19940024 Ver 1_Complete File_19940110

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
E H N R
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
February 8, 1994
Mr. Barney O'Quinn
N.C. Dept. of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Dear Mr. O'Quinn:
Subject: Proposed fill in Wetlands or Waters
Wiley Davis road reconstruction
Guilford County
DEM Project #94024
Upon review of your request for 401 Water Quality Certification
to place fill material in 1.45 acres of wetlands or waters which are
tributary to Reddick's Creek for relocation of Wiley Davis Road
located at SR 1383 in Guilford County as described in your submittal
dated 6 January 1994, we have determined that the proposed fill can be
covered by General Water Quality Certification No. 2671. A copy of
the General Certification is attached. This Certification may be used
in qualifying for coverage under Corps of Engineers' Nationwide Permit
No. 26.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you, you have the right
to an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30)
days following receipt of this Certification. This request must be in
the form of a written petition conforming to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative
Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. Unless such
demands are made, this Certification shall be final and binding.
1786.
If you have any questions, please contact John Dorney at 919-733-
Sincerely,
'Kn Howard, r. P.E.
94024.1tr !".G'
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Raleigh Field Office
Winston-Salem DEM Regional Office
s ,porn-e, .R;
Central Files
Ed Schwintzer; Land Design
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
MEMORANDUM PRINT NAMES:
Reviecaer : _ T
TO: John Dorney WQ Supv. .: :QA, ,0 ??
Planning Branch DATE: q4QU 3
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
***EACH ITEM MUST BE ANSWERED (USE N/A FOR NOT APPLICABLE) ***
PERMIT YR: 014 PERMIT NO: 0000024 COUNTY: GUILFORD
APPLICANT NAME: NC DOT - RELOCATE SR 1383, (WI EY"',PAVIS)
PROJECT-TYPE: RELOCATE ROAD PART 2 PE?2M,IT-TYPE: NW14/26
COE_# : ??` DOT_#
RCD_FROM-CDA: DOT DATE_FRM_CDA: 01/10/94
REG-OFFICE: WSRO
RIVER-AND-SUB-BASIN-#: CPF 43-D!o
EY_ N;'' 17 - 8 2
STREAM-CLASS: C
WL_IMPACT?: Y&N ? WL_ TYPE: gHD STR
WL_REQUESTED : 1.y5 Acres C EA+Ire ?M ec+ WL_ACR_ EST? : Y N
WL SCORE (#) : CRoss,?6 3 - 2'i•5
- WATER IMPACTED BY FILL?: &N
C(ZO561ub _ yZ
MITIGATION?: Y)ON MITIGATION- TYPE: uflkn6wn
MITIGATION_SIZE:Unknown DID YOU REQUEST ORE
f e P12eiC2 INFO?: Y&N
re5?
+ C aC?C?i+ GnQ{ ?(? Gcre
rc
e
P
c
IS WETLAND RATING SHEET ATTACHED?: )
&N
RECOMMENDATION (Circle One): ISSUE DENY
COMMENTS : 2c wen 5p_d, meal6? 15: n5 (e ?-
?`r`tGC?
G? ec s crrm i? ' e Fv
of

se lva?e?
+

t.?-

sfs
oU'dinq ?f-heSe as ;t\5 c6n?tnue_ --o U5 tua?er

)lace_ *5 prro,Iec± op? '
Qh nrr v" au J\1 At Scu sS?.U t AA Oro,
5
,n(),e t0 h2
cc: Regional Office
Central Files
duft
? ? e v: ws d('-, c use. on s . Tt
i r cI u s ('Ve. A 0?? ; n\pac+s
4e 4o l ;s ? ssu-eO
6? 4e &_Ve(6pMV1\+,
n D 5? 5
IDSS?S
? ?ase
Y ?6r S rAe )PGr
Project name ELGC ?,'l%' ?? t;0?4n 5? X38 3 Nearest road W ?IeU JCty: s
County U L 2 1^'-) Wetland area _•2_ acres Wetland width Z d 6 feet
Name of evaluator L- Nv 1 LL E T A- SA 1*714 Date- 4'--1 a Z 02-
•
.
•
9C6
0
z
z
0
G-
Wetland type (select one) ? Other

? Swamp forest ? Shoreline •
,Q'Bottomiand hardwood forest ? Brackish marsh
? Carolina bay ? Freshwater marsh •
? Pocosin ? Bog/Fen •
? Pine savannah ? Ephemeral wetland
? Wet flat '
The rating system cannot be applied to sait marshes.
sum
.., .t.
Water storage
ili on
-
Bank/Shoreline stab zati
..... x 4.00
Pollutant removal

Sensitive watershed _
x 1.50
Wetland score.
Travel corridor
? Hydroiogicauy connected ? Hydrologically isolated

Project name R LoC , INI- n ROAD 5R F 8.8 Nearest
County r U i L Fo 2 r) Wetland area a
Name of evaluator L 1 NV 1 Ll E, Snn T I l
•
•
•
•
•
•
&S
Wetland type (select one)
0' Other --:)I r-r-'u m ('011-r 1 u? t e •
,
? Swamp forest ? Shoreline '
? Bottomiand hardwood forest ? Brackish marsh
? Carolina bay ? Freshwater marsh •
? Pocosin ? Bog/Fen '
? Pine savannah ? Ephemeral wetland
? Wet flat
•
The rating system cannot be applied to salt marshes. •

Water storage .=f«:sum::.f.
2
Bank/Shoreline stabilization

4.00 -
x •
Pollutant removal

Sensitive watershed
1
50 =
>><>
x
. Wetlan d score.
Travel corridor
.....................
• • • • • • • • • • . 0 • 0 • 0 0 0 • 0 • 0 • • 49 • • • 0 • 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n
c
z
6'
x
0
W
I Wetland width C feet
Date_ 940262
? Hydrologically connected. ? Hydrologically isolated
1

1w-v
MEMORANDUM PRINT NAMES:
Reviewer:-7-9L . r-r-
TO: John DorneY WO Supv. .: N j,?,a s - ??
Planning Bunch DATE: .q40263--
SUBJECT : WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND REr C)WMEi1DAT -1
**EACH ITEM MUST BE ANSWERED (TTSE N/A FOR NOT APPL T CABLE)
PERMIT YR: 94 PERMIT NO: 0000 024 COUNTY: GUILFORD
APPLICANT NAME: NC DOT - RELOCATE SR 1383 (WILEY DAVIS)
PROjEC`I'_TYPE: RELOCATE ROAD PART 2 PERMIT-TYPE: NW14/26
COE_#: lY DOT #:
RCD_FROM _CDA : DOT DATE_FRM_CDA : 01/10'94
R.EG_OFFICE: WSRO°
RIVER-AND-.SUB-BASIN-#: C'P F a 3-
STREAM_CLASS: C
WT-IMPACT-e: &N
WL_REQUESTED : ,y5 Acres C Entire
WL SCORE (#) : CRoss}??6 3 - 2?i 5
cR0561u6 (p yZ
STIJ,'-INDES;_NO: (7- 8- 2_
BN D S??
WL_TYPE:
A WL_ACR_EST? EST?: Y, No
WATER IMPACTED BY FILL?: ?D/N
MITIGATION?: Y,O MITIGATION_TYPE: Uvjkn6wn
MIT, IGATION_SIZE:Unkomwn DID YOU REQUEST ORE INFO?: YY'N
f ereerPhee re5f C? pm)Qc-' C aCQ A,*Ona` (060 acre
IS WETLAND RATING SHEET ATTACHED?: &N
RECOMMENDATION (Circle One): ISSUE ISSUE/COND DENNY
COMMENTS : i .Ucml &,A n5 to e_ le ?- jae?
6? er eel ; 5_ CC, ?e , e- 4-p Gt+ s??- wa?e,
prov"Ain? -? ??es? ?as;ns Co??T?n?? -? nc? ?? ?s (?a?e?
C ?cY, ?r5 -75;nce s Oro`ecnj
hove tea, rev QUJ\1 & Scu sse. Uf? Drop ec? M(??aG ?
(onfdd Ro a6 SPnSP 4-n P.nSure- 4a aool<?ti I n5S?S
nie to he-
cc: Regional Office
Central Files
ev;ous d? s cuss,on s .
iYnCIu5 Ve- A OL1 ;n yacts
4o l ;s ? ssu-eO f?
o? ?e Cl?ve(oP M?-?-.
?, ?IIOS? q
15 ?YIUUI? l7?'

Project name lei ELt C ? ?? ?;a?n 5 X38 3 Nearest road W 11eg D(Av; s d, L ES
County nWetland area_* 4,2 _ acres Wetland width Z? 6 feet
Name of evaluator L I NY' LL A- SM 17" Date_ q Ll 6 Z aZ
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wetland type (select one) ? Other
? Swamp forest ? Shoreline '
,Ia'?'Bottomland hardwood forest ? Brackish marsh ;
? Carolina bay ? Freshwater marsh •
? Pocosin ? Bog/Fen •
? Pine savannah ? Ephemeral wetland
? Wet flat '
The rating system cannot be applied to salt marshes.
sum
Water storage ,
Bank/Shoreline stabilization x 4.00 =
Pollutant removal _I-``<>'<
Sensitive watershed Q <<> >'''' x 1.50 -
Travel corridor
Special ecological attributes
Wildlife habitat x 1.50 =
Aquatic Life value -ti >'< € >
Eu-,
n
?l
C?
Z
C
01-
RecreatioNEducation < ....>'» _
Economic value x 0'25
......................
.....................
....• ....................4?....•...•....•.................
SCORE appir&RS -Fb OF SL l Gf{TL ; t{(GtfE TW 44) LqJOLC ( L Q?
- ? Hydrologically connected ? Hydrologically isolated
Project name EFLOC• I) 1?0AD 76R 13g S Nearest
County CU i L F-o 2 rJ Wetland area .d 2 a
Name of evaluator L 1 NV ?1 SnA \ T 1A
gus.
z-
z
G
w
•
•
•
Wetland type (select one)
? Swamp forest U Shoreline '
? Bottomland hardwood forest ? Brackish marsh ;
? Carolina bay ? Freshwater marsh •
? Pocosin ? Bog/Fen '
? Pine savannah ? Ephemeral wetland
ID Wet flat '
•
The rating system cannot be applied to salt marshes.
2 sum
Water storage
2
stabilization
Bank/Shoreline
4.00
Pollutant removal '
. ....................
Sensitive watershed
x 1.50
etlascore
.
W
Travel corridor 1 .
.
S ecial ecolo ical attributes d ... ........... > g
-

tat i x 1.50 _
i
Wildlife hab
'_>?`<s ?

<>«>>?<?<:
Aquatic life value

Recreation/Education 0
2 - '
Economic value
»>:
......
.......................049 .............. ........ .
ores Wetland width feet
Date. 9"0202-
Q Hydrologically connected ? Hydrologically isolated
FEB-04-1994 07:53 FROM
,. 4

SCU S
WTLDJ P. 0:3
MEMORANDUM PRINT NAMES:
Reviewer:
TO : John Dorney WQ Supv. .: ::-] ?s?c.?
Planning Branch DATE: 407,03
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
***EACH ITEM MUST BE ANSWERED (USE N/A FOR NOT APPLICABLE) **%
PERMIT YR: 94 PERMIT NO: 0000024 COUNTY: GUILFORD
APPLICANT NAME: NC DOT - RELOCATE SR 1383 (WILEY DAVIS)
PROJECT_TYPE: RELOCATE ROAD PART 2 PERMIT_TYPE: NW14/26
COE_#. DOT-#:
RCD_yROK-CDA : DOT DAT£ FRM_CDA : 01/10/91*
REG_OFFICE: WSRO
RIVER?AN SUB_BASTN # : C ?F o3-ot?-OS STR`INDEX_NO: 17- g- 2
STREAM-CLASS : G
WL_1XPACT? : Y&N WL TYPE : DB D J
WL REQUESTED : i AS Acres ( Er,+%,e WL_ACR_EST? : Y AD
WL SCORE (#) Guos?w6 3 2`" WATER IMPACTED BY FILL?: &N
C.903610 r. (O - y Z
MITIGATION?. Y, MITIGATION TYPE: Unknown

MITIGATION? $IZE: UAkn wn DID YOU REQUEST A40RE INFO? : dN
l
' Qr'c0rx Aj;C r c1 i6Z cue
. re+-elehCQ res+ j
IS WETLAND RATING SHEET ATTACHED?: &N
RECOMMENDATION (Circle On e): ISSUE SSUE/COND DENY
COMMENTS : p-f[XnmPn(4
n i
: pr`t 1
" rs
cc:
f, r.,5 Al
It Drtov,'ouslN
???' P SPn52 '
I fo h? r?
n??re
Regional Office
Central Files
i
I
TO
9,5J- lee- Qupt,*y S?,S
) ue T: r,n aS wader
-oor
a'
e ma
- <& OS inx?, cated duil rA 4-it6se.
??eu;a,s d?scuss?ons. ?r??s should( b?. I
i n C t ? S? ue att i rn?gc?5 Q (eSS e whb
i SSA cs? S ??,?-e ?
4e 401 ;S
i
k 4e de.ve (op mlen\+:
TOTAL P.032
FED-04-1994 07:5_3 FROM
To: John Dorney
TO W I LDS Fl. Id2
From:: Ron Linville
Date 940204
Re: Additional Comments
Relocation of SR 1383 Wiley Davis Rd_
duilford County
DEM #940000024
After a further review of the stormwater controls proposed for
this !development and further consideration of the slope at the
proposed crossings, it appears to be unnecessary that the
construction sedimentation basins be left intact. It would appear
to be;in the best long-term interest of these tributaries to-seek
setting and placement of the crossing structures or piping so that
the bibs can return to their pre-existing elevation levels. This
work !could also be accomplished during low flow conditions.
This could reduce sedimentation concerns significantly.
FED-04-1994 07:53 FROM TO WTLDS r.U1
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources
Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section
Winston-Salem Regional Office
TO:
FAX
j -
# of pages FAX #
FROM:
,/ V,/__
NOTE:

8026 Noah Point Blvd., Suite 100, Winston-Salem, NC 27108-3203 • 919-896-7007 • FAX [phone]
f
Lana Desm Inc.
Landscape Architecture Land Planning
Urban Design
January 6, 1994
Mr. John Domey
Water Quality Planning
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental,
Health and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Re: Relocation of Wiley Davis Road (SR 1383) - Guilford County
State Project No. 9.8079816
TIP No. U-3108
Dear Mr. Domey:
This letter serves to transmit our joint application for a nationwide permit from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers and Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Management for the above referenced NCDOT project. This project consists of the
relocation of existing Wiley Davis Road from Vickrey Chapel Road to Groometown Road.
Construction of the project is scheduled to begin in the spring of 1995 with the anticipated completion
scheduled one year later.
Certification is being requested for six (6) roadway crossings along this proposed road. Five (5)
should qualify under NWT #14 for road crossings, and the other under NWP #26 for general wetland
modification. All proposed crossings are located over unnamed tributaries of Reddick's Creek and
were positioned to minimize the amount of wetland fills.
Copies of this application have been sent to Cliff Winefordner at the Wilmington District Corps of
Engineers District Office and to John Thomas at the Raleigh Regulatory Field Office. I want to thank
you in advance for your timely review of this. material; and if you have questions or require additional
information, please contact me at [phone].
Yours truly,
6 VA(-(:iAMkt6"V
Edward M. Schweitzer
Landscape Architect
1701 East Boulevard
P.O. Box 11938
Charlotte, NC 28220-1938
704.333.0325
Fax: [phone]
Offices in
Alexandria, VA & Raleigh, NC
FEB-03-1994 16:25 FROM TO WTLDS P.01
I- i
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources
Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section
Winston-Salem Regional Office
FAX
TO:
FROM:
NOTE:

# of pages FAX #

U E'J
a
8025 North Point Blvd., Suite 100, Winston-Salem, NC 27908-3203 + 919.896-7007 + FAX [phone]
I
FEB-0-3-1994 16:25 FROM l u W I L1J?-;
MEMORANDUM PRINT NAMES:
Reviewer:)
TO: John norney WQ Supv.: J
Planning; Branch DATE: 2_ 03?
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
***EACH ITEM MUST rE ANSWERED (USE N/A FOR NOT APPLICABLE) ***
PERMIT YR: 94 PERMIT NO: 0000024 COUNTY: GUILFORD
APPLICANT NAME: NC DOT - RELOCATE SR 1383 (WILEY DAVIS)
PROJECT TYPE: RELOCATE ROAD PART 2 PERMIT-TYPE: NW14/26
COE_# : DOT_# :
RCD_FRCK_CDA: DOT DATE-FRM_CDA: 01/10/94
REG OFFICE: WSRO
RIVER-AND_SUB-BASIN # : 640F 63-OG- OS STR_INDEX_NO: 1-7-S-2
STREAI_CLASS : C.
WL_IMPACT? : Y&N WL_TYPE : Su D !R
WL_REQUESTED : i AS Aces (Enure Q,?A WL_,ACR-EST ? : YXR)
WL-SCORE (#) : eR055)MG S - 21-1.5 WATER IMPACTED BY FILL?: Y&N
[Q056iu6 (p ?1x
MITIGATION?: Y. NO MITIGATION-TYPE: Urtkrwwn
MITIGATION_SIZE:Unknown DID YOU REQUESTX4ORE INFO?: dN
r2Pace rest ?c?eEr ?GZCpC?i? ?nQt ?oC? Gc,
i5 TvJETLi1iv'D RATING G: T A`----HED?: II&W,
RECOMMENDATION (Circle One): ISSUE TSU?E:/:C0,ND DENY (?
COMMENTS : _eecom?ner,c? Q 1 nS lle (`J
eo 5 C(rYn.nt

?y ? Ss,eS
:eft QS

cc: Regional Office
Central Files
<kT as inoi, cake ouri rA *hose --
?? e_u.ous d('S cuss;ons .. -M,5 skIoulj be
Qdl'?SS 4 r?
i +? Pa_ t-S r ?C,,-
2 ?r0 ? a'
2 401 ;S ; SSu-eC +6 S
I
6? 4e Avef op nne? ,
FEB-037-1994 16:26 FROM TO WTLDJ P. CJJ
Project name Q-QC "LL 2 Nearest road v: s ?e1.
t..ounty t) I LC-6 211 _ Wetland areay . acres Wetland wid feet
Name of evaluator I NV I L-Z-e A ?M -I10 Date_ Q'-I a 2 62
Ru5
h
0
Z
0

Wetland type (select one) C1 other ;
• ? Swamp forest ? Shoreline •
,Q?BOttomiand hardwood forest ? Brackish marsh ;
• ,
U Carolina bay ? Freshwater marsh •
' ? Pocosin ? Bog/Fen •
? Pine savannah ? Ephemeral wetland ;
• ? Wet flat •
The rating system cannot be appli ed to salt marshes. ;
Water storage sum
Bank/Shoreline stabilization Sol
x
4
00
Pollutant removal - . •
.
Sensitive watershed M.'
Travel corridor _
x 1'50 •
Weiland score.
Special ecological attributes 0
Wildlife habitat x 1.50
mr, ZM'
:1 . AG o uatic life value •' %?'?= •
.
Recreation/Education ?.R °-? •
Economic valuex 0.25 ..a`?;?'°m`.' •
.X •
• • • • • • ... • • . • • • . • • • • • • • ..4b • • • • • • • ... • .. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • •
ScoRE RPPBA25 70 $E SL(G1¢7L Y t4(6ifE2 -Ttf4A1 C??E [TCU,
? Hydrologically connected ? Hydrologically Isolated ;
FEB-03-1994 16:218 FROM TO WTLDS P.04
a
0
Z
x
G
t1-
Wetland type (select one) Z- Other :7-) t r_= a rr" r or t-v- t tilt n G .
0 Swamp forest 0 Shoreline
0 Bottomland hardwood forest Q Brackish marsh .
4 Carolina bay Cl Freshwater marsh •
13 El Bo Fen
? Pine savannah ? Ephemeral wetland
0 Wet flat
The rating system cannot be applied to salt marshes.
• w . w w • • • • + • • • i • • • • • • • •
2 • • • • a • .. . • . • • + • • • i • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • •
"m
Water storage .
Bank/Shoreline stabilization 7c 4.00 = 24 ` " •
Pollutant removal ".

