20110978 Ver 1_SR 1596 Glensford Rd (2)_20081117

Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Project Review Form
Project Number: 09-0131 County: Cumberland Date Receives.: 11113;
DID(- 7 ° r ?!? 0/1-0 G
Project Description: Widening & extension of SR 1596 (Glensford Road) from US 401 Business (Raeford Road) to
SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road) in Cumberland County TIP No U-4422
This Project is etng reviewea as maicaceo oeiow
Regional Office Regional Office Area In-House Review
Asheville Air Soil & Water Marine Fisheries
Fayetteville Water Coastal Management Water Resources
Mooresville Aquifer Protection Wildlife Environmental Health
Raleigh Land Quality Engineer ? Wildlife - DOT Solid Waste Mgmt
Forest Resources Radiation Protection
Washington
Land Resources Other
Wilmington
Parks & Recreation
Winston-Salem
_ Water Quality
M, .Water Qa li y-Ij DOT
Air Quality

Manager Sign-Off/Region Date In-House Reviewer/Agency
Response (check all applicable)
No objection to project as proposed No Comment
Insufficient information to complete review Other (specify or attach comments)
If you have any questions, please contact
Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator at [e-mail]
;
N Br47)#R8
AN6 ',S0Q;U.,417?-
?R
SR 1596 (Glensford Road)
From US 401 Business (Raeford Road) to SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road)
Cumberland County
Federal Aid Project STP-1592(2)
WBS Element 35024.1.1
TIP PROJECT U-4422
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N C DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Submitted Pursuant to 42 U S C 4332(2)(c)
y?p??Of p10RTH CA?
04
v 2
^' O
P?
OF TRANSeO~P
APPROVED
!v 019
aAte I 0/8/?B

Uregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT

Date ohn F. Sullivan III, P.E., Division
q-44ederal Highway Administration
nistrator
pp
N&V
i2v
SR 1596 (Glensford Road)
From US 401 Business (Raeford Road) to SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road)
Cumberland County
Federal Aid Project STP-1592(2)
WBS Element 35024
TIP PROJECT U-4422
Finding of No Significant Impact
October 2008
Documentation Prepared in Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
by:
&2k,za. p-4k,- IDl2/08
Matthew W. Potter
Project Planning Engineer
is

v,
!0 2 og ? ? ?g ?s ?k
41k 4-
Charles R. Cox, P.E (? .•.FgIGIN?? 15
Project Engineer ?'•.,;?qRi ?? 'Q?_ir?
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
SR 1596 (Glensford Road)
From US 401 Business (Raeford Road) to SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road)
Cumberland County
Federal Aid Project STP-1592(2)
WBS Element 35024
TIP PROJECT 0-4422
Financial Management Section, Roadway Design Unit
• A municipal agreement will be implemented between NCDOT and the City of
Fayetteville for the inclusion of sidewalks along all sections of SR 1596 (Glensford
Road) where they do not currently exist Based on NCDOT's Pedestrian Policy, the
City of Fayetteville will fund 50% of the cost of the sidewalks
Congestion Management Section, Roadway Design Unit
• A school operations study was completed for both Montclair Elementary and Berean
Baptist Academy The Roadway Design Unit will incorporate the results and
recommendations from the study into the final design.
Roadway Design Unit
The project includes 13-foot outside lanes to accommodate bicycles
U-4422 Finding of No Significant Impact Page 1 of 1
October 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. TYPE OF ACTION ...................................................................................................1
11. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ..............................................................1
III. PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE .................................................................................2
IV. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS .......................................................................................2
V. ACTIONS REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES ......................................................4
VI. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS ......................................................................5
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment (EA) .....................................5
B. Comments Received on the EA ......................................................................5
1. Environmental Protection Agency ........ ................................. ...... 5
2. United States Fish & Wildlife Service ........................ . ..... ....... . . 6
3. NC Division of Water Quality ..... . ..... ..... ............................... .. 6
4. North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office . ........ ............. .. 10
5 Fayetteville MPO ...... ....... .................................................... 10
C. Public Involvement ........................................................................................ 11
D. Public Comments .......................................................................................... 11
1. Manna Church . ...... . ... ............. ................... ........ . ... . 11
2. Berean Baptist Church ..... ... .... .............................. .. ....... 12
3. Citizen Comments ... . . ........ ..... ...... .......................... . . 13
VII. REVISIONS TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ........................................... 16
A. Stream Impacts .............................................................................................. 16
B. Design Changes ............................................................................................ 16
C. Forest Resource Impacts .............................................................................. 16
VIII. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION .............................................................................. 17
A. Air Quality - Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) .......................................... 17
IX. ONLY PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVE FINDING ................................................ 18
X. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ......................................... 18
TABLES
Table 1. U-4422 Resources Impact Table ... ... .......... ........... .................... .3
APPENDICES
Appendix A Figures
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Appendix B Comments from Federal, State, and Local Agencies
SR 1596 (Glensford Road)
From US 401 Business (Raeford Road) to SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road)
Cumberland County
Federal Aid Project STP-1592(2)
WBS Element 35024
TIP PROJECT U-4422
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Prepared by the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
In Consultation with
The Federal Highway Administration
1. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administrative action,
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
The FHWA has determined this project will not have any significant impact
on the environment. This FONSI is based on the Environmental Assessment
(EA), which has been independently evaluated by the FHWA and determined to
adequately and accurately discuss the environmental issues and impacts of the
proposed project The EA provides sufficient evidence and analysis for
determining that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. The FHWA
takes full responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and content of the EA.
