20120040 Ver 1_Report_20060324

I.-SDUZ,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMFNT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
MEMORANDUM
TO: Richard Spencer
Gary Jordon
Chris Militscher
Felix Devila
Polly Lespinasse
Travis Wilson
March 21, 2006
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Fish and Wildlife Service
EPA-Region IV
FHWA
NCDENR-DWQ
NCWRC
FROM: Jennifer A. Evans, PE
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
LYNI)o TiPPETr
SECRETARY
MV A 'i)0106
SUBJECT: Moore County, Bridge No. 2 over CSX Transportation on US 15/501,
FA. Project No. BRSTP- 15(11), WBS No. 3433222.1.1, TIP Project No. B-3680
Attached for your files is a copy of the Natural Resources Technical Report — Executive
Summary for the above referenced project.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at [phone]
extension 218.
JAE/jae
Attachment
cc: Files
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
TELEPHONE ". 919-733-3141
FAX: [phone]
WEUSITE. WWW.DOHDOr.STATE.NC.US
LOCATION:
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
I SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
RALEIGH NC

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
B -3680
MOORE COUNTY
Proposed replacement of Bridge No. 2, on US 151501 over the CSX Railroad in Moore County, North
Carolina (TIP B- 3680).
INTRODUCTION
The project proposes to replace Bridge No. 2 on US 151501 over the CSX Railroad in Moore County,
North Carolina. Three alternatives are being considered for the project.
• Alternative 1 (Alt. 1) includes replacement of the existing approximately 216 -foot (ft) two -lane
bridge with a new four -lane structure located approximately 50 ft west of the existing structure.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing structure during construction. The total project length
is approximately 2000 ft.
• Alternative 2 (Alt. 2) includes the replacement of the existing approximately 216 -ft two -lane
bridge with a new four -lane structure located approximately 40 ft west of the existing structure.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing structure during construction. The total project length
is approximately 2630 ft.
• Alternative 3 (Alt. 3) includes the replacement of the existing approximately 216 -ft two -lane
bridge with a new four -lane structure located approximately 20 ft east of the existing structure.
Traffic will be maintained on the existing structure during construction. The total project length
is approximately 2560 ft.
• Alternative 4 (Alt. 4) includes replacement of the existing approximately 216 -ft two -lane bridge
with a new four -lane structure in approximately the same location as the existing structure with
slight realignment adjacent to and east of the existing structure. Traffic will be maintained on the
existing structure during construction. The total project length is approximately 2570 ft.
The existing bridge is located approximately 1000 ft south of the intersection of US 151501 and US I. The
project study area comprises an area approximately 2000 ft in length and ranging from approximately 400
ft in width up to 800 ft at the intersection. The project study area is urban in nature and the surrounding
landscape is dominated by a mixture of forested communities and maintained/disturbed land.
The project study area is located in the Sandhills Region of the Coastal Plain physiographic province.
The topography in the project study area is generally characterized as nearly level to gently sloping.
Hydric soils are present in the project study area.
B -3680 I September 2005
0