Sensitive watershed

1.50 •

tlascore
We
Travel corridor =
M
l
i
l
ib
i
l
t >
om
ra o
attr
u
es
og
ca
Spec
a
eco
Wildlife habi
tzit
x 1.50 -
''O

-?-
Aquatic life value

Recreation/Education ? ?.w<«
2?`1y•Yw' M"= _
'
"""`
Economic value ; •
• • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • w • • 14A • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
TOTAL P.04
Project name - ?,- - C • 1A1" ? Ro19-0 5? 13 $ 3 Nearest road W; E J Nv, s a l 18.E &--,,
County C, U I L 1=020 _ Wetland arm- acres Wetland width P 4 O feet
Nanne of evaluator } NV Ll< ?^n T 1? Date- quo 2 ??
0 Hydrologically connected O Hydrologically isolated
MEMO
TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CIO
I 2t q3-, CO-?-
C
'61 Vt
?NI
From:
STATE q,
i? Qunm ?i
YYU
yw'?
(rd-
Noah Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources ey 9 Printed on Recycled Paper
IMPORTANT
To
Date I Time
RILE YOU WERE OU
M S?hc
of-
Phone V
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
Message
Signed
N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources

MEMO
TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
0?'. Iq-Q S -
OA
)61--
n,074-

6??
?0 V4? '?b'kv

From:
?.?,a. SfAlp o,
` Quw ^ •
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources @? Printed on Recycled Paper
q V661 g
•buTJP8q agq Jo agep agq Oa AOTad
sAep Uanas uugq aeget of 449l.ze0 *AN ZTao Aleut noA 'aousgsTsse
STgq gsanbaa oy •bUTaeaH OTTgnd aqq buTPuagge UT pagssaaquT
uosaad paTgesTp paTJTTenb Aue ao3 sOOTAaas PUP spTe
AaeTTTxne 'suoTgepounuoooe OTgeuoseaa aptnoad TTTM 10aOH
Z60V-OSZ (6T6) aumidaTaq ao TT9LZ OH 'gbtaTeH
'TOZSZ xOQ 'O 'd qe 'H 'd ''af '449aae0 •6' -M 'JH
agTaM Aeut UOT4eutaO3uT TeUOT4Tppe buTaTSap auoAUV
°UMOgsauter 'gaaags UTVH 4se3 TOE 'TTeH uMoy qe pue oaogsuaaa0
'gaaagS 9ITTAA80ueA V89T '90TJJ0 UOTSTATQ s,UOTgegaodsueay 3o
quautgaedea eUTToaeO ggaOH agq qe Matnaa OTTgnd aoj eTgeTTeAe
aae quautssassv Te4uautUOaTAU3 agq go Adoo a pue ubTsap
pue uotgeooT aqq buTMOgs susTd AaeututTTaad 3o qas y
•4oaCoad sTgq Jog paaTnbea aq
TTTM sautoq auras 3o uOTgeoOTaa aqq Pulp AeM 90 ggbTa TeuOTgTpPY
•UOT BOOT Mau Uo PagOnagsuoo aq oq peoa aqq 3o UOTgaod a ggTM
PPOH uM048ut00a0 oq PeoH Tadvgo AaaXoxA moa3 AvAPeoa PapTATp
aueT-ano3 a Og peoH STAeo AOTTM UapTM oq pasodoad sT qI
•goeload sTgq
bUTpaebea squaututoo axeq pue 4 SUOTgsanb aamsuv 'UoT42•?tac-UT
apTAOad oq OTgeTTeAe aq TTTM Tauuosaed sAeMgbTH 90
UOTSTATO •sanoq pagegs anoge aqq usemlaq aouaTUOAUOO aTatiq
ge bUTaeaq sTgq puagge Aleut sTenpTATpuT pagsaaaqul •uMOISOMPr
uT peoH WTOd gbTH T09 qs PageoOT aa4ua0 sndute0 uTTP9H
aqq 3o I IOAOq Uo abaTTOD AgTunututo0 TeOTugOas pa0JTTnq aqq qv
'ut'd 00:8 pue -ut-d 00:5 go sanog aqq uaaMgaq 666T '6T Aaenuer
'AepsaUpaM UO bUTaeaq OTTgnd asnoq uado anoge aqq pTOq
TTTM uotgegaodsueas 3o guautgaedea euTTOasO ggaON aqs
Aquno0 Ps03TTnO 80TE-n 9196LOO.6 gfla?OZd
aVOU NM0S21HOOV9 01 CITOH 'I3cIVHO A3HXOIA HOUJI
QKO*d SIAVa A37IM JO DKIIVO073H MM SHIN3QIM Q3S0d0Ha NO
JNIUVRH OIZHnd 38non N3d0 Kv &0 93ISON
I)

JAMES B. HUNT, JP
GOVERNOR
x _
UF!
FEB -
STATI'OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
February 1, 1994
Mr. G. Wayne Wright, Chief
Regulatory Branch
Wilmington District
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Post Office Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
SAM HUNT
SECRETARY
SUBJECT: Wiley Davis Road (SR 1383), Guilford.County, U-3108,
State Project No. 9.8079816
Dear Mr. Wright:
Reference is made to your letter of January 5, 1994,
regarding our permit application for the relocation of Wiley
Davis Road (SR 1383) in Guilford County. Your letter indicated
that consultation as required by Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act will be necessary.
In that there are no federal funds being utilized on this
highway project, the Corps of Engineers will be the lead federal
agency. We will furnish you with the necessary information for
consulting with the State Historic Preservation Officer.- It -
should be noted that the project is a joint effort between NCDOT
and a private developer. Kimley-Horn and Associates, an
engineering firm, has been employed by the developer and is
responsible for the planning and environmental document.
,b
t? 4
Sincerely,
B O'Quu' n, P.E.
Assista?? Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch
BJO/eah
cc: Mr. William S. Price, Jr.
State Historic Preservation Office
North Carolina Division of
Archives and History
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Mr. John Parker
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. John Dorney
Water Quality Section
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and
Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Mr. Larry Meisner
Kimley-Horn and Associates
Post Office Box 33068
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3068
Mr. John Thomas
Raleigh Field Office
Regulatory Branch
U. S. Army Corps of Engineer
6512 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 105
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609
DEM M: ACTION ID:
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Permit 14 Crossing #1
J 0ET FORM FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Engineers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMI`1GTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLANNWG
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIROMMENTAL MANAGE--vrMq I'
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NC DEP.4RTME.N7 OF ENVIROI
P.O. Box 1890 AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890 P.O. Box 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535 a
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR 101-L N DORNEY JAN I 0 12-94
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD 'BE SENT TO ? C N?Ly-E?S
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SENT' TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF ENVIRO` (.l ALIT 'GENMNT
PLEASE PRINT.
1. Owners Name: North Carolina Department of Transportaion
2. Owners Address: P • 0 . Box 2 5 2 0 1 , R a l e i g h , NC 2 7 61 1
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): (Work(919) 733-7842
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number.
LandDesign, Inc. Kimley-Horn & Assoc., Inc.
P.O.-Box 11938 P.O. Box 33n6p
Ch.arlo.tte,. ANC 28220-1938. Raleigh, NC 27636-3068-
5. Location of work (MUST ATTACH MAP). County: G u i l f o r d
Nearest Town or City: . Greensboro
Specific Location (Include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): Southwest of Greensboro, Exit 120
off I-85, Wiley-Davis Rd-(SR.1383)
6. NarreofClosest StrearVPiver: Reddick's Creek/Deep River
7. River Basin: Cape Fear
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS H? YES [ ] NO- ]
9. Have any Section 404 permits been previously requested for use on this property? YES [ ] NO [X]
If yes, explain.
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
Total within easement: .05 AC
1 I. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled: ± 1950 SF (.04 AN
)
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:

Total Impacted: .04 AC
f
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/2" X 11 " drawings only): R o a d C r o s s i n g # 1
(See Attached Plan) Road Crossing to accommodate relocation of
Wiley Davis Rd (SR 1383)
13. Purpose of proposed work: Planned thoroughfare facility for the State
and City of Greensboro
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimize wetland impacts. M a n a n e m a n t n r a r . t i r e s w i l l he f o l l o w e d to m i n i m i z e
construction impacts. Roadway was located to minimize wetland disturbance
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish'and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed orproposed for listing endangered orthreatened species orcritical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES [X J - NO [ J
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS A.NL D/OR iIFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presen a of historic,
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [ ] NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wedand delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a.stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What is land use of surrounding property?E x i sting u-n d e v e 1 o e d/ r o o s e d mixed use d e v e .
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? N A - -
DE.M M: L?
ACTION ID:
Nationwide P--,-,,,t Requested (Provide Nationwide Pe,,. it T}: 14 Crossing #2
i0I i F ORNI FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of En,, neers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WIL ZX IGTON DISTRICT ENGIYE-'R WATER QUALITY PLALNLVG
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIROivZVMNTAL N1AuYAGEN EMT
DEPARTN ENT OF THE AR.tifY NC DERART.MEV'T OF E. OV,
P.O. Box 1390 AL-D NATURAL. RES OUR 71 W ilrrmin-ton, NC 23402-1890 P.O. Box 29535 2'
ATTW: CESAW CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Telephone [phone] ATTN: MR. JOHN DORRVE JAN 10 1994
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE Sr__ Tr
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SEMI' TO = MC. DIVISION OF E: WSAGL`{•EERS
PLEASE PRlIi -I: G'EtifEi?t'I'
1. Owners Name: North Carolina Department of Transportaion
2. Owners Address: P . 0 . Box 2 5 2 0 1 , R a l e i g h , NC 2 7 61 1
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): (?yor?): [phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number.
LandDesign, Inc. Kimley-Horn & Assoc., Inc.
P.O.-Box 11938 P.O. Box 33068
Ch.arlo.tte,. NC 28220-1938 Raleigh, NC 27636-3068
3 - _
5. Location of work (tifUST ATTACH :MAP). County: G u i l f o r d o
Nearest Town cr City: • Greensboro
Speciric Location (Incline road numbers, Iandmares, etc.): Southwest o f Greensboro , Exit 1 2 0
off I-85, Wiley-Davis Rd-(SR.1383)
6. Naz,.eofClosestSze-aver: Redd ickIs Creek /Deep River
7. River Basin: Cape Fear
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS II? YES [ ] NO 1
9. Have any Section 404 pe,z-,-its been previously requested for use on this propery? YES [ I NO [X]
If yes, explain.
10. Estimated fora! number of acres of wavers of the U.S., including We;I nds, located on project site:
Total within easement: .28 AC
I I. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including we;lands, unpac:ed by the proposed project:
Filled: ± 10 , 460 SF (.24 AC)
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted: .24 AC
12. Description of proposed work- (Attach PLAINS-8 I/2" X 11 " drawin;s only): Road C r n s s i n a /_2.
(See Attached Plan) Road Crossing to accommodate relocation of
Wiley Davis Rd (SR 1383)
13. Purpose of proposedworc: Planned thoroughfare facility for the State
and City of Greensboro
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimize wetland impacts. Roadway was I n c: a t p (i t n a r r o w nni n t to m; n; m; o
wetland disturbance. Management practices will be followed to minimize"
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
i S) re;ardina the presence or any Federally listed orproposed for listing endangered orthreatened species orcritical
habitat in the perr?t irea chat rnayrbe affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES (] NO ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR Nj'YIFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to. contact the State Historic--Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES ( X] NO(
]
RESPONSE FROl&1 THE SILO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEyi:
A. Wetland delineation map showing -II wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project-
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a.stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What is land use of suf. oundinaproperty?E x i sting u•n d e v e l o e d/ r o o s e d mixed use d e v e.
-
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? N/A
Owner's i-naA re ate
DEM•M: -
ACTIOiN ID.
Nationwide Pe.,, "t Requested (Provide Nationwide Pe,-mit T): 14 Crossing #3
j0 N FOR-N11 FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Enm neers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 403 certification
WTL,'vf YGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PL
ANL--T N.
CORPS OF ENGDi EERS .
DIVISION OF EVVIRON PVM

DEPARTMENT OF THE AR.2MY
P.O
Box 1390 .
NC DEPARTMENT OF E:
.
Wilmington, NC 23402-1890 AND NATURAL. RESOURCE
P.O. Box 29535
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E
Telephone [phone] Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
ATTN: MR- JOHN DORNEY
Telephone [phone]
JAN I 0 ;?;.:;
r
TMI L t UALITY SEr
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD -BE SENT TO THE CORPS OF EvGLVEERS.
SEVEN- (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SEMI' TO THE N.C. DIVISION OF EN VIRONME:YTAL yLA.\ TAGEN, fE?yT
PLE.-kS E PRINT.
I Owne-s Name: North Carolina Department of Transportaion
2. Owners Address: P . 0 . Box 2 5 2 0 1 , R a l e i g h , NC 2 7 61 1
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): (Work): [phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone number:
LandDesign, Inc. Kimley-Horn & Assoc., Inc.
P.O.-Box 11938 P.O. Box 33068
Ch.a•rlo.tte, NC 28220-1938 Raleigh, NC 27636-3068
0 0 _
5. Location of work (yfUST ATf_4CH :NLA.P). County: G u i l f o r d
Nearest Town or City: Greensboro
Specit=c Lodatio,n (Include road ;numbers, Izndmarts, ;..Southwest of Greensboro, Exit 120
off I-85, Wiley-Davis Rd -(SR 1383)
6. Nar,-,eof Closest Steanvplver: Reddick's Creek/Deep River
7. River Basin: Cape Fear
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS II? YES [ J NO ]
9. Have any Section 404 per-,nits been prey-,ously requested for use on this property? YES [ J NO [X]
If yes, explain.
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
Total within easement: .34 AC .
11. Nunber of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, Lrnpacted by the proposed project:
Filled: ± 12 , 550 SF (.28 AC)
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Tot- IImpacted: . 28 AC
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 I2" X 1 I" drawings only): Road Crossing #.3
(See Attached Plan) Road Crossing to accommodate relocation of
Wiley Davis Rd (SR 1383)
13. Purpose of proposedworc: Planned thoroughfare facility for the State
and City of Greensboro
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken tominimize wetlandimpacts. Roadway was located at narrow point to minimize
wetland disturbance. Management practices will be followed to minimize •-
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish'and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
i ? S) regarding the presence or any Federally listed or proposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES Q(] - NO [ ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NZIvIFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Histori( Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presents(,- of historic.
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [ ] NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROM TI-E SILO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM2 :
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a.stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What is land use of s=ounding property?E x i sting u-n d e v e 1 o e d/ r o o s e d mixed use d e v e.
-
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? NIA
DE-Nf 1:D: C14Oqq
ACTION ID:
Nationwide Permit Requested (Provide Nationwide Pe.:.tit T): 14 Crossing /E4
jOI 1 F OR-M FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Ena neers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
W L,"YfNGTON DISTRICT ENGZ E^ER WATER QUALITY PLANNLNG
CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIRONS [EINT
DEPARTMENT OF 71M ARMY INC DER-kRT MEV'T OF E: N?F?7ffl
-
-lvJ
RO. Box 1390 AND NATURAL. RES OUR
Wilmington, NC 23402-1390 P.O. Box 29535
ATTZ : CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535 JAN 1
Telephone [phone] ATTN. MR JOHN DORNE
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COti1PLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE Sc: WET Iv r
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SEIN TO T? N.C. DIVISION OF E-VIRONTv E:vGLN?ERS.
PLEASE PRINT 7 i NAG iEyT
I. Owners Name: North Carolina Department of Transportaion
2. Owners Address: P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): (Work): [phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name orr°.sponsible corporate of icial, address, phone number:
LandDesign, Inc. Kimley-Horn & Assoc., Inc.
P.O.-Box 11938 P.O. Box 33068
Charlotte, NC 28220-1938 Raleigh, NC 27636-3068.
0 0 -
5. Location of work (14UST ATTACH MAP). County: G u i I f o r d
Nearest Town or City: . G r e e n s b o r o
Speci'r!? `Location (Include raad,numbe_rs, landrnarc ,etc.) Southwest of Greensboro, Exit 1 2 0
off I-85, Wiley-Davis Rd-(SR.1383)
6. Nacre of Closest, Szea , ver: Redd i ck I s Creek/Deep Ri v e r
7. River Basin: Cape Fear
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS M YES [ J NO J
9. Have any Section 4104 perr..its been previously requested for use on this property? YES [ ] NO [X]
If yes, explain.
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
Total within easement: .13 AC
I I. Number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, irnpacted by the proposed project:
Filled: ± 4 , 300 SF (.1 AC)
Drained:
Fiooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted: .1 AC
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 I2" X 11 " drawings only): Road Cross in q #4
(See Attached Plan) Road Crossing to accommodate relocation of ,
Wiley Davis Rd (SR 1383)
13. Purpose of proposedwor.%-: Planned thoroughfare facility for the State
and City of Greensboro
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to ma imize wetland impacts. Roadway was located at narrow point to m i n i m i 7 P
wetland disturbance. Management practices will be followed to minimize-
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish'and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
i S) regarding the presence or any Federally listed orproposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES [ X] - NO [ ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NiNiIFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic.
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [X ] No[
j
RESPONSE FROM THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM, :
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineadon line.
D. If a.itormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What island use of surrounding property?E x is t i n g u•n d e v e l'o e d/ r o o s e d mixed use d e v e.
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? N A
DE."Yi iD: D
ACTION ID:
Nationwide Pe.,, 't Requested (Provide Nationwide Pe.;nit T): 14 Crossing #5
.COI i FOP.&M FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Ena nears
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
WILMINGTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLA',42, G
CORPS OF ENGLVEERS DIVISION OF ENVIROIv KILTA _rw ;' " "`
DE. ARTINIENT OF TFIE ARMY NC DERA27MEN7 OF E:
P.O. Box 1390 AIVTI) NATUR-4L RE SO W ilrnington, NC 28402-1990 P.O. Box 29535 -
ATTN: CESAW CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626_0535
JAN
I 0 ?? `-
Telephone (919) 25I-4511 ATN: MR JOHN DOR Y
Telephone [phone] WETL Pti?s t, °?' ',
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS COtiIPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD ""BEE S UAM 'r
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOLTL.D BE SENT TO T? N.C. DIVISION OF OLMYMNTAL ?A E:,aNrr_
PLE.-%SE PRINT.
1. Owners Name: North Carolina Department of Transportaion
2. Owners Address: P . 0 . Box 2 5 2 0 1 , R a l e i g h , NC 2 7 61 1
3. Owners Phone Number (Home): (Wor:): [phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate of iciai, address, phone nut:.ber: -
LandDesign, Inc. Kimley-Horn & Assoc., Inc.
P.O.-Box 11938 P.O. Box 33068
Ch.arlatte,.NC 28220-1938 Raleigh, NC 27636-3068
5. Location of work (yfUST ATT_4CH N P). County: G u i l f o r d
Nearest Town or City: • G r e en s b o r o
Specific Location (Include road rtuml ea, Ia.*tdrnar-cs, Southwest of Greensboro, Exit 120
off I-85, Wiley-Davis Rd-(SR.1383)
6. Narreof Closest Strea, ve.: Reddick's Creek/Deep River
7. River Basin: Cape Fear
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS II? YES [ j NO
9. Have any Section 404 pe, --ats been previously requested for use on this property? YES [ ] NO [y]
If yes, expIain.
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of Lhe U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
Total within easement: .13 AC
IL N umber of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, irr.pacted by the proposed project:
Filled: ± 4 , 050 SF (.09 AC)
Drained:
Flooded: -
Excavated:
Total Imoacted: .09 AC
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLANS-8 1/Z" X 11 " drawin(s only): Road Crossing #5,
(See Attached Plan) Road Crossing to accommodate relocation of
Wiley Davis Rd (SR 1383)
13. Purpose of proposedwonk: Planned thoroughfare facility for the State
and City of Greensboro
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note mgasures
taken to minimize wetland impacts. Roadway was located at narrow point to minimize
wetland disturbance. Management practices will be o owe to minimize
nnncfirii?tinn impact
15. You are required to'contact the U.S. Fish'and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
i i S) regarding the presence or any Federally listed or proposed for listing endangered or threatened species or critical
habitat in the perrut area that may be affected by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES J NO [ J
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR NNTS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic-Preservatioa Officer (SHPO) regarding the presence of historic.
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [ X] NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROM THE SPIPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEM:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, streams, and la'.ces on the property.
B. If available, representative photograph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a.itormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What island use of surrounding property?E x is t i n g u'n d e v e l o e d/ r o o s e d mixed use d e v e.
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? N A - -
Owner' iana? e to
DE..N?M:
ACTION ID:
Nat onw•ide Pe.,, ;t Requested (Provide Nationwide Pe.:.rit T): 26 Crossing #6
jOI 1 r 0??1 FOR
Nationwide permits that require notification to the Corps of Enc neers
Nationwide permits that require application for Section 401 certification
W1LyMNCiTON DISTRICT ENGINEER WATER QUALITY PLANNING
CORPS OF ENGIINEERS DIVISION OF ENVIRONI i1r.- %TAGE1?fENT
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NC DERA.RTMEN'I' OF E. 0 VZ', FIE.4 LTH,
P.O. Box 1890 AINT3 NATURAL RESOUR ?-
Wilmington, INC 28402-1890 P.O. Box 29535 = -
ATTN: CESAW-CO-E Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Telephone [phone] A77 N: MR. JOHN DOR JAN 1
Telephone [phone]
ONE (1) COPY OF THIS C01fPLETED APPLICATION SHOULD BE SE- WETLANDS GR _
SEVEN (7) COPIES SHOULD BE SEMI' TO T4iEN.C. DIVISION OF E.vVIROY1VT' , OL4NAG?, .-
PLEASE PRI\1T.
1. Owne:sNare: North Carolina Department of Transportaion
2. Owners Address: P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh-, NC 27611
3. Owners Phone Number (Horne): (wont): .[phone]
4. If Applicable: Agent's name or responsible corporate official, address, phone riurnber:
LandDesign, Inc. Kimley-Horn & Assoc., Inc.
P.O.-Box 11938 P.O. Box 33068
Ch.arto-tte,. ANC 28220-1938 Raleigh, NC 27636-3068
5. Location of work (MUST A T ACH I IvP). County: G u i l f o r d
Nearest Town or City: . Greensboro
Specr4_c Location (Inclu?e?tdad numbers, Iandrn=ks, etcSouthwest of Greensboro, Exit 120
off I-85, Wiley-Davis Rd•(SR 1383)
6. Namne of Closes-, SLLea.*n/River: Redd i c k ' s Creek/Deep R i yer
7. Rive: Basin: Cape F e a r
8. Is this project located in a watershed classified as Trout, SA, HQW, ORW, WS I, or WS II ? YES [ J NO k]
9. Have any Section 404 p e.-rmts been previously requested for use on this property? YES (J NO [XI
If yes, explain.
10. Estimated total number of acres of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, located on project site:
Total within easement: ,88 AC
11. i`iurrlber of ac-es of waters of the U.S., including wetlands, impacted by the proposed project:
Filled: ± 30,900 SF (.70 AC)
Drained:
Flooded:
Excavated:
Total Impacted: .70 AC
V
12. Description of proposed work (Attach PLAINS-8 I/2" X 11 " drawings only): Road Crossing #6
(See Attached Plan) Road Crossing to accommodate relocation of
Wiley Davis Rd (SR 1383)
13. Purpose of proposed work.. Planned thoroughfare facility for the State
and City of Greensboro
14. State reasons why the applicant believes that this activity must be carried out in wetlands. Also, note measures
taken to minimize wetland impacts. Road design criteria for a major thoroughfare
established the centerline. Major road connection with Groometown Roa
wa-s a, datermining factor.
15. You are required to contact the U.S. Fish'and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) regarding the presence or any Federally listed orproposed for listing endangered or threatened species orcritical
habitat in the pernit area that may be affected, by the proposed project. Have you done so? YES [X] - NO [ ]
RESPONSES FROM THE USFWS AND/OR INMFS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
16. You are required to contact the State Historic; -Preservation Officer (SHPO) regar ding the presence of historic.
properties in the permit area which may be affected by the proposed project? Have you done so? YES [ ] NO [ ]
RESPONSE FROivI THE SHPO SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPS.
17. Additional information required by DEyI:
A. Wetland delineation map showing all wetlands, steams, and lakes on the property.
B. If available, representative photo*aph of wetlands to be impacted by project.
C. If delineation was performed by a consultant, include all data sheets relevant to the placement of the
delineation line.
D. If a.stormwater management plan is required for this project, attach copy.
E. What island use of surrounding property?E x is t in g u'n d e v e l o p e d /proposed mixed use d e v e.
N
F. If applicable, what is proposed method of sewage disposal? A - -

