19930214 Ver 1_Complete File_20100726

1
r
3,?2a
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary October 21, 1991 Director
Rcgn n,al Offices MEMORANDUM
Asheville
704/251-6208 To: Melba McGee
Fayetteville
919/486-1541 From: Alan Clark
f-i/ /
704/663IG Subject: Final EA/FONSI - US 220/ From NC 704 to Virginia State
04/66SV1lle
?9 >`?
Rockingham County
Raleigh
919/733-2314 The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The
Washington Division of Environmental Management is responsible for the
919/7)466481 issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for
Wilmington activities which may impact waters of the state including
919/395-39x) wetlands. The following comments are offered in response to the
Wi EA/FONSI prepared for this project.
nsu m - Salem
919/896-7007
1. NCDOT should require that the contractor not impact
additional wetland areas due to the disposal of excavated
spoil material, as a*source of borrow material or other
construction related activities.
2. As stated above, a 401 Water Quality Certification will
be required for this project. The document does not
acknowledge this requirement on page 28 as it should.
3. Endorsement of the EA/FONSI by DEM does not preclude the
denial of the 401 Certification upon application if wetland
impacts have not been avoided and minimized to the maximum
extent practicable.
4. In general, we prefer on-site, in-kind mitigation. The
ratios and locations should be discussed by all relevant
agencies (including COE, DEM, WRC, US FWS, etc.).
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed
to Ron Ferrell in DEM's Water Quality Planning Branch.
220ELLER.DOC
JRD/Wetlands
?cc: Ron Ferrell
PO Box 29535, lUcigh, North Canduia 27626{)535 Wt-phone [phone] / Pollution Prevention Pavs
An lqu.J Opp,nunnv Aaii--m f V1-i, I "i,Nn"

Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Planning and Assessment
Project Review Form

? Project located in 7th floor library
Project Number:( I County: Date: Date Response Due (firm deadline):
This project is being reviewed as Indicated below:
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All RIO Areas ? Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
? Fayetteville ? Air ? Coastal Management ? Water Planning

? M
ill ? Water ? Water Resources Environmental Health
ooresv
e ?Groundwater Wildlife ?Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer Forest Resources ? Radiation Protection
? Washington ? Recreational Consultant
` Land Resources David Foster

? Wilmington ? Codstal
MarmgementsCo,nsujtant Parks and Recreation (specify)
? Otfiors I Environmental Management
? Winston-Salem
OCT 9 foe

Manager Sign-Off/Region: +?E"?, 1 t fi,:? a Date: I -House Rovlewor/Agency:

Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient Information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attachedlauthority(ies) cited)
In-House Reviewer complete Individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated In attached comments (authority(les) cited)
?Applicant has been contacted
? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
?- N?EPA?and SEPA
B Other (specify and attach comments)
RETURN TO: -
Melba McGee
Ps 1w
Division of Planning and Assessment by Due Date shown.
wm 16,
f
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH r=iND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION O PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT
PROJECT REVIEW FORM -
TITLE - EAiFONSI FOR THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO US 220 FROM NC. 704
TO VIRGINIA STATE LINE (TIP 4R-2232)- ADDENDMUM
PROJECT DISTRIBUTION LIST
NO •- 94-035 WILDLIFE
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
COUNTY •- ROCKINGHAM FOREST RESOURCES
SOIL AND WATER
DATE - 03 /24/93 PARK AND RECREATION
WATER PLANNING
RESPONSE DUE DATE - ? oZ? 13 I._r"iND RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (lea(: -0-1 `
tl.INSTON SALEM REGIONAL OFFICE
AT WQ, GW, LCD
OTHER
MANAGER SIGN-OFF/REGION: DATE:
IN--HOUSE REVIEWER/AGENCY: DATE:
AS A RESULT OF THIS REVIEW, THE FOLLOWING IS SUBMITTED:
NO OBJECTION TO PROJECT AS PROPOSED
NO COMMENT
INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION
CONSISTENCY STATEMENT NEEDED NOT NEEDED
OTHER &SPECIFY AND ATTACH COMMENTS)
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT REQUIRED UNDER THE
. PROVISIONS OF NEPA AND SE1=A
RETURN TO MELBA MCGEE, DIVISION OF F'i_ANI'`lING AND ASSESSMENT
D" T)

US 220
From NC 704 to Virginia State Line
Rockingham County
T.I.P. Number R-2232
State Project 6.519002T
ADDENDUM TO STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/FINDING OF NO
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
APPROVED:
e ?//
7.23 q
Dat 1. 'J Ward-, -P . E. , Manager
/?-Planning and Environmental Branch

US 220
From NC 704 to Virginia State Line
Rockingham County
T.I.P. Number R-2232
State Project 6.519002T
ADDENDUM TO STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/FINDING OF NO
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:

Marc L. Hamel '
Project Planning Engineer
?•``'??H CARO''?...
•?OEES
SE
7
/NEE:,
%;NkL I N `l'? Z3 ?3
Assistant Manager of Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT

Addendum to Environmental Assessment/Finding of
No Significant Impact
Prepared by the Planning and Environmental Branch of
the North Carolina Department of Transportation
1. TVDe of Action
This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT),
Division of Highways action, Addendum to Environmental Assessment/Finding
of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) for US 220 in northwestern Rockingham
County, T.I.P. #R-2232.
2. Project Status
This project is to be constructed with State Trust Fund Intrastate
funds at a total estimated cost of $24,075,000. It is to be constructed
on existing right-of-way purchased when US 220 was constructed initially.
The EA/FONSI for the project was approved and circulated in
August 1991. Plans were developed for the project.
The current proposal is for the upgrading of US 220 to a four-lane
divided facility with a 30-foot depressed median from NC 704 northward to
0.2 miles north of the Virginia State Line (approximately 12.5 miles).
Existing US 220 is a 24-foot, two-lane facility with unpaved shoulders
stage constructed on a multi-lane (150 to 260-foot) right-of-way completed
in the early 1960's. The existing lanes were originally constructed
offset to allow for future widening.
The proposed improvements consist of adding new lanes, median, and
general resurfacing of the existing pavement. Also, improvements to the
existing interchanges and bridges are proposed.
4. Revisions to the Recommend Improvements
NCDOT proposes to extend project R-2232, the multi-laning of US 220,
southward to include improvements to the existing US 220/NC 704
interchange (which was not included in the EA/FONSI).
Improvements to the interchange include ramp repairs, shoulder
widening, and revisions to traffic flow. These upgrades will complete the
improvements to the US 220 corridor, enhancing traffic movement and
safety.
In the northeast, northwest, and southwest quadrants of the
interchange, the ramp intersections are being upgraded by removing
concrete nosings, and curbs, and replacing them with paved shoulders.
Also, ditches along the ramps are being regraded and stabilized where
needed to meet current standards.
V
In the southeast quadrant, 0.4 mile south of NC 704, access from
US 220 onto SR 2448 and SR 2449 is being cut by pavement removal of safety
concerns.
5. Environmental Effects
A. Natural Resources
BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
The proposed project will have small impacts on Roadside plant
communities. Dominant species of this disturbed community include: fescue
Festuca spp.), broomstraw (Andropogon sp.), trumpet creeper (Cam psis
radicans), sericea Lespedezaa cuneata), pokeweed Ph tolacca americana),
winged sumac Rhus copallina), smooth sumac LR. gla?bra Joe-Pye-weed
Eu atorium fistulosum), blackberry Rubus spp.), milkweed (Asclepias
verticillata) and butterfly weed (A. tuberosa). Impacts are to be kept
within t Fe existing right-of-way (80 meters).
Residential animal species are expected to be few given the limited
size and complexity of this habitat; however, during certain times of the
year, particularly when plants are in flower or seed, several species may
use this as foraging grounds. Birds such as American robin Turdus
americanus)*, northern mockingbird Mimus op lyglottos), Carolina wren
TThr ot?horus ludovicianus)* and northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis),
forage in this area on seeds, berries and insects. Rodents including the
house mouse Mus musculus) and Norway rat Ratus norvigicus) are abundant
in nearby business residential areas and often use disturbed roadside
habitats to forage and occasionally nest. Consequently, rodents, small
birds and large insects are preyed upon by red-tailed hawk Bueto
amaicensis) and American kestreal Falco sparverius). Scavengers such as
turcey vulture (Carthartes aura), American crow (Corvus brach_yrh?noc?hos)*,
and racoon (Procyon lotor)* frequent roadside habitats, feeding largely on
roadkills and garbage.
Note: Animals which were observed in the project area during site visit
are denoted by (*) in the text.
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS: BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
Because of the developed nature of the project area and the limited
scope of construction, impacts to faunal species will be minimal. Some
destruction of foraging habitat will occur, however, these impacts will be
temporary, because a new roadside community will develop after
construction is completed.
WATER RESOURCES/WETLANDS
There are no surface waters or wetlands within the project impact
area, consequently neither Section 404, or 401 permits will be required.
3
I
PROTECTED SPECIES
Plants and Animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are
protected under provisions of section 7 and section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. As of May 13, 1993, the Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) lists one federally protected species for
Rockingham County, the smooth coneflower Echinacea laevigata). Suitable
habitat for this species occurs within the project boundaries. Brief
descriptions of the smooth coneflower's characteristics and habitat
requirements are provided below.
Echinacea laevigata (smooth coneflower)
Status E
Family Asteraceae
Listed: 12-9-91
This perennial herb grows from simple or branched rhizomes, up to 1.5
meters tall. It has a smooth stem and few leaves. Habitat for the smooth
coneflower is found in areas of meadows, open woodlands, glades, cedar
barrens, roadsides, power line right-of-way, clear cuts, and dry limestone
bluffs. Plants usually grow in soil derived from calcareous parent
material. North Carolina populations are found in soils derived from
Diabase, a circumneutral igneous rock. Optimal sites are in areas with
abundant sunlight and little competition from other herbaceous plants.
Natural fires and large hebivores are important in the maintenance of the
smooth coneflowers habitat.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for this species occurs along the existing roadside.
Plant by plant, and windshield surveys for this species were conducted
along the alignment on June 22, by NCDOT Biologist Tim Savidge. No plants
were observed. It can be concluded that construction of this project is
not likely to have an adverse impact on the smooth coneflower.
B. Cultural Resources
As US 220 was stage constructed initially as a two-lane facility, and
the right-of-way was largely cleared and graded at that time, there are no
historic architectural or archaeological sites to be affected by the
proposed improvements. These findings were concurred with by the State
Historic Preservatoin Officer, Department of Cultural Resources.
6. Conclusions
The addition of the US 220/NC 704 interchange to the T.I.P.
Project #R-2232 will not have a significant adverse impact on the
environment. Due to the project's positive affects on traffic
movement and safety, the additional interchange enhancements are
recommended.
MH/wp
is 2- 1

1 7t al f7
a ?? :

\
32
I
e .1

to 734
tz
END PROJECT 7
1- a-- VIRGINU-- --
- --- -- -' -- -
-
- - - _..
?
---
NORTH CAROLINA 1380 '? •7 a a.e K
; ?

1 l!>t
' . 11802 :
712 ,::
114
Byirop ? ' _. _

?
? iii , t4 119-1
.? 100 i
?} ? in ,
1M2 1Ll lll} Lill.

ttVs
J
4?
P

`l - , IIZl .I LIlQ 11411,
.• \ 1104 1709 ?' ?
2 •I
_.
•T _
?'
?l 1x7. --1--,Buffalo ISO
7-` ^ ll?l ?lllZ ,
-
ZI'

\ /
\
1Nj0)d1,
G IMP 1349
- _- 1
2 1717 L772
14"
'a
1i12

C'
EN
1 ?.?
O . llii
to _ _--- e 7
.? •;i,
1?
--
till _ -'s \
4,i ED
IOL 15.672
lL2
.ILO ), Im
.. I Lfl! , !232
iii
ttdt am
•` till :i: LiN
9W

lllt .4 .t 1. _1211 249 ` hggg m ?
1221 >2l ? __
1 4 I e 7O ?f .S 01 13,
]l 7.
i II7! ll8\ . ?' 134114 i.] ]lei / lu 7141 1 1247 ' ,F5 CR
- V
,`• t ?'.,\? 1•. ?; 141
1 . /7133 q
121 .4 1 1791 7147
llll ( . I x? ] ^ .1
@( ]I4)
1312 'b\ ?7 ! 'IS 1137 '4 n4a ]u 4 ]w
1O ?,•T ?'. 13ffi \ 11]S ls9f ] ex« 2124 ?. n W o ?t: " 2114 1110
Z `
9 ?1 1715 1>is ?
tir 1771 1/177114 A334 iJ? 7A1S 1` ]le3 I]5• 1 ^ 211, _6 -
1, ? 4 211 I' v
' I 1715 720 225 Shiloh
+ A4!,h
J, 704 IS . 171 Nil ! `S 7795.. /71.1 / ]]le" 4 6 ].(?. , ?'132
7 F x11]
-? b I I3 ]]97' l
21)9..1 q '• 7145 ]
O Y" ? WM, ' shS 213, 131 7126
t MAYODAN 7171 213, ] 132 1151 t'
V 36.25' ,o, 2.677 r] 7130 /• E 5 213) 7170
JZL' .? I4ya?? ?.:: us .tJ 2- 2130 t` 2119 ~ Vo ]1x1
2117 17170 w2 121 `w.
1.9 J %li 1179 2132 , ,, - .
Y I? S ] M I122 7192 2117 0 7 2 LL
7113 7111 O 1121 a 1 ?L: ? 214! 7
1 R t .: i- IS2 J 2139 h 4121
.a. 1.` ln' 1104 2181 T A YI]Sf
11112 T ?o? 2.806 uv y 7 417
RIVER r rr1O _1/ x. q? ?n
] I V Il!! 1112 4 77?3 / 2199 9 7124 \ \0 / 1 1704 P1. 2304
I ]1... 1 v W .4 1 .J .I 6 1! 192 n704 227! 2)04 776
R964 ?, , .9 -? ':•?>a - °'" .3 f 71714 - 220!
BEGIN PROJECT 2707" 2769 U 2395-s
? ? ? ? 2LO6. - ? U?1 ? M9aearMill9 ,1304 M.,
j ; / 17_7 7219 6' J .1`. 229' _ 1aC 11k h 1'.7440 _
11L irL! (•, 7122
'l 11431144 1147 1110 a ]W7
ye 4- 4 r-
,
aT+ Or" 2397 ?p!? `` ?. n 7 ,,. 4 J
,,
q
. 79
ADDENDUM LOCATION 82
1 1119 Ilel , e (! 1172 : • UN
-To WAL~WA Co54 1 1169 1 X1127 % 1135 vr? 2041 2716 t G neo
11 t+ ...r ,N1J?
4e
n
u
t
3
Iri]
I?1
Y7174
t?27
?J.
1 '
I ? 1z74
? 1272-
111
- 1737
1114
67' NORTH CAROLINA
6
111
4+'
1,44
Hsu
1001
b
1303
2111
i1e J 2»9
IIIQ? ) 1?25.¦ 11. ? 1.1 . . 11,1w ]..• ? . ? a "I T?'- ? •y. ...,7?..: ._u
I N 2185
r
0
0
)UIHERN
EL
IR
RE
0, 2186
0
NEW MADISON WAREHOUSE INC.
P
TRUE GOSPEL
?F 1150 CA PT.
148 a 114 9 1148

1147
1110
((0
?N
N
5
P? J
?0?
P?
0 2
2187
x
704
006
2308 w
- NG ? p
CEMI
2448
2448
I 2308
2449
2308
G?? E K
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
(j4 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND RESEARCH BRANCH
US 220
FROM NC 704 TO DIVIDED SECTION
N. OF VA. STATE LINE
ROCKINGHAM COUNTY
R-2232
0 mile 0 2 FIG. 2

\ BUS
/
U220
n
7/0 ?4
.10
41, US 220
From NC 704 to Virginia State Line,
Rockingham County,
State Project Number 6.511013
T.I.P. Number R-2232
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dat,o L. J. ard, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental
Branch, NCDOT
US 220
From NC 704 to Virginia State Line,
Rockingham County,
State Project Number 6.511013
T.I.P. Number R-2232
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
August, 1991
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Marc Hamel
Project Planning Engineer
Richard B. Davis, P. E.
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
?Ssl
q.
SE aL l
c
6n i? _
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. TYPE OF ACTION ........................................... 1
II. PROJECT STATUS AND HISTORICAL RESUME ..................... 1
III. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION .................................... 1
A. General Description .................................
B. Proposed Improvements ........... ..................... 1
2
1.
2. General Location ..............................
Length of Proposed Project ..................... 2
2
3. Project Terminals .............................. 2
4.
5. Design Speed ...................................
Cross Section .................................. 2
2
6.
7.
8. Right-of-Way ...................................
Access Control ...............................
Intersection Treatment ......................... 3
3
3
9. Structures ..................................... 3
a. Roadway Structures ........................ 4
b. Railroad Structures ....................... 5
C. Drainage Structures ....................... 5
10. Interchange Revisions ........................... 5
11. Median Crossovers ............................... 5
12. Parking ......................................... 6
13. Sidewalks .................................... 6
14. Bicycle Facilities .............................. 6
15. Landscaping ..................................... 6
16. Railroad Work Required ........................ 6
17. Special Permits Required ........................ 6
18. Cost Estimates ................. 6
IV. NEED FOR PROJECT .......................................... 7
A. Characteristics of Existing Facility ................ 7
' 1. Length of Roadway Section Studied .............. 7
2. Pavement Width and Shoulders ................... 7
3. Right-of-Way ................................... 7
4. Sidewalks ... ................................ 7
5. Roadside Interference ......................... 7
6. Type of Roadside Development ................... 7
7. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature .............. 8
8. Restricted Sight Distance ...................... 8
9. Structures .... ... . ... ...... ......... 8
10. Intersecting Roads and Type ofControl .......... 8
11. Speed Zones ........... ... ................. 8
12. Railroad Crossings and Control ................. 8
13. School Bus Data ................................ 8
V.
VI.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
B. Transportation Plan ........................... 9
C. Traffic Accident Analysis .......................... 9
0. Projected Traffic Volumes .......................... 10
E. Capacity Analysis .................................. 10
F. Intrastate System . ..... ...... ............. 11
G. Benefits to State, Region, and Community ........... 11
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ................................. 12
A. Description of Alternatives ........................ 12
1. Location Alternative .......................... 12
2. Design Alternative ............................ 12
3. No-Build Alternative .......................... 12
4. Public Transportation ......................... 12
SOC IAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT .............. 13
A. Social Effects ..................................... 13
1. Land Use Planning ............................. 13
a. Status of Planning ....................... 13
b. Existing Land Use ........................ 13
C. Existing Zoning ... . .. . ....... 14
d. Project Compatibility with Local Plans ... 15
e. Future Land Use Plans .................... 15
2. Neighborhood Characteristics .................. 16
3. Relocation and Family Impact .................. 17
4. Public Facilities and Services ................ 17
5. Historic and Cultural Resources ............... 17
a. Historical-Architectural ................. 17
b. Archaeological Resources ................. 17
B. Economic Factors ................................. 21
C. Environmental Effects .............................. 22
1. Introduction .................................. 22
2. Physical Elements ............................. 22
a. Soils .................................. 22
b. Water Resources .......................... 24
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
3. Biological Elements ........................... 25
a. Vegetation Resources ..................... 25
b. Wildlife Resources ... .. ............ 31
C. Threatened & Endangered Species .......... 32
d. Unique Natural Areas ..................... 33
D. Air Quality Analysis ............................... 33
E. Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise Analysis .. 36
MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
APPENDIX
State Environmental Assessment/
Finding of No Significant Impact
Prepared by
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT),
combined Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI).
The NCDOT has determined that this project will not have any
significant impact on the human or natural environment. The NCDOT takes
full responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and content of this document.
II. PROJECT STATUS AND HISTORICAL RESUME
US 220 Bypass was stage constructed from the late 1940's through the
early 1960's as State and Federal Aid projects (See Figure 1). Initially,
the route was constructed as a two-lane facility with interchanges at
major routes. The original two lanes were constructed on an offset to the
east of the anticipated, divided multi-lane centerline to allow for future
upgrading.
The 1991-1997 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) calls
for widening the existing two-lane roadway to a four-lane divided
facility. Right-of-way acquisition is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year
1991, and construction is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 1993.
A public meeting on the project was held in Mayodan in May of 1990.
There was no public opposition to this project.
III. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
A. General Description
The project consists of the upgrading of US 220 to a four-lane
divided facility with a 30-foot depressed median from NC 704 to the
Virginia State Line (See Figure 2). Note also that this project extends
0.2 miles into Virginia, accommodating a transition, and necessitating
coordination with Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). North of
the State Line, upgrades to the northbound lane only will be completed in
this project. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has
planning underway to resurface and improve the alignment of the southbound
lanes in Virginia in the next 5 to 6 years.
2
This project is approximately 12.5 miles in length. These improvements
will provide a four-lane link from the existing four-lane section of
US 220 in Virginia, southward for an eventual continuous multi-lane
highway to Greensboro. The new southbound lanes are to be constructed to
the west of the existing pavement.
B. Proposed Improvements
1. General Location
TIP project R-2232 is located in northwestern Rockingham county,
and will complete the multi-laning of US 220 from Greensboro to the
existing multi-lane in Virginia that continues into Martinsville (See
Figure 1).
2. Length of Proposed Project
The length of the proposed project is approximately 12.5 miles,
0.2 mile of which is in Virginia.
3. Project Terminals
South of the project, at the NC 704 interchange , US 220
consists of a four-lane divided facility with a 30-foot median, two
24-foot pavements, and 4-foot paved shoulders. This divided section
was constructed through this interchange when US 220 was initially
built. The cross section south of NC 704 is a two-lane, 24-foot
facility with 10-foot unpaved shoulders. This segment, from NC 704
southward to NC 68, is currently being widened to a four-lane divided
section with a 30-foot median under T.I.P. project number R-2019.
North of the project, in Virginia, US 220 is also a four-lane
divided facility. This facility has a 22-foot, two-lane pavement
southbound, and a 24-foot, two-lane pavement northbound. The
shoulders are unpaved, and of variable width. Median width varies in
Virginia between 60 and 120 feet (the latter at the median cross-
over). The Virginia Department of Transportation has planning
underway to upgrade the southbound lanes of US 220 in Virginia in the
next 5 to 6 years.
4. Desi n Speed
The project will be designed for a design speed of 60 MPH. This
corresponds to the original design speed of 60 MPH for the existing
roadway. It is anticipated that the posted speed limit will be 55
MPH for the entire project.
5. Cross Section
The proposed project consists of widening US 220 to a four-lane
divided facility with a 30-foot grassed median. This widening is to
be performed along the west side of the existing two-lane facility.
Two 24-foot pavements with 10-foot usable shoulders (2 feet paved)
are recommended.
3
Ordinarily, recommended minimum median width is 46 feet for this
type of cross section. However, in this case an exception is
recommended for the following reasons:
a. Continuity - The adjoining project, R-2019 has been
designed with a 30-foot median.
b. Cost - Although the additional amount of required right of
way is small, the number of parcels involved would make
acquisition costs rise rapidly.
6. Right-of-Way
The existing right-of-way width along US 220 is a variable 150
to 260 feet (with partial control of access) from NC 704 to US 220
Business, approximately 1 mile from the Virginia State Line. The
remainder of the project in North Carolina has a claimed 150-foot
right-of-way. The right-of-way for the portion of the project in
Virginia is to be provided by the State of Virginia. The
right-of-way from NC 704 to US 220 Business is offset to the west in
anticipation of future widening. On the majority of the project
existing right-of-way will be sufficient to contain proposed
upgrades. However, small additional amounts of right-of-way will be
necessary at selected locations.
7. Access Control
Partial control of access was acquired when US 220 Bypass was
initially constructed. Full control of access at interhanges was
purchased when the interchanges were constructed, and will be
maintained in this project.
8. Intersection Treatment
All existing intersections on the project are to be retained.
There are no existing signals on the route, and no additional signals
are planned.
Additional left-turn lanes are to be added in the median at the
following intersections on US 220: SR 2209 (Mountain Road); SR 2206
(Peddle Road); SR 1375 (Craddock Road); SR 1376 (Paw Paw Road);
US 220 Business ; SR 1500 (Fulp Sawmill Road); and SR 1380 (Spencer
Road) (See Figure 2).
9. Structures
When US 220 was constructed, provision was made for future
widening to a four-lane divided cross section. Four structures carry
roadways over US 220 Bypass and were constructed to allow this
widening. These routes are SR 2153 (1#123), NC 135 (474), NC 770
(769), and SR 1360 (7170) (See Figure 2). There are three structures
carrying US 220 Bypass over existing features. These are bridge 763
over the Dan River, bridge 7131 over the Norfolk and Western Railway
4
(N.& W. RY.), and bridge 4150 over US 220 Business. There is also
one structure (#R 179) carrying the N.& W. RY. over US 220 near the
north end of the project.
a. Roadway Structures
Dan River, Bridge #63 - It is recommended that this bridge over
the Dan River be retained and rehabilitated, and that a
parallel structure be constructed to carry the southbound
lanes. The existing structure should also be retrofitted
with guard rails that meet current design criteria.
SR 2153 (River Rd.), Bridge #123 - This structure carries
SR 2153 over US 220. It is recommended that this structure
be retained.
Note: It should be noted that this structure was
built when US 220 was initially constructed. Along with
the other facilities carrying roadways over US 220 Bypass,
this older structure has restrictive minimum clearances,
both vertical and lateral. In some cases it may be
necessary to mill the existing US 220 pavement to insure
acceptable minimum vertical clearances. Capacity analyses
determined that traffic volumes do not warrant rebuilding
of any of the existing interchange structures to
accommodate additional lanes over US 220.
NC 135, Bridge #74 - This structure carries NC 135 over US 220
Bypass. It is recommended that this structure be retained
(see note under SR 2153 above).
N.& 14. Railway, Bridge #131 - This structure carries US 220 over
the N.& W. RY. and is recommended to be retained,
rehabilitated, and retrofitted with new guard rails. A
parallel structure will be necessary to carry the
southbound lanes.
US 220 Business, Bridge 4150 - This structure carries US 220
over US 220 Business. It is recommended that this bridge be
retained, rehabilitated, and retrofitted with new guard
rails. A parallel structure is needed to carry the
southbound lanes.
NC 770, Bridge #69 - This bridge carries NC 770 over US 220 and
is recommended to be retained. See note above under SR
2153.
SR 1360 (Sandy Ridge Road), Bridge #170 - This bridge carries
SR 1360 over US 220 and is to be retained (see note under
SR 2153 above).
5
b. Railroad Structures
Bridge #R 179 carries the N.& W. RY. over US 220
approximately 0.7 mile south of the Virginia State Line. This
bridge is recommended to be removed and replaced on new location
south of the existing structure. The existing bridge has
insufficient lateral and vertical clearances, and has no
provision for a second pair of lanes.
C. Drainage Structures
There are five existing drainage structures on the project
carrying US 220 over creeks and small tributaries. These
structures are recommended to be retained and lengthened as
necessary to accommodate the planned upgrades.

