I-85 (2)

Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Project Review Form
Project Number: 10-0023 County: Cabarrus and Date Received: 07/20/2009
Mecklenburg
Due Date: 8/17/2009
Project Description: Environmental Assessment - Reconstruction and widening of 1-85 to a basic
eight-lane facility from 1-485 in Charlotte to NC 73 Davidson Highway TIP #
1-38036
TTI-s rolec is emg reviewe d as indicated below:
Regional Office Regional Office Area In-House Review
Asheville ? Air _ Soil & Water _ Marine Fisheries
_
Fayetteville ? Water _ Coastal Management - Water Resources
_
? Mooresville v/ Aquifer Protection Wildlife ? Environmental Health
Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer ? Wildlife - DOT _ Solid Waste Mgmt
_ ? Forest Resources Radiation Protection
Washington
_ Land Resources Other
Wilmington _ _
? Parks & Recreation
Winston-Salem
_ Water Quality
? Water=Quality DOT
Air Quality
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: IIn-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
- No objection to project as proposed. - No Comment
Insufficient information to complete review _ Other (specify or attach comments)
If you have any questions, please contact, JJk G a D
Melba McGee, Environmental Coordinator at [e-mail] n ... ` 2009
I-85
From I-485 to NC 73
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
Federal Aid Project NHIMF-85-2(51)47
WBS Element 34187.1.1
STIP Project No. I-3803 B
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
APPROVED:
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Submitted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2) (c)
6 - as - O9 A/,t,?/'
Date ?b f -Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, NCDOT
(2- -®9
W_
Date ?`,?-John F. Sullivan III, P. E., Division
?" 't''ederal Highway Administration
I-85
From 1-485 to NC 73
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
Federal Aid Project NHIMF-85-2(51)47
WBS Element 34187.1.1
STIP Project No. 1-3803 B
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
June 2009
Documentation Prepared in the Project Development and Environmental
Analysis Branch by:
K-lq-a9
Date
(O - ' -
Date
urrrrprrk'?
,b4sr??
tAeU ? _
07
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
I-85
From I-485 to NC 73
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
Federal Aid Project NHIMF-85-2(51)47
State Project Number 8.1765101
WBS Element 34187.1.1
STIP Project No. I-3803 B
1. Roadwav Design Unit and Project Development and Environmental Analvsis
Branch - Section 106 Resources
National Register boundaries for the Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church and the Blake
House will be shown on the project plans. Both properties will be labeled "Historic Property,
Do Not Impact" on the plans. As presently proposed, the project will have No Adverse
Effect on these properties. Additional consultation with the Historic Preservation Office will
be performed if project design changes in the vicinity of these properties.
2. Proiect Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch - Federallv Protected
Species
The U. S Fish and Wildlife Service has concurred with the biological conclusions of
No Effect for Michaux's sumac, Carolina heelsplitter, and Smooth coneflower and May
Effect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect for Schweinitz's sunflower. If project plans change
and new areas are impacted, potential impacts to these species will be reevaluated.
3. Project Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch - Noise Sensitive
Areas
Three noise sensitive areas have been identified within the project limits, based upon
preliminary traffic noise studies. These areas, all three of which are located near the I-85
interchange with Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway, will be further studied during
final design to more accurately determine anticipated noise impacts and to identify
appropriate mitigation measures. Additional public involvement will be performed if noise
mitigation measures are warranted.
A fourth noise sensitive area, located on the east side of I-85 just south of Irish
Buffalo Creek, was identified during the preliminary noise evaluation. This area isjust
north of the limits of STIP Project I-3803 B and will be further evaluated as part of STIP
Project 1-3802.
6-24-09 I-3803 B Environmental Assessment Page 1 of 3
4. Project Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch, Roadwav Design
Unit, Hydraulics Unit, Structure Design Unit, and Division 10 - Provisions for
Bicyclists, Pedestrians and Greenwavs
The proposed new I-85 bridges over Rocky River and Coddle Creek will be designed
with adequate vertical and horizontal clearance to accommodate future greenways proposed
along those streams. Coordination with the Cities of Concord and Kannapolis will be
performed during the design of those bridges to ensure they are compatible with the future
greenways.
North Carolina Bike Route 6 follows Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) and Pitts School
Road (SR 1305) within the project limits. In order to accommodate bicycle traffic, 14-foot
outside lanes will be constructed on the section of Poplar Tent Road to be widened as part of
this project. In addition, 6-foot paved shoulders will be constructed to along the portion of
Pitts School Road to be realigned. Appropriate signing for the bike route will be provided,
and appropriate bridge rails will be provided on the Poplar Tent Road bridge over I-85.
5. Project Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch - James L. Dorton
Park
James L. Dorton Park, owned and managed by the City of Concord, is located on the
east side of I-85 adjacent to and north of Coddle Creek. No additional right of way or
easements are proposed along 1-85 in this area, and no right of way or easements will be
required from the park property; thus, the project will not impact James L. Dorton Park. If
plans change in this vicinity, possible impacts to the park will be evaluated.
6. Roadway Design Unit, Project Development Branch, and Division 10 - Managed
Lane Provisions
The new bridges that will be constructed to carry Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 over
I-85 will be constructed with sufficient length to accommodate future construction of
managed lanes (one in each direction) along 1-85. This will require an extra length of 32 feet
(16 feet for each managed lane) for each of these bridges.
Consideration will be given to also constructing the proposed new bridges over the
Rocky River and Coddle Creek with sufficient width to accommodate future managed lanes
as part of Project I-3803 B. If this work is not accomplished under this project, widening of
the bridges will be performed as part of the future managed lane project.
7. Roadway Design Unit - Public Transportation Provisions
Both the Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) and Concord-Kannapolis Area
Transit (CKTS) operate bus service in the project study area. Coordination with CATS and
CKAT will be performed during the design phase to identify special provisions needed for
these bus routes.
6-24-09 I-3803 B Environmental Assessment Page 2 of 3
8. Protect Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch - Permits Required
Depending upon the amount of stream impacts that will result from the project, an
individual Section 404 permit may be required from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. In
addition, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification will be required from the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality. A permit will be required from the Federal Aviation
Administration if the project will affect navigable airspace.
9. Project Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch - Farmland Impacts
A farmland assessment is being prepared for the project. NCDOT will perform
additional coordination with the Planning Division of the Cabarrus County Commerce
Department regarding anticipated impacts to volunteer agricultural districts. Farmland issues
will be addressed in more detail in the final environmental document.
10. NCDOT Hvdraulies Unit- Floodplain Mapping Program Coordination
The NCDOT Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the North Carolina Floodplain
Mapping Program (FMP), the delegated state agency for administering FEMA's National
Flood Insurance Program, to determine the status of the project with regard to the
applicability of NCDOT's Memorandum of Agreement with the FMP (dated 6-5-08) or
approval of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of
Map Revision (LOMR).
11. NCDOT Division Office - As-Built Plans
This project will involve construction activities on or adjacent to FEMA-regulated
streams. Therefore, the NCDOT Division Office shall submit sealed as-built construction
plans to the NCDOT Hydraulics Unit upon completion of project construction, certifying that
the drainage structures and roadway embankment that are located within the I00-year
Foodplain were built as shown in the construction plans, both horizontally and vertically.
12. Congestion Management Unit - Interchange Modification Report
Due to the proposed improvements at the I-85 interchanges with Poplar Tent Road
and NC 73 (Davidson Highway), an interchange modification report is being prepared and
will be submitted to the Federal Highway Administration for approval following completion
of the final environmental document.
13. Project Development and Environmental Analvsis Branch - Quantitative MSAT
Analvsis
NCDOT will perform a quantitative Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSAT) analysis prior
to completing the next environmental document for the project, which will be either a
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or a Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS). If the quantitative analysis indicates MSAT emissions will increase as a result of the
project, NCDOT will present the findings of this analysis to the public and to environmental
review agencies prior to making a final decision as to whether to prepare a FONSI or a DEIS.
6-24-09 I-3803 B Environmental Assessment Page 3 of 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
SUMMARY
A. Description of Proposed Action
B. Summary of Purpose and Need
C. Project Cost, Schedule, and Funding ............................................
D. Alternatives Considered
E. Summary of Environmental Effects
F. Permits Required ..............................._-_------
---------------------------------
G. Coordination
H. Additional Information
1. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION
Page
--- S-1
1
II. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT I
A. Summary of Purpose and Need -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- I
B. Description of Existing Conditions ------------------ -----1.
1. Functional Classification 1
2. Physical Description of Existing Facility and Roadway Cross Section 2
3. Horizontal and Vertical Alignment .-------------------------------------------------------------- ---- 2
4. Right of Way and Access Control --------------------------------------- ----2
5. Speed Limits
6. Intersections and Interchanges -- ---------------------------------- ----3
7. Railroads 5
8. Structures-.. - - ------------------------------------------- ---- 5
9. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities and Greenways --------------------------------------- ----5.
a. Bicycle Facilities----- ----------------------- _-.........................------------------- -----5
b. Pedestrian Facilities 5
C. Greenways --------------------------------------------------------------------................... -----5
14. Park and Ride Lots 10
15. Intelligent Transportation Systems-------------------------------------------------------------------10
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
C
1. Existing and Future Traffic Volumes 10
2. Existing and Future Levels of Service--------------------------------------------------------------10
III.
D.
E.
F.
Page
16. Lighting---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10
17. Noise Abatement 10
18. Emergency Services--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10
Traffic Volumes and Traffic Carrying Capacity----------------------------------------------------------10
a. General Information 10
b. Existing Conditions Levels of Service (year 2006) ............................12
C. Future Levels of Service (No Build Scenario, year 2030)-------------------12
d. Future Levels of Service - Build Scenario
(NCDOT-preferred improvements, year 2030) ----------------12
Crash History--------------------- ...------------------.....................---...---------------------14
Transportation and Land Use Plans ---------------------15
I. NCDOT State Transportation Improvement Program -------------------------- -----------
2. NCDOT Strategic Highway Corridors ------------------------------- -----------15
3. Mecklenburg-Union MPO Long-Range Transportation Plan --------------- -----------15
4. Cabarrus-Rowan MPO Long-Range Transportation Plan-------------------- -----------16
5. I-85 Sub-Area Study 16
6. Charlotte Region Fast Lanes Study ..............._-....._--_.__-_-_._...._...-_.-_. ---._.._.16
7. NC 73 Transportation/Land Use Corridor Plan--- --------- _ ------- ----_---19
8. Cabarrus County Livable Community Blueprint ---------------------------------
-- 19
----------
9. Cabarrus County Northwestern Area Plan ------------------- --------------------------- ---------- 20
10. NC 73 Small Area Land Use and Economic Development Plan -------- ---------20
11. NC 73/Poplar Tent Small Area Plan - ---------- 20
Benefits of the Proposed Proj
ALTERNATIVES. 21
A. Alternate Modes of Transportation ----------------------------------------------------------- -------------------21
B. Managed Lanes,.--------------------------------- ------------................------------------------ ------...----.......21
C. Travel Demand Management Alternatives----------------------------------------------- --------------------22
D. Transportation Systems Management Alternatives --------------------------------- --- ---- --------23
E. Intelligent Transportation Systems Alternatives -------------------------------------- --------------------- 23
F. New Location Alternatives 25
G. No-Build Alternative 25
H. Improve Existing Facility (NCDOT-preferred alternative) --------------------- --- .---------------- 25
1. Interchange Alternatives 26
1. I-485 26
2. Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard 26
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
IV
3. Poplar Tent Road------------- -- ------------------------------------- ------------------------------ -------27
4. Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway--------------------------------------------- ------ 27
5. NC 73 (Davidson Highway),--- --- --- --------- -------_ --_----- -- ------ 28
J. Pitts School Road Realignment Alternatives --------------------_-------_---- -------29
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS - - - ° 29
A. Introduction 29
B. Roadway Cross-section (I-85) .......................-----------------------...----.-- ---- --- ---30
C. Auxiliary Lanes------- - ------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- --.-...30
D. Right of Way and Access Control------------------------------------------------------_------------------ ------ 31
E. Speed Limit---------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------- 31
F. Design Speed-- ---------------------------------------------...-----.....-....--------------------------------------. ..-----31
G. Anticipated Design Exceptions------------ --------- ---------------------------------------------------- ------.31
H. Interchanges and Grade Separations- -------„---,--------„-------------------------------- -------32
1. Poplar Tent Road 32

3. I-485 32
4. Concord Mills BoulevardBruton Smith Boulevard and Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway ----------------- --- --- .. - -- - - -..-...-.. .......32
5. Mallard Creek Road 33
L Intersecting Roadways... ... ... . - ---- ----- ............. ..._------------------------ --° ---...33
1. Poplar Tent Road---'------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- 33
2- NC 73 - _ 34
J. Proposed Pitts School Road Realignment--------------------------------------------------------------- ------35
K. Proposed Rustic Lane Access Road------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------35
L. Railroads and Railroad Crossings,---„--„------------------------------------------------------------------ ------35
M. Public Transportation---------------------------------------------------------------------------_------------------- ------36
N. Managed Lanes ---,--36
O. Travel Demand Management------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------- ------36
P. Transportation Systems Management--------------------------------------------------------------------- ------37
Q. Intelligent Transportation Systems-------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------37
R. Structures.--------------------------------------------- - ...._..........---------------------------------------- ------37
1. Bridges
2. Culverts
37
38
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
V,
S. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities and Greenways -----------------------------------39
1. Bicycle Facilities 39
.2. Pedestrian Facilities 39
3. Greenways---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 39
T. Noise Abatement 40
U. Work Zone, Traffic Control, and Construction Phasing 40
V. Lighting --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- 40
W. Emergency Services .... ° .. .......... ............. . ....°----.....---- ................................41
X. Landscaping........ -- -- -- -° . ................ .... ............. ...........................41
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 41
A. Natural Resources 41
1. Physical Resources------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------41
a. Soils 41
b. Water Resources-.-.. -.......41
2. Biotic Resources 42
a. Terrestrial Communities 42
b. Terrestrial Wildlife 46
C. Aquatic Resources ------------------------------------------------------ ........................... 47
d. Invasive Species ............................................................................... .47
2. Jurisdictional Topics ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
a. Clean Water Act of the United States 47
b. Summary of Anticipated Effects 48
C. Clean Water Act Permits 48
d. Construction Moratoria 48
e. N. C. River Basin Buffer Rules 48
f Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters----------------- .......
g. Mitigation-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------48
h. Endangered Species Act Protected Species-----------------------------------------50
i. Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 53
j. Endangered Species Act Candidate Species----------------------------------------53
tv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
B. Cultural Resources 54
I. Compliance Guidelines -------------------------------------- -----------------54
2. Historic Architecture 54
3. Archaeology .. --------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- -------- .......55
C. Sections 4(f) and Section 6(f) Resources 55
1. Section 4(f) Resources 55
2. Section 6(f) Resources ---- ---------------------------------------- ------------------57
D. Community Impact Assessment 57
1. Existing Land Use ----- ------------------57
2. Key Community Characteristics, ---------------------------------------- -........... - ------------------ 57
a. Geographic Location---------------------------------------------------------- ------------------57
b. Demographics ............ --- ------------------------ ------- ------------------58
C. Business Activity/Employment Centers ----------------------------- ------------------ 58
d. Public Facilities, Schools, and Institutions----------- --------- ------------------58
e. Present and Future Zoning ------------------------------------------------- ------------------58
f. Land Use and Development Plans------------------- ----------------59
g. Transportation Improvement Plans 59
h. Natural Resources 59
3. Key Direct Community Impacts ------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- 59
4. Indirect and Cumulative Effects 59
F. Relocations 60
G. Title VI and Environmental Justice 61
H. Flood Hazard Evaluation 61
1. Farmland Impacts ......................................... ------------------------------- ---------------- ----------------- 62
J. Traffic Noise Analysis -------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- -----------------62
1. Characteristics of Noise 62
2. Noise Abatement Criteria. 63
3. Ambient Noise Levels 63
4. Procedure for Predicting Future Noise Levels-------------------------------- -----------------64
5. Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours ------------------ ---- -- -- ----- -----64
6. Traffic Noise Abatement Measures 65
a. Highway Alignment Selection --------------------------------------------- ------- 65
b. Transportation System Management Measures----------------- ------------------ 6
C. Noise Barriers 66
d. Other Measures 67
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
7. No Build Alternative 67
8. Construction Noise
------------------------------------------------------ 68
--------------------------------------
9. Summary ....................................... .-----------------..... ................. ........ --------------------------- 68
K. Air Quality Analysis----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------68
1. Introduction 68
2. Attainment Status
............................................... ..... . 68
... . -- . . .
3. Carbon Monoxide 69
4. Ozone and Nitrogen Oxide --------------------------- -- .---------- 70
5. Particulate Matter and Sulfur 70
6. Lead 70
7. Mobile Source Air Toxics 70
8. Burning of Debris ------------_ -----------_-----------76
9. Summary----------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------76
L. Hazardous Materials 76
VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
----------------------------------------- 76
--------------------------------------
A. Public Involvement
1. Local Officials Meeting ................
2. Citizens Informational Workshop
76
77
- 77
B. Public Hearing ........................ ........... ........................................................................ 79
C. NEPA/Section 404 Merger Process ------------------------------------------------------------------------------79
D. Additional Agency Coordination ----------------------------------------------------------------------80
E. Finding of No Significant Impact---------------------------------------------------------------------------------80
VII. BASIS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 80
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 - Summary of Direct Project Impacts-------------------------------------------- -------------------------------S-3
Table 2 - Existing Bridges -------- -------- -------- -------- ------- - - --- .. ...........6
Table 3 - Freeway Operational Analysis----------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------11
Table 4 - Intersection Operational Analysis ............................................... ...............................11
Table 5 - Year of Failure Analysis (LOS E)............................................... ............................... 13
Table 6 - Crash Rate Comparisons for I-85 -.14
Table 7 - Nearby STIP Projects.. .-------------------------- -------------------------------15
Table 8 - I-85 Sub-Area Study Recommendations------------------------------------ -------------------------------17
Table 9 - Soils in the Project Study Area ................................. -_._- -.--
- -- -------- --------42
Table 10 - Project Study Area Streams----------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------43
Table 11 - Project Study Area Stream Characteristics------------------------------- ------------------------------44
Table 12 - Terrestrial Community Impacts .................................... ----- ------------------------------- 6
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Table 13 - Jurisdictional Streams in the Project Study Area ---------------------------------------------------49
Table 14 - Wetlands in the Project Study Area . -------. ------- -- --.--- 50
Table 15 - Federally Protected Species in Cabarrus and Mecklenburg Counties .-------_-__-_._ 51
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Figures la and lb - Project Location and Vicinity Maps
Figure 2 - Aerial Photograph (14 sheets)
Figure 3 - Photos of Project Area (4 sheets)
Figure 4a and 4b - Area Bike Routes
Figures 5a through 5e - Future Greenways
Figures 6a and 6b - Charlotte Area Transit System and Concord-Kannapolis .
Area Transit Bus Routes
Figure 7a through 7c - Projected Traffic Volumes
Figure 8 - Area TIP Projects
Figure 9 - Proposed Typical Sections
Figure 10 -Historic Property Photos
Figures 11 a and l lb - Proposed Improvements near Poplar Tent
Presbyterian Church and Blake House Historic Properties
Appendix B - Scientific Nomenclature for Biotic Resources and Section 7 Correspondence
(pages B-1 through B-15)
Appendix C - HPO Correspondence (pages C-1 through C-5)
Appendix D - NCDOT Relocation Report and Relocation Programs (pages D-1 through D-3)
Appendix E - Preliminary Traffic Noise Analysis Information (pages E-1 through E-17)
Appendix F - Air Quality Analysis Information (pages F-1 through F-7)
Appendix G - USTs, Landfills, and Other Potentially Contaminated Sites
(pages G-l through G-3)
Appendix H- Citizens Informational Workshop Materials (pages H-1 through H-13)
Appendix I - NEPA/Section 404 Merger Team Concurrence Forms (pages I-1 and I-2)
Appendix J - Start of Study Comments Received from Federal and State
Agencies and Regional and Local Governments (pages J-1 through J-6)
vii
SUMMARY
.1-85
From I-485 to NC 73
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
Federal Aid Project NHIMF-85-2(51)47
WBS Element 34187.1.1
STIP Project No. I-3803 B
A. Description of Proposed Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) propose the reconstruction and widening of I-85 to a basic eight-lane facility
from 1-485 in Charlotte in Mecklenburg County to NC 73 (Davidson Highway) in Cabarrus County.
The project is approximately 8.7 miles in length and is shown in Figures la and 2b. The proposed
improvements (shown in Figure 2) also include the following:
• Construction of northbound and southbound auxiliary lanes from I-485 to Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard (SR 2894) and from Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles
Parkway (SR 1430) to NC 73 (Davidson Highway)
• Reconstruction of the existing interchanges at Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) and NC 73
(Davidson Highway)
• Widening Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) and NC 73 (Davidson Highway) to four-lane divided
facilities
• Realignment of Pitts School Road (SR 1305) in the vicinity of Poplar Tent Road
• Construction of a two-lane roadway on new location to link Rustic Lane with
International Drive near the I-85 interchange with NC 73
• Removal and replacement of the existing pavement
B. Summary of Purpose and Need
The purpose of this project is to provide relief from present and future congestion and
provide a higher level of efficiency on I-85.
C. Project Cost, Schedule, and Funding
The estimated project cost is $230,258,000, which includes $42,095,000 for right of
way acquisition, $2,163,000 for utility relocation, and $186,000,000 for construction. The
NCDOT 2009-2015 State Transportation Improvement Program (ST1P) calls for right of way
acquisition to begin in Fiscal Year 2010 and for construction to begin in Fiscal Year 2011.
The STIP includes a total funding of $207,880,000 for the project, including $10,000,000 for
right of way acquisition and $197,880,000 for construction.
S-1
D. Alternatives Considered
In addition to the NCDOT-preferred improvements (Improve Existing Facility), the
following alternatives to the proposed widening of I-85 were considered:
• Alternate Modes of Transportation
• Managed Lanes
• Travel Demand Management
• Transportation Systems Management
• Intelligent Transportation Systems
• New Location Alternatives
• No-Build Alternative.
Although the first five above alternatives (Alternate Modes of Transportation,
Managed Lanes, Travel Demand Management, Transportation Systems Management, and
Intelligent Transportation Systems) would reduce congestion and provide a higher level of
efficiency on I-85, they would provide lesser degrees of benefit than the proposed
improvements. In addition, these alternatives alone would not provide lane continuity
between the existing eight-lane sections of I-85 south of the project and north of adjacent
Project I-3802.
The New Location Alternative would provide a similar degree of capacity for the I-85
corridor as the proposed improvements and could perhaps provide lane continuity between the
existing eight-lane sections noted above, but would result in much greater environmental
impacts than the recommended improvement.
The No-Build Alternative would not reduce congestion or provide a higher level of
efficiency and thus does not meet the project purpose. In addition, this alternative does not
provide lane continuity between the existing eight-lane sections noted above.
For these reasons, the alternatives to the proposed action listed above are not
recommended.
E. Summary of Environmental Effects
The project will result in the displacement of approximately two homes and nine businesses.
It crosses thirty-seven streams, including seven major streams, and will impact approximately 5255
linear feet of streams and 0.11 acre of wetlands. Approximately 86 residences and 17 businesses will
experience traffic noise impacts. Two historic properties were identified in the project study area, and
the project is anticipated to have No Adverse Effect on those properties. No archaeological sites have
been identified within the project study area. Nineteen hazardous material sites have been identified in
the project study area.
Four federally-protected species are listed for the Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties. The
project is anticipated to have no effect on three of those species, Smooth coneflower, Carolina
heelsplitter, and Michaux's sumac. The project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect,
Schweinitz's sunflower.
A summary of project impacts is presented in Table 1
S-2
Table 1
Summary of Direct Project Impacts
STIP Project I-3803 B
Feature Anticipated Impact
Project length - miles 8.7
Railroad crossings 0
Residential relocations - 2
Business relocations 9
Total relocations 11
Major utility crossings 1
Historic Properties (See Note 1) No Adverse Effect- two properties
Archaeological Sites 0
Cemeteries (See Note 2) 1
Wetland Impacts - acres (See Note 3) 0.11
Stream Impacts - linear feet (See Note 3) 5255
100-year floodplain crossings 6
Water supply watershed protected areas 0
Wetland mitigation sites (See Note 4) 1
Stormwater retention basins 1
Hazardous spill basin areas 0
Impacted noise receptors (See Note 5) 103
Federally-protected species in Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
(see Note 6) 4
Hazardous Material Sites 19
Voluntary Agricultural District Impacts (acres) 7.2
Notes:
(1) = Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church and Blake House
(2) = Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church Cemetery (no impacts anticipated)
(3) = Shown acreage includes 25-foot clearing limits outside slope stake lines
(4) = Constructed as part of STIP Project U-2009 A
(5) = Based upon preliminary traffic noise analysis
(6) = Biological conclusions: No Effect for Smooth coneflower, Carolina heelsplitter, and Michaux's sumac;
May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect for Schweinitz's sunflower
S-3
F. Permits Required
Depending upon the extent of stream impacts that will result from the project, an
individual Section 404 permit may be required from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. In
addition, a Section 401 Water Quality Certification will be required from the North Carolina
Division of Water Quality. A permit will be required from the Federal Aviation
Administration if the project may affect navigable airspace.
G. Coordination
Federal, state, and local government agencies were consulted at the outset of project
studies. Written comments received from those agencies are presented in Appendix J. A
local officials meeting and a citizens informational workshop were held on October 30, 2007
(see Appendix H for information about the meeting and workshop). Due to anticipated
impacts to streams and wetlands, a NEPA/Section 404 Merger meeting was held on March
11, 2008 for Concurrence Point 1 (Purpose and Need and Study Area) and Concurrence Point
2 (Alternatives to Carry Forward for Detailed Studies). A second Merger meeting was held
on November 18, 2008 for Concurrence Point 2A (Alignment Review and Bridging
Decisions). Concurrence was reach on each of these points (see Appendix I). Merger
coordination will continue throughout project studies. This document will be sent to federal,
state, and local government agencies for review and comment, including the agencies
represented on the NEPA/Section 404 Merger team. NEPA/Section 404 Merger coordination
will continue throughout project studies, including Concurrence Point 3 (Least
Environmentally Damaging Practical Alternative, or LEDPA), Concurrence Point 4A
(Avoidance and Minimization), Concurrence Point 4B (30 percent Hydraulic Review), and
Concurrence Point 4C (Permit Drawing Review).
H. Additional Information
Additional information concerning this proposal and document can be obtained by
contacting either of the following individuals:
John F. Sullivan III, PE, Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Telephone: [phone]
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph. D., Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NC Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1501
Telephone: [phone]
S-4
I-85
From I-485 to NC 73
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
Federal Aid Project NHIMF-85-2(51)47
WBS Element 34187.1.1
STIP Project No. I-3803 B
1. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) and Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) propose the reconstruction and widening of I-85 to a basic eight-lane facility
from 1-485 in Charlotte in Mecklenburg County to NC 73 (Davidson Highway) in Cabarrus County. The
project is approximately 8.7 miles in length and is shown in Figures la and lb. The proposed
improvements (shown in Figure 2) also include the following:
• Construction of auxiliary lanes from I-485 to Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard
(SR 2894) and from Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway (SR 1430) to NC 73 (Davidson
Highway)
• Reconstruction of the existing interchanges at Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) and NC 73 (Davidson
Highway)
• Widening Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) and NC 73 (Davidson Highway) to four-lane divided
facilities
• Realignment of Pitts School Road (SR 1305) in the vicinity of Poplar Tent Road
• Construction of a two-lane roadway on new location to link Rustic Lane with International Drive
near the I-85 interchange with NC 73
• Removal and replacement of the existing pavement
The estimated project cost is $230,258,000, which includes $42,095,000 for right of way
acquisition, $2,163,000 for utility relocation, and $186,000,000 for construction. The NCDOT
2009-2015 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) calls for right of way acquisition
to begin in Fiscal Year 2010 and for construction to begin in Fiscal Year 2011. The TIP includes
a total funding of $207,880,000 for the project, including $10,000,000 for right of way
acquisition and S197,880,000 for construction.
II. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR PROJECT
A. Summary, of rpose and Need
The purpose of this project is to provide relief from present and future congestion and
provide a higher level of efficiency on I-85.
B. Description of Existing Conditions
Functional Classification
I-85 is designated as a principal arterial-interstate.
2. Physical Description of Existing Facility and Roadway Cross-Section
I-85 is a major thoroughfare that transects the Charlotte-metro region. It stretches 668
miles between Montgomery Alabama and Petersburg, Virginia and is a vital transportation link
between Charlotte and other major cities such as Greensboro and Richmond to the north and .
Greenville/Spartanburg and Atlanta to the south.
The proposed project is located in the Charlotte-metro region and spans northeastern
Mecklenburg County and southwestern Cabarrus County through rolling terrain. Existing land
uses in the proposed project area are primarily a combination of residential subdivisions and light
industrial uses along the interstate corridor. Commercial uses can be found at the interchange
locations on the interstate and scattered throughout the proposed project area.
South of the project I-85 consists of a basic eight-lane divided facility with a 22-foot
median and a concrete barrier. Within that segment of 1-85 auxiliary lanes are provided between
many of the interchanges due to their close spacing. North of the project I-85 consists of a four-
lane divided facility with a 68-foot grassed median.
Photos showing existing conditions are presented in Figure 3. A description of I-85
within the project limits is presented below:
• Eight-lane divided freeway (four northbound lanes and four southbound lanes) with a 22-
foot median and concrete median barrier from Mallard Creek Church Road (SR 2472) to I-
485; one northbound lane is dropped at I-485; ten-foot paved shoulders are provided on
both sides of I-85
• Seven-lane divided freeway (three northbound lanes and four southbound lanes) with a 22-
foot median and concrete median barrier from I-485 to Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton
Smith Boulevard (SR 2894); one northbound lane is dropped at Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard); two southbound lanes are added at the Concord
Mills/Bruton Smith Boulevard interchange; ten-foot paved shoulders are provided on both
sides of I-85
• Four-lane divided facility with a 68-foot grassed median from Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard to north of NC 73 (Davidson Highway); four-foot
paved shoulders are provided on the left side of I-85, and ten-foot paved shoulders are
provided on the right side
Horizontal and Vertical Alignment
The existing horizontal and vertical alignment of I-85 is suitable for the posted speed
limit of that facility, 65 mph.
Right of Way and Access Control
The existing right of way width along I-85 varies approximately from 290 to 340 feet.
Access to I-85 is fully controlled and is limited to the five interchanges within the project study
area: I-485 (Charlotte Outer Loop), Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard (SR
2894), Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394), Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway (SR 1430), and
NC 73 (Davidson Highway). Mallard Creek Road (SR 2467) crosses I-85 via a bridge (grade
separated crossing) just north of I-485, but no interchange is provided at that location.
5. Speed Limits
The posted speed limit on I-85 is 65 mph within the project limits and within the
segments of I-85 north and south of the project. The posted speed limits on the roads
intersecting I-85 and on other area roads are presented below:
• I-485: 65 mph
• Mallard Creek Road (no interchange at this location): 45 mph
• Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard: 45 mph
• Poplar Tent Road: 45 mph (35 mph during school hours near Cannon School)
• Pitts School Road: 45 mph (an advisory speed limit of 20 mph is posted just south of the
Pitts School Road intersection with Poplar Tent Road)
• Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway: 45 mph
• NC 73: 45 mph
• Intemational Drive: 45 mph
• Rustic Lane: 35 mph
6. Intersections and Interchanges
The project area contains five interchanges along I-85 and one grade-separated crossing
of I-85 without an interchange. These crossings are described below and are shown in Figure 2:
I-485 (Charlotte Outer Loop), Exit 48 - This trumpet-type interchange includes a three-
lane bridge over I-85 (one westbound lane and two eastbound lanes). I-485 consists of
four basic lanes eastbound plus auxiliary lanes eastbound, two lanes (with extra grading
and paving to the outside) westbound and a wide grassed median between I-85 and US 29
(Tryon Street)
Mallard Creek Road (SR 2467) - This grade-separated crossing of I-85 is located just
north of I-485; no access to I-85 is provided. A two-lane bridge is provided over I-85.
Mallard Creek Road consists of a two-lane shoulder and ditch section
Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard (SR 2894), Exit 49 - This partial
cloverleaf interchange contains ramps in all four quadrants and a loop in the northwest
quadrant. Both the northbound and southbound ramp terminals are signalized. A seven-
lane bridge is provided over I-85, including two lanes eastbound, two lanes westbound,
one westbound right turn lane at the southbound I-85 ramp terminal, and two left turn
lanes eastbound at the northbound I-85 ramp terminal.
Concord Mills Boulevard (west of I-85) consists of a six-lane divided facility (three lanes
in each direction) with curb and gutter westbound and shoulders and ditches eastbound.
The opposing travel lanes are separated by a narrow raised median. The main entrance to
Concord Mills Mall just west of I-85 is signalized.
Bruton Smith Boulevard (east of I-85) consists of a four-lane divided shoulder and ditch
section with a raised median between I-85 and Weddington Road and a grassed median
from Weddington Road 0.5 mile westward (a five-lane shoulder and ditch section extends
from that point to US 29). The Bruton Smith Boulevard intersection with Weddington
Road is signalized.
Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394), Exit 52 - This diamond interchange includes a two-lane
bridge over I-85, with one lane each eastbound and westbound. Both the northbound and
southbound ramp terminals are stop sign controlled.
West of I-85 Poplar Tent Road consists primarily of a basic two-lane shoulder and ditch
section. A left turn lane is provided on westbound Poplar Tent Road at Poplar Woods
Drive just west of the project limits. Left-turn lanes are also provided on all four
approaches at the Poplar Tent Road/Derita Road/Odell School Road intersection.
Between Derita Road/Odell School Road and Akins Drive a continuous left-tum lane is
provided on Poplar Tent Road.
Poplar Tent Road also consists of a basic two-lane shoulder and ditch section east of I-85.
Left-turn lanes are provided in both directions of Poplar Tent Road at the Gable Oaks
Lane/Woodhaven Place intersection.
The Derita Road/Odell School Road and Pitts School Road intersections with Poplar Tent
Road are signalized. In addition, an emergency vehicle signal is provided at City of
Concord Fire Station #9, located just west of Ivey Cline Road/Goodman Road. The
remaining intersections on Poplar Tent Road are stop sign controlled.
Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway (SR 1430), Exit 54 - This diamond
interchange includes a six-lane bridge over I-85, with two lanes eastbound, two lanes
westbound, one left turn lane eastbound at the southbound I-85 ramp terminal, and two.
left turn lanes westbound at southbound I-85 ramp terminal. Both the northbound and
southbound ramp terminals are signal controlled. Kannapolis Parkway (west of I-85) and
George Liles Parkway (east of 1-85) both consist of five-lane curb and gutter sections
outside the interchange area
• NC 73 (Davidson Highway), Exit 55 - This diamond interchange includes a three-lane
bridge over I-85, with one eastbound lane, one westbound lane, and left-turn lanes at each
ramp terminal. The southbound ramp terminal is stop sign controlled, while the
northbound ramp terminal is signal controlled.
West of I-85 NC 73 consists primarily of a basic two-lane shoulder and ditch section.
Left-turn lanes are provided on both NC 73 approaches at Stanley Drive. A right-turn
lane is provided on westbound NC 73 and a left-turn lane is provided on eastbound NC
73 at Trinity Church Road. Two through lanes are provided on eastbound NC 73 for a
short distance just east of Trinity Church Road to accommodate dual left turns from
southbound Trinity Church Road. The Stanley Drive and Trinity Church Road
intersections with NC 73 are signalized, and the remaining intersections on NC 73 west
of I-85 are stop sign controlled.
East of I-85 right turn lanes are provided on NC 73 in each direction between the
northbound ramp terminal and International Drive/Rhymla Place. A left turn lane is
provided on eastbound NC 73 at International Drive/Rhymla Place. NC 73 consists
primarily of a basic two-lane shoulder and ditch section east of International
Drive/Rhymla Place, with left-turn lanes provided on both NC 73 approaches to the
Branson Road/Westgate Circle intersection. The International Drive/Rhymla Place
intersection with NC 73 is signalized, and the remaining intersections on NC 73 east of I-
85 are stop sign controlled.
Railroads
No railroads are located within the immediate project study area. However, North
Carolina Railroad/Norfolk-Southern Railroad tracks cross I-85 just south of US 29-601 in
Kannapolis approximately two miles north of the north project terminal.
Structures
The project study area contains eleven bridges, including six structures over highways
and six structures over streams. Information about each structure is presented in Table 2.
9. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities and Greenwavs
a. Bicycle Facilities
The Piedmont Spur (North Carolina Bike Route 6) follows Pitts School Road (SR 1305)
northward to Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394), then follows Poplar Tent Road westward beyond the
limits of TIP Project I-3803 B into Mecklenburg County. The Piedmont Spur is part of a system
of bicycling highways identified by the North Carolina Department of Transportation as being
relatively safe for bicycling due to their low traffic volumes and good roadway conditions. The
Piedmont Spur is a 200-mile route that offers a southern alternative to the Piedmont portion of
the 700-mile Mountains to Sea Trail (NC Bike Route 2). The segment of the Piedmont Spur
within the project limits (Segment B-3) is known as "Iron Forge" and is shown in Figure 4a.
Figure 4b presents a portion of the Bicycling Cabarrus County map in the vicinity of the project
and shows NC Bike Route 6 (green line), as well as other area bike routes.
b. Pedestrian Facilities
Sidewalks are provided for a short distance on the north side of NC 73 west of I-85 near
Trinity Church Road. No other sidewalk exists along the roadways that cross I-85, and no
sidewalk is provided on the bridges that cross I-85.
Each of the roadways that cross I-85 within the project study area consists of a shoulder
and ditch typical section. Each bridge over I-85 provides a minimum shoulder width of
approximately six feet; thus, pedestrian movements across these bridges are presently
accommodated.
C. Greenwavs
The Livable Community Blueprint for Cabarrus County, a Plan for the Future of Parks
and Bicycle/Pedestrian Transportation was completed in 2002 and has been adopted by the
Cities of Concord and Kannapolis, Cabarrus County, and other entities within Cabarrus County.
The Blueprint identifies three future greenway corridors (for bike and pedestrian traffic) within
the project limits, along Rocky River, Afton Run/Coddle Creek, and Irish Buffalo Creek.
Figures 5a through 5e, taken from the Blueprint, present bike and pedestrian routes for the entire
county and for Subdistricts 1, 2, 4, and 5. The Blueprint is discussed in more detail in Section
II.E.
co
N M
N O
m M
N O M
'C -L
d co
J
z 0) U
N
O C
N IL
W d

?O w co
4 a a m a a a a

0(
0
W
OD
Z
Z
Z
Z
LO
Z
Z

F- M
co

.-.
W-j O 7 m
0 m
0 v
o
a
a
a'
a
o
O
o
O
a
a
-j .7 Z0?-
U N co O Z Z
z
Z
co
co
Z'
Z
W v
co ?
N
_
M
O
N
O
O
7
O
O
co
O
O
?. 0) co 0) V V ce)
V'
V
l0
V
V

=
aw

o W F=- O
M co N
n V
N V
N V
N V
N V
N 0)
LO 7
N V
N V
N
a> O

W Z
F -
(D
O
O
V
cD
(o
1?
(O
M
O
O
-. Z N N I N M Lo co co N co
to
to
Q
m J

W
LL O O) co Cl O N O O O N M
J m N 7 M M M N M 7 Cl)
W

LL Z O 41 O) Ln 1? 0 0) Il- N co co

co K (0 (0 co co co (D
W
J t` I,- (D CO co CC) co W co co 00 co
a (D (D D) (D (0 O O (D O O (D (D
W Z) 0) 0 0) 0) 0) O 0) O N 0) O) 0)
} co
w 0
of w
D (n
Ln
LO
Lo >.
Y >.
Y
LO N Y
' N Y
- O Y
L O Y
L

(n
N
CO
co N
U> N
U>
00 O N
0 O d
V N LO
O (D
C9 ?0 N
y .? N (0 N
` 21= 0
U U ?mU - mU
V V
LL U
O co
3
2 20' N co M 0 N y

Q
Y
n
co
m
m
co
co
-
o `o m _
>?
m
m
U co 0 V 'O CO .?.. Z (n N Z (n .
.
N N Y M (6 3 Z (n
} (? N O LO Ln 4'l N C CD
IT
L
Ln
LO
Q' U co CO Q' CO 00 C >.
(6 O) 00 00
U m (? U > o n - - Y 3 _ - -

d J Z
LL mm
m m
} ? 7 N N N N N y N N N y
F L d ` J J
Z C C
D N N (0 /4 l9 (Q N (6 N (D
6

