Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20161268_Public Notice_20110915US Army Corps PUBLIC NOTICE Of Engineers Wilmington District Issue Date: September 15, 201 I Comment Deadline: November 1, 2011 Corps Action ID #:2007-1386 T[P Project No. U-4751 and R-3300 The Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received an application from the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) regarding a potential future requirement For Department of the Army authorization to discharge dredged or fill material into waters of the United States associated with improvements to the US 17 and Market Street (US 17 Business) Corridor in Northern New Hanover and Southern Pender Counties, NC. Specific alternative alignments and location information are described below and shown on the attached plans. `This Public Notice and all attached plans are also available on the Wilmington District Web Site at http://www. saw. usace.army.mil/Wetlands/Notices/Current notices. html. xxViewing the on-line version will better display color and grant the ability to view exploded views. This public notice provides information on the various alternatives that are being considered for the subject project and also announces the availability of the Draft Envirohmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the subject project. The DE[S comment period and this public notice comment period are the same with a deadline of November 1, 2011. The DEIS can be viewed on the Corps' website at: http: //www saw. usace.army. m i I/Wetlands/Projects/H ampsteadBypass. Comments received from review of the DEIS will be utilized in the development of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). Applicant: North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) c/o Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, PhD, Manager Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch 1551 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina, 27699-1551 Authority The Corps will evaluate this application to compare alternatives that have been carried forward for study pursuant to applicable procedures under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). In order to more fully integrate Section 404 permit requirements with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and to give careful consideration to our required public interest review and 404(b)(1) compliance determination, the Corps is soliciting public comment on the merits of this proposal and on the alternatives evaluated in the DEIS. At the close of this comment permit, the District Commander will evaluate and consider the comments received as well as the expected adverse and beneficial effects of the proposed road construction to select the least environmentally damaging. practicable alternative (LEDPA). The District Commander is not authorizing construction of the proposed US 17 improvements at this time. A final Department of the Army permit could be issued, if at all, only afrer our review process is complete, impacts to the aquatic environment have been minimized to the maximum extent practicable and a compensatory mitigation plan for unavoidable impacts has been approved. Location For project U-4751, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to extend Military Cutoff Road as a six-lane divided roadway on new location from its current terminus at US 17 (Market Street) in Wilmington north to an interchange with the US 17 Wilmington Bypass (John Jay Burney Jr. Freeway). Limited and full control of access is proposed. For project R-3300, NCDOT proposes to construct the US 17 Hampstead Bypass as a freeway mostly on new location. The US 17 Hampstead Bypass may connect to the proposed Military Cutoff Road Extension at the existing US 17 Wilmington Bypass and extend to existing US 17 north of Hampstead. The project is more specifically located around Latitude 34°21'57" N (R-3300) and 34°15'54" N (U- 4751)and Longitude 77°42'43.2" W (R-3300) and 77°17'9.6"W (U-4751). The project vicinity and study area are shown in Figure 1. The study area boundaries roughly follow I-40 to the west, the Northeast Cape Fear River to the north, Holly Shelter Game Land to-the east and existing US 17 to the south. 2 r =--_ c. P `r~:~~ I x~o`P ~ '~ ~" ...,.. . '\~ ---• ~ w Cy VICINITY f ~ '/. ~ ~ Figure 1 PROJECT VICINITY US 17 Corridor Study NCDOT TIP Nos. U-4751 and R-3300 Naw Hanover and Pender Counties ~~, Nurlh Carolina DCpertmCnl Or TfanspOflCllOn ,may. I I J L ~, L`.~R ~~~^~-~~ I t ~ ~ r ~~~ \ `~ . 1„n ,- PROJECTAREA ~~ ~, o-..aw. ( ~^ r-~y i ~ _ ~t• Yvw° .~~~ 4 _. +: ~ ~,. ~ ~~~,~. ':.tip ,'~~~ _ ti+ -'~ ...~. ~ (~ STl1DV AREA . ~~-..~. n-' . ~`~ ~' ~; ~... l ~ ~ ' 1 ,s- y ?