19950118 Ver 1_Complete File_19950206

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO February 27, 1998
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. 199401494
Mr. H. Franklin Vick
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:

In accordance with your written request of January 21, 1998, the completion date of your
Department of the Army permit to place fill material into approximately 19.4 acres of waters
and wetlands at 28 separate locations in the headwaters of Coffey Creek, Sixmile Creek,
Fourmile Creek, and North Fork Crooked Creek to construct 9.5 additional miles of the
Charlotte Outer Loop Highway (I-485) between York Road and Interstate Highway 77 and
between Providence Road and Idlewild Road at Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
is hereby extended until December 31, 1999. All other conditions of your permit remain in full
force and effect.
We understand from your request that the only section of road in this permit that is not
completed is R-2123AA which extends north from the Independence Boulevard (US 74)
interchange to Idlewild Road. If this permitted work is not completed on or before the date
herein specified, the authorization, if not previously revoked or specifically further extended,
will cease and become null and void.
Sincerely,
Terry R. Youngbluth
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Engineer

-2-
Copies Furnished:
Mr. John Domey
Division of Water Quality
North Carolina Department of
?Environment and Natural Resources
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Mr. Gordon Cashin
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
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
April 5, 1995
MEMO
To: Cyndi Bell
DOT
Through: John Dorne
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: I-77 and Tyvvola Road Interchange
TIP # I-2506
Mecklenburg County
C) FE F1
A site visit was performed by DEM, WRC and DOT on March 27, 1995. This site
visit was requested by DEM to determine the appropriate measures to protect water quality
and aquatic life in the proposed relocated stream in the southwest quadrant of the interchange.
Since staff from DOT's Hydraulic Unit were not present at the site, DEM has the following
questions:
1) Please provide a copy of a map of the existing stream to us. This map should
include all the physical stream dimensions, and locations of pools, riffles, runs
and flats.
2) Has DOT developed a detailed stream relocation diagram that approximates the
characteristics of the existing stream? A copy of the map showing the
relocated stream should be forwarded to us. DEM requests that DOT
coordinate with WRC and us for this project.
Should you have any questions, please contact Eric Galamb at 733-1786.
I77&tyvo.mem
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
?Ty oa SUiEo
N d ?A?
.401
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH. N.C. 27611-5201
January 27, 1995
R. SAMUEL HUNT I II
SECRETARY
qD)Jg
District Engineer
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
Subject: Mecklenburg County - Interstate 77 Interchange
with Tyvola Road; State Project No. 8.1673601;
T.I.P. No. I-2506
Attached for your information is a copy of the project
planning report for the subject project. The project is
being processed by the Federal Highway Administration as a
"Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with FR 771.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate request' an I dividual
Permit but propose to proceed under a ationwi Permit in
accordance with 33 CFR 330 Appendix (B-23) ' sued November
22, 1991, by the Corps of Engineer The p visions of
Section 330.4 and Appendix A (C) then regulations will be
followed in the construction of the oject.
We anticipate that 401 General Certification No. 2745
(Categorical Exclusion) will apply to this project, and are
providing one copy of the CE document to the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Division of Environmental management, for their review.
If you have any questions or need additional
information, please call Cyndi Bell at [phone].
Sin ly,
r
B J. 'Quin , P.E.
A ant anager,
Planning and Environmental Branch

FEB - 6 1995
zL3
WIER
9
Jr- .
v .*11
BJO/clb
Attachment
cc: Steve Lund, COE, Asheville Field Office
Eric Galamb, DEHNR, DEM
John Parker, DEHNR, DCM/Permit Coordinator
Kelly Barger, P.E., Program Development Branch
Don Morton, P.E., Highway Design
A.L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
John L. Smith, Jr., P.E., Structure Design
Tom Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design
B.G. Payne, P.E., Division 10 Engineer
Angela Smith, Planning & Environmental
Davis Moore, Planning & Environmental
r ..A-
I-77 Interchange with Tyvola Road
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County
Federal Aid Project No. IMS-71-1(127)5
State Project No. 8.1673601
T.I.P. Project No. I-2506
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
APPROVED:
Date H. 4in Vic P. E., anager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
ate Nicho as L. Gra , P. E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
• 1a
I-77 Interchange with Tyvola Road
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County
Federal Aid Project No. IMS-77-1(127)5
State Project No. 8.1673601
T.I.P. Project No. I-2506

