20091031 Ver 1_Environmental Assessment_20080924

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Wake County
Federal Aid Project No STPDA-0520(25)
WBS Element No 39949 1 1
TIP Project No. U-4901
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AND
THE CITY OF RALEIGH
Documentation Prepared By:
URS CORPORATION - NORTH CAROLINA
September 2008
{ ae NORrH C4
J~ = br? 4oG?
I
^e O
r
9?;fro TRANgQOP?
Submitted Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act 42 U.S.C 4332(2(c)
2&L,9,F `
Date of Ap roval Gregory J Thorpe, PhD
#A740le Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
?q( 0
Date of Approval John F Sullivan, 111, PE
ivision Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Ly", 4:r?
11
Date of Approval Dean Fox, E
Design/Construction Manager
City of Raleigh
W7@
np
- v cUUQ
QENR - w,
sr6n- w?`rFR aw
AICR
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Wake County
Federal Aid Project No STPDA-0520(25)
WBS Element No 39949 1 1
TIP Project No. U-4901
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AND
THE CITY OF RALEIGH
Documentation Prepared By:
URS CORPORATION - NORTH CAROLINA ` \\\\+? II111/,,,
CAR
September 2008 'SSO?
y ?Q?O?SEAL
O?r=9
18470
FN IN
Ed Edens, PE ?-,?„ ?`''
Project Manager and Roadway Project Engineer GLENN v
`\\\\1141111!!,,,
CARD
0S1, by
a don Hall, PE _ SEAL r
ructural Design Engineer 5953
?'q ,,NGI REF;. ?\.-
For the•%?' ?.?.
CITY OF RALEIGH
and
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
vest r Percival, El
Project Engineer - City of Raleigh
Vince Rhea, P
Project Engin r - North Carolina Department of Transportation
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and
PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
Falls of Neuse Road (SR 2000) Realignment and Widening
City of Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina
Federal Aid Project No STPDA-0520(25)
WBS Element No 39949 1 1
TIP Project No U-4901
In addition to the Section 404 Conditions, Regional Conditions, State Consistency, City of
Raleigh (City) controls for protecting surface water resources, North Carolina Department of
Transportation's (NCDOT) Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters
(March 1997), General Certification Conditions, and Section 401 Conditions of Certification, the
City of Raleigh has agreed to the following special commitments
1 Special construction techniques to minimize impacts during construction of structures
over the Neuse River will be considered
2 The City of Raleigh will further assess the affected properties for hazardous materials
and make nght-of-way recommendations accordingly Should hazardous substance sites
be discovered, measures to minimize and/or mitigate potential impacts would be
implemented
Environmental Assessment
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Environmental Assessment
•
• Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
•
•
• SUMMARY
•
• S.1. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
• The proposed action is designated in the 2009-2015 North Carolina Department of
• Transportation (NCDOT) State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as STIP project
number U-4901 and is described as "SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Road) widen to multilanes and
• realignment from Raven Ridge Road to Neuse River including new structure over Neuse River"
• The goal of this study is to identify solutions to create a new north-south connection over the
Neuse River and improve the efficiency of the local and regional area roadway networks while
• considering local human, natural and physical environments
• In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended, an
• Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared for the proposed Falls of Neuse Road
• Widening and Relocation Project The EA is intended for use as an informational document by
the decision-makers and the public As such, it represents a disclosure of relevant
• environmental information concerning the proposed action
The content of this EA conforms to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidelines,
• which provide direction regarding implementation of the procedural provisions of NEPA, and the
• Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA's) Guidance for Preparing and Processing
• Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents (Technical Advisory T6640 8A, 1987) The NCDOT
and FHWA are the lead agencies for the proposed action
•
• S.2. PURPOSE AND NEED
• The primary purposes of the proposed project (TIP U-4901) are
• • Improve north/south connectivity and local and regional access on project study
• area roadways in North Raleigh and northern Wake County
• Needs Addressed The City of Raleigh, Town of Wake Forest, and Wake County as whole,
• experienced unprecedented levels of growth over the past 30 years Much of this growth
• occurred and is still occurring in North Raleigh and areas north of the City extending along
• existing Falls of Neuse Road to the Town of Wake Forest The existing road network,
including north-south crossings of the Neuse River, does not support associated increases
• in traffic volumes and changing travel patterns
• Increase traffic capacity on congested roadway segments
•
• Needs Addressed The traffic capacity studies discussed in Section 2 4 show that in the
project study area, 2 of 3 existing signalized intersections are operating at level of service
• (LOS) E or worse in either the AM or PM peak hour for the current year (2007) In addition,
• all 3 signalized intersections will operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hours for the
• design year (2035) without the proposed project in place
Results of the adjacent system level of service show that in the current year (2007) all
• multilane segments and ramp functions operate at LOS D or better, however, 6 of 8
signalized intersections and the only unsignalized intersection are operating at LOS E or
• worse in either the AM or PM peak hour In the design year (2035), the results of the
•
•
•
•
Environmental Assessment S-1
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
analysis show that 5 of 8 signalized intersections, 6 of 10 basic freeway segments, and 6 of
16 ramp functions will operate at LOS E or worse in either the AM or PM peak hour
The City of Raleigh recognizes the need for an improved travel corridor and additional crossing
of the Neuse River to serve citizens who live and travel in the northern part of the City,
unincorporated areas of Wake County and the Town of Wake Forest SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse
Road) is a primary means of access to established communities and new development, as well
as, local recreational destinations including Falls Lake and the Neuse River The four (4) Build
Alternatives presented in this EA are being pursued to enhance local and regional connectivity
by providing an additional crossing of the Neuse River and improving traffic capacity throughout
the travel corridor
S.3. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
A full range of alternatives including the No-Build Alternative, Transportation System
Management (TSM) Alternative, Mass Transit Alternative, and four Build Alternatives are
presented and evaluated in this document In addition, alternatives (or options) for the new
structure crossing over the Neuse River are also presented
A description of the four Build Alternatives follows
Alternative 1 (Figure 9 a and b) is a 6-lane divided roadway with a raised landscaped median
Full movement intersections (conventional intersections that allow all turning movements) would
be provided at October Road, Dunn Road, Lake Villa Way/Tabriz Point and existing Falls of
Neuse Road The remaining intersections would be restricted to right-in/right-out operation
(eliminating left and through turning movements from the cross streets)
Alternative 2 (Figure 11 a and b) is a variation of Alternative 1 with the difference being that
directional median crossings (islands that allow left turn vehicles from the mayor roadway) would
be constructed for vehicles turning from Falls of Neuse Road onto Dehquston Road, Kings
Grant Drive/Whittington Road and Waterwood Court Providing left turn movements from Falls
of Neuse Road would improve access to these areas by providing a sheltered left turn
movement in the center island In this type of access known as a "left-over", the turning traffic
only needs to cross one opposing direction of traffic The flow of traffic is improved over
Alternative 1 with additional direct connections to side roads being provided
Alternative 3 (Figure 13 a and b) provides the highest level of traffic flow improvement of the
four Build Alternatives by redirecting all side street traffic to turn right and utilize u-turns provided
along Falls of Neuse Road Eliminating left turns from full movement intersections improves
safety by allowing vehicles to turn right into safe acceptable gaps in one direction of traffic and
then get into a sheltered median island and perform a u-turn into an appropriate safe gap in the
opposite direction of traffic This eliminates the necessity for a driver to accurately identify a safe
gap in two opposing directions of traffic on a multilane roadway The signal at Dunn Road would
be modified to provide protected left turns onto Dunn Road from southbound Falls of Neuse
Road and timing coordinated with an additional signal for a u-turn north of the intersection Left-
over access would be provided at Dehijuston Road and October Road
Alternative 4 (Figure 14 a and b) was developed based on citizen input and regulatory agency
feedback requesting an alternative that considered the need for direct access into the
neighborhoods along Falls of Neuse Road and that would still provide a safe roadway to meet
the predicted traffic volumes in the future The alternative added as Alternative 4 utilizes a part
Env?ronmental Assessment S-2
•
•
• Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
•
• of Alternative 2 and combines it with the desirable traffic operations aspects of Alternative 3
• Alternative 4 provides full movement intersections at October Road, Dunn Road, and Lake
Villa/Tabriz Pointe The intersection of existing Falls of Neuse would be restricted as in
• Alternative 3 to left-over operation with u-turn accommodations Left-over movements would be
• provided at Dehquston Road and Kings Grant Drive/Whittington Road Alternative 4 includes the
• option of placing a new left-over movement at Waterwood Court A new traffic signal would be
constructed at the existing Falls of Neuse Road intersection along with upgrades to the existing
• signals at Raven Ridge Road and Dunn Road
• S.4. STRUCTURE CROSSING OF THE NEUSE RIVER
•
• An analysis was completed for the new structure crossing that considered the economics of
different bridge cross sections, span arrangements, and construction materials, as well as,
• spanning waterways and the proposed Upper Neuse Greenway Impacts were quantified for
• natural resources and aesthetic consideration given with respect to the views from the planned
Upper Neuse Greenway, located on the south bank of the River, and general everyday users of
• the Neuse River Three bridge options were studied
• Option 1 (Figure 15) consists of three spans, 112-foot, 112-foot, and 100-foot, for a total length
• of 324 feet One set of interior bents would be in the river, while the second set would be
• constructed on the northern river bank The bents and end bents would be constructed on an
84-degree skew
Option 2 (Figure 16) consists of five spans, 45-foot, 67-foot, 78-foot, 67-foot and 67-foot, for a
total length of 324 feet Two sets of bents would be in the water and two sets on the bank The
bents and end bents would be constructed on an 84-degree skew
Option 3 (Figure 17) consists of three spans, 70-foot, 166-foot, and 100-foot, for a total length
of 336 feet No substructure elements are in the water The bents and end bents would be
constructed on a 77-degree skew The construction of this option is based on using structural
steel plate girders which would enable moving the bents out of the water
S.5. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
The potential impacts for the four Build Alternatives as discussed above are shown in Table S 1
Environmental Assessment S-3
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table S 1 Summarv of Imnacts Build Alternatives
Impact No-Build Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4
Local Community 0 + + + +
Land Use,
Development,
Transportation
0 + + +
+
Parks and
Recreation 0 0 0 0 0
Farmlands 0 0 0 0 0
Utilities 0 0 0 0 0
Relocations 0 0 0 0 0
Environmental
Justice 0 0 0 0 0
Historical and
Cultural Resources 0 0 0 0 0
Noise 0 0 0 0 0
Air Quality 0 0 0 0 0
Physical Features 0 0 0 0 0
Flora 0 0 0 0 0
Wildlife 0 0 0 0 0
Aquatic Resources 0 0 0 0 0
Floodplains 0 0 0 0 0
Significant Natural
Heritage Areas 0 0 0 0 0
Water Quality 0 0 0 0 0
Jurisdictional
Wetlands 0 0 0 0 0
Jurisdictional
Streams 0 0 0 0 0
Neuse River Buffer 0 0 0
- 0 0
Threatened and
Endangered Species 0 0 F
0 0 0
Key Positive Impact +
Negligible to Low Impact O
Medium Impact O
High or Adverse Impact •
Environmental Assessment S-4

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
S.6. INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
The project is primarily located in an existing suburban corridor with little developable land
available Therefore, the project is not expected to induce a substantial amount of new growth
- Individual parcel access along the corridor will be limited to existing driveway connections
Future driveway connections will be subject to approval by the City in accordance with current
zoning restrictions Any indirect and cumulative effects of the project are expected to be
- associated with encroachment-alteration rather than induced growth No further analysis of
. indirect and cumulative effects related to induced growth is recommended
Overall impacts to the region are expected to be positive However, several small businesses
- located along the realigned portion of Falls of Neuse will likely be indirectly impacted by a
reduction in drive by traffic
- While long-term economic impacts associated with the road widening and relocation protect are
considered positive, the short-term impacts during construction activities and local impacts to
bypassed businesses along the proposed realigned portion of Falls of Neuse Road are
- considered a negative impact Long-term traffic related noise is also a likely indirect effect of
the project to residents and businesses located in the immediate vicinity of the project
S.7. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT
The following Recommended Improvements for the Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and
- Widening protect are recommendations based on data collected and studies completed at the
time this document was published Changes to preliminary designs (both roadway and
structures) are subject to change in the final design to ensure compliance with local, State, and
Federal regulations and permits

Alternative 4 - begins approximately 500 feet south of the existing Falls of Neuse Road/Raven
Ridge Road intersection and proceeds north along the existing roadway until approximately
Waterwood Court The new alignment then leaves the existing alignment of Falls of Neuse
Road, makes a slight eastward turn and proceeds north bound on new location crossing the
Neuse River and connecting with New Falls of Neuse Road in the Wakefield development The
length of the widening section on existing location is approximately 1 46 miles The new location
section is approximately 0 78 miles including the new bridge structure over the Neuse River
The widening section would be comprised of a mix of symmetrical and asymmetrical widening to
balance and minimize property impacts to the greatest extent possible The land uses adjacent
to existing Falls of Neuse Road are primarily residential consisting of individual homes and
neighborhoods Existing intersecting streets would be re-connected to the widened Falls of
Neuse Road and with appropriate vertical grade adjustments Dunn Road would be widened to
accommodate additional turn lanes onto southbound Falls of Neuse Road at the existing traffic
signal to improve intersection capacity Individual driveways would be re-connected to the
widened roadway utilizing NCDOT standards In the area of the realignment and new location,
several roads would be terminated with cul-de-sacs and not be reconnected to the new location
section Existing Falls of Neuse Road would be realigned to form a new 4-leg intersection on the
new location section with the extension of Wide River Drive
The general typical section of the project would consist of a six lane, raised median divided
roadway with curb and gutter The standard median width would be 23 feet The median would
also have curb and gutter treatment with NCDOT standard 1-foot/6 inch curb and gutter on each
Environmental Assessment S-5
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
side The median would be narrowed in sections to facilitate turn lanes In several narrow
sections the median would be reduced to concrete islands to separate turning traffic
Lane widths for the cross section would consist of two inner 11-foot travel lanes and a 13-foot
wide outside travel lane to accommodate bicycle traffic The project cross section would also
include a 5-foot concrete sidewalk on the west side of the roadway and an 8-foot asphalt
sidewalk on the east side Appropriate ADA-accessible wheel chair ramps and cross walks
would be provided at intersections and street radius returns
Bridge Option 1 consists of three (3) span, dual structures with spans of approximately 112
feet, 112 feet, and 100 feet One (1) interior bent is located in the Neuse River and the other
interior bent located on the bank north of the river The bridges consist of reinforced concrete
decks supported on concrete girders The substructure consists of post and beam bents
founded on drilled shaft columns and conventional end bents with turn back wing walls
S.B. ANTICIPATED PERMITS
Construction of the project would result in activities requiring environmental regulatory permits
from federal and state agencies A list of these permits, organized by issuing agency, is
provided below The City of Raleigh would obtain all necessary permits prior to construction
Many of the environmental issues and mitigation measures discussed in this EA will be further
quantified and evaluated as final roadway designs are completed
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Section 404 Permit any action that proposes to place fill into "Waters of the United States" falls
under the jurisdiction of the United States Corps of Engineers (USAGE) under Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 US C 1344) The CWA provides for public notice and review of
pending Section 404 permit applications Encroachments into areas determined as subject
under the CWA must be reviewed and approved by the USACE through the Section 404
program It is anticipated that a Department of the Army Nationwide Permit #14 - Linear
Transportation Projects will be required, for impacts to the unnamed tributaries to the Neuse
River, and a Section 10 permit for the proposed bridge crossing of the Neuse River
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
Section 401 Water Quality Certification any activity which may result in discharge to navigable
waters and requires a federal permit must obtain a certification through the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) that such discharge would be in compliance with applicable
state water quality standards This permit is required in association with the Section 404
permitting process and is required prior to Section 404 authorization
The City of Raleigh is subject to the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permitting program for roadway construction and
material storage facilities The permit requirements include implementing a comprehensive
stormwater management program, monitoring the program, and annual reports of the program's
effectiveness and direction
Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules an "Authorization Certificate" is required for any non-exempt
activity within the 50-foot wide riparian buffer along all perennial and intermittent streams in the
Environmental Assessment S-6
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening

Neuse River Basin (including the Neuse River) A listing of allowable "uses" of the buffer areas
is provided in the rules
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Land Resources
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan in accordance with the North Carolina Sedimentation
Pollution Control Act of 1973, projects disturbing more than one acre of land must submit an
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan to the NCDENR Division of Land Resources (NCDLR)
The plan must include erosion control measures and be approved by the DLR prior to
construction
United States Coast Guard
Section 9 Permit a permit must be obtained for any new bridge built over navigable waterways,
including the Neuse River Bridge clearances are reviewed under this permit
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Forest
Resources
Open Burning Permit a permit is required to start a fire in woodlands or within 500 feet of
woodlands under the protection of the Division of Forest Resources Thirty day permits can be
issued for highway construction
S.9. COORDINATION
The following federal, state, and local agencies and officials were consulted regarding this
project
• U S Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District
• U S Coast Guard, Fifth District
• U S Environmental Protection Agency
• U S Fish and Wildlife Service
• Federal Highway Administration
• NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
- N C Division of Water QualityM/etlands
- N C Division of Environmental Health
- N C Division of Forest Resources
- N C Wildlife Resources Commission
• N C State Clearinghouse Department of Administration
• N C Division of Archives and History/Department of Cultural Resources
• Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
• City of Raleigh Department of City Planning
• City of Raleigh Public Works Department
• City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department
• City of Raleigh Council
• City of Raleigh City Manager
• City of Raleigh Fire Department
• City of Raleigh Police Department
• City of Raleigh Parks and Recreation
• Wake County Planning
• Wake County Schools - Transportation
Environmental Assessment S-7
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
S.10. CONTACTS
Federal Highway Administration
Mr John F Sullivan III, P E
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Telephone [phone]
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Dr Gregory J Thorpe
Manager, Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Telephone [phone]
City of Raleigh
Mr Dean Fox, P E
Design/Construction Manager
City of Raleigh Public Works Department
222 West Hargett Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
Telephone [phone]
Environmental Assessment S-8
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table of Contents
1 0 Description of the Proposed Action 7
1 1 Project Description of Proposed Action 7
1 2 Project Study Area 7
20 Need For Proposed Action 11
2 1 Existing Facility 12
2 1 1 Description of Existing Facility 12
212 Safety 12
22 Other STIP and City of Raleigh Projects in the Area 13
23 Other Modes of Transport 15
24 Traffic Analysis Methodology 15
241 Traffic Operations Analysis General Methodology 15
242 Design Level of Service 15
25 Traffic Capacity Analysis 16
251 Year 2007 Existing Traffic Conditions 19
2511 Year 2007 Project Study Area Analyses 19
2512 Year 2007 Adjacent System Level Analyses 19
2513 Year 2035 No-Build Conditions 24
2514 Year 2035 Project Study Area Analyses 24
2515 Year 2035 Adjacent System Level Analyses 24
26 Summary Purpose of and Need for the Project 27
30 Alternatives for the Proposed Action 29
31 No-Build Alternative 29
32 Transportation System Management 29
33 Mass Transit 30
34 Build Alternatives 30
341 Build Alternative 1 31
342 Build Alternative 2 35
343 Build Alternative 3 39
344 Build Alternative 4 43
35 Cost Estimates 47
36 Crossing of the Neuse River 47
37 Traffic Capacity Anlysis Summary of Build Alternatives 51
3 7 1 1 Adjacent System Level Analyses Summary 58
38 Build Alternatives Not Recommended for the Proposed Action 63
381 Alternative 1 63
382 Alternative 2 63
383 Alternative 3 64
384 Bridge Option 2 64
385 Bridge Option 3 64
39 Recommended Alternative for the Proposed Action 64
391 Detailed Description of Recommended Alternative 64
392 Cross Sections 65
393 Right of Way and Access Control 67
394 Design Speed 67
395 Intersecting Roadways 68
396 Structure and Drainage Recommendations 68
397 Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations 68
40 Environmental Impacts 71
41 Local Community 71
Environmental Assessment 1
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
41 1 Community Facilities and Services 73
412 Effects 73
42 Land Use, Zoning, and Development 74
421 Raleigh Comprehensive Plan 74
422 Falls of Neuse Corridor Plan 75
423 Zoning 77
424 Transportation Plans 77
425 Effects 79
43 Parks and Recreation 79
431 Parks and Recreation 79
432 Effects 80
44 Federally Owned Land 80
441 Federally Owned Land 80
442 Effects 81
45 Farmlands 81
4 5 1 Farmlands 81
452 Effects 81
46 Utilities 81
461 Electric 81
462 Water and Wastewater 81
463 Solid Waste/Recycling 82
464 Natural Gas 82
465 Telephone 82
4 6 6 Effects 82
47 Relocations 83
4 7 1 Relocations 83
472 Effects 85
473 Relocation Assistance 85
4 8 Environmental Justice 86
4 8 1 Identification of Protected Populations 87
482 Effects 88
49 Historic and Cultural Resources 88
491 Architectural Resources 88
492 Archaeological Resources 88
493 Effects 89
410 Flood Hazard Evaluation 89
4101 Floodways / Floodplains 89
4102 Neuse River 92
4103 Effects 92
4 11 Hazardous Materials 92
4 11 1 Database Search 92
4112 Effects 94
412 Noise 94
4121 Noise Abatement Criteria 94
4 12 2 Ambient Noise Levels 95
4 12 3 Future Traffic Noise Levels 98
4124 Traffic Noise Impacts 99
4125 Traffic Noise Abatement Measures 99
4126 Effects 102
4 13 Air Quality 102
4131 Attainment 105
Environmental Assessment 2
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4132 Microscale Analysis 105
414 Viewshed/Aesthetics 106
4141 Landscape 106
4142 Effects 106
4 15 Natural Environment 107
4151 Background Investigations 107
4152 Physical Characteristics 107
4153 Soils 107
4154 Effects 108
4155 Biotic Resources 110
4156 Flora 110
4 15 6 1 Maintained/Disturbed 110
4 15 6 2 Fallow Agricultural 110
4 15 6 3 Disturbed Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype) 110
4157 Wildlife 111
4158 Biotic Resource Effects 111
4159 Aquatic Resources 111
4 15 10 Aquatic Resource Effects 111
41511 Significant Natural Heritage Areas 112
4 16 Water Quality 112
4161 General 112
4162 Stormwater 113
4163 Water Quality Effects 113
4 17 Jurisdictional Topics 114
4171 Waters Of The United States 114
4172 Jurisdictional Wetlands 114
4173 Jurisdictional Streams 117
4174 Neuse River Buffers 117
4175 Jurisdictional Effects 118
4176 Neuse River Buffer Effects 118
4177 Avoidance, Minimization and Compensatory Mitigation 118
4178 Required Permits 119
4 18 Threatened and Endangered Species 120
4181 Federally Protected Species 120
4182 Species Of Concern 121
4183 Threatended And Endangered Species Effects 121
4 19 Summary of Impacts 122
4 20 Construction Effects 123
4201 Neuse River Crossing 123
4202 Utility Service 123
4203 Noise 123
4204 Air 123
4205 Biotic Communities 124
4206 Construction Waste 124
4207 Detours and Accessibility 124
4208 Cultural Resources 125
5 0 Indirect and Cumulative Effects 127
51 1 Future Conditions 129
51 1 1 Population Growth and Land Use Changes 129
5 1 1 2 Land Development 129
51 2 Effects Related to the Human Environment 129
Environmental Assessment 3
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
51 21 Alteration of Traffic Patterns and Access 129
51 22 Relocation or Alterations of Homes, Businesses, or Public Facilities 129
51 23 Environmental Justice 129
51 24 Safety 130
51 25 Aesthetics and Cultural Values 130
51 3 Effects Related to the Natural Environment 130
51 31 Water Resources 130
51 3 2 Wetlands 130
51 33 Threatened and Endangered Species 130
60 Comments and Coordination 131
61 Project Scoping 131
62 NEPA/Section 404 Process 131
63 Public Involvement 136
631 Mailing List 136
632 Newsletters 136
633 Citizens Workshops 136
634 Corridor Public Meeting 144
64 Public Hearing 148
70 Distribution List 149
71 Federal Agencies 149
72 Regional Offices 149
73 State Agencies 149
74 Local Government Agencies 149
80 References 151
90 List of Acronyms 155
List of Tables
Table 1 Population Trends 1970-2000 11
Table 2 Existing Falls of Neuse Road Crash Rates 13
Table 3 Level of Service Definitions 16
Table 4 2007 Project Study Area Analyses, Existing Conditions 19
Table 5 Year 2007 Adjacent System Level Analyses, Existing Conditions 22
Table 6 Year 2035 Project Study Area Analyses, No-Build Conditions 24
Table 7 Year 2035 Adjacent System Level Analyses, No-Build Conditions 25
Table 8 Roadway Cost Estimates 47
Table 9 Bridge Option Details 51
Table 10 Project Study Area Analyses, Level of Service Summary 51
Table 11 Adjacent Systems Analyses, Level of Service (LOS) Summary 58
Table 12 Population Groups Protected under E012898 87
Table 13 Threshold Values and Comparison Percentages of Minority Populations 87
Table 14 Recorded Sites Hazardous Materials 93
Table 15 FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria 95
Table 16 Criteria for Substantial Noise Increase, Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level 95
Table 17 Ambient Noise Levels (Leq) 98
Table 18 Ambient Noise Levels (Leq) 99
Table 19 Jurisdictional Wetlands Identified within the Project Study Area 114
Table 20 Classifications of Streams Identified within the Project Study Area 117
Table 21 Impacts to Jurisdictional Streams 118
Table 22 Neuse River Buffer Impacts 118
Table 23 Federally Threatened and Endangered Species Listed for Wake County 121
Environmental Assessment 4
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table 24 Summary of Impacts 122
Table 25 Summary of Indirect and Cumulative Effects 128
Table 26 Summary of Agency Comments 132
List of Figures
Figure 1 Project Location 8
Figure 2 Study Area 9
Figure 3 Existing Typical Section 12
Figure 4 STIP Projects 14
Figure 5a and b Existing Conditions, Project Study Area and Adjacent Systems Analysis 17
Figure 6a and b 2035 No-Build, Project Study Area and Adjacent Systems Analysis 20
Figure 7 Conventional Intersection with Full Movement 32
Figure 8 Right-In/Right-Out Only Intersections 32
Figure 9a and b Build Alternative 1 33
Figure 10 Left-Over Intersections 35
Figure 11 a and b Build Alternative 2 37
Figure 12 U-Turn Accommodations 39
Figure 13a and b BuddAlternative 3 41
Figure 14a and b Build Alternative 4 45
Figure 15 Option 1, Crossing of the Neuse River 48
Figure 16 Option 2, Crossing of the Neuse River 49
Figure 17 Option 3, Crossing of the Neuse River 50
Figure 18a and b 2035 Build LOS, Alternative 1 52
Figure 19a and b 2035 Build LOS, Alternative 2 54
Figure 20a and b 2035 Build LOS, Alternative 3 56
Figure 21 a and b 2035 Build LOS, Alternative 4 59
Figure 22a and b 2035 Build LOS, Adjacent System Level 61
Figure 23 Typical Section Alternative 4 66
Figure 24 Public Facilities and Services 72
Figure 25 Falls of Neuse Corridor Plan 76
Figure 26 Generalized Zoning 78
Figure 27 Potential Relocations 84
Figure 28 FIRM Floodplain 91
Figure 29a and b Noise Measurement Locations 96
Figure 30a and b Impacted Noise Receptors 100
Figure 31 US Annual VMT vs Mobile Source Air Toxics Emmissions 104
Figure 32 Wake Forest USGS Map 109
Figure 33 Jurisdictional Streams and Wetlands 116
List of Appendices
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX F
SCOPING LETTER
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
RELOCATION REPORTS
FARMLAND RATING SHEET
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Env?ronmental Assessment
5
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and
This page Intentionally left blank
Environmental Assessment 6
I
is
is Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
The proposed action is designated in the 2009-2015 North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as STIP project
number U-4901 and is described as "SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Road) widen to multilanes and
realignment from Raven Ridge Road to Neuse River including new structure over Neuse River."
The goal of this study is to identify solutions to create a new north-south connection over the
Neuse River and improve the efficiency of the local area roadway network while considering
local human, natural and physical environments.
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended, an
Environmental Assessment (EA) is being prepared for the proposed Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening Project. The EA is intended for use as an informational document by
the decision-makers and the public. As such, it represents a disclosure of relevant
environmental information concerning the proposed action.
The content of this EA conforms to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) guidelines,
which provide direction regarding implementation of the procedural provisions of NEPA, and the
Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Guidance for Preparing and Processing
Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents.'
1.2 PROJECT STUDY AREA
The project is located in northern Wake County, North Carolina, immediately east of Falls Lake
and south of the Town of Wake Forest (Figure 1). The project study area, shown in Figure 2,
encompasses existing Falls of Neuse Road beginning slightly south of the intersection at Raven
Ridge Road, extending just north of the Neuse River and includes both extraterritorial
jurisdiction (ETJ) areas of the City of Raleigh and unincorporated areas of Wake County. In
general, the study area is characterized by a mix of low and medium density residential and
supporting commercial development, abandoned farmlands, and protected natural areas
associated with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Falls Lake Reservoir and
the Neuse River.
The project includes two proposed improvement segments, as shown in Figure 2. The first
segment (Section 1) is a multilane widening beginning approximately 500 feet south of the Falls
of Neuse and Raven Ridge Road intersection, extending northward along existing Falls of
Neuse Road for approximately 7,500 feet, and ending with a new intersection at Fonville Road.
The second segment (Section 2) is on new location beginning at the improved intersection with
Fonville Road and extending northward for approximately 4,200 feet, crossing the Neuse River
by means of a new bridge, and ending at New Falls of Neuse Road located in the Wakefield
neighborhood.
Environmental Assessment 7

a I
Dr Vnd1eY pc
or
'Raleigh
`e
e
Begin Section 1
?a
5a
eJ
0
?a
A
a
Falls Lake Reservoir
L-
City of Raleigh
North Carolina
?ll, cry'`
r
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
?a
2
O
?0 \ Begin Section 2
e se ?
a
n
K `esbt?d9 ?
L L? CN00
unn Rd
c
Us ?and`n
tin ton Dr
c?`n
Q? e p
r q'?P 'o
Rd
Dr
Legend
Project Study Area
- Local Road
Streams
Falls Lake Reservoir
J Municipal Boundary
Study Area
End Section 2
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
This page intentionally left blank.
Environmental Assessment 10
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
2.0 NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION
From 2000-2005, the City of Raleigh and Town of Wake Forest ranked among the fastest
growing municipalities in the state, growing by 23 percent and 57 percent, respectively Rapid
growth is expected to continue over the coming decades Currently, the City of Raleigh's
population is approximately 350,000 By 2030, Wake County is projected to double in population
to nearly 1 5 million 2 Population trends from the US Census are shown in Table 1
Table 1 Population Trends 1970-2000
1970 1980 1990 2000
City of Raleigh 122,830 150,255 212,092 276,094
Town of Wake Forest 3,148 3,780 5,832 12,588
Wake County 229,006 301,429 426,301 627,866
North Carolina 5,084,411 5,880,095 6,632,448 8,049,313
Source NC Census Lookup (LINC), from 1970, 1980, 1990, & 2000 US Census Data
http //data osbm state nc us/pls/linc/dyn_linc_main show, September 2007
• SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Road) is a primary means of access to established communities and
• new development in North Raleigh, the Town of Wake Forest, and unincorporated parts of
• northern Wake County Falls of Neuse Road also provides access to park and recreational
destinations including the Falls Lake Reservoir and the Neuse River The area is transitioning
• from rural to suburban land uses with new growth occurring primarily to the east of Falls of
- Neuse Road and to the north of the study area Most of the property west of Falls of Neuse
Road is in the Falls Lake Water Supply Watershed where growth is limited by water quality
• restrictions
• The City of Raleigh first recognized the need for future improvements to Falls of Neuse Road in
• the 1960's when the Raleigh Thoroughfare System Plan was introduced In the 1990s the need
• was further defined as an extension and realignment when plans were submitted for the
Wakefield development located dust north of the Neuse River Local leaders realized the existing
• road network, including existing north-south crossings of the Neuse River, would not support
• traffic volumes associated with future large scale residential and mixed use developments
• In addition to increased residential development, travel patterns throughout the area are also
• influenced by mayor employment centers in Research Triangle Park (RTP) and downtown
• Raleigh These employment centers draw commuters through the project study area from
northern Wake County
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The City of Raleigh recognizes the need for an improved travel corridor and additional crossing
of the Neuse River to serve citizens who live and travel in the northern part of the City,
unincorporated areas of Wake County and the Town of Wake Forest The four Build Alternatives
presented in this EA are being pursued to improve regional connectivity and traffic capacity
throughout the Falls of Neuse Road north-south corridor
Detailed descriptions of the purpose of and need for the project are included in Section 2 6
Environmental Assessment 11
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
21 EXISTING FACILITY
211 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING FACILITY
Existing Falls of Neuse Road is a north-south minor arterial (as classified by NCDOT) which
runs from Old Wake Forest Road north to NC 98 (Durham Road) and is located in the City of
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina From North of 1-540 to Raven Ridge Road, Falls of
Neuse Road consists mostly of a five lane typical section From Raven Ridge Road north to NC
98 (Durham Road), Falls of Neuse Road is a two-lane facility The volume of traffic traveling this
route is higher than the optimum levels recommended for a two-lane roadway, resulting in a
congested facility during peak hours
Within the project study area, Falls of Neuse Road is functionally classified as a secondary
arterial thoroughfare by the City of Raleigh The current typical section of the roadway is a two-
lane road with 11-foot lanes and minimal paved shoulders, for a total pavement width of 22 feet
(Figure 3) In places, the typical section includes a center turn lane and a ditch where
topography lends itself to construction of a ditch The posted speed limit along Falls of Neuse
Road is 45 miles per hour (mph) through the project area The right-of-way width along Falls of
Neuse Road averages 60 feet in width
Figure 3 Existing Typical Section
111-0* 11-0
TRAVEL LANE THRU TRAVEL
I t
EXISTING GROUND
21 2 SAFETY
EXISTING GROUND
As part of the study, a crash analysis was prepared by NCDOT's Traffic Safety Unit to evaluate
the safety of the corridor The typical section where the project is located has rolling terrain, is
undivided and the speed limit is 45 mph The 2005 annual average daily traffic (AADT) for this
section was estimated at 21,500 vehicles per day, which equates to a total vehicle exposure
rate of 52 26 million vehicle miles (MVM) traveled
For crash rate purposes, this location can be classified as a 2-Lane Undivided Urban Secondary
Route (SR) Table 2 shows the comparison of the crash rates for the analyzed section of Falls
of Neuse Road versus the 2003-2005 statewide crash rates and the calculated critical rate
None of the current crash rates exceeded any of the statewide or critical crash rates for the
comparable categories 3
Environmental Assessment 12
1-4
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table 2: Existing Falls of Neuse Road Crash Rates
Rate Crashes Crashes per 100 MVM Statewide Rate'
Total 126 241.08 471.51
Fatal 0 0.00 1.49
Non-Fatal 39 74.62 143.83
Night 25 47.83 107.30
Wet 28 53.57 80.12
2003-2005 Statewide Crash rate for 2-Lane Undivided Urban Secondary Route (SR).
2.2 OTHER STIP AND CITY OF RALEIGH PROJECTS IN THE AREA
Other proposed transportation projects in or near the study area that are included in the 2009-
2015 STIP include two North Carolina Strategic Highway Corridor projects, R-3600 and R-2809.
The Strategic Highway Corridors initiative seeks to identify, protect and maximize the use of
highway corridors that play a critical role in regional or statewide mobility in an ongoing effort to
enhance transportation, economic development and environmental stewardship throughout
North Carolina.4 R-3600 is the widening of US 1A from US 1 (Capital Boulevard) to the NC 98
Wake Forest Bypass. R-2809 is the Wake Forest Bypass, from west of SR 1923 (Thompson Mill
Road) to east of SR 2053 (Jones Dairy Road). Additionally, a bridge replacement project, STIP
Project Number B-3705, located on SR 2045 will replace the existing bridge over Smith Creek.
The NCDOT Falls of Neuse Road bridge replacement project (STIP Project Number B-4660)
replaces Bridge #19 over the Neuse River. Bridge #19 was identified as a deficient structure
and studies are on-going for replacement options. Construction for this project is scheduled to
begin in fiscal year (FY) 2010. One of the construction options being studied for the bridge
replacement project designates the new crossing of the Neuse River, detailed in this EA, as a
temporary detour during construction. Figure 4 shows other transportation projects in the vicinity
of the project study area.
The Upper Neuse Greenway is both a NCDOT enhancement project as well as a City of Raleigh
project (EB-4829). The proposed bicycle and pedestrian project extends from the Falls Lake
Dam south to the WRAL Soccer Complex on SR 2006 (Perry Creek Road).
The projects listed above are not connected actions to this project.
Environmental Assessment 13

61
Wake Forest
Falls Lake Reservoir

O?
?m
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
N

0 R-2809 (NC 98 Bypass)
©R-3600 (Widening of US-1A)
Q B-4660 (Falls of Neuse Bridge Replacement)
OB-3705 (Smith Creek Bridge Replacement)
Legend
Project Study Area
¦11¦ TIP Projects
AL TIP Bridge Project
Future Upper Neuse Greenway
Streams
Falls Lake Reservoir
Interstate
US Route
NC Highway
Local Road
Municipal Boundary
STIP Projects

0 1 2
Miles
Figure 4

i
i
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
•
i 23 OTHER MODES OF TRANSPORT
- There are limited public transportation opportunities in the study area The Triangle Transit
Authority (TTA) provides vanpools to residents on a first-come, first served basis primarily for
i commuting purposes The TTA also provides regional bus service throughout the Triangle,
i however, no fixed route service is available in the study area Capital Area Transit (CAT)
i provides fixed route bus service on Falls of Neuse Road via its Falls of Neuse and Triangle
Town Center routes However, these routes operate south of Durant Road and therefore do not
i directly serve the study area
i Raleigh Durham International Airport (RDU) is located southwest of the study area, adjacent to
i 1-40 and 1-540 The airport is served by nine mayor and 16 regional carriers, and offers nearly
i 450 arrivals and departures per day with direct service to 37 destinations, including international
flights
i
i Transportation to local public schools is provided by school bus service as well as private
vehicles Many students are within walking or bicycling distance to these schools No special
i accommodations currently exist for pedestrians or bicyclists along existing Falls of Neuse Road
i within the project study area
i 2 4 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
241 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS GENERAL METHODOLOGY
The project has been analyzed utilizing the techniques contained in the 2000 Edition of the
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) and the associated Highway Capacity Software (HCS Plus,
version 5 2) 5 Standard practices recommended in the NCDOT Congestion Management
Section's "TIP Project Analysis Guidelines" were also utilized The analysis of unsignalized and
signalized intersections was completed using Synchro Version 7 analysis software, which is
based on the HCM Methodologies for signalized intersections The analysis includes the
evaluation of Level of Service (LOS) for the 2007 existing conditions, the 2035 No-Build
conditions, and each of the 2035 Build Alternatives
242 DESIGN LEVEL OF SERVICE
The procedures used to define the operational qualities of the roadways are based on the
concepts of capacity and LOS as set forth in the HCM The LOS is defined with letter
designations from A to F as shown in Table 3 LOS A represents the best operating conditions
along a road or at an intersection while LOS F represents the worst conditions Given the
proposed project includes upgrading an existing facility, the selection of the minimum
acceptable LOS for the design year 2035 was determined to be LOS D due to the project's
location within a highly developed residential area and numerous amount of driveway and
neighborhood connections Measures required to achieve a better LOS would not be compatible
with the vision of this corridor and would require additional impacts throughout the corridor
Environmental Assessment 15
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table 3 Level of Service Definitions
Level of Signalized Road Segments
Service Intersections
A Very low delay (<10 0 Free flow Individuals are unaffected by other vehicles and
seconds per vehicle) operations are constrained only by roadway geometry and
Most vehicles do not driver preferences Maneuverability within traffic stream is
have to stop at all good Comfort level and convenience are excellent
B 10 0-20 0 second delay Free flow, but the presence of other vehicles begins to be
Good progression and noticeable Average travel speeds are the same as in LOS A,
short cycle length but there is a slight decline in freedom to maneuver and level
of comfort
C 20 1 to 35 0 second Influence of traffic density on operations becomes marked
delay Fair progression The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is clearly
and/or longer cycles affected by other vehicles Multi-lane highways with a free
The number of vehicles flow speed (FFS) above 50 miles per hour (mph), the speeds
stopping is significant reduce somewhat Minor disruptions can cause serious local
deteriorations and queues will form behind any significant
traffic disruption
D 35 1 to 55 0 second The ability to maneuver is severely restricted due to traffic
delay Many vehicles congestion Travel speed is reduced by the increasing
stop Individual cycle volume Only minor disruptions can be absorbed without
failures are noticeable extensive queues forming and the service deteriorating
E 55 1 to 80 0 second Operating conditions at or near the capacity level, usually
delay Individual cycle unstable The densities vary, depending on the FFS Vehicles
failures are frequent are operating with the minimum spacing for maintaining
uniform flow Disruptions cannot be dissipated readily Most
multilane highways with FFS between 45 and 60 mph vehicle
mean speeds at capacity range from 42 to 55 mph, but are
highly variable and unpredictable
F Delay in excess of 80 0 Breakdown flow Traffic is over capacity at points Queues
seconds Considered form behind such locations, which are characterized by
unacceptable to most extremely unstable stop-and-go waves Travel speed within
drivers queues are generally less than 30 mph
Source Transportation Research Board, 2000
2 5 TRAFFIC CAPACITY ANALYSIS
The following sections are summarized from the Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and
Widening Traffic Capacity Technical Memorandum and present the traffic volumes and
operational analyses including the evaluation of LOS for the 2007 existing conditions and the
2035 No-Build conditions
The project is planned to complete the existing Falls of Neuse Road to New Falls of Neuse
Road connection As such, travel patterns on the adjacent roadway network are expected to
change when the new alignment is complete In order to evaluate the effect this project would
have both on the roadways within the study area and on the adjacent transportation system, the
analysis has been divided into two geographic sections Project Study Area Analysis and
Adjacent System Level Analysis (Figure 5a and b)
Environmental Assessment 16

CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA

Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Le end
Basic Freeway Segments
® Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
Q Analysis Reference Number
N
W E
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 5b
Existing Conditions, Project Study A
and Adjacent Systems Analysis
?
NOTE:
•
•
• Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
•
• 2.5.1 YEAR 2007 EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
• The traffic forecasts used for the traffic operations analyses were obtained from the Traffic
i Forecasts for NCDOT State TIP Project No. U-4901, Falls of Neuse Road Widening and
Realignment (Traffic Forecast Technical Memorandum). The traffic forecasts provided Annual
i Average Daily Traffic (AADT) volumes for the transportation network within and surrounding the
• study area for the 2007 Existing Conditions. Existing traffic volumes on Falls of Neuse Road
• within and surrounding the study area range from 14,200 AADT to 40,000 AADT and volumes
on New Falls of Neuse Road range from 4,400 AADT to 21,200 AADT.
•
• 2.5.1.1 Year 2007 Project Study Area Analyses
i For the 2007 Existing Conditions, the Project Study Area Analysis consists of only the existing
roadway network within the project study area.
A summary of the project study area LOS results for the signalized intersections is included in
Table 4 and the LOS for each analysis is shown on Figure 5a and b. The results of the analysis
show that 2 of 3 signalized intersections are operating at LOS E or worse in either the AM or PM
peak hour.
Table 4: 2007 Proiect Studv Area Analvses. Existina Conditions
Location 2007 Peak Hour LOS
Signalized Intersections AM(PM)
P1-SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Rd.) and SR 2002 (Raven Ridge Rd) D(F)
P2-SR 2000 Falls of Neuse Rd. and SR 2011 Dunn Rd. E(C)
P3-SR 2000 (New Falls of Neuse Rd.) and Wakefield Pines Dr. D(D)
Note: The analysis reference numbers are shown as P##, which correspond with analysis points shown in Figure 5 a
and b.
2.5.1.2 Year 2007 Adjacent System Level Analyses
For the 2007 Existing Conditions, the Adjacent System Level Analysis consists of only the
existing network adjacent to the project study area.
A summary of the adjacent system level analysis results for the multi-lane roadways, basic
freeway segments, freeway ramp junctions, unsignalized intersections, and signalized
intersections is included in Table 5 and the LOS for each analysis is shown on Figure 6 a and b.
The results of the analysis show that all multilane segments and ramp junctions operate at LOS
D or better; however, 6 of 8 signalized intersections are operating at LOS E or worse in either
the AM or PM peak hour and the one unsignalized intersection has individual movements
operating at LOS E or worse in either the AM or PM peak hour.
Environmental Assessment 19
............................................................................................................................. .............?i
CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Le end
Basic Freeway Segments
Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
0 Analysis Reference Number
N
E
w
5
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 6a
2035 No-Build, Project Study Area
and Adjacent System Analysis

NOTE:
P# = Proiect Studv Area Analvsis Point
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table 5: Year 2007 Adiacent Svstem Level Analvses. Existina Conditions

Location 2007 Peak
Hour LOS
AM(PM)
Signalized Intersections
S1-SR 2006 (Durant Rd.) and SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Rd) F(D)
S2-SR 2006 (Durant Rd./Perry Creek Rd.) and US 1 (Capital Blvd.) F(F)
S3-US 1 (Capital Blvd.) and New Falls of Neuse Rd./US 1A(Main St.) D(E)
S4-US 1 and Wake Forest Bypass B(B)
S5a-US 1 SB Ramps and NC 98 (Durham Rd.) E(C)
S5b-US 1 NB Ramps and NC 98 (Durham Rd.) D(E)
S6-NC 98 (Durham Rd.) and SR 1967 (Old NC HWY. 98)/SR 1976(Fawn Dr.) D(F)
S7-SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Rd.) and Wakefield Pine Dr. C(B)
Unsignalized Intersection
S7a- SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Rd.) and SR 1967 (Old NC HWY. 98)
Eastbound Through/Right
Westbound Left[Through
Northbound Left/Right -(-)
-(-)
B(A)
C(E)
Multilane Segments
S8-US 1 SB south of SR 2006 (Durant Rd./Perry Creek Rd.) D(C)
S9-US 1 NB south to SR 2006 (Durant Rd./Perry Creek Rd.) B(C)
S10-US 1 SB north of SR 2006 (Durant Rd./Perry Creek Rd.) C(C)
S10a-US 1 SB north of SR 2006 (Durant Rd./Perry Creek Rd.) C(C)
S11-US 1 SB south of US 1A (Main Street) B(B)
S11a-US 1 NB south of US 1A (Main Street) B(B)
S12-US 1 SB between New Falls of Neuse Rd./US 1A(Main St.) and Wake Forest
Bypass B(B)
S13-US 1 NB between New Falls of Neuse Rd./US 1A(Main St.) and Wake Forest
Bypass B(B)
S14-US 1 SB between NC 98 (Durham Rd.) and Wake Forest Bypass C(B)
S15-US 1 NB between NC 98 (Durham Rd.) and Wake Forest Bypass B(C)
S16-US 1 SB north of NC 98 (Durham Rd.) C(B)
S17-US 1 NB north of NC 98 (Durham Rd.) B(C)
S22-Wake Forest Bypass EB (east of US 1) A(A)
S23-Wake Forest Bypass WB (east of US 1) A(A)
Ramp Junctions
S32-US 1 SB from Wake Forest Bypass B(B)
S33-US 1 NB to Wake Forest Bypass B(B)
Environmental Assessment 22
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening

Location 2007 Peak
Hour LOS
AM(PM)
S34-US 1 SB to Wake Forest Bypass B(B)
S35-US 1 NB from Wake Forest Bypass B(B)
S36-US 1 SB from NC 98 (Durham Rd ) B(B)
S37-US 1 NB to NC 98 (Durham Rd ) B(C)
S38-US 1 SB to NC 98 (Durham Rd ) C(B)
S39-US 1 NB from NC 98 (Durham Rd ) B(B)
Note The analysis reference numbers are shown as S#, which correspond with analysis points shown in Figure 5 a
and b WB means westbound, EB means eastbound, NB means northbound, SB means southbound
Environmental Assessment 23
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
2.51 3 Year 2035 No-Build Conditions
The traffic forecasts used for the traffic operations analyses were obtained from the Traffic
Forecast Technical Memorandum The traffic forecasts provided AADT volumes for the
transportation network within and surrounding the study area for the 2035 No-Build Conditions
and assumed that all improvements contained in the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning
Organization (CAMPO) fiscally constrained Long-Range Transportation Plan were constructed
with the exception of the proposed project Projected 2035 No-Build traffic volumes on Falls of
Neuse Road within and surrounding the study area range from 16,400 AADT to 50,600 AADT,
and volumes on New Falls of Neuse Road range from 8,000 AADT to 55,400 AADT
2514 Year 2035 Project Study Area Analyses
For the 2035 No-Build Conditions, the Project Study Area Analysis consists of the existing
roadway network and programmed future improvements with the exception of the proposed
project
A summary of the Project Study Area Analysis level of service results for the signalized
intersections is included in Table 6 and the LOS for each analysis is shown on Figure 6a and b
The results of the analysis show that all three (3) signalized intersections will operate at LOS F
in both the AM and PM peak hours
Table 6 Year 2035 Proiect Studv Area Analvses_ No-Budd Conditions
Location 2035 Peak Hour LOS
Signalized Intersections AM(PM)
P1-SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Rd ) and SR 2002 (Raven Ridge Rd) F(F)
P2-SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Rd) and SR 2011 (Dunn Rd) F(F)
P3-New Falls of Neuse Rd and Wakefield Pines Dr F(F)
Note The analysis reference numbers are shown as P##, which correspond with analysis points shown in Figure 5
and b
2515 Year 2035 Adjacent System Level Analyses
For the 2035 No-Build Conditions, the Adjacent System Level Analysis consists of the existing
roadway network and programmed future improvements with the exception of the proposed
project
A summary of the Adjacent System Level Analysis LOS results for the basic freeway segments,
multilane segments, freeway ramp junctions, and unsignalized / signalized intersections is
included in Table 7 and the LOS for each analysis is shown on Figure 6a and b The results of
the analysis show that 5 of 8 signalized intersections, 6 of 12 basic freeway segments, and 6 of
16 ramp junctions will operate at LOS E or worse in either the AM or PM peak hour
Environmental Assessment 24

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table 7 Year 2035 Adiacent Svstem Level Analvses. No-Build Conditions

Location
2035 Peak Hour LOS
AM(PM)
Signalized Intersections
S1-SR 2006 (Durant Rd ) and SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Rd) F(E)
S2-SR 2006 (Durant Rd /Perry Creek Rd ) and US 1 (Capital Blvd) D(D)
S3-US 1 (Capital Blvd ) and New Fails of Neuse Rd /US 1A(Main St) E(E)
S4-US 1 and Wake Forest Bypass D(F)
S5a-US 1 SB Ramps and NC 98 (Durham Rd ) D(C)
S5b-US 1 NB Ramps and NC 98 (Durham Rd ) D(D)
S6a-Old Falls of Neuse Rd /NC 98 (Durham Rd ) and Wake Forest Bypass D(E)
S7-SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse Rd ) and Wakefield Pine Dr E(C)
Unsignalized Intersections
S6- NC 98 (Durham Rd) and SR 1967 (Old NC HWY 98)/SR 1976(Fawn
Dr)
Eastbound Left
Southbound Left/Right -(-)

A(B)
D(D)
Basic Freeway Segments
S8-US 1 SB south of SR 2006 (Durant Rd /Perry Creek Rd ) F(D)
S9-US 1 NB south to SR 2006 (Durant Rd /Perry Creek Rd ) D(F)
S10-US 1 SB north of SR 2006 (Durant Rd /Perry Creek Rd) F(D)
S10a-US 1 NB north of SR 2006 (Durant Rd /Perry Creek Rd) D(F)
S11-US 1 SB south of US 1A (Main Street) D(D)
S11a-US 1 NB south of US 1A (Main Street) D(D)
S12-US 1 SB between New Fails of Neuse Rd /US 1A(Main St) and Wake
Forest Bypass E(C)
S13-US 1 NB between New Falls of Neuse Rd /US 1A(Mam St) and
Wake Forest Bypass C(E)
S14-US 1 SB between Wake Forest Bypass and NC 98 (Durham Rd ) C(B)
S15-US 1 NB between Wake Forest Bypass and NC 98 (Durham Rd ) B(C)
S16-US 1 SB north of NC 98 (Durham Rd ) C(B)
S17-US 1 NB north of NC 98 (Durham Rd ) B(C)
Multilane Segments
S18-Wake Forest Bypass EB (west of Old Falls of Neuse Rd) B(C)
Environmental Assessment 25
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and
Location
2035 Peak Hour LOS
AM(PM)
Signalized Intersections
S19- Wake Forest Bypass WB (west of Old Falls of Neuse Rd) C(B)
S20-Wake Forest Bypass EB (between Old Falls of Neuse Rd and US 1) B(C)
S21-Wake Forest Bypass WB (between Old Falls of Neuse Rd and US 1) C(B)
S22-Wake Forest Bypass EB (east of US 1) B(D)
S23-Wake Forest Bypass WB (east of US 1) D(B)
Ramp Junctions
S24-US 1 SB from SR 2006 (Durant Rd /Perry Creek Rd ) F(D)
S25-US 1 NB to SR 2006 (Durant Rd /Perry Creek Rd ) D(F)
S26-US 1 SB to SR 2006 (Durant Rd /Perry Creek Rd ) F(D)
S27-US 1 NB from SR 2006 (Durant Rd /Perry Creek Rd ) D(F)
S28-US 1 SB from New Falls of Neuse Rd /US 1A(Main St) D(D)
S29-US 1 NB to New Falls of Neuse Rd /US 1A(Main St) D(D)
S30-US 1 SB to New Falls of Neuse Rd /US 1A(Main St) D(C)
S31-US 1 NB from New Falls of Neuse Rd /US 1A(Main St) C(E)
S32-US 1 SB from Wake Forest Bypass F(A)
S33-US 1 NB to Wake Forest Bypass A(B)
S34-US 1 SB to Wake Forest Bypass C(B)
S35-US 1 NB from Wake Forest Bypass B(C)
S36-US 1 SB from NC 98 (Durham Rd ) C(B)
S37-US 1 NB to NC 98 (Durham Rd ) C(C)
S38-US 1 SB to NC 98 (Durham Rd ) C(B)
S39-US 1 NB from NC 98 (Durham Rd ) B(C)
Note The analysis reference numbers are shown as S#, which correspond with analysis points shown in Figure 6 a
and b WB means westbound, EB means eastbound, NB means northbound, SB means southbound
Environmental Assessment 26
n
i Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
i 26 SUMMARY PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT
i The primary purposes of the proposed project (TIP U-4901) are
•
i Improve north/south connectivity and local and regional access on project study
i area roadways in North Raleigh and northern Wake County
i Needs Addressed The City of Raleigh, Town of Wake Forest, and Wake County as a whole,
i experienced unprecedented levels of growth over the past 30 years Much of this growth
occurred and is still occurring in North Raleigh and areas north of the City extending along
existing Falls of Neuse Road to the Town of Wake Forest The existing road network,
- including north-south crossings of the Neuse River, does not support associated increases
in traffic volumes and changing travel patterns
i
• • Increase traffic capacity on congested roadway segments
i Needs Addressed The traffic capacity studies discussed in Section 2 4 show that in the
project study area, 2 of 3 existing signalized intersections are operating at LOS E or worse
- in either the AM or PM peak hour for the current year (2007) In addition, all 3 signalized
intersections will operate at LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hours for the design year
(2035) without the proposed project in place
i Results of the adjacent system level of service analysis show that in the current year (2007)
i all multilane segments and ramp junctions operate at LOS D or better, however, 6 of 8
i signalized intersections and the only unsignalized intersection are operating at LOS E or
worse in either the AM or PM peak hour In the design year (2035), the results of the
i analysis show that 5 of 8 signalized intersections, 6 of 12 basic freeway segments, and 6 of
• 16 ramp junctions will operate at LOS E or worse in either the AM or PM peak hour
i The City of Raleigh recognizes the need for an improved travel corridor and additional crossing
of the Neuse River to serve citizens who live and travel in the northern part of the City,
unincorporated areas of Wake County and the Town of Wake Forest SR 2000 (Falls of Neuse
Road) is a primary means of access to established communities and new development, as well
as, local park and recreational destinations including Falls Lake and the Neuse River The four
i Build Alternatives presented in this EA are being pursued to enhance local and regional
connectivity by providing an additional crossing of the Neuse River and improving traffic
i capacity throughout the travel corridor
•
•
•
•
•
•
Environmental Assessment
27
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
This page intentionally left blank
Environmental Assessment 28

