HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-2240
JAMES B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
oa 5f/1jo
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
August 11, 1999
Mr. Ronald E. Ferrell, Program Manager
North Carolina Wetland Restoration Program
NCDENR-DWQ
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Dear Sir:
DAVID MCCOY
SECRETARY
Subject: Wilkes County, Proposed Widening of US 421 from East of Maple
Springs to East of NC 268 near Wilkesboro, Sections A and B, State
Project Number 6.769002T, TIP No. R-2240.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen
US 421 in Wilkes County. The NCDOT requests Section 404 permits for Sections A and
B of TIP No. R-2240, 421 from East of Maple Springs to East of NC 268 near
Wilkesboro. The Ill. I mile project consists of widening US 421 from a two lane roadway
to a four lane facility. Permanent and temporary surface water and wetland impacts
associated with the project include 3524 linear feet of surface waters and 0.13 acres of fill
in wetlands. The current let schedule for both sections of the project is August 2000.
The purpose of this letter is to request that the WRP provide confirmation that you
are willing to accept payment for the compensatory mitigation requirements. The US
Army Corps of Engineers requests a ratio of 2:1 for surface water impacts. This will
result in a total of 7048 linear feet of stream mitigation required for this project.
The project is located in Wilkes County in the Yadkin River basin in Cataloguing
Unit 03040101 in the Piedmont Province. The attached table provides a listing of the
streams that will be impacted, their hydrologic order and best usage classification.
PHONE (919) 733-2520 FAX (919) 733-9150
Surface Water Impacts Associated with US 421 Widening, Wilkes County
Length of Best Usage
Site No. Station Surface Water Channel Hydrologic Classification
Impacted (ft) Order And Index #
South Prong of Lewis Fork No Impact C
IA 32+60 Creek Dual Bridges N/A 12-31-2-(7)
UT#1 to S. Prong of Lewis C
2A 34+00 Fork Creek 168.5 1s` 12-31-2-(7)
50+50 UT #2 to S. Prong of C
3A Lewis Fork Creek 102.4 1s` 12-31-2-(7)
50+50 to UT #3 to S. Prong of C
4A 55+90 Lewis Fork Creek 454.2 is` 12-31-2-(7)
57+55 UT #1 to Lewis WS-IV
5A Fork Creek 99.5 1A 12-31
UT 92 to Lewis WS-IV
6A 60+90 . Fork Creek 97.2 1st 12-31
UT 43 to Lewis WS-IV
7A 65+40 Fork Creek 98.7 1 St 12-31
No Impact WS-IV
8A 89+85 Lewis Fork Creek Dual Bridges N/A 12-31
96+85 to UT #4 to Lewis WS-IV
9A 98+55 Fork Creek 786.6 1st 12-31
UT #5 to Lewis WS-IV
10A 103+50 Fork Creek 132.7 1S` 12-31
UT #lto WS-IV & B Tr
11A 114+75 Smithey's Creek 168.7 1s! 12-3;
WS-IV & B Tr
12A 116+75 Smithey's Creek 224.0 2nd 12-33
UT #2 to • WS-IV & B Tr
13A 124+20 Smithey's Creek 110.0 1St 12-33
UT#1 to WS-IV & B Tr
14A 129+80 Yadkin River 134.4 isc 12-(27)
UT #2 to WS-IV
15A 137+40 Yadkin River 128.1 1S` 12-34
UT #1 to WS-IV
16A 141+30 Fish Dann Creek 134.2 is` 12-35
WS-IV
1B 13+20 Fish dam Creek 103.7 2nd 12-35
WS-IV
213 17+45 UT #2 to Fish Dam Creek 111.5 is` 12-35
WS-IV
313 25+60 UT #3 to Fish Dam Creek 157.5 1S` 12-35
WS-IV
413 28+65 UT #3 Yadkin River 59.1 1St 12-(34)
WS-IV Tr
58 39+00 Miller's Creek 853 2°d 12-36
WS-IV Tr
613 43+20 UT #1 Miller's Creek 68.9 1St 12-36
No Impact C
7B 72+20 Yadkin River Dual Bridges N/A 12-(38)
C
813 13+80-Y 14- UT #I Moravian Creek 98.4 1 S` 12-39
TOTAL 3523.6
N/A denotes Not Applicable, UT denotes Unnamed Tributary, A and B denote A and B Sections
Please send the letter of confirmation to Mr. Eric Alsmeyer at U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers Raleigh Regulatory Field Office, 6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120,
Raleigh, NC 27615-6814. Mr. Alsmeyers's Fax number is 919876-5823
If you have any questions or need additional information please call Mr. Bruce
Ellis at (919) 733-1203.
Sincerely,
// C- -9ZL
William D. Gilmore, P.E., Manager
Project Development & Environmental Analysis Branch
cc:
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, USACE, Raleigh Field Office
Mr. David Franklin, Corps of Engineers, Wilmington Field Office
Mr. John Hefner, USFWS, Raleigh
Mr. N. L. Graf, P.E., FHWA
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Mr. W. E. Hoke, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
R
JAMEs B. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
?Ty ,.swF°?
puM
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 DAVID
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6512 Falls of the Neuse Road
Suite 105
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
November 1, 1999
Attention: Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
NCDOT Coordinator
Subject: Wilkes County, Proposed Widening of US 421 from East of Maple
Springs to- East of NC 268 Near Wilkesboro, State Project Number
6.769002T, TIP No. R-2240 Sections A and B.
USACE Action ID No. 199601926
f
This letter is a response to recommendations offered by the NC Wildlife
Resources Commission (WRC) dated September 15, 1999, concerning the proposed
project. Specifically, recommendations 1 and 5, as presented in the referenced.letter.
Recommendation No. l : The WRC recommends that mitigation money paid to the NC
Wetland Restoration Program (WRP) be used for stream restoration projects in the
Yadkin River drainage in Wilkes County.
Response to Recommendation No. 1: In a letter dated August 11, 1999 the NCDOT
requested that the WRP accept payment for compensatory mitigation associated with the
project. The WRP in a letter to Mr. Eric Alsmeyer dated October 1, 1999 indicated that
the WRP is willing to accept payment for stream and wetland impacts associated with the
project, and that the WRP will provide the required restoration in Cataloging Unit
03040101. Cataloging Unit 03040101 includes portions of the following counties:
Wilkes, Surrey, Yadkin, Forsyth, Davie and Davidson.
PHONE (919) 733-2520 FAX (919) 733-9150
2-
Limiting mitigation measures to Wilkes County is too restrictive. The NCDOT
proposes that mitigation for the project be allowed within the entire basin contained in
cataloging unit 03040101. If suitable mitigation cannot be found within cataloging unit
03040101, then NCDOT requests that mitigation in adjacent cataloging units within the
Yadkiri`River Basin be deemed acceptable.
Recommendation No.5: The WRC recommends that clearing and grubbing along stream
channels within the project corridor should not occur within a minimum of 50 feet of
either side of the stream channel... until 72 hours before work begins in that area.
Response to Recommendation No. 5: The NCDOT recognizes that clearing and grubbing
up to the edge of a stream channel has negative impacts on the water resource. However,
the time constraints contained in recommendation no. 5 are too restrictive and
impracticable. Under normal circumstances, clearing and grubbing are performed as a
single operation with one mobilization of equipment. In order to comply with
recommendation no. 5, several mobilizations of clearing and grubbing equipment will be
required which will result in increased cost and time delays. Additionally, the 72 hour
time constraint is impracticable in that it may take longer to clear and grub a particular
area, and weekend down time may be involved.
The NCDOT proposes that procedures contained in special provisions for
environmentally critical areas be implemented for buffer areas in proximity to water
resources. The NCDOT Roadside Environmental Unit has developed special provisions
for environmentally critical areas (attached) which include, clearing but no grubbing
within 50 feet of a water resource. All exposed areas will be re-seeded immediately
following the clearing operation. Grubbing will commence shortly before work begins in
the environmentally critical area. Best Management Practices for erosion control will be
installed and maintained. Additionally, Division 11 now has an Environmental Officer
on staff. His duties include monitoring the project for compliance with environmental
permit conditions.
3
I
Thank you for your assistance with this project. If you have any questions or
need additional information, please contact Mr. Bruce Ellis at (919) 733-1203.
Sincerely,
C - Ot?
William D. Gilmore, PE, Branch Manager
Planning Development and
Environmental Analysis Branch
cc:
Mr. David Franklin, Corps of Engineers, Wilmington Field Office
Mr. John Dorney, NCDENR, Division of Water Quality
Mr. Ron Linville, WRC, Eastern Mountain Coordinator
Mr. Calvin Leggett, P.E., Program Development Branch
Ms. Debbie Barbour, P.E., Highway Design Branch
Mr. A. L. Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics Unit
Mr. William J. Rogers, P.E., Structure Design Unit
Mr. John Alford, P.E., Roadway Design Unit
Mr. W. E. Hoke, P.E., Division 11 Engineer
Mr. Pete Colwell, Division 11 Environmental Officer
Ms. Stacey Baldwin, P.E., Project Engineer, PD&EA Branch
Attachment
4
Environmentally Critical Areas:
This project is located in an environmentally critical area. This designation requires
special procedures to be used for clearing and grubbing, temporary stream crossings, and
grading operations within the "Environmentally Sensitive Areas" identified on the plans.
This also requires special procedures to be used for seeding and mulching and staged
seeding within the project.
Seeding and Mulching
Seeding and mulching shall be performed in accordance with Section 1660 of the
Standard Specifications. and vegetative cover sufficient to restrain erosion shall be
installed immediately following grade establishment.
Seeding and mulching shall be performed on the areas disturbed by construction
immediately following final grade establishment. No appreciable time shall lapse into the
contract time without stabilization of slopes, ditches and other areas within the "Critical
Habitat Water Zone(s)" as indicated on the E.C. Plans.
Stage Seeding:
The work covered by this section shall consist of the establishment of a vegetative cover
on cut and fill slopes as grading progresses. Seeding and mulching.shall be done in
stages on cut and fill slopes which are greater than 20 feet (6 meters) in height or greater
than 2 acres (0.8 hectares) in area. Each stage shall not exceed the limits stated above.
All work described above will be paid for at the contract unit prices established in the
contract for the work involved. Additional payments will not be made for the
requirements of this section as the cost for this work should be included in the contract
unit prices for the work involved.
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Clearing and Grubbing:
In areas identified on the erosion control plans as "Environmentally Sensitive Areas", the
Contractor may perform clearing operations, but not grubbing operations until
immediately prior to beginning grading operations as described in Section 200, Article
200-1, in the Standard Specifications. The "Environmentally Sensitive Area" shall be
defined as a 50 foot (16 meter) buffer zone on both sides of the stream, measured from
top of streambank. Only clearing operations (not grubbing) shall be allowed in this
buffer zone until immediately prior to beginning grading operations. Erosion control
devices shall be installed immediately following the clearing operation.
;rte
Grading: .
0
Once grading operations begin in identified "Environmentally Sensitive Areas", work
will progress in a continuous manner until complete. All construction within these areas
must progress in acontinuous manner such that each phase is complete and areas
permanently stabilized prior to beginning of next phase. Failure on the part of the
Contractor to complete any phase of construction in a continuous manner in
"Environmentally Sensitive Areas" as specified will be just cause for the Engineer to
direct the suspension of work in accordance with Section 108-7 of the Standard
Specifications.
Temporary Stream Crossings:
?E
Any crossing of streams within the limits of this project must be accomplished in
accordance with Section 107-13(b) of the Standard Specifications.
r US 421
EAST OF MAPLE SPRINGS TO
' EAST OF NC 268 NEAR WILKESBORO
WILKES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PROJECT No. 6.769002T
' T.I.P. No. R-2240
' ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
' Submitted Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)
' By the
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
and the
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
i LIZ
Da a of Approval H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
' Planning & Environmental Branch, NCDOT
? 1 Z2 S ?
Date of Approval Fog Nicholas L. Graf, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
1
1
1
H
11
H
US 421
EAST OF MAPLE SPRINGS TO
EAST OF NC 268 NEAR WILKESBORO
WILKES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PROJECT No. 6.769002T
T.I.P. No. R-2240
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Prepared by:
11
WOOLPERT
Charlotte, North Carolina
Michael A. Iagiocc#,, Project Manager
ell J
Ronald A. Geiger, PE, Alqsociate
Prepared for:
x``1`.3• a"•'??'A' '?O.
S m '
?? AL •.
A.
ff°r+rrrrrerow%
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Raleigh, North Carolina
J& Bissett, Jr., P.E., Unit Head
Consultant Engineering Unit
i:9 /J .
Stacy Bal#*in
Project Manager
Department of Environment, Health, and Natu rces
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmenta Affairs
Project Review Form
Project Number: County:
Date:
I-rip '#_? 9-a9.
C
? Project located in 7th floor library
11??7
Date Response Du (firm deadline):
c AP& > s
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional office/Phone Regional Office Area .'
? Asheville ? All RIO Areas
? Fayetteville Air
Water
? Mooresville Groundwater
? Raleigh Land Quality Engineer
? Recreational Consultant
? Washington
? Coastal Management Consultant
? Wilmington ? Others
Winston-Salem PWS
Manager Sign-Off/Region: I Date:
Response (check all applicable)
In-House Review .
Q Marine Fisheries
ater Planning
Environmental Health
? Solid Waste Management
? Radiation Protection
? David Foster
? Other (specify)
RECEIVED
? Soil and Water
? Coastal management
? Water Resources
ildlife
Forest Resources
Land Resources
Parks and Recreation
nvironmental Management
Monica Swihart
Regional office response to be compiled. and completed by Regional Manager.
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development'with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attachedlauthority(ies) cited)
RETURN TO:
JAN 1 81996
ENVIRON?&*NTAL SCIEN
Q4e hums
In-House Reviewer/Agency:
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
? Applicant has been contacted
? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Other (specify and attach comments)
Melba McGee Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
S-104
US 421
S-1
' SUMMARY
1
US 421
1 Environmental Assessment
East of Maple Springs to East of NC 268
Wilkes County, North Carolina
Prepared by the
' North Carolina Department of Transportation
in Consultation with the
Federal Highway Administration
0
n
SA TYPE OF ACTION
This is a Federal Highway Administration Environmental Assessment.
S.2 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Additional information concerning the proposed project and the Environmental
Assessment (EA) study can be obtained by contacting the following persons:
H. Franklin Vick, PE, Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Telephone (919) 733-3141
S.3 DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
Nicholas L. Graf, PE
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, NC 27601
Telephone (919) 856-4350
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), in consultation with the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), proposes to widen 1JS421 to a multi-lane
ialty from east of Maple Springs to east of NC 268, near Wilkesboro. Up proposed
im -ovements will involve constructing e-HI3b -travei4wt swath-of the existing.
roadway. The proposed roadway will follow the alignment of existing US 421 and
provid `al .,control of access. The location of this project is shown on Figures 1 and
2 in Section 1.
US 421 has been identified in NCDOT's 1996-2002 Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) as a "key economic development highway." This project is identified in
the TIP as project number R-2240. The TIP has included this segment of US 421 as
part of the "priority completion corridor" that will multi-lane US 421 from Winston-
Salem to Boone. US 421 is part of the intrastate corridor system and this segment
NCDOT
Federal BA
July 1995
'
US 421 S-2
'
serves as the main highway link between the Piedmont and the northwest section of the
state. US 421 serves as the major transportation corridor needed to foster economic
' development and enhance the tourism industry that this region depends on.
The estimated costs included in the 1996-2002 TIP are $22,500,000 for construction
and $5,020,000 for right of way, which includes utility relocation costs. The estimated
cost of the project based on preliminary design is $37,816,000, which includes
$32,800,000 for construction and $5,016,000 for right of way and utility relocation.
S.4 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
' The alternatives considered in the development of this project included: the No-Build
option, which involves no new construction; Alternative A (Recommended Alternative),
which entails widening the existing roadway to a multi-lane facility; and Alternative B,
' which combines widening with a• bypass, on new location. The three mile 'bypass would
occur on the eastern end of the ;project and avoid a heavily travelled commercial area
along US 421. Partial control of access, with access provided by permit only, is
' proposed for both build alternatives. The new location portion of Alternative B would
offer full control of access, with access provided only at interchanges.
' S.5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
A summary of the potential impacts associated with the recommended alternative is
' presented in Table 1.
The proposed widening of US 421 will provide a multi-lane roadway from east of
Maple Springs to east of NC 268, and serve as an important link between Winston-
Salem and Boone. The proposed project will provide a facility that will more efficiently
and safely accommodate both existing and projected traffic volumes.
' Widening US 421 will provide a number of beneficial socioeconomic impacts. The
proposed improvements to US 421 will increase accessibility to this portion of the state,
which, in turn, will foster economic development and enhance the tourism industry.
1 Existing travel delays and traffic congestion encountered in the project area will be
greatly reduced.
' Approximately 32 acres of additional right of way will be required to accommodate the
proposed improvements. This acreage is generally comprised of upland forested areas,
residential and commercial lawns and properties, open fields, cultivated fields and
' grassy shoulder areas. Construction easements will be required along the project.
The proposed widening of US 421 will require the filling of approximately seven acres `
of 100-year floodplain. Approximately 5.4 acres of this floodplain involvement will
resentl
nment
US 421 ali
h
th
f
h
d
y
g
p
ere
e
e project, w
t
o
occur along the far western en
1
6 acres
The remainin
is Fork
L
th P
f
S
l
i
h
d
.
g
.
rong
ew
ou
n o
e
t
p
a
encroaches on the floo
of fill will be associated with the approaches and abutments at the three bridge ct,
locations, including approximately 1.3 acres at the Yadkin River, and 0.3 and 0.03 bN `
acres at the Lewis Fork and South Prong Lewis Fork crossings, respectively. Structures
' provided for these crossings will be adequately sized to accommodate the 100-year
Potential
nificant increase (less than one foot) in flood height
i
t
ith
fl
d
.
g
a s
w
ou
oo
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421
TABLE I
Summary of Potential Impacts
Recommended Alternative
Recommended Alternative
Affected Resource Total R-2240
• Relocations
-Families 9
-Businesses 5
-Churches 0
-Non-profit 1
• Parks/Recreational Areas None
• National Register Properties None
• Major Hydrologic Crossings 7
• Floodplains (Acres) 7
• Floodway (Acres) 0
• Potential UST Sites Requiring Relocation I
• Locations Exceeding or Approaching Noise Abatement Criteria Levels
-Residences 25
-Businesses 22
• Stream Crossings Requiring Bridges 3
• Wetlands (Acres) <0.2
• Prime Farmlands (P3 & P5) 9
(Acres)
• Right of Way and Utility Relocation Costs $5,016,000
• Construction Costs $32,800,000
• Total Cost $37,816,000
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
' US 421 S-3
impacts to floodplain areas are further described in Section 4.3.2.5. Regulated floodway
areas will not be impacted by the proposed project.
The proposed improvements will involve "waters of the U.S." While the widening will
involve a number of watercourses, minimal wetlands involvement is anticipated. The
project's involvement with waters of the U.S. will occur above headwater areas, as a
direct result of the extension of existing drainage structures. All totalled, its estimated
that the Recommended Alternative will impact less than one acre of wetlands. There
' will be nq diversion p ,,t affected.stream channels and no changes.to :existing drainage
patterns. Potential impacts to wetlands are further described in Section 4.3.1.2.
' The Recommended Alternative will result in the relocation of nine residences. No
minority communities will be divided by the Recommended Alternative. No other social
group, such as low income families or the elderly, will be disproportionately affected
by the Recommended Alternative. Five businesses and one non-profit organization will
' be displaced as a result of the proposed improvements.
71
One historic property within the project area was identified as eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places. FHWA has determined and the State Historic Preservation
Office has concurred that this property will not be affected by the Recommended
Alternative (Appendix Q. No public parks or recreational areas of local significance
will be affected by the project.
One archaeological site, of nine sites discovered and two revisited during an
archaeological survey of the alternative corridors, was assessed as potentially eligible
for the National Register of Historic Places. The FHWA, in a letter of July 21, 1992,
transmitted the functional design plan illustrating the proposed corridor right of way
with respect to sites 31Wkl21 and 31Wkl22. The Recommended Alternative is
widening US 421. The Recommended Alternative is more than 3,000 feet north of the
location of archaeological sites 31Wkl21 and 31Wk122. Since neither site is located
within the Recommended Alternative, the project will not impact any significant
archaeological site.
Improvements to US 421 will result in the loss or displacement of common plants and
animals. The potential impact to wildlife is primarily related to habitat loss. The
removal of wooded areas bordering watercourses will impact habitat which functions as
wildlife nesting and foraging habitat and corridors. However, the recommended
improvements will occur along existing US 421 right of way where the wildlife habitat
is already fragmented and degraded from previous development in the area.
Correspondence with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service indicates that the Peregrine
falcon (Falco pere rg inus) is the only federally-listed endangered species known to
potentially occur within the study area. Based upon a review of historical records, field
surveys, and the lack of suitable habitat in the existing US 421 corridor, it is concluded
that this species will not be impacted by the proposed widening.
Recommended improvements to US 421 will involve one site containing underground
storage tanks (USTs). This site consists of an operational gas station. The extent of any
UST and/or hazardous waste site impacts will be determined during the final design
phase of the project. Any underground storage tank encountered during construction
NCDOT Federal EA
July 1995
S-4
US 421
' will be reported to the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources' (DEHNR) Division of Environmental Management.
' The project will not result in a violation of National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
' Noise levels at an estimated 25 residences and 22 businesses are predicted to approach
or exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria by the year 2018. These impacted
receptors are located in the areas of roadway widening. Since these receptors are
isolated, and will continue to have direct driveway connections to the proposed
roadway, a noise barrier would not be effective and/or reasonable and has not been
included as part of the proposed project.
' The Recommended Alternative will impact approximately nine acres of soils designated
as Prime Farmland. Much of this affected area, however, is located within or
immediately adjacent to existing right of way, and has been converted into sites for
residences and businesses.
Construction activities will result in several short-term environmental impacts. Potential
short-term impacts to the water quality of Lewis Fork, South Prong Lewis Fork,
Yadkin River, and their respective tributaries, will be minimized through the
implementation of NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface
I Waters (June 1991). Long-term reduction of water quality is not anticipated. The
construction phase will result in temporal and localized impacts to ambient noise and air
quality. Temporary impacts will be minimized through strict adherence to NCDOT's
' standard specifications for roads and structures.
' S.6 COORDINATION
A Citizens Informational Workshop was held in July 1990 at the Wilkes County Office
Building in Wilkesboro, North Carolina, to receive input regarding the proposed
i
ci
l'
M
li
Off
ngs
eet
i
a
s
c
project. Approximately 25 citizens attended the workshop. Pub
were held in July 1990 and March 1995. Officials attending these meetings included
City Council members, Town and County Commissioners, the Mayor of Wilkesboro,
and members of the Wilkes Chamber of Commerce.
Input concerning effects of the project on the environment was requested by a scoping
' letter from appropriate federal, state, and local agencies in preparation of this
Environmental Assessment. The following agencies were contacted:
' U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District*
' U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources*
North Carolina State Clearinghouse, Department of Administration*
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission*
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources*
Region D Council of Governments*
' County of Wilkes*
Wilkes County Schools
NCDOT Federal EA
July 1995
US 421 S-5
' Wilkes County Planning Department
City of Wilkesboro Police Department
' City of Wilkesboro Fire Department
City of Wilkesboro City Manager
' An asterisk (*) indicates those agencies that have provided comments to date.
S.7 BASIS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
On the basis of the planning and environmental studies, it is determined that this project
will have no significant detrimental effect upon the quality of the human or natural
environment. The project has been reviewed by appropriate Federal, state, and local
agencies and no objections have been raised. A public meeting was held for this
project, and the project is not controversial in nature. As a result of the meeting and
reviews by appropriate agencies, it is concluded that an Environmental Assessment is
applicable to this project.
' S.8 ACTIONS REQUIRED BY OTHER AGENCIES
The placement of fill material and structures in "waters of the United States" will
require a federal permit(s) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act. The project is also located in a designated "trout" county.
Consequently, a letter of approval from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission must be obtained as part of the Section 404 permitting process. A Section
491-State Water Quality Certification from the North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR) wM-also-be required. Storm
' water point source discharges associated with construction activities will be authorized
pursuant to General Permit No. NCG010000 under the authority of NCDEHNR's
Division of Environmental Management.
1
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
n
11
J
n
n
1
0
1
US 421 S-6
S.9 LIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUTMENTS
All standard NCDOT measures and procedures, including Best Management Practices,
will be implemented during construction to avoid or minimize environmental impacts.
The following is a list of environmental commitments pertaining to the improvements of
US 421 covered by this Federal EA.
1. Geotechnical studies to determine hazardous waste site contamination, exact
location, and possible mitigation will be completed during final design.
NCDOT will give consideration to bottomless culverts or putting the floor of
the culvert below stream bottom to prevent disruption of fish movements.
3. Coordination with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will
occur, as necessary, during the design phase of the project. Appropriate
measures will be made to ensure compliance with FEMA floodway regulations.
4. Coordination with Wilkes County will be conducted during final design for
compliance with their respective floodplain ordinances.
5. Underground storage tanks encountered during construction will be reported to
the NCDEHNR's Division of Environmental Management.
Potential impacts to water quality of rivers and creeks will be minimized
through the implementation of techniques described in NCDOT's Best
Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters (June 1991) and the
North Carolina Administrative Code, Chapter 4, Sedimentation Control.
7. Prior to construction, the NC Geodetic Survey will be contacted regarding
monument locations and procedures.
8. Final design plans will be provided to the NC Department of Cultural
Resources to allow an evaluation of the potential effect of the proposed
construction on archaeological resources at the Montford Stokes house.
9. Final design plans will include the placement of a fence along the portion of
US 421 right of way bordering the Mount Pleasant Elementary School property.
NCDOT
Federal F4
July 1995
US 421 1
' TABLE OF CONTENTS
................... S-1
........
SUMMARY .....................
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .................... 1
1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION .............................. 1
2 HISTORICAL RESUME ................................
1 1
.
1.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXISTING ROADWAY ............ 2
0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT ...................
2 4
' .
2.1 PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT ............................
VEMENTS 4
4
.
2 FUTURE PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED IMPRO
2
.
2.3 TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND CAPACITY ...................... 5
' 2.3.1 Traffic Volumes-1998 5
5
••..••.•..•••.••••..•••.•..••
2.3.2 Level Of Service - 1998
2.3.3 Traffic Volumes - 2018 ............................. 6
' 2.3.4 Level of Service-2018......
2.4 TRAFFIC SAFETY . . . . . • . • . • • . . • • . • • • . . . . 6
7
2.5 SUMMARY OF BENEFITS TO THE STATE, REGION, AND
' COMMUNITY ...................................... 8
3.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ............................. 9
3.1 NO-BUILD, ALTERNATIVE .............................
...............
ER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 9
9
.....
3.2 OTH
3.2.1 Bypass Alternatives ............................... 10
3.2.2 Improve Existing Alternatives ........................ 10
' 3.3 RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE ........................ 11
3.3.1 Project Terminus ................................ 11
3.3.2 Length of Project ................................ 11
' 3.3.3 Design Criteria and Typical Sections .................... 11
12
3.3.4 Right of Way ...................
3.3.5 Access Control .................................. 12
' 3.3.6 Interchange/Intersection Treatment ..................... 12
13
3.3.7 Required Structures
3.3.8 Considerations for Future Improvements .................. 13
' 3.3.9 Actions Required by Others .......................... 15
15
3.3. 10 Estimated Cost
'
'
' 4.0 SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS .........
4.1 SOCIAL EFFECTS
4.1.1 Land Use .....................................
4.1.2 Neighborhoods and Community Cohesion .................
4.1.3 Relocation
4.1.4 Community Resources .............................
4.1.5 Public Services and Utilities .........................
4.1.6 Historic Architectural and Archaeological Resources .......... 16
16
16
17
18
20
21
21
4.2 ECONOMIC EFFECTS ................................ 22
' 4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ..........................
4.3.1 Natural Resources ................................ 23
23
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
1 US 421
11
[7
1
L1
1
ii
4.3.1.1 Biotic Communities .... ....................... 23
4.3.1.2 Wetland Areas ....... ....................... 25
4.3.1.3 Wildlife ........... ....................... 26
4.3.1.4 Protected Species ..... ....................... 27
4.3.1.5 Wild and Scenic Rivers ......................... 30
4.3.2 Physical Environment ...... ....................... 30
4.3.2.1 Air Quality ......... ....................... 30
4.3.2.2 Noise .................................... 31
4.3.2.3 Hydrology and Drainage ........................ 34
4.3.2.4 Water Quality ............................... 34
4.3.2.5 Floodplains ........ ........................ 36
4.3.2.6 Topography and Geology ....................... 37
4.3.2.7 Soils and Prime Farmland ....................... 38
4.3.2.8 Mineral Resources .... ........................ 40
4.3.2.9 Hazardous Materials Sites and Underground Storage Tanks .. 40
4.3.3 Construction Impacts ...... ........................ 41
5.0 COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ......................... 44
5.1 AGENCY COORDINATION ............................ 44
5.2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT .............................. 44
5.2.1 Mailing List, Post Office Box, and Toll-free Hotline .......... 45
5.2.2 Newsletters .................................... 45
5.2.3 Small Group Informational Meetings .................... 45
5.2.4 Public Officials Meetings ........................... 45
5.2.5 Citizens Informational Workshops ...................... 46
REFERENCES ............................................... R-1
APPENDICES
Design Criteria and Typical Sections .............................. A
Relocation Report ........................................... B
SHPO Coordination ........................................ C
Common Wildlife
US 421 Project Area ..................................... D
Agency Scoping Letters ....................................... E
Farmland Impact Conversion Rating ............................... F
Recommended Alternative .................................... G
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
US 421
F
n
1-1
u
u
n
1
1
1
LIST OF TABLES
1 Summary of Potential Impacts - Recommended Alternative ............ S-2
2 Description of Levels of Service ............................... 5
3 Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections .................. 5
4 Signalized Intersection Level of Service .......................... 6
5 Level of Service of Roadway Segments and Key Unsignalized Intersections .... 6
6 Traffic Accident Rates Per 100 Million Vehicle Miles .................. 7
7 Level of Service of Roadway Segments and Key Unsignalized Intersections ... 14
8 Comparision of Average Per Capita Income ....................... 23
9 Watercouse Involvement ................................... 26
10 Carbon Monoxide Concentrations ............................. 31
11 Noise Abatement Criteria .................................. 32
12 Noise Exposure Estimates .................................. 33
13 River and Creek Data ..................................... 34
14 Prime and Important Farmlands .............................. 39
LIST OF FIGURES
1 Vicinity Map ........................................... 1
2 Location Map ........................................... 1
3 Traffic Volume & LOS 1998 PM Peak No Build ..................... 5
4 Traffic Volume & LOS 2018 PM Peak No Build ..................... 6
5 Traffic Volume & LOS 2018 PM Peak Improve Existing
(With Minor Improvements to Existing 5-Lane Section) ............. 13
6 Cultural and Community Resources ............................ 20
7 Biotic Communities ...................................... 23
8 Wetlands ............................................. 26
9 Noise and Air Quality Measurement Sites ........................ 31
10 Drainage System Within the Study Area ......................... 34
11 Floodplain Areas ........................................ 36
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
US 421
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
1.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), in consultation with the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), proposes to widen US 421 to a multi-lane
facility from east of Maple Springs to east of NC 268, near Wilkesboro (Figures 1 and
2). The proposed improvements will involve constructing additional eastbound travel
lanes south of the existing roadway. The proposed roadway will follow the alignment of
existing US 421 and provide partial control of access.
1
1
F
US 421 is classified as a Rural Principal Arterial in the statewide Functional
Classification System and is a Federal Aid Highway. US 421 has been identified in
NCDOT's 1996-2002 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) as a "key economic
development highway." The TIP is a transportation planning document for the state and
provides a projection of all transportation improvements, including highway, rail,
public transportation, and aviation, funded for the next seven years. The TIP provides
an outline of recommended highway improvement projects throughout the state.
This segment of US 421 is included in the TIP as part of the "priority completion
corridor" that will multi-lane US 421 from Winston-Salem to Boone. US 421 is part of
the Intrastate Corridor System and this segment serves as the main highway link
between the Piedmont and the northwest section of the state. The North Carolina
Intrastate System was established by the State Legislature in July 1989. The mandated
goal of the Intrastate System is to provide high-speed, safe travel service throughout the
state. The proposed project is in conformance with NCDOT's current TIP. Right of
way acquisition for this project is scheduled to begin in federal fiscal year (FFY) 1999
with construction to begin in FFY 2001.
1.2 HISTORICAL RESUME
The westernmost segment of US 421 between Maple Springs and SR 1322 was
constructed in 1956-1957. The remainder of US 421 in the project area was constructed
in 1967-1968 as part of the North Wilkesboro Bypass. No improvements other than
resurfacing have been made since the original construction was completed.
US 421 between SR 1323 and the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection was
recently upgraded to a five-lane section as part of TIP Numbers W-2817 and W-2861.
These improvements included the signalization of the at-grade intersection of US 421
with SR 1372 and US 421 Business. This traffic signal was coordinated with the
existing signal at the US 421 and Addison Avenue intersection in an effort to reduce
accidents and congestion. Improvements along this segment also included the
realignment and channelization of the at-grade US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business
intersection.
The project is located in a predominantly rural environment. The western end of the
study area is particularly rural in character, with isolated residences and businesses
NCDOT
Federal F..!
July 1995
•. is!?y.',?ar'Y,`.•'',72S.:i.S:.irv .i:4;j} :•
i•'!+jl!:• •'•i'Y,•'?:!?tj:,??•Y ?:::: P'::Fj'r: ? :'i T'r,T'!?
:.!,cif ,y5;!;;'.^•.T:f,.:.: ::9y .:s? .:f:i2•: •: %???•T•!•``
:ti!55!:•ii:?i?j!i,!.?+r;: l{Tr`•i%:.•'S:Y i:.C; ?'?55" ?Yr.•..•' ??'
iiiti.::: r'v.;:y;•;, •;,i.:::s• t:iH: .:f ::iii':,:??i;_, I!}rhi: .•!%f!:
T'•TC`++? '• ;i;.y;: {:l:l,•:^..+4!C,.:•::fiY:r' r~`i'/• • i7::"l? i??:r,T •5::r:
•Tf is t.:.yTZiii'?iii:•';iC+• +i;,:i''!;i:'YrA !::Y!,.$ i?"•!,'?:7
i!iiilr,.Ti:aT•l,•:::R'•i9rs! .;.zrti%tii::r ? •'r:riiv `. ::.y3•' ;vr:•yy .
(i7?ih: r,•: wiiiiyz:::z;:i• :5. ?5:i}^.:tr.
i:i4Tii: :: x.:.. .. .:5{:f:+ •n t.. ::T?'/''z;'•i :;til•5: ..i::z:::r'
. :i n:i°ti:'i'•i5G•: •:,ts ryff7,•^5 .rA
.::NYj':?':i•'.:za:::Tii:2ii•.'•'r;•,'+ : ttS::S..
: f.
fr ?.
`•,:izRr:i:: ,5s.:yTt,: v ;::,L? .: `"} . '.•?,i4;r.
y;•?(„y5 i'i:•}?y?•jSr,z'?i: ?:. .,:{ .. :T,:i:•. .TF.
'T' , F) • .. t : f . p :: : p q,. , ?}.: ? 33'; wl : P : ?. ^?r • ; • • S T : • Y, •; 5 + r
•:n:..,.r.. ?r:rssfl• s ...fi••ii?; '??!`i?:: •fri:
• •.:L>,:7.:."•?y{;: •N,. Y:?'.f..,r•. •+• r. :?STTi::r
?+ 't:F,•:?at},nu?.;':4':„ fir'
.;Yt. y. :r fy
(iAce //w??L i t //ice? i ? 3 ? .:•?f.?f{r?7+:.i!ij:.
fr;'fE 4:
? ?7f O N .P W W ? ??s"i•X•:
/ N tyT r>:
O :•!.:
i? C Q m M
Wo O
m
n
W
`+ N -+ r
O O n
3 x ^O W W ML
i
CA)
?? •kti•?.T.x L ?v
O? N .s
cr .+ W
O N
O
O 0•' C) ..s r N cn •
j rri
z :3
?
-1
s
m
•
v rri Z woo
O cn 0 0D
O O Z
0
D h
I • O
D
-
m
=
= ::E
z c
-c[
N 8
-,-
-•
O p
Nr
'
;u
o
Z5
0
L-
D N
O
3
D r
*1
00
?
m g
D?
.D?
N O CD
"D t)
Z "'O
o m;v
-+ D Z
3 c)
m to
0
/----?
a: Bassmap.DWG
{ O
0
rr
MATCHLINE? s
r...,.,...,f k
J'
1 W
SR 1155
f _
• t
3 ? ?
• { •y `J t V? J S , mfr
t .,
r ,.
m a
r ,.r t i. ?? ? ?, ,.?, .,• ,, is ?C?
.
r•" ! { S r,Ir
r
ti
w y
,?•Tlver ,- fJ
`? N N f tg?1 as t ! r Oho
•• r
ann,
lea
s 1 43 ;
Q? : Z`- ?y rr R 1 "? rrf
?Ol a
-LID 6? r' 1 t7V
r
.-r
,
{
1147
,
f t -
r'' r0
,r
MATCHLINE
N
D
• ' k'' ? o ? w -a? ?
U
i •
ra v o' z 0 0
O (/1 p
N p O ;o z
O
CAD
M
;u
O
N
i
m
-? o N
.rte '
:3 v r
000
° v (A
Z
m O m
z ?- D z
8
O
O
US 421 2
fronting US 421. East of NC 16, commercial activity and residential development
densities increase dramatically.
In recent years, a substantial amount of commercial development has occurred between
SR 1323 and the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection. This expanding
commercial district, in conjunction with the increasing numbers of travelers using
US 421 to access the western mountains of North Carolina, have substantially increased
daily traffic volumes. Subsequently, traffic congestion in the area has increased
accordingly, resulting in drastically reduced roadway level of service. The W-2817 and
W-2861 projects, previously described, were implemented in order to improve motorist
safety and provide some relief to this congestion.
1.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXISTING ROADWAY
US 421 between Maple Springs and SR 1323 consists of two lanes and 24 feet of
pavement with 10-foot shoulders (four feet paved). The existing 200 feet of right of
way is offset 115 feet south and 85 feet north of the highway centerline to
accommodate future south side widening to a four-lane divided facility. There is partial
control of access along this segment, with access provided by permit only. A traffic
signal is located at the NC 16 intersection; all other intersections are stop sign-
controlled.
US 421 between SR 1323 and the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection was
recently upgraded to a five-lane section. No improvements are proposed for this 1.2-
mile stretch of US 421 as part of this project. This segment provides no control of
access.
' The segment of US 421 between SR 1322 and NC 268 is a controlled access facility
with a right of way varying in width from 260 to 320 feet. The easternmost portion
consists of a four-lane divided facility with 24-foot pavements, 12-foot shoulders (four
' feet paved) and a 30-foot median. A grade-separated diamond interchange is provided at
the NC 268 junction.
' Posted speeds range from 55 miles per hour (mph) west of NC 16 and east of NC 268,
to 45 mph in the heavily commercialized five-lane section. Approximately 65% of the
project has an unrestricted passing sight distance of greater than 1,500 feet.
' Four signalized intersections are located along US 421 in the project area. Traffic
signals are located at NC 16, Addison Avenue, US 421 Business, and SR 1372. All
' other intersections are stop sign-controlled.
Four bridges occur along the project, spanning the South Prong Lewis Fork, Lewis
Fork, Yadkin River, and NC 268. Bridge No. 49 spanning the South Prong Lewis Fork
' is a five-span reinforced concrete, post and beam structure. Built in 1955 with
supplemental construction in 1960, this bridge is 251 feet long and 32 feet wide, with a
' height of approximately 57 feet above the creek bed as measured from the top of the
55 spanning Lewis Fork was constructed in 1955. This five-span
Bridge No
rail
.
.
structure of reinforced concrete floor on I-beams is 277 feet long, 32 feet wide, with a
height of approximately 56 feet above the creek bed. Bridge No. 67 spanning the
i
B
il
' n
t
u
Yadkin River is a three-span structure of reinforced concrete floor on I-beams.
1 NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421 3
1 ?P? .
1966, this structure is 225 feet long, 31 feet wide, with a height of approximately 33
feet above the river bed. i `0S6dfhT Lewist Fork and,'L'ewis?Fo k,,bridge& willr <be ,
I aeplaced: It is recommended that the existing Yadkin River bridge remain.
IA
Bridge No. 70, spanning NC 268, is a three-span structure of reinforced concrete floor
on I-beams. Constructed in 1966, this bridge is 196 feet long and 31 feet wide. The
' bridge provides a vertical clearance of 21 feet over NC 268 and a horizontal clearance
of 43 feet. The bridge has been recommended for minor maintenance repairs. It is
' recommended that the existing structure remain.
No sidewalks are located along the existing highway and there are no major pedestrian
movements along the project corridor. No railroad crossings are located within the
' project area.
C
r
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
'
US 421 4
'
2.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT
t
2.1 PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT
' il
t
i
l
12
f
h
e segmen
-m
mate
y
e approx
t
The US 421 project is a multi-lane improvement o
of two-lane roadway, from east of the community of Maple Springs to east of NC 268,
near the Town of Wilkesboro, North Carolina. The purpose of the proposed project is
' to construct a highway facility that will serve the growing transportation needs of
Wilkes County and the region. US 421 is part of the Intrastate Corridor System and is
' the only major east-west highway serving the northwest portion of the state. This
highway serves as the principal east-west connector between 1-40, 1-77, and US 52 in
North Carolina, and 1-81 in Tennessee. The roadway also provides important
connections to local and regional north-south routes. The cities of Winston-Salem,
' Yadkinville, Boone, and Wilkesboro are all directly served by this route.
In addition to serving as a link with other major highways, US 421 is also the main link
' between the populous Piedmont and the vacation areas in the northwest mountains of
North Carolina. The safe rapid movement of goods and people along this corridor is
vital to the economic well being of the region. US 421 serves as the major
' transportation corridor needed to foster economic development and enhance the tourism
industry that the region depends on.
' 2.2 FUTURE PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED IlUPROVEMENTS
A number of projects to improve the US 421 Intrastate Corridor are identified in the
' 1996-2002 TIP. In general, these programmed improvements involve widening existing
US 421 to a four-lane divided facility, with a number of segments targeted for new
location. US 421 from Winston-Salem to Boone is identified in the 1996-2002 TIP as a
' "key economic development highway" and a "priority completion corridor." These
projects will ultimately provide a multi-lane facility extending from Winston-Salem to
Boone, augmenting US 421's role as the main highway link between the Piedmont and
' the northwest section of the state.
The TIP projects programmed to improve US 421 are listed as rural projects. Those
' projects in the vicinity of the R-2240 study area are as follows:
• TIP No. R-2120; I-77 to west of the Yadkin River; right of way acquisition FFY
t 1996; construction FFY 1997; part complete
• TIP No. R-2239; Wilkesboro to 1-77; right of way acquisition FFY 1996; part
' under construction; and
• TIP No. R-529; NC 194 in Boone to two miles east of US 221; right of way
' acquisition underway; part under construction.
The Wilkes County Land Development Plan (Wilkes County Land Use Planning
' Committee, 1987) identified the need for improvements to US 421 near Wilkesboro in
These improvements were also identified in the plan
order to relieve traffic congestion
.
' NCDOT Federal Erb July 1995
US 421
r
I
C
L
1
1
5
as an essential element for fostering county-wide commerce and the enhancement of
commercial, industrial, and residential growth.
A Thoroughfare Plan for the town of Wilkesboro and North Wilkesboro was prepared
by the Statewide Planning Branch of NCDOT in August 1993. This plan served to
update the original thoroughfare plan adopted in 1975 and revised in 1983. Among the
recommended improvements comprising the plan included: the NC 268 Bypass (TIP
No. R-616) involving the proposed construction of a four-lane divided facility from
NC 268 to US 421; and the Western Connector which proposes the construction of a
two-lane facility from the western terminus of the proposed NC 268 Bypass to NC 268
west of the former county airport site.
2.3 TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND CAPACITY
2.3.1 Traffic Volumes - 1998
Figure 3 presents the 1998 Average Daily Traffic for the project area. The volumes
range from a low of 7,300 vehicles per day between SR 1304 and SR 1154 (Segment
#1) on the western end of the project, to a high in excess of 43,000 vehicles per day in
the heavily commercialized area west of the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business
intersection.
2.3.2 Level Of Service - 1998
The Highway Capacity Software was utilized to perform a Level of Service analysis for
US 421. Roadway segments and intersections were analyzed for the existing geometrics
(No-Build) for the years 1998 (estimated start of construction) and 2018 (design year).
Traffic conditions are expressed in terms of levels of service (LOS). Level of service
describes the measure of driver comfort based on delay and maneuverability in a
driving situation. The LOS is divided into six levels designated by the letters "A"
through "F", ranging from the best service (LOS A) to the worst service (LOS F).
Tables 2 and 3 provide descriptions of these LOS designations.
A LOS analysis for 1998 was conducted on the four signalized intersections and key
unsignalized intersections in the study area. Signalized intersections were evaluated
based on vehicle delay time for the PM peak period, which represented the worst case.
The signalized intersection LOS analysis reveals that the US 421/NC 16 intersection
(INT #1) will operate at LOS C in year 1998 (Figure 3). A similar LOS is projected for
INT # 3 and INT # 4, the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business and US 421/SR 1372
intersections, respectively. Signalized INT # 2, i.e., the US 421/Addison Avenue
intersection, is predicted to operate at LOS D.
The unsignalized intersections which characterize the west end of the project are a
substantial distance from the signalized intersection network. As a result, traffic arrives
at this portion of US 421 in a random pattern, reducing the gap size available for side-
street traffic. Subsequently, each of the key unsignalized intersections east of NC 16
will operate at LOS E for minor or side-street approaches in 1998.
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
I• MI ?? m IM m m m m m m m m m m m m m
z m? c om
o 80 00
40,
? ° O
00 -_H m Z .
_ z
c NC 16
C)
o
z C? SR ' ,SS ov
N ?
O M
o °' v M SR 1304
C7 CA
°
SR 1313 SR 1154
c D
m SR 1154
?cb
m N m SR D
o ? 1152 oti ti?
SR 1182 ?
v 0
----e
SR 1323 cn
m A m
o fTl
o w
°z M n
_ - SR 1147 SR 1147
z
m 000
Z DRIVEWAY N ADDISON AVE.
v7
o
m = cn m o
D m co
o SR 1146 SR 1146
DRIVEWAY SR 1322
cn cy m m
m C)
w 0
qj:z
n fa N ^ c
n
O z
00
W
^ 000
q
l l l - NC 16
a sF? 41
?CP e
-u z •ww 000 I C' N
C3 4? 46 (10
G ZL? l 21S -A m ;u
rn ???(c
0 `r W o
6z
?G c
S
z
a
M --1 0 z ::E m m -" r- L- 0 -> C?
o c (0 m;v c) -+, r 0 (/) •
O Fl o0 o Z M , 0 m -I --I 4Fj
()o M --TI rrl
0
I OZ co 0 BOO ,?