~~ Existing Site Conditions The proposed projects are located in the outer Coastal Plain and cross portions of northern . New Hanover County and southern Pender County, USGS Hydrologic Units (HU) 03030007and 03020302 of the Cape Fear River Basin. This part of the Cape Fear River basin is the only coastal area in North Carolina that is accessible by interstate highway, making it a popular destination because of its proximity to the Atlantic Ocean, beaches, and estuarine waters. [n the project vicinity, the City of Wilmington is home to one of the 3 state's largest historic districts and the USS North Carolina battleship and memorial. Wilmington and nearby communities of Hampstead, Topsail Island, Wrightsville Beach, Kure Beach, and Carolina Beach offer numerous options for dining, shopping, recreation, and entertainment. The Hampstead area is home to four golf courses that are centered in large residential developments. Proximity to numerous coastal communities makes this area a popular second-home and retirement destination. The southern extent of the study area is characterized primarily by a mix of commercial and residential development; the northern extent includes preserved land, undeveloped forests, open fields, and wetlands. Natural areas preserved for recreation and education uses include the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Holly Shelter Game Land and the North Carolina State University blueberry research station. Open fields are primarily managed agricultural areas used for blueberries, row crops, and tobacco production, or are left fallow. Jurisdictional waterways within the project area include Smith Creek, Island Creek, Mill Creek, Harrisons Creek, Godfrey Creek, Futch Creek, Prince George Creek, and the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway and/or tributaries to these waterways. The jurisdictional wetlands in the study area include palustrine forested and palustrine scrub-shrub. Applicant's Stated Purpose The purpose of the proposed action is to improve the traffic carrying capacity and safety of the US 17 and Market Street corridor in the study azea. The stated needs to be addressed by the proposed projects include; traffic carrying capacity, safety issues, and transportation demand. The purpose and need for this project was agreed upon by federal, state, and local agency representatives in September 2006. Project Description In order to meet the stated purpose and need of the project a number of alternatives were considered and studied. Alternatives considered for the proposed project include the No- Build Alternative, the Transportation System Management Alternative, the Travel Demand Management Alternative, the Mass Transit Alternative, and the build alternatives, including the [mprove Existing Alternative. Preliminary build alternatives were established through an evaluation of suitability mapping based on available socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental resource data. Preliminary build alternatives that met the purpose of and need for the proposed project and with the least impacts to the human and natural environments were identified as detailed study alternatives. The detailed study alternatives selection process incorporated recommendations made by federal and state environmental regulatory and resource 4 agencies and comments received from two citizens informational workshops held in April 2007. Project alternatives were further refined as more comprehensive information was obtained through detailed field studies and environmental analysis. There are two current detailed study alternatives for Military Cutoff Road Extension (U-4751) and four current detailed study alternatives for Hampstead Bypass (R-3300). Hampstead Bypass Current Detailed Study Alternatives (R-3300) Alternative E-H (Combination of Alternatives E and H) Alternative E-H begins in New Hanover County at a proposed interchange with the US 17 Wilmington Bypass, approximately midway between I-40 and Market Street. The alternative extends northwest past Sidbury Road into Pender County. Land use between the bypass and Sidbury Road is mostly undeveloped property. Alternative E-H turns to the northeast and continues to a proposed interchange with NC 210 east of Island Creek Road. From its interchange at NC 210, Alternative E-H extends northeast across several minor roads that include lightly developed residential areas and through undeveloped forested areas. Alternative E-H crosses Hoover Road north of South Topsail Elementary School and continues northeast through undeveloped property to a proposed interchange with realigned US 17 approximately 0.7 mile west of Grandview Drive. Alternative E-H continues north behind the Topsail School complex and then turns east,to tie into existing US 17 near Leeward Lane. Alternative E-H continues north on existing US 17 to Sloop Point Loop Road. Alternative O Alternative O begins in New Hanover County at a proposed interchange with the US 17 Wilmington Bypass approximately one mile west of the Market Street interchange. It extends north from the bypass through undeveloped land and crosses Sidbury Road at the New Hanover County/Pender County line. The alternative continues north through predominantly undeveloped land to a proposed interchange at NC 210. From its interchange at NC 210, Alternative O extends northeast across several minor roads that include lightly developed residential areas and through undeveloped forested areas. It continues through farmland, crosses Hoover Road north of South Topsail Elementary School and continues northeast through undeveloped property to a proposed interchange with realigned US 17 approximately 0.7 mile west of Grandview Drive. Alternative O continues north behind the