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
3.0 ALTERNATIVES FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION
- Descriptions of the No-Build Alternative, Transportation System Management (TSM) Alternative,
Mass Transit Alternative, and several build alternatives are presented in this section A range of
alternatives for the proposed action were evaluated Several of the alternatives that were
evaluated were eliminated from further consideration because they did not meet the Purpose
and Need for the project, while four build alternatives were evaluated to a level where one could
be chosen as the recommended alternative
Three bridge options were studied for the new structure crossing of the Neuse River and for the
intents of this document are considered sub-options that can be included with any of the
- proposed build alternatives The following sections in this chapter describe each alternative and
provide reasons for the elimination of the alternative or an explanation of why it was not
selected as the recommended alternative One build alternative was carried forward for detailed
study as the recommended alternative and is described in Section 3 9
31 NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE
The No-Build Alternative assumes that traffic would continue to utilize existing routes for travel
within and through the local area Under the No-Build Alternative, travel conditions through the
- study area are expected to deteriorate in future years Existing traffic signals are located at
Raven Ridge Road/Falls of Neuse Road, the project's southern terminus, Dunn Road/Falls of
Neuse Road and at Wakefield Pines Drive/New Falls of Neuse Road, which is adjacent to the
- project's northern terminus Traffic data forecasted for the 2035 No-Build Alternative resulted in
the three signalized intersections within the study area operating at an overall Level of Service
(LOS) F in both the AM and PM peak hour Thus the No-Build Alternative does not address the
purposes of or satisfy the need for the project because it does not increase the capacity on
- congested roadways or improve north-south connectivity
32 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT
Generally speaking, Transportation System Management (TSM) consists of adding low-cost
- transportation improvements to an existing facility in place of large-scale modifications TSM is
designed to maximize the use and energy efficiency of a facility and to enhance the operations,
while minimizing capital outlay TSM provides tools or methods to find optimum strategies to
. relieve, lessen or control congestion with minimal roadway widening

Two categories of TSM were examined, operational and physical improvements
Operational changes are largely administrative in nature Examples include
• Traffic law enforcement,
• Flexible work hours to stagger traffic,
• Turn prohibition,
• Speed restrictions, and
• Signal phasing or timing changes
Environmental Assessment 29
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Physical changes are usually more capital intensive Examples include
• Turn lanes,
• Striping,
• Warning devices,
• Improved warning and information signs, and
• High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes
In general, TSM improvements do not adequately address the system connectivity needs or
traffic capacity of the corridor Operational changes would not decrease the number of vehicles
traveling to a level that would make the existing facility operate at an acceptable level, nor would
the implementation of physical changes provide enough additional capacity to address the need
for increased capacity
33 MASS TRANSIT
Mass transit options generally include passenger rail or enhanced bus service within densely
populated corridors and typically serve a downtown or mayor employment center The City of
Raleigh and regional transportation planning organizations are currently studying ways to
provide transit service to the Triangle region One possible transit improvement being
considered in the general location of this study area is providing passenger rail service running
from downtown Raleigh to the northern Wake CountylWake Forest area, on former CSX tracks
that parallel Capital Boulevard This alignment is also identified for passenger rail service by the
Raleigh Comprehensive Plan
The Falls of Neuse Road Corridor north of Durant Road is primarily a low-density residential
area, which in general does not support passenger rail Regulatory restrictions such as the Falls
Lake Water Supply Watershed place limits on impervious surface and geographic constraints
such as parklands and water features limit future development in the area The traffic forecasts
developed for the project are based on the Triangle Regional Model which accounts for modes
besides vehicles, including passenger rail and buses The forecast traffic volumes along the
Falls of Neuse Corridor would be greater than the capacity of the existing facility Therefore the
mass transit option was eliminated from further consideration because it would not provide
adequate additional capacity, nor would it substantially improve the north-south connectivity
along the Falls of Neuse Corridor
34 BUILD ALTERNATIVES
The project includes two (2) proposed improvement segments Section 1 is a multilane widening
beginning approximately 500 feet south of the Falls of Neuse and Raven Ridge Road
intersection, extending northward along existing Falls of Neuse Road for approximately 7,500
feet, and ending with a new intersection at Fonville Road Section 2 is on new location
beginning at the improved intersection with Fonville Road and extending northward for
approximately 4,200 feet, crossing the Neuse River by means of a new bridge structure, and
ending at New Falls of Neuse Road located in the Wakefield neighborhood
The development of alternatives for Section 1 considered options to widen existing Falls of
Neuse Road in its present location As such, design decisions were based on options such as
type and width of medians and location of sidewalks and other amenities Options were
constrained by existing right of way, location of structures, and presence of
Environmental Assessment 30

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
surface/underground utilities. The development of alternatives for Section 2 began with the
- preparation of an environmental constraints map using geographic information system (GIS)
data to identify human, physical and natural environmental features in the project study area.
While considering potential environmental impacts, a range of build alternatives were developed
to incorporate avoidance and minimization efforts to the greatest extent possible.
In general, all alternatives widen existing Falls of Neuse Road from two lanes to six lanes,
realign the existing Falls of Neuse Road and Fonville Road intersection area, include a new
location roadway and bridge connection to New Falls of Neuse Road and the Wakefield
community, and provide new sidewalk facilities. A 23-foot wide, raised median with a variety of
access accommodations runs the length of the project from Raven Ridge Road to New Falls of
Neuse Road. The total distance is approximately 2.24 miles.
All Build Alternatives include a potential interim solution for the realignment of the existing Falls
of Neuse Road and Fonville Road intersection area including a termination of Fonville Road and
existing Falls of Neuse Road and a cul-de-sac western terminus of Lowery Farm Road.
Additionally, Wide River Drive would be extended north on new location, forming a new
intersection with the project and existing Falls of Neuse Road. The interim solution would allow
for a short-term solution concerning the existing traffic volumes on Fonville Road.
3.4.1 BUILD ALTERNATIVE 1
Alternative 1 is a 6-lane divided roadway with a raised landscaped median. Full movement
- intersections (conventional intersections that allow all turning movements) would be provided at
October Road, Dunn Road, Lake Villa/Tabriz Point and Old Falls of Neuse Road in accordance
with NCDOT standards for full movement median openings. The remaining intersections would
- be restricted to right-in/right-out operation (eliminating left and through turning movements from
- the cross streets). An example of a conventional intersection with full movement and a right-
in/right-out only intersection are shown below (See Figure 7 and Figure 8, respectively). Figure
9a and b shows the entire Alternative 1 configuration.
a Reducing the number of full movement intersections would eliminate additional conflicting
turning movements and improve safety along the corridor. A new traffic signal would be installed
- at the Old Falls of Neuse Road intersection along with upgrades to the existing signals at Raven
Ridge Road and Dunn Road. All alternatives would be a best-fit alignment with a mix of
symmetric (widened equally on both sides) and asymmetric (widened more to one side than the
- other) widening to achieve the necessary lanes to carry the forecast volume of traffic in the
design year while minimizing effects on adjacent properties and environmental resources. A
new bridge would be constructed to cross the Neuse River and the roadway would connect to
- the current terminus of New Falls of Neuse Road in the Wakefield community.
Environmental Assessment 31
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening

f

y
f
Figure 8: Right-In/Right-Out Only Intersections
Environmental Assessment
32
Figure 7: Conventional Intersection with Full Movement

City of Raleigh
North Carolina
a F
X.
J
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
Legend
Turning Movements
Right of Way
Full movement Sidewalk
Traffic Lanes
• Right-in/Right-out
N
N E
5
0 250 500 1,000
Feet
Figure 9a
Date: September 2008
Build Alternative 1

City of Raleigh
North Carolina
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
Date: September 2008
Turning Movements
Full movement
• Right-in/Right-out
Legend
Right of Way
Sidewalk
Traffic Lanes
Cul-de-sac
- Roadway Removal
(®', Structure Crossing
u % _ E
0 250 500 1,000
Feet
Figure 9b
Build Alternative 1
Falls of Neuse Road
3.4.2
and Widening
BUILD ALTERNATIVE 2
Alternative 2 is a variation of Alternative 1 with the difference being that directional median
crossings (islands that allow left turn vehicles from the major roadway) would be constructed for
vehicles turning from Falls of Neuse Road onto Dehijuston Road, Kings Grant Drive/Whittington
Road and Waterford Court. Providing left turn movements from Falls of Neuse Road would
improve access to these areas by providing a sheltered left turn movement in the center island.
In this type of access known as a "left-over", the turning traffic only needs to cross one opposing
direction of traffic (See Figure 10). The flow of traffic is improved over Alternative 1 with
additional direct connections to side roads being provided. Figure 11a and b show the
Alternative 2 configuration.
a
? y
r
Figure 10: Left-Over Intersections
Environmental Assessment 35

. _110•

`r r' r
?faLi f?
-10
0
City of Raleigh
North Carolina Legend
01
Turning Movements Right of way
Sidewalk 0 250 500 1,000
Full movement
Traffic Lanes
Feet

Falls of Neuse Road Right-in/Right-out
Figure 11a
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
Directional median crossing
Build Alternative 2
Date: September 2008

i?

City of Raleigh
North Carolina
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
Legend
Turning Movements
® Full movement
• Right-in/Right-out
Directional Median Crossing
µ
Right of Way
Sidewalk
Traffic Lanes 0 250 500 1,000
Cul-de-sac Feet
- Roadway Removal
Structure Figure 11 b
Date: September 2008
Build Alternative 2
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
3.4.3 BUILD ALTERNATIVE 3
Alternative 3 provides the highest level of traffic flow improvement of the four alternatives by
redirecting all side street traffic to turn right and utilize u-turns provided along Falls of Neuse
Road. Eliminating left turns from full movement intersections improves safety by allowing
vehicles to turn right into safe acceptable gaps in one direction of traffic and then get into a
sheltered median island and perform a u-turn into an appropriate safe gap in the opposite
direction of traffic (See Figure 12). This eliminates the necessity for a driver to accurately
identify a safe gap in two opposing directions of traffic on a multilane roadway. The signal at
Dunn Road would be modified to provide protected left turns onto Dunn Road from southbound
Falls of Neuse Road and timing coordinated with an additional signal for a u-turn north of the
intersection. Left-over access would be provided at Dehijuston Road and October Road. Figure
13a and b show the entire Alternative 3 configuration.

w
- --------------- -----------
s r
y
Figure 12: U-Turn Accommodations

Environmental Assessment 39

City of Raleigh Legend
North Carolina
Turning Movements
N ? I
Right of Way
l Full movement
% Sidewalk
;,;.,zF> • 0 250 500 1,000
Right-in/Right-out Traffic Lanes
y v, Feet
Falls of Neuse Road Directional median crossing
Realignment and Widening Figure 13a
Wake County
U-turn
Build Alternative 3
Date: September 2008

.f

t .f

City of Raleigh Legend
North Carolina
Turning Movements
,. M Right of Way
Full movement Sidewalk
06>r^ Traffic banes 0 250 500 1,000
• Right-in/Right-out • Cul-de-sac
Feet
- Roadway Removal
Falls of Neuse Road Directional median crossing Structure
Realignment and Widening Figure 13b
Wake County
® U-turn
Date: September 2008 Build Alternative 3
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
344 BUILD ALTERNATIVE 4
Based on citizen input and regulatory agency feedback Alternative 4 was developed to both,
address citizens' desire for direct access into the neighborhoods along Falls of Neuse Road and
provide a safe roadway to meet the predicted traffic volumes in the future Alternative 4 (Figure
14a and b) utilizes a part of Alternative 2 and combines it with the desirable traffic operations
aspects of Alternative 3 Alternative 4 provides full movement intersections at October Road,
Dunn Road, and Lake Villa/Tabriz Pointe The intersection of existing Falls of Neuse would be
restricted as in Alternative 3 to left-over operations at the intersection and u-turn
accommodations in the form of a median u-turn at an adjacent location Left-over movements
would be provided at Dehijuston Road and Kings Grant Drive/Whittington Road Alternative 4
includes the option of placing a new left-over movement at Waterwood Court A new traffic
signal would be constructed at the existing Falls of Neuse Road intersection and upgrades will
be made to the existing signals at Raven Ridge Road and Dunn Road
Environmental Assessment 43
r
64

s???•{?

.4 ? .
.W
City of Raleigh
North Carolina Legend
"" •,?' Turning Movements
•??? Right of Way
Full movement Sidewalk 0 250 500 1,000
Traffic Lanes Feet
Right-in/Right-out
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening Figure 14a
Directional median crossing
Wake County
Date: September 2008 Build Alternative 4

F
s? ` ryyy
City of Raleigh
North Carolina Legend
Turning Movements
--- Right of Way
o Full movement Sidewalk
1V?1
M L? Traffic Lanes 0 250 500 1,000
Right-in/Right-out
® • Cul-de-sac F
eet
Directional median crossing Roadway Removal
Falls of Neuse Road Structure
• Figure 14b
Realignment and Widening U-turn
Wake County
Date: September 2008 Directional median crossing/U-turn Build Alternative 4
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
3.5 COST ESTIMATES
Estimated project costs for the Build Alternatives are included in Table 8. The cost estimates are
preliminary and more detailed cost information will be provided during the final design. The
selected alternative would be constructed in two phases, Section 2 and then Section 1. Any
phased construction would be within the footprint of the selected alternative and would minimize
the amount of throw-away construction that is not part of the ultimate build project, thus
reducing unnecessary costs.
Table 8: Roadway Cost Estimates

Alternative Construction
Cost (millions) Right-of-Way
Cost (millions) Utility Cost
(millions) Total Cost
(millions)
Build Alternative 1 $14.5 $5.1 $1.3 $20.9
Build Alternative 2 $14.9 $51 $1.3 $21.3
Build Alternative 3 $15.1 $5.1 $1.3 $21.5
Build Alternative 4 $14.7 $5.1 $1.3 $21.1
Source: URS 2008.
3.6 CROSSING OF THE NEUSE RIVER
In the early 1990s local leaders realized the existing road network, including existing north-south
crossings of the Neuse River, would not support traffic volumes associated with future large
scale residential developments and general growth patterns in northern Wake County. The
current crossings of the river are, beginning east to west; US 401, US 1 North, existing Falls of
Neuse Road, and NC 98 (structure crossing of Falls Lake). See Figure 2 for locations with
respect to the project study area.
An analysis was completed for the new structure crossing that considered the economics of
different bridge cross sections, span arrangements, and construction materials, as well as,
spanning waterways and the proposed Upper Neuse Greenway. Impacts were quantified for
natural resources and aesthetic consideration given with respect to the views from the planned
Upper Neuse Greenway, located on the south bank of the Neuse River, and general everyday
users of the Neuse River. Three Bridge Options were studied.
Option 1 ( Figure 15) consists of three spans, two 112-foot spans and one 100-foot span for a
total length of 324 feet. One set of interior bents would be in the river, while the second set
would be constructed on the northern river bank. The bents and end bents would be constructed
on an 84-degree skew.
Option 2 (Figure 16) consists of five spans, 45-foot, 67-foot, 78-foot, 67-foot and 67-foot, for a
total length of 324 feet. Two sets of bents would be in the water and two sets on the bank. The
bents and end bents would be constructed on an 84-degree skew.
- Option 3 (Figure 17) consists of three spans, 70-foot, 166-foot, and 100-foot, for a total length
of 336 feet. No substructure elements are in the water. The bents and end bents would be
constructed on a 77-degree skew. The construction of this option is based on using structural
S steel plate girders which would enable moving the bents out of the water.

Table 9 presents details of each including relative costs.
Environmental Assessment 47
a

d d
N
R
U to
r
fn d
=
z
3 O
"
z LL O
01
.y
N
U

4
3

llm U
rn
c

O c c
m m
0:2
o

q o
G a
N
m
E.
m w a
c 0
m o
z E
o r V i t

O `
UZ y
zc
C m
y?3
a
o m
a
? a
LL A N
m
w

d

y
f6
V CO 7
N
CO y
L Z
+?+

? O
=

Y
z
LL Y Y
Q O o
a?
c
.
y
0
L
U

n

? mb m gW ?( b

? I
r
3
o ? ^
5 ? i F
m s
I
W W ? i
9f

m
I?
I
N

i Ym mo 4

b m ?? b
-
i
b w ?g

w• 4
_
3-

W

c

c_

t r6 ? =
m d
0,0 o m
o 0
0
N
T ?
W
Q R I
U ? N 3
O C O
m?U O
Z E
m
O s q .`? Z= m ?
m a
?' C ?
U Z O d R
w = ? rn
a

LL
m
m
F
in
d
S
O.
O
d
L
0 m
O E 0
z
C

10 _
O C
? d

o m
C
07 T

0 0.0
7
C O

U Z N c
m

?
LL
m
K

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table 9: Bridae Option Details
Number of
Spans (#) Length of Spans
(feet) Total Length
(feet) Bents in
Water? Cost
(millions)
Option 1 3 112, 112, 100 324 Yes $3.35
Option 2 5 45, 67, 78, 67, 67 324 Yes $3.60
Option 3 3 70, 166, 100 336 No $5.20
3.7 TRAFFIC CAPACITY ANLYSIS SUMMARY OF BUILD ALTERNATIVES
Table 10 reports the project study area results. For a detailed description and evaluation of
traffic capacity please refer to the Traffic Capacity Technical Memorandum, appended by
reference.
Table 10- Proiect Studv Area Analvses_ Level of Service Summarv
Scenario Level of Service (LO S)
A B C D E F
2035 Build Alternative 1 0 3 3 2 0 4
2035 Build Alternative 2 0 2 3 0 1 6
2035 Build Alternative 3 2 0 4 3 0 7
2035 Build Alternative 4 0 1 4 1 1 7
Note: Level of Service reported is overall for signalized intersections, or worst movement LOS for unsignalized
intersections.
2035 Build Alternative 1 would result in 4 out of 12 analysis points operating at LOS E or
worse, with 2 analysis points being associated with signalized intersections located at both ends
of the project and the other 2 analysis points being associated with unsignalized intersection
minor movements. Signalized intersections improved under this alternative would achieve
overall LOS D, with several individual movements operating at LOS E or worse. A summary of
the Project Study Area LOS results for the signalized intersections is shown on Figure 18a and
b.
2035 Build Alternative 2 would result in 7 out of 12 analysis points operating at LOS E or
worse, with 2 analysis points being associated with signalized intersections located at both ends
of the project and the other 5 analysis points being associated with unsignalized intersection
minor movements. Signalized intersections improved under this alternative would achieve
overall LOS D, with several individual movements operating at LOS E or worse. A summary of
the Project Study Area LOS results for the signalized intersections is shown on Figure 19a and
b.
2035 Build Alternative 3 would result in 7 out of 16 analysis points operating at LOS E or
worse, with 2 analysis points being associated with signalized intersections located at both ends
of the project and the other 5 analysis points being associated with unsignalized intersection
minor movements. Signalized intersections improved under this alternative would achieve
overall LOS D and all individual movements achieve LOS D or better. A summary of the Project
Study Area LOS results for the signalized intersections is shown on Figure 20a and b.
Environmental Assessment 51

MATCHLINE FIGURE 18b
,\ -
SR 2000 (FALLS OF NEUSE RD.)
EXTENSION
P4 B(B)
SR 2001 (Fornille Rd.) V Lowery Rd.
1Netsrwood CL,
Falls Managment Center Rd. \
EBRT C(B) WBRT A(C)
Falls Tower Dr. ?1
B(B)
SR 4423 (longs Grant Dr
WBRT B(C) ?I
WBLTRT F(F) 0
SBLTU B(F) O
NBU F(B)
WBRT B(A) O
E(F) P,
P' EBRT D(B)
Villa P„ EB F(F) WB E(F) NBLTU F(C) SBLTU C(F)
Tabriz PL
P10 EBRT C(B)
High Holly Ln.
SR 2011 (Dunn Rd.)
D EBRT C(B) WBRT B(D)
\ Whittington Dr.
SR 4490 (Coolmors Dr.)
SR 3508 (October Rd.)
Dehijustin CL
NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound
CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Leaend
Basic Freeway Segments
® Multilane Segments
Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
Analysis Reference Number
N
E
w
S
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 18a
2035 Build LOS
Alternative 1

NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound
L
a
\ Wakefield Pines Dr.
O F(F)

?r?y??N fF?GURe
lga
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Leciend
Basic Freeway Segments
Multilane Segments
Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
Analysis Reference Number
N
AL
W E
s
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 18b
2035 Build LOS
Altemative 1

MATCHLINE FIGURE 19b
SR 2000 (FALLS OF N ELISE RD.)
EXTENSION
Falls Managment Center Rd.
EBRT C(B) WBRT A(C;
Falls Tower Dr. ?i
B(B) 0
SR 4423 (Kngs Grant Dr
WBRT B(C)8
WBLT/RT F(F)
1 SBLTU B(F)
NBU F(B)
E(F) P
P4 B(B)
SR 2001 (Fornille Rd.) Lowery Rd.
Wi?Oervrcod Ct. V EBRT D(B)
P' NBLT E(C)
Villa P11 SBLTLl
EB F(F) NBLTU F(C)
0 (F) WB E (F)
Tabriz Pt
P10 EBRT C(B)
High Holy Ln.
SR 2011 (Dunn Rd.)
V?NB-L T C( B) WBRT B(D)
T C(B) SBLT B(F)
Whittington on Dr.
\ SR 4498 (Coolmore Dr.)
SR 3588 (October Rd.)
WBRT B(A) SBLT B(F)
I
Dehijustin CL
NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Legend
Basic Freeway Segments
Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
0 Analysis Reference Number
N
E
w
s
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 19a
2035 Build LOS
Alternative 2

NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound

(PASS

SR 2DDD (FALLS OF NEUSE RD.)
Wakefield Pines Dr.
O F(F)
MAT?HLIIyEF?GURE l9a
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Lenend
Basic Freeway Segments
® Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
Analysis Reference Number
N
W E
s
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles

MATCHLINE FIGURE 20b
V SR 2000 (FALLS OF NEUSE RD.)
EXTENSION
t-D(B) NBU C(B)
SR 2001 (Fomdlls Rd.) wery Rd.
Waterwood Ct..
Falb Managment Center Rd.
A(A) ®t___
EBRT C(A) WBRT A(C)C
A(A)?
SR 4423 (Kings Grant Dr.)
NBLTU F(C)
. SBLTU B(F) "-
E (F) P1
_JwPj EBRT D(B)
Mile
P„ 11 NBU E(C) SBU C(F)
Tabriz PL EBRT C(B) WBRT B(D)
P10 EBRT C(B)
High Holy Ln.
?- SR 2011 (Dunn Rd.)
whtwngton Dr. EBRT F(B) WBRT B(D)
SR 4496 (Coolmore Dr.) WBRT B(C)
SR 3W (October Rd.) WBRT B(D) SBLT B(F)
3RT B(A) SBLT B(F)
Dehijuatin CL
NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound
CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
v ?
Falls of Nauss Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Leaend
Basic Freeway Segments
Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
CI) Analysis Reference Number
SR 2006 (PERRY CREEK RD.)
N
E
w
e
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 20a
2035 Build LOS
Altemative 3

NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound

Wakefield Pines Dr.
0 F(F)
CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
Y
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
MATLHCIHEF/GORE
?oa
Lenend
Basic Freeway Segments
Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
10 Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
Analysis Reference Number
N
W E
0 0.25 065 1.0
Miles
Figure 20b
2035 Build LOS
Alternative 3
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
2035 Build Alternative 4 would result in 8 out of 14 analysis points operating at LOS E or
worse, with 2 analysis points being associated with signalized intersections located at both ends
of the project and the other 6 analysis points being associated with unsignalized intersection
minor movements. Signalized intersections improved under this alternative would achieve
overall LOS D, with several individual movements operating at LOS E or worse. A summary of
the Project Study Area LOS results for the signalized intersections is shown on Figure 21 a and
b.
Generally, the unsignalized intersections operating at LOS E or worse were evaluated for and
failed to meet criteria for signal warrants. Although failing LOS for unsignalized intersections is
not desirable, it is acceptable for these minor movements and signals would not be
recommended.
3.7.1.1 Adjacent System Level Analyses Summary
Table 11 reports the Adjacent System Level results for both the No-Build and Build scenarios,
and the results for the 2035 Build Alternatives are included in Figure 22a and b.
Table 11: Adjacent Systems Analyses, Level of Service (LOS) Summary
Scenario LOS
A B C D E F
2035 No-Build Alternative 0 1 14 11 6 11
2035 Build Alternatives 1 1 13 11 5 12
Note: Level of Service reported is overall for signalized intersections, or worst movement LOS for unsignalized
intersections, in addition to multilane segments, basic freeway segments and ramp junctions analysis points.
2035 No-Build Alternative Adjacent System Level Analysis would result in 17 out of 43
analysis points operating at LOS E or worse, with 5 analysis points being associated with
signalized intersections, 6 analysis points associated with basic freeway segments, and 6
analysis points associated with ramp junctions.
2035 Build Alternative (the same for all Build Alternatives) Adjacent System Level Analysis
would result in 17 out of 43 analysis points operating at LOS E or worse, with 5 analysis points
being associated with signalized intersections, 6 analysis points associated with basic freeway
segments and 6 analysis points associated with ramp junctions.
The results of the 2035 No-Build Alternative compared with the 2035 Build Alternative show that
implementation of this project would not adversely affect the Adjacent System Network.
Environmental Assessment 58
a
1/ - SR 2000 (FALLS OF NEUSE RD.)
EXTENSION
P' DD (B) NBU C(B)
SR 2001 (Forrville Rd.) Lowery Rd.
Waterwood Ct ?NBU E(C) SBU C(F)
v ALT. 2 TO THE SOUTH
Falls Ma"°°"ne"cce"rerRd. EBRT D(B) SALT. 3 TO THE NORTH
P'Z
NBLT E(C)
Lake Villa
N, SBLTU C(F) NBLTU F(C)
EBRT C(B) WBRT A(C) Tabriz Pt EB F(F) WB E(F)
EBRT C(B)
Falls Tower Dr. O
High Holly Ln.
B(B) O SR 2011 (Dunn Rd.)
SIR 4423(I(ingsGrant Dr.) O EBRT C(B) WBRT B(D)
NBLT C(B) SBLT B(F)
WBRT B(C)8
P7 Whittington Or
WBLT/RT F(F)
SBLTU B(F) ? SR 4496 (Coolmore Dr.)
NBLTU F(B) SR 3566 (October Rd.)
Ps WBRT B(A) SBLT B(F)

E(F) P, Dehijustin Ct
NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound
CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Leaend
Basic Freeway Segments
¦ Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
signalized intersection
19 Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
Analysis Reference Number
I?
N
E
w
S
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 21 a
2035 Build LOS
Altemative 4
NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound
WAKE FOREST BYPASS

Wakefield Pines Dr.
O F(F)
T CHCI NF111c:??URE
?1a
CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
Via,
0
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
Leaend
Basic Freeway Segments
® Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
Analysis Reference Number
N
W E
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 21 b
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
2035 Build LOS
Alternative 4

SR 2001 (Fonville Rd) Lowery Rd
Weterwood Ct .
Falls Managment Certtr Rd.
Lake Villa
•
• rabrtz Pt.
• High Holly Ln
SR 2011 (Dunn Rd.)
423 (Kings Grant Dr.) •
Whittington Dr.
SR 4496 (Coolmore Dr.)
SR 3568 (October Rd.)
Dehijustrn C1
SR 2002 (RAVEN RIDGE RD.)
s, F(F)
SR 2000 (FALLS OF NEUSE RD.)
NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound
CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
?a Up'v°
Y ?
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
SR 2006 (DURANT RD.)
US 1 (CAPITAL BLVD.)
F(D) sto
D(F)
F(D)*
C(F)
F(D`
FO OD(F)
US 1 (CAPITAL BLVD j
D(F)
Legend
Basic Freeway Segments
Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
0 Analysis Reference Number
SR 2006 (PERRY CREEK RD.)
Date: May 2008
N
E
w
S
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 22a
2035 Build LOS
Adjacent System Level
l,E F \ G U ?? 22b
SR 2000 (FALLS O N USE RD)
EXTENS
NOTE:
P# = Project Study Area Analysis Point
S# = System Level Analysis Point
SB = Southbound
NB = Northbound
EB = Eastbound
WB = Westbound
= Denotes analysis that could not be
accomplished with HCM Methods
NC 98 (DURHAM RD.)
B(C) s,e
FUTURE
WAIF FOREST BYPASS
.Kil?

Fawn Dr. EBLT A(B)
\LT/ROT D(D)
sa ?
D(B) n?,,?v B(C)
B(C)
D(D) NC 98 (DURHAM RD.)
litD) 811 -,815 B(C)
D(E) C(C)O s
A
C(B)ss, B(C)
OD(C)
WAIF FOREST BYPASS
B(C) szo C(D)
A(A)* OA(B) s` D(F)
SR 2000 (FALLS OF NEUSE RD.) E(C) s,
s,a C(E)
E(D) S30 US 1 (CAPITAL BLVD.)
sal C(F)
NEW FALLS OF NEUSE RD. S3
tn) O DD (D)
n n
MpJCHLINE FIGURE 223 \
CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
y? i? S!
f
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Leaend
Basic Freeway Segments
® Multilane Segments
A Freeway Ramp Junctions
Freeway Weaving Segments
Signalized Intersection
10 Unsignalized Intersection
A(A) Level of Service - AM(PM)
Analysis Reference Number
F(F)
US 1A (MAIN ST.)
Date: May 2008
N
W E
0 0.25 0.5 1.0
Miles
Figure 22b
2035 Build LOS
Adjacent System Level
US 1 (CAPITAL BL
C(B) 3,6
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
38 BUILD ALTERNATIVES NOT RECOMMENDED FOR THE PROPOSED
ACTION
All four of the Build Alternatives are very similar to each other, were studied in detail and are
- included in the analysis of impacts in Section 4 The primary difference between the alternatives
is accommodating access to and from Falls of Neuse Road The differences in impacts related
to effects on the human and natural environments between each of the four build alternatives
- are either non-existent or negligible Therefore the selection of the recommended build
alternative is based on balancing the traffic operations and opportunities for access with the
desires expressed by the citizens along the corridor as a result of the public involvement efforts
• Based on balancing these factors, Build Alternatives 1, 2 and 3 were eliminated as the
recommended alternative In addition to results from traffic capacity and level of service
analysis, comments received from local citizens at public workshops on Build Alternatives 1, 2
and 3 were part of the decision making process
Many citizens were concerned that measures being considered to improve traffic flow during
preliminary design did not improve neighborhood access along existing Falls of Neuse Road,
• and in some instances, created further impediments to access movements
Alternative 4 was developed as a balance between improving traffic capacity deficiencies and
- allowing more neighborhood access The following sections detail individual concerns with
each of the alternatives that were not carried forward as the recommended alternative Based
on these concerns it was determined that the positive elements from Alternative 2 with regards
- to neighborhood access combined with operational benefits realized in Alternative 3 would
produce a hybrid alternative that best balanced the traffic operations and access concerns
voiced for the project

381 ALTERNATIVE 1
The traffic capacity analysis for Alternative 1 determined that the signalized intersections
located at existing Falls of Neuse Road/New Falls of Neuse Road and Falls of Neuse
Road/Dunn Road would result in an overall LOS B, however the Falls of Neuse Road/Dunn
Road intersection would have individual movements that would operate at LOS E or worse,
which is not desirable Many citizens were concerned with the lack of direct access from
neighborhood streets to Falls of Neuse Road and requested that additional measures to provide
additional access be considered
382 ALTERNATIVE 2
The access from Falls of Neuse Road to neighborhood side streets would be improved over
Alternative 1 due to the use of left-over crossings The traffic capacity analysis for Alternative 2
determined that the signalized intersections located at existing Falls of Neuse Road/New Falls
of Neuse Road and Falls of Neuse Road/Dunn Road would result in an overall LOS B, however
both intersections would have individual movements that would operate at LOS E or worse,
which is not desirable Therefore, the increased access provided by Alternative 2 created less
desirable traffic operations (as compared to Alternative 1) at the existing Falls of Neuse
Road/New Falls of Neuse Road intersection, but showed a slight improvement for the Falls of
Neuse Road/Dunn Road intersection due to distributing more of the southbound left turns to the
left-over intersections
Environmental Assessment 63
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
38.3 ALTERNATIVE 3
Access to and from Falls of Neuse Road to neighborhood side streets would be restricted to a
greater extent for Alternative 3 (as compared to Alternatives 1 and 2) due to the elimination of
left-turn movements from side streets The traffic capacity analysis for Alternative 3 determined
that the signalized intersection located at existing Falls of Neuse Road/New Falls of Neuse
Road would operate overall at LOS D during the AM peak hour and LOS B during the PM peak
hour Additionally the Falls of Neuse Road/Dunn Road would result in an overall LOS B,
however neither intersections would have individual movements that would operate at LOS E or
worse, which is desirable Therefore, the reduced access provided by Alternative 3 created
more desirable traffic operations (as compared to Alternatives 1 and 2) at both intersections, but
had strong opposition from the citizen's along the corridor
384 BRIDGE OPTION 2
Bridge Option 2 was eliminated from further study due to the higher number of spans (5),
increased number of bents in the water and potential impacts to natural systems, and higher
overall costs than Option 1
385 BRIDGE OPTION 3
Bridge Option 3 was eliminated from further study due to increased costs (higher than Options 1
and 2) associated with the steel girders necessary to move the bents out of the water
39 RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION
Alternative 4 was selected as the Recommended Alternative because it would provide the best
balance between traffic operations and access Alternative 4 also would include Bridge Option
1, which is recommended because it would provide the best balance between cost and impacts
to the natural environment
391 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
Alternative 4 (see Figure 14) begins approximately 500 feet south of the existing Falls of Neuse
Road/Raven Ridge Road intersection and proceeds north along the existing roadway until
approximately Waterwood Court The new alignment then leaves the existing alignment of Falls
of Neuse Road, makes a slight eastward turn and proceeds northward on new location crossing
the Neuse River and connecting with New Falls of Neuse Road in the Wakefield neighborhood
The length of the widening section on existing location is approximately 1 46 miles The new
location section is approximately 0 78 miles including the new bridge structure over the Neuse
River
The widening section would be comprised of a best-fit alignment with a mix of symmetrical and
asymmetrical widening to balance and minimize property impacts where possible The land
uses adjacent to existing Falls of Neuse Road are primarily residential consisting of individual
homes and neighborhoods Existing intersecting streets would be re-connected to the widened
Falls of Neuse Road and with appropriate vertical grade adjustments Dunn Road would be
widened to accommodate additional turn lanes onto southbound Falls of Neuse Road at the
existing traffic signal to improve intersection capacity Individual driveways would be re-
connected to the widened roadway utilizing NCDOT standards In the area of the realignment
and new location, several roads would be terminated with cul-de-sacs and not be reconnected
to the new location section Existing Falls of Neuse Road would be realigned to form a new 4-
leg intersection on the new location section with the extension of Wide River Drive
Environmental Assessment 64
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
392 CROSS SECTIONS
The general typical section (Figure 23) of the project would consist of a six lane, raised median
divided roadway with curb and gutter The standard median width would be 23 feet The median
would also have curb and gutter treatment with NCDOT standard 1-foot/6 inch curb and gutter
on each side The median would be narrowed in sections to facilitate turn lanes In several
narrow sections the median would be reduced to concrete islands to separate turning traffic
Lane widths for the cross section would consist of two inner 11-foot travel lanes and a 13-foot
wide outside travel lane to accommodate bicycle traffic The project cross section would also
include a 5-foot concrete sidewalk on the west side of the roadway and an 8-foot asphalt
sidewalk on the east side Appropriate ADA-accessible wheel chair ramps and cross walks
would be provided at intersections and street radius returns
Environmental Assessment 65
0
Y?
5 d M O
r) U
N O
N N to
CY)
I Z H
m=s-
Z
O
W
5
? v
a?
z
a?
Nit
O
a ? ? o
s
? f
g_ c
f t ` --- J 'O 7 O a
C Q , ? c 0 z E
tJ` ?l LL Z d d a
m
OZ .. ?Ac
1 ? ?? w E3 a
`. a A
L` m uric
R ?

r
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
393 RIGHT OF WAY AND ACCESS CONTROL
The standard right of way (ROW) width for the corridor would be 120 feet Some variation may
occur to accommodate widened sections at intersections Additional easements beyond the
120-foot ROW would be acquired as necessary for slope, drainage, and utility easements
Access control at individual intersections would be as follows
1 Raven Ridge Road - no access restrictions
2 Dehijuston Road - access would be restricted to provide southbound left-over turning
accommodations U-turn movements are accommodated at downstream intersections
3 October Road - no access restrictions
4 Coolmore Drive - access would be restricted to right-in, right-out only U-turn
movements would be accommodated at downstream intersections
5 Whittington Drive/Kings Grant Drive - access would be restricted to left-over turning
accommodations into each roadway No left outs would be provided U-turn movements
would be accommodated at downstream intersections
6 Dunn Road - no access restrictions
7 High Holly Lane - access would be restricted to right-in, right-out only U-turn
movements would be accommodated at downstream intersections
8 Falls Tower Drive - access would be restricted to right-in, right-out only U-turn
movements would be accommodated at downstream intersections
9 Falls Management Center Road - access would be restricted to right-in, right-out only
U-turn movements would be accommodated at downstream intersections
10 Tabriz Point/Lake Villa Way - no access restrictions
11 Waterwood Court - access would be restricted to provide northbound left-over turning
accommodations U-turn movements would be accommodated at downstream
intersections
12 Fonville Road - direct access to Falls of Neuse Road eliminated Terminated with cul-
de-sac
13 Lowery Farm Road - direct access to Falls of Neuse Road eliminated Terminated with
a cul-de-sac
14 Existing Falls of Neuse Road - realigned to form a new 4-leg intersection with the
extension of Wide River Drive New intersection would provide northbound left-over
movements for Falls of Neuse Road northbound traffic and southbound left-over
movement into the extension of Wide River Drive U-turn movements would be
accommodated at downstream intersections
394 DESIGN SPEED
The design speed for Falls of Neuse Road would be 50 mph The posted speed limit would be
45 mph Proper horizontal and vertical design criteria would be applied to the project meeting
American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and NCDOT
standards Other intersecting roadways would maintain their existing design speeds and posted
speed limits
Environmental Assessment
67
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
395 INTERSECTING ROADWAYS
Intersecting roadways would be connected back to the widened section of Falls of Neuse Road
with the access control discussed above An exception would occur at Fonville Road and
Lowery Farm Road, which would both be terminated in cul-de-sacs Existing Falls of Neuse
would be realigned to form a new intersection with the extension of Wide River Drive
The existing signal at Raven Ridge Road would be modified to accommodate additional turning
lanes A new signal would be constructed at Falls of Neuse Road and existing Falls of Neuse
Road intersection to accommodate the dual northbound left turns
3.96 STRUCTURE AND DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS
A Preliminary Hydraulics Study for Environmental Impact completed for the project identified two
mayor hydraulic crossings as part of the proposed action The first is a bridged structure
crossing, oriented in a north-south direction, over the Neuse River, while the second is culvert
crossing of tributary to the Neuse River
Bridge Option 1 (Figure 15) was selected as the recommended structure option and consists of
three span, dual structures with spans of approximately 112 feet, 112 feet, and 100 feet One
(1) interior bent is located in the Neuse River and the other interior bent is located on the bank
north of the river The bridges consist of reinforced concrete decks supported on concrete
girders The substructure consists of post and beam bents and conventional end bents with turn
back wing walls
The length of each dual structure is approximately 324 feet The width of each of the structures
would be approximately 47 feet and includes 38 5 feet of roadway and 5 5 feet of sidewalk
along the outside edge
The culvert crossing is located on an unnamed perennial tributary located dust north of the
Neuse River The culvert is recommended as a 10-foot by 10-foot box concrete culvert
In addition, there are currently two culvert crossings under existing Falls of Neuse Road An
existing 18-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) is located dust south of Falls Management
Center Road and a 15-inch RCP is located dust north of Waterwood Court These structures
would be modified as appropriate for the widening of existing Falls of Neuse Road
Existing drainage patterns would be maintained throughout the project A final determination of
the proposed structure sizing (culverts crossings) and location would occur during final design
phases for the proposed project
39.7 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN /ACCOMMODATIONS
Lane widths for the Falls of Neuse Road Cross section include 13-foot wide outside travel lanes
to accommodate bicycle traffic The project cross section would also include a 5-foot concrete
sidewalk on the west side of the roadway and an 8-foot asphalt sidewalk on the east side
Appropriate ADA-accessible wheel chair ramps and cross walks would be provided at
intersections and street radius returns
Environmental Assessment 68

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
The 8-foot asphalt sidewalk would connect to the Upper Neuse Greenway planned to run along
the south side of the Neuse River The Greenway will stretch from the Falls of Neuse Dam to
the WRAL Soccer Center and will connect with neighborhood greenways along the way The
greenway is part of the Mountains-to-Sea Trail and is the first section of a planned Neuse River
Trail that will stretch to the Wake/Johnston County line Construction on the Greenway is
expected to begin by the end of 2008
The proposed project would traverse the Upper Neuse Greenway with a grade separation of the
bridge structure over the greenway and Neuse River
Environmental Assessment
69
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
This page intentionally left blank
Environmental Assessment 70
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Based on data gathered and presented in this EA, Alternative 4 was selected as the
Recommended Alternative. The overall effects for all Build Alternatives are very similar and are
included in the following sections for comparative purposes.
The existing conditions within the study area are described in the next sections. Following a
description of each, an evaluation of effects is presented for each of the four Build Alternatives
and the No-Build Alternative. The three bridge options that are being considered are applicable
to any of the four build alternatives and from an environmental impacts standpoint would be
treated the same during the project development process. Therefore, the environmental impacts
shown for each build alternative would be identical for any of the potential bridge options and
will not be quantified separately.
Indirect and Cumulative Impacts are addressed separately in Section 5.0.
4.1 LOCAL COMMUNITY
The study area encompasses Wake County and City of Raleigh planning jurisdictions. Most of
the property west of Falls of Neuse Road is in Wake County's planning jurisdiction and the Falls
- Lake Watershed. Properties east of Falls of Neuse Road are in the City of Raleigh planning
jurisdiction. Immediately south is an interchange with 1-540 and to the north is the Town of Wake
Forest.
The 2005 population of Wake County was estimated at approximately 755,034.6 Wake County
encompasses both the City of Raleigh, 2005 population of 338,357, and the Town of Wake
Forest, 2005 population of 19,792. From 2000-2005, the City of Raleigh and Town of Wake
Forest ranked among the fastest growing municipalities in the state, growing by 23 percent and
57 percent, respectively. Rapid growth is expected to continue over the coming decades. By
2030, Wake County is projected to double in population to nearly 1.5 million.' Figure 24 shows
public facilities and services along the project corridor.
Environmental Assessment
a
allnwford Dr

G?
5rld
/?9s G?dn
D?
cfObe
7.2
Wakefield High School Z

VV,ikefield Middle School

Lakefield Elementary School ,.. _?

r' '
?
a

c
3
Falls Baptist Church
pY,
Falls Volunteer Fire Station »21
_ i
acY - ---
e?d North Raleigh SDA Church
?
i?
0
br\d9e \
K yes ?n
'O'IY °°a
4? z
unn Rd
±y
Whittin ton Dr
?C P'CA GiJ
e es/ a ool Spring Rd o•
9S° . LSf m 41e
i--r--?SCOr. ,
Ct
escott Or ? ?o,
?opusi Cnurch a Stha n r
\ d? Crisp D S
5 c
sc? W kertown Dr
Oakboro D
a - -------. __ r Ingo rove
?S
EM Johnson Water Treatment Plant
? k n : ky
" `;NakeMed North Healthplex
10)" T
(-
City of Raleigh Le end
North Carolina
Protect Study Area
ct na. Local Road ?? -
c
NC Highway
US Route
Interstate 0 0.25 0.5
s. d Churches Miles
Falls of Neuse Road Cemeteries
Realignment and Widening Figure 24
Wake County Fire Station
©
STIP Project No. U-4901 Hospital Public Facilities and
Date: September 2008 Schools Services
a

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
- 411 COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES
. The Falls Volunteer Fire Department is located on Falls of Neuse Road just north of Lowery
Farm Road The Department serves the majority of the residents in the study area, providing
primary fire and emergency medical services to an approximate 7-square mile area of northern
Wake County and contracted areas for the City of Raleigh The Falls Volunteer Fire Department
- is a private department operated by both paid and volunteer members and is part of the
Northern Wake County Departments, which also includes Bay Leaf, Durham Hwy, New Hope,
Six Forks, Stony Hill, and Wake Forest
The City of Raleigh Fire Department has 28 fire stations throughout the city Station 22, located
at 9350 Durant Road and Station 25, located at 2740 Wakefield Crossing, serve the study area
- Additionally, the Raleigh Fire Department is part of a regional Urban Search and Rescue Team
(USAR) and serves as one of the state's Regional Response Teams (RRT) providing hazardous
materials response within Raleigh and surrounding counties
The nearest medical facility, WakeMed North Healthplex, is located just south of the project
study area at the intersection of Falls of Neuse Road and Durant Road The hospital was
constructed to serve residents in northern Wake County with emergency care and outpatient
- services Falls of Neuse Road is the main access to this facility
The project study area is located in District 22 of the city of Raleigh Police Department The
- nearest substation is at Litchford Village Shopping Center, 8320 Litchford Road, southeast of
the study area a Emergency 911 service is available throughout the study area
- Three churches are located in the protect area Mount Pleasant Baptist Church is located on
the east side of Falls of Neuse Road, just north of Dehijuston Court The North Raleigh Seventh
Day Adventist Church is located near the intersection of Fonville Road and Falls of Neuse
- Road First Baptist Church backs up to Falls of Neuse Road, however, the front entrance is
located on Fonville Road
Wakefield Senior High, Wakefield Middle, and Wakefield Elementary Schools are located just
north of the study area near the intersection of Falls of Neuse Road and Wakefield Pines Drive
Southeast of the study area, Durant Road Middle and Elementary Schools are located on
Durant Road between Falls of Neuse Road and Capital Boulevard None of these schools are
• located within the study area, however, there are 150 school bus routes that travel along the
protect corridor and study area each school day Additionally, an undocumented number of bus
trips are made to carry students on field trips and to extracurricular activities
41.2 EFFECTS
Coordination with Falls Volunteer Fire Department revealed several concerns with respect to the
proposed project with the primary concern being response time to all areas of their designated
- service area The Department responds as far north on Falls of Neuse Road as Wakefield
(Wakefield Estates) and as far south as Honeycutt Road The service also covers all
subdivisions located along both sides of Falls of Neuse Road from Honeycutt Road north to
- Wakefield A meeting was held on February 29, 2008 regarding the Build Alternatives, and the
various widening, realignment, closures and construction activities associated with each Most
options being reviewed for preliminary design met the Department's needs for expedient
• response time Several small changes were made to ensure the trucks would have
- unencumbered access at all times including adjusting turn radii, providing better accessibility
Environmental Assessment 73
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
north and south along Falls of Neuse Road, and considerations for providing a dedicated
service driveway are being evaluated Temporary closures and re-routing would be coordinated
with the Department during construction
The implementation of any of the Build Alternatives should reduce response times for fire,
rescue and police service by creating greater connectivity throughout the study area and moving
traffic more efficiently with fewer delays No adverse effects to these important services are
expected
All of the Build Alternatives would require the acquisition of property from Mount Pleasant
Baptist Church due to the wider footprint of the roadway The approximate area of impact to the
church property would be 0 05-acre for any of the build alternatives and would not affect the use
of the facilities on the property An additional area may be required for temporarily construction
easements during the construction of the project, but would likely be located within the existing
easement for the City of,Raleigh water line located along Falls of Neuse Road In addition,
Mount Pleasant Baptist Church and First Baptist Church would not experience loss of access
The North Raleigh Seventh Day Adventist Church has no on-site parking and a corner of land at
existing Falls of Neuse Road and Fonville Road is currently used for parking during services
The land at the corner would become unavailable when the road is constructed and access may
be changed Further communication with the church will occur during the right-of-way process
There are no schools located in the study area Coordination with school transportation would
occur prior to construction to ensure school buses have safe and timely access using local
roads No other impacts are expected from any of the Build Alternatives
The No-Build could negatively impact emergency response times throughout the study area as
traffic increases in the future and local roads become increasingly more congested In addition
to emergency response, citizens could experience additional delays in their daily trips to local
services such as church, school and work
42 LAND USE, ZONING, AND DEVELOPMENT
Land use patterns are shaped by numerous factors, such as watershed management, zoning
regulations, accessibility, and topography With any change in transportation and access to an
area, there is a possibility that land use patterns may be impacted It is important to consider
both the existing land uses and future land use plans The project is within the planning
jurisdictions of the City of Raleigh and Wake County Watershed management, land use and
zoning in the study area are described in this section
421 RALEIGH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Raleigh Comprehensive Plan, as adopted in November 2006, includes a subsection titled
"Falls of Neuse Corridor Plan" The corridor plan includes Falls of Neuse Road from Durant
Road north to the Neuse River and New Falls of Neuse Boulevard The intent of the Corridor
Plan was to provide guidance for future zoning and development along the corridor that will
preserve the character of the corridor in connection to the Falls Lake Water Supply Watershed,
the Falls Lake Dam, parks, and the historic Falls Community
The Raleigh Comprehensive Plan identified Falls of Neuse Road as a Secondary Arterial
Thoroughfare and established the following transportation policy guidelines
1 New detached single family residences fronting the thoroughfare are discouraged
Environmental Assessment 74
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
2. The design of the sites within the focus area should plan for and accommodate bicycle
and pedestrian travel (excluding the water treatment plant). This includes bicycle
parking, crosswalks, and connections between properties.
3. Due to the numerous parks in the area and the high concentration of families with
children in the area, an eight-foot wide multi-purpose path/sidewalk and wide outside
lanes should be included in the cross-section details for the widening of Falls of Neuse
Road.
4. A new-location public street should connect Durant Road to Shadowlawn Drive and
provide connectivity to Rio Springs Drive.
5. A new-location public street should connect Dehijuston Court with Raven Ridge Road.
6. Primary vehicular access for the Dunn Road/Falls of Neuse Neighborhood Focus should
be evaluated with a private development plan on this property or with the Falls of Neuse
Road widening project.
7. A new-location Sensitive Area Major Thoroughfare should connect Falls of Neuse Road
to Wide River Drive at New Falls of Neuse Boulevard.
4.2.2 FALLS OF NEUSE CORRIDOR PLAN
Falls Lake is the primary drinking water source for the City of Raleigh and several other towns in
the area. Watershed protection objectives are carried out through cooperative joint planning
efforts between eight (8) municipalities, six (6) counties, and local Soil and Water Conservation
Districts in the Upper Neuse River Basin. Community goals and objectives for protection and
improvement of water quality and related water quantity management in the basin were
established in the Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan.9
The Falls of Neuse Corridor Plan (Figure 25) identifies the following community focus areas in
the vicinity of the project:
Area 1: Northeast corner of Raven Ridge Road and Falls of Neuse Road
Area 2: Dunn Road and Falls of Neuse Road
Area 3: North of High Holly Lane and north of Tabriz Point and Falls of Neuse Road
• Area 4: Falls Community (Fonville Road and the River)
• Area 5: New Falls of Neuse Boulevard from Falls of Neuse Road to the Neuse River10:
The focus areas include corridor transition areas, historic sites, retail areas, environmentally
sensitive areas and neighborhoods. Land uses in these focus areas are shown in Figure 25.
Designated as a "Secondary Arterial Thoroughfare" by the City of Raleigh, the character of this
corridor is largely defined by its residential communities, Falls Lake Watershed and Dam, and
the Neuse River. The frontage properties are largely rural and low density residential and
include extensive roadside vegetation. This development pattern respects the rural character of
the Falls Lake Water Supply Watershed and the Falls Mill Village (circa 1850), which still exists
on the northern end of the corridor along Fonville Road.
Environmental Assessment 75

Falls of Neuse Corridor Plan
vac? oun l ?3B ryng ?r1: ^ cn
' ;in A, ;i )r m,te!y Fr- li •. I

4fnq 1. r,
:,rr,

a
y

Sotlrcartlol ?.

,man

T NM
C?nmy
i

4
z, 1 i +, n j
1: 7
t R S
Italoi#jh Lbparlmont of City Planning ±" G
I+e, m+o
WAKERELD
SMALL
yam,. ?,.
AREA
m1didal PLAN I
A
k t J M ="Trwsibon,%ea
J -
?.