Cf) 0
0
D
r
rm

, N
0

F
m
cn
C
?s n a
Z
-G

z
?
z
r
m v
m
V

0
r-
fn
0=0 z0.z?
OD per.
w o0 n -n
2

?z

? =y
z
a HIV
z'

0
z

Z
m rn
-n o
co p o = -n
D i ('? fit- '-a ?c o
i mz =
< I j z
0 n A Z
IC)
Z Z- O I *Y?
. -17
4> I
CA)
- o . o o s VA. 0
10
Iii! EZ ! ft.?. ! ? :? -•i ?; ?\? i7 ? '
Z: 0
;lit ; t tt?t (j Ei N ;. N f
' t ; t i t 'f !
lit t
1E ?t I It III...!!
S ?; '. f• Ir .?f
w 3 1 f E t l ? ---J I ?
: f E z
t: - D ... .. 'E7E fstlllii? r.r•^r ? - ?• I?
© p ;Et
t
IT!
O
?Fj
1
2
cn
n
m
w
0
x

n
m m
v? n
S?
in
? O
(!?
o?
ov' ?
"o ..
co
w ?o =? Z

r, in
z
n co
CO 0
me --?
z ?A-i
o
z
A
0
m
? ? rn
1
a
z /

? ?.
. M
o Z m j

?- v
a I
m

a

O 'L CD_ Ir Ain f
?I
r tI ,
?I1f a
co
s,<
> 1
m
1
I --
? o
? goo

0
T f +
1 co
? rn a
0
m
pv K rr i
/ z
n ?? m Z
m
v
LJ7
0
fI1
n

0
0
0
+0.0.

m
n
c z
v 0
cn -i m )
c
M r
M a
M
v z
v
m
a

i
1
v
A? x
-v -n o m
?0 Zz i
w nc mO
W '0 O = T Z k?
me 5 I
rz =D
o? Dz ?.
W,0o
a
z
o
O; ? f< I
(P N C) D V
z
I? Z x?o
v ;>
P U J' c -mi rn cP Q ?.
0 ?? ? r p S-? ;r
r+f?A D
0 m° Z a
00
r ? m x
N
> ?1(??ONC n
_> 6?0? ooh I
co
No?

I
? ?
ls ?li

?(b
0
0
?o
i
a

Qj
ti C
n" W
a m I

/D
v
m
I D
U) C
? v
?r Rim
r
r<< 1 6) m Z
'? v
7 D
3a1
OL ? ??,C
v O
?C .
UP 17-7
sa ?
? Z D
-n
i
\ I?

m "'

< c U, O ;

o 0 z -i
U3 ,
l
wno-°o

71
Co PO
w
mZ
o -+ >* z
I
C) -< D v
w
?x ? ' l
o -i nr

c', 3
= /r

T
Hs ? G? N

o' ? I
cn

. ? I
F
•?m ? I
m

^ Z O

m
?n
c m
-1 ?.r

r
Z

_
D D "0 1
n Z
,
.? v
ii "
n
v r
m rn
?
m o .
j
N

vt
I
I?
a
rr,
U
l??t ti
o?
l
r?
Vi uj
U _
L

Lp
I Z
L I r
rf

D
\
X
S. ? Z Z
PC 74+ c m
rn D
D
?U3
X ?
2.4 n r?(?? ?? N N

z
STa??+S?L
:pp- I
`??
L 9L 00+5L tL
I.
I
I
- I
I ? I
-4 t:; L d
-57
can L?
1 =
I - -
Sao
"ZIP 13 AR
f _
I f
OLL
I
I
I i
1
I i
f
I
1
I I I
l I
I I I
i 7 I
I I i ;
I I ,
I i
I I
1
I I I I I I
I
1 I
I I
I .
I
- I
I I I
I `
I I
I L
f
f
lit
- I
- I T
i
i I
r, o I ?
m m r s `? , T
-< n I x c
b o r?? I r rC`? m
:tn -n o m 0 V\
o D
?o? o? I 1.1
Sv ?' / oml% Z
w 00 =-n Z Z
o I / v
mZ =D I / N
o -<? / C m
cl),o 4:k
Z ? _ 7Cl a" f f? ? m Z
L '1
o v
Z to 0 D
ol ?0
rF? Xo P
-Tl I W Ol !
S? I N '
I; ooon y 'l
i' 7
v _ f U:
x) ? I k -? s X
rI C y T o m
D
Cl I Z - r? I o p?
4
c z I m
m t? I z
i c m MATCH UNE STA. 110 +00
v z m
m w -.
00+011 601 801 )-o l
-- ! ,
-,0-A L L :31`dOS IV01183A
..O-,09=,.L :31VOS IVINOZ180H
OL m v
\ F c?? \ I ..mom S - o
in r p z
:0 O z-!
m cn
cn w ono. aO -n -n
co
7Q jam, +? rz =z
` ffi QS ?? moo
?? i F U O A
R
(Ja
g. 1 z 'z
r? ? ? / .,10 C m
c'?o ao r
D
m
D
C Z r O .S
Pit r ?` t? i Lr G
r Z D \ \?? P
M N m
D * z (' t
r P OD In
1
?o r-
D a i t v I ` \?
o

Z? I I I 00+021 6Z
_?
? z, I z
t
v
j m C7 2>
,m n? <m
C Z d \. , ` ul o zz z
v j O. M O
L7 w >'u -n O
co 0 , p O s -n
Z 4
c m ? ' mz z>z
m -1 r % o? a
0 Z I C U)?
D r i
r O
o 7, fil
rn r-
Z z z
Cl)
i --. 'y C., Z r
m -i f Z
z
n?
m -.
-v p ??,??? m y 0 p v r
o o
'N
O N m ri.r ..
z .p ? ?,?, cn D rv ?' o
GG ?? \
o.
b
? fib'
L? I 9? i 00+9£1 t2 l
i
i
I ! I
I
I
i
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I ?-
--r
I I I --L
XxyxxA
I
I ;
t
i
r
I '
f I
i 1
I ; I I I
I
.I
' I I
I ,
I
a I ' I ' I
I i 1
I
I
I I
1 ?-
_-?
1 , I
11 Iff-A
I
_ I
I
I
I
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Monica Swihar'
yyl ?(1-?.cU
THROUGH: Boyd DeVaneW
FROM: 4(o/n Ferrell
t
DATE: February 15, 1994
IFM 16 1994
SUBJECT: EA/FONSI, Wiley Davis Rd.
Project # 94-0450
TIP # U-3108
Guilford County
The subject document has been reviewed and the following comments are offered:
1. The impacts to wetlands and waters for this project total 2.43 acres. The majority of
these impacts (2.18 acres) were certified in 1992 during the review of the golf course,
subdivision and conference center which is planned for this area. The relocation and
widening of the road is due to the planned development. Mitigation measures for the
impacts associated with Wiley Davis Road were incorporated into the certification for
the larger project.
2. The DOT should use the recently developed BMP's on channel changes for the
relocation of 500 feet of the UT to Reddick's Creek.
3. Endorsement of the EA/FONSI does not preclude the Division from requesting
minimization of impacts to waters and or wetlands during the review of the 401
certifications that have not been previously approved.
If you have questions concerning these comments I can be contacted at 919/733-1786.
ref-9/wileyea.mem
' Wiley Davis Road
Vickrey Chapel Road to Groometown,Road
' Guilford County
State Project No. 9.8079816
TIP No. U-3108
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1 Division of Highways
In compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information
contact•
.
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
' Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
[phone]
la? `
Da H. ranklin Vick, P.E.
Manager of Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation

71

I

Wiley Davis Road
Vickrey Chapel Road to Groometown Road
Guilford County
State Project No. 9.8079816
TIP No. U-3108
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Documentation Prepared By:
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
9";bm
. Meisner, P.E., AICP
ntal Study Manager
111 r
Y ?.
•??FESSIp?•C?il?`-
..
9435
°oF JA?i •` ?"
For the North Carolina Department of Transportation
James A. Bissett, Jr., P.E., mt Head
Consulting Engineering Unit
IL, to ?- J-\-,
Thomas R. Kendig, Al
Project Manager
1

SUMMARY
1. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Administrative Action,
' Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact.
2. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The following person can be contacted for additional information concerning this action:
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
' Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
[phone]
1
3. ACTIONS REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES
Permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are anticipated to be required under the
provisions of Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of
1972. Permits under Section 404 are anticipated to consist of either Nationwide Permits
No. 26 or General Permit No. 30.
4. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AREA
The project area is located south of the city of Greensboro in Guilford County. The
western terminus is Vickrey Chapel Road at the existing Wiley Davis Road intersection
' and the eastern terminus is Groometown Road at the existing Wiley Davis Road
intersection. The study area consists primarily of undeveloped woodland, with
subdivisions and single-family dwellings primarily concentrated at the project termini.
The undeveloped area has recently been approved for mixed-use development, including
residential, commercial, office, and golf course uses.
The project area contains several streams and creeks, all tributaries of Reddicks Creek.
S-1

? s.
1
PROPOSED PROJECT
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to improve Wiley
Davis Road from Vickrey Chapel Road to Groometown Road in southwest Guilford
County. The improvements involve widening and relocating Wiley Davis Road to a four-
lane divided facility. The length of the project is approximately 2.7 miles. The proposed
project is designated U-3108 and is included in the 1994-2000 NCDOT Transportation
Improvement Program for right-of-way acquisition in Fiscal Year 1994 and construction
in Fiscal Year 1995. NCDOT estimates the cost of the project at $6.7 million, including
$0.9 million for right-of-way and $5.8 million for construction. In addition to U-3108,
the document includes the widening of Vickrey Chapel Road from the US 29-70
interchange to Wiley Davis Road, but not including the interchange itself, with an
estimated cost of $500,000 for construction and $180,000 for right-of-way. Also included
is construction of a small portion of Guilford College Road in the vicinity of the Wiley
DavisNickrey Chapel intersection.
SUMMARY OF BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
Construction of the proposed project will help meet traffic needs and fulfill the goals of
the 1989 Greensboro Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan. Wiley Davis Road is designated
a major thoroughfare between Groometown Road and Vickrey Chapel Road.
Adverse impacts from the proposed project include proximity to residences and minor
wetland encroachment. One residence will be relocated by the roadway. Right-of-way
is required from a property listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
The typical section being considered for Wiley Davis Road and Guilford College Road
is a four-lane divided section. This typical section is required based on projected traffic
volumes. Vickrey Chapel Road is proposed as a five-lane typical section south of Wiley
Davis Road.
S-2

? 9.
A new location alternative proposed by citizens would follow US 29-70 more closely,
tying into Vickrey Chapel Road south of the Wiley Park subdivision. This alternative was
analyzed and subsequently determined not to be feasible because of inadequate spacing
from the interchange at US 29-70 and impact to an historic property.
Other alternatives considered and found not viable were the no-build alternative and
postponement of the proposed project.
BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
An analysis of the potential environmental impacts from the proposed project has
concluded that no significant adverse effects will result to the human or natural
environment from the construction of the proposed improvements to Wiley Davis Road.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
NCDOT agrees to take the National Register listed Stephen Gardner House into
consideration in the development of landscape, lighting, and signage plans for the project
and to provide suitable access to the historic property. Continued coordination with the
N.C. Department of Cultural Resources regarding this property will be required.
S-3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Summary S-1
1. Need for the Proposed Project 1
A. General Description 1
' B.
C. Project Status
Characteristics of Existing Facility 1
1
1. Typical Section Description 1
2. Right-of-way 2
3. Speed Limit 2
4. Access Control 2
5. Degree of Roadside Development 2
6. Intersection Treatment 2
7. Railroad Crossings 2
' 8. Drainage Structures 3
9. Utilities 3
D. Accident Analysis 3
1 E. Traffic Volumes and Level-of-Service 5
F. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community 6
II. Descri ption of the Proposed Project 7
A. General Description 7
B. Summary of the Proposed Project 7
1. Typical Section Description 7
2. Right-of-way 7
3. Bikeways/Sidewalks 7
4. Proposed Design Speed 8
5. Access Control 8
6. Intersection Treatment
7. Drainage Structures 8
8
8. Permits Required 8
' III. Alternatives to the Proposed Project 9
A. No Build Alternative 9
' B. Postponement of the Proposed Project 9
C. Other Alternatives 9
' IV. Social, Economic, and Environmental Impacts 11
A. Social Impact 11
1. Land Use 11
' 2. Neighborhood Impacts 11
3. Relocation of Families and Businesses 11
4. Public Facilities and Services 12
1 B. Economic Impact 12
' i

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page
C. Cultural Resources 13
1. Historic Architectural Resources 13
2. Archaeological Resources 14
D. Environmental Impact 14
1. Vegetation and Wildlife 14
2. Rare and Protected Species 18
3. Wetlands 20
4. Water Quality 23
5. Flood Hazard Evaluation 24
6. Soils 25
7. Farmland 27
8. Traffic Noise Analysis 27
9. Air Quality 32
10. Geology 39
11. Potential Hazardous Material Sites 39
12. Visual Impacts 40
13. Construction Impacts 41
14. Secondary Impacts 42
15. Permits Required 43
16. Geodetic Markers 43
V. Public Involvement 44
VI. Comments and Coordination 46
VII. Finding of No Significant Impact 47
APPENDIX
11

LIST OF FIGURES
Following
Page
Figure 1 Project Location Map 1
Figure 2 Proposed Alignment 1
Figure 3 1989 Greensboro Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan in Study Area 1
Figure 4 Existing and Projected 2010 Traffic Volumes 5
Figure 5 Typical Sections 7
Figure 6 Historic and Potentially Historic Sites 13
Figure 7 Wetlands 21
Figure 8 Streams and Floodplains 24
Figure 9 Ambient Noise Monitoring 30
Figure 10 Proposed Right-of-Way 47
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1 Accident Rate Comparison 4
Table 2 Distribution of Impacts to Vegetative Communities 16
Table 3 Wetland Impact Areas 22
Table 4 Soil Summary 26
Table 5 Typical Sound Levels 28
Table 6 Noise Abatement Criteria 29
Table 7 Summary of Ambient Noise Levels 31
Table 8 Summary of National Ambient Air Quality Standards 34
Table 9 Summary of Air Quality Impacts 38
iii

I. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. General Description
' This report presents the results of a study of proposed improvements to Wiley Davis Road
(see Figures 1 and 2). Wiley Davis Road is proposed to be widened to a four-lane
divided roadway, with a portion of the road to be constructed on new location. A short
piece of future Guilford College Road north of Wiley Davis Road is included in this
' project. The study area begins at Vickrey Chapel Road at the existing Wiley Davis Road
intersection and ends at Groometown Road at the existing Wiley Davis Road intersection,
a distance of approximately 2.7 miles. Other improvements included in this document but
not currently funded are the widening of Vickrey Chapel Road to a five-lane section and
' its realignment to tie to Guilford College Road.
Wiley Davis Road is classified as a major thoroughfare in the 1989 Greensboro Urban
Area Thoroughfare Plan, shown in Figure 3.
' B. Project Status
The project is listed in the 1994-2000 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP) as U-3108. The TIP lists right-of-way acquisition beginning in Fiscal Year 1994
' and construction beginning in Fiscal Year 1995. This funded TIP project includes only
the Wiley Davis Road widening and relocation, turn lanes at Vickrey Chapel and
Groometown Roads, construction of a 500-foot section of Guilford College Road north
of Wiley Davis Road, and realignment of Jarvis Road. The full widening of Vickrey
' Chapel Road is planned as a future project.
' C. Characteristics of Existing Facility
' 1. Typical Section Description
Existing Wiley Davis Road is a two-lane roadway. It is paved from its
' intersection with Groometown Road to just west of Rose Lake Drive. It is also
paved from its intersection with Vickrey Chapel Road east to the bridge at

F

n

u
0

0

O * ?OS 1 4 OScec,
2l 5 erli d Browns Monticello 10 Ilyy**
Summi
Ua e 6 Lake 2`+ 29 ()SS1D
7 6 r
?yc a !Aa?1rFt'? O R ?
Me 1 NS
r ofv Mc? ansvil 1 sonvi
lax E ulltCrdl it {
=College * 1 70 Sedalia
6
' 1 0 1 * 6 8'...
2f 5 t 1022 l Whitse6 At
edHiel 1 i 0? 1
tow j -
0 2
t 1 q Pleasant Garden 6
p Ul ?. e 5 421 Kim
#4 l0 n 6 3 lion
GROOMETOWN RD.
1
1 ?' ??. 11x9 r39a ?s°y'
n?47
URa. 1406 .x0 ^ tP // °O
1383 281 1
p QOM > T
1365
143 ?
a7 - ? .6p
1116
Groometown .53
73 1139 JL ??°
1438 1127
4 29 1129 VICKREY ' 70 M1 a ,p lzu ?
.0 9 06
use 1383 1126
CHAPEL RD. V
° '.10 .Id .10 is
1
:157 M1° 1x7
O O
1223
n ?2 a Oa?,OS 11 125 b
.13
? 1x70
Oa tltrl
.16 1237
444 74 .15 aJ ?M1
1254 1x58 ?.
LZU till 171
1Z
1480 a3 N 1179
WILEY DAMS ROAD 11 Figure
RELOCATION & WIDENING PROJECT LOCATION MAP 1
'?
m
v
a
r
z
rn
z

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I , E
t I `

'41 0
Guilford Colle'g'e . y
Rd. Ext. 40
00
oil
?' + O ?O
From High-Pointe.
.,Urban Area .? '
s T t"
Thoroughfare Plan--••
J ? Ewa _ ? "' `;• :f
)` O
1 t
-N- ..
r , 0 3000
Map source: North Carolina Department of TFansportation Scale Feet
WILEY DAVIS ROAD 1989 GREENSBORO URBAN AREA Figure
RELOCATION & WIDENING THOROUGHFARE PLAN IN STUDY AREA 3

' Reddicks Creek. The central portion of existing Wiley Davis Road (approximately
' 1.7 miles) is gravel and dirt. The paved sections are typically 20 feet wide and
the gravel section is typically 18 to 20 feet wide. Most of the unpaved portion of
the road has been closed and removed from the state road system.
2. Right-of-way
The existing right-of-way width is 60 feet.
3. Speed Limit
' The existing speed limit on Wiley Davis Road on the western paved section is 45
miles per hour. There is no posted speed limit on the eastern paved section or on
the gravel section.
' 4. Access Control
Existing Wiley Davis Road has no control of access.
5. Degree of Roadside Development
' Development along Wiley Davis Road consists of single-family dwellings
primarily located near the intersections at Groometown Road and Vickrey Chapel
' Road. Most of the dwellings at the western end of the project are part of the
Wiley Park subdivision. The central section of the project area is primarily
undeveloped.
1 6. Intersection Treatment
All intersecting roads connect with Wiley Davis Road at-grade and have stop sign
control. Wiley Davis Road has stop sign control at its intersections with
Groometown Road and Vickrey Chapel Road.
7. Railroad Crossings
i There are no railroad crossings in the project area.

L

F
L
8. Drainage Structures
A timber bridge crosses Reddicks Creek. As the remainder of the existing road
follows a ridge line, no other drainage structures exist.
9. Utilities
Overhead power lines parallel the paved portions of existing Wiley Davis Road
on the south side. Most utility poles have been removed from the closed central
portion of the road. A row of high voltage lines run diagonally across the existing
facility from the northwest just east of the Reddicks Creek bridge. In addition, an
underground natural gas line runs east to west across the existing facility parallel
to and just south of Bismark Road. There is no city water or sewer service in the
project area.
D. Accident Analysis
A traffic accident rate analysis was prepared for Wiley Davis Road, Vickrey Chapel Road,
and Groometown Road. The analysis, summarized in Table 1, covers the period from
July 1990 to June 1993. This table indicates the actual accident rates on these roads and
compares them with the average statewide accident rates for similar types of roadways.
-3-

TABLE 1
ACCIDENT RATE COMPARISON
(accident rate per 100 million vehicle miles)
Total
Total Accident
Fatal Fatal
Accident Injury
Accident
Classification Facility Between Accidents Rate A ccidents Rate Rate

' Rural Wiley Davis Road Vickrey Chapel 12 2608.70
secondary Road and 0 0.00 1521.74
route Groometown Road
Vickrey Chapel Wiley Davis Road 8 304.18
Road and US 29-70 0 0.00 76.05
Groometown Road Wiley Davis Road 15 500.00 1 33.33 166.67
and I-85
1992 STATEWIDE AVERAGE (324.2) (2.9) (137.5)
Source: NC Department of Transportation, Traffic Engineering Branch
As shown in the above table the total and injury accident rates on Wiley Davis Road and
Groometown Road are higher than the statewide average for similar facilities. The
extremely high total and injury accident rates on Wiley Davis Road are due primarily to
' single vehicle incidents involving motorists running off of the side of the road, combined
with very low traffic volumes. Also, the high fatal accident rate on Groometown Road
is due to one fatal accident that occurred in June 1993, combined with the short length
of the section being analyzed (less than 0.4 mile).
A new four-lane divided facility would be expected to have a lower accident rate, as
' indicated by the 1992 statewide average rate of 230.3 accidents per 100 million vehicle
miles for four-lane divided urban primary routes with no access control versus the average
rate of 262.5 (per 100 MVM) for two-lane undivided urban primary routes.