Topsail School complex and then turns east to tie into existing US 17 near Leeward Lane. Alternative O continues north on existing US 17 to,Sloop Point Loop Road. Alternative R Altemative R begins in New Hanover County at an interchange with the US 17 Wilmington Bypass, approximately midway between I-40 and Market Street. Alternative R extends northeast from the bypass across undeveloped land and crosses Sidbury Road at the New 1-lanover County/Pender County line. The alternative continues north through predominantly undeveloped land to an interchange at NC 210. From its interchange at NC 210, Alternative R crosses Hoover Road north of South Topsail Elementary School and continues northeast through undeveloped property to a proposed interchange with realigned US 17 approximately 0.7 mile west of Grandview Drive. Alternative R continues north behind the Topsail School complex and then turns east to tie into existing US 17 near Leeward.Lane. Alternative R continues north on existing US 17 to Sloop Point Loop Road. Alternative U Alternative U begins in New Hanover County at a proposed interchange with the US 17 Wilmington Bypass. The interchange location will vary depending on the selected preferred Military Cutoff Road Extension alternative (M1 or M2). Alternative U follows the Wilmington Bypass through the existing interchange at Market Street. The alternative runs along existing US 17 to a proposed interchange with realigned Sidbury Road. Alternative U continues north on existing US 17 for approximately two miles to where it transitions to new location at a proposed interchange with existing US 17. Alternative U continues north on new location to intersect with NC 210 at a proposed interchange approximately 0.5 mile west of existing US 17. From its interchange at NC 210, Altemative U continues north parallel to existing US 17 and crosses Hoover Road south of South Topsail Elementary School. The alternative continues northeast through undeveloped property to a proposed interchange with realigned US 17 approximately 0.5 mile west of Grandview Drive. Alternative U continues north behind the Topsail School complex and then turns east to tie into existing US 17 near Leeward Lane. Alternative U continues north on existing US 17 to Sloop Point Loop Road. Military Cutoff Road Extension Current Detailed Study Alternatives (U-4751) Alternative Ml Alternative M1 begins at a proposed interchange at Military Cutoff Road and Market Street. "I'he alternative extends north through vacant County property between the two sections of Ogden Park and residential areas. Alternative M 1 turns northwest and ends near Plantation Road and Crooked Pine Road at a proposed interchange with the US 17 Wilmington Bypass, approximately midway between I-40 and Market Street. The City of Wilmington adopted a Transportation Official Corridor map for the proposed extension of Military Cutoff Road on August 8, 2005. Alternative M1 follows the adopted corridor map alignment. Alternative M2 Alternative M2 begins at a proposed interchange at Military Cutoff Road and Market Street. Alternative M2 follows the Alternative M 1 alignment for approximately two miles. Alternative M2 then turns northeast and extends through mostly undeveloped property to a proposed interchange with the US 17 Wilmington Bypass approximately one mile west of Market Street. Current detailed study alternatives are shown below: a ~ a m ~~~ ~~ l . •. ~ ; ~ X 'o F ~ 4 (Y F, yy ~ I i- f.~~ b ~U~ ( I ~ ~ ~ g~ Y, l ij ~~ 8C ~il~~jj$\ ~1 .~ PA rf~ ~~~1 4`~6 •~ ; i wp '~s ~ R 1 ~i' ~~ ~ .~ m ~-'~ y n a l~ "K~ t~ T3~ _ r` / i I Y.L ~ Q T ~~----; --.-, ~, yqb.. ~ f ~ m~8 J\\VJ ` J 6:. L. m J X 5 ! r' -i ); o r3 1} ~; ` ~ i i YYY !~ of '~ 4'!1 j~ 1 r" ~ " `~4~ / 1 S ~3= ~ ~- r >~ ,..~~i.- ~ ~.i . /, ~.~ ~_ ' _ mil;€~:.:. =~ ~ ~ f ~ , ~ .1 ,. ~ i ,~;-..~ i //f `. 5 q"7JJ ~ ! " ~ / ~ j ~~ 7 ~ / J (~~1 ! ~~ ~~ ~ / ~~ ~ ~ ' ~ l Y i ~ ,,. , a n >- ~ ~ 's ~,a `( 4 ..4 l E I ~ 8 i.- ~ A breakdown of the detailed study alternatives impacts and costs are displayed in the table below: 'Table 1. Summary Comparison of Current Detailed Study rllternadves Current Detailed Study Alternative FEATURE M1+E-H M2+O M1+R M1+U M2+U Len th (miles) 17.5 16.6 17.1 18.0 16.8 Delineated Wetland Impacts 246.1 384.4 297.4 218.4 283.8 acres Delineated Stream Impacts linear feet) 24,531 13,842 24,571 15,450 8,786 Residential Dis lacements 61 60 59 93 95 Business Dis lacementsz 84 84 84 106 106 Red-cockaded Woodpecker Future Potentially Suitable / 8.67/ 8.67/ 8.67/ 8.67/ 8.67/ Potentially Suitable Habitat 7.39 7.39 7.39 7.39 7.39 acres May affect, Likely to Adversely RCW, RCW, Affect federally protected RCW, RLL CM, CM, RCW, RCW, s ecies3 RLL, RLL, RLL RLL p GS GS Natural Heritage Program SNHA, Managed Areas and 4 43 42 94 5 01 3 24 34 40 Wetland Mitigations Sites . . . . . acres Prime Farmlands/Farmlands of 67.5 1 58 58.1 49 9 49 9 Statewide Im ortance (acres . . . Forest acres 518 512 472 406 455 Historic Pro erties (no.) 1 1 1 4 4 Noise Rece for Im acts 257 236 248 310 304 High Quality Waters (HQW, ORW, WS Protected or Critical 9.6 9.6 9.6 12.4 12.4 Areas acres) Total Cost (in millions) $362.0 $359.3 $356.2 $404.8 $398.4 'Impact calculations are based on preliminary