10. Interchange Revisions
Interchanges at NC 135, US 220 Business, NC 770, and SR 1360 are
to be revised to accommodate the four-laning of US 220 in this
project. Each of these interchanges were originally constructed to
allow for future upgrading. Revisions are as follows:
NC 135 - This interchange presently has four-lane pavement, and
therefore revisions are limited to resurfacing and removal of
existing pavement transitions.
US 220 Business - This interchange requires extensive revision. As
noted under structure recommendations, a second bridge will be
constructed, and a second pair of US 220 lanes will be
constructed through the interchange. The northwest .and
southeast ramps will be revised to remove single access points
from each ramp. The existing alignment through the interchange
will be modified slightly as well to provide better roadway
geometry.
NC 770 - This interchange will require modification to the southwest
ramp to improve alignment and eliminate an existing access
point.
SR 1360 - This interchange will require minor realignment of the
ramps to accommodate the southbound additional lanes.
11. Median Crossovers
Median crossovers will be provided at all major intersections
and at other selected locations in accordance with NCDOT design
standards. Left-turn lanes will be provided at each crossover to
enhance safety and improve traffic operations.
6
12. Parking
There is no existing parking on the project that would be
affected by planned upgrades. There is no new parking facilities
planned in conjunction with the project.
13. Sidewalks
There are no sidewalks existing or planned on the project.
14. Bicycle Facilities
It was determined by the NCOOT Bicycle Coordinator that no
special accommodations for bicycles is indicated for this project.
15. Landscaping
No special landscaping plans are proposed for this project.
16. Railroad Work Required
Modification to the Norfolk and Western Railway will be
necessary to accommodate the planned replacement of bridge #R 179
over US 220 Bypass. A relocation of approximately 1800 feet of track
to the south of existing will be necessary to meet design standards.
17. Special Permits Required
Permits required are covered fully under "Biological Elements -
Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation" below. It is anticipated
that all areas may be covered under Nationwide Permits.
18. Cost Estimates
Construction Cost
Roadway $22,400,000
Structures $ 4,900,000
Construction Total $27,300,000
Right-of-way Cost $ 11000,000
Prior Years Cost 5 1,150,000
Total Cost $29,450,000
Construction cost estimates include engineering and
contingencies and right-of-way estimates include acquisition and
utility-costs.
7
IV. NEED FOR THE PROJECT
A. Characteristics of Existing Facility
1. Length of Roadway Section Studied
The total length of the project is approximately 12.5 miles, 0.2
of which is in the State of.Virginia.
2. Pavement Width and Shoulders
The basic pavement width for the project is 24 feet. The
shoulders are generally 10 feet, with 4 feet of this width stabilized
with gravel.
Through the NC 135 interchange, the pavement widens to a
four-lane divided section. This divided section has two, 24-foot
pavements with shoulders as described above.
From the NA W. Railway north to the state line the pavement
width decreases to 22 feet with 12-foot shoulders.
North of the state line, US 220 has varying pavement widths due
to this section encompassing a transition from two-lane to four-lane
pavement.
3. Right-of-Way
The existing right-of-way width along US 220 Bypass is a
variable 150 to 260 feet recorded from NC 704 to the US 220 Business
interchange. This section has partial control of access. The
remainder of the project in North Carolina has a claimed 150 foot
right-of-way. The section in Virginia has a varying width due to the
transition from two-lane to four-lane.
The existing roadway was constructed on an offset east of center
to accommodate future widening.
4. Sidewalks
There are no existing sidewalks on the project.
5. Roadside Interference
Roadside interference is very light on the project.
6. Type of Roadside Development
Development along the project is predominantly sparse
residential, with small commercial properties intermingled
throughout. Due to recorded right-of-way owned by the state,
setbacks on the west are generally adequate for the proposed
upgrades.
8
7. Horizontal and Vertical Curvature
The maximum grade on the project is 4%, occurring at four,
approximately one half mile sections.
There is one horizontal curve with a curvature of 3 degrees
located approximately 1200 feet north of SR 2210. There are no
curves with a greater degree of curvature.
8. Restricted Sight Distance
There are four zones where sight distance is limited to
approximately 600 feet, two where it is limited to 800 feet, and two
where it is limited to 1000 feet.
9. Structures
Existing structures are described above under "III. Description
of Action, B. Proposed Improvements, 9. Structures."
10. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control
Listing from south to north, roads intersecting the project
at-grade are as follows:
Route/Name
SR 2210, Camden Road
SR 2164, Frye Road
SR 2209, Mountain Road
SR 2206, Peddle Road
SR 1375, Craddock Road
SR 1376, Paw Paw Road
US 220 Business
SR 1380, Spencer Road
Type of Control
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
Stop Sign
11. Speed Zones
The speed limit on the project is 55 mph.
12. Railroad Crossings and Type of Control
There are two locations where US 220 crosses the N. &. W.
Railway. Each of these are grade separated, and are described above
under "III. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION, B. Proposed Improvements, 9.
Structures".
13. School Bus Data
Projected volumes for 1991 anticipate approximately 24 total
trips by busses on US 220, 12 mornings and 12 afternoons.
9
B. Transportation Plan
US 220 Bypass appears on the adopted Madison/Mayodan Thoroughfare
Plan (adopted 1983) as a major existing thoroughfare. Outside the
thoroughfare planning limits, US 220 Bypass appears as a Federal Aid
Secondary/Rural Major Collector on the County Functional Classification
Plan.
C. Traffic Accident Analysis
The following table presents a comparison between accident rates
along the project and the statewide rates for all rural "US" routes. The
rates for US 220 were obtained from studies conducted between 1986 and
1988. The average statewide rates were obtained from studies conducted
from 1986 through 1988.
Accident Rates
(per 100 million vehicle miles)
Accident Type
Rates along US 220
Average Statewide
Rate, rural US
routes (1987-1989)
Total rate 108.27 188.0
Fatal 2.55 3.7
Non-fatal 44.58 88.3
Nighttime 36.94 53.7
Wet conditions 24.20 41.7
These figures show the rates for all types of accidents along the project
are lower than the corresponding statewide rates (with the exception of
fatal accidents, which has approximate parity).
Twenty-two percent of the recorded accidents involved vehicles
running off the road to the right; twenty percent involved angle
collisions; fifteen percent involved rear-end collisions; twelve percent
involved striking animals; and eleven percent ran off the road to the
left. It is anticipated that the proposed improvements, which include
providing an additional travel lane in each direction, with a median and
improved shoulders, will enhance safety along the project.
Three accidents occurred near the southern end of the project (at the
NC 704 interchange); four near the Dan river Bridge (#63); twelve near the
NC 135 interchange (#74); and seven near SR 1378. During the design
stage, consideration will be given to enhancing safety and traffic
operation at these locations.
10
D. Projected Traffic Volumes
It is anticipated that traffic volumes will range from a low of
14,900 vehicles per day (vpd) north of NC 770, to a high of 22,400 (vpd)
near NC 704 in the year 2011. The current volumes at these locations are
approximately 6200 vpd and 9000 vpd respectively. Projected traffic
volumes along the project, design hour data, and truck percentages are
shown in Figure 3.
E. Capacity Analysis
The concept of levels of service is defined as a qualitative measure
describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, and their
perception by motorists and/or passengers. A level-of-service definition
generally describes these conditions in terms of such factors as speed and
travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and
convenience, and safety.
Six levels of service are defined for each type of facility for which
analysis procedures are available. They are given letter designations,
from A to F, with level-of-service A representing the best operating
conditions and level-of-service •F the worst. In general, the various
levels-of-service are defined as follows for uninterrupted flow
facilities:
Level -of-service A represents free flow. Individual users are
virtually unaffected by the presence of others in the traffic stream.
Freedom to select desired speeds and to maneuver within the traffic stream
is extremely high. The general level of comfort and convenience provided
to the motorist, passenger, or pedestrian is excellent.
Level-of-service B is in the range of stable flow, but the presence
of other users in the traffic stream begins to be noticeable. Freedom to
select desired speeds is relatively unaffected, but there is a slight
decline in freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream from LOS A. The
level of comfort and convenience provided is somewhat less than at LOS A,
because the presence of others in the traffic stream begins to affect
individual behavior.
Level-of-service C is in the range of stable flow, but marks the
beginning of the range of flow in which the operation of individual users
become significantly affected by interactions with others in the traffic
stream. The selection of speed is now affected by the presence of others,
and maneuvering within the traffic stream requires substantial vigilance
on the part of the user. The general level of comfort and convenience
declines noticeably at this level.
Level-of-service D represents high-density, but stable, flow. Speed
and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted, and the driver and
pedestrian experiences a generally poor level of comfort and convenience.
Small increases in traffic will generally cause operational problems at
this level.
11
Level -of-service E represents operating conditions at or near the
capacity level. All speeds are reduced to a low, but relatively uniform
value. Freedom to maneuver in the traffic stream is extremely difficult,
and it is generally accomplished by forcing a vehicle or pedestrian to
"give way" to accommodate such maneuvers. Comfort and convenience levels
are extremely poor, and driver or pedestrian frustration is generally
high. Operations at this level are usually unstable, because small
increases in flow of minor perturbances within the traffic stream will
cause breakdowns.
Level -of-service F is used to define forced or breakdown flow. This
condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approaching a point
exceeds the amount that can traverse the point. Queues form behind such
locations. Operations within the queue are characterized by stop and go
waves, and they are extremely unstable. Vehicles may progress at
reasonable speeds for several hundred feet or more, then be required to
stop in cyclic fashion. Level-of-service F is used to describe the
operating conditions within the queue, as well as the point of the
breakdown. It should be noted, however, that in many cases operating
conditions of vehicles or pedestrians discharged from the queue may be
quite good. Nevertheless, it is the point at which arrival flow exceeds
discharge flow which causes the queue to form, and level-of-service F is
an appropriate designation for such points.
A capacity analysis was performed for both the existing two-lane
highway and the proposed four-lane divided facility based upon projected
traffic volumes for the years 1991 and 2011. These analyses indicate that
if no improvements are made to US 220, the existing two-lane facility will
operate primarily at LOS E in the year 1991, and LOS F or worse in the
year 2011 during peak hours. With the proposed four-lane widening, US 220
is expected to operate at LOS C or better in the year 1997 (build out),
and primarily at LOS D or better in the year 2011. Based on this capacity
analysis, the proposed four-laning of US 220 will allow that facility to
operate at an acceptable level- of-service through the design year.
F. Intrastate System
US 220 in Rockingham County is identified as an Intrastate Corridor
in the NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program. This corridor serves as
a north-south connector between Greensboro and cities in Virginia such as
Martinsville. On the Intrastate System, US 220 is listed as "Needing
Improvement" within the boundaries of this project. Its improvement will
assist economic development in Rockingham County by providing upgraded
access to this northern portion of the Piedmont.
G. Benefits to State, Region, and Conxnunity
The improvement of US 220 Bypass will provide better access, when
coupled with TIP project #R-2019, from Greensboro to points north in North
Carolina and Virginia. This will complete the multi-laning of this
important intrastate corridor north of Greensboro.
12
The improved access to the area, savings in operating costs, reduced
accidents, reduced travel times, and the general improvement in the ease
and convenience of travel will benefit the state and region as well as the
local community.
V. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
A. Description of Alternatives
1. Location Alternative
The alternative of building the facility on new location was
considered and rejected. The original construction of US 220 Bypass
was built to allow for future upgrading to a four-lane divided
facility. Much of the existing right-of-way is owned by the State,
and development is set back to allow for this upgrading. Impacts to
the environment in this area have therefore already occurred. Any
new location alternative would therefore be more expensive, and would
have severe social and ecological impacts in comparison to the
recommended widening.
2. Design Alternative
The alternative of constructing a five-lane cross section was
considered. The main advantage to a five-lane is the reduced
right-of-way required. As this route was initially set up for a
divided section, with clearing and set-backs to accommodate, this
does not prove to be an advisable alternative. Also, with divided
sections in place at interchanges, and divided sections at the
project terminals, a five-lane is not logical.
3. No-Build Alternative
If the no-build alternative were chosen, it would have a
definite negative impact on transportation in the proposed corridor.
Due to heavy truck percentages on the route, and anticipated
increases in traffic volumes, levels of service are expected to drop
noticably in the future. Without the proposed improvements, the
motorists using US 220 Bypass would not enjoy the comfort and safety
benefits that are expected to accompany the improvements. As traffic
loads and accompanying congestion continue to increase on the
unimproved highway, the accident potential of the highway will
worsen. The no-build alternative was thus rejected.
4. Public Transportation
As this segment of rural highway has no direct or adjacent
connection to any proposed or existing public transportation network,
the alternative of public transportation is not a viable option.
13
VI. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND,.ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT
A. Social Effects
1. Land Use and Planning
a. STATUS OF PLANNING
The proposed project lies within the jurisdictions of
Rockingham County, North Carolina, Henry County, Virginia, and
the Towns of Madison and Stoneville, North Carolina, and the
Town of Ridgeway, Virginia.
Rockingham County adopted in 1988 the 1988-2000 Development
Guide Map, however no text accompanies the map. The County has
zoning authority, although only selected areas within the county
are zoned. The Town of Madison adopted the Madison, North
Carolina Development Plan: 1989-2010, July, 1989. The town of
Stoneville adopted the Land Development and Housin Plan in
1979. It has not been updated since that time. Both towns have
zoning authority within their jurisdictions.
Henry County, Virginia enforces its zoning ordinance within
Ridgeway's jurisdiction. Ridgeway does not have a land use plan
in effect.
It should be noted that the Towns of Madison, Mayodan, and
Stoneville have requested that the State Legislature grant their
request to extend the limits of their extraterritorial
jurisdiction (ETJ) to 2.5 miles from the municipal limits. The
ETJ boundary is currently set at one mile. If this is
permitted, the three towns will have jurisdiction over more than
eleven miles of US 220.
To prepare for this, the Towns have developed a draft
report entitled, Recommended Actions for the US 220 Corridor:
Rockingham County, North Carolina. This draft report attempts
to establish policy for the coordination of the planning and
zoning efforts to the three communities, and Rockingham County.
As a result of this effort, the three communities are working
toward establishing a unified planning board, which would be
specifically responsible for the US 220 Corridor. This would go
into effect with the new ETJ boundaries if approved.
b. EXISTING LAND USE
The land in the vicinity of US 220 from NC 704 to the
project terminus in Virginia is generally undeveloped. It is
primary wooded, though some farms are located in the area. Some
commercial and light industrial establishments are scattered
along the roadway, some with direct access to US 220. These
businesses tend to be located in or near the municipal
jurisdictions of Madison or Stoneville. Very little residential
development exists along the roadway, through a few residential
structures front US 220 in Virginia.
14
A new high school is under construction in the northwest
quadrant of NC 135 and US 220.
C. EXISTING ZONING
Rockingham County
Most of the land adjacent to US 220 remains unzoned. Those
areas which are zoned often simply reflect existing land uses.
A description of the County zoning districts and their location
along US 220 Bypass is provided below.
Highway Commercial Districts (HC) permit most retail and
commercial uses, as well as multi-family development such as
townhouses and condominiums. Seven HC districts are located
along US 220. One is located on the east side of the roadway,
just outside of the Dan River floodplain, near Madison. Three
other districts are located near Madison, one on each side
US 220, at NC 135, another in the southeast quadrant of SR 2150
(River Road) and US 220.
The other HC districts ae located near the Virginia State
Line. Two are located at the intersection of US 220 with US 220
Business. Another is located on the east side of the roadway,
and is bounded to the north by the Virginia State Line.
Town of Madison
The land west of US 220 within Madison's ETJ is zoned
Residential (R-20), permitting single family development on lots
no less than 20,000 square feet in size.
Town of Stoneville
Most of the land within Stoneville's jurisdiction near
US 220 is zoned Residential-Agriculture, which permits
residential development on lots no less than 20,000 square feet
in size, in addition to agricultural uses.
Two Highway Business Districts (B-1) exists, one in the
northeast quadrant of NC 770 and US 220, the other on the east
side of the roadway, north of SR 1391 (Sawmill Road). Most
retail uses are permitted in these districts.
Two Industrial Districts (I-1) are also located near
US 220, one in the southeast quadrant of NC 770 and US 220, one
in the southeast quadrant of NC 770 and US 220, the other
adjacent to the B-1 district near SR 1391, described above.
A Residential Suburban District (RS) is located along
US 220 Business near its interchange with US 220 Bypass.
15
Henry County, Virginia
The land use on the west side of US 220 is zoned
Industrial, which permits both heavy and light uses, such as
manufacturing the warehousing. The land on the east side of
'US 220 is zoned Agricultural.
d. PROJECT COMPATIBILITY WITH LOCAL PLANS
None of the plans specifically address the proposed
widening of the US 220 Bypass. However, local officials from
each of the affected communities have formed a US 220 Committee,
in the interest of assisting in the project's development and in
beginning advance planning efforts. Public officials indicate
that the proposed widening is generally supported.
Each locality is hopeful that the widening will help
attract additional industrial development, as a means of
strengthening their employment base. It can therefore be
concluded that the project is compatible with the goals of the
various communities.
Farmland
As the proposed improvment will occur within the existing
right-of-way, the project is exempt from the regulations
established by the Farmland Protection Policy Act.
e. FUTURE LAND USE PLANS
Town of Madison
The overall theme of the Madison Development Plan is to
encourage compact development close to the center of Town,
thereby keeping public service costs to a minimum. The Town
also wishes to encourage additional light industrial
development, in an attempt to diversify its economy. The Town's
land use plan addresses the area just south of NC 704 to nearly
one mile north of the Dan River, west of US 220.
The northwest quadrant of NC 704 and US 220 is designated
for Commercial development. The northwest quadrant of NC 135'
and US 220 is designated Community Facility, which accommodates
the high school now under construction.
Single family Residential development is expected north of
the Dan River, along SR 2177.
Town of Stoneville
According to the 1979 Land Development and Housing Plan,
most of the land within Stoneville 's ETJ will remain
Residential-Agricultural through the year 2000.
16
Exceptions include the land in the western quadrants of the
interchange of US 220 and NC 770. In the northwestern quadrant,
Commercial Development is expected to occur, surrounded by
Industrial Development to the north and east. The southwestern
quadrant is similar, with Commercial Development in the
immediate vicinity of the interchange, and Industrial
Development to the south.
Residential Development is expected in the triangle formed
by US 220 Business and US 220 Bypass, in the southwestern
portion of Stoneville. This development is contingent on the
availability of sewer.
Henry County, Virginia
Although a current land use map and comprehensive plan
exists for Henry County, they do not address land within
incorporated areas, including the Town of Ridgeway.
It should be noted that some conflicts exist between
Rockingham County's land use map and the plans prepared by the
individual towns. In such cases, it should be assumed that the
municipal land use plan precedence.
Rockingham County
The 1988-2000 Development Guide Map indicates that most of
the land in the vicinity of US 220 will remain
Agricultural-Residential. Several areas have been identified
for Residential-Single Family development. These include the
area on the west side of the roadway at SR 2164, the west of
US 220 at the Norfolk and Western Railroad, and the west side at
SR 1360.
Other areas have been designated for Residential-Mixed
Housing, which basically accommodates mobile homes. These are
located in the northeast and southeast quadrant of the
intersection of NC 135, and US 220, on the east side of US 220
at the Norfolk and Western Railroad crossing, in the southeast
quadrant of SR 1360 and US 220, and on the west side of US 220,
just south of the Price community.
2. Neighborhood Characteristics
Rockingham County is in the North Central Section of the State,
and is bounded by Caswell, Guilford, and Stokes Counties and the
state of Virginia. According to the 1980 U. S. Census, Rockingham
County's population is 83,426. The North Carolina Office of State
Budget and Management and Information Services, in a more recent
document indicated that by year 1990 the population of Rockingham
County would be 86,825.
17
The proposed project begins at NC 704 along US 220, and extends
0.2 miles into Virginia. The neighborhood environment throughout the
proposed project site is rural. It is characterized by sparsely
populated rural residential development, that for the most part, sets
back from the site of the proposed improvements along the existing
highway facility. Some of the residential homes are situated in
small rural clusters. Scattered at various intervals along the
proposed project are a few commercial establishments.
3. Relocation of Individuals and Families Impact
There appears to be no need to relocate any businesses, homes,
or public facilities.
4. Public Facilities and Services
No public facilities will be adversely impacted along the
proposed project site. There is a church along the proposed project,
but it is set back from the proposed action.
5. Historic and Cultural Resources
a. Historical-Architectural
A search by the N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
disclosed no structures of historical or architectural
importance located within the planning area. Likewise, there
are no structures listed in the National Register of Historic
Places located in the area of potential effects of this project.
These comments were submitted pursuant to Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory
Council on Historic Presercation's Regulations for Compliance
with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
b. Archaeological Resources
INTRODUCTION
Since the project is along an established highway, much of
the corridor is developed or has at some time in the recent past
been affected by residential or commercial development. Almost
all of the proposed improvements will be within existing
right-of-way. Areas with potential for significant
archaeological sites were intensively surveyed. During the
intensive survey of approximately one mile of the 13.5 mile
project, one isolated find was encountered, but no previously
unrecorded prehistoric archaeological sites were found. The
project will not affect any sites or properties listed on the
National Register of Historic Places.
18
This project is being coordinated with the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) in accordance with the procedures for
compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (GS
113) and the North Carolina Historic Commission (GS 121.12).
The SHPO requested that an archaeological study be conducted in
order to evaluate the project's possible impact upon sites
listed in the National Register of Historic Places.
The project area was surveyed on August 7, 1990. The
results of the archaeological study indicate that the project
will have no impacts upon any archaeological sites that are
eligible for or are listed on the National Register of Historic
Places.
SETTING
This project is located in Rockingham County, in the
northern part of the Piedmont. The geology is complex, with
metamorphic and igneous rocks predominating, but with a band of
sedimentary rocks of Triassic age stretching across the region
in a southwest to northeast band. This triassic basin crosses
the southern part of the US 220 project area.
Soils in the triassic basin are in the Mayodan, Stoneville,
Spray, Ayersville, and Leaksville soil series. Most of these
soils were formed from dark colored shales. The B horizons are
typically clay or clay loam, yellow-brown to reddish brown in
color. Leaksville soils are grayish brown clay (Daniels et al
1984).
Topography is mildly rolling with some steep slopes along
the ridges flanking the Dan River. Drainage is to the Dan River
in the southern portion of the project, to the Mayo River and
Buffalo Creek, tributaries of the Dan, in the central and
northern sections.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Human occupation of the Piedmont Region began at least
12,000 years ago, during the Paleo-Indian Period. There is
evidence from surface finds that Paleo-Indian groups wandered
throughout the region (Perkinson 1971, 1973; Ward 1983), but few
sites with evidence of more intensive occupation during this
period have been recorded. The lower levels of the Hardaway
site in Stanly County (Coe 1964) are generally accepted as
remains of a Paleo-Indian occupation, represented by the
distinctive Hardaway Blade, Hardaway-Dalton projectile point,
and other lithic artifacts (Oliver 1985: 197-200, Daniel 1989).
Other Piedmont sites with Hardaway artifacts are known, but the
Hardaway type site (31 St 4) remains the best representative of
the Paleo-Indian Period in the region.
19
The Archaic Period (8000 - 500 B.C.) marks a long cultural
development characterized by larger populations, increasingly
sedentary occupations, and the first use of cultivated plants
(although the subsistence economy was still based upon hunting
and collecting of wild foodstuffs). Many investigators have
postulated that, at least by Late Archaic times, a system of
seasonal exploitation of different ecological zones or ecotones
was in use by the Piedmont inhabitants. Ward (1983) points out
that this seasonal model has likely been overemphasized, and
that different models varying from sedentary village life to
seasonal migration patterns could be equally applicable to the
Piedmont at different times and places during the long span of
time we call the Archaic.
The successive Woodland Period (500 B.C. - A.D. 1700) is
marked by the introduction of ceramics. In the southern and
central parts of the Piedmont (Yadkin River Basin) the early
ceramics were sand-tempered, usually with cord or fabric
impressions on the exterior surfaces. This has been termed the
Badin Series. It was succeeded around 500 AD by the Yadkin
Series of pottery which had similar surface treatments, but with
crushed quartz particles used for tempering.
In the Late Woodland, beginning around 1000 AD, Uwharrie
ceramics replaced the Yadkin pottery in the Dan River Basin of
the northern Piedmont (Gardner 1980, Woodall 1984). The Dan
River Series of well made, sand and quartz tempered ceramics
replaces Uwharrie ceramics in the Dan River area beginning about
1300 AD, but the latter persisted in the central Piedmont until
nearly 1500 AD, when the intrusive Pee Dee culture entered the
region.
Most of the stone tool technology remained similar to that
of the Late Archaic, but new lithic artifact types (particularly
projectile point forms) appeared. The Early Woodland projectile
points were large, often crude triangular types (Badin,
Vincent). This triangular point tradition continued through
successively smaller, finer forms (Oliver 1985).
Villages and towns were established along floodplains of
the main stream courses, where horticulture (and later maize
agriculture) could be practiced. Hunting and collecting was
still relied upon to provide a major portion of the subsistence
base. Evidence of fishing and mussel shell collecting has been
found at some sites (cf. Woodall 1984), and this may have been
common throughout the Piedmont, but probably was not as
important a part of the subsistence pattern here as it was in
other regions.
In 1701 John Lawson traveled through the Piedmont following
an earlier (1670) excursion by John Lederer. Lawson recorded a
number of visits to Indian villages along the way (Lefler 1967).
20
By the middle of the Eighteenth Century, when European colonists
started moving into the area in larger numbers, most of the
Native American population had been decimated by warfare and
disease.
The upper Piedmont, and especially the Dan River Basin, was
the home of the Sara Indians at the time of European contact.
But when William Byrd's party surveyed the North Carolina -
Virginia state line in 1733, they recorded abandoned Indian
villages and noted evidence of the previous inhabitants all
along the Dan River and its tributaries (Lewis 1951).
One of the abandoned Indian towns, identified as "Sauro
Town" on Byrd's map of the area, was discovered archaeologically
by Coe in 1938. This site, 31RK1 located southeast of Eden on
the Dan River, has traditionally been referred to as "Lower Sara
Town". Others, however, have indicated that Lower Sara Town was
probably located at archaeological site 31RK6 near Madison
(Simpkins 1985). Upper Sara Town has been identified as the
cluster of sites in Stokes county about 9 miles upstream from
31RK6 on the Dan. Recent research (Davis and Ward 1989) has
defined two phases of the Sara occupation of the region: the Dan
River Phase (late prehistoric) lasted until about 1550; the
Saratown phase (protohistoric and historic) dates from 1550 to
1710. After 1710, yielding to increasing European pressure, the
Sara abandoned the Dan River Basin and moved southwest to join
the Catawba Indians.
Several old trails passed through the region, including the
Saura-Saponi Trail and the Great Indian Warpath (Simpkins 1985,
Figure 6). Part of the Great Warpath (or "Great Road from the
Yadkin River") followed an alignment similar to the Norfolk and
Western Railroad line along the Mayo River west of US 220. This
road was used as General Green's Baggage Road during the
Revolutionary War (cf. Lautzenheiser 1985). For a short time in
the mid-1800's the Dan River was made navigable by construction
of a series of canals, locks and dams. One feature of this Dan
River Navigation System was the Cross Rock Rapid Sluice Site
(31RK56**), which is located just east of the US 220 bridge over
the Dan River. The Dan River Navigation System is listed on the
National Register of Historic Places.
Rockingham County was formed in 1785 from Guilford County
(Corbitt 1950). Wentworth was established as the county seat.
The town of Madison was settled in 1818, Stoneville in 1857, and
Mayodan in 1899 (Powell 1968). In 1967 the towns of Leaksville
(1818), Spray (1813), and Draper (1905) merged to form the town
of Eden.
METHODOLOGY
In consultation with the Office of State Archaeology, North
Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, it was determined
that the area extending from the Dan River crossing to the ridge
21
line north of the river should be surveyed for archaeological
resources. The remainder of the project has very little
potential for significant archaeological sites due to the amount
of land alteration that has already occurred. A drive-over
reconnaissance of the entire project confirmed that most of the
northern part of the right-of-way had been cleared and graded
years ago. This was also true of the area next to the bridge
over the Dan River.
It is unlikely that any significant archaeological sites
would have been located in the northern section of the project
since the previous research in the region has shown that the
settlement patterns of the post-Archaic occupations increasingly
favor use of floodplain and terrace landforms (Coe 1964, Davis
and Ward 1989, Simpkins 1985, Simpkins and Petherick 1986). In
the survey of US 220 between NC 68 and NC 704, just south of the
present project, no archaeological sites were found (Laut-
zenheiser 1985), further confirming this pattern.
The area surveyed intensively was the crest and upper slope
of the ridge north of the Dan River (Appendix, Figure 2-1) on
both sides of the existing roadway. The western side was shovel
tested in order to increase the prospects of discovering any
cultural deposits in the heavily forested area. A series of
five shovel
tests was excavated at intervals of 10 meters. All subsurface
tests showed a highly deflated soil profile (ef. Trimble 1974)
with clay subsoil horizons encountered within 20 cm of the
surface.
RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
No archaeological sites were found during the survey. One
isolated find of cultural material (a cobble hammerstone) was
found in an exposed woods trail on the slope of the ridge, but
no other material was found in association with this artifact
and subsurface tests upslope from the find were negative.
Therefore, no site designation was given to the location.
The Cross Rock Rapid Sluice site (31RK56**) is located on
the eastern side of the present US 220 bridge over the Dan
River. The proposed project includes a new structure to be
built on the west side of the current bridge. No impacts or
effects on this National Register listed site is expected.
Since the project as currently planned will have no effects
on any archaeological sites that are on or are eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places, no further
archaeological work is recommended.
B. Economic Factors
The proposed project will not adversely impact any economic
facilities currently in service. There is a Service Station near the
North Carolina and the Virginia State Line that may be in close proximity
to the proposed action; but, it appears to be closed.
22
According to North Carolina Employment Commission, Rockingham County
as of May 1990 had 40,500 persons in the labor force. Out of this number,
38,650 persons were gainfully employed. This left an unemployment total
of 1,940 or 4.8 percent.
C. Environmental Effects
1. INTRODUCTION
This biological/ecological evaluation represents an
investigation of existing conditions (water resources, soils,
vegetation, wetlands, wildlife, threatened and endangered species and
unique natural areas) on the site, and presents potential impacts to
these resources from the project.
2. PHYSICAL ELEMENTS
a. SOILS
Although a soil survey has yet to be published for
Rockingham County, the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) provided
a soil map for the project site and tables of various soil
properties. General descriptions of soil series found within
the project corridor were obtained from completed SCS Soil
Surveys from other North Carolina and Virginia counties.
Nine soil series are represented in the project corridor.
Each is described below in general terms, with reference to site
topography and physiography. None of the series is listed as
hydric by the SCS, although two of the soil series are known to
contain inclusions of hydric soil.
Cecil Series
The Cecil Series consists of well-drained, moderately
permeable soils formed in residuum that was weathered from acid
igneous and metamorphic rocks. These soils are found on nearly
level to steep Piedmont uplands. The Cecil sandy clay loam
soils on the site have slopes from 2 to 8% and are eroded. This
soil type has been designated as prime farmland by the SCS.
Chewacla Series
Chewacla soils are somewhat poorly drained, moderately
permeable soils formed in recent alluvium. These soils are
found in long, flat areas parallel to the floodplains of major
streams which cross the site. Slopes are less than 2%, most
areas flood frequently, and runoff is slow. While the Chewacla
loam on the site is not listed as a hydric soil (USDA, 1987), it
often contains inclusions of hydric soil.
23
Congaree Series
Soils of the Congaree Series are deep, well to moderately
drained, moderately permeable, and formed in. recent alluvium.
These soils have slopes from 0 to 4% and are found on long,
narrow floodplains or at the base of slopes. On the site,
Congaree loam is found in the Dan River floodplain and along one
of the tributaries to the Mayo River. This soil floods for
brief periods during winter or spring but fails to meet the
criteria to be classified as hydric by the SCS (USDA, 1987).
Congaree soils commonly contain inclusions of hydric Wehadkee
soil.
Madison Series
The Madison Series consists of well-drained, moderately
permeable soils formed in residuum weathered from acid micaceous
metamorphic rock. These soils are found on gently sloping to
steep Piedmont uplands. Slopes on the site range from 8 to 35
percent. Four soils from this series are on the site; Madison
sandy loam (8 to 15% slopes and 15 to 35% slopes) and Madison
sandy clay loam (2 to slopes and 8 to 15% slopes). The
Madison sandy clay loam (2 to 8% slopes) is listed as prime
farmland by the SCS. Madison soils tend to be concentrated on
the northern portion of the project site.
Mayodan Series
Mayodan soils are well-drained, moderately permeable soils,
with a medium to rapid runoff found on gently sloping ridges and
rolling to moderately steep side slopes. These soils formed in
residuum weathered from Triassic materials such as shale, sands
tone, mudstone and siltstone. Five Mayodan soils are present on
the site. Two of these, Mayodan sandy loam (2 to 8% slopes) and
Mayodan sandy clay loam (2 to 8% slopes, eroded) are classified
by the SCS as prime farmland. Mayodan soils tend to be
concentrated on the southern end of the project site.
Pacolet Series
The Pacolet Series consists of well-drained, moderately
permeable soils on long, narrow side slopes. These are soils
formed in residuum weathered from acidic crystalline rocks, such
as granite. Two soils from this series are found on the site,
Pacolet sandy clay loam (8 to 15% slopes, eroded) and Pacolet
sandy clay loam (15 to 25% slopes, eroded). Pacolet soils are
found on only a small portion of the project corridor.
Rinn SPriPS
Soils of the Rion Series are deep, well-drained, moderately
permeable soils formed in material weathered from acid
crystalline rocks of Piedmont uplands. Rion soils are found on
24
gently sloping to steep slopes and have a runoff that is medium
to rapid. One small band of Rion sandy loam (15 to 30% slopes)
is found on the site, adjacent to a stream channel.
Stoneville Series
Soils of the Stoneville Series underlie a significant
portion of the southern half of the project corridor, in areas
dissected by minor stream channels. Slopes range from 2 to 250s.
Stoneville loam (2 to 8% slopes) is considered prime farmland by
the SCS.
11dnrthantc
Udorthents consist of nearly level to gently sloping, well-
drained to somewhat poorly drained, loamy soil materials in
areas of cut and fill on the project site. This soil type
underlies the existing interchanges along the US-220 corridor.
b. WATER RESOURCES
Water resources within the US-220 corridor consist of the
Dan River and numerous tributary streams, which lie within the
Roanoke River basin. This basin stretches from the mountains of
Virginia through the Piedmont and Coastal Plain of North
Carolina, for a total drainage area of 8,386 square miles. Just
under half of the basin is contained in North Carolina. Major
land uses in the basin are forestry and agriculture. These
activities, coupled with erodible soil make nonpoint runoff
(sedimentation) a major problem in the Roanoke basin (NCDEHNR,
1989a).
In North Carolina the basin can be divided into two main
drainages, the Dan River and the Roanoke River. The Dan River
is a major tributary to the Roanoke River, and has its origins
on the eastern slope of the Blue Ridge Mountains in Patrick
County, Virginia. It drains sections of both the mountain and
inner piedmont ecoregions. The river flows in and out of North
Carolina several times before finally flowing into Virginia and
joining the Roanoke River at the J. H. Kerr Reservoir (NCDEHNR,
1989a).
The Dan River represents the largest water resource on the
project site. Data from the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient
Network (BMAN), 1983-1988, show that water quality in the
general vicinity of the project site is excellent (NCDEHNR,
1989a). The section of the Dan River crossed by US-220 is
classified by the NCDEHNR (1989b) as WS-III, a water supply
segment with no categorical restrictions on watershed
development or discharges, suitable for all Class C uses. Class
C uses include fish and wildlife propagation, secondary
recreation, agricultural and other uses requiring waters of
lower quality (NCDEHNR, 1989b). At the US-220 crossing the Dan
River has an eastward flow and a channel width of approximately
165 feet.
25
Other water resources within the project corridor are the
numerous tributaries and stream crossings traversed by US-220.
Water resource data for these tributaries are presented in the
Appendix in Table 2-1.
Based on Flood Hazard Boundary Maps for Rockingham County
(U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1978), two
areas of special flood hazard (equivalent to the 100 year
floodplain) exist within the US-220 expansion corridor. The
first of these is an approximately 1,000 foot (total) segment of
the Dan River floodplain. The second is an approximately 500
foot wide segment adjacent to the Mayo River tributary located
approximately 2,500 feet south of the US-220/NC-170 interchange.
3. BIOLOGICAL ELEMENTS
a. VEGETATION RESOURCES
Vegetation resources within the US-220 project corridor
were identified through interpretation of color-infrared aerial
photography (1"=660') and field reconnaissance. Project impact
acreages were obtained through manual planimetry. The resulting
map of vegetation communities is presented in the Appendix as
Figure 3-1.
Upland Communities
Upland communities on the project site include deciduous
hardwood forest, mixed pine-deciduous hardwood forest, pine
forest, cropland, ruderal, and disturbed areas. What follows is
a brief characterization of each upland vegetation community and
a discussion of potential impacts to each.
Deciduous Hardwood Forest
The deciduous hardwood forest is the largest vegetation
community in the corridor, covering approximately 96 acres or
34% of the total site. Canopies in the area tend to be
dominated by either tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera) or red
maple Acer rubrum). Dominant species in the subcanopy include
tulip tree, American hornbeam Car inns caroliniana), red oak
uercus rubra) and umbrella tree (Magnolia tripetala). The
shrub layer also has several dominate species, including red
oak, umbrella tree, black gum N ssa sylvatica) and flowering
dogwood Cornus florida). The her aceous layer, which appears
to have the greatest diversity, is dominated by the woody
seedlings of overstory species. The deciduous hardwood forests
tend to be located on the less steep side slopes and flatter
bottom areas of the site.
Mixed Pine-Deciduous Hardwood
Mixed pine-deciduous hardwood forest are those areas that
have an approximately equal number of coniferous and hardwood
trees in the canopy layer. This community covers approximately
26
21 acres of the project corridor or 7% of the site. In terms of
areal extent this is one of the smaller communities on the site.
The mixed forests tend to be found in transition areas between
the deciduous hardwood and pine forests.
The canopy in this community is typically co-dominated by a
combination of scrub pine (Pinus virginiana) and tulip tree, or
scrub pine and red maple. The subcanopy tends to be dominated
by sourwood (Oxydendron arboreum). Sourwood also dominates the
shrub layer, while woody seedlings dominate the herbaceous
layer. When present, poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans) is the
dominant vining species.
Pines Fnract
Pine forests represent the second largest forest resource
within the roadway corridor, with a coverage of approximately 36
acres or 13% of the project site. These forests are typically
found as small patches on ridge tops and on other dry, nutrient
poor areas on the site. The pine forest canopy is dominated by
scrub pine, while the subcanopy is co-dominated by scrub pine
and sourwood. Sourwood is also the dominant species in the
shrub layer. The herbaceous layer is dominated by a variety of
woody seedlings of species such as red maple, black cherry
Prunus serotina), American beech Fa us grandifolia) and
mockernut hickory Cara to mentosa). The vine stratum is
dominated by poison ivy and Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus
quinquefolia).
Disturbed Areas
For the purposes of this study, disturbed areas are defined
as those sections of the project corridor covered by roads
(excluding US-220), houses and other buildings, yards, and
cleared areas. This category is not a natural vegetation
community and represents a small portion of the roadway
corridor. Approximately 35 acres or 12% of the project site is
classified as disturbed.
Cropland
Cropland, or agricultural areas, represent a very small
portion of the total roadway corridor, with a coverage of
approximately 7 acres or 3% of the site. According to Godfrey
(1980), 30% of the Piedmont region between the Potomac and
Savannah Rivers is active farmland. The only crop observed
during field reconnaissance was tobacco although other row crops
such as corn and soybeans, and pasturelands could be expected in
the corridor.
27
Ruderal
This vegetation category includes the grassed and shrubby
ruderal zones along the existing roadways and highway segments
of the corridor. Ruderal vegetation comprises approximately 27%
of the project site with an areal coverage of approximately 78
acres. The vegetation in this consists of primarily a
herbaceous layer. Species identification during field
reconnaissance was complicated by mowing practices, but foxtail
Setaria lg auca) appeared to be the dominant weedy species in
most areas. Other areas were dominated by kudzu Puera ria
lobata).
Impacts
The widening of existing US-220, as proposed, has the
potential for both short-term and long-term effects on the
upland vegetation resources of the site. Consistent use of Best
Management Practices (BMPs), however, will insure that these
effects are kept to a minimum. A summary of impacts to upland
vegetation is presented in the Appendix as Table 3-1.
The primary impact to the vegetation resources will be the
loss of existing terrestrial habitats. Upland communities
experiencing the greatest amount of impact will be the deciduous
hardwood forest and grassland communities. Upland communities
to receive the least degree of impact are cropland, mixed
pine-deciduous hardwood forest and disturbed areas.
Potential short-term effects of the project to vegetation
include soil erosion and dust accumulation on foliage in areas
adjacent to those being cleared. Oil, grease, and diesel
emissions from construction machinery may also impact
vegetation. These short-term effects may cause a temporary
decrease in plant primary productivity in affected areas. All
efforts should be made to minimize such effects through strict
adherence to BMPs. For instance, soil erosion and sedimentation
from highway construction activities can be controlled through
the use of sedimentation ponds, catchment basins, hay bale
barriers, and diversion ditches. Such procedures have been
shown to dramatically minimize adverse impacts to vegetation.
It should be stressed that impacts such as the above are
temporary in nature and should diminish when construction
activities cease.
Other potential adverse effects to upland vegetation
resources on the project site could be long-term. Examples
include soil compaction from heavy machinery, top soil removal
and nutrient loss from grading, and mechanical damage from
equipment, all of which can result in decreased plant vigor.
Post-construction revegetation with native species and species
of ecological value could help offset any permanent loss of
resources.
28
Wetland Communities
Wetlands are transitional areas between terrestrial and
aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the
surface, or the land is covered by shallow water (Cowardin et
al., 1919). Non-tidal wetlands are areas such as marshes,
swamps, and bottomland forests found in wet, low-lying areas
that have hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and the
hydrology sufficient to produce chemically reducing conditions
(Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation (FICWD),
1989). Wetland habitats are an important component in the
maintenance of adjacent terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and,
as such, represent a valuable ecological resource in the US-220
corridor. Wetlands play a critical role in hydrological
processes such as flood mitigation, aquifer recharge and water
quality maintenance and improvement (Mitsch and Gosselink,
1986). They are also valued for their intrinsic aesthetic
qualities and their various biotic support functions. Wetlands
serve as nesting and feeding areas for wildlife, provide nursery
areas for aquatic organisms, and function as a contributing link
to terrestrial and aquatic food chains.
Wetlands on the project site are regulated pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which requires a federal
permit for the discharge of dredged and/or fill material into
waters of the United States and adjacent wetlands. The federal
regulations define the term "waters of the United States" to
include all navigable waters, their tributaries, and wetlands
adjacent to such waters, and any other wetlands in which the
use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate
or foreign commerce (33 CFR 328.3(a)). Adjacent wetlands are
defined as those wetlands that border, are contiguous to, or
neighbor other waters of the United States, or those that are
separated from other waters by man-made dikes or barriers, or
material barriers, such as river berms or beach dunes (33 CFR
328.3(c)) (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USCE), 1986). The USCE
has authority to issue permits for activities that involve the
placement of fill material into these regulated areas, but this
authority is subject to a veto power held by the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)(1980).
A routine on-site determination of areas subject to
jurisdiction by the USCE under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act was conducted using methodology set forth in the Federal
Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands,
referred to herein as the Manual (FICWD, 1989). This analysis
was conducted to determine the location and approximate areal
extent of non-tidal wetlands on the site.
Color infrared (CIR) aerial photography, U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS) topographic maps and site specific soils map
provided by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) were used to
produce an initial map of wetland boundaries on the project
29
site. Field reconnaissance was then conducted to verify and
supplement the preliminary mapping. Areas with vegetation that
indicated the presence of potential wetlands were further
investigated. Edaphic characteristics such as soil color,
chroma, and evidence of mottling within the top 25 cm of soil
were recorded on to Routine On-Site Determination Method Data
Forms, as provided in the Manual, for representative areas of
the property.
Wetland communities on the site include the riparian zone
adjacent to the Dan River and the riparian wetlands associated
with the other streams which cross the corridor. What follows
is a discussion of each community followed by a discussion of
potential wetland impacts. Results of a WET (Wetland Evaluation
Technique) II analysis are also presented in the Appendix as
Figure 3-3, along with a discussion of wetland avoidance,
minimization and mitigation.
Riparian - Dan River
The riparian zone of a river, stream, or other body of
water is the land adjacent to that body of water that is, at
least periodically, influenced by flooding. Technically, the
wetlands associated with the Dan River can also be classified as
bottomland hardwood forest, a more specific type of riparian
wetland that is common in the southeastern United States (Mitsch
and Gosselink, 1986). This vegetation category covers
approximately 0.05 acre or 0.17% of the overall roadway
corridor.
The Dan River riparian wetlands have a canopy dominated by
sycamore Platanus occidentalis) and a subcanopy dominated by
green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica). The shrub layer is
dominated by spicebush (Lindera benzoin), whereas the herbaceous
and vine layers are dominated by false nettle (Boehmeria
cylindrica) and poison ivy, respectively.
Riparian - Other
The remainder of the wetlands within the US-220 corridor
are classified as riparian-other. These wetlands are associated
with numerous stream crossings. Approximately 12 acres or 4% of
the project site fall into this vegetation category.
The riparian-other canopies are typically dominated by red
maple, white oak ( uercus alba), or tulip tree. The subcanopies
tend to be dominated by either red maple or flowering dogwood,
the latter of which is also the dominant species in the shrub
layer. Bedstraw Galium sp.) dominates the herbaceous layer,
while poison ivy and Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica)
dominate the vine layer.
30
Impacts
The US-220 project has numerous small sites that total
approximately 12 acres of riparian wetlands associated with the
Dan River and stream channels. A breakdown of individual
wetlands within the corridor and their acreages is shown in
Table 3-2. The expansion of the existing roadway and the
construction of a new bridge over the Dan River may result in a
temporary change of stream flow, decreased water quality, and
impacts to aquatic life in the Dan River and other riparian
wetlands. Appropriate buffers should be maintained during
construction, and strict adherence to BMPs should be enforced
for the life of the project to minimize runoff, erosion and
siltation during and after construction. Given that BMPs,
including erosion control and water quality maintenance
procedures will be used, the environmental impact of these
crossings will be minimized to the greatest extent possible.
Wet II Analysis Results
The Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET) Volume II (Adamus et
al., 1987) was used to evaluate the two types of riparian
wetlands found on the US-220 corridor, namely those associated
with the Dan River and the numerous smaller streams that
traverse the site. The evaluation results are presented below
and are summarized in the Appendix as Table 3-3.
Riparian - Dan River
The evaluation results prove to be higher in value for the
Dan River than for the stream crossings. Of high Social
Significance is sediment stabilization, wildlife diversity and
abundance, aquatic diversity and abundance, and uniqueness and
heritage. The Dan River is highly effective in groundwater
discharge, flood flow alteration, sediment stabilization,
sediment/toxicant retention, and nutrient removal/
transformation. The opportunity is high for sediment/toxicant
retention, and nutrient removal/transformation is high.
Riparian - other
The first evaluation results to be discussed are for the
stream crossings within the corridor. Scoring high in Social
Significance for this wetland type are sediment and toxicant
retention, wildlife diversity and abundance, aquatic diversity
and abundance, and uniqueness and heritage. Recreation is of
little Social Significance. This wetland type is highly
effective in groundwater discharge, flood flow alteration,
sediment stabilization, sediment/toxicant retention, and
nutrient removal/transformation. The opportunity for
sediment/toxicant retention and nutrient removal/transformation
is high.
TABLE 3-2
Summary of Impacts to Wetlands
Waland" Vegetation Community3 Acres(+)
#1 RO 0.69
#2 RD 0.05
#3 Ra 0.20
#4 RO 0.30
#5 Ro 0.20
#6 Ra 0.23
#7 Ra 0.50
#8 Ra 1.40
#9 Ro O.SO
#10 Ra 0.40
#11 Ra 0.02
# 12 Ro 0.03
# 13 Ra 0.90
# 1.1 Ro 0.55
# 15 Ra 1.90
# 16 Ro 0.01
# 17 Ro 0.04
1 S Ra 0.35
# 19 Ro 0.20
#20 Ra 0.35
#21 Ra 0.35
#22 Ra 2.40
#23 RO 0.05
#2.3 Ra 0.20
I Water resource data (e.g. channel width, depth) presented in Table 2-1.
Assigned #s correspond with those on Table 2-1.
3 Ro = Riparian-other, RD = Riparian-Dan River
31
Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation
-1 1 In keeping with the 404(b)(1) guidelines of the Clean Water
Act of 1977, projects should be designed to avoid wetland
encroachment wherever possible; to minimize wetland impacts when
avoidance is not possible; and to mitigate wetland losses when
necessary. For this particular project, the decision to widen
the existing roadway was made after an analysis of alternatives.
Because of the fixed nature of the corridor location, avoidance,
by shifting the project location, is not an option. Wetland
impacts will be minimized through the use of BMPs, as discussed
above.
Regarding mitigation, it is the position of NCDOT to follow
the February, 1990 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the EPA
and the USCE which states that mitigation is not a requirement
under the conditions of a General Permit, which includes
Nationwide Permits.
Nationwide Permits are typically issued for activities that
pose minimal environmental consequences. Based on the
evaluation contained herein, it is likely that wetland impacts
for the US 220 project will be covered under the Nationwide
program and based on this assumption mitigation will not be
required, as stated in the MOA. The decision as to the type of
permit to be issued, however, ultimately rests with the USCE.
In the event that wetland mitigation becomes a part of the
US-220 project, NCDOT will make every effort to achieve "in
kind" mitigation and to fulfill the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) "step down" policy. NCDOT may recommend
utilization of Company Swamp Mitigation Bank credits, depending
on the availability of suitable on-site mitigation opportunities
and/or the type of habitat to be mitigated.
b. WILDLIFE RESOURCES
Based on scoping correspondence with the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), the proposed US-220
expansion will result in only modest losses of wildlife habitat
along the corridor. According to the NCWRC, the mixed hardwood
forests on the site provide habitat for white-tailed deer
(Odocoileus virginianus), wild turkey (Meleagris gallopava),
common bobwhite Colinus virginianus), eastern cottontail
S lvila us floridanus), gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis),
and various furbearers, raptors, and songbirds. Waterfowl and
wading birds are found along the Dan River, Mayo River, and the
numerous small streams in the project area. While the smaller
streams provide limited sport fishery resources, they do serve
as nursery streams for the Centrarchid (sunfish) population of
the Mayo River. Other principal fish include Ictalurids
(catfish), Catastomids (suckers) and an occasional smallmouth
bass (Micropterus dolomieui). Wildlife species observed during
32
field reconnaissance include the hairy woodpecker Picoides_
villosus), eastern box turtle (Terrapene carolina) and bull frog
Rana catesbeiana).
The expansion of US-220 will probably result in some
decrease in wildlife population levels and species diversity,
although much of the area is already disturbed. Such effects
would be the result of habitat modification and, possibly,
increased human activity. Habitat modification includes removal
of existing vegetation, alteration of aquatic habitats, and the
alteration of soils, terrain characteristics, and other surface
features. Species occupy distinct ecological niches, which, if
altered, could result in varying degrees of population loss.
Both short and long-term changes in wildlife habitat will result
from the project. Some species may be displaced during roadway
construction but could be expected to return once construction
is completed. The species most likely to return are those which
are generally tolerant of or favored by development. Others
would relocate to similar off-site environments, and would have
to compete for available habitat.
There is a small possibility that wetland alterations will
result in the loss of less mobile wildlife such as reptiles,
amphibians and some small mammals. If construction occurs
during the nesting season, there is the potential that nestling
birds may also be disturbed.
Potential impacts to aquatic biota in the Dan River and
other streams can be greatly minimized by the use of appropriate
erosion control measures. Examples include the use of siltation
barriers and settlement basins, retention of natural vegetation
buffers, and immediate post-construction revegetation.
C. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES
Federally Listed Species
Based on scoping correspondence with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), there are no records of any federally
listed or proposed endangered or threatened plant or animal
species within the project corridor.
State Listed Species
According to scoping correspondence, the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database (Schafale, 1990)
reports two rare species of fish in the Dan River near the
project site, the bigeye jumprock (Moxostoma arriomum), which is
listed as threatened and the riverweed darter (Etheostoma
podostemone) which is of special concern. Both species occur in
the Dan River adjacent to the site proposed for the new bridge.
33
Six other plant and animal species are listed in the NCNHP
database (Schafale, 1990) as threatened, endangered, or of
special concern in Rockingham County. Goldenseal (Hydrastis
canadensis) is listed as state endangered (S2) and ginseng
(Panax quinquefolius) is of special concern within North
Carolina. The latter has a rank of S4, apparently secure
statewide though it may be quite rare in parts of its range.
Significantly rare in North Carolina is the Alabama grape fern
(Botrychium jenmanii), with a state rank of S1 (critically
imperiled within the state due to extreme rarity, or is very
vulnerable to extinction throughout its range). The flattened
entodon Entodon compressus) is a candidate species within the
state, also state ranked as S1. Of special concern within the
state are the four-toed salamander (Hemidactylium scutatum) and
the Roanoke hog sucker (Hypentelium roanokense), which have a
state rank of S3 and S4, respectively. None of these rare
species were observed on the US-220 site during field
reconnaissance.
d. UNIQUE NATURAL AREAS
According to the
natural areas has not
and existing data for
specific information
corridor. No unique
reconnaissance.
NCNHP (Schafale, 1990) a study of unique
yet been undertaken for Rockingham County,
this part of North Carolina is minimal. No
exists for the county or the study
natural areas were observed during field
D. Air Quality Analysis
Air pollution is the result of industrial emissions and emissions
from internal combustion engines. The impact resulting from the
construction of a new highway or the improvement of an existing highway
can range from aggravating existing air pollution problems to improving
the ambient air conditions. Motor vehicles are known to emit carbon
monoxide (CO), nitro-gen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate
matter, sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb) (listed in order of decreasing
emission rate).
The primary pollutant emitted from automobiles is carbon monoxide.
Automobiles are considered to be the major source of CO in the project
area. For these reasons, most of the analyses presented are concerned
with determining expected carbon monoxide levels in the vicinity of the
project.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor near
a highway, two concentration components must be used: local and
background. The local component is due to CO emissions from cars
operating on highways in the near vicinity (i.e., distances within 100
meters) of the receptor location. The background component is due to CO
emissions from cars operating on streets further from the receptor
location.
34
In this study, the local component was determined using line source
computer modeling and the background component was determined by the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
(NCDEHNR). These two concentration components were determined separately,
then added together to determine the ambient CO concentration for
comparison to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
Automobiles are generally regarded as sources of hydrocarbons and
nitrogen oxides. Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides emitted from cars are
carried into the atmosphere where they react with sunlight to form ozone
and nitrogen dioxide. It is the ozone and nitrogen dioxide that are of
concern and not the precursor hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxide. Area-wide
automotive emissions of HC and NO are expected to decrease in the future
due to the continued installation and maintenance of pollution control
devices on new cars, and thus help lower ambient ozone and nitrogen
dioxide levels.
The photochemical reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide
require several hours to occur. For this reason, the peak levels of ozone
generally occur 10 to 20 kilometers downwind of the source of hydrocarbon
emissions. Urban areas as a whole are regarded as sources of
hydrocarbons, not individual streets and highways. The emissions of all
sources in an urban area mix together in the atmosphere, and in the
presence of sunlight, the mixture reacts to form ozone, nitrogen dioxide,
and other photochemical oxidants. The best example of this type of air
pollution is the smog which forms in Los Angeles, California.
Automobiles are not generally regarded as significant sources of
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources
account for less than seven percent of particulate matter emissions and
less than two percent of sulfur dioxide emissions. Particulate matter and
sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the result of non-highway
sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, and agricultural). Because
emissions of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide from cars are very low,
there is no reason to suspect that traffic on the project will cause air
quality standards for particulate matter and sulfur dioxide to be
exceeded.
Automobiles emit lead as a result of burning gasoline containing
tetraethyl lead which is added by refineries to increase the octane rating
of the fuel. Vehicles with catalytic converters burn unleaded gasoline,
thereby eliminating lead emissions. Also, the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has required the reduction in the lead content of
leaded gasolines. The overall average lead content of gasoline in 1974
was 2 grams per gallon (gpg). By 1989, this composite average had dropped
to 0.01 gpg.
In the future, lead emissions are expected to decrease as more cars
use unleaded fuels and as the lead content of leaded gasoline is reduced.
Because of these reasons, it is not expected that traffic on the proposed
project will cause the NAAQS for lead to be exceeded.
35
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine future
CO concentrations resulting from the proposed highway improvements.
"CALINE3 - A Versatile Dispersion Model For Predicting Air Pollutant
Levels Near Highways And Arterial Streets" was used to predict the CO
concentration at the nearest sensitive receptor to the project.
Inputs into the mathematical model to estimate hourly CO
concentra-tions consisted of a level roadway under normal conditions with
predicted traffic volumes, vehicle emission factors, and meteorological
parameters. The traffic volumes are based on the annual average daily
traffic projections. The modeling analysis was performed for a
"worst-case" condition using winds blowing parallel to the roadway.
Carbon monoxide vehicle emission factors were calculated for the years
2000 and 2010 using the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission Factors"
and the MOBILE4 mobile source emissions computer model.
The background CO concentrations for the project area was estimated
to be 1.9 parts per million (ppm). Consultation with the Air Quality
Section, Division of Environmental Management (DEM), North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR)
indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.9 ppm is suitable for most
rural areas.
The closest receptor affected by "worst-case" air quality conditions
resulting from building the proposed 4-lane divided highway is R63
(residence). R54 will likely experience "worst-case" air quality
conditions if the project is not built. Predicted 2000 and 2010 one-hour
average CO concentrations for the proposed project and the "do nothing"
alternative are presented in the table below.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
Build 4-lane divided highway
"Do Nothing"
ONE HOUR
CLOSEST CO CONC (ppm)
RECEPTOR 2000 2010
R63 (Res) 2.5 2.5
R54 (Bus) 2.4 2.4
Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS (maximum
1-hour - 35 ppm; 8-hour average - 9 ppm) indicates no violation of these
standards. Since the results of the "worst-case" 1-hour CO analysis is
less than 9 ppm, it can be concluded that the 8-hour CO level does not
exceed the standard. (See Tables Al, A2, A3, and A4 in the Appendix for
input data.)
The project is located within the Northern Piedmont Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Rockingham County has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Since this project is located in an area where the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control
measures, the conformity procedures of 23 CFR 770 do not apply to this
project.
36
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting
from clearing and grubbing, demolition or other operations will be removed
from the project, burned or otherwise disposed of by the Contractor. Any
burning done will be done in accordance with applicable local laws and
ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in
compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning will
be done at the greatest distance practicable from dwellings and not when
atmospheric conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public.
Burning will be performed under constant surveillance.
Measures will be taken in allaying the dust generated by construction
when the control of dust is necessary for the protection and comfort of
motorists or area residents.
E. Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise Analysis
This analysis was performed to determine the effect of the widening
of US-220 in Rockingham County on noise levels in the immediate project
area between NC-704 and the Virginia State Line. This investigation
includes an inventory of existing noise sensitive land uses and a field
survey of ambient (existing) noise levels in the study area. It also
includes a comparison of the predicted noise levels and the ambient noise
levels to determine if traffic noise impacts can be expected resulting
from the proposed project. Traffic noise impacts are determined from the
current procedures for the abatement of highway traffic noise and
construction noise, appearing as Part 772 of Title 23 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. If traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination
and evaluation of alternative noise abatement measures for reducing or
eliminating the noise impacts must be considered.
CHARACTERISTICS OF NOISE
Noise is basically defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted from
many sources including airplanes, factories, railroads, power generation
plants, and highway vehicles. Highway noise, or traffic noise, is usually
a composite of noises from engine exhaust, drive train, and tire-roadway
interaction.
The magnitude of noise is usually described by its sound pressure.
Since the range of sound pressure varies greatly, a logarithmic scale is
used to relate sound pressures to some common reference level, usually the
decibel (dB). Sound pressures described in decibels are called sound
pressure levels and are often defined in terms of frequency weighted
scales (A, B, C, or D).
The weighted-A scale is used almost exclusively in vehicle noise
measurements because it places most emphasis on the frequency range to
which the human ear is most sensitive (1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound levels
measured using A-weighting are often expressed as dBA. Throughout this
report, references will be made to dBA, which means an A-weighted decibel
level. Several examples of noise pressure levels in dBA are listed in
Table N1 in the Appendix.
37
Review of Table N1 indicates that most individuals in urbanized areas
are exposed to fairly high noise levels from many sources as they go about
their daily activities. The degree of disturbance or annoyance of
unwanted sound depends essentially on three things: 1) the amount and
nature of the intruding noise, 2) the relationship between the background
noise and the intruding noise, and 3) the type of activity occurring where
the noise is heard.
Over a period of time, individuals tend to accept the noises which
intrude into their lives. Particularly if noises occur at predicted
intervals and are expected. Attempts have been made to regulate many of
these types of noises including airplane noises, factory noise, railroad
noise, and highway traffic noise. In relation to highway traffic noise,
methods of analysis and control have developed rapidly over the past few
years.
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
In order to determine that highway noise levels are or are not
compatible with various land uses, the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) has developed noise abatement criteria and procedures to be used in
the planning and design of highways. These abatement criteria and
procedures are set forth in the aforementioned Federal reference (Title 23
CFR, Part 772). A summary of the noise abatement criteria for various
land uses is presented in Table N2 in the Appendix. The Leq, or
equivalent sound level, is the level of constant sound which in a given
situation and time period has the same energy as does 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.
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the project
to determine the existing background noise levels. 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.
The field data was also used to establish ambient noise levels for
residences, businesses, and other noise sensitive receivers in the
vicinity of the project. The existing Leq noise level along US-220 as
measured at 50 feet from the roadway was 73 dBA.
PROCEDURE FOR PREDICTING FUTURE NOISE LEVELS
The prediction of highway traffic noise is a complicated procedure.
In general, the traffic situation is composed of a large number of
variables which describe different cars driving at different speeds
through a continually changing highway configuration and surrounding
terrain. Obviously, to assess the problem certain assumptions and
simplifications must be made.
The procedure used to predict future noise levels in this study was
the Noise Barrier cost Reduction Procedure, STAMINA 2.0 and OPTIMA
(revised March, 1983). The BCR (Barrier Cost Reduction) procedure is
38
based upon the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model
(FHWA-RO-77-108). The BCR 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.
In this regard, it is to be noted that only preliminary alignment was
available for use in this noise analysis. The proposed project is to
widen the existing 2-lane roadway to a 4-lane divided highway with a 30'
grass median. The proposed project was modeled assuming no special noise
abatement measures would be incorporated. Only those existing natural or
man-made barriers which could be modeled were included. The roadway
sections and proposed intersections were assumed to be flat and at-grade.
Thus, this analysis represents "worst-case" topographic conditions. The
noise predictions made in this report are highway-related noise
predictions for the traffic conditions during the year being analyzed.
Peak hour design and Level-of-Service (LOS) C volumes were compared,
and the volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions were used with
proposed posted speed limits. Thus, during all other time periods, the
noise levels will be no greater than those indicated in this report.
The STAMINA 2.0 computer model was utilized to enable the
determination of the number of land uses (by tape) which, during the peak
hour in the design year 2010, would be exposed to noise levels approaching
or exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and those land uses
predicted to expect a substantial noise increase. The basic approach was
to select receptor locations such as 25, 50, 100, 200, 400, 800, and 1600
feet from the center of the near traffic lane (adaptable to both sides of
the roadway). The location of these receptors were determined by the
change in projected traffic volumes along the proposed project. The
result of this procedure was a grid of receptor points along the project.
Using this grid, noise levels were calculated for each identified
receptor.
The traffic noise impacts of this project in terms of increased noise
levels is predicted to range between +3 and +8 dBA. When real-life noises
are heard, level changes of 2-3 dBA are barely perceptible. A 5 dBA
change is more readily noticeable, and a 10 dBA change is judged by most
people as a doubling or a halving of the loudness of the sound.
The number of receivers in each activity category that are predicted
to approach or exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) are shown in
Table N3 in the Appendix. As shown, 22 receptors (18 residences and 4
businesses) in the project area are predicted to approach or expand to
NAC. In addition, no receptors are predicted to experience substantial
noise level increases along this project. Other information included in
Table N3 is the maximum extent of the 72 and 67 dBA noise level contours.
This information should assist local authorities in exercising land use
control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway in
local jurisdiction and to prevent further development of incompatible
activities and land uses.
39
TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise levels
either (a) approach or exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC),
with approach meaning within 1 dBA of the Table N2 value in the Appendix,
or (b) substantially exceed existing noise levels. The NCDOT definition
of substantial increase is displayed at the bottom of Table N2. Noise
abatement must be considered when either of the two preceding conditions
exist.
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels can often
be applied with a measurable degree of success by the application of solid
mass, attenuable measures to effectively defract, absorb, and reflect
highway traffic noise emissions. Solid mass, attenuable measures may
include earth berms or artificial abatement walls.
The project will maintain partial control of access, meaning most
major intersections will continue to be grade-separated interchanges.
However, most commercial establishments and residences fronting the
project will have direct driveway connections to the proposed roadway.
For a noise barrier to provide sufficient noise reduction it must be
high enough and long enough to shield the receptor from significant
sections of the highway. Access openings in the barrier severely reduce
the noise reduction provided by the barrier. It then becomes economically
unreasonable to construct a barrier for a small noise reduction. Safety
at access openings (driveways, crossing streets, etc.) due to restricted
sight distance is also a concern. Furthermore, to provide a sufficient
reduction, a barrier's length would normally be eight times the distance
from the barrier to the receptor. For example, a receptor located 50 feet
from the barrier would normally require a barrier 400 feet long. An
access opening of 40 feet (10 percent of the area) would limit its noise
reduction to approximately 4 dBA (FUNDAMENTAL AND ABATEMENT OF HIGHWAY
TRAFFIC NOISE, Report No. FHWA-HHI-HEV-73-7976-1, USDOT, chapter 5,
section 3.2, page 5-27). Businesses, churches, and other related
establishments located along a particular highway normally require
accessibility and high visibility. Solid mass, attenuable measures for
traffic noise abatement would tend to disallow these two qualities and
thus, would not be acceptable abatement measures in their case.
Based on past project experience, these factors effectively negate
the effectiveness of any physical abatement measures and none are
recommended for this project.
"DO NOTHING" ALTERNATIVE
The traffic noise impact for the "Do Nothing" alternative was also
considered. Although building the project will result in 22 traffic noise
impacts, not building the project will yield 19 noise impacts (15
residences and 4 businesses). Traffic noise level increases for the Do
Nothing" alternative are approximately 3 dBA, which is a barely noticeable
change in the acoustic environment for those living and working in the
project area.
40
CONSTRUCTION NOISE
The major construction elements of this project are expected to be
earth removal, hauling, grading, and paving. General construction noise
impacts, such as temporary speech interference for passersby and those
individuals living or working near the project, can be expected
particularly from paving operations and from the earth moving equipment
during grading operations. Overall, construction noise impacts are
expected to be minimal, since the project is along the existing roadway,
traversing through low-density areas. In addition, these impacts are not
expected to be substantial considering the relatively short-term nature of
construction noise. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby
wooded areas and structures will likely be sufficient to moderate the
effects of intrusive construction noise.
SUMMARY
Based on these preliminary studies, no traffic noise abatement is
reasonable or feasible along this project and none is proposed. This
evaluation completes the highway traffic noise requirements of Title 23
CFR, Part 772, and unless a major project change develops, no additional
reports are required for this project.
MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
i?
}47
1, ?? ,f !' ?? ivy rx
1 0? °? 37 'qt) ? •° '
Yr- '1e/ ?'•