Y
Y L L L L d d L 0 L 0
O j ) N 6 9 N 6 0 co 6 6
U U U U U U U U U U

w?
w
O co O co c0 Lr)
co
co M (D CO
7 O
r
tf)
N
07
(O
N
aD
m
Z
6
10. Utilities
Utilities in the project study area include natural gas, water, electric, sewer, telephone,
and cable television. An electric utility easement crosses I-85 approximately 0.5 mile north of
Mallard Creek Road (SR 2467). In addition, an electric utility easement crosses NC 73
(Davidson Highway) west of I-85, then parallels I-85 on the west side to approximately 0.3 mile
north of NC 73. The latter utility includes high-tension power line structures in close proximity
to NC 73 and I-85.
11. School Buses
Based upon coordination with the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools and Cabarrus County
Schools Transportation Departments, no school buses carrying students to or from school travel
on I-85 or I-485 within the project limits. Daily school bus trips along the roads that have
interchanges with I-85 are presented below:
• Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard (SR 2894): approximately 25 to 30
buses twice daily
• Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394): 25 buses twice daily
• Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway (SR 1430): approximately 25 to 30 buses
twice daily
• NC 73 (Davidson Highway): 34 buses twice daily
12. Airports
Concord Regional Airport is located just west of I-85 between Concord Mills Boulevard
(SR 2894) and Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) (see Figure 113). The airport, which is owned and
operated by the City of Concord, has one runway, which was recently extended by 1900 feet to
its current length of 7400 feet. A taxiway widening project, which also included installation of
new lighting, was also recently completed. The airport serves both corporate and private aircraft
and has a full instrument landing system and a 12,500 square foot terminal. Access to the airport
is provided via Derita Road (SR 1445), which can be accessed by either Concord Mills
Boulevard (SR 2894) or Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394).
Due to the existing elevation of Poplar Tent Road, large trucks on that facility encroach
into the airport's 50:1 approach slope surface. This results in a displaced threshold of 650 feet
on the north end of the runway, thereby reducing the useable runway length to 6750 feet. The
City of Concord has requested that the elevation of Poplar Tent Road be lowered 13 feet in the
vicinity of the airport in order to avoid vertical encroachment into the airport's approach slope
surface. This lowering would allow the airport to fully utilize the recently-extended runway,
thus allowing larger and heavier aircraft to land from the north. The City has relocated its
utilities along this segment of Poplar Tent in order to remove those approach slope surface
obstructions and is working with Vulcan Materials, located on the north side of Poplar Tent Road
across from the airport, to remove obstructions from that property.
Coordination with the City of Concord regarding the possible lowering of Poplar Tent
Road in the vicinity of Concord Regional Airport is in progress. Based upon preliminary design
studies, NCDOT anticipates the requested lowering of Poplar Tent Road would require
additional earthwork, acquisition of additional rights of way and easements, and construction of
a temporary on-site detour on the south side of Poplar Tent Road approximately 0.3 mile in
7
length (at an offset of approximately 80 feet from the existing road) to allow traffic to be
maintained through the work zone during construction. The estimated construction cost of this
lowering is $4,100,000 (utility relocation costs and right of way costs are not included in this
figure).
13. Public Transportation
a. Bus Service
Both the Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) and Concord-Kannapolis Transit Area
Transit (CKTS) operate bus service in the project study area. The portions of those routes within
the I-3803 B project study area are described below. The need for special provisions for these
routes will be evaluated during final project design.
CATS Route 80X (Concord Express)
The CATS Concord Express route follows US 29 northward from the Charlotte
Transportation Center to Concord and Kannapolis, ending just north of I-85 (see Figure 6a). It
includes a spur route (across I-85) via Bruton Smith Boulevard/Concord Mills Boulevard (SR
2894) to Concord Mills Mall, where it connects to the CKTS Red Route. It also connects to the
CKTS Purple Route.
CKTS Red Route
The CKTS Red Route provides service to Concord Mills Boulevard and Bruton Smith
Boulevard (SR 2894) in the vicinity of I-85, then follows I-85 northward beyond the limits of
TIP Project I-3803B, exiting at US 29-601 in Kannapolis (see Figure 6b). This route connects to
the Yellow, Green, Purple, Brown, and Orange CKTS routes at the Davidson Drive Transfer Hub
in Concord. It also connects to the CATS Concord Express route at two locations, at Concord
Mills Mall and in Kannapolis at the Home Depot near 1-85. The Red Route includes stops west
of 1-85 (Concord Mills Boulevard, the Pavilion at Kings Grant, and Concord Mills Mall) and
stops east of I-85 (Gateway Lane, Lyles Lane, and Embassy Suites).
CKTS Yellow Route
The CKTS Yellow Route serves NC 73 (Davidson Highway) and Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway (SR 1430) in the vicinity of 1-85, but does not follow I-85 (see
Figure 6b). This route connects to the Red, Green, Purple, Brown, and Orange CKTS routes at
the Davidson Drive Transfer Hub in Concord. It includes stops on NC 73 east of I-85 at
International Drive and at Branson Road/Westgate Circle, as well as stops at Rowan-Cabarrus
Community College (via Trinity Church Road), Target/Afton Ridge west of I-85 near
Kannapolis Parkway, and Afton Village YMCA east of I-85 near George Liles Parkway.
Rail Service
Amtrak operates rail passenger service in the general project area, including three daily
round trip trains, the Piedmont, the Carolinian, and the Crescent. The Piedmont provides service
between Raleigh and Charlotte and includes stops in Salisbury, Kannapolis, and Charlotte. The
Carolinian provides service between New York and Charlotte and also includes stops in
Salisbury, Kannapolis, and Charlotte. The Crescent also provides service between New York
and Charlotte, but includes stops only in Salisbury and Charlotte. All three trains follow the
North Carolina Railroad/Norfolk Southern Railroad (NCRR/NSRR) rail corridor that crosses I-
85 just south of US 29 in Kannapolis, continues in a southeastward direction through Concord,
then roughly parallels US 49 and US 29 in a southwestward direction into downtown Charlotte
The future Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR) Corridor (Washington, D.C. to
Charlotte) is expected to use the same (NCRR/NSRR) rail corridor that the Piedmont,
Carolinian, and Crescent currently follow. The purpose of this segment of the SEHSR Corridor
(between Washington, D.C. and Charlotte) is to provide the travelling public with improved
transportation choices, ease existing and future congestion (air, highway, passenger rail, and
freight rail), improve safety and energy effectiveness within the transportation network, and
improve overall transportation system efficiency within the corridor, with a minimum of
environmental impact. Eight daily round-trip trains are proposed by the year 2020. Some of
those trains would include stops at each station, while others would provide express service with
only limited stops.
Currently, a Tier II Environmental Impact Statement is being completed for the portion of
the project between Richmond, Virginia and Raleigh. The schedule anticipates a Record of
Decision for this document in 2012. Improvement projects are currently underway in the other
portions of the corridor with full service anticipated in the 2018 to 2020 range.
C. Light Rail Service
Studies are underway by the Charlotte Area Transit System for the Northeast Corridor
Light Rail Project (LYNX Blue Line Extension). This dual-track corridor will run from Center
City Charlotte to just south of I-485, a distance of 11 miles. It will follow an existing rail
corridor from Center City to near Eastway Drive, and from that point will follow US 29 (North
Tryon Street) to I-485. Fourteen stations and seven park and ride lots are proposed along this
corridor. The Northeast Corridor is expected to serve 22,000 passengers per day by the year
2030. Preliminary engineering and environmental studies are in progress, right of way
acquisition is scheduled to begin in the spring of 2011, and construction is scheduled to begin in
the fall of 2012. The projected start of service date for the project is 2016.
The Categorical Exclusion for the adjacent 1-85 project to the south, I-3803 A, was
completed in April 2001. That report noted that in addition to the now-proposed light rail transit
alternative, two bus rapid transit alternatives were also being considered for the Northeast
Corridor. Both bus rapid transit alternatives called for bus-only shoulder lanes along portions of
I-85 within the limits of Project I-3803 A. Project 1-3803 A included the construction of 14.5-
foot outside paved shoulders (including 11.5-foot full depth paved shoulders) to accommodate
possible future bus lanes on the shoulder.
As noted above, the bus rapid transit alternatives are no longer being considered as part
of the Northeast Corridor project. However, the MUMPO 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan
calls for bus rapid transit on I-85 within the limits of I-3803B by the 2030 horizon year.
As explained in Section W.A., Project I-3803 B includes construction of 14-foot paved
outside shoulders, including a12-foot full-depth pavement width. Thus, the proposed
improvements, like those proposed under I-3803 A, will accommodate possible future bus lanes
on the shoulder.
14. Park and Ride Lots
A signed park and ride lot, with space for approximately 20 to 30 vehicles, is located on
NCDOT right of way on the south side of Poplar Tent Road between I-85 and Pitts School Road
(see Figure 2, sheet 7). In addition, a park and ride lot is provided at Charlotte Motor Speedway
(outside the project study limits) at the intersection of Bruton Smith Boulevard and US 29
(Concord Parkway).
15. Intelligent Transportation Systems
Existing intelligent transportation system (ITS) provisions within the project study area
include conduit and fiber-optic cable, out of pavement detection every half-mile, and closed
circuit television (CCTV) surveillance cameras from the south project terminal to Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard. In addition, a changeable message sign is provided on
southbound I-85 just south of Poplar Tent Road
16. Li htin
Lighting is provided in the median of I-85 from the south project terminal to just north of
Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard. In addition, interchange lighting is provided
at the I-485 and Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard interchanges with I-85.
17. Noise Abatement
No noise abatement is currently provided along this section of 1-85.
18. Emergency Services
City of Concord Fire Station #9 is located on the south side of Poplar Tent Road just west
of Ivey Cline Road/Goodman Road. An emergency vehicle signal is provided at the fire station.
C. Traffic Volumes and Traffic Carrying Capacity
Existing and Future Traffic Volumes
Traffic volumes on I-85 in the.year 2006 (see Figure 7a) ranged from 82,400 vehicles per
day (vpd) at the north project terminal (north of NC 73) to 100,400 vpd at the south project
terminal (north of I-485).
Traffic volumes in the design year (2030) (see Figures 7b and 7c) are expected to range
from 168,400 vpd just north of Kannapolis Parkway/George W. Liles Parkway (SR 1430) to
186,200 vpd just north of I-485.
2. Existing and Future Levels of Service
a. General Information
Freeway element and intersection analyses were performed for this project following the
NCDOT Congestion Management Section's Capacity Analysis Guidelines for TIP Project
Traffic Analyses. Traffic operations analysis for individual freeway elements (basic freeway
10
segments and ramp merge/diverge areas) was conducted using Highway Capacity Software 2000
(HCS 2000; version 4.10, which is based on the methodologies of the 2000 Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM). Synchro Version 7 (Build 757) was used to determine the level of service
(LOS), corresponding delay, and capacity at signalized intersections. Highway Capacity
Software 2000 (HCS 2000, version 4.10 was used to determine the LOS, corresponding delay,
and capacity at unsignalized intersections.
A summary of the Final Traffic Operations Technical Memorandum is presented below.
Table 3 (Freeway Operational Analysis) and Table 4 (Intersection Operational Analysis) present
performance measurement comparisons for the three scenarios (2006 Existing Conditions, 2030
No Build, and 2030 Build) in terms of level of service (LOS). A copy of the entire report is
available for review in the offices of the Project Development and Environmental Analysis
Branch of the North Carolina Department of Transportation, located at I South Wilmington
Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27601, telephone [phone].
Table 3
Freeway Operational Analysis
2006 2030 2030
Performance Existing Conditions No Build Scenario Build Scenario
Measurement Scenario
37 freeway elements 39 freeway elements 37 freeway elements
LOS E or F in am or 34(92%) 39(100%) 37(100%)
m peak periods
LOS E or F in both 26(70%) 38(97%) 14(38%)
peak periods
LOS D or better in

am or m periods 11 (30%) 1 (3%) 22(59%)
LOS D or better in 1 (3%) 0 1 (3%)
both peak periods
Table 4
Intersection Operational Analysis
2006 2030 2030
Performance Existing Conditions No Build Scenario* Build Scenario
Measurement Scenario
12 intersections 13 intersections 12 intersections
LOS E or F in am or

m peak periods 8(67%) 9(69%) 6(50/o ° )
LOS E or F in both
peak periods 7(58%) 9(69%) 5(42%)
LOS D or better in

am or m periods 5(42%) 4(31%) 7(58%)
LOS D or better in
both peak periods 4(33%) 4(31%) 6(50%)
*Note: This analysis was based upon the assumption that STIP Project U-3415, which will
widen Poplar Tent Road to a multilane facility, will have been constructed by the year 2030.
11
b. Existing Conditions Levels of Service (year 2006)
As noted in Table 3, the existing freeway operations analysis (for the year 2006) indicates
that of the thirty-seven freeway elements (mainline segments and ramp junctions) analyzed,
thirty-four (92%) operate at an unacceptable level of service (LOS E or F) in the morning or
afternoon peak traffic period, with twenty-six (70%) operating at LOS E or F in both peak
periods. Eleven elements (30%) operate at LOS D or better in the morning or afternoon peak
periods, while only one element (3%) operates at LOS D or better in both peak periods.
As noted in Table 4, the existing intersections analysis indicates that eight (67%) of the
twelve intersections evaluated (including ramp terminals and other nearby intersections)
currently operate at LOS E or F during morning or afternoon peak traffic periods, with seven
(58%) operating at LOS E or F during both periods. Five of the intersections (42%) operate at
LOS D or better in the morning or afternoon peak periods, with four (33%) operating at LOS D
or better in both periods.
C. Future Levels of Service (No Build Scenario - year 2030)
A No-Build traffic analysis was performed to assess how the existing roadway network
would perform in the year 2030 if no improvements were made to the I-85 corridor. This
analysis is based upon the assumption nearby STIP Projects R-2248E, R-2123CE, and U-3415
will be completed.
The year 2030 No-Build freeway analysis (see Table 3) indicates that all thirty-nine, of
the freeway elements analyzed will operate at LOS E or F during morning or afternoon peak
traffic periods, with thirty-eight (97%) operating at LOS E or F in both peak periods. Only one of
the elements (3 percent) operates at LOS D or better in the morning or afternoon peak periods,
and none operate at LOS D or better in both peak periods.
The year 2030 No-Build intersection analysis (see Table 4) indicates that nine (69%) of
the thirteen intersections evaluated will operate at LOS E or F during both the morning and
afternoon peak hour periods. Four (31%) of these intersections will operate at LOS D or better,
in both the morning and afternoon peak periods.
d. Future Levels of Service - Build Scenario (NCDOT-preferred improvements-year 2030)
The year 2030 Build Scenario freeway analysis (see Table 3) indicates that all thirty-
seven freeway elements evaluated will operate at LOS E or F during the morning or afternoon
peak traffic periods, with fourteen (38%) operating at LOS E or F in both periods. Twenty-two
(59%) of the elements will operate at LOS D or better in the morning or afternoon peak periods,
while one (3%) will operate at LOS D or better in both periods.
A year of failure analysis, performed for 5-year increments (see Table 5), shows that
twenty-four (65%) of the thirty-seven freeway elements will operate at LOS D or better until the
year 2020. Five (13.5%) of the elements will operate at LOS D or better through the year 2025,
and none will operate at LOS D or better in the design year. In order for all freeway segments to
operate at a LOS D or better through the design year (2030), the I-85 mainline would need to be
designed as a twelve-lane mainline section (six lanes in each direction) with a single auxiliary
lane between all interchanges (for a total of fourteen lanes). Since the adjacent sections of 1-85
12
will consist of eight basic lanes (four in each direction) in the design year, lane continuity would
not be maintained if this segment of I-85 were widened to twelve basic lanes.
Table 5
Year of Failure Analysis (LOS E)
Interchange

Year of Failure for Concord Mills Kannapolis
Freeway Element
Boulevard/ Poplar
Parkway/
NC 73 (Davidson
(LOS E) I-485 Bruton Smith Tent George Liles Highway
Boulevard Road Parkway
Mainline NB
south of - 2020 2015 2015 2025
interchange
Mainline SB
south of - 2020 2015 2015 2025
interchange
NB

off ram - 2020 2015 2015 2020
SB on loop from

WB direction - 2020 - - -
SB - 2025 2020 2020 2020
on ram
NB 2010 2020 2020 2020 2020
on ram
SB

