Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20130918 Ver 1_Application_20130828 S TATE OF N ORTH C AROLINA D EPARTMENT OF T RANSPORTATION P AT L. M C C RORY A NTHONY J. T ATA G OVERNOR S ECRETARY MAILING ADDRESS: NC D EPARTMENT O F T RANSPORTATION P ROJECT D EVELOPMENT & E NVIRONMENTAL A NALYSIS U NIT 1598 M AIL S ERVICE C ENTER R ALEIGH NC 27699-1548 T ELEPHONE : 919-707-6000 FAX: 919-212-5785 W EBSITE :NCDOT .GOV LOCATION: C ENTURY C ENTER , B UILDING B 1020 B IRCH R IDGE D RIVE R ALEIGH NC 27610 August 26, 2013 U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Field Office 3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105 Wake Forest, NC 27587 ATTN: Mr. Andy Williams NCDOT Coordinator SUBJECT: Application for Section 404 Individual Permit and Section 401 Individual Water Quality Certification for the proposed Greensboro Eastern Loop from US 70 Relocation to SR 2303 (Lawndale Drive), Guilford County , Division 7. WBS Element No. 34821.1.1, TIP Nos. U-2525B and U-2525C. Debit $570.00 from WBS Element No. 34821.1.1 Dear Sir: The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT ) proposes to construct a section of the Greensboro Eastern Loop from US 70 Relocation to SR 2303 (La wndale Drive) in Greensboro, for a total of 9.7 miles. The project involves constructing a new four-lane freeway from US 70 Relocation to US 29 and a new six-lane freeway fr om US 29 to Lawndale Drive. In addition to this cover letter, the application package consis ts of an ENG Form 4345, Interagency Hydraulic Design Review meeting minutes for U -2525B (Concurrence Points 4B and 4C), Stormwater Management Plan, permit drawings (U-2525B onl y), onsite mitigation plans (Section U-2525B only), and half-size roadway plan sheets. T he North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) acceptance letter is forth coming. PROJECT SCHEDULE For construction purposes, the remaining Greensboro Eastern Loop project has been broken down into two sections, U-2525B and U-2525C. Section U-2525A was permit ted separately and completed in 2002. Table 1 reflects the project breakdown and se ction termini. Table 1. Description of Project Sections for Construct ion Purposes Section Project Termini Let Date U -252 5 A South of SR 3041 to US 70 Relocation (1.1 miles) Complete (May 200 2 ) U -252 5B US 70 Relocation to US 29 (5.0 miles) May 20 , 201 4 U-2525C US 29 to SR 2303 (4.7 miles) July 1 7 , 201 8 U-2525B & U-2525C Individual Permit Application 2 Permit drawings for the proposed project have been prepared based on final design for U-2525B. Preliminary design permit drawings have not yet been prepar ed for U-2525C. The NCDOT will apply for any relevant permit modifications for U-2525C when final design is complete. Construction will not commence on U-2525C until permit modificat ions have been received based on final designs. This project calls for a Let date of May 20, 2014 and a revie w date of April 1, 2014 for Section U-2525B. The Let date for Section U-2525C is July 17, 2018. However , the Let dates may advance as additional funds become available. PURPOSE AND NEED The purpose of the proposed project is to provide an efficie nt circumferential connection for major arterial thoroughfares such as I-85, I-40, US 29, and US 70, and to improve service for local traffic. NEPA DOCUMENT STATUS A Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Record o f Decision (ROD) for U-2525 (includes Sections U-2525A, U-2525B, and U-2525C) were approved on August 12, 1994 and March 7, 1995, respectively, and have been provided to the appropriat e agencies. Right of Way (ROW) Consultations for U-2525B to update the U-2525 FEIS were c ompleted on March 31, 2009, June 14, 2010, and February 24, 2012. No ROW Consultations have been done for U-2525C. Additional copies of the FEIS, ROD, and ROW Consulta tions will be provided upon request. INDEPENDENT UTILITY The subject project is in compliance with 23 CFR Part 771.111(f), which lists the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) characteristics of independent utility of a project: (1) The project connects logical termini and is of sufficient length to address environmental matters on a broad scope; (2) The project is usable