HomeMy WebLinkAbout20120285_004_S_DEISGaston_ChS_Summary_20101222
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-1
SUMMARY
S.1 FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
(X) Draft ( ) Final
( ) Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation attached
S.2 LEAD AGENCIES, COOPERATING AGENCIES, AND
PARTICIPATING AGENCIES
The lead agencies for this project are the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the North
Carolina Turnpike Authority (NCTA), and the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT). The following individuals may be contacted for additional information concerning this
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS). Comments and questions may also be sent
to the project’s email address: gaston@ncturnpike.org.
Federal Highway Administration
Mr. John F. Sullivan, III, PE
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, NC 27601
Telephone: (919) 856-4346
North Carolina Turnpike Authority
Ms. Jennifer Harris, PE
North Carolina Turnpike Authority
5400 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 400
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone: (919) 571-3000
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Mr. Gregory Thorpe, Ph.D.
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Telephone: (919) 733-3141
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-2
The Section 6002 Coordination Plan for the Gaston East-West Connector identified agency roles
for this project (Section 9.2.3.2). The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is a cooperating
agency. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has been invited to be a
cooperating agency. The following agencies are participating agencies:
• US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
• US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
• NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ)
• NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC)
• NC Department of Cultural Resources State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
• Gaston Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (GUAMPO)
• Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization (MUMPO)
S.3 PROPOSED ACTION
The NCTA proposes to construct a project known as the Gaston East-West Connector, which
would be a controlled-access toll road extending from I-85 west of Gastonia in Gaston County to I-
485 near the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport in Mecklenburg County. Figure 1-1 shows
the general project location.
The project is included in the NCDOT’s 2009-2015 State Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP) as STIP Project U-3321. The project is known both as the “Gaston East-West Connector”
and as the “Garden Parkway.” This study refers to the project as the Gaston East-West
Connector.
S.4 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT
The purpose of the proposed action is to improve east-west transportation mobility in the area
around the City of Gastonia, between Gastonia and the Charlotte metropolitan area, and
particularly to establish direct access between the rapidly growing areas of southeast Gaston
County and western Mecklenburg County. The primary needs for the project are summarized
below:
• There is poor transportation connectivity between Gaston County and
Mecklenburg County and within southern Gaston County.
o Limited crossings of the Catawba River constrain travel between Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties. No crossings are located in southern Gaston County.
o Projected growth in southern Gaston County and western Mecklenburg County will
continue to increase demands for accessibility and connectivity between the two
counties.
o Within southern Gaston County, south of I-85, a lack of connecting east-west
roadways makes travel circuitous and limits mobility.
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-3
o The GUAMPO and the MUMPO include a new location roadway running through
southern Gaston County and connecting over the Catawba River to Mecklenburg
County in their long range transportation plans.
o The Gaston East-West Connector is a state-designated Strategic Highway Corridor,
envisioned as a new freeway facility on the Strategic Highway Corridors Vision Plan.
• There are existing and projected poor levels of service on the Project Study
Area’s major roadways.
o Traffic volumes are projected to increase on I-85, I-485, US 29-74 and US 321 in the
Project Study Area through 2030.
o There are existing poor levels of service on segments of I-85 in Gaston County; from
Exit 19 (NC 7 [Ozark Avenue]) through Exit 27 (NC 273 [Park Street]).
o Levels of service on I-85, US 29-74 and US 321 are projected to worsen in the future.
o Congestion and frequent incidents on I-85 inhibit regional travel and diminish the
ability of I-85 to function as a Strategic Highway Corridor and Intrastate Corridor.
A detailed discussion of the project’s purpose and need is included in Chapter 1.
S.5 OTHER MAJOR ACTIONS IN THE PROJECT STUDY
AREA
Fifteen other roadway projects in the NCDOT’s 2009-2015 STIP are in the general vicinity of the
proposed action. Two of these projects are rural projects (R-2608 and R-2248). Seven projects are
urban projects (U-2408, U-2713, U-3405, U-3411, U-3425, U-3806, and U-2325). Five projects are
bridge replacement projects (B-4517, B-4752, B-4753, B-4860, and B-4344). There is one
interstate project (I-5000). These are described in Section 1.8.1, and their general locations are
shown in Figure 1-7.
Charlotte-Douglas International Airport, located in west Charlotte near the eastern end of the
proposed project, is constructing a third runway (Section 1.5.2.2) scheduled for completion in
January 2010. The runway project requires the relocation of three area roads: Old Dowd Road
(SR 1191), Wallace Neel Road (SR 1195), and West Boulevard (NC 160) (Charlotte-Douglas
International Airport Web site:
www.charmeck.org/Departments/Airport/Runway+Road+Relocations.htm).
Charlotte-Douglas International Airport has plans for an “intermodal zone” that would combine
direct rail and truck access with incoming air cargo. The intermodal facility is planned to be
located between the new runway and the existing runway and is expected to have a 10-track rail
yard and approximately 2,500 tractor trailer parking spaces. Additional truck traffic generated
from the site would use the relocated NC 160 (West Boulevard) for access to and from the site
(Charlotte-Douglas International Airport Web site:
www.charmeck.org/Departments/Airport/Runway+Road+Relocations.htm). According to the
Airport’s 2007 Annual Report to the Community, planning for this facility is underway, but no
opening date was provided. However, it is likely it would open after the runway project is
completed in January 2010.
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-4
S.6 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
S.6.1 ALTERNATIVES SCREENING PROCESS
A two-step alternatives screening process was used to develop and evaluate a range of
alternatives and ultimately determine the Detailed Study Alternatives (DSAs) that are
considered in this Draft EIS. In the First Screening (Section 2.2), six alternative concepts were
evaluated to determine if they were reasonable and practicable based upon their ability to meet
purpose and need, their potential impacts, and their financial feasibility. The six alternative
concepts included:
• Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative
• Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Alternative
• Mass Transit Alternative
• Multimodal Alternative
• Improve Existing Roadways Alternatives (Toll and Non-Toll Scenarios)
• New Location Alternatives (Toll and Non-Toll Scenarios).
Only the New Location Alternative Toll Scenario was carried forward to the Second Screening.
In the Second Screening (Section 2.3), Preliminary Corridor Segments were overlain onto land
suitability maps, avoiding sensitive features to the extent possible and in accordance with the
design criteria. Based on a quantitative evaluation of the potential impacts of the preliminary
corridors and consideration of comments received through public involvement and agency
coordination, the set of 90 preliminary corridors was screened to twelve DSAs.
S.6.2 DETAILED STUDY ALTERNATIVES
There are twelve DSAs considered in this Draft EIS: DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, 27, 58, 64, 68, 76, 77,
and 81. These DSAs are controlled-access toll facilities on new location. In February 2005, the
NCTA Board of Directors selected the Gaston East-West Connector as a candidate toll facility.
Figure S-1a-b and Table S-1 present the 1,400-foot wide corridor segments that comprise the
twelve DSAs. Figure 2-9a–ii shows the corridor boundaries and the preliminary engineering
design right-of-way limits in each Corridor Segment, combined to create the DSAs. Corridor
Segments are wider than 1,400 feet in areas where interchanges and/or service roads will be
considered.
The preliminary engineering designs for the DSAs are for a controlled-access toll facility with six
lanes and a 46-foot-wide grass median. The preliminary engineering designs were initially based
upon traffic projections for DSAs for the Non-Toll Scenario. The traffic projections for the Toll
Scenario may show that four lanes may be sufficient. If the number of lanes is reduced from six
to four along the Preferred Alternative, that reduction would be achieved by removing the two
lanes in the center. The outside footprint of the project would remain the same. The width of the
grass median would change from 46 feet to 70 feet. The number of lanes and median width will
be resolved prior to the Final EIS.
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-5
TABLE S-1: Twelve Detailed Study Alternatives
West Area –
Generally west of US
321
Central Area –
Generally east of US 321 and west
of NC 279 or the South Fork
Catawba River
East Area –
Generally east of
NC 279 or the South
Fork Catawba River
Detailed Study
Alternative #
H Segments J Segments K Segments
4 H2A‐H3 J4a‐J4b‐J2c‐J2d‐J5a‐J5b K2A‐KX1‐K3B‐K3C
5 H2A‐H3 J4a‐J4b‐J2c‐J2d‐JX4‐J1e‐J1f K1A‐K1B‐K1C‐K4A
9 H2A‐H3 J4a‐J4b‐J2c‐J2d‐JX4‐J1e‐J1f K1A‐K3A‐K3B‐K3C
22 H2A‐H2B‐H2C J3‐J2c‐J2d‐J5a‐J5b K2A‐KX1‐K3B‐K3C
23 H2A‐H2B‐H2C J3‐J2c‐J2d‐JX4‐JIe‐J1f K1A‐K1B‐K1C‐K4A
27 H2A‐H2B‐H2C J3‐J2c‐J2d‐JX4‐JIe‐J1f K1A‐K3A‐K3B‐K3C
58 H1A‐H1B‐H1C J1a‐JX1‐J2d‐J5a‐J5b K2A‐KX1‐K3B‐K3C
64 H1A‐H1B‐H1C J1a‐J1b‐J1c‐J1d‐J1e‐J1f K1A‐K1B‐K1C‐K4A
68 H1A‐H1B‐H1C J1a‐J1b‐J1c‐J1d‐J1e‐J1f K1A‐K3A‐K3B‐K3C
76 H1A‐HX2 J2a‐J2b‐J2c‐J2d‐J5a‐J5b K2A‐KX1‐K3B‐K3C
77 H1A‐HX2 J2a‐J2b‐J2c‐J2d‐JX4‐J1e‐J1f K1A‐K1B‐K1C‐K4A
81 H1A‐HX2 J2a‐J2b‐J2c‐J2d‐JX4‐J1e‐J1f K1A‐K3A‐K3B‐K3C
The mainline design speed is 70 miles per hour (mph), with a planned posted speed limit of
65 mph. Each DSA currently is proposed to have 11 to 12 interchanges (depending upon the
DSA), as listed below from west to east.