off ramp 2010 2020 2015 2020 2020
Mainline
NB north of 2020 2015 2015 2025 2020
interchange
Mainline
SB north of 2020 2015 2015 2025 2020
interchange
Note: NB and SB denote northbound and southbound travel, respectively
The year 2030 Build Scenario intersection analysis (see Table 4) indicates that six (50%)
of the twelve intersections evaluated will operate at a LOS E or F during the morning or
afternoon peak traffic periods, with five (42%) operating at LOS E or F during both periods.
Seven (58%) of the intersections will operate at LOS D or better during the morning or afternoon
peak periods, and six (50%) will operate at LOS D or better during both periods.
Additional through lanes would be required on the roads crossing I-85 (in addition to the
lanes proposed for construction under TIP Project I-3803 B) to improve the operation of these
intersections above the shown levels of service.
13
In order to maximize roadway capacity, many of the measures recommended in the I-85
Sub-Area Study Final Report completed in December 2000 are recommended as part of Project
I-3803 B. The Sub-Area Study is further discussed in Section II.E.5 of this report.
D. Crash History
A crash analysis was performed for I-85 from just south of I-485 to Irish Buffalo Creek, a
distance of 9.1 miles (the project's northern terminus is approximately 0.4 mile south of Irish
Buffalo Creek). A total of 906 crashes were reported along this section of roadway during the
three-year period between January 1, 2005 and January 31, 2008. This analysis was performed
for the time period after the completion of TIP Project I-3803A. Table 6 presents a comparison
of the crash rates for this segment of I-85 with the 2003-2005 crash rates for comparable roads.
Table 6: Crash Rate Comparisons for I-85
Rate Crashes Crashes per 100 Statewide Rate Critical Rate
MVM1
Total 906 90.71 138.01 107.40
Fatal 1 0.10 0.59 1.15
Non-Fatal 253 25.33 39.60 32.16
Injury
Night 184 18.42 34.38 31.23
Wet 131 13.12 30.60 26.26
Notes:
t MVM = Million Vehicle Miles
2 2003-2005 statewide crash rate for urban interstates in North Carolina
3 Based on the statewide crash rate (95% level of confidence)
Major crash types included rear-end slow or stop (51 %), sideswipe (same/opposite
direction (19 %), and fixed object collision (16%). Forty-five percent (413) of these crashes
occurred in the 2.2-mile segment of the crash study area south of Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard, while the remaining crashes were distributed fairly evenly
along the remainder (6.9 miles) of the crash study area. One fatal crash was reported during the
study period. The crash rates for this segment of I-85 were lower than both the statewide crash
rates and the critical rates for similar roadways.
A crash analysis was also performed for Pitts School Road within the I-3803 B study
area. Of the thirty-two crashes reported from August 1, 2005 through July 31, 2008, twenty-five
occurred within 500 feet of the Pitts School Intersection with Poplar Tent Road. Of those
twenty-five crashes, fifteen were lane departure crashes, with the majority (fourteen) of those
concentrated around the curve on Pitts School Road, located just south of its intersection with
Poplar Tent Road (see Figure 2, sheet 7). This curve is currently posted with an advisory speed
limit of 20 mph.
14
E. Transportation and Land Use Plans
NCDOT State Transportation Improvement Program
The 2009-2015 NCDOT State Transportation Improvement Program includes six other
projects in the vicinity of STIP Project I-3803 B. Those projects are presented below in Table 7
and are shown in Figure 8.
Table 7 - Nearby STIP Projects
STEP County Project Description Project Schedule
Number
R-2123CE Mecklenburg Revise I-485/1-85 interchange northeast Right of way Fiscal Year 2012
of Charlotte Construction Fiscal Year 2015
R-2248 E Mecklenburg Charlotte Western Outer Loop (I-485), Right of way Fiscal Year 2010
from east of NC 115 (Old Statesville Construction Fiscal Year 2015
Road) to I-85 North, construct freeway
on new location
U-3415 Cabarrus Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394), from Right of way Fiscal Year 2015 (Part A,
Derita Road (SR 1445) to US 29-601 from Derita Road to George Liles Parkway)
Bypass, widen to multilanes Construction Unfunded
U-4910 Cabarrus Derita Road (SR 1445), from Poplar Construction Fiscal Year 2010
Tent Road (SR 1394) to Concord Mills
Boulevard SR 2894), widen to multilanes
B4449 Cabanas Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394), replace Right of way Complete
bridge number 2 over Coddle Creek Construction Under Construction
I-3802 Cabarrus 1-85, from NC 73 in Cabarrus County to Right of way Fiscal Year 2013
Rowan US 29-601 Connector in Rowan County, Construction Unfunded
add additional lanes
2. NCDOT Strategic Highway Corridors
The subject portion of I-85 is identified as a segment of two Strategic Highway
Corridors:
• Corridor 16, connecting Spartanburg, South Carolina to Petersburg, Virginia
• Corridor 29, connecting Charlotte to Winston-Salem
The NCDOT created the Strategic Highway Corridors initiative in collaboration with the
N. C. Department of Commerce and the N. C. Department of Environment and Natural
Resources. The purpose of this initiative was to protect and maximize the mobility and
connectivity on a core set of highway corridors throughout North Carolina, while promoting
environmental stewardship through maximizing the use of existing facilities to the extent
possible and fostering economic prosperity through the quick and efficient movement of people
and goods. The Strategic Highway Corridors policy was adopted by the North Carolina Board of
Transportation in September 2004.
3. Mecklenburg-Union MPO Long-Range Transportation Plan
The Mecklenburg-Union MPO (MUMPO) completed an update of the Long Range
Transportation Plan (LRTP) in 2005 and is currently working on an update that will be adopted
15
in early 2010. The updated LRTP will include a Congestion Management Process (CMP) to
address the area's most congested corridors. The I-85 corridor in MUMPO's planning area has
been identified as Phase I work associated with the CMP, along with a recommended strategy to
implement a managed lanes concept.
4. Cabarrus-Rowan MPO Gong Ranee Transportation Plan
The Cabarrus-Rowan MPO completed an update of the Long Range Transportation Plan
(LRTP) in 2005. The LRTP includes a Congestion Management Plan to address the area's most
congested corridors. The I-85 corridor, from Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard
to the Rowan County line (7.5 miles north of the project corridor), is included in the Congestion
Management Plan. The recommended strategy presented in the LRTP for this section of the I-85
corridor is to increase the physical capacity of the corridor.
I-85 Sub-Area Study
The I-85 Sub-Area Study, sponsored by the North Carolina Department of
Transportation, was conducted to identify short- and long-term actions to address existing and
projected peak-period traffic along 1-85. It evaluated strategies to maximize roadway capacity,
including traditional capacity improvements (widening existing roadways and/or constructing
new roadways), managed lanes (high-occupancy vehicle, or HOV, express, and reversible lanes),
high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, transit system improvements, intelligent transportation
systems (ITS), transportation system management (TSM), travel demand management (TDM),
and land use/transportation integration.
. The executive and technical steering committees for this study included representatives
from the following: North Carolina Board of Transportation, North Carolina Department of
Transportation, Mecklenburg-Union MPO, Cabarrus-South Rowan MPO, Cabarrus Regional
Chamber of Commerce, Federal Highway Administration, Cabarrus County Planning
Department, Kannapolis Planning Department, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission,
and Charlotte DOT. The I-85 Sub-Area Study Final Report was completed in December 2000.
This study focused on the segment of I-85 between the US 29/NC 49 Connector in
Charlotte and US 29-601 in Concord, which includes the segment of I-85 to be improved under
TIP Project I-3803 B. It included a comprehensive public involvement program to allow citizens
to express their views.
Table 8 presents a summary the I-85 Sub-Area Study recommendations and the related
improvements recommended under 1-3803 B.
6. Charlotte Region Fast Lanes Study
The Charlotte Region Fast Lanes Study has been undertaken to examine the feasibility of
Fast Lanes on major highways in the area. Study partners include the North Carolina
Department of Transportation, the South Carolina DOT, the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO), the Cabarrus-Rowan MPO, the Gaston Urban Area MPO, the
Rock Hill-Fort Mill Transportation Study, the Lake Norman Rural Planning Organization (RPO),
the Rocky River RPO, and the Town of Mooresville. This study was undertaken due to the
recognition that traditional approaches to congestion (e.g. widening existing roads) along likely
will not be sufficient to solve existing or future problems.
16
Table 8: I-85 Sub-Area Study Recommendations
I-85 Sub-Area Study Corresponding STIP Project I-3803 B Proposed Improvements
Recommendation
Widen I-85 to eight basic lanes to Eight basic lanes are proposed on I-85 throughout the I-3803 B project
match up with segments north and limits.
south of the sub-area
Construct auxiliary lanes on I-85 Auxiliary lanes are proposed at two locations, between I-485 and
between Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard and between
I-485 and Concord Mills Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway and NC 73.
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard
New bridge over 1-85 south of This bridge is beyond the scope of Project I-3803 B and, as stated in
Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton the Sub-Area Study, would most likely be constructed as a private
Smith Boulevard (private sector sector project.
construction)
Managed Lanes - construct HOV Managed lanes are not proposed as part of Project I-3803 B; however,
lanes in the future in the median of the proposed bridges that will carry Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 over
1-85 I-85 will be of sufficient length to accommodate future construction of
managed lanes (one in each direction) in the median of I-85; in
addition, consideration is being given to constructing the new I-85
bridges over Rocky River and Coddle Creek with sufficient width to
accommodate future managed lanes.
Rapid Transit - Implement peak- Fourteen-foot outside paved shoulders (including twelve-foot full-
period bus operations on the outside depth pavement width) are proposed on 1-85, which will accommodate
shoulders of I-85 from 1-485 to possible future bus lanes on the shoulders
Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton
Smith Boulevard
TDM Strategies (see Section III.C) The existing park and ride lot at the I-85 interchange with Poplar Tent
Road will be removed due to the proposed acquisition of full control of
access along the proposed widening of Poplar Tent Road. No park and
ride lots are proposed under Project I-3803 B;
TSM Strategies (see Section III.D.) Existing traffic signals at the interchanges to be improved (Poplar Tent
Road and NC 73) will be repaired and upgraded, as needed; the signals
at these interchanges will be coordinated to ensure optimal traffic flow;
and the Poplar Tent Road interchange will be improved, including turn
lanes and improvements to the ramp terminals.
ITS Strategies (see Section IILE) Surveillance, detection, and traveler information will be implemented
during the early phases of project construction, including installation of
conduit and fiber-optic cable, out-of-pavement detection
approximately every mile, closed-circuit television surveillance
cameras a roximatel eve mile, and dynamic message signs.
Land Use/Transportation Integration The Sub-Area Study indicated a number of land use/transportation
(see Section III.F) integration initiatives were already underway in both Mecklenburg and
Cabarrus Counties to evaluate this issue; other studies noted in this
Environmental Assessment (see Section II.E.) include the NC 73
Transportation/Land Use Corridor Plan, the Cabarrus County
" Northwest Area Plan, the NC 73 Small Area Land Use and Economic
Development Plan, and the NC 73/Po lar Tent Small Area Plan.
17
Fast Lanes, or managed lanes, offer enhanced operational conditions within separated
lanes and provide greater efficiency, free-flow speeds, or reduced congestion. Fast Lane
alternatives include High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes,
and Special Use lanes. HOV lanes are reserved for buses, carpools, and vanpools. HOT lanes
allow buses, carpools, and vanpools to travel at no charge; single-occupant vehicles are also
allowed, but must pay a toll. Special Use lane alternatives include express bus lanes with limited
entrances and exits, bus-only lanes, and truck-only lanes.
A Final Corridor Screening Report for Phase 1 of the Charlotte Region Fast Lanes Study
was completed in February 2008. That report identified five highway corridors that met the
screening criteria and recommended those corridors for detailed study. The I-85 corridor from
I-485 just north of Charlotte to the Cabarrus/Rowan County line in Mecklenburg and Cabarrus
Counties, which includes the segment of I-85 being addressed under TIP Project I-3803 B, was
among the five corridors recommended for further evaluation under Phase 2 of the Fast Lanes
Study. The Phase 1 report indicates this segment of I-85 meets the congestion, HOV demand',
and physical threshold criteria.
The Phase 2 Analysis is underway, and the Fast Lanes Study Final Report is scheduled to
be completed in the spring of 2009. The Phase 2 Analysis is anticipated to evaluate the five
corridors with respect to trip time savings for managed lane users, levels of congestion in the
general purpose and managed lanes, mobility (number of vehicle and person trips per hour,
forecasted revenues, and estimated capital costs.
Although the Final Report has not yet been completed, the anticipated minimum typical
cross section that would be required (which would require design exceptions from the Federal
Highway Administration) will call for a median consisting of a concrete dividing barrier to
separate the two directions of travel, a buffer 2 to 4 feet in width between the concrete barrier
and the Fast Lane, a Fast Lane 11 to 12 feet in width, and a buffer 2 to 4 feet in width between
the Fast Lane and the general purpose lanes. Based on these assumptions, the Fast Lane would
require, at a minimum, a median varying in width from 32 to 42 feet. In comparison, the median
proposed under Project I-3803 B is 22 feet in width, including two 10-foot paved inside
shoulders and a concrete barrier 2 feet in width. However, as noted in Section IV.M., the
proposed new bridges that will carry Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 over I-85 will be constructed
to provide 32 feet extra feet of lateral clearance along I-85, thus providing sufficient clearance
for a future median width of 54 feet, which would be sufficient for one Fast Lane in each
direction.
It is anticipated providing managed lanes along this segment of I-85 would require the
following additional improvements:
•' Widening to the outside of the lanes proposed under Project I-38038 throughout the
project length
• Replacement of the existing bridges carrying Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith
Boulevard (bridge # 348) and Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway (bridge # 84)
over I-85 to provide sufficient lateral clearance
• Widening the I-85 bridges over Rocky River and Coddle Creek (as noted in Section
IV.M., this widening maybe performed under Project I-3803 B)
• Extension of reinforced concrete box culverts at Stony Creek, Tributary to Rocky River
(UT 10), Tributary to Rocky River (UT 8), Afton Run, and Tributary to Afton Run (UT
4)
18
• Construction of entrances and exits to and from the managed lanes
NC 73 Transportation/Land Use Corridor Plan
The NC 73 Transportation/Land Use Corridor Plan was completed in September 2004.
This plan brought together communities along NC 73 from US 321 in Lincolnton to I-85 in
Kannapolis/Concord (in Lincoln, Mecklenburg, and Cabarrus Counties) to produce a coordinated
land use and transportation plan. Business organizations and NCDOT also participated in the
preparation of this plan. The plan calls for widening the segment of NC 73 just west of I-85 to a
four-lane suburban boulevard with curb and gutter and a 16-foot median, 11-foot travel lanes,
five-foot bike lanes, and 6-foot sidewalks. The plan also calls for constructing a single point
urban interchange at the I-85/NC 73 junction.
8. Cabarrus Countv Livable Community Blueprint
The Cabarrus County Livable Community Blueprint is a multijurisdictional parks and
recreation master plan prepared for Cabarrus County, the municipalities of Concord, Kannapolis,
Harrisburg, and Mt. Pleasant, the Cabarrus Health Alliance, the Cabarrus and Kannapolis School
Districts, and the Cabarrus/South Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization. It was prepared
to serve as a guide to assist Cabarrus County and the municipalities in developing parks and
recreation facilities and to identify bicycle and pedestrian routes on which to focus over the next
decade. The blueprint was completed in February 2002 and was approved/accepted by all of the
participating agencies later than year.
The blueprint identifies eighteen major bicycle and pedestrian connector corridors and
recommends that public access in those corridors be established within ten years. Three of these
corridors (see below) lie within the I-3803 B study area (see Figures 5a through 5e):
Rocky River Corridor (49.0 miles total length) - major destinations include Concord
Mills Mall and Lowe's Motor Speedway; identified as a major bicycle/pedestrian route
Afton Run/Coddle Creek Corridor (18.3 miles) - major destinations include James
Dorton Park, YMCA, and Cannon School; includes substantial nearby residential
development
hish Buffalo Creek Corridor (19.5 miles) - connects Concord and Kannapolis; major
destinations include North Cabarrus Park; identified as an important corridor in that it
connects four of the sub districts identified in the blueprint
The blueprint also identifies North Carolina Bike Route 6 as a proposed on-road bicycle
route. Bike Route 6 follows Poplar Tent Road and Pitts School Road within the project study
area (see Figures 4a and 4b).
The blueprint recommends the following bicycle and pedestrian guidelines:
• Pedestrian trails - 5-foot minimum width; surface material varies from firmly packed
crushed stone to asphalt or concrete
• Sidewalks - 5-foot minimum width with 6-foot planting strip between road and sidewalk
• Multi-use facilities- 12-foot trail width, 16-foot cleared width, 10-foot cleared height
• Underpasses - 10-foot minimum vertical clearance, with greater clearance if route is to
be used by bicyclists or equestrians; recommends lighting the underpasses, especially
lengthier ones
19
• Shared lanes (wide outside lanes) for bicycles - 14-foot minimum width to accommodate
both motorists and bicyclists
• Separate bicycle lanes - 4-foot minimum width
9. Cabarrus County Northwestern Area Plan
Cabarrus County's Northwestern Area Plan is a joint plan between Cabarrus County, the
City of Concord, and the City of Kannapolis. It creates a plan for future development and
growth issues within northwestern Cabarrus County. The plan indicates that mixed use centers
will be located at the I-85/NC 73 (Davidson Highway) interchange.
10. NC 73 Small Area Land Use & Economic Development Plan
The NC 73 Small Area Plan builds upon the NC 73 Transportation/Land Use Corridor
Plan noted above. The Town of Davidson (Mecklenburg County), the Town of Huntersville
(Mecklenburg County), and Cabarrus County worked to coordinate land use, urban design, and
transportation through this small area land use plan. The plan sets seven goals for the NC 73
corridor. They are:
• Make Place, Create a High Quality Environment
• Create a Balance of Jobs and Housing
• Make NC 73 a Livable Corridor
• Provide Livable Mobility
• Create Meaningful Open Space
• Build in a Sustainable Manner
• Create a Competitive Economic Development Approach
11. NC 73/Poplar Tent Small Area Plan
This small area plan is a result of a recommendation from the NC 73 Transportation/Land
Use Corridor Plan (see above) to further study the NC 73/Poplar Tent Road area, where
development pressures are increasing. Significant development has occurred at this interchange
in recent years. It is envisioned that this area can change within a predictable, managed, and
agreed upon environment. The plan describes a vision that balances jobs and housing, and a
network of streets that reduces congestion and improves connectivity. The plan does not include
specific recommendations within the project corridor.
F. Benefits of the Proposed Project
The proposed additional lanes on I-85 will increase the capacity of that facility and thus
provide relief from present and future traffic congestion. The proposed auxiliary lanes at two
locations (between I-485 and Concord Mills Boulevard Speedway Boulevard and between
Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway) will further enhance the capacity by more
efficiently accommodating vehicles entering and exiting I-85 from the nearby interchanges. The
proposed interchange improvements at Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 and the proposed
construction of additional lanes on those roadways in the vicinity of I-85 will increase the
capacity and improve the performance of those interchanges, thus providing motorists with
improved access to and from I-85. The proposed widening of Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 will
also allow the portions of those facilities outside the I-3803 B project limits to be widened to
multilane roadways at some future date while avoiding the need to redesign their interchanges
20
with I-85. The proposed widening of Poplar Tent Road from west of Derita Road/Odell School
Road to east of Akins Drive, which originally was to have been performed under Project U-3415
(see Section IV.H.1.), will provide continuous multilane access between I-85 and Concord
Regional Airport via Poplar Tent Road and Derita Road.
III. ALTERNATIVES
A. Alternate Modes of Transportation
As discussed in Section II. B, the Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) and Concord-
Kannapolis Area Transit (CKAT) operate bus service in the project study area, including the
CATS Concord Express (Route 80X) and the CKAT Red and Yellow Routes. Amtrak operates
rail passenger service in the project study area, including the Piedmont, the Carolinian, and the
Crescent. In addition, studies are underway for future public transportation projects, including
the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor and the CATS Northeast Corridor Light Rail Transit
Project.
The proposed improvements are compatible with the existing bus service provided in the
project area. Additional coordination with CATS and CKAT will be performed during the
design phase to identify special provisions that may be needed for these bus routes. The project
is also compatible with the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor Project and the CATS Northeast
Corridor Project, which are outside the project study area.
The MUMPO 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan calls for bus rapid transit on I-85
within the limits of Project I-3803B by the 2030 horizon year. Project I-3803 B includes
construction of 14-foot paved outside shoulders, including a 12-foot full-depth width. Thus, the
proposed improvements will accommodate possible future bus lanes on the shoulder.
While the bus, light rail, and rail passenger services noted above will reduce congestion
within the I-85 corridor, it is anticipated the benefits of these improvements alone would be
much less than the benefits of the proposed I-85 improvements. In addition, these bus, light rail,
and rail improvements would not provide lane continuity between the existing eight-lane
segments south of this project and north of adjacent Project 1-3802. Thus, relying entirely upon
(and improving) alternative modes of transportation in lieu of the proposed 1-85 improvements iE
not recommended.
B. Managed Lanes
Managed Lanes are lanes that offer an enhanced operational condition within separated
lanes, which result in outcomes such as greater efficiency, free-flow speeds, or reduced
congestion. Managed Lanes can include High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes, High
Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes, Truck Only Toll (TOT) Lanes, and Special Use Lanes (e.g.,
express bus lanes with limited entrances and exits, bus-only lanes, and truck-only lanes).
The I-85 Sub-Area Study (see Section II.E.) calls for the construction of HOV lanes in
the future in the median of I-85. In addition, the Final Corridor Screening Report for Phase 1 of
the Charlotte Region Fast Lanes Study (see Section II.E.) identified five highway corridors
(including the subject segment of 1-85) that meet the screening criteria and recommended those
corridors for detailed study. The anticipated minimum typical cross section to accommodate
Fast Lanes would require a maximum median width of 42 feet.
21
The median proposed under Project I-3803 B is 22 feet in width, including two 10-foot
paved inside shoulders and a concrete barrier 2 feet in width. Because the proposed new bridges
that will carry Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 over I-85 will be constructed to provide 32 feet extra
feet of lateral clearance along I-85, they will provide clearance for a total future median width of
54 feet, which would be sufficient for one managed lane in each direction.
While managed lanes will reduce congestion within the I-85 corridor, it is anticipated the
benefits of these improvements alone would be much less than the benefits of the proposed I-85
improvements. In addition, managed lanes alone would not provide lane continuity between the
existing eight-lane segments south of this project and north of adjacent Project I-3802. Thus,
relying entirely upon managed lanes in lieu of the proposed I-85 improvements is not
recommended.
C. Travel Demand Management Alternatives
Travel Demand Management (TDM) involves programs to encourage travelers to use
alternatives to driving alone, and, in some cases, to encourage travelers to not travel at all. A
major purpose of TDM is to reduce the number of single-occupant vehicles on the road during
peak travel periods when the roads are most congested. These programs can include car/van
pools, telecommuting, flexible work hours, and park and ride lots.
The I-85 Sub-Area Study Final Report (see Section II.E) identified the following possible
TDM measures:
• Conduct ajoint commuter management roundtable between the University Area Council
of the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce and the Cabarrus Regional Chamber of
Commerce; develop "best practices" programs for early implementation
• Expand the CATS Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) Program among
northeast Mecklenburg County companies
• Develop an approach for extending the CATS ETC Program to Cabarrus.County
employers
• Publish the new CATS Commuter Register to provide ridesharing information for the
region
• Implement the recommendations of the Countywide Transit Services Plan regarding
regional expansion of selected TDM programs
• Adopt zoning ordinances in Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties to set aside reserved
parking for carpools and vanpools
• Adopt travel reduction ordinances in Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties, including
employer-based vehicle miles of travel (VMT) reduction goals
• Establish telecommuting centers in the I-85 corridor
• Construct park and ride facilities at the I-85 interchanges with Poplar Tent Road,
Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway, and NC 73
The subject project does not include any of the above TDM measures, most of which
must be undertaken at the local government level or by the private sector.
A signed park and ride lot, with space for approximately 20 to 30 vehicles, is located on
NCDOT right of way on the south side of Poplar Tent Road between I-85 and Pitts School Road.
In addition, a park and ride lot is provided at Charlotte Motor Speedway (outside the project
22
study limits) at the intersection of Bruton Smith Boulevard and US 29 (Concord Parkway). The
park and ride lot on Poplar Tent Road will impacted by the proposed widening of Poplar Tent
Road and by the proposed acquisition of full control of access along Poplar Tent Road and will
not be available for use after project construction has begun. The project will not impact the
park and ride lot located on US 29.
While TDM measures will reduce congestion within the I-85 corridor, it is anticipated the
benefits of these improvements alone would be much less than the benefits of the proposed I-85
improvements. In addition, TDM measures alone would not provide lane continuity between the
existing eight-lane segments south of this project and north of adjacent Project I-3802. Thus,
relying entirely upon TDM measures in lieu of the proposed I-85 improvements is not
recommended.
D. Transportation Systems Management Alternatives
Transportation Systems Management (TSM) improvements are modest physical and
operational improvements to improve traffic performance, safety, and management. These
measures can include ramp lengthening, construction of auxiliary lanes,. constructing new
interchanges, improved signing and lane markings, and improved shoulder illumination.
Possible transportation systems management (TSM) measures were identified in the I-85
Sub-Area Study Final Report, including:
• Perform signal progression studies and improvements on Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard, Poplar Tent Road, and NC 73
• Perform arterial management studies for Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith
Boulevard
• Complete access management studies along Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith
Boulevard, Poplar Tent Road, and NC 73
• Repair and upgrade existing traffic signals
• Widen ramp terminals and turn lanes at the Poplar Tent Road interchange
The subject project includes repairing and upgrading, as needed, the existing traffic
signals at the I-85 interchanges to be upgraded as part of Project I-3803 B, at Poplar Tent Road
and NC 73. The signals in the vicinity of each of these interchanges will be coordinated to
ensure optimal traffic flow. In addition, the I-85 interchange with Poplar Tent Road will be
reconstructed under the subject project, which will include widening the ramp terminals and
providing turn lanes.
While TSM measures will reduce congestion within the I-85 corridor, it is anticipated the
benefits of these improvements alone would be much less than the benefits of the proposed I-85
improvements. In addition, TSM measures alone would not provide lane continuity between the
existing eight-lane segments south of this project and north of adjacent Project I-3802. Thus,
relying entirely upon TSM measures in lieu of the proposed I-85 improvements is not
recommended.
E. Intelligent Transportation Systems Alternatives
Intelligent Transportation Systems (TSM) use advanced technology, such as
telecommunications and computing and control software, to provide better, more efficient
23
management of the transportation system. ITS is used to gather accurate, real-time traffic
conditions data, detect changes in traffic flow (such as incidents) that affect system capacity,
verify the nature of any detected incidents, respond to incidents and restore normal traffic flow,
and inform drivers of current traffic conditions.
The I-85 Sub-Area Study Final Report (see Section II.E) recommended the following ITS
measures:
• Implement surveillance, detection and traveler information on I-85 prior to beginning
major roadway widening, including the installation of conduit and fiber-optic cable, out
of pavement detection every half-mile, CCTV surveillance cameras every half-mile,
changeable message signs, and highway advisory radio)
• Develop an integrated Regional Incident Management Program and expand it throughout
the study corridor; improve coordination between NCDOT IMAP and Charlotte-
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus police/Fire/EMS and 911 centers
• Install closed-circuit television cameras at the I-85 interchange with Poplar Tent Road
• Provide traveler information via the NCDOT web site and through Commercial Vehicle
Operations
• Integrate I-85 corridor ITS with regional transit and arterial signal systems on US 29,
Harris Boulevard, and Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard
• Install wireless detection and surveillance on Poplar Tent Road and NC 73
• Implement ramp metering on I-85, beginning initially in the southbound direction for
morning peak traffic periods; coordinate ramp signals on crossing arterials to
accommodate ramp metering; study further metering at other times and in the northbound
direction
Surveillance, detection, and traveler information will be implemented during the early
phases of project construction. These measures will include installation of conduit and fiber-
optic cable, out-of-pavement detection approximately every mile, closed-circuit television
surveillance cameras approximately every mile, and dynamic message signs.
A review of the freeway operational analysis for the year 2030 for the "Build" alternative
indicates that each of the ten on-ramps within the project limits will operate at LOS F in the
morning or afternoon peak traffic periods. One (the I-485 on-ramp to northbound I-85) will
operate at LOS E or F in both the morning afternoon peak traffic periods. The remaining nine
will operate at LOS C or D in the morning or afternoon periods. The on-ramp from I-485 is a
freeway-to-freeway ramp and therefore would not be considered for metering. Ramp metering at
the other nine locations is not proposed as part of the subject project, but could be implemented
in the future as a separate project once warranted by traffic conditions.
While the above ITS measures would reduce congestion within the I-85 corridor, it is
anticipated the benefits of these improvements alone would be much less than the benefits of the
proposed I-85 improvements. In addition, ITS measures alone would not provide lane continuity
between the existing eight-lane segments south of this project and north of adjacent Project I-
3802. Thus, relying entirely upon ITS measures in lieu of the proposed I-85 improvements is not
recommended.
24
F. New Location Alternatives
Given the amount of development in and near the I-85 corridor, constructing a new
freeway facility would not be a cost-effective means of addressing the highway capacity
deficiency. In addition, environmental impacts would be considerably greater if a new facility
were constructed. For these reasons, construction of a freeway on new location is not
recommended.
G. No-Build Alternative
As explained above in Section II.C.2, the majority of the existing four- to seven-lane
facility is already operating at level of service E or F. The No-Build Alternative would not
provide relief from existing traffic congestion and would result in the further deterioration of
traffic conditions as volumes increase. In addition, lane continuity would not be provided with
the existing eight-lane cross sections on I-85 south of I-485 and north of adjacent Project I-3802.
For these reasons, the No-Build Alternative is not recommended.
H. lmprove Existine Facilitv (NCDOT-preferred alternative
The NCDOT-preferred alternative calls for reconstructing and widening existing I-85 to a
basic eight-lane facility from I-485 in Charlotte (Mecklenburg County) to NC 73 (Davidson
Highway) in Concord and Kannapolis (Cabarrus County). This alternative includes the
following additional improvements and is described in detail in Section W of this report. The
proposed improvements are shown in Figure 2.
• Construction of northbound and southbound auxiliary lanes from I-485 to Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard (SR 2894) and from Kannapolis Parkway/George
Liles Parkway (SR 1430) to NC 73 (Davidson Highway)
• Reconstruction of the existing diamond interchange at Poplar Tent Road
• Reconstruction of the existing diamond interchange at NC 73 (Davidson Highway) to
provide a partial cloverleaf interchange
• Widening Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) and NC 73 (Davidson Highway) to four-lane
divided facilities
• Realignment of Pitts School Road (SR 1305) in the vicinity of Poplar Tent Road
• Construction of a two-lane roadway on new location to link Rustic Lane with
International Drive near the I-85 interchange with NC 73
• Removal and replacement of the existing pavement
This alternative is recommended because it will result in improved operating conditions
through the design year (2030) with respect to the No-Build Alternative and provide lane
continuity with the existing eight-lane cross sections on I-85 south of the project and north of
adjacent Project I-3802. These improvements are supported by the I-85 Sub- Area Study, which
calls for:
• Widening I-85 to at least eight lanes to match the segments north and south of the sub-
area
25
• Constructing auxiliary lanes on I-85 between I-485 and Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton
Smith Boulevard
• Constructing HOV lanes in the future in the median of I-85
(Managed lanes are not recommended as part of I-3803 B, but will be accommodated in
the design of the new bridges over 1-85 at Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 and possibly the
new bridges over Rocky River and Coddle Creek)
• Implementing peak-period bus operations on the outside shoulders of I-85 from 1-485 to
Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard
(Bus operations could be accommodated with the proposed 12 foot full-depth outside
shoulders proposed on 1-85)
• Traffic Systems Management strategies - The subject project includes repairing and
upgrading, as needed, the existing traffic signals at the I-85 interchanges to be upgraded
as part of Project I-3803 B, at Poplar Tent Road and NC 73. The signals in the vicinity of
each of these interchanges will be coordinated to ensure optimal traffic flow. In addition,
the I-85 interchange with Poplar Tent Road will be reconstructed under the subject
project, which will include widening the ramp terminals and providing turn lanes.
• Intelligent Transportation Systems strategies - Surveillance, detection, and traveler
information will be implemented during the early phases of project construction. These
measures will include installation of conduit and fiber-optic cable, out-of-pavement
detection approximately every mile, closed-circuit television surveillance cameras
approximately every mile, and dynamic message signs.
Interchange Alternatives
This section presents the alternatives that were evaluated for improving the five existing
interchanges along I-85 within the project limits. The supporting rationale behind the selection
of the NCDOT-preferred alternative for each interchange is also presented.
1-485
The I-85 interchange with I-485 at the south project terminal will be improved under
adjacent Project R-2123 CE (see Section II.E.1). Only minor improvements to this interchange
(ramp junction improvements) are proposed under Project I-3803 B.
2. Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard
Three alternatives were evaluated for improving the I-85 interchange with Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard:
• Diverging diamond interchange
• Split diamond interchange
• Minor improvements to existing interchange (ramp junction improvements) (NCDOT-
preferred alternative); see Figure 2, Sheets 3 and 4
Traffic operation analyses showed the split diamond interchange alternative would
provide the best level of service in the design year (2030), since it would shift traffic off of
Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard onto a new Quay Road-New Holland Road
connector. However, this alternative would also be the mostly costly of the alternatives
considered, requiring a new bridge over I-85 to connect Quay Road (SR 1170) and New Holland
Road (SR 1520) south of Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard, extended ramps
26
south of the new bridge, and additional right of way on either side of I-85 to accommodate the
new bridge and extended ramps. The diverging diamond interchange would perform similarly to
the split diamond interchange, but would require reversing the directions of westbound and
eastbound Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard in the vicinity of 1-85 and would
likely require widening the existing bridge and purchasing additional right of way.
The I-85 interchange with Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard was
completed under TIP Project R-2315 in October, 1996, and the existing bridge has a sufficiency
rating of 89.0. Given the excellent condition of the existing bridge and the relatively high
capacity provided at the interchange (in comparison with the Poplar Tent Road and NC 73
interchanges), it is recommended that only minor improvements (ramp junction improvements)
be performed at this interchange. This alternative avoids the need to purchase additional right of
way and minimizes construction costs.
3. Poplar Tent Road
Three alternatives were evaluated for improving the I-85 interchange with Poplar Tent
Road:
Diamond interchange (NCDOT-preferred alternative); see Figure 2, Sheet 7
Single point urban interchange
Diamond interchange with loop in northeast quadrant
Traffic operations analyses showed that of the three studied alternatives, the diamond
interchange alternative would operate at the best level of service in the design year (2030). The
diamond interchange with a loop in the northeast quadrant would require the acquisition of
additional right of way to accommodate the new loop and would decrease the spacing between
the northbound I-85 ramp terminal and the Shelton Road/Realigned Pitts School Road
intersections with Poplar Tent Road. The single point urban interchange would require
construction of a more expensive bridge over I-85. For these reasons, the diamond interchange
alternative is the NCDOT-preferred design for this interchange.
4. Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway
Six alternatives were evaluated for improving the I-85 interchange with Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway:
• Improved diamond interchange
• Diamond interchange with loop in southeast quadrant
• Diamond interchange with loop in southwest quadrant
• Diamond interchange with loop in northwest quadrant
• Partial cloverleaf interchange with loops in northwest and southeast quadrants
• Minor improvements (ramp junction improvements)(NCDOT-preferred alternative); see
Figure 2, Sheets 11 and 12
Traffic operations analyses showed that of the first five alternatives listed above, the
partial cloverleaf interchange with loops in the northwest and southeast quadrants would operate
at the best level of service in the design year (2030). However, that alternative would require
widening Kannapolis Parkway and George Liles Parkway to six basic lanes and would require
the acquisition of additional right of way to contain the new loops. The diamond interchange
27
alternatives with loops in the southeast, southwest, and northwest quadrants and the improved
diamond interchange alternative would also offer more capacity than the NCDOT-preferred
alternative (minor improvements to ramp junctions), but would also require widening Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway to six basic lanes. In addition, the four alternatives that call for
construction of loops would require additional right of way.
The I-85 interchange with Kannapolis Parkway/Georg Liles Parkway was completed
under TIP Project U-2009 A in November, 2003, and the existing bridge has a sufficiency rating
of 97.0. Given the excellent condition of the existing bridge and the relatively high capacity
provided at the interchange (in comparison with the Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 interchanges),
it is recommended that only minor improvements (ramp junction improvements) be performed at
this interchange. This alternative avoids the need to purchase additional right of way at the
interchange to accommodate the proposed improvements, which would be required for four of
the five other alternatives considered.
NC 73 (Davidson Highway)
NC 73:
The following nine alternatives were evaluated for improving the I-85 interchange with
• Diamond interchange
• Diamond interchange with one-lane loop in southeast quadrant
• Diamond interchange with two-lane loop in southeast quadrant
• Partial cloverleaf interchange with loops in northwest and southeast quadrants
• Partial cloverleaf interchange with loops in southwest and southeast quadrants
• Three-point diamond interchange
• Compressed diamond interchange with right-in/right-out only at Trinity Church Road
intersection with NC 73.
• Two-quadrant partial cloverleaf interchange with loops and ramps in southwest and
northeast quadrants
• Three-quadrant partial cloverleaf interchange with loops and ramps in southwest and
northeast quadrants and ramp in southeast quadrant (NCDOT-preferred alternative); see
Figure 2, Sheet 13
Traffic operation analyses show the partial cloverleaf interchange with loops in the
northwest and. southeast quadrants would provide the best level of service in the design year
(2030). However, this alternative would likely impact the National Register-eligible Blake
House located on Trinity Church Road and would require four traffic signals on NC 73 in the
vicinity of I-85.
The diamond interchange alternative with a two-lane loop in the southeast quadrant and
the diamond interchange alternative would also provide a better level of service than the
NCDOT-preferred alternative (three quadrant partial cloverleaf interchange), but would require
four traffic signals on NC 73 in the vicinity of I-85. These alternatives would also result in the
close spacing of the Trinity Church Road and southbound I-85 ramp terminal intersections with
NC 73 west of I-85, as well as the close spacing of the International Drive/Rhymla Place and
southbound I-85 ramp terminal intersections with NC 73.
The partial cloverleaf interchange alternative with loops in the southwest and southeast
quadrants would also provide a better level of service than the NCDOT-preferred alternative and,
28
like the NCDOT-preferred alternative, would require only three signals on NC 73 in the vicinity
of I-85. In addition, it would avoid the close spacing of the Trinity Church Road and southbound
I-85 ramp terminal intersections with NC 73 west of I-85 by constructing the southbound I-85
southbound ramp terminal opposite Trinity Church Road. This alternative would, however, not
eliminate the close spacing of the International Drive and northbound I-85 ramp terminal
intersections with NC 73 east of I-85.
Although the NCDOT-preferred alternative (three-quadrant partial cloverleaf interchange
with loops and ramps in the southwest and northeast quadrants and a ramp in the southeast
quadrant) does not offer the best level of service with respect to the other studied alternatives, it
is recommended because it minimizes the number of traffic signals on NC 73, avoids impacts to
the Blake House, avoids the close spacing of intersections in the interchange area, and offers a
medium-range level of service of the alternatives considered.
Pitts School Road Realignment Alternatives
As explained in Section IV, it is recommended that Pitts School Road be realigned near
its intersection with Poplar Tent Road (see Figure 2, Sheet 7). This realignment, which is
approximately 0.5 mile in length, is recommended due to (1) the close spacing (approximately
450 feet) between the northbound I-85 ramp terminal and the existing Pitts School Road
intersection with Poplar Tent Road and (2) the existing horizontal curve (with an advisory speed
limit of 20 mph) on Pitts School Road near its intersection with Poplar Tent Road. It is
anticipated one residence will be displaced and 5.4 acres of land within a Voluntary Agricultural
District (see Section V.I.) will be impacted as a result of this realignment.
A shorter realignment (approximately 0.3 mile in length) of Pitts School Road was also
evaluated. This alternative would reduce overall project costs slightly as compared with the
recommended realignment of Pitts School Road, avoid the displacement of homes and
businesses, and reduce impacts on the Voluntary Agricultural District. However, this alignment
would not provide the same degree of improvement of the horizontal alignment of Pitts School
Road as the recommended improvement. As noted in Section II.D., fourteen crashes involving
vehicles leaving the travel lane occurred during the study period (August 1, 2005 through July
31, 2008) in the vicinity of the curve on Pitts School Road, located just south of its intersection
with Poplar Tent Road. This curve is currently posted with an advisory speed limit of 20 mph.
Since it would not provide as favorable an alignment as the recommended realignment of Pitts
School Road, the shorter realignment is not recommended.
IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
A. Introduction
The improvements described below are recommended in order to address the project
purpose; that is, to provide relief from present and future congestion on I-85 and provide a higher
level of efficiency on that route.
The recommended addition of four additional lanes throughout the project length, the
'recommended construction of auxiliary lanes at two locations (from I-485 to Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard and from Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway), and
the proposed improvements to the I-85 interchanges with Poplar Tent Road and NC 73
29
(including improvements to those crossing roadways in the vicinity of I-85) will provide relief
from present and future traffic congestion on I-85.
The recommended provisions relating to future managed lanes, Transportation Systems
Management, and Intelligent Transportation Systems are proposed to ensure I-85 will operate as
efficiently as possible.
B. Roadway Cross-Section (I-85)
A basic eight-lane median-divided freeway with 12-foot travel lanes and 14-foot outside
shoulders (including a 12-foot full-depth pavement width) is proposed along I-85 (see Figure 9).
The northbound and southbound lanes will be divided by a 22-foot median, which will include a
concrete barrier and 10-foot paved shoulders on either side of the barrier. The existing pavement
north of Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard will be removed and replaced, while
the existing pavement south of that point will be retained, widened, and resurfaced.
Providing a basic eight-lane freeway throughout the project will require constructing one
additional northbound lane along the outside of the existing lanes from the northbound I-85 off-
ramp at I-485 to Concord Mills BoulevardBruton Smith Boulevard. North of Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard, the majority of the proposed widening to eight lanes will be
performed by constructing four additional lanes (two in each direction) in the existing 68-foot
grassed median. Minor widening will also be required to the outside.of the existing lanes north
of Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard.
The I-85 improvements proposed under STIP Project I-3803 B to the I-85 are shown in
Figure 2.
C. Auxiliary Lanes
Auxiliary lanes are proposed at two locations, from just north of the Mallard Creek Road
(SR 2467) bridge to Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard and from Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway to NC 73. Auxiliary lanes are recommended in these areas due
to the close interchange spacing. These lanes will improve operating conditions by better
accommodating vehicles entering and exiting I-85.
Two auxiliary lanes are proposed in each direction of I-85 from Mallard Creek Road to
Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard. These auxiliary lanes, which will be
constructed to the outside of existing I-85, will bring the total number of lanes in each direction
in this area to six (four through lanes and two auxiliary lanes). Northbound motorists in these
auxiliary lanes will be required to exit at Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard,
while southbound motorists in these lanes will be required to exit at I-485. One of the two
southbound auxiliary lanes to be constructed in this area will be striped out near the
Mecklenburg/Cabarrus county line due to the restricted lateral clearance under the existing
Mallard Creek Road bridge, while the second southbound auxiliary lane will be dropped at the I-
485 interchange. Construction of these auxiliary lanes as part of TIP Project I-3803 B will
minimize the amount of construction required north of Mallard Creek Road as part of TIP
Project R-2123 CE.
One auxiliary lane is proposed in each direction of I-85 from Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway to NC 73. These auxiliary lanes, which will be constructed the
30
outside of existing I-85, will bring the total number of lanes in each direction in this area to five
(four through lanes and one auxiliary lane). Motorists in the northbound auxiliary lane will be
required to exit at NC 73, while motorists in the southbound auxiliary lane will be required to
exit at Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway.
D. Right of Way and Access Control
Sufficient right of way and easements will be acquired to accommodate the proposed
improvements. The majority of the new right of way will be acquired for the proposed widening
of Poplar Tent Road and NC 73, the proposed improvements to the I-85 interchanges with Poplar
Tent Road and NC 73, the proposed realignment of Pitts School Road, and the proposed Rustic
Lane access road. Minor amounts of additional right of way will be required at several locations
along I-85 (primarily in areas with high embankments) to accommodate the proposed widening
of that facility. No additional right of way will be acquired along Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard or along Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway.
Full control of access will be maintained along I-85. In addition, full control of access is
proposed along Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 in the vicinity of I-85 to ensure proper operation of
the ramp terminal intersections with those roadways. Full control of access is proposed along
Poplar Tent Road from west of Ivey Cline Road (SR 1439)/Goodman Road (SR 1441) west of I-
85 to the intersection of Poplar Tent Road with realigned Pitts School Road east of I-85. Full
control of access is proposed along NC 73 from west of Trinity Church Road (SR 1622) west of
1-85 to Rural Drive east of I-85.
No control of access is proposed along the segment of Pitts School Road (SR 1305) to be
relocated or along the proposed Rustic Lane access road. In addition, no changes in access
control are proposed along Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard or Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway.
E. Speed Limit
It is anticipated the existing speed limit on I-85 (65 mph) and the existing speed limits on
the intersecting roadways (65 mph on I-485, 45 mph on Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith
Boulevard, Poplar Tent Road, Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway, and NC 73) will be
maintained. It is anticipated the existing speed limit on Pitts School Road (45 mph) will also be
maintained.
F. Design Speed
The proposed design speed is 70 mph for I-85, 45 mph for the proposed Rustic Lane
access road, and 50 mph for all other roadways.
G. Anticipated Design Exceptions
No design exceptions are anticipated.
31
H. Interchanges and Grade Separations
Poplar Tent Road
It is recommended the existing I-85 diamond interchange with Poplar Tent Road (SR
1394) be reconstructed. This will include reconstructing the ramps in each quadrant, replacing
the existing two-lane bridge carrying Poplar Tent Road over 1-85 with an eight-lane bridge,
widening Poplar Tent Road to a four-lane divided curb and gutter facility, constructing turn
lanes at the northbound and southbound I-85 ramp terminal intersections, and installing
interchange lighting. These improvements are shown in Figure 2, Sheet 7.
2. NC 73
It is recommended the existing I-85 diamond interchange at NC 73 be reconstructed as a
three-quadrant partial cloverleaf interchange with loops and ramps in southwest and northeast
quadrants and ramp in southeast quadrant. This will require constructing new loops and
reconstructing the existing ramps in the southwest and northeast quadrants, reconstructing the
existing ramp in the southeast quadrant, removing the existing ramp in the northwest quadrant,
replacing the existing three-lane bridge carrying NC 73 over I-85 with a seven-lane bridge,
widening NC 73 to a four-lane divided section with shoulders and ditches, and constructing turn
lanes at the northbound and southbound 1-85 ramp terminal intersections. The loop and ramp in
the southwest quadrant will tie into NC 73 opposite Trinity Church Road (SR 1622), while the
loop and ramp in the northeast quadrant will tie into NC 73 opposite International Drive (SR
1429). Interchange lighting will also be installed. These improvements are shown in Figure 2,
Sheet 13.
I-485
The I-85 interchange with I-485 at the south project terminal will be improved under
adjacent Project R-2123 CE (see Section ILEA). Only minor improvements to this interchange
(ramp junction improvements) are proposed under Project I-3803 B.
Two alternatives are currently being evaluated for improving this interchange under
R-2123 CE, including a modified cloverleaf interchange and a four-level, fully-directional
interchange. A citizens informational workshop was held for that project on February 5, 2009.
Improvements proposed under I-3803 B will be designed so as to minimize overlap
between the two projects, which are not currently scheduled to be constructed simultaneously.
Because the construction of two auxiliary lanes is proposed in both directions of I-85 as part of
Project I-3803 B from just north of Mallard Creek Road to Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton
Smith Boulevard, it is anticipated only minor improvements will be needed north of Mallard
Creek Road under Project R-2123 CE. Also, consideration will be given to constructing the
bridge pier foundations in the median of I-85 needed for Project R-2123 CE as part of Project I-
3803 B, which would minimize traffic disruption during construction of the former project.
Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard and Kannapolis Parkway/George
Liles Parkwav
The existing I-85 interchanges with Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard
(SR 2894) and Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway (SR 1430) will receive only minor
32
improvements, consisting mainly of ramp/loop widening and resurfacing to ensure proper
connections with the 1-85 through lanes. These improvements are shown in Figure 2, Sheets 3
and 4 (Concord Mills Boulevard/Speedway Boulevard) and Sheets 11 and 12 (Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway).
5. Mallard Creek Road
No improvements to the existing grade-separated Mallard Creek Road (SR 2467)
crossing of I-85 just north of I-485 are proposed. The existing bridge at this location (bridge
number 311) will be replaced as part of TIP Project R-2123 CE due to insufficient horizontal
clearance under the bridge for the widening of I-85 proposed in this area under Project R-2123
CE. R-2123 CE improvements in the vicinity of the bridge will include construction of two
auxiliary lanes in each direction along I-85 (to match up with the auxiliary lanes proposed to the
north under I-3803 B) and realigning and widening the on-ramp from westbound I-485 to
northbound I-85. This crossing is shown in Figure 2, Sheet 2.
1. Intersecting Roadways
Poplar Tent Road
Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) will be widened to a four-lane divided curb and gutter
facility from west of Derita Road (SR 1445)/Odell School Road (SR 1442) west of I-85 to west
of Gable Oaks Lane east of I-85. This will include widening or improving Derita Road, Odell
School Road, Akins Road (SR 2902), Ivey Cline Road (SR 1439), and Goodman Road (SR
1441) near their intersections with Poplar Tent Road to ensure proper operation of those
intersections. A raised 30-foot median is proposed along Poplar Tent Road to separate the
eastbound and westbound lanes. Proposed improvements to Poplar Tent Road are shown in
Figure 2, Sheets 7 through 9. The proposed typical section for Poplar Tent Road is presented in
Figure 9.
The existing bridge carrying Poplar Tent Road over 1-85 (bridge number 51) will be
replaced as part of the project. The new bridge will be of sufficient length to span not only the
additional lanes proposed on I-85, but also one future managed lane in each direction (see
Section IV.M). This provision for future managed lanes will require an extra bridge length of 32
feet.
The outside lanes will be 14 feet in width to provide shared motor vehicle/bicycle lanes,
given the routing of North Carolina Bike Route 6 (Piedmont Spur) along Poplar Tent Road (see
Section II.B.9 of this report). Appropriate bicycle signing will be provided along Poplar Tent
Road. Coordination with the City of Concord regarding the construction of sidewalks along
Poplar Tent Road is in progress.
Full control of access is proposed along Poplar Tent Road from west of Ivey Cline Road
(SR 1439)/Goodman Road (SR 1441) west of I-85 to Shelton Road/Realigned Pitts School Road
east of I-85 to ensure proper operation of the northbound and southbound I-85 ramp terminal
intersections with Poplar Tent Road.
U-turn bulb-outs are proposed at two locations on Poplar Tent Road to enhance traffic
flow: (1) at the proposed median crossover to be constructed west of Ivey Cline Road/Goodman
33
Road, for westbound traffic (see Figure 2, Sheet 8) and (2) at the Shelton Road/Realigned Pitts
School Road intersection for eastbound traffic (see Figure 2, Sheet 7).
The Poplar Tent Road intersection with Derita Road/Odell School will remain signalized.
In addition, the recently-installed emergency vehicle signal at Concord Fire Station #9 Oust west
of Ivey Cline Road/Goodman Road) will remain in place. The Poplar Tent Road intersections
with the northbound 1-85 ramp terminal, the southbound I-85 ramp terminal, and realigned Pitts
School Road will be signalized as part of the project. All other intersections along Poplar Tent
Road will remain stop-sign controlled. The signals in the vicinity of the I-85 interchange will be
coordinated to ensure optimal traffic flow.
The widening of Poplar Tent Road from west of Derita Road/Odell School to east of
Akins Drive originally was to have been accomplished under STIP Project U-3415. Right of
way acquisition for Project U-3415 is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2015, while construction
is unfunded. The NCDOT State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) also calls for
widening Derita Road to a multilane facility from Poplar Tent Road to Concord Mills Boulevard
under STIP Project U-4910. Construction of Project U-4910 is scheduled to begin in fiscal year
2010. Given the later scheduling of Project U-3415 with respect to Projects I-3803 B and U-
4910, the widening of this segment of Poplar Tent Road as part of Project I-3803 B is
recommended to avoid a short segment (approximately 0.3 mile) of two-lane roadway along
Poplar Tent Road (from Derita Road/Odell School Road and Akins Road) connecting the
multilane facilities proposed along Poplar Tent Road and Derita Road under Projects I-3803 B
and U-4910, respectively.
As explained in Section II.B.12, NCDOT is currently evaluating the City of Concord's
request to lower Poplar Tent Road in the vicinity of Concord Regional Airport as part of Project
I-3803 B and will perform further coordination with the city regarding this issue.
2. NC 73
NC 73 (Davidson Highway) will be widening to a four-lane divided section with
shoulders and ditches from Stanley Drive west of I-85 to Branson Road/Westgate Circle east of
I-85. This will include widening or improving Stanly Drive, Trinity Church Road (SR 1622),
Rural Drive, and Branson Road/Westgate Circle near their intersections with NC 73 to ensure
proper operation of those intersections. A raised 30-foot median is proposed along NC 73 to
separate the eastbound and westbound lanes. The proposed improvements to NC 73 are shown
in Figure 2, Sheet 13. The proposed typical section for NC 73 is presented in Figure 9.
The existing bridge carrying NC 73 over I-85 (bridge number 63) will be replaced as part
of the project. The new bridge will be of sufficient length to span not only the additional lanes
proposed on I-85, but also one future managed lane in each direction (see Section Iv.M). This
provision for future managed lanes will require an extra bridge length of 32 feet.
Coordination with the Cities of Concord and Kannapolis regarding the need for sidewalks
and bicycle accommodations on NC 73 is in progress.
Full control of access is proposed along NC 73 from west of Trinity Church Road west of
I-85 to Rural Drive east of I-85 to ensure proper operation of the northbound and southbound I-
85 ramp terminal intersections with NC 73. Direct access between NC 73 and Rustic Lane will
34
be eliminated due to the proposed acquisition of full access control in this area. As explained
below in Section IV.J., an access road is proposed to provide continued access to Rustic Lane.
The proposed loop and ramp in the southwest quadrant, which will intersect NC 73
opposite Trinity Church Road, will be signalized. In addition, the proposed loop and ramp in the
northeast quadrant, which will tie into NC 73 opposite International Drive, will also be
signalized. The NC 73 intersection with Stanley Drive will remain signalized. A signal will be
installed at the NC 73 intersection with Branson Road/Westgate Circle. All other intersections
along NC 73 will remain stop-sign controlled. The signals in the vicinity of the I-85 interchange
will be coordinated to ensure optimal traffic flow.
J. Proposed Pitts School Realignment
It is recommended that Pitts School Road be realigned near its intersection with Poplar
Tent Road (see Figure 2, Sheet 7). This realignment, which is approximately 0.5 mile in length,
is recommended due to (1) the close spacing (approximately 450 feet) between the northbound I-
85 ramp terminal and the existing Pitts School Road intersection with Poplar Tent Road and (2)
the existing horizontal curve (with an advisory speed limit of 20 mph) on Pitts School Road near
its intersection with Poplar Tent Road. A two-lane, 24-foot pavement with 8-foot'grassed
shoulders (six feet paved) is proposed.
The proposed 6-foot paved shoulder on Realigned Pitts School Road will accommodate
North Carolina Bike Route 6 (Piedmont Spur), which is routed along this section of Pitts School
Road. Appropriate bicycle signing will be provided along realigned Pitts School Road. See
Section II.B.9 provides more information about N.C. Bike Route 6.
The proposed realignment of Pitts School Road will result in the displacement of one
residence. It will also result in the conversion of approximately 5.4 acres of farmland within a
voluntary agricultural district (established by Cabarrus County) to non-agricultural uses.
Coordination with Cabarrus County with regard to impacts to the voluntary agricultural district is
underway.
K. Proposed Rustic Lane Access Road
Full control of access is proposed along NC 73 from I-85 eastward to west of Rural
Drive. This will result in the loss of direct access to NC 73 from Rustic Lane, a residential street
maintained by the City of Concord. In order to provide continued access to properties on Rustic
Lane, a new two lane roadway approximately 0.2 mile in length is proposed to link Rustic Lane
with International Drive (see Figure 2, Sheets 14 and 15). This connector will provide access
between Rustic Lane and NC 73 via International Drive and will intersect International Drive
approximately 650 feet from the NC 73 intersection. A two-lane, 24-foot pavement with 8-foot
grassed shoulders (four feet paved) is proposed. It is anticipated no homes or businesses will be
displaced as a result of this improvement.
L. Railroads and Railroad Crossings
No railroads are located within the immediate project study area. No railroad
improvements are proposed as part of the project.
35
M. Public Transportation
As discussed in Section II.B.13 of this report, both the Charlotte Area Transit System
(CATS) and Concord-Kannapolis Area Transit (CKAT) operate bus service in the project study
area. Existing public transportation includes CATS Route 80X (Concord Express), the CKAT
Red Route, and the CKAT Yellow Route. Coordination with CATS and CKAT will be
performed during project design to identify special provisions needed for these bus routes.
The MUMPO 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan calls for bus rapid transit on
I-85 within the limits of Project I-3803B by the 2030 horizon year. Project I-3803 B includes
construction of 14-foot paved outside shoulders, including a12-foot full-depth pavement width.
Thus, the proposed improvements will accommodate possible future bus lanes on the shoulders
of I-85.
The project is compatible with the proposed Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor and the
proposed CATS Northeast Corridor Light Rail Transit Project, which are outside the project
study area.
N. Managed Lanes
The I-85 Sub-Area Study completed in December 2000 identified and evaluated short-
and long-term actions to address existing and projected peak-period traffic along this section of
I-85. Among the recommended actions was the construction.of high occupancy vehicle (HOV)
lanes in the future in the median of I-85.
In addition, a Fast Lanes Study is underway to evaluate the possibility of adding managed
lanes (HOV, HOT, or Special Use Lanes) to five highway corridors in the Charlotte area,
including the subject section of I-85.
Construction of managed lanes along I-85 is not proposed as part of Project I-3803 B.
However, the new bridges that will be constructed to carry intersection roadways over I-85, at
Poplar Tent Road and NC 73, will be constructed with sufficient length to accommodate future
construction of managed lanes (one in each direction) along I-85. This will require an extra
length of 32 feet (16 feet for each managed lane) for each of these bridges.
Consideration will be given to constructing the proposed new bridges over the Rocky
River and Coddle Creek with sufficient width to accommodate future managed lanes as part of
Project I-3803 B. If this work is not accomplished under this project, widening of the bridges
would be required as part of the future managed lanes project.
0. Travel Demand Management
As noted in Section II.B.14, an existing park and ride lot (with space for approximately
20 to 30 vehicles) is located on NCDOT right of way southeast of the I-85 interchange with
Poplar Tent Road. Access to the park and ride lot is provided via a driveway connection to
Poplar Tent Road located approximately 200 feet east of the northbound I-85 ramp terminal
intersection with Poplar Tent Road. As noted in Section IV.G.1, full control of access is
proposed along Poplar Tent Road in this area to ensure proper operation of the I-85 interchange
with Poplar Tent Road. As a result, access to this park and ride lot will be eliminated as part of
the project. In addition, the existing NCDOT right of way on which this lot is located will be
36
needed for the proposed improvements to Poplar Tent Road. Thus, the park and ride lot will be
removed as part of the subject project. No park and ride facilities are proposed as part of Project
I-3803 B.
P. Transportation Systems Management
Existing traffic signals at the interchanges to be upgraded as part of Project I-3803 B
(Poplar Tent Road and NC 73) will be repaired and upgraded, as needed. In addition, signals in
the vicinity of each of these interchanges will be coordinated to ensure optimal traffic flow.
Q. Intelligent Transportation Systems
Surveillance, detection, and traveler information will be implemented during the early
phases of project construction. These measures will include installation of conduit and fiber-
optic cable, out-of -pavement detection approximately every mile, closed-circuit television
surveillance cameras approximately every mile, and dynamic message signs. These measures
will provide commuters with travel information that will aid them in making mode and route
decisions in order to avoid congestion.
R. Structures
The project study area contains seventeen structures, including six bridges over
highways, six bridges over streams, and five reinforced concrete box culverts carrying streams
under I-85. Information about the twelve bridges is presented in Table 2 (see page 6). The
proposed treatment of each structure is presented below:
Bridges
• I-485 - bridge number 119 - retain existing bridge (to be replaced under STIP Project R-
2123 CE)
• Mallard Creek Road (SR 2467) - bridge number 311 - retain existing bridge (to be
replaced under STIP Project R-2123 CE)
• Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard (SR 2894) - bridge number 348 -
retain existing bridge
• Rocky River - bridge numbers 18 (northbound) and 1 1 (southbound) - remove and
replace the existing bridges with new bridges approximately 210 feet in length with
approximately the same bridge deck elevation as the existing bridge; the new bridges will
be constructed to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian traffic underneath the structures
for the fixture Rocky River Greenway (see Section II.B.9 and Figures 5a and 5e); no
bridge deck drains will be allowed to discharge directly into the Rocky River; NCDOT
will evaluate the possibility of constructing the new Rocky River bridges with sufficient
width to accommodate one future managed lane in each direction on I-85
• Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) - bridge number 51 - remove and replace existing bridge
with a new bridge that will accommodate eight lanes on Poplar Tent Road and provide
clearance for one future managed lane in each direction, which will require lengthening
the bridge by 32 feet (16 feet for each managed lane); bridge length: approximately 330
feet
Coddle Creek - bridge numbers 55 (northbound) and 58 (southbound) - remove and
replace.the existing bridges with new bridges approximately 200 feet in length with
approximately the same bridge deck elevation as the existing bridges; the new bridges
37
will be constructed to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian traffic underneath the
structures for the future Coddle Creek Greenway (see Section II.B.9 and Figures 5a and
5d); no bridge deck drains will be allowed to discharge directly into Coddle Creek;
NCDOT will evaluate the possibility of constructing the new Coddle Creek bridges with
sufficient width to accommodate one future managed lane in each direction on I-85
Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway (SR 1430) - bridge number 84 - retain
existing bridge
NC 73 (Davidson Highway) - bridge number 63 - remove and replace the existing bridge
with a new bridge that will accommodate seven lanes on NC 73 and provide clearance for
one future managed lane in each direction on I-85, which will require lengthening the
bridge by 32 feet (16 feet for each managed lane); bridge length: approximately 500 feet)
Irish Buffalo Creek - bridge numbers 86 (northbound) and 88 (southbound) - retain
existing bridge under I-3803 B (Project I-3803 B ends south of these bridges); bridge
treatment will be addressed under TIP Project I-3802; the needs of the future Irish
Buffalo Creek greenway (see Section II.B.9 and Figures 5a and 5d) will be considered as
part of Project I-3802
Merger 01 concurrence has been reached for the proposed treatment of the bridges at the
Rocky River and at Coddle Creek (see Section VI.C. and Appendix I).
2. Culverts
• Stony Creek - additional Merger 01 coordination will be performed to determine the
proper treatment of the existing 2 @ 9-foot by 10-foot reinforced concrete box culvert
(RCBC); this culvert is undersized, and supplemental conveyance may be required (see
Figure 2, Sheet 1)
• Tributary to Rocky River (UT 10) - retain and extend the existing 1 @ 6-foot by 8-foot
RCBC; this culvert is undersized, and supplemental conveyance may be required (see
Figure 2, Sheet 3)
• Tributary to Rocky River (UT 8) - retain and extend the existing 1 @ 7-foot by 7-Foot
RCBC; this culvert is undersized, and supplemental conveyance may be required (see
Figure 2, Sheet 5)
• Afton Run - additional Merger 01 coordination will be performed to determine the proper
treatment of the existing 4 @ 9-foot by 8-foot RCBC; preliminary studies indicate this
culvert is properly sized (see Figure 2, Sheet 11)
• Tributary to Afton Run (UT 4) - retain and extend the existing I @ 7-foot by 6-foot
RCBC; this culvert is undersized, and supplemental conveyance may be required (see
Figure 2, Sheet 12)
Merger 01 concurrence has been reached for the proposed treatment of the culverts at the
Tributaries to Rocky River (UT 8 and UT 10) and at the Tributary to Afton Run (UT 4). As
noted above, additional Merger 01 coordination will be performed to determine the proper
treatment of the existing culverts at Stony Creek and Afton Run (see Section VI.C. and
Appendix I).
38
S. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities and Greenways
Bicycle Facilities
North Carolina Bike Route 6 (Piedmont Spur) follows Pitts School Road and Poplar Tent
Road within the limits of TIP Project I-3803 B (see Figures 4a and 4b). Both roadway facilities
will be designed to accommodate bicycle traffic. Poplar Tent Road will include 14-foot outside
travel lanes, which will provide sufficient room for both motor vehicles and bicycle traffic.
Relocated Pitts School Road will include 6-foot paved shoulders, which will provide a space for
bicycle traffic. Appropriate bicycle signing will be provided on both facilities, and appropriate
bridge rails will be provided on the new Poplar Tent Road bridge over I-85. These provisions
have been coordinated with the NCDOT Division of Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation and
the City of Concord.
Coordination with the City of Concord is in progress with regard to the need for bicycle
accommodations on the section of Poplar Tent Road east of Pitts School Road, which is not part
of N.C. Bike Route 6. In addition, coordination with the Cities of Concord and Kannapolis
regarding the need for bicycle provisions on NC 73 is also in progress.
Pedestrian Facilities
The City of Concord has requested that sidewalks be constructed along both sides of
Poplar Tent Road, and the Cities of Concord and Kannapolis have requested that sidewalk be
constructed along NC 73 as part of TIP Project I-3803 B. Coordination with the municipalities
regarding sidewalk provisions on Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 is in progress.
3. Greenways
As noted in Section II.B.9, future greenways are proposed along the Rocky River, Coddle
Creek, and Irish Buffalo Creek (see Figures 5a through 5e). The new bridges to be constructed
at the Rocky River and Coddle Creek crossings will be designed and constructed to
accommodate the future greenways. It is anticipated this will be accomplished by providing a
level, unpaved "shelf" on at least one stream bank under the bridges and by providing adequate
lateral and vertical clearance under the bridges for the greenways. In addition, the "shelves" will
be stabilized with rock to prevent erosion. TIP Project I-3803 B ends south of the Irish Buffalo
Creek crossing; thus, treatment of those bridges will be addressed as part of STIP Project I-3802.
The City of Concord requested that the segments of the Rocky River and Coddle Creek
greenways within the proposed I-85 right of way limits be constructed as part of Project I-3803 B
and that the control of access fencing be placed so as to prohibit direct access to I-85 from the
greenways. Because the sections of the greenways leading to I-85 have not been constructed,
access to the portions of the greenways within the I-85 right of way limits (if constructed as part
of Project I-3803 B) would not be available and the constructed portions would not be
maintained, resulting in deterioration of the pavement over time. Thus, constructing the portions
of the greenways within the I-85 right of way limits under Project I-3803 B is not proposed.
However, consideration will be given to tying the control of access fencing directly to the
bridges as part of Project I-3803 B to allow for future construction of the greenways under I-85
without having to alter the fencing.
39
T. Noise Abatement
Based on the preliminary traffic noise analysis performed for the project, and in
accordance with the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, three potential traffic noise
impact areas were indentified within the project limits, near the I-85 interchange with Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway). All mitigation measures will be reevaluated during the design
phase of the project to determine more accurately the noise impacts and appropriate mitigation
measures. Please note that this noise analysis was based upon preliminary plans. The number of
traffic noise impacts could change based upon the final plans to be prepared for the project.
Additional public involvement will be performed if noise mitigation measures are warranted.
The results of this analysis are presented in Section V.J. and Appendix E.
A fourth noise sensitive area, located on the east side of I-85 just south of Irish Buffalo
Creek, was identified during the preliminary noise evaluation. This area is just north of the
limits of TIP Project I-3803 B and will be further evaluated as part of TIP Project I-3802.
U. Work Zone, Traffic Control, and Construction Phasing
The subject project is within both the Mecklenburg-Union MPO and the Cabarrus-Rowan
MPO, both of which have been designated as Transportation Management Areas (TMA), and is
therefore considered "significant" with regard to the NCDOT Work Zone Safety and Mobility
Policy. "Significant" projects require, at a minimum, the following measures to ensure the safety
and mobility of workers and road users:
• A transportation management plan that provides detailed construction sequencing
through a temporary traffic control plan, addresses transportation operations and direct
impacts on the transportation network, and incorporates public information into the
planning, design, and construction of the project;
• Consideration of possible alternative delivery techniques to minimize impacts and
durations of those impacts; and
• Appropriate work zone strategies, such as enforcement and incident management
techniques and technology, to create a more efficient and effective work zone.
In addition, during construction of the project the work zone strategies, practices, and
procedures that were put into place for the project will be continuously monitored, assessed, and
improved.
During project construction four lanes of traffic on I-85 will be maintained as much as
possible. Some lane closures and traffic shifts will be required. If off-site detours are required,
appropriate signing will be provided. Changeable message signs and dynamic message signs
will be used to notify motorists of construction activities and lane shifts. Other methods to notify
motorists of changing traffic conditions may also be used as part of the public information
efforts. Efforts will be made to provide continuous access to businesses and residences, while at
the same time ensuring work zone safety and efficiency.
V. Li phting
Interchange lighting is proposed at the I-85 interchanges with Poplar Tent Road and NC
73 (Davidson Highway). The need for minor alterations to the existing lighting at the I-85
interchange with Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard will be evaluated.
40
Interchange lighting is not recommended at the I-85 interchange with Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway. In addition, no lighting is proposed between the interchanges.
The need for lighting at the I-85/I-485 interchange will be evaluated under STIP Project R-2123
CE.
W. Emergency Services
The current project design requires the acquisition of additional right of way and/or
temporary construction easements from Concord Fire Station #9, located on the south side of
Poplar Tent Road just west of Ivey Cline Road/Goodman Road, but will not result in the
displacement of the fire station. Provisions will be made to allow emergency vehicles left-turn
access out of the fire station onto Poplar Tent Road, so that access to the west (towards Derita
Road/Odell School Road) will be provided. In addition, the existing emergency vehicle signal
on Poplar Tent Road at the fire station will be retained.
X. Landscaping
No special landscaping is proposed at this time.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Natural Resources
Physical Resources
The project study area is located in the southwestern part of the piedmont physiographic
province of North Carolina. Topography in the project vicinity is characterized as gently
sloping to steep. Elevation averages approximately 670 ft above mean sea level. The project is
located on the northeast edge of Charlotte in an urbanized area surrounded by shopping centers,
residential areas, and construction sites for future places of business.
a. Soils
The Cabarrus and Mecklenburg Counties Soil Surveys identify eleven soil types within
the project study area, as shown in Table 9.
b. Water Resources
Water resources within the project study area are part of the Yadkin-Pee Dee river basin
(USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040105). Thirty-seven streams were identified in the project study
area (see Table 10). The location of each water resource is shown in Figure 2. The physical
characteristics of these streams are provided in Table 11.
All surface waters identified within the study corridor limits have been assigned a
primary water resource classification of "C". There are no anadromous fish present or essential
fish habitat identified. Rocky River is included on the 2006 303(d) list for turbidity due to urban
41
Table 9 - Soils in the Project Study Area
Soil Series Mapping Unit Drainage Class Hydric
Status
Altavista sandy loam Aab Moderately drained Hydric
Cecil sandy clay
loam CcB2, CeB2, CeD2 Well drained Non Hydric
Chewlaca clay loam Ch Somewhat poorly drained Hydric
Coronaca clay loam CoB Well drained Non Hydric
Cullen clay loam CuB2, CuD2 Well drained Non Hydric
Enon sandy loam EnB, EnD Well drained Non Hydric
Mecklenburg loam MeB, MeD Well drained Non Hydric
Monacan loam MO Poorly drained Hydric
Pacolet sandy loam PaF Well drained Non Hydric
Poindexter loam PoD, PoF Well drained Non Hydric
Wilkes loam WkD, WkE Well drained Non Hydric
runoff/storm sewers, impaired biological integrity, and fecal coliform. Coddle Creek is included
on the 303(d) list for impaired biological integrity. There are no other 303(d) streams within one
mile of the project study area. No High Quality Waters (HQW), water supply (WS-1 or WS-II)
areas or Outstanding Resource Waters (ORWs) are located within the study area. There are no
trout streams designated by the North Carolina Wildlife Resource Commission (NCWRC).
There are no benthic sampling or fish survey stations within one mile of the project study
area.
2. Biotic Resources
The biotic resources located in the project study area include both terrestrial and aquatic
communities. Descriptions of the observed terrestrial systems are presented in the context of
dominant plant community classifications and where possible follow those presented by Schafale
and Weakley (1990). Additionally, the fauna observed, or likely to occur, in each community
are described and discussed.
Scientific nomenclature is included in Appendix B (pages B-1 through B-3) for each
described plant and animal species. The fauna observed during the site visits is denoted with an
asterisk (*). The published range distributions and habitat analysis is also used in estimating
fauna expected to be present within the project study area.
a. Terrestrial Communities
Five different communities were observed in the project study area: maintained/disturbed
land, agriculture, piedmont bottomland forest, piedmont mesic mixed hardwood forest, and
piedmont alluvial forest. A brief description of each community type follows. As noted above,
scientific names of all species identified are included in Appendix B.
42
Table 10 - Project Study Area Streams
Map ID Stream Name DWQ Index Number
Best Usage
Classification
Figure 2 Sheet
Number
IBC Irish Buffalo Creek 13-17-9(2) C 15
AR Afton Run 13-17-6(6) C 11,12
CC Coddle Creek 13-17-6(5.5) C, 303(d) 10,11
RR Rocky River 13-17 C, 303(d) 4
SC Stony Creek 13-17-5(5) C . 1
UT 1 UT 1 (Irish Buffalo Creek 13-17-9(2) C 13,14,15
UT IA UT 1A (Irish Buffalo Creek) 13-17-9(2) C 15
UT 1B UT 1B Irish Buffalo Creek 13-17-9(2) C 13,14,15
UT 1B1 UT 1B1 (Irish Buffalo Creek 13-17-9(2) C 13,15
UT 1132 UT 1132 Irish Buffalo Creek) 13-17-9(2) C 13,14,15
UT 2 UT 2 (Afton Run) 13-17-6(6) C 13
UT 3 UT 3 (Afton Run) 13-17-6(6) C 13
UT 4 UT 4 (Afton Run) 13-17-6(6) C 12,13,14
UT 4A UT 4A (Afton Run) 13-17-6(6) C 13,14
UT 4B UT 4B' Afton Run) 13-17-6(6) C 12,13
UT 4C UT 4C (Afton Run) 13-17-6(6) C 12
UT 5 UT 5 (Afton Run) 13-17-6(6) C 11,12
UT 6 UT 6 (Afton Run 13-17-6(6) C 11
UT 7 UT 7 (Coddle Creek) 13-17-6(5.5) C 10
UT 7A UT 7A (Coddle Creek 13-17-6(5.5) C 7,10
UT 8 UT 8 (Rocky River) 13-17 C 4,5,6,7
UT 8A UT 8A (Roc River) 13-17 C 6,7
UT 8A1 UT 8A1 (Rock River) 13-17 C 6,7
UT 8B UT 8B Roc River 13-17 C 5
UT 8C UT 8C (Roc River) 13-17 C 5
UT 9 UT 9 (Rock River) 13-17 C 4
UT 10 UT 10 (Roc River) 13-17 C 3,4
UT l0A UT 1 0A (Rock River 13-17 C 2,3
UT 1 I UT 11 (Stony Creek) 13-17-5(5) C 2
UT 12 UT 12 (Stony Creek) 13-17-5(5) C 1
UT 13 UT 13 (Stony Creek) 13-17-5(5) C 1
UT 13A UT 13A (Stony Creek) - 13-17-5(5) C 1
UT 13B UT 13B (Stony Creek) 13-17-5(5) C 1
UT 14 UT 14 (Rocky River) 13-17 C 9
UT 14A UT 14A (Rocky River) 13-17 C 9
UT 14B UT 14B (Rocky River) 13-17 C 9
UT 15 UT 15 (Irish Buffalo Creek) 13-17-9(2) C 13,14
UT 15A UT 15A (Irish Buffalo Creek) 13-17-9(2) C 13,14
43
Table 11 - Project Study Area Stream Characteristics
Map ID Bankful
Width (ft) Water Depth
(in) Flow Clarity Channel
Substrate
IBC 15 12 - 48 Medium Slightly Turbid sa,sl,co,bo
AR 10- 15 8 - 36 Medium Slightly Turbid sa,sl,co
cc 15 - 18 12 - 48 Medium Slightly Turbid sa,sl,co,bo
RR 30 12 - 60 Medium Slightly Turbid sa,sl,co
SC 15 6-24 Medium Slightly Turbid sa,sl,co
UT 1 6 4-12 Medium Clear sa,sl
UT IA 3 1 -4 Low Clear sa,sl
UT 1B 2 2-4 Low Clear sa,sl
UT IB1 1 1 -2 Low Clear sa,sl
UT 1132 2 2-4 Low Clear sa,sl
UT 2 3- 8 1- 8 Low Clear sa,sl,bo
UT 3 3- 10 1 - 18 Low Clear sa,sl,bo
UT 4 3 4-6 Medium Slightly Turbid sa,sl
UT 4A 2 1 - 6 Medium Turbid sa,sl
UT 4B 2 1-6 Medium Slightly Turbid sa,sl
UT 4C 3 1-4 Low Slightly Turbid sa,sl
UT 5 3-4 4-6 Medium Clear sa,co
UT 6 4 3-6 Low Clear sa,sl
UT 7 4-10 2-16 Medium Clear sa,sl,bo
UT 7A 3-4 1-7 Low Clear sa,bo
UT 8 8 - 10 4-16 Medium Clear sa,sl,co,bo
UT 8A 4-6 3-8 Medium Clear sa,sl,co
UT 8A1 3 2-8 Medium Clear sa,sl,co
UT 8B 2 4-6 Medium Clear sa,sl,bo
UT 8C 2 4-6 Medium Clear sa,sl
UT 9 4-6 4-8 Medium Clear sa,sl
UT 10 8 4-10 Medium Clear sa,sl.co
UT l0A 4 2-10 Medium Clear sa,sl,co
UT 11 4-6 2-10 Medium Clear sa,sl,co
UT 12 2- 3 4-10 Low Clear sa,sl
UT 13 2-3 2-6 Low Clear sa,sl
UT 13A 2 - 3 3 -7 Low Clear sa,sl
UT 13B 2-3 2-5 Low Slightly Turbid sa,sl
UT 14 3-6 3 - 10 Medium Clear sa, sl, co, bo
UT 14A 3-4 2-6 Medium Clear sa, sl, co
UT 14B 2 1-3 Low Clear sa, sl
UT 15 2 - 8 1 - 12 Medium Clear sa, sl
UT 15A 4 -8 1-4 Low Clear sa, sl
sa: sand, sl: silt, co: cobble, bo: boulder
44
Maintained/Disturbed Land
Maintained/disturbed areas are found throughout the project study area. This community
includes areas such as maintained lawns, eithencommercial or residential, utility easements, right
of ways, and various impervious surfaces. The majority of the disturbed land is located along
I-85 with dominant vegetative species including fescue, beadgrass, threeawn, and foxtail grass.
The irregularly maintained roadside shoulder has denser herbaceous vegetation and
shrubs. Dominant herbs, grasses and vines include blackberry, goldenrod, daisy fleabane,
butterweed, bushelover, trumpet creeper, poison ivy, fescue, Queen Anne's lace, passion flower,
Japanese honeysuckle, and pokeweed. Trees and shrubs include smooth sumac, tree of heaven,
multiflora rose, red maple, box elder, American elm, winged elm, and sweetgum. Wetland G is
contained within the maintained/disturbed community.
Agriculture
The agriculture areas are found along the proposed realignment of Pitts School Road. In this
community few canopy species occur, but sapling and shrub species include red maple, smooth
sumac, and multiflora rose. The herb layer consists of goldenrod, bushclover, beadgrass, and
Japanese honeysuckle. The field edges are probably mowed or otherwise maintained every few
years, allowing a thick shrub, herb and vine layer, but halting the development of a mature forest
community.
Piedmont Bottomland Forest
The bottomland forest community is located adjacent to portions of the larger water
bodies throughout the study corridor. This community type usually results from occasional
flooding, having an uneven-aged canopy with primarily gap phase regeneration. Dominant
species located in the canopy and subcanopy include tulip poplar, southern red oak, American
elm, green ash, red maple, paw paw, hackberry, and flowering dogwood. Species located in the
herb and vine layer include poison ivy, muscadine grape, greenbrier, Japanese grass, smartweed,
tearthumb, marsh seedbox and lizard's tail. Wetlands C and D are contained within the
Piedmont bottomland forest community.
Piedmont Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
This community is dominant throughout the project. The forest is open with little
herbaceous or shrubby vegetation, except in edge habitat where it has been disturbed. Dominant
species located in the canopy and subcanopy include sweetgum, red maple, tulip poplar, red bud,
American elm, Southern red oak, willow oak, white oak, flowering dogwood, hickory, American
beech, river birch, green ash, paw paw and trifoliate orange. Species located in the herb and
vine layer include poison ivy, trumpet creeper, Japanese honeysuckle, muscadine grape,
greenbrier and pokeweed. Wetlands E, F, H, I, J, K and L are contained within the Piedmont
mesic mixed hardwood forest community.
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
The piedmont alluvial forest is located along the floodplain of the Rocky River that holds
water as a result of overbank flooding. The herbs and vines located in this community include an
aster, muscadine grape, lizard's tail, Japanese honeysuckle, goldenrod, false nettle, joe-pye weed,
45
poison ivy, and wingstem. Shrub and trees located within the community include sweetgum, red
maple, tulip poplar, winged elm, American elm, and. hackberry. Wetlands A and B are contained
within the Piedmont alluvial forest community.
Terrestrial Community Impacts
Terrestrial communities in the project study area will be impacted by project construction
as a result of grading and paving of portions of the project study area. Table 12 presents the
extent of each terrestrial community type in the project study area and the anticipated impact to
each community type, including a 25-foot buffer for clearing limits.
Table 12 - Terrestrial Community Impacts
Plant Communities Coverage Area in
Stud Area acres Anticipated
Impacts acres)*
Maintained/Disturbed Land 516 164
Agriculture 20 7
Piedmont Bottomland Forest 9 3
Piedmont Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest 214 73
Piedmont Alluvial Forest 9 4
Totals: 768 251
*Note: these acreages include a 25-foot buffer outside the anticipated construction limits for
additional clearing limits
b. Terrestrial Wildlife
Many species prefer open, disturbed habitat to feed and nest in. The least shrew inhabits
relatively open areas dominated by herbaceous vegetation. The eastern mole prefers areas with
well-drained soils in open areas, such as power line easements. Birds such as mourning doves*,
American crows, and European starlings forage for seeds and insects in open, disturbed areas.
Soaring over open areas searching for carrion, turkey vultures* can be observed. Thick,
overgrown herbaceous vegetation in power line easements are preferred by the indigo bunting,
rufous sided towhee*. Copperheads may also be observed within the dense vegetation.
Many species are highly adaptive and may utilize the edges of forests and clearings or
prefer a mixture of habitat types. The eastern cottontail* prefers a mix of herbaceous and woody
vegetation in disturbed open areas such as power line easements and edges of forests. Foraging
along these areas the gray fox* may be seen. White-tailed deer* will utilize the forested areas as
well as the adjacent open areas. The southeastern shrew may be found in the tangles of vines
and dominant herbaceous vegetation in forests or power line easements. Underground in tunnels
dug under woodlands and open disturbed areas, the woodland vole may be found in this area.
The black rat snake* will come out of forested habitat to forage in open areas. Northern
mockingbirds* can be observed perched in edge habitat in urban areas. Blue jays, bluebirds and
brown thrashers also utilize fringe habitat.
Many species prefer to forage and nest primarily in forested communities. The opossum*
and the raccoon* prefer woodlands but can be observed as road kill in open areas as well. hi the
46
leaf litter of the forested habitats, the southern short-tailed shrew and the white-footed mouse
may be found. Gray squirrels are often observed in wooded areas. The spring peeper can be
found under forest litter and in brushy undergrowth. The eastern box turtle* is a terrestrial turtle
but will be found near streams in hot, dry weather. Also found near streams are the eastern king
snake* and the northern water snake*. The five-lined skink may also be found in forested
communities. Birds such as the northern cardinal, tufted titmouse, Carolina chickadee*, red
bellied woodpecker, red eyed vireo, Carolina wren*, wood thrush, barred owl, and wild turkey*
will forage and nest within the forested community.
C. Aquatic Resources
The aquatic community consists of areas below the mean high water line in all the water
resources within the project study corridor. Water resources include: Stony Creek, Rocky River,
Coddle Creek, Afton Run, Irish Buffalo Creek, and thirty-two unnamed tributaries. Dominant
instream habitat includes riffles, runs, pools, sticks, and root mats. Other aquatic habitat present
includes leaf packs and undercut banks. Aquatic or water-dependent vertebrates observed or
expected within the project study area include: the spring peeper, green frog, slimy salamander,
northern dusky salamander, golden shiner, creek chub, redbreast sunfish, bluegill, and other
sunfishes. Aquatic or water-dependent invertebrates observed or expected within the project
study area include crayfish* and water striders*.
d. Invasive Species
In accordance with the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North Carolina, tree of
heaven, multiflora rose, Japanese grass (all threat status 1) and Japanese honeysuckle (threat
status 2) are located in the project study area. NCDOT will follow the Department's BMPs for
the management of invasive plant species.
2. Jurisdictional Topics
a. Clean Water Act Waters of the United States
Thirty-seven jurisdictional streams were identified in the project study area.
Jurisdictional characteristics of and anticipated impacts to these streams are presented in Table
12. The locations of these streams are shown in Figure 2. The physical characteristics and water
quality designations of each jurisdictional stream are detailed above in Section V.A.1. All
jurisdictional streams in the study area have been designated as warm water streams for the
purposes of stream mitigation.
There are twelve wetlands located within the project study area (see Figure 2). Wetland
classification and quality rating data, as well as anticipated impacts to these wetlands, are
presented in Table 13. All wetlands in the project study area are within the Yadkin-Pee Dee
basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit 03040105). Descriptions of the natural communities 'at each
wetland site are presented in Section N.A.2. Wetlands A and B are included within the
piedmont alluvial forest community. Wetlands C and D are contained within the piedmont
bottomland forest. Wetland I is found partially in the maintained/disturbed and piedmont mixed
mesic hardwood forest communities. All other wetlands are a part of the piedmont mixed mesic
hardwood forest.
47
b. Summary of Anticipated Effects
Anticipated impacts to jurisdictional streams and wetlands are presented above in Tables
13 and 14, respectively. Approximately 5335 linear feet of jurisdictional streams will be
impacted as a result of the project, including 1829 linear feet within the slope stake lines and
3506 feet within an assumed clearing area (25 feet) beyond the slope stake lines.
Approximately 0.11 acre of jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted as a result of the project,
including 0.075 acre within the slope stake lines and 0.035 acre within an assumed clearing area
(25 feet) beyond the slope stake lines. These impacts are based upon preliminary design
mapping and could change during final project design.
Clean Water Act Permits
The factors that may determine the applicability of a Nationwide Permit (NWP) as
authorized by 33 CFR §33 include total stream and wetland impacts, impacts to cultural
resources, impacts to federally protected species, or impacts to High Quality Waters (HQW).
Although an individual site may qualify under NWP authorizations, overall, cumulative impacts
from a single and complete project may require authorization under an Individual Permit (IP).
The proposed project is being processed as an Environmental Assessment (EA)
document. A Section 404 IP is anticipated for this project. There is the potential for cumulative
impacts of wetlands totaling greater than a 0.5 acre and a cumulative loss or degradation of more
than 300 linear feet of a single jurisdictional stream with this project. The USACE holds the
final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project construction.
In addition to the 404 permit, other required authorizations include the corresponding
Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWQ. A Section 401 Water
Quality Certification (WQC) will be required prior to the issuance of a Section 404 IP.
d. Construction Moratoria
The water resources within the project study area are not considered trout waters or
anadromous fish habitat. Mecklenburg and Cabarrus counties are not listed as NCWRC trout
counties. No moratoriums are expected with this project.
C. N.C. River Basin Buffer Rules
The water resources within the project study area do not lie within any of the buffered river
systems regulated by NCDWQ.
f Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Navigable Waters
No water resources within the project study area are considered Navigable Waters under
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act.
g. Mitigation
(1) Avoidance and Minimization:
The NCDOT will attempt to avoid and minimize impacts to streams and wetlands
to the greatest extent practicable in choosing a preferred alternative and during project
design. At this time, no decisions have been made with regard to the final design of the
project.
48
Table 13 - Jurisdictional Streams in the Project Study Area
Site ID Length
in Classification Compensatory
Mitigation Anticipated Impacts
(feet)
Study
Area
(feet) Required?
Within
slope stake
lines
Additional clearing
limits (25 feet
outside slope stake
lines)
Total Impacts
IBC 418 Perennial Yes 0 0 0
AR 1,818 Perennial Yes 15 45 60
CC 444 Perennial Yes 0 0 0
RR 549 Perennial Yes 0 0 0
SC 246 Perennial Yes 68 65 133
UT 1 878 Perennial Yes 265 125 390
UT ]A 198 Intermittent Yes 23 42 65
UT IB 441 Perennial Yes 32 308 340
UT 1111 76 Intermittent Yes 0 10 10
UT 1131 34 Intermittent Yes 3 38 41
JIT2 80 Intermittent Yes 0 0 0
UT 3 115 Intermittent Yes 0 0 0
UT 4 2,899 Perennial Yes 200 585 785
UT4A 309 Perennial Yes 56 - 50 106
178 Perennial Yes 5 60 65
UT4C 584 Intermittent Yes 0 627 627
UT5 212 Perennial Yes 0 103 103
UT 6 491 Perennial Yes 0 0 0
UT7 1,975 Perennial Yes 0 140 140
UT 7A 825 Intermittent/Perennial Yes 185 325 510
UT 8 2,097 Perennial Yes 160 210 370
UT 9A 1,723 Perennial Yes 300 280 580
689 Perennial Yes 350 0 350
UT 811 258 Perennial Yes 14 52 66
UTRC 108 Perennial Yes 11 25 36
230 Perennial Yes 0 0 0
UT 10 210 Perennial Yes 15 26 41