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
The NCDOT, in consultation with the FHWA, proposes the widening and
extension of SR 1596 (Glensford Road) from US 401 Business (Raeford Road)
to SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road) in Fayetteville, Cumberland County. The total length
of the project is approximately 1.2 miles. The project includes both widening and
a new location section.
According to the approved 2009-2015 TIP, nght-of-way acquisition for the
project is scheduled to begin in Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2009, with
construction to begin in FFY 2010 The current estimated total cost is
approximately $11,925,470.
U-4422 FONSI
III. PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Three alternatives were evaluated in the EA, which included a "No Build"
Alternative, Alternative 1, and Alternative 2. Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 only
differ in the type of intersection control along SR 1596 (Glensford Road).
Alternative 1 proposed traffic signals, while Alternative 2 proposed three
roundabouts Alternative 2 was shown at the public hearing. Alternative 2 is the
preferred alternative due to its safety and traffic calming benefits, while still
providing the necessary transportation improvements
IV. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS
Adverse impacts to the human and natural environments were minimized
for the proposed project by utilizing a best fit alignment No adverse effect on the
air quality of the surrounding area is anticipated as a result of the project. A total
of 38 noise receptors will be impacted (None characterized as being substantial
noise level impacts) The proposed project will not adversely impact any historic
structures eligible for or listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The
proposed project will not impact any known archaeological sites eligible for listing
in the National Register. The project will relocate 4 residences and 5
businesses, while also impacting 2 churches and 2 schools. The project will
have 65 linear feet of stream impacts, no wetland impacts, and approximately 1
acre of terrestrial forests impacts. Three potential Underground Storage Tank
(UST's) Facilities were identified within the project limits; low to negligible
monetary and scheduling impacts are anticipated to result from these sites. No
Environmental Justice issues were identified. The project will have no effect on
federally threatened and endangered species. Table 1 gives details of the
impacts
2
U-4422 FONSI
Table 1: U-4422 Resources Impact Table
Resource Impacted Alternative 2
Preferred Alternative
Length 1.2 miles
Railroad Crossings 1
Schools 2
Residential Relocations 4
Business Relocations 5
Historic Properties None
Archaeological Sites None
Churches 2
Cemeteries None
Wetland Impacts None
Stream Impacts 65 feet
100-Year Flood lain Crossings None
Water Supply Watershed Protected
Areas None
Potential Hazardous Spill Basins 3
Impacted Noise Receptors 38
Federally Protected Species within
Corridor None
Forest Impacts 1 acre
Prime, Unique, and Important
Farmland
None
Low Income Population Impacts None
Minority Population Impacts None
Construction Cost $6,050,000
Right-of-Way Cost $5,574,000
Utilities Cost $301,470
Total Pro'ect Cost $11,925,470
U-4422 FONSI
V. ACTIONS REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES
A Nationwide Permit will be required from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers due to impacts to surface waters.
A Water Quality Certification is required from the North Carolina Division
of Water Quality Section.
4
U-4422 FONSI
VI. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment (EA)
The EA was approved on October 10, 2007 The approved EA was
circulated to the following federal, state, and local agencies for review and
comments An asterisk (*) indicates a written response was received from the
agency Copies of the correspondence received are included in Appendix B of
this document Responses to substantial comments are noted below.
U S Army Corps of Engineers - Regulatory Division
U S Environmental Protection Agency
U S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U S Geological Survey
N C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of
Water Quality
N C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Wildlife
Resources Commission
N C Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of
Marine Fisheries
State Clearinghouse
Fayetteville MPO
B. Comments Received on the EA
1. Environmental Protection Agency
COMMENT: "Due to minimal impacts, the proposed project did not warrant
inclusion in the NEPA/Section 404 Merger 01 process. EPA has
no specific environmental concerns following our review of the
EA."
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
COMMENT: "The proposed project may impact 2 churches, 2 schools, 5
business relocations, approximately 1 acre of terrestrial forests, 3
hazardous material sites, and 38 noise receptors (None
characterized as being substantial noise level impacts) The
impacts summary tables in the EA did not specifically include the
terrestrial forest impacts, potential impacts to hazardous material
sites or the impacted noise receptors."
5
U-4422 FONSI
RESPONSE: Comment noted Table 1 has been updated to include terrestrial
forest impacts, potential impacts to hazardous material sites and
impacted noise receptors
2. United States Fish $ Wildlife Service
COMMENT: "Due to the urban nature of the project area and the lack of fish
and wildlife habitat, the Service does not have any concerns with
this project. Due to the lack of habitat, we concur that the project
will have no effect on federally threatened and endangered
species."
RESPONSE: Comment noted
3. NC Division of Water Quality
COMMENT: "Environmental assessment alternatives shall consider design
criteria that reduce the impacts to streams and wetlands from
storm water runoff These alternatives shall include road designs
that allow for treatment of the storm water runoff through best
management practices as detailed in the most recent version of
NC DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices"'
RESPONSE: Comment noted. Best management practices are a standard
procedure for NCDOT designs.