• I-85 • Bud Wilson Rd (SR 2423)
• US 29-74 • NC 274 (Union Rd)
• Linwood Rd (SR 1133) • NC 279 (South New Hope Rd)
• NC 273 (Southpoint Rd) • Lewis Rd (SR 1126)
(DSAs 58, 64, and 68 only) • Dixie River Rd (SR 1155)
• US 321 • I-485
• Robinson Rd (SR 2416)
In addition to the twelve new location build DSAs, the No-Build Alternative is being retained to
provide a baseline for comparison with the DSAs, in accordance with National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) regulations (40 CFR Part 1502.14(d)) and FHWA guidelines (Technical
Advisory T 6640.8A; Section V.E.1). The No-Build Alternative assumes that the transportation
systems for Gaston and Mecklenburg counties would evolve as currently planned in their
respective Long Range Transportation Plans, but without major capacity improvements to I-85 or
to US 29-74. However, the No-Build Alternative would not meet the project’s purpose and need.
Tolls would be collected by an electronic toll collection (ETC) system. There would be no cash toll
booths. The primary means of ETC would involve pre-registration with the NCTA and use of a
transponder/receiver system. The transponder may be mounted on the windshield of a vehicle.
This would allow the vehicle to move through the toll-collection locations at highway speeds. The
user’s account would then be debited for the cost of the toll. The NCTA would work with other
toll authorities to enable, where possible, other systems’ transponders to work on the Gaston
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-6
East-West Connector. For travelers who do not have a transponder, a video system would
capture license plate information and the NCTA would bill the vehicle’s registrant. In addition,
in accordance with State law (NCGS 136-89.213), the NCTA would operate a facility in the
immediate vicinity of the project that accepts cash payment for prepaid tolls. It is anticipated
that this facility will operate from an existing commercial building within the project area.
S.7 RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
Based on the information available to date, including this Draft EIS, the FHWA, NCTA and
NCDOT have identified DSA 9 as the Recommended Alternative. This alternative is comprised
of Corridor Segments H2A-H3-J4a-J4b-J2c-J2d-JX4-J1e-J1f-K1A-K3A-K3B-K3C, as shown in
Figure 2-8a-b.
It should be noted that the “Recommended Alternative” is only a recommendation; it is not a
Preferred Alternative and it is not a final decision. The FHWA, NCTA and NCDOT have
identified a Recommended Alternative as a way of giving readers of the Draft EIS an indication
of the agencies’ current thinking. After the Draft EIS comment period ends, the FHWA, NCTA
and NCDOT will identify a Preferred Alternative based on consultation with local transportation
planning agencies, and state and federal environmental resource and regulatory agencies, as well
as consideration of agency and public comments on this Draft EIS and at the public hearings.
The Preferred Alternative may be developed further in the Final EIS. The NEPA process will
conclude with a Record of Decision, which will document the Selected Alternative to be
constructed.
DSA 9 has been identified as the Recommended Alternative based on the following
considerations. Please note this list is not in order of importance, but is organized by issues as
they are presented in the Draft EIS. Also, this list does not represent all benefits or impacts of
DSA 9, just those elements that differentiated DSA 9 when compared to the other DSAs.
Cost and Design Considerations
• DSA 9 is one of the shortest alternatives at 21.9 miles (all alternatives range from 21.4 to
23.7 miles).
• DSA 9 has the second-lowest median total cost ($1,282 million) (all alternatives range
from $1,281 million to $1,378.4 million).
Human Environment Considerations
• DSA 9 is one of the four DSAs with the fewest numbers of residential relocations at 348
residential relocations (the range being 326 to 384 residential relocations).
• Although DSA 9 is higher in the range of business relocations at 37 (the range being 24 to
40 business relocations), it would avoid impacts to Carolina Specialty Transport (provides
transportations services to special needs groups) that would occur under DSAs 58, 64, 68,
76, 77 and 81.
• DSA 9 is in the middle of the range of total neighborhood impacts at 25 impacted
neighborhoods (the range being 21 to 31 impacted neighborhoods).
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-7
• DSA 9 would have no direct impacts to schools. (DSAs 5, 23, and 27 also avoid direct
impacts to schools.)
• DSA 9 would not require relocation of known cemeteries. (DSAs 27, 68, and 81 also
would not require relocation of known cemeteries.)
• At Linwood Road, DSA 9 is one of three alternatives (DSAs 4, 5, and 9) that would avoid
impacting either the Karyae Park YMCA Outdoor Family Center or the Pisgah Associate
Reformed Presbyterian Church (part of the church property is also an historic site eligible
for listing on the National Register of Historic Places).
• DSA 9 is one of the three alternatives (DSAs 4, 5, and 9) farthest from Crowders
Mountain State Park.
• DSA 9 would avoid right-of-way requirements from Daniel Stowe Botanical Garden.
(DSAs 4, 22, 27, 58, 68, 76, and 81 also avoid these right-of-way requirements.)
• DSA 9 would avoid the relocation of Ramoth AME Zion Church and cemetery, which is
part of the Garrison Road/Dixie River Road community. (DSAs 4, 22, 27, 58, 68, 76, and
81 also avoid this church.)
• DSA 9 is one of the eight alternatives (DSAs 4, 9, 22, 27, 58, 68, 76, and 81) with the least
amount of right of way required from future Berewick District Park in Mecklenburg
County.
Physical Environment Considerations
• DSA 9 is in the middle range of estimated numbers of receptors impacted by traffic noise
at 245 receptors (the range being 204 to 309 impacted receptors).
• DSA 9 is one of the alternatives (DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27) that would impact the least
acreage of land in Voluntary Agricultural Districts. DSA 9 also is one that is expected to
have the least indirect and cumulative effects to farmlands.
• DSA 9 is one of the alternatives with the fewest power transmission line crossings at 14
crossings (the range being 13 to 18).
Cultural Resources Considerations
• DSA 9 is one of six alternatives (DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27) that would not require right
of way from the Wolfe Family Dairy Farm historic site. Selection of DSA 9 makes it more
likely that, if the US 321 Bypass is constructed at some future time, the project would
also avoid the Wolfe Family Dairy Farm historic site.
• DSA 9 is one of four alternatives (DSAs 5, 9, 23, and 27) with low to moderate potential to
contain archaeological sites requiring preservation in place or complex/costly mitigation.
Natural Resources Considerations
• DSA 9 is one of eight alternatives (DSAs 4, 9, 22, 27, 58, 68, 76, and 81) that would cross
the South Fork Catawba River and the Catawba River where the rivers have been more
affected by siltation and they are less navigable, and water-based recreation would be
affected less than with DSAs that cross farther south.
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-8
• DSA 9 would impact the least amount of Upland Forested Natural Communities at
882 acres (all alternatives range from 882 to 1042 acres).
• DSA 9 is one of the alternatives (DSAs 4, 9, 22, and 76) having the lowest potential to
indirectly affect upland wildlife species due to habitat fragmentation.
• DSA 9 is lower in the range of impacts to ponds at 4.1 acres (all alternatives range from
2.1 to 6.3 acres).
• DSA 9 is lower in the range of impacts to wetlands at 7.5 acres (all alternatives range
from 6.9 to 13.2 acres).
• DSA 9 is lower in the range of impacts to perennial streams at 38,894 linear feet (all
alternatives range from 36,771 to 50,739 linear feet).
• DSA 9 would have the fewest number of stream crossings at 91 (all alternatives range
from 91 to 120 crossings).
• DSA 9 is one of eight alternatives (DSAs 5, 9, 23, 27, 64, 68, 77, and 81) that has a
biological conclusion of No Effect relating to the federally endangered Schweinitz’s
sunflower.
S.8 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Table S-2, found at the end of this chapter, is a summary of the estimated direct and indirect
impacts to the human, physical, cultural, and natural environments for each DSA, and proposed
mitigation. A brief narrative summary is provided below.
S.8.1 NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE
The impacts from choosing the No-Build Alternative occur from the continuation of existing
conditions. Development patterns, land use changes, and neighborhood conditions would
continue to develop as they have been in the past. Traffic conditions would worsen, creating
traffic impacts that could affect the reliability of the transportation system and further reduce
mobility and accessibility within southern Gaston County and between southern Gaston County
and western Mecklenburg County. There would be no permanent or temporary impacts to
resources from construction activities.
S.8.2 IMPACTS TO THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
S.8.2.1 Land Use and Planning
Since the DSAs would be on new location, direct land use changes from any of the DSAs would
include converting the land needed for right of way from its existing use to a transportation use.
This land includes a wide variety of uses, such as industrial, commercial, residential,
recreational, agricultural, and undeveloped. The proposed project would be consistent with local
land use plans and regional, state, and local transportation plans (Section 3.1.3).
The Gaston East-West Connector would provide better access to portions of Gaston County,
potentially facilitating faster growth and different kinds of development than under the No-Build
Alternative. Growth induced in western Mecklenburg County from the project is expected to be
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-9
moderate, although the roadway would potentially accelerate non-residential construction plans,
particularly in the area of the Charlotte-Douglas International Airport. The Charlotte-Douglas
International Airport is a generator of cumulative effects and is currently expanding roadway
access points; adding a third runway on the west side of the facility; and creating a new
intermodal (rail switching area) facility on the existing airport site. The project also would
provide improved access to portions of York County, South Carolina, resulting in a moderate
potential for indirect impacts in York County.
S.8.2.2 Relocations
All DSAs would require the relocation of residences and businesses. The total number of
residential relocations estimated for each DSA ranges from 326 residences (DSA 68) to 384
residences (DSA 76). Eight of the DSAs (DSAs 5, 9, 23, 27, 64, 68, 77, and 81) would include one
to two farm relocations. Business relocations would range from 24 (DSA 77) to 40 (DSA 22).
Most of the business relocations for each DSA are concentrated around US 321, US 29-74 and
I-85. The NCTA will follow the NCDOT’s policies for right-of-way acquisition and relocation.
S.8.2.3 Neighborhoods
All DSAs would impact neighborhoods. The type of effect ranges from a minor right-of-way
encroachment with no relocations/access changes to total displacement of a neighborhood. The
most impacts to neighborhoods would be in the area between I-85 and US 321. The number of
named neighborhoods impacted by the DSAs ranges from 15 (DSA 68 and DSA 81) to 24 (DSA 5).
The number of rural (unnamed) neighborhoods impacted ranges from five (DSA 27) to ten (DSAs
58 and 64).
Indirect effects could occur to neighborhoods under any of the DSAs. The project could accelerate
land use changes and growth of non-residential uses, causing changes in the character of
neighborhoods locally.
S.8.2.4 Environmental Justice
Direct and indirect impacts to low-income and/or minority populations resulting from
implementing the Gaston East-West Connector as a toll facility are not anticipated to be
“disproportionately high and adverse”.
