20200234 Ver 1_BR_0114_Final_CE_20200212

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Type I and II Ground Disturbing Categorical Exclusion Action
Classification Form
Project No.
WBS Element
Federal Project No.
A. Project Description:
BR-0114
67114.1.1
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to replace Bridge No.
480165 on SR 1601 (Branton Road) over Rocky Creek in Iredell County (Refer to Figure 1).
Built in 1965, Bridge No. 480165 has two 10-foot to 11-foot travel lanes, is approximately 90
feet in length, with timber deck on I -beams construction. Bridge No. 480165 has a posted
Single Vehicle weight limit of 21 tons and a Truck Tractor Semitrailer weight limit of 24 tons.
The existing right of way along Branton Road is 22 feet. The project is scheduled for Right of
Way (ROW) in August 2019 and Let in March 2020. Minor ROW acquisition is anticipated.
The project proposes replacing the existing two-lane bridge with an approximately 30-foot wide
structure with two 10-foot travel lanes with 3-foot 11-inch paved shoulders. The proposed
bridge would be approximately 102 feet in length and the proposed right of way varies from 40
feet to 90 feet. The total length of the project is approximately 740 feet. The proposed bridge
will not be posted and will be designed to meet the legal load rating. The bridge replacement
would be constructed in place using an off -site detour and includes structural and geometric
improvements. The roadway is classified as a Local Route with a 55-mile per hour design
speed with a sag vertical curve (K value) design exception that will result in a speed limit
reduction in the area of the bridge.
B. Description of Need and Purpose:
The replacement of Bridge No. 480165 is part of the Growing Rural Economy and Agriculture
through Transportation and Technology Enhancement or Replacement in North Carolina
(GREATTER-NC) Project under the United States Department of Transportation's 2018 Better
Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) Grant program. The purpose of the
grant and this bridge replacement project is to provide transportation infrastructure to support
economic development and improve physical and digital connectivity in rural communities in
North Carolina. The posted weight restriction on Bridge No. 460165 prohibits large or heavy
vehicles, typically used in transporting agricultural and manufactured products, from using the
bridge. Vehicles above the posted weight must detour approximately 3.75 miles to avoid the
bridge. Replacing the existing bridge will eliminate posted weight limits by providing a safe
crossing for all legal loads and will make accommodations for broadband installation in order to
support economic competitiveness.
NCDOT Structures Management Unit records indicate Bridge No. 480165 has a sufficiency
Updated 7/10/19

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
rating of 69.92 out of a possible 100 and has a posted weight limit. The proposed project will be
designed to meet the legal load rating.
C. Categorical Exclusion Action Classification:
❑X
TYPE I A
❑
TYPE I B
❑ TYPE II A
❑ TYPE IIB
D. Proposed Improvements:
28. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade
separation to replace existing at -grade railroad crossings, if the actions meet the
constraints in 23 CFR 771.117(e)(1-6).
E. Special Proiect Information:
Anticipated Permit or Consultation Requirements: As a result, a Nationwide Permit (NWP)
No. 3- Maintenance, NWP No.14- Linear Transportation Projects, and/or NWP No. 23-
Approved Categorical Exclusion will likely be applicable. The US Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) holds the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project
construction. A Section 404 permit is required and a Section 401 Water Quality Certification
(WQC) from the NC Department of Environmental Quality- Division of Water Resources (NC
DEQ- DWR) is needed.
Floodplain: Rocky Creek, which crosses under Bridge No. 480165, is in a FEMA Zone AE
Floodplain. The Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program
(FMP)applicability of NCDOT'S Memorandum of Agreement, or approval of a Conditional Letter
of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of Map Revision (LOMR). This is noted
in the greensheet/project commitments.
Historic and Archaeological Resources: In compliance with NCDOT's Programmatic
Agreement with the State Historic Preservation office, a No National Register of Historic
Places Eligible or Listed Archaeological Sites Present Form for Archaeological Resources was
completed by NCDOT on 03/11/2019; and on 10/29/2018, NCDOT completed a No Survey
Required Form for Historic Architecture and Landscapes.
Agricultural Land Use: Based on the site visit, aerial imagery, and local planner input, it
appears there is agricultural land use surrounding the project study area, primarily hay
production. Continued coordination should occur through right of way with the owners of the
agricultural lands that are temporarily impacted by the off -site detour. This is noted in the
greensheet/project commitments.
Environmental Commitments: Greensheet/Project commitments are located at the end of the
checklist.
2 Updated 7/10/19

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Estimated Costs (Pending): The estimated costs are as follows:
Utility* $ 60,000
R/W** $ 30,000
Const.* $ 1,500,000
Total $ 1,590,000
Source:
* NCDOT Connect GREATTER Rural Bridge Program- Bridges Budget Sources and Uses, Accessed June 3, 2019.
https://con nect. ncdot.gov/resources/G REATTER-Ru ral-Bridge-Program/Documents/05%20 N C DOT%2OB ridges%20 Budget%2OSou rces%20and %2OUses.xlsx
** (NCDOT Cost Estimate and EIS Relocation Report, June 2019)
Estimated Traffic:
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) 2016 430 vehicles per day (vpd)
ADT 2040 960 vpd
Crashes: NCDOT's Safety Planning Group completed a planning level query of bridge crash
counts from 1/1/2013 to 12/31/2017. Over the five-year study period, zero crashes were
reported within a 500 feet distance of Bridge No. 480165 on Branton Road.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Accommodations: There are no existing bike and pedestrian
facilities on Bridge No. 480165 along Branton Road. However, NC 2 - Mountains to Sea bicycle
route crosses the project study area along SR 1598 (Linney's Mill Road). NC 2 - Mountains to
Sea bicycle route bisects the state west to east, starting in Murphy, NC and ending in Manteo,
NC.
Design Exceptions: A design exception is required for the sag vertical curve (K value) due to
the existing sag at the bridge and the steepness of the roadway between the bridge and
Linney's Mill Road. This will result in a speed limit reduction in the area of the bridge.
Alternative Analysis:
No Build — The no build alternative would not meet the requirements of the GREATTER-NC
Project, and thus is not a viable option.
Rehabilitation — Rehabilitation would not meet the requirements of the GREATTER-NC Project,
and thus is not a viable option.
Onsite Detour — An offsite detour was determined acceptable.
New Alignment — A new alignment option for Branton Road is not preferred due to the utilities
on the eastern realignment option, and the large cut that would be required in the rocky hillside
for the western realignment option.
Replace Bridge in Place with Offsite Detour (Preferred Alternative) — The detour route is
approximately 3.75 miles long and follows SR 1447 (Pilgrim Church Road), SR 1600/SR 1449
(Fox Mountain Road), SR 1595 (Coolbrook Road), and SR 1598 (Linney's Mill Road). NCDOT
Project No. BR-0115 proposes the replacement of Bridge No. 480166 on SR 1595 (Coolbrook
3 Updated 7/10/19

