20150330 Ver 1_Application_20150401

n�o�
� "•-� �T ��
� �
m��
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPART`NIENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PATRICK L. MCCRORY
GOVE2ItOR
April 1, 2015
N.C. Division of Water Resources
Transportation Permitting Unit
1650 MSC-Archdale Building
Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Attention: Mr. Rob Riding, NCDOT Project Coordinator
ANTHONYJ.TATA
$BCftETARY
Subject: Proposed roadway construction and replacement of a structure conveying
an unnamed tributary to Cypress Creek on SR 1628 (Simon Collie
Road) in Franklin County. WBS No. SC.035005
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to construct
SR 1628 (Simon Collie Road) in Franklin County. This roadway improvement project
will include grade, drain, base, pave, and erosion control for the project length of 0.75
mile. This project will involve permanent stream impacts including surface water fill
associated with a pipe replacement and rip rap armoring for bank stabilization as well as
temporary stream impacts for dewatering. This project is within the Tar-Pamlico River
Basin and does involve permanent buffer impacts. Application is hereby made for
NCDENR-DWR Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) for Road
Improvements. A pre-construction notification, construction plan sketch, project
mapping, and photographs are attached with this request. By copy of this letter we are
notifying the USACE of the intent to work under a non-reporting NWP 14. If you have
any questions or need additional information, please contact Mrs. Heather Montague at
[phone] or hwmontague(a�ncodot.gov.
Sincerely,
�Q� W� %�ot,,�
f�, J.R. Hopkins, P.E.
Division Engineer
cc: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, NCDOT Coordinator, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Mr. Steve Winstead, P.E.; NCDOT DIV 5; District 3 Engineer
Mr. Jonathan Tyndall, NCDOT Franklin County Maintenance Engineer
Mrs. Dawn Phipps, P.E. CPESC; NCDOT REU Field Operations Staff Engineer
Division Frve-2612 North Duke S[reet Dwham North Carollna27704
Telephone: [phone] Fas: 919-560-3371

� �� . � �
�: � 1 p � j �
� '
.: ` I;.'.' ; .
1 � �, � ,� �+ l
I
! i�i? ��. .,� i. J 1 'a
� � ���:� ' � ��..y f;, .
�� 4
, , 1 ,—
.
.
. �,{� .r:t:e :_4� �'.1.r7.r
.�- �.iis � •' r. � �:�1E
G'°�?�? . �.� _ : R:, t!e .1� .:
_;.� . � � 8 �L ,.
T �
G�. ' ' �G� � : .-�'; '`� '1
�,,�� � �! a .
�. t .'xF
� T�� -'t .1k �.-, � � �-.Id�
�
1 NN� �� � �y�
f � �T,1
=�` , , � i.:
�-- z � ��•��.
'r e°t s � � y a '
.. J ' ii�" ♦ i� r
.. - r y , �.. � '�;r�.�
� a
-. �' . , y L ' .� .
/Y.�� � ��L �,� _,,. � � �
- � � 'C� l Y � .x � .
� `� ...�.v .".i ."S. 'i i ,w'a'h�d'
� - .
"` �sp►�.'i * .. ;� � '. y ;: �t '
. �- .,�'� ,-
Site 1 inlet.
•r rr
� j .i �
��'� �
�� ' ,
�
r j
h - �
�. : }'
P� ..�_ '.
.�, ��� ,�F+�'-, i r _ „ � ._ ,� _� ,
< � ti � t h a
i
.
,d °,� _;,��' K .' �, �."
� � I i L fM{* J� S.h 1 .. �J
'Y�r /{i
V � 4� p�
*.t�. . - �� � 13' �_ � y�i_ ��? I
� t �� t n� ��S < �
jist '( �+ � � �qn _ -.r
".� t > � i_: •
�''�' r v �,.ii
Z � , . )7�;
'��.1. .P�';i _ _ '
~` �.. :tii. r .. ' l�Ao)aL4E1eC9.�lUCl'�.
. . :C` � ::J' . . �
+.�. ���.�.1 ,' :. ., t �_
' : ;`�� . "�*` ,. ... - . .
� , „ -z .: , >
.,
� � i+ � . r v.,
� t � ` , ,� � 4: Wt "�" ;: �-�(�`{ y' ,
r •� � .� . � •i y� �l � � � . . , � tL;� � r ° I:
r;ly'71�� '. ; � tr �• ���� 'L�Ulx9'�� � -1
az ,' , =�� ; � �, . . �,r �`� �
Y �. `e` �t i H r r � V �. n
, � �i �� ��. K �� "r(/
. ,A y k.
AC'
.,. YM Y�� P. � ��y � � �� �y, f•,� ' .
F ♦ . �Jj �
w r �l ?.',� � J
i. �,i.: dYry.� Z� .r t, r. ITt ',:�} i'�� �� 7_dw'f �.�«
�- i � y-�.,� � � . } � ' . ' . � .i
! �
�� :.. . If�♦F/� � 6 , �.� .
R`, ! l�f��N
�1\. � / i��' N�[�i iEY' . . .
�}. ,`�p" .� � )� � � ' �
. � i�N�'��{/�. ��!' . � .
� . . . ]� " � ! . 4\p�"4�� ' . y . . .
• � -
I . � - e � � � �,'d
{'. I �R:.����� {.S - ! �.J.�J' , .
. G' ' �'. .� ' .
♦
Iit • i i' �!N_'i' *�, /�� ri F• •1' � � �. 4 ;: . _
C � t �v_ // �i s� ` �'
�`� � ,�; �' c. ti r.+'� �. „� f� �jn • * ..
...-Lf �` ? ., . . _ .. ..��r��� �' �� � �
�.
. �y..�,..
x „..,
_._,,4✓;�:
. ':��c _
.. � .
Site 1 outlet.
� � >.�.y�:
Q 3 . 2r3 . 2��i15
SR 1628 (Simon Collie Road) — Franklin County
Secondary Roads Program