6113
c ,
V? IV
651 u END PROJECT '".,
3' VINGINIA
.?.. .j
Ila
lu NORTH CAROLINA 'ar ""i? j,a k -? _u •??
14
r-II?p, M' CAY '._ r?? >. ??}}!? ?? - _- w ••?••:?: >>?? 171e ?its
1,1 1714 ` I r 11N 1)e9 +. '?? 1 .'?. Ull !A) 1/M. ?? •y3iriT}q •r7.7w
11_1 " 7.J
...M1 y_ 1)9] uf
x7 ^l:• !1)1 ! -'
r" 'r1t ? Z? ? Y1. 177• ? -V ~':.' 17C! ^ x'714 1].•
I //" r Vx ,111 ,? • 1v?' 1,o, ?A . ?l? t117} ? ??' 'r
? ?1,•^ .'?'I>{'?' .?•'; ,)ie 1`.'` - - 1v ? ++iz'3i,s,yMG. 'y j!? ,l!I ? !111 ?' _ .4" ^j +
o 'j1FI?y d'134
. I,w {tJ? 1st. "? u•?: I}L c:r??l [DEN
1(, •I '? ..?• ? ? X2'1 • 7 Ip 11.e77
,j,••`J' t 17.1 I71 Y~ ?•_?\? _717 .Cr..1 ?7V 1y ,
I U11 ' '177 _.., ?lw ^, ,1r7 1. `/ ` rJ \, .,x;'711,
- Wti` 1310 ->?~ ?! ?? 171• y11 '14'? 7 , e r 121 '
?rN)>ri` ?!l21 -? IN7 ? 'y 7•• ,S T? 1 j• ^ ? _ .'i: 1}.i r• '. Ili/i - `? .w
r I , y?Y /
? r ^•S . ss 1 ?Ti ` Y33>i]N7 •??'Sr ? MA 1 ? ` ? J 1171 • i Jf71 1 ,?
N v .: • , T 7744 M?. 170" i ?? 9 Uj! ,/ "'? ' 311
,? I y N17I1 ''??,, • ?. ?? 1]•1 IM' V,.?I •? ` STOMA -_ N i .ll4"' I,7tLa ; If•t ^`Y''?! , 11
y 770
„ 1117 '^ , • , 70.1.034
•q. n 1
^' , y w ??7v _ y y •.Y r., ?,. ••"•?~' 1 _ - u4 ' i =? _?^ no J 7!I 1 J, to •• - t I•S- \'s
j1`'• v7l+a '? il' ?•'1, • . .1 ., „_I}.4 .?Ylu? , .,t; e y /. 1 11.E fill _ i •o _j71?4 ii??? m JY
?y l/ M y 77• )DO tSytill H _ 7•, 1 ?. ] J .1 }.r ^ 17
11 H 1770 1)1?117t 177 „ 1 I1C1 S.?
.?? ?. ? r`f'? X1111 1w)-? •' '/ 11 f1 11 ..< j!•i 71,1 ^? r„. 1 I HI?• K
} ?, ?v ?7)S 1)77. SY]•r 7 ? -:1 )
,-- ?`? h ? '7,+ i 17)0 11H ! .,• ,_ ' ? JI•) ^ I t
na ?• ?
? 1,,,117'• k?' al,} ] ?• ,1''1'x+.. 1,,, '.it ? nw n.1 + ?_ ? . .
J, '325
• •,,. ? -? ' r. _ c• ? `,,' " 1, s ew? 2114 , ?, „ 1 , n l
1AAl'00A11 ? +.. :?11 ',n 1• 1 ,'. 1, :7121 ,11,
ea , l'` 11II
1_I 1„ 7• .. I 101. 1 e77 '? ' .• S e 71,0 _. 1 •.. .
411 r7 e : /yr /? ?.1 ), , ,Iw ' ,? 7tif
]110 ^ 7?••? T. ?.?
7177 S'
,• •, ^ 71,07 •'
11 r,1 '? lµ ! 11,1 h? `
I . Il:7? ?, 2'10 / r171R ,, ,.. ?' I, x+41 ` 1 u?
l ?,? 1111 '•1 , 1 1 4.. ?? / 770! jIt} 71.7 71 •) 7707 i 11
11„ r1 .. .j] jl,q n„ t 1r J7 • 1 II•) Cf? '
•.? .. T : 1?II 111 7'7/ ,i,• .!T•
IJ} _ ='.::: ? t r 7712 •? 1 - 711 ? 1117 ri% , 7777 ' t'!?
•A . ? s
` 1 ' - alp ?iVn'?.\ 74•
1» 7111 `I
11!17 T. .-?•op7.?? 7M ., 1217 r? ] Cef ! ?`.,'1
t' J; = N!1'!'R ?. 111• 77 `? 'L?. ?i'4' f7 p o \`??^a •.? ,-'_ 7,.• 13•7
7. 1171 721• y r'4 `\
I I f ,`. . Pw°f'•J 0, tits, {? ,Y' 1777 ?vu :S1•' I1•i '1 21N
~- 7111 7710 7W .Y, - -. Y• ' :e` I
I• -
R , •y ` 11 ,
/Pa1] Il!1 0 77w . 770] ? 21.0 7)N -.
it1 s I BEGIN PROJECT'- I ,s,t 11 . .11: 1. !)..
1171 • - }III •? 4r .. r•r ` dim b•M P 1••021 ,
,1 j.?'117 f 1 4 . - i _ ?,1, 7110 '
• 1101 X71 Cro...ood. /'•1^{y `
,. 1.]11.. 1•, u1J r ^ 1', ,.•. H.. 4' 7?
Ix, 4
,I / 1 +.+,+ .. I1M .? '^ ] 1141^. ])10
' r' 1.7 /!« '. ' V1••iYO••?• ?J 7,1] '1`'+ 73C,
•A 2111 ' , 111• ^
„w
,. '? 117• ly ' ,1)a - u#', v/1uf
•,n, ',017- ly•.+ ? 1^'.o +
to w.u•.'t con 711 ?11J'\ww 1q •.r' nT'? ,1r J7"... i7?. ?sjt7 s 770) `7,0! 2141 17L,.•,?•t? '
/? " 1j1 _ •.7 ..?. , k .tiyi 1X+.Y 7)10
1m
I
1
d
1711 ?
Y
»I.
77
711.
fI)f
NORTH CAROLINA
Ng-, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND RESEARCH BRANCH
US 220
FROM NC 701 TO DIVIDED SECTION
N OF VA. STATE LINE
ROCKINGHAM COUNTY
R-2232
0 mile 2
1 ! __j FIG. 1
1u 1
?i-
71U `•'
1