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Road) over Rocky Creek and is located along the detour route. This is a posted bridge with a
Single Vehicle weight limit of 24 tons and a Truck Tractor Semitrailer weight limit of 30 tons.
This would require constructing BR-0115 first since it is on the detour route and is posted. This
is noted in the greensheet/project commitments.
Agency Comments: Input forms were sent to the Iredell County EMS Director, Iredell County
Planning and Development Planning Director, and the Iredell-Statesville Schools Director of
Transportation in February of 2019. At the request of the Iredell County EMS Director, additional
EMS input forms were sent to Iredell County Rescue Squad Chief, Alexander County
Emergency Services, and the Central Fire Department in May of 2019.
The Iredell-Statesville Schools Director of Transportation did not note any school buses crossing
the bridge daily and stated there would be no impact to the Iredell-Statesville School System if
the bridge was closed for up to a year. A low level of impact was noted from the Iredell County
Planning and Development Planning Director if the bridge was closed for up to a year. The
Planning Director also described the area as a rural farming community. The Iredell County EMS
Director stated a high level of impact if the bridge was closed for up to a year since it would
create significant difficulty in response to the residents beyond the bridge and might require EMS
response from Alexander County. Coordination between Iredell County EMS, Alexander County
EMS, and NCDOT should occur, as mutual aid may be required during construction. This is
noted in the greensheet/project commitments.
Agency Start of Study notifications were sent to the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE),
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), NC Department of Environmental Quality -
Division of Water Resources (NC DEQ- DWR), NC Wildlife Resources Commission (NC
WRC), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and NC Division of Parks and Recreation
(NC DPR) in May of 2019. Start of Study notifications were also sent to NCDOT Division 12 and
NCDOT Preconstruction contacts in May 2019.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) provided general comments regarding general
recommendations for replacing structures that cross rivers and streams, erosion and sediment
control, Northern Long-eared Bats (NLEB), and migratory birds. The project specific comments
provided by USFWS include surveying for Hexastylis naniflora (Dwarf -flowered heartleaf) and
recommend winter tree clearing for NLEB.
Response: A Natural Resources Technical Report (NRTR) was completed in May of 2019 for
this project and provided a biological conclusion of "No Effect" for Hexastylis naniflora (Dwarf -
flowered heartleaf) based on surveys performed on April 2, 2019 by Three Oaks Engineering.
A Section 7 Survey Results for the Northern Long-eared Bat Memorandum was provided by
NCDOT Biological Surveys Group on June 3, 2019 that covers the following conservation
commitments for NCDOT:
1) No alterations of a known hibernacula entrance or interior environment if it impairs an
essential behavioral pattern, including sheltering northern long-eared bats (January 1
through December 31);
2) No tree removal within a 0.25-mile radius of a known hibernacula (January 1 through
December 31); and
3) No cutting or destroying a known, occupied maternity roost tree, or any other trees
within a 150-foot radius from the known, occupied maternity tree during the period from
June 1 through and including July 31.
4 Updated 7/10/19

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
The US Army Corps of Engineers and NC Division of Parks and Recreation had no specific
concerns for the project. No responses were received from the NC Department of
Environmental Quality- Division of Water Resources and NC Wildlife Resources
Commission.
Public Involvement: A landowner notification letter was sent on 2/7/2019 to all property owners
affected directly by this project to inform them of representatives being present on their property.
The letter indicated the following, "Please note that if the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has
already issued a Jurisdictional Determination on your property confirming the presence of
streams and/or wetlands, or if you have general questions or comments about the project,
contact David Stutts at clstuttsC@_ncclot.gov or [phone]. No comments have been
received to date.
Prior to ROW, newsletters will be sent out by NCDOT to the properties affected by the project
to inform them of the project and the offsite detour. This is noted in the greensheet/project
commitments.
F. Project Impact Criteria Checklists:
Type I & II - Ground Disturbing Actions
FHWA APPROVAL ACTIVITIES THRESHOLD CRITERIA
If any of questions 1-7 are marked "yes" then the CE will require FHWA approval.
Yes
No
1
Does the project require formal consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife
❑
Service (USFWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)?
2
Does the project result in impacts subject to the conditions of the Bald and
❑
Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGPA)?
3
Does the project generate substantial controversy or public opposition, for any
❑
reason, following appropriate public involvement?
4
Does the project cause disproportionately high and adverse impacts relative to
❑
low-income and/or minority populations?
5
Does the project involve a residential or commercial displacement, or a
❑
substantial amount of right of way acquisition?
6
Does the project require an Individual Section 4(f) approval?
❑
0
Does the project include adverse effects that cannot be resolved with a
7
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) under Section 106 of the National Historic
❑
Preservation Act (NHPA) or have an adverse effect on a National Historic
Landmark (NHL)?
5 Updated 7/10/19

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
If any of questions 8 through 31 are marked "yes" then additional information will be required for those
questions in Section G.
Other Considerations
Yes
No
Does the project result in a finding of "may affect not likely to adversely affect"
8
for listed species, or designated critical habitat under Section 7 of the
❑
❑X
Endangered Species Act (ESA)?
9
Is the project located in anadromous fish spawning waters?
❑
0
Does the project impact waters classified as Outstanding Resource Water
10
(ORW), High Quality Water (HQW), Water Supply Watershed Critical Areas,
❑
303(d) listed impaired water bodies, buffer rules, or Submerged Aquatic
Vegetation (SAV)?
11
Does the project impact waters of the United States in any of the designated
❑
mountain trout streams?
12
Does the project require a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Individual
❑
0
Section 404 Permit?
13
Will the project require an easement from a Federal Energy Regulatory
❑
0
Commission (FERC) licensed facility?
14
Does the project include a Section 106 of the NHPA effects determination
❑
other than a no effect, including archaeological remains?
Other Considerations (continued)
Yes
No
15
Does the project involve hazardous materials and/or landfills?
❑
0
Does the project require work encroaching and adversely affecting a
16
regulatory floodway or work affecting the base floodplain (100-year flood)
❑
elevations of a water course or lake, pursuant to Executive Order 11988 and
23 CFR 650 subpart A?
Is the project in a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) county and
❑
17
substantially affects the coastal zone and/or any Area of Environmental
Concern (AEC)?
18
Does the project require a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) permit?
❑
0
19
Does the project involve construction activities in, across, or adjacent to a
❑
0
designated Wild and Scenic River present within the project area?
20
Does the project involve Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) resources?
❑
0
21
Does the project impact federal lands (e.g. U.S. Forest Service (USFS),
❑
USFWS, etc.) or Tribal Lands?
22
Does the project involve any changes in access control?
❑
0
23
Does the project have a permanent adverse effect on local traffic patterns or
❑
community cohesiveness?
24
Will maintenance of traffic cause substantial disruption?
❑
0
Updated 7/10/19

