20160787_Public Notice_20090624

US`rCorps PUBLIC NOTICE
Of Engineers
Wilmington District
Issue Date: June 24, 2009
Comment Deadline: July 24, 2009
Corps Action ID #: SAW-2001-10771
All interested parties are herby advised that the Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
(Corps) has received an application from the North Carolina Department of
Transportation for work within jurisdictional waters of the United States. Location
information is described below and shown on the attached figure (online) and alternative
location maps (paper copies) . This Public Notice and all attached plans are also
available on the Wilmington District Web Site at www.saw.usace.army.mi[/wetlands
Applicant: Mr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph. D.
Environmental Management Director, PDEA
N. C. Department of Transportation
Project Development & Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Authority
The Corps will evaluate this application and a decide whether to issue, conditionally
issue, or deny the proposed work pursuant to applicable procedures of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. The Corps is only soliciting comment at this time pertaining to the
selection of the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative (LEDPA)
pursuant to applicable procedures of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Location
The proposed TIP project R-3826 involves widening existing NC 125 between NCSR
1 182 (East College Road) and US Highway 64 Alternative to three lanes and constructing
a NC Highway 125 bypass of Williamston from US Highway 64 Alternative to existing
125 northwest of Williamston, mostly on new location. The proposed project is
approximately 2.5 to 3.3 miles long, depending on the alternative chosen. (See Figure 5
online or separate alternatives location figures 1, 2N, and 4 for versions not online).
Originally there were 7 alternatives being considered and they were presented at a
Citizens Informational Workshop held in Williamston on January 9, 2003. Six
alternatives were selected by the NEPA/404 merger team for detailed study and are
presented in the Environmental Assessment. Table 1 presents the alternatives studied in
detail. During the Merger 01 process, several alternatives were dropped for consideration
and three alternatives, 1, 2N, and 4 were carried forward. The proposed facility would be
a two-lane roadway on multi-lane right of way for portions of the bypass on new location.

Approximately 100 feet of right of way will be required for portions of this project along
existing roadways and 175 feet of right of way will be required for portions on new
location. Partial control of access (one access per parcel for properties with no other
access) will be obtained along sections of the project constructed on new location. The
project would impact several streams and their wetlands. Only one stream, Skewakee
Gut is named. Other streams in the project area are unnamed tributaries of Skewakee
Gut, Beaverdam Creek and Mill Branch. Two ponds are also present within the study
area. The proposed project is located in the Lower Roanoke River Basin, Hydrologic
Unit 03010107. The starting point of the project is located at approximately Latitude
35.8347532N, Longitude 77.0914093W and ends at approximately Latitude
35.8746730N, Longitude 77.1127018W.
TABLEI
DETAILED STUDY ALTERNATIVES
Impacts computed based on approximate width required for future four-lane typical
section for the project.
Shaded cells in table indicate alternatives dropped from consideration following
detailed environmental surveys.
Alternative
I 2N 2S 4
Residential Relocatees 5 7 n M 0 14
Business Relocatees I I MIMI 2
Wetlands Affected (Acres)
Delineated 1.3 3.0 4.0 4.1 3.4 2.6
Streams Affected (Feet) 541 657 793 5'83 13 195
Open Water Impacts (Acres) 0 0 Una 0
Protected Species Habitat? No No No No M No
Effect Protected Species? No No M No
Effect Historic Properties? No No M 0 No
Involve Section 4(F)? No No M No No
Length New Location (Miles) 2.3 2.3 ©4 2.3 1.4 1.6
Farmland Affected (Acres) 45.4 43.6 39.5 42.4 0 47.5
Total Length (Miles) 2.5 2.4 001M 3.3
Existing Site Conditions
The project area is in Martin County, in northeastern North Carolina. The project study
corridor is dominated by forested and agricultural lands with scattered residential land
uses.
The project lies in the Inner Coastal Plain physiographic region of North Carolina. Flat
terrain, slow-moving streams, and swamplands characterize the area. Elevations in the
study area range from 4 to 26 feet above mean sea level.
All areas within the project study drain towards Skewakee Gut and three perennial
tributaries to Skewakee Gut, Mill Branch, and Beaverdam Creek. There are also several
intermittent and small perennial streams within the project area that discharge to these
streams. All these tributaries end up draining into the Roanoke River.