COMMENT: "After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an
issuance of the 401 Water Quality Certification, the NCDOT 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 {15A NCAC
2H.0506(h)}, mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than
1 acre to wetlands 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 wetland mitigation "
RESPONSE: If mitigation is required, NCDOT will coordinate with the NC
Ecosystem Enhancement Program for use as stream mitigation
6
U-4422 FONSI
COMMENT: "Future documentation, including any 401 Water Quality
Certification Application, should continue to include an itemized
listing of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with
corresponding mapping."
RESPONSE: This information will be included in the permit application
COMMENT: "DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that
could result from this project. NCDOT shall address these
concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to
the aquatic environments and any mitigating factors that would
reduce the impacts."
RESPONSE: Please see pages 50-51 of the EA regarding anticipated impacts
to aquatic communities. Potential adverse effects will be
minimized through the implementation of NCDOT's Best
Management Practices (BMP)
COMMENT: "NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts including but
not limited to, bridging, fill, excavation and clearing, to
jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be
included in the final impact calculations. These impacts, in
addition to any construction impacts, temporary or otherwise, also
need to be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification
Application "
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
COMMENT: "Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges used
in lieu of culverts However, we realize that economic
considerations often require the use of culverts Please be
advised that culverts should be countersunk to allow unimpeded
passage by fish and other aquatic organisms Moreover, in areas
where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge
may prove preferable. When applicable, DOT should not install
the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable "
RESPONSE: Comment noted The culvert at the unnamed tributary to Beaver
Creek will be extended
COMMENT: "Sediment and erosion control measures should not be placed in
wetlands or streams."
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
7
U-4422 FONSI
COMMENT: `The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to
specifically address the proposed methods for stormwater
management More specifically, stormwater should not be
permitted to discharge directly into streams or surface waters "
RESPONSE: The application will indeed address the proposed methods for
stormwater management. Stormwater will not be permitted to
discharge directly into streams or surface waters.
COMMENT: "Also, please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification
requires satisfactory protection of water quality to ensure that
water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses
are lost. Final permit authorization will require the submittal of a
formal application by the NCDOT and written concurrence from
the NCDWQ. Please be aware that any approval will be
contingent on appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland
and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical, the
development of an acceptable stormwater management plan, and
the inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate."
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
COMMENT: "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 "
RESPONSE: Comment noted
COMMENT: "Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams,
and wetlands shall be placed below the elevation of the stream
bed 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
downstream of the above structures.
RESPONSE: Comment noted. The extended culvert will be buned
appropriately.
8
U-4422 FONSI
COMMENT: "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."
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
COMMENT: "All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a
dry work area Approved BMP measures from the current version
of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance Activities manual such
as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other diversion
structures shall be used to prevent excavation in flowing water."
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
COMMENT: "While the use of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, NC
Coastal Regional 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."
RESPONSE: Comment noted A site evaluation verified that no jurisdictional
wetlands are present within the project area.
COMMENT: "Heavy equipment shall 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, lubricants,
hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials "
RESPONSE: Comment noted
COMMENT: "Riprap shall not be placed in the active thalweg channel or
placed in the streambed in a manner that precludes aquatic life
passage. Bioengmeenng boulders or structures shall be properly
designed, sized and installed."
RESPONSE: Comment noted
COMMENT: "Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) shall be preserved
to the maximum extent possible Riparian vegetation must be
reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the
end of the growing season following completion of construction."
9
U-4422 FONSI
RESPONSE: Comment noted
4. North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
COMMENT: "We have received the Environmental Assessment for the above
referenced undertaking and concur with its finding that no historic
properties will be affected."
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
5. Fayetteville MPO
COMMENT: "The MPO fully supports the widening of Glensford Rd to a multi
lane facility with a Center medium and dual lane roundabouts at
the intersections of Montclair Rd, Belford Rd and Chambersburg
Rd."
RESPONSE: Comment noted.
10
U-4422 FONSI
C. Public Involvement
Following the circulation of the Environmental Assessment, a formal
Public Hearing was held on April 22, 2008 at the Montclair Elementary School in
Fayetteville, NC Approximately 106 citizens were present for the hearing. A
transcript of the Public Hearing was prepared.
Nineteen citizens spoke at the hearing and 19 wntten comments were
received between the hearing and the Post Hearing Meeting Based on the
comments received, Alternative 1 was favored by a majority of the respondents,
who cited concerns about pedestrian safety, Right of way acquisition, and high
speeds. The Fayetteville MPO fully supported Alternative 2 The remaining
comments didn't indicate any specific support for an Alternative but expressed
concerns about issues like right of way acquisition, increased traffic volumes,
driveway access, and increased speeding.
D. Public Comments
The following comments were received from the public following the
formal Public Hearing.
1. Manna Church
COMMENT: Is concerned with the relocation of their church sign at the comer
of Cliffdale Road and Glensford Road.
RESPONSE: The widening of Glensford Road will require the relocation of the
Manna Church sign located at the comer of Glensford Road and
Cliffdale Road. Relocation costs for the sign will be addressed
during right of way acquisition.
COMMENT: Is also concerned about the loss of 47 parking spaces and the
ability to enter its parking lot from Glensford Road.
RESPONSE: NCDOT will try to minimize impacts to the Manna Church parking
lot if at all possible. Access to the Manna Church auxiliary
parking lot will be limited to right in right out movements. Vehicles
trying to access the auxiliary parking lot from Cliffdale Road will
be required to travel south on Glensford Road and use the
roundabout at Chambersburg Road, to make a u-tum, then travel
north on Glensford Road to access the auxiliary parking.