� �' �5... , 1 �--+ � . ��`V '. _.
.. --^" ' '`''
' r � / �_... ....%" ;' �-....
- __ , �� M. , . �.}_.
�f /
�^�
l : . :-,� °� : _-..� �'- � �,r . � . � ' . � •�
�....+'� b'_ . � 1 ,_-.. /' \ � _r°'�.. i .""'"V \ . � .
� i! '� J' �! {' . � �.
��'� V I`
�' � � j G
,
e�---' , � � (, �
,
� „ , � :
_ . +�� `
�_
- , ,. �
;:; __ ,,,� � , --- -- -_ ; : _\ _ '' _ :� :r :,
_ _� r
� � #++ ��
-`"% , ''�-� ; ' ,:% v
/'� '� �`�� �, � - ,-_.� / �_�,�!
^� l f �: .
•
_
�- '
' � " � � `.��t ` � , . �-..•-.-_�,s._ ,.,., _ � =�""�:. -'�: , 1 �
� i. ��„"_'"�` �,� +�E � ry` `'✓/,�-� i``�"!� e '- �...
� � �� f
• f � 7�� � ,:iw"".�N' ` r\ \�� �� t 'L` l � ....
S✓ } .f ��r.. `. ... v^ .� �,l+J�� � � `i��
� {
' f. � � �,,�-r �n � �, �,, .
/ .
. .._.i / ta ' .F� � � � � � �i'���
t I�,.. '^`- � % . � m . J
_ _ _ _1___ , _ _. . � , �- �
, r .� . .� __ ,
t . �1� , .� .. _..`... ..�. . . n m / ; _ �
i , j t
*.� '� / m ^�i
f' `� --^' � " � � ,:f
�
` � I ' ,.�.�y ' '� f , ` �. � �
.. , .r _� „ E FS�, �
� `.� . N .`=' J � � /r-n
. � � �'� J dG] t� r _ �_��:
I � '" �`�'' '�'� � � ` . �� �
. _ `�wL .: _ � ". �r � ��
. ; , ti y�-,
,
� � '' �'� ~ . �'` t ,� v� � �� _�
�, : �
��� � o
� ,•'` } i �.., �� ��,- W n. ' I.
��
� : ,�
- ....__. — „�..,,__ .... �
.. ` �.�- � _..� _.-�,.___
..., .
i.
r ' ' '' � �,
s^t i I 1 .Y'X, °�
{ � �� �`�.J ... 4.--�.
�.� � j `" �' _- �
\jw. � J
r{ : ...- - ao,,,`- °'"' - '^.+ �
t-"": ��""� . \ .Y' r--�`-.�r:�.. _ _._ _.�
---"� j ".,� a „ 'rc--..�.v- =.+
, .•. � ,�_ ,. ., ; _--.,,
!� � . . � ? �- �.-..._ . - .
- _ _ , l . ... }
� J, . _. --..1 .
�
� �
� �> � �
� ti_ l i� i
. �`t � - ?'t � ',
-'��t � _-r-• � __ 1 ,_. � . > � ..... � j......,_....._ . .
X . �, i '�.s. -
�,...-.—� '
cu -
�
0
U �
�c
o��w
E � o m
(n � i C]. �n
�- O
� � � 6
c�-r�c:
-= �'J �r
a' �fJ� N
�ii ��
�` r
�l
!
. �u
ti
0
o�
� �
� tn
t,l �
�v�
�`
L��S
µ �� � .
�j
� _ ��' � �
� ' `l �
4�'
---. _ . .—,.X. , . _
�
rr. A
� /
_ l
k �
� -= °' ,
� ,. �
- �
- .�
���
, �,
�' "" . ..4�`i
'� 7�J
e; ,i
� � .
':*� J S, '�;
'� .�` _
�, s � n
`;r«"" "3 t ; tl '^ ..
ea } � a
k . �.
_{ �. �� :
-� „
(�' �7
s
v / g ='
� o f c�
ci �� �
a
m �?.
!� � r �'
`"J � � � * �J ti = . _."� . ^,
� ff �_, � � . 1., � � %;
� � ��1"��� . .. !� { f � S � R � '
4
�.� �` � __ '''. 8 ! j �' °`' _-'`-
,-`' : - � �, _ � .
� y�- F
---' � reek� � �-`_ ��`� '� '`-� ' � - � _`�--�-1;. ,
�
� � . _ r,- � ___ ,<. � _ -_ti � � ��-... ; .
_ .� ', .' ' .��
�.*��y/"'�..�_ / FY`�r.�.�_—� -�-.""-.\ .._ _
� i . ��
i M1� e •
__ 1�
�
; ., r
` ` 3�- �
;, � i
`� Ar �
.. -,� .. `-F
.._,. -_-' "�: "�
�-._ 1
/� I �
— �-� -,..�;:�{" .1
�'l .
: ��� �� . � . :
�` �' �---ti
��',� �,
' ��r` ��::
»ro�<. .

°� -r° �- `.�c.e'^ .-4 d' tt .}.� r ..._,.� �.,:.. . " ..�::�..'� ", . �i.�y.�, .....;_..... -->--�
� �� � t �s��r . - � � 4 � � f ; �
� � � � . T r .? � °.. _
�f-�"�,�,����,�° � �,.�,y�.�,� ��y��'' j� �,�� �Y�,_� SR 1628 {Simon Collie Road) �
�
�,� �.,�, S�_ �---�..� � )`�\ � �ti,��` �, ,�-;�,."�, _ � Franklin County �
6,� � r�;"' � � l� t � -�l ~-� .. ��
r— �� r`—} f` �'` ,s-� : � M j ' � � � �� ,�; ��
� � t i�_ y� �1.., _ _� �. ..
�� ,`��� ��;'-�% � ;��t` 4 -,�:, ,� ��� ,�„ ���;, �f., �vRCS zoa4 i : z4,00a
, � ..-.� u� � ;
� � _ , �: � � F , � x.
" � ,`�, ,.. , �r � � i��,� } 4,� �� � � �.�"`,�ti�- Figure 2 _
�..� ' � `.,� � � ,�� ���,.�-. �({ 'w� .�'' � -
�"`.o-GJ..r- � l i �:. �.,°a` ) \ t �'� � � l ��L,�,1.:.w! .�f. �� - . .
.�.""�' :1 � � .J {'^}� 9 ..� � d/1"�
.�
. %/ j/'', ,r / �
� / ./'� ^'t t' �(''',r' � � � ���7 � _�✓ �-.,.f ` �ft.._..-,1/-} L- 't s�� ,��`�: y.. z] ! �`..:.,� "� . ;�
��y �{ /�i, �j �'+�` s �,. }Y ,.,� `�-�-�. ... , u-^.. f'.- . ``.. 'riC.f t„ :�! Jn.;. �'�
'S. �� � j �✓'�,. 1 � T � " /°� � /� � I � � i '..»�«-� �� � . � �, �� � j--+� /� i'� �' R �„f i
' t�t�, ,� � ; z/\. t + ��� ; I t �,, t ,_..'.,..,,-�" � �,^`� „u -'}�/� ±j ( `�' 1 f1 f -�
e ✓` ....,• �j `�--;.� 1 � l � .
` � /"� ) � t-�7 � -�,`' . -• \ � �, _; . f t � (
�} � �xa � f'�%. ��--,--�., .�„ J� �� •�'K. _. �< \� . � �� �.�- .+} f �€ s.� �,��� I ..
t .' 'r ) � � �` ' / �4 ����1 !�
'`'i �r 'l V .'��� �"� � °. . L` J [� '� • j'
�� � ��- ( %�� i'r' _✓ r-t�—y � 4_„r � . A . 1 t 'r., r�, , � � s. � �\� , " ,.
f �� f
�J, t y �'` �u/ �t}� '`-., i� 'w � � / � ���� \ ���
� �% � rt . ��y„„./�{" �� l�� ^+. t `� �S ��;r� ��\w. �i�t�, � �`y �` ( �i�.� 1 �� r.
y � �y � � , �, � � � ..,�r,t "". l `� ��J �f i � � rf �-� r
� t' y
F 5 � Yil:`� `� 1 � � 1 V� ! � (�.% . f� T &
� � � � � � l. � �' ,� .� �`� ` ' ,�'1,'�`4 � }�. � �Z n,�� `� ,�a4t� � �� � < l l; °� j_ ��`
/ �. t,
, � �;�.. - ti,� � . t,, ,�,, Lk �, „� "°^" �. r e � ,i � ; ' � r `4...� �=i� � -i I _.?' ;
,� _ . . , � �'_ 1� �y 7
� { ^� t " �{ �' : ^� � �! ° �` �_ �v , 1 " �
r.'�_ 1� ` qi� �,,' '�• t�$ '/ —: `"--:, ��. �` ��"—r��`
, .t::l� ! "'��.�� . .. l .V ✓\ } ��';-w.�. A i�.,� _� � � .,� b•��� � , „ � �� � �,��� '�� � z;-�-.._ ._- ..
r ,�
r. _.1 � � at � J ,,i1��, kE 1t t ..._ ;..
�'� � �r ' . �� 1 l 7 ' � � ; � �, f,i � r , 1. ,\ i � lJ J�/f � � 3: "�1«-<
ti+�i/�Y�.�ry3Jy !h \ j1f
i�t H r `�._ ✓" i F ` i�\/ f 1 {�� �` � ,�F1 ''�, .�,:. � ' �' \`_y.;J t+"�''�y �' r ) � \,� ! ,j'cs'� ....' �i"�- 1..�
.� / '.' . � f j,y* r > f , f. ' ��� l t �� � ))f q��S, , ``�y { j � `�� ;, —
�„ 4 � � ��� f � � � 1 � A� �, .�'..; � � �E � � iie4 � 1 � �'�i ' ! f � �C �x� S �} t ��!�� ti. n {� @:'
1
�' .,, � � / � �.•jj'' � -. i' r«� `4. L� ��� � �� .� J� � /"f .r'„-..� .�-..
. , ,'.'7 "'rrN� % � . - �r � � � � ,� ��,", �.. ( \�.-.{°`. � � f ` ^�..._�1�, ..-�.J
� ,�^ ��`^ C; +`'^�.aS �., " . � � � ��t :�, t�n'}^"�.�r . � � � .:'�.,� � � �',.y ti i._.,�" � � r ' .
r d � �/ ) 1 \f/ J � �� � �
\ 1 f �.0 � � � , t..,- , � I i �/ � ""'� r`�� +. ( � ,
'+- ,�.-� r�( `,r/� / r �+;� q " J. �!`� �, V /� H�u : �:.. �C) vd& �;,t /
� `� �r�,'� r ( �r�. ��" ' j'.7F1� 1 , � "f�,.�_....f . ?�, A r �� / � . '� �� _ t � �/: � S;.
t �y�-� �
, � ,i.a � . r�'�`i, tl `•-'' i r l�f� 'i'� � :�" �� } � �.� ,+. 1 /7' / - ,,�
{ ,r'�...� ( ''-.r-,-.. �y-�._ t ��'}.^°..�^J+�.S'�' � �•�`"� 4. � �� i ( -�r'`�` ... � A f �./f � I! :.���.
� 4 �,w^�i � ��' / � E �`�� � '�, i t �'�..i �,..t-5%�,,,.J ^ � � � �� � n }'.... .._. . 1 j � r� � r �' �.'� y �} .S �/ x ��/ % � �
# �/ r
Mr/ �. f _�t r _ � 1 �...�� .��1 �:1` ,,,... t 1 � �/���i
:� �-� r� f C_.-° xat �' r��le+� i`, r '"}� k��r S �$ � � r�� 1� .� i j f'�%>
+�,� �. �._ �,^ �y'' i` a� � S i. ^.�[ .� � _/I �. i � } t^ f J 1.I i/✓� i
� ' zs_t, � L� A.rv'"-� 1 ..'''--*�-Y'�� '`^ "��' 7 t �_ '� � � �- `�.', '� "-'.. 'l �'���.i��f. � i i i �r r.l .. � ��n �J�!'��
� � � . � ,� � ._-� �� � � l� .� � � � t rf. - � � ..r ' �� 11 I. .!�
. /)}�.'{
F . ,i !4J ±_ � � t 1� ,/� / '/} 4 i .� ."' � /�S i tJ,�j .. .'!-.
� � �r Y `.` ` � • � `' S "�d� '�f � � r��" I i �" q� � �� � .(, � � `� � �� {�,� f .
� -., x r, .�� r � y ...��.,� � �.,�,� �, I. � �' ., � r. i �� ' ��
� � L'r- /� ��- ` �: ✓ � 'd 3 E, � � �( ,ti�/
r i :.� ... q � . `' c. / � �'° / .��'r� ``" L .� i �5 i ! � (� ^-^�
�( `-•�'. �' �?� ir �` l� . _ ti r -� - ) i f �J .l'� ! n a { � ��
�if'� � ,y.,, �y - �� r'.,� ` °� �,y,� � �'. J \� � : ( � . -`� �"" �l � � . i ' .� �.' •� � _
•� . ; r� � '{� " . d'�; � r 1 �',. (� ti .,
,. ....r-..��.,l�. _. !,_ �� _ l r .,`S �` e - , i,. .��G v �^sc4 . i. '..� \ i u ` r��\ '. {,' � � � �.�` � .
,. , . 3.f �z ,._
'ra,+� :��m ]52°IitO(1..