Based on the US Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) survey of Martin
County, the general soils associations within the project study area include the
Goldsboro-Lynchburg-Norfolk and Chastain-Bibb-Dorovan associations. The
Goldsboro-Lynchburg-Norfolk association is characterized by nearly level to gently
sloping, somewhat poorly drained to well drained soils that have a sandy or loamy
surface and a loamy subsoil; on uplands. The Chastain-Bibb-Dorovan association is
characterized by nearly level, poorly drained and very poorly drained soils that have a
muck or loamy surface and a sandy or loamy subsoil or underlying material; on flood
plains. There are four hydric soil mapping units, two non-hydric soil mappings units that
contain hydric inclusions, and nine other non-hydric soil mapping units with the project
study corridor. Soils in the study area can be found on page 39 of the Environmental
Assessment for TIP Project # R-3826. Descriptions of the soils can be found in the
Martin County Soil Survey.
Applicant's Stated Purpose
The purpose of the proposed project is to reduce truck traffic and improve safety on
existing NC Highway 125 through downtown Williamston. The purpose and need for
this project was agreed upon by federal, state, and local representatives in April 2002.
Background
An Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project was approved by FH WA on April 30,
2009. A citizen's informational workshop was held on January 9, 2003, at Martin
Community College to obtain comments and suggestions about the project from the
public. Based on the comments received at the workshop, the majority of the public
comments supported the project but some citizens expressed concerns about project
effects on their property, but agree with the need of the project. A public hearing for this
project will be held in the future prior to right of way acquisition. This hearing will
I r 1
provide more detailed information to the public about proposed improvements and will
give the public the opportunity to ask questions and submit written comments about the
proposed project and the alternatives under consideration.
Project Description
The project is identified as TIP 9 R-3826. The following description of work is taken
from data provided by the applicant. The alternatives and the no-action/build alternative
are described below. Additional findings for the project including the FH WA approved
Environmental Assessment may be reviewed at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Field Office at 2407 W. 5`h Street, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Project Alternatives
1. No-Action/Build Alternative: The "no build" alternative offers no improvements to
the project area. This alternative would avoid the environmental impacts anticipated to
occur as a result of the proposed project, but would not meet the purpose and need of the
project.
2. Alternative 1 - This alternative would follow the alignment of existing NC 125 between
SR 1182 (East College Road) to US 64A. North of US 64A, Alternative I would follow
the alignment of the existing industrial park access road to the CSX rail line. North of the
railroad tracks, Alternative I would extend northward and then northeasterly on new
location, crossing SR 1420 (McCaskey Road) approximately 1,300 feet east of Corey
Drive. Alternative I would then continue in a northeasterly direction, tying into existing
NC 125 approximately 2,500 feet northwest of Skewakee Gut.
3. Alternative 2N - This alternative would follow the alignment of existing NC 125
between NCSR 1182 (East College Road) to US 64A. North of US 64A, Alternative 2N
would follow the alignment of the existing industrial park access road to the CSX rail
line. North of the railroad tracks, Alternative 2N would extend northeasterly on new
location, crossing NCSR 1420 (McCaskey Road) approximately 2,300 feet east of Corey
Drive. Alternative 2N would then continue in a north and northeasterly direction, tying
into existing NC 125 approximately 2,500 feet northwest of Skewakee Gut.
Alternative 4 -This alternative would follow the alignment of existing NC 125 between
NCSR 1182 (East College Road) to US 64A. North of US 64A. Alternative 4 would
follow the alignment of the existing industrial park access road to the CSX rail line.
North of the railroad tracks, Alternative 4 would extend northward and then
northwesterly on new location, tying into NCSR 1420 (McCaskey Road) near Corey
Drive. Alternative 4 would then follow the alignment of NCSR 1420 from near Corey
Drive to approximately 1,300 feet west ofNCSR 1441 (Landfill Road). Alternative 4
would then continue on new location to the north-northwest, tying into existing NC 125
near NCSR 1421 (View Nichols Road).
Impacts to Waters of the United States
Impacts to water resources will be unavoidable due to the nature of the project study area.