1 -4-

7

Ir-,
u

n
`.1

11
E. Traffic Volumes and Level of Service
The existing (1992) average annual daily traffic (AADT) volume on Wiley Davis Road
in the project study area ranges between 100 and 1,400 vehicles per day (VPD). The
1992 AADT volume on Groometown Road in the vicinity of Wiley Davis Road is 7,800
VPD. Vickrey Chapel Road has a 1992 AADT volume of 6,800 VPD in the vicinity of
Wiley Davis Road.
Preliminary traffic forecasts for the year 2010 project an AADT volume of approximately
46,000 VPD on the proposed facility. In the vicinity of Wiley Davis Road, Groometown
Road is projected to have a 2010 AADT volume of 35,800 VPD and Vickrey Chapel
Road is projected to have 43,300 VPD. These projections assume full build-out of the
1,200-acre private planned development adjacent to much of the proposed roadway.
Existing and future traffic volumes are shown on Figure 4.
A detailed analysis was performed to determine level of service (LOS) for the future
traffic conditions. Levels of service are designated with letters from A to F. LOS A
represents the best operating conditions with free flow and virtually no delay. LOS F
represents the worst operating conditions and indicates long queues of traffic tend to form
and delay at intersections exceeds 60 seconds per vehicle. The results of the analysis for
the year 2010 indicate a need for Wiley Davis Road to have six lanes west of
Groometown Road; for Groometown Road to have four lanes north of Wiley Davis Road
and six lanes between Wiley Davis Road and I-85; and for Vickrey Chapel Road to have
six lanes south of Wiley Davis Road. Even with those improvements, level-of-service
would be F at the major intersections. As proposed by NCDOT and programmed in the
TIP, this project is not intended to fully address those projected traffic needs. It does
provide a substantial increase in capacity on Wiley Davis Road that will serve future
growth and development.
-5-
m m m m m m m m m = m m m i = m m r m
r
m
a
O
v
m
O
n
z
v
m
z_
Z
L
N
MONTEVISrq
DR.

:p

. `" P3.
19ddµ7
.
_
ati y r
N ..

O OH am1....
O O 01 °i

` ZC,
NA
p dA m O O
`, aO
I

t::
V
.N
v
a r

'
tlq Ny
n
G
o
o 71

x

tP
c:7 4 I i v

3
L] i. a .S

?
n
m
z

v
x .

°
aq co ,
z
2 ??wo
O
01
N N
tC v ;; <
?
> ?
:
1
p D
m -
O W ? ? CI O a
O O ? ?D
a y
e
+
v
p?
M
~Q,
V
A

PE

m
x_
N
-q
a
z
v
M
m
0
C-
? /
1
m
v
N
O
0
m
a
n
C
O
m
cf)
OO
00
00
00
Mm
mx
o
vi
?O
° < m
ym z
mn 4
m?
G8 m
my
a?
?n
M"n
a2!
r
S
0
E
I
a
W
mW
Z
Z
m
9
9
cl
O O
00
0
SFr
tx-,
Q
y
U) o
C)
,
c
d
c?
O
A
O
O
OD
-+ o . odaapd?
a
o?
pp V
A U,
O O
00
m
a
x"a
av
m m
U
Yd?
YO
c9
cOMFro?
2
10m
v

o?

a ..
vi

? W
N
O N
O
yn
'
(l
c-?
it
' F. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community
This project enhances the safety and general welfare of residents of Guilford County by
providing more travel lanes and a more direct route for the flow of goods, services, and
traffic. The project is expected to enhance economic growth and development in the
project area and favorably affect the local tax base.

l

1 -6-
L?
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
I A. General Description
NCDOT proposes to improve Wiley Davis Road from Groometown Road to Vickrey
Chapel Road in southwest Guilford County along both existing and new right-of-way (see
Figures 2 and 10). The facility will be constructed as a four-lane divided roadway. The
widening of Vickrey Chapel Road to a five-lane roadway is included in this document but
' is not currently funded as part of the Wiley Davis Road project. The length of the project
is approximately 2.7 miles.
B. Summary of the Proposed Project
1. Typical Section Description
' The typical section for Wiley Davis Road and Guilford College Road consists of
two 12-foot lanes in each direction separated by a typical 24-foot raised median.
' The typical section for Vickrey Chapel Road is a five-lane section, with two lanes
in each direction and a two-way left-turn lane. The typical sections are shown in
Figure 5.
2. Right-of-Way
The acquisition of adequate right-of-way to contain the four-lane section is
' proposed. The right-of-way width is to be 100 feet, with additional right-of-way
at intersections and slope easements as necessary.
3. Bikeways/Sidewalks
i Vickrey Chapel Road, Trailwood Drive, and Rockingham Road are designated as
secondary bicycle routes by Guilford County. There are no special
' accommodations required for bicycles on this project as per coordination with the
NCDOT Office of Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation.

1 -7-

w cn
J
J to
ma
:5
ag
cr-
o
1 N to

o
N _ O

O
N
O
N

M
N
` Z
p o
a
I I Z
p
U o
c U
w J
t
j
o
a U j
-ID O? _
U
Q _ w

_ V J U
>11 F}-
wl
b
I
iv ?
o
M I

0 - it
N O
fV
Q ?
0 WD

N a C
3
cr c
m
w
fn Q
at O 9 (n

0
w
z
O
V
V
r
2
W
c
CO)
z
?O
J Q
3O,
w
cc

1
4. Proposed Design Speed
The design speed for the proposed roadway will be 50 miles per hour. The
anticipated posted speed limit is 45 miles per hour.
5. Access Control
No control of access is proposed for this project.
6. Intersection Treatment
All intersections will be at-grade, with stop sign control for intersecting side
streets. Based on future projected traffic volumes, signalization will be warranted
at the intersections of Wiley Davis Road with Groometown Road and Vickrey
Chapel Road. In addition, future signalization may be required at other locations
as dictated by future development traffic.
7. Drainage Structures
The existing bridge at Reddicks Creek is proposed to be replaced with a box
culvert.
8. Permits Required
Permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be required for all stream
crossings. Most of these permits are anticipated to fall under the Nationwide
Permit 26; however, General Permit 30 may be required for the Reddicks Creek
crossing.
-8-

III. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. No Build Alternative
The "no build" alternative would avoid some negative impacts of the proposed project,
such as the disruption of the natural environment by the use of additional land for
roadway purposes. However, benefits of the proposed action, such as providing a more
direct route for the flow of traffic, increased safety, user cost savings, and completion of
a major thoroughfare, would not be realized. The long-term benefits resulting from the
construction of the proposed project -- including increased accessibility, enhanced
economic development, and provision of a more efficient route -- would more than
compensate for any unavoidable adverse impacts.
B.
C.
Postponement of the Proposed Project
Postponement would delay the effects of any negative impacts, but it would also delay
positive impacts from improvement of this road and accommodating traffic from planned
development. The project would also be more difficult to construct in the future as
development within the project area increases.
Other Alternatives
An alignment alternative was proposed by several citizens who attended the public
workshop on this project. That alternative would continue west on new alignment along
US 29-70, south of the Wiley Park subdivision, tying into Vickrey Chapel Road opposite
Fallingbrooks Drive. The alternative alignment is shown in Figure 2.
This alignment was investigated and determined not to be feasible for three reasons:
1. Projected traffic volumes on Wiley Davis Road, Vickrey Chapel Road, and the US
29-70 ramps indicate the need for at least 900 feet of storage between Wiley Davis
Road and the westbound off-ramp from US 29-70. Fallingbrooks Drive is only
600 feet from the ramp, while existing Wiley Davis Road is 1,700 feet from the
-9-

0

0

ramp. Locating Wiley Davis Road 900 feet from the ramp would place it in the
middle of the Wiley Park subdivision.
2. The proposed alignment would have a more severe impact on the Gardner House
and Farm, listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) prefers widening on existing alignment to minimize
impacts to the historic site. The proposed alignment would also impact other
property on Vickrey Chapel Road identified by SHPO as eligible for the National
Register.
3. A crossing of Reddicks Creek near US 29-70 would cross a much wider floodplain
and would have a greater wetland impact than the proposed widening.
Additionally, building more of the road on new location would cost more to build, would
destroy more natural habitat, and would impact residents of Kacia Court, Tarkington
Drive, and Newkirk Drive.
-10-

IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
A. Social Impact
1. Land Use
Existing land use in the project vicinity includes residential development west of
Reddicks Creek, and a few homes just west of Groometown Road. The majority
' of the project area is currently being developed as a 1,200-acre mixed-use
development, in accordance with County and City growth policy. This project is
' consistent with those development plans.
' 2. Neighborhood Impacts
Several residences in the Wiley Park subdivision (see Figure 2) that front existing
Wiley Davis Road will have some property taken as right-of-way for the proposed
project. The alignment in this area is being designed to mitigate impacts on
' residences on both sides of the existing road and no houses in this subdivision will
be taken. Consequently, the neighborhood's integrity will not be affected by the
project.
' Two other small neighborhoods (one on the east end of existing Wiley Davis Road
and one on Jarvis Road) will be affected by their proximity to the proposed
project. Some land will be taken as right-of-way from the homes fronting existing
Wiley Davis Road and Jarvis Road is planned to be extended through to proposed
' Wiley Davis Road. No residences in these areas will be taken by the proposed
proj ect.
3. Relocation of Families and Businesses
' The proposed project will require the relocation of one residence on the north side
of Wiley Davis Road near Vickrey Chapel Road. No businesses or institutions
will be relocated.

I
' 4. Public Facilities and Services
There are no schools, churches, fire stations, or police stations located in the
' immediate vicinity of the project. Ragsdale High School, Jamestown Middle
School, and Millis Elementary School are all located off Vickrey Chapel Road
north of the project, while Guilford Technical Community College is located off
High Point Road north of Vickrey Chapel Road.
B. Economic Impact
Construction of the proposed project would have both short-term and long-term economic
impacts. In the short-term, the local economy would be affected by providing
employment to contractors and workers during the construction period, resulting in
additional income-generation. Also in the short-term, due to right-of-way requirements,
some parcels of land will be removed from the real property tax rolls.
On a long-term basis, the proposed project would provide increased access through
previously undeveloped land in the central portion of the project location. This access is
necessary for a planned 1,200-acre mixed-use development that has been approved by the
City of Greensboro. This development alone is projected to create approximately 14,000
permanent jobs at full build-out, as well as creating about 13,000 construction jobs
through build-out. It would also have a major positive impact on the local tax base
through the generation of property, sales, hospitality, and income taxes. In addition, the
value of other land in the area will be enhanced by the development potential. After
' development, the real property values would increase.
As part of the region's traffic network, the proposed project will have a positive impact
on the overall local economy. The flow of goods and services, as well as traffic flow,
will be enhanced by the proposed project. Users will benefit from reduced travel time
and reduced congestion. In particular, this project will serve traffic generated by the
' approved development mentioned above. As previously stated, no businesses will be
relocated.
' -12-

I C.
0

F

E

E

Cultural Resources
1. Historic Architectural Resources
This project is subject to review pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 121-
12(a) which requires that if a state action will have an adverse effect upon a
property listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the North Carolina
Historical Commission will be given an opportunity to comment.
The area of potential effect of the subject project was delineated, and this area was
then reviewed for the presence of properties listed in the National Register and any
other important properties. The Stephen Gardner House and Mine Site is the only
property in this area listed in the National Register (see Figure 6). The Stephen
Gardner House, along with the Gardner Hill Gold Mine Site, was listed in the
National Register is 1974. The ca. 1827 house is an architecturally significant
two-story brick dwelling with an unusual arch-linked double chimney, a modified
Quaker plan, and Federal-style detailing. Along the drive northwest of the house
are a brick spring house and a log loom room. The house is historically
significant for its association with the Gardner Hill Gold Mine, a highly profitable
gold mine during the mid-nineteenth century which later operated as a copper
mine, located northeast of the house. The alignment in the vicinity of this historic
property has been refined to reduce impact to the property while balancing that
impact with damage to residential property on the north side of Wiley Davis Road.
During a meeting held on October 4, 1993 between the NCDOT and the North
Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, it was determined that the project as
proposed would have an adverse effect on the Stephen Gardner House. As
mitigative measures, it was agreed that the NCDOT would take the historic
property into consideration in the development of landscape, lighting, and signage
plans and provide suitable access to the property.
-13-

C
m
a
O
v
m
r-
0
a
O
Z
s?
m
Az
iI
U)
O
n
Z
v
z
a
r
cn
O
vs m
e
'o

.
N 3d?D r ? ?l ??
r

'? u1

_
-? A wvYlrSi
O
O
... ,.., n 0-4 C
?
? .• r;? 0
y'{i
tr .f')
G c
C
- Z -q M
ME: v m

._-, v
L
z?.
Ny(ipWlitlA m m C)
0 rw
O
MONT -'
STA y p
0 woo
CT. ,1 t:.i ii N
9 Q s9 N O

G
°?

r `
pp3N
,O VA m
V 09
x m
F9

` ' o A30;...
G
p rD
o n
o A O

?9

DR.

O l m-:
??
m p --
m 3
z

v
fq4
Z , , •
/?

8 -i
y O a .
S'wrr'rir'ariy --------------
9
'em.
0!

m t

W D m
i
'
Z of

0
x
m
.x°
m
co
z
? o
a O
r
y
-Ab
N O
0 O
O
?rZ?s
A
O
O
O Nspdt1
dp d
' Z
O mi
z m
` a
M zoz'
?a
a.
o mz
mm rn r, m
c O -? v
N
000
` m
0 -+ n m
5via
O
D
` v
CHOO
1f?cTO`L
N
Y?
?ftftw
m
i
O
a
0
C_'1
L
D
N
O .:
0
?o
mm
a
Ny
Rp
9
.
.?
m
-qCD
0
o
A
SOUrh
z
z
CT
.Rp YtlO 3nj1

C
Willi
Th
G
Wil
H
e
am
.
ey
ouse on Vickrey Chapel Road is considered potentially
' eligible for the National Register. The alignment in the vicinity of this historic
property, although not covered by GS 121-12(a), has nevertheless been refined to
' reduce impact to the property.
' 2. Archaeological Resources
An examination of the archaeological site files at the Office of State Archaeology
' and review of a recent archaeological study indicate the presence of archaeological
sites listed in the National Register within the proposed project area. The Gardner
' Hill Gold Mine remains include an old mine shaft and a kiln that are included
within the Stephen Gardner House and Mine Site National Register boundaries and
' that are judged to be important contributing elements. Both of these sites are over
1,500 feet from the proposed project and will not be affected by it.
D. Environmental Impact
1. Vegetation and Wildlife
a. Plant Communities

u

0
H

The distribution of plant communities throughout the project area is a result of
topographic positioning, climate, soil characteristics, hydrologic influences, and
past or present land use practices. Many of the plant communities along the
project corridor have been disturbed and modified by urban changes to the
surrounding landscape. The remaining undisturbed forested tracts serve as natural
buffers between I-85 and adjacent residential development.
Four community types were identified within the project area through the
interpretation of aerial photography and data collected during field reconnaissance
in September, 1993. The communities identified include hardwood forest, mixed
pine and hardwood forest, riparian forest, and urban/disturbed lands. Wetland
-14-

' habitats, which comprise a small percentage of the project area, are discussed
separately in Section C.3.
' Hardwood Forests
Upland hardwood forest usually occur in more mesic conditions adjacent to upland
' mixed forest. Sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) white oak (Quercus alba),
post oak (Q. stellata), red maple (Acer rubrum), and red cedar (Juniperus
' virginiana) dominate the forest canopy.
' Understory composition of the forested community includes saplings of overstory
species as well as flowering dogwood (Cornus florida), redbud (Cercis
' canadensis), and yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera). Groundcover species
include Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), blackberry (Rubus spp. ), and
green brier (Smilax rotundifolia).
Mixed Pine and Hardwood Forest
The upland mixed forest has vegetative characteristics similar to the upland
hardwood forest community which it precedes in development. This is the most
common vegetative community in the project area. Loblolly (Pinus taeda) and
' short-leaf pine (Pinus echinata) are present in various amounts and share the
canopy dominance with the hardwood species listed above. Typically, well-
developed pine-hardwood forest represent later successional stages of a pine forest
in which pines are becoming less common.
Riparian Forest
Riparian forest are present along the steep banks adjacent to Reddicks Creek. This
community is subject to seasonal inundation and supports a canopy of hardwood
species such as green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), yellow poplar, and sweet-gum.
The subcanopy includes such species as red maple and sycamore (Platanus
' occidentalis). Groundcover includes smilax, blackberry, Japanese honeysuckle,
' and poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans).
-15-

Urban/Disturbed
Communities identified as urban/disturbed lands include residential areas, utility
corridors, existing roads, and other natural areas that have been cleared for
1 development. The majority of vegetation within these areas has been removed or
altered by human activity. Maintained grass areas adjacent to residential houses
' and roadside right-of-ways are also included in this category.
' Many disturbed areas, particularly residential sites, are heavily vegetated with
introduced ornamental species. Native pine and hardwood species are often
' incorporated into landscaped areas.
Impacts to vegetative communities associated with the proposed widening and
relocation of the road would consist primarily of habitat modifications resulting
from clearing, cut and fill, paving, and the creation of borrow areas. The impacts
to the vegetative communities were quantified based on the proposed right-of-way
' widths for the alternative. These impacts were derived using 1 "=200' scale blue-
line aerials which contained vegetational borders and other landmarks to measure
the habitat areas. Table 2 shows the distribution of impacts to each habitat group.
TABLE 2
' DISTRIBUTION OF IMPACTS TO VEGETATIVE COMMUNI'T'IES
Community Type < Acreage of Impact
Hardwood Forest 7.5
Mixed Pine and Hardwood Forest 17.7
' Riparian Forest 0.3
Urban/Disturbed Lands 17.4

7
L
LII
F

11

b. Animal Communities
The upland hardwood and mixed forest are the most extensive vegetative
communities in the project area. These upland forests provide food, shelter, and
nesting resources for a relatively diverse population of wildlife. These areas are
particularly conducive to woodland wildlife when located adjacent to agricultural
fields, successional areas and open fields.
Animal life characteristic of these habitats includes mammal species such as the
gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus),
eastern cottontail (Sylvilgus floridanus), raccoon (Procyon lotor) and the opposum
(Didelphis marsupialis). Nesting bird species typically occurring in these upland
forests include the wood thrush (Hylocichia mustelina), red-eye vireo (Vireo
olivaceous), tufted titmouse (Parus bicolor), and the pine warbler (Dendroica
pinus). Other common bird species include the cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis),
common flicker (Colaptes auratus), bluejay (Cyanocitta cristata), quail (Colinus
virginianus), downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), and the common crow
(Corvus brachyrhynchos).
Wildlife diversity and populations are typically high in riparian forest
communities. Mammals such as beaver (Castor canadensis) and muskrat (Ondatra
zibethicus) may be somewhat limited to this habitat, whereas racoons (Procyon
' lotor) and the southeastern shrew (Sorex longirostris) may utilize the area as part
of their home range.
Reddicks Creek and Jenny Branch provide aquatic habitats which may support
populations of fish, amphibians and invertebrates. The distribution of aquatic
organisms, including both fishes and invertebrates, is dependent on stream
characteristics such as flow, riffles and pools, substrate type and water quality.
Fish species typically found in the project area include catfish (Ictalurus spp.),
largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), bluegill and other sunfish (Lepomis

L

?J

1

2
spp. ), carp (Cyprinus carpio), and various other minnow species (Gambusia affinis,
Notropis spp., and Catostomus spp. ).
Amphibious species such as the bullfrog (Rana catesbania), green frog (R.
clamitans), American toad (Bufo americanus), and the mudpuppy (Necturus
maculosus) are dependent on waters of creeks, streams, and ponds where they
either permanently reside or use the aquatic environment for breeding habitat.
Reptile species such as snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), sliders (Chrysemys
spp. ), and water snakes (Natrix spp.) rely upon aquatic habitat for food and
shelter.
Rare and Protected Species
The methodology employed in the identification of suitable habitat for the Federal
and State listed candidate species for Guilford County consisted of a literature
review, coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP), and field reconnaissance of
the project area.
a. Federally Listed Species
Federally protected plant and animal species with Endangered (E) or Threatened
(T) status receive protection under the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973.
Records maintained by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (listing revised May
18, 1993) indicate no known endangered or threatened species with ranges which
extend through Guilford County. However, the following Category 2 candidate
species are known to occur in Guilford County:
Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula)
Greensboro burrowing crayfish (Cambarus catagius)
-18-

11

11

Candidate species are those which may in the future be considered for listing as
endangered or threatened. Category 2 candidates are those species for which
information substantial enough to support listing is unavailable. These candidate
species are not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act or any of its
provisions until they are formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered.
Although these species are not granted legal protection, consideration of them in
the development of a project is encouraged.
Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula) is a low colonial shrub known chiefly from the
Piedmont physiographic province of the southeastern United States. Its natural
range extends from south Virginia, through the Piedmont region of North Carolina,
South Carolina, Georgia and eastern Alabama (Horn and Kral, 1984). The shrub
has simple, lanceolate leaves and small, yellow-green flowers. The species flowers
in April and May with fruits (drupes) being produced in July (Kral, 1983). Plants
are generally found in successional, dry, open upland forest of mixed hardwood
and pine.
The North Carolina Heritage Program data base has no records of occurrences of
this species within the project area, or areas surrounding the project corridor.
Nestronia was not observed during recent on-site investigations.
Another Category 2 candidate species, the Greensboro burrowing crayfish
(Cambarus catagius) has been reported in the vicinity of East Whittington Street
in southeastern Greensboro, Guilford County. This species is dark brown with
greenish-tan chelae (pinkish underneath) with orange fingertips. The carapace
length of adults is approximately 30 millimeters (mm) with the total length of the
species being approximately 55 mm (Natural Heritage Program records). Little
information is known about the species habitat requirements, life cycle or
distributional patterns.
11
1 -19-

The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database has no records of
occurrences of this species within the project area or areas surrounding the project
corridor. Although no specific survey was conducted for this burrowing species,
' the presence of this species within the project area is unlikely due to its limited
population distribution and lack of recent occurrence.
' b. State Listed Species
Species of mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and plants with the North
Carolina status of Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC)
receive limited protection under the North Carolina Endangered Species Act and
the North Carolina Plant Protection Act of 1979.
I Both Nestronia and the Greensboro burrowing crayfish are classified as
I Significantly Rare (SR) species by the State. "Significantly Rare" designations
indicate rarity and the need for population monitoring and conservation action.
' These species are not protected by the State's Endangered Species Act or Plant
Protection Act. As previously discussed, the occurrence of these species within
' the project area is unlikely.
' 3. Wetlands
Wetlands are defined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (33 CFR 328.3) as:
' "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at
a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for
life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps,
marshes, bogs and similar areas."
In accordance with this definition, wetlands must possess three essential
parameters: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and evidence of wetland
hydrology (COE Wetlands Delineation Manual, 1987).
' -20-
" r r r ¦r M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
C
m
A
Cl)
O
v
M
O
a
0
Z
v
m
z
c
i
a
v
M
n
M
M
Cl)
Z
v
z
G)
a
M
Cl)
0
M
's
E -4

g
( 71
u
D
Z
O
o'
-mow
x
z
G J
MONTEVI N
.:..;?r.srn v
9 OR.

