20141132 All Versions_Other Documents_20130225

QUALITATIVE
INDIRECT AND
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
ASSESSMENT
TIP Project R -2501
Richmond County, North Carolina
PREPARED FOR:
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Office of Human Environment
PREPARED BY:
HNTB North Carolina, PC
343 East Six Forks Road
Suite 200
Raleigh, NC 27609
October 3, 2005

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................... ............................... 1
II.
PROJECT DOCUMENTATION AND BACKGROUND .... ............................... 2
III.
STUDY AREA BOUNDARIES ............................................... ............................... 4
IDENTIFICATION OF GROWTH IMPACT STUDY AREA .................... ...............................
4
IDENTIFICATION OF DEMOGRAPHIC AREA ................................... ...............................
4
TIMEFRAME FOR ANALYSIS ......................................................... ...............................
5
IV.
STUDY AREA DIRECTION AND GOALS .......................... ............................... 5
REGIONAL INFLUENCES ............................................................... ...............................
5
GROWTHTRENDS ........................................................................ ...............................
6
TRANSPORTATION PLANS ............................................................ ...............................
9
EXISTING LAND USE .................................................................... ...............................
9
LAND USE PLANS AND ZONING ................................................. ...............................
10
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS WATER RESOURCES) ............ ...............................
12
Water ,Supply Watersheds ................................................... ...............................
13
303(4) Waters ...................................................................... ...............................
15
Wetlands.............................................................................. ...............................
15
V.
INVENTORY OF NOTABLE FEATURES ......................... ...............................
15
INVENTORY OF NOTABLE FEATURES ......................................... ...............................
15
VI.
ACTIVITIES THAT CAUSE EFFECTS ............................. ...............................
16
PREVIOUS REPORT CONCLUSIONS .............................................. ...............................
16
RECENT DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY ............................................. ...............................
17
VII.
POTENTIAL INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS FOR ANALYSIS
................................................................................................... ...............................
18
VIII.
INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ..................... ...............................
20
POTENTIAL FOR LAND USE CHANGE ......................................... ...............................
20
IX.
ANALYSIS RESULTS ........................................................... ...............................
21
INDIRECT EFFECTS ..................................................................... ...............................
21
CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ............................................................... ...............................
22
X.
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................... ...............................
24
APPENDIX.......................................................................................
...............................
25

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Office of Human Environment
Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects (ICE)
TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
L EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The North Carolina Department of Transportation ( NCDOT) proposes to widen
approximately 4 miles of US 1 from north of SR 1606 (Fox Road) to SR 1001 (Marston
Road). The project also includes the constriction of a 15 -mile, four -lane divided, full
access controlled facility bypassing the City of Rockingham and the City of Hamlet from
near Osborne Road to existing US 1 in the vicinity of Fox Road. The project is primarily
located in unincorporated Richmond County with small portions of the project also
located in the City of Hamlet. The purpose of the project is to improve capacity, increase
safety along the project corridor, and reduce congestion in Rockingham by diverting
vehicular traffic away from local streets. TIP Project R -2501 is included in the 2006-
2012 NCDOT Draft Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), with constriction
scheduled to begin in 2008.
Existing Conditions
Richmond County, Rockingham, and the Demographic Area are experiencing
minimal population growth, while Hamlet and Dobbins Heights are losing population.
All of Marks Creek west of NC 177 within the Growth Impact Study Area (GISA) of
TIP Project R -2501 is listed as a 303(d) impaired water due to impaired biological
integrity. The GISA also includes portions of three water supply watersheds (Falling
Creek, Marks Creek, and Hitchcock Creek) that include much of the area northeast of
County Home Road. These water supply watersheds are protected by the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR) and the
water supply protection ordinances of Richmond County and the City of
Rockingham.
The GISA encompasses portions of the Sandhills and Pee Dee Game Lands (in the
eastern and western portions of the GISA, respectively) which are protected by the
state. These areas preserve the natural habitat while providing recreational
opportunities for outdoor enthusiasts.
The majority of TIP Project R -2501 falls within Richmond County, which has
established zoning and other ordinances that manage growth and development
patterns. The GISA also encompasses portions of the Cities of Rockingham and
Hamlet, as well as the Town of Dobbins Heights, all of which have land planning
strategies in place.
The GISA of TIP project R -2309 encompasses a relatively rural area, with denser
pockets of development centered on the Cities of Rockingham and Hamlet, and the
Town of Dobbins Heights. Most land within the GISA is utilized for residential or
agricultural purposes (including timber). Recent residential development has been

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
October 3, 2005
primarily limited to the northeastern portion of the GISA along McDonald Church
Road and a recently approved subdivision along Battley Dairy Road. Commercial
development is occurring along the existing US 74 corridor in Rockingham and, to a
lesser extent, Hamlet. A limited amount of in -fill industrial development in some of
the industrial parks scattered throughout the GISA.
US 1 is a national roadway with the primary purpose of transporting people and
goods through the GISA of TIP Project R -2501 to the major regional termini of
Columbia, South Carolina to the south and Raleigh, North Carolina to the north. US
1 also provides a local link between the City of Rockingham and the Town of
Southern Pines.
Potential Indirect and Cumulative Impacts
The lack of a stable economic base, stagnant population growth, environmental
features (such as the water supply watersheds, wetlands, and floodplains), limited
availability of public utilities, municipal regulations (such as water supply watershed
protection ordinances), and the presence of protected lands (including the Sandhills
Game Lands and Pee Dee River Game Lands) could potentially limit future growth
potential within the Growth Impact Study Area (GISA).
Commercial development related to TIP Project R -2501 would likely cluster around
proposed interchanges, particularly the US 1/US 74 Bypass interchange. Industrial
development would likely occur in one of the existing local business parks or in close
proximity to one of the interchanges of the proposed Bypass. Residential
development resulting from the project would likely be limited to existing
subdivisions, mobile home parks, or rural areas.
Potential cumulative impacts include spillover growth from neighboring communities
(Moore County and the towns of Southern Pines and Pinehurst to the northeast) and
increased regional traffic flow due to the creation of I- 73/74. According to local
officials, they have seen a recent increase in development interest from commercial
and industrial companies looking to capitalize on the close proximity to two future
interstate corridors (I -73 and I -74).
A biological conclusion of "no effect' was rendered for all state or federally protected
species with the exception of the red - cockaded woodpecker. The red - cockaded
woodpecker received a biological conclusion of "not likely to adversely affect'. An
additional investigation for the red - cockaded woodpecker may be required for a pine
tree observed in an area northeast of the intersection of US 1 and Fox Road.
II. PROJECT DOCUMENTATION AND BACKGROUND
Currently, US 1 has numerous typical sections along the corridor through downtown
Rockingham, including a two -lane shouldered section, a pair of one -way sections with
curb and gutters and parallel parking, a three -lane facility with a center lane utilized for
left -hand turning movements, and a four -lane, non - divided curb and gutter section. The
existing facility has several signalized intersections and various turning movements as the
road winds its way through the downtown area.

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JK October 3, 2005
TIP Project R -2501 proposes to constrict a bypass of Rockingham on new location and
widen an existing section of US 1 from Fox Road to Marston Road (see Figure 1). The
southern terminus of the bypass portion of the project is located near the intersection of
existing US 1 and Osborne Road. From this point, the project would extend eastward on
new location, roughly paralleling Loch Haven Road and Battley Dairy Road. Shortly
after crossing Airport Road, the project turns to the northeast, bypassing the cities of
Rockingham and Hamlet to the south and north, respectively. The project would then
continue heading in an easterly direction, passing just south of the intersection of Wire
Grass Road and County Home Road, before turning back to the northeast and tying into
existing US 1 near the intersection of Fox Road. The bypass portion of the project would
be designed as a four -lane, median divided, fully- controlled facility, and other than at the
two termini, would include three interchanges (US PUS 74 Bypass, US 1 /Airport Road,
and US PUS 74). The typical section for the bypass portion would include 24 feet of
pavement, 4 -foot paved shoulder sections, and a 70 -foot median, with the intention of
narrowing the median width to 46 feet if right -of -way or environmental constraints exist.
There are no frontage roads proposed as part of TIP Project R -2501.
The widening portion of
TIP Project R -2501,
extending from Fox Road
to Marston Road, would
upgrade existing US 1
from a two -lane facility to
either a four -lane, median
divided facility or a five-
lane section with a center
turn lane. Right -of -way
widths will vary between
100 to 148 feet depending
upon the chosen typical
section.
Osborne Road, in the vicinity of the existing US 1/US 1
Bypass Interchange.
The majority of this 19-
mile project corridor is located within unincorporated portions of Richmond County,
North Carolina. Short segments of this project are also located within the City of Hamlet
and the extra territorial jurisdiction (ETJ) of both Hamlet and Rockingham. The purpose
of the project is to improve capacity and safety along this portion of the US 1 corridor.
TIP Project R -2501 is included in the 2006 -2012 NCDOT Draft Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). Right -of -way acquisition for the project is scheduled to
begin in 2006, with constriction scheduled to begin in 2009.