11
U-4422 FONSI
COMMENT: Requests the NCDOT's help in getting vehicle access over
railroad tracks to connect parking lot
RESPONSE: The NCDOT has no control over railroad right of way. Any
access agreement would be between Aberdeen & Rockfish
Railroad and Manna Church.
2. Berean Baptist Church
COMMENT: Requests that crosswalk between Berean Baptist Church and
Berean Baptist Academy, be adjusted to provide larger pedestrian
refuge.
RESPONSE: The NCDOT will install an "off-set' pedestrian refuge island to
accommodate the large groups of pedestrians that travel between
Berean Baptist Church and Berean Baptist Academy. This type of
crossing provides more storage for pedestrians in the median,
while also orienting the pedestrians to face oncoming traffic,
forcing them to look before crossing the second set of lanes.
COMMENT: Requests that Glensford Road be widened on the western side at
its intersection with Cliffdale Road to provide more room for
U-tums.
RESPONSE: Since access to Glensford Road from the Berean Baptist Church
parking lot will be limited to right out only, u-turns will be allowed
at the intersection of Glensford Road and Cliffdale Road. The
NCDOT will provide additional space on the western side of
Glensford Road to accommodate these u4ums.
COMMENT: Requests that speed humps, dips, or rumble strips be installed
near crosswalk for school and church.
RESPONSE: The NCDOT does not propose to install any type of speed hump,
dips, or rumble strips near the crosswalk between Berean Baptist
Academy and Berean Baptist Church The NCDOTs standard
high visibility crosswalk and signage will be used.
12
U-4422 FONSI
3. Citizen Comments
COMMENT: Several comments were received concerning pedestrian safety,
specifically children crossing the roadway, and the need for more
crosswalks in the Fayetteville area.
RESPONSE: Roundabouts are designed to incorporate pedestrian crosswalks
into each leg of the intersection. Roundabouts by design are
pedestrian friendly because they require all traffic to slow down or
stop before entering the intersection. Pedestrians are able to
cross at points where vehicles are moving the slowest, both
entering and exiting the roundabout. Roundabout designs also
provide pedestrian refuge islands in the middle of each pedestrian
crosswalk, so pedestrians are only required to cross two lanes at
a time. -
COMMENT: Some were concerned about sidewalks and asked where they
would be located.
RESPONSE: Sidewalks will be placed along both sides of Glensford Road
throughout the entire length of the project.
COMMENT: Several commented that the roundabouts will be harder to use,
and were concerned about being able to access side roads such
as Montclair Road, and Chambersburg Road at peak hour
conditions.
RESPONSE: The NCDOT understands that some motonsts are unfamiliar with
the rules and operations of a roundabout, however, roundabouts
provide many advantages when compared to signalized
intersections. These advantages include a continuous flow of
traffic and lower operating speeds. The roundabouts will be
designed and striped to make them as user friendly as possible
Additionally, signs will be placed in advance of the roundabout to
give guidance on how to maneuver through the roundabouts.
Motorists will easily be able to access all side roads through the
roundabout since all entering traffic must yield to vehicles already
inside the roundabout
COMMENT: Several commented that the project would increase speeding
throughout the neighborhood, and one person commented that
the roundabouts would be used for road racing late at night.
RESPONSE: The NCDOT recognizes that it is very important to reduce speeds
throughout the project limits in order to maintain a safe living area
for the entire neighborhood The roundabout alternative was
chosen mainly based on its traffic calming capabilities
13
U-4422 FONSI
Roundabouts require all traffic to slow down or stop before
entering the intersection therefore reducing the speed of each and
every vehicle traveling through the intersection. The NCDOT
always strives to design a safe roadway for both motorists and the
surrounding community; however, any design could be misused
for illegal activities such as road racing. The NCDOT depends on
local law enforcement to enforce speed limits, and to help prevent
any illegal activity.
COMMENT: One person asked why roundabouts aren't used in other
communities, and feels that three roundabouts are too much
RESPONSE: Roundabouts have been used effectively throughout the world for
many years. However, until recently they have not been used
widely throughout the United States because of driver
unfamiliarity and limited research on proper design techniques
With advances in design techniques, and their advantages over
signalized intersection, roundabouts are now considered a very
useful type of intersection control throughout the United States as
well. Three roundabouts were used because of their traffic
calming capabilities There are currently 60 roundabouts already
installed by NCDOT throughout North Carolina
COMMENT: Several comments were received regarding the loss of property
and homes Many felt they would have no front yard left and
others expressed concerns about no longer being able to turn
around in front yard, but instead will be forced to back out into
traffic.
RESPONSE: The project will require that right of way be purchased from many
of the homeowners. Homeowners will be compensated at fair
market value for any right of way that is required. The NCDOT
will work with individual homeowners to address driveway
concerns. Some homeowners may be required to back out into
traffic The NCDOT has tried to make this as safe a possible by
keeping a 35 mph speed limit and adding a raised grass median,
so that homeowners will be entering into traffic flowing in one
direction.
COMMENT: Some suggested that the grass median and lane widths be
reduced to minimize right of way impacts.
RESPONSE: The NCDOT has already reduced the lane and median widths in
an attempt to minimize right of way impacts.