W
J
3
a
i
JU
d'
v
c4

d
Z
J
V
r?Np F.
=°CZ$ o
?F-FAO=W
won>
=oVp v0"?
v?HZZFW -
IL I" a
ZW??.NC?Z
O")??NO(7
c&mz0F-;
Q
?A
0
r,

•1
W
cc
Z
W
m
O
it
I
.a
I
J
1
U
a
i
W
0
a
0
0
N
C
a
d
4 -

1 1
:j

MATCH LINE A
nruur nnrauuuunrtuuuuur
O
I
m
O S
0
0
N
O
i
g _J
I.. LL
a G 1' ?
5a w
1_.
?f d
L
' rtF.

1 ?+ a
g
K
11111//IIIIIIIIIIIIIII 11111111 II IIt IIi 1.1f1 S
V 3NIl HD1VW ?..
11 r
SR 2153 I (ilVpq - '?
i
t?
?i m 1
I _ .
_ C ry I !
I
l `
Im-
D
m m X x X $ -U C) p m
M m x
-a r a Z v c v _? g N
v v -- a
0 Z Z < O z O m ?< }
a m L) 17 ,n m O C m G1 cnj
O a: a m c? O p 70 11 cn < O O O m m -1 D sp
m Oa D 0 m OZ ra- OX
n O D D D Z m OD -=c 0 N vvv
D<< N Z can
-22
C<{ O O vii m
u
U) 03 m co z -i <
M 33
--1 0
m m N 'n
a O p
C) O <
m
19o
a X o cO m W D D X
zz X
v a p m Z O z
x a () 9 i m L7 p O \ All
m n r?i U' can m ?'
v r 0 (n m
o N
T
ZZ V)
O
rn
in
u
\ e
0001,
1*4,64
-- X 1 1 I ? I
Wbd 7
?=ZEN ??xp-3 z
?n 1Y
n MApr, ' J _.... ,
r 4 m r y
x - -
m
230
Ti = C
d' ,/ _ 1 TII
Q
Z-=I? -
M 0 7no f2
0 m 9?TfA a A?'1
M a O m
z H m < 'A
11111111111141110b1111 Ti ° H g
8 3NIl Ho". m y
1 1wp"(NEE
Nei `JBNNA?
!. Z r
\....?a Sh ..

Q

'
I
'N ?'
N y

?

MATCH LINE C
1111111/IIIIIIIIII III III
i

3 T

VVVWWW
wcc
a 7
tl

O

I h \
(T \

I b
-
'
?
?
r li . ? ? \
?
• \

z > ?0P
61 ? ?
U"F
?N

o I e
I
( ??? Jr ?Q^ i?? ` Y I
r

? I I_ I IJd
QQh
? ? I
J ?? ?
Z<
jt;
i g 111 ?[,i
w
6 K
o
m
N r\ T { }} NS \

'
:
Q8 8.3AI8 OAVW see '''''J°. r` i ?•
r ys O6 .??.' .. .
,
Zw \

?tk
I"Ilei > ? J
tyi ,1f ,??\,?\\pP
\t\
P? \
m a:
RO ? CJto:, T
O q V
; N ?j. -
L ;:

Z
Z
.
jN
O
OWO
I 7

LL ` • a

dso Q N b ? ?
?? .? ?
N _ O I?
r

??HV C)
:et
1 FP

j I
F\

h .;
dH3dS -
I i ro£
z
y Uti1, H3?ddS
4¢ I yr11JOO 4 \
f?
• ??
1N /.VPI` N?
i
1
?Z
Q JJ
!!
`'. . 'I 6W
3 ,1 ? `1

,I
, U

a
b

lA W
11
W
%!

MATCH LINE B
1 1111.
11111t1111t111111
ffi o f
3

S NN
11111111111111111111
0 3NIl HO1VW
SRO
t t

I
..1? 8
?009
z +.
N
D OW ?
C
t \ 'SFSO
O
Sandy Ridge.
(((nnn
v 390
lr,
x001 ,? ? i ;
?
ow
l -
wl
72 10 O
? $ T
i
4,10
oDyl
4fi3Z t
i q9o
` r
I '
,p,
f
y
q4o ? \
D ?
o `\
IT
r? eorooyr
X+ ?o \
x Z
?=Z;C
Z KCO)
)
N; 0
n a jog
x G m Z C A.
m V) >
j y
m
T ?Z} (1(1
11111111111111111111111111111 9 93
0 9N1'1 H?1VW yy"1

a

4
01
g(fa.
co

>
b
S a
i
J
.APO 5
i9?5 •i ;rJ?{ x eN
> i? 8 VAMOYW L
?> ( V a?1
F Ob'
1 LL F
???
m< t 1 ,
? oe,??, dcl
m ,
• ' 'Od5
ml .IXII
1y1y1y i
-1 .... -....... .. . , ,.
U NVOOHOJ'
11131S3-,
o ,
:)N
N
r
OR j
SN It
? a
064
a -w
d1 r-
r U
UBb q
?g
S
Y
LL
.I
WW
r

1 d
1
W MATCH LINE E
? c uuua,,,,aaw.unl

vU'W

QZJ
i.
,
Q 41 r
V 0
CC
cc _ _
= v
O
v?0
j
w
H J
i
i

1 { T
41
?R

ai
a
13
w
¢ U
Q
N ¢ O
cc w
c J
U F W
a ¢ O o 10
> U W U Tn
O a Z w w
W O P W
p
¢ N a TJ
R a¢ m m N w a-
. j W
W aLL
7T
LL uj
O F ww
Q ~ m m U)
3 C o OR Q 3 w
p U) z (f) > >
O° ¢ w I- a a¢ 3 °
cc w w w o 0 0 °a o¢
O ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ d N
¢ w Q o
oz N FF- Q>- Z A p z a.
X X C, !?- X X x¢ W Q
w w a v o w w w a I- a
1y
. ., _..,
a?
,la I
g
I ~
±k {
I-

TCH
Z s
Y

= H N
JNFI NpJ.VW sa
p
IT
LI - pq

w

M.J 560
&C J
WICANC:,tt

- MAMIF J'.
`, HROWN

o ,

ydd 9
?n
? -,
-- - FRFDJ &
'.t MYRfIE J
? ,rrn
?
I a
,
I
?ro 7J T r ?
?
N? r
b
N
m
z p
9e

D D
NC I
O?

z
(
Z 19,

t

mob
f
? ?
J ^ D
i D
?'
FmiC. gYy
m dg

Z 670

r
?
.
? a 1 I
F
qx?
Y v
r
? y
y
I
ZD '

?- I ? gfPJ ? 90 .
m ? s `4t
?'
_ ?
FgHn

X

fir
ON
¦rrr
VIN?`Jbl L

rrrr <' `

o
? ? own

R?
Ctl d 7
O

p yy
y7
)?7
?t (?
'- .?
art P
'
`
C Z 0 C
S N ?pyy n
p? o y
?F o
N S

Z
ic En ?
? n p
04
X
cm?
r
m
tip.
ZD
»
N r Q [.

w

O I

n

I
<-iczmvo
eo N m x p-
Z"CZ-m a
OZ
;.40 m0a-4IP
ommoa c
m m Z N r
mZZ.<nw0
O O
6.m r-om
Z-4CZNa
0 Z° ?Z
p'Zt,0
ON$
m -4
a
O
r
2
a
d ti
Q ti
-IN
ay / ?
\
.? / \
o1

1 /
1
1
\
/
\
i ?-163
\ O N
?
is \rIN NN

d
r
/
?
~ ?
X1
0 d?
O
N
n
U
X1
q

1007N - Ad0:) O
n
N

A 1
O W

?I N
Y

^1\
N

?Ic7 / ~
??/
nom\\ .
~i
I mom
\ 1
d
C P1.4
? [1q\IA
N
y
/
/Nti
~
,,
?yy

/ N
N \
N 1"IN\\IA
ti ? H
N
O
N
N
rt
W
C? co
1-
O
ti
1
U
d

67 co
?
?
N? din d
S //IN aiN\ N Ido C4.0
\ /

1
1 \
tin
\\ /
/ ?~
1 P10

Nn \ / •r
?N ddi \\ // ?N
.. ".0 t4- N.
Mn
rs v
n o

O O
N
n N
:7
N CI
n o
0
C N
N
W

C

C
4

O

x La .0 tj
s

..
.. o
O N
4
l W4 -W ca -4 cla cl
-4 04 C3 N CPA C
c
.,

h
rv 4d 'v

©
n N
r? o
to
r

cis 1.1 ca
W
L3
I/ dca
/ N Y
CyV? ?
® yy
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
b
ESTIMATED
TRAFFIC
VOLUMES
1991/2011
IN HUNDREDS
FIGURE 3
APPENDIX
yt,?`.L err•' MCaddo
tn
cil
Zli
/ % •'?
7777 \ ?r • /. `
f ? ? •'?." ?'' i 7111
If It nu
tar - i • "`,Y?, ?' J
• 7 • , , ?7 r/O f '? ' ?-+?.?. Dan
\ i. n f /
?_ . ry •.. ?/ SURVEYED AREA
i o
As /*
_ ?
b?? V
-1I r
oo/
010
fond
y9+ „...wENo,I:L0 .J ?• '95 fELLIS00R0)^ 'S5 "77 55•
?9) 57.30" G•+C[?+SOOpO ?• M I 703E ,v sw
1 SCALE 1 24000 - -
woo 7000 r t t t
1000 0 * - -- - 1000 7(X70 woo 6000 5(=
I c» 7 0 1 . La»Ctt, c IGTIRE 2-
L
'J
L
J
V
:J
•L
fJ
N
r
:J
i
L
,L
J
L
n
:J
r
I
N
F
^ r
r
_r
:!1
W
E
G_ y
v ^
M
E
r ?
? G
v
r
? r
<
J
Z

Z
J
Z i
r ?
r ?
?. f
r Z
r
E <
=' J
f
- .n
t ?