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
III. STUDY AREA BOUNDARIES (STEP 1)
Identification of Growth Impact Study Area
The North Carolina DOT's and North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR) (guidance for Assessing Indirect and Cumulative Impacts of
Transportation Projects in North Carolina indicates that the development effects of a
new or improved roadway facility are most often found up to one mile around an
interchange, and up to two to five miles along major feeder roadways to the interchange.
Based upon these assumptions, and the fact that TIP Project R -2501 includes the
widening of an existing facility and the constriction of a fully controlled bypass on new
location, it was determined that the potential for growth impact as a result of TIP Project
R -2501 will most likely occur within a two -mile radius of the project alignment (see
Figure 1). After performing a field survey of local conditions, interviewing local
officials, and using professional judgment, this area was deemed sufficient to encompass
the ma. ority of potential indirect and cumulative effects resulting from TIP Project R-
2501.
This two -mile radius, referred to as the Growth Impact Study Area (GISA), is the area
within which the project has the potential to induce land use changes. Although the
GISA was the focus of data collection and analysis activities for this study, it is not
necessarily the extent to which the growth impact is expected to occur. More specific
areas within the GISA that are likely to experience land use changes as a result of the
roadway improvements will be identified later in this report.
Identification of Demographic Area
TIP Project R -2501 is located in Richmond County, as well as the corporate limits of the
City of Hamlet in the Sandhills region of North Carolina. In order to analyze statistical
trends within the GISA, a Demographic Area was defined for the project (see Figure 2).
The Demographic Area includes most Census Block Groups and Census Tracts that fall
within or partially within the GISA of TIP Project R -2501. However, two Block Groups
were omitted (Census Tract 9711, Block Group 3 and Census Tract 106, Block Group 4)
because only small portions of their extents were within the GISA and could have skewed
demographic data. The following US Census Bureau Block Groups from the 2000
Census are included in the Demographic Area for TIP Project R -2501:
• Census Tract 9701, Block Group 2
• Census Tract 9704, Block Groups 1 & 4
• Census Tract 9707, Block Groups 1 -2
• Census Tract 9708, Block Groups 2 -5
• Census Tract 9711, Block Groups 1 -2
• Census Tract 9706
• Census Tract 9709
• Census Tract 9710

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
This Demographic Area is generally bounded by the following: Hitchcock Creek, Rocky
Branch, Sandhill Road, Green Lake Road, Sand Hills Management Road, Millstone
Road, McDonald Church Road, and the Richmond /Moore County line to the north; the
Richmond /Scotland County line to the east; US 74, NC 381, the CSX Railroad, Marks
Creek, NC 177, and the North Carolina/South Carolina State line to the south; and the
Richmond /Anson County line (Pee Dee River) to the west.
Timeframe for Analysis
According to the NCDOT "Guidance for Assessing Indirect and Cumulative Impacts of
Transportation Projects in North Carolina ", the time frame should be short enough in
duration to anticipate reasonably foreseeable events, but should be long enough in
duration to capture the development and relocation effects that may only transpire over
the course of several business cycles. Most indirect/cumulative effects studies set a time
horizon equal to the planning design life of a project (from conception to completion),
usually 20 to 25 years. This is also the time horizon used in most MPO and county -level
planning forecasts.
In evaluating the timeframe for which impacts may occur as a result of highway
improvements, Mark Hansen and Robert Cervero found that models which measure
impacts within 4 to 5 years of road improvements best capture variation in travel demand.
Cervero goes on to note that "a time lag of more than five years from project
announcement to new development is not uncommon. The time between when capacity
is actually added and when induced development occurs is likely shorter, on the order of
2 to 3 years ".
IV. STUDY AREA DIRECTION AND GOALS (STEP 2)
Regional Influences
Richmond County is located in the Sandhills region of south- central North Carolina.
This region is relatively rural with the largest urban centers being Rockingham and
Fayetteville, located approximately 50 miles to the east in Cumberland County. The
regional road network is composed of several major US highways (including US 1, US
74, and US 220) and a limited network of state and local roads. The region is home to
several key military facilities including Camp Mackall, Fort Bragg, and Pope Air Force
base. In the past, the region has relied upon the textile industry and the North Carolina
Motor Speedway to fuel its economy. However, the closing of many textile mills and the
loss of the featured NASCAR race at Rockingham has created economic hardship for the
area. The area also relies upon tourism activities generated by the world -class golf
courses in and around the Village of Pinehurst and other outdoor recreational activities.

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
Growth Trends
Table I indicates population growth trends for the Demographic Area, the City of
Rockingham, the City of Hamlet, the Town of Dobbins Heights, Richmond County, and
the State of North Carolina. Population in several of these communities experienced
stagnant growth between 1990 and 2000, including the City of Rockingham (2.9 %),
Richmond County (4.6 %), and the Demographic Area (7.2 %). Furthermore, two local
communities, the City of Hamlet and the Town of Dobbins Heights, experienced negative
population growth during the same time period ( -2.9% and - 18.2 %, respectively). The
only jurisdiction to gain population was the State of North Carolina, with a growth rate of
21.4 %. These statistics indicate that the GISA of TIP Project R -2501 is lagging far
behind the remainder of the state in terms of population growth. According to local
officials, these trends could be the result of a sluggish local economy that has lost more
than 2,800 jobs over the past 13 years.
Table L Population Growth, 1990 -2000
Area
Pa txlation
Growth
1990
2000
#
%
Demographic
Area
25,867
27,738
1,871
7.2%
Rockingham
9,399
9,672
273
2.9%
Hamlet
6,196
6,018
-178
-2.9%
Dobbins
Heights
1,144
936
-208
-18.2%
Richmond
Count
44,518
46,564
2,046
4.6%
North Carolina
6,628,637
8,049,313
1,420,676
21.4%
Source: ITS Census Bureau
According to data from the North Carolina Employment Security Commission,
employment in Richmond County decreased by 163% (2,864 jobs) between 1990 and
2003 (see Table 11). During that time, Richmond County suffered a major loss (4,233
jobs) in its manufacturing sector. Despite this loss, the manufacturing sector still
provided the largest number of jobs within the County in 2003. According to local
planners, the loss in manufacturing jobs was primarily the result of the closure of textile
facilities. The largest employment gains for Richmond County were in the health care &
social assistance and government sectors (with 898 and 574 jobs added, respectively).
Gains in the health care & social assistance sector were likely indicative of the presence
of two hospitals and ancillary medical activities within the County.

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
October 3, 2005
Table 11. Em to ment By Sector Growth, Richmond County
Sector
Em' to
1990:
rnent
2003
Chan e, `90 -`03
©/Q
Agriculture, Forestry,
Fishing & Hunting
162
171
9
5.6%
Mining
*
125
N/A
N/A
Utilities
74
152
78
105.4%
Constriction
385
594
209
543%
Manufacturing
8,282
4,049
-4,233
-51.1%
Wholesale Trade
403
244
-159
-39.5%
Retail Trade
2,124
2,005
-119
-5.6%
Transportation and
Warehousing
424
90
-334
-78.8%
Information
118
140
22
18.6%
Finance and Insurance
274
267
-7
-2.6%
Real Estate and Rental
and Leasing
81
136
55
67.9%
Professional and
Technical Services
127
159
32
25.2%
Management of
Companies and
Enterprises
*
*
N/A
N/A
Administrative and
Waste Services
137
216
79
57.7%
Educational Services
*
13
N/A
N/A
Health Care and Social
Assistance
1,036
1,934
898
86.7%
Arts, Entertainment,
and Recreation
51
117
66
129.4%
Accommodation and
Food Services
760
803
43
5.7%
Other Services, Ex.
Public Administration
242
288
46
19.0%
Unclassified
*
24
N/A
N/A
Government
2,584
3,158
574
22.2%
T001 1�
17,550
14,686
-2,864463%
Source: North Carolina Employment Security Commission (NCESC)
* - Indicates disclosure suppression
N/A — Not Applicable
** - 1990 total does not include data for * sectors
Due to the closing of many textile facilities, losses in manufacturing have become a
recent trend throughout North Carolina (see Table III). The largest employment gains in
North Carolina were in the health care & social assistance and government sectors. The

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
October 3, 2005
health care & social assistance and government sectors have been growing as operations
throughout North Carolina expand to support the growing population in the State.
Table III. Em to ment By Sector Growth, North Carolina
Sector
Em to ment
1990 2003
Change, `90 -`43
# %
Agriculture, Forestry,
Fishing & Hunting
21,827
30,422
8,595
39.4%
Minin
3 993
3,976
-17
-0.4%
Utilities
26,626
14,112
- 12,514
-47.0%
Constriction
166,733
211,121
44,388
26.6%
Manufacturing
820,239
602,017
- 218,222
-26.6%
Wholesale Trade
139,697
162,750
23,053
16.5%
Retail Trade
377,026
431,925
54,899
14.6%
Transportation and
Warehousing
82,772
108,410
2 5,63 8
31.0%
Information
57,615
75,357
17,742
30.8%
Finance and Insurance
102,412
137,797
35,385
34.6%
Real Estate and Rental
and Leasing
32,488
47,143
14,655
45.1%
Professional and
Technical Services
89,618
145,953
56,335
62.9%
Management of
Companies and
Enterprises
35,104
61,193
26,089
743%
Administrative and
Waste Services
108,590
211,244
102,654
94.5%
Educational Services
22,091
46,339
24,248
109.8%
Health Care and Social
Assistance
203,641
363,400
159,759
78.5%
Arts, Entertainment, and
Recreation
27,952
45,594
17,642
63.1%
Accommodation and
Food Services
205,943
291,530
85,587
41.6%
Other Services, Ex.
Public Administration
77,172
96,446
19,274
25.0%
Unclassified
*
7,943
N/A
N/A
Public Administration
*
*
N/A
N/A
Government
476,906
625,996
149,090
31.3%
Total #1�
13,079,017
3,720,668
1 6411651
1 20.8%
Source: North Carolina Employment Security Commission (NCESQ
* - Indicates disclosure suppression
N/A - Not Applicable
** - 1990 total includes data for * sectors