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Water Resources
The project study area is located within sub -basin 030750 of the Lumber River Basin (DWQ 2001) and is
part of USGS hydrologic unit 03040203 (USGS 1974). Two streams are located in the project study area,
Aberdeen Creek and an unnamed tributary to Aberdeen Creek. Aberdeen Creek originates at Watson
Lake southwest of the intersection of SR 1309 and NC 211 and flows in a southerly direction through the
project study area to its confluence with Drowning Creek at the Moore- Richmond County boundary. The
UT to Aberdeen Creek (UT 1) originates approximately 550 ft east of the intersection of US 1 and US
151501 and flows in a southerly direction to its confluence with Aberdeen Creek in the project study area.
The Best Usage Classification of Aberdeen Creek [Stream Index Number 16- 11- (14- 2- 11 -(6)j is Class C.
The unnamed stream within the project study area carries the same Best Usage Classification as its
receiving water, Aberdeen Creek. No water resources classified as High Quality Waters, Water Supplies
(WS -1 or WS -2), or Outstanding Resource Waters are located within 3.0 miles upstream or downstream
of the project study area. Neither Aberdeen Creek or its unnamed tributary are listed as impaired
according to the DWQ 2004 Draft 303(d) list.
Biotic Resources
Two natural communities were identified within the project study area: Alluvial Forest and Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest. In addition to these plant communities, there are also areas of maintained/disturbed
land. A summary of plant community areas is presented in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary of V
VEGETATION
COMMUNITY
Alluvial Forest
Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest
Maintained/
Disturbed Land
Communities.
n..a....c:..l i_.. +. A rroc ! ha tnrac 1
Project
Alt.1
Alt.2
Alt.3
Alt.4
Study
Impacts
Pot.
Impacts
Pot.
Impacts
Pot.
Impacts
Pot.
Area
Temp.
Temp.
Temp.
Temp.
Im acts
Impacts
lm pacts
Impacts
5.21
1.14
0.0
1.10
0.0
1.19
0.0
0.33
0.0
6.65)
1.94
0.0
3.45
0.0
2.12
0.0
2.44
0.0
6.00
0.89
0.0
0.87
0.0
1.31
0.0
1.94
0.0
17.86
3.97
0.0
5.42
0.0
4.62
0.0
1 4.71
0.0
Totals for vegetation communities do not include the open wafer area aunUULUU W to �,' "U =��n �_ �•_,
impervious road surfaces.
JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Aberdeen Creek and one unnamed stream within the project study area are considered jurisdictional
surface waters under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Six jurisdictional wetland areas were also
identified and confirmed as jurisdictional by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Areas of these
systems within the project area are summarized in Table 2 and are depicted in Figures 2a -c.
B -3680 2 September 2005

7­.-_A:__-___1 A
aultillidly V1 i
LMULt.LIULJUI
Project
Study
Alt. I
Alt.
2
Alt. 3
Alt. 4
JURISDICTIONAL
Area
-_
AREAS
Amount
Impacts
Pot,
Impacts
Pot,
Impacts
Pot.
Impacts
m
Pot,
Present
Temp.
Temp.
Temp.
Temp.
Impacts
impacts I
Impacts I
Impacts
Acres
W1
3._05
0,0
0.0
0.21
0.0
1.17
0.0
0.32
0.0
W2
0.62
-0.18
0,0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
W3
0.64
O.Oa
0.0
0,48
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
W4
0.56
0.32
0.0
0.34
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
W5
0.01
0.00
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0,0
0,0
U
W6
0.03
O.Oa
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
-
0.0
0.0
_eenCreek
Aberdeen
0.35
0.01
0�0
0.01
0.0
0.0
,0
0.0
-
0.0
UT Aberdeen Creek
0.05
0.0
0.0
0.02
0,0
0,05
0.0
1 0.03
0.0
Total: -
K3 -1
0.50
0. 0
1.06
0.0
-Feet
1.22
0.0
0.35
0.0
Linear
Aberdeen Creek
525
0a
0
213
0
0
0
0
UT Aberdeen Creek
259
0
0
65
0
223
0
165
0
Total:
784
0
0
278
0
223
0
165
0
" Bridged
Permits
This project is being processed as a Categorical Exclusion (CE) under Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) guidelines [Nationwide Permit (NWP) #23 (67 FR 2020, 2082; January 15, 2002)]. In
accordance with Draft Internal Policy: Cumulative Impacts and the 401 Water Quality Certification and
Isolated Wetland Programs, Version 1.3 (NC Division of Water Quality, May 3, 2002), bridge
replacements normally have low potential for cumulative impacts since little (if any) new impervious
surface is added and the projects are usually in already developed locales.
Mitigation
Utilization of 13M?s is recommended in an effort to minimize secondary impacts, including avoiding in-
stream work and use of a channel spanning structure. Temporary impacts associated with the
construction activities could be mitigated by replanting disturbed areas with native species and removal of
any temporary fill material within the floodplain upon project completion. On-site mitigation may be
possible through the removal of existing bridge and approaches with appropriate regrading to original
contours and replanting with desirable species, Final mitigation requirements rest with the COE.
Mitigation may be required for wetland impacts greater than 0.1 ac or stream impacts greater than 150 ft.
Federally Protected Species
Species with the federal classification of Endangered, Threatened, or officially proposed for such listing
are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Four federally protected species are listed for Moore County: Cape Fear shiner (Notropis inekistocholas),
red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii), and American
chaffseed (Schwalhea americans). (29 January 2003 USFWS list).
B-3680 3 September 2005