a� ��s oZ - I
N
�
V7
��
\
�
� -�'
,-.. -
�� �
>�
.`?— � �� —>
y � �
"l
—�s 1 �
.�u b 1
�.�3
.. 4- � (�
���� �
�
��
�!
� �
�
� �'
7 �
� �
� �
d �
v�
I �
— N
�
�' �
i� �
�
�
�
cn
d
� �
S �
�St�
V
5_
�
�
l�
.�
�
�
�
�
�

c^��: v`In.T�R�.
ry�q� �
- 1.J1,U�X.-,
Offce Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification PCN Form
A. A licant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps: non-reporting � Section 404 Permit ❑ Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: non-reporting NWP 14 or General Permit (GP) number:
1 c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? ❑ Yes � No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
� 401 Water Quality Certifcation - Regular ❑ Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
❑ 401 Water Quality Certification - Express � Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record For the record only for DWQ 401 For the record only for Corps Permit:
because written approval is not required? Certifcation:
❑ Yes � No � Yes ❑ No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation � yes � No
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program.
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h ❑ Yes � No
below.
1 h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ❑ Yes � No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Proposed upgrading and paving SR 1628 (Simon Collie Road)
2b. County: Franklin
2c. Nearest municipality / town: Northeast of Bunn
2d. Subdivision name: N/A
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state WgS No. 5C.035005
project no:
3. Owner Information
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: NCDOT Division 5
3b. Deed Book and Page No. N/A
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC i f N/A
applicable):
3d. Street address: 2612 N. Duke Street
3e. City, state, zip: Durham, NC 27704
3f. Telephone no.: [phone]
3g. Fax no.: [phone]
3h. Email address: ihopkins(a�ncdot.qov
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner) N/A
5. AgenUConsultant Information (if applicable) N/A
Page 1 of 8
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identifcation no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): N/A
1b. Coordinates (in decimal degrees):
Site: Latitude:36.0100 Longitude: -78.1881
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1 c. Property size:
5.45 acre (0.75 mi long project with 60ft ROW)
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to UT to Cypress Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: B NSW
2c. River basin: Tar-Pamlico
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
The existing pipe needs to be replaced to support road improvements. Site is surrounded by wooded land agricultural
land.
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
NONE
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
60ft
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project: The pipe replacement will facilitate road improvements through this
crossing.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
The existing 42ft long concrete pipe will be replaced with a 60ft long metal pipe. Rip rap will be installed underlined with
geotextile for long term stability surrounding the mouth of the new pipe ends. The NCDOT will also dewater the work
zone as needed durin construction. E ui ment ma include an excavator, a backhoe, a bulldozer, and rader.
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained for this property / � Yes � No ❑ Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past?
Comments: N/A
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
of determination was made? ❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company: N/A
Name (if known): N/A Other: N/A
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
N/A
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifcations been requested or obtained for � yes � No ❑ Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help f le" instructions.
N/A
Page 2 of 8
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ❑ Yes � No
6b. If yes, explain.
N/A
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands � Streams - tributaries � Buffers
❑ Open Waters ❑ Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type ofjurisdiction
number — Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ — non-404, other) (acres)
Tem ora T
W1 ❑ P❑ T N/A N/A � Yes ❑ Corps N/A
❑ No ❑ DWQ
2g. Total Wetland Impacts: NONE
2h. Comments: Although the soils at this crossing are mapped as hydric, no wetlands existing within the project footprint.
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3 b. 3c. 3d. 3 e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number- (PER)or (Corps-404,10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ — non-404, Width (linear
Temporary (T) (INT)? other) (feet) feet)
Site 1� P❑ T UT to ❑ PER � Corps
Stream 1 pipe fill CypressCrk � INT � DWQ 5 18
Site 1� P O T UT to ❑ PER � Corps
Stream 1 rip rap CypressCrk � INT � DWQ 5 20
Site 1❑ P� T UT to ❑ PER � Corps 20
Stream 1 dewatering CypressCrk � INT � DWQ 5 concurrent
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts 38
3i. Comments: Rip rap will be placed on banks only for stabilization.
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a. 4b. 4c. 4d. 4e.
Open water Name of
impact number— waterbody Type of impact Waterbody type Area of impact (acres)
Permanent (P) or (if applicable)
Tem ora T
01 ❑ P❑ T N/A N/A N/A N/A
4f. Total open water impacts NONE
4g. Comments: N/A
Page 3 of 8
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Pond or Lake Construction
If ond or lake construction ro osed, then com lete the chart below.
5a. 5b. 5c. 5d. Se.
Wetland Impacts (acres) Stream Impacts (feet) Upland
Pond ID Proposed use or purpose of (acres)
number pond
Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded Filled Excavated Flooded
P1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
P2
5f. Total NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE
5g. Comments: N/A
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
❑ Yes � No If yes, permit ID no: N/A
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres): N/A
Sj. Size of pond watershed (acres): N/A
5k. Method of construction: N/A
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an im acts re uire miti ation, then ou MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
❑ Neuse � Tar-Pamlico ❑ Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ❑ Catawba ❑ Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number— Reason for Buffer Zone t impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) or impact Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
Tem ora T re uired?
Pipe
Site � P❑ T replacement UT to Cypress Crk � Yes 2,2g0 1,520
Bufferlmpact1 forroad � No
improvements
6h. Total buffer impacts 2,280 1,520
6i. Comments: Necessary improvements of expanding this roadway from 40ft maintenance limits to 60ft ROW will involve
impacts to buffers.
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifcally describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
Rip rap armoring around the pipe ends and tie-in points to the existing stream back will be limited only to the amount
necessary to ensure long term stability.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
Sediment and erosion control Best Management Practices for protection of surface waters will be enforced during project
construction.
Page 4 of 8
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 1 Q 2008 Version