0
O 0 O O ;u ZX:
rn rcn cn rZ cn > 00D
< Q Cm Ic:, A ao p
rm rn r? D C 0 N fl Nt-
c> OZ OM m m m M C 0 0 00C))
> -Ti (D
r- U) (n O D i{7 -0 Z -p
Dz
rn m m N ;u
rn - N to
_rn
O n -4- -A
z 0
US 421
TABLE 2
Description of Levels of Service
Level of Service Description
A • Free flow conditions
• Low volumes
• High operating speed
• No restrictions on maneuverability
B • Stable flow conditions
• Operating speeds beginning to be restricted
C e Drivers may have to wait more than one signal
indication
• Backups may develop behind turning vehicles
• Drivers feel somewhat restricted
D • Delays to approaching vehicles at intersection may be
substantial for short periods within the peak, but
enough cycles with lower demand occur which permit
periodic clearance of developing queues
• Increasing restrictions approaching instability
E • Delays may be up to several signal cycles
• Volumes at or near capacity
• Unstable flow
• Major delays and stoppings
F • Forced flow conditions
• Low speed
• Stoppage for long periods
Source: Louis J. Pignataro, 1973, Traffic Engineering Theory and Practice.
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
US 421
TABLE 3
Level of Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections
Level of Servi a OS
A
B
C
D
E
F
Storming Delay Per Vehicle (Sec.
0 to 5.0
5.1 to 15.0
15.1 to 25.0
25.1 to 40.0
40.1 to 60.0
> 60.0
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, 1985.
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
r
US 421 6
As further depicted on Figure 3, the level of service for roadway segments in the
project area will range from LOS C through LOS F. As described in Table 2, LOS D
and lower will be characterized by substantial delays for short periods within the peak
travel period and general instability.
2.3.3 Traffic Volumes - 2018
Traffic volumes were forecasted to determine if the existing roadway system will
provide sufficient capacity in the design year (2018). As indicated on Figure 4, average
daily traffic in 2018 will range from 12,740 vehicles per day along Segment # 1, near
SR 1304, to nearly 67,000 vehicles per day on Segment # 11, near SR 1322. US 421
between SR 1323 and the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection, i.e., the
heavily commercialized area, will continue to be the most heavily traveled section. In
some instances, these projected volumes represent a greater than 60% increase over
1998 traffic volumes.
2.3.4 Level of Service - 2018
Based upon projected year 2018 traffic volumes, two of the signalized intersections in
the project area will exceed capacity in the design year. As indicated in Table 4, the
LOS for Intersections #1 and #2 will be unattainable, with stopping delays of over 60
seconds per vehicle. The remaining two signalized intersections will degrade to a LOS
D.
With the exception of the SR 1152 and SR 1323 intersections, which will operate at
LOS D and F, respectively, the remaining key unsignalized US 421 intersections in the
project area will operate at LOS E for minor approaches during peak travel periods
(Table 5). This level of service is attributed to the heavy through movements on
US 421 reducing the gap size available for side-street traffic.
TABLE 4
Signalized Intersection
Level of Service
US 421
Intersection #+ Description 1998
No-Build 2018
No-Build
1 NC 16 C
2 Addison Avenue D
3 US 421 Business C D
4 SR 1372 C D
+ See Figure 3 for intersection locations
* LOS unattainable; volume/capacity ratio Z 1.2; conditions worse than LOS F
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
U) -71
'0 W
Z m? C C0 MIMI
00
4 0 On z LZ
Z 00 m Z
z
= NC 16
-ate m v
? o
z w?•, SR 1 bA
? ss
W
CA
o
-3F
00
r cn
c
?c
m z
D
nW
?r
m
O
N_
N
mz
00
m
N
m
0 -T1
rn
SR 1313
m
T v
SR 1182
N
N G7 0
O Oo
SR 1323
z m
O O
C1
m c CO
X ? ° co 00
z DRIVEWAY N ADDISON AVE.
U)
:4k
? m o
cm []ll m T1
z
DRIVEWAY SR 1322
7?-
a
cn
C) rn
(O
O
O Z
f
000
Q w
sF
. '4 s?
V, ?15
Iro
0
m
SR 11,54
S=' S2 cC E-) 14
A2
7
?G
s
4
r i m `v i SR 130
°
m
SR 1154
Ali
0 tips,`
fTl
N ?
rri
m .gip ? m
O W
SR 1147
SR 1147
N cn
m
m O
SR 1146
w
SR 1146
N (n 0 -Ti
W M
v
N ?
O Ln
Z
0o NC 16
mo
m;v
mn
r?
OZ
? Z
c
O
Z
41
F]
000
0
\./
X Mm
? m m
? to D
cn
z C)
m
m 0
m <
r.,i m
r
i z
D
G') OZ v
i
o
-TI n
N
m
r U) w o r D
5 m
< m z
< ? ,=
m
m
m m
U)
D
n
O 0
Z
M i IV I- 'n L- °• Z
o m m
D D
C
m ? < > c ?v ...? ? c-?iW
v ()C) rrl '71 rr' z n CA 0 0
C7 o v, o
?
0 O -p o o ZK:
00> ?-••
a)
Q :3
'D
C -D u) 0
I-' N ?
r m
>
m
C
o
o OD
T` < n m
(-? m - > Z
m Ro 0
7
0
US 421
Level of Service of Roadway Segments
and Key Unsignalized Intersections
Segment '#/
US 421 Intersection" 1998
No-Build 2018
No-Build
1 D E
2 D E
3 E E
4 D E
5 E F
6 E F
7 E F
g F F
9 C F
10 C F
11 C F
12 C D
13 C E
SR 1304 C E
SR 1154 C E
SR 1152 A D
SR 1147 D E
SR 1146 E E
SR 1313 E E
SR 1182 E E
SR 1323 E F
SR 1322 E E
See Figure 3 for Segment # and Intersection locations
TABLE 5
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
1
i
i
US 421 7
2.4 TRAFFIC SAFETY
An Accident Analysis for a section of road can indicate if the roadway is deficient in
safe operating characteristics. An analysis was conducted on US 421 in the project area
for the four-year period from January 1986 to November 1989. During that timeframe,
a total of 435 accidents occurred along US 421 from the four-lane section east of
Maple Springs to the four-lane section east of NC 268 and at associated intersections.
The accidents represent a total accident rate of 210.97 accidents per 100 million vehicle
miles (ACC/100 MVM). Since US 421 is located in a predominantly rural area of
Wilkes County, this accident rate may be evaluated by comparing it to accident rates
for similar rural routes in the state. As indicated in Table 6, during the analysis period,
the total accident rate in the project area was higher than the statewide average rate of
180.1 ACC/100 MVM for all two-lane undivided rural routes. The fatality rate of 5.33
ACC/100 MVM along this stretch of US 421 was well above the statewide average of
3.1 ACC/100 MVM.
Traffic Accident Rates Per 100 Million Vehicles Miles
(ACC/100 MM
Statewide Average Statewide Average
Accident Category US 421 2-Lane Rural U.S.Routes 1986-1989 4-Lane Divided Rural U.S. Routes
Fatal Accidents 5.33 3.1 1.0
Personal Injury 88.27 84.09 50.9
Total Accidents 210.97 180.12 107.5
The three primary accident types in the project area were rear-end collisions (43.0%),
accidents involving running off the road (19.0%), and accidents involving left-turn
movements (13.6%). These accident types accounted for over three-quarters (75.6%) of
the total number of accidents. The highest accident locations were the intersections of
US 421 Business, SR 1323, and NC 16, and the interchange at NC 268.
The proposed improvements, including the widening to a four-lane divided section or
the addition of travel lanes and a paved median, will reduce the potential for these
accident types. As Table 6 illustrates, based on statewide averages, improving US 421
to a four-lane divided rural route could nearly halve the total number of accidents and
drastically reduce the fatality rate from 5.33 to 1.0 (ACC/100 MVM). The
recommended improvements will better allow motorists to safely stop and maneuver for
turns, while through-lanes will allow more avoidance options to avoid accidents such as
rear-ends or side swipes. The median will also provide separation for evasive
maneuvering. Due to the hilly terrain, particularly west of NC 16, the proposed
improvements will enhance sight distances which will also have a positive impact on
reducing accidents. Based on this analysis, the Recommended Alternative will greatly
improve the overall safety and convenience of motorists in the project area.
TABLE 6
NCDOT
Federal Ed
July 1995
0
n
0
1
US 421 8
2.5 SUMMARY OF BENEFITS TO THE STATE, REGION, AND
COMMUNITY
US 421 is the primary link between the population centers of the Piedmont and the
growing tourism and recreation industries of the western mountains of North Carolina.
Safe surface transportation along this corridor for both people and goods is vital to the
economic well being of the northwestern region of the state. The purpose of the
proposed project is to:
• Improve traffic flow and carrying capacity along this segment of US 421
• Improve the efficiency of US 421 as the only major east-west highway serving the
northwest part of the state
• Serve regional transportation needs by providing the principal link between 1-40,
I-77, and US 52, in North Carolina, and between these highways and 1-81 in
Tennessee
• Improve traffic safety and driveability
• Complete the multi-laning of US 421 between Winston-Salem and Boone, which has
been identified in the TIP as a "key economic development highway" and a
"priority completion corridor"
• Encourage economic growth and enhance the recreation and tourism industries
This stretch of US 421 is currently experiencing traffic congestion and travel delays
during peak travel periods. Much of the existing segment will exceed capacity by 1998,
and without the recommended improvements this entire portion of US 421 will
substantially exceed capacity by the 2018 design year. The roadway level of service
will dramatically worsen, resulting in reduced operating speeds along the corridor and
characterized by extensive traffic congestion, delays, and unsafe driving conditions. The
resulting long queues of traffic will greatly compromise the ability for emergency
services (fire, police, rescue) to respond to calls in the area. Since the maintenance of
an effective travel corridor is an essential element in the fostering of economic
development and the enhancement of the tourism industry that the region depends on,
the need for these recommended improvements to US 421 are clearly demonstrated.
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421
9
3.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
3.1 NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE
The no-build alternative would result in no improvements to US 421 in the study area.
The existing 12-mile segment of US 421 would remain a two-lane facility, with the
exception of the 1.2-mile, existing five-lane section in the vicinity of the US 421
Bypass/US 421 Business intersection.
Benefits associated with the no-build alternative include: no residential relocations; no
impacts to biotic communities, wetlands, wildlife, and agricultural lands; and no
temporal increases in noise, dirt, and dust during construction. In addition, no state or
federal funds would be expended for right of way acquisition and construction.
The no-build alternative would have a profoundly negative effect on level of service
(LOS) and highway capacity in the project area. As previously described in Section
2.3.4, projected traffic volumes for the design year will result in current signalized
intersections exceeding their capacity. Travel in this area will be characterized by
extensive stopping delays at these intersections of well over 60 seconds per vehicle.
Key unsignalized intersections in the project area will operate at a LOS "E" during
peak periods. Increased traffic volumes on the unimproved highway will also likely
increase the incidence of vehicular accidents, especially at intersections.
In summary, the no-build alternative will result in significant travel delays and traffic
congestion along this portion of US 421. The unacceptable level of service will conflict
with US 421's important role as the main highway link between the Piedmont and the
western part of the state. Without the recommended improvements, US 421's ability to
function as a safe and effective part of the Intrastate Corridor System will be
substantially compromised. In conclusion, the no-build alternative is not considered a
reasonable or feasible alternative for this project.
' 3.2 OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
A series of preliminary construction alternatives were considered for the project,
ranging from improvements along the existing US 421 facility, to alignments on new
location that would bypass the existing commercial district.
' Preliminary highway alternatives were developed through the application of land
suitability mapping (LSM) within the study area. This mapping shows factors that
would limit or discourage highway development by utilizing overlays at a common
' scale. The factors mapped and subsequently evaluated included wetlands, floodplains,
biotic communities, agricultural uses (prime farmland), soils, topography, residential,
commercial, and industrial development density and archaeological and historic
' architectural resources. The overlay process revealed specific areas or "windows" that
would minimize potential impacts. These windows, in turn, were linked to form
potential highway corridors.
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
'
US 421 10
'
3.2.1 Bypass Alternatives
' Through the above-described process, a series of potential alignments on new location
were developed. These bypass alternatives were preliminarily sited south of existing
US 421, between NC 16 and the US 421/NC 268 interchange. Five new location
' corridors were identified, both north and south of the Yadkin River. These corridors
exited the existing US 421 roadway in the vicinity of NC 16 and tied back into US 421
just west of the Yadkin River bridge. Each of the proposed controlled access
' alternatives bypassed the existing business district. New right of way would be required
to accomodate the proposed four-lane divided facility. A preliminary centerline was
established for assessing environmental impacts. The assessment process concluded that
' a bypass north of the Yadkin River, thereby requiring only one crossing of the river,
was the most reasonable and feasible.
' West of NC 16, this Bypass Alternative was identical to the current Recommended
Alternative. At NC 16, however, the Bypass Alternative departed from the existing
US 421 facility in a southeast direction. This four-lane divided freeway facility,
' extending approximately 3.0 miles in length, would cross Millers Creek, Tucker Hole
Creek, and two unnamed tributaries before tieing back into US 421 approximately 500
feet west of the Yadkin River bridge. This segment, on new location, would have full
control of access. The bypass would be designed with a 46-foot median and require the
' purchase of 250 feet (minimum) of new R/W.
A detailed evaluation and comparison between the Improve Existing and the Bypass
' Alternatives was then performed. The comparison of these two reasonable and feasible
alternatives or "build" alternatives considered a variety of factors, including
environmental impacts (i.e., impacts to wetlands, floodplain, vegetative communities of
' biotic importance, et al.), ability to meet the purpose and need of the US 421 Intrastate
Corridor System, safety and engineering, traffic (level of service), and estimated
construction costs.
1 As a result of this evaluation the Bypass Alternative was eliminated from further
consideration based, in part, on the following: 1) 4(f) considerations as a result of
direct conflicts with the Johnson Farm Complex - an historic property determined
' eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (refer to Section 4.1.6); 2) greater
environmental impacts, notably with respect to areas of biotic importance which
included the removal of marginally disturbed forested areas along the new location
' segment; 3) more residential and commercial relocations; 4) potential conflicts with the
Montford Stokes site - an archaeological site determined eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places (refer to Section 4.1.6); and 5) greater construction costs
' based on the substantial amount of earthwork that would be required along the bypass
segment. Contrastingly, the Improve Existing Alternative would 1) result in no conflicts
' with historic or archaeological properties, 2) have minimal impact on forested areas of
with proposed improvements to be largely confined within the
ortance
biotic im
,
p
existing right of way, and 3) require approximately 60% less earthwork.
' 3.2.2 Improve Existing Alternatives
' North side widening of existing US 421 was also evaluated. This alternative would
the addition of two westbound travel lanes and a 46-foot median north of the
l
i
nvo
ve
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
'
US 421 11
' i
d Al
d
ternat
ve
e
existing roadway. This alternative was compared with the Recommen
(south side widening) and eliminated from further consideration based, in part, on the
' following: 1) greater wetlands and floodplain impacts; 2) more involvement with
operational gas stations and potential conflicts with underground storage tanks; and 3)
more residential and commercial relocations - this alternative would fail to take full
' advantage of the existing right of way which has been offset to the south to
accommodate future widening.
' 3.3 RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
The proposed improvements will involve constructing additional eastbound travel lanes
south of the existing roadway. The proposed roadway will follow the alignment of
' existing US 421 and provide partial control of access.
West of NC 16 and east of the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection, the
' proposed widening will involve the addition of two eastbound lanes and a 46-foot
grassed median south of the existing roadway. East of NC 16 this four-lane divided
section will transition to a five-lane section to tie into the existing five-lane facility
' located between SR 1323 and the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection. The
Typical Sections and Design Criteria governing the proposed improvements are
' included in Appendix A. Functional Design Drawings of the Recommended Alternative
endix G
resented in A
.
pp
are p
As previously described, US 421 between SR 1323 and the US 421 Bypass/US 421
' Business intersection was recently upgraded to a five-lane section as part of TIP Nos.
W-2817 and W-2861. Further minor improvements to this 1.2 mile segment will be
considered, as necessary, during final design of this project. These minor improvements
' will be contained within the existing right of way.
3.3.1 Project Terminus
'
The western terminus of the project is located east of the community of Maple Springs
and approximately 2,700 feet west of SR 1304. West of the project, US 421 is a four-
lane divided facility with partial control of access. The eastern terminus of R-2240 is
1,000 feet east of the US 421/NC 268 interchange. East of the project is a 1.8-mile
segment of the US 421 North Wilkesboro Bypass with full control of access and a four-
lane divided cross section.
3.3.2 Length of Project
' The overall length of this project, including the 1.2-mile section of existing five-lane
roadway from SR 1323 to east of the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection, is
' approximately 12 miles.
3.3.3 Design Criteria and Typical Sections
' West of NC 16 and east of the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection, the
proposed widening will involve the addition of two eastbound lanes and a 46-foot
' grassed median south of the existing roadway. East of NC 16 this four-lane divided
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421 12
section will transition to a five-lane section to tie into the existing five-lane facility
located between SR 1323 and the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection.
The two new travel lanes (eastbound) will be constructed in accordance with NCDOT
Standards and AASHTO (1990), particularly with respect to clear zones, sight distance,
vertical clearance, and length of curve. The existing two-lane roadway will be
resurfaced and upgraded, as necessary.
The design speed for the proposed eastbound lanes, and the improved existing
(westbound) lanes will be 70 and 60 mph, respectively. Posted speeds in the project
area currently range from 55 mph on the eastern and western ends, dropping down to
45 mph in the heavily commercialized area.
Travel lanes for the four-lane divided section will be 12 feet in width. The proposed
eastbound lanes will include a 10-12 foot outside shoulder (four feet paved) and a six-
foot inside shoulder (two feet paved). The proposed five-lane section from NC 16 to
SR 1323 will include five 12-foot wide travel lanes with four-foot paved shoulders.
Typical sections and design criteria for the project are presented in Appendix A.
3.3.4 Right of Way
I The existing right of way will be utilized for the project with some additional right of
way acquired in areas where large cuts or fills are necessary and where future slope and
drainage maintenance needs warrant. This additional right of way is required due to the
rolling terrain in the project area and the proposed roadway's horizontal and vertical
alignment.
3.3.5 Access Control
The proposed four-lane divided section will provide partial control of access, with
' access being allowed by permit only. The proposed five-lane section (NC 16 to
SR 1323) will provide no control of access.
' Project improvements from US 421 Business to NC 268 and continuing east of the
project area will provide full control of access. Access to this segment of US 421 is
provided via the diamond interchange at NC 268.
' 3.3.6 Interchange/Intersection Treatment
' The existing interchange at NC 268 will undergo minor improvements in the northwest
quadrant. The US 421 eastbound exit ramp to NC 268 will be realigned to terminate
opposite the eastbound entrance ramp.
With th
i
d
ll
e
e.
n at-gra
rema
All remaining intersections along the project length wi
exception of the traffic signals at NC 16 and those located in the existing five-lane
' section, all intersections will continue to be stop sign controlled. Improvements are
planned for the existing intersections at SR 1154, SR 1307, SR 1145, and SR 1323.
Proposed improvements include realignments to achieve a minimum cross road
' intersection angle of 75° and/or to improve the alignments of four-way intersections.
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
' 13
US 421
' SR 1378 will be
d
ill b
e remove
.
The existing US 421 intersection with SR 1378 w
realigned westward to intersect with SR 1312; the SR 1312 intersection with US 421
' will remain.
The intersection with SR 1234 will also be eliminated. SR 1234 will be terminated
south of its intersection with US 421; SR 1234 traffic will utilize SR 1143 to access
' US 421.
' Median openings for this project will be determined during final design.
3.3.7 Required Structures
' Proposed improvements west of NC 16 include the replacement of two existing bridges.
The existing bridge spanning the Lewis Fork, east of SR 1307, will be replaced by a
new bridge approximately 275 feet in length. A second bridge, to be located over the
' South Prong Lewis Fork, east of SR 1304, will be approximately 250 feet in length.
' At each of the above described locations, new bridges will be constructed to
accommodate the proposed eastbound lanes. The Lewis Fork bridge will be replaced in
order to raise the vertical grade and thereby improve sight distance at this location. The
South Prong Lewis Fork bridge will be replaced due to structural deficiencies.
' Recommended bridge widths will be 38 feet.
The existing bridge over the Yadkin River, with an estimated remaining life of 25
' years, will remain. A new structure, approximately 225 feet in length, will be located
at the Yadkin River to accommodate the proposed eastbound lanes. Recommended
bridge width will be 38 feet.
l
i
h
on
as
uat
The existing bridge spanning NC 268 will remain. A preliminary eva
indicated that this bridge will accommodate the future widening of NC 268. A new
structure will be added south of the existing structure to accommodate the eastbound
' travel lanes. This structure will be approximately 225 feet in length and 38 feet wide.
' Seven existing major drainage structures, including five reinforced concrete box
culverts and two corrugated metal pipes, will be extended to the south to accommodate
the proposed cross-section. The exact lengths of these extensions will be determined
during the final design phase of the project.
3.3.8 Considerations for Future Improvements
The existing five-lane section and its associated intersections were evaluated for LOS in
the design year. The capacity analysis of the five-lane section of the improved US 421
corridor revealed that some minor geometrical and signal modifications could greatly
' improve the LOS at the east end of the project. These suggested minor improvements
are described below. These considerations will be further studied during the final design
phase of the project. Figure 5 compares the LOS for the existing five-lane section both
' with and without these minor improvements.
The forecasted afternoon (PM) peak hour of the year 2018 included high volumes of
' traffic between the US 421 Business/US 421 Bypass intersection and the SR 1323
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
'0 ca
V) in: z ? 7D
o m? O
Z
c -u z j 00 ? m
z : 0
C: NC 16
=
0
w? S?1S5 00
CA
w
(T1 14
00
r cn
c
?c
m z
n?
a
nz
lrri
0
N
N
7D v
0m
n
i
2n
\a?
7t
Q/
Sy
m
0 --0
rn
SR 1313
m 0
n
-*z
v
SR (11821
R X304
pa 21
m V S
SR 1154 $
SR 1154
SR 1152 w O?
O ^?
D
U)
00 00
-?-I ° SR 1323 m
-ri m 0) O W
;u O qtz
C/) W
o m CYI ( m n
_ 'a0o o _ SR 1147 SR 1147
z
?
o
m 000 4
z DRIV N "WAY ADDISON AVE.
N_ N
m co
V O
M D M M m O
D V 47 n
N m m ° o SR 1146 SR 1146
z
DRIVEWAY SR 1322
14
40
w\`
m
Z
tot
.1h.
ZL£ l 8S
R?
S
N
w fn CD
m
v
N
O o
1-4k
-Zi
00
-' NC 16
G'
?
?
c
'4N
w
m O
m;v
coo
c)
r
Oz
* Z
c
0
z
-1 0 z ::E M m C?
M rrl M C) r- (A (A
L42
C: : D
m --i -- i
D O 000 0 m m:- < D
r*i O
Z ?< _ K: CK) M
v -p ?- -*1 OZ N 0 O -p
Z z O -p O C? cn o o ? z X N
-u? o m t to - G) D or< O n D
x ! ? m ? m ! ? m Ln ;0 < I ? -p
;U 3:5 IU) M I r- rm? Z I Q N ?_ O Nr-
O Dm m U) r ry m M
< c -, z z z m r N O O)
K U) ?? Omn m m Z;0 X m O O 0 co
C (D V)
Zzr r cn cno ° >° M o <.?.? D 13 Z-0
cnX° z < cz z -? 03 Z m D? z C)
Z m m V 0--1O 3 MO
-? z N m R° CD to
z 0
En
t0
0 ? - -0 -
O Q
000
W
SF
sa?? ?2
I
I
US 421 14
intersection. This segment of US 421 had unfavorable Levels of Service (LOS F) when
analyzed with the Multi-lane Module of the Highway Capacity Software. The
unfavorable LOSS were a result of very heavy west bound traffic volumes being
accommodated by only two through lanes. When a third west bound through lane and a
third east bound through lane were added, the capacity analysis showed a considerable
improvement to LOS C. In addition, the intersection capacity analysis indicated that
improvements at the "KFC" driveway, located between the SR 1322 and SR 1323
intersections, would require other lane additions in order to make the intersection
operate favorably by the 2018 design year. The third west bound and east bound
through lanes coupled with an additional south bound left-turn lane, creating a dual-left
turn lane arrangement to accommodate the eastbound US 421 movement, combined to
achieve a LOS D. The south bound approach of the driveway to this intersection is
currently part of a parking lot. To insure favorable operation on this approach, the
throat length would need to be extended into the property as much as 250 feet. This
would provide adequate channelization for the south bound left- and right-turn
movements as well as discourage traffic entering the KFC by crossing into the path of
the exiting (south bound) traffic.
The US 421 Business/ US 421 Bypass intersection obtained a LOS D with the five-lane
section in the year 2018. By adding an additional through lane for both the east bound
and west bound direction, a LOS "C" is obtained. Table 7 compares the LOS of
roadway segments and key unsignalized intersections for the Improve Existing
Alternative and the no-build in the design year.
' In summary, heavy through movements are projected for the eastern end of the US 421
corridor. To improve operations, additional east bound and west bound through lanes
should be utilized east of the SR 1323 intersection. The existing US 421 cross section
' east of SR 1323 is a five-lane facility with a flush median. The additional east bound
and west bound lanes could be added to the outside of the existing cross-section. The
limits of the expansion would begin at the SR 1323 intersection and head east through
' the US 421 Business/US 421 Bypass intersection. It was found that these additional
through lanes were needed to accommodate the 2018 traffic conditions. These and/or
other proposed minor improvements to the existing five-lane section will be considered,
as necessary, during final design. Improvements to the existing five-lane section would
' be completed during the construction phase of the R-2240 project.
A number of future roadway improvements are currently planned and/or programmed
' for the project area. Recommended improvements contained in the local Thoroughfare
Plan which would have a positive impact on future level of service on US 421 include
' the NC 268 Bypass (TIP No. R-616), the Western Connector, and the US 421 Bypass
of Wilkesboro. The NC 268 Bypass involves the proposed construction of a four-lane
divided facility from NC 268 to US 421, north of Wilkesboro. The Western Connector
proposes the construction of a two-lane facility from the western terminus of the
' proposed NC 268 Bypass to NC 268 west of the former county airport site. The
US 421 Bypass of Wilkesboro (TIP No. U-3468) involves the proposed construction of
a four-lane divided facility on new location, north of existing US 421. This project has
' been scheduled for a Feasibility Study.
t NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
i
US 421
Level of Service of Roadway Segments
and Key Unsignalized Intersections
Segment #/
US 421 Intersection' 2018
improve' Existing 2018
No-Build
I A E
2 A E
3 B E
4 B E
5 B F
6 C F
7 C F
8 C F
9 C F
10 C* F
11 C* F
12 D* D
13 E E
SR 1304 E E
SR 1154 E E
SR 1152 D D
SR 1147 E E
SR 1146 E E
SR 1313 E E
SR 1182 E E
SR 1323 F F
SR 1322 E E
See Figure 5 for Segment # and Intersection locations
* Includes suggested minor improvements to Existing Five-Lane Section-See text for
details
TABLE 7
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
i
US 421 15
3.3.9 Actions Required by Others
The placement of fill material and structures in "waters of the United States" will
require a federal permit(s) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act. Generally, "waters of the U.S." are subdivided into
"wetlands"and "surface waters." The proposed improvements to US 421 will require
the placement of new bridges over Lewis Fork, South Prong Lewis Fork, and the
Yadkin River, as well as the extension of existing drainage structures. Minor wetland
and surface water impacts will result from these construction activities. This is
attributed to the moderately steep topography in the study area. It is anticipated that the
project can be authorized by a nationwide permit(s). Much of the project's involvement
with waters of the U.S. will occur above headwater areas, as a result of the extension
of existing drainage structures. There will be no diversion of the affected stream
channels and no changes to existing drainage patterns.
The project is also located in a designated "trout" county. Consequently, a letter of
approval from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission must be obtained as
part of the Section 404 permitting process. A Section 401 State Water Quality
Certification from the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR) will also be required.
Storm water point source discharges associated with construction activities will be
authorized pursuant to General Permit No. NCG010000 under the authority of
NCDEHNR's Division of Environmental Management.
3.3.10 Estimated Cost
The estimated costs included in the 1996-2002 TIP are $22,500,000 for construction
and $5,020,000 for right of way, which includes utility relocation costs.
Cost estimates based on preliminary design of the Recommended Alternative include
$32,800,000 for construction and $5,016,000 for right of way and utility relocation.
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421 16
' 4.0 SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL
' EFFECTS
4.1 SOCIAL EFFECTS
4.1.1 Land Use
The project is located in a predominantly rural environment. Primary land uses in the
study area include rural residential/agricultural, undeveloped forested lands, and the
urban-commercial area of western Wilkesboro. The western end of the study area is
particularly rural in character, with isolated residences and businesses fronting US 421.
Much of the undeveloped land fronting the existing roadway is wooded, with scattered
' farms. East of NC 16, commercial activity and residential development densities
increase dramatically.
' In preparing the Wilkes County Land Development Plan, 1987, the Wilkes County Land
Use Committee held numerous meetings and two workshops to identify strengths and
' weaknesses in the existing land use strategy for the County. A land classification system
was developed by the Committee for determining the growth strategy for Wilkes
County over the next 20 years. This classification system was similar to that which was
developed by the North Carolina Land Policy Council pursuant to the Land Policy Act
' of 1974. Six land use categories were derived from the North Carolina Land
Classification System to characterize planned land use in the county. These categories
include Developed, Transition (10 years), Transition (20 years), Community, Rural,
' and Conservation.
Developed lands were determined to be those with a variety of land uses and where the
' population densities were considered by the Committee to be moderate to high. These
areas have necessary public services (including municipal water and sewage hookups).
Developed lands in the project area include the towns of Wilkesboro and North
' Wilkesboro.
Transition (10 years) refers to areas expected to be developed within the next 10 years
and where necessary public services will be provided to accommodate that growth.
' Within the next 10 years, Wilkesboro will continue to grow outward along the major
roadways. Wilkesboro's transition area is expected to extend to the community of
Champion located along the western end of the US 421 project corridor.
The Transition (20 years) classification refers to areas that should develop within the
next 20 years and have a full range of public services. Within 20 years Wilkesboro is
' likely to extend in an arc north of Millers Creek to Champion, then eastward past
Oakwoods.
' The rural land use classification encompasses most of the study area outside the towns
of Wilkesboro and North Wilkesboro. This category includes those lands good for
agriculture, forestry, and other land uses, such as rural housing dependent on private
' wells and septic tanks.
NCDOT Federal FA July 1995
US 421 17
As described in the land development plan, continued industrial and commercial growth
is planned for the project area in general, and the US 421 corridor in particular. The
multi-laning of US 421 and the orderly flow of traffic in and around Wilkesboro and
North Wilkesboro are of critical importance to county-wide commerce and the
promotion of industrial and housing growth. The recommended improvements to
US 421 are necessary to accommodate the predicted changes in land use in the area.
Without the US 421 improvements, the Committee has concluded that the projected
growth may be limited.
The proposed improvements will result in the conversion of existing land uses
bordering US 421 to highway right of way. The Recommended Alternative will
typically require an additional 50 feet of right of way along the south side of US 421
from the western terminus to SR 1323. This right of way conversion will impact
approximately 32 acres of land.
4.1.2 Neighborhoods and Community Cohesion
' The construction of a controlled access or partially-controlled access facility may impact
a community by creating a barrier or impediment to existing traffic patterns, thus
dividing areas of the community on a local level. The towns of Wilkesboro and North
' Wilkesboro and the crossroads community of Champion represent the communities
potentially impacted by the Recommended Alternative. The remainder of the project
area is dominated by rural farms and residences fronting existing US 421.
Based on population projections, by the year 2000 approximately 65,125 individuals or
95.4% of the county population would be members of the white race, with the
remaining 3,131 or 4.6% of the population being comprised of other races.
As described in Section 3.3.6, the Recommended Alternative will result in a number of
minor roadway and intersection realignments along US 421. West of NC 16, the
addition of medians will prevent traffic from crossing the highway at access points
other than state road intersections. Median crossovers will be located at road
intersections, but not provided at every driveway. It will be necessary for some
motorists to make U-turns to reach desired destinations. These minor changes to
secondary roads and existing travel patterns are not anticipated to negatively affect the
general cohesiveness of the local communities. No minority communities will be
divided by the Recommended Alternative. No other social group, such as low income
families or the elderly, will be disproportionately affected by the proposed
improvements.
Contrastingly, the recommended improvements of US 421 will relieve traffic congestion
near Wilkesboro. This will improve accessibility to old and new residential areas,
which in turn, is anticipated to enhance community cohesion. Another benefit of the
improved roadway level of service will be the shorter response times realized for
emergency service vehicles, including fire and rescue services, traveling along the
US 421 corridor.
The existing US 421 facility does not provide pedestrian walkways or bicycle paths.
Given the largely rural nature of the study area, there is little anticipated need or
demand for these type features. The Recommended Alternative does not incorporate
NCDOT
Federal E!
July 1995
US 421 18
specific provisions for these features, however, the four-foot paved shoulders to be
provided will prove suitable for these type activities.
' 4.1.3 Relocation
' The relocation and displacement of existing land uses are unavoidable impacts of the
Recommended Alternative. The number of residential and business displacements were
determined by reviewing the approximate right of way limits of the project, followed by
' a field review. The relocation report is included as Appendix B. Included in the
relocation report is an estimate of decent, safe, and sanitary (DSS) housing available in
the project area. The source for this available housing includes realtors, classified ads,
Section 8 Housing and the Federal Housing Authority (FHA).
Residential Relocations
'
The Recommended Alternative will result in the relocation of an estimated nine
families. These displacements will occur predominantly west of NC 16 and are
' attributed to the need for an expanded right of way. None of these displacees are
minorities.
Business Relocations
The Recommended Alternative will result in the relocation of an estimated five
businesses. Three of the businesses are owner occupied while two appear to be rent
' continuous. These displaced businesses employ approximately 46 full time and seven
part time employees. None of the affected businesses are minority businesses.
' Non-profit Organization Relocation
The Recommended Alternative will result in the relocation of the Mt. Pleasant Masonic
' Lodge, a non-profit organization located west of SR 1152.
Efforts will be made during final design of the project to reduce the number of
displacees to the maximum extent practicable without compromising the safety and
efficiency of the proposed facility. With the exception of relocation assistance, this will
serve as the primary mitigation measure for relocation impacts.
Relocation Assistance
' It is the policy of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) to ensure
that comparable replacement housing will be available prior to construction of state and
federally-assisted projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina Board of Transportation
' has the following three programs to minimize the inconvenience of relocation:
• Relocation Assistance,
0 Relocation Moving Payments, and
' • Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement.
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff will be available to
' assist displacees with information such as availability and prices of homes, apartments,
or businesses for sale or rent, and financing or other housing programs. The Relocation
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
i
US 421 19
1
Moving Payments Program, in general, provides for payment of actual moving
expenses encountered in relocation. Where displacement will force an owner or tenant
' to purchase or rent property of higher cost or to lose a favorable financing arrangement
(in cases of ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent
Supplement Program will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and
250 to tenants who are eligible and qualify.
to $5
and u
ualif
,
p
y,
q
The relocation program for the proposed action will be conducted in accordance with
' the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act
of 1970 (Public Law 91-646), and the North Carolina Relocation Assistance Act
(GS-133-5 through 133-18). The program is designed to provide assistance to displaced
' persons in relocating to a replacement site in which to live or do business. At least one
relocation officer is assigned to each highway project for this purpose.
1
1
u
n
The relocation officer will determine the needs of displaced families, individuals,
businesses, non-profit organizations, and farm operations for relocation assistance
advisory services without regard to race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The
NCDOT will schedule its work to allow ample time, prior to displacement, for
negotiations and possession of replacement housing that meets decent, safe, and sanitary
standards. The displacees are given at least a 90-day written notice after NCDOT
purchases the property. Relocation of displaced persons will be offered in areas not
generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and commercial facilities. Rent and
sale prices of replacement housing offered will be within the financial means of the
families and individuals displaced and will be reasonably accessible to their places of
employment. The relocation officer will also assist owners of displaced businesses, non-
profit organizations, and farm operations in searching for and moving to replacement
property.
All tenant and owner residential occupants who may be displaced will receive an
explanation regarding all available options, such as (1) purchase of replacement
housing, (2) rental of displacement housing, either private or public, or (3) moving
existing owner-occupant housing to another site (if possible). The relocation officer will
also supply information concerning other state or federal programs offering assistance
to displaced persons and will provide other advisory services as needed to minimize
hardships to displaced persons in adjusting to a new location.
The Moving Expense Payments Program is designed to compensate the displacee for
the costs of moving personal property from homes, businesses, non-profit
organizations, and farm operations acquired for a highway project. Under the
Replacement Program for Owners, NCDOT will participate in reasonable incidental
purchase payments for replacement dwellings such as attorney's fees, surveys,
appraisals, and other closing costs and, if applicable, make a payment for any increased
interest expenses for replacement dwellings. Reimbursement to owner-occupants for
replacement housing payments, increased interest payments, and incidental purchase
expenses may not exceed $22,500 (combined total), except under the Last Resort
Housing Provision.
A displaced tenant may be eligible to receive a payment, not to exceed $5,250, to rent
a replacement dwelling or to make a down payment, including incidental expenses, on
the purchase of a replacement dwelling. The down payment is based upon what the
state determines is required when the rent supplement exceeds $5,250.
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
u
H
u
7
1
F1
I I
1
US 421
20
It is a policy of the state that no person will be displaced by the NCDOT's state or
federally-assisted construction projects unless and until comparable replacement housing
has been offered or provided for each displacee within a reasonable period of time prior
to displacement. No relocation payment received will be considered as income for the
purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 or for the purposes of determining
eligibility or the extent of eligibility of any person for assistance under the Social
Security Act or any other federal law.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable replacement housing is not
available, or when it is unavailable within the displacee's financial means, and the
replacement payment exceeds the federal and state legal limitation. The purpose of the
program is to allow broad latitudes in methods of implementation by the state so that
decent, safe, and sanitary replacement housing can be provided. It is not felt that this
program will be necessary on the US 421 project, since there appear to be adequate
opportunities for relocation within the area.
4.1.4 Community Resources
Community resources, including schools, parks and churches, located in the project
study area, are presented on Figure 6.
Three schools are present within the study area. Trinity Fellowship Church and
Christian Academy_ is a private school for grades K through 12. This school is located
along US 421 in West Wilkesboro. Mount Pleasant Elementary School is a public
school located approximately 200 feet south of US 421 on SR 1154 (Mount Pleasant
Road). Wilkesboro Elementary Public School is located 3,000 feet southwest of US 421
and west of Wilkesboro. Total county school enrollment in 1990 was 10,002 (NC Data
Center, 1991). The only school which will be directly affected by the project is the
Mount Pleasant Elementary School. Permanent right of way will be acquired from the
school in order to complete the proposed improvements. The property to be acquired is
currently owned by the Wilkes County Board of Education. The acquisition of right of
way from the Mount Pleasant Elementary School will impact an existing school
playground. The school playground is not of local significance for recreational
purposes, therefore, the prglect is in com liance with Section 4(f) of the Department of
Transportation Act of 1966, as amended (pSee Appendix E). Final design plans will
include the placement of a fence along the portion of US 421 right of way bordering the
school property.
Mount Pleasant Elementary School generates school bus traffic along both the east and
westbound lanes of US 421. School bus traffic is also generated by Wilkes County High
School located in Wilkesboro. Bus routes may be temporarily disrupted during the
construction phase of the project.
Five churches are located along the south side of the US 421 project corridor,
including: the Faith Baptist Church and cemetery, located approximately 500 feet south
of US 421 along SR 1155; the Mount Pleasant Baptist Church and cemetery, located
approximately 250 feet south of US 421 along SR 1154; the Yadkin Valley Baptist
Church and cemetery, located approximately 1,000 feet south of US 421 along
SR 1195; the Trinity Fellowship Church, situated approximately 250 feet south of
US 421 and west of SR 1147; and the Holiness Church and cemetery, located
approximately 750 feet south of US 421 along SR 1146 (Figure 5). A temporary
construction easement may be necessary in the vicinity of the Trinity Fellowship
Church in order to complete the project.
No municipal, state, or federal parks are located within the study area. To the south of
the project area is the W. Kerr Scott Reservoir Park. Approximately 80% of the
visitors to this park are from within a 75-mile radius. Easy access to the park from
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
F11•_421cu= M M M _
O
C
?,F o
MATC H LI N E
rte. ` SR t a
Branch
? s
1 IN
00
ON&
t
{?4i1 SR 1145
; 3 Sr ?_,. ewe )°..` F ?. ` boa y?tug`
nAi t , `v 3 .1j47
, It'
MATCHLINE
j n ?-
m 0
m --1 O Z
° m m
5
rN>
L45
i
u Z
v C
-I
o
- M
m
Z o
n
0 0
o 0 O N
- ? bj
?o
i
s
c o
D CO) 0
:3
O_ OF O
O O
?• Z
O C7 D
55 m
p
n
n m C- m
;u
Z
0
N
-±
O
N r
?;u r
° ? O ? O
3
v ?
0?0
m'''
r ?z
v m c
M -+ 3
3 O CD
-v N
Z -v
cn m
m
?F m z
N ?
3 n
g
g m CD
a
M m - -?
0
'
US 421 21
' US 421 and NC 268 encourages visitors from North Wilkesboro, Wilkesboro, Boone,
Hickory, Lenoir, Winston-Salem, and Morganton (Wilkes County Land Use Planning
' Committee, 1987). Improvements of US 421 will enhance accessibility and may
increase visitation and utilization of this park.
' 4.1.5 Public Services and Utilities
At the present time, no intercity bus lines pass through Wilkes County. Six taxicab
' companies operate in the county and all of the companies are located in either
Wilkesboro or North Wilkesboro (Travel, et al., 1989). Neither a Rideshare Program
nor commuter rail service exists in the county.
'
The new Wilkes County Airport provides services and facilities for private aircraft as
well as private-for-hire flights. This airport is located northeast of North Wilkesboro.
' The former county airport site is located south of the Yadkin River and northwest of
the US 421/NC 268 interchange. Airports for commercial flights are located
approximately two hours from Wilkesboro in the cities of Charlotte, Winston-Salem,
' Greensboro, and High Point.
Emergency response services in the project area include police, fire, and ambulance.
During construction activities, traffic flow will be maintained along US 421, thereby
' minimizing any disruption in the movement of emergency vehicles.
' The completion of the project will have a positive impact on the above-described
services and other users of US 421 by improving traffic flow, relieving traffic
congestion, and improving the driveability and safety of the roadway.
' Existing utilities in the study area include electric, sewer, and water. Most of the utility
lines follow existing roadways. Consequently, the Recommended Alternative will result
in expenditures for utility relocations. Based on a utility conflict severability scale of
' low, medium, or high, utility conflicts are anticipated to be medium for the project.
The preliminary estimate for utility relocations for the Recommended Alternative is
$440,000.
'
4.1.6 Historic Architectural and Archaeological Resources
' Archaeological Resources
An Archaeological Survey was conducted for the proposed project corridors. This
' survey was coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in
accordance with the Federal Highway Administration's procedures for compliance with
the National Historic Preservation Act and the Federal-Aid Highways Act (Department
' of Transportation Act, as amended). The archaeological survey was conducted to
evaluate the project's probable impact upon archaeological resources.
' During the survey, nine previously unrecorded archaeological sites were recorded and
two previously recorded sites were revisited. In addition, the archaeological remains of
the Montford Stokes house site were recorded as archaeological site 31WK121. The
' Montford Stokes house was listed in the National Register of Historic Places, but was
delisted after the structure burned in 1972. The archaeological components of this site,
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
1
US 421 22
' however, were assessed as potentially eligible for the National Register. In a letter of
August 27, 1992, the Deputy SHPO concurred with this recommendation (See
' Appendix Q.
The proposed widening of US 421 along the existing right of way will have no effect
' on archaeological sites previously identified in the southern bypass alternative. The
project's area of potential effect does not include archaeological resources currently
listed in the National Register or on the State Study List.
Historical Architectural Resources
' An Architectural Resources Survey has been completed for the project. The survey had
the following goals: (1) to determine the "area of potential effects" (APE) of the
project; (2) to identify all historic architectural resources within this area; (3) to
' evaluate these resources according to National Register Criteria; and (4) to provide
preliminary assessments of effects for properties listed in or evaluated as eligible for the
National Register, if such properties exist. The architectural survey within the APE was
' necessary for the project's compliance with both Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act.
' The survey identified a total of 31 resources considered to be 50 years of age or older
within the APE. Of these, eight were recorded, of which one, the Johnson Farm
Complex, has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The
approximately 51-acre complex is located on the north side of the Yadkin River. This
' potential National Register property includes cultivated bottomland, pasture, and
woodland, a 1913 vernacular, frame, story-and-a-half house, a 1935 gable-front, story-
and-a-half house, and eight associated farm outbuildings. The approximate location of
' the Johnson Farm Complex property is presented on Figure 6. The findings of the
survey were coordinated with the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources and
the SHPO has concurred (Appendix Q.
'
FHWA has determined and the SHPO has concurred that the proposed widening of
US 421 along the existing right of way will have no affect on the National Register-
eligible property located within the project's APE (Appendix Q. The APE does not
contain architectural resources currently listed in or eligible for the National Register or
on the State Study List.
' The completed architectural survey report, a technical appendix to this EA, is available
for review at the NCDOT Planning and Environmental Branch, located in the
' Transportation Building at One South Wilmington Street in Raleigh, North Carolina.
4.2 ECONOMIC EFFECTS
' The population of Wilkes County has steadily increased since the 1960s. The period
from 1970 to 1980 experienced a 9.4% increase in population. This trend is "directly
attributable to the location of manufacturing firms and businesses into the county,
' effectively reducing the out-migration of the young to seek employment in the adjoining
counties." (Wilkes County Land Use Committee, 1987). The 1990 Census lists the
' population of Wilkesboro as 2,573 (2,086 over the age of 18) and the population of
423 over the a
393 (45
e of 18) (NC Data Center
1990)
B
Wilkes Count
as 59
the
,
,
g
,
y
y
.
1 NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
'
US 421 23
'
year 2000, the county population is projected to be 68,256. This projected population
' would represent a 12.3% increase since 1985.
Wilkes County has experienced sharp increases in per capita income since 1970. The
mean per capita income for the County as of 1986 was $11,703 (Table 8). This trend is
' expected to continue at rates equal to or greater than that of the 1987 rate of 6.1 %,
based on the average yearly increase of 8.6% since 1970 (NC State Data Center, 1989).
Wilkesboro is listed among the fastest growing townships in the county. Contrastingly,
' the town of North Wilkesboro was listed among towns exhibiting trends towards little
or no growth (Wilkes County Land Use Committee, 1987).
Wilkes County is currently experiencing clustered commercial development occurring at
an accelerated pace along major roads and intersections. Significant commercial
development has recently taken place along the US 421 right of way, particularly in the
vicinity of the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection. Several fast food
' restaurants, an expanded shopping center, and a multi-tenant mall have recently been
completed in this area. A large area along the south side of US 421 has been recently
' graded in preparation of further commercial development. In addition, a future
Industrial Park is being planned at the former county airport site, located south of the
Yadkin River and northwest of the US 421/NC 268 interchange.