S.8.2.5 Community Resources and Services
Churches and Cemeteries. All of the DSAs, except for DSA 81, would result in an impact to at
least one church and/or cemetery. DSAs 4, 5, and 23 would result in the most impacts. DSAs 27,
76, and 77 would have the least impacts to these facilities, other than DSA 81.
Schools. A minor encroachment on Sadler Elementary School property would be needed under
DSAs 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, and 81. Normal use of the school and its access would not be impacted.
DSAs 4, 22, 58, and 76 could require land from the southeast corner and the front of the Forest
View High School property to construct the relocation of NC 274 (Union Road). All access points
to the school would remain. DSAs 5, 9, 23, and 27 would not impact either school.
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-10
Parks and Recreation Areas. All DSAs would require minor right-of-way acquisition from the
edges of the publicly-owned property designated as future Berewick District Park, owned by
Mecklenburg County. Private recreational facilities impacted by the DSAs include Karyae Park
YMCA Outdoor Family Center (DSAs 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, and 81), Carolina Speedway (DSAs 5, 9,
23, 27, 64, 68, 77, and 81), and Duke Energy Corporation’s Recreation Fields managed by the
Belmont Optimist Club (DSAs 4, 9, 22, 27, 58, 68, 76, and 81). In addition, DSAs 5, 23, 64, and
77 would require a minor right-of-way acquisition on the northeastern corner of the privately-
owned Daniel Stowe Botanical Garden.
Fire Stations. DSAs 58, 64, and 68 could require right of way from the front of the Crowders
Mountain Volunteer Fire Department along Bethany Road (SR 1112), but impacts to parking or
other uses are not anticipated.
Overall, the cumulative effects of population growth and development in southern Gaston County
could impact local school systems and place more of a burden on emergency management
services.
S.8.3 IMPACTS TO THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
S.8.3.1 Traffic Noise
Traffic noise from the DSAs was evaluated based on FHWA and NCDOT criteria. The numbers
of receptors estimated to be impacted by year 2030 traffic noise from the project range from 196
impacted Category B receptors for DSA 68, to 301 impacted receptors for DSA 76. Category B
receptors in the Project Study Area are mostly residential, with some churches. Few Category C
receptors (businesses) are impacted by noise along the DSAs, with the numbers of impacts ranging
from three businesses for DSA 77 to ten businesses for DSA 22. For an explanation of noise activity
categories (A, B, C, etc.), refer to Table 4-1 in Section 4.1.2.
Overall, ambient noise levels would be expected to increase in the vicinity of the DSAs due to the
cumulative effects of the proposed project, together with increases in population and land
development.
Barriers were evaluated to mitigate the impacts of traffic noise. Twenty-two locations were
identified where preliminary noise barriers were determined to be potentially reasonable and
feasible. In general, DSAs closer to the municipal limits (e.g. DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27),
particularly on the west side of the Project Study Area, have more noise impacts, a greater
number of noise barriers, and higher noise abatement costs. DSAs 4, 9, and 22 have the longest
length of barrier and the highest noise abatement costs. DSA 64 has the shortest length of
barrier and the lowest noise abatement costs. The determination of feasibility and
reasonableness is preliminary and subject to change based upon final design, building permits
issued as of the Date of Public Knowledge, and the public involvement process. A Design Noise
Study will be prepared during final design of the Preferred Alternative using updated traffic
forecasts and more refined engineering designs.
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-11
S.8.3.2 Air Quality
The Project Study Area is in the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill air quality region (which includes
Gaston County and Mecklenburg County), which is a moderate non-attainment region for ozone.
Mecklenburg County is a maintenance area for carbon monoxide.
Compliance of an individual project with the ozone and carbon monoxide NAAQS (National
Ambient Air Quality Standards) is demonstrated if the project is included in a conforming
transportation plan, which considers the urban area as a whole. The proposed project (STIP
Project U-3321) is included in both the 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) for the
portion of the project located in the GUAMPO area and the 2030 LRTP for the portion of the
project located in the MUMPO area, both of which are conforming transportation plans, and so
the project is in conformity with air quality standards at a regional level. The project is included
in both LRTPs as a four-lane, non-toll facility. If the Preferred Alternative is a toll facility, the
LRTPs will need to be amended prior to completion of the NEPA process to designate the project
as a toll road.
Compliance of a project with the carbon monoxide (CO) NAAQS also is considered at the localized
(hot-spot) level. It is concluded that the project would not cause or contribute to any new
localized CO violations or increase the frequency or severity of any existing CO violations since
none of the DSAs fit the criteria requiring a quantitative CO hot-spot analysis.
Mobile source air toxics (MSATs) were qualitatively addressed (Section 4.2.5.2 and
Appendix H). Analysis of MSATs is a continuing area of research and the tools and techniques
for assessing project-specific health impacts from MSATs are limited. These limitations impede
the FHWA’s ability to evaluate how mobile source health risks should factor into project-level
decision-making under NEPA.
S.8.3.3 Farmland
All proposed DSAs would involve the use of prime and statewide important farmland soils.
However, the impacts of the DSAs to prime and important farmland soils do not meet the
threshold of protection based on the evaluation under the Farmland Protection Policy Act
(FPPA).
There are 21 parcels currently participating in the Voluntary Agricultural District (VAD)
program that would be directly impacted by various DSAs. These parcels are mainly
concentrated in the area surrounding the intersection of Union Road and Union New Hope Road
with additional parcels along Robinson Road near York Road and north of Lewis Road near Camp
Rotary Road. The impacted VAD acreage ranges from 44.7 to 138.4 acres. DSAs 64 and 68 would
impact the most VAD acreage and DSAs 4 and 22 would impact the least VAD acreage.
Duck Crossing Farm in Corridor Segment J1c would require relocation with DSAs 64 and 68, and
the White Rock Horse Farm in Corridor Segment K1A would require relocation with DSAs 5, 9,
23, 27, 64, 68, 77, and 81. Because much of southern Gaston County is still rural, it is
anticipated there would be suitable replacement property available for farm relocation.
Future induced growth within the Project Study Area has the potential to convert farmlands to
other uses. These effects are projected to occur with or without the Gaston East-West Connector,
but at a higher rate if the project is implemented.
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-12
S.8.3.4 Utilities
All proposed DSAs would cross power transmission lines, natural gas transmission pipelines,
natural gas distribution lines, water lines, sewer lines, and other utilities. The NCTA would
coordinate with all utility providers to avoid or minimize service disruptions caused by
construction or permanent relocation/modification of the utility.
Future growth in the Project Study Area has the potential to place increased pressure on the
county’s water and sewer infrastructure. Future growth in some areas is constrained due to
current sewer capacity issues.
A Norfolk-Southern Railroad mainline runs east-west through Gaston County. It is close to, and
parallels, the east side of NC 274 (Bessemer City Road). Under DSAs 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, and 27,
modifications to the I-85/NC 274 interchange and the interstate mainline would require
replacement of the existing Norfolk-Southern railroad bridge over I-85. The NCTA would
coordinate with Norfolk Southern Railroad and the NCDOT Rail Division during final design if
DSA 4, 5, 9, 22, 23, or 27 is selected as the Preferred Alternative.
S.8.3.5 Visual Resources
DSAs that have a higher number of neighborhoods exposed to the roadway (i.e., impact a greater
number of neighborhoods with residential relocations) were estimated to have a greater degree of
visual impacts. Therefore, DSAs 4 and 5 would have the most visual impacts, and DSAs 27 and
81 would have the least.
All DSAs would result in visual impacts to riverfront residents (particularly those in proximity to
the Catawba River bridge) and to boaters on the Catawba River and South Fork Catawba River.
S.8.3.6 Hazardous Materials
Hazardous materials sites within and near the DSAs are generally concentrated around I-85,
US 29-74, and US 321. The potentially contaminated sites are estimated as having a low, low to
medium, or medium anticipated impact severity, and no sites have an anticipated impact severity
of high. DSA 64 contains the lowest number of potentially contaminated sites (12) and DSAs 4
and 9 contain the highest number of potentially contaminated sites (each has 24).
S.8.3.7 Floodplains/Floodways
The DSAs have been located in floodplains and/or floodways only in locations where existing
residential and business development and other human and natural environment constraints
have left no feasible alternatives to the use of floodplains. The effect of all DSAs on floodways
and floodplains can be mitigated effectively through proper sizing and design of hydraulic
structures (culverts, bridges, and channel stabilization). A detailed hydrologic and hydraulic
analysis will be performed for each stream crossing location along the Preferred Alternative.
Based on preliminary hydraulic analysis, DSAs 22, 23, and 27 would have the largest numbers of
bridges (eight bridges) and DSA 58 would have the least (six bridges). DSAs 4 and 58 would have
the most numbers of major culverts and pipes (47 culverts and pipes), while DSA 77 would have
the fewest (39 culverts and pipes).
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-13
DSAs closer to the municipal limits of Gastonia and Belmont (DSAs 4, 5, and 9) would cross the
most numbers of floodways, since floodway limits in Gaston County have only been defined for
areas within and near the municipal limits. DSAs that are closer to Crowders Creek (DSAs 4, 5,
9, 22, 23, and 27) have the most total floodway and floodplain crossings.
S.8.4 IMPACTS TO CULTURAL RESOURCES
S.8.4.1 Historic Architectural Resources
Eighteen resources on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places were
identified in the project’s Area of Potential Effects. None of the DSAs would result in an Adverse
Effect to a historic property on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Thirteen
properties would have No Effect from the DSAs. There are five properties with a No Adverse
Effect determination. Each DSA is associated with one to three of these properties. During final
design of the Preferred Alternative, the designs will be reviewed to ensure the applicable
conditions are met to maintain the No Adverse Effect determinations.
S.8.4.2 Archaeological Resources
The archaeological resource assessment included an evaluation of the potential for archaeological
site types that would merit preservation in place or would require costly and complex excavation.
The results indicate that DSAs 4, 22, 58, and 76 have the highest overall potential for these types
of archaeological sites, while DSAs 23 and 27 have the lowest potential. Regardless of ranking,
the Preferred Alternative, once defined, is recommended for additional survey to determine if
archaeological sites eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places are present.
The results of the archaeological survey will be reported in the Final EIS.