Transportation Plans
TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
October 3, 2005
Thoroughfare Plan for the Cities of Rockingham — Hamlet (1998)
This plan was developed by the Statewide Planning Branch of the North Carolina
Department of Transportation in cooperation with the Cities of Rockingham and Hamlet,
and the Federal Highway Administration. According to the plan, the US 1 Bypass should
be constricted as a multi -lane, controlled access facility in order to relieve traffic
congestion along existing US 1 through Rockingham and provide north -south traffic
circulation throughout the area. This plan includes several projects not yet funded within
the NCDOT 2006 -2012 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP).
Based upon the NCDOT 2006 -2012 TIP, other transportation projects within or partially
within the GISA include the following (see Figure 1):
• TIP R -2502: Widen US 1 to multi -lanes from SR 1001 to existing 4 -lane section
in Moore County; constriction scheduled to begin 2005.
• TIP U -3456: Widen US 1 to multi -lanes from SR 1424 to SR 1640 east of
Rockingham; constriction scheduled to begin 2007.
• TIP R -3421: Constrict 4 -lane bypass northwest of Rockingham on new location;
constriction scheduled to begin post years.
• TIP I -3801: Upgrade US 74 to interstate standards; Rockingham - Hamlet Bypass
to Laurinburg Bypass; constriction to begin post years.
• TIP U -3807: Constrict new route on new location; SR 1909 (Hylan Avenue) to
US 74; constriction to begin post years.
• TIP R- 2501A: Widen US 1 to multi -lanes from the South Carolina State line to
Sandhill Road vicinity; constriction scheduled to begin post - years.
• TIP U -3818: Extend SR 1645 (Mt. Olive Church Road) to the intersection of SR
1624 (County Home Road) and SR 1641 (Clemmer Street); two lanes on new
location; constriction to begin post years.
Existing Land Use
Land use along the TIP
Project R -2501 corridor is
predominantly rural, with low
density residential, farmland,
timberland, and vacant land
intermixed throughout the
area. According to local
officials, existing land use
mapping, and a field visit, the
majority of the GISA is
utilized for agricultural,
residential, or
conservational /institutional

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
purposes. The majority of the GISA outside of Rockingham, Hamlet, and Dobbins
Heights is used for agricultural purposes, including logging, farming, and raising
livestock (chickens, horses, or cows). Low density single - family residential housing is
scattered along state routes and secondary roads throughout the GISA. The majority of
the residential land use is typified by single - family manufactured housing or low- density
single - family housing. Rural residential land uses on large lots are located throughout
most of the GISA. Although these tracts of land could easily be converted into higher
intensity uses, there has been little or no development pressure within most of the GISA.
Conservational land uses include the Yadkin -Pee Dee Game Lands and the Sandhills
Game Lands, located in the western and eastern portions of the GISA, respectively.
The portions of Rockingham, Hamlet, and Dobbins Heights that fall within the GISA
contain a mix of land use types. Residential land uses are most prevalent within
incorporated portions of the GISA, including lands utilized for low, medium, and high
density single - family residential and mobile home parks. Furthermore, commercial uses
are scattered throughout the GISA, primarily concentrated along the US 74 Business
corridor, and to a lesser extent NC 177. Industrial land uses are clustered in the Pine
Hills Industrial Park/CSX terminal near the NC 177 /County Home Road intersection and
along Airport Road in the vicinity of the Rockingham - Hamlet Airport.
Land Use Plans and Zoning
Richmond County Land Use Plan (2000)
This plan recommended strategies for land use development throughout Richmond
County. The plan was created by local citizens and officials in order to establish land
use- related goals, objectives, and strategies through 2010. The plan generally calls for
the preservation of the county's agricultural and natural resources, heritage, and small
town /rural way of life through the use of smart growth practices.
Richmond County Zoning Ordinance (2003)
Richmond County has established a zoning ordinance that attempts to control the
intensity and location of land uses throughout the County. Zoning throughout the
Richmond County portion of the GISA includes primarily low- intensity uses, including
rural residential, agricultural residential, and conservation (see Figure 3). Small portions
of the GISA are zoned for higher intensity usage, including industrial and highway
commercial purposes. Industrial zoning is scattered throughout Richmond County, with
sizeable concentrations along the US 74 Bypass west of Rockingham, south of the
intersection of US 1 and NC 177, along the railroad tracks east of Hamlet, and the
Richmond County Industrial Park south of Hamlet. There is also a highway commercial
overlay zone that buffers US 1 and several other major regional roadways (US 74, US 74
Bypass, US 220, NC 381, NC 38, and NC 177) throughout the Richmond County portion
of the GISA.
10

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JK October 3, 2005
Scotland County Zoning Ordinance (2003)
This plan was adopted to regulate land development throughout Scotland County by
ensuring that compatible land uses are located adjacent to one another. The small portion
of Scotland County within the GISA is zoned for conservation uses (see Figure 3). The
majority of this area is farmland, wooded tracts of land, or rural residential in nature.
According to local officials, there are no current or future plans to extend public utilities
into this area.
Scotland County Land Use Map (2002)
This map was adopted in order to show existing land use characteristics within Scotland
County. The GISA portion of Scotland County currently has an "open space"
designation which generally includes rural residential, farming, timbering, and vacant
land uses. This land use matches the current conservation zoning designation within the
GISA.
City of Rockingham Unified Development Ordinance (2004)
This plan was recently adopted to establish riles and regulations for land development
within the City of Rockingham and throughout its extra - territorial jurisdiction (ETJ).
This plan establishes standards for zoning, watershed protection, flood protection,
historic preservation, and several other development related issues. Zoning throughout
Rockingham and its ETJ is a broad mix of residential, commercial, and industrial zoning
districts. The majority of the land is zoned for residential purposes, including large areas
of high density residential scattered throughout the central portions of the ETJ and
low /medium density residential throughout the northeastern portion of the ETJ.
Commercial zoning exists primarily along major highways and in clusters throughout the
ETJ, including along US 74 Business, US 1, the central business district in downtown
Rockingham, and around the US PUS 74 interchange. Industrial development is also
concentrated in particular areas, including the Rockingham West Business Park
northwest of the city, west of downtown along US 1, and in the vicinity of Airport Road
and the railroad tracks south of the city. The ordinance was created to ensure that proper
measures are taken to control development in an organized fashion and protect the natural
environment of the Rockingham area.
City of Hamlet Ordinance (1992)
This plan was adopted to establish riles and regulations for land development within the
City of Hamlet and throughout its extra - territorial jurisdiction (ETJ). A portion of this
plan establishes standards for zoning. Zoning throughout Hamlet and its ETJ is primarily
residential in nature, with lesser quantities of land zoned for industrial and commercial
uses. High density residential zoning is concentrated around the central portions of town,
with low density residential zoning classifications in the western portion of Hamlet.
Commercial zoning is concentrated around the central business district and along US 74
Business north of the City. Industrial zoning is concentrated along the railroad tracks
east and west of the downtown area, as well as the area east of the NC 177 /US 74 Bypass
11

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
intersection. This ordinance was developed to ensure that proper measures are taken to
control the intensity and location of development throughout Hamlet.
Environmental Regulations (Water Resources)
In terms of federal environmental regulations, in 1972, the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System ( NPDES) program was established under the authority of the Clean
Water Act. Phase I of the NPDES stormwater program was established in 1990. It
requires NPDES permit coverage for large or medium municipalities with populations of
100,000 or more. In North Carolina, there are six Phase I communities. The Phase II
program extends permit coverage to smaller (< 100,000 pop.) communities and public
entities that own or operate a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) by requiring
them to apply for and obtain an NPDES permit for stormwater discharges. Federal law
requires communities and public entities that own or operate an MS4, and that meet
either of the following two conditions, to obtain an NPDES Phase II stormwater permit:
1) The MS4 is located in an urbanized area as determined by the latest Decennial
Census of the Bureau of the Census. If the MS4 is not located entirely within an
urbanized area, only the portion that is within the urbanized area is regulated.
2) The community or public entity is designated by the NPDES permitting authority.
In the state of North Carolina, the NPDES permitting authority is the
Environmental Management Commission (EMC).
Based upon North Carolina Division of Water Quality (DWQ) data, neither Richmond
County nor Rockingham is considered a Phase I or Phase II county /urbanized area, and
therefore does not fall under the jurisdiction of these regulations.
In terms of State environmental regulations, the North Carolina Division of Land
Resources' Sediment and Erosion Control Act requires that any development disturbing
more than one acre of land within the State of North Carolina to submit a Sedimentation
and Erosion Control Plan to the Division of Land Resources. Local governments may
review and enforce the plan within their jurisdiction, but the plan has to be as strict as the
program administered by the Division of Land Resources. Site disturbances of less than
one acre require the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs), but not a site plan.
According to the NCDOT report entitled "Best Management Practices for Protection of
Surface Waters" (March 1997), BMPs include activities, practices, and procedures
undertaken to prevent or reduce water pollution. This includes things such as: on -site
detention areas, vegetative buffers, culverts, and erosion control mechanisms.
Floodplains are distributed throughout the GISA of TIP Project R -2501, with major
floodplain areas located along Marks Creek, the McKinney Lake area, Falling Creek, and
Chock Creek (see Figure 4). The City of Rockingham Unified Development Ordinance
and the Richmond County Floodplain Damage Protection Ordinance limit the type and
intensity of development within designated floodplains, while at the same time
establishing constriction guidelines within the floodplain. Furthermore, it requires a 20-
12