Q

9
m
r
M
O
z
M
A
N o
0 0
0
0
0
W
0
0
r?

dl?Ti 1?a. 'l5
i 10 VIOVH
venomous
??Il\ naive
?\ I
J
J K
> n

fa
n

r7 ?p
i m° ,
2 I {
'.

/ '
t
Z 1
l

j n
o
'Pm
O
x
x
m 9
5p ? I

i -n
-? C
O -?
vM
M
n
O
r
r
O
M
M
D l

O
mp
0
OM
a
ROCk/NGNgMHp S x .a2?pp?
.?
mpp'
??CREEK y?
1 ? r
/ 1 0
I \?
` f mrm
rm0
?..\ p00
m
p N v wi?Fr \
z 40
m \ , D \
v
vy
/ ny \
C.
dp dN?pdN` \ /

m
f

i'
Cry
Cry
Y
o
m

x
0
0
i a
0
1
a
xN
mm
some mom.mmmm? Cl
?I
\ S
O ..
0
C.]

H

?I

i

1

11
17
Table 3 lists the map reference number for each wetland site as shown on Figure
7 and the area impacted at these sites. An electronic planimeter was used to
calculate the impact areas based upon the construction limits of the proposed
roadway.
TABLE 3
WETLAND IMPACT AREAS
Wetland Acres
Site Number Wetland Location Impacted Permit Issued
W-1 Reddicks Creek 0.15 Not Yet
W-2 UT to Reddicks Creek 0.24 NWP#14
W-3 UT to Jenny Branch 0.24 NWP#14
W-4 UT to Reddicks Creek 0.25 NWP#14
W-5 UT to Reddicks Creek 0.79 NWP#14
W-6 UT to Reddicks Creek 0.30 NWP#14
W-7 UT to Reddicks Creek 0.13 NWP#14
W-8 UT to Jenny Branch 0.23 NWP#14
W-9 UT to Reddicks Creek 0.10 Not Yet
* UT = Unnamed Tributary a 3 A?
NWP = Nationwide Permit
In accordance with Executive Order 11990, this project has been designed to avoid
new construction in wetlands to the extent possible, and employ all practical
measures to minimize or mitigate impacts to wetlands. Measures have been
employed in the initial planning of the proposed alternatives to minimize potential
impacts through route location (avoidance), design (i.e. use of bridge crossings
instead of fill embankment), and construction practices. Where wetland crossings
are unavoidable, the proposed alternative crosses the wetland sites at their
narrowest point to minimize impacts.
Minor alignment shifts may also be possible in the final design stages of the
project to further reduce wetland impacts.
-22-
1

1?
I?

77
u

1
4. Water Quality
The Wiley-Davis project area is drained by two tributary watersheds to the Deep
River: 1) Reddicks Creek and 2) Jenny Branch. These drainage systems are part
of the larger Cape Fear River basin.
Both Reddicks Creek and Jenny Branch are classified as Class "C" tributaries
(N.C. Division of Environmental Management, 1993), indicating suitability for fish
and wildlife propagation, secondary recreation, agriculture, and other uses
requiring waters of lower quality. The DEM classifications are based upon
existing or contemplated best uses for various stream segments. There are no
major point source dischargers (>0.05 mgd) into any segments of these creeks
(N.C. Division of Environmental Management, 1988). In addition, no biological
sampling locations have been established for these creeks. However, in 1988,
Richland Creek, located south of the project area received a biological
classification of poor. Biological classifications are based on the survey results of
the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN). BMAN results are
available for certain water basins throughout the state and are useful for assessing
long-term changes in water quality. The rating scale for biological classification
includes poor, fair, good/fair, good and excellent.
Reddicks Creek, a tributary to the Deep River, flows in a north-south direction
within the project area. The stream bed is approximately 20 feet wide, average
depth at the time of field reconnaissance was 6-12 inches with a sandy substrate.
A culvert crossing of the creek is planned as part of the roadway improvement.
Jenny Branch, a tributary that confluences with Reddicks Creek south of the
' project area, flows in a northeast to southwest direction in the project area. Six
road crossings are planned for this creek and its associated tributaries.

1

11

I!
5
While Reddicks Creek and Jenny Branch are part of the Randleman Dam
Watershed, their watershed is not within the Watershed Critical Area. Vickrey
Chapel Road forms the outer edge of the Tier 4 critical area.
Design measures to protect water quality are similar to measures taken to protect
wetlands. Design measures for protection of water quality in roadway design can
include minimizing the number of stream crossings, crossing streams at their
narrowest segments as close to perpendicular as practical, maximizing the distance
between the stream and the road, and avoiding public water supplies and high
quality aquatic habitats.
Construction practices should also include sedimentation control measures such as
berms, dikes, dams, silt basins and silt fences. Best management practices should
be incorporated during all phases of construction to avoid adversely impacting the
water quality in or near the study area. In addition to potential increases in
turbidity, stormwater runoff from roads may present additional impacts on surface
water quality. Runoff from roads may contain heavy metal loadings, high
dissolved and particulate matter, oil and grease. Management measures such as
vegetative controls (grass swales), detention/infiltration basins, and retention of
wetland vegetation are often effective in reducing pollutants in stormwater runoff.
Flood Hazard Evaluation
Guilford County is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program.
Figure 8 shows the floodplain impact of the proposed project. The impacts are
based on a draft version of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
floodplain maps. The proposed alignment will involve 0.15 acres of floodplain.
The proposed action will be designed such that the floodway will carry the 100-
year flood without increasing the flood water elevation more than one foot at any
given point. The dimensions of the drainage structures and the roadway grades
-24-

D
m
a
V/
O
v
m
r-
0
a
0
z
RO
v
z
.z)
GI
m
/a
Cl)
a
v
0
v
r
a
z
'o
E m

?9 DP. 1

l N

Db 1addND 1 n ?•%J
N 3tltllfl?l ' ano
wou"alw

-r
aso
y.? ', 10 vlov
Z '? 11
y
M ? ?
V
4
°
v
• ` m
HS(1 THY
O `
z 0? .,
m

?tt1tNM??
d4 c=' ? zo: ? S
G

z
? ?_ ? ??w0op o I

E
A
I u %(
N
m
0
c
m
S
o
o
? m
x
n
'i lI
V?
c
cl)
0
S?-?--3!MMI
A
O
0
C dN`

mrm
s ?M
m
ONE
ZZc \ ` Z o
` v
92
s

09
.o
O
m
c

J
mg
0
5067
cT
l ? / 'u 1
1 ?
Q?S
9p
?'<FY o
j ?.
x
0
x
O
L.- D
L '1
D
1
t-
O '

O SDN
mm

I

will be adjusted and designed to avoid increasing the flood hazard in the project
area. The project will be coordinated with appropriate state and local officials and
FEMA to assure compliance with FEMA, state, and local floodway regulations.
6. Soils
Soil formation and characterization result from a combination of biological and
geological activity along with the topographic positioning of an area. The soils
within the project area are characterized by two soil associations: 1) the Enon-
Mecklenburg association consists of gently sloping, well drained upland soils with
a sandy/clay loam subsoil. This is the dominant association within the project
area; 2) the Wilkes-Enon association consists of steep sloping, well drained upland
soils with a sandy/clay loam subsoil. This association is concentrated along the
western portion of the project area.
Eight soil series from these major associations were identified in the project area
(USDA 1977). Characteristics of these soil series are summarized in Table 4.
' Typical non-hydric series include Cecil, Enon, Mecklenburg, and Wilkes.
I A hydric soil is one that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the
growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (USDA, 1991).
Such soils typically support the growth of hydrophytic vegetation. No soils that
are classified as hydric by the Guilford County Soil Conservation Service are
' located in the project area; however, Chewacla sandy loam may have hydric soil
inclusions. This soil unit is concentrated within the channel limits and floodplains
bordering Reddicks Creek.
In addition, Cecil sandy clay loam, Enon fine sandy loam (2-6%) and
Mecklenburg sandy clay loam are classified by the Soil Conservation Service as
prime farmland soils.

-25-

L

I?
J

'I
TABLE 4
SOIL SUMMARY
Map Unit Soil `>.Series % Slope General Characteristics
Ce132 Cecil sandy clay loam 2-6% Well drained, located on broad upland ridges.
Moderate permeability and water capacity.
Slope, erosion, runoff and permeability are the
main limitations.
Ch Chewacla sandy loam 0-2% Poorly drained, level, located in flat areas
parallel to major streams or floodplains.
Moderate permeability and water capacity.
Frequently flooded for brief periods.
EnB Enon fine sandy loam 2-6% Well drained, located on broad, smooth upland
interstream divides. Slow permeability and low
water capacity. Slope, runoff, high shrink-
swell potential, and slow permeability are the
main limitations.
EnC Enon fine sandy loam 6-10% Well drained, located on long, narrow upland
side slopes. Slow permeability and low water
capacity. Slope, runoff, erosion, high shrink-
swell potential and slow permeability are the
main limitations.
EnD Enon fine sandy loam 10-15% Well drained, located in long, narrow upland
side slopes. Slow permeability and low water
capacity. Slope, runoff, erosion, slow
permeability and high shrink swell potential are
the main limitations.
MhB2 Mecklenburg sandy 2-6% Well-drained, located on broad, smooth upland
clay loam interstream divides. Slow permeability and
medium water capacity. Slope, runoff, erosion
and slow permeability are the main limitations.
WkD Wilkes sandy loam 10-15% Well-drained, located on long side slopes that
commonly border drainageways. Moderately
slow permeability and very low water capacity.
Slope, runoff, erosion and depth to rock are the
main limitations.
-26-

1

n

TAB:
SOIL. SU,
Map Unit Soil Series % Slope
,J 4
MARY
General Characteristics
WkE Wilkes sandy loam 15-45% Well-drained, located on side slopes adjacent to
7. Farmlands
major drainageways. Moderately slow
permeability and low water capacity. Slopes,
runoff, erosion and depth to bedrock are the
main limitations.
Acquisition of farmland will not be required for this project. The project area
consists of areas that are planned to be urbanized, and are therefore exempt from
the Farmland Protection Policy Act.
8. Traffic Noise Anal
Noise is typically defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted from many sources
including airplanes, factories, railroads, power generating plants, and highway
vehicles. Traffic noise is composed of noises from the engine, the exhaust, the
drive train, and the tire-roadway interaction.
The actual magnitude of sound is caused by short-duration fluctuations in
atmospheric pressure. These fluctuations are called sound pressures. Since the
range of sound pressures varies greatly, a logarithmic relationship is used to
reference sound pressures to a common pressure. This relationship is defined as
the sound pressure level and is measured in decibels (dB). To approximate the
sensitivity of the human ear while listening to pure tones, the decibel is often
modified by frequency-weighting curves (A, B, C, or D).
-27-
ri

J

7LJ

Vehicle noise levels are commonly modified by the A-weighting curve. This
curve correlates very well with human response to noise, particularly in describing
annoyance caused by traffic. Sound levels utilizing the A-weighting curve are
expressed in dBA. Typical sound levels, expressed in dBA, are listed in Table 5.
TABLE 5
TYPICAL SOUND LEVELS
Source Distance Level (dBA)
Jet Takeoff 200 ft. 120
Jet Takeoff 2,000 ft. 110
Jet landing 200 ft. 100
Heavy truck 50 ft. 90
Pneumatic drill 50 ft. 80
Freeway traffic 50 ft. 70
Air conditioning unit 20 ft. 60
Normal conversation 12 ft. 50
Light auto traffic 100 ft. 50
Library ---- 40
Soft whisper 15 ft. 30
Threshold of hearing ---- 0
Source: US. Noise Pollution, Environmental Protection Agency, 1972
Sound pressure levels in this report are referred to as Leq(h). The hourly Leq, or
equivalent sound level, is the level of constant sound that in an hour would
contain the same acoustic energy as the time-varying sound. In other words, the
fluctuating sound levels of traffic noise are represented in terms of a steady noise
level with the same energy content.
To determine if roadway noise levels are compatible with various land uses, the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has developed noise abatement criteria
-28-

F

1

i

and procedures to be used in the planning and design of highways. These
abatement criteria and procedures are in accordance with Title 23 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Part 772, U.S. Department of Transportation, FHWA,
Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise. A
summary of the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) for various land uses is
presented in Table 6.
TABLE 6
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level -- Decibels (dBA)
Category Led(h) Description of Activity Category
A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of
(Exterior) extraordinary significance and serve an important
public need and where the preservation of those
qualities is essential if the area is to continue to
serve its intended purpose.
I Source:

B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active
(Exterior) sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels,
schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not
included in Categories A or B above.
D -- Undeveloped lands.
E 52 (Interior) Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms,
schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and
auditoriums.
23 CFR 772 Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and
Construction Noise.
Receptors generally include such sites as residences, churches, businesses, and
parks. In the project area, all of the receptors are category B. No category A
receptors were identified.
-29-

' Two factors are involved in determining if traffic noise warrants noise abatement.
The first factor is when future noise levels either approach or exceed the criteria
levels for each activity category, where approach is defined as within 1 dBA of
the criteria. The second factor for considering traffic noise abatement is when
future noise levels constitute a substantial increase over existing noise levels. If
the existing noise level is relatively quiet, less than or equal to 50 dBA, a
substantial increase is defined as a 15 dBA or greater increase. If, however, the
existing noise level is greater than 50 dBA, a 10 dBA or greater increase is
considered substantial. Noise abatement measures are considered when there is
either a substantial increase in noise or the noise level approaches or exceeds the
NAC.
I To establish the ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the pro'
sect, noise
measurements were taken at nine sites using a CEL 493 Type I Precision Impulse
Integrating Sound Level Meter. The noise measurement locations are shown in
Figure 9 and the ambient noise levels are listed in Table 7.

1

-30-
= m m = = m m r m = = m r = m = m

m
a
cn
O
v
m
O
n
z
s0
v
m
z
^Z
m
z
O
V/
m
O
O
m
Z
El
O
z
O
N
m
c
z
O m
m O
z m
Z
o ?
n

O
z
N

30
o ?3?yatn 9< ??

as
mai"uni
was??
I
? ??
em N ??? ¦???

' % lO vloaN r -7

C
m
O
?,
m O,
oc ,3,n,wuv
Z a
(
?

?
(7
O

MONTcgvl TA ? - te
O w r
r

a A
?
R
a`? o
ma as p
?
m g =
3: O
.
9 D c.
O m p v

14
?
pp
O

O .
?
O
ROck? lm pp o
SO?rN
9 \
G '
'O ?y0 3nt?
ba

0
m
0
co
m
m
al
Z
Z
'm
i
r
n
N
o
0
RL
0
z-3!?
0
0
C d?`
o 0a Scle
mrm
Om v
0
v
Dian
p
z oq??s p
a
v
a?
® ? U
mN
a m
CR `
IMF
TONY
N pa O'
Y ?
YO oa°?
?q

2
N

O

?J

F

TABLE 7
SUMMARY OF AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
Site Location. Leq (RIBA) ;
south of Wiley Davis Road)
2 Kacia Court (south end) 48
3 Wiley Davis Road (between 51
Yarmouth Drive and Newkirk
Drive)
4 Wiley Davis Road (at 54
Reddicks Creek)
5 Wiley Davis Road (1700' east 55
of Reddicks Creek)
6 Wiley Davis Road (2800' east 53
of Reddicks Creek)
7 Bismark Road (2300' east of 64
Wiley Davis Road)
8 Wiley Davis Road (at 51
intersection with Rose Lake
Drive)
9 Jarvis Road (west end) 58
Based on the field measurements, the existing noise levels generally ranged
between 48 dBA and 64 dBA.
One measure of the noise impact is the extent of the 66 dBA noise level contour.
This contour line is the distance from the centerline of proposed Wiley Davis
Road to the contour line where a noise level of 66 dBA is predicted to occur and
can be used to determine which receptors approach or exceed the FHWA NAC.
The distance from the centerline of proposed Wiley Davis Road to the 66 dBA
noise contour line based on projected 2010 traffic volumes is 187 feet. There are
25 residences located along the proposed alignment that fall within this noise
contour.
-31-

l

l

11

9
The 66 dBA noise contour can assist local officials in land use planning decisions.
The contour line may be used to prevent problems in the future such as placing
a residential development within the 66 dBA noise contour.
The other measure for assessing the noise impact is to determine the noise level
increase from the existing condition to the future conditions (build and no-build).
Based on the ambient noise level measurements recorded, it was determined that
a representative ambient noise level of 51 dBA would be used for the western end
and 57 dBA for the eastern end of existing Wiley Davis Road. Therefore, the 61
dBA noise contour was used to identify residences experiencing substantial noise
increases at the western end, and the 67 dBA noise contour was used for the
eastern end. Analysis revealed that 28 residences fall within the 61 dBA noise
contour and five residences fall within the 67 dBA contour, for a total of 33
residences experiencing substantial noise increases.
When the noise levels of a proposed roadway project exceed noise abatement
criteria or cause substantial noise increases, noise abatement measures should be
considered. One very effective noise abatement measure is the use of noise
barriers. Noise barriers reduce noise levels by blocking the sound path between
a roadway and noise sensitive areas. However, noise barriers are not being
considered for this project because, according to NCDOT noise abatement
guidelines, it is not considered reasonable to provide noise abatement on non-
controlled or partial control access facilities. In addition, barriers are not feasible
on this project because they would cut off access to the receptors that they were
designed to benefit.
Air Quality
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has identified six pollutants for
tracking air quality. These six pollutants are: particulate matter (PM-10), sulfur
dioxide (SOA nitrogen dioxide (NOA carbon monoxide (CO), ozone (03), and
-32-
C

1

i

lead (Pb). Mobile sources (principally vehicular traffic) are linked to the emission
of carbon monoxide and, to a lesser extent, nitrogen dioxide and ozone. Recent
nation-wide estimates indicate that more than 50 percent of all CO emissions are
from mobile sources. Particulate matter, lead, and sulfur dioxide emissions are
generally associated with stationary sources and industrial activities.
CO is the most commonly occurring air pollutant generated by mobile sources.
It is a colorless gas produced from incomplete combustion of carbon-containing
fuel. CO is a potentially fatal gas that affects the oxygen-carrying capacity of
blood. At low concentrations, mental function, vision, and alertness are affected.
Ambient air quality is determined by measuring ambient pollutant concentrations
and comparing the concentrations to the corresponding standard. The "ambient
air" is defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as "that
portion of the atmosphere, external to buildings, to which the general public has
access." The EPA has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for the six previously identified pollutants: PM-101 CO, 03, SOD NO2,
and Pb. The ambient air quality standards are classified as primary standards,
secondary standards, or both. The primary standards were established allowing an
adequate margin of safety for protection of public health. Secondary standards
were established with an adequate margin of safety to protect the public welfare
from adverse effects associated with pollutants in the ambient air.
In protecting public welfare, air pollution effects on the following are considered:
soils, water, crops, vegetation, man-made materials, animals, wildlife, weather,
visibility, climate, property, transportation, economy, personal comfort, and well-
being. The scientific criteria upon which the standards are based are periodically
reviewed by EPA, and the standards are re-established or changed based upon the
findings. The current national primary and secondary standards ambient air
quality standards are summarized in Table 8.
-33-

TABLE 8
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
National National
Primary Secondary
Pollutant AveragingTime Standard Standard
PM-10 Annual Arithmetic Mean 50 µg/m'a Same as primary'
24 h? 150 gg/m'a Same as primary'
SOZ Annual Arithmetic Mean 80 gg/m' None
24 hr' 365 gg/m' None
3 hour' None 1,300 gg/m'
NO, Annual Arithmetic Mean 100 gg/m' Same as primary
CO 8 hour' 9 ppm None
1 hour' 35 ppm None
03 1 hou? 0.12 ppm Same as primary
Pb Quarterly
Arithmetic Mean' 1.5 gg/m' Same as primary
a. Not to be exceeded more than once per year
b. Not to be exceeded more than one day per year averaged over a three-year period
gg/m' - micrograms per cubic meter of air
ppm - parts per million
microgram - one millionth of a gram, where 454 grams = 1 pound
Monitoring of the pollutants, except Pb, is performed statewide by the North
Carolina Division of Environmental Management (NCDEM). When standards are
-34-

exceeded, an area is labeled as non-attainment for that pollutant. As stated
previously, Guilford County is classified as non-attainment for 03. The last 03
exceedance occurred in 1990.
The most prevalent pollutant emitted from motor vehicles is CO. For this reason,
the analyses presented are concerned with determining the projected 2010 CO
levels in the vicinity of the project.
To determine the CO concentration at a receptor, two concentration components
must be used: local and background. The local component is predicted from
dispersion modeling and is due to CO emissions from motor vehicles operating
' near the receptor locations. The background component is the ambient CO level.
The background CO component for the project area was estimated to be 1.9 ppm
by the Air Quality Section). This is a typical value for a suburban area. These
two components were added together to determine the total CO concentration for
comparison to the NAAQS.
Areas with high traffic volumes are most likely to generate the highest levels of
CO. In determining the air quality impact of the proposed project, the
' intersections with the highest projected volumes of traffic were evaluated. The
intersection of Wiley Davis Road with Vickrey Chapel Road and Groometown
Road are anticipated to have the highest CO levels due to higher traffic volumes
and the presence of vehicles idling at these proposed signalized intersections.
At these intersections, the line source computer model CAL3QHC was used to
predict the local CO concentration components. The CAL3QHC model is a
dispersion computer model developed for the Environmental Protection Agency
t (EPA). Based on the assumption that vehicles at an intersection are either in
motion or in an idling state, the program is designed to predict air pollution levels
' by combining emissions from both moving and idling vehicles.

