U-2221

Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Project Review Form
Project Number: County: Date:
- <_') / Z
ce.
Fo NS l - N C loo _ S?(?
? Project located in 7th floor library
Date Response Due (firm deadline):
This project is being reviewed as indicated below: /
Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In-House Review
? Asheville ? All R/O Areas ? Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
ill
? F
tt ? Air ? Coastal Management ? Water Planning
ev
aye
e
? Water ? Water Resources ? Environmental Health
? Mooresville ? Groundwater Wildlife ? Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer Forest Resources ? Radiation Protection
? Washington ? Recreational Consultant ? Land Resources ? David Foster
ED Coastal Management Consultant ? Parks and Recreation ? Other (specify)
? Wilmington
? Others
Environmental Management
? Winston-Salem PWS Monica Swihart
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
? Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
?Applicant has been contacted
?Applicant ha!FAAWcon`tacted
? Project Controv (Arn is attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Recommended for further development if specific & substantive Other ( pecify and attach comments)
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments (M-
attached/authority(ies) cited)
RETURN TO: f VVJ- IN/Y\ yyU/r?t?'^ U /? Q?f / !? G(` CCC
Melba McGee , Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
PS-104

NC 180 (Post Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
Federal Aid Project STP-180(1)
State Project 8.1800701
TIP Project U-2221B
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMMSTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Submitted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)
Approved:
6'-29-96 o? q!
DATE 4,-r H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
DATE Nich L. Gr , P. E.
?Divis'on Administrator, FHWA
r
NC 180 (Post Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
Federal Aid Project STP-180(1)
State Project 8.1800701
TIP Project U-2221B
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
June, 1996
Documentation Prepared in the Planning and Environmental Branch By:
0A CARp??,,,
?JESS/py.,.y
SEAL 9r
19802
Project Planning Engineer
41US1
J. W' on Stroud
lkr? Planning Unit Head
Lubin V. Prevatt , P.E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1. TYPE OF ACTION 1
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 1
III. SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS 2
IV. PROJECT STATUS AND SCHEDULE 3
V. SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 3
VI. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS 4
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment 4
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment 4
C. Comments Received During and Following the Public Hearing 5
VII. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 6
VIII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 7
FIGURES
Figure I Project Location Map
Figure 1A Project U-2221 Location Map
Figure 2 Project Vicinity Map
APPENDIX
Comments Received A- 1
Public Hearing Notice and Handout A-11
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
NC 180 (Post Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
Federal Aid Project STP-180(1)
State Project 8.1800701
TIP Project U-2221B
L TYPE OF ACTION
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administrative action, Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The FHWA has determined this project will not have
any significant impact on the human environment. This FONSI is based on the
Environmental Assessment, which has been independently evaluated by the FHWA and
determined to adequately and accurately discuss the environmental issues and impacts of
the proposed project.
The Environmental Assessment provides sufficient evidence and analyses for
determining that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. The FHWA takes
full responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and content of the Environmental Assessment.
IL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways,
proposes to improve NC 180 (Post Road) from SR 2200 (Taylor Road) to SR 2052
(Elizabeth Avenue) located east of Shelby in Cleveland County. The existing facility,
which contains two and three-lane sections, is to be widened to a five-lane, 19.2-meter
(64- foot) face-to-face curb and gutter section. The project vicinity is shown on Figures 1
and 2. The proposed improvements for this 3.5-kilometer (2.1-mile) long project have an
estimated cost of $ 7,850,000, including $ 3,050,000 for right of way acquisition and
$ 4,800,000 for construction.
M. SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS
A. Permits
Impacts to "Waters of the United States" will be in the form of Surface Water
impacts at minor stream crossings. No jurisdictional wetlands are located in the project
area. It is anticipated that Surface Water impacts will meet the criteria for a Department
of Army Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330.5 (a) (14). A North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water Quality General
Certification is also required. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state
issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may
result in a discharge into waters of the United States. The issuance of a 401 permit from
DEM is a prerequisite to issuance of Section 404 Permit.
B. Geodetic Surygy Markers
Seven geodetic survey markers may be impacted. The N. C. Geodetic Survey will
be contacted prior to beginning construction.
C. Underground Storage Tanks and Hazardous Materials
Five operational and one non-operational facilities with the potential for
underground storage tank (UST) involvement were identified. If any of the UST facilities
are to be impacted, those sites will be further investigated for possible fuel leakage prior to
the right-of-way acquisition phase of the project.
D. Utilities
It is estimated that the proposed improvements will involve a medium to a high
degree of utility conflicts. Any relocation of public utilities along the project will be
coordinated with the appropriate utility or local government agency.
E. Closure of SR 2059 (Woodlawn Avenue)
The City of Shelby has requested the elimination of the intersection of SR 2059
(Woodlawn Avenue) with NC 180 by closing SR 2059 at that intersection (see Figure 2).
NCDOT does not object to eliminating this intersection, since this would enhance the
safety of NC 180. However, since the elimination of this intersection was not presented as
part of the proposed improvements at the public hearing, a survey of the residents of
Woodlawn Avenue regarding this particular proposal will be conducted prior to a
determination regarding this request.
3
IV. PROJECT STATUS AND SCHEDULE
Project U-2221 is included in the 1997-2003 NCDOT Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP recommends widening NC 180 to a multi-lane
facility from NC 226 to NC 150 as project U-2221 (see Figure 1 A). The subject of this
action, U-2221B, is a part of project U-2221, and it covers the segment of NC 180
between SR 2200 (Taylor Road) and SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue) as shown in Figure 1.
Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1997 and construction
scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1999. The proposed improvements are to be federally-
funded. The remaining segments of project U-2221, which are not included in this action,
are: U-2221 A, NC 180 from NC 226 to SR 2200; and U- 2221 C, NC 180 from SR 2052
to NC 150. Right-of-way acquisition and construction of these two segments are
scheduled after the year 2002 in the current TIP. The TIP has allocated a total of $
7,850,000 for project U-2221B, which includes $ 3,050,000 for right of way acquisition
and $ 4,800,000 for construction.
V. SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The proposed improvements will provide additional traffic carrying capacity and an
efficient and safe facility. In addition, the widened roadway will provide safer access to
adjacent businesses and residences along the project. More efficient travel and improved
access will result in increased economic benefits to users of the facility and surrounding
businesses.
It is anticipated that eight residences, three businesses, and one non-profit
organization will be relocated as a result of the project. It is predicted that approximately
65 receptors will experience traffic noise impacts. However, based on traffic noise
analysis, no receptors are anticipated to be impacted by a substantial increase in future
exterior noise levels. The following table show the predicted maximum extent of the 72
and 67 dBA noise level contours:
Maximum Predicted
Leq Noise Levels
dBA
Project Segment 15m 30m 60 m
Maximum Contour
Distances
(meters)
72 dBA 67 dBA
1. From SR 2200 to SR 2048 73 69 63 26 47
2. From SR 2048 to US 74 Bus. 72 68 62 24 43
3. From US 74 Bus. to SR 2052 71 67 62 22 40
Notes: 1. 15 m, 30 m, and 60 m distances are measured from the center of the
nearest travel lane.
2. The 72 dBA and 67 dBA contour distances are measured from the center
of the proposed roadway.
This information was included in Table N5 on page A46 of the Appendix to the
Environmental Assessment, and is shown here to assist local authorities in exercising land
use control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway within local
jurisdiction. It should be noted that in accordance with NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement
4
Policy, the Federal/State governments are no longer responsible for providing noise
abatement measures for new development which 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 Categorical Exclusion, Finding of No Significant Impact, Record of Decision,
or the Design Public Hearing, whichever comes later. For development occurring after
this public knowledge date, local governing bodies are responsible to insure that noise
compatible designs are utilized along the proposed facility.
No significant impacts to plant and animal life are expected. No impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands are anticipated. No federally- protected threatened or endangered
species will be impacted. No recreational facilities or sites eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places will be involved. No prime farmland impacts are expected.
The proposed improvements will not cause significant negative impacts to air quality.
VI. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment
The Environmental Assessment was approved by the NCDOT Division of
Highways and the FHWA on September 29, 1995. The approved Environmental
Assessment was circulated to the following federal, state, and local agencies for review
and comment. An asterisk (*) indicates a written response was received from the agency.
Copies of the correspondence received are included in the Appendix to this document (see
pages A-1 through A-10).
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
* U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
* N.C. Department of Administration - State Clearinghouse
N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
* - Division of Environmental Management
* - N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
N.C. Department of Public Instruction
Cleveland County Commissioners
* City of Shelby
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment
N.C.D.E.H.N.R. - N.C. Wildlife Resource Commission
Comment - "NCDOT staff should note that total hectares and acres impacted by the
project appear to be incorrect as recorded in Table 3 on page 20. These should be revised
in the FONSI."
Response - The comment is acknowledged, and the corrected Table 3 is on page 6 of this
document.
5
C. Comments Received During and Following the Public Hearing
Following the circulation of the Environmental Assessment, a public hearing was
held at Cleveland County Community College in Shelby on March 28, 1996. A copy of
the public hearing notice and a copy of the handout presented at the public hearing are
shown in the Appendix to this document (pages A-11 to A-19). The purpose of the
hearing was to solicit public comments on the proposed widening project. The hearing
was opened with a brief overview of the proposed project and NCDOT right of way
acquisition procedures. Citizens were then encouraged to comment either at the hearing
or by mailing in comments sheets which were distributed as a part of the project handout.
A summary of the comments received during and following the public hearing and
responses to those comments is included below.
City of Shelby
Comment - " Sidewalks need serious consideration, especially on the east side of
NC 180 between Garrett Street and East Marion Street. Pedestrian traffic generated in
this vicinity is'due to the adjacent Cleveland County Community College, the Fairgrounds
and the County's Department of Social Services complex. Consideration should include
crosswalks at key locations."
Response- The City of Shelby withdrew this request for pedestrian facilities after further
City staff review (see City of Shelby May 15, 1996 letter on page A-10 in the Appendix).
Comment - "The City requests that the geometric design of the proposed widening
and/or addition of a storm drainage system fit the location of the existing utility
infrastructure. Any costs for utility relocation outside of routine surface adjustment of
valves and manholes, will have to be at the NCDOT's expense."
Response - Prior to construction, a determination will be made regarding the need to
relocate or adjust any existing utilities in the project area. A determination of whether the
NCDOT or the utility owner will be responsible for this work will be made at that time. It
is the NCDOT's policy to assume the financial responsibility for adjusting or relocating
utilities that are occupying a valid utility right of way. The municipality or other utility
owner is financially responsible for the adjustment or relocation of utilities located within
the right of way of an existing State system highway, except as provided for in G.S.
136-27.
Comment - "Any trees and/or shrubs removed due to widening needs to be replaced as
per City ordinance. Structures that would fall inside the zoning setback due to widening,
need justification not to be removed/relocated."
Response - NCDOT will have an appraisal or evaluation prepared for each property
affected by the proposed project. The compensation offered to the owner is the difference
in the fair market value of the entire property immediately before right of way acquisition
and the fair market value of the remaining property immediately after the acquisition. The
owner will receive a written offer that will include buildings, structures, and other
improvements such as landscaping, signs, etc. that are located on the property, as well as a
statement of the compensation for damages to the remainder of the real property caused
by proximity, reduction of size, etc.
6
Comment - "The Woodlawn Avenue/NC 180 intersection needs consideration to be
eliminated and convert the east end of Woodlawn Avenue into a cul-de-sac."
Response - NCDOT does not object to eliminating this intersection (see Figure 2), since
this would enhance the safety of NC 180. However, since the elimination of this
intersection was not presented as part of the proposed improvements at the public hearing,
a survey of the residents of Woodlawn Avenue regarding this particular proposal will be
conducted prior to a determination regarding this request. It should be noted that
SR 2059 (Woodlawn Avenue) is currently a part of the State-maintained system. The City
of Shelby has requested that NCDOT eliminate this street from the State-maintained
system; if this request is granted, Woodlawn Avenue will be maintained by the City of
Shelby.
Cleveland County Fairground
Comment - "I would like to know what advantage there is in moving Kemper Road from
the present location to a new location 400 feet east of the stop light on east Marion Street
through fairground property."
Response - As stated in the Environmental Assessment, the proposed realignment of
SR 2063 (Kemper Road) will allow the intersection of NC 180 with US 74 Business
(Marion Street) to operate more efficiently as a signalized four-leg intersection.
VII. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Table 3 on page 20 of the Environmental Assessment contains several errors. The
following is the corrected table:
TABLE 3 (CORRECTED)
ANTICIPATED BIOTIC COMMUNITY IMPACTS
COMMUNITY
IMPACTS
Hectares Acres
Maintained Community 5.0 (12.4)
Hardwood Forest 0.2 (0.5)
Total 5.2 (12.9)
VIII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the impacts of the proposed project as documented in the
Environmental Assessment and upon comments received from federal, state, and local
agencies and from citizens, it is the finding of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration that the project will not have a
significant impact on the quality of the human or natural environment. The project is not
controversial from an environmental standpoint. No significant impacts to natural,
ecological, cultural, or scenic resources are expected. No known Section 4(f) properties
are involved, no wetlands are impacted, no residences or businesses are anticipated to be
relocated, no significant impact on air or water quality is expected, and no effects on
federally listed threatened and endangered species are anticipated. The proposed project
is consistent with local plans and will not disrupt any communities. In view of the above
evaluation, it has been determined a Finding of No Significant Impact is applicable for this
project. Neither an Environmental Impact Statement nor further environmental analysis
will be required.
MBWmlt
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
NC 180
FROM SR 2200 TO SR 2052
SHELBY
CLEVELAND COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2221 B
0 MOLES 0.5
1 1 1 FIG. 1
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
NC 160
FROM NC 226 TO NC 150
SHELBY
CLEVELAND COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2221
??S i FIG. 1A
al t ?
E ??? r
9Z'0 63-M 0
a izzz-n 103road dil
AlNf100 (INV 13A310
A913HS
Z9OE US Ol OOZE US WOb4
08 L ON
HDNVM9
'IVZNgNMOZILANB QNV ONIN Md
SIVAAHJIH AO NOISUIQ
N0LLV.LM0dSNVIf.L
30 .LNZW,tlVdHG VNI'I0MV3 HZZION
® ®0602
!1£Z
1602
9602
Y1
dll9
Y!
££ IZ StiB
/ ).lm scoo T
LYOZ
)Z \
J LZ IZ
A*+
e
'vs
£89?
ZII
ZOIZ ?.,?? I£61
?90Z OZIZ
9C IZIZ 6112 / Hosa3 " V.
Q
'HO'ldtl8 ` ?
O 30IS1S`13
091
9oZ
OS Q C
9902
O
?
1 9902 ^ 9£/ 7FIMI Att30vJtl
SWO 3A13N1
Y661
I/P
NT Of Ty
tim United States Department of the Interior
vi 9
O
? S
J FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
?4ACH 33 ?0a9 V Asheville Field Office 160 h a Street
Asheville, , North Carolina 28801
November 14, 1995
i v
Mr. H. Planning randlEnvironmental Brancher
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
Subject: Federal Environmental Assessment for the proposed widening of
NC 180 (Post Road), from SR 2200 (Taylor Road) to SR 2052
(Elizabeth Avenue), in Shelby, Cleveland County, North
Carolina, T.I.P. No. U-22218
In your letter of October 30, 1995, you requested our comments on the
subject document. The following comments are provided in accordance with
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e),
and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
According to the environmental assessment, this project will involve the
widening of existing NC 180 from SR 2200 to SR 2052 just east of Shelby.
The existing road will be widened from a two-lane to a five-lane facility
for a distance of 2.1 miles. The project will involve culvert extensions
for stream crossings of unnamed tributaries to Buffalo Creek. There will
be no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. The purpose of the project is
to increase traffic capacity and to improve safety along this section of
NC 180.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has no objection to this
project and believes the project will not result in significant
environmental impacts. However, we encourage the implementation of the
following measures to minimize impacts to aquatic resources in the three
streams within the construction corridor: (1) riparian vegetation should
be maintained wherever possible (i.e., reduce canopy removal in or near
streams); (2) stringent erosion control measures should be implemented
during all construction activities in order to minimize downstream
effects; (3) the construction and/or extension of culverts should allow
for continuous flow in tributaries crossed by the alignment and should be
accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact water entering or
flowing in the stream to reduce the likelihood of fish kills; and
A-1
(4) culvert lengths should be minimized and barrels should be placed
below the grade of stream channels, whenever possible, to allow for the
reestablishment of natural substrate in the culvert.
The Service concurs with the "no effect" determination made regarding
this project and its potential impacts to federally listed endangered and
threatened species. In view of this, we believe the requirements of
Section 7(c) of the Act are fulfilled. However, obligations under
Section 7 of the Act must be reconsidered if: (1) new information
reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect endangered or
threatened species or critical habitat in a manner not previously
considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner not
considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical
habitat is determined that may be affected by the action.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any
questions regarding our comments, please contact Ms. Janice Nicholls of
our staff at 704/258-3939, Ext. 227. In any future correspondence
concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-94-037.
Sincerely,
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
cc:
Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
320 S. Garden Street, Marion, NC 28752
A-2
FM20b DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116 WEST JONES STREET
?J RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 2760 -
.? C?__J t
9 KE
OV
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT
ayELOPh9EtJT UPJiT
MAILED TO FROM R; ^',? „" Dr f - -
N.C- DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION MS. JEANETTE FURNEY
WHIT WEBB ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
PROGRAM DEV. BRANCH STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
TRANSPORTATION BLDG-/INTER-OFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ENV- ASSESS. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO US 180 (POST RD.) FROM
SRLZ00 (TAYLOR RD-) TO SR 2052 (ELIZABETH AVE.) IN SHELBYi NC
TIP #U-ZZZ1B
TYPE - ENV- ASSESS.
THE N-C• STATE CLEARINGHOUSE HAS RECEIVED THE ABOVE PROJECT FOR
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW- THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED STATE
APPLICATION NUMBER 9bE42200331. PLEASE USE THIS NUMBER WITH ALL
INQUIRIES OR CORRESPONDENCE WITH THIS OFFICE.
REVIEW OF THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE COMPLETED CN CR BEFORE 12/02/95•
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL (919) 733-7Z32-
IVE
?,qq5
Na
4??$ E7?vtPlv?%
A-3
? N_
4 !r •?`
6?
IM5 ?9
116 WE5T JUNE5 5iKtti
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
MAILED TO" FROM
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
WHIT WEBB
PROGRAM DEV. BRANCH
TRANSPORTATION BLDG./INTER-OFF
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
,? ? 1995
DEC 6 L
f OG-ili; i D'L ,: JI 'iILiaT Wr
MRS. CHRYS BAGGETT
DIRECTOR
N C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
J
ENV. ASSESS. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO US 180 (POST RD.) FROM
SR 2200 (TAYLOR RD-) TO SR 2052 (ELIZABETH AVE.) IN SHELBYt NC
TIP #U-2221B
SAI NC 96E42200331 PROGRAM TITLE - ENV. ASSESS.
THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CARCLINA

INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. AS A RESULT OF THE REVIEir THE FOLLOWINi
IS SUBMITTED ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONSY PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone].
C•C• REGION C
A-4
rcip
r 1995 ?
0?- rz
,?Z81 ENVI'ao';
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Henry M. Lancaster II, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee
Environmental Review Coordinator
RE: EA for NC 180, Cleveland County
SL /' ?&- 03 1
DATE: November 29, 1995
DEC 61995,
r
PROGMAM GLEYELCPMENT UNIT
The Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources has reviewed
the proposed project. The attached comment are for your consideration.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
MM:jr
Attachment
RECEIVL'e--- D

N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
EDEHN
A-5
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 2761 1-7637 Te!eghone 919-733-4984
An Equal Oppcrtunity Afflirmctive Acticn Emp!oyer .5TIC recyded/ 10°,o post-cCnsumer pcper
DEVE•i CIPMENT UI
RE North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission E2
312 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Full-wood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Melba McGee, Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
kid"
November 14, 1995
SUBJECT: State Clearinghouse Project No. 96-0331, Environmental Assessment for NC 180,
Cleveland County, TIP 9U-2221B.
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our review and comments regarding
the Environmental Assessment (EA) for NC 180 in Cleveland County. I conducted a site visit on
23 May 1994 and previously commented on this project in a memorandum to you dated the same
day. These comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d.) and the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen NC 180
(Post Road) from SR 2200 (Taylor Road) to SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue) in Shelby. The existing
two and three-lane roadway will be widened to five lanes. Approximately 12.4 acres of
maintained community and 0.4 acre of hardwood forest will be impacted. No wetlands will be
impacted.
This project should have minimal impacts on fish and wildlife resources; therefore, we
concur with the findings of the EA and would concur with a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI). NCDOT staff should note that total hectares and acres impacted by the project appear
to be incorrect as recorded in Table 3 on page 20. These should be revised in the FONSI.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 704/652-4257.
cc: Ms. Janice Nicholls, USFWS, Asheville
A-6
slda 619
: :.S:te of North.Cacofina
:._ = :Departftieh-fd Eniiironment,
Health and NatUtal Resources
Division of Environmental Mcnagen
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., RE., Director
22, 1995
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
From: Eric Galamb°?? I
Subject: EA for IBC 180 in Shelby;
Cleveland County I '
State Project DOT No. 8.4 800701,
EHNR # 96.0331, DEM #; 11109
[?EHNF1
CCEs0WR i.?;.
6 M ;
TIP # U-2221B
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which; impact waters of the state including wetlands.
The document states that no waters including wetlands will be impacted.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of
a 401 Certification upon application if; wetland or water impacts have not been avoided
and minimized to the maximurn extent' practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Envir6htnental Sciences Branch.
cc: Monica Swihart
Asheville COE
nc180cle.ea
A-7
P.O. Box 29535. Raleigh. North Ccrolina 27626-0.35 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Eaual Orportunity Affirmative Action Employer W%recyclec( 10% post-consumer paper
`<R
.`,,ti VED "-IV J
APR 11 1996
CITY OF SHELBY
I.
1, BOX 207 - WASHINGTON AT GRAHAM ST. - SHELBY NORTH CAROLINA 281 51 - 0207
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
i
fMr. L. L.. Hendricks April 8, 1996
Public Hearing Officer
Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
RE: N.C. 180 PROPOSED WIDENING - PROJECT 8.1800701
Dear Mr. Hendricks:
j' The City of Shelby staff under the direction of the City Manager,
requests that the attached remarks be entered into the record (as
j' allowed by the 15 day window) as a follow up to the public: hearing
held in Shelby on March 28, 1996. We trust that the NCDOT will
take these remarks seriously and consider them during the design
phase of the project. Should there be a question of interpretation
of the remarks; please advise.
The City also requests a review of the preliminary design prior to
finalizing the plans.
Very truly yo s,
/-Harlow- ?, . Town, P . E .
Water and Sewer Superintendent
HLB : j wh
Enclosure
Copy: Dee Freeman, City Manager
Hal Mason, Community Development Director
Bob Gidney, Director of Utilities
A-8
City of Shelby April 8, 1996
STAFF COMMENTS ON N.C. 180 WIDENING
Sidewalks and Crosswalks
Sidewalks need serious consideration, especially on the east side
of N.C. 180 between Garrett Street and East Marion Street.
Pedestrian traffic generated in this vicinity is due to the
adjacent Cleveland County Community College, the Fairgrounds and
the County's Department of Social Services complex. Consideration
should include crosswalks at key locations.
Utilities
The City owns and operates major water, sewer and gas mains within
this highway ROW. These utilities have already been located by
your location survey subcontractor. There are also several private
sewer force mains serving industries and commercial establishments
in the area that tie into the City's sewer system within this ROW.
The City's financial position will not allow for any major
extension and/or relocation of these utilities. Therefore; since
this project is a widening mostly within the existing ROW, 'the City
requests that the geometric design of the proposed widening and/or
addition of a storm drainage system fit the location of the
existing utility infrastructure. Any costs for utility relocation
outside of routine surface adjustment of valves and manholes, will
have to be at the NCDOT's expense.
Landscaping & Zoning
Any trees and/or shrubs removed due to widening needs to be
replaced as per City ordinance. Structures that would fall inside
the zoning setback due to widening, need justification not to be
removed/relocated.
Woodlawn Avenue
The Woodlawn Avenue/N.C. 180 Intersection needs consideration to be
eliminated and convert the east end of Woodlawn Avenue into a cul-
de-sac. Woodlawn Avenue is a City street, and the basis for this
recommendation is; (1) safety due to the close proximity to the
U.S. 74 Business/N.C. 180 Intersection, and (2) neighborhood
preservation. Left turns from Woodlawn onto N.C. 180 as a five
lane highway would be dangerous. Woodlawn is 100% residential and
converting the street to a cul-de-sac would help preserve the
integrity of the neighborhood, eliminate any vehicle "cut-throughs"
and increase safety for residents along the street.
A-9
FC 8 Y. ?CITY OF SHELBY

BOX 207 -WASHINGTON AT GRAHAM ST. -SHELBY NORTH CAROLINA 28151 - 0207
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager May 15, 1996
Planning and Environmental Branch
NCDOT - Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
RE: N.C. 180 WIDENING; STATE PROJECT 8.1800701
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Dear Mr. Vick:
In response to Mr. Mohammed B. Mustafa's April 25, 1996 letter
requesting additional information for pedestrian facilities for the
proposed N.C. 180 widening, please be advised that after further
City staff review; the City withdraws it's request for pedestrian
facilities.
The other comments on the project stand as submitted.
Very truly yours,
' r'-
Harlow L. Brown, P.E.
Water and Sewer Superintendent
HLB : j wh
Copy: Mohammed B. Mustafa, P.E.; Project Engineer
Dee Freeman
Hal Mason