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JK October 3, 2005
foot buffer, or a buffer of five times the width of the stream at top of bank (whichever is
greater), in areas along streams without designated floodplains. These ordinances should
serve to limit the amount and intensity of development within floodplains, and thereby
help protect the water quality within the GISA. Also, according to Hamlet officials, the
City of Hamlet does not have their own floodplain protection ordinance, but follows the
guidelines established by the Richmond County Floodplain Damage Protection
Ordinance.
Water Supply Watersheds
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) data obtained from the NCDOT and DWQ
information indicates the presence of three water supply watersheds within the GISA (see
Figure 4). Falling Creek is located east of Rockingham in the central portion of the GISA
and is classified as a WS -III water supply watershed. The majority of the critical area for
that watershed is located within the GISA north of County Home Road. Hitchcock
Creek, encompassing much of the eastern portion of the GISA, is considered a WS -III
water supply watershed. Additionally, a limited portion of the Marks Creek WS -II water
supply watershed (including the critical area) is located east of Dobbins Heights along the
eastern boundary of the GISA. The designation of Marks Creek as a Class II water
supply watershed qualifies it as a high quality water body.
DWQ, working under the direction of the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), has been delegated the responsibility of protecting the state's surface and
ground water resources. In order to accomplish this task, a number of environmental
regulations have been created. These environmental regulations exist for each river
basin, and separate regulations exist for the water supply watersheds. The following is a
summary of the water supply watershed regulations with regard to TIP Project R -2501:
Marks Creek Water Supply Watershed (Class II)
• Development within the protected area is restricted to one dwelling unit per acre
or 12% built -upon area for the low density option and one dwelling unit per acre
or 12 -30% built -upon area for the high density option (required to control the 1"
storm event).
• Development within the critical area of these watersheds is restricted to one
dwelling unit per two acres or 6% built -upon area for the low density option and
one dwelling unit per two acres or 6 -24% built -upon area for the high density
option. The critical area is the area adjacent to a water supply intake or reservoir
where risk associated with pollution is greater than from the remaining portions of
the watershed.
Hitchcock Creek & Falling Creek Water Subbly Watersheds (Class III
• Development within the protected area is restricted to two dwelling units per acre
or 24% built -upon area for the low density option and two dwelling units per acre
or 24 -50% built -upon area for the high density option (required to control the 1"
storm event).
13

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JK October 3, 2005
Development within the critical area of these watersheds is restricted to one
dwelling unit per acre or 12% built -upon area for the low density option and one
dwelling unit per acre or 12 -30% built -upon area for the high density option. The
critical area is the area adjacent to a water supply intake or reservoir where risk
associated with pollution is greater than from the remaining portions of the
watershed.
Furthermore, the Rockingham Unified Development Ordinance states that portions of
watersheds that fall within the ETJ or corporate limits of the city of Rockingham require
a minimum 100 -foot vegetative buffer for all new development that exceeds the low
density option. Otherwise, a 30 -foot vegetative buffer will be required for all perennial
waters indicated on the most recent versions of United States Geological Survey (USGS)
7.5 minute quadrangle maps.
The GISA of TIP Project R -2501 encompasses portions of two different river basins, the
Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin and the Lumber River Basin. The Yadkin -Pee Dee River
Basin covers the majority of the GISA with the exception of a small portion near the
Richmond /Scotland County Line. Two subbasins of the Lumber River comprise the
remainder of the GISA and are confined to an area south of US 1 and east of NC 177.
According to DWQ Basinwide plans for these river basins, the following information was
retrieved:
The Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin portion of the GISA is totally comprised of
subbasin 03- 07 -16. Water quality throughout the basin generally received a
`good -fair' rating. Despite this, according to the subbasin report, most water
bodies have some notable water quality impacts. Most of these problems are
associated with the Hamlet wastewater treatment facility and non -point sources of
pollution such as swine farming and urban run -off. Marks Creek and Hitchcock
Creek are two of 55 watersheds within the Yadkin — Pee Dee River basin that
have been identified by the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program
(NCWRP) as areas with the greatest need and opportunity for wetland and stream
restoration efforts.
The GISA contains a portion of subbasin 03 -07 -55 within the Lumber River
Basin. According to the subbasin report, water quality monitoring generally
produced a bioclassification rating of `good' or `good - fair'. In order to prevent
aquatic habitat degradation as a result of increasing development pressure, the
subbasin report recommended that protection measures be put in place
immediately. Furthermore, all waters within the subbasin are considered impaired
due to the presence of mercury and are subject to a fish consumption advisory.
The eastern edge of the GISA contains a small portion of subbasin 03 -07 -50 of
the Lumber River Basin. According to the subbasin report, water quality
monitoring generally produced a bioclassification of `excellent' or `good'
throughout the subbasin. In order to prevent aquatic habitat degradation as a
result of increasing development pressure, the subbasin report recommended that
protection measures be put in place immediately. Furthermore, all waters within
14

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
the subbasin are considered impaired due to the presence of mercury and are
subject to a fish consumption advisory.
303(d) Waters
The 303(d) list is a product of the Clean Water Act, which requires states to identify
those waters that do not meet water quality standards or those that have impaired uses. If
control strategies for point and non -point source pollution exist for impaired waters, they
may be excluded from the 303(d) list. The NCDOT GIS data reveals Marks Creels as the
only 303(d) water body within the GISA of TIP Project R -2501 (see Figure 4). A search
of DWQ's 2004 Draft 303(d) List reveals that Marks Creels is included due to impaired
biological integrity. Marks Creels falls within subbasin 03 -07 -16 of the Yadkin -Pee Dee
River Basin with urban runoff from storm sewers listed as a potential source of the
impairment. According to DWQ's report on the Lumber River Basin, all waters within
subbasins 03 -07 -50 and 03 -07 -55 are considered impaired on an evaluated basis and are
subject to a fish consumption advisory.
Wetlands
According to National Wetlands Inventory GIS information, wetland areas are scattered
throughout the entire GISA of TIP Project R -2501 (see Figure 5). Concentrations of
wetlands exist along the entire length of Marks Creek, Chock Creek and its tributaries,
McKinney Lake and its tributaries, and the southwestern portion of the GISA near
Osborne Road. Other than direct impacts to wetlands, the overall scattered nature and
expected concentration of development within specific areas of the GISA should limit
any potential indirect impacts to wetlands within the GISA.
V. INVENTORY OF NOTABLE FEATURES (STEP 3)
Inventory of Notable Features
Based on existing NCDOT GIS information, the 1999 Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS), and database research, an inventory of notable features was assembled for TIP
Project R -2501 (see Figure 6). Tables indicating the name, status, and location of these
notable features are located in the Appendix.
Numerous state and federally protected species, several natural communities, a 303(d)
impaired stream (Marks Creek), wetlands, three water supply watersheds (Falling Creek,
Marks Creek, and Hitchcock Creek), 14 potential hazardous materials sites, three
National Register Districts (the Hannah Pickett Mill 41 site, the Covington Plantation
House, and the Main Street commercial district in Hamlet), and a high - quality water body
(Marks Creek) are all located within the GISA of TIP Project R -2501. Additionally, a
CSX rail line, the Sandhills and Pee Dee Game Lands, the North Carolina Speedway and
associated straight track, two golf courses, and the Rockingham — Hamlet Airport are
located within the GISA of TIP Project R -2501.
15

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
0JK October 3, 2005
VI. ACTIVITIES THAT CAUSE EFFECTS (STEP 4)
Previous Report Conclusions
1998 Natural Systems Report
Although potential indirect impacts to the foraging habitat of the red - cockaded
woodpecker are unresolved, no other federally or state - protected species should
be indirectly impacted by this project.
Despite suffering from limited direct impacts, water quality within the area should
not be indirectly affected by TIP Project R -2501.
1999 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
The 1999 DEIS for TIP Project R -2501 concludes the following:
• A biological conclusion of "no effect' was rendered for all state or federally
protected species with the exception of the red - cockaded woodpecker.
• The red - cockaded woodpecker received a biological conclusion of "not likely to
adversely affect'. An additional investigation for the red - cockaded woodpecker
may be required for a pine tree observed in an area northeast of the intersection of
US 1 and Fox Road.
• No properties included on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places
within the TIP project area will be affected by this project. No Section 6(f) or
Section 4(f) properties would be impacted by this project. Furthermore, it is
anticipated that any hazardous materials sites will be avoided or would not pose
enough concern to interfere with the project.
• Cumulative impacts associated with the project include the movement of people,
commerce, and businesses out of Rockingham and into surrounding portions of
Richmond County as regional access increases.
1999 Red - Cockaded Woodpecker Survey
The 1999 red - cockaded woodpecker survey for TIP Project R -2501 determined the
biological conclusion of "not likely to adversely affect'.
2001 Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement
The 2001 Supplemental DEIS documents changes that have occurred to TIP Project R-
2501, including the extension of the proposed project from Fox Road to Marston Road
and the evaluation of a new preliminary alternative. The 2001 Supplemental DEIS
concludes the following:
• The preferred alternative has the potential to adversely affect local water quality
through increased stormwater runoff, however, due to the lack of proposed stream
crossings and the limited number of streams along the corridor, it is likely that
water quality impacts will be minimal.
• The proposed project will have an overall positive impact on the economy
throughout the area by providing improved access to businesses, the creation of
16