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Is the project inconsistent with the STIP or the Metropolitan Planning
25
Organization's (MPO's) Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) (where
❑
❑
applicable)?
Not Applicable
Does the project require the acquisition of lands under the protection of
Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act, the Federal Aid in Fish
26
Restoration Act, the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, Tennessee Valley
❑
Authority (TVA), or other unique areas or special lands that were acquired in
fee or easement with public -use money and have deed restrictions or
covenants on the property?
27
Does the project involve Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
❑
buyout properties under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program HMGP ?
28
Does the project include a de minimis or programmatic Section 4(f)?
❑
❑X
29
Is the project considered a Type I under the NCDOT's Noise Policy?
❑
❑X
30
Is there prime or important farmland soil impacted by this project as defined by
❑
the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)?
31
Are there other issues that arose during the project development process that
❑
affected the project decision?
G. Additional Documentation as Required from Section F
Response to Question 16: This project involves construction activities on or adjacent to
FEMA-regulated stream(s). Therefore, the Division shall submit sealed as -built construction
plans to the Hydraulics Unit upon completion of project construction, certifying that the
drainage structure(s) and roadway embankment that are located within the 100-year floodplain
were built as shown in the construction plans, both horizontally and vertically.
The Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program (FMP), to
determine status of project with regard to applicability of NCDOT'S Memorandum of
Agreement, or approval of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
Response to Question 30 - Prime and Important Farmland Soils:
Prime and Important Farmland Soils as defined by the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA)
are located within the project study area. A project footprint for the Prime and Important
Farmland Soils assessment was created to include a 25-foot buffer from the slope stakes. The
Prime and Important Farmland Soil found within the footprint are designated as all areas are
Farmland of Statewide Importance (BnD) and Prime Farmland if drained and either protected
from flooding or not frequently flooded during the growing season (CsA).
A Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Farmland Conversion Impact Rating has
been completed for this project and a total score of 48 out of 160 points was calculated for the
BR-0114 project site. Since the total of the points assigned in part VI of the NRCS Farmlands
Conversion Form AD-1006 for BR-0114 is less than 60 and therefore the total points of the
NRCS Farmlands Conversion Form AD-1006 is less than 160, no mitigation for farmland loss
is required for the project in accordance with FPPA.
7 Updated 7/10/19

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
H. Project Commitments
Iredell County
Bridge No. 480165 on SR 1601 (Branton Road) over Rocky Creek
WBS No. 67114.1.1
Project No. BR-0114
NCDOT Hydraulics Unit
FEMA Coordination
The Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the NC Floodplain Mapping Program (FMP), to
determine status of project with regard to applicability of NCDOT'S Memorandum of
Agreement, or approval of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and
subsequent final Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
This project involves construction activities on or adjacent to FEMA-regulated stream(s).
Therefore, the Division shall submit sealed as -built construction plans to the Hydraulics
Unit upon completion of project construction, certifying that the drainage structure(s)
and roadway embankment that are located within the 100-year floodplain were built as
shown in the construction plans, both horizontally and vertically.
NCDOT Structures Management Unit
Northern Long -Eared Bat (NLEB)
NCDOT has determined that the proposed action does not require separate
consultation on the grounds that the proposed action is consistent with the final Section
4(d) rule, codified at 50 C.F.R. § 17.40(o) and effective February 16, 2016. NCDOT
may presume its determination is informed by best available information and consider
Section 7 responsibilities fulfilled for NLEB.
NCDOT Structures Management Unit
Public Involvement Newsletter
Prior to ROW, newsletters will be sent out on behalf of NCDOT to the properties
affected by the project to inform them of the project and the offsite detour.
NCDOT Division 12
Off -site Detour
The detour route is approximately 3.75 miles long and follows SR 1447 (Pilgrim Church
Road), SR 1600/SR 1449 (Fox Mountain Road), SR 1595 (Coolbrook Road), and SR
1598 (Linney's Mill Road). Bridge No. 480166, which is part of project No. BR-0115, is
located along the detour route on SR 1595 (Coolbrook) and is a posted bridge. BR-0115
should be constructed prior to BR-0114.
NCDOT Division 12
Emergency Management Services
BR-0114 is located near the Iredell and Alexander county line and the off -site detour
route crosses in to Alexander County. NCDOT should coordinate with Iredell County
EMS (Phone No. [phone]) and Alexander County EMS (Phone No. (828) 632-
9336), as mutual aid may be required during construction.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
NCDOT Division 12
Agricultural Land Use
Continued coordination should occur through right of way with the owners of the
agricultural lands that are temporarily impacted by the off -site detour.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Categorical Exclusion Approval
Project No.
WBS Element
Federal Project No.
Prepared By:
7/10/2019�
DocuSigned by: ll
Date
liza a Cott.
BR-0114
67114.1.1
s I v tnglneers Inc.
Prepared For: North Carolina Department of Transportation
Reviewed By:
F
DocuSigned by:
7/22/2019 44,'A�
Date I Ip . irris, III, PE, Environmental Analysis Un
North Carolina Department of Transportation
If all of the threshold questions (1 through 7) of
❑X Approved Section F are answered "no," NCDOT approves this
Categorical Exclusion.
❑ Certified
7/10/?019
Date
If any of the threshold questions (1 through 7) of
Section F are answered "yes," NCDOT certifies this
Categorical Exclusion.
—DocuSigned by:
s6t'p' -14�
Kevin Fischer, PE, Structures Management Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
FHWA Approved: For Projects Certified by NCDOT (above), FHWA signature
required.
Not Applicable
Date John F. Sullivan, III, PE, Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
10 Updated 7/10/19

