook ?????? i
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
r??`J1S1? '7?
SUBJECT: Interchange on US 264 Bypass at SR
1311, Greene County, R-5251), Federal ;?G' ?''
Aid Project No. F-38-1(63), State Project `'?V--=--
8.T221002, 97-E-4220-0570
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures of
historical or architectural importance located within the planning area. We,
therefore, recommend that no historic architectural survey be conducted for this
project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project 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 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: State Clearinghouse
N. Graf
B. Church
T. Padgett
B-14
109 East Jones Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 gj?(7