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
October 3, 2005
temporary constriction jobs, and jobs resulting from new commercial or
industrial development.
Recent Development Activity
Recently, commercial and industrial development has been occurring at specific locations
within the GISA of TIP Project R -2501. Commercial development has been expanding
southward from Rockingham along US 74 Business in the form of big -box retail centers,
restaurants, offices, and shopping plazas. A smaller amount of commercial growth has
also occurred along the Hamlet portion of US 74 Business. According to local officials,
there have been several developers interested in property, or are already holding property,
in the vicinity of the proposed interchange with TIP Project R -2501 (the US 1 Bypass).
Most of the commercial growth within the GISA has been concentrated along this
corridor with minimal or no recent commercial development occurring elsewhere.
Industrial development within
the GISA has also been
confined to specific locations
and is also occurring on a
relatively limited scale.
Constriction of new
industrial facilities is
currently ongoing at the Pine
Hills Industrial Park
(intersection of County Home
Road and NC 177) and just
outside of the GISA at the
Richmond County Industrial
Park (west of the intersection
V NC 38 and US 74).
According to local officials, several other companies are exploring the possibility of
locating within these industrial parks. They also indicated that the area fronting the
project corridor between the Airport Road and US 74 Bypass interchanges would be
prime industrial land. Local officials indicated that much of this recent growth and
industrial development interest is likely a result of the US 74 Bypass, the proposed US
Bypass (TIP Project R- 2501), and the proposed I -73/74 corridor.
Recent residential development activity has been minimal throughout the GISA of TIP
Project R -2501. Only scattered single - family residences (mostly manufactured houses)
have recently been constricted in rural areas and restricted subdivisions throughout the
GISA. According to Hamlet officials, a residential subdivision containing 69 units has
recently been approved along Battley Dairy Road, southeast of the proposed Airport
Road interchange. Local officials also indicated that several subdivisions (greater than
60 units) have been approved, or are currently under constriction, along McDonald
Church Road north of the existing US 1 corridor. Furthermore, Rockingham officials
17

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JK October 3, 2005
indicated that northeastern Rockingham (north of the GISA) has been the focus of most
of the residential growth in recent years.
VII. POTENTIAL INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS FOR
ANALYSIS (STEP 5)
The North Carolina DOT, in their April 2001 handbook titled "Cnsidance for Assessing
Indirect and Cumulative Impacts of Transportation Projects in North Carolina," outlines
a set of factors that needs to be evaluated to determine whether or not a more detailed
indirect and cumulative impact analysis (ICI) may be necessary for specific projects. The
following is an assessment of those factors as they relate to TIP Project R -2501.
Conflict with local plan:
TIP Project R -2501 is in agreement with "The Thoroughfare Plan for the Cities of
Rockingham — Hamlet" which calls for a freeway /expressway bypass between the cities
of Rockingham and Hamlet. TIP Project R -2501 includes full- access control and a
median along its entire length, limiting growth to areas surrounding the interchanges and
along feeder roadways to those interchanges. This appears to be consistent with local
zoning and land use plans, which call for a mix of low density residential and agricultural
uses throughout most of the GISA, and commercial or industrial land uses near the
proposed interchanges.
Explicit economic development purpose:
While there is no explicit economic development purpose for this project, local officials
see TIP Project R -2501 as a potential catalyst for economic development. They are
hoping that the combined effects of TIP Project R -2501, the US 74 Bypass, and the future
I -73/74 corridor, will spur industrial and commercial development. According to the
NCDOT, the project is designed to improve carrying capacity, reduce congestion in
Rockingham, and enhance the safety of US 1 along the project corridor.
Planned to serve specific development:
TIP Project R -2501 does not appear to be designed to serve a specific development.
Likely to stimulate land development having complementary (to highway - related
travel) functions:
The assessment of this factor partially involves an evaluation of a subset of factors
commonly used to determine the potential for growth resulting from transportation
projects including:
• Distance to a major urban center
• Traffic volumes on intersecting roadways
• Presence of frontage roads
• Availability of water /sewer
18

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JK October 3, 2005
TIP Project R -2501 is primarily located within rural Richmond County (with a short
section within the incorporated limits of the City of Hamlet) in south- central North
Carolina. The project is located in close proximity to the urban centers of Rockingham
and Hamlet, and is located approximately 50 miles west of the nearest major urban
center, Fayetteville, North Carolina.
According to the 1999 Traffic Analysis Report (TAR), the average daily traffic (ADT)
volume in 2000 along existing US lwas anticipated to range between 3,460 (US 1 at
Sand Hill Road) and 14,400 (in downtown Rockingham) vehicles per day. This number
is expected to rise to between 6,900 and 22,360 vehicles per day by the year 2020 without
the project, and range between 2,680 and 17,500 with the project. Traffic volume
estimates for 2020 along the proposed project are anticipated to range between 4,280 and
10,220 vehicles per day. Anticipated traffic volumes for 2020 along major intersecting
roadways are as follows in order from southwest to northeast:
• US 1:
3,460 ADT
• US 74 Bypass:
11,680 ADT
• Airport Road:
6,605 ADT
• US 74:
24,950 ADT
• US 1:
6,490 ADT
There are no frontage roads proposed as part of TIP Project R -2501.
Richmond County provides water along several major roads throughout the GISA and
has excess capacity at their water treatment facility. Rockingham provides water and
sewer services throughout most of the city, its ETJ, and some portions of surrounding
Richmond County (see Figure 7). Local officials indicated that they have excess capacity
at their sewer treatment facility, and can provide additional water capacity by utilizing the
Richmond County system. The City of Hamlet provides water and sewer service within
the city, its ETJ, the Town of Dobbins Heights, and small portions of Richmond County.
Hamlet officials indicated that their existing treatment facilties were operating under
capacity with room for expansion. All three utility providers indicated a willingness to
expand their existing systems if development opportunities existed and the extensions
were feasible. Based upon this information, utilities could become available in areas
surrounding Hamlet and Rockingham, but a lack of sewer will probably continue to exist
in the eastern and western portions of the GISA.
Likely to influence intraregional land development location decisions:
TIP Project R -2501 has a low- moderate likelihood of influencing intraregional land
development depending upon the location within the GISA. Lack of a market for
development, a depressed economy, and limited availability of public utilities will likely
limit the amount of development within the majority of the GISA. Some portions of the
GISA, particularly near the proposed interchanges and connecting roadways, are much
more likely to be influenced by TIP Project R -2501. When TIP Project R -2501 is
combined with the US 74 Bypass and the proposed I- 73/I -74 corridor, the improved
19

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
regional transportation network could generate new interest in development within the
GISA, particularly for industrial (distribution- related) uses.
Notable features present in GISA:
There are a number of notable features within the GISA of TIP Project R -2501. Please
refer to Figure 5 and the Appendix for a more comprehensive list of these features.
VIII. INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS (STEP 6)
Potential For Land Use Change
To further evaluate whether indirect and cumulative impacts would likely result from TIP
Project R -2501, an analysis of a set of quantitative factors was completed. This analysis
helps to determine the potential for land use changes as a result of the project. Table IV
indicates the results of this rating analysis:
Table IV. Potential For Land Use Change, 2000 -2020
TIP Project R -2501 proposes to constrict a 15 -mile, fully- controlled, four -lane bypass of
Rockingham on new location and widen approximately 4 miles of existing US 1 to a four
or five -lane facility northeast of Rockingham. The project will divert traffic from
downtown Rockingham, eliminate traffic signals and turning motions, and control access
to an improved facility capable of sustaining higher vehicular speeds. Based upon these
characteristics and the length of the project, it is likely that a substantial travel time
savings (greater than 10 minutes) would be experienced as a result of this project. The
greatest travel time savings would likely be recognized by workers commuting between
Rockingham and Southern Pines or tourists traveling to or from Southern Pines.
20
Land
Change
Supply
in
vs:
Water /'
Change in
property
Forecasted
Land
Sewer
Market For
Public
Rating
Accessibility,
Values
Growth
Demand
Availability
Development'
polio
> 50%
increase
>3%
< 10-
Less
> 10 min.
in
armual
year
Existing
Development
stringent: no
travel time
property
pop.
supply
sen-ice
activity
growth
Strong
I savings
values
Growth
of land
available
abundant
management
^
X
"
X
X
"
X
X
X
"
X
No
04%
> 20-
No seivice
More
< 2 min.
property
armual
year
available
Development
stringent:
travel time
value
pop.
supply
now or in
activity
growth
Weak
savings
increase
Growth
of land
future
lacldng
management
TIP Project R -2501 proposes to constrict a 15 -mile, fully- controlled, four -lane bypass of
Rockingham on new location and widen approximately 4 miles of existing US 1 to a four
or five -lane facility northeast of Rockingham. The project will divert traffic from
downtown Rockingham, eliminate traffic signals and turning motions, and control access
to an improved facility capable of sustaining higher vehicular speeds. Based upon these
characteristics and the length of the project, it is likely that a substantial travel time
savings (greater than 10 minutes) would be experienced as a result of this project. The
greatest travel time savings would likely be recognized by workers commuting between
Rockingham and Southern Pines or tourists traveling to or from Southern Pines.
20

