20021126 Ver 1_Complete File_20020715

d? S1A7[o
.??.:R . 0 211 2 6
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTNMNT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
July 5., 2002
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Field Office
6508 Falls of Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
LUUL
ATTENTION: Mr. Eric C. Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Dear Sir:
Subject: Wake County, Replacement of Bridge No. 540 on US70-NC50 (Glenwood
Avenue) over SR 1728 (Wade Avenue), Federal Project No. BRNHS-70(41),
State Project No. 8.140360 1, T.I.P. No. B-3254.
Please find enclosed three copies of the December 21, 2000 Categorical Exclusion
(CE) and Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation document for the above referenced
project. Existing Bridge No. 540 will be replaced with a four-lane bridge at its current
location using the existing 80 ft (24.4 m) right-of-way (ROW). Approach work will
extend approximately 250 ft (76.2 m) beyond the south end of the bridge and
approximately 300 ft (91.4 m) beyond the north end of the bridge. Traffic will be
maintained on Glenwood Avenue during construction. Traffic operation will be restricted
to one-lane in each direction and shifted to allow staged construction of the replacement
structure. The NCDOT proposes to construct other safety improvements, traffic
operation improvements, environmental enhancements, and drainage improvements as
part of this project. These improvements are listed on page 7 of the project's CE and
Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation document.
One construction improvement listed on page 7 of the aforementioned document
involves rehabilitating the existing 142 ft (43.3 m) long reinforced concrete arched
culvert under Glenwood Avenue approximately 35 ft (10.7 m) north of the existing
bridge. The culvert, which conveys water from Williamson Branch, must be rehabilitated
due to its advanced deterioration. No improvements are proposed for the culvert under
Wade Avenue and the culvert under the ramps in the northwest quadrant of the project.
Tim Bassette TELEPHONE: [phone] LOCATION:
FAX: [phone] TRANSPORTATION BUILDING
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1 SOUTH WILMINGTON STREET
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS WEBSITE. WWW.NCDOT.ORG/ RALEIGH NC
1548 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1548
The culvert rehabilitation along Williamson Branch will involve four specific
operations:
• Replace a 20 ft (6.1 m) of floor slab on the inlet end of the culvert
• Overlay 30 ft (9.1 m) of existing floor slab on the inlet end of the culvert
• Repair a crack in the culvert wall
• Grout behind the culvert walls
An environmental enhancement listed on page 7 of the project's CE and
Programmatic Sectb 4 Evaluation document involves restoring, via natural stream
design techniques, aprxjmately 1,000 linear ft (305 linear m) of Williamson Branch
situated in the northernquadrant of the project's interchange. At the request of the local
community in Raleigh, NCDOT will restore the stream's natural sinuosity, stabilize its
banks, and revegetate its banks and buffers. According to February 19 and 27, 2002 e-
mail correspondences between NCDOT and USACE, the environmental agency
determined that the B-3254 road construction and its associated stream mitigation are
separate and complete projects, both in time of construction and permitting.
Consequently, this permit application does not request authorization under Nationwide
Permit (NWP) No. 27 (Stream and Wetland Restoration Activities) and General
Certification (GC) No. 3353 (Wetland and Riparian Restoration and Creation) to restore
Williamson Branch. The NCDOT is currently devising a stream mitigation plan for
Williamson Branch, and will apply for the appropriate environmental permits once this
plan is complete.
In order for the construction contractor to rehabilitate the culvert, the inlet portion
of stream will be temporarily diked with an impervious material (most likely sandbags)
chosen by the contractor. The stream's water will then run through a 6 in (15 cm) to 8 in
(20 cm) plastic pipe placed inside of the existing culvert. Stream water will not be
diverted or pumped during construction activities. Once culvert rehabilitation is
complete, the temporary dike and pipe will be removed, thereby allowing normal flow of
stream water.
Since B-3254 rehabilitates an existing culvert, no jurisdictional stream or wetland
impacts will occur on the project. Therefore, compensatory wetland and stream
mitigation is not required to offset jurisdictional impacts on this project. As previously
mentioned, NCDOT will uphold its project commitment, at the request of the local
community, to restore the section of Williamson Branch situated in the northern
quadrants of the project's interchange.
Williamson Branch is also considered a surface water in the Neuse River Basin
(sub-basin 03-04-02, Hydrologic Code 03020201). In accordance with 15A NCAC 02B
.0233 (6), activities under B-3254 are exempt under the buffer regulations because the
project is a road crossing that impacts equal to or less than 40 linear ft (12 linear m) of
riparian buffer. Therefore, the project does not require a Buffer Certification from NC
Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ).
Tim Bassette Page 2 July 5, 2002
In accordance with 23 CFR §771.115(b), the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) processes the proposed project activities as a Categorical Exclusion. Per 67 FR
2020; January 15, 2002 and Clean Water Act (CWA) §404, NCDOT requests that these
activities be authorized under a NWP No. 23 (Approved Categorical Exclusions) and
NWP No. 33 (Temporary Construction, Access and Dewatering). The NCDOT also
anticipates that a CWA §401 GC No. 3361 (Approved Categorical Exclusions) and GC
No. 3366 (Temporary Construction, Access and Dewatering) will apply to this project.
A Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) form is enclosed with this application. In
accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0501(a), NCDOT is providing two copies of this
application to the NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR)-
NCDWQ for their records.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Mr. Tim
Bassette, Environmental Specialist, at 919-733-7844 x305.
Sincerely,
Mr. V. Charles Bruton, Ph.D., Manager
PDEA Branch, Office of Natural Environment
VCB/tb
Enclosure
cc w/ encl.: ?Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, DWQ
Mr. David Cox, NCWRC
Mr. Garland Pardue, USFWS
Mr. Greg Perfetti, P.E., NCDOT Structure Design
cc w/o encl.: Mr. David Franklin, USACE, Wilmington District
Mr. Jay Bennett, P.E., NCDOT Roadway Design
Mr. Omar Sultan, NCDOT Programming and TIP
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., NCDOT Design Services
Mr. David Chang, P.E., NCDOT Hydraulics Unit
Mr. Mark Staley, NCDOT Roadside Environmental Unit
Mr. Jon Nance, P.E., NCDOT Division 5 Engineer
Mr. Chris Murray, NCDOT Division 5 Environmental Officer
Ms. Missy Dickens, P.E., NCDOT Project Planning Engineer
Tim Bassette Page 3 July 5, 2002
Office Use Only: Form Version April 2001
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
If any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A" rather than
leaving the space blank.
I. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit
? Section 10 Permit
® 401 Water Quality Certification
? Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: NWP No. 23 and 33.
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification is
not required, check here:
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (see section VIII - Mitigation), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Mailing Address: Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC. 27699-1548
Telephone Number: 919-733-3141 Fax Number: 919-733-9794
E-mail Address: cbrutongdot.state.nc.us
2. Agent Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter must be attached
if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: n/a
Company Affiliation: n/a
Mailing Address: n/a
Telephone Number: n/a Fax Number: n/a
E-mail Address: n/a
Page 1 of 11
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Replacement of US70-NC50 (Glenwood Ave.) bridge over SR 1728
(Wade Ave.)
2. T.I.P. Project Number (NCDOT Only): B-3254
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN):
n/a
4. Location
County: Wake Nearest Town: Raleigh
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): n/a
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Bridge No. .540 at the
intersection of US70-NC50 (Glenwood Ave.) and SR 1728 (Wade Ave.) north of downtown
Raleigh, NC.
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): 35.798° north, 78.646° west
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Describe the existing land use or condition of the site at the time of this application:
Developed urban tract connecting educational/institutional, residential, retail, recreational,
governmental, and service land uses. Site sits within the city limits of Raleigh, NC.
7. Property size (acres): Interchange/overpass road project approximately 0.22 mi in length.
8. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Williamson Branch.
9. River Basin: Neuse.
Page 2 of 11
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/admin/maps/.)
Describe the purpose of the proposed work: Replacement of Bridge No. 540 with a new
structure on the existing alignment of Glenwood Avenue One construction improvement
involves rehabilitating the existing reinforced concrete arched culvert under Glenwood Ave The
culvert, which conveys water from Williamson Branch must be rehabilitated due to its advanced
deterioration.
10. List the type of equipment to be used to construct the project: Equipment includes, but is not
limited to bulldozers backhoes cranes graders and dump trucks
11. Describe the land use in the vicinity of this project: Urban.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
n/a
V. Future Project Plans
Are any additional permit requests anticipated for this project in the future? If so, describe the
anticipated work, and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current
application: An environmental enhancement listed on 1age 7 of the project's CE and
Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation document involves restoring, via natural stream design
techniques, approximately 1,000 linear ft (305 linear m) of Williamson Branch situated in the
northern quadrants of the project's interchange. At the request of the local community in
Raleigh, NCDOT will restore the stream's natural sinuosity, stabilize its banks, and revegetate its
banks and buffers. According to February 19 and 27,. 2002 e-mail correspondences between
NCDOT and USACE, the environmental agency determined that the B-3254 road construction
and its associated stream mitigation are separate and complete projects, both in time of
construction and permitting. Consequently, this permit application does not request
authorization under Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 27 (Stream and Wetland Restoration
Activities) and General Certification (GC) No. 3353 (Wetland and Riparian Restoration and
Creation) to restore Williamson Branch. The NCDOT is currently devising a stream mitigation
Page 3 of 11
Wan for Williamson Branch, and will apply for the appropriate environmental permits once this
plan is complete. Since the B-3254 road construction project involves rehabilitating a culvert,
the road construction project will not impact jurisdictional streams and wetlands. Therefore,
compensatory stream mitigation is not required to offset such impacts on the project.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Wetland Impacts
Wetland Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(yes/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet)
Type of Wetland***
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, till,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at htti):Hw-ww.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.)
List the total acreage (estimated) of existing wetlands on the property: n/a
Total area of wetland impact proposed: n/a
Page 4 of 11
2. Stream Impacts, including all intermittent and perennial streams
Stream Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Length of
Impact
(linear feet)
Stream Name** Average Width
of Stream
Before Impact Perennial or
Intermittent?
(please specify)
existing culvert under
Glenwood Ave culvert
rehabilitation 0 Williamson Branch 6 ft x 7 ft- 7 ft
x 7 ft culvert perennial
p

x List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-rap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usgs.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.toyozone.com,
www.mapquest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 0 linear feet
3. Open Water Impacts, including Lakes, Ponds, Estuaries, Sounds, Atlantic Ocean and any
other Water of the U.S.
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on map)
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Name of Waterbody
(if applicable) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
4. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): F-1 uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): n/a
Page 5 of 11
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): n/a
Size of watershed draining to pond: n/a Expected pond surface area: n/a
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
The NCDOT avoided all direct impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and streams. Neuse River
Basin surface water buffers, and federally protected species protected under ESA W and 9.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/stn-ngide.html.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
Page 6 of I 1
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
No proposed mitigation with this permit application An environmental
enhancement listed on page 7 of the project's CE and Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation
document involves restoring, via natural stream design techniques approximately 1,000
linear ft (305 linear m) of Williamson Branch situated in the northern quadrant of the
project's interchange. At the request of the local community in Raleigh NCDOT will restore
the stream's natural sinuosity, stabilize its banks, and revegetate its banks and buffers.
According to February 19 and 27, 2002 e-mail correspondences between NCDOT and
USACE, the environmental agency determined that the B-3254 road construction and its
associated stream mitigation are separate and complete proiects both in time of construction
and permitting. Consequently, this permit application does not request authorization under
Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 27 (Stream and Wetland Restoration Activities) and General
Certification (GC) No. 3353 (Wetland and Riparian Restoration and Creation) to restore
Williamson Branch. The NCDOT is currently devising a stream mitigation plan for
Williamson Branch, and will apply for the appropriate environmental permits once this plan
is complete.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP) with the NCWRP's written agreement. Check the box indicating that
you would like to pay into the NCWRP. Please note that payment into the NCWRP must be
reviewed and approved before it can be used to satisfy mitigation requirements. Applicants
will be notified early in the review process by the 401/Wetlands Unit if payment into the
NCWRP is available as an option. For additional information regarding the application
process for the NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.eur.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htin. If
use of the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide
the following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): zero
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): zero
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): zero
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): zero
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): zero
IX. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Only)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public funds or the use of public (federal/state/local)
land?
Yes ® No ?
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ® No F_J
Page 7 of 11
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes [:] No ®Not required under CE program.
X.
Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (DWQ Only)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 2B .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify n/a )?
Yes [:] No ® If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* (squImpct are feet) Multiplier M tig ti n
1 0.05 3 n/a
2 0.01 1.5 n/a
Total 0.06 n/a
Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
Not required.
XI. Stormwater (DWQ Only)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Approximately 75% of existiniz and proposed land uses consist of. or will consist of, impervious
surfaces. Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be strictly enforced during the life of the
Page 8 of 11
I
project for sedimentation and erosion control for the protection of surface waters and wetlands.
The NCDOT will also place temporary around cover or re-seed disturbed sites to reduce runoff
and sediment loading, and reduce the amount of necessary clearing and grubbing along streams
in the project area. Finally, NCDOT will restore, via natural stream design techniques
agpproximately 1,000 linear ft of Williamson Branch situated in the northern quadrant of the
project's interchange.
XII. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Only)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
n/a
XIII. Violations (DWQ Only)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
n/a

Applicant/Agent's Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 9 of 11
US Army Corps Of Engineers Field Offices and County Coverage
Asheville Regulatory Field Office Alexander Cherokee Iredell Mitchell Union
US Army Corps of Engineers Avery Clay Jackson Polk Watauga
151 Patton Avenue Buncombe Cleveland Lincoln Rowan Yancey
Room 208 Burke Gaston Macon Rutherford
Asheville, NC 28801-5006 Cabarrus Graham Madison Stanley
Telephone: [phone] Caldwell Haywood McDowell Swain
Fax: [phone] Catawba Henderson Mecklenburg Transylvania
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office Alamance Durham Johnston Rockingham Wilson
US Army Corps Of Engineers Alleghany Edgecombe Lee Stokes Yadkin
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road Ashe Franklin Nash Surry
Suite 120 Caswell Forsyth Northampton Vance
Raleigh, NC 27615 Chatham Granville Orange Wake
Telephone: [phone] Davidson Guilford Person Warren
Fax: [phone] Davie Halifax Randolph Wilkes
Washington Regulatory Field Office Beaufort Currituck Jones Pitt
US Army Corps Of Engineers Bertie Dare Lenoir Tyrrell
Post Office Box 1000 Camden Gates Martin Washington
Washington, NC 27889-1000 Carteret* Green Pamlico Wayne
Telephone: [phone] Chowan Hertford Pasquotank
Fax: [phone] Craven Hyde Perquimans *Croatan National Forest Only
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office Anson Duplin Onslow
US Army Corps Of Engineers Bladen Harnett Pender
Post Office Box 1890 Brunswick Hoke Richmond
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 Carteret Montgomery Robeson
Telephone: [phone] Columbus Moore Sampson
Fax: [phone] Cumberland New Hanover Scotland
US Fis
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
Telephone: [phone]
h and Wildlife Service / National N
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, NC 28801
Telephone: [phone]
Marine Fisheries Service .
National Marine Fisheries Service
Habitat Conservation Division
Pivers Island
Beaufort, NC 28516
Telephone: [phone]
North Carolina State Agencies
Division of Water Quality
401 Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Division of Water Quality
Wetlands Restoration Program
1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
State Historic Preservation Office
Department Of Cultural Resources
4617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-4617
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Page 10 of 11
CAMA and NC Coastal Counties
Division of Coastal Management Beaufort Chowan Hertford Pasquotank
1638 Mail Service Center Bertie Craven Hyde Pender
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638 Brunswick Currituck New Hanover Perquimans
Telephone: [phone] Camden Dare Onslow Tyrrell
Fax: [phone] Carteret Gates Pamlico Washington
NCWRC and NC Trout Counties
Western Piedmont Region Coordinator Alleghany Caldwell Watauga
3855 Idlewild Road Ashe Mitchell Wilkes
Kernersville, NC 27284-9180 Avery Stokes
Telephone: [phone] Burke Surry
Mountain Region Coordinator Buncombe Henderson Polk
20830 Great Smoky Mtn. Expressway Cherokee Jackson Rutherford
Waynesville, NC 28786 Clay Macon Swain
Telephone: [phone] Graham Madison Transylvania
Fax: [phone] Haywood McDowell Yancey
Page 11 of 11
Raleigh
Bridge No. 540 on US 70/NC 50 (Glenwood Avenue)
Over SR 1728 (Wade Avenue)
Wake County 03
Federal-Aid Project BRNHS - 70(41) ; .``
State Project 8.1403601
TIP No. B-3254 W.4T?TL?Nps?
Ll SECTIp?y
021126
Categorical Exclusion and
Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation
US Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
and
NC Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Approved:
Date: Wiffi m D. Gilmore, PE, Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
Date Nicholas L. Graf, PE
Division Administrator, FHWA
Raleigh
Bridge No. 540 on US 70/NC 50 (Glenwood Avenue)
Over SR 1728 (Wade Avenue)
Wake County
Federal-Aid Project BRNHS - 70(41)
State Project 8.1403601
TIP No. B-3254
Categorical Exclusion and
Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation
US Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
and
NC Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
December, 2000
Document Prepared
by
Wetherill Engineering, Inc.
???••••?M CARol ?'`°%11r,;.;/i,
le
Norman H. Willey, PE
-? S -
/
For the '•,'yp••Fh'GI NE`?d•`?
?j? /pA,.•eea•ee°•?\?\' ,vim
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMEN
OF TRANSPORTATION
J?' (6n ,
?,1?1
Thous R. Kendig, AICP, Un`1 1-lead
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Glary Alile Dickens, PE, Project Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
Raleigh
Bridge No. 540 on US 70/NC 50 (Glenwood Avenue)
Over SR 1728 (Wade Avenue)
Wake County
Federal-Aid Project BRNHS - 70(41)
State Project 8.1403601
TIP No. B-3254
Bridge No. 540 is located in Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina on US 70/NC 50
(Glenwood Avenue) over SR 1728 (Wade Avenue) (see Figure 1). It is programmed in the
2000-2006 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a bridge replacement project. This
project is part of the Federal-Aid Bridge Replacement Program and has been classified as a
"Categorical Exclusion." No substantial environmental impacts are expected to result from
this action.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 3