M
r
H
a C
c
S 72

C
U ,C+ C G C C
_, h ?

17 U
? U
] ?n
1
C
.
] V
.C U
? pp
? --
pp u '
V 3 C V U C V G
;0 t•1 N

iI? N N N N N ^?
J U J J J

C C C C C C G
0 0 0 a 0 Q 0
z m z w w

'.' N v7 w = C N = C c,J .C

v
C

7

7 73
7
:J
r`1 .+ fV v N

,
?3? :.
Z C CaZ C AZ C Oi4Z O NZ Z CCi
cn
r V)
J vI
r cn
>1 cn
J cn
> cn
r
• v vl ?o n x
7
O
:J
L
•L
L
7
J
u
L
r
0
N
N
v
•L
a
7
v
O
..Ji
L
I
N
C

:4
r
C
X
r
r?
v ^
? r
t
rC r-.
v t
r N
::a vI
J
Z
:r
Z
v
J
6n v
Z
r <
r r
r" Z
r r?
r .s
C C
U
f
d r
r J

ti
C ? C C
?"' q q q 3
U U U J
C `? ?
C
q • ? .'C7 O C i C
i C
U U v
-J+ U U
p L
• ?
N V
V V U V U u
"" ?„ r. N r • cV

N jQ
1
J U "? U J U .J.
v
O O Q O O o C

L G .4 .4
G
L

J
N
N L.1 L 1
N (n (/7 j
N?
x ma M
PJ cOO p
PJ ?CCn
?
l = ?N C
? = N
? r^: N
? r: N
.?

?
q
33N
q
3 nN
C
UL
U
72
Us
c
C;
_ C
p U ?.
C
C O ! VI Cn 7 i
N G N O .. 4+ N C -^ N _. N .. ? ...
C C C
O N O Z LLI Z .?+ VJ •? O N J =
?-r . 2, N O
C l O c
v O
cn N v) ci] cif to v? U
3 3 3 3 r 3 3

r
3
u
0
u
4
•L.
L
O
J
:J
V
N
N
n
:J
:S
•L
,L
u
.ri
L
.J
r
N
<
a
F
?r
r
.t
•r r
C
r
r r"'
C
r •y
< A
U
z_
Z
v
Z >
v ?
J r
Z
v
? .r
U
r r
Z
r
? J
:n
r U

F

a7 W Q

C C C J •
O c c
N O?
N O •
yJ C
.OG C3
o
d A C
d
c
d

•
(V
O
? •
N
V V
C C
a
3= 3=
N a N
O
• V1 M v1 ,N., • .?. f`J
fV v1 N

U U U U U c c T

d'. ci n'. a a ? ? E
3 3 3 3 3 `_ •'_
7 y 7 7 y ? 7 '1
... G1. 0.. G. ••• G G G

z z z z n `? ul
Z
v) v
? c%f
c o
f to cn
O v? ? Q
? ? f ? _
.. C C C O` O O 0 0 O z G O z ,G. 0 0 eJ
I
N $ N. C N N "" 'N ? C N ? C N .
LLI

C N~
r+ N~ O ?
C N ?
`
L' C
C ?
C N ?S
C N '?
•? (` J U
ONES ON°S !
ON?+ ON ON ONLY
N
O ,
C
U U U U U U U U
? 70 ^ ^ ..-. N e^, ?
N N f`J N f`J
4k lk ;t
T
N 7
U
3
U
i
J
v
J /
7 C
C ?•
3 J
,N n
:J
J
O G
y ..
C ?
G 3
J
J
C
v J
3 ?•
c
O ?
• C ? N
n :J
-
C :J
C
-? C G
J ?y
c v
c
73
/ ?.
7 t4 C 7
`? C G •j
? G n
•? O 7
-z N U
C 4.
v?
•
U
J
z
cc
ar4
1 n.' 7 ?pV
fi•t ei•C S S V 2
sy ? O >
t [
I O ? ? C ? H~ r
N • .( GGGG? ? ?L O f'1
N
N 7? V K V W
? ? ?- cv y W
/ 1? • _ K
/IIII F W ?n 14
Ll C:)
1 = W Q
1J ° r y y x
W 1--
/ /I ? OC
s ?
d N
N
I
F
0
? h
?x h
N
Y
f
r
N I y JS s ., .. .. ? ? ,
O ? J ? Q
N
J
Oy
• v
0
O,O '\?y W Qyy
T. M Q
+ ,? L "'J'y b v w
Oy 0O
?? .Hi O Tom.
° // / L+O T, vyy? O
? .O+f6 H
/? t W H W O
w H >
?! ' u ?? v"li l
i
W 7. 7.
U yO? O 7. W
.. VI S °. ?! N
CJ cc
1_ g

o ce.
? C3
ai•[ o a?•t Sv >??
•v .h y Y

J c
U
V
'1

D 7 G

F• •? V
1.1 T
T .Z W
K
J

f ?
? C O zz
"Cl
u V.
? f 1... N tL
= LC y
HV1Y
I

f
f
r?

H W V
v?o
W cL
]. W
=
V

? a W

? F"
K
o
N
• o
v f
N
o
f
to
.? n

t I
n V

r '
f
! Z
r

N t ? ?

/.o R r w .• d t e

/ a
\ f m
Q
u n
I

?

s w
o¢ o
W < J
•n oCM
I a W
a ? [r
h
I .n oc ?

f
1 ?. J
n
u J
?

i m
f ? T. WN O
W H

• H t
< H ai
Hwtu
o
o
O
..?
N

f W rK 7.
u fy t
W ?J tK In o

I
T <
y?
? O
• ni
H O
:?e?o
u
• ,
1 m_ f
' y
VI Y C. r+6 N
o?
,
1
'1 0

7 ?•? V
? J
?O~

?
N 7_
? r
1 .d
' •
C K O
(7 [1 V
U rt ?
lJ
I 1 ? •! W
1 I 7 N C O N l7 ••••
i
[ 1-•• N y
K LL
C •• N Y
1
w •u

? r?

N u?o
W CY
ti W
W ?
CI

N ? 1

7

a t?.
0
in
w
''
v? 0
2 u
1y v....
o{ 7. Ir

woK' • '
?:. pM
w a
J J -
?oca
z

-C 64 H4
U M n?. N
u W K ?n o

' u o o r

O U
S 1
o w x
in x c, u
v)
•
o
7 i_
1

\ a

? o
i

•

N
N

a w
a
-
u
'
? N O

=
1 Q Q ?
r/

/ 0 11
1 0j? f ?•C
i
K
oC
V\ r
W fY. .
•? ? d oC U
u ?u
C?
f ?O V
? ' ..
r
,a ce z ? 1

E
7 K K O
o?w ?
-
C ?
w T U1
cc
?

/-Ny W
Q
H N Y
?? W U
W.u
a t: ?0
w ac
W ? IJ
S
F•
K

.- tS
Y 7
:ti lI s w n .. J i m
O
w n
H y
T, a{ p
W t-+(G J
VI W
W Y. W
M
O
N nl VI
W p H
w J ?+
M O T.
a d
O ?]
u H 1
V
T,
T. v1 O
O W
a6 H
M R
< N u O
M ? W V .o
W cp61 7 •p
> C W 1
7 •(
W T. .-? 7
V O O :: ,W
O O u
O W 5 W U
N Y n. oL vl
L
(J ; K V
v -
O 2>
ce
nc K o
c ? .( V lrl
{.l = cY
C d K 7
CC FK- N Y
Y ? w u
W CY
1--
/rj /. K
I/ W
/ C
It I/ V
Il/ i
11 /
i J
f
b
N j
U
2
2
N A
i O
O
ono .? "mac-/
a ?
a?a
0
N
N Y • ?/
0 p
W p
? H W
W pJ
W
a
p
•. S'a`I
f .. V H 1
V J
• /H c ? ? ? S. 1V1 y
r j? ? 4 Fi H W O
7? . ? n r• . ?. ? ? `: W H K 7 .D
•C H
o? t 4ti,? °1 i w0T'i
y. ?r o
W
o
J tj oo? o ou
NO wl S W V
Sa`/ N
0 // ?ri
KS
u?i ? d d' V
• 5 ? ?. O S
11-C r II•C v ? .
7 y
O ? K
S O ? ..?.
N
• j ? K vl O r
d K K O n
O V
r / T V K W
111 W ? K
K
2 25 Z y
p 1 .? 1 ? 1-• N y Y.
W U
w o
w
y W ? w
x
( W H
O
K
O
o
o /
i
v \ ?r
r
: err
j
I
?I I
III ? I
_i
lit,
? '1 N
b U
t 2
w
z
1?5
e N?
I
s
o
O.?
111yy yOy
0 7 K C3
W < .J
? N d W
' o
i ?n ey
j o F .W.O
.r+ o w
2m u `I
v
0 C3
? u
i ? " .. ? 1 ? S x vyyl .r°.•
Y .. y
7 ai H
?/ r ? ? •?i -C_wHw o
W T
l?/? %? U ?O?11 O 1 W
DI•C a a{ O V <
' 1 ' ' .? v1 S O. o{ vl
rj /? W 6K V
J N7, tiir? ? S 5 ? ?
h %% % \ x p O Y
O
r rl?•?
M r
/ O d V
T? V W T K
0O5 .^
/ l N
W _ V
t.3 C2
? ? O W ". W [Y
N y W
r ?' V S
(\/ s W 1-
\ O
.N+ lV
o
7
0
i
I
i
z.
/ NI ? d A ? r; 1 1
/ z o S i 3
,e
•
0
•
. ? o0
o w..
N Ei ??JJ
W O H
J
/ u O u
• ? V J
? s?H
< N H W o
H 31 ? U o
u 1+ 0py? 1 o
oZ W W O{ VI
? of ?1u
w t
r/ w r.
Q u0ori.
-?i o'jou?1
?? -? voiso=. ai vUi
TABLE 3-1
Summary of Impacts to Upland Communities
Community Type AcresU+ °-70 Of Total Site
Deciduous Hardwood Forest 96 34
Mixed Pine-Deciduous
Hardwood Forest 21 7
Pine Forest 36 13
Disturbed Areas 35 12
Cropland 7 3
Ruderal 78 27
TABLE 3-3
Summary of WEI' U Results for the
US-220 Project Corridor
Social Effectiveness Opportunity
Si nificance
Ro RD Ro RD Ro RD
Groundwater Recharge M U L L '
Groundwater Discharge M M H H '
Floodflow Alteration IM L H H
Sediment Stabilization M H H H «
Sediment Toxicant Retention H NI H H H H
Nutrient RemovaMansformation l%1 L H H H H
Production Export L L '
Wildlife Diversity/Abundance H H '
(D/A)
Wildlife D/A Breeding L L `
Wildlife D/A Migration M M
Wildlife D/A Wintering M IN 1 '
Aquatic D/A H H L L '
Uniqueness/Heritage H H «
Recreation L L
Note: Ro=Riparian-Other, Rp=Riparian-Dan
H=High; M=Moderate; L=Low; U=Uncertain; and '=not evaluated.

UK! Al
`rt-•;?. ^rT ^7'Ir tI'- .?. ?i .:?^3 ?I?:: :Inn !1..? J - _?117C7 1??7 ^tr
?JC3: LTS-227/?CCwi!io A!{ CC:'!?i/?-?232 RC I: 2CC3 3II:E SS !?3
1. 3I77. URIF?LFS
- 60 !i!I iF S
L, - I H/S C:AS - 7 (:) 'is - 0 C!{/S 'AT V
ERG = S D:S?SSS IO = I3 C.{ D. - 3 CHIS AF3 - 1.3 ??!{
I!. LINK 7ARIABLIS
LIlI LS:CRi:fIv!I. t i.ISr, C^:jR T,1nT?S (!!) t rI!In _E.NY7:I
.......................................................................
.2 = n ??? ? 13n? ! 1n?
I1.. :.7CUT2 , CCA':3!iJ AN: !l :Z14 RLJULTS
R.Ce'riC? = CCC.;?LhAlta ({) = Ca
......................... -.............................. -.......
.. ?153 ...5 73' R: ai = 22.3 C 1.1 t ..S

L:V1 33G
3U
FII3 = 400 H
"7v? - 21 of
Ti?3 7 ci 3 7
-----------------------------
yG I1S3 5.93 0 23.'s
i:.. .L?...!i
?JS-220/RCCYISG ;'.{ CCC!13Y/?-?232 25:.3:3 :?I:5 ? S: V--j

::. t.:! ;F. IA Esc
C:AS CHIS AT T:! = 3': :ll?._ :'.ilt? = 4C7 V
2J - IC CH "n 7 0 `V, J :.:ice 1.3 ..!!
= E: Ti _. :2 t (v
.... ...................t................................ l.... .......

......................... -.............................. ........
:. R:_ 7 i' ..._... _ : _ ...

;n ,S r 20.3
• .
TABLE 1,3
T ; +
,••7. r?•T7n.n. T-rT /?7 S7C ^ H::TT . ::f7«V::? t :1^
?f.r 1.V.... TNT :Jv SC. rl-,r Z7,-, •r.». ? 1Jli Ir..r. r.1
rr-.:0/ECC:,::IG_ [
I. SI 3 VARIABLE'S
- I H/3
3RG = r :EGRESS

'Us = 6 (F) 73 - 0 C:!/S AM - 60 H::i,,TES HIY3 - X00 j
i0 = 10 Cl VD : 0 CH;S A:43 = 1.5 PH i?M ? = :7 OF
:,:Sr rESCR:?7ICH = Li.3 CCC3DI:i;?ES (?{; = LINE LE1oi
= 71 Y2 t (H)
......................... -................................ t......------
?rr
A. 13-2I0 = 0 -iCC°u 0 1C00 t L d
;r
III. R"CE?:CR LCCA'.IG:iS AND YCC,.? REr;i.,I:
r I t (p?H)
-----• ..................................................t.......
r. R54 E .*S ..e• ? 0 t K*GH:1 t f 10 s
.T •rT.9 ? 1.3 r.9
YABL"a Ai
.1-Ha BIG TYP". 7?H 3e ' i
GIMT
71,
........................................
363 AG 1130 6..3: S 13.3
ArTIl:rr. 1• CALIFORNIA T" iOC•n J :T :Y«:? 1? Tnl
C r.,Iti LINE SrrUE s D1.
CV rr...,:V.i ' Derr ?siIr. prr..l ly ?sxS.V.I
9 n n^;•+?^»w+l "..'I.?q`?f/R-LrrL •?271 R"'ri: .1
,MPH
'0 r
?V3. U3-X24/Rr LAI.IJHi..1 C. J ••1r .
SITE V1R:AKES
u = i X/3

C:A3 - 6 :) V3 - 0 Calf S A'.ia = i0 H" .rr 3:i3 - -:'.
IJ = 1u+C1! 7G = 0 CH/S 'M = 1.? ?'ta
t ?1 ?I a: is
......................... -------------------------------
rr t •1CC' r nCr
tl• v?•?.'v J ? 1V r
^n•?nI^vC rn Un?;L
•..• R:?:. •VR .vL.7• r.1. ...1. rrr .. r.?r 11r:?
! •!' T ; ,'
r ..l. r 1 •:
t .W..
t w 1 r . : l l
.........................t.............................. _.......
1. 5s rrr 3. J1. .1 .7 ? •.? ..t
L1A r I:
-----------------------•-------.....---
. ??? aJ i.iv ?•.?? . l.i.
:.;3I"s II1
HARING: .'AILY
1 ?
blast, jet 17 ft aura? at tak2cff
motor test cha-ber FUHA:i EAR

?ir2crac};ers
Ic. :Ever 2 th.:aer, p:2. :at c. ;':t.:3:aar
BY.i.iy cr:d I
AiplifiEd rJ:k :.sic "?^ a 1f:c? `T17 ? J r r I
? 11. J..t L.r
110

IN S.twip :Lain, el 2'7a.2i trai:, fall t:aCtcr
FJ;rer laa::Ja2r, 2A:pap2l gass
HE i7,1 .i.1 triffic, ::isy fa:t:rp .??
'n

", incl. tr.ck 4'4 :pa S' ft. an
B .5 Crcwdid 12st3.ra:t, C'rf3y2 ?ispJSal 4
C ;7ara:E fi:.:lj, 1:.?..::123:..
- i3S5eny2l J3I :; ', ax ay

q.iet tjpiariter
I
? Y'li2t 3UtJ;c?i.c

-^ !
!
'Ural cc:versaticn, IvEriy2 ef:_:2 y7iE i
1
y =eeseteld r2iri,2l3.cr
q.iet offic:

40 1

?72Ia: a::e
j+
'ihsp2r 5 feat 1-42Y
tI Liyh t rai:fall, r.stle c: ??3725

f A:iscer :U3 r.'I.,Id BLL
•. i
c! the
B1:jCl=:2lia ....ri:i:a, .:Stliii
by J. E ?i. :I a.
z L.
.Aril NZ
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA

ti 7.46 t
t L
;.i CyG.p .y(
?s
(?StellGrj
of
(:,?teriGIJ
(?wteri:r}

cesCIiFC1G« Ci ACti'iltj :itey:ry
«ii .. i?'iG i 1 It "^- ,?? r ••??..
....«F?. i» -
r3»1S »a w.;{:? se"l e .?! .«1 yiiet 3r_= ^.j . and ser.e
«eej 3«j artere 'he ;rose:---Wcn ^i tNJSe -%aliLies is esseat:3l if :!-o :e is
se:"e its i:te«:ej FarF?sz.
IECIDId^y.??..jS, t17e SCGrtS a, GJte s,
?iC7iC areas, =.iti G.. ^ areas, aC areas
LCL2I5, S:»CC:s, Cl'1rChes, li"raries, and h:spitals.
:erzlcF_j Ii»js, r::F:Ities, :r r _...:r :.r:7a.
•.,a ? I.Lj
u....e7el?re? ?
Rasii :es, nt.EIs, ..:t a!$, C.hI1: -.:-a ti:; +s, s:I:.-ls, ...:chas, 1.:1:1rics, h:sgi:3l5, 3:d
-Ji:C?. 11Lic :? :?2 CI .ems.:3i Cey""Zi:.:S ?:R:; part 'ia, .cF3r._c« .. '1: .« ai.«, .: ..s_ J:y d3
DEFINITION OF SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE
EG«Ily A-i--ig«tej :G'i»j :e',e: - .aE.:i1ils
t (

J ?v YIlVYiV.l
,
aC-lei iU J?-2i?:
! J :1.
?Eiin NOISE ABATZMENT CRITERIA' .,M RY
1r
.1n-220, t'cM .0 T VIRS12.1 Y11iJ J1!
3J,.3L,G:.,.. wr.fTYf IP Y_.Y
YlaTs •wVY:?T ? r.?11.13
vidl?•,.2 :IC?IL r.J ?L?Lr r.
TE'y :i::5: ?evz.?s
d°i ?!ta.tzs??
57 d°'
50, 1N, 214) 72 c d,1+ I _,
7c 1c aE lr?' 1r?'
75 71 a5 102f 1?.'
7E 72 EE 1C2' 1SS'
71, 55 IO" I?7r
;E
iFy::i: :»y OI :x:_cd:«7 ii
A 5 ?. r r
0 0 0
TYlAS =) v .. 9

O
F ? ;. ?z I
i
` AIC„ Town of Mayodan
North Carolina. 27027 - INCORPORATED 1899 -
A "-? •+ '
February 27, 199C
. J. Ward, P E
'
L
Manager of Planning and Research
Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward,
JEFFREY G. HULLINS
Mayor
/i?. 213'1-
Regarding your letter of January 1S concerning the
widening of US 220 from NC 704 to Virginia, there are no
permits or approvals required by the Town of Mayodan for
this project as US 220 is situated approximately 1.5
miles outside of the town limits.
Than}; ycu for including the schedule of construction
for this project. I am excited to see this work done
because of the positive impact on the Town of Mayodan and
western Rockingham County.
If I can be of any further assistance please feel
free to contact me.
Sincerely,
ytfr?S' G. B":lllns
Mayor

ar ??
.,a w 0
State of North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development
Division of Forest Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor Griffiths Forestry Center
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary 2411 Garner Road
Clayton, North Carolina 27520 .
February 2, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Environmental Assessment Unit
FROM: Don H. Robbins
Staff Forester QPe!
Harry F. Layman
Director
Y'
r `• r ' v
SUBJECT: EA of the Propo-5ed Improvements to US 220 from NC 704 to the
Virginia State Line in Rockingham County, N.C.
PROJECT #90-0499
DUE DATE February 2, 1990
To better determine the impact, if' any, to forestry in the area of the
proposed project, the Environmental Assessment should contain the following
information concerning the proposed Improvements for the possible right-of-way
purchases for the project:
1. The number of total woodland acres that would be taken out of timber
production as a result of new right-of-way purchases.
2• The acres breakdown of this woodland concerning present conditions
such as clear-cut areas, young growing timber, and fully stocked
stands of very productive timber within the new right-of-way
purchases for disturbed and undisturbed portions.
3. The site indexes of the forest soils that would be involved within
the proposed right-of-way, so as to be able to determine the
productivity of these forest soils in the area.
4. The number of woodland acres that would affect any watersheds in the
area, if the woodland was removed.
PO. Box 27057, Paletgh. North Qrohna 2;611.7687 Telephone y19.733-1102
An Equal Opportunity At6rmati•e Action Employer
J?
Melba McGee
PROJECT 190-0499
February 2, 1990
Page 2
5. If woodland is involved, it is hoped that the timber could be
merchandised and sold to lessen the need for piling and burning of
debris during right-of-way construction.
Provisions should be indicated in the EA that the contractor will
make all efforts to salvage any merchantable timber to permit
construction, once the contractor takes charge of the right-of-way.
6. The provisions that the contractor will take during the construction
phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation and construction damage to
the remaining standing trees outside of the right-of-way boundary
and construction limits.
DHR:la
cc: Fred White
File
rsW_ ro
% a
F,t?a c
d
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. ititartin, Governor Stephen G. Conrad
William W Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 30, 1990
To: Melba McGee
From: Randy Cotten"t-'&
Thru: Gary Thompson
Subject: Rockingham County, US 220 from NC 704
to 0.2 mile North of the Virginia State Line
State Project 6.511013 TIP Project R-2232
we have reviewed the above referenced project and find
that 17 geodetic survey markers will be impacted.
The N.C. Geodetic Survey should be contacted at P.O.
Bost 27687, Raleigh, N.C. 27611, [phone] prior to
construction. Intentional destruction of a geodetic
monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
G'.+T/ais
cc: Joe Creech, NCDOT
PO Box 27th-,. Ralc,gh. North Carolina 2701.7657 Tclephone 919-733.3833
An Equal Opportunity Arfirnramr Action Employer

State of North Carolina Reviewing Office:
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS I Project Number. Due Date:
20- ?qu
After review of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) indicated must 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 are available from the same Normal Process
Regional Office.
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
. C
C
C
C
C
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS (statutory time
limit)
Permit to construct d operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions, 3 sever construction contracts On-site inspection. Post-application
systems not discharging into state surface waters. technical conference usual (90 days)
NPDES • permit to discharge into surface water and/or Application 160 days before begin activity. On-site inspection. 90.120 days
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities Pre-application conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to
discharging into state surface waters. construct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPDES. Reply (NIA
time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-whichever Is later.
30 days
Water Use Permit Pre-application technical conference usually necessary
(NIA)
Well Construction Permit NIA 7 days
(15 days)
Application copy must be served on each riparian property owner. 55 days
Dredge and Fill Permit On-site Inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of (90 days)
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permit to construct 3 operate Air Pollution Abatement 60 days
facilities andlor Emission Sources NIA (90 days)
Any open burning associated with subject proposal
must be in compliance with 15 NCAC 20.0520.
Demolition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with 60 days
NCAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal NIA
prior to demolition.
(90 days)

Complex Source Permit required under 15 NCAC 2D.0800.
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion 3 sedimentation control plan
will be required it one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Sect.) at least 30 days before begin activity.
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance:
On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with EHNR as shown:
Any area mined greater than one acre must be permited.
AFFECTED LAND AREA AMOUNT OF BOND 30 days
Mining Permit Less than 5 acres S 2,500
5 but less than 10 acres 5,000
10 but less than 25 acres 12,500 (60 days)
25 or more acres 5,000
North Carolina Burning permit On-site inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit 1 day
exceeds 4 days (NIA)
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit - 22 On-rile inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required "if more 1 day
counties in coastal N.C. with organic sods than five acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspections (N/A)
should be requested at least ten days before actual burn is planned."
90.120 days
Oil Refining Facilities NIA (NIA)
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction.
Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to. prepare plans, 30 days
Dam Safety Permit inspect construction, certify construction is according to EHNR approv-
ed plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. An a (NIA)
404 permit from Corps of Engineers.
P11 1Cis
Continued on reverse
C
-C
C
C
C
C
C
C
r-
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS li
i
m
t)
surety bond of 15,000 with EHNR running to State of N.C.
File surety bond of $5,000 with EHNR running to State of N.C. 10 days
10 days
Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well
Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well conditional that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon
conditional that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon (NIA)
(N/A)
abandonment, be plugged according to EHNR rules and regulations.
abandonment. be plugged according to EHNR rules and regulations.
Geophysical Exploration Permit
Geophysical Exploration Permit Application filed with EHNR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit
Application filed with EHNR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit 10 days
10 days
Application by letter. No standard application form.
Application by letter. No standard application form. (NIA)
(NIA)
State Lakes Construction Permit
State LaXe3 Construction Permit Application foe based on structure size is charged. Must Include
Application foe based on structure size is charged. Must Include 15.20 days
15-20 days
descriptions 3 drawings of structure S proof of ownership
descriptions & drawings of structure & proof of ownership (NIA)
(NIA)
of riparian property.
of riparian properly.
60 days
60 days
401 Water Quality Certification
401 Water Quality Certification NIA
NIA (130 days)
(130 days)
55 days
55 days
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development 110.00 fee must accompany application
$10.00 fee must accompany application (180 days).
(180 days).
22 days
22 days
CAMA Permit for MINOR development
CAMA Permit for MINOR development 110.00 fee must accompany application
$10.00 fee must accompany application (60 days)
(60 days)
Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monuments need to be moved or destroyed, please notify:
Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monuments need to be moved of destroyed, please notify:
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C. 27611
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687. Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Abandonment of any wells, if required, must be in accordance with Title 15, Subchapter 2C.0100.
Abandonment of any wells, if required, must be in accordance with Title 15, Subchapter 2C.0100.
Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cito comment authority):
Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cito comment authority):
L
&
&
r
r
reviewer signature
reviewer Signature agency date
agency date
REGIONAL OFFICES
REGIONAL OFFICES
?Asheville Regional Office
El Asheville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, NC 28801
Asheville, NC 28801
[phone]
[phone]
? Mooresville Regional Office
Moorseville Regional Office
919 North Main Street
919 North Main Street
Mooresville, NC 28115
Mooresville. NC 23115
[phone]
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
Washington Regional Office
1424 Carolina Avenue
1424 Carolina Avenue
Washington, NC 27889
Washington, NC 27889
[phone]
[phone]
Winston-Salem Regional Office
Winston-Salem Regional Office
8003 Silas Creek Parkway Extension
8003 Silas Creek Parkway Extension
Winston-Salem, NC 27106
"",*,Winston-Salem, NC 27106
[phone]
[phone]
El Fayetteville Regional Office
El Fayetteville Regional Office
Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Fayetteville, NC 28301
Fayetteville, NC 28301
[phone]
[phone]
? Raleigh Regional Office
Raleigh Regional Office
Box 27687
Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611.7687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
[phone]
[phone]
C Wilmington Regional Office
Wilmington Regional Office
7225 Wrightsville Avenue
7225 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
Wilmington, NC 28403
[phone]
[phone]
Nom,
Nor?,
To
To
(stalutormll)
DIVISION OF PARKS AND RECREATION
February 15, 1990
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: Carol Tingley
SUBJECT: 90-0499 Widening US 220, Rockingham County
The Division of Parks and Recreation has reviewed the proposal to
widen U. S. 220 in Rockingham County. Our Natural Heritage
Program database shows several records for two rare species of
fish (for which state listing is pending) occurring in the Dan
River adjacent to the site proposed for the new bridge. The
bigeye jumprock (Moxostoma arriomum) is considered threatened
within the state and the riverweed darter (Etheostoma
podostemone) is considered of special concern.
The major threat to aquatic species due to bridge construction
comes from siltation. Techniques that can minimize this impact
include the use of siltation barriers and settlement basins;
preservation of a buffer-strip of natural vegetation along the
watercourse; and reseeding cleared areas following construction.
Bridge alignments can also be selected that cross the narrowest
area of wetlands.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project.
CT/sk
cc: Chuck Roe
3144
7