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JK October 3, 2005
Property values could experience localized increases along the bypass portion of the
project, especially in the vicinity of proposed interchanges. However, since the majority
of TIP Project R -2501 involves the constriction of a fully- controlled facility in a low -
growth, rural area, it is likely that property values will experience minimal increases
throughout most of the GISA.
The population of the Demographic Area grew at approximately 0.4% annually between
1990 and 2000, while Richmond County is projected to experience a 0.2% annual growth
rate between 2000 and 2020. These factors, coupled with the stagnant economy, lack of
development pressure, and large amount of developable land, likely indicate that there is
a greater than 20 -year supply of land available for development within the GISA of TIP
Project R -2501.
According to Richmond County officials, water service exists along several major roads
throughout the unincorporated portions of the county (see Figure 7). The water
distribution system in Richmond County is currently operating under capacity and could
be expanded in the future, if necessary. Sewer service is virtually non - existent in
Richmond County, with the exception of some sewer service provided in the ETJ's of
Rockingham and Hamlet. Sewer and water service within Rockingham is provided by
the city and extends into its ETJ in some instances. Rockingham officials indicated that
sewage treatment facilities are operating under capacity and water supplies can be
expanded by purchasing additional water from Richmond County. Hamlet officials
indicated that water and sewer services were provided throughout most of the city, with
utility lines extending into their ETJ and the Town of Dobbins Heights. Furthermore,
they indicated that both treatment facilities were currently operating under capacity.
Officials from all three governing bodies indicated a willingness to extend existing utility
lines to new developments if feasible.
Development throughout the majority of the GISA is stagnant, although specific regions
are experiencing recent development interest or are likely to experience development in
the near future. Most recent or approved development has been related to industrial uses
in several business parks, commercial activity along US 74 Business, and residential
development along McDonald Church Road and Battley Dairy Road.
Growth management strategies in the form of zoning ordinances and land use plans are in
place for Richmond County and all municipalities encompassed by the GISA.
Consequently, it is likely that such policies will be able to control the amount and
intensity of potential growth resulting from this project.
IX. ANALYSIS RESULTS (STEP 7)
Indirect Effects
The creation of the US I Bypass around Rockingham and Hamlet should increase
capacity, relieve downtown traffic congestion, improve regional traffic flow, and increase
safety throughout the project area. With respect to estimating any potential indirect
21

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
effects relating to this project, the findings indicate that TIP Project R -2501 has a low to
moderate potential to indirectly cause land use changes or accelerate growth and
development throughout the GISA.
TIP Project R -2501 generally bisects low- growth, rural portions of Richmond County.
Most of this land is unlikely to experience development due to limitations such as
environmental restrictions (wetlands, floodplains, and water supply watersheds), lack of
utilities (limited availability of water and sewer for most of the GISA), and the presence
of state and privately owned lands (State Game Lands and timberland properties). These
limitations, combined with the general lack of a market for extensive development, seem
to indicate that growth related to TIP Project R -2501 will be constrained throughout most
of the GISA. Any induced growth would predominantly be in the form of land use
conversion from lower intensity uses (agricultural, vacant, and forest) to higher intensity
uses (industrial, highway- oriented commercial, and residential), as well as an acceleration
of already approved development.
Most potential development would likely occur in close proximity to the interchanges
(the two termini, the US 74 Bypass, Airport Road, and US 74 Business) of the proposed
bypass portion of the project, as well as existing developments (both commercial and
residential) that have remaining capacity. Industrial development resulting from the
project would likely be focused in specific areas within the GISA (or just outside of it),
most notably the Pine Hills Industrial Park, the Richmond County Industrial Park, along
the Airport Road corridor, or in close proximity to one of the interchanges. Local
officials indicated that several companies have recently broken ground on new facilities
in these areas and that negotiations are currently underway for several more. Due to the
controlled access nature of the majority of this project, commercial development would
likely be limited to areas near the interchanges or continue developing along the US 74
Business corridor. This commercial development would likely include big box retailers,
restaurants, office space, and other smaller retail outlets.
Typical highway commercial development could occur at one of the several key
intersections along the widening portion of the project (in the vicinity of the US 1/US 1
Bypass and US INC 177 intersections). Scattered residential development could occur
in one of the several existing manufactured housing subdivisions throughout the GISA, in
the McDonald Church Road area, or along feeder roads near one of the proposed
interchanges. Despite these development trends there should be minimal other induced
development within the GISA of TIP Project R -2501.
Cumulative Effects
TIP Project R -2501 involves the constriction of a new location bypass around
Rockingham and Hamlet, as well as the widening of an existing segment of US 1
northeast of Rockingham where the majority of the area is relatively rural. TIP Project
R -2501 will provide a direct connection to the future I- 73/I -74 corridor which bisects the
area. An adjacent project, TIP Project R -2502, involves widening US 1 to multi -lanes
22

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JW October 3, 2005
from Marston Road to the Richmond /Moore County line. These connections should help
improve the overall flow of traffic and goods throughout the region.
The vast majority of land within the GISA is rural and contains minimal utility and
transportation infrastructure. Land is generally being utilized for agriculture, forestry,
conservation (the Pee Dee and Sandhills Game Lands), and low density residential
purposes. Population growth has been relatively stagnant, the economy has been
suffering through substantial job losses, and utilities are lacking throughout most of the
GISA. Despite these facts, when TIP Project R -2501 is coupled with other roadway
projects in the area, most notably the future I- 73/I -74 facility, specific areas within the
GISA will become more attractive for development. That growth should predominantly
take the form of commercial and /or industrial facilities and will likely be concentrated
around the many highway interchanges and along the roads that feed into them.
Furthermore, existing land planning and development policies, the large amount of rural
and conservational lands, the general lack of utilities (except in built -up areas), low
population growth, and a stagnant economy should limit the potential of any induced
growth to further degrade the water quality of the area.
23

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
04K October 3, 2005
X. BIBLIOGRAPHY
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Water
Supply Watersheds and 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies, available from
www.enr.state.nc.us
North Carolina Employment Security Commission, www.ncesc.com, 1990 and 2000
North Carolina State Demographics, http: / /demog.state.nc.us /, 2010, 2020 County and
State Population Data/Forecasts
U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and the North
Carolina Department of Transportation, Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact
Statement - US 1 from Sandhill Road (SR 1971) to Marston Road (SR 1001) Richmond
County, Federal Aid Project No. NHF -1(1), State Project No. 8.T580501, T.I.P. No. R-
2501,2001
Presnell Associates, Inc., Draft Environmental Impact Statement - US 1 from Sandhill
Road (SR 1971) to Marston Road (SR 1001) Richmond County, Federal Aid Project No.
NHF -1(1), State Project No. 8.T580501, T.I.P. No. R -2501, 1999
Environmental Services, Inc., Natural Systems Report — Proposed US 1 Rockingham
Bypass (R- 2501), Richmond County, North Carolina, 1998
Environmental Services, Inc., Red - cockaded Woodpecker Survey — US 1 Rockingham
Bypass, Richmond County, North Carolina (T.LP. No. R- 2501), 1999
Richmond County Land Use Committee, Strategic Land Use Plan, Richmond County,
North Carolina, July 2000
Richmond County Zoning Ordinance, Richmond County, North Carolina, July 2003
Scotland County Land Use Map, Scotland County, North Carolina, May 2002
Scotland County Zoning Ordinance, Scotland County, North Carolina, July 2003
The Louis Berger Group, Inc., Volume II Practitioner's Handbook "Guidance for
Assessing Indirect and Cumulative Impacts of Transportation Projects in North
Carolina," p. III -56— III -64, issued November 2001
US Census Bureau, www.census.gov, 1990 and 2000
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory; Available from
http://www.nwi.fws.gov/index.html, accessed March, 2004
24

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0JK October 3, 2005
APPENDIX
State and Federally- Protected Species
Growth Impact Studv Area
Common
Scientific
VSGS Quad
Name
Name
Federal Status
State Status
Ma
Plant:
Sandlulls
Gaillardia
Significantly Rare
Gaillardia
aestivalis
N/A
- Peripheral
Hoffman, Marston
Earle's Blazing
Liatris
Significantly Rare
Marston, Diggs,
Star
egnarrnlosa
N/A
- Peripheral
Ghio, Hamlet
Spring - flowering
Species of
Significantly Rare
Goldenrod
Solida�yo versa
Concern
- Limited
Marston, Diggs
Significantly Rare
Branched Gerardia
Agalirzis virgata
N/A
- Peripheral
Marston
Clianraesyee.
Significantly Rare
Heartleaf Sandmat
cordifolia
N/A
- Peripheral
Marston
Significantly Rare
Soft Milk-pea
Galactia nrollis
N/A
- Peripheral
Marston
Lttdi gia
Significantly Rare
Slunbbi- Seedbox
snffrnticosa
N/A
- Peripheral
Marston
Southern Water
Significantly Rare
Grass
Lnziola flnitarzs
N/A
- Peripheral
Marston
Pinebarren
Altblenbergia
Smokegrass
torre alga
N/A
Endangered
Marston
Mudbank Crown
Paspalnnr
Significantly Rare
Grass
dissectnnr
N/A
- Peripheral
Marston
Polygorznnr
Significantly Rare
Hairy- Smart eed
hirsntnnr
N/A
- Peripheral
Marston
Awned Meadow
Species of
Beauty
Rhexia aristosa
Concern
Threatened
Marston
Quillwort
S'agittaria
Significantly Rare
Arrowhead
isoetifornris
N/A
- Peripheral
Marston
S' iwalbea
Chaffseed
Anrericarza
Endangered
Endangered
Marston
Significantly Rare
Scale -leaf Gerardia
Agalirzis a li >lla
N/A
- Peripheral
Hoffman, Hamlet
Sandlulls Milk-
Astraglns
Species of
vetch
nrichanxii
Concern
Threatened
Hoffman, Marston
Carex carzescerzs
Significantly Rare
Hoffman. Marston.
Silveiv Sedge
ssp disfnrzcta
N/A
- Peripheral
Hamlet
Hoffman. Marston.
Species of
Significantly Rare
Millstone Lake,
Bog Oatgrass
Darzthorzia e ilis
Concern
- Threatened
Diggs, Hamlet
Heller s Rabbit
Gnapbalitarr
Significantly Rare
Tobacco
helleri var helleri
N/A
- Peripheral
Hoffman
Significantly Rare
Saivis Holh-
Ilex anrelarzchier
N/A
- Peripheral
Hoffman
Hoffman. Marston.
Significantly Rare
Millstone Lake,
White Wickv
Kalnria cnrzeata
N/A
- Limited
Ghio, Hamlet
Sandlulls UK
Lilinnr pyrophilnnr
N/A
Endangered —
Hoffman, Marston,
25

