The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutU-4414 (2)APPROVED: / 2 Z3 �► Da e ��U/ ��'-/� `' / Date Widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive to the proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop Cumberland County Federal Aid Project NHF-1007(13) WBS No. 39054.1.1 TIP No. U-4414 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION AND N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Submitted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c) �F NORIIt CqR 1P1� U`��' ti 7 * * O 2 C 99j��rOr TRANSQ��` o � Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Unit Head Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit, NCDOT • /� � , � , -. �� _. .. - - ��" <"-f=' - �___._ _ -�o��n F. Sullivan III, P. E., Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration Widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive to the proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop Cumberland County Federal Aid Project NHF-1007(13) WBS No. 39054.1.1 TIP No. U-4414 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT North Carolina Department of Transportation December 2011 Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis Unit by: 1��/ D te '° ��.�1 ate� �, Clfarles R. Cox, P: E. Project Engineer � ;a�`Si°tj'r,'-iii�� 3��'�a,�. ► ��.,.:s �.a��+eata„9,j�'i+��'s �a ��"If�fl� pa r AAi � �� i. �"g : 7 •� � o a: � i�•bG-iT :' r�� sa` �i nc„a- f'/��'��q6��r �°�?°u",,,f c: f;S%;�; � �,� *� C-��a�� r. �„r. +f:.�,:_,1tir. t�°�tF*�R �'`�� S K�s� ��!�F:wi�S%�' PROJECT COMMITMENTS Widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive to the proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop Cumberland County Federal Aid Project NHF-1007(13) WBS No. 390541.1 TIP No. U-4414 Proiect Development and Environmental Analvsis/ Roadwav/ Division 6 Based on the initial noise report, several noise walls are warranted for this project. A more detailed analysis will be perfornied during project final design to determine the length and location of these walls. U-4414 Environmental Assessment December 2011 Page 1 of 1 SUMMARY................................................................................................................................. t TYPEOF ACTION ........................................................................................................................... I DESCRIPTIONOF ACTION ............................................................................................................... I SUMMARY OF PURPOSE AND NEED ............................................................................................... I ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ....................................................................................................... II SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS .................................................................................... II PERMITSREQUIRED ..................................................................................................................... III COORDINATION........................................................................................................................... IV CONTACTINFORMATION ............................................................................................................. IV I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION .......................................................................1 A. GENERAL DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................... 1 B. SCHEDULE AND COST ........................................................................................................... 1 II. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT ........................................................................... 2 A. PURPOSE OF PROJECT ........................................................................................................... 2 B. NEED FOR PROJECT .............................................................................................................. 2 1. Description of Existing Conditions ...................................................................................2 a. Functional Classification ................................................................................................ 2 b. Physical Description of Existing Facility ........................................................................ 2 c. School Bus Usage ........................................................................................................... 4 d. Capacity Analysis (No Build Scenario) .......................................................................... 4 e. Airports ........................................................................................................................... 6 £ Other Highway Projects in the Area ............................................................................... 6 2. Transportation and Land Use Plans ....................................................................................7 a. NC Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) ......................................................... 7 b. Local Thoroughfare Plans ............................................................................................... 7 c. Land Use Plans ...................................................................................:............................ 7 C. BENEFITS OF PROPOSED PROJECT ......................................................................................... 7 III. ALTERNATIVES .............................................................................................................8 A. PRELIMINARY STUDY ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................. g 1. No-Build Alternative ........................................................................................................8 2. Alternative Modes of Transportation ................................................................................8 3. Transportation Systems Management Alternative ............................................................8 4. Build Alternatives .............................................................................................................8 B. CAPACITY ANALYSIS �BUILD SCENARIO� ............................................................................. 9 l. Future Traffic Volumes .....................................................................................................9 2. Future Levels of Service .................................................................................................10 IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS .................................................................................. 12 A. ROADWAY CROSS-SECTION AND ALIGNMENT ................................................................... IZ B. RIGHT OF WAY AND ACCESS CONTROL ............................................................................. IZ C. DESIGN SPEED & SPEED LIMIT ........................................................................................... 1 Z D. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS .................................................................................... 12 E. INTERSECTIONS/INTERCHANGES ..................... .................................................................... 12 F. SERVICE ROADS ................................................................................................................. 13 G. RAILROAD CROSSINGS ....................................................................................................... 13 H. STRUCTU�s ......................................................................................................................13 I. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ............................................................................... 13 J. UTILITIES ........................................................................................................................... 13 K. NOISEBARRIERS ................................................................................................................13 L. WORK ZONE, TRAFFIC CONTROL AND CONSTRUCTION PHASING ....................................... 14 V. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION .........................................15 A. NATURAL RESOURCES ....................................................................................................... 1 S l. Biotic Resources .............................................................................................................15 a. Terrestrial Communities ............................................................................................... 15 b. Terrestrial Community Impacts .................................................................................... 15 c. Terrestrial Wildlife ........................................................................................................ 16 d. Aquatic Communities ................................................................................................... 16 e. Invasive Species ............................................................................................................ 16 2. Clean Water Act -Waters of the United States ...............................................................17 a. Streams, Wetlands ......................................................................................................... 17 b. Clean Water Act Permits .............................................................................................. 18 c. Construction Moratoria ................................................................................................. 19 d. NC River Basin Rules ................................................................................................... 19 e. Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters ................................................. 19 f. Wetland and Stream Mitigation .................................................................................... 19 g. Endangered Species Act Protected Species .................................................................. 20 h. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act ......................................................................... 23 i. Endangered Species Act Candidate Species ................................................................. 24 j. Essential Fish Habitat ................................................................................................... 24 3. Soils ....................................................................................................:...........................24 B. CULTIJRAL RESOURCES ...................................................................................................... 2S 1. Compliance .....................................................................................................................25 2. Historic Architectural Resources ......................................................:...................:.........25 3. Archaeological Resources ...............................................................................................25 C. SECTION 4�F�/C�F� RESOURCES ........................................................................................... ZS D. FaRtviLaND ........................................................................................................................ 25 E. Soc1aL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................ 26 1. Demographics .................................................................................................................26 2. Neighborhoods/Communities .........................................................................................28 3. Relocations of Residences and Businesses .....................................................................28 4. Environmental Justice ....................................................................................................28 5. Recreational Facilities .....................................................................................................29 F. ECONOMIC EFFECTS ........................................................................................................... 29 G. LANDUSE ..........................................................................................................................30 l. Existing and Future Land Use ........................................................................................30 2. Project Compatibility with Local P1ans ..........................................................................30 H. INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ................................................................................ 3O I. FLOOD HAZARD EVALUATION ........................................................................................... 31 .T. TRAFFICNOISE ANALYSIS .................................................................................................. 32 1. Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours .....................................................................32 2. No Build Alternative .......................................................................................................33 3. Traffic Noise Abatement Measures ....................................................................:..........33 4. Noise Barriers .................................................................................................................34 5. Suinmary .........................................................................................................................3 5 K. AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... 3E 1. Background CO Concentrations .....................................................................................36 2. Air Quality Analysis Results ...........................................................................................36 3. Construction Air Quality Effects ....................................................................................36 4. Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs) ..............................................................................37 L. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ................................................................................................... 3% VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ....................................................................... 38 L�. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ....................................................................................................... 3g B. PUBLIC HEARING ............................................................................................................... 38 C. NEPA/404 MExGER PROCESS ........................................................................................... 38 D. OTHER AGENCY COORDINATION ....................................................................................... 39 ::___ � TABLE S-1: SUMMARY OF RESOURCES AND IMPACTS ..................................................................... III TABLE 1: EXISTING HYDRAULIC STRUCTURES ................................................................................. 3 TABLE 2: 2011 INTERSECTION NO BUILD LEVELS OF SERVICE ......................................................... S TABLE 3: ZO I C AND ZO3S INTERSECTION NO BUILD LEVELS OF SERVICE ........................................ E TABLE 4: OTHER HIGHWAY PROJECTS IN THE AREA ........................................................................ 6 TABLE S: SUMMARY OF RESOURCES AND IMPACTS .......................................................................... 9 TABLE 6: 203 S INTERSECTION BUILD LEVELS OF SERVICE ............................................................. 1 O TABLE %: POTENTIAL NOISE BARRIER LOCATIONS ......................................................................... 14 TABLE g: COVERAGE OF TERRESTRIAL COMMUNITIES WITHINPROJECT STUDY AREA .................. 16 TABLE 9: INVASIVE SPECIES THREAT LEVELS WITHIN PROJECT AREA .......................................... 1% TABLE 1 O: WATER RESOURCES IN THE STUDY AREA .................................................................... 1% TABLE 11: JURISDICTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WATER RESOURCES ....................................... 1 S TABLE 12: JURISDICTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WETLANDS ..................................................... 18 TABLE 13: FEDERALLY LISTED SPECIES FOR CUMBERLAND COtTNTY ........................................... ZO TABLE 14. SOILS IN THE STUDY AREA ........................................................................................... Z4 TABLE 1 S. PREDICTED TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS BY ALTERNATIVE�` ............................................. 33 APPENDICES Appendix A Figures Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map Figure 2 Aerial Map Figure 3 Typical Sections Figures 4A-4B Traffic Forecast 2011/2016/2035 Figure 5 Nearby TIP Projects Appendix B Comments from Federal, State, and Locai Agencies � Appendix C Relocation/Displacement Policies & Relocation Reports Widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive to the proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop Cumberland County Federal Aid Project NHF-1007(13) WBS No. 39054.1.1 TIP No. U-4414 SUMMARY Tvue of Action This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to evaluate the potential impacts of this proposed transportation improvement project. From this evaluation, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) do not anticipate that signiiicant impacts to the environment will occur as a result of this proposed project. A final determination will be made in supplemental documentation, likely a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) document Description of Action The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), in consultation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), proposes to widen All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive to the proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop (see Figure 1). The project is approximately 5.6 miles in length. The proposed improvements will add one 12-foot lane in each direction. From Owen Drive to north of the bridge over the Aberdeen and Rockfish Railroad, widening will be to the outside of the existing lanes. North of the railroad to the Fayetteville Outer Loop, widening will be to the inside of the median. The improvements will bring the total number of lanes from four (4) to six (6). ' This project is included in the approved 2012-2020 North Carolina State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The total cost in the STIP is $48,480,000, which includes $1,780,000 for right of way and $46,700,000 for construction. The current estimated total cost is $48,429,000. Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin in Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2016 and construction to begin in FFY 2019. Summarv of Purpose and Need The purpose of the proposed project is to improve capacity and relieve congestion along the project corridor. Alternatives Considered Several alternatives were considered for detailed study for this project, including alternate modes of transportation and transportation systems management options. The build alternative was selected for detailed study in this document and is the preferred alternative. The build alternative consists of widening of All-American Freeway (SR 1007) with the addition on one 12-foot lane in each direction utilizing a"best-fit" alignment to minimize impacts. Summarv of Environmental Effects Adverse impacts to the human and natural environment were minimized through the development of the alternative. No adverse effect on the air quality of the surrounding area is anticipated as a result of the project. Approximately 110 properties were impacted by noise level increases, which will warrant noise walis in several locations. No properties listed the National Register of Historic Places will be affected by this project. The proposed alternative will not encroach upon any known archaeological sites or those eligible for listing in the National Register. One (1) business and two (2) residential relocations are anticipated for the proposed project. Further information can be found in Table S-l. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists seven federaily protected species for Cumberland County. Six (6) of the seven (7) of these species have a biological conclusion of No Effect for this project. A biological conclusion was not required for the American alligator. No wetlands will be impacted and 3841inear feet of Buckhead Creek wili be impacted. Table S-1 gives a summary of the resources and impacts for the proposed alternative. Figure 2 shows the alternative currently under consideration. ii Table S-1: Summary of Resources and Impacts Alternative Project Length (miles) 5.6 Residential 2 Relocations Business 1 Total Relocations 3 Minority/Low Income Populations - � Disproportionate Im acts* Historic Properties (Adverse Effects) 0 Community Facilities Impacted* * 1 Section 4(� Impacts 0 Noise Im acts (Im acted Properties) 110 Prime Farmland (Acres) 0 Forested Acres 0 Wetlands (Acres) 0 Streams (Linear Feet) 384 Flood lain (Acres 0 Federally Protected Species 0 Right of Way $4,600,000 Cost Cost Utilities Cost $1,029,000 Construction Cost $42,800,000 Total Cost $48,429,000 * Impacts defined as disproportionate adverse impacts to minority or lo�v income populations. **Impacts to a section of the Village Christian Academy baseball field Permits Required A Section 404 Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14 wiil likely be applicable. Other permits that may apply include a NWP No. 33 for temporary construction activities such as stream dewatering, work bridges, or temporary causeways that are often used during bridge construction or rehabilitation. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) holds the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project construction. In addition to the 404 permit, other required authorizations include the corresponding Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the N.C. Division of Water QualiTy (NCDWQ). A NCDWQ Section 401 Water Quality General certification for a CE 3701 may be required prior to the issuance of a Section 404 Permit. Other required 401 certifications may include a GC 3688 for temporary construction access and dewatering. iii Coordination Federal, state, and local agencies were consulted during the preparation of this EA. Written comments were received and considered from agencies noted with an asterisk (*) during the preparation of this document. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency * U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service * State Clearinghouse * N.C. Department of Cultural Resources * N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources N.C. Department of Public Instruction * N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission N.C. Division of Environmental Health N.C. Division of Forest Resources N.C. Division of Parks and Recreation * N.C. Division of Water Quality Contact Information Additional information concerning the proposai and assessment can be obtained by contacting either of the following: , John F. Sullivan III, P. E. Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410 Raleigh, NC 27601 Telephone: (919) 856-4346 Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Unit Head Project Development & Environmental Analysis Unit North Carolina Department of Transportation 1548 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1548 iv Widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive to the proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop Cumberland County Federal Aid Project NHF-1007(13) WBS No. 39054.1.1 TIP No. U-4414 I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION A. General Description The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), in consultation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), proposes to widen All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive to the proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop (see Figure 1). The project is approximately 4.8 miles in length. The proposed improvements will add one 12-foot lane in each direction. From Owen Drive to north of the bridge over the Aberdeen and Rockfish Railroad, widening will be to the outside of the existing lanes. North of the railroad to the Fayetteviile Outer Loop, widening will be to the inside of the median. The improvements will bring the total number of lanes from four (4) to six (6). B. Schedule and Cost This project is included in the approved 2012-2020 North Carolina State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The total cost in the STIP is $48,480,000, which includes $1,780,000 for right of way, and $46,700,000 for construction. The current estimated total cost is $48,429,000. Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin in Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2016 and construction to begin in FFY 2019. II. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT A. Purpose of Proiect The purpose of this project is to increase capacity and relieve congestion along the project corridor. B. Need for Proiect 1. Descriution of Existin� Conditions a. Functional Classification All American Freeway (SR 1007) is designated as a major thoroughfare in the Fayetteviile Thoroughfare Plan and as a freeway/expressway in the North Carolina Statewide Functionai Classification System. The Department of Defense has designated the roadway as a Major Strategic Highway Netwark (STRAHNET) Connector. STRAHNET Connectors are highway routes linking important military installations and ports. b. Phvsical Description of Existin� Facility l. Roadwav Cross-Section All American Freeway (SR 1007) is currently a four-lane, median divided facility with 12-foot lanes, 10-foot paved outside shoulders and 4-foot paved inside shoulders. The median width ranges from 16 feet to approximately 68 feet. 2. Horizontal and Vertical Ali�nment The existing horizontal alignment and vertical alignments of All American Freeway are in accordance with NCDOT and AASHTO standards. � 3. RiEht of Wav and Access Control There is fuli control of access along the All American Freeway (SR 1007). The existing right of way along All American Freeway (SR 1007) varies between 200 and 350 feet through the project limits. 4. Speed Limit The posted speed limit along All American Freeway (SR 1007) is 45 miles per hour (mph) from Owen Drive to north of the Aberdeen and Rockfish Railroad and 55 mph from north of the railroad to the Fayetteville Outer Loop. � 5. Intersections/Interchanges There are five existing interchanges on this project: Raeford Road/LTS 401Business, Cliffdale Road (SR 1400), Morganton Road (SR 1404), Skibo Road/US 401 Bypass, and Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437). There is one (1) at grade intersection on this project, Walter Reed Road/Owen Drive. 6. Railroad Crossin�s Crossings of the Cape Fear Railways (CFR) and Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad (A&R) will be impacted by the project. Each of these crossings is grade separated, with All American Freeway (SR 1007) carried over the A&R by a bridge just north of Raeford RoacUUS 401 Business and the CFR carried over All American Freeway (SR 1007) by a bridge just north of Skibo Road/LTS 401 Bypass. A&R averages four trains per day with speeds of up to 25 mph. The CFR is currently out of service, and trains have not run over this section in many years. 7. Structures There are four (4) existing major stream crossings associated with the proposed project. Table 1 gives further detail on these existing structures. Table 1: Existing Hydraulic Structures Site Stream Location Existin Structure 1 Jacks Ford South of Santa Fe Drive 1@ 6 ft. x 6 ft. Branch (SR 1437) Interchange RCBC 2 UT to Beaver North of Yadkin Road (SR 1415) 1@ 78 in. RCP Creek Overpass 3 UT to Buckhead Southern end of Morganton 2@ 66 in. RCP Creek Road (SR 1404) Interchange 4 Buckhead Creek West side of Ciiffdale Road 2@ 6 ft. x 6 ft. (SR 1400) Interchange RCBC S. Bicvcle and Pedestrian Facilities There are no bicycle or pedestrian facilities located along All American Freeway (SR 1007). 3 9. Utilities Major utilities on this project include two (2) natural gas lines crossing the project. One gas line crosses at approximately 3500 feet north of Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437) and the other at approximately 1000 feet north of Skibo Road. c. School Bus Usa�e According to the Cumberland County Schools Transportation Department, thirty-three (33) school buses travel twice daily on All-American Freeway (SR 1007). d. Capacitv Analvsis (No Build Scenario) l. Existing Traf�ic Volumes According to the 2011 traffic counts, the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) along the All American Freeway (SR 1007) ranged from 42,000 to 59,300 vehicles per day (vpd). 2. Existin� Levels of Service Freeway, freeway ramps, and intersection capacity analyses were performed following the NCDOT Congestion Management Section's Capacity Analysis Guidelines for TIP Projects. Simulations were completed for no-build scenarios using the 2011 traffic forecasts. The freeway analysis shows the freeway portion of All American Freeway (SR 1007) currently operates at Level af Service (LOS) E. The freeway ramp analysis shows that junctions along All American Freeway {SR 100�} currently operate at LOS D or better based on 2011 volumes. The ramp junctions are aisa expected to operate at LOS D in 2016. For the intersection analysis, Table 2 provides greater detail on the current traffic conditions at all five interchanges and the at-grade intersection in the project study area. 4 Table 2: 2011 Intersection No Build Levels of Service Interchange Intersection 2011 No Build Santa Fe Dr. (SR 1437) Southbound Ram s F Northbound Ram s F Skibo Rd./US 401 Bypass Southbound Ram s B Northbound Ramps B Morganton Rd. (SR 1404) Southbound Ramps B Northbound Ramps C Ciiffdale Rd. (SR 1400) Southbound Ramps F Northbound Ramps C Raeford Rd./US 401 Southbound Ram s B Business Northbound Ram s B At Grade Walter Reed Rd /Owen Dr. F (SR 1007) 3. Future Traf�ic Volumes According to the 2016 traffic forecast, the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) along the All American Freeway (No Buiid with partial Fayetteville Outer Loop) is forecasted to range from 48,100 to 65,400 vpd. The 2035 AADT (with Fayetteville Outer Loop in place) is forecasted to range from 67,400 to 87,800 vpd. 4. Future Levels of Service The analysis shows the freeway will operate at LOS F by year 2016 and 2035 with no improvements. The analysis results indicate that several intersecting roadways have design year volumes that exceed capacity and will experience a failing LOS prior to 2035. By 2035 most ramp junctions are expected to operate at LOS F. Table 3 shows the predicted LOS for all five intersections and the at grade intersection in the project study area. � Table 3: 2016 and 2035 Intersection No Build Levels of Service Interchange Intersection 2016 2035 No Build No Build Santa Fe Dr. Southbound Ramps F F (SR 1437) Northbound Ram s F F Skibo Rd./US 401 Southbound Ramps B C Bypass Northbound Ramps C D Morganton Rd. Southbound Ram s B C (SR 1404) Northbound Ramps C D Cliffdale Rd. Southbound Ram s F F (SR 1400) Northbound Ram s D E Raeford Rd./US 401 Southbound Ram s B B Business Northbound Ramps B C At Grade Walter Reed Road / Owen Drive F F e. Airuorts The nearest airports to the project area are Grannis Field Airport (located approximately 2.7 miles away from the start of the project at Owen Drive) and Pope Field on Fort Bragg (located approximately 4 miles away from the end of the project). f. Other Highwav Proiects in the Area Table 4 provides information on several other TIP projects located near the proposed project. Figure 6, located in Appendix A, provides a graphical representation of the location of these projects, as well as others in the Fayetteville area. Table 4: Other Highway Projects in the Area TIP project Description Construction Number U-2519 Fayetteville Outer Loop Part Under Construction U-3423 NC 24/NC 87 Bragg Blvd. - Widening Under Construction U-4422 Glensford Road ( SR 1596) - Widening FY 2012 U-4444 NC 210 (Murchison Road) -Widening FY 2012 X-0002 Fayetteville Outer Loop Under Construction 6 2. Transportation and Land Use Plans a. NC Transuortation Improvement Pro�ram (STIP) This project is currently included in the 2012-2020 STIP. Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin in FFY 2016 and construction in FFY 2019. b. Local Thorou�hfare Plans The Fayetteville Thoroughfare Plan was adopted in 1995. The 2035 Long Range Transportation P1an for Fayettevilie was adopted in April 2009. This transportation plan includes this project as a recommended improvement to the roadway network. c. Land Use Pians The 2030 Cumberland County Land Use Pian was adopted by the Cumberland County Board of Commissioners in April, 2009. C. Benefits of Proposed Proiect The All-American Freeway (SR 1007) serves as one of the primary roadways for military and civilian traffic into and out of Ft. Bragg. It also provides access to a regional shopping mall and employment centers along a primarily urbanized corridor. The proposed project will improve the operation of the roadway, which will have a failing LOS by the year 2016. Construction of the project wiil expand capacity for the existing facility, reducing congestion and delay while improving travel time to and from the base. � III. ALTERNATIVES A. Preliminarv Studv Alternatives 1. No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative offers no improvements to the project area. This alternative will not allow for the construction of additional lanes or interchange loops along All-American Freeway. As a result, there will be no additional increase in traffic capacity or reduction in congestion. Since the No-Build Alternative does not address the purpose and need of the proposed action, it is not recommended. However, this Environmental Assessment utilizes the No-Build Alternative as a basis for comparison of the other alternatives. 2. Alternative Modes of Transportation Alternative modes of transportation, including transit options, would not meet the purpose and need of this project since they do not provide any increase in capacity and would not afford an adequate reduction in congestion along this facility. 3. Transportation Svstems Management Alternative The Transportation Systems Management (TSM) improvements involve increasing the available capacity of the facility within the existing right-of-way with minimum capital expenditures and without reconstructing the facility. Items such as the addition of turn lanes, striping signing, signalization, and minor realignments are examples of TSM physical improvements. Traffic law enforcement, speed restrictions, control, and signal timing changes are examples of TSM operational improvements. However, the TSM alternatives on their own would not meet the purpose and need of the project to increase capacity on this limited access control facility and were eliminated from consideration. ' 4. Build Alternatives There is one (1) build aiternative under consideration for this project which calls for the widening of All-American Freeway (SR 1007) with the addition of one lane in each direction. From Owen Drive to north of the bridge over the Aberdeen and Rockfish Railroad, widening will be to the outside of the existing lanes. North of the railroad to the Fayetteville Outer Loop, widening will be to the inside of the median. The improvements will bring the total number of lanes from four (4) to six (6). The build alternative was selected for detailed study in this document and is the preferred alternative. The impacts associated with the build alternative are noted in Table 5. : Table 5: Summary of Resources and Impacts Alternative Project Length (miles) 5.6 Residential 2 Relocations Business 1 Total Relocations 3 Minority/Low Income Populations - � Disproportionate Im acts* Historic Properties (Adverse Effects) 0 Community Facilities Impacted** 1 Section 4(� Impacts 0 Noise Impacts Im acted Properties) 110 Prime Farmland (Acres) 0 Forested Acres 0 Wetlands (Acres) 0 Streams (Linear Feet) 384 Flood lain (Acres) 0 Federally Protected Species � Right of Way $4,600,000 Cost Cost Utilities Cost $1,029,000 Construction Cost $42,800,000 Total Cost $48,429,000 * Impacts deiined as disproportionate adverse impacts to mmority or low income populations: **Impacts a section of the Village Christian Academy baseball field. � B. Canacitv Analvsis Build Scenario) 1. Future Traffic Volumes Future years (2016 & 2035) traffic volumes for the No Buiid w/Partial Fayetteville Outer Loop Scenario are the same as the No Build Scenario since the traffic pattern is not being changed. According to the Build 2035 traffic forecast, the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) on All American Freeway (SR 1007) between Owen Drive and the proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop is 6�,400 to 87,800 vpd. 9 2. Future Levels of Service A capacity analysis was performed for the 2035 Build scenario for this project. The freeway analysis shows that with the TIP improvements in place, the facility is expected to operate at LOS E in 2035. With the TIP improvements in place, the ramp junctions axe expected to operate at LOS D or better in the 2035 design year, with the exception of the Santa Fe Drive and Cliffdale Road. Additional improvements (not part of this TIP project) would be needed at Santa Fe Drive and Cliffdale Road to achieve the LOS of C in the 2035 design year. Table 6 shows the predicted LOS for all five interchanges and the at grade intersection in the project study area. Table 6: 2035 Intersection Buiid Levels of Service Interchange Intersection 2035 2035 Build Build Future Santa Fe Dr. (SR Southbound Ramps F C 1437) Northbound Ramps F C Skibo Rd./ US 401 Southbound Ram s C C Bypass Northbound Ram s D D Morganton Rd. (SR Southbound Ramps C C 1404) Northbound Ramps D C Cliffdale Rd. (SR Southbound Ram s F C 1400) Northbound Ramps D C Raeford Rd./ US Southbound Ramps B B 401 Business Northbound Ramps C C At Grade Walter Reed Rd / . Owen Drive F E *"2035 Build Future" shows LOS if additional ramp lanes and conversion of interchanges to a Diverging Diamond Interchange. These improvements are not part of the i�4414 project. The following provides a discussion of the failure year analysis. NCDOT analyzed additional improvements at each interchange/intersection to improve traffic operations. It should be noted, that this project does not propose improvements to intersecting facilities. Therefore, these improvements are considered to be outside of the scope of work for TIP project U-4414. The operational analysis and additional improvements considered are available for review at NCDOT PDEA Unit and the TMSS Unit. 10 Santa Fe Drive Analysis shows that the interchange ramp intersections will operate at LOS D or better until year 2020. After that time, additional lane improvements will be needed on Santa Fe Drive. Cliffdale Road Analysis shows that the interchange ramp intersections wili operate at LOS D or better until year 2020. After that time additionai lane improvements wiil be needed on Cliffdale Road. Raeford Road Analysis shows that the interchange ramp intersections will operate at LOS C or better in 2035. However, the loop ramp volumes will begin to exceed 800 vehicles during the peak hour in 2012. After that time the ramp will begin to near capacity. The TIP proposed improvements along All American Freeway (SR 100i) and its ramps will accommodate the 2035 design year traffic and prevent Y-line queuing from adversely affecting the freeway operations. Additional improvements are needed to remedy capacity issues on the intersecting roadways. 11 IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS A. Roadwav Cross-Sectian and Ali�nment The proposed typical section for All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive to the proposed Fayetteville Loop will have six 12-foot lanes (three in each direction) with 12-foot paved median shoulders. The outside shoulders will remain at 10-feet. Widening will occur to the outside from Owen Drive to just north of the Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad, approximately one mile. Widening will occur in the median over for the remainder of the project, approximately four miles. B. RiEht of Wav and Access Control Additional right of way required will vary between 15-70 feet. The full control of access on All American Freeway (SR 1007) will remain the same. C. Desi�n Sueed & Speed Limit The design speed along Ail American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive to north of the Aberdeen and Rockfish Railroad is 50 mph and is expected to remain at the posted speed limit of 45 mph. The design speed along All American Freeway (SR 1007) from north of the railroad to the Fayetteville Outer Loop is 60 mph and is expected to remain at the posted speed limit of 55 mph. D. Anticinated Design Exceutions No design exceptions are anticipated at this time. E. Intersections/Interchan�es Five (5) interchanges and one (1) at-grade intersection currently exist along the project. The Ail-American Freeway (SR 1007) will be widened to the outside at the Raeford Road/ US 401 Business interchange. The ramps will be realigned to tie back into the new outside lanes. For future project U-4405, a ramp will be required in the northwest quadrant of the Raeford Road/iJS 401 Business Interchange. For this U-4414 project, the ramp will not be constructed, but the grade will be built up to a11ow the placement of the noise walls in this location. The ramps at Cliffdale Road (SR 1400) and Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437) will be widened to provide for additional turn lanes. No improvements are proposed on the intersecting roadways as a part of this project. 12 F. Service Roads No service roads are planned for this project. G. Railroad Crossin�s The bridge over the Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad (A&R) will be widened. The bridge over the Cape Fear Railways (CFR) will not be altered. H. Structures The four (4) existing culverts will be retained and extended. I. Bicvcle and Pedestrian Facilities There are no pedestrian facilities along the existing corridor. The widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) will serve as a full controlled access freeway and no bicycle or pedestrian facilities will be recommended. J. Utilities No major utility lines will be relocated. K. Noise Barriers Six (6) candidate noise wall locations were identified and determined to be feasibie and reasonable, as defined in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy. A more detailed analysis will be performed during project final design to determine the length and location of these walls. The general locations of the proposed wails are noted in Table 7. 13 Table 7: Potential Noise Barrier Locations Barrier Length Proposed No. Direction and Location feet Southbound-Between Walter Reed Road/ 1 Owen Drive and Cliffdale Rd. (SR 1400) 6175 Northbound-Between Walter Reed Road/ 2 Owen Drive and Cliffdale Rd. (SR 1400) 4495 Northbound-Between Cliffdale Rd. (SR 1400) and 3 Morganton Rd. (SR 1404) 1756 Southbound-Between Cliffdale Rd. (SR 1400) and 4 Morganton Rd. (SR 1404) 1868 Southbound-Between Skibo Rd./US 401 Bypass and 6 Santa Fe Dr. (SR 1437) 3000 Northbound-Between Skibo Rd./LTS 401 Bypass and � Santa Fe Dr. (SR 1437) 2700 L. Work Zone, Traffic Control and Construction Phasin� During construction of the project, the improvements to All American Freeway (SR 1007) will be implemented as "phased construction." The project will be widened to the outside and in the median using a combination of lane closures and portable concrete barriers. This will allow traffic to be maintained on the existing roads and bridges throughout the length of construction. Bridge widening on Ali American Freeway (SR 1007) may require temporarily stopping traffic during low volume hours for the installation of bridge beams. Due to the heavily congested nature of this facility, night and weekend construction is recommended to prevent further impact to daily commuters. No detours are currently expected. � V. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION A. Natural Resources 1. Biotic Resources a. Terrestrial Communities Three (3) terrestrial communities were identified in the study area: coastal plain bottomland hardwood forest, mixed pine/hardwood forest and maintained/disturbed. 1. Bottomland Hardwood Forest This habitat can be found mainly along the northwestern portion of the study area. The canopy of this community is dominated by various combinations of bottomland hardwoods and conifers, primarily laurel oak, overcup oak, wiliow oak, black oak, red maple, loblolly pine and sweetgum. Sub-canopy tree species include red maple, red bay, American holly and sweet bay. The shrub layer is often well developed and may become very dense. Typical species found include ti-ti, sweetpepperbush and Virginia sweetspire. Giant cane was common throughout. The herbaceous layer was most prolific in the wetlands and consisted of sedge, clearweed, lizard's tail, netted chain fern and rush. Vines are sometimes dense and include roundleaf greenbrier, poison ivy and muscadine as the most typical species. 2. Mixed Pine/Hardwood Forest This community is the result of past disturbance and does not match a`natural' community type. Dominant species include loblolly pine, sweetgum, water oak, sycamore, red maple, Japanese honeysuckle, grape and low bush blueberry. The mixed pine-hardwood community is located throughout the project area. 3. Maintained/Disturbed Maintained-disturbed areas are scattered throughout the study area in places where the vegetation is periodically mowed, such as roadside shoulders, utility rights-of-way, and residential areas. The vegetation in this community is comprised of low growing grasses and herbs, including bahiagrass, wild onion, fescue, clover, broomsedge and sawtooth blackberry. There are aiso scattered trees including lobiolly pine, and black willow; and shrubs such as multiflora rose and winged sumac. Vines present include Japanese honeysuckle, poison ivy, muscadine and kudzu. b. Terrestrial Communitv Impacts Terrestrial communities in the study area may be impacted by project construction as a result of grading and paving of portions of the study area. Therefore, community data are presented in the context of total coverage of each type within the study area (Table 8}. 15 Table 8: Coverage of Terrestrial Communities within Project Study Area c. Terrestrial Wildlife Many faunal species are highly adaptive and may utilize ail biotic communities previously discussed (those species or evidence thereof that were actually observed are indicated with *). Generally, the community boundaries are abrupt, with little transitional area between them. Maintained roadsides and residential communities adjacent to forested tracts provide foraging and cover areas and support early successional species. Forested areas provide forage and cover for wiidlife dependent on mature forests with mast producing hardwoods. Many opportunistic species use both habitats to satisfy nutritional requirements and shelter. Mammals expected in the study area include white-tailed deer*, gray squirrel*, gray fox and Virginia opossum. Reptiles expected in this area are eastern box turtle, five-lined skink*, brown snake, green anole and the black rat snake. Bird species expected in and around the study area include pine warbler, great-crested flycatcher, eastern towhee*, Carolina chickadee*, red-tailed hawk, northern cardinal and Carolina wren. d. Aquatic Communities Aquatic communities in the study area consist of perennial streams and wetlands. The larger, named perennial streams in the study area have been known to support golden shiner, eastern mosquito fish, redfin pickerel, blue spotted sunfish, largemouth bass; redear sunfish, bluegill, yellow bullhead and yellow perch. Amphibians expected in the study area include bull frog, southern leopard frog, southern dusky salamander, spring peeper, southern toad and the mud salamander. Reptiles common to the area include the banded watersnake, yellow bellied slider, redbelly water snake and painted turtle. e. Invasive Species Four species from the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North Carolina were found to occur in the study area (Table 9). The species identified were Chinese privet, kudzu, multiflora rose (Threat level 1) and Japanese honeysuckle (Threat level 2). NCDOT will manage invasive plant species as appropriate. 