I .
Wilkerson Tract kt±:;
(Proposed Park lb-
";accar_ud
m Faus

o Corridor ^t
TraosIUw
m r° ..` Area

Fu 4 •

C •.
,mv s
a Rasle
i
rJeiylborneod
Y _? B1
f? 4.4

C
i41' FALLS OF
NELSESMALL
SEA FLAN
City of Raleigh
North Carolina
U,`_ f J'
s
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
:us
4 prey'
bb
Falls of Neuse
Corridor Plan
r-kj -
'bnrai•m Law
WakF:
CounI
L a n n I I
N
R" I
Not to Scale
Figure 25

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Issues important to the local community were identified during the public involvement process
for the Falls of Neuse Corridor Plan. A series of public meetings were held as follows:
¦ September 09, 2005 Public Meeting
¦ December 08, 2005 Public Meeting
¦ February 06, 2006 Public Meeting
• May 04, 2006 Public Meeting
¦ July 25, 2006 Public Hearing
The plan was formally adopted on November 21, 2006. Issues identified as important to local
citizens included:
1. Minimize redevelopment impacts to properties fronting Falls of Neuse Road and
properties backing the frontage lots.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2. Protect the character of the corridor. Maintain the sense of place created by the
extensive roadside vegetation, the Falls Lake dam and Falls Community.
3. Provide for safe, convenient, and connected travel for automobile, bicycle and
pedestrian travel.
4. Expand the opportunity for restaurants, shopping and other services.
5. Protect environmentally significant areas to include the Falls Lake watershed, the
Neuse River, slopes greater than 15 percent and the 100 year floodplain along the
Neuse River."
4.2.3
ZONING
The project study area is located within the jurisdictions of the City of Raleigh and Wake County.
Generalized zoning in the project study area is shown in Figure 26.
4.2.4 TRANSPORTATION PLANS
Raleigh is a member of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO).
CAMPO is responsible for transportation planning in the eastern portion of the Research
Triangle area, and currently has three principle documents guiding planning activities; the
2006-2012 CAMPO Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program, the CAMPO FY
2006-2012 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program Priority List, and the Long Range
Transportation Plan.
The project is consistent with the 2006-2012 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement
Program. 12 The project is listed as a priority project in the CAMPO FY 2007-2013 Metropolitan
Transportation Improvement Program Regional Priority List and is ranked as the 1St local
priority. 13
Environmental Assessment 77
a
??
Dr L..\n\d\0 or
m
a
N
`m
New
Wood t
a
h Hoi_ Iv
Irk
-o Whittin
?
moo,
e?
Ra
p` ool Spring Rd
n
o<\d9 ?
0
t Rd
Q?
r
OG
o?
iii. ?o•
Dr C
J
?a
City of Raleigh
North Carolina
Falls of Neuse Road
Oakboro vt
W?,
r ingto rI
Q
Legend N
Project Study Area C Commercial
O USACE Property Boundary _ Office/institution
Local Road industrial U 0.25 0.5
C? Very Low Density Residential
u Low oesity Residential Miles
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
_ Planned Urban Development Fiaure 26
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Generalized Zoning
a
Ne?Se
Falls Lake Reservoir 7
a

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
425 EFFECTS
- As described in the Raleigh Comprehensive Plan, the project corridor is transitiornng from a
rural area to a suburban, green corridor The defining features of the project corridor are Falls
Lake/Dam and the Neuse River The Plan designates this corridor as a Secondary Arterial
Thoroughfare which generally has region-wide continuity City of Raleigh Streets, Sidewalks,
• and Driveway Access Handbook, most recent amendment (May 2002) 14 states "maintaining
high levels of service is considered the most important function of the roadway, while
maintaining limited degrees of access is considered a secondary function" Design standards in
- the handbook depict secondary arterial thoroughfares with a six lane cross section Natural and
man-made features have shaped how development has occurred in the past and how it will
unfold in the future While the area's proximity to 1-540 and commercial retail shopping to the
- south (near Durant Road) has made it an attractive area for families, residential development
has for the most part been confined to the east side of Falls of Neuse Road due to watershed
restrictions and U S Army Corps of Engineers property to the west As the area continues to
grow, it is expected that the remaining vacant lots will be built out to the maximum use as zoned
- by the city and county and, likewise, underdeveloped lots will be redeveloped to achieve the
greatest value for the property
All of the Build Alternatives would improve mobility and access within the corridor increasing
traffic capacity, connectivity, access to community facilities such as fire and rescue, and
supporting alternative transportation modes Transportation improvements would include new
bicycle and pedestrian routes and serve both existing and new developments, including new
park facilities planned for the northern portion of the study area Adverse impacts to study area
land use, zoning or development are not expected The Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and
Widening project is consistent with transportation planning in the Triangle region The project is
listed as a priority project in the CAMPO FY 2007-2013 Metropolitan Transportation
Improvement Program Regional Pr?onty List and is ranked as the 1 st local priority 15
The No-Build Alternative would not be consistent with transportation planning or planned
development for the area Existing conditions would continue to deteriorate if the No-Build
Alternative is selected including level of service, travel times, and the number of accidents
would likely increase as traffic volumes continue to rise Therefore, the identified transportation
needs of the local and regional communities would not be met
43 PARKS AND RECREATION
• 431 PARKS AND RECREATION
A man-made reservoir, Falls Lake is located in the upper portion of the Neuse River Basin, to
the west of Falls of Neuse Road The reservoir covers almost 12,500 acres with water, and is
- surrounded by 25,500 acres of public land The lake stretches 22 miles upstream to the
confluence of the Eno, Flat, and Little Rivers near Durham
- Recreation activities in the Falls Lake reservoir play a large part in community life for nearby
residents Falls Lake also attracts visitors from throughout the Triangle region The USACE
has partnered with the State of North Carolina in order to operate recreational facilities around
- the reservoir Specifically, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and the North
Carolina Division of Parks and Recreation manage public lands around the lake Additional
areas are subleased to Wake County and the City of Raleigh Recreation facilities in the area
include multiple campgrounds, boat ramps, marina, hunting and fishing areas and hiking trails

Environmental Assessment 79
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widen
The Raleigh City Council adopted the Neuse River Master Recreation Plan in 1996 which
included the possibility of developing a white water course on the Neuse River in the area of the
Falls Lake Dam The site has been evaluated and plans are being developed at this time The
park will serve as a competition grade whitewater slalom course and freestyle venue It is
anticipated that this project will be completed in early 2010 This project is not part of the Falls of
Neuse project
The Leonard Tract is a parcel of land on the south side of the Neuse River that has been
acquired by the City of Raleigh The City is currently studying the possibility of using the tract
as a park/recreation area No masterplan has been prepared and the property has not been
formally designated as parkland
432
EFFECTS
In general, all of the Build Alternatives would improve access to study area parklands and
recreational opportunities by increasing traffic capacity and providing new bicycle and
pedestrian routes Connections would be created to the Upper Neuse Greenway, local
neighborhood greenways and the proposed white water park
The Falls Lake impoundment entrance and a small 13-spot parking area off of existing Falls of
Neuse Road would be impacted by any of the Build Alternatives The surface water and
surrounding land areas of the Falls Impoundment are Federal property and, as such,
discussions were held with FHWA and USACE about the use of the property and impacts from
widening associated with existing Falls of Neuse Road FHWA indicated that the use of this
property was as a water supply and as such, would not be subject to Section 4(f) of the USDOT
regulations In an agreement between the City of Raleigh and the USACE, the City would
relocate entrance signs and provide a new parking lot that accommodates the road widening
project as well as additional parking demand to meet the needs of the reservoir's visitors
The Leonard Tract would be traversed by all of the Build Alternatives, however, since the tract is
not currently designated as a park/recreation area it would not be subject to Section 4(f)
regulations
The No-Build Alternative would fail to improve access to study area parklands and would
provide no additional bicycle or pedestrian accommodations
44 FEDERALLY OWNED LAND
441 FEDERALLY OWNED LAND
The Falls Lake impoundment, including the entrance and parking area immediately adjacent to
existing Falls of Neuse Road, is owned by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) The City
of Raleigh does not have the authority to condemn property owned by the federal government
The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 establishes public land policy by
establishing guidelines which provide for the management, protection, development, and
enhancement of public lands 16 Applicants seeking a license, certificate, or other authority for a
project which involves a "right-of-way over, upon, under, or through public land" must apply to
the Secretary of the Interior through the Bureau of Land Management for the appropriate
authority to use public lands
Environmental Assessment 80
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
442 EFFECTS
The Falls Lake impoundment entrance and parking area adjacent to existing Falls of Neuse
Road would be impacted by all of the Build Alternatives In an agreement between City of
Raleigh and USACE, the City would relocate entrance signs and provide a new parking lot that
accommodates the road widening project as well as additional parking demand to meet the
needs of the reservoir's visitors The City of Raleigh will coordinate the acquisition of USACE
land for the project in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976
45 FARMLANDS
4.5.1 FARMLANDS
The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) of 1981 (7 CFR 568), implemented by the United
States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS),
requires all federal agencies to consider the impact of land acquisition and construction
activities on prime and important farmland soils in an effort to "minimize the extent to which
Federal programs contribute to the unnecessary conversion of farmland to non-agricultural
uses" (Public Law 97-98, Section 1539-1549, 7 U S C 4201, et seq) A Farmland Conversion
Impact Rating Form (NRCS-CPA-106) is used to evaluate the potential impact of land
acquisition and construction activities on farmland Soil quality, as well as other factors that may
affect the farm's viability, are rated on the form The FPPA states that sites receiving a total of
less than 160 points should be given a minimal level of consideration for protection (7 CFR Part
6584)
45.2 EFFECTS
In accordance with the FPPA and State EO 96, the impact of the project on farmland was
assessed Form NRCS-CPA-106 was completed and is included in Appendix E The results
show approximately 21 acres of Prime and Unique Farmland and 15 acres of Statewide and
Local Important Farmland could be converted or otherwise impacted any of the Build
Alternatives Ninety-four points were given for the project The 94 points awarded fall below the
threshold of 260 maximum points necessary for further assessment, therefore, this project is in
compliance with the FPPA
The No-Build Alternative would have no impact on farmland
46 UTILITIES
Utilities serving the study area and project impacts are described below
461
ELECTRIC
Electrical service to local residents and businesses is provided by Progress Energy No power
plants or substations are located within the project study area
462 WATER AND WASTEWATER
- The majority of citizens in the study area are serviced by municipal water/wastewater resources,
- however, in a few pockets throughout the unincorporated areas of Wake County private wells
and individual septic systems are in use

The City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department provides water and sanitary sewer service to
over 167,000 metered customers and a service population of approximately 410,000 people
Falls Lake is the drinking water supply for the City of Raleigh with a capacity of 100 million
Environmental Assessment 81
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
gallons per day (mgd) allocated for drinking water The City of Raleigh is the sole entity that is
permitted to use Falls Lake water for drinking water " The EM Johnson Water Treatment Plant
is located dust off of Falls of Neuse Road, south of the study area, and processes all drinking
water for the City The Department is also developing its reuse water system to provide an
alternative water resource for demands not requiring potable water quality
Watershed protection objectives are carried out through cooperative point planning efforts
between eight municipalities, six counties, and local Soil and Water Conservation Districts in the
Upper Neuse River Basin Community goals and objectives for protection and improvement of
water quality and related water quantity management in the basin are established in the Upper
Neuse Watershed Management Plan 18
A new water line is currently being constructed by the City of Raleigh along existing Falls of
Neuse Road and continues across the Leonard Tract along a similar alignment to the proposed
project, before crossing under the Neuse River The proposed project will take into account the
water line to the greatest extent possible to avoid or minimize impacts associated with any
modification or relocation of the water line
463 SOLID WASTE/RECYCLING
The City of Raleigh provides curbside recycling service available to single-family households
and townhome households The City's multi-family program services apartment/condominium
and some townhouse communities using centrally located multi-compartment recycling
containers
Wake County provides solid waste and recycling facilities for residents at eleven Convenience
Centers located throughout the county The closest facility to the study area is located at 9008
Deponie Drive, at the entrance to North Wake Sanitary Landfill off Durant Road
4.64 NATURAL GAS
Natural gas is distributed and serviced throughout the study area by Public Service Company of
North Carolina, Inc (PSNC)
465 TELEPHONE
Telephone service is provided to the residents in the project study area by AT&T A switch
transformer is located at the intersection of existing Falls of Neuse Road and High Holly Lane
466 EFFECTS
Any of the Build Alternatives would require minor relocations in service area utilities throughout
the project study area The AT&T switch transformer located adjacent to existing Falls of Neuse
Road at High Holly Lane would require relocation This would be a substantial relocation with
costs estimated up to $500,000 Coordination would occur during construction so that
disruptions in service and right-of-way takings for the relocation of utility services would be
minimized and citizens notified in advance of upcoming outages
The No-Build Alternative would have no effect on local area utilities
Environmental Assessment 82
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4.7 RELOCATIONS
4.7.1 RELOCATIONS
The impacts associated with the relocation of residential, business and farm property located
within the proposed right-of-way for the Build Alternatives are presented in this section.
Relocation studies were conducted to estimate the number of residential and business
relocations that would be necessary to implement the project. Details of this information are
included in Appendix D. For each of the Build Alternatives, four residential relocations are
anticipated and no relocations of business, churches, or farms are anticipated. Figure 27 shows
the location of potential relocations.
Environmental Assessment 83

...... •

CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
Falls of Neuse Road
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Legend
Parcels with Potential
---J Relocations
Parcels
Proposed Project
N
W E
5
0 400 800 1600
Feet
Figure 27
Potential Relocations
...... •

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
- 472 EFFECTS
- It is anticipated that four residences would be relocated or replaced as a result of the proposed
project for any of the Build Alternatives In addition to direct takings of residences, multiple
residences located adjacent to existing Falls of Neuse would be affected by the widening These
- impacts could range from loss of trees, landscaping, and fences to disruption of utilities Efforts
- to avoid and minimize the number of relocations would continue through the final design phases
of the project Residential relocation impacts would be mitigated through implementation of the
relocation assistance programs described in Section 4 7 2
The No-Build Alternative would not cause any relocations
- 473 RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
- The City of Raleigh has determined that there are comparable replacement housing and
business sites available within the study area for displaced homeowners, tenants, and
businesses The availability of residential and non-residential units for sale and rent was
- determined based on information obtained from realtors, newspapers, and real estate multiple
- listing services
It is the policy of the City to ensure that comparable replacement housing for residents and
- suitable locations for displaced businesses would be available prior to construction of projects
There are three programs available to minimize the inconvenience of relocation Relocation
Assistance, Relocation Moving Payments, and Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or
- Rent Supplements
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced staff will be available to provide displaced
- residents and businesses with information pertaining to financing and housing programs and the
availability and prices of homes, apartments, or businesses for sale and/or rent
- The Relocation Moving Payments Program generally provides payment of actual moving
• expenses encountered during relocation
- Where displacement will force an owner or tenant to purchase or rent property of higher cost or
to lose favorable financing arrangements (in cases of ownership), the Relocation Replacement
Housing Payments and Rent Supplement Program would compensate up to $22,500 to owners
who are eligible and qualify, and up to $5,250 to tenants who are eligible and qualify
The relocation program established for the project will be conducted in accordance with the
Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970
- (Public Law 91-646) and the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act (GS 133-5 through 133-
18) The program is designed to provide assistance to displaced persons in relocating to a
replacement site in which to live or do business At least one relocation officer is assigned to
- each highway project for this purpose
The relocation officer determines the need of displaced families, individuals, businesses,
• nonprofit organizations, and farm operations for advisory services without regard to race, color,
- religion, gender or national origin The City will schedule its work to allow ample time, prior to
displacement, for negotiations and possession of replacement housing which meets decent,
safe, and sanitary standards Those who are displaced are given at least a 90-day written notice
- after the City purchases the property Relocation of displaced persons and businesses will be
Environmental Assessment 85
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
offered in areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and commercial facilities
Rent and sale prices of replacement property offered will be within the financial means of the
families and individuals displaced and will be reasonably accessible to their places of
employment The relocation officer will assist owners of displaced residences, businesses,
nonprofit organizations and farm operations in searching for and moving to replacement
property
All residential tenants and owner-occupants who may be displaced will receive an explanation
regarding available options, such as (1) purchase of replacement housing, (2) rental of
replacement housing, either private or public, or (3) moving existing owner-occupant housing to
another site (if feasible) The relocation officer will also supply information concerning other
state and federal programs offering assistance to displaced persons in adjusting to a new
location
The Moving Expenses Payments Program is designed to compensate for the costs of moving
personal property from homes, businesses, nonprofit organizations and farm operations
acquired for a highway project Under the Replacement Program for Owners, the City will
participate in a reasonable incident purchase payments for replacement dwellings such as
attorneys fees, surveys, appraisals, and other closing costs If applicable, the City also makes a
payment for any increased interest expenses for replacement housing payments, increased
interest payments, and incidental purchase expenses Reimbursement to owner-occupants for
replacement housing payments, increase interest payments, and incidental expenses may not
exceed a combined total of $22,500, except under the Last Resort Housing Provision
A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment to rent a replacement dwelling or to
make a down payment, including incidental expenses, on the purchase of a replacement
dwelling This payment will not exceed $5,250 The down payment is based upon what the City
determines is required when the rent supplement exceeds $5,250
It is the state's policy that no person will be displaced by any federally-assisted construction
project unless and until comparable or adequate replacement housing has been offered or
provided for each person displaced within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement No
relocation payment received will be considered as income for the purposes of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1954 or for the purposes of determining eligibility or the extent of eligibility of
any person for assistance under the Social Security Act or any other federal law
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement housing is not available
or when it is unavailable within the displacee's financial means, and the replacement payment
exceeds the federal and state legal limitations This program allows broad latitude in methods of
implementation by the City so that safe, decent and sanitary replacement housing can be
provided Since opportunities for replacement housing appear adequate within the study area, it
is not likely that the Last Resort Housing Program will be necessary However, this program will
still be considered as mandated by state law
48 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Executive Order (EO) 12898 requires that "each Federal agency shall make achieving
environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate,
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations s19
Environmental Assessment 86

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table 12 is an adaptation of a table presented at the 2005 North Carolina Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO) conference In the table, those combinations of population groups
considered protected by EO 12898 are summarized
Table 12 Population Groups Protected under E012898
Low-Income Middle-Income Upper-Income
Blacks ? ? ?
Hispanic ? ? ?
Asians ? ? ?
American Indians or
Alaskan Natives ? ? ?
Whites ?
Source Morris, Anne "How to Identify and Engage Environmental Justice Populations " 2005 NC MPO Conference
Greenville, NC 13 October 2005
481 IDENTIFICATION OF PROTECTED POPULATIONS
- A general approach for identifying potential environmental justice areas involves the use of the
comprehensive demographic information for a project study area or larger representation of
typical area demographics, such as the county in which the project is located Once identified,
characteristics of this larger geographic area are then compared to areas in which
- environmental and socioeconomic impacts are predicted to occur to determine which
communities would be affected, which might be potential environmental justice issues, and also
to determine whether or not the impacts to the environmental justice areas would be
- disproportionate (substantially greater) compared with those experienced by the nearby non-
environmental justice areas If disproportionate impacts are identified in this process, mitigation
to alleviate those impacts to those communities should occur

In order to determine where there are high concentrations of minority and low-income
populations, study area demographics were compared to larger-area geographic units called
thresholds Census blocks, the smallest geography that the US Census releases data for, were
used for identifying minority populations However, block groups were used for identifying low-
income populations since the U S Census does not release this more sensitive information at
the block level For this project, data on Wake County was used as a threshold value Data for
the State of North Carolina and Raleigh were also collected for comparison The threshold
values and comparison data for minority and low-income populations are shown in Table 13
Table 13 Threshold Values and Comparison Percentages of Minority Populations
Geographic Area Percent Minority* Percent Low-income**
United States 374 124
North Carolina 326 123
Wake County 330 103
Raleigh 437 155
Average across Study Area 164 44
Threshold value 330 103
*Source US Census 2000, American Fact Finder, Summary File 1
** Source US Census 2000, American Fact Finder, Summary File 3
Environmental Assessment 87
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
This analysis shows that the study area relative to Raleigh, Wake County, and North Carolina
has a lower percentage of population that is either a minority or low-income Despite this finding,
it is worthwhile to determine whether other indicators of the presence of minority or low-income
populations might exist within the study area
482 EFFECTS
There is no expectation of disproportionate impacts to environmental justice populations from
any of the Build Alternatives being considered Impacts associated with the project are expected
to be concentrated along the project corridor Of the four residential relocations identified for the
Recommended Alternative, none are minority owned
There are no relocations and therefore, no disproportionate impacts to any environmental
justice populations associated with the No-Build Alternative
49 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.91 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES
A reconnaissance-level inventory of the project study area was conducted to identify historic
architectural resources As a result of this inventory and subsequent consultation with the
NCDOT and North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO), it was determined that
there are no historic architectural resources within the study area that are potentially eligible for
National Register listing and that merit further assessment See Appendix B for confirmation
letter dated September 05, 2007
492 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
A Phase I archaeological investigation study was conducted for the project in June 2007 A
search of state records indicated no previously recorded sites exist within the project study area
A shovel test survey of upland areas resulted in three identified sites These were recorded as
31 WA1644, 31 WA1645, 31 WA1646 by the North Carolina Office of State Archaeology (OSA)
Site 31WAl644 produced a Badin Phase (1000-800 B C ) fabric impressed ceramic sherd
(prehistoric piece of pottery) which associates the site with an Early Woodland occupation In
addition, non-diagnostic lithic debitage was recovered Sites 31 WA1645 and 31 WA1646 are
prehistoric sites that produced temporally non-diagnostic lithic materials, which could not be
associated with any particular prehistoric time period
A Phase II survey (deep testing) was recommended by OSA to determine more about the
recorded sites Deep testing studies did not further identify any deeply buried cultural deposits
In general, deep testing showed that the floodplain within the project study area has been
largely disturbed through flooding episodes and agricultural practices Excavation at all three
recorded sites produced low densities of prehistoric artifacts The lack of intact deposits
suggests that additional work at any of these sites would not significantly add to current
understanding of the prehistoric past The Phase II study concluded that no further work at
these sites is recommended
As a result of this inventory and subsequent consultation with the NCDOT and North Carolina
State Historic Preservation Office (HPO), it was determined that properties 31WA1644,
31WA1645, and 31WA1646 are not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places
under Criterion D In a letter dated July 23, 2008, HPO concurred with the recommendation that
no additional archaeological investigation is warranted in connection with this project as
currently proposed See Appendix B for confirmation letter dated July 23, 2008
Environmental Assessment 88
u
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
49.3 EFFECTS
There are no historic architectural resources within the study area that are potentially eligible for
- National Register listing, thus none of the Build Alternatives would impact any architectural
resource
The findings for both the Phase I and Phase II work effort are documented in the Archaeological
Survey of the Falls of Neuse Road Widening and Realignment Project, Wake County The
- findings conclude properties 31WA1644, 31WA1645, and 31WA1646 are not eligible for listing
in the National Register, thus, none of the Build Alternatives would impact any archaeological
resources
- The No-Build Alternative would not impact any cultural resources
410 FLOOD HAZARD EVALUATION
4101 FLOODWAYS / FLOODPLAINS
This section contains information corresponding to the analysis of impacts to floodplains and
floodways in the project study area Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management (42 CFR
- 26951) requires the following
• All federal actions must avoid the occupancy and modifications of floodplains and avoid
direct or indirect support of floodplain development wherever that is a practicable
- alternative
• If an action must be located on the base floodplain, the agency shall take action to
reduce the risk of flood loss, to minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health
- and welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values served by
floodplains
• Each agency shall also provide opportunity for early public review of any plans or
- proposals for actions in floodplains
A primary need for this project is to provide a new north-south crossing of the Neuse River As
• such, avoiding the crossing is not a feasible alternative for the proposed action During planning
and design, efforts have been made and will continue to be made to minimize the impacts to
floodplains and to diminish the risk to human life associated with any encroachments
Consideration must be given to the floodplain's "natural and beneficial values" which are
discussed in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Unified National Program
- for Floodpla?n Management According to FEMA, surface waters, their floodplains and their
watersheds must be viewed as parts of one ecological system 20 This system exists in a state of
dynamic equilibrium If one of the parts of the system is disturbed, the entire system will readjust
- toward a new equilibrium The geological and biological effects of the system's readjustments
toward its new equilibrium are often felt far from the original site of the disturbance and can last
for decades For this reason, if for no other, floodplain development and modification should be
viewed with caution and with careful assessment of the potential adverse impacts on natural
- values
- Floodplains in their natural or relatively undisturbed state provide three broad sets of natural and
beneficial resources and hence resource values (1) water resources values including natural
moderation of floods, water quality maintenance, and groundwater recharge, (2) living resources
• values including large and diverse populations of plants and animals, and (3) cultural resource
values including historical, archeological, scientific, recreational, and aesthetic sites in addition
Environmental Assessment 89
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
to sites generally highly productive for agriculture, aquaculture, and forestry where these uses
are compatible with natural values 21
Wake County participates in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program (NFIP)
administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) The most recent Flood
Insurance Study (FIS) for the area was published in May 2006 The study area is contained
within the limits of FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) - Community Panel Number 3720
1729J as included in the AS See Figure 28
The project study area contains one system that is designated by name on the FIRM along with
adjacent floodplains The construction of the proposed protect would encroach on the
designated floodplain associated with the Neuse River The Neuse River is designated as
Stream 1 in Basin 15 A description of the system and encroachments are discussed in the
following section
Environmental Assessment 90
o-
Falls Lake Rcservoi-
ti
G

s

?n gh Ho11Y l
9s Grab

° - Whi
c ttin t,
->
.
b
,,
•

p` C ool Spring Rd
Gs?° Ives

? CO
C Crisp
City of Raleigh
Legend
North Carolina
Project Study Area
Interstate
US Route
NC Highway

Streets
Falls of Neuse Road \ Floodplain
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008

?
arp?? ? v
a\\s
'

A O

0

0.25
Miles
Figure 28
FIRM Floodplain
0.5 1
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4102 NEUSE RIVER
The Neuse River leaves Falls Lake impoundment and enters the project study area from the
northwest The river flows southeastward through Wake County and into Johnston County on its
way towards the coastline of the State and empties into the Pamlico Sound in the vicinity of the
City of New Bern FIRM mapping shows the proposed roadway and Neuse River crossing are
located in a Special Flood Hazard Zone, Zone AE The 100-year base flood elevation is
approximately 205 feet at the proposed crossing
4.103 EFFECTS
Each of the Build Alternatives would include a new crossing of the Neuse River The floodplain
for the Neuse River in this location is included in a FEMA detailed study Impacts to these
floodplains and floodways would be analyzed, mapped and a Conditional Letter of Map Revision
(CLOMR) would be requested
The CLOMR would be submitted to FEMA for review and approval The analysis would detail
the proposed structure opening, roadway embankment encroachments and any hydraulic
changes that would occur within the floodplain Upon approval and after construction is
complete, as-built plans would be submitted with documentation for a Letter of Map Revision
(LOMR) to FEMA Once this is approved, the FEMA maps would be revised and reissued by
FEMA
Structure No 1 (Neuse River Bridge)
FIRM mapping shows the proposed roadway and Neuse River crossing are located in a Special
Flood Hazard Zone, Zone AE The 100-year base flood elevation is approximately 205 feet at
the proposed crossing and is not expected to flood the roadway during severe weather events
Structure No 2 (Unnamed Tributary to Neuse River)
A CLOMR would be required to ensure compliance to FEMA regulations A LOMR would be
required post-construction
The overall affect to floodplains for any of the Build Alternatives would include approximately 2 8
acres of encroachment into designated floodplains, with no encroachments being made into the
floodway The encroachments on floodplains are anticipated to be minor and are not likely to be
significant, as the project would not raise the water elevation to a level that would affect
insurable structures The encroachments on the floodplain would also not present an increased
danger to human health and safety as a result of the construction, nor would it promote
development within the floodplain
The No-Build Alternative would not impact local area floodplains or floodways
411 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
4111 DATABASE SEARCH
Hazardous waste is defined by the USEPA as any waste material, or combination of waste
materials that pose a hazard to human health, welfare, or the environment Materials classified
as hazardous can be in the form of solids, sludges, liquids, or gases, and are characterized as
either, reactive, toxic, infectious, explosive, flammable, corrosive or radioactive Examples of
Environmental Assessment 92
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
hazardous waste sites include landfills, dumps, pits, lagoons, salvage areas, retail operations
and storage tanks
A visual inspection of the area during project studies located a small dump site on the Leonard
tract dust south of the river and on the east side of existing Falls of Neuse Road The site
appeared to contain slabs of concrete, metal parts, glass and other household debris No further
information on this dump pile was found
A search of available environmental records was conducted to identify potential hazardous
materials in the study area Results of the search were reported and mapped in the EDR
DataMap Corridor Study Report As part of the report, several sites were documented through
various databases and are listed in Table 14 A copy of the report and map showing the
locations are included in Appendix F
Table 14 Recorded Sites Hazardous Materials
Database Name Address Map ID
Federal
Resource Conservation and City of Raleigh, EM 10301 Falls of Neuse Road 3
Recovery Act (RCRA) Johnson Water
Conditionally Exempt Small Treatment Plant
Quantity Generators (CESQGs)
Facility Index System (FINDS) Falls Lake 11405 Falls of Neuse Road 1
Management Center
Mt Pleasant Baptist 10720 Falls of Neuse Road 2
Church
State / Local
State Hazardous Waste Sites Durant Park 8305 Camp Durant Road 4
Incident Management Database Falls Lake 11405 Falls of Neuse Road 1
(IMD) Management Center
City of Raleigh, EM 10301 Falls of Neuse Road 3
Johnson Water
Treatment Plant
Leaking Underground Storage Falls Lake 11405 Falls of Neuse Road 1
Tanks Incident Management Management Center
Database (LUST)
City of Raleigh, EM 10301 Falls of Neuse Road 3
Johnson Water
Treatment Plant
Underground Storage Tank City of Raleigh, EM 10301 Falls of Neuse Road 3
Database (UST) Johnson Water
Treatment Plant
*EDR DataMap Corridor Study, May 2008
Environmental Assessment 93
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4112 EFFECTS
Each of the Build Alternative would require the acquisition of 0 05-acre from the Mount Pleasant
Baptist Church to accommodate the wider roadway footprint The acquisition is located on
existing Falls of Neuse Raod along the front yard entrance area of the church The church has a
registered above ground storage tank (AST) located to the rear of the property which is listed on
the Facility Index System (FINDS) While no impacts are expected due to the proposed project,
the City of Raleigh will further assess the affected property for hazardous materials and make
right-of-way recommendations accordingly Should hazardous substance sites be discovered,
measures to minimize and/or mitigate potential impacts would be implemented
The No-Build Alternative would have no impacts to any areas containing hazardous materials
4 12 NOISE
In order to determine the noise impacts of the project, an analysis was conducted in accordance
with the provisions in Part 772 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR 772),
Detailed results of the noise analysis are presented in the Traffic Noise Technical Memorandum
(2008) As part of this evaluation, the existing noise levels were measured in the vicinity of the
proposed project The maximum design year (2035) peak hour equivalent sound level (Leq)
traffic noise levels expected by receptors in the vicinity of the project were predicted The FHWA
Traffic Noise Model 2 5 (TNM 2 5) was used to compute the future design year noise levels in
this study Traffic noise impacts were determined based on the procedures set forth in the
NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy Where traffic noise impacts were predicted, the
analysis included an examination and evaluation of alternative noise abatement measurements
for reducing or eliminating the noise impacts
4121 NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
To determine if roadway noise levels are compatible with various land uses, the FHWA has
developed noise abatement criteria and procedures to be used in the planning and design of
roadways These abatement criteria and procedures are in accordance with 23 CFR 772, U S
Department of Transportation, FHWA, Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and
Construction Noise A summary of the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) for various land
uses is presented in Table 15 Sound pressure levels in this report are referred to as Leq(h)
The hourly Leq is the level of constant sound that over an hour time interval would contain the
same acoustic energy as the time-varying sound In other words, the fluctuating sound levels of
traffic noise are represented in terms of a steady noise level with the same energy content
Noise mitigation measures must be considered when future noise levels either approach or
exceed the criteria levels, or if there are substantial increases over the ambient noise levels
The NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy uses an "approach value" of 1 dBA less than those
shown in Table 15 Additionally the value used for "substantial increase" is shown in Table 16
and is based on the existing noise level Title 23 CFR, Section 772 11(a) states, "in determining
and abating traffic noise impacts, primary consideration is to be given to exterior areas
Abatement would usually be necessary only where frequent human use occurs and a lowered
noise level would be of benefit " For this project, the majority of the identified receptors were
residential Commercial receptors are located sparsely along the corridor
Environmental Assessment 94
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table 15 FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria
Criteria For Each FHWA Activity Category
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - Decibels (dBA)
Activity
Category Leq(h) Description of Activity Category

A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance
(Exterior) and serve an important public need and where the preservation of
those qualities are essential if the area is to continue to serve its
intended purpose
B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas,
(Exterior) parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and
hospitals
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories
(Exterior) A or B above
D -- Undeveloped lands
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools,
(Interior) churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums

Source Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 772, U S Department of Transportation, Federal
Highway Administration
Table 16 Criteria for Substantial Noise Increase. Hourly A-Weiahted Sound Level
Existing Noise Level in Leq(h) Increase in dBA from Existing Noise Level to
Future Noise Levels
< 50 >_ 15
51 >_14
52 >_ 13
53 >_ 12
54 >_ 11
55 >_ 10
Source North Carolina Department of Transportation Noise Abatement Policy
412.2
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the project to determine ambient
(existing) noise levels for the identified land uses The purpose of this noise level information
was to quantify the existing acoustic environment and to provide a base for assessing the
impact of noise level increases Ambient noise levels were measured at eight representative
locations in the project vicinity The measurement locations are shown on Figure 29 a and b and
their results summarized in Table 17 Four noise measurements (TN-1 through TN-4) were used
to calibrate the noise model, while the other four measurements (AN-A through AN-D) were
taken to determine the base ambient noise level in the vicinity of the project absent any nearby
traffic noise The base ambient noise level used for the analysis is 51 7 dBA
Environmental Assessment 95
YINY
#ATCHL
Vl Ir
N. Wlr-Tv
3F
I ir
Jr
6Js
<
tV 7
P
Ere'
a
in
N-1
COOLMORE DRL
a
.0 wk
N� 0
it
-A
r
T
4,
#
K'
#A
7
4C
CITY OF RALEIGH Legend
NORTH CAROLINA Measurement Site
Proposed Project
0 400 800 1600
Feet
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening Figure 29a
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901 Noise Measurement Locations
Date: September 2008

?
?

Kti
CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
. tic
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Legend
Measurement Site
Proposed Project
N
W E
0 400 800 1600
Feet
Figure 29b
Noise Measurement Locations
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Table 17: Ambient Noise Levels (Leq
Site Ambient Noise Levels for Model Calibration Noise
Level
(dBA)
Measured Noise
Level
(dBA)
Calculated
TN-1 Falls of Neuse Road - In Front of Mount Pleasant Baptist
Church 67.7 67.7
TN-2 Falls of Neuse Road - 170 feet North of High Holly Lane 67.5 67.5
TN-3 Corner of Falls of Neuse Road and Fonville Road 66.9 66.9
TN-4 Falls of Neuse Road - Falls Lake Dam Entrance 64.8 64.8

AN-A Falls Tower Drive - 400 feet Northwest of Falls of Neuse Road 52.0 N/A
AN-B North side corner of Turtle Ridge Way and Paddy Hollow Lane 48.3 N/A
AN-C Wide River Drive - 400 feet North of Royal Forest Drive 57.6 N/A
AN-D Falls of Neuse Road - 1300 feet North of Lowery Farm Drive
and 765 East of Falls of Neuse Road 48.8 N/A
The existing roadway and traffic conditions were used with the most current traffic noise
prediction model in order to calculate existing noise levels for comparison with noise levels
actually measured. The calculated existing traffic noise levels were predicted to be within 3 dBA
of the measured traffic noise levels for the locations where traffic noise measurement were
obtained. Thus, the computer model is a reliable tool in the prediction of noise levels.
Differences in dBA levels can be attributed to "bunching" of vehicles, low traffic volumes, and
actual vehicle speeds versus the computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles and single vehicular
speed.
4.12.3 FUTURE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS
In general, the traffic situation is composed of a large number of variables that describe different
cars driving at different speeds through a continuously changing roadway configuration and
surrounding terrain. Due to this complexity, certain assumptions and simplifications must be
made to predict roadway traffic noise. The TNM 2.5 traffic noise prediction model uses the
number and type of vehicles on the planned roadway, their speeds, the physical characteristics
of the road (curves, hills, depressed, elevated, etc.), receptor location and height, and if
applicable, barrier type, barrier ground elevation, and barrier top elevation.
The noise predictions made in this report are roadway-related noise predictions for the traffic
conditions during the year being analyzed. Peak hour design and LOS C volumes were
compared, and the volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions were used with the proposed
posted speed limits. Thus, during all other time periods, the noise levels would be no greater
than those indicated in this report. The TNM 2.5 computer model was utilized in order to
determine the number of land uses (by type) which would be impacted during the peak hour of
the design year 2035. A land use is considered impacted when exposed to noise levels
approaching or exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and/or predicted to sustain a
substantial noise level increase.
Environmental Assessment 98
I
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4.12.4 TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACTS
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise levels either: [a] approach or exceed
the FHWA noise abatement criteria (with "approach" meaning within 1 dBA of Table 16 value);
or [b] substantially exceed the existing noise levels. Consideration for noise abatement
measures must be given to receptors that fall in either category.
Under Title 23 CFR, Part 772, the number of impacted receptors due to roadway traffic noise
approaching or exceeding FHWA noise abatement criteria or by experiencing a substantial
increase in noise level within the project area is included in Table 18 for each of the Build
Alternatives:
Table 18: Ambient Noise Levels (Leq)
Alternative Number of Impacted Receptors
1 73
2 72
3 71
4 71
The impacted receptors for the Recommended Alternative are shown in Figure 30 a and b. The
predicted noise level increases for this project range up to 16 dBA. When real-life noises are
heard, a noise level change of 2-3 dBA is barely detectable. A 5-dBA change is more readily
noticeable. A 10-dBA change is judged by most people as a doubling or a halving of the
loudness of the sound.
4.12.5 TRAFFIC NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES
If traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of alternative noise abatement
measures for reducing or eliminating the noise impacts must be considered. Consideration for
noise abatement measures must be given to all impacted receptors. Various noise abatement
measures were evaluated for all impacted.
The selection of alignment for noise abatement purposes must consider the balance between
noise impacts and other engineering and environmental parameters. Generally, alignment
selection involves the horizontal or vertical orientation of the proposed improvements in such a
way as to minimize impacts and costs. The majority of impacted receptors as shown on Figure
30 a and b occur along existing Falls of Neuse Road. The widening proposed here can only be
shifted slightly to one side or the other. Thus any changes in alignment would not improve
overall traffic noise.
Traffic management measures that limit vehicle type, speed, volume and time of operations are
often effective noise abatement measures. For this project, traffic management measures are
not considered appropriate for noise abatement due to their negative effect on the capacity and
level-of-service on the proposed roadway.
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels can often be incorporated into a
project design with a measurable degree of success. Example measures may include earth
berms or artificial abatement walls. Noise barriers at noise sensitive locations are analyzed (by
estimating the cost of the barrier and determining the cost per benefited) to determine if they
would meet the minimum noise reduction goals. The NCDOT defines the benefited receptors,
as receptors, impacted and non-impacted, that would receive a minimum noise level reduction
of 5 dBA as a result of placing the noise mitigation measure.
Environmental Assessment 99
.ti

Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
_ ....,? .

,c

t !' fem..,`..
Legend
Non-Impacted Receptor
Impacted Receptor
Proposed Project
p{ _ J.
i; rte. ?E _ E
N
W E
S
0 400 800 1600
Feet
Figure 30a
Impacted Noise Receptors
- -- - ---- .......... .. _ --- ------------- - ........... ............ --................... 0
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
. -

r '.

Zi FsY`"C
A r` _LAl

-1

CITY OF RALEIGH
NORTH CAROLINA
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
Legend
Non-Impacted Receptor
Impacted Receptor
Proposed Project
N
W E
0 400 800 1600
Feet
Figure 3Ob
Impacted Noise Receptors
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
NCDOT noise abatement policy requires that installation of a noise barrier cost no more than
$35,000 (plus an incremental value) per benefited receptor and that the total height not exceed
25 feet. Noise abatement on non-controlled access or partially controlled access highways
usually is not a feasible option due to the multiple property owners along the roadway.
Therefore, based on the number of direct access points along the project's corridor, noise
barriers are not feasible.
The acquisition of property in order to provide buffer zones to minimize noise impacts is not
considered to be a feasible noise mitigation measure for this project. The cost to acquire
impacted receptors for buffer zones would exceed the abatement threshold of $35,000 per
benefited receptor. The use of buffer zones to minimize impacts to future sensitive areas is not
recommended because this could be accomplished through land use control.
The use of vegetation for noise mitigation is not considered reasonable for this project due to
the substantial amount of right-of-way necessary to make vegetative barriers effective. FHWA
research has shown that a vegetative barrier should be approximately 100' wide to provide a 3-
dBA reduction in noise levels. In order to provide a 5-dBA reduction, substantial amounts of
additional right-of-way would be required. The cost of the additional right-of-way and planting
sufficient vegetation is estimated to exceed the abatement threshold of $35,000 per benefited
receptor.
4.12.6 EFFECTS
Changes in noise and perception of noise are an unavoidable consequence of roadway
construction. Between 71 and 73 receptors would be impacted by each of the Build Alternatives.
Based on the amount of direct access, no noise barriers were determined to be feasible for the
proposed project.
The No-Build Alternative would not increase the number of impacted receptors along the
corridor. However, the perception of noise could worsen over time as traffic volumes and
corresponding delays increase.
4.13 AIR QUALITY
An analysis was conducted in accordance with the transportation conformity requirements of the
federal Clean Air Act (CAA). The transportation planning provisions of Title 23 and Title 49 of
United States Code (23 USC Sections 134 and 135; 49 USC Sections 5303-5306) and the air
quality provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 USC Sections 7401-7671q), establish
the major connection between transportation planning and emission reductions from
transportation sources. Regulations governing transportation conformity are found in Title 40 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93) and are closely linked with the joint
FHWA/Federal Transit Administration (FTA) transportation planning regulations found in 23
CFR Part 450. For a detailed description and evaluation of air quality analysis please refer to
the Air Quality Analysis Technical Report, appended by reference.
In accordance with North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines, the air quality analysis consisted of a dispersion
modeling analysis of carbon monoxide (CO) from motor vehicles at potential "hot-spots" in the
project area. A "hot-spot" is an area where localized high concentrations of pollutants may form,
generally at signalized intersections, where idling of vehicles occur.
Environmental Assessment 102
70-
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
The analysis included analysis of the Year 2007 Existing Conditions, the Years 2015/2020/2035
No-Build Condition, and the evaluation of four Build Alternatives in the Years 2015/2020/2035.
The years 2015 and 2020 represent interim years while 2035 represents the design year.
In addition to the criteria air pollutants for which there are NAAQS, EPA also regulates air
toxics. Most air toxics originate from human-made sources, including on-road mobile sources,
non-road mobile sources (e.g., airplanes), area sources (e.g., dry cleaners) and stationary
sources (e.g., factories or refineries).
Mobile source air toxics (MSATs) are subset of the 188 air toxics defined by the CAA. The
MSATs are compounds emitted from highway vehicles and non-road equipment. Some toxic
compounds are present in fuel and are emitted to the air when the fuel evaporates or passes
through the engine unburned. Other toxics are emitted from the incomplete combustion of fuels
or as secondary combustion products. Metal air toxics also result from engine wear or from
impurities in oil or gasoline.
The EPA is the lead Federal agency for administering the CAA and has certain responsibilities
regarding the health effects of MSATs. The EPA issued a final rule on Controlling Emissions of
Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources in 66 FR 17229 (March 29, 2001). This rule was
issued under the authority in Section 202 of the Clean Air Act. In its rule, EPA examined the
impacts of existing and newly promulgated mobile source control programs, including its
reformulated gasoline (RFG) program, its national low emission vehicle (NLEV) standards, its
Tier 2 motor vehicle emissions standards and gasoline sulfur control requirements, and its
proposed heavy duty engine and vehicle standards and on-highway diesel fuel sulfur control
requirements. Between 2000 and 2020, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) projects
that even with a 64 percent increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT), these programs will reduce
on-highway emissions of benzene, formaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and acetaldehyde by 57
percent to 65 percent, and will reduce on-highway diesel particulate matter (PM) emissions by
87 percent, as shown in Figure 31 below.
Environmental Assessment 103
Is
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Figure 31: US Annual VMT vs. Mobile Source Air Toxics Emmissions
U.S. Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) vs.
VMT Mobile Source Air Toxics Emissions, 2000-2020 Emissions
(trillion s?year) (tons?year}
5 - - - - - --
2C O.OrJ4
Ben_ene 57%)
.WT r-°Ah:
3
1co.ooO
F:rT 31:ET•]e? tE°i?
',;1E'rJt30e'IE i-'C°e;
hcrden;-E3% . C, -
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Vc:es: Fcr c--road more sc.•:es. Er, ssions ;act-,s were yenerxed cs -y MCEILES.__. MTEE oponon ci rarke: is c,y;_ratas :s he c
:onstact a: 5 N Gasoline P.':rP and _rygena:e :r:en: a _ he c consta^:. VM1T: !+,gt.e av 2ra5srres 299G. Tat; eVM-_ For 2-00 analysis
assurres annua grcwt- rase of 2 5% 'CFV + ?E s rased - M06 LEP.2-gene-ate c ?actc•s fore Ere-:a' carbon, orga- ::a bon scd
2--4 tc ^i :,iesel-poverEd eh 6es, ar :he oart let ze atoff set at 1C.0 ri crcns.
As a result, EPA concluded that no further motor vehicle emissions standards or fuel standards
were necessary to further control MSATs. The agency is preparing another rule under authority
of CAA Section 202(1) that will address these issues and could adjust the full 21 and the primary
6 MSATs.
For each alternative in this EA, the amount of MSATs emitted would be proportional to the
vehicle miles traveled, or VMT, assuming that other variables such as fleet mix are the same for
each alternative. The VMT estimated for each of the Build Alternatives will likely be slightly
higher than that for the No Build Alternative, because the additional capacity increases the
efficiency of the roadway and attracts rerouted trips from elsewhere in the transportation
network. The increased VMT would lead to higher MSAT emissions for the action alternative
along the highway corridor, along with a corresponding decrease in MSAT emissions along the
parallel routes. The emissions increase is offset somewhat by lower MSAT emission rates due
to increased speeds; according to EPA's MOBILE 6.2 emission model, emissions of all of the
priority MSATs except for diesel particulate matter decrease as speed increases. The extent to
which these speed-related emissions decreases will offset VMT-related emissions increases
cannot be reliably projected due to the inherent deficiencies of technical models.
Because the estimated VMT under each of the Alternatives are nearly the same, it is expected
there would be no appreciable difference in overall MSAT emissions among the various
alternatives. Also, regardless of the alternative chosen, emissions will likely be lower than
present levels in the design year as a result of EPA's national control programs that are
projected to reduce MSAT emissions by 57 to 87 percent between 2000 and 2020. Local
conditions may differ from these national projections in terms of fleet mix and turnover, VMT
Environmental Assessment 104

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
growth rates, and local control measures However, the magnitude of the EPA-protected
- reductions is so great (even after accounting for VMT growth) that MSAT emissions in the study
area are likely to be lower in the future in nearly all cases
- The additional travel lanes contemplated as part of the protect alternatives will have the effect of
moving some traffic closer to nearby homes and businesses, therefore, under each alternative
there may be localized areas where ambient concentrations of MSAT could be higher under
certain Build Alternatives than the No Build Alternative The localized increases in MSAT
- concentrations would likely be most pronounced along the new alignment segments and along
the sides of existing roadways where symmetrical widening occurs However, as discussed
above, the magnitude and the duration of these potential increases compared to the No-build
. alternative cannot be accurately quantified due to the inherent deficiencies of current models In
sum, when a highway is widened and, as a result, moves closer to receptors, the localized level
of MSAT emissions for the Build Alternative could be higher relative to the No Build Alternative,
• but this could be offset due to increases in speeds and reductions in congestion (which are
associated with lower MSAT emissions) Also, MSATs will be lower in other locations when
traffic shifts away from them However on on a long-term, regional basis, EPA's vehicle and fuel
- regulations, coupled with fleet turnover, will eventually cause substantial reductions that will
- significantly lower region-wide MSAT levels
4131 ATTAINMENT
The protect is located in Wake County, which is within the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill non-
attainment area for ozone (03) and the Raleigh-Durham non-attainment area for CO as defined
by the EPA This area was designated nonattainment for 03 under the eight-hour ozone
standard effective June 15, 2004 The 1990 CAA designated this area as a moderate
- nonattainment area for CO However, due to improved monitoring data, this area was
redesignated as a maintenance area for CO on September 18, 1995 A maintenance area is a
geographic region designated as nonattainment pursuant to the CAA and subsequently
redesignated to attainment subject to the requirements of a maintenance plan
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires that transportation plans, programs, and protects conform to
the intent of the State Air Quality Implementation Plan (SIP) The current SIP does not contain
- any transportation control measures for Wake County
The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (2030) Long Range Transportation Plan
- (LRTP) and the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) conform to the intent of the
SIP There are no significant changes in the project's design concept or scope, as used in the
conformity analyses
4132 MICROSCALE ANALYSIS
A dispersion modeling analysis was conducted for the worst-case conditions, or "hot-spots," for
an existing year (2007) and three future year (2015/2020/2035) Build and No-Build scenarios A
"hot-spot" is considered an area where the most congested traffic volumes and roads may
• produce high concentrations of CO A hot-spot analysis is an estimate of the likely future
localized CO pollutant concentrations and a comparison of those concentrations to the NAAQS
Local effects of these protects on CO concentrations must be considered to determine whether
- there is a potential that the protect may cause a new CO violation or exacerbate an existing CO
hot-spot A hot-spot analysis assesses impacts on a scale smaller than the entire non-
attainment area or maintenance area, and uses an air quality dispersion model to determine the
• effects of emissions on air quality Detailed results of the microscale analysis are presented in
the Air Quality Technical Memorandum
Environmental Assessment 105
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Based on the modeling, all modeling sceneries indicate that the NAAQS for CO will not be
exceeded Also, none of the four Build Alternatives are expected to cause or contribute to a
violation of the NAAQS for CO
414 VIEWSHED/AESTHETICS
4141 LANDSCAPE
The viewshed throughout the study area consists of a variety of manmade and natural
landscape features that include neighborhoods and small businesses, agricultural/open land,
and wooded areas found along the Neuse River The natural features of the landscape
providing vistas are the open spaces and wooded areas along the river These features
combine with the topography and manmade objects (buildings, transmission line, etc) to create
views
The viewshed from the proposed roadway would include scenic views of the Neuse River and
adjacent woodlands
4142 EFFECTS
Any of the Build Alternatives would introduce a new roadway and bridge into the landscape The
current viewshed citizens have while using the greenways, parks and Neuse River would
change The inclusion of treatments such as coloring of the structural elements, buffer areas,
and landscape screening can obscure views of transportation features The City of Raleigh
would consider various options during final design of the bridge and roadway in order to create
an aesthetically acceptable structure and minimize visual impacts
The No-Build Alternative would have no impacts to the visual environment
Environmental Assessment 106
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
415 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
= 4151 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS
- This section of the EA provides a summary of the potential impacts to the natural environment
Further details and analysis related to the natural environment are provided in the Natural
Resources Technical Report prepared for the Falls of Neuse Road Widening and Relocation
- Project (NRTR) 22
Impacts to the natural environment were analyzed for the study area Field investigations were
- conducted in April and May 2007 Walking surveys were undertaken to determine natural
resource conditions and to document natural communities, wildlife, and the presence of
protected species or their habitats
Dominant plant species were identified for all natural communities encountered Plant
community descriptions are based on those classified in Schafale and Weakley, where
applicable 23 For the context of this document, community classifications have been modified in
- some instances to better reflect field observations Names and descriptions of plant species
generally follow Radford et al,24 unless information that is more current is available Animal
names and descriptions follow Burt,25 Martof et al,26 and Sibley 27 Scientific nomenclature and
- common names (when applicable) are provided for each plant and animal species listed
Subsequent references to the same organism include the common name only
- During surveys, wildlife identification involved a variety of observation techniques including
active searching, visual observations (both with and without the use of binoculars), and
observing the characteristic signs of wildlife (sounds, scats, tracks, and burrows) Quantitative
- water sampling was not undertaken, rather existing data was used to the analysis
Jurisdictional wetland delineations were performed using the three-parameter approach
prescribed in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manua128 Supplementary
technical literature describing the parameters of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and
wetland hydrological indicators was also utilized
- 4152 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
- The project is located in the Northern Outer Piedmont Ecoregion of the Piedmont physiographic
province of North Carolina 29 The topography of the study area is characterized as gently rolling
with some steep areas Gently rolling areas are found within interstream areas, with steeper
- slopes found along the edges of some stream floodplains Elevations range from approximately
200 feet above mean sea level (MSL) to approximately 410 feet above MSL as depicted on the
Wake Forest, North Carolina USGS topographic quadrangle map (Figure 32) Land use within
- the project vicinity includes a mixture of residential, pasture fields, and forested areas
4153 SOILS
The process of soil development depends on both biotic and abiotic influences These
influences include past geologic activities, nature of parent materials, environmental and human
- influences, plant and animal activity, duration of development, climate, and topographic position
The soil series most prevalent in the environmental study area are the Cecil Series and the
- Appling Series The Cecil Series consists of gently sloping to steep, well-drained, deep soils of
the Piedmont uplands Cecil soils occupy large areas in the northern and central parts of the
county, where they have formed under forest in material that weathered from gneiss, schist, and

Environmental Assessment 107
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
other acidic rocks The Appling series consists of gently sloping to strongly sloping, deep, well-
drained soils of the Piedmont uplands These soils were also formed under forest in material
that weathered from gneiss, schist, and other acidic rocks Other dominant soils in the
environmental study area include the Chewacla series which consists of deep, nearly level to
gently sloping soils that are somewhat poorly drained, and the Congaree series which consists
of nearly level, well drained soils on the flood plains of most of the streams in the county 30
A number of other soils, which encompass small areas, are also located within the study area
There are no hydric soils listed for the project study area although two soil types (Chewacla and
Congaree series) are known to have hydric inclusions A complete inventory of the specific soil
types within the environmental study area as well as hydric soil classifications can be found in
the NRTR
4154 EFFECTS
As a result of earthwork and various other construction activities associated with any of the
Build Alternatives, the project would result in localized alterations of study area topography,
geology, and soils within the right-of-way limits As construction materials are added to the
project site, soils may be replaced, redistributed, and/or compacted Addition of material would
raise the elevation of certain areas The project is expected to have a negligible overall impact
to the region's topography, geology, and loss of or creation of soils
The construction of any of the Build Alternatives would permanently impact approximately 41 5
acres of local sods within the construction right-of-way
The No-Build Alternative would not impact any local soils
Environmental Assessment 108
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
r
\.,
City of Raleigh
North Carolina
Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening
Wake County
STIP Project No. U-4901
Date: September 2008
0
Legend
Project Study Area "
0 0.25 0.5
Miles
Figure 32
Wake Forest
USGS Map
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4155 BIOTIC RESOURCES
The project study area is composed of different vegetative communities determined by
topography, soils, hydrology, disturbance, and past and present land uses These systems are
interrelated and, in many aspects, interdependent Scientific nomenclature and a common name
(when applicable) are provided for each plant and animal species listed Subsequent references
to the same organism include only the common name
4156 FLORA
Terrestrial communities in the environmental study area are represented by three major
community types Maintained/Disturbed, Fallow Agricultural, and Disturbed Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest These descriptions refer to the dominant flora and fauna in each community
and the relationship of these biotic communities Classification of plant communities is based
loosely on a system used by the NCNHP, Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina 3' However, Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina restricts its
scope to those communities that are considered `natural' and without the overriding influence of
modern human activities The difficulty in using this classification for a project in a disturbed
area is that the area is significantly altered from its `natural condition ' If a community is modified
or otherwise disturbed such that it does not fit in an NCNHP classification, it has been given a
name that best describes current characteristics
4 15 6 1 Maintained/Disturbed
The Maintained/Disturbed community includes road shoulders, rights-of-way, and residential
neighborhoods The Maintained/Disturbed community comprises approximately 46 percent (79
acres) of the study area Many plant species are adapted to these disturbed and regularly
maintained areas The dominant species within this community include fescue (Festuca sp ),
blackberry (Rubus sp ), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera
japonica), Chinese privet (Ligustrum srnense), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), and sweet gum
(Liqu?dambar styraciflua)
4 15 6 2 Fallow Agricultural
Fallow Agricultural includes fallow fields that were historically used to graze cattle
Occasionally, the areas included small forest blocks Open fields allowed for proliferation of both
annual and perennial grasses and herbs The Fallow Agricultural community comprises
approximately 19 percent (33 acres) of the environmental study area Dominant vegetation
included bluestem (Andropogon sp ) and other unidentified grasses
4 15 6 3 Disturbed Meslc Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype)
Disturbed Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest is present along riparian zones and along the existing
roadway hillslope This community comprises approximately 35 percent (59 acres) of the
environmental study area Plant species present in the overstory of this plant community include
sweet gum, loblolly pine, box elder (Acer negundo), American elm (Ulmus amencana), willow
oak (Quercus phellos), and white oak (Quercus alba) The sparse shrub layer consisted of
American holly (Ilex opaca), red maple (Acer rubrum), and red buckeye (Aesculus pavia) The
herbaceous layer included species such as woodsorrel (Oxalis d1llenn), wolfberry (Lyceum spp
and clover (Tnfolium spp )
Environmental Assessment 110