A-10
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC.HEARING
ON THE PROPOSED WIDENING/IMPROVEMENTS OF-POST ROAD (NC 180)
FROM TAYLOR ROAD (SR 2200) TO ELIZABETH AVENUE (SR 2052)
Project 8.1800701 U-2221B Cleveland County
The North Carolina Department of Transportation will
hold the above public hearing on Thursday, March 28, 1996 at
7:00 p.m. in the Cleveland Community College Auditorium
located at 137 South Post Road in Shelby.
The hearing will consist of an explanation of the
proposed design and right of way requirements/procedures.
The hearing will be open to those present for statements,
questions, comments, and/.or submittal of material pertaining
to the proposed project. Additional material may be
submitted for a period of 10 days from the date of the
hearing to: L. L. Hendricks, NCDOT, Citizens Participation
Unit, P. 0. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611.
It is proposed to widen the existing roadway from Taylor
Road to Elizabeth Avenue to a five-lane facility with curb
and gutter - a distance of approximately 2.3 miles (3.7.
Kilometers). Additional right of way and the relocation of
homes and businesses will be required for this project.
Representatives of the Department of Transportation will
be available to discuss the proposed project with those
attending the public hearing. Anyone desiring additional
information may contact Mr. Hendricks at the above mailing
address or by telephone at [phone].
A map setting forth the location and design and a copy
of the environmental document - Environmental Assessment -
are available-.for public review in the North Carolina
Department of Transportation's Division Office located at
1710 East Maricn Street (US 74 Business) in Shelby -
approximately 1.5 miles east of the Shelby City Limits.
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services for
disabled persons who wish to participate in the hearing. To
receive special services, please call Mr. Hendricks at the
above number to give adequate notice prior to the date of the
hearing.
A-11
NC 180
(POST ROAD)
FROM TAYLOR ROAD
TO ELIZABETH AVENUE
PROJECT 8.1800701
TIP NO. U-2221 B
CLEVELAND COUNTY
COMBINED PUBLIC HEARING
CLEVELAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE
MARCH 28, 1996
A-12
PURPOSE OF PROJECT
The proposed widening/improvements of NC
additional traffic carrying capacity and
widened facility will provide safer acce,
homes along the project. More efficient
result in increased economic benefits to
surrounding businesses.
180 (Post Road) will provide
an efficient, safe roadway. The
ss to adjacent businesses and
travel and improved access will
users of the facility and
PURPOSE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Tonight's hearing is one step in the Department of Transportation's
procedure for making you, the public, a part of the planning process.
The Department of Transportation is soliciting your views on the proposed
widening/improvements of NC 180 (Post Road) from Taylor Road (SR 2200) to
Elizabeth Avenue (SR 2052).
The Department of Transportation's views on the above project are set
forth in the environmental document - Environmental Assessment. A copy
of this report is available for review in the North Carolina Department
of Transportation's Division Office located at 1710 East Marion Street
(US 74 Business) in Shelby - approximately 1.5 miles east of the Shelby
City Limits.
YOUR PARTICIPATION
Now that the opportunity is here, you
your comments and/or questions a part
Transcript. This may be done by havi:
them on the comment sheet and leaving
submitting them in writing during the
Hearing.
are urged to participate by making
of the official Public Hearing
Zg them recorded tonight, writing
it in the designated location or by
10 days following the Public
Those wishing to-submit written material may do so to:
Mr. L. L. Hendricks
Public Hearing Officer
Division of Highways
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Everyone present is urged to participate in the proceedings. It is
important, however, that THE OPINIONS OF ALL INDIVIDUALS BE RESPECTED
REGARDLESS OF HOW DIVERGENT THEY MAY BE FROM YOUR OWN. Accordingly,
debates, as such, are out of place at public hearings. Also, the public
hearing is not to be used as a POPULAR REFERENDUM to determine the
alignment and design by a majority vote of those present.
WHAT IS DONE WITH THE INPUT?
All input received through the public involvement process will be
reviewed and considered by the Administrative and Engineering staffs of
the Division of Highways for recommendations prior to final decisions
being made.
A-13
1944
• t
L
tit
7?i?1 4
fR IL
I1M • , t.tL tm 7,57
-! anaar s ? \
r I 212! -. rrrN-'"? 1
' \ ra }
\\\\ a
At,
24lt ohs
tM GARRETT DRIVE '
W2 / ?HGS ROAD
I9
aTENSION
?J
?I
Brwll 7c. 1?

t
/
END

ti

--, PROJECT f4j'19
? t!!t
'-? an
1 1111; ml m y4?•E nn
n not
,h eis
I T! im Am` m v. toS
an .al•
M
na 1
!pp INS?
1
tot m aL ?l
?
' V-1 2

rte I n1.
? 1!2
I/.4!
I13I
' ? ; +

I

-
-i \-- VU
u KEMP
ER ROAD'
h
I -? ? s 1
tit ?e
r y
i>44
TAYLOR
PO
A-14
.YO
...u w .c
? QEGIN
PROJECT
CARMELDR?IVEi slit „
na
. ?.fea7
Bus
74
n
u
tL?i
,4

NORTH CAROLINA DBPAUUf= OF
TRANSPORTATION
' DIVISION Of HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND BNYIRONMUTAL
BRANCH
NC ISO
FROM SR 2200 TO SR 2052
SHELBY
CLEVELAND COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-22218
I 1 I
PROJECT INFORMATION
Length 3.7 Kilometers (2.3 Miles)
Typical Section Five Lanes - 3.6 Meters Wide (12 Feet)
Curb & Gutter; Berm
Right of Way 30.0 Meters + Easements
98.4 Feet + Easements
Relocatees Residences - 8
Businesses - 3
Non-Profit - 1
Estimated Cost Right of Way - $ 2,628,000
Construction - 4,800,000
$ 7,428,000
Tentative Schedule Right of Way: August, 1997
Construction: May, 1999
STATE-FEDERAL RELATIONSHIP
This proposed project is a Federal-Aid Highway Project and thus will be
constructed under the State-Federal Aid Highway Program. Financing of
this project will be 80% Federal Funds and 20% State Funds. The Board of
Transportation is responsible for the selection and scheduling of
projects on the Federal Aid System, their location, design, and
construction. The Board is responsible for 100% of the project's
maintenance cost after construction. The Federal Highway Administration
is responsible for the review and approval of the previously mentioned
activities to ensure that each Federal Aid Project is designed,
constructed, and maintained to Federal Aid Standards.
A-15
'C
io IC\l
t
Z
O
U °
w
LLJ
N
cr) o
to to 4