' Positive economic benefits will result from the proposed improvements to US 421. The
improved road network and enhanced traffic movement will allow the continued growth
of commerce and industry. This continued growth will, in turn, help maintain the low
' unemployment rates the county is experiencing, as well as provide a source of new tax
revenues.
u
n
4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
4.3.1 Natural Resources
4.3.1.1 Biotic Communities
For presentation purposes, biotic communities in the study area have been placed in one
of three categories. The first, hardwood forests, receive the highest wildlife habitat
ranking due to the relative lack of human disturbance in these areas, their functions as
wildlife refuges, their importance in controlling runoff and sedimentation into creeks
and rivers, and their potential biotic diversity. The second category is the mixed
stands/pine forests. Within the study area, these forests indicate previous disturbance of
hardwood forests which has allowed for the establishment of pines. The third category,
cleared/urban lands, consists of agricultural and urbanized areas (Figure 7).
Upland Forested Areas
The study area lies within the extreme western Piedmont Plateau and within the eastern
Mountain Region which was described by Braun (1950) as consisting of the Southern
Appalachian Section of the Oak-Chestnut Forest Region and the Atlantic Slope Section
of the Oak-Pine Region. No virgin forests are known to be within the project study
area. The majority of the wooded areas are replacement stands of trees and shrubs.
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
US 421
TABLE 8
Source:
Comparison of Average Per Capita Income of Wilkes County With
That of North Carolina and the United States
Year United States North Carolina Wilkes County
1970 3,869 3,236 2,786
1975 5,618 4,941 4,495
1980 9,153 7,999 7,092
1985 12,855 11,658 10,156
1987 14,814 13,332 11,703
State Data Center, North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management,
1989
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
MATCHLINE \? ?2
2 ?y' ,/ ?3d,?? SF2 t55 7304 Old
Ra ? u
oy ?
- Branch
? C
0 ?4)1 -
? a
n
'a A
v
? ? ? 5 r r?SQ
J
ka
River ? b
pip N ?? \ -./ •.._
Gw N•y i, l lL J'S° it-
\ E s ni ° ynj
it
tvlCfO'AO/1 (o a?A` ^•?/'`? V
A
77
yar`?•• V
to 114
IWO
y?
MATC H LI N E
- °, o D D C
Z 1'*'I
Li
a Woo
o o
J o c
n
O ja
4
= C >;o -o g o M • 0 0>
v chi ;uK m ? Z ? N
-' fl Nr
D
o
°'n
Z z
0
o •
?• N
?
0 p) ITI
00
z to m o
m
mm
C:
;u
N 0
(D
(A
Z
z v -t c ?- D Z
_
m D to ;u C)
V)
zv to sn> cD
O
u
US 421 24
Typical canopy vegetation consists of Virginia pine inns vir inian a , yellow poplar
(Liriodendron t& :if u r), short leaf pine T. china a , Eastern white pine T. strobus ,
hickory (Cava sp.), white oak (Quercus lbw, and red maple A er rurum . The
subcanopy species include flowering dogwood Corns fl ri ), ironwood (Cupinus
caroliniana), sourwood (Oxydendron arborescens), and American holly Qgx o c
Species common to the herb layer are poison ivy (Toxicodendron r i n , Japanese
honeysuckle "nicer jgponic , and blackberries (Rubus allegheniensis) (Radford, et.
al., 1968).
Upland forests within the US 421 study area may be classified as Basic Mesic Forests
(Piedmont Subtype) (Schafale and Weakley, 1990). Although pines are not normally
associated with this forest type, their presence is an indication of previous disturbance.
These mixed stands/pines are the dominant forest type within the US 421 study area
(Figure 7). Notable small, isolated hardwood stands are located along the eastern bank
of the Yadkin River approximately 2,000 feet northeast of the US 421/NC 268
interchange and along South Prong Lewis Fork west of the US 421/SR 1304
intersection. These hardwood stands are not considered to be a rare or unique forest
types.
Open Fields
Open fields and cleared lands located within the project study area are located primarily
to the west of NC 16 (Figure 7). These open areas are agricultural fields used either as
pastureland for cattle or planted in grains such as wheat, barley, and soybeans. Hay
may also be planted in these fields. Wildlife that might utilize these areas include
bobwhite quail Colinus vir inig_anus), mice, red fox ul es , or gray fox roc on
cinereoargenteus), and red-tailed hawk uteo jamaicensis). Where fields border forests,
white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianusl, raccoon (Procyon lotor , and Eastern
cottontail rabbits S lvil s flori anus may be present (Parnell and Biggs, 1985;
Parnell and Teulings, 1986). Man-dominated areas or urban lands are located primarily
to the east near Wilkesboro, from the eastern terminus of the project west to SR 1146.
West of SR 1146, developed areas are interspersed with forests. Man-dominated areas
west of SR 1146 to the western terminus of the project (east of Maple Springs) consist
of light residential and agricultural areas (crop fields, pastures, and poultry farms).
Rare/Unique Natural Areas
No known rare or unique natural systems or vegetation communities are located within
the US 421 project area as determined from on-site field investigations and consultation
with the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. Rural development west of NC 16
and "urbanization" east of NC 16 have fragmented most of the natural areas along the
existing US 421 corridor. Commercial and industrial development south of US 421 and
north of NC 268, respectively, continues to encroach upon the expansive wooded area
in this vicinity. Remaining natural areas found within the study area are common to the
surrounding region.
The Recommended Alternative will not affect any hardwood stands, i.e., biotic
communities given a high ranking with respect to potential wildlife habitat. The
proposed improvements will, however, impact an estimated 96 acres of mixed
stands/pines. Approximately 75%a of this impact occurs west of NC 16 where fairly
extensive cut and fill activities will be necessary to accommodate the proposed
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
0
n
US 421 25
widening. These improvements will primarily involve man-dominated areas and the
edges of mixed stands and pines bordering the existing US 421 right of way.
4.3.1.2 Wetland Areas
Wetlands are an important natural resource serving a variety of functions, such as fish
and wildlife habitat, floodwater storage, groundwater protection, and
erosion/sedimentation control.
Wetlands were field checked in June 1990 using the "three parameter" method
described in the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands
(January 1989). The manual was designed to assist in making jurisdictional
determinations using a multi-parameter approach. This approach requires the positive
evidence of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology to determine
that an area is a wetland. The soils' hydric status was field verified using Soil
Conservation Services' (SCS) list of hydric soils, and the Munsell Color Chart. The
hydrophytic vegetation status was determined using the National List of Plant Species
That Occur in Wetlands: Southeast Region 2 (Porter B. Reed, Jr., 1988). Hydrology
was determined through field investigation and observations. Final wetland
determinations will be completed, as necessary, during the permitting phase of the
project. The final wetland assessments will be completed according to the 1987 "Corps
of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1. However,
because of the type of wetlands occurring in the project area, major differences in
acreage determined using the two manuals is not anticipated.
Two areas in relative proximity to the existing US 421 roadway were confirmed as
wetlands during field surveys. The largest of these areas, a wooded depression formed
partly from an old lake impoundment, abuts US 421 approximately 1,500 feet west of
the US 421/SR 1154 intersection. Surface water depth ranged from 0 to 4". Dominant
vegetation within this depression included silky willow Salix serica , soft rush Juncus
effusus ,and broad-leaf cattail (T_ypha latifolia . Adjacent to the depression, the
dominant vegetation consisted of brook-side alder Alnus serrulata), red maple Acer
rubrum , and Chinese privet i st m sinense (Reed, 1988).
The second confirmed wetland area was a 70' by 30' borrow pit located approximately
150 feet north of US 421 in the vicinity of Fish Dam Creek. Vegetation at this site was
100% hydrophytic and was dominated by common buttonbush (Cephalanthus
occidentalis) and brook-side alder (Reed, 1988). Although it was not listed as hydric,
the soil at this site was mucky. Approximately 4" of standing water was observed
during the field survey.
A number of creeks and rivers flow through the study area. Field observations revealed
t that these watercourses were typically narrow, perennial streams with steep, well-
defined banks. These watercourses are classified as Riverine wetlands. The category
Riverine is derived by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USF&WS) Classification
' of Wetland and Deep Water Habitats of the United States (Lewis M. Cowardin, 1979).
Cowardin describes the Riverine system as "all wetlands and deep water habitats
contained within a channel...." These Riverine systems are "bounded on the landward
' side by upland, by the channel bank (including natural and manmade levees), or by
wetlands." Although lacking adjacent wetlands, these watercourses are, however,
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
US 421 26
subject to the provisions of the Clean Water Act as "waters of the United States." The
' USF&WS's National Wetlands Inventory Maps of the project area further classify the
majority of these riverine wetlands in the project area as "upper perennial,
unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded" systems. Another "water" of the U.S. in
' the study area is the impoundment located north of US 421 in the vicinity of SR 1312.
The locations of these waters of the U.S. are depicted on Figure 8.
In accordance with Executive Order 11990, "Protection of Wetlands," impacts to
' wetlands are to be avoided where practicable. If avoidance is not possible, then impacts
should be minimized and, lastly, mitigated.
' The two confirmed wetland areas described above and situated north of US 421, will
not be impacted by the Recommended Alternative. However, as illustrated on Figure 8,
a number of watercourses will be impacted by the placement and/or extension of
' existing drainage structures (culverts, cross pipes). Table 9 summarizes the potential
watercourse involvement for the project by location and recommended action. As
indicated on the table, impacts associated with the placement of structures in these
' "waters of the U.S." are anticipated to be less than 0.2 acre for the proposed
improvements.
The Department of the Army and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency entered
' into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) establishing procedures to determine the
level and type of wetland mitigation necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act
Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Effective on February 7, 1990, the MOA provides for
' first, avoiding impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the least
damaging practical alternative; second, taking appropriate steps to minimize impacts;
and third, compensating for any remaining unavoidable impacts to the extent
appropriate and practical
.
All efforts will be made to avoid filling or otherwise disrupting wetlands during both
' the design and construction of this project. Given the minimal wetland involvement
anticipated for the project, it is not expected that a mitigation plan will be necessary.
Given the limited wetlands involvement for the entire project it's anticipated that the
' project may qualify under a Nationwide Permit from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE). For those construction activities covered by Nationwide Permits,
minimization of wetland impacts will be achieved through the implementation of
' NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters (June 1991).
4.3.1.3 Wildlife
'
Historically, before the original dense forests were cleared, Wilkes County supported a
complex community of fauna that was characterized by larger herbivores such as white-
tailed deer and buffalo, the omnivorous black bear, and large carnivores such as
bobcats, wolves, and mountain lions.
' The patchwork of young forests and encroaching urban development throughout the
vicinity of the study area has eliminated potential habitat for large carnivores and
herbivores, with the exception of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus vir inp ice), from the
' area. The vicinity of the study area still has the capacity to support a fairly diverse and
abundant assemblage of small mammals and other wildlife. The high amount of habitat
1 NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
MATCHLINE
r? j m
pC
LL ?
k i
SY O ^A? b?A\??
na Rwer rn b .
fir. ?' `aN
\\ ? 1oN ?.
Moravian o
\ P
l Qo?r
? N
O
r
70
a
Q
?R
V?
ci
0.
d
tw
?a
s
i?
Dt
Ql?
i
3 f ? r.
]i 1
l
1
c>?
S>z
X03
'Ce,o
as
L..• • - fti ,K
cn i-
N
. y
r ??0 b
Q
1
MATCHLINE
--1 0 z *MM
m p C 7C -i --1
o rn
1 z
:3 rrl
Q Z n ai 0 0
v,
00 O? 0 0?-n N
?
o O D ~
== Z r D? On
v <O mo 0 z C,
0
r' cn N -_?; N r
m N O 1 m 9 n r N 0 ? f *7
O m o z 0 r. OD
O CA
r? v r?*
c c v r. m N ??
a` Z m -°? c D Z
c 3 M0
OD U)
0
US 421
Table 9
n
Watercourse Involvement
Potential System/ Class/
Location Recommended Action impact Subsystem Water Regime
(Acres)
South Prong Lewis Replace existing bridge Unconsolidated
Fork and add new bridge 0 Upper ' Bottom,
Perennial Permanently
Flooded
South Prong Lewis Extend existing 9' x 7'
R
e Unconsolidated
Fork Tributary, RCBC
0
Uppe
,
Bottom,
3,000' east of Perennial Permanently
SR 1156 Flooded
South Prong Lewis Extend structure* R
e, Unconsolidated
Fork Tributary, <0.01 Upper Bottom,
2,500' east of perennial Permanently
SR 1156 Flooded
South Prong Lewis Extend structure*
Fork Tributary, <0.01 NA' NA
1,600' east of
SR 1150
Lewis Fork Replace existing bridge R
e Unconsolidated
and add new bridge 0 Upperr Bottom,
Perennial Permanently
Flooded
Smitheys Creek Extend structure*
Tributary, 150' east <0.01 NA NA
of SR 1145
Smitheys Creek Extend existing 7' x 7'
Tributary, 400' west RCBC 0.01 NA NA
of SR 1378
Smitheys Creek at Extend existing 5' x 5' 0.01 NA NA
SR 1378 RCBC
Smitheys Creek Extend 72" CMP
Tributary, 1,600' 0.01 NA NA
west of SR 1147
Unnamed Tributary Extend structure*
Yadkin River, 200' <0.01 NA NA
east of SR 1147
Unnamed Tributary Extend structure*
Yadkin River, 800' <0.01 NA NA
east of SR 1147
Fish Dam Creek Extend structure*
Tributary, 200' east <0.01 NA NA
of SR 1146
Fish Dam Creek Extend triple 11' x 12' Riverine, Unconsolidated
RCBC 0.02 Upper Bottom,
Perennial Permanently
Flooded
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
r_
US 421
Potential System/ Class/
LceaWu Recommended Action Impact Subsystem Water Regime'
(Acres)
ed Tributary
[r Extend 78" CMP
River,
F 0.01 NA NA
east of
OO'
2,
6
rs Creek 1,400' Extend 11' x 9' RCBC Riverine Unconsolidated
west of SR 1321 0.02 ,
Upper Bottom,
Permanently
Perennial Flooded
Millers Creek Extend structure*
Tributary, 200' east <0.01 NA NA
of SR 1321
Yadkin River Replace existing bridge Riverine Unconsolidated
and add new bridge 0 ,
Lower Bottom,
Permanently
Perennial Flooded
Total: < 0.2
Indicates minor structure - < 72" in size
INA Indicates unclassified linear drainageway
RCBC Reinforced concrete box culvert
' CMP Corrugated metal pipe
n
t NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
L
US 421
interspersion and "edge" effect among the vegetation communities is a major factor
contributing to this capacity. The presence of permanent streams and the predominance
of important food plants such as oak, wild cherry, dogwood, hickory, sweetgum, tulip
trees, and blackberries are also important factors.
The perennial nature of Lewis Fork, Smitheys Creek, Fish Dam Creek, Millers Creek,
Tucker Hole Creek, the Yadkin River, and the number of available aquatic habitat
types, (silt to gravel bottoms, shallow to deep water, open to shaded areas), historically
created the potential to support a reasonably diverse aquatic macroinvertebrate fauna
(adult and larval insects, crayfish, and mollusks). Recent heavy sedimentation,
however, caused by erosion from upstream development in the Yadkin River watershed
has degraded the potential for broad aquatic habitat diversity. Common fish species that
might be expected in the creeks and the Yadkin River include shiners Notro i spp.),
catfish actalurus spp.), common carp, bullhead, sunfish, and bluehead chub Nocomis
ll otocephalus) (Thompson, 1985). Some trout may be found in the headwaters of
South Prong Lewis Fork, such as rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus m kiss , brown trout
Salmo trutta , and brook trout Salv linus fontinalis with bass, bream, and catfish in
lower reaches (Wilkes County Land Use Committee, 1987).
Open water bodies within the study area include small ponds formed from the
impoundment of creeks, and the Yadkin River. Most small ponds are located on
agricultural lands and serve as a source of irrigation water. One large impoundment,
located north of US 421 approximately 500' west of the US 421/SR 1313 intersection,
is 800' long and 500' wide at its widest point. Fish species that might be present in
these small ponds are brown bullhead ctaluru nebulosus , common carp C rinus
ca io , and sunfish a omis spp.). Stocked ponds may also have bass (Thompson,
1985).
A list of faunal species common to the US 421 study area is presented in Appendix D.
This list also identifies those species observed during field investigations.
The potential long-term impact of the proposed improvements on wildlife is primarily
related to habitat loss. The Recommended Alternative will have minimal impact on
wildlife in the project area. Minimal previously undisturbed areas will be affected for
this alternative. The construction to improve the existing highway to a four and five-
lane facility will impact previously disturbed fields and woodlands along the existing
US 421 right of way.
4.3.1.4 Protected Species
Federally-listed Species
27
' Animal and plant species listed as endangered (E), threatened (T), proposed endangered
(PE), and proposed threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended. Under the provisions of Section 7 of the ESA,
' each federal agency has a legal responsibility to insure, through consultation and
interagency cooperation, that any federal/federally-funded action "... is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence..." of any federally-listed endangered or threatened
species. According to the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (72
Stat. 563, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 661 through 664, 666, 666c, 1976) and Section 7 of
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
US 421 28
'
the ESA (as amended 16 U.S.C. 1531-1543), the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) has provided written notification of the potential occurrence of federally
' protected species in the project area.
The "Listed and Candidate Species of North Carolina, by County" provided by the
USFWS (Appendix D) has identified one federally-listed endangered species, the
Peregrine falcon. Four federally-listed candidate species (C2) were also identified,
including the Bog turtle, Cerulean warbler, Keever's bristle-moss, and the Diana
' fritillary butterfly. Candidate species are not afforded protection under the provisions of
the ESA. These species have been considered in the ensuing discussion in the event
they are upgraded to protected status, i.e., proposed-T/E, followed by TIE.
r
rin
s
l
F
i
(F
l
P
e
u
con
ne
co e
eregr
a
a
The Peregrine falcon is the only federally-listed endangered species potentially
' occurring within the study area. This is a large, dark falcon with a thick, dark mustache
mark and dark head that appears hooded. Peregrine's are known for spectacular vertical
dives (stoops) from great heights, with wings held tight against the body, diving at and
' striking birds at high speeds. Peregrines eat birds almost exclusively, usually capturing
them in the air and occasionally on the ground (Parnell and Teulings, 1986; Clark and
' Wheeler, 1987). Peregrine falcons nest primarily on cliffs, but have been known to use
trees, buildings and bridges. Peregrines have been known to breed in the southern
Appalachians of North Carolina. However, this falcon is more likely to be an
uncommon fall and rare winter transient (Parnell and Teulings, 1986). Suitable nesting
' habitat for peregrine falcon (i.e., cliffs, tall buildings, high-rise bridges) does not exist
within the US 421 project area. Based upon a review of historical records, field
surveys, and the lack of suitable habitat in the existing US 421 corridor, it can be
concluded that construction of this project will not impact this species.
Cerulean Warbler endroica cerulea
This federally-listed candidate species is the only warbler in NC with a blue back and
white throat patch. This species breeds in the Great Smokey Mountains National Park
' and singing males have been heard along US Route 21 in northeastern Wilkes County.
This species prefers a canopy of mature hardwood forests with an open understory
during the breeding season as well as during migration. The presence of favorable
nesting areas and migration resting areas (hardwood forests with open understories)
were not identified in the US 421 project area. Based upon a review of historical
records, field surveys, and the lack of suitable habitat in the existing US 421 corridor,
it can be concluded that construction of this project will not impact this species.
Bog Turtle Clemm s muhlenbergii)
' This federally-listed candidate species is the smallest turtle in NC with a length of three
to four inches. The bright orange or yellow blotch on each side of the head and neck
identifies this species. The bog turtle occurs in the mountains and upper Piedmont of
' North Carolina, and is found in damp grassy fields, bogs, and marshes. Field surveys
of the project area failed to identify potential bog turtle habitat. Based upon a review of
historical records, field surveys, and the lack of suitable habitat in the existing US 421
' corridor, it can be concluded that construction of this project will not impact this
species.
' NCDOT Federal FA July 1995
US 421 29
Keever's Bristle-Moss (Orthotrichum keeverae
' This federally-listed candidate species is a rare moss found in only two counties in the
United States, both of which are in North Carolina. These locations are Alexander
County (Brushy Mountains near Hiddenite and Rocky Face Mountain, north of
' Hiddenite) and Wilkes County (Cedar Rock).
Keever's bristle-moss primarily inhabits the trunks of dead chestnut oaks, but has also
been reported to grow on black oak and on the bark of red cedar. Members of the
genus Orthotrichum are quite small and inconspicuous, and typically grow in small tufts
on bark or rock. The existing US 421 corridor lacks the oak-chestnut forests where
' Keever's bristle-moss may potentially be found. Based upon a review of historical
records, field surveys, and the lack of suitable habitat in the existing US 421 corridor,
it can be concluded that construction of this project will not impact this species.
'
Diana fritillary butterfly S e eria diana)
' The spectacular blue-colored females of this federally-listed candidate species are the
largest fritillary butterfly in the world, with individuals typically reaching 8" across.
Habitat requirements for this butterfly include well-developed to mature old-growth
' hardwood forests. The butterfly also requires wet, boggy, seep-type areas for breeding.
Consequently, riparian zones bordered by long standing hardwood forest provide
optimal habitat. The butterfly appears strongly restricted to this habitat, resulting in
' localized, non-dispersing populations. In addition, catepillars feed exclusively on violets
(Viola spp.). This species of butterfly is photonegative, preferring to spend its time in
the shadows. It has been suggested that this species requires approximately 2 miles of
' linear, stream valley habitat in order to sustain a viable population (Paul C. Hammond,
Pers. Comm., 1995). The presence of favorable habitat was not identified in the project
' area. Based upon a review of historical records, field surveys, and the lack of suitable
habitat in the existing US 421 corridor, it can be concluded that construction of this
project will not impact this species.
' State-listed Species
In the State of North Carolina, certain species of plant and animal with the status of E,
' T, or Special Concern (SC) are also granted protection by the State Endangered Species
Act (G.S. 113-331 to 113-337) and the NC Plant Protection and Conservation Act of
1979, administered by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and the NC Department
' of Agriculture, respectively.
The NC Natural Heritage Program and Plant Conservation Program Element List
' (Appendix D) has identified three state protected species as potentially occurring in the
project study area. These species include the state-listed endangered peregrine falcon
and Keever's bristle-moss and the threatened bog turtle. No state-listed threatened or
endangered species are known to exist within the US 421 project area or adjacent areas
(Schafale, 1991, Pers. Comm.).
11
NCDOT
Federal E!
July 1995
US 421 30
4.3.1.5 Wild and Scenic Rivers
The North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources has
stated that no state or federally designated wild and scenic rivers will be impacted by
' this project.
Rivers in North Carolina are classified as wild or scenic in accordance with Statute
113A-30. No rivers falling under this classification are present within the US 421 study
area, nor are any tributaries of these rivers present within the study area (Kim Huband,
Pers. Comm., 1991).
' 4.3.2 Physical Environment
' 4.3.2.1 Air Quality
The impact resulting from the improvements of an existing highway can range from
' aggravating existing air pollution problems to improving ambient air conditions. Motor
vehicles are known to emit carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons
(HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (SO), and lead (Pb), in decreasing order of
' emission. The primary pollutant emitted from automobiles is carbon monoxide (CO).
Automobiles are considered to be the major source of CO in the study area. For these
reasons, the analysis presented is concerned with determining expected carbon
' monoxide levels in the vicinity of the project.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor near a highway, two
concentration components must be used: local and background. The local component is
' due to CO emissions from cars operating on highways in the near vicinity (i.e.,
distances within 100 meters) of the receptor location. The background component is due
to CO emissions from cars operating on streets further from the receptor location.
In this study, the local component was determined using line source computer
modeling, while the background component was determined by the Air Quality Section,
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) North Carolina Department of
' Environment, Health and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR). The background
concentration was used as input for the line source computer modeling. The output of
the modeling corresponds to an ambient CO concentration resulting from the combined
' local and background levels. This concentration was then used for comparison to the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
A microscale air quality analysis was performed to determine future CO concentrations
resulting from the proposed highway improvements. A revised, 1992 version of
"CAL3QHC" (Version 2.0) a modeling methodology for predicting air pollutant
concentrations near roadway intersections, was used to predict total (local and
background) CO concentration at the nearest sensitive receptors to the project. Since the
final designation of the area is attainment for CO, CAL3QHC was used to predict CO
concentrations near highway or arterial streets where only free flow links interact.
' Inputs into the mathematical model to estimate hourly CO concentrations consisted of a
level roadway under normal conditions, predicted traffic volumes, vehicle emission
factors, and meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes were based on the 1998
' and 2018 peak hour average traffic projections. The carbon monoxide vehicle emission
factors were determined (for both traffic volumes) using the USEPA publication
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421 31
"Mobile Source Emission Factors" and the accompanying MOBILE5a mobile source
emissions computer model. The MOBILE5a and CAL3QHC input parameters were
' presented in a technical memorandum entitled Air Quality Analysis, appended to this
document by reference.
The background CO concentration for the project area was estimated to be 1.8 parts per
' million (ppm). Consultation with NCDEHNR indicated that an ambient CO
concentration of 1.8 ppm is suitable for most rural areas.
' The results of the Microscale Analysis are tabulated in Table 10. This table shows the
predicted 1998 and 2018 one-hour CO concentrations for the Recommended and No-
Build Alternatives at the "worst case" receptor. These worst case air quality conditions
occur in the heavily commercialized area at the intersection of US 421/Driveway and
' SR 1322 (Figure 9).
TABLE 10
' Carbon Monoxide Concentrations
d
1
1-Hour CO Concentration
Alternative (ppm)
2018 1998
Recommended 4.5 3.8
No-Build 4.6 3.9
NAAQS: 35 ppm 1 hr.
The one-hour and eight-hour concentration standards, as established by the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), are 35 ppm and 9 ppm, respectively. For the
Recommended Alternative, the worst case one-hour concentrations were 3.8 ppm and
4.5 ppm for 1998 and 2018, respectively. Based on these results, no violations of these
standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
The project is located in Wilkes County, which has been determined to be in
compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 40 CFR Parts 51 is not
applicable, because the proposed project is located in an attainment area. This project is
not anticipated to create any adverse effect on the air quality of this attainment area.
4.3.2.2 Noise
A detailed analysis of the probable traffic noise impacts associated with this project was
made in accordance with the procedures and provisions of the Code of Federal
Regulations Section 23, Part 772. This traffic noise analysis includes the identification
of existing activities and land uses, prediction of traffic noise levels, determination of
existing noise levels, determination of traffic noise impacts, and if applicable, an
examination of alternative noise abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the
noise impacts. This analysis was presented in the technical memorandum, entitled
Highway Traffic Noise/Construction Noise Analysis, is appended to this document by
reference.
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
MATCHLINE
m ? woo ?
a 1
9? \\ 1
N
o y>
F?rvef C° I
I
N O
c+
aG
N
'
` Moravian N? OD
few
u ?.
cn x r_,.
sue
(
'
`
.
!
ekylC
A
Q
0
1
J
N
0
E
n
v'
n
n A
J
-0
?A
•i'a'f ? ??? SR 1155 SR y;i? U?
ufh
u
r Reoa Rrtinch
r {n
( " Q
;a' h -a ,A J
,?q ? Sa, coS.
c
:r
u?
rn ? • J
tst >> ? Ufa
S'a r y ?c;r
w 'v
'.,i•
(l` rte/ S 70
4
o? boa
a
SR 1745 ,?? C? :
cif y 79
??- 5
?6,
•L \
cn as steu?,ws` -?•?
J@@JJ
r`w w
?60
9 ti J^ am
sue. / ?9c, /
MATCHLINE
'-' Z TI ? O Z m m
C?
M (D 0. 5 ->>
D o o y ? ?
L z
o
0
z
3
n m
O
O
.p
o OD
a
co
° -q -q
W
O
N
S o o
?Z? ~
r >X ?O rm A D O O
cc mm U)- r
?0
m
M
Z
N
.
n
Nm
r
-? m
1
O _ N
O
:3
0 pi
00
m
m m
m cD
y
fl
-O to
z -?
m v m m?
z
c D Z
m z u
i 3 O
g
8 O
0
US 421 32
' i
on
The procedure used to predict future noise levels was the Noise Barrier Cost Reduct
Procedure, STAMINA 2.0 and OPTIMA (revised March 1983). The BCR (Barrier Cost
Reduction) procedure is based upon the FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction
' Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). The BCR traffic noise prediction model uses the number
and type of vehicles on the planned roadway, their speeds, the physical characteristics
of the road (curves, hills, depressions, elevations, etc.), receptor location and height,
' and, if applicable, barrier type, barrier ground elevation, and barrier top elevation.
Ambient noise measurements were taken at 11 locations along the proposed project
corridor at representative locations (Figure 9).
' To determine whether highway noise levels are or are not compatible with various land
uses, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) developed noise abatement criteria
(NAC) and procedures to be used in the planning and design of highways. A summary
' of the noise abatement criteria for various land uses is presented in Table 11.
TABLE 11
i
i
ter
a
Noise Abatement Cr
' Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
' Activity
Category Leq(h) Description of Activity Category
A 51 (Exterior) Lands on which serenity and quiet
' are of extraordinary significance and
serve an important public need and
where the preservation of those
qualities is essential if the area is to
' continue to serve its intended
purposes.
B 67 (Exterior) Picnic areas, recreation areas,
playgrounds, active sports areas,
parks, residences, motels, hotel,
schools, churches, libraries, and
hospitals.
' erties
or
ed lands
ro
C 72 (Exterior) Develo
,
, p
p
p
activities not included in Categories
A or B above.
d
d
l
d l
U
eve
ope
an
s.
n
D --
E 52 (Interior) Residences, motels, hotels, public
' meeting rooms, schools, churches,
libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums.
'
Source: Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 772, US Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Procedures for
' Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise.
1 NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421
L
33
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic noise levels either (a) approach
or exceed the NAC, or (b) substantially exceed existing noise levels. NCDOT defines
approach as meaning within one dBA. A substantial increase is defined by NCDOT as a
15 dBA or greater increase between existing noise levels and future noise levels, when
existing noise levels are less than or equal to 50 Leq (h) and a 10 dBA or greater
increase between existing noise levels and future noise levels, when existing noise levels
are greater than 50 Leq (h). Noise abatement measures must be considered when either
of these conditions exist. The Leq, or equivalent sound level, is the level of constant
sound which in a given situation and time period has the same energy as does time
varying sound. In other words, the fluctuating sound levels of traffic noise are
represented in terms of a steady noise level with the same energy content.
The traffic noise impacts for the Recommended Alternative were predicted using design
year peak hour traffic projections. Receptors on the side of the widening will
experience increases in noise levels because some vehicles will be closer to the
receptors. As summarized on Table 12, a total of 25 residences and 22 businesses are
expected to approach or exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria as a result of the
proposed widening. Fifty-four receptors will substantially exceed existing noise levels.
These 54 receptors include 19 residences, 31 businesses, as well as a school,
playground, and two churches.
TABLE 12
Noise Exposure Estimates
Approaching or Exceeding FHWA
Noise Abatement Criteria
Alternative Residence Business Other
No-Build 5 0 0
Recommended 25 22 0
The Recommended Alternative will maintain partial control of access which means that
most commercial establishments and residences will have direct driveway connections to
the proposed roadway, and all intersections will adjoin the project at-grade. All
impacted receptors (25 residences) will have direct driveway connections to the
improved roadway. For a noise barrier to provide sufficient noise reduction it must be
high enough and long enough to shield the receptor from the highway. Access openings
in the barrier severely reduce noise reduction effectiveness. It then becomes
economically unreasonable to construct a noise barrier for a small noise reduction.
Safety at access openings due to restricted sight distances is also a concern. For these
reasons, noise barriers are not considered reasonable and are not recommended for this
project.
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
' US 421 34
' 4.3.2.3 Hydrology and Drainage
' The US 421 study area is located within the Yadkin River drainage basin. The drainage
patterns of the river and creeks of the study area have been identified through USGS
map surveys and field investigations. A schematic representation of this drainage
' pattern is presented in Figure 10. Table 13 presents characteristics of the creeks and
river crossed by the US 421 project.
t Moravian Creek drains an area to the south and east of Wilkesboro and flows
northward to enter the Yadkin River approximately 200 feet southeast of US 421 near
the NC 268 interchange (Figure 1). Tucker Hole Creek is approximately 3 miles long
' and drains an area predominantly to the north of US 421. Tucker Hole Creek crosses
US 421 near the US 421/US 421 Business intersection. Millers Creek crosses US 421
approximately one mile east of NC 16, is approximately 4.8 miles long, and drains the
area between Tucker Hole Creek and Fish Dam Creek. Located one-half mile west of
' NC 16, Fish Dam Creek drains the area between Millers Creek and Smitheys Creek.
Fish Dam Creek is approximately 4.6 miles long and its headwaters originate from the
northernmost point of Meadow Branch. Meadow Branch is 1.1 miles long and joins
' Fish Dam Creek approximately 1.8 miles north of US 421 (USGS, 1966a and 1966b).
Smitheys Creek is approximately 2.8 miles long and drains the region between Fish
' Dam Creek and North Prong Lewis Fork. Smitheys Creek crosses US 421
approximately one mile west of SR 1147. Lewis Fork is approximately 3 miles long
and drains the region to the west and northwest of Smitheys Creek. Lewis Fork
' originates just north of US 421 at the confluence of North Prong Lewis Fork (11 miles
long) and South Prong Lewis Fork (16 miles long), crossing US 421 approximately one
mile west of SR 1145. South Prong Lewis Fork crosses US 421 just east of SR 1155
' (USGS, 1966a and 1966b).
Within the US 421 study area, the Yadkin River flows east from the W. Kerr Scott
' Dam toward Wilkesboro. The river flows beneath US 421 north of the NC 268
interchange. Moravian Creek, Tucker Hole Creek, Millers Creek, Fish Dam Creek,
and an unnamed creek located east of Fish Dam Creek, flow into the Yadkin River.
Lewis Fork, Smitheys Creek, and an unnamed creek west of Smitheys Creek flow into
' the W. Kerr Scott Reservoir.
' 4.3.2.4 Water Quality
Streams, creeks, and rivers in North Carolina are assigned usage classifications based
' upon water quality data collected at various sites within each major river drainage
basin. Analytical procedures include chemical/physical analysis as outlined by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (40 CFR, Part 136) with further
amendments in accordance with G.S. 150B-14(c). Biological monitoring is based on
' methods outlined in EPA reports 600/4-85/013 and 600/4-85/014. Best usage and
classification assignments of streams and rivers in North Carolina are specified in G.S.
' 143-214.1(d) and 15A NCAC 2B .0100 (NCDEHNR, 1991a).
Lewis Fork,.South Prong Lewis Fork (from SR 1155 to Lewis Fork Creek), Fish Dam
Creek, Millers Creek, and Moravian Creek are classified Class "C." This designation is
' given to freshwater streams that may be used for aquatic life propagation and survival,
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
CREEK
FIGURE 10
Drainage System Within The Study Area
YADKIN RIVER
MILLERS
CREEK
TUCKER FISH
HOLE DAM
CREEK CREEK
SMITHEYS LEWIS
CREEK FORK
PRONG
LEWIS
FORK
NORTH
PRONG
LEWIS
FORK
i
i
M
F?
H
¦
A
x
a?
c?
a?
P?
Z?
V 1? t?
q R e=+ ?
7 N N V1 c
Q? ! a
aw ar° w w w
¢3,
? a. se a.
W to N N N N <v
U 4)
V5
??
U z z z z z s
U
Op .ca * v, = iV in
Q D ?
a' '? ? r+ v ?o
0 0 0 0 0 0
• ?? ti b b V V r1 V .? ??
? rl
?
0
' ??'•I
V? ?1? 0
V U
.C as Vj
U
y
al fA •D
&n
U
? 7 p
.y
W U
7
Uo 0
.y?
•
?.
xo.?
Q,?:? *1
H
U
U LI
oo
U?
U ?
..
v,
v
x A4 ?
(? w ti U ? U ?
y '•14 W
T • . w
rT .,7 ? F
N w
• A
z
>:Q
00 00
ae
O? M
?
C
D d ?
E
' h H •
"
0. Oq
Q
C U
U
VO
U U U
oa 'a
h
a d N
U O 7
O ? r7 .
i7?j
'_
U O
U O
U
r.
p° w
w
z
w v
, ?
z3?, 3
a
O
04
C
F
O
ca
u
z
U
N
H
U3
a
00
0
T
a
y
0
y y
b
? O
pq U
b o _
rn
11.) 06 :t
'°
0°
y °? 'fl
U
N )
r? H
N r; X
y
O O ?
v
w
U
US 421 35
fishing, wildlife, and secondary recreation, and agriculture. Secondary recreation is
defined as boating, wading, and other uses not involving human body contact with the
water, or activities involving human body contact with the water on an infrequent or
incidental basis. The Class C designation represents the lowest of the freshwater
classifications (NCDEHNR, 1990, 1991).
South Prong Lewis Fork from its source to SR 1155 is classified "C Tr", indicating
that it can be used for secondary recreation and as trout water. Trout waters are those
which have conditions which will sustain and allow for trout propagation and survival
of stocked trout on a year-round basis. South Prong Lewis Fork is also the only creek
within the US 421 study area to carry a Public Mountain Trout Waters (Hatchery
Supported) designation from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. This
designation ends at SR 1155, approximately 800 feet upstream of the South Prong
Lewis Fork bridge.
Smitheys Creek is designated Class "B Tr", indicating that it can be used for primary
recreation (such as swimming, skin diving, skiing, or other similar activities involving
prolonged human body contact with the water on a frequent basis), and as a trout
water. Tucker Hole Creek is also designated as a trout water and as WS-III. This
classification indicates that Tucker Hole Creek is a water supply segment with no
categorical restriction on watershed development for discharge. It is also suitable for all
Class C uses (NCDEHNR, 1990, 1991a).
The Yadkin River, from W. Kerr Scott Dam east to Moravian Creek, is designated
Class "WS-III." From the Moravian Creek downstream to the mouth of the Roaring
' River, the Yadkin River has a classification of "C" (NCDEHNR, 1990).
Long and short-term water quality impacts could result from the various creek
' crossings, extensions of existing drainage structures, and bridge construction associated
with the Recommended Alternative. Long-term impacts include those impacts associated
with the operation and maintenance of the facility. The proposed facility will increase
' the amount of impervious surface area, thereby increasing storm water runoff and
discharge rates. Storm water runoff from roadways typically contains various
pollutants, including oils and greases, sediments, and heavy metals. Short-term impacts
' to water quality include those impacts associated with the construction of the project,
such as sedimentation and erosion. Construction related impacts are further discussed in
' Section 4.3.3.
Improvements of US 421 west of NC 16 will require the replacement of the existing
bridges over South Prong Lewis Fork and Lewis Fork. Construction activities to
replace these structures and to build the new structures needed to accommodate the
proposed eastbound lanes may result in temporary siltation of these creeks. Although
South Prong Lewis Fork from its source to Lewis Fork Baptist Church (south of
' US 421) is listed by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Division of
Inland Fisheries as a Hatchery Supported Public Mountain Trout Water, the likelihood
of a viable trout population in the vicinity of the study area is poor due to warm water
' temperatures and existing siltation (Joe Mickey, Pers. Comm., 1991).
In addition to the new bridges, existing culverts and drainage structures will be
extended to accommodate the proposed widening. The existing major drainage
' structures and recommended improvements were previously summarized in Table 9 in
' NCDOT Federal E! July 1995
' 36
US 421
' ithin the
k l
t
d
F
i
L
w
oca
e
or
ew
s
Section 4.3.1.2. As with the segment of South Prong
study area, the likelihood of a trout population in Smitheys Creek near US 421 is poor
' (Joe Mickey, Pers. Comm., 1991). However, because both South Prong Lewis Fork
and Smitheys Creek have a supplemental trout water designation from the North
Carolina Environmental Management Commission, they fall under the 25 foot minimum
buffer zone requirements for land-disturbing activities near trout waters as presented in
' 15A NCAC 4B .0025, Erosion and Sediment Control Buffer Zone Requirements
(NCDEHNR, 1991).
' Efforts will be made to mitigate potential impacts to the water quality of the affected
waterways during the construction phase. The key element in the mitigation strategies
' will be the design, implementation and maintenance of an effective erosion and
These measures will largely contain sediments within the
sedimentation control plan
.
limits of construction, thereby minimizing impacts to existing watercourses. The
implementation of NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface
Waters will insure that the usages protected under the existing water quality
designations will not be compromised by the project.
' 4.3.2.5 Floodplains
Floodplains and floodways were identified from Federal Emergency Management
Fi
11
17
1992
b
' gure
,
.
er
Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps, revised Septem
shows the 100-year floodplain and floodway boundaries for the Yadkin River, and flood
hazard area boundaries for the creeks and tributaries included within the project study
' area.
Within the project area, the Yadkin River floodplain is estimated to be approximately
t 2,000 feet wide where the US 421 bridge crosses the river. The floodway in this
vicinity is approximately 200 feet wide. No detailed study of floodplain and floodway
information is currently available for the creeks within the study area. However, flood
hazard areas maps have been developed for Lewis Fork and South Prong Lewis Fork
by FEMA. Where Lewis Fork crosses US 421, the flood hazard area is approximately
700 feet wide to the north of US 421 and 300 feet wide to the south. At the South
Prong Lewis Fork bridge, the flood hazard area is approximately 100 feet wide
immediately north and south of the structure. However, the flood hazard area widens to
600 feet approximately 100 feet north of the bridge, and is 400 feet wide approximately
100 feet south of this structure.
Protection of the 100-year floodplain from impacts due to fill and construction activities
are established in the objectives set forth in Executive Order 11988, "Floodplain
"
The
Management" and DOT Order 5650.2 "Floodplain Management and Protection.
proposed widening to the south side of existing US 421 will minimize the impacts to
' floodplain areas along the project corridor.
'
length, height,
Based on the preliminary design and assessment of the existing bridges
and waterway opening, the existing bridges have been determined hydraulically
' adequate. Each of the existing structures will be replaced by a similar structure. This
replacement strategy is based, in part, upon the respective estimated remaining life
spans of these bridges.
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
MATCHLINE
m g `3 fioa?0 p SR 1155 13 0!d
m woo a ??
0
o? ? A
R?
n l"•? Branch
?y m
S• w ,?h
ppZEp as S?, c?
N W N ?/ ?
N Na o' 1511 aS >> T fo
m s'? ? -o 'r
o V
i to
e' yy4 ?o yS
Ion a.?a\
Morovian ? y
1
Qo x 6 SR 1145 O Chi
Y
a 77 S 7gS
N m 2611'
0 s ti?
ub 0 as
Craak \? '? ? yaea? 431wS
Q o
..».
0?
a?\\ S
t+ p C '147
ro
y?ao O '? \ ' ?,?,JII
G4
O
-a do
7
MATCHLINE
r
rn -n
F. -n
G7 -I
. O Z
'.?, O rn rn
D D ?i
ci
° v o N
?
C m a o D :3. = O o D
m 0
n z O
O N
N 0. 0 N r
O) M
o
n > m -
i no .p p pp
c
r
z z
m
? O cD N
Z-
c
can v ?
_
z m D
?- rrl;
D Z
D Z4
. ? tD V1
0
'
US 421 37
i
f
h
f
h
e new
e construct
on o
t
rom t
Minimal impacts to flood hazard areas are anticipated
structures over South Prong Lewis Fork and Lewis Fork due to the current and
' proposed heights of these bridges over the watercourses and the narrow width of the
flood hazard areas. The construction of bridges at South Prong Lewis Fork and Lewis
Fork will result in an estimated 0.03 and 0.3 acres of fill being placed in their
' respective flood hazard areas. The bridge at the Yadkin River will require the
placement of approximately 1.3 acres of fill within the 100-year floodplain to construct
the bridge approaches and abutments. No impacts to the regulated floodway or increase
in flood height will result from this new structure. The proposed widening of US 421
' will also require the placement of fill in approximately 5.4 acres of flood hazard area
associated with South Prong Lewis Fork. This involvement will occur along the far
western end of the project, where the US 421 alignment presently encroaches on the
the Recommended Alternative will require the filling of
All totalled
flood hazard area
,
.
approximately seven acres of 100-year floodplain. Little or no increased flood risk will
be associated with the proposed project due to encroachment in the floodplain, and the
Th
d
h
d
i
' e propose
n unc
ange
.
potential for loss of property or human life will rema
US 421 improvements will be designed to minimize encroachment in floodplain areas.
The remaining seven major drainage structures along the Recommended Alternative will
be left in place and extended, as needed, in order to accommodate the proposed
improvements. These extensions will serve to maintain the existing drainage patterns of
the watercourses. Based on preliminary hydraulic analysis, all existing major drainage
structures were determined adequate. No overtopping was experienced with the 100-
year storm, given the proposed vertical grades.
' Information concerning existing and proposed structures, including the completed
Culvert Survey and Hydraulic Design Reports, and Assessment of Stream Crossings
and Encroachment Forms, is included in the technical memorandum, entitled Hydraulic
Locations, appended to this document by reference.
4.3.2.6 Topography and Geology
The study area lies partially within the extreme western Piedmont Plateau region and
partially within the extreme eastern Mountain Region of North Carolina. This area is
' characterized by rolling uplands and very steep sided slopes along drainageways.
Approximate elevations along the study corridor are 1263 feet above Mean Sea Level
(MSL) at the western terminus, 1114 feet above MSL at Lewis Fork, and 1030 feet
above MSL near the eastern terminus (USGS, 1966b). The existing grade of the study
area reaches its maximum elevation of 1420 feet above MSL approximately one mile
east of Maple Springs. The minimum elevation of 960 feet above MSL is at the Yadkin
' River, approximately one-half mile from the eastern project area terminus.
The topography is flat along the Yadkin River floodplain, and slightly rolling west of
' Wilkesboro. The topography becomes semi-mountainous approaching Maple Springs as
the western terminus of the project area enters the foothills of the Blue Ridge
' Mountains.
The study area lies in a highly complex geologic region consisting of sedimentary and
metamorphic rocks of the Blue Ridge Belt (laminated to thin-layered gneiss, mica
' schist, and phyolite), metamorphic rocks of the Smith River Allochthon (banded gneiss
' NCDOT Federal Fri July 1995
US 421 38
interlayered with amphibolite and granitic rock), metamorphic rocks of the Sauratown
Mountains Anticlinorium (metagraywacke, amphibolite, and kyanite schist with minor
' ultramafic and granitic rock) and metamorphic rocks of the Inner Piedmont Belt
(biotite, gneiss and schist, and small masses of granitic rock). The study area crosses
five postmetamorphic thrust faults. These faults are located between the Smith River
Allochthon, between the Smith River Allochthon and the Sauratown Mountains
Anticlinorium, and the Inner Piedmont Belt, and within the Inner Piedmont Belt.
' The potential impact of the project on the study area's topography and geology is a
function of the amount of earthwork required to complete construction. The proposed
widening will require a substantial amount of cut and fill in order to achieve
recommended cross slopes; with cuts likely requiring blasting.
4.3.2.7 Soils and Prime Farmland
Soils in the study area, as determined from the draft Wilkes County Soil Survey
(USDASCS, 1988), include Toccoa sandy loam and Rosman-Reddies complex on the
nearly level floodplains of Lewis Fork and the Yadkin River, Pacolet sandy loam and
Pacolet sandy clay loam on gently sloping to steep side slopes and along minor
drainageways, and Rion fine sandy loam and Evard-Cowee complex on severe upland
slopes and ridgetops. Also included are areas of urban land and disturbed land where
' the natural soil has been altered or obscured by development. The soil overlying
bedrock is formed in place from the weathered bedrock residuum, except along streams
where recent alluvium is the dominant parent material.