[IT IOA 506 Perennial Yes 0 125 125
UT 11 435 Intermittent/Perennial Yes 127 205 332
UT 12 501 Perennial Yes 0 25 25
UT 13 934 Perennial Yes - 0 0 0
UT 13A 163 Perennial Yes 0 0 0
UT 13B 122 Perennial Yes 0 0 0
UT 14 825 Perennial Yes 0 25 25
UT 14A 55 Perennial Yes 0 10 10
UT 14B 51 Perennial Yes 0 0 0
UT 15 403 Perennial Yes 0 0 0
UT 15A 793 Intenmittent Yes 0 0 0
Totals 1829 3506 5335
*Streams turn from intermittent to perennial within the project study area.
49
Table 14 - Wetlands in the Project Study Area

Site Area

Within

Cowardin

Cl
ifi
i DWQ

Wetland

Connecting

Map
Impacts (acres) -
ID Study Area

(acres) Classification on
ass
cat Rating

Score Stream Number Within slope

stake lines Additional

clearing-
Total
A 0.6t PFOI Riverine 63 UT9 4 0 0 0
B 0.16 PFOI Riverine 50 RR 4 0 0 0
C 0.04 PFOI Riverine 50 UT 4C 12 0 0 0
D 0.06 PFOI Riverine 50 UT 4C 12 0 0.03 0.03
E 0.04 PFOI Riverine 41 UT 1 13,14 0 0 0
F 0.06 PFOI Riverine 42 UT 1B 13,15 0 0 0
G 0.07 PEMI Riverine 44 UT 4A 13,14 0.07 0 0.07
H 0.04 PFOI Riverinc 46 UT 12 1 0 0 0
I 0.01 PFOI Riverine 66 UT 13 1 0 0 0
1 0.19 PFOI Riverine 64 UT 14 9 0 0 0
K 0.01 PEMI Riverine 32 UT 14 9 0.005 0.005 0.01
L 0.08 PFOI Riverine 42 UT 15 13,14 0 0 0
Totals 0.075 0.035 0.11
*Within 25 feet of the slope stake lines
(2) Compensatory Mitigation
The NCDOT will investigate potential on-site stream and wetland mitigation
opportunities once a final decision has been rendered with regard to the location of the
preferred alternative. Off-site mitigation needed to satisfy the federal Clean Water Act
compensatory mitigation requirements for this project may also be provided by the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Ecosystem Enhancement
Program (EEP), in accordance with the "Memorandum of Agreement Among the North
Carolina Department of Transportation and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Wilmington District" (MOA), dated July 22, 2003.
h. Endangered Species Act Protected Species
As of January 31, 2008 the USFWS lists four federally protected species for Cabarrus
and Mecklenburg Counties (see Table 15). A brief description of the characteristics and habitat
requirements for these species is provided in the following below. Section 7 survey reports and
correspondence from the USFWS are included in Appendix B (pages B-4 through B-15).
Carolina heelsplitter
Survey Window: Year-round
Habitat Requirements: The Carolina heelsplitter habitat typically consists of shaded
areas either in ponded portions of streams or in runs along steep banks with moderate
current. The more recent habitat where the Carolina heelsplitter has been found is
sections of streams with bedrock containing perpendicular crevices, with sand and gravel
in between the crevices, and with large buffers associated with the stream.
50
Table 15 - Federally Protected Species in Cabarrus and Mecklenburg Counties
Common Scientific Status Area Habitat Biological
Name. Name Present Conclusion
i L Stony Creek Yes No Effect
na
Carol asmigona Endangered All other
heelsplitter decorata No No Effect
streams
Smooth Echinacea ' Endangered Entire project yes No Effect
coneflower laevi ata
Schweinitz's Helianthus Endangered Entire project yes MANLAA*
sunflower schweinitzii
Michaux's Rhus Endangered Entire project yes No Effect
sumac michauxii
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus Delisted Entire project No Not Applicable
leucocephalus
Notes:
* May Affect/Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Endangered: A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range"
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Mussel surveys were conducted in August and December 2007 and April, July, and
October 2008 by NCDOT biologists in Stony Creek, Rocky River, Coddle Creek, Afton
Run, and Irish Buffalo Creek. No freshwater mussels were found in Rocky River,
Coddle Creek, Irish Buffalo Creek, or Afton Run. The initial survey in Stony Creek
found 56 Carolina creekshell (Villosa vaughaniana). No Carolina heelsplitter were
observed during the surveys in any of these streams.
The Biological Conclusion for the Carolina heelsplitter is No Effect. The U. S. Fish and
Wildlife Service has concurred with this finding.
Smooth Coneflower
Survey Window: Late May - October
Habitat Requirements: Habitat for the smooth coneflower is found in areas of meadows,
open woodlands, glades, cedar barrens, roadsides, power line rights-of-way, clearcuts,
and dry limestone bluffs. Plants usually grow in soil derived from calcareous parent
material. North Carolina populations are found in soils derived from Diabase, a
circumneutral igneous rock. Optimal sites are in areas with abundant sunlight and little
competition from other herbaceous plants.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for smooth coneflower is present in the project study area along roadside
shoulders and disturbed areas. A survey of suitable habitat for smooth coneflower was
conducted on October 18, 2006 by NCDOT biologists, encompassing 40 man-hours. No
51
individuals of smooth coneflower were observed. A review of the NCNHP records on
January 3, 2008, indicated no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
The project study area was expanded in November 2007, outside the survey window for
smooth coneflower. NCDOT biologists performed additional surveys within potential
habitat of the expanded study area on August 28 and September 17, 2008. This habitat
consisted of clearings ad the edges of open stands of upland woods. A walking visual
search for the species was conducted to ensure no individuals existed either within or in
the immediate vicinity of the proposed road widening. During the survey, no individuals
of smooth coneflower were observed. A total of five man-hours were spent conducting
the surveys.
The biological conclusion for smooth coneflower is No Effect.
Schweinitz's sunflower
Survey Window: Late August - October
Habitat Requirements: Current habitats for this species include roadsides, power line
clearings, old pastures, woodland openings and other sunny or semi-sunny situations.
Schweinitz's sunflower is known from a variety of soil types but is generally found
growing on shallow, poor, clayey and/or rocky soils, especially those derived from mafic
rocks. In the few sites where Schweinitz's sunflower occurs in relatively natural
vegetation, the natural community would be considered a Xeric Hardpan Forest (Schafale
and Weakley 1990).
Biological Conclusion: May Affect-Not Likely to Adversely Affect
Possible habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower exists along roadside shoulders and disturbed
areas in the project study area. A survey of suitable habitat for Schweinitz's sunflower
was conducted on October 18, 24, and 25, 2006, encompassing 40 man-hours. No
populations of the species were observed at the site. A review of the NHP database of
rare species and unique habitats on January 3, 2008 revealed two known populations of
Schweinitz's sunflower within one mile of the project study area. Both populations are
located along Mallard Creek Road (SR 2467), west of the project area.
The project study area was expanded in November 2007, outside the survey window for
Schweinitz's sunflower. NCDOT biologists performed additional surveys within
potential habitat of the expanded study area on August 28 and September 17, 2008, after
having reviewed a reference population of Schweinitz's sunflower to confirm the
flowering/vegetative status of this species as it relates to local conditions (the reference
population was in flower). This habitat consisted of clearings and the edges of open
stands of upland woods. A walking visual search for the species was conducted to ensure
no individuals existed either within or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed road
widening. During the survey, no individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower were observed.
A total of five man-hours were spent conducting the surveys.
As habitat exists and known populations occur within close proximity to the project study
area, the biological conclusion for Schweinitz's sunflower is May Affect, Not Likely to
Adversely Affect. The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service has concurred with this finding.
52
Michaux's sumac
Survey Window: May - October
Habitat Requirements: Habitat for Michaux's sumac consists of sandy, rocky, open
woods and roadsides. Its survival is dependent on disturbance (mowing, fire, clearing) to
reduce competition from competing vegetation. Michaux's sumac is endemic to the inner
coastal plain and piedmont physiographic regions of Virginia, North Carolina, South
Carolina and Georgia.
Biological Conclusion: No Effect
Suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac is present in the project study area along roadside
shoulders and disturbed areas. A survey of suitable habitat for Michaux's sumac was
conducted on October 18, 2006 by NCDOT biologists, encompassing 40 man-hours. No
individuals of Michaux's sumac were observed. A review of the NCNHP records on
January 3, 2008, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
The project study area was expanded in November 2007, outside the survey window for
Michaux's sumac. NCDOT biologists performed additional surveys within potential
habitat of the expanded study area on August 28 and September 17, 2008. This habitat
consisted of clearings ad the edges of open stands of upland woods. A walking visual
search for the species was conducted to ensure no individuals existed either within or in
the immediate vicinity of the proposed road widening. During the survey, no individuals
of Michaux's sumac were observed. A total of five man-hours were spent conducting the
surveys.
The biological conclusion for Michaux's sumac is No Effect.
Bald and Golden Ea.Qle Protection Act
The bald eagle was removed from the list of threatened and endangered species on July 9,
2007. However, the species still requires federal protection under the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act. Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in close proximity
to large bodies of open water for foraging. Large, dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites,
typically within 1.0 mile of open water. Suitable habitat for bald eagle does not exist in the
project study area. There are no large bodies of open water near the project study area. A
review of the NHP database on January 3, 2008 revealed no known incidents of bald eagle
within five miles of the project study area.
j. Endangered Species Act Candidate Species
As of January 31, 2008 the USFWS lists one Candidate species for Cabarrus and
Mecklenburg Counties, the Georgia aster (Symphyotrichum georgianum), for which habitat is
present in the project study area. A review of NCNHP records on January 3, 2008 reveals no
known occurrences of Georgia aster within 1.0 mile of the project study area.
53
B. Cultural Resources
Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Section 106 requires federal agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings
(federally-funded, licensed, or permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the
National Register of Historic Places and to afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity
to comment on such undertakings.
Historic Architecture
A field survey of the Area of Potential Effects (APE) was conducted by an architectural
historian in May 2007. All structures within the APE were evaluated for National Register
eligibility, and the architectural historian concluded that there were two eligible properties within
the APE (Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church and the Blake House). On August 2, 2007 an
NCDOT architectural historian submitted a letter to the North Carolina State Historic
Preservation Office (HPO) to notify them of the results of the survey. On October 25, 2007 an
NCDOT architectural historian submitted a second letter to HPO with additional information that
HPO had requested in a letter dated August 20, 2007 (see Appendix C, page C-1). HPO
concurred with the findings in a memorandum dated November 28, 2007, a copy of which is
included in Appendix C (see page C-2). In a meeting between NCDOT, FHWA, and HPO on
August 25, 2008 it was determined that the proposed project would have no adverse effect upon
either property provided that the following conditions were met:
• No right of way or permanent easements will be acquired from either property;
• Poplar Tent Road will be shifted northward away from the Poplar Tent Presbyterian
Church;
• Access to the Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church will be maintained by two driveways (one
at the westernmost National Register boundary and the other at the existing driveway
near the cemetery; and
• The existing southbound I-85 off-ramp at the NC 73 interchange (near the Blake House)
will be removed.
A copy of the signed concurrence form from the August 25, 2008 meeting is included in
Appendix C (see pages C-3 and C-4). Boundaries for both of these historic properties will be
shown on the project plans as "Historic Property, Do Not Impact." Additional consultation with
the HPO will be required if the project design changes in the vicinity of the Poplar Tent
Presbyterian Church or the Blake House.
The Popular Tent Presbyterian Church, now listed in the National Register, is located on
the south side of Poplar Tent Road east of I-85 (see Figure 2, Sheet 7). The Blake House is
located on the east side of Trinity Church Road (SR 1622) northwest of the I-85 interchange with
NC 73 (see Figure 2, Sheet 13). Photos of these properties are presented in Figure 10. Proposed
improvements to Poplar Tent Road and Trinity Church Road in the vicinity of these properties
are presented in Figures l la and l lb, respectively.
54
Additional correspondence from HPO regarding these properties is included in Appendix
J (see page J-3).
3. Archaeoloey
The State Historic Preservation Office (HPO), in their 9-30-05 response to NCDOT's
request for comment at the beginning of project studies (see Appendix J, page J-3), commented
that based on their knowledge of the area and the lack of known archaeological resources in the
project area, it is unlikely that any resources eligible for listing in the National Register of
Historic Places will be affected by the project, as proposed. HPO recommended no
archaeological investigation be conducted in conjunction with the project.
Due to possible construction on new location associated with the project, NCDOT
archaeologists completed a reconnaissance of the project to assess potential impacts to
archaeological resources. As a result, two areas were identified for further evaluation. These
areas are situated (1) between International Drive (SR 1429) and Rustic lane south of NC 73 and
(2) along NC 73 between Branson Road and Cambridge Heights Place. Both areas were found
to be highly disturbed, and, as a result, no shovel testing was performed at either location. As a
result of this evaluation, NCDOT concluded that the project will have no effect on any
archaeological resources, and no further archaeological studies were recommended. The HPO
concurred with these findings in their 2-26-08 response (see Appendix C, page C-5).
C. Sections 4(f) and 6(f) Resources
1. Section 4(f) Resources
The U. S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Act of 1966 included a special provision,
Section 4(f), which stipulated that the Federal Highway Administration and other DOT agencies
cannot approve the use of land from publicly owned parks, recreational areas, wildlife and
waterfowl refuges, or public and private historical sites unless the following conditions apply:
There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of the land; and
The action includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the property resulting from
that use.
The project study area includes four Section 4(f) resources: Poplar Tent Presbyterian
Church (National Register-listed), the Blake House (National Register-eligible), James L. Dorton
Park (City of Concord), and North Cabarrus Park (City of Kannapolis). The project study area
also includes two properties, Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church Baseball Field and Overcash
Soccer Complex, which were evaluated and found to not qualify as Section 4(f) resources.
These five resources are discussed below:
Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church and Blake House
Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church, which is listed in the National Register of Historic
Places, is located on the south side of Poplar Tent Road east of Shelton Road (see Figure 2, Sheet
7). The Blake House, which is eligible for listing in the Register, is located on the east side of
Trinity Church Road northwest of the 1-85 interchange with NC 73 (see Figure 2, Sheet 13). The
project has been designed to avoid the taking of right of way or easements from either property.
The North Carolina Historic Preservation Office (HPO) has concurred that the project, as
55
currently designed, will have No Adverse Effect on either property (see Section V.B.1 above).
Because there will be no Section 4(0 use of these properties, the requirements of Section 4(0 of
the DOT Act of 1966 are satisfied.
James L. Dorton Park
James L. Dorton Park, owned by the City of Concord, is located on the east side of I-85
adjacent to and north of Coddle Creek (see Figure 2, Sheet 11). Access to the park is provided
on Poplar Tent road just east of its crossing of Coddle Creek, outside the limits of Project I-3803
B. A portion of the park property comes to within approximately 200 feet of, but does not
adjoin, the existing I-85 right of way. In this area the proposed widening of I-85 to eight lanes
will be accomplished primarily in the existing median, although minor widening will be required
to the outside of the existing lanes. No additional right of way or easements are proposed along
I-85 in this area, and no right of way or easements will be required from the park property; thus,
the project will not impact James L. Dorton Park, and there will be no Section 4(0 use of this
property.
North Cabarrus Park
North Cabarrus Park, owned by the City of Kannapolis, is located on the west side of I-85
near the north project terminal and is bounded by I-85 to the east, Irish Buffalo Creek to the
south, and Orphanage Road (SR 1778) to the west (see Figure 2, Sheet 14). Although the park is
located within the project study area, proposed improvements to I-85 end approximately 2000
feet south of the park's southern boundary (Irish Buffalo Creek); thus, the project will not impact
the park, and there will be no Section 4(f) use of this property under Project I-3803 B. Possible
impacts to the park will be evaluated as part of Project I-3802.
Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church Baseball Field
The Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church Baseball Field is located on the north side of Poplar
Tent Road between Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church and Gable Oaks Lane/Woodhaven Place
(see Figure 2, Sheet 7). It is bounded to the south by Poplar Tent Road and to the east by
Woodhaven Place. The baseball field is gated and is available for use by the public only by
permission of the church; therefore, this property does not qualify as a Section 4(f) resource.
The proposed improvements to Poplar Tent Road have been designed to avoid direct
impacts to National Register-listed Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church. This will be accomplished
by shifting Poplar Tent Road northward in the vicinity of the church. This shift of Poplar Tent
Road will result in impacts to the baseball field, including acquisition of rights of way and
easements from the property and grading/paving activities. In addition, although preliminary
design has not been completed for adjacent TIP Project U-3415, it is likely that project will result
in additional impacts to the baseball field, since the transition between TIP Projects I-3803 B and
U-3415 occurs in this area.
Overcash Soccer Complex
The Overcash Soccer Complex is located on the east side of I-85 near the north project
terminus (see Figure 2, Sheet 14). It is bounded by I-85 to the west, Irish Buffalo Creek to the
north, and the Dennbriar Drive community to the south. The soccer complex is privately-owned,
has a gated and locked entrance from NC 73, and has a sign posted at its entrance (in both
56
English and Spanish) indicating the field may be used by permit only. Since the soccer complex
is gated and locked and available for public use only by permit, it does not qualify as a Section
4(f) resource.
The improvements to I-85 proposed under TIP Project I-3803 B end approximately 1800
feet south of, and will not impact, the soccer complex. The widening of the portion of I-85 in the
vicinity of the soccer complex will be accomplished under adjacent Project I-3802. Possible
impacts to the soccer complex will be evaluated as part of that project.
Conclusions
Based upon the above considerations, the project will not result in Section 4(f) use of the
properties noted above (Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church, Blake House, James L. Dorton Park,
and North Cabarrus Park).
2. Section 6(f) Resources
No properties purchased or improved using Section 6(0 (of the. Land and Water
Conservation Fund Act of 1965) funds are located within the project study area. Thus, no
Section 6(f) properties will be affected by the project.
D. Community Impact Assessment
The following is an abridged version of the Community Impact Assessment (CIA) for
TIP Project I-3803 B. A copy of the entire, unabridged CIA is available for review in the offices
of the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch of the North Carolina
Department of Transportation, located at 1 South Wilmington Street, Raleigh, North Carolina,
27601, telephone [phone].
Existing Land Use
Existing land uses in the proposed project area are primarily a combination of
residential subdivisions and light industrial uses along the interstate corridor. Commercial uses
can be found at the interchange locations on the interstate and scattered throughout the proposed
project area. The project is not planned to expand into these areas and will primarily be
contained within the existing right-of-way.
Key Community Characteristics
a. Geographic Location
I-85 is a major thoroughfare that transects the Charlotte-metro region. The interstate
stretches 668 miles between Montgomery Alabama and Petersburg, Virginia and is a vital
transportation link between Charlotte and other major cities such as Greensboro and Richmond
to the north, and Greenville/Spartanburg and Atlanta to the south. The proposed project is
located in the Charlotte-metro region and spans northeastern Mecklenburg County and
southwestern Cabarrus County.
57
b. Demographics
Growth within the study area for the proposed project corridor has dramatically increased
at a faster rate than the state and local counties. The State of North Carolina population increased
approximately 21.4 percent between 1990 and 2000. Mecklenburg County population saw a 36.0
percent increase during this same period and Cabarrus County population experienced a 32.5
percent increase for the same years. The study area for this project experienced a 155.8 percent
population increase between 1990 and 2000.
Census Bureau data indicates that the study area for proposed project corridor is mainly
occupied by a white population (approximately 84.7 percent). Black or African American made
up the second largest race in accounting for approximately 10 percent of the population in the
study area.
In 2000, the median household income for the study area for the proposed project
corridor ($67,714) was higher than it was within North Carolina ($40,729), Mecklenburg County
($50,579) and Cabarrus County ($46,140). Poverty rates were lower in this area, as compared to
the State and County rates, due to the higher household income.
Business Activity/Employment Centers
its proximity to Charlotte, the second largest banking city in the country, had made the
area a highly desirable destination for business relocation and expansion. Strong commercial
land uses are located at several interchange locations, most notably at the Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard, Poplar Tent Road, and NC 73 (Davidson
Highway) interchanges. Additional business parks (International Business Park), educational
facilities (Cabarrus-Rowan Community College), a variety of multi-denominational churches,
and healthcare providers (CMC University) are also located within the project vicinity and have
helped to fuel the growth along the I-85 corridor, especially near the interchanges. Cabarrus
County also houses Concord Mills Mall, the number one tourist destination in the state. The area
is also home to Lowe's Motor Speedway, often considered the home of NASCAR, with 90
percent of NASCAR teams located within 50 miles. The planned development of the North
Carolina Research Campus in Kannapolis (8 miles north of the proposed project area) is also
expected to increase business development and employment opportunities in the area.
d. Public Facilities, Schools, and Institutions
Mecklenburg County, Cabarrus County, the municipalities of Concord and Kannapolis
operate numerous public facilities and services within the proposed project area, including
schools, parks and recreation centers, emergency services, and transit. The Concord Regional
Airport is located just west of I-85 along the project corridor and provides a local airport with
convenient access to the area. Cabarrus-Rowan Community College is located at the NC
73/Davidson Interchange, and many students from the region attend educational programs
offered by the college.
C. Present and Future Zoning
The proposed widening project is consistent with both current and future zoning for
Charlotte-Mecklenburg County and Cabarrus County. The study area is primarily zoned for
residential, commercial, and industrial uses along the I-85 corridor. Future land use maps call for
58
the development of this corridor with industrial, commercial, large office and warehouse uses.
These zoning designations were designed to accommodate the growth that is expected in this
area.
f. Land Use and Development Plans
The proposed widening project is consistent with the various land use and transportation
plans that exist for the area including the Cabarrus County Northwest Area Plan, the
Mecklenburg-Union MPO Long Range Transportation Plan, the Cabarrus-Rowan County MPO
Long Range Transportation Plan, the NC 73 Corridor Plan, the NC 73 Small Area Land Use
and Economic Development Plan, and the NC 73 Poplar Tent Small Area Plan.
g. Transportation Improvement Plans
The 2009-2015 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program includes six projects in
the vicinity of TIP Project I-3803 B. Those projects are presented in Section II.E.I and are
shown in Figure 8.
h. Natural Resources
I-85 crosses five major streams and their tributaries: Stony Creek, Rocky River, Coddle
Creek, Afton Run, and Irish Buffalo Creek. There are no wild and scenic rivers located in
Mecklenburg County or Cabarrus County. The I-85 widening project corridor is located in the
Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin. The project is not located within any of Mecklenburg County's
Watershed Overlay districts or within Cabarrus County watersheds districts. There are no
designated Water Supply waters or High Quality waters within the project corridor. Rocky River,
Coddle Creek, and Irish Buffalo Creek are listed as 303 (d) impaired waters due to impaired
biological integrity. Rocky River is also listed as a 303 (d) impaired water for fecal coliform and
turbidity, while Irish Buffalo Creek is also listed for turbidity.
3. Key Direct Community Impacts
The project will modify I-85 to relieve traffic congestion and improve travel time within
this corridor. The proposed project will support the goals and local visions of the Long Range
Transportation Management plans strategy to modify the efficiency of the interstate. The project
will result in the relocation of two homes and nine businesses, which will be addressed through
NCDOT's standard policies and procedures on this subject. The proposed realignment of Pitts
School Road will split a 75-acre active produce farm. This impact is likely to cause farm work
and irrigation issues for the property owner. The proposed improvements to Trinity Church Road
as proposed could result in displacement of an existing convenience store. The proposed Rustic
Lane-Brownwood Lane connector, which will provide access to Rustic Lane from NC 73, will
likely result in the relocation of one or two residences.
4. Indirect and Cumulative Effects
The widening of I-85 in this proposed project area is unlikely to cause significant indirect
and cumulative growth along the 1-85 corridor. Future development in the project area will
continue to be centered on residential development and commercial uses in Mecklenburg County
and residential and employment growth in Cabarrus County. Traffic services can be maintained
throughout the project's construction with no anticipated adverse effects on emergency services
59
coverage in the area. Likewise, no impacts to public services, such as public transportation, are
anticipated. The project will not disrupt community stability or neighborhood cohesion, impact
community facilities, negatively impact property values, alter emergency response, or have any
visual-aesthetic implications due to its development primarily within existing NCDOT right of
way. The project is not expected to have a disproportionate impact on low-income or minority
populations. The widening of I-85 is not likely to spur development along the corridor, but may
contribute to development, particularly commercial uses, at interchange locations, as well-
functioning interchanges naturally attract development.
It is unlikely that the widening of I-85 will be the primary variable responsible for
secondary growth. Increased development in the project area is already expected based on the
high growth projections for the region. Several undeveloped, for-sale parcels are located at the
Poplar Tent Road interchange. Modifications to this interchange could make these parcels more
attractive for large commercial, business, or residential development. Increased traffic, noise, air
pollution, and run-off from impervious surfaces could follow this development.
With an existing large shopping complex, a mixed-use development, and a residential
subdivision at the Kannapolis Parkway/ George W. Liles Parkway interchange, the roadway
network is already experiencing an increase in traffic. Since modifications to this interchange
could improve traffic conditions, faster development of currently vacant parcels could follow.
Increased traffic, noise, air pollution, and run-off from impervious surfaces could follow this
development.
The NC 73 (Davidson Highway) interchange is a key route for accessing an educational
institution and a large business park. It is currently a two-lane roadway, but will be widened to a
four-lane roadway as part of this project. In an area where several for-sale parcels are located,
growth and development are likely to occur because of the business park, which currently
accommodates over 1,000 employees, and the community college, which serves hundreds of
students. Interchange modifications may help facilitate this development by providing better
access to businesses and residences. Increased traffic, noise, air pollution, and run-off from
impervious surfaces could follow this development.
Existing regulations and ordinances governing ongoing and future development in the
project area will serve to manage impacts that could result from the proposed I-85
improvements.
F. Relocations
NCDOT anticipates two homes and nine businesses will be displaced as a result of the
proposed improvements. A relocation report for the project is included in Appendix D (see page
D-1). That report provides preliminary information regarding ownership status and income level
of the anticipated displacees. Information regarding NCDOT's Relocation Programs is included
in Appendix D (see pages D-2 and D-3).
Based upon the preliminary relocation study performed for this project, NCDOT
anticipates no special relocation services will be necessary, the project will not cause a housing
shortage, additional housing programs will not be needed, Last Resort Housing will not be
needed, public housing will not be needed (but is available), and replacement housing within
financial means will not be an issue. In addition, business services will still be available after the
project is completed, and suitable replacement business sites are available in the project area.
60
G. Title VI and Environmental Justice
Title VI and Environmental Justice considerations promote the fair treatment and
involvement of all people, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to
development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental law and regulations. In order
to assess social impacts associated with this project, a field review and review of demographic
information, available through the U.S. Census Bureau, were performed. The demographics of
the Census Tracts in which the project corridor is located were obtained, as were the
demographics of the Mecklenburg County, Cabarrus County, and North Carolina. The 2000
Census demographics information indicates that the impacted census tracts are not significantly
different from Mecklenburg County or Cabarrus County with regard to high concentrations of
minority or low-income populations. The project corridor is largely occupied by a middle- to
high-income white population. The median household income is higher within most areas of the
project corridor than it is within North Carolina, Mecklenburg County, and Cabarrus County.
Approximately 4.0% of the population within the project corridor lived below the poverty level
in 2000, less than within North Carolina, Mecklenburg County, and Cabarrus County.
As noted in the relocation report in Appendix D (see page D-1), neither of the two
residences anticipated to be relocated as a result of the project is owned by minority or low-
income individuals. Only two of the nine businesses anticipated to be relocated are owned by
minority individuals. Full access control is proposed on Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 (Davidson
Highway) in the vicinity of I-85, but the resulting changes in access to homes and services is not
anticipated to fall disproportionately on low-income or minority populations. Approximately 17
percent of the population of census tract 55.06 in northeast Mecklenburg County (near the south
end of TIP Project I-3803 B) is Black or African American, but in this area only minimal
additional right of way will be purchased, no homes or businesses will be relocated, and no
changes in access control are proposed. Based upon these considerations, the proposed project is
not expected to have a disproportionate impact on low-income or minority populations.
H. Flood Hazard Evaluation
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties are currently participating in the National Flood
Insurance Regular Program. Five stream crossings in the project area are located within detailed
flood study areas: Stony Creek, Tributary to Rocky River (UT 10), Rocky River, Coddle Creek,
and Afton Run (see Figure 2 for the 100-year floodplain limits associated with these five
streams). Two stream crossings, Tributary to Rocky River (UT 8) and Tributary to Afton Run
(UT 4), are not located within detailed flood study areas.
Based upon coordination with the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Flood Mitigation Program, the
proposed improvements will not impact any properties acquired with FEMA funds.
The NCDOT Hydraulics Unit will coordinate with the North Carolina Floodplain
Mapping Program (FMP), the delegated state agency for administering FEMA's National Flood
Insurance Program, to determine the status of the project with regard to the applicability of
NCDOT's Memorandum of Agreement with the FMP (dated 6-5-08) or approval of a
Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) and subsequent final Letter of Map Revision
(LOMR).
This project will involve construction activities on or adjacent to FEMA-regulated
streams. Therefore, the NCDOT Division Office shall submit sealed as-built construction plans
61
to the NCDOT Hydraulics Unit upon completion of project construction, certifying that the
drainage structures and roadway embankment that are located within the 100-year floodplain
were built as shown in the construction plans, both horizontally and vertically.
I. Farmland Impacts
State highway construction projects that receive funding from federal sources are
typically subject to the Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA), which stipulates that federal
programs (including highway construction projects) be compatible with state, local, and private
efforts to protect farmland. Cabarrus County has implemented a Voluntary Farmland
Preservation Program Ordinance to promote agricultural values, encourage the economic and
financial health of agriculture, and increase protection from non-farmland development and other
negative impacts on farms.
For the most part, the proposed project calls for widening existing roadbeds, and much of
the proposed construction will take place within existing rights-of-way. However, the proposed
improvements will require the acquisition of approximately 7.2 acres of land from a voluntary
agricultural district (VAD) located southwest of the I-85 interchange with Poplar Tent Road,
including approximately 5.4 acres for the proposed realignment of Pitts School Road,
approximately 0.9 acre for the proposed widening of I-85 between Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard and Poplar Tent Road, and approximately 0.9 acre for the
proposed widening of Poplar Tent Road. The VAD is shown in Figure 2 (see sheets 5 through
7).
The project will impact a 75-acre active produce farm located within the VAD noted
above, which could cause farm work and irrigation issues for the property owner.
A farmland assessment is being prepared for the project. The findings of that assessment
will be presented in the final environmental document. In addition, NCDOT will contact the
Planning Division of the Cabarrus County Commerce Department regarding the project's
anticipated impacts to VADs. If needed, NCDOT will request a public hearing in accordance
with the Cabarrus County Voluntary Agricultural District Ordinance and North Carolina General
Statute 106-740, as appropriate. That coordination and outcome will also be addressed in the
final environmental document.
Traffic Noise Analysis
Characteristics of Noise
Noise is basically defined as unwanted sound. It is emitted from many sources, including
airplanes, factories, railroads, power generation plants, and highway vehicles. Highway noise, or
traffic noise, is usually a composite of noises from engine exhaust, drive train, and tire-roadway
interaction.
The magnitude of noise is usually described by its sound pressure. Since the range of
sound pressure varies greatly, a logarithmic scale is used to relate sound pressures to some
common reference level, usually the decibel (dB). Sound pressures described in decibels are
called sound pressure levels and are often defined in terms of frequency-weighted scales (A, B,
C, or D).
62
The weighted-A decibel scale is used almost exclusively in vehicle noise measurements
because it places the most emphasis on the frequency range to which the human ear is most
sensitive (1,000-6,000 Hertz). Sound levels measured using a weighted-A decibel scale are often
expressed as dBA. Throughout this report, all noise levels will be expressed in dBA's.
Several examples of noise pressure levels in dBA are listed in Table E-1 in Appendix E
(see page E-1), which indicates that most individuals in urbanized areas are exposed to fairly
high noise levels from many sources as they go about their daily activities. The degree of
disturbance or annoyance of unwanted sound depends essentially on three things:
1) The amount and nature of the intruding noise.
2) The relationship between the background noise and the intruding noise.
3) The type of activity occurring when the noise is heard.
Over time, particularly if the noises occur at predicted intervals and are expected,
individuals tend to accept the noises that intrude into their lives. Attempts have been made to
regulate many of these types of noises, including airplane noise, factory noise, railroad noise, and
highway traffic noise. In relation to highway traffic noise, methods of analysis and control have
developed rapidly over the past few years.
2. Noise Abatement Criteria
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has developed Noise Abatement Criteria
(NAC) and procedures to be used in the planning and design of highways to determine whether
highway noise levels are or are not compatible with various land uses. These abatement criteria
and procedures are set forth in Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772, Procedures for
Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise (23 CFR 772). A summary of the
noise abatement criteria for various land uses is presented in Table E-2 of Appendix E (see page
E-2). 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.
Ambient Noise Levels
Ambient noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the project to determine
ambient (existing) noise levels for the identified land uses. The purpose of this noise level
information was to quantify the existing acoustic environment and to provide a base for assessing
the impact of noise level increases. The existing Leq noise levels in the project area, measured
50 feet from the edges of pavement, ranged from 77 to 80 dBA. A background noise level of 45
dBA was determined to be used in areas where traffic noise is not the predominant source. The
ambient measurement locations are described in Table E-3 of Appendix E (see page E-3).
The existing roadway and traffic conditions were used with the most current traffic noise
prediction model to calculate existing noise levels for comparison with noise levels actually
measured. The calculated existing noise levels averaged less than 1 dBA difference from the
measured noise levels for the location where noise measurements were obtained. Hence, the
computer model is a reliable tool in the prediction of noise levels. Differences in dBA levels can
be attributed to "bunching" of vehicles, low traffic volumes, and actual vehicle speeds versus the
computer's "evenly-spaced" vehicles and single vehicular speed.
63
4. Procedure for Predicting Future Noise Levels
In general, the traffic situation is composed of a large number of variables that describe
different cars driving at different speeds through continually changing highway configurations
and surrounding terrain. Due to the complexity of the problem, certain assumptions and
simplifications must be made to predict highway traffic noise. The procedure used to predict
future noise levels in this study was the FHWA-produced Traffic Noise Model software (TNM
2.5).
The TNM 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, depressed,
elevated, etc.), noise receptor location, receptor height above the roadway, and, if applicable,
barrier type, barrier ground elevation, and barrier top elevation.
In this regard, it must be noted that only preliminary alignment information was available
for use in this noise analysis. The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes
widening I-85 just south of I-485 to north of NC 73 in Mecklenburg County. Peak hour design
and level-of-service (LOS) C volumes were compared, and the volumes resulting in the noisiest
conditions were used with the proposed posted speed limits. Hence, during all other time
periods, the noise levels will be no greater than those indicated in this report. Only those
existing natural or man-made barriers were included in setting up the model. All roadway
sections and proposed intersections were assumed to be flat and at-grade. Thus, this analysis
represents the "worst-case" topographical conditions.
The noise predictions made in this report are highway-related noise predictions for the
traffic conditions during the design year (2030) being analyzed. The Leq traffic noise exposures
associated for this project are listed in Table E-4 of Appendix E (see pages E-4 through E-14).
Information included in these tables consist of listings of all receptors in close proximity to the
project, their ambient and predicted noise levels, and the estimated noise level increase for each.
Traffic Noise Impacts and Noise Contours
A land use is considered impacted by highway traffic noise when exposed to noise levels
approaching or exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and/or when predicted to sustain a
substantial noise increase. The NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy defines a traffic noise
impact occurs when the predicted traffic noise levels either:
(a) Approach or exceed the FHWA noise abatement criteria, with "approach" meaning
within l dBA of the Table E-2 (see Appendix E) value, or
(b) Substantially exceed the existing noise levels as shown in the lower portion of
Table E-2
Consideration for noise abatement measures must be given to receptors that fall in either
category.
The number of receptors in each activity category, for each section, that are predicted to
become impacted by future traffic noise are shown in Table E-5 of Appendix E (see page E-15).
These receptors are noted in terms of those receptors expected to experience traffic noise impacts
64
by either approaching or exceeding the FHWA NAC or by a substantial increase.in exterior noise
levels. Based on this analysis and under Title 23 CFR Part 772, eighty-six residences and
seventeen businesses are predicted to be impacted due to highway traffic noise in the project
area. .
Table E-6 of Appendix E (see page E-16) exhibits the exterior traffic noise level increases
for the identified receptors by roadway section. There are six substantial noise level impacts
anticipated due to this project. The predicted noise level increases for this project range up to +14
dBA. The amount of substantial noise level impacts for each roadway section can also be found in
Table E-6. When real-life noises are heard, it is barely possible to detect noise level changes of 2-3
dBA. A 5-dBA change is more readily noticeable.
In accordance with the NCDOT 2004 Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, Federal and State
governments are not responsible for providing noise abatement measures for new development
where building permits are issued within the noise impact area of a proposed highway after the
"Date of Public Knowledge". The Date of Public Knowledge of the location of a proposed
highway project will be the approval date of the final environmental document. For development
occurring after this public knowledge date, local governing bodies are responsible to ensure that
noise compatible designs are utilized along the proposed facility.
With the proper information on future traffic noise contours and predicted noise levels, the
local authorities can prevent further development of incompatible activities and land uses with the
predicted noise levels of an adjacent highway. The maximum extent of the 72-dBA noise level
contour, measured from the center of the proposed roadways, is three hundred and eight feet (308
feet). The maximum extent of the 67-dBA noise level contour, measured from the center of the
proposed roadways is five hundred and five feet (505 feet). Contour information and predicted
future noise levels are shown by roadway section in Table E-7 of Appendix E (see page E-17).
This information should assist local authorities in exercising land use control over the remaining
undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway within local jurisdiction.
Traffic Noise Abatement Measures
If traffic noise impacts are predicted, examination and evaluation of alternative noise
abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the noise impacts must be considered.
Consideration for noise abatement measures must be given to all impacted receptors. The
following discussion addresses the applicability of these measures to the proposed project. There
are four potential traffic noise impact areas indentified due to highway traffic noise in the project
area.
a. Highway Alignment Selection
Highway alignment selection involves the horizontal or vertical orientation of the
proposed improvements in such a way as to minimize impacts and costs. The selection of
alternative alignments for noise abatement purposes must consider the balance between noise
impacts and other engineering and environmental parameters. For noise abatement, horizontal
alignment selection is primarily a matter of siting the roadway at a sufficient distance from noise
sensitive areas. Changing the highway alignment is not a viable alternative for noise abatement
on this project.
65
Traffic System Management Measures
Traffic system management measures, which limit vehicle type, speed, volume and time
of operations, are often effective noise abatement measures. For this project, traffic management
measures are not considered appropriate for noise abatement due to their effect on the capacity
and level of service of the proposed facility.
Past project experience has shown that a reduction in the speed limit of 10 mph would
result in a noise level reduction of approximately 1 to 2 dBA. Because most people cannot
detect a noise reduction of up to 3 dBA, and because reducing the speed limit would reduce
roadway capacity, it is not considered a viable noise abatement measure. This and other traffic
system management measures, including the prohibition of truck operations, are not considered
to be consistent with the project's objective of providing a high-speed, limited-access facility.
C. Noise Barriers
Physical measures'to abate anticipated traffic noise levels are often applied with a
measurable degree of success on fully controlled facilities by the application of solid mass,
attenuable measures strategically placed between the traffic sound source and the receptors to
effectively diffract, absorb, and reflect highway traffic noise emissions. Solid mass, attenuable
measures may include earth berms or artificial abatement walls.
However, these mitigating measures may not be feasible or reasonable in all cases,
particularly for receptors that front a primary or secondary roadway in the project area. For a
noise barrier to provide sufficient noise reduction, it must be high enough and long enough to
shield the receptor from significant sections of the highway. Access openings in the barrier
severely reduce the noise reduction provided by the barrier. It then becomes economically
unreasonable to construct a barrier for a small noise reduction. Safety at access openings
(driveways, crossing streets, etc.) due to restricted sight distance is also a concern. Furthermore,
to provide a sufficient reduction, a barrier's length would normally be eight times the distance
from the barrier to the receptor. For example, a receptor located 50 feet from the barrier would
normally require a barrier 400 feet long. An access opening of 40 feet (10 percent of the barrier
length) would limit its noise reduction to approximately 4 dBA. Consequently, this type of
control of access effectively eliminates the consideration of berms or noise walls as noise
mitigation measures.
Additionally, businesses, churches, and other related establishments located along a
particular highway normally require accessibility and high visibility. Solid mass, attenuable
measures for traffic noise abatement would tend to disallow these two qualities, and thus, would
not be acceptable abatement measures in this case.
A preliminary noise barrier evaluation was conducted for this project to consider areas of
potential areas of impacts that could be mitigated by the placement of a noise wall. This
qualitative barrier evaluation was performed for each impacted receptor that considered each
receptor's FHWA NAC activity category, source-receptor relationships, impacted site densities,
and the ability to have continuous barriers.
Based on this preliminary evaluation, four potential traffic noise impact areas were
indentified for this project as listed below:
66
• Area #1 is southeast of the I-485 interchange with George W. Liles Parkway (Receptors #
33-37). These homes appear to contain 6 dwelling units (DLl) per building for a total of
30 potential impacts.
• Area #2 is northeast of the I-85 interchange with George W. Liles Parkway (Receptors #
75-90 and 93 -96) with 20 potential impacts.
• Area 43 is northwest of the I-485 interchange with George W. Liles Parkway (Receptors
# 65-68, 70, and 71) with 6 potential impacts.
• Area #4 is just south of Irish Buffalo Creek on the east side of I-485. Two streets,
Mistletoe Ridge Place and Gainsway Court, both contain potential impacts (Receptors #
111-124) with a total of 14 potential impacts. (See below - Area #4 will be addressed
under TIP Project I-3802)
Based on these preliminary evaluation to date, it is recommended that all mitigation
measures be reevaluated during the final design phase of the project to determine more
accurately the noise impacts and appropriate mitigation measures.
I-85 improvements proposed as part of TIP Project I-3803 B end approximately 2200 feet
south of Irish Buffalo Creek (approximately 1000 feet south of Mistletoe Ridge Place). As a
result, Traffic Noise Impact Area #4 described above is not within the construction limits of this
project, but rather is within the limits of adjacent TIP Project I-3802. Traffic noise impacts in
the vicinity of Traffic Noise Impact Area #4 (in the vicinity of Mistletoe Ridge Place and
Gainsway Court) will be evaluated as part of TIP Project I-3802.
d. Other Measures
The acquisition of property in order to provide buffer zones to minimize noise impacts is
not considered a feasible noise mitigation measure for this project. The cost to acquire impacted
receptors for buffer zones would exceed the allowed abatement cost of $35,000 per benefited
receptor. The use of buffer zones to minimize impacts to future sensitive areas is not
recommended because this could be accomplished through land use control.
The use of vegetation for noise mitigation is not considered reasonable for this project,
due to the substantial amount of right-of-way necessary to provide effective vegetative barriers.
FHWA research has shown that a vegetative barrier must be approximately one hundred feet
(100 feet) wide to provide a 3-dBA reduction in noise levels. In order to provide a 5-dBA
reduction, substantial amounts of additional right-of-way are required. The cost of the additional
right-of-way and to plant sufficient vegetation is estimated to exceed the abatement cost of
$35,000 allowed per benefited receptor. Noise insulation was also considered; however, no
public or non-profit institutions were identified that would be impacted by this project.
7. No Build Alternative
The traffic noise impacts for the "do nothing" or "no-build" alternative was also
considered. If the proposed widening does not occur, fifty-eight receptors are anticipated to
approach or exceed the FHWA NAC. These receptors could anticipate experiencing an increase
in exterior noise levels of approximately 2 dBA. As previously noted, it is barely possible to
detect noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5-dBA change in noise levels is more readily noticed.
67
8. Construction Noise
The major construction elements of this project are expected to be earth removal, hauling,
grading, and paving. General construction noise impacts, such as temporary speech interference
for passers-by and those individuals living or working near the project, can be expected,
particularly from paving operations and from the earth moving equipment during grading
operations. However, considering the relatively short-term nature of construction noise, these
impacts are not expected to be substantial. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby
natural elements and man-made structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of
intrusive construction noise.
9. Summary
Traffic noise impacts are an unavoidable consequence of transportation projects,
especially in areas where there are no previous traffic noise sources. All traffic noise impacts
identified in this analysis were considered for noise mitigation. Based on this analysis and in
accordance with the NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement Policy, four potential traffic noise impact
areas were indentified for this project, three of which are located within the limits of TIP Project
I-3803 B and one of which is located within the limits of adjacent TIP Project I-3802. Based on
these preliminary studies to date, it is recommended that all mitigation measures should be
reevaluated during the final design phase of the project to determine more accurately the noise
impacts and appropriate mitigation measures. This evaluation completes the highway traffic
noise requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772.
K. Air Quality Analysis
Introduction
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from industry and internal
combustion engines are the most prevalent sources. The impact resulting from highway
construction ranges from intensifying existing air pollution problems to improving the ambient
air quality. Changing traffic patterns are a primary concern when determining the impact of a
new highway facility or the improvement of an existing highway facility. Motor vehicles emit
carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matter, sulfur
dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb) (listed in order of decreasing emission rate).
Attainment Status
The project is located partially in Mecklenburg County, which is within the Metrolina
nonattainment area for ozone (03) and the Charlotte nonattainment area for carbon monoxide
(CO) as defined by the EPA. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) designated these
areas as moderate nonattainment area for CO. However, due to improved monitoring data, this
area was redesignated as maintenance for CO on September 18, 1995. This area was designated
moderate nonattainment for 03 under the eight-hour ozone standard effective June 15, 2004.
Section 176(c) of the CAAA requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform
to the intent of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). The current SIP does not contain
any transportation control measures for Mecklenburg County. The Mecklenburg-Union
Metropolitan Planning Organization 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the
2009-2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) conform to the intent of the SIP. The
USDOT made a conformity determination on both the LRTP and the TIP on July 11, 2008. The
68
current conformity determination is consistent with the final conformity rule found in 40 CFR
Parts 51 and 93. There are no significant changes in the project's design concept or scope, as
used in the conformity analyses.
The project is also located in Cabarrus County, which is within the Charlotte-Gastonia-
Rock Hill nonattainment area for ozone (03) as defined by the EPA. This area was designated
moderate nonattainment for 03 under the eight-hour ozone standard effective June 15, 2004.
Section 176(c) of the CAAA requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform
to the intent of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). The current SIP does not contain
any transportation control measures for Cabarrus County. The Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan
Planning Organization 2030 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and the 2009-2015
NCDOT State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) conform to the intent of the SIP (or
base year emissions, in areas where no SIP is approved or found adequate). The USDOT made a
conformity determination on the LRTP on June 29, 2007 and the TIP on July 11, 2008. The
current conformity determination is consistent with the final conformity rule found in 40 CFR
Parts 51 and 93. There are no significant changes in the.project's design concept or scope, as
used in the conformity analyses.
3. Carbon Monoxide
Automobiles are considered the major source of CO in the project area. 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 concentration is defined as the CO
emissions from cars operating on highways in the near vicinity (i.e., distances within 400 feet) of
the receptor location. The background concentration is defined by the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources as "the concentration of a pollutant at
a point that is the result of emissions outside the local vicinity; that is, the concentration at the
upwind edge of the local sources."
A microscaie air quality analysis was performed to determine future CO concentrations
resulting from the proposed highway improvements. CAL3QHC - A Modeling Methodology For
Predicting Pollutant Concentrations Near Roadway Intersections was used to predict the CO
concentration near sensitive receptors.
Inputs into the mathematical model used to estimate hourly CO concentrations consisted
of a level roadway under normal conditions with predicted traffic volumes, vehicle emission
factors, and worst-case meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are based on the annual
average daily traffic (AADT) projections. Carbon monoxide vehicle emission factors were
calculated for the years 2010, 2015 and 2030 using the EPA publication Mobile Source Emission
Factors and the MOBILE6 mobile source emissions computer model.
The background CO concentration for the project area was estimated to be 1.8 parts per
million (ppm). Consultation with the North Carolina Department of Environment & Natural
Resources' Air Quality Section indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.8 ppm is
suitable for most suburban and rural areas.
The worst-case air quality scenario was determined to be in the vicinity of the I-85
interchange with Poplar Tent Road. The predicted 1-hour average CO concentrations for the
evaluation years of 2010, 2015, and 2030 are 6.70, 6.20 and 6.90 ppm, respectively. Comparison
of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS (maximum permitted for 1-hour averaging
69
period = 35 ppm; maximum permitted for 8-hour averaging period = 9 ppm) indicates no
violation of these standards. Since the results of the worst-case 1-hour CO analysis for the build
scenario is less than 9 ppm, it can be concluded that the 8-hour CO. level does not exceed the
standard. See Tables F-1 through F-3 in Appendix F for input and output data.
4. Ozone & Nitrogen Dioxide
Automobiles are regarded as sources of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides.
Hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides emitted from cars are carried into the atmosphere, where they
react with sunlight to form ozone (03) and nitrogen dioxide (N02)• Automotive emissions of HC
and NOx are expected to decrease in the future due to the continued installation and maintenance
of pollution control devices on new cars. However, regarding area-wide emissions, these
technological improvements maybe offset by the increasing number of cars on the transportation
facilities of the area.
The photochemical reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide require several hours
to occur. For this reason, the peak levels of ozone generally occur ten to twenty kilometers
downwind of the source of hydrocarbon emissions. Urban areas as a whole are regarded as
sources of hydrocarbons, not individual streets and highways. The emissions of all sources in an
urban area mix in the atmosphere, and, in the presence of sunlight, this mixture reacts to form
ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and other photochemical oxidants. The best example of this type of air
pollution is the smog that forms in Los Angeles, California.
5. Particulate Matter & Sulfur
Automobiles are not regarded as significant sources of particulate matter (PM) and sulfur
dioxide (S02). Nationwide, highway sources account for less than seven percent of particulate
matter emissions and less than two percent of sulfur dioxide emissions. Particulate matter and
sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the result of non-highway sources (e.g., industrial,
commercial, and agricultural). Because emissions of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide from
automobiles are very low, there is no reason to suspect that traffic on the project will cause air
quality standards for particulate matter and sulfur dioxide to exceed the NAAQS.
6. Lead
Automobiles without catalytic converters can burn regular gasoline. The burning of
regular gasoline emits lead as a result of regular gasoline containing tetraethyl lead, which is
added by refineries to increase the octane rating of the fuel. Newer cars with catalytic converters
burn unleaded gasoline, thereby eliminating lead emissions. Also, the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has required the reduction in the lead content of leaded
gasoline. The overall average lead content of gasoline in 1974 was approximately 0.53 gram per
liter. By 1989, this composite average had dropped to 0.003 gram per liter. The Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 made the sale, supply, or transport of leaded gasoline or lead additives
unlawful after December 31, 1995. Because of these reasons, it is not expected that traffic on the
proposed project will cause the NAAQS for lead to be exceeded.
Mobile Source Air Toxics
In addition to the criteria air pollutants for which there are National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS), EPA also regulates air toxics. Most air toxics originate from human-made
70
sources, including on-road mobile sources, non-road mobile sources (e.g., airplanes), area
sources (e.g., dry cleaners), and stationary sources (e.g., factories or refineries).
Mobile Source Air Toxics (MSATs) are a subset of the 188 air toxics defined by.the
Clean Air Act. The MSATs are compounds emitted from highway vehicles and non-road
equipment. Some toxic compounds are present in fuel and are emitted to the air when the fuel
evaporates or passes through the engine unburned. Other toxics are emitted from the incomplete
combustion of fuels or as secondary combustion products. Metal air toxics also result from
engine wear or from impurities in oil or gasoline.
The EPA is the lead federal agency for administering the Clean Air Act and has certain
responsibilities regarding the health effects of MSATs. The EPA issued a Final Rule on
Controlling Emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources in 66 FR 17229 (March
29, 2001). This rule was issued under the authority in Section 202 of the Clean Air Act. In its
rule, EPA examined the impacts of existing and newly promulgated mobile source control
programs, including its reformulated gasoline (RFG) program, its national low emission vehicle
(NLEV) standards, its Tier 2 motor vehicle emissions standards and gasoline sulfur control
requirements, and its proposed heavy duty engine and vehicle standards and on-highway diesel
fuel sulfur control requirements. Between 2000 and 2020, FHWA projects that even with a 64
percent increase in VMT, these programs will reduce on-highway emissions of benzene,
formaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and acetaldehyde by 57 percent to 65 percent and reduce on-
highway diesel PM emissions by 87 percent, as shown in Figure G-1 in Appendix G (see page G-
7).
On February 9, 2007 and under authority of CAA Section 202(1), EPA signed a final rule,
Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources, that sets standards to control MSATs
from motor vehicles. Under this rule, EPA is setting standards on fuel composition, vehicle
exhaust emissions, and evaporative losses from portable containers. The new standards are
estimated to reduce total emissions of MSATs by 330,000 tons in 2030, including 61,000 tons of
benzene. Concurrently, total emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) will be reduced by
over 1 A million tons in 2030 as a result of adopting these standards.
Unavailable Information for Project Specific MSAT Impact Analysis: This document
includes a basic analysis of the likely MSAT emission impacts of this project. However,
available technical tools do not enable us to predict the project-specific health impacts of the
emission changes associated with the alternatives in this EA. Due to these limitations, the
following discussion is included in accordance with CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1502.22(b))
regarding incomplete or unavailable information:
Information that is Unavailable or Incomplete: Evaluating the environmental and health
impacts from MSATs on a proposed highway project would involve several key elements,
including emissions modeling, dispersion modeling in order to estimate ambient concentrations
resulting from the estimated emissions, exposure modeling in order to estimate human exposure
to the estimated concentrations, and then final determination of health impacts based on the
estimated exposure. Each of these steps is encumbered by technical shortcomings or uncertain
science that prevents a more complete determination of the MSAT health impacts of this project.
• Emissions: The EPA tools to estimate MSAT emissions from motor vehicles are not
sensitive to key variables determining emissions of MSATs in the context of highway
projects. While MOBILE 6.2 is used to predict emissions at a regional level, it has
71
limited applicability at the project level. MOBILE 6.2 is a trip-based model - emission
factors are projected based on a typical trip of 7.5 miles, and on average speeds for this
typical trip. This means MOBILE 6.2 does not have the ability to predict emission
factors for a specific vehicle operating condition at a specific location at a specific time.
Because of this limitation, MOBILE 6.2 can only approximate the operating speeds and
levels of congestion likely to be present on the largest-scale projects and cannot
adequately capture emissions effects of smaller projects. For particulate matter, the
model results are not sensitive to average trip speed, although the other MSAT emission
rates do change with changes in trip speed. Also, the emissions rates used in MOBILE
6.2 for both particulate matter and MSATs are based on a limited number of tests of
mostly older-technology vehicles. Lastly, in its discussions of PM under the conformity
rule, EPA has identified problems with MOBILE6.2 as an obstacle to quantitative
analysis.
These deficiencies compromise the capability of MOBILE 6.2 to estimate MSAT
emissions. MOBILE6.2 is an adequate tool for projecting emissions trends and
performing relative analyses between alternatives for very large projects, but it is not
sensitive enough to capture the effects of travel changes tied to smaller projects or to
predict emissions near specific roadside locations.
• Dispersion: The tools to predict how MSATs disperse are also limited. The EPA's
current regulatory models, CALINE3 and CAL3QHC, were developed and validated
more than a decade ago for the purpose of predicting episodic concentrations of carbon
monoxide to determine compliance with the NAAQS. The performance of dispersion
models is more accurate for predicting maximum concentrations that can occur at some
time at some location within a geographic area. This limitation makes it difficult to
predict accurate exposure patterns at specific times at specific highway project locations
across an urban area to assess potential health risk. The NCHRP is conducting research
on best practices in applying models and other technical methods in the analysis of
MSATs. This work also will focus on identifying appropriate methods of documenting
and communicating MSAT impacts in the NEPA process and to the general public.
Along with these general limitations of dispersion models, FHWA is also faced with a
lack of monitoring data in most areas for use in establishing project-specific MSAT
background concentrations.
• Exposure Levels and Health Effects: Finally, even if emission levels and
concentrations of MSATs could be accurately predicted, shortcomings in current
techniques for exposure assessment and risk analysis preclude us from reaching
meaningful conclusions about project-specific health impacts. Exposure assessments are
difficult because it is difficult to accurately calculate annual concentrations of MSATs
near roadways and to determine the portion of a year that people are actually exposed to
those concentrations at a specific location. These difficulties are magnified for 70-year
cancer assessments, particularly because unsupportable assumptions would have to be
made regarding changes in travel patterns and vehicle technology (which affects
emissions rates) over a 70-year period. There are also considerable uncertainties
associated with the existing estimates of toxicity of the various MSATs, because of
factors such as low-dose extrapolation and translation of occupational exposure data to
the general population. Because of these shortcomings, any calculated difference in
health impacts between alternatives is likely to be much smaller than the uncertainties
associated with calculating the impacts. Consequently, the results of such assessments
72
would not be useful to decision makers, who would need to weigh this information
against other project impacts that are better suited for quantitative analysis.
Summary of Existing Credible Scientific Evidence Relevant to Evaluating the Impacts of
MSATs: Research into the health impacts of MSATs is ongoing. For different emission types,
there are a variety of studies that show that some either are statistically associated with adverse
health outcomes through epidemiological studies (frequently based on emissions levels found in
occupational settings) or that animals demonstrate adverse health outcomes when exposed to
large doses.
Exposure to toxics has been a focus of a number of EPA efforts. Most notably, the
agency conducted the National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) in 1996 to evaluate modeled
estimates of human exposure applicable to the county level. While not intended for use as a
measure of or benchmark for local exposure, the modeled estimates in the NATA database best
illustrate the levels of various toxics when aggregated to a national or State level.
The EPA is in the process of assessing the risks of various kinds of exposures to these
pollutants. The EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) is a database of human health
effects that may result from exposure to various substances found in the environment. The IRIS
database is located at http://www.epa.gov/iris. The following toxicity information for the six
prioritized MSATs was taken from the IRIS database Weight of Evidence Characterization
summaries. This information is taken verbatim from EPA's IRIS database and represents the
Agency's most current evaluations of the potential hazards and toxicology of these chemicals or
mixtures.
• Benzene is characterized as a known human carcinogen.
• The potential carcinogenicity of acrolein cannot be determined because the existing data
are inadequate for an assessment of human carcinogenic potential for either the oral or
inhalation route of exposure.
• Formaldehyde is a probable human carcinogen, based on limited evidence in humans,
and sufficient evidence in animals.
• 1,3-butadiene is characterized as carcinogenic to humans by inhalation.
• Acetaldehyde is a probable human carcinogen based on increased incidence of nasal
tumors in male and female rats and laryngeal tumors in male and female hamsters after
inhalation exposure.
• Diesel exhaust (DE likely to be carcinogenic to humans by inhalation from
environmental exposures. Diesel exhaust as reviewed in this document is the
combination of diesel particulate matter and diesel exhaust organic gases.
• Diesel exhaust also represents chronic respiratory effects, possibly the primary
noncancer hazard from MSATs. Prolonged exposures may impair pulmonary function
and could produce symptoms, such as cough, phlegm, and chronic bronchitis. Exposure
relationships have not been developed from these studies.
There have been other studies that address MSAT health impacts in proximity to
roadways. The Health Effects Institute, a non-profit organization funded by EPA, FHWA, and
industry, has undertaken a major series of studies to research near-roadway MSAT hot spots, the
health implications of the entire mix of mobile source pollutants, and other topics. The final
summary of the series is not expected for several years.
73
Some recent studies have reported that roximity to roadways is related to adverse health
outcomes -- particularly respiratory problems' . Much of this research is not specific to MSATs,
instead surveying the full spectrum of both criteria and other pollutants. The FHWA cannot
evaluate the validity of these studies, but more importantly; they do not provide information that
would be useful to alleviate the uncertainties listed above and enable us to perform a more
comprehensive evaluation of the health impacts specific to this project.
This document provides a qualitative analysis of MSAT emissions relative to the various
alternatives and acknowledges that some of the project alternatives may result in increased
exposure to MSAT emissions in certain locations, although the concentrations and
duration of exposures are uncertain, and because of this uncertainty, the health effects from these
emissions cannot be estimated.
Qualitative MSAT Analysis
It is possible to qualitatively assess the levels of future MSAT emissions under the
project. Although a qualitative analysis cannot identify and measure health impacts from
MSATs, it can give a basis for identifying and comparing the potential differences among MSAT
emissions, if any, from the various alternatives. The qualitative assessment presented below is
derived in part from a study conducted by the FHWA entitled A Methodologyfor Evaluating Mobile
Source Air Toxic Emissions Among Transportation Project Alternatives, found at:
www.ibwa.dot.gov/environ ment/airtoxic/msatcompare/msatemission s.htm.
For each alternative in this document, the amount of MSATs emitted would be
proportional to the vehicle miles traveled, or VMT, assuming that other variables such as fleet
mix are the same for each alternative. The VMT estimated for each of the Build
Alternatives will likely be slightly higher than that for the No Build Alternative, because the additional
capacity increases the efficiency of the roadway and attracts rerouted trips from elsewhere in the
transportation network. The increased VMT would lead to higher MSAT emissions for the
action alternative along the highway corridor, along with a corresponding decrease in MSAT
emissions along the parallel routes. The emissions increase is offset somewhat by lower MSAT
emission rates due to increased speeds; according to EPA's MOBILE6 emissions model,
emissions of all of the priority MSATs except for diesel particulate matter decrease as speed
increases. The extent to which these speed-related emissions decreases will offset VMT-related
emissions increases cannot be reliably projected due to the inherent deficiencies of technical
models.
South Coast Air Quality Management District, Multiple Air Toxic Exposure Study-II (2000);
Highway Health Hazards, The Sierra Club (2004) summarizing 24 Studies on the relationship
between health and air quality); NEPA's Uncertainty in the Federal Legal Scheme Controlling
Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles, Environmental Law Institute, 35 ELR 10273 (2005) with
health studies cited therein.
Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Los Angeles, et. al.
Effect of exposure to traffic on lung development from 10 to 18 years of age: a cohort study.
The Lancet, (2007).
74
Because the estimated VMT under each of the alternatives are nearly the same, it is
expected there would be no appreciable difference in overall MSAT emissions among the
various alternatives. Also, regardless of the alternative chosen, emissions will likely be lower
than present levels in the design year as a result of EPA's national control programs that are
projected to reduce MSAT emissions by 57 to 87 percent between 2000 and 2020. Local
conditions may differ from these national projections in terms of fleet mix and turnover, VMT
growth rates, and local control measures. However, the magnitude of the EPA-projected
reductions is so great (even after accounting for VMT growth) that MSAT emissions in the study
area are likely to be lower in the future in nearly all cases.
The additional travel lanes contemplated as part of the project alternatives will have the
effect of moving some traffic closer to nearby homes and businesses; therefore, under each
alternative there may be localized areas where ambient concentrations of MSAT could be higher
under certain Build Alternatives than the No Build Alternative. The localized increases in
MSAT concentrations would likely be most pronounced along the new alignment segments and
along the sides of existing roadways where asymmetrical and symmetrical widening occurs.
However, as discussed above, the magnitude and the duration of these potential increases
compared to the No-build alternative cannot be accurately quantified due to the inherent
deficiencies of current models. In sum, when a highway is widened and, as a result, moves
closer to receptors, the localized level of MSAT emissions for the Build Alternative could be
higher relative to the No Build Alternative, but this could be offset due to increases in speeds and
reductions in congestion (which are associated with lower MSAT emissions). Also, MSATs will
be lower in other locations when traffic shifts away from them. However, on a regional basis,
EPA's vehicle and fuel regulations, coupled with fleet turnover will, over time, cause substantial
reductions that, in almost all cases, will cause region-wide MSAT levels to be significantly lower
than today.
Quantitative MSAT Analysis
According to interim guidance issued by FHWA concerning MSATs, a quantitative
analysis is required for any project that (1) creates or adds significant capacity to urban highways
such as interstates, urban arterials, or urban collector-distributor routes with projected traffic
volumes in the range of 140,000 to 150,000 vehicles per day or greater by the design year and (2)
is located in proximity to populated areas or in rural areas in proximity to vulnerable populations
(e.g., schools, nursing homes, and hospitals).
Traffic volumes in the year 2030 are projected to exceed 150,000 vehicles per day
throughout the entire project. In addition, the project passes near potential vulnerable
populations (including residences, Dorton Park, and the Cannon Memorial YMCA). As a result,
the project meets the criteria for a quantitative MSAT analysis.
NCDOT will perform a quantitative MSAT analysis prior to completing the next
environmental document for the project,'which will be either a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) or a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Based upon the results of
quantitative MSAT analyses conducted for other highway improvement projects, it is highly
unlikely that MSAT emissions will increase as a result of the project. However, if the
quantitative analysis indicates MSAT emissions will increase as a result of the project, NCDOT
will present the findings of this analysis to the public and to environmental review agencies prior
to making a final decision as to whether to prepare a FONSI or a DEIS.
75
8. Burning of Debris
During construction of the proposed project, all materials resulting from clearing and
grubbing, demolition, or other operations will be removed from the project, burned, or otherwise
disposed of by the contractor. Any burning done will be done in accordance with applicable
local laws and ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance
with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. Care will be taken to insure burning will be done at the greatest
distance practical from dwellings and not when atmospheric conditions are such as to create a
hazard to the public. Burning will be performed under constant surveillance. Also during
construction, measures will be taken to reduce the dust generated by construction when the
control of dust is necessary for the protection and comfort of motorists or area residents.
This evaluation completes the assessment requirements for air quality of the 1990 Clean
Air Act Amendments and the NEPA process, and no additional reports are necessary.
9. Summary
Vehicles are a major contributor to decreased air quality because they emit a variety of
pollutants into the air. Changing traffic patterns are a primary concern when determining the
impact of a new highway facility or the improvement of an existing highway facility. New
highways or the widening of existing highways increase localized levels of vehicle emissions,
but these increases could be offset due to increases in speeds from reductions in congestion and
because vehicle emissions will decrease in areas where traffic shifts to the new roadway.
Significant progress has been made in reducing criteria pollutant emissions from motor vehicles
and improving air quality, even as vehicle travel has increased rapidly.
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties are non-attainment for ozone. Mecklenburg County
is also non-attainment for CO, while Cabarrus County is in attainment for CO. Because
Mecklenburg County is non-attainment for CO, a CO microscale analysis was performed. As
explained in Section V.K.3, the worst-case air quality scenario was determined to be in the
vicinity of the I-85 interchange with Poplar Tent Road, in Cabarrus County.
L. Hazardous Materials
Nineteen sites containing contaminated materials have been identified in the project study
area. These sites are listed in Table H-1 in Appendix H and are shown in Figure H-1 in
Appendix H (see pages H-1 through H-3). These sites include sixteen underground storage tank
(UST) facilities, one landfill, one construction storage yard, and one auto body shop. No
hazardous waste sites were identified within the project limits. NCDOT will perform soil and
groundwater assessments on each of these properties before the beginning of right of way
acquisition. It is possible that additional sites containing contamination may be identified during
the more detailed assessment process. .
VI. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
A. Public Involvement
A local officials meeting and a citizens informational workshop (CIW) for the project
were held on October 30, 2007 in the Family Life Center of Concord Christian Church in
76