L
{4.
.? :

7'!

r N

No_rth_ Carolina Wildlife Resources_ Cor=ks
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611, 919-733.3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
Cl-
6'
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health & Natural Resources
FROM: W. Don Baker, Program Manag r
Division of Boating and Inland Fisheries
DATE: February 9, 1990
SUBJECT: US 220 Expansion by NCDOT in Rockingham County
Project # 90-0499.
Professional staff biologists with the Wildlife
Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the subject
permit project and are familiar with habitat values
associated with the proposed project area. An onsite
investigation was conducted on February 6, 1990 for the
purpose of assessing construction impacts on wildlife and
fisheries resources. Our comments are provided in
accordance with certain provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et
seq.), and North Carolina General Statutes (G.S. 113-131 et
seq.).
The agency requesting comments for the development of
• an EIS is the N.C. Dept. of Transportation. The project is
to expand US 220 from NC 704 to 0.2 miles north of the
Virginia State Line, Rockingham County, State Project
6.511013, TIP Project R-2232. Presently, most of the
proposed area is already modified and very little
construction will be required. Modest losses of wildlife
habitat will occur along this existing right-of-way. The
site does have several areas where habitat loss could occur.
They are described below.
The project area is mainly a mixed hardwood site and
lemo Page 2 February 8, 1990
Provides habitat for deer, turkey, quail, rabbit, squirrel,
furbearers, raptors and songbirds. Waterfowl and wading
birds are found along the Dan River, Mayo River and the
numerous small streams in the project area. Most of these
small streams, including Paw Paw Creek, providb little sport
fishing but these tributaries are nursery streams that
support the Mayo River and its quality Centrachid (sunfish)
population. Other principal fish catches include Ictalurids
(catfish), Catastomids (suckers) and an occasional
smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui). _
The most critical area is the bottomland/wetland
habitat adjacent to the northwest side of the Dan River
where a new bridge is to be constructed. NCWRC recommends
that the new bridge construction span the wetland area
instead of using fill material. Should this not be an
acceptable alternative wetland habitat losses should be
mitigated.
Appropriate erosion control measures should be
implemented along all stream crossings and drainages to
minimize siltation impacts to receiving waters (Mayo River).
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on
this scoping EIS project. If we can provide further
assistance, please call on us.
DB/lp
cc: Larry Warlick, District 5 Wildlife Biologist
Roger Jones, District 5 Fisheries Biologist
.I----
?,r c l
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
Melba McGee V-L?
Project Review Coordinator
Douglas G. Lewis
Director
Planning and Assessment
00
1
a' ? r
90-0499 - Scoping for comments for proposed
improvements to US 220
February 20, 1990
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the proposed scoping notice to widen US 220 in
Rockingham County.
As a result of this review, our divisions have provided some
specific concerns that will need to be fully addressed by the
Department of Transportation (DOT). There is mention of possible
impacts on two rare species of fish and loss of wetland habitat.
DOT is encouraged to work with our divisions throughout the
planning stages and that they incorporate features such as those
recommended to lessen the impacts and/or maintain the fragile
natural systems in the area.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
MI-1: bb
Attachments
PCB I3 ix 271,47. Ka!ci.h, Ntmh Caru!ma 2701 7(,s7 lc!cphunc 919 733 td7t,
?? Z
1
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
I I
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives and History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
March 2, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
?i r
FROM: David Brook, Deputy State G%?,'???
Historic Preservation Officer )
SUBJECT: US 220 from NC 704 to 0.2 miles north of
Virginia state line, Rockingham County, State
Project 6.511013, TIP R-2232, CH 90-E-4220-0499
We have received notification from the State Clearinghouse concerning
the above project.
With regard to archaeological resources, Cross Rock Rapid Sluice (31Rk56**)
is located east of the existing bridge over the Dan River. This sluice
is part of the Dan River Navigation System which is listed in the National
Register of Historic Places. Although the project as presently planned
will have no effect upon this site, we wish to alert you to its presence.
The area from the project beginning, across the Dan River to the adjacent
ridge contains a high probability for the presence of archaeological
resources and should be surveyed by an experienced archaeologist. The
remaining portion of the project is unlikely to affect national Register
eligible sites and we do not recommend field investigations.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures
of historical or architectural importance located within the planning
area. However, since a comprehensive historical architectural inventory
of Rockingham County has never been conducted, there may be structures
of which we are unaware located within the planning area.
There are no structures listed in the national Register located in the
area of potential effect of this project. Should this project utilize
federal funds, however, we recommend that the area of potential effect
be defined and surveyed by a qualified architectural historian and a
report of this survey be submitted to our office for review.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina R9 27601-2307
Page Two
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with 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 14s. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
OB:slw
cc: State Clearinghouse
B. Church
M. Mustafa
K 4 ?w

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
September 10, 1990
MEMORANDUM ,.
G
TO: L. J. Ward, :tanager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation SEP 1 .1990 FROM: David Brook ?? f' ?/W (I'( "??•? =r'r t
1
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer t-11 G1
SUBJECT: Archaeological Study, US 220 from NC 704 to 77-
Virginia State Line, Rockingham County, State
Project 6.511013, R-2232, C11 90-E-4220-0499,
ER 91-7180
We have received the archaeological report for the above project from
Thomas J. Padgett of your staff. In response to our letter of March 2,
1990, Mr. Padgett conducted an investigation of specific areas considered
to have a high potential for the presence of archaeological resources.
During the course of the survey no archaeological sites were located
within the project area. Due to the absence of sites, Mr. Padgett has
recommended that no further archaeological investigation be conducted in
connection with this project. We concur with this recommendation since
this project will not involve significant archaeological resources.
These comments are made in accord with G.S. 121-12(a) and Executive Order
XVI. If you have any questions regarding them, please contact Renee
Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
cc: State Clearinghouse
T. Padgett
109 East ones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807

CONIMO WEALTH of VIRGI IA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1401 EAST ©RCA0 STREET
RAY D. PETHTEL RICH%IC%0, 23 19
::C `A MASS GNER
September 19, 1989
D. L. EURE
P-CG?A'AN NG AND tiCHFDL'L "%G t %G?%H R
State of North Carolina
Project - U.S. Route 220
Fr: North Carolina Route 704
To: Virginia/Forth Carolina State Line
Mr. Muhammad Mustafa
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Planning and Research
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Mr. Mustafa:
As indicated in our telephone conversations, this is to advise that we are
definitely interested in the improvement of Route 220 south of Martinsville,
Virginia.
According to our graphic log, approximately .12 of a mile remains two lanes
in Virginia. As you know, this is the transition from the four-lane section in
Virginia to the two-lane section in North Carolina.
Some type of formal agreement will be necessary. I am confident this can
be worked out.
If you could provide us with an estimate of the cost of the section in
Virginia, it would be a start.
We stand ready to cooperate with North Carolina in any way possible in this
important project.
Sincerely,
T .- iujr e
State Programming & Scheduling Engineer
DLE/dg
cc: Mr. J. G. Ripley
Mr. B. W. Sumpter
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
,AV,
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
RAY D. PETHTEL
COMMISSICNER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. O. BOX 3071
SALEM, 23153
January 25, 1990
B. W. SUMPTER
DISTRICT AUMINISIRATCI1
Route 220 Henry County
NC State Proj.: 6.511013
From: NC 704
To: 0.2 mile north Virginia
State Line
Mr. Mohammed Mustafa
NC DOT
P O Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Mustafa:
Thank you for your letter of January 18, 1990, regarding the
project on Route 220. We hope the information below will be
helpful in preparing your environmental document.
Our office has determined that no permits will be required
for the small section of Route 220 in Henry County.
It is our understanding that this project is not federally
funded. The procedure for non-federally funded projects in
Virginia is to clear the archaeology and historic resources with
the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. A letter with the
exact project limits and a set of plans should be sent to
Virginia Department of Historic Resources, Attention: Mr. Hugh
Miller, Director, 221 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219,
Telephone [phone]. Copies should be sent to the following:

Ms. Beth Hoge - Virginia Department of Historic Resources
Address same as above.
Mr. J. C. Wamsley - VDOT - 1401 East Broad Street,
Environmental Division - Richmond, Virginia 23219
Mr. J. M. Amos - VDOT - Resident Engineer - P O Drawer
3631, Martinsville, Va. 24115
Ms. Chris Decker, VDOT - P O Bor. 3071, Salem, Virginia,
24153
It is our understanding that NCDOT will clear the
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
archaeology and historic, obtain proper permits if needed, and
write the document. Please provide this office with a copy of the
archaeology and historic clearance.
If we can be of further help, don't hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
Christine D. Decker
Environmental Specialist
/cd
CC: Mr. H. L. Howard
Mr. J. C. Wamsley
Mr. J. M. Amos

`Hl-C
/1716C7 P' PPMS g :
PROJECT r T/'
ROUTE: _ ,2O COUNTY:
USGS QUAD: PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
FROM: -------
REASON FOR PERMIT DETERMINATION:
LD-2 ?? ? 7,•Qe,fS. / - ------------(----
REQUEST BY ?-----z Lt
-
(Name of contact, date of ruquest)
TO MEET PPMS TARGET DATE -__-__ r----------------------
(List duo date)
STREAM INFORMATION:
(Detail each stroam separately) ,
NAME -41 1 ------------------------
--------------------- -------------------------
DRAINAGE BASIN ~
-------------------------
------------
DRAINAGE AREA __
PUT-AND-TAKE TROUT
WILD TROUT
PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY
ENDANGERED SPECIES
SCENIC RIVER
HISTORIC/ARCH SITE
WIDTH
DEPTH
SUBSTRATE
EXISTING STRUCTURE -------------------------
PROPOSED STRUCTURE* ------------------ -----------------------
CHANNELIZATION " -----------------
-------------------------
WETLANDS "* -------------------- ---------------------------------
I
structure is not to b?- roplacod, givo namo/data of contact that lndic"tud
zo.
**Is there any possibility of channolization within the limits of the pro)uct?
Nl?
??? ?(/ ';1 j?(?f ;\??i ?( ?`?i'? /!" ?°./f ?!% ice' ; I ! ??•'\ ;?? 1 \ ??? '?? (-` b
1/--\ \=
/'J 1 3•x.1 /' )/.^
10
_ `? : - I ; \ - ? ?` ?-?--• ''? ?? ? ! `I?. '.-,"-Z, ??/,1'(,j-?j1 ? '`? =:i'(?? rim o? 6
1» iiJ / )?^-- _?? ?`I? „-,'?_ ?((? t I\? ?1 '?\ '/i(f IIl 11 `_ , L.`L ?7 Lj. _ 'l .931 ?• ...
?~??? •./J.??``?? `I'IL l" /. .?' ? _-../??????L41.1 i?\"?I`11J. y1.,,/? ?/1 ?.77. ? ??. •.,
?4! J '?? ??•• 1?\??• ),?, ?•I•i1il' I?,i!"?/J'U /L..?\l,7• ?IL/ I';I?.; r? l ?/ az7 :', •1?\.
- ?` 1 -1??/ ?r?'?-??-??,i. r?1\ ?,?, 1, `?-, ; 11-x• ?? ?? 1 _, /r, ?./N '/?'???v'??11?? ? ?l. 1 1 ?•-_
-„, c r\ 1
17
?? 9?/' ?r,?•'? ?+ 1 1???'?1! 1 ? f `vr ll' I ???(??`? ?????L ? ? ?I ? ? ?'4? `.::' i ` • %0,,1
IN
• K i •,Chtt? ? ? ;`?1? i, Y/9 a.K1??••? _ 1 (I? ±r? 'al. ? n ? \ `?•', /r I -?, ? r :;-?
1
?, '? ???• ???• ' <'?' - _ / 11F-NRY C-0
1 _ '"? •i. •?? ?•- +???\.,;.!",r. -.fib ` ?1 Il '•`' Q r _ rV.Cc
i /ms's •,? •II - , ?' ? ' e ;-??? ,1 ?' ? ((1 `?I I?. ? ,.gib ;Z?
\,'I,^ =''?ir?'-\ `;?- -a °`Jw.. ,•;?.`` _ FRo.Trcr?'45, s7/0i3 77P PRaTZcrR-zz
?. ??I( 1•, ? , w „ ?? _ _ .? ' \ ?? ? oii •?s '? ?$T?•F/?? CRGLS?/NG: /VO/1/.E /4? /?.F-PJ`'f?l?
COPY- NCOOT
31990
CONINIONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RAY D. PETHTEL P. O. BOX 3071
SALEM. 24153 e. W. SUMPTER
COMmiSS40NER March 28, 1990 DISTRICT ADMINt5TRA1(iJ
Ms. Sandra 1-1. Nance
Program & Policy Branch
State of North Carolina
Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
31
r'o
r
cry -sue 0
y
Subject: Improvement to US 220 from 1.0 mile south of the Virginia State
Line to 0.5 mile north of the Virginia State Line
Project - R-2232 C
Dear ills. Nance:
Thank you for your letter of March 22, 1990 regarding the proposed improvements
to Route 220 which will extend approximately 0.5 mile within the State of Virginia.
Concerning your question as to who you should contact regarding a necessary agree-
ment between NCDO'r and VDOT, I believe that Mr. J. G. Ripley, Director of Planning
& Programming, 1401 E. Broad Street, Richmond, VA 23219, would be the appropriate
contact person.
Any questions as far as design are concerned would come through my office or
to .1r. H. L. Howard, :Assistant-(.District,-i Engineer. Also, any questions with regard
to right-of-way would come through my office or to Mr. D. L. Weddle, District R/W
Engineer.
We look forward to working with you on this project. If you have any further
questions, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
BWS:mrc
c: '-fr. J. G. Ripley
Mr. D. L. Eure
,•1r. It. L. Iioward
Mr. D. L. Weddle
B. W. Sumpter
District Administrator
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY %
Y
C0M.7'Y10'ZV'EALTH of V1RCI'L\,'IA
Hugh C Wier. Duec;or Department of Historic Resources
221 G o%ernor Street
Richmond, Virrtnia 23219
July 5, 19

L.J. Ward, P.E.
Manager of Planning and Research
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
RE: State Project 6.511013
DHR file 0 5326-HR
Dear L. J. Ward:

F. "?p•1?s
CO
PAX

09 , Thank you for your letter to Mr. Hugh Miller notifying the
Department of Historic Resources of the proposed improvements to
US 220. There are no listed or eligible National Register
properties within the project area in Virginia, nor are there any
previously recorded sites or structures. The portion of the
road project that extends into Virginia appears to be minimal.
We do not feel the impacts will be extensive enough to warrant an
archaeological or architectural assessment. We would, however,
be interested in receiving a copy of the cultural resource
assessment of the North Carolina portion of the project area for
our library.
Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth P. Hoge
Review and Compliance Officer
cc: Mr. Cooper Wamsley, Virginia Department of Transportation
Ms. Chris Decker, Virginia Department of Transportation
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
I P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON. NORTH CAROLINA 28402.1890
February 7, 1990
IN REPLY REFER TO
Planning Division
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E. , Manager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
N
We have reviewed your letter of January 18, 1990, requesting
information on "US 220 from NC 704 to 0.2 miles north of the Virginia
State Lire, Rockingham County, State Project 6.511013, TIP Project R-2232"
and offer the following comments.
Effects on flood plains need to be evaluated to ensure that there will
be no adverse impacts on the 100-year-frequency flood event. Any effects
will have to be coordinated with the appropriate local officials.
The proposed work may involve the discharge of fill material into the
waters of the United States and wetlands. Affected waterbodies include
the Dan River, several unnamed tributaries to the Mayo River, and several
tributaries to Paw Paw Creek. Department of the Army permit authorization,
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be
required for the discharge of excavated or fill material in waters of the
United States or any adjacent and/or isolated wetlands in conjunction with
this project, including disposal of construction debris. Department of the
Army permit requirements will depend on the final project design, area of
waters and/or wetlands filled, construction methods, etc. When final plans
are completed, including the extent and location of any work within waters
of the United States and wetlands, our Regulatory Branch would appreciate
the opportunity to review these plans for a project-specific determination
of Department of the Army permit requirements. Should you have any
questions, please contact Mr. David Lekson, Raleigh Field Office, at
[phone].
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can
be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Lawrence W. Saunders /
Chief, Planning Division
d:
?.,
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
yy'S.•r1 . ~ . • w 14
February ;1'?, 'f990
F; - t
Mr. L. J. Ward, Manager L
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways
N.C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201 -M
Dear Mr. Ward:
Subject: Scoping Comments for US 220 from NC 704 to 0.2 miles north of
the Virginia State Line in Rockingham County; TIP R-2232.
This responds to your letter of January 18, 1990, requesting comments on
the proposed project. These comments are provided in accordance with
provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is particularly concerned
about potential impacts of the proposed project upon stream ecosystems and
associated wetlands within the study corridor. At least seven stream
and/or wetland crossings are present in the study corridor. Special care
should be exercised in the design and implementation of all stream crossing
structures.
Based on our records, there are no federally listed or proposed endangered
or threatened plant or animal species in the impact area of the project.
Therefore, the requirements of Section 7(c) of the Act are fulfilled.
However, obligations under Section 7 of the Act 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; (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner which was
not considered in this review; or, (3) a new species is listed or critical
habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.
The Service's review of any environmental document would be greatly
facilitated if it contained the following information:
1) A description of the fishery and wildlife resources within existing
and required additional right-of-way and any areas, such as borrow
areas, which may be affected directly or indirectly by the proposed
improvements.
Q
1
o
0 0
2) Acreage of branches, creeks, streams, rivers or wetlands to be
filled. Wetlands affected by the proposed project should be mapped
in accordance with the _Federal Manual for Identifying and
Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands.
3) Linear feet of any water courses relocated.
4) Acreage of upland habitats, by cover type, which would be
eliminated.
S) Techniques which will be employed for designing and constructing
any relocated stream channels or for creating replacement wetlands.
6) Mitigation measures which will be employed to avoid, eliminate,
reduce or compensate for habitat value losses associated with any
of the proposed improvements.
7) Assessments of the expected secondary and cumulative impacts of the
proposed project on fish and wildlife resources.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments to you and
encourage your consideration of them. Please continue to advise us of the
progress of this project.
Sincerely yours,
/? t I ?I r
R. Wilson Laney
Acting Supervisor

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor April 21, 1993 A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary Director
Mr. Barney O'Quinn
Planning and Environmental Branch
N.C. Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N.C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. O'Quinn:
Subject: Proposed fill in Wetlands or Waters
Widenaing of US 220 from NC 704 to the Virginia state
line
Rockingham County
DEM Project # 93214
Upon review of your request for 401 Water Quality
Certification to place fill material in 2.3 acres of wetlands or
waters which are tributary to Dan River for widening US 220 in
Rockingham County as described in your submittal dated 4 March
1993, we have determined that the proposed fill can be covered by
General Water Quality Certification No. 2671 issued January 21,
1992. A copy of the General Certification is attached. This
Certification may be used in qualifying for coverage under Corps
of Engineers' Nationwide Permit No. 26. Additional conditions
are that 1) water should continue to flow in ints existing
direction at site # 8 and 2) drainage pipes at site # 8 shall be
sized in such a manner as not to drain upstream wetlands at this
site.
If you have any questions, please contact John Dorney at
919-733-1786.
Sincerely,
reston Howard, r . P . E .
1
93160.1tr
Attachment I
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Winston-Salem DEM Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney Regional Offices
Asheville Centge/IttePillil es Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Salem
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/571-4700 919/946-6481 919/395-3900 919/896-7007
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
APR-12-1993 11:40 FROM
FAX
IU HLJ1`JYjj1 __H 11.Ul
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT,
HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES :
8025 North Point Boulevard, Suite 100
Winston-Salem, N. C. 27106
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
FROM:
NAME: ------------------- -_-___-_____
DATE: # OF PAGES (including this page)
TO:
NAME
COMPANY _ G it ____ ???- --------- -------------------
ADDRESS
FAX # --------------------------------
NOTE: s
?..j
d?f
s so ?- ('Je,J?4
?- A
r
APR-12-1993 11:40 FROM
o „a SYN£
? y
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
ATTENTION:
TU
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
June 23, 1991
Abdul Rahmani, P.E.
Hydraulics Unit
M. Randall Turner, Biologist
Environmental Unit
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR.. P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Reevaluation of wetland site 4-8 for R-2232,
Rockingham County
Moussa Ishek, Project Engineer
At your request I visited the subject wetland on June
13, 1991 (with Mr. Ishek, NCDOT Hydraulics Unit). There is
no question that erroneous wetland boundary information was
provided by the consultant (Espey, Huston & Associates). It
is possible that their original delineation was accurate, but
subsecluent transfers of their data to plan sheets (provided
by Ralph Whitehead & Associates) was in error.
Mr. Ishek and I walked throughout the area identified as
wetland by the consultant, This area lies west of the
ex1sting roadway, approximately between stations 25400 and
265+00. Wetlands do occur throughout most of this linear
distance, but in most cases, the wetlands lie west of the
line delimiting proposed construction limits. The average
width of the wetland it estimated to be less than 10 feet,
with areas as wide as 20 feet and as narrow as 2 feet. The
wetland is associatet? with a small stream and an intermittent
drainage channei.
Based upon r.his field investigation, it is obvious that
nc mor(, 1rhan 0.5 acre of wetland will be impacted by the
proposed action, per preliminary design. Since the
co,iEultant o?:iginally estimated the site to be 1.4 acres, it
is obvious that ar. Individual section 404 Permit will not be
req.lired. Should the design criteria change, necessitating
more extensive impacts west of the proposed limits of
construction, please inform this office so that a necessary
reevaluation can be conducted.
C: V. C'iarles Bruton, Ph.D.
Dennis Pi'Dkin, P.E.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
1
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of EHNR
APR 12- 1993
Winston-Salem
Regional Office
'DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APR-12-1993 11%41 FROM
? ,
V
A. _ ?.r . ? 12?a ?
" ? •
II -I < t Sys
K T livx
i : v.
17>N? ,

` 1}LI 1
21
J1
t - ]7?1
?
S
f tw
llll u
` 12A ! •t list

1 F
13: .?
-
V.1W
,'1
Q
TO 89197331338 P.03
1f21
1w ? x x1s2

/
4272 JAM)
2212
1

•% _e
; . '
.W 11 _ ?@-
,` = A N p X122

IV*
Clow-, , 'tUl. .. iat uu w
MAYAN \ >•1?.
1
ror. a \l 21! 4.
altl \ ,aft ?' ? ?...i,., i!sx 21l)•ri
LW '? 1.11 • xm 1"I
7 219} 2MM
V
Im
1]!2
ee? .
1
y at -
'C f-, r
27]l 71!4
119* fl
e I ; 11•,
ta,L!

? ? 17Z£
Y '? t
1
V
11JR ? ??
r,:',o il4Q L1L
• 711

' AIN.
S;r."? 711n
-r
FORS;
C? couNrr

II]4
.+ by 4? ?. 8731
Ant
1
\t• x?'-_- )1111 x? xx9
? ,1q Slxi •e q { ? r
a72Q \ 1799.
9 Rxl4.
Geld 12xe.
L' a
R!i!? xW M4.
X7EL
"31 ?
2]x1
lia} x? 77xx t? x292
„ i>r1? 7 x>il
Ixv
C1
3>4
i xat 5;. pztb \Ia M a .ar I ;s.?
I ]119 ?? n 'w- 14t
WNM xtm
1a ' /1 Govo?
21H1
Y
J 1}2x. > x2Et ?
eV ? ?4 I IM l4vx
? ?R tl.l a .o ia4t 14
9
b
TUTAL P.03

MF:MORANI>T_TM Pl} I NT NAME',:' :
Re y i ?- wr,i.: ? c L
TO: I ohn Li,>>ney WO "'upv.
.:
Plarin:in-p Hl-'all ch DA`I'S;: /3__lf?p,i,?l
c,UBJECT: WFTLAND STAFF REPORT AND RI?COMMENDATIONS
* + *:!?AC'II ITEM MUST BE ANSWERED (11(`E N //A VOR
Al?PL1 {_'ASLh;) ?* *
M ,T
PERMIT YR: 9? PERMIT NO: 0000214 C'r?±T_1NTY: RO?_".IC.I NGHAM
APPL1+?'ANT NAME: NC DOT - Wl-DENIN(?: IT;T :?20 FROM NO 70h/VA
PROJECT TYPE: ROAD WIDFN:IN(, PER MT7' TY!'F: NGd'6
C()E it: DOT #t: R--2?.32
RCD FROM CDA : DO'T' PATE E'RM _( D.A : 03 / I? / 9 3
PF -OFF _[C.K: R-IVER_AND ` LTT'. _I3A:lI N _# : l'a,?q 0 3 -
STREAM CLA,„" : cJ S -- i d
WL---IMPA("'T'? : CN
WL..._RE0UE ,`.I.F'T) . S
WL ICORE ( #)
HYDRO_(''NECT':' : ON
-
:=QTR INDEX N():;4 2-
WL TYPE: JA) F
WATER IMPA("1'EL) BY FI I,1 ? : Y/a
MITI("A`l,FUN'.,': Y/N
MITIGATION TYPE: MPH ?-?Wl'I(_)N :_,II,E:
I:_, WETLAND RATING; I'll-TEIE'1' A`C'Cl1C;Iil';I?? : Y N
RECOMMENDATION Wlirclc Ono): Df''NY
7 KrJ•',,.?L?/.?.
COMMENT;' : zyJ-
- _._ ??_.._.-r_??=-?-----??"'?--5'??? :----._-.__L-sJ2']??%_?LiZ. t'.J------.?-.----l..ll-y?....... ? /? _- ?/ -K... GAY i 1N-?•.t??
-Ji ,F.1.. y? c;.'
112
P 71 t-r, t l I'' t l oS
('
f (..?- ?? ,S" c ? .,,? ? ? ? c,.., ?•?.- 'I"mo"-- h E:....1 V o c?.?.
1
APR 1 41993
l-
A

U.S.G.S. or NWI map / sa cy?
NWI wetland type
? Coastal Plain ? Sandhills
Nearest stream name M T D 616-) h
River Basin and sub-basin A' 0 A
Stream index number / s'
Wetland area S" acres

.6'1 r ti c,1
W -Piedmont ? Mountain
_ Classification_ S
Wetland width = a S-0 feet
Wetland location front map field verification
? on sound or estuary ?
O on pond or lake, ?
? on perennial stream ?
n intermittant stream
?
o ?
?
on
4a" in drainage basin headwaters
Cl In ovate-shaped depression
? other ?.__.__--- ?