and a reasonable expenditure, even if no a dditional transportation improvements are made in the area; (3) The project does not restrict consideration of alternatives for other reasonably foreseeable transportation improvements.. RESOURCE STATUS Wetland delineations within the U-2525B project study area foll owed the field delineation method outlined in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (USACE, 1987) and the Interim Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (USACE, 2010). Stream identification and classification followed the Methodology for the Identification of Intermittent and Perennial Streams and Their Origins (NC Division of Water Quality [NCDWQ], 2010 and 2005). A jurisdictional determination (JD) for both sections, dat ed September 26, 2005, was received from USACE. The JD expired on September 26, 2010. Jurisdiction al features were last re- verified by USACE Regulatory Specialist Andy Williams a nd NC Division of Water Resources U-2525B & U-2525C Individual Permit Application 3 (NCDWR) representative Amy Euliss on October 10, 2012, Decem ber 6, 2012, and January 29, 2013 for U-2525B only. A request packet for the final JD for U-2525B was submitted to the USACE on February 4, 2013. No written JD was received from the USACE for the re- verification. U-2525B This project lies within the Piedmont Physiographic Province in the Cape Fear River Basin [Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03030002]. Jurisdictional features within the U-2525B project study area that will be impacted include 4 unnamed tributaries (UT) to South Buffalo Creek (NCDWQ Classification WS-V; NSW; NCDWQ Index No. 16-11-14-2), 18 UTs to North Buffalo Creek (NCDWQ Classification WS-V; NSW; NCDWQ I ndex No. 16-11-14-1), and 4 UTs to UT at Camp Herman [NCDWQ Classification WS-V; N SW; NCDWQ Index No 16-11- 10-(2)], 2 ponds, and 34 riparian wetlands. U-2525C Jurisdictional features within the U-2525C project study area that will be impacted include 2 UTs to North Buffalo Creek (NCDWQ Classification WS-V; NSW; NCDWQ Index No. 16-11-14-1), 5 UTs to UT at Camp Herman [NCDWQ Classification WS-V; NSW; NCDWQ Index No 16-11- 10-(2)], 14 UTs to Reedy Fork [NCDWQ Classification WS-III; NSW, CA; NCDWQ Index No 16-11-(3.5)], and Richland Creek (Richland Lake) and 10 UTs to Richl and Creek [NCDWQ Classification WS-III; NSW; NCDWQ Index No 16-11-7-(1)], 3 pond s, and 16 riparian wetlands. There are no designated Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supply I (WS-I), or Water Supply II (WS-II) waters w ithin 1.0 mile of the project area. North Buffalo Creek and South Buffalo Creek, including the ir UTs, within the project area and within a mile of the project area are listed on the 2012 303(d) Final List of Impaired Waters of North Carolina due to standard violations of Copper (2008) and Zinc (2008). North Buffalo Creek, including its UTs, is also listed for standard violation of nitrite-nitrate nitrogen series (2012). IMPACTS TO WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES Utility Impacts There will be no impacts from utilities for Section U-2525B. Utility impacts for Section U-2525C will be evaluated during the permit modification proce ss. Surface Waters U-2525B Total surface water impacts for U-2525B are 10,255 linear feet of permanent stream impacts, 607 linear feet of temporary stream impacts, and 0.62 acres o f pond impacts. The jurisdictional stream impacts are summarized below in Table 2. U-2525B & U-2525C Individual Permit Application 4 Table 2. U-2525B Stream Impacts (Final) Permit Site No. Stream Name/JD Packet ID I/P Flow Status Impact Type Permanent Impacts (ft) Impacts requiring USACE mitigation (ft) USACE Mitigation Ratio 1 Impacts requiring NCDW R mitigation (ft) Temp Impacts (ft) 1 UT to South Buffalo Creek/SAF P Fill 1352 1352 2:1 1352 0 I Fill 332 332 1:1 0 3 0 4 UT to South Buffalo Creek/SAE P Fill 394 394 2:1 394 153 BS 98 0 2 n/a 98 0 5 UT to South Buffalo Creek/SAD P Fill 1598 1598 2:1 1598 20 6 UT to South Buffalo Creek/SAG I Fill 138 138 1:1 0 3 10 9 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SAA P Fill 462 462 1:1 462 10 9A UT to North Buffalo Creek/SAJ I Fill 84 84 1:1 0 3 0 10 