S.8.4.3 Section 4(f) and 6(f) Resources
Section 4(f) Resources. All DSAs would involve a minor encroachment into the undeveloped
parcels owned by Mecklenburg County that are designated for future park use as Berewick
District Park. It appears there are grounds for a finding of de mimimis effect, and NCTA intends
to seek a de minimis finding from FHWA. Section 4(f) property may be used where the FHWA
determines that the use of the property, including any measure(s) to minimize harm (such as any
avoidance, minimization, mitigation, or enhancement measures) committed, will have a de
minimis impact (as defined in 23 CFR 774.17) on the property. By publishing this Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS), FHWA is requesting comments on the proposed
finding of de minimis impact for the planned Berewick District Park. The final determination
regarding this property will be included in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final
EIS).
Of the five historic architectural properties within the DSAs, only the Wolfe Family Dairy Farm
would have a direct encroachment. Approximately 29 acres from the property would be required
to construct DSA 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, or 81. Provided specific conditions are met, there is a
determination of No Adverse Effect to the property. The FHWA has determined that the impacts
from DSAs 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, and 81 would constitute a de minimis effect, and therefore an
analysis of avoidance alternatives is not required. If DSA 58, 64, 68, 76, 77, or 81 is selected as
the Preferred Alternative, the FHWA intends to make a de minimis finding, and at that time the
Section 4(f) process would be complete for this property. The SHPO concurred with the de
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-14
minimis finding on August 11, 2008 (letter in Appendix A-5 from FHWA dated August 7, 2008,
with signed SHPO concurrence dated August 11, 2008).
Section 6(f) Resources. Crowders Mountain State Park is the only Section 6(f) resource
located near the DSAs. None of the DSAs would directly impact the park or convert any of the
park property to a non-recreational purpose.
S.8.5 IMPACTS TO NATURAL RESOURCES
S.8.5.1 Soil and Geology
The entire area underlain by the DSAs is rated “moderate” or “severe” for road construction,
meaning that the soil properties indicate special planning, design, or maintenance is needed to
overcome soil limitations. The expected soil limitations can be overcome through proper
engineering design, to be determined during final design.
S.8.5.2 Water Resources
Short-term impacts on water quality within the Project Study Area may result from soil erosion
and sedimentation. Construction impacts to water quality may not be restricted to the
communities in which the construction activity occurs, but may also affect downstream
communities. Long-term impacts on water quality also are possible due to particulates, heavy
metals, organic matter, pesticides, herbicides, nutrients, and bacteria that are often found in
highway runoff. Prior to construction, an erosion and sedimentation plan would be developed for
the selected alternative in accordance with the NC Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NCDENR) publication Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design and the
NCDOT’s Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.
Boating, fishing, and waterskiing occur on the Catawba River and South Fork Catawba River.
The DSAs that cross the South Fork Catawba River and Catawba River south of the Duke
Energy Corporation’s Allen Steam Station (DSAs 5, 23, 64, and 77) would cross in areas with
greater potential for impacts to recreational opportunities. Recreation likely would be
temporarily affected during construction of the bridges.
Lake Wylie is included in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) boundary for the
Catawba-Wateree Hydro Project for which Duke Energy has a FERC license. All the proposed
DSAs cross Lake Wylie and a FERC permit would be needed. The NCTA has initiated
coordination with Duke Energy Corporation regarding the FERC permit process. In addition,
FERC has been invited to be a cooperating agency in this study because FERC’s approval would
be needed for any of the DSAs.
The Gaston East-West Connector would have indirect and cumulative effects to water quality.
The longevity of indirect impacts that contribute cumulatively to water quality degradation,
when considered with other actions, is dependent on the magnitude and duration of upstream
hydrologic events including sediment inputs, flooding, land use change (including changes in land
use regulations), and, ultimately, watershed stability. The effect of these events can be
minimized through implementation of local stormwater ordinances and Best Management
Practices (BMPs).
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-15
Actions including the airport expansion, residential and commercial development, and
infrastructure improvements have the potential to cumulatively impact water quality through
erosion and stream sedimentation, although there are stormwater management programs in
place to help minimize these effects. Increasing levels of non-point source pollution associated
with increasing impervious surfaces and land disturbing activities are anticipated with the
construction of any of the DSAs.
S.8.5.3 Natural Communities and Wildlife
Terrestrial (Upland) Communities. Both direct and indirect impacts from the DSAs would
occur to the terrestrial communities and the animals that inhabit them. Destruction of natural
communities along the DSAs’ rights of way would result in the loss of foraging and breeding
habitats for the various animal species that utilize the area. DSAs 5, 23, 27, 58, 64, 68, 77, and
81 would have a greater potential to indirectly affect upland species due to habitat fragmentation
because these corridor segments are located the farthest distance away from previously
fragmented forestland. DSAs 4, 9, 22, and 76 would have similar levels of lesser indirect effects
due to existing habitat fragmentation.
The impacts of habitat fragmentation can be reduced by providing connections between habitats
on either side of the Gaston East-West Connector. During final design, the NCTA will coordinate
with the USFWS, USEPA, and the NCWRC on the possible design of the wildlife passage at
Stream S156. All DSAs cross Stream S156, located between Forbes Road to the west and
Robinson Road to the east.
Aquatic Communities. Impacts to aquatic communities include fluctuations in water
temperature as a result of the loss of riparian (forest) vegetation. Construction impacts may not
be restricted to the communities in which the construction activity occurs, but may also affect
downstream communities. Temporary and permanent impacts to aquatic organisms may result
from increased sedimentation. Impacts to aquatic communities and wildlife from erosion and
sedimentation will be minimized through implementation of a stringent erosion-control schedule
and the use of BMPs.
Invasive Species. Construction of any of the DSAs has the potential to provide opportunities
for invasive plant species. Known invasive plant species will not be used in construction,
revegetation or landscaping. BMPs will be implemented to reduce the potential for spreading
invasives.
S.8.5.4 Jurisdictional Resources
Wetlands, Streams, and Ponds. Project construction for any of the DSAs cannot be
accomplished without infringing on surface waters; including streams, wetlands, and ponds.
Anticipated surface water impacts are under the jurisdiction of the USACE and the NCDWQ.
Most stream impacts would occur to perennial streams. DSA 58 and DSA 22 would impact the
most linear feet of perennial stream, at 50,739 linear feet and 50,100 linear feet, respectively. The
fewest linear feet of perennial stream impacts would occur with DSA 81 (36,771 linear feet) and
DSA 68 (37,223 linear feet).
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-16
Wetland impacts for the DSAs range from 6.9 acres for DSA 5 to 13.2 acres for DSA 68. The
three DSAs with the most wetland impacts (DSAs 58, 64, and 68) are those that use Corridor
Segment H1C, the westernmost corridor segment.
Pond impacts range from 2.1 acres for DSA 68 to 6.3 acres for DSA 4.
Implementation of any of the DSAs would require an Individual Section 404 Permit from the
USACE for the surface water impacts, and a corresponding Section 401 Water Quality
Certification from the NCDWQ. Mitigation for impacts will be required under the permit.
Catawba Buffer Rules. Based upon the preliminary engineering designs within each DSA,
impacts to the Catawba River riparian buffers are projected for the crossings of Lake Wylie.
Since Lake Wylie spans the Project Study Area, none of the DSAs could avoid crossing Catawba
River buffers. DSAs 4, 22, 58, and 76 would have the least overall impacts to Catawba River
buffers. These DSAs would be designated as uses that are allowable without mitigation because
they would cumulatively impact less than one-third acre (14,505 square feet) of buffer area.
DSAs 5, 9, 23, 27, 64, 68, 77, and 81 would be designated as uses that are allowable with
mitigation because they would cumulatively impact more than one-third acre of buffer.
S.8.5.5 Protected Species
The DSAs were surveyed for federally protected plants and animals: bald eagle, bog turtle,
Carolina heelsplitter (mussel), Michaux’s sumac, Schweinitz’s sunflower, and smooth coneflower.
The DSAs are anticipated to have no effects on bald eagle, bog turtle, Carolina heelsplitter,
Michaux’s sumac and smooth coneflower.
There is a population of the endangered Schweinitz’s sunflower on the northern edge of Corridor
Segment K2A (DSAs 4, 22, 58, and 76). Due to its location along the northern edge of the DSA
corridor, it is assumed that all direct impacts to the observed Schweinitz's sunflower population
can be avoided. Indirect impacts from the DSAs to this site also are not likely. Concurrence from
the USFWS on the biological conclusion of May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Effect would be
needed if DSA 4, 22, 58 or 76 is selected as the Preferred Alternative. Only informal consultation
is likely to be required.
S.9 UNRESOLVED ISSUES AND AREAS OF
CONTROVERSY
Unresolved issues to be addressed prior to the publication of the Final Environmental Impact
Statement (Final EIS) include:
• Selection of the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) and
Preferred Alternative, and identification of avoidance and minimization efforts within the
corridor of the selected alternative.
• Preparation of a conceptual mitigation plan for unavoidable wetland and stream impacts.
• Completion of additional archaeological surveys for the Preferred Alternative corridor.
• Amendment of the local LRTPs to ensure consistency of design concept and scope with
the Preferred Alternative (if the Preferred Alternative is a toll facility).
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-17
S.10 OTHER GOVERNMENT ACTIONS REQUIRED
S.10.1 PERMITS REQUIRED
All the proposed DSAs for the Gaston East-West Connector would require environmental
regulatory permits from the following agencies:
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Section 404 Permit. A permit from the USACE is required for any activity in water or
wetlands that would discharge dredged or fill materials in to Waters of the United States
and adjacent wetlands. To obtain permit approval, impacts to wetlands must be
mitigated through avoidance, minimization and compensation measures in accordance
with the Memorandum of Agreement Between the Environmental Protection Agency and
the Department of the Army Concerning the Determination of Mitigation Under the Clean
Water Act Section 404 (b)(1) Guidelines (February 1990). Additional policy and guidance
is provided through the NEPA/404 Merger Agreement (May 1997).
Authority. Federal Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 and Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act of 1977. Regulations promulgated in 33 CFR Part 323.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Section 404 Permit Review. The USFWS reviews Section 404 permits and provides
recommendations to the USACE on how impacts to fish and wildlife resources and
habitats can be minimized.