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
November, 1994
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Angel H. Smith
Project Planning Engineer
?•.•`??H CAR ' .,
Linwood Stone E <'
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head _
.. 1 4 s
s ,
%
01 NIH. Frank in Vick, E., 74anager
,?????????"'?•??••
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
The following environmental commitments are called for in this
doc ument:
A. Any rechannelization of Kings Branch Creek or any of its tributaries
will be coordinated with the Department of Environment, Health and
Natural Resources (DEHNR), and with the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission if necessary.
B. NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters and Sedimentation Control guidelines will be followed during
construction of the project.
C. Precaution will be taken to avoid widening in the vicinity of the
private landfill in the northeast quadrant of the interchange.
D. Any change in the proposed action will be coordinated with the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&WS). Threatened and endangered
species will be reevaluated prior to construction of the project.
E. If any evidence of a significant archaeological site is discovered
during construction, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
will be immediately contacted.
F. The N. C. Geodetic Survey will be contacted concerning the
anticipated impact to two geodetic survey markers prior to
construction.
G. The anticipated Nationwide Permit #23 will be coordinated with the
Army Corps of Engineers (COE).
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .......................... 1
A. General Description........... 1
B. Summary of Proposed Improvements ....................... 1
1. Project Termini..... .......... 1
2. Project Length .......................... ...... 1
3. Cross Section... .......................... 2
4. Right of Way Width.. 2
` 5. Access Control..... 2
6. Drainage Structures.. . 2
7. Design Speed and Speed Zones ............. 3
8. Railroad.. . 3
9. Construction Phasing .............................. 3
10. Interchange.. 3
11. Bicycle Provisions ................................ 4
12. Signals .......................................... 4
13. Sidewalks ............................... 4
14. Utilities .............. 4
15. Special Permits Required .......................... 4
16. Cost Estimate ..................................... 4
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............................... 5
A. Existing Roadway Inventory ............................. 5
1. Cross Section ...................................•. 5
2. Right of Way ...................................... 5
3. Structures.. . 5
4. Access Control ........................................ . 5
5. Speed Zones .............................. 5
6. Railroads ......................................... 5
7. Signals ........................................... 6
8. Sidewalks ......................................... 6
9. Utilities ..................................... 6
10. Geodetic Markers ........................ 6
11. School Buses ...................................... 6
B. Functional Classification ...................... 6
C. Thoroughfare Plan... ... 6
D. Traffic Volumes and Capacity ........................... 6
E. Accident History ....................................... 7
III. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED........ 8
A. Recommended Improvements.... 8
B. Other Alternatives Considered .......................... 8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ....................................... 8
A. Social Environment ..................................... 8
1. Neighborhood Characteristics ...................... 8
2. Public Facilities ................................. 9
3. Cultural Resources ................................ 9
a. Architectural Resources .............. 9
b. Archaeological Resources ..................... 9
4. Relocation Impacts. ..... o ......................... 9
B. Economic Environment. '***** ................... .... 9
C. Land Use ............................................... 10
1. Scope and Status of Planning ...................... 10
2. Existing Land Use............ 10
3. Future Land Use ........................... 10
4. Farmland .......................................... 10
D. Natural Environment .................................... 11
1. Ecological Resources .............................. 11
a. Plant Communities ....................... 11
b. Wildlife Communities ......................... 13
2. Protected Species ................................. 14
a. Federally Protected Species .................. 14
b. State Protected Species ...................... 16
3. Physical Resources ................................ 17
a. Geology, Topography, and Soils ............... 17
b. Contaminated Properties ...................... 18
C. Water Resources .............................. 18
d. Floodplain Involvement ....................... 21
e. Wetlands ..................................... 21
4. Air Quality and Traffic Noise ................. 22
5. Construction Impacts .............................. 22
6. Permits ........................................... 24
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ................................... 25
APPENDIX
FIGURES
CORRESPONDENCE
I-77 Interchange with Tyvola Road
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County
Federal Aid Project No. IMS-77-1(127)5
State Project No. 8.1673601
T.I.P. Project No. I-2506
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), Division of
Highways, proposes to widen Tyvola Road at the I-77 interchange in
Charlotte (see Figure 1). This project extends approximately 1.1
kilometer (km) (0.7 mile) along Tyvola Road, and 1.9 km (1.2 mile) along
I-77. The recommended action is to replace the existing bridge with a new
single point urban interchange (see Figure 2). The proposed typical
section on the bridge will be 6 lanes. The 6 lanes will transition to
5 lanes on the east side to Westpark Lane and to 7 lanes on the west side
to Nations Ford Road. The new structure will accommodate an ultimate
8 lanes on I-77.
This project is included in the 1995-2001 Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) with right of way acquisition to begin in fiscal year (FY)
1995 and construction scheduled to begin in FY 1996. The estimated total
project cost in the 1995-2001 TIP is $4,800,000, which includes $1,000,000
for right of way and $3,500,000 for construction. The amount of
expenditure for the previous years was $300,000. The actual cost of the
recommended improvement is $10,810,000, which includes $1,610,000 for
right of way and $9,200,000 for construction.
No significant adverse environmental impacts are anticipated from the
proposed improvements. The project has been coordinated with the
appropriate state and regional review agencies, federal permit agencies,
and local government officials.
B. Summary of Proposed Improvements
1. Project Termini
The project will extend on Tyvola Road to Seventy-Seven Center
Drive (just east of Westpark Drive) on the east and to Nations Ford
Road on the west of the proposed interchange. The limits on I-77 will
extend to the Southern Railroad on the north and to approximately 457
meters (m) (1500 feet) south of the ramp terminals to the south. See
Figures 1 and 2.
2. Project Length
The total project length along Tyvola Road is 1.1 km (0.7 mile),
and 1.9 km (1.2 mile) along I-77.
2
3. Cross Section
The recommended cross section is a 6-lane roadway on the
proposed single point urban interchange. One lane will be dropped to
match the existing 5-lane section on Tyvola Road east of the
interchange and an additional lane will be added and maintained to
Nations Ford Road to the west. The 7-lane section will provide for
4-lanes in the westbound direction (which includes one exclusive left
turn lane) and 3-lanes in the eastbound direction. Left turns will
only be permitted at the intersection. A concrete median will
separate eastbound and westbound traffic.
4. Right of Way Width
It is anticipated that additional right of way will be required
north of Tyvola Road to accommodate widening on Tyvola Road (see
Figure 2 for right of way limits).
5. Access Control
Tyvola Road will have full control of access within the inter-
change area and partial control of access along existing Tyvola Road.
I-77 will retain full control of access.
6. Drainage Structures
The proposed project will impact three major drainage
structures. The first structure carries Kings Branch Creek under
Tyvola Road and is located just west of the existing interchange.
The structure is a double 2.4 m by 3 m (8-foot by 10-foot) reinforced
concrete box culvert (RCBC). This structure is hydraulically
adequate and is anticipated to be retained and extended as necessary
due to widening or relocation of the ramps west of I-77.
The second drainage structure carries Kings Branch Creek under
I-77, south of Tyvola Road. This structure is a double barrel 3 m by
3 m (10-foot by.10-foot) RCBC and is anticipated to be retained and
extended. Extension of this culvert to the southeast (downstream
end) will be limited by nearby structures and the confluence of a
tributary approximately 6 m (20 feet) to the southeast. To avoid
encroachment of fill material into the stream channel, a retaining
wall may be necessary (this will be determined in the design stage).
The third structure carries a tributary to Kings Branch and is
located just east of I-77. This structure is a double
1500-millimeter (mm) (60-inch) reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) that
begins at Tyvola Road and extends approximately 183 m (600 feet) to
the south. This structure is currently undersized and must be
supplemented to provide adequate conveyance. In addition, there is
an existing 2590 mm (102 inch) corrugated metal pipe (CMP)
approximately 30 m (100 feet) upstream that is recommended to be
connected to this structure by means of a special junction structure.
7. Design Speed and Speed Zones
Tyvola Road will have a design speed of 80 kilometers per hour
(km/h) (50 miles per hour (mph)). The existing speed limit of
70 km/h (45 mph) is expected to be retained after completion of the
project.
8. Railroad
No impacts to the Southern Railroad are anticipated.
9. Construction Phasing
Traffic must be maintained during construction along both I-77
and Tyvola Road. On I-77 traffic will be maintained in its existing
pattern during construction, except for short durations (weekends or
nights) to allow for girder placement and ramp tie ins. On Tyvola
Road the existing traffic patterns will be maintained by phase
constructing the proposed bridge. The north side of the bridge will
be constructed while traffic is maintained on the existing structure.
Traffic will then be shifted to the north side of the proposed
structure. The old bridge will then be removed and the southern
portion of the proposed structure will be completed. Four lanes of
traffic will be maintained across the structure at all times.
Although the existing traffic pattern may be affected for short
durations for utility and drainage. system work, no major disruptions
to traffic flow are anticipated during construction. Impacts to
traffic movements will be minimized during special events at the
Charlotte Coliseum.
10. Interchange
The recommended interchange configuration is a single point
urban design (see Figure 2). One of the advantages of the single
point urban interchange is minimization of right of way required.
Since land costs are at a premium in the project area, this results
in a significant cost savings. This type structure is unique in that
all left turning movements meet at one traffic signal located on the
platform (bridge deck). Right turning movements are handled off the
structure and merged onto the crossroad (Tyvola Road). See Figure 4
for a schematic diagram showing traffic movement on the single point
urban interchange.
The structure width is 70 m (230 feet) and the length is 43 m
(140 feet). The horizontal clearance under the bridge will allow for
the future widening of I-77 to 8 lanes.
The lane configuration for the recommended alternative is
described below and illustrated in Figure 4. The interchange will
consist of two through lanes and two left turn lanes in the eastbound
and westbound directions on Tyvola Road. In addition, one right turn
lane will be required for both eastbound and westbound directions.
Traffic exiting from I-77 will require dual left turn lanes on the
platform and a single right turn lane.
4
11. Bicycle Provisions
No special accommodations for bicycles are recommended due to
the high traffic volumes on this project.
12. Signals
The unique design of the single point urban interchange will
utilize signalization on the bridge in one location instead of two
locations, as required with the compressed diamond configuration.
See Figure 5 for a detail of the basic operation of a single point
urban interchange (SPUI).
13. Sidewalks
Sidewalks will be located along both sides of the proposed
structure as requested by the City of Charlotte. In the City's
May 4, 1994 letter, they requested that we include sidewalk along
Tyvola Road where it does not currently exist. The City is also
willing to participate in the cost of constructing these sidewalks.
Municipal participation in funding of sidewalks is based on
population. The City of Charlotte has a population over 100,000 and
would therefore be expected to share in 50% of the cost of sidewalks.
For an estimated 1829 linear meters (6000 linear feet) of sidewalk,
the cost to the City is estimated to be $37,000.
14. Utilities
Utility conflicts along the project are anticipated to be
medium.
Utilities located along the project include minor lines for
Piedmont Natural gas, Duke Power, and Southern Bell. No additional
utilities are anticipated to be added during construction by the
city.
15. Special Permits Required
A Nationwide Permit #23 is anticipated to be required for this
project. Final permit decisions will be made by the Corps of
Engineers (COE).
16. Cost Estimate
The recommended interchange configuration (single point urban
interchange) is estimated to cost $1,610,000 for right of way
($100,000 for advance acquisition) and $9,200,000 for construction,
for a total cost of $10,810,000.
5
II. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. Existing Roadway Inventory
1. Cross Section
The existing Tyvola Road consists of a 4-lane, 14.4 m (48-foot)
pavement on the bridge and a 5-lane curb and gutter section to the
east and west of the existing bridge.
I-77, in the project area, was widened from a 4-lane to a 6-lane
median divided section in 1994. All widening was accomplished in the
median.
2. L qt of W ay
Existing right of way on I-77 is 73 m (240 feet) flaring out to
approximately 244 m (800 feet) at the interchange. Tyvola Road has
approximately 30 m (100 feet) of right of way.
3. Structures
The existing structure, Bridge # 150, was constructed in 1966
and has a sufficiency rating of 91.8. This structure is comprised of
a reinforced concrete deck on I-beams. The bridge has an estimated
remaining life of 31 years. Rehabilitation of the existing bridge
was not considered since the horizontal clearance under the existing
structure will not accommodate the proposed cross section for future
widening of I-77 to eight lanes.
A below-ground parking garage for Scott Buick and a retaining
wall for the Radisson Hotel are near (possibly within 15 m (50 feet))
the existing right of way in the southeast quadrant. Widening in
this area may require minor stream rechannel ization because of the
proximity of Kings Branch Creek.
Only one billboard is present near the right of way. It is in
the northwest quadrant and is not anticipated to be impacted.
4. Access Control
Tyvola Road has partial control of access except at the I-77
interchange, where full control of access exists.
5. Speed Zones
The speed limit on Tyvola Road in the project area is 70 km/h
(45 mph) and 90 km/h (55 mph) on I-77.
6. Railroads
The Southern Railroad crosses both Tyvola Road and I-77 near the
project area (see Figure 1) but this project is not involved with the
railroad.
6
7. Signals
Signals are currently located at both ramp terminals, at Nations
Ford Road, at Westpark Drive and at Seventy Seven Center Drive.
8. Sidewalks
Sidewalks are currently located on the south side of Tyvola Road
between the interchange and Nations Ford Road. No sidewalks are
located on the existing bridge, however it was noted that pedestrians
frequently cross the bridge and the City does request sidewalks
across both sides of the bridge.
9. Utilities
Utility conflict is expected to be medium along the project.
Utilities located along the project include minor lines for Piedmont
Natural gas, Duke Power, and Southern Bell.
10. Geodetic Markers
This project will impact 2 geodetic survey markers. The N. C.
Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior to construction.
11. School Buses
The proposed project is expected to have a positive effect on
the Mecklenburg County School System by improving traffic flow
through this section to area schools. Thirty buses currently use
this section of Tyvola Road daily.
B. Functional Classification
I-77 is part of the National Highway System and is classified as an
urban principal arterial-interstate in the Statewide Classification
System.
C. Thoroughfare Plan
I-77 is classified as a freeway on the Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Thoroughfare Plan adopted in 1990, and Tyvola Road is classified as a
major thoroughfare. The present thoroughfare plan specifies an ultimate
8-lane cross-section on I-77. Therefore, the proposed improvement is in
conformance with the thoroughfare plan (see Figure 3 for an excerpt from
the thoroughfare plan).
D. Traffic Volumes and Capacity
The estimated average daily traffic (ADT) for the intersecting roads
is shown on Figures 7A through 7E. Tyvola Road is expected to have 42,000
vehicles per day (vpd) in 1998 and 70,200 vpd in 2018. Interstate 77 is
expected to have 92,000 vpd in 1998 and 145,000 vpd in 2018. These
estimates of the average daily traffic include 3% truck-tractor
semi-trailers (TTST) and 5% dual tired vehicles (dual) on Tyvola Road and
17% TTST and 6% dual for I-77.
7
The traffic carrying ability of a roadway is described by levels of
service (LOS) which range from A through F. Level of service A, the
highest level of service, is characterized by very low delay in which most
vehicles do not stop at all. Typically, drivers are unrestricted and
turns are freely made. In level of service B, traffic operation is stable
but more vehicles are stopping and causing higher levels of delay. Level
of service C is characterized by stable operation with drivers
occasionally having to wait through more than one red indication. Most
drivers feel somewhat restricted in these circumstances. At level of
service D, the influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Delay to
R approaching vehicles may be substantial during short periods of the peak
hour. Level of service E is considered to be the limit of acceptable
delay and represents the theoretical capacity of the facility. Level of
service F represents over saturated or jammed conditions which are
considered unacceptable to most drivers.
The interchange currently operates at LOS F during peak periods due
to the westbound move on Tyvola Road (which consists of one left turn lane
and one through lane on the bridge). Based on current and projected
traffic volumes, the recommended interchange design (the single point
urban interchange) on Tyvola Road would operate at level of service D in
2018 using the lane configuration shown in Figure 4a. Interstate 77 would
operate at a LOS E in 2018 with a future 8-lane section and continuous
auxiliary lanes between interchanges. A 10-lane facility with auxiliary
lanes would operate at LOS D in 2018.
The compressed diamond interchange (the studied alternative) would
require a through lane in each direction and another left turn lane in the
southbound direction in addition to the recommended lanes to operate at
level of service D in 2018 (see Figure 4b for this lane configuration).
E. Accident History
A total of 213 reported accidents with no fatalities occurred on the
studied portion of Tyvola Road and I-77 between March 1991 and February
1994. The primary types of accidents were rear-end collisions (52.6%),
left-turn across traffic collisions (10.3%), angle collisions (8.51-.), and
sideswipe collisions (81-.). The proposed improvement will reduce the
potential for these types of accidents.
The total accident rate for the studied section of Tyvola Road/I-77
is 266.45 accidents per 100 million vehicle miles (acc/100 mvm) compared
to the state average for similar routes (having full control of access) of
102.2 acc/100 mvm. The accident rate for this project is significantly
higher than the statewide average. This rate will likely continue to
increase unless provisions are made to accommodate the projected traffic
volumes. The new structure is expected to greatly improve traffic
movement through the interchange and thus reduce these types of accidents.
8
III. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
A. Recommended Improvements
The recommended alternative consists of replacing the existing bridge
carrying Tyvola Road over I-77 with a single point urban interchange. A
sketch of the recommended intersection layout is shown in Figure 4. The
proposed structure will be 43 m (140 feet) in length and 70 m (230 feet)
in width.
B. Other Alternatives Considered
Due to the project scope calling for widening an existing segment of
roadway (Tyvola Road), no alternative corridors were considered. The
other interchange configuration considered is the compressed diamond (see
Figure 2a). This alternative was rejected since the single point urban
interchange was shown to serve traffic more efficiently in the capacity
analysis. Also, the additional right of way required made this
alternative more costly. The right of way cost for the compressed diamond
is $3,110,000, and the construction cost is $8,200,000 for a total of
$11,310,000. The total cost is $500,000 higher than the recommended
alternative (single point urban interchange).
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
A. Social Environment
1. Neighborhood Characteristics
The proposed project is located in Mecklenburg County within the
city limits of Charlotte, North Carolina.
Mecklenburg county is located in the south central section of
the state and is bounded by the state of South Carolina and Gaston,
Lincoln, Iredell, Cabarrus, and Union counties. According to the
latest statistical report from LINC-SYSTEM - NC STATE DATA CENTER FOR
1992, Mecklenburg County population consists of a total of 536,870.
Mecklenburg County is the largest urbanized area in the state.
During the year of 1990, the city of Charlotte had a population of
395,934.
The neighborhood in the project area is urban. It is 1
characterized with commercial development, especially in the
northeast and southeast quadrants. Businesses within the quadrants '
consist of a car dealership, restaurants, a motel, a fast food
restaurant, and a nearby shopping center.
Based on surveys and research completed on this study, the
proposed project will not disrupt community cohesion, interfere with
facilities and services, and will not displace any community
residents and businesses.
9
2. Public Facilities
One public facility is located in the immediate project area,
the Nations Ford Church of Christ.
3. Cultural Resources
a. Architectural Resources
On May 17, 1993, the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) reported that they were aware of no
structures of historical or architectural importance that would
be affected by the proposed project (See letter of SHPO
concurrence in the Appendix). This coordination and finding
completes compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance. with Section 106,
codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
b. Archaeological Resources
There are no known archaeological sites within the project
area. Due to the limited scope of the project and the extensive
modern development in the project area, it is unlikely that any
archaeological resources which may be eligible for inclusion on
the National Register of Historic Places will be affected. The
SHPO has reviewed the project scope and recommends that no
further archaeological investigation be conducted (see SHPO
letter of May 17, 1993 in the Appendix). This coordination and
finding completes compliance with Section 106, codified at
36 CFR Part 800.
4. Relocation Impacts
Based on preliminary designs, the recommended improvements will
not require any displacements of businesses or residences.
B. Economic Environment
NORTH CAROLINA PRELIMINARY CIVILIAN LABOR FORCE ESTIMATES PRELIMINARY
DATA FOR MARCH OF 1994 indicates that Mecklenburg County has a labor force
of 306,440. Out of this total, 297,530 persons were gainfully employed.
This left an unemployment total of 8,910, or 2.9 percent.
The low unemployment rate of Mecklenburg can be contributed partly to
the county's infrastructures. Mecklenburg is constantly initiating
programs and projects to enhance its road system in order to attract
commercial and industrial development into the region. This proposed
project maintains that type of continuity because it is located within a
neighborhood consisting mostly of commercial development.
10
C. Land Use
1. Scope and Status of Planning
All development activities in the Charlotte and Mecklenburg
County are controlled by the Mecklenburg County Joint Planning
Commission. The Commission adopted the Generalized Land Plan: 2005
in 1985, and has subsequently completed a series of small area, or
district plans. The Southwest District Plan, completed in 1991,
includes the Tyvola Road interchange with I-77.
2. Existing Land Use
The southeastern quadrant of the interchange is developed with
commercial land uses, including a shopping center, automobile sales,
restaurants, and large hotels. The southwestern quadrant is occupied
by low-to-medium density residential development, while the remaining
two quadrants are vacant.
The interchange provides access to the Charlotte Coliseum, in
addition to other relatively large traffic generators.
The land on the east side of I-77 is currently zoned I-2,
General Industrial, which permits a wide range of intensive
industrial and commercial uses. The northwestern quadrant is zoned
for multi-family residential development, as well as a shopping
center immediately at the interchange. The southwestern quadrant is
zoned for low density residential use, reflecting the existing
condition, as well as multi-family development near Nations Ford
Road.
3. Future Land Use
According to the Southwest District Plan the immediate area of
the interchange is designate or in ustrta development. Low
density residential development is expected just west of the
interchange. The Plan identifies i-mprovements to the interchange as
one of the needed transportation improvements for the area.
Given that residential development already exists, and is
planned for expansion on the west side of I-77 and that an employment
center, shopping, and other services are available on the east side,
the need for a sidewalk on the Tyvola Road bridge over I-77 is
apparent.
4. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 requires all federal
agencies or their representatives to consider the impact of land
acquisition and construction projects on prime and important farmland
soils, as designated by the U. S. Soil Conservation Service. Soils
which are developed or committed to urban development by the local
planning authority are exempt from the requirements of the Act. The
Tyvola Road area is generally urbanized, with land committed for
11
commercial, industrial, and residential development in its immediate
area. Therefore, further consideration of potential farmland impacts
is not required.
D. Natural Environment
1. Ecological Resources
a. Plant Communities
Three distinct terrestrial communities were identified in
the project study area: (1) Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest; (2)
Open Field Community and (3) Urbanized/Roadside Community.
Community boundaries are frequently ill-defined; contiguous
communities generally merge without any transition zone between
them. Many faunal species are highly adaptive and may populate
the entire range of terrestrial communities discussed.
Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forest The Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory
Forest is found primarily on mid slopes, low ridges and upland
flats. These forests are scattered throughout the piedmont and
coastal plain. They are uneven aged and contain moderate
amounts of old trees. Because the overall moisture level is not
easy to determine, Dry-Mesic Oak-Hickory Forests are most easily
distinguished by the canopy composition.
The upper canopy of the hardwood forest in the study area
contains mesophytic trees adapted to moderately wet conditions.
Species present include pignut hickory (Carya glabra), mockernut
hickory (Carya tomentosa), white oak (Quercus alba), southern
red oak (Q. falcata), blackjack oak (Q. marilandica), water oak
(Q. nigra), willow oak (Q. phellos), northern red oak (Q.
rubra), black oak (Q. velutina), sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciflua), sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) and American elm
(Ulmus americana). The understory vegetation includes paw paw
(Asimina triloba), dogwood (Cornus florida), red bud (Cercis
canadensis), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), tree-of-heaven
(Ailanthus altissima), red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), red
maple (Acer rubrum), shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata), eastern
white pine (Pinus strobus), black cherry (Prunus serotina) and
winged elm (Ulmus alata). Shrub species are sparkleberry
(Vaccinium arboreum), huckleberry (V. stamineum), winged sumac
(Rhus coppallina) and common sumac (Rhus glabra). The vine
layer contains species such as trumpet vine (Campsis radicans),
Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), poison ivy
(Toxicodendron radicans), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus
quinquefolia), kudzu (Pueraria lobata), wild grape (Vitis
rotundifolia) and greenbrier (Smilax rotundifolia). The herb
layer is often moderately dense and diverse, though it may be
under heavy shade. Herb species include christmas fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides) and many species of grass (Panicum
spp.).
12
Open Field The Open Field Community consists mainly of
vine and herbaceous vegetation. However, canopy species
including loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) and mimosa (Albizia
julibrissen) are present along the edges of the field. Vine and
herb species are greenbrier, Japanese honeysuckle, soft rush
(Juncus effusus), thoroughwort (Eupatorium album and E.
purpureum), barnyard grass (Echinochloa crusgalli) and
dog-fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium).
Roadside/Urbanized The Roadside/Urbanized community is
dominated by both woody and weedy herbs that are regularly
controlled by mowing. Species such as fescue (Festuca spp.),
panic grass (Panicum spp.) and dandelion (Taraxacum officinale)
thrive in areas with full sunlight. In addition, woody species
including Bradford pear (Pyrus communis), poison-ivy, red maple,
sycamore, trumpet creeper, and dogwood occur.
Construction of the subject project will have various
impacts on the biotic resources described. Any
construction-related activities in or near these resources will
impact biological functions. This section quantifies and
qualifies impacts to the natural resources in terms of area
impacted and ecosystems affected. Temporary and permanent
impacts are considered here as well.
Calculated impacts to terrestrial resources reflect the
relative abundance of each community present in the study area.
Project construction will result in clearing and degradation of
portions of these communities. Table 5 summarizes potential
quantitative losses to these biotic communities, resulting from
project construction. Estimated impacts are derived using the
entire proposed right-of-way width of 122.0 m (400.0 ft) on
I-77, interchange diameter of 244.0 m (800.0 ft) at the
intersection of I-77 and Tyvola Road and the proposed
right-of-way width of 45.7 m (150.0 ft) on Tyvola Road.
Usually, project construction does not require the entire right
of way; therefore, actual impacts may be considerably less.
TABLE 5. ESTIMATED IMPACTS TO BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
Community Impact
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 5.4 (13.6)
Open Field 0.2 ( 0.5)
Roadside/Urbanized 7.5 (18.7)
Total 13.1 (32.8)
NOTE: Impacts are in hectares (acres).
13
r