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SZ P Fill 212 212 2:1 212 29 BS 97 0 2 n/a 97 0 11 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SY P BS 18 0 2 n/a 0 4 0 12 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SX P Fill 286 286 2:1 286 22 BS 30 0 2 n/a 30 0 13 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SW P Fill 137 137 2:1 0 4 7 BS 10 0 2 n/a 0 4 0 I Fill 32 0 5 n/a 0 3 0 14 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SV I Fill 347 347 1:1 347 35 BS 10 0 2 n/a 10 0 15 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SU P Fill 292 292 2:1 292 26 BS 20 0 2 n/a 20 0 16 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SS P Fill 382 382 1:1 382 43 BS 12 0 2 n/a 12 0 17 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SR I Fill 51 51 1:1 0 3 20 18 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SQ P Fill 241 241 2:1 241 20 BS 30 02 n/a 30 0 U-2525B & U-2525C Individual Permit Application 5 Table 2. U-2525B Stream Impacts (Final) continued Permit Site No. Stream Name/JD Packet ID I/P Flow Status Impact Type Permanent Impacts (ft) Impacts requiring USACE mitigation (ft) USACE Mitigation Ratio 1 Impacts requiring NCDWR mitigation (ft) Temp Impacts (ft) 20 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SL P Fill 815 815 2:1 815 49 20A UT to North Buffalo Creek/SL P Fill 236 236 1:1 236 29 20B UT to North Buffalo Creek/SM P Fill 29 29 2:1 0 4 0 21 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SI P Fill 374 374 2:1 374 10 22A UT to North Buffalo Creek/SK I Fill 142 142 1:1 0 3 10 BS 10 0 2 n/a 0 3 0 25 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SO I Fill 12 12 1:1 0 3 10 BS 12 0 2 n/a 0 3 0 26 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SI P Fill 319 319 2:1 319 11 BS 12 0 2 n/a 12 0 27 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SH I Fill 215 215 1:1 0 3 10 28 UT to North Buffalo Creek/SH I Fill 461 461 1:1 0 3 0 29 UT to UT at Camp Herman/SF P Fill 290 290 2:1 290 4 BS 10 0 2 n/a 10 0 31 UT to UT at Camp Herman /SD P Fill 191 191 2:1 191 27 BS 21 0 2 n/a 21 0 32A UT to UT at Camp Herman/SB P Fill 151 151 2:1 151 25 BS 28 0 2 n/a 28 0 33 UT to UT at Camp Herman/SC I Fill 115 115 1:1 0 3 10 BS 17 0 2 n/a 0 3 0 35 UT to UT at Camp Herman/SF P Fill 120 120 2:1 120 17 BS 10 0 2 n/a 10 0 TOTALS (ft) 10,255 9,778 8,440 607 Notes: P = Perennial; I = Intermittent; BS = Bank S tabilization; n/a = not applicable. 1 Determined from USACE during verification site visits on October 10, 2012, December 6, 2012, and January 29, 2013. 2 Mitigation for bank stabilization not required by U SACE. 3 Intermittent streams grandfathered from NCDWR mitig ation. 4 Mitigation not required by NCDWR (less than 150 lin ear feet of steam). 5 Stream deemed unimportant by the USACE requiring no mitigation. U-2525B & U-2525C Individual Permit Application 6 U-2525C Total preliminary surface water impacts for U-2525C are 12,646 linear feet of permanent stream impacts and 1.7 acres of pond impacts. This total was deri ved by calculating stream and pond impacts within slope stake limits plus 25 additional feet outside of slope stake limits. Impacts are anticipated to be reduced during final design. Wetlands U-2525B There will be a total of 7.65 acres of permanent riparia n wetland impacts associated with this section. These impacts will result from 6.96 acres of perma nent fill, 0.31 acres of excavation, and 0.38 acres of mechanized clearing. There will also be 0.03 ac res of wetland impacts due to hand clearing. Permanent and temporary wetland impacts are s ummarized below in Table 3 for U-2525B. Table 3. U-2525B Wetland Impacts (Final) Permit Site No. JD Package ID Permanent Fill (ac) Excavation (ac) Mechanized Clearing (ac) Total Impacts (ac) 1 WAP 0.57 0.04 0.61 1A WAO 0.03 0.03 1B WAN 0.01 0.01 2 WAQ 0.05 <0.01 0.06 3 WAM 0.12 0.12 3A WAX 0.03 0.03 3B WAL 0.02 0.02 3C WAK 0.25 0.02 0.02 0.29 4 WAI 0.02 0.02 5A WAH 0.08 0.08 5B WAG 0.02 0.02 6 WAE 0.03 0.03 6A WAD 0.05 <0.01 0.05 7 WAC 1.29 0.05 0.03 1.37 8 WZ 0.88 0.09 0.97 8A WAA <0.01 <0.01 9 WX/WY 2.07 0.15 2.22 10A WU 0.02 0.02 0.04 10B WT 0.03 <0.01 <0.01 0.04 10C WS 0.25 0.04 0.29 11 WR 0.33 0.33 13 WO 0.02 0.01 0.03 16 WAY <0.01 <0.01 18 WK 0.03 0.01 0.04 19 WJ 