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
0Jw October 3, 2005
26
Special Concern
Millstone Lake,
Diggs, Hamlet
Litzdera
Species of
Hoffman, Marston,
Boa S icebush
subcoriacea
Concern
Threatened
Millstone Lake
Southern Water
Luziola fluitarza
Significantly Rare
Hoffman,
Grass
N/A
- Peripheral
Millstone Lake
Rough -leaf
Lysintachia
Hoffman, Marston,
Loosestrife
as eruHfolia
Endangered
Endangered
Diggs
Polygala
Significantly Rare
ShoAA-ti- Milk wort
gyratzdiflora
N/A
— Peripheral
Hoffman, Marston
Confen-a
Potantogetotz
Species of
Significantly Rare
Hoffman, Marston,
Pondweed
cotzfervoides
Concern
- Disjunct
Hamlet
Endangered —
HoffmaiL MarstoiL
Michaux's Sumac
Mats nticlzauxii
Endangered
Special Concern
Millstone Lake
Long -beak
Rhytzchospora
Significantly Rare
Baldsedge
stir oides
N/A
- Other
Hoffman
Sandlrills Wild-
Sigrficantly Rare
etiuria
Ruellia ciliosa
N/A
— Peripheral
Hoffman. Marston
HoffmaiL MarstoiL
Schoetzoplectus
Significantly Rare
Millstone Lake,
Canbv"s Bulrush
etuberculatus
N/A
— Peripheral
Hamlet
Schoetzoplectus
Significantly Rare
Hoffman. Marston.
SwayingBulrnsh
subtermitzalia
N/A
— Peripheral
Ghio,Hamlet
Significantly Rare
WaterDawnflower
1; )1is iaacuatuca
N/A
— Peripheral
Hoffman
Pickering's
pickeritzgii var
Species of
Hoffman. Marston.
Dawiflower
pickerillgii
Concern
Endangered
Ghio
HoffmarL MarstoiL
Tridetzs
Significantly Rare
Millstone Lake,
Carolina Triodia
carolirziarzus
N/A
- Threatened
Hamlet
HoffmarL MarstoiL
Millstone Lake,
Chapman 's
Sigrficantly Rare
Diggs, Glrio,
Yellow-ei-ed -grass
_yris cha ntatui
N/A
- Threatened
Hamlet
HoffmarL MarstoiL
Roughleaf Yellow-
Species of
Significantly Rare
Millstone Lake,
eyed -grass
Y>risscabrifolia
Concern
- Threatened
Diggs
Millstone Lake,
Diggs, Gluo,
Significantly Rare
Rockingham,
Azure Sage
Salvia azurea
N/A
- Peripheral
Hamlet
Millstone Lake,
Huger's Carrion-
Signficantly Rare
Diggs,
flower
';Milax bugeri
N/A
- Peripheral
Rockingham
Feather - bristle
Rhytzchospora
Significantly Rare
Beaksedge
oligarztha
N/A
- Peripheral
Diggs, Hamlet
Globe -fitit
Lttdi gia
Seedbox
s aerocar a
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Diggs
Cumberland
Euphorbia
Significantly Rare
Diggs,
Spurge
nzercurialirza
N/A
- Peripheral
Rockingham
Cypress Knee
Significantly Rare
Diggs,
Sedge
Carex decont osita
N/A
- Threatened
Rockingham
Piedmont Aster
Aster nzirabilis
Species of
Significantly- Rare
Diggs,
26

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
04W October 3, 2005
27
Concern
- Threatened
Rockingham
,Scutellaria
Significantly Rare
Southern Skullcap
australis
N/A
- Peripheral
Rockingham
Significantly Rare
Glade Milkvine
Alatelea deci ierzs
N/A
- Peripheral
Rockingham
Significantly Rare
Water Purslane
Didi lis Diarzdra
N/A
- Peripheral
Rockingham
Clinopoditmr
Significantly Rare
Georgia Calamint
georgiarzum
N/A
- Peripheral
Rockingham
Dissected
Cardanirze
Significantly Rare
Tooth wort
dissecta
N/A
- Peripheral
Rockingham
Anor ^plia
Georgia Indigo -
Georgiarza var.
Species of
bush
georgiarza
Concern
Endangered
Hamlet
Spindle - Fruited
Dicharztheliunz
Significantly Rare
Witch Grass
fusiforme
N/A
- Peripheral
Hamlet
Significantly Rare
Texas Hatpins
Eriocaulorz tezerzse
N/A
- Peripheral
Hamlet
Southern White
Rhyrzchospora
Beaksedge
Matra
N/A
Endangered
Hamlet
Candidate —
Peripherally
Sandhills bog lily
Liliunz iridollae
N/A
Threatened
N/A
Carolina asphodel
Tofieldiaglabra
N/A
Candidate
N/A
Reptile:
Threatened due to
American
Alligator
Similarity of
Alligator
Inississippielisis
Appearance
Threatened
Marston
Deirochelys
Chicken Turtle
reticularia
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Marston
Southern Hognose
Species of
Marston, Hoffman,
Snake
Heterodorz sinus
Concern
Special Concern
Millstone Lake
Alasticopliis
flagellum
Marston, Millstone
Coachwhup
Pituophis
N/A
Significantly Rare
Lake
Pituophis
Hoffman, Marston,
Northern
melarzoleucus
Species of
Millstone Lake,
Pinesnake
melarzoleucus
Concern
Special Concern
Hamlet
Marston, Hoffman,
Pigmy- Rattlesnake
Sisrrurus mdarius
N/A
Special Concern
Hamlet
Eastern Coral
Snake
Alicrurus fulvius
N/A
Endangered
Marston
Amphibian:
Eastern Tiger
Anbystona
Salamander
tigrirzun
N/A
Threatened
Marston, Hamlet
Mabee's
Salamander
Amystorza mabeei
N/A
Significantly Rare
Marston
Marston, Hoffman,
Pine Barrens
Millstone Lake,
Treefrog
H>la arzdersorzii
N/A
Significantly Rare
Diggs, Hamlet
Carolina Gopher
Species of
Frog
Rarza ca ito
Concern
Threatened
Marston
Mollusk:
27

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
_ Qualitative Indirect and Cuiuulative Effects
04W October 3, 2005
Carolina
I illosa
Species of
Creekshell
vaugharziarza
Concern
Endangered
Rockingham
Carolina
Lasnnigoria
Heels litter
decorata
Endangered
Endangered
N/A
Carolina
Lampsilis radiate.
Fatmucket
tolls icna
N/A
Threatened
Rockingham
Ariodorita
Alewife Floater
inn licate
N/A
Threatened
Rockingham
Mammal:
Eastern Fox
Marston, Hoffman,
Squirrel
Scinrns rziger
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Millstone Lake
Special Concern —
Rafinesque's big -
Coryrzorhinns
Proposed
eared bat*
rafirzesquii
N/A
Threatened
N/A
Bird:
Marston, Hoffman,
Red - cockaded
Millstone Lake,
woodpecker
Picoides borealis
Endangered
Endangered
Hamlet
Baclunan's
Ainioplida
Species of
Marston, Hoffman,
Sparrow
aestivalis
Concern
Special Concern
Millstone Lake
ktiriia
Mississippi Kite
nrississi ierzsis
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Diggs
Moss:
Savanna
Canrpylopns
Species of
Significantly Rare
Cam ylo us
carolirzae
Concern
— Threatened
Marston
Srliagnrar�
Significantly Rare
Giant Peatmoss
torre >aznnr
N/A
— Peripheral
Marston, Hamlet
Fish:
Marston, Hoffman,
Etheostonia collis
Federal Species of
Millstone Lake,
Pinewoods darter
lepidirziorz
Concern
Special Concern
Ghio, Rockingham
Carolina Redhorse
Aloyostonra s .
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Rockingham
Alotioston7a
Diggs,
Robust Redhorse
robnstnni
N/A
Special Concern
Rockingham
Marston, Hoffman,
Federal Species of
Millstone Lake,
Sandhills Chub
Ie1notdns lnnibee
Concern
Special Concern
Rockingham
Santee Chub —
Coastal Plain
())pririella zarienia
Population
pop 2
N/A
Special Concern
Hoffman
Shortnose
Aciperzser
Sturgeon
brevirostrnni
Endangered
N/A
Rockingham
Insect:
Dusky Roadside-
Aniblyscirtes
skipper
Alternate
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Marston
Northern Oak
Fixseriia favonins
Hairstreak
Ontario
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Millstone Lake
Hessel's
Millstone Lake,
Hairstreak
Callo hr >s hesseli
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Hamlet
Reversed
Aniblyscirtes
Roadside - skipper
reversa
N/A
Significantly Rare
Marston, Hoffman
Dotted Skipper
Hesperia attains
N/A
Significantly Rare
Marston, Millstone
28