?J

i

CAL3QHC uses emission factors generated by EPA's approved model MOBILE
5A. To evaluate the maximum impact of the proposed project on ambient CO
concentrations, worst-case inputs were used in the modeling including receptor
locations at minimum right-of-way distances, adverse meteorology, peak traffic
conditions, and worst-case CO vehicle emission factors. The worst-case
assumptions for these parameters are not expected to occur simultaneously;
however, the objective is to develop a worst-case scenario to predict the highest
CO concentrations that could occur as a result of the proposed project.
MOBILE 5A input parameters included:
Vehicle Mix
autos (gasoline)
light truck (gasoline)
medium trucks (gasoline)
heavy trucks (gasoline)
autos (diesel)
medium trucks (diesel)
' heavy trucks (diesel)
motorcycles

7
Li

Tampering rates:
Annual mileage accumulation rates
and registration distributions:
Basic exhaust emission rates:
Inspection/maintenance program:
Additional corrective factors:
Anti-tampering program:
Refueling emission rates:
Ambient temperature:
Minimum and maximum daily
temperature:
Base and in-use volatility (RVP):
Region:
Calendar year:
Speed:
Operating mode fractions:
55.6%
20.9%
8.1%
3.6%
0.2%
0.3%
10.8%
0.5%
MOBILE 5A Default
MOBILE 5A Default
MOBILE 5A Default
No I/M in 1991, assume Basic I/M
starting in 1992
None
None
Uncontrolled
45°F
minimum = 45.0°F maximum = 45.0°F
10.5 in 1992, 10.5 in 2010
Low altitude (approximately 500 feet above
mean sea level)
1992 and 2010 (January 1)
25 MPH
Non-catalyst, cold-start vehicles = 20.6%
Catalyst, hot-start vehicles = 27.3%
Catalyst, cold-start vehicles = 20.6%
-36-
C

n

u
u

1

0

0

Worst-case CAL3QHC and CALINE3 input parameters included:
Averaging time:
Surface roughness:
Settling velocity:
Deposition velocity:
Receptor height:
Traffic volumes:
Emission factor:
Source height:
Wind speed:
Wind direction:
Mixing height:
Ambient concentration:
60 minutes
0.75 (corresponds to tall grass)
0 centimeters/second
0 centimeters/second
1.8 meters
peak hour volumes, years 2010
from MOBILE 5A (grams per mile)
0 meters
1 meter/second
10° increments
1,000 meters
1.9 ppm
As stated earlier, the intersections with the heaviest projected traffic volumes were
evaluated. A total of 24 different receptors (12 at each intersection) were analyzed
to compare the air quality impact of proposed Wiley Davis Road. Table 9
summarizes the results of the air quality analysis. Only the CO concentration at
the most affected receptor (worst case) is shown.
-37-

aUIVIIVIARY Ur AIR VUAL11Y PAUTS

- --- ------
CO-Concentration (ppm)
Receptor Intersection w/ Intersection w/
Number Vickrey'Chapel Road Groometown Road'
1 7.0 6.0
2 8.9 6.7
3 8.0 6.6
4 6.1 5.4
5 7.2 6.4
6 7.3 6.5
7 7.8 7.0
8 8.7 7.4
9 7.0 5.7
10 7.5 7.0
11 7.8 7.9
12 6.5 6.4
In 2010, the maximum one-hour CO concentration at the intersection of Wiley
Davis Road and Vickrey Chapel Road is predicted to be 8.9 ppm and the
maximum at Groometown Road is predicted to be 7.9 ppm, as shown in Table 9.
Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS indicates that
no violations of the 1 hour CO standard of 35 ppm occur. Likewise, it can be
concluded that the eight-hour standard (9.0) will not be exceeded because the one-
hour CO analysis does not exceed 9.0 ppm.
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality of the Winston-Salem
Regional Office of the N.C. Department of Health, Environment, and Natural
-38-

r
r

0
u
u

Resources. Guilford County has been designated as a moderate non-attainment
area for ozone (03). The attainment date is November 15, 1996 for 03. The
current State Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation
control measures (TCM) for Guilford County. The Greensboro Urbanized Area
Thoroughfare Plan (TP) and the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) were
determined on September 13, 1993 to be in conformity to the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments and the Interim Conformity Guidance dated June 7, 1991. There
have been no significant changes in the projects's design concept and scope, as
used in the conformity analysis. This evaluation completes the assessment
requirements for air quality analysis of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and
the NEPA process, and no additional reports are required.
10. Geology
The site is located within the Carolina Slate Belt and is characterized by
metamorphosed granitic rock. These are intrusive rock types of the late
Proterozoic to late Cambrian periods (520-650 million years ago). These rock
types are typically megacrystic, well foliated, and locally contain hornblende.
Bedrock is well indurated and is encountered at depths of 48 feet to greater than
60 feet.
11. Potential Hazardous Material Sites
Potential hazardous material sites include generators, treaters, and disposers of
hazardous wastes, landfills, sewage treatment facilities, garbage dumps, abandoned
services stations with underground storage tanks, fuel, oil, and gasoline storage
tanks and lagoons. The following sources were reviewed to determine if any
hazardous material sites or leaking underground storage tanks are located in the
project study area:
• Hazardous Waste Branch Files, North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR)
• Special Incidents Branch Files, NCDEHNR
-39-

' Superfund Section Branch Files, NCDEHNR
• Solid Waste Branch Files, NCDEHNR
• North Carolina Solid Waste Section List of Solid Waste Facility
Contacts, December 1992
• North Carolina Inactive Hazardous Sites Program, Status Report,
February 1992
• United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV,
Wasteland Preremedial/Federal Facility Report, September 1993
' As a result of the review, no sites were identified in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed project. However, two sites located in the southwest quadrant of the
' Groometown Road and 1-85 interchange were identified as potential hazardous
material sites: the Exxon Service Station and Fredrickson Motor Express. The
' Exxon Station was found to have soil and groundwater contamination upon
excavation of six underground storage tanks in July 1990, and Fredrickson Motor
Express has been identified as a small generator of hazardous waste. Neither site
is close enough to impact the proposed project.
There are three additional service stations in the vicinity of the proposed project
two on Vickrey Chapel Road north of the US 29-70 interchange and one on
Groometown Road north of the I-85 interchange. The underground storage tanks
(USTs) at each of these sites are additional possible sites of hazardous materials
involvement; however, no UST leaks are known to exist or have been reported at
these sites.
12. Visual Impacts
The central portion of the project area is predominantly wooded and undeveloped
' with gently rolling hills and small creeks. Residences are primarily located at the
' eastern and western ends of the project area. Portions of the study area will be
visually impacted by the construction of the proposed project. The typical section
' -40-

iF
L

for this project was selected to allow for landscaping and screening in selected
areas to mitigate adverse visual impacts.
13. Construction Impacts
Short-term construction impacts may occur in the areas of water quality, air
quality, natural resources, and noise. The potential impacts can be minimized by
careful adherence to established construction methods. These methods are
described below:
a. Waste and debris will be disposed of in areas outside of the right-of-
way and provided by the contractor, unless otherwise required by the plans
or special provisions or unless disposal within the right-of-way is permitted
by the engineer. Disposal of waste or debris in active public waste or
disposal areas will not be permitted without prior approval by the engineer.
Such approval will not be permitted when, in the opinion of the engineer,
it will result in excessive siltation or pollution.
' b. During construction of the proposed project, all material resulting from
clearing, grubbing, demolition, or other operations will be removed from
1 the project, and disposed of by the contractor. Any merchantable timber
should be salvaged. If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning
shall be done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of
the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC
' 2D.0520. Additionally, trees outside of the construction limits should be
protected from construction activities to prevent skinning tree trunks from
heavy equipment, exposing roots, smothering trees from fill dirt around the
base, or accidentally spilling petroleum.
c. Borrow pits and ditches will be drained insofar as possible to alleviate
breeding areas for mosquitoes.

E

I I
d. Care will be taken not to block existing drainage ditches.
e. There will be strict adherence to the erosion control plan by the
contractor, including limiting areas and duration of exposed earth and
stabilizing exposed areas as quickly as possible. Careful attention to
erosion control will be concentrated at Reddicks Creek and at its tributary
entering immediately south of the existing bridge.
f. Measures will be taken to alleviate the dust generated by construction
when the control of dust is necessary for the protection, safety, and
comfort of motorists and nearby residents.
g. Although the high equipment noise levels are expected to be the main
contributor to the construction activity noise emissions, noise impacts
during project construction are of short duration. Peak noise levels from
highway construction equipment as measured at a distance of 50 feet may
vary from 70 dBA to 100 dBA. It is anticipated that the major sources of
construction noise will be from earth removal, hauling, grading, pile
driving, and paving. General construction noise impacts that can be
expected are temporary speech interference for passersby and those
individuals working near the project. Such noise will be limited to
daylight hours as much as possible.
14. Secondary Impacts
A major purpose of the proposed project is to carry future traffic volumes.
These traffic volumes are projected to increase substantially, from less than
1,500 vehicles per day to over 40,000 vehicles per day. Much of this
increase originates from a planned 1,200-acre mixed-use development
adjacent to the proposed road. This development has been approved by the
City of Greensboro and construction on parts of it have already begun.
-42-

0

J

f'

fl

The impacts of this development are in accord with Greensboro's plans and
will occur with or without this project.
15. Permits Required
Section 404 permits will be required from the Army Corps of Engineers
for any activities that encroach into jurisdictional wetlands or "waters of
the United States." In addition, Section 401 of the Clean Water Act
requires each state to certify that state water quality standards will not be
violated for activities which: 1) involve issuance of a federal permit or
license; or 2) require discharges into "waters of the United States." The
Corp of Engineers cannot issue a 404 permit until 401 water quality
certification is approved by the N.C. Department of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources -- Division of Environmental Management.
As discussed in Section IV.C.3, a majority of the wetland crossings have
already received Nationwide Permits from the Corp and water quality
certification from the state. The permits were previously obtained by the
property owner and will be used or modified for this project. Additional
permits will be required for the crossing at Reddicks Creek and the channel
relocation of an unnamed tributary of the creek.
16. Geodetic Markers
No geodetic survey markers will be impacted by the subject project (see
Appendix).
-43-

V. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
A. Public Meetings
A citizens informational workshop was held early in the study. The workshop was
' informal with one-on-one interaction between project staff and the public. It was held on
the Jamestown Campus of Guilford Technical Community College (GTCC) on September
15, 1993. The workshop lasted from 5:00 PM until 8:00 PM. Approximately 100
citizens attended the meeting (81 signed the sign-in sheet). Representatives from NCDOT
and the City of Greensboro were also present. Exhibits for the workshop included maps
of the proposed alignment, streams and floodplains, historic and archaeological sites, and
current and future projected (with project built) average daily traffic volumes. Citizens
had the opportunity to be added to the mailing list or to make comments on forms that
' were provided. A summary of the comments made at the meeting and received by mail
follows:

1. The proposed project will have an adverse impact on the Wiley Park subdivision
and other residences in the area, particularly on the west end of existing Wiley
Davis Road.

2. The proposed project should be moved south of the Wiley Park subdivision and
' other residences along existing Wiley Davis Road and run parallel to US 29-70,
possibly even interchanging with US 29-70 to limit adverse impacts on Vickrey
' Chapel Road.
' 3. The proposed median should be narrower to limit adverse impacts on residences
along existing Wiley Davis Road.

4. There was concern about the increased traffic in the area due to this project, as
' well as other proposed projects in the area, and the resulting negative impacts on
safety and on property values.

-44-
i
B.
5. It was suggested that consideration be given to taking some property from the
historic property (the Stephen Gardner House) located on existing Wiley Davis
Road in order to limit property losses from other residences in the area.
6. There was concern over who would be responsible for paying for the water and
sewer service that would be brought into the area once it is annexed by
Greensboro (as a result of the new development in the area).
7. Residents were concerned that they don't actually have much say in the proposed
project and its impacts on them.
Public Hearin
There will be a public hearing following the publication of this document. Advance
notification will be given by mail to individuals on the project mailing list and also will
be provided in the local newspaper.
-45-

VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
Comments on the proposed improvements to Wiley Davis Road were requested from the
' following agencies. An asterisk indicates that a written response was received. These
comments are incorporated into the environmental assessment contained in this report.
' A copy of the comments is included in the Appendix.
*U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington
*U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Raleigh
' U.S. Geological Survey - Raleigh
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Atlanta
' *N.C. State Clearinghouse
*N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
' N.C. Department of Public Instruction
*N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
*N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
*City of Greensboro
*Guilford County
Piedmont Triad Council of Governments

f

H
n

I I
H

r

I

I

VII. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon the assessment of environmental impacts included in this document, it has been
determined that the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. This
FONSI completes the environmental review. An Environmental Impact Statement will not be
prepared for this project.
-47-

?_?
1r
'>'
V•
0
v
m
0
0
0
Z
90
v
z
^Z^
?I
0
a
m
v
A?
iI
0
n

r
M
O m
z
cn v
m
v
m
Z5
.O
m
n
va -
r
I
A 77 1 f a
NN
?? .f" s to t ~y?y3d
++?? I A
b f- 7
r'' ;
?h
4Yr, Fy4 N r', d4, j'
G azx:,
Y;
tr

-AF
r
w
wv?
err` J ?• a _ •g
J;
VIII
r
1 44
41
??dd
+o
FIN
t A?? 't ? _: 'w:kc
MATCH

??
r
m
n
cn
O
v
m
O
0
Z
2S
v
z
^Z
0
m
v
?I
O

i T
O C
A
m
O Q
m
z
Cl)
v.
v
0
a
/? i
? I? I:
I
? MATpIi
? di :. ?f.
r I tl{ I
1 I 1
d k; + •A
I-
?I
h 1 I [ ? I?,:[i I k. I rl Ir.. I [s afi?? r 4 4
4,?S
¦

? I'? is I I I_ ? ' 1 ? i ';5 ,?N.f ?Y, ii
Y I d
I `? i' ,,; ?ql e$r Ir?,yC, ~II if l ? ?! i??i ?y4,b?11 '.•y
' I I I S?, ` Vf I ±?' `? r'! O 1: 9 ? ?_ ??'R!)Y I r I
i I E 111` I ? -. I; ;I }III 11-?r a' 7 ?y ?.I. r? N
I V
1'^rh y I
t ;^. $ i ?' e i 7 S fk '? w ? 'r jfl ? -I '?i I r :.I ..,k i ,? • y ,? - y •
'
tl ycr # f,, rte'
f E r ? 14 !.
' I r I l:• ? I} 'll? Y -li ?• x llh r I to
?? i , ;? ?_ r• Ir I - r
?'•, N I?? P ?? - Y .b
I ,
F
I I
?JL I ?,. ? ? II I h Y.
I ? I,{' ?'1„ a I ? I?. I III :y a .1' _:?,? ??. - - r1 ? ? I "' ?F--ik.
I a ?t p
-I ? H III ? h? ? ? ?I , I ir I (I "'h Ft I I d
l 5 i i• ?
??,,?,? I ?. 4 Il ?? I': r ,1{ iui, 4 _fG ?' .F' '11y2 ?'
?FgILi ` - 1. ? r+ I I ?I c ' ? ? {? vF '?` }I I ,? k• k-?,4t?r l I ?.1?, 1? ??fl ?.;r
p ii
i
'- I: ??I _Y ? I•' r, I y ? - II f I.L '? ?., I H{ ?i i. ?II1F ??! ? ik1
I I ? I - f?1 ?? r 4? ' it
^^n, O
W
0
N
O
0
<D 'p'
P* O
?I 1
1 1
A }

I
I
h ? I
kf i I ,
1Jk4 111 '
1? Ij, I j t I ':r I{ h I I 1 4 y 6'I?lhi 4?
I ? I
1 I- I pp I I H II ? I ! II h f l 7 i
-°I": ???.:i,Ld?L?..t.•si}uim4yl.iJ?:'kFU: ? I , .. .. .. a .•5 .. .
II I!
-Alm
I - I
4 I ?yti
i ,•
fti ' I r? n h !?
Lr M{o-
a
I r -?f
i- t b' i I1
N ?? r I MII I ;{

I
{
I i 'G
,I I
IA:
Y
• i? *H
k
4i^' ^ •
WW'
16
?` a 7p}'• ?` , i ? ?. ?
u
{r ti ?.
- { I : I jI F F
, f A Ic?.. t' 7, I E
?11 r ?
E

m
N
0
v
m
0
0
Z
RO
v
z
^Z
0
8
U)
v
iI
0

.r =
c
O n
a
O O
m
z
rn v
v
L/
0
a
-MATCHLIN
? MATCHLINE
? I 1y. ? at +! * ? ? _
'IN -y. IV fr? fMi, ' 4F11 41 .?
I I .? t F' 4 t ?' ' ? I f
- ` ?' / aC;' I '?A"};ya'iA ? I ?'•,?' I -I ! :.M1I ? f I '+v `-..II y k ? O
1 ?
41
I is I ?t?? I? Piz
' <? ?'? PIS ? Fy °??, ?? 2.* W ?!z ; ?` ? ?k;
?r
f'YRlr?'k . tP l?a i L 'y..
?M
_ 1 ri?L
h
>?} MR f7 ? '? Pa f Ni
xeN'... ,:I:,. ?; •Zr {` fr' ? ?Y`????_ ?`.xl 1. ? i ?- ,'?F "a3G i ?
.
f., J ku ,
Roo
110 W
"
Al,
.
va ,
1
P
f ?
?3' ATP
41
y .
/ i
I'TY' r
c,
a S? 4
lP.
t" IT
`4'?
I.P `, ,} µ ..
?y h 5.. as f `> I. 7
ll J 5 ? «? ? 1 ^ y
I I ? /
®r
? c
I I, ` I Ar
I '-+';? '1-. l r 5 p,?. , ?t• ?'' S ?tt'' ro ? ?pe. ?y>n 1 F ,?L?,,?, - rt " ?? a.?A ? lµ -; }+'
c S'' 4 J y' ' ?".
? ? °i 34 ?? a4',?/ ' / ? 1 ? ?f?.,$.'[, ,?1n?.a { ?' f ,?'I:?'ay ? 1 ? 5J ? *' ???'a? h.?? .i ? ??.' ? J ?"?'?.t?'
O!w
41
P S
d k
1
O ' ?+`, ?. X14'' ? .iC ? ~ k- lI 11I I r t I `
51x1 I Ifr x, ? lyr
K
tk t ,
k, 14 '1 t ? ?, .r
a ro
"ti" . 5 '. . ? - 'u• _ [ _'iik? 1i 1? ?F 14:.._ 14 r a'?.I?P1 lll?. I?' ' I .51 ? ? iK, ,?J.?'' ?.