Authority. Endangered Species Act of 1973, Section 7; Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Permit. Lake Wylie is included in the
FERC boundary for the Catawba-Wateree Hydro Project for which Duke Energy
Corporation has a FERC license. Any crossings of Lake Wylie’s contour line at 569.4 feet
above Mean Sea Level require a permit. All DSAs would cross Lake Wylie. Upon
identification of a Preferred Alternative, the NCTA will coordinate with Duke Energy
Corporation to comply with the FERC permit process. The process is anticipated to
result in a FERC license revision to allow the transfer of land within the FERC project
boundary to the NCTA to construct the Gaston East-West Connector including bridges
over Lake Wylie. Information on FERC licensing can be found at the FERC Web site:
www.ferc.gov.
Authority. Federal Power Act, 16 USC 791a-825r, 2601-2645 and 42 USC 7101-
7352. Regulations promulgated in 18 CFR Part 4 (FERC Web site:
www.ferc.gov/legal/maj-ord-reg.asp).
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-18
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality
Section 401 Water Quality Certification. Any activity that may result in discharge to
Waters of the United States requires a certification that the discharge will be in
compliance with applicable state water quality standards. An application for a USACE
Section 404 permit (see above) is considered an application for a water quality
certification.
Authority. North Carolina General Statute 143, Article 21, Part 1. Regulations
promulgated in 15A NCAC 2H and 2B.
Catawba River Riparian Buffer Certification. The Catawba River Buffer Certification
will be obtained from NCDWQ in conjunction with the Section 401 Water Quality
Certification.
Authority. North Carolina General Statute 143, Article 214, Parts 20-23.
Regulations promulgated in 15A NCAC 02B.0243-0244.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. A permit is required
for projects involving sewer systems, treatment works, disposal systems and certain
stormwater runoff that could result in a discharge to surface waters. The state has the
authority to administer the national NPDES program for projects in North Carolina.
Authority. North Carolina General Statute 143, Article 21, Part 1. Regulations
promulgated in 15A NCAC 02H.0100.
Isolated Wetland Permit. NCDWQ has established rules to protect isolated wetlands and
isolated waters within the state of North Carolina. Activities which result in a discharge
in these areas may be authorized b the issuance of either an Individual Permit or a
Certificate of Coverage to operate under a General Permit.
Authority. North Carolina General Statute 143, Article 215, Part 1. Regulations
promulgated in 15A NCAC 02H.1300.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Land
Quality
Soil and Erosion Control Plan. Persons conducting any land-disturbing activity shall
take all reasonable measures to protect public and private property from damage caused
by such activities. Pursuant to NC General Statute 112A-57(4) and 113A-54(d)(4), an
erosion and sedimentation control plan must be filed and approved by the agency having
jurisdiction.
Authority. North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 15A. Department of Environment
and Natural Resources Chapter 4. Regulations promulgated in 15A NCAC 04B.0101.
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-19
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Air
Quality
Burn Permit. Any burning during construction of the proposed project will be done is
accordance with applicable local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North
Carolina State Implementation Plan for air quality in accordance with 15A NCAC
02D.0520.
Authority. Regulations promulgated in 15A NCAC 02D.0520.
Mecklenburg County Land Use and Environmental Services Agency, Department of
Air Quality
Burn Permit. Any burning during construction of the proposed project will be done in
accordance with applicable local laws and ordinances. This applies to work performed in
the Mecklenburg County portion of the project only.
Authority. Mecklenburg County Air Pollution Control Ordinance (MCAPCO)
Section 1.5106.
S.10.2 SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS
Approval of this Draft EIS does not complete the project implementation process. The Draft EIS
will be circulated to local, state, and federal agencies, local governments, and the public for
review. The following is a summary of actions to be completed prior to project construction to
advance the project through the NEPA process, Section 404 permitting, and other requirements.
Coordination with environmental resource and regulatory agencies will be maintained
throughout the process.
• A public hearing will be held to receive comments on the Draft EIS and the proposed
locations and designs of the DSAs. The comments received through the Draft EIS review
and public hearing processes will be thoroughly considered in the selection of the Least
Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA) and Preferred Alternative
by the NCTA in consultation with the FHWA, NCDOT, and the Agency Coordination
Team.
• Hazardous materials investigations will be conducted, if necessary, to further review sites
which could be potentially impacted by the Preferred Alternative.
• Preliminary designs may be refined for the Preferred Alternative, and will include efforts
to further minimize impacts to the human and natural environments, specifically to
streams and wetlands.
• Engineering designs for the Preferred Alternative will be provided to the HPO to
determine a survey protocol for further evaluation of archaeological resources along the
Preferred Alternative.
• A mitigation plan for unavoidable impacts to streams and wetlands will be developed in
consultation with the USACE.
• Additional surveys for protected species will be conducted as needed for the Preferred
Alternative, in conjunction with USFWS.
SUMMARY Chapter S
APRIL 2009 GASTON EAST-WEST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-20
The Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) will be prepared based on the results of
the items listed above. The Final EIS will be circulated for public and agency review. In
addition, agency concurrence with the Final EIS will be pursued. After approval of the Final EIS
and Record of Decision, additional public involvement will be conducted to receive public
comments on the refined preliminary engineering designs for the Preferred Alternative.
Final roadway design plans will be prepared, taking into consideration all public and agency
comments received on the preliminary designs and Final EIS. The following studies will be
conducted as a part of the final design process:
• Drainage and hydrological studies will identify and design major drainage structures.
• Traffic control plans will be developed to facilitate access during the construction phase.
• Surveys for wells within and adjacent to the proposed right-of-way limits will be
conducted.
• Noise analyses based on updated traffic and detailed design plans will be conducted to
evaluate whether or not potential noise barriers are still feasible and reasonable.
• Geotechnical investigations will be conducted to identify abandoned mine shafts and
recommend techniques and materials to overcome any soil limitations along the Preferred
Alternative.
• Project right-of-way limits will be finalized.
Other actions that must be completed prior to the start of project construction include but are not
limited to the following:
• Preparation of an erosion control plan incorporating the NCDOT’s Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.
• Coordination with municipalities and utility owners for relocation and reconfiguration of
utility systems.
• Implementation of the Relocation Assistance Program and other right-of-way programs.
• Approval of all required permits and certifications.
S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
Chapter
S
AP
R
I
L
2
0
0
9
G
A
S
T
O
N
E
A
S
T-
W
E
S
T
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
O
R
D
E
I
S
S-
2
1
TA
B
L
E
S
-
2
:
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
DE
T
A
I
L
E
D
ST
U
D
Y
AL
T
E
R
N
A
T
I
V
E
IS
S
U
E
4
5
9
22
23
27
58
64
68
76 77 81
Le
n
g
t
h
(m
i
l
e
s
)
21
.
4
21
.
5
21
.
9
21
.
9
22
.
0
22
.
4
23
.
1
23
.
3
23
.
7
21
.
8
21.9 22.2
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Co
s
t
s
(m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
$)
1
95
5
.
0
‐
1,
1
4
0
.
8
98
0
.
2
‐
1,
1
7
3
.
2
97
4
.
5
‐
1,
1
6
8
.
4
99
9
.
5
‐
1,
1
9
5
.
0
1,
0
2
2
.
6
‐
1,
2
2
8
.
2
1,
0
1
9
.
7
‐
1,
2
2
1
.
7
97
8
.
2
‐
1,
1
7
1
.
3
99
2
.
4
‐
1,
1
8
8
.
6
98
6
.
2
‐
1,
1
8
0
.
9
98
2
.
1
‐
1,
1
7
4
.
0
1,007.4‐1,209.6 1,000.5‐1,199.7
Ri
g
h
t
‐of
‐Wa
y
Co
s
t
(m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
$)
1
18
6
.
7
‐
22
8
.
5
19
9
.
1
‐
24
3
.
0
17
3
.
9
‐
21
3
.
0
19
7
.
0
‐
24
1
.
1
20
8
.
8
‐
25
5
.
5
18
3
.
5
‐
22
4
.
5
19
7
.
3
‐
24
1
.
3
21
5
.
7
‐
26
3
.
2
19
0
.
8
‐
23
3
.
2
18
2
.
4
‐
22
3
.
2
194.6‐ 237.6 169.6‐207.3
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Co
s
t
s
(
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
$)
1
38
.
9
‐41
.
1
34
.
8
‐36
.
7
32
.
2
‐34
.
0
40
.
4
‐42
.
6
36
.
4
‐38
.
4
33
.
8
‐35
.
7
41
.
5
‐43
.
7
34
.
3
‐36
.
1
31
.
8
‐33
.
5
37
.
7
‐39.8 33.2‐35.0 31.1‐32.8
To
t
a
l
Co
s
t
s
(m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
$)
1
1,
1
8
0
.
6
‐
1,
4
1
0
.
4
1,
2
1
4
.
1
‐
1,
4
5
2
.
9
1,
1
8
0
.
6
‐
1,
4
1
5
.
4
1,
2
3
6
.
9
‐
1,
4
7
8
.
7
1,
2
6
7
.
9
‐
1,
5
2
2
.
0
1,
2
3
7
.
1
‐
1,
4
8
1
.
9
1,
2
1
7
.
0
‐
1,
4
5
6
.
3
1,
2
4
2
.
4
‐
1,
4
8
8
.
0
1,
2
0
8
.
7
‐
1,
4
4
7
.
6
1,
2
0
2
.
1
‐
1,
4
3
6
.
9
1,235.2‐1,482.3 1,201.2‐1,439.8
Me
d
i
a
n
To
t
a
l
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Co
s
t
(m
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
$)
1
1,
2
8
0
.
5
1,
3
1
6
.
9
1,
2
8
2
.
0
1,
3
4
2
.
2
1,
3
7
8
.
4
1,
3
4
2
.
9
1,
3
2
1
.
2
1,
3
4
8
.
2
1,
3
1
2
.
6
1,
3
0
4
.