2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ❑ Yes � No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
26. If yes, miti�ation is required by (check all that apply): ❑ DWQ ❑ Co�ps
❑ Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigat ion option will be used for this project? ❑ Payment to in-lieu fee program
❑ Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank: N/A
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type N/A Quantity N/A
3c. Comments: N/A
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ❑ Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: N/A linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ❑ warm ❑ cool ❑cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): N/A square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: N/A acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: N/A acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: N/A acres
4h. Comments: N/A
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
Sa. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
N/A
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) — required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires ❑ Yes � No
buffer mitigation?
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.
6c. 6d. 6e.
Zone Reason for impact Total impact Multiplier Required mitigation
(square feet) (square feet)
Zone 1 N/A N/A 3(2 for Catawba) N/A
Zone 2 N/A N/A 1.5 N/A
6f. Total buffer mitigation required: NONE
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund). N/A
6h. Comments: N/A
Page 5 of 8
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identifed � Yes ❑ No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
Comments: this pipe replacement will not alter storm water runoff at this site, no new ❑ Yes � No
ditches will be cut through the buffers
2. Stormwater Mana ement Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? <20 %
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ❑ Yes � No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: no new ditches will be cut through buffers
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, narrative description of the plan: N/A
❑ Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ❑ DWQ Stormwater Program
❑ DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? N/A
❑ Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ❑ NSW
apply (check all that apply): ❑ USMP
❑ Water Supply Watershed
❑ Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ❑ Yes ❑ No
attached? N/A
4. DWQ Stormwater Pro ram Review
❑ Coastal counties
❑ HQW
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply � ORW
(check all that apply): N/A ❑ Session Law 2006-246
❑ Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
attached? N/A ❑ Yes ❑ No
5. DWQ 407 Unit Stormwater Review
Sa. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? N/A � Yes ❑ No
Sb. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? N/A ❑ Yes ❑ No
Page 6 of 8
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1 a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the � yes ❑ No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ❑ Yes � No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1 c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments: N/A
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ❑ Yes � No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ❑ Yes � No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s): N/A
3. Cumulative Impacts �DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in � yes � No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
N/A
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
N/A
Page 7 of 8
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or � yes � No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act � Yes � No
impacts?
❑ Raleigh
Sc. If yes, ind icate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
❑ Asheville
Sd. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
http://www.fws.qov/nc-es/es/countvfr.html and NC Natural Heritage Program Database, Element Occurrences
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fsh � Yes � No
habitat?
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
http://ocean.Floridamarine.orqlefh coral/ims/viewer.htm
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation � Yes ❑ No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties signifcant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
HPO's historic layer using GIS ArcView database, SHPO's webpage httq://qis.ncdcr.qov/hpoweb/, and PDEA HEU review
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ❑ Yes � No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: N/A
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? http:/lwww.ncfloodmaps.com/
jor J. R. Hopkins, P.E. a�n ��oy`, 04/01/15
�
ApplicanUAgenPs Signatur Date
AppllCanUAgenYs Pflnted Name (AgenPs signature is valid only if an authorizatlon let ar from the applicant
... Is provided.) . �
Page 8 of 8
PCN Form — Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version

�A.�'__ -
( ��`��,RJ�
+��,
/ 3 'v �:A �
.: ..e..s. �
tlt
Praject No:
WBS No.:
Fed. Aid No:
I eder�d
Prr,��-�t 7);<r6�inA ,A'u. (ln[rrira[ U,re�
IZ-�2-��Ig
HIS1'ORIC ARCFIiCTECTURP AND LANllSCAPES
ASS�SSMENT OF EFFECTS FORM
This form only pertains ro Historic Architecture and Landscapes for this project It
is not valid for Archaeological Resources. You must consult separately with the
Archaeology Group.
I'-120JP �'�i#�012��'F�4A'
SC.035005
N/A
Ycs I I No
Corurty:
Doctrment
Franklin
MCDC
Fturding: �� State U Federal
Permi! � USAC� Nationwide
Proiect Descriptio�r.
Improve grade and ditches, clear ROW, a��d pave SR 1628 (Simoil Collie Road) fi•om its
intersection with SR ] 002 (Seven Paths Road) for 0.75 miles to end of road. Proposed 60'
RO W.
SUMMAI2Y OF HIST0121C ARCHICTEC'fURE AND LANllSCAPES REVIEW
vescrrptroii ol revieiv �retivities, restdts nnd conchrsions:
Project revicwed by architecturll historiau on HPOWeb aud a NR-listed property (Andrews-
Moore House) was noted along one side of tlte iroad. Subsequent field visits verified the location
of a slavc cemetciy opposite the bolmdaiy of the NR property. Approximately 60 interments and
active throtigh tl�e 1930s. Projcct managers and designers notifed that we sliould strive to avoid
the treeline associatcd witl� lhe Andrews-Moore House and avoid impacts to the cemetery.
Property Nmne:
Survey Site No.:
Cfjects
❑ No Effect
ASSTSSM�NT OF EFF�CTS
Andrews-Moore IIouse Stnttts: NR-listed (1998)
PK0288
PIN:
� No Adverse Tffect
❑ Adverse Effect
Hevnriidr�l]•UnrcnnlL dv[npr,�/Ol6(7V'dA;S'ESS4lL17'/m-mjur�.11�nuifran�purrauunPru0.n.a.Orznlilirdm�hr p0-7r�rurmm�beaGiruueni.
Page 1 of 2