O U

Cc LL
O
co
J `
o
o
et U W
CL ..j

U x
O
a
Q. a
} a

o E
• .a. N
p t0 ?-
cli
r
vi

N
r
N
m
A-16
c
W
N
22
oo
OU
? W
W
h
0
d ?
V
4
N
0
I
W
Z
Go
w
a
J
(this is a "cat example for a major project The actual process and public vahernent opportunities are esmblis W at an appropriate kW for each prgect based on its complexity,
and may vary in accordance with federal and state legal requirements) e - ind-tes typical public partiapadon opportunities (varies depending upon specific project)
1. Develop Local Area Thoroughfare Plan
Study Initiation
- Conduct initial field trip
- Meet with local policy boards and technical staff
- Conduct goals and objectives survey
• - Establish local steering committee (upon local request)
Data Collection
-.Collect socio-economic data (land use, population,
traffic volumes and employment data)
- Collect transportation network data
- Research environmental and cultural concerns
• - Receive input from various local area sources (needs,
problems, concerns, etc.)
e Local area develops future year socio-economic
forecasts
Data Analysis
- Model existing transportation network
- Generate design year transportation information
- Conduct deficiency analysis
Discuss Findings with Local Area Policy Boards, Technical
Staff, and Public
• - Discuss deficiencies with local area
• - Discuss possible alternative solutions
Plan Development
- Develop alternative plans
.. - Review project impacts
- Conduct cost-benefit analyses
- Discuss alternatives with local area staff and policy boards
e - Conduct public information workshop(s)
- Discuss and resolve public comments with local staff
- Select recommended plan in cooperation with local
staff and policy boards
Plan Adoption
- Local government conducts public hearing(s)
?- Present plan for adoption by local government and the
North. Carolina Board of Transportation
Plan Implementation .
. - Local govemment.enforces land use controls
e -Present project requests through TIP process
11. Develop Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP)
e - Local governments. select priorities to include in TIP
- Board of Transportation holds annual public meetings
statewide to update the previous year's TIP
- Transcribe comments and material received at public
meetings. and submit to Transportation Board
- Transportation Board members work with NCDOT
staff to update TIP
• -. Release draft Transportation Improvement Program
to the press, public and governments for review.
Finalize TIP following comments
- Board of Transportation adopts state TIP
• - Metropolitan Planning Organizations receive public
comment and approve local TIP
- Secretary of Transportation approves local TIPS
M. Develop Environmental Doaunents
Notify Public and Government Agencies of Project Study
• - Hold citizen information workshops
Evaluate comments received at workshops
- Form citizen's advisory group to get local citizens
involved (upon local request)
Select corridors to be studied
- Identify feasible corridors and evaluate costs and
environmental impacts
• - Hold information workshop on selected corridors
- NCDOT staff uses recommendations from local citizens,
governments and state agencies to prepare a draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or Environmental
Assessment (EA)
Prepare Draft Environmental Document
• - Make draft EIS or EA, which addresses the impacts of
each corridor, available to public and send to review
agencies and local officials for comment
• - Hold public hearing on location of corridor (10-day
comment period follows public hearing)
- NCDOT holds post hearing meeting and a corridor is
recommended using technical data and information
received in conjunction with the public hearing
Notify public of selected corridor
Prepare Final Environmental Document
- Begin preliminary design of highway in selected
corridor {1)
- If final EIS/Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
required, send to State Clearinghouse (N.C. Dept
of Administration) and federal'agencies for 30-day
comment period
- Send notification of Final EIS to Review Agencies and
Federal Register
- Publish record of decision on preliminary design using
comments from public, review agencies and the FHWA
• - Hold public hearing on project design (10-day public
comment period follows public hearing) (7)
- Hold post hearing meeting where any changes in
design are made if necessary.
tI j These steps are combined mM cwxW )patron for most smwrer prg-.
Questions? Call Citizen Participation Unit [phone]
® North Carolina Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 25201 Raleigh, N.C. 27611 211196
A-17
Development Process
For A New Highway
Identified in Local Area
Thoroughfare Plan
Included in Local Area's
TIP Request
Feasibility Study is Conducted
Funding Established in TIP
Project Plans and Environmental
Documents are Prepared
.Right of Way.Plans are Prepared
Right of Way Acquisition;
Final Design. Plans are Prepared
Construction
A-18
COMMENT SHEET
Widening/Improvements of NC 180 (Post Road)
From Taylor Road To Elizabeth Avenue
March 28, 1996
U-2221B Cleveland County Project 8.1800701
ADDRESS:
COMMENTS.AND/OR QUESTIONS:
Comments may be mailed to:
L. L. Hendricks, Public Hearing Officer
N. C. Department of Transportation, Division of Highways
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Telephone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
A-19
fk
NC 180 (Post Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
Federal Aid Project STP-180(1)
State Project 8.1800701
TIP Project U-2221B
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Submitted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)
Approved:
6 -, 2 9 - 961 ` q1- P-, L
DATE ?r H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
DATE Nich L. Gr , P.E.
ivis on Administrator, FHWA
I%
NC 180 (Post Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
Federal Aid Project STP-180(1)
State Project 8.1800701
TIP Project U-2221B
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
June, 1996
Documentation Prepared in the Planning and Environmental Branch By:
(H CAR???,,?FESS/py.•'yy
SEAL 9?'s
19802
Project Planning Engineer E;:••'
41 US, (T-W-Pn Stroud
L? I
J. W- on Stroud
ct Planning Unit Head
Lubin V. Prevatt, P.E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. TYPE OF ACTION I
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 1
III. SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS 2
IV. PROJECT STATUS AND SCHEDULE 3
V. SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 3
VI. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS 4
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment 4
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment 4
C. Comments Received During and Following the Public Hearing 5
VII. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 6
VIII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 7
FIGURES
Figure 1 Project Location Map
Figure IA Project U-2221 Location Map
Figure 2 Project Vicinity Map
APPENDIX
Comments Received A- 1
Public Hearing Notice and Handout A-11
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
NC 180 (Post Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
Federal Aid Project STP-180(1)
State Project 8.1800701
TIP Project U-2221B
1. TYPE OF ACTION
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administrative action, Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The FHWA has determined this project will not have
any significant impact on the human environment. This FONSI is based on the
Environmental Assessment, which has been independently evaluated by the FHWA and
determined to adequately and accurately discuss the environmental issues and impacts of
the proposed project.
The Environmental Assessment provides sufficient evidence and analyses for
determining that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. The FHWA takes
full responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and content of the Environmental Assessment.
IL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Highways,
proposes to improve NC 180 (Post Road) from SR 2200 (Taylor Road) to SR 2052
(Elizabeth Avenue) located east of Shelby in Cleveland County. The existing facility,
which contains two and three-lane sections, is to be widened to a five-lane, 19.2-meter
(64- foot) face-to-face curb and gutter section. The project vicinity is shown on Figures 1
and 2. The proposed improvements for this 3.5-kilometer (2.1-mile) long project have an
estimated cost of $ 7,850,000, including $ 3,050,000 for right of way acquisition and
$ 4,800,000 for construction.
2
III. SUMMARY OF SPECIAL PROJECT COMMITMENTS
A. Permits
Impacts to "Waters of the United States" will be in the form of Surface Water
impacts at minor stream crossings. No jurisdictional wetlands are located in the project
area. It is anticipated that Surface Water impacts will meet the criteria for a Department
of Army Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330.5 (a) (14). A North Carolina
Division of Environmental Management (DEM) Section 401 Water Quality General
Certification is also required. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act requires that the state
issue or deny water certification for any federally permitted or licensed activity that may
result in a discharge into waters of the United States. The issuance of a 401 permit from
DEM is a prerequisite to issuance of Section 404 Permit.
B. Geodetic Surva Markers
Seven geodetic survey markers may be impacted. The N. C. Geodetic Survey will
be contacted prior to beginning construction.
C. Underground Storage Tanks and Hazardous Materials
Five operational and one non-operational facilities with the potential for
underground storage tank (UST) involvement were identified. If any of the UST facilities
are to be impacted, those sites will be further investigated for possible fuel leakage prior to
the right-of-way acquisition phase of the project.
D. Utilities
It is estimated that the proposed improvements will involve a medium to a high
degree of utility conflicts. Any relocation of public utilities along the project will be
coordinated with the appropriate utility or local government agency.
E. Closure of SR 2059 &oodlawn Avenue)
The City of Shelby has requested the elimination of the intersection of SR 2059
(Woodlawn Avenue) with NC 180 by closing SR 2059 at that intersection (see Figure 2).
NCDOT does not object to eliminating this intersection, since this would enhance the
safety of NC 180. However, since the elimination of this intersection was not presented as
part of the proposed improvements at the public hearing, a survey of the residents of
3
IV. PROJECT STATUS AND SCHEDULE
Project U-2221 is included in the 1997-2003 NCDOT Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP recommends widening NC 180 to a multi-lane
facility from NC 226 to NC 150 as project U-2221 (see Figure 1 A). The subject of this
action, U-2221B, is a part of project U-2221, and it covers the segment of NC 180
between SR 2200 (Taylor Road) and SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue) as shown in Figure 1.
Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1997 and construction
scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1999. The proposed improvements are to be federally-
funded. The remaining segments of project U-2221, which are not included in this action,
are: U-2221 A, NC 180 from NC 226 to SR 2200; and U- 2221 C, NC 180 from SR 2052
to NC 150. Right-of-way acquisition and construction of these two segments are
scheduled after the year 2002 in the current TIP. The TIP has allocated a total of $
7,850,000 for project U-2221B, which includes $ 3,050,000 for right of way acquisition
and $ 4,800,000 for construction.
V. SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED BENEFICIAL AND ADVERSE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The proposed improvements will provide additional traffic carrying capacity and an
efficient and safe facility. In addition, the widened roadway will provide safer access to
adjacent businesses and residences along the project. More efficient travel and improved
access will result in increased economic benefits to users of the facility and surrounding
businesses.
It is anticipated that eight residences, three businesses, and one non-profit
organization will be relocated as a result of the project. It is predicted that approximately
65 receptors will experience traffic noise impacts. However, based on traffic noise
analysis, no receptors are anticipated to be impacted by a substantial increase in future
exterior noise levels. The following table show the predicted maximum extent of the 72
and 67 dBA noise level contours:
Project Segment
1. From SR 2200 to SR 2048
2. From SR 2048 to US 74 Bus.
3. From US 74 Bus. to SR 2052
Maximum Predicted
Leq Noise Levels
dBA
15m 30m 60m
Maximum Contour
Distances
(meters)
72 dBA 67 dBA
73 69 63 26 47
72 68 62 24 43
71 67 62 22 40
Notes: 1. 15 m, 30 m, and 60 m distances are measured from the center of the
nearest travel lane.
2. The 72 dBA and 67 dBA contour distances are measured from the center
of the proposed roadway.
This information was included in Table N5 on page A-46 of the Appendix to the
Environmental Assessment, and is shown here to assist local authorities in exercising land
use control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway within local
jurisdiction. It should be noted that in accordance with NCDOT Traffic Noise Abatement
4
Policy, the Federal/State governments are no longer responsible for providing noise
abatement measures for new development which 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 Categorical Exclusion, Finding of No Significant Impact, Record of Decision,
or the Design Public Hearing, whichever comes later. For development occurring after
this public knowledge date, local governing bodies are responsible to insure that noise
compatible designs are utilized along the proposed facility.
No significant impacts to plant and animal life are expected. No impacts to
jurisdictional wetlands are anticipated. No federally- protected threatened or endangered
species will be impacted. No recreational facilities or sites eligible for the National
Register of Historic Places will be involved. No prime farmland impacts are expected.
The proposed improvements will not cause significant negative impacts to air quality.
VI. COORDINATION AND COMMENTS
A. Circulation of the Environmental Assessment
The Environmental Assessment was approved by the NCDOT Division of
Highways and the FHWA on September 29, 1995. The approved Environmental
Assessment was circulated to the following federal, state, and local agencies for review
and comment. An asterisk (*) indicates a written response was received from the agency.
Copies of the correspondence received are included in the Appendix to this document (see
pages A-1 through A-10).
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
* U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
* N.C. Department of Administration - State Clearinghouse
N.C. Department of Cultural Resources
N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
* - Division of Environmental Management
* - N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission
N.C. Department of Public Instruction
Cleveland County Commissioners
* City of Shelby
B. Comments Received on the Environmental Assessment
N.C.D.E.H.N.R. - N.C. Wildlife Resource Commission
Comment - "NCDOT staff should note that total hectares and acres impacted by the
project appear to be incorrect as recorded in Table 3 on page 20. These should be revised
in the FONSI."
Response - The comment is acknowledged, and the corrected Table 3 is on page 6 of this
document.
C. Comments Received During and Following the Public Hearin
Following the circulation of the Environmental Assessment, a public hearing was
held at Cleveland County Community College in Shelby on March 28, 1996. A copy of
the public hearing notice and a copy of the handout presented at the public hearing are
shown in the Appendix to this document (pages A-11 to A-19). The purpose of the
hearing was to solicit public comments on the proposed widening project. The hearing
was opened with a brief overview of the proposed project and NCDOT right of way
acquisition procedures. Citizens were then encouraged to comment either at the hearing
or by mailing in comments sheets which were distributed as a part of the project handout.
A summary of the comments received during and following the public hearing and
responses to those comments is included below.
City of Shelby
Comment - " Sidewalks need serious consideration, especially on the east side of
NC 180 between Garrett Street and East Marion Street. Pedestrian traffic generated in
this vicinity is'due to the adjacent Cleveland County Community College, the Fairgrounds
and the County's Department of Social Services complex. Consideration should include
crosswalks at key locations."
Response- The City of Shelby withdrew this request for pedestrian facilities after further
City staff review (see City of Shelby May 15, 1996 letter on page A-10 in the Appendix).
Comment - "The City requests that the geometric design of the proposed widening
and/or addition of a storm drainage system fit the location of the existing utility
infrastructure. Any costs for utility relocation outside of routine surface adjustment of
valves and manholes, will have to be at the NCDOT's expense."
Response - Prior to construction, a determination will be made regarding the need to
relocate or adjust any existing utilities in the project area. A determination of whether the
NCDOT or the utility owner will be responsible for this work will be made at that time. It
is the NCDOT's policy to assume the financial responsibility for adjusting or relocating
utilities that are occupying a valid utility right of way. The municipality or other utility
owner is financially responsible for the adjustment or relocation of utilities located within
the right of way of an existing State system highway, except as provided for in G.S.
136-27.
Comment - "Any trees and/or shrubs removed due to widening needs to be replaced as
per City ordinance. Structures that would fall inside the zoning setback due to widening,
need justification not to be removed/relocated."
Response - NCDOT will have an appraisal or evaluation prepared for each property
affected by the proposed project. The compensation offered to the owner is the difference
in the fair market value of the entire property immediately before right of way acquisition
and the fair market value of the remaining property immediately after the acquisition. The
owner will receive a written offer that will include buildings, structures, and other
improvements such as landscaping, signs, etc. that are located on the property, as well as a
statement of the compensation for damages to the remainder of the real property caused
by proximity, reduction of size, etc.
6
Comment - "The Woodlawn Avenue/NC 180 intersection needs consideration to be
eliminated and convert the east end of Woodlawn Avenue into a cul-de-sac."
Response - NCDOT does not object to eliminating this intersection (see Figure 2), since
this would enhance the safety of NC 180. However, since the elimination of this
intersection was not presented as part of the proposed improvements at the public hearing,
a survey of the residents of Woodlawn Avenue regarding this particular proposal will be
conducted prior to a determination regarding this request. It should be noted that
SR 2059 (Woodlawn Avenue) is currently a part of the State-maintained system. The City
of Shelby has requested that NCDOT eliminate this street from the State-maintained
system; if this request is granted, Woodlawn Avenue will be maintained by the City of
Shelby.
Cleveland County Fairground
Comment - "I would like to know what advantage there is in moving Kemper Road from
the present location to a new location 400 feet east of the stop light on east Marion Street
through fairground property."
Response - As stated in the Environmental Assessment, the proposed realignment of
SR 2063 (Kemper Road) will allow the intersection of NC 180 with US 74 Business
(Marion Street) to operate more efficiently as a signalized four-leg intersection.
VII. REVISIONS TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Table 3 on page 20 of the Environmental Assessment contains several errors. The
following is the corrected table:
TABLE 3 (CORRECTED)
ANTICIPATED BIOTIC COMMUNITY IMPACTS
COMMUNITY
IMPACTS
Hectares Acres
Maintained Community 5.0 (12.4)
Hardwood Forest 0.2 (0.5)
Total 5.2 (12.9)
7
VIII. BASIS FOR FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based upon a study of the impacts of the proposed project as documented in the
Environmental Assessment and upon comments received from federal, state, and local
agencies and from citizens, it is the finding of the North Carolina Department of
Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration that the project will not have a
significant impact on the quality of the human or natural environment. The project is not
controversial from an environmental standpoint. No significant impacts to natural,
ecological, cultural, or scenic resources are expected. No known Section 4(f) properties
are involved, no wetlands are impacted, no residences or businesses are anticipated to be
relocated, no significant impact on air or water quality is expected, and no effects on
federally listed threatened and endangered species are anticipated. The proposed project
is consistent with local plans and will not disrupt any communities. In view of the above
evaluation, it has been determined a Finding of No Significant Impact is applicable for this
project. Neither an Environmental Impact Statement nor further environmental analysis
will be required.
MBM/mlt
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
I(NBRANCH
NC 180
FROM SR 2200 TO SR 2052
SHELBY
CLEVELAND COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2221 B
0 WES 0.5
t 1 1 FIG. 1
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
ON DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
NC 180
FROM NC 226 TO NC 150
SHELBY.
CLEVELAND COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2221
l WL S 2 FIG. 1A
£oZZ 1
Z '°Jid
9Z ,o STM D
a izzz-n lo3road dil
AlNnoo aNV13A310
A813 HS
Z90Z HS Ol OOZZ US WOdd
08 L ON
HDNVN9
'IVZNSmmomIANS QNV JNINNV'Id
SdVASHJIH JO NOISIAIQ
NOIZV.EZIOdSNVZI.E
Ao INHWIlVdSQ VNI'IOZIVa HZMON
® ®o6oz

i
?1
t I£z
? 16oz \?\
rt
dA9
rt
s?re
.? I.-Omsv lswi
E£IZ
11po
oyoa bo7,?b1
oo£z
OOZE
,N?v m3roSd
NIJ39
'9N sm 111ilO
_ 081
8L£Z
Z60Z
"OZ
9zz
081
'H?'1dr8
0"on
ISZ
Z05Z
Uri 3ARIa

wg)l "go
?I??
Tz
J tilz
e
r?
£897
s91z L lolz ??
'!A1'J:
no 01 1ZIz
11k)t11 y
8LOZ
I KR
M
50Iz A31ivSSfMW
? ail b, s
8boz
y?
I/
silzlz
'Itq `
,
M; a ,
0
ISOZ ? `C
a >
7d v ?
'H?'ldrlG? ?Y
1113BrZll3 7 oc 1
?V IG ??-? Q ? N3py?p
?O\ Z? ZgOZ ? " ?I?? 1
1L6
?i ? -0
507 9410 ?? `? . ? 1
1
A 1
1117,
Z0Z t50Z of III ? .. ? ? ` !
5 o ?? ? Isoz?
esoz 103rONd GN3 Moe
?? -? /?
ssoz ? `?
M -19-02 toz rsoz 0sl ? `,
tsoz ?
'ONI ilNnV38
Ia ? 1 O
O
ss l? lilzl7
zol
OZIZ
KIM 6112
1tIZ BIIZ
590E
?? I£61
??rrosa3j
" ? %r,
'e?'ldre ?
301S15r3 ._ ` .
An30rOr
SWV0 3A13M1
T90Z
C
osl