Raleigh
Bridge No. 540 on US 70/NC 50 (Glenwood Avenue)
Over SR 1728 (Wade Avenue)
Wake County
Federal-Aid Project BRNHS - 70(41)
State Project 8.1403601
TIP No. B-3254
L PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Roadway Design and Roadside Environmental
? NCDOT will restrict the construction staging area.
? NCDOT will designate tree protection zones, utilize tree protection fencing and
penalize violation of restrictions.
? NCDOT will not allow construction employee parkinginside the tree protection
area.
Structure Design
? NCDOT will provide bridge plans to SHPO for their review and comment prior
to contract letting.
? NCD'OT will utilize a simulated masonry treatment on the outward visible face
of the retaining walls so they resemble the walls on the nearby Josephus
Daniels House and Broughton High School.
? NCDOT will stain the replacement bridge rails a color agreed upon by the
neighborhoods and the Raleigh City Council.
? NCDOT will require the piles, where feasible, to be drilled first and then
driven. This would reduce the duration of driving the piles and minimize noise
and vibration impacts resulting from driving them.
? NCDOT will utilize Texas Classic railing on the replacement structure.
? NCDOT will extend the replacement rail along the designated tops of the
retaining walls to more nearly simulate the existing bridge.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 4
Roadway Design and Geotechnical
? NCDOT will conduct a Preconstruction Survey of surrounding houses to insure
proper compensation in the unlikely event of any construction-related damage.
Project Development and Environmental Analysis, Hydraulic Unit, Roadside Environmental
? NCDOT will restore the stream that meanders through the northern quadrants
of the interchange using natural channel design techniques.
0 NCDOT will retain the loblolly pine located on the north bank of the stream in
the northeast quadrant of the interchange during the stream restoration if
possible. ,
Roadside Environmental
? A post-construction landscape plan that has been coordinated with the Raleigh
City Council will be implemented if the City of Raleigh commits. to maintain
in a municipal. agreement.
D Roadside Environmental will include a tree care plan and special provisions in
'the construction document to optimize tree preservation efforts.
Roadway Design
? NCDOT will use retaining walls to retain existing trees where feasible to do so.
Right of Way
? NCDOT will permanently relocate the overhead utilities off the bridge as part
of this project.
? _ NCDOT will use metal pole standards on replacement street lights.
Traffic Engineering
? NCDOT will use steel-strained poles (no guy wires) on proposed traffic signals
with the provision that the City will share cost if there is room for the guy
wires.
Traffic Control
? NCDOT will maintain a sidewalk on the bridge during construction.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 5
II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 540 will be replaced with a new structure on the existing horizontal
alignment of Glenwood Avenue (see Figure 2). Traffic will be maintained on Glenwood
Avenue during construction. Traffic operation will be restricted to one-lane in each direction
and shifted to allow staged construction of the replacement structure (see Figure 5).
The new structure will provide the minimum vertical clearance of 15 feet (4.6 meters)
over Wade Avenue while minimizing changes to the grade on Glenwood Avenue. The new
bridge will be approximately 91 feet (27.7 meters) in length with a 68-foot (20.7-meter)
width. This width includes two 23-foot (7.0-meter) travelways separated by a 10-foot (3.0-
meter) median with a 6-foot (1.8-meter) sidewalk on each side (the bridge typical section is
shown on Figure 2). The approach work will extend approximately 250 feet (76.2 meters)
beyond the south end of the bridge and approximately 300 feet (91.4 meters) beyond the north
end of the bridge.
Other safety improvements, traffic operational improvements, environmental
enhancements and drainage improvements are proposed to be constructed as part of this
project. The improvements include:
1. Widening and signalizing the westbound Wade Avenue to northbound Glenwood
Avenue ramp (see Figure lA for description of the ramp designations referred to
throughout this document) to address a high accident location.
2. Adding an acceleration lane on eastbound Wade Avenue under the bridge to improve
traffic flow and safety.
3. Signalizing the eastbound Wade Avenue ramp/loop termini at Glenwood Avenue and
Cole Street which is experiencing unacceptable traffic delay.
4. Landscaping provided-in accordance with NCDOT guidelines and coordinated with
the Raleigh City Council and to be maintained by the City of Raleigh.
5. Restoring the stream located inside the interchange area north of Wade Avenue.
6. Repairing the culvert under Glenwood Avenue just north of the bridge due to the
advanced deterioration of the center portion. No improvements are included for the
culvert under Wade Avenue and the culvert under the ramps in the northwest
quadrants.
The estimated cost of the project is $3,514,000 including $123,000 in right-of-way
cost. The estimated cost in the 2000-2006 TIP is $1,197,000.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 7
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
US 70/NC 50, Glenwood Avenue, is classified as an Urban Other Principal Arterial
in the Statewide Functional Classification System and as a Major Thoroughfare in the Greater
Raleigh Urbanized Area Transportation Study. The speed limit along this section of roadway
is 35 mph (60 km/hr). The route serves both local and through traffic by connecting the
Central Business District (CBD) with the northwest portion of the urbanized area. The
through town routing of US 70 and NC 50 is assigned to Glenwood Avenue north of Wade
Avenue and Wade Avenue east of Glenwood Avenue. The project vicinity is urban, with
mixed residential, office and institutional land use. Photographs of the existing area are
included on Figure 14.