E.�planation o{Effec/s Deternrinnlion:
May 28, 2014 meeting on site with NCllOT cultural resources staff, division staff and Franklin
Cout�ty transportalion engineer. ROW limits were staked and are proposed to be 50' wide which
docs not impact the trees that line tlie west side of the road, nor the gravcs ou the east side of the
road. Construction engineers stated that within the bou��daries of the history property and
associated cemetcry tliey do not plan to work outside the existing ditches along either side of the
road. They also agreed to provide NCDOT's cultural resources groups 72 how's' notice prior to
work in the adjaccnt to the cemetery so that a staff member can be on site at the commencement
"no adverse effect."
Lis! of En vironn:entnl Cofnnritments:
Tree impacts limitcd to limited pruniug along the east aud west sides of road within the
boundarics of the histoiy property and associated cemeteiy. Monitori��g -- 72 hours' notice prior
to work in the adjaccut to the cemetery.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
�Map(s) ❑Yrevious Survey Info. �Photos ❑Correspondence �Design Plans
FINDING I3Y NCDOT AND STATE ffiSTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
Historic Architecture and Landscapes —ASSESSMENT OP EPPI;CTS
NCDO'1�
�
I Historian
State I Iistoric Preservation Office
0
zo /zo i �I_ __
Date
G• Zo • I
llatc
Humrrr.4r liirco�rn nr l L nidampee C[ l I('l J':11Sl:SS V1 V7' lorm Jnr I Lnw 7)nn�pni i r� n l rni� cn� as Uiml�ll�d m ihv �OUV Prngrornm vi � d, nunenr.
Page 2 of 2

_ � �
— _-- � ���, �
�� mp" �°�
�� \ �_�
��- � �g��\
� �
��
�\ _
��
�`
� �0 \
\�
\ N
\ —
\
\
n — ��
m¢ �
$ 0
a.�oDs
N�q�° �q
�k.�
o �i�� m �, y�e �o
� �� ' o
„ \ \
`$—s � o \y
4�fJ6
a O I
Y
r n
D p
O
Z p�
�C.i ClN
W
�
�r DN
G ;
m�" zo
� oz
o� nci
, zoo
y Am
D p
D ➢
n O
m
: � � ,:.:::�a
������
�
00 �p
C
o=,f� � a
�180 0
a�o �
I
�
i
�aw�
��
�
, \ mo�
� \ $N
\ \ a
" \� \�
— PHaPOS�o sa alv�
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
�
�
pROP�S
F�
\ \
�0 1
�� I�
�
6p,R/�
� O
�'
�
�

r�� r n � -�. �, �
�� ' �, � �s
- � , �3
r , �� � �
. F uk� =t , ��
� " �� �' -
� � ' ir f �' 3�� �`1, '�`�
�- . it ! 4 ,.1: � .
.� . 7;:,�� �.. ti��> .
.
- E� � ;!:77��9; � _
� � � 7'
I�
t` � .
.� .�=� � � �k �'
�;sx f
s�;� �
;.; , � :';�
� I�
, }l � t
�I I (�ii�� 1' 1 I
3S � � F.
�� � �
(di � 1
� , J
J � y iD� ��
,1/ ; �' � %
1/ �r �y ��
�/ . [� - � � �.
f -�r „r. i��;�:�.; �
i ,
1 I
� �
. 1� . ISi � 4 �
1�\ y ��
� I,r i .@.� *
+.� � 43�.. .
�a li aS�'e"rc; , �FSrae . . .
.a� � e � `
r��'. x u � .�SA �.
,
u
�: ��E
Obt
�
L�
l /
N
�aoj�
� av ce oz o� s c
� —'IjI1� �,ado�oZ�_�,�a,�C
\ siu IIV sl!o5
1f1btlAH —
eaps paweq �
slaa�l5 —
OElIIIOZ-sluiod-300-1S-tlN •
� I�d Isal lanoyg �
� slewgAa�awapane�Seiooyy�smaip�ry �
bepunog /ea�awa� anelS a�ooyJ-smaipuy
(3dtl) sl�ey3lepua�od �o aey O
�N'6�uno� uique�j
•�,�?� s�uawano�dw�peob
' ;{1 - (peoa a���o� uowiS) 8Z9L i1S
��„ BLORZPZItld

“No Historic Properties Present” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

12-02-0018

PROJECT INFORMATION

Project No: SR 1628 (Simon Collie Rd) County: Franklin
WBS No: 5C.035005 Document: MCDC
F.A. No: N/A Funding: State Federal
Federal (USACE) Permit Required? Yes No Permit Type: NWP 14
Project Description: SR 1628 (Simon Collie Road), from its intersection with SR 1002 (Seven Paths
Road) for a length of about 0.75 mile. Clear right-of-way. Improve roadway grade, drainage, base,
erosion control, and then pave surface. Project will be built out to a proposed 60’ right of way. The
Purpose & Need for the project is to provide roadway improvements for increased safety and to facilitate
long term maintenance.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) reviewed the subject project and determined:

Historic Architecture/Landscapes
There are no National Register-listed or Study Listed properties within the project’s area of potential
effects.
There are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criteria Consideration G
within the project’s area of potential effects.
There are no properties within the project’s area of potential effects.
There are properties over fifty years old within the area of potential effects, but they do not meet the
criteria for listing on the National Register.
All properties greater than 50 years of age located in the APE have been considered and all compliance
for historic architecture with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and GS 121 -12(a) has
been completed for this project.
There are no historic properties present or affected by this project. (Attach any notes or documents as
needed)

Archaeology
There are no National Register-listed or Study Listed properties within the project’s area of potential
effects.
No subsurface archaeological investigations are required for this project.
Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources considered eligible
for the National Register.
All identified Archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all compliance for
archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a)
has been completed for this project.
There are no historic properties present or affected by this project. (Attach any notes or documents as
needed)

Project Tracking No. (Internal Use)
NO PREHISTORIC OR HISTORIC PROPERTIES
PRESENT/AFFECTED FORM
“No Historic Properties Present” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

SUMMARY OF CULTURAL RESOURCES REVIEW

Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:

A map review and site file search was conducted at the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) on Monday, February 20,
2012. A comprehensive archaeological survey along SR 1628 (Simon Collie Road) has never been conducted nor
have there been any archaeological sites recorded within one-half (1/2) mile of the proposed project. Digital copies
of HPO’s maps (Justice Quadrangle) as well as the HPOWEB GIS Service (http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/) were
reviewed on Tuesday, February 21, 2012. There are known historic architectural resources located within the project
area that may have intact archaeological deposits within the footprint of the proposed project. Elements associated
with the Andrews-Moore House (FK288), including a possible slave cemetery and original outbuilding locations,
may be located within the Area of Potential Effects (APE). In addition, topographic maps, historic maps (NCMaps
website), USDA soil survey maps, and aerial photographs were utilized and inspected to gauge environmental factors
that may have contributed to historic or prehistoric settlement within the project limits, and to assess the level of
modern, slope, agricultural, hydrological, and other erosive-type disturbances within and surrounding the
archaeological APE.