3
1,341.9 1305.0
LA
N
D
US
E
Co
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
wi
t
h
La
n
d
Us
e
Pl
a
n
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Ye
s
Yes Yes Yes
IC
E
2: Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
Ac
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
e
d
Gr
o
w
t
h
an
d
In
d
i
r
e
c
t
Ef
f
e
c
t
s
in
Ga
s
t
o
n
Co
u
n
t
y
Hi
g
h
Hi
g
h
Hi
g
h
Hi
g
h
Hi
g
h
Hi
g
h
Hi
g
h
Hi
g
h
Hi
g
h
High High High
RE
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
AN
D
NE
I
G
H
B
O
R
H
O
O
D
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
37
7
35
8
34
8
37
3
35
4
34
4
35
9
33
6
32
6
384 365 355
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
38
33
37
40
35
39
30
26
30
29 24 28
Na
m
e
d
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
21
24
18
19
22
16
17
21
15
18 21 15
Ru
r
a
l
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
3
8
8
7
6
6
5
10
10
9
7 7 6
IC
E
2: Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
in
d
i
r
e
c
t
ef
f
e
c
t
s
du
e
to
pr
o
x
i
m
i
t
y
to
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
Mo
s
t
Mo
s
t
Mo
s
t
Mo
s
t
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
Mo
s
t
Mo
s
t
Le
a
s
t
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
Most Least Moderate
S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
Chapter S
A
P
R
I
L
2
0
0
9
G
A
S
T
O
N
E
A
S
T
-
W
E
ST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-
2
2
TA
B
L
E
S
-
2
:
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
DE
T
A
I
L
E
D
ST
U
D
Y
AL
T
E
R
N
A
T
I
V
E
IS
S
U
E
4
5
9
22
23
27
58
64
68
76 77 81
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
Co
n
f
o
r
m
to
Un
i
f
o
r
m
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
Ac
t
;
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
pu
b
l
i
c
ou
t
r
e
a
c
h
ef
f
o
r
t
s
;
me
e
t
wi
t
h
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
or
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
representatives; continue to
ev
a
l
u
a
t
e
de
s
i
g
n
im
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
to
le
s
s
e
n
im
p
a
c
t
s
.
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
Y
SE
R
V
I
C
E
S
AN
D
FA
C
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Pu
b
l
i
c
Pa
r
k
s
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1 1
Pr
i
v
a
t
e
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
5
2b,
d
3b,
c
,
e
3b,
c
,
d
1d
2c,
e
2c,
d
2a,
d
3a,
c
,
e
3a,
c
,
d
2a,d 3a,c,e 3a,c,d
Sc
h
o
o
l
s
6
1
0
0
1
0
0
2
1
1
2 1 1
Ch
u
r
c
h
e
s
wi
t
h
Im
p
a
c
t
s
to
Ma
i
n
Bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
2
3
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
0 1 0
Ch
u
r
c
h
e
s
wi
t
h
Im
p
a
c
t
s
to
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
an
d
/
o
r
Ou
t
b
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
On
l
y
3
3
1
4
4
2
2
2
0
2 2 0
Ce
m
e
t
e
r
i
e
s
Re
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
1
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1 1 0
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
Co
n
f
o
r
m
to
Un
i
f
o
r
m
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
Ac
t
;
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
pu
b
l
i
c
ou
t
r
e
a
c
h
ef
f
o
r
t
s
;
me
e
t
wi
t
h
sc
h
o
o
l
di
s
t
r
i
c
t
re
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
v
e
s
re
g
a
r
d
i
n
g
si
t
e
pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
,
bus routes and property
en
c
r
o
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
;
co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
wi
t
h
ch
u
r
c
h
le
a
d
e
r
s
on
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
en
c
r
o
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
s
an
d
re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
st
r
a
t
e
g
i
e
s
;
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
to
ev
a
l
u
a
t
e
de
s
i
g
n
improvements to lessen impacts.
NO
I
S
E
IM
P
A
C
T
S
To
t
a
l
# of
Im
p
a
c
t
e
d
Re
c
e
p
t
o
r
s
30
2
27
1
24
5
29
8
26
7
24
1
27
2
23
1
20
4
309 278 276
IC
E
2: Ov
e
r
a
l
l
am
b
i
e
n
t
no
i
s
e
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
Weak to moderate effects Weak to moderate effects
NO
I
S
E
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
To
t
a
l
Le
n
g
t
h
of
No
i
s
e
Ba
r
r
i
e
r
s
(f
t
)
22
,
1
6
2
19
,
2
2
0
20
,
5
6
2
19
,
9
2
2
16
,
9
8
0
18
,
3
2
2
13
,
9
2
6
10
,
3
3
5
11
,
6
7
7
17
,
9
6
7
15,025 16,367
To
t
a
l
# of
No
i
s
e
Ba
r
r
i
e
r
s
7
13
11
12
11
9
10
8
6
7
10 8 9
S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
Chapter S
A
P
R
I
L
2
0
0
9
G
A
S
T
O
N
E
A
S
T
-
W
E
ST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-
2
3
TA
B
L
E
S
-
2
:
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
DE
T
A
I
L
E
D
ST
U
D
Y
AL
T
E
R
N
A
T
I
V
E
IS
S
U
E
4
5
9
22
23
27
58
64
68
76 77 81
Nu
m
b
e
r
of
Be
n
e
f
i
t
t
e
d
Re
c
e
p
t
o
r
s
19
1
15
7
16
9
17
1
14
4
14
9
13
2
98
11
0
161 128 139
AI
R
QU
A
L
I
T
Y
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
f
o
r
m
i
t
y
Th
e
LR
T
P
s
an
d
ai
r
qu
a
l
i
t
y
co
n
f
o
r
m
i
t
y
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
s
fo
r
th
e
MU
M
P
O
an
d
GU
A
M
P
O
re
g
i
o
n
s
wi
l
l
ne
e
d
to
be
up
d
a
t
e
d
pr
i
o
r
to
th
e
co
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
of the Record of Decision
so
th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
de
s
i
g
n
co
n
c
e
p
t
an
d
sc
o
p
e
ar
e
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
.
Mo
b
i
l
e
So
u
r
c
e
Ai
r
To
x
i
c
s
(M
S
A
T
s
)
Qu
a
l
i
t
a
t
i
v
e
as
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
.
Cu
r
r
e
n
t
to
o
l
s
an
d
sc
i
e
n
c
e
no
t
ad
e
q
u
a
t
e
to
qu
a
n
t
i
f
y
th
e
he
a
l
t
h
im
p
a
c
t
s
fr
o
m
MS
A
T
s
.
FA
R
M
L
A
N
D
IM
P
A
C
T
S
VA
D
8 Ac
r
e
a
g
e
Im
p
a
c
t
e
d
by
ri
g
h
t
of
wa
y
44
.
7
49
.
2
49
.
2
44
.
7
49
.
2
49
.
2
68
.
8
13
8
.
4
13
8
.
4
64
.
0
68.5 68.5
Fa
r
m
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
2
2
0 1 1
IC
E
2: Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
in
d
i
r
e
c
t
ef
f
e
c
t
s
on
ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
an
d
fa
r
m
l
a
n
d
Le
a
s
t
Le
a
s
t
Le
a
s
t
Le
a
s
t
Le
a
s
t
Le
a
s
t
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
Mo
s
t
Mo
s
t
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
Moderate Moderate
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
No
n
e
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
.
UT
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Po
w
e
r
Tr
a
n
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Li
n
e
Cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
10
14
13
14
14
13
14
18
17
17
17 15 17
Ga
s
Tr
a
n
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
Pi
p
e
l
i
n
e
Cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
11
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4 4 4
Ra
i
l
r
o
a
d
Cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2 1 2
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
Co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
te
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
an
d
pe
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
ch
a
n
g
e
s
in
ut
i
l
i
t
y
li
n
e
s
wi
t
h
ea
c
h
of
th
e
ut
i
l
i
t
y
pr
o
v
i
d
e
r
s
.
VI
S
U
A
L
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Ch
a
n
g
e
s
in
th
e
Vi
s
u
a
l
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
Mo
s
t
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Mo
s
t
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Le
a
s
t
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
Moderate visual impacts Least visual impacts
S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
Chapter S
A
P
R
I
L
2
0
0
9
G
A
S
T
O
N
E
A
S
T
-
W
E
ST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-
2
4
TA
B
L
E
S
-
2
:
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
DE
T
A
I
L
E
D
ST
U
D
Y
AL
T
E
R
N
A
T
I
V
E
IS
S
U
E
4
5
9
22
23
27
58
64
68
76 77 81
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a la
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
pl
a
n
fo
r
th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
.
In
v
e
s
t
i
g
a
t
e
th
e
fe
a
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
an
d
re
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
n
e
s
s
of
co
s
t
‐ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
tr
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
s
fo
r
th
e
bridge sides, piers, and railings to
en
h
a
n
c
e
ae
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
s
.
HA
Z
A
R
D
O
U
S
MA
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Ha
z
a
r
d
o
u
s
Ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
Si
t
e
s
wi
t
h
i
n
DS
A
Co
r
r
i
d
o
r
24
23
24
22
21
22
14
12
13
14 13 14
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
A mo
r
e
de
t
a
i
l
e
d
fi
e
l
d
re
c
o
n
n
a
i
s
s
a
n
c
e
wi
l
l
be
co
n
d
u
c
t
e
d
fo
r
th
e
Pr
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
.
FL
O
O
D
P
L
A
I
N
S
/
F
L
O
O
D
W
A
Y
S
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Fl
o
o
d
p
l
a
i
n
Cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
12
13
13
12
13
13
11
12
12
10 11 11
Lo
n
g
i
t
u
d
i
n
a
l
Fl
o
o
d
p
l
a
i
n
En
c
r
o
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0
Fl
o
o
d
w
a
y
Cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
10
10
10
9
9
9
7
7
7
7 7 7
Nu
m
b
e
r
of
Ma
j
o
r
Cu
l
v
e
r
t
s
/
P
i
p
e
s
(>
7
2
”
di
a
m
e
t
e
r
)
12
47
43
45
45
41
43
47
42
44
42 39 40
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
Th
e
ef
f
e
c
t
of
al
l
th
e
DS
A
s
ca
n
be
mi
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
th
r
o
u
g
h
pr
o
p
e
r
si
z
i
n
g
an
d
de
s
i
g
n
of
hy
d
r
a
u
l
i
c
st
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
(c
u
l
v
e
r
t
s
,
br
i
d
g
e
s
,
an
d
ch
a
n
n
e
l
stabilization). A detailed
hy
d
r
o
l
o
g
i
c
an
d
hy
d
r
a
u
l
i
c
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
wi
l
l
be
co
n
d
u
c
t
e
d
fo
r
th
e
Pr
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
.