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
ti
H
C
CC
0
a
See Sheet I A For Index of Sheets
See Sheet I For Standard Symbology Sheet
\ �VQ.
I
\
LINNEY 15 ILL RD.
BEGIN PROJECT (SR
END PROJECT
BRANTON % D.
(SR 1601 �OO G�eel`
PP OOSBRROOK RD.
'o O 1595)
v! z--
a
z2
y \ O Ln
XO
Q G `
FOY V 1600)
SHOE
I rs'S93 RD,1
1
VICINITY MAP
�--�� DETOUR N.T.S.
\ \ 41
\ ✓s ,hip �'!�
BEGIN TIP PROJECT BR-011�
-L- STA.11 + 80.00
a
DESIGN EXCEPTION REQUIRED FOR K VALUE & NIGHTTIME VERTICAL SSD.
THIS PROJECT IS NOT WITHIN ANY MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES.
CLEARING ON THIS PROJECT SHALL BE PERFORMED
TO THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY METHOD
STATE OF NORTH i' [? C Li'; '.
DIVISION OF HIlk-31HWAYS
IREDELL
CfOUNTY
LOCATION: BRIDGE ##165 OVER ROCKY CREED
ON SR 1601 (BRANTON RD)
TYPE OF WORD: GRADING, DRAINAGE, PA TVING, &
BEGIN BRIDGE
-L- STA. 15 + 56.84
-L-
R 1601 (BRANTON RD.
END BRIDGE
-L- STA. 16 + 59.16
STRUCTURE
STATE
STATE PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
SHEET
NO.
TOTAL
SHEETS
N.C.
BR-0114
1
STATE PROJ. NO.
F. A. PROD. NO.
DESCRIPTION
67114.1.1
P.E.
20NA
N�
P� 83
END TIP PROJECT BR-0114
-L- STA.19 + 20.00
INCOMPLETE PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR R // W ACQUISITION
DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
GRAPHIC SCALES
50 25 0 50 100
DESIGN DATA
ADT 2014 = 430
ADT 2040 = N /A
D H V = N/ A
D = N / A
T = N /A
V = 5 5 MPH
FUNC. CLASSIFICATION:
LOCAL
SUB -REGIONAL TIER
PROJECT LENGTH
',
LENGTH OF ROADWAY TIP PROJECT BR-0114 = 0.121 MILES
LENGTH OF STRUCTURE TIP PROJECT BR-0114 = 0.019 MILES
TOTAL LENGTH OF TIP PROJECT BR-0114 = 0.140 MILES
PLANS PREPARED FOR THE NCDOT BY:
STV Engineers, Inc.
K?/6STV 100 900 West Trade St., Suite 715
NCaL tenseNNumberr2F-0991
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
P.E.
Q o
o a
V
, o
°�
2018 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
NIKKI T. HONEYCUTT, PE
PLANS
50 25 0 50 100
RIGHT OF WAY DATE:
AUGUST 1 , 2 01 9
SIGNATURE:
ROADWAY
DESIGN
ENGINEER
P.E.
PROJECT ENGINEER
BHUPESH R. JOSHI, EIT
PROFILE (HORIZONTAL)
10 5 0 10 20
LETTING DATE:
APRIL 21, 2020
NCDOT CONTACT: TIERRE PETERSON, PE
Structures Management Unit
PROJECT DESIGNER
PROFILE (VERTICAL)
SIGNATURE:

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
CT
Q
L
m
0
CT�ro
3
o_0
Nro
�o
Lna�
N
(L,CF
O
`^' X
N0 0 mC
X�11
m 0
w000S
BS DEBAR
BM-1
+75.75
1.23' LT
ki p��Wooc FkisT��C
goo
pOs�
20
Is
T�
D1
PI Sta 11+03.43
S 73°08 _911
E
���
0 = IT 26" 45.6" (LT
,y
D = 14° 19' 26.2"
is REBAR
eST
L _ 121.801
Mir
T 6137
=
R 4 .00'
'l' r
BEGIN SBG
+80.004P.15'
•9S, F
DI O
`Y°°bs
Fx�S. "V
Raw
JS-
o
REBAR O
� N �
06 F
BEGIN PR ECT —
//4 + 80.00
Exist R/W,20.00
—L— POC A. ll+ 0.00 BL-4
+09.79
+ 50.0
60.00
Ln
Ln
"� +
0o
�O
O
:1 11
11 ••
" :: • O 1 11 � 11
11 II 11 • 1 11
Now
.wq�--
11
0
GURNEY G CONNOLLY III
DB 1996 PG 166
+ 80.38
45.0 END APPROACH SLAB
15' TAPER
—L— STA. 16+70.00 T
R +20. 10
W _ 2000.R _
GREU TL-3
EXI TING R/ �' 22i
TY P
E-III GREU TL-3 r •
_- �F w CC,�
�( 1 +\ 80.38
11 RIP RAP
� BM-2
CULTIVATED FIELD +63.94
BEGIN PPROACH SL 96.74' RT
y�
—L , STA. 15+46•
NOT Ea DESIGN SPEED FOR HORIZONTAL CURVES IS UP TO /0 MPH LESS
THAN PROJECT DESIGN SPEED PER SUB REGIONAL DESIGN GUIDELINES.
1150
1140
1130
1120
1110
1100
1090
1:1
1070
1060
10+00
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
MENEM
■■■ ii • iiiii
■■■■■■■■■■■■� iii ii •' • iiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii No '� ■■■■iiiii
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ ■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ • ■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ ■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■ I �• • ■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■i ■■■■■
M!!*■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■
iii■mmiii ' ' MEN
■■■■■■■■ - �•
iiiiiiii • I ■■■■■■■■
----------------
0
VID C WILLIAM ET AL
DB 1780 PG 393 s
6S.
J, S9S
�9, c„
BEGIN BRIDGE t t
—L— STA 15+56.84
PROPOSED EXCAVATION
TO ELEV.1090
EST.
52 CY 4h1
1111111 /P�
CL 11 RlP RAP _
(SEE ST R• PLANS) j�
NOTE: DESIGN SPEED FOR VERTICAL CURVES IS UP TO 20 MPH LESS -
THAN PROJECT DESIGN SPEED PER SUB REGIONAL DESIGN GUIDELINES.
11+00 12+00 13+00 14+00
Ptd'78+04.78
= 14° /0' 54.0" (LT)
D
=w3' 46.5"
L =
247.52'
T
= 124.39'
R
= /,000.00/
5111 soon
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■MENNEN
■■■■■■■■■■
ENzMENEM • • • I iiiii
NONE■■■■■■■■■
• • • ■iiiiiiiiiiiiii
•• ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■
I:i::::ii:::i::::i ii:::iEMEM
L— EXISTING GROUND
•••••I I t Leiz
••. ■iiiiiiiiiii
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
" " "�" ■iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
" " • iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
■ : i iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
STA T STV Engineers, Inc.
100 900 West Trade St., Suite 715
Charlotte, NC 28202
NC License Number F-0991
O�
a Zp�1
~ O $
PROJECT REFERENCE NO.
BR -0114
RNV SHEET NO.
ROADWAY DESIGN
ENGINEER
SHEET NO.
4
HYDRAULICS
ENGINEER
INCOMPLETE PLANS
0 DO NOT USE FOR R/W ACQUISITION
Qo
2 - DOCUMENT NOT CONSIDERED FINAL
Qo/� �, ��o UNLESS ALL SIGNATURES COMPLETED
�JB
S OPe
N /O
1 / INV=1109.98'
INV=1110.76 �J\\� M' /'u///$.95,
I / RIP-
/ /LANDSCAPING RAP / Q: ml
• I
/ EXISTING R/W \
+20.00
LT �� o I I IRIS L MAYBERRY
Exist R W,20.00X
__ w DB OIE PG 276
ti WD I ? v1
I I POS \ I I m
> RIP- �\ `�
W x
co I I z RAP x I
1 c�a I o W D I I
16,1 SPIGOT�POST �o oo'
A
I w000s 1 1 � X
r C\
ao.00 END PROJECT BR-0/14
o
t P.W 25.00 _L— POC STA. I9+20.00
o �
O o �
1
0
WANDA M WHITLEY
DB 1658 PG 277
� • iii
■■■■■■■■■■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
"
�&TICAMI �
" "
" � � �
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
�
" ■C.■■1■I
iiiii
NOON■■I
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii■
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
1■
1
■■■■■■■
■■■■■
■■■■■■■
■■■■■
11 . 11 11 11
• 11
1 11
11
22 + 00
23+00
1150
1140
1130
1120
1110
1100
1090
1:1
1070
1060
24+00