6b61
P??gST ? 00
TyF
f/J A
O
H a9 V
?4RCH 3 ?a
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
November 14, 1995
ty0? `'' to 15
Mr. H. Planning randl Environmental Blrancher
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201 U £,Lvi:Rctit'
Dear Mr. Vick:
Subject: Federal Environmental Assessment for the proposed widening of
NC 180 (Post Road), from SR 2200 (Taylor Road) to SR 2052
(Elizabeth Avenue), in Shelby, Cleveland County, North
Carolina, T.I.P. No. U-2221B
In your letter of October 30, 1995, you requested our comments on the
subject document. The following comments are provided in accordance with
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e),
and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
According to the environmental assessment, this project will involve the
widening of existing NC 180 from SR 2200 to SR 2052 just east of Shelby.
The existing road will be widened from a two-lane to a five-lane facility
for a distance of 2.1 miles. The project will involve culvert extensions
for stream crossings of unnamed tributaries to Buffalo Creek. There will
be no impacts to jurisdictional wetlands. The purpose of the project is
to increase traffic capacity and to improve safety along this sec-, of
NC 180.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has no objection to this
project and believes the project will not result in significant
environmental impacts. However, we encourage the implementation of the
following measures to minimize impacts to aquatic resources in the three
streams within the construction corridor: (1) riparian vegetation should
be maintained wherever possible (i.e., reduce canopy removal in or near
streams); (2) stringent erosion control measures should be implemented
during all construction activities in order to minimize downstream
effects; (3) the construction and/or extension of culverts should allow
for continuous flow in tributaries crossed by the alignment and should be
accomplished so that wet concrete does not contact water entering or
flowing in the stream to reduce the likelihood of fish kills; and
A-1
(4) culvert lengths should be minimized and barrels should be placed
below the grade of stream channels, whenever possible, to allow for the
reestablishment of natural substrate in the culvert.
The Service concurs with the "no effect" determination made regarding
this project and its potential impacts to federally listed endangered and
threatened species. In view of this, we believe the requirements of
Section 7(c) of the Act are fulfilled. However, obligations under
Section 7 of the Act must be reconsidered if: (1) new information
reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect endangered or
threatened species or critical habitat in a manner not previously
considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner not
considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical
habitat is determined that may be affected by the action.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any
questions regarding our comments, please contact Ms. Janice Nicholls of
our staff at 704/258-3939, Ext. 227. In any future correspondence
concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-94-037.
Sincerely,
V
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
cc:
Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
320 S. Garden Street, Marion, NC 28752
A-2
FM20b°
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116 WEST JONES STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27b0 -
n
f !
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT i
MAILED TO FROM RAM DcVEL0FhiENT UINIT ?
..._ .., --
N.C• DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION MS. JEANETTE FURNEY
WHIT WEBB ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
PROGRAM DEV. BRANCH STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
TRANSPORTATION BLDG./INTER-OFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ENV. ASSESS. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO US 180 (POST RD.) FROM
SRLZ00 (TAYLOR RD-) TO SR 2052 (ELIZABETH AVE.) IN SHELBYi NC
TIP #U-2221B
TYPE - ENV. ASSESS.
THE N•C• STATE CLEARINGHOUSE HAS RECEIVED THE ABOVE PROJECT FOR
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW. THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED STATE
APPLICATION NUMBER 96E42200331• PLEASE USE THIS NUMBER WITH ALL
INQUIRIES OR CORRESPONDENCE WITH THIS OFFICE.
REVIE'w OF THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE COMPLETED CN CR BEFCRE 12/02/95.
ShCULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL [phone]•
v?
a
o,?1?`?S ?-
;; N?okA
?rU,$ EtV1Afr
r.
A-3
X1208
DE?AXiMtiNi Ur AiJMlN1?1NA1l'jN
116 WEST JONES STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27603-8003
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
MAILED TO FROM
N-C. DEPT- OF TRANSPORTATION
WHIT WEBB
PROGRAM DEV. BRANCH
TRANSPORTATION BLDG./INTER-OFF
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
CC
AEG 61995
MRS- CHRYS BAGGETT
DIRECTOR
N C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
? I
ENV. ASSESS. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO US 180 (POST RD-) FROM
SR 2200 (TAYLOR RD-) TO SR 2052 (ELIZABETH AVE.) IN SHELBY9 NC
TIP #U-ZZZ1B
SAI NC 96E42200331 PROGRAM TITLE - ENV. ASSESS.
THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CARCLINA
INTL=RGOVERINMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. AS A RESULT OF THE REVIEir THE FOLLOWING
IS SUBMITTED ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone]-
C-C- REGION C
A-4
r o?, ?
r 195 r
0-? i
Q4, EN
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Legislative & Intergovernmental Affairs
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Henry M. Lancaster II, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee V/
Environmental Review Coordinator
RE: EA for NC 180, Cleveland County
SC/? 9&- 033)
DATE: November 29, 1995
11 '3 DEC 6 11995 ";`.,
a
PROG4,94 GElELOPMENT UNIT'
The Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources has reviewed
the proposed project. The attached comment are for your consideration.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
MM.jr
Attachment
RECEIVL
NOV ? 11 M6
N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
EDEHNR
A-5
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Te!ephone 919-733-4984
An Eque! OFPcrtunity Affirmc+ive Acticn Ernp!cyer 50110 recyded/ 10'0 post I -ccnsumer Fc,^,er
-6
ROGRAM DEVELGIMIENT U1117 F
KE North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
312 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Full-wood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Melba McGee, Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
Dept. of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program

November 14, 1995
State Clearinghouse Project No. 96-0331, Environmental Assessment for NC 180,
Cleveland County, TIP 9U-2221B.
This correspondence responds to a request by you for our review and comments regarding
the Environmental Assessment (EA) for NC 180 in Cleveland County. I conducted a site visit on
23 May 1994 and previously commented on this project in a memorandum to you dated the same
day. These comments are provided in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d.) and the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)).
The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen NC 180
(Post Road) from SR 2200 (Taylor Road) to SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue) in Shelby. The existing
two and three-lane roadway will be widened to five lanes. Approximately 12.4 acres of
maintained community and 0.4 acre of hardwood forest will be impacted. No wetlands will be
impacted.
This project should have minimal impacts on fish and wildlife resources; therefore, we
concur with the findings of the EA and would concur with a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI). NCDOT staff should note that total hectares and acres impacted by the project appear
to be incorrect as recorded in Table 3 on page 20. These should be revised in the FONSI.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please contact me at 704/652-4257.
cc: Ms. Janice Nicholls, USFWS, Asheville
A-6
` .Sta to of Norrh.Carofina
:Deparfi ehfbf Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Mcnagem
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba !McGee
?EHNR
r S '`
22, 1995
ri 6 M

1 J1I.f3 il:.r Jr?'? S?
I
From: Eric Galamb t /
9
Subject: EA for NC 180 in Shelby;
Cleveland County
State Project DOT No. 8.1800701, TIP # U-2221 B
EHNR # 96-0331, DEM ". 11109
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which, impact waters of the state including wetlands.
The document states that no waters including wetlands will be impacted.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of !an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of
a 401 Certification upon application if; wetland or water impacts have not been avoided
and minimized to the maximum extent-practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in D2M's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Monica Swihart
Asheville COE
nc180cle.ea
A-7
P.O. Box 29535. Raleigh. North Ccrolina 27626-0635 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Eaual Opportunity Affirmative Action Empioyer 50% rec yclec/ 10% post-consumer paper
<'
ut 10
li ? 'Ii F['BY. ?
R
CITY OF SHELBY
~?C1VCp -'yi
APR 1 1 1996
BOX 207 - WASHINGTON AT GRAHAM ST. - SHELBY NORTH CAROLINA 281 51 - 0207
ill
it
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. L. L. Hendricks April 8, 1996
Public Hearing Officer
Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
j Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
RE: N.C. 180 PROPOSED WIDENING - PROJECT 8.1800701
Dear Mr. Hendricks:
The City of Shelby staff under the direction of the City Manager,
requests that the attached remarks be entered into the record (as
allowed by the 15 day window) as a follow up to the public hearing
held in Shelby on March 28, 1996. We trust that the NCDOT will
take these remarks seriously and consider them during the design
phase of the project. Should there be a question of interpretation
of the remarks; please advise.
The City also requests a review of the preliminary design prior to
finalizing the plans.
Very truly yo s,
/-Harlow L. i5roown, P.E.
Water and Sewer Superintendent
HLB : j wh
Enclosure
Copy: Dee Freeman, City Manager
Hal Mason, Community Development Director
Bob Gidney, Director of Utilities
A-8
City of Shelby April 8, 1996
STAFF COMMENTS ON N.C. 180 WIDENING
Sidewalks and Crosswalks
Sidewalks need serious consideration, especially on the east side
of N.C. 180 between Garrett Street and East Marion Street.
Pedestrian traffic generated in this vicinity is due to the
adjacent Cleveland County Community College, the Fairgrounds and
the County's Department of Social Services complex. Consideration
should include crosswalks at key locations.
Utilities
The City owns and operates major water, sewer and gas mains within
this highway ROW. These utilities have already been located by
your location survey subcontractor. There are also several private
sewer force mains serving industries and commercial establishments
in the area that tie into the City's sewer system within this ROW.
The City's financial position will not allow for any major
extension and/or relocation of these utilities. Therefore; since
this project is a widening mostly within the existing ROW, 'the City
requests that the geometric design of the proposed widening and/or
addition of a storm drainage system fit the location of the
existing utility infrastructure. Any costs for utility relocation
outside of routine surface adjustment of valves and manholes, will
have to be at the NCDOT's expense.
Landscaping & Zoning
Any trees and/or shrubs removed due to widening needs to be
replaced as per City ordinance. Structures that would fall inside
the zoning setback due to widening, need justification not to be
removed/relocated.
Woodlawn Avenue
The Woodlawn Avenue/N.C. 180 Intersection needs consideration to be
eliminated and convert the east end of Woodlawn Avenue into a cul-
de-sac. Woodlawn Avenue is a City street, and the basis for this
recommendation is; (1) safety due to the close proximity to the
U.S. 74 Business/N.C. 180 Intersection, and (2) neighborhood
preservation. Left turns from Woodlawn onto N.C. 180 as a five
lane highway would be dangerous. Woodlawn is 100% residential and
converting the street to a cul-de-sac would help preserve the
integrity of the neighborhood, eliminate any vehicle "cut-throughs"
and increase safety for residents along the street.
A-9
OF SH
V(fF' ,?? ?
B Y.
CITY OF SHELBY
BOX 207 - WASHINGTON AT GRAHAM ST. - SHELBY NORTH CAROLINA 281 51 - 0207
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager May 15, 1996
Planning and Environmental Branch
NCDOT - Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
RE: N.C. 180 WIDENING; STATE PROJECT 8.1800701
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Dear Mr. Vick:
In response to Mr. Mohammed B. Mustafa's April 25, 1996 letter
requesting additional information for pedestrian facilities for the
proposed N.C. 180 widening, please be advised that after further
City staff review; the City withdraws it's request for pedestrian
facilities.
The other comments on the project stand as submitted.
Very truly yours,
Harlow L. Brown, P.E.
Water and Sewer Superintendent
HL.B : j w h
Copy: Mohammed B. Mustafa, P.E.; Project Engineer
Dee Freeman
Hal Mason
A-10
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC.HEARING
ON THE PROPOSED WIDENING/IMPROVEMENTS OF-POST ROAD (NC 180)
FROM TAYLOR ROAD (SR 2200) TO ELIZABETH AVENUE (SR 2052)
Project 8.1800701 U-2221B Cleveland County
The North Carolina Department of Transportation will
hold the above public hearing on Thursday, March 28, 1996 at
7:00 p.m. in the Cleveland Community College Auditorium
located at 137 South Post Road in Shelby.
The hearing will consist of an explanation of the
proposed design and right of way requirements/procedures.
The hearing will be open to those present for statements,
questions, comments, and/.or submittal of material pertaining
to the proposed project. Additional material may be
submitted for a period of 10 days from the date of the
hearing to: L. L. Hendricks, NCDOT, Citizens Participation
Unit, P. O. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611.
It is proposed to widen the existing roadway from Taylor
Road to Elizabeth Avenue to a five-lane facility with curb
and gutter - a distance of approximately 2.3 miles (3..7.
Kilometers). Additional right of way and the relocation of
homes and businesses will be required for this project.
Representatives of the Department of Transportation will
be available to discuss the proposed project with those
attending the public hearing. Anyone desiring additional
information may contact Mr. Hendricks at the above mailing
address or by telephone at [phone].
A map setting forth the location and design and a copy
of the environmental document - Environmental Assessment -
are available -.for public review in the North Carolina
Department of Transportation's Division Office located at
1710 East Marion Street (US 74 Business) in Shelby -
approximately 1.5 miles east of the Shelby City Limits.
NCDOT.will provide auxiliary aids and services for
disabled persons who wish to participate in the hearing. To
receive special services, please call Mr. Hendricks at the
above number to give adequate notice prior to the date of the
hearing.
A-11
NC 180
(POST ROAD)
FROM TAYLOR ROAD
TO ELIZABETH AVENUE
PROJECT 8.1800701
TIP NO. U-2221 B
CLEVELAND COUNTY
COMBINED PUBLIC HEARING
CLEVELAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE
MARCH 28, 1996
A-12
PURPOSE OF PROJECT
The proposed widening/improvements of NC
additional traffic carrying capacity and
widened facility will provide safer acce,
homes along the project. More efficient
result in increased economic benefits to
surrounding businesses.
180 (Post Road) will provide
an efficient, safe roadway. The
ss to adjacent businesses and
travel and improved access will
users of the facility and
PURPOSE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Tonight's hearing is one step in the Department of Transportation's
procedure for making you, the public, a part of the planning process.
The Department of Transportation is soliciting your views on the proposed
widening/improvements of NC 180 (Post Road) from Taylor Road (SR 2200) to
Elizabeth Avenue (SR 2052).
The Department of Transportation's views on the above project are set
forth in the environmental document - Environmental Assessment. A copy
of this report is available for review in the North Carolina Department
of Transportation's Division Office located at 1710 East Marion Street
(US 74 Business) in Shelby - approximately 1.5 miles east of the Shelby
City Limits.
YOUR PARTICIPATION
Now that the opportunity is here, you are urged to participate by making
your comments and/or questions a part of the Official Public Hearing
Transcript. This may be done by having them recorded tonight, writing
them on the comment sheet and leaving it in the designated location or by
submitting them in writing during the 10 days following the Public
Hearing.
Those wishing to submit written material may do so to:
Mr. L. L. Hendricks
Public Hearing Officer
Division of Highways
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Everyone present is urged to participate in the proceedings. It is
important, however, that THE OPINIONS OF ALL INDIVIDUALS BE RESPECTED
REGARDLESS OF HOW DIVERGENT THEY MAY BE FROM YOUR OWN. Accordingly,
debates, as such, are out of place at public hearings. Also, the public
hearing is not to be used as a POPULAR REFERENDUM to determine the
alignment and design by a majority vote of those present.
WHAT IS DONE WITH THE INPUT?
All input received through the public involvement process will be
reviewed and considered by the Administrative and Engineering staffs of
the Division of Highways for recommendations prior to final decisions
being made.
A-13

mw W
LUZ
WI d
II •/ /
I ?\ M?
\ f//aiOr 1/ aL>z
an an
f nn Un
S
ri1Mt aG
••?/• WI
1- 150 0-4 NMI
END
1 011j1'•.i 1 PROJECT M22
^ 1 ! I41L ?
MML
1 I . ?? sOS am
1 •
! iyf__? Lai 2412 >R1i i
'^? a • :?': 1 ,.} 2141
1 _ aria F
l ? w? y .yi
?J

s°°?sm v. ? r
? I431 Llif

ffi
2lZZ

I •1 nn
! ? :1? ILQ!
1 ' •!4r +•, ..3 - LUI KEMPER ROAO'i
i
?! a.vnr a
R1 2121
" ``•!p
' ? ? I?\ Ia1rrN
24l1 \\\!'i 3 ?
1a1 VMGARREITERNE
l4NG$ RO
AD
2L34 cr Pp a Z? w ?TENSIOIy >S za
?p an Imt Im
Im rt
lttt - a0.ma1 it
4
1._
?, /ItS
moll
araaar..c
BEGIN
CARMEL D RI E? s2u r PROJECT
.4 '
1 ml ..
2141 Zfi8
?y
1144
TAYLOa ,?
O OHO
A-14 L
r ?
ftj