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4157 WILDLIFE
The environmental study area was visually surveyed for signs of terrestrial wildlife Due to the
• disturbed nature of the environmental study area, all of the faunal species observed are
opportunistic species that will inhabit any and all of the terrestrial communities discussed above
A listing of all species observed during field reviews or expected in the project study area is
contained within the NRTR32 for review
4158 BIOTIC RESOURCE EFFECTS
The project study area is in a disturbed state from decades of farming and other agricultural/
land clearing activities Many of the plant communities within the area are fragmented by
• previous human activity Protect impacts from the construction of any of the Build Alternatives
would be limited to areas directly adjacent to the existing roadway and right of way needs along
the new location portion of the alternative Habitat impacts would occur during clearing and
• grubbing for construction or altered as a result of construction Temporary fluctuation in
populations of animal species that utilize terrestrial areas is anticipated during the course of
construction Slow-moving, burrowing, and/or subterranean organisms would be directly
impacted by construction activities, while mobile organisms would be displaced to adjacent
- communities Competition within the adjacent communities may affect the population of
relocated organisms by either increasing or decreasing competitive pressure on the individuals
inhabiting the area
As a result of earthwork and various other construction activities associated with the proposed
project, localized alterations are expected in study area terrestrial communities All of the Build
- Alternatives are expected to impact approximately 415 acres of disturbed terrestrial
communities 27 acres of Maintained/ Disturbed, 7 acres of Fallow Agricultural, and 7 5 acres of
Disturbed Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
• The No-Build Alternative would not impact any terrestrial communities or any local wildlife
populations
- 4159 AQUATIC RESOURCES
- Aquatic habitats within the study area include habitats ranging from intermittent tributaries to
perennial first order streams to perennial riverine habitat within the Neuse River Community
composition of these aquatic communities is reflective of physical characteristics of the water
- body and the condition of the water resource The North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) GIS coverage of proposed critical habitats for aquatic species was
reviewed and no waterways in the environmental study area supporting critical habitats were
- identified 33
4 15 10 AQUATIC RESOURCE EFFECTS
Construction of any of the Build Alternatives may cause temporary impacts to aquatic
communities due to sedimentation and reduced water quality resulting from project construction
- Permanent impacts are not expected due to the implementation of Best Management Practices
(BMPs) and other measures to avoid and minimize harm to natural systems in the project study
area

The No-Build Alternative would have no impacts on aquatic resources
Environmental Assessment 111
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
41511 SIGNIFICANT NATURAL HERITAGE AREAS
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) has compiled a statewide list of
Significant Natural Heritage Areas (SNHA) The presence and/or occurrence of rare plant and
animal species, rare or high quality natural communities, and geologic features are evaluated
A site's significance rating is based upon the global and statewide rarity of these elements and
the quality of their occurrence relative to other occurrences Sites on the SNHA list are
considered to be the best representatives of the natural diversity of the state and have priority
for protections
No SNHAs were identified within the project study area, therefore, no impacts are anticipated
416 WATER QUALITY
4161 GENERAL
The proposed project lies within the Neuse River basin The Neuse River originates northwest
of the city of Durham in Person and Orange Counties and the headwaters start in the Southern
Outer Piedmont and the Carolina Slate Belt ecoregions 34 The Neuse River basin is the third
largest basin in North Carolina and is one of only three basins that are located entirely within the
state The basin covers 6,192 square miles and spans 19 counties
The surface waters in the area are located in the watershed of the Upper Neuse drainage basin
(USGS 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03020201) within NCDWQ subbasin 03-04-02 35
Streams identified in the study area include the Neuse River and six unnamed tributaries (UTs)
to the Neuse River Figure 33 presents the locations of these surface waters Perennial streams
in the environmental study area include the Neuse River and four UTs to the Neuse River
Intermittent streams include two UTs to the Neuse River
The Neuse River is classified as WS-IV, NSW The stream index number is 27-(20 7) Since the
remaining surface waters (S1 through S6) in the study area are all UTs to the Neuse River, they
share the same designation as the body of water to which they flow WS-IV waters are waters
protected as water supplies that are generally in moderately to highly developed watersheds
Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) are waters that require limitations on nutrient inputs No
Outstanding Water Resources (OWR), High Quality Waters (HQW), or Critical Areas (CA) were
identified 36
Benthic macroinvertebrates, or benthos, are organisms that live in and on the bottom substrates
of rivers and streams These organisms are primarily aquatic insect larvae The use of benthos
data has proven to be a reliable monitoring tool, as benthic macroinvertebrates are sensitive to
subtle changes in water quality One benthic macro invertebrate community monitoring station is
present on the Neuse River, near US 401 The station was given a Good-Fair bioclassification in
1995, and remained the same in 2000
The condition of the fish community is one of the most meaningful indicators of ecological
integrity Fish occupy the upper levels of the aquatic food web and are both directly and
indirectly affected by chemical and physical changes in the environment Water quality
conditions that significantly affect lower levels of the food web (such as benthic
macroinvertebrates) would affect the abundance, species composition and condition of the fish
population No fish community monitoring sites are present on the Neuse River Fish community
monitoring sites located downstream of the environmental study area on Richland Creek, Smith
Creek, and Crabtree Creek all have Good to Excellent bioclassifications 37
Environmental Assessment 112
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
The Ambient Monitoring System (AMS) is a network of stream, lake and estuarine sample
stations strategically located for the collection of physical and chemical water quality data One
AMS was set up on the Neuse River, near Falls Lake No adverse physical or chemical water
quality conditions were reported "
Point source discharges located in North Carolina are permitted through the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program Any discharger is required to register for a
permit The NCDWQ Basinwide Water Quality Plan for the Neuse River basin identified 52
permitted dischargers within subbasin 03-04-02 39 The largest are Raleigh Neuse Wastewater
Treatment Plant (WWTP) which discharges 60 million gallons per day (MGD), Central Johnston
WWTP (4 5 MGD), Cary North WWTP (12 MGD), Little, Creek WWTP (1 9 MGD), and Wake
- Forest WWTP (2 4 MGD) All permitted dischargers are located downstream of the
environmental study area
- Non-point source discharge refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater or
snowmelt Agricultural runoff may serve as a source for various forms of non-point source
pollutants Land clearing and plowing disturb soils to a degree where they are susceptible to
- erosion and can lead to sedimentation in streams Pesticides, fertilizers and land applications of
animal waste can be transported via runoff to receiving streams Within the environmental
study area, the Neuse River is not listed on the 2006 303(d) list ao
i 4162 STORMWATER
Stormwater runoff rates would increase slightly due to the increase in impervious roadway
surface area as a result of both detailed construction alternatives Sedimentation may also
cause an impact to water systems that would be crossed Sedimentation of the stream channel
- causes changes in flow rate and stream course, which may lead to increased stream bank
scour and erosion Sedimentation also leads to increased turbidity of the water column
Removal of the riparian vegetation could result in decreases in dissolved oxygen and
- temperature instability of the stream Stormwater runoff, as well as temporary construction
impacts due to erosion and sedimentation, would be minimized through implementation of a
stringent erosion control schedule and use of best management practices (BMPs)
4163 WATER QUALITY EFFECTS
• Impacts to water quality, as a result of constructing any of the Build Alternatives, are not
anticipated to be significant The study area is already disturbed from years of agricultural
practices and human use Impacts to water resources could include stormwater runoff,
- disruption of the substrate, increased sedimentation and siltation, and temporary decreases of
dissolved oxygen during construction Clearing and grubbing activities, as well as bridge and
culvert construction activities could also impact water resources Most impacts would be
- temporary in nature during protect construction and would likely be limited to the immediate area
i of construction and would be minimized
Stormwater runoff rates would experience a slight increase with the construction of any of the
i Build Alternatives due to the addition of impermeable surfaces (roadway, bridge, sidewalk,
greenways) The City of Raleigh would incorporate measures to control non-point source water
quality impacts as described in NCDOT's "Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface
- Waters (March 1997) " The goal of these BMPs is "to prevent degradation of the state's waters
through the location, construction, or operation of the highway system "4' These measures
would be incorporated into the final engineering design of the project and would be detailed in
- an erosion and sedimentation control plan This plan would be prepared in accordance with the

Environmental Assessment 113
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
guidelines and requirements of the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act (15A
NCAC 4B 0101-0130)
The No-Build Alternative would have no impacts on local water quality, riparian buffers, or
stormwater
417 JURISDICTIONAL TOPICS
4171 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES
Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act require regulation of discharges of fill material into
"Waters of the United States " The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the principal
administrative agency of the CWA, however, the USACE has responsibility for implementation,
permitting, and enforcement of the provisions of the CWA related to dredging and filling The
USACE regulatory program is defined in 33 CFR 320-330 NCDWQ Is the principal
administrative agency of the Section 401 Surface Water and Wetland Standards, which are
defined in NC Administration Code 15A NCAC 02B 0100 and 0200
Water bodies, including lakes, rivers, and streams, are subject to jurisdictional consideration
under the Section 404 Program Wetlands are also identified as waters of the United States
Wetlands, defined in 33 CFR 328 3, are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface
water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions Any action that proposes to place fill into these areas falls under USACE jurisdiction
417.2 JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS
Wetland delineations were conducted in April 2007 using the 1987 Corps of Engineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual 42 The manual provides guidelines and methods for determining
jurisdictional wetlands for purposes of Section 404 of the CWA This technical guidance requires
that a positive wetland indicator be present for each of the delineation parameters (hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology) The USACE wetland determination forms and
NCDWQ Wetland Rating Forms can be found in the NRTR 43
Approximately 0 77 acres of jurisdictional wetlands were identified in the project study area All
wetlands identified are classified as palustrlne emergent (PEM) These wetlands are found in
floodplain and topographic depressional areas Figure 33 presents the locations of the
jurisdictional wetlands while Table 24 lists the jurisdictional wetlands identified in the project
study area
Table 19 Jurisdictional Wetlands Identified within the Prniant Rfiirly Area
Wetland Rrverine/
Non-Rivenne Wetland
Classification'
(Cowardin) DWQ
Wetland Rating2 Wetland Area
(acres)
W1/W2 Non-Riverine PEM1 24 0 46
W3 Riverlne PEM1 24 0 02
W4 Rivenne PEM1 24 0 29
1 Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat of the United States (Cowardin et al , 1979)
2 Guidance for Rating the Values and Functions of Wetlands in North Carolina Fourth Version (NCDWQ, 1995)
Environmental Assessment 114

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
A functional assessment of wetland systems present within the project study area was
conducted using the Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina Fourth
Version, developed by NCDWQ as The procedure rates wetlands according to seven functional
attributes water storage, bank/shoreline stabilization, pollutant removal, low flow augmentation,
wildlife habitat, aquatic life, and recreation and education Attributes are weighted to enhance
the results in favor of water quality functions Pollutant removal is weighted to be the most
important wetland attribute, while water storage, bank/shore stabilization, and wildlife habitat
functions are given equal weight as secondary attributes, and low flow augmentation, aquatic
life, and recreation and education are given minimal credit The ratings of the seven attributes
are summed to provide a score for each wetland system Scores range from 0 to 100, higher
scores indicate higher wetland values Wetland ratings are presented above in Table 19

Environmental Assessment 115
I
a
Falls of Neuse Road Reahgnment and Widening
4173 JURISDICTIONAL STREAMS
Streams identified in the study area include the Neuse River and six unnamed tributaries (UTs)
to the Neuse River Figure 33 presents the locations of these surface waters Perennial streams
in the study area include the Neuse River and four UTs to the Neuse River Intermittent streams
include two UTs to the Neuse River The identified streams and classifications are provided in
Table 20 Stream classifications were approved and a letter dated September 18, 2007 Is
contained in Appendix B
Table 20 Classifications of Streams Identified within the Project Study Area
URS Stream
Label Stream as
Indicated on USGS
Quad NCDWQ Stream
Form Rating' Stream Classification Shown on
USGS/Soil
Map
Neuse Neuse River N/A2 Perennial Yes/Yes
S1 UT to Neuse River 305 Perennial No/Yes
S2 UT to Neuse River N/A2 Perennial Yes/Yes
S3 UT to Neuse River 365 Perennial No/No
S4 UT to Neuse River N/A2 Perennial Yes/Yes
S5 UT to Neuse River 19 Intermittent Yes/Yes
S6 UT to Neuse River 275 Intermittent No/No
1 NC Division of Water Quality Stream Classification Method NCDWQ Stream Classification Form (NCDWQ, 2005)
2 The NCDWQ stream form was not completed as the stream exhibited strong perennial characteristics
Sedimentation is likely to be the most adverse impact to the water systems Studies have shown
that during roadway construction, there is a direct correlation between the amount of suspended
particles in the stream channel and the amount of clearing and grubbing activity, embankment
modification, and project duration Sedimentation is detrimental to aquatic ecosystems and
affects the physical characteristics of streams Sedimentation of the stream channel causes
changes in flow rate and stream course, which may lead to increased streambank scour and
erosion Removal of the riparian vegetation could result in decreases in dissolved oxygen and
temperature instability of the stream Temporary construction impacts due to erosion and
sedimentation would be minimized through implementation of a stringent erosion control
schedule and use of NCDOT's BMPs for Protection of Surface Waters (March 1997)
• 4 17 4 NEUSE RIVER BUFFERS
- The Neuse River basin is subject to buffer rules designed to protect and preserve existing
- riparian buffers to maintain their nutrient removal function Riparian buffers act to remove
nitrogen, phosphorus, and other pollutants from rainwater and runoff 45 The buffer rules
establish a protected 50-foot wide riparian buffer consisting of two zones Zone 1 consists of a
. vegetated area that extends landward a distance of 30 feet on all sides of a surface water
Zone 2 begins at the outer edge of Zone 1 and extends landward 20 feet Under the buffer
rules, Zones 1 and 2 are to remain essentially undisturbed, except for certain exempted and
- allowed uses provided by 15A NCAC 213 0233 (6) Uses designated as prohibited under this
rule may not proceed within the riparian buffer unless a variance is granted pursuant to 15A
NCAC 2B 0233 (9) The buffer rules are administered by the NCDWQ

Environmental Assessment 117
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4175 JURISDICTIONAL EFFECTS
No impacts to jurisdictional wetlands are anticipated for any of the Build Alternatives or the No-
Build Alternative
Of the approximately 6,400 linear feet of jurisdictional streams present within the project study
area, each of the Build Alternatives would directly impact a maximum of approximately 879
linear feet of jurisdictional streams (see Table 21 ) The No-Build Alternative would not impact
jurisdictional streams
Table 21 Impacts to Jurisdictional Streams
URS Stream as Impacts Impacts Impacts Impacts
Stream Indicated on Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4
Label USGS Quad (linear feet) (linear feet) (linear feet) (linear feet)
S2 UT to Neuse 182 182 182 182
River
S3 UT to Neuse 98 98 98 98
River
S4 UT to Neuse 315 315 315 315
River
S5 UT to Neuse 55 55 55 55
River
S6 UT to Neuse 229 229 229 229
River
Total 879 879 879 879
417.6 NEUSE RIVER BUFFER EFFECTS
Each of the Build Alternatives would impact a maximum of approximately 34,969 square feet of
Zone 1, and 22,307 square feet of Zone 2 Neuse River Buffers (see Table 22 )
Table 22 Neuse River Buffer Impacts
URS
Stream
Label Alt 1
Zone 1
Impacts
(sq ft) Alt 1
Zone 2
Impacts
(sq ft) Alt 2
Zone 1
Impacts
(sq ft) Alt 2
Zone 2
Impacts
(sq ft) Alt 3
Zone 1
Impacts
(sq ft) Alt 3
Zone 2
Impacts
(sq ft) Alt 4
Zone 1
Impacts
(sq ft) Alt 4
Zone 2
Impacts
(sq ft)
Neuse 335 3,073 335 3,073 335 3,073 335 3,073
S2 12,834 6,703 12,834 6,703 12,834 6,703 12,834 6,703
S4 17,824 10,101 17,824 10,101 17,824 10,101
1 17,824 10,101
S5 31976 21430 3,976 21430 3,976 2,430 3,976 2,430
Total 34,969 22,307 34,969 22,307 34,969 22,307 1 1 34,969 22,307
4.177 AVOIDANCE, MINIMIZATION AND COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Land development activities that may adversely impact wetlands require consent through permit
approval from the regulating agency At the federal level, under the CWA Section 404b(1)
Guidelines (40 CFR 230) and USACE regulations (33 CFR 320 4(r)), the USACE is obligated to
require mitigation for any unavoidable impacts to wetlands and streams as a condition of permit
Environmental Assessment 118

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
approval Mitigation for impacts to wetlands and streams include avoiding impacts, minimizing
- impacts, and compensating for impacts
Avoidance
• Avoidance examines the appropriate and practicable possibilities of averting impacts to
wetlands and streams One of the primary needs for the proposed project includes a new
crossing over the Neuse River Due to the need for a new crossing and the fixed end points at
• existing Falls of Neuse/Fonville Road and New Falls of Neuse in Wakefield, avoidance of
jurisdictional streams is not possible Due to the location of wetlands in the far western part of
the study area, jurisdictional wetlands would be avoided
Minimization
- Minimization includes the examination of appropriate and practicable steps to reduce adverse
impacts to streams and wetlands Steps that would be implemented to minimize impacts to
streams impacted by the proposed project include
• Minimizing "in-stream" activities,
- • Strictly enforcing the sedimentation and erosion control BMPs for the protection of
streams and wetlands,
• Decreasing the footprint of the proposed project through the reduction of right-of-way
widths and steepening of fill slopes where possible, and
• Utilizing natural stream channel design principles when relocating streams
Compensatory Mitigation
- Compensatory mitigation is meant to replace, on at least a one-to-one basis, the lost functions
and values of natural streams and wetlands affected by development activities The City of
Raleigh would investigate the study area for on-site mitigation opportunities If on-site mitigation
. is not possible, mitigation requirements would be satisfied by the Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP) for the project The EEP is designed to protect the natural resources of North
Carolina through the assessment, restoration, enhancement and preservation of ecosystem
functions, and compensation for development impacts at the watershed level
a 4178 REQUIRED PERMITS
Construction of the project would result in activities requiring environmental regulatory permits
from federal and state agencies A list of these permits, organized by issuing agency, is
- provided below The City of Raleigh would obtain all necessary permits prior to construction
Many of the environmental issues and mitigation measures discussed in this EA would be
further quantified and evaluated as final roadway designs are completed
United States Army Corps of Engineers
Section 404 Permit any action that proposes to place fill into "Waters of the United States" falls
• under the jurisdiction of the USACE under Section 404 of the CWA (33 U S C 1344) The CWA
provides for public notice and review of pending Section 404 permit applications
Encroachments into areas determined as subject under the CWA must be reviewed and
- approved by the USACE through the Section 404 program It is anticipated that a Department
of the Army Nationwide Permit #14 - Linear Transportation Projects will be required for impacts
Environmental Assessment 119

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
to the UTs to the Neuse River, and a Section 10 permit for the proposed bridge crossing of the
Neuse River
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
Section 401 Water Quality Certification any activity which may result in discharge to navigable
waters and requires a federal permit must obtain a certification through the NCDWQ that such
discharge would be in compliance with applicable state water quality standards This permit is
required in association with the Section 404 permitting process and is required prior to Section
404 authorization
The City of Raleigh is subject to the requirements of the NPDES stormwater permitting program
for roadway construction and material storage facilities The permit requirements include
implementing a comprehensive stormwater management program, monitoring the program, and
annual reports of the program's effectiveness and direction
Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules an "Authorization Certificate" is required for any non-exempt
activity within the 50-foot wide riparian buffer along all perennial and intermittent streams in the
Neuse River Basin (including the Neuse River) A listing of allowable "uses" of the buffer areas
is provided in the rules
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Land Resources
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan in accordance with the North Carolina Sedimentation
Pollution Control Act of 1973, projects disturbing more than one acre of land must submit an
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan to the NCDENR Division of Land Resources (NCDLR)
The plan must include erosion control measures and be approved by the DLR prior to
construction
United States Coast Guard
Section 9 Permit a permit must be obtained for any new bridge built over navigable waterways,
including the Neuse River Bridge clearances are reviewed under this permit
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Forest
Resources
Open Burning Permit a permit is required to start a fire in woodlands or within 500 feet of
woodlands under the protection of the Division of Forest Resources Thirty day permits can be
issued for highway construction
4 18 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
4.181 FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
Species with the federal status of endangered (E), threatened (T), proposed endangered (PE),
and proposed threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) of 1973 as amended (16 USC 1531 et seq ) Any action likely to adversely affect a
species classified as federally protected will be subject to review by the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) The USFWS and NCNHP online databases were reviewed for
federally listed species potentially occurring in Wake County as 47 The federally protected
species listed for Wake County as of May 04, 2008 are listed in Table 23 Suitable habitat for
Environmental Assessment 120
•
•
•
•
•
i
i
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
these protected species was searched in April and May 2007 The following biological
conclusions are a result of integrating the findings from all field visits Coordination with the
USFWS can be found in Appendix B
NCNHP coverages were also reviewed and no known documented occurrences of federally
listed threatened or endangered species were identified within one mile of the environmental
study area 48
Table 23 Federally Threatened and Endanaered Snecies Listed for Wake Countv
Scientific Name Common Name Federal State
Status Status Current
Status Biological
Conclusion
Vertebrates
P?co?des borealis Red-cockaded
woodpecker Endangered Endangered Historic No Effect
Invertebrates
Alasm?donta heterodon Dwarf wedgemussel Endangered Endangered Current No Effect
Vascular Plants
Rhus m?chaux?? Michaux's sumac Endangered Endangered Current No Effect
Sources Lists of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed and Candidate Species for the Southeast Region (USFWS,
2008)
Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina (NCNHP, 2008)
Notes Endangered - A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range "
Historic - The species was observed in the county more than 50 years ago
4182
SPECIES OF CONCERN
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the ESA and are not subject
to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as
threatened or endangered An FSC is defined as a species that is under consideration for listing
for which there is insufficient information to support listing Organisms which are listed as
threatened, endangered, or special concern (SC) on the NCNHP list of Rare Plant and Animal
Species are afforded state protection under the ESA and the North Carolina Plant Protection
and Conservation Act of 1979
NCNHP coverages were reviewed and one known documented occurrence of an FSC listed
species was identified within one mile of the, environmental study area 49 The Southeastern
myotis (Myotis austroripanus) was identified within one mile of the environmental study area
According to the database, this occurrence was last observed prior to 1982 No other
occurrences or available habitat for any of the listed species was located in the environmental
study area during field reviews
4.18.3 THREATENDED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES EFFECTS
The US Fish and Wildlife Service has concurred with the biological conclusions of "No Effect" for
the federally endangered red-cockaded woodpecker, dwarf wedgemussel, and Michaux's
sumac These conclusions would apply to all of the Build Alternatives Following the original
coordination effort with USFWS in 2007, the bald eagle was removed from the federal list of
threatened and endangered species Even though they are delisted, bald eagles are still
protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The No-Build Alternative would not impact any protected species
Environmental Assessment 121
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4 19 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
A summary of impacts is provided in Table 24 shown below
Table 24 Summarv of Imnacts
Impact No-Build Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4
Local Community 0 + + + +
Land Use,
Development,
Transportation
0 + + +
+
Parks and
Recreation 0 0 0 0 0
Farmlands 0 0 0 0 0
Utilities 0 0 0 0 0
Relocations 0 0 0 0 0
Environmental
Justice 0 0 0 0 0
Historical and
Cultural Resources 0 0 0 0 0
Noise 0 0 0 0 0
Air Quality 0 0 0 0 0
Physical Features 0 0 0 0 0
Flora 0 0 0 0 0
Wildlife 0 0 0 0 0
Aquatic Resources 0 0 0 0 0
Floodplains 0 0 0 0 0
Significant Natural
Heritage Areas 0 0 0 0 0
Water Quality 0 0 0 0 0
Jurisdictional
Wetlands 0 0 0 0 0
Jurisdictional
Streams 0 0 0 0 0
Neuse River Buffer 0 0 0 0 0
Threatened and
Endangered Species 0 0 0 0 0
Key Positive Impact +
Negligible to Low Impact O
Medium Impact O
High or Adverse Impact •
Environmental Assessment 122

- Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4 20 CONSTRUCTION EFFECTS
Construction impacts associated with any of the Build Alternatives would create environmental
- impacts that are short-term in nature and can be controlled, minimized or mitigated through
conformance with BMPs and standard City procedures
- 4.201 NEUSE RIVER CROSSING
The potential exists for minimization of impacts to the Neuse River and surrounding tributaries
- and riparian buffers through the utilization of various construction methods
Erosion and sedimentation caused by construction activities would affect drainage patterns and
- water quality Bridge construction activities would create turbidity in the Neuse River and its
tributaries
In accordance with the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act (15A NCAC 4B
0001- 0027), an erosion control plan would be developed and implemented prior to
construction The plan would incorporate measures to control non-point source impacts as
recommended in NCDOT's Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Protection of Surface
Waters (March 1997) 50 These BMPs include, but are not limited to, using berms, dikes, silt
barriers, and catch basins, vegetating or covering disturbed areas as soon as possible, and
conforming to proper clean-up practices
4202 UTILITY SERVICE
Construction of any of the Build Alternatives would likely require some degree of adjustment,
relocation, or modification to existing public utilities, particularly on the secondary roads Any
- modifications, adjustments, or relocations would be coordinated with the affected utility
companies
4203 NOISE
Construction of any of the Build Alternatives would result in temporary increases in noise levels
- within the vicinity of the project Noise would be generated primarily from heavy equipment used
to transport materials and to construct the roadway Sensitive receptors located close to the
construction activities may temporarily experience increased noise levels
r
Construction noise can be controlled by regulating the hours of construction and equipping
machinery with noise reduction devices Certain construction activities could also be limited
during the evening, weekends, and holidays Storage and staging areas would be located as
far from noise sensitive areas as practicable The City of Raleigh specifications require the
contractor to limit noise levels in noise-sensitive areas adjacent to the project The City of
Raleigh also reserves the right to monitor construction noise and to require noise abatement
where limits are exceeded
4204 AIR
During construction of the project, debris associated with clearing and grubbing, demolition, and
other operations would be removed from the project area and disposed of or burned by the
contractor in accordance with 15 NAC 2D 0520 Best management practices (BMPs) would be
incorporated into these activities to ensure that burning of debris does not become a nuisance
to area residents and to ensure that these activities do not create a public health hazard
Measures to minimize dust from construction activities would also be taken by the contractor
Environmental Assessment 123
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Dust control would be the responsibility of the contractor and could include the following
• minimizing exposed earth surface,
• temporary and permanent seeding and mulching,
• watering working and haul areas during dry periods,
• covering, shielding, or stabilizing material stockpiles, and
• using covered haul trucks
Emissions from construction equipment are regulated by federal standards Any burning of
cleared materials would be conducted in accordance with applicable state and local laws,
regulations, and ordinances Specifically, a Burning Permit from the N C Division of Forest
Resources must be obtained for burning within woodlands or within 500 feet of woodlands
under the protection of the Division of Forest Resources
4205
BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
Construction, staging, and stockpiling operations would result in the disruption of the resident
wildlife population adjacent to the roadway The clearing of habitats, human activity, and noise
from construction operations would result in the displacement of mobile wildlife species Non-
mobile species would be lost as habitat is converted to construction areas
Maximum disruption of wildlife communities would occur when project construction begins as
displaced animals are forced to compete for space with other nearby resident wildlife and
human populations These impacts would be minimized as much as possible by restricting land
clearing and construction operations within the project right of way Off-site staging and
stockpiling areas would be located to impact the least amount of natural habitat as possible
Stockpiling and staging areas would be revegetated after construction, which could provide
replacement habitat for some species Expected impacts to biotic communities due to project
construction are expected to be minimal
4206 CONSTRUCTION WASTE
All construction waste material generated during clearing, grubbing, and other construction
phases would be removed from the project site and burned or disposed of by the contractor in
accordance with state and local regulations Disposal of construction waste in jurisdictional
areas or riparian buffers would not be allowed unless properly permitted Litter and other
general trash would be collected and disposed of at local landfill locations The City of Raleigh
would require contractors to conduct historic, archaeological, wetland and threatened and
endangered species surveys prior to approval and use of construction waste disposal and/or
borrow sites identified for the proposed project
4207 DETOURS AND ACCESSIBILITY
Impacts to traffic patterns and motorists would occur throughout the construction duration
Access to adjacent properties would be maintained at all times and in each direction Public
awareness of construction activities or changes in traffic patterns through radio reports, press
releases, and changeable message signs can inform drivers to the current or upcoming road
conditions
An increase in truck traffic in the study area would occur during construction Access to
construction staging areas and the construction sites may require temporary access roadways
The traffic plan developed during the final engineering design phase would define designated
truck routes and parking areas for construction vehicles
Environmental Assessment 124
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
4208 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Throughout construction, all construction inspectors would have the responsibility to monitor the
project area for potential archaeological remains If an unanticipated discovery is determined to
be ineligible for inclusion in the National Register, the contractor would proceed with the project
following written concurrence from the NCHPO If the site is determined to be potentially
eligible for inclusion in the National Register, additional work, such as a Determination of
Eligibility or Data Recovery, may be required Further construction work at the site would be
suspended until all criteria of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and other
related federal and state regulations have been successfully addressed
In the event that human remains are discovered, the Construction Inspector would immediately
halt work and notify the local law enforcement agency and medical examiner If remains are
found not to be of recent origin, the contractor and the City would consult with the NCOSA to
ensure that all provisions of state and federal laws concerning human remains are followed
Provision for security to protect suspected burials from vandalism would be taken Only after
the human remains have been properly removed from the site would construction in the area be
resumed
Environmental Assessment 125
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
This page intentionally left blank
Environmental Assessment 126
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
5.0 INDIRECT AND CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
An Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment and Technical Memorandum was prepared in
accordance with the NCDOT Guidance for Assessing Indirect and Cumulative Impacts of
• Transportation Projects ?n North Carolina (November 2001) The technical memorandum is
appended by reference and the findings of the assessment are presented in this section of the
Environmental Assessment
• The project is primarily located in an existing suburban corridor with little developable land
available Therefore, the project is not expected to induce a substantial amount of new growth
Indirect and cumulative effects of the project are expected to be associated with encroachment-
alteration rather than induced growth Individual driveway access along the proposed project will
be limited to existing driveway connections Future driveway connections will be limited and
subject to approval by the City in accordance with current zoning restrictions No further
- analysis of indirect and cumulative effects related to induced growth is recommended
Overall impacts to the region are expected to be positive However, small businesses located
- along the bypassed/realigned portion of Falls of Neuse will likely be indirectly impacted by a
reduction in pass-by traffic Wet n' Dirty Toys and Heritage Play Sets are small businesses that
rely on pass-by traffic for advertising Both of these businesses are located along the realigned
portion of Falls of Neuse Road and as such, would experience a substantial reduction in pass-
by traffic due to the new traffic patterns
While long-term economic impacts associated with the road widening and relocation project are
• considered positive, the short-term impacts during construction activities and local impacts to
bypassed businesses along the proposed realigned portion of Falls of Neuse Road are
considered a negative impact Long-term traffic related noise is also a likely indirect effect of
- the project to residents and businesses located in the immediate vicinity of the project

Overall cumulative effects (future conditions with the proposed action) of the project are
expected to be negligible A summary of the indirect and cumulative effects expected to be
associated with the project is provided in Table 25
Environmental Assessment
127
a?
O y U

.:
Lu -6
d e
>Ua c
y O -? aJ
w
t QI m m 01 co co Q rn
U 3Q Z Z Z z z d d D Z J J

c
co
O
'a ?
++ CID
0 o
m?
- C
U N
a
N ? d Y
d
d
m
m
CD
cm
o>
m
C
Q
??
W i
N
Z i
N
Z N
Z ?
Z N
Z N
Z N
Z C ?
Z ?
Z N
Z O aJ
z
I N

Q
N N
z a

N ++ N
O V)
O .
+
O = d
d ? v
?
V
Or ..0. E W aJ

"C a
lJJ

=O
s
v aJ

N
?
0 -
° CD

a? `
U m
0
rn
0)
rn
rn
rn
?
?
CD

O w

I
0 0
L. = W Q z z z 0
z 0
z 0
a c0
G C
0 Z J N
V >

m ca
t W ¢ `-'

O = _ °c
Lo ? N II ?

C e £ o o Q o C o 0 Q a°'i 3
J 3
J
_ J J Z J Z CL a Z Z
? U

O OQ 7 W
w O 7
'8 a U.
C
? a
>
c y O O
w .
-0 w
N
U C? O O Q O O O O Q N p N
d O O Q J J Z J J d Z Z Z J ca -2

r w

?
3
L 0
(L)
'

z
y

0 O
?
d
n u
Q e L m

c 0 0
a) U)
z L 0 0 z 0 0 0 ° z o °
vQ a
oIL a z _
,
Lu
U

N O
U d Lu

aJ
j O
Q ]
C

C O
O

V)

N N

ca O

O
N
O O

d

2

E U

d

N
U

co

N

c J

II II
CL C
co V) O
E
ca- ip `

N
a N M3
_N co ,
Z = ? C N J d
?+
V cp > C N
Q1 O C
C co UU
C C
, U
U U
Q.
5
I a _N E > c cp O N =
>
- = U m 0 N
2 N N Y
2 j F- LU LLJJ 2 Z Q
Ln
N
d
OC)
N
e-
i
i
• Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
i 511 FUTURE CONDITIONS
511 1 Population Growth and Land Use Changes
The project study area has faced tremendous growth pressure given its close proximity to 1-540
and Falls Lake CAMPO has made growth projections for population, housing, and employment
i through the year 2030 based on growth trends and the existing zoning and land use regulations
i in place The population estimates for the area show it growing by an estimated 60 percent
over the next 25 years 5' However, it is important to note that the geographic level CAMPO uses
for its projections are Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) The TAZs that cover the study area include
i a larger geographic region than that of the study area Therefore, despite the TAZs showing
significant growth in the next 25 years, the project study area is not expected to experience
much growth, as much of the land has already been built upon An expanded and improved
i facility would help to accommodate the transportation needs of both the current users and the
expected increase in users from growth in the surrounding area
5 1 1 2 Land Development
The improved facility and re-alignment of the roadway, together with the overall strong growth of
- the area, would likely lead to the development of the remaining vacant parcels within the study
area Likewise, the growth pressure would also encourage the redevelopment of underutilized
parcels To a lesser degree, the increased access the project provides to 1-540 could potentially
i accelerate development in Wake Forest and northern Wake County However, this development
would likely occur with or without the project
i 512 EFFECTS RELATED TO THE HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
5121 Alteration of Traffic Patterns and Access
The project corridor serves as an arterial roadway that feeds into 1-540, an outer loop that
connects Raleigh and the surrounding communities The project would improve overall access
i to study area destinations and improve connectivity for through travelers The widening and re-
alignment would improve traffic flow, reduce congestion, and decrease travel time along the
corridor Parcel access will be limited to existing connections Future driveway coneections will
- be controlled by the City in accordance with zoning restrictions Negative indirect or cumulative
impacts related to traffic patterns or access are not expected
5122 Relocation or Alterations of Homes, Businesses, or Public Facilities
• Indirect effects could impact small businesses in the area due to the proposed termination of
existing Falls of Neuse Road Wet n' Dirty Toys and Heritage Play Sets are located along the
i terminated portion of Falls of Neuse Road and, as a result of new traffic patterns, could
- experience a reduction in pass-by traffic
There are no indirect or cumulative effects expected from relocation or alteration of project area
i to homes or public facilities
i 5 1.2 3 Environmental Justice
There is no expectation of disproportionate indirect or cumulative impacts to environmental
i justice populations from the project
•
Environmental Assessment 129
i
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and
512.4 Safety
Improved mobility along the project corridor would likely result in decreased congestion and
improved safety
5125 Aesthetics and Cultural Values
The build alternatives are not expected to substantially change aesthetics and cultural values in
the study area Enhanced landscaping of the roadway and careful consideration of bridge
design, location, and materials would help to ensure that the project complements the existing
corridor aesthetics, surrounding parkland, and other natural features such as the Neuse River
The project includes new sidewalks and provides increased access to study area destinations
including parklands This enhanced connectivity and access promotes values associated with
outdoor recreation and healthy living
51 3 EFFECTS RELATED TO THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
51 31 Water Resources
Since the proposed project consists primarily of improvements within existing right of way and
development has already occurred in many of the areas adjoining the project, indirect and
cumulative impacts to water resources are expected to be minimal The future land use
assessment shows continued development in the area with or without the project Future
development impacts to the Neuse River include water quality degradation as a result of more
impervious surfaces that block or redirect discharge and more storm drains that divert
precipitation into streams instead of aquifers, which could increase erosion rates over time The
land development in the area would increase non-point source water pollution
5 1 3 2 Wetlands
The project is not expected to substantially induce growth, therefore, indirect and cumulative
effects of the project on study area wetlands are not expected
5133 Threatened and Endangered Species
There are no known occurrences of Threatened or Endangered Species within a mile of the
project study area Therefore, no impacts to Federally Protected Species are expected
Environmental Assessment 130
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
6.0 COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
6.1 PROJECT SCOPING
The Realignment and Widening of Falls Neuse project (U-4901) is a federal-aid project subject
to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) As such, the FHWA is the
lead agency in this action A Start of Study notice was mailed in May 2007 informing local, state
and federal resource agencies and government officials of the upcoming project development,
environmental analysis and engineering studies The letter requested review of the proposed
action and any comments the particular person could have regarding potential impacts to the
human, natural, and/or physical environments (See Appendix A for copy of scoping letter)
In addition, the same mailing was sent to staff at local emergency service facilities, local schools
and hospitals, if applicable, and school transportation
Coordination was maintained with these contacts throughout the project development process in
order to evaluate and minimize potential project impacts
62 NEPA/SECTION 404 PROCESS ,
The general purpose of the Merger 01 Process is to integrate the coordination and
documentation processes for surface transportation projects in the State The integrated
approach is an attempt to streamline the project development and permitting processes, with a
stated objective of " to ensure that the regulatory requirements of Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act are incorporated into the NEPA decision-making process for surface transportation
projects in North Carolina " There are designated milestones or Concurrence Points (CPs)
during the planning and design process where interagency meetings are held with team
members and other interested parties and project specifics discussed and agreed upon
The following agencies are typically part of the Merger Team
• USACE
• FHWA
• NCWRC
• NCDENR
• USEPA
• NCDOT
• HPO
• USFW
The Initial Merger 01 Screening Meeting for the proposed project was held on May 14, 2007
Staff members representing FHWA, USACE, NCDENR,DWQ, NCDOT and the City of Raleigh
were present at the meeting It was determined in this meeting that the project would not follow
the Merger 01 Process and the Merger Team would not be convened for TIP Project No U-
4901 However, the USACE requested that resource agency input be obtained on the crossing
of the Neuse River before a final design is selected The agencies could review the designs and
decide if all avoidance and minimization options were applied
A Structure Design Study for the new crossing of the Neuse River was submitted to the
following agencies on April 01, 2008,
Environmental Assessment 131
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
• Federal Highway Administration
• United States Army, Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Division
• United State Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
• United States Environmental Protection Agency
• North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of
Water Quality
• North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
• North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Historic Preservation Office
• North Carolina Department of Transportation
In response to the letter and study, an on-site meeting was scheduled for May 28, 2008 to
review the designs at the proposed location of the crossing The conclusions reached at the
meeting were the 3 (three) span structure with one set of end bents in the water of the Neuse
River was acceptable (Option 1) Drilled pilings would be required Construction could take
place from each side of the river, thus, a temporary work structure would not be necessary
Comments received from local, state and federal agencies from the project scoping phase
through the publishing date of this document are in Table 26 along with responses See
Appendix B for copies of all correspondence
Table 26 Summarv of Aaencv Comments
Date Comment Response
United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
May 03, We recommend that a bald eagle nest Comments noted Surveys completed
2007 survey be conducted within 1,500 feet of the May 09, 2007
proposed crossing site of the Neuse River
We also recommend that a survey be
conducted for Michaux's sumac
May 30, This letter is in response to your letter of Comments noted
2007 May 23, 2007 which provided a biological
determination of "may effect, but is not likely
to adversely effect the federally threatened
bald eagle", "no effect" on the federally
endangered Michaux's sumac, "no effect" on
the federally endangered red cockaded
woodpecker, "no effect" on the federally
endangered dwarf wedgemussel The
Service concurs with your determination
April 15, The Structure Design Study considers 3 Comment noted Per an on-site meeting
2008 options for crossing the Neuse River held on May 28, 2008, it was decided
Options 1 and 2 would have one and two that the minimized structure "Option 1"
bents in the river, respectively Option 3 would be acceptable with 1 set of bents
would completely span the river Since in the Neuse River
Option 3 would not require in-channel work,
Option 3 appears to have the least potential
for adverse effects to the water quality and
fish and wildlife habitats within the river
Therefore, the Service prefers Option 3 over
the other two options
Environmental Assessment 132
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening

Date Comment Response
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, D ivision of Water Quality
June 05, DWQ recommends that highly protective Comment noted
2007 sediment and erosion control BMPs be
implemented to reduce the risk of runoff
requests that road design plans provide
treatment of stormwater runoff through
BMPs as detailed in the most recent DWQ
Stormwater Best Management Practices
presence of surface waters classified as Comment noted
Water Supply Critical Area (CA) requests Bridge structure is not located within a
the applicant strictly adhere to North Water Supply Critical Area
Carolina regulations entitled "Design
Standards in Sensitive Watersheds (15A
NCAC 04B 0124) Should abridge be
located with this CA the applicant will be
required to design, construct, and maintain
hazardous spill catch basins
This project is within the Neuse River Basin Comment noted
Riparian buffers impacts should be avoided
and minimized to the greatest extent
possible
If mitigation is necessary, it is preferable to Comment noted
present a conceptual mitigation plan with the
environmental documentation If the event
mitigation is required, the mitigation plan
should be designed to replace appropriate
lost functions and values The NC
Ecosystem Enhancement program may be
available for use as wetland/stream
mitigation
DWQ is very concerned with sediment and Comment noted
erosion impacts that could result form this
project The applicant should address these
concerns by describing potential impacts
that may occur to aquatic environments and
any mitigating factors that would reduce the
impacts
Bridge bents should not be placed in the Comment noted Per an on-site meeting
water held on May 28, 2008, it was decided
that the minimized Bridge Option 1
would be acceptable with 1 set of bents
in the Neuse River
September The DWQ concurs with the referenced Comment noted
18, 2007 document regarding the following stream
calls,
S1, S2, S4 - Perennial stream, subject to
Mitigation Rules and Neuse Buffer Rules
S3 - Perennial stream, subject to Mitigation
Rules but not Neuse Buffer Rules
S5 - Intermittent stream, subject to Neuse
Buffer Rules but not Mitigation Rules
S6 - Intermittent stream, not subject to
Environmental Assessment 133
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Date Comment Response
Neuse Buffer Rules or Mitigation Rules
NC Wildlife Resources Commission
June 13, Our standard recommendations for bridge Comments noted
2008 crossings of this scope are as follows
1 We generally prefer spanning structures
2 Bridge deck drains should not discharge
directly into the stream
3 Live concrete should not be allowed to
contact the water in or entering the stream
4 If possible, bridge supports (bents)
should not be placed in the stream
5 If temporary access roads or detours are
constructed, they should be removed back
to original ground elevations immediately
upon the completion of the project
Disturbed areas should be seeded or
mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree
species should be planted with a spacing of
not more than 10' by 10'
6 A clear bank (riprap free) should remain
on each side of the steam underneath the
bridge
7 In streams that contain threatened or
endangered species, NCDOT biologist Mr
Logan Williams should be notified
8 In streams that are used by anadromous
fish, the NCDOT official policy "Stream
Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish
Passage (05/12/07) should be followed
9 Sediment and erosion control measures
sufficient to protect aquatic species must be
implemented prior to any ground disturbing
activity
10 Temporary or permanent herbaceous
vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of ground disturbing
activates to provide long-term erosion
control
11 All work in or adjacent to stream waters
should be conducted in a dry work area
12 Heavy equipment should be operated
from the bank rather than in stream
channels in order to minimize sedimentation
and reduce the likelihood of introducing
other pollutants into streams
13 Only clean, sediment-free rock should
be used as temporary fill rock should be
used as temporary fill and should be
removed without excessive disturbance to
natural stream bottoms
During subsurface investigations,
equipment should be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent contamination of
Environmental Assessment 134
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Date Comment Response
surface waters from surface waters from
leaking fluids, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or
other toxic materials
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, N atural Heritage Program
June 04, The Natural Heritage Program has no Comment noted
2007 current record of rare species, significant
natural communities, or significant natural
heritage areas at the site nor within a mile of
the project area
NC Department of Cultural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office
September There are no properties less than 50 years Comment noted
04, 2007 old that meet the Criteria Consideration G
within the project's area of potential effects
(APE)
There are properties over 50 years old with Comment noted
the project's APE but based on historical
information available and the photographs of
each property, the properties identified as A-
E are considered not eligible for the National
Register and no further evaluation is
necessary
There are no National Register-listed or Comment noted
Study-listed properties with the project's
APE
All properties greater than 50 years of age Comment noted
located in the APE have been considered at
this consultation and upon the above
concurrence, all compliance for historic
architecture with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act has been
completed for this project
April 17, The structure design study submitted does Comment noted
2008 not indicate the location of the proposed
bridge, so we cannot evaluate potential
effects upon archaeological resources The
report of findings completed has not been
submitted to our office for review and
comment After we receive and review the
archaeological survey report, we will be able
to make recommendations as to the need for
additional investigations
July 23, For purposes of compliance with Section Comment noted
2008 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, we concur that the following properties
are not eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places under criterion D
31 WA1644, 31 WA1645, 31 WA1646
We concur with the recommendation that no Comment noted
additional archaeological investigation is
warranted in connection with this project as
currently proposed
Environmental Assessment 135
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
63 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A public program was developed and will be maintained throughout the project pursuant to Part
1506 6 of NEPA (Public Involvement Regulations for Implementing the Provisional Procedures
of NEPA) In general, the Public Involvement Program to date has included development of a -
project mailing list, three (3) newsletter mailings, and two (2) Citizens Informational Workshops
631 MAILING LIST -
The project mailing list started in May 2007 with a GIS inquiry of property owners within the -
project study area and was expanded to include anyone requesting the addition The list
included approximately 300 entries Newsletter Nos 1 and 2 were mailed using the original list
In April 2008, a secondary mailing list was developed prior to Newsletter No 3 that was
expanded to target a larger audience The "public involvement area" included approximately
1250 entries The list was expanded to include citizens and neighborhoods adjacent to the
original study area that may have interests in access and safety along existing Falls of Neuse
Road
In July 2008, an e-mail distribution list was developed based on e-mail requests received from
citizens since the design commencement of this project The list is constantly being updated to
include new e-mail addresses received and will be used in the future as a notification source
along with the mailing list
632 NEWSLETTERS
Newsletter No 1 was mailed in July 2007 The purpose of the first newsletter was to announce
the initiation of the planning and design phases for the project and provide
announcement/invitation to Citizens Workshop No 1 scheduled for July 26, 2007 Contact
information for the project managers with the City of Raleigh and their consultant, URS
Corporation were included for additional information requests during the process
Newsletter No 2 was mailed in January 2008 The purpose of the second newsletter was to
provide an update on the development of alternatives for the project and announce Citizens
Workshop No 2 scheduled for January 29, 2008
Newsletter No 3 was mailed in April 2008 The purpose of the mailing was to inform citizens
and other interested parties of, 1) the current status of the project, 2) the addition of Alternative
No 4 to the Build Alternatives, and 3) provide answers to some general questions posed during
and after Workshop No 2
Copies of all newsletters are contained in Appendix C
633 CITIZENS WORKSHOPS
Citizen Workshop No 1 was held on July 26, 2007 The meeting was held at Durant Road
Middle School from 5 00 PM to 8 00 PM Approximately 70 interested citizens and other
stakeholders attended The meeting summary and copies of sign in sheets are contained in
Appendix C
Specific questions asked of attendees and their responses are summarized below
Environmental Assessment 136
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Question 1 If you could identify one feature that you would like the CITY to consider
while planning the proposed project, what would this be? (For example, endangered
species, water quality protection, loss of individual home, loss of neighborhood
cohesion, noise, safety, etc )
Question 2 Why do you think the feature listed in Question 1 is important to yourself and
the local community?
1 Traffic signals on Spruce Tree and New Falls of Neuse - 5 comments
2 New Falls will have the same problem that Falls has right now during morning rush hour,
only we have children walking to and from the schools
3 Widen outside lanes or striped bike lanes - perhaps wider sidewalks
4 Safety This should be evident - 2 comments
5 Studying traffic patterns to help promote an easier commute especially during peak
hours Because of the increased population growth north of Durant Road the heavy
traffic on Falls of Neuse has become a problem I think most commuters are looking for
some relief because this road is the only access they have to their residences
6 Bridge over Neuse elevated sufficiently to allow wildlife passage and protect water
quality Design of bridge and its construction should have minimal impact on the
environment We don't want deer trying to cross a 6-lane thoroughfare The Neuse
River/dam area will become a destination recreation area and we want to be proud of it
7 Double lanes in front of the church (Mount Pleasant Baptist Church) will provide a road
hazard for our members It is important for safety reasons Our church also sits very
close to Falls of Neuse Road
8 Noise and safety - we would like for you to consider the distance of the Mt Pleasant
Baptist Church from the road We will also be losing parking spaces The safety of the
church members is important Since there is only about 50' to the front, we would like to
keep that space intact
9 What will happen to Mount Pleasant Baptist Church at 10720 Falls of Neuse? What will
happen to our property line - front yard?
10 Falls Baptist Church is located on Fonville Road - possibly below the proposed
extension of Falls of Neuse - will there be any access so that worshippers can get to
church easily? Especially if Fonville Road is closed at the south end Our church is 107
years old and we are a congregation that will be severely affected if people from the
Raleigh area/surrounding neighborhoods cannot easily access us from Fonville Road
11 Neighborhood cohesion and intersection with existing Falls of Neuse
12 Character of neighborhoods (entrance) which sets the tone for the neighborhood
Changes could have negative impacts
13 Time to completion Disruption of traffic pattern that is already congested will be a
nightmare for residents along Falls of Neuse It seems that this will be a 5-6 year project
on a mayor thoroughfare (not secondary)
14 The Falls Community is often overlooked as a historical and vital part of the area's
history and development It is crucial that planning reflect the simpler lives of people who
call this area home and do not want the "big city" feel that could easily mushroom if not
planned properly By keeping (even improving) the appearance of this community as a
"breath of fresh air" - a destination that that has drawn many people to seek a quieter
lifestyle, you will allow the established residents and their families to live with dignity and
continued appreciation for their community Please do not forget all about people who
love this area but are not officially part of "Raleigh" So much of our community is being
eroded by construction - including homes that do not quite fit the feel of the area Please
do all you can to preserve as much as possible
Environmental Assessment 137
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
15 Integration with neighborhood architectural styles and building in more green-fostering
sustainable support for emerging climate changes Important because of satisfaction and
beauty
16 Aesthetics - so that Falls does not look like Capital Boulevard, and more like Weston
Parkway Important for real estate values
17 Loss of the entrance to our neighborhood at Whittington Drive to a shopping center at
Dunn and Falls of Neuse Please consider a median strip on Whittington
18 Access from Saybrook to Falls of Neuse and New Falls of Neuse at Waterwood Court
This includes the configuration and location of the intersections Important due to, 1)
property values - people don't want to buy a house that they can't get to Access to Falls
of Neuse and a sign help neighborhood identity, 2) safety - fire and police access, also
safety of turning in and out, 3) convenience = access, also deliveries need to be able to
find us, and 4) noise on Waterwood and Wellwater - these are small lots
19 Bridge at Fonville Road and Falls of Neuse may not need replacing when heavy traffic is
taken off existing Falls of Neuse Save some money - locals will be fine
20 Keep access points on Fonville Road at Falls of Neuse both at bridge (north) and south
(Holiness Church) even if you have to "T" Fonville Road to come out at the fire
department
21 Traffic safety through rationalizing neighborhood access to the proposed Falls of Neuse
The current intersections are so unsafe or busy that traffic diverts through
neighborhoods to get alternate connections Example traffic along Midlovian to get to
Lake Village instead of Waterwood
22 Pedestrian bridge to proposed greenway to allow access for Wakefield residents to
greenway and future park areas
23 Location of park area along corridor leading to Neuse River We need more park &
recreation areas in N Raleigh
Question 3 1 also wish to comment on the following aspects of the proposed project?
1 Road widening needs to be done before bridge is constructed
2 We were told at the city planning meeting at the church that all of the widening of Falls of
Neuse going by Daltons Ridge would be on the other side of the road - this is a MUST
3 Please locate full movement crossovers at intersections of Falls of Neuse and October
Road, Dunn Avenue, Tabriz Place, and Lowry Farm Road This provides a minimum of
1200 feet of spacing for 45 mph posted speed - NCDOT Design Standard
4 This project is needed now
5 It's about time
6 Need to maintain traffic lights (which improve through traffic) Go ahead and get 6-lanes
now
7 Cars too close to the road and church - noise will become a factor
8 Since the church (Mt Pleasant Baptist Church) is close to the road, there needs to be
some type of protection in front of the church
9 Concerned about potential commercial development between Woodspring and Bedford
which may impact Woodspring and entrance
10 Fonville Road access to Falls of Neuse Road - please be very thoughtful when
considering how you will create/limit access with new road
11 Would like consideration that south entrance of Waterwood be closed off or merged into
a loop with Fonville Road So that Waterwood could only be accessed via Daltons Ridge
or by the north entrance off of Fonville and traffic on both Waterwood and Fonville are
minimized
12 Appears superior in terms of thinking, thoughtfulness, involvement and citizens
Environmental Assessment 138
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
i 13 We should have impact to the focus area and feeders prior to formalize plans
14 Street lights
15 The more feedback that citizens have an opportunity to give, the better
i 16 1 fully support the project It is critically needed for safety of school children at Wakefield
i schools as quickly as possible, please complete the project
Question 4 Concerning the format of the July 26, 2007 Workshop, do you have any
positive or negative comments, or suggestions for improvements to the way the
i information was presented to the public?
i 1 The large displays were very helpful in understanding the scope of the project and the
i schedule was informative as well
2 1 was hoping there would be more concrete options at this point Instead, answers were
i "too soon to tell" or "we're considering all options"
3 Good idea
i 4 OK - look forward to next meeting with more details
5 The presenters were very nice and readily answered questions I will be well pleased if
the professionalism and genuine concern for the community continues throughout the
project Please keep residents of this area closely involved in the process
6 Could not be any better Staff had considerable knowledge and could articulate it They
listened and contributed in appropriate measures All in all a superb demonstration of
- good government I hope other appreciate the experience here
7 Multiple aerial maps for display - too many people around that display - other wise great
i workshop
i 8 Positive
9 Thanks for the update
i 10 Good information
11 Good information Make it available on website - that is, all of the planning maps
i Citizens Workshop No 2 was held on January 29, 2008 The meeting was held at Durant
Nature Park, Campbell Lodge, from 5 00 PM to 7 00 PM Approximately 45 citizens and other
interested stakeholders attended the meeting The meeting summary, copies of sign-in sheets,
i and copies of comment sheets are contained in Appendix C
i Specific questions asked of attendees and their responses are summarized below
•
i 1 Please leave your comments (both positive and negative) on Alternative No 1
• Please close October Road - we vote for the right turn only and left turn in to October
i Road
• Request that you widen on both sides of Falls of Neuse Road My septic tank system is
- in back yard facing the area set for widening Please don't disrupt it Close October
Road entrance
• 1 do not agree with a cul-de-sac of Fonville, prefer a "T" intersection Do not like option
i for emergency responder areas Prefer a turning lane - no one way traffic patterns
• Many church members are concerned about accessibility of the church to people coming
i from Raleigh - north of Falls of Neuse Road since Fonville Road will become a cul-de-
sac
i • Do not like loss of left turn at High Holly Road
• More full movement intersections needed How in the world do moving vans do u-turns?
i Need full intersection at Waterwood or left turn northbound and left-over at Waterwood
i
i
•
Environmental Assessment
139
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Add a left-over at Waterford to keep peak evening traffic from coming through Daltons
Ridge
My house is the first one on the right after crossing the existing bridge going south The
previous map I saw had the curve dust before my house straightening out through the
Leonard property and connecting with New Falls of Neuse Road The current map does
not show this It shows the curve as it currently is, then going through the Leonard
property It is almost impossible getting in and out of my driveway now A lot of times we
park in the church parking lot and exit out Fonville Road I am asking that the old
(design) per the map showing the curve being straightened out be used instead of the
existing design This would put me and others in the Falls Community basically on a
service road Please try to leave the Falls Community in tact
2 Please leave your comments (both positive and negative) on Alternative No 2
• Do not like intersection for both directions at October Road and Falls of Neuse Road
• Don't like Alternative 2 or 3 People are now wrecking into our pine trees in our
backyard We have lost 2 trees from these wrecks and people have been hurt
• 1 do not agree with cul-de-sac of Fonville - prefer a "T" intersection Do not like option for
emergency service vehicles
• Do not like loss of left turn at High Holly Road
More full movement intersections needed How in the world do moving vans do u-turns?
Need full intersection at Waterwood or left turn northbound and left-over at Waterwood
Add a left-over at Waterwood to keep peak evening traffic from coming through Daltons
Ridge
3 Please leave your comments (both positive and negative) on Alternative No 3
• 1 do not agree with cul-de-sac of Fonville - prefer "T" Prefer to use existing roads - Falls
of Neuse and not cut into existing environmental areas Create better access for
emergency service vehicles
• No way forcing right turns only out at Dunn is not desirable and down right crazy
• Unworkable - too many u-turns unprotected by lights
• This is no good I want a full service intersection at Lake Villa
4 Please leave your comments (both positive and negative) on the various options
presented for the new bridge crossing over the Neuse River
• Single bridge - no walkways
• Interim construction access to the bridge construction would appear to have less
environmental impact if it comes from south side of river and through the field rather than
over the tributary at the end of existing New Falls of Neuse Road (Wakefield)
• Dual spans are preferred if built concurrently Advantages of single span if it all gets
built, is further ensuring widening will actually happen
All Alternatives
Instead of a rounded curve with the realignment of Fonville Road connecting to Falls of
Neuse Road, design a permanent T intersection so drivers have to come to a complete
stop Possibly make a full intersection with Lowry Farms Road
Miscellaneous Comments
• We need serious consideration to be given to closing October Road, entrance and exit
The street is not busy, it is poor quality - heavy equipment and trucks are tearing it up
Environmental Assessment 140
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Persons turning into October Road speed and have often wrecked turning left into
October Road and have often run into our yard and trees
• Build a fence to block seeing and hearing traffic
• Please consider left turn lights for Raven Ridge Road now It is impossible to make a left
off of Raven Ridge during rush hours
• All designs look good My only concern is Falls Fire Department having quick access to
homes on Fonville Road
• There should be a light at Tabriz There should be left turns at Dunn, Tabriz, Whittington
and October Maybe a light at October
• Keep project moving forward regardless of design so the highway network is improved
Economic development potential of Wakefield Community can be fully realized once the
bridges and widening are complete
• Next meeting provide a better location that people can find or give directions in the
newsletter and newspaper notice
In addition to the written comments left at the workshop, staff present at the workshop
recorded the following comments
1 Many citizens were concerned about the location of the workshop, the change in venue
from the first workshop and the ability to find the facility
2 Multiple residents of Fonville Road were concerned about the long-term location of the
Fonville Road connection to Old Falls of Neuse Road They were in favor of a "T"
intersection as shown as an interim solution They would like to see more of a T-
intersection with stop signs in order to discourage speeding through what would appear
as a continuous roadway section despite the sharpness of the proposed curve
3 Residents on Dehijuston Drive and members of Mt Pleasant Baptist are in favor of the
median cutover located near their driveway Their one concern is that the median break
is too close to the driveway and members will struggle to merge through lanes and make
the turn They were inquiring about a signal at Dehijuston or from the church's driveway
to make this move safer Also inquired about a signal that would only be active on
Sundays Finally they asked that fence, short wall or other barrier to protect children
playing in the front yard of the church
4 Multiple residents located directly adjacent to existing Falls of Neuse will be affected by
the widening - this ranges from actual relocation to loss of trees and landscaping,
fences and the addition of traffic noise and resultant air quality issues
5 Alternative 3 - Concern regarding proposed realignment of existing/Old Falls of Neuse
across from the "Parks and Recreation property" (Falls Lake facility) Property owner
indicated his opinion would not carry the weight of the Corps of Engineers input
regarding location
6 Emergency response safety concerns on the bridge Eliminate sidewalks on bridge to
allow for emergency vehicle accessibility Definitely preferred single structure to 2
separate structures for same reason - emergency accessibility
7 Alternative 3 - Concern over potential cut-thru traffic on Lake Villa due to omission of
northbound left turn onto Waterwood Drive
8 Resident of Waterwood inquired about additional traffic and noise if a large intersection
were designed at Fonville Road and Old Falls of Neuse Road
9 Could we maintain the existing access at Falls of Neuse from the Lowery Farm Road?
Lowry Farm's entrance is at this intersection Also, this entrance appears prospectively
fruitful to accommodate right-ins in a manner that could be efficient for traffic movement
within this location
Environmental Assessment 141
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and
Citizen Workshop No 2 was held at Durant Nature Park, Campbell Lodge, beginning at 5 00
PM and ending at 7 00 PM T Approximately 50 interested citizens and other stakeholders
attended The workshop was set up in 5 primary areas A greeting table was set up at the
entrance to the room to have residents sign-in An introductory self-running presentation
presented a brief history of the project and gave instructions for proceeding through the
workshop exhibits The meeting summary and copies of sign in sheets are contained in
Appendix C
Listed below are the comments most discussed at each workstation during the meeting
STATION 1 - Schedule / NEPA Planning / Environmental Findings
This workstation presented the current project schedule and how this schedule meshed with the
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), efforts of which are underway
concurrently Also shown was mapping depicting the completed natural resources located in the
study area Comments heard here include
1 Multiple residents located directly adjacent to existing Falls of Neuse expressed various
concerns about the widening - which ranged from actual relocation to loss of trees and
landscaping, fences and the addition of traffic noise and resultant air quality issues
2 Resident of Waterwood inquired about additional traffic and noise if a large intersection
were designed at Fonville Road and Old Falls of Neuse Road
STATION 2 - Traffic and Intersection Concepts
1 This workstation presented current and projected traffic flow numbers on existing Falls of
Neuse Road, road networks supporting traffic in the study area, and the future network
with the Extension in place Also presented were visuals of potential intersection
treatments including several signalization options and a "superstreet" option Comments
heard here include
2 Many residents of the Fonville Road area did not agree with a cul-de-sac of Fonville and
preferred a "T" intersection Also did not like option for emergency responder areas and
preferred a turning lane - no one way traffic patterns
3 Residents requested a left-over at Waterford to keep peak evening traffic from coming
through Daltons Ridge
4 Request intersections for both directions at October Road and Falls of Neuse Road
5 Another resident said the "superstreet' concept was unworkable - too many u-turns
unprotected by lights and requested a full service intersection at Lake Villa
6 There should be a light at Tabriz There should be left turns at Dunn, Tabriz, Whittington
and October Maybe a light at October Road
7 More full movement intersections needed How in the world do moving vans do u-turns?
Need full intersection at Waterwood or left turn northbound and left-over at Waterwood
Environmental Assessment 142
i
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Real?gnment and Widen?ng
STATION 3 - Roadway Design Alignments
This workstation presented 3 design options for the realignment and widening project These
were shown on aerial mapping which also included property lines and environmental features
Cross sections of the options were shown and citizens could see the relation of the roadway,
right of way limits, utilities, sidewalks, etc Comments heard at this workstation include
1 Please close October Road - we vote for the right turn only and left turn in to October
Road
2 Request that you widen on both sides of Falls of Neuse Road My septic tank system is
in back yard facing the area set for widening Please don't disrupt it Close October
Road entrance
3 Many church members are concerned about accessibility of the church to people coming
from Raleigh - north of Falls of Neuse Road since Fonville Road will become a cul-de-
sac
4 Do not like loss of left turn at High Holly Road
5 Don't like Alternative 2 or 3 People are now wrecking into our pine trees in our
backyard We have lost 2 trees from these wrecks and people have been hurt
6 Do not like loss of left turn at High Holly Road
7 Do not like forcing right turns only out at Dunn, this not desirable and down right crazy
8 Instead of a rounded curve with the realignment of Fonville Road connecting to Falls of
Neuse Road, design a permanent T intersection so drivers have to come to a complete
stop Possibly make a full intersection with Lowry Farms Road
STATION 4 - Structure Design Options
This workstation presented structural design options for the proposed new crossing of the
Neuse River Comments heard at this workstation include
1 Single bridge - no walkways
2 Interim construction access to the bridge construction would appear to have less
environmental impact if it comes from south side of river and through the field rather than
over the tributary at the end of existing New Falls of Neuse Road (Wakefield)
3 Dual spans are preferred if built concurrently Advantages of single span if it all gets
built, is further ensuring widening will actually happen
STATION 5 - Citizens Interactive Map and Comment Station
1 We need serious consideration to be given to closing October Road, entrance and exit
The street is not busy, it is poor quality - heavy equipment and trucks are tearing it up
Env?ronmental Assessment
143
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Persons turning into October Road speed and have often wrecked turning left into
October Road and have often run into our yard and trees
2 Build a fence to block seeing and hearing traffic along the widening
3 Please consider left turn lights for Raven Ridge Road now It is impossible to make a left
off of Raven Ridge during rush hours
4 All designs look good My only concern is Falls Fire Department having quick access to
homes on Fonville Road
5 There should be a light at Tabriz There should be left turns at Dunn, Tabriz, Whittington
and October Maybe a light at October
6 Keep project moving forward regardless of design so the highway network is improved
Economic development potential of Wakefield Community can be fully realized once the
bridges and widening are complete
7 Next meeting provide a better location that people can find or give directions in the
newsletter and newspaper notice
8 My house is the first one on the right after crossing the existing bridge going south The
previous map I saw had the curve dust before my house straightening out through the
Leonard property and connecting with New Falls of Neuse Road The current map doe
not show this It shows the curve as it currently is, then going through the Leonard
property It is almost impossible getting in and out of my driveway now A lot of times we
park in the church parking lot and exit out Fonville Road I am asking that the old
(design) per the map showing the curve being straightened out be used instead of the
existing design This would put me and others in the Falls Community basically on a
service road Please try to leave the Falls Community intact
634
CORRIDOR PUBLIC MEETING
A Corridor Public Meeting was held on July 17, 2008 at the Durant Road Nature Park
Approximately 160 citizens attended the meeting Handouts including Frequently Asked
Questions (FAQs), sign-in sheets, and comment forms The meeting summary and copies of
sign in sheets are contained in Appendix C
The format of the meeting was an "open house" from 7 00 PM to approximately 7 30 PM
followed by a presentation made by the City and their consultants which provided a detailed
overview of the planning and design process for the project At approximately 8 30 PM the floor
was opened for a question and answer session Citizens had the opportunity to review maps,
schedules, design options, etc for the proposed project
A summary of the comments and concerns heard at the meeting are summarized below
Traffic Signals/Access Issues
A majority of the comments heard at the "open house" and the question/answer session related
to the access control options proposed for the project Many citizens living adjacent to the
widening portion of the project were concerned about how they would access their individual
Environmental Assessment 144