The existing bridge was completed in 1954. It is 131 feet (39.9 meters) long and 68.25
feet (20.8 meters) wide (inside rail to inside rail). This provides for four travel lanes, a 10-
foot (3.0-meter) median, and a 6-foot (1.8-meter) sidewalk on both sides. It crosses Wade
Avenue at an approximate 90° angle.
According to the Bridge Maintenance Unit, the sufficiency rating of the bridge is 42.9
out of a possible 100. Presently, the bridge is posted with a weight limit of 38 tons for a
single vehicle and legal gross weight for truck tractor semi-trailers (TTST).
The Glenwood Avenue horizontal alignment is tangent for a distance of at least 500
feet (152 meters) beyond the end of the bridge in each direction. The roadway is a four-lane,
curb and gutter roadway with a landscaped median section on both approaches to the bridge.
On-street parking is not permitted within the interchange area. However, on-street parking
is allowed on Glenwood Avenue during off-peak traffic times both north and south of the
interchange.
The estimated year 2000 ADT traffic volume on Glenwood Avenue, just north of the
bridge, is 30,000 vehicles per day (vpd) and is projected to increase to 39,000 vpd by the year
2025 (see Figure 5A).
The NCDOT Traffic Engineering Branch indicates that forty-two accidents have been
reported within the interchange during a three-year period. Of these, nineteen accidents
occurred at the intersection of the ramp terminal (northeast quadrant) with northbound
Glenwood Avenue. At this intersection, the right, or curb lane, of Glenwood Avenue has to
yield right of way to the ramp free flow movement. The inside, or median lane, on northbound
Glenwood Avenue is a free flow movement. This unorthodox treatment has resulted in ten
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 8
rear-end accidents on Glenwood Avenue and nine sideswipe accidents at the ramp merge
during the three-year period.
Four of the total forty-two accidents were reported at the loop terminal with Glenwood
Avenue for the westbound Wade Avenue to southbound Glenwood Avenue loop. Three of
these four accidents were rear-end accidents and one was a ran-off-road accident.
Of the total forty-two accidents, fourteen have occurred at Glenwood Avenue and the
ramp terminal opposite the Cole Street intersection. This intersection is stop-sign controlled.
These fourteen accidents include three rear-end and eleven angle accidents. These eleven
angle accidents are largely related to insufficient gaps, driver-frustration and risk-taking, or
poor sight distance. The other five accidents were not involved in the intersection and
involved changing lanes or running off the road and striking a fixed object (trees). Thus, from
the analysis it can be concluded that the majority of the recorded accidents (thirty-seven of
forty two) occurred at the intersection of the interchange ramps north and south of the bridge.
Ninety school bus trips cross the bridge daily. The Wake County School Trans-
portation Director indicates closing it, even for short periods of time, would be disruptive to
school bus routing in Wake County.
An existing culvert is located under Glenwood Avenue approximately 35 feet (10.7
meters) north of the existing bridge. The reinforced-concrete-arched-culvert is 142 feet (43.3
meters) in length. It has a cross-section of 6 feet (1.8 meters) by 7 feet (2.1 meters) on part.
The other part is an extension having a cross section of 7 feet (2.1 meters) by 7 feet (2.1
meters). Two reinforced-concrete- box-culverts are located under the ramps in the northwest
quadrant. Both have a cross-section of 7 feet (2.1 meters) by 7 feet ( 2.1 meters). The length
of the one under the loop is 65 feet (19.8 meters) and the one under the cross ramps is 87 feet
(26.5 meters). The culvert under Wade Avenue is not part of this project. The culverts are
shown on Figure 13. Additional information on the culverts is included in the hydraulic
technical memorandum on the subject project, dated October, 1998.
The City of Raleigh has water and sewer lines located within the interchange area. A
six-inch water line and eight telephone conduits are attached to the existing bridge. A sewer
line is located under the southbound lanes of Glenwood Avenue north of the bridge and a
sewer line, which may be inactive, is attached to the bridge. Other sewer lines are located east
of the bridge and under the ramp in the northwest quadrant. Bell South has extensive
underground lines, including fiber optic, located along Glenwood Avenue. Manholes are
located in all four quadrants of the interchange. Carolina Power and Light Company (CP&L)
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 9
has aerial three-phase power lines attached to poles along the west side of Glenwood Avenue
through the interchange area. Telephone cables and cable television service lines are attached
to the CP&L poles. The utility impact rating for this project is high.
Existing sidewalks are located on both sides of Wade Avenue and Glenwood Avenue.
The land use in the project vicinity is urban with mixed residential and office and
institutional (O & I) development. Adjacent development consists of. the Josephus Daniels
House (Masonic Temple of Raleigh), which is designated as a National Historic Landmark;
the Five Points Neighborhood Historic District, which is on a study list for the National
Register of Historic Places; the Glenwood Historic District, which is listed on the National
Register of Historic Places; and the Methodist Home Property, which has been redeveloped
O&I. The Hayes Barton Neighborhood is located northwest of the project and the Five Points
Neighborhood Commercial District is located a few blocks north on Glenwood Avenue.
Research of public records and an on-site inspection did not find any evidence of the
presence of any hazardous/toxic material in the immediate project area. However, due to the
age of the bridge there is the potential of lead paint on the bridge.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 10
IV. PROPOSED ALTERNATES STUDIED
Three build alternates, a "do-nothing" alternate, a rehabilitation alternate and four
Section 4(f) Avoidance Alternates were considered for the improvement of Bridge No. 540
in Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina. All of the three build alternatives propose to
construct an acceleration lane under the bridge. The acceleration lane is needed from traffic
safety and traffic operational standpoints. Although a retaining wall is proposed that
minimizes the right of way taking, some limited additional right of way involving a Section
4(f) resource is required. This, along with the Avoidance Alternates, are discussed in the
Programmatic 4(f) Evaluation included in the Appendix (page B-10).
Alternate A (recommended) Refer to Figure 2
Alternate A represents the improvements the Department believes best address the
variety of issues raised by this project. Alternate C provides somewhat better traffic operation
and traffic safety improvements than Alternate A; however, Alternate C is the most disruptive
to the existing street pattern and landscape setting and received considerable opposition from
the public. The project is estimated to cost $3,514,000, including $123,000 for right of way
and $3,391,000 for construction. The total funding in the 2000-2006 Transportation
Improvement Program is $1,197,000, $205,000 of which is for preliminary engineering,
$74,000 of which is for right of way and $918,000 of which is for construction. Table 1,
comparing the estimated cost of Alternates A, B and C, is included in Section VII, Estimated
Cost.
Alternate A proposes to stage construct the replacement of Bridge No. 540 on
Glenwood Avenue over Wade Avenue at its existing location. The replacement bridge length
will be approximately 91 feet (27.7 meters) long and 68 feet (20.7 meters) wide (face to face
of the inside rails). This width includes two 23-foot (7.0-meter) travelways, a 10-foot (3.0-
meter) wide median and 6-foot (1.8-meter) wide sidewalks on both sides of the bridge. The
proposed bridge will provide the same width between the rails as the existing bridge. The
depth of the bridge will be minimized by constructing a single span plate girder bridge. This
type of bridge has less depth than the existing bridge, but it will require the grade on
Glenwood Avenue to be raised approximately 1.1 feet (0.3 meter) on the north end of the
bridge and approximately 0.5 foot (0.2 meter) on the south end. A retaining wall is also
proposed (see Figure 7A). The use of this girder design and the retaining wall allows the
required 15-foot (4.7 meters) minimum vertical clearance above Wade Avenue to be obtained
with minimal effects to the adjacent tree-scape and residential development. A retaining wall
is proposed along the south side of Wade Avenue to accommodate the addition of an
acceleration lane and sidewalk replacement. On Glenwood Avenue north of the bridge,
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 1 l
retaining walls will be constructed on both the. east and west sides of the roadway to save
several trees. Consideration was given to eliminating the cross ramp connecting westbound
Wade Avenue to Williamson Drive (see Figure 12), to simplify the ramp and street
configuration in the northwest quadrant; however, due to considerable public opposition
received and the lack of accident data supporting this action, it was determined that the cross
ramp would not be removed at this time.
The culvert repair under Glenwood Avenue will be constructed simultaneously with
the bridge. The westbound Wade Avenue to northbound Glenwood Avenue ramp will be
widened to two-lanes (west side widening) and a traffic signal will be installed on Glenwood
Avenue at the ramp terminal. This signal meets the accident warrant (warrant 6) in the Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The grade on westbound Wade Avenue to
southbound Glenwood Avenue loop will be adjusted to meet the raised grade on Glenwood
Avenue. A traffic signal will be installed on Glenwood Avenue at the intersection of Cole
Street and the eastbound Wade Avenue ramp/loop, south of the bridge. This signal meets four
delay warrants (warrants 1, 2, 9, and 11) and the combination warrant (warrant 6), as defined
in the MUTCD. The signal is primarily expected to reduce delay, particularly for the left
turning traffic on the minor streets (Cole Street and the eastbound Wade Avenue ramp). The
signalization is also anticipated to reduce the potential for accidents which are occurring at
this intersection. This intersection has poor sight distance to the south for vehicles stopped at
Cole Street/eastbound Wade Avenue to Glenwood Avenue ramp.
Alternate B Refer to Figure 3
Alternate B consists of all improvements described above for Alternate A plus a slip
lane from the westbound Wade Avenue to northbound Glenwood Avenue ramp that would
allow traffic to cross Glenwood Avenue to access Williamson Drive and Caswell Street
directly. This slip lane intersects Glenwood Avenue opposite the existing access to the
westbound Wade Avenue ramp. One of the original objectives of this alternative was to
provide more direct access to Williamson Drive given the proposed removal of the cross
ramp connecting Wade Avenue to Williamson Drive. However, due to the strong public's
opposition to the removal of this access, Alternates A and B were changed to allow this
access to remain. Consequently, Alternate B offers no apparent benefits in construction costs
or safety and traffic operational characteristics over the recommended Alternate A.
Alternate C Refer to Figure 4
Alternate C includes the bridge replacement, culvert repair, signal installation and
acceleration lane construction on Wade Avenue as described in Alternate A. Furthermore,
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 12
this alternate removes the westbound Wade Avenue to southbound Glenwood Avenue loop
and both the cross ramp access to Williamson Drive from Wade Avenue and the direct ramp
access to Williamson Drive from Glenwood Avenue. The east end of Williamson Drive will
be connected to Caswell Street. The Glenwood Avenue to westbound Wade Avenue ramp
is relocated to provide better alignment, and a short acceleration lane on the north side of
Wade Avenue is provided. The westbound Wade Avenue to northbound Glenwood Avenue
ramp is realigned to "T" type intersection with Glenwood Avenue and is widened to a three
lane approach (one right-turn lane, one shared right/through lane and a left-turn lane) at the
signalized intersection. This alternate conforms to current design standards in the northern
quadrants and offers better traffic operation and improved safety. However, as with Alternate
B, the removal of the cross ramp and access from Wade Avenue to Williamson Drive
received considerable public opposition. Furthermore, this alternative, by redesigning the
interchange, is more intrusive on the neighborhood. The other alternatives better preserve the
existing character of the interchange. Alternate C is estimated to cost $201,000 more than
the recommended Alternate A.
Alternate A is the preferred construction alternative for the following reasons:
¦ Alternate A addresses the need for replacing the bridge and the designated
acceleration lane at the optimum cost.
¦ Alternate A minimally disturbs the neighborhood context by leaving the
interchange design as is.
¦ Alternate A includes signalization and improvements to the two ramp termini
with Glenwood Avenue which are currently experiencing a high accident rate
and/or delay.
¦ Alternate A also permits the existing cross ramp connecting Wade Avenue to
Williamson Drive to remain open, whereas Alternate C would require its
removal. Removal of the cross ramp received considerable public opposition.
No accidents are documented at the cross ramp. However, because the potential
for accidents still exist, the cross ramp will be monitored for safety problems
and removal may be considered in the future.
The NCDOT Division 5 Engineer has reviewed the alternates and concurs in the
recommendation of Alternate A.
The Raleigh City Council has reviewed the alternates and concurs with the
recommendation of Alternate A, except for the two proposed signals and the proposed
widening of the westbound Wade Avenue to northbound Glenwood Avenue ramp. The City
Council has withheld its support of these latter improvements. However, based on accident
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254
i
and delay conditions at these locations and the MUTCD traffic signal warrants met by these
conditions (see page 12 of this document), NCDOT is proceeding with its recommendation
to install signals at these locations.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 14
V. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
Rehabilitation of the existing deteriorating bridge is neither practical nor economically
feasible. It would require significant repairs to the structure which is in poor structural
condition. This rehabilitation is estimated to cost approximately $680,000 and require six to
nine months to complete the work. This information was obtained from Alpha & Omega
Group, PC, Consulting Engineers, from their report entitled "Glenwood Avenue Bridge
Inspection and Repair Evaluation" and dated May, 2000. Furthermore, the bridge
rehabilitation would not provide the required vertical clearance over Wade Avenue or provide
for the acceleration lane on eastbound Wade Avenue. The NCDOT Bridge Maintenance Unit
calculates the sufficiency rating of the rehabilitated bridge to be 65 to 70. This resultant
sufficiency rating would not qualify the bridge for the Federal Aid Bridge Replacement
funding which generally requires a minimum sufficiency rating of 80.
The "do-nothing" alternate is not feasible. This will require the closing of the road as
the existing bridge deteriorates to a point where it is unsafe at any posted weight limits.
A preliminary alternate to close Glenwood Avenue during the construction period and
detour traffic off-site was considered and eliminated due to the high volume of traffic on
Glenwood that would have to be detoured and the capacity constraints on all feasible detour
routes.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 15
VI. ANTICIPATED DESIGN EXCEPTIONS
No design exceptions are anticipated.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake Count) Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 16
VII. ESTIMATED COST
Table 1 Estimated Cost
ITEM Alternative A
(Recommended) Alternative B Alternative C
New Bridge Structure $893,100 $893,100 $893,100
Temporary Pedestrian Bridge $83,100 $83,100 $83,100
Bridge removal $111,900 $111,900 $111,900
Proposed Box Culvert not required not required $52,300
Box Culvert removal not required not required $48,700
Approach Roadway $588,900 $826,900 $885,900
Retaining Walls $424,500 $424,500 $424,500
Culvert Rehabilitation $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
Traffic Signals (includes steel-
strained poles) $140,000 $140,000 $140,000
Engineering & Contingencies $339,500 $341,500 $365,500
Total Construction $2,601,000 $2,618,000 $2,802,000
Right of Way $123,000 $123,000 $123,000
Total Cost $2,724,000 $2,741,000 $2,925,000
Table 1-A Mitigation Costs
Simulated masonry applied to retaining walls $60,600
Increment for Texas Classic Bridge Rail $21,000
Post-construction landscape Plan $213,100
Stream Restoration $275,000
Utility Relocation $27,000
Metal pole standards on replaced street lights $90,000
Engineering and Contingencies $103,000
Total Mitigation Costs $790,000
Total Project Cost (Recommended Alternate A with Mitigation Costs)- $3,514,000
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 17
VIII. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 540 will be replaced with a new structure on the existing alignment of
Glenwood Avenue over Wade Avenue in Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina (see Figure
2). Two-lane, two-way traffic will be maintained on Glenwood Avenue by stage constructing
the replacement bridge (removing and replacing approximately one-half the bridge width at
a time).
The new structure will be a single-span plate girder bridge approximately 91 feet (28
meters) in length with a 68-foot (21-meter) width (face to face of the inside rails) to-
accommodate two 23-foot (7.0-meter) travelways, a 10-foot (3.0-meter) median and a 6-foot
(1.8-meter) sidewalk on each side. The grade on the north end of the bridge will be 1.1 feet
(0.3 meter) higher than the existing bridge. This increase in elevation is required to provide
the required 15.0-foot (4.6-meter) minimum vertical clearance over Wade Avenue.
Approach work will extend approximately 250 feet (76.2 meters) south of the bridge
and approximately 300 feet (91.4 meters) north of the bridge. The approach roadways consist
of a four-lane curb and gutter, median divided cross section with a sidewalk on each side. The
proposed design speed is 45 mph (70 kilometers per hour).
A sidewalk on one side of the bridge will be provided at all times during construction
to accommodate pedestrian traffic along Glenwood Avenue.
The culvert under Glenwood Avenue, north of Wade Avenue, will be repaired
simultaneously with the bridge replacement. The westbound Wade Avenue to northbound
Glenwood Avenue ramp will be widened to two lanes, and a traffic signal will be installed on
Glenwood Avenue at the ramp terminal. The grade on the westbound Wade Avenue to
southbound Glenwood Avenue loop will be adjusted to match the grade change on the
Glenwood Avenue north approach. A traffic signal will be installed on Glenwood Avenue at
the intersection of Cole Street/eastbound Wade Avenue ramp/loop south of the bridge. These
improvements are shown on Figure 2.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 18
IX. NATURAL RESOURCES
The study area lies in an urban section of Wake County, North Carolina (see Figure
1). The proposed project is in the Piedmont Physiographic Province, which includes all parts
of North Carolina east of the foot of the Blue Ridge Escarpment and west of the fall line.
Methodology
Information sources used to prepare this report include: U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) Raleigh West quadrangle map (1987); Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Soil Survey
Sheets of Wake County (November, 1970); United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
National Wetlands Inventory Map (Raleigh West, 1995); USFWS list of protected and
candidate species (1997); North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database of
rare species and unique habitats (1997); North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)
water resources data; North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) proposed
critical habitat information; and North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
archaeological and historic data. Research using these resources was conducted prior to the
field investigation.
A general field survey was conducted by Ken Roeder (PhD), Amy Morgan and Lisa
Warlick of Resource Southeast, Ltd., along the proposed project corridor on September 4,
1997. Plant communities and their associated wildlife were identified using a variety of
observation techniques including active searching, and identifying characteristic signs of
wildlife (sounds, tracks, scats, and burrows).
Definitions for areal descriptions used in this report are as follows: "project study
area," "project area," and "project corridor" denote the specific area being directly impacted
by each alternative. "Project vicinity" denotes the area within 1.6 kilometers (1.0 mile) of
the project area.
Topography and Soils
The topography of the project vicinity is characterized as flat to gently rolling with
steeply sloped banks along the major streams. The project area elevation is approximately
300 feet (91.4 meters) above mean sea level. The entire road and interchange areas have been
improved and graded at some point in their history.
According to the General Soil Map for Wake County (SCS 1970), the project area
consists of the Cecil Soil Association. The Cecil Series is described as gently sloping to
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 19
steep, deep, well-drained soils that have a subsoil of firm red clay. This soil is typical of the
Piedmont uplands forming under forest material that weathered from primarily gneiss, schist,
and other acidic rock. These soils are often found on rounded divides that have a 75-foot
difference in elevation from the highest to lowest points. The permeability and shrink-swell
potential for the Cecil Series is moderate. The Cecil Series was confirmed in the field by soil
borings taken throughout the project area.
Biotic Resources
_ Living systems described in the following sections include communities of associated
plants and animals. These descriptions refer to the dominant flora and fauna in each
community and the relationship of these biotic components. Classification of plant
communities is based on the system used by the NCNHP (Schafale and Weakley 1990).
Scientific nomenclature and common names (when applicable) are used for the plant and
animal species described. Subsequent references to the same species include the common
name only. Vascular plant names follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968).
Terrestrial and aquatic wildlife were determined through field observations, evaluation of
habitat, and review of field guides and other documentation.
Terrestrial Communities
The predominant terrestrial communities found in the project study area are man-
dominated, Piedmont Alluvial Forest, and Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont
Subtype). Dominant faunal components associated with these terrestrial areas will be
discussed in each community description. Many species are adapted to the entire range of
habitats found along the project alignment but may not be mentioned separately in,each
community description.
Man-Dominated Community
This highly disturbed community within the project area includes the road shoulders
and regularly maintained areas within the road loops adjacent to the bridge. A limited number
of ornamental species have been planted along with grass that is regularly mowed.
The man-dominated community at this site lacks diversity and wildlife components
may be scarce. Species that might utilize the area include Carolina anole (Anolis
carolinensis), hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus), and occasionally various insectivorous
birds foraging for food.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 20
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
This community exists in the southeast and northwest quadrants of the project site. It
occurs in small patches between a stream and various residential properties. Dominant canopy
species include river birch (Betula nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum), yellow-poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), and occasional white oak
(Quercus alba) and black walnut (Juglans nigra). Understory species consist of beech (Fagus
grandifolia), black locust (Robinia pseudo-acacia), sassafras (Sassafras albidum), Chinese
privet (Ligustrum sinense), white mulberry (Morus alba), mimosa (Albizia julibrissin),
dogwood (Corpus florida), and hophombeam (Ostrya virginiana). The herbaceous layer
includes poison ivy (Rhus radicans), English ivy (Hedera helix), and Japanese honeysuckle
(Lonicera japonica). Diameters of overstory species are noticeably larger in the northwest
quadrant.
Wildlife species that might normally be present in Piedmont Alluvial Forests may not
be found at this particular site due the limited size of the area. Species possibilities for this
site may include gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris),
eastern chipmunk (Tamias striates), American toad (Bufo americanus), eastern box turtle
(Terrapene carolina), tufted titmouse (Parus bicolor), and cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis).
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest (Piedmont Subtype)
This community occurs on a steep slope in the southwest quadrant of the project area.
The location and species present are typical of this type of community; however, the size is
atypical. It is basically a small buffer zone between the road and the parking lot of a business.
Canopy species include willow oak (Quercus phellos), southern red oak (Quercus falcata),
sweet-gum (Liquidambar styraciua), red maple, loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), shortleaf pine
(Pinus echinata), and yellow-poplar. Understory species consist of sassafras, black cherry
(Prunus serotina), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), dogwood, and hop hornbeam. The
herbaceous layer is largely open and the ground is covered with pine needles. Poison ivy is
scattered throughout, but more often on the outside edges of the community.
As noted in the previous community descriptions, faunal components normally found
in this type of community may not be present due to its limited size. Wildlife that might
utilize this site include common grackle (Quiscalus quiscula), blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata),
and gray squirrel.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake Count)) Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 21
Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community in the project area exists within a small tributary of Pigeon
House Branch which enters the project area from the northwest quadrant and flows southeast,
discharging into Crabtree Creek several miles to the east. Pigeon House Branch, from its
source to the intersection with Crabtree Creek, is rated as a Class C-NSW stream. Class C
means it is freshwaters, protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including
propagation and survival, and wildlife. The NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) rating means
these waters are subject to growths of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation requiring
limitations on nutrient inputs. A large, steeply-sloped, channelized ditch also flows into the
tributary of Pigeon House Branch within the northeast quadrant of the project area.
The tributary of Pigeon House Branch is approximately 8 feet (2.4 meters) wide with
extremely steep, channelized bank slopes (see Figure 2). The creek bottom is rocky with fine
silty sands and, on the day of observation, water within the creek had a low flow and turbidity.
The depth of the tributary varies from 0.5-2.0 feet (0.1-0.6 meter). The tributary flows across
the project area beginning in the northwest quadrant and proceeds through a culvert under the
northwest loop of the interchange. It continues through another culvert under Glenwood
Avenue and at approximately 100 feet (30.5 meters) to the east it turns to the southeast and
flows through another culvert under Wade Avenue. From this point the tributary flows
parallel to Wade Avenue and exits the project area to the southeast at Filmore Street.
Overstory vegetation along the tributary includes river birch, red maple, and yellow-
poplar. The understory species surrounding the tributary include sassafras, mimosa
dogwood, and white mulberry. The herbaceous layer surrounding the tributary is quite dense
and includes English ivy, poison ivy, and Japanese honeysuckle.
The only fauna observed in the tributary on the day of the site visit was limited to an
unidentifiable minnow population. Other species which may utilize the tributary include the
American toad, Fowler's toad (Bufo woodhousei), and the bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana). No
clams or mussels were found. An active search for macroinvertebrates within the streambed
was conducted by looking in snag habitats and turning over stones; however, none were
found. Macroinvertebrates such as the larvae of the mayfly (Ephemerptera), stonefly
(Plecoptera), and caddisfly (Trichoptera) would be expected to be found within the snag
habitats and the riffle areas of the tributary. The macroinvertebrate fauna found within the
deeper portions of the tributary may include chironomid larvae (midges) and oligochaetes
(segmented worms).
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 22
The channelized ditch, located in the northeast quadrant of the project area, is
approximately 6 feet (1.8 meters) wide with extremely steep banks. The bottom of the ditch
consists of gravel and silty sand with the depth of water in the ditch varying from 0.2-0.5 feet
(0.06-0.2 meter). On the day of observation the flow of water was low with minimal
turbidity.
Vegetation along the ditch is entirely of the man-dominated community type. The area
is dominated by various grasses and weeds which are frequently mowed.
No fauna were observed in the ditch on the day of the site visit. Due to its highly
disturbed setting, the ditch is most probably utilized by only a very few species on a
temporary basis. Some of those species may include the American toad, Fowler's toad and
the bullfrog.
Anticipated Impacts to Biotic Communities
Biotic community impacts resulting from project construction are addressed separately
as terrestrial impacts and aquatic impacts. However, impacts to terrestrial communities,
particularly in locations exhibiting gentle slopes, can result in the aquatic community
receiving heavy sediment loads as a consequence of erosion. It is important to note that
construction impacts may not be restricted to the communities in which the construction
activity occurs. Efforts will be made to ensure that no sediment leaves the construction site
by following the sediment and erosion control plan and the NCDOT Best Management
Practices (BMPs)for construction projects of this type.
Terrestrial Communities
The Piedmont Alluvial Forest, Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest, and the man-dominated
communities serve as nesting, foraging, and shelter habitat for fauna. The loss of these
habitats will result in the displacement of faunal species in residence. Individual mortalities
may occur to some terrestrial animals from construction machinery used during clearing
activities and from loss of habitats.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the relative abundance of each
community present in the study area. Project construction will result in clearing and
degradation of portions of these communities. Table 2 details the anticipated impacts to
terrestrial and aquatic communities by habitat type, based on the preliminary design.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 23
TABLE 2
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS TO
TERRESTRIAL and AQUATIC COMMUNITIES
Man-Dominated Piedmont Alluvial Mesic Mixed Aquatic Combined Total
Community Forest Hardwood Forest Community (acre/hectare)
(acre/hectare) (acre/hectare) (acre/hectare) (acre/hectare)
0.61/0.25 0 0 0 0.61/0.25
Aquatic Communities
The aquatic community in the study area exists within the tributary of Pigeon House
Branch. Impacts to the adjacent man-dominated community can have a direct impact on
aquatic communities. Activities such as the removal of trees as well as repairs to the culvert
and approach work could result in an increase in sediment loads and water temperatures and
a decrease in dissolved oxygen in the short term. Construction activities can also increase the
possibility of toxins, such as engine fluids and particulate rubber, entering the waterways.
The combination of these factors can potentially cause the displacement and mortality of
aquatic vertebrates and local populations of invertebrates which inhabit these areas. NCDOT
will implement natural channel design techniques on this tributary to Branch Fork Creek.
This is considered a positive effect on the stream. BMPs for the protection of surface waters
will be strictly enforced to minimize potential adverse impacts due to this bridge replacement
project.
Water Resources
The proposed project lies within the Neuse River drainage basin.
Water Resource Characteristics
The tributary of Pigeon House Branch flows southeast through the proposed project
area with a width of 8.0 feet (2.4 meters). This section of the tributary has a classification of
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 24
C-NSW from the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(NCDENR). All Class C uses are those which are secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life
including propagation and survival, and wildlife. The classification of NSW indicates these
are waters subject to growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation requiring limitations
on nutrient inputs. The Classification Index number for this portion of the creek is 27-33-18.
Benthic macroinvertebrates, or benthos, are organisms that live in and on the bottom
substrates of rivers and streams. The NCDWQ uses benthos data as a tool to monitor water
quality as benthic macroinvertebrates are sensitive to subtle changes in water quality.
According to Ms. Nancy Guthrie, the NCDWQ sampled Pigeon House Branch near Dortch
Street in July of 1995 and determined the water quality to be rated poor.
The Wake County Watershed Map indicates that the project area is not within a
Critical Area. There are no water resources classified by the NCDWQ as High Quality
Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), or waters designated as WS-I or WS-
II located within the project vicinity.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina are permitted through the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Any discharger is
required to register for a permit. There are no NPDES permitted dischargers located in the
project vicinity.
Non-point source refers to runoff that enters surface waters through stormwater flow
or no defined point of discharge. In the project area, stormwater runoff from Wade and
Glenwood Avenues may be the main source of water quality degradation. Residential
development surrounds the project area and would be another source of runoff collected
through guttering and sheet flow.
Anticipated Impacts to Water Resources
Impacts to the water resources resulting from the rehabilitation of the culvert in the
tributary channel will be minimal. Rehabilitation to the culvert will include re-grouting and
improvements to the surface floor. No culvert extension or replacement is proposed. In the
short term, the bridge and approach work will increase sediment loads. Additional sediment
loading into the Pigeon House Branch tributary can further reduce flow and result in a
decrease in oxygen levels. The NCDOT, in cooperation with the DWQ, has developed a
sedimentation control program for highway projects which adopts formal BMPs for the
protection of surface waters. The following are methods to reduce sedimentation and water
quality impacts:
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 25
• strict adherence to BMPs for the protection of surface waters during the life of
the project
• reduction and elimination of direct and non-point discharge into the water
bodies and minimization of activities conducted in streams
• placement of temporary ground cover or re-seeding of disturbed sites to reduce
runoff and decrease sediment loadings
• reduction of clearing and grubbing along streams
• restoration of the stream within the interchange area
Special Topics
Waters of the United States: Jurisdictional Issues
Wetlands and surface waters fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3 and in accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). "Waters of the United States" are regulated by the United
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
Investigation into wetland occurrence in the project impact area was conducted using
methods of the 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual. No wetland areas were found within the
project area.
Surface water impacts fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE. It anticipated that
jurisdictional surface water impacts will be. involved with the rehabilitation of the culvert
associated with the replacement of Bridge No. 540.
Permits
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USACE
1344), a permit will be required from the USACE for the discharge of dredged or fill material
into "Waters of the United States."
Categorical Exclusions are subject to the Nationwide Permit Provisions of 33 CFR 33-
.5 (A) 23. This permit authorizes any activities, work and discharges undertaken, assisted,
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 26
authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part, by another federal agency. It
states that the activity is "categorically excluded" from environmental documentation because
it is included within a category of actions which neither individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the environment. A 404 permit is anticipated to be required for this
project due to the proposed culvert rehabilitation; however, final permit decisions are left to
the discretionary authority of the USACE.
A 401 Water Quality Certification, administered through the NCDENR, is issued for
any activity which may result in a discharge into waters for which a federal permit is required.
A 401 permit is anticipated to be required for this project.
Mitigation
Since no wetland impacts are anticipated, mitigation should not be required by the
USACE. Mitigation for impacts to surface waters of less than 150 feet (45.7 meters) are
generally not required by the USACE. However, NCDOT will voluntarily restore the stream
in the interchange area (northern quadrants only) by implementing natural channel design
techniques. These techniques will include: re-instating natural meanders, bank stabilization,
and vegetation. The Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch is working
with the Hydraulics Unit to develop the stream plans. The effort will be coordinated with the
N.C. Division of Water Quality and the USACE.
Rare and Protected Species
Some populations of plants and animals have been or are in the process of decline, due
either to natural forces or their inability to coexist with humans. Rare and protected species
listed for Wake County, and any likely impacts to these species as a result of the proposed
project construction, are discussed in the following sections.
Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classification 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.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists four federally protected
species for Wake County as of the February 28, 2000 listing (see Table 3).
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 27
TABLE 3
FEDERALLY PROTECTED SPECIES
FOR WAKE COUNTY
Scientific Name Status
Common Name
Haliaeetus leucocephalus T
(Bald eagle)
Picoides borealis E
(Red-cockaded woodpecker)
Alasmidonta heterodon E
(Dwarf wedge mussel)
Rhus michauxii E
(Michaux's sumac)
NOTES:
E Denotes Endangered (a species that is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its range)
T Denotes Threatened (likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range)
Haliaeetus leucocephalus (Bald eagle) T
Family: Accipitridae
Date Listed: 3/11/67 (E), 7/12/95 (T)
Distribution in N.C. Beaufort, Brunswick, Chatham, Chowan, Craven, Dare,
Davidson, Durham, Granville, Guilford, Haywood, Hyde,
Montgomery, Northampton, Pasquotank, Pitt, Rowan,
Stanly, Tyrrell, Vance, Wake, Washington.
The bald eagle is a large bird, 32-43 in. (81-109 cm), with a wingspan of more than 6 ft.
(1.8 m). Adults are dark brown with a white head and tail, and immatures are brown and
irregularly marked with white until their fourth year.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 28
Bald eagles typically nest in the top of a tall tree. Nest size may measure 6 ft. ( 1.8 m)
across and up to 6 ft. (1.8 m) in depth. The species may be seen around lakes throughout the
inland portions of North Carolina, as well as along the coast. Bald eagles will frequently
abandon nesting sites in sight of man. A large portion of the eagle's diet often consists of
fish, but it also feeds on small mammals, reptiles, and other birds.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The project is located entirely within an urban setting. Adequate habitat does not exist
for the bald eagle in the project area. There are no lakes nearby to supply fish for the
species, and the vegetative communities at the site are not large enough to provide an
adequate supply of mammals and birds necessary for food. In addition, a search of the
NCNHP database indicated no reported occurrences of bald eagles in the vicinity of the
project site.
Picoides borealis (Red-cockaded woodpecker) E
Family: Picidae
Date Listed: 10/13/70
Distribution in N.C.: Anson, Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen, Brunswick, Camden,
Carteret, Chatham, Columbus, Craven, Cumberland,
Dare, Duplin, Forsyth, Gates, Halifax, Harnett, Hertford,
Hoke, Hyde, Johnston, Jones, Lee, Lenoir, Montgomery,
Moore, Nash, New Hanover, Northampton, Onslow,
Orange, Pamlico, Pender, Perquimans, Pitt, Richmond,
Robeson, Sampson, Scotland, Tyrrell, Wake, Wayne,
Wilson.
The red-cockaded woodpecker is a small 7-8 in.(18-20 cm) long bird with a black and
white horizontal stripes on its back, a black cap and a large white cheek patch. The male has
a small red spot or "cockade" behind the eye.
The preferred nesting habitat of the red-cockaded woodpecker is open stands of pines
with a minimum age of 60 to 120 years. Longleaf pines (Pinus palustris) are preferred for
nesting; however, other mature pines such as loblolly (Pinus taeda) may be utilized. Typical
nesting areas, or territories, are pine stands of approximately 200 acres (81 hectares);
however, nesting has been reported in stands as small as 60 acres (24 hectares). Preferred
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 29
foraging habitat is pine and pine-hardwood stands of 80 to 125 acres (32.4 to 50.6 hectares)
with a minimum age of 30 years and a minimum diameter of 10 inches (25 centimeters). The
red-cockaded woodpecker utilizes these areas to forage for food sources such as ants, beetles,
wood-boring insects, caterpillars, and seasonal wild fruit.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
This habitat type does not exist in the project area; there are no stands of old
growth pines within or adjacent to the study area. No red-cockaded woodpeckers or
• cavity trees were observed during the site visit. A search of the NCNHP database
showed no recorded occurrences of this species within the project vicinity. It can be
concluded that the construction of the proposed project will not impact the red-
cockaded woodpecker.
Alasmidonta heterodon (Dwarf wedge mussel) E
Family: Unionidae
Date Listed: 3/14/20
Distribution in N.C.: Franklin, Granville, Halifax, Johnston, Nash, Vance, Wake,
Warren, Wilson.
The dwarfwedge mussel is a small freshwater mussel that rarely exceeds 1.5 in. (3.8 cm)
,in length. The shell's outer surface is usually brown or yellowish-brown in color with faint
green rays that are more noticeable in young specimens. The inside of the shell is bluish or
silvery white.
The dwarf wedge mussel is found in sand, muddy sand, and gravel substrate in large
rivers and small creeks where the current is slow to moderate and where there is little silt.
The species is generally found in association with other mussels, but it is never very
numerous.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
The drainage and creek channels within and immediately downstream of the
project area were scanned for evidence of mussels and mussel shells. There was no
evidence of mussels on the day of the site visit, and the NCNHP database shows no
reported occurrences of the dwarf wedge mussel in the project area. The tributary
present has been extensively channelized and carries excessive highway runoff and
sedimentation. It has been determined that the habitat required for the mussel does not
exist in the project area.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 30
Rhus michauxii
Family:
Date Listed:
Flowers Present:
Distribution in N.C.:
(Michaux's sumac) E
Anacardiaceae
2/28/89
April - June
Davie, Durham, Franklin, Hoke, Johnston, Lincoln,
Mecklenburg, Moore, Orange, Richmond,
Robeson, Scotland, Wake, Wilson.
Michaux's sumac is a densely hairy shrub with erect stems which are 1 to 3 feet (0.3 to
0.9 meter) in height. The shrub's compound leaves are narrowly winged at their base, dull on
their tops, and veiny and slightly hairy on their bottoms. Each leaflet is finely toothed on its
edges. The flowers are greenish-yellow to white and are 4-5 parted. The plant flowers from
April to June.
Michaux's sumac is found in sandy or rocky open woods in association with basic soils.
This plant survives best in areas where some form of disturbance has provided an open area.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Although possible habitat exists for Michaux's sumac in the man-dominated
community, the species was not found at the site. Most of the interchange area is
regularly mowed. The search for the species consisted of walking the disturbed roadside
areas( during the leafing season where their presence would be evident), especially the
unmaintained areas, looking for the presence of individuals of this species. In addition,
a search of the NCNB P database showed no recorded occurrences of this species within
the project vicinity.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 31
Federal Species of Concern
Federal Species of Concern (FSC) are not legally protected under the Endangered
Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. Species designated as FSC are
defined as taxa which may or may not be listed in the future. These species were formerly
Candidate 2 (C2) species or species under consideration for listing for which there is
insufficient information to support listing. Some of these species are listed as Endangered,
Threatened, or Special Concern by the NCNHP list of Rare Plant and Animal Species and are
afforded state protection under the State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979; however, the level of protection given to state listed
species does not apply to the NCDOT activities. Table 4 provides the FSC for Wake County
and their state classifications.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 32
TABLE 4
NORTH CAROLINA STATUS OF
FEDERAL SPECIES OF CONCERN IN WAKE COUNTY
Scientific Name North Carolina Habitat
(Common Name) Status Present
Etheostma collis lepidinian NL Yes
(Carolina darter)
Lynthrurus matutinus NL No
(Pinewoods shiner)
Lindera subcoriacea E No
(Bog spicebush)**
Aimophila aestivalis SC No
(Bachman's sparrow)
Heterodon simus SR No
(Southern hognose snake)
Myotis austroriparius SC No
(Southeastern myotis)
Elliptio lanceolata T No
(Yellow lance)
Fusconaia masoni T No
(Atlantic pigtoe)
Lasmigona subviridus E No
(Green floater)
Speyeria dana SR No
(Diana fritillary)
Monotropsis odorata C No
(Sweet pinesap)
Trillium pusillum var. pusillum E No
(Carolina least trillium)
NOTES:
NL Listed by USFWS but not by NCNHP for this county.
E Denotes Endangered (species which are afforded protection by state
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 33
laws).
T Denotes Threatened (species which are afforded protection by state
laws).
SC Denotes Special Concern (species which are afforded protection by state
laws).
SR Denotes Significantly Rare (species for which population monitoring
and conservation action is recommended).
C Denotes Candidate (species for which population monitoring and
conservation action is recommended).
WL Denotes Watch List (species believed to be rare and of conservation
concern in the state but not warranting active monitoring at this time).
PT Denotes Proposed Threatened (species proposed for official listing as
threatened).
An April 7, 2000 search of the NCNHP database, via the Internet, showed no recorded
occurrences of any FSC within the project vicinity.
Summary of Anticipated Impacts
Although acidic soils make its presence unlikely, possible habitat may be present for the
federally protected species, Michaux's sumac. However during the site inspection this species
was not found and there are no reported occurrences of this species at the location in the
NCNHP database. Habitat exists for one FSC, the Carolina darter.
w
NC Department of Transportation
Wake Count), Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 34
X. CULTURAL RESOURCES
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation for Compliance with Section 106, codified as 35 CFR Part 800. Section 106
requires that for federally funded, licensed, or permitted projects having an effect on
properties listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation will be given the opportunity to comment.
In terms of historic architectural resources, the following properties are listed or
considered eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places and are located in
the project vicinity (see Figure 6):
Glenwood Historic District (WA 193) located on the eastside of Glenwood Avenue
south of Wade Avenue.
Five Points Neighborhood Historic District (WA 4071) located on the east side of
Glenwood Avenue north Wade Avenue.
Josephus Daniels House (Masonic Temple of Raleigh) (WA 10) 1520 Caswell
Street, located on the west side of Glenwood Avenue north of Wade Avenue.
The North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) was contacted early in
the planning study process. The SHPO, after reviewing available resource data, recommended
that no historic architectural or archaeological surveys be conducted for this project.
Everything within the Area of Potential Effects (APE) had been previously surveyed (all
alternatives have essentially the same APE). It has been determined that the proposed
improvements will have a No Adverse Effect with environmental commitments on the
Glenwood Historic District, the Five Points Neighborhood Historic District and the Josephus
Daniels House. The SHPO has concurred in this finding and a letter of concurrence is attached
in the Appendix B (see page B-4).
At a conference on July 12, 1999 with the SHPO, it was agreed that the cultural
resources listed above are in the project's Area of Potential Effects. Additional right of way
will be required from properties located within the Glenwood Historic District in the southeast
quadrant of the interchange. A Programmatic Section 4(f) Evaluation, found in Appendix B,
has been prepared as a part of this document.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 35
The SHPO, in a letter dated April 30, 1997, stated that no archaeological survey is
recommended in connection with this project. A copy of the SHPO's letter is included
Appendix B (see page B-1).

NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 36
XI. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A local government and public involvement program was included in the planning
process for this project. The staff of the City of Raleigh was included in the development of
the project from its initiation. This included the development of alternates, their evaluation
and ultimately the selection of the recommended alternate.
A Public Officials Meeting was conducted at the regular City Council meeting of July
5, 1999. At that meeting, the alternates were shown and explained and any questions about
the project, regarding such items as traffic operational impacts and the Section 106 process,
were answered.
A Citizens Informational Workshop was held in Raleigh on September 30, 1999.
Approximately 200 citizens attended the 4:00 to 8:00 PM session conducted at Jaycee Park.
The project was explained through the use of display boards, and questions were answered
by DOT and consultant staff. Concerns. expressed include: loss of trees, traffic operations on
Cole Street, loss of access to Williamson Drive, bridge rehabilitation, bridge replacement,
increased clearance under the bridge (fear that this would bring increased truck traffic through
the neighborhood), and possible disruption of sewer and other utility services. A summary
of the written comments received are in the Appendix A.
At the regular meeting of the Raleigh Appearance Commission on October 21, 1999,
the project was presented via display boards and a PowerPoint® presentation. Questions
relating to the various aspects of the planned improvement were answered by DOT and
consultant staff in attendance.
The project was presented at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Five Points Area
citizens Advisory Council (CAC) on May 23, 2000.
A public informational meeting was held on May 6, 2000 with the Brooklyn Heights
Neighborhood at Jenkins Memorial Methodist Church. Also several meetings were held with
the Raleigh Appearance Commission.
The proposed project was also discussed at Raleigh City Council meetings held on
December 7, 1999 and January 4, 2000.
The proposed Alternate A, modified based upon citizen input to allow the cross-over
ramp from Wade Avenue to Williamson Drive to remain and to include enhancements, was
presented to the Raleigh City Council on July 18, 2000. After discussion, action was deferred.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 37
At the next regular Council meeting, on August 1, 2000, the Council agreed to recommend
Alternate A except for the two proposed signals and widening of the northeast quadrant ramp.
The Council intends to discuss these issues further, with the understanding that they remain
part of NCDOT's current recommendation.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 38
XII. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replacement of the
inadequate bridge and construction of safety improvements will result in safer and overall
more efficient traffic operations.
The bridge replacement will not have an adverse effect on the quality of the human or
natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and specifications.
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or zoning regulation. No
change in land use is expected to result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated. No relocatees are
expected with implementation of the proposed project.
Section 4(f) ofthe U.S, Department ofTransportation Act of 1966 specifies that publicly
owned land from a public park, recreation area, historic site, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge
of national, state, or local significance may be used for a federal project only if.
1. There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land, and
2. Such highway program or proj ect includes all possible planning to minimize harm
to Section 4(f) lands resulting from such use.
The potential Section 4(f) lands listed below are located in the project vicinity:
Glenwood Historic District (WA193) - Use - A Programmatic Section 4 (f)
Evaluation is included.
Five Points Neighborhood Historic District (WA 4071) - No use
Josephus Daniels House (Masonic Temple of Raleigh) (WA10) - No use
A retaining wall is proposed along the south side of Wade Avenue, east of Glenwood
Avenue, to allow construction of the acceleration lane with minimum encroachment on the
Glenwood Historic District. A small amount of additional right of way, 0.06 acre (0.02
hectare), involving properties located within the Glenwood Historic District will be required
by this project. The build alternatives (including recommended Alternate A), with this
exception, will be contained within the existing right of way. There are no other publicly
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 39
owned parks, recreational, facilities, wildlife or waterfowl refugees of national, state, or local
significance in the vicinity of the project.
No geodetic survey markers will be impacted.
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives
to consider the potential impacts to prime and important farmland soils by all land acquisition
and construction projects. Since the bridge will be replaced at the existing location and is
located in an urban setting, the Farmland Protection Policy Act does not apply.
The project is located in Wake County, which is within the Raleigh-Durham non-
attainment area for ozone (03) and carbon monoxide (CO) as defined by the EPA. The 1990
Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) designated these areas as "moderate" non-attainment
area for 03 and CO. However, due to improved monitoring data, these areas were re-
designated as "maintenance" for 03 on June 17, 1994, and "maintenance" for CO on
September 18, 1995. Section 176(c) of the CAAA requires that transportation plans,
programs, and projects conform to the intent of the state air quality implementation plan
(SIP). The current SIP does not contain any transportation control measures for Wake
County. The Capital Area Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) was determined to
conform to the intent of the SIP. The last TIP conformity determination was on August 20,
1999 for the Capital Area 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan and October, 1999 for the
2000-2006 Metropolitan TIP. The current conformity determination is consistent with the
final conformity rule found in 40 CFR Part 51. There have been no significant changes in the
project's design concept or scope from that used in the conformity analyses.
The traffic volumes will not increase or decrease because of this project. The project
will not adversely impact noise or air quality in the immediate project area.
Noise levels could increase temporarily during construction. If vegetation is disposed
by burning, all burning shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations
of the North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) air quality in compliance with
15NCAC2d.0520. This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for highway traffic
noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air quality (1990 CAAA and NEPA) and no additional
reports are required.
An examination of records at the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, Groundwater Section and the North Carolina
Department ofHuman Resources, Solid Waste Management Section revealed no underground
storage tanks or hazardous waste sites in the project area.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 40
The City of Raleigh is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program. The
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Wake
County indicate the project area is in Zone A, where no base elevations have been determined
for the tributary of Pigeon House Road Branch.
All borrow and solid waste sites will be the responsibility of the Contractor. Solid waste
will be disposed of in strict adherence to the NC Division of Highways "Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures." The Contractor will observe and comply with all
laws, ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees regarding the disposal of solid waste. Solid
waste will not be placed into any existing land disposal site that is in violation of state or local
rules and regulations. Waste and debris will be disposed of in areas that are outside the right
of way and provided by the Contractor.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no significant adverse
environmental effects will result from implementation ofthe project. The project is a Federal
"Categorical Exclusion due to its limited scope and lack of significant environmental
consequences.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 41
FIGURES
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254
CEEE /
1 1 SIAh ? ((?? ` ' _ _
? I 1
STATE
\ UN
\ t
w.EEO 0
I
BRIDGE 116. vo
\ J
O 3 O
O ? ,I•
U
moo, J
j ?
=?o?l
L r / 2108