? Hydrologically connected ? Hydrolog
....................................... ically isolated
...........
............
Soil series
from map field veriCcation
? ( ? predominantly organic/ ?
t • ?Iunius, muck or peat
/
?
predominantly mineral/
silt la
? predominantly sandy

gleyed or mottled
saturated or high nvaler table
Endangered, threatened, rare species _1111a? I?
Source (NHP, USFWS, other)
Adjacent land use froitl ntap field verification
? wetland _,,r__% ?
r
? other natural vegetation _'7.1,_% ?
? agriculture__1C2_% ?
? suburb,m/urban _??_°lo (..?
Adjacent special natural are - __ _CLkC_"_- au A?mt
Nearest road JL?
S, #
j'_ I
vllsn hx? I
4"I?_A JI'_
(, (- J .
AIP
Hydraulic actors Freshwater Q Brackish L] Saltwater
steep topography
U ditched or channelized
1i constricted outlet
Flooding and wetness
Q semipermanently to permanently flooded or inundated
© ti al, regularly flooded
Wr"non-tidal, regularly flooded or conveys water during or after storms
seasonally flooded
intermittently flooded or temporary surface water
d no evidence of flooding or surface water
Vegetation
arBroad-leaved, evergreen shrubs present
& ,,-Herbaceous flowering plants dominant ? moss dominant
Dominant vegetation (1)

(3) a

Special attributes t -S

• f.•• f f f•• f f f• f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f•• f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f
Wetland type (select one)
? Swamp forest ? Shoreline
? Bottomland hardwood forest ? Stream channel •
? Carol ina bay ? Salt marsh
• ? Pocosin ? Brackish marsh •
: ? P e savannah ? Freshwater marsh :
Wet flat ? Bog/Fen
• ? Perched ? Vernal pool •

• ;` ;.. i':, ._.,...; »;e. >.n. s,,,. <:_;.-T. ;ivai.??c... ,. 'N.._ 'd.... ..... ?.vt,2s x:•
Water storage
-
• Bank/Shoreline stabilization
• Pollutant removal 3 •
/x5.00- t7,D :
Sensitive watershed - 3 :
• Dispersal corridor 3_ Weiland score •
6 x 0.75 =
Special ecological attributes-r---&--? SIRS-
Wildlife habitat- •
Aquatic life value ?...-__.
/3 x 1.00 - ?3 0 - -- - -
: Recreation/Education 2 :
Economic value ]--
q x0.25=
.....................................................
.........
STMt
RECEIVED
N.C. Dept. of EHNR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA APP 12 IM
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201 Winston--Salem
RALEIGH 27611-5201 Regional Office
JAMES G. MARTIN DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO
FROM:
SUBJECT:
ATTENTION:
June 23, 1991
Abdul Rahmani, P.E.
Hydraulics Unit
M. Randall Turner, Biologist
Environmental Unit
Reevaluation of wetland site t-,e for R-223`,
Rockingham County
Mollssa Ishek, Project Engineer
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
At your request I visited the subject wetland on June
13', 1991 (with Mr. Ishek, NCDOT Hydraulics Unit). There is
no question that erroneous wetland boundary information was
provided by the consultant (Espey, Huston & Associates). It
is possible that their original delineation was accurate, but
sub ecluent transfo-rs of their data to plan sheets (provided
by Ralph Whitehead & Asscciates) was in error.
Mr. Ishek, and I walked throughout the area identified a--
wetland by tiie consultant. This area lies west of the
Existing roadway, approximately between stations 254+00 and
265+00. Wetlands do occur throughout most of this linedr
distance, but in most cases, the wetlands lie west of the
line delimiting proposed construction limits. The average
width of the wetland is estimated to be less than 10 feet,
with areas as wide as 20 feet and as narrow as 2 feet. The
wetland is associated with a small stream and an intermittent
drainage channel.
Based upon this field investigation, it is obvious that
nc mort.- thdn 0.5 acre of wetland will be impacted by the
proposed action, per preliminary design. Since the
conEultant originally estimated the site to be 1.4 acres, it
is obvious that an Individual Section 404 Permit will not be
required. Should the design criteria change, necessitating
more extensive impacts west of the proposed limits of
construction, please inform this office so that a necessary
reevaluation can be conducted.
c : V. C'_larles Bruton, Ph.D.
Dennis Pi.?kin, P.E.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
301 16 =
e 1151 <p /. \/1
VA -. t y 1p4 30] 107 5 SII F 700 j : PAP
Lu- x+02 .e 1411 0 'R :.
N. C. s ? :;- ? o h1 ,? 1? .4 ? t 1?4J. a ?•.
1 ?e10
1151 \ I? v
` l IS01 J ???, f1532 'i ?U .. : fAU tAJt
1#70,-_-._ ? 1344 1343
9 lei.
c'4 EDEN
I J.e 1]761? as }0f I 137!T 15 P for. 15,672 ?e7 L
4 17#1- ` ..
w
IN1 e 1719 ,,:::• 3
1 ILK 1739 Y It` f ? / \ 1y75 U
N 'It`. 1 1347 _ y 'J IS?9- 7 '1
1357- a fA
b 36'JO ltd- ? t n 1319 1 t7 r " 1? 1 h 1 1 :!: 1547 1 1347
ail J )49 ? 1317 a? 7 i1y 1 .II.r :I
' I ,,.,\?u. -' IM7 s. - o 's 1 770 :`y`•y• ,.'%?»
159.1 ti? u 770 I 1 137 i 1743 7 a
4 t? i l ', 319 1199 1 Ste, 1Wy 3591? FAS
I f i ? / 'f 1? 7?1T
13 '? x•.71-.7 DS
$ "' 1]44 179!179 N ..,.? b? 770 5
r: tl94 147 7144 - 7179
I v 5 P T! -12446 7197 7203 7 tA5 ER
1 1 ? .6N15 4 TO In 4' S 1u `1_47 7141 C4
/7
1771 12x4 A 41 1747 1m . q
\117_ 1 ip fA5 )71 ss 3145
11-4 - n ? 1 2147 71411
- ,
V •D ?? A I 11195 1 70 _
•.1` . 2112
6 1.-- 1 71441 7161 149 2134 7uo
1111 y .?? 3217 ? ' :'{• _
1123 1 -5 '7 ? 9 ?. _- x167 21 SA % `I C/p.. Ali e - 7111 o T?
J 5 ??C 'N
1344 11141 1174 7171
1 ! u ?? _ x167 7 L -! 711
.0 ' a N _ - .7 , j e -7131 a 2219
4 t 3 1711144L l3. 1714 770 1754, / L J e 7_41 X171 2111
C? \ Illl 1.2 N 1 T 15 2212 2171 1154 7141 7762 Ne
4 1 tM` /I 7177
a \ L77- p t ? H 'to ` 1 \ 7137 ? 7151 I s 11 23x6
7134 6
11-9 2134 1144 `_t / A I.0
Y JYQDAN `' 149 170
J x177111'
ror. 7.677 7 2180
. .1 q
° us , t• .7147 3 1134
»qI 1 1? ., I,y?-?\ .: v 7123 2152 1? x191 7143 ,? .7 7145
--=??I "' 4%4 ,. 115 ' .I i}i 3 13Q 6 1 ?L! 1 7177_ •?? 'S•.
x16 7.0
1141 I.v R T 11 ry 1 l7 O i]3J 1V3 J x139 h .0 WENIW01M,
7111 7111. °
? . 1113 ? ??G 7141 „ T y es
c? a
J1!! a?q•':: C?? . 1141 7197 .y Y
*F,m\4\'4\''}I'yF ?
1117 In. 7114 ^ t '2 7366 27N
eN ? ^ 0
,6 170 7740 ?- P90 ? 7194 7765
7119 193 ?7a 1?9. ° o x744
Por.7, RIVER 777
1141 LM ,e
1_I. S .J 04 .4 1 .J .1 1.5 j •'•. IA5 \- U 2716 't
71 319 13.10
- X334? J .)
L, / '?PleO]onhdlle 704 ?•,
:. .7 3-. - 7L11 ZQ '0 3345 x7440
?.; -
. r` 5 f ? 5a ?L. BOken
r 1? ?::.... fA5 s 2 1 ! C,o rood ?,• ,,lI7 77_
R66d \ r R' 113 Lll- ? fl` , 730 7 .4 q J
1 ? ?) ...4 ? -? 7767
I 5 , 1J 73.14 1714.
jLf? '7 7!4 'R,• Gyk .` ,u n 2363 ? ??_?7779,6
•? 6 1174 113 111. O 7701 37? {" s 2
11 7344 3741 1 -1302 1717 'D
?_/ T? - u Mtellip4esce •J.7715 1001
SIaRv•v ?' 711s - 7760 J_
7.J f ?i, 7701 y J _ 2701 1.7 7711 2360
+ Q 114 Y 4 7311 X1 .44
2e 111! ` 1123 % 2 17! 3711 1341 1#41 \ x711 1
2341 14 , 117 'J 7716 ci
t ti lll4 1140 147 '1177 / X19 'N tub 5 ?714 7707.
11.9 MWWO Cove I1 .e U v. IAA x5120 1317. )• r 7717 7441 01207
1
t?.J - 1° 231
5 1131 ? •d,:e n 773- 1761
"' 1111 t? 1474 33x! 7779 'O - 7 17l±?
)11.4 liO \\1174 7#2-1 • ~ 1Z 4r 74Qe _ 1001
11.31 11
Y 7736
71'70' n •;i, .13 6 n v .1 - 10 .e c m e5 s 2406
1 - -- 1117 _ 5'124 x?
y _ 7
` 33z 5 76
L31_ 1 v ,0 5 X177 7 Gold 2333 ? .7 t
v 1J1 177 13Q I11 7- 7x1 7716 tey 1#34 11191 :',
r '1314- r 377
' 1327 a 149L 103
4
e 1 I1 9 s I1 1 23'10 s 1#7_ BeM430Y V •4 7 7397
I "20 1171 27#2 4 n 1159.'7 7734 ? 1771 779_ /
5 I. . 7737 -1 c---l
7794
e 1179 7 71#L 213 7731 23sxz,7_S.1 ,.- 77)
1 n i.w n a. . ti 7751 77
7774 J /- T
e 1111 a -Q.y?J 2116 - x3£1
1 19
1
Ilse 141 0 7135 t/!?4
1129 7409° 7794 2447 11-IL /
7776
16" .J /114\'•'%1' 0 .7 .7
1107 , 1_IM b a \ 38 i?
O
A , tilt 1119-J 1105 .x497 ?` 47_ 2730 7 :4 1 q 1
1110 11 IZ 1104 y 7141 77 / 7751 IAF Midway T
1104• 1779 2744 - \ 1.73
1103 :/ q witty?
- 1? Crossroad] 7793
11 1114 1101 1A5 733 / 7746 2729
s
1i? ° ee . tws ? `y
ti 1113 2301 t?5... _ .7
7 ! 2351 L991
1179 1117 t? ? 7 - 34# 7]Q 1Q01 llj
103 ;'69 2348
Ltd 11110
112 - M: -?_-? --- 6 - '
.2 ?' 41_ n se ?.e
_•__ -r--- X68 2 r.
FORSYTH I ry 63 '0 1, / o
COUNTY ! 051
si /` ;4
\ G u I L F 0 R D

?69
f
d
I
r
li -
A
HYalon
? f]a
Cedder
ess. Mtn
f I
goo R
n 000"
n .100, . ?° a u y ?;
100 ?' ?? tae
y_ c
BM c'
1 F
594
Dan Valley 673
•? Ch ,f
Cem
68 O?-
Golf Course
- -
J? ipo Cem ?C
600
,i - 694 ?.-
® Dan Yalley
" 684 II /?
..,
ewa
D sposa •?
Substation
JJJ
80 II
-
? .658 • - ?f652
? :? 633 4,?
I ? ? ?? ? -'? ? Gravel
Fi t
ICity R
I 'BNT ,,, ? RI V'E
Mall i 5740
?? 1 -
R -
S_"=? / 1 buo 1 ?? ??
II PO
Cem II ' ._,`• :Fr• : C
587. - 4?
S
311
:Riverview 1 ?yO'?1?,'? A\ ?" ??
Cem
Substation Cem_
Se? 'D sP81 •\\ , - GI• ` f, ?? '!.-mil: ,yt
BM696 0.
I'?AS
Q'? ? ? ? ?•? ?? / 220 ?? ??"?' •?i ? ?? li 1 ?,-? ?- ?-,l
??. 'A, •, ??_3? ?,?
"6* ?, 00 (0?
-•/-oodland Cem 7 z •??,? ? ° i'
?. J
593 57'30„ 594 -. I
.SUMMt NFIEL fJ 1,3 MI ' _? -...-_ --- --1•--?_.__._ __ _ _____
GREENSl3p RU 20 Ml r 5056 6 IV V S Sw W
595 (EL 596 597 55'
SCALE 1 '4 one
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ogre
TRANSMITTAL SLIP
TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM, SLOG.
F,$O M. R[ O. OR ROOM, SLOG.
(?nLv& ? ?
ic

-
ACTION
? NOTE AND RILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? Pilot YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ASOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
I t
r I
?y rf tv3
S,mriE OF NoRTii CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
IAMI? Is. I It IN]. IR. DIVISION OF I HU (WAYS
GO VI RNO R
P.O. ROX 15201. IZAI-II6 FI, N.C. 27611-1201
1'Au -niKV 1
1-,aJ I.Ij. . I]d 'I.l11il .?i. I. P.". BOX __"K
1' .1 _II, it )r'.11 I> I i?. '(; r
ATTENTI"N: Mi. john Dal-py
61d npI P_" 1 I y p! onn 1i1'' ;i

q-)10
SAM 111 IN I
MUM IARY
-?D
MAR
tunm N(
.41101 :.I.P. N [ QA, r. and.!
I!F- Ac !-t It tL ..i .il? I ,pall_-1on, t. ?ran; _ DI 1 ?,r 10U PPV
?idell '.wo-.Lone i gai1w a')/ I.;:' ?! rail Li d ' L(J -:;-1
I I. Ji ol,+ I_1!,1 [Ih°?,^I I]?lC;l.'I[1 I ri':lt ?1M f-11 (- h(F?(:t.
Sidi- if rile-' shIng andway. The, p 1_XPL VPIIME°nV, Will
-1
, i1dt' - J.'i-)1.- ',11.i ? i..", y .i
?I! ,3C^r illrl?: l i_i -.i-l !f_t' !L? I ?1 Lil Lilai?.
llE n : -'l P 16H
I 1. C?Ci Vi Lf1I.iiI ? 1 iIt 1, iII1?_ `t IIJIJ i1; ilf
Q)w11 L involve w t L mil. K11 11 ,1- i ",M-tny t h .-li _ , :1 p nn1 ?
1 ti, in uu- Ic it . 'r f t-]1ws n i i I I r Wh ch 1"
)"C'dl i-A ;9.I-)mp ead-W.il.": . The t"t;l-I_ w I Dd { 1 at F.li.a:.,r-,
five it Q;> m 1 I ill ll l _ .
Ii 16 l11r.Pi I1,JV l-L of ii pp 'i -lI 111?'i'.
f-1llla i 1=..:,0 1-1 m l :11 !JL JE C'U
IIv -law I r- e f'I. jl I L1 I .1 ` i 1 a1 4 U l W li
n a I 1 1 y r L._ t i .t p ? r 1 i_ ]y l a - I 111 1 I r .? f'>y .;1_IWI]
t? Lei Lt, 6', .
V

I J
?, i es
if you ??.?av- any 1 t igns, p r a:_,n c'<)nta,:.'t yn . i Be_ An
Rp I r, Qh at. 191q) -.J I'QnaIp N.L.
l\. dII-t IaI1d
N.1I1S ing A En % i mnmelit:a.1_ 1 1- inc ti
M1: , (,. T 5 llPa1 iv , v . F . , R0:Irlwmy U" ;.r q
I"Ii, . )1O1-;. IvI O1 Lou, i K. , Highway 1 pn i gn
'L't1 . i1:)I.1I]. :-;1111 ,iL, P. E. St=I ..tUrr f)en i1
Mr. J.L. mat., P. C . , ''IIG,A
Hr. Kelly .Banger, P,E. • rojo t Management
Mi. 11 . ., . IIav n • P . E . , U ya a "I h
Mi . Denni s FlpKiU. P.E., Pldlivlinu I'n 1I?;nii1pllha]
Mi. J.W. Watt/ US, P.R., Diviv "n 1 F;11y11 ppi
} ?IRGINIA 138 4 1.)-s q I ? r
r
0 I C
I 7
ti Pr' END PROJECT U
79 1.302
.
d
' , 1 w
3
LZS? BEGIN. PROJE 71.
?
U6Q
END PROJECT --

.] 1303
b
?
•+ . 1307•.
1304
?
• 173
•° I SC
B
f/
?
%
Q
! 1509
9 u
a
•
? ? Kc
1349 o L 1
ol
1309
L
V
lx1
+ • ?I
w \e
13?7
b •
1]d7 ? '!i
9
1.42

3A6
2?0
176
1]67 - '? S70NEVIUE
7 v'
t7A6 1313 ?
?0?. W
li6L ., 7
u Li44
-ni
.t 1i?1 \2 ,::n,::.
T

U d
S FAS
s I:; no
.1 u12 AI ")
t;'} f•IS.1 h:•
J BEGIN PROJECT
`" ' 2 -' L ti ?
t 767 .,
0 4 END PROJECT
.
1
/..
1I
3
9
.? -
.+ 13 17
)ts3
`
3

N ? IS ? ? t
F '3 t 33 ! LPL ? 2161
cli
CV
1373 13 124 "' trLj L A
7142
.L?3t 13f? `
7131 i
N t t
2-16 .3.
11_1_ NJ& J
220 2231 IJS
12J ! A \ 5 124! 214A
4- 5
b

N 1712
2712 2179 •S A /
e
m AOLIC40iR Yb `S t tom' I I !
c\j
MAYODAN
I FAS ?1??
?OP. 2,627 1
(? ;t•J 7160
135
e
PAS ' 2176
'?.V. ? I i ? i ] I
ZO
q ,
s .s ? a
•. r, .1

. . .
..
L2
C2

•
Y
, ?? ; 'S„ 2117
r;
x 4:'. V
b 2161
H 61 2104 2161
`. SON i.+ 6Y?
,
ro?. 2,1 220

' RIVER 2L!2
2.3 CA
° + 177j 6 BEGIN PROJECT
04

.J 17 10 ,? 7709 •J
I• : :? R. fA5 S I1 0 306 ° 2303
VICINITY MAP
ROCKINGHAM COUN'T'Y
SHOWING THE LOCATIO14 OF STATE
PROJECT 6.519002T
Summary of Lrpacts to Wetlands
Site #
1
N?
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
m 16
N
M
N
N 17
18
19
20
21
F22
U
N 23
M
N
N
P Lo- 2 4
Station
49+00 -Lr- +
6o+oo -Lr- +
96+oo -Lr- +
112+00 -Lr- +
122+00 -Lr- +
162+00 -Lr- +
170+00 -Lr- +
260+00 -L, +
273+00 -Lr- +
331+00 -Lr- +
34o+oo -Lr- +
382+00 -Lr- +
408+oo -L- +
440+50 -Lr- +
476+oo -Lr- +
547+00 -Lr- +
557+00 -Lr- +
567+00 -Lr- +
586+oo -Lr- +
592+00 -Lr- +
594+oo -Lr- +
667+00 -Lr- +
679+00 -Lr +
705+00 -Lr- +
Acres (+)
No Impact
No Impact
No Impact
No Impact
No Impact
No Impact
No Impact
0.59
No Irrpact
No Impact
0.27
No Impact
0.57
0.46
0.34
No Impact
No Impact
0.20
0.34
0.25
0.28
0.16
No Irrpac t
0.10
i

I
I
C \, ? I
r + rr, ?
N _ I
z
H
w
:.

94,
3 ?,N cc
./ _ x =
cr-
cr-
r ?cr. 1 W
0
?-}- N
W 0
- ` rL

? a ?
z
w

1 ?
i
+1 1

?I Q
U
r 1

OD /

M Q, _ r

M ,cy
-
1
ON
I
i
11I-- N\
r ? 1 .7N
11
tf
V
K
K
?I a
I=
I-
.I
I
Un
N N
O
cr-
tW I ?
(:D ?
.01
`'• i in
?Y QI Z ?
U\\V
O
1. ?M
\ \\ r \
Nidao ,
x
13NNf1.4 w
-
z
O
/
z
?,7
tr I
J

w
O tr =
,
4

Iw
o
3
a_
Q-
0

I
1
1 ?
t
Q
1
r
C
I c
3 t
_ i

cD
i / cr-
A
n i/ = N
I'
y
(!D X

C-3',
I
I
N
N
,
Ij,

Cd
N

(n J
a a
I N ( d' ,,??rr?
I ? 5 5 _
T
I
A
5 133HS 33S
3NII HOiVVY
N oUUUU
O
O
O
to
N
r
w

?EEI U j ZI
I
> ? U)
0m W m 1

Z = W
!
D w
N% W N tt U' t;r
o 7 a
\ ac
W Y
_
?? 7
O > _
N 2.m I ,!
w F- /
J (
_ N C) a. o _
I ~ CD
-_ Nava

W r?) co

o cn NIN
? ?3
?to ?
-
_
+ p
z M ,.51 a

J
M
II _ u) N

a m
«

N _
II 0
-

`C3.
WIT,
0 =

O _
c ar D _

-
0-0

?
W
Q
W
4 /0

_ .
C) i (n, -
,
N
0
\ 0
Q/
0
„} N
C)
O?
?---I O
CL ?
?

p
N
lr-v

f
Y u, I'
? z
P4 R
M

w w
z
a J

w
a LL- - z cn
=off

N

41

.,? w o -
0 m
0m
y •
cr X

-. •.*? ? .. n, :?y. •• .?,p .,?..?„1A?Y .fir ` .a,?ny„?H^S? -•t. r"?Yll"?xh?"'c?x mf+??r:•.gM?•?ryr .. ri?•
?££I ? ? ?? - ?LZI

3
tp 133HS 33S - 3NI1 HO1dW

tiT
. ?aT

a
o
3

Co.

?
y
T ? s ? y
? r

( o
Z
L.
JIV\VCl I? G
?[M dS?? I,81
V I
N
i
?v <
I z z
o a
I ? cr-
(n
J
Z (n w
o z.
z
NU LL-
? a
3 c?

3
IS,
? I
1- I
cn I --
X 1
W =W ? _ I
V
P
- °

59 WU
i?
w0) 1
> ?' -
il.

I
IL
w
_
W Z
0 L L
ImJa wU
Zcn W
? c r
Z
?? o °
0
INC
I
1 O `til
3

v
ti
N

(O
••14'
0
a
o ?
W J
-i lid
I
'
z=
1 - -
cG

U
rr?7

ty} I ? ?

J
?'
F"'
N a rn
°
O

O =?
W ?

00

y.T

-w o
?
,
w
U70
e o
3

? i
n M 1.t

F_-
l) - cn
1-7 C
W

17 -57
N
1
6 W -
_::z
7 J - i -. ?
Y - Q
? W
O ,0)
W
C3 -
N
?

H 4Y
O
W
w
> ,

- )

J -

J
a
cm
J
t
:)N
Z Ig5

It,
I Ill-
ON
p;
,?_.
J o /
w w
Z w N I
R ?n I a
(n w I m
m m° ow 0
N I m
w
r, Cl) u a Q + (3D i ?
Q
J F- }: U ? I O
a (n Lo w
Ua Vj WwmZ + ' (D R
pU O >M~? w
I- d a
O ' JWVw
CC) g + N W 1MoE ,
?
? d 5J
o
U')
w
t~ w . I O
W? I
A
13NNnzi
i ,o
m +
V p V) to w w M cn

J W
? M 3
96
CL -i
w
N
_
V

fit

I?
N
1
i?
I
/A 1-0
,7
V
W
W
w
O
W
cr-
Q
V
J
J

W
a

r t ,rte U m N ,r!?
_-? -
x 0 JI _
w
l
_stUi -
77
t4L. ' N
_ I U-1 _
ON
M-T: - I _
c? = N I 0
N ?W
pN. Ow
-->a1 r
` p , N IM
W 0) `cif J I
=cc In
u? tea:.
;;jVoo 10
I W 10 - . 0 S 11 1 I _ 13NNRi? N
I Oj tt w. o
I a = O = ? = w
1 N CD
q! O!QZOO (D -i I
_
a co
EN Z
l"CT
\ I

1 N
. O? ? 1
Y 1
1 V
?

?2 1 z
0
Q
z

o

1 w
w
c
,~i ` ~
M
Hwy v
D ul
QUVw
M N
V
= 1
N
O
i w MN
0
- N
IN
JON
M =
_W -
Uw =
F-
N1

H
N
X
w
w
O
m
w
Ir
O
cm de
?- O
i
O M of
%0
w a
N ?N J
2 m?
,. N w
gN
..?. 'r w<- ,. r.. .. 'i..t.;'l'1?',?u^.1 f i?'4s•c:.r,e,.ry ? ?,•f
o ?
3 ?
1
3 ?
? r
z r
r
X r
z w
m

. X11
? 1l'

I

1 ?
w
> (231 --
o =I
w - w
?1 = (C3 N

r w a

1 _ W >

a
_ -
Z3 U z

>r O
N
_
aW ~
d'
I ..
J
i ; w
Zz ;

1 ?
O
1
0
M
z
JII
J
Z
a
Q
a
1 .. 1 7(4QI_n
C\j
? `cam ?n
O
09 ? O z
= r
two / fm
-4° '
0-
0 V 3
i X
? J ??',r•? cA

' to N '
6` 3
?
a: o

CL a QWm
JWN
r \

U Q •'W
Nl
?s = i F
I ?^
W

09-13 Z/M

,d
O

J V)

I m

zW
0
I
J
I I i
MU
II In
• II ? = O
NIV80
d. \ 3NNn j
TD T M \ 2
1
OMEN"
Q
F-
W -
\ to t o S
\Q ?r
N J Q ti
? `N U U
LLJ
ON
\
NN UQ? I
•W
n N I
I
,91.9121 I FU L0'9_I+ _ 1_•
GZ I mw LZIN 1
- £0-oZ9S
N L) OX
to ell
w U w
cun)
pp
>
4 ccn /
J W
I i m.
N 66000 ' w
Q
0
U
N

r a- NIVHQ
13NNn ,

w 0)
+ 0
i z -
+ N =
cn -I
-•

I w -
I _- N

O
JN
I

z
c?
J • RAP

w
U-
O
W _ 11
Q` _

I 0

(r _ U
{ U-
-- > O Sc
'
•
W J
CD CD

cr
co)
I_
I NlV Cl
i 13NNn3 _ W
F-
1= O -
I ? ?Z N
I O tq
a
I _ U
t
I
I=Y? =

z
a)

_ = W to
a
s
<
cli
w W ±
> cm,
O 1
~ w
`C W
Q (
JW-N
?Q
LLI
00
:• Oil
'n O
?
'(015
?
O =
10
(D
Q
`
NIV a
-
13NNn

W.
1
u~i v Q ? ?,?
(n m
Z cn
ON
QJ
N U
091

J

Q

U

>

u v
k

-
cn

fn
zQ
D? ZZJ
(j0 ?
WW
I Z
N
O
31 133HS 33S
/

JN
?bZ X51 X51 ;ti
a Mc
N
N Ns
' -
' I

I
_
I
I ?a
cr.
a
1

U') 0
(D 0
11
1_ I

...c) .