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Project Tracking No.:
18-09-0090
NO NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
o� ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
4 MAP
PRESENT FORM iO
This form only pertains to ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES for this project. It is not i . �............. t o::....... Y A P J
valid for Historic Architecture and Landscapes. You must consult separately with the
Historic Architecture and Landscapes Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No: BR-0114 (STRUCTURE 480165) County: Iredell
WBS No: 67114.1.1 Document: Federal CE
F.A. No: N/A Funding: ® State ❑ Federal
Federal Permit Required? ® Yes ❑ No Permit Type: USACE (not specified)
Project Description: NCDOT's Division 12 proposes to replace Bridge No. 165 on Branton Road (SR
1601) over Rocky Creek in Iredell County. Bridge No. 165 was built in 1965 and has been selected to be
replaced. Since there is no planned change to the existing cross-section, Bridge No. 165 will presumably
be replaced in place. Since Preliminary Design Plans have not been developed, a Study Area has been
generated in order to facilitate environmental planning purposes at this stage. The Study Area will be
centered on the bridge location and measure about 400 feet wide (200 feet off centerline) by about 1,500
feet long, encompassing about 14.4 acres, inclusive of all existing roadways and any modern development.
SUMMARY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
INTRODUCTION
On behalf of NCDOT, Louis Berger completed an intensive archaeological survey and evaluation in
association with the proposed replacement of Bridge No. 165 on Branton Road (SR 1601) over Rocky Creek
in Iredell County (Figure 1). The purpose of this archaeological investigation was to identify and evaluate
the eligibility of any archaeological sites in the Study Area for inclusion in the NRHP through the
application of 36 CFR Part 60.4 criterion {a-d}. Evaluation of archaeological sites typically consists of
establishing site integrity; integrity is defined by the National Park Service (NPS) as "The ability of a
property to convey its significance" (Little et al. 2000; Shrimpton and Andrus 1991). In the case of
archaeological resources evaluated under 36 CFR Part 60.4 criterion {a-d}, characteristics that convey
significance include location, design, materials, and association.
For the purposes of this survey, the Study Area was considered to be the Area of Potential Effects (APE).
The Study Area was centered on the bridge location and measured about 400 feet wide (200 feet off
centerline) by about 1,500 feet long, encompassing about 14.4 acres, inclusive of all existing roadways and
any modern development (Figure 2). Within the APE, four (4) discrete survey areas (2a to 2d) were
delineated based on a review of historic mapping, topography and soil types, visual inspection, previous
surveys, and locations of recent development/construction.
A total of 3.79 acres was tested through the excavation of 19 shovel test pits (STPs). A total of 10.61 acres
was not tested due to the presence of roadways, ditching related to roadway drainage, steep slope, or
saturated soils and/or standing water.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT"
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
1 of6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Project Tracking No.:
18-09-0090
BACKGROUND RESEARCH
An NCDOT archaeologist conducted a map review and site file search at the North Carolina Office of State
Archeology (OSA) on September 19, 2018. In addition, topographic maps, historic maps (NCMaps
website), USDA soil survey maps, and aerial photographs were utilized and inspected to gauge
environmental factors that may have contributed to historic or prehistoric settlement within the project
limits, and to assess the level of modern, slope, agricultural, hydrological, and other erosive -type
disturbances within and surrounding the Study Area. Additional review of land deeds, parcel searches, and
historic maps was conducted by a Louis Berger SOI qualified archaeologist. The following background
combines the results of both the Louis Berger and NCDOT records reviews.
No previous archaeological surveys have included the Study Area. The Office of State Archaeology (OSA)
has not reviewed any projects within the vicinity of the Study Area for environmental compliance so
inferring anything meaningful from previously reviewed projects was not possible. Within five (5) miles of
the Study Area, NCDOT's Archaeology Group has reviewed at least four (4) transportation -related projects
for environmental compliance under the Programmatic Agreement (PA) with the State Historic
Preservation Office (NC- HPO), none of which is located within one (1) mile of the proposed project. An
archaeological survey was recommended for two (2) of those projects, both of which were bridge
replacement projects in Wilkes County, and because a review of OSA's site files showed that very few
archaeological investigations have been carried out in this region of the state, they determined that further
work was needed throughout the area in order to better understand settlement patterns in that section of the
state before any firm conclusions can be drawn on site predictability. Only one (1) archaeological site
(31 WK269) was documented as a result of those surveys. The site was located on a remnant levee and
consisted of a single piece of lithic debitage. It was recommended not eligible for listing in the NRHP.
Review of the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office HPOWEB GIS Service
(http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/) indicated there are no known historic architectural resources located within
or adjacent to the Study Area for which intact archaeological deposits would be anticipated within the
footprint of the proposed project.
The Study Area consists of a mixed wooded/ agricultural rural setting in the western Piedmont of North
Carolina and is composed primarily of three (3) soil types (Braddock -Clifford complex, 8-15% slopes
[BnD], Evard-Cowee complex, 25-60% slopes, stony [EvF], and Ronda-Comus complex, 0-5% slopes,
occasionally flooded [RxB]). Although portions of the Study Area consist of poorly drained soils or sloping
topography, sections of well -drained and relatively level terrain are present and are considered to have a
medium to high probability for archaeological deposits.
RESULTS OF THE FIELD INVESTIGATION
A. Visual Reconnaissance Survey
The visual reconnaissance of the Study Area showed that it consists of slope greater than 20 percent at
several locations. There was also moderate to extensive disturbance from utilities throughout. Two houses
were on levelled land and had manicured lawns.
B. Results of the Phase I Archaeological Testing
Four (4) discrete survey areas were tested within the Study Area. This was part of a larger survey project
which consisted of four locales in Gaston, Catawba, and Iredell Counties. As such, the project area for
Bridge No. 165 was recorded as Area 2.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT"
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
2 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Project Tracking No.:
18-09-0090
Area 2 was located in Iredell County near Rocky Creek. There were four discrete survey areas (2a to 2d)
within the Study Area (Figure 3). The survey areas were located on the east and west sides of Branton Road
and north of the Branton Road/Linney's Mill Road (SR 1598) intersection, in floodplain and low ridge
environmental settings.
1. Survey Area 2a
Survey Area 2a was situated in an open grassy area, possibly pasture or a fallow field, on the east side of
SR 1601 (Branton Road), in the southeast quadrant of the bridge over Rocky Creek (Figure 4). It was
bounded to the south by a small unnamed creek, to the east by the edge of the Study Area, to the west by
slope up to the roadway (SR 1601), and to the north by Rocky Creek. The majority of the survey area had
standing water (Photos 1 and 2).
A total of five shovel tests (STPs A-1 to A-5) was excavated in places where the ground was not inundated.
Stratigraphy generally consisted of a brown silt loam topsoil (Al -horizon) that averaged 9 cm deep above
a reddish brown silt loam soil (A2-horizon) that averaged 30 cm deep. That sat above a yellowish red sandy
subsoil (B-horizon). STPs A-1 and A-4 contained hydric soils, and STPs A-2 through A-5 encountered
water in the shovel test. Depth to water ranged from 35 cm below surface to 65 cm below surface. No
artifacts were found during the testing of this survey area.
Directly across SR 1601 from Survey Area 2a there was a collapsed wooden shed -like structure with metal
roof (Photos 3 and 4). The area around the shed was littered with modern debris (and roadside trash) and
large brush piles. The structure was built almost against the steep slope that led to an upper ridge to the
west/southwest. Between the structure and the road, there was disturbance from cutting and ditching related
to the road construction. A review of historic aerial photographs, maps, and parcel records did not produce
information on the date of the structure. However, it is on property that was once part of a larger twentieth
century farmstead (discussed in more detail below with Survey Area 2b) and was in all likelihood a
secondary structure related to that farm. Given the slope, disturbance, and the amount of modern debris, no
shovel testing was done around the structure.
2. Survey Area 2b
On the east side of SR 1601 (Branton Road), Survey Area 2b extended south from the intersection of SR
1601 (Branton Road) and SR 1598 (Linney's Mill Road) to Rocky Creek (Figure 5). On the north side of a
driveway there was extensive disturbance from utility installation, cutting/grading, and slope (from east to
west; Photos 5 and 6). The house on the property was built in 1940 and to the south (downslope) of the
house there was an abandoned tobacco barn (Photos 7 and 8). The barn measured about fifteen feet square
and was a log structure with a concrete block foundation and sheet metal roof. Deed research showed that
the Mayberry Family has owned the land since the mid- 1800s. The house and tobacco barn are both visible
on the 1964 aerial photo (HistoricAerials). The 1964 image is the earliest found showing the barn but it
likely predates that time. The ruins noted across from Survey Area 2a were probably once part of the larger
farmstead.
Five shovel tests were dug in Survey Area 2b; STP B-4 was skipped because of the sloping topography.
STPs B-1 to B-3 were dug in the level yard area just west of the house. The area sloped to the south (>20
percent slope) past STP B-3 down to the level terrace above the creek where the tobacco barn is located.
Two shovel tests (B-5 and B-6) were dug on the east and west sides of the old barn in an attempt to locate
artifacts that might indicate a period of use. Stratigraphy on the ridge and the terrace generally consisted of
a reddish brown silt loam to silty clay loam topsoil (A -horizon) that ranged from 11 to 30 cm thick above
a red clay loam to silty clay loam subsoil (B-horizon). No artifacts were found as a result of the testing.
Modern glass was found in Shovel Test B-1, which was adjacent to the modern driveway.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT"
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
3 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Project Tracking No.:
18-09-0090
3. Survey Area 2c
Survey Area 2c was located on the west side of SR 1601 (Branton Road) on the north bank of Rocky Creek
(see Figure 5). Currently, there is a house with a manicured yard just outside the northern extent of the
survey area. Prior to that house being built in 2002, there was a structure (possible barn/garage) at this
location that may have been associated with the Mayberry Family property mentioned above. The east side
of the survey area was bounded by the roadway, the west side by the edge of the Study Area, and the south
by the bank of Rocky Creek. The terrace sloped down from the house southward to Rocky Creek (Photo
9).
Four shovel tests were excavated on the lower terrace, which was a grassy field. Stratigraphy generally
consisted of a dark brown to dark yellowish brown sandy loam plowzone (Ap I -horizon) that ranged from
25 to 48 cm deep above a very dark gray sandy loam soil (A2-horizon) that suggested the area retains water.
The A2-horizon ranged from 20 to 40 cm deep. That sat above a dark yellowish brown fine sandy loam
subsoil (B-horizon). No artifacts were found as a result of the testing of this survey area.
4. Survey Area 2d
Survey Area 2d was located in an agricultural field on ridge slope about 230 meters north of Rocky Creek
(Figure 6). The ridge sloped from north to south towards SR 1598 (Linney's Mill Road). Three shovel tests
(D-1 to D-3) were dug on the upper, most level portion of the ridge. STP D-4 was placed on the side of the
slope in a near level area to compare the soils with those upslope (Photo 10). Stratigraphy generally
consisted of reddish brown clay loam plowzone (Ap-horizon) that ranged from 10 to 20 cm deep above a
red clay loam subsoil (B-horizon). STP D-4 had a much -deflated topsoil that was only 4 cm thick. This
indicates fairly intensive slopewash downslope. No artifacts were found as a result of the testing of this
survey area.
DISCUSSION
As a result of the survey, no newly identified archaeological sites were documented within the Study Area.
A total of 3.79 acres was tested through the excavation of 18 shovel test pits (STPs). A total of 10.61 acres
was not tested due to the presence of roadways, ditching related to roadway drainage, steep slope, or
saturated soils and/or standing water.
Based on the results, no additional archaeological work is recommended in conjunction with the proposed
bridge project. If the project scope changes to include areas beyond the Study Area or if design plans change
prior to construction, further archaeological investigation will be necessary.
REFERENCES
Iredell County, Register of Deeds
Accessed online at https://www.co.iredell.nc.us/533/Register-of-Deeds, February 2019.
Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC [NETR]
2018 Historic Aerials. NETR, Tempe, Arizona. Accessed online October 2018, at NETR Online,
https://www.netronline.com/.
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office [NCSHPO]
2017 HPOWEB, GIS Web Service. Maps supplemented with aerial photography, county tax parcel
layers, and other information. Accessed at <http://gis.ncdcr.gov/hpoweb/>.
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT"
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
4 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Project Tracking No.:
18-09-0090
Office of State Archaeology [OSA]
2017 Archaeological Investigation Standards and Guidelines for Background Research, Field
Methodologies, Technical Reports, and Curation (December 2017). Division of Archives and
History, North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, Raleigh.
Shrimpton, Rebecca H. and Patrick W. Andrus
1991 How to Apply the National Criteria for Evaluation. United States Department of the Interior,
National Park Service, Interagency Resources Division, Washington, D.C. Accessed online
October 5, 2016, at <http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/>.
Townsend J.J., J.H. Sprinkle, and J. Knoer
1993 National Register Bulletin 36: Guidelines for Evaluating and Registering Historical Archaeological
Sites and Districts. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Interagency
Resources Division, Washington, D.C.
National Resources Conservation Service (MRCS)
2018 Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture Web Soil
Survey. Electronic document, http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/, accessed January 2018.
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
2000 Gilreath, North Carolina 7.5' quadrangle (1: 24 000).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) Archaeology Group reviewed the subject
project and determined:
® There are no National Register listed or eligible ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES present
within the project's area of potential effects. (Attach any notes or documents as needed)
❑ No subsurface archaeological investigations were required for this project.
® Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources.
❑ Subsurface investigations did not reveal the presence of any archaeological resources
considered eligible for the National Register.
❑ All identified archaeological sites located within the APE have been considered and all
compliance for archaeological resources with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act and GS 121-12(a) has been completed for this project.
Brief description of review activities, results of review, and conclusions:
The Louis Berger Group conducted these investigations on behalf of NCDOT's Archaeology Group
under the guidelines of the department's Programmatic Agreement (PA) with the State Historic
Preservation Office (NC-HPO). As a result of the survey, no newly identified archaeological sites were
documented within the Study Area. No additional archaeological work is recommended for this location.
I concur with these findings. It is recommended that the proposed project be allowed to proceed without
concern for impacts to significant archaeological resources. Additional fieldwork within the Study Area
is unlikely to provide any significant or substantial amounts of archaeological data. Therefore, it is
recommended that additional archaeological work should not be required. Based on the recommendation
put forth (see above), a finding of "No NRHP-Eligible or -Listed Archaeological Sites Present" is
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT"
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
5 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Project Tracking No.:
18-09-0090
considered appropriate for the proposed project. However, should the description of this project or
designs plans change prior to construction, then additional consultation regarding archaeology may be
required. If archaeological materials are uncovered during project activities, then such resources will be
dealt with according to the procedures set forth for "unanticipated discoveries," to include notification of
NCDOT's Archaeology Group.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
See attached: ® Map(s) ❑ Previous Survey Info
Signed:
(- �1-
IA ryueu,.
NCDOT ARCHAEOLOGIST
® Photos El Correspondence
March 11, 2019
Date
"NO NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBLE OR LISTED ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES PRESENT"
form for Minor Transportation Projects as Qualified in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
6 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Project Tracking No. (Internal Use)
18-09-0090
tr
f HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES
-, ,`I '�., NO SURVEY REQUIRED FORM
'WI -A. ;
"� y ' This form only pertains to Historic Architecture and Landscapes for this project. It
is not valid for Archaeological Resources. You must consult separately with the
Archaeology Group.
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project No:
U-5703
County:
Iredell
WBS No.:
50129.1.3
Document
Type:
MCC
Fed. Aid No:
Funding:
® State ❑ Federal
Federal
Permit so:
❑ Yes ® No
Permit
T e s
none
Protect Description:
Realign US 74 (James Hamilton Rd) to intersect with SR 1514 (Rocky River Rd) at Myers Rd.
SUMMARY OF HISTORIC ARCHICTECTURE AND LANDSCAPES REVIEW
Description of review activities, results, and conclusions:
Review of HPO quad maps, relevant background reports, historic designations roster, and
indexes was undertaken on October 29, 2018. Based on this review there are no NR, DE, LL, SL
or SS in the Area of Potential Effects (APE). There is one structure over 50 years of age,
however it does not have level of significance or architectural integrity to warrant further
evaluation due to the evident multiple additions. No Survey is required at this time.
Why the available information provides a reliable basis for reasonably predictinz that there
are no unidentirted sipniftcant historic architectural or landscape resources in the project
area: Using HPO GIS website and county tax data provides reliable information regarding the structures
in the APE. These combined utilities are considered valid for the purposes of determining the likelihood
of historic resources being present.
SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION
®Map(s) ❑Previous Survey Info. ®Photos ❑Correspondence ❑Design Plans
FINDING BY NCDOT ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIAN
Historic Architecture and Landscapes -- NO SURVEY REQUIRED
1
NCDOT Architectural
Date
Historic Architecture and Landscwpee NQ.SURVEY REQUIRED joro) for Minor Transportation Projects as Qralifred in the 2007 Programmatic Agreement.
Page 1 of 3