64
(RALEIGH 10s
_
LAKE `
POP. 221,10 /
imm"

01
i

O 401
£ OAR 40

70

1 0 1 2 3 4 MILES
WAKE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT #540 ON US 70 /NC50
(GLENWOOD AVENUE)
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT B-3254

FIGURE 1
1 \ \ i ? 1 11
it 1 lol 1
II II 131 11
? ? ?I 1? I 11
II ? ? ilij -?11
II 1 III --
?I
I I Iml SOUTHBOUND GLENWOOD AVE. III 0? ? 11
IS IFI TO WESTBOUND WADE AVE. RAMP I ^ 1?1
?1 I-1
PI I m III I 1 ? 1?
1?1 1 I WESTBOUND WADE AVE. I I?1
I II \? 1
1 ` 1 I GLENW 00 DB AVEDLOOP I AI \? 1
\ \ 11 /!III \\\ \? 11
\ \ \ \ / ?.I I \ \` \ ?` WESTBOUND WADE AVE.\
\ \ \\ /I I `\ TO NORTHBOUND
/ \ \ I I \\\? GLENWOOD AVE. RAMP 1 I
\\? i
! ?/ ?\ III ????\ 11\x\
41AMSON -DRIVE i ?/ I !I I \ , 1 \\ \
A
00
GLENWOOD AVE. TO /j
'? _? \ \ \ \
EASTBOUND WADE AVE. LOOP
/00.00, / WESTBOUND WADE AVE. I I \ ?bF I
/ y I I CROSS I RAMP ON DR. ! I I \yF^,VF
I _
N? --/100,?/l
EASTBOUND WADE AVE.
TO GLENWOOD AVE. I (? COL . WI
RAMP
-r W
111 ? /,' 1
14, , ? ? I
Iq?1 11
111 !
!il
------i?S?------!t
---- :
is
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT #540 ON US 70 /NC 50
(GLENWOOD AVENUE)
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT B-3254
RAMP DESIGNATIONS
FIGURE IA
„.
1-1
nl_.?;?h..,54 nom.\prgl\olto.psh
V ?A \ro
i
i
rJ I I ,1 \ e
'?
m s
• I •,?? N J ? ? \ ?` ?.?? sr?a z???s °_ as ? III ,`•
70 PEACE STREET

II p T1 p p
g 11 i g
b II o ? ? --r--
? II ?? rn ? I ?
?m? 11 om ? ? I
m
o? y I ro
Z II °
z
o IIpq_ o ?

t0
R

? m

mo ?r r
?m
///
? k
o?
ZI
i
r s.
m? s
\`r °
r .tom\._ ,
III ? ig 's -W?

I°
I ' o b
o.v
??
I
? F ? ° - •
III •

I
! ? _?^'
?
I
I
[ . ?
I l l t ,, 6 :/ ??
111 Y-? ' ?? ? ?
0 1 \,.

/ s
.J.
s'
G> m
°' Z m o 15 sue' ?,..
Y
w =v O? mvp--IZ ? o ? ••--?'?
o ??7ODZ OnO?=
C Z r^ Z =kf; 3 v
?O DDnICV' r^'^ODv /
yNO rOOZ D
rr'
ZD
D -'>7 DDS
n m ? N cri+? v{i D /? /? ? ? //F• I
C> c
?Z co
m p /
n Z Z /
CD r)
O
Or
v
`gym
n?
?x

x
D D m D v
Z x Z A ? m m
x x v w
m C
°
-4
`n
Z G)Z ON - Z Z Z
G) ° C C) C m m G) 0 m

m N m A m

O ° p o O n P1

A O
D D D D
v v C Va
m
O m O °
A z
D -4
C D D

> mN °v
O O
D D ^''
? to

° r D w

D m m

m
O
Z
r
D
Z
m
m
o
° n
Z
c
O
° n m
<
n C -
m
c
m D
°
m n
a
g
rn
c
rn
c
z ?
r2a
D L
rn
0
On
ft?
gi
?G
e stEan?mo .vewie
--
i0 FIVE POINTS -,-
. S l J
• IY ?C
?? ?m m

i
?`'I y1
.. \
`
Xqj\
G%
?n
PTSto. 16+27.67
g m
\ o
\ \ m
II '? +
l3 ?
/ ? dal ? \\ \\
\\
1

0 A
I l •. l 11 1 //° ? ° \I III •?:??. ° \. ? 1
IS m
m a ° ^'\
t t °
I If
!_j I l a $ ll k $ \ ??? x • SfL6+2 '0155 ...` Ill !4 r
_ I l o \ \ ? _ lu ??
`YI l \ STS/o. 22+47!5 ` -
1 • ° 5M.6+3628
RETNNdIG w
-- TO PEACE STREET 4.1
248' 549 E
•
. (
{1. i'1 ° 1111 I ?^ __.- .. ° 7 ? - -
rH. t?f wn l
? Y- ?1?1 111.
1 ! m
0
k
1 1 ?; 1
1 1 b

U U N ?
T

II H m
? a
y
O II
o o
II ? m 4 ? ?
1 III ?

- rrl
V) c Fi
t
r II
orn ? II
4 4
n II y O

I f !? 1. :I: Il•

1 W
A
m
X yo
°
0
o -, Gyn ZAv_-00
Dv?Zrn ?omf-N-A••i-t
T -? m0rn0? Z?ZO=
c n n0 N
Z
d mm0 -iD
O
rn
w -a ?cao
o
ca C::
m D -`
?0
Dr=0r
WN?ZZ D =ZD
A
m
C
?
Z m
?

-°_.N !
if
V v
--44
V1 p. (A A
O p N
Z m m
> z
n z --I
o = O
Q
Z
c ?I RETNN1hG WKl.
W ,' ?,' III ul
.. I Y _ .
_1 III s ?p A : ! t ..°.
g
rn
1
1
n R:
^Ln g? l
o ?
m
w?

rn
C
rn
m
O ?
? -1
?Tj 8
U
O
rn
rn
0
° =o
2i
n
mg
' vrn
?H
0
u,
6CEAVAM M'ENUE
-------------------
TO FIVE POIMTS
r *a"C`i ? i
01
" 910
• o ? ° IV
m et nl (II o ? ? ° ° / /
f ? III a a? a :i' ?z
t
4
I
P,
47 '"m
/ /
f
s.
?7,
t is S3T135? . i'.?f : ...
/ m
At,
xm"
a
o?
?m
O
??IBII???II
m r >m D v -° m rn -o w
x D Zx ZA A x x p C
m v ,n 00 O O

z G? z G1 O O z z (A Z
0 jO C O C m m 61 O m G)
m r

A . 10 W

3 :° o-+ m- 7o O O

=

r^ 7O

i C
"r O
D
l D
D D
v 0
C
C
O
co
A 1'
f
D
m C D
N < < ?+

"
-<

0O r
D D m m O N
z -fN
Dr ::E -
H
°' r
G
y D
rr m
m O
v
v X z
0 o m m N
v N
Z O
v c n
N 10 n °

C)
r -
m
m
v
1?
0-

O\
L
R?+ - °' ft°' t\\ \ K. PTSto.16+77,67
p \ ?
N \' \ m
°
srl6+2 WISS1 ' «_ r I
I 't? ° \ STSta.22+47J5 °
?- TO PEACE STREET Z48' 54.9'E
?- - --
- - 1 .•..» a •. ?, {
t _11 14'A ? - 11,11 L• °
? ? ???i 1F1'1? 1 y?
1 1 ti
1 1 ..e
1 1
1 l "

I ? ? m q
- Q

m II m N

O II O

O
II
0 1
H
q ? ?
II 2
C- rr)

C)
N-
G-

m I I
° m n
~ II
O II
o II
N ~
O
o
N Z
o
?

rn ? M•
U
O 9
r

o ZAa-IZ
<
7.O
<O
m3
?
Z _
3i 23
T. m
N
'-' -o r
-AD
Z
Omo
m Z--4zo
c ? .' `
Zmnp?k
n 3v -?iD
m ?
tO?c Zm?>1 p
a ° L
Zm0 t-O
=ZZ
(1
?
N?ZZ G)
>3 y
a
M to v
!r -4 m
N
O O N Qp to

\ ?
3
C1 z
o = 0
I
D
n
?b
C)
0
6 mm
k
\?\ ?/ 11 € ?;le
? i? Ike
Xll Iti ,

ti
T ! a
? a
b
a
g t '?
0
o t?
A i
n t
p + ' 1S
?I cm
wO NN
e.rn l
III "O °
?o b
III R ? ?• °
C)
rn
rn
c
rn
d
rn -?
0
rn
0
o ?m
W
\ to
? :.
-''? \\ • ? -_3-.mot ?+; e_
o t
fir.? _ - - --= - - -... _
TO FIVE POIN^S-??

?^crN
I ..
L.a/
I ° ?
I ?
/SZ

I ?? ' •.?,
?? • ; ?` yam,.
?