Cape Tear Shiner Biological Conclusion: No Effect
The Cape Fear Shiner is endemic to waters of the Cape Fear River Basin, Aberdeen Creek flows into the
Lumber River and is considered outside of the known river basin distribution for this species. No
potentially suitable habitat for the Cape Fear Shiner exists within the project study area and therefore this
project will not impact Cape Fear Shiner populations. A review of NCNHP records revealed no
documentation of this species occurring within 3.0 mi of the project study area.
Red - cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) Biological Conclusion: No Effect
NCNHP records document thirteen (13) occurrences of RCW between 1.0 and 3.0 mi of the project study
area. However, this species has not been documented from the project study area. No pine dominated
forested communities are present in the project study area that could provide potential foraging or nesting
habitat for the RCW. Pines present in the project study area are in forest stands dominated by hardwoods
(c50% pine) and would not be considered suitable RCW habitat. No potentially suitable habitat for this
species is present within the project study area this project will not affect this species.
Aichaux's sumac Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac in the form of disturbed open areas with reduced
competition exists within the project study area along roadside margins and other similarly disturbed
plant communities. These areas are generally located on either cut or fill slopes in association with the
existing roadway or railroad corridor. A systematic survey of all potentially suitable habitat was
conducted by ESI biologist Kevin Lapp in June 2001 during the flowering season for this species.
Approximately 2 man -hours were spent conducting a plant by plant survey for this species. No
individuals of Michaux's sumac were observed during the 2001 survey.
Surveys for federally protected plants are valid for a period of 3 years after which a resurvey needs to be
conducted of any suitable habitat to confirm that the species is not present. Potentially suitable habitat in
the project study area was resurveyed for this species on 30 August 2005 by ESI biologist John Metrailer
and no individuals were observed. Approximately 2 man -hours were spent conducting a plant by plant
survey for this species after conducting reconnaissance at a reference population in Wake County to
determine the current vegetative status of this species. No individuals of Michaux's sumac were observed
in the project study area, therefore, construction of the proposed project should not affect Michaux's
sumac. A review of NCNHP records revealed no documentation of this species within 3.0 mi of the
project study area.
American chaffseed Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Potentially suitable habitat for this species in the form of open, frequently burned long leaf pine stands
does not occur in the project study area. The shrub layer in forested areas within the project study area is
too dense to provide potentially suitable habitat for this species. Therefore, construction of the proposed
project should not affect American chaffseed. A review of NCNHP records revealed no documentation of
this species within 3.0 mi of the project study area.
B_3680 4 September 2005
r

Conclusions
Within the project study area for this project there are six jurisdictional wetland areas and two
jurisdictional stream channels. Four alternatives are proposed in an effort to minimize impacts to
jurisdictional areas. All four alternatives have unavoidable impacts to jurisdictional areas. However, Alt.
1 avoids impacts to jurisdictional streams by bridging, and Alt. 4 minimizes impacts to wetlands but
impacts the UT to Aberdeen Creek. A biological conclusion of "No Effect" has been determined for each
of the four species listed as federally protected for Moore County. Potentially suitable habitat was
identified in the project study area for Michaux's sumac but a subsequent survey of these areas did not
identify any individuals of this species.
g_3680 5 September 2005
n V