b. Wildlife Communities
The surrounding landscape
existence of mainly edge type
reptiles and amphibians.
provides habitat for the
species of birds, mammals,
Many birds were observed during the project visit. Species
such as the northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), blue jay
(Cyanocitta cristata), mourning dove (Zenaidura macroura),
American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), northern mockingbird
(Mimus polyglottos ), Carolina chickadee (Parus carolinensis),
house sparrow (Passer domesticus), house finch (Carpodacus
mexicanus) and American robin (Turdus migratorius) were observed
along wooded edges. A red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) was
seen foraging in the open field.
Mammals which are known to inhabit these communities within
the project area include the gray squirrel (Sciurus
carolinensis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), opossum (Didelphis
virginiana), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), eastern
mole (Scalopus aquaticus) and the white-footed mouse (Peromuscus
leucopus).
Small concentrations of amphibians are expected to inhabit
Kings Branch and its tributary. Most of these amphibians live
in springs, seepages and streams throughout hardwood forests. A
few species thought to inhabit this area are the two-lined
salamander (Eurycea bislineata), red salamander (Pseudotriton
ruber), spring peeper (Hyla crucifer), green frog (Rana
clamitanus) and pickerel frog (Rana sphenocephala).
Reptiles thought to inhabit the project and surrounding
areas are snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina), eastern box
turtle (Terrapene carolina), eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus
undulatus), five-lined skink (Eumeces fasciatus), black racer
(Coluber constrictor) and the queen snake (Regina
septemvittata).
Aquatic Communities
One aquatic community type, the small Piedmont perennial
r urbanized stream, will be impacted by the proposed project.
Physical and chemical characteristics of the water body dictate
faunal composition of the aquatic communities. Terrestrial
Ir communities adjacent to a water resource also greatly influence
aquatic communities and vice versa.
Kings Branch and its tributary probably support a low
diversity of fish species. The bluehead chub (Nocomis
leptocephalus), creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus), redbreast
sunfish (Lepomis auritus), bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) and
largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) are thought to inhabit
streams in the area. Common insects are small whirligig beetle
(Gyrinus spp.) and common water strider (Gerris remigis).
14
2. Protected Species
Some populations of fauna and flora have been in, or are in, the
process of decline either due to natural forces or their inability tc
coexist with man. Federal law (under the provisions of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended) requires that any action,
likely to adversely a species classified as federally-protected, be
subject to review by the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Other
species may receive additional protection under separate state laws.
a. Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with Federal Classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE), and
Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of
Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended. As of July 8, 1994, the FWS lists the following
federally-protected species for Mecklenburg County (Table 6). A
brief description of each species' characteristics and habitat
follows.
TABLE 6. FEDERAL LISTED SPECIES FOR MECKLENBURG COUNTY
Scientific Name Common Name Classification
Lasmigona decorata Carolina heelsplitter E*
Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz's sunflower E
"E" denotes Endangered (a species that is threatened with
.extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its
range).
"*" No specimen from Mecklenburg County found in the past
twenty years (1973-1993).
Lasmigona decorata (Carolina heelsplitter) E
Animal Family: Unimdae
Date Listed: June 30, 1993
Distribution in N.C.: Cabarrus, Mecklenburg, Union.

The Carolina heelsplitter has an ovate, trapezoidal,
unsculptured shell which is greenish, yellowish, or brownish in
color with greenish or blackish rays. The nacre is usually
pearly-white to bluish-white graying to orange near the umbo and
in older specimens the entire nacre may be mottled orange. The
umbo is flattened and the beaks are depressed and project a
little above the hinge line.
15
Habitat for the Carolina heelsplitter has been found in
creeks, streams, and rivers. Individuals are most often found
in shaded areas, either in a ponded portion of a small stream,
or in runs along steep banks with a moderate current. Water less
than three feet deep and substrates that are composed of soft
mud, sand, muddy-sand, and sandy gravel are preferred.
Presently, only three known populations of this mussel species
exists; two of these populations are found in the North Carolina
streams of Waxhaw Creek, Catawba River System, Union County and
Goose Creek, Pee Dee River System, Union County.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
Kings Branch and its unnamed tributary do not provide
suitable habitat (mud, sand, muddy-sand and sandy gravel) for
the Carolina heelsplitter. Therefore, it can be determined that
the project will have no impacts on the Carolina heelsplitter.
Helianthus schweinitzii (Schweinitz's sunflower) E
Plant Family: Asteraceae
Federally Listed: June 6, 1991
Flowers Present: mid September-early October
Distribution in N.C.: Cabarrus, Davidson, Mecklenburg,
Montgomery, Randolph, Rowan, Stanly, Stokes,
Union.
Schweinitz's sunflower is a rhizomatous perennial herb that
grows 1-2 m tall from a cluster of carrot-like tubrous roots.
The stems are deep red, solitary and only branch above mid-stem.
The leaves are rough feeling above and resin-dotted and loosely
soft-white-hairy beneath. Leaves of the sunflower are opposite
on the lower part of the stem and usually become alternate on
the upper stem. The broad flowers are borne from September
until frost. These flowers are yellow in color and arranged in
an open system of upwardly arching heads. The fruit is a
smooth, gray-black achene.
Schweinitz's sunflower is endemic to North and South
Carolina. These sunflowers grow best in full sunlight or light
shade in clearings and along the edges of open stands of
oak-pine-hickory upland woods. Common soils that this species
?. is found in are moist to dryish clays, clay-loams, or sandy
clay-loams, often with a high gravel content and always
moderately podzolized. ' Natural fires and large herbivores are
considered to be historically important in maintaining open
habitat for these sunflowers.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: NO EFFECT
A plant-by-plant survey for Schweinitz's sunflower was
conducted by Phillip Todd, Environmental Biologist NCDOT, on
May 4, 1994. The project study area was walked and no
populations of Schweinitz's sunflower occur in the area.
16
A review of the Natural Heritage Program database of
uncommon and protected species revealed no recorded occurrence
of federally-protected species in or near the project study
area.
b. State Protected Species
There are five federal candidate (C2) species listed for
Mecklenburg County. Federal Candidate species are not afforded
federal protection under the Endangered Species Act and are not
subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until
they are formally proposed or listed as Threatened or
Endangered. C2 species are defined as organisms which are
vulnerable to extinction although no sufficient data currently
exists to warrant a listing of Endangered, Threatened, Proposed
Endangered or Proposed Threatened. Organisms which are listed
as Endangered (E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) by
the North Carolina Heritage Program list of Rare Plant and
Animal Species 1993 are afforded state protection under the
State Endangered Species Act and the North Carolina Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979.
Table 7 lists federal candidate species, the species' state
status (if afforded state protection) and the existence of
suitable habitat for each species in the study area. This
species list is provided for information purposes as the status
of these species may be upgraded in the future.
TABLE 7. FEDERAL CANDIDATE/N.C. PROTECTED SPECIES FOR
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
Scientific Name
Aster georgianus
Lotus purshianus var.
helleri
Nestronia umbellula
Delphinium exaltatum
Isoetes virginica
Common Name NC Suitable
Status Habitat
Georgia aster - Y
Heller's trefoil - N
Nestronia - N
Tall larkspur E-SC N
Virginia quillwort - N
NOTES: "-" Species not afforded state protection but listed
as Federal Candidate.
Surveys for these species were not conducted during the
site visit, nor were any of these species observed. A review of
the database of the N.C. Natural Heritage Program Rare Species
and Unique Habitats revealed no records of North Carolina rare
and/or protected species in or near the project study area.
17
3. Physical Resources
a. Geology, Topography, and Soils
The study area is in an urban environment in south
Charlotte. Locally, all but the northeast quadrant lies in a
valley running parallel to I-77. There is a confluence of two
creeks, Kings Branch and one unnamed creek, at the southern end
of the interchange.
Mecklenburg County lies in the Piedmont Physiographic
Providence. The topography of Mecklenburg County is
characterized by rolling hills with deep, channelized ravines.
Since Mecklenburg County is mostly urbanized at the project
site, evidence of floodplains and other natural occurrences have
been obscured.
The study area is situated within the Charlotte Belt, which
is classified as metamorphosed mafic rock. The rock unit
underlying this area is identified as either a metagabbro and/or
a metadiorite. Any evidence of a floodplain has been obscured
because of the existing interchange. The unnamed branch laying
parallel to south bound I-77 is generally flowing on either soft
or hard weathered rock.
The dominant soil series within the project site is the
Cecil Series. This series consists of well drained, moderately
permeable soils that formed in residuum from acid igneous and
metamorphic rocks. These Ultisols are found along broad ridges
and side slopes. Slopes range from 2 to 15 percent. Table 4
provides an inventory of all specific mapping units which occur
in the project area.
TABLE 4. COUNTY SOILS IN THE PROJECT AREA
Map Unit Specific Percent Hydric
Symbol Mapping Unit Slope Classification
CeB2 Cecil sandy clay loam 2-8 -
CeD2 Cecil sandy clay loam 8-15 -
EnB Enon sandy loam 2-8 -
MO Monacan 0-2 B
UO Udorthents (fill) - -
NOTE: "B" denotes soils with inclusions of hydric soils or
which have wet spots.
18
b. Contaminated Properties
The northeast quadrant of the interchange contains an old
private landfill which has been poorly controlled. It has been
recommended that no widening occur in this quadrant, since a
detailed geological study would have to be performed to
determine the composition of the buried wastes in the landfill.
C. Water Resources
The project is located within the Sugar Creek Sub-basin of
the Catawba River Basin. Kings Branch originates just north of
the project site and flows southward approximately 6.6
kilometers (3.0 mi) to converge with Sugar Creek. From this
point, Sugar Creek meanders southward 17.6 km (8.0 mi) and
ultimately converges with the Catawba River.
Evidence of erosion and channelization are present in both
streams at the project site. Table 1 describes characteristics
of Kings Branch along the northwest, southwest and southeast
quadrants.
TABLE 1. CHARACTERISTICS OF KINGS BRANCH AT THE
I-2506 PROJECT SITE
LOCATIONS NW Quadrant SW Quadrant SE Quadrant
SUBSTRATE bedrock/stone bedrock/stone bedrock/stone
boulder/ boulder/ boulder/
cobble cobble cobble
CURRENT slow slow slow
STREAM GRAD. flat flat flat
CHANNEL WIDTH 3.0 m 3.0 m 1.0 m
(10.0 ft) (10.0 ft) (3.0 ft)
CHANNEL DEPTH 30.5 cm 30.5 cm 30.5 cm
(12.0 in) (12.0 in) (12.0 in)
BANK HEIGHT 15.3 m 15.3 m 6.1 m
(50.0 ft) (50.0 ft) (20.0 ft)
WATER COLOR stained stained stained
AQUATIC VEG. none none none
NOTE: Measurements were taken 9.0 m (30 ft) upstream and
downstream from crossings on both I-77 and Tyvola Road
The small tributary to Kings Branch was also studied in the
northeast quadrant. Its characteristics are listed in Table 2.
19
TABLE 2.
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT
AT THE 1-2506 PROJECT SITE
LOCATIONS
0
SUBSTRATE
CURRENT
STREAM GRAD.
CHANNEL WIDTH
CHANNEL DEPTH
BANK HEIGHT
WATER COLOR
AQUATIC VEG.
Office
Plaza
bedrock/stone
boulder/
cobble
medium
flat
1.5 m
(5.0 ft)
15.3 cm
(6.0 in)
4.6 m
(15.0 ft)
stained
none
Tyvola Road
(North side)
bedrock/stone
boulder/
cobble
medium
flat
1.8 m
(6.0 ft)
15.3 cm
(6.0 in)
9.2 m
(30.0 ft)
stained
none
Tyvola Road
(South side)
bedrock/stone
boulder/
cobble
medium
flat
0.6 m
(2.0 ft)
15.3 cm
(6.0 in)
4.6 m
(15.0 ft)
stained
none
NOTE: Measurements were taken 9.0 m (30 ft) south of entrance to
office park and 9.0 m (30 ft) upstream and downstream from
crossings on Tyvola Road.
Most streams have been assigned a best usage classification
by the Division of Environmental Management (DEM). Table 3
lists best usage classifications for all water resources likely
to be impacted by the proposed project.
TABLE 3. WATER RESOURCES BEST USAGE CLASSIFICATIONS
Water Resource Classification
Kings Branch C
Unnamed tributary C
NOTES: Class "C" waters are suitable for aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing , wildlife, secondary
recreation, and agriculture.
Neither High Quality Waters (HQW), Water Supplies (WS-I or
WS-II) nor Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW) occur within 1.6 km
(1 mile) of the project study area.
20
Water Quality
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) is
managed by DEM and part of an ongoing ambient water quality
monitoring program which addresses long term trends in water
quality. The program assesses water quality by sampling for
selected benthic macroinvertebrate organisms at fixed monitoring
sites. Macroinvertebrates are sensitive to very subtle changes
in water quality; thus, the species richness and overall biomass
are reflections of water quality.
No BMAN information is available for Kings Branch nor its
unnamed tributary.
Point source dischargers located throughout North Carolina
are permitted through the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) program. Any discharger is required
to register for a permit.
The NPDES does not list any dischargers on Kings Branch nor
its unnamed tributary. However, three discharges into Sugar
Creek and seven discharges into one of its unnamed tributaries
are noted. All discharges are located downstream of the I-2506
project.
Anticipated Impacts
Rechannelization and sedimentation are the major
anticipated impacts to water quality. Three major drainage
structures will be impacted by the proposed new interchange:
(1) A double 2.4 by 3.0 m (8.0 x 10.0 ft) reinforced
concrete box culvert (RCBC) conveying Kings Branch under Tyvola
Road (NW and SW quadrants) may be extended.
(2) A double barrel 3.0 by 3.0 m (10.0 x 10.0 ft) RCBC,
carrying Kings Branch under I-77 (SW and SE quadrants) may be
extended to the southeast (downstream end) and a retaining wall
may be necessary.
(3) A double 152.4 cm (60.0 in) reinforced concrete pipe
(RCP) that begins at Tyvola Road (NE and SE quadrants) and n
extends approximately 180 m (600 ft) to the south. This
structure conveys a tributary to Kings Branch. It is currently
undersized and will need to be supplemented in order to provide
adequate conveyance. In addition, there is an existing 260 cm
(102 in) corrugated metal pipe (CMP) approximately 30.5 m (100
ft) upstream that will have to be connected to this structure by
means of a special junction structure.
Scouring of the stream bed, soil compaction, loss of
shading due to vegetation removal and alterations of water
levels are potential impacts. Increased sedimentation from
lateral flows along with erosion is expected. Material must be
21
brought in to divert the natural flow of the stream. Water flow
is increased due to channelization. Precautions will be taken
to minimize impacts to water resources in the study area,
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters and Sedimentation Control guidelines will be strictly
enforced during the construction stage of the project.
Provisions to preclude unnecessary contamination by toxic
substances during the construction interval will be strictly
enforced.
There are no water supply areas or other environmentally
sensitive areas in the project vicinity. Erosion and
sedimentation will be controlled through the appropriate
specification, installation, and maintenance of standard erosion
and sedimentation control measures. This project is not
anticipated to affect existing drainage patterns or groundwater
resources.
Anticipated Impacts
Potential impacts resulting from the modification of the
interchange at I-77 and Tyvola Road include: (1) excessive
sedimentation from fill material and surrounding bare soils
during construction; (2) possible chemical and toxic
infiltration of elements from construction activity and
increased traffic leads; (3) channel relocation; (4) changes in
hydraulic regimes; and (5) losses of biodiversity.
d. Floodplain Involvement
Mecklenburg County participates in the National Flood
Insurance Regular Program. A portion of Kings Branch Creek is
included in the detailed flood study. Figure 6 shows the Flood
Boundary Map which shows the established limits of the floodway
and the 100 year floodplain in the project vicinity. The
floodplain areas are urban and moderately to highly developed in
the vicinity of the interchange. There are no buildings with
floor elevations below the 100 year flood level. It is
anticipated that the proposed improvements will not have any
significant adverse impact on the existing floodplains.
e. Wetlands
Surface waters and wetlands fall under the broad category
of "Waters of the United States," as defined in Section 33 of
the Code of Federal Register (CRF) Part 328.3. Wetlands, defined
in 33 CFR 328.3, are those areas that are inundated or saturated
by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in
saturated conditions. Any action that proposes to place fill
into these areas falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE) under Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. 1344). No jurisdictional wetlands are
anticipated to be affected by this project.
22
4. Air Quality and Traffic Noise
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality
of the Mecklenburg County Department of Environmental Protection.
Mecklenburg County is designated as a moderate nonattainment area for
Carbon Monoxide (CO) and Ozone (03). The attainment dates are
December 31, 1995 for CO and November 15, 1996 for (03). However,
due to recent improved air quality monitoring data, this area is
under review to become a maintenance area. All appropriate
Transportation Control Measures (TCM) included in the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) which was approved by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) on March 19, 1981 have been completed. The
Charlotte/Mecklenburg 2010 Urbanized Area Thoroughfare Plan (TP) and
1994 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) have been determined to
be in conformity to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and the Interim
Conformity Guidance dated June 7, 1991. The approval dates of the TP
and the TIP by the MPO were on September 18, 1991 and September 15,
1993, respectively. The approval dates of the TP and the TIP by
USDOT were on November 15, 1991 and December 15, 1993, respectively.
There have been no significant changes in the project's design
concept and scope, as used in the conformity analyses.
The project consists of replacing the existing interchange with
a Single Point Urban Interchange. The majority of construction will
be performed within the existing right of way, and there will be no
through lanes beyond the interchange; therefore, impact from the
proposed project will be minimal due to the transmission loss of
nearby structures and the type of existing environment of the
receptors.
Noise levels could increase during construction but will be
temporary. 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. This evaluation completes the assessment
requirements for highway traffic noise (23 CFR Part 772) and for air
quality (1990 CAAA and NEPA) and no additional reports are required.
5. Construction Impacts
There are some environmental impacts normally associated with
the construction of highways. These are generally of short term
duration and measures will be taken to minimize these impacts.
During construction of the proposed project, all materials
resulting from clearing and grubbing, demolition, and other
operations will be removed from the project, burned, or otherwise
disposed of by the contractor. Any burning done will be in
accordance with the applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations of
the North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Air Quality in
compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure
burning will be done at the greatest distance practicable from
dwellings and not when atmospheric conditions are such as to create a
hazard to the public. Burning will be made under constant
surveillance.
23
Measures will be taken to allay. the dust generated by
construction when the control of dust is necessary for protection and
comfort of motorists or area residents.
The general requirements concerning erosion and siltation are
covered in Article 107-3 of the Standard Specifications for Roads and
Structures, which is entitled "Control of Erosion, Siltation, and
Pollution. The N. C. Division of Highways has also developed an
Erosion and Sedimentation Control Program which has been approved by
the N. C. Sedimentation Control Commission. This program consists of
the rigorous requirements to minimize erosion and sedimentation
contained in the Standard Specifications together with the policies
of the Division of Highways regarding the control of accelerated
" erosion on work performed by State Forces.
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.

Materials placed in nonpermitted disposal areas will be limited
to clean soil, rock, concrete, brick, other inert materials, and
bituminous asphalt when placed at least 4 feet above the water table.
Mixtures of soil and vegetation which are primarily soil may also be
placed in nonpermitted disposal areas. All other debris shall be
placed in sites which have been permitted by the Solid Waste
Management Division of the North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources unless otherwise permitted by the
Engineer.
On sites other than permitted public waste or disposal areas,
the Contractor shall maintain the earth surfaces of all waste areas,
both during the work and after the completion of all seeding and
mulching or other erosion control measures specified, and until final
acceptance of the project in a manner that will effectively control
erosion and siltation.
The Contractor and Property Owner shall jointly submit a
Development, Use, and Reclamation Plan for each waste or Disposal
area that he proposes to utilize. The plan shall address drainage,
slopes, construction debris, and erosion control.
Where the Engineer has granted permission to dispose of waste
and debris within the right of way, the Engineer will have the
authority to establish whatever additional requirements may be
necessary to insure the satisfactory appearance of the completed
project.
Where the Contractor elects to dispose of waste or debris in
active public waste or disposal sites, he shall provide evidence
satisfactory to the Engineer that the proposed area or site has been
permitted by the Solid Waste Management Division of the North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
24
Disposal of waste and debris will not be allowed in any area
under the Corps of Engineers' regulatory jurisdiction until the
Contractor has obtained a permit for such disposal from the Corps'
District Engineer having jurisdiction and has furnished a copy of
this permit to the Resident Engineer.
Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained to alleviate
breeding areas for mosquitos. In addition, care will be taken not to
block existing drainage ditches.
The construction of the project is not expected to cause any
serious disruptions in service to any of the utilities serving the
area. Prior to construction, a determination will be made regarding
the need to relocate or adjust any existing utilities in the project
area. A determination of whether the NCDOT or the utility owner will
be responsible will be made at this time. In all cases, the
contractor is required to notify the owner of the utility in advance
as to when this work will occur. In addition, the contractor is
responsible for any damages to water lines incurred during the
construction process. This procedure will insure that water lines,
as well as other utilities, are relocated with a minimum of
disruption of service to the community.
Traffic service in the immediate area may be subjected to brief
disruption during construction of the project. Every effort will be
made to insure the transportation needs of the public are met both
during and after construction.
General construction noise impacts such as temporary speech
interference for passers-by and those individuals living or working
near the project can be expected, particularly from paving operations
and from earth moving equipment during grading operations. However,
considering the relatively short term nature of construction noise,
these impacts are not expected to be significant. The transmission
loss characteristics of nearby structures will moderate the effects
of intrusive construction noise.
6. Permits
Impacts to waters of the United States come under jurisdiction
of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). A Nationwide Permit #23
is applicable to the project. Nationwide permits do not require
mitigation according to the Memorandum of Agreement (MOE) between the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Army
(COE). However, final permit/mitigation decisions will be made by the
Corps of Engineers (COE).
25
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
Comments on the proposed improvements to the Tyvola Road I-77
interchange were requested from the following federal, state, and local
agencies. An asterisk indicates that a written response was received.
Responses are included in the Appendix.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Atlanta
U.S. Department of Transportation - FHWA
*U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - Asheville
N.C. Department of Human Resources
*N.C. Department of Public Instruction
N.C. State Clearinghouse
N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
*N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
*N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Mecklenburg County Commissioners
*City of Charlotte
Mayor of Charlotte
*Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools
In addition to the above comments, the subject project was further
coordinated with local government officials. The City of Charlotte
requested in their May 4, 1994 letter that the proposed interchange be
designed to accommodate a future proposed 10-lane section on I-77 which
will include High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes. This HOV lane concept is
currently being studied by the city as a future addition to I-77. The
proposed interchange design will accommodate an ultimate 8-lane section in
addition to allowing for future HOV lanes should they become necessary.
AS/plr
FIGURES
_A

M
a
SI

V VIr'
?/~ 'Y i0?n11? lid
N \w a a Gt O1ms o 3 riao 60^',/ ` °\\`cq? Qc
S r• D• 4 n e,?,, qC D O`s
j o` mot' ?9I iD d
y yt Q Q DQ c \ ,°`
N-A
..,. 't• °j',o,. ,?, O`c? .9 ° - `•^?.h' ° p o4 PQG9
O . r r, l tir• > C j D,S 4j .
~:? 5 ra iL ° cd pr. \?1 D 31
Tsokvo °` o °.Yarr Adn hus so, C,.
:\ ... rreler q k6. uoio PI. c Av
e
9 GIOOr ?; 04? O` r?a° O .,1L- ° erc 4?
O York
PARK __ Memorial .aae ° f p`• Q• ?, racyM U
I i Py' GroQe?Or A$IO•a+Rd:.° y\a a. I lnw ?49,yv
-? • f. Inc 0 ,t Rd. o O .D e' o.
• 'g6 G<°?O =? °0? 9 $Dringbr OOk E ?' ob•q c
p6
( o? nne •' J `_r_ 9i- Rain tree Rd. Q a\?° °? ?° c 4
ee^ rt Green N*edleCt `-:? I a Ln
y?IA.? iss
Co PI m W 4 v
01 .
r ?\ In v
o °d e' 44). Seven
57 Su '. 5
i y
rfl- p r? 77' 1 a Coao 00
walk Pt
Ste e r D. p/ Rd o
1 D r.
IckersRrRa? ee0, c I T YI?O
a I?q c? o Ebb Pt.
k
v Rd. G` : 1
N Y a '' .? o Ab.. F o
o Ed e o Stfarvi 521 fie ?D I^
on o,© \GI nom...... • e -IHifh
PROJECT LOCATION ON, cytt li
E
Park Dr.
Nations Dr,
midge
Or.
8aa vpe
.
O
Biod gore Rd, / 2. c
_
/ het .c? • /y/i °'
S -r
/l
5 Ur. 4 v rots p
A eenw Fo
bV
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
CHARLOTTE
I -.77 AND TYVOLA ROAD
INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION
- MECKLENBURG COUNTY
1- 2506
0 feet 2000
I I I FIG. 1
;
4 „dv
a ?e a
SEVE?? R O'R?VE ;

Lij
;a

°: cc

J'? : / : 4 { a ' . L

LO
N

U.O/ r
I-
?Ali G
plod o

s?
Fki "r e \
r la1 (" l
ol 1, IA
01
nn s ••
'? r ao • a o40? .......? \ l? t f
- -?
?m
f
ff _
suopQN

_,
•? v i
f It
m ??

RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
JGLE POINT URBAN INTERCHANGE
i ? FIGURE 4A?
?Q5
P
?Q5
z
TYVOLA ROAD.

TYVOLA ROAC

1-77 RAMPS
------------
i
1 ILL
I

r
------------
------------
1-77 RAMPS
z
t
GE
STUDIED ALTERNATIVE
COMPRESSED DIAMOND INTERCH)
I. FIrIJRE 4B
OPERATION OF THE SPUI
I-77

x

?-- a

.
1-77
-
-

y 0
..?
..
.. ..: .
.
i?
•
•

PHASE 1: Tyvola Road thru moves,
protected right onto I-7
PHASE 2: Tyvola Rd. left turns
onto I-77,
protected right from I-7
PHASE 3: left turns from I-77
onto Tyvola Rd.>
protected right onto I
FIGURE 5.
TYVOLA ROAD.
C
/r
'l,l

APPROXIMATE SCALE.
500 0 500 FEET
FLOODWAY
FLOOD BOUNDARY AND
FLOODWAY MAP =
CITY OF
CHARLOTTE,
NORTH CAROLINA
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
FIGURE 6_ ?I .
1-2506
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
APRIL, 1993
t-77
1-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange Modification
Estimated 1998 Average Daily Traffic in Hundreds

US-521 23s 60
`- '3 26
239 ? 101
r'? 51
60
lp1 17d
78 `? / r r'' ??
/
I 78 ?..
? 331 51 178

1-77
Nations
Ford Road 460
/ 11460
148
481
119 i/
j 119 21 3 `
118
?4 ?1 t 27
17 123 92 96 Tyvola
118 3 1 45 92 Road
65 y r? ?f
30 30 24 1 123 105----*_ "- - 123 215 19
' 17 18--j 27 ?} "'] M •r-? f - 10 17s
17o
`• 16 45 215 169-,
46 ??--
7j 1 t 71 / ? 46 10? 179
63
i`
63
. /? o 1Ss
westpark
olive
FIGURE 7A
SHEET 1 OF 2
I-LOUD
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
APRIL, 1993
1-77
1-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange Modification
Estimated 1998 Average Daily Traffic in Hundreds

A
,q,
Nations
Ford Road
14
a
FIGURE 7B
SHEET 2 OF 2
1-2506
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
APRIL, 1993
1-77
1-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange Modification
Estimated 2018 Average Daily Traffic in Hundreds
11
al
a
I g05
665
I
US-521 378 102s .
7as
378 r
102 ?
15g
117
L 46
-? 759
i? 91
296
117 517 gr
6
1-77
Nations
Ford Road 725 ? % 725
1
85 l 85
' 187
.j
217 70 38 37 t 37
-?- - "? 147
30 214 49 13g 165
217 10-j w- -/ 81
147--y -7 t r --..
60-- 60 38 214 . 181
30 33 -? _
128
t t 128
187
Tyvola
138 Road
213 35 i 289
49 w? t 13
-?? r ?+- `?
270 302
33 87 351 289
/ 62 f 2 13 302
.114
114
S ?
Westpark
G 2 Drlve
FIGURE 7C
SHEET 1 OF 2
- 1-2506
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
APRIL, 1993
1-77
1-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange Modification
Estimated 2018 Average Daily Traffic in Hundreds