1

1

1
APPENDIX
11
RE L-O C A T I O N REP O R T North Carolina D o r
e a tmen+ ,. of Transoorta+
_ron
x. E.! S. - CORRIDOR _. DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
PROJECT= I ——1 RI6 ....... COLIJTY: Gu.i !...f.orri Alternate 1-. of 1 Q!±erna±e
1.0. NO.: "---31_nS......... .__._........... _ F.A. PROJECT. SFGM=NT »Q»
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Widenino of Ui Iev Davis !?a. fr-rr Lroome+own Pry.. to V;ckrpv 1.'h?oo "-a
Improvements to Vickrev Chacel tc LlS 29/7C.
_..._.H -. ..._. _...._............I..........._ ............................................... .... _...... _.................. _..................... ............. _.......... __......... _..... _._.......... ....... _.._.......... ........ .................. ............................. 1
ESTIMATED D I SPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
..._._. E..._._. ..........................T.........._.._._..._.r.... -.._.__...........,......................._............_...r......_.._...._......._.._._......._..._....j..................._....................................r..............._._........_._...._..__.._
Tvoe .
-.' ^ .... .. of .............. Minor- I
01soiacee Owners Tenants Total ities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-SOM SD LF
..... __._.. ......... .............. ........... .._......... .._.................... _ _....._........................................_..............__._._...
:Ind i dup! s 0 0 11 rr ......... ...ri........ __........... ......... _............. ........ .._......... ...... ........_..._-r1 n
__................ ......... ........... .-___.- . .............. ........... '.:.....................
.. aRr es 1 n 1 0 n n n n ,
........... ....... .-............ .......... ..__..__._.......... __.._.......... .... - ...
__..__......_........._...... __._.........._....__.__._.........___._.___.. VALLE OF DWELLING DSS DWELL I NGS AVA I LABL E I
...................._......................... ..__................................ ..........__.._.. - ........._....................... ...------ .._...... i
.._._.., __-_-____..... ............ ..
..
.....................
' Farms 0 n n n
................... _............. ..__._....._._..__ __. ?..__ _.._. _..___._.__-- ..__?_.....___....... Owners Tenants For Sa I e For Rent
No.. 13 f i t 0 0 0 n 0-20M 0 0-? n
h _50 0 0-2OM 0 $ 0-_50
...................... ..................__..._..................._......?_. -- ._..._........_.............. _....... __........ _................ ..........._......... ...... ._....-_...... ............ _.__._._.._..... .................. _....... ......._..
.. ALL QLESTIONS 20-40M n 150-250 D 20 4OM 0 150-251.1 D
11 a
?
YES NO EXPLAIN ALL "YES" ANSWERS 4.0-70M 0 250--4 ._.__. .........................._....0...........
.` ................_._...._._.......'...._..__.____........_._.__._.....___.-..__.._.__._.._-_-. ?- Ln 0 0 40...- 70M 2 250-40D ..... ...... .... _....... ......... .._...__............ ._.__._...._..__.._ __._...._.__.........' _.......... =..._._.
" 1, tAl i. I sr,erc i a l re I or-at i on 70-100 0 400--?,OD: 0 70-1D0 3 400--600 0
services be necessary _
' Y, 2. GI i I I schoo Is or churches be . 1011 UP 1 61..0 (1 1 1 rin L-P r5 t-no L?' °_......_...._r
affected by d i so I arement _...... ......._....__.......__? ............................ _....___.._...._.... - ......... __._............. _._..................... __..
3. Will business services still TOTAL 1 C)
11 0
-.............. be available after oro iect .................... -.....
4. W i I I any business be dis - ?
REMARKS (Respond by Number) Mr11? S
:( ? placed. If so, indicate size
ttir^e, estimated number of
........... v- emoIovees, minorities, etc. 3. NON= AaFFCTE0.
S. Will relocation cause a i' 1993
?___...._...._......... housing sho,-taae 1
X
Rour,p for eve i l ab l e hous- 6. VISL1Al_. 4J?L ' '. -
i n g ( ! is t)
f 7 LJiII additional housing "
....... _ . _
?..._..__.._ NT ? D AS IV=CF I'i _____
programs be needed 8. WILL BE INPL!N(= -
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing
----C be considered
9. Are there Iarae, disabled, 9. NOWE ANTICIPA ' T'ED, HOWEVER, IF CONTACT DISCLOSES
_S
........... .r ............. elderly, etc. f a m i l i e s DIFFERENT NO MAJ(:P PR013_ FMS APc ANTICIPATED.
.?._..........
_ SE AL FOR DESIGN
10, f? i ou. ous i ng a ---
--- needed for oro iect 12. BASED ON VISI A!_. S! RVEY C-F T}-_ AREA.
N A 11. Is public housing avail-
_...._..._....._..._ ah I e
x 1.2. is it felt tl-,erp will be ad-
eauate DDS housing available
• ^ _ .. dt,r i ng re I ocat i on period
'X 13. Will there he a or-oblem of
housing within financial
............................... means
f N n 14. Are suitable business sites
available (list source)
IS. N,.lmhpr mnnths est.imateri to
Como I ete RF _OCAT IONN 10 _ 12
I...._........_I ................... ---
A en
- -- -- -----------
tea.-. AooroveC{ Date
Form 15.4 RP?:ise' 5/90 Orioinal & 1. Coov. State Relocation Ampnt
2 Coov: Area Relocation Rile

R C L_ O C A-r I O N REP O R T North Carolina Deoartment of Transoortat i on
X_. F.I.S. CORRIDOR DESIGN RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
i PROJECT: _3IJ7?81.6.._..._............. COUNTY: Guilford Alternate 1 of 1 Alternate
1.D. NO. : !. fJB._ ................_......._........ F . A . PROJECT! N/A SEGMENT "B"
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT : W i den i no e{ W i l ey_ Davis Pd._.._. from Ind to V k rev Chane ! _ PA
& Improvements to Vickrev Chaoel to US 29/70
---
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME !
....._........_........_._._.._.._....! ................... __..._...x-................. ..... _......................... __ ..... .................... .........._... -- -- I...__................. _..-- - .......... F?. __.._..r-.......... .......... I._....... _....... .....
?
Tvoe of Minor
Di•soiacee_ Owners Tenants Total ities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-SOM 50 LP
... .........................
I nd dui 15 0 fJ n
Fam i 1 ! es 0 p 0 0 0 0_-_ .....__fl_.._.._.
.___..._____................. _.... ..........._._.__..._ ...._._.__._...._........ ..._....___..... __.....__.__....__.._ ....__....... -. .__._............ ._..__..__.___ _ -.__....._.._..`._..__._._._.
guSinesses D 1] n n
.. _._ ..................... _.._........ ........._.._.......__...._......
VALUE OF DWELLING DWELLINGS AVAILABLE
.................................. _ _....._._ ........... ............._._._.............. ........... _
ar R,s p p p p Y
..... __....... ..__.._._._._._
,,,.•„...•._•.•., ..•. Owners Tenants For Sa l e_? For_Rent .......
Non-Profit 0 0 0 0 0-ZQM N/A 0-150 N/A ?0-20M N/A T, 0-150 N/A
__.._....._..___. - __--_.._...__._W__ ____....._.._.__...._._-•-- --__ __-- .------._....
ANSWER ALL OLESTIONS ?p-40M N/A 15D-250 N/A 20-40M N/A 150-250 N/A
YES NO .EXPLAIN ALL "YES" ANSWERS 40-70M N/A 250-400 N/A 40--70M N/A 250-400 N/A
... ............... .................. _........ ...... ....... --............................... _......... _.......... ............ ........ _•.____..__. ____...... __..._ _._......_...._._............. __...._.._.._._..
N A 1 , h) i I I spec i a I relocation 7D-100 N/A 400--600, N/A '70-1110 N/A ADO-600 N/A
'-_.__ ............... cnrv!ces ?o -ecesserv ....... ........ __._.-.._ ____....__........._..._.-...___._....._....___......_..._..._._._..._.....__.__.
NJ A 2 . W i I I sr..heo Is or churr_hes be 1D0 LIP N/A 600 LI' N/A 100 UI' N/A? 600 LIP N/A
..__..... _ .................. affected by d i so I acement ........... _...... _- ._....... __...................... __.... -- ._........ _............... .... _............. _...._..._--............ _..__.._._.._........ _....... ................. _........
.
! N A 3, W i I I business services St iII TO'rA1._ N/A N/A N/A
N/A
he eve i I ab I e of ter nro_ie_t .................. -. .._._...... .._.
Will anv husiness be dis- REMARKS (Resoond by Number)
j: NI'A mia-ed. If so, indicate size
I tvme, estimated number of
. .............
em^IOVeeS, minn!'!tteg, etc. tt
Nt A Li i I I f^e I nc:?t l nn t N(.) RFLOCF"TICN
ceuSe a
............... .?.......... .. houS I no shortaap
° NI,A 6 Snu-ce for available hnus-
.
?.. _. .
_.. ?...
ina (I1st)
N A 7. Will additional housinc
I..._.._....... ............. erOgrams be seeder
NIfA 8. Shm..!!d Last Resort Hous!no
f......_._..._..?........... be cons i der ed
t11A 9. A!-e there large, disabled,
.......... p1•ferly, etc, fami I ies
?__ _...._._7_........... ANSWER THESE ALSO FOR DESIGN
N?A 10. 11iT-. ou. ! oL !np ..e
!. -
needed for or^o iert
NtA 11, 1c; nubiic housing eve;!
?----._------ f ..._....... ? a b I'm
NfA X12. Is it felt there tuil! be ad
equate DDS housino available
durino relocation oeriod
Nf^ ?13. Wi11 there be a oroblem of
how- ino I11!th!n financial
?.......... _........ _.. means
N A. 14. Are Suitable huSiness sites
available (list source)
C 15. Num!-,er months estimated to
i C!]I!1 1 l (?t_? 12r1_0-AT (fNJ
.....__..._. ........_... ...... ........ .. ........... ................ _..__..__......._.._. ....... --._................... ... ?.
1. F. 01.....93
1?e ! neat i on Fla ± Date Aooroved 1
?!,r.m tti.!, Revi?:?d /90 Late
Original 8, 1 Coov: State Relocation Aocnt
2 Coov: Area Relocation File

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO
Planning Division

GEIV?
SEP 2 2 1993
DIVISIG I OF r -
September 17, 1993

Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:

This is in response to your letter of July 21, 1993, requesting our
comments on the "State Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant
Impact for Wiley Davis Road (SR 1383) from west of Groometown Road to
Vickrey Chapel Road in Greensboro, Guilford County. Tip No. U-3109"
(Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199303598).
Our comments involve impacts to U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)
projects, flood plains, and other environmental aspects, primarily waters
and wetlands. The roadway does not cross any COE-constructed flood
control or navigation projects.
The proposed project is sited in Guilford County, which participates
in the National Flood Insurance Program. From a review of the November
1988 Guilford County Flood Insurance Rate Map, the roadway crosses
Registers Creek (shown as Reddicks Creek on the United States Geological
Survey topo map), a detailed study stream, with the 100-year flood
elevations determined and a floodway defined. We suggest that you
coordinate with Guilford County for compliance with their flood plain
ordinance and possible revision to their flood insurance map and report.
Our Raleigh Field Office, Regulatory Branch, indicates that the
proposed improvements could impact the above-headwaters waters and/or
wetlands of Reddicks Creek and Jenny Branch. All work restricted to
existing high ground areas will not require prior Federal permit
authorization. However, Department of the Army permit authorization,
pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will
be required for the discharge of excavated or fill material within the
aforementioned crossing of the waters and wetlands. Specific permit
requirements will depend on design of the project, extent of fill work
within streams and wetland areas (dimensions, fill amounts, etc.),
construction methods, and other factors. When final construction plans

-2-
are completed, including the extent and location of development within
waters and wetlands, your office should contact Mr. John Thomas at our
' Raleigh Field Office, telephone [phone], for a final determination
of Federal permit requirements.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can
be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Lawrence W. Saunders
Chief, Planning Division

ii

1

1

1

1

1
United States Department of the Interio
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Ecological Services
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
August 2, 1993
Mr. L.J. Ward, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
jmm. ?? &r?L
TAVE? \J
Reference is made to your July 21, 1993, request for potential
environmental impacts associated with the proposed widening and
relocation of SR 1383 (Wiley Davis Road), Greensboro, Guilford
County, North Carolina (TIP Number U-3109). The Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) makes the following recommendations in accordance
with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.), and Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
The proposed improvements may adversely affect wetlands along the
widened and relocated portions of Wiley Davis Road. As you are
probably aware, review by the Wilmington District, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers will be required to determine the presence and extent
of wetlands along the proposed route. Areas of concern to the
service include marshes, submerged aquatic vegetation, scrub/shrub,
and forested wetlands. Such wetlands are of high fish and
wildlife. habi a'L. value, dnd perform important water quality and
land stabilization functions. If wetlands are likely to be
affected, the Service will recommend the use of alternatives that
avoid wetland impacts. These alternatives may include different
alignments, the use of bridges instead of culverts, or special
construction techniques. Unavoidable wetland impacts should be
reduced, and the fish and wildlife habitat value of affected
wetlands should be replaced with suitable mitigation.
Several candidate species for Federal listing occur in Guilford
County (see attached list). Your environmental analysis should
address all possible impacts to these species and their habitats.
Your analysis should consider direct affects, as well as secondary,
indirect impacts that may result from altered drainage patterns,
stream blockages, construction-related turbidity, induced

F?'

r

fl
1

1

development along new highway alignments, or any other effects. If
any threatened, endangered, or candidate species are likely to be
affected, further coordination with this office will be required.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project.
If you have any questions, please contact Ray Johnson, Endangered
Species Coordinator for this office (919/856-4520).
Sincerely,
/70 AAn 2j.,
Tom Augspurger
Acting Supervisor
F?11
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
REVISED MAY 18, 1993
Guilford County
There are species which, although not now listed or officially proposed for
listing as endangered or threatened, are under status review by the Service.
These "Candidate" (C1 and C2) species are not legally protected under the
Act, and are not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7,
until they are formally proposed or listed as threatened or endangered. We
are providing the below list of candidate species which may occur within the
project area for the purpose of giving you advance notification. These
species may be' listed in the future, at which time they will be protected
under the Act. In the meantime, we would appreciate anything you might do
for them.
Nestronia (Nestronia umbellula) - C2
Greensboro burrowing crayfish (Cambarus catagius) - C2
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
FM208 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
.116 WEST JONES STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003

8/26/93
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
MAILED TO: FROM:
NC DDT MRS. CHRYS BAGGETT
TOM KENDIG DIRECTOR
HIGHWAY BUILDING N C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
RALEIGH/INTEROFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
SCOPING-RELOCATION AND IMPROVEMENTS FOR WILEY DAVIS ROAD(SR 1383) FROM
WEST OF GROOMETOWN ROAD TO VICKREY CHAPEL ROAD IN GREENSBORO:
TIP NO U-3109
SAI NO 94E42200070 PROGRAM TITLE - SCOPING
THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. AS A RESULT OF THE REVIEW THE FOLLOWING
IS SUBMITTED: ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
(X ) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone].

G.C. REGION G

..,STATf ."r:.
North Carolina
Department of Administration
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Katie G. Dorsett, Secretary
September 30. 1993
' MEMORANDUM
TO: Tom Kendig, N.CIr? Dept. of Transportation
C
FROM: Chrys Baggett, N.C. State Clearinghouse
RE: SCH File #94-E-4220-0070; EA/FONSI - Improvements to Wiley
Davis Road in Greensboro (TIP #U-3109)
' Attached are additional comments which were submitted following
our clearance letter on your:
' Notification to Clearinghouse of Intent to Apply for
Federal Assistance
X Environmental Review
Other
If you have questions regarding these comments, please contact
me at [phone].
' CB/jf
Attachment
116 West Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27603-8003 • Telephone [phone]
State Courier 51.01-00
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer ??(?

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Policy Development
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
John Humphrey, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee}-?
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 94-0070
DATE: September 27, 1993
The attached comments were received by this office after the
response due date. These comments should be forwarded to the
applicant and made a part of our previous comment package.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
MM: bb
Attachment

P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

?Fl

LI
. dt,. SfA7[v?
s . 0'..
rsY pur ?•?' ?'
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
August 25, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook I
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
Division chives and History
1 i r., Director
? Fo
AUG 30 199,
2 'rD;VIS,'C%I Cf=
4? HIGHWAY ?3C
SUBJECT: SR 1383 (Wiley Davis Road) from west of SR 1129
' (Groometown Road) to SR 1140 (Vickrey Chapel
Road), Greensboro, Guilford County, U-3109, CH 94-
E-4220-0070
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.

77
u

We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following
structures of historical or architectural importance within the general area of the
project:
Gardner House (Stephen Gardner House and Gardner Hill Gold Mine Site).
SR 1383, 0.5 mile east of the junction with SR 1140. The Gardner House
was included in the National Register of Historic Places on November 15,
1974. We have enclosed a map showing the National Register boundaries
which encompass sixty acres.
Considering that the 1974 boundaries do not provide an appropriate setting for the
house and new development may occur near the gold mine site, we believe the
existing boundaries for the property may be inappropriate. We are planning a site
visit with Army Corps of Engineers' representatives to the property in the near
future to facilitate our review of a Section 404 Nationwide Permit for development
in the vicinity of the Gardner House. Following our site visit and reassessment of
the boundaries, we will notify the North Carolina Department of Transportation of
our findings.
Although the improvements to SR 1383 are state-funded, we would like to note
that the William G. Wiley House is located on SR 1 140 just south of the
intersection with SR 1383 and within the area of potential effect. The William G.
Wiley House was determined eligible for listing in the National Register during the
Section 106 review for the improvements to US 29A/70A (TP No. U-2412).
G9'
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 QP

' These comments are made in accord with G.S. 121-12(a) and Executive Order
XVI. If you have any questions regarding them, please contact Renee Gledhill-
Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB:slw
Enclosure
cc: State Clearinghouse
Wayne Wright, Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
Ken Jolly, Army Corps of Engineers, Raleigh
B. Church, NCDOT
' Guilford County Joint Historic Properties Commission

1

7.5 MINUTE SERiCS (TOPOGRAPHIC) 0"
X97 55' _^y; 7 79°52'30"
74OCZA FELT
Z 36'00'
.:y/'•T:•Sa`&o?`,\, •?•\ /• `\JV .'. > ij/.?OO\?l •? 'l•??(Jw _'//i?/?I, /???... ;?;?.j^'C
•31\I. , .'?, '\\\._u t\, is 'r,aY f'N, rt.,l`:. / .,7?? \\1 Y -}'°o\\\•. ;/?c• 111(-..'?r? ^.. -jj C:
1 / '-^ :? : "1?1-1 :?w .' \C\ • '!\??.??:."? C,'?r I',`\? I ill ?/ti; G 1\f ?•J iCl
,;'I r? ? /?' Jul •\i ? .,• l_;::-1L-, j 1?_ „/ ? ?' i i I \? ? ?; - / N .? r??:":?f.?' .r. ? I (eax as
' \L•1"1 \ ,?,•- ?/ % .. , r 3?qqqJ '``?'' ?r??\. `,r \ Sri /Q,1?7 Jy? ?? )' oy1\J/ II
.._ /t!A N 4C ..//? •?\ \ ? ? I \ I,,l n ? i'?"', 1:, \V / r? t ..t. I ?J'. /\ ? ?_?J 1 . `? ??\ o m
\
?(?`` 1\h,r?. ? \ iL/.mob '•% ?.? ,.1/ ?1?+/ 'l:„•J <<:?r; %( rt_ ? \v-/? -/?.. oW
kdnlC
V;J
1 _f 1 oy:.: (I
4' I ?j1 ,••.q = 1 , fir: ? , •?? :?:?' °?:,? { ? ? ,,. : C• iJ`? ? I ` ?y? U .?Y=? /
3982
' ??•. ?•? _• ,?° :?-? `"rl, ?\\•-rl-7//l?'hI l/I .•??'J •'?%j".{`,.{??J,;
_ ;'/-?= ?z_, .._(: ? ? ??• ??% 1;? %(?'? °?"' ?- 03'' p ? -`>? ( Ill f ??. •? ?z ?: i?.
" = : ti= ?? Pti?? , ?,? j .\•.?:r• .,, F„ r,,.? i,..?,.%/-? `??'. ?•,-?.- f_, (' \ ??• `???\'?? ??:7 j 810000
%?' !i ; \L, I , Irv ?M t \ r 1 /lG \ /J' / ?'
FEET
/ /?? ,. 1 _ r ?? ? / •?1?? ?/ S /'" UAL y%.?'J?_
(?L\ (?
/ osr dJ `?s?a t ?I ?
Z-111?, Mvj /l'; r )s81
17
\` \J'`l`(( ?X r`l'o'll (J
/Ih "/._ { ) I 1v' '/.r ?- 1 ?J ? )) y\\,
K. , OA ,
1?\.;??lll
3984
,;\ .i if ? 'I,y?l: '\ ,. ? .'`,,,1;\. __ -7,1: ???5(l\?,`• j ?/j ?^' ? "?.? it J? ? `'?1 / • I
00
,..\± ?' \,'''• r? \': rJ'7r , T`, C.? ?II r '? . JII?N• 1\??? ///? °!r.- -Y JIs:? '???"} 5T30"
?•?, Cl \? \r ENyi..Z`,'?'ri;ci?i
Gardner House <
Jamestown v ?
icinity r
?'ll?? ?: . •?: %?i North Caro ?'? 1
lina \
USGS Ma $h Point East \i
1 `\ _- ??1r, '• p, Hi Quadrangle
i i?yj j (;1^y Scale: 1: 24,000 ?.;
Date: 1950: photorevised 1968
;? I' 71t_ 1. •; ?• Is ,\ ,
Latitude
Longitude
degrees minutes seconds degrees minutes seconds
NI' II Cis
36 59
32 79 53 15 l "
1? rg r•.,•7 NE 36 59 32 C`
79 53 43
_ R
SE 36 59 05 79 53 43 , »78
r. i
36 59 05 79 53 15
-My
(Itj ? r r f ' \) ?o/ ' ?'r°p?s'1 r \ r \ I??re ?nCt',/, ` \ ! 52
??':?%.
fIN fl.r yr?r I
=. ?(:I? . ?,-r?<ll::?(',?,\rl;f ,;% \ ,??:;'``. )-/ I Ij, , 1?? ;, l/(: L??'11:;1?? f/?r?.. ? 1? ?Y????. \, \
/ AR, %r `"77
t/
!(y /V)('•/ 1.' ? t ?11 rl' ?'"'lr lV'i-l'f •I r I;,%! % (? }. •<??'?? ?4' \, l?\?•• '?
y
\?:).V?)I,
\1 I ! ( 1 it 3(?? { ( ??, ?? •.;,
l • 111 (? : j ??%/?ll:)7 Mir
1 /nn'' _.`? G r ? 1 {I J/, I /f / ? ,?- I' 11,1 (O`l, r^I r ) 11 ?? ?l ?•? ??? ?' \`:'I
1I
1
0

1

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Policy Development
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
John Humphrey, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee 1114'
Project Review Coordinator
EE
RE: 94-0070 - Scoping Wiley Davis Road Relocation and
Improvements, Greensboro, Guilford County
DATE: August 11, 1993
The Department of Environment, Health, and
has reviewed the proposed scoping notice. The
list and describe information that is necessary
to evaluate the potential environmental impacts
More specific comments will be provided during
review.
Thank
encouraged
assistance

H

H

you for the
to notify
is needed.
attachments
cc: David Foster
Natural Resources
attached comments
for our divisions
of the project.
the environmental
opportunity to respond. The applicant is
our commenting divisions if additional
AUG 1993
S?CR? a? J ? ?Q
D0R affiq
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
' An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
Health
and Natural Resources; t? 2
,
,
' Division of Land Resources
y
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS
Charles H. Gardner
Wiliam W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
Project Number: ?c '
County: ?- C.
' Project Name: L% C 7C?
Geodetic Survey
' This project will impact geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
Survey should be contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
Oth
er (comments attached)
For more information contact the Geodetic Survey office at [phone].