COMMENT: One person voiced concern that the median would increase
response time for emergency vehicles
14
U-4422 FONSI
RESPONSE: Emergency vehicles will have the option of driving over the
median in cases of extreme emergency It is believed that the
project will actually decrease emergency response time by
connecting Glensford Road to NC 59 and Raeford Road.
COMMENT: Several commented that traffic signals are more cost effective and
would require less nght of way, at the intersections.
RESPONSE: Traffic signals do cost less and require less right of way; however,
the advantages of the roundabout design were determined to
warrant the additional cost and right of way. The roundabout
design will be safer for pedestrians and motorists, while providing
traffic calming to help reduce traffic speed along the entire length
of the project.
15
U-4422 FONSI
VII. REVISIONS TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. Stream Impacts
The stream impacts were updated to include impacts due to the extension
of the culvert at the unnamed tributary to Beaver Creek The total anticipated
stream impact is 65 linear feet The impacts are calculated from slope stake to
slope stake plus an additional 25 feet out of each limit as determined from the
current preliminary design plans.
B. Design Changes
The culvert at the unnamed tributary to Beaver Creek will be extended by
40 linear feet This extension is required to provide an additional through lane in
each direction, and an additional designated left turn lane for traffic turning left
from Glensford Road on to Cliffdale Road. Additional widening is also required
on the western side of Glensford Road at this location to allow for u-tums.
The diameter of the roundabout at Belford Road was increased from 150
feet to 180 feet to increase the deflection angle of traffic entering the roundabout
Additional right of way easements will also be required at the roundabouts
located at Belford Road and Montclair Road. The right of way easement
increases, at these roundabouts, will require the relocation of two residences at
each location
The pedestrian crosswalk between Berean Baptist Church and Berean
Baptist Academy will be constructed with an "off-set" pedestrian refuge island.
This will increase the pedestnan refuge storage, while also onenting the
pedestrian to face oncoming traffic.
C. Forest Resource Impacts
Forest resource impacts were calculated for each Alternative. Both
Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 impact approximately 1 acre of Terrestrial Forests
16
U-4422 FONSI
VIII. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
A. Air Quality - Mobile Source Air Toxics MAT)
Concerns for air toxics impacts are becoming more frequent on
transportation projects during the NEPA process. Transportation agencies are
increasingly expected by the public and other agencies to address MSAT
impacts in their environmental documents as the science emerges Mobile
Source Air Toxics (MSATs) analysis is a continuing area of research where,
while much work has been done to assess the overall health risk of air toxics,
many questions remain unanswered In particular, the tools and techniques for
assessing project-specific health impacts from MSATs are limited. These
limitations impede FHWA's ability to evaluate how mobile source health risks
should factor into project-level decision making under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA). Also, EPA has not established regulatory concentration
targets for the six relevant MSAT pollutants appropriate for use in the project
development process. FHWA has several research projects underway to more
clearly define potential risks from MSAT emissions associated with transportation
projects. While this research is ongoing, FHWA requires each NEPA document
to qualitatively address MSATs and their relationship to the specific highway
project through a tiered approach (as according to US DOT's Federal Highway
Administration memorandum, "Interim Guidance on Air Toxic Analysis in NEPA
Documents," from February 3, 2006) The FHWA will continue to monitor the
developing research in this emerging field. A qualitative analysis of MSATs for
this project appears in its entirety as an addendum to the project Air Quality
Analysis report and can be viewed in Room 443, of the Transportation Building, 1
South Wilmington Street, Raleigh.
17
U-4422 FONSI
IX. ONLY PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVE FINDING
Executive Order 11990, "Protection of Wetlands," established as a
national policy to avoid, to the extent possible, adverse impacts on wetlands and
to avoid direct or indirect support of new construction wherever there is a
practicable alternative
NCDOT was able to totally avoid wetlands impacts because of the lack of
wetlands within the project area.
X. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the impacts of the proposed project, as
documented in the EA, and upon comments received from federal, state, local
agencies, and the general public, it is the finding of the NCDOT that this project
will not have a significant adverse impact upon the human or natural
environment. The project is not controversial from an environmental standpoint.
No significant impacts to natural, social, ecological, cultural, or scenic resources
are expected. The proposed project is consistent with local plans and will not
disrupt any communities The project has been extensively coordinated with
federal, state, and local agencies. In view of the above evaluation, it has been
determined that a FONSI is applicable for this project. Therefore, neither an
Environmental Impact Statement nor further environmental analysis is required.
The following people may be contacted for additional information
regarding this proposal
Mr. Gregory J Thorpe, Ph.D.
Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mad Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
[phone]
Mr. John F. Sullivan, III
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue
Suite 410
Raleigh, NC 27601-1418
[phone]
MWP/mp
18
U-4422
Appendix B
(Comments from Federal, State, and
Local Agencies)
US ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 4 RALEIGH OFFICE
TERRY SANFROD FEDERAL COURTHOUSE
310 NEW BERN AVENUE
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27601
Date January 4, 2008
Dr Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Manager, Project Development and Environmental Analysts Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
SUBJECT EPA Review Comments of the Federal Environmental Assessment for the
SR 1596 (Glensford Road) Improvements, Cumberland County, TIP U-
4422
Dear Dr Thorpe-
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 (EPA) has reviewed the
subject document and is commenting in accordance with Section 309 of the Clean Air
Act and for general consistency with Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA). The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) is
proposing to provide widening and extension improvements to SR 1596 (Glensford
Road) from US 401 Business to SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road) in the City of Fayetteville,
Cumberland County for an approximate distance of 12 miles The proposed project
includes a 16-foot raised grass median with curb and gutter and sidewalks on both sides
of Glensford Road
Due to minimal impacts, the proposed project did not warrant inclusion in the
NEPA/Section 404 Merger 01 process EPA has no specific environmental concerns
following our review of the EA NCDOT evaluated two alternatives including a
widening option with signalized intersection control and a widening option with a
roundabout intersection control NCDOT's preferred alternative is Alternative #2, which
includes the roundabout option
For Alternatives land 2, there are no jurisdictional wetland impacts Both
alternatives will potentially impact approximately 150 linear feet of intermittent stream
(i.e , An unnamed tributary to Beaver Creek, Class C waters) depending upon the culvert
requirements at this stream crossing. The proposed project may impact 2 churches, 2
schools, 5 business relocations, approximately l acre of terrestrial forests, 3 hazardous
material sites, and 38 noise receptors (None characterized as being substantial noise level
impacts) The impact summary tables in the EA did not specifically include the
terrestrial forest impacts, potential impacts to hazardous material sites or the impacted
noise receptors
EPA notes the interim guidance discussion on Mobile Source Air Toxtcs
(MSATs) included in the EA (Pages 32-39) EPA requests a copy of the Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) when it becomes available If you have questions, please feel
free to contact me at 919-856-4206 Thank you for the opportunity to comment
Sincerely,
1
1?? - 4C-) % lc?
a
Christopher A Militscher, REM, CHMM
Merger Team Rpresentative
NEPA Program Office
For: Heinz J. Mueller, Chief
EPA Region 4 NEPA Program Office
cc- Brian Wrenn, NCDWQ
Scott McClendon, USACE
Clarence Coleman, FHWA
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
STATE NUMBER: 08-E-4220-0154
DATE RECEIVED. 11/27/2007
AGENCY RESPONSE. 12/24/2007
REVIEW CLOSED: 12/28/2007
MS RENEE GLEDHILL-£ARLEY
CLEARINGHOUSE COORD
DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES
ARCHIVES-HISTORY BLDG - MSC 4617
RALEIGH NC
REVIEW DISTRIBUTION
CC&PS - DEM, NFIP
DENR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
DEPT OF CUL RESOURCES
DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
MID CAROLINA COG
PROJECT INFORMATION
APPLICANT N C Dept. of Transportation
TYPE National Environmental Policy Act

i4wizz D
jW 2W 00
F02
C.) ZlSI?
A -
5 -
ERD ) Environmental Assessment CU,1r16tr'oui d Co );./AVOT
DESC Widening & extension of SR 1596 (Glensford Road) from US 401 Business (Raeford
Road) to SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road). TIP No U-4422
The attached project has been submitted to the N. C. State Cldaringhouse for
intergovernmental review Please review and submit your response by the above
indicated date to 1301 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-1301
If additional review time is needed, please contact this office at [phone].
AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED:
k NO COMMENT
CO MENTS ATTACHED
SIGNED BY ?1?. $4?=
DATE
AL 0 4 202
c9
5O? ?G
??,,g19ZO11??
171
t] < h
a
'Cuui
r
r
MEMORANDUM < 9 ?? j!
William G Ross Jr , Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
December 6, 2007
To Melba McGee, DENR Environmental Coordinator
From Rob Ridmgs, Division of Water Quality, Transportation Permitting Unit A^
Subject Comments on the Environmental Assessment related to proposed SR 1596 protect from
SR 1400 to US 401-Business, Cumberland County, Federal Aid Project No STP-
1592(2), State Project No 35024 1 1, TIP No U-4422
This office has reviewed the referenced document dated received November 30, 2007 The Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for
activities that impact Waters of the U S , including wetlands. It is our understanding that the project as
presented may result in impacts to streams or other surface waters. The DWQ offers the following
comments based on review of the aforementioned document
General Comments:
1. Environmental assessment alternatives shall consider design criteria that reduce the mzpacts to
streams and wetlands from storm water runoff These alternatives shall include road designs that
allow for treatment of the storm water runoff through best management practices as detailed in the
most recent version of NC DWQ Stormwater Best Management Practices, such as grassed swales,
buffer areas, preformed scour holes, retention basins, etc.
2 After the selection of the preferred alternative and prior to an issuance of the 401 Water Quality
Certification, the NCDOT 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 115A NCAC 2H 0506(h)),
mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 1 acre to wetlands 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 wetland
mitigation
3 Future documentation, including any 401 Water Quality Certification Application, should continue
to include an itemized listmg of the proposed wetland and stream impacts with corresponding
mapping
4 DWQ is very concerned with sediment and erosion impacts that could result from this protect NC
DOT shall address these concerns by describing the potential impacts that may occur to the aquatic
environments and any mitigating factors that would reduce the impacts
NC DOT is respectfully reminded that all impacts, including but not limited to, bridging, fill,
excavation and clearing, to jurisdictional wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers need to be included
No°0 Can?}}}}!!??a
Tramportabon Permitting Unit Qtll!'Qllt?