IRANS AROLINA DVAtiSlfitf Of
7RANStOXTATIO OtfAT10N
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND 9R7tONMLNTAL
DRANCN
NC 130
FROM 3R 2200 TO SR 2052
SHELBY
CLEVELAND COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-22218
I 1 I

. , i
Identified in Local Area
Thoroughfare Plan
Included in Local Area's
TIP Request
Feasibility Study is Conducted
Funding Established in TIP
Project Plans and Environmental
Documents are Prepared
Right of Way.Plans are Prepared
Right of Way Acquisition;
Final Design. Plans are Prepared
Construction
A-1'8
(This is a typical example for a major project The actual process and public insohwnent cpporturuties are established at an appropriate level for each project based on its complexity,
and may vary in accordance with federal and state legal requirements.) • - mdotes typiol public partiopation opportunities (varies depending upon specihc project)
L Develop Lod Area Thoroughfare PLan
Study Initiation
- Conduct initial field trip
- Meet with local policy boards and technical staff
• - Conduct goals and objectives survey
e - Establish local steering committee (upon local request)
Data Collection
-.Collect socio-economic data (land use, population,
traffic volumes and employment data)
- Collect transportation network data
- Research environmental and cultural concerns
- Transportation Board members work with NCDOT
staff to update TIP
• Release draft Transportation Improvement Program
to the press, public and governments for review.
- Finalize TIP following comments
- Board of Transportation adopts state TIP
• - Metropolitan Planning Organizations receive public
comment and approve local TIP
- Secretary of Transportation approves local TIPS
10. Develop Environmental Documents
Notify Public and Government Agencies of Project Study
• - Hold citizen information workshops
• - Receive input from various local area sources (needs,
problems, concerns, etc.)
• Local area develops future year solo-economic
forecasts
Data Analysis
- Model existing transportation network
- Generate design year transportation information
- Conduct deficiency analysis
Discuss Findings with Local Area Policy Boards, Technical
Staff, and Public
. • - Discuss deficiencies with local area
• - Discuss possible alternative solutions
Plan Development
- Develop alternative plans
- Review project impacts
- Conduct cost-benefit analyses
- Discuss alternatives with local area staff and policy boards
• - Conduct public information workshop(s)
- Discuss and resolve public comments with local staff
- Select recommended plan in cooperation with local
staff and policy boards
Plan Adoption
0 - Local government conducts public hearing(s)
?- Present plan for adoption by local government and the
North. Carolina Board of Transportation
Plan Implementation .
-Local government.enforces land use controls'
• - Present project requests through TIP process
11. Develop Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP)
0 - Local governments select priorities to include in TIP
0 - Board of Transportation holds annual public meetings
statewide to update the previous year's TIP
- Transcribe comments and material received at public
meetinos. and submit to Transportation Board
- Evaluate comments received at workshops
0 - Form citizen's advisory group to get local citizens
involved (upon local request)
Select corridors to be studied
- Identify feasible corridors and evaluate costs and
environmental impacts
• - Hold information workshop on selected corridors
NCDOT staff uses recommendations from local citizens,
governments and state agencies to prepare a draft
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or Environmental
Assessment (EA)
Prepare Draft Environmental Document
• - Make draft EIS or EA, which addresses the impacts of
each corridor, available to public and send to review
agencies and local officials for comment
• - Hold public hearing on location of corridor (10-day
comment period follows public hearing)
- NCDOT holds post hearing meeting and a corridor is
recommended using technical data and information
received in conjunction with the public hearing
- Notify public of selected corridor
Prepare Final Environmental Document
- Begin preliminary design of highway in selected
corridor {1}
- If final EIS/Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
required, send to State Clearinghouse (N.C. Dept
of Administration) and federal'agencies for 30-day
comment period
- Send notification of Final EIS to Review Agencies and
Federal Register
- Publish record of decision on preliminary design using
comments from public, review agencies and the FHWA
• - Hold public hearing on project design (10-day public
comment period follows public hearing) {1}
Hold post hearing meeting where any changes in
design are made 9 necessary.
{1 } These steps are combined with corridor location for most smaller projects.
Questions? Cal Citizen Participation Unit [phone]
® North Carolina Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 25201 Raleigh, N.C. 27611 21119
A-17

Z
O
t--
U °

o
LU cc

p
Cl) LL

o
o ?
OC U J

CL
-j H
a
d

U x
X

_
Q a

AL
.

O
W
E
S?
N K m
4
N It!
G

O
E
C) O `°
IV E
?ci
?E
E
N
E
co v
A-16
0
W
N
R O
O of
4 in
V
4
W
h
O
F
LU
0
Z
co
cc
U
Z
J
LO
PROJECT INFORMATION
Length 3.7 Kilometers (2.3 Miles)
Typical Section Five Lanes - 3.6 Meters Wide (12 Feet)
Curb & Gutter; Berm
Right of Way 30.0 Meters + Easements
98.4 Feet + Easements
Relocatees Residences - 8
Businesses - 3
Non-Profit - 1
Estimated Cost Right of Way - $ 2,628,000
Construction - 4,800,000
$ 7,428,000
Tentative Schedule Right of Way: August, 1997
Construction: May, 1999
STATE-FEDERAL RELATIONSHIP
This proposed project is a Federal-Aid Highway Project and thus will be
constructed under the State-Federal Aid Highway Program. Financing of
this project will be 80% Federal Funds and 20% State Funds. The Board of
Transportation is responsible for the selection and scheduling of
projects on the Federal Aid System, their location, design, and
construction. The Board is responsible for 100% of the project's
maintenance cost after construction. The Federal Highway Administration
is responsible for the review and approval of the previously mentioned
activities to ensure that each Federal Aid Project is designed,
constructed, and maintained to Federal Aid Standards.
A-15
COMMENT SHEET
Widening/Improvements of NC 180 (Post Road)
From Taylor Road To Elizabeth Avenue
March 28, 1996
U-2221B Cleveland County Project 8.1800701
Q %"K Y
ADDRESS:
COMMENTS AND/OR QUESTIONS:
Comments may be mailed to:
L. L. Hendricks, Public Hearing Officer
N. C. Department of Transportation, Division of Highways
P. O. Box 25201
Raleigh, NC 27611
Telephone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
A-19
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, 'Aq
Health and Natural Resources • •
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary ID E H N F?
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
November 22, 1995
MEMORANDUM
To: Melba McGee
From: Eric Galamb,
Subject: EA for NC 180 in Shelby
Cleveland County
State Project DOT No. 8.1800701, TIP # U-2221 B
EHNR # 96-0331, DEM # 11109
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The Division of
Environmental Management is responsible for the issuance of the Section 401 Water
Quality Certification for activities which impact waters of the state including wetlands.
The document states that no waters including wetlands will be impacted.
DOT is reminded that endorsement of an EA by DEM would not preclude the denial of
a 401 Certification upon application if wetland or water impacts have not been avoided
and minimized to the maximum extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certification should be directed to Eric Galamb (733-
1786) in DEM's Water Quality Environmental Sciences Branch.
cc: Monica Swihart
Asheville COE
nc180cle.ea
FOES
NOV 2 21995
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
W. I
7.'p r7
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs Project located In 7th floor library
Project Review Form 11)01
Project Number: County: Date: Date Response Due (firm deadline):
--0 33 C' W-7171
1)6 1 mi- NAX? tJA '5he 16
- anal ? V' nrr
This project is being reviewed as indicated below: D? -D?; "6 Regional Office/Phone Regional Office Area In- WAL"
42 A

? Asheville
? All R/O Areas _
%N01
Soil and Water ? Marine Fisheries
? Fayetteville ?Air ?Coastal Management ? Water Planning
? Water ? Water Resources ? Environmental Health
? Mooresville ? Groundwater ildlife ? Solid Waste Management
? Raleigh ? Land Quality Engineer eorest Resources ? Radiation Protection
El Washington ? Recreational Consultant ? Land Resources ? David Foster
AOL

? Wilmington ? Coastal Management Consultant arks and Recreation El Other (speVECI VEQ
? Others nvironmental Management p
1995(
? Winston-Salem PWS Monica Swihart NOV 2 n
ENV!RONMEKAL SCIENC
Manager Sign-Off/Region: Date: In-House Reviewer/Agency:
Response (check all applicable)
Regional Office response to be compiled and completed by Regional Manager. In-House Reviewer complete individual response.
? No objection to project as proposed
? No Comment
? Insufficient information to complete review
10 Approve
? Permit(s) needed (permit files have been checked)
? Recommended for further development with recommendations for
strengthening (comments attached)
? Recommended for further development if specific i£ substantive
changes incorporated by funding agency (comments
attached/authority(ies) cited)
? Not recommended for further development for reasons
stated in attached comments (authority(ies) cited)
?Applicant has been contacted
? Applicant has not been contacted
? Project Controversial (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement needed (comments attached)
? Consistency Statement not needed
? Full EIS must be required under the provisions of
NEPA and SEPA
? Other (specify and attach comments)
RETURN TO:
i
Melba McGee Office of Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs
PS-104
NC 180 (Postf Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
F. A. Project No. STP-180(1)
State Project No. 8.1800701
T. I. P. No. U-2221B

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
and
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
Submitted Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)
and 49 U.S.C. 303
J-21-95 c?e ' ?/,
Date H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
1
9-2`t-Q5 e ?.
Nicn0iaS L. GraT, N. t.
Division Administrator, FHWA
NC 180 (Post Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
F. A. Project No. STP-180(1)
State Project No. 8.1800701
T. I. P. No. U-2221B