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
neighborhoods if a median with limited turn movements was installed as part of the project
Many questions related to traffic capacity and how models were developed and
correspondingly, how the traffic results were used to design the alternative options
The options that were discussed included the iterative approach for intersection treatments
Many intersections along the way began in the design phase as full movement intersections and
resulted with a poor level of service, which resulted with the next iteration being reducing the full
movement intersection to either a right-in/right-out or a superstreet design
Citizens from several different neighborhoods along the widening portion asked for traffic
signals at their respective neighborhood entrances (Tabriz/Lake Villa, Dehijuston, Wide River
Drive, etc)
Right-of-Way
Local citizens living along the project corridor also expressed negative comments over the 6-
lane build out cross section and the 120-foot right-of-way proposed Specifically, concerns over
losing yards, landscaping, driveways, development entrance signs, were heard
Project History
Staff received questions on the history of the project, such as when the need for the
improvement was first put in writing Concerns were raised about why the corridor was not
protected after the need for project was first identified
Noise
Questions were asked about the noise abatement studies and if any noise walls or other noise
abating measures were being considered
General Support for the Project
Citizens who lived further north (new location portion and neighborhoods north of Neuse River)
were generally supportive of the project Many expressed their preference for Alternative 4 A
comment heard from these citizens was that they wanted the project built as soon as possible
Bridge
Prefer to construct a 4-lane bridge, then widen when the additional 2 lanes are constructed
(concern about the $3 million cost estimate for the structure) Widen the shoulder - especially
on the inside of the bridge opposite the sidewalk
The comments received in writing at the meeting are summarized below
General support for the project
• The project is critical to traffic flow and the safety of our children
• Alternative 3 is okay
• We go for Alternative 4 which shows providing left turn access
• Buy 6-lane land and build 4-lanes initially, start construction now
• Go for Alternative 4 so that enough access points can be provided to this extensive
residential neighborhood
• Proposal (Alternative) 4 appears the best It is clear we really need to expand the existing
Falls of Neuse - the project is long overdue We need to find ways to expedite the project
Environmental Assessment 145
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
• A great plan - prefer Alternative 4 Overall I like the plan, though would prefer no large
trucks on enlarged Falls of Neuse cutting through from Capital Boulevard to 540 Speed it
up
• Concerned Citizens of Wakefield recognize the need for this project and fully endorse /
support Alternative 4 We ask that you expedite construction of the bridge and widening of
Falls of Neuse Road
• Prefer a signal at Falls of Neuse/New Falls of Neuse and synchronize signals
• Falls of Neuse Road is currently handling in excess of 20,000 vehicles per day Given
growth projections for NE Wake County, Franklinton, etc it makes sense to choose an
option that keeps traffic moving as smoothly as possible on New Falls of Neuse/Falls of
Neuse Expedited completion is a must
General opposition to the project
• Opposed to the proposed project
• Opposed to the current 4-lane design expansion
• Opposed to medians and 120-foot right-of-way for the project
• Opposed to widening to 6-lanes adding too much traffic on the road and the possibility of
change in zoning in some areas that will allow strip malls in the future
Specific comments/comments
Traffic Signals/Access Issues
• Like to see a traffic signal installed at Lowry Farms Road and Wide River Drive
• All traffic will exit on Dunn Road from the development of Bedford, Oakcroft, Falls River
and River Run This will create a traffic dam on Dunn Road that will be worse than what
is there currently
• Not Alternative 3- the neighborhoods located on the east side need left turn access to go
south on Falls of Neuse
• Left turn access must be allowed to some roads to help move traffic to those areas and
decrease the amount of traffic that would have to go only through intersections with
stoplights and affect neighborhoods in those restricted areas Therefore, Alternative 2 is
the best
• Alternative 3 with many u-turns was opposed by many people at the meeting Please do
not consider it a viable alternative It would not work for individual drivers at any time and
would be a mayor concern for quick travel for emergency vehicles
• Right only out of neighborhoods to fight and get over 3 lanes to u-turn will not work Your
engineers should look at Route 17 in New Jersey to see how proper turn lanes that
promote traffic flow are constructed
• Falls of Neuse should be no more than 4-lanes wide That width works fine all the way to
Millbrook Road We do not need to fix the Capital Boulevard traffic problem by routing
more traffic onto Falls
• Road should not be 6 lanes, creating a "super road"
• This road travels through residential neighborhoods To make 6-lanes and a median will
put the road right on top of people's houses How will anyone in the neighborhoods be
able to effectively enter and exit Falls of Neuse Road?
• This is a bad plan - what happened to the 4-lane plan that was proposed?
• We are concerned that the intersection of Lake Villa Way and Falls of Neuse remain
open to left turns for cars coming north from Raleigh as well as cars leaving Lake Villa
Way turning north (left)
Environmental Assessment 146
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
• Is there no way to safely cross 3-lanes of traffic to make a right turn'?
• What about closing High Holly Lane because it is so close to Dunn Road Make the new
entrance at Paddy Hollow which connects to Dunn Road, perfect for traffic flow out of
Woodbridge development
• Rather than plan for dual left-overs at the intersection of Falls of Neuse/New Falls of
Neuse, why not dust peel off traffic going north on Old Falls of Neuse at Fonville Road by
the fire station Continuing north on Old Falls of Neuse will become very inconvenient
• Why was the decision made to not continue the road as it has been built and widened
over the years? That is with a center turn lane Then in a new area as it cuts through
from the station make all the medians, etc the designers and budget can afford
Speed Limit
• If this is a done deal, please look at lowering the speed limit at least during services at
the church
• If safety is such a huge concern, which prompted the medians, then the speed limit
should be even more important
• Speed limit should be 35 mph through residential sections
Truck Traffic
• There should be local truck traffic only
• 1 think the truck traffic on Falls increasing from current usage is legitimate Why can't you
post it as limited to a certain tonnage or no truck usage? It will be forever before Capital
Boulevard is a "freeway" between 98 and 540 - there will be obvious advantages for 18-
wheel truckers to exit Capital at New Falls down to 540
Neighborhood Facilities/Services
• It seems as if there has been no consideration regarding taking all the front driveway of
Mount Pleasant Baptist Church What can we do as a church to out on the street safely?
We have senior citizens and young people - what can the City do to help us?
• My fire department is the Falls FD - forcing them to go down Wide River Drive to get to
Old Falls of Neuse will increase my response time (to Wakefield)
Noise
• A berm and landscaping as a noise buffer should be installed on both sides of Falls of
Neuse Noise is already unbearable The City is already running our neighborhoods with
the added noise
• Can noise reduction walls still be evaluated for Autumn Hill?
• My concern relates to the noise abatement measures along the east side of the corridor,
particularly around the Tabriz intersection I hope the project considers permanent
structures (walls, etc) to help minimize additional noise pollution generated with the
completion of the corridor The additional traffic and the closer proximity to residential
structures warrant substantial consideration to noise abatement procedures
• Noise could be a big problem, anything being thought of or planned for homeowners
close to Falls of Neuse (walls, etc)? This might save property values at Woodbridge
development
Environmental Assessment 147
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
Drainage/Hydrology
• There has been a drainage problem in the past along the wall that runs beside Daltons
Ridge development A ditch has been added - the current proposal does not have the
same problem
• Our drainfield (which is our second drainfield) backs up to Falls How the widening
impact my drainfield? If I get city sewer - who pays? I don't think it is fair to make me
pay for city sewer if the City alters my drainfield
Miscellaneous
• Please keep me updated on the project
• Please consider new development at Dunn Road and Falls of Neuse Road Current
proposal includes medical office (high traffic) and day care (rush hour in/out)
• Has the entrance to future business section at intersection of Dunn and Falls of Neuse
been determined? A proper entrance can avoid any potential local bottlenecks
• 1 live there (Rocky Toad Road) and we got no response - answer these questions How
many driveways access alls between Raven Ridge and the fire station? How many will
be able to turn left? The old simple way would allow them all and probably cost less
Who made the decision that the new way, no one who has a driveway can turn left?
• 1 am interested in a more detailed discussion about the proposed right of way acquisition
in the backside of the Falls Pointe development and would welcome an on site meeting
with engineers or project management
• Is there a website where the detail drawings (in color) reside? If not, please add the
detail drawings to a website
• I feel so sorry for the people who have owned property for along time along Falls - it was
a 2-lane country road posted at 55 mph when I moved here dust 9 years ago You are
disturbing these people's lives - Beford at Falls River, Falls Pointe, Daltons Ridge, River
Run etc - these should never have been allowed to be built in the first place
• Falls of Neuse is a pretty corridor and we don't want it to turn into Capital Blvd
• If we are in the county, not "city" do we pay assessments? When is the hearing to
determine the assessments?
• If the City has known about this road since 1960, they are definitely in collusion with the
builders to allow upscale residential homes to be built in the middle of a super road
64 PUBLIC HEARING
A public hearing will be held following formal distribution and public availability of this EA
Environmental Assessment 148
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
7.0 DISTRIBUTION LIST
This environmental document was prepared and distributed to the following agencies for review
and comment
71 FEDERAL AGENCIES
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Environmental Affairs
Department of the Interior
Department of Agriculture
72 REGIONAL OFFICES
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Environmental Protection Agency
U S Fish and Wildlife Service
U S Army Corps of Engineers
73 STATE AGENCIES
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
North Carolina Depart of Cultural Resources
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
North Carolina Department of Economic and Community Development
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
North Carolina State Clearinghouse
74 LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Mayor, City of Raleigh
City Manager, City of Raleigh
Chair, City Council
Planning Director, City of Raleigh
Planning Director, Wake County
Chair, County Commissioners
Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
Environmental Assessment 149
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
. This page intentionally left blank
Environmental Assessment 150

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
8.0 REFERENCES
Burt, William H and Richard P Grossenheider 1976 A Field Guide to the Mammals of North
America, Third Edition The Peterson Field Guide Series Boston, MA
Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization FY2007-2013 Metropolitan Transportation
Improvement Program Regional Priority List Available at http //www campo-
nc us/index html
Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization TAZ Projections, 2007
Cawthorn, Joel W 1970 Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina U S Department of
Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Washington, DC
Clinton, William Jefferson Executive Order 12898 11 February 1994
<http //www fs fed us/land/enviust html>
Environmental Laboratory 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical
Report Y-87-1 " United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, MS
Federal Emergency Management Agency Unified National Program for Floodplain
Management March 1986 Available http Hwww fema gov/pdf/fima/fema100 pdf
FHWA Guidance for Preparing and Processing Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents,
http //www section4f com/pdf files/ta66408a htm
Griffith, G E, Omernik, J M, Comstock, J A, Schafale, M P, McNab, W H, Lenat, D R,
MacPherson, T F 2002 Ecoregions of North Carolina (map scale 1 1,500,000) U S
EPA Corvallis, OR
Martof, B S , W M Palmer, J R Bailey, and J R Harrison, III 1980 "Amphibians and Reptiles
of the Carolinas and Virginia " The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC
North Carolina Department of Transportation, "Safety Review for TIP Project U-4901
Prepared by NCDOT Traffic Safety Unit, June 29, 2007
North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways "Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters " 1991
North Carolina Department of Transportation and the City of Raleigh "Falls of Neuse Road
Realignment and Widening Traffic Capacity Technical Memorandum " February, 2008
North Carolina State Demographics, http //demog state nc us/
North Carolina Department of Transportation, Strategic Highway Corridors,
http //www ncdot org/doh/PRECONSTRUCT/tpb/SHC/overview/
NCDENR 1995 "Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina " 4th Version
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Raleigh, NC
Environmental Assessment 151
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
NCDENR 2005 Natural Heritage Element Occurrences North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage
Program, Raleigh, NC
NCDWQ 2007 Neuse River Basin Waterbody Report Basinwide Information Management
System 2007 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality Report updated April 28, 2007 Available URL
http Hh2o enr state nc us/bims
NCDWQ 2006 North Carolina Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2006
Integrated 305(b) and 303(d) Report)
NCDWQ 1999 Riparian Buffer Protection Rules for the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico River Basins
NCDENR, NCDWQ Nonpoint Source Management Program [15A NCAC 2B 0233]
NCWRC 1998 Significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitats 1988 North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, Raleigh, NC
NCNHP 2007 North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Natural Heritage Program List of Rare
Plant Species of North Carolina Office of Conservation and Community Affairs, NC
Department of Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC Available URL
http //149 168 1 196/nhp/
Schafale, M P and A S Weakley 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, Third Approximation North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of
Parks and Recreation, Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Raleigh, NC
Radford, A E, H E Ahles, and C R Bell 1968 "Manual of the Vascular Flora of the
Carolinas " The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC
City of Raleigh, Falls of Neuse Corridor Plan, http //www raleigh-nc org
City of Raleigh "Natural Resources Technical Report for Falls of Neuse Road Widening and
Relocation Project TIP Project Number U-4901 " Prepared by URS Corporation July
2007
City of Raleigh, Police Department, Available
http //www raleighnc gov/portal/server ot/gateway/PTARGS 0 0 306 202 0 43/http /pt
03/DIG Web Content/category/Resident/Police/Police Districts/Cat-Index html
Accessed 11 September, 2007
City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department, http //www raleigh-
nc org/portal/server pt/gateway/PTARGS 0 2 306 202 0 43/http%3B/pt03/DIG Web
Content/dept/public/Dept-AboutUs-PubUtil html, accessed February 4, 2008
Sibley, David A 2003 The Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Eastern North America National
Audubon Society New York, NY
Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan, http //www unrba org/mgmtplan htm
Environmental Assessment 152

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
USFWS 2007a Lists of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed and Candidate Species for the
Southeast Region Wake County, North Carolina Available URL
http //southeast fws gov/es/county%201ists htm
Environmental Assessment
153
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
This page Intentionally left blank
Environmental Assessment 154
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
9.0 LIST OF ACRONYMS
AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic
APE Area of Potential Effect
BMPs Best Management Practices
CA Critical Areas
CAA Clean Air Act
CAMPO Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization
CAT Capital Area Transit
CEQ Council on Environmental Quality
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CLOMR Conditional Letter of Map Revision
cps Concurrence Points
EA Environmental Assessment
EEP Ecosystem Enhancement Program
EO Executive Order
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Endangered Species Act
ETJ Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FFS Free Flow Speeds
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FIS Flood Insurance Study
FPPA Farmland Protection Policy Act
FSC Federal Species of Concern
FTA Federal Transit Administration
Environmental Assessment
155
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
FY Fiscal Year
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
HOV High Occupancy Vehicle
HPO State Historic Preservation Office
HQW High Quality Waters
HUC Hydrologic Unit Code
IRIS Integrated Risk Information System
LOS Level of Service
LOMR Letter of Map Revision
MGD Million Gallons Per Day
MPH Miles Per Hour
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization
MSATs Mobile Air Source Toxics
MSL Mean Sea Level
MVM Million Vehicle Miles
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAC Noise Abatement Criteria
NATA National Air Toxics Assessment
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NCDLR North Carolina Division of Land Resources
NCDOT North Carolina Department of Transportation
NCDWQ North Carolina Division of Water Quality
NCNHP North Carolina Natural Heritage Program
NLEV National Low Emission Vehicle
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Services
Environmental Assessment 156
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
NRTR Natural Resources Technical Memorandum
NSW Nutrient Sensitive Waters
OSA Office of State Archaeology
OWR Outstanding Water Resource
PSNC Public Service Company of North Carolina
PEM Palustrine Emergent
RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RDU Raleigh Durham International Airport
RFG Reformulated Gasoline Program
ROW Right Of Way
RRT Regional Response Team
RTP Research Triangle Park
SEPA North Carolina (State) Environmental Policy Act
SNHA Significant Natural Heritage Program
SR State Route
STIP State Transportation Improvement Program
TSM Transportation System Management
TTA Triangle Transit Authority
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USAR Urban Search and Rescue Team
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USDOT United States Department of Transportation
UTs Unnamed Tributaries
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
Environmental Assessment 157
Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
This page intentionally left blank
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Environmental Assessment 158 •
•
•

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
' FHWA Guidance for Preparing and Processing Environmental and Section 4(f) Documents,
http //www section4f com/pdf files/ta66408a htm, accessed 7 23 07
z North Carolina State Demographics, http //demoq state nc us/, accessed 7 23 07
3 North Carolina Department of Transportation, "Safety Review for TIP Project U-4901" Prepared by
NCDOT Traffic Safety Unit, June 29, 2007
4 NCDOT Strategic Highway Corridors, http //www ncdot orq/doh/PRECONSTRUCT/tpb/SHC/overview/,
accessed 7 27 07
5Transportation Research Board, National Research Council Highway Capacity Manual Washington,
DC 2000
6 North Carolina State Demographics, http //demoq state nc us/, accessed 7 17 07
North Carolina State Demographics, http //demoq state nc us/, accessed 7 23 07
- 8 City of Raleigh, Police Department, Available
http //www raleighnc qov/portal/server pt/gateway/PTARGS 0 0 306 202 0 43/http,/pt03/DIG
Web Content/category/Resident/PoI ice/Police Districts/Cat-Index html Accessed 11
- September, 2007
9 Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan, http Hwww unrba org/mgmtplan htm Accessed 7 18 07
10 Falls of Neuse Corridor Plan, http //www raleigh-nc orq, accessed 7 23 07
- 11 Falls of Neuse Corridor Plan, http //www raleigh-
nc ora/portal/server pt/gatewav/PTARGS 0 2 306 200 0 43/http%3B/pt03/DIG Web Content/
- category/Business/Strategic Planning/Plans in Process/Archive Plans/Cat-1C-20051010-
- 133942-Falls of Neuse Corridor html, accessed 7 23 07
12 Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization 2006-2012 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement
- Program Available at http //www campo-nc us/index html Accessed 4 October 2007
13 Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization FY2007-2013 Metropolitan Transportation
- Improvement Program Regional Priority List Available at http //www campo-nc us/index html
Accessed 4 October 2007
- 14 City of Raleigh Streets, Sidewalks, and Driveway Access Handbook Department of Transportation,
- 1995 Edition Revised May 2002
'S Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization FY2007-2013 Metropolitan Transportation
Improvement Program Regional Priority List Available at http //www campo-nc us/index html
- Accessed 4 October 2007
16 US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management The Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976, as Amended http //www blm qov/flpma/FLPMA pdf
Environmental Assessment

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
17 City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department, http Hwww raleigh-
nc org/portal/server pt/gatewav/PTARGS 0 2 306 202 0 43/http%3B/pt03/DIG Web Content/
dept/public/Dept-AboutUs-PubUtil html, accessed February 4, 2008
18 Upper Neuse Watershed Management Plan, http //www unrba orq/mgmtplan htm, accessed 7 18 07
19 Clinton, William Jefferson Executive Order 12898 11 February 1994
<http //www fs fed us/land/enviust htmI> (10 October 2004)
20 Federal Emergency Management Agency Unified National Program for Floodplain Management
March 1986 Available http //www fema gov/pdf/fema/fema100 pdf
21 Federal Emergency Management Agency Unified National Program for Floodplain Management
March 1986 Available http //www fema gov/pdf/fema/femal00 pdf
22 City of Raleigh "Natural Resources Technical Report for Falls of Neuse Road Widening and
Relocation Project TIP Project Number U-4901 " Prepared by URS Corporation July 2007
23 Schafale, M P and A S Weakley 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina,
Third Approximation North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC
24 Radford, A E, H E Ahles, and C R Bell 1968 "Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas " The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC
25 Burt, William H and Richard P Grossenheider 1976 A Field Guide to the Mammals of North America,
Third Edition The Peterson Field Guide Series Boston, MA
26 Martof, B S , W M Palmer, J R Bailey, and J R Harrison, III 1980 "Amphibians and Reptiles of the
Carolinas and Virginia " The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC
27 Sibley, David A 2003 The Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Eastern North America National Audubon
Society New York, NY
28 Environmental Laboratory 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report
Y-87-1 " United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS
29 Griffith, G E, Omerrnk, J M, Comstock, J A, Schafale, M P, McNab, W H, Lenat, D R, MacPherson,
T F 2002 Ecoregions of North Carolina (map scale 1 1,500,000) U S EPA Corvallis, OR
30 Cawthorn, Joel W 1970 Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina U S Department of Agriculture
Soil Conservation Service Washington, DC
31 Schafale, M P and A S Weakley 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina,
Third Approximation North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC
32 City of Raleigh "Natural Resources Technical Report for Falls of Neuse Road Widening and
Relocation Project TIP Project Number U-4901 " Prepared by URS Corporation July 2007
33 NCWRC 1998 Significant Aquatic Endangered Species Habitats 1988 North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, Raleigh, NC
34 Griffith, G E , Omernik, J M , Comstock, J A, Schafale, M P , McNab, W H , Lenat, D R , MacPherson,
T F 2002 Ecoregions of North Carolina (map scale 1 1,500,000) U S EPA Corvallis, OR
Environmental Assessment

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and
35 NCDWQ 2002 Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
35 NCDWQ 2007 Neuse River Basin Waterbody Report Basinwide Information Management System
2007 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water
Quality Report updated April 28, 2007 Available URL http //h2o enr state nc us/bims
[Accessed May 1, 2007]
-
37 NCDWQ 2002 Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
38 NCDWQ 2002 Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
39 NCDWQ 2002 Neuse River Basinwide Water Quality Plan North Carolina Department of
- Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
- 40 NCDWQ 2006 North Carolina Water Quality Assessment and Impaired Waters List (2006 Integrated
- 305(b) and 303(d) Report) North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality

- 41 North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways Best Management Practices for
Protection of Surface Waters 1991

42 Environmental Laboratory 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report
"
United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station Vicksburg, MS
Y-87-1

43 City of Raleigh "Natural Resources Technical Report for Falls of Neuse Road Widening and
Relocation Project TIP Project Number U-4901 " Prepared by URS Corporation July 2007
44 NCDENR 1995 "Guidance for Rating the Values of Wetlands in North Carolina " 4`h Version
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Raleigh, NC
- 45 NCDWQ 1999 Riparian Buffer Protection Rules for the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico River Basins
NCDENR, NCDWQ Nonpoint Source Management Program [15A NCAC 213 0233]

46 USFWS 2007a Lists of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed and Candidate Species for the Southeast
Region Wake County, North Carolina Available URL
- http //southeast fws gov/es/county%20lists htm [Accessed April 23, 2007]
47 NCNHP 2007 North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Natural Heritage Program List of Rare Plant
- Species of North Carolina Office of Conservation and Community Affairs, NC Department of
Environment and Natural Resources Raleigh, NC Available URL http //149 168 1 196/nhp/
[Accessed April 23, 2007]
48 NCDENR 2005 Natural Heritage Element Occurrences North Carolina Department of Environment
- and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh,
- NC
- 49 NCDENR 2005 Natural Heritage Element Occurrences North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Recreation, Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh,
NC

Environmental Assessment

Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widening
50 North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways "Best Management Practices for
Protection of Surface Waters " 1991
51 Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization TAZ Projections, 2007
Environmental Assessment
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Falls of Neuse Road Reahgnment and Widening
Appendices
Enwronmental Assessment
Appendix A
Scoping Letter and Mailing List
•
•
•
•
•
City Of 6Raleigh
.North Carolina
May 30, 2007
NAME
TITLE
AGENCY
ADDRESS
SUBJECT
Dear M
Start of Study for Widening and Realignment of Falls of Neuse Road
City of Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina (TIP U-4901)
The City of Raleigh is initiating the project development, environmental analysis, and
engineering studies for the Widening and Realignment of Falls of Neuse Road See Figure 1 for
project location The project is included in the 2007-2013 North Carolina Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) as TIP No U-4901 and is scheduled for right of way acquisition
beginning in fiscal year 2009 and construction beginning in fiscal year 2011
The City has selected URS Corporation as their engineering consultant for this study
Figure 2 depicts the study area for the proposed project By receipt of this information, we are
requesting your review and comments on the action We would appreciate any information you
might have that would be helpful in evaluating potential impacts to the natural, human, or
physical environmental If applicable, please identify any permits or approvals that may be
required by your agency A scopmg meeting will be scheduled in the immediate future to discuss
the proposed project in more detail In order to include your comments in our materials for this
meeting, we would appreciate your response by June 25, 2007
It is anticipated that an Environmental Assessment will be prepared for this project in accordance
with the National Environmental Policy Act If you have any questions concerning the project,
please contact me at [phone]
Sincerely,
Sylvester Percival, El, Project Engineer
City of Raleigh, Public Works Department
Enclosures

I
Pa:aigh
- i
GRANVILLE COUN
- i' -
Falls Lake
?z
OJ
(--?I

City of Raleigh
North Carolina
?- u
Widening and Realignment of
Falls of Neuse Road
Wake County
Date: May 2007
Legend
Project Location
Interstate
US Route
NC Highway
Local Road
----- County Boundary
Municipal Boundary
FRANKLIN COU
? J
N
w &
S
0 0.5 1 2 3
Miles
Figure 1
Project Location
WAI~; COUNT"
i
Joe Bryan
Wake County
206 Maplewood Drive
Kmghtdale, NC 27545
Chris Militscher
US Environmental Protection Agency
FHWA Room 412
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27601
Tom Freeman
US Army Corps of Engineers
11405 Falls of Neuse Road
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Jake Riggsbee
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, NC 27601
Betty Lou Ward
Wake County
1321 Deerhurst Drive
Raleigh, NC 27614
Linda Rimer, PhD
US Environmental Protection Agency
519 Hooper Lane
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
Gary Jordan
US Fish and Wildlife - Raleigh
P O Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636
Chrys Baggett
North Carolina Department of
Administration
1301 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699

-
Tony Gurley
Wake County
100037 Sycamore Road -
Raleigh, NC 27613

Eric Alsmeyer
US Army Corps of Engineers -
6508 Falls of Neuse Road
Suite 120 -
Raleigh, NC 27615 -

Clarence Coleman
Federal Highway Administration -
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410 -
Raleigh, NC 27601

Steve Claggett
North Carolina Department of Cultural -
Resources
4619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -
Peter Sandbeck Linda Pearsall John Hennessy -
North Carolina Department of Cultural North Carolina Department of Environment North Carolina Department of Environ meni

Resources
& Natural Resources
& Natural Resources ,
4617 Mail Service Center 1601 Mail Service Center 1650 Mail Service Center -
Raleigh, NC 27699 Raleigh, NC 27699 Raleigh, NC 27699

Rob Ridings Brian Strong Travis Wilson .
North Carolina Department of Environment North Carolina Department of Environment North Carolina Wildlife Resources -
& Natural Resources & Natural Resources Commission
1650 Mail Service Center 1615 Mail Service Center 1142 I-85 Service Road -
Raleigh, NC 27699 Raleigh, NC 27699 Creedmoor, NC 27522

J Wally Bowman, PE
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
2612 N Duke Street
Durham, NC 27704
Vince Rhea
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1541 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1541
Lacy Love, PE
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1538 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1538
Eric Midkiff, PE
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1541 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, Nc 27699-1541
Robert E Shultes, PE
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1576 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1576
Derrik Weaver, PE
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1541 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1541
Jay Bennett, PE
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1582 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1582
Chris Murray
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
2612 N Duke Street
Durham, NC 27704
Chris Haire, PE
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1582 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1582
NJoroge Wainaina, PE Art McMillan, PE Dave Henderson, PE
North Carolina Department of North Carolina Department of North Carolina Department of
Transportation Transportation Transportation
1589 Mail Service Center 1584 Mail Service Center 1590 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1589 Raleigh, NC 27699-1584 Raleigh, NC 27699-1590

Obarles Brown, PE, PLS Steve Vamedoe, PE
0orth Carolina Department of North Carolina Department of
ransportation Transportation
5588 Mail Service Center 1537 Mail Service Center
daleigh, NC 27699-1588 Raleigh, NC 27699-1537
Sreg Perfetti, PE Kevin J Lacy, PE
0orth Carolina Department of North Carolina Department of
ransportation Transportation
5581 Mail Service Center 1561 Mail Service Center
&leigh, NC 27699-1581 Raleigh, NC 27699-1561
Seborah Hutchings, PE Scott Walston, PE
orth Carolina Department of North Carolina Department of
ransportation Transportation
JW54 Mail Service Center 1554 Mail Service Center
?aleigh, NC 27699-1554 Raleigh, NC 27699-1554
Mary Pope Furr Carl Goode, Jr, PE
orth Carolina Department of
40 North Carolina Department of
1ransportation Transportation
4W83 Mail Service Center 1583 Mail Service Center
4aleigh, NC 27699-1583 Raleigh, NC 27699-1583
Senneth Withrow Sylvester Percival, El
?apital Area Metropolitan Planning City of Raleigh
rganization 222 West Hargett Street, Room 602
We Professional Building, Suite 406 PO Box 590
27 West Hargett Street Raleigh, NC 27602
Saleigh, NC 27601
Synn Raynor, PE Russell Allen
?ty of Raleigh City of Raleigh
2 West Hargett Street, Room 602 222 West Hargett Street, Room 602
Box 590 PO Box 590
sleigh, NC 27602 Raleigh, NC 27602
-
Oictor Lebsock
ity of Raleigh
PO Box 590
Saleigh, NC 27602
a
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Keith Johnston, PE, PLS
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1585 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1585
Mike Stanley, PE
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1534 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1534
Tracy Walter
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
1551 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1551
Ed Johnson
Capital Area Metropolitan Planning
Organization
The Professional Building, Suite 406
127 West Hargett Street
Raleigh, NC 27601
Dean Fox, PE
City of Raleigh
222 West Hargett Street, Room 602
PO Box 590
Raleigh, NC 27602
Enc Lamb
City of Raleigh
222 West Hargett Street, Room 602
PO Box 590
Raleigh, NC 27602
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Appendix B
Agency Correspondence

-? TQ,?" oFr United-States-Department of-the Interior
W
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
- Raleigh Field Office
-Post Office Box 33726 ---
Mope a Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
May 3, 2007
Tina L Randazzo
--- - URS-Corporation- - - - - - - - -- ---- -- -- --- - - - - - - - - - -
- 1600 Perimeter Park Drive, Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560
--"- -Dear-Ms-Randazzo - --- - - - -- - This letter is in response to your letter of April 30, 2007 which provided the U S Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological determination that the proposed widening and
- relocation of Falls ofNeuse Road-m Wake County (TIP No-U=4901) will have no effect on-any -- - -
federally listed species These comments are provided in accordance with section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U S C 1531-1543)
Due to the lack of habitat, we would concur that the protect will have no effect on the fedeally
endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (Picotdes borealis) and dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta
heterodon) However, based on the information you provided, we would not concur with your
- - --determination-for-the-bald eagle (Haliaeetus-leucocephalus) and Michaux's sumac (Rhus
e
h
N
l
eus
e
ong t
michauxii) Albeit marginal, some potential bald eagle nesting habitat may exist a
River near the northern end of the project There has been recent documentation of bald eagles
- nesting near areas of human disturbance within the southeastern U S As bald eagle numbers
--increase, eagles appear to be utilizing more marginal-habitats--At-a minimum,--we recommend---
that a bald eagle nest survey be conducted within 1500 feet of the proposed crossing site of the
Neuse River
?- - We also recommend that a survey be conducted-for Michaux's sumac -The-species-has been--- ---- - - -
observed in regularly maintained roadside areas Also, the presence of Michaux's sumac should
- not be ruled out based on soil type It is true that the known locations of the species have
-generally-been in-basic-sods, howe_v_er, there maybe unknown locations where this does not hold -
true Also, published soil surveys have a degree of inaccuracy, so basic soils may indeed be
present within the study area
--- --- ---Your-letter-addresses-a-cnucal-habitat design ation-for-V-irgima-least-tnlhum-(Trillium pusilluni_
van vugi»iariu»i) We recognize that this was listed on our website for Wake County, howe?,ei
the listing is incorrect Virginia least trillium is currently not a federally listed species and
therefore does not have any critical habitat designation, We apologize for any inconvenience
that our website has caused
------- - -- -- -- - - - - - - -- -

The map enclosed with your letter is somewhat confusing in that it does not specifically indicate
where the new location portion of the road will tie back into the old road The text of your letter
indicates that the new road will tie back in at the Wakefield Development, but this is not
indicated on the map Please clarify this in any future correspondence
The Service appreciates the opportunity to review this protect If you have any questions
regarding our response, please-contact Mr Gary Jordan at [phone] (Ext 32)-
Sincerely,
Pete Benjamin
J Field Supervisor
cc Eric Alsmeyer, USACE, Raleigh, NC
Rob Ridings, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Mihtscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
John Sullivan, FHWA, Raleigh, NC-
David Hams, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC
United States Department of the Interior
s FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
- Raleigh Field Office
-Post Office Box 33726
4q a'? Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
May 30, 2007
Tma L Randazzo
URS Corporation
• 1600 Peruneter Park Drive, Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560

-Dear-Ms-Randazzo-
This letter is in response to your letter of May 23, 2007 which provided the U S Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) with the biological determination that the proposed widening and
relocation-of Falls of Neuse Road-m-Wake County (TIP-No-U=4901) may affect,-but is not likely-
to adversely affect the federally threatened bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) In addition,
you have determined that the project will have no effect on the federally endangered Michaux's
sumac (Rhus michauxii) These comments are provided in accordance with section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U S C 1531-1543)
- In a previous letter dated April 30, 2007, you provided the Service with a biological
-determination that the-project would have no effect on the federally endangered red-cockaded _
woodpecker (Picoides borealis) and dwarf wedgemussel (Alasmidonta heterodon) In our May
3, 2007 response, the Service concurred with those determinations In that letter, we also
- requested surveys for the bald eagle and Michaux's sumac According to information in your
-current-letter,-surveys-were conducted-for-both-species on-May 9,-2007 --Based on the results of-
the surveys and on other available information, the Service concurs with your determination that
y the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the bald eag!T- It -ofttibb, w-, concur
with your determination that the project will have no effect on Michaux's sumac
- We remind you that obligations under section 7 consultation must be reconsidered if (1) new
• information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical
habitat in a manner not previously- considered in this review, (2) this action is subsequently
modified in a manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or
- critical habitat determined that maybe affected by this identified action The Service appreciates
- the opportunity to review this project If you have any questions regarding our response, please
-- - ------contact-Mr-Gar-y-Jordan-at-(919)-856-4520 (Ext -32) - ------ - - ----

- Sincerely

-- Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisoi

cc Eric Alsmeyer, USACE, Raleigh, NC
Rob Ridings, NCDWQ, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
John Sullivan, FHWA, Raleigh, NC
David Hams, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC

•
• phi i?-
• i
" United States Department of the Interior
-•- - s -- -- -FISH AND-WILDLIFE-SERVICE - - - - - --
• Raleigh Field Office
M4RCH 3 ?6pe Post Office Box 33726
• Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
_• -- - -- April 15, 2008 ---- - - - - -- - -----
•
•
Vince Rhea
• North Carolina Department of Transportation
_•__-____Project-De-v_elopment_and_Environmental-Analysis_
• 1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
•
-Dear Mr-Rhea - - - - - -- - - -- - - -- ---
•
• This letter is in response to your request for comments from the U S Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service)-on the Structure Design-Study_for_the_crossmg-of-the-Neuse_River as part-of the----
proposed widening and relocation of Falls of Neuse Road in Wake County, North Carolina (TIP
• No U-4901) These comments provide information in accordance with provisions of the Fish
and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U S C 661-667d) and the National Environmental Policy Act
• -------(42-U-S-C 4332(2)(c))---- - - - - -- --- - - - -- -- - - - -
•
• The Structure Design Study considers three options for crossing the Neuse River Options 1 and
2-would-hav_e_onc?and-two bents-in-the-nver,-respectively Option 3-would-completely span-the
• nver Since Option 3 would not require in-channel work, Option 3 appears to have the least
• potential for adverse effects to the water quality and fish and wildlife habitat within the river
• Therefore, the Service prefers Option 3 over the other two options
• The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project If you have any questions
• regarding our response, please contact Mr Gary Jordan at [phone], ext 32
• Sincerely,
• Pete Benjamin
U Field Supervisor
•
•
• cc Eric Alsmeyer, USACE, Raleigh, NC
-• - -----Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC - - - - - -- -
• Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
•
- ----- ----- - -- --- - - - -
•
•
Vv . -
0? C9 William G Ross Jr ,Secretary
`O? - - OG North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Cq r Alan W Klimek PE Director
Division of Water Quality
O
Public Works
June 5, 2007 'JUN -+ 4 200/
MEMORANDUM Received
To Sylvester Percival, Project Engineer, City of Raleigh Public Works Department
From Rob Ridings, NC DWQ Transportation Permitting Unit -
Subject Scopmg comments on proposed widening and realignment to Falls OfNeuse Road (SR 2000) in Wake
County, NCDOT TIP No U4901
Reference your correspondence dated May 30, 2007 in which you requested comments for the referenced project
Preliminary analysis of the project reveals the potential for multiple impacts to jurisdictional streams, wetlands, and
riparian buffers in the project area More specifically, impacts to
Stream Name River Basin &
Subbasin Stream Classifications Stream Index Number
UTs to Falls Lake NEU 02 WS-IV, B, NSW, CA 27-(55)
Neuse River & UTs NEU 02 WS-IV, NSW 27-(207)
Further investigations at a lugher resolution should be undertaken to verify the presence of other streams and/or
jurisdictional wetlands in the area In the event that any jurisdictional areas are identified, the Division of Water
Quality requests that the applicant consider the following environmental issues for the proposed project
Project Specific Comments:
1. Falls Lake and the Neuse River are NSW waters of the State DWQ is very concerned with sediment
and erosion impacts that could result from this project DWQ recommends that highly protective sediment
and erosion control BMPs be implemented to reduce the risk of nutrient runoff to these waters- DW_Q
requests that road design plans provide treatment of the storm water runoff through best management
practices as detailed in the most recent version of NC DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices _
2 Review of the project reveals the presence of surface waters classified as Water Supply Critical Area in
the project study area Given the potential for impacts to these resources during the project implementation,
the DWQ requests that the applicant strictly adhere to North Carolina regulations entitled "Design Standards
in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B 0124) throughout design and construction of the project This
would apply for any area that drams to streams having WS CA (Water Supply Critical Area) classifications
Should a bridge project be located within the Critical Area of a Water Supply, the applicant will be required
to design, construct, and maintain hazardous spill catch basins in the project area The number of catch
basins installed should be determined by the design of the bridge, so that runoff would enter said basm(s)
rather than flowing directly into the stream, and in consultation with the DWQ
3. This project is within the Neuse River Basin Riparian buffer impacts should be avoided and minimized
to the greatest extent possible pursuant to 15A NCAC 2B 0233
_Transportabon Permitting Unit
1650 Mad Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone [phone] FAX [phone] I Internet htto //h2o enr state no us/ncwetlands
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
N Carolyn
om`
?vatura!!y
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recydeif110% Post Consumer Paper

General Project Comments.