Nations
Ford Road
,Q .
P
FIGURE 7D
SHEET 2 OF 2
APRIL, 1993
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
I-2506
I-77 FROM US-521 TO NATIONS FORD ROAD
ESTIMATED 1993/1998/2018 ADT IN HUNDREDS, TRUCK %, & DESIGN. HOUR %

m
A

ROUTE . ADT IN 100'S
TTST% ,

1993
1998
2018 DUALS. DHV% DIR%
1-77 786 920 1450 17 5 10 55
US-521 418 478 756 3 4 9 55
TYVOLA ROAD 364 420 702 3 5 9 60
NATIONS FORD 224 262. 508 4 7 10 60
RD AT I-77
NATIONS FORD 120 142 256. 2 4 10 60
RD AT TYVO.LA
ROAD
WESTPARK DRIVE 98 112 150 2 4 10 60
FIGURE 7E
NTO
F
TAM?
aPPSF? ,?"F,,p United States Department of the Interior PRIDE IN ??
o
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
y a9 Asheville Field Office
4gCH 1 ?a 330 Ridgefield Court
Asheville, North Carolina 28806
July 16, 1993 1 1' ?`
1993
JULT 19
2
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager DwiSicv o?
Planning and Environmental Branch ?'S HIGHWAYS...
...
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Ward:
Subject: Proposed interchange modifications at I-77 and Tyvola Road
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, T.I.P.
No. I-2506
In your letter of June 14, 1993, you requested our input on potential
environmental impacts associated with the subject project. The following
comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), and Section 7
of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543)
(Act).
According to the information provided in-your.letter, this project will
involve the replacement of the present interchange structure with either
a single point urban interchange (preferred alternative) or a compressed
diamond that will include the widening of Tyvola Road across the bridge.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) believes that no federally
endangered or threatened species occur within the impact area of the
proposed action. Therefore, we believe the requirements of Section 7(c)
of the Act are fulfilled. However, obligations under Section 7 of the
Act must be reconsidered if: (1) new information suggests that the
action may affect listed species in a manner not previously considered,
(2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner not previously
considered, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is
determined that may be affected by the identified action.
In accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, the Service has also reviewed the subject project with regard to the
effects the proposed action may have on wetlands and related fish and
wildlife resources. It appears there will be no significant impacts to
wetlands or other important environmental areas in or adjacent to the
proposed impact area. Therefore, the Service has no objection to the
proposed action.
If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please
contact Ms. Janice Nicholls of our staff at 704/665-1195, Ext. 227. In
future correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log
Number 4-2-93-097.
Sincerely,
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
cc:
Mr. Dennis L. Stewart, Program Manager, Division of Boating and Inland
Fisheries, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Archdale
Building, 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27604-1188

? v js•n,v
?1 (1
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
May 17, 1993
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Improve existing 1-77 and Tyvola Road
Interchange, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, 1-
2506, 8.1673601, IMS-77-1(127)5, ER 93-8588
Dear Mr. Graf:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
C E /\
O
MAY 1 9.1993
2
2t' :'?SlCN OF Re P?v
H'GHWAYS
?N`?FsC•iv;? c?A?
On May 4, 1993, Robin Stancil of our staff met with North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) staff concerning the above project. We reported our
available information on historic architectural and archaeological surveys and
resources along with our recommendations. NCDOT provided project area
photographs and aerial photographs at the meeting and for our use afterwards.
Based upon our review of the photographs and the information discussed at the
meeting, we offer our preliminary comments regarding this project.
In terms of historic architectural reso.u.rces, we are aware of no historic structures
located within the area of potential effect.-- We recommend that no historic
architectural survey be conducted for this project.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based
on our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological
resources which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places will be affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend
that no archaeological investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
Having provided this information, we look forward to receipt of either a
Categorical Exclusion or Environmental Assessment which indicates how NCDOT
addressed our concerns.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East Jones Strect • Ralcibh, North Carolina 27601-2807 r6:?
_ Nicholas L. Graf
May 17, 1993, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely,
r
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:sIw?
cc: "L. J. Ward
B. Church
T. Padgett
. te.

11
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
Water Quality Section
April 30, 1993
c
Memorandum To:
R
From:
Mr. L. J. Ward
DOT - P&E
Eric Galamb.69,
DEM
- I V ? ?40
MaR ? 6 1993 z
Q
Cs Pow
?EtivIFON?'?
Subject: 1-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange
Mecklenburg County
State Project No. 8.1673601, TIP No. 1-2506
A scoping meeting was held on April 29, 1993 to discuss the subject project.
During the meeting, I requested that DEM be consulted on any stream relocation/
channelization that may result from the subject project. Please keep DEM advised.

P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North carorina 27626.0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
Ui.of_L Z mom ,
wry
K d 9 : NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
301 North Wilmington Street, Education Building BOB ETHERIDGE
Raleigh, NC 27601-2825 State Superintendent
July 19, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E.
Manager of Planning and Research
NC Division of Highways
FROM: Charles H. Weaver
Assistant State Superintendent
Auxiliary Services
>~ 1 V_>
JUL- 2 3 1993
y?
DIVISION OF
HIGHWAYS
RE: I-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange Modifications, Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, Federal Aid Project No. I MS-77-1(127)5, State
Project No. 8.167360.1-, TIP Project I-2506
Please find attached communication from Dr. John A. Murphy, Superintendent for
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, relative to subject project.
mrl
Attachment

#I
I appreciate the early notification of this project and an Vportunity to respond.
0i
k

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools
Post Office Box 30035
Charlotte, North Carolina 28230
Telephone [phone]
Mr. Charles H. Weaver
Assistant State Superintendent
Auxiliary Services
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction
301 North Wilmington Street
Education Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2825
Dear Mr. Weaver:
John A. Murphy
Superintendent
1? l
July 8, 1993 a
t au j 61993
M L 1A ES
;7 SE-11 I-
I am in receipt of the information concerning Federal Aid Project No. IMS-77-1
(127) 5, State Project No. 8.1673601 and TIP Project I-2506. (I-77 and Tyvola Road
Interchange modifications).
yY,
This project does not cause the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools additional
hardship other than the normal delays that may be caused because of road construction.
No additional permits or approvals will be required due to this project.
Join A. Murphy
lb
Administrative Offices Education Center 701 East Second Street
l A
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
3 2
TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.

FROM: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLD
G.
'n^
ROI
v. 1/?('ELti ?•rV
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? P OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
v
,,.swro ? a
L MAN. 8
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
March 7, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E. `'
Manager, Planning and Environmental Aranch
FROM: r,,y A. L. Hankins, Jr. P.E.
State Hydraulics Engineer
SUBJECT: Hydraulic aspects of the modification of the -77 /
Tyvola Road Interchange, Mecklenburg Cou ty,
State No. 8.1673601, TIP No. I-2506.
The proposed project involves modifying the interchange at Tyvola Road ai?.' 4I-77.
Tyvola Road is currently five lanes but drops to four lanes at the existing intt 'change.
The project will involve replacing Bridge No. 150 over I-77 and revising rants to
accommodate future traffic. It should also be mentioned that the City of Charlotte
requests accommodation of pedestrian traffic on the I-77 bridge due to the high number of
pedestrians using the existing structure (currently no sidewalks are provided). Three
different configurations are being considered for the new interchange:
(1) A single point urban interchange (preferred by the Traffic Engineering
Branch and the City of Charlotte)
(2) A compressed diamond
(3) An urban diamond.

The northeast quadrant of the interchange contains an old private landfill which has been
poorly controlled. Before widening in this quadrant, a detailed geological study must be
performed to determine the composition of the buried wastes in the landfill; also,
construction activities in this area should be minimized as much as possible.

The proposed project involves three major drainage structures that will be impacted by the
proposed new interchange. These are described below along with preliminary hydraulic
recommendations regarding replacement structure size, supplemental measures, and/or the
retaining and extension of existing structures.
The first drainage structure conveys Kings Branch Creek under Tyvola Road and is
located just west of the existing interchange. This structure is a double 8 foot by 10 foot
reinforced concrete box culvert (RCBC) and is hydraulically adequate and can be retained
and extended as necessary due to widening or relocation of the ramps west of I-77.
The second drainage structure carries Kings Branch under I-77 on the south Tyvola Road.
This structure is a double barrel 10 foot by 10 foot reinforced concrete box culvert
(RCBC). This structure is hydraulically adequate and can be retained and may be
extended. However, extension of this culvert to the southeast (downstream end) will be
limited by nearby structures and the confluence of a tributary approximately 20 feet to the
southeast. To avoid encroachment of fill material into the stream channel, a retaining wall
may be necessary.
The third structure, conveying a tributary to Kings Branch , is located just east of I-77.
This structure is a double 60 inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) that begins at Tyvola
Road and extends approximately 600 feet to. the south. This structure is currently
undersized and will need to be supplemented in order to provide adequate conveyance. In
addition, there is an existing 102 inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) approximately 100
feet upstream that will have to be connected to this structure by means of a special
junction structure.
Mecklenburg County participates in the National Flood Insurance Regular Program. A
portion of Kings Branch is included in the detailed flood study. Attached is a copy of the
Flood Boundary Map on which is delineated the established limits of the floodway and the
100-year floodplain in the project vicinity. The floodplain areas are urban and moderately
to highly developed in the vicinity of the interchange. There are no buildings with floor
elevations below the 100 year flood level. It is anticipated that the proposed
improvements will not have any significant adverse impact on the existing floodplains.

There are no wetlands, water supply areas, or other environmentally sensitive areas in the
project vicinity. Erosion and sedimentation will be controlled through the appropriate
specification, installation, and maintenance of standard erosion and sedimentation control
measures. This project will not affect existing drainage patterns or groundwater
resources.
ALHjr/AMR/bmw
cc: Mr. D. R. Morton, P.E.
Attachment
t

A
Off IVE
C, iii o t`
Water Quality Section
April 30, 1993
Memorandum To: Mr. L. J. Ward
DOT - P&E
From: Eric Galamb
DEM
Subject: 1-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange
Mecklenburg County
State Project No. 8.1673601, TIP No. 1-2506
A scoping meeting was held on April 29, 1993 to discuss the subject project.
During the meeting, I requested that DEM be consulted on any stream relocation/
channelization that may result from the subject project. Please keep DEM advised.

Ja
?-2PA
WETLANDS GROUP
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ?, w._.....
WATER UALITY SECTION
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. IR SAM HUNT
GOVERNOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS SECRETARY
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
March 31, 1993
Planning and Environmental Branch
MEMORANDUM T0: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager ? 9. alaue,
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheet for I-77 and Tyvola Road
Interchange, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, Federal Aid
Project No. IMS-77-1(127)5, State Project No. 8.1673601,
TIP Project I-2506
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets for the
subject project (See attached map for project location). The purpose of
these sheets and the related review procedure is to have an early "meeting of
the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the project. A scoping meeting for this
project is scheduled for April 29, 1993 at 10:00 A. M. in the Planning and
Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 434). You may provide us with
your comments at the meeting or mail them to us prior to that date.
Thank you for your assistance in this part of our planning process. If
there are y questions about the meeting or the scoping sheets, please call
C_ s, Project Planning Engineer, at 733-7842.
Ail r 6z-
Attachment
? r la`s
1
Zy-0( Taw
/IJ4 -Iplo?p
T, VJ G?\ 1VW ?

u n= P;,e!
69

Project Scoping Sheet (I-2506)

Date 3-29-93
Revision Date
Project Development Stage
Programming
Planning 1993
Design 1995
TIP # I-2506
Project # 8.1673601
F.A. Project # IMS-77-1(127)5
Division 10
County Mecklenburg
Route I-77 & Tyvola Road Interchange
Functional Classification Urban Principal Arterial Interstate (I-77)
USCS Quad Sheet Charlotte West
Length 0.5 mile
Purpose of Project: Increase capacity and improve safety of the existing
I-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange.
Description of project (including specific limits) and major elements
of work: Replace existing structure (Bridge 0150) over I-77 and revise
ramps to accommodate future traffic volumes.
Type of environmental document to be prepared: Categorical Exclusion
Type of funding: Federal and State
Will there be special funding participation by municipality,
developers, or other? Yes No X
If yes, by whom and amount: ($) or M
How and when will this be paid?
Type of Facility: Urban Interstate (I-77)
Type of Access Control: Full X Partial None
Type of Roadway: To be determined.
Page 1
Project Scoping Sheet (I-2506)
Interchanges 1 Grade Separations Stream Crossings _
Typical Section of Roadway: To be determined.
Traffic: Current X, 1 g ?Design Years Q? ?0 % Trucks
Design Standards Applicable: AASHTO X 3R
Design Speed: MPH C
Preliminary Resurfacing Design: ) x.76
C ? e
Preliminary Pavement Design: ( '' L CUJ --Lp-
Ceah 0,t ?ti I f l`h
Current Cost Estimate: Construction Cost (including engineering/
and contingencies). . . . . . . . . . . . $
Right of Way Cost (including rel., util.,
and acquisition) . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Force Account Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Preliminary Engineering. . . . . . . . . . . $
Total Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
TIP Cost Estimate:
Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 3,500,000
Right of Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,715,000
Total Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,215,000
C 14 O1i C?

. e T Ud 1?
k
Page 2
off(
Project Scoping Sheet (I-2506)
} List any special features, such as railroad involvement, which could affect
cost or schedule of project:
ITEMS REQUIRED ( ) COMMENTS COST
fl-
Estimated _ Costs of Improvements:
_ Pavement
_ Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
- Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Milling & Recycling . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Turnouts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Shoulders: _ Paved. . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Earth. . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Earthwork . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . $
_ Subsurface Items : . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Subgrade and Stabilization. . . . . . . . . $
_ Drainage (List any special items) . . . . . $
_ Sub-Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Structures: Width x Length
- Bridge Rehabilitation x $
- New Bridge x $
- Widen Bridge x $
- Remove Bridge x $
- New Culverts: Size Length $
Fill Ht.
_ Culvert Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Retaining Walls: Type Ave. Ht. $
Skew
Noise Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Any Other Misc. Structures. . . . . . . . $
_ Concrete Curb & Gutter. . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Concrete Sidewalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Guardrail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Fencing: W.W. and/or C.L. . . . $
_ Erosion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
- Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Traffic Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Signing: _ New. . . . . . . . . . . . $
- Upgrading. . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Traffic Signals: New . . . . . . . . . $
_ Revised . . . . . . . $
_ RR Signals: New . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_ Revised . . . . . . . . . . $
_ With or Without Arms. . . . $
_ If 3R: _ Drainage Safety Enhancement. . . $
- Roadside Safety Enhancement. . . $
Realignment for Safety Upgrade $
Pavement Markings: Paint Thermo $
Markers
Delineators . . $
- Other . . $
CONTRACT COST (Subtotal): $
F
Page 3
Project Scoping Sheet (I-2506)
i
Contingencies & Engineering . . . . . . . . . . $
PE Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Force Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
- New Right of Way Needed: Width Est. Cost $
_ Easements: Type Width Est. Cost $
- Utilities: $
Subtotal: $
Right of Way:
Will Contain within Exist Right of Way: Yes _ No _
Existing Right of Way Width:
Right of Way Subtotal: $
Total Estimated Cost $
(Includes R/W)
Prepared By: Christa L. Atkins Date: 3-29-93
The above scoping has been reviewed and approved* by:
INIT. DATE
Highway Design
Roadway
Structure
Design Services
Geotechnical
Hydraulics
Loc. & Surveys
Photogrammetry
Prel. Est. Engr.
Planning & Research
Right of Way
R/W Utilities
Traffic Engineering
Project Management
County Manager
City/Municipality
Others
Board of Tran. Member
Manager, Program and
Policy Branch
Asst. Highway Admin.
Pre-Construction
Secondary Roads Off.
Construction Branch
Landscape
Maintenance Branch
Bridge Maintenance
Chief Engineer
Division Engineer
Bicycle Coordinator
DEHNR
INIT. DATE
Scope Sheet for local officials will be sent to Division Engineer for
handling.
Comments or Remarks:
*If you are not in agreement with proposed project or scoping, note your
proposed revisions in Comments or Remarks Section and initial and date after
comments.
Page 4
r
Y `oo orr Ry rna O? ' ` O t??t'+ ^ o o PD.
° o rear Sev, en ?a at' \0
t
57 s? 5 0 0 °bn t?`c 5 cd
?\

S1er 77' j - o COOpej 0 O
/ wolk PI: r erw i i = E
ea t .dpi Rd
. e°O
k
Rr o o Dr.
Eb
r TYV
r
Ic
ers
Re b Pl.
O uY

` c o
C Q m
R d. o w
o

4
a _
H •-r `
o
P a as
o
•
Ed

.F Gl
repoo a
Sharvi ?
521 f QD
•
1
c
Onb
rook ncock -° a / c Grif fith /
S
P
'
i? Ln. o Or. Or a
c o. „0
Bo ?a *N o
urb
O
93
n' Echoda
le w o
r
..
? ,
o
4C Jly v
-Ln .I c c?, y O A?
bo
C
g ?
o
PROJECT LOCATION P NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
grcxflal DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
rutty „ Archdale PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
e
P e. BRANCH
ark Dr. ftelwoo
Nati ons Dr. pl.
enridge A CHARLOTTE
Dr.
- p
1- 77 AND TYVOLA ROAD
Bogen Ple
PI O INTERCHANGE MODIFICATION
Cr. MECKLENBURG COUNTY
8%(1901e Rd, t`
k t
a e 1-2506

5het \ yr
v x J
A
eena d
,
_ / I r 0 feet 2000

b FIG
1
.