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
REQUEST FOR R/W COST ESTIMATE / RELOCATION EIS
COST ESTIMATE REQUEST ® RELOCATION EIS REPORT
NEW REQUEST: ® UPDATE REQUEST:❑ REVISION REQUEST:❑
Update to Estimate Revision to Estimate
Revision No.:
DATE RECEIVED: 05 06 19 DATE ASSIGNED: 05 09 19 # of Alternates Requested:
DATE DUE: 05 31 19
DESCRIPTION: Replace bridge # 165 on SR 1601 over Rocky Creek
TIP No.: BR-0114
WBS ELEMENT: 67114.1.1 COUNTY: Iredell DIV: 12 APPRAISAL OFFICE: 4
REQUESTOR: Kevin Bailey & Michelle Lopez DEPT: STV Engineers
TYPE OF PLANS: HEARING MAPS❑ I LOCATION MAP❑ I AERIAL❑ I VICINITY❑ I PRELIMINARY❑ I CONCEPTUAL❑
** Based on past project historical data, the land and damage figures have been adjusted to include condemnation
and administrative increases that occur during settlement of all parcels.**
APPRAISER: Richard Pegg COMPLETED: 05 23 19 # of Alternates Completed: 1
TYPE OF ACCESS:
NONE:❑
IMITED: ❑
PARTIAL:❑
ULL: ❑
ESTIMATED NO. OF PARCELS:
4
RESIDENTIAL RELOCATEES:
-
$ -
BUSINESS RELOCATEES:
-
$ -
GRAVES:
-
$ -
CHURCH / NON — PROFIT:
-
$ -
MISC:
-
$ -
SIGNS:
-
$ -
LAND, IMPROVEMENTS, & DAMAGES:
$ 9,375
ACQUISTION:
$ 20,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED R/W COST: $ 29,375
** THIS IS A COST ESTIMATE AND NOT TO BE USED AS AN APPRAISAL **
NOTES:
Page 1 of 1