Concord, located on NC 73 (Davidson Highway) approximately one mile east of I-85. This
meeting and workshop are discussed below.
Local Officials Meeting
A local officials meeting was held prior to the CIW. Meeting participants included
elected officials and staff from the Cities of Concord and Kannapolis, staff from the City of
Charlotte and Cabarrus County, representatives from the Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO), the Mecklenburg-Union MPO, a Duke Energy representative, and NCDOT
staff from Division 10, the Roadway Design Unit, the Traffic Engineering and Safety Systems
Branch, and the Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch. Media
representatives were also present (Newpaper - Concord Standard, Television - Fox News
Charlotte).
A meeting agenda and a copy of the CIW information packet (see Appendix H, pages H-
1 through H-12) were given to each attendee. Aerial photographs of the project study area were
displayed at several locations in the meeting room, and participants were able to review those
aerials prior to the meeting. The aerial mosaics showed the project study area, the project
terminals, and major points of interest within the study area. A map showing other nearby
proposed NCDOT projects was also displayed.
NCDOT representatives presented a summary of the information included in the packet
and a description of the information shown on the aerial mosaic. The following comments and
questions were received from meeting attendees:
• Land use in the northern quadrants of the I-85 interchange with Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway (SR 1430) is expected to change from residential to
commercial. It was suggested this anticipated land use change be considered as
NCDOT considers the need for noise walls in this area.
• It was questioned whether the Carolina Heelsplitter, which is listed by the U. S. Fish
and Wildlife Service as an Endangered species with habitat in both Mecklenburg and
Cabarrus Counties, actually exists in this area. In addition, concern was raised that
studies to determine whether the species will be affected by the project could affect
the project schedule.
• Additional information regarding the proposed realignment of Pitts School Road (SR
1305) was requested.
• Concern was expressed for the potential loss of the full-movement intersection of
International Drive with NC 73 just east of I-85.
• Following the meeting, Mark Kincaid, Deputy Director of the City of Concord Parks
and Recreation Department, submitted information from the Livable Community
Blueprint for Cabarrus County, a master plan for future parks and bike/pedestrian
transportation.
• It was questioned whether the project would be administered as a design/build
project, as was the adjacent I-85 project to the south (TIP Project I-3803 A).
2. Citizens Informational Workshop
A citizens informational workshop was held between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 7:00
p.m. Approximately 120 citizens, local officials, local government staff, a representative of
Rowan-Cabarrus Community College, media representatives, and NCDOT representatives
77

. ;
. V.ly 4
(Division 10 Office, Roadway Design Unit, Right of Way Branch, Traffic Engineering and ,•
ry
=s.;
Safety Systems Branch, Location and Surveys Unit, and Project Development and 1
Environmental Analysis Branch) were present at the workshop. Media representatives present
included television reporters (from Channels 14 and 22) and a newpaper reporter (Independent " - `
Tribune). A copy of the news release for the workshop is included in Appendix H (see page H-
13) "
.
A project information packet (see Appendix I) was given to each workshop attendee.
Aerial photographs of the project study area were displayed at several locations in the meeting
room. The aerial mosaics showed the project study area, the project terminals, and major
landmarks within the study area. A map showing other nearby proposed NCDOT projects was
also displayed.
The following comments, suggestions, and questions were received before, during, and
following the workshop, either via direct communication at the workshop or via telephone/e-mail
correspondence:
• NCDOT should include a fax number in the information packet to provide an
additional means for the public and local officials and staff to contact NCDOT.
• NCDOT should schedule public meetings at times that are more convenient to
citizens
• Comments received suggesting the completion of I-485 (TIP Project R-2248 E)
before I-3803 B is constructed
• Overhead signing should be provided on northbound I-85 at the existing two-lane exit
to Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard to let motorists know which
lane to be in (left exit lane for Concord Mills Boulevard, right exit lane for Bruton
Smith Boulevard).
• The I-85 off-ramps at the Poplar Tent Road interchange should be improved.
• Consider constructing collector-distributor lanes along I-85 from NC 73 to
Kannapolis so that "through" motorists can avoid entering and exiting traffic
• A bridge across I-85 should be constructed to connect Quay Road and New Holland
Road south of Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard to alleviate
congestion on Concord Mills Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard
• The construction of I-3803 B should be performed similarly to the recently-completed
widening of I-85 to the south (TIP Project I-3803 A)
• Consider constructing HOV lanes along I-85 as part of the project
• Is TIP Project I-3803 B funded for right of way acquisition and construction?
• Will additional right of way be acquired? If so, where?
• How will my property be affected? How close will I-85 be to my property after
construction is complete?
• Will noise barriers be constructed along I-85 near the Kannapolis Parkway/George
Liles Parkway interchange?
• Comments received in support of project construction.
• Construct an auxiliary lane along northbound I-85 from I-485 to Concord Mills
Boulevard/Bruton Smith Boulevard.
• Extend the project northward to US 29-601 to avoid overlap with adjacent TIP
Project I-3802
78
Staff from the City of Concord requested that the grade of Poplar Tent Road be
lowered to allow the full use of the recently-extended runway, and they provided
mapping for the area.
As noted above, the aerial photograph displayed at the local officials meeting and at the
:IW included the project study area. The study area shown on the aerial photographs did not
include the area where the proposed Rustic LaneBrownwood Lane connector is proposed
southeast of the I-85 interchange with NC 73. In addition, the proposed widening of Derita Road
and Odell School Road in the vicinity of Poplar Tent Road extend beyond the study area limits
presented on the aerial photographs at the workshop. The remaining improvements proposed as
part of TIP Project I-3803 B are within the study area limits presented at the local officials
meeting and at the CIW.
B. Public Hearing
A public hearing will be scheduled following the distribution of this Environmental
Assessment. During the hearing citizens will have the opportunity to review the preliminary
design for the project and to ask questions and state their comments regarding the proposed
improvements.
C. NEPA/Section 404 Merger Process
Due to the extent of the project's anticipated impacts to streams, the project has been
coordinated closely with environmental resource agencies as part of the NEPA/Section 404
Merger 01 Process. NEPA refers to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA),
while Section 404 refers to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of 1973.
Merger 01 is a process to streamline the project development and permitting processes,
agreed to by the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the North Carolina Department of
Natural Resources (Divisions of Water Quality and Coastal Management), the Federal Highway
Administration, and NCDOT and supported by other stakeholder agencies and local units of
government. To this effect, the Merger 01 process provides a forum for appropriate agency
representatives to discuss and reach consensus on ways to facilitate meeting the regulatory
requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act during the NEPA/SEPA decision-making
phase of transportation projects.
The Merger 01 process allows agency representatives to work more efficiently (quicker
and more comprehensive evaluation and resolution of issues) by providing a common forum for
them to discuss and find ways to comply with key elements of their agencies' missions. The
merger process helps to document how competing agency mandates are balanced during a shared
decision-making process, which results in agency representatives reaching a "compromise based
decision" to the regulatory and individual agency mandates.
Merger 01 concurrence has been reached on Concurrence Point 1 (Purpose and Need and
Study Area Defined), Concurrence Point 2 (Alternatives to be Carried Forward for Detailed
Study), and Concurrence Point 2A (Bridging Decisions and Alignment Review). Copies of the
concurrence forms are included in Appendix I (see pages I-1 and I-2).
Coordination with the Merger process agencies will continue throughout project studies,
including Concurrence Point 3 (LEDPA, or Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable
79
Alternative), Concurrence Point 4A (Avoidance and Minimization of impacts), Concurrence
Point 4B (30% Hydraulic Design Review), and Concurrence Point 4C (Permit Drawings
Review).
D. Additional Agency Coordination
Letters were sent to the following federal and state environmental environmental
agencies and regional and local Governments at the beginning of project studies:
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U. S. Geological Survey
U. S. Department of Interior, National Park Service
N. C. Department of Administration, State Publications Clearinghouse
Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization
Cabarrus-Rowan Metropolitan Planning Organization
Mecklenburg, Cabarrus, and Rowan County Boards of Commissioners
Mayors of Charlotte, Concord, and Kannapolis
The following agencies and governments provided written comments on the project (see
Appendix J, pages J-1 through J-6):
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
N. C. Department of Administration, State Publications Clearinghouse
N. C. Department of Cultural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office
N. C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality
Mecklenburg-Union MPO
Cabarrus County Commerce Department
E. Finding of No Significant Impact
Following the public hearing, NCDOT will prepare a final environmental document
(anticipated to be a Finding of No Significant Impact, or FONSI). The FONSI will address
comments received on this Environmental Assessment and on the preliminary design presented
at the public hearing and will present the final recommended improvements. The recommended
improvements will be based upon preliminary engineering studies, environmental considerations,
and public comment.
VII. BASIS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
On the basis of planning and environmental studies, it is anticipated that this project will
not have a significant detrimental effect on the quality of the human environment. The proposed
project will cause no significant changes in route classification and land use and is not
controversial in nature. The project has been reviewed by federal, state and local agencies and no
objections have been raised. No major objections to the project were voiced at the citizens
informational workshop held on October 30, 2007. For these reasons, it is concluded that an
Environmental Assessment is applicable to this project.
JWS
80
Appendix A
Figures
"((L?, J \ \V -??` End Project 1-3803 B -
n v
??? r?? ,y 1, iI `-C ?? N8038
/ _
U, ` ?s? l v C`? _./17
0 >?c Ii ?h ?I
i
4 29
1-4
{/ 1 T,
0/0 6
t- - Begin Project 1-3803 B Aire" I ? k
_c
7, 49
0,? ro
21 t v ) _ _ iJ ??
/?
49
?1
1
r r N DTI ?' i f )Y??
5 " 29 - 1` „?, a Y,)r r+r ,' T-?'n?
o
CIL
N
1-38038
1-85 from 1-485 (Charlotte Outer Loop) WE Project Location Map Figure
to NC 73 (Davidson Highway) g to
PW Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties Not to scale

6
'ON a/ryyY _
0
r
C
R(EGIOMd.
Appm
ii-'-0s.'
O' RLOTTE CONCORD
WILLS BLVD
-BEGIN :4j1 pp
r Xf"? K ,'.
A n
0 4,500 9,000 5?4 ONt
Feet
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
. OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
? pp ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
rrn?° ??
PROJECT
TIP PROJECT I-38036
VICINITY MAP
I-85
FROM I-485 TO NC 73
MECKLENBURG AND
CABARRUS COUNTIES
0
END
\ PROJECT
GEORGE W.
N
uLES PaRxwar
a
County: MECKLENBUR
Div: 10 TIP#I-38038 Figuure
WBS: 34187.1.1 ? o
Date: NOV 2008 -

!err - '.,..-l7
4>'frF JSa .ltd ?i6
fill!
th
PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS
1-85
FROM 1-485 TO NC 73
MECKLENBURG AND
CABARRUS COUNTIES
TIP PROJECT 1-3803B
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ., ?.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
(n o
_ c
m -
.. o
n
m A

o?
O CD 0 m
O 0
4k
W 2
-? W C

pp e
a+ e ??
04
0
cn
0
w
a
0
0
m O
(D
(D

a
L
' a
J c
CD
7
CIO a
j (D
oo

° Q
T
y <
m m
i Q (p ? ?? 3 n
cn m
m cn =' o o
p a m v m cn a
' r m 3
m 3 v, in m
' °
1C
? N -
_ r n? ?MG cn

m

-7 o

2i
D

9
wN

A o

o< o

z ? ?m

o

X

ROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT °'
?`'':
1-85 OF TRANSPORTATION
00
0 o DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS 4
TO N
7
,j ° FROM 1-485
C
3
rk)

?
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
~
o c
D o o u ; z m MECKLENBURG AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
`<?;
,.•`
s ° W W r , , ,
CABARRUS COUNTIES
A ?3 D TIP PROJECT 1-3803B

cn

m (D cn
w
0

CSrt (7 0o a ?m?

W N m

0 CD
C)
o co
M
. a CD W ?
;o C
1 00 1 Lc--CW A` PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS

0 1-85
0 FROM I-485 TO NC 73
m MECKLENBURG AND
CABARRUS COUNTIES
D TIP PROJECT 1-3803B
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
(.;A
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
i? - ? '? ^3 s - ^? ?! r 4J? Dot
half al :` ?" Z M
m I&
C) 4
BUTZ

T
? ?2
401-
r
•+ 1 t7rf s` +.y s } fit'. i.,?,..,,, °' `GLI??S!/L,?
VD _
o ` fH
M o 6 P. '
_c'
m®
m?

?,, ? 's wk. ••?! ? .._;?r a ? ::elm.: 4.R?

Ile
~J ? ?fA 7-:CA ?s
sit
.. t
Akw _ > B B

? B
4 fir ?t.t:
2114

O
Cr
O
W
O
O
O)
O
1l O
CD
(D
,-.
t
q? i

14

ll,
y r
D

CD
°
o Cn m m o o Q
-G - v g 0 0

- C N (D m 3 Q
n (n
Cj)
m
o
o w
C Uj ? o
U,

Q
Q m n
.
-0 m
?
-, ( 3
(n m ?c
(
D
cn
0 ca
N ° c- PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS
m D w o p I-85 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT °` "yn H
<
m -7
m n o m FROM I-485 TO NC 73 OF TRANSPORTATION 4
--I CH co
`++ = J DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
A 'v N ram mm MECKLENBURG AND PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ;r r'P
O CD o s a 4t D z m
h o o W r CABARRUS COUNTIES ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH £,, ghHgQ
C° D TIP PROJECT 1-3803B

V
j t f f v? •?
Y?,_ ` t Y?il' /fit ?.:`_ ?#. Y15- , J ?? ? ? ,?{ Y ; lye.. •,, t ` _,.
..
at°C?i LZ'
(9 ?nr
p 00 cc
. i ? ,fit ; •:??.__??i ? , L? ? ?C', i ?.i . ? i ? 1y1 j ? /( ? - -
_ 4' .. ter'
F! ?RFf • ;
I Z117
41 'r
` ;e v 4 , y ;I T'? T f
CON 8Y r. ? ? t r ? . t ' } 't'.i ..?M . ;? S . ?'FWs
Fly-7,111 -
i`O 4 O
`i
I)1
O
:.??RI? r - r 4,.{,. ..5.?.?rt1?+r -. ter...
ju r t,
° - -:, o
7 o
m
< 3
o cn CD g N O D O fl.
µY K O = 3 O
CD 'o
(D
v ? Q O
a <;2 3 0-
o m C/) ? 9 > o
a a.a co m v c N a
c a?i
v w 3 (n
r ` (D cn c
j

m 7

>
cn

A' O
-`

C) p
_
7 L?
-1
O
.,\ PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
I-85
OF TRANSPORTATION '
? o o 485 TO NC 73 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
FROM 1
o -

o D
m PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
o (DD
-t
o 000
o n z MECKLENBURG - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH

-?
w m
r
CABARRUS COUNTIES
0 D TIP PROJECT 1-3803B

0 _p o

m
- D.. o

n
m

N j n
cQ C7 00 00
N
a) = 2 v -?
>x
O CCD o _
ca
co m m

(o Lo c:

PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS
1-85
o FROM 1-485 TO NC 73
m MECKLENBURG AND
r CABARRUS COUNTIES
D
TIP PROJECT 1-3803B
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT 'r
OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS ?r
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND 4l ;
Trti .-
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH

o< z CD
I m '° '° a°
CL
<? y CL CL 3 a
(D {y
O -0 d . O
_
O'
r CD 3 (D
!a <
(D CD
3 a a C ..

ED
3 :E
CD
N CD
7
1 .? CL
CD LU
o
co

7 X Z
00
. ?- - C W

o m 7C
rnm
0
0 7
?+ b V !?/ c@

? P nri,

1
!?A - - LAY
,i
_,.:41 } •1
1h •?j?(I?rr _ ?f?i!
?i ?? 1
E
" r
co) C
Innl
U
? (US;
z ;K
P1 ,
L
r•
a %
:New
a
x
cn -- ? o
_
cD
c/)
m A W o -7
rn
-
N n 00 o?
c
V =
A M
N Ca mm
O X
0 C
is W a
G
,
W
O }
0
? I
D
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
1-85 OF TRANSPORTATION
FROM 1-485 TO NC 73 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
MECKLENBURG AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
CABARRUS COUNTIES
TIP PROJECT 1-3803B

,i
a
O
. ?,{ ? ? Lam, L - ?f LY
?? # }` w y tea`- '+
• Tn ??J,L7 '•? '? ??_`. !} ?'J6y v? 1 wee - -???•
01
r ?

V 1

LO
TI O
r ?--f

_ _ c-`

1T1 iz (D
D.
p PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
111 -n ;o

0 z m
M
o
1-85 OF TRANSPORTATION
N
00 N 0 ? ° Z FROM 1-485 TO NC 73 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

0

ca

o

# D r

n z
;o

m PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND

MECKLENBURG AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
u
0 o A r
r CABARRUS COUNTIES
-A
j ?'
I
1
> I TIP PROJECT 1-38038
_
cn
O
W
O
O
0)
O
n O
(D
(D

- $ _ lD
I1 o a

"' CL -D (D
s _ :'

3

(!1 Cn :S7

O CD
?J
o

fi

F
i

44.
f
-

r

N (D
V 3 (n
cn CL
yr• m

KTTTT

I
h
?

/I

I

JP:
ei
Y
1
N
'?' " • . ?: --, -??'1:?•?.? _; x Q Glut
f`
sh=n
Rog,
06
r
ti' i?
o c(D)
cn <
` 0
m . D ?
w.. ,
o
n
m > m

--I cQ
ao
0
0
N ? _
7-1
N
0 -'
co Z
D
M
0 _• ik
CD

A ?0

L.
_ PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
I-8S OF TRANSPORTATION
o 'Z FROM 1-485 TO NC 73 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
m MECKLENBURG AND PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
r CABARRUS COUNTIES
D TIP PROJECT 1-3803B

f?? f D

U ?D
O (A (D (D p O LZ
0
(D C 2:1 < 01
0) 0_
f-- cn
(D
N CD
D
v CD
o
0
N
cnn w
CL
-0
r
v w
3 CL
v F 3 m ,c
U.

e?
Aft
_ ^J
U
r,
jot o? i
w
r
.a:
--S 7
t ? \
S
. y t .
Vl.. I-
0(D /i
G? 0
©®?F?()
= 41 - r
I ?
T
7, vp
J-4 90?
J ?
I
d
1' r
¦1 1
4

k 471%

O
c n
0
w
0
0
0
Tl O
0
.-r
•-.i
41
J A r
ti..
ll ? ?? ` ?TM1 'rt.?.t? '? 'moo, •??.
r y t
cn 0 G
' o

2
?(D
N < c
c
IT!
m -n x A D?
(? 0 o M,
N
O (D N W D m m
0
co 00
° D Z
W c
A
co
LO
z
O
m
r
r
D
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
1-85 OF TRANSPORTATION
FROM 1-485 TO NC 73 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
MECKLENBURG AND PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND 4rI
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
CABARRUS COUNTIES
TIP PROJECT 1-3803B
cn o o m
--I PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS
m D C) Z p NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT
m 0 D 1-85 OF TRANSPORTATION
s N _ O ? o FROM 1-485 TO NC 73 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS m? r
iv cq m m m PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
CD o CDC D z m MECKLENBURG AND
?, o o Xm r ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH •° ., ,,„•:'
w A r CABARRUS COUNTIES
A °J U c D TIP PROJECT 1-38036
r" ;+-,
4 y. .
0 r
o
T ?
(D
A• ti " w
34
y

t

v

Y15,•? .t71.: r?fK
?,\? b • ti
vM?
w
?r

?iP
`I 1...

}
'=J
4b
0

i '
?TT I

l '
,r j?? 3
i
irk d
h••?rN
I
A' ? A ?Fii? . ? ? . y
.,??,? r? ?A, ?f>r7 , t? t,l ry r ?'r -???
{
.' I E {
Cc o ?I fill
k7T
fliltl ?t/i - '
F •.
- • -•'
y-f
Yq ?y b
O ? ,g- 111FFF
? ?, uL'L?Il "'171 L, ? ? '? • a??
` 4•
l'
CD
U ??1 X98 O (n (?-«D ?p b a
nJ p N 3 O O
C m p < <n
Usti ,__ ^h`, n? Q CL M Q
f r n in
71 U CCa µ °o D in o
Lin q_- IZ Q N Q
1. r a?i 3 :E
-; d w 3 m m
?. CD cn <
1w (n
o o O PROPOSEDIMPROVEMENTS
m D w oK ? p 1-85 NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT rM "qq*
m o FROM 1-485 TO NC 73 OF TRANSPORTATION '
_ DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
co M PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
Iv N N -* w r r MECKLENBURG AND
cD ° m m ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
0 0 0 r CABARRUS COUNTIES
(n D TIP PROJECT 1-3803B
t?.?ls
m
e d

5

y

-
71

0
co)
_ ? q p

loJ 0 o
CE 2:

cn
_ o
Km 5 0
` 0
_ °°
, `
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
m
m -n y
;a w. o Z

z p NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT

I-85 OF TRANSPORTATION E
w + ` = 00 DIVI
I
N
F
Y
? -
O;R o S
O
O
HIGHWA
S
FROM I-485 TO NC 73
;?)

CD
?
o ?
w-
co r r
> z
m PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
- MECKLENBURG AND
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH
s
, o o ;am r ?, F,,•
w c ;u c:
A
r
CABARRUS COUNTIES
00 o D TIP PROJECT 1-3803B

r
Q r `
L-'
O
CD

J T j
° IL ` ?.
° r

-ti J

-' G7 7 0 O
O (n CD fD 'a
co V w 3 3
n 1 O O

N
CL w °-' CL
3
T
o (n
m to cD X

Q
1 cn
•.• fD
m w o

a

(n .
v
. y 3 cn
? N
n
I
cl)
o
o
0
_ ?

m 5
D"
w..
o
m -n m Ds
00 m

.Pb
N
r
Y
0 00# DZ
-k o m m

+f

F4

Q?
L
i
r u
?d O
0
i
J 2,)
ft L S
i
L ? ?
o
??? Uri rte, c,

ir

U f 111 C fFnj
go IE
,"
4

?% .. V
w

t,
;k

/'A s,

z, I I ??.?1it.
.t
y
1> 1
O
O
m
r
r-
Nlk
IR
'\'N

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT q
1-85 OF TRANSPORTATION
FROM 1-485 TO NC 73 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND
MECKLENBURG AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH p
CABARRUS COUNTIES
TIP PROJECT 1-3803B
,,w
. '-aw
r
ra

Looking north along 1-85 north of Mallard Creek Road
Looking east along Concord Mills Boulevard west of 1-85
Figure 3
Sheet 1 of 4
Looking west along Poplar Tent Road west of 1-85
rte. $Wkl
Looking west along Poplar Tent Road east of Pitts School Road
Figure 3
Sheet 2 of 4

7W
Yid
Looking north along 1-85 near Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway
Looking west along George Liles Parkway east of 1-85
Figure 3
Sheet 3 of 4
Looking east along NC 73 (Davidson Highway) just west of 1-85
Looking east along NC 73 (Davidson Highway) just east of 1-85
Figure 3
Sheet 4 of 4
s
O
Z
m
O O
m
E? CO)
co
V-
a? a -
O Y O
g "- 'm a
c0 _a
L Z i-
o °E m
°'pa
? m
?' m o
a c
O ? m S
d O d d-p? ? T? in y d W
j O _ C L_ c
m L 4 H m p D m P 0 -
d L J o E m d D rn' d « a ? °i
p 0 O D? - c ? O
uo ? c pp1m ? o c'= oac rnN
? < ? d d
c
_? ? N o rn c m_ m n a N j ? w
LL O d d 0' O? p d
' o v c'Ti Emc ?m
v v.? o 0'3 u L i m N a c E E
O A O D n m d p L
O U - N p 4'
L T m a d vi E ; C y u -
p O N ; 0 0 D D C V 0 0? Q D O n
muA `c ?? ?o m? c U°
yc ??- d= n-oo w o 3 0
U Oi L li w - m a y= L y O r
>,d.E a.c rnrn?.Ea EL i o° eu' Z n
-_° „ mo o-u DO n m m L M o D ° rn m Z d E -
owU E °c'JO'"D O,'oc '" ¢ N°? °'ym
c ?= L c ° n o 'y" d L a? ?' F .? N m? E .d m
?=t u m T? Na ?t A qt¢ a T o cp
Ec o >N3o?°1c? doc 3 O-' Z
dds ? ? m ? n L di ; o m m ? ? n,c d
S ?nnc Y1 2 d?m_Z' °m'D? _ = U dn= ? Z..o
d? d V d d
C E y_ f? d O N
QQ? ?o oo?o`?o v-r ;?r o? o oJ°
Nr?oc2 0. _._ Sonm n =° o
c d
E o u
Q E E
4 z
d O C
m U O
d c
L _ c
O < y S
L J D
n
- n
,, a a O1
qp >
rn- ? - i E
; = E p E
. _? y D o m ?_ o
L
C 3
? U o a m
` o c? E 3 m
o "' 4
C a. m o, o 0
J y c n Q y ? Z
? ? ? m rn a EC F
ao
aN
v?
? d
?a
UZ
y G.
E
o c
L -
Z' m
c=
L n
C d
d ?
W n
y C =
E E
o T-
_
Y d °1
Figure 4a
N T (j l
O O
C- 7 C
? S n
CD (D
(
[D 'D D
= LU
Q1 ?
(D _
N 1 O
? rT 3
T
7
n
?`oz
O ?
7 cj'
O n
? 3•
n
iSttrrlood Dr:$
O hod
?`?•,,, mom'
N Z ?D 0
,<0
?' ca wawa hw`I:nH 2
O
r?r• 1
O CD
(D
O
6W
1 C)
co
C?7i W
Z
00
W

eon sD€
pog
m
. ,9
I'-?`h?4 v w s
IM (D ? a

C-
Jd
J
Y?