Thi
l
.
s
Tocca sandy loam is a deep, moderately well-drained, rapidly permeable soi
relatively young soil is formed from recent alluvium and is classified as a coarse-loamy,
' mixed, nonacidic, thermic Typic Udifluvent. The well-drained Rosman-Reddies
complex has moderate permeability and is formed in loamy alluvium, washed from soils
formed from a variety of rocks such as granite, schist, gneiss, slate, and metasandstone.
' The Rosman-Reddies complex is classified as a coarse-loamy, mixed, mesic Fluventic
Haplumbrepts.
' Pacolet sandy loam and sandy clay loam series is a very deep, well drained, moderately
permeable soil formed from material weathered mostly from felsic crystalline rocks of
the Piedmont uplands. These soils are classified as clayey, kaolinitic, thermic Typic
Kanhapludults. The Evard-Cowee complex consists of a mixture of well-drained,
' moderately permeable Evard series soils that formed in residuum from granite, gneiss,
or schist (classified as fine-loamy, oxidic mesic Typic Hapludults) and well-drained,
moderately permeable Cowee soils formed in residuum from felsic to mafic crystalline
' rocks such as granite, hornblende gneiss, and schist.
The Rion series consists of deep, well-drained, moderately permeable soils that formed
l
if
d
i
i
' ie
as a
s c
ass
es
in material mostly weathered from acidic crystalline rocks. This ser
fine-loamy, mixed, thermic Typic Hapludult.
Other soil series in the project area include the Tate series, Masada series, Buncome
series, and Chewacla series. According to the list of hydric soils for Wilkes County,
prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the only soil unit classified
as hydric in the study area is Wehadkee loam, 0% - 2% slope (Wk). The Wehadkee
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
t US 421
P
it
i?
loam soil unit occurs in the study area in two isolated areas in the vicinity of the former
county airport site. Soils that are flooded, saturated, or ponded long enough during the
growing season to develop an anaerobic condition in the upper portion of its profile are
classified as hydric. The presence of a hydric soil is one of three criteria used to
delineate wetlands. Soil units in the study area which are not considered to be
completely hydric, but which may have hydric inclusions under certain conditions (i.e.,
if located in drainageways, stream channels, and depressions) are Chewacla loam (Cw),
Cullowhee fine sandy loam (Fr), Dogue fine sandy loam (DoB), Potomac very cobbly
loamy sand (Po), Rosman-Reddies complex (Cv), Tate-Cullowhee complex (TfD), and
Toccoa (Co) (USDASCS, 1990).
None of the soils in the study area are well-suited as sources of sand or gravel. Only
soils of the Rosman series or the Toccoa series are well-suited for use as roadfill.
Toccoa series soils are the only soils in the project area suited for use as topsoil. The
underlying bedrock may be a suitable source of building stone (USDASCS, 1988).
Soils in the study area have some limitations for highway construction. These
limitations include low strength (Pacolet series), flooding and wetness (Toccoa and
Rosman series), and steep slopes (portions of Pacolet, Evard, Cowee, and Rion series
with slopes greater than 15%). The limitations to roadway construction presented by
these soil series may be overcome through proper roadway design, subgrade
stabilization, adequate-drainage, and soil modifications. Erosion of soils during
construction can be greatly reduced by implementing erosion control practices.
Table 14 presents a listing of those soils in Wilkes County identified as Prime
Farmlands or State Important Farmlands. As defined by the USDA, Prime Farmland
soils are those soils best suited for the cultivation of food, forage, fiber, and oilseed
crops. These soils produce the highest yields with the least expenditure of energy and
economic resources, as well as having minimal impacts on the environment
(USDASCS, 1990). Soils with the "Pl" through "P5" designation are considered prime
farmlands. Soils with an "S" designation are considered of statewide importance.
Generally, soils ranked as "P1" require the least expenditure of time and resources to
be prepared for agricultural use (i.e., fertilizing, draining, and/or grading), while soils
with a higher numeric rank require more preparation for use.
Currently, the majority of the soils in the study area are classified as S1 (State
Important Farmland). Soils classified as P1, P3, and P5 are found as small, isolated
pockets to the west of Wilkesboro. Large areas of P3 Toccoa sandy loam (ToA) are
found along the southeastern Yadkin River floodplain. Wilkes County consists of
493,189 surface acres of which 39,456 acres (8%) was pastureland and 39,456 acres
(8%) was cropland as of 1987 (Wilkes County Land Use Committee, 1987).
The acreage of prime farmland soils converted by the proposed improvements of
US 421 will be small and is estimated at nine acres. This acreage is comprised of soils
designated P3 and P5. Coordination with the Natural Resources Conservation Service
(formerly the Soil Conservation Service) of the USDA indicates that this impact
represents .03% of the county's prime and unique farmland.
Existing agricultural use does not always coincide with soils identified as prime or
' important farmland. The proposed widening of existing US 421 will utilize land within
the existing right of way or immediately adjacent to the right of way. Much of this land
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
39
US 421
I TABLE 14
1 Prime and Important Farmlands
In Wilkes County, North Carolina
1
"Pl" All soil areas meet the soil criteria for Prime Farmland
' BrB Braddock clay loam 2 to 8 percent slope erode
DoB Dogue fine sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, rarely flooded
' MaB Masada sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, eroded
HwB Masada gravelly sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes eroded
PeB Pacelot sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, eroded
"P3" Only soil areas that are protected from flooding or not frequently flooded
' during the growing season are Prime Farmland
Cv Rosman-Reddies complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes, rarely flooded
L Co Toccoa sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, occasionally flooded
' 11P5" Only drained soil areas that are either protected from flooding or not
frequently flooded during the growing season meet the soil criteria for
Prime Farmland
' Cw Chewalca loam, 0 to 20 percent slopes, frequently flooded
Fr Cullowhee fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes, frequently flooded
"Sl" All soil areas meet the soil criteria for State Important Farmland
' HbD Bethlehem - Hibriten complex, 6 to 15 percent slopes
EvD Evard gravely sandy loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes
' HaD Hayesville sandy clay loam, 6 to 15 percent slopes, eroded
MaD Masada sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded
HwD Masada gravely sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded
PeD Pacolet sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded
' RwD Rion-Wedowee complex, 5 to 15 percent slopes
Sa State fine sandy loam, 1 to 6 percent slopes, rarely flooded
' WaD Watauga loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes
' Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, 1987.
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421 40
' tl
C
i
d b
y,
onsequen
nesses.
us
has been previously converted into sites for residences an
considerable expenditures of money and labor would be required to return these soils to
a condition suitable for agricultural use.
Form AD 1006, Farmland Conservation Impact Rating, as well as a letter and a study
area map were submitted to the USDANRCS office in Raleigh, North Carolina. The
completed form is included in Appendix F.
' 4.3.2.8 Mineral Resources
No active mines or quarries are present in the US 421 project area. A clay pit indicated
1 on the USGS map (USGS, 1966a) is currently the site of a shopping center (Wes
Tuttle, Pers. Comm., 1991).
4.3.2.9 Hazardous Materials Sites and Underground Storage Tanks
Hazardous waste, under the broad definition of the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), includes any waste material(s) that poses a hazard to human health and welfare
and/or the environment. Hazardous wastes occur in a variety of mediums, e.g., solid,
liquid, gas, and are generally characterized as flammable, infectious, toxic, radioactive,
et al. Examples of hazardous waste sites include landfills and dumps. The disturbance
of hazardous waste sites during roadway construction has the potential to result in
deleterious effects to the environment. For this reason the locations of potential
hazardous waste sites in the study area were considered as part of the planning process.
The Division of Solid Waste Management of the North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR) is largely responsible for
the development and implementation of the hazardous waste management program in
the State. Within the Division of Solid Waste Management, the Solid Waste Section
maintains files containing information on closed dumps and permitted sanitary landfills;
the Hazardous Waste Section maintains files that include information on facilities that
treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste; and the Superfund Section maintains files on
all known potential hazardous waste sites in the State. The Groundwater Section of the
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) is in charge of implementing federal
regulations concerning Underground Storage Tanks (USTs).
Information provided by these agencies, in concert with field surveys and land use
evaluations via aerial photographs and topographic maps, have resulted in the
compilation of potential hazardous waste sites and UST locations in the study area. A
total of eight operational gas stations with associated USTs were identified along the
existing US 421 roadway. Seven of the eight service stations appear to be situated
beyond the construction limits of the project; three of these gas stations are located at
the US 421/NC 268 interchange and four are located north of US 421.
The Recommended Alternative will, however, likely impact USTs associated with an
operational gas station located southeast of the US 421/SR 1145 intersection. Additional
right of way will be acquired at this location to accommodate the proposed widening,
possibly resulting in direct conflict with the USTs. USTs encountered at this or other
possible locations within the right of way will require sealing or removal in accordance
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
1
J
11
US 421 41
with current state and federal hazardous waste regulations. No potential hazardous
waste sites have been identified within the proposed project limits.
Geotechnical studies to determine hazardous waste site contamination, exact location,
and possible mitigation will be completed during final design. Any underground storage
tanks encountered during construction will be reported to the North Carolina Division
of Environmental Management.
4.3.3 Construction Impacts
Air Quality
Temporary impacts on air quality during the construction phase will occur. These
impacts include fugitive dust during earthmoving operations, smoke and odors from
burning operations, and release of volatile compounds during asphalt preparation. These
impacts will be most noticeable near residential and business areas. All burning
operations will be conducted in accordance with applicable local laws and ordinances;
regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with
15 NCAC 2D.0520; as well as the National Environmental Policy Act and the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990. Control of fugitive dust produced during construction
and earth moving operations could be controlled or reduced through the application of
water as a stabilizing agent to the working and haulage areas of the site, covering or
shielding stockpiled materials as necessary, using covered haul trucks, and by
minimizing the exposure of erodible soil, where possible. Stabilizing exposed earth with
paving material, mulch, or vegetation as early as possible would also reduce airborne
dust.
Water Quality
Water quality of the Yadkin River and the numerous creeks and their tributaries
intersected by the proposed project may be temporarily affected during construction.
Impacts to water quality may occur as a result of the cutting, filling, and grading of the
roadway during construction and by the construction of bridges that will span the river
and creeks. The most observable impact will be an increase in turbidity and siltation
due to erosion of bare soil. This impact will be minimized through the use of erosion
and sediment control measures such as sediment/siltation control fences and other
techniques as described in Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters
(NCDOT, 1991) and the North Carolina Administrative Code, Chapter 4,
Sedimentation Control. Best Management Practices (BMPs) commonly utilized during
the construction phase of highway projects include mulching, sodding and grassing,
diversion berms, sediment catch basins, and cleanup practices. Exposure of cleared
areas and erodible earth also may be minimized by scheduling construction activities in
stages. Precautions will be taken to prevent the contamination of streams by harmful
substances. It is not anticipated that other parameters of water quality such as pH,
temperature, and dissolved oxygen content will be affected by the project construction.
The North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
regulates the discharge of storm water under the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System. Storm water point source discharges associated with construction
activities, including clearing and grading, resulting in the disturbance of five or more
acres of total land area are authorized pursuant to General Permit No. NCGO10000.
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
' US 421 42
Pursuant to this General Permit a Notice of Intent and applicable fees must be filed with
the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management, Water Quality Section,
' National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Group, prior to the commencement of
construction activities.
' Noise and Vibration
Roadway construction will result in temporary noise and vibration increases along the
project corridor. Noise and vibration will be generated primarily by heavy equipment
used in earth removal, hauling, grading, and paving. Sensitive areas located close to the
construction work will temporarily experience increased noise levels.
Mitigation of construction noise and vibration can be accomplished through the
development of a construction noise plan. Such a plan would include measures such as
the limitation of certain construction vehicles or activities during the evening,
1 weekends, or holidays, and the location of storage and staging facilities away from
noise sensitive areas.
The effects of temporarily increased noise levels during construction were considered as
directed by Part 772 of Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Although noise
impacts during the construction of this project are of short duration, the high noise
levels of combustion engine powered equipment would be the main contributor to the
sound levels from construction equipment activity. Peak noise levels from highway
construction equipment, as measured at a distance of 50 feet, may vary from 70 dBA to
100 dBA. This includes earth moving equipment, concrete pumps and mixers, erection
' equipment, saws, and vibration equipment. All construction equipment will be well
maintained and fitted with properly functioning mufflers to reduce noise. Time of day
restrictions on construction activities as well as the maintenance of heavy equipment
' would serve to mitigate construction noise impacts even further. Manufacturers of
construction equipment have begun to implement source control measures in response to
the General Services Administration (GSA) Construction Equipment Noise Standards
which became effective July 1, 1972 and which were made more restricting on January
1, 1975.
Biotic Communities
The Recommended Alternative will result in short-term impacts to biotic communities.
I Construction may require additional disturbance of vegetation and soil along the right of
way to allow for construction vehicle access and operation.
The increased amounts of disturbed natural communities and the elevated activity and
noise levels will create active, short-term disruption to normal wildlife activity patterns
and will displace many mobile species (primarily birds and mammals). Maximum
disruptions would occur during the time of construction activities, resulting in
competition between displaced wildlife populations and resident populations adjacent to
the construction site. Clearing activities, soil extraction/compaction, and equipment
operations in the project corridor will directly affect fewer, less-mobile species such as
burrowing mammals, amphibians, and reptiles.
Construction impacts on the aquatic environment may result in a loss, though
' temporary, of macroinvertebrate communities as well as individuals from some fish
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421
Ll
I
43
species. Macroinvertebrate losses will likely be replaced through recolonization by new
individuals from populations and communities upstream .of the construction zone.
Borrow pits and ditches will be drained in order to eliminate potential mosquito
breeding areas. Precautions will also be taken to avoid disrupting the flow patterns of
existing ditches.
Construction Waste
Solid waste will be compacted, covered, and stored in selected areas along the highway
right of way or other areas that are made available. Solid waste will be disposed of in
strict adherence to the NC Division of Highways "Standard Specifications for Roads
and Structures." The contractor is required to observe and comply with all laws,
ordinances, regulations, orders, and decrees regarding the disposal of solid waste. Solid
waste will not be placed into any existing land disposal sites that is in violation of state
or local rules and regulations.
A rodent control program will be implemented for any structures requiring removal or
demolition. Waste and debris will be disposed of in areas that are outside 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 responsible
engineer.
The contractor will maintain the earth surface of all waste areas, both during the
construction phase and until the completion of all seeding and mulching, or other
erosion control measures specified, in a manner that will effectively control erosion and
siltation. Disposal of waste or debris in active public waste or disposal areas will not be
permitted without prior approval by the responsible engineer.
Vegetation from land clearing, and other demolition, construction, and land clearing
materials, will be disposed of in accordance with applicable air pollution and solid
waste regulations. If woodland is involved during right of way construction, efforts will
be made by the contractor to salvage merchantable timber and thereby lessen the need
for piling and burning of debris.
Information provided by the NCDEHNR Division of Land Resources, indicates that 22
geodetic survey markers may be impacted by improvements to US 421. Prior to
construction, the NC Geodetic Survey will be contacted regarding monument locations
and procedures.
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421 44
5.0 .COMMENTS. AND COORDINATION
5.1 AGENCY COORDINATION
A scoping letter for the proposed US 421 project was forwarded to state and federal
agencies and local officials on April 24, 1990. The letter included a figure illustrating
the project study area and described important issues that would be addressed in the
planning document. A written response was requested from each recipient regarding
any positive or negative impacts of the project relative to their specific areas of
concern. The scoping letter was sent to the following:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District*
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources*
North Carolina State Clearinghouse, Department of Administration*
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission*
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources*
Region D Council of Governments*
County of Wilkes*
Wilkes County Schools
Wilkes County Planning Department
City of Wilkesboro Police Department
City of Wilkesboro Fire Department
City of Wilkesboro City Manager
Those agencies that responded in writing to the scoping letter have been denoted by an
' asterisk (*). Agency responses have been incorporated directly into project planning
where appropriate. Copies of the agency coordination letters are included in Appendix
E.
5.2 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
At the outset of the planning process, a Public Involvement Program was developed to
facilitate public participation in the US 421 project. The major components of the
program include:
' *Newsletters
*Toll-free telephone hot line
*Mailing list and post office box
•Small group informational meetings
*Elected officials informational meetings
*Public meetings/Citizens Informational Workshops
' *Agency coordination
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
'
US 421 45
5.2.1 Mailing List, Post Office Box, and Toll-free Hotline
A mailing list was generated which contains the names and addresses of all parties
(elected officials, local government agencies, and interested individuals) who expressed
an interest in the project. This mailing list has been periodically updated over the
course of the project. The list was used for mailings of newsletters and the
announcement of informational workshops and will be used to announce the public
hearing on the EA.
A post office box was established at the beginning of the project for correspondence
concerning the project. The address was publicized at informational workshops and in
newsletters.
A toll-free telephone number, established at the outset of the project, was listed in the
first newsletter. The public was invited to call this number to obtain additional
' information on the study and/or voice concerns.
' 5.2.2 Newsletters
Newsletters were prepared and sent to individuals on the mailing list and other
interested parties. The first newsletter, distributed in July 1990, featured information
concerning the need for the proposed improvements, the time and place of the first
Citizens Informational Workshop, and a list of important dates in the planning process.
Addresses for points of contact and a toll-free telephone number were provided for
' individuals wishing to comment or obtain additional information on the project. The
second newsletter, distributed in Winter 1995, detailed the alternative evaluation
process and included information on the selection of the Recommended Alternative. It
is anticipated that the final newsletter will be distributed in late Spring 1995 to
announce the distribution of the Environmental Assessment document and the date of
the public hearing.
5.2.3 Small Group Informational Meetings
Staff members were made available during the planning and document preparation
process for presentations to civic groups, neighborhood organizations, and other
interested parties.
5.2.4 Public Officials Meetings
' A meeting was held in cooperation with local public officials in July 1990. This
meeting focused on the purpose and need of the project, project study corridors,
potential impacts and issues to be addressed in the EA, and the public involvement
' plan. A second Public Official's Meeting was held in March 1995. This meeting
provided a summary of the alternative evaluation process and the selection of the
Recommended Alternative.
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421 46
'
5.2.5 Citizens Informational Workshops
' The first Citizens Informational Workshop was held in July 1990 at the Wilkes County
Office Building. Aspects of the project, including environmental and design constraints,
were discussed with the individuals who attended. An aerial photograph of the study
area with potential study corridors was also presented. Participants were given the
opportunity to draw on an acetate overlay their suggestions for alignments, locations of
wildlife sightings, etc. Approximately 25 citizens attended the meeting.
1 h
C
oncerns
op.
Written comments on the project were received following the works
included impacts of potential alternatives on existing homes and businesses, and the
' possible loss of businesses in Wilkesboro if the commercial district were to be
bypassed.
t
1
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
r 1
US 421 R-
r
REFERENCES
r
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 1990. A Policy
r on Geometric Design of Highway and Streets. AASHTO, Washington, DC. 1044 pp.
Braun, E.L. 1950. Deciduous Forest of Eastern North America. The Free Press, New
r York. 596 pp.
Clark, W.C. and B.K. Wheeler. 1987. Hawks of North America. Houghton Mifflin
r Company, Boston, MA.
Coastal Carolina Research, Inc. 1992. Archaeological Survey of US 421 West of
Wilkesboro to East of Maple Springs, Wilkes County, North Carolina. Prepared for
r Woolpert for North Carolina Department of Transportation.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
r Wetlands and Dgowater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS - 79/31. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
' Earley, L.S. 1991. Going, going...? Wildlife in North Carolina, Vol. 55, No. 3,
March 1991.
Farvel, F.D. B. Hamby, and R.J. Hayes. 1989. Transportation Development Plan for
r Wilkes County. North Carolina. Ecosometrics Incorporated. Bethesda, Maryland. 110
pp. plus appendices.
r Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1991a. Wilkes County. North Carolina,
Unincorporated Areas. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community No. 370256 0175 B.
r Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1991b. Wilkes County, Unincorporated
Areas. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community No. 370256 0150 B.
r Federal Highway Administration. 1983. Noise Barrier Cost Reduction Procedures.
STAMINA 2 0/OPTIMA Users Guide.
r Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manual for
Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A.
r Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC. Cooperative technical publication. 76 pp.
plus appendices.
r Hammond, Paul C. 1995. Pers. Comm. Private Consultant. Philimoth, Oregon.
Huband, Kim. 1991. Pers. Comm. North Carolina Division of Parks and Recreation,
r Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC.
ydric Soils of the State of North Carolina. 1985. United States Department of
H
r _
Agriculture in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils.
Washington, DC.
r NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
'
US 421 R-2
' li
h C
aro
na
Louis Berger and Associates, Inc. 1993. Traffic Forecasts. Prepared for Nort
Department of Transportation.
t nd
hibi
n
A
1980
id
D
s a
a
mp
.
erm
.
Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Harrison III, and J.
Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia. University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill,
' North Carolina. 264 pp.
Mattson and Associates. 1994. An Architectural Resources Survey for the US 421
Improvement, Wilkes County, NC. Prepared for Woolpert for North Carolina
' Department of Transportation.
Mickey, Joe. 1991. Pers. Comm. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
' Division of Inland Fisheries, District 7.
Munsell Soil Color Charts. 1990 Revised Edition. Munsell Color, MacBeth Division of
MD
Baltimore
oration
en Instruments Cor
r
Kill
.
,
.
p
g
mo
National Environmental Technologies, Inc. 1994. Technical Memorandum on Air
' Quality. Prepared for Woolpert for North Carolina Department of Transportation.
National Environmental Technologies, Inc. 1994. Technical Memorandum on Highway
' Traffic Noise. Prepared for Woolpert for North Carolina Department of Transportation.
National Park Service. 1986. National Register Bulletin. US Department of the Interior,
' National Park Service. Washington, DC.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1985.
' Geologic Mao of North Carolina. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1990.
Classification and Water Quality Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Yadkin-Pee
' Dee River Basin. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1990.
' Guidelines for Evaluating the Air Quality Impacts of Complex Sources. Division of
Environmental Management, Raleigh, NC.
' North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1991a.
Administrative Code Section: 15A NCAC 2B .0100 and 15A NCAC 2B .0200.
Division of Environmental Management, Raleigh, North Carolina. 25 pp.
' North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1991b.
Administrative Code Section: 15A NCAC 4A - 4E. Sedimentation Control
' Commission, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1992.
t Water Supply Rules Adopted by the Environmental Management Commission on
February 13. 1992. Raleigh, NC.
' NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421 R-3
N
rth
l R
d N
l
h
esources.
o
atura
, an
t
North Carolina Department of Environment, Hea
Carolina Natural Heritage Program Element List. North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program. Raleigh, North Carolina. 16pp.
North Carolina Department of Transportation Division of Highways. June 1991. Best
Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1988. Bridge Inspection Reports.
' US 421, Wilkes County. North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1990. Policy and Procedure Manual.
' Highway Design Branch, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1990. Standard Specifications for Roads
and Structures.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1990. Traffic Forecast for U.S. 421,
Four Lanes East of Maple Springs to East of NC 268 Near Wilkesboro. R-2240. Louis
Berger & Associates, Inc. Raleigh, North Carolina. 56 pp. plus appendices.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1993. Thoroughfare Plan for the Town
of Wilkesboro and the Town of North Wilkesboro. Statewide Planning Branch, Raleigh,
NC.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1994. Transportation Improvement
Program 1995-2001.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. Construction Manual, Highway Design
' Branch, Construction Unit, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 1987. Endangered. Threatened, and Primary
' Proposed Plant Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
' North Carolina Office of State Budget, State Data Center, 1991.
North Carolina State Office of Budget and Management. 1991. 1990 Census for North
Carolina. State Data Center, Raleigh, NC.
Parnell, J.F., and W. C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas. Virginia, and
' Maryland. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 255 pp.
Parnell, J.F. and R.P. Teulings. 1986. Birds of the Carolinas. University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 408 pp.
Pignataro, L.J. 1973. Traffic Engineering Theory and Practices. Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
NJ. 502 pp.
Potter, E.F., J.F. Parnell, and R.P. Teulings. 1980. Birds of the Carolinas. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 408 pp.
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
1-1
1
u
I!
1
US 421 R-4
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of Vascular flora of the
Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.
Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Southeast
Region 2. US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(26.2). 124 pp.
Rogers, Linwood. 1990. Pers. Comm. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of Natural Communities of
North Carolina. Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Raleigh, NC. 325 pp.
Schafale, Michael. 1991. Pers. Comm. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Raleigh, NC.
Snider, Jerry. 1992. Pers. Comm. Department of Biological Sciences. University of
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Thompson, Peter. 1985. Thompson's Guide to Freshwater Fishes. Houghton Mifflin
Company, Boston, MA.
Transportation Research Board. 1985. Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209.
National Research Council, Washington, DC.
Tuttle, Wes. 1991. Pers. Comm. North Carolina Soil Conservation Service,
Wilkesboro, North Carolina.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1988. Soil Survey of
Wilkes County, North Carolina.
U.S Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1990. Hvdric Soils of
Wilkes Count, North Carolina. Technical Guide Section II-A-2, Raleigh, North
Carolina.
U.S. Department of Transportation. Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772,
Procedure for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. National Wetlands Inventory Map: Purlear,
North Carolina.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. National Wetland Inventory Map: Wilkesboro,
North Carol ina.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1966a. 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map Series:
Purlear, North Carolina.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1966b. 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map Series:
Wilkesboro, North Carolina.
NCDOT
Federal FA
July 1995
R
5
-
US 421
ies of North
Pl
t S
R
f
h
Li
an
pec
are
e
st o
t
Weakley, A.S. 1990. Natural Heritage Program
Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
Raleigh, NC. 56 pp.
Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell, and W.C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas.
Virginia. and Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
255 pp.
' Wilkes County Land Use Planning Committee. 1987. Wilkes County Land
Development Plan. Wilkesboro, North Carolina. 48 pp. plus appendices.
Woolpert. 1992. Technical Memorandum on Hydraulic Locations. Prepared for North
Carolina Department of Transportation.
l
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421
APPENDIX A
DESIGN CRITERIA AND TYPICAL SECTIONS
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421 EA
TIP No. R-2240
ROADWAY DESIGN CRITERIA
1
DESIGN FACTORS RECOMMENDED STANDARDS*
' SPEEDS NEW ALIGNMENT 70 MPH
EXIST. 4-LANE
WITH MEDIAN 60 MPH
CROSS ROADS 45 MPH-60 MPH
' ZONTAL ALIGNMENT
OR
H
I
SUPERELEVATION NEW ALIGNMENT .08 MAX.
EXIST. ALIGNMENT .08 MAX.
CROSS ROADS .08 MAX.
DEGREE OF CURVATURE NEW ALIGNMENT 3'00'
EXIST. ALIGNMENT 4!45'
' CROSS ROADS 9' 30' - 44 45'
LENGTH OF CURVE PER NCDOT STDS. & AASHTO (1990)
' SPIRAL CURVES WHERE REQUIRED BY NCDOT
TANGENTS BETWEEN REVERSED CURVES. LENGTH ADEQUATE
TO FACILITATE SUPERELEVATION TRANSITION.
ERTICAL ALIGNMENT
V
GRADE NEW ALIGNMENT 5% MAX.
EXIST. 4-LANE
' WITH MEDIAN 8% MAX.
CROSS ROADS 8%-10% MAX. RURAL 45-60 MPH)
9%-12% MAX. (URBAN 45-60 MPH)
(AASHTO)
LENGTH OF CURVE PER NCDOT STDS. & AASHTO (1990)
VERTICAL CLEARANCE PER NCDOT STDS. & AASHTO (1990)
SIGHT DISTANCES PER NCDOT STDS. & AASHTO (1990)
CROSS ROAD INTERSECTION MINIMUM OF 75
' ANGLE
PAVEMENT WIDTHS NEW ALIGNMENT 12' STD. LANE
EXIST. 4-LANE
WITH MEDIAN
12' STD. LANE
TURNING LANES 12' PLUS WIDENING FOR CURVATURE PER
AASHTO (1990)
CROSS ROADS 11' MIN.
SHOULDER WIDTHS NEW ALIGNMENT 10' IN CUT W/ 4' PAVED RIGHT SHOULDER &
2' PAVED MEDIAN SHOULDER
12' IN FILL W/ V PAVED RIGHT SHOULDER &
' 2' PAVED MEDIAN SHOULDER
EXIST. 4-LANE 10' IN CUT W/ 4' PAVED RIGHT SHOULDER &
2' PAVED MEDIAN SHOULDER
12' IN FILL W/ 4' PAVED RIGHT SHOUDLER &
2' MEDIAN SHOULDER
CROSS ROADS 8'
BRIDGE SECTION PER TYPICAL SECTIONS
US 421 EA
' TIP No. R-2240
ROADWAY DESIGN CRITERIA
' (CONTINUED)
DESIGN FACTORS RECOMMENDED STANDARD&
MEDIAN WIDTHS NEW ALIGNMENT 46'
' EXIST. 4-LANE WITH MEDIAN 46'
NEW 5-LANE SECTION (CENTER LANE) 12'
' CROSS SLOPES PAVEMENTS
SHOULDERS
46' MEDIAN
NEW EMBANKMENTS
' CUT SECTIONS
ROADWAY DITCHES PER NCDOT ROADWAY HINGE STDS.
' DITCH GRADES NEW ALIGNMENT
EXIST. ALIGNMENT
' CLEAR ZONES PER NCDOT STDS. & AASHTO (1990)
BRIDGE WIDTHS NEW ALIGNMENT
EXIST. ALIGNMENT
TO ACHIEVE R-R-R GUIDELINES
E
+ IMPROVEMENTS TO S
EXISTING LAN
1 /4" /FT.
1 /FT.
6:1
6:1 - 2:1 MAX.
2:1 MAX.
.5% MIN.
.5% MIN.
38'
28' MIN. W/CONSIDERATION OF UPGRADING
TO 38'
Z
(A
Oqq?
p
GPAQIE POW
N
A
00
K
r
-1 ob
Q
K
Q Q
r
K
?M R t?
f?
u
4
RA OR
@
a
--? ?1 -1 O Z m M
25 :1
. .
n
Q m
O m
oo
.p
. N o
- m
o N
o .?
O O
;Oz m ?...
t./) ? o =. O
CD
N
-?- o ?
N r
o?
o a
m 00
N
o ?
C4 rn
?- n z
3
. m
0
US 421
APPENDIX B
RELOCATION REPORT
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
RELOCATION REPORT
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
North Carolina Department of Transportation
AREA RELOCATION OFFICE
Y E.I.S. 1 CORRIDOR DESIGN (PAGE 1 OF 2)
PROJECT: 6.769002T COUNTY Wilkes Alternate 1 of 1 Alternate
I. D. NO.: R-2240 F.A. PRoiFcr NIA
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Widen US 421 From East of Maple Spfings to East of NC 268
° .rte ?.}..... _ ,<.:. ?.. ?. ',,:...
?.K,w.,n._ •fh+.a. Sc',dar,r++Sk.^.<.k?.:..d.?.??""H??R..:.
I5PLACEES ' ' ::; : :;;
= ; -. ESTIMATED D
;':• ..... ....::y : _ ...
..
' INCOt IE LE EL
Type of
(
Dis lacees Owners Tenants Total Minorities 0-15M 15-25M 25-35M 35-50M 50 UP
Individuals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C.
Families 9 0 9 0 0 2 1 '2
Businesses 3 2 5 0 '•: .-VALUE OF DWEIZING.. - ,:. ''•DSS DV6712 YGAVAII.ABLE . '
Fauns 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For R ent
Non-Profit 1 - 0 1 0 0-2011 0 $0-150 p 0-20a: 0 $0-1501
t
...................
:- ..ANSWER ALL UES
: ..... ..
T10NS•::::::
MAW
1
150-250
p
20_4o.Ni
4 o-ZSo
It
f
Yes No Ex lair al! "I2:S" ans-veers 40-70m 1 250-400 0 40-70,i 24 29-400
f
X 1. Will special relocation services be necessary?
f
70-I00zi 4 400-400 p 70-IOOM 21 400-600
X 2. Will schools or churches be affect by 100 167 3 coo uP 0 ioo up 21 cao up
:
.......... ............ . displacement?
......................
TOTAL 9 70 ..............
X 3. Will business services still be available after REMARKS Res bird b Number
....
.... ...... E project? 3. YES
I
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so,
indicate size, type, estimated number of 4. (A) NYBT SERVICES, INC. TRANSPORTATION I SERVICES.
employees, minorities, etc. 40 FULL TIME, 2 PART TIME - NOT A MINORITY
,Y 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage? BUSINESS.
6. Source for available housing (list).
,Y 7. Will additional housing programs needed? (B) AUTREY'S FLEA MARKET, FLEA MARKET BLDG.
X 8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered? SPACES APPEAR TO BE USED FOR NVEEKEND
X 9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc. VENDORS. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES WOULD VARY,
families? THERE ARE 2 VENDORS THAT APPEAR TO RENT
X 10. Will public housing be needed for project? CONTINUOUS. (1) YVILKES HOBBY - HOBBY SHOP,
X 11. Is public housing available? 2 FULL TIME,1 PART TIME, NOT A MINORITY
X 12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing BUSINESS. (2) FLOWERS BAKERY, BAKERY DIST, l
housing available during relocation period? FULL TIME, 2 PART TIME - NOT A MINORITY
X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within BUSINESS.
.
.......... - ...........
-
financial means?
X 14. Are suitable business sites available (list (C) COPY SERVICE & SUPPLY, INC. - SALES Se"
_
- - source). SERVICE BUSINESS, 3 FULL TIME, 2 PART TIME. NOT
15. Number months estimated to complete A MINORITY BUSINESS.
- - . RELOCATION?
(D) MT. PLEASANT MASONIC LODGE, FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION NON-PROFIT.
6. LOCAL REALTORS, WILKES COUNTY MLS, NEWSPAPERS & VISUAL SURVEY.
ALAN
H ROTHROCK At 02-16-95 &'-'O_
. Relocation Agent Date Approved b Date
Form *4 Rvise4"
original & 1 Copy: wme xetoeeuon i%etm
2 Copy Area ltelocRtion Office
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
RELOCATION REPORT
EIS
PROJECT 6.769002T
IN: R-2240
(PAGE 2 OF 2)
WILKES CO.
8. WILL BE IMPLEMENTED AS NECESSARY.
9. ' IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THERE MAY BE SOME LARGE FAMILIES,
ELDERLY AND DISABLED AFFECTED BY THIS PROJECT. HOWEVER.
NO LARGE NUMBERS ARE EXPECTED, DUE TO THE LIMITED
DISPLACEES ON PROPOSED PROJECT. NO MAJOR PROBLEMS
ANTICIPATED.
11. WILKES COUNTY PUBLIC HOUSING.
12. YES, AS INDICATED BY THE AVAILABLE HOUSING AUTHORITY.
14. SEE -- ITEM #6.
NOTE -- AVAILABLE HOUSING LIST WAS COMPLIED FROM LISTINGS IN THE
AREA OF PROJECT AND DOES NOT INDICATE THE TOTAL AVAILABLE
HOUSING IN WILKES COUNTY.
1 US 421
APPENDIX C
SHPO COORDINATION
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
- TIP Sz-- 2240
CONCURRENCE FORM
FOR
ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
.CJ
County 0 K.YcEs
Brief Project Description
U5 41,1 IoM ErtST of MAPLF- sY??n!(,s ro EAsr of tJr, 2.(ob
v_North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Representative N O D
L
Al, C, 9? 7,1
FHwA, f 6 e Divi ?Ivi!fi& Administrator, or other Federal Agency
411LY.??iP.aofLO .
On ?6??ctt?.Y 1,115 representatives of the
r
?/ North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHwA)
Other
' reviewed the subject project and agreed
there are no effects on the National Register-listed property within the project's area of potential
effect and listed on the reverse. . '
? there are no effects on the National Register-eligible properties located within the project's area
' of potential effect and listed on the reverse/ .SoH,?soa FARM uwlpt,Ex t w Fr- •
there is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties within the project's area of
erse
potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s) are listed on the rev.
the
there is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties within project's area of
potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) are listed on the reverse.
Signed:
aq?s
1
Administrator, or other Faderal Agency
(over)
Federal Aid #
TIP # tZ- 224o Federal Aid # County 141LKE5
1
' Properties within area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is National
Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
JoHtJ?,oN ?AW?I AMP X DE, Oor 10 APE)
' Properties within area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status (NR or DE)
and describe effect.
Initialed: NCDOT FHwA SHPO
v ??W wwA?f
North Carolina Department of Cultural Reso
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
December 7, 1994
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
F
Re: Revised Architectural Resources Survey Report for
US 421 west of Wilkesboro to east of Maple
Springs, Wilkes County, TIP R-2240, State
6.769002T, ER 95-7826
Dear Mr. Graf:
?t ?
es DEC 1 2 1994
Divis, L f Arrdhl;J2,sjd}-(H•istory?
Wil ' w SJq?,/'jr^,'1'srec?
ONME
Thank you for your letter of October 28, 1994, transmitting the above referenced
report and an original photograph of structure #28 which we requested.
We have reviewed the report and concur that the Johnson Farm Complex (#31) is
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A for agriculture
and Criterion C for art and architecture. The boundaries of approximately fifty-one
acres appear appropriate for the complex.,
We also agree that the following properties do not appear eligible for the National
Register for the reasons outlined in the report:
Elledge Farm Complex (#29)
Monroe Foster House (#27)
Ulysses Grant.Foster House (#7)
Foster Log House (#17)
Huffman-Eller House (#6)
Robert Jones House No. 2 (#12)
J. C. McNeil House (#8)
In general the report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of
the Interior.
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807 ??
Nicholas L. Grat
December 7, 1994, Page 2
' The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance. with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,-
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
Sincerely;
David Brook
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw?;
' cc: ? H. F. Vick
B. Church
Mattsen & Associates
1-1
u
n
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives and History
' Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
Patric Dorsey,
' August 27, 1992
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator.
' Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
' Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Widening of US 421, R-2240, Wilkes County, CH
90-E-4220-0884, ER 93-7109
' Dear Mr. Graf:
Thank you for your letter of July 21, 1992, transmitting the archaeological survey
report by Loretta Lautzenheiser concerning the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, we concur that the following property is eligible for the National Register of
Historic Places under the criterion cited:
' Montford Stokes house site (31 WK121).
This site appears to be eligible for the National Register as an archaeological site
' under Criteria B and D. We request that final design plans be submitted to us to
evaluate the potential effect of the proposed- construction on this site.
The report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior.
' We concur with all the report recommendations.
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 Street' Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
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.
Si cerely,
David Brook
U Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw
cc: Loretta Lautzenheiser*
L. J. Ward
US 421
APPENDIX D
COMMON WILDLIFE
US 421 PROJECT AREA
FEDERAL AND STATE
PROTECTED SPECIES LISTS
NCDOT Federal Fes! July 1995
Listed. and Candidate Species
' of North Carolina', by County
November 17, 1994
-:Indicates no specimen from that county .in at least 20 years.
a - Indicates consultations conducted by the Asheville Field Office; other
' counties are covered by the Raleigh Field Office.
These 'records should be used only as a guideline, not as the final authority.
Records are updated continually andt-may be different from the following. This
' county list includes records after the year 1900 only.
ALAMANCE
Taxa Common Name Scientific Name Cat.
Plants
' met pinesap Monotropsis odorata 2
ALEXANDER o
Taxa Common Name Scientific Name Cat.
Mammals
_afinesque's big-eared bat Plecotus rafinesquii* 2
' Re?ti less
06 g turtle Ciemmvs muhlenberaii 2
Plants
em's bristle-moss Orthotrichum keeverae 2
ALLEGHANY a
'Taxa Common Name Scientific Name Cat.
Mammals
' ash tern woodrat Neotoma floridana 'magi ster - 2
Re ti 1 es
' og turtle Clemmvs muhlenberQii 2
Amphibian,
e en er Cryptobranchus alleganiensis* 2
' Fishes
aK na?-vffa minnow _Phenacobius teretulus 2
' Insects
Midget snaketail dragonfly 0 hio m hu h wei 2
Regal fritillary butterfly e ria i alia 2
Gammon's stenelmis riffle beetle Stenelmis a? mmoni 2
Plantss /
Tall larkspur D?elDhi ni um x l to m* 2
Gray's lily ?• - Lill um ra l 2
Sweet pinesap oFI ntro si ?dor?a 2
Gray's saxifrage axi r a taro-liniana* 2
Ul/L4/y0 luG uo..i.rnn -- : - ..._
I
Clams
Tennessee heelsplitter
Green floater (mussel)
Insects
' Diana fritillary butterfly
Plants
Area ing avens
' Roan Mountain bluet
Heller's blazing star
Blue Ridge goldenrod
A liverwort
Mountain bittercress
Tall larkspur
Bent avens
Butternut
'
' Gray
s lily
Bog bluegrass
Gray's saxifrage
WAYNE
' Taxa. Common Name
Mammals
a?nesque's big-eared bat
' Birds
ReT-cockaded woodpecker
Clams
' Neuse slabshell (mussel)
Atlantic pigtoe (mussel)
Plants
' on spice
' WILKES a
Taxa Common Name
Birds
' peregrine falcon
Cerulean warbler
' .Re t?iles_
oB g turtl
e
Insects
' Tana ritillary butterfly
Plants
eK ever's bristle-moss
L_a_s_m_igona hol stoni a
asmL igona su viri i5
Scientific Name
Plecotus rafinesauii*
Pi-co-ides borealis
Elli do judithae
usconaia masons
Litsea aestivalis
Scientific Name
Falco ere rinus
en roica ceru ea
WILSON
Taxa- -Common Name ' '
Birds
Re-d--cockaded woodpecker
' Henslow's sparrow
1
Clemmvs muhlenber4ii
S e eria diana
Orthotrichum k everae
Scientific Name
Picoides borealis
rn ramusLensl-owii
40
• ux atana
2
2
E
T
2
2
2
2
2
Cat.
2
E
2
2
Cat.
2
2
2
2
Cat.
2
S e eria diana
SCIENTIFIC AND
STATE
FED.
STATE
GLOBAL
COMMON NAME PROT. PROT. RANK RANK
*** Wilkes County
** Vertebrates
T
C2
S2
G3
CLEMMYS MUHLENBERGII
BOG TURTLE
SR
C2
S3B,SZ
G4
DENDROICA CERULEA
CERULEAN WARBLER
E
LE
S1B,S2
G4
FALCO PEREGRINUS
t PEREGRINE FALCON
RIPARIA RIPARIA
SR
S1B,SZ
G5
BANK SWALLOW
' ** Invertebrates
SR
C2
S3
G3
SPEYERIA DIANA
DIANA
TACHOPTERYX THOREYI
SR
S3?
G4
GRAY PETALTAIL
** Vascular plants
AGALINIS DECEMLOBA
SR
S2?
G4
PIEDMONT GERARDIA
C
S1
G3G4
ALLIUM CUTHBERTII
STRIPED GARLIC
SR
S1
G4
ASPLENIUM PINNATIFIDUM
LOBED SPLEENWORT
SR
S2
G5
CAMPANULA APARINOIDES
' MARSH BELLFLOWER
C
S1
G5
CIRSIUM CAROLINIANUM
CAROLINA THISTLE
HEXALECTRIS SPICATA
SR
S2
G4?
CRESTED CORALROOT
SR
S1
G5T4
WOODSIA APPALACHIANA
' APPALACHIAN CLIFF FERN
** Nonvascular plants
SR
Sl
G4.
BARBILOPHOZIA BARBATA
A LIVERWORT
SR
Sl
G5
CIRRIPHYLLUM PILIFERUM
' A MOSS
MACROCOMA SULLIVANTII
SR
S2
G3G5
SULLIVANTIS MANED-MOSS
E
C2
S1
G1
.ORTHOTRICHUM KEEVERAE
t KEEVER'S BRISTLE-MOSS
C
S1S2
G1G2
RHACHITHECIUM PERPUSILLUM
BUDDING TORTULA
' ** Natural communities S5 G5
ACIDIC COVE FOREST
CHESTNUT OAK-FOREST S5 G5
DRY-MESIC OAK--HICKORY FOREST S5 G5
' LOW ELEVATION GRANITIC DOME S1 G2
LOW ELEVATION ROCKY SUMMIT S2 G2
SCIENTIFIC AND STATE FED. STATE GLOBAL
' COMMON NAME PROT. PROT. RANK RANK
PIEDMONT MONADNOCK FOREST S4 G5
PINE--OAK/HEATH S4 G5
RICH COVE FOREST S4 G4
NC Natural Heritage Program
' NC Division of Parks and Recreation January 1995
NATURAL HERITAGE ELEMENTS AND SPECIES STATUS CODES
The attached 'output from the' t Natural tnaturalgcommuri ties, andaspecialg of
the elements (rare species, geologic
animal habitats)'.known to occur ,in your geographic area of interest..-The
comiled_*-,variety of sources,'.:
information on thi's dph printout i
surveys, sliteraturefrandapersonal communicationscluTheg field
museum
database is dynamic, with new records being addedand"old records being revised as
we receive new information:- The :enclosed. list cannot be considered a definitive
record of-natural heritage-elements,:and.it _should not be considered a substitute nt, for field surveys- When this ii.an
Pr gram bewcreditedt that
the printout-date be -g'
This cover sheet explains the. four columns of status codes that 'are given on the
I right-hand side.of the printout.' '
STATE PROTECTION'
CODE STATUS CODE STATUS
I
E Endangered SR Significantly Rare
Threatened V Vulnerable
SC Special Concern UNFC Undetermined
i T
EX Extirpated
C Candidate .
P_ Proposed (E, T, or C)
Plant statuses are determined by the Plant Conservation Program (N.C. Dept. of
Agriculture) and the Natural Heritage Program (N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health,
and Natural Resources). E, T, and SC species are protected by state law (the Plant
Protection and Conservation Act, 1979); C and SR designations indicate rarity and
the need for population monitoring and conservation action, as determined by the
I Plant Conservation and Natural Heritage Programs.
Animal statuses that indicate state protection (E, T, and SC) are published in
"Endangered Wildlife of North Carolina", March 16, 1992, N.C. Nongame and Endangered
Wildlife Program. The Rare, Undetermined, Vulnerable
Program designatio sa ETherypated
statuses are (for the most p?)
indicate rarity and the need for population monitoring and conservation action..
I FEDERAL PROTECTION'
The current federal status is listed in "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and
Plants, July 15, 1991 (50 CPR 17.11 & 17. Department of the'Interior).
Definitions are taken from the.Endangered the Federal Register, Part VIII?aNoveemberd21, 1991
the 100th Congress (1988), and
(50 CFR 17, Department of the Interior).
CODE STATUS DEFINITION
E Endangered A taxon which "is in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of its
range"
T Threatened A taxon;"which.is:likely to become an endangered
species within the foreseeable future throughout
all or a significant portion of its range"
' P Proposed A taxon which has been proposed for official
listing as-endangered or threatened
L Listed A taxon which has been officially listed as
- endangered or threatened
Cl Category 1 A taxon which is under consideration, and for
Candidate 1") which there is sufficient information to support
listing
1
' C2 Category 2 A taxon which is under consideration, but or
("Candidate 2")which there is-:insufficient,information to support
listing
3A -.Category-.3A "A taxon`which•was formerly under consideration for
' ("Candidate 3A")' -listing,`..but for which there--is "persuasive
evidence.of extinction"? `
3B Category 3B-: A taxon which-.was formerly under-.consideration for
' --.("Candidate 3B"):, listing,-:but which current taxonomic understanding
::does.not-.support as.a distinct-entity meeting the
- Endangered Species Act's definition -of .."-species". •-
3C Category 3C A taxon.formerly under consideration. for listing,
("Candidate 3C") but which has been"proven to be'more abundant.or
widespread than previously believed and/or [which
is] not subject to any identifiable threat".