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
EIS RELOCATION REPORT Jj
North Carolina Department of Transportation
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
® E.I.S. ❑ CORRIDOR ❑ DESIGN
WBS ELEMENT:
67114.1.1
coUNTY
I Iredell
Alternate 1 of 1 Alternate
T.I.P. No.:
I
BR-0114
Replace bridge # 165
on SR 1601 over Rocky Creek
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES
INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Dis lacees
Owners
Tenants
Total
Minorities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP
Residential
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Businesses
0
0
0
0
VALUE OF
DWELLING
DSS DWELLING
AVAILABLE
Farms
1
0
0
0
0
Owners
Tenants
For
Sale
For Rent
Non -Profit
0
0
LL10l
0
0-20m
0
$ 0-150
0
0-20m
0
$ 0-150
0
ANSWER
ALL QUESTIONS
20.40m
0
150-250
0
20-40m
0
150-250
0
Yes
No
Explain all "YES" answers.
0-70m
0
250.400
0
40-70m
0
250-400
0
❑
®
1.
Will special relocation services be necessary?
[70-100M
0
400-600
0
70-100m
0
400-600
0
❑
®
2.
Will schools or churches be affected by
100 up
0
600 up
0
100 up
0
600 up
0
Total
0
Total
0
Total
0
Total
0
displacement?
®
❑
3.
Will business services still be available
REMARKS (Respond by Number)
afterproject?
No residential or business relocatees. No signs or
4. Will any business be displaced? If so,
❑
®
indicate size, type, estimated number of
billboards on the project.
5.
employees, minorities, etc.
Will relocation cause a housing shortage?
#3 Business services will still be available
#8 As required by law
#1 1 Public housing is available
❑
®
6. Source for available housing (list).
❑
7. Will additional housing programs be
needed?
#12 There is adequare DSS housing in the area
#6 & 14 MLS, Newspaper, Realtor.com
®
El8.
Should Last Resort Housing be
considered?
❑
®
9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc.
families?
❑
®
10. Will public housing be needed for project?
®
El11.
Is public housing available?
®
El
Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing
housing
housin available during relocationperiod?
❑
®
13. Will there be a problem of housing within
financial means?
®
El
Are suitable business sites available (list
source).
source).
15. Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION? N/A
CPW 05/23/2019
0& 312olot
Relocation oordinator Date
—Right of Way Agent Date
FRM15-E