I2 °
let
?9 J ,Ir
0
1. x/
0
?m
c? O
o?
xm
x
0
A il
m
X r
D Dm
Z X D-a -a
Z ;o A m en
X X m
A C
N M, a to O° ° to to r
--1

Z N

1 Z

6100 -t -j
v
°
G
Z ZZ z
0 jO C') C m m
+ 61 61 m 61
r
< -? -
v v v t„
A m (A m A A
O AA ?(A A O O n

-? O
D C D D D
7 C
- I
n
° C1
C m
o D ? C) > > Z
m a
tom C D
,A < -n v

to
AN
0m
^
d O r
r
D _ m: to
z -4

D m m O
-o m
0 ? Z m

O 0
O m
H 3 LA
Z r) C
O
0 C n A
D
m 10 v
n

0
TI
C)
. " I'-' I
'Z...a__-I. Ll 1, s I 4
i?I 1E tillI y,
° I
III
LI `
ij III
- - Ise SI
??.?h I I,,i, III
GU o=", It
a
?? yyt,,= l+l a
jy fl;f?. ?/' 111
D 'lit??1 lr1 a
111
- U.1
?: 7g??? ti Ill.° ?
4 Ott t?'I,: 41 N 'ED
{n F s ;
Z T? -
•••? 3 .£•SO.bI.LB S
e O O e 2 to .
oa j ?
, R c, W
E ,? ?L ()I t y i ? ?
0 o i
°
; =
?> I Q
Y??: a ° III `? I Ian /
\. II l?ti'/ /%
e
• I °
ill le ill;. I?,
-? ? •I I . i- r
!t f
' l
r- 71.
Z f1 4 fs kill i,
o C m ?--- :?) Ip ? III{•??
ctm
n S t"
Z-c?Zm <OZa I II '.
T o ?orn?Z ZQZN03
C -Tr,mc)o
M nQo°A z??D>o , I =1 II i
C p ?m ?O ° I I i
o ON rno -o5ZD 111 I illl I \
AA mC DZ v II 4 • II l I
o
O O v N? f/f A n
O E/1
Z Z H
Z -?
o=
t
0
s?
I,,, .? D
L'-, ? !I , I,I II ti
r
:?,Q • ICI ¢?
Emu
al
ttlll fk
6
p
ININ
I I
I
lit
,a1 tit o
1 hl
Ili _ !
; l y
I? 4 O
II ?t
T ?., I? } o ilk
,a
° ?ot
e b"'' E E
3.1750.64-N s `
o D o Mtn. /
IRA
rn z I t ??$ o
.,° III
6 •° ? \ 1.
IIL J
;i LI
tro
_ i ° Il? ?II• 9
`J I III : sa N -
? `` ' i ll? l'l'• -
I I':
?'•, 1?.4 to E
D ?y5e ,? • ? I -iD
O t;)
It t `? Ic ? I li '
° "I' le Ili { ?\
III 1 t??
1
-I
-n
CA
?-n)
-1
i
V •
rn
I
0
A
T
N
T tl?l ti
"
E
Tir'
`
?r Mi 4 fill I
.a?`?? l6 loll t,_?

IItI 'I
D
EED
' Ij"oil!
C - ii.
0
??I aE) 1,tt
lyll <
l,o
lit
0
I ,.
E
r?-
it 0 5
1 0 ?? U
'" •f IIi
e t
et '? of ?
E A
n
O
z
N
C
n
0
z
'1'I
"n
n
7TIB: 9>rfNM13N `6
r I I M I 1!
? .
1 4 , !
` jo III ? 1 \.\
r AllOra-
ti i
i
,Ia
D °
\ ? t'r
JAI
1i• °1114.° ?°
t t ' ilk °illij sz I?
1-
I? t ? I ?'lli, 1>'
1. ' I ? j`II I •
• Lr?D
I t
It t?`1 ijl?
I y ,i:ll.
III ? ,I?.,
3
1
n
O
z
O
r
v
D
G7
?
y o = o
? ? 6
rn ? ? p to
0
?
m c ?
m " 2
r
?
g ' o
? ? m
z
o
C-) r
0
107,
ESTIMATED 2000 ADT VOLUMES
ESTIMATED 2025 ADT VOLUMES
US 70\NC 50
GLENWOOD AVENUE
30,000
39,000
c 15,000 I 15,000
19,500 1
r: . 2
1,500 1
o
2,000
WADE
AVENUE 2,700
(SR-1728)
3,600
11,500
;14, 00 l?
2,600
4,700 3,200
18,500
26,200
33,000 D 65 13 n '-
°
Tricks
0
900
1,200
900 14,500
18,700
1,200
19,500
t 7,300
9,400
1,200
1,600
9,700
2,900 15,000
3,700 19,000
2,900
3,700 300
1 0 300 100
200 -'"*- 100
100
100
1,100
1,400
loo
loo too COLE

100 STREET
100 100
1,400
1,700 7,600
10,000
13,000 7,800
16,600 10,200
20,800
26,800
GLENWOOD AVENUE
not to scale
LEGEND
XXX VPD VEHICLESDAY
DHV DESIGN HOURLY VOLUME (%)
D DIRECTIONAL FLOW (%)
pm PM PEAK
(0,0) DUALS, %)
Note: DHV .?
indicates the direction D
Reverse flow direction for
AM Peak
9,000
11,700
7,300
9,400 16,900
__. WADE
W AVENUE
(US 70 /NC 50)
15,000 31,900
19,000 40,500
pm
D 65 121 12 DHv
T-ks
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT &
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT #540 ON US 70 /NC 50
(GLENWOOD AVENUE)
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT B-3254
TRAFFIC DIAGRAM
FIGURE 5A
900
900
NATIONAL REGISTER HISTORIC PROPERTIES AND DISTRICTS
FIVE POINTS NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT (WA 4071) DETERMINED ELIGIBLE ON APRIL 30, 1997
O2 JOSEPHUS DANIELS HOUSE (MASONIC TEMPLE OF RALEIGH) (WA 10) LISTED ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER ON DEC. 8, 1
LATER DESIGNATED A NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK
O3 GLENWOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT (WA 193) LISTED ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER ON JULY 29, 1985
\\ PVEY
I0? ? ?1 ? - W ? I P IIQo 0????\
?r I [? ?R`?
Q
0 1? t p aP
_ aA?O JAI
?m 1 19
RUG HUS 0 R GH) ?I U I \\ \ .,p a 1? 0
`.
//ice -m m ?/` 111 \F? ftft
o `"`' - ! h? e 111
BRIDGE 540 III1? ?? ? '??` _ 11?? L?
-?-? I 3
r /?i I I i I= Cl 7I
?i 1\ \\ \ \\?` _ C / I I it I ?1? ?? tr \ \
\ ?, G \ \ \ ` _ ` 1 ?I /COLE STwEET_ -T A,01
Zf,
o ?-- - -n r I I ??I 1 co I
s-? III I? a ?a o ?? I/
u IQ °? j I NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
- - - - - - -- ti
TRANSPORTATION
(? -?+++?++r+rr1 DIVISION
L
CTCT HIGHWAYS
08PROJE DEVELOPMENT d
\ ? y ?= ?1 r. ^Zr ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0540 ON US 70 /NC 50
GLENWOOD AVENUE
WAKE COUNTY
?/ ?? ` <I I I I II O I TIP PROJECT B-3254
z
???i'`` -- 1111 yl '
I FIGURE 6
GLENWOOD AVENUE
GLENWOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT
GLENWOOD AVENUE
I

/LT
- DO
s ,
t ;
LTA

`° w O fJ £ 00 OO 000 0 OOO O 'D 000 SOIL

' O O
.30
RED
WILLOW OAK

s
MAPI
30"
u
_
IICAR
MAPLE
-- ------ _. ---
5.0
ST R/W --_

_-;_ - -- -

- _ _ _
15.0

I
_
fON 24' TULI P PO A
a
-V
N
ttt????

z

.+
Z?: n
_
2.

`
X I
D s 1
ZX Zp A X x p C
m vHvoo ?? o-
v

Z

o
N

z
OZ 00 O Z Z

CO C
m 0 0 _
0
Z
m

m v
+ o z
v ,,,
r
?? T T A A T
O A v? pin O O
JO O D > n
C

p n D C D O O
o, Zn v f f '-?
a m

>>
f Z
mm C D < <
^ 0 0
mN v
r v
D
<
D >
!
O ZD Dr m m
? 0
O Z m n
vo
v ; '^
z
v c n O
m > v
m o

°o?sjd
- O
O N
a
S
T
O
a i
vI
0
n I
x
0
.-W/L T
75
i
I . I

? III
II III
IIo O I I I
?lo I I I
III I I i
IIo I I l
? I Iz
W I
?I
°II
I I
\II
O II
II
° II
(-,J I I
'll
F-rlII
II
i
?____7
I

va
A
TA r Fe
o
to z v
-? A :jOn
T '° Z60-jZ
<

T

-O a3

?ADZ i
?- to Z ?O
O [m10v=
G) ?gmE)g--l Z"lZO
c o;mZ? 30 !n
m S DD?CA
D - in MMT-mo
? Dr20-
?yw
0
Z LAMZ
D -06ZZ
>32 D
i Am
-
rn ()", ZrtYiE a
??D M

-o
014 ,
t'-i? R° N D
Z O
? N A-I

?n W
z
z

O n
O
x

F-ri
l
C sl I I I

/C/)

? ? I lit
C ~
jj F
uj 0
F-q
C X
o
O Y?
"
z '
^^Z /
V J /
1
I
ROCK;
ROCKS
r "l
J, ?.:
/ I '! o
m
4Y -i
F
fff p? R -1
r /

/A/
w
,A
002 o
A
v? m
rC O
o - o0
r
rC rc
ar nc
0
I I
I I I
- I I I
II I
I I I
I I I
I I I ?
I I I
I I i
II I
I I I
I I
I I
III
?_l I
I'.;l I
III
III
III
I l
i
lily ;
I l ?;
I I ,/
I
I I ,
I l ;' r
I l
?A
4Y /
/
/

., i
NA %
I'
o\\
A
R N\\
o , \ .% ? \ $`' NFU. `\
am 1 ? ?/
?.:
PTSlo.16+27.67
°O
V,V /
' . i 'y..,::% tip- •„r .. / \ E I?
INS
I
1 _ V
m
i O \ _...
STSfo.22+47J5
Sfa'6+3628
a ?.. nErN"°ti au
I
a
TO PEACE STREET
4.11
2.48'5+9' E
:
LLD;
11 . u e FETNNING WI((
Do!? 6mY? . r::.i b am a , II I mo e..
I
_o

m II A rn
b
O II o
O 1

m II
rn r
?
'?^ c% I I c 1=
I
I
-I
_0
?
nom ?? ? II
x .3 11 C) II
rn II am -

? II
o II
y
o C
)
?
o
II ro

N

n
m
n R? F?
y ?T
o ?
z
0
Z
rn
Z
no _
m
y
O

m ?° °

a? o
°

w
m
°
m °

° '-.z. Am o
O t mM ?3` V j• ? ///'
6 FL+S o1S t t ..?m .r ? w? I.;,sf''% /, j ?? -?':''.•..
y II' ? ??•o / /A5fb j c
°B;
14
10
/// /// : 1111 ;
Y 7;r
A ®,...
01 m
D
o Z,. 56 Onn'N=
-r, _ Z _Ov Am
D C7 to m Q v ? j W
co 01 mTZ< >3:0t:
o ZNEmO r6nZ
Dcn CZ z D
m? v w
/f
n m
z Z1
tri ()
O = n
or
o
IN
z
?m
F?
xm
. -GLEMyg7p .wExuf -
- -- TO FIVE POINTS •-...• -
im ..
• I xm
./ ? 0 A Y
p
?
n$
o?
?m
s
O

X D D X D? A X X m C
v 02 G ? 0

Z ?
1
, o v
O
6
Z Z Z
z Z
Gl ? C (? C m r. 6l m Gl

7 <
m
1
H

rn
D
O 70 m N
A m m
A A 0 O A
O
^

A
O-4 O
Zn v D
* D
f c '
V
rn
O ttt
D C
m 0-4 A D D Q. Z
?+

3 A

m
M
C D
H-o <
<
-<
?+
-
v
D vr -1
O -4
O r

< D
Z m_
D m
vs
m
w N

D
z
rr
m
m o

•o
° N
O 0 v Z
v m
N m
3
Z
v
c
(l
?
O
<
co m > o
v

as \
10
p t,,5 t.._
*W_
Pkl?
0
n
yT
m
?? 4j
./ % // / , ,? A? ° \ ? ,?, <\ r ?•. ?}'. "s / f//ice O? , ?'\ ,??!/i?? ? /
°
rn
C--
rn
Z
P)
rn
rn
n
y
0

?p 1 11 \ ° i
1ti s 1 \ . °
'(=J °a . ® I a / „ / ? o \ ?o \ 2L88+IZ 'oISSJ _ ,?
l 1 !
1 1
1 l
1 1
4 4
m li r
z ti $
? II o 1
II m? rn
mcKll ?c ? III
?rny e? nm c?
Zn II Cn r
m II v Orn ro
? II C) ~
OZ II H 02 ro O
O II - O
p
• e"

S 9V}
=
O 5 I
? I ai

o 4 i J[1?
•,

`? SS60f 92 •n1SJ S ??

? F1,

cf 25 H o
vov,
i

J' ? ? r7 ! I' y 1
(?t r 1
s a) / ,, t l'q ..?,:.i 111 1.
22
?v m3: ?QvD70
o
Zm amNN?
?: QCa m
a
AO
O c Z(,Zrn0 r-Q-ZZ / 'r
n3?ZZ y = D
14
-CA
IV
CA LA
Z z z /l
v n O: '
O = 0

do
T
fn m
? m
O.o
AO
n2
vN
?Z
X m_
no
2
O
O
O
v

la ? 1
X D DX
Z DA "
Z X X 7° C
to m O fn Do 0 fn fn 0 r

Z

to

0 -0.

0O O
1 •1
Z

O

G1
a Z
C
0

C rn m Z

G1 G1 Z
In
Gl
m --1 O O v in
7o ---I rn

O
° .A
A
;o p
o o
n

-Nt
"i
C O

DC D

O O
>> c

m
y 0 Q) A
d D D A°
0 c -4 Z
mm Na -C
H AC, 70m
o o
D D m m
. rn
Dr in w

ZD D
r-D m
m O
v ?
0 v Z
0 M m
N w
Z
v c n o
N X C: m
>
m v
0

• 4 m ? -
fl
v••N
15
Y
-GLEN- -N+ k-?? -- C(EM1YL1) AV£N
i
-
'-i: ': I?11 I?',r,rr II I1•.,rJr I ?.?.•.ri
\ \
\ r?. to X15 I...
N
°? \\ \
Fig
rr)
t
i II11
4
\?
41
I I I ° m ? r L-._
A ?i1
'r J ? / / ? $ \ \ ? a • ZC88+IZ 'olSSJ ? <
A/M
TO PEACE STREET Z 48154_7 E =-
•
Jr?.
? = _•11 111
m° R IL s
1 1 ..o ? • I:
A ? it
1
n
R?
a
rr,
o ?
a

2 It
_ N
%/
Ali
G7 ?`
G7 ?
I ro ro I mo •?\? ° ?v
SS6p?9Z olSJ Y o/ X ra w\ i'
II g u n S ?:, ; l
M-
?c)3II
? to I I N O V1 rn II K os`s`7 * ? j //?? ° \
? II ? y 4 F
a II o °/»a f //?//
N N
C) IIo / ///? _=
O m
J/?/r p
• 3a' o
/ 3 CCA
H
?Z
/ HY. •x r9 Xm
03
/ ?? ?•lE' , , - O
r
v
70
01 m
rn v ?....
......
y S \/ _/-.; ?, IPA ?..r q.. ?•.
-1 a .. _..
WO p r rn Z p O / fem. O
D oDZ'^ .vmNVZi? / Aa t ?/ ?? r
Z;o 0 nOrnO--' Z-ZO hm
M;ii
o ZwZmp rOoZZ
:?ZZ D-2 D // ? / ? ?
w mN ?ZZ'I?
Ln LA Q.
0 CA
W : ?
?
? z z ?.
14
C) = 0
:ZE
0
rn
C
rn
n
r
m
O
ZZ:
2i
n
rng
?g
?rn
° u zo iI
ltn
?k 1 8 1 L A 11
m
x r
D D Q
Zx D -o •V
Zp 7o ITl m
x x w
A C
N m ON 00 O N rn O r
4
Z N .-I
T v ;
oO O 1 -1 - 0
O