N * W J

Q
I
W Z
Z V O a
00 F-
to
LL W
I ,p
(n + (f I m I N
Co N I
tD
T (n W
Ua O ( O
3 co
M0
(
N
W(n N>-
z +" I
I I
I
Q
MOU-) N
I I
F-- U-) N

V
cr
I
01--
? -I

00
°oo
vlal
3
cr.
CL.
O
0-
I p
I

I I O + =
? la I + O
_ Iol
N I
I
w
> - I
I

cr a-:
00

I
o a l l i N

Q m
Q- U
- I
I I
c i

l
?
i I a

m I
Y I
ON I
N

-= ©? ,gyp \ ? ? I ? } -II I (D J lr / / ? ?j = 4i
W `?© I 0 11 1cnV ?. V-
0 1 ` I M 1© V / In
© O OQ N -F 1- Q I I? t! 111 co cn
v)?,j ?? •• J V p ddill = to / Z00
° Q?jN \\ 1 M 0 ?l Il Ow
V
m Z II
cio
l
a a.
0 OD r--
1 rn / .
OI ;
11 w Q
cr. a)
OLL+
-CO
LL W
4UVtANOC - Zmw
+ -2 (n U) ° o ti ? ? ? ?
I Q a o. \` \\ Q4 _Q w
it- w z
W V)
> W M V 3.3 J
a
W Z
4
U" -
p ?
> V
3: z
W m
O ©
Zo
?BN D
8g 81+ I Q (n Q D © M CDQN rn © 4
N W
_ W p 1© $Q mj cn ?n x
W ,© w
? F- a41" I ? N N I G?© 4 ? D
Q = (D Y ?C
Z +?I- U L... .J P 3 ?
m I - a [C
O 9 w
N 70500
I U Q Z I V Q W o
4c9 O -
°ti° o V _ = p N
? N J
+ 4 w O W
y 1 .O
ZW-
WZ=V 4 I ?m - 81 =Q I © Z
0W()W Od U 4
3 Z tl'
W
_ ,v ?, .i. ,?, J
r I
1 I
a I
I
17
w?
3 '-1 1
X021
;1 I , dqD
16(5 4?'\\ OON°51`
C13 =
I _Cf) ti
I (.)W
-
L-W
_o N
n,? I 1 i CL .
N
zz-
N 78$00 a° 0 X) °
; ON
co 0
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
11
` II
I
1
of
?I
-I
I
14
, U,(*,*J-
01<
?W
W
z-
O N
O
oa
W
W Z. cr a
,
J
> F- (
6 FD W
t!) N Cr_ rim

N
a Co
V
W
?

a N O
F
V CC
in
-
f
ON
U W
I
i
r
1
I
I
?
?
r
r
?
?

+ r3 11
? ILL,
rs\

/,091
i
.021
o co

m =
vj?321
+
S_ U-)
-+

M

rtJll

M 0
?-
u Q
4
N
O icc?' -
= iU Q

CP
N - a. ?VZ YSI ??? ?bZ
• .. ?,.. ?,;, ,? 1 ..y ...?Yt.?fe• ?\„Mrs f. ?ttfw vu?Y,:4,.rq cri ?.PJt,,.i? ..t:
W 81 133HS 33S - 3N11 HO1dW

w
cv I
/W91
l
r
N
IA
? a
t w
1 _ Oa
?,+ r
._
`Q771:)IN7 AvM 310 tr °N
as?uaN? uaawHflnv )1009 310N
a??a,oti- , i r`y
?} 1 lo-v~i d3 d i I a
/ C7 ? O
i
'?/ ? ? ? Y N t 'ilt N ?
J cm
I 1 c
m = 1, 111 , a
?° 3 f UW 1 N Z
a 1 0 i
w ?i w.
' I H
W ( I -_ _ _
N w I ?1 o --z-? -o[e
o 85 £9+
co D z U) a-
0 w
YI I ,? co I-W
09Z W?
o; o J 16+
\ cn' z a) cn
C\i
Ld .40
ti
U- ox OD
O J (q3 =? t +D
I I f ? M
N O{ a f ca a 4 o E•- c
r.t9.;.:o :r t.? r WS ',1''.`r7j?,?` .' ,ntKav. i N .f.. .. ,v ..i?wxrori!j;iiM• _ ?i. a M r ..`+f?^?'w'/..'?`.'?
m i _ ! r
i co
I p f U Q
N ,
I ? I tf' f
o w 1, ;#
i I I p a
-i III co
No ? I N m = [L ? f /
3 j i •11 I Z U W N F
?• I H w - I /??a ?
LLJ
v? p0? • a F I KIJ M
am- (r 0
i
C ? oo,
0) rn a3 u co + I 1T ?- -? I a_ a
J
U-) 00
f' y _J • I // o p 0 3
101
1 dO'a of = z 3 =,''
45R z
°° 1
N J 1Q- w ??- .
(n w
i ` '`c!1 8ulr- 11 Q: 17M OZf I
J + 1"1 w .? \\
Z
w
1 co
w
44 W.
?cr (n
IV
a w
11 Q I ?.: 0 $
1 a
33
Uf -7
?,5•!•Y, ':f:??!' -' 6 J V v, wk I?i?1a\? "°??-fit'" '(V"-16T v.?..' r a : w -, ?,,,.? +• j.ewy ..r. . •!w?.Y
W cD (n 1 I 1 M M
3 ? > w w
3 W ? ~f
0 J
ai-
h?? I ° a O
W\ w z (L Cl
S3 Ql) 4C3
I
33 • c}n d 1=1 „51 a Q
fn ` N i
0 O
LS) 1
@
00
_ (00+£LZ 01 ip Z61 'NI W
05+ZLZ 'd1S) ..: . l. ,b91 -
'ONI S3SIadd31N3 3'111X34 3Nals 9 ssd?0 sN0 IZ MA 80' _
;:
300 ?Q 5Z '1S3 1Ob?S££ _
,9b,LLb =
H0110 3Sd8 Z 'IVI
o .. ,5fi'bLl =
133HS 33S ,00'Z91 30N3? _ „00'00-,OOt, 0?1 =
D SNOT £b 00'Lb+ NIJ38 4` 11 uZ5-,bl?o0b =
X3 L£ '1S3 _ ,L91 saooM 301
8Z'SI , -91 =
3SVG,Z ltl- -4 90+ 5A, -
00'0£ 1 b M/d rl0d
Z r.
00'00+ d 0;
i
cc: 3NO1S 9 SSV-10 z ? 33N3J ON3 -n
3Z 133N ~?-'
SNOT Z / m S 33S
3NO1S 8 SSV'lo z
??? 9S1 o i I 1 Mai SNOT Z r- 10£I
'tf' ?j ? •III rl??.r ,? D
Nb1S 3d03S ??' '??' c' rlr •} rlr ;3•r?i .rlr • { F3 r?i •ili il? .111C
T
S
S1 I s
17DHdSd bZ 03?? ' 01 Xe-£ M M
1SIX3 NI4138--r" r
3AOW38 _
192
M B'Zb-,LS-oZ N M I -, - v 3dX1
N
'r?r.r ? I S +
IL L I:
77
/? N
z 3NOlSti? z
soooM r ' w 9 SSd1O rm- -- rn• r NO1S 8 S
00 ? SNOl b w o ?'
} 1
3Z 133HS 33S v SNO
O - scoots
3NO1S 8 SSnD SNOT 8 z - OF 3?N3? D
d 300 Z '1S3 30N3? ?? ?.? ==-- ?s*•
M 3_3A IV-1 N1938 ON3 ?I
/ d13 M/a '1six ` i
M/a?, d0ad ,?\` ?' ? • Z y? Noy ,? ? ?.'?' ?' ?
?,c'svi ,LSI \ 17 S yb? •yd ,,,? ??
26+
S
000'0£
?.. 'lam \` i?? Yp, S000M
3CA-10 f79-99+61 lOd -9?1- s ,.
NOI.LoMBISNOD ON3 r '>
?` Old ? ? _ j l I _ ?I - +o ? ?.
I 1 c/)
W
I ? o I I I :I ,I ? ?
Q I ? •1 ? ?_ 0 4
tLj
Q Z I I ?? S'
?? cc
a ? , saw I I ? I' •, ?
000
?T kt N
Nv ?U % =v (A =v=i ' ?? ' - 111• ill 111 ?„' ICI' '?''
M . ! U I z
-I- I 0 I? O z 0s
Z??SS??? Fo' Q \?? • J +0 H En O
? o o smogl3 i ,tsZ ?g ' V2 '}1e e-i
V) p m o
n d. Z//Vy , _ M
I a 3
,51 eIZN
Z5 >
_M alp • 2f:j N
Fp s _
69
?.
CL z
a a
U - ?
40D w
cr /
U*) I I I
Q r ? ,n, W U
?vtY'.?l'l, l v •ti? s? 1?6000'.,•',` `/ '.' u : T• 1, f.?: ?? /1 •?'i? .. ?? 1'? i?. ?n .i ?.?iY : a + .. Y" ',? ?'i6s s ' •?f
V? , 9t itv' O `cam - N N O Z
I r `til. 0' W I t,,' }tQ _ Q (D ?
c>: --.)
JW >w
/ I to I z
U Q ? I w N WO
oil I3 z z JF-
/ .7N I--
Of ?wWo U)
(It) Z
M ° -? O
(Q cr-
w >' o
bZ ON -j
N cx 00 (1) (X)
NO ! V' SI Nom' M
+ . I ? of Q
cn, Q N cn
I ' GI (V
I VA r
r
11 DNS 0 .J
vtt.mwi
/ ?? ?Z 2?d? ad 1 = co
J i
c.f OCD
.UJ ?°_ n' ? ?3 va
cn bo CL.
00' 0-
N
° U
o ? / I = ? O in C
i I M tC7 ?
3 i ?m (3
ZIP I
_ W I Q '='
= W N U, I
?g o ? 10 I ??
Q > cn I
U W
W l °S 1
gyn. W 12 W ? ? o? y
> le) 10
40,
40 w
CD . 4 3,I I W 20 I D
\ ?\
r+ - 4* 4 ?
! 4I pct
° I
NI .? I 1 V Q N
XV ?\. • i i
I B
W>
CD I I I = N to V
+ ?J O w. I I_ 3j co M
O 0 U }- H H
Z/M'" ?- I3 I W Q C,-)
SMO w J. w
,?,
/.. 3(3l w
2 NI
J ? °D 0 w i I I = w 1
M CL in o N - 1
N I
ZO N I
o J
Q ? ? I I =,p 1
0 1
W 0? I I I
L,C) ? a? _ t9 I ,
N \
M y?M ,
d
:11,?g8 g? 00 0+£ 0
0 1S+g8? Opd c
V N`o p O
M O +.
oa'03 + O°?
F- W O% N + cD cn
n
Cl)
Ca LLI (D 2: aP-)
CD C) aii?
M W (O Cn?J
lL +
J3aUg? ?- ,
T CJ` Sp w /
/,.,f J
?. N V Q
vr• + /j
0
°o
9
O3? cl:
OD ,W dW Q ?
J Q
cv
ICU a
71
d '^ 1
c? . /j ? w N
CO) Z I N
10+6 W I
lsdyd
N00© _ p * ?I
ONE _ 2 d` •N# * o v
NI I W
co
Yp O
082
COX
v
U) t?
N •
NI `.
/ ???• . V ? V w
ago. Q
R/•N 0 ?! V
d •? /? 0
/ I
?J
n I G,• ?,
ri.=.
d
l
o
• r, o O W
v r
W r(I aI 4
CI)
z;(-)/ Q
QQ u, ;
o°Cfjk:j
?
Q O
N N
I
F- W
w >- W
I s
o
> I tq
C9
?N W
)
O(q
Z
J
J
V
>1 -
2 V)
W
c
w
O
w
It
W
a
V
W

)P
+^
z

a V
0+1
V) ?
?.N
U) -
Fp ? • OD \ C7
m
N
0o Qa
W O m
LL is O
mVZcCcc N
W
COD R U) h. (-TI)
%d?wjj T T U-)
y ? -j
© 3 ? + Q W2U3V)
I,P X a
b N W
da WQO
?a ©a• p ?W v'
? p
1 ©p Q
?= a
N
•?Q r
z
8 Q

w
>
`

o: 1
1
soft
ja
Ww Q

? W
l!n Q ~
wi
i Nam Mp
-}- N ?
t ?n
? +N 90750
?. # . Z-1
k? °
C
N

X0
ao
F- ?
N ?
Z
U V
O
z a.
31
01:3
J
;r xw
N ?N Q
??o
o>\ -
W U,,
V I ./.'?``?• III.
nroE)
P ? cH
RS. G' ?#??p ,3O A-?!v?? ?Y. 005 p. 510
M { i 0? 2 ??2 t`" Z• 2C? s GLPS. 408•
'Oo
4oc
E5?' ZONS "' R W ?3 P
34 R°P. E
0().159
P '' SE .? . Z a
?\66o i" 0 ,?98 SH SON a 45
/ S
°0°53 A t• ?? /0 ENG? CA- ?9 0
* 569`
PR
i ;CSP OWS .\ s O GO
_5 E
DNS ?,, -.L \w 2 E 0 s pROP°5 ?\ o +
B?
UNNE \ Q c)
g4' ASP'4'4C
i
GN
.. / 01Z SH• 20 / ` I
/ RED ti 015 ICI } `I'
o
SEO \0D
ROp° , ,? r ? ?? OEG?GE ? pP• R? ? ?
FENGE ? o \?
L C _ X45 ?-?0H
a
? 2• ., I P 2 g?,SE pE • g 5
SEE SH N ,22 ? _ ?P?' `JS
?? p0A 30
TDF
iii o`er l - I ?Y
?' rnUv~i - I ? I la
W (n
z O t,..i n;,
00 0 (0- I I I O 0
LC)
(n C\j
c'
1?r +0 ? - ?
m
{
V Ld (n 0
?o Q, ) 1-
U-) z IW
o
LIJ >:
V cn -?- N
I m o o=
N- cn _ I I I
acn to?W Q Q / f
-i w -cn? / ; I I3
a.
Q
NIV80 j 4
_ o 0 3 _ 3NNf1 ? ? = z
o / I f cr
° M £ y a z 1 ;m
W
J N ( f-
L) C\j
to O 1 i
Z lU cn cr co
3 II
NMO= - ?O Z 00 oo Q o< 1- f 40
/
a) W
(D CL ED
e o
00
0000 w
7 01
V rN /
A 0\1
Q? M la. 6?6 fo / // I ?( n 00
of
* W I IO .
.+1 I CL
41
n!
` ( N
• - « may, - ,.'
w r 3n
1
4ow
ool
b ° °z w SM 0
8?3 Z
00 ON N 01 Y b W U-/. 1 d S 0 „S1 • o N I I
?N
Co 0
+ rn J I ._ _ m £E+ I I 1.4
m ??o?
SI
wu.
O N ' N
U o ds ,-
N z -U a-
c? Z ON
zw w w
o Lr) _ u \ mi-v ,bZ ,OZ
a
a) r4)
C\i ()D 41
fir' •
-0
Z AN. -
r` p \1 lf9 3
CD to M
w * _+ _
Q _
c .0 +
U cr. >
N O
z Zw
n ww 0 w _
?
°o O? ? w ?
4- to D ti + UJ (n
a 0
O _ ac
CL (C3
Y
?m c
- ? Nit1bQ I
3NNn-4
i N ? to m
w ?o o w
F- Z
-j (20 7
I
O NV? ~
CKI
? W O Q G V d I /?
cn Q CD I
\N' 0
)GO
.(
N h
N I
to
o
?
i

1 0 O

,OZI v Q

CL c? _ O
? I
?{r _
._ to d'
I 24
1
.
I W ,
I N P

I ? ZI = -
to
I w I

Z Q 1

I N
i W
cn
Q

H

- N

co
Ov

= H d

w
a: I

Nln0 g NU

_

-
?+
9+?b
s wl
} vl
Z
_ = U wj
[t
to
? ? x ml
F3
~
v
to -
(?3

>

I w
cr - W
ow 1 V
+
?
_ oWI

I (r?
r3' 1 I
a
(?-;
- I O ?

X .o - 1
I
w w
w o = c t:
I
o ?'3 1
w WO 6 m = 1
l ? I
> co
\)s 6
1-7
m
rn
D
? z
l D 1 ,1
_0
0010
-r ''
bD
r •
-'- w m
OON.
10 (n
to rC7„ v
0
Ul C rM
w .? cn
+ ao
cn
m

rM?v
V
*29
?W
(no
? O
z
aD cn

(n O
-
rn
o .03
+94
=m

NO I

Ilk"
O
F
r
?ll
r\
m
--i

-z;7
0
?m
I T `?

n
24
N
O
z
m

I '
I D ) _
0 /
r DI

v
D
ao
c N

U- PC: 544+95.75
- + C \
c°n rn A _ c+n
?D cal.. .3 ?tooCA js
N
? .cnrn r _ D
\ mcnD
- rn -1 cn 0
A Z
mc CPQ=OD m - cn
zz ?o +
or
r o

F
00
v= =
? i (n
CA in
cn , _ m _ ao
r
(n
v = _ + cn
00
n
z
rn =
a) U,
- m
18" RCP
-v cn n o
I
0 OD4
c.
ch
(nno
m
in
m

' [i 24'
MATCH LINE
SEE SHEET 21
?i
O
o
oSZ??? N
0
0
D /0
0-(n m r-
m --I -DI
? N m
v rn
oC-)
v=
rn
m?
rnN-I CD
?rn D
in
v=
m
? Ao
.0
7 DN
=Ln o
- - .N z
+i (n
o0'
or
D
?in
cn in
.p Im
+ cn
00
z
m

545

D

m
-v ?

tD

O N

D

?v
0

z
o N
O

v
m
(1)
w

ON
z
c I
CO
CQ
i-I
J
W
•
Z
cr

Q Cf)
z a6

V O
N? tO
+ +
m?
U)
N to to
=WQ I
F-ov0U9

O? N
p
WU
Z
»o to m
U)
ac~nr-? w
in LLJ
J W
a
'.i
i
J
X
?0 a
- to O
^(D a

- m
?. t
(O
.IO0
? rl-
?m=
to N
?
?Q- W

U)
-SIN

I
I
cr-
ONZ
I I t7
l
~4°
c?a I ? I
NUN _ I
I X
I W I
I
I _ W
I ? I
O
\ ?

\\
W
I W
I
\

OLIO
v to
tD tD
Z.
3 Nlvao -
NO A
i
w ?N (o
/ O U) z

NUcn -X
v % m
tn as
f
Nz a N
N
p
Q U
VN:
Z/M
I
?\\ \\ Ql zNz
OQO
/ 2 I
W
I CG I
50
..51 Il

\w- 0- ?4 to W
O
?m

to to
m?
>N
to
Im WN t
V$tn

?l't 0
~
I
jU
'
U) >---
?p?
, V to CM ao
w
t W
il W
OD
c?G
- O
N > -
a??
Q
n
3
N
J
v~
i
..JW -N
O?
N

~
.
to c
n J
?

NIVNO

N ?
+ t^ I G
?$
i
J
00
J N
=
to
I UN
uW
om
I -I-?
I I `j
I a
I y
. 14,
I
I
I I
0 l7C t (?o 1 +?
v I
+
m I
ti
v Q I Q?
J O J O 1
U*) 0
U - 4-
(n p? to CO 0 In to
{-
XDNN
_ ?5b1
-? U W
? _- p 3
°?3a}°},? _
Q z- w
Q N N >
V m N O
W ,,c=c?? N ~ N W
N `v?Q ? W Q
0 - .J W to
Ito 3::
Z I
w
m
o w N
O_0 '00.
+-0/h ..??I?
a m /?. p Q4 .
1 j a
\h0
H
a
w
J
I co
'a ° Z t
CnE
Q Ngl
?Ulal
' DI0
)
)

? c
N s? oz - `
to (\j c1r)
00 (V °oC)) N
M J;Mj F.-O
N
M
a- loq (D ? Mao?,o
i
? cn O
9-0+ 0
0-
v:
w
co ° ° CO
I-•- Q O
V
O(/)
;y
'N 0-0
44
+ - A
?1 41
V

-IA w-
r? 0
N
co hm
= Q O +
?VUO
(n +
M
> cQ
JWfnN +
in
m
_ cn V_
1V- O Q? on 0
50 V Q No
w U-
C)
m Zw w
N?p`J w
Cf)
J W N 3 J
y '
i
Wa
O(S F
CL cr-
/ -OQ
M O
a (D
/ der-
all
Q =
_ Q
„bZ
cwn o
U
c
m
(nom W
OQO
-)I
IZ
4
M
)I ?
V IQ-•
w
m
PwZ C
z Q, -? t
x U- 0, -O-DJJ
IPN I U 1
\
N \ ZNw\ F
R!qz
N U m i
G
IW
rZ
J
IW
IY
r'Q
a
IIQ)
i
f
i
ru)
WU.
ip
i
i
i
I
i
cr-
i U -
Q w I.
U ?
W
I
m
0
IZ
N
M
?? II
III ? i I
I' l
I=
U
0
I?
a
ICL
o I
I = ?o(D
t, lcr q
I ?) + 2J
d
o '`
+ N
N o
0
-
a m ?.
000
w"
W
_ I V
1 C13
0-
W
?C3*
z? I ?• -......................_
I I
I 1 ? aJ?
I
I \
I
I ' 0
r,
I ? ? Boa
? u
? n
I - s
I
1,001 ,?i
L 2

IP
Q1
r-1
IV%
? K-t-

I1J lD (O ?y O
o ; vN
_ 0 + ?2
C) 0 (n
o°z`n
O D W O0 Q pOj c0 U Q
+IN >LLj cbr?U ?

x'00
N
IM

M ? \
J «
Q
J
0
\ z
9
a _
co V)
In N \ tr
\ r
N D
? N /W ` M , 772
d U 0 -
aT LL Q i
/? 111 ? V
( OD
?j ?1
II?' ?^' III III III rll.0 1 1. 1 (.. 2
p 1 WZ_
ct1 0 ? Q 4
? - ` 0U' 0
1 nGQ
+
??•?rro
? I
a
C7
F•-
c_n
X
W
W
m
w

. JJ
E ~.
0.
N
10, N
m=
U
U
I u
pu
-
d O 1191 N
a
?r

I

r
? ? 4
I

)
_ ( _

I
C
_
?
} )L
?
_ cl>u
3 > ILD z

\
- H'Ht?-m
JWM
1 F
cn I
ILO
0
? V
r N W
?NW
OZ --AT
ti
(fl
+ J
N
W
(10 Q o

.1f 41

III 111 111 (OD
111 ??
1
C3
el ?.
rr ?
.?J
a ;w
wz=
I?IT'i ?1

W
rct:
? ?r( a
? r ct0 1
A a
? U
. ter,

° I
N
)
7 v1 Z '?
t
L N
t 0
L 1 a?
L 1 \
`•? 06? 0 - -?_
C3, a /
T M/
z
X: 0
O =o
a- ? v
O W 0 W +0 i
oCc o I
U ?-
r- Ld
0 0
0LLJr
Q U
= m
? im rqr 117 50
w L
U
a w V)o
to o
U
co

zi
„SI
•
I'
N-1 -v?
?h
t?
w
z
O
N
N m
z (f)
o?
N U
lbW ct
?a )
N
d-
b ? (v
1OZ Z 2
iCe ?bZ z -D cQ
LL. Q
-I
C\j
I
U a
O N =
m = N I ll?
k2 tu
0U N I
oI'Q ?V Ql
la ? ?
Q
a
t >?
O I
W?t
a j ?t
Q7 t 1 I ?-
I
Aoz)!?, '
O Ire
- O) 0=-
+
t
wl
t J I ?}
I t w I =_
c;
z
c
c;

1 I
„ 1Z I w
1 . I v 1 -?
a4acr- I _ j9+: ry I ?
I r+ ) I?3 I a: ti _
i I /0 b ) I I N Oi d'
w 0; I ,r 1? ,^
-1-
N J m o N
1 191Y ) O : 1 mOo' Lo K)
)
1 oil _ 1 aa°
0 I ?? I I
I ? I •? I I
J sFf I= I ZE'8£ + 96 5 1
_ I a Fo d
g, Ir I
I ?
CV (D
O_r_i if)rin? s9?' ,cam ?
1 + N + OO bo - I O) o
1 3 cr to
1 ? ) 1 Y Q/ N I N
ON N N
1,1 • GP ?m ? J m - I J +?
_ 3 ? 1
00
00 0
a O ? c? ,O o
w
U)m
0 -J,
969, W C) cn U)
t -'nN ? I W a4O
t 14 O - ?

N
w
z
0
N
m
W
N
J
V
N
z
O
H
tT
0
N_ t ,3 O) N O9+ v X31 p W
. .'• I
a] X001 cr- ,
U3 -7
to I cn z
` tL
41
i Z) : Q. C7 w ???
N ao
v> ?,OF ?? a 1L LL
wOC
L p
OZ K N_
l PC
cr- J tip Cu b0' , -CIb
LL
,It
?? ?Z 133HS 3S " 3N11 Held
? _ O
CO o

NOW oo r rr
02
1 H
a: w
V,g cn , x

w<
?--w
w .
sue`

° 3?
i
o
s r M

1
r
?
0
I J Q
I U
to `O
iO
U

9 W
a
n I .

W
I N
. a

J Sod a

w °? I of
x
w ~ I f"
a I u
33
cn
z
Q 14 > -? J
W 2 a t, ` w 1 w J
W O ~
W a J O Z
?= 0 n: \ O w
\ m to
x = a
w 0 • \? dS w
3 _ w 3 w
- ` 0 ?1\
6
o ZO'= 91t (npZp x0 Y Z
V
Q F-\ 01?
i 10'
W
? _,, bZ? hod 0 w 0.
1"b9.6 +599 d SM08 3 /M
0
• tb9.66 + 5991' d 3-ad
I ? Od
I 10' \
c? I w i 60 T°45'31c? -
a ? CL 76.04 57.
I8 1 _- -
LL 0
I ZO' £'Ib t ? x ? w
I
I? Q i M O
I I fi ?
999
Z IV
cr-
x (n
° ?33 W I9Z I ?8 w
ISS7 cn 0
X62.54 '
5bl ?
+
2 ? N I .L
i I .v ( I 2
O A5 I Sc I },.t 6Q
Ull
~ 1 3 ?5.B6 I I-- _
m
0) I N W cI) I- U W
_..._ ._I + O II ,.I\. _Z I_I.r
-4 02 z
a to
1 W 040 d: W O
J to ti >.?
gQ .,tea m
?S
o •• OD: W Qcn
IC\ i
?--
_j cn
CP I?? / ? \ kb?
ctc,?.,??s N .-., :7„_....._W ? ..._ ? ,. I dJ ?z u,..,.?0'?1 .w,•??!
1
O I ?/ r 1 I y 1 0
.t
Og ???? -\ 1 190 ? ? ?
a:. w
p
w4 66e 0?
g k4 .?O 0 N
z 3 9 J d?b -?' .
1C? 0 iOD 00 - - -j8?o4r
6\
L1: _ Z 61
OC Cf) 1 r -
J07XMpAVM'40'•18
C!' a9?6"?' .s '`?y. ?} y ,at L r Qi»3H? 1AdwN911v 71009 3LON
AMns
0(f)
in p
/: lse w
cv Cf)
/ J (n
?r.. X UW
®r Q -?
W Z 41
Z- %b
?• f ?? 1 S Z9. ? Sol
3 (? '? o+ ?bW Po
?'= l O
k o p. ?, dw WZQ
oA ? mom
ra - /J 41 w C. ?Z U
.Q ? ? f o ? ?o ? , M aN ,•
a
S .0
NON M
„? T s CO `Q , rO
?W M/
X511 ?` _ ?• + , .g i :? ? "
m CD
m W Z., Ih - M
C) W (D
FT Ci ( / 3 ?W arno to 0to
16'?w k= W 2Y ?" ? Cif W?a WO?? ??NO
?d rt ?V.. 0U b a. U W ] u u u u u u n
j 0:
/ a Q o I- J Lr fn
? U
I I !i. Z6 - ,
?o _ w
N - r- c?
Lo W) ro
I r1x W 12 loll N 0)
? ? _