>• U clot
?0 4 h
l "M V.?rY 1p?
408

?Q ^11u11iuliltll

-' -*-O?d I

t o * i oy Rc ?- ?e 1
1
Mot
-4, Q
P / C
1145 1 ?,` {o C ?SaI"D" 9
• J _?
°
Fdy?'"rtl ! ' u d
?% r IY A I R"y Linker J 3 ??
Id Rd. ?;.., m
y rn
^1100
Rd.
/0w??i.?]-'.',.,?r /tea
o
•n
?.,
V8 ?rn o? ` m 0. pco e?q r0,nbr6 -/
i i kn R, a -
K E.
`? °c ?' i n'pa,v°s + aq9 !u_ h lPd+•,111i? una H 1,i7 JiJ
Rq?
1 1 n g rn
1 F 1
; fl J7 ? 1? -- ? I"' ;
1
i '
1t I
i
? •Sl0?c?0* ?
1 Y1 - 1
1 T _ U ? I
? n 1
1
I I
I I
1
-----------------
Iyp"
°' \p ate` •?A

- ,o-Rd ? \ ra 'may E `?1
c
r'v?? ` Mltl , N w
fr\
nFp C, ? m ? ` .'. r?
a
$n • 1 p
a Q, ?• Bch -n
a
N
V N Cr

f
//

?
r 4. - n 1
?
^ rs-..? \ `? f
l?`''.
i?{
om •1
Y 'y -•M I?
m
?? V.7 r
I
Tom,
?
I ???
\ •w ?j
_
1 _
y
• ;l
_)\ t
'
/. ?.5?-.'t 'c? Z
1
1 ? _I r
F ?
y?/.?}.'
,
T• 1 ? • 1I ?'!+' II` ? :
L ?i?L?.? i ?+?,
'
'r ??...•`?` r h 1 •^kf ?
-?--:
? c?•11•
' '?
•
?
1
?
I ?
(( , ,r
t?,? ?.? 1
i x
,

?, r
?. i
j ti'•f
t?
_
,' `
??', t L
L: 7
I
i"
t ,
. e r. \ t' ? , ?• F ? J ? ?(?( ` •; ?\\??^I` ?F'?+w.+ay •??` ? I ?`l l 'V %??, J , i? . ? ? (Ve' I,1'j I .
e •i,^ " f, ' • - L .\ •\_ ?.• / ?` `r? 1L1? `S s? r _ ` ...,,C- "-`. _ L ?-?\ c'? ` i-l
? y ? r '_ / ? / , •y -fir \ rz, -
r _-n
K.
7
o ?
? i
I ?

2 CL CL
7 7• 7' v?

rh r1• rT rr r•h r--f
T C?'? .p W N -?
I I I I I I
? ? ? Z z z
0
0 Q

r-r• r•r ?} r-- ,--r r-r

.+)
w
V•I (
ry rD

rt

0
2<1
m^
` V
Cn
r-f•

uay?oa1N
6a?`a
? a
. JJ
a G
y f
4
o-
d
f p
TD6
m
, 0 (n ID
??,g?
2 C
o a o= ° rr
zl
o d p a o
$1

? 07
? oa y??17 Z1p \ .
/ d (]
?A • / I
Atop
C
•
?r! ? ? ? ?.d a v- 3

r J p ..c 0

/
ra 0)
° n cn
t mCD

m a
m o

?A 4
? O C o
? 7 C Q

7

r0 a ~
°m'?
.
r
T
lJ "- y
m 0
C
T ]
? r
?I
nA
D?I
U a •
C X X
< _ 0 cQ
rp Ua Orcr
V) CD
O 0
A1
77
alUu?>

f
¦
7
CD
0
O
O
a?
O
J
D
m
C
fD
S
C1
CD
VII
r
_

r) 7,, Q° M
D a'
- ` p
O Q A? Q7 = (D
G
?G
-D
1 ?
J?
'i?
r
?•
CL r? C7

o n r-*
1
4
CL 0
.1
_ `° Z ,0
J
13

O C J
(D C

IPCM

z J

?
m 9 y
a

1 r`sh is
o }
fo Geek
CJ :0 p-
~- r
?'- I
co CD
t
-2? ?
O

0 'S-? CJ'S? CJ
-ri 5 CCD
CD
m
7
} 0 0
A`tor, Rein c"

° v
a"
cr
m
2 w
d N N
n: ca
w Cn
o

a
0
1
I
0
ja •? ??z
®da??
vp
9 e
0
M C
G
CD M
7 b
d 0t

J
0
77
t

9
0
b
i
0-
OC

{ I
1
Q ?
r.
¦

0
0
O
C "ralo Creek
0
' 0D O
cl) ID a/
° 1C
(ID
0
-a
y
err L
rL
Ce 40 ?
0 CD
0
o N'
,f t y? 1
!?mT
?. r 11
.f
1!
rr
f
Coldwa!er Creek
v 0
m

Q ?.. Q ? o x
.. v+
,N 4 • ??? w a Z K ;r,-?"V 0°'a
Sm g 0?p z -z ?o o o m,?
c CD 00 1
ID 0 > > am m fl
a? ?m cm vii w AZ C ` - W CD m ??o y ?c -vm m a m C ?W ?OOO0scn>
L) r a?0 ? ? tz ;a
? G z Z? n ? a. 5;•8
O
A c ao ono aom-o c'D ?-Dy 2 xc'? c'2 jmm
O cn w _a m my m° a .° N '9 O m m m m N' n
?
-0 o
2 ;- x07 0 N m- 0 ??ID x`r ?(n ch
CL rm G)
CA W
cu (D
2-7 a 7 2`??`c? OZ C
0

0 ?
3
?

M •-
T
Q
ca

Oi ?

y?y • ?
G) 0
2-0
/ f
w ' o ?aa?? • oz
Z ' S
cr m 6 ?ti a ?} O O •
G.
0 0 4,
Aftor. Run
o ?- q
c
(o cr
?c O-
c =r ;00 N ' tiO ?' °' -
C/) 0 03 5
?O w 3 6
Ch
aa?7 r Q -moo' ` Q
O
20
0 ` ¢ a
Irish
m O (?, s n B.
.` m Q
tn, C(D3 b 0 o t'
(D cc 114 -
?c m 0 co M CI)
n,,
cg < co c
d . Z
O. _r0 1 ( t a a
0 OD
'im
O s?*??-'CD
cn lye (?
CD M
c 4 4? c 4 a
fD
It cl
Q (D
c ON
- s
• a s
C ` • u
m CL M
v
e o a e f t1 CL7 D
ry p ? d -+ 4
P J Cam?
q b
9 p ? p G
r ? ? b d
m
to
? C•
m n 7? 7C -ten (? = a
Q ?' cX-n' = O fD Q O 1 0 cr
Y' f?D 7U {7Q T d O O cn Q om' O=Q C (DI
n
o o
Q cD m n o ?, ? = o Z O-a
V O fD n N m w a- yI3
?F a ? n Q? n T ,?
CD A Q
/ O O C 1 1
n n o o n G
a
a o cn
. ? b
a
4
0
rs
v '
• s
G
.
• a
_ JI

r
m
i a
O o •
m m
x
. x
r-' Q gyn ".
< ?. z.
ro ? ?
a ?.
oooo?j?

(Q
C
L"
lD
- 3
? v
i
r
?ca
0

O

o

C
iu

"

O
?
D
_
?.

(D

ro

A-
„
T.
ro

n

O
o
<
m

o

D
n
0

a

=

<
?

Ul

O

?

?

C
00

M

°

C

tG
N
i
r ?
v .
N V
^N,
i O W
CL o ,i
w a co
? M
O
V
c
U
C)
CC)
G?
N
c
L
co
W
L
I
O ?
U
11(79{K:./ LcJ«?
+r!„??I r rnlomy, g1V? ,
9
hM? 4
.'oj
\ \ N.
1 ? N Y
ti >
r 3 !v ?; m
cr ?, s ? x v
.c = N y
y a C X
I!?
-
I n
Ju t C
W 1: J .r
Q?
JI U n ,J
Cl Q
or [ 7
v c
N
T_1 C 7 ? ? b
G 3 O ?
d ? 3 ? y j
J w ?2 `
V
Ci C p _ ? CL {V t, ?Yw
H C Qi h „ ? C? 'ir ?,
J ^yi ? : b d G V 4 .,
= C
a + w v Z-5 i
x ? z ? y
O x Q? ? 'p = x 4
cn 3 a) m p rn z,
5
v
c Q
Uw
N
4
O
?a
\ Cc'
t\ r y :sn ?1Vd
04
ao
co e
n
:i\ m
a
a ? + ,e
o O [? ?7 w C -
cr- V CC9 ?4s 3 H
o- p p w n o
C p ~
? O
1 ? O J
= S
U
LL
Concord-Kannapolis Area Transit System
r r ?
rtfl Kannapolis Loop] 1llut-fwmTirardw1
oi. falmon vRyue. hose Alin (ontmwrity. l
?: uet>ar?ll?
Transfer Hub to: Rowan-Cabarrus (ommunity
College, TargeUAfton Ridge, Afton Village YMCA and International Dr
Bus Stop Key:
0 Indicates bus stops along route - color matches route color
• Indicates bus stops that connect with Concord Express
Indicates bus hubs - the main hub is on Davidson Drive in (oncord
O
End TIP
Project 1-3803 B

pOn/a, T
ant Ra
C
Rd
Embassy
Suites
Davidson Hwy
i
F
p1% 'V611%,461
Bakers
?y Crook Perk
0
s!C c
S! A
C
YMCA &
Senior Center •
90
J?
e9a Shad
Elem
-4Jpo
, Or
Q
d
s n (6Q1
o m • •
Bn;vcpY10'
CITY OF
KANNAPOLIS
Rowan-Caberrus
Community
College O
C ?. O o
o' 4 .73 O O
? e
m`
z
? Corporals
Enterprise
on Village
YMCA
nues
0
• ?l1
f
.-.-J l
?
•
Concord Commons
Sh
i
C
t r
e+
opp
ng
en
er qa
Na ?e
?e
Dove
Courthouse L:enter
73
0
Logan dQ
Center ?o
S?
tlLS
(toil
C Coleman Blvd
V
c
i
µ
cam'
c?
z?
CITY OF
CONCORD
Summit Ridge
, Pa

RIDER HOURS:
Monday - Friday
5:30 am - 8:30 pm
[Blue koulF Malts & 5:00 am]
Saturday
8:30 am - 8:30 pm
[81ue koute 161i Ia at 8:00 amf
43
NOT TO SCALE
`Oe0
``J
g0ai
`ar e?
o•
Gr?rr d
s`
m
U
n Davidson Dr
TRANSFER
HUB
O e?
F
Poplar Tent Rd a era
o K-Mart
0 °
$ 29
3 q
o ? oe4
y
AA.
o RO The a
.? --- Village
w
O
Q
a
ve
Source: Adapted from Concord Kannapolis Area Transit Map <HTTP://WWW.CKRIDER.COM>
N•
rIGURL 2 - PAGE I 7
SR1622-TRINITY CHURCH RD 824 SERVICES
136 40
;J2
s: 4 PM- 10
t8 T t1a
196 ° J ( 296

?--?

z
222

4
HWY 73
ss
a
, A 3 H
II
1 1 ss 75?
) to
9
(
) 1
/
f0 2 ? 60
(43) 166
NC HWY 73
854 Hj 114 rv
~o SR1429•INTERNATIONAL DR
60 ?- 13 / `II /
86 (..1) I!
SR1441•GOODMAN RD 10
6 858
aT; o
CJ
h PM ? 55
(' ' 1 118
I'm- 55
10 (1o. A 1
4
1 PM
55
IO
_ 210 216 (
137
PLAR T=NT RD
4„ _
IO PM ;• 55 ?'L SRI394-POPLAR TENT Ri
10 PM1 55 951 16
(10.4) (6.4)
4
3 1$l;
- 8921; 111
SR1439-IVEY CLINE RD S SR1305•PITTS SCHOOL RD
PM
55 1 16
(2.1;
0N'CZ;?D N11LLS
55 0 13
( 3. 1
PM
55 (0 16
55 ?- PM 13
(s.1) 97
541 541

148 at n -107
30 137 137
-100 111
NC HWY 11 f-
-.?
148 11t -? NC HWY 73
122 122 at
37 30 111
37 81
601 601
?n
G H
221 = 221

43
?

52
41
It
5
2 20

59
?--
0 .
-
sRa3o
- 4 39
F
-?
43 30
13 SM430 _.i _0 ? f
50 50 -J ?.
13 tt 59
48 -?
241 241
E F
441 441

105
23 21 '*-- A2
33
115
1
15 21
108
4
` 3Pi Saa -87
4-

105 77

-? SRI349

98

98

23

22 33 108
28 75 -?
611 61
C D
1 65 1B
OFFRAMP 1.65 SB
- ONRAMP
77, 49 77t

212 (
212
212 28
156
!?
! • 163 f- ? SR2694 .-128
F
12 128
as zRZ694 156 156 49
107 -? 84 49 156

841 1331
A B
20 06 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC
WITH TRUCK, DHV AND DIRECTIONAL FACTORS
SCENARIO I
DIVISION: 10 TIP: 1-3803B WBS: 34187.1.1
DATE: March 2006 COUNTY: Mecklenburg & Cabarrus
LOCATION: 1.85 from 1.485 in Mecklenburg County to NC73
in Cabarrus County
PROJECT: Reconstruct 1-85 with additional travel lanes
PREPARED BY: R. Tanner -- rtannerj1dot.state.nc.us
V
CD
V
IN
r$
1004 al3
..o

S;?.ec
L E G E N D
DHV :dM D
ttrstt No. of Vehicles Per DHV Design Hourly Volume K3o
Day (VPD) in loos PM PM Peak Period
trrn- Much less than D Peak Hour Directional Split (;.,)
##.I VPD -? Indicates Direction of D
r. r. Turninq volume (VPD) ( d. t ) Duals. TT-STs
Gina irn 7-2
_1_. - -,
N -
FIGURE 4 - PAGE I
SR1622-TRINITY CHURCH RD 1738 _ SERVICES 118 oil 118
1
162 N =1 40 !5
tit
I a Nj?
I
;' 211 4 115
96 22 48
163
163 22
X120
142
,
N i 4- ?- 4- NE HWY 13 4-

211 N: HWY 7]
168-i _i
190 -?
190
96 43 48 ??
142
43 94 -

;, ss ~ n 30 132
422 20 10 II -0 60
284 c4M) 218
911
911
NC HWY 73 -H
' NC HWY 73
6?
55 (411 , D
11 (4.3 . 55 9
U 721 a 721
S T -

1684

V v
?
146

231 f- 205
26 46
23

228

228 46

157

203
- SR1429-INTERNATIONAL DR 4- 4- v wso 4
1 -?
231 SRIA JO
160-?
206
02 6
26
02 3
71 71 23
180-1.
94i

og
94 ?a
4?
PM
462 nn 'r 1) 13 PM
55 ) II 406
E
F
SR1430-KANNAPOLIS PKWY T I SR1430-GEORGE LILES PKWY
871 871 mo

SR1441-GO
ODMAN RD
9
207 4 156
51 36 61
~J
217
217 36
-152
188
4- 4 4"" SRI J49
9 r
±I; 1728
-ai
02 7 SM344
142 -----1-

178

178

51 651 61

188
65 127 --
-~o

1261 w?
1261 0
C D
10 -P ? 55
409 (10.4' T 5
y 414 10 P0 55
376 16' 4 ) 276
R1394-POPLAR TENT RD
Q
10 PM 55
10 PM 55 1330 SR1394-POPLAR TENT RD
O
OF:R
.d
AMP
(10.4) 16,4) ONRA
_ MP
1321 78 1321 m

U
_
254
73 59
78
259
259 59
236

J F 181 4- 4- SR2A9A -1 -177 f-
W
?
254
172--0 SR2"9

231

231

73

82 78

23(.
12 1806 aj
_ 160 82 .
158
SRI439 IVE Y CLINE RD a SR1305-PITTS SCHOOL RD
821
eR?
1601

A B
+-PM
55 'd
)
l2.1
186,200 vpC • 1862 Ali
_a
PM
55 *7
255 1) 11
SR2467-MALLARD CREEK RD
PM
1242 I0 ('- ) ? 55
CHARLOTTE OUTER LOOP
CD
a,
PM
55 16
472
ss ?'"- 13
(5.1) 255
SR2467-MALLARD CREEK RD
PM
55 H- f0
15'7) 1304
CHARLOTTE OUTER LOOP
1
1-85/1-485
Interchange Inset
See Figure 7cj=
1512 a
6-+-A
AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC I
'jo
WITH TRUCK. DHV AND DIRECTIONAL FACTORS
20
SCENARIO 3
DIVISION: 10 TIP: 1-38038 WBS: 34187.1.1
DATE: March 2006 COUNTY: Mecklenburg & Cabarrus
LOCATION: 1-85 from 1-485 in Mecklenburg County to NC73
in Cabarrus County
PROJECT: Reconstruct 1-85 with additional travel lanes
PREPARED BY: R. Tanner -- rtannerNdot.state.nc.us
B°aa H
L E G E N D
DHV
M?D
I
##V No. of Vehicles Per DHV Desiqn Hourly Volume (%) - K30
Day (VPD) In IOOs PM PM Peak Period
#44- Much less than D Peak Hour Directional Split (% )
### VPD -? Indicates Direction of D
### Turninq volume (VPD) ( d. t ) Duals. TT-STs (%)
Figure 7b
V
L
OL ainfii.1
ii
(%) s1S-11 'slen0 ( I -p) (ddA) awnloA buluml ###
a ?o uolpaala sale)lpul 44 adA ###
('I) IIdS leuoll:)ajla jnoH dead (3 uegl ssal gDnW -###t
polJad dead Wd Wd x001 ul (adA) Aea
oc)q = (°;) awnloA AlmoH ublsa(3 AK gad sal:)!gaA bo 'ON ###
° d^H° a N303 l
sn'ou'ajejs'jop? jauuejj -- aauuel '8 :A8 a38Vd3dd7
sauel laneal leuolIlppe qj!m Sg-1 1:)njlsuo:)ad :1J3rO8d
Ajuno0 snjjege:) u1
UA of Aluno0 bjnqualN:)aW ui Sgti-l woi? 5g-1 :N011vool
snjjege0 '3 binqualpaW :A1Nn0:) 9002 PIPW :31bd
Vilg1b£ :SBM E£08£-I :dll OI :NOISIAIG I
S80i:)VA IVN0110321I4 aNV AHO ')IJndl HilM O E 0 Z
D133t1a1 AIIb'4 ivnNNV 30V83AV
JSNI 30-NVI•iM3.LM S917°-S9.1
2
584

SSZ
lf6 + +116
2991
I,a
584
2 39Vd - b 3dl15!,
Z
O
O
7o I
O
C
l 1
L ? A
W
0 m rn
rn
Ib
v+ D
Or p
m? O
m ' Hce_ro«r
C ro.Au
N
Iw O b b A
-?; b p f c o b
S ? .
A) _ -- N
cD
W -•
O :3 CD
0 0 _.
< o b I, -
O }IO I°
?i0 ? ° OiN ? • i? o •?
O'
i O N
N
C I ?N b I ?- _
b N
CD I? ?C O o;? b
- r p zm
r-._
-• ??? N O p- N O C
_• p v b
a ?- O O is b
30- 30-
CA -0 CD
5 m
CDC - I _ b
00 CL '
? -? CD y 00
Q C I! a?? CD t o?? O Ln
-?- o c b
CL CD c
I v, 00
-•nC n?
? p fo ?b
Op !! ?_-? I O N
i N (D C
O
O Z O N
Q.. y m b
(D to ^-+ N N
CD -++ b p (A) a
? b a -Z
r'L C) 16
- • ?, pL. CD O
? -?, n Q b
ti ?
0< N o -
C N
P ? ' 1 A
` I I m b
/ ? YA
b
CD ,p b (A • (. CD
CD N
?> a G) 0
r
m O
! a m
r - Q
O m r)
N
O O Z
b
-DDn.
to p O
_ o
?J?7C D,
z0
O?m? rnOrr??D < b
C- C Z CO i -< Z m 0 J OF t
f?1 N co 00 ? D r ? r
nnC LnC7 r O Z Z f
IOC?O D aZ m \ y
wZDZ N ?? p
OD1 Zf? frl cN-nD
Z
C7 0o N o w v Z y
LAJ C ?Z n p o
m c/1 2 r z
v
l.0

801 I
ISO
115
29
1

0
;a ?3 I
f

al ,

52
m ?
.
I
'
2
1 r
15
? ?153 ?

r
I r

I 29
I
\
I
dell Coun
- R
wan
eWen
_ - i-- --
Cou - -- --- -- o
- °Cntk
-- '
kfenbu
I _
1

,
i ,3

d

N
G

G7
73
,
\ ?

l
? 3
1 r
29

l - ! 73
LEGEND
rrr
c TIP Project No.
r ?? egimidl _
-- 1-38038

1 ® 1-3802
t i R-2248E

U-3415

? U-4910

l
° 9

B-4449
?
2
4 \
,
29 R-2123CE

N
1-38036 W I E
1-85 from 1-485 (Charlotte Outer Loop)
Area TIP Projects Figure
to NC 73 (Davidson Highway) S
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties Not to Scale $
TIP Project I-3803 B
Historic Property Photos
Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church
National Register-Listed
Blake House
National Register-Eligible
Figure 10
y
S
O
/sa r?
a
\ (o~ rr
,:. O O
/ a
rot,
CL
a cz
? h
v 14
i
D /
g?

;Q \

-o
vs
9 'wcp 1.
m",I
moo'

3 O
d
n 0 N ?
C. N
CLa
t/? Z tD `,
oa r' 0 tr
N ?' <O fD O Q
C trJ
000 N ", a co
O 3 N N? W
W C.
O ? CI
.r t! ?
s
: 235

ca
lD
..a
O
moy
V
O
S

\ ?? C

ra I I -

D C-n ?(v
BST PA
7° c„
q ?
ti
ff

1 a
r) ell
I ^

E
?t
® q?
ti t
r?
? N
ROWAN TECHNICAL COLLEGE
? n
xi / z a 7? s
\s / ?? I CCggG o
??
r
9
Q1. D ?OO1i?? ?OMM18K
Y
?. \ I W ?I c? ?y?s? cr,,4nrrT
z "' a
v N °1 \ ti I ®1? ???
o ?p
?V., ^ 4 ?? '`, • ti aC?
0
\ as "? 00
c- (SR 1622)
!
SF \ ?;< \ 9 O
i
4 / ?.3 Z\ 1 o C? N
Sr ? ;i ''? ?\\ `L o
Ej ?K D ??Av \ ?? \ G
2-1
CL 0
T 17
?D p 3 M 11
f0 O \ \ \\
H H C n %..
to ? c C W
O
co N -• N = co
O
71
-9
m
O'
Appendix B
Scientific Nomenclature for
Biotic Resources
and
Section 7 Correspondence
SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF SPECIES IDENTIFIED IN REPORT
Plants
American beech Fagus grandifolia
American elm Ulmus americana
aster Aster spp.
beadgrass Paspalum spp.
blackberry Rubus argutus
bluestem Andropogon spp.
box elder Acer negundo
bushclover Lespedeza spp.
butterweed Erigeron canadensis
chickasaw plum Prunus angustifolia
daisy fleabane Erigeron annuus
evening primrose Oenothera biennis
false nettle Boehmeria cylindrica
fescue Festuca spp.
flowering dogwood Cornus Florida
foxtail grass Setaria spp.
goldenrod Solidago spp.
green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica
greenbrier Smilax rotundifolia
hackberry Celtis occidentalis
hickory Carya spp.
honey locust Gleditisia triacanthos
Japanese grass Microstegium vimineum
Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica
joe-pye weed Eupatoriadelphus spp.
lizard's tail Saururus cernuus
marsh seedbox Ludwigia palustris
multiflora rose Rosa multifora
muscadine grape Vitis rotundifolia
orchard grass Dactylis glomerata
passion flower Passii fora edulis
paw paw Asimina triloba
poison ivy Toxicodendron radicans
pokeweed Phytolacca americana
Queen Anne's lace Daucus carota

? <-;
3-1

red bud Cercis canadensis
red maple . Acer rubrum
river birch Betula nigra
smartweed Polygonum hydropiper
smooth sumac Rhus glabra
Southern red oak Quercus falcata
stinging nettle Uritica dioica
sweetgum Liquidambar styraciflua
tearthumb Polygonum sagittatum
threeawn Aristida spp.
tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima
trifoliate orange Poncirus trifoliata
trumpet creeper Campsis radicans
tulip poplar Liriodendron tulipifera
white oak. Quercus alba
willow oak Quercus phellos
winged elm Ulmus alata
wingstem Actinomeris alternifolia
wood sorel Oxalis spp.
Animals
American crow Corvis ossifragus
bald eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
barred owl Strix varia
black rat snake Elaphe obsoleta
bluebird Sialia sialis
bluegill Lepomis macrochirusi
blue jay Cyanocitta cristata
brown thrasher Toxostoma fufum
Carolina chickadee Parus carolinensis
Carolina wren Thryothorus ludovicianus
copperhead Agkistrodon contortrix
crayfish Cambaridae spp.
creek chub Semotilus atromaculatus
Eastern box turtle Terrapene carolina
Eastern cottontail Syvilagus floridanus
Eastern king snake Lampropeltis getula
Eastern mole Scalopus aquaticus
European starling Sturnus vulgaris
B-2
five-lined skink Eumeces fasciatus
golden shiner Notemigonus crysolencas
gray fox Urocyon cinereoargenteus
gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis
green frog Rana clamitans
indigo bunting Passerina cyanea
least shrew- Crypototis pm-va
mourning dove Zenaida macroura
Northern cardinal Thryothorus ludovicianus
Northern dusky salamander Desmognathus fuscus
Northern mockingbird Mimus polyglottos
Northern watersnake Nerodia sipedon
opossum Didephis virginiana
raccoon Procyon lotor
red bellied woodpecker Melanerpes erythrocephalus
redbreast sunfish Lepomis auritus
red eyed vireo Vireo olivaceus
rufous sided towhee Pipilo erythrophthalmus
slimy salamander Plethodon glutinosus
Southeastern shrew Sorex longirostris
Southern short-tailed shrew Blarina carolinensis
spring peeper Pseudacris crucifer
sunfish Lepomis spp.
tufted titmouse Parus bicolor
turkey vulture Cathartes aura
white-footed mouse Peromyscus lencopus
white-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus
wild turkey Meleagris gallopavo
woodland vole Microtus pinetorum
wood thrush Hylocichla mustelina
B-3

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
MEMORANDUM TO: Wilson Stroud, Project Development Engineer
FROM: Jason Dilday, Environmental Specialist
SUBJECT: I-3803B Protected Species Update
This memo serves to update the status of the federally protected species Schweinitz's sunflower
(Helianthus schweinitzii) for project I-3803B, the widening of I-85 from 1-485 to Irish Buffalo
Creek.
A reference population of Schweinitz's sunflower was.reviewed prior to the survey to confirm
the flowering/ vegetative status of this species as it relates to local conditions. The reference
population was in flower.
On October 18, 24 and 25, 2006, NCDOT biologists surveyed potential habitat within the project
area. This habitat consisted of clearings and the edges of open stands of upland woods. A
walking visual search for the species was conducted to ensure no individuals existed either
within or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed road widening. During the survey, no species
of Schweinitz's sunflower were observed. A search of the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program files indicates two occurrences of this species within one mile of the project study area.
A total of 40 man-hours were spent conducting the surveys. As habitat exists and known
populations occur within close proximity to the project study area , the biological conclusion is
May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect.
Qualifications of principal investigators.
September 21, 2007
LYNDO TIPPETT
SECRETARY
Investigator: Jason Dilday
Education: B.S. Marine Biology, UNC - Wilmington, 1993
Experience: Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, July 2006 - Present
Fisheries Technician, NCWRC, July 2005 - June 2006
Fisheries Biologist, NCDMF, January 1999 - April 2005
Fisheries Technician, NCDMF, December 1994 - December 1998
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
B-4
TELEPHONE [phone] or
919-715-1335
FAX: [phone]
WESSITE: WWWNCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING
2728 CAPITAL BLVD. SUITE 240
RALEIGH NC 27604
Investigator: Kristoffer J. G. Dramby, PWS, CE
Education: Graduate Certificate, Natural Resource Management, Virginia Tech, 2005
B.S. Biology (Concentration in Wildlife Ecology), Towson University, 2000
Certification: Professional Wetland Scientist (Society of Wetland Scientists)
Certified Ecologist (Ecological Society of America)
Experience: Environmental Biologist, NCDOT, April 2006-Present
Ecologist, Williamsburg Environmental Group, March 2001-March 2006
Wildland Firefighter, USFS, Salmon-Challis National Forest, Salmon,
Idaho, September 2000
Wildlife Technician, USFS, Allegheny National Forest, April 2000-
September 2000
Wildlife Technician, Howard County Parks & Recreation, April 1999-
August 1999
Investigator: Erin K. Schubert
Education: B.S. Biology, Winthrop University, 2002
Experience: Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, June 2006 - Present
Research Technician, NC State University, March 2004 - May 2006
Environmental Specialist, FL Department of Environmental Protection, July
2002 - July 2003
Investigator: Michael Turchy
Education: BA Geology, Western Carolina University, 2001.
Experience: Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, May 2002-Present
Investigator: Michael Sanderson
Education: B.S. Fisheries and Wildlife Science, North Carolina State University
Experience: Environmental Specialist, NCDOT April 2004- present
Wildlife Research Biologist, Down to Earth Environmental, February - June,
2003
Wildlife Research Technician, NC Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research unit,
1991-1999
Biological Science Technician (Wildlife), US Fish and Wildlife Service, 1995-
1997
If you have any questions, please contact Jason Dilday at ildilday dot.state.nc.us
or 919 715 5535.
B-5

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
January 30, 2008
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe, Manager
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Dear Dr. Thorpe:
RECEIVED
:division of Highways
FEB 0 s ?m
Preconst,:c[ian
Project Development and
cmdronmental Analysis Branch
Subject: Endangered Species Concurrence for TIP Project No. 1-380313, Proposed Widening of
I-85 from 1-485 to NC 73, Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties, North Carolina
As requested by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), we have reviewed
the natural resources infonmation and biological conclusions for federally protected species for
the subject project. The following comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act). .
The NCDOT proposes to widen I-85 from I-485 (Charlotte Outer Loop) in Mecklenburg County
to NC 73 in Cabarrus County. Currently, I-85 varies from four to eight lanes along the project
length; the proposal is to wid6n it to eight to ten lanes. Lanes will be added primarily within the
existing maintained right-of-way of the current facility.
According to the information provided, the entire project length was surveyed for the federally
endangered Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). Although there are occurrences of
the Schweinitz's sunflower within a mile of the project area on Mallard Creek Road, no
individuals were located along the project length. Given the negative survey information, we
agree that there will be no impact to listed species from implementation of this project.
Therefore, we believe the requirements under section 7(c) of the Act are fulfilled for this species.
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.
B-6
If you have questions about these comments please contact Ms. Marella Buncick of our staff at
828/258-3939, Ext. 237. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please reference
our Log Number 4-2-08-092.
Sincere "
J- 4
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
cc:
Ms. Marla J. Chambers, Western NCDOT Permit Coordinator, North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, 12275 Swift Road, Oakboro, NC 28129
Mr. Steve Lund, Asheville Regulatory Field Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 151 Patton
Avenue, Room 208, Asheville, NC 28801-5006
Ms. Polly Lespinasse, Mooresville Regional Office, North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301, Mooresville, NC 28115

B-7
0
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY
GOVERNOR
MEMORANDUM TO
FROM:
SUBJECT:
October 6, 2008
Wilson Stroud, Project Development Engineer
Jason Dilday, Environmental Specialist
I-3803B Protected Species Update
I
II II
I
II
I 1 '
I
I
I
LYNDo TIPPETT
SECRETARY I'
This memo serves to update the status of the federally protected species Schweinitz's
sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii), smooth coneflower (Echinacea laevigata), and
Michaux's sumac (Rhus michauxii) for project I-3803B, the widening of I-85 from I-485
to Irish Buffalo Creek.
A reference population of Schweinitz's sunflower was reviewed prior to the survey to
confirm the flowering/ vegetative status of this species as it relates to.local conditions.
The reference population was in flower.
On August 28 and September 17, 2008, NCDOT biologists surveyed potential habitat
within the expanded project area. This habitat consisted of clearings and _the edges of
open stands of upland woods. A walking visual search for the species was conducted to
ensure no individuals existed either within or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed
road widening. During the survey, no species of Schweinitz's sunflower, smooth
coneflower or Michaux's sumac were obseived. A search of the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program files indicates two occurrences Schweinitz's sunflower within one mile
of the project study area. A total of 5 man-hours were spent conducting the surveys. As
habitat exists and known populations occur within close proximity to the project study
area, the biological conclusion for Schweinitz's sunflower is May Affect, Not Likely to
Adversely Affect. The biological conclusion for smooth coneflower and Michaux's
sumac is No Effect.
MAILING ADDRESS:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598
B-8
TELEPHONE: [phone] Or
919-715-1335
FAX: [phone]
V?ESSITE: WVVW.NCDOT.ORG
LOCATION:
PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING
2728 CAPITAL BLVD. SUITE 240
RALEIGH NC 27604
Qualifications of principal investigators
Investigator: Jason Dilday
Education: B.S. Marine Biology, UNC - Wilmington, 1993
Experience: Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, July 2006 - Present
Fisheries Technician, NCWRC, July 2005 - June 2006
Fisheries Biologist, NCDMF, January 1999 - April 2005
Fisheries Technician, NCDMF, December 1994 - December 1998
Investigator: Kristoffer J. G. Dramby, PWS, CE
Education: Graduate Certificate, Natural Resource Management, Virginia Tech, 2005
B.S. Biology (Concentration in Wildlife Ecology), Towson University,
2000
Certification: Professional Wetland Scientist (Society of Wetland Scientists)
Certified Ecologist (Ecological Society of America)
Experience: Environmental Biologist, NCDOT, April 2006-Present
Ecologist, Williamsburg Environmental Group, March 2001-March 2006
Wildland Firefighter, USFS, Salmon-Challis National Forest, Salmon,
Idaho, September 2000
Wildlife Technician, USFS, Allegheny National Forest, April 2000-
September 2000
Wildlife Technician, Howard County Parks & Recreation, April 1999-
August 1999
Investigator: William A.Barrett
Education: B.S. Marine Science, University of South Carolina
Experience: Environmental Supervisor, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC, 1105 - present.
Environmental Specialist, NCDOT, Raleigh, NC, 11/04 - 12/05.
Environmental Specialist, Florida Department of Environmental
Protection, West Palm Beach, FL 10/97 - 11/04.
Environmental Scientist, GLE Associates, Inc., Tampa, FL 1/93 - 3/97.
Environmental Scientist, EnviroAssessments, Inc., Tampa, FL 8/91 - 1/93.
Environmental Technician, Pace Laboratories, Inc, Tampa, FL 3/90 - 8/91.
If you have any questions, please contact Jason Dilday at ildildavPdot.gov or
919-715-5535.
B-9
?SINio I I
'ass I 1 I
I
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MICHAEL F. EASLEY LYNDO TIPPETT
GOVERNOR SECRETARY
October 27. 2008
Memorandum To: Wilson Stroud, Project Development Engineer, In-House Group
Jason Dilday, Western Environmental Specialist, Natural Environment
Project Management Group
From: Jared Gray, Environmental Program Consultant
Natural Environment Biological Surveys Group
Subject: Protected species survey report for the Carolina heelsplitter (Lasmigona
decorata) for the proposed widening of I-85 from I-485 in Mecklenburg
County to NC 73 in Cabarrus County; Mecklenburg and Cabarrus
Counties: Federal Aid Project No. NHIMF-85-2 (51) 29; WBS Element
34187.1.1; TIP Project No. I-3803B.
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to widen I-85 from I-485 in
Mecklenburg County to NC 73 in Cabarrus County; TIP (I-3808B). There are 5 major streams
impacted by the proposed widening project and they are: Stony Creek, Rocky River, Coddle
Creek, Afton Run and Irish Buffalo Creek that will be discussed in this report. There also 32
tributaries crossed by the project: Rocky River with 11, Afton run with 8, Irish Buffalo 6, Stony
Creek with 5 and Coddle Creek with 2. The tributaries were generally too small to provide
Carolina Heelsplitter habitat, so we have concentrated on their receiving streams, which are the
five major streams listed above. All of the streams crossed by the I-3803B project are in the
Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basin. A map of the project site is attached.
Background
The Carolina heelsplitter was historically known from several locations within the
Catawba and Pee Dee River systems in North Carolina and the Pee Dee and Savannah River
systems, and possibly the Saluda River system, in South Carolina. In North Carolina, the species
is now known only from a handful of streams in the Rocky and Catawba River systems.
The species exists in very low abundances, usually within 6 feet of shorelines,
throughout its known range. The general habitat requirements for the Carolina heelsplitter are
shaded areas in large rivers to small streams, often burrowed into clay banks between the root
B-10
MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: [phone] or LOCATION:
NC DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 919-715-1335 PARKER LINCOLN BUILDING
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 2728 CAPITAL BLVD. SUITE 240
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UNIT FAX [phone] RALEIGH NC 27604
1598 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1598 WEBSITE: WWWNCOOT.ORG
systems of trees, or in runs along steep banks with moderate current. The more recent
habitat where the Carolina heelsplitter has been found is in sections of streams containing
bedrock with perpendicular crevices filled with sand and gravel, and with wide riparian buffers.
Prior to conducting in-stream surveys, reviews of the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program (NHP) database were conducted (August 7, 2007 and April 2, 2008) to determine if
there were any records of rare mussels within the proposed project study area or receiving
waters. These reviews indicated that there are no known occurrences of the federally
protected Carolina Heelsplitter within the project area or in the unnamed tributaries to
Stony Creek, Rocky River, Coddle Creek, Afton Run or Irish Buffalo Creek. The closest
population is in Goose Creek in Union County which is over 37 miles away from this
project.
303 and Impaired Waters
The section of Stony Creek up and downstream from the project site appears on DWQ's
2008 Draft Impaired Waters List as impaired for aquatic life due to impaired ecological/biological
integrity (benthos) and with the reason being biological criteria exceeded. Rocky River is
impaired for aquatic life up and downstream of the project due to turbidity. Rocky River also has
a tributary, Clarke Creek, which comes in 1.5 miles upstream of the project is impaired for aquatic
life due to ecological biological integrity (fish community) and reason biological criteria
exceeded. Coddle Creek is impaired for aquatic life up and downstream of the project due to
turbidity. hish Buffalo Creek is impaired for aquatic life due to impaired ecological/biological
integrity (benthos) and reason biological criteria exceeded (NCDWQ, 2008a).
NPDES Dischargers
Stony Creek is a tributary to Mallard Creek. Mallard Creek WWTP holds NPDES Permit
# NC 0030210 to discharge treated wastewater into Mallard Creek. Rocky River has three minor
dischargers, one upstream of the project (Poplar Trails Subdivision NPDES Permit # NC
0061786) and two downstream (Carolina Village Mobile Home Park NPDES Permit #NC
0063762 and Silver Maple Mobile Estates NPDES Permit # NC 0047091). Coddle Creek has a
minor discharger upstream of the project which is Coddle Creek WTP NPDES Perm t # NC
0083119. Kannapolis WTP holds a minor discharge permit NPDES Permit # NC 0006220 to
discharge conditioned water into Irish Buffalo Creek (NCDWQ, 2008b). Chemicals in the
discharge from these facilities are likely to create an inhospitable environment for freshwater
mussels.
Survevs and Habitat Assessment Results
NCDOT staff members Neil Medlin (Permit No. NC-2008-ES-30), Jared Gray, Anne
Burroughs, Chris Manley, Karen Lynch and Jason Mays did surveys on August 9 and December
12, 2007, April 9, July 29 and October 6, 2008 in Stony Creek, Rocky River, Coddle Creek Afton
Run and Irish Buffalo Creek by wading using batiscopes from approximately 400 meters
downstream to 100 meters upstream of the project crossing. No freshwater mussels were found in
Rocky River, Coddle Creek, Irish Buffalo Creek and Ashton Run during the surveys. The initial
survey in Stony Creek NCDOT found 56 Carolina Creekshell (Villosa vaughpniana). An
additional downstream survey was conducted by NCDOT, once NCDOT found out that Catena
Group had also previously surveyed the same stretch along I-85.
B-11
Within in the project area, Stony Creek is roughly five meters wide, and had some
undercutting and erosion of the banks. The stream banks were one and half meters high. On the
day of the site visit, the overall water depth was very shallow; with 98% of the stream reach less
than 2 feet in depth. The creek contained runs and riffles with normal substrate compactness.
The substrate above and below the bridge was generally dominated by bedrock, with some sand,
cobble, boulders, and a considerable amount of gravel. The riparian buffer width is generally
wide, with surrounding land use of natural woodland. Stony Creek was surveyed by NCDOT on
July 29 and October 6, 2008. Stony Creek was also surveyed by the Catena Group for the R-
2123C project on June 5, 2008. The June 5 survey by Catena and the July 29 survey by NCDOT
were 100 meters upstream of 85 and 400 meters downstream of I-85. The October 6 survey was a
downstream stretch between 1-485 and US 29. The results of those surveys are in the following
table.
Agency Date Mussels Found Man-Hours CPUE
NCDOT Jul 29, 2008 56 live & 9 shells 7.0 8.0
Catena Group June 5, 2008 44 live 5.17 8.51
NCDOT October 6, 2008 3 live & 4 shells 4.0 0.75
Within in the project area, Rocky River is roughly eight meters wide, and the banks of
the stream were unstable. The stream banks were two to three meters high. On the day of the site
visit, the overall water depth was shallow; with 90% of the stream reach less than 2 feet in depth.
The creek contained runs and pool areas with normal/unconsolidated substrate compactness. The
substrate above and below the crossing was generally dominated by sand, with silt, gravel, trace
amounts of cobble, and a considerable amount of clay. The riparian buffer width is generally
wide, with surrounding land use of natural woodland, urban and road. No mussels were
observed in 2.5 man-hours of survey time during the site visit on August 9, 2007.
Within in the project area, Coddle Creek is roughly five meters wide, and had some
undercutting and erosion of the banks. The stream banks were three meters high. On the day of
the site visit, the overall water depth was shallow; with 90% of the stream reach less than 2 feet
in depth. The creek contained slack water along with runs, riffles and pool areas with normal
substrate compactness. The substrate above and below the crossing was generally dominated by
sand, with gravel, pebble and trace amounts of cobble. The riparian buffer width is generally
narrow, with surrounding land use of rural and road. No mussels were observed in 1.5 man-
hours of survey time during the site visit on August 9, 2007.
Within in the project area, Afton Run is roughly two meters wide, and the banks of the
stream were unstable. The stream banks were two and half meters high. On the day of the site
visit, the overall water depth was shallow; with 90% of the stream reach less than 2 feet in depth.
The creek contained runs and pool areas with normal substrate compactness. The substrate
above and below the crossing was generally dominated by sand, with silt, clay, trace amounts of
cobble and a considerable amount of gravel. The riparian buffer width is generally narrow, with
surrounding land use of rural and road. Afton Creek is deeply incised throughout the survey .
reach and parallels I-85. No mussels were observed in 0.5 man-hours of survey time during
the site visit on August 9, 2007.
Within in the project area, hish Buffalo is roughly ten meters wide, and the banks of the
stream were unstable. The stream banks were three to four meters high. On the day of the site
visit, the overall water depth was shallow; with 100% of the stream reach less than 2 feet in
depth. The creek contained runs and pool areas with normal substrate compactness. The
B-12
substrate above and below the crossing was generally dominated by sand, with gravel,
clay, trace amounts of cobble and a considerable amount of silt. The riparian buffer width is
generally narrow, with surrounding land use of urban and road. Irish Buffalo Creek is deeply
incised and channelized throughout the survey reach. No mussels were observed in 2.25 man-
hours of survey time during the site visit on December 12, 2007.
Carolina Heelsplitter
As a result of these surveys and habitat assessments, as well as the review of GIS and
NHP data, it appears that the Carolina Heelsplitter does not exist in the project vicinity of Rocky
River, Coddle Creek, and hish Buffalo and their tributaries and the preferred habitat for the
Carolina heelsplitter does not occur at the survey sites. Rocky River, Coddle Creek, and Irish
Buffalo are all 303 D streams and have NPDES dischargers on them that are likely to create
inhospitable conditions for the Carolina Heelsplitter. Afton Run would also be affected by this
because it is a tributary to Coddle Creek. Furthermore, these streams and their tributaries are
over 37 miles upstream from the nearest population of Carolina Heelsplitter in Goose Creek.
Therefore, the Biological Conclusion for Carolina Heelsplitter within 1-3803B Section is "No
Effect" for all streams where no mussels were located. Since a population of the Carolina
Creekshell is present along with habitat for Carolina Heelsplitter in Stony Creek, the Biological
Conclusion for the Carolina Heelsplitter in Stony Creek is "May Affect-Not Likely to
Adversely Affect."
References
NatureServe. 2007. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web
application]. Version 6.2. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia.
http://www.natureserve.orglexplorer. (Accessed 02/14/08)
NCDWQ. 2008a. North Carolina Division of Water Quality Assessment and Impaired waters 303
(d) list draft report. http://h2o.enr.state.ne.us/tmdUdocuments/B.Draft2008303dLig2ff
(Accessed 06/09/08).
NCDWQ. 2008b North Carolina Division of Water Quality Basinwide Planning Program:
Yadkin-Pee Dee River Basinwide Water Quality Plan. NPDES Dischargers & Individual
Stormwater Permits. July 2008.
http•//h2o enr state nc usibasinwide/Neuse/2008/documents/Permits YAD.pdf
NC Natural Heritage Program. 2008. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database
(Accessed 04/21/2008). Raleigh, N.C.
[NCWRC] North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. North Carolina Mussel
Atlas: http'//www.ncwildlife.org/pgO7 WildlifeSpeciesCon/pg7blal.htm. (Accessed
02/14/08)
[USFWS] United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Carolina heelsplitter in North
Carolina. http://www.fws.gov/nc-es/mussel/carolheel.html. (Accessed 02/14/08)
File: I-3803B
B-13
N MM
ils!
NOR
S
3
SCR ?? ? ?
S Y+?
c ??s ??!<--?? 1K! t( ? rte[ r I?r??V V'.
A y y
B-14
rage t or t
From: Dilday, Jason L
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 2:50 PM
To: Stroud, Wilson
Subject: FW: TIP 1-3803B
Wilson,
This is the response Marella had to the updated mussel survey for 1-3803B. This makes the Biological Conclusion a
"No Effect" for Carolina heelsplitter. Let me know if you have any questions.
Jason
Jason Dilday
Environmental Specialist
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Natural Environment Unit
(W) 919-431-6693
(F)919-431-2002
[e-mail]
www.ncdot.org/
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 2:44 PM
To: Dilday, Jason L
Subject: TIP I-38038
Jason,
I have reviewed the file for 1-3803B, the widening of 1-85 from 1-485 to NC 73 in Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties,
including our concurrence letter from January of 2008. In your concurrence request you determined there would be
no effect to federally listed species for Mecklenburg and Cabarrus counties with the exception of Schweinitz's
sunflower and we concurred with your "not likely to adversely affect" determination for that species.
An additional survey for Carolina heelsplitter in October, 2008, found no native freshwater mussels in streams
affected by the project. These findings supported previous surveys that also found no native freshwater mussels.
Based on the updated survey data, the conclusions in our January 30, 2008 letter remain the same.
If you have further questions please call or e-mail.
Marella
marella buncick
USFWS
160 Zillicoa St.
Asheville, NC 28801
828-258-3939 ext 237
People don't resist change, they resist being changed.
Email correspondence to and from this sender is subject to the N.C. Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
B-15
file://S:\PDEA\Folder with Project names\JBridges_Projects\STROUD\I-3803 B, Cabarrus-... 5/8/2009
RECEIVE[
Division of Highways