0 David-
'pneliu? '
\?

- ?
aldwel.
f
•
t
J 5 16
unlersv'
? 1
s
i
r
(
d
1
\
yyy ??ra
ill
{((
R
.
'
vw1
6 1! ] 21
unl Holly Nc 11
1
'
? ?Newelll
a
? %7
y
29 Chtte+ ,
`
,
n, 1, fi 1
Allen .
1
Min 91111 51
1 a '
?
•tG '
_ u a s I _C
/
u \ s ^,
Ir9 Ln a S ,..
Mar' A rineville `Ind'
?
s 6 /

y 521

N ?1
,
.o ¢ ti p .o`
or ??' K 4 J Ya
Gb° ms V ca?
a??/ 0\``4
4eaw' ri
D
i St. e
s d
QD' ?? a o' r. 'Qp•? py.?

'
. c 00 -j p
?

?v^? eti oy'Di ..
.. o
?o
• p
* 4
g
o a

°? _ 4j Q\
R
'> -rV'ti• ? ' D S O
°oD
P•Q 9c
Z?
l oj
o °
.
?
u. o O
Q v
a
\ D. 31 ^
y
c ?. 4 b.
. LL p
I
fi :i•. 58
of D
1
Teakwood a` o s
°Nor Mon hue se
J auk . t Pd. Se uoio Pl.
° a Ave

1 ClpOta
c O4.
4
0 Q O
e t
l
i o
York
?
° i 2 ?
. °
? a '?•
j
PARK -,Memorial
.?•
` Slaton Rd: c
e,4 \
i P
'
c O
to
Qd
1 t
oQ
o
O
C_l
-f• Urc 0 ,P

!
k
Invo
Rd. o O DQD
J Q Gtove 3i °ea
e 5Otln9br0o ° n • O D` Q Cj
°
S?°0 n• e / ??c Shollz Rd. 1 o C°nre
°O
?o
?'p°c ad ?
9Roun tree O' r
Rd. Q 1 \?°s o?• `o
Z- Queen Green NaedleCt 21
..
it o
m LA.
> G?' Or ?'o co
w

o ° I
Witt
PI C n ery c is
a 3 , o v
J : gc q,
.MiaY... lT+,t.?i'RY S, VN'W$.2y
.. , «w.+Y ?Y,ri.: . a+t'sw:x'ri.!iGft7
- - 1.
September 12`, 1990
Regulatory Branch

SUBJECT: Nationwide Permit No. 26 and CESAW-C090-D-060

Mr, Joe Meads
Sain Associates, Incorporated
Post Office Box 19953
Birmingham, Alabama 35219-9953

Dear. Mr . Meads : n
rc
cn

Thank your for:your:,inqu rAugust 21, 1990, regarding the plans
by a
s
.
Sam's Wholesale Club to construct anew store off Nations Ford Road and o
Interstate-Highway 77 at Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. r?
. From..our,}review of,the project plans, it is evident that the proposed
constructiorwwill;result in the.relocation and\or culverting of,
approximately Z
,
350 feet/ of channel,=on an unnamed, headwaters tributary to Sugar Creek. This
work-would-,"impact less:;.than 1 acres of waters of the United States.
For"the purposes of the Corps of Engineers' Regulatory Program, Title 33,
Code--of,-Federal-,Regulations (CFR), Part 330, published in the.Federal Register
on,-November 13,, ` 1986. . l'istg,4 natioowtde permits. Authorization was ,,provided
for discharges of-dredged or'fill;-.,matsrial'1nto non-tidal rivers,.streams, and
their, lakes:.and;; mpoundments.,,.including adjacent 'wetlands, that are located
above the.;he;adwaters;`and other non-tidal waters.of the United.`States,.
including adjacent wetlands,-that?are'not a part of a. surface"tributary system
to interstate waters or navigable waters of the United States.:,This; general
authorization is valid only for work that causes the loss or substantial
adverse modification` of less than one :acre of wetlands.
Your work is authorized by nationwide permit provided it is accomplished
in strict accordance with'the enclosed conditions. Please be aware that this
authorization does not relieve you of the responsibility to obtain any
required State or local approval.
This verification will.be valid until the nationwide permit is modified,
reissued, or revoked. All the, nationwide permits are scheduled to-:be
modified,'reissued, or revoked prior to January 13, 1992. It is incumbent
upon you to 'remain informed,of changes`to the nationwide permits. We will
issue a public notice announcing the changes when they occur. Futhermore, if
you commence or are under contract to commence this activity before the date
the nationwide permit.is modified or revoked, you will have 12 months from the
date of the modification or revocation ;to complete the activity under the
present terms andconditions of this nationwide permit.

July 7, 1993
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Policy and Development
A,,,
FROM: Monica Swihart, Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #93-0985; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements I-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange
Modifications, Charlotte, Mecklenburg County,
TIP Project I-2506
The Division's Water Quality Section has reviewed the subject
scoping letter. The proposed interchange modifications would occur
near a tributary of Sugar Creek (Kings Branch) which is classified
as Class C by the State of North Carolina. DEM requests that the
following topics be discussed in the Categorical Exclusion
environmental document prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
B. Number of stream crossings.
C. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed.
D. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
E. 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.
I

Melba McGee
July 7, 1993
Page 2
F. 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.
G. Did NCDOT utilize the existing bridge alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
H. Please provide a detailed discussion for mass-transit as an
option.
I. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
J. 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.
9712er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
I^ r
JUN 1 ! 7 K ?
WETLANDS GROUP
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA WATER QUALIT`r .`.? CT ION
DEPARTMENT OF TPANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JP, SAM HUNT
GOVERNOR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS SECRETARY
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
June 14, 1993
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
FROM: L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: I-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange Modifications,
Charlotte, Mecklenburg County, Federal Aid Project No.
IMS-77-1(127)5, State Project No. 8.1673601, TIP Project
I-2506
The Planning and Environmental Branch of the Division of Highways has
begun studying the proposed improvements to the I-77 and Tyvola Road
interchange. The project is included in the 1993-1999 North Carolina Trans-
portation Improvement Program and is scheduled for right of way in fiscal
year 1996 and construction in fiscal year 1998. A "categorical exclusion"
(CE) environmental document will be prepared in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
The proposed project is located at the I-77 and Tyvola Road interchange
in Charlotte. It is proposed to replace the present structure with either a
single point urban interchange (preferred) or a compressed diamond and widen
Tyvola Road across the bridge. A sketch of both interchange configurations
is shown in the attached figures. Traffic will be maintained during
construction.
We would appreciate any information you might have that would be helpful in
evaluating potential environmental impacts of the project. If applicable,
please identify any permits or approvals which may be required by your agency.
Your comments will be used in the preparation of a document evaluating
environmental impacts of the project. It is desirable that your agency respond
by July 19, 1993 so that your comments can be used in the preparation of this
document.
If you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Angela
H. Smith, Project Planning Engineer, of this Branch at [phone].
LJW/plr
Attachment

.?:?L T??
?? -? ?
`<`;
=? ? -?
c ? ? ??
?..
? \??
.., ?
,..
r,
N
0
?`
c
??
?`/ ;'
',
?, ; ,
.!
ti ? i
?1 f
\?
?``
i ? ? /
/-?' ?
??
?? ?-?/
??
1 I, i
? `?

_.
?P
O
? G
1
J')- t
JUN 1 71993
JAMES B. HUNT. JR
GOVERNOR
June 11, 1993
FROM:
SUBJECT:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
Angela H. Smith
Project Planning Engineer
SAM HUNT
SECRETARY
I-77 and Tyvola Road Interchange, Charlotte, Mecklenburg
County, Federal Aid Project No. IMS-77-1(127)5, State
Project No. 8.1673601, TIP Project I-2506
This memo is a summary of the scope of studies for the subject project
based on the results of the April 29, 1993 scoping meeting.
The following were present at the meeting:
MEMORANDUM TO:
Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor
Photogrammetry
Photogrammetry
NCWRC Habitat Conservation
Hydraulic Design Unit
Structure Design
Traffic Control
Roadway Design
Roadway Design
DEM
Location & Surveys
City of Charlotte
City of Charlotte DOT
Planning & Environmental
Planning & Environmental
Planning & Environmental
Jack Matthews
Keith Johnston
David Yow
Jerry Snead
Ray Moore
Jay Woolard
Enrico A. Roque
John Maddox
Eric Galamb
John P. Taylor
Dick Williams
Timothy D. Gibbs
Frank Vick
Linwood Stone
Angela H. Smith
Planning studies will evaluate the modification of the interchange at
the I-77 and Tyvola Road interchange. The existing 48-foot section of Tyvola
Road across the bridge will be widened to either a 6 or 8 lane roadway
depending on the interchange design chosen.
Traffic must be maintained during construction of this project.
Additional cost will be included in the revised construction cost estimate
that Roadway Design will provide. The revised construction cost estimate
will be sent to the Program Development Branch when it becomes available so
it can be included in the new TIP.

June 11, 1993
Page 2
Traffic on Tyvola Road is currently estimated at 38,400 vehicles per day
and on I-77, traffic is estimated at 78,600 vehicles per day.
A capacity analysis was completed by the Traffic Engineering Branch
(following the scoping meeting) to determine whether a single point urban
interchange or a compressed diamond will best handle the anticipated traffic.
It was determined that the single point urban interchange functions more
efficiently. The single point urban interchange will require 2 through
lanes, whereas the compressed diamond requires three through lanes in each
direction (see attached sketches of the two types of design). The ramp
terminals will meet on the bridge for the single point urban interchange
requiring a wider structure width, but the additional through lanes on the
compressed diamond will also require more structure width. The City of
Charlotte favors the single point urban interchange.
When I-77 was constructed in 1968, it was built through a landfill
located in the north-east quadrant. It was noted by the City that this is a
private landfill, not a controlled city dump. Any widening in this quadrant
will require extensive geological study to determine the type of buried
wastes. Widening in this area should be avoided. There is also some
construction debris in the north-west quadrant, but an extensive
investigation will not likely be required.
Structure Design requested that during the phased construction, enough
room be set aside to allow for construction of the footings and overhang of
the new structure (minimum of 10 feet between structures).
Since slopes are steep on I-77, a retaining wall may be required if an
extra lane is built on the outside lanes of I-77 to transition from the
interchange.
At the Westpark Drive and Tyvola Road intersection, a new development is
presently under construction. The City will provide DOT with site plans.
Kings Branch Creek has been completely piped in the north-east quadrant.
A detention basin is located in front of the hotel and under the Scott car
dealership and ends just short of the Southern Railroad. A detailed
hydrologic survey of this area is needed, since relocation of the stream may
be necessary. Environmental Agency representatives prefer relocating the
stream to keep it open. The water quality of Kings Branch Creek is class 3
which will require the use of standard control measures. Flood control and
channelization will be the major environmental concerns with this project.
The Fish and Wildlife Department representatives will be notified when more
detailed surveys have been completed. The City will send drainage plans to
the Hydraulics Unit to assist with their surveys.
The City wants to accommodate pedestrian traffic on the bridge due to
the high amount of pedestrians presently using the current structure (no
sidewalks are currently provided for pedestrian use). Although crosswalks
are presently located at the NC 16 and I-85 interchange (sidewalks were
located here previously), DOT does not encourage pedestrian traffic on a
June 11, 1993
Page 3
single point urban interchange. No accident history is available for NC 16/
I-85 since the facility was first opened in the fall of 1992. Sidewalks are
located along Tyvola Road toward the new coliseum and end at Nations Ford
Road. The City has no plans to extend these. DOT will address the need for
sidewalks in the environmental document.
This project has a production right of way acquisition date of
September, 1994 and a production let date of September, 1996. The planning
document is scheduled to be completed by July, 1994. Photogrammetry will fly
the project area now and obtain field surveys when available. Roadway Design
will request plan sheets in May, and we anticipate having a preliminary
design and cost estimates by November 22, 1993. The planning document for
this project will not be completed in metric, however, the final plans will
be in metric.
I-77 will be resurveyed to determine how far south the project limits
need to extend (limits stop at Southern Railroad to the north). Plan sheets
for the Project I-2401 (the I-77 widening project) are presently on CADD, and
it was suggested that Roadway Design update these for use with this project.
It was recommended that the western limits of the project be stopped before
the Nations Ford Road and Tyvola Road intersection and the widening already
present but not currently utilized should be used (for a total of 6 lanes as
requested by the City). Since the railroad bridge will not accommodate
additional lanes, construction is recommended to be terminated before the
railroad for the eastern limits.
A public hearing is not planned for this project since there are no
relocatees. The Citizens Participation Unit will advertise the project for a
public hearing. City officials are aware of one business owner with
extensive land holdings between Nations Ford Road and Westpark Drive on the
east side of Tyvola Road. All property owners will be contacted regarding
donation of right of way. When plans are completed, we may need to meet with
affected business owners.
Project I-2401 is presently under construction and will provide for six
lanes on I-77 under the Tyvola Road bridge. One additional lane in each
direction is being added in the median section.
If significant issues develop, the decision whether to cover the subject
project under the planned Categorical Exclusion instead of an Environmental
Assessment will be reevaluated.
AHS/plr
Attachments (2)
Ia >
k-
N
o ?.
? G
b
1

0
CCC i l i

.I
I I
1
i
it
i;
i
W j
i
1
i
i

„ i
i ?
i
!
>a

Y
J`
I I I i\1\ ? \
/ /? 1 I I r 1 '\ \
j I I I { \ \
?-' II \
R1

777
r Q
N
G?
l?
b?
I
I Cy
E
r
i ,:
p
N. C. DEPAR E?T OF TRANSPORTATION
-
TRANSM.ITTAL.SLI.;
DATE
TO
l l c- /" REF. NO. OR ROOM. BLDG.

4e
FROM:
{ REF. NO R-RO ? LOG.