16 Table 9: Invasive Species Threat Levels Within Project Area 2. Clean Water Act -Waters of the United States a. Streams, Wetlands Nine jurisdictional streams and their characteristics were identified in the study area (Tables 10 and 11). All streams have been designated as a warm water stream for the purposes of stream mitigation. Table 10: Water Resources in the Study Area Stream Name Map ID DWQ Index Number Best Usage Classification Jacks Ford Branch Jacks Ford Branch 18-31-24-5-2 C Buckhead Creek Buckhead Creek 18-31-24-6 C UT to Buckhead Creek S 1 18-31-24-6 C UT to Buckhead Creek S2 18-31-24-6 C UT to Buckhead Creek S3 18-31-24-6 C UT to Buckhead Creek S4 18-31-24-6 C UT to Buckhead Creek SS 18-31-24-6 C UT to Buckhead Creek S6 18-31-24-5 � C UT to Buckhead Creek S7 18-31-24-5 C 17 Table 11: Jurisdictional Characteristics of Water Resources Length Stream Impacted Classification Compensatory River Basin ft. Mitigation Required Buffer Jacks Ford 0 Perennial Yes Not Subject Branch Buckhead Creek 384 Perennial Yes* Not Subject Sl 0 Perennial Yes Not Subject S2 0 Perennial No Not Subject S3 0 Perennial Yes Not Subject S4 0 Perennial Yes Not Subject SS 0 Perennial Yes Not Subject S6 0 Perennial Yes Not Subject S7 0 Perennial Yes Not Subject *A portion of this stream is mltigable. Table 12: Jurisdictional Characteristics of Wetlands NC WAM Hydrologic DWQ Wetland �rea Map ID Classification Classification Rating Impacted (ac.) WA Floodplain Pool Riparian 38 0 WB Headwater Forest Ri arian 33 0 WC Basin Wetland Non-riparian 47 0 WD Headwater Forest Riparian 55 0 Bottomland � Hardwood Forest �p�ian 58 0 Total: 0 Based on the current design footprint (with a 25-ft. offset from the proposed slope stakes), no wetlands will be impacted and 3841inear feet of Buckhead Creek will be impacted (Table 12). No waters listed on the North Carolina 2010 Final 303(d) list of impaired waters for sedimentation occur within 1.0 mile of the study area. b. Clean Water Act Permits The proposed project has been designated as an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the purposes of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation. As a result, a Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14 will likely be applicable. Other pertnits that may apply include a NWP No. 33 for temporary construction activities such as stream dewatering, work bridges, or 18 temporary causeways that are often used during bridge construction or rehabilitation. The USACE holds the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project construction. In addition to the 404 permit, other required authorizations include the corresponding Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWQ. A NCDWQ Section 401 Water Quality General certification for a CE 3701 may be required prior to the issuance of a Section 404 Permit. Other required 401 certifications may include a GC 3688 for temporary construction access and dewatering. c. Construction Moratoria No moratoria are recommended for this project. d. NC River Basin Rules There are no applicable buffer rules within the study area. e. Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navi�able Waters No water body in the project area has been designated as a Navigable Water under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. f. Wetland and Stream Miti�ation 1. Avoidance and Minimization of Impacts The NCDOT has attempted to avoid and minimize impacts to streams and wetlands to the greatest extent practicable in choosing a preferred alternative and during project design. The footprint is minimal and options to widen were limited. 2. Comnensatorv Mitigation of Impacts The NCDOT will investigate potentiai on-site stream and wetland mitigation opportunities once a finai decision has been rendered on the location of the preferred alternative. If on-site mitigation is not feasible, mitigation will be provided by North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP}. In accordance with the "Memorandum of Agreement Among the North Carolina Department of Transportation, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wiimington District" (MOA), July 22, 2003, the EEP, will be requested to provide off-site mitigation to satisfy the federal Clean Water Act compensatory mitigation requirements for this project. 19 g. Endangered Species Act Protected Species As of September 22, 2010, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists seven federaily protected species for Cumberland County (Table 13). A brief description of each species' habitat requirements follows, along with the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the study area. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the current best available information as per referenced literature and USFWS correspondence. Tabie 13: Federally Listed Species for Cumberland County Scientific Name Common Name Federal Habitat Biological Status Present Conclusion Neonympha mitchellii Saint Francis' satyr butterfly E No No Effect francisci Alligator American alligator T(S/A) No N/A mississippienis Picoides borealis Red-cockaded woodpecker E No No Effect Schwalbea americana American chaffseed E No No Effect Lysimachia Rough-leaved loosestrife E No No Effect asperulaefolia Rhus michauxii Michaux's sumac E No No Effect Lindera melissifolia Pondberry E No No Effect E— Endangered; T— Threatened; T(S/A) - Threatened due to similarity of appearance Saint Francis' satyr butterfly USFWS optimal survey window: May 5-June 6 and July 26-August 21 Habitat Description: The Saint Francis' satyr butterfly is only known from the Sandhills of North Carolina, although its historic range may have been much larger. This butterfly is known to inhabit wide, wet meadows dominated by sedges and other wetiand graminoids. These wetlands are often relicts of beaver activity and are boggy areas that are acidic and ephemeral. These sites must be continually maintained to persist as open areas. The larval host of the Saint Francis' satyr is thought to be grasses, sedges and rushes. Biological Conclusion: No Effect Habitat for the satyr is not present in the study area. A search of NHP database, updated August 2011, shows no occurrences of this species within one mile of the project vicinity. Therefore, this project will have no effect on the satyr. 20 American alligator USFWS optimal survey window: year round (only warm days in winter) Habitat Description: In North Carolina, ailigators have been recorded in nearly every coastal county, and many inland counties to the fall line. The alligator is found rivers, streams, canals, lakes, swamps, and coastal marshes. Adult animals are highiy tolerant of salt water, but the young are apparently more sensitive, with salinities greater than 5 parts per thousand considered harmful. This species is not threatened or endangered, but has the T/SA classification to help in preventing illegal take and trafficking of threatened or endangered "look-alike" reptiles. No survey is required for species that are not threatened or endangered. Biological Conclusion: No Survey Required Red-cockaded Woodpecker USFWS optimal survey window: year round; November-early March Habitat Description: The red-cockaded woodpecker (RCV� typically occupies open, mature stands of southern pines, particularly longleaf pine, for foraging and nesting/roosting habitat. The RCW excavates cavities for nesting and roosting in living pine trees, aged 60 years or older, and which are contiguous with pine stands at least 30 years of age to provide foraging habitat. The foraging range of the RCW is normally no more than 0.5 miles. Biological Conclusion: No Effect Suitabie habitat for the RCW does not exist in the study area. Forests in the study area are comprised of a closed hardwood canopy and sub-canopy. Where pine trees occur, they are not of sufficient age or density to provide suitable nesting or foraging habitat. A review of N.C. Natural Heritage Program (NHP) records, updated August 201 l, indicates known RCW occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. However, since there is no suitable habitat in the study area, there will be no effect on this species. � American chaffseed USFWS optimal survey window: May-August (1-2 months after a fire) ' Habitat Description: American chaffseed generally occurs in habitats described as open, moist to dryish Mesic Pine Flatwoods and longleaf pine flatlands, Pine Savannas, Pine/Scrub Oak Sandhills, Sandhill Seeps, and other open grass/sedge-dominated communities. This herb also occurs in the ecotonal areas between peaty wetlands and xeric sandy soils and on the upper ecotones of, or sites close, to Streamhead Pocosins. The species prefers sandy peat or sandy loam, acidic, seasonally moist to dry soils in sunny or partly sunny areas subject to frequent fires in the growing season. The plant is dependent on factors such as fire, mowing, or fluctuating water tables to maintain its required open to partly-open habitat. Most extant populations, and all of the most vigorous populations, are in areas subject to frequent fire. This species is also known 21 to occur on road cuts and power line rights-of-way that experience frequent mowing or clearing. Soil series that it is found on include Blaney, Candor, Gilead, Fuquay, Lakeland, and Vaucluse. Biological Conciusion: No Effect Habitat for chaffseed is not present in the study area. A search of the NHP database, updated August 201 l, shows no occurrences of chaffseed within one mile of the project vicinity. Therefore, this project wili have no effect on this species. Rough-leaved loosestrife USFWS optimal survey window: mid May-June Habitat Description: Rough-leaved loosestrife, endemic to the Coastal Piain and Sandhills of North and South Carolina, generally occurs in the ecotones or edges between longleaf pine uplands and pond pine pocosins in dense shrub and vine growth on moist to seasonally saturated sands and on shallow organic soils overlaying sand (spodosolic soils). This perennial herb specifically occurs in the ecotones between the following habitats: longleaf pine savanna and pocosin, longleaf pine flatwood and pocosin, longleaf pine savanna and rnixed herb, longleaf pine/pond pine and evergreen shrub, longleaf pine/wiregrass savanna and Carolina bay pocosin, streamhead pocosin and pine/scrub oak sandhill, and sandhill seep and pine/scrub oak sandhill. Occurrences are also found in the following natural habitats: low Pocosins, Pocosins, wet pine flatwoods, pine savannas, streamhead pocosins, sandhill seeps, riparian floodplains, boggy seeps and meadows, on deep peat in the middle of the low shrub community of large Carolina bays, and at the peaty margins of ponds and lakes. Occurrences are found in such disturbed habitats as roadside depressions, maintained power and utility line rights-of-way, firebreaks, and trails. The species prefers full sunlight, is shade intolerant, and requires areas of disturbance (e.g., clearing, mowing, and periodic burning) where the overstory is minimal. It however, can persist in a vegetative state for many years in overgrown, fire-suppressed areas. Blaney, Gilead, Johnston, Kalmia, Leon, Mandarin, Murville, Torhunta, and Vaucluse are some of the soil series that occurrences have been found on. ' Biological Conclusion: No Effect Suitable habitat for rough-leaved loosestrife does not exist in the study area. A review of NHP records, updated August 201 l, indicates there are no known rough-leaved loosestrife occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area. Michaux's sumac USFWS optimal survey window: May-October Habitat Description: Michaux's sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal P1ain and lower Piedmont, grows in sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well-drained sands or sandy loam soils with low cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy or � submesic loamy swales and depressions in the fall line Sandhilis region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights�of- way; areas where forest canopies have been opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food plots; abandoned building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In the central Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and, therefore, grows best where disturbance (e.g., mowing, ciearing, grazing, and periodic fire) maintains its open habitat. Biological Conclusion: No Effect A survey for this species was performed on 5/13/08 and re-surveyed on 5/16/11. Potential habitat was originally identified in the study area. However the open habitat within the study area is intensively maintained by mowing at a frequency that would not aliow the establishment of this species or too grown up to support populations of Michaux's sumac. In addition, the NHP database, updated August 2011, does not show any occurrences of this species within one mile of the project vicinity. Therefore, this project will have no effect on this species. Pondberry or southern spicebush USFWS optimal survey window: February-October Habitat Description: Pondberry occurs in seasonally flooded wetlands, sandy sinks, pond margins, and swampy depressions. This deciduous, aromatic shrub occurs in bottomland hardwood forests with perched water tables along inland areas of the southeastern United States. In the Coastal Plain of the Carolinas, the species occurs at the margins of limestone sinks and ponds and in undrained, shallow depressions of longleaf pine and pond pine forests. Known populations in North Carolina occur in the Small Depression Pocosin natural community, grow in soils with sandy sediments and high water table, contain high peat content in the subsurface, and include a prevalence of shrubs due to historically frequent or intense fires. It generally grows in somewhat shaded areas, but can tolerate full sun. ' Biological Conclusion: No Effect A survey for this species was performed on 5/13/08 and re-surveyed on 5/16/11. Potential habitat was originally identified in the study area. However the open habitat within the study area is intensively maintained by mowing or too grown up to support populations of pondberry. In addition, the NHP database, updated August 201 l, does not show any occurrences of sumac within one mile of the project vicinity. Therefore, this project will have no effect on this species. h. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open water for foraging. Large, dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of open water. Suitable nesting or foraging habitat for the bald eagle is a significant 23 distance from open water. There have been no sightings of this species within the project vicinity during the investigation. Impacts to this species will not occur from project construction. i. Endan�ered Species Act Candidate Species As of September 22, 2010, the USFWS does not list a Candidate species for Cumberland County. j. Essential Fish Habitat The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has not identified any stream in the project study area as an Essential Fish Habitat. 3. Soils The Cumberland County Soil Survey identifies 16 soil types within the study area (see Table 14). Table 14. Soils in the Study Area Soil Series Ma in Unit Draina e Class H dric Status Blaney loamy sand BaB Well-drained Non-hydric Blaney loamy sand BaD Well-drained Non-hydric Candor sand CaD Somewhat excessively Non-hydric drained Coxville loam Co Poorly drained Hydric Faceville loamy sand FaB Well-drained Non-hydric Facevilie-Urban land FcB Well-drained Non-hydric complex Goldsboro loamy sand GoA Moderately well-drained Hydric* Johnston loam JT Very poorly drained Hydric Norfolk loamy sand NoA Well-drained Hydric* Norfolk loamy sand NoB Well-drained Hydric* Rains sandy loam Ra Poorly drained Hydric Urban land Ur NA Non-hydric Vaucluse loamy sand VaD VVell-drained Hydric* Vaucluse-Gilead loamy sands VgE Well-drained Non-hydric Wagram loamy sand WaB Well-drained Hydric* Wagram-Urban land WgB Well-drained Non-hydric complex *Soils which are primarily non-hydric, but which contain hydric inctusions � B. Cultural Resources l. Compliance This project is subject to compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA} of 1966, as amended. Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, 36 CFR Part 800, requires Federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NR) and to afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings. 2. Historic Architectural Resources There are no historic properties on this project. The North Carolina Historic Preservation Office (NCHPO) stated that they were not aware of historic properties that would be affected by the project (see letter dated November 3, 2005, Appendix B). Therefore, no surveys were conducted. 3. Archaeological Resources There are no archaeological properties on this project. In a letter dated Apri13, 2007, the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) and the SHPO did not recommend that an archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project (see Appendix B). C. Section 4(fl/6ff1 Resources Section 4( fl of the USDOT Act of 1966 protects the use of publicly owned parks, recreation areas, wildlife/waterfowl refuges, and historic properties from USDOT actions. The proposed project wiii not impact any Section 4(� properties. Section 6( fl of the Land and Water Conservation Act appiies to the conversion of certain recreation lands to non-recreational purposes. The act appiies to recreation 1'ands that have received Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) money. Any land conversions on property that has received LWCF money must be approved by the US Department of the Interior—National Park Service. Section 6(� also requires that any applicable land converted to non-recreational uses must be replaced with land of equal or greater value, location, and usefulness. No Section 6(� protected properties will be impacted by this project. D. Farmiand North Carolina Executive Order Number 96 (NC EO 96), Preservation ofPrime Agricultural and Forest Lands, requires all state agencies to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction projects on prime farmland soils, as designated by the US Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). These soils are determined by the Natural Resource Conservation Service and based on criteria such as crop yield and level of input of economic 25 resources. The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) requires that applicable environmental documents evaluate farmland impacts and comply with FPPA guidelines to minimize impacts. The project is located in an urban area and the FFPA and NC EO 96 do not apply. Therefore, no further study is required. E. Social Effects 1. Demogranhics a. Population According to 2000 Census data, the population of the Demographic Study Area was 8,496 persons, Fayettevilie was 120,843, while Cumberland County was 302,963. According to 1990 Census data the Demographic Study Area (DSA} increased 27.6% during the last census decade, while the City increased approximately 59.6 %, and Cumberland County increased 10.3% during this period. The large population increase in Fayetteville during this period was largely due to annexation by the City. As also indicated by 2000 Census data, within the Demographic Study Area, the median age is 31 with 75% of the population being 18 years old and over. Of note, approximately 12,094 military personnel live in barracks on the military reservation. Residents living in temporary lodging units are not included in the population estimates. Moreover, Fort Bragg is on the verge of dramatic growth due to the Base Re- alignment and Closure Act and Army Modular Force. According to the 2010 BRAC report, likely growth directly associated with Fort Bragg is a net increase of 9,089 military, an associated 8,662 dependents 7,867 civilians and another 3,231 contractors by 2015. In contrast, for the past quarter-century, Fort Bragg has had essentially a stable population with no growth. b. Race & Ethnicitv 2000 Census data reveals that out of the totai population of the demographic study area, 4,887 persons are White and 2,520 persons are Black. The Black population in the demographic study area is 34.1 % and 34.4% in Cumberland County generally. A much higher than county average percentage biack population is found in Census Tract (CT) 22, Block Group (BG) 1 (79.7%) and a somewhat higher than average percentage black population is found in CT 22, BG 2(50.2%) which are potential environmental justice populations. These two block groups are found at the northern end of the project corridor. The average Hispanic population is 8.4% in the demographic study area (DSA) and 5.7% in Fayetteville, and 6.1% in Cumberland County. A higher than county average percentage Hispanic population is found in Census Tract 22, Block Group 2(19%). 26 Executive Order 13166 "Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency" requires all recipients of federai funds to provide meaningful access to persons who are limited in their English proficiency (LEP). The US Department of Justice defines LEP individuals as those "who do not speak English as their primary language and who have a limited ability to read, write, speak, or understand English" (67 FR 41459). Data about LEP populations was gathered in the 2000 Census. The data indicate there are no language groups within the Demographic Study Area in which more than 5% of the adult population or 1,000 persons speak English less than "Very Well". Therefore, demographic assessment does not indicate the presence of LEP language groups that exceed the Department of Justice's Safe Harbor threshold. However, NCDOT will include notice of Right of Language Access for future meetings for this project. Thus, the requirements of Executive Order 13166 appear to be satisfied. c. Emplovment 2000 Census data shows that the median household income in the DSA is $41,315. The median per capita income is $20,256 in the DSA, $19,141 in Fayetteville as a whole, and $17,736 in Cumberland County. A lower than average per capita income is found in CT 18, BG 2 ($15,703) and in CT 22, BG 2($15,686); and a much lower than average per capita income is found in CT 22, BG 1($11,325). The poverty rate in these three block groups is also higher than in the DSA (12.5%), in Fayetteville at large (14.4%), and in Cumberland County as a whole (12.0%). In CT 18, BG 2, the poverty rate is 17.8%. In CT 22, BG l, the poverty rate is 23.9%; and in CT 22, BG 2, it is 19.2%. The NC Employment Security Commission provides unemployment rates for cities and counties throughout North Carolina. The unemployment rate for City of Fayetteville in November 2010 was 7.1%, while Cumberland County's unemployment rate for the same period was 9.2%. The unemployment rate in Fayetteville in November 2007 was 4.2%, and during the same period it was 5.3% in Cumberland County. These unemployment trends are directly related to the downturn in the economy over the past three years. Major private employers in Cumberland County include the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (2,650 employees), Wai- Mart Distribution Center (1,200 employees), and Purolator (1,150 employees). Public sector employers include Cumberland County Schools (6,500 employees) and Cape Fear Valley Health System (5,000 employees) and total government employment in the County (33,09'7). d. Housin� The number of housing units in the DSA was 1,812, approximately 53,486 in Fayetteville and approximately 118,425 in Cumberland County according to the 2000 US Census. The number of units increased during the past census decade by 73% in the DSA, 68.6% in Fayetteville, and 20.3% in Cumberiand County according to data from the 1990 - 2000 US Census. It is important to note that the City's population growth and growth rate in housing units is partly due to the large annexations which occurred during this time period. m The median home value in the DSA is $98,625, and the median monthly rent in the DSA is $619. The median value of housing units in the DSA varied from $30,900 in CT 22, BG 1 ta a high of $91,900 in CT 22 BG 2, while the median value in Fayetteville was $87,200 and $84,900 in Cumberland County. The three block groups that have the highest rental occupancy as opposed to homeownership, at 59% in CT 18, BG 2; 54% in CT 22, BG l; and 64% in CT 22, BG 2, which are also Block Groups that have higher poverty rates, and higher minority populations. For the DSA the rate of rental occupancy is 38%; in Fayetteville as a whole, 47%; and in Cumberland County, 40.6%. 2. Nei�hborhoods/Communities The Ali-American Freeway (SR 1007} already exists as a major barrier between neighborhoods on the east and the west sides of the road. This existing barrier, which is physicai as well as psychological, is already so notable that the addition of lanes will not increase the barrier effect as much as if there were no barrier or only a small barrier effect in existence. In comparison to the existing major barrier, the proportionate increase in the barrier effect will be small. Adding lanes will increase the overall number of vehicles that the road can carry. This increases the perception of the road as a barrier. Isolation from an additional barrier effect is unlikely to increase. This is because neighborhoods are weli served by alternative routes and have connectivity throughout the neighborhoods with street grids and streets that cross the All American Freeway (SR 1007). The widening of the road will not create an isiand or cul-de-sac effect in terms of access. 3. Relocations of Residences and Businesses For the preferred alternative, there are two (2) residential and one (1)'business relocations anticipated. The relocation report for the preferred alternative, as well as more information on NCDOT's Relocation and Dispiacement Policies can be found in Appendix C. 4. Environmental Justice Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects individuals from discrimination on the grounds of race, age, color, religion, disability, sex, and nationai origin. Executive Order 12898 requires that Environmental Justice principles be incorporated into all transportation studies, programs, policies, and activities. The three environmental principles are: 1) to ensure the fuli and fair participation of ali potentially affected communities in the transportation decision making process, 2) to avoid, minimize or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects, including social and economic effects, on minority or low income populations, and 3) to fully evaluate the benefits and burdens of transportation programs, palicies, and activities upon low-income and minority populations. 