' AUG 2 4 7001
t Qom. preconstluclion
p*-d De d and
Environmental Ana" Branch
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sendbeck. Admhdsentor
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
August 20, 2007
MEMORANDUM
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
TO: Gregory Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: Peter Sandbeck 1' 6k flay
SUBJECT: Determination of Eligibility Evaluation Letter, Widen I-85 From I-485 to NC 73, I-3803B,
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties, ER 05-2124
Thank you for your letter of August 2, 2007, concerning the above project.
We have reviewed your findings and request further information.
Please attach to the Determination of Eligibility Evaluation Letter the survey map with the properties keyed to
the map. The map should delineate the Area of Potential Effects. In addition, we request a historic district
evaluation statement.
We look forward to receiving our information request so that we may continue our review.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 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,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763 ext. 246. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
cc: Courtney Foley
Mary Pope Furr
Wilson Stroud
C-1
Location Mailing Address ,'a. Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount Street, Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4677 [phone]/733-8653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount Strecq Raleigh NC 4617 Mvl Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715-4801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount Street, Raleigh, NC 4617 . fail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715-4801
a
U(eheel F. E..ky, Goeern n
rirbed, C Evm4, Sec emy
leffieyl. emv, Deputy Secreeuy
November 28, 2007
MEMORANDUM
Ofaar of Arliee. nl F4emey
Di.ms of late A.-I Rcmeen
D.rid 9"k. Dia ter
TO: Courtney Foley
Historic Architecture, Office of Human Environment
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: Peter Sandbeck PALe P13S
RE: Determinations of Eligibility, Widening I-85 from I-485 to NC 73,1-3803B,
Mecklenburg and Cabamis Counties, ER 05-2124
Thank you for your letter of October 25, 2007, summarizing the National Register eligibility findings for the
following properties in the undertaking's Area of Potential Effects.
• Six properties were evaluated and determined to be not eligible for the National Register and do not
warrant additional study.
• Poplar Tent Presbyterian Cburch (CA 527) is listed on the National Register and remains eligble.
• Blake House (CA 444) was determined eligible for the National Register on March 3, 2006, and remains
eligible.
• Walter S. Ritchie House (CAW) was recommended as not eligible, a finding with which we concur
based on the information provided in the letter.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservatioo Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regtiations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR
Pan 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
bc: DOT
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Sr2te Historic Preservation Office
Peu. B. Sendbsk Admwi,vomr
C-2
leeae:.a' 1M N., leo.. Sean, iWeah Ne 27601 M.1., AM1 .r 4617 MQ se, c. ce,=. lwcigS Ne 71699- 4617 idrphovr/Fat' 1919) 9074570/807-6379
Federal Aid NHINIF-85-2(51)47
TIP#. I-3803B County: Mecklenburg/Cabarrus
CONCURRENCE FORM FOR ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS
Project Description: I-85, from I-485 to NC 73 in Cabarrus County, add additional lanes
On, representatives of the
® North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
® Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
® North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (HPO)
? Other
Reviewed the subject project and agreed
? There are no effects on the National Register-listed property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
? There are no effects on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within
the project's area of potential effect and listed on the reverse.
There is an effect on the National Register-listed property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and the effect(s) are listed on
the reverse.
LK There is an effect on the National Register-eligible property/properties located within the
project's area of potential effect. The property/properties and effect(s) arc listed on the
reverse.
Signed:
FHWA, for the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency
Representative, HPO
State Historic Preservation Officer
C-3
25 AwusT Zoo,
Date

Date

Date
s '

Date
I
Federal Aid #: NHIMF-85-2(51)47 TIP#: I-3803B County: Mecklenburg/Cabarrus
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is no effect. Indicate if property is
National Register-listed (NR) or determined eligible (DE).
Properties within the area of potential effect for which there is an effect. Indicate property status
(NR or DE) and describe the effect.
13LA149 HOUSE &F-? - NO AsO\JMEE 6FftiCT
foi?L,4 L T% NT DES • C 0U04 t1 (NA-) - [AIT t A ALT?-] -M AW09. 6FfEcV
Reason(s) why the effect is not adverse (if applicable).
BLPKE HouSE : Opy APmp MEAa. pp-ox Wtw 13s 12zLae^r? NOT
ACAutPLINcr Rnr?/ ?KOw polo tioly
QoP1.PR 7BhfT AcGa55 To C}[ux" f GEM?7tFiy 15 MA1i?7P?tKCO
-
1 i
N6VJ "t-D ';A tTT5 A"I P2o? PO-o PeazI VV D
RpvJ 15 $Et N& Ac Q u tp..ao li" ? F-4't1n1 D f 041
D
?7
Initialed: NCDOTC4Ff FHWA
2 HPO
C-4

North CaroHna Department cif Cultural Resources
State;IIistnric?Praservation,0IMcc
1'ctcr 6. SuidMe'.., 4drvrtuiisarn
}dmh.ad F.<l at let, C7anxixrraK - tl?aec nf,Vrgknr .t•.dl'4islrir,'
1 i,be h C:. Liar,,' svcmi? ' Ur e;irsn z't tfis;on sl H suvitts::
jdtY "t_Citt i'hrtulJ'ri crrt+.ry'.. Umtd ?iai»ak?ll ne.uY _
1'ebruary 26:'2008... ..
hlEiiiORAN171.1\2
TC_ :Matt xx'akersdhr
Officc taf Human Environment
North Carolina Del9artment of Transportation
I=Rom: Peter,Sandbecl. pr
1:.
SUBJECT: ]?ielun7iuan? Reconizz s?ance'of:the lteri?-ed'Environ iientA Study .lre f0i the E-83/NC 73
Interchange Vicirvn=„ 1 "3803B , NfecIdenburg and'CaUarrus Counties, ER 05-21.'x,'$'
Thank'cori for y bur litter; of 1" clnru; r5' 14, 2f1f7$, cor ccx llg tlic above prajccr?
The repbrt 3ud-kO6 StateJ11-"tr rura arch cOW'riCal %iteS N%c& . ilikO cMd elunng'thc t reliarodt?gical -rccnnn3i tiaEivc
rlivesrigltrons; to ct the Proposed project trill not.affect an} ;archaeological reslaurces'and that nt7rfurdier cult rnl
resources ant esti:?alaonc .ue necessar' and/6r, armnted ?1 ©r, purposes of com131ianee with 5ectitan 1l G u1 tllc
NatianalHr;torie Presen tcton:Lct, we eoncus nlih,their recotiimendadons:
Historic Picsen•at16n>.Act and the
With Section,146 66iffi:d at 36'C FR
Tl='K'yciti for' 'Our ci)ope_ation and consi&ri bons: If:you , ha've an; questions, coacerti n the a136ve
ct,mmenl, plensc:ernnract' enee tsledhtll-Earlev, environmental-revieka coordinator, at919'807i6S79• In all
future ;coi imimication concerning this projeci; pj sti,citc the"alai t % cmnced tracki3ag rtumbec;
C-5

t utt6ac !t)1 ,a t lom-cS I `r .t;v .(. ; .. ..td dddre 9 J6I A.i, ?.h _t t, -n, r.. :%al"?. f. ?" "POtupfitmeJFvvr, ai t" .S`;'J
Appendix D
NCDOT Relocation Report
and
Relocation Programs
EIS RELOCATION REPORT
® E.I.S. ? CORRIDOR ? DESIGN
North Carolina Department of Transportation
RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
WBS: 34187.1.1 COUNTY Meck. & Cabarrus Alternate 1 of 1 Alternate
I. D. NO.: 1-3803 B F.A. PROJECT NHIMF-85-2 62 57
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Relocation report request for 1-85 from south of 1-85 just north of Charlotte to
Irish Buffalo Creek just north of NC 73 near Concord and Kanna olis.
ESTIMATED DISPLACEES. r INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Displacees
Owners
Tenants
Total
Minorities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP
Residential 2 2 0 2
Businesses 5 4 9 2 VALUE OF DWELLING ` DSS DWELLING AVAILABLE' -
Farms Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
Non-Profit 0-20m SO-150 0-20m 30-150
ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS ?. - 20-40m 150-250 2040M 150-250
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers. 40-70m 250.300 40-70m 25+ 250-400
X 1 . Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100m 400-600 70-100m 40+ 400-600 50+
X 2. Will schools or churches be affected by 100 up 2 600 UP 100 up 65+ 600 UP 75+
displacement? TOTAL 2. '
X 3. Will business services still be available REMARKS (Respond by Number)
after project? 3. Similar business services in area of project are available
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so, And are not affected.
indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc. 4. Accel Gas Station - Canopy 3,960 s.f. $146,000 tax value
4 emp.
X 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage? Texaco - Building (3,786 s.f.) & Canopy (2,760 sq ft.) tax
6. Source for available housing (list)- value $371,000 - 5 emp. ( 2 min.)
X 7 . Will additional housing programs be
needed? X-Treme Car Wash and Lube - Building (4,173sq ft.) tax
X 8 . Should Last Resort Housing be
considered? value $ 800,000 - 12 emp. (4 min.).
X 9 . Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc. Exxon Gas Station - Building ( 1,798 sq. ft.) tax value
families? $1,322,0006 emp. (1 min.)
X 10. Will public housing be needed for project? Waffle House - Building (1,633 sq. ft.) tax value $611,000
X - 11 . Is public housing available? 9 Emp. (4 min.)
X 12. Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing Shell Gas Station/McDonalds - Building(5,336 s.f.) & Canopy
housing available during relocation period? (988 S.f.) Tax value $2,371,000 17 emp. (11 min.)
X 13. Will there be a problem of housing within Huddle House - Canopy (995 sq. ft.) & Tanks (4)
financial means? Tax value $ 25,000. Emp. 10 (4 min.)
X 14 . Are suitable business sites available (list Circle K - Canopy (7,920 s.f.) Tax value $253,662

'
15 source).
. Number months estimated to complete
RELOCATION? 24 Months 9 emp. (5 min.)
Phillips 66 - Canopy(456 s.f.) & Tanks Tax value $25,000
11. Public Housing available in Cabarrus County
12. Yes, Public housing is available on current market.
14. MLS, Newspaper, Realtors, and Publications
10-15-2008 10-17-08
D-1
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS RELOCATION PROGRAMS
It is the policy ofNCDOT to ensure 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
• Relocation Moving Payments
• Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement
As part of 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 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 case of ownership), the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or
Rent Supplement Program will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and
qualify and up to $5,250 to tenants who are eligible and qualify.
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/or 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.
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 which 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 property 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 replacement housing, either private or public, or (3) moving existing owner-
occupant housing to another site (if possible). The relocation officer will also supply
D-2
II
information concerning other state and federal programs offering assistance to displaced
persons and will provide other advisory services as needed in order 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.
It is a policy of the state that no person will be displaced by the NCDOT's state of
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/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 project, since there appear to be adequate opportunities
for relocation within the area.
D-3
Appendix E
Preliminary Traffic Noise
Analysis Information
TABLE E-1
HEARING: SOUNDS BOMBARDING US DAILY I
140 Shotgun blast, jet 30m away at takeoff PAIN
Motor test chamber HUMAN EAR PAIN THRESHOLD
130 -----------------------'----- ----------------------
Firecrackers
120 Severe thunder, pneumatic jackhammer
Hockey crowd
Amplified rock music UNCOMFORTABLY LOUD
110 ------------------------------- --------------------------
Textile loom
100 Subway train, elevated train, farm tractor
Power lawn mower, newspaper press
Heavy city traffic, noisy factory LOUD
90 --------------------------------------- -------------------
D Diesel truck 65 km/h at 15m away
E 80 Crowded restaurant, garbage disposal
C Average factory, vacuum cleaner
I Passenger car 80 km/h at 15m away MODERATELY LOUD
B 70 ----------------------- --------------------------'
E Quiet typewriter
L 60 Singing birds, window air-conditioner
S Quiet automobile
Normal conversation, average office QUIET
50 ----------------------------- -----------------------
Household refrigerator
Quiet office VERY QUIET
40 -------------------------- -'---------------------'
Average home
30 Dripping faucet
Whisper at 1.5m away
20 Light rainfall, rustle of leaves
AVERAGE PERSON'S THRESHOLD OF HEARING
Whisper _ JUST AUDIBLE
10 -=----'--------------------- ---'-'-------'----------'---
0 THRESH OLD FOR ACUTE HEARING
I World Book, Rand McNally Atlas of the Human Body, Encyclopedia America, "Industrial Noise
and Hearing Conversation" by J. B. Olishifski and E. R. Harford (Researched by N. Jane Hunt and
published in the Chicago Tribune in an illustrated graphic by Tom Heinz.)

E-1
TABLE E-2
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA I
CRITERIA FOR EACH FHWA ACTIVITY CATEGORY
HOURLY A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL - DECIBELS (dBA)
Activity Leq(h) Description of Activity Category
Category

57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an
A
(Exterior) important public need and where the preservation of those qualities are essential if the
area is to continue to serve its intended purpose
B 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks,
(Exterior) residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories
(Exterior) A or B above
D -- Undeveloped lands .
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches,
(Interior) libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums
i Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part772, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration
CRITERIA FOR SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE 2
HOURLY A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL - DECIBELS (dBA)
Existing Noise Level Increase in dBA from Existing
in Leq(h) Noise Levels to Future Noise Levels
<= 50 >= 15
51 >= 14
52 >- 13
53 >= 12
54 >= 11
>= 55 >= 10

Norm i-arouna vepartment of transportation trattic Noise
Abatement Policy (09/02/04).
E-2
TABLE E-3
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS (Leq) 1
NOISE
SITE LOCATION DESCRIPTION LEVEL
(dBA)

1 I-85 (SB Side) south of SR 2894 (Speedway
Grassy
61
Boulevard)
2 I-85 (SB Side) south of SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Grassy
y 75
Road)
1 Ambient noise level sites were measured at 50 feet from the edge of pavement
of the nearest lane of traffic.
E-3

M
rv
U
Z?
m`u

gza
0 H.

W
?7 ?

Q plp
UWr
L lL C G

v,

u

z Z + + + + 4 + + } } + + } + } + + + + + + + + + i

J , .6 ? fi m ?
r- rv
r r3 ,(
?D
..1 .
y
iC
? • • • r
W
W eJ
?

W

Z y
q '
W

d
w a m m
a
a
a
a
a
s
a
a
a
a
?
?
?
?
D n n n c? n o n D n o n o _. n n n o n o : o

4
?
?
t d
rv J cl
r- ad ,r 5 i
,
?'
a f
ra ri
a ri
a,
q l Y. A, Y. .
V Ci w, v W. EI CV N Y, r. N
?
° u
N
a

W
Zo W
? S
R O
H

Z
Q , m
4
J
in d r N, .r, - r-
.' h
Y
r-
?Za

8

r
H
+C
w
T tf
?'
S
?
{{$$jj 'fi ,? U
((
zZ z ?? ,T,
a w

pp
}t ? ,9 ?+ p p _l f? _t ?ry fl h fl _r l; 9 W W Il fi /l ?t ? tl
VV W
` Y
V Y' CA
5

?
u
W
=M
-+

B

&

?

B

?

&

N ti

a

N

N

N

N

N

N

N
z
? ?
3. ? ry?
L ry?ry
L ry?
TJ ry?
'O ,?ryy
9
# Npp
? yN
? +LN
¢ ?yN?y
O ryN
? V
4L N yy
G b ryNM
C
L y
? y
? ryry
G yy
G ryry
Z
Z
F- .-1 ... 12 ' M a '2 f9 t11 m W .i. f tl U u m W tb Gl W
0.

t
J CA CA 'A
L
?
d R
m
y c
v
0
o?
?m
0
w
o
?
O
r?
a
a
2? U
9
C
S
N
A
c
Q
(y L
?a
o U
? CA
'N
a
U r
a9
V
aw
y
p
?

W
f!
u
U
Z p?
La V

q gg?
W IY „
a ? yf u
u
Z
d ?
F ? C
r r
ey

If.
r?
W
? ? d ? d d O d f d S y <.? O ?J S
W
W ttl d d y ?t 1 d ;
(
V . + + + + + + + + + + + + + + # + + + + 4 4 }

,_? y v? R e? .[t
.] ry
t
W

O
z
y
a '

u
? S
.
.
1
.
.
.
.
1
.
.
1
.
.
.
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
.
a
r`te' J J J J J J tY Cl a a s a K a a a a
Q v ?? 6 J D O r! O ?a O_ p 6
0 0 Z, O n Cy p C?

1 O
i 1 -A D
r O
C?
. ? ? ? ? fi iIJ (? (mot ai ?1 ?i ? 1_I ry ? I!1 V•
v y. f. C? Vl A
t.
,tt, y Y. If. (? rf .
1 IJ? If. ?? nr N, .Ti ? d 'P M1 M1 'D 'L r. ?
6
ti rv
?
h
a
w U
Z
S
.
ZO OS
,
t
a
z
~
o R
O
>
RI O >1
G
tl w T
7o
G
:P
F Z ?

Lll
r s

WW
a ti

W ? tl ^. fJ J CJ _i Y) fi , , . r^. ."-. .?. ._
?. d
s'
b u

a m
s ?
?
„
?
an
?,
?
q
?.
H
q
C1
0
Q
?
(]
?
$
?
&
c
?
o
a
_ _
`° n ' m ' m m a a < ? a
m <
n _
1' fJ
Wta
*3
8 r?'
?I
Q NNm
n e
a
R
o
a
.? 6
O
c
? n!
b
9
?u
?r
rv
au
b
?m
m m
CJ ?t

W
a
r?
U
z?
W O

? ?za
r
H
? G

"'? O K V
M
U w

W
L

W

vii ww t? a e -? v -? v -r e a v ?'? y v a y r? K -s .r K
Z 3 Z + 4 + i i + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
L.

W
y
Z r

W
J
? S
d
w
9 a
0 a
7 a
L
J a
C,
7 a
0 ix
0 a
0 a
Cr a
C, a
0
71 a
4 a
0 a
0
0
0,
O
-
0
C
,

? 'Aj r,C? r; 6 .p C. rl Ct J_ ?N? ri ?•
? U V
?a

W
?
a

W ^
U
z
z o V

ti
Z
V
Ew a`
Z 4 a
°
w
r ?
3 ya
'
z?
z m
r r
a ?
a
Z
O
V r
IJ
w a°O _ _ _ _ _ a ? : _

S U

?
m a
N
i s a pi 91, 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
n n n n n n e n ° ° n n n c c ° ^
G w ?
S ? ?S ? ?
i ?
J ?
J ? ;? ;
$ ;? ? ? ?
S ?
S ;
e ?
S ?
,O ? ? yy
a ryh
K a _
H t? ? ryry
a ryry
a ryry
a K i? ry
a _
N yy
a ryry
a pp
a u
a ?
a ry
a ? DV
a^ ?
C
_
? A
i,
3
Y,
N
a
n e
D U
.?. w
O ?
Yi q
o
n
°
= b
U U
C N
O F
N ?+
aU
all
rv
F ?
9 .?
W
1ti1 N

W
It
k
Kr
u
z?

V1 V "'
? O Z a
6
W ? S F-
W

m

rn

w

N " K !'i O K ?t Y ?t t ?f H K K K < d K K

Z
X 2 2 b g r r Ir nI n r: I n

w

z r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
.
o
w
H
u
S

r

r

r

r

r

r

r

r

r

r

r

r

r
a
?. .? a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
;- H ? O O O D O
' D 0 0 0 0 0 0 :1
' 0 0
f 0 0 0
` 0
' 0 -
'

Q $ uj ri I ;i rr
,
S' rrj rr r i v, r iri 1 `
i rri f 'tJi I ci
.> w C. O it r C4 C,4 CJ ?.t b C i C4
r,
ri
it
U V V

H ? n
w
?^
a
w G
z
S
.
Zr? G
Pa L
r z

F.
w J
'D
a G ?' :? ?•t w e •c ;c' ?;E ;TC w ?Tw c c r2 r w o' c ti 'z

Q c
w
Y 9
H V

oe
C
a ?

O
W) o
y
?a U
W n
cam.
' ,`rj @ B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B
?
O u ? e e c e c e ? e e e a e e e a c
? c
Z
d
N
N ;q zi w: N_ _
N
O j o g
'a
a?
a?
?°
a
c4
?'
c4
a4
y4
"?
c4
0.

'^
r..
C'!
f-
P•
M1
_
rrl
_
'L-

1'-
I:.
P-.
O..
l'-
?.
!F
^.
?.,
rv
/J.
"i
"f.
Tt
Lt
Vi
'Y..
-.
Y.
f=
p.N
N"
'{.
?
I _
_
'!
-
.1
±_
rn?
1..1
?vh
a?
? m
G
? C
a
r
N
9
O y
a 0
$' o
a
r?
n W
e 9
o CJ
C N
O rv
N ?+
s' a
G [J
a rr
? N
a
? m
?s
n
W
s
to
u
zw

6 Q
7
W
w (44 c
l

al
O
U
F 5 2
e sd

v,
.4

Z + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
]

,?j?j c
R
?
•
k
?
O
•
R
w ?
i..i

0
z
r
A '
w
r.
U

d
w
q a
G a
G a
G
1 ?
4 ?
p ? a a a a a a
C a a a a a a
C'
ci Ct G 00 0 ± G i 0 p G 0 =? G ? p

0 u U

til
A
a

ww+ r-
u
Z
'

.?

.
Z O y
?
V
a ? ?
z
F.'
w `?
?tn W V
o

L7 0
t

r-
ro

dr
e

c

W

.!
c

'

it
.d

N,
ti

.!
io

ri
a

i?
..,

e

Ic
,c '}

iF,'

'G

D yy

?0 _

r-

>L

'G
?za
0
w
or
V s
y Z j

CO
i"' ?
U Ifl
40
J4
'- a -
z?a

a ?
4

s r,
U .^- S

(17 a
ti
0 2 w % w % % % w %
Z ? Q ? w % % % % % % ? ^_ Q ? ? ? Q ? ? ? ? ?

a s a a" c ' m w' m'

n 26
T ?
3
d e
16
o y
w
G
L (?j
w
'.8 0
?L al
a
?y
?u
a
c
? m
ri
V r-
N w
?V
m ra
V
L 777
93
y? yyO
9 LJ
Cl?
w
a
C-
z
w

Rzz``
?
W $ F
o
W mh
N ..
? O K V
Z

F V ?
e
?
e y
'S
?
.
4
w

N
Q
z + + + + + ? + .+ + + + + + + + +

w i R R i i i R
J

w

z ;.
ca
w
H

d
? ?
'v a
O a
o a
0 a
D a
, a
, ? a
iD s
0
D ?
0 ?
0 a
0- a
0 a
^

Q
ri
v, _

2
ri
6
Ci
7
v.
'O
Cl
r
4

d

iT C,

rv
.? v ii in 7
4 -? !a IC I; !1 -
? d o
u
Na
Q I,

rn

w u
?
Z 0 Z y .
a
0. a

V

.d
z yr

LU
?w
w
^ G N?

1G fJ

?c

K. r+
DT
Z
O

ID
N
y
?
rr
n
I
n
n
ri
n
n
2 z
L z. . r-
W V

a ? b
E w a
w a a a ? _ ? ?
? V
u W
o
t a,
w ? ? S & 3 ti F; s ? ? p ? ? & & ? & B ?S &

O :.d p l C "
J a a a a 2 a a a a a a a a a
y a s z z x s a
opf R
v
3 ?
M, k
m 2
e a
0
a'
Y y
D ?y
Yw
V
C ?
? rJ
y7 9
m
e C!
p r-
V J
9
4m
?a
u
J
M ?
m y
L
J i
W

art
(rj gze3
W gti
L'1 '69
r,a W ? c J
N m
?
O
UG
zzaz
Utr,?
W ? c
'
r
y

W

Z + + + } } #
r +
• + + + }
rr +
r } # } + + + } + + + + }

rte.. mm,?
,p
?
?
?
?
fi
?
-1
M1 y
? ??}
yy
y
? pp
,G
M1
'?
w
?
rG-
r
f M1 J
,G
L
. J
j w
W ?

W

Q '
A '
W

? S
a

?"'' ? a a a a a a a a a a s a a ? ? ? a
?

?
'?'
G O
Ci G
M G
r

? G
r••i G
Y,
'? G
iJ 7
7
} G
v
? ?
? G
?S G

N G
uu''tt G

a G

ry ?, r.

r ?

a
LG?
?G-(
,py
T
G
G
wl
t4
J
1
r (J ? f ?i r
'r. , i
(1 J Y
t ? .+, a0
y i
y N, J
(1 , .L
Y. N ,
.
fJ CI r, Y, 1

°
a
Q
Q
y

a ?
P
, o
H

x
?+
T rn

Fr @p
7 ,n
W s
9 ,r;
VJ
-

y
W tK w
?, J 3
a
O -1
r1
n_
n_
?
r.i
r_i
0
'
V f' a
J
t
a
= e o a ? ' ? w w w w a ? w w w w H ? w ? w w

r 2. a a'3
o w
0 n
0 w w v 'w w
I w w ? ? w u. w .w 'w

'

? yy

tL ry

a

0yry L my

y' 61 0

47

to o

61 .4

.'. o

81 N >

67

J LI

L_I >

Q7

87

67

S

CI

W
b C
L
e ?
0
a k
D D
L L„
3a
$ o
aT
8
a m
a
e J
M1
O F
a ?
?a
a
a U
M,
? N
J
W
Cy!
pyW?
ca
a ?? n
a [
p uz
oa 0
80
Z wz
u w
tL v? e

{
w

+ + i + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Z
2 2 2 w w '?o rni ?? ?r, ' a b

c

W

z r
A
w '
u

° S
a
a a a a % a a a a a a a a a
a
a
r a ,-, a o -, c, g ID g 0 (:1 -1 o g ra o t
q ? i ce' a rv i^i a of ci J -? ' r? ? x e`d ? 'yf
r
b

o
°
N u
Q w z

0. ZU
u
z
La 91
7 ? • .
0
J ? O p p b
Z
, o
W
Y
U ?

? a

a ?

eee -
S W
v ?'
OS
? j u ? H MM ?
^ '
^ '
^ °
^ A A A p A ? CY a s a s c c ? g a a
Z Q W N
V ry
G y
p .
y
p N
O ry
p b rD b ,O b +p b N
'O ry
V N
'O N
TJ i
y
V N
TJ t
y 1`
'
'0 ry
9
' ? ' ? ? 1? 7
° m I m m m m d a a a
a

0.' G

Y
.. J
? o
o?
D
w
o?
0
?Y
a
'r W
m r4
c 9
o u
J
c
C !
O F
?a
a
au
? a.
an r!
W ?
9 3
°a
w
11
W ri
rv
rph t J 'J'
6 Z 0.
w °?o

d z ? W°z
F

sy

rrW
J
-

W .
. c -. ,. .., ... o ... ... o o -. o - - c - o -
,
a
Z
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
S b ,o a b iG ? Y ,D ? b ? ? ? ' b V b 'D ? b ,O %C V b
y
a
J L

Pi

a '
w
r

a

G .
9 a
o s
c
_, a
o a
c a
o a
c a
o a
o a
,
:
? a
o .?
, ?
o .:
o ? ? .?
- ? a a a

"f
G
C
tom' ?
,
J
!? ?
= ? ? .
, ? o
cl o
"i o
vd' .
f o
y o
t7 o
Si o
.
U
a
w r
v
a w z m

z
u
4 W
z ' e n w o m. ??,' T 'D c n' Z ,e ?c w n u -e d o b

c
W
?a

Ala r"
a ?

u ? a
° x x ^ x

MI - - -
x
x
x -

u
a
W y
a
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
B
8
B
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
b
8
8
Z ? v v a v v v c v v ? a v v a ? c v a c c
? .m ? a M .? a .? a ? .w a .a a Po 'a "; 77 .7
y
y y y
y y y ry ry

a
z °
u ?
a?
G
L. m
s? m
m 4
° U
S c
C N
q r-
rv
Iy L
?a
?a
a?
am
yw yJ
GJ I-I
J
W
h
? m

Z+
W yL?
Wv. ??
W `^.LOm
Q?
F ? V U
z?wz

W

W - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
z

J t

W
fA
c
Z
j. '
A '
W
U
'
d.
0.
a s a a a a m a a a a a a a a a re -j -3 -1
C y v
' p r -? r_r ?i :fi r 0 C, 0 i 0
' o
- n 0 O 0 a r 0 o n

q ? r, rx r :? '? i rd -f i vi r 1 $
? ir• i
n n ? ? ?n r; fl it ?, Ci
O j ire a .v N CA v C4 r,
V

a V
,

pi r-

a
w U
Z
2

Q
U .
a ? a
G
Z

J
0
? V
4

'?.
Cu

K•
Ni

?D
n

?L
v

.?

?
(?

Z•

•

?
Ki

?D
w,

b
.p

:L.
?.

'u
,?.

•f+-

D

?
r!

Y,

D
e-i

2.
N

'D
c?}}

Ya
-

•D
aG

D
W

?D
a0

?•
Z
°
w
Y

1 OR

4 U

W CK
v1

Lti
N
a
B
?
B
8
?3
C
g
.-
?
r
B
..
y
B
r yy
O yy
O

p
?

7
?

o
?

0
?
a ??jj
V

C qq
J

? yy
V

C
?
?
p
?
..
N
N
N
Z O
?' O
.?yy
TJ O
ryry
+J ? C
.?yy
9 ryry
9 ??yy
9 ryry
9 ??yy
9 _
NN
'J ryry
9 ry
ry
l
? O r?? r
' '9 ryry ry
ry
9 ry
ry
9 yy
9 '8
O ryry
9 ryry
a v '
e '
a .'
n ?7, .
o n
: ,n 'w a ?3 '
e
. '7
, w '
? '
w '
e ,
O ry
a y
y
a ry
5 ?i
?
y
Y' yy
OL @@
K ?
?ii
CL ry
ry
a y
a @
@
a @
@
a y
y
K ry
ry
d: ry
Y' o
d] Ib m
0.
?Sf v? K. C J? p x
:F i _
X Y
f
1 m
B O+
:a r-,
O?
J C 1 K
3t F
J. C
? r .r
7 •3

T
.. J
m o
s
U ti
3
G LI
w y
? e
D
v a
Ny
a
r W
9 G
W a
?y
c ?b
? J
5 c
o y
N ?
y 0.
a
av
m <v
m ?
P
9 .?
y
w
g& }myy
L1 LI
w

t?

W Rz

? ? ur
z
u
Z
q
q
W L

.. y
L
W
J
W ra o -. -. O -. -. - -. - ... .-r -. O - -r -s O - -

J z 4 + + + + + + + + 4 + 4 i + + + + + + + } + i + + +
C
aa??
1D
2
?
z
7 ry1
N p
D
b
?
12 N
?D
f?- p?
1G
8
b ry
?G
12
a
N
M
12
2

W

W
v.
Z j.
A '
W
r,

a
? ? a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a ?
C F" a
c
7
G
_'
O
p
ra
G
O
G
?
G
J
G
G
G
i?
?=
G
7
G
G
G
G
G
? l
Ci 6
?
?2

rv

r

K

i
C r" d C-i
7 Y
c
a

y
W u
z
2

o
? .
a d
Z C

Z
W
?W o

p

Q ? . ?

K.

D J

?, .J

r0 r

?

1D

?
?
i
``T 1f?

Y.

C.
+e}
Y

.(?
?
rv
r-
•D
1n
D
^9
D
ra
?d
.!
D
T
D
G
r-
a6
?D
n,
Y
rq
?D
?
G
Z J j
a
W

v.

w x
H
a ?

O G
W O
_
_
_
S a
U
a

u`'. W
a y
2
?
?
a
?
?.
?
8
a
B
c
B
e
8
c
B
B
-
?S
c
?
?
c
6
8
8
?
s3
?
8
6
1
F1
? m
q

o
W
B
?
B
B
bl
i
?
^S
2s
? ?ry
9 cry
.0 ryc
.0 oy
'O cry
,J c
?8 a
8 e c
-4 ?
-
?
n ' ° ,
' " N a w a s a s a a , 2 vl a
m m m ? ? 7 ? ? ?
nl-I?f
U
an
?7,
7
'_
ri
1
l'
_?
i_
I
cl
^l
•?i
?5
tt
? gg - - - - - - - - - - - -

W?
3 v'.
ry
N C
o Z
4, rv
e
O
? V
°
r W
c
a ti
c ?
a
?V
5 c
c.
G M1
u r
o U
? rJ
V
V
a
L
[y W
pm a
CJ
S?
7
W
TABLE E-5
APPROXIMATE # OF IMPACTED RECEPTORS
ACCORDING TO TITLE 23 CFR PART 772
BUILD ALTERNATIVE ACTIVITY CATEGORY
A B C D E
I-85 from I-485 to SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) 0 5 6 0 0
I-85 from SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) to SR
1394 (Poplar Tent Road) 0 0 7 0 0
I-85 from SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Road) to end
of project North of NC 73
0
81
4
0
0
SR 1305 (Pitts School Road) Realignment 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 86 17 0 0

NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE ACTIVITY CATEGORY
A B C D E
I-85 from I-485 to SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) 0 4 6 0 0
I-85 from SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) to SR
1394 (Poplar Tent Road) 0 0 5 0 0
I-85 from SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Road) to end
of project North of NC 73
0
48
0
0
0
SR 1305 (Pitts School Road) Realignment 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 52 11 0 0
E-15
TABLE E-6
PREDICTED SUBSTANTIAL NOISE LEVEL IMPACTS
EXTERIOR NOISE
SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS
BUILD ALTERNATIVE LEVEL INCREASE NOISE LEVEL DUE TO

<9
10-14
> 15
INCREASE BOTH
2
dBA dBA dBA CRITERIA
I-85 from I-485 to SR 2894 (Speedway 6 6 0

Blvd.) 6 2
1-85 from SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) to

SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Road) 12 0 0 0 0
I-85 from SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Road) to

End of Project North of NC 73 141 0 0 0 0
SR 1305 (Pitts School Road) realignment
4 3 0 0 0
TOTALS 163 9 0 6 2

EXTERIOR NOISE
SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS

NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE LEVEL INCREASE
NOISE LEVEL DUE TO

<9
10-14
> 15
INCREASE ? BOTH
z
dBA dBA dBA CRITERIA
1-85 from I-485 to SR 2894 (Speedway

Blvd.) 7 5 0 4 0
1-85 from SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) to

SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Road) 12 0 0 0 0
1-85 from SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Road) to

End of Project North of NC 73 148 0 0 0 0
TOTALS 167 5 0 4 0
E-16
TABLE E-7
PREDICTED Leq NOISE LEVELS
and NOISE CONTOURS
MAXIMUM
. - MAXIMUM PREDICTED
. Leq NOISE LEVELS (dBA)' CONTOUR'
BUILD ALTERNATIVE DISTANCES
50 ft 100 ft 200 ft 72 dBA 67 dBA
I-85 from I-485 to SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) 81 78 73 302 495
I-85 from SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) to SR 81 78 74 305 501
1394 (Poplar Tent Road)
I-85 from SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Road) to end
of project North of NC 73 81 78 74 308 505
SR 1305 (Pitts School Road) Realignment 67 61 56 <37 60

MAXIMUM
MAXIMUM PREDICTED CONTOUR
Leq NOISE LEVELS (dBA)t '
NO-BUILD ALTERNATIVE DISTANCES
50 ft 100 ft 200 ft 72 dBA 67 dBA
I-85 from I-485 to SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) 81 78 73 274 439
I-85 from SR 2894 (Speedway Blvd.) to SR 81 77 71 232 363
1394 (Poplar Tent Road)
I-85 from SR 1394 (Poplar Tent Road) to end
of project North of NC 73 81 77 71 234 367
E-17
b
O
O
P'1
^Q
W
U
O
m
q
a
O
e'I
O
N
r'I
w
m
rl
E
N
ci
?I
0
N
z
O
H
N?
W
W
I
a
w
Q
0
z
O
H
W
C34
H
Q
w
ID
O
w
z
H
a
z
I
U
.1
a "
f?l a
a m
? o
U „
W
M
0
m
H
h
W T I

W {al ,
I m C O N O? N
m '.J >? I N N N C' N N
W d I
w I
a u 1
(? I Ifl M M ?D M W
w 7 I ri C C M M N

o F 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 w 1
I m P P P P P P C' C m N m C
I ID N N C G' C N N P ?O N P C
I' x F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.

w moo M M M o o M M o o M
W? i
W w b O O P P P O O P P O O C
U' 1 r-I O O rl .-I rl O O H rl O O N
m - I N N N N N fi
N
x I Ifl 01 M 10 O? r Ifl N m r r b 01
a I ri r O ill 1l1 ?Il N O? .--I O
N m
r
11 > '
,
I H N C N M ?fl P N C m I(1 P
1 !n
£m
Q
W
I

r ?aaasaaaaaaQaa
F
£ i
c? c? 1 0 00 0 ooos0 oo 00
a w I to b m b m m r b m r m m r
O GI g 1 M M rl M N. N N N N
O I
O I
x 1

U' E I o m r o 0 o m M o o r P o
u z W l o M P o 0 o M m o o In P o
w- + o 0 0 0 0 0 0

x I
H 1
£

1 O O 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

m
M P b N N N
1 C Wool
W 1 10 I(1 O O N N N M C 'i rl
F N 1 O? I O O I I I
N I
z

U £
I
F I O O O O O O N P O O P O O
m o w
.
.
o b o
i m P P o M r o M
C
N P N N N ?O O O b m O
UI N 1 O O
II II W x 1 I N rl
F I I

N N Z I

Q
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
' O I O O N C N C m N N N
Q I O O N ry rl N M P N N
U N 1 O O I 1 I
N 1 N N
m III
o z

- H
u a I
l o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o P 1
em
o
o
m .
m P a
P
w 1 P N N N O N N O M
a N I I O I I O
W ? II x I .i ..
Q I I 1
H I II VI
I a
a
#
?
U I
1

U U
O H
m
0 1 m l a N
a l u m w 1 H 4' a s
o lu, a1 a I aa?
W I £ i U I W W 4
F l o m I Q Q N F a q F a q F
W I O H I W p,aa aaa as
£ 1 a t q i
F E N W W E x W a E x W
H I a .] g q Q a F O Q a E q
? i > i
1 I Z i m m fA W 0.1 W W W W R! W w 6l
'I " z Z z Z In w w w w 3 3 3
E y a

H
I VI 7
H .
I
f/) I > ;
a I .-? N M P II1 b r m Ol O .-1 N M
I N N N N
aQ
> W
H F i M m m m r? n
Q w
U' N I N 'i 'i N rl rl
H F I
m
I
wauiooooo0
a w .Ci I N N N N N N
H£ E I m m m m m m
w bl i mmmm mm
o w
H F
[v Q ?. I
WQ a. x 1000000
a O o o O O o
? 3> I b b b b b b
EQ O i N N N N N N
m w I
I
I
QO a S m.-Imm mm
a O> m?nN.-I m
w > > I rl C rl P
a I 'i
Q
I
W W I
U £ I
H
E U i o 0 0 0 0 0
F W I N N N N N N
W m fli I
a O -
U a I
w U i O N P M 01 b
q $]' w I r O O r m 10
W H m . I N
a E 1
x _
w F U I
m 1 a c7 w 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
w l >. w=' I N.4 'iN N N
F 1 u a I H
I I
a I YI +
I I
z
a i z
w.°
o E
w i a
'J I H ? a a
a 1 a l a a
I N I Q Q .J
?W a a
o1x ?aaaFaF
1F-I ' Z i 2 2? W 3 3
N M r W 'N, N
Q I
•i

0
O
U
v
r?
W
JJm
Id
E
w
O
H
a
O
a
E
a
u
z
+I +
i
'1 O O O O O O o 0 o O O O o O O O
I
I I(1 Itl Ifl 10 Ifl Vl «1 U1 N 10 Vl Vl Ifl I(1 U1 I(1
I
I
N 1
I
1
W I
I
I o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
m I
w t o In -o0 o In o 0 o In o 0 o In o 0
F l o r m m o r m rn o r m m O r m m
Q, I N N N N I I N N I I N N
z r l I I I
H 1
a I
O
O
U I O O O O O O o 0 0 o O O O O O O
I o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O o 0 0
1 0 m Ol N m m Cl N (O CD Ol N W 0 OI N
.-I N .-1 N I I N N 11 N
X I
I
I I I I I
I
I
+I
+ + +
i

+ + +

+ +

+ + +

+ +
I y 1
I N N rl N N N F I
I N N N N ry .-I N N VI 3 3 'j, Z? 3 ?.] I
a l 2 z w w m m w w N 3 In W z 5 I
O I W W z z W W cn w 3 I I I I W I
F I I I o N N t1 C Ul ID W I
J I N N ft C Itl 1D [? m 01 N N ri N N N a I
w I
u l u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u a
W I w w W w w w w w w w w w W w w w w l
a?aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa of
I N N (+1 ? 111 10 r a OI O N N (+I V Ifl 10
I N N N rl N N N
L
N EE
Y w 7 E
b E .N
C O X
., c x x ro
q Y E E
O T a
N G E ro
N O b ?O
ll N N
FI L
O C C ro
U O Y U
d Y 3 O
N ro O
m 4 «) .N
N G N N
W tT ..I
W U
L O N
U N C
w C O
O E L .i
7 L
F E w ro
U N O
SI X L
ro ro • C
d E N N
N N U
C C O
ro u
a
C
U
W
a
O
? U
O z a
O
H
4 £ U
F a wa
W
V N
w o w
a u a
U
+ W a
z ?z z w
3 3 K -
b 1
N 1
V 1
W I
a I
? I
N 1
U I
a
I
O I
N 1
u I
wl
al
N
N I
V I
W I
a I
N I
rl 1
U I
w I
al
N 1
U I
W I
a I
I
O I
N I I(1
U I U
w I W
ala
m I O
U I a
W I w
a I
I w
w
ro I W
V i a
W C7
a I w
I ?
i
r r
u I m
W I N
a I
I F
b I Q
U I
C i W
I a
Ill I O
U I r
w I
a 1 10
Iw-I
O
QH
yE
W
U
O
U
F
2
U
H
z
F
N
FJ-I
N
CV)
W ?
a1
M
O
,ri
(M
11 C)
? N
t
W
Q H
W w
U?
1"1
O
v? a
w
o
a z
O
L H
N 04
$4 H
ro Q
w
>iU
w
O
N
P4 H
a
m
A x
cd a
H
a
U

W 2 I

i
'.J ?
W I N O? C ? t+l N
I
m O B I N N N C M N
W a I
W I
a u 1
[? I m 01 M N m N
w 7 I .-I C I(1 p N
W I
I

O
F I
I O O O O O O O O O O O O O
3 w
-' I m C' cT GI OI C C C C m N m y?
I 10 N N C a' C N N 10 N C C
I
II .T. E I O O O O O O O O O O O O O

a ? I
(A I
r; o o m m m o o m m o o m
a a? i
a W 1 M oo H.-1 r100ti.+o o.-I
[? I N O O N N N O O N N O O rl
' m '-' I rl N rl N N N

'.Y I r I(1 r N I? O Ol r M O W Ill r
IL I d? N O O N C N N r O? M O Itl
II 7 I r N M M d? IO M N C \O N C Ill
I N
m I
I
a ?
u c? u u u u u u u c? u u?
F aaaaaaaaaaaaa
i
£ ^
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0
a W l mmmlommrlomrmrnr
O (I1 (] I M M N M N N N N N
O I
O 1
N

? E 1 O N r 0 0 0 m Ill O O Ifl O O
II 'Zi W I O C I(1 O O O O m O O ID Vt O
W -? 1 O O O O O O O
.Ti I-] 1 N rl rl .i N
X 1
H 1
£
k k k k k+++##+ k k+ k
•I
O 1, 0 0 0 O N O O O O O
m I m m O O C M C b N N N
W I 111 IO O O N N N M C N N
F N I Ol O O 1 I
} I ri 'i
2 I I
£ H 1
u £ 1
I
F 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ill O O Ill N O
m o w 1
oio 1 ma va .i mo rl loo
N I C N N N r O r W O
U] N I N O O
II II W X I I N N
E I 1

NH
F H 1
a ? 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I
O I O O N C N C l0 N N N
O 1 O O N rl N M d N N
U N I 00 1 I 1
} I N N
w x I
W z
$'? `? H I
U
1 ........... 0