design slope stake limits plus an additional 25 feet. Z Includes non-profit displacements. RCW-red-cockaded woodpecker, RLL- rough-leaved loosestrife, GS- golden sedge, CM- Cooley's meadowrue Waters of the United States The proposed project will impact water resources in the study area. Impacts to wells, streams, ponds, wetlands, and floodplains would be expected. Water resources in the study area are part of the Cape Fear River basin (U.S. Geological Survey [USGS] Hydrologic Units 03030007 and 03020302). A total of 59 jurisdictional streams, 17 ponds, and 108 jurisdictional wetlands are located within the current detailed study alternatives' study corridors. Streams, Ponds and Wetlands Impacts to Waters of the U.S. would occur at various locations throughout the length of the project, at stream crossings, wetland areas, and ponds. Anticipated impacts by stream are presented for the detailed study alternatives in the DEIS. Table 2. Total Stream, Impacts Delineated Stream Alternative Impacts (linear feet) M1+EH M2+O M1+R M1+U M2+U Perennial 17,987 11,486 18,634 11,755 7,687 Intermittent 3,487 1,346 2,553 997 486 Other ~ 3,057 1,010 3,384 2,698 613 Total 24,531 13,842 24,571 15,450 8,786 t Tdbulan' waters determined to~be jurisdictional during preliminarc jurisdictional determination process based on the presence of an ordinan' high wa[er mark (OFi~C~i) Anticipated impacts for each pond are presented for the detailed study alternatives in the DEIS. Table 3. Total Pond Impacts Alternative M1+EH M2+O M1+R M1+U M2+U Delineated Pond Impacts (acres) 3.90 4.32 4.18 3.G8 3.68 Anticipated impacts by wetland are presented for the detailed study alternatives in the DEIS. 'T'able 4. 'Dotal Wetland Impacts Alternative M1+EH M2+O M1+R M1+U M2+U Delineated Wetland Impacts 24G.Oi 384.42 297?4 218.3 283.77 (acres) The DEIS includes additional details about Waters of the U.S. Cultural Resources A preliminary architectural survey was conducted in January 2010 and identified a total of 78 individual resources that were built prior to 1961 within the Area of Potential Effects (APE). There is one property within the Area of Potential Effect listed on the National Register of Historic Places and four properties eligible for listing. The potential effect of the proposed project on historic architectural resources was evaluated in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Effects are summarized by alternative in Table 5. The State Historic Preservation Office concurred with these effect determinations at a meeting held on March 8, 2011. Table 5. Historic Architectural Resource Effects Alternative Historic Property M1+EH M2+0 M1+R M1+U M2+U No No No Adverse Adverse Poplar Grove Effect Effect Effect Effect Effect Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Adverse Mount Ararat AME Church Effect Effect Effect Effect Effect Wesleyan Chapel United No No No Adverse Adverse Methodist Church Effect Effect Effect Effect Effect No No No Adverse Adverse Scotts Hill Rosenwald School Effect Effect Effect Effect Effect No No No No No Topsail Consolidated School Effect Effect Effect Effect Effect Archaeological surveys will be conducted for the project after the selection of the preferred alternative. 10 Federally Threatened and Endangered Species As of September 22, 2010, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists 11 federally- protected species for New Hanover County and 12 federally-protected species for Pender County (see Table 6 below). Table 6. Federally-Protected Species Effects SciehtiBc Common Federa Biological Name Name 1 Status County Conclusion Alternatives Alligator New missis.rippiens American alligator T(S/A) Hanover Not Required -- is Pender Chelonia Green sea New mydas turtle T Hanover No Effect -- Pender Caretta Loggerhead New carelta sea turtle T Hanover No Effect -- Pender Charadrius New melodus Piping plover T Hanover No Effect -- Pender Picoides Red- New May Affect, borealis cockaded E Hanover Likely to E-H, O, R, U woodpecker Pender Adversel Affect Acipenser ' Shortnose New breviroslrum sturgeon E Hanover No Effect -- Pender Trichechus West Indian New. E Hanover No Effect -- manatus manatee Pender SchN~alhea American E New Hanover No Effect -- americana chaffseed* Pender Thalictrum Cooley's New May Affect, E Hanover Likely to O, R cooleyi meadowrue Pender Adversely Affect May Affect, Carex lutea Golden sedge E Pender Likely to O, R Adversely Affect Lysimachia Rough-leaved New May Affect, E-H, O, R, asperulaefolia loosestrife E Hanover Likely to U M1 M2 ' Pender Adversel Affect Amurunthus Seabeach New pumilus amaranth T Hanover No Effect -- Pender E -Endangered T -Threatened T(S/A) -Threatened due [o Similarity of Appearance * Historic record ([he species was last observed in the county more than 50 years ago) Anadromous Species No special designations, such as anadromous fish waters or fish nursery areas, are in effect for any of the project study area water resources. Mitigation Evaluation Mitigation has been defined in the National Enviromnental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations to include efforts that: a) avoid; b) minimize; c) rectify; d) reduce or eliminate; or e) compensate for adverse impacts to the environment [40 CFR 1508.20 (a-e)]. Practicable alternative analysis must be fully evaluated before compensatory mitigation can be discussed. Avoidance and Minimization During the development of the detailed study alternatives, efforts were made to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and streams wherever practicable. Because of the number of streams and wetlands present in the study area, total avoidance of surface waters is not practicable. Impacts to wetlands and streams were considered during the selection of the current detailed study alternatives. Alignments for the altematives have been developed within the study corridors that minimize impacts to streams and wetlands. The NEPA/Section 404 merger team has concurred on the streams that should be bridged by the alternatives. NCDOT will attempt to avoid and minimize impacts to streams and wetlands to the greatest extent practicable in selecting the preferred alternative and during project design. Preliminary build alternatives were established through an evaluation of suitability mapping based on available socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental resource data. Potential corridor alternatives were screened for suitability based on several criteria, including meeting the purpose of and need for the proposed project, minimizing impacts to resources and consideration of community features. Geographic information system (GIS) data and modeling, aerial photography and observations from field visits were used in the analysis. Corridor centerlines were drawn to reflect alignments that minimized impacts. Impacts were calculated by section for each alignment and the sections with the least overall impacts were retained and combined into alignment alternative segments. The segment centerlines were buffered and several 1,000-foot corridor alternatives were generated by merging the segments in different combinations. Roadway alignments were 12 developed and placed within the 1,000-foot corridors to minimize impacts to resources, provide a roadway that is constructible, and crosses roads, streams and utility easements at a reasonable angle. Preliminary build alternatives meeting the purpose of and need for the proposed project and with the least impacts to the human and natural environments were identified as detailed study alternatives. Preliminary design plans were developed for alternatives selected for detailed study. The detailed study alternatives selection process incorporated recommendations made by federal and state environmental regulatory and resource agencies and comments received from two citizens informational workshops held in April 2007. Four streams within one mile downstream of the study area have been designated HQW by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ). These streams, Futch Creek, Old Topsail Creek, Pages Creek, and an unnamed tributary to the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, receive water from streams in the study area. In addition, Howe Creek has been designated an ORW by DWQ. All tributaries of these streams within the study area are designated as HQW or ORW due to the classification of their receiving waters. Design Standards for Sensitive Watersheds will be implemented for these streams during project construction. Compensatory Mitigation The NCDOT will investigate potential on-site stream and wetland mitigation opportunities once the preferred alternative has been selected. Offsite mitigation needed to satisfy the federal Clean Water Act requirements for this project will be provided by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program in accordance with the "North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources' Ecosystem Enhancement Program In-Lieu Fee Instrument", dated July 28, 2010. Evaluation The decision whether to issue a permit (which will come after the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Altemative Corridor is chosen, being considered now) will be based on an evaluation of the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects thereof; among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain values (in accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. 13 For activities involving the discharge of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, the evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest will include application of the Environmental Protection Agency's 404(b)(1) guidelines. Commenting Information The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local agencies and officials, including any consolidate state viewpoint or written position of the Governor; Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers to select the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA). To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of a Corps of Engineers Environmental Assessment (EA) and/or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity. Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received by the Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, until Spm, November 1, 2011. Comments should be submitted to Mr. Brad Shaver, Wilmington Regulatory Field Office, 69 Darlington Ave., Wilmington, North Carolina 28403-1343. 14