GLOBAL AND STATE RANK
These ranks are determined by The Nature Conservancy's system of measuring rarity
' and threat status. "Global" refers to worldwide and "State" to statewide.
RANK DEFINITION
' Gi Critically-imperiled globally because of extreme rarity or otherwise
very vulnerable to extinction throughout its range
G2 Imperiled globally because of rarity or otherwise vulnerable to
extinction throughout its range
G3 Either.very rare and local throughout its range, or found locally in
a restricted area
G4 Apparently secure globally, although it may be quite rare in parts
of its range (especially at the periphery)
G5 Demonstrably secure globally, although it may be quite rare in parts
of its range (especially at the periphery)
GH Of historical occurrence throughout its range
GX Believed to be extinct throughout its range
' GU Possibly in peril but status uncertain; more information is needed
G? Unranked, or rank uncertain
_Q Of'questionable taxonomic status
T Status of subspecies or variety; the G rank refers to the species as
" .
a whole,
State rank codes follow the same definitions, except the words "in the state" should
be substituted for "globally" or "throughout its range." Also, there are four
additional state ranks:
RANK DEFINITION
SR = Reported from'North :Carolina,'but without persuasive documentation
B Rank of the breeding ;population inNorth_Carolina; used only for
migratory species
N Rank of the.non-breeding population in:North Carolina;-used only for.._.V
migratory species.-. ,-:
Z Population'is not of, significant conservation concern; applies to
transitory,•.migratory species
2/4/93 . __ »..__.._. _ - :... -.. P.O. Box 27687
N.C. Natural.Heritage Program Raleigh, NC 27611
Division of Parks and Recreation
US 421
Faunal Species Common To Or Observed
In the US 421 Study Area
Wilkes County, North Carolina
Fish
Common carp
Brown bullhead
Catfish
Madtom
Bluegill sunfish
Redbreast sunfish
Bluehead chub
Gizzard shad
Whitefin shiner
*Shiner
Amphibians
*Bullfrog
*Green frog
Northern dusky salamander
Two-lined salamander
Eastern newt
Fowler's toad
Reptiles
*Northern water snake
*Queen snake
Cyprinus carpio
Ictalurus nebulosus
Ictalurus spp.
Noturus spp.
Lepomis macrochirus
Lepomis auritus
Nocomis le tp ocephalus
Dorosoma cenedianum
Notro is niveus
Notropis spp.
Rana catesbeiana
R. clami ans
Desmognathus fuscus
Eurycea bislineata
Notophthalmus viridescens
Bufo woodhousei
Nerodia sipedon
Regina septemvittata
NCDOT
Federal EA
July 1995
US 421
Eastern garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis
*Five-lined skink Eumeces fasciatus
Rough green snake heod s aestivalis
Rat snake Elaphe obsoleta
Copperhead Agkistrodon contortrix
Timber rattlesnake Rotalus horridus
Painted turtle Chr, s emys Eicta
*Eastern box turtle Terrapene carolina
Birds
*Mallard Anus platyrhynchos
Wood duck Aix ssponsa
*Northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis
*Rufous-sided towhee Pik ervthrophthalmus
*Carolina chickadee Parus carolinensis
Red-eyed vireo Vireo olivaceus
*White-eyed vireo Vireo rig seus
Warbling vireo Vireo ilvus
*Yellow-breasted chat Icteria virens
*Northern bobwhite quail Colinus virginianus
*American robin Turdus migratorius
Common grackle uiscalus uiq scula
*Carolina wren Thryothorus ludovicianus
*Indigo bunting
ea
Passerina cyan
*Northern mockingbird Mimus pol lXg ottos
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
I
US 421
0
*Tufted titmouse Parus bicolor
*Blue-gray gnatcatcher Polioltila caerulea
*Wood thrush Hylocichla mustelina
Red-bellied woodpecker Melanerpes carolinus
*Eastern wood-pewee on o u virens
Eastern screech-owl Otus asio
*Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis
Turkey vulture athartes aura
Barred owl Strix varia
*Common nighthawk Chordeiles minor
*Chimney swift Chaetara ela ica
*Killdeer Charadrius vociferus
*Mourning dove Zenaida macroura
*Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens
*Northern flicker Cola a auratus
*Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus
*Eastern phoebe Sayornis hp oebe
*Acadian flycatcher Empidonax virescens
*Northern rough-winged swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis
*Barn swallow Hirundo rustica
*Blue jay Cyanocitta cristata
*American crow Corvus brachyrh, ny chos
*Eastern bluebird Sialia sialis
*Gray catbird Dumetella carolinensis
*European starling Sturnus vulgaris
*Louisiana waterthrush Seiurus motacilla
NCDOT Federal FA July 1995
US 421
*Chipping sparrow S i? zella passerina
*Vesper sparrow Pooecetes gramineus
*Song sparrow MeloWptza melo is
*House finch Carpodacus mexicanus
*American goldfinch arduelis tristis
*Olive-sided flycatcher Contous borealis
Mammals
*White-tailed deer Odocoileus vir ing`ianus
Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus
Beaver Castor canadensis
*Racoon Procyon lotor
*Opossum Didelphis virginiana
Long-tailed weasel Mustela frenata
*Striped skunk Mephitis mephitis
Meadow vole Microtus pennsylvanicus
Meadow jumping mouse Zapus hudsonius
Eastern mole Scalo us a uaticus
Eastern cottontail rabbit Sy(vilaQus floridanus
Golden mouse Ochrotomvs nuttalli
*Gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis
Eastern chipmunk Tamias striatus
White-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopus
Eastern pipestrelle Pipistrellus subflavus
Red bat Lasiurus borealis
Red fox Vulpes vulpes
NCDOT
Federal F.!
July 1995
i
1
1
1
1
1
US 421
Gray fox
Ferral dog
Urocyon cinereoargenteus
Canis domesticus
*Observed and/or evidence noted during field surveys
References: Parnell and Teulings, 1986; Martof et. al, 1980; Webster et. al, 1985.
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
US 421
11
u
APPENDIX E
AGENCY SCOPING LETTERS
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
1
MOUNT PLEASANT ELEMENTARY
D ?
To: Mr. H. Franklin Vick
Planning and Environmental Branch
Department of Transportation
' Division of Highways
From: Mr. Jim McRae
Principal
Mt. Pleasant Elementary School
State Project No.
Subject: US 421 Improvements, Wilkes County, ?
6.769002T, TIP No. R-2240
In response to your letter of August 18, 1995 requesting information
t -on the significance of the playground equipment that may be affected by
the widening of Highway 421, the following information is hereby
1 provided:
After reviewing the preliminary plans for the widening with Mr. Wade
' Hoke of the Highway Department and inspecting the area in question, it is
my opinion that this proposed project and the playground on our school
' property that may be affected, IS NOT OF LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE FOR
RECREATIONAL PURPOSES. The area in question is in an inconvenient area
of the schoolgrounds and is used very little by either the school or the
community.
During my meeting with Mr. Hoke I did express my concern about the
safety of a major roadway being any closer to the school. I also asked if a
fence. would be erected at the top of the proposed new bank leading down
' to the highway. He replied that these concerns would be addressed at a
future public meeting and would also be addressed in negotiations with
' the Board of Education.
Please keep us advised as to the progress of this project and let us
' know if we can be of any assistance.
1
11
d ??o
???""? .111N 2 1 ?
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
June 15, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
Division of Highways'
Department of Transportation
David Brook, Deputy State / 0L_}VQ z
Historic Preservation Officer
Widening of US 421 from NC 268 in Wilkesboro to
east of Maple Street, R-2240, Wilkes County,
CH 90-E-4220-0884
We have received notification from the State Clearinghouse concerning
the above project.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures
of historical or architectural importance located within the planning
area. However, since a comprehensive historical architectural -inventory
of Wilkes County has never been conducted, there may be structures of
which we are unaware located within the planning area.
We understand that a historic architectural resources survey will be
conducted for the area of potential effect of this project. Please
forward a copy of the report of this survey to our office as soon as it
is available so we may complete our review of this project.
Several archaeological sites are recorded in the vicinity of the',proposed
project. We concur with the recommendation for an archaeological
survey.
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 Street * Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Page Two
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. -If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Ms. Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DS:slw
cc: Federal Highway Administration
State Clearinghouse
4-Louis Berger & Associates
1
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
ASHEVILLE FIELD OFFICE
100 OTIS STREET, ROOM 224
ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28801
¦
TAIL MDE IN
'.¦?:
AMUM
June 5, 1990
`JUN
-? 71990
=
v s
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E. ?2
DIVISION OF co
-
' '
?
2
Manager, Planning and Research Branch HIGHWAyS QS. J"
th Carolina Department of Transportation
N
or
P.O. Box 25201 RESEp,RG
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
' Dear Mr. Ward:
Wilkesboro to east of
268 i
n
Subject: Proposed widening of US 421 from NC
Maple Street in Wilkes County, North Carolina (State Project
No. 6.769002T, TIP No. R-2240)
This responds to your letter of April 24, 1990 (receiv_ed May 7, 1990),
requesting our comments on the subject proposal. These comments are
f the Fish and Wildlife
i
' ons o
provided in accordance with the provis
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).
' Fish and Wildlife Service is particularly concerned about the
S
The U
.
.
potential impacts the proposed action may have on endangered/threatened
species and on stream and wetland ecosystems within the project impact
area. Preference should be given to alternative alignments, stream
and construction techniques that avoid and/or minimize
structures
sin
,
g
cros
encroachment and impacts to these resources.
The enclosed page identifies federally protected endangered (E) and
threatened (T) species that may occur in the area of influence of this
proposed action. The legal responsibilities of a Federal agency or their
ered
dan
E
f th
g
n
e
designated non-Federal representative under Section 7 o
reviously
ou
t t
l
.
p
o y
sen
Species-Act, as amended, were detailed in materia
have an
if
y
you
If you would like another copy of this material or
questions, please contact Mr. John Fridell at 704/259-0321 (FTS 672-0321).
The Service's review of any environmental document would be greatly
facilitated if the document contained the following information:
(1) A complete analysis and comparison of all available alternatives
including the no action alternative.
(2) A description of the fishery and wildlife resources within
' existing and required additional rights-of-way and any areas,
such as borrow areas, which may be affected directly or
indirectly by the proposed improvements.
i
' (3) Acreage and descriptions of branches, creeks, streams, rivers, or
wetlands which will be filled as a consequence of proposed
highway improvements. Wetlands affected by the proposed project
should be mapped in accordance with the Federal Manual for
Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands.
u
fl
(4) Linear feet of any water courses which will be relocated as a
consequence of the proposed improvements.
(5) Acreage of upland habitats, by cover type, which will be
eliminated as a consequence of proposed highway improvements.
(6) Techniques which will be employed fordesigning and constructing
any relocated stream channels or f creating
wetlands.
(7) Description of all expected-secondary and cumulative
environmental impacts associated with this proposed work.
(8) Mitigation measures which will be employed to avoid, eliminate,
reduce, or compensate for habitat value-losses associated with
any of the proposed improvements.
-We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments and request that
you continue to keep us apprised on the progress of this project. In any
future correspondence concerning this project, please reference our log
number 4-2-90-060.
Sincerely,
?- P
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
Enclosure
cc:
Section Manager, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, Archdale
. Building, 512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, NC 27611
Mr. Charles Roe, Director, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, NC 27611
Mr. Rob Sutter, North Carolina Department of Agriculture, Plant
Conservation Program, P.O. Box 27647, Raleigh, NC 27611
Division Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, Box 26806,
Raleigh, NC 27611
Field Supervisor, FWS, P.O. Box 33726, Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
IN REPLY REFER TO
LOG NO. 4-2-90-060
LISTED SPECIES
BIRDS
Peregrine falcon - Falco peregrinus anatum (E)
STATUS REVIEW SPECIES
"Status Review" (SR) species are not legally protected under the Endangered
Species Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including
Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as
endangered/threatened. We are including these species in our response for
the purpose of giving you advance notification. These species may be
listed in the future, at which time they will be protected under the
Endangered Species Act. In the meantime, we would appreciate anything you
might do to avoid impacting them.
Reptiles
Bog turtle - Clemm s muhlhenbergi (SR)
t
I-
IN REPLY REFER TO
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402.1890
May 22, 1990
Planning Division 0 v? L
D -
a 13 M0
Mr. L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch ++
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
sr' `
1-5
?9?40
e8ANC7-1?
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
' Dear Mr. Ward:
We have reviewed your letter of April 24, 1990, requesting information L 1
' for the "Federal Environmental Assessment of the Proposed Widening of US 4?
from NC 268 in Wilkesboro to East of Maple Springs, Wilkes County, North
Carolina, State- Project No. 6.769002T, T.I.P. #R-22140" and offer the
following comments.
Several flood plains could be involved in this proposal; therefore, the
' Environmental Assessment should address potential impacts to these flood
plains.. Any adverse effects on the flood plains should be evaluated and
mitigated.
The proposed work may involve the discharge of fill material into the
waters of the United States and wetlands. Affected waterbodies include
South Prong Lewis Fork Creek, Lewis Fork Creek, Smitheys Creek, Fish Dam
Creek, Tucker Hole Creek, the Yadkin River, and tributaries to these waters.
In addition, a portion of South Prong Lewis Fork Creek that is located
within the study area is a designated public mountain trout water. Prior
Department of the Army permit authorization, pursuant to Section 4014 of the
Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for the discharge of
excavated or fill material in waters of the United States or any adjacent
' and/or isolated wetlands in conjunction with this project, including
disposal of construction debris. Due to the size and scope of this project,
we recommend that the wetland limits within the construction corridor be
delineated pursuant to the January 1989 Federal Manual for Identifying and
' Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. Once delineated, a representative of
the Regulatory Branch will verify the survey in the field.
On November 15, 1989, the Department of the Army (DOA) and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) establishing procedures to determine the type and level of mitigation
' necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act Section 404(b).(1) Guidelines.
1
F
n
1
-2-
This MOA, which became effective on February .7, 1990, provides for: first,
avoiding impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the least
damaging, practical alternative; second, taking appropriate and practical
steps to minimize impacts on waters and wetlands; and third, compensating
for any remaining unavoidable impacts to the extent appropriate and
practical. To enable the Regulatory Branch to process your application in
full compliance with this MOA, we request that you provide the following
inf ormation:
a. Permits are available only for work dependent upon being located
within an aquatic site and being the least environmentally damaging,
practical alternative. Please furnish information regarding any other
practical alternatives, including upland alternatives, to the work for which
you have applied and provide justification that your selected plan is the
least damaging to waters and/or wetland areas.
b. It is necessary for you to have taken all appropriate and practical
steps to minimize wetland losses. Please indicate all that-you have done,
especially regarding development and modification of plans and proposed
construction techniques, to minimize adverse impacts.
e. Appropriate and practical mitigation will be required for all
unavoidable adverse impacts remaining after all appropriate and practical
minimization has been employed. Please, indicate your. plan to mitigate for
the projected, unavoidable loss of waters or wetlands or provide information
as to the absence of any such appropriate and practical measures.
Final Department of the Army permit requirements will depend on the
final project design, area of waters and/or wetlands filled, construction
methods, etc. Accordingly, our Regulatory Branch would appreciate the
opportunity to review the plans, when they become available, for- a project-
specific determination of Department of the Army permit requirements.
' Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. David Leksoa at the
Raleigh Field Office, telephone (919) 846-0648.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can be
of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.
1
C
C
a' North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611, 919=733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
1
1 ?L':'??
MEMORANDUM
1 TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment JUIN
i f I!
Dept. of Environment, Health & Natural Resources
1 FROM: W. Don Baker, Program Manager -'
Division of Boating and Inland Fisherie
1 DATE: May 14, 1990
SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment of the Proposed Widening of US 421 from
NC 268 in Wilkesboro to East of Maple Streets, Wilkes County, N.C.
These comments are provided in response to your request of April 24, 1990,
for information for input relating to fish and wildlife concerns for the proposed
1 subject project. Wildlife Resources Commission review of the environmental
document would be greatly facilitated if it contained:
1 1. A description of fishery and wildlife resources, including habitats,
existing within, or impacted by the project.
1 2. The quantity of wetlands, streams, lakes, ponds and other fish or
wildlife habitats to be graded, filled or otherwise disturbed.
1 3. Stream relocations, crossings or other proposed construction activity
that may impact them..
4. Acreage of upland habitat impacted by cover type.
1 •
5. Mitigation measures proposed to avoid, eliminate, reduce, or
compensate for fish and wildlife habitat losses.
1 Thank you for the opportunity for input during the pre-planning stage for this
project. We will be happy to assist in any manner feasible during all phases of the
1 project.
WDB/lp
i
1
4
•?` a.r or
1 State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
1 512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
,dames G. Martin, Governor Stephen G. Conrad
Villiam W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
1
MEMORANDUM
- J I J N 1 ? !R)
1 Date: May 11, 1990
To. Melba McGee
From: Randy Cotten4
1 Thru: Gary Thompson
Subject: Wilkes County, Wilkesboro, N.C.
1 Proposed Widening of US 421 from NC 268 in
Wilkesboro to Ea : of Maple --reets'
No. K-
1 e have reviewed the Above referenced project and find
that 22 geodetic survey markers will be impacted.
1 - G --4 t i c `?urvey should be c -ritacted at P.O.
The N-C. ev - _,
Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C. 276119 (919%1 733-38-36 prior to
construction. Intention,.l destruction of a geodetic
monument is a violation o ":.C. General Statute 102-4.
GWT/ajs
cc: Joe Creech, NCDOT
P.Q. Box 27687, Raleigh. North Carolina 276167687, Telephone 919-733.3833
A,, Fnual Onnonunim, Ar irmarive k-non Fmolrner
.D
FrUN I
11D _6e6__-
Rh DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, County
AND NATURAL RESOURCES V/i (-
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
nt r-Agency Project Review Response
Project Name- l a? F{??c ??j.
1_71
Type of Project tL S
Several water lines are located in the path of and adjacent to the
proposed project. Due to a possible rupture during construction, the
contractor should contact the appropriate water system officials to
specify a work schedule.
The proposed project will be constructed near water resources wnicn
are used for drinking. Precautions should be taken to prevent
contamination of the watershed and stream by oil or other harmful
substances. Additional information is available by contacting the
Public Water Supply Branch at (919) 733-2321.
If this project is constructed"as proposed, we will recommend closure
' of feet of adjacent waters to the harvest of shellfish. For
? informationregarding the shellfish sanitation program, the applicant
should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Branch at (919) 726-6827.
' The spoil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a
mosquito breeding problem. For information concerning appropriate
' mosquito control measures, the applicant should contact the Public
Health Pest Management Section at (919) 733-6407.
' The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demo-
lition of dilapidated structures, an extensive rodent control program
may be necessary in order to prevent the migration of the rodents to
adjacent areas. For information concerning rodent control, contact
the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management
Section, (919) 733-6407.
' The applicant should be advised to contact the local health depart-
ment regarding their requirements for septic tank installations (as
F1 required under 10 NCAC l0A .1900 et. seq.). For information con-
cerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods, contact
the On-Site Sewage Branch at (919) 733-2895.
The applicant should be advised to contact the
' County Health Department regarding the sanitary facilities required
? for this project.
4a4t
Reviewer Branc /Unit ' DEHHR 3198 (Revised 2/90)
r" isinn of Envirnxurontal Health
n?s?12V Lj 71
'f, ry
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Water Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor J4.hn N. Morris
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary Director
may 30, 1990
i `,
MEMORANDUM I?11
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: John Sutherlan
SUBJECT: 90-0884, Improving U.S. 421 in Wilkes County
We have the following comments on the above project:
1. At stream and wetland crossings, utilize bridges whenever
possible to minimize habitat losses and floodplain
encroachment.
2. Minimize the loss of timber and prime farmland.
3. Provide vegetation buffers when highway passes close to
residential areas.
4. Mitigate the loss of wetlands and forests.
5. Minimize the use of curb and gutter; maximize the use of
porous pavement and grass swales.
6. Involve local landowners in gathering data on impacts; be
flexible on location of alternatives - adjust them to meet
local concerns.
1
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 276117687 Telephone 919-733-4064
An Equal Opportunity Affirmarive Action Employer
State of North Carolina Reviewing Office:
F[,),epartment of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Project Number: Due ate:
ERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS
After review of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) indicated must be obtained in order for this project to
omply with North Carolina Law.
uestions regarding Inese permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
III applications, information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same Normal Prc=ess
Time
Regional Office.
(statutory :rme
PERMITS
Permit to construct & operate wastewater treatment
facilities, sewer system extensions, & sewer
systems not discharging into state surface waters.
NPOES - permit to discharge into surface water and/or
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities
discharging into state surface waters.
Water Use Permit
Well Construction Permit
SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
Application 90 days before begin construction or award of
construction contracts On-site inspection. Post-application
technical conference usual
Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection.
Pre-application conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to
construct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPDES. Reply
time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES_
permit-whichever is later.
Pre-application technical conference usually necessary
N/A
Application copy must be served on each riparian property owner
e and Fill Permit On-site inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement I _ 7:-
facilities and/or Emission Sources
Any open burning associated with subject proposal V
y?ti
must be in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. JUN l IN 19 1r1,1?}
D ' olition or renovations of structures containing
asbestos material must be in compliance with
NCAC 20.0525 which requires notification and removal
prior to demolition.
limit)
30 days
t
I
(90 days)
90.120 c-:s
(NIA
i
30 days
(NIA!
7 days
(15 da)
55 d-vs
(90 da_. s.
60 days
(90 days:
60 dais
1 (90 days-
(The mplex Source Permit required under 15 NCAC 20.0800.
Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion & sedimentation control plan
ll be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Sect.) at least 30 days before begin activity;.
e Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance:
Mining Permit
North Carolina Burning permit
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit - 22
counties in coastal N.C. with organic soils
01 Oil Refining Facilities
Dam Safety Permit
PS-105
On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with EHNR as shown:
Any area mined greater than one acre must be permited.
AFFECTED LAND AREA AMOUNT OF BOND
Less than 5 acres S 2,500
5 but less lhan.10 acres 5.000
10 but less than 25 acres 12,500
25 or more acres 5,000
30 days
60 days)
On-site Inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit 1 day
(NfA)
exceeds 4 days
On-site inspection by N.O. Division Forest Resources required "if more 1 day
(NIA)
than five acres of ground :•aaring activities are involved. Inspections
s before actual bum is planned--
da
y
should be requested at least ten
90-120 Gays
(NIA)
NIA
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction. 30 days
Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans,
inspect construction, certify construction is according to EHNR approv- (NIA)
ed plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. An a
404 permit from Corps of Engineers.
Continued on rev erse
Normal n
Time
(statutory time
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES Or REQUIREMENTS limit)
File surety bond of 55,000 with EHNR running to State of N.C. 10 days
Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well conditional that any well opened by drill operate: shall, upon (NIA)
abandonment, be plugged according to EHNR rues and regulations.
Geophysical Exploration Permit Application filed with EHNR at least 10 days pric: to issue of permit 10 days
Application by letter. No standard application fore. (NIA)
State Lakes Construction Permit Application fee based on structure size is charge. Must include 15.20 days
descriptions d drawings of structure 8 proof of ownership (NIA)
of riparian property.
60 days
401 Water Quality Certification NIA (130 days)
55 days
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development $10.00 fee must accompany application (180 days)
22 days
J CAMA Permit for MINOR development 510.00 fee must accompany application (60 days)
Several geodetic monuments are located in or near the project area. If any monuments need to be moved or destroyed, please notify:
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C. 27611
Abandonment of any wells, if required, must be in accordance with Title 15, Subchapter 2C.0100.
Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority):
fib
date
I I
reviewer signature agency
1
? Asheville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, NC 28801
(704) 251-6208
? Moorseville Regional Office
REGIONAL OFFICES
919 North Main Street
• Mooresville, NC 28115
(704) 663-1699
' ? Washington Regional Office
1424 Carolina Avenue
Washington, NC 27889
(919) 946-6481
? Winston-Salem Regional Office
8003 Silas Creek Parkway Extension
Winston-Salem, NC 27106
tn, rn,Yc i _ )nei
? Fayetteville Regional Office
Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Fayetteville, NC 28301
(919) 486-1541
? Raleigh Regional Office
Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7657
(919) 733-2314
? Wilmington Regional Office
7225 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
(919) 256-4161
L-
Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Garner Road
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
May 15, 1990
TO: Melba McGee
Environmental Assessment Unit
FROM: Don H. Robbins
Staff Forester ?JV
SUBJECT: EA of the Proposed Widening of US 421 from NC 268 in Wilkesboro to
East of Maple Street in Wilkes County, North Carolina
PROJECT #90-0884
DUE DATE 5-28-90
To better determine the impact, if any, to forestry in the area of the
proposed project, the Environmental Assessment report should contain the
following information concerning the proposed alternative routes for the
possible right-of-way purchases for the project:
1. The number of total woodland acres that would be taken out of timber
production as a result of new right-of-way purchases.
2. The acres breakdown of this woodland concerning present conditions
such as clear-cut areas, young growing timber, and fully stocked
stands of very productive* timber within the new right-of-way
purchases for disturbed and undisturbed portions.
3. The site indexes of the forest soils that would be involved within
the proposed right-of-way, so as to be able to determine the
productivity of these forest soils in the area.
4. The number of woodland acres that would affect any watersheds in the
area, if the woodland was removed.
1
1
1
1
Melba McGee
PRDJECT 4190-0884
Page 2
D ?•
191 1991
i1
5._ If woodland is involved, it is hoped that the timber could be
merchandised and sold to lessen the need for piling and burning of
debris during right-of-way construction.
Provisions should be indicated in the EA that the contractor will
make all efforts to salvage any merchantable timber to permit
construction, once the contractor takes charge of the right-of-way.
6. The provisions that the contractor will take during the construction
phase to prevent erosion, sedimentation and construction damage to
the remaining standing trees outside of the right-of-way boundary
and construction limits.
We would hope that a route could be chosen, that would have -the least
impact to forest and related resources in that area.
DHR:la
cc: Fred White
File
fEQUEST
FOR REVIEW
ease review the attached notification and indicate your response. If your
agency requires additional information, contact the applicant directly or
all Region D Council of Governments' Clearinghouse. Please submit your
espouse to the above office by the due date indicated. Phone: (704)264-5558.
'CH Number 90 .E-4"220-0884-
Date
5/8/90
Response Date 5/29/90
Please sign and return to: Region D Council of Governments
Clearinghouse Coordinator
P. 0. Box 1820
Boone, North Carolina 28607
iffeviewers:
Cecil Wood, Wilkes County Manager
Orman Call, Wilkesboro Town Manager
hris Carter, North Wilkesboro Town Manager
orothy Smith, Ronda Town Clerk
esponse: This agency has reviewed the notification and offers the following
ecommendation: (check appropriate response/more than one can be checked)
No Comment
, Favorable. The project is in agreement with the goals and objectives
' of this agency's programs.
Unfavorable. The project is not in agreement with the goals and objec-
tives of this agency's programs.
Potential Problem(s). Identify:
Romments..
A
L
-- --- - `a Ju"{ 1990 co
`, K%P 7r }} i f FICE c
Zeviewed by %I-_
' uWll' unitea zjcates 'xJlk 44U-) blana xoaa, aulce cuo
Department of Conservation Raleigh, NC 27609
Agriculture Service -.
Telephone: (919) 79.0.,29Q5.,..
' June 5, 1990
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E.
' Manager of Planning and Research
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. O.'Box 'Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201 `?.
Re: Federal Environmental Assessment of the Proposed Widening of•US_A21-.--'''
from NC 268 in Wilkesboro to East of Maple Streets, Wilkes County,
North Carolina, State Project No. 6.769002T, T.I.P. #R-2240 C
Z
N
Dear Mr. Ward:
Crl
' This is in response to your request for Important Farmland Information for
.t
the R-2240 project. The ten enclosed interim soil maps contain soils -•f
information for the corridor area. Note the corridor boundary is basede-?±__
' the outline sketch that you provided. The soil map shows the locationf
the soils in the project area. Their soil symbols are identified on the----?1
enclosed soil identification legend. Please note, the important farmland
' legend is also shown on the soil identification legend.
These symbols are defined as follows:
P1-All soil areas meet the soil criteria for Prime Farmland.
' Rt0.%',*P3-Only soil areas that are protected from flooding or not frequently
flooded during the growing season are Prime Farmland.
-`P5-Only drained soil areas that are either protected from flooding or
' not frequently flooded during the growing season meet the soil
criteria for Prime Farmland.
1
1
.,0W S1-All soil areas meet the soil criteria for State Important Farmland.
The non-marked soil units do not meet the soil criteria for Important
Farmland.
In our review of the soil maps, we note that the important farmland soil
acreage is small in the project area. The soil maps can be used to
identify these soils, which should be helpful in the planning process.
If there are questions, please contact Ernest Hayhurst, at (919) 790-2905.
Sincerely,
C'_ ?..
Bobbye J. Jones
State Conservationist
cc: Ronald C. Howard
O The Sod Conservation Service
`J is an agency of nx
Department of Agriculture
CECIL E.,WOOD
County Manager
' JOE 0. BREWER
County Attorney
klene E. Faw
Clerk
May 25, 1990
COUNTY OF WILKES
WILKES COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
WILKESBORO,
NORTH CAROLINA 28697-2427
651-7346
' Mr. L. J. Ward, PE
Manager of Planning and Research
' Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
D
30=
RALEIGH, N.C.
' SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment of Proposed Widening of
US 421 - State Project No. 6.76790027 - TIP No. R-2240
I
Dear Mr. Ward:
The above referenced project is of great importance to Wilkes County and
all of northwestern North Carolina. It is necessary to complete the multi-
laning of US 421 to provide for a multi-laned facility that will connect
northwest North Carolina with the Piedmont. Presently, there is no such
facility. The economic impact of this facility will be very positive to
the area. The increased accessibility to the area will help with indus-
trial recruitment and also assist in improving the standard of living for
the area. I do foresee additional traffic in residential areas; however,
I do not feel that this will be harmful to the areas. especially if the
road is built as a fully controlled access facility. I, in conjunction
with other county leaders and other local business leaders, fully endorse
the fully controlled access option. This will provide protection for
residential and rural areas and will also help guarantee that the proposed
road will deliver it's intended service. I also strongly recommend the
by-pass south of Wilkesboro. This by-pass is needed for the following
reasons: the existing roadway is a heavily traveled commercial area. Any
attempt to use the existing right-of-way will result in a roadway that will
be dangerous for the traveling public because-the numerous entrance conn-
ections will create a bottleneck in that area due to the entering, exiting
and turning of traffic and will not allow the road to comply with the in-
tent of the intra-state system. While there will be a limited amount of
adverse impact because of the proposed project, it is obvious that the
benefits of this project exceed any adverse effects. I totally support
the building of the project to include a fully controlled access facility
and a southern by-pass.
JOE. H. BYRD, Chairman
C. C. JACK COMBS, Vice Chairman
ROGER D. SMITHEY
HENRY FORD RASH
R. TRACY WALKER
Mr. L. J. Ward, PE
Page 2.
May 25, 1990
' If you have any questions or comments concerning my comments, please
do not hesitate to contact me.
' Sincerely,
' Cecil E. Wood
Wilkes County Manager
' CEW/aef
I US 421
11
n
11
APPENDIX F
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
1
U.S. Department of Agricuiture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
FkRT I (To be comolereo by seder a/ Agency! 1 ANy1?RY 24- 411-!5-
L) S 4ZI -TIP NO. r' 44'?V 1
1 raposed Lana 51 Coutnt And State ?.G
l&*WIW &;efVST1-urrlVA A, TZI&A-T aG Wait
2&92T II /To be cmmDlered by SCS) I Oate Request Received By 5
Does the site contain prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland? Yes No
(If no, the FPPA does nor apply - do nor completeaddirional parrs of this form). t? ?
Major Croats) Farmable Land In Govt. Jurisdiction
CO R tj Ants: I 9 C1 a% % 24--7
Name Of Land Evaluation System Used Name Of Local Site Assessment System
GSA NA Acres Irrigated Average Farm Size
tm 93
Amount Of Farmland As Oetined in PPA
Acres: ? S S 9 1 _5
Oat* Land Evaluation Returned BY SCS
I-3;- 9.5
Alternative Site atln
RT 111 (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site A Site a Site C Site 0
A. Total Acres To Be Converted Directly 2-4 32
B. Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
C. Total Acres In Site 3 Z
RT IV (To be completed by SCSI Land Evaluation Information
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
B. Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland ! 5
C. Percentage Of Farmland In County Or Local Govt Unit To Be Converted D .153
0. Percentage Of Farmland in Govt. Jurisdiction With Sarno Or Higher Relative Value I `. 7
RT V (To be completed by SCSI Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (ScaleofOro100Points).
49
TIM
yART V I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained In 7 CFR 6WXbl
Maximum
Points
1. Area In Nonurban Use
2. Perimeter In Nonurban Use
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed
4. Protection Provided By State And Local Government
10-5. Oismnce From Urban Builtup Area
S. Distance To Urban Support Services
7. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average
8. Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland
9. Availability Of Farm Suo rt Services
10. On-Farm Investments
11. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services
12 Comoatibili With Existing Agricultural Use
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160
RT V I1 (To be completed by Federal Agency!
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Parr V) 100
Total Site Assessment (From Parr V1 above ora local
site assasrmenr)
TOTAL POINTS (Total ofabove 2lines) 160
260
Selected:
L
Date Of Selection was A Local Site Asassm9m Used?
Yes C3 No E3
e
lesson For Saection,
0
U.S. Department of Agriculture
FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING
Date Of Land Evaluation rl?guast
T I f ro 7e corno/e•el by =ederal Agency) J 40V?44Y ZS 1`1'9
NATl? Ag?ntYIrn ol y
;'Alf`t -r-l a .1.. - 2-2-APO FederaGFI u ?dw/ NXb0f
opasta unc s51tse - - CouG3ILKES _ j`l •C .
1?lksv4Y c:aNSTQ.ut?1o1J 4- TLI&4-T- aG 1. 4y 1 -
igzT n /Te he cernnlered by SCS) I -Oat* Request /Received _ .-,,QBV SCS_
des the site contain prime, unique. statewide or local important farmland? Yes No
f no. the FPPA does not apply - do not complete additional parts of this form). 19' C3
Major Croo/s) FsrtnalNe Land In Govt. Jurisdiction
C p R l,( Acres: 1 q % 96 2 4.7
Of Land Evaluation System Used Name Of local Site Assmment System
cSA NA Aces Imgacad Average Farm Size
14A 93
Amount Of Farrt+Iand As Defined in PPA
Acres: (o , 5 ) A 3.5
Oace Land Evalwtion Returned BY SCS
1-3)-9s
Alternative Site atln
T III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Site A Site a Site C Site O
Total Acres To Be Converted Directly 24 32
Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly
Total Acres in Site 3 7
IV (To be completed by SCS) Land Evaluation Information '
A. Total Acres Prime And Unique Farmland
Total Acres Statewide And Local Important Farmland ) 5
Percentage Of Farmland In Countv Or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted
Percentage Of Farmland in Govt. Jurisdiction With Same Or Higher Relative Value D .
H- 7
tRT V (To be completed by SCSI Land Evaluation Criterion
Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Sca/eo(Oro 10OPoints)
4'9
T VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)
e Anessment Criteria Mew criteria err exo1ained In 7 CFR 6M.51b) Maximum
Points
R. Area In Nonurban Use
Perimeter In Nonurban Use 10
3. Percent Of Site Being Farmed 2
. Protection Provided By State And Local Government 0
. Distance From Urban Builtup Area
8. Oistance To Urban Support Services d
. Size Of Present Farm Unit Compared To Average 5
Creation Of Nonfarmable Farmland 2
. Availability Of Farm Suo rt Services S
10. On-Farm Investments
. Effects Of Conversion On Farm Support Services 10
Comoatibili With Existing Agricultural Use
TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS 160 108
V1I (To be completed by Federal Agency)
Relative Value Of Farmland (From Parr V) 100 ?q
cal Site Assessment (From Parr V! above or a local
assa=menr) 160
(? (a
TAL POINTS (Total of above 2lines) 280
elected:
Oats Of Selection was A Local Site Away nt Used?
Yes ? No e
son For Selection:
US 421
L
C
n
u
1
APPENDIX G
RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE
FUNCTIONAL DRAWINGS
1 NCDOT Federal EA July 1995
? m m m m m m m m m m m m m m w m m m
V L 2
yc
50+00
9
6
60+00
X
A x5+00
al ia? 70°°I
d 19 11
A
,
15+00
Hil ? (-) 10+00
0+00
5+00 1
A
F
10+00
a
x
I
r
?M
A
t
i
20+00
25+00
30+00 1
Ji,
35+00
i
g i
40+00
NIB
r
(-) 5+00
5
.w ..? w w w w w w w w w w w w w w ?w
a
i?
st
8
t
8
?a
0000
00Q0
fill
woe
i?
Opp, i
_1000
i
000
i
i
i
17SHO 1
180+W
? ?eis+ao
I `,w+w
F004+,c
g3
i
305+00
S
T^- 3
I
1 ag
Nr
f
?a
310+00
-- -
320+00
m
J 323+OI
c\
?. a
330+00
;?I 3 335+00
a
w?
t
t
8
r
I
r
r
t
/r
l
r
i
r
F
r
r
P
a
a
_Y
a
I
5+00
r
r
270+00
a
r
Q
r
2x0+00
240+00
SEE SHEET' NO. 9
-7 STA. 41
y
8
71
•I
fl. n?
15-1,
6
R
410+00
413100
>.. 0
_U
! 435+00
450+00
A }
38G+00
lop
F
/ N
' S IRA
\?t
I '
Gr2
N ?
rUF
Q
ro + w+
N I ,
A
395+00
31
400+00 I
Y 1 -
_ E
STA.
SEE SFEET NO.
•ras l
i
1 I(1)
_ I III .
1 ? I
I I •
i+
I I }
1 I ?• I )
I I IV
' II
t
+? r it
,I
I r -RAV- I'
n Ott -' n
+ a I
? I
1
+
u uu R 0
SEE SW NO. 12
MX 470+00 470+00
- 476+00
a
N•.
485+00
a'
00
I
? ' 40+00
/
rr
/
rr
t
t
t
I
,
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Ja mes B. Hunt, Jr., G ove mor
Jonathan R Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
1"4j??A
10 A
?EHNF?
August 29, 1996
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McG
Through: John Dorn
From: Eric Galam
Subject: FONSI for US 421
Wilkes County
State Project DOT No. 6.769002T, TIP # R-2240
EHNR # 97-0093
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of Environmental
Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for
activities which impact of waters of the state including wetlands. The document states that
0.20 acres of waters will be impacted by this project but no impacts to wetlands. DEM offers
the following comments on the FONSI:
A) To the maximum extent practicable, DOT should not install the bridge bents in the
creek.
B) DWQ requests that weep holes not be installed in the replacement bridges in order to
prevent sediment and other pollutants'from entering the body of water. If this is not
completely possible, weep holes should not be installed directly over water.
C) Should stream relocations be necessary, DWQ requests that these relocations be
coordinated with the Wildlife Resources Commission.
D) Borrow/waste areas should avoid wetlands. It is likely that compensatory mitigation will
be required if wetlands are impacted by waste or borrow.
E) DWQ requests that DOT use hazardous spill catch basins to protect the existing water
use in accordance with DOT/DEHNR hazardous spill catch basin policy. DWQ also
requests that the location of the basins be stated in the environmental documents.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of a FONSI by DEM would not preclude the denial of a
401 Certification upon application if wetland and water impacts have not been avoided and
minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-1786) in
DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch. FAXED
us 421wil.fon
cc: Raleigh COE AUG 3 01996,
Environmental Sciences Branch • 4401 Reedy Creek Road Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Telephone 919-733-9960 FAX # 733-9959
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/100/6 post consumer paper
Environmental Review Tracking Sheet
DWQ - Water Quality Section RE?E1VEp
g '2 40C 14 1996
MEMORANDUM f IR0'V,,'"°'Z'_t- t s
n4 CIE/yCFS
TO:
Env. Sciences Branch
* Wetlands
? ohn Dorney
Eric Galamb (DOT)
? Greg Price (airports)
? Steve Kroeger
* Bio. Resources, Habitat, End. Species
? Trish MacPherson
? Kathy Herring (forest/oRw/HQw)
* Toxicology
? Larry Ausley
Technical Support Branch
? Colleen Sullins, P&E
? Dave Goodrich, P&E, NPDES
? Carolyn McCaskill, P&E, State
? Bradley Bennett, P&E, Stormwater
? Ruth Swanek, Instream Assess. (modeling)
? Carla Sanderson, Rapid Assess.
Operations Branch
? Dianne Wilburn, Facility Assessment
? Tom Poe, Pretreatment
? Lisa Martin, Water Supply Watershed
Regional Water Quality Supervisors
Planning Branch ? Asheville []Mooresville ? Washington
? ? Fayetteville ? Raleigh ? Wilmington
? Winston-Salem
FROM: Michelle Suverkrubbe, Planning Branch
RE: Do -T- L 5 1- 7 bj f kes(oovo , Wt(ke 5 L°o.
Attached is a copy of the above document. Subject to the requirements of the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act, you are being asked to review the document for potential significant impacts
to the environment, especially pertinent to your jurisdiction, level of expertise or permit authority.
Please check the appropriate box below and return this form to me along with your written comments, if
any, by the date indicated.
Thank you for your assistance. Suggestions for streamlining and expediting this process are
greatly appreciated!
Notes:
You can reach me at:
phone: (919) 733-5083, ext. 567 fax: (919) 715-5637 e-mail: michelle@dem.ehnr.state.nc.us
mLs:?circmemo.doc
-- -Ir " . i'
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form
? Project located in 7th floor library
Project Number: County: Date: Q Date Response Due (firm deadline):
( ,
?D NS ? ' DoT- r?1S ?Z I ?, 0 12ia?r S ; ?o ? ?. a ?c ZIPg ?1??.
This project is being reviewed as indicated below:
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All RIO Areas ? Soil and Water CI Marine Fisheries
? Fayetteville ?Air ?Coastal Management ?Water Planning
ill
El M El Water ED Water Resources environmental Health
ooresv
e
?Groundwater
Wildlife JSolid waste management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer K Forest Resources U Radiation Protection
? Washington ? Recreational Consultant ?J Land Resources ? David Foster
[]Coastal Management Consultant Parks and Recreation ?Other (specify)
? Wilmington
?Others
environmental Management
u Winston-Salem PWS Monica Swihart
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
No Comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attached/authority(ies) cited)
in-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
?Applicant has been contacted
II??II ?Applicant has not been contacted
LJ Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Other (specify and attach comments)
RETURN TO:
Melba McGee
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
PS IN
I]
US 421
EAST OF MAPLE SPRINGS TO
EAST OF NC 268 NEAR WILKESBORO
WILKES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PROJECT No. 6.769002T
T.I.P. No. R•2240
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Submitted Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)
J
1
By the
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
and the
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
-
-7 /-JS
19 ( o
' Da of Ap roval
7 //, 16,
Date of Approval
1
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning & Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Lj ?? '0'7 STN
1:?4 Nicholas L. G af, P.E.
Division Administrator, FHWA
i
1
1
u
1
1
US 421
EAST OF MAPLE SPRINGS TO
EAST OF NC 268 NEAR WILKESBORO
WILKES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
STATE PROJECT No. 6.769002T
T.I.P. No. R-2240
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Prepared by:
WOOLPERT
Charlotte, North Carolina
rrrrrr,,i
CAR
01
Michael A. Ia c roject Manager
`7Al..
Ronald A. Geiger, PE, Associate Partner
440
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Raleigh, North Carolina
J.A. Bissett, Jr., P.E., Unit ea
C ultant Engineering Unit
Stacy B dwi
Project Manager
0
J
n
1
E
t
US 421
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
section Page
List of Environmental Commitments ................................ ii
1. Type of Action ........................................... I
2. Additional Information ...................................... I
3. Description of Action ....................................... 2
4. Actions Required By Others .................................. 2
5. Recommended Alternative ................................... 3
6. Summary of Impacts ....................................... 3
7. Wetland Finding .......................................... 5
8. Floodplain Finding ........................................ 7
9. Circulation of the Federal Environmental Assessment .................. 8
W. Comments Received on the Federal Environmental Assessment ............ 9
11. Public Hearing .......................................... 19
12. Revisions to the Federal Environmental Assessment .................. 20
13. Basis For Finding of No Significant Impact ........................ 21
Appendix A - Agency Comments
Appendix B - Revised EA Exhibits
Appendix C - Public Hearing Comments
NCDOT FONSI Juh, 1996
1
LJ
1
0
US 421 ii
1
1 LIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard NCDOT measures and procedures, including Best Management Practices, will
be implemented during construction to avoid or minimize environmental impacts. The
1 following is a list of environmental commitments pertaining to the improvements of US 421
covered by this FONSI.
I 1. Geotechnical studies to determine hazardous waste site contamination, exact
location, and possible mitigation will be completed during final design and before
right of way acquisition.
2. NCDOT will give consideration to bottomless culverts or putting the floor of the
culvert below stream bottom to prevent disruption of fish movements.
3. Coordination with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will
occur, as necessary, during the design phase of the project. Appropriate measures
will be made to ensure compliance with FEMA floodway regulations.
i 4. Coordination with Wilkes County will be conducted during final design for
compliance with their respective floodplain ordinances.
' 5. Underground storage tanks encountered during construction will be reported to the
NCDEHNR's Division of Environmental Management.
Potential impacts to water quality of rivers and creeks will be minimized through
the implementation of techniques described in NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters (June 1991) and the North Carolina
Administrative Code, Chapter 4, Sedimentation Control.
7. Prior to construction, the NC Geodetic Survey will be contacted regarding
monument locations and procedures.
' 8. Final design plans will be provided to the NC Department of Cultural Resources to
allow an evaluation of the potential effect of the proposed construction on
archaeological resources at the Montford Stokes house.
9. Final design plans will include the placement of a six foot high chain link fence
along the portion of US 421 right of way bordering the Mount Pleasant Elementary
School property. A fence will be in place both during construction and after
completion of the project.
10. The economic feasibility of a retaining wall will be investigated by NCDOT during
final design in an attempt to save parking space at the Mount Pleasant Baptist
Church.
11. Efforts to improve the existing steep grade of the entrance into the Laurelwood
Subdivision from US 421 will be made by NCDOT during final design.
12. NCDOT will investigate potential improvements to the US 421 Bypass/US 421
Business intersection during final design.
I NCDOT FONSI Juh• 1996
1
US 421 1
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Prepared by the
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
of the
I NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
and. the
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
1. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Administrative Action, Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI).
The FHWA has determined that the recommended alternative for this project will have no
significant impact on the human environment. This Finding of No Significant Impact is
based on the Environmental Assessment (EA) prepared for the portion of US 421 from east
of Maple Springs to east of NC 268, near Wilkesboro, North Carolina (TIP No. R-2240),
which was approved on November 22, 1995. This EA has been independently evaluated by
FHWA and determined to adequately and accurately discuss the need, environmental issues,
and impacts of the proposed project. It provides sufficient evidence and analysis for
determining that the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required
for this project.
2. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Additional information concerning the proposed action can be obtained by contacting the
following:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
PO Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Telephone: (919) 733-3141
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Nicholas L. Graf, P.E., Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
PO Box 26806
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Telephone: (919) 8564346
I NCDOT FONSI July 1996
US 421 2
3. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), in consultation with the
FHWA, proposes to widen US 421 to a multi-lane facility from east of Maple Springs to
east of NC 268, near Wilkesboro. The proposed improvements will involve constructing
additional eastbound travel lanes south of the existing roadway. The proposed roadway will
follow the alignment of existing US 421 and provide no control of access. The location of
this project is shown on Figure 1.
This segment of US 421 is included in the TIP as part of the "priority completion corridor"
that will multi-lane US 421 from Winston-Salem to Boone. US 421 is part of the Intrastate
Corridor System which serves as the main highway link between the Piedmont and the
northwest section of the state. US 421 serves as the major transportation corridor needed to
foster economic development and enhance the tourism industry that the region depends on.
The North Carolina Intrastate System was established by the State Legislature in July 1989.
The mandated goal of the Intrastate System is to provide high-speed, safe travel service
throughout the state. The proposed project is in conformance with NCDOT's current TIP.
Right of way acquisition for this project is scheduled to begin in federal fiscal year (FFY)
1999 with construction to begin in FFY 2001.
The estimated costs included in the 1997-2003 TIP are $22,500,000 for construction and
$5,020,000 for right of way, which includes utility relocation costs. The estimated cost of
the project based on preliminary design is $39,316,000, which includes $34,300,000 for
construction and $5,016,000 for right of way and utility relocation.
4. ACTIONS REQUIRED BY OTHERS
The placement of fill material and structures in "waters of the United States" will require a
federal permit(s) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, pursuant to Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. The project is also located in a designated "trout" county. Consequently, a
letter of approval from the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission must be
obtained as part of the Section 404 permitting process. A Section 401 State Water Quality
Certification from the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources (DEHNR) will also be required. Storm water point source discharges associated
with construction activities will be authorized pursuant to General Permit No. NCG010000
under the authority of DEHNR's Division of Environmental Management.
5. RECOMN[ENDED ALTERNATIVE I
The proposed improvements will involve constructing additional eastbound travel lanes
south of the existing roadway. The proposed roadway will follow the alignment of existing
US 421 and provide no control of access. Private driveway connections will be
allowed from abutting properties, and crossroad connections will occur at-grade.
West of NC 16 and east of the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection, the proposed
widening will involve the addition of two eastbound lanes and a 46-foot grassed median
south of the existing roadway. East of NC 16 this four-lane divided section will transition to
NCDOT FONSI July 1996 1
O
c
O E D
Za i Z
Fx LEI
CL Z v
Q
u, LLI
V)
oo
C)
~
O L.Li
F-
~
LaJ .0 N -? U
?N N
I
a Z
3 ?
a w
. 3 a
.-? m Z w O O
a
N O
LL. LL.
M
v
V
y .
o
Z
.-
0 0( 0 L,,J O
LLJ
F- L
CL } Z
LLJ
(n V)
W W
J
-
j
?I Z
Z O H- Li
3N13HD1dW
INN
1-1
1?
V?jso-""
3NI IHO1dW
?j
t?
_a
3
F
C
4?J
N
O
! \ I
O
f..? x
I
I
m r = = = = m = m = m = = m
US 421 3
a five-lane section to tie into the existing five-lane facility located between SR 1323 (Darcy
Road) and the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection.
As previously described, US 421 between SR 1323 (Darcy Road) and the US 421
Bypass/US 421 Business intersection was recently upgraded to a five-lane section as part of
TIP Numbers W-2817 and W-2861. Further improvements to this 1.2 mile segment will be
considered, as necessary, during final design of this project. These minor improvements
will be contained within the existing right of way.
6. SUMMARY OF VAPACTS
A summary of the potential impacts associated ciate with Recommended Alternative i
pacts a so d the is
presented in Table 1.
The proposed widening of US 421 will provide a multi-lane roadway from east of Maple
Springs to east of NC 268, and serve as an important link between Winston-Salem and
Boone. The proposed project will provide a facility that will more efficiently and safely
accommodate both existing and projected traffic volumes.
' Widening US 421 will provide a number of beneficial socioeconomic impacts. The
proposed improvements to US 421 will increase accessibility to this portion of the state,
which, in turn, will foster economic development and enhance the tourism industry.
Existing travel delays and traffic congestion encountered in the project area will be greatly
reduced.
Approximately 32 acres of additional right of way will be required to accommodate the
proposed improvements. This acreage is generally comprised of upland forested areas,
residential and commercial lawns and properties, open fields, cultivated fields and grassy
shoulder areas. Temporary construction easements will be required along the project.
The proposed widening of US 421 will require the filling of approximately seven acres of
100-year floodplain. Approximately 5.4 acres of this floodplain involvement will occur
along the far western end of the project, where the existing US 421 alignment encroaches
on the floodplain of the South Prong Lewis Fork. The remaining 1.6 acres of fill will be
associated with the approaches and abutments at three bridge locations, including
' approximately 1.3 acres at the Yadkin River, and 0.3 and 0.03 acres at the Lewis Fork and
South Prong Lewis Fork crossings, respectively. Structures provided for these crossings
will be adequately sized to accommodate the 100-year flood without a significant increase
(less than one foot) in flood height. Regulated floodway areas will not be impacted by the
proposed project.
The proposed improvements will involve "waters of the U.S." ,1`a.file the widening will
t&blve'a'number of watercourses, minimal wetlands involvement is anticipated. The
project's involvement with waters of the U.S. will occur above headwater areas, as a direct
result of the extension of existing drainage structures: All totaled, it's estimated that the
Recommended Alternative will impad less than one acre of wetlands ere will be no
diversion of the affected stream channels and no changes to existing drainage patterns..
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
US 421
4
The Recommended Alternative will result in the relocation of nine residences. No minority
communities will be divided by the Recommended Alternative. No other social group, such
as low income families or the elderly, will be disproportionately affected by the
Recommended Alternative. Five businesses and one non-profit organization will be
displaced as a result of the proposed improvements.
One historic property within the general project area was identified as eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places. The State Historic Preservation Office has concurred
that this property is located outside of the area of potential effects of the Recommended
Alternative. No public parks or recreational areas of local significance will be affected by
the project.
One archaeological site, of nine sites discovered and two revisited during an archaeological
survey of the alternative corridors, was assessed as potentially eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places. The FHWA, in a letter of July 21, 1992, transmitted the
functional design plan illustrating the proposed corridor right of way with respect to sites
31Wk121 and 3]Wkl22. The Recommended Alternative is widening US 421. The
Recommended Alternative is more than 3,000 feet north of the location of archaeological
sites 31Wkl21 and 31Wkl22. Since neither site is located within the Recommended
Alternative, the project will not impact any significant archaeological site.
Improvements to US 421 will result in the loss or displacement of common plants and
animals. The potential impact to wildlife is primarily related to habitat loss. The removal of
wooded areas bordering watercourses will impact habitat which functions as wildlife nesting
and foraging habitat and corridors. However, the recommended improvements will occur
along existing US 421 right of way where the wildlife habitat is already fragmented and
degraded from previous development in the area. Correspondence with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service indicates that the Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) is the only federally-
listed endangered species known to potentially occur within the study area. Based upon a
review of historical records, field surveys, and the lack of suitable habitat in the existing
US 421 corridor, it is concluded that this species will not be impacted by the proposed
widening.
Recommended improvements to US 421 will involve one site containing underground
storage tanks (USTs). This site consists of an operational gas station. The extent of any UST
and/or hazardous waste site impacts will be determined during the final design phase of the
project. Any underground storage tank encountered during construction will be reported to
the DEHNR's Division of Environmental Management.
The project will not result in a violation of National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Noise levels at an estimated 25 residences and 22 businesses are predicted to approach or
exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria by the year 2018. These impacted receptors
are located in the areas of roadway widening. Since these receptors are isolated, and will
continue to have direct driveway connections to the proposed roadway, a noise barrier
would not be effective and/or reasonable and has not been included as part of the proposed
project.
The Recommended Alternative will impact approximately nine acres of soils designated as
Prime Farmland. Much of this affected area, however, is located within or immediately
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
US 421
Summary of Potential Impacts
Recommended Alternative
Recommended Alternative
Affected Resource Total R-2240
• Relocations
-Families 9
-Businesses 5
-Churches 0
-Non-profit 1
• Parks/Recreational Areas None
• National Register Properties None
• Major Hydrologic Crossings 7
• Floodplains (Acres) 7
• Floodway (Acres) 0
• Potential UST Sites Requiring Relocation 1
• Locations Exceeding or Approaching Noise Abatement Criteria Levels
-Residences 25
-Businesses 22
• Stream Crossings Requiring Bridges 3
• Wetlands (Acres) <0.2
• Prime Farmlands (P3 & P5) 9
(Acres)
• Right of Way and Utility Relocation Costs $5,016,000
• Construction Costs $34,300,000
• Total Cost $39,316,000
TABLE 1
NCDOT
FONSI
July 1996
n
C
Ll
1
11
US 421 S
adjacent to existing right of way, and has been converted into sites for residences and
businesses.
Construction activities will result in several short-term environmental impacts. Potential
short-term impacts to the water quality of Lewis Fork, South Prong Lewis Fork, Yadkin
River, and their respective tributaries, will be minimized through the implementation of
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters (June 1991). Long-
term reduction of water quality is not anticipated. The construction phase will result in
temporal and localized impacts to ambient noise and air quality. Temporary impacts will be
minimized through strict adherence to NCDOT's standard specifications for roads and
structures.
7. WETLAND FINDING
1
Wetlands are an important natural resource serving a variety of functions, such as fish and
wildlife habitat, floodwater storage, groundwater protection, and erosion/sedimentation
control.
Initial wetland assessments of the study area were performed using the U.S. Department of
the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Maps and
mapped hydric soil series from the Wilkes County Soil Survey.
Wetlands were, field checked in Junei49.90 'using the "three parameter" method described in
the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands;(Jammr , 1989).
The manual was designed to assist in making jurisdictional determinations using a multi-
parameter approach. This approach requires the positive evidence of hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology to determine that an area is a wetland. The
soils' hydric status was field verified using Soil Conservation Services' (SCS) list of hydric
soils, and the Munsell Color Chart. The hydrophytic vegetation status was determined using
the National List of Plant Species Mat Occur in Wetlands: Southeast Region 2 (Porter B.
Reed, Jr., 1988). Hydrology was determined through field investigation and observations.
Final wetland delineations will be completed, as necessary, during the permitting phase of
the project. The final wetland assessments will be completed according to the 1987 "Corps
of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1. However, because
of the type of wetlands occurring in the project area, major differences in acreage
determined using the two manuals is not anticipated.
A number of creeks and rivers flow through the study area. Field observations revealed that
these watercourses were typically narrow, perennial streams with steep, well-defined banks.
These watercourses are classified as Riverine wetlands. The category Riverine is derived by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Classification of Wetland and Deep Water
Habitats of the United States (Lewis M. Cowardin, 1979). Cowardin describes the Riverine
system as "all wetlands and deep water habitats contained within a channel...." These
Riverine systems are "bounded on the landward side by upland, by the channel bank
(including natural and manmade levees), or by wetlands." Although lacking adjacent
wetlands, these watercourses are, however, subject to the provisions of the Clean Water Act
as "waters of the United States." The FWS's National Wetlands Inventory Maps of the
project area further classify the majority of these riverine wetlands in the project area as
"
"upper perennial, unconsolidated bottom, permanently flooded
systems.
NCDOT FONSI .Iu4, 1996
US 421
6
Two areas in relative proximity to the north side of the existing US 421 roadway were
identified as wetlands during field surveys. The largest of these areas, a wooded depression
formed partly from an old lake impoundment, abuts US 421 approximately 1,500 feet west
of the US 421/SR 1154 intersection. The second identified wetland area was a 70-foot by
30-foot borrow pit located approximately 150 feet north of US 421 in the vicinity of Fish
Dam Creek.
In accordance with Executive Order 11990, "Protection of Wetlands," impacts to wetlands
are to be avoided where practicable. If avoidance is not possible, then impacts should be
minimized and, lastly, mitigated.
*e`Recommended. Alternative's widening of US 421 south of the-existing facility will avoid
kfth? field confirmed wetland areas.,The watercourses crossed by the existing roadway will
be impacted by the placement and/or extension of existing drainage structures (culverts,
cross pipes) to accomplish the proposed widening. Unavoidable bank to bank impacts
associated with the placement of structures in these "waters of the U.S.," based on
preliminary design, are anticipated to be less than 0.2 acre of Riverine wetlands.
The Department of the Army and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency entered into a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) establishing procedures to determine the level and type
of wetland mitigation necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act (40 CFR 230) Section
404(b)(1) Guidelines. Effective on February 7, 1990, the MOA provides for first, avoiding
impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the least damaging practical
alternative; second, taking appropriate steps to minimize impacts; and third, compensating
for any remaining unavoidable impacts to the extent appropriate and practical.
Continued efforts will be made to avoid filling or otherwise disrupting wetlands and waters
of the U.S. during both the design and construction of this project. Given the limited
wetlands involvement for the entire project it's anticipated that the project will be authorized
under one or more nationwide or regional general permits from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE). The Department will coordinate with representatives of the COE's
Regulatory Branch prior to submitting a permit application, in order to determine which
permit(s) would best suit the project and thereby streamline the permitting process.
The project is located within one of the 25 mountain counties of the state that contain trout
waters. Consequently, a written letter of approval must be obtained by NCDOT from the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, as a special condition of these permits.
Based on the above-described considerations, it is determined that there are no practicable
alternatives to the proposed construction in wetlands/waters of the U.S., and that the
Recommended Alternative includes all practical measures to minimize harm to wetlands
which may result from such use. The actual acres of wetland impacts will be delineated
during final design. The Department will coordinate with the COE and appropriate state
agencies, as needed, during the Section 404 permitting. Due to the limited nature of the
impacts, the use of NCDOT's Best Management Practices for the Protection of Surface
Waters is recommended as mitigation for unavoidable losses. Examples of these BMP's
would include maintaining sheet flow in wetlands, designing stream crossings to
accommodate the natural stream channel with minimal disruption to the adjoining
ecosystem, and maintaining vegetated buffers or berms between water courses and highway
fill slopes.
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
US 421 7
8. FLOODPLAIN FINDING
A floodplain evaluation was conducted in accordance with Executive Order 11988
"Floodplain Management," to determine if encroachment would occur with implementation
of the Recommended Alternative. This evaluation is based on Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps, revised September 17, 1992
which depict the 100-year floodplain and floodway boundaries for the Yadkin River, and
flood hazard area boundaries for the creeks and tributaries included within the project study
area. The proposed widening of US 421 will encroach upon the floodplain of the Yadkin
River, and the flood hazard area associated with the Lewis Fork.
As noted in FEMA's detailed flood study, encroachment on floodplains by structures and fill
can reduce flood-carrying capacity, increase flood height and velocities, and increase flood
hazards beyond the encroachment itself. As part of the National Flood Insurance Program,
FEMA has determined floodway boundaries as a tool for floodplain management. Based on
the FEMA definition, the 100-year floodplain is divided into a floodway and a floodway
fringe. The floodway is the channel of a stream plus any adjacent floodplain areas that need
to be kept free of encroachment so the 100-year floodplain can be carried without
substantial increases in flood heights. Minimum standards limit such increases to one foot,
provided that hazardous velocities are not produced. The area between the floodway and the
100-year floodplain boundaries is termed the floodway fringe. The floodway fringe
1 encompasses the portion of the floodplain that could be completely obstructed without
increasing the water surface elevation above FEMA's published floWway elevation.
Within the project area, the Yadkin River floodplain is estimated to be 2,000 feet wide at
the US 421 bridge. The floodway in this vicinity is approximately 200 feet wide. No
detailed study of floodplain and floodway information is currently available for the creeks
within the study area. However, flood hazard area maps have been developed for Lewis
Fork and South Prong Lewis Fork by FEMA. Where US 421 crosses Lewis Fork, the flood
hazard area is approximately 700 feet wide to the north (upstream) of US 421 and 300 feet
wide to the south (downstream). At the South Prong Lewis Fork bridge, the flood hazard
area is approximately 100 feet wide immediately north and south of the structure. However,
the flood hazard area widens to 600 feet approximately 100 feet north (upstream) of the
bridge, and is 400 feet wide approximately 100 feet south (downstream) of this structure.
Based on the preliminary design and assessment of the existing bridge length, height, and
waterway opening, the existing bridges have been determined hydraulically adequate. Each
of the existing structures will be replaced by a similar structure. This replacement strategy
is based, in part, upon the respective estimated remaining life spans of these bridges.
The Recommended Alternative will widen US 421 to the south at the Lewis Fork and South
Prong Lewis Fork crossings, thereby minimizing impacts to the flood hazard areas at these
locations. Minimal impacts to flood hazard areas are anticipated from the construction of
the new bridges due to the current and proposed heights of these bridges over the respective
watercourses and the narrow width of the flood hazard areas. The construction of bridges at
South Prong Lewis Fork and Lewis Fork will result in an estimated 0.03 and 0.3 acres of
fill being placed in their respective flood hazard areas
.
The bridge at the Yadkin River will require the placement of approximately 1.3 acres of fill
within the 100-year floodplain to construct the bridge approaches and abutments. Based on
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
US 421 g
I
the preliminary design and assessment, bridge construction will result in no impact to the
regulated floodway or resultant increase in flood height. The proposed widening of US 421
will also require the placement of fill in approximately 5.4 acres of flood hazard area
associated with South Prong Lewis Fork. This unavoidable involvement will occur along the
far western end of the project, where the existing US 421 alignment results in a longitudinal
encroachment on the flood hazard area.
The seven remaining major drainage structures along the Recommended Alternative will be
left in place and extended, as needed, in order to accommodate the proposed improvements.
These extensions will serve to maintain the existing drainage patterns of the watercourses.
Based on preliminary hydraulic analysis, all existing major drainage structures were
determined adequate. No overtopping was experienced with the 100-year storm, given the '
proposed vertical grades.
All totaled, the Recommended Alternative will require the filling of approximately seven
acres of 100-year floodplain/flood hazard area. Little or no increased flood risk will be
associated with the proposed project due to encroachment in the floodplain, and the potential
for loss of property or human life will remain unchanged. The proposed US 421
improvements will be designed to minimize encroachment in these regulated areas.
No substantial increases in backwater elevations or velocities at floodplain encroachments
are anticipated. Construction limits will be restricted to those areas necessary to conduct the
work and will be defined during final design. All appropriate coordination and certifications
concerning floodplain encroachments and local ordinances will be conducted during the final
design. Under the conditions described herein, any impacts to natural and beneficial
floodplain values associated with the project would be negligible.
Construction of the Recommended Alternative will increase the amount of impervious
surface areas within the study area, thereby increasing storm water runoff. The area
impacted by this increased runoff would be minor in comparison to the remaining pervious
surface areas. The increased amount of road surface draining into the area would be very
small in relation to overall drainage areas.
In summary, while the proposed US 421 widening will result in unavoidable impacts to
floodplain areas, the preliminary design of the Recommended Alternative has included
elements to minimize encroachment, negate increases in flooding risk, and mitigate long-
term environmental impacts. Potential impacts to the floodplain as a result of erosion will be
mitigated by strict adherence to NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of
Surface Waters (June 1991).
9. CIRCULATION OF THE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT (EA)
The approved Federal EA was circulated to the following federal, state, and local agencies.
Those agencies that provided written comments on the EA are denoted by an asterisk (*).
Copies of the agency comment letters are presented in Appendix A.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV*
NCDOT FONSI Juty 1996 1
US 421 9
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District*
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service
U.S. Forest Service
U.S. Geological Survey
National Marine Fisheries Service
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
North Carolina State Clearinghouse, Department of Administration*
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission*
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources*
Wilkes County Manager
Wilkes County Commissioner
Wilkes County Library
Mayor of Wilkesboro
Town of Wilkesboro Town Manager
10. COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
Comments received from the circulation of the Federal EA for US 421 from east of Maple
Springs to east of NC 268 are included in Appendix A.
A. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR-Fish and
Wildlife Service (Pages A-1 and A-2)
i 1. Comment:
"Riparian vegetation should be maintained wherever possible (i.e., reduce canopy removal
in or near creeks)."
Response:
Efforts will be made to minimize riparian tree removal during construction, whenever
feasible and practicable. As a general application of NCDOT's Best Management Practices
(BMP's) and pursuant to its Guidelines for Control of Erosion and Sediment During
Construction (NCDOT, 1980), "No land disturbing activity shall be permitted in proximity
to a lake or natural watercourse unless a buffer zone is provided along the margin of the
water course of sufficient width to confine visible siltation within the twenty-five percent of
the buffer nearer the land disturbing activity."
South Prong Lewis Fork, Smithey's Creek, and Tucker Hole Creek each have a
supplemental trout water designation. These creeks fall under the 25 foot minimum buffer
zone requirements for land-disturbing activities near trout waters as presented in 15A
NCAC 4B .0025, Erosion and Sediment Buffer Zone Requirements (DEHNR, 1991b).
I NCDOT FONSI July 1996
US 421 10
2. Comment:
"If any riparian areas are disturbed, they should be revegetated with native species as soon
as possible after construction to minimize run-off and to lessen the impacts associated with
"bare banks" (decrease in nutrient input, temperature changes, flow changes, sediment
filtration, etc.)."
Response:
NCDOT recognizes the benefits provided by riparian vegetation. Riparian areas disturbed
during construction will be revegetated in accordance with NCDOT's Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures (July, 1995) and pursuant to the guidance provided
in Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters (NCDOT, 1991).
Minimizing the time of exposure of disturbed ground on a construction site is a primary
consideration at the outset of a project.
3. Comment:
"Stringent erosion control measures should be implemented during all construction activities
in order to minimize downstream effects."
Response:
NCDOT's Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters (June 1991) were
originally developed as a result of the adoption of state regulations addressing protection of
water supply watersheds. The BMP's were subsequently expanded to include all surface
waters. The primary goal of the BMP's is to prevent degradation of the state's waters
through the location, construction, and operation of the highway system. The Department is
committed to implementing these BMP's consistently on all projects, as applicable. The
most stringent application of these BMP's occurs where highway projects affect receiving
waters of special designation, such as water supply watersheds, as noted in the US 421
project area.
All highway projects are subject to the Rules and Regulations established by the
Sedimentation Control Commission (SCC), which is responsible for the implementation of
the Sedimentation Control Act of 1973. In 1991, the SCC delegated the authority to
NCDOT to administer its own Sediment and Erosion Control Program within the
jurisdiction of its activities. Guidelines established by NCDOT's BMP's, in conjunction with
the Department's Standard Specifications and the Sediment and Erosion Control Program,
will result in adequate protection of water supply watersheds and other water bodies,
thereby minimizing downstream effects.
4. Comment:
"Any extension of culverts should allow for continuous flow in tributaries crossed by
alignment."
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
L
US 421 l1
Response:
Pursuant to NCDOT Standard Specifications, prior to beginning work, an erosion control
schedule shall be approved. This schedule will describe the construction sequence which
will provide for the maintenance of continuous flow in tributaries crossed by the project.
5. Comment:
"Construction should be accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact water entering
or flowing in the stream."
Response:
Measures will be implemented during construction to insure that wet concrete does not
contact water entering or flowing in the stream. In the event dewatering is required for
bridge construction, procedures will be in accordance with NCDOT's Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters.
The implementation of measures to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contact
with waters of the state until such time as the concrete hardens is a regional condition of the
State's 401 Water Quality Certification.
B. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY Region IV (Pages A-3 through A-6)
r 1. Comment:
"Accictem Pntantial - Based on Table 6 (pg. 7), the number of traffic accidents occurring
along the proposed sections of US 421 exceeds the state averages; therefore roadway
modifications may reduce the accident potential. However, it should also be noted that the
proposed widening of the highway would encourage and accelerate local development and
thereby increase traffic volumes, which could increase traffic accident potential (NOTE: to
"encourage economic growth" was listed as a project benefit on page 8). In addition, the
proposed extension of the five-lane segment of the highway with a flush median turn lane
could also have a potential for traffic accidents associated with non-signalized turns (e.g., if
strip development is allowed with no control of access). Potential U-turns made at segments
of US 421 having a grassed median may also have accident potential. In addition, higher
speeds on the widened highway could be a potential accident problem unless adequately
controlled."
P
Response:
The statement "encourage economic growth" was intended to underline the importance of
US 421 in serving this region of the state. On a local level, economic growth, particularly
along the eastern end of the US 421 project corridor, has progressed dramatically during the
course of this project's planning effort. This economic growth continues, despite the
deficiencies and current congestion of the existing US 421 facility.
NCDOT
FONSI
Juty 1996
US 421 12
West of NC 16, the divided facility, combined with improved roadway sight distances and
geometrics, will dramatically improve driving safety and reduce accident potential.
The extension of the existing 5-lane section to NC 16 was dictated by the "urban-like"
setting of this portion of the project. A divided facility to serve this heavily commercialized
area would necessitate the construction of service roads. The right of way required to build
this facility would result in a substantial economic impact to local businesses as well as
result in a large number of relocations.
The number of "U-turns" or median cross-overs will be minimized. Cross-overs will be
designed in accordance with NCDOT's Design Manual to provide adequate deceleration
lanes, storage capacity, etc., and thereby achieve maximum safety.
While the roadway design speed is 70 mph along new alignment, the existing posted speed
limits along the corridor will remain. As described in the EA, posted speed limits range
from 55 miles per hour (mph) west of NC 16 and east of NC 268, to 45 mph in the heavily
commercialized five-lane section.
2. Comment:
"Alternatives - From an environmental perspective, EPA typically does not favor the
construction of bypass alternatives on new location due to potential impact to wetlands,
wildlife and fragmentation of habitat. However, we believe it is appropriate to consider
such alternatives since improvement alternatives can have noise, relocation, and
environmental justice implications. In order to properly compare improvement versus new
options, both need to be appropriately assessed. While we understand that the document is
an EA as opposed to a typically more detailed Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the
quantification of certain potential impacts is unclear in the document for the new bypass
alignment. Therefore, based on the information provided, an informed comparison cannot
be made."
Response:
The recommended bypass alignment would have resulted in unavoidable impacts to a
historic property that was determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places. Improving the existing alignment was subsequently demonstrated to be feasible,
thereby providing an avoidance alternative. Therefore, a more detailed assessment of the
bypass was not performed.
3. Comment: I
"Waters of the tJS - Both streams and wetlands would be impacted by the proposed
widening. Seven hydrologic crossings are proposed, including three bridge replacements. A
minimal loss of less than 0.2 acres of wetlands at bridge approaches is estimated.
Based on Appendix E, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) indicated that NCDOT-
delineated wetland losses would be field verified by the COE Regulatory Branch. It is
unclear from the EA if this has occurred or when this is planned. This should be
determined. In addition, the EA suggests that the wetland losses may be covered under a
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
fl
II?
Lam'
US 421
13
Nationwide Permit. What is the status of such a possibility? This information should be
presented in the next document."
Response:
See Wetland Finding (Section 7). Wetland impacts will be field confirmed by the COE
during final design as part of the Section 404 permitting process. Final acreages and the
locations of headwaters will dictate which nationwide permit(s), general permits, and/or
combinations thereof will be utilized.
4. Comment:
"Water Q I;ty - The impacts of construction at the bridge and other (culvert) crossings are
somewhat minimized by the fact that existing crossings are already present and they would
either be replaced or widened as opposed to initiated. Nevertheless, construction Best
Management Practices (BMPs) must be implemented for erosion and sedimentation control,
particularly near wetlands/waterways.
In regard to construction BMPs, the document should provide more of a commitment to
implement erosion control methods. For example, we note that at least one waterway
crossed by the NCDOT-re commended alternative (Tucker Hole Creek) is a water supply
segment (pg. 35). It is unclear from the document if any spill containment features would
be constructed at the bridge approaches over water supply waterways in the event hazardous
waste carriers would have an accident at/on the replaced, existing or widened bridges. Also,
a description and effectiveness of the HazMat response team having jurisdiction along this
segment should be included in the next document relative to spill control and clean-up."
Response:
See response to Comment A. 3. (page 10).
The Town of Wilkesboro's raw water intake is located on the Yadkin River, approximately
1,000' west (upstream) of the US 421 bridge. Critical areas are defined in the Water Supply
Watershed Protection Rules adopted by the Environmental Management Commission in
1992, as those areas within one-half mile and draining to a river intake Wicker Role. Creek
m:.the,vicinity of the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business intersection,. represents the: only
c tical`ar6rpotentially irnpast =by tli oject:' Tucker Hole Creek drains beneath this
intersection, flowing south towards its confluence with the Yadkin River, upstream of the
raw water intake. While improvements to this portion of US 421 are not part of this project,
minor improvements to this intersection will be considered, as necessary, during final
design 60111,containment features wall be provides; at, bridge approaches ieaccordance with
NCDOT Standard Specifications. These provisions will be developed, as needed during
final design.
In the event of a hazardous spill in the project area, the Wilkesboro Volunteer Fire
Department will provide the initial response. Conversations with the local fire chief
indicated that the anticipated response time to the east end of the project would be less than
five minutes (Carl Perkins, Pers. Comm., 1996). At the time the fire department is
dispatched, the Wilkes County Emergency Management Office (EMO) would be notified.
NCDOT FONSI Ju4, 1996
US 421 14
The EMO has an agreement with the firm STAT, Inc., located in Lenoir, NC, for HazMat
response services. Based on communications with the county's Emergency Coordinator, the
estimated response time of the HazMat team, including load up time, etc., would be 30-45
minutes (Suzanne Hamby, Pers. Comm., 1996). The role of the fire department would be
to contain the spill until the HazMat team arrives. STAT would be responsible for all phases
of clean-up, from containment and treatment, to removal and restoration, as warranted. ,
5. Comment: ,
"Noise -...Table 12 (pg. 33) of the EA indicates that 54 receptors (i.e., 19 residences, 31
business, 1 school playground, and 2 churches) along the NCDOT Recommended ,
Alternative would substantively exceed their existing noise levels, and 47 (25 residences and
22 businesses) would exceed the noise abatement criteria. No noise barriers are proposed
due to access openings to residences and the attendant reduced noise attenuation. ,
The final document should indicate how many receptors are affected by substantive noise
increases or resultant levels (i.e., is there any overlap between the 54 and 47 receptors
substantively affected?).
As indicated above, NCDOT considered noise barriers as mitigation but determined that
noise attenuation would be minimal due to the access openings for residences. It is clear that
conventional noise barriers may not be very effective in such situations. However, because
substantive noise impacts are predicted, other attenuation options should be pursued. These
could include additional noise insulation of affected homes, installation of air conditioners
(as relevant) so that windows could be closed during the summer to reduce noise, additional
relocations of affected residences near but outside the right-of-way (if the residents agree),
and slight alignment shifts that may reduce noise impacts. Other forms of compensations
might also be considered to provide some relief, although these would provide no or
minimal noise attenuation (e.g. vegetative visual screening along the right-of-way; monetary
compensation).
All construction equipment should be supplied with mufflers and engine housing insulation
per manufacturer's specifications to minimize noise at the source."
Response:
The model used to evaluate noise impacts predicts a "worst case" for the design year. The
model is not sensitive to changes in topography, e.g., the proposed improvements being in a
"cut" section, and the receptor located above the road surface. Considerable noise ,
attenuation can occur in these situations. Noise impacts in the project area will occur under
the no build alternative, simply due to the predicted increases in traffic volumes.
Thirty-one of the 54 receptors predicted to substantially exceed existing noise levels will
approach or exceed the FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria. This represents a 57 percent
overlap. A combined total of 70 receptors will be affected by either substantive noise
increases or resultant noise levels. Based on the noise modeling performed, traffic noise
impacts, in terms of increased exterior noise levels, are predicted to range from + 1 to + 12
dBA for most of the receptors. Exterior noise level increases in this range are common in
areas of widening. Noise level changes of 2-3 dBA are barely perceptible. A 5 dBA change
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
n
lI
fl
US 421 IS
is more readily noticeable, and a 10 dBA change is typically judged by most people as a
doubling or a halving of the loudness of the sound.
The contractor will be responsible for ensuring that all construction equipment is properly
equipped and maintained in accordance with manufacturer's specifications to minimize noise
impacts.
6. Comment:
"Air Q.uali- Construction equipment should be tuned according to manufacturer's
specifications to minimize air emissions.."
Response:
The contractor will be responsible for ensuring that all construction equipment is properly
tuned and operating, in an effort to minimize air emissions and localized air quality impacts.
7. Comment:
"Environmental I uctire_(FT.) - EPA appreciates the inclusion of some EJ information in the
EA (pg. 17) under Section 4.1.2 "Neighborhoods and Community Cohesion." This section
indicates that county demographics projected a 95.4% of Caucasian and 4.6% of other races
by the year 2000. While this suggests a low number of minority inhabitants in the county,
additional project-specific is needed for comparison.
First, a current census should be documented for the county and for the census block in the
project area of concern, and compared against the state demographics. If the percentages
are not substantively different, no disproportionate impact on minority group would be
possible.
Response:
Census Block information is not available for this rural portion of Wilkes County. United
States 1990 Census data was reviewed for the townships encompassing the project corridor.
Based on communications with the Wilkes County Community Development Planning
Supervisor, the US 421 improvements west of the existing five-lane section are located in
Lewis Fork Township (Paul Robinson, Pers. Comm., 1996). According to the 1990 Census
data, the total population of the township is 1,194. Of this population, 1,182 individuals or
99 percent of the township is comprised of members of the white race. The remaining 1
percent is comprised of 10 individuals of the black race and 2 individuals of all other races
or minorities. A review of North Carolina 1990 Census demographics reveals that the black
race comprises 21.97 percent of the state population. This percentage is based on 1,456,223
individuals of the black race and a total state population of 6,628,637. Since all anticipated
project relocations would occur within the Lewis Fork Township, it can be concluded that
no disproportionate impact on minorities is anticipated.
NCDOT FONSI Juh, 1996
US 421 16
8. Comment:
"
FAisorial - The NCDOT may wish to consider using double-sided copies in its NEPA
documents to reduce tree losses, document size, and printi ng/mailing costs.."
Response:
The suggested use of double-sided copies has been incorporated in the printing of this t
document.
C. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY Wilmington District, Corps of
Engineers (Pages A-7 through A-10)
1. Comment:
"It appears that you have attempted to minimize flood plain impacts associated with the
project. However, for the Yadkin River crossing, we refer you to the enclosed copy of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency's "Procedures for `No Rise' Certification For
Proposed Developments in Regulatory Floodways." In addition, we suggest coordination
with the town and county for compliance with their flood ordinances and any changes, if
required, to their flood insurance maps and reports."
Response:
Preliminary hydraulic analyses indicate little or no increased flood risk will be associated ,
with the proposed project as a result of anticipated floodplain encroachments. All
appropriate coordination and certifications concerning floodplain encroachments and local
ordinances will be conducted during the final design. See Floodplain Finding (Section 8).
2. Comment:
"Prior Department of the Army permit authorization, pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean ,
Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for the discharge of excavated or fill
material into waters and/or wetlands in conjunction with this project, including the disposal
of construction debris. Under our mitigation policy, impacts to wetlands should first be
avoided or minimized. We will then consider compensation or mitigation for unavoidable
impacts." '
Response:
Improvements south of the existing facility will serve to minimize impacts to wetlands.
Additional wetlands avoidance and minimization strategies will be further documented and
detailed during final design of the project, and will accompany the Section 404 permit
application. In the event wetland mitigation is required, the plan will be developed in
cooperation with the Corps of Engineers and DEHNR. See Wetland Finding (Section 7).
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
fl
?l
r"'
US 421 17
3. Comment:
"In regard to the Department of the Army Corps of Engineers regulatory perspective, based
on the information provided in the subject EA, alternative A is recommended as the
preferred alternative because it has the lowest acreage of wetland impact (<0.2)."
Response:
Alternative A has been selected.
4. Comment:
"When final plans are completed, including the extent and location of any work within
waters of the United States and wetlands, our Regulatory Branch would appreciate the
opportunity to review these plans for a project-specific determination of Department of the
Army permit requirements. It is possible, if the impacts from the proposed project are
minor, that the work could be authorized under one or more nationwide or regional general
permits. Special conditions of these permits state that before discharging dredged or fill
material into waters of the United States occurring within the 25 mountain counties of North
Carolina that contain trout waters, the applicant will obtain a letter of approval from the
North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission."
Response:
D.
The permitting process will be initiated during final design of the project. See Wetland
Finding (Section 7).
The Wetland Finding (Section 7) recognizes the need to obtain a written concurrence from
NCWRC.
REGION D COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS
(Page A-11)
Comment:
"
We would respectfully recommend that Bridge No. 70 be made a part of this project, and
replaced to accommodate additional lanes on NC 268. Pedestrians now are having to walk
in the lanes of traffic to get to the existing sidewalk located on either side of bridge. The
' new proposed bridge should be constructed to accommodate additional lanes for the same
reason."
Response:
I Bridge No. 70 will be replaced as part of this project.
I NCDOT FONSI Ju4, 1996
US 421
18
E. DEHNR-Division of Environmental Management (Page A-14)
1. Comment:
"DEM requests that DOT strictly adhere to North Carolina regulations entitled, "Design
Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024) throughout design and
construction for this project due to the water supply and trout classifications."
Response:
The implementation of techniques described in Best Management Practices for Protection of
Surface Waters (NCDOT, 1991) and the North Carolina Administrative Code, Chapter 4,
Sedimentation Control, will insure that the best usage of waters will not be compromised by
the project.
2. Comment:
"The FONSI should have the current stream classifications. Most of the stream
classifications have changed since 1990."
Response:
Appendix B includes Table 13 River and Creek Data which has been revised to reflect
current stream classifications.
3. Comment:
"DEM requests that weep holes not be installed in the replacement bridges in order to
prevent sediment and other pollutants from entering the body of water. If this is not
completely possible, weep holes should not be installed directly over water."
Response:
This request will be reviewed during final bridge design.
F. DEHNR Public Water Supply Section (Page A-15)
Comment:
"A well thought out erosion and sediment control plan should be closely followed during
construction. Permanent storm water ponds may be a wise consideration for spill
containment, and to lessen the detrimental effects of sudden storm events."
Response:
Techniques described in Best Management Practices for Protection of Surface Waters
(NCDOT, 1991) and the North Carolina Administrative Code, Chapter 4, Sedimentation
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
1
IL J
US 421 19
Control, will be implemented and closely followed to insure adequate protection of water
bodies in the project area. Permanent storm water ponds will be considered during final
design.
11. PUBLIC HEARING
A Corridor/Design Public Hearing was held at the Mount Pleasant Elementary School
Gymnasium in Champion, North Carolina, on January 30, 1996. At the public hearing the
Recommended Alternative was presented for review and comments. Approximately 15
citizens spoke at the public hearing.
Citizens' comments at the hearing, as well as in post-hearing letters, were generally
favorable for the improvement of US 421. Citizens' verbal comments at the hearing were
largely concerned with the future locations of cross-0vers. Statements were read, and
subsequently submitted, by representatives of the Town of Wilkesboro and the Mount
Pleasant Elementary School. Copies of these submittals are included in Appendix C.
Public officials recommended that 1) Bridge No. 70 be made part of this project in order to
accommodate the future widening of NC 268, and 2) that the construction of a Wilkesboro
By-Pass with controlled access from NC 268 to the intersection of US 421 and NC 16 be
reinstated as part of R-2240, and that right of way (R/W) acquisition and plan preparation
be accelerated (page C-1). As indicated in Section 12, the US 421 project has been amended
to include the replacement of the existing bridge at NC 268. The Wilkesboro By-Pass has
been reprogrammed into the TIP as project U-3468. A Feasibility Study for this project has
already been completed.
A representative of a school in the project area raised concerns involving safety and
maintaining a good learning environment for its students. Toward this end the school
requested 1) that an essentially childproof fence be installed along the perimeter of the
playground during construction and upon completion of the project, 2) that a comprehensive
study of the amount of noise generated by the proposed road be conducted, and 3) that the
proposed widening be reviewed to determine its affects on the access and egress to the
school campus (page C-3). As previously indicated in the EA and as further detailed in
Section 14, NCDOT has committed to the placement of a six foot high chain link fence
along the portion of US 421 right of way bordering the school property. This fence is of
sufficient height and make-up to deter students from accessing the US 421 R/W. As part of
the EA, a highway traffic noise/construction noise analysis was completed. This analysis
was performed to determine the effect of the proposed project on noise levels in the project
area. The study included an inventory of existing noise sensitive land uses and a field survey
of ambient (existing) noise levels in the study area. Traffic noise impacts were then
determined by comparing the predicted noise levels and the ambient noise levels. Maximum
noise levels at the school are predicted to be 63 decibels (dBA). This 1 I dBA increase over
existing noise levels represents a substantial increase as defined by NCDOT. The study
concluded that the use of noise barriers was not reasonable nor recommended. However, it
is important to note that some noise attenuation will be afforded the school due to its
location on a knoll, combined with the proposed US 421 improvements occurring in a "cut"
situation. In addition, consideration will be given to adding vegetation as a noise mitigation
measure. The Department's Traffic Control Unit will ensure safe travel during
construction. Upon completion of the project, overall safety should be greatly improved.
NCDOT
FONSI
July 1996
US 421
20
Citizen's concerns also involved the potential loss of parking spaces at a local church. The
use of a retaining wall will be investigated by NCDOT during final design in an attempt to
save parking space for the church. The economic feasibility of this substantial structure was
unknown at the time of this writing. The church also commented favorably on the project's
proposed closing of SR 1153 (Champion/Mount Pleasant Road) to through traffic.
In addition to the verbal comments given at the public hearing, a total of 37 written
comments were received.
Eighteen of these comments requested cross-overs at seven different locations. During the
Department's Post Public Hearing Review each of these requests was formally discussed.
Each of these cross-over requests will be considered during final design. Its important to
note that cross-overs will be provided at all US 421 /Secondary Road (SR) intersections.
Five public comments expressed concern over the existing steep grade of the entrance into
the Laurelwood Subdivision from US 421. Efforts to improve the steep grade into
Laurelwood will be made during final design. These efforts may result in the realignment of
SR 1182 (Laurelwood Drive).
Four written comments requested improvements to the US 421 Bypass/US 421 Business
intersection. As previously stated in the EA, minor improvements to the recently improved
1.2 mile segment of US 421 between SR 1323 (Darcy Road) and this intersection will be
considered during final design.
12. REVISIONS TO THE FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The following underlined wording changes reflect revisions to the project and/or
informational updates since the circulation of the Federal EA.
Section 1.0, Subsection 1. 1, page 1, first paragraph
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), in consultation with the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), proposes to widen US 421 to a multi-lane
facility from east of Maple Springs to east of NC 268, near Wilkesboro (Figures 1 and
2). The proposed improvements will involve constructing additional eastbound travel
lanes south of the existing roadway. The proposed roadway will follow the alignment of
existing US 421 and provide no control of access.
Section 1.0, Subsection 1.3, page 3, second paragraph
Bridge No. 70, spanning NC 268, is a three-span structure of reinforced concrete floor
on 1-beams. Constructed in 1966, this bridge is 196 feet long and 31 feet wide. The
bridge provides a vertical clearance of 21 feet over NC 268 and a horizontal clearance
of 43 feet. It is recommended that the existing structure he rep laced. The propose-d
stnicture. will nrovide. additional horizontal clearance in order to accommodate the
f6ture widening of NC 268 as well as pedestrian walkways-
Section 3.0, Subsection 3.3. 10, page 15, last paragraph
NCDOT FONSI July 1996
t
fl
1
L
t
US 421 21
Cost estimates based on preliminary design of the Recommended Alternative include
$14,3, for construction and $5,016,000 for right of way and utility relocation.
Section 4.0, Subsection 4.3.2.4, Table 13, entitled River and Creek Data, has been revised
to reflect updates of water quality classifications. The revised table is included in Appendix
B.
13. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based on a study of the proposed project documented in the Environmental Assessment,
and upon comments received from the public hearing and federal, state, and local agencies,
it is the finding of NCDOT and FHWA that the widening of US 421 from east of Maple
Springs to east of NC 268, near Wilkesboro, will not have a significant impact upon the
human or natural environment. The project is consistent with NCDOT's overall
transportation plan of improving US 421 to a multi-lane facility and its designation as a
priority completion corridor. The described improvements of US 421 will not require an
Environmental Impact Statement or further environmental analysis.
NCDOT
FONSI
Ju! - 1996
1
I1
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
US 421
APPENDIX A
AGENCY COMMENTS
NCDOT
FONSI
AI N- 1996
n
n
J
Caw I n
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
January 31, 1996
ru
ex ? f _
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E.. Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
r
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
' P.O. Box 25201 ~G+'?? }
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
' Dear Mr. Vick:
Subject: Federal envirormiental assessment for US 421 from east of Maple
Springs to east of NC 268 near Wilkesboro, Wilkes County, North
Carolina, TIP No. R-2240
In your letter of December 20, 1996 (received January 9, 1996), you
' requested our review of 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 environmental assessment, this project will involve the
widening of a 12-mile section of existing US 421 from east of Maple
' Springs to east of NC 268 near Wilkesboro. The project will involve the
construction of additional eastbound travel lanes south of the existing
roadway. The project will involve the replacement or expansion of three
bridge crossings over the Yadkin River, Lewis Fork, and South Prong Lewis
Fork, requiring 1.6 acres of fill in waters of the United States
associated with the bridge approaches and abutments. Additionally, seven
existing drainage structures, including five reinforced concrete box
' culverts and two corrugated metal pipes, will be extended to accommodate
the new facility. There will be minimal wetland impacts (< 0.2 acre).
Finally, the project will result in the loss of approximately 96 acres of
mixed pine-hardwood forest. The purpose of the project is to provide a
link between Winston-Salem and Boone and to improve the safety of the
existing facility.
' The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) does not object to the
selection of Alternative A, widening the existing alignment. The Service
believes the preferred alternative will not result in significant
' environmental impacts. However, we encourage the implementation of the
following measures to minimize impacts to aquatic resources in project
area streams: (1) riparian vegetation should be maintained wherever
A-1
P9. 9
?J
possible (i.e., reduce canopy removal in or near creeks); (2) if any
riparian areas are disturbed, they should be revegetated with native
species as soon as possible after construction to minimize run-off and to
lessen the impacts associated with "bare banks" (decrease in nutrient
input, temperature changes, flow changes, sediment filtration, etc.):
(3) stringent erosion control measures should be implemented during all pg.10-11
construction activities in order to minimize downstream effects; (4) any
extension of culverts should allow for continuous flow in tributaries
crossed by the alignment; and (5) construction should be accomplished so t
that wet concrete does not contact water entering or flowing in the
stream. This will reduce the likelihood of fish kills associated with
culvert construction. Finally, the Service appreciates that
consideration will be given to using bottomless culverts or lowering the
floor of culverts below the stream bottom to allow for a natural
substrate on the bottom of the culverts. ,
We have reviewed our files and our data indicate that no federally listed
or proposed threatened or endangered species would be affected by the
proposed action. In view of this, 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
reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species
or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered. (2) this ,
action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in
this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is
determined that may be affected by the identified action.
We appreciate the opportunity to review this environmental assessment and
request a copy of the Finding of No Significant Impact. In any future ,
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number
4-2-90-060.