' Reviewer Date
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
' No comment
This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if more
than one (1) acre will be disturbed.

' ? If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements
the document must b
b
itt
d
,
e su
m
e
as part
of the erosion and sedimentation control plan.
If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water
Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
increased design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
Th
e erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
Other (comments attached)
' For more information contact the Land Quality Section at [phone].
Reviewer Date
' P.O. Box 27687 • Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7687 • Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

t

f

II

• State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Reviewing Office:
? 2D
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW -PROJECT COMMENTS Project Number. Due Date:
Q -ODD 9 )g C)3
After review of this project It has been determined that the EHNR permit(%) and/or approvals Indicated may treed to be obtained in
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of On form.
wn atpprewtfores, amorrrsauon sna puroerrnes relative to inese plans and permits are available from the same
Regional Office. Normal Process
T
, erre
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REOUIREMENTS tstatutory time
Mnitl
t?
0 Permit to construe( a operate wastewater treatment Application IC days before begin construction or eward of ao ays
. facilities, Sewer system extensions, t Carver construction contracts Ors-site inspection. Post application
Systems not discharging into state surface waters. technical conference BtWI apt)
NPDES - permit to discharge into surfa:e water antlror Application 180 Cars before begin activity. On sits inspection. yp.120 a?
0 permit 10 Oberst! and construct wastewater facilities Pro-"PliCaliOn Conference usual Additionally. obtain permit to
discharging info state surface waters. construct wastewater treatment fa=ility-granted after NPDES Reply MIA)
ttmc. 30 days after reterpt of plans or iuue of NPDES
prarmilwhichever is later.
D
Water tts.e Mnnlt
Pr!-application fechnKal eonterence usually necessary an days
(NIA)
D
Wttl Construction Pemfit
Complete application must be (f4:tiretl and permit issued
7 days
prior to the inslallatron of a wait. (15 days)
Application copy must be served on each adlacenl riparian property 55 days
edge and Fitt Penn11 owner On-site ins;reVion. Pre -&:) plicatson conference usual Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C Department of (90 days)
Administration end Federal DrKge and Fill Permit.

? Permit to construct S opemate Air Pollution Abatement

f
il 60 days
ac
ities andro' Emission Sources as per 15A NCAC 21H. NIA (90 Cart)
An pin burning assocraieC with subject proposef
usl be in eomptlance with ISA NCAC 20.0520.
Demotmtron or renovations of structures containing
as:a ma:eria! must be in compliars,e with 15A 60 days
AC 2D 052: which requires notification and removal NIA
prior to demolition Contact AsSesios Control Group
919 733.0820
CDC da
s

Complex Source Permit regvired under 15A NCAC 2D.0W0.
, y
)
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must t>e pioprerly addressed for any (snd disturbing activity. An erosion 8 seQrmenlano
control
lan will be re
uired if one or mor
acr
t
til
t
P:
i
h
R
b
d
b
d
:
'
f
p
q
proem
e
es
o
e
vr
an
w
t
,s
ed
e
eg
or+a
Of
ice (Land Oualify Sect.1 at (east 30 20 days
Ca,s te'ore beg-nnrns activity A fee or S30 for the first acre ago 52000 for earn addmOn; acre or part mus' accom^an I e tan 30 Ca al
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the refe fenced Local Ordinance: (30 days)
On site Inspection usual. Surety bond filed wilt: EHNR Bond amount
D Mining Permit varies with type mine and numt,er of acres of affected land Any area 30 days
mined greater than one acre must be permited. The appropriate bond (60 days)
must De received terore the permit can be issued.
D North Carolina Burning permit Ons11e inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources it permit 1 day
exceeds A days (NIA)
Special Ground Cfearance Burning Permit • 22 On-site inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required -It more 1 day
counties In eoastat N.C. with Organic soot than five acres of ground clearing activities a'e involved tn3peclions (NIA)
should be requested at least ten days t>efore actual burn is pranned."
90 120 days
t Oil Refining Facilities NIA (NIA)
If permit required. a;prcaGon (A days before btQin construction.
t{?- ?1 Applicant must hiss- N C. quaNf-ed engineer to prepare plans. 30 Gays
L: D.m Safety Permit. Inspect .construe .•:;. ce:':: onsfrucGon fa according to cioin approv
ed plans. is'ay arsu rcquiie pe:mil under mosqu;1o corarof program. And (6r, days)
' a 404 ptunil from Corps of Ent:ncerS An inspec Gon of time is neces-
sary to verity lit:aid Cma:srfica:ion. A minimum (ec• Of S ,? W must ae•
company lf.e ep;fica:ion. An ad"itiunaf processing fee tistd on a
^.c rr,nG-a or [fit 1C:21 project cost vii; be requi,ed u;:-,;,n completion
4:1
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Normal Protest

PERMIM SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS (statutory time
iMnit)

Penn" to Owl expiorator
Oil or
n vs0 File surety bond of 95,000 with EKNR wnning to State of N.C.
i
l
i IQ gays
y
o cond
t
ona
that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon pl/A)
i?andonmenl, be plugged according to EKNR rules and r egutations.
Geophysical Esploratron Permit
J Application filed with EKNR at least to days prior to issue or permit 10 clays
Application by fetter. No standard application form. fWA)
State Lakes Cortstrwlion Pat I
J Application fee based on structure sire Is charged Must fndu0e 15-20 clays
descriptions i drawings of structure t proof of ownership 4N/A)
of riparian property.

401 Water Ousllty Cemihoation
WA 60 clays
4130 gays)
CAUA Permit for MAJOR d"alopmant VW-00 fee must
accompany application ss days
(150 gays)

CAIAA Permit lot MINOR development
$W-0C fee must accompany application 22 clays
as days)
Several geodetic monuments are located in or new the project area if any monuments need to be moved or aesiroyeo, please notify:
N.C Geodetic Survey, Box 27687, A.&Wph, N.C. 27611
Atandoriment of any wens. If reQuireG, must be in accordance with Title SSA, Subehapter 2CD100.
Notification of the proper regional office Is reQvesied If `orphan' underground storage tanks (LISTS) are discovered during any excavation operation.
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2M 1000 (Coaslat Stomnwater Rules) Is required.
I
As days
(NIA)
Otner commmerils (attach additional pages as wessa'y, being certain to cite eocnmeril authority):
ANY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES INCLUDING CLEARING, GRADING, AND
EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES RESULTING IN THE DISTURBANCE OF FIVE (5) OR MORE
ACRES OF TOTAL LAND ARE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A NPDES STORMWATER PERMIT
PRIOR TO BEGINNING THESE ACTIVITIES.
a_

• ?' /?
C\j

6?. f:J;• ... ;.4
GCS ?
'
.
l -_ ?
?

REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should tWaddressed to the Regional Office marked below.
?Asheville Re tonal Office
gl
W
fi ?Fayetteville Regional Office
n
ood
ace
59 Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Asheville, NC 28801 Fayetteville, NC 28301
(70,41251-6208 [phone]
? 1&0'esvilie Regional Office ? Ra'eiQh Regional Office
919 North fain Street, P.O. Box 950 3E-')O Lanett Drive
Suite 101
Mooresville, NC 28115 ,
Fa'e;Qh, NC 27609
(704) &6 1699 [phone]
yy--x?
[DWAshinglon Regtonai Office ?\Vit
i

1424 Carolina Avenue m
nClon negionai Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Woshington, NC 27889 Wilmington, NC 28405
• (9 t 9) 9:6 b481 .-, (919) 395-39W
I

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
MEMORANDUM
A MMA
v'A
141
DEHNR
August 5, 1993
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: David Harrison
SUBJECT: Proposed Improvement for Wiley Davis Road (SR 1383)
from west of Groome Town Road to Vickrey Chapel Road.
Guilford County. Project No. 94-0070.
The proposed improvements include relocation and widening of 2.7
miles of road paralleling I-85. The Environmental Assessment
should identify any unique, prime, or important farmlands that
would be impacted by the project. A wetlands evaluation should
be included.
DH/tl
1

J (,T
uL
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, NorthCarolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

. State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
' Health and Natural Resources
Division of Forest Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary

11
MEMORANDUM
AdebudobodaL
C)EHNR
Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Old US 70 West
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
August 11, 1993
I TO: Melba McGee, Policy & Development

FROM: Don H. Robbins, Staff Forester a-YAe
SUBJECT: DOT EA/Scoping for Impacts from Wiley Davis Road (SR 1383) on New
Location from West of Groometown Road to Vickrey Chapel Road in
Greensboro, Guilford County
PROJECT 494-0070
DUE DATE: 8-18-93

It appears that some woodland will b
be impacted as a result of
the proposed
project. The EA should address the following.

1. The total forest land acreage by types that would be taken out of forest
production as a result of new right-of-way purchases.
2. The productivity of the forest soils as indicated by the soil series,
that would be involved within the proposed project.
3. The impact upon existing greenways within the area of the proposed
project.
4. The provisions that the contractor will take to sell any merchantable
timber that is to be removed. This practice is encouraged to minimize
the need for piling and burning during construction. If any burning is
needed, the contractor should comply with all laws and regulations
pertaining to debris burning.

P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Page 2
August 11, 1993
5. The provisions that the contractor will take during the construction
phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation and construction damage to forest
land outside the right-of-way and construction limits. Trees outside the
construction limits should be protected from construction activities to
avoid:
a. Skinning of tree trunks by machinery.
b. Soil compaction and root exposure or injury by heavy equipment.
C. Adding layers of fill dirt over the root systems of trees, a
practice that impairs root aeration.
d. Accidental spilling of petroleum products or other damaging
substances over the root systems of trees.
We would hope that a route could be chosen that would have the least impact to
forest and related resources in that area.
DHR:gm
pc: Warren Boyette -CO
File

1

1

I Ll

1
t

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
August 16, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Policy and Development
FROM: Monica Swiharm,1jWater Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #94-0070; Scoping Comments - EA
Proposed NC DOT Relocation and Improvement of Wiley Davis
Road (SR 1383) from West of Groometown Road to Vickrey
Chapel Road in Greensboro, Guilford County, TIP No.U-3109
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project.
Based on the information provided, it appears that the
proposed improvements will cross Reddicks Creek and Jenny
Branch which both have stream classification designations of
Class C by the State of North Carolina.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channel ized/ relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? Identify the
responsible party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper

1

1

n

Melba McGee
August 16, 1993
Page 2
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. Please provide a detailed discussion for mass-transit as an
option.
K. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
L. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same watershed
is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Permit 31 will require
written concurrence. Please be aware that 401 Certification may be
denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable.
10009er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
I

11

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Division of Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
FROM: David Yow, Acting Highway Project Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: September 24, 1993
SUBJECT: Request for information from the N. C. Department
of Transportation (NCDOT) regarding fish and
wildlife concerns for Wiley Davis Road (SR 1383)
from west of Groometown Road to Vickrey Chapel
Road in Greensboro, Guilford County, North
Carolina, TIP No. U-3109, SCH Project No. 94-0070.
This memorandum responds to a request from Mr. L. J.
Ward of the NCDOT for our concerns regarding impacts on fish
and wildlife resources resulting from the subject project.
The N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) has reviewed
the proposed project, and our comments are provided in
accordance with provisions of the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act (G.S. 113A-1 et seq., as amended; 1
NCAC 25) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48
Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
The proposed work involves widening of the subject
facility, with extensive relocation on the eastern portion
of the project. NCWRC concerns include potential direct
impacts to fish and wildlife habitat resulting from
construction, and indirect impacts which will result from
subsequent development in the vicinity of the improved
roadway. Of greater concern, however, is the proposed
relocation of a significant portion of the roadway corridor.
Large tracts of woodlands and old fields presently exist
within the proposed relocation corridor, and two additional
stream crossings would be required. While fisheries habitat
is limited, the quality of wildlife habitat is moderate to
high in the area of potential impact. Secondary development
stimulated by the improved road access may lead to

Memo Page 2 September 24, 1993
substantially greater habitat impacts than those resulting
' from the roadway project itself.
In contrast to the significant natural resources
impacts which would result from construction on new
I alignment, use of existing alignment throughout the project
would have minimal impact. A site visit by NCWRC personnel
revealed that little or no residential or commercial
relocation would be required by improving existing
facilities. It was also noted that land clearing activities
are presently occurring along Wiley Davis Road, indicating
that this thoroughfare corridor may not have been adequately
protected by municipal land managers. For the reasons
above, the NCWRC maintains that use of existing facilities
is a practicable alternative for this project and should be
fully evaluated as such. The NCWRC is unlikely to concur
with a decision to construct roadway on new alignment when
such alternatives exist.
In addition to the specific concerns listed above, our
general informational needs are outlined below:
' 1. Description of fishery and wildlife resources
within the project area, including a listing of
federally or state designated threatened,
endangered, or special concern species. When
practicable, potential borrow areas to be used for
project construction should be included in the
inventories. A listing of designated plant
species can be developed through consultation
with:
The Natural Heritage Program
N. C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
and,
Cecil C. Frost, Coordinator
NCDA Plant Conservation Program
P. O. Box 27647
Raleigh, N. C. 27611
[phone]
In addition, the NCWRC's Nongame and Endangered
Species Program maintains databases for locations
of vertebrate wildlife species. While there is no
charge for the list, a service charge for computer
time is involved. Additional information may be
obtained from:

1
memo Page 3 September 24, 1993

Randy Wilson, Manager
Nongame and Endangered Species Section
N. C. Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, N. C. 27604-1188
[phone].
2. Description of any streams or wetlands affected by
the project. The need for channelizing or
relocating portions of streams crossed and the
extent of such activities.
3 C
t
h
i
. over
ype maps s
ow
ng wetland acreages impacted
by the project. Wetland acreages should include
all project-related areas that may undergo
hydrologic change as a result of ditching, other
drainage, or filling for project construction.
Wetland identification may be accomplished through
coordination with the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE). If the COE is not consulted, the
person delineating wetlands should be identified
and criteria listed.
4. Cover type maps showing acreages of upland
' wildlife habitat impacted by the proposed project.
Potential borrow sites
h
ld b
i
l
d
d
s
ou
e
nc
u
e
.
5. The extent to which the project will result in
loss, degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife
habitat (wetlands or uplands).
6. Mitigation for avoiding, minimizing or
compensating for direct and indirect degradation
in habitat quality as well as quantitative losses.
7. A cumulative impact assessment section which
analyzes the environmental effects of highway
construction and quantifies the contribution of
' this individual project to environmental
degradation.
8. A discussion of the probable impacts on natural
' resources which will result from secondary
development facilitated by the improved road
access.
9. If construction of this facility is to be
coordinated with other state, municipal, or
private development projects, a description of
these projects should be included in the
environmental document, and all project sponsors
' should be identified.

Memo
Page 4
September 24, 1993
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input in the
early planning stages for this project. If I can further
1 assist your office, please contact me at [phone].
cc: Larry Warlick, District 5 Wildlife Biologist
' Shari Bryant, District 5 Fisheries Biologist
Randy Wilson, Nongame/Endangered Species Section Mgr.

1

11

Office of the Mayor
'City of Greensboro
tO?S)

?II
LJ

fl.

1""
r
GREENSBORO
August 19, 1993
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
NCDOT
Planning & Environmental Branch
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, N. C. 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:

Subject: Wiley Davis Road EA-FONSI from Groometown Road to
Vickery Chapel Road TIP No. U-3109
Thank you for allowing the City of Greensboro to comment on
this project. The City of Greensboro supports this project and
will provide cooperation necessary to allow this project to
continue. This project will provide safe vehicular into our
corporate limits. We are indeed glad to see that this
improvement has been recognized by NCDOT. Our citizens fully
support this project and expect the department to proceed
expeditiously to begin this project.
On behalf of our citizens I believe that we need to emphasize
several areas that should be addressed by NCDOT. The safety of
the motorist, bicyclist, and pedestrians need to be maintained;
opportunity for non-vehicular travel should be provided;
the integrity of neighboring communities should be maintained;
and measures undertaken to ensure the safety of Greensboro's wate
should be included if applicable. The identification and
protection of cultural, historical, and environmental sensitive
areas within and along this project should be addressed.
Our citizens, elected leaders and staff look forward to working
with your department in the implementation of this project .
\inc rely,
a um
Mayor
cc: City Council
Secretary Hunt
City Manager
Director of Transportation
One Governmental Plaza, P.O. Box 3136, Greensboro, NC 27402-3136 [phone]

iJ

GUILFORD COUNTY
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
July 29, 1993
F C ? J LF
JUL 3 0 1993
of
R rti "VAYS J'
.
vi- .
t?rvc?? gyp?
L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
RE: Comments on State Environmental Assessment/Finding of No
Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) for Wiley Davis Road (SR 1383)
from west of Groometown Road to Vickrey Chapel Road in
Greensboro, Guilford County. TIP No. U-3109
Dear Mr. Ward:
This is in response to your letter dated July 21, 1993 requesting
comment on the above mentioned project. Below are several
comments, concerns, and observations that our department would like
addressed in the EA/FONSI.
Environmental
The proposed project is located in the Randleman Dam Watershed,
which was locally designated in August, 1985. Guilford County has
enforced watershed protection requirements in this area since that
time and will treat this watershed as a WS-IV under the State's
classification. Every effort should be made to provide for
permanent runoff control and treatment from all impervious surfaces
from the project.
Consideration should also be given to the crossing at Reddicks
Creek. This is a mapped floodplain area and contains some
wetlands. Every effort should be made to mitigate this impact by
wetland replacement and insuring no rise after construction in the
base flood elevation (BFE).
Impact on Historic Properties
Attached is a statement from the Guilford County Joint Historic
Properties Commission concerning the Gardner House which is located
on the south side of Wiley Davis Road and listed on the National
Register. As the memo states, the grounds, including the front
yard, contribute to the historic setting of the house. Any
disturbance beyond the existing side ditches would cause
significant negative impact to the property.
Post Office Box 3427 • Greensboro, North Carolina 27402
Telephone: [phone]

IL

Ward, L. E.
July 29, 1993
page 2
The Wiley House located on Vickrey Chapel Road is also on the
National Register but is only indirectly impacted by this project.
See attached map for locations.
Coordination with Other Plans
In 19891 Guilford County adopted the Southwest Area Plan that
addresses land use and transportation planning in this part of
Guilford County. The plan identified the need for the widening and
relocation of Wiley Davis as currently proposed. However, the plan
also identified the need for the extension of Stanford Road south
from High Point Road to Business I-85. The intersection of
Stanford Road with Wiley Davis will cause a significant impact to
properties at Vickrey Chapel and Wiley Davis. In 1992, the Koury
Corporation had a regional traffic impact study done to address the
impact of their proposed development. The study revealed the need
for upgrading Groometown and Wiley-Davis, east of Groometown, and
for interchange improvements at Business I-85/Groometown and
Business I-85/Vickrey-Chapel. All of these transportation projects
should be addresses in the EA/FONSI for this project.
' Neighborhood Impact
The western portion of this project passes through two established
residential neighborhoods, Wiley Park and Trailwood. Most of the
homes along Wiley Davis have moderate setbacks and direct access.
Care should be taken to provide for the ultimate design in the
least amount of right-of-way. Also, there are several vacant
tracts of land on the north and south sides of Wiley-Davis.
' Attention should be given to the additional right-of-way
requirements and final design to minimize impact to developed
properties and maximize impact to undeveloped properties.

If you have any questions concerning these comments, please call me
at 373-3746. I would also like to receive a copy of the completed
report.
SiFZA Cf.
.
Mark E
. Kirstner, AICP
Senior Planner
Attachments
cc: John Shore, Interim County Manager
Board of Commissioners

mi
GUILFORD COUNTY
July 27, 1993

III
LJ'

TO: Mark Kirstner
FROM: Roger Bardsley
SUBJECT: Impact of Wiley-Davis
Rd. Widening on Gardner House
On July 14 the Historic Preservation Commission met on site to
assess the potential impact of widening Wiley-Davis Rd. on the
Gardner House, a National Register property. The Commission
reached the following conclusions:
1) The grounds of the property contribute to the historic setting
of the house. A substantial encroachment on the grounds would be
damaging. Since the grounds slope downhill from the road, any
widening would require considerable fill.
2) Significant widening on the opposite (north) side of the road
would damage the yards of the homes fronting Wiley-Davis Rd. These
homes are much closer to the road than the Gardner House.
3) A 5-lane roadway section (56 feet of pavement) with curb, gutter
and storm drainage could be placed within the existing 60 foot
right-of-way and have minimal impact on either side of the road.
This is because the existing two-lane 22 foot roadway has wide side
ditches, and the disturbed area is almost 60 feet. If the storm
drainage is placed underground during widening, the area of
disturbance will not extend much further than at present.
4) Any widening beyond five lanes should avoid the Gardner House
property entirely.
Post Office Box 3427 9 Greensboro, North Carolina 27402