0
A G
Z
CGl
C m m Z Z
O O Z
m 0

r
< -+ -? o v v ,,,
X m m N m 7° w rn
Gl A a A
A O O n

-=i
-Ni ?°
-+ C -a
o
D C D D D
0 0 C
_ ?1
T

D w C O C D D

3
m ,vm
N In C
- 'n
v
N AN m

N
O
O r
> D m- m N
0 D r
D D to
r m m m
r O
Z
o °
° m m
`A 3 to
z p 0
0 C fT
N W W > v

v
- ? -°- -- CI.fMYGbp•pyE? -
--- _ -_- . ___-_? - -
TO FIVE POINTS -? --
? m

0D U\\ E.
PTStO. 16+27.67
m / 1a? j o ? Ira ? \ ?
It I N "k
? ? ? ICS _.........
n
v
c
n
y ?Y
O
I/A
to his
16

rn
c
rrn
m
c?
0
. 1
-i °? 11 I P ° ti Ls+lz •otssa `N 111 I I ° I?
??,...... } `xl 1 ?? fig ° \'•# ?`C ` STStO. 22+47J5 °? ' { \ \ \\ ?\ ° ° I t ?•°' - -_"?''
SfO.6+3628
F-' T PEACE STREET - - - R£rvMwC
248' 549E
_ i.
PTO FIVE
r- 'i`e,. ` san! a °O m 1 POINTS -?
f • • aeraWin I wNL --
f ''' 611 ?? 1 1. ? ';1 ? I ?? '- ? p? I (ra f III " b Ty ° •_,.. lSsi -7'-'..:>L_.. _ ? •
1 1 C_
m
1 1 ?, o
1 i

w ro

m II ti m ?, $
o II o
o II v o I
II II
mzm
II zzz -
?m orn e II

?? ? it
?n II II
II
rn m srn
z2: C)
II
O II
N
O
N
Z! II o

o M W
A
m
r° .++ti
D
_o O? r0m ZA0-IZ
O<
?0
m
D-o?Zm _
<
r. tAN-,
-O n?mo
i
Z...{ZO
0
C mQ00A -ID
DA
.01
° m
ZwZm0
? rOz)ZZ
DN
ZZ
mA DZS D
DZ?
mC
A r , rZ' 'mo
O Eh
o sA (A A
cn ?
to
n z
Z
14
o n
= O
? I I o III ° '^ ? ; ; ? A ° t o °-•: --1 y- ? ; d ??. ?.
R °° I Ill ?' a
\N
:III IIf; \\.:,\ L
a
A 'obl;'lll '"
n s r. - / ? ? a O
L /s d m / /'? "E\ O
a
° \\
"l f y r (A <
U .4m
0,
/?` ! m/r Ao
?Al/H?.? \ n-
///t ?/, + I Ipl l i
s `. r a
i
y °
o/?
o It O£
/ f

o?
N
-i Z
;am
!? G1
-I=
0
i
O
0
O

D D
X D x 70 A X X 7o C
H m aN 00 O rn H 0 r

Z OZ C) O Z Z O Z
0 jO C O C m m 0 6l m z
r
m 1 O O ?^

O
A Ln ;u
A O O
A
C: '' O
D;D D D c

0 vo m
0 rn C C U-4 A D D Z

'n D
w
C D
•G -<
T
3 mA H
o ?

to
m
? to
?
? m
A

-i '+
0
r
r v
D D m- m O
`
Z

a
N
?
ZD yH
ry m o

0
Z
m 0

O op m N
°
H 3
Z n C O
v C n A

N 03 M n v

0
I I I I?
I I w
I? I i I IW
I I LEGEND
I I la
1 ? I ? STOP SIGN
I Ito
t o I ? MELD SIGN I j ? I I
I I 4- TRAFFIC MOVEMENT O
I i 3
I I / IIOI
\ \ // I I I
\\ \\ NOTE: THIS RAMP IS THE / / ^ \ I
\ \ FREE FLOW MOVE.
\ dT'lp
WILLIAMSON DRIVE ?? /' ' I j I I j t I
\ // I I I I I
\?\; // I \ I I I I
i/
/
I
I I
I '
I
I
I
I
?
? II I
I I I
11
I\
i
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 8
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
BRIDGE REPLACEMENT #540 ON US 50 /NC 70
(GLENWOOD AVENUE)
WAKE COUNTY
TIP PROJECT B-3254
NORTHWEST QUADRANT TRAFFIC FLOW
FIGURE 12

ApEA
fit
?I
1
EXISTING Tx T R.C.B.C. # 2
-- i UNDER ACCESS LOOP
EXISTING 7' x 7' R.C.B.C. # I
UNDER ACCESS RAMP
x
z z
AAFA
I11', `fir EXISTING 6' x T ARCH ?CULVERT
WITH 7' x T R.C.B.C. EXTENSION----
I - ` ;UNDER GLENWOOD AVENUE - - " .1
`j?"f!.-.\1, ..\`+?.r is ^. •...
fill
}. • f \ ,\ \\ EXISTING DOUBLE 8'x 6' R.C.B.C.
lI{i ;i ' R \', ,,•?.. UNDER WADE AVENUE
_ . irk' ? ?:..'`•'? _._ %i`
`? rie , I l
WADE AVENUE
s:.e
BRIDGE NO. 40. g(R
X13m., v:
I rl_ -L?- O 2v
??'- z,z.s x
Bridge Replacement 4540 Figure 14A
' Wake Cc r.;z TIP B-3254
GLENWOOD AVENUE LOOKING SOUTH
GLENWOOD AVENUE LOOKNG NORTH
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
r
i
i
r
r
r
WADE AVENUE LOOKING WEST
Bridge Replacement 4540
Wake County
Figure 14B
TIP B-3254
WADE ,,kV-ENUE LOOKING EAST
I

I
0
D
I
0
r
C!
¦
Bridge Replacement 9540 Figure 14C
Wace County TIP B-3254
HOUSE IN GLENWOOD HISTORIC DISTRICT
JOSEPHUS DANIELS HOUSE (MASONIC TENIPLE OF RALEIGH)
LOOKING NORTH
APPENDIX A
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The written comments received during the public involvement process are summarized
as follows:
1. Save all (or most) of trees with primary concern for those in median - 8 comments
Design consideration will minimize tree removal; however, at least two median trees,
adjacent to each end of bridge, will need to be removed or severely disfigured to remove
and replace the bridge (or even rehabilitate it).
2. Traffic using Cole Street as a cut-though between Glenwood Avenue and Wade Cole
Street - 9 comments
Cole Street is apart of the City of Raleigh's jurisdiction. Any revision in traffic operation
on Cole Street must be initiated by the City. The City has cooperated in the development
of this project and will consider this concern.
3. Rehabilitate the existing bridge rather than replace it - 7 comments
Rehabilitation is not economically prudent. Rehabilitation would require a large
expenditure of money for not much benefit. Furthermore, rehabilitation would not
preserve the oaks trees in the median. The City of Raleigh investigated the rehabilitation
option independently and came to the same conclusion.
4. Do not raise bridge or lower Wade Avenue - 7 comments
The bridge has a substandard vertical clearance over Wade Avenue at the north end of the
bridge. To replace it at the same elevation would not address the bridge's functional
obsolescence.
5. Revise ramp configuration in northwest quadrant to eliminate some or all connections to
Williamson Drive and Caswell Street - 7 comments.
Alternate C accomplishes this and provides a safer traffic operation. However, it is more
disruptive to existing travel patterns and neighborhood connectivity. Furthermore, many
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254
Public Involvement
Page A-2
citizens requested this connector remain. There are no accidents at this location.
Therefore, Alternate A is the preferred improvement.
6. Concern for the visual aspects of the replacement bridge and/or retaining wall - 3
comments
The replacement bridge will have a rail that looks like that on the existing bridge rail.
- Also, a simulated masonry surface is planned for the retaining walls that will be in
keeping with the historic neighborhood.
7. Improve interchange and/or Glenwood Avenue and Wade Avenue thoroughfares - 2
comments
Alternate A is a compromise to address both traffic and neighborhood concerns.
8. Traffic speed is too high on Glenwood Avenue at present and improvement may increase
it - 3 comments
The speed limit on Glenwood Avenue conforms to the city-wide 35 mph. Non-adherence
to this limit is an enforcement issue. Primary enforcement responsibility rests with the
City of Raleigh Police Department.
9. Concern for pedestrian safety on sidewalks and crossing Glenwood Avenue - 3
comments
Sidewalks on both sides of the bridge and on the approaches of Glenwood Avenue will
be replaced. Also, a sidewalk on at least one side of Glenwood Avenue will remain open
during construction. The traffic signals should make crossing Glenwood Avenue safer.
10. Question need for additional traffic signals at Cole Street and northeast ramp - 3
comments
Signals will improve traffic operations and safety and will not be installed unless
warranted by Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. A signal warrant analysis has
justified both proposed signals. The signal at Cole Street meets five delay warrants, and
the signal at the northeast ramp meets the safety warrants.
11. Close Glenwood Avenue and detour traffic to replace or rehabilitate bridge in the
shortest time possible - 5 comments
NC Department of Transportation
[flake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254
No detour route exists in the immediate area with excess capacity to carry the anticipated
detour traffic volume. All detours would shift traffic burden to other parts of the
community.
12. Concern for appearance or landscaping of area - 2 comments
A landscape plan will be finalized once construction is complete. The landscaping has
been, and will continue to be coordinated with the Raleigh City Council.
13. Concern about increased truck traffic due to improvements - 2 comments
It is not anticipated that the project will increase either truck or auto traffic on the
roadway.
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254
APPENDIX B
HISTORIC RESOURCES
COORDINATION
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254
-?R .wt°•?
ti ? .tom
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Hunt 1r., Governor
ay McCain, Secretary
April 30, 1997
Nicholas L.'Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Bridge 540 on US 70-NC 50 (Glenwood Avenue)
over SR 1728 (Wade Avenue), Raleigh, Wake
County, B-3254, State Project 8.1403601, ER
97-9043
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
Jeffrey 1. Crow, Director
On April 28, 1997, Debbie Bevin of our staff met with North Carolina Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) staff for a meeting of the minds concerning the above
project. We reported our available information on historic architectural and
archaeological surveys and resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT
provided project area photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting.
Based upon our-review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural resources, the following properties are located
within the project area:
Glenwood Historic District (WA 193). This district is listed in the National
Register of Historic Places.
Five Points Neighborhood Historic District (WA 4071). This district was
placed on the state study list because it appears worthy of further
investigation to definitively determine its eligibility for listing in the National
Register. For purposes of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, and barring a finding to the contrary, we consider this property eligible
for the National Register under Criterion A for community planning and
development and Criterion C for architecture.
Josephus Daniels House (Masonic Temple of Raleigh) (WA 10), 1520
Caswell Street. This property, located within the Five Points Neighborhood
Historic District, is a designated National Historic Landmark and a locally-
designated historic landmark.
8-1
lnQ Pnu Inn... Crr.-rr .nil.:..:. ?r....? r+.._. ._ ........ ......- . ,.
Nicholas L. Graf
April 30, 1997
To determine whether this project requires a Certificate of Appropriateness, please
contact Robin Quinn, Wake County Historic Preservation Commission, P.O. Box
550, Raleigh, N.C. 27602, telephone [phone]. Section 36 CFR 800.10 of
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations also require special
handling of projects involving National Historic Landmarks.
We recommend that no historic architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that
no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a Categorical
Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT addressed our
comments.
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 Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental
review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
if ,
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: H. F. Vick
B. Church
T. Padgett
Wake County Historic Preservation Commission
bc: File
Brow XB vin
Clagget /Hail
County
RF
B-?

Map of project area. Bridge No. 540 and all eligible properties are identified.
.......................................................
-
B-3254 Replacement of Bridge No. 540 on Glenwood Avenue over Wade Avenue in
Raleigh, Wake County
5-3
Federal Aid # BRNHS-70(41) TIP # B-3254 County: Wake
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Project Description: Replace Bridge No. 540 on Glenwood Ave. over Wade Ave.
On November 2, 2000, representatives of the
® North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
® North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
reviewed the subject project and agreed
there are no effects on the National Register-listed property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
7 there are no effects on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
?Y there is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties located within the
/prdject's area of potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s) are listed on the
reverse.
11
there is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within the
r-ect's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed on the reverse.
Signed:
Representative`,, NCDOT
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency
11
State Historic Preservation Officer
18- 4
Date
Date
Date
Federal Aid # BRNHS-70(41) TIP # B-3254 County: Wake
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
National Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status
(NR or DE) and describe the effect.
ti0. L t Al .. t__ L- L.
?i L ! ?' t i _ '?'•?? t ?? ?? J?'t ?? f t _) l F l - ) 1 IL. ?L'./t? ?."Z Jl.
\ ml ?l t ll` :
C:ti 1Di-r.? t l Il fJ `
i i \C-i ?t ICU
Reason(s) why the effect is not adverse (if applicable).
Initialed: NCDOT FHWA SHPO
1 5'
5-5
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
FINAL NATIONWIDE SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION AND APPROVAL
FOR FEDERALLY-AIDED HIGHWAY PROJECTS WITH MINOR INVOLVEMENTS
WITH HISTORIC SITES
i
F. A. PROJECT BRNHS - 70 (41)
STATE PROJECT 8.1403601
T. I. P. NO. B - 3254
Description: Raleigh, Bridge No. 540 on US 70/NC 50 (Glenwood Avenue), Over SR
1728 (Wade Avenue), Wake County
1. Is the proposed project designed to
improve the operational characteristics,
safety, and/or physical condition of the
existing highway facility on essentially
the same alignment?
2. Is the project on new location?
3. Is the historic site adjacent to the
existing highway?
4. Does the project require the removal or
alteration of historic buildings,
structures, or objects?
5. Does the project disturb or remove
archaeological resources which are
important to preserve in place rather
than to recover for archaeological
research?
6. a. Is the impact on the Section 4(f)
site considered minor (i.e. no effect,
no adverse effect)?
b. If the project is determined to have
"no adverse effect" on the historic
site, does the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation object to the
determination of "no adverse effect"?
YES NO
X
? X
F-1 x
F-1 X
X F-1
; F-1 X
-6
7. Has the SHPO agreed, in writing, with the ?
assessment of impacts and the proposed X
mitigation?
8. Does the project require the preparation
of an EIS? F-I X

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND FOUND NOT TO BE FEASIBLE AND
PRUDENT
The following alternatives were evaluated and found not
to be feasible and prudent:
1. Do nothing Yes No
Does the "do nothing" alternative: X ?
(a) correct capacity deficiencies?
or (b) correct existing safety hazards?
or (c) correct deteriorated conditions?
and (d) create a cost or impact of
extraordinary measure?
2. Improve the highway without using the
adjacent historic site
(a) Have minor alignment shifts, changes
in standards, use of retaining walls,
etc., or traffic management measures
been evaluated?
(b) The items in 2(a) would result in:
(circle, as appropriate)
(i) substantial adverse environmental
impacts
or (ii) substantial increased costs
or (iii) unique engineering,
transportation, maintenance, or
safety problems
or (iv) substantial social, environmental,
or economic impacts
? NA
? X
? X
F-I NA
X ?
x?
F3_- 7
o (v) a project which does not meet
the he need
or (vi) impacts, costs, or problems which
are of extraordinary magnitude