CU
L
T
U
R
A
L
RE
S
O
U
R
C
E
S
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
wi
t
h
No
Ad
v
e
r
s
e
Ef
f
e
c
t
13
1a
2b,
c
2b,
c
1a
2b,
c
2b,
c
2a,
e
3b,
d
,
e
3b,
d
,
e
2a,e 3b,c,e 3b,c,e
Ov
e
r
a
l
l
Po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
Ar
c
h
a
e
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
Si
t
e
s
Hi
g
h
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
Hi
g
h
Lo
w
Lo
w
Hi
g
h
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
to
Hi
g
h
Mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
to
Hi
g
h
High Moderate Moderate
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
Du
r
i
n
g
fi
n
a
l
de
s
i
g
n
of
th
e
Pr
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
,
th
e
de
s
i
g
n
s
wi
l
l
be
re
v
i
e
w
e
d
to
en
s
u
r
e
th
e
ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
ar
e
me
t
to
ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
the No Adverse Effect
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
Th
e
Pr
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
,
on
c
e
de
f
i
n
e
d
,
wi
l
l
be
su
r
v
e
y
e
d
to
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
if
ar
c
h
a
e
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
si
t
e
s
el
i
g
i
b
l
e
fo
r
li
s
t
i
n
g
on
the NRHP are present.
S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
Chapter S
A
P
R
I
L
2
0
0
9
G
A
S
T
O
N
E
A
S
T
-
W
E
ST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-
2
5
TA
B
L
E
S
-
2
:
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
DE
T
A
I
L
E
D
ST
U
D
Y
AL
T
E
R
N
A
T
I
V
E
IS
S
U
E
4
5
9
22
23
27
58
64
68
76 77 81
SE
C
T
I
O
N
4(
F
)
/
6
(
F
)
RE
S
O
U
R
C
E
S
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Se
c
t
i
o
n
4(
f
)
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
wi
t
h
de
mi
m
i
n
i
s
Im
p
a
c
t
14
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2 2 2
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6(
f
)
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0 0
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
Al
l
ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
mu
s
t
be
me
t
in
or
d
e
r
to
ma
i
n
t
a
i
n
th
e
No
Ad
v
e
r
s
e
Ef
f
e
c
t
s
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
to
cu
l
t
u
r
a
l
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
.
Th
e
NC
T
A
will continue coordination with local
ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
wi
t
h
ju
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
ov
e
r
pa
r
k
an
d
re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
to
en
s
u
r
e
th
a
t
ri
g
h
t
‐of
‐wa
y
an
d
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
li
m
i
t
s
wi
t
h
i
n
th
e
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
boundaries are minimized to the
ex
t
e
n
t
fe
a
s
i
b
l
e
.
NA
T
U
R
A
L
CO
M
M
U
N
I
T
I
E
S
IM
P
A
C
T
S
15
Di
s
t
u
r
b
e
d
/
C
l
e
a
r
c
u
t
(a
c
r
e
s
)
55
2
56
1
56
7
54
4
55
3
56
0
51
3
53
5
54
2
514 523 529
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
(a
c
r
e
s
)
12
1
14
2
17
7
12
1
14
2
17
7
15
3
22
0
25
6
128 148 184
Up
l
a
n
d
Fo
r
e
s
t
e
d
(a
c
r
e
s
)
91
3
90
2
88
2
98
2
97
2
95
1
10
4
2
10
0
8
98
7
965 955 935
Su
c
c
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
(a
c
r
e
s
)
15
5
12
8
11
4
12
5
99
85
14
9
11
7
10
2
156 130 115
Op
e
n
Wa
t
e
r
(a
c
r
e
s
)
22
26
21
22
26
21
22
26
21
22 26 21
IC
E
2:
Ef
f
e
c
t
s
on
wi
l
d
l
i
f
e
an
d
ha
b
i
t
a
t
th
r
o
u
g
h
ha
b
i
t
a
t
fr
a
g
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
We
a
k
to
mo
d
e
r
a
t
e
ef
f
e
c
t
s
Strong effects Strong effects
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
An
er
o
s
i
o
n
an
d
se
d
i
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
pl
a
n
wi
l
l
be
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
fo
r
th
e
Pr
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
to
pr
e
v
e
n
t
ru
n
o
f
f
,
er
o
s
i
o
n
an
d
se
d
i
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
im
p
a
c
t
s
and to minimize impacts to
aq
u
a
t
i
c
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
an
d
wi
l
d
l
i
f
e
in
ac
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
wi
t
h
th
e
NC
D
E
N
R
gu
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
an
d
Be
s
t
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pr
a
c
t
i
c
e
s
.
Th
e
NC
T
A
wi
l
l
co
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
e
with the USFWS, USEPA, and
th
e
NC
W
R
C
on
th
e
fe
a
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
an
d
de
s
i
g
n
of
a wi
l
d
l
i
f
e
pa
s
s
a
g
e
at
St
r
e
a
m
S1
5
6
fo
r
al
l
DS
A
s
,
an
d
on
de
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
br
i
d
g
e
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
to
be
wildlife friendly when feasible for
al
l
DS
A
s
.
Co
n
t
r
o
l
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
wi
l
l
be
im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d
to
re
d
u
c
e
th
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fo
r
sp
r
e
a
d
i
n
g
no
n
‐na
t
i
v
e
pl
a
n
t
sp
e
c
i
e
s
.
S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
Chapter S
A
P
R
I
L
2
0
0
9
G
A
S
T
O
N
E
A
S
T
-
W
E
ST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-
2
6
TA
B
L
E
S
-
2
:
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
DE
T
A
I
L
E
D
ST
U
D
Y
AL
T
E
R
N
A
T
I
V
E
IS
S
U
E
4
5
9
22
23
27
58
64
68
76 77 81
JU
R
I
S
D
I
C
T
I
O
N
A
L
RE
S
O
U
R
C
E
S
IM
P
A
C
T
S
16
Po
n
d
Im
p
a
c
t
s
(a
c
r
e
s
)
6.
3
5.
1
4.
1
5.
1
3.
9
2.
9
5.
5
3.
1
2.
1
5.5 6.1 3.3
We
t
l
a
n
d
Im
p
a
c
t
s
(a
c
r
e
s
)
7.
4
6.
9
7.
5
8.
8
8.
2
8.
9
12
.
1
12
.
5
13
.
2
9.7 9.1 9.8
Pe
r
e
n
n
i
a
l
St
r
e
a
m
Im
p
a
c
t
s
(l
i
n
e
a
r
ft
.
)
48
,
2
9
6
42
,
7
3
3
38
,
8
9
4
50
,
1
0
0
44
,
6
0
9
40
,
7
6
6
50
,
7
3
9
40
,
9
1
5
37
,
2
2
3
46
,
1
0
5
40,033 36,771
In
t
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
n
t
St
r
e
a
m
Im
p
a
c
t
s
(l
i
n
e
a
r
ft
.
)
9,
0
4
8
9,
5
0
1
10
,
1
0
1
8,
9
5
3
9,
4
0
6
10
,
0
0
6
9,
5
0
5
9,
5
3
7
9,
9
8
6
9,
3
6
4
9,678 10,417
To
t
a
l
St
r
e
a
m
Cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
10
6
99
91
11
1
10
5
97
12
0
11
2
10
3
111 105 97
To
t
a
l
St
r
e
a
m
Im
p
a
c
t
s
(l
i
n
e
a
r
ft
.
)
57
,
3
4
4
52
,
2
3
4
48
,
9
9
5
59
,
0
5
3
54
,
0
1
5
50
,
7
7
2
60
,
2
4
4
50
,
4
5
2
47
,
2
0
9
55
,
4
6
9
49,711 47,188
To
t
a
l
Im
p
a
c
t
s
to
Ca
t
a
w
b
a
Ri
v
e
r
Bu
f
f
e
r
s
(s
q
ft
)
17
4,
1
4
5
22
,
5
9
0
20
,
6
1
5
4,
1
4
5
22
,
5
9
0
20
,
6
1
5
4,
1
4
5
22
,
5
9
0
20
,
6
1
5
4,
1
4
5
22,590 20,615
IC
E
2: Ef
f
e
c
t
s
on
wa
t
e
r
qu
a
l
i
t
y
,
we
t
l
a
n
d
s
,
im
p
a
i
r
e
d
wa
t
e
r
w
a
y
s
,
an
d
wa
t
e
r
s
h
e
d
s
Ve
r
y
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
Ve
r
y
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
Ve
r
y
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
Ve
r
y
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
Ve
r
y
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
Ve
r
y
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
St
r
o
n
g
ef
f
e
c
t
s
Strong effects Strong effects
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
Th
e
DS
A
s
in
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
to
av
o
i
d
an
d
mi
n
i
m
i
z
e
im
p
a
c
t
s
to
Wa
t
e
r
s
of
th
e
US
an
d
th
e
Ca
t
a
w
b
a
Ri
v
e
r
bu
f
f
e
r
s
.
Th
e
NC
T
A
ag
r
e
e
d
to include several bridges in
th
e
pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
en
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
de
s
i
g
n
s
,
be
y
o
n
d
th
o
s
e
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
to
co
n
v
e
y
fl
o
o
d
w
a
t
e
r
s
.
In
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
fi
n
a
l
de
s
i
g
n
ef
f
o
r
t
s
wi
l
l
ex
a
m
i
n
e
all appropriate and practical
po
s
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
of
av
o
i
d
i
n
g
an
d
mi
n
i
m
i
z
i
n
g
im
p
a
c
t
s
to
Wa
t
e
r
s
of
th
e
US
an
d
Ca
t
a
w
b
a
Ri
v
e
r
ri
p
a
r
i
a
n
bu
f
f
e
r
s
.
St
r
i
c
t
ad
h
e
r
e
n
c
e
to
Be
s
t
Management Practices will assist in
mi
n
i
m
i
z
i
n
g
pr
o
j
e
c
t
im
p
a
c
t
s
.