Table 2 details a summary of resources and impacts for the three alternatives. Tables 3,
4, 5, and 6 detail the wetland and stream sites that are impacted by the proposed
alternatives and the effects of each of the alternatives on these resources. Wetland and
stream impacts are calculated from slope stake to slope stake, plus an additional 25 feet
outside of each limit as determined from the current preliminary design plans for each
alternative and they are based on an approximate width required for a future four-lane
typical section. In consultation with other agencies, NCDOT has determined that
compensatory mitigation will likely be required for the potential impacts associated with
this project. Wetland restoration or enhancement potential will be evaluated on site and
The Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) also could serve as a potential in-lieu-fee
source for compensatory mitigation. Appropriate compensatory mitigation for wetland
and stream impacts from the Preferred Alternative would be determined in consultation
with the appropriate Federal and State environmental resource and regulatory agencies.
TABLE 2
CURRENT STUDY ALTERNATIVES
Alternative
1 2N 4
Residential Relocatees 9 11 15
Business Relocatees 1 1 2
Wetlands Affected (Acres) 1.59 3.15 3.28
Streams Affected (Feet) 596 1,191 257
Open Water Impacts (Acres) 0 0 0
Protected Species Habitat? No No No
Effect Protected Species? No No No
Effect Historic Properties? No No No
Involve Section 4(F)? No No No
Receptors Impacted By Traffic Noise 2 3 8
Forested Areas Affected (Acres) 39.2 34.7 33.6
Farmland Affected (Acres) 45.4 43.6 47.5
Length New Location (Miles) 2.27 2.25 1.63
Total Length (Miles) 2.45 2.43 3.31
Total Cost
Millions $15.1 $15.3 $20.1
Impacts computed based on approximate width required for future four-
lane typical section for the project.
Shaded cells in table indicate highest impact or most unfavorable response.
TABLE 3
STREAMS WITHIN PROJECT AREA

Stream Avg.
Width
11 Avg.
Depth
ft
Cowardin
Classification

Perennial/ Intermittent/ Ditch
Skewakee Gut 25 4 to 6 R3 Perennial
UT 1 4.0 3 R3 Perennial
UT 2 2.0 1.5 R3 Perennial
UT 3 4 to 5 2.0 R3 Perennial
UT 4 3.0 2.0 R4/R3 Intermittent/Perennial
UT 5a 5.0 2.0 R4 Intermittent
UT 5b 3.5 2.0 R4 Intermittent
UT 6 4.0 2.0 R4/R3 Intermittent/Perennial
UT 7 4.0 2.0 44/R3 Intermittent/Perennial
UT 8 2.0 0.5 R4 Intermittent
UT 9 2.0 1.0 R4 Intermittent
UT 10 2.0 2.0 R4 Ditch
UT 11 4.0 1.5 R3 Perennial
UT 12 2.0 1.0 R4 Intermittent
UT 13 1.5 1.0 R4 Intermittent
UT 14 5.0 0.5 R3 Perennial
UT 15 5.0 1.5 R3 Perennial
UT 16 2.0 0.75 R4 Intermittent
UT 17 2.0 1.5 R3 Perennial
UT 18 1.5 0.5 R4- Intermittent
UT 19 2.0 1.5 R4 Intermittent
UT 20 2.0 1.0 R4 Intermittent
UT 21 4.0 1.0 R4 Intermittent
Unnamed - - Roadside Ditch
Anticipated effects of the project alternatives on area streams are presented on Table 4.
TABLE 4
PROJECT EFFECTS ON STREAMS
Effects of Alternative
(Feet)
Stream 1 2n, 4
UT1 112 83 0
UT3 50 263 0
UT4 0 14 0
UT5 233 192 0
UT6 0 11 0
UTIO 201* 628* 257*
Total 596 1,191 257
Streams not listed on this table will not be affected by
any of the project alternatives.
• - An error was discovered in the stream impacts
for Alternative 10 presented in the EA. These
are the corrected impacts.