F. i0 D

ACTION VA. V-Ar
SP N
NOTE AND FILE ? P 'O4 ??pp``VER SPN
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME PER YOU4:-I i``g--gy((11ES"I JM
%
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR ATP
AL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFO ?`R//ff?`AA ON
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE -? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION - -? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:

?61
cl ZA? yl

- ~ 3
L ~ PROJECT REFERENCE N0. SHEET NU.
TR~~, [-2506 1B
1 ~
-L.. _
ti ~7 ~'J~
~~~~~~1V ~ ONST.REV. ~
•S.U.E = SUBSURFACE UTILITY ENGINEER
1 JL ~ ~ ~ ~ d@' ~ ll ~ /M REY, ,
~L SYMBOLS
CONVENTICJNAL
- ROADS f~' RELATED ITEMS MINOR Television elevision or Radio Tower ~ Area Outline G~
recorded Woter Line _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ----W Gote _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _
Edge of Pavement _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Head & End Wall _ _ coN~\ Recorded
)esignated Water Line (S.U.E.') _ _ -w-W- Gas Pump Vent or USG Tonk Cap
Curb _ Pipe Culvert _ _ _ ~ Designat _
.
' Prop. Slope Stakes Cut . _ _ _ - - - ~ - - - Footbridge _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ y-------{ Sanitary Prop. Slope Stakes Fill . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - - - F - - - Drainage Boxes _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ¦ ca Recorded unitary Sewer _ -SS--SS- Church
recorded Sanitary Sewer Force Main School J~
9 rY )esi Hated Sanita Sewer Force Main S.U.E.' Park _ _ )F55 _ .~5
Prop. Woven Wire Fence _ _ _ - Paved Ditch Gutter _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ Designat Prop. Chain Link Fence _ Recorded
recorded Gas Line _ _ _ _ Cemetery. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ L t ~
Dam _ _ _ _ _
)esignoted Gas Line (S.U.E.`) _ _ .
Prop. Wheelchair Romp _ _ ~ UTIZ.ITIES Designat _ Exist. Guardrail _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ _ Exist. Pole _ . Storm S ' Prop. Guardrail _ _ _ _ _ _ - 6cist. Power Pole _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ? Recorded
Sign........ _ _ _ os
storm Sewer _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -S-S---
Well _ _ _ _ _ _ _ o w
recorded Power line - -
)esignated Power Line (S.U.E.*) _ -F- - SmaII Mine _ _ _ _ _ _ -st~ _ _p _
Equality Symbol _ _ _ _ ~ Prop. Power Pole _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ b Designat RIGHT OF WAY Exist. Telephone Pole . Recprded
;ecprded Telephone Cable _ Swimming Pool _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _-T~-T
Prop. Telephone Pole _ _ _ ¢ Designat Right of Way Marker _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ )esignated Telephone Cable (S.U.E.#) _ _ _T_ . _ T~PD~i~PHY
Exist. Joint Use Pole _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ Recorded tecorded lLG Telephone Conduit - _ ___T~., Loose Surface
Exist. Right of Way Line wiAAarker - Designated USG Telephone Conduit (S.U.E.`) _ _T~--.~- - Hard SurFace
Prop. Joint Use Pole ~ _ ~ Designat Prop. Right of Way Line (by others) _ - T- 'l7nknow Telephone Pedestal pD
7nknown Utility (S.U.E.`) _ -~~T~-~~1~- Change in Road Surface
Prop. Right of Way Line (by contract) Recorde Cable N Pedestal _ _ _ . _ _ ~ zecorded Television Cable - - . -TV---~~-- Curb
_
Exist. Control of Access Line _ ~\A~,-- Designa Hydrant _ _ _ 0 Designated Television Cable (S.U.E.`) __T~_ Right of Way Symbol _ _ R/w
Recorded Fiber Optics Cable -FO-FO-- Guard Post _ _ o
Prop. Control of Access Line ~ Recorde
_ _ _ E Satellite Dish _ _ . , _ _ y) Exist. Easement Line _ _ Designa E~cist. Water Valve _ ~ Designated Fiber Optics Cable (S.U.E.") _ _-FO- , Paved Walk
Exist. Water Meter _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ ' - 0
Prop. Temp. Construction Easement Line _ ____E-T Exist. W Sewer Clem Out _ _ _ _ _ _ Q
Bridge _
_ Prop. Temp. Drainage Easement Line _ _ _
T~ Power Manhole ^ . _ D
BOU11lDARIES PROPERTIES ~X Culvert or Tunnel
Prop. Perm. Drainage Easement Line _ _ _ Telephone Booth _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ m
itate Line _ _ _ . Few
HYDROLOGY State ~~n Culvert _ . _ . _ _ >
Water Manhole _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ county Line _ _ _ _ _ _ - - -
Stream or Body of Water County _ _ _ - - - - - Light Pole _ _ _ n
fownship Line Footbridge _ _ _ . - .
Flow Arrow _ _ _ _ _ ^ ~ ~ Townshi _ H-Frame Pole _
City Line _ _ - Tr`dil, Footpath _ _ _ _ -
Disappearing Stream _ ~ City Line _ _
' Power Line Tower _ _ ~j _ Reservoti Reservotion Line l,i9ht House
Spring - - - - O Pole with Base _ o
Property Line _ '
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Gas Valve _ '
Swamp Marsh _ J~ Property _ _ _ _ . _ ' _ o Property
Property dine Symbol ~ VEGETATION
Shoreline _ _ _ _ Gas Meter . _ _ _ a _ _ .Single Tree . _ _ _
Exist. Iron Pin _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ o t.;
Wet Land Boundaries 6cist. Iro _ _ _ - - - - - - Telephone Manhole . O ' T
Property Comer _ _ _ + Single Shrub _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _
Falls _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - Property
- _ _ Power Transformer _ _ _ . _ ~ Property Property Monument _ _ _ _ ~ Hedge _ . -,-,,,,.-~,-r.~v,~,....
Rapids _ - - - r- - - - Sanitary Sewer Manhole . _ _ _ •
Property Number _ _ 123 Woods Line_.......__.
Prop Lateral, Tail, Head Ditches _ ~ Property Storm Sewer Manhole _ _ _ . _ _ _ ~ Parcel N STRUCTURES Water Tank - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ~
F~ Parcel Number _ O Orchard _ - _ ~4~~~ 6
one ord . I
_ Fence U FMCe ~fl@ . ~ -X--X-X- Y ...~ILL<Oll/!S #~VINEYARD
WW & ISBW
MAJOR Water Tank nth Legs
Bridge, Tunnel, or Box Culvert _ ;Cco~c ] Traffic Signal Junction Box _ _ 0 B Bridge Wing Wall, Heod Wall :y ~ Fiber Optic Splice Box , ~ Building and End Wall ~co~+c ww~ BUILDI11tG f~' OTHER CULTURE Standord Gauge - -
Buildings _ _ _ . - RR Signal Milepost _ _ „~,~°n35 v
~ _ Foundat F _ _ . _ _ ~ o Foundafion5 . _ ~ Switch
.~rs~d i~oiove3
t

90 NOY UEE FOR w/~I ACOUI8IYIOW

w.:.iz;..° _ . ~ .,L"'k'., .en~, ~•'~`S31Gia•irf'~•r.:,.: r.. .:y.. .c.~>r'S~'~' +k~'3~'iw.,~'ki

5: i y*"ACyi• - ?P •:u '4' g- , ~3 1 1'F' _ ~ r j ' 4 h, t r 5 x ~ .:>iy',,.~ _ _ _ . .
a ~ r ~ai~ .xy.~'- _ f :r It ~ ~ ~M. lT m R ~ r _ y ?~F ~ ~ . ~ i .-n`tb'Y' fl'''ay 7 } 7 ~ .~AZ ~41:j~ . Y ' :~iy.:4~ , y ~ ~ ~ ~ 1...1 r
t ; F aro r'L : ; a a.t0.,+ t.'. „ ty ~,a fax w~F ,f. 4. . Sx>. ~ a<. x _ r .r n. t^r'. . .air". ~.x. ~4. r ,e. w::a: - r ` yes ~~A~~ ~ ,
q~ • _ t. ~ as . ' 'i# r.~'. s. a 4. 3 x.. ~ 4.:, t, ^a r ..I'~, •.L ^^K 1. r. _ - w5.
. _ aQ '3,. ski ~..1, ~1~ l - $'eeYF? y^~ k h.c}
b. . dn.. 5. .i . ~ t. s.:. ,:.b:.' .'1e A . ~ ~ r r;'
'-'At'e. rm d'.^ e. ..r wu A.. "aYN:Y.. . , i , . 3~ a ....x.. . mf . k , 4. . C w -yr,-,Yk y"4a-.r.F.~' r.. „T. r^, fi. - '
t. .4,. W, ..,c, r,, . 4 _ . ~ .!r.. _ 7 - r.}.. ''+G4.t § -~r~ p.:'4e",a ~
r 1
I 1-
' 1 1

io
' MATCHI MATCHIIN TO SHEET 5
' STA STAT I 1700 i.REr.
T310MAS L. wT~cHU+ r` fEIA OEV, CORP.
Be.+~~~ 3 s . D0.68T4-0286 4i,=-`Y RAAP 8 0 RAW A Yd
sw ` i ~ , i
wn
aNi POwFA a+~t~POrrn f 26.000lLT1 0 ~ 1 le2,a) ~ ~ ,Q
r PROP. CL FENCE ~ . ~ a~ t ~ • -Y- REV.
.x I ~ j ~ X50 LTV' + .6
- +17 ¢ 31.2fiI1LT1 ' 1122.21 ! J A ~ (190.3'1
4. ~ , . 'h ...~'+s.A~. ENO PROP, C/A v X65.389 LREV
~ =>~t..~,,.~,._., .,,~~P,,>,~.,~ PT 4+49.7n (u.4 RTl fENCE
f; r CLASSi'g8'mSTONf y Mi n~ ry (M4.4') RAW C i i I RAW D hrn nm~n RIAVIA XT \ - y OP E x •6 .661 (REV
M/T,5 mz 'MALI FENCEC FILTER FABRIC JOSETlI RR;CNS 1 GEORGE FTIIGERALD, It d '~-f9`ta+c FENCE ~ T4,932 art 'SKETCH SHOWING RELATIONSH~
DB.3211-04A ~ p+ ny" n'a F ~ 4 , , OF -L- REV. BRIDGE T4 PAVEMENT
RUiN - sc?raoER ~ - $ ' caNC REIL ~ ` A591 END T ~ roods .ter
F r\/_~~ , PM'E 8 ELBON OB. 4Mi3.0472 Pr , ~ woos _ ? ~ . 300 FUNNE/ DRAM 300 FUNNEL DRAM PIPE 1 E1601' ~ . - ~ tti~e 2 PT 4dl.69((((.~ LT1 A-2 P,0.T. ~'.*ea655 ~ . ti.n. r °I
RAMP B-ISTA.N43 RAMP 8-I STA. 2+20 ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ 4r \~RE' , C T PIPE ~ BEWN PROP C/A ,
N +T8 TREY O woocs ; B-2 x ,alw sPURRIER .ooos k TT, an O - : = + ~ , BEGIN PROP. E e A- * y x f LET NTO , i~LQNtNG 12.000 IRTI pEy,
ZS + 1 SUE S. ~FlET t 4m BASE DITCH ~ ~ + R P ~ p .DEPTH M ~ ~ ~ M9.26] YREY M/CLASS 'Y RP RAP ~ . ~ ~ CB , + o / DB.Si OQtb PTH To?1 f ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ,
~ 62.000 tITI O C ~ ~ - (203.Mt SEE DITCH DETF~ 'F' ¦ ST. 1.8 m T SEE PROFL A ~ " ~ ~ + 'CB TO OI `A' ~ n _ ~ OP. Mw FENCE ~ d' n s ~ ~ • A-~ ~Di.1T11.0017 ~ 7 ~ w ° \
CLASS ' STONE gETAN 8 E%TEND P/M 4b 6. Y / \ r/T.5 mT EtGST. 2- 1.8.2.4 C 4 t -!i . ~ ~ _ ~ ~ m TES r~oats
FILTER FABRIC RCBC ~ ' `i' ~ DEPTH C~ ` a \ C 1LTEP FABRIC 3
+48 YREY s~ }Q y.. /•T v Y 44,251(lT) u G ~ PROP. GUARDRAIL y} -i.. _ _ IRTI * _ to i o
N (14521 'ew j-' J~ s , - - Coen a 3~? CR~1 IitfTBl ?3I RA~1 s ' r J) ~ f _ _ PROP. GUARDRAIL ~ 0'1
5 100 T Y ~2 - - - - a i f'E-M C , _ _ 4, s .,a _ ~ r - - i SEE FALSE lit.71 ' '~4, AEY, P,O. « _ _ aQe„ coNC. ca~~ ~ DETAIL i
A _ - ,6. 4. S t., STILL ,
rR An BASH tl""'"`'""'•.. ~ ~ ; ~ ,r~` c `r i t T , 34 - r - - , ~...L.- c
CONC. ~FU~- _ _ _ l" _ r`~ ~ ~ COILA )15 RCPT , c~At~Iw'~ r~•` s- - - _ _ _ _ `7 ' 4 p~~N ~ ` FIAT _ 1 ' ~ 'S ~ - - - 1 - - B I ~k E AEL - MlP L' -
- - c p i - n' ~ - - - ` F • 10006 ..J` ~ t •~T .,i nQODS~ RC x1PE - - - CONG.COLLAR
R~pN ~ -Y ~ - - ~ ~ ~
F f _
A' lrJ --DAFT. Q r`~ - d RE _ _ , W - . - ~