0.14 0.14 20B WI 0.02 0.02 21 WE 0.34 0.04 0.38 22 WH 0.03 0.03 U-2525B & U-2525C Individual Permit Application 7 Table 3. U-2525B Wetland Impacts (Final) continuted Permit Site No. JD Package ID Permanent Fill (ac) Excavation (ac) Mechanized Clearing (ac) Total Impacts (ac) 22A WF 0.02 0.02 22B WG 0.01 0.01 23 WAB 0.02 0.0 2 24 WAB 0.19 0.19 27 WAR 0.10 0.10 30 WA 0.03 <0.01 0.0 4 34 WAT <0.01 <0.01 TOTALS (ac) 6.96 0.31 0.38 7.65 Notes: Totals are rounded based upon sum of actual impacts. Most permanent impacts require 2:1 USACE mitigation except for Permit Sites 20B and 34 which USACE determined as 1 :1 mitigation. Permit Site 8A is an isolated wetla nd and therefore not under USACE jurisdiction. U-2525C Total preliminary wetland impacts for U-2525C are 2.4 acres. This total was derived by calculating wetland impacts within slope stake limits plus 25 additional feet outside of slope stake limits. Impacts are anticipated to be reduced during fi nal design. MITIGATION OPTIONS The USACE has adopted, through the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), a wetland mitigation policy that embraces the concept of “no net loss of wetlands” and sequencing. The purpose of this policy is to restore and maintain the chem ical, biological, and physical integrity of the waters of the United States. CEQ has defined mitigat ion of wetland and surface water impacts to include: avoiding impacts, minimizing impacts, r ectifying impacts, reducing impacts over time, and compensating for impacts (40 CFR 1508.20). The NCDOT is committed to incorporating all reasonable a nd practicable design features to avoid and minimize jurisdictional impacts, and to provide full c ompensatory mitigation of all remaining, unavoidable jurisdictional impacts. Avoidance meas ures were taken during the planning phase and minimization measures were incorporated as part of the project design. Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and pra cticable steps to reduce the adverse impacts. Avoidance and Minimization Avoidance and minimization has been employed in the project are a to the maximum extent practicable. The following measures were implemented for the project: U-2525B Minimization Measures · NCDOT’s Best Management Practices (BMPs) for the Prote ction of Surface Waters will be enforced; · Impacts to wetlands and surface waters were minimized us ing 2:1 side slopes where practicable. Sites with greater than 2:1 slopes are d ue to roadway constraints such as grade differences between roadway fill and natural ground, safe ty issues, and maintenance issues such as mowing; · No direct discharges into streams from proposed lateral ditches; U-2525B & U-2525C Individual Permit Application 8 · Grass swale treatment will be utilized in drainage sys tems discharging into jurisdictional streams; · All storm drainage will be diffused and designed for non-er osive velocities before entering wetland areas to the maximum extent practicable; · Rip rap stabilization on banks of jurisdictional streams will be implemented to prevent erosion; · Pre-formed scour holes will be constructed at 14 location s; · 4 box culverts will be buried one foot below stream bed with one foo t sill in one barrel; · Reduction of permanent wetland and stream impacts at Perm it Site 11 due to bridging; For additional avoidance/minimization for U-2525B see attached Stormwater Management Plan. Despite these best efforts of NCDOT, final wetland im pacts (10.05 acres) for U-2525B/U-2525C did increase from the impacts reported in the FEIS (5.1 ac res). The FEIS lists 11.2 acres of wetland impacts, but 6.1 acres of the 11.2 acres were for Sec tion U-2525A which has already been completed, leaving 5.1 acres for Sections U-2525B and U-2525C. The increase is due to new wetlands found within the project area that were not ca lculated in the FEIS. The difference between FEIS calculations and those done for this permit applic ation may be explained based upon differences in field determination methodology of wetlands used between the FEIS and this permit application. Calculations in the FEIS were based m ainly on desktop review using soil survey maps, US Geological Survey topographic maps, FEMA Fl ood Insurance Rate Maps, and