Si ncex-ely, '
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
CC:
Mr. Bob Johnson, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Regulatory Field Office,
151 Patton Avenue, Room 143, Asheville, NC 28801-5006 '
Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
320 S. Garden Street, Marion, NC 28752
A-2
REG ADr't"1TP; 2'23'9-6 10:44AH; 40-4 G47 5206 ANNING AND ENV,RGN;
v :tti? St,r?,?
r ? j
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
4", REGION 4
3A5 COURTLAND STREET, N.L.
ATLANTA. GECRG?A 30365
Februarv 23, 1996
' 4PM/FAB/cmh
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E.
Manager, Planning and Environmental Branch
l:orth Carolina Departr.:ent of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611-5201
' SUBJ: EPA Review of NCDOT Environmental Assessment; US 421
Widening from East of Maple Springs to East of NC 268
near Wilkesboro, in Wilkes County, NC
' Dear 1.1r. Vick:
' In accordance with S?
Environmental Protection
Environmental Assessmer.z
' ?r7e note that the North
(NC?DWOm) proposes to widen
lane highway from east of
intersection with NC 264.
ectio- 2,051 of `Lh& C1can Air she U.S.
Acr?ncy ,EPA) has reviewed the subject
(EA) For the proposed widening of US 421.
Caro=ina Department of Transportation
a section of existing US 421 to a multi-
Maple Springs, NC to east of the US 421
NCDGT -refers Alt,e--native A (widezinq of
' existing facility) as their Recommended Alternative to Aitcrnat_ve
B (bypass) and the No-Suild* Alte_ na_ivc .
In regard to environmental impacts of the proposed widening,
' EPA is principally concerned with =h= numerous waterway crossings
that would be undertake:. and -r-he associated potential wat er quality
impacts, the noise impacts to nearby sensitive receptors that would
not be relocated, and the magnitude of the alternative s analysis
for the considered -bypass alterr_ai-_-rve. We offer the following
comments/concerns:
? Accident Potential - Based or. Table 6 (pc. 7), the number of
traffic accidents occurring alone the proposed section of US 421
exceeds the state averages; therefore i:uddway modifications may
reduce the accident potential. However, it should also be
noted that the proposed widening of the highway would encourage
and accelerate local development and thereby increase traffic
vo_untes, which could inc_ease traffic accident potential (NOTE:
to "encourage economic growth" uras listed as a project benefit on
pace 8). In addition, the proposed extension of the five-lane
segment of the highway with a flush median turn lane could also
have a potential for traffic accidents associated with non-
_ignalizcd turns (e.g., if strip develop-rent is allowed with no
control of access). Potential U-fai'r's made d:. segments of US 421
' raving a grassed median may also have accident potential. In
addition, higher speeds on the widened highway could be a potential
accident prohle:n unless adequately controlled.
A-3
=2
p9. 11
S
f
3
i
a`
BY: ASSTNT REG ADHINTR; 2-23-95 10:46AM; 404 347 5206 ANNING AND ENVIRON;
2 1
? Alternatives - From an environmental perspective, EPA typically
does not favor the construction of bypass alternatives on new
location due to potential impacts to wetlands, wildlife and
fragmentation of habitat. However, we believe it is appropriate to
consider such alternatives since improvement alternatives car. have
12
noise, relocation, and environ_•nental justice implications. In ,
pg'
order to properly compare improvement versus new options, both
need to be appropriately assessed. While we understand that
the document is an EA as opposes to a typically more detailed
Environmental Impact Statement (?IS), the quantification of certain '
potential impacts is unclear in the document for the new bypass
alignment. Therefore, based on the information provided, an
informed comparison cannot be made. '
? Waters of the US - Both streams and wetlands would be impacted
by the proposed widening. Seven hydrelccic crossing are proposed, '
including three bridge replacements. A -minimal loss of less than
0.2 acres of wetlands at 'cridge approaches is estimated.
Based on Appendix E, the U-S. -Mr.my Corps of Engineers (COE) pg.13 ,
indicated that NCP,OT-delineated we ? ar.c hoses would be field
verified by the COE Regulatory -2-ranch. It ;.s unclear from the EP.
if this has occurred or when this is planned. This should be ,
determined. In addition, the EA sucges:.s that the wetland losses
may be covered under a Nationwide Permit. what is the status oT
such a possibility? This information should ba pzesented in the
next document.
. Water Quality - The impacts of construction at the bridge and
other (culvert) crossings are 3^_mcwhat m_r.:mized by the fact that '
existing crossings are already present and they would either be
replaced or widened as opposed to initiated. Nevertheless,
construction Rest Management P=act_ces (-r_Ps) rust be implemented
for erosion and sedimentation control., particularly near
wetlands/watcrways.
In regard to construction BMPs, the document should provide more of pg. 13 '
a commitment to implement erosion control methods. For example,
we note that at least one waterway crossed by the NCDOT-recommended
alternative (Tucker Hole Creek) is a water supply segment (pg. 35).
It is unclear froin the document if any spill containment features
would be constructed at the bridge approaches over water supply
waterways in the evert hazardous waste carriers would have an
accident at/on the replaced, existing or widened bridges. Also, a
description and effectiveness of the HazMat response team having
jurisdiction along this segment should be included in the next
document relative to sp=11 control and clean-up.
? Noise - We note (pg. 33) that NCDOT defines a 15 dBA increase
as a substantive noise increase for existing noise levels of
50 dBA(h) or less and a :0 d3a increase as substantive for levels '
greater than 50 dBA(h). EPA believes that all noise increases are
A-4 I
BY: ASSNT REC-, AC-?INTR; 2-23.96 10:45AM; Ana 347 5206 ANNING AND ENVIRCN;
1 s
impacts but not necessarily substantive. E_A defines substantive
(significant) noise increases as increases of 10 dBA or more at
' any existing ambient noise level (greater than, equal to, or less
than 50 dBA).
In regard to resultant noise levels, NCDOT uses FHWA Noise
Abatement Criteria of 67 dB:, (exterior residential areas) and
72 dBA (exterior corr?nercial areas). Any resultant noise levels
that approach or exceed these criteria are considered substantive.
Table 12 (pg. 33) of the EA indicates that 54 receptors (i.e.,
19 residences, 31 businesses, 1 school playground, and 2 churches;
' along the NCDOT Recommended Alternative would substantively
exceed their existing noise levels, and 47 (25 residences and
22 businesses) would exceed the noise abatement criteria. No noise
barriers are proposed due tc access cpeninas to residences and the
attendant reduced nose attenuation.
The final document should i ndicate ow many ?'e?e??tors are affected
by substantive noise increases or resultant levels (i.e., is
there anv o:'e_-ap the F., and 47 receotors sll.bsta`t -iCl j
affected ?) . =n any event, a ? arge num'^er of recptcrs i rcludi:::
residences and churches would be impacted (based on A_ pendiy E, t)' :e
portion of the school playground near the highway was infrequently
used but safety was still a concern).
' As indicated above, NCDOT considered noise barriers as mitigation
but determined that noise attenuation would be minimal due to the
access openings for residences. It is clear that conventional
noise barriers may not be very effective in such situations.
However, because substantive noise impacts are predicted, other
attenuation options should be pursued. These could include
additional noise insulation of affected horses, installation of air
' conditioners (as relevant) so that windows could be closed during
the sum.•ner to reduce noise, ad iti onal relocations of affected
residences near but outside the right-of-way (if the residents
agree), and slight aligr-ment shifts that may reduce noise impacts.
Other for:as of compensation might also be considered to provide
some relief, although these would provide no or minimal noise
attenuation (e.g., vegetative visual screening along the
right-of-way, monetary compensation).
All co::struction equipment should be supplied with mufflers and
' engine housing insulation per manufacturer's speci_f,.cations to
minimize noise at the source.
? Air Ouality - Construction equipment should be tuned according to
manufacturer's specifications to minimize air eniissivi:s.
? Environmental Justice (EJ) - EPA appreciates the inclusion of
some EJ information in the EA (pg. 17) under Section 4.1.2
"Neighborhoods and Comm.:nity Cohesion." This section indicates
i
A-5
u?
pg. 14
pg. 15
SY: ASSTRii RE3 ADkIINTP; 2-22-96 ana 347 5206 => ANNING AND ENVIRCN;
4
that county demographics projected a 95.4% of Caucasian and 4.6% of
other races by the year 2000. While this suggests a low number
of minority inhabitants in the county, additional project-specific
information is needed for comparison.
First, a current census should be doc:unented for t:hP nrnunt_v and for
the census block in the protect area of concern, and compared
against the state demographics. If the percentages are not
substantively different, no disrrooo_ticr.ate imnact on minority
group would be possible. ?L there is a substantively greater
percentage of minorities in the pxo-?ect area compared to the county
or state, there could be a disprcportiona'.e inpact that should be
considered for mitigation (e.a., alternatives, al4gnment shifts,
buy-outs, relocations, etc. . Eeccr.d, the ecoraml,'.cs of t-e
;.rnp.acted popu=a:ion ,:ould need tc be compared against the poverty
.Line of tr e state and county to determine if env low inccir.e groups
would be disproportionately `_nF,acted. If so, mitigative measures
cotald be as abc)ve.
? Editorial - The N(-'DC'- may wish .o consider using double-sides
copies in its doc•_,me-its tc red: -ree lasses, accU:r.ent ze,
and printing/m641._nq costs.
Si^ce_ely
uei.i^z J. Mueller, Chief
Environmental Policy Section
Federal Activities Pranch
#5
pg. 15
pg.16
A-6
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
.
56- %
P.O. BOX 1890 ,.u.
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
\ REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF February 23, 1996
Special Studies and
Flood Plain Services Section
?,0E
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager ;r- FEB ^ R co
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Division of Highways L DIVIS?C?rCF
' Post Office Box 25201 yS c?\
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201 'y?7RON,
' Dear Mr. Vick:
' This is in response to your letter of December 20, 1995, requesting our
comments on the "Federal Environmental Assessment for US 421, East of Maple
Springs to East of NC 268 Near Wilkesboro, Wilkes County, North Carolina,
' State Project No. 6.769002T, TIP No. R-2240" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D.
No. 100601925).
' Our comments involve impacts to flood plains and jurisdictional resources,
which include waters, wetlands, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projects.
The proposed roadway improvements would not cross any Corps-constructed flood
' control or navigation project. Enclosed are our comments on the other issues.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If we can be of
further assistance, please contact us.
Sincerely, -
C. E. Shu ord, Jr., P.E.
Acting Chief, Engineering and
' Planning Division
Enclosure
A-7
1
f
-2-
Copy Furnished (with enclosure
and incoming correspondence):
Ms. Stephanie Briggs
Supervisor, Permits Section
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
BCF: (w/encl and cy of inc. corres.):
CESAW-CO-R/Wright
CESAW-CO-RR/Alsmeyer
A-8
i
7
7
0
I
February 23, 1996
Page 1 of 2
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, WILMINGTON DISTRICT, COMMENTS ON:
"Federal Environmental Assessment for US 421, East of Maple Springs to East of
NC 268 Near Wilkesboro, Wilkes County, North Carolina, State Project No.
6.769002T, TIP No. R-2240" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199601926)
1. FLOOD PLAINS: POC - Bobby L. Willis, Special Studies and Flood Plain
Services Section, at (910) 251-4728
The.proposed project is located in Wilkes County and partially within the
Town of Wilkesboro, both of which participate in the National Flood Insurance
Program. From a review of Panel 150 of the May 1991 Wilkes County Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), the roadway appears to cross Lewis Fork once and
South Prong Lewis Fork twice, both streams being approximately mapped. Based
on the February 1993 Town of Wilkesboro FIRM, the roadway also crosses Yadkin
River, a detail study stream with 100-year flood elevations determined and a
floodway defined. These crossings and effects on the flood plains are
identified and discussed in some detail in Section 4.3.2.5 of the
Environmental Assessment (EA). It appears that you have attempted to minimize
flood plain impacts associated with the project. However, for the Yadkin
River crossing, we refer you to the enclosed copy of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency's "Procedures for `No Rise' Certification For Proposed
Developments in Regulatory Floodways". In addition, we suggest coordination
with the town and county for compliance with their flood ordinances and any
changes, if required, to their flood insurance maps and reports.
2. WATERS AND WETLANDS: POC - Mr. Eric Alsmeyer, Raleigh Field Office,
Regulatory Branch, at (919) 876-8441, Extension 23
a. Review of the project indicates that the proposed work would involve
the discharge of excavated or fill material into waters and/or wetlands.
' Effected water bodies include the Yadkin River, Millers Creek, Smitheys Creek,
Fish Dam Creek, South Prong Lewis Fork, and unnamed tributaries.
' b. Prior Department of the Army permit authorization, pursuant to
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1977, as amended, will be required for
the discharge of excavated or fill material into waters and/or wetlands in
conjunction with this project, including the disposal of construction debris.
Under our mitigation policy, impacts to wetlands should first be avoided or
' minimized. We will then consider compensation or mitigation for unavoidable
impacts.
A-9
pg. 16
p9. 16
February 23, 1996
Page 2 of 2
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, WILMINGTON DISTRICT, COMMENTS ON:
"Federal Environmental Assessment for US 421, East of Maple Springs to East of t
NC 268 Near Wilkesboro, Wilkes County, North Carolina, State Project No. '
6.769002T, TIP No. R-2240" (Regulatory Branch Action I.D. No. 199601926)
(continued)
.c. In regard to the Department of the Army Corps of Engineers regulatory
perspective, based on the information provided in the subject EA, alternative pg.17 '
A is recommended as the preferred alternative because it has the lowest
acreage of wetland impacts (< 0.2).
d. When final plans are completed, including the extent and location of '
any work within waters of the United States and wetlands, our Regulatory
Branch would appreciate the opportunity to review these plans for a project- ,
specific determination of Department of the Army permit requirements. It is pg. 17
possible, if the impacts from the proposed project are minor, that the work
could be authorized under one or more nationwide or regional general permits. '
Special conditions of these permits state that before discharging dredged or
fill material into waters of the United States occurring within the 25 '
mountain counties of North Carolina that contain trout waters, the applicant
will obtain a letter of approval from the North Carolina Wildlife Resource
Commission. '
e. Questions or comments pertaining to permits may be directed to
Mr. Alsmeyer.
A-10 1
REQUEST FOR REVIEW
rv;e•,'! the attached notification and indicate your response. If your agency requires additional information, contact the
Jiceanet directly or call Region D Council of Governments' Clearinghouse. Please submit your response to the address below by the
?ue date indicated.
),ne: (704) 265-5434
I Number 96-E-4220-0451 Date 1/12/96 Response Date 1/31/96
' Please Sign and Return
This Page Only To:
' Region D Council of Governments
Clearinghouse Coordinator
P.O. Box 1820
Boone, NC 28607
iewers
Barber-Willies County Manager
11 rman Call-Wilkesboro Town Manager
A complete copy of the environmental assessment is available for revie x at the Region D Council of Government's offices in Bccne,
I
?spoase: This agency has reviewed the notification and offers the following recommendation: (Check appropriate
responseftore than one can be checked)
No C ent
Favorable. The project is in agreement with the goals and objectives of this agency's programs.
Unfavorable. The project is not in agreement with the goals and objectives of this agency's programs.
Potential Problem (s). Identify:
Comments: - 7U
'Reviewed by q
ame: Agency: Date: a /
p9. 1
A-11
r
J
p
C
0
i
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Reviewing Office
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS Project Number: Die Date":.
1-x451 I Ila.c
After review of this project it has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) and/or approvals indicated may need to be obtai
order for this project to comply with North Carolina Law.
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
All applications. information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same (-
Regional Office. .
I PERMITS I SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES Or REQUIREMENTS
? Permit to construct d operate wastewater treatment Application 90 days before begin construction or award of
facilities, sewer system extensions. d sewer construction contracts On-site inspection. Post •applicaiion
systems not discharging into state surface waters. technical conference usual
NPDES - permit to discharge into surface water anc/or
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities Application 180 days before begin activity. On-site inspection
Pre-a
li
L' discharging into state surface waters pp
cation conference usual. ACCltionally. obtain permit to
construct wastewater treatment facint
y-srante_ after NPDES Fecy
time. 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-whichever is later.
' Water Use Permit
I Pre-application technical conference usually n
ecessary
I
Well Construction Permit
Complete apnSZ
must be received and permit issu
d
lI
e
prior to me instanati on of a well.
'
cge anc Fill Fermis Apptncat;on copy must be served on each aelacen: npar;ar, prco
er;y
ewr,e, On-site ins.ec;for,. Pre-application Centerence usual Fining
I may require Ease'rent to Fin from N C Decarirnen: of
Administration anc Feceral Dredge and Fill Permit.
Fermis to construct d operate Air Pcnut;cn Abatement
LI (
:
' ac
litres and/or E.nniss cn Sources as per 15A NCAC 2l H.04 N/A
C ? Any CC en burning assoc:atec with sublet: proposal
?1- .. 'st be in compliance with 15A NCAC 20.0520. I
Demoliuoonn•dr renovations or slruc:ures containing
aSC tD5 material must be in compliance with 15A
C CAC 20.0525 whicn requires notification and removal N;A
prior to demolition. Contact Asbestos Control Group
4:9.733-0820
[ i Complex Source Permit required under 15A NCAC 20.0800. I
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be property aderesseC for any land disturbing activit
cCnlrof plan will b
An ero
i
d
' y
sion
e requ
sec menia;jcr
red if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Lana Ouality Sec;
davs before beeinninc activity A lee of S3G I
) at leas! 3C
r th
f
.
e
e
irst acre and $2000 for each additional acre or cart must accomoany the elan
rI The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 m
? ust be addr essed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance:
'
Mining Permit On-site inspection usual. Surely bond filed with EHNR. Bona amount
varies with t
pe mine
d
y
an
number of acres of affected land. Any area
mined greater than one acre must be permited. The appropriate bond
North Carolina Burning permit must be received before the permit can be issued
O
i
' n-s
te inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit
exceeds a days
r
L Special Ground Clearance Burning Permit • 22
1 On-site inspection by N
D
Division F
counties in coastal N.C. with organic soils .
.
orest Resources required "it more
than five acres of ground clearing activities are involved. Inspecficns
sho
ld b
u
e requested at least ten days before act
al b
i
•'
u
urn
s planneC.
D Oil Refining Facilities
C F0--Safety Permit
°:
NIA
in
Normal Procz
Time
Watutory tir-
limit)
30 days
C-3 days)
1-120 days
(N'AI
30 says
tN <i
7 cars
(15 cays_)
55 days
is cars,
EO cays
19C cays;
r cays
tC days)
2C days
aI davs;
C-C cays)
days
(Cc days)
1 day
(NIA)
1 day
(NIA)
90-120 days
tN,A)
If permit requireC. application 60 days before begin construction.
Applicant must :tire N.C. Qualified engineer to: prepare plans.
inspect construction, certify construction is according to EHNR acprov• .koays
ea plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. And
a a04 permit from Corps of Engineers. An inspection of site is neces• (C0 days)
sary to verify Hazard Classification. A minimum fee of 5200.00 must ac•
company the application. An additional processing fee based on a
percentage or the total project cost will be reouirea upon completion
A- 2 Continued on reve•se
• NCrrr.-, P:CCESs
• Tire
Islatulcry ure
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS
File surety bond of $5,000 with EHNR running to Slate of N.C. 10 days
Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well conditional that any well opened by drill operator shall, upon (N'
abandonment, be plugged according to EHNR rules and regulations.
r-, Geophysical Exploration Permit Application filed with EHNR at least 10 days prior to issue of permit I
lication form
r
No standard a
t
i
b
l 1C ca; s
(NIA;
tJ .
.
pp
et
e
cation
y
Appl
State Lakes Construction Permit Application fee based on structure size is charged. Must include 15.2: Cays
descriptions d drawings of structure d proof of ownership (N/A)
of riparian property.
by Cays _
401 Water Quality Certification NIA I (120 cayst
`.5 Cays
CAMA Permit for MAJOR development I 5250.00 fee must accompany aoclication (1° ca;s
CI
CAMA Permit for MINOR development
550.00 fee must accompany application 22 Cays
I (25 Cays;
-- Several deodeud monuments are located in or near the project area. It any monuments neeC to be moved or cestroyed. please holly
r
E i i N.C. Geodetic Survey. Box 27667. Raleigh. N.C. 27611
C Abandonment of any wens, if requires. must be in acccrcance with Title 15A. Subchapter 2C.0100
C Notification of the proper regional office is requesiec if "orphan" underground storage tanks (USTS) are e srverec Curing any e7cavacc- cce•a:,cn
Compliance with 15A NCAC 2H.1000 (Coastal S tormwater Rulesl is required. says
• Other comments (attach acdittonal pages as necessary. being certain to cite comment authority).
r , ?lq 1
-2 -L- (r
REGIONAL OFFICES
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional
? Asheville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, NC 28801
(704) 251.6208
? Mooresville Regional Office
919 North Main Stree!, P.O. Box 950
Mooresville, NC 28115
(704) 663.1699
Office marked below.
? Fayetteville Regional Office
Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Fayetteville, NC 28301
(919) 486.1541
? Raleigh Regional Office
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101
Raleigh, NC 27609
(919)733.2314
? Washington Regional Office
1424 Carolina Avenue
Washington, NC 27889
(919) 946.6481
Winston-Salem Regional Office
8025 North Point Blvd.
Suite 100
Winston-Salem, NC 27106
oru 7nm
? Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Exlcnsion
Wilmington, NC 28405
(919) 395.3900
State of North Carolina
' Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 4 • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary ID F= H N R
' A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
February 1, 1996
MEMORANDUM
' To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorn
From: Eric Galamb?
Subject: EA for US 421
Wilkes County
State Project DOT No. 6.769002T, TIP x R-2240
EHNR n 96-0451, DEM # 11157
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
' Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that 0.20 acres of waters will be impacted by this
project but no impacts to wetlands. DEM offers the following comments on the EA:
A) DEM requests that DOT strictly adhere to North Carolina, regulations entitled,
"Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC'04B .0024) throughout Pg.18
design and construction for this project due to the water supply and trout
classifications.
B) The FONSI should have the current stream classifications. Most of the strearn 18
classifications have changed since 1990. pg
C) DEM requests that weep holes not be installed in the replacement bridges in
order to prevent sediment and other pollutants from entering the body of water. pg. 18
If this is not completely possible, weep holes should not be installed directly
over water.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of
a 401 Certification upon application if wetland and water impacts have not been
avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
' Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
' us 421 wil. ea
cc: Raleigh COE
Stacy Baldwin, DOT
Monica Swihart
FAXED
FEB 1 1996
' P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Wephone 919-733-7015 FAX 919-733-2496
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
A-1,d
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
IT,
Health and Natural Resources 1 •
Winston-Salem Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor E)aHNFZ '
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary January 23, 1996 ?,, ---, - .-:--- -- '
'"Y
FEB 8 190
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
FROM: Lee G. Spencer, Regional Engineer
Public Water Supply Section
Winston-Salem Regional Office
SUBJECT: Project No. 96-0451 - U.S. 421 east of Maple Springs to
east of NC 268 near Wilkesboro '
Administrative Action - Environmental Assessment
US DOT and NC DOT
Wilkes County '
The Town of Wilkesboro's water supply intake is on the Yadkin
River near this project. Even though Kerr Scott Reservoir is a '
relatively short distance upstream of this intake, wide variations
in turbidity exist in the river at the location of the intake.
This is believed to be primarily due to several streams which enter
the Yadkin River between the reservoir and the intake. Most of
these streams drain from developed areas along this section of US
421. ,
It is very important that this project be carefully
constructed with the above in mind. A well thought out erosion and
sediment control plan should be closely followed during pg. 18
construction. Permanent stormwater ponds may be a wise
consideration for spill containment, and to lesson the detrimental
effects of sudden storm events.
Pertaining to this project specifically, this office has no
objection, provided that water quality standards are consistently i
met on the affected streams.
cc: Public Water Supply, Raleigh '
585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27107-2241 Telephone 910-771-4600 FAX 910-771-4633
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Acflon Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
A_Ir,,
C!
E North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission E
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
' MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
FROM: Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: January 22, 1996
SUBJECT: State Clearinghouse Project No. 96-0451, Environmental Assessment for widening
US 421, Wilkes County, TIP 4R-2240.
1 This correspondence responds to a request by you for our review and comments regarding
the Environmental Assessment (EA) for widening US 421 from east of Maple Springs to east of
NC 268 near Wilkesboro. These comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the
' Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d.) and the
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)).
' The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to widen a 12-mile segment
of US 421 to a multi-lane facility. The recommended alternative includes constructing eastbound
travel lanes south of the existing roadway. The new lanes will follow the alignment of existing US
421. Proposed improvements will impact approximately 96 acres of mixed stands of hardwood
and pine forest. Two existing bridges over Lewis Fork and South Prong Lewis Fork will be
replaced with new bridges, and seven culverts in various streams will be extended to
accommodate the new roadway for an estimated impact of 0.2 acre of waters of the United
' States. No relocation of stream channels is included in the project.
We believe that the recommended alternative will minimize impacts to fisheries and
wildlife resources, and are pleased that this alternative is preferred by the NCDOT rather than the
bypass alternative. Therefore we concur with the findings of the EA, and would concur with a
Finding of No Significant Impact.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 704/652-4257.
' cc: Ms. Janice Nicholls, USFWS, Asheville
A-16
I I
17
US 421
NCDOT
APPENDIX B
REVISED EA EXHIBITS
FONSI
Juh 1996
1
-1
J
M
q
H
VV
C?
A
?r
U
it
CJ
7
J
v
J "?
J- ? v
J ? L
L :J
L .lvi
L Gri
L
.`
J U
C Q
:L -
L?
v ? C
v O
? N ?n
N O
M
-
Y G C
? N 1 C
. O
O C.
O C.
O
V1 T
O
N N N N N
-V J J ? :J y J
P" J J J y 7 J
_ L
U z z z z z.
CU
L •J, 'J. 'J. V. 'l. •J,
U U U U U U U
-_ Y , ? Y Y J C.1
L^
LL
.
?
? = U3 3 3- 3 3 3>
Z3U 3
.D Y
Y Y
j Y
J
i
Y
J
J
c 3 3 ? p ? Y U
Cl
n
i?
C
z
F
J
t
U = L:? ?L
<
y
t0 L
< a
? c o
N
L
- U :!
J U
J
U U
U U
t
?= c
:) y u ?r
U U U
C 'T c
Z ti '' <
>
r.
Eo'??
•
U U
s>?
L
Z3? - 3
Y
J
U C
v
.y
t
J L
v
?
J
h •C y ,
h U ti Y
y
c ao L
U
? ? G y
Vi L u. y
-
T L ti
is -
? 3 U
c Y
v,
v v R y U
F
3 .? z •?
L
? f ?
M
Y y
= L 7 = _
L
Y G
R G
-
J
- C; r
U ? v-0_ •- U U
^
CUp .
7 . U G :
J ?
J J < _
Y
:v u U
a
G
C- .5 Y
__' 33 yU
G
V ,> - L y Y
?
3 ? c c
_
=
n
U =?'
c
'1 C
3 = ? _ _
c L ? G
?," c 3
V
J
.` U .y 7 y C
'? ?
`
v
L J
C
? v 3 F
t iF ?' n? .G 'l. a
c
2
c
fl
J
1
US 421
NCDOT
APPENDIX C
PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS
FO:VSI
Juh 1996
17
1
u
-" -" - - PUBLIC INVULVCIVILIN I
' RECEIVED
PETE M. MANN
TOWN OF W I L K E S B O R q 5 1996 CCMMtS510NERS:
Mayor
Home: (910) 667-2981 OFFICE OF GEORGE P. SNYDER
tnak bpmann O delpN.com
Fax: (910) 838.9905 CLERK AND TREASURER DENNIS R. RIDDLE
NORMAN CALL ,,, .... _..." -. ......__.__, _ TOMMY BUMGARNEA
Manager 203 WEST MAIN STREET
;• ? .-GLENN JOHNSON
JOSEPHINE F. CASS WILKESBORO, NORTH CAROLINA 28697
Clerk d Finance OHlcer TELEPHONE: (910) 838-3951
' GARY L PARSONS
Chlef of Police
' January 30, 1996
Mr. L. L. Hendricks
' Public Hearing Officer
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
' Raleigh, NC 27611
Dear Mr. Hendricks:
The Town Board of the Town of Wilkesboro reviewed the proposed four-laning of
U. S. 421 from east of Maple Springs to east of NC 268 in Wilkesboro
(Project 6.769002T - TIP No. 2240 - Wilkes County).
' 1) We respectfully recommend that Bridge No. 70 be made a part of this project,
and replaced to accommodate additional lanes on NC 268. This is very
important in order to accommodate the volume of traffic and allow for the
construction of a sidewalk which presently ends on either side of Highway 268.
Pedestrians now are having to walk in the traffic lanes to get to the existing
sidewalk located on Highway 268. We also recommend that the new proposed
bridge be constructed to accommodate additional lanes for the same reasons.
2) We further recommend that the construction of a Wilkesboro by-pass with
' controlled access from Highway 268 to the vicinity of the intersection of
U. S. 421 and NC 16 be reinstated in Project No. 6.769002T, TIP No. R2240
and that land acquisition and plan preparation be accelerated.
The recommendations that we have made are fully supported by the Transportation
Needs Input Committee of the Wilkes Chamber of Commerce, the Towns of North
' Wilkesboro, Wilkesboro, Ronda, by business leaders, and school officials.
77,
3
i
1
i
1
i
I C-1
1
Mr. L. L. Hendricks
Page 2
January 30, 1996
On behalf of the Town of Wilkesboro and its citizens, please accept our sincere
appreciation for this opportunity to present our highway recommendations to the
North Carolina Department of Transportation.
Sincerely,
ete Mann
Mayor
TOWN OF WILKESBORO
PMM/j c
cc: Mr. Wade Hoke - NC Department of Transportation
Mr. Edison - NC Department of Transportation
C-2
Mt. Pleasant Elementary School
..
532 Champion Mt. Pleasant Road
' Ferguson, North Carolina 28624
(910) 973-3780 • (910) 973-7955 .
Jim McRae
?inclpal
TO: DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
' ATTN: DIRECTOR 421 PROJECT
FROM: JIM MCRAE
DATE: JANUARY 30, 1996
Mary Etta Abernethy
Secretary
' -This letter is written to express some concerns about the
proposed:. widening of Hwy. 421 in the Mt. Pleasant Community.
' I believe that these concerns are also shared by many of the
teachers and parents in the Mt. Pleasant area.
My number one concern, as Principal of Mt. Pleasant School,
is for the safety of the students in our school. It is my under-
standing that upon completion of this project, there will be a
steep bank on the northern side of the school property that will
' slope down to the new road. This area of the school is currently
utilized as a play ground. I would therefore like to request
that:
1
1
11
1. A substantial, tall, and essentially "childproof"
fence be installed along the perimeter of the play
ground during both the construction phase and the
completion phase of this project. I would further
request that this fence be constructed at no cost to
the school or the Wilkes County Board.of Education.
My second major concern as Principal, is that we maintain
a good environment for learning at Mt. Pleasant. As a part of
this effort we make every attempt to limit the amount of noise
in the buildings and.surrounding areas. I would therefore like
to.request: r
2. That a comprehensive study of the amount of noise
generated by the proposed road be conducted to
determine if the school would be adversely affected
by increased noise. If this is the case, we would
like to request that appropriate "sound deadening"
measures be taken in'areas adjacent to the school.
C-3
}
My third concern is for the safety of the buses and cars
that transport students to and from our campus each day. For
this reason I would like to request that:
3. The current study be reviewed to determine if the
widening of Hwy. 421 will in any way adversely affect
access.or egress to the school campus.
I would like to thank the Department of Transportation for
keeping us informed of the progress of this project. We hope
you will see fit to address the concerns I have outlined in
this letter.
C-4
1
1
0
n
C
1
CI
1
ti
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
August 1, 1996
Mr. Eric Galamb
DEHNR-Div. of Env. Management
Water Quality Lab
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Dear Mr. Galamb:
GARLAND B. GARRETT J R.
SECRETARY
RECE/QED
Us 1996
FNViRON,?NrAC ,, SCIFN?,?S
SUBJECT: Federal Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for US 421, East of
Maple Springs to East of NC 268 Near Wilkesboro, Wilkes County, North
Carolina, State Project No. 6.769002T, T.I.P. No. R-2240
Attached for your information is a copy of the approved FONSI for the subject
proposed highway improvement. This report records the determination that implementing
the proposed action will not have a significant effect upon the quality of the human
environment.
Sincerely,
AV61a??H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/plr
Attachment
?01
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
F
Health and Natural Resources 4 • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Secretary p E H N F1
Jonathan B. Howes, , SecreLata
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
February 1, 1996
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorn
From: Eric Galamb6i
Subject: EA for US 421
Wilkes County
State Project DOT No. 6.769002T, TIP # R-2240
EHNR # 96-0451, DEM # 11157
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact of waters of the state including
wetlands. The document states that 0.20 acres of waters will be impacted by this
project but no impacts to wetlands. DEM offers the following comments on the EA:
A) DEM requests that DOT strictly adhere to North Carolina regulations entitled,
"Design Standards in Sensitive Watersheds" (15A NCAC 04B .0024) throughout
design and construction for this project due to the water supply and trout
classifications.
B) The FONSI should have the current stream classifications. Most of the stream
classifications have changed since 1990.
C) DEM requests that weep holes not be installed in the replacement bridges in
order to prevent sediment and other pollutants from entering the body of water.
If this is not completely possible, weep holes should not be installed directly
over water.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of
a 401 Certification upon application if wetland and water impacts have not been
avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
us 421 wil.ea
FAXED
cc: Raleigh COE FEB 11996
Stacy Baldwin, DOT
Monica Swihart
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone 919-733-7015 FAX 919-733-2496
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
RECEIVED
JAN 0 4 1996
EWIRCNMENTAL SCIENCES
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS GARAND B. GARRETT JR.
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
December 20, 1995
Mr. Eric Galamb
DEHNR - Div. of Environmental Management
Water Quality Lab
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Dear Mr. Galamb:
SUBJECT: Federal Environmental Assessment for US 421, East of Maple Springs
to East of NC 268 Near Wilkesboro, Wilkes County, North Carolina,
State Project No. 6.769002T, TIP No. R-2240
Attached is a copy of the Environmental Assessment and the Natural
Systems Technical Memorandum for the subject proposed highway improvement.
It is anticipated this project will be processed with a "Finding of No
Significant Impact"; however, should comments received on the Environmental
Assessment or at the public hearing demonstrate a need for preparing a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement you will be contacted as part of our scoping
process.
Copies of this Assessment are being submitted to the State
Clearinghouse, areawide planning agencies, and the counties, towns, and
cities involved.
Permit review agencies should note it is anticipated Federal Permits
will be required as discussed in the report.
Any comment you have concerning the Environmental Assessment should be
forwarded to:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Division of Highways
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Your comments should be received by February 23, 1996. If no comments
are received by that date we will assume you have none. If you desire a copy
of the "Finding of No Significant Impact," please so indicate.
Sincerely,
H. ran i1n i , E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
HFV/plr
r
e
NCDENR
JAMES B. HUNTJR.
GOVERNOR
WAYNE MCDEVITT.
SECRETARY
KERR.T..S-rEVENS
DIRECTOR
3
,. 3
r NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
October 1, 1999 j..~°
Mr. Eric Alsmeyer
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
r ')
US Army Corps of Engineers I
€a' j
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27615
Dear Mr. Alsmeyer:
Subject: NCDOT Project #R-2240
Wilkes County
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North
Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is willing to accept
payment from the North Carolina Department of Transportation
(NCDOT) for stream and wetland impacts associated with the subject
project in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding
between the NCWRP and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Based on
information supplied by the NCDOT in a letter dated August 11, 1999,
7048 linear feet of stream restoration is required to satisfy the
compensatory mitigation requirements for this project. As requested
by NCDOT, the NCWRP will provide the required restoration within
Cataloging Unit 03040101 of the Yadkin River basin.
If you have any questions or need additional information I can
be reached at 919-733-5219.
Sincerely,
Ronald E. errell
Program Manager
Wetlands Restoration Program
cc: John Hennessy, Wetlands/401 Unit
Bruce Ellis, NCDOT
P.O. BOX 29535, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27626-0535
PHONE 91 9-733-7015 FAX 91 9-733-2496
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST-CONSUMER PAPER
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
NATURAL SYSTEMS REPORT
US 421
WILKES COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
T.I.P. No. R-2240
PROJECT NO. 6.769002T
Prepared By:
Woolpert Consultants
June 1992
E
1
n
L
1
11
r
1
1
1
1
1
f
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
US 421
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose ........................................... 1
1.2 Study Area ......................................... 1
1.3 Methodology ........................................ 2
1.4 Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives ......................... 2
2.0 NATURAL RESOURCES
2.1 Geology .......................................... 2
2.2 Soils ............................................ 3
2.3 Rare/Unique Natural Areas .............................. 4
2.4 Wildlife .......................................... 4
2.5 Protected Species .................................... 5
2.5.1 Federally-listed Species ................................ 5
2.5.2 State-listed Species ................................... 7
2.6 Water Resources ..................................... 7
2.7 Water Quality ...................................... 8
2.8 Floodplains ........................................ 9
2.9 Wild and Scenic Rivers ................................ 10
3.0 BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
3.1 Upland Forested Areas ................................. 10
3.2 Open Fields ........................................ 11
3.3 Open Water/Watercourses ............................. 11
3.4 Wetland Areas ...................................... 11
NCDOT
Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
n
0
H
,7
i
US 421
ii
Section Page
3.5 Human-Dominated Areas ............................... 13
4.0 IMPACTS ............................................ 13
5.0 PERMITTING AND COORDINATION ......................... 15
6.0 MITIGATION ......................................... 16
7.0 REFERENCES ......................................... 16
APPENDIX
NCDOT
Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
US 421 iii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Description Follows Page
1 Location Map 1
2 Reasonable & Feasible Alternative Alignments 2
3 Drainage System Within the Study Area 7
4 Floodplain Areas 9
5 Biotic Communities 10
6 Wetlands 12
LIST OF TABLES
Table Description Follows Page
1 US 421 Project Area River & Creek Data 7
2 US 421 Build Alternatives 13
c.w"rajtincdadus4211w(21nattoc
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
1
F
1
1
IJ
1
n
US 421 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
The US 421 Project (TIP # R-2240) is a multi-lane improvement of the existing 11.6
mile segment of the two-lane facility east of the Community of Maple Springs to east of
NC 268 near the Town of Wilkesboro, North Carolina. US 421 has been designated as
part of the intrastate corridor system and serves as the main highway link between the
Piedmont and the northwest section of the state. This highway also serves as the
principle east-west connector route between I-40 and I-77 in North Carolina, and
between these highways and I-81 in Tennessee, as well as providing important
connections to local and regional north-south routes. In addition to serving as a link
with other major highways, US 421 also provides access to the tourist areas of the
western mountains of North Carolina (NCDOT, 1990).
1.2 Study Area
The project study area lies completely within Wilkes County in northwestern North
Carolina (Figure 1). Wilkesboro is the major urban center in the study area with a
growing business and commercial district to the southwest along US 421. At present,
commercial development is along the north and south sides of US 421, gradually
thinning and giving way to occasional residences and small businesses west of the
intersection of NC 16. US 421 approaching Maple Springs passes through the most
rural portion of the project study area. The Community of Champion is located at the
intersection of US 421 and SR 1150.
Elevations range from approximately 920' above Mean Sea Level (MSL) along the
Yadkin River at the eastern end of the study area to 1720' above MSL south of US
421 near its intersection with Lewis Fork Road (SR 1155). The topography is flat
along the Yadkin River floodplain, and slightly rolling west of Wilkesboro. The
topography becomes semi-mountainous approaching Maple Springs as the western
terminus of the project area enters the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Creek
banks are generally steep and V-shaped throughout the project area.
The Yadkin River flows east beneath US 421 approximately 2000' southeast of the
junction of US 421 and US 421 Business west of Wilkesboro. Other hydrologic
features located within the study area include Tucker Hole Creek, Millers Creek, Fish
Dam Creek, Smitheys Creek, Lewis Fork Creek, tributaries of South Prong Lewis Fork
Creek, and several unnamed creeks. With the exception of Lewis Fork and Smitheys
Creeks, which drain to the W. Kerr Scott Reservoir, these creeks flow south and join
with the Yadkin River. The W. Kerr Scott Reservoir is located to the south of the
study area and is an impoundment of a portion of the Yadkin River. The reservoir lake
covers 1,475 acres at normal pool elevations and is bounded by NC 268 to the south
and US 421 to the north.
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
J
r
1
1
0
c
cn
O ry
E o
o co
a
Z Q i z .
W
Z
O_
to w :2
Of
(n? o O p
F-
W
J N
a
-
N
z
w
Q-
QU O 0 (
C)f Q
D 3-
° Q
3:
a- W
r--t Z 0:? 0 0
0 N
N
lot W W m
00 (n a
U
-
!n
D
O
Z
T"
O
M
2
o
CA W
F- l- Y r-
+- i..
}-
r2 W
ry =+=
O Z
W i i
i i
•
O
(n (n .1
3
Z
O _
I- C 7
L U
J i i
W W L. J
3NI3HOiVN
11 k6
R
V,\ °?
Gl°
1A
0
OAD 1
cti
rn
c SNN 4*1 S a'a
U v
'~---h-'
Creek
SR r
N
,y1
SR 1192
• -9611
kh
,`
9* LL as
o-
h
y EOL?#-
,
SR o
J
4
m
to
0.
E
c Oc
O
7
ti N
O NO
F.,
l2X o_ J is
A!O ? !t SR 1151
O y? ?? bS
s -
M co
N
dS
A
!
!
N b 4*
O
3
G
N
tf'
4OUwg
Ob
O
? O
°dr
? rn
N
f N
47no
p?O cr s!!
POE, 99L I 'vs
a
V)
°
a
°
O.
O O?F
?.
O
F-
L v I
L d
z ?:.: _ ..e'A?? n
O ..J
w
?.?
oD
o
U
s j G
J
d O m
im N
1 JaA-rd
C
O
132 eFG?°
d 7 p r
C O J
o
? N
m
v s k'y
O ? o
0
?r DOM Y mi
30
3NI?HXVN
t
I US 421 2
'
1.3 Methodology
The following evaluation of natural resources in the study area was undertaken as part
of the Environmental Assessment for the US 421 project MP# R-2240). Information
pertaining to the natural systems and resources found within the US 421 study area was
obtained through study of USGS maps, aerial photographs, and field investigations.
Wetland determinations were conducted on July 11-13, 1990. Additional field
investigations were conducted in July and August, 1990 and November, 1991.
Information was also obtained through coordination and consultation with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, the N.C. Natural Heritage Program, N.C. Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, and the N.C. Soil Conservation Service.
Additional resources used in the preparation of this document are presented in Section
7.0.
1.4 Reasonable and Feasible Alternatives
The two "reasonable and feasible" alternatives for the project, i.e., Alternatives A and
B, are shown on Figure 2. These build alternatives would improve the existing two-
lane US 421 facility to a four-lane divided facility. Alternative B includes a southern
' bypass of the existing commercial district.
West of NC 16, the proposed improvements are identical for Alternatives A and B.
These improvements, denoted as "A & B" on Figure 2, involve the addition of two
lanes and a 46' median south of the existing alignment.
East of NC 16 Alternative A continues as a four-lane divided expressway facility with
at-grade intersections. From east of SR 1323 to SR 1372, service roads would be
provided. Contrastingly, Alternative B departs from the existing US 421 facility in a
southeast direction at NC 16. This four-lane divided freeway facility, extending
approximately 3.0 miles in length, would cross Millers Creek, Tucker Hole Creek and
two unnamed tributaries before tieing back into US 421 approximately 500' west of the
Yadkin River bridge. The bypass, on a new location, would have fully-controlled
access.
1 2.0 NATURAL RESOURCES
' 2.1 Geology
The study area lies in a highly complex geologic region consisting of sedimentary and
metamorphic rocks of the Blue Ridge Belt (laminated to thin-layered gneiss, mica
schist, and phyolite), metamorphic rocks of the Smith River Allochthon (banded gneiss
interlayered with amphibolite and granitic rock), metamorphic rocks of the Sauratown
' Mountains Anticlinorium (metagraywacke, amphibolite, and kyanite schist with minor
ultramafic and granitic rock) and metamorphic rocks of the Inner Piedmont Belt
(biotite, gneiss and schist, and small masses of granitic rock). The study area crosses
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
O
V)
O
a> m ^ o
z
w
Q
? W i ? Q M ? Q W
Z O O
E 0,
:3
O olf
FW- > > Q
U > gg
00
W to M
O
N N
L`'
-? U
0 F-
z H
z H Z g
z
J N
CL p ?'" N ._0)
? z w ? w w? w?
v 0 = L - Q ° Q.. Q? Q?
N :2 Z D:f
O o
L_ O
0
.
CV
O
>
°
p p? O
U N O
Z W o .v p n ¦
W
I- F- Y S
+
- L
F-
CL CL'
? w
i i
•
V) (n J
a
Q
? 0 1+-
L Q
Q
LLI
J
i i
u
¦
W W Z O f-- ?
3NI?HXVN
SS
}a d
V
V
z
h
°/ aS
d?
fYk Q S? Sn°?
?Q
??
s
J
a
z
1:1 t {
( £
° R
GS.
T
Leel-
a
tr:
0
ppp3? t?
1v.,,? =E l
.vR
J
?? 's
O N
G
?,.....? .tom
O
1: 114?
3NI?HXVIN
m r m m = w = no* = = = = m r = ¦r = - =
L F
t
2.2 Soils
Soils in the study area, as determined from the draft Wilkes County Soil Survey
(USDASCS, 1988), include Toccoa sandy loam and Rosman-Reddies complex on the
nearly level floodplains of Lewis Fork Creek and the Yadkin River, Pacolet sandy loam
and Pacolet sandy clay loam on gently sloping to steep side slopes, and along minor
drainageways, and Rion fine sandy loam and Evard-Cowee complex on severe upland
slopes and ridgetops. Also included are areas of urban land and disturbed land where
the natural soil has been altered or obscured by development (USDASCS, 1988). The
soil overlying bedrock is formed in place from the weathered bedrock residuum, except
along streams where recent alluvium is the dominant parent material.
Tocca sandy loam is a deep, moderately well-drained, rapidly permeable soil. This
relatively young soil is formed from recent alluvium and is classified as a coarse-loamy,
mixed, nonacidic, thermic Typic Udifluvent. The well-drained Rosman-Reddies
complex has moderate permeability and is formed in loamy alluvium, washed from soils
formed from a variety of rocks such as granite, schist, gneiss, slate, and metasandstone.
The Rosman-Reddies complex is classified as a coarse-loamy, mixed, mesic Fluventic
Haplumbrepts.
Pacolet sandy loam and sandy clay loam series is a very deep, well drained, moderately
permeable soil formed from material weathered mostly from felsic crystalline rocks of
the Piedmont uplands. These soils are classified as clayey, kaolinitic, thermic Typic
Kanhapludults. The Evard-Cowee complex consists of a mixture of well-drained,
moderately permeable Evard series soils that formed in residuum from granite, gneiss,
or schist (classified as fine-loamy, oxidic mesic Typic Hapludults) and well-drained,
moderately permeable Cowee soils formed in residuum from felsic to mafic crystalline
rocks such as granite, hornblende gneiss, and schist.
The Rion series consists of deep, well-drained, moderately permeable soils that formed
in material mostly weathered from acidic crystalline rocks. This series is classified as a
fine-loamy, mixed, thermic Typic Hapludult.