=t a' - tnsei ~C V3fh vwv esY - - - - - -
1 _ _ ~ 'E~ REPLACE r- - - - - - __-'-"r" 1 ~ O - - - - SEE D11CH DETAIL 'C' ~ ~ s~::~ itAL 'G' r n sa ~ IE ~ SEE PROFM.E ~ ~ ` ~ nN Air r
EX[Si. CONC. ~ IANBARRiER -kPPA • .t ~ Q~
WO - - P.0. . L (T ~EL_.-- - - • _ _
_ ~ • ~ rM Aif ~ / ~ b a _ / m ! REDUCE DIR/ + - h0~ ~l.BA-IFUf - - S f ~ Zrr
~a ~ a 2!- SNIDR BERN Ttt~T1FIF = - • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - -TR~AMFAC BE?R'L- _ _ _ _ _ 5FE EASE SUMP OE j ~ 1RAFFIC BEAR'6 ,L_ REV. P.a . IB+7f.7O9 C r
UVI - - - - - - GUTTER ' ~ ~ - . - - - r - - - TRAFiI~ REAR~G - f- - - - - „ iTA: _ . _ _ ' . ~ r - - - 6-_ - - _ FALSESIR! OEfiAt - - urG,1e_ - - - - ~c UN
+ 4- - - L a ~ RET.a, . - ~ - - - - r _ _ FRET. y~ _ _ - _ _ •
-x- ~ _ ~ 3TS RCP P, T: +71.7
. Ui r ' / ~ ~ u
` tf ~ III: 1 'I G~ ~ J p-I ~ ~ r,,•~' ~
~ 1 PROP. GUARDRAIL E o ti ~>rr5 ` ~s .-.--x ,
. , M' ~ TIP. ND 4,5 3• a TYPE'D' ,tf,~,,,;,ti..
,ti . AEL T J END/BE BEGIN PROP. C!A 400 1Y0~ TIE J 6 PROP. «44. -I 300 FUMIEI DRAM PIPE 1 EIROR FENCE TO - ~ ~ ~ ( ~ f'ti s,
i 1/L6 a TONS +TI 59 RC-I ~ o • 4.S ~ . TIE~TO MN 27.398 fRTt CLASS 8 STONE FAOWC MIND NAZI (89.8'1 eR ILTER 19. UtTI f P ~ ~ nr ~
I~ ENO RETAIING RAIL R/S.O 16 .)'t E10ST. ~ - ~ ~ ~ 4.5 -Y- REV STA. 103+50 -Y- REY STA. 103+20 R ~ AY M . ;Y 4 •i BERN OUTLET u Si I r~fJ^ ` C ~ C
C BEGN 2• i.5 ac L5 RCRC N +X859 RC-t - 2C1 2CI u ~ c. STRUCT. ~ - ~ A ~.7 ~
8 BEGIN DITCH T ~Y' 23.000 OtTI ENO PROP,F ~T~~ ~ $ : A, (04+40 t RE . \r ~ ~ ' ? -Y- REV. STA 103N3 (45.4'1 EYp x b5.80?~fiC-I ` ~ F MCE _ t ' ~t c ~ r r - ~ C SEE LSE r'oas C
SEE DITCH DETAIL 'E' PROP. wll E p~ -y lR1 .y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ STA M)5+00 18L6't k f~ I X69,630 RD-I C ro0vs ?
CNMCO MDLDIIG CO, NC. E%TEIq 600 RCP R/ .12.406 _ C\ ~ ~ , ~ \ 4`i97 C 06 86]-OAS CONC. COLLAR r - ~l;Nl ITCH pj~ C .,r - ~ 42.000 iLTI qp a ~ A zL ~ SEE DQCH t137.8'1
NTO 1 ~ ~ ~ - CAST P/E .2' \ k \ A RCBC STRLCT. + \ Wi 72.016 NC-i \ \ ' "T ~ : C~ ~lPo/~`.1.' ~ OETAL 'E' • AR E M1 T BECMI S1AtG. a CH
Et0 pTCM 28. IRTt \ \ C-2 a ~ ~Tto iRAYEIERS NSURANCE CO. SEE gTCN DETAIL 'E' Sl1.1'1 1 R s ~o~' \ ~x 4 ~ RAIF D•t5Te 'trio
D8.6110-0276 -Y- REV. STA. M35+00 ssra~ ~ ~l \ . \ \ ,`x 4' i ` a ~ ~ rr~oa acrorK\ ~ k
. ~ ~ ~ ~ , 1lTl T ,r 'tM4.5')
a TT \ CN DITCH PROP, ww FENCE -I _L- __-Y-
. ~ T~' . \ \ ~ 08.4553 SEE DITCH DFrT~"~'E' ~ PT . M+ TS ?a P1 S , 20~ .427 Pi A 107 .315 = . ` SEE,PBOFIE" L~ _ ' i3' Y (LT? C, - ~ ~ , F,' (t T) -
DITCH D)?TAIL F ~ _E1(1EIO 121 dD0 RCP - 1 42 L = d ~ ' 4LT1 + N/ CONC. COLLAR ? 5 L 74 ~ Tf9
L FALSE SL HP DETAIL. I R p0T TG SCAiE) ' 0~ ~ f ~ R , DITC - ~ cT ; ~ ~ T _ T .972 ? - 8.} F ~ 0.0 R 3Ap.OD = 3•~9t. H ~ -
WTSIDE DITCH T~ 'Y' DiTCN tta',7 rC XYf I ~ `r Al ~ ~ \ ~1 V
TRAFF;C FLDw -z ~ CROUIO' R !'~40 t.S-rn • SPfi,AL DITCH ELEV. iT poi rD. Jm ;4Y i ~ ^ ~ 2 P 4« . ((f.i LT1 lT 11 roods - + , k.
- 0 3m~ / S , I NATURAL ' / ! - < rcROUND & s .f ~ PROP FENCE SEVENTY SEVEN LAID CO. ~ 1 ~R / ~ N. 06.4J1T-0990
F LITER FABRIC-' i. ~ 1 ' ` \ " _ r END DRCH t ~ D , SLAD~t~ ! SEE DITCH
tc. I ST ~ . a,,i+:.! • A;ti ~ ~ +'t4y+_-. * , CLASS '8 ONE . ~ ' ~ DElul B ~ A PROPOSED PAVED SHOULDER i STdNA DIIAM1Af,E PPE 'G
_ - _ _ j 1 -l- REV. LEFT STA. 20+00 TO STA. 20~ar; _ . J ENTER ?T00 Cite TIgU .000 PROPOSED NONOLtTHIC CONC. ISLAND a N ~ REMOVE MITERED NAIL N/ fABiACRTEO~~~ ~ 6O0 9.8w T15~b ~ r c
i---- ".LASS 'B'STDNE = U.3 m TONS NM8,0 m2 i~~TER FABRIC -r-REY,LEFT S1 A.=,r•3C ?0 Si A.gB~P' - aT1E ~ ~3 ~ ' RILMY SCOTT, •t ~ • g,Op h , SECTION 5 .ONC T_E SECTION ~ x u ? ~ ~ PROPOSED t.iu CLNC• 51DEwALA 5 ~
REV. RIGHT STA. 103 13 TO STA. 105 00 ,2 i CLASS 'B' STONE _ !w.lm TC?+S 1/2)2.0 ~ FILTER iAygC Da 4/M-0440 t "a • = PIIOPQSED STD. 750rN1 CONC. C11R6 d GUTTER it ' EBTEND 2700 CIIPt15nVnx251rm CORR.,q 4AlIGE) I-T7 .-11
E'ALSE SUMP DEL II Rae ttfT sTA.3+Y0 Ta sTti3+u - [LASS '8' STO~f = 29.4 m ONS 1'.'662 ~ f9 TER FABRC • i ~ i ~ i NdEY PRAEIFiESr N w P NS r+. ~ f tg~~g f ,q,~ PROPOSED RETAI fNG ALl t~' t\ ~p ~ -6'fOb 2T~60b ® PAVEAENT OBLITERATION
OUTSIDE DITCH ~ ,E ' ~ t ~ 1 ; ~
TRAFFIC c,!~w I C ~i _ o2i-'= • CilIYERt INLET E><TENSIlJH ~ ~r ~ m ~ p? ` ~ - - C D FOA 1.- REV. PROFILE, SEE SHEEi 14 8 15 eIk StA1T+~,~, FOR -r- REV. PROFILE, SEE SHEET 16 d 17
m I iNOr 'r KATE, ~ ~ • 0~.N~0lt6 • I OR~~lib /f • ~ 1 fOR RAWS A-1 E A-2 PROFILES. SEE SHEET 19 ~ G ~ 1 ~ - 4 . fOP RAIDS 8-1 d B-2 PRUFiLES. SEE SHEET 20 + ~S v ~ , • ~ ~ i ~ 70.3.00 i fOR RANDS C-i d C-2 PROf lLES. SEE SHEET 21
. 1 NATURAi ; °7f r• * •p~~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ FUR RAWS D-1 d D-2 ,PROFILES. SEE SHEET 22
` t. GROUND-' ~ ~ ~ ~ A e~T ~ ~ FOR -L- REV. tXIRYE DATA. SEE SHEET 10 \ r Ar~_ -t A- URVE DA1A. SEE 5HEET 10 d, y Trofilr pr Glp 1 FOR RAAPS A d 2 C
Mi~OSEC~.-~ G.45r!-~ i Oa2.an ' ~ITttl tNIN.1 • r - S = DTTCH SLOPE ~ ' I s ?/VOID Rd. d I-T7 IADT! FOR RA1P5 B-1 6 8-2 CURVE DATA. SEE S1~ET 10 4R \ ~ ' fOR RAIDS C-i d C-? CURVE DATA. SEE SHEET i0
'`,iyp R FABRIC - _ i ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ FOR RAIDS D-1 d 0-2 CURVE DATA. SEE SHEET 10 ~ " 1fp + ~ a + CULVERT PlRi15. SHEETS C- iHRU C-
i • a ~ ~ STa~! w 9E0 I 0 Sm fteEO4?Ewn • ~*tCll+ O;TiN Etfv j + O - fOR 2f 1.5X2.4 R~. SEE CILYERT PLANS, SHEETS C- THRU C- ~ 'I + w e fOR 2w 1.5x1.5 RCBC. SEE CUI.VfRi PLANS. SHEETS C- TNAU C-
Rti ~'_FTT STA.1«~ rp SrA. i,y., _ - ~ ` ' r 1 T Q1, SEE RDwY STANDARD DNG. 100.06 arc ~ FOR All RAW NOSE CONS RUC F
aSS ~ RIP-RAP : IOM,C • i~NS ~ ~ w~ 2a8.im~r? tER F18RC art:'. V ~ ipi RAAP A DE7CUR, SEE SHEET 2- ~ fql RAID D DETOl1N. SEE SHEET / t i
i•w ~Lr a . NlTOR nnw , I '1 LT ` • K4A1 e ~ ~
~ 5 TYVO~A AQ~4D / 1.17 .u,1. soars / ~ ~ ,
~ I oa 4'p t ~ • 0 1 f t^
+wr• uw~ } l V ~ 1~
.~~p ~Ii~i~AAY ~EAiI~
h ~•I'1~7TF i~ MAITOTrM _ w rf ~ N>t yr ~9N9>Iil9lf ti
wr'rrM ATM i , : s r.wa ~
I ~ I •4.
~
r. i ;.w 5~ wt .
,fir r r ' i ~ ' ?~3*~- t i". i?~ . :..f e ~ l r r s: 'Ri'.~5. li ,&i ~ 'Yr tr w.a;. _k - ~s i.-. ir, , ` ~,y
Y w` r . .-r ~ r. r., - y " ~z l` . ~ ,
4 ram i•.f' F,q' t x ~ ~ •LS a. , a • e...
, • .x~'.~~ try-? ti. ~ ~ t ; I - k., . I u' s r;t;- y~, + 1'p
:*;"w;i f.,T " y., '~Y'r' ,"t `s' i'fs.. ..y , v~ r ~fz,~';'~i?.- Frr r-. , W e r p.. may. - ~
a•, a a 4« ~iY~ j i 4
I~ ,i
d. i ~i
i

Y.
r
RA46 awn vnoma ~vowa xa ~
to llp~[!
See Sheef i.-A For Index of Sheets ~ ~ ~ I' ~j ~ ~q ~T TRIG 8.1673601 ~
srsn r~w.wa r..~rm.~ra o~cw~nm+
See Sleet 7-B For Corrvenflonal Symbols l~.e u ' b.'~
8.1673601 IMS-77-112 5 P.f.
~ ALL DIMENSIONS IN THESE
PUNS ARE IN METERS AND
~1Q /OR MILLIMETERS UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED
Sill ST. ~
-gsyp. ~ ° ~ MEC.~~LE11~B UR J 1R U11 ~7'Y G C~
l
N ~
I ~ e~w. . pa~~o~o~~~~r p~a~~
~ - LOCATION: TYVOLA ROAD FROM WEST ~ ~ EAST OF WESTPARK DRIVE i WEST OF NATIONS FORD ROAD TO ~ 9A NOY Utff FAQ CAVJtYRUCYI9Y!
)RIVE ~0 YIOY USA ~0~ ~/~1 A60U931Y10Yt
~ ctuntorra
~ / o TYPE OF WORK: GRADING, PAVING, CURB G, CURB & GUTTER, DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALLS,
SIDEWALKS, FENCING, CU E~ SIGNALS, LONG LIFE PA J
:ING, CULVERT EXTENSIONS, STRUCTURES, SIGNING,,
LIFE PAVEMENT AAARKINGS, AND RAISED REFI.~CTIVE MARKERS
STATE PROJECT 8.1673601
STATE rROJKT 8.1673601 ~I ~
~ ~ Its; ~a -l- REV. STA. 10+70.000 BEGIN STATE PROJECT 8.1673601 1
, l " -L- REV. STA. 10+70.000 BEGIN F.A. PROJECT IMS-77-1(127)5
N 158,402.522
_ s
c ~ E 436,667.931
i
VICINITY MAP = = _ - :
. s SNOT ro sc~ ~ -
SHIPPING POINT: CHARLOTTE, N.C.

e
77e ~N`s FQ ; ~ ~ ` r'
~ BEGIN BRIDGE ~
~ Tp - -l- REV. STA. 18+45 ~ s ~o s p ' ; <r
E CO\~ _Y- REV.STA-96+35.370 ~ ~p rn -Y- REV. STA. 112+87.140
~(~A' BEGIN CONSTRUQION - A O ~ ~ i END CONSTRUCTION 1;••
9 t5eu J,~I~ _
,,;..~0 ~ ~ KEN
. P I-77
~ Q~
O ~ -
- ~m ~
F - i ~ _ .
~S ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ,
-Y- REV. STA. 100+40.000
BEGIN CONSTRUCTION -r ENO CONSTRUCTION ~ '
' ~N
(NBt~
REV. STA. 23+60.000 END STATE PROJECT 8.1673601
END BRIDGE
-L- REV. STA. 18 + 98 ` \ , "c' -L- REV. STA. 23 + 60.000 END F.A. PROJECT IMS-77-1 12 5 = ~
_ ~ ~ Q~~ ~ -L- STA. 23 + 72.552 (14.070 L~
N 158,488.383 ~ -
~ 6 E 437,907.832 I-77 IS ACONTROLLED-ACCESS FACILITY WITH
~g'~QP ro ACCESS BEING LIMITED TO .THE INTERCHANGE.
• ~ ~~~?ly~c~~ CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED
- ~ NCDOT CONTACT: MR. R. E. PEARSON, P.E. ..'x,0.6 9°~ TO IHE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD III
ENGINEERING COORDINATOR
Prgavred In the Olflce off: HYDRAULICS SNGIXEBR DIt~ISIQN OF ffiGHWAYS
~ V ~ PROJECT LENGTH
k GRAPHIC RATIO LENGTH ROADWAY F.A. PROJECT IM~77-1(127)5 =1.237km B Barbara H. Mulkey Engineering, InC. STATE OF NORTX CAROLINA
5 m 4 10 m LENGTH STRUCTURES P:A. PROJECT IM~77-1(125 =0.053km
TOTAL LENGTH STATE PROJECT 8.1673601 =1.290km PLANS ~r srumNxn sr~cu~rcaaoxs ~awrwc~
RIGHT~~1OF WAY DATE:
PS
O 5 m~o~lo m DESIGN DATA MARCH 1995 R. M. WALKER
PRO~C.T QBSIGN AL1NAfi~t SIGNATURH: r~
ADT (1998) ADT (2018) DHV D T V ROADWAY DESIGN ST.178 ~G9RdY BNGaBBR -DESIGN
' DEPARTMENT OP TRANSPORTATION
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL) - - +
~ o~~ ,r, TYVOLA ROAD 43,000 70,200 996 60% 8% 80 kmM LETl7NG DATE: ERAL HIGI{R'AY ADMIXISTRATION
SEPTEMBER t7.1996 W.S. HOOD, P.E.
. PROJFCI FNGAZSR y
PROFILE (VERTICAL) ~MER5TATE 77 92,000 145,000 1096 5590 229'0 110 kmh t~ - APf/tOVBD POR -
SlGNATURfi: DNf3lON ADA(IHIS7RA7VR Af7d
~'rA H' ! t ~ "~`BIli~419~1d~t~gl'~Idif I i 9 d! J ~1tl•,~~,R Id,l~ . .