As stated in the Survey Required Form for this project, “This is a State-funded project that will require a Federal
permit. The existing cross-section of SR 1628 consists of a 16’ wide gravel road way with 4’ shoulders and 8’ ditch
widths, thus equating to 40’ wide. The proposed cross-section consists of a 20’ wide paved roadway with 6’
shoulders and 14’ ditch widths, thus equating to 60’ wide; therefore, project activities will take place outside the
NCDOT’s maintained 40’ ROW for SR 1628. A review of Web Soil Survey
(http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app), USGS maps, and Franklin County GIS reveals a project area (i.e. APE)
amidst a landscape of rolling hills, typical of the North Carolina Piedmont. The project corridor also consists of four
(4) soil types: Cecil sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes (CaB), Wedowee sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes (WeB),
Chewacla and Wehadkee soils, 0 to 3 percent slopes, frequently flooded (ChA), and Wedowee sandy loam, 6 to 10
percent slopes (WeC), all favorable (aside from the freq. flooded Chewacla soils) for containing intact
archaeological materials. More importantly, the lands to either side of SR 1628 were once part of the late-18th c. to
early 19th c. plantation (2,470 acres) owned by William Andrews (d.1820). The Andrews-Moore House (FK288),
and the tract on which it is located albeit only 12 acres in size now, has been officially nominated and listed on the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) thus invoking NC General Statute 121-12(a) and our need to take into
account the effect the proposed project may have on the property. The Andrews-Moore House Tract is located near
the southern end of the proposed project, and currently consists of Tract A on the west side of SR 1628 and a small
sliver of property known as Tract B on the east side of SR 1628; Tract B also contains the remnants of a slave
cemetery, which is located immediately adjacent to the existing ROW. Based on the information provided above, an
archaeological survey is recommended for the proposed project. A visual inspection of the entire corridor should be
conducted first, followed then by systematic archaeological excavations along the edge of the NRHP-listed Andrews-
Moore House Tract and then, if deemed appropriate, along the remaining length of SR 1628. In addition, the
location of the purported slave cemetery should be confirmed and properly delineated and recorded with the Off ice
of State Archaeology (OSA). Should the description of this project or design plans change prior to construction,
additional consultation regarding archaeology will be required.”

On Thursday, February 23, 2012, a reconnaissance survey of the APE revea led that the permit area (i.e. the crossing
of an unnamed tributary of Cypress Creek) consists of severely flooded soils and should not be subjected to any form
of archaeological investigation. In addition, much of the project corridor (i.e. cut line to c ut line) equates to the
proposed 60’ ROW width, suggesting that almost all of the project corridor has already been subjected to a great
deal of disturbance (e.g. removal of vegetation and cut embankments). However, in an effort to avoid the area that
has always been known as the Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery, proposed designs may shift the current road
alignment away from the cemetery, thus encroaching upon the boundary drawn for the Andrews-Moore House. At
the time of its nomination, the location of the slave cemetery was known, yet it was not incorporated within the
National Register boundary for the house. On Friday, May 4, 2012, because of the possible shift in the road’s
alignment, a transect of eight (8) shovel tests was excavated along the West edge of Simon Collie Road within the
National Register limits of the Andrews-Moore House because the nomination form stated, “Possible archaeological
sites including the locations of razed original outbuildings and the original well site are known but have not been
explored.” During a phone conversation on Thursday, May 3, 2012, Dean Ruedrich, former owner of the property,
suggested that he did not think anything would be located along Simon Collie Road that would be associated with the
Andrews-Moore House; all structures, to the best of his knowledge were located behind the main house away from
“No Historic Properties Present” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

the road. No archaeological materials were recovered from any of the shovel tests, corroborating Mr. Ruedrich’s
knowledge of the property. The GPS’ing of depressions within the area of the slave cemetery was also begun on
Friday, May 4, 2012. The sheer number of depressions required a second day of GPS’ing, which was then
accomplished on Friday, May 11, 2012. Overall, sixty (60) depressions were recorded, and a boundary was drawn
around the cemetery. The depressions are located on both Tract B of the McGlothlin Property (i.e. Andrews-Moore
House Tract) and the neighboring tract owned by Mrs. Carolyn F. Sykes Cale. A parcel line, along which burials are
located, has noticeably been “cut” through the cemetery. The Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery has been recorded as
Site 31FK136** with the Office of State Archaeology.

As mentioned before, sixty (60) depressions were recorded as being part of the Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery.
Based on their positioning, there could easily be more than sixty (60) graves present. At least nine (9) rows of
burials were noted in the field, with apparent clustering along each of the rows suggesting familial connections
within the clusters. The overall size, or length, of some burials does suggest the presence of not only adults but also
children or adolescents. All of the rows are oriented along a North-South alignment, with all of the burials facing
East. None of the burials were marked with any type of formal headstone. Small fieldstones marking the head
and/or foot of the graves are present, but are few in number. Over time, fieldstone markers may have been removed
or have become buried underneath the thick root mat and vegetative overburden of the forest floor. For a detailed
historic background of the Andrews-Moore House, please read the National Register nomination form prepared by
Cynthia Satterfield in 1998 (http://www.hpo.ncdcr.gov/nr/FK0288.pdf).

In an effort to determine whether sixty (60) depressions was an appropriate and/or expected number of burials,
additional research was conducted. The Andrews-Moore House was built as the dwelling of Franklin County planter
and slave holder William Andrews, who bought thousands of acres on either side of Cypress Creek as early as 1792.
William Andrews died in 1820, leaving undivided interests in all of his personal property including 2,470 acres, his
house, and twenty (20) slaves to his wife Mary Andrews, his daughter Ailsey Andrews Adams, and his three minor
grandchildren Martha Andrews Adams, Sarah Andrews Adams, and Mary Andrews Adams. In fact, the “Division of
the Negroes of William Andrews, dec’d,” dated June 8, 1820, lists 28 slaves by name (21 adults and 7 children)
(Will Book G, Page 50). Afterwards when the widow Mary Andrews passed away in 1828, another “Division of the
Negroes of William Andrews, dec’d,” dated December 28, 1829, was recorded, listing 21 slaves by name (19 adults
and 2 children) (Will Book I-J, Page 97). Given the 9-year interval between these records, there is a slight overlap in
the names listed; however, some names that appear in 1820 do not in 1829, and some names that appear in 1829 do
not in 1820. With that in mind, at least 33 slaves (if not more) were present during the 1820s.

Robert R. (aka Robin) Moore married Martha Andrews Adams, one of William Andrews’ grandchildren, in
December 1828. Robin and Martha Moore inherited the tract that included the main house upon the death of her
mother Mary Andrews Denton, who had remarried. In 1830, the Federal Census indicates that Robert Moore ’s
household included himself, his wife Martha, and 9 slaves. By 1840, the Federal Census indicates that Robt Moor e’s
household included himself, his wife Martha, along with 5 children as well as 14 slaves. By 1850, the household has
increased, including 8 children now as well as 21 slaves, ranging in age from 1 year old up to 70 years old (1850
Slave Schedule). Robert R. Moore died in 1858, leaving his real property to his widow Martha. Upon her death in
1874, the land was divided among their five sons: William A., James C. Robert A., Moses R., and John W. Moore.
Robert A. Moore inherited the tract, which included Martha’s “mansion-house,” in which she was living at the time
(Will Book U, Page 102). In 1860, Robert’s brother William is recorded as having 26 slaves, ranging in age from 2
years old up to 80 years old (1860 Slave Schedule). Based on these records, o n average per year, at least 20 to 30
slaves were recorded as being part of the Andrews-Moore estate, starting with William Andrews in the 1820s up to
Robert A. and William A. Moore in the 1850s and 1860s. Following the Civil War, the immediate area around the
Andrews-Moore House showed an influx of “black” families, presumably former slaves and their kin now taking up
residence in the countryside close to the families for whom they toiled for so long (see 1870 Federal Census). This
influx would then give rise to the surrounding slave descendant community. Given the information above, a rough
start date for interments within the associated slave cemetery could be the 1820s, if not earlier. A neighboring
property owner mentioned that she recalls her grand father telling of a burial taking place at the cemetery, with a
horse-drawn carriage and procession; this would have occurred within the first couple of decades of the 20 th century
(~1920s), and shows that the slave cemetery was still very much a part of the descendant community at that time.
Since then, however, the location of the cemetery has become overgrown and abandoned with no visible signs of
routine maintenance. Based on documentation and personal recollections, this location has been used as a cemetery
for at least 100 years, from the 1820s up to the 1920s, starting off as a place of burial for those who toiled in the
fields of the Andrews and Moore Families and evolving into a communal place of burial for those who would
eventually be given their freedom. Sixty (60) depressions, if not more, could easily reflect such a period of time.
“No Historic Properties Present” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