Yes No
3. Build an improved facility on new
location without using the historic site. X a
(a) An alternate on new location would
result in: (circle, as appropriate)
(i) a project which does not solve
the existing problems
or (ii) substantial social,
environmental, or economic
impacts
or (iii) a substantial increase in
project cost or engineering
difficulties
and (iv) such impacts, costs, or
difficulties of truly unusual
or unique or extraordinary
magnitude
MINIMIZATION OF HARM
Yes No
1. The project includes all possible planning ?
to minimize harm necessary to preserve the X
historic integrity of the site.
2. Measures to minimize. harm have been
agreed to, in accordance with 36 CFR X F
Part 800, by the FHWA, the SHPO,
and as appropriate, the ACHP.
3. Specific measures to minimize harm are
described as follows:
The measures are described in the project commitments in the document.
35-8
COORDINATION
The proposed project has been coordinated with the following (attach correspondence):
a. State Historic Preservation Officer see attachment
b. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
c. Property owner
d. Local/State/Federal Agencies see attachment
e. US Coast Guard not applicable
(for bridges requiring bridge permits)
SUMMARY AND APPROVAL
The project meets all criteria included in the programmatic 4(f) evaluation approved on
December 23, 1986.
All required alternatives have been evaluated and the findings made are clearly applicable
to this project. There are no feasible and prudent alternatives to the use of the historic site.
The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm, and the measures to minimize
harm will be incorporated in the project.
All appropriate coordination has been successfully completed with local and state agencies.
Approved:
IZ2iav
ate Ma er, Project Development a
/?/? Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT I,/ &:? . 14
Date Division Administrator, FHWA
-5-9
PROGRAMMATIC SECTION 4(f) EVALUATION
A. Proposed Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways, proposes to
replace Bridge No. 540 located at the interchange of Glenwood Avenue and Wade Avenue
with a new structure (for general location, see Figure 1).
The new bridge is approximately 91 feet (27.7 meters) in length [approximately 40 feet
(12.2 meters) shorter than the existing structure] and 68 feet (20.7 meters) wide
(approximately the same width as the existing structure). This width is measured from inside
rail to inside rail and will provide two 23-foot (7.0-meter) travelways separated by a 10-foot
(3.0-meter) median and a 6-foot (1.8-meter) sidewalk on both sides. The approach work to
the bridge will extend approximately 250 feet (76.2 meters) beyond the south end and 300 feet
(91.4 meters) beyond the north end. It is proposed to raise the vertical alignment (grade) on
Glenwood Avenue at the north end of the bridge approximately 1.1 feet (0.3 meter) to provide
a minimum vertical clearance of 15 feet (4.6 meters) for Wade Avenue at the north end of the
bridge.
The through town routing of US 70 and NC 50 is currently assigned to Glenwood
Avenue north of Wade Avenue and Wade Avenue east of Glenwood Avenue. A loop in the
southwest quadrant of the interchange and a ramp in the northeast quadrant provide for this
routing within the interchange. US 70/NC 50, Glenwood Avenue, is classified as an Urban
Other Principal Arterial in the Statewide Functional Classification System and as a Major
Thoroughfare in the Greater Raleigh Urbanized Area Transportation Plan. The route serves
as a major connection to the northwest portion of Raleigh to the central business district.
The proposed four lane bridge will be stage-constructed by building the bridge width in
half-sections. This will permit two lanes (one lane in each direction) of traffic on Glenwood
Avenue during construction. Half of the width of the old bridge will carry the traffic while
the other half is being removed and replaced with half of the new structure. Traffic on
Glenwood Avenue will then be shifted to the completed portion of the structure until the final
portion of the new bridge is completed. Four lanes of traffic on Wade Avenue will be
maintained during construction.
The existing bridge was constructed in 1954. The bridge has reached the end of its
useful life and needs to be replaced. The inclusion of the bridge on the NCDOT Statewide
Bridge Replacement Program is based upon a sufficiency rating of 42.9. The bridge is posted
with a weight limit of 38 tons for a single vehicle and legal gross weight for truck tractor
NC Department of Transportation
Tfake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3259 B-10
semi-trailers (TTST). The bridge provides only 13.9 feet (4.2 meters) of vertical clearance
for Wade Avenue at the north end of the bridge.
w
In addition to replacing the bridge, several safety and operational improvements are
proposed as part of this project. These include:
¦ Signalizing the intersection of Glenwood Avenue and eastbound Wade Avenue
ramp/loop and Cole Street,
¦ Signalizing the intersection of Glenwood Avenue and westbound Wade Avenue to
northbound Glenwood Avenue ramp,
¦ Widening the westbound Wade Avenue to northbound Glenwood Avenue ramp to
two lanes,
¦ Providing an acceleration lane for Glenwood Avenue traffic accessing eastbound
Wade Avenue.
Signalization of the intersection of Glenwood Avenue and eastbound Wade Avenue
ramp/loop and Cole Street will improve this intersection which is experiencing an
unacceptable traffic delay, undesirable traffic operation resulting from poor sight distance and
risk-taking of impatient motorists. Signalization of the intersection of Glenwood Avenue and
westbound Wade Avenue to northbound Glenwood Avenue ramp is needed to address the
high number of accidents occurring at this location. Nineteen accidents, over a three year
period, were recorded at this location. The westbound Wade Avenue to northbound
Glenwood Avenue ramp is proposed to be widened to increase capacity to prevent vehicle
queues from backing up onto Wade Avenue and to improve efficiency at its intersection with
Glenwood Avenue. The existing acceleration lane on Wade Avenue for Glenwood Avenue
traffic accessing eastbound Wade Avenue provides insufficient distance (240-foot [73.2
meters] taper) for merging traffic. The acceleration lane will be extended approximately 348
feet (106 meters) which will improve traffic flow and safety.
The recommended improvement described above (Alternate A) will involve additional
right of way from two properties located in the Glenwood Historic District, which is listed in
the National Register of Historic Places. A strip of additional right of way is needed,
approximately 10 feet (3.0 meters) wide by 265 feet (80.8 meters) long along Wade Avenue
(approximately 0.06 acre or 0.02 hectare). The strip is needed to construct the retaining wall
for the extension of the acceleration lane under the bridge (see Figure 2 and Figure 7A).
As the proposed improvements are federally funded and propose the use of land from
a significant historic site, compliance with Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation
Act of 1966 (80 Stat., PL 89-670) is required. Section 4(f) is designed to insure that special
NC Department of Transportation
14?ake Count- Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 B-I I
efforts are made "to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and
recreational lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites."
B. Description of the Section 4(f) Resource
Name: Glenwood Historic District
Location: Located on the eastside of Glenwood Avenue south of Wade
. Avenue (see Figure 7).
Date of Construction: c. 1906-1929
Statement of Significance:
Purchased in 1905-06 by James H. Pou, platted in 1906 by Riddick and Mann and sold
by the Glenwood Land Company, the Glenwood suburb represents the first major
documented attempt by the city's controlling interests to accommodate the rapidly
growing white middle class of early 20" century Raleigh. Located on a beautiful forested
plateau and provided with the amenities of water, sewer, sidewalks and streetcars,
Glenwood attracted a variety of inhabitants. This is reflected in the architectural fabric
which is predominantly small cottages and bungalows with some large neo-classical and
colonial revival dwellings. With Boylan Heights and Cameron Park, Glenwood offers
a great source of information and insight into this historically significant period of
urbanization in Raleigh and the State.
Criteria Assessment:
Glenwood is significant in American history, architecture and culture because the
neighborhood possesses integrity of location, setting, representative architectural design, and
feeling and:
A. As one of Raleigh's first 20" century suburban neighborhoods is associated with the
growth of industrialization and urbanization in Raleigh and North Carolina, an event
that has made a significant contribution to broad patterns of our history;
B. The neighborhood's developer, James H. Pou, is a person who is significant in
Raleigh and North Carolina's past, being representative of the leader of the New
South;
C. The neighborhood embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type-suburban
- popular architecture-and a period-the first decades of the 20`" Century-that
represents a significant and distinguishable entity within the development of the
landscape of the city.
NC Department of Transportation
J,Vake Count- Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 B-12
Evaluation:
The Glenwood Historic District is listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The
basis for listing were: Criterion A for community planning, Criterion B for significant persons,
Criterion C for architecture.
Boundaries:
The proposed National Register boundaries for the Glenwood Historical District are
shown in Figure 7.
C. Impacts on the Section 4(f) Property
Alternate A, the recommended alternative will require a limited amount of right of way
from two properties located within the Glenwood Historic District (see Figure 2 and Figure
7A) . On the south side of Wade Avenue just east of the bridge, the existing right of way is 40
feet (12.2 meters) from the centerline. Approximately 270 feet (82.3 meters) east ofthe bridge,
the existing right of way increases to 70 feet (21.3 meters) from the center-line. Existing right
of way is not sufficient to contain the proposed acceleration lane. An additional right of way
width of approximately 10 feet (3.0 meters) is needed along Wade Avenue for a distance of
approximately 265 feet (80.8 meters). The approximate acreage involved is 0.06 acre (0.02
hectare). Most of the additional 10 feet (3.0 meters) of right of way is located on a steep slope
within a wooded area. This additional right of way provides little if any utility to the adjacent
property owners. The extension of the acceleration lane is needed to improve traffic flow and
to correct a potential safety problem.
Alternate A will not involve additional right of way from the Josephus Daniels House or
from the Five Points Neighborhood Historic District.
D. Applicability of Programmatic Section 4(f)
Since this project necessitates the use of a minor amount of land from a historic site
which is adjacent to the existing roadway and since the project meets the criteria set forth in
the Federal Register (December 23, 1986), a programmatic Section 4(f) evaluation satisfies the
requirements of Section 4(f).
NC Department of Transportation
141'ake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 B-13
E. Avoidance Alternatives
Four avoidance alternatives were evaluated for the Section 4(f) properties. A discussion
of the alternates follows. For comparison of avoidance alternatives see the table at the end of
this section.
Avoidance Alternate 1 See Figure 8
This alternate consists of a modification of the recommended Alternate A. This
alternative would eliminate the extension of the acceleration lane under the proposed bridge
and would consequently shorten the associated retaining wall. This would eliminate the need
for taking additional right of way from the Glenwood Historic District. The existing
acceleration lane consists of a single lane taper beginning at the loop nose and tapering down
to the edge of the eastbound Wade Avenue lane just west of the bridge. The existing
acceleration lane is approximately 240 feet (73.2 meters) long. There is inadequate sight
distance for traffic on the loop from Glenwood Avenue merging with eastbound Wade Avenue
traffic. The poor sight distance combined with the short acceleration lane presents a potential
for accidents. The existing lane taper does not conform to current design criteria. There are
no recorded accidents at this location. Since this merge situation:
¦ carries US 70/NC 50 routing;
¦ serves a heavy traffic volume (2900 VPD making the merge in the year 2000);
¦ has an acceleration lane of substandard length; and
¦ presents poor safety and traffic operational characteristics due to poor sight distance
at the point of merge;
elimination of the proposed acceleration lane extension would not solve an existing safety
problem.
Avoidance Alternate 1 would not require additional right ofway from Glenwood Historic
District, the Five Points Neighborhood Historic District or the Josephus Daniels Historic
House.
Avoidance Alternate 2 See Figure 9
This alternate is also a modification of Alternate A. It consists of shifting the alignment
of Wade Avenue northward about 10 feet (3.0 meters) to avoid the taking of right of way from
the Glenwood Historic District. Sufficient preliminary studies were performed to verify that
NC Department of Transportation
If'ake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 B-14
the shift would require right of way [approximately 10 feet (3.0 meters) wide as shown on
Figure 9) from the Josephus Daniels House property, another Section 4(f) resource and a
National Historic Landmark. This alternate would basically move the interchange as proposed
in Alternate A approximately 8 feet (2.4 meters) north. This alternative would require the
reconstruction of a portion of Wade Avenue, ramps and revisions to ramps, loops and drainage
structures.
Avoidance Alternate 3 See Figure 10
10 This alternate is a modification of Alternate C. The same interchange redesign as
proposed with Alternate C would be proposed here, but the alignment of Wade Avenue within
the interchange area, including the interchange, would be shifted north approximately 8 feet
(2.4 meters). This shift would avoid the taking of right of way from the Glenwood Historic
District. No right of way would be required from the Five Points Neighborhood District or the
Josephus Daniels House. It is anticipated that this alternate would receive the same strong
public opposition as Alternate C received. The public opposition came from the Raleigh
Appearance Commission, the Five Points Citizens Advisory Council and from verbal and
written comments received at the Citizens Informational Workshop. Both Alternate C and
Avoidance Alternate 3 totally rebuild the interchange in the two northern quadrants and result
in greater visual impacts to the historical resources in the area.
Avoidance Alternate 4 See Figure 11
This alternate is a modification of Alternate A. The proposed acceleration lane would
be eliminated. This would avoid the taking of right of way from the Glenwood Historic
District. No right of way would be required for the Five Points Neighborhood Historic
District or the Josephus Daniels property. The Glenwood Avenue to eastbound Wade Avenue
loop would be reconstructed to connect to Wade Avenue with a stop-sign controlled "T" type
intersection. Eastbound traffic on the loop would have to come to a complete stop and turn
right on Wade Avenue. Sight distance for these stopped vehicles toward the west is restricted.
This alternate would potentially introduce unsafe traffic operation for the vehicles stopped and
also for eastbound traffic on Wade Avenue approaching the "T" intersection. The sight
distance problem causes another concern that eastbound traffic on Wade Avenue could miss
the exit ramp to Glenwood Avenue. After missing the exit ramp, this traffic might then
• attempt to turn into the proposed entrance ramp in the wrong direction. This loop carries the
eastbound through routing of NC50/ JS 70 through the interchange. This alternate would
• replace one safety problem with another one that might be even more severe.
NC Department of Transportation
[Make County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 B-15
Section 4(f) Avoidance Alternatives
For the Glenwood Historic District
Table 5
AVOIDANCE ALTERNATIVE
(for the Glenwood Historic District) OTHER SECTION 4 (f)
INVOLVEMENTS POTENTIAL SAFETY &
TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL
PROBLEMS

1 NO YES
2 YES* NO
3 NO YES
4 NO YES
* This avoidance alternate takes property from the Josephus Daniels Historic Property, a
National Historic Landmark.
F. Measures to Minimize Harm
The following measures will be implemented as part of Alternate A in order to minimize
harm to the Glenwood Historic District. These measures were developed in coordination
with the SHPO, the Glenwood Citizens Advisory Council, and the Raleigh City Council.
1- A retaining wall in lieu of a earth slope is proposed to minimize the right-of-way
required from the Glenwood Historic District to construct the proposed improvements.
2- The face of the retaining walls, will be treated with simulated masonry to match stone
used on the Josephus Daniels House located north of the proposed improvements.
3- The bridge railing on the proposed bridge will be designed to match the existing bridge
railing.
4- The replacement bridge rails will be stained a color agreed upon by the neighborhoods
and Raleigh City Council.
5- The replacement rail will be extended along the designated tops of the retaining walls
to more nearly simulate the length of existing bridge.
6- The bridge is being replaced with a bridge having essentially the same width and
somewhat shorter length [approximately 40 feet (12.2 meters) less].
NC Department of Transportation
Wake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 B-16
7- The loss of trees, which has been a major concern to the neighborhoods, has been
minimized by the construction of retaining walls. The retaining wall layout has been
modified to save the most trees possible. A landscaping plan is being developed in close
coordination with the Raleigh City Council.
8- The loblolly pine located on the north bank of the stream in the northeast quadrant of the
interchange will be retained during the stream restoration if possible.
9- The stream that meanders through the northern quadrants of the interchange will be
restored using natural channel design techniques.
10- Metal pole standards will be used on replacement street lights.
11- Steel-strained poles (no guy wires) will be used on proposed traffic signals with the
provision that the City will share cost if there is room for the guy wires.
12- A Preconstruction Survey will be made of surrounding houses to insure proper
compensation in the unlikely event of any construction-related damage.
13- Construction employee parking will not be allowed inside the tree protection area.
Vehicles (including those belonging to construction employees), equipment, material
storage, and disposal of construction debris and chemicals will not be allowed inside the
tree protection area.
G. Coordination
The proposed project has been coordinated with the City of Raleigh. The Raleigh City
Council agrees with the selection of Alternate A as proposed and the developed mitigation
measures with a few exceptions. The City Council is withholding recommendation of the
installation of the two signals proposed as part of this project and the proposed widening of
the ramp in the northeast quadrant.
The North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) was contacted early in
the planning study process. The SHPO, after reviewing available resource data, recommended
that no historic architectural or archaeological surveys be conducted for this project. It has
been determined that the proposed improvements will have a No Adverse Effect with
environmental commitments on the Glenwood Historic District and on the Five Points
Neighborhood Historic District and a No Adverse Effect on the Jos ephus Daniels House. The
SHPO has concurred in this finding and a letter of concurrence is attached in the Appendix
B (see page B-4).
NC Department of Transportation
[Vake County Bridge Replacement
TIP No. B-3254 B-17