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
October 3, 2005
Source: North Carolina Natural Heritage Program; Marston, Millstone Lake, Hamlet, Rockingham, Diggs,
Ghio, and Hoffman USGS topographic quadrangles (March 2005),
litti)://ils.utic.edu/i)arlii)ro t/rihp
Natural Communities
Growth Impact Study Area
Name
slossorzae
Coastal Plain Semi - permanent Impoundment
Hoffman, Marston, Hamlet
Lake
Marston, Hoffman, Millstone Lake, Diggs, Ghio,
Hamlet
Atrytorze arogos
Hoffman, Marston, Ghio
Basic Mesic Forest (Piedmont SubtN- e)
Diggs, Rockingham
Arogos skipper
arogos
N/A
Significantly- Rare
N/A
Hoffman, Millstone Lake
Small Depression Pocosin
Marston
Small Depression Pond
Marston, Hoffman,
Meske's Skipper
Hesperia nraskei
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Millstone Lake
a stonefli-
Attarzeuria rurahs
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Hoffman
Rocky Bar and Shore
Ceraelea
Piedmont/Mountain Levee Forest
Rockingham
Piedmont/Mountain Semi-permanent Impoundment
a caddisflti-
carzcellata
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Hoffman
A triaenode
Triaerzodes
caddisfli-
nrargirzata
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Millstone Lake
C.'horoterpes
a mai-fli-
basahs
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Hoffman
Argo
Ephemerellan
Mai-flti-
E henierella argo
N/A
Significantly- Rare
Hoffman
Source: North Carolina Natural Heritage Program; Marston, Millstone Lake, Hamlet, Rockingham, Diggs,
Ghio, and Hoffman USGS topographic quadrangles (March 2005),
litti)://ils.utic.edu/i)arlii)ro t/rihp
Natural Communities
Growth Impact Study Area
Name
USGS Quad Ma
Coastal Plain Semi - permanent Impoundment
Hoffman, Marston, Hamlet
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp (Black water
SubK e)
Marston, Hoffman, Millstone Lake, Diggs, Ghio,
Hamlet
Mesic Pine Flatwoods
Hoffman, Marston, Ghio
Basic Mesic Forest (Piedmont SubtN- e)
Diggs, Rockingham
Pine /Scrub Oak Sandhill
Marston, Hoffman, Millstone Lake
Sandhill Seep
Marston, Hoffman, Millstone Lake
Streamhead Atlantic White Cedar Forest
Hoffman, Millstone Lake
Small Depression Pocosin
Marston
Small Depression Pond
Marston, Hamlet
Streamhead Pocosin
Marston, Hoffman, Millstone Lake, Hamlet
Vernal Pool
Marston, Millstone Lake
Wet Pine Flatwoods
Marston. Hoffman
Xeric Sandhill Scrub
Marston, Hoffman, Millstone Lake, Ghio
Basic Oak — Hickory- Forest
Rockingham
Rocky Bar and Shore
Diggs, Rockingham
Piedmont/Mountain Levee Forest
Rockingham
Piedmont/Mountain Semi-permanent Impoundment
Diggs, Rockingham
Piedmont/Coastal Plain Heath Bluff
Millstone Lake
Div Oak — Hickory- Forest
Millstone Lake
Source: North Carolina Natural Heritage Program; Hoffman, Marston USGS topographic quadrangles
(March 2005), litti)://ils.utic.edu/l)arliI)ro t/rihp
29

TIP Project R -2501, Richmond County
Qualitative Indirect and Cumulative Effects
October 3, 2005
National Register Districts
Growth Impact Study Area
Name
Address
Status
Main Street Commercial Historic
District
Main St., Hamlet, NC
National Register
Covington Plantation House
US 1, southwest of Rockingham, NC
National Register
Hannah Picket Mill #I
Mill Road, south of Rockingham, NC
National Register
Source: North Carolina Historic Presen-ation Office (March, 2005),
http:// ii- ii- ii- .hpo.dcr.state.nc.us /nrlistthtm
Hazardous Substance Sites
Growth Impact Study Area
Site
Size
Location
Richmond CounK
Priority
East of Stokes Road/Maiv Wall Road intersection,
Landfill
86.1acres
Rockingham, NC
Marks
Old Cheraw Highway, approximately 6 miles
Dockeiv Pro eM-
8.2 acres
southwest of Rockingham, NC
Charles Macon
NC /SC State line
Old Cheraw Highway, approximately 6 miles
Lagoon & Drum
9.4 acres
southwest of Rockingham, NC
Tartan Marine
Pro eity
8.1 acres
NC 177, Hamlet, NC
Georgia — Pacific
11.2
Corporation
acres
NC 177, Hamlet, NC
Source: NCDOT GIS shapefile
Area Streams and Water Quality
Growth Impact Study Area
Stream
Affected
Water
Ouse of Impairment
Priority
Portion
Classification,
Marks
From NC 177 to
Creek
NC /SC State line
C
Biological impairment
Loy
Source: North Carolina Division of Water Quality (March, 2005), http:/ /ii-ii-ii-.h2o.eur.state.nc.us/
30

TIPProjectR -?501, US], RichmoudCougjj
OuulkivehOrect mid Cunuddiv¢EffedsAssessment
Octob¢r3,2005
FIGURE 1- PROJECT ALIGNMENT
& OTHER TIP PROJECTS
9 91ooMI TIP Project R-2501
Proposed Interchanges
TIP Project R-2501A
a.o�� ❑ -�- TIP Project R-2502
1111111111 TIP Project R-3421
010BE011EI TIP Project U-3456
US Route
State Route
Secondary Road
�Ilioacs
Streams & Creeks
Water Bodies
Rockigg am - HamlelkpoIt
County Boundary
Dobbins Heights
Hamlet
Rockingham
0 1 2 4 Miles
N
MAP SOURCES;
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ESRI)
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C.

I «a
c
a
u
r
South
r
0
Rd
TIPhojefl -?501, US], RichmoudCougjj
01al riv¢ Iud' rectmidCunuddiv ¢EffedsAssessment
Octob¢r3,2005
FIGURE 2 - DEMOGRAPHIC AREA
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Growth Impact SludyAiea
1�1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
® klunicipaRies
]HEM: TIP Project R-2501
US Route
Slate Route
Secondary Road
++� Railroads
Slreams &Creeks
Wafer Bodies
County Boundary
Census Tracts & Block Groups
CT 9101, Block Group 2
CT 91�, Block Group 1
CT 97K Block Group 4
CT 9101, Block Group 1
CT 9101, Block Group 2
CT 9108, Block Group 2
CT 9108, Block Group 3
u CT 9108, Block Group 4
CT 9108, Block Group 5
CT 9111, Block Group 1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .
CT 9111, Block Group 2
CT 9106
CT 9109
CT 9110
0 2 4 6 Miles
N
MAP SOURCES;
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ESRI)
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C.

v
TIPProjectR -?501, US], RichmoudCougjj
OuulkivehOrect mid Cunuddiv¢EffedsAssessment
Octob¢r3,2005
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
FIGURE 3 -ZONING
Grot Impact S[udykea
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
]EHE K TIP Project R -2501
US Route
State Route
Secondary Road
Railro�ds
Streams & Creeks
Water Bodies
County Bo mdary
® Municipalities
r7 ETJ Boundary
Zoning Classification
Commercial
Consenv IoOpen Space
High Density Residential
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Officellnstitu bal
Rural Residential
Conservation
Richmond County Highway Commercial Overlay
0 1 2 4 Miles
N
MAP SOURCES;
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ESRI)
RCHMOND COUNTY
SCOTLAND COUNTY
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C.

,+
0
A( WSW
n
kKiinnq
Pa r °h
Cred( WSW
TIPProj¢ctR -2501, US1,RiobmoudCougjj
OuulkivehOr¢ot mid Cunuddiv¢Eff¢dsAss¢ssru¢ut
Octob¢r3,2005
FIGURE 4 - WATER FEATURES
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Growth Impact StucyAfea
TIP Project R -al
US Route
State Route
Secondary Road
Railroad
Streams & Creeks
Water Bodies
Dobbins Heights
Hamlet
Rockingham
E, W, "WMH is 1H County Boundary
® High Quality Water
303�d) Impaired Stream
WateiSupplyWateteds
WSW Critical kea
0 1 2 4 Miles
N
MAP SOURCES;
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ESRI)
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C.

■
TIPProj¢ctR -?501, US], RiobmoudCougjj
OuulkivehOr¢ot mid Cunuddiv¢Eff¢dsAss¢ssru¢ut
Octob¢r3,2005
FIGURES
WETLANDS & FLOOD ZONES
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Growth Impact Studykea
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
TIP Project R -2501
US Route
State Route
Secondary Road
Railroad
Streams & Creeks
County Boundary
Watei Bodies
Dobbins Heights
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hamlet
Rockingham
Flood Zones
Wetlands
0 1 2 4 Miles
N
MAP SOURCES;
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ESRI)
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C.

r
TIPProjefl -?501, US], RichmoudCougjj
01al rive hOr ectmidCunuddiv¢EffedsAssessment
Octob¢r3,2005
FIGURE 6 - NOTABLE FEATURES
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Growth Impact Study kea
TIP Project R -2501
US Route
State Route
Secondary Road
Railroads
Streams & Creeks
Water Bodies
County Boundary
Dobbins Heights
Hamlet
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Rockingham
USGS Quads (with labels)
National Register Districts
Gamelands
Hazardous Substance Disposal Facilities
North Carolina Motor Speedway
Rockingham - Hamletkport
0 1 2 4 Miles
N
MAP SOURCES;
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ESRI)
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C.

r
TIPProj¢ctR -?501, US], RiobmoudCougjj
01al rive hOr¢ otmidCunuddiv¢Eff¢dsAss¢ssru¢ut
Octob¢r3,2005
FIGURE 7 - PUBLIC UTILITIES
Groh Impact ltl rea
TIP Project R -2501
US Route
State Route
Secondary Road
Railroads
Streams & Creeks
Water Bodies
Sew Mains
hei Mains
County Boundary
Dobbins Heights
Hamlet
Rockingham
0 1 2 4 Miles
N
MAP SOURCES;
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH INSTITUTE (ESRI)
HNTB NORTH CAROLINA, P.C.