stereographic interpretation of aerial photography to determine the locations and extent of the wetlands in the study area. A field reconnaissance was cond ucted only in selected areas for the FEIS. This mostly likely lead to an underestimation of actual wetlands when compared to complete ground-truthing as done in the most recent re-verifi cation of wetlands for this permit application. Stream impacts for this permit application cannot be accur ately compared to the FEIS since stream impacts in the FEIS were calculated in acres. Streams were treated as bank-to-bank wetlands in the FEIS, and therefore, received the same me thodology of determination for wetlands explained above. More accurate stream determinati on methodology has been developed well after the field work (1991) for the FEIS was completed . Therefore, it is assumed that an underestimation of stream impacts resulted in the FEIS base d upon the methodology used when compared to the more accurate methodology used for this permit a pplication. This is reflected by streams shown in the FEIS (fewer stream crossings) than what is shown in the most recent jurisdictional waters re-verification package sent to the U SACE in 2013. Compensatory Mitigation U-2525B Compensatory mitigation requirements for U-2525B are summari zed below in Table 4. The U-2525B section will permanently impact 10,255 feet of warm wat er streams. Of these 10,255 feet, there are 445 feet of bank stabilization and 32 feet of an intermittent stream that do not require mitigation by the USACE, resulting in 9,778 feet of s tream impacts requiring USACE mitigation. The USACE is requiring 2:1 mitigation for 4,746 feet and requ iring 1:1 mitigation for 2,977 feet of stream impacts. NCDWR is requiring 1:1 mitigation fo r 8,440 feet. Therefore, the total USACE mitigation requirement exceeds the NCDWR requiremen t. NCDOT is providing onsite mitigation of 2,055 feet of warm water stream by relocating or restoring streams at three sites. See Table 1 of the attached On-Site Mitigation Plan Docum ent for further information. The remaining mitigation requirements of 7,723 feet of permanent warm water stream impacts will be provided by the NCEEP for U-2525B (Table 4) U-2525B & U-2525C Individual Permit Application 9 NCEEP will also provide mitigation for the 7.65 acres (7.63 ac res at 2:1, 0.02 acres at 1:1) of permanent riparian wetland impacts resulting from roadway fi ll, excavation, and mechanized clearing. Table 4. U-2525B Required Compensatory Mitigation Summary (Fin al) Stream Impacts in Length (ft) Riparia n Wetland Impacts (ac) Impacts Requiring Mitigation 9,778 7.65 Onsite Mitigation Credits 2,055 Total Mitigable Impacts Less Onsite Mitigation 7,723 7.65 Required EEP Mitigation 4,746 @ 2:1 7.63 @ 2:1 2,977 @ 1:1 0.02 @ 1:1 Total EEP Mitigation 12,249 15.28 U-2525C Compensatory mitigation requirements for stream and wet land impacts are summarized in Table 5. The U-2525C section will permanently impact a total of 12,646 feet of warm water streams and 2.4 acres of riparian wetlands. Since these impacts a re preliminary, it is assumed that these impacts will require 2:1 mitigation by the USACE for the worst-case scenario. Once a final re-verification of streams and wetlands is made by the USAC E and NCDWR and final design drawings are complete for Section U-2525C, the mitigation req uirements will be revised in the Permit Modification for this section. Table 5. U-2525C Required Compensatory Mitigation Summary (Pr eliminary) Stream Impacts in Length (ft) Riparian Wetland Impacts (ac) Impacts Requiring Mitigation 12,646 2.4 Required EEP Mitigation 12,646 @ 2:1 2.4 @ 2:1 Total EEP Mitigation 25,292 4.8 FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES Plants and animals with a Federal classification of End angered (E) or Threatened (T) are protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. As of December 3, 2012, the U.S. Fish and W ildlife Service (USFWS) list one federally protected species for Guilford County: Small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides). A species description and biological conclusion for the small w horled pogonia was not stated in the FEIS because the species was added to t he USFWS