One archaeological site, 31FK136** - the Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery, was identified along the corridor of SR
1628 (Simon Collie Road). It is our recommendation that the Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery be seen as a
contributing element to the Andrews-Moore House, which was officially listed on the National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP) per Criterion C. In addition, it is our recommendation that the current nomination form for the
Andrews-Moore House be augmented by the Historic Preservation Office by incorporating Site 31FK136** within
the boundary for the already listed property and adding Criterion D to its Statement of Significance. Based on
current design plans provided by NCDOT’s Division Engineers, the proposed road improvements will have no effect
to the Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery. In addition, since no archaeological materials were recovered from within
the proposed ROW within the National Register boundary of the Andrews-Moore House, there will be no effect to
the listed property from an archaeological perspective. Thus, no further archaeological work is recommended prior
to construction. A finding of “no historic properties” is considered appropriate in association with this road
improvement project. Should the description of this project or design plans change prior to construction, then
additional consultation regarding archaeology will be required.

Given the proximity of burials to the edge of the treeline along the East side of SR 1628, if the existing embankment
is to be regraded, cut, or modified in any way, then the Archaeology Group is to be notified in order to monitor any
activities adjacent to the cemetery location.

The Division (or contractor) will contact the NCDOT (Archaeology Group) when ground-disturbing
activities are anticipated within the area of the Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery.
The Division (or contractor) will provide 48-hrs notice to the NCDOT (Archaeology Group) prior to
ground-disturbing activities within the area of the Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery. The 48-hr period will
begin upon acknowledgment by the NCDOT (Archaeology Group) that the Division (or contractor) has
contacted them.
The NCDOT (Archaeology Group) will be on-site during ground-disturbing activities in order to monitor
said activities within the area of the Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery. Monitoring activities may include,
but not be limited to: 1) cleaning and photographing areas exposed during construction, 2) mapping both
plan and profile views of open trenches, and 3) collecting materials or artifacts exposed during construction.
The NCDOT (Archaeology Group) will have the authority to halt all construction work within the area of
the Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery in order to assess the need for formal archaeological excavations.
Should archaeological resource(s) deemed eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) be
discovered during the monitoring phase as determined by the NCDOT (Archaeology Group), then all wor k
will be halted within the limits of the NRHP resource and the State Historic Preservation Office will be
contacted. The SHPO will consult with the NCDOT (Archaeology Group), on-site if necessary, in order to
develop appropriate protection/mitigation measures for the resource(s). Appropriate measures for the
resource(s) may include preservation in place, photographing and mapping, and/or formal archaeological
excavations.
Both the SHPO and the NCDOT (Archaeology Group) will agree upon and provide to the Division (or
contractor) a written description of the measures required for the resource(s). The description will include a
schedule for implementing and completing the measures. Upon receipt of written confirmation from the
NCDOT (Archaeology Group) that the resource measures have been completed, construction activities may
resume in the location containing the resource(s).

Shovel Test Pit Discussion (see maps for spatial reference):

STP 1: 0-6cmbs, root mat; 6-10cmbs, 10YR 5/6 SA Clay LM; 10-17cmbs, 10YR 6/6 SA Clay. Soil strata are baked out and
hard as a rock. No cultural material.
STP 2: 0-7cmbs, root mat; 7-10cmbs, 10YR 5/6 SA Clay LM; 10-18cmbs, 10YR 6/6 SA Clay. Soil strata are baked out and
hard as a rock. No cultural material.
STP 3: 0-4cmbs, root mat; 4-13cmbs, 10YR 5/6 SA Clay LM; 13-24cmbs, 10YR 6/6 SA Clay; 24-30cmbs, 5YR 5/8 Clay.
Soil strata are baked out and hard as a rock. No cultural material.
STP 4: 0-4cmbs, root mat; 4-10cmbs, 10YR 5/6 SA Clay LM; 10-26cmbs, 10YR 6/6 SA Clay; below 26cmbs, 5YR 5/8 Clay.
Soil strata are baked out and hard as a rock. No cultural material.
STP 5: 0-9cmbs, 10YR 6/6 SA Clay; 9-14cmbs, 5YR 5/8 Clay. Soil strata are baked out and hard as a rock. No cultural
material.
STP 6: 0-6cmbs, 10YR 6/6 SA Clay; 6-16cmbs, 5YR 5/8 Clay. Soil strata are baked out and hard as a rock. No cultural
material.
“No Historic Properties Present” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

STP 7: 0-10cmbs, 10YR 6/6 SA Clay; 10-17cmbs, 5YR 5/8 Clay. Soil strata are baked out and hard as a rock. No cultural
material.
STP 8: 0-12cmbs, 10YR 6/6 SA Clay; 12-16cmbs, 5YR 5/8 Clay. Soil strata are baked out and hard as a rock. No cultural
material.

SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: Figures, Photos

Signed:

May 21, 2012
Cultural Resources Specialist, NCDOT Date

Figure 1: Justice, N.C. (USGS 1979).

SR 1628 (Simon Collie Road)
“No Historic Properties Present” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

Photo 1: Shovel Test Transect, near STP 4, looking South.

Photo 2: Shovel Test Transect, near STP 4, looking North.

“No Historic Properties Present” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

Photo 3: Shovel Test Transect, near STP 1, looking South.

Photo 4: Southwest Corner of Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery (Site 31FK136**), looking North.

“No Historic Properties Present” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

Photo 5: Representative Depression within Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery, looking Northwest.

Photo 6: Representative Depression within Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery, looking Northeast (NB: fieldstones).

“No Historic Properties Present” form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
NCDOT Archaeology & Historic Architecture Groups

Photo 7: Representative Depression within Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery, looking West (NB: headstone).
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D

1
0
'

x

7
0
'
N

1
3
%
%
d

3
9
'

1
5
.
5
"

W
P
I

S
t
a

1
1
+
8
9
.
6
3
=

1
0
%
%
d

5
4
'

3
6
.
0
"

(
R
T
)
D D

=

7
%
%
d

0
9
'

4
3
.
1
"
L

=

1
5
2
.
3
3
'
T

=

7
6
.
4
0
'
R

=

8
0
0
.
0
0
'
N

2%
%
d

4
4'

3
9.
5
"

W
P
I

S
t
a

1
7
+
9
7
.
4
9
=

1
7
%
%
d

0
4
'

0
4
.
9
"

(
R
T
)
D D

=

7
%
%
d

0
9
'

4
3
.
1
"
L

=

2
3
8
.
3
1
'
T

=

1
2
0
.
0
5
'
R

=

8
0
0
.
0
0
'
P C S t a . 1 1 +1 3 .2 3
PT Sta. 12 +6 5.56
15
PC Sta. 16+77.44
PT Sta. 19+15.76
O
T
H
E
R
S
P
I
N