-1 The environmental document should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed Impacts
15A NCAC
d b
y
to wetlands and streams with corresponding mappmg If mitigation is necessary as require
- 2H 0506(h), it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental
documentation Appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification --- -- -- - - --- - - -- - - --
- 2 Environmental assessment alternatives should consider design criteria that reduce the impacts to streams
and wetlands from storm water runoff These alternatives should include road designs that allow for

- ----- treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the most recent
-
--
-
-
-
buffer areas,
grassed swales,
as
version of NC DWQ Stormwatei Best Management Practices; such
preformed scour holes, retention basins, etc
3 After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification,-the applicant is respectfully reminded that they will need-to demonstrate the avoidance and -- - -
- minimization of impacts to wetlands (and streams) to the maximum extent practical In accordance with
the Environmental Management Commission's Rules (I 5A NCAC 2H 0506(h)), mitigation will be
- required for impacts of greater than l acre to wetlands In the event that mitigation is required, the
-_mtigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost functions and values The NC Ecosystem
- Enhancement Program may be available for use as wetland mitigation
4 In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Rules {1 5A NCAC 2H 0506(h)),
mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial stream In the
event that mitigation is required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace appropriate lost
functions and values The NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program may be available for use as stream
- mitigation
- --
5 DWQ is very concemed with sedunent and erosion Impacts that could-result from this project -The
- applicant should address these concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to the aquatic
environments and any mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts
------6--If a-bridge is being replaced with a-hydrauhc conveyance other-than another-bndge,-DWQ believes the use--- ------
of a Nationwide Permit may be required Please contact the US Army Corp of Engineers to determine the
- required permit(s)
7 --If-an old bridge is removed, no-discharge of bridge material into-surface-waters is allowed unless otherwise
- authorized by the US ACOE Strict adherence to the Corps of Engineers guidelines for bridge demolition
will be a condition of the 401 Water Quality Certification
- 8 Bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream when possible
-- ---- -
i 9 Whenever possible, the DWQ prefers spanning structures Spanning structures usually do not require work
within the stream or grubbing of the streambanks and do not require stream channel reahgnment The
- horizontal and vertical clearances provided by bridges allow for human and wildlife passage beneath the
- - i structure, do not block fish passage and do not block navigation by canoeists and boaters ---- - - -v
- 10 Bridge deck drams should not discharge directly into the stream Stormwater should be directed across the
bridge and pre-treated through site-appropriate means (grassed swales, pre-formed scour holes, vegetated
-?----- -- buffers; etc) before entering the stream-Please refer to the most current-version of-NC-DWQ Stormwater- - - -
- Best Management Practices
I?
------ --- - - -- - -- ---- --- -- -- - - - --- - -
II If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area should be maintained to prevent direct contact
between curing concrete and stream water Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete should not
be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and fish kills
12 If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction contours
and elevations Disturbed areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and appropriate native
woody species should be planted When using temporary structures the area should be cleared but not
grubbed Clearing the area with chain saws, mowers, bush-hogs, or other mechanized equipment and
leaving the stumps and foot iriafintact allows the area to re-vegetates naturally and miru=- es soil- -
disturbance
13 Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands shall be below the elevation of
the streambed by one foot for all culverts with a diameter greater than 48 inches, and 20 percent of the
culvert diameter for culverts having a diameter less than 48 inches, to allow low flow passage of water and
aquatic life Design and placement of culverts and other structures including temporary erosion control
measures shall not be conducted in a manner that may result in dis-equilibrium of wetlands or streambeds
or banks, adjacent to or upstream and down stream of the above structures The applicant is required to
provide evidence that the equilibrium is being maintained if requested in wntmg by DWQ If this
condition is unable to be met due to bedrock or other linutmg features encountered during construction,
please contact the NC DWQ for guidance'on how to proceed and to determine whether or not a permit
modification will be required
14 If multiple pipes or barrels are required, they should be designed to mumc natural stream cross section as
closely as possible including pipes or barrels at flood plain elevation and/or sills where appropriate
Widening the stream channel should be avoided Stream channel widening at the inlet or outlet end of
structures typically decreases water velocity causing sedinent deposition that requires increased
maintenance and disrupts aquatic life passage
15 If foundation test borings are necessary, it should be noted in the document Geotechmcal work is
approved under General 401 Certification Number 3624/Nationwide Permit No 6 for Survey Activities
16 Sediment and erosion control measures sufficient to protect water resources must be implemented and
maintained in accordance with the most recent version of North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control
Planning and Design Manual and the most recent version of NCS000250
17 All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area LLnless otherwise approved
by NC DWQ Approved BMP measures from the most current version of NCDOT Construction and
Maintenance Activities manual such as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other diversion structures
should be used to prevent excavation in flowing water
18 Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in wetlands and streams
19 Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practical Impacts to wetlands m
borrow/waste areas could precipitate compensatory mitigation
20 While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, NC Coastal Region Evaluation of Wetland
Significance (NC-CREWS) maps and soil survey maps are useful tools, their inherent inaccuracies require
that qualified personnel perform onsite wetland delineations prior to permit approval
21 Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in order to minimize
sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other pollutants into streams This equipment
should be inspected daily and maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels,
lubiicants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials
J
•
22 In most cases, the DWQ prefers the replacement of the existing structure at the same location with road
- closure If road closure is not feasible, a temporary detour should be designed and located to avoid wetland
L
M-P acts, mimumze the need for clearing and to avoid destabilizing stream banks -If the structure will be-on
a new alignment, the old structure should be removed and the approach fills removed from the 100-year
- floodplain Approach fills should be removed and restored to the natural ground elevation The area
should be stabilized with grass and planted with native tree species Tall fescue should not be used in
riparian areas
23 Riprap should not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that
• precludes aquatic life passage Bioengineenng boulders or structures should be properly designed, sized
and installed
- Thank you for requesting our input at thus time The applicant is rerrunded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality
- Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met and
designated uses are not degraded or-lost--If-you have any questions or-require additional-mformation, please contact ---
Rob Ridings at [phone]
cc Eric Alsmeyer, US Anny Corps_of Engineers, Raleigh Field Office
- Vince Rhea, NCDOT PDEA
Chris Militscher, Environmental Protection Agency
- Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources Conumssion
Gary Jordan, US Fish and Wildlife Service
-? Chns Murray, NCDOT Division 5
. File Copy
- -------- - ---- - - - - - --- - - - - -- -- -
OF WATER
O? QG
O C

-Michael F Easley, Governor - -
William G Ross lr, Secretary
-
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources -
Coleen H Sullins, D lector -
Mvisibn oof Water Quahty
September 18, 2007 -
Tina Randazzo -
URS Corporation
1600 Perimeter Park Drive, Suite 400
Momsville, NC 27560 -
Subject City of Raleigh/ NCDOT TIP # U4901, Wake County
Falls of Neuse Widening and Relocation Project
On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Neuse Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233)
On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Mitigation Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0506(h))
Dear Ms Randa7ao
On September 18, 2007, at your request and in your attendance, Rob Ridings, Division of Water Quality (DWQ) staff,
conducted an on-site determination to review drainage features located at the Falls of Neuse relocation projmt for
applicability to_the Neuse River Buffer Rules and for applicability to the Mitigation Rules (15A NCAC 2H 0506(h))
The diamage features are approximated on the Junsdictional Stream and Wetland Data Forms document prepared by
URS Corporation on July 20, 2007
The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) concurs with the referenced document regarding the following
stream calls:
S I Perennial stream, subject to Mitigation Rules and Neuse Buffer Rules
S2 Perennial stream, subject to Mitigation Rules and Neuse Buffer Rules
S3 Perennial stream, subject to Mitigation Rules but not Neuse Buffer Rules
S4 Perennial stream, subject to Mitigation Rules and Neuse Buffer Rules
S5 Intermittent stream, subject to Neuse Buffer Rules but not Mitigation Rules
S6 Intermittent stream, not subject to Mitigation Rules or Neuse Buffer Rules
This -letter only Addresses-the applicability to the mitigation rules and the buffer rules and does not approve any activity
within the buffer, Waters of the United States, or Waters of the State Any impacts to wetlands, streams and buffers must
comply with the Neuse Buffer Rules, 404/401 regulations, water supply regulations (15A NCAC 2B 0216), and any
other required federal, state and local regulations Please be aware that even if no direct impacts are proposed to the
protected buffers, sheet flow of all new stormwater runoff as per I SA NCAC 2B 0250 is required
The owner (or future owners) or pennittee should notify the DWQ (and other relevant agencies) of this decision in any
future correspondences concenung this property and/or project. This on-site determination shall expire five (5) years
from the date of this letter
h mild
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 2321 Crabtree Blvd, Suite 250 Phone [phone]
Intemet h2o enrstate m us Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportun4/Aff rniahve Action EmploM - 50% Retydedl10% Post Consumer Paper
- ------- -- -----
Landowners or affected parties that dispute a determination made by the DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that a
-t, -surface-water-exists and that it-is subject-to the-mitigation rules may-request a determination by-the Director -A-request- -
- for a determination by the Director shall be referred to the Director in writing c/o John Hennessy, DWQ Transportation
Permitting Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 Individuals that dispute a determination by the
DWQ or Delegated Local Authority that "exempts" a surface water from the mitigation rules may ask for an adjudicatory
heanng You-must-act within 60 days of-the date that-you receive-this letter-Applicants are-hereby-notified that-the 60-
day statutory appeal time does not start until the affected party (including downstream and adjacent landowners) is
notified of this decision DWQ recommends that the applicant conduct this notification in order to be certain that third
• party appeals are made in a timely manner To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter
15013 of-the-North Carolina General-Statutes-to the Office of-Administrative Heanngs76714-Mail-Service Center,
Raleigh, N C 27699-6714 This determination is final and binding unless you ask for a hearing within 60 days
If you have any additional questions or require additional information please call Rob Ridings at 919-733-9817
Sincerely,
ARob Ridings
• DWQ Transportation Permitting Unit
• Attachments Map of designated streams from jurisdictional document
--- cc -- - Enc AlsmeyeT US Army Corps of Engmeers = Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
- DWQ RRO File Copy
DWQ Wetiands 401 Transportation Unit file copy
- - - ----- - ---- ------- ------
-- - -- - ---- --- - -
-? _
- -

• r
•
•
•
- - ---- ---- -
• ® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
•
•
_• _ __- - __ _-- _ -__-- __-_ Ra T@12 pdCN- 0
• MEMORANDUM JUN 3 0 2008
•
- -- URS CORPORATION- -
• - TO Vince Rhea- - - ---- --- -------- --- `- - - - - NORTH CAROLINA
• NCDOT, PDEA, Project Development
?--- - --FROM --- Travis Wilson; Highway-Project-Coordinator--- -
• Habitat Conservation Program
•
• _ DATE _ June 13, 2008
SUBJECT Structure Design Study for Falls of the Neuse Road Widening and Relocation
Project, TIP U-4901
Biologists with the N C Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the
information provided and have the following preliminary comments on the subject project Our
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act
_(42 U S C 4332(2)(c))_and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat 401, as amended, 16 _
U S C 661-667d)
Our standard recommendations for bridge crossings of this scope are as follows
1 We generally prefer spanning structures Spanning structures usually do not require'
work within the stream and do not require stream channel realignment The horizontal
and vertical clearances provided by bridges allows for human and wildlife passage
_ beneath the structure, does not block fish passage, and does not block navigation by_-
canoeists and boaters
2 Bridge deck drains should not discharge directly into the stream
3 Live concrete should not be allowed to contact the water in or entering into the stream -
4 If possible, bridge supports (bents) should not be placed in the stream
5 If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, they should be removed back to
original ground elevations immediately upon the completion of the project Disturbed
areas should be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and native tree species should
- Maihng Address: Division of Inland Fisheries - 1721 Mail Service Center - Raleigh, NC 27699-171-17-
Telephone: [phone] - Fag: [phone]
U-4901 2 June 13, 2008 -
be planted with a spacing of not more than 10'x10' If possible, when using temporary
-
structures the area should be cleared but not grubbed Clearing the area with chain
-- - - - - - - saws' mowers; bush-hogs,-or-other mechanized equipment and leaving the-stumps and - - - - -?
root mat intact, allows the area to revegetate naturally and minimizes disturbed soil -
6 A clear bank (nprap free) area of at least 10 feet should remain on each side of the
steam underneath the bridge
8 In streams that contain threatened or endangered species, NCDOT biologist Mr
Logan Williams should be notified Special measures to protect these sensitive species
- - - may be-required - NCI)OT should-also contact-the-U S Fish and-Wildlife Service-for-
information on requirements of the Endangered Species Act as it relates to the project
9 In streams that are used by anadromous fish, the NCDOT official policy entitled
"Stream Crossing Guidelines for Anadromous Fish Passage (May 12, 1997)" should
be followed
11 Sedimentation and erosion control measures sufficient to protect aquatic resources
- - must be implemented-pnor to any ground disturbing activities -Structures should be
maintained regularly, especially following rainfall events
12 Temporary or permanent herbaceous vegetation should be planted on all bare soil
within 15 days of ground disturbing activities to provide long-term erosion control
13 All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area
Sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams, or other diversion structures should be used
where possible to prevent excavation in flowing water
14 Heavy equipment should be operated from the bank rather than in stream channels in
order to minimize sedimentation and reduce the likelihood of introducing other
pollutants into streams
15 Only clean, sediment-free rock should be used as temporary fill (causeways), and
should be removed without excessive disturbance of the natural stream bottom when
-construction-is completed
16 During subsurface investigations, equipment should be inspected daily and
maintained to prevent contamination of surface waters from leaking fuels, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials
Project specific comments
At this tune we do not have any specific concerns related to the structure design options
presented in the report If you need further assistance or information on NCWRC concerns
regarding bridge replacements, please contact me at [phone] Thank you for the
opportunity to review and comment on these projects
Cc Eric Alsmeyer, USACE
Gary Jordan, USFWS
Rob Ridings, DWQ
•
AWIMA • -? - -P?ablic Vilorks
• M, JUN 2007
-?- _rth_ -- _- NCDENR - _
• No Carolina Department of Environment and Natu-ral Re-sourcesRecelved- -- ---
• Michael F Easley, Governor William G Ross Jr, Secretary
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mr Sylvester Percival
City of Raleigh
Public Works Department
222 W Hai gett St
Raleigh, NC 27601
---Subject Widening and-Realignment of Falls-of Neuse Road near Neuse River, Raleigh, Wake-County _
Project TIP U-4901
Dear Mr Percival
June 4, 2007
• The Natural Heritage Program has no current record of rate species, significant natural communities, or
- significant natural heritage areas at the site nor within a mile of the project area There is an historical
i ecord of the Federal Species of Concern and State Special Concern southeastern myotis [bat] (Myous
•-? --austr?i rpcrrru?)-from an abandoned warehouse on the Hord' side of the river This warehouse has, we
• believe, been converted into condominiums Our managed area data layer indicates that U S Army
• Corps of Engineers land (Falls Lake) has a short boundary line on the west side of Falls of Neuse Road
near their entrance road to the Management Center Thus, we encourage you to contact that agency
• _ about their input on this project, if you have not already done so
• You may wish to check the Natural Heritage Program database website at www ncnhp org for a listing of
---tare plants-and_animals_and_significant _ natural communities_in 1he-county and on the quad map
• NC OneMap now provides digital Natural Heritage data onlme frr ee Tit is service provides site
• specific information on GIS layers with Natural Heritage Program rare species occurrences and
-•-------Significant-Natural-Heritage Areas The-NC-OneMap-website provides-Element-Occurrence (EO) ID- - -- -- ----
- -an, her ',..-stead c `speci: s name), soil the data us:; is then en:61ircbcd to contact inc :1ati.ra! Ycntaa
Program for detailed information This service allows the user to quickly and efficiently get site specific
NHP data without visiting the NHP workroom or waiting for the hiformation Request to be answered by
-v----NHP-staffFor more-information-about-data formats and-access,-visit <www nLonemap comldata html>,----- - - ---
• or email NC OneMap at <dataq@ncmail net>
•- Please do not hesitate to contact me at 919_715-8697 if you have questions or need further information
• Sntceiely,
-• -- _Hai iv Setand, Jr, Zoologist - --- -- -- -- - - - - -- "- J -
• Natural Heritage Program
• 1601 Mad Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1601 None Carolina
--'Phone 919-733=49841 FAX--919=715-30601 Internet" www enr state nc us/ENR/ -- a1t___ - ??
• An Equal Opportundy / Affimiab ve Action Employer - 50 % Recyded 1 t0 % Post Consumer Paper
- -- - - -- - --- -- - --- - - - ----- - - -- -- - - - ---- -
•
JUN-02-2008 22 19

- - Federal Aid # - -
TIN U4 AI -County Wake
P 02 •
•
CONCURRFNCF FORM FOR PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR •
TM NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC_PLACES •
Project Description City of Raleigh Project: Widening and Relocation of Falls of Neuse Road in Raleigh, Wake u -?
County
On September 4, 2007 representatives of the
® North Carolina Dcpdrtment of Transportation (NCDOT)
? Federal Highway Admtntstratton (FHWA)
® North Carolina State_ Historic_ Preservation Office (HPO)
? Other
Reviewed the subject project at
? St oping meeting
® Hi%tonc arctutectural resources photograph review %cssion/eonsultation
? Other
All pameq prescnt agreed

19

There are no properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effect,
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
There are no properties lcvr than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria Consideration G within the •
project's area of potential effects •
There are properties over fifty years old within the project's Area of Potential Effects (APE), but based on the •
historical information available and the photographs of each property, the properties identified as A-E are
- •
considered not eligible for the National Register and no further evaluation of them is necessary
There are no National Register-listed or Study Listed properties within the project's area of potential effects. •
•
All properties --eater than 50 years of age located in the APE have been considered at this consultation, and based •
upon the above concurrence, all compliance for histonc architecture with Section 106 of the National Histonc
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has been completed for this project •
? There are no h torte properties affected by this project (Attach any notes or documents as needed)
Signed
Date
FIIWA, for the Division Administrdtor, or other federal Agency
Date
Re recentative, HPO Date
State Hiotonc Preservation Officer Date
If v purvey report is prepared. a final copy of this farm -d the attached list will be included
NCDOT HEU-BRG 919 715 1501
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TOTAL P.02 •
•
•
RECEIVED
ao Division of Highways
-?---- -- - ---- ---- -- ---- - -- - -APR-2 3-2008- - - - --
Pmcmswmn
o
Pr*d Development and
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B Sandbeck, Admrntstrator
Nfichael F Easley, Govemor Office of Areluves and History - -
-lisbeth C-Evans,-Secretary ----- - - - - - - -- ------ -- -- --- - - Dimon of Histoncal Resources-
• Jeffrey J Crow, Deputy Secretary David Brook, Director
April 17, 2008 -- 0 @L
MEMORANDUM M ? ---- _
? I AY 0 22008
- TO Vince Rhea t URS C
--Protect-Development-and-Environmental-Analysis Branch NORTM C OA IoN _
NCDOT Division of Highways
• FROM _ Peter Sandbeckmfl9w Qe?ey..A?Ct.IL
SUBJECT Falls of the Neuse Road Widening and Relocation Protect, U-4901, Wake County, ER 07-1140
Thank you for your memorandum of March 2, 2008, concerning the above protect We were unable to
-? comment by March 19, 2008 as requested,-is-w-6 did not receive the memorandum until April 4, 2008 -
The structure design study submitted does not indicate the location of the proposed bridge, so we cannot
evaluate potential effects upon archaeological resources However, our maps and records indicate that URS has conducted an archaeological survey in the vicinity of the protect area and recorded Three archaeological
- sites The report of these findings has not yet been submitted to our office for review and comment
After we receive and review-the archaeological sur_v_ey-report, we will be able to make recommendations as to
the need for additional investigations We look forward to receipt of the report and accompanying site forms
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
--- --- Advisory-Council on-Historic-Preservation's Regulations for_Compbance-vnth Section 106 codified at 36 CFR -
Part 800
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration If you have questions concerning the above comment,
-----please contact-Renee Gledhill-Earley,-environmental review-coordinator, at_919/-807_657Q_In all future
communication concerning this protect, please cite the above referenced tracking number
cc Matt Wilkerson,NC DOT
• Location 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address 4617 Mail Service Center, Ralagh NC 27699-4617 Telephone/Fax [phone]-6599
„a STATl a
North Carohna Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B Sandbeck, Admtnt,trator
Mlchacl F Lacley, Governor
Lttbcth C Evans Secretary
Jeffrey J Crow Depurv Secrewrv
July 23, 2008
MEMORANDUM
TO Matt Wilkerson
Office of Human Environment
NCDOI' Division of Highways
FROM Peter Sandbeck 2J'jj ,_z,
Office of Archi%c, and 1 bator)
Dnvnion of I f„torncal Rc,ourcc,
Da%id Brool, DIMCtor
SUBJECT Archaeological Survey of the Falls of the Neuse Road Widening and Realignment Pioject,
U-4901, Wake County, ER 07-1140
Thank you for j our letter of July 16, 2008, transnutting the survey report by Matthew Jorgenson, Daniel
Cassedy and Marvin Brown of URS Corporation for the above project
For purposes of compliance v.ith Section 106 of the National Historic Pieservation Act, we concur that the
following properties are not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under criterion D
31WA1644, 31WA1645 and 31WA1646
None of these Native American sites retain sufficient integrity to yield information mmpoitant to prehistory
The ieport meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior We concur with the ?
recommendation that no adchtional archaeological investigation is warranted in connection with this project as -
currently proposed
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Pieservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preseii-ration's Regulations for Coinphance u ith Section 106 codified at 36 CFR -
Part 800
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration If j ou have questions concerning the above comment
please contact Renee Gledhill -Earley, em ironmental review coordinator, at 919/807-6579 In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number
cc Daniel Cassedv, URS Corporation

Location 109 List Jones street Ralogh NC. 27601 Matting Address 4617 Mail senlce Gt.ntcl, Ralugh I\f 27699 4617 Telephone/raa [phone]/807 6599

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Appendix C
Public Involvement

C-1
Reports of Public Meetings

31825753
August 1, 2007
M E M O R A N D U M
TO Project File
FROM Ed Edens
SUBJECT. Report of Public Meeting - July 26, 2007, 5 00 P M to 8 00 P M - Durant
Road Middle School
Falls of Neuse Road Widening and Realignment Project
Attendees
Eric Lamb, PE, City of Raleigh
Lynn Raynor, PE, City of Raleigh
Dean Fox, PE, City of Raleigh Public Works Department
Ed Edens, PE, URS Corporation - North Carolina (URS)
Tim Keener, PE, CEP, URS
Kim Leight, AICP, URS
Tina Sekula, URS
Susan Shehngoski, URS
Citizens See Attached List
The irutial Public Workshop was held at Durant Road Middle School beginning at 5 00 p in and
continuing to 8 00 p m to discuss Falls of Neuse Widening and Realignment Project The
workshop was set up in 4 primary areas A greeting table was set up at the entrance to the room to
have residents sign in and give instructions for proceeding through the workshop exhibits Listed
below are the comments most discussed at each workstation during the meeting
STATION 1- Thoroughfare Map/Project History
This workstation covered the Comprehensive Transportation Map for the region The display was
intended to show Citizens the overall Thoroughfare Map for this area of Wake County and all the
future proposed projects and corridor classifications for each roadway facility The map also
indicated planned future facility build-out to the ultimate typical section anticipated Falls of
Neuse Road is classified as a Secondary Arterial and is planned to ultimately be a six-lane facility
and connect to New Falls of Neuse in the Wakefield Area and connect to Capital Boulevard The
Citizens who reviewed the map posed general questions on the hrruts of the project and the typical
URS Corporation - North Carolina
1600 Perimeter Park Drive Suite 400
Morrisville NC 27560
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
www urscorp com

Page 2 of 4
section for the proposed project Several questions were asked about whether the project would
have a median divided typical section Those displays were presented in Station 4
STATION 2 - NEPA Process/Project Schedule
This workstation featured a graphical representation of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) as applicable to the current project's status as part of the NEPA process A project
schedule showing how the proposed action fit into the NEPA flowchart and our currently
predicted schedule were shown as well The most commonly received comments and concerns are
summarized below
• Many residents were confused over the status of the current project and workshop and
previous planning efforts by the City (particularly corridor workshops) Many thought the
Falls of Neuse project was already in alternative study phase and they would see alternative
options at the workshop
• Citizens who lived in the Wakefield community specifically inquired about adding a new
signal at Spruce Tree and New Falls of Neuse Road
• There were members of several church congregations (Mt Pleasant Baptist Church and
Falls Baptist Church) present who were very interested in issues of safety, access, increased
noise and loss of facilities
• Residents who lived in the Falls and Fonville Road communities adjacent to existing Falls
of Neuse Road stressed that their area is historical and has ties to the church (Falls Baptist
Church circa 1900) They stated they are losing their community cohesion and
neighborhood values as development encroaches
• Many comments were expressed that the area is becoming a nice recreational area and this
trend should be encouraged by future construction (such as the referenced project)
• Overall citizens expressed concern that Falls of Neuse Road not turn into a "Capital
Boulevard" area - they expressed concerns about a zoning change allowing commercial
development between the neighborhoods of Bedford and Woodspring
P \Jobs1 \31825753_FalIsotNeuse\Publie Involventent\Correspondence and Coorcbnahon\File-Report of Meet ng_PMI_072607 doc
Uns Page 3 of 4
STATION 3 - Environmental Features
This workstation covered the overall corridor study area A display board print-out of the project
corridor and outlined study area showing environmental features was displayed on an aerial map
The mapping included the project study corridor, streams, Neuse buffer areas within the study
corridor, and wetlands It also showed the approximate location of the only federally listed species
in the vicinity of the study corridor (located well outside of the study corridor) The species (a bat)
is a Federal Species of Concern Federal Species of Concern are not protected under the
Endangered Species Act Residents did not comment specifically on environmental concerns, but
did inquire about the location of the crossing of the Neuse River and how the crossing would
affect the current crossing of Falls of Neuse Road
STATION 4 - Project Corridor Layout/Typical Sections
This workstation covered the overall corridor study area The project typical sections under
consideration for this facility were also displayed A roll-stock print out of the project corridor and
outlined study area showing the various community and environmental features were displayed on
an aerial map also containing parcel lot lines The typical sections for the new facility being
considered were shown on a board mounted graphic The typical sections included a 4-lane
divided roadway with an option for widening to the outside in the future and a section showing a
4-lane roadway with extra width median with an option to widen to the inside in the future The
most received comments and concerns are summarized below
• Residents of the Dalton's Ridge neighborhood were concerned if the widening would
affect their wall that was constructed when the neighborhood was built Eric Lamb noted
that the City had required the developer to dedicate his half of the 120' of right-of-way
when the subdivision was approved So likely, the wall will not be affected by the widening
project
• Several residents of the Fonville Road community were interested and wanted to know
about the reconfiguration of that intersection Several residents had requested that
Fonville be dead ended in a cul-de-sac to lessen traffic flow through their neighborhood
• Several residents in the Dalton's Ridge neighborhood noted that southbound traffic from
neighborhoods on the east side of FON were turning north in the morning and U-turning
in their roads and driveways since making left turns were extremely difficult
• Several members of the Mt Pleasant Church near Raven Ridge Road attended the meeting
and discussed their concerns Most of their concerns were focused on right-of-way and
median access to their grounds Team members from URS and the City of Raleigh had
previously met with the Pastor and Deacon's of the church and had discussed the project
with them Members of URS and the City will work more with the Church on providing
additional information as alternatives are developed
• Several residents of Wakefield were concerned about maintaining the dedicated buffer
adjacent to the corridor after the new bridge crosses the river More than likely the
P Vobsl\31825753_FallsofNeuse\Pubhc Involvement\Correspondence and Coordmahon\File_Report of Meetmg_PMI_072607 doc
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•

Page 4 of 4
developer set aside that 50' buffer adjacent to the dedicated right-of-way for New Falls of
Neuse Road and the alignment will not likely impact the buffer
• Several residents were curious about the schedule for the project and the phasing The
current phasing calls for the new location section to be completed first starting in spring
2009 to allow for the B-4660 Bridge Replacement project to be constructed using the new
bridge as a detour for traffic The widening part of the project will be constructed at a later
time
• Several residents were asking questions about the waterline project and how it would affect
the roadway widening part of the project The waterline currently under construction will
be complete prior to the widening section of the roadway beginning construction At this
time, no direct impacts to the waterline are anticipated and the alignment of the roadway
will be adjusted as necessary to protect the waterline
• Most residents reviewing the typical sections under consideration seemed to favor the 4-
lane divided section with provisions to widen to the median in the future This option
would minimize future disruption and reduce proximity to construction operations in the
future if widened to six lanes
Action Items
cc
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
• Mr William Jackson requested a copy of the corridor study map be sent to the Falls
Volunteer Fire Department to his attention URS sent this map out on 7/30/07
• A meeting with Mr Sam Rabon (citizen who could not attend the workshop) was held on
7/30/07 Mr Rabon lives on the north east corner of October Road and Falls of Neuse
Road
Meeting Attendees
P Uobsl\31825753_FallsotNeuse\Public InvohemenACorrespondence and CoordfnanonTile_Report of Meenng_PM1 072607 doc
Summary of Written Public Comments Received at July 26, 2007
Citizens' Informational Workshop
Durant Road Middle School
500 PMto800PM
Approximately 70 citizens attended the open house format workshop on July 26, 2007
Summarized from the Comment Form
Question 1 If you could identify one feature that you would like the CITY to consider
while planning the proposed project, what would this be? (For example, endangered
species, water quality protection, loss of individual home, loss of neighborhood cohesion,
noise, safety, etc )
Question 2 Why do you think the feature listed in Question 1 is important to yourself and
the local community
1 Traffic signals on Spruce Tree and New Falls of Neuse - 5 comments
2 New Falls will have the same problem that Falls has right now during morning
rush hour, only we have children walking to and from the schools
3 Widen outside lanes or striped bike lanes - perhaps wider sidewalks
4 Safety This should be evident - 2 comments
5 Studying traffic patterns to help promote an easier commute especially during
peak hours Because of the increased population growth north of Durant Road the
heavy traffic on Falls of Neuse has become a problem I think most commuters
are looking for some relief because this road is the only access they have to their
residences
5 Bridge over Neuse elevated sufficiently to allow wildlife passage and protect
water quality Design of bridge and its construction should have minimal impact
on the environment We don't want deer trying to cross a 6-lane thoroughfare
The Neuse River/dam area will become a destination recreation area and we want
to be proud of it
7 Double lanes in front of the church (Mount Pleasant Baptist Church) will provide
a road hazard for our members It is important for safety reasons Our church also
sits very close to Falls of Neuse Road
8 Noise and safety - we would like for you to consider the distance of the Mt
Pleasant Baptist Church from the road We will also be losing parking spaces The
safety of the church members is important Since there is only about 50' to the
front, we would like to keep that space intact
9 What will happen to Mount Pleasant Baptist Church at 10720 Falls of Neuse9
What will happen to our property line - front yard?
10 Falls Baptist Church is located on Fonville Road - possibly below the proposed
extension of Falls of Neuse - will there be any access so that worshippers can get
to church easily9 Especially if Fonville Road is closed at the south end Our
church is 107 years old and we are a congregation that will be severely affected if
P IJobs1131825753_FallsofVeusePublic InilolvementlPublic Workshop No IlSummary of
Public Comments Received at July 26 doc
people form the Raleigh ar4ea/surrounding neighborhoods cannot easily access us
from Fonville Road
11 Neighborhood cohesion and intersection with existing Falls of Neuse
12 Character of neighborhoods (entrance) which sets the tone for the neighborhood
Changes could have negative impacts
13 Time to completion Disruption of traffic pattern that is already congested will be
a nightmare for residents along Falls of Neuse It seems that this will be a 5-6 year
project on a mayor thoroughfare (not secondary)
14 The Falls Community is often overlooked as a historical and vital part of the
area's history and development It is crucial that planning reflect the simpler lives
of people who call this area home and do not want the "big city" feel that could
easily mushroom if not planned properly By keeping (even improving) the
appearance of this community as a "breath of fresh air" - a destination that that
has drawn many people to seek a quieter lifestyle, you will allow the established
residents and their families to live with dignity and continued appreciation for
their community Please do not forget all about people who love this area but are
not officially part of "Raleigh" So much of our community is being eroded by
construction - including homes that do not quite fit the feel of the area Please do
all you can to preserve as much as possible
15 Integration with neighborhood architectural styles and building in more green-
fostering sustainable support for emerging climate changes Important because of
satisfaction and beauty
16 Aesthetics - so that Falls does not look like Capital Blvd , and more like Weston
Parkway Important for real estate values
17 Loss of the entrance to our neighborhood at Whittington Drive to a shopping
center at Dunn and Falls of Neuse Please consider a median strip on Whittington
18 Access from Saybrook to Falls of Neuse and New Falls of Neuse at Waterwood
Court This includes the configuration and location of the intersections Important
due to, 1) property values - people don't want to buy a house that they can't get
to Access to Falls of Neuse and a sign help neighborhood identity, 2) safety - fire
and police access, also safety of turning in and out, 3) convenience = access, also
deliveries need to be able to find us, and 4) noise on Waterwood and Wellwater -
these are small lots
19 Bridge at Fonville Road and Falls of Neuse may not need replacing when heavy
traffic is taken off existing Falls of Neuse Save some money - locals will be fine
20 Keep access points on Fonville Road at Falls of Neuse both at bridge (north) and
south (Holiness Church) even if you have to "T" Fonville Road to come out at the
fire department
21 Traffic safety through rationalizing neighborhood access to the proposed Falls of
Neuse The current intersections are so unsafe or busy that traffic diverts through
neighborhoods to get alternate connections Example traffic along Midlovian to
get to Lake Village instead of Waterwood
22 Pedestrian bridge to proposed greenway to allow access for Wakefield residents
to greenway and future park areas
23 Location of park area along corridor leading to Neuse River We need more park
& recreation areas in N Raleigh
P hobsM1825753_FallvofNeuselPublic Inv2)lvementPublic WoyAshop No I (Summary of
Public Comments Received at July 26 doc
Question 3 I also wish to comment on the following aspects of the proposed project9
1 Road widening needs to be done before bridge is constructed
2 We were told at the city planning meeting at the church that all of the widening of
Falls of Neuse going by Daltons Ridge would be on the other side of the road -
this is a MUST
3 Please locate full movement crossovers at intersections of Falls of Neuse and
October Road, Dunn Avenue, Tabriz Place, and Lowry Farm Road This provides
a mmunum of 1200 feet of spacing for 45 mph posted speed - NCDOT Design
Standard
4 This project is needed now
5 It's about time
6 Need to maintain traffic lights (which improve through traffic) Go ahead and get
6-lanes now
7 Cars too close to the road and church - noise will become a factor
8 Since the church (Mt Pleasant Baptist Church) is close to the road, there needs to
be some type of protection in front of the church
9 Concerned about potential commercial development between Woodsprmg and
Bedford which may impact Woodspring and entrance
10 Fonville Road access to Falls of Neuse Road - please be very thoughtful when
considering how you will create/limit access with new road
11 Would like consideration that south entrance of Waterwood be closed off or
merged into a loop with Fonville Road So that Waterwood could only be
accessed via Daltons Ridge or by the north entrance off of Fonville and traffic on
both Waterwood and Fonville are minimized
12 Appears superior in terms of thinking, thoughtfulness, involvement and citizens
13 We should have impact to the focus area and feeders prior to formalized plans
14 Street lights
15 The more feedback that citizens have an opportunity to give, the better
16 I fully support the project It is critically needed for safety of school children at
Wakefield schools as quickly as possible, please complete the project
P Vobs1131825753_FallsofVeuselPubhc Ini3olvemenAPublic Workshop No I1Summaiy of
Public Comments Received at July 26 doc
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
i
•
i
•
•
i
•
i
i
•
i
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
i
•
Question 4 Concerning the format of the July 26, 2007 Workshop, do you have any
positive or negative comments, or suggestions for improvements to the way the
information was presented to the public?
1 The large displays were very helpful in understanding the scope of the project and
the schedule was informative as well
2 I was hoping there would be more concrete options at this point Instead, answers
were "too soon to tell" or "we're considering all options"
3 Good idea
4 OK - look forward to next meeting with more details
5 The presenters were very nice and readily answered questions I will be well
pleased if the professionalism and genume concern for the community continues
throughout the project Please keep residents of this area closely involved in the
process
6 Could not be any better Staff had considerable knowledge and could articulate it
They listened and contributed in appropriate measures All in all a superb
demonstration of good government I hope other appreciate the experience here
7 Multiple aerial maps for display - too many people around that display - other
wise great workshop
8 Positive
9 Thanks for the update
10 Good information
11 Good information Make it available on website - that is, all of the planning
maps
P Uobs1131825753_Fallsof VeusePublic In*lvementTubhc Workshop No I (Summary of
Public Comments Received at July 26 doc

r
CL v
° '
3: 0 0
z
tt.2 h
U
0 Z J "
a
U- 0 ..? 4 a.
U-
L
U- r?
Qn
z z
uj
uua
LL. °"v
C
te) z
LU Z
U
z
Fmq
L-J
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• 9
0 C:: 3c
• ?
0 O
• = z
• w
z F ?
• O
Ow-IL
U a=
• ?s z
• o°
• ?zz
• ago
-
Z CZ-u
0
•
LL.
•°a
• Z
? Q
• w
• z
•
•
•
•
• i
•
•
•
•
•

s

- J-1

gi 3 r
J

C? NZ)

r?

:

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Q
CL
m o 0
(? z
I
a< z U
?-a
J p
OCR
< IL
Q ; u r
?z
°
6-
z Z;5
rn
3-a
®0
z
. uj
z

Nu a'
f C? N ? ? J

? + J
d
V ° n

01.
N
?
J
Q
uj t1

rirh
i
b gyp. ?3
0
O
x o
?ce z
ad ?<v
0zZW
0
dm0-
fn < CL
?:ji U?
U- ?r,
fl
?"?
O "°
ZZa
O
LU i Z
~ZB
LL. U- t-
Z OZ OQ
LU Z
c?
LU
0
u
z

2

?ja

.? NO a ('? r
CY ?
? lv r V
J v ? -

:= o q V O
C

CL
LLJ

a -
CL

? w

!
•
•
•

•

tsd '
l y
,

•

• 3:0 0
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
tn a.: z
he ui
V) t-
ad = Q U
z tI
Z =
LL- 00
o w n.
cn <t a.
:? U E=-
L?
0000
zz?
?0CL
LU?Z
0 i
LA- ?.'
z?0
d ?: I-
?u
z
t to Q
Lu
U
L

--N
-19 ?-

? U y?
??
v
J /
? ? a n
C\

>

-a f

3
Z
J 1
H
_?lj ?-

_ 4 cl ?
1
v

r-
0
CL qr
O 4
z
N
o U
0 ZZw
o°a-
NQa..
P
Z z
0 oo°
a=- zz
0 o
N C'J et,..
N
Lu mJ Z
W
LL. LL.
zz0o
w
tJ z
!%d LL+
Ct-
W
U
z
n

0
0 in
0
ce. O
°. v
=3 < U
0 WzLU
Z= O
LL- OwC
.? vs c
z d z
0 wO
C)
zz?
0 o
v,
Z Z
x w w
LL. ?-
00
LEJ
_zu
Z
uj
Uj
z

Date
To
From
Subject
Attendees.
February 12, 2008
Ed Edens
Kim Leight
Memorandum
Report of Public Meeting - January 29, 2008, 5.00 PM to 7:00 PM - Durant Nature Park,
Campbell Lodge
City of Raleigh, Falls of Neuse Road, Realignment and Widening
Carl Dawson, PE, City of Raleigh
Eric Lamb, PE, City of Raleigh
Lynn Raynor, PE, City of Raleigh
Sylvester Percival, El, City of Raleigh
Chris Haire, PE, NCDOT
Mohammed Mahjoub, PE, NCDOT
Tim Keener, PE, URS
Ed Edens, PE, URS
Carldon Hall, PE, URS
Mike Littlefield, El, URS
David Griffin, CEP, URS
Peter Trencansky, PE, URS
Chris Werner, PE, URS
John Sloan, El, URS
Duane Verner, AICP, URS
Susan Shelingoski PWS, URS
Brenda Crumpler, URS
Kim Leight, AICP, URS
Citizens See Attached List
The second Public Workshop was held at Durant Nature Park, Campbell Lodge, beginning at 5 00 PM and
ending at 7 00 PM The workshop was set up in 5 primary areas A greeting table was set up at the entrance to
the room to have residents sign-in An introductory self-running presentation presented a brief history of the
project and gave instructions for proceeding through the workshop exhibits Listed below are the comments
most discussed at each workstation during the meeting
Page 2 of 3
STATION I - Schedule / NEPA Planning / Environmental Findings
- This workstation presented the current project schedule and how this schedule meshed with the requirements of
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), efforts of which are underway concurrently Also shown was
• mapping depicting the completed natural resources located in the study area Comments heard here include
1 Multiple residents located directly adjacent to existing Falls of Neuse expressed various concerns about
• the widening - which ranged from actual relocation to loss of trees and landscaping, fences and the
- addition of traffic noise and resultant air quality issues
2 Resident of Waterwood inquired about additional traffic and noise if a large intersection were designed
at Fonville Road and Old Falls of Neuse Road
- STATION 2 - Traffic and Intersection Concepts
This workstation presented current and projected traffic flow numbers on existing Falls of the Neuse Road, road
networks supporting traffic in the study area, and the future network with the Extension in place Also presented
- were visuals of potential intersection treatments including several signalization options and a "superstreet"
option Comments heard here include
• 1 Many residents of the Fonville Road area did not agree with a cul-de-sac of Fonville and preferred a "T"
- intersection Also did not like option for emergency responder areas and preferred a turning lane - no
one way traffic patterns
- 2 Residents requested a left over at Waterford to keep peak evening traffic from coming through Daltons
- Ridge
3 Request intersections for both directions at October Road and Falls of Neuse Road
4 Another resident said the "superstreet' concept was unworkable - too many a-turns unprotected by
- lights and requested a full service intersection at Lake Villa
5 There should be a light at Tabriz There should be left turns at Dunn, Tabriz, Whittington and October
Maybe a light at October Road
- 6 More full movement intersections needed How in the world do moving vans do u-turns? Need full
intersection at Waterwood or left turn northbound and left over at Waterwood
- STATION 3 - Roadway Design Alignments
This workstation presented 3 design options for the realignment and widening project These were shown on
• aerial mapping which also included property lines and environmental features Cross sections of the options
- were shown and citizens could see the relation of the roadway, right of way limits, utilities, sidewalks, etc
Comments heard at this workstation include
- 1 Please close October Road - we vote for the right turn only and left turn in to October Road
2 Request that you widen on both sides of Falls of Neuse Road My septic tank system is in back yard
facing the area set for widening Please don't disrupt it Close October Road entrance
- 3 Many church members are concerned about accessibility of the church to people coming from Raleigh -
- north of Falls of Neuse Road since Fonville Road will become a cul-de-sac
4 Do not like loss of left turn at High Holly Road

Page 3 of 3
5 Don't like Alternative 2 or 3 People are now wrecking into our pine trees in our backyard We have lost
2 trees from these wrecks and people have been hurt
6 Do not like loss of left turn at High Holly Road
7 Do not like forcing right turns only out at Dunn, this not desirable and down right crazy
8 Instead of a rounded curve with the realignment of Fonville Road connecting to Falls of Neuse Road,
design a permanent T intersection so drivers have to come to a complete stop Possibly make a full
intersection with Lowry Farms Road
STATION 4 - Structure Design Options
This workstation presented structural design options for the proposed new crossing of the Neuse River
Comments heard at this workstation include
1 Single bridge - no walkways
2 Interim construction access to the bridge construction would appear to have less environmental impact if
it comes from south side of river and through the field rather than over the tributary at the end of
existing New Falls of the Neuse Road (Wakefield)
3 Dual spans are preferred if built concurrently Advantages of single span if it all gets built, is further
ensuring widening will actually happen
STATION 5 - Citizens Interactive map and Comment Station
1 We need serious consideration to be given to closing October Road, entrance and exit The street is not
busy, it is poor quality - heavy equipment and trucks are tearing it up Persons turning into October
Road speed and have often wrecked turning left into October Road and have often run into our yard and
trees
2 Build a fence to block seeing and hearing traffic along the widening
3 Please consider left turn lights for Raven Ridge Road now It is impossible to make a left off of Raven
Ridge during rush hours
4 All designs look good My only concern is Falls Fire Department having quick access to homes on
Fonville Road
5 There should be a light at Tabriz There should be left turns at Dunn, Tabriz, Whittington and October
Maybe a light at October
6 Keep project moving forward regardless of design so the highway network is improved Economic
development potential of Wakefield Community can be fully realized once the bridges and widening are
complete
7 Next meeting provide a better location that people can find or give directions in the newsletter and
newspaper notice
8 My house is the first one on the right after crossing the existing bridge going south The previous map I
saw had the curve dust before my house straightening out through the Leonard property and connecting
with New Falls of Neuse Road The current map doe not show this It shows the curve as it currently is,
then going through the Leonard property It is almost impossible getting in and out of my driveway
now A lot of times we park in the church parking lot and exit out Fonville Road I am asking that the
old (design) per the map showing the curve being straightened out be used instead of the existing
design This would put me and others in the Falls Community basically on a service road Please try to
leave the Falls Community in tact
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
??yY
` sF ±
?ry
J ? O
U
a ui
z®®
once
U Z P
w to
z
?Zo
® oc??
?z
?ix0
w?H
J Z
ce Ix
L!? W h-
O yr u-
® y- O
ui 1-
Z
z U. N J ?
U- u,
D
Z
n.
m
a
c
0
I
d
0
J
Q
V
m
a
0
0
ti
0
CL
0
0
I
O
O
O
N
0
N
!0
a
c
ea
N
0
a
,f
r
0
0%
C
O
z
0
zZ
LU
O?o0
0 z W
Q CL
Q ?- a.
V ui H
Z wzZ
® 0 ca
? zQa
??0
-az
0?0?
U- w ?-
Z 0=u.
® >. LU
Z
z LL.
V0?
C-1 J,?
LA- LU
0
U
Z

c?
a?
z
e
e?
a
s
0
CL
E
m
V
0.
0
0
0
a
0
0
P
0
C
tV
;v
C
cc
R
tti
H

0
o?
0 c? a
CO
V) W Z
Q W
0 Z00
0z?
V ui N
z
w?0
_ O
zaa
0ad0
i z
0 ?09?
LA- LL- to I0ZnLL.
® ui 0
Z
uj U 0 :*
J ?
® ? Q
Q d
LL. LAJ
O
U
Z
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
co
0
p
•
•

•

- CL
1J
?g z O
s
?
+ w
?
?®® uj
Z
O
ce.
xe®aa Q
U w v
?::* Z
ix Z
O
°
O
Z
UJ C4
j CL
U
Z
LL.
w
LL. =
OH®
W
zz
U

LU o all
?
F--
J Q
?_ Q a
-
U- LLJ
u

z

Date July 17, 2008
Memorandum
To Project File
From Ed Edens, URS
Subject Summary of Written Public Comments Received at Corridor Public Meeting and
Design Study Review
Durant Road Nature Park
7 00 PM to 10 00 PM
Attendees Carl Dawson, City of Raleigh
Dean Fox, City of Raleigh
Lynn Raynor, City of Raleigh
Eric Lamb, City of Raleigh
Victor Lebsock, City of Raleigh
Tim Keener, URS
Ed Edens, URS
David Griffin, URS
Mike Lindgren, URS
John Sloan, URS
Susan Shelmgoski, URS
Brenda Crumpler, URS
Chris Werner, URS
Kim Leight, URS
Citizens See Attached List
Approximately 160 citizens attended the Corridor Public Meeting on July 17, 2008
The format of the meeting was an "open house" from 7 00 PM to approximately 7 40 PM where citizens had the
opportunity to review maps, schedules, design options, etc for the proposed project At 7 40 PM a presentation was
made by the City and their consultants which provided a detailed overview of the planning and design process for the
project At approximately 8 30 PM the floor was opened for a question and answer which lasted till approximately
1030 PM
A summary of the comments and concerns heard at the meeting are summarized below
Traffic Signals/Access Issues
A majority of the comments heard at the "open house" and the question/answer session related to the access control
options proposed for the project Many citizens living adjacent to the widening portion of the project were concerned
about how they would access their individual neighborhoods if a median with limited turn movements was installed
as part of the project Many questions related to traffic capacity and how models were developed and
correspondingly, how the traffic results were used to design the alternative options
The options that were discussed included the iterative approach for intersection treatments Many intersections along
the way began in the design phase as full movement intersections and resulted with a poor level of service, which
resulted with the next iteration being reducing the full movement intersection to either a right-in/right-out or a
superstreet design

Page 2 of 4
Citizens from several different neighborhoods along the widening portion asked for traffic signals at their respective
neighborhood entrances (Tabriz/Lake Villa, Dehijuston, Wide River Drive, etc) )
- Right-of-Way
- Local citizens living along the project corridor also expressed negative comments over the 6-lane build out cross
section and the 120-foot right-of-way proposed Specifically, concerns over losing yards, landscaping, driveways,
• development entrance signs, were heard
Project History
Staff received questions on the history of the project, such as when the need for the improvement was first put in
• writing Concerns were raised about why the corridor was not protected after the need for project was first identified
Noise
• Questions were asked about the noise abatement studies and if any noise walls or other noise abating measures were
- being considered
- General Support for the Protect
• Citizens who lived further north (new location portion and neighborhoods north of Neuse River) were generally
supportive of the project Many expressed their preference for Alternative 4 A comment heard from these citizens
was that they wanted the project built as soon as possible
Bridge
• Prefer to construct a 4-lane bridge, then widen when the additional 2 lanes are constructed (concern about the
• $3 million cost estimate for the structure)
• • Widen the shoulder - especially on the inside of the bridge opposite the sidewalk
- The comments received in writing at the meeting are summarized below
General support for the project-
0 The project is critical to traffic flow and the safety of our children
- ¦ Alternative 3 is okay
¦ We go for Alternative 4 which shows providing left turn access
¦ Buy 6-lane land and build 4-lanes initially, start construction now
• ¦ Go for Alternative 4 so that enough access points can be provided to this extensive residential neighborhood
¦ Proposal (Alternative) 4 appears the best It is clear we really need to expand the existing Falls of Neuse -
the project is long overdue We need to find ways to expedite the project
- ¦ A great plan - prefer Alternative 4 Overall I like the plan, though would prefer no large trucks on enlarged
- Falls of Neuse cutting through from Capital Boulevard to 540 Speed it up
¦ Concerned Citizens of Wakefield recognize the need for this project and fully endorse / support Alternative
4 We ask that you expedite construction of the bridge and widening of Falls of Neuse Road
- ¦ Prefer a signal at Falls of Neuse/New Falls of Neuse and synchronize signals
¦ Falls of Neuse Road is currently handling in excess of 20,000 vehicles per day Given growth projections for
NE Wake County, Franklmton, etc it makes sense to choose an option that keeps traffic moving as smoothly
- as possible on New Falls of Neuse/Falls of Neuse Expedited completion is a must
General opposition to the project:
. Opposed to the proposed project
- Opposed to the current 4-lane design expansion
¦ Opposed to medians and 120-foot right-of-way for the project

1??J
Page 3 of 4
¦ Opposed to widening to 6-lanes adding too much traffic on the road and the possibility of change in zoning
in some areas that will allow strip malls in the future
Specific comments/comments:
Traffic Signals/Access Issues
¦ Like to see a traffic signal installed at Lowry Farms Road and Wide River Drive
¦ All traffic will exit on Dunn Road from the development of Bedford, Oakcroft, Falls River and River Run
This will create a traffic dam on Dunn Road that will be worse than what is there currently
¦ Not Alternative 3- the neighborhoods located on the east side need left turn access to go south on Falls of
Neuse
¦ Left turn access must be allowed to some roads to help move traffic to those areas and decrease the amount
of traffic that would have to go only through intersections with stoplights and affect neighborhoods in those
restricted areas Therefore, Alternative 2 is the best
¦ Alternative 3 with many u-turns was opposed by many people at the meeting Please do not consider it a
viable alternative It would not work for individual drivers at any time and would be a mayor concern for
quick travel for emergency vehicles
¦ Right only out of neighborhoods to fight and get over 3 lanes to u-turn will not work Your engineers should
look at Route 17 in New Jersey to see how proper turn lanes that promote traffic flow are constructed
¦ Falls of Neuse should be no more than 4-lanes wide That width works fine all the way to Millbrook Road
We do not need to fix the Capital Boulevard traffic problem by routing more traffic onto Falls
¦ Road should not be 6 lanes, creating a "super road"
¦ This road travels through residential neighborhoods To make 6-lanes and a median will put the road right on
top of people's houses How will anyone in the neighborhoods be able to effectively enter and exit Falls of
Neuse Road?
¦ This is a bad plan - what happened to the 4-lane plan that was proposed9
¦ We are concerned that the intersection of Lake Villa Way and Falls of Neuse remain open to left turns for
cars coming north from Raleigh as well as cars leaving Lake Villa Way turning north (left)
¦ Is there no way to safely cross 3-lanes of traffic to make a right tum9
¦ What about closing High Holly Lane because it is so close to Dunn Road Make the new entrance at Paddy
Hollow which connects to Dunn Road, perfect for traffic flow out of Woodbridge development
¦ Rather than plan for dual left-overs at the intersection of Falls of Neuse/New Falls of Neuse, why not dust
peel off traffic going north on Old Falls of Neuse at Fonville Road by the fire station Continuing north on
Old Falls of Neuse will become very inconvenient
¦ Why was the decision made to not continue the road as it has been built and widened over the years? That is
with a center turn lane Then in a new area as it cuts through from the station make all the medians, etc the
designers and budget can afford
Speed Limit
¦ If this is a done deal, please look at lowering the speed limit at least during services at the church
¦ If safety is such a huge concern, which prompted the medians, then the speed limit should be even more
important
¦ Speed limit should be 35 mph through residential sections
Truck Traffic
¦ There should be local truck traffic only
¦ I think the truck traffic on Falls increasing from current usage is legitimate Why can't you post it as limited
to a certain tonnage or no truck usage9 It will be forever before Capital Boulevard is a "freeway" between 98
and 540 - there will be obvious advantages for 18-wheel truckers to exit Capital at New Falls down to 540

Page 4 of 4
Neighborhood Facilities/Services
¦ It seems as if there has been no consideration regarding taking all the front driveway of Mount Pleasant
Baptist Church What can we do as a church to out on the street safely? We have senior citizens and young
people - what can the City do to help us9
¦ My fire department is the Falls FD - forcing them to go down Wide River Drive to get to Old Falls of Neuse
will increase my response time (to Wakefield)
. Noise
- ¦ A berm and landscaping as a noise buffer should be installed on both sides of Falls of Neuse Noise is
already unbearable The City is already running our neighborhoods with the added noise
¦ Can noise reduction walls still be evaluated for Autumn Hill?
• ¦ My concern relates to the noise abatement measures along the east side of the corridor, particularly around
the Tabriz intersection I hope the project considers permanent structures (walls, etc ) to help minimize
additional noise pollution generated with the completion of the corridor The additional traffic and the closer
- proximity to residential structures warrant substantial consideration to noise abatement procedures
¦ Noise could be a big problem, anything being thought of or planned for homeowners close to Falls of Neuse
(walls, etc)? This might save property values at Woodbridge development
• Drainage/Hydrology
¦ There has been a drainage problem in the past along the wall that runs beside Daltons Ridge development A
ditch has been added - the current proposal does not have the same problem
- ¦ Our dramfield (which is our second dramfield) backs up to Falls How the widening impact my dramfield? If
I get city sewer - who pays? I don't think it is fair to make me pay for city sewer if the City alters my
dramfield
Miscellaneous
¦ Please keep me updated on the project
¦ Please consider new development at Dunn Road and Falls of Neuse Road Current proposal includes medical
office (high traffic) and day care (rush hour in/out)
¦ Has the entrance to future business section at intersection of Dunn and Falls of Neuse been determined? A
proper entrance can avoid any potential local bottlenecks
¦ I live there (Rocky Toad Road) and we got no response - answer these questions How many driveways
access alls between Raven Ridge and the fire station? How many will be able to turn left? The old simple
way would allow them all and probably cost less Who made the decision that the new way, no one who has
a driveway can turn left?
¦ I am interested in a more detailed discussion about the proposed right of way acquisition in the backside of
the Falls Pointe development and would welcome an on site meeting with engineers or project management
¦ Is there a website where the detail drawings (in color) reside? If not, please add the detail drawings to a
websrte
¦ I feel so sorry for the people who have owned property for along time along Falls - it was a 2-lane country
road posted at 55 mph when I moved here dust 9 years ago You are disturbing these people's lives - Beford
at Falls River, Falls Pointe, Daltons Ridge, River Run etc - these should never have been allowed to be built
in the first place
¦ Falls of Neuse is a pretty corridor and we don't want it to turn into Capital Blvd
¦ If we are in the county, not "city" do we pay assessments? When is the hearing to determine the
assessments?
¦ If the City has known about this road since 1960, they are definitely in collusion with the builders to allow
upscale residential homes to be built in the middle of a super road
q?
?J

P?
Ao
r
V
Z o
?ypJp Z Z
z
=io
LIJ 0 Z Ix
to ac < a-
< ?- d
ULN
wZo
Z
?-gui
0
0 ® LL.u?
LA-
®G O n
?. L O
® U z O CW
C
H
J ?
Q CL
6s. W
in
u
Z
sr
O? t..r>C`aC,I
r
0
'n
V
z0
Z Z
?U
Z tL
® z n
-Sao
uj O Z oc
ui ce Q °-
< -- a-
u W N
Z
ce Z0
CIO z
`gy
CL ='p
C9 °C
ce
0
agazce
® LL. W F'
O?nU-
,?. LU
0z
u :E
J ?
CL
W W
0
U
Z
y
0
F
F-
0

O
P?
V ?
z
uj z
LU
z -n
0z?
??CL.
ULUV)
ix Z Z
0 00
-,?
Z J
'r uj
6 I= 0
zu- CL
N
?0<
AC IX
tt
>-=4
F® UA pa.
U W w
®?
? Q
LL. w
z
o?
Ll

•?
?i
a„
?+tY, 1? c
ki

J

5

r
v01 a--%
J

r . ?, _ u
?.n L
?V
*y
n
"

- r-t

• i ,f
f
' ? f ly
?? ?v{}
"`. ,.
1 ui
u
j y J is
T ?
q
!moo
?
?
`?/
?y
? •
1.
Jv

tea.
?0?e
V
a
z
z o
z
.? z?
pziw
W ixQCL
F- q-
UZP
ui v)
:E z
ac z0
z??
U'
0 J<
o Zt
W
o v? ?ca°'
H LJ! Fv-
®v z U.
0
JQ
U- ?
c?
z

_
y

-19
V

V V

am' 4D ??

P2

T.s itt14_
Y- b ?..• ?.? -15 ?1
T
d r c?

a

0 ---`
ti v

t,T., ,, t .1, (gyp co ? O

>

F` ry CL V

LU
®
?:
-

2
CL
0
0
00
0
0
N
ti
T
lC
s
H
0
w
z0
zz
U
?
??
0
LU Oz0
LLjj cc s-
a f- a.
U W H
UagZ0
z??
?LU
O
040<
® O H LL.
=O
u,
®? z ??
0
N a"
Q ?
U. W
0
U
z
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
r r?1 5-
i
Z ?
Z O
w Z
®Z??
LU®Zlu
CL
tg F-- d
Z ~
LL O N
* Z
?ZO
-JZOop
CL L&J
0
V)
?0Z
® LLu
O N U-
L
Z
U- Lu
O?
J B
Q ?
U. w
a
u
A
?S

t

®
v k ?

17 t. ;

N

?
a ;n?
y Vl1j /^?
tom'', ?
V

F

}.

.. `i _ I?u

IN-

4CV
l1w
i \
•

O0%
Z
20
W
Z
¦?? 0 z
Lu w <
Q I.- CL
U LAJ W)s
*Z
?zo
-JO 0F
zJa
a?
gLu
0
1 ? N
0 Qoz
02 6L F
W
0NO
' LLU
Z
ULL.Uj
o?
?cc
a CL
U- uj
z

o
?
C v
fi

V
V
?

4 N,
J v S
>

;e
1j
ti? x c 1

V) a
Uk

}
r? i zit

Z z
uj
0 a ?_
- u
z LLJ
KE
_j 0
OZW
ce < 9L.
< t- a-
U Z P:
ui W)
z
Z 0
0 0
Z =i
UJ
ad 0
ca CL
ce _j (e)
0 4 0 z
a::
0
LU
0 Z z
U. LLJ
U 0
t^
< a-
LL_ LU
M
u
z

41

O§Til
GO

-4-
CS

c-

Oo

LU CL:
LU

QJ
ae

0
t9 ?
Z
zz
®V
z??
?
U,i 0z0
?a
U.J
U W H
? z
C, I= z0
®a Q
CIO ?epzJ?
CL 0=0
0Q
Ix w
W
® O v u-
W O
® zz
?LL. LLj
o?
C'n?
?a
U- W
z
.,.y'..s.
O 2-
.?
?

ti
?1

to

y . A?.. F "tea

4 l Yom-
L. F N ? ? ?y

LLI
y

uj

+a
k
I

Q
o=
Zo
zz
W
Z -n
688 0Z0
Lu a: Q
a E-. A.
Uui(A
u =:E z
_ Ix z0
z??
a-
CL =Lu0
O
uj V)
® aoa
iWad
® W
W
0 Zn U-
0
z
vU- uj
0
as
U. W
a
u
z
V

may,
0
ZO
Z Z
®
Z U
z3: I
? O Z ce
Q °-
W ix
Qa--IL
UZr
W N
Z
wZO
ZOa
?-?w0
0 Qoz
?
w <
® W W I9 OHO
?
n w
®?,L Z I . Uj
0
J?
Q CL
U- W
0
U
Z
0
o,
O?
z CO
2z
o?
Z z?-1
LU oz?
Lu cc Q ?
Q F-- a
V W N
?zo
z?a
?adO
-jqy
® LL- LU
O H u-
?uj O
Z
® V 1L. uj
0
V)
i2d
as
W w
0
U?y
z
6
'v
?
® C

O
v

v
-J d

? v

?
o N

Z
C9
v
CL
LU d"7
Z
H
W fj

4
\-SJ ? ti
a
0
0
I
co
0
0
N
n
T
3
t
H
R
r
Q
n
V
Z 0
Z Z
Q H
Z -11
=a 0
uj 0 z Ax
Lu Q a
I-- a.
V W N
z0
?a:: X* z
0 Op
CL =ce 0
0
du h
0 09 a
LL. 9 O n
C LL.
DLO
®U z OW
44
Zj
Q CL
y- W
0
v
z
CITY OF RALEIGH
WIDENING AND
REALIGNMENT OF
FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD
Newsletter Date July 2007
PROJECT
CONTACTS
CITY OF RALEIGH
Sylvester Percival, El
Project Engineer
Public Works Department
City of Raleigh
222 West Hargett Street
Room 602
Raleigh, NC 27602
919-890-3892 telephone
919-890-3832 fax
SYLVESTER PERCIVAL@
CI RALEIGH NC US
URS CORPORATION
Ed Edens, PE
Project Manager
1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560
919-461-1323 telephone
919-461-1415 fax
ED_EDENS@
URSCORP COM
Volume 1, Issue i
PLANNING AND DESIGN STUDIES
FOR FALLS OF NEUSE PROJECT
The City of Raleigh is pleased to announce the initia-
tion of planning and design studies for the proposed
Widening and Realignment of Falls of Neuse Road in
Raleigh The proposed project begins at Ravens Ridge
Road, extends northward along existing Falls of Neuse
Road, splits off to the northeast on new location at
Fonville Road, extends over the Neuse River with a
new crossing and ends at New Falls of Neuse Road in
Wakefield
URS Corporation has been selected as the planning
and design consultant who will be responsible for
completing human, natural and physical environment
studies and assessments URS and their contractors
will also complete technical analysis associated with
air, noise, traffic and safety, as well as, design studies
on improving the existing roadway and creating a new
crossing over Falls of Neuse River
The results of these assessments will be shared with
the public over the course of the study with the first
opportunity for comments and questions occurring at a
Citizen's Workshop scheduled for July 26th See re-
verse side of this newsletter for more information
SCHEDULE
Project Studies Begin
Citizen's Workshop No 1
Draft Environmental Document
Citizen Workshop No 2
Final Environmental Document
Right of Way Acquisition
Construction (New Location)
Construction (Widening)
May 2007
July 26, 2007
Fall 2007
Late Fall 2007
Spring 2008
Beginning Fall 2008
Beginning Spring 2009
Beginning 2011
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
UPCOMING CITIZEN'S WORKSHOP!
A Citizen's Workshop has been scheduled for July 26th, 2007, please see details below
Staff will present the study corridor, preliminary findings from environmental Investigations, and
design options for the proposed roadway and structure over the Neuse River The format will be
an "open house" with visual displays and project team staff available anytime during the 3-hour
period to answer questions and collect citizen comments and concerns
No formal presentation will be made at the workshop
WHO? All Interested Citizens
WHAT? Citizen's Workshop
WHERE? Durant Road Middle School, 10401 Durant Road, Raleigh, NC 27614
WHEN? July 26th, 2007 from 5 00 PM until 8 00 PM
WHY? Ask Questions and Leave Comments Concerning the Proposed Project
Anyone requiring special consideration to attend the workshop due to hearing or sight
impairment or lack of transportation should contact Kim Leight at 919-461-1515 or
KIM_LEIGHT@URSCORP COM prior to July 23, 2007
A KID'S CORNER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR CHILDREN'S ENTERTAINMENT
URS CORPORATION
1600 Perimeter Park Drive, Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560
Attn Ms Kim Leight
CITY OF RALEIGH
FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD
REALIGNMENT AND WIDENING
Newsletter Date January 2008
PROJECT
CONTACTS
CITY OF RALEIGH
Sylvester Percival, El
Project Engineer
Public Works Department
City of Raleigh
222 West Hargett Street
Room 400
Raleigh, NC 27602
919-890-3892 telephone
919-890-3832 fax
SYLVESTER PERCIVAL@
CI RALEIGH NC US
URS CORPORATION
Ed Edens, PE
Project Manager
1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560
919-461-1323 telephone
919-461-1415 fax
ED_EDENS@
URSCORP COM
Volume 1, Issue 2
ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT FOR
FALLS OF NEUSE PROJECT
The City of Raleigh would like to update interested citizens on the planning
and design studies for the proposed Realignment and Widening of Falls of
Neuse Road The proposed project begins at Ravens Ridge Road, extends
northward along existing Falls of Neuse Road, and splits off to the northeast
on new location at Fonville Road The new alignment extends over the
Neuse River with a new structure crossing and ends at New Falls of Neuse
Road in Wakefield
Since Workshop No 1 was held in July 2007, city consultants have
completed environmental, technical and engineering analyses to improve
the existing roadway and create a new crossing of the Neuse River
Alternative scenarios for the roadway segment, as well as the new bridge,
were developed using technical study results, input
received from local officials and the Department of
Transportation, and comments received from citizens
A 2nd Citizens Workshop is scheduled for January 29th,
2008 Citizens will have the opportunity to view and com-
ment on the preliminary designs See reverse side of this
newsletter for more information on the second
workshop We hope to see you there'
Project Studies Begin May 2007
Citizen's Workshop No 1 July 26, 2007
Citizen's Workshop No 2 January 29, 2008
Environmental Document Spring 2008
Corridor Public Meeting (25% Design) Early Summer 2008
Design Public Meeting (65% Design) Late Summer 2008
Council Public Hearing Early Fall 2008
Right of Way Acquisition Beginning Fall 2008
Construction (New Location) Beginning Spring 2009
Construction (Widening) Beginning 2011
SCHEDULE
'i i - +�' ? ,�'h'' ! _ K{•:. e., o S'� •+ + ' ',�`, � '' ^ Ate..'
.r !�
I ' 'YiF - .�f •Ft tir `. .., •- �... , ��: t. _ Vii{
A; "c s 9r r . r • '� i'+.;+4 . .l ) �i ati . _ ► ..j �i'„K-, -'7�i..
8� 8z as � �� � y� Y � gy 8z 'n' "- p �� t •b 8A r , �� � »� -
a t- �, "Si n i•» t '�i-" 9 9 r > `-,�e.��. i C- � > J y �ti•�i ?..f 3'S�9�.r �
Ur
AW
10 10
ip
L21 e
k CIO
z vi
,.
46--
ir Er
ZL
go
�
no n nM IM
d :.
= e
o3i
/� -. • _' 1 is ?N � �� 4 ,�3 rt rJ � ��•, +"a�t,�;1P
ID
,,� "` �=' �. -�,;•
a • a 0,
ff 00
CL CL
WI�_ @I�i w]r .3�.,,A $ � '� fie' - �' • o �_ 7 � y �c'c
�►�,' s� �3 yam' i•, K ; �' ter;
Q3 a:3
(13 al
•Y - •r •iqw
74
}�*.4:
^.:. ���_ r _. � mitt• 4.
777
ti
"�'. .x� � 'moi "� 7 r —� ►+ ' - r � i� ,qsa•"' . 'F� a}3 -
.a..
t . `�� +w • i - 'r ` i s:¢Sr'Y 2�• :: � ti y ":n�.+'�_ `+ i�c`,'+�(t' ,_� �. -
r •, ► co
j d► w �' - r b
t i
35 P
City of Raleigh LEGEND
North Carolina
5
SCENARIO 1
SCENARIO 2
SCENARIO 3
TIP No. U-4901
Falls of Neuse Road Widening Potential
Realignment Project from Raven Ridge Road cul-de-sac NOT TO SCALE
to New Falls of Neuse Road locations
January 2008 Project Design Options

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
UPCOMING CITIZEN'S WORKSHOP!
A Citizen's Workshop has been scheduled for January 29, 2008, please see details below
Staff will present preliminary alternatives for the proposed roadway and bridge structure over
the Neuse River The format will be an "open house" with visual displays and project team staff
available anytime duringthe 2-hour period to answer questions and collect citizen comments
and concerns
No formal presentation will be made at the workshop
WHO? All Interested Citizens
WHAT? Citizen's Workshop
WHERE? Campbell Lodge, Durant Nature Park, 8305 Camp Durant Road,
WHEN? January 29th, 2008 from 5:00 PM until 7.00 PM
WHY? Ask Questions and Leave Comments Concerning the Proposed Project
Anyone requiring special consideration to attend the workshop due to hearing or sight
impairment or lack of transportation should contact Kim Leight at 919-461-1515 or
KIM_LEIGHT@URSCORP COM prior to January 22. 2008
A KID'S CORNER WILL BE PROVIDED FOR CHILDREN'S ENTERTAINMENT
URS CORPORATION
1600 Perimeter Park Drive, Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560
Attn Ms Kim Leight
i
1
JC 1_T_Y O F R_A-L-E-1_G H I C
FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD
REALIGNMENT AND WIDENING
PROJECT
Newsletter Date April 2008
Volume 1, Issue 3
CONTACTS
CITY OF RALEIGH
Sylvester Percival, El
Project Engineer
Public Works Department
City of Raleigh
222 West Hargett Street
Room 400
Raleigh, NC 27602
919-890-3892 telephone
919-890-3832 fax
SYLVESTER PERCIVAL@
CI RALEIGH NC US
URS CORPORATION
Ed Edens, PE
Project Manager
1600 Perimeter Park Drive
Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560
919-461-1323 telephone
919-461-1415 fax
ED_EDENS@
URSCORP COM
PROJECT TECHNICAL AND DESIGN
STUDIES CONTINUE ...
The City of Raleigh and their consultant, URS Corporation, are continuing
to study the human, physical and natural environments in the project study
area to ensure a balanced solution is reached for the planned
improvement project
Input from local citizens has been received via two (2) Citizens
Informational Workshops held on June 28, 2007 and January 29, 2008,
telephone calls, mail and a-mails received directly by the project team, and
several small group meetings held on request over the past 12 months
Soon, the City of Raleigh will select an alternative for the Falls of Neuse
Road Realignment and Widening Consideration to results gathered from
technical studies, input received from citizens and resource agencies such
as the US Army Corps of Engineers and the NC Division of Water Quality,
and through guidance received from transportation agencies such as the
Federal Highway Administration and the NC Department of Transportation
will direct the final decision
A Corridor Public Meeting will be held in June 2008 where citizens will have
the opportunity to view and comment on the selected alignment
Your participation is and continues to be an important part of the process'
SCHEDULE
Project Studies Begin May 2007
Citizen's Workshop No 1 July 26, 2007
Citizen's Workshop No 2
Environmental Document
Corridor Public Meeting (25% Design)
Design Public Meeting (65% Design)
Council Public Hearing
Right of Way Acquisition
Construction (New Location)
January 29, 2008
Spring 2008
June 2008
Late Summer 2008
Fall 2008
Beginning Fall 2008
Beginning Spring 2009
Z
O
Q
W
vI
Z
O
U
W
G
Z
D
W
Q
Z
W
J
Q
Z
W
2
Z
J
Q
cN - O N -a W-o N
Q
0
Q
O
Q) m N N C C Q) U
NO N N C
0- 0 70
N 2 co Z O +' ? a) tza aci
Q) CL ?l Q)
0 0 N E .N Q
m 0 > O + 0
C N LL .i 0 +' Q) 4)
Q 0 O O N E N E S >
m ;' p O w -oOE E W
0 >1
> U O C N
N i C E
c m L Q)
a) CL
to E c 0 *1 =3 C: Q)
O 0.0 C C::tf m o co
CIE MC)W 3:oTj?:
s _
Co ° N •? - c° -0 C: w-C
>
E c :3 0-0 N N *'
.
C _0 > m `J U m -0c
C C: 0
t)pc ??
+1 0 N O m O O C. z
Fz
m (n - 0 O C Q)
O C > -C-0 i _T U
w CO ? s -0 M ) °
U m O C ?, m (A
06 N NJ (D -0 Q) m
r LL
0 E 4- CO 'c o ° 3
N> C O w E Lz O O Q)
O ?? C a) Ez
Z3 = (D C: 0
=3 E=3 30 >
m? a) c E N Z o n N
w
E ° o °
a O - O c N E 0 0
a)? ?cr _0 Q) mE
0 LL i c i LL. > 0
N
Z CO U 0 +a) X>
E m E cO m o N
C) co a) to o -0 Q)
°E
ttz Ez
> 'O 0 'c - N O s
Co -0 N O- L v- O .? ° O
C _0 0 m-0 0 _Q N 0 O
O to: .N m 0 i () Q) L'
O i -0 4-' Q-0> U U
E U Co += O-0 -0 O - c O
o E 3 3 a) E 3 c°
E N N 3 (n O m
7 Q) (n -0 C a) >
- m
-
Q w a) o w Q) N Q c c
_O tl0 .> ' N -5 .C U U O
-p 0 +?' - 0 (?0 m O Q)
c 3 a; O N= 3
Q) o m -0 Z c a) c
(n 0 C:
m w° m o m
U U C LLu U i• Q "_O taA
m m Q) =3 o .
m mw t? i'0
` O C
o m .? m o m o 3
N ° 0 "O 1 a)
Q) '? Q) a) c 0 c6 0 r-
U° Q) Q
> Q) 0 f
U O o
U a- t
c >? Q? o? *' we o
_ = tw -o m
m Q C -0 •? O Q)
E O Q O -o m m E Q) 6 Q) cl
o
0 C
`. E > o
Q) m (n CL *4;
O ° >
4 CO Q) m
m Q) O m C C
0> .0 > m m N +' 0 Q) p
E 0 m U
m L Q) m w~ N> to 1 CO
` O i C .? _6 N 0 c0 Q) Q)
+?+ o a) 0 UCD 0 C 7
U)!.E Q 4- Ir L 'N E o U
Q) N i N
° O
EY ?3
0?.° O
C N
Q) O Q)
U m
O 0 C
C 0 + 0
i
N ( U
Q)
L U
O C
3 Q m O - O E
o
Qj
c ° O
O
m E
+?' m W
N 0 - + U
"O ? 3 U
N c >
O O
.N Z N 4--
to C:
w > O
0 0 '
(n m N
N 7 N C
CO N c0 m
U U- Q) a-'
E a?i 3 c
O 0
O O
C:
'
E a) 0
o ? o a
U N p m
? CJ ? O Q)
m a) ?'
> Z N
ao 0 o 3
a
.O _0 N ? c-I
O N O N O
N o
`
U >
a) -0 0 U Q
N Q) E
p >O 4- >
3 ? •? L
c-I ? E C
} to - E Ln
> 3
0 Q) N O O
+1 +-
to E
O O O O U
M O -0
•) =
m
> O w ~
m d a) U
N O
N o
} •? M
0 O
a) O N O
U CO
N ? •C ts0 v
Q > •>
N 3 o
N _0 > C, N
m-r TO
rl O 0 -0 Q
C 0 + N
O 0
O 0
Q Ec?? O
F ?

t
?.

i
tM ?. ,{
C

C' 6.wl
't rt

F r?p L,?
'

-
r?'a
(14
pr
! t t j
t ?
i r {

! t r
F
fl P,
x ?

<ZQp ; f r (Y t-
wOWa
`n
w c
F w
'
'^
u?C?e
O ?3
•?
:•
?-
' ..
W Q J W t? 7;• ,
W
WQ< QO
>:E O0
x

.
F Z?Zy'.,
OQ , '. A?
r. :.
.
?(
NZ,
a=)
<?; <o? ?
t
,
_ a
-
5?
0
ZwYQ3 10T
o°gz

Q \ 3
,
Q
z No
?LLQ
LLQ
J
a

r ?.

H
W
r.
E°m-0E0
00-?>M0
i w
+' p C
? i UOQ (6 ? - O
- 0 0
D Q 4- (n
C U)
to C: 'n -0
N C m 0 0 U
Q) +- U U +?0 C)
T Co c O a)
T
-,r- C cn i
o w o 0 >
U 0 O
}; = Q) E +J J
Q o- .- c a c
(n (D
7 O W> Q) O
Z o Q+O
CU 0
O o c U> Q N
Q N Q) C
co m L a
N IL to + U)
> N
Q C -0 cn Q w
Q co - O co O
Q 430 L
(n o U U)
a)
a U O
C
C 0
Q (6 -O
N 0
M o Q o 0 ca
man-C:
0Q)
c ao
w
o a) c ? ca
+, •? }, O
Q) c c .
E p C Q co cn
Q) t m
> (o O CO
O C Q) C: O C ,0
Q N O «_
a) En U
c m
O > co
a) Q ? _ co
U , OO O (o
-a 3: c to
(o (1) O O Fn
0 U) (1")
> 4- co
0 C
?? txp>?
} 0 - O
N O ( n 7 C C 0 a
cn Q i to co
(1) U Q C
:E C >o co o co
N -C Q E 3.
N L E O a,
C C U
to (n o co 0
> Q- Q a a
co c
CL O C p (6
:D a) co
CO 0 c(n a0i W M
4-.I 4- Q) C (n Z3
Q 0 co co - 0 c
i ce' En >,4- z 0
_co }' c }
O c +J p cn
M a) co c Z N .C
++ E Q) (o _
a) a) a) co a)
a a) co a a
>?_ 0 o'n 0
a
m_?w±2 >-0 a)
-Fo ` a) a) U O -
+-(+ tz C En Q O O
Q .? I co ? .? ( Q
Q •? 0 o USA
o c: -o a)
O - U) a) _
Q) co ? 73 co
o - E o
a X03 `o
w
-r- CO E 20
cc a) 0 ?T
3 + N to
U
o O (D
> a aj U o o co
co +--4] >
co p c i
i O } L-
a) co O i' O co _0 m m N a) o a
c m
ns o ? co c Q)
Q)
u tC >
N N O T UN C Cl)
0
=> co
Z N C Q? L
Q a) w co co
O O O .? U
L .p J o (o
i o E a'n O N= 0
O Q o M C OQ 6 D
00 M W C
Q) ? = -0 ±' c (D
N 7 N C O -p Q a) d
U 3 a c E 0 0 m c.
WA (=00 p= ? ? O
U - (o 4 -
3 +a OM E O D U
O 0 N p tip co O
o O > w
t? U)
a co a) '? 0 N
> co o c
(D 4- O?Y >
U Z 0 0 ?> p .N E
Yoa) 00a)om
U fn (n +, a) a) co
co -?- c m a)
-0 Li a) }, O >
O U Q0 co O 4--
Q) O to to O
CO C i 0 UO 0 a co
U (o > C > co
a) a p to
U Q_ .- co
t p Q c o C i) C>
O cn a) co >
4 -0
O 0 N> m o 0 3
E
o>? O
= N 2 c c
> - ca p co 0 0
o
0 C .c o U O N
aLM?a;.;0oa)
co o Q) Q) Q U Q o
co
Q)
U a Q) > 0 0 Q) a w
N U a U .0 , M- i
m co co O> hm0 3 0
cn cn ? --
a) c
a ~ co 0 -0 > ? cB
-0 co
N n c
-0 toZ N Q
co a 0 C o C o o
CY5
c > 3 U
a)
N N co LL M C/)
a) +? cn c 4-
'++ ? C (o O Q) ? "? 'd ?
c Z E 0 O c
a) O +' ? > U co Q)
Q C LO E a N 4- W
aD > 0? 0 0 0 0w
U U? a O? N? i
O m~ Q0 M c F
co U) v- a) O
M 0 J ? o< 0
a)
Q
i
F-
c
O
Q)
cn
0
U
Q)
C
7
C
U
N
f6
cn
UA
O
U)
Q)
Q
O
3
a)
L
0
Q)
nA
C
co
N
a)
Q
C
O
U
Q)
p
Q)
F--
N
(o
O
E
E
O
U
U
co
U)
a)
Q
0
m
L
7
0
a)
i
O
a)
c
C
O
Q
co
3
C
Q)
Q)
UA
t1Q
m
O
U
a)
Q)
O
O
Z
a)
0
Q)

YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED... Several questions or concerns were raised consistently
by citizens since the study on the proposed project began in May 2007 The City of Raleigh would like to provide a
response to all citizens on these important concerns as discussed below
More full movement intersections needed - Locations for the use of full movement intersections have been
studied in order to provide direct access to/from Falls of Neuse Road Full access intersections shown in
Alternatives 1 and 2 have been located based on NCDOT design standards, with priority being given to locations
that will provide access for the highest volume of users
Right turn only at Dunn Road will not work - The left turn movement from Dunn Road was eliminated for
Alternative 3, which required traffic from Dunn Road wishing to travel southbound on Falls of Neuse Road to turn
right and utilize a U-turn north of the intersection Traffic signals would be located at Dunn Road and at the u-turn
north of Dunn Road The intersection treatment was utilized for this alternative because it allows for the
movements of a traditional full movement intersection to be redistributed to two signal controlled intersections,
which can reduce the amount of time spent being stopped at a red light when compared to a full movement
intersection with a signal
U-turns and left-over crossings will not work - U-turns and median left-over crossings, when carefully planned,
have been shown to operate successfully in numerous roadways across North Carolina While somewhat initially
unfamiliar to current daily users, this type of access reduces conflict points and the potential for accidents
between through traffic and turning vehicles to and from the main roadway Once daily commuters adjust to this
traffic pattern, roadway facilities with this type of access operate safer and more efficiently
Median access should not be limited - Medians were included in the master planning of the corridor for this
project due to concerns for safety Available NCDOT Accident Data for Urban Secondary Routes in North Carolina
from 2003 to 2005 shows a 32 9% reduction in crashes on multilane roadways with median separation as
compared to similar facilities with center turn lanes Likewise, fatalities were reduced approximately 53 3% on
the same roadways Placing limitations on the number and spacing of median access locations eliminates
potential conflict points between through traffic and side street turning traffic, thus making the facility safer
URS CORPORATION
1600 Perimeter Park Drive, Suite 400
Morrisville, NC 27560
Attn Ms Kim Leight
Appendix D
Relocation Reports
0
EIS RELOCATION REPORT II
a North Carolina Department of Transportation
- RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
®E I S ? CORRIDOR ? DESIGN
WBS COUNTY WAKE Alternate 1 of If Alternate
I D NO U-4901 F A PROJECT
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
- ;--a = :?t? Falls of Neuse Widening from Raven Ridge Road to New Falls of Neuse
-- - -- --
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
- Type-Of -- --- - --- -
`
Dlsplacees Owners Tenants Total Minorities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP
Residential 4 0 4 0 0 1 2 0 1
Businesses VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLING AVAILABLE
Farms-- - - - - -Owners -Tenants --For S ale - -For R ent-
Non-Profit 0-20m -0 so-ISO 0 0-20m 0 so-150 0
ANSWER ALL QUEST IONS 20-40m 0 150-250 0 20-40m 0 150-250 0
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers 40-70m 0 250-400 0 40-70m 0 250-400
X 1 Will special relocation services be necessary) 70-100m 1 400-600 0 70-100m 22 400-600 6
2 Will schools or churches be affected by 100 up 3 600 UP 0 100 UP 60 600 UP 17
AO L X displacement? TOTAL 82 23
- - - - --- 3 -Will business services still be available - ---- - -- --REMARK S (Resp ond b N umber -------- -
X after project? 6 Local newspapers, rental agencies, real estate agencies
4 Will any business be displaced? If so, 8 Last resort housing will be administered in accordance
with State & Federal guidelines.

x indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc 11. Public Housing is available
12 Given the current housing market comparable housing should
be available during the relocation period
X 5 Will relocation cause a housing shortage?
_ _
X 6 Source for available housing (list)
X 7 Will additional housing programs be
needed?
X 8 Should Last Resort Housing be
considered?
9 Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc
X` families?

X -X _ 10 _ Will public housing be needed for project?
11 Is public housing available?
12 Is ?t felt there will be adequate DSS housing
X housing available during relocation penod9
- - - 13-Will there be a problem of housing within--- - -- - -- - - - -- - - - --
X _ financial means?
N/A 14 Are suitable business sites available (list

-
`-" -` source)
15-Number month`s estimated to complete
RELOCA710N? 12 Months
wa.6
i

5/27/08 Pfd .s
w4 1171 / ?
5/27/08

Ri ht of Wa A ent

??,?;? _ -Approved by Date_
_

EIS RELOCATION REPORT
®E I S ? CORRIDOR ? DESIGN
North Carolina Department of Transportation
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
WBS COUNTY WAKE Alternate of y- Alternate
I D NO U-4901 F A PROJECT
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Falls of Neuse Widening from Raven Ridge Road to New Falls of Neuse

ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacees -
Owners -
Tenants -
Total --
Minorities
0-15M - -- -
15-25M -
25-35M - - - -
35-50M - -
50 UP
Residential 4 0 4 0 0 1 2 0 1
Businesses VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLIN G AVAILABLE
Farms Owners Tenants For S ale For R ent
Non-Profit 0-20M 0 $ 0-15o 0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 0
ANSWE R ALL QUEST IONS 20-40M 0 150-250 0 20-40M 0 150-250 0
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers _ 40-70M 0 250-400 0 _ 40-70M 0 250-400 __ _p
X 1 Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100M 1 400-600 0 70-100M 22 400-600 6
2 Will schools or churches be affected by 100 up 3 600 up 0 1100 up 60 600 up 17
X displacement? TOTAL 82 23
3 Will business services still be available REMARKS (Respond b Number
X after project) 6 Local newspapers, rental agencies, real estate agencies
4 Will any business be displaced? If so, 8. Last resort housing will be administered in accordance
with State & Federal guidelines

X indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minonties, etc 11 Public Housing is available
12 Given the current housing market comparable housing should
be available during the relocation period
X 5 Will relocation cause a housing shortage?
X 6 Source for available housing (list)
X 7 Will additional housing programs be
needed?
X 8 Should Last Resort Housing be
considered?
9 Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc
X families?
X 10 Will public housing be needed for project?
X 11 Is public housing available?
12 Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing
X housing available during relocation period?
- 13 Will there be a problem of housing within
X financial means?
NIA 14 Are suitable business sites available (list
source)
15 Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION? 12 Months t

5127/08 e 3
Paz"
r
/
' 5/27/08
Date
Right of Way Agent

? pproved by Date

-

?? EIS RELOCATION REPORT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
®E I S ? CORRIDOR ? DESIGN
WBS COUNTY WAKE Alternate of Alternate
I D NO U-4901 F A PROJECT
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Fails of Neuse Widening from Raven Ridge Road to New Falls of Neuse
N(
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
- - TYPe of -- --- -- -
Dlsplacees Owners Tenants Total Minorities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP
Residential 4 0 4 0 0 1 2 0 1
Businesses VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLING AVAILABLE
-Farms - - ------ ----- -- Owners-- -Tenants -For-S ale -Foy R nti
Non-Profit 0-20m 0 $0-150 0 0-20m 0 so-ISO 0
ANSWE R ALL QUESTIONS 20.40m 0 150-250 0 20-40m 0 150-250 0
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers 40-70m 0 250.400 0 40-70m 0 250-400 0_
X 1 Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100m 1 400-600 0 70-100m 22 400-600 6
2 Will schools or churches be affected by 100 up 3 600 up 0 100 ur tip 11 600 up 17
X displacement? TOTAL ,'.s•a ,s :` 82 23
_3 _ -Will business services still be available-- REMARK S (Res and bN umber -)---?---- L---------
i after project? 6 Local newspapers, rental agencies, real estate agencies
m 4 Will any business be displaced? If so, 8 Last resort housing will be administered in accordance
with State & Federal guidelines.
x Indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc 11. Public Housing is available
12 Given the current housing market comparable housing should
be available during the relocation period

X X 5 Will relocation cause a_ housing shortage?
6 Source for available housing (list) `
-
X 7 Will additional housing programs be
needed?
X 8 - Should Last Resort Housing be
considered?
9 Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc
families?
X_
- 10 Will public housing be needed for project?_
X 11 Is public housing available?
12 Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing
X housing available during relocation period?
--- - -- 13-- Will there be a problem of housing within
--
- - - -- -
- -
Xsi financial means?
N/A 14 Are suitable business sites available (list

--
?"
- r source)
15-Number months estimated to complete -
RELOCATION? 12 Months. r
- - ------ - - -
5/27/08 n
a,Date
•
•
5/27/08
- - - - - - - - - - Date- -- - -
EIS RELOCATION REPORT •

North Carolina Department of Transportation •
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
®E 1 S ? CORRIDOR ? DESIGN •

v
WBS COUNTY WAKE Altemate of ?- Altemate =
I D NO U-4901 F A PROJECT
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Falls of Neuse Widening from Raven Ridge Road to New Falls of Neuse •

ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL •

- Type of - - - - ------ - - --- - - - - - -
Displacees Owners Tenants Total Minonties 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP •
Residential 4 0 4 0 0 1 2 0 1

•
Businesses VALUE OF DWELLING DSS MEWNG AVAILABLE
Farms Owners Tenants For S ale For R ent •
Non-Profit 0-20M 0 so-ISO 0 0-20M 0 $ 0-150 0 •
ANSWE R ALL QUESTIONS 20-40M 0 150-M p 20-40M 0 150-250 0
Y
N E
l
ll "YE
i
" 40
70M 250400 40
70 250 •
es
o xp
a
n a
S
answers. - 0 0 -
M p
.400 0
X 1 Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100M 1 400-600 0 70-100m 22 400600 g •
2 Will schools or churches be affected by 100 UP 311 600 uP 0 100 uP 60 600 uP 17 •
X displacement? TOTAL 82 23

3 Will business services still be available
REMARKS (Respond by Number •
X after project? 6 Local newspapers, rental agencies, real estate agencies •
4 Will any business be displaced? If so, B. Last resort housing will be administered in accordance •
with State & Federal guidelines.

indicate size, type, estimated number of
11. Public Housing is available •
x employees, minorities, etc 12 Given the current housing market comparable housing •
should be available during the relocation period
X 5 Will relocation cause a housing shortage? •
X 6 Source for available housing (list) •
X 7 Will additional housing programs be •
needed?
X 8 Should Last Resort Housing be •
considefed?
•
9 Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc
X families? •
X 10 Will public housing be needed for project?
11 Is public housing available?
12 Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing
housing available dunng relocation period?
13 Will there be a problem of housing within
R financial means?
A 14 Are suitable business sites available (list •
source) -
15 Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION? 12 Months aj = •
•

5/27/08 5/27/08
t
b D
' A
D
t •
e
a
e _w.
pprov
a
rf.tx 9y - - -

Ri
ht of Wa Agent

,?,? •
•
FRM15-E Revised 09-02 Original 8 1 Copy Relocation Coordinator •
2 Copy Division Relocation File
•
Appendix E
Farmland Rating Sheet
• US Department of Agriculture
• FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
- PART I (To be completed by Federal Agency) Date Of Land Evaluation Request 1/18/08
• Name Of Project Falls of Neuse Road Realignment and Widenin Federal Agency Involved
9 Federal Highway Administration
• Proposed Land Use Road County And State City of Raleigh / Wake County / North Carolina
• PART II (To be completed by NRCS) Date Request Received By NRCS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmlands Yes No
(If no, the FPPA does not apply - do not complete additional parts of this form) ? Acres Irrigated Average Faun Size
Q
Major Crop(s)
r j Farmable Lapd In Govt J risdlction

41
Acres `r[ '7 ? 7 2- LLj % Jam, Amount Of Farmland AsDefined in FPPA,

Acres °
i
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used
L,' 00 L Name Of Local Site Assessment System
e_ Date Land Evaluation Returned By NRCS
/-z
PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Alternative Site Rating
Site A Site B Site C Site D
A Total Acres To Be Converted Directly ,
B Total Acres To Be Converted indirectly 00
C Total Acres In Site 0 0 0 0 0 0
PART IV (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Information
A Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
B Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland ,
C Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt Unit To Be Converted 4), oo Z)
D Percentage Of Farmland In Govt Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value , &
PART V (To be completed by NRCS) Land Evaluation Crtenon
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of 0 to 100 Points) 0 1?
?t? 0 0 0
PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Site Assessment Criteria (These crdena are explained in 7 CFR 658 5(b) Maximum
Points
1 Area In Nonurban Use 5
2 Perimeter In Nonurban Use p p
3 Percent Of Site Being Farmed 0
4 Protection Provided By State And Local Government 20
5 Distance From Urban Builtup Area O Q
6 Distance To Urban Support Services p O
7 Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average 0 O
8 Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland 25 p
9 Availability Of Farm Support Services 5 O
10 On-Farm Investments ZO p
11 Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services 25 Q
12 Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use 10 5
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 q 0 0 0
PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V) 100 85 0 0 0
Total Site Assessment (From Part V/ above or a local
site assessment)
160
C'
0
0
0
TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 ones) 260 (?t{ 0 0 0

Site Selected S I -T (F-
Date Of Selection
3110 ZoO ? Was A Local Site Assessment Used?

Yes © No
• Reason For Selection
•
•
•
•
• (See Insbuctions on reverse side) Form AD-1006 (10-83)
• This form was electronically produced by National Production Services Staff

Appendix F
Hazardous Materials
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
EDR DataMap®
Corridor Study
City of Raleigh Falls of Neuse Rd Project
Raleigh, NC 27614
May 09, 2008
Inquiry number 2213712.1s
EDR® Environmental
Data Resources Inc
The Standard in
Environmental Risk
Information
440 Wheelers Farms Road
Milford, Connecticut 06461
Nationwide Customer Service
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Internet www edrnet com
Thank you for your business
Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050
with any questions or comments
Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resou
It cannot
rom
this
that
information
for the
and
concluded other sou cescNO WARR NTY EXPRE SE p coverage
surroundin ED OR IMP IED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WI H THIS REP6RTr?EN IiRONMENTALexist from
DATA RESOURCES, INC SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION,
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER IN NO EVENT SHALL
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE,
ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL,
CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC IS STRICTLY
LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS" Any analyses, estimates, ratings,
environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor
should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property Only a Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment performed by an environmental professional can provide information regarding the environmental risk for any
property Additionally, the information provided in this Report is not to be construed as legal advice
Copyright 2006 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc All rights reserved Reproduction in any media or format, in whole
or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc , or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission
EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, Inc or its affiliates All other
trademarks used herein are the property their respective owners
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TARGET PROPERTY INFORMATION
ADDRESS
RALEIGH, NC 27614
RALEIGH, NC 27614
DATABASES WITH NO MAPPED SITES
No mapped sites were found in EDR's search of available ("reasonably ascertainable ") government
records within the requested search area for the following databases
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL-------------------------- National Priority List
Proposed NPL_ -------------- Proposed National Priority List Sites
Delisted NPL_______________ National Priority List Deletions
NPL LIENS__________________ Federal Superfund Liens
CERCLIS-------------------- Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
CERC-NFRAP--------------- CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
LIENS 2______________________ CERCLA Lien Information
CORRACTS----------------- Corrective Action Report
RCRA-TSDF----------------- RCRA - Transporters, Storage and Disposal
RCRA-LOG------------------ RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRA-SQG------------------ RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
RCRA-NonGen-------------- RCRA - Non Generators
US ENG CONTROLS-------- Engineering Controls Sites List
US INST CONTROL-------- Sites with Institutional Controls
ERNS________________________ Emergency Response Notification System
HMIRS_______________________ Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
DOT OPS____________________ Incident and Accident Data
US CDL_____________________ Clandestine Drug Labs
US BROWNFIELDS__________ A Listing of Brownfields Sites
FUDS________________________ Formerly Used Defense Sites
LUCIS_______________________ Land Use Control Information System
CONSENT------------------- Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
ROD_________________________ Records Of Decision
UMTRA______________________ Uranium MITI Tailings Sites
DEBRIS REGION 9__________ Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
ODI__________________________ Open Dump Inventory
MINES_______________________ Mines Master Index File
TRIS_________________________ Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
TSCA________________________ Toxic Substances Control Act
FTTS________________________ FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide
Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
HIST FTTS___________________ FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
SSTS------------------------ Section 7 Tracking Systems
ICIS__________________________ Integrated Compliance Information System
PADS________________________ PCB Activity Database System
TC2213712 1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MLTS________________________ Material Licensing Tracking System
RADINFO____________________ Radiation Information Database
RAATS______________________ RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
NC HSDS____________________ Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
SWF/LF______________________ List of Solid Waste Facilities
OLI__________________________ Old Landfill Inventory
HIST LF---------------------- Solid Waste Facility Listing
LUST TRUST---------------- State Trust Fund Database
AST__________________________ AST Database
INST CONTROL_____________ No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
VCP_________________________ Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
DRYCLEANERS_____________ Drycleaning Sites
BROWNFIELDS_____________ Brownfields Projects Inventory
NPDES______________________ NPDES Facility Location Listing
TRIBAL RECORDS
INDIAN RESERV------------ Indian Reservations
INDIAN ODI------------------ Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
INDIAN LUST________________ Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
INDIAN UST_________________ Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Manufactured Gas Plants--_ EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
SURROUNDING SITES SEARCH RESULTS
Surrounding sites were identified
Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on
individual sites can be reviewed
Sites listed in bold itahcs are in multiple databases
Unmappable (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis
FEDERAL RECORDS
RCRA-CESQG RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA)
of 1984 The database includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or
dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Conditionally
exempt small quantity generators (CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of
acutely hazardous waste per month
A review of the RCRA-CESQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/06/2008 has revealed that there is
1 RCRA-CESQG site within the searched area
Site Address Map ID Page
CITY OF RALEIGH EM JOHNSON WTP 10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RD 3 12
TC2213712 1 s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DOD Consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of
Defense, that have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U S
Virgin Islands
A review of the DOD list, as provided by EDR, and dated 12/31/2005 has revealed that there is 1 DOD
site within the searched area
Site
Address
Map ID Page
FALLS LAKE RESERVOIR
FINDS The Facility Index System contains both facility information and "pointers" to other
sources of information that contain more detail These Include RCRIS, Permit Compliance System (PCS),
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS), FATES (FIFRA [Federal Insecticide Fungicide Rodenticide Act]
and TSCA Enforcement System, FTTS [FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System], CERCLIS, DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to
manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), Federal
Underground Infection Control (FURS), Federal Reporting Data System (FRDS), Surface Impoundments (SIA), TSCA
Chemicals in Commerce Information System (CICS), PADS, RCRA-J (medical waste transporters/disposers), TRIS,
and TSCA The source of this database is the U S EPA/NTIS
0 3
A review of the FINDS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/03/2008 has revealed that there are 2
FINDS sites within the searched area
Site Address Map ID Page
FALLS LAKE MANAGEMENT CENTER
MT PLEASANT BAPTIST CHURCH
11405 FALLS OF NEUSE RO
10720 FALLS OF NEUSE RO
1 5
2 6
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
SHWS The State Hazardous Waste Sites records are the states' equivalent to CERCLIS These sites
may or may not already be listed on the federal CERCLIS list Priority sites planned for cleanup using state
funds (state equivalent of Superfund) are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by
potentially responsible parties The data come from the Department of Environment & Natural Resources'
Inactive Hazardous Sites Program
A review of the SHWS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/09/2008 has revealed that there is 1 SHWS
site within the searched area
Site Address Map ID Page
DURANT PARK DURANT ROAD
IMD Incident Management Database
4 17
A review of the IMD list, as provided by EDR, and dated 07/21/2006 has revealed that there are 4 IMD
sites within the searched area
Site
Address
Map ID Page
1 3
3 6
3 7
US ARMY CORPS OF ENG -FALLS LK 11405 FALLS OF THE NEUS
RALEIGH WATER TREATMENT PLANT 10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RO
E M JOHNSON WATER PLANT 10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RD
TC2213712 1 s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Site
EM JOHNSON WTP
w rr-...
10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RD
Map ID Page
3 13
LUST The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incidents Management Database contains an inventory
of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents The data come from the Department of Environment, &
Natural Resources' Incidents by Address
A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 02/28/2008 has revealed that there are 2
LUST sites within the searched area
Site Address Map ID Page
US ARMY CORPS OF ENG -FALLS LK 11405 FALLS OF THE NEUS 1 3
EM JOHNSON WTP 10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RD 3 13
UST The Underground Storage Tank database contains registered USTs LISTS are regulated under
Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) The data come from the Department of
Environment & Natural Resources' Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
A review of the UST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 01/08/2008 has revealed that there is 1 UST
site within the searched area
Site Address Map ID Page
E M JOHNSON WATER PLANT 10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RD 3 7
TC2213712 1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Please refer to the end of the findings report for unmapped orphan sites due to poor or inadequate address information
TC2213712 1 s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Database
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL
Proposed NPL
Delisted NPL
NPL LIENS
CERCLIS
CERC-NFRAP
LIENS 2
CORRACTS
RCRA-TSDF
RCRA-LQG
RCRA-SQG
RCRA-CESQG
RCRA-NonGen
US ENG CONTROLS
US INST CONTROL
ERNS
HMIRS
DOT OPS
US CDL
US BROWNFIELDS
DOD
FUDS
LUCIS
CONSENT
ROD
UMTRA
DEBRIS REGION 9
ODI
MINES
TRIS
TSCA
FTTS
HIST FTTS
SSTS
ICIS
PADS
M LTS
RADINFO
FINDS
RAATS
STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
Total
Plotted
SHWS 1
IMD 4
NC HSDS 0
SW F/LF 0
OLI 0
TC2213712 l s Page 1 of 17
MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY
Database
Total
Plotted
HIST LF 0
LUST 2
LUST TRUST 0
UST 1
AST 0
INST CONTROL 0
VCP 0
DRYCLEANERS 0
BROWNFIELDS 0
NPDES 0
TRIRAI RF(N1Rnq
INDIAN RESERV 0
INDIAN ODI 0
INDIAN LUST 0
INDIAN UST 0
EDR PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Manufactured Gas Plants 0

NOTES
Sites may be listed in more than one database
TC2213712 1 s Page 2 of 17
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
DOD FALLS LAKE RESERVOIR
Region
FALLS LAKE RESERVOIR (County), NC
DOD
Feature 1 Army Corps of Engineers DOD
Feature 2 Not reported
Feature 3 Not reported
URL Not reported
Name 1 Falls Lake Reservoir
Name 2 Not reported
Name 3 Not reported
State NC
DOD Site Yes
Tile name NCWAKE
US ARMY CORPS OF ENG -FALLS LK
11405 FALLS OF THE NEUSE ROAD
WAKE FOREST, NC
LUST
Facility ID Not reported
Incident Number 26135 UST Number RA-226
LaULong 355605 783545 LaULong Decimal 0 0
Testlat Not reported
Regional Officer Project Mgr RMR
Region Raleigh
Company US ARMY CORPS OF E NGINEERS
Contact Person TOM FREEMAN
Telephone [phone]
RP Address 11405 FALLS OF THE N EUSE ROAD
RP City,St,Zip WAKE FOREST, NC 27587-
RP County Not reported
Comm / Non-comm UST Site NON COMMERCIAL
Risk Classification L
Risk Class Based On Review L
Corrective Action Plan Type Not reported
Level Of Sod Cleanup Achieved Industrial/Commercial
Tank Regulated Status Non Regulated
Contamination Type Soil
Source Type Leak-underground Product Type PETROLEUM
Date Reported 1/8/1999 Date Occur 12/7/1998
NOV Issue Date Not reported NORR Issue Date Not reported
Site Priority E Phase Of LSA Req Not reported
Site Risk Reason Not reported Land Use Not reported
Closure Request 3/28/2000 # Of Supply Wells 0
Close Out 4/25/2000
MTBE No MTBE1 Unknown
Flag No Flag1 No
LUR Filed Not reported Release Detection 0
GPS Confirmed 7 Cleanup Not reported
Current Status File Located i n Archives RBCA GW Not reported
PETOPT 3 RPL No
CD Num 155 Reel Num 123
RPOW No RPOP No
Error Flag 0
Error Code N Valid No
PIRF
Facility Id 26135
MAP FINDINGS
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
DOD CUSA138023
N/A
LUST S105765109
IMD WA
TC2213712 1 s Page 3 of 17
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
US ARMY CORPS OF ENG -FALLS LK (Continued)
Date Occurred 1217/1998
Date Reported 1/8/1999
Description Of Incident Not reported
Owner/Operator Not reported
Ownership 5
Operation Type 1
Type 3
Location 1
Site Priority Not reported
Priority Update Not reported
Wells Affected Y/N N
Samples Include Not reported
7#5 Minute Quad 4
5 Minute Quad Not reported
Pirf/Mm Soil Not reported
Release Code Not reported
Source Code Not reported
Err Type 2
Ust Number C
Last Modified Not reported
Incident Phase Not reported
NOV Issued Not reported
NORR Issued Not reported
45 Day Report Not reported
Public Meeting Held Not reported
Corrective Action Planned Not reported
SOC Signed Not reported
Reclassification Report Not reported
RS Designation Not reported
Closure Request Date Not reported
Close-out Report Not reported
Comments duplicate incident 21565 deleted-no information was included on any tabs in the
database and a hard copy file was not located wdp 2/18/04
IMD
Region RAL
Facility ID 26135
Date Occurred 12!7/1998
Submit Date 1/8/1999
GW Contam No Groundwater Contamination detected
Soil Contam Yes
Incident Desc Not reported
Operator TOM FREEMAN
Contact Phone [phone]
Owner Company US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Operator Address 11405 FALLS OF THE NEUSE ROAD
Operator City WAKE FOREST
Oper City,St,Zip WAKE FOREST, NC 27587-
Ownership Federal
Operation Public Service
Material Not reported
Qty Lost 1 Not reported
Qty Recovered 1 Not reported
Source Leak-underground
Type Gasoline/diesel
Location Facility
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
S105765109
TC2213712 1 s Page 4 of 17
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
US ARMY CORPS OF ENG -FALLS LK (Continued)
Setting Not reported
Risk Site L
Site Priority Not reported
Priority Code Not reported
Priority Update Not reported
Dem Contact RMR
Wells Affected No
Num Affected Not reported
Wells Contam Not reported
Sampled By Other
Samples Include Not reported
7 5 Min Quad Not reported
5 Min Quad Not reported
Latitude 35 93472222
Longitude -78 59583333
Latitude Number 355605
Longitude Numbe r 783545
Latitude Decimal 35 9347222222222
Longitude Decimal 78 5958333333333
GPS 7
Agency DWM
Facility ID Not reported
Last Modified Not reported
Incident Phase Not reported
NOV Issued Not reported
NORR Issued Not reported
45 Day Report Not reported
Public Meeting Held Not reported
Corrective Action Planned Not reported
SOC Sighned Not reported
Reclassification Report Not reported
RS Designation Not reported
Closure Request Date Not reported
Close-out Report Not reported
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
S105765109
FALLS LAKE MANAGEMENT CENTER FINDS 1007726860
11405 FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD 110018835019
WAKE FOREST, NC 27587
FINDS
Other Pertinent Environmental Activity Identified at Site
NC-FITS (North Carolina - Facility Identification Template For States)
is North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources'
(NCDENR) Facility Identification Template for States that provides a
common facility identifier in order to improve accessibility to
comprehensive information about environmental regulated entities in
the state of North Carolina
TC2213712 1 s Page 5 of 17
r
MAP FINDINGS
Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
2 MT PLEASANT BAPTIST CHURCH
10720 FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD
RALEIGH, NC 27614
FINDS
Other Pertinent Environmental Activity Identified at Site
NC-FITS (North Carolina - Facility Identification Template For States)
is North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources'
(NCDENR) Facility Identification Template for States that provides a
common facility identifier in order to improve accessibility to
comprehensive information about environmental regulated entities in
the state of North Carolina
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
FINDS 1007697253
110018538402
3 RALEIGH WATER TREATMENT PLANT
10301 FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD
RALEIGH, NC
IMD
Region RAL
Facility ID 86347
Date Occurred 8/5/2002
Submit Date 11/17/2004
GW Contam Groundwater Contamination status unknown
Sod Contam Not reported
Incident Desc APPROX 1418 GALLONS HYPOCHLORITE LEAKED INTO STONE BENEATH
VAULT CLOSED OUT Closed File- Sent to State Records Center 11/12/04
Box 6 of 7 Item #25681
Operator CRISP, DALE
Contact Phone [phone]
Owner Company PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
Operator Address PO BOX 590
Operator City RALEIGH
Oper City,St,Zip RALEIGH, NC 919-870-2870
Ownership Unknown
Operation Residential
Material Not reported
Qty Lost 1 Not reported
Qty Recovered 1 Not reported
Source Unknown
Type Other inorganics
Location Not reported
Setting Not reported
Risk Site Not reported
Site Priority 45
Priority Code B
Priority Update Not reported
Dem Contact J ROUSH
Wells Affected No
Num Affected 0
Wells Contam Not reported
Sampled By Not reported
Samples Include Not reported
7 5 Min Quad Not reported
5 Min Quad Not reported
Latitude 35 91527
Longitude -78 59777
Latitude Number Not reported
Longitude Number Not reported
IMD S105586630
N/A
TC2213712 1 s Page 6 of 17
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
RALEIGH WATER TREATMENT PLANT (Continued)
Latitude Decimal Not reported
Longitude Decimal Not reported
GPS GPS
Agency DWQ
Facility ID 86347
Last Modified 11/17/2004
Incident Phase Closed Out
NOV Issued 8/29/2002
NORR Issued Not reported
45 Day Report Not reported
Public Meeting Held Not reported
Corrective Action Planned 1/6/2004
SOC Sighned Not reported
Reclassification Report Not reported
RS Designation Not reported
Closure Request Date Not reported
Close-out Report 2/11/2004
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
S105586630
3 E M JOHNSON WATER PLANT UST 0003133995
10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RD IMD WA
RALEIGH, NC 27614
UST
Facility ID 0-000224
Region 05
Facility Telephone [phone]
Last Update 1/5/2005
Owner Name CITY OF RALEIGH
Owner Address PO BOX 590/ATTN MARTY MOLNAR
Owner City,St,Zip RALEIGH, NC 27602
Owner Phone [phone]
Tank ID 38
Tank capacity 15000
Comment Not reported
Date installed 2/5/1984
Date removed 10/1/2001
Status Permanent Closed
Tank product Diesel, Diesel Mixture
Product Type GEN
Tank material Steel
Interior Protection None
Exterior Protection Cathodic Protection
Piping material Cathodic Protection
Certify Type Not reported
Leak Detection Type Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 1 Not reported
Corrosn Protec Tank Sacrificial annonde
Corrosn Protec Pipe Sacrificial annonde
Spill and Overfill Catchment basins
Latitude 35 91500
Latitude 1 35 54 54 01
Longitude 78 59769
Longitude 1 78 35 51 69
GPS String Confirmed Yes
Initials of Individual Confirming GPS JFM
Financial Responsibility Description Not reported
Surface Water Not reported
TC2213712 1 s Page 7 of 17

•
MAP FINDINGS
. Map ID
Direction
- Distance
Distance (ft )Site
-
E M JOHNSON WATER PLANT (Cont inued)
- Water Supply Well Not reported

- Leak Detection Piping 2 Not reported
Leak Detection Type 2 Not reported
• Corrosion Protection Tank1 Not reported
Corrosion Piping Not reported
. Overfill D
Compartment Tank No
- Main Tank No
Tank ID Number Not reported
- Corrosion Protection Tank Date 2/5/1984
Corrosion Protection Piping Date 12/21/1998
Spill Overfill Date 11/16/1995
- Piping System Type Code Not reported
Piping System Type Description Not reported
• Tank Last Used Date Not reported
Tank Certified Number 2001020390
- Date Last Certified 12/27/2000
Begin Certified Number 1/1/2001
- End Certified Number Not reported
Facility ID 0-000224
Region 05
Facility Telephone [phone]
Last Update 1/5/2005
Owner Name CITY OF RALEIGH
Owner Address PO BOX 590/ATTN MARTY MOLNAR
Owner City,St,Zip RALEIGH, NC 27602
Owner Phone [phone]
Tank ID 39
Tank capacity 5000
Comment FILLED W/CONCRETE
Date installed 1/14/1967
Date removed 8/30/1991
Status Permanent Closed
Tank product Unknown
Product Type NON
Tank material Steel
Interior Protection None
Exterior Protection Paint
Piping material Steel
Certify Type Not reported
Leak Detection Type Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 1 Not reported
Corrosn Protec Tank Not reported
Corrosn Protec Pipe Not reported
Spill and Overfill Not reported
Latitude 35 91500
Latitude 1 35 54 54 01
Longitude 78 59769
Longitude 1 78 35 51 69
GPS String Confirmed Yes
Initials of Individual Confirming GPS JFM
Financial Responsibility Description Not reported
Surface Water Not reported
Water Supply Well Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 2 Not reported
Leak Detection Type 2 Not reported
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
0003133995
TC2213712 1 s Page 8 of 17
MAP FINDINGS
I-
Map ID
Direction EDR ID Number
Distance
Distance (ft )Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
E M JOHNSON WATER PLANT (Continued) 0003133995
Corrosion Protection Tankll Not reported
Corrosion Piping Not reported
Overfill Not reported
Compartment Tank No
Main Tank No
Tank ID Number Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank Date Not reported
Corrosion Protection Piping Date Not reported
Spill Overfill Date Not reported
Piping System Type Code Not reported
Piping System Type Description Not reported
Tank Last Used Date Not reported
Tank Certified Number Not reported
Date Last Certified Not reported
Begin Certified Number Not reported
End Certified Number Not reported
Facility ID 0-000224
Region 05
Facility Telephone [phone]
Last Update 1/5/2005
Owner Name CITY OF RALEIGH
Owner Address PO BOX 590/ATTN MARTY MOLNAR
Owner City,St,Zip RALEIGH, NC 27602
Owner Phone [phone]
TanklD 39A
Tank capacity 6000
Comment Not reported
Date installed 1/7/1991
Date removed 12/9/2001
Status Permanent Closed
Tank product Diesel, Diesel Mixture
Product Type HEA
Tank material Steel
Interior Protection None
Exterior Protection Cathodic Protection
Piping material Steel
Certify Type Not reported
Leak Detection Type Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 1 Not reported
Corrosn Protec Tank Not reported
Corrosn Protec Pipe Not reported
Spill and Overfill Not reported
Latitude 35 91500
Latitude 1 35 54 54 01
Longitude 78 59769
Longitude 1 78 35 51 69
GPS String Confirmed Yes
Initials of Individual Confirming GPS JFM
Financial Responsibility Description Not reported
Surface Water Not reported
Water Supply Well Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 2 Not reported
Leak Detection Type 2 Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank1 Not reported
Corrosion Piping Not reported
Overfill Not reported
TC2213712 1 s Page 9 of 17
MAP FINDINGS
Map ID
Direction EDR ID Number
Distance
Distance (ft )Site Database(s) EPA ID Number
E M JOHNSON WATER PLANT (Continued) 0003133995
Compartment Tank No
Main Tank No
Tank ID Number Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank Date Not reported
Corrosion Protection Piping Date Not reported
Spill Overfill Date Not reported
Piping System Type Code Not reported
Piping System Type Description Not reported
Tank Last Used Date Not reported
Tank Certified Number 2001020390
Date Last Certified 12/27/2000
Begin Certified Number 1/1/2001
End Certified Number Not reported

Facility ID 0-000224
Region 05
Facility Telephone [phone]
Last Update 1/5/2005
Owner Name CITY OF RALEIGH
Owner Address PO BOX 590/ATTN MARTY MOLNAR
Owner City,St,Zip RALEIGH, NC 27602
Owner Phone [phone]
Tank ID 40
Tank capacity 5000
Comment FILLED W/CONCRETE
Date installed 7/5/1966
Date removed 8/30/1991
Status Permanent Closed
Tank product Diesel, Diesel Mixture
Product Type NON
Tank material Steel
Interior Protection None
Exterior Protection Paint
Piping material Steel
Certify Type Not reported
Leak Detection Type Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 1 Not reported
Corrosn Protec Tank Not reported
Corrosn Protec Pipe Not reported
Spill and Overfill Not reported
Latitude 35 91500
Latitude 1 35 54 54 01
Longitude 78 59769
Longitude 1 78 35 51 69
GPS String Confirmed Yes
Initials of Individual Confirming GPS JFM
Financial Responsibility Description Not reported
Surface Water Not reported
Water Supply Well Not reported
Leak Detection Piping 2 Not reported
Leak Detection Type 2 Not reported
Corrosion Protection Tank1 Not reported
Corrosion Piping Not reported
Overfill Not reported
Compartment Tank No
Main Tank No
Tank ID Number Not reported
TC2213712 1 s Page 10 of 17
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
E M JOHNSON WATER PLANT (Continued)
Corrosion Protection Tank Date Not reported
Corrosion Protection Piping Date Not reported
Spill Overfill Date Not reported
Piping System Type Code Not reported
Piping System Type Description Not reported
Tank Last Used Date Not reported
Tank Certified Number Not reported
Date Last Certified Not reported
Begin Certified Number Not reported
End Certified Number Not reported
IMD
Region RAL
Facility ID 23176
Date Occurred 1/10/2001
Submit Date 5/22/2001
GW Contam Yes, Groundwater Contamination has been detected
Soil Contam No
Incident Desc SOIL CONTAMINATION DISCOVERED DURING UST REMOVAL
Operator DONNA JACKSON
Contact Phone [phone]
Owner Company CITY OF RALEIGH
Operator Address P O BOX 590
Operator City RALEIGH
Oper City,St,Zip RALEIGH, NC 27601-
Ownership Municipal
Operation Public Service
Material Not reported
Qty Lost 1 Not reported
Qty Recovered 1 Not reported
Source Leak-underground
Type Gasoline/diesel
Location Facility
Setting Residential
Risk Site L
Site Priority U
Priority Code Not reported
Priority Update 5/22/2001
Dem Contact JFM
Wells Affected No
Num Affected Not reported
Wells Contam Not reported
Sampled By Not reported
Samples Include Not reported
7 5 Min Quad Not reported
5 Min Quad Not reported
Latitude 35 9225
Longitude -78 59
Latitude Number 355521
Longitude Number 783524
Latitude Decimal 35 9225
Longitude Decimal 78 59
GPS NOD
Agency DWM
Facility ID 23176
Last Modified 7/17/2001
Incident Phase Closed Out
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
0003133995
TC2213712 1 s Page 11 of 17
•
•
MAP FINDINGS
Map I D
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
E M JOHNSON WATER PLANT (Continued)
NOV Issued Not reported
NORR Issued Not reported
45 Day Report Not reported
Public Meeting Held Not reported
Corrective Action Planned Not reported
SOC Sighned Not reported
Reclassification Report Not reported
RS Designation Not reported
Closure Request Date Not reported
Close-out Report 5/18/2001
3 CITY OF RALEIGH EM JOHNSON WTP
10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RD
RALEIGH, NC 27614
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
0003133995
RCRA-CESQG 1004550747
NCD986185510
RCRA-CESQG
Date form received by agency 02/21/1991
Facility name CITY OF RALEIGH EM JOHNSON WTP
Facility address 10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RD
RALEIGH, NC 27614
EPA ID NCD986185510
Mailing address PO BOX 590
RALEIGH, NC 27602
Contact LARRY MCMILLAN
Contact address PO BOX 590
RALEIGH, NC 27602
Contact country us
Contact telephone [phone]
Contact email Not reported
EPA Region 04
Classification Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator
Description Handler generates 100 kg or less of hazardous waste per calendar
month, and accumulates 1000 kg or less of hazardous waste at any time,
or generates 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous waste per calendar
month, and accumulates at any time 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous
waste, or 100 kg or less of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or
other debris resulting from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any
land or water, of acutely hazardous waste, or generates 100 kg or less
of any residue or contaminated soil, waste or other debris resulting
from the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely
hazardous waste during any calendar month, and accumulates at any
time 1 kg or less of acutely hazardous waste, or 100 kg or less of
any residue or contaminated sod, waste or other debris resulting from
the cleanup of a spill, into or on any land or water, of acutely
hazardous waste
Owner/Operator Summary
Owner/operator name
Owner/operator address
Owner/operator country
Owner/operator telephone
Legal status
Owner/Operator Type
Owner/Op start date
Owner/Op end date
CITY OF RALEIGH
PO BOX 590
RALEIGH, NC 27602
Not reported
[phone]
Municipal
Owner
Not reported
Not reported
TC2213712 1 s Page 12 of 17
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
CITY OF RALEIGH EM JOHNSON WTP (Continued)
Handler Activities Summary
U S importer of hazardous waste
Mixed waste (haz and radioactive)
Recycler of hazardous waste
Transporter of hazardous waste
Treater, storer or disposer of HW
Underground injection activity
On-site burner exemption
Furnace exemption
Used oil fuel burner
Used oil processor
User oil refiner
Used oil fuel marketer to burner
Used oil Specification marketer
Used oil transfer facility
Used oil transporter
Off-site waste receiver
Unknown
Unknown
No
No
No
No
Unknown
Unknown
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Commercial status unknown
Hazardous Waste Summary
Waste code D015
Waste name TOXAPHENE
Waste code D016
Waste name 2,4-D
Waste code D017
Waste name 2,4,5-TP (SILVEX)
Violation Status No violations found
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
3 EM JOHNSON WTP
10301 FALLS OF NEUSE RD
RALEIGH, NC
LUST
Facility ID 0-000224
Incident Number 23176
Lat/Long 35 55 21 78 35 24 96
Testlat Not reported
Regional Officer Project Mgr JFM
Region Raleigh
Company CITY OF RALEIGH
Contact Person DONNA JACKSON
Telephone [phone]
RP Address P O BOX 590
RP City,St,Zip RALEIGH, NC 27601-
RP County wake
Comm / Non-comm UST Site COMMERCIAL
Risk Classification L
Risk Class Based On Review L
Corrective Action Plan Type Not reported
Level Of Soil Cleanup Achieved Residential
Tank Regulated Status R
Contamination Type Groundwater/Both
Source Type Leak-underground
Date Reported 2/12/2001
NOV Issue Date Not reported
Site Priority Not reported
1004550747
LUST S101523082
IMD N/A
UST Number RA-3813
Lat/Long Decimal 35 9225 78 59027778
Product Type PETROLEUM
Date Occur 1/10/2001
NORR Issue Date 2/21/2001
Phase Of LSA Req 1
TC2213712 1 s Page 13 of 17

Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
MAP FINDINGS
Land Use Industrial/commercial
# Of Supply Wells 0
Database(s) EPA ID Number
EM JOHNSON WTP (Continued)
Site Risk Reason Not reported
Closure Request 5/14/2001
Close Out 5/16/2001
MTBE No
Flag No
LUR Filed Not reported
GPS Confirmed Not reported
Current Status File Located in Archives
PETOPT 3
CD Num 134
RPOW No
Error Flag 0
Error Code N
EDR ID Number
S101523082
MTBE1 Unknown
Flag1 No
Release Detection 0
Cleanup 111012001
RBCA GW Cleanups to 2L 0202 standards
RPL No
Reel Num 48
RPOP No
Valid No
PIRF
Facility Id 23176
Date Occurred 1/10/2001
Date Reported 5/22/2001
Description Of Incident SOIL CONTAMINATION DISCOVERED DURING UST REMOVAL
Owner/Operator DONNA JACKSON
Ownership 1
Operation Type 1
Type 3
Location 1
Site Priority U
Priority Update 5/22/2001
Wells Affected Y/N N
Samples Include Not reported
7#5 Minute Quad Not reported
5 Minute Quad Not reported
Pirf/Min Sod Not reported
Release Code Not reported
Source Code Not reported
Err Type 2
Ust Number C
Last Modified 7/17/2001
Incident Phase Closed Out
NOV Issued Not reported
NORR Issued Not reported
45 Day Report Not reported
Public Meeting Held Not reported
Corrective Action Planned Not reported
SOC Signed Not reported
Reclassification Report Not reported
RS Designation Not reported
Closure Request Date Not reported
Close-out Report 5/18/2001
Comments Not reported
Facility ID 0-000224
Incident Number 6534
LaULong 35 55 21 78 35 24 96
Testlat Not reported
Regional Officer Project Mgr WDP
Region Raleigh
Company CITY OF RALEIGH
Contact Person MR PERRY ALLEN
UST Number RA-991
LaULong Decimal 35 9225 78 5902778
TC2213712 1 s Page 14 of 17
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
EM JOHNSON WTP (Continued)
Telephone Not reported
RP Address PO BOX 590
RP City,St,Zip RALEIGH, NC 27601-
RP County Not reported
Comm / Non-comm UST Site COMMERCIAL
Risk Classification L
Risk Class Based On Review L
Corrective Action Plan Type Not reported
Level Of Sod Cleanup Achieved Not reported
Tank Regulated Status Non Regulated
Contamination Type Groundwater/Both
Source Type Leak-underground
Date Reported 2/5/1991
NOV Issue Date Not reported
Site Priority 60C
Site Risk Reason Not reported
Closure Request Not reported
Close Out 6/30/2005
MTBE No
Flag No
LUR Filed 7/22/2005
GPS Confirmed 6
Current Status File Located i n House
PETOPT 4
CD Num Not reported
RPOW No
Error Flag 0
Error Code N
Product Type PETROLEUM
Date Occur 2/5/1991
NORR Issue Date Not reported
Phase Of LSA Req Not reported
Land Use Industrial/commercial
# Of Supply Wells 0
S101523082
MTBE1 No
Flag1 No
Release Detection 0
Cleanup 2/5/1991
RBCA GW Cleanups to alternate standards
RPL No
Reel Num Not reported
RPOP No
Valid No
PIRF
Facility Id 6534
Date Occurred 1/29/1991
Date Reported 4/5/1991
Description Of Incident SOIL SAMPLES SHOWED ELEVATED LEVELS OF TPH
Owner/Operator CITY OF RALEIGH
Ownership 1
Operation Type 5
Type 4
Location 1
Site Priority 60C
Priority Update 4/16/1998
Wells Affected Y/N N
Samples Include 0
7#5 Minute Quad 3
5 Minute Quad 2
Pirf/Min Soil Not reported
Release Code Not reported
Source Code Pirf
Err Type Not reported
Ust Number Not reported
Last Modified 2/10/1992
Incident Phase Closed Out
NOV Issued 4/17/1991
NORR Issued Not reported
45 Day Report Not reported
Public Meeting Held Not reported
Corrective Action Planned Not reported
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
TC2213712 1 s Page 15 of 17

Map ID
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
F7 MAP FINDINGS
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
EM JOHNSON WTP (Continued)
SOC Signed Not reported
Reclassification Report Not reported
RS Designation Not reported
Closure Request Date Not reported
Close-out Report Not reported
Comments 1/17/03 Review of file determined 'u' nskfrom2x5000 gal diesel usts used for
heating Soil adjacent to UST was max 7880 ppm TPH Soil contaminated to 4 1/2
'BLS where bedrock encountered Sent NOVs in 4/91 and 6/92 but no action to
assess and JFMsent N
IMD
Region RAL
Facility ID 6534
Date Occurred 2/5/1991
Submit Date 4/5/1991
GW Contam Yes, Groundwater Contamination has been detected
Sod Contam No
Incident Desc SOIL SAMPLES SHOWED ELEVATED LEVELS OF TPH
Operator MR PERRY ALLEN
Contact Phone Not reported
Owner Company CITY OF RALEIGH
Operator Address PO BOX 590
Operator City RALEIGH
Oper City,St,Zip RALEIGH, NC 27601-
Ownership Municipal
Operation Industrial
Material #2 FUEL OIL
Qty Lost 1 Not reported
Qty Recovered 1 Not reported
Source Leak-underground
Type Gasoline/diesel
Location Facility
Setting Rural
Risk Site L
Site Priority 60C
Priority Code L
Priority Update 4/16/1998
Dem Contact WDP
Wells Affected No
Num Affected 0
Wells Contam Not reported
Sampled By Responsible Parties
Samples Include Sod Samples
7 5 Min Quad Not reported
5 Min Quad Not reported
Latitude 35 9225
Longitude -78 59
Latitude Number 355521
Longitude Number 783524
Latitude Decimal 35 9225
Longitude Decimal 78 59
GPS 6
Agency DWM
Facility ID 6534
Last Modified 2/10/1992
Incident Phase Closed Out
NOV Issued 4/17/1991
S101523082
TC2213712 1 s Page 16 of 17
Map ID MAP FINDINGS
Direction
Distance
Distance (ft )Site
4
EM JOHNSON WTP (Continued)
NORR Issued Not reported
45 Day Report Not reported
Public Meeting Held Not reported
Corrective Action Planned Not reported
SOC Sighned Not reported
Reclassification Report Not reported
RS Designation Not reported
Closure Request Date Not reported
Close-out Report Not reported
EDR ID Number
Database(s) EPA ID Number
DURANT PARK
DURANT ROAD
RALEIGH, NC
SHWS
Facility ID
Facility Status
NONCD0000037
Sites Requiring No Further Action
S101523082
SHWS S103229165
N/A
TC2213712 1 s Page 17 of 17
•
•
•
i
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
}
¢
Q
D
U)
Z
Q
2
m¢
O
LL
J
(n LL LL
(n J J
pW D ? p p
2

2
LL
Z LL p p p
¢ U
2 D
> ¢ Z LL ¢ LL
Z H__ LL Z Z Z O LL U) (n U) p z z U) Z p (n (n 0 (n 3 w z p p ) LL Z
J J J
J J J
J
J
O O w (n D 00 (n W W w (n m (n (n W W (n (n W O LL LL
U) W
W U)
in

N (D (0
N N
¢
0
z
a
LZ H Y
U
W W U)
¢ Cl z
H U) U Q
p
U) cr ¢ 0
0 LL LL

LL
W
Y
Y
O
¢
¢ ¢

w
w Q Q
?: z Q

p W Q Z

z

w Z)

H w
(n

J
H
W
~ O m p
Q p
Q w w x
co
-
(D
x x
z¢
C7 p p
Q
Q
LL L3 Q
Z Y Cl)
Y m F-
} C
J
? N Q
p Q ¢
w
U m p 0 m
z L Q
O
O
p 0
Q
U 4 w Co
LO z
O
O
O
L
Oa0 LL
H¢a LL ¢ U) cn
11 T ¢Q¢
CCw
F
U
Z CL
U
U) 3 U
Z ~ w¢ In
m (n ¢ H Q In N~ w¢ W
0? 0 Q Y Q cr j¢ Y
W 0 C)
O=
=
¢
W
¢
W 0U)
~ F- ¢ ¢ p
UJz
p} w W z

W 0

D (n m

? 2 w W p p Q
¢z0 >
~ p W (n U w ¢
¢
W W
LL D
w p
Cl) ?0J(n > Q z
(n ul H¢ m} p¢ Z W?? W Y F co
? (J F-

Z } w Z
z
w
¢ p
O
W Q W Z=
CO
U)
Z) U C\j
Q Q J m-i QO p w (n Z Z~ a
O¢ x Z CL O m co U

O F" Q a p¢ m

f- W N ¢ W S J_ x J 0 a¢ w} m w w LL
p z w
C[
O J Q J
> p W¢>
Z J

H H H
¢¢¢
F- m¢¢¢ O
¢ r C O m
O
¢
O
N O 3:
>- x=} 0¢
Q
O
F-
p Q Z Q Z W 0 a U Q LL (.L J U) M J
r)
Z Z W
O W W 0 w¢ O
m U)
w x LL Y m
2
0
¢ U¢ U Cr
Lo
r j O N N j j } 0
(D Z
x
2} (O (o Co N p
U
U) (n
O O Q W V p J J rn O¢
2

»>
DCCO u¢i(¢n(¢n¢
¢
=
m(°D»
22¢°v Omv C:, z 'D LL
m ? U Lo '( DD w U U m¢O LLLL O(D 2U)
w
N
m
a
m
p
0-
F4
w
N
Q
a?
CO
w
Y
Q
p
J
0
Z J
0 Z
O (n ¢
H w ¢
w F- ~
¢ D
a CO mUin
ua w
w 0U¢(n
LL LL 0 0
J J Z Z w Q O
(7(?F p0¢0?
J J O (J w~ W
¢¢zw?cnwF
p
0 a Z) LL m 0 z m
E
z
d
U
w
Y
Q
zZ
Q
Y
¢
0
x
U)
z
w
w m
w x
m w
p
v ¢
H
w (n
LLI
Z) Cc
¢ O
p
O
O
w w
O ¢ (7
z M Q
H Z
J
w co U Cl)
¢
J 0 a ¢ N = ? w
W
p ? O LL z C) Z U
¢ ?w? 2z z xOw¢(7
¢ IL ZzmLLJ(n0 w _3YUazwa
O p Z O J} J Z 0 m m (~n W Z m LL
H°woO_wgZ=YUMj zOU OMM?&)WOU
x w Z p> O m O U¢ F p 0 J 0 Q w}¢ x}
W U Y Q 0 t¢ w m x a¢ w x 0 0¢ O a¢¢ z
¢ O¢ x x J¢ ZZ¢} p} w x w 0¢ Z w O z 0
(~n o t7 (.? C7 Q J< w¢ ¢~ J C7 0 p¢ O} W U
(n 0 0¢> w U} w Q z p z w
x ¢ J J W? J O 3 Y
¢} p J J J J¢ Q a Co
0 3 z 0 0 0¢ w Q d w z J? x a J m H Q 0 0 Q
LL mQ¢¢¢w}U(n3: Om m¢>0Qcc (DF3
x (n
p w
Q 0
W ¢
2 ¢ CO
x
O w
¢ LIJ H U z
o C7 ¢O = O
J z O Y
=i Q
J m w o(f m
LL LL J Z ¢ I?
0 0 J Q W N
J >- < J N M
m U o a J
LD u) x 3 z x
a(gm2w 0cr - U) C)
J000 ¢ O
p D
J Q ¢ ¢ Q 0
0¢ U m< 0 w
N co to N M V V m (D V O M w m (D O W m N m O M co N cm O O N
(o o m 0 (D C) a N O N N w w of N N O O O 1- 0 m aD (D N w m n o Lo N
O O m O V (D O O O O m W V N O M O W (o to co co h cm N 0 N? O M
(D (D (o co a N O Lo m m ID N N m m m m (p 0_J ht (D (O o w N m _
p m m w M M co O w w O Lo M N w M? o7 co m (o (D N O M N n? 0 0 N co a f?
R V D3 V V co to (D O m W a N N M O M 47 N m m m N N V N M m T V N N N N m
¢ (n (n M Lo M co Lo Lo M M m (D m co M (o M W N M O m O M m (o (o co (n of m (D m N N N to M m
p O O N 0 00 _O O_ _O V N _O _O _O O_ O O O O M w _O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O_ M O_ O O O O O Lo
W (n (n m (n 2 (o (n co m rn ? m m m (n (n m m n rn? (n N Cn (n M m m m M M o) (n m (n U co
U
2 2 x = 2 2 2 x 2 x x x 2 2 2 x 2 2 2 2 x x x x x 2 2 2 2 m x x x x x x x 2 2
000 0 0 0 0 0 0 (7 (D (_? (_3 (? C} (? (? (? (3 (7 (7 (_3 O_ O (? (? C7 (7 (_3 (_3
W W W W W W W W W w W W W W W w w w w W w W w W W W W W w W W W W W W W W W W
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J
Q Q Q Q a a Q a a Q Q a Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ m ¢ m ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ m ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ m ¢ m ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ m
¢
N
O
c
f0
CL
N
r-
M
N
N
F-
}
Q
0
Cl)
z
Q
S
M
O
LL
J LL
J LL
J LL LL LL
J J J LL LL
J J

Do x D x MT- 0 T -T- x x S 0
Q 2 LL
J cr LL
J LL
J LL LL LL
J J J LL LL
J
J
_
Cn
(n Cl) 3 ?-
F U)
M CJ 0 Z m

LL Z 0
Cl) _ (n

M LL 0 0 0 0? 0
U)
li LL Z LL (n
U)
Cn
3 L% z LL F- 0 H H?U) ?
O J J M (n O J W M W D- J C/) --- O O O LL J- M m w 0 0
(n (n W w 02 - D D J LL
0
N
N
cd
0
N
0
¢
¢
W
J
W
W
2
w Q Y
H W Q
0
3 0
¢
LL Lf)
z o°? LO
12
m o O¢ W 0
^ m w J Z ¢
S ¢ ¢ Co tr LL W
CD Cn 0 O H ¢ ¢
¢ z Q Q z H co
Q ¢ Q Y O¢ a Z
F O¢ O U 3
cf)
CL w o¢0
o ;oow
m Y 'o LL,
0 L)
J(n(no03> 0?
x D M? -< J J co
y
U
N
(n
rl-
N
}
Q
¢
2 J Q > W
Cn W LL LL a 0 W
z O ¢
0 g ¢ 0 z z
LL w w c o w m ¢
O2 O(o¢QU CL x
N (n 2 L9
LU ¢ O ° Oj > 0 0 Q¢ Z ? ¢
LU (n J J ¢
¢ J ? v 0 Q¢ m m U Q x J C=
C~n g LL j j ¢ O Z J D¢ H CL U ¢¢
J Q Q a W mCC H¢ Y¢ O Cf) 0 x 0
a¢¢ww0a O wQ0¢dMQ¢r0LLI
o ¢3 CJU¢Ia 3zagaaZ¢0Um
wwm?¢?QZOzOC=¢00i
>>z 3 O O O O¢ O w p W O Y
CO W W N (°D O O LL ? J Q O Q M O 0 x Z H U Q
(D Z Z Lo M to 2 0 v O W Z W N z¢ (n (n Cn > 3
}
~ Y
J -
U g -
Q <
LL
O
a ¢ H Lo z
2 CL LO F- L
O W o c2 Q
U O LL ¢ Cf)
CC L
w
w M 'n w w F- w
LL V O w LL F CO CL F- Z
C70(f)a: cL?m3 CE L
W CD J 0 W W O¢ H O¢ w'
O¢ CL FL
¢O W OFQ-¢m=0?w(?(
0 O Q U U 0 w U U 2 U
o a 3 z 0 3 z CO 3 z
CD
E
z
a)
M
V N m N 7 L (?D 0) N
(°D N N m 0Lo cm 0) :) 0) (A T M M O
(C7 ;
a(D 0 CA O OR N M 0 p O
¢ LO m U') V ° N (n M (ND co M O_ _O _O _O _O O O O_ _O co O_
W (n (n (n (n Cn Cn (n (n (n rn (n c
C O
N N N N N N
co co O co ° co
LO Lo U') Lo Lo M
N N N N N N
N N N N N N
N
O
N
N
(T
M
a
r
N
N
Cl)
Y
¢
Q N

N

LL U
?
H
U W
>
0
¢ P Q
a W Cl ¢
m Q a co m Di 0
O
¢ 0 w O
Q
W 2 N V
cn P-

w U) ¢ o} m w
0
3
x w
2 w Z)
Cn 3 3? m F 0 S U
J <
(n z
D Q z m z
CL O O
D W LL¢ U 0 Q Q Q
' O co LU a_ F- ¢ W ED Y U ¢
? O Z Q N W U Q w W
Z J W 0 m ¢ W LL
CL O
3 ¢ J J O U) Z Q } cn
j U O z° xs N¢ `r ¢ ¢ O Z U< ¢¢ U O z LLJ
'- ¢ C7 C\J C) QJ W Z J** ft LL W W } J u it O Y~ O D U¢ H
M N CL m Q Q O O J J J O Q Q Z't Q J J 0 X< M¢¢ O Q
CO CL ::) S S w m 0 0 Q CL 2
Z U ? CL w o x C7 O C7 < 0 0 0 J C7 O Q J Q Z W} Z to w
Z M O F- LL C] Q W W W¢ 0 LL 0 W W W Q¢ Y Q CL Y
j W W Cr N C) W U) Q w w cr? < LL
O Q Q = W Z) CE Ir FU ~O P O (-¢n U) W O O w
J W 3 Y =) O 0 0 0 C] >- -a Q Q m C) 0 J¢¢} O J W w W J
J Q x O Q 0 0 0 J J J J 0 (] LL¢ H O J J Q O O~ W Q J m z Q
¢ (n 3 z¢ LL 0 0 0 O U¢¢ U C7 (n ¢ 0 0 ¢ 0 3 U¢ LL 0 0 0 LL
N
VLf) CO Cf) m M O 4 O -t T O M N M M N (D O co N N M CO N (O CO
CO O N m m M V N O N CD m t M M to
Cn O m O O CA N N V V
co N M M c0] N M cf) (°D co °((0 N O M V a) N M V m M M° (D ° M N N W V M
T (n
O CA ? CO CO V M M (D CA (D V O M M O m° CO N N CA M M (n
D N 0) (n N V O V V V V
M M M (n LO V (o N (O (O (O LO V (D cf) CO (NO (o (o (LO (LO O LO m LO CO
C?
O 00 D D O O_ _O _O O_ O O 0 _O _O O O N 0 0 0 0 O N _D o O 00 C, 0 Lr)
0
D (n M (n U U (n U CO (n U U 0 r U U U U M U U U U U m U:) U 7 5 Cn
H H H H H
0 W U) U) W W W U) U)
W
Z ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢
2 x 5 2 2 2 S 2 x x 2 2 2 x x 2 2 2 x 5 2 2 2 2 2 5 2 2 2 x x 2 2 2 x 2¢ 0 0 0 0 0
C7 C7 O G7 C7 C7 C7 C7 O C7 C7 (7 O O C7 C7 (7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 C7 (7 C7 C7 (7 O C7 C7 C7 C? O C7 C7 CL LL LL LL LL LL
J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J 0 Y Y Y Y Y
41
U
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency
on a monthly or quarterly basis, as required
Number of Days to Update Provides confirmation that EDR is reporting records that have been updated within 90 days
from the date the government agency made the information available to the public
FEDERAL RECORDS
NPL National Priority List
National Priorities List (Superfund) The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority
cleanup under the Superfund Program NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas As such, EDR provides polygon
coverage for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center
(EPIC) and regional EPA offices
Date of Government Version 01/31/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/08/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 38
NPL Site Boundaries
Source EPA
Telephone N/A
Last EDR Contact 04/28/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/28/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
Sources
EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center (EPIC)
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 1
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 3
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 4
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 5
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 10
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 6
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 7
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 8
Telephone [phone]
EPA Region 9
Telephone [phone]
Proposed NPL Proposed National Priority List Sites
A site that has been proposed for listing on the National Priorities List through the issuance of a proposed rule
in the Federal Register EPA then accepts public comments on the site, responds to the comments, and places on
the NPL those sites that continue to meet the requirements for listing
Date of Government Version 01/31/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/04/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 42
Source EPA
Telephone N/A
Last EDR Contact 04/28/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/28/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
DELISTED NPL National Priority List Deletions
The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) establishes the criteria that the
EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL In accordance with 40 CFR 300 425 (e), sites may be deleted from the
NPL where no further response is appropriate
Date of Government Version 01/31/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/08/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 38
Source EPA
Telephone N/A
Last EDR Contact 04/28/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/28/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
TC2213712 1s Page GR-1
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
NPL LIENS Federal Superfund Liens
Federal Superfund Liens Under the authority granted the USEPA by CERCLA of 1980, the USEPA has the authority
to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner
received notification of potential liability USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens
Date of Government Version 10/15/1991
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/02/1994
Date Made Active in Reports 03/30/1994
Number of Days to Update 56
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/19/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency No Update Planned
CERCLIS Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System
CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities,
private companies and private persons, pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA) CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities
List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL
Date of Government Version 01/09/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/05/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 02/20/2008
Number of Days to Update 15
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 04/25/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/16/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
CERCLIS-NFRAP CERCLIS No Further Remedial Action Planned
Archived sites are sites that have been removed and archived from the inventory of CERCLIS sites Archived status
indicates that, to the best of EPA's knowledge, assessment at a site has been completed and that EPA has determined
no further steps will be taken to list this site on the National Priorities List (NPL), unless information indicates
this decision was not appropriate or other considerations require a recommendation for listing at a later time
This decision does not necessarily mean that there is no hazard associated with a given site, it only means that,
based upon available information, the location is not judged to be a potential NPL site
Date of Government Version 12/03/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/06/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 02/20/2008
Number of Days to Update 76
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/17/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/16/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
LIENS 2 CERCLA Lien Information
A Federal CERCLA ('Superfund') lien can exist by operation of law at any site or property at which EPA has spent
Superfund monies These monies are spent to investigate and address releases and threatened releases of contamination
CERCLIS provides information as to the identity of these sites and properties
Date of Government Version 02/08/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/07/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/20/2008
Number of Days to Update 13
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
CORRACTS Corrective Action Report
CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity
Date of Government Version 03/26/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 04/02/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 05/06/2008
Number of Days to Update 34
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/03/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/02/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
RCRA-TSDF RCRA - Transporters, Storage and Disposal
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Transporters are individuals or entities that
move hazardous waste from the generator offsite to a facility that can recycle, treat, store, or dispose of the
waste TSDFs treat, store, or dispose of the waste
TC2213712 1s Page GR-2 0

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version 03/06/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/06/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 04/18/2008
Number of Days to Update 43
RCRA-LOG RCRA - Large Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Large quantity generators (LQGs) generate
over 1,000 kilograms (kg) of hazardous waste, or over 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month
Date of Government Version 03/06/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/06/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 04/18/2008
Number of Days to Update 43
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/06/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/06/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
RCRA-SOG RCRA - Small Quantity Generators
• RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
• and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
• as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Small quantity generators (SQGs) generate
between 100 kg and 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Date of Government Version 03/06/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/06/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 04/18/2008
Number of Days to Update 43
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/06/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
RCRA-CESQG RCRA - Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA's comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Conditionally exempt small quantity generators
(CESQGs) generate less than 100 kg of hazardous waste, or less than 1 kg of acutely hazardous waste per month
Date of Government Version 03/06/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/06/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 04/18/2008
Number of Days to Update 43
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/06/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
RCRA-NonGen RCRA - Non Generators
RCRAInfo is EPA s comprehensive information system, providing access to data supporting the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 The database
includes selective information on sites which generate, transport, store, treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste
as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Non-Generators do not presently generate hazardous
waste
Date of Government Version 03/06/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/06/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 04/18/2008
Number of Days to Update 43
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/06/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
TC2213712 1 s Page GR-3
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
US ENG CONTROLS Engineering Controls Sites List
A listing of sites with engineering controls in place Engineering controls include various forms of caps, budding
foundations, liners, and treatment methods to create pathway elimination for regulated substances to enter environmental
media or effect human health
Date of Government Version 01/18/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/31/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 46
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/31/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/30/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
US INST CONTROL Sites with Institutional Controls
A listing of sites with institutional controls in place Institutional controls include administrative measures,
such as groundwater use restrictions, construction restrictions, property use restrictions, and post remediation
care requirements intended to prevent exposure to contaminants remaining on site Deed restrictions are generally
required as part of the institutional controls
Date of Government Version 01/18/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/31/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 46
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/31/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/30/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
Emergency Response Notification System ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous
substances
Date of Government Version 12/31/2007 Source National Response Center, United States Coast Guard
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/23/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008 Last EDR Contact 04/22/2008
Number of Days to Update 54 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/21/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System
Hazardous Materials Incident Report System HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT
Date of Government Version 10/31/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/17/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 60
Source U S Department of Transportation
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 04/16/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/14/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
DOT OPS Incident and Accident Data
Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety Incident and Accident data
Date of Government Version 02/14/2008 Source Department of Transporation, Office of Pipeline Safety
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/27/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 03/20/2008 Last EDR Contact 02/27/2008
Number of Days to Update 22 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/26/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
CDL Clandestine Drug Labs
A listing of clandestine drug lab locations The U S Department of Justice ("the Department') provides this
web site as a public service It contains addresses of some locations where law enforcement agencies reported
they found chemicals or other items that indicated the presence of either clandestine drug laboratories or dumpsites
In most cases, the source of the entries is not the Department, and the Department has not verified the entry
and does not guarantee its accuracy Members of the public must verify the accuracy of all entries by, for example,
contacting local law enforcement and local health departments
TC2213712 1s Page GR-4 -
r--1
V
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version 09/01/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/03/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 12/28/2007
Number of Days to Update 25
Source Drug Enforcement Administration
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/28/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/23/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
• US BROWNFIELDS A Listing of Brownfields Sites
Included in the listing are brownfields properties addresses by Cooperative Agreement Recipients and brownfields
i properties addressed by Targeted Brownfields Assessments Targeted Brownfields Assessments-EPA's Targeted Brownfields
Assessments (TBA) program is designed to help states, tribes, and municipalities--especially those without EPA
i Brownfields Assessment Demonstration Pilots--minimize the uncertainties of contamination often associated with
brownfields Under the TBA program, EPA provides funding and/or technical assistance for environmental assessments
i at brownfields sites throughout the country Targeted Brownfields Assessments supplement and work with other efforts
under EPA's Brownfields Initiative to promote cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields Cooperative Agreement
i Recipients-States, political subdivisions, territories, and Indian tribes become Brownfields Cleanup Revolving
Loan Fund (BCRLF) cooperative agreement recipients when they enter into BCRLF cooperative agreements with the
• U S EPA EPA selects BCRLF cooperative agreement recipients based on a proposal and application process BCRLF
i cooperative agreement recipients must use EPA funds provided through BCRLF cooperative agreement for specified
brownfields-related cleanup activities
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
i
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Date of Government Version 01/03/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/17/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 02/20/2008
Number of Days to Update 34
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 04/30/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/14/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually
DOD Department of Defense Sites
This data set consists of federally owned or administered lands, administered by the Department of Defense, that
have any area equal to or greater than 640 acres of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U S Virgin Islands
Date of Government Version 12/31/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR 11/10/2006
Date Made Active in Reports 01/11/2007
Number of Days to Update 62
Source USGS
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 05/09/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 08/04/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually
FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites
The listing includes locations of Formerly Used Defense Sites properties where the US Army Corps of Engineers
is actively working or will take necessary cleanup actions
Date of Government Version 12/31/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR 08/31/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 10/11/2007
Number of Days to Update 41
Source U S Army Corps of Engineers
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 04/03/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/30/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
LUCIS Land Use Control Information System
LUCIS contains records of land use control information pertaining to the former Navy Base Realignment and Closure
properties
Date of Government Version 12/09/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/11/2006
Date Made Active in Reports 01A 1/2007
Number of Days to Update 31
Source Department of the Navy
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/10/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/09/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees
Mayor legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL (Superfund) sites Released
periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters
TC2213712 1s Page GR-5
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version 09/01/2007 Source Department of Justice, Consent Decree Library
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/03/2007 Telephone Varies
Date Made Active in Reports 12/28/2007 Last EDR Contact 04/22/2008
Number of Days to Update 25 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/21/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
ROD Records Of Decision
Record of Decision ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL (Superfund) site containing technical
and health information to aid in the cleanup
Date of Government Version 01/14/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01 /22/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 01/30/2008
Number of Days to Update 8
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/31/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/30/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
UMTRA Uranium Mill Tailings Sites
Uranium ore was mined by private companies for federal government use in national defense programs When the mills
shut down, large piles of the sand-like material (mill tailings) remain after uranium has been extracted from
the ore Levels of human exposure to radioactive materials from the piles are low, however, in some cases tailings
were used as construction materials before the potential health hazards of the tailings were recognized
Date of Government Version 07/13/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/03/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 01 /24/2008
Number of Days to Update 52
Source Department of Energy
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/17/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/16/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
ODI Open Dump Inventory
An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or Part 258
Subtitle D Criteria
Date of Government Version 06/30/1985
Date Data Arrived at EDR 08/09/2004
Date Made Active in Reports 09/17/2004
Number of Days to Update 39
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 06/09/2004
Next Scheduled EDR Contact N/A
Data Release Frequency No Update Planned
DEBRIS REGION 9 Torres Martinez Reservation Illegal Dump Site Locations
A listing of illegal dump sites location on the Torres Martinez Indian Reservation located in eastern Riverside
County and northern Imperial County, California
Date of Government Version 12/28/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/28/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 01/24/2008
Number of Days to Update 27
Source EPA Region 9
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/24/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/23/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
MINES Mines Master Index File
Contains all mine identification numbers issued for mines active or opened since 1971 The data also includes
violation information
Date of Government Version 02/07/2008 Source Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/26/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 04/18/2008 Last EDR Contact 03/26/2008
Number of Days to Update 23 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/23/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually
TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Toxic Release Inventory System IRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air, water and
land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313
TC2213712 1s Page GR-6
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version 12/31/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/29/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 04/18/2008
Number of Days to Update 49
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/29/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/16/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
- TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
Toxic Substances Control Act TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the
• TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant
site
Date of Government Version 12/31/2002
Date Data Arrived at EDR 04/14/2006
Date Made Active in Reports 05/30/2006
Number of Days to Update 46
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 04/28/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/14/2008
Data Release Frequency Every 4 Years
FTTS FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)ITSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
FTTS tracks administrative cases and pesticide enforcement actions and compliance activities related to FIFRA,
TSCA and EPCRA (Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act) To maintain currency, EDR contacts the
Agency on a quarterly basis
Date of Government Version 01/15/2008 Source EPA/Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/22/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 01/30/2008 Last EDR Contact 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 8 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/16/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
FTTS INSP FIFRA/ TSCA Tracking System - FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, & Rodenticide Act)/TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act)
A listing of FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) inspections and enforcements
Date of Government Version 01/15/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/22/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 01 /30/2008
Number of Days to Update 8
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/17/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/16/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
. HIST FTTS FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Administrative Case Listing
A complete administrative case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA regions The
• information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB) NCDB supports the implementation of FIFRA
• (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) Some EPA regions
are now closing out records Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing EPA Headquarters
• with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database It included records that may not be included
in the newer FTTS database updates This database is no longer updated
Date of Government Version 10/19/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/01/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 04/10/2007
Number of Days to Update 40
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 12/17/2007
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 03/17/2008
Data Release Frequency No Update Planned
HIST FTTS INSP FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System Inspection & Enforcement Case Listing
A complete inspection and enforcement case listing from the FIFRA/TSCA Tracking System (FTTS) for all ten EPA
regions The information was obtained from the National Compliance Database (NCDB) NCDB supports the implementation
of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act) Some
EPA regions are now closing out records Because of that, and the fact that some EPA regions are not providing
EPA Headquarters with updated records, it was decided to create a HIST FTTS database It included records that
may not be included in the newer FTTS database updates This database is no longer updated
TC2213712 1 s Page GR-7
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Date of Government Version 10/19/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/01/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 04/10/2007
Number of Days to Update 40
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 12/17/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 03/17/2008
Data Release Frequency No Update Planned
SSTS Section 7 Tracking Systems
Section 7 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodentiade Act, as amended (92 Stat 829) requires all
registered pesticide-producing establishments to submit a report to the Environmental Protection Agency by March
1 st each year Each establishment must report the types and amounts of pesticides, active ingredients and devices
being produced, and those having been produced and sold or distributed in the past year
Date of Government Version 12/31/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/14/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 04/18/2008
Number of Days to Update 35
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 04/14/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/14/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
ICIS Integrated Compliance Information System
The Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS) supports the information needs of the national enforcement
and compliance program as well as the unique needs of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
program
Date of Government Version 02/28/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/18/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 05/06/2008
Number of Days to Update 49
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 04/14/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/14/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
PADS PCB Activity Database System
PCB Activity Database PADS Identifies generators, transporters, commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers
of PCB's who are required to notify the EPA of such activities
Date of Government Version 12/04/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/07/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 39
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 05/09/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 08/04/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
MILTS Material Licensing Tracking System
MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which
possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements To maintain currency,
EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis
Date of Government Version 01/15/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/07/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 39
Source Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/31/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/30/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
RADINFO Radiation Information Database
The Radiation Information Database (RADINFO) contains information about facilities that are regulated by U S
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations for radiation and radioactivity
Date of Government Version 01/29/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/31/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 46
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 05/01/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/28/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
TC22137121s PageGR-8
I-1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
i
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registry System
Facility Index System FINDS contains both facility information and 'pointers' to other sources that contain more
detail EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report PCS (Permit Compliance System), AIRS (Aerometric
Information Retrieval System), DOCKET (Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial
enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS (Federal Underground Infection Control), C-DOCKET (Criminal
Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS (Federal Facilities
Information System), STATE (State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS (PCB Activity Data System)
Date of Government Version 04/03/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 04/08/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 05/06/2008
Number of Days to Update 28
Source EPA
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/31/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/30/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System
RCRA Administration Action Tracking System RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA
pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA For administration
actions after September 30, 1995, data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued EPA will retain a copy of
the database for historical records It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources
made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database
Date of Government Version 04/17/1995 Source EPA
Date Data Arrived at EDR 07/03/1995 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 08/07/1995 Last EDR Contact 03/03/2008
Number of Days to Update 35 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/02/2008
Data Release Frequency No Update Planned
• BRS Biennial Reporting System
The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation
• and management of hazardous waste BRS captures detailed data from two groups Large Quantity Generators (LQG)
and Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities
• Date of Government Version 12/31/2005 Source EPA/NTIS
• Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/06/2007 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 04/13/2007 Last EDR Contact 03/13/2008
• Number of Days to Update 38 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/09/2008
Data Release Frequency Biennially
• STATE AND LOCAL RECORDS
• SHWS Inactive Hazardous Sites Inventory
i State Hazardous Waste Sites State hazardous waste site records are the states' equivalent to CERCLIS These sites
may or may not already be listed on the federal CERCLIS list Priority sites planned for cleanup using state funds
(state equivalent of Superfund) are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by potentially
responsible parties Available information varies by state
• Date of Government Version 01/09/2008 Source Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/11/2008 Telephone [phone]
• Date Made Active in Reports 01/31/2008 Last EDR Contact 04/07/2008
• Number of Days to Update 20 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/07/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
• IMD Incident Management Database
Groundwater and/or soil contamination incidents
• Date of Government Version 07/21/2006 Source Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR 08/01/2006 Telephone [phone]
- Date Made Active in Reports 08/23/2006 Last EDR Contact 04/25/2008
Number of Days to Update 22 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/21/2008
• Data Release Frequency Quarterly
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TC2213712 1s Page GR-9
•
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
•
•
•
•
HSDS Hazardous Substance Disposal Site
Locations of uncontrolled and unregulated hazardous waste sites The file includes sites on the National Priority •
List as well as those on the state priority list

Date of Government Version 04/06/2006 Source North Carolina Center for Geographic Information and Analysis
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/28/2007 Telephone [phone] •
Date Made Active in Reports 04/13/2007 Last EDR Contact 02/28/2008
Number of Days to Update 44 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/26/2008 •
Data Release Frequency Biennially
•
SWF/LF List of Solid Waste Facilities .
Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites SWF/LF t ype records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal
facilities or landfills in a particular state Depending on the state, these may be active or inactive facilities
or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Subt itle D Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal
sites •
Date of Government Version 01/22/2008 Source Department of Environment and Natural Resources •
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/23/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 01/31/2008 Last EDR Contact 04/23/2008 •
Number of Days to Update 8 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/21/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually •
OLI Old Landfill Inventory
•
Old landfill inventory location information (Does not include no further action sites and other agency lead
sites) •
Date of Government Version 01/11/2008 Source Department of Environment & Natural Resources •
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/08/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 03/18/2008 Last EDR Contact 04/23/2008 •
Number of Days to Update 39 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/21/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies .
HIST LF Solid Waste Facility Listing •
A listing of solid waste facilities •
Date of Government Version 11/06/2006 Source Department of Environment & Natural Resources

Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/13/2007
Telephone [phone] -
Date Made Active in Reports 03/02/2007 Last EDR Contact 04/21/2008 •
Number of Days to Update 17 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/21/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly •
LUST Regional UST Database •
This database contains information obtained from the Regional Offices It provides a more detailed explanation
of current and historic activity for individual sites, as well as what was previously found in the Incident Management
Database Sites in this database with Incident Numbers are considered LUSTS
•
Date of Government Version 02/28/2008 Source Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/05/2008 Telephone [phone] •
Date Made Active in Reports 03/18/2008 Last EDR Contact 03/05/2008
Number of Days to Update 13 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/02/2008 •
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
•
LUST TRUST State Trust Fund Database •
This database contains information about clai ms against the State Trust Funds for reimbursements for expenses
incurred while remediating Leaking USTs •
Date of Government Version 02/01/2008 Source Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/06/2008 Telephone [phone] •
Date Made Active in Reports 03/18/2008 Last EDR Contact 05/07/2008 •
Number of Days to Update 41 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 08/04/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually •
•
•
•
•
•
TC22137121s PageGR-10 •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
UST Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Database
Registered Underground Storage Tanks UST's are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program Available
information varies by state program
Date of Government Version 01/08/2008 Source Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/06/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 03/14/2008 Last EDR Contact 03/28/2008
Number of Days to Update 37 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/02/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
AST AST Database
Facilities with aboveground storage tanks that have a capacity greater than 21,000 gallons
Date of Government Version 01/17/2008 Source Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/18/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 02/21/2008 Last EDR Contact 04/28/2008
Number of Days to Update 34 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/14/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually
INST CONTROL No Further Action Sites With Land Use Restrictions Monitoring
A land use restricted site is a property where there are limits or requirements on future use of the property
due to varying levels of cleanup possible, practical, or necessary at the site
Date of Government Version 01/09/2008 Source Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/11/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 01/31/2008 Last EDR Contact 04/07/2008
Number of Days to Update 20 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/07/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
VCP Responsible Party Voluntary Action Sites
Responsible Party Voluntary Action site locations
Date of Government Version 01/09/2008 Source Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/11/2008 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 01/31/2008 Last EDR Contact 04/07/2008
Number of Days to Update 20 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/07/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually
DRYCLEANERS Drycleanmg Sites
Potential and known drycleamng sites, active
knowledge of and entered into this database
Date of Government Version 12/21/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 01/17/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 01/31/2008
Number of Days to Update 14
and abandoned, that the Drycleaning Solvent Cleanup Program has
Source Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 04/16/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/14/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
BROWNFIELDS Brownfields Projects Inventory
A brownfield site is an abandoned, idled, or underused property where the threat of environmental contamination
has hindered its redevelopment All of the sites in the inventory are working toward a brownfield agreement for
cleanup and liabitliy control
Date of Government Version 10/01/2007 Source Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Date Data Arrived at EDR 10/31/2007 Telephone [phone]
Date Made Active in Reports 01/14/2008 Last EDR Contact 05/02/2008
Number of Days to Update 75 Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/28/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
TC2213712 1 s Page GR-11
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
NPDES NPDES Facility Location Listing
General information regarding NPDES(National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permits
Date of Government Version 03/10/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/12/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/18/2008
Number of Days to Update 6
TRIBAL RECORDS
Source Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/10/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/26/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
INDIAN RESERV Indian Reservations
This map layer portrays Indian administered lands of the United States that have any area equal to or greater
than 640 acres
Date of Government Version 12/31/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/08/2006
Date Made Active in Reports 01/11/2007
Number of Days to Update 34
Source USGS
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 05/09/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 08/04/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually
INDIAN ODI Report on the Status of Open Dumps on Indian Lands
Location of open dumps on Indian land
Date of Government Version 12/31/1998
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/03/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 01 /24/2008
Number of Days to Update 52
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/25/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/26/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
INDIAN LUST R6 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in New Mexico and Oklahoma
Date of Government Version 02/28/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/29/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 17
Source EPA Region 6
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
INDIAN LUST R8 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming
Date of Government Version 02/20/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/04/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 13
Source EPA Region 8
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
INDIAN LUST R7 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska
Date of Government Version 03/17/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/27/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 05/06/2008
Number of Days to Update 40
Source EPA Region 7
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
INDIAN LUST R9 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Arizona, California, New Mexico and Nevada
Date of Government Version 02/25/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/26/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 20
Source Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TC2213712 1s
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
INDIAN LUST R1 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
A listing of leaking underground storage tank locations on Indian Land
Date of Government Version 03/12/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/14/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/20/2008
Number of Days to Update 6
Source EPA Region 1
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
INDIAN LUST R4 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Florida, Mississippi and North Carolina
Date of Government Version 03/17/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/27/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 05/06/2008
Number of Days to Update 40
Source EPA Region 4
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually
INDIAN LUST R10 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
LUSTs on Indian land in Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and Washington
Date of Government Version 02/21/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/26/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/20/2008
Number of Days to Update 23
Source EPA Region 10
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
INDIAN UST R4 Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
No description is available for this data
Date of Government Version 03/17/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/27/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 05/06/2008
Number of Days to Update 40
Source EPA Region 4
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually
INDIAN UST R5 Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
No description is available for this data
Date of Government Version 12/21/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/21/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 01/24/2008
Number of Days to Update 34
Source EPA Region 5
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 12/21/2007
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
INDIAN UST R10 Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
No description is available for this data
Date of Government Version 02/21/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/26/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/20/2008
Number of Days to Update 23
Source EPA Region 10
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
INDIAN UST R8 Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
No description is available for this data
Date of Government Version 02/20/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/04/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 13
Source EPA Region 8
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
TC2213712 1s Page GR-13
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
INDIAN UST R1 Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
A listing of underground storage tank locations on Indian Land
Date of Government Version 03/12/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 03/14/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/20/2008
Number of Days to Update 6
Source EPA, Region 1
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
INDIAN UST R6 Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
No description is available for this data
Date of Government Version 02/28/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/29/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/17/2008
Number of Days to Update 17
Source EPA Region 6
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Semi-Annually
INDIAN UST R9 Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
No description is available for this data
Date of Government Version 02/25/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/26/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 03/20/2008
Number of Days to Update 23
Source EPA Region 9
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Quarterly
INDIAN UST R7 Underground Storage Tanks on Indian Land
No description is available for this data
Date of Government Version 06/01/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 06/14/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 07/05/2007
Number of Days to Update 21
R PROPRIETARY RECORDS
Source EPA Region 7
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/15/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/19/2008
Data Release Frequency Varies
Manufactured Gas Plants EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plants
The EDR Proprietary Manufactured Gas Plant Database includes records of coal gas plants (manufactured gas plants)
compiled by EDR's researchers Manufactured gas sites were used in the United States from the 1800's to 1950's
to produce a gas that could be distributed and used as fuel These plants used whale oil, rosin, coal, or a mixture
of coal, oil, and water that also produced a significant amount of waste Many of the byproducts of the gas production,
such as coal tar (oily waste containing volatile and non-volatile chemicals) sludges, oils and other compounds
are potentially hazardous to human health and the environment The byproduct from this process was frequently
disposed of directly at the plant site and can remain or spread slowly, serving as a continuous source of soil
and groundwater contamination
Date of Government Version N/A
Date Data Arrived at EDR N/A
Date Made Active in Reports N/A
Number of Days to Update N/A
OTHER DATABASE(S)
Source EDR, Inc
Telephone N/A
Last EDR Contact N/A
Next Scheduled EDR Contact N/A
Data Release Frequency No Update Planned
Depending on the geographic area covered by this report, the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be
complete For example, the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the
area covered by the report are included Moreover, the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily
mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report
TC2213712 1s
Page GR-14 -
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
CT MANIFEST Hazardous Waste Manifest Data
Facility and manifest data Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through
transporters to a tsd facility
Date of Government Version 12/31/2005
Date Data Arrived at EDR 06/15/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 08/20/2007
Number of Days to Update 66
NJ MANIFEST Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information
Date of Government Version 09/30/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/04/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 12/31/2007
Number of Days to Update 27
Source Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/14/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/09/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
Source Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone N/A
Last EDR Contact 04/03/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/30/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
NY MANIFEST Facility and Manifest Data
Manifest is a document that lists and tracks hazardous waste from the generator through transporters to a TSD
facility
Date of Government Version 02/15/2008
Date Data Arrived at EDR 02/28/2008
Date Made Active in Reports 04/09/2008
Number of Days to Update 41
PA MANIFEST Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information
Date of Government Version 12/31/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR 12/21/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 01/10/2008
Number of Days to Update 20
RI MANIFEST Manifest information
Hazardous waste manifest information
Date of Government Version 10/01/2007
Date Data Arrived at EDR 11/09/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 01/15/2008
Number of Days to Update 67
WI MANIFEST Manifest Information
Hazardous waste manifest information
Date of Government Version 12/31/2006
Date Data Arrived at EDR 04/27/2007
Date Made Active in Reports 06/08/2007
Number of Days to Update 42
Source Department of Environmental Conservation
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 02/28/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 05/26/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
Source Department of Environmental Protection
Telephone N/A
Last EDR Contact 03/10/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/09/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
Source Department of Environmental Management
Telephone [phone]
Last EDR Contact 03/17/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 06/16/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
Source Department of Natural Resources
Telephone N/A
Last EDR Contact 04/07/2008
Next Scheduled EDR Contact 07/07/2008
Data Release Frequency Annually
Sensitive Receptors There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity
to environmental discharges These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly, the sick, and children While the location of all
sensitive receptors cannot be determined, EDR indicates those buildings and facilities - schools, daycares, hospitals, medical centers,
and nursing homes - where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located
AHA Hospitals
Source American Hospital Association, Inc
Telephone [phone]
The database includes a listing of hospitals based on the American Hospital Association's annual survey of hospitals
TC22137121s PageGR-15
GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED /DATA CURRENCY TRACKING
Medical Centers Provider of Services Listing
Source Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Telephone [phone]
A listing of hospitals with Medicare provider number, produced by Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services,
a federal agency within the U S Department of Health and Human Services
Nursing Homes
Source National Institutes of Health
Telephone [phone]
Information on Medicare and Medicaid certified nursing homes in the United States
Public Schools
Source National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone [phone]
The National Center for Education Statistics' primary database on elementary
and secondary public education in the United States It is a comprehensive, annual, national statistical
database of all public elementary and secondary schools and school districts, which contains data that are
comparable across all states
Private Schools
Source National Center for Education Statistics
Telephone [phone]
The National Center for Education Statistics' primary database on private school locations in the United States
Daycare Centers Child Care Facility List
Source Department of Health & Human Services
Telephone [phone]
Flood Zone Data This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR in 1999 from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA
NWI National Wetlands Inventory This data, available in select counties across the country, was obtained by EDR
in 2002 and 2005 from the U S Fish and Wildlife Service
State Wetlands Data Wetlands Inventory
Source Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Telephone [phone]
STREET AND ADDRESS INFORMATION
© 2008 Tele Atlas North America, Inc All rights reserved This material is proprietary and the subject of copyright protection
and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to Tele Atlas North America, Inc The use of this material is subject
to the terms of a license agreement You will be held liable for any unauthorized copying or disclosure of this material
TC22137121s