S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
Chapter S
A
P
R
I
L
2
0
0
9
G
A
S
T
O
N
E
A
S
T
-
W
E
ST CONNECTOR DEIS
S-
2
7
TA
B
L
E
S
-
2
:
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
o
f
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
I
m
p
a
c
t
s
DE
T
A
I
L
E
D
ST
U
D
Y
AL
T
E
R
N
A
T
I
V
E
IS
S
U
E
4
5
9
22
23
27
58
64
68
76 77 81
PR
O
T
E
C
T
E
D
SP
E
C
I
E
S
IM
P
A
C
T
S
Sc
h
w
e
i
n
i
t
z
’
s
Su
n
f
l
o
w
e
r
18
Ma
y
Af
f
e
c
t
/
N
o
t
Li
k
e
l
y
to
Ad
v
e
r
s
e
l
y
Af
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
Ma
y
Af
f
e
c
t
/
N
o
t
Li
k
e
l
y
to
Ad
v
e
r
s
e
l
y
Af
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
Ma
y
Af
f
e
c
t
/
N
o
t
Li
k
e
l
y
to
Ad
v
e
r
s
e
l
y
Af
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
May
Af
f
e
c
t
/
N
o
t
Li
k
e
l
y
to
Ad
v
e
r
s
e
l
y
Af
f
e
c
t
No Effect No Effect
Mi
c
h
a
u
x
’
s
Su
m
a
c
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Effect No Effect No Effect
Sm
o
o
t
h
Co
n
e
f
l
o
w
e
r
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Effect No Effect No Effect
Ca
r
o
l
i
n
a
He
e
l
s
p
l
i
t
t
e
r
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Ef
f
e
c
t
No
Effect No Effect No Effect
MI
T
I
G
A
T
I
O
N
Co
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
ne
e
d
e
d
fr
o
m
US
Fi
s
h
an
d
Wi
l
d
l
i
f
e
Se
r
v
i
c
e
on
th
e
bi
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
co
n
c
l
u
s
i
o
n
of
Ma
y
Af
f
e
c
t
/
N
o
t
Li
k
e
l
y
to
Ad
v
e
r
s
e
l
y
Ef
f
e
c
t
.
Once the Preferred Alternative is
se
l
e
c
t
e
d
,
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
su
r
v
e
y
s
wi
l
l
be
co
n
d
u
c
t
e
d
as
ne
e
d
e
d
.
No
t
e
s
:
1.
So
u
r
c
e
:
Ga
s
t
o
n
Co
s
t
Es
t
i
m
a
t
e
Su
p
p
o
r
t
Me
m
o
r
a
n
d
u
m
,
HN
T
B
,
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
20
0
8
2.
IC
E
= In
d
i
r
e
c
t
an
d
/
o
r
cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
ef
f
e
c
t
3.
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
no
t
na
m
e
d
/
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
av
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
GI
S
ma
p
p
i
n
g
,
bu
t
ar
e
a
s
co
n
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
cl
u
s
t
e
r
s
of
ho
m
e
s
an
d
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
ru
r
a
l
co
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
4.
Be
r
e
w
i
c
k
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
Pa
r
k
(o
w
n
e
d
by
Me
c
k
l
e
n
b
u
r
g
Co
u
n
t
y
)
5.
a)
Ka
r
y
a
e
YM
C
A
Fa
c
i
l
i
t
y
– im
p
a
c
t
to
st
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
,
en
t
r
a
n
c
e
,
an
d
pa
r
k
i
n
g
;
b)
Li
n
w
o
o
d
Sp
r
i
n
g
s
Go
l
f
Co
u
r
s
e
‐
ac
c
e
s
s
ch
a
n
g
e
on
l
y
;
c)
Ca
r
o
l
i
n
a
Sp
e
e
d
w
a
y
– ri
g
h
t
‐of
‐wa
y
en
c
r
o
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
and impact to parking ; d) Duke
En
e
r
g
y
re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
fi
e
l
d
s
– ri
g
h
t
‐of
‐wa
y
en
c
r
o
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
,
e)
Da
n
i
e
l
St
o
w
e
Bo
t
a
n
i
c
a
l
Ga
r
d
e
n
– mi
n
o
r
ri
g
h
t
‐of
‐
wa
y
en
c
r
o
a
c
h
m
e
n
t
6.
DS
A
s
4,
22
,
58
an
d
76
en
c
r
o
a
c
h
on
Fo
r
e
s
t
v
i
e
w
Hi
g
h
Sc
h
o
o
l
’
s
pr
o
p
e
r
t
y
ed
g
e
an
d
so
m
e
pa
r
k
i
n
g
ar
e
a
s
.
DS
A
s
58
,
64
,
68
,
76
,
77
,
an
d
81
en
c
r
o
a
c
h
on
Sa
d
l
e
r
El
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
y
Sc
h
o
o
l
property with no impacts to
sc
h
o
o
l
us
e
or
ac
c
e
s
s
.
7.
Un
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
lo
t
s
be
h
i
n
d
th
e
ba
r
r
i
e
r
mu
s
t
ha
v
e
a bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
pe
r
m
i
t
is
s
u
e
d
by
th
e
Da
t
e
of
Pu
b
l
i
c
Kn
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
fo
r
th
i
s
ba
r
r
i
e
r
to
be
co
s
t
ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
.
8.
VA
D
– Vo
l
u
n
t
a
r
y
Ag
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
a
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
9.
Ac
r
e
a
g
e
s
ar
e
ca
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
fo
r
th
e
pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
en
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
de
s
i
g
n
ri
g
h
t
of
wa
y
fo
r
ea
c
h
DS
A
.
Ar
e
a
s
of
pr
i
m
e
an
d
st
a
t
e
w
i
d
e
im
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
so
i
l
s
al
r
e
a
d
y
in
ur
b
a
n
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
were not included in the totals.
10
.
Th
e
r
e
ma
y
be
on
e
to
th
r
e
e
in
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
li
n
e
s
in
a po
w
e
r
tr
a
n
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
ea
s
e
m
e
n
t
.
Th
i
s
ta
b
l
e
re
p
o
r
t
s
th
e
nu
m
b
e
r
s
of
in
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
tr
a
n
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
li
n
e
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
.
11
.
Th
e
fo
u
r
ga
s
tr
a
n
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
pi
p
e
l
i
n
e
cr
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
ar
e
lo
c
a
t
e
d
in
th
e
tw
o
ea
s
e
m
e
n
t
s
th
a
t
cr
o
s
s
US
32
1
ne
a
r
Cr
o
w
d
e
r
s
Cr
e
e
k
Ro
a
d
.
12
.
In
c
l
u
d
e
s
al
l
of
th
e
mu
l
t
i
p
l
e
pi
p
e
s
/
c
u
l
v
e
r
t
s
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
at
in
t
e
r
c
h
a
n
g
e
s
.
13
.
a)
Th
o
m
a
s
Al
l
i
s
o
n
Ho
u
s
e
;
b)
Ha
r
r
i
s
o
n
Fa
m
i
l
y
Da
i
r
y
Fa
r
m
;
c)
JB
F
Ri
d
d
l
e
Ho
u
s
e
;
d)
Wi
l
l
i
a
m
Cl
a
r
e
n
c
e
Wi
l
s
o
n
Ho
u
s
e
;
e)
Wo
l
f
e
Fa
m
i
l
y
Da
i
r
y
Fa
r
m
14
.
De
mi
n
i
m
i
s
im
p
a
c
t
s
on
pu
b
l
i
c
l
y
‐ow
n
e
d
pa
r
k
s
ar
e
de
f
i
n
e
d
as
th
o
s
e
th
a
t
do
no
t
ad
v
e
r
s
e
l
y
af
f
e
c
t
th
e
ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
,
fe
a
t
u
r
e
s
an
d
at
t
r
i
b
u
t
e
s
of
th
e
Se
c
t
i
o
n
4(
f
)
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
.
Be
r
e
w
i
c
k
District Park would be minimally
im
p
a
c
t
e
d
by
al
l
DS
A
s
an
d
it
ap
p
e
a
r
s
th
e
r
e
ar
e
gr
o
u
n
d
s
fo
r
a de
mi
n
i
m
i
s
fi
n
d
i
n
g
.
De
mi
n
i
m
i
s
im
p
a
c
t
s
re
l
a
t
e
d
to
hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
si
t
e
s
ar
e
de
f
i
n
e
d
as
th
e
de
t
e
r
m
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
of
ei
t
h
e
r
"No Adverse Effect" or "No Historic
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
Af
f
e
c
t
e
d
"
in
co
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
wi
t
h
Se
c
t
i
o
n
10
6
of
th
e
Na
t
i
o
n
a
l
Hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Ac
t
(N
H
P
A
)
.
Th
e
Wo
l
f
e
Fa
m
i
l
y
Da
i
r
y
Fa
r
m
wo
u
l
d
be
im
p
a
c
t
e
d
by
DS
A
s
58
,
64
,
68, 76, 77, and 81. The State
Hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
Pr
e
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
Of
f
i
c
e
ha
s
co
n
c
u
r
r
e
d
th
a
t
th
e
s
e
im
p
a
c
t
wo
u
l
d
co
n
s
t
i
t
u
t
e
a de
mi
n
i
m
i
s
ef
f
e
c
t
, an
d
FH
W
A
in
t
e
n
d
s
to
us
e
SH
P
O
’
s
co
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
c
e
as
a ba
s
i
s
of
a de
mi
n
i
m
i
s
finding for this property if DSA
58
,
64
,
68
,
76
,
77
,
or
81
is
se
l
e
c
t
e
d
as
th
e
Pr
e
f
e
r
r
e
d
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
.
15
.
Ac
r
e
a
g
e
s
ca
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
wi
t
h
i
n
th
e
DS
A
ri
g
h
t
‐of
‐wa
y
li
m
i
t
s
.
16
.
Th
e
s
e
im
p
a
c
t
s
we
r
e
ca
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
us
i
n
g
th
e
pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
en
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
de
s
i
g
n
s
’
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
li
m
i
t
s
,
wi
t
h
an
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
25
‐fo
o
t
bu
f
f
e
r
.
17
.
Th
i
s
in
c
l
u
d
e
s
im
p
a
c
t
s
to
bu
f
f
e
r
zo
n
e
s
1 an
d
2 fo
r
th
e
Ca
t
a
w
b
a
Ri
v
e
r
,
So
u
t
h
Fo
r
k
Ca
t
a
w
b
a
Ri
v
e
r
,
an
d
Ca
t
a
w
b
a
Cr
e
e
k
.
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
is
no
t
re
q
u
i
r
e
d
fo
r
im
p
a
c
t
s
of
le
s
s
th
a
n
one‐third acre (14,505 square feet).
18
.
Du
e
to
it
s
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
on
th
e
no
r
t
h
e
r
n
ed
g
e
of
th
e
DS
A
co
r
r
i
d
o
r
,
it
is
as
s
u
m
e
d
al
l
im
p
a
c
t
s
to
th
e
ob
s
e
r
v
e
d
Sc
h
w
e
i
n
i
t
z
'
s
su
n
f
l
o
w
e
r
po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
wi
l
l
be
av
o
i
d
e
d
.