2
8
4
1
-
0
9
-
3
8
6
1
1
1
2
J
A
M
E
S

F

M
c
G
L
O
T
H
L
I
N
A
N
D

S
P
O
U
S
E
,

S
U
E

A

M
c
G
L
O
T
H
L
I
N
D
B

1
7
7
5

P
G

6
6
5
A
N
D

S
P
O
U
S
E
,

S
U
E

A McGLOTHLIN
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
107
295.12
2
292.99
110
292.93111
293.14
112
292.98
113
292.79114
292.59
115
292.58
116
293.06
117
293.67
118
292.67
119
291.85 125
291.82
126
291.24
4218
128
293.18
129
294.31
130
296.28
131
299.02
132
302.51
133
306.24
134
305.80
135
306.39
136
306.80
137
306.12
138
306.31
4215
139
305.07
4215
140
308.49
141
308.36
142
306.93
143
308.17
3
308.17
144
304.35
145
301.56
146
301.80
147
301.92
148
302.19 149
302.26
150
300.86
4215
151
300.04
4215
152
298.10
153
296.46
154
296.02
155
295.13
156
296.65
157
294.37
15" RCP
1
5
"

R
C
P
1 8 " R C P
S
R

1
0
0
2
E
I
P
E
I
P
G
R
A
V
E
L

D
R
I
V
E
G
R
A
V
E
L

D
R
I
V
E
C
U
R
R
E
N
T

P
A
T
H
!?
!?
!?
!?
!?
!?
!?
!?
GF
GFGF
GFGFGF
GFGF GFGFGF
GFGFGF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF GF GFGFGFGF
GF GFGF
GF
GF GF GF
GF
GFGFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGFGFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGF
GFGF
GFGF
GF
GFGF
GF
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
CaB
WeB
WeC
WeB
WeC
WeC
S
I
M
O
N

C
O
L
L
I
E
S
E
V
E
N P
A
T
H
S
PA 12-02-0018
SR 1628 (Simon Collie Road)
Road Improvements
Franklin County, NC
Area of Potential Effects (APE)
Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery Boundary
GF Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery Burials
!?Shovel Test Pit
NR-SL-DOE-Points-20111130
Streets
Named_streams
HYARUT
Soils_All
Franklin_2010Parcels ¹
0408012016020
Feet
N

2
%
%
d

4
4
'

3
9
.
5
"

W
133
306.24
134
305.80
135
306.39
136
306.80
137
306.12
138
306.31
4215
139
305.07
4215
140
308.49
141
308.36
142
306.93
143
308.17
3
308.17
144
304.35
1
5
"

R
C
P
G
R
A
V
E
L

D
R
I
V
E
C
U
R
R
E
N
T

P
A
T
H
!?
!?
!?
!?
!?
!?
GF
GF
GF
GFGFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGFGF
GF GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF GF
GF
GF
GF
GF GF
GF
GF
GF
GF GF
GF
GFGFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGFGFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
9
8
7
6 5 4
3
2
1
60
59
58
57
5655
5453
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37 36 35
34
3332
31
30
29
2827
26
25
24
2322
20
19
18
1615
14
13
12
11
10
7
6
5
4
3
2
CaB
WeB
SI
M
O
N
C
O
L
L
IE
PA 12-02-0018
SR 1628 (Simon Collie Road)
Road Improvements
Franklin County, NC
Area of Potential Effects (APE)
Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery Boundary
GF Andrews-Moore Slave Cemetery Burials
!?Shovel Test Pit
NR-SL-DOE-Points-20111130
Streets
Named_streams
HYARUT
Soils_All
Franklin_2010Parcels ¹
0102030405
Feet
0
S
C
A
L
E

1
"

=

1
0
0
’
1
0
0
’
1
0
0
’
2
0
0
’
S
H
E
E
T

N
O
.
P
R
O
J
E
C
T

R
E
F
E
R
E
N
C
E

N
O
.
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D

B
Y
:
RE
V
I
E
W
E
D

B
Y
:
P
R
E
P
A
R
E
D

B
Y
:
D
A
T
E
:
SC
A
L
E
:
R
E
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
I
N
I
T
.
D
A
T
E
N
.
C
.

D
E
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T

o
f

T
R
A
N
S
P
O
R
T
A
T
I
O
N
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N

o
f

H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
S
D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N

0
5
S
R

1
6
2
8
1
"
=
1
0
0
’
4
-
1
5
-
1
1
D

D
A
V
I
S

D
I
V
I
S
I
O
N

F
I
V
E

D
E
S
I
G
N

U
N
I
T
F
R
A
N
K
L
I
N

C
O
U
N
T
Y
C
Y
P
E
S
S

C
R
E
E
K

DEPARTMENT
O
F
T
R
A
N
S
POR
T
A
T
I O N
S
T
A TE
O
F
N
O
R
T
H
C
AROLINA

D
I
V
I
SI
O
N

O
F

H
IGHWAYS

DIVISIO
N

U
N
I
T
DI
VI
S
I
O
N

F
IV
E 4
D
E
S
I
G
N
G
R
A
D
I
N
G
,

P
A
V
I
N
G

A
N
D

D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
S
R

1
6
2
8

S
I
M
O
N

C
O
L
L
I
E

R
O
A
D
NAD 83
NC
GRID
MATCHL
INE
:
21+00

(
T
Y
P
)
S
I
G
H
T

T
R
I
A
N
G
L
E
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D

1
0
’

x

7
0
’
T
SEVEN PATHS ROAD
B
A
R
N
A
B
A
N
D
O
N
E
D
15
" R
C
P
1
5
"

R
C
P
18" RCP SR 1002
15
" R
C
P
E
I
P
E
I
P
EIP
G
R
A
V
E
L

D
R
I
V
E
G
R
A
V
E
L

D
R
I
V
E
D
R
IVE
GR
AVE
L
C
E
M
E
T
E
R
Y
E
X
IS
T
IN
G
G
R
A
V
E
L
R
O
A
D
PIN 2841-09-3861 OTHERS LAWRENCE E ALFORD &PIN 2842-10-0108 LOUISE Y WILDER JOHNNIE C &DB 807 PG 699 GLENNA E THOMPSON
D
B

7
9
8

P
G

5
8
7
MICHA
E
L

L
U
D
O
L
P
H

E
D
W
A
R
D
S
D
B

7
4
1

P
G

1
0
3
M
R
S

C
A
R
O
L
Y
N

F

S
Y
K
E
S

C
A
L
E
D
B

7
4
3

P
G

5
5
M
R
S

C
A
R
O
L
Y
N

F

S
Y
K
E
S

C
A
L
E
D
B

1
8
1
9

P
G

9
5
3
A
N
D

W
I
F
E
,

G
L
O
R
I
A

A

N
O
R
W
O
O
D
J
A
C
K

E

N
O
R
W
O
O
D
1
1
D
B

1
8
1
9

P
G

8
6
3
A
N
D

S
P
O
U
S
E
,

S
U
E

A

M
c
G
L
O
T
H
L
I
N
J
A
M
E
S

F

M
c
G
L
O
T
H
L
I
N
1
2
D
B

1
7
7
5

P
G

6
6
5
A
N
D

S
P
O
U
S
E
,

S
U
E

A

M
c
G
L
O
T
H
L
I
N
J
A
M
E
S

F

M
c
G
L
O
T
H
L
I
N
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
P
I

S
t
a

1
5
+
7
0
.
2
2
DL

=

3
9
0
.
6
5
’
T

=

1
9
9
.
3
0
’
R

=

8
0
0
.
0
0
’
POT Sta. 10+00.00
PC Sta. 13+70.92
P
T
St
a.
17+
6
1.
5
7
P
C
St
a.
2
0
+
9
9.
3
8