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Roy COOPER
GOVERNOR
Date:
MEMORANDUM TO
From:
SUBJECT:
JAws H. TROGDON, III
SECRETARY
June 3, 2019
File
Michelle Lopez, Transportation Planner, STV Engineers,
Inc
NRCS Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Bridge No. 165
on SR 1601 (Branton Road) over Rocky Creek
Iredell County, NC
WBS 47114.1.1, Project No. BR-0114
The Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 (7 CFR Part 658) (FPPA) requires an assessment of
the potential impacts of land acquisition and construction activities in prime, unique, and local or
statewide importance as defined by the US Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS). This
memo is to document the completion and results of the NRCS Farmland Conservation Impact
Rating process for Project BR-0114 consistent with FPPA.
Project Description
BR-0114 proposes to replace Bridge No. 165 on SR 1601 (Branton Road) over Rocky Creek
in Iredell County. The project proposes replacing the existing bridge with an approximately
30-foot wide structure with two 10-foot travel lanes. The proposed bridge would be
approximately 102 feet in length and the proposed right of way varies from 40 feet to 90 feet.
The total length of the project is approximately 740 feet.
Applicability
Project BR-0114 is subject to the provisions of FPPA for the following reasons:
• It is a federally funded project.
• It is not within a municipality, urbanized area, or urban built-up area.
• Prime farmlands of statewide importance are found within the project area.
• The land is not in water storage or used for national defense purposes.
Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone]
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fax: [phone]
Structures Management Unit Website: www.ncdot.gov
1581 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1581

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
NRCS Farmland Figure
In accordance with guidance provided by NCDOT Community Studies, the farmland figure was
created to display the project location and a one -mile buffer over a layer displaying prime
farmland, farmland of statewide importance, and Farmland of Local Importance in the vicinity
of the project. A project footprint was created to include a 25-foot buffer from the slope stakes.
The NRCS farmland figure is attached to this memo.
Completion of Part VI of the NRCS Form AD-1006
Part VI (Site Assessment Criteria) of the NRCS Form AD-1006 was completed for this project.
Points allotted for each criterium and reasoning are provided below.
1. Area in Non -urban Use: 15 out of 15 points. Estimated using aerial
photography; approximately 95% of the land within the 1-mile buffer is non -
urban.
2. Perimeter in Non -urban Use: 10 out of 10 points. Estimated using aerial
photography; more than approximately 90% borders on land in non -urban use.
3. Percent of Site Being Farmed: 3 out of 20 points. Estimated using aerial
photography; approximately 30% of the site is being farmed.
4. Protection Provided by State and Local Government: 0 out of 20 points. The site is
not designated as a Voluntary Agriculture District (VAD) or Enhanced Voluntary
Agriculture District (EVAD).
5. Distance from Urban Built-up Area: 10 out of 15 points. Determined using aerial
photography; site is within 1.5 mile of Central Fire Department and Barker's
Grove Baptist Church.
6. Distance to Urban Support Services: 0 out of 15 points. Services exist within'/2 mile
of the project site.
7. Size of Present Farm Unit Compared to Average: 0 out of 10 points. The farm units
are more than 50% below the average size farm unit in Iredell County (127 acres).
8. Creation of Non-farmable Farmland: 0 out of 10 points. This project will have
no implications on remaining farmable land.
9. Availability of Farm Support Services: 0 out of 5 points. No farm support
services were identified within the site.
10. On -Farm Investments: 10 out of 20 points. Some on -farm investments including
barns, storage buildings, and waterways were identified using aerial imagery.
11. Effects of Conversion on Farm Support Services: 0 out of 10 points. No significant
reduction in demand for farm support services would occur as a result from the
project.
12. Compatibility with Existing Agricultural Use: 0 out of 10 points. The project is
compatible with existing agricultural use.
Result of Site Assessment Criteria
The sum of the points assigned in part VI of the NRCS form AD-1006 for BR-0114 is 48.
Summary
Because the total of the points assigned in part VI of the NRCS form AD-1006 for BR-0114 is
less than 60 and therefore the total points of the NRCS Farmlands Conversion Form AD-1006 is
less than 160, no mitigation for farmland loss is required for the project in accordance with
FPPA.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 5B97E3BF-39D1-4862-8E60-BA4A4D7AFE74
Sources
US Census. Census of Agriculture. 2012. County Data. North Carolina. Iredell County. Accessed
6/3/2019.
(hgps://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2012/Online Resources/County Profiles/North Carohna/c 3p 7097.pdf)
Iredell County. GIS Mapping. ConnectGIS Web Hosting. Iredell County, NC. Accessed 6/3/2019.
(hqps:Hiredell.connectgis.com/Mgp.aspx
Legal Information Institute. Section 658.5- Criteria. Accessed 6/3/2019.
(https://www.law.comell.edu/cfr/text/7/658.5)
Attachments
NRCS Farmland figure
Cc: Harrison Marshall and Herman Huang, NCDOT Community Studies

flnciiRinn Fn%/PInnP in. FR97F'lRF-39fl1-ARR9-RFRn-RAAAAn7AFF7A