1650 Mad Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone [phone] /FAX [phone] / Internet: http //h2o enr state nc us/ncwetlands
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recyded/10% Post Consumer Paper
in the final impact calculations These impacts, in addition to any construction impacts, temporary
or otherwise, also need to be included as part of the 401 Water Quality Certification Application
6 Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts However, we
realize that economic considerations often require the use of culverts Please be advised that
culverts shall be countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms
Moreover, in areas where high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove
preferable When applicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum
extent practicable.
7 Sediment and erosion control measures shall not be placed in wetlands or streams.
8 Borrow/waste areas shall avoid wetlands to the maxunum extent practical Impacts to wetlands in
borrow/waste areas will need to be presented in the 401 Water Quality Certification and could
precipitate compensatory mitigation.
9 The 401 Water Quality Certification application will need to specifically address the proposed
methods for stormwater management. More specifically, stormwater shall not be permitted to
discharge directly into streams or surface waters Also, please be advised that a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires satisfactory protection of water quality to ensure that water quality standards
are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost Final permit authorization will require the submittal
of a formal application by the NCDOT and written concurrence from the NCDWQ. Please be
aware that any approval will be contingent on appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland
and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical, the development of an acceptable stormwater
management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate nutigatioti plans where appropriate.
10 If concrete is used during construction, a dry work area shall be maintained to prevent direct contact
between curing concrete and stream water. Water that inadvertently contacts uncured concrete shall
not be discharged to surface waters due to the potential for elevated pH and possible aquatic life and
fish kills.
11 If temporary access roads or detours are constructed, the site shall be graded to its preconstruction
contours and elevations. Disturbed areas shall be seeded or mulched to stabilize the soil and
appropriate native woody species shall be planted. When using temporary structures the area shall
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 re-vegetate
naturally and minimizes soil disturbance
12 Placement of culverts and other structures in waters, streams, and wetlands shall be placed 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-equihbnum 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 writing by DWQ If this condition is unable to be met due to bedrock or
other limiting 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
13 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
14 All work in or adjacent to stream waters shall be conducted in a dry work area. Approved BUT
measures from the most current version of NCDOT Construction and Maintenance Activities
manual such as sandbags, rock berms, cofferdams and other diversion structures shall be used to
prevent excavation in flowing water
15 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
16 Heavy equipment shall 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, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, or other toxic materials.
17 Riprap shall not be placed in the active thalweg channel or placed in the streambed in a manner that
precludes aquatic life passage Bioengineering boulders or structures shall be properly designed,
sized and installed.
18. Riparian vegetation (native trees and shrubs) shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible.
Riparian vegetation must be reestablished within the construction limits of the project by the end of
the growing season following completion of construction.
The NCDWQ appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on your project Shall you have any
questions or require any additional information, please contact Rob Ridings at [phone].
cc Richard Spencer, US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington Field Office
Clarence Coleman, Federal Highway Administration
Jim Rerko, Division 6 Environmental Officer
Chris Militcher, Environmental Protection Agency
Travis Wilson, NC Wildlife Resources Commission
DWQ Fayetteville Regional Office
File Copy
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
Reviewing Office J ?( Q
Project Number 01- O I ir4 Due Date /e1- .14-0-7
After review of this project it has been determined that the ENR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtained in order for this project to comply with North
Carolina Law Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form All applications, information and guidelines
relative to these plans and permits arc available from the same Regional Office

Normal Process Time
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS (statutory time limit)
P
ermit to
construct
operate wastewater
treatnIxwent

[] s,
to
r
syste
fac
d sewer system extensions do sewn systems Application 90 days before begin constriction or award of construction 30 days

not
not discharging into state surface water
contracts. On-sue Inspection Post-application technical conference usual
(90 days)
NPDES - permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 180 days before begin activity On-site inspection Pre-application
U permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities conference usual Additionally, obtain permit to construct wastewater 90.120 days
discharging into state surface waters, tneiotment facility-granted after NPDES Reply time, 30 days after receipt of (NIA)
plans or issue of NPDES permit-whichever s later
U Water Use Permit Pre-application technical conference usually necessary (
days
w
U Well Construction Pemut Complete application must be received and pernut sued prior to the 7 days
installation of a well (15 days)
Application copy must be saved on each adjacent riparian property owner
U Dredge and Fill Permit On-site inspection Pre-application eonfaance usuuL Filling may require 55 days
Easement to Fill from N C Department of Admmstratron and Federal (90 days)
Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permit to constrict do operate Air Pollution Abatement Application must be submitted and permit nxaved prior to
0 facilities and/or Emission Sources as per IS A NCAC construction and operation of the source. If @ permit a required in an 90 days
(2Q 0100 thru 2Q 0300) area without local zoning, than there arc additional requirements and
tunelines (2Q 0113}

U Permit to construct do operate Transportation Facility as
per 15 A NCAC (2D 0800.2Q 0601) Application must be submitted at least 90 days prior to construction or 90
dam
modification of the source.
Any open bummg associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with IS A NCAC 2D 1900
Demolition or renovations of strocarex containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with IS A
(_J NCAC 201110 (a) (1) which requires notification and N/A 60 days
removal prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control (90 days)
Group 919.707-5950
U Complex Source Permit required under 15 A NCAC
2D 0800
imeetation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity An erosion do
imentatnon control plan will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed Plan filed with proper Regional Office (land Quality 20 days
Section) At least 30 days before beginning activity A fee of $65 for the first acre or soy put of an acre, An express review option a (30 days)
avu le with additional fax.
imentation and erosion control must be addressed in accordance with NCDOTs approved program. Particular attention should be given to (30 days)
design and installation of appropniate perimeter sediment trapping devices as well as stable stamwater conveyances and outlets.