O C .
m m C O O l0 b
W I I V N NN N ON N N O M
a 1 y 1 0 l o
m I II X I N N
a I I I
H
p
: 1 11 m
a
a . i. + k k # ? + + + + # k k k
k
1 ? V
I l
a I 1
a 1 1
U 1 1
H I z 1
C7 I O I
D l ?
m F
O \ w 1 a
a l£ m w 1 H 1 a s
o l u a l a I a w
£ W
F o 4 4 4 F E a ? F a 'J F
W 1 o H I W I W w a a G4 W a w
£ I {q 1 p 1 F F W W a F 9 W a F T W
? i a a w Q a .] F Q a a E w
.a i 7 Y i
1 I z I m m m m m m m m m m m m m
w 1 II II Y I H I z z z z In w w w w 3 3 3 3
z a
1 I m o 1
-1 ? ?
V] 17 r] I 1 N N I`l C Ifl IO r m O? O N N M
I N N N N
0
I
a I
w i
H E I M t`l t`l Nl t"1 M
aw'
I
F] I
a W I
C? 'Y I 'i rl fi N N rl
H E I
m I
i
u - I
W a Sl l 000000
A w F l to io m io io b
H£ I m m m m m m
W bl I IO ID l0 t0 ID b
v I
O W I
H E I
F I a _ I
02' a S. 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
w I, 0 0 0 0 0 0
p 3 ' 1 IO b lO lO lD 1D
F O - I ,-I rl .-I .-I .-I rl
y W 1 I
I
I
2 I
O .] S i m OI m M M r
a o a 1 Holor Mln
m?' I N N N C N l(1
Q ? I
i
I
ww
u £
F- i o 0 0 0 0 0
U I
w m m I N N N N N N
ao-I
U .] I
-1
W V I O O G' C' O 10
?£ w 1 r o o r m b
w H m I 'I N
a F '- I
w E U
m I ?] U' W I O O O O O O
a I V `G m I N N N N N N
W I '?r W `-' I N.N N N N N
W I U .]
1
1
? I # + # k # k #
x I I
z I I
H
2
1 O
W I H
wl a

o I a s
a
I U I a d
aa
Qi w 1
a a
Q sF
?
O i i a
] E a E
Hl x
E
i 2 i Z Z W W 3 3
I
i

a I I N I`l r m 'y N
1 N N
M
?T-I
ro
4-1
fi
0
U
N
1
JJN
rl
E
0
H
a
U
.U]
O
a
w
U
a
I
I
I o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 111 1I1 1f1 N If1 1I1 1f1 lI1 111 111 111 111 1f1 L11 l11 1f1
I
I
N I
i
w
j
l o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
w .
w 1 ovlooolnooolnooolnoo
E l o r m m o r m m o r m m o r m m
y' I .y .-1 rl N I I N N I I N N
Z N I I I
H I
? I
o
0
u i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I W W Ol N W W Ol N W W O1 N W W W N
N N N N I I rl 'i I I N N
X I I I I I

a
O
a
w
a
k} k k k k k k k k x x k++
w I
N N N N N rl N '[? I
•i N .-i N ri N rl N N w 3 3 Z 'j ?? rl I
rat] W 2 Z W W y vwi 3 3?? 1 1 1 w
I I I I I I I I I o N N M p 111 IO W I
N ry M V Ifl \O r W 01 'i .4 .-I N N N a I
I
U U U U U U U U iJ U U U U U U U r] I
w w W w W w w W W w w w w w w w w l
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a W I
N N M? N 10 r W Ol O rl N t+l C If1 1D
N NNNN'iN

N I
U 1
W I
a 1
N 1
N 1
U
a
I
I
C I
N I
U I
W I
a I
M I
N I
U I
a
1
N I
f{ 1

a

N I
u I
w I
a I
o
N 1
U I
W I
a I
I
W I
u 1

a
W 1
U I

Y a I
N
I
EE
Y
'?+ 7 E U I
trl E .? W 1
N
b a
C X
'C Y ?
E
F.. ID I
O J. N U I
o.N v m w I
N C E
v o ro a 1
1
N N v 1
L
0
O C.C N U I
U O Y U W I
.1 ti N a I

OI 11 Ui ..i V 1

N C r+ N W I
v al .? a 1
v U C. O
C C b -
Y O N M
U v C I U I
W
?
o E Y 0 2 a

A E w m
U ?.i O Y1 ? E N I
m ro
[ w w
- w
v r v v u p E a a i
N N U
v
N O[ I
W
O
H Y N
U 2 U I
W O w I

vl y
C k k k
fi w z
2 ? W ?
Z

W Z
Ca I
r
4 3 I
34
U
w
a
0
W
w
z
U
w
m
a
a
a
O
N
w
H
O
E
w
u
0
U
E
W
H
x
w
F
W
W
rot
F
O
.r{
(m
1'1
^Q
W
U
14
O
N
.r'
a
O
M
O
N
(
,
$4
w?
W
W
r-I
fd
E
N
CY)
a
J
O
N
z
O
H
N?
W
I
a
w
Q
0
0
H
w
P4
H
Q
w
U
(Yi
0
O
W
HH
a
U
x
a
f7
U
U
n
O
h
N
W
a
u
Q
0
II
(7
a
£
d
m
£m
4
£
0
O
II
X
£
W
?E
m o
O b
N
II I
o £
N H
4
N q
u
O P
m I
W I
a I
m I II
a I
H i II N
>
a
u
F1 I
N 1
O I
a N
of
a $ N
olu?
W I £
F I O
w I o
£ I
I '{
? I
w I II u
E I
H I N ?
N I >
N I
w I
? i
al
H I
a I
a> I
u
Z I
H I
a I
w x
W W I .-IN om rb
'J >- ? m P P b P rl
a
U
I b .-I M ,-? .-I o
j ? Nr rlo bM
I
I
I
3 w,° o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
- W P P P P P P P P m N m P
b N N P P C N N P b N P C
x F I O O O O O O O O O O O O O
H
W ?
C7
a
>
a
N
E
am A
F ^
2 w
a
k k ?
r
l0 O O P P P O O P P O O P
l o o O1 Ol O\ O o O1 OI O O OI
O O 00 00
N N N N N .-I
o r?.y in 0. 0. on wo
O b P !•'1 M 01 P m M P N N 10
C N N P b m N N b T N M r
m
Q R a Oa Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o 0 0 0 0
rbi mmbm mr lomr m mr
N M .-I N N N N
O -l m° O° T m O o M •-I o
01 m 0001000 10
o Oo o .-I o0 0
H 'i H 'i .-1 •4 N
%% k Y Y x+ Y i Y Y x i
O Ol N O O O O b O O O O O
... 0P M P b N N N
M O O O N .-I N M P N N
m H o 0
F I o 0 0 0 0 o b vl o o m b o
m P P P N r o m b o
I P N N N O Ill O 01 O O
VIN I N .-I O rl O
w K I I I N N
Q I
z
M I
qa I O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O I O O N P N P IO N N N
O O O N N rl N M P N N
U •-I I 00 I I
?• I N . I
x III
z I
H I
a I
l o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I
m C O b
I P N N NON N O M
.-? I l o l l °
x I ti
I I
Y Y +Y k k k k k k k% k k
YI
I
I
o
H I
a I
H I a a
a I a a
U I n, n,
N I a a F F a 0 F a O F
w I w w w a w a a w
w i a .F] A ? Q .F] E O a a F 0
Z I W m t? w x W m m m V1 w w W
a i z 2 2 2 N w w w w 3 3 3 3
I
I rINMPlnbrmmo.-IrvM
I rl i-1 N N
a I
> F i M M M M M M
a 6' I
Q I
I
I
I
a I
aw I
I-I E I
N I
W Q 4
o w ?
H £ E
W -
O W
F ? -
?a a
O 3 >
Q 0 -
N W
U
a O W
a > >
a
w w
u£
H
F U
F w
w m N
U ? -
w U
Q £ W
W N N
a E.
-
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
P P P P P P
N N N? N N
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1D ?O IO b b b
•-1 'i fi N rl N
VI
J1 V1 O O
N 0 0 t+l m lO ?[q
N ?O rl r
0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N
c?oMr P m
1D O o r O1 1D

x - I
W F V I
!L I U Z N I O O O O O O
W I? W- I N .-I N H N N
W I U a I
Q I Y x 4 .+% Y k
Y
Y
W I
I I
x
Z I
F; I
a O
I
5
1 F
w I a I
a a a
i K i
I V I W W
aI N laa ° °
I
2 i 0 F F F S F x
O i I a a a F a F
a
F I Z i m m m m x x
H I H r Z Z w w 3 3
w I a I

Q I I rv M r m N N
I rl 'i
ro
i.)
o
U
M
W
JJW
cd
Ei
I
I
l ...........
0 0 0 0 0
I
N I
i
E I
W I
I
l o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W I O N O O O I(1 O O O ?I1 O O O N O O
F l o r m m o r m m o r m m o r m m
/.(; N N N N 1 N N 1 N N
2} I 11 11
H I
°a
0
O
U I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
l o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I m m O? N m m Ol N m m O? N m m O? N
N N N N I I N N I I N N
K I I
I
I
i i it ++ t«+ t+« i i + t x
I
I
i
N N N H N N N
N N N N N N N N N m 3 Z Z 3 3
a l z Z w w m m w w m m
3 m m
O I'W W Z Z W W m m 3 I 11 I I I
E I I I 1 I I I 11 I O N N M C Il) ?O
J I N N f+1 V N lD r m O? N N N fi N N N
W I
u I U u u u u u u u u u u u u U U U
W I W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
a l a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
N N M C Ifl ?O r m Ol O r-? M C Jl 1p
I N rl N N N N N
O
E
U
0
a
O
F
a
U
w
a
m I
? I
m I
W I
al
I
o
? I
L
N
O U E E
L w E
b r E .H
N C X N
C u E E
O >. N
m C E ?
W O N'O
f. N N
O C C b
u O i u
N L 3 RJ
N b C
OI SI fll .N
N G N N
W m .+
N U C
L O tl N
W U C O
O E L .I
C E W N
U O
x N
N X a?
N R - C
N E O
N I u
U
N tr C
C C C O
H L N U
w
a
O
M
O
U
a
U
?d
2
3
N 1 Ifl
V 1 U
w 1 w
a . a
b

o. ? o W
V I a
C w
i
I m
I W
m i W
U a
C i W

I W
r lm
U I m
w i N
a
u i Q
a I a
I W
I(1 I O
U I m
W 1
a 1
1
c I
U I
a I N
Z
O
2 C i Q
O I f?
H I F
qEq N I Z.
a d W i U
w i U
U N
O w w
V a i S
O 0 w S
z0 w I w
3 a s i E
FIGURE F-1
U.S. ANNUAL VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT)
VS.
MOBILE SOURCE AIR TOXICS (MSAT) EMISSIONS, 2000-2020
VMT
(trillions/year)
6 --
Benzene (-57%)
V PAT
D PL4+DEiG r£7%'
3
Tvmatle V(k
?.ce t1w. hie : %)
I. -541attk he ?W'
P.enkll ?+53'ti'
0
Emissions
(to n slye a r)
200,000
100,000
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Notes: For on-road mobile sources. Emissions factors were
generated using MOBILE6.2. MTBE proportion of market for
oxygenates is held constant, at 50%. Gasoline RVP and oxygenate
content are held constant. VMT: Highway Statistics 2000, Table
VM-2 for 2000, analysis assumes annual growth rate of 2.5%.
"DPM + DEOG" is based on MOBILE6.2-generated factors for
elemental carbon, organic carbon and S04 from diesel-powered
vehicles, with the particle size cutoff set at 10.0 microns.
F-7
Appendix G
USTs, Landfills, and.Other
Potentially Contaminated Sites
y
.yr
"a
Y
ce
O
U?
C
00
r M
C ?
a
?y Y L
?a
QI
`SJ
.r
cC
c
?
Cl) J
J
'p

O w
x

>
M
N rn :m w N F N

O > cr.
O m d z O L Q m -p
p
E 0 w F -j U U) a)
f (D
C) E 0
a) 21
CU
J
0 <
to
`0
w
CL 0

U
d

r7 T
CL

a) J J J J J J J
C U)
Q
N N N N N .0 w N N
-0
a) 0 U) N w W a)
w N w
N
Co. U
a O a)
0 O p
a)
Co p N
a) -- O N
a) -- O '0 N m
a) m co S] 0 a)
a) O N
a) --
a oc o oc oc o?3E oc oc
E a) E p 2 N C O C
Q dal d(O a-m am a- a Co N am am
c C C C ? E m C C
O
U O
U O
U O
U 7 p
OU 0 J O
U O
U

U lL
co
O Q J
>
0Q J( Z OKY m

?c
0
Zg
-
Qa
i
jU
¢
2 o
T
3

= 0 Cl) - -
x?-j _
0xOZ
~ Z z
Z0
U) "
mC
?
U C: a
Q ~F Q co g t c
?p Q
Jcn w ? U Cl) ? C
J

T
W 0
co ?0 N

N U)

C O
U

3 C J C a
J -p t0 C

O N W C
d O J a 7 F a) a) 0 0 3 > V O
O Q
cn C C
s
S
C7
w Dw -
-
T
w v 'IT

M It ?
M ?
O v
O 0
M
Q
O 0
(
00
0 M (?7 M O Z N
~- O O O O O O
O O O O O O
z 0 ) a)
Q Q Q
C
g aa)i o3: 0 m d? `m N m
U J I? J Z
0 (n 0
Z 02' 0Q' 0d'
O o rwm C) -
?W n. d d
J
OD IL
u) ? J
o g IT
o o
r? co
m 0
o
LO
00 r O
m 00
m O
rn

Z) 0 > > U m}
W 0 D

N M V Ln CO t?
CS

w C
x O LL
a W .-.
) m cn Q
(/)2

Z
a W N' LL (O 0
= OY U
W J o ZY Q

p
W Q c
o r'-
Z)
?Z
E a> co m
m SW o 5 _? a?
Of m
C)

U F m O Q
L
Q2 W

of jU ?-

O LL> 000

> ?W

Y F
? a
a F
U a
x Zx
=
w Q
z
co
?? Q
U
i
a
m

V J J J J J J J J J 0
C (n
Q
N a) a) N N N N N N
y
y m m
C m
C m
C m
C m
C m
C m m

N
E _
E _
E _
E _
E _
E _
E
E
E
a? co m m m m co m m m co
y m U
Co F

O C 0
0-
O C to
0-
O C to
0-
0 C m
0-
O c fn
0-
0 0 0
O =
O 0 0
0-
O C 0)
0-
O C w
O
O
C E _
(0 U
E 0
E U
E U)
E U
E cn
E U
E w U
E (n
E U
E w
E U
E N
E U
E N
E U
E N
E
G Q ?. N N N 0
N N N N N N
O O O O O O O O O
o d d d d a a a d a
?
o
00 U
C N
C Z
J- Q >-
m z F
- Y Z J Q
OW to
(n > C7
Qz
Q +M C Q m
m'c
L) U j ?JQU (n
a?U W
Jco z
p= U W
2WU U

V U)
=
O
Z gQ
co (D
>
C) Y of CL
U O Z
(n
z
W
E
'If
F-
w
O Z
z
? J

Z
~ m Q Q af o U
U Z U LL ?? a
.? a C U U m ? U co Y U
03LL
. c aNi
- ti m a
N
++ ay
(O O U J
T
J -
W
N U
O -S
? :2
p C
N
C U
C
F^ 0? F a) a)
N OJ >1
m
O
(7 a)
06 3

j J >

> O)
rn C
O 3 N N co
J LL J c
co p_ C
m- 0 N
J
co
Y .C
IL r
m (D
F m
v a? co E
U 0 y aNi m
E m
E 3
Y v
R
U)a
>
a o
a
o
a
a

uj -
'U

m

Q O
O

m N

W N
LL7

N N
Cl)

N (0

V
M O

CD
m (0

f?

V

N
(h

V]
LL
p
Z (O
M N
M (O
co (O
Cl) O
N LO
(`7 O
CO h
O M
N
'?- - O O O O O O O O O
? O O O O O O O O O

Q
N
N

¢ >

2 z

n

N z

U) z

U ?

}
0
4 F
m F
m F
m CL z p(°O m }
OQ -1-
Z?
m a-a as a-0 OF- o0 >°_° m 3 -
>r >?
a_ 0- 0 (D

cm0 Cl) v = 'IT ir) ° U
m LL F- F- f- F F F f- F F
>1 c
m
J

2t

O

0)

O
?.., N 7

(
V
l0
(O
I?
NV
Locations of USTs, Landfills & Other Potentially Contaminated Sites
/
End Project
v Site # 19
^ NC 7
° e
Site # 18
f ry ,.
Sile # 17 Site # 1a
NC f
Site # 16 `
`• Site # 15
v

Site # 13 o d
O Zeo??
eJ 0 P?
l
O eIl Schoo #
v \
y Sile # 10
J/I Site # 11 1
SteIt 889
Site At Q ° Site # 7 Q
oa
?
?
S e
? Site It 6 q
°
n_ ? P
Site#/
6
I i f
Site
I $ p #5
tts C e /
,-?

( °
8 \ J`
Site #] Site #2

B I+
IQ
Ho n0
¢n " /b, l

o Site # 1

E d 0
altar Cre k R

\
Project 34187 1.1 lno I-Min
1ffi to.1L wMCWIerAwp CO v
b rIC ]] M U.- Co \ \
\
MenileMU#GMrNe Caunry
Begin Project
Owt
0 0.5 1 Miles

NC Dep dr re OrMmeeo..
C wewnKw Egl step unn
GeoEni.- ntal Sedue
o
\

Figure G-1
G-3
Local Officials Meeting Agenda
TIP Project I-3803 B
I-85, Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
October 30, 2007
1. Introductions
II. Review of Information Packet
III. Proposed Improvements Under Consideration
• Number of lanes on I-85
• Interchange Improvements
• Pitts School Road Realignment
• Auxiliary lanes
• HOV/HOT lane accommodations
• Bicycle and pedestrian accommodations
IV. Questions and Comments
V. Adjourn
H-1
North Carolina Department of
Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
wt rN RTt,
Citizens Informational Workshop
I-85, from I-485 to NC 73
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
October 30, 2007
TIP PROJECT I-3803 B
11-2
• t•
CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
Proposed Improvements to 1-85
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
TIP Number I-3803 B
PURPOSE OF THE CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
The purpose of this workshop is to involve the public in the project development process
and to present the alternates under consideration for the proposed widening of Interstate
85. Public involvement is an integral part of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation's project development process. The concerns of citizens and interest
groups are considered during project
development studies. Often, additional project alternatives are studied or recommended
alternatives are changed based on comments received from the public and/or local
officials.
NCDOT realizes individuals living close to a proposed project want to be informed of the
possible effects of the project on their homes and businesses. However, exact
information may not be available at this stage of the project development process. For
example, design work is necessary before the actual right of way limits can be
established. This type of detailed information will be available at a later date. The
purpose of this workshop is to receive your comments before final design decisions are
made.
Written comments on this project may be left with NCDOT representatives at the
workshop or mailed to the address below. If additional information is needed or you
would like to submit comments after the workshop, please address requests and
comments to:
Write: Dr. Gregory Thorpe, Manager
Attention: Wilson Stroud, Project Planning Engineer
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1548
Call: Wilson Stroud, Project Planning Engineer
[phone] x 310
Email: [e-mail]
H-3
THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Planning and environmental studies for federally funded highway projects are conducted in order
to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The type of document
published following the planning study depends on the magnitude of the project and its expected
environmental impact. NCDOT is preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) for this project.
The Environmental Assessment will discuss the purpose and need for the proposed
improvements, evaluate alternatives, and analyze the project's impact on both the human and
natural environment. The document will address the following areas of concern:
Efficiency and safety of travel
Neighborhoods and communities
Relocation of homes and businesses
Economy of project area
Land use plans
Historic properties
Wetlands
Endangered species
Wildlife and plant communities
Water quality
Floodplains and streams
Farmland
Archaeological sites
Hazardous materials
Traffic noise
Air quality
Following the completion of the EA, NCDOT will conduct a Public Hearing to review the
proposed project design.
11 OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC AWARENESS
SCOPING LETTER - Published in the NC Environmental Bulletin. This letter notifies agencies
and groups on the State Clearinghouse mailing list that a project study has been initiated and
solicits comments from them.
CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP - Informal meeting with the public. NCDOT staff
conducts these workshops to speak one-on-one with citizens about projects. Commentsheets are
provided for citizens to write down their questions, comments, and concerns. The number of
workshops scheduled for a project depends on the scope and anticipated impact of the project.
DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION - Copies of environmental documents are submitted to the State
Clearinghouse for distribution and a notice is published in the NC Environmental Bulletin. Upon
request, NCDOT will provide copies of the document to the public. Copies are available for
public viewing at NCDOT Raleigh and Division offices, the State Clearinghouse office, local
government offices, including the local council of government office, and local public libraries.
PUBLIC HEARING - One or more formal public hearings are held and public comments are
recorded. Format typically involves a short presentation followed by an opportunity for citizens
to comment.
CITIZEN LETTER- Citizens are encouraged to write NCDOT and provide information and
express concerns regarding proposed improvements at anytime during the process.
Correspondence from citizens and interest groups is considered during the course of planning
study and is included in the project file.
1I-4
11 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS 11
TIP Project 1-3803 B proposes widening I-85 from I-485 just north of Charlotte in Mecklenburg
County to NC 73 near Concord and Kannapolis in Cabarrus County. Interchange improvements
and auxiliary lanes are also being considered, as well as the relocation of Pitts School Road,
which intersects Poplar Tent Road in close proximity to I-85. The project is 7.2 miles in length.
It is anticipated 1-85 will be widened to an eight-lane divided facility with a 22-foot median and
a concrete median barrier, similar to the segment of I-85 south of the project. Although this
widening will be performed primarily within the existing 68-foot grassed median, some
widening to the outside of the existing northbound and southbound pavements may be required.
The need for auxiliary lanes along the project will be considered. Such lanes would be
constructed to the outside of the eight "through" lanes to accommodate merging and diverging
traffic. Areas of special interest with regard to auxiliary lanes are (1) between the I-485 and
Concord Mills Boulevard/Speedway Boulevard interchanges and (2) between the Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway and NC 73 interchanges, due to the close spacing of those
interchanges.
It is anticipated the existing bridges at Concord Mills Boulevard/Speedway Boulevard and
Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway will be retained as part of the project. It is
anticipated the remaining bridges, with the exception of the Mallard Creek Road bridge, will be
replaced. The Mallard Creek Road bridge is expected to be replaced as part of TIP Project R-
2123 CE, which calls for revising the I-485/I-85 interchange. The possibility of constructing the
proposed new bridges at Poplar Tent Road and NC 73 with sufficient length to accommodate
future HOV or HOT lanes will be considered.
PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose of the proposed project is to increase capacity on I-85 for local and regional traffic,,
thereby improving traffic flow and mobility and reducing congestion.
This segment of I-85 is a heavily-congested freeway that serves both interstate and regional
traffic. Traffic volumes in 2006 ranged from 111,000 vehicles per day (vpd) just south of I-485
to 88,000 vpd just north of NC 73. Traffic volumes in the design year (2030) are anticipated to
range from 186,200 vpd just north of I-485 to 168,400 vpd just north of Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway. The existing traffic volumes already exceed the capacity of the
existing highway, and operating conditions will continue to deteriorate if no improvements are
made.
During the three-year period from May 2002 to April 2005, 688 crashes were recorded on 1-85
within the project limits. Rear-end crashes accounted for 51 % of those crashes, while run-off-
road crashes accounted for 24 % and sideswipe crashes accounted for 14 %. These crashes were
distributed fairly evenly along the length of the project, although there was a greater
concentration in the vicinity of the I-485 interchange. These crashes were primarily the result of
the heavy stop and go traffic during peak travel times. Four fatal crashes were reported during
the study period. It should be noted that the widening of the adjacent segment of I-85 to the
south (TIP Project 1-3803 A) took place during much of that crash study period. A new crash
11-5
analysis will be performed within the next few months so that conditions since I-3803 A was
completed can be evaluated. A comparison of the crash rates along the project with the statewide I?
rates for comparable routes shows that the crash rates along the project, with the exception of the
fatal crash rate, are below the statewide rates (see Table 1).
Table 1: Crash Data
Rate Number of crashes Crashes per 100 mvm Statewide rate
Total 688 100.15 133.44
Fatal 4 0.58 0.50
Non-fatal 218 31.15 41.82
Night 150 21.84 32.59
Wet 117 17.03 31.12
11 EXISTING CONDITIONS
I-85 is a seven-lane divided facility (three northbound lanes and four southbound lanes) with a
22-Foot median and a concrete median barrier from I-485 to Concord Mills Boulevard/Speedway
Boulevard. From Concord Mills Boulevard/Speedway Boulevard to NC 73,1-85 is a 4-lane
divided facility with a 68-foot grassed median.
The posted speed limit is 65 mph throughout the project. The existing right of way width varies
from 290 to 340 feet. Access to I-85 is fully controlled and is limited to the five interchanges
within the project study area: I-485 (Charlotte Outer Loop), Concord Mills Boulevard/Speedway
Boulevard (SR 2894), Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394), Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway
(SR 1430), and NC 73 (Davidson Highway). Mallard Creek Road (SR 2467) crosses I-85 just
north of I-485, but no interchange is provided at that crossing. Bridges also span the following
streams within the project limits: Rocky River (just north of Concord Mills Boulevard/Speedway
Boulevard), Coddle Creek (just south of Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles Parkway), and Irish
Buffalo Creek (north of NC 73). Information regarding these bridges is presented below in
Table 2.
11 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS 11
The proposed improvements to I-485 will result in impacts to both the human and natural
environments. Detailed planned studies and surveys are being conducted by field personnel to
determine the extent of those impacts. Several known areas of concern are discussed below.
Natural Environment
The project is located within the Yadkin River basin. There is a potential for impacts to
perennial streams and jurisdictional wetlands within the project limits associated with Stony
Creek, Rocky River, Coddle Creek, Afton Run, and Irish Buffalo Creek.
H-6
Table 2 - Existing bridge inventory
Bridge County Facility Feature Year Built Sufficiency
Number Carried Crossed Rating
119 Mecklenburg 1-485 1-85 1968 95
311 Mecklenburg Mallard Creek 1-85 1967 80
Road (SR 2467)
348 Cabarrus Concord Mills I-85 1996 89
Blvd/Speedway
Blvd (SR 2894)
18 Cabarrus I-85 NB lanes Rocky River 1968 93
11 Cabarrus I-85 SB lanes Rocky River 1968 94.1
51 Cabarrus Poplar Tent Road I-85 1968 87
(SR 1394)
55 Cabarrus 1-85 NB lanes Coddle Creek 1968 81.6
58 Cabarrus 1-85 SB lanes Coddle Creek 1968 95.2
84 Cabarrus Kannapolis 1-85 2001 96.6
Pkwy/George
Liles Pkwy (SR
1430)
63 Cabarrus NC 73 (Davidson I-85 1968 88
Highway)
86 Cabarrus I-85 NB lanes Irish Buffalo 1968 92
Creek
88 Cabarrus I-85 SB lanes Irish Buffalo 1968 943
Creek
• The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service lists four threatened and endangered species in
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties (see Table 3 below). Potential impacts to those species
will be addressed during project planning and design.
Table 3 - Threatened and Endangered Species - Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties
Common Name Counties Endangered (E) or Threatened T
Carolina heels litter Mecklenburg, Cabarrus E
Michaux's sumac Mecklenburg E
Schweinitz's sunflower Mecklenburg, Cabarrus E
Smooth coneflower Mecklenburg E
Human Environment
• Greenway corridors within the project study area include Rocky River and Coddle Creek.
• A bicycle facility is planned along Poplar Tent Road.
• Traffic noise studies will be performed to determine if noise walls are warranted. Potential
noise wall locations include residential areas near the Kannapolis Parkway/George Liles
interchange and near Irish Buffalo Creek.
Two properties within the project study area have been detennined, through consultation with the
State Historic Preservation Officer, to be eligible for listing in the National Register of
Il-7
• Historic Places: Popular Tent Presbyterian Church, located on Poplar Tent Road east of I-85;
and the Blake House, located on Trinity Church Road west of I-85.
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND COSTS
Currently, NCDOT is scheduled to complete an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project
by July 2008. A public hearing, during which a more detailed design will be presented, will be
held approximately four to six months after the completion of the EA. The final environmental
document (anticipated to be a Finding of No Significant Impact, or FONSI) is scheduled for
completion by July 2009. Right of way acquisition for the project is scheduled to begin in fiscal
year 2010, and construction is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 2011. Please note these
schedules are subject to the availability of sufficient highway funding. As noted below in Table
4, the estimated project cost is $242,353,000, including $200,000 for right of way acquisition
and $242,153,000 for construction.
Table 4 - NCDOT 2007-2013 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
TIP Project 1-3803 B Schedule and Cost
PROJECT STAGE SCHEDULE ESTIMATED COSTS
RIGHT OF WAY Fiscal Year 2010 $200,000
CONSTRUCTION Fiscal Year 2011 $242,153,000
Total project cost $242,353,000
OTHER TIP PROJECTS IN THE AREA
R-2123 CE Revise I-485/1-85 interchange, Mecklenburg County
Planning/Design In Progress
Construction Fiscal Year 2013
R-2248 E Charlotte Western Outer Loop (I-485), from east of NC 115 (Old Statesville
Road) to I-85 North, Mecklenburg County
Right of way Fiscal Year 2010
Construction Fiscal Year 2013
U-3415 Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394), from Derita Road (SR 1445) to US 29-601 Bypass,
Cabarrus County
Right of way Fiscal Year 2013 (Part A, from Derita Road to George
Liles Parkway)
Construction Unfunded
H-8
U-4910 Derita Road (SR 1445), from Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394) to Concord
Mills Boulevard (SR 2894), Cabarrus County; project to be administered
by the City of Concord
B-4449
I-3802
JWS
Right of Way Fiscal Year 2008
Construction Fiscal Year 2010
Poplar Tent Road (SR 1394), replace bridge number 2 over Coddle Creek,
Cabarrus County
Right of way Fiscal Year 2007
Construction Fiscal Year 2008
I-85, from NC 73 in Cabarrus County to US 29-601 Connector in Rowan
County, Cabarrus and Rowan Counties
Planning/Design
Right of way
Construction
In Progress
Fiscal Year 2012
Unfunded
H-9
COMMENT SHEET
I-85 WIDENING, FROM I-485 TO NC 73
MECKLENBURG AND CABARRUS COUNTIES
TIP Project I-3803 B
October 30, 2007
Name:
(please print)
Address:
City: State: Zip Code:
Comments, concerns, and/or questions regarding TIP Project I-3803 B:
Please continue on a separate sheet of paper if necessary. Send comments to: Dr. Gregory Thorpe, Attn:
Wilson Stroud, Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch, North Carolina Department of
Transportation, 1548 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
H-10
Citizens Informational Workshop
Comment Sheet (Continued)
I-3803 B
Was the project adequately explained to you? Yes No
Were NCDOT representatives understandable and clear in their explanations?
Yes No Further comments:
Were NCDOT representatives courteous and helpful? Yes No
Were display maps and handouts easy to read and understand? Yes No
How might we better present proposed projects and address citizens' concerns in future
informational workshops?
How did you hear about this meeting today?
Based on the information available, were all substantial questions answered?
Yes No
What was the most helpful aspect about the workshop today? What was the least helpful?
THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING THE WORKSHOP.
YOUR COMMENTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT IN THE PLANNING PROCESS.
1411
i
i
0 4,500 9,000 1?RR/ 31
s t j HA-ISBURG
Feet)
k
VICINITY MAP
iO"-"?w COUnry: MECKLENBUftG-
£4?i NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT I-SS
FI ure
OF TRANSPORTATION ADD ADDITIONAL LANES D'v: 10 TIP#I-38038 9
z DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS FROM 1-485 TO NC 73
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND MECKLENBURG- WBS: 3418Zt1 1
y `H?nr,ae"` ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS BRANCH CABARRUS COUNTIES
Bra J.TORTORELLA TIP PROJECT 1-38038 Date: APRIL 2007
H-12
NOTICE OF A CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
FOR THE PROPOSED WIDENING OF 1-85 FROM
1-485 INTERCHANGE TO NC 73 INTERCHANGE
TIP Project No. 1-3803 B Mecklenburg / Cabarrus Counties
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) will hold the
above Citizens Informational Workshop on October 30, 2007 between the hours
of 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. at the Concord Christian Church - Family Life Center,
3101 Davidson Highway, Concord, 28027. Interested individuals may attend this
workshop at their convenience during the above stated hours. Please note there
will be no formal presentation.
NCDOT proposes to widen 1-85 from the 1-485 interchange to the NC 73
interchange to an 8-lane divided facility with auxiliary lanes. The project will also
include improvements to interchanges within the project limits.
The purpose of this workshop is for NCDOT representatives to provide
information, answer questions, and accept written comments regarding this
project.
Anyone desiring additional information may contact Mr. Wilson Stroud,
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch at 1548 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1548, phone [phone] ext. 310, fax (919) 733-
9794 or email wstroud(a-)dot. state. nc. us.
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services under the Americans with
Disabilities Act for disabled persons who wish to participate in this workshop.
Anyone requiring special services should contact Mr. Stroud as early as possible
so that arrangements can be made.
H-13
Appendix I
NEPA/Section 404 Merger Team
Concurrence Forms
SECTION 404 / NEPA MERGER INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT
CONCURRENCE POINTS 1 AND 2: PURPOSE AND NEED, STUDY AREA,
AND ALTERNATIVES TO CARRY FORWARD FOR DETAILED STUDY
Project Title: I-85 improvements, from I-485 north of Charlotte to NC 73 near Concord and Kannapolis, Mecklenburg
and Cabarrus Counties, Federal Aid Project NHIMF-85-2(51)47, State Project 8.1765101, WBS Element 34187.1.1, TIP
Project 1-3803 B
Purpose and Need of the Proposed Action: The purpose of this project is to provide relief from present and future
congestion and provide a higher level of efficiency on I-85.
Study Area: The project study area is 400 feet in width along I-85 and along the roads that intersect I-85. The project
study area (red line) is shown in Figure 2 (dated March 2008) and Figure 3 (dated 3-11-08).
Alternatives to Carry Forward for Detailed Study: The following alternatives will be carried forward for detailed
study: (IA) Widen existing I-85 (best-fit, primarily inside the median) to provide eight basic travel lanes (four in each
direction) and perform interchange improvements at Poplar Tent Road and NC 73, (IB) the same as lA but with
construction of minor interchange improvements at Concord Mills Blvd./Speedway Blvd. and at Kannapolis
Parkway/George Liles Parkway, and (1C) the same as 1B but with construction of needed auxiliary lanes.
The Merger Process Team met on March 11, 2008 and concurred with the Purpose and Need, Study
Area, and Alternatives to Carry Forward for Detailed Study for the proposed improvements to I-85.
USACE
USEPA
NCDWQ
SHPO
CRMPO
Steve Lund
Christopher A. Militscher
Date
Date
Polly Lespinasse Date
Rence Gledhill-Earley
Phil Conrad
Date
FHWA
USFWS
NCWRC
MUMPO
Ron Lucas Date
Marella Buncick Date
Marla 1. Chambers Date
Bob Cook Date
NCDOT
Wilson Stroud
Abstaining Agencies
Name
Date
A enc
Date
1-I
Section 4041NEPA Interagency Agreement III
Concurrence Point No. 2A: Bridging and Alignment Review
Project Title: I-85 improvements, from 1-485 north of Charlotte to NC 73 near Concord and Kannapolis, Mecklenburg and Cabarrus I
Counties, Federal Aid Project NEIMF-85-2(51)47, State Project 8.1765101, WBS Element 34187.1.1, TIP Project I-3803 B
I
The project team has concurred with the following bridging recommendations:
Site Stream Location Bridging Recommendation
2 Tributary to Rocky River 0.6 mile south of SR 2894 Retain and extend existing 1 @ 6'x8' RCBC; supplemental
(UT 10) conveyance may be required
3 Rocky River 0.4 mile north of SR 2894 Replace existing dual bridges at same location with
approximately the same low steel and bridge deck elevations,
with a new bridge length of 210 feet, and with minimum 3%
deck grade for deck drainage or retain and widen existing
bridges (bridge length: 194 feet)
4 Tributary to Rocky River 1.4 miles north of SR 2894 Retain and extend existing I @ 7'x7' RCBC; supplemental
(UT 8) conveyance may be required
5 Coddle Creek 0.6 mile south of SR 1430 Replace existing dual bridges at same location with
approximately the same low steel and bridge deck elevations,
with a new bridge length of 200 feet, and with minimum 3%
deck grade for deck drainage or retain and widen existing
bridges (bridge length: 186 feet)
7 Tributary to Afton Run 0.5 mile north of SR 1430 Retain and extend existing 1 @ 7'x6' RCBC; supplemental
(UT 4) conveyance may be required
The project team has further concurred with the following:
• Defer bridging decisions for Site 1 (Stony Creek) and Site 6 (Afton Run) until the CP4A meeting (avoidance and
minimization), at which time additional information regarding proposed culvert extension lengths, existing stream conditions,
and required supplemental conveyance will be available
• Delete Site 8 (Irish Buffalo Creek), since it is located north of the project and will be addressed under TIP Project I-3802
USACE FHWA
Steve Lund Date Ron Lucas Date
II USEPA USFWS
Christopher A. Militscher Date
NCDWQ
Polly Lespinasse
SHPO
Date
Renee Gledhill-Earley Date
NCWRC
Marella Buncick Date
Chambers Dale
MUMPO
Bob Cook Date
CRMPO NCDOT
Phil Conrad Date Wilson Stroud Date
Abstaining Agencies
Name Agency Date
1-2
Appendix J
Start of Study Comments Received
from Federal and State Agencies and
Regional and Local Governments

North Carolina
Department of Administration
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Gwynn T. Swinson, Secretary
September 15, 2005
Mr. Ryan White
NC DOT
Transportation Bldg.
1548 MSC
Interoffice
Dear Mr. White:
Subject: Seeping - Addition of Lanes to 1-85 from I-485 to NC 73 in Cabarrus-Mecklenburg
Counties; TIP # I-3803B
The N. C. State Clearinghouse has received the above project for intergovernmental review. This
project has been assigned State Application Number 06-E-4220-0078. Please use this number with
all inquiries or correspondence with this office.
Review of this project should be completed on or before 10/15/2005 . Should you have any
questions, please call [phone].
Sincerely,
Ms. Chrys Baggett,
Environmental Policy Act Coordinator "
J-1
Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone] Location Address:
1301 Mail Service Center Fax [phone] West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27699-1301 State Courier #51-01-00 Raleigh, North Carolina
e-mail. [e-mail]
An Equal Opporluni(y/liffirmative Action Employer
:-.M _ * . : E;; C K L E N B U R G - U N I O N
,-METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
600 East Fourth Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202-2853
704-336-2205
www.mumpo.org
3_..
CHARLOTTE'
CORNELIUS
DAVIDSON TO: Wilson Stroud, Project Planning Engineer, NCDOT
HUNTERSVILLE FROM: Robert W. Cook, AICP, MUMPO Secretary
INDIAN TRAIL DATE: September 26, 2006
MATTHEWS SUBJECT: I-3803B Scoping Comments
MECKLENBURG
COUNTY The following are the comments of the staff of the Mecklenburg-Union
MINTHILL Metropolitan Planning Organization (MUMPO) regarding the Subject project:
MONROE
NCDOT 1. The Scoping letter calls for 12 lanes to be constructed between I-485 and
PINEVILLE Speedway Boulevard/Concord Mills Boulevard. The letter also calls for I-
3803BB to widen I-85 in this stretch to 12 lanes. Will these lanes be built
STALLINGS initially as part of this project or with the I-485/I-85 interchange project (R-
UNION 2123CE)?
COUNTY
OUNT Y
2. Will the Mallard Creek Road bridge over I-85 be rebuilt as part of I-3803BB
W or with R-2123CE?
WEDDINGTON 3. Will a grade-separation connecting Quay Road and Old Holland Road be built
WESLEY CHAPEL as part of this project? This was a recommendation in NCDOT's December
WINGATE 20001-85 Sub-Area Study.
4. What accommodations will be made for the future installation of HOV lanes?
5. What accommodations will be made for the future installation of ITS
features?
J-2

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
rem, B. Smdbeek, ddnennneu,r
Michael F. Easley, Governor
Lisbeth C. Evans, Seereta,
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
September 30, 2005
MEMORANDUM
Office of Archives and 1-listoty
Division of I le,torical Resources
David Brook, Director
TO: Greg Thorpe, Ph.D., Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
FROM: Peter Sandbeck ('&t
SUBJECT: I-85, From I-485 (Charlotte Outer Loop) to NC 73 near Concord-Kannapolis, I-3803B,
Mecklenburg and Cabarrus Counties, ER 05-2124
Thank you for your letter of September 8, 2005, concerning the above project.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and located the following structure of historical or
architectural importance within the general area of this project.
? (CA 527) Poplar Tent Presbyterian Church and Manse, SE side SR 1394,.2 miles NE of jct. with
SR 1440.
We recommend that a Department of Transportation architectural historian identify and evaluate any
structures over fifty years of age within the project area, and report the findings to us.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on our knowledge of the
area, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources that may be eligible for conclusion in the National Register
of Historic Places will be affected by the project. We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 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. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above-referenced tracking number.
cc: Mary Pope Furr, NCDOT
Matt Wilkerson, NCDOT
State Clearinghouse J-3
location Mailing Address Telephone/Fax
ADMINISTRATION 507 N. Blount Street. Raleigh NC W7 Mail S rviee Center, Rxleilph NC 27699 4617 (91))7.33-4763/733.9653
RESTORATION 515 N. 131ou,n Street, Rrlcigh NC 4,17 61ail Senvi¢ Conte,, Raleigh NC 27699-4617 [phone]/715.4801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N. Blount Swat, Raleigh, NC 4617 ht. it Nonce (:en,,,. Raleigh NC 27699-4617 (91'))733-6545/715-4801
Michael F. Easley, Govemor
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee, Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
T
r
=I
T
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek. P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
October 3, 2005
From: Polly Lespinasse, NCDWQ, Mooresville Regional Office
Subject: Scoping Comments for 1415, from 1-485 to NC 73 Near Concord-Kannapolis, Mecklenburg and
Cabarrus Counties, Federal Aid Project NHIMF-85-2(51)47, State Project No. 8.1675101, WBS
34187.1.1, TIP Project No. 1-3803B
This office has reviewed the referenced document. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) is responsible for the
issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for activities that impact Waters of the U.S., including
wetlands. Preliminary analysis of the project reveals the potential for multiple impacts to perennial streams
and jurisdictional wetlands in the project area. More specifically, impacts to:

7
AQ ?n?
i
?
?a' ?lassifizafior+ a
t+)um'tier ??sYed _; 1•?n°!
a
.?;z
ne,?,_ _
?.
?.,
s
?'~ .
, „-
._; •. ..
5„ .::
Coddle Creek Yadkin C 13-17-6-(5.5) Yes Impaired biological
integrity
Afton Run Yadkin C 13-17-6-6 No N/A
Rocky River Yadkin C 13-17 Yes Impaired biological
integrity, fecal colifonn
and turbidi
Ston Creek Yadkin C 13-17-5-5 No N/A
Further investigations at a higher resolution should be undertaken to verify the presence of other streams
and/or jurisdictional wetlands in the area. In the event that any jurisdictional areas are identified, the Division
of Water Quality requests that NCDOT consider the following environmental issues for the proposed project:
Several of the waters in the project area are listed as 303(d) impaired waters for North Carolina. Extreme
care should be taken to prevent impacts to these waters from this project. DWQ requests that alternatives
developed for the proposed environmental document consider design criteria that reduce the impacts to
streams and wetlands from storm water runoff. These alternatives should include road designs that allow
for treatment of the stone water runoff through best management practices as detailed in Best
Management Practices for the Protection of Surface Waters.
2. Future documents should provide a detailed and itemized presentation of the proposed impacts to
wetlands and streams with corresponding mapping.
J-4
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 610 East Center Avenue. Suite 301
Internet h2o.enr.state.nc.us Mooresville, NC 25115
Phone[phone]
Fax [phone]
i`orth Carolina
Naturallil
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Regded110% Post Consumer Paper
3. Future documents should contain a discussion on mitigation plans for unavoidable impacts. If mitigation is
required, it is preferable to present a conceptual (if not finalized) mitigation plan with the environmental
documentation. While the NCDWQ realizes that this may not always be practical, it should be noted that
for projects requiring mitigation, appropriate mitigation plans will be required prior to issuance of a 401
Water Quality Certification.
4. Wetland and stream impacts should be avoided (including sediment and erosion control
structures/measures) to the maximum extent practical. If this is not possible, alternatives that minimize
wetland impacts should be chosen. Mitigation for unavoidable impacts will be required by DWQ for
impacts to wetlands in excess of one acre and/or to streams in excess of 150 linear feet.
5. Borrow/waste areas should not be located in wetlands. It is likely that compensatory mitigation will be
required if wetlands are impacted by waste or borrow.
6. In accordance with the Environmental Management Commission's Wetlands Rules {15A NCAC
2H.0506(b)(6)}, mitigation will be required for impacts of greater than 150 linear feet to any single perennial
stream. In the event that mitigation becomes required, the mitigation plan should be designed to replace
appropriate lost functions and values. In accordance with the NCDWQ Wetlands Rules {15A NCAC
2H.0506 (h)(3)), the Wetland Restoration Program may be available for use as stream mitigation.
7. A qualitative analysis of cumulative and secondary impacts anticipated as a result of this project is
required.
8. Where streams must be crossed, the DWQ prefers bridges be used in lieu of culverts. However, we realize
that economic considerations often require the use of culverts. Please be advised that culverts should be
countersunk to allow unimpeded passage by fish and other aquatic organisms. Moreover, in areas where
high quality wetlands or streams are impacted, a bridge may prove preferable. When applicable, DOT
should not install the bridge bents in the creek, to the maximum extent practicable.
Please be advised that a 401 Water Quality Certification requires satisfactory protection of water quality to
ensure that water quality standards are met and no wetland or stream uses are lost. Final permit authorization
will require the submittal of a formal application by the NCDOT and written concurrence from the NCDWQ.
Please be aware that any approval will be contingent on appropriate avoidance and minimization of wetland
and stream impacts to the maximum extent practical, the development of an acceptable stormwater
management plan, and the inclusion of appropriate mitigation plans where appropriate.
Thank you for requesting our input at this time. The DOT is reminded that issuance of a 401 Water Quality
Certification requires that appropriate measures be instituted to ensure that water quality standards are met
and designated uses are not degraded or lost. If you have any questions or require additional information,
please contact Polly Lespinasse at [phone].
cc: Ryan White, PDEA Project Development Engineer
Steve Lund, Corps of Engineers Asheville Field Office
Marella Buncick, USFWS
Marla Chambers, NCWRC
Chris Militcher, USEPA
Rob Ridings, DWQ Wetlands Unit
File Copy
J-5
Commerce Department
October 10, 2005
Dr. Gregory J. Thorpe
NC Department of Transportation
Project Development and Environmental Analysis
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Re: TIP No. I-3803B
Dear Dr. Thorpe
?D
y. .
7cy121 ?
oYSISg POD
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on I-3803B. As you may know this project continues to be the
top priority for Cabarrus County and its MPO. We will be happy to assist you in anyway that we can to
assist with this project.
I only have a couple of comments regarding this project:
1. 1-85 crosses two major greenway corridors: the Rocky River and Coddle Creek corridors.
These corridors are contained in the, "Livable Community Blueprint for Cabarrus
County: A Plan for the Future of Parks and BicyclefPedestrian Transportation". The plan
was adopted by the Cities of Concord, Kannapolis, Harrisburg and Mount Pleasant,
Cabarrus County and the Cabarrus-Rowan MPO. These corridors should be
accommodated during the construction of this project.
2. An on road bike facility is planned to cross at the Poplar Tent Road / I-85 interchange.
This interchange should be designed to accommodate bicycle traffic.
3. The Poplar Tent Road / I-85 interchange is severely congested. The interchange should
be redesigned. This road is also to be widened.
4. The NC 73 / I-85 interchange is severely congested. The interchange should be
redesigned as a single point urban diamond as called for in the, "NC 73 Transportation !
Land Use Corridor Plan". The plan was funded and adopted by NCDOT, Lincoln,
Cabarrus and Mecklenburg Counties, the cities and towns of Concord, Davidson,
Kannapolis, Huntersville, and Cornelius as well as the MPO's and RPO along the route.
In addition, per the NC 73 plan, this route is planned to be widened to a 4 lane median
divided roadway.
If I can be of any other assistance please contact me at 704-920-2147. Also, please include me on all future
mailings regarding this project including the scoping meeting described in your letter.
Sincerely,
Rodger ICP
Planning and Zoning Manager
J-6
Cabarrus County • Commerce Department • 65 Church Street, SE • Post Office Box 707 • Concord, NC 28026-0707
® Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone] • www.cabarruscounty.us
??z
CabarrusCoo
The terrier of American Matoraporls
xomx caxouxA