' Other soil series in the project area include the Tate series, Masada series, Buncome
series, and Chewacla series. According to the list of hydric soils for Wilkes County,
prepared by USDA, the only soil unit classified as hydric in the study area is Wehadkee
loam, 0% - 2% slope (Wk). The Wehadkee loam soil unit occurs in the study area in
two isolated areas in the vicinity of the former county airport. Soils that are flooded,
saturated, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop an anaerobic
' condition in the upper portion of its profile are classified as hydric. The presence of a
hydric soil is one of three criteria used to delineate wetlands (Federal Interagency
Committee for Wetland Delineation, 1989). Soil units in the study area which are not
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
US 421
3
five postmetamorphic thrust faults. These faults are located between the Blue Ridge
Belt and the Smith River Allochthon, the Smith River Allochthon and the Sauratown
Mountains Anticlinorium, the Sauratown Mountain Anticlinorium, and the Inner
Piedmont Belt, and within the Inner Piedmont Belt (NCDEHNR, 1985).
US 421 4
considered to be completely hydric, but which may have hydric inclusions under certain
conditions (i.e., if located in drainageways, stream channels, and depressions) are
Chewacla loam (Cw), Cullowhee fine sandy loam (Fr), Dogue fine sandy loam (DoB),
Potomac very cobbly loamy sand (Po), Rosman-Reddies complex (Cv), Tate-Cullowhee
complex (TfD), and Toccoa (Co) ((TSDASCS, 1990).
None of the soils in the study area are well suited as sources of sand or gravel. Only
soils of the Rosman series or the Toccoa series are well-suited for use as roadfill.
Toccoa series soils are the only soils in the project area suited for use as topsoil. The
underlying bedrock may be a suitable source of building stone (USDASCS, 1988).
1
n
II
Soils in the study area have some limitations for highway construction. These
limitations include low strength (Pacolet series), flooding and wetness (Toccoa and
Rosman series), and steep slopes (portions of Pacolet, Evard, Cowee, and Rion series
with slopes greater than 15%).
2.3 Rare/Unique Natural Areas
No known rare or unique natural systems or vegetation communities are located within
the US 421 study area as determined from on-site field investigations and consultation
with the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. Rural development west of NC 16
and "urbanization" east of NC 16 have fragmented most of the natural areas along the
US 421 corridor. Commercial and industrial development south of US 421 and north
of NC 268, respectively, continues to encroach upon the expansive wooded area in this
vicinity. Remaining natural areas found within the study area are common to the
surrounding region.
2.4 Wildlife
The patchwork of young forests and encroaching urban development throughout the
vicinity of the study area has eliminated potential habitat for large carnivores and
herbivores, with the exception of white-tailed deer Odocoileus yirginianus), from the
area. The vicinity of the study area still has the capacity to support a fairly diverse and
abundant assemblage of small mammals and other wildlife. The high amount of habitat
interspersion and "edge" effect among the vegetation communities is a major factor
contributing to this capacity. The presence of permanent streams and the predominance
of important food plants such as oak, wild cherry, dogwood, hickory, sweetgum, tulip
trees, and blackberries are also important factors.
The perennial nature of Lewis Fork Creek, Smitheys Creek, Fish Dam Creek, Millers
Creek, Tuckers Hole Creek, the Yadkin River, and the number of available aquatic
habitat types, (silt to gravel bottoms, shallow to deep water, open to shaded areas),
historically created the potential to support a reasonably diverse aquatic
macroinvertebrate fauna (adult and larval insects, crayfish, and mollusks). Recent
heavy sedimentation, however, caused by erosion from upstream development in the
Yadkin River watershed has degraded the potential for broad aquatic habitat diversity.
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
US 421 5
A list of faunal species common to the US 421 study area is presented in the Appendix.
This list also identifies those species observed during field investigations.
2.5 Protected Species
2.5.1 Federally-listed Species
Animal and plant species listed as endangered (E), threatened (T), proposed endangered
(PE), and proposed threatened (PT) are protected under provisions of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended. Under the provisions of Section 7 of the
ESA, each federal agency has a legal responsibility to insure, through consultation and
interagency cooperation, that any federal/federally-funded action "... is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence..." of any federally-listed endangered or threatened
' species. According to the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (72
Stat. 563, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 661 through 664, 666, 666c, 1976) and Section 7 of
the ESA (as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531-1543), the US Fish and Wildlife Service has
' provided written notification of the potential occurrence of federally protected species in
the project area.
The NC Natural Heritage Program and Plant Conservation Program Element List for
Wilkes County (March 27, 1992) identified one federally-listed endangered species, the
Peregrine falcon. Three federally-listed candidate species (C2) were also identified,
including the Bog turtle, Cerulean warbler, and Keever's bristle-moss. Candidate
species are not afforded protection under the provisions of the ESA. These species
have been considered in the ensuing discussion in the event they are upgraded to
' protected status, i.e., proposed-T/E, followed by T/E.
Peregrine Falcon
The Peregrine falcon alco neregrinus) is the only federally-listed endangered species
known to exist within the study area. This is a large, dark falcon with a thick, dark
mustache mark and dark head that appears hooded. Sexes are almost alike in plumage
' with females noticeably larger than the males. The adult eye-ring, cere, and leg colors
are yellow to yellow-orange, and the iris color is dark brown (Clark and Wheeler,
1987).
In active flight, the Peregrine's wingbeats are shallow but stiff. Deeper wingstrokes are
used when the falcon is actively chasing prey. Peregrine's are known for spectacular
' vertical dives (stoops) from great heights, with wings held tight against the body, diving
at and striking birds at high speeds. Peregrines eat birds almost exclusively, usually
capturing them in the air and occasionally on the ground (Parnell and Teulings, 1986;
Clark and Wheeler, 1987).
Peregrine falcons nest primarily on cliffs, but have been known to use trees, buildings
and bridges. Fledglings often chase after and capture flying insects such as dragonflies.
This species is worldwide in distribution, primarily in the arctic and temperate zones.
Most of these birds migrate to South America to breed. Autumn concentrations of
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
1
US 421
6
Peregrines are noted at coastal areas such as Cape May, New Jersey, Assateague
Island, MarylandNirginia, and Padre Island, Texas. This northeastern population
appears stable, but was probably reduced by pesticide contamination. There is still
concern for this species because of increasing use of pesticides in South and Central
America (Clark and Wheeler, 1987).
The breeding population in eastern North America south of the Arctic was extirpated by
the 1960's due to DDT and other persistent pesticides. As a result of reintroduction
efforts, Peregrines are now breeding along the central Atlantic Coast and in New York,
New England, and eastern Canada. Peregrines have been known to breed in the
southern Appalachians of North Carolina. However, this falcon is more likely to be an
uncommon fall and rare winter transient (Parnell and Teulings, 1986). Suitable nesting
habitat for peregrine falcon (i.e., cliffs, tall buildings, bridges) does not exist within the
US 421 project area.
Cerulean Warbler endroica cerulea
' This federally-listed candidate species is the only warbler in NC with a blue back and
white throat patch. The female is paler and lacks the narrow dark bank that separates
the male's white throat patch from the white breast with streaked sides.
1
During spring and fall, the cerulean warbler migration is uncommon in the mountains,
becoming rare to absent toward the coast. The spring migration through the state
occurs from early April to early May, and the fall migration is from July until mid-
September. This species breeds in the Great Smokey Mountains National Park and
singing males have been heard along US Route 21 in northeastern Wilkes County. This
species prefers a canopy of mature hardwood forests with an open understory during
the breeding season as well as during migration. Three to five eggs are usually laid
and young are cared for by both parents (Parnell and Teulings, 1986). The presence of
favorable nesting areas and migration resting areas (hardwood forests with open
understories) were not identified in the US 421 project area.
Bog Turtle (Clemmys muhlenbergii)
This federally-listed candidate species is the smallest turtle in NC with a length of 3 to
4 inches. The carapace is brown and the plastron is black. The bright orange or
yellow blotch on each side of the head and neck identifies this species. The bog turtle
occurs in the mountains and upper piedmont of North Carolina, and is found in damp
grassy fields, bogs, and marshes. When disturbed, the bog turtle quickly burrows into
mud and/or debris. In June or July, three to five eggs are laid in a shallow nest in
moss or loose soil, with eggs hatching approximately 55 days later. Habitat loss and
predation by raccoons, dogs, and collection by humans are the primary threat to this
species' existence (Martof et al, 1980; Earley, 1991). Field surveys of the project area
failed to identify potential bog turtle habitat.
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
G
u
US 421 7
Keever's Bristle-Moss (Orthotrichum keeverae
This federally-listed candidate species is a rare moss found in only two counties in the
United States, both of which are in North Carolina. These locations are Alexander
County (Brushy Mountains near Hiddenite and Rocky Face Mountain, north of
Hiddenite) and Wilkes County (Cedar Rock).
Keever's bristle-moss primarily inhabits the trunks of dead chestnut oaks, but has also
been reported to grow on black oak and on the bark of red cedar. This moss appears
to be restricted to the oak-chestnut zone in and around the Brushy Mountains.
Members of the genus Orthotrichum are quite small and inconspicuous, and typically
grow in small tufts on bark or rock. Orthotrichum keeverae is identified by its long
leaves with cuspidate points (Jerry A. Snider, Pers. Comm. 1992). Both the existing
US 421 corridor and the proposed bypass corridor lack the oak-chestnut forests where
Keever's bristle-moss may potentially be found.
2.5.2 State-listed Species
In the State of North Carolina, certain species of plant and animal with the status of E,
T, or Special Concern (SC) are also granted protection by the State Endangered Species
Act (G.S. 113-331 to 113-337) and the NC Plant Protection and Conservation Act of
1979, administered by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and the NC Department
of Agriculture, respectively.
The NC Natural Heritage Program and Plant Conservation Program Element List, dated
March 27, 1992, has identified three state protected species as potentially occurring in
the project study area. These species include the state-listed endangered peregrine
falcon and Keever's bristle-moss and the threatened bog turtle. Information on these
species with regard to morphology, habitat preference, and the likelihood of occurrence
in the project study area was previously presented in Section 2.5.1. No state-listed
threatened or endangered species are known to exist within the US 421 project area or
adjacent areas (Schafale, 1991, Pers. Comm.).
2.6 Water Resources
The US 421 study area is located within the Yadkin River drainage basin. The
drainage patterns of the river and creeks of the study area have been identified through
USGS map surveys and field investigations. A schematic representation of this
drainage pattern is presented in Figure 3. Table 1 presents characteristics of the creeks
and river in the US 421 project area.
Moravian Creek drains an area to the south and east of Wilkesboro and flows
northward to enter the Yadkin River approximately 200' southeast of US 421 near the
NC 268 interchange (Figure 1). Tucker Hole Creek is approximately 3 miles long and
drains an area predominantly to the north of US 421. Tucker Hole Creek crosses US
421 near the US 421/US 421 Business intersection. Millers Creek crosses US 421
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
1
1
1
1
1
MORAVIA
CREEK
FIGURE 3
Drainage System Within The Study Area
YADKIN RIVER
MILLERS
CREEK
TUCKER FISH
HOLE DAM
CREEK CREEK
FORK
CREEK
PRONG
LEWIS
FORK
CREEK
NORTH
PRONG
LEWIS
FORK
CREEK
i
C
¦
rcis
A
r•r +? x
ao?
?U
F" N cu
? L
a
? X0,1 n' y a.+
N a+
N
v a.+
N C
td C
y
y e#
2C?!CJi
:
4n?
:
:
:
: U Fr U O
tko O O O '? O 'Q
:<
:
:
:
:
eo
....................
..... .......
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
.....................
O O O O S° O O
N N
v) V) vI H V? to
'
.,....
z Z z z Z c c
t
n: ,c
00
• • .
.?...... C O C Q C C C
U U U U U U U
4 G
?:
:::: 3:;:::; :;
;:;:;;:;:5:
'? t? ed .O
?. p .D c? •..
O.. h 7
% ?C U
U ...
Cn h . t0
'? O F' C
t/) 4' ..O
p
p 7 cs ... O
V1
F
Rl ., w` U U U .:. U
;wi
to W
U
c U w
U w 18. o
U
w w q xU i
z r= :01
F
?
V
1
O/
C
COPY
C
V
ti
C
u °
8 o0
a
4)
U
ri
N
q
C
U
o
w
T
U
3
2
'o
a
a
r
0
a
O h
y
b
.n
U `Ct
z ?
U
?
V
h
00
0
0
a
,o
o -?
N N
w °
? U
7 y„
H ?
CIS C O °
0 o y to s
U
?
y
b
?I
O 7 O s7
?
m
i * +
1 US 421 s
'
approximately 1 mile east of NC 16, is approximately 4.8 miles long, and drains an
area between Tucker Hole Creek and Fish Dam Creek. Located 0.5 mile west of NC
' 16, Fish Dam Creek drains the area between Millers Creek and Smitheys Creek. Fish
Dam Creek is approximately 4.6 miles long and its headwaters originate from the
northernmost point of Meadow Branch. Meadow Branch is 1.1 miles long and joins
' Fish Dam Creek approximately 1.8 miles north of US 421 (USGS, 1966a and 1966b).
Smitheys Creek is approximately 2.8 miles long and drains the region between Fish
Dam Creek and North Prong Lewis Fork Creek. Smitheys Creek crosses US 421
' approximately 0.8 mile west of SR 1147. Lewis Fork Creek is approximately 3 miles
long and drains the region to the west and northwest of Smitheys Creek. Lewis Fork
Creek originates at the confluence of North Prong Lewis Fork Creek (11 miles long)
and South Prong Lewis Fork Creek (16 miles long) approximately 0.2 mile north of US
421 (USGS, 1966a and 1966b) and crosses US 421 approximately 1 mile west of SR
1145. South Prong Lewis Fork Creek crosses US 421 approximately 0.2 mile east of
SR 1155.
Within the US 421 study area, the Yadkin River flows east from the W. Kerr Scott
Dam toward Wilkesboro. The river flows beneath US 421 north of the NC 268
interchange. Moravian Creek, Tucker Hole Creek, Millers Creek, Fish Dam Creek,
and an unnamed creek located east of Fish Dam Creek, flow into the Yadkin River.
' Lewis Fork Creek, Smitheys Creek, and an unnamed creek west of Smitheys Creek
flow into the W. Kerr Scott Reservoir.
2.7 Water Quality
' Streams, creeks, and rivers in North Carolina are assigned usage classifications based
upon water quality data collected at various sites within each major river drainage
basin. Analytical procedures include chemical/physical analysis as outlined by the U.S.
' Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (40 CFR, Part 136) with further amendments
in accordance with G.S. 150B-14(c). Biological monitoring is based on methods
outlined in EPA reports 600/4-85/013 and 600/4-85/014. Best usage and classification
' assignments of streams and rivers in North Carolina are specified in G.S. 143-214.1(d)
and 15A NCAC 2B .0100 (NCDEHNR, 1991a).
Lewis Fork Creek, South Prong Lewis Fork Creek (from SR 1155 to Lewis Fork
Creek), Fish Dam Creek, Millers Creek, and Moravian Creek are classified Class "C".
This designation is given to freshwater streams that may be used for aquatic life
' propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, and secondary recreation, and agriculture.
Secondary recreation is defined as boating, wading, and other uses not involving human
body contact with the water, or activities involving human body contact with the water
' on an infrequent or incidental basis. The Class "C" designation represents the lowest
of the freshwater classifications (NCDEHNR, 1990, 1991).
South Prong Lewis Fork Creek from its source to SR 1155 is classified "C Tr",
indicating that it can be used for secondary recreation and as a trout water. Trout
waters are those which have conditions which will sustain and allow for trout
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
1 US 421 9
' propagation and survival of stocked trout on a year-round basis. South Prong Lewis
Fork Creek is also the only creek within the US 421 study area to carry a Public
' Mountain Trout Waters (Hatchery Supported) designation from the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission. This designation ends at SR 1155, approximately
800' upstream from the South Prong Lewis Fork Creek bridge (Figure 1).
' Smitheys Creek is designated Class "B Tr", indicating that it can be used for primary
recreation (such as swimming, skin diving, skiing, or other similar activities involving
prolonged human body contact with the water on a frequent basis), and as a trout
water. Tucker Hole Creek is also designated as a trout water and as WS-III. This
classification indicates that Tucker Hole Creek is a water supply segment with no
' categorical restriction on watershed development for discharge. It is also suitable for
all Class "C" uses (NCDEHNR, 1990, 1991a).
The Yadkin River, from W. Kerr Scott Dam east to Moravian Creek, is designated
Class "WS-III". From the Moravian Creek downstream to the mouth of the Roaring
River, the Yadkin River has a classification of "C" (NCDEHNR, 1990).
' 2.8 Floodplain
Floodplains and floodways were identified from Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM region study maps dated 1991).
Figure 4 shows the 100-year floodplain and floodway boundaries for the portions of the
Yadkin River, and flood hazard boundaries for the creeks and tributaries within the
project study area.
' Within the project area, the Yadkin River floodplain is estimated to be approximately
2,000' wide where the US 421 bridge crosses the river. The floodway in this vicinity
is approximately 200' wide. The Yadkin River floodplain broadens near the site of the
former Wilkes County Airport to 1,900', and the floodway to 1,200' (FEMA, Panel
No. 370256 0175 B, 1991a). In general the floodplain area is more extensive along the
southern bank of the river.
G
No detailed study of floodplain and floodway information is currently available for the
creeks within the study area. However, flood hazard areas maps have been developed
for Lewis Fork and South Prong Lewis Fork Creeks by FEMA. Where Lewis Fork
Creek crosses US 421, the flood hazard area is approximately 700' wide to the north of
US 421 and 300' wide to the south. At the South Prong Lewis Fork Creek bridge, the
flood hazard area is approximately 100' wide immediately north and south of the
structure. However, the flood hazard area widens to 600' approximately 100' north of
the bridge, and is 400' wide approximately 100' south of this structure (FEMA, Panel
No. 370256 150 B,199lb).
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
G
M ATC H LI N E
4>
.P - L"g / ?rdd w
m ?.
,,. $ a LP s:
?• ?^ j??P?°''xP`?tk? ?§,e "°°??? ?+3..:???r? ri -ate ? d??
i
t? raw?.? P
•` y? f ?? er F>y
F
SSR
ar
£ 2 f r F
°"• 'q...?•?r t<tab ' ?-...'1,!`? FwKF' [ARV ??
MATCHLINE
¦ r m -*i -t o Z ::E m m
O
Q C --? O
-1
¦ i i
i i Z
O .
Q ?
m
Z ? S
C7 m
(n 0 0
o ?. .P o Q o
= ;u Z K
?-•
r -Ti
0
0 n D
0 1 Z D
m --4 D
--j -o g --I
o
D T
N I . O C7 D
U) o o * m C- m z CD
N cl
p
N?
0
D _0
?? ?Z
z-j rz
0:9 Z m C)
o N -•
?
0
M
00
U) d z cn m
m -D_-+ m m m c ?
U) O N (n
C r ?D Zm D m Q m iU
° U m
z v z
C: ?. D Z
CD U)
-+- -I
0
II
1
Cl
s
1
US 421 10
2.9 Wild and Scenic Rivers
Rivers in North Carolina are classified as wild or scenic in accordance with Statute
113A-30. No rivers falling under this classification are present within the US 421
study area, nor are any tributaries of theses rivers present within the study area (Kim
Huband, Pers. Comm., 1991).
3.0 BIOTIC COMMUNITIES
For presentation purposes, biotic communities in the study area have been placed in one
of three categories. The first, hardwood forests, receive the highest wildlife habitat
ranking due to the relative lack of human disturbance in these areas, their functions as
wildlife refuges, their importance in controlling runoff and sedimentation into creeks
and rivers, and their potential biotic diversity. The second category is the mixed
stands/pine forests. Within the study area, these forests indicate previous disturbance
of hardwood forests which has allowed for the establishment of pines. The third
category, cleared/urban lands, consists of agricultural and urbanized areas (Figure 5).
3.1 Upland Forested Areas
The study area lies within the extreme western Piedmont Plateau and within the eastern
Mountain Region which was described by Braun (1950) as consisting of the Southern
Appalachian Section of the Oak-Chestnut Forest Region and the Atlantic Slope Section
of the Oak-Pine Region. No virgin forests are known to be within the project study
area. The majority of the wooded areas are replacement stands of trees and shrubs.
Typical canopy vegetation consists of Virginia pine Tim virginiana), yellow poplar
(Liriodendron tuli ifera), short leaf pine T. echinata , Eastern white pine T. strobus),
hickory (Car, sp.), white oak uercus alba , and red maple Acer rubrum). The
subcanopy species include flowering dogwood Cornus florida), ironwood C inus
caroliniana), sourwood (Oxydendron arborescens), and American holly Ilex o aca .
Species common to the herb layer are poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), Japanese
honeysuckle onicera japonica), and blackberries ubus allegheniensis) (Radford, et.
al., 1968).
Upland forests within the US 421 study area may be classified as Basic Mesic Forests
(Piedmont Subtype) (Schafale and Weakley, 1990). Although pines are not normally
associated with this forest type, their presence is an indication of previous disturbance.
These mixed stands/pines are the dominant forest type within the US 421 study area
(Figure 5). Notable small, isolated hardwood stands are located along the eastern bank
of the Yadkin River approximately 2,000' northeast of the NC 268/US 421 interchange
and along South Prong Lewis Fork Creek west of the SR 1304/US 421 intersection.
These are not considered to be a rare or unique forest types.
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
r
MATCHLINE i
?•.'. '?? j ,,.i '?'.r.•..?:.?.rr• Y... \` A Jig ?i : ? '?? :v'-.f
;s X i' ir:' f,? ,.... rJ" x'4`14 .^.•?:3
.t
x
3 ' :L a
} a
Z,. v r?
i ,.f'?Y• M
. r. } C? ` C'.. r
?£•„` - j, '~ ?; ? ?'. .fit::: r''' ,?.
lyr
<'?'?
' `ry`e-:••-.,.«-» ,?' y , ,? .. ?..` s £
?- P
MATCHLINE
¦ (- -Ti -1 O Z m m
M
o
C -++
?
rvDitDn L_{
•
M
o m
cn Z
o :3
n
0 0
TI
•?
o 3 n Z
O N
r
?
C r
Zr
r c -1 0
O C)
D ~
D - D O
I -+
_.
-
m m
o =
U) m
;o m
-;a m
M o
C- -+
z p
t
* D
Q 0
N r
\ o
O
Om o D
Z --q
O 0 r
K CD N
O 0
? 0) M
co
Y
o 0
U) m m <
A m
< --?
m o
jo U) 'II CD W
Z
Z cn
\
C o
0D °
vao
D m
m Q
-?
m
-<
D m c
N -+ >:z
D
z (n
m 'm U)
U) _ F
0
1
US 421
11
3.2 Open Fields
Open fields and cleared lands located within the project study area are located primarily
to the west of NC 16 (Figure 5). These open areas are agricultural fields used either as
pastureland for cattle or planted in grains such as wheat, barley, and soybeans. Hay
may also be planted in these fields. Wildlife that might utilize these areas include
bobwhite quail Colinus virginianus), mice, red fox u(V lpes), or gray fox roc on
cinereoargenteusl, and red-tailed hawk uteo jamaicensis). Where fields border
forests, white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), raccoon roc on lotor , and
Eastern cottontail rabbits S lvila s floridanus) may be present (Parnell and Biggs,
1985; Parnell and Teulings, 1986).
3.3 Open Water/Watercourses
Open water bodies within the study area include small ponds formed from the
impoundment of creeks, and the Yadkin River. Most small ponds are located on
agricultural lands and serve as a source of irrigation water. One large impoundment,
located north of US 421 approximately 500' west of the SR 1313/US 421 intersection,
is 800' long and 500' wide at its widest point. Fish species that might be present in
these small ponds are brown bullhead ctalurus nebulosus), common carp C rinus
c io , and sunfish a omis spp.). Stocked ponds may also have bass (Thompson,
1985).
As previously described in Section 2.6, numerous creeks and tributaries are located in
the study area. The Yadkin River flows east through the eastern portion of the study
area. The existing US 421 highway crosses over this river near its confluence with
Moravian Creek. Common fish species that might be expected in the creeks and the
Yadkin River include shiners Notro is spp.), catfish ctalurus spp.), common carp,
bullhead, sunfish, and bluehead chub ocomis leotocephalus) (Thompson, 1985).
Some trout may be found in the headwaters of South Prong Lewis Fork Creek, such as
rainbow trout (Oncorh, nY chus m kiss , brown trout Salmo trutta), and brook trout
Salvelinus fontinalis) with bass, bream, and catfish in lower reaches (Wilkes County
Land Use Committee, 1987).
3.4 Wetland Areas
US Fish and Wildlife Service Wetland Inventory Maps are currently unavailable for the
region encompassing the US 421 study area. An initial determination of the presence
of wetlands in the study area was conducted July 11-13, 1990. Wetlands were field
checked in accordance with the "three parameter" method (hydric soils, hydrology, and
wetland vegetation) as presented in the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating
Jurisdictional Wetlands (Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation,
1989). Final wetland determinations will be completed following the selection of a
preferred alternative. The final wetland assessment will be completed according to the
1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual", Technical Report Y-87-1, or
the pending revisions to the 1989 Manual.
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
LI
L?
The second field-confirmed wetland area is a 70' by 30' borrow pit located 150' north
of US 421 in the vicinity of Fish Dam Creek. Vegetation at this site is 100%
hydrophytic and is dominated by common buttonbush (Ceohalanthus occidentalis) and
brook-side alder Alnus errulata (Reed, 1988). Although it was not listed as hydric,
the soil at this site was mucky. Approximately 4" of standing water was present.
The third wetland area is located immediately southwest of the western end of the old
Wilkes County airport runway, within a region of hydric soil (Wehadkee) (USDASCS,
1989). This wetland is a vegetated stream channel approximately 10' wide. At the
time of the investigation, the surface was inundated with 6" of water. Water flows
northeast to the Yadkin River. Dominant plant species at this site included broad-leaf
arrow-head Sa ittaria latifolia), soft rush, arrow-leaf tearthumb (Polygonum
sasitiagmD, and bushy seedbox udwi is altemifolia) (Reed, 1988).
A fourth wetland area was identified north of the Yadkin River in the vicinity of the
former airport. This area, largely disturbed and currently being used as a pastureland,
is situated in a region of hydric (Wehadkee) soil.
A number of "probable" wetland areas were also identified during field surveys. This
designation includes those areas requiring additional field work prior to a final
determination, as well as very narrow (5-10' wide) and/or very small, isolated wetland
areas. Probable wetland areas are also depicted on Figure 6.
Flood hazard areas associated with Lewis Fork and South Prong Lewis Fork Creeks
were also investigated for the presence of wetlands. Field data concluded that these
areas have been effectively drained for agricultural practices.
As previously described in Section 2.6, a number of creeks and rivers flow through the
study area. Field observations revealed that these watercourses were typically
characterized by steep, well-defined banks. Although lacking adjacent wetlands, these
watercourses are, however, subject to the provisions of the Clean Water Act as
"waters of the United States". Another "water" of the U.S. in the study area is the
impoundment located north of US 421 in the vicinity of SR 1312. These waters of the
U.S. have been depicted on Figure 6.
1
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
US 421
12
Three areas were confirmed as wetlands during field surveys (Figure 6). The largest of
these areas, a wooded depression formed partly from an old lake impoundment, abuts
US 421 approximately 1,500' west of the SR 11541US 421 intersection. Surface water
depth ranged from 0 to 4". Dominant vegetation within this depression included silky
willow (Salix serica , soft rush Juncus effusus , and broad-leaf cattail T?ha latifolia .
Adjacent to the depression, the dominant vegetation consists of brook-side alder Alnus
serrulata , red maple (Leer rubrum), and Chinese privet (LLigustru m sinense) (Reed,
1988).
m mm m " w " " m m m mm mom m m m
MATCHLINE
Srt _1
- fn
i ??
/
ez.r
t
it •'`••'•?,,K j ? ??
1
aM
Fl ?...,,, •*
-Ek
k, J, li
2 .. ?` 3.
`w r/
q J
at
,47
.?•?'iti i' G.7 ? t Y. /•
li EIS ! ! ... f'. ;
f^+ far t !
3 a
J ? t ? r 4
V h83.
f f .. •a• N>,?
i
MATCHLINE
CD-_0 --h 0 > > C?
r''
C) (A V) Ln
f,
406
(40 0 CA
-0 Q o N
z K O-&
-_{ D ? m p -rI rq r-I D z O+ ?• 0 ? -0
W ° N m ;a -I- Q
z? ?' ? z z z m z N Nr
D C7 (7) M
r N ?
m O °0 q z? ?? Di C7 o :3 0 00
cn O
F X9 (n mm ?m m rnm C: CD U)
C 2 C D z m D - m fl :Z7
D
i Z --1 C N° -< m > z
° > vCu 3 (A
D C
1
I?
t
US 421
3.5 Human-Dominated Areas
13
Human-dominated areas or urban lands are located primarily to the east near
Wilkesboro, from the eastern terminus of the project study area west to SR 1146. The
highest concentration of development is located to the south and north of US 421 west
to NC 16 and is comprised primarily of commercial/light industrial and residential sites.
This area is part of the rapidly developing southwestern commercial district of
Wilkesboro. A large shopping mall, smaller shopping plazas, individual stores,
motels, and fast food restaurants dominate this area. West of SR 1146 developed areas
are interspersed with forests. Human-dominated areas west of SR 1146 to the western
terminus of the project (east of Maple Springs) consist of light residential areas and
agricultural areas (crop fields, pastures, and poultry farms). In comparison with the
eastern end of the project area, the western area is rural in nature.
4.0 IMPACTS
The proposed improvements of US 421 along the existing facility (Alternative A) are
not expected to result in significant impacts to the natural resources in the study area.
Alternative A improvements would be largely contained within the existing 200' right
of way. The existing right of way limits have been impacted by urban encroachment,
including development and routine maintenance. Remaining forested areas continue to
provide coverage and habitat for avian and other opportunistic species tolerant of
human activity.
The potential adverse effect on total wildlife diversity within the project area would be
greater for Alternative B. The bypass would involve the disruption of woodlands and
watercourses which previously have experienced only moderate disturbance.
Displacement of small mammals, white-tailed deer, avian species, and loss of vegetation
will occur along the ±250' wide construction corridor. Maximum disruptions would
occur during the time of construction, resulting in competition between displaced
wildlife populations and resident populations adjacent to the construction site. The
additional clearing, soil extraction, compaction, and equipment operations in the project
area will directly affect less-mobile species such as burrowing mammals, amphibians,
and reptiles. The impacts associated with the bypass will be somewhat attenuated by
the existing and historic land uses in the immediate area. At present, and as noted
earlier, this expansive wooded area is being subjected to encroachment by commercial
development south of US 421 and by industrial development north of NC 268. Historic
impacts to this area included the construction and operation of the county airport.
Estimated impacts resulting from the construction of the two build alternatives are
presented in Table 2. The alternatives would not affect any hardwood stands-areas
previously given a high ranking with respect to potential wildlife habitat. All totaled,
Alternative A would, however, impact an estimated 44.2 acres of mixed stands/pines.
Approximately 75% of this impact occurs west of NC 16 where fairly extensive cut and
fill activities will be necessary to accommodate the proposed improvements. By
comparison, Alternative B would impact approximately 97.9 acres of mixed stands.
NCDOT
Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
t? N O? 00
N r.
F 0A
U
d c
F
Q M
O •-
Cli N ?n
? N
z
o
U
M ?
i-
? +j [? r 00 O 00
M
CO
d
ma
U r
G
N WF
aid U
a?
Na
cn I O N
ray ? O ? N
F
5
V Ict Ct O
? O? O -- M
a
N
Q
?
?a
0
a ?xv
w 3 ua
a
o
b
•U
a
bo 3
U U
?
? C
o
C3. ?
cv U
a? y
4c"
U
.. b
w oa
con o
O O v
44
V 10
F" `o ? O
?A ?
04
3 ?
ai U A
cz z
U
cis
cc
U w V?
? O
A
i
d cCS
Cz adi
C?.s?y, tip',
V U U '?
1 4 S H 'LS •E
?'
ti
N 5q
CE
Fr
U
n
US 421
14
Over 65 acres of mixed stands/pines would be removed for placement of the bypass
segment.
Both build alternatives will involve floodplain areas associated with the Yadkin River.
Construction of a new bridge over the Yadkin River will require some fill within the
100-year floodplain for the bridge approaches and abutments. No impact to the
regulated floodway or increase in flood height will result from this new structure.
Improvements west of NC 16, common to Alternatives A and B, would include 7
drainage structures (bridges and culverts) that are 72" or greater. No impacts to
floodplains, floodways, or flood hazard boundary areas are expected with the extension
of these existing structures. Construction of the new bridge structures over Lewis Fork
and South Prong Lewis Fork Creeks may result in minor impacts to the flood hazard
areas (i.e., placement of footing and support structures). However, no significant
impacts will occur due to the heights of these bridges (> 55') above the creek beds and
the narrow width of the flood hazard areas.
Alternative B would require the construction of two cross pipes and two box culverts to
convey the flows of two unnamed tributaries, Millers Creek, and Tucker Hole Creek.
Three of these drainage structures may extend into the Yadkin River floodplain.
1
F1
1
1
The three field confirmed wetland areas described in Section 3.4 would not be impacted
by the build alternatives. However, as previously noted, the watercourses in the study
area would be impacted by the placement and/or extension of drainage structures
(culverts, cross pipes) and bridges. Impacts associated with the placement of structures
in these "waters of the U.S." are anticipated to be 0.81 acre for Alternative A and 1.12
acres for Alternative B. As a result, total wetlands involvement, including impacts to
both wetland areas and waters of the U.S., is estimated to be 1.21 acres and 1.52 acres
for Alternatives A and B, respectively.
Both long and short-term surface water quality impacts may result from the
construction of the proposed US 421 improvement. Short-term water quality impacts
would be associated with various creek crossings and bridge structures comprising build
alternatives A and B. Short-term impacts to water quality would be those associated
with the construction of the project and typically involve sedimentation and erosion.
Long-term impacts include those impacts associated with the operation and maintenance
of the facility. The proposed facility would increase the amount of impervious surface
area, thereby increasing storm water runoff and discharge rates. Storm water runoff
from roadways typically contains various pollutants, including oils and greases,
sediments, and heavy metals.
Improvements of US 421 west of NC 16 to east of Maple Springs would require
replacement of the existing bridges over South Prong Lewis Fork Creek and Lewis
Fork Creek. Construction activities to improve these structures may result in
temporary siltation of these creeks. Although South Prong Lewis Fork Creek from its
source to SR 1155 (upstream of US 421) is listed by the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, Division of Inland Fisheries, as a Hatchery Supported Public
Mountain Trout Water, the likelihood of a viable trout population in the vicinity of the
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
PJ
1
US 421
15
study area is poor due to warm water temperatures and existing siltation (Joe Mickey,
Pers. Comm., 1991). Further, bridge construction activities would occur
approximately 800' downstream of the point at which the trout water designation of
South Prong Lewis Fork Creek ends. The trout water segment of South Prong Lewis
Fork Creek does, however, closely parallel US 421 near the western terminus of the
project.
In addition to the new bridges, existing culverts would be lengthened to coincide with
the highway improvements. As with the construction of the bridges, temporary siltation
of the creeks may occur during construction activities. This includes potential impacts
to Tucker Hole Creek (water quality classification "WS-III Tr"), and Smitheys Creek
(water quality classification "B Tr"). As with the segment of South Prong Lewis Fork
Creek located within the study area, the likelihood of a trout population in Smitheys
Creek near US 421 is poor (Joe Mickey, Pers. Comm., 1991). However, because
South Prong Lewis Fork Creek, Smitheys Creek, and Tucker Hole Creek have a
supplemental trout water designation from the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, they fall under the 25' minimum buffer zone requirements
for land-disturbing activities near trout waters as presented in 15A NCAC 4B .0025,
' Erosion and Sediment Control Buffer Zone Requirements (NCDEHNR, 1991b).
US 421 improvements are not expected to result in long-term impacts to ground water.
' Wells in the county, while typically less than 300' deep, normally average greater than
200 feet in depth (Wilkes County Land Use Committee, 1987). Seasonal high ground
water may be encountered, however, during construction in the vicinity of
watercourses. This may result in temporary, localized changes in ground water regime
in the construction zone.
5.0 PERMITTING AND COORDINATION
The build alternatives under consideration have the potential of impacting freshwater
wetland resources and/or watercourses. The placement of fill material and structures in
these "waters of the United States" may require a federal permit pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act. Given the limited wetlands involvement for the entire
project, estimated to be 1.21 acres for Alternative A and 1.52 acres for Alternative B,
it's anticipated that the project may be qualified under a Nationwide Permit from the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE). In addition, a Section 401 State Water Quality
Certification from NCDEHNR, Division of Environmental Management, would also be
required. Recent and proposed changes in the Nationwide Permit Program may also
influence the project. Final Nationwide Permits (NWP) were published in the
November 22, 1991, issue of the Federal Register. The effective date of the NWP's is
January 22, 1992. The Wilmington District of the Corps of Engineers recently issued a
' Public Notice (dated December 26, 1991) concerning discretionary authority actions
involving mountain trout waters of North Carolina. As described in the notice, as of
the .effective date of the new NWP's, no discharge activities will be authorized by the
Nationwide Permits within designated counties, including Wilkes County, without a
letter of approval from the NC Wildlife Resources Commission and written concurrence
from the Wilmington District Engineer.
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
J
J
1
t
1
t
1
1
J
J
US 421
16
6.0 MITIGATION
The Department of the Army and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency entered
into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) establishing procedures to determine the
level and type of wetland mitigation necessary to comply with the Clean Water Act
Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Effective on February 7, 1990, the MOA provides for
first, avoiding impacts to waters and wetlands through the selection of the least
damaging practical alternative; second, taking appropriate steps to minimize impacts;
and third, compensating for any remaining unavoidable impacts to the extent
appropriate and practical. All efforts will be made to avoid filling or otherwise
disrupting wetlands during both the design and construction of this project.
Given the limited wetland involvement anticipated for the project (0.4 acre for
Alternative A, .31 acre for Alternative B, exclusive of impacts to watercourses), it is
not expected that a mitigation plan will be necessary.
The use of Best Management Practices is recommended during all phases of
construction in order to minimize impacts to wetlands and water quality. The key
element in mitigation strategies will be the design, implementation, and maintenance of
an effective erosion and sedimentation control plan. These measures will largely
contain sediments within the limits of construction, thereby minimizing impacts to
existing watercourses. During the construction phase of this project there will be strict
adherence to an erosion control plan in accordance with standard NCDOT construction
procedures. This includes limiting areas and duration of exposed earth and the rapid
restabilization of exposed areas. This plan will include temporary soil` erosion control
measures such as the installation of silt fences, rock check dams, diversion channels,
and bank stabilization. Special emphasis on erosion and sedimentation control should
be made at water crossings and near the western terminus of the project area in the
vicinity of South Prong Lewis Fork Creek (Public Mountain Trout Water). Permanent
erosion control measures, including permanent slope protection, revegetation and
sodding, and erosion control devices, should be installed as necessary following
construction activities.
Potential water quality impacts related to increased storm water runoff along the
proposed alignments, would also be mitigated through the use of lateral ditches. The
movement of storm water runoff along these ditches will allow treatment of storm water
through the removal of sediments and pollutants, resulting in the discharge of improved
quality storm water into the receiving water bodies.
7.0 REFERENCES
Braun, E.L. 1950. Deciduous Forest of Eastern North America. The
Free Press, New York. 596 pp.
Clark, W.C. and B.K. Wheeler. 1987. Hawks of North America. Houghton Mifflin
Company, Boston, MA.
NCDOT
Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
I US 421 17
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS - 79/31. U.S.
' Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
Earley, L.S. 1991. Going, going...? Wildlife in North Carolina, Vol. 55, No. 3,
March 1991.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1991a. Wilkes County, North Carolina.
Unincorporated Areas. Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community No. 370256 0175 B.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1991b. Wilkes Court, Unincorporated
Areas. Flood Insurance Rate Map,
Community No. 370256 0150 B.
Huband, Kim. 1991. Pers. Comm. North Carolina Division of Parks and Recreation,
Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, NC.
' Martof, B.S., W.M. Palmer, J.R. Harrison III, and J. Dermid. 1980. Amphibians and
Reptiles of the Carolinas and Virginia. University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill,
North Carolina. 264 pp.
a Mickey, Joe. 1991. Pers. Comm. North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
Division of Inland Fisheries, District 7.
' North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1991a.
Administrative Code Section: 15A NCAC 2B .0100 and 15A NCAC 2B .0200.
Division of Environmental Management, Raleigh, North Carolina. 25 pp.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1991b.
Administrative Code Section: 15A NCAC 4A - 4E. Sedimentation Control
Raleigh
Commission
NC
,
,
.
' North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1990.
Classification and Water Quality Standards Assigned to the Waters of the Yadkin-Pee
Dee River Basin. Raleigh, North Carolina.
' North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1985.
Geologic Map of North Carolina. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. 1988.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Element List. North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program. Raleigh, North Carolina. 16pp.
North Carolina Department of Transportation. 1990. Transportation Improvement Plan
1990-1996.
r
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
U
1
US 421 18
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 1987. Endangered. Threatened, and Primary
Proposed Plant Species of North Carolina. North Carolina Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Parnell, J.F. and R.P. Teulings. 1986. Birds of the Carolinas. University of North
Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 408 pp.
Parnell, J.F., and W. C. Biggs, Jr. 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas. Virginia, and
Maryland. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 255 pp.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of Vascular flora of the
Carolinas. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.
Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Southeast
(Region 2). US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(26.2). 124 pp.
Rogers, Linwood. 1990. Pers. Comm. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington
District, Wilmington, North Carolina.
Schafale, Michael. 1991. Pers. Comm. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Raleigh, NC.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of Natural Communities of
North Carolina. Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
Raleigh, NC. 325 pp.
' Snider, Jerry. 1992. Pers. Comm. Department of Biological Sciences. University of
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Thompson, Peter. 1985. Thompson's Guide to Freshwater Fishes. Houghton Mifflin
Company, Boston, MA.
Tuttle, Wes. 1991. Pers. Comm. North Carolina Soil Conservation Service,
Wilkesboro, North Carolina.
' U.S Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1990. Hydric Soils of
Wilkes County, North Carolina. Technical Guide Section II-A-2, Raleigh, North
Carolina.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1988. Soil Survey of
Wilkes County, North Carolina.
U.S. Geological Survey. 1966a. 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map Series:
Purlear, North Carolina.
'
U.S. Geological Survey. 1966b. 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map Series:
Wilkesboro, North Carolina.
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
US 421 19
' Webster, W.D., J.F. Parnell and W.C. Biggs, Jr., 1985. Mammals of the Carolinas
Virginia, and Maryland. The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.
255 pp.
Wilkes County Land Use Planning Committee. 1987. Wilkes County Land
Development Plan. Wilkesboro, North Carolina. 48 pp. plus appendices.
I g.ladmmlwppM%ncdotWs4211u"21naLtw
1
11
11
1
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
US 421
1
11
1
1
APPENDIX
I
S NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
US 421 A-1
Faunal Species Common to or Observed in the US 421 Study Area
Wilkes County, North Carolina
Fish
Common carp
Brown bullhead
Catfish
Madtom
Bluegill sunfish
Redbreast sunfish
Bluehead chub
Gizzard shad
Whitefin shiner
*Shiner
Amphibians
*Bullfrog
*Green frog
Northern dusky salamander
Two-lined salamander
Eastern newt
Fowler's toad
Reptiles
*Northern water snake
Cyprinus carpio
Ictalurus nebulosus
Ictalurus spp.
Noturus spp.
Lepomis macrochirus
Loomis auritus
Nocomis leptocephalus
Dorosoma cenedianum
Notropis niveus
Notropis spp.
Rana catesbeiana
R. clamitans
Desmognathus fuscus
Eurycea bislineata
Notophthalmus viridescens
Bufo woodhousei
Nerodia sipedon
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
US 421
*Queen snake Regina seotemvittata
Eastern garter snake Thamnophis sirtalis
*Five-lined skink Eumeces fasciatus
Rough green snake heod s aestivalis
Rat snake ElVhe obsoleta
Copperhead Agkistrodon contortrix
Timber rattlesnake Rotalus horridus
Painted turtle Chrysemys picta
*Eastern box turtle Tenapene caroling
Birds
*Mallard Anus platyrhynchos
Wood duck Aix ssponsa
*Northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis
*Rufous-sided towhee Pipilo erZhrophthalmus
*Carolina chickadee Parus carolinensis
Red-eyed vireo Vireo olivaceus
*White-eyed vireo Vireo riseus
Warbling vireo Vireo ilvus
*Yellow-breasted chat Icteria virens
*Northern bobwhite quail Colinus vir inianus
*American robin Turdus migratorius
Common grackle uiscalus uig scula
*Carolina wren Thryothorus ludovicianus
A-2
NCDOT
Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
US 421 A-3
*Indigo bunting Passerina cyanea
*Northern mockingbird Mimus polyglottos
*Tufted titmouse Parus bicolor
*Blue-gray gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea
*Wood thrush Hylocichla mustelina
Red bellied woodpecker Melannes carolinus
*Eastern wood-pewee Contopus virens
Eastern screech-owl Otus asio
*Red-tailed hawk Buteo jamaicensis
Turkey vulture Cathartes aura
Barred owl Strix varia
*Common nighthawk Chordeiles minor
*Chimney swift Chaetara pelagic
*Killdeer Charadrius vociferus
*Mourning dove Zenaida macroura
*Downy woodpecker Picoides pubescens
*Northern flicker Colaptes auratus
*Red-shouldered hawk Buteo lineatus
*Eastern phoebe Sgyornis hn oebe
*Acadian flycatcher Empidonax virescens
*Northern rough-winged swallow Stelgidopteryxx serripennis
*Barn swallow Hirundo rustics
*Blue jay Cyanocitta cristata
*American crow Corvus brachyrhynchos
NCDOT Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report June 1992
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
US 421
*Eastern bluebird Sialia sialis
*Gray catbird Dumetella carolinensis
*European starling Sturnus vugaris
*Louisiana waterthrush Seiurus motacilla
*Chipping sparrow SSpizella passerina
*Vesper sparrow Pooecetes gramineus
*Song sparrow Melospiza melodia
*House finch Cnodacus mexicanus
*American goldfinch Carduelis tristis
*Olive-sided flycatcher Contopus borealis
Mammals
*White-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus
Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus
Beaver Castor canadensis
*Racoon Procyon lotor
*Opossum Didelphis virginian
a
Long-tailed weasel Mustela frenata
*Striped skunk Mephitis mohh tis
Meadow vole Microtus nennsylvanicus
Meadow jumping mouse Zapus hudsonius
Eastern mole Scalopus a uaticus
Eastern cottontail rabbit Sylvilag_us floridanus
Golden mouse Ochrotomys nuttalli
A-4
NCDOT
Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
US 421
*Gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis
Eastern chipmunk Tamias striatus
White-footed mouse Peromyscus leucopus
Eastern pipestrelle Pinistrellus subflavus
Red bat Lasiurus borealis
Red fox Vulpes vulpes
Gray fox Uroaon cinereoar enteus
Ferral dog Canis domesticus
*Observed and/or evidence noted during field surveys
References: Parnell and Teulings, 1986; Martof et. al, 1980; Webster et. al, 1985.
g:ladmin\wpproj,nodaumazl\waalani
A-5
NCDOT
Technical Memorandum - Natural Systems Report
June 1992