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental_ Branch by:
/%!?
Monammeo B. Mustara, F. t.
Project Planning Engineer
J. Wil on Stroud
Pro ct Planning Unit Head
Lubin V. Prevatt, P. E., Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
CAR,
?? nFESS n,R Y
SEAL
19802
M us,
11
NC 180 ,t Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
F. A. Project No. STP-180(1)
State Project No. 8.1800701
T. I. P. No. U-22216
SUMMARY
1. Type of Action
This is a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) administrative
action, Environmental Assessment.
2. Description of Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of
Highways, proposes to improve NC 180 (Post Road) from SR 2200 (Taylor
Road) to SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue) located east of Shelby in Cleveland
County (see Figure 1). The existing facility which contains two and
three-lane sections is to be widened to a five-lane, 19.2-meter (64-foot)
face-to-face curb and gutter section. The proposed improvements for this
3.5-kilometer (2.1-mile) lon project have an estimated cost of
$6,128,000, including $2 000 for right of way acquisition and
$3,500,000 for construction. The TIP has allocated a total of $4,050,000
for project U-22218. This includes $1,600,000 for right of way
acquisition and $2,450,000 for construction. The current estimated cost
of the proposed improvements exceeds the TIP funding for project U-2221B
by $2,078,000.
3. Suamary_of_Beneficial _and_Adverse _Environmental_Impacts
The proposed improvements will provide additional traffic carrying
capacity and an efficient and safe facility. In addition, the widened
roadway will provide safer access to adjacent businesses and residences
along the project. More efficient travel and improved access will result
in increased economic benefits to users of the facility and surrounding
businesses.
It is anticipated that 8 residences, three businesses, and one
non-profit organization will be relocated as a result of the project. It
is predicted that approximately 65 receptors will experience traffic noise
impacts. However, no receptors were found to be impacted by a substantial
increase in future exterior noise levels. No significant impacts to plant
and animal life are expected. No impacts to jurisdictional wetlands are
anticipated. No federally-protecte reatened or en angered species wi
be impacted. No recreational facilities or sites eligible for the National'
Register o1 Historic Places will be involved. No prime farmland impacts
are expected. The proposed improvements will not cause significant
negative impacts to air quality.
''?
_. ?,
1
4. Summary of Special Project Conmi to ents
a. Special_Permits Required
Impacts to "Waters of the United States" will be in the form of
Surface Water impacts at minor stream crossings. No jurisdictional
wetlands are located in the project area. It is anticipated that
Surface Water impacts will meet the criteria for a Department of Army
Nationwide Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330.5 (a) (14). Also, a
` Section 401 water quality certification will be required from the N.
C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.
b. Geodetic-Survey-Markers
Seven geodetic survey markers may be impacted. The N. C.
Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior to beginning construction.
c. Underground Storage Tanks and Hazardous Materials
Five operational and one non-operational facilities with the
potential for underground storage tank (UST) involvement were
identified. If any of the UST facilities are to be impacted, those
sites will be further investigated for possible fuel leakage prior to
the right-of-way acquisition phase of the project.
d. Utilities
It is estimated that the proposed improvements will involve a
medium to a high degree of utility conflicts. Any relocation of
public utilities along the project will be coordinated with the
appropriate utility or local government agency.
5. Alternatives Considered
Due to the nature of this project, the widening of an existing
roadway, alternative alignments are not practicable. Due to the traffic
and development characteristics of this route, only a multi-lane undivided
facility was studied, with the number of lanes proposed based on desired
capacity and access to adjacent development. Impacts to existing
development were considered when determining the alignment of the widened
roadway.
The "No Build" alternative was considered and rejected, since the
traffic and safety benefits to be provided by the proposed improvements
would not be realized. The "Alternate Modes of Transportation"
alternative was rejected due to the fact that the private automobile is
the dominant mode of transportation in the area, and the project involves
widening an existing highway.
6. Anticipated Design Exceptions
None.
7. Coordination
The following federal, state, and local agencies and officials were
consulted regarding this project:
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U. S. Geological Survey
State Clearinghouse
• N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
N. C. Department of Environment, Health and
N. C. Department of Public Instruction
Isothermal Planning & Economic Development
Cleveland County Commissioners
Mayor of Shelby
8. Additional Information
Natural Resources
Commission
Additional information concerning the proposal and assessment can be
obtained by contacting either of the following:
Nicholas L. Graf, P. E.
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 410
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601
Telephone [phone]
H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Telephone [phone]
9. Basis for Environmental Assessment
On the basis of planning and environmental studies, it is anticipated
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
11, 1994. For these reasons, it is concluded that an Environmental
Assessment is applicable to the project.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT ................................. 1
A. Existing Conditions ...................................... 1
1. Length of Studied Section ........................... 1
2. Project Terminals ............................. 1
3. Functional Classification ........................... 1
4. Existing Cross Section .............................. 1
5. Right-of-Way ........................................ 2
6. Alignment ........................................... 2
7. Intersecting Roadways ....... .. ................... 2
8. Service Roads near the US 74 Bypass
Intersection ...................................... 3
9. Access Control ...................................... 4
10. Utilities .......................................... 4
11. Speed Limit ..................................... 4
12. Railroad Crossings .................................. 4
13. School Bus Data ..... ........................... 4
14. Degree of Roadside Interference ..................... 4
15. Bridges and Drainage Structures ..................... 4
16. Airports ............................................ 4
17. Sidewalk ............................................ 4
18. Bikeways ............................................ 4
B. Project Terminals ........................................ 5
C. Thoroughfare Plan ........................................ 5
D. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the Area .......... 5
E. Traffic Data and Capacity Analysis ....................... 5
F. Accident Analysis ........................................ 7
G. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community ............. 8
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION ................................ 8
A. General Description ...................................... 8
B. Project Status ........................................... 8
C. Recommended Improvements ................................. 8
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Length of Project ................................... 8
Project Terminals ... ........................ 9
Proposed Typical Cross-Section ...................... 9
Proposed Right-of-Way and Access Control ............ 9
Design Speed ...................................... 9
Intersection Treatment .............................. 9
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page
7. Service Roads near the US 74 Bypass
Intersection ................................... 11
8. Permits ............................................. 11
9. Bikeways ............................................ 11
10. Sidewalks ..... ...... .......................... 11
11. Degree of Utility Conflicts ......................... 11
12. Changes in the State Highway System ................. 12
13. Multiple Use of Space ............................... 12
14. Noise Barriers .... ........ ... ............... 12
15. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in
the Area ....................................... 12
16. Anticipated Design Exceptions ....................... 12
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ....................................... 12
A. Recommended Alternative .................................. 12
B. Alternate Modes of Transportation Alternative ............ 12
C. "No Build" Alternative ................................... 13
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS .................. 13
A. Land Use Planning ..................... o, ............ 13
1. Status of Planning .................................. 13
2. Existing Land Uses .................................. 13
3. Future Land Uses .................................... 13
B. Social and Economic Development .......................... 14
1. Neighborhood Characteristics and
Social Impacts ...................................... 14
2. Economic Factors .................................... 14
3. Public Facilities ................................... 14
4. Relocatees .......................................... 15
C. Cultural Resources ....................................... 17
1. Architectural Resources ............................. 17
2. Archaeological Resources ............................ 17
D. Section 4(f) Resources ................................... 17
E. Environmental Effects .................................... 18
1. Biological Resources ................................ 18
a. Plant Communities ..... .................. 18
b. Wildlife-Terrestrial Communities ................ 19
c. Aquatic Communities ............................. 19
d. Biotic Community Impacts ........................ 20
s
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page
2. Physical Resources .................................. 21
a. Soils and Topography ............................ 21
b. Water Resources ................................. 21
c. Water Resource Impacts .......................... 22
3. Special Topics ...................................... 22
a. Jurisdictional Waters of the United States ..... 22
b. Permits ....................................... 23
C. Mitigation .. .. . ....................... 23
d. Rare and Protected Species ........ ..... 23
(1) Federally-Protected Species . 24
(2) Federal Candidate Species ................. 24
(3) State-Protected Species ................... 25
4. Flood Hazard Evaluation ............................. 25
5. Farmland ......................................... 25
25
6. Traffic Noise .................................
7. Air Quality Analysis ................................ 31
8. Stream Modification .. ... ...... .................. 35
9. Hazardous Materials and Underground
Storage Tanks ................................. 35
10. Geodetic Survey Markers ............................. 35
11. Construction Impacts ................................ 35
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ..................................... 37
A. Comments Received . ............................. 37
B. Citizens Informational Workshop .......................... 37
C. Public Hearing ........................................... 38
TABLES
Table 1 - Intersection Capacity Analyses ..................... 6
Table 2 - Accident Rates ..................................... 7
Table 3 - Anticipated Biotic Community Impacts ............... 20
Table 4 - One Hour CO Concentration .......................... 34
MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1 - Location Map for Project U-2221B
Figure 1A - Location Map for Project U-2221
Figure 2 - Vicinity Map
Figure 3A - Photographs of Existing Conditions
Figure 3B - Photographs of Existing Conditions
Figure 4A - Estimated Traffic Volumes (1994)
Figure 4B - Estimated Traffic Volumes (2020)
Figure 5 - Shelby Thoroughfare Plan
Figure 6 - Aerial Photograph of Proposed Improvements
Figure 7 - Proposed Typical Cross-Section
Figure 8A - Existing Intersection Layouts
Figure 8B - Proposed Intersection Layouts
Page
APPENDIX
Relocation Report ............................................. A-1
Comments Received ... .... .... ..................... A-2
Citizens Informational Workshop Press Release ................. A-26
Citizens Informational Workshop Handout ....................... A-27
Air Quality Data .............................................. A-35
Traffic Noise Data ............................................ A-39
NC 180 (Post Road)
From SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
To SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Shelby
Cleveland County
F. A. Project No. STP-180(1)
State Project No. 8.1800701
T. I. P. No. U-2221B
I. NEED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT
A. Existing Conditions
1. Length of Studied Section
The studied portion of NC 180 is 3.5 kilometers (2.1 miles in
length). The project vicinity is shown in Figures 1, 1A, and 2.
2. Project Terminals
The project's southern terminal is at the intersection of NC 180
and SR 2200 (Taylor Road). At this location NC 180 consists of two
3.6-meter (12-foot) lanes with 10-foot shoulders.
The project's northern terminal is at the intersection of NC 180
with SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue). At this location NC 180 consists of
two 3.6-meter (12-foot) lanes and 10-foot shoulders.
3. Functional Classification
The studied segment of NC 180 is classified as an Urban Minor
Arterial.
4. Existing Cross Section
The existing cross section along the studied segment of NC 180
(see Figures 3A and 3B) is as follows:
From SR 2200 to approximately 457 meters (1500 feet) south of US
74 Bypass: Two-lane, 7.2-meter (24-foot) pavement with 2.4-meter
(8-foot) usable shoulders.
From approximately 457 meters (1500 feet) south of US 74 Bypass
to US 74 Business: Three-lane, 40-foot (face-to-face) curb and
gutter section.
From US 74 Business to SR 2052: Two-lane, 7.2-meter (24-foot)
pavement with 2.4-meter (8-foot) usable shoulders.
2
'I5. Right-of-way
The claimed right-of-way width along the studied segment of NC
180 is as follows:
From SR 2200 to US 74 Bypass: Varies from 12.2 to 15.2
meters (40 to 50 feet)
From US 74 Bypass to US 74 Business: 12.5 meters (41 feet)
II'' From US 74 Business to SR 2052: 12.2 meters (40 feet)
La,
6. Alignment
I ?
The existing horizontal roadway alignment contains two 6-degree
curves located approximately 305 meters (1000 feet) north of US 74
Bypass and a 4-degree curve located approximately 91 meters (300
feet) south of SR 2052. The vertical grade does not exceed 3.0
percent at any location along the project.
7. Intersecting Roadways
Most of the intersections along the studied segment of NC 180
are at-grade and stop sign controlled and contain one lane per
intersecting roadway approach. The exceptions are described below.
?i The existing layouts of all the major intersections along the project
are shown in Figure 8A.
Shopping Center/Lowes Entrance
This signalized intersection is located approximately 230 meters
(754 feet) south of the NC 180/US 74 Bypass intersection. This
four-leg intersection is formed by the driveway to the shopping
center located on the west side of NC 180 and the driveway to the
Lowe's store located on the east side of NC 180. Each of the four
approaches to this intersection consists of one left-turn lane and
one shared through/right-turn lane.
US 74 Bypass
Both US 74 Bypass approaches to the intersection contain one
left-turn lane, one exclusively through lane, and one shared
'I through/right-turn lane. Both NC 180 approaches contain one
l' left-turn lane and one shared through/right-turn lane.- Two-way,
;'!I two-lane service roads are located along both sides of US 74.
Currently, these service roads are separated by approximately
9 meters (30 feet) of grass shoulders from US 74 Bypass, with open
access to the US 74 Bypass/NC 180 intersection in three quadrants.
The exception is the service road in the northwest quadrant, which is
not provided with access to the intersection. These access points
Ili are not controlled by the existing traffic signal.