28 Access, mobility, community cohesion, economic and other community impacts are expected to be minimal or none as a result of the project. The potential impacts of the project are related primarily to any noise and visual effects arising from the additional lanes. The noise, visual effects and loss of the buffer do not cumulatively impact minority or low income populations disproportionately. Thus, this project is not expected to have disproportionately high and adverse impacts on environmental justice populations. Benefits and burdens resulting from the project are anticipated to be equitably distributed throughout the community. Public involvement and outreach activities will continue to allow full and fair participation of ali potentiaily affected communities in the transportation decision-making process. 5. Recreational Facilities The project will remove a small portion of the Village Christian Academy properly that includes a baseball field, and a soft bail field. Right of way lines intersect a portion of the baseball field. Interviews with the Village Christian Academy and the property owner, Village Baptist Church indicate that students and church members are the only users of the ball fields. F. Economic Effects The project will remove a small strip of property frontage from the 316 Oyster Bar and Grill located at Owen Drive and the All American Freeway (SR 1007). The project will also take a small strip of property of the Lainey Apartment Complex that is located on Lainey Lane and Old McPherson Church Road. The project is not expected to displace economic or business resources through right-of-way acquisition or closing road access to businesses. Upon completion the project will not degrade vehicular access or decrease traffic counts; therefore, viable businesses are not likely to become less viable as a result of the project. Because the existing road is already a limited access freeway, changes to traffic patterns are not likely to curtaii access to businesses. The effect on travel patterns in Fayetteviile will depend on the extent that the additional lanes aliow more vehicles to use the existing road. However, in itself, increased usage of the All- American Freeway is unlikely to significantly change travel routes and destinations. For businesses already served by the existing road, the project is more likely to facilitate travel and access to businesses than to make travel and access more difficult. The project is unlikely to affect employment and commercial access or parking needs. This is because the existing road is aiready a limited access freeway; the addition of lanes wiil not curtail access to businesses or affect parking areas, and is unlikely to cause alterations in travel routes that would to adversely affect employment and commercial access or parking needs. 29 G. Land Use l. Existing and Future Land Use Since the majority of the project study area is currently developed or planned for development, land use changes as a result of this project are expected to be minimal, as residentiai and commercial development are likely to continue in the project study area with or without this project. 2. Proiect Compatibilitv with Local Plans The corridor is urbanized and includes regional shopping and employment centers, residential developments and the Cape Fear Vailey Medical complex area. Local plans, particularly the 2010 Land Use Pian, indicate that the project corridor is planned for a wide variety of land uses, from single-family residential neighborhoods to commercial and light industrial areas. H. Indirect and Cumulative Effects There is one build alternative for the project which will result in travel time savings of approximately three minutes. The project will not change property access or exposure. The no build alternative would have an increasingly negative effect on travel time, due to the increasing level of congestion. This project would not create a new land use/transportation node. Overall, the project is expected to have minimal indirect effects, in the form of change in land use. The project is not expected to have a long term impact on water quality in the project area. This project is not expected to natably contribute to indirect effects, as much of the development in the Future Land Use Study Area (FLUSA) would occur with ar without the project. The project wiil result in a minor (less than three minutes) travel tirrie savings. The project will not change property access or exposure, or create a new land use/transportation node. The surface water designations in the project vicinity inciude a WS-IV water supply watershed designation of which a small portion is included within the northeast portion of the FLUSA. The proposed project corridor does not drain into the WS-IV water supply watershed drainage area. The watershed designation does not affect commercial or residential densities within the FLUSA, as only a very small portion is located in the FLUSA. Notable natural resources include Beaver Creek and Buckhead Creek. Both of these streams have associated wetlands, of which small portions coincide with the project corridor study area. Both have use-support ratings of "fully supporting". Little Rockfish Creek and its tributaries constitute one of the areas of highest water quality in the coastal area of the Cape Fear River basin, according to NCDENR. This stream has shown improvements in water quality in recent years due to upgrades at wastewater treatment facilities. 30 The widening of the All American Freeway (SR 1007) within the FLUSA, along with increases in residential, commercial development and the construction of the Faye�teville Outer Loop will increase the amount of impervious surface within the FLUSA. There is a potential for cumulative effects to water quality within the FLUSA. Potential water quality effects are addressed through a stormwater design utilizing established Best Management Practices. Fort Bragg has established a"Green Belt" of protected conservation lands surrounding the perimeter of Fort Bragg within the project vicinity that will not be developed and is set aside for the protection of the Red-cockaded woodpecker. This protected open space will also help protect water quality. There are no threatened, impaired or protected species within the FLUSA. Population levels in the DSA are anticipated to continue at present rates through 2030, or untii the FLUSA is built out. Military related business growth is expected to continue throughout the planning period. Important generators within the FLUSA include the regional shopping center, the regional medical facility, Fort Bragg and the Military Business Park. Approximately 2,316 acres of the 3,189 acres in the FLUSA are currently developed, and approximately 755 acres (23.7 percent) are availabie for development. There are 117 acres of undeveloped/unconstrained lands that are mostly protected wetlands, streams, buffers or protected open space. The City of Fayetteville's land development regulations address speciiic environmental provisions, including 30-foot vegetative buffers along rivers and streams that will help manage stormwater runoff and mitigate potential cumulative water quality effects. The City also utilizes floodplain, zoning, land and development ordinances, to regulate development in sensitive environmental areas and encourages open space set aside to minimize potential cumulative effects. There are no other notable environmental resources within the FLUSA. With these regulations, the combination of past, current and future projects are not expected to cumulatively impact notable environmental resources in the FLUSA. This project is not expected to notably contribute to cumulative impacts to the environmental resources within the FLUSA. I. Flood Hazard Evaluation Fayetteville and Cumberland County are participants in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). No designated flood hazard zones will be significantly impacted by this project. NCDOT's Hydraulics Unit will ensure compliance with applicable floodplain management ordinances. 31 J. Traffic Noise Analysis In accordance with Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772, Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise (23 CFR 772), and the North Carolina Department of Transportation Traffic Noise Abatement Policy (effective July 13, 2011 }, each Type I highway project must be analyzed for predicted traffic noise impacts. In general, Type I projects are proposed Federal or Federal-aid highway projects for construction of a highway or interchange on new location, improvements of an existing highway which significantly changes the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the vehicle capacity, or projects that involve new construction or substantial alteration of transportation facilities such as weigh stations, rest stops, ride-share lots or toll plazas. Traffic noise impacts are determined through implementing the current Traffic Noise Model (TNM2.5) approved by the Federal Highway Administration and following procedures detailed in Title 23 CFR 772 and the NCDOT Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Manual. When traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of alternative noise abatement measures must be considered for reducing or eliminating these impacts. Temporary and localized noise impacts will likely occur as a result of project construction activities. Construction noise control measures will be incorporated into the project plans and specifications. A copy of the unabridged version of the full technical report entitled Revised Traffic Noise Analysis - SR 1007 (All American Freeway) can be viewed in the Project Development & Environmental Analysis Unit office, Century Center Building A, 1010 Birch Ridge Drive, Raleigh. 1. Traffic Noise Imnacts and Noise Contours The maximum number of receptors in each project alternative predicted to become impacted by future traffic noise is shown in Table 15. The table includes those receptors expected to experience traffic noise impacts by either approaching or exceeding the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria or by a substantial increase in exterior noise levels. The maximum extent of the 72- and 67- dB(A) noise level contours measured from the center of the proposed roadway is 177 feet and 275 feet, respectively. 32 Table 15. Predicted Traffic Noise Impacts by Alternative* Segment Description Traffic Noise Impacts Residential Churches/Schools, Total AC B etc. (NAC C& E All American Freeway from 0 0 0 Owen Drive to Raeford Road All American Freeway from �6 0 76 Raeford Road to Cliffdale Road All American Freeway from Ciiffdale Road to Morganton 14 1 15 Road All American Freeway from 0 0 0 Morganton Road to Skibo Road All American Freeway from 19 0 19 Skibo Road to Santa Fe Drive All American Freeway from 0 0 0 Santa Fe Drive to End of Project Total 110 Per TNM�2.5 and in accordance with 23 CFR Part 772 2. No Build Alternative The Traffic Noise Analysis also considered traffic noise impacts for the "no-build" alternative. If the proposed project does not occur, 85 receptors are predicted to experience traffic noise impacts and the predicted future traffic noise levels will increase by approximately 7 dBA. Based upon research, humans baxely detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5-dBA change is more readily noticeable. Therefore, most people working and living near the roadway will notice this predicted increase. 3. Traffic Noise Abatement Measures Measures for reducing or eliminating the traffic noise impacts were considered for all impacted receptors in each alternative. The primary noise abatement measures evaluated for highway projects include construction of noise barriers, traffic system management measures, alteration of horizontal and vertical highway alignments, establishment of buffer zones and noise insulation (Activity Category D land use facilities only). For each of these measures, benefits 33 versus costs (reasonableness), engineering feasibility, effectiveness and practicability and other factors were included in the noise abatement considerations. Substantially changing the highway alignment to minimize noise impacts is not considered to be a viable option for this project due to engineering, right of way and/or environmental factors. Traffic system management measures are not considered viable for noise abatement due to the negative impact they would have on the capacity and level of service of the proposed roadway. Costs to acquire buffer zones for impacted receptors will exceed the NCDOT base doilar value of $ 37,500 plus possible incremental increases per benefited receptor, causing this abatement measure to be unreasonable. 4. Noise Barriers Noise barriers include two basic types: earthen berms and noise walls. These structures act to diffract, absorb and reflect highway traffic noise. Earthen berms would normally be reasonable, based upon the maximum allowable base quantity of 7,000 cubic yards of soil pius possible incremental increases per benefited receptor for berm construction. However, for this project, earthen berms are not found to be a viable abatement measure because costs for the needed additional right of way are estimated to exceed the NCDOT base dollar value of $ 37,500 plus possible incremental increases per benefited receptor, as defined in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy. A noise barrier evaluation was conducted for this project utilizing the Traffic Noise Model (T`NM° 2.5) software developed by the FHWA. The first potential barrier location (Barrier 1) evaluated with TNM° is located left of the highway alignment. The preliminary design of an optimized concrete waii at this location is approximately 6,175 feet long with an exposed height ranging from 8 to 10 feet. This barrier has an exposed area of 59,500 square feet and wi11 benefit 84 receptors at an average of 708 square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity of noise wali is below the allowable base quantity of 2,500 square feet per benefited receptor. Based upon reasonableness criteria defined in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, this barrier is cost-effective and, therefore, is recommended for construction, contingent upon completion of the project design and the public involvement process. The second potential barrier location evaluated with TNM° (Barrier 2) is located right of the highway alignment. The preliminary design of an optimized concrete wall at this location is approximately 4,495 feet long with an exposed height ranging from 9 to 10 feet. This barrier has an exposed area of 44,907 square feet and will benefit 63 receptors at an average of 713 square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity of noise wall is below the allowable base quantity of 2,500 square feet. Based upon reasonableness criteria defined in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, this barrier is cost-effective and, therefore, is recommended for construction, contingent upon completion of the project design and the public involvement process. The third potential barrier location evaluated with TNM° (Barrier 3) is located right of the highway alignment. The preliminary design of an optimized concrete wall at this location is approximately 1,756 feet long with an exposed height ranging from 9 to 11 feet. This barrier has 34 an exposed area of 18,000 square feet and will benefit 14 receptors at an average of 1,286 square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity of noise wall is below the allowable base quantity of 2,500 square feet. Based upon reasonableness criteria defined in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, this barrier is cost-effective and, therefore, is recommended for construction, contingent upon completion of the project design and the public involvement process. The fourth potential barrier location evaluated with TNM° (Barrier 4) is located left of the highway alignment. The preliminary design of an optimized concrete wall at this location is approximately 1,868 feet long with an exposed height ranging from 9 to 10 feet. This barrier has an exposed area of 15,300 square feet and will benefit 35 receptors at an average of 437 square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity of noise wall is below the allowable base quantity of 2,500 square feet. Based upon reasonabieness criteria defined in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, this barrier is cost-effective and, therefore, is recommended for construction, contingent upon completion of the project design and the public involvement process. The fifth potentiai barrier location evaluated with TNM° (Barrier 6) is located left of the highway alignment. The preliminary design of an optimized concrete wall at this location is approximately 3,000 feet long with an exposed height ranging from 9 to 18 fee� This barrier has an exposed area of 47,637 square feet and will benefit 19 receptors at an average of 2,507 square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity of noise wall is close enough to the ailowable base quantity of 2,500 square feet that it is recommended for further evaluation during project final design. Based upon reasonableness criteria defined in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, if this barrier is found to be cost-effective during additional analysis, it will be recommended for construction, contingent upon completion of the project design and the public involvement process. The sixth potential barrier location evaluated with T`NM° (Barrier 7) is located right of the highway alignment. The preliminary design of an optimized concrete wall at this location is approximately 2,700 feet long with an exposed height ranging from 9 to 13 feet. This barrier has an exposed area of 30,000 square feet and will benefit 26 receptors at an average of 1,154 square feet per benefited receptor. This quantity of noise wall is below the allowable base quantity of 2,500 square feet. Based upon reasonableness criteria defined in the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, this barrier is cost-effective and, therefore, is recommended for construction, contingent upon completion of the project design and the public involvement process. 5. Summarv Based on the preliminary traffic noise analysis, traffic noise abatement is recommended and noise abatement measures are proposed. This evaluation partially completes the highway traffic noise requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772. An additional noise analysis must be performed during final design of this project to verify the feasibility and reasonableness of the proposed barriers and to develop more detailed barrier locations and dimensions of the recommended noise barriers. � In accordance with NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, the Federal/State governments are not responsible for providing noise abatement measures for new development for which building permits are issued after the Date of Public Knowledge. The Date of Public Knowledge of the proposed highway project will be the approval date of the Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). For development occurring after this date, local governing bodies are responsible to insure that noise compatible designs are utilized along the proposed facility. K. Air Qualitv Analysis Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from industry and internal combustion engines are the most prevalent sources. The impact resulting from highway construction ranges from intensifying existing air pollution problems to improving the ambient air quality. Changing traffic patterns are a primary concern when determining the impact of a new highway facility or the improvement of an existing highway facility. Motor vehicles emit carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb) (listed in order of decreasing emission rate). l. Back�round CO Concentrations Automobiles are considered the major source of CO in the project area. In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor near a highway, two (2} concentration components must be used: local and background. The local concentration is defined as the CO emissions from cars operating on highways in the near vicinity (i.e., distances within 400 feet) of the receptor location. The background concentration is defined by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources as "the concentration of a pollutant at a point that is the result of emissions outside the local vicinity; that is, the concentration at the upwind edge of the local sources." 2. Air Qualitv Analvsis Results The project is located in Cumberland County, which complies with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This project will not add substantial new capacity or create a facility that is likely to meaningfully increase emissions. Therefore, it is not anticipated to create any adverse effects on the air quality of this attainment area. 3. Construction Air Quality Effects During construction of the proposed project, all materials resuiting from clearing and grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed from the project, burned or otherwise disposed of by the Contractor. Any burning done will be done in accordance with applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning will be done at the greatest distance practical from dwellings and not when atmospheric conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public. Burning will be performed under constant surveillance. Also during 36 construction, measures will be taken to reduce the dust generated by construction when the control of dust is necessary for the protection and comfort of motorists or area residents. 4. Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs) Recently, concerns for air toxics impacts are more frequent on transportation projects during the NEPA process. Transportation agencies are increasingly expected by the public and other agencies to address MSAT impacts in their environmental documents as the science emerges. Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs) analysis is a continuing area of research where, while much work has been done to assess the overall health risk of air toxics, many questions remain unanswered. In particular, the tools and techniques for assessing project-specific health impacts from MSATs are limited. These limitations impede FHWA's ability to evaluate how mobile source health risks should factor into project-level decision-making under the National Environmentai Policy Act (NEPA). Nonetheless, air toxics concerns continue to be raised on highway projects during the NEPA process. Even as the science emerges, we are duly expected by the public and other agencies to address MSAT impacts in our environmental documents. The FHWA, EPA, the Heaith Effects Institute and others have funded and conducted research studies to try to more clearly define potential risks from MSAT emissions associated with highway projects. The FHWA will continue to monitor the developing research in this emerging field. Also, EPA has not established regulatory concentration targets for the six relevant MSAT pollutants appropriate for use in the project development process. FHWA has several research projects underway to more clearly define potential risks from MSAT emissions associated with transportation projects. While this research is ongoing, FHWA requires each NEPA document to qualitatively address MSATs and their relationship to the specific highway project through a tiered approach.l What we know about mobile source air toxics is still evolving. As the science progresses FHWA will continue to revise and update this guidance. To that end we expect that a number of significant improvements in model forecasting and air pollution analysis guidance are forthcoming in the EPA's release of the final MOVES model and the issuance of the PM 2.5 Hot Spot Modeling Guidance. A qualitative analysis of MSATs for this project appears in its entirety in the project Revised Air Quality Analysis dated November 30, 2011. A copy of this report can be viewed in the Project Development & Environmental Analysis Unit office, Century Center Building A, 1010 Birch Ridge Drive, Raleigh, NC. L. Hazardous Materials Based on the Geographical Information Systems (GIS) technology and a field reconnaissance study, conducted in January 2007, the GeoEnvironmental Section determined that there were no sites that may contain petroleum underground storage tanks (LJSTs) within the project limits. No hazardous waste sites or landfills were identified within the project limits. No other geo-environmentai concerns were found within the project limits. 37 VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION A. Public Involvement On November 14, 2006, a Citizens Informational Workshop was held in Fayetteville at the Westover Recreationai Center to introduce this project to the public and obtain their comments and suggestions about the improvements. Approximately 43 people attended. Eleven (11) written comments were received during and after the workshop. Nine (9) of the written comments expressed concern of current and future noise levels resulting from the project. Severai persons requested noise walis, and for additional trees be planted in the buffer area. Noise walls have been proposed in several locations and a corridor wide planting plan is under consideration for development. Other comments requested improvements to exit ramps at Yadkin Road (SR 1415) and concerns over increased traffic on Owen Drive. B. Public Hearing A public hearing will be held following the circulation of this document. This public hearing wiil provide more detailed information to the public about the proposed improvements. The public will be invited to make additional comments or voice concerns regarding the proposed project. C. NEPA/404 Mer�er Process The Merger Process is a system used to streamiine the project development and permitting processes, agreed to by the USACE, NCDENR DWQ, FHWA, and NCDOT, and supported by other stakeholder agencies and local units of government. To this effect, the Merger Process provides a forum for appropriate agency representatives to discuss and reach consensus on ways to facilitate meeting the regulatory requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act during the NEPA/SEPA decision-making phase of transportation projects. Due to its limited scope and lack of substantial environmental consequences, this project does not meet the criteria for the NEPA/404 Merger Process. 38 D. Other A�encv Coordination Federal, state, and local agencies were consulted during the preparation of this Categorical Exciusion. Written comments were received and considered from agencies noted with an asterisk (*) during the preparation of this assessment. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency * U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service * State Clearinghouse * N.C. Department of Cultural Resources * N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources N.C. Department of Public Instruction * N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission * N.C. Division of Environmental Health N.C. Division of Forest Resources N.C. Division of Parks and Recreation * N.C. Division of Water Quality These comments and related issues, included in Appendix B, have been addressed in this document. 39 � � � ' ♦ . � 1 �' ; � , � � �i n � � r1. n N Fort Bragg `'�� " .+ny END PROJECT U-4414 nshley 51 �` =�olpti` 5 � , � �� µ:. �� '`,,, �� i � �. `� f �:--.�.. .. ` � _ v_ "."', :� � m 0 210 J�e� ��2� ,�1.} i;��T - �, ti�eJ� �h,�, i �os a`�Q' 11t� .s�'� - � 2680 0 ��;N`'� �,.�; V.2519 s . t�.� � ,., «�� »,r � ;� � ,;,.. . Yn; 4 � �, .. _ V i az9 �k �r�,i � � ,�.52 2r,i�3 ��a�a� p � - � _,��` SI N . cn 1 �22 0 { '%; �- � ��;71 :� -OC `V ''r � ' - . _ ._�. 401 ze .. �. ,. f o� f, � ''� '��, � ° � �r R O o I n IP ;. ''c . . 1476 � c �` �'s� 'y ` . o . 2788 � � � 0 1583 ` `�'o�� 1 RV � y r' ''IiN,l..l� � ' 1582 YIn�.,�� Morporytnn !!t� n ��,.— . , . . FV(In Ur ��1� .t . _' • _ , ,_ 1d67 � Mur�� m � , �� 87� � ,? , 155� •_ •_ _ o� sTG � �, � �". . �� °�- Fayetteyill e 9 �� ssz � � '��q ( BEGIN PROJECT BUSIXESS �,`� �, s` °��,sa s �� U-4414 401 c� � BIISIAFSS , ��,.3 2nz 'P - - 401 - � �� , , ` y - u �;^ Q �1�;� _ .� c 4 '-,-_�- I i1�I ~ � 27%g 401 `�n , � y''�,� �� ;�rl� 1'. .. 7 ; � ` .� i � �r.L 111 � 1 � �. (1� � �, �' sss9 �:., 0 59 ? ,` �,<<.,•:' ,�>� . ,> �� .� ° � � aoss �sza �� ` �'.,, 0 6,000 _ � � , �; �2�9 V ��,s� � � ", Feet Z�27 VICINITY MAP � NOAiN p,� County:CUMBERLAND � °, NORTH CAROLINA UEPARTMENT W�DENING OF ALL AMERICAN FI UC@ `^ '. OF TRANSPORTATION FREEWAY (SR1007) FROM Div: 6 TIP# U-4414 g DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS OWEN DRIVE TO THE PROPOSED � ° PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND WBS: 39054.1.1 Qo�`P ENVIRONMENTALANALYSIS BRANCH FAYETTEVILLE OUTER LOOP �e"'oF,ap"S CUMBERLAND COUNTY Date: OCT2011 TIP PROJECT U-4414 By: J.TORTORELLA Ilunnycull RJ ,� c P y Anr1r�:+ 1611 , N ;� 2a�.,, z�,o i?:;�� ,:, � r Proposed Edge of Pavement +w ' ' - � •��' •�(% � �� ., a +'�i. ,S . � � 1 R � � .'�}�� ° Proposed Curb & Gutter ��; �,�,•�� 4 � q��Q /o� /y ,,;� ' � �- Proposed Right of Way � � �� ` `�� o d � ` ' '� �., ' Proposed Construction Easements � � Q�, r� � j" �� '�: ' � f: '� �'� f s Delineated Streams � �' , �`� ,� , ,. - ' �y�"?�l f/ � t .1�, � s � r �,�'��"� . `��` _ � I�' /�� ; �/ �• . � �' �' _ t .i_� `� � •�� ..i� ��;!.-r�.,�` � . � � . , � � � �� x r �'C . �1� �"' , o . � ` , r� ' !• 9" � �� .� � ' 1+d � � . . � �� • , ` � .y yv �� . ' �,�♦ � \ � , 1,- "r' r U� .�f� a , ' � �• .. �J p¢.��ifY'•� � / �' •✓ • �s,►� � ��; �, ;`` ! �, ` ^ .•r . �e , �. �. I .. .`• , � y'+� , ��.. . •c� .� , `y,» � • ` . . `o*'a, , . � , tiy,i` - �;P r . , �i �+� �. � `�'� � �� , ��', °.�r "� �F ��. �;I � i � � t y� � �: � '��F /� � � r ��, � � -} I i � � � A• • � .r�. �� S� � Y� � �i � �ij ry .,, ��` � .r� �� , v �. �' � � ° /� *w � j ' ►,�� g � . - � �'0�► ) �y � �.� �� .,� � ', y y ��' s '� � ` � ` '� 1` °� / r �� .. * 4 , � � �� 1�16�IflN��/�YVI ;��..1 �. .� a,�j�y,._• ,�i :�� i 1 �� • � �i �• � i�''i • S 7�� • ��1��`( Q�� I o 0�1� r ,y . .'� 's�, 1 �- � W • q f � � � � ,� yy •. ; �' � ' '` � - � � '� . ' .. v r � '�+ � J � . �� , • �f� � _..rs � .:,'�� . �� ,. ±► ,'' , '1 , ` � • � __ _ . ♦ � � � � _ �+r � �, �., '� + � � � ' � : � � � .. � . � '�� , '� . _ �P � ;; � . • �� , . ' � .- � � � � - i .J i� _ ,' ��z_.�_�.�� ..,m � . � ' , '� � ` � � . '�a� � � � ' �"� �i � �" ; •�. , [�C�C��NI "f .,r� ` . '! R "`,� ! w ,� _' ,.t � , . w��t'-' � :'�C PG�30O dC��4 � . � � F � �' � ��.; r�.' • �" �. � �_ _ _ �, * � T _ �: — _ �: . , w '� y,,, � � •,... • t. � � ._�'` � ,r � • $ -__ - - ,� '� r; y� r � ,t-- ;� . .�r� �/�/ ,► ..- ' � r _` �,..,]�� '.�� ` � � �` . �,�i'�'♦ . �j j � \ 1 � . �� ' '�7 �.` ,ti `, , � .+ � ` ��' . f ' ✓ + � � r� � � .� .�� • , :'�" ,��7�'ti f.�, _. , � 1 , r . . � , •- y � `�' •�� ,,� , , > > . •�•. � _� � , 1 �, � � - ,, �" / {�c � ��, y� � f � .y � ��: i, �,/� � - !� t . ... _.�r �� rr � � `,y _ � ' \ � � ' < - .r \ . � . _. � f �. !� )) ` �. P f� r ;.`.__ . , . ..� �� .♦ .j�' � � � .'Vy� 1 '�} 1 + l •�� ' � � �r� ' �. � y� �e J . `•. I! t I� .. � ' �w y . �. .w� + . � - � �t a � .�' +., . .- � _ --._ , _ �,,, y � • �� yV 4 , . • . � . 4 _+� . y � . � . - -- � - = --, y'" �, � r�� . s ' � � ,M . 7 . . � ,. � - .. � s� �= ,�� _ . � � � .r , . --�---- y,_r!� ,r. a► . _ ,� ,� �� _-�+" � w , . � ,. L _ 1 - < �� r u _"i. ' . ' � _ ,'_ . . - - - .. -_ � . , � � , , � �_ �,� ° % �.' - _ . . .. .-- - � 1 - � i' � '�•+, . � '` 3 �i�,"".°_ , ,.�..,.,, �__`�--� _ .� , '�1 'r � �-t� � ' �`, � , t ' � : �, • ' . .., . , � � � .Y + �a �' • : .. _ �r,`� � ,��` � �`��i ` � ��'/^ '� , � � R4 � yl� r' ��, � � «� 1 f�� _ _ �f + ` • `'. ' �'- �1 `"� •� y,� . . ��' � � �� ` � ' ' ' { '��' _ � � .. y ' "�t 4 /� �a�, . � � � 'e :.i # I . ,� �`� „�.. � y t "a. L�' r. �"� � •. I�.�� r. M ��'- 3. , , ;� y . �� - w � ' �v �' � � �:. - � - �: ! + � , ; , � � , � ...� � � e � , `' Y� , � � � ��. � , ' ; ,� _ j ! � . `� � I�1 ,� : `� . � �� C� � � � �� D� ' '� ' , . �� --'� � � � r i y r �'� �� I r o � � �► �• ; � a. � -� � � y � � F r ` ' �� ,ri t � ,, , , �� : � .�s . ; .. • .. � ' w �+- a � � , , i �.a � . . , l. ' ' �� , `4 �:,�i, ° � ° � -� ,�, � �, � :L � - � '� �� °�. �' � . � 0 100 200 , ,�- '� � � �; - . `" ,� �_ � � ,� � . --.. ,� . � '��r �.=�: - ��.- . Feet �, . : ' � ♦ �'. , i �: � • ' . r �� . r-' . . . •, �. 4POJ�p N � b�$�a g o � ��'`�fs . o P�P�� 2 U z w Zm � a� a �W-}' oOa�Z a Q = J ZHC9�jQ � � O = W Z a�o vzz~o U _ � � W � ��0> OLL>�Z zooaw G W N a ��QO Wu.�� Q~a� �� O W = U � J��.=-� �U Q y � J J W tO7Q>> m� Z�—W �a. ZW��' U~ �u�.wQ � O � BY: J.TORTORELLA Counry: MBERLAND Div: TIP# 6 - WBS: 39054.1.1 Date: Figure 2 Sheet 1 of 12 i� � 1� �• —��'� ` a�s�XESS ;, � r-- �, �. � ''i 401 • L _ � ,� ;• s '�� `� : � ;% T � �s �; ti �tt� � ' .�: . '� . ,: �v - � � ..� _�: • ` ` ± _ � . � ��,r �� ,� , �,• �, ' �• �� ` � � a + +� -a � � � � � .�t � � �`'•� ',�''� ? ' � i � � �N� ' ��°� � !;, � y� �<, � :. z,,e;� �� _ , � �S �R : � � (��j� ! � •,�7R y� f'� '��' }`$'' ' ' I �L � ��.(/�{� �� I jV`��/.'`'�• I! Y�i� t Yjj f ;T' � t L � , J �,�� = � _- Y�� '� � �.r��f�.� j ��'T �i.. �� r�" #� � �;�1�� !�` 4a, / � �:,." ,�.�a� � � ` � '\ ,;� •• �� A�� '� "'' , � • ; �i �i ef` i . . : . ��. �. '�.�,� � `°'> ` �.� . ' , � �� t�� 7 �%� ` : , ` / �� "y�� - �.s�4•:�; ��. ��'> �^� - �_- - - -- � ,� # r+ . ,� �. � � � 4>a � ! .� �`I � � � . ',�� < r � �..� � �; , � � . ,. � � '�.`\ . � ... � , � 0 100 200 � Feet � � . `. x �� s i __ « � { .' � ' ' �� . �Ul�k.,.&��Val'�jAREA��_ • -- . �. ti f I ' � � .�r �� _ _ � � � '`+��- _ ` � _ ,� � �� r, � .�'�'� 1 .;. , -- — � � ` ' _ ,. , ----a. . � - -- - - - - _ _ - �- - ....�. _�. --- � � � y -�-- - •r��..�� < r.��_ _ - ..r ° - _ -:� - ��. -,�-...�._� _,., -;_.. , - — - - - � ^ .�r'� — � s � � � �F--� --•.-r�F� = - - = yi i ��,�.� - - - � _ _: r�� _ .i 1— . r � .. . . ' ._� � y� . - � __� .��-� -_� . � _ * _ - . - � -�-� _ --. -- - ai...� = F _ ! � � '�,_ -- - � ��'�?t- � �� _ . � � - - . . A. � : `��:rF,�r� - . yJ4 I. ��`ic.-r1_ � - � �,� � . � � '�at � . !/I�� , , ;� � '�. � �/ �� - � _ "itro,. ..-�_ ' � ,>t .�E34' � � ``:�� • � �� '� ~ ,,� � r`. �,ec ��. h , _ w '�� its��,c �i y�,<� ! '�`"�, . �: � ' � _- �, rc �� ' � �% �i " �� f . ',► � � � ..,} '. 1 =. � � , .fi . � a � ' , � _� � � �r a'' �" � � . y ��,_� � , ` : �,. , - . �� J r� y�� , ' , j , � ' -' �1�; � r�' � F . "�, ''� I ' r , ,, t � . , � �. t� j •.�, , a� �. , � i l � „ ��'`�, � `Ij . "r I r . k�'+'�iJ � ,(.�s�Gf' �11f�)YAREA y �� ` ' . � � � . . � .� ; � �' _�� - � ` ' � . . } n �: ,M � _ _ � �!;. �/ � � � i. � '� �� ., �l ,�' � ` � �4 � �' �, � �a �� .��'+ � 1 y � j_ � a.: �. � � . !t _ ♦ � y� -�Ni�il�r"�'�' �1 � , +►: � � � ao �. � s.�b� x� � . � � � ,`, ` j � ,r, � �i'� � �`ti� � � � . "��°� r �• ' �w�� x r � -i1, . � , ,� ; �t I .1��.. ..�� J : 1..� :�' ,.1� w' - �� ''�� , .�:'' � �' / , � y+� �'�o - , '.� '�*�, `�-- � ' _ -►. : � I � � "� � ��\S' � � �� i � � � � �' � � � � �y � � �`'� ,�,� �,� , � O�� , �p�� ' � � . � '.�. i , �;' o �r�, .. ' . �a ' i � ` " . � ��v�Q ' - - t � �} � �'�; � i," '_ � '1 ,,�1' �� - �% (� ' � " ,` �. � � � 7 O .�' . ` �� o � t+�' a . ° (�/�, ' ��'' \` - r � . ��' �0� � , + � �R/ Q� _ i r ', , \� • � �' � � �R C. , _ �, �� `��811SIHC$$ � �O� ` i� � y �� ,• 1 .. .�;� � ' � '�., ' '� _ �i2 � � '�` + . , , `�' . - � i � 401 �°a .. •� . � , �Q _ � � ', ` ; .� � � , � , . + W Y /.-I .I'�� • _ r � .4 J� A � p (Ln �^L p, �� J y -� ` �\ ��r� `C � ` ic' �,,,' � �, ,:;. ��`]G�G°3�0[►`� C�G�MG3�:�rii �� .. ` •. � ,�� i ' � �„ y �' � �C� r� � -- � . - Proposed Edge of Pavement � ,t .. ,Y� a 4 ,� � � _.. StudyArea �� ' ! � + �%� Proposed Right of Way � , +'4L �� " • • � _ � �� - � � J ^[� ��/ ,,,4w r , �� _� � a � � Delineated Streams & Wetlands I '- .y� � � �- . � �ti.. 5, . , i ,�jy 1'' ,� ,�4 O Noise StudyArea _ �'! _T'i . r `'�i' . . "*. ' . � . � . _ /:�.~ . PO�p N �b�0 �� a � : 0 Z � 2 O��bfS . p P�P�� x c� z W Z m � f- t� a NW-}' ooa�z a a = J ZHC9�Q 0 Q = W Z Q (�% O � c UZZ�Z =�pWO � ��NO> OLL>�z zooaw � W U�ap ��G.W ?� J O = � O j JrF-0 �U Q N 0 J J w 0 � W ; m a � a � W � � Z W 0 � U ~ D�Wa � O LL � BY: J.TORTORELLA Coun�ty: CUMBERLAND Div:6 TU�414 wes: 39054.1.1 Date: OCTOBER 2011 Figure � Sheet 2 of 12 � �� ,�.� �,��— ,,, ,�, -� �-) �� - � _ _ �•,, _- _�' � --� - � :�� .. � 1��. - � ` (,4EERDD EEN ROCF�FISH R,qILROAD►) r �"'°�� O.1 � .V'.� ��''�� . 7'�'�•' ', �•. � , -�r . � t • -` _ ° 1 _ � ,� rl�''- � ' ,`1 �` ��,�`' /a.L� /�.f�'If�'�i!'� �� r� �� ,1 � ' . � �+ ,y ��, �, � �` �,•� '- '��' ,'� - _ _ _ - 1 1 `,,- ' ��`x^ < � 1 ,'� 1 . � t�' � ti�� . � . � .� `:` } � O�'� "�[7r �� f, �'� , `. . . . �^' I • �_ 1 . 9 1 ` �� - 'ic � Y� �j / = "� �� ..�. � — 1 _ ' �. •1�p , r',''�� _ , � � �. ��.�, . O , . ► �� y � � ' �r �) � • �� OQ • ', -, �� ` -� � I A � . ;� b. -. . . � . � �'. � ;j� �'� !.i � • � •, ` -�1 r " r . . � � i�. � Z ��'+ �.� • �!�� r � `-� e .,�•. . � k � • 1 '.� _ a• � �N, - R� - � s � i � ` ! • � � ` r �, . ,' � ' ` � � ` ' � �O � � � �. . , : � `� �'. .�ti= 3,. ' � ��' `.'t. _��' � F��O ` ' • " � � � � ;�, �- `' � �'' .�: • �. , , ' uN� S ` `� �...: � � � ' �.. � " . • ;� " �.' 1 `t-; • � � " . `► ��_ r � � , t � '� , . � ♦ �.i ` - ; � :'� ,. ��. c � „�.. . . .. , � . d:` ~ .1 "� ,� t �. 1 1 , � - , � � � - . , � �,,�' 1 � . ' ' �,. - . � �„''� � .• ; \'l�' ^ T � . ' � 'F_ `. s, , . � � •�„�- ,.�� 1� � ` �► J+ �� . " '+�! • , 1 � � ' � ti � '�• ' a � � �, ��.�- .. � � � � , � 1 `. , r a, - . I .. ' � ' , � � � t ' I .�''' � � R �.; M�''� � �, REE�C D � _�; � �: '� _ � . , t� . FERNC . , j ;� .,, y : `� s �, � A *�� l � -. , fi ��.��, ��: : � __ �;,��- �•�` ��. � O� ' � � � � ,� �. � � ` � - `„ ' �� t '� ,,'" _ ' R�p4�1 • , �' ' (Z,� �s` �' �. , �,�: . =� , NP a � . _ N �. ' � ,�. , ' � � . . , , �� „, � . �s + ' y o Y � �� !- � —' .. _ ,:�, � ' s' �` ,�;• "' � _ O 1t,f, C� .. ; " - �.• _ .. ` _ , ,r . ' y, � , t ;. ': - , , �-r : � � , ► � -`��h t '- . �� r . .R . ` � � 2. �� - :�►, ��' o i� � z � �'' , ' „ + . ,,� ' : : � 7�" ' : �" �:� �' , � . „ _ , • .. � ' � ,�'4►,`� • � ;�, . �t� ; �'�;�` �. � ` � . _, , � �'� ' � w "- f 1 T. , , �- . � ~��y' . 2-. �� ! , + � T� .�'' , . � � �; � v. �`;,� � . . : , � . i. ! eX ► , � J� � .. ` � n' . . + - n' �, � �, � 7 ( - +... . ' Y • � .E�+` . . �,� . tr '.�# �� 1 ` '/.:< ' �� . _ J. . . � y` �..�3. ^ �� "�� ,,, '•' . �, • �'. � ^ ,� � `�~� T 'IT• • • •� -�� '. � . , J. ' �� '%M1 � 1 �� i� ' _, (� ��' . f . � , r � , x � r � `� ! � .r 1� .ri� � 1 1.•.� 'S: ' . � �'` ° ' 11 � ` > � • �. �T t ' . 4'(. � . I * I � � � ; � � ,;' ' <� � "� � . - � ��l� . ' �► '+ � � - " �" � , •� `.. ' �'` �� _ � � •• ..::. 'r � . .... � �' .` \ �• � , � * ` _� • 1 _ � . .� . .�.� ,, � / ' , '� L, � .�' �y � ' '1-�. . .`J � 'a. • ,' � • • � ' T • . ' � . ��" ��y. �;- „�. � �•' �. �• �ij•. \ .�. �. �4R ' ` 1 ' ,+ � .1^ . . . ��j� T �� j� �% �� r . � � ' � ' �� L�"�� E�� '� - I f , x� � � t. ` ,,,y��' � ,� . � , ' r � � , n - vt i+ � ., -��' �� - ?� � � � � , - ,�'-. N RD .. ' �. it � � I . , �� , Y ' '� �,`�`��O : . � vRC �..,,� � � � . . . . _ �. �l .-� , , ,', � �,�. c - N �N � � �L' � .rl,._ - ^ �` . ` � � •; - s o . _ _ . .. - . . . - . f y .._.__ �, z � �,�� ,: �J�N �. ��r, �� ..,,, y M � - • �, �,`• , �<- � � ► � ,. � �,,,-3� �+S . QN r• :� �Y� . � . - - . � - ■ �r � / � ,. ' �„ ' `� G � `` '' 4 � � � � � �-� �"', ` . ' . � , .. �� .a. T � ^�� } �. •�• -• � • � • �Q � r N.'.�` � 1 �' y , � • . _ � � - - � • ' '' l ' , •• . �'a �� ? �'-,� }�� , �. . , • _ • � a � � � �� . � , � _ \ \r � � w �r V ii�.• �� ... � a!� . �� . . . � � . !` �t�� . - � '_ - �►�� _� -' Proposed Edge of Pavement ' f• '' .1 'I� . tw 'c • . 1 Study Area � �3` �- ' . �—�- Proposed Right of Way i�� « �°~ � � ,� '. . - ��. - Z� � . Delineated Streams & Wetlands _ t ,�- v .� � „� �� O Noise Study Area ; � �' � • � � # ' w � - . ��b Q �� '! �� '` �- U` _ � 9_ � =' - - '.f� � _ � � NOIS� STUDYAF:�� IiC�n?}� ti__ _ .,�} _ 1 �� ;e � : �. . : . ' � - � . ti��(��C�) � '�� i�� , � � - ..: • • � i i � `=,1 !!_' ' " i 1 � � , s }� � � �� . � � - > � � ��-,� • �. �� . -^�•� _ . _ � �- - - - - �� _ � _ - . � +�° � A - '� , w: �.s ; �, ' . � ' ' '. � � ' `�. . � .. / . `:i �`, i �- `-� ..* �� :� , ,; , '. r �� . ,. � �� 1 ' (�'�` ,%, ' 'l�� .� �� a� � ' - , _ � +! o � � �� . - • _,j � . S� ' ,�� ' ��O�j ' � `r � - • � � �J .� � � � . y, _ � � � � ♦, • o � (�aQ �� ,� _' �' :. "t � "�► , '��--,° ,j' � ':r � _ � • ' ;• ' � , � � '_�i , ' ��Q v • ' � , � • , � '' o�. It �� •r __. �O� . ..� �►� �-� q a� - f � � ��`� . - - r� y � ,� � . a�� . �� -, _ ;; , �i,� t . �� # � � S .: - 1 ` , � �� ' � � r � �' - '` y > �' . �,r�I�� (�p�� 1 t � Vv `�" _ � . -�u'"''.r : 6• � ... �s.�'�. � I "! � � � � . , \ . y 1 . , •`' � � � / j ` ra � �. _ ri` P = �" `�1��"`�' ; �► . ' c +i�„ �' �` "►., ---�. ' ' _ .� :�� sv""_..�., - . - _ � ; . ,..� , ' �i� i - � „ � , , -- .. � :,r=,+'.',.- . . - . ,'� �- � ,'e� � � � � . -�- �--�--- � � . , y �� / J J � -- i -�' _ _f"..� �► �� ' ; '� 'rf , _ ---` o �. — _ _ � , • j�� • o� P��P " „' _ - _,-' _ - ' `' . �� FLEP - � � �-�v , :. r � .. . � , ��o� _ 0�� '�` �r. -f;` �L -� "' - � . � . _ � \ �`� C, � "� - �� . _ � . � � � `� i"r . , - � '` • �j�, � i ` � e. � � ,. .�i - �.� - �' � , e 1 ..��=�� tE 1 � `-- � a --..r, � � � :- ' ..�-°" _ ' - , ,► � : �, � � ��f - �"'�, � , _ .l w° � �� ._ ' . _ �..�� .0 : �r.� ±'ri�� ` d j�� . � - .- r'��,,,� � _ — . ` ,� ' - _ - -. �. _ __ -_ -.-.-_ � r �� - ' -� � � ` �` - �. � � '� � � . , � -� _ �- :'� �,i� - , -„�� _ � - •t r • } ` .� -- � ='�-,r'�"�` � 4f. � � _� ' �`s�+ : � - ; ,: / - � � � / • a ' , �:_ N�+ 1 � � . �; f � �fi� ' � � ��O• A ° �; ��' �, ,. � .:,�:_ � �►►LL AMERICAId ,r, � a a '" `=°°��" `^ ` FREEIN/�Y (SR 1A07) �-� p ' � r ' � � Ji' ,i� ° , �j�� • . a. �i � � � .� • ' , i► � �; _ , - � ' � 4 - s a: �h d �v , . � E .� . � � .'`� •�'-� P �-� � . � •s . �.., Fz� � G�q,,o � O � �' S �p� P ` r� '� '••� ° QQ o��,, . . t � � 0 100 200 i` , �'"Np�gE •� � ,-�V �Q, .',�. . . � . �- � ,� ., . �' 4� ., � ;. -�- Feet . � � �t y ,i� _ "" • .: , � �'��:t�a� `�. . .�1�ti �w �.� . NOl1 b P�� l�v VP i Z � o S�`. '�1yrs o pP� x U Z H W Z m � a� � �- co��Q z�= J c��a Op=Wz �a�ow V Z Z(~j0 � � W � OLL>�Z zOoaw 0 LJJ N a �� LLJ �L � � z � QtiaF' o� J O = � U � J�� U Q � Q � J � � Q � � m � Z�� °" Z W 0 W U o�� O � BY: J County: U B Div: TIP# 6 - wBS: 39054.1.1 Date: Figure � Sheet 4 of 12 0 100 200 � a � � � � � �� ' K * , ` `�' ':� �� , O C�q��Q .�i �. . ` ` ` ��o �, J ��,. ' _ � j V /, . ` - . ' ` .` �. Feet � :� , _: �°0 -. t � � ,�. � �, '�- . - .' � '��. S . � � ' �� ,� . at,��, �� ►, �,�;� i,, � � j! *�, r� � y � ' � �+�� ; � ' + Q � � � ` � ' � r � ��. � ,, .. . ' � � . ��• � � , t 'r:� � t , ,, .� � e� � r � ; , � �� , � .` �,•. � ` ' • � � � � . �_ - . � • • •O � �� . . `'" '�� ' � NO��,-,� 1� F�~� ,� �;'{'1 � � � �'� . , ' ! � � I � .1 � S,1�lJ C1 ..., � � � ' , �'Y °aF2�q , �' . ,, "'� ,^ ' + .. � I } � i __ � H � r N . �,�,5 � �' ;,,, C� �K..i �� -- — _ `_ �� r , 3"a� !R - - !� i *� `� r� . , �:"� -� � o' . . � � � : ,I ` � 3 I R j � .._. �� 1 I i �It•ii�yillMw� � - . . ' � �.. �` - � � ' - . � , V � . • ' - e 1' ` - j ' .� b . .. . . _... � _ i � .. • . . " " - .. �-_ - b .._- ' • . _ �•,,, . ��''" \ ... ' _' --�-�._. '� _ . . Y' ' p///{//�. /L.. . � J _ -. �3��1i � . . _ . .. __ ' � . .- _. __ - lJ�lj�nlr/UI . �1 . �. ♦ °'-' '� —" " . �� 7/L��1 D � ��` � ,: _ ..-� - _ , � �, _ „ �Q�// }�� .�, , . ; �r'a #O y � _. _ . _ � .. . L� , � � �!.''. . � . � , �. . � I O . �_ _ . ', . . .' � . `� �. . � " ��.-.. ' v � _ . q � 4 � ' ��, �= j 'i �5 • � � °' , �• �a.. I� f F i _ � i _ . ,.� - I �i° . _ � -� .�' --, �� -', i�:�ois�ST ��, _ � . _. � o DU ��U�3 �o � .: uD,Y aR�� _� 1- � � � - _ ' . �; �o ,l�w � ' `, � . .�� ' � ` ,�# 5� �l♦ ; ' . - �- '� . - �;,,�• � ,�l .� , ...... Cr�u ,- � '*�•� •- � � . ,, � '��i G��G��;1�;D�:�: � _ �,�. ' �-�: � - ' � � � � �.; • - � �',! -- � , �. r �, i� lR � . �;�- , ..f� s , � — � � +,�_' ' II � ':, '� � � � � Proposed Edge of Pavement � y Study Area s---�- Proposed Right of Way �� - - • Delineated Streams & Wetlands �',+�' - �'�" o ,�` . O Noise Study Area ° • �'�` _ e �.` �_�- .- _ - "�.� . - : ��_. '''.�,-- `-_-`-;�:4_` �--- , _ � i _ '=�; . � � �- � � :_� '� ;`�--� ��, � - ,x. - _ ,��,��_ �, . }� , ,� „- -.,,R � - . �. ' . _,�. ` � ` .... _� -:..`_�. � � ' ! `�`�.. '� ��L AMERICAN . : _ 1�6�E�AV (�R 1007) � . . s � � � - � - ' `,, ' s� �, _'� _ � , . �' .,� � � . s '�� ! "�'�' '`� � 1 -:;.. � ..� ��, ',� �� ' ' �' �`1 .� -� ` `�. , , . � ' /. /'y ` y, � �.a L� ~� + . -C �.- i ' � � ♦ / � � � ;� � . -�� , '* � � % . �� ','�r N ;: +''� ='f �� f '.�� F -,,. .�{ .s��y , � ,. , . . ., , :� ,,.� �,� � 1'�,- � . �� A � � � � � �... .' �'�� a ."'� - ' � �, a- � , � • � ) I ��d, �� . � • . '� jJ � ., � 1 1 ��O , �� , , ,'�� r i : .. '�* . � � .# , N^ »� � o Q� ♦ +I � °� i - � � . � i�� . '' � • � . ` �' � %j � � � � �c�J , , .. �,� .' , • � `u' , r : � -' ��. �,.� ' i!� •y� � � - , ' �� % � . �t, � ti� ' ' t, •� � ,,.; . , ` , ' ,; � , 'r� �,. � � �� " � i , %�� F � � �� . �� . ,� i ' � - ' . � • �' � ' -� r � �. � r',�# ;'.� ' , . ,,, � ,. 1 ' � � � !'�l � /� � #3 �' �* � � , �, �; � _ . � �•. .�-�, . � ; c� ,; �� .� �,r� � �w . � i � .. i' Q\S' �,'�;� � �' � �' �,' I> ,� � � f �Iy,� : � �. , ,� • `-: _ .. Qo.�p • .Yp�blbo � UP �d � � 0 1 � Q ^2 � 1 �b1S , p p*Q S U Z H i W Z m � aN � � oO��Q = J Z � V' � Q J � 2 > ~ �aoow U Z Z V Z � � � � = W �F"NO> o�?�z zOoaw � W N a � � Q � } Wu.�� z� Q�`a�'"' �� J O = � U � J�1--0 �U a�� J J� �a>> ma W � p. Z W 0 ~ U ~ r 0 LL W a �' O � BY: J.TORTORELLA County: L Div: TIP# 6 WBS: 39054.1.1 Date: Figure 2 Sheet 5 of 12 v ) / a� • �S, j/�� ' • rf - � � .,� ; • ; " �� - `' , � �i�� .. -�• � ,�, Proposed Edge of Pavement i � �. ��'__ ♦P . �� f .�. J � �*> � ,'�/ � , ,` � �' ;p,.: \��k � � �'r, . °°i�� a,X,� R a., � - —� Proposed Curb & Gutter � � • f �s� `� ` • s,;.. '�'�` . �� ; `' � , , � r�� fa � Proposed Right of Way � `♦ ,� , "'...w�� . \� • � �,- �� '"'` 'j ,�'" •. t �� Proposed Construction Easements � . �,;y�' •i � '� f. -� .r� � r ` Delineated Streams * (� � / , � ".t _, � , � Q� ` `i�, � .4� : �� .� � ' i o° , � � ' • y >, i .i�� • '!. � �'. . i'�� 4q , -♦ l� /� , � . � �., i • • � ��,�°'D �� '"�= 1:�.*�, ' .� � � � .. � � r�''�� r '< � J. /: �� ``^ o �l i � � � '`� / � � : ., -� � = ��G� �� ,�1� � b A _- � _. Y� _,�� ,� .. � ; '; � � - � •, � ,� , �; ' � ��Q =X � �' ��' i �;� ? `/r� '��,� � /I+ , � �y. ' i � �': � . �+ ► �/ � , �.hC v `y -� O ,� . ��f'. ;� . ' �. �: •,� . �1 �', .., � ; � � � M � �, • . � � �' • � ' � '��.. � � �1� . � �I� °� �� ''� . - -•; �� r y --� ♦ 4 ^+�.�. '1� ( �`\� � ' i ' �` • '�� • � ir f',� r�� c ) ` ',:"�. � ' ♦ \` � �� '�! 4� _•.' ,�j��J�„ '1 � � ,�/ �d:. _ • � � � ' t� � :� : -ad� ,► ��`',, .. �� +�� " l� �.. �` � •y r / • . .,,r� •,► ,�._�: � .�� i � �� + y f��' � �'�� - r . � �� ,, �� , ` t _ ' j�. '� . � � t�` ,� ��+; t?('I� • � ' . • � -+ , t � I '+�� . , ,�.:_ _-'K,n�: X� • . 1�� ,�y� � �► s ♦ _;�� '� >, . �LI� ��I�� .� ,��, � �R�: , -� ! y I � ��VI`.�� `' _ �i^�� ..�� ` • : ,� � � , �-. ` �� Y �� 10�� - � ,�-i .,� � — � _ 0 — � .+�'�';K .p. . I � a; - �_ `� ` 44� �T , `- • . �� i � � . � z • �� ' _ : � t � �"\ � �� {. M �"�" � � �~ �J• ..� � `� �. . � � . " ' _ ' 1.. .`�� 3 � � � =� ' `` „ '.- ' - +g� A � � � -� � � �. � � ��` �� 'r^ � �� i �� , = , - �e •,�, �. • � _ , \ " �' a„°�` �` . • � _ �r�� I- � % � � �'t. � � +�� . . a` - �c , �, �_ .:�. . _ , . .f� � '"�, ♦ _ � < � ,,� . � `� `�.. �r ..�i• � // - - �A` � . � ,_..�� . ` � w .. _ �_e -'a. k. .rd� �y, a' � ,, 1 . II' " !' - 2� : �;.� i, � �' > �, �-�° `"- �: ��. _ "` � C�G30O �� C� "�' ' � - . `'� �. _ �, Q �� , Y I��[�G�.Gu�GQ'L�'� ,_ �� , _ .�,a, �., =..,, `�'� - � Q �Cs�'�,1 D� c�QL�L�G�� . _ �_ � i � ` — - - - � —'�,___ .� � � • J . � ��. �'' , �.._---._ - '� _ - - �;, � - _� �.� �_ - _x =_ -: , _ .w � \ '"� ^ '� " � ' �"�r��'�''f"�-�.+F'�� ..—�,.s�" ., ?--�",�., � ! _ .- �� , _ ____ . - °---- - i " ' -- d __. - � __.. : --�� ---�-�._ - � .r y '!' - � . p �-:.��-� ..:_�+."` ._��. ..- � .._._'.-__.:, � + �'��.� �' � � t�.n-�__-�,_..�..,vs�. - _---_._.�___ -�- � � . . �„�'.. • � _ . ' . ' .�-�.'r�/R '_ . j �f - ." _�- Z'�_�.-.-.. _ . . � � � __ . "_ - _.-__" - . � , �, . _" .�. _ - . _ _.._ ,. ' _ _ ._-_ ._ _ _ _ _'. s.. ._ �__ _"�~� ." __ !�, ) �t q " .� �� : . , . _ . _ `� � ,. "*,� .. . �. . . . . . „ � . �t �Il M. ,� . � �' ..`. �.. .i �^ 'i�� <�.i:•fC`�-f�,. -�� ' _ ��e � _ - _ _.... „ . . � � � - ,�� ' � a : �. �, ` _ { �... ` � -� ��Q�Oa� o�oa� �� - . - i � � � ` ` ,*,� , . ' �-. ► " � �� s. � ' • � �"i � . - h . � ..! `_ ti-, • � '� ` ' _ . . y,� ,� _ « � � �h • � � � � '� '�''3 � - �� ,. ` . � � • i' . �• �`'�... �' �', - ,. ' • '4 � � ~ �'� � �ij�... � . i� � � ,� _'. �' �"' " �' �� M � _ �� j ' �II� . ' s i � Y`, ' � � '�� i � ...... 1 �� ' I _ � `�f � tl "�' � � � � � ., . •.,.,�►. � � �., a � � �': � , ; � } ` �: �, _ cc „ i �,.r{ . . °� ' �' � i i�► , y. . ' f � , +�wtio Cu.W � • � o ^ �, � _- '�a .y ' � �� ,+' = ��' �. � i' � �-�� ;f� +.,,� � - - ' iO. . " , t ' —' ? � • �i i � ► .. . ` �'I� '�� _,_ �� s �� lr� �.'0�� ,. �., . _ � U�;- �11�IIi�1lif�ti ,. _� � e�,,: p.i�l,.,,� .■- � ��_ � Y �ls . ^+c�• .� a � ,,ti' ' . �i��w . � 4� ' _ { y { 0 100 200 Feet `PO� • VOlfb�$�t � ` � � a ° s"2 3�brs p PPPti _ U z H W Zm � a�f- r GO��a = J ZFa-U' �Q J � 2 > ~ � a LL � W av,� � U Z Z V O H��'� OLL>�Z zOoaw � W � �. � � Q O W LL � � � � �-,aw �� J O = � O j J �� 0 � V Q � � J Q � C�a>� ma Z W � � U~ ��i.WQ � O LJ. � BY: J 0 County: U Div: TIP# 6 U-4414 WBS: 39054.1.1 Date: Figure 2 Sheet 6 of 12 r� '. p ' { - . i , � , �� i._ , � . � .,, �. , i , ,•� � f. :, • �, . ', . g , , . . � �. �_.-� , .. . � �� ,4 ` �a�.L �►IIAERIC�►IV y � �� ;�� , , ' +�.z;{ E w �., I �. � r`�_�_ � _� � ` �� N,� � . "4 ' �REEWAY (SR 1007) � �� 4 � ��i y' � 3j� `�i:�;� . � `"� �4'�. UU� � S�. ' �'' � ` - }l � +�,�+! , � ,� 1 � 1 � • � •� �, .'•- , ,,, ti !�, ~ �1r�� "... F, � ` ♦. ,r r �. �y.• . �1'�� e ,.� rz-.- � I � s„ r•,a '* . y .-M�, '�� lia �' �� ' �s � � � �j' ~ , . . �� ` ` ' . ' _ . . _ _. . I ` � s� + j � �F, �,J�.,� � . '� t` `, � ' ,�,, � , . �'' ,.R, .'+��. �` '�`., S r �� .` �'' t._� .. ,.K'�• ��l�y�.��li��.�4�,�,.� � fu�� „ � .a�•� r, �� n�� :i. M^ �ri , � l +' O � � � � + �� ' ., r � Jir `� ,.y � , � �t � � �, . . ��.' .- -€- � ,,1�� / _-� �� ^T � f. ~' e�� !..'f• '� 1,,, , � O� ' �-'' � " = Y'�` ' - - � _ . fi M v � �;� � r�� f� � � �_�. , �,, ► -• �iYt � ' r , t 1 � � i a�. + �� _ _ - - °� - �"� 't � •` " 1 � �, �� ±' ` j ' I I' ' "S. �'; 1 ��" ♦ �� ' _ � i � - ' ` ��► � '. '�= � •'' �i �--r" � ; a 1 _ _ ;.. � � ' .�+ .c_► � �=. �/ �,r �- �-� �� .. . �� 1�` � �,... .1� � , . . : -��' -��..;�,.: y �s - - - ' �J _ � 4.. , � , ", + • . --` .� �y �� `� r � � '� + � � � � � ,./� �•es'`� +��"' � _ - - ► �� , `11�,. /��"'�`` ' '� � � � � � '� � , ,� � ` _ � �' �_ � ' � �'` f o `I • , - j � ��_ o �! ' ,s! ' �:v . � . ' , , , . _ " 1��, , � ' � . ' ,�:� �A� , _ � 3 � ��• s ; , . . � � � . _ - ,•„ � ��', � ;"� � �, ,. ` �� „� ; ' ..� � b i ! � - ,., � ` � � � '� � °�s . ' - i" ' � .� ; , o,,�` _ �: _, �` _ / �. � ', ,t '� i � ,f �'+�� d„�` ` v' � .�� `*, ' • ,� 1 �= � �� . ;�►1►�► r'� � �� • , s r �� d=�• �.�'� � '� � 1 , . � �r, �� c � � � � � s t _ �� ' -,�: _ _ 1 -- 1 �� y - ��n�'' ��+F.;�'� .. j� '�; ��► '� , �J - __: ,�.,�-�---"'`" : - -�' - l i - ..' �i '' ' � '� 1 '+. i� ,� , . . ..: � . : :._,. °i -; p.:" � . ..�R�;� � ,' ' 1 . � (i - �`- .; �' t �� `` ., . .� • �. �� r i�� y. .�-'� � -.�- � � r ' � � '� . + - � � `� � ''� �`�� s `' . � .. - �� + � - �� 4�� . ' , , b . � � � - . o'� s. � � � ,. , �. � � �? � ��f� ,� � ;� �i�, . � � �� . �1 .. S, ' � � � 9 . �. ' • : y ,� .,� ✓ ,sK 1'• �'. i- � .; � �r � . �� , � �^ �� '�,4� ,� . f I ,. � � 1 ��,, • �. 4O, t �s F � ; -�••+� � \e �t`` _ ��t`�Q � , � * a� ♦a y � y _ �� ,,�\ � .. i.,i "�s� "��'� � � : ia ' �y a'� ! r � _;� .. � �� ,i � "� � x;,�/�� ':F lt,� � "�►� �'�7' . l �s .r ,� _ , �. � e�: • r:- -.� 1� � '�� • _ �'� � �J . � � f . ,, `. _ ,� _ ` `' � ' , y . .Iy� � � �• �^ . + 1! �r..�[ � �"�� - � ,�+� �'' �', � "i . \ �k • '� � �' ':� • � ��•4 ` y 0 � \�� Proposed Edge of Pavement �] t�� 5 � � ''� i!� �l �� •� ! - �'`y�a~ � �=� Proposed Curb & Gutter O 1 0o L�0 i� -, ��'t . J• J.• , �� r i ' . � �N ' ��a . r: �, 't � � ` �•- Proposed Right of Way � � , � •� � r �, �� '�� ' �. • � �4'' �, � y� - �" `f� � ` "� t �; _ Proposed Construction Easements Feet � '� .�' .r . `�.� ' i t��;-A • -�O � � , s � `.�� .:� = � Delineated Streams � .�. ,.�.•� > . . � . �P . ,vo�bt `pO �b�l � � 0 2 � O 54.2 �?`�1s . o P'� S U Z H W Zm � a� � H oO�aQ = J ZHC9OQ J � _ � ~ �a�ow U Z Z V Z � °� O�NpCZ zooaw � W N a ��p� � WLL�� Z� Q'` a �' o `� O W � U � J � � � � V Q � Q J J � C�a>> ma Z�—W �a Z W 0 � U ~ 0 � W a � O LL � BY: J.TORTORELLA County: C L Div: TIP# 6 wBS: 39054.1.1 Date: Figure � Sheet 7 of 12 `;�,;{n_� y -t 1_I . � : ,y� � a t " Y { , RF .�� : t t i�:}'4F'�'y�T. ,4'�' . +'�9.� 'S;:r`,'� �:Y �� ` ' � II ��' �. !�• � '�, �� , � '� y�\ ! f?i � I i a Rz �q 'f , � �' � A � ��` �f �, �� , t '�; � `� ' • �i , � ` �� ,J I + , ; �';�� "Q '� � � �+ ` , `i1 '�� ' ��jy:�� t : C, �. �'�C�� /� ,� �, .�,�,. ��I �'i��y'#�- ,�'Kt�r� f �.E. r1, '� ' '� ! � ' —�.ZI��` n/Jn /� n � �� ' � I ,; � . " �j '� � I i N � � � `� �_ (.• � � L%( ► `�'�',,;.• � �' �� : .;' �u�� p � _ � .. � � 'Y�•x:� � , �� •' �t�i P � r rl�:I� �� Yf' � � �� , � ' , � � y' IJ �. �i DO� �,.�, . � ,` #• x�� , r .�:. � _ � �f`� ✓ �I � , it � � � . . . r` . `y� ` - i._� '. � � . �._ . . . . ./� ��.r:� .,. � • � -�� r � �.4rq�"` -.T,.,.,.,- . . � � _ _ �� ,� ��. , . .: � , -_ . . �• '� / ,, i - � �..C�'.., ' �.�:1�� i,4�� • 2'�'..-. -"_' '_. ,. g� T � f�f'+�'� . '� . �Y�. �;� , �,f : ,� . b �.� K•# �: ` ALL A�IIERICAN �� _ �. �' " "'.$,� . y� - ,� FREE11VAY (SR 1007) '' � -- ' , , '� '�:�' 4. . ". "�* � , � .; . � � ,� �' � -!• -� !' '!w � � .� � '!�� pe � 4 �_. � - � �'.�iF --�-- � .� �� . a � M . _ b: :_ a : . � _�_��. ~ j� - �'1 . � �+ �4�'^�'__,"��t.-� �� . -?� - .. " - x . ..,. . .. - .:cw� `�-��. .i,�, :. , � � .� __ _ . N . . - �— ~`~*�.-...�_ -- , -h' , . ..a _ �+ �•�yy�...�_.� --� - �•.- � _ � . _ _ _ ��.��E_ ;, ��,� ..-_ - -� - � - - - - - — --- ._ _ , � "� ': fi I ��` � - _ �` -� ` � f� E=,q . .. � , ... J � ` _ _ � _ _ �- � ,r•. � �'� , _ , - . . __ . _ � __ . __ � i _ _<, -�' -�.. - ��[' - •• ` � . _ . .. � ... _ _�_ ,� . � .�P` - � �� •�._. . . `. %� .,,, _ _ ` . _ ,�,,�, _x_ _ . �.. �. . ' 1 ; �_"� - - ==—_ ' -- - _ — �• Q�� DG3 : _ •� �` . � ° `o.:. " .."""� . , ' � "-. ., 4 N r°'J ` ' '�' 1 y � ""�.,, � . � �,�� ` � ,, ..L►- �`� � • �� _ , �ps � � �' : �- ; \ �' � �► •��►► ` ?�'�` ". •_. -. � r � ' , - �y ` -� . i; s �+'c r' . � �? � / , •. �„� , _�"'i'�+�=. - += d + r .., -__♦• , --__ �- ,;y. . - . - ._ ,� i",t, '.'�' , �� _ \ , �l .� s,. �( -:� � 1' � . � ' "� a� '� � � �:�1 � f i �' . � p � ��,�r,� , , _ ,F v f . � O�� r` �OQ O' �+ t ��•� �- _, �, � � �" o� ,�• '� a��'+ � ��' � e�''��s � Y � .� �;, r , � �; �, � � ,,,,'',�►� •� - f -�=-. . ' ':'� � � - i��' . , ��,W i y�} `, , • •' � .p � � �� ,y:I' � ir�l �—�I � .; �'� !�� !'�'�11i`�G'; Ey"k��J'��' ��,k��;r=t. 4� 11 CC`�) � � � "` , P�I 1_[' ` �� '�; � +, .:,�,, � �}� -,.�J, .�, �r• � I fl �� a '4 • ♦ � '�,'� .��. ..+y .' � '�i� a, .. � . ��nt �', - � .� .� ,i �.' s�.v�: � � � . � � , i . �. `. , r. ,�h. .. _ i -' , >. : Y � . 1 i * ... . `�� T :.� .,�� , ' �* r '� :� � c �. � � , .. * 4i . , f . ` � � fi,,. , , ,h ` � +;_ ,. � � .. , ,�ir j Proposed Edge of Pavement a v • •� �� ''' ^,� StudyArea o � �0 2�� ' �� - . ,� „ ;+,�`'�_ ��`;` • Q Noise StudyArea � ;�j, '1� . ,�� ,` j; `� < - Proposed Right of Way � . `� � 1� �; , , `�� . , ' ��, Proposed Construction Easements Feet %. �:' `, 1,' ` . �� :±, i ,'��#�.i Delineated Streams .. ? � Po`?� v 11blh0 �� Sa � : S a �a ��,2 � ``1: . p P� 2 V Z H W zm � � � i oo�aQ = J z�c��a J � 2 � ~ �a�ow av,o � V Z Z V Z =aoWo ��N�� OLL>�a'Z zOOaw C W � a �� W�� Z� Q'` a E- o � J O = � U � J �� 0 � U QN�� Q� C9a>> wn' W � d Z W G ~ U ~ H ��WQ � O LL � BY: J.TORTORELLA County: MBERLAND Div: TIP# 6 WB.S: 39054.1.1 Date: Figure Z Sheet 8 of 12 POV p N 1 `�O Up A� ��{ � L O J2 ��b1S . p p'F,' E _ U Z H Q W Z m � a� a �W-�' �Oa�Z a a = J ZHC)�Q J � 2 > ~ oaOQz U Z Z ~ Z =�QWO � ��0> zOOaw � W V�ap w�� z� a�a� o� J O = � U � J�1—� �U Q N � J Q� C�a>> mn" z�� Z W � W U ��Q LL � � BY: J.TORTORELLA County: MBERLAND Div: 6 TIP# U-4414 wBS: 39054.1.1 Date: Figure 2 Sheet 9 of 12 . H �1 b QO � �O GP �Za i � �42 �`f5 . p Q�� _ U Z H Q W Z m � � � a NZJ wzQaZ �O= J z�c��a op=Wz �a�ow O ca.�ZZ�--z =aoWo �� zOoaw � W N a ��p� �- w�� Z� Q�a� o� J O = � U � J�1--� �C~j Q N 0 � J � i�a�l� wo" w . �a ZWO� U~ ��WQ � � LL 0 � BY: J.TORTORELLA County: Div: TIP# 6 U-4414 wBS: 39054.1.1 Date: OCTOBER 201 Figure Z Sheet 10 of 12 '' � • j •�. N �i� + M �1t i. ,� ,� �� . � � ' ■ j• � • ' • � � - • �` � �� ' • � f � �{ .,,�..� � �� s• � .,�"i � f , . . � � � �� '� :� -�''� ► • ,". e� . � � � -' � � a ��;. y��i . , �l. - —. 1 • � • - � • �''�-4 ' ` a +. r r . • �.r.. ' . � � �; �, s�• _ • •L Y � 1 � • � • - • • i�a ' . ' � ., , af ' ' . �s a �^.�?: ti}� 4 �r- N t r. � r �f � �� , � ., f � ` ,.,�, 1 � r= 1 •�• -• � • . � /� , 1. � �'' ,- � O�i Aw. ,i�' � L 1 C � 'yt �_' i: _.qt y �L � ,�[� . �,�•' ` ; �,_ Z1 - ... -. . . ,�. � • �• � ..; � �► :... . '� �:,�!e ' '= ', � • - ` ' '•. � � ' � _ � i� '"/ r �,� � ., � —{�.= 1 �,� �- -• - �y,`� s► `�'r ' s �.s•t1 J r *.: " , �..,i` �. ��' � � , ��^ � � `n 1,,. I I ',;°lv'w�Ia'��- t�. 1`l -�- } � 'Y » : � ,. "" ,^. y�y� - � � !r�. � - , ` .� � � � :' Z f" .' �^ � ,� � •yy'' :i •�v.� �i.� �.1��j(�,- ;i:�.. � � �'�' " 'Y' . � titil�i. +.!� �' � �, ��; a.,! :y �%'„ �4� T � „ , , ,t ,t.~` �J �R.fi� ' ]F , ��' -i. � _ �� . � •• ' ' � - .. . � , . c . � . :� �;�t � �.+� � . � � , ' . .. ...: ' , r. �:. . r�t � � .s' u � . � � , � w • 1- 4 . �'�dlj . �' �' ,t �. ' h�. . . � • . . � � . • � , . � , ' ^ .. . , ' � , �+, �L v _ �^ �' f . � t. .� ` - ~ �� 1 � � i '7' � ..�.r _ .,y - � � . � _, j ... . - � '�" ' . ' A r `� ` f r �' t•.i � . • � . ' '� � ,� � ,',� r�c I f� I.� i � ' •` �.� . � � ;�` • f r � i'� "...w'%y� T i + � s- • ` .�► , � . • �. . aF� c1.r. � l ''c . . . . . . �` . ' J��• ��'�� s • � � + - �'- -L � ' _.�'� r. .. •' '�. «r• �•� ' �� r � �. .w 'Q' � iy T�I� . ' �, _ '4 "?; �� / • �.�r,� a � ' , T. . -'4 � �F ' . t {, . 'r , , +t � rV . � ; �V., . � 'qf^ r; ��'T�C ., r � � 4 - ,� � s � .,- d . . i �4 � ' +�� ' � .�y� . !�' �'x +: {� .}� : � • ' : � =�;. �. 1 • . . � ��'• � • �' .� �- - ; � •�9� �Y• ;�� •i . , . , �1� iT h� r �f�Fsr,,=�/�' � ti .. � � � �... - . _ •'�� ' � ' � T . •�( '��'�p•., - . i ,' 7 . ' _ ' , 1 . * .r . 'y= � [y.` -�'�,',� . � �_ . ��L . � -i t "'-_ ��.,y�" �: �~' • ` w. . �R � � .' q��i,�� * . :,`: ,� �, �_ - � ,�f a . .�1 . •� �1 .. ' ~ * ,[ - �� ; ' i . ` � s , '� .. +'R A. . ,+fi�(,,. ��► �+^f � � � � `� �'f► � �, r ' t�,4 � �� •��I' � . .�f.-� �� ' .�. ' . i� �' , f � �-� - ' +i y � �• '� ' - 3 � .i�i. �`�r, t ii,�" r:� .�r. ; . �' i � ' •,� ,�.. r , � kC , � ~� �� `� ' ` f =� ' �', ^ •.{� ' �� t � � '�� ' • � `. � �•• , �•r . . . � _ _ � �� ' < =� �tf� � i��. � . � r. r,- � �_ � • � • ` •� . `n � . . � , i . r . � y r � yc , � _� � ,, r, « .�.�t; ' z �• . .._ �..r � rZ'y .! {� r+ . { ' � •r` . „c � ,r � • A; , � ' r [ ■�� F � ♦ . ' .k t . •t n .�� iJ'� 't �' . � '"" . E �' �,. .�V I `� ' � . �� "'r . .•� � A�� ✓y''.," ...�. �'`.,,�1"., . �. • �� . , l� . S\ ,{ _ . 'SR�. � ��,f�y �. . �v - • r� � ��'• 1 � _ . , i� s�" . � ' _ - ' 1 ��:; e �;;; -�`��-ty,•-�I „ � 'fi �'"'"��'� _ . � ��•� � ��c.� ��+ ''r � • F �` i�I � � '`�'1 ��`, , '''��' ";; ' � `�b' `'� � `r' w~ � - ��'. � � � � ' ..� _ �'i►�y,; ' '+, � �. � � , l��M,�►. • �''�.•� � �`� _ .` . " ��,�'` �� :��` k '� � ' • ,�+ � � ,,. �„. r� � ��': � '`� • �. 1 . ,�J`. _ . w� ., . 1 .7�C s-� �� . ._� . � ' ' �! � �r1, � � � �� . . � > ^� r �rA��. � '� . •� O � ,`i �, ; '! � '� .� � �� ._ � ��'� � � � �.1 - -� • :�,_.. .� !. � � � �� c � k � � -.�, � ��;r. - -s — . � �� . � , �- ? ` :�. f � � b�.: w �.w . �»� ' . � � .'�' �'•" • - • � � � , :R.} ` '� 1 - �� `�1��'��:Y t • �t^ . � � ��►. i � '-':'`* �.'�►�.�„ � R . . , • � ,�,�- r , �� j .� � ~ �� .�• � `� � � � �. :` � - �,`� � M' ,� $` ��-' , � , �ti„ � . _ �'` r _ •'r , � i �, - � � �.� f * � � �h. • t "�, . i_ �r. P - r+- � ,- � � +� r �1 ,� J�. � . '' a ' ' +T'R � � • � .., ` M i. � ~ �� . . `, � �' ^ + � '` • � �,n� � �' �',+' �►1 ,t'�' + ��y� �'� t '•M �,, - • , 7+ - 'Y `� + �`� ��4- ` �, �'. t �C > • '"' ` � � ��` �♦' � .� , � ±%t��+ . � � • ,�'='i� �s;,;,� � a�,��.'�� ._ N � 4• '� �• • f t �`�S �`.'�' • ' �, , '��, ,�`+� ; '�-.,r " -�, '�� ,r• �`•' � ''"'�'� '��s , . � � . .�,� . ��.;. � ,�� ,� �� :�. `.�� ' 9 t �� ! _�•,';�� `R � � . , i - � .� � . j ;..w- .� '�+, � �' ` , ! . • . �:' � • � `;� . �r �5 � 'rr- '� c� � • r � � .4 ��. ,.�� :�_.�,,��- ,� -�,.� —'r � ♦ ""..��i, _ f � � s,� ,:� � � �r . _._`�l.. � _�.. r � ,,a .� �' � �1 ,� � �► � ,,; \ � • �4.. � � �� - y �. '1![ `,s !�'� � � � ' � � �� M�� 9� . � ` .� � � � �� i♦ , �. =ki� . i � . r 0 . � � � ` �.. . , ��f �� / , � _ � � . f, 1 �� l'' Y � . .. �� ' .� 1 � ,1 '�- :� � � � r f � � . � � $ ��;``.� i O`ap . 4p1b� V �`P ¢ Z o 6 4,`' � �6f5 . O P? _ U Z F- � Z m � H � } oO�aa Q�=OJ Z H:7 J Q J � _ > ~ paOQz V Z Z V Z sQpWO ��'� OLL>�z zOOaw G W N a ��p� WLL�� Q~a� o� J O = � U � J �� 0 U Q� 0 J Q W � a � � m a W � a Z W G ~ U ~ H ��WQ � O � BY: J.TORTORELLA Counry: MBERLAND Div: TIP# 6 U-4414 WBS: 39054.1.1 Date: Figure 2 Sheet 12 of 12 EXlST. ` GROUND 6' I 18' ex�sr. ` GROUND By: J.TORTORELLA 6' I 18' 14' 12' 12' 12 Shoulder � n � v 12' 12' 12' 14' � � � Shoulder NEW LANE EXISTING LANE � EXISTING LANE NEW LANE TYPICAL SECTION NO. 1 FROM OWEN DRIVE TO NORTH OF BRIDGE OVER ABERDEEN & ROCKFISH VARIES 16' TO 44' MED 14' 0-12' 12' 12' 12' Shoulder � � � 1 EXISTING LANE NEW LANE AUX LANE 12' 12' 12' 0' - 24' 14' � � ^ � Shoulder �� NEW LANE EXISTING LANE AUX LANE TYPICAL SECTION NO. 2 FROM BRIDGE OVER ABERDEEN & ROCKFISH TO FAYETTEVILLE OUTER LOOP EXIST. GROUND 3•� EXIST. I �P � N �l b QO �O � �a ¢ Z � 2 ��615 . p P�� _ U Z H W Z m � H � a tn W J ooaaZ = J Z�i��Q pp=WZ �a,OOw V Z Z V Z O �— � ��0> OLL>�Z zOOaw � W U�ap J v ��aw �� ^ o� a O W � U � J°�� °w �� o O�WJ ma Q � Z W 0 � U ~ �LLWQ � �� O N County: CUMBERLAND Div: TIP# 6 U-4414 WBS: 39054.1.1 Date: OCTOBER 2011 Figure 3 42� PROPOSED FAYETTEVILLE -____ _____- OUTERLOOP � 0 �i � ('� y_� N�% 3 �� 1Q�e�� m tA 9 0 ��a cD� �� Q3 �.l 3739 50 1� 4� 1165 Q�1� L 60 �� 49 � )./5 0 ��a�00c w�'Og o a �a � o 5ac 550 � g`P 1 t31 a 40, Q� ^ 66 � � hy ,�0 24 ) �41 f /^1 ��i l�� 6� 407 �O A 53a ��?` ?i 435 � o a 'o �`� 60 P � �yo ga� 40q (Y j s N k N A� �, N �, ,, �� ,, i, Fort Bragg � � � m, NA 3� d� $ n `'�y�AFa�� T � �a er ga� Begin m4 � ma i '� SR1415 1 J McPherson Church Rd ' ?33 � a 60 + PM 9 6� �� Raeford Rd ' � (Z� 1) ,t gg 45G . � 37II 404 27 � ss " \� � 149 � ! Owen Dr EMension l ..�r .,__-. ... � �`° 401 �a i i �ot M Sa �O�^ Rd SR140� GIiHd� • �Np �°o o� RaeFtord R _ ___ _= - 401 � I I E�a �I � °� Rd 42� 65 s5�� 43 (?, �� 9 / 1 9� � 15 5 S I,, o �yo� R�4oq o�so,wo a oo � a soo s 000e 9anto� Rd u�'� J� �" 2011 �, � SR1400 102 � ?GI ��iffdaleRd AVERAGE ANNUAL SR1400 .13, PM 8 DAILY TRAFFIC Cliffdale Rd s� �(ZM) �Q g� �4 55 � NO BUILD �9p ��s�p SHEET 1 OF 3 0 'o �� o �s'°� '�' SR1415 LEGEND '�/ s ��d McPherson Church Rd K P�� D O 1' (d��) 5G9 �' ?,'i]JF No. of Vehicles Per Day (VPD) � ' in 100s 60 t PM 9 y Raetord Rd 1- Less lhan 50 VPD ' 2 j (y� �) �� I X Movement Prohibiled � SR1007 Owen Dr Extension q�Q qot -- Roadway All American Freeway 75 ��. K Design Hour Factor (%) I �'�9 Raeford Rd PM PM Peak Period �99 �99 � D Peak Hour Direclional Split v� I . 2' � Indicales Direclion of D I /S� � � (d,t) Duals, TT-STs ( % ) I / G� Vy NORTHCAROLINADEPARTMENT R 9 �� - I OF TRANSPORTATION C 47) 3 a DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R f � \ ,r- PROJECTDEVELOPMENTAND `Walter Reed Rd 111 r ,�s'� ENVIRONMENTAL ANALY515 BftANCH � 37 \y13 . +,.qs.. g (ZM'� 55 WIDEN ALLAMERICAN :! �`�3 FREEWAY (SR 1007) FROM p . N OWEN DRIVE (SR 1007) � P� TO NORTH OF � � ? �o SANTE FE DRIVE (SR 1437) 593 p--� CUMBERLANDCOUNTY � SR1007 �� TIP PROJECT U-4414 Owen Dr � OCT08ER 2011 FIGURE 4 401 N � N A , A i � FuruRe Fort Bragg / � FAVETTEVILLE �� ___I_ �_-�_- OUTERLOOP �i, -- � I _ '-- � y��— � � NP 3 �� d7�� 2I 5�1a�eOt o' $ y er Sao� A 9egin ^f i � ^ N� a �� c °` ` � i 5 �a a � y SR1415 1 � 6h �A �\ � �`� �` McPherson Church Rd i U 7,�� , :� __ - � o 5� �ap pM a ,�d �� lA9 �i PM R Rn C60� RaefordRd � ao� 31 60 � 60 �(2� 1) 9 g71 l�Y 4�4 , -�.: za e� � �tot aza •� � � /,� 401 33G '0 22 y'•° . o J ��p�y�� °'\�3 o a , 'r`r� _ . ° M1 Sa �0�^ Rd Y � gac�� s2s � 5�i-`O a\� sa�aoo p � 1�4 CliHda 510 � Owen Dr E�Rension a ; 401 � n� ` �NA 72 y � Qo h �� 2 � �43 ` ..___, .. fordR�_- .,..- , � Rae Q� �.1 39 . . _ _ . _ 401 1 60 �01 �p ' End �a 461 GOG �a`y?i — F / 'o° �''r i 5� MoSRlqp4 so �-�� 8 9a�to� Rd ,141 69 Sg PM �� 9� � `~ 9 � / 0 50 37?. SR140 oisawo aoo awo a000e � � MO 9anto Rd � - - J�3 G37 2016 0 J SR1400 �� » 271 Cliffdale Rd AVERAGE ANNUAL SR� 1�� q60 DAILY TRAFFIC Cliffdale Rd so ; PM �o �o �4 55 � 8 NO BUILD w/ Partial (2, 1) -�„ Fayetteville Outer Loop �'��;�, SHEET 2 OF 3 �°A �'T' LEGEND /sv� _ ��a. McPhe son Chu�ch Rd K PM �� ? ` � SR1007 Owen Dr Extension ' All American Freeway � 154 � 555 �o ,,,� i % V SS 9 I 5 ( Walter Reed Rd � �� 40 j'2� � ( PM , � 9 (Z �� 55 i 654 � � SR1007 ° 9 � owen or � , rM Raetow.._ �- ��.,,��a��,,.,,,�., 60 .'2 �) 9 93 �� i � X Movement Prohibited ao7 -- Roadway �� 80 �'� K Design Hour Factor (%) :ford Rd PM PM Peak Period ;5 ,� D Peak Hour Direclional Split 2 � Indicales Direction of D (d,t) Duals, TT-STs ( % ) i� I �4 HORTHCAROLINA�EPARTMENT \ OF TRANSPORTATION � DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS �� • PROJECTDEVELOPMENTANO ky ENVIRONMENTALANALYSISBRANCH WIDENING OF ALL AMERICAN �'' FREEWAY (SR1007) FROM �Np� OWEN DRIVE TO THE PROPOSED �� o FAYETTEVILLE OUTER LOOP Q CUMBERIAND COUNTY TIP PROJECT U-4414 OCTOBER 2011 FIGURE 4a N � °� tv n N /V � FUTURE � � FAYETTEVILLE OUTERLOOP � � II Fort Bragg I ,� ��a ; � � � � NP dj �� 2< Sfl1A�0 l ' � e 3 o e Sa�\ Begin ^4 D�3 � N%�� a .� �T-� p�'��`Fe�� o` � m � 5 �a a � y Qtt 9 ;yg �'a ; SR1415 � '` y �A. �� McPherson Church Rd 1 I 5 � 301 ' � -.,..—�-.. 56 � � � 2 gq pM a �° � Q�g\9 �24 60 � PM 9 R 60� Raeford Rd � aoi lA� •� (2, 1) 8� 1�y25 594 . � za � 5 � 494 52d � 54 407 �A7_0 ° 25 . � Js ^a�e0� ��' Q-a � ��R\ � r� M1 r a�OORd `'a a� 85G o �:�� a'\?i SR1400 � soa � m � r � cnaaJe�� Owen Dr E�Aension �^` ao� Q�• � �No `�6j� yy o °� '�� 3� ( 51 Q�• r�\ � .. _.,_._._,. Rae(ord R ... y.., ,.---- __T�.. 401 �. : _ _ 0 � 4 � i 6 407 � i�\AEnd � 549 �735 „ — � �a �,� � � �,00 r� 60 P Mo ga 1 o� Rd �� (� � 82 } .� ` �r 55 P�y � i�� .3 (� 2 9 114 so �a'�� SR7 'o � 90 o�so,wo aoo a.wo aoaoe � \� Mo 9ant�n Rtl — - - D� 87�' 2035 0 � SR1400 132 12 31G ��iffdaleRd AVERAGE ANNUAL SR1400 54G DAILY TRAFFIC ��i(idaleRd so f�ZM� �o �zs � 55 � 8 BUILD w/ Full q, Fayetteville Outer Loop , 9��,s�p ��z SHEET 3 OF 3 0 's� �''�' sR,a,s L E G E N D � SS P�'�dy McPherson Church Rd K PM �� o la,c) ,j �. �iit-tF No. of Vehicles Per Day (VPD) S � in 100s Q� � � - � � � 2 � 60 � PM 9 � Raetord Rd 1- Less lhan 50 VPD � (2� �) 176 88 , � X Movemenl Prohibited SR1007 Owen Dr Extension g� y aot �� -- Roadway ' All American Freeway gg g, K Design Hour Factor (%) �� 1 � Rae(ord Rd PM PM Peak Period . �» 77p D Peak Hour Direclional Splil � �� " 2- � Indicales Direclion of D �s,o� � j (d,t) Duals, TT-STs ( % ) ./ j E s d'y'"��, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT s ��1� `I . . � O OFTRANSPORTATION DINSION OF HIGHWAYS 65 � �', PROJECTDEVELOPMENTAND -Walter Reed Rd 137 136 I \ S0 `�,, ENVIRONMENTAL ANALVSIS BRANCH g PM � 55 48 � WIDENING OF ALL AMERICAN (�� 1) 'i al� ' FREEWAY (SR1007) FROM '� �`�P� OWEN DRIVE TO THE PROPOSED ( `0� °o FAYETTEVILLE OUTER LOOP _1 d78 'i � CUMBERLANDCOUNN I SR1007 ' TIP PROJECT U-4414 � Owen Dr � .� � OCTOBER 2011 FIGURE 4b By: J.TORTORELLA PO�p N U`�'O � �Z F r S � ��d15 , p P*�� _ U Z H W Z m � H � � oO�aQ = J z�c��a op=Wz �au.ow VO ZZC~,)O 2aOW ��N'� O�>�z zOOaw � W Vpao J � WL�� Z� Q �` a H O � J O = � U � J�1-� �U Z Q�� J Q� C�a>> m� W �� Z W Q � U � � � W Q � � LL � N County: CUMBERLAND Div: TIP# 6 U-4414 was: 39054.1.1 Date: OCTOBER 2011 Figure 5 ♦ � � , � , � , 1 � � ♦ ; , � � `� � �: �� ' .�, � '.� �� < FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Raleigh Field Office Post Office Box 33726 Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726 October 20, 2005 Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D. North Carolina Department of Transportation Project Development and Environmental Analysis 1548 Mail Service Center Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548 Dear Dr. Thorpe: .�� € � � � � � � ``�°4,. ��' � � �� '; :.a t..� �` , — t';�5a /� � " �; � #` :�� _ , ; y. � , f ' ¢ � ' � � fY'.<.,, j � � .ti r°i �%.r e �` �_a��s��_��`�T:: This letter is in response to your request for comments from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on the potential environmental effects of the proposed widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive (SR 1151) to north of Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437) in Fayetteville, Cumberland County, North Carolina (TIP No. U-4414). These comments provide scoping infornlation in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act requires that all federal action agencies (or their designated non-federal representatives), in consultation with the Service, insure that any action federally authorized, funded, or canied out by such agencies is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any federally-listed threatened or endangered species. A biological assessmentlevaluation may be prepared to fulfili the section 7(a)(2) requirement and will expedite the consultation process. To assist you, a county-by-county list of federally protected species known to occur in North Carolina and information on their life histories and habitats can be found on our web page at http://uc-es.fws.�ov/es/countvfr.html . Most of the project area occurs within a previously disturbed, urban/suburban environment with minimal fish and wildlife habitat. However;�he northern terminus of the project, as currently defined in your scoping information, occurs within a red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW)(Picoides bo��ealis) partition (an approximately 0.5 mile radius around the center of a cluster of cavity trees). ` The RCW partition, designated as FB 65; is an active cluster which occurs within Fort Bragg's RCW management corridor known as the Green Belt.' The Service recently completed a formai section 7 consultation for the proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop (TIP No. U-2519), The project limits of U-2519 included the area covered by the northem termiuus of U-4414. As currently defined, the �roject limits of U-4414 overlap significantly with U-2519. Impacts of U- 2519 to the RCW partition FB 65 were addressed in the Federal Highway Administration's biological assessment of U-2519 and in the resulting biological opinion rendered by the Service. In that biological opinion, the Service issued an incidental take statement for FB 65. Tllerefore, adverse effects to FB 65 are already accounted for, and no additio11a1 take would occur with regard to FB 65., Howevei•, the Service recommends that the North Carolina Department of � Transportation redefine the project limits at the northern terminus of U-4414 to avoid any question of potential impacts to RCW. Since the project design for U-2519 includes a portion of the northern end of U-4414, it appears that northern project terminus for U-4414 could be relocated farther south. Although the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database does not indicate any other known occurrences of listed species near the project vicinity, use of the NCNHP data should not be substituted for actual field surveys if suitable habitat occurs near the project site. The NCNHP database only indicates the presence of known occurrences of listed species and does not necessarily mean that such species are not present. It may simply mean that the area has not been surveyed. If suitable habitat occurs within the project vicinity for any listed species, surveys should be conducted to determine presence or absence of the species. If you detemiine that the proposed action may affect (i.e., likely to adversely affect or not likely to adversely affect) a listed species, you should notify this office with your determination, the results of your surveys, survey methodalogies, and an analysis of the effects of the action on listed species, including consideration of direct, indirect, and cumulative effects, before conducting any activities that might affect the species. If you determine that the proposed action will have no effect (i.e., no beneficial or adverse, direct or indirect effect) on listed species, then you are not required to contact our office for concuirence. For road improvement projects such as widening, realignment, bridge replacement and culvert replacement, the Service recommends the following general conservation measures to avoid or minimize environmental impacts to fish and wildlife resources: �Vetland and forest impacts should be avoided and minimized to the maximal extent practical. Areas exhibiting high biodiversity or ecological value important to the watershed or region should be avoided. Proposed highway projects should be aligned along or adjacent to existing roadways, utility corridors or other previously disturbed areas in order to minimize habitat loss and fragmentation. Highway shoulder and median widths should be reduced through wetland areas; . 2. Crossings of streams and associated wetland systems should use existing crossings and/or occur on a bridge structure wherever feasible. Bridges should be long enough to allow tor sufticient wildiife passage along stream corridors. Where bridging is not feasible, culvert structures that maintain natural water flow and hydraulic regimes without scouring or impeding fish and wildlife passage should be employed; 3. Bridges and approaches should be designed to avoid any fill that will result in damming or constriction of the channel or flood'plain. To the extent possible, piers and bents should be placed outside the bank-full width of the stream. If spanning the flood plain is not feasible, culverts should be installed in the flood plain portion of the approach to restore some of the hydrological functions of the flood plain and reduce high velocities of flood waters within the affected area; 4. Bridge designs should include provisions for roadbed and decic drainage to flow through a vegetated buffer prior to reaching the affected stream. This buffer shouid be large enough to alleviate any potential effects from run-off of storm water and pollutants; Off-site detours should be used rather than construction of temporary, on-site bridges. For projects requiring an on-site detour in wetlands or open water, such detours should be aligned along the side of the existing structure which has the least and/or least quality of fish and wildlife habitat. At the completion of construction, the detour area should be entirely removed and the impacted areas be planted with appropriate vegetation, including trees if necessary; 6. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, a plan for compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable impacts should be provided early in the planning process. Opportunities to protect mitigation areas in perpetuity via conservation easements,land trusts or by other means should be explored at the outset; 7. Wherever appropriate, construction in sensitive areas should occur outside fish spawning and migratory bird nesting seasons. In waterways that may serve as travel corridors for fish, in-water work should be avoided during moratorium periods associated with migration, spawning and sensitive pre-adult life stages. The general moratorium period for anadromous fish is February 15 - June 30; Best Management Practices (BMP) for Protection.of Surface Waters should be implemented; and We reserve the right to review any federal permits that may be required for this project, at the public notice stage. Therefore, it is important that resource agency coordination occur early in the planning process in order to resolve any conflicts that may arise and minimize delays in project implementation. In addition to the above guidance, we recommend that the environmental documentation for this project include the following in sufficient detail to facilitate a thorough review of the action: 1. A clearly defined and detailed purpose and need for the proposed proj�ct, supported by tabular data, if available, and including a discussion of the project's independent utility; 2. A description of the proposed action with an analysis of all alternatives being considered, including the upgrading of existing roads and a"no action" alternative; A description of the fish and wildlife resources, and their habitats, within the project impact area that may be directly or indirectly affected; 4. The extent and acreage of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, that are to be impacted by filling, dredging, clearing, ditching, or draining. Acres of wetland impact should be differentiated by habitat type based on the wetland classification scheme of the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). Wetland boundaries should be determined by using the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual and verified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 5. The anticipated environmental impacts, both temporary and permanent, that would be likely to occur as a direct result of the proposed project. The assessment should also include the extent to which the proposed project would result in secondary impacts to natural resources, and how this and similar projects contribute to cumulative adverse effects; 6. Design features and construction techniques which would be employed to avoid or minimize impacts to fish and wildlife resources, both direct and indirect, and including fragmentation and direct loss of habitat; 7. Design features, construction techniques, or any other mitigation measures which would be employed at wetland crossings and stream channel relocations to avoid or minimize ' impacts to waters of the US; and, 8. If unavoidable wetland or stream impacts are proposed, project planning should include a compensatory mitigation plan for offsetting the unavoidable impacts. The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please continue to advise us during the progression of the planning process, including your official determinaiion of the impacts of this project. If you have any questions regarding our response, please contact Mr. Gary Jordan at (919) 856-4520, ext. 32. Sincerely, ��--'°-° '�r ' � �Pete Benjamin Ecological Services Supervisor cc: Richard Spencer, USACE, Wilmington; NC Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC Travis Wiison, NC�VR�, Creecimoor, NC Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC ...�v % d �� , w a' �aw�u�� Norih Carolina Department of Administration Michael F. Easley, Governor November 18, 2005 Mr. Charles R. Cox NCDOT Transportation Building 1548 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1548 Dear Mr. Cox: Gwynn T. Swinson, Secretary Re: SCH File # 06-E-4220-0121; Scoping; NCDOT proposes to widen ALL American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive (SR 1151) to north of Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437) in Fayetteville. TIP Praject No. U-4414. The above referenced environmental impact information has been submitted to the State Clearinghouse under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act. According to G.S. 113A-10, when a state agency is required to prepare an environmental document under the provisions of federal law, the environmental document meets the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act. Attached to this letter for your consideration are the comments made by agencies in the course of this review. If any further environmental review documents are prepared for this project, they should be forwarded to this ofiice for intergovernmental review. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, ,� �: �;, � �:�� ,; - � � Ms. Chrys Baggett , Environmental Policy Act Coordinator Attachments cc: Region M MailingAdrlress: Teleplione: (919)807-2425 LocationArldress: 1301 Mail Service Center Fax (919)733-9571 I 16 West Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27699-1301 State Courier #51-01-00 Raleigh, North Carolina e-mail Chrys.Baggett@ncmail.net Ari Eqtial Opportuniry/Affirmative Action Employer MIC�L F. EASLEY GOVERNOR I 1 •' � � • FROM: /i�'+� T'�;'� 4Y�� 4:;=�1 STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTZVIEEN'T OF T'RANSPORTATION November 7, 2005 North Carolina State Clearinghouse Department of Administration Intergovernmental Review Darius D. Sturdivant �{�S Transportation Engineer Transportation Planning Branch LYNDO TIPPETI` SECRETARY � ; �1 �� l; �� /�� SUBJECT: Proposal to widen All American Freeway, SR 1007 from Owen Drive, SR 1151 to north of Santa Fe Drive, SR 1437 in Fayetteville. TIP Proj ect U-4414. The proposal to widen All American Freeway will help to improve access to Fort Bragg and Pope Air Force Base. The need for this project has been proposed by the Fayetteville Metropolitan Planning Organization and has been included in the 2006-2012 State Transportation Improvement Program. This location has also been identified as a Strategic Highway Corridor, which means this facility, is critical to the movement of goods and services (i.e. military equipment and persormel). The proposed Fayetteville Outer Loop is shown to intersect with the All American Freeway providing a faster route to Interstate 95. The scheduled improvements far this facility will help to provide improved access to all sections of the city. For more information regarding the proposed project schedule, please contact the NCDOT Program Development Branch or NCDOT Division 6 Office. DDS MAILING ADDRESS: NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BRANCH 1554 MA�� SERVICE CENTER RALEIGH NC 27699-1554 TE� E PHO Ne: 919-733-4705 FAX: 919-733-2417 WEBSITE: WWW. DOT. STATE NC. US LOCATION: TRANSPORTATION BUILDING 1 SOUTH W ILMINGTON STREET RAIEIGH NC = NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION � INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW � ;; � ,�, . f �,� �i: , , . f.� 4' � � ... STATE NtJMBER: 06-E-4220-0121 F02 DATE RECEIVED: 10/17/2005 AGENCY RESPONSE: 11/14/2005 REVIEW CLOSED: 11/17/2005 MS CARRIE ATKINSON CLEARINGHOUSE COORD DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION STATEWIDE PLANNING - MSC #1554 RALEIGH NC REVIEW DISTRIBUTION CC&PS - DEM, NFIP DENR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DEPT OF AGRICULTURE DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION MID CAROLINA COG PROJECT INFORMATION �7�8`9; , j- -,�j� � ��v ��o� � J � �}''s, � �-,}� �� ' _��.r/ APPLICANT: NCDOT TYPE: National Environmental Policy Act ERD: Scoping DESC: NCDOT proposes to widen ALL American Freeway (SR 1007} from Owen Drive (SR 1151} to north of Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437) in Fayetteville. TIP Project No. U-4414. The attached project has been submitted to the N. C. State Clearinghouse for intergovernmental review. Please review and submit your response by the above indicated date to 1301 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-1301. If additional review time is needed, please contact this office at (919)807-2425. AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED: ❑ NO COMMENT �COMMENTS ATTACHED t ° �—� � � � SIGNED BY: � � r e DATE: ? (�� \� � i t 1L ` �� t:' i; a- NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW MS RENEE GLEDHILL-EARLEY CLEARINGHOUSE COORD DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES ARCHIVES-HISTORY BLDG - MSC 4617 RALEIGH NC REVIEW DISTRIBUTION CC&PS - DEM, NFIP DENR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DEPT OF AGRICULTURE DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION MID CAROLINA COG PROJECT INFORMATION APPLICANT: NCDOT STATE NUMBER: 06-E-4220-0121 DATE RECEIVED: 10/17/2005 AGENCY RESPONSE: 11/14/2005 REVIEW CLOSED: 11/17/2005 ��1•�'`�f � J i � �� 60� �� idf�t� o �..�,'aty's i�ffr�, �. � �, c _. \ ,� r �1��J. #�v( �i ! f �1�.:�` TYPE: National Environmental Policy Act k �`�i"� ��- ERD: Scoping DESC: NCDOT proposes to widen ALL American Freeway (SR 1007) to north of Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437} in Fayetteville. F02 �� :r�-�- - ,_ �� ✓��F �` `",� _ � �-� �� t� ' t � � �� ;; �` ` � �� ° �� ;�� " � � � € � �' +e%.,-°�� _ } � �,�; � from Owen Drive (SR 1151�� TIP Project No. U-4414. � �f�� __- --� The attached project has been submitted to the N. C. State Clearinghouse for intergovernmental review. Please review and submit your response by the above indicated date to 1301 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-1301. If additional review time is needed, please contact this office at (919)807-2425. AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED: NO COMMENT ❑ CO NTS ATTACHED � SIGNED BY: � � �� DATE: � OCT . f ,.�.�...�. e., � � North Carolina Departr� � � �Cultural Resources State Historic Pr�servarion Office Petec B. Sandbeck, Administrator Michael P'. Easley, Govemor Lisbeth C. E��ans, Secretary Jeffrey J. Cro�v, Depury Secretary NovembeY 3, 2005 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Thorpe, Ph.D., DirectoY Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch NCDOT Division of Highways FROM: suBJECT: Peter Sandbeck �� -��f&� �4 ,�.�" ��;, � �, ,�� F: `�'��t:i ;��. 4; � � �5 a f�:. r ;� 4 ;6� s 'r • � f-`� t��t., �-:. �'F.� � � c �' _�„'�'1" -�� t , �`.�� ;`'�A ��r,�� ,.� :t�;�- �,er � < � • � :�::- � c: �` �:'� Office of Archices and Hisrory Division of Historical Resources David Brool;, Director Widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) From Owen Drive (SR 1151) to North of Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437), U-4414, Fayetteville, Cumberland County, ER 05-2411 Thank you foY your letter of October 7, 2005, concerning the above project. We have conducted a review of the proposed undextaking and are aware of no historic resources that would be affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the undertaking as proposed. The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic 1'reservafion 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, envixonmental review cooYdinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future communication concerning this project, please cite the above-ieferenced tracking number. cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT Location Mailing Addrese Telephone/Fax ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount Strect, Rateigh NC 4617 biail Senice Center, Italeigh NC 27699-4617 (919)733-4763/�33-8G53 RESTORATION 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4G77 Mail Scrvice C.entcr, Rateigh NC 27699-4G17 (919)733-G547/715-4801 SURVEY & PL.ANNING 515 N. Blount Street, Ralcigh, NC 4(17 Mail Sen•ice Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 (979)733-6545/775-4801 • � �! i �� ' ��, ; u � , � � . i - : _ .,__. r � _ m� � 1� � . �� . � i�� 1� ��' �� i Niichael F. Easley, Governor MEMOiZANDUM T0: Chrys Baggett State Clearinghouse FROM: Melba McGee � Project Review Coordinator � DATE William G. Ross Jr., Secretary ^�1� 1�� €°riS j� , �� ,� �� 06-0121 American Freeway Widening in Cumberland County December 12, 2005 The attached comments were received by this office after the response due date. These camments should be forwarded to the applicant and made a part of our previous comment package. Thank you for the opportunity to respond: Attachment 1�01 Mail S��vice Cenfier, Raleigh, Nor�h Carolina 27699��601 Pf�c�r��: 91�J-733-49�41 FAX; 919-715-3060 \ Infernet: uvww.en►�.stafie.nc.us/ENR/ An Equai Opportunity I Affirmative Action Employer - 50 °10 Recycled 110 °!o Post Consumer Paper NorthCarolina at �� e_ �ICC3ENR North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Michaei F. Easley, Governor MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: William G. Ross Jr., Secretary October 17, 2005 Charles R. Cox; NCDOT Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch • Harry LeGrand, Natural Heritage Program ��- Widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive (SR ll 51) to north of Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437) to a 6-lane facility; Fayetteville, Cumberland County REFERENCE: TIP Project No. U-4414, Federal Aid No. NHF-1007(13), WBS No. 39054 The Natural Heritage Program has no records of significant natural communities or priority natural areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area. However, we have a record of the Federally Endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) roughly 0.5 mile to the northwest of the northern terminus of the project, on Fort Bragg land. This cluster was active in 1999, the last year of data that our Program have for Fort Bragg woodpecker clusters. Another woodpecker site that was inactive in 1999 is located less than %z-mile to the northeast of the northern terminus of the project, also on Fort Bragg land. Though the widening of All American Freeway to several additional lanes is not likely to directly affect the woodpecker, there might be some taking of foraging habitat (if active clusters are present on nearby Fort Bragg), and thus a consuitation with the U.S. Fish and V�ildlife Service (919-856-�520) is recommended. In , addition, just west of the southern terminus of the project is an historic site for the State Threatened and Federal Species of Concern sandhilis milk-vetch (Astragalus michauxii). This site is presumed to ha�e been destroyed. You may wish to check the Natural Heritage Program database website at <www.ncs�arks.net/nh�/search.html> for a listing of rare plants and animals and significant natural communities in the county and on the topographic quad map. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 919-715-8697 if you have questions or need further information. 1601 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601 NOT�ICIT'OIlIla Phone: 919-733-4984 � FAX: 919-715-3060 • Internet: www.enr.state.nc.us ��turall� An Ernial (�nnortunitv • Affinnative Action Emolover - 50 % ReCyCled • 10 % Post Consumef Papef s -;� ;"' � � ��: � . ,.,:. . w ., .. . ... -. � ■ .�,.� � , .�.. I � ` � • � _�._ � •� . • ii. • .. . . ... .i _ _ � r. .. � t .�: � ' � ., .. . a / f�ichael F. Easley, Governor MEMOFZANDUM T0: Chrys Baggett State Clearinghouse FROM: Melba McGee � Environmental Review Coordinator SUBJECT: DATE William G, Ross Jr., Secretary �� v � = `; -_ � _ ;.._, ,,.; ._, ,r` �4�f��J 06-0121 Scoping for the Proposed Widening of All American Freeway from Owen Drive to North of Santa Fe Drive in Fayetteville, Cumberland County November 16, 2005 The Department of Environment and Natural Resources has reviewed the proposed information. The attached comments are for the applicant's information. Thank you for the opportunity to review. Attachments 1601 �l�il Servic� Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699�1601 Ph�n�: 919-733-49�41 �AX: 91 9-71 5-3060 1 Int�rnet: wv�w.enr.sfat�,nc.us/ENR/ An Equai Opportunity / A�rmative Action Employer - 50 % Recycied \ 10 % Post Consumer Paper i - f • . • . / � 1. � N��rt� ��a1i�a Wi1�1if'� �tesou�r�es �om�n�ss1�� --.� NI�M��LANDUM _.. _- F�ir.t'i�irci B. Hamilton� �x�cutive I7ir�ccur ._.._ ___._. . .._.---- TO: M�lba McGee Office of Legislative �u�.d Ii�tergovernmental Affairs, DENR FRaM: Travis Wilson, l�ig�way Proj�ct Coordin�LQr �.,,_ ��%�i/iI y-- �ab�tat Ca�iservation Pro�ram �-�=�•� �/�• '�"""`�' DAT�: l�lovember 14, 2005 SUBJECT; Response to the stari of stu�y notifieatiori frq�t the N. C. �epartment of T�ansportation (NCAQT} regarding fish and wildlife cancerns far tihe proposed widening of A11 America�. Frec�way froin Owen Drive to r�orth of Sa�ta r� I7ri�ve in Faye�Cewille, Cun,�berland County, Narth Carolina, TIF N�. tT-4414, SCH Prpject No. 0�-0121. This nlem�ran�ium responds to a request frorri Gre�ory J. T11oz�e of the IV�DOT for our conc�rns regardin,g impacts on �sh and wild�i�'e resQi�r�es resulting from t11� subje�t project. �3iologists on the staf� oi'the N. �. �ildlife l�.esoure�s Cornmission (NC�l�C} hav� revier�ved �he proposed improvements. Qur Gvia�ments are pravided it� accordai�ce witii eertain pravisions pi the N�tional �nvironmental Poliey [�.c� (42 C1.S.C. 4332(2�(c}) and the Fish and yVildlife Coordination Ac� (48 St�t. 401, as ar�ended; 1� U.S.C. 661-66'�d). At thi� time we do not have an� sp�cif c c�z�Gerns related ta this project. To help faeilitat4 document preparation and the r�v��w process, our �enc,yral i��,f�r�national needs �re outlined below: 1. 17escription oi' fisilery and wildlife tESOUrees withiti ihe proJect area, includin� a listing of fed�rally Qr stat� designated thre�t4netl, endangerec�, or special coneern speci�s. Fpt�r�tial boi�ow arEas �o b� used for proj�ci consh-uation should be included in t(ie inventori�s. 1-� tisting of dESi�na�ed plant species can be developed through eonsult�tiQn with: The Natural Herilage �rograrn N. C_ Division af pa.rks and R�creation 1�15 I1�Sail Servic� C�nter RAleigh, iV. C. 27699-1 � 15 (�l�)733-7795 ��V 1%V'.ilcsparlts.IlLClllll�7 90 ��Jdd 6£868Z56L6 LZ�SZ 900Z/bZlZZ Metno 2 Novemher 14, 2005 axad, NCI71� Plant Co�serva�ion Program P. 4. Box 27�47 Ralc,i�h, N_ C. 27611 (g19�7�3-3b10 '�. Descriptian ofany strearns or wel'la��ds affected by th� project. The need for channelizing or reloeating portions of streams erossed and the �xtent of such activities. 3, �over type maps showing wetlanc� acreages impact�c� by �h� project. Wetland acreages should include al1 �roj�ct�relat�d �reas th�t may undergo hydrolo�ic chan�e as a r�sult a�' di�ehing, c,t�her dsaina�;e, or filling for �roj�et co�siruction. We�land identification m�.y be accomplish�t� lhruugh coordinati�iz witl� th� �(T. S. Army �orps of Er�gir�eers (COE). If the CGE is not eonsulted, the p�rso� delinea�ir�g wetlands should be ic�entiti�d and erit�ria lisi�d. 4. Caver type maps showing acreages of upland wild�ife habitat impac�ed by the proposed project, Potential borrovv sit�s s�ould b� inclt�ded. 5. Tlie ext�nt �o wl�ich th� prpject will result iai loss, degrad�tion, or fz�a�entat�on of wildlife habitat (wetlands or uplands). �. Miliga�iion �or �vaiding, ��in�zni;�ii�g or compensating for direot ai�d indireet degradation in habitat quality as well as q�antitative losses. 7. A cun�ula�tive impa4t �sses5ment se�tio�� which a�►alyzes the environrr�ental ��'fects af highway construction and quantifies the contributio� afthis individual project to environmental d��radation. $. tk disc�ussion of th� p�ab�ble irnpacls pn n�iural resources whioh will result F�om second�ry developmeiit facilitated by the improved road aecess. 9. �f cc�nstru.ctioi� of tl�is facility is ta be coordinAted with other state, municipat, oi privaie develo�mEnt projECts, a descri�tion Qf these projeG�s shouId be includ�d in the enviranmental dacum�rzt, �nd �il �roject spansart� sl�QUld be iden�i�ed. Tha�lc you fo� the opporcuni�y Co �r�vide input in th� early planning stages %r this prQj�ct. I� wre can furth�r �s$ist yo�u office, please contact me at (919) 52$-9$86. L0 3Jt1d 6�868Z96�6 LZ�9T 5eez�tri�zi ��+�� y `�`r State of North Carolina Reviewing O�ce: �%"��1-��•.- � G� NCDENR Department of Environment and Natural Resources Project Number: �, � ' �' �� f Due Date: � � / � 7 / � � INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECTCOMMENTS After review of this project it has been determined that the DENR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law. Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional O�ce indicated on the reverse of this form. All applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Regional Office. PERMITS SPECIAI APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS Normal Process Tirrie (Statutory Tme Limit) ❑ Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of construction 30 days facilities, sewer system extensions & sewer systems contracts. On-site inspection. Post-application technical conference usual. (90 days) not discharging into state surface waters. ❑ NPDES-permit to discharge into surface water a�d/or Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection preapplication permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities conference usual. Additionaily, obtain permit to mnstruct wastewater treatment 90 -120 days discharging into state surface waters. . facility-granted after NPDES. Reply time, 30 days aker receipt of pians or issue (N/A} of NPDES permit-whichever is Iater. ❑ Water Use Permit Preapplication technical conference usually necessary 30 days (N/A) � Well Construction Permit Complete application must be received and permit issued prior to the 7 days instaliation of a we1L (15 days). � Dredge and Fill Permit Application copy must be served on each adjacent riparian property owner. 55 days , On-site inspection, Preappli�ation conference usual. FiHing may require Easement (90 days) - - to Fill from N.C. Department of Administration and Federal Dredge and FiII Permit. � Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement facilities and/or Emission Sources as per 15 A NCAC N/A 60 days (2Q.0100, 2Q.0300, 2H.0600} Any open burning associated with subject proposai must be in compiiance with 75 A NCAC 2D.1900 Demolition or re�ovations of structures containing asbestos material must be in compliance with 15 A NCAC 2D.1110 (a) (1) which requires notification N/A 60 days and removal prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos (90 days} Control Group 919-733-0820. � Complex Source Permit required under 15 A NCAC 2D.0800 � The Sedimentation Poliution Control Act of 1473 must be properly addressed For any land distur6ing activiry. An erosion & sedimentation. 20 days mntrol pian wili be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional O�ce (land Quality Section) at least 30 (30 days) days before beginning activity. A fee of $SO for the first acre or any part of an acre. � The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referenced Local Ordina�ce. 30 days Sedimentation and erosion control must 6e addressed in accordance with NCDOTs approved program. Particular attentio� should be given to design and installation of appropriate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well as stable stormwater conveyances and outlets. ❑ Mining Permit On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with DENR. Bond amount varies with type mine and number of acres of affected land. Any are mined greater than 30 days one acre must be permitted. The appropriate bond must be received before (60 days) the permit can be issued. � North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources if permit exceeds 4 days 1 day ,`(N/A) � Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit-22 counties On-site inspection by N.C. Division of Forest Resources required "if more than five 1 day in coaztal N.C.with organic soiis. acres ofground dearing activities are involved. Inspections shouid be requested (N/A) at least ten days before actual burn is planned." ❑ Oil Refining Facilities N/A 90 - N�Adays ( PERMITS �� Dam Safery Permit ❑I Permit to drill expioratory oil or gas well � � Geophysical Exploration Permit ❑ � State lakes Construction Permit ❑ � 407 Water Quality Certification ❑� CAMA Permit for MAIOR development ❑� CAMA Permit for MINOR development SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMEN75 If permit required, appiication 60 days beFore begin construction. Appiicant must hire N.C.qualified engineer to: prepare plans, inspect construction,certify construction is according to DENR approved plans. May aiso require permit under mosquito control program, and a 404 permit from Corps oFEngineers. An inspection of site is �ecessary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of $200.00 must accompany the appiication. An additional processing fee based on a percentage or the total project cost will be required upon completion. File surety bond of $5,000 with DENR running to State of N.C, conditional that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon abandonment, be piugged according to DENR rules and regulations. Application filed with DENR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit. Application by letter. No standard application form. Application fees based on structure size is charged. Must include descriptions & drawings of structure & proof of ownership of riparian property. N/A 5250.00 fee must accompany application 550.00 fee must accompany appiication � Severai geodetic monuments are Iocated in or near the project area. If any monument �eeds to be moved or destroyed, piease notify: N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27b87 Raleigh, N.C. 27671 ❑ Abandonment of any wells, if required must be in accordance with Title 15A, Subchapter 2C.0100. Normai �rocess Time ,'Statutory Time Limiri ❑ Notification of the proper regional o�ce i� requested if "orphan" underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during any excavation operation. Q Compliance with.t 5A NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal Stormwater Rules) is required, # I Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority) 30 days (60 days} 10 days (N/A) 10 days (N/A) 15- (N/A) 55 days (130 days) 60 days (7 30 days) 2Z days (25 days} 45 days (N/A) REGIONAC OFFICES �uestions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regionai Office marked below. ❑ Asheville Regional Office 59 Woodfin Place Asheville, N.C.28801 (828) 251-6208 O Fayettevitle Regional Of�ce 225 Green Street, Suite 714 Fayetteville, N.C.28301 (910) 486-1541 ❑ Mooresville Regional Office 919 North Main Street Mooresville, N.C. 2811 S (704) 663-1699 ❑ Wilmington Regional Office 127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, N.C.28405 (910) 395-3900 ❑ Raleigh Regional Office ❑ Winston-Salem Regional Office 3800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687 585 Waughtown Street Raleigh, N.C.27611 Winston-Salem, N.C.27107 (919) 571-4700 (336) 771-4600 ❑ Washington Regional Office 943 Washington Square Mall Washington, N.C. 27889 (252) 946-6481 PERMITS � � Dam Safety Permit � I Permit to drill exploratory oiI or gas well �) Geophysical Expioration Permit [' � State Lakes Construdion Permit ❑ I 401 Water Qualiry Certification ❑� CAMA Permit for MAIOR development ❑' CAMA Permit for MINOR deveiopment SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEOURES or REQUIREMENTS if permit required, application 60 days before begin construction. Applicant must hire N.C. qualified e�gineer to: prepare plans, inspect construction,certify construction is according to DENR approved plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program, and a 404 permit from Corps of Engineers. An inspection of site is necessary to verify Hazard Qassification. A minimum fee of $200.00 must accompany the application. An additional processing fee based on a percentage or the total project cost wili be required upon mmpletion. File surety bond of 55,000 with DENR running to State of N.C. conditionai that any well opened by drill operator shali, upon abandonment, be plugged according to DENR rules and regulations. Application filed with DENR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit. Application by letter. No standard application form. APplication fees based on structure size is charged. Must include descriptions & drawings of structure & proof of ownership oFriparian property. N/A $250.00 fee must accompany application SS0.00 fee must accompany application ❑ I Severai geodetic monuments are Iocated in or near the project area. If any monument needs to be moved or destroyed, please notify: N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687 Raleigh, N.C. 27611 ----�-----_ Normal Process Time Statutory Time Limit) 30 days (60 days) 10 days (N/A) 7 0 days (N/A) ❑ Abandonment of any welis, if required must be in accordance with Title 15A, Su6chapter ZC,0100. ❑ Notification of the proper regional o�ce is requested if "orphan" underground storage tanks (USTS) are dismvered during any excavation operation. O Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal5tormwater Ruies} is required. �F � Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, bei�g certain to cite comment authority) 15 - 20 daXs (N/A) 55 days (130 days) 60 days (130 days) 2� days (25 days} 45 days (N/A) REGIONAL OFFICES Questions regarding these permits should be addressed ta the Regional Office marked below. ❑ Asheville Regionai Office 59 Woodfin Place Asheville, N.C.28801 (828) 251-6208 ❑ Mooresville Regional Office 919 North Main Street Mooresville, N.C. 28115 (704) 663-1699 ❑ Wilmington Regional Office 127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, N.C.28405 (910) 395-3900 O Fayetteville Regional Of�ce ❑ Raleigh Regional Office ❑ Winston-Salem Regionai Office 225 Green Street, Suite 714 3800 Barrett Drive, P.O. Box 27687 Fayetteville, N.C.28301 585 Waughtown Street Raleigh, N.C. 27611 Winston-Salem, N.C. 27107 (910) 486-1541 (919) 571-4700 (336) 771-4600 ❑ Washington Regional Office 943 Washington Square Mall Washington, N.C. 27889 (252) 94b-6481 . j ,DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND - NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH � . . Inter-Agency Project Review Response Project Name 1vc DoT Comments provided by: ❑ Regional Program Person � ❑ rt'`�,v, �,� F f� ��` Project Number 06-0121 County Cumberland Type of Praject Proiect to widenin� of All American Freewav to a 6- lane Regional Supervisor for Public Water Supply Section Central Office program person Name Debra Benoy-Fayettevilte RO Date 11/14/05 Telephone number: Program within Division of Environmentai Health: ❑ Public Water Supply ❑ Other, Name of Program: Response (check ali applicable): ■ ■ ■ � ■ No objection to project as proposed No comment � Insufficient information to complete review Comments attached See comments below �� -r'�—c/�v '----�' Keturn to: Public Water Supply Section Environmental Review Coordinator for the Division of Environmenta! Health .��4 �,� U 4L�;s_ f,� �,' , � �� ,., �„�-�,�, . �� DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURALRESOURCES DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH Inter-Agency Project Review Response Project Number 06-0121 County Cumberiand Project Name NC DoT Type of Project Proiect to widenin� of All American Freewav to a 6- lane ❑ 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 .0300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919) 733-2321. ❑ This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must compiy with state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the applicant should contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919) 733-2321. ❑ If this project is constructed as proposed, we wili recommend closure of feet of adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shelifish sanitation program, the applicant should contact the Shelifish Sanitation Section at (252) 726-6827. ❑ The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding problem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the applicant should contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at (919) 733-6407. ❑ The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated structures, a extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the migration of the rodents to adjacent areas. For information concerning rodent control, contact the locai health department ar the Public Health Pest Management Section at (919) 733-6407. ❑ The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A. 1900 et. sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods, contact the On-Site Wastewater Section at (919) 733-2895. ❑ The applicant shouid be advised to contact the local health department regarding the �; sanitary facilities required for this project. �` If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line � relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1634 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1634, (919) 733-2321. � For Regional and Central Office comments, see the reverse side of this form. Reviewer Section/Branch Date S:\PwsWngela W�Clearinghouse�Review Response Pgs 1 and 2 for input.doc � DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND Project Number NATURAL RESOURCES os-o�2� DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH County Cumberland Inter-Agency Project Review Response Project Name i�iC Do'r Type of Project Proiect to widenint of All American Freewav to a 6- lane ❑ 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 .0300et. seq.). For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, (919} 733-2321. ❑ This project wiil 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, (919) 733-2321. ❑ if this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of feet of adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish sanitation program, the applicant shouid contact the Shelifish Sanitation Section at (252) 726-6827. ❑ The soil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding problem. For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the applicant should contact the Pubiic Health Pest Management Section at (919) 733-6407. ❑ The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated structures, a extensive rodent control program may be necessary in order to prevent the migration of the rodents to adjacent areas. For information concerning rodent control, contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management Section at (919) 733-6407. ❑ The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding their requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 15A NCAC 18A. 1900 et. sep.). For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods, contact the On-Site Wastewater Section at (919) 733-2895. ❑ The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding the sanitary facilities required for this project. If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water Supply Section, Technical Services Branch, 1634 Mai► Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1634, (919) 733-2321. � For Regional and Central Office comments, see the reverse side of this farm. Reviewer Section/Branch Date S:\Pws�Angela W\Clearinghouse\Review Response Pgs 1 and 2 for input.doc �aF V�JE{TFAP �O � �? r > --1 � � Michaei F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director Division of Water Quality November 9, 2005 MEMORANDUM To: Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs From: Brian L. Wrenn, NCDWQ, Transportation Pernutting Unit ?�4� Subject: Request for Comments for the Proposed Widening of SR 1007 (All American Freeway) from SR 1151 (Owens Dr.) to 0.2 miles North of SR 1437 (Santa Fe Dr.) in Cumberland County, Federal Aid No. NI-�-1007(13), WBS Element 39054, TIP Projects U-4414, State Clearinghouse No. 06-0121. This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is respansible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including wetlands. After a preliminary review, DWQ has identified the following named streams located within the project study area: Stream Name River Basin Beaver Creek Ca e Fear Buckhead Creek Cape Fear DWQ has the following comments: Project Specific Comments: Stream Classification Stream Index Number C 18-31-24-5 C 18-31-24-6 1. Beaver Creek and Buckhead Creek are Class C waters of the State. Preliminary review using mapping tools indicates that there are riverine wetland systems associated with both streams. Widening alternatives should be developed that avoid and minimize impacts to these streams and the associated riverine wetlands as much as possible. General Comments: 1. DOT is respectfully reminded that they will need to demonstrate the avoidance and minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practicaL 2. The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specificaliy address the proposed methods for storm water management. In accordance with the Environmental Management Cominission's Rules { 15A NCAC 2H.0506(b)(6) }, mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 1501inear feet to any single perennial stream and for impacts of greater than one acre to wetlands. In the event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions and values. In accardance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules { 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h)(3) }, the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as stream mitigation. NoithCarolina Transportation Permitting Unit �rrturall� 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 Phone: 919-733-1786 ( FAX 919-733•6893 / Internet: http�/lh2o enr state nauslncwetlands An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper November 9, 2005 Page 2 4. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events. 5. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands. 6. Bare soil should be stabilized through vegetation or other means as quickly as feasible to prevent sedimentation of water resources. 7. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area. Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water. 8. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This equipment should be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials. Thank you for requesting our input at this time. DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Brian Wrenn 919-733-5715. pc: Richard Spencer, Artny Corps of Engineers Wilmington Regulatory Field Office Chris Militscher, US EPA Travis Wilson, NC WRC Gary Jordan, US FWS Ken Averitte, Fayetteville Regional Office, DWQ File Copy November 9, 2005 Page 2 4. Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented prior to any ground disturbing activities. Structures should be maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events. 5. Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands. 6. Bare soil should be stabilized through vegetation or other means as quickly as feasible to prevent sedimentation of water resources. 7. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area. Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water. 8. Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to rninimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams. This eguipment should be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other to�c materials. Thank you for requesting our input at this time. DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Brian Wrenn 919-733-5715. pc: Richard Spencer, Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington Regulatory Field Office Chris Militscher, US EPA Travis Wilson, NC WRC Gary Jardan, US FWS Ken Averitte, Fayetteville Regional Off'ice, DWQ File Copy NCDOT's Relocation/Displacement Policies NCDOT's policy regarding relocations involves providing assistance to those affected by transportation improvements per the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Properties Acquisition Policies Act. All alternatives under evaluation wili result in the displacement of homes and/or businesses. Some residents in the DCI Study Area appear to be low-income. If so, and if they are displaced, the Last Resort Housing Program established by the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (PL 91-646) may be used. The Division of Highways offers a Relocation Assistance Program to help minimize the effects of displacement on families and businesses. The occupants of the affected residences or businesses may qualify for aid under one or more of the NCDOT relocation programs. It is the policy of the NCDOT to ensure that comparable replacement housing wiil be available prior to construction of state and federally assisted projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina Board of Transportation has the following three programs to minimize the inconvenience of relocation: Relocation Assistance Relocation Moving Payments Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement The Relocation Assistance Program provides experienced NCDOT staff to assist displacees with information such as availability and prices of homes, apartments, or businesses for sale or rent and financing or other housing programs. The Relocation Moving Payments Program pravides for payment of actual moving expenses encountered in relocation. Where displacement will force an owner or tenant to purchase or rent property of higher cost or to lose a favorable financing arrangement (in cases of ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement Program will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and qualify and up to $5,250 to tenants who are eligible and qualify. The relocation program for the proposed action wiil be conducted in accordance with the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646), and the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS-133-5 through 133-18). The program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in relocating to a replacement site in which to live or do business. At least one relocation officer is assigned to each highway project for this purpose. The relocation officer will determine the needs of displaced families, individuals, businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations for relocation advisory services without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The NCDOT will schedule its work to allow ample time prior to displacement for negotiations and possession of replacement housing that meets decent, safe, and sanitary standards. The displacees are given at least a 90-day written notice after NCDOT purchases the property. Relocation of displaced persons will be offered in areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and commercial facilities. Rent and sale prices of replacement property will be within iinancial means of the families and individuals displaced, and will be reasonably accessible to their places of employment. The relocation officer will also assist owners of displaced businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations in searching for and moving to replacement properly. All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced will receive an expianation regarding all a�ailable options, such as (1) purchase of replacement housing, (2) rental of replacement housing, either private or public, or (3) moving existing Owner-occupant housing to another site (if possible). The relocation officer will also supply information concerning other state or federal programs offering assistance to displaced persons and will provide other advisory services as needed in order to minimize hardships to displaced persons in adjusting to a new location. The Moving Expense Payments Program is designed to compensate the displacee for the costs of moving personal property from homes, businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations acquired for a highway project. Under the Replacement Program for Owners, NCDOT will participate in reasonable incidental purchase payments for replacement dwellings such as attorney's fees, surveys, appraisals, and other closing costs and, if applicable, make a payment for any increased interest expenses for replacement dwellings. Reimbursement to owner-occupants for replacement housing payments, increased interest payments, and incidental purchase expenses may not exceed $22,500 (combined total), except under the Last Resort Housing provision. A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to exceed $5,250, to rent a replacement dwelling or to make a down payment, including incidental expenses, on the purchase of a replacement dwelling. The down payment is based upon what the state determines is required when the rent supplement exceeds $5,250. It is the policy of the state that no person will be displaced by the NCDOT's state or federally assisted construction projects unless and until comparable replacement housing has been offered or provided for each displacee within a reasonable period of time before displacement. No relocation payment received will be considered as income for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 or for the purposes of determining eligibility or the extent of eligibility of any person for assistance under the Social Security Act or any other federal law. Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement housing is not available, or when it is unavailable within the displacee's financial means, and the repiacement payment exceeds the federal/state legal limitation. The purpose of the program is to allow broad latitudes in methods of implementation by the state so that decent, safe, and sanitary replacement housing can be provided. Last Resort Housing may be used if necessary. EIS �ELOCATION REPORT North Carolina Department of Transportation RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROORAM XE.I.S. ❑ CORRIDOR ❑ DESIGN WBS E�EMErvT: 39054.1.1 Courvn Cumberland Aiternate N/A of Alternates T.I.P. No.: U-4414 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Widening of All American Freeway (SR 1007) from Owen Drive (SR 1007) to _ north of Santa Fe Drive (SR 1437) in Fayetteville. ESTIMATED DISPLACEES � INCOME LEVEL Type of Displacees Owners Tenants Total Minorities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP Residential 2 0 2 N/A 0 0 0 0 2 BUSifI@SS@S 1 O 1 N/A VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLING AVAILABLE Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale Fvr Rent Non-Profit 0 0 0 0 a2oM 0 $ 0-150 p azon+ Q $ 0-150 p ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS 20-40M p 150-250 � 20-40M g 150-250 p Yes No Explain all "YES" answers. 40-70M 250-400 p 44-70M 20 2�� 0 X 1. Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100M p 400-600 p 70-100M 47 400-&00 1 X 2. Will schools or churches be affected by 10o ua 2 soo uP p 10o uP 501 soo uP 54 displacement? TOTAL 2 0 574 55 X 3. Will business services still be available after project? X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so, indicate size, type, estimated number of employees, minorities, etc. X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage? 6. Source for available housing (list). X 7. Will additional housing programs be needed? X 8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered? X 9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc. families? X 10. Will public housing be needed for project? X 11. Is public housing available? X 12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing housing available during relocation period? X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within financial means? X 14. Are suitable business sites available (list source). 15. Number months estimated to complete RELOCATION? 12-24 months -..... r�`/`'`' : "".. (! 2-lf ` i Steven C. Imas Date Riaht of Wav Aaent REMARKS iRASROnd bY NU�11b91') Please see attached addendum for a detailed response to the 'Yes" answers. We anticipate that the homes considered in the study meet DSS standards, however they have not been inspected at this time for this report. Relocation Coordinator 9/29/11 Date EIS Relocatian Report: FA Project Number: W BS No.: NCDOT TIP No.: Widening of All American Freeway NHF-1007 (13) 39054.1.1 U-4414 This report is a study af the relocation impact of the propased widening of the All American Freeway (SR 1007), from Owen Drive to just north of Santa Fe Drive (SR-1437), based on the preliminary engineering and design study. The proposed project corridor stretches approximately 8 miles and is located in the city of Fayetteville, Cumberland County. The expansion of SR 1007 will convert the 4 lane controlled access highway into 6 lanes and will include modifications to existing access ramps. Below please find detailed explanations to the questions with "yes" answers on the cover of the EIS Relocation Report. 3. Will business services still be available after project? Yes, only one business is being impacted and there are various replacement sites available within close proximity to the project area. 4. Will any businesses be displaced? If so, indicate size, type, estimated number of employees, minorities, etc. Yes, the current plans indicate impact to a 3,433 square foot business structure, which appears to be a veterinary clinic that employs approximate(y 10 to 15 individuals. No minorities have been identified at this time. 6. Source for available housing (list) The Real Estate Book.com , Realtor.com, HomesAndLand.com, RelocatianGuide.biz, local newspapers- such as the Fayetteville Observer, for sale by owner signs, local realtors such as Ed Blanchard, Jr., 910-672-0072, homes�TheResidentialGroup.com 8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered? Yes, Last Resort Housing should be considered if necessary, and based on Federal requirements. 11. (s Public Housing available? Public Housing is available on an as needed basis. According to Dawn Driggers, the Executive Director, the waiting list is near 40d with anly a handful of available units. information for public housing can be found at the Fayetteville Metro Housing Authority located at: 1000 Ramsey Street, Fayetteviile, NC 28301 910-483-3648; ddriggers�embarqmail.com Website: fayettevillemetrohousingauthority.org, 12. ls it felt there will be adequate DSS housing available during relocation period? Yes, there is ample DSS housing available. Piease see item 6 for list of availab[e housing information resources. 14. Are suitable business sites available (list source): Craig's list, locai newspapers such as the Fayetteville Observer Loopnet.com.