TABLE 5
JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS WITHIN PROJECT AREA

Wetland Cowardin
Classification* Wetland
Classification Wetland
Rating
WA PFO Flood lain 28
WB PFO Riparian Hardwood 72
WC PSS Disturbed Forest 19
WD PFO Headwater 64
WE PFO Riparian Hardwood 72
WF PFO Headwater and Riparian
Hardwood 70
WG PFO Headwater 64
WH PFO Headwater 64
WI PFO Riparian Hardwood 70
WJ PFO Headwater and Riparian
Hardwood 70
WK PFO Headwater and Riparian
Hardwood 70
WL PFO Headwater 43
WM PSS Disturbed
Scrub Shrub 19
WN PFO Headwater 43
WP PFO Headwater 43
W PFO Headwater 43
WR PFO Headwater 43
WS PFO Headwater 43
WT PFO Headwater 43
WU PFO Headwater 43
WV PFO Headwater 43
WW PFO Headwater 43
WX PFO Headwater 65
WY PFO Riparian Hardwood 72
WZ PFO Cypress Gum Swam 56
*PFO-Palustrine Forested, PSS-Palustrine Scrub Shrub
TABLE 6
PROJECT EFFECTS ON WETLANDS
Effects of Alternative
(Acres)
Wetland 1 2N 4
WE 0 <0.01 0
WF 0.12 0.17 0
WG 0.39 0.10 0
WH 0 0.05 0
WK 0 0.02 0
W L 0.02 0 0
WM 1.06 2.80 2.88
WQ 0 0 0.23
WT 0 0 0.17
Total 1.59 3.15 3.28
Wetland areas not listed on this table will not be
affected by any of the project alternatives.
Schedule and Costs
Preliminary cost estimates for the Detailed Study Alternatives are presented in Table 2
above. The costs include right-of-way (including utility relocations) acquisition.
construction costs, and wetland/stream mitigation costs. The project is included in the
approved 2009-2015 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The project is
scheduled in the 2009-2015 STIP for right-of-way acquisition and construction in Federal
fiscal years 2012 and 2014.
Other Required Authorizations
This notice and all applicable application materials are being forwarded to the appropriate
State agencies for review. The Corps will generally not make a final permit decision
until the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) issues, denies, or waives
State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (PL 92-500). This
application for a Section 401 certification will be submitted to the NCDWQ after the
LEDPA has been chosen and the final design plans are available. Additional information
regarding the Clean Water Act certification process may be obtained from the NCDWQ
Central Office, Transportation Permitting Unit, 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Raleigh, North
Carolina 27604-2260, Attn: Mr. Brian Wrenn.
10
Essential Fish Habitat
This notice initiates the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Corps' initial
determination is that the proposed project will not adversely impact EFH or associated
fisheries managed by the South Atlantic or Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Councils
or the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Cultural Resources
The Corps has consulted the latest published version of the National Register of Historic
Places and is not aware that any registered properties, or properties listed as being
eligible for inclusion therein are located within the project area or will be affected by the
proposed work. Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistoric, or historical
data may be located within the project area and/or could be affected by the proposed
work. Archaeological surveys will be preformed following selection of the preferred
alternative for this project from north of the CSX rail line to existing NC 125 northwest
of Williamston.
Endangered Species
The Corps has reviewed the project area, examined all information provided by the
applicant and consulted the latest North Carolina Natural Heritage Database. Based on
available information, the Corps has determined pursuant to the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, that the proposed project will have no effect on federally listed endangered or
threatened species or their formally designated critical habitat.
Evaluation
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable
impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity on the public interest.
That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of
important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors
which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects
thereof, among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental
concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain
values (in accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation, shoreline
erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy
needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property
ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. For activities involving
the discharge of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, the evaluation of
the impact of the activity on the public interest will include application of the
Environmental Protection Agency's 404(b)(1) guidelines.
Commenting Information
In order to more fully integrate Section 404 permit requirements with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and to give careful consideration to our required
public interest review and 404 (b)(I ) compliance determination, the Corps of Engineers is
soliciting public comment on the merits of the proposal and on the alternatives evaluated
in the EA. At the close of this comment period, the District Engineer will evaluate and
consider the comments received as well as the expected adverse and beneficial impacts of
the proposed intersection improvement and road relocation to select the least
environmentally damaging, practicable alternative (LEDPA). The District Engineer is
not authorizing construction of TIP # R- 3826 at this time. A final department of the
Army permit could be issued, if at all, only after our review process is complete, impacts
to the aquatic environment have been minimized to the maximum extent practicable, and
a compensatory mitigation plan has been approved.
Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice,
that a public hearing be held to consider the application. Requests for public hearings
shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. Requests for a
public hearing shall be granted, unless the District Engineer determines that the issues
raised are insubstantial or there is otherwise no valid interest to be served by a hearing.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received
by the Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, until 5pm, July 24, 2009. Comments
should be submitted to William Biddlecome, Washington Regulatory Field Office, Post
Office Box 1000, Washington, North Carolina 27889.
12