On-site inspection usual Stray bond filed with ENR Bond amount vanes
U Mining Permit with type mine and number of acres of affected land Any are mined greater 30 days
than one acre must be permuted. The appropriate bond must be received (60 days)
before: the permit an be issued.
L) North Carolina Bummg pernut On-site inspection by N C. Division Forest Resources if permit exceeds 4 days I day
(WA)

? Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit - 22 On-site inspection by N C Division Forest Resources required 'd more than
f
l
f
d
I
ld b
h I day
counties in coastal N C with organic soils ive sera o
groun
c
earing activities are involved
ou
nspections s
e (N/A)
requested at last ten days before actual bum is planned.'
U il Refining Facilities N/A
days
(NIA) /A)
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction Applicant
must hire N C qualified engineer to prepare plans, inspect construction
certify construction a according to ENR approved plans May also require
U Dam Safety Permit permit under mosquito control program And a 404 permit from Corps of 30 days
Engineers An inspection of site is necessary, io verify Hazard Classification A (60 days)
minimum fee ofS200 00 must accompany the application An additional
processing fee based on a percentage or the total project cost will be required

Normal Process rune
(statutory time limit)
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
File surety bond of S5,ODO with ENR running to State of NC conditional that 10 days
U Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well any well opened by drill operator shall, upon abandonment, be plugged N/A
according to ENR rules and regulations
L7 Geophysical Exploration Permit Application filed with ENR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit 10 days
Application by letter No standard application form. N/A
Application fees based on structure size is charged Must include descriptions I5-20 days
G State Lakes Construction Permit & drawings of structure & proof of ownership of riparian N/A
property
Water Quality Certification N/A 60 days
130 days)
L CAMA Permit for MAJOR development 5250 00 fee must accompany application 55 days
(150 days)
? CAMA Permit for MINOR development $50 00 fee must accompany application 22 days
(25 days)
Several geodetic monuments arc located in or near the project area. If any monument needs to be moved or destroyed, please notify
? N C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687 Raleigh, NC 27611
? Abandonment of any wells, if required must be in accordance inch Title I5A Subchapter 2C 0100
? Notification of the proper regional office is requested if "orphan" underground storage tanks (USTS) are discovered during any excavation operation
? Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H 1000 (Coastal Stonnwater Rules) is requited 45 days
(N/A)
? Tar Pamlico or Neuse Riparian Buffer Rules required
t Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being Certain to cite comment authority)
i?]Zgl9
lk
?
U
,
'
,,

w

• REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office marked below.
C Asheville Regional Office
2090 US Highway 70
Swannanoa, NC 28778
[phone]
0 Mooresville Regional Office 0 Wilmington Regional Office
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301 127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Mooresville, NC 28115 Wilmington, NC 28405
[phone] [phone]
C Fayetteville Regional Office 0 Raleigh Regional Office 0 Winston-Salem Regional Office
225 North Green Street, Suite 714 3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101 585 Waughtown Street
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043 Raleigh, NC 27609 Winston-Salem, NC 27107
[phone] [phone] [phone]
0 Washington Regional Office
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
[phone]
t
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726 °t aid
s Branch
November 29, 2007
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D.
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr Thorpe:
This letter is in response to your November 21, 2007 letter which requested comments from the
U S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on the Federal Environmental Assessment for the
widening and extension of SR 1596 (Glensford Road) from US 401 Business (Raeford Road) to
SR 1400 (Cliffdale Road) iti Cumberland County, North Carolina (TIP No U-4422) These
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
(16 U S C 661-667d) and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16
U S C. 1531-1543)
Due to the urban nature of the project area and the lack of fish and wildlife habitat, the Service
does not have any concerns with tins project. Due to the lack of habitat, we concur that the
project will have no effect on federally threatened and endangered species We appreciate the
opportunity to review this project. If you have any questions regarding our response, please
contact Mr Gary Jordan at [phone], ext 32.
Sincerely,
C
Pete Benjamin
Field Supervisor
cc Chris Militscher, USEPA, Raleigh, NC
Travis Wilson, NCWRC, Creedmoor, NC
Richard Spencer, USACE, Wilmington, NC
John Sullivan, FHWA, Raleigh, NC
Mr Rick Hewlmn, SemvWy
130 Gillespie St
Fayetteville, NC 29301
Telephone [phone]
TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMIV MEE FAX (910) ;g-7 8
cksen@oo a,mhatand.ac us
FAYETTEVILLE AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
COMMISSIONER TIM MCNEILL
CHAIRMAN
April 24, 2008
Memorandum
To: Greg Burns PE.
NC Department of Transportation Division 6
From Rick Heicksen, Secretary
Subject: Project U-4422 Glensford Rd.
COMMISSIONER JEAN POWELL
VICE-CHAIRWOMEN
The MPO fully supports the widening of Glensford Rd. to a multi lane facility with a
Center medium and dual lane roundabouts at the intersections of Montclair Rd, Belford Rd. and
Chambersburg Rd.
If you have any questions please give me a call.
CONTINUING-COMPRr:AF.NSIVE- COOPERATIVE- TRAMPORTATIONPLANMNG