county list of protected species after the documents were completed. A survey (U-2525B only) was done by Atkins, Inc. biologists on June 13-15 and June 18-19, 2012 and a biological conclusion of “N o Effect” was given for small whorled pogonia. A search of the North Car olina Natural Heritage Database on August 1, 2013 revealed no known occurrences of any federally protec ted species within 1.0 mile of the limits of this section. U-2525B & U-2525C Individual Permit Application 10 Since the FEIS the bald eagle has been delisted for Guilfor d County. The bald eagle was delisted as of August 2007 and is not subject to Section 7 consultation a nd a biological conclusion is not required. However, the bald eagle remains protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. No habitat exists in the U-2525 project study area for the bald eagle. CULTURAL RESOURCES One historic structure that is listed on the National Regis ter of Historic Places (NRHP) and that will be adversely affected from the proposed project inclu des the Schoolfield-Hatcher Farm. A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), regarding impacts to this property, between the USACE, NCDOT, and the North Carolina Department of Cultural Re sources, State Historic Preservation Office (HPO) was written and signed by all parties (las t signature date on October 2, 2008). The property owner concurred with the MOA on October 12, 2008 (ROW co nsultation dated March 31, 2009). Based on stipulations stated in the MOA, the proposed al ignment was shifted to reduce impacts to the Schoolfield-Hatcher Farm. The new transportation facili ty with control-of-access fencing will divide the farm into two discontiguous parcels. Access to the first parcel, containing the house and primary farm structures, will be retained via the curr ent driveway. NCDOT will provide a cul-de-sac to allow access to the second parcel. The driveway and cul-de-sac are included in the U-2525B final design plans. Another stipulation of the MOA involved developing a landscaping plan. In consultation with HPO and the property owner, NCD OT developed a landscape plan for the Schoolfield-Hatcher property which was approved on May 14, 2013. Another stipulation of the MOA states that prior to the initation of construction , NCDOT will record the existing condition of the Schoolfield-Hatcher Farm and its surroundings in accordance with the attached Historic Structures and Landscape Recordation Plan. Based upon the NCDOT Archaeological Survey Report dated Jan uary 22, 2008, NCDOT recommended three sites as being eligible for the NRHP. These sites include Site 31GF452** (Schoolfield-Hatcher Farmstead), Site 31GF456 (long-term multi -component Native American site), and Site 31GF466 (long-term Early Archaic to Middle Wood land Native American site). The proposed project will not adversely impact any of these s ites. However, archaeological monitoring will be conducted during initial ground-disturbing ac tivities at both Sites 31GF452** and 31GF466. Given the National Register eligibility of Sites 31GF456 and 31GF466 and their proximity to the proposed project, a visual barrier or fencing of some kind will be placed along the proposed right-of-way in order to avoid and prevent any disturbanc e to these two archaeological sites. Site 31GF445** (May/Hudson Cemetery) w hile not eligible, cannot be avoided and will be relocated in accordance with the provis ions of NCGS Chapter 65. In addition, five areas within the area of potential effect were not surveyed due to denial of access by the property owners. Of these five areas, only the Louis e Coble parcel (15.64 acres) is to be affected by the proposed project and will require additional investigations once access has been granted or right-of-way has been acquired and prior to any construction activities. HPO concurred with these recommendations and findings on September 12, 2008. FEMA COMPLIANCE There are streams within the project limits that are w ithin Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-designated flood zones. Coordination between the NC DOT Hydraulics Unit and FEMA will occur prior to Let to ensure that NCDOT i s in full compliance with applicable floodplain ordinances.