3
SR 2049 (Kings Road)
This is a signalized three-leg intersection where NC 180 forms
the northern and southern legs, while SR 2049 forms the western leg.
SR 2049 is a two-lane roadway, and its approach to this intersection
consists of a single shared right/left-turn lane. The northbound NC
180 approach consists of one left-turn lane and one through lane.
The southbound approach consists of a shared through/right-turn lane.
US 74 Business (East Marion Street)
This is a signalized five-leg intersection formed by NC 180,
which forms the north-south legs, US 74 Business, which forms the
northwest-southeast legs, and SR 2063 (Kemper Road), which forms the
northeast leg. The NC 180 approaches consist of one left-turn lane
and one shared through/right-turn lane. The US 74 Business approaches
consist of one left-turn lane and one shared through/right-turn lane.
The SR 2063 approach consists of one lane.
SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Each of the four approaches to this signalized intersection
consists of one left-turn lane and one shared through/right-turn
lane.
8. Service Roads near the US 74 Bypass Intersection
US 74 Bypass is flanked by two-lane, two-way service roads on
its north and south sides. The service roads are separated from
US 74 Bypass by approximately 9-meter (30-foot) wide grassed
shoulders and provide access to several businesses. These service
roads are provided with open access to the US 74 Bypass/NC 180
intersection in three quadrants. The exception is the service road in
the northwest quadrant (SR 2093), which is not provided with access
to the intersection. These access points are not controlled by the
existing traffic signal at the NC 180/US 74 Bypass intersection. The
service roads near the US 74 Bypass/NC 180 intersection are as
follows (see Figures 2 and 6):
- SR 2092 (North Service
of the intersection.
- SR 2318 (South Service
of the intersection.
- SR 1229 (South Service
of the intersection.
- SR 2093 (North Service
of the intersection
Road) is located in the northeast quadrant
Road) is located in the southeast quadrant
Road) is located in the southwest quadrant
Road) is located in the northwest quadrant
4
9. Access Control
Access to adjacent properties along the studied segment of
NC 180 is not controlled. Access to adjacent properties along the
segment of US 74 Bypass in the vicinity of the project is not
controlled. However, access to these properties from US 74 Bypass is
provided only via service roads that flankboth sides of US 74 Bypass.
10. Utilities
The proposed improvements will likely impact water, sewer, gas,
power, television, and telephone lines. Impacts to utilities due to
the proposed improvements are considered to be medium to high in
severity. The appropriate utilities or local government officials
will be consulted concerning possible relocation of utilities.
11. Speed Limit
The posted speed limit along the studied section of NC 180 is
45 mph.
12. Railroad Crossings
The studied segment of NC 180 is not crossed by railroads and
the proposed improvements will not involve any railroad crossings.
13. School Bus Data
Twelve school buses travel the studied section of NC 180 twice
each school-day.
14. Degree of Roadside Interference
Roadside interference is moderate along the project.
15. Bridges and Drainage Structures
No bridges or major drainage structures are located along the
studied segment of NC 180.
16. Airports
No airports or other aviation facilities are located within the
project's study area.
17. Sidewalks
.
There are no sidewalks along the studied segment of NC 180.
18. Bikeways
The studied segment of NC 180 does not contain any bikeways, and
is not a designated bicycle route. Also, this segment of NC 180 does
not correspond to a bicycle TIP improvement.
5
B. Project Terminals
The project's southern terminal is at the intersection of NC 180 and
SR 2200 (Taylor Road). At this location NC 180 consists of two 3.6-meter
(12-foot) lanes with 10-foot shoulders.
The project's northern terminal is at the intersection of NC 180 with
SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue). At this location NC 180 consists of two
3.6-meter (12-foot) lanes and 10-foot shoulders.
C. Thoroughfare Plan
The Shelby Thoroughfare Plan was adopted in November, 1994 (see
Figure 5). NC 180 (North Post Road) is designated as a major
thoroughfare..
D. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the Area
In addition to projects U-2221A and U-2221C (see Section II. B.), the
other proposed highway improvement in the area is TIP Project R-2707. TIP
project R-2707 is the construction of a new four-lane, median-divided US
74 Bypass on a new location north of Shelby (see Figure 5). Project
R-2707 is scheduled for right-of-way acquisition to begin in Fiscal Year
1999 and for construction to begin in Fiscal Year 2001.
E. Traffic Data and Capacity Analysis
The minimum and maximum estimated traffic volumes in vehicles per day
(vpd) for the studied facility are as follows (see Figures 4A 'and 4B for
traffic volumes and turn movement estimates along the studied roadway):
1994 Average Daily Traffic: high = 15,100 vpd
south of US 74 Business)
low = 8,260 vpd (north of SR 2200)
2020 Average Daily Traffic: high = 24,800 vpd
(south of SR 2049)
low = 14,260 vpd (south of SR 2052)
The design hourly volume (DHV) is estimated to be 9% to 12% of the
ADT. Truck traffic will comprise approximately 7% of the ADT (2 % TTST
and 5. % Dual).
It should be noted that Figures 4A and 4B include turning movement
estimates for the current and the proposed US 74 Business intersection
layouts (see insets in Figures 4A and 4B). The proposed intersection
layouts are discussed in Section II.C.6.
6
The concept of level-of-service is defined as a qualitative measure
describing operational conditions within a traffic stream and how these
conditions are perceived by motorists and/or passengers. A
level-of-service definition generally describes these conditions in terms
of such factors as speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic
interruptions, comfort, convenience, and safety. Six levels are defined
for each type of facility for which analysis procedures are available.
They are given letter designations from A to F, with level-of-service A
representing the best operating conditions and level-of-service F
representing the worst.
An arterial capacity analysis was performed for the years 1994 and
2020 to determine the level of service (LOS) at which the existing
facility would operate with no improvements. This analysis indicated that
with no improvements, the LOS of NC 180 during the peak hours varied from
D to E (Capacity) in 1994. With the estimated growth in travel demand,
the existing facility would reach LOS F before the design year 2020.
An arterial capacity analysis was also performed for the years 1994
and 2020 to determine the level of service at which the facility would
operate with the addition of the proposed improvements. It is estimated
that in 1994 the widened facility would have operated at LOS B. By the
year 2020, the proposed facility would operate at LOS D to E (Capacity)
during the peak hours of traffic demand.
Intersection capacity analyses were performed for major intersections
along the project due to heavy expected turning movements at these
locations (see Table 1).
The analyses results shown in Table 1 indicate that the intersections
with US 74 Bypass and US 74 Business operated at LOS E (capacity) in 1994,
and that all four studied intersections will reach LOS F by 2020 if no
improvements are made. It should be noted that the proposed improvements
are estimated to upgrade the LOS of these four intersections to LOS D, or
better, by 2020.
TABLE 1
INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSES
INTERSECTION
WITH
NC 180
1994/2020
LOS @ PEAK HOUR
(WITHOUT IMPROVEMENTS)
1994/2020
LOS @ PEAK HOUR
(WITH IMPROVEMENTS)
US 74 Bypass E/F C/D
SR 2049 (Kings Road) C/F B/C
US 74 Business E/F C/D
SR 2052 (Elizabeth Ave.) C/F B/D
F. Accident Analysis
Table 2 presents a comparison of accident rates along the studied
segment of NC 180 and the statewide rates for similar urban NC routes.
The rates shown for NC 180 were based on reported accidents that occurred
on the studied segment of NC 180 from January 1, 1990 through April 30,
1994. The statewide rates were obtained from studies conducted from 1990
--• through 1994.
TABLE 2
ACCIDENT RATES
(per 100 million vehicle miles)
Average Statewide Rates For Similar
Accident Type NC 180 Urban NC Routes
All Accidents 598.0 263.2
Fatal 2.2 1.9
Non-Fatal Injury 260.4 102.4
Night Accidents 119.2 55.9
Wet Pavement 128.0 60.8
These figures indicate that the accident rates along the studied
section of NC 180 were consistently higher than corresponding average
statewide rates for similar urban NC routes.
As expected, many of the 271 reported accidents that occurred on the
studied segment of NC 180 from January, 1990 through April 1994 were
clustered in the vicinity of intersections along the subject project. Of
the 271 reported accidents, 90 occurred in the vicinity of the
NC 180/US 74 Bypass intersection, including 43 rear-end collisions and 25
collisions at an angle. The proposed closure of service road access
points near the NC 180/US 74 Bypass intersection (see Section II.C.7 of
this document) will help reduce accidents occurring at that intersection.
During the same time period, 52 reported accidents occurred in the
vicinity of the five-leg intersection of NC 180/US 74 Business, including
23 rear-end collisions and 23 collisions at an angle. The proposed
improvements to the geometry of the intersection of NC. 180 with US 74
Business will increase the efficiency and safety of that intersection (see
Section II.C.7).
Rear-end collisions constitute the largest percentage of the
accidents (43.5 percent) along the studied segment of NC 180. The
proposed five lane typical cross-section will help reduce the number of
rear-end collisions, as well as improve the overall safety of the highway,
by sheltering left-turning vehicles in the center-lane, away from through
traffic.
8
G. Benefits to the State, Region, and Community
The proposed improvements will alleviate the current and anticipated
future capacity deficiencies along the studied portion of NC 180. In
addition, safety will be enhanced along the project as a result of the
widening. The ability of emergency vehicles to respond quickly will be
improved. Road user costs savings will be realized as a result of more
efficient travel, while improved access will result in increased economic
benefits for local businesses and the community.
II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION
A. General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to improve
NC 180 from SR 2200 (Taylor Road) to SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue) in
Cleveland County. The project area is shown on Figures 1 and 2. The
studied facility, which currently contains two and three-lane sections, is
to be widened to a five-lane facility with curb and gutter. This 3.5
kilometer (2.1 mile) long project has an estimated cost of $ 6,128,000,
including $ 2,628,000 for right-of-way acquisition and $ 3,500,000 for
construction.
B. Project Status
This 'project is included in the 1996-2002 NCDOT Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP recommends widening NC 180 to a
multi-lane facility from NC 226 to NC 150 as project U-2221 (see Figure
1A). The subject of this action, U-22218, is a part of project U-2221,
and it covers the segment of NC 180 between SR 2200 (Taylor Road) and
SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue) as shown in Figure 1. The proposed improvements
are to be federally-funded. The remaining segments of project U-2221,
which are not included in this action, are: U-2221A, NC 180 from NC 226
to SR 2200; and U-2221C, NC 180 from SR 2052 to NC 150. Right-of-way
acquisition and construction of these two segments are scheduled after the
year 2002 in the current TIP. The TIP has allocated a total of
$ 4,050,000 for project U-2221B. This includes $ 1,600,000 for right of
way acquisition and $ 2,450,000 for construction. This estimated cost of
the proposed improvements exceeds the TIP funding for project U-2221B by
$ 2,078,000. Right of way acquisition is scheduled to begin in fiscal
year 1997 and construction is scheduled to begin in fiscal year 1999.
C. Recommended Improvements
1. Length of Project
The studied portion of NC 180 is 3.5 kilometers (2.1 miles) in
length.
9
2. ProJ ect Terminals
The project's southern terminal is at the intersection of NC 180
and SR 2200 (Taylor Road). The project's northern terminal is at
the intersection of NC 180 with SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue).
3. Proposed Typical Cross-Section
The proposed typical cross-section is a five-lane, 19.2-meter
(64-foot) curb and gutter section with 2.4-meter (8-foot) berms. The
proposed cross section will accommodate five 3.6-meter (12-foot)
lanes, two in each direction of travel separated by a 3.6-meter
(12-foot) center left-turn lane. The proposed cross section is shown
on Figure 7.
The proposed typical cross-section will be constructed
symmetrically about the centerline of the existing roadway. In the
vicinity of Elizabeth Church and cemetery, consideration will be
given to asymmetrical widening towards the east side of the existing
roadway to minimize impacts to the cemetery.
4. Proposed Right-of-Way and Access Control
The acquisition of additional right of way will be necessary to
contain the proposed improvements. Variable amounts of new right of
way will be required along the project, depending on the topography
of any given location. The estimated total width of the proposed
right-of-way is 34.0 meters (112.0 feet). The estimated total
required right-of-way acquisition is 7.4 hectares (18.1 acres).
Easements may be required in some locations depending on their
topography. No control of access to adjacent properties is proposed.
5. Design Speed
The proposed design speed is 80 km/h (49.7 mph).
6. Intersection Treatment
The proposed project includes improvements to each intersection
along the project. Proposed improvements to the major intersections
are discussed below. Figure 6 shows the recommended improvements at
each intersection. Figure 8B shows the proposed layout of these
intersections. It should be noted that with the exception of minor
intersection radius improvements, all other intersections along the
project are to retain their current layouts and one-lane approach
configurations.
SR 2200 (Taylor Road) and SR 1232 (Carmel Drive):
SR 2200 and SR 1232 are currently stop-sign controlled and form
an offset intersection with NC 180 (see Figures 2, 6, and 8A). The
two roads intersect NC 180 with an offset of approximately 9.1 meters
(30.0 feet). It is recommended that SR 2200 and SR 1232 be realigned
10
to form a four-leg intersection with NC 180. It is also recommended
that this intersection remain unsignalized. The recommended.
realignment will offer a safer and a more efficient intersection and
will accommodate signalization better when signalization is
warranted.
US 74 Bypass:
The following are recommended improvements to the signalized
intersection of US 74 Bypass with NC 180:
- Provide dual left-turn lanes on the eastbound approach of US 74
Bypass.
- Provide one exclusive right-turn lane for the southbound,
westbound, and eastbound approaches.
It should be noted that closure of access to the North and South
Service Roads near the intersection with NC 180 is also recommended,
as discussed in Section II.C.7 below.
SR 2049 (Kings Road):
It is recommended that the northbound approach of NC 180 be
provided with one left-turn lane, and that the eastbound approach of
SR 2049 consist of one left-turn lane and one right-turn lane.
US 74 Business/SR 2063 (Kemper Road)
Currently, this is a signalized five-leg intersection (see
Figure 8A for the current layout of the intersection). The
recommended improvements include the realignment of SR 2063 to
intersect US 74 Business on a new location (see Figure 6). The
recommended realignment of SR 2063 will allow the NC 180 intersection
with US 74 Business to operate more efficiently as a signalized
four-leg intersection. SR 2063 will form a new three-leg (T)
intersection with US 74 Business approximately 107 meters (350 feet)
southeast of NC 180. It is recommended that SR 2063 be initially
stop-sign controlled at its new intersection with US 74 Business.
However, the intersection will be signalized when warranted. It is
estimated that with the exception of the southbound approach on SR
2063, all the approaches to the proposed unsignalized intersection
will operate at LOS B or better by the year 2020. It is estimated
that the southbound approach on SR 2063 to the unsignalized
intersection will operate at a LOS F by the year 2020.
It should be noted that consideration was also given to allowing
the intersection to continue as a five-leg intersection. However,
this layout, combined with the proposed widening of NC 180, would
have operated at LOS D in the year 1994 and would operate at LOS F in
the year 2020. In comparison, the recommended four-leg intersection
would have operated at LOS C in 1994 and is expected to operate at
LOS D in the year 2020.
11
SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue):
While this intersection represents the north terminal of this
project, it is recommended that the southbound approach of NC 180 be
widened to three lanes for a distance of approximately 100 meters
(328 feet) to accommodate one exclusive left-turn lane and one shared
through/right-turn lane. It is also recommended that the northbound
approach of NC 180 contain one exclusive left-turn lane, one
exclusive through-lane, and one exclusive right-turn lane. No
revisions are recommended to the eastbound approach of SR 2052 at
this time.
7. Service Roads near the US 74 Bypass Intersection
It is recommended that the three service road (SR 2092, SR 1229,
and SR 2318) intersections with NC 180 near US 74 Bypass be
eliminated (see Figures 2 and 6). The elimination of these service
road intersections will increase the safety of the NC 180/US 74
Bypass intersection by reducing turn-movement conflicts and driver
confusion. As discussed in Section I.F. of this document, 90
accidents occurred at this intersection between January, 1990 and
April, 1994.
8. Permits
It is anticipated that all stream crossings within the project
limits will meet the criteria for a Department of Army Nationwide
Permit in accordance with 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 14. In addition, a
Section 401 Water Quality Certification will be required from the NC
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources. The
conditions and best management practices described in the provisions
of 330.5(b) and 330.6 will be followed.
9. Bikeways
The need for special accommodations for bicycles along the
project has not been identified. The studied segment of NC 180 is
not a designated bicycle route.
10. Sidewalks
No sidewalks currently exist along the studied segment of
NC 180. The need for sidewalks along this project has not been
identified.
11. Degree of Utility Conflicts
It is estimated that this project will have a medium to a high
degree of utility conflicts. The proposed improvements will likely
impact water, sewer, gas, power, television, and telephone lines.
The appropriate utilities or local government officials will be
consulted concerning possible relocation of utilities.
12
12. Changes in the State Highway System
No changes in the state highway system due to this project are
anticipated.
13. Multiple Use of Space
There are no plans to utilize the right-of-way for any other
purposes except public utilities, which will be allowed to utilize
the right-of-way within certain limitations.
14. Noise Barriers
No noise barriers are proposed for this project.
15. Other Proposed Highway Improvements in the Area
In addition to projects U-2221A and U-2221C (see Section
II. B.), the only other proposed highway improvement in the area is
TIP Project R-2707. TIP project R-2707 is the construction of a new
four-lane, median-divided US 74 Bypass on a new location north of
Shelby (see Figure 5). Project R-2707 is scheduled for right-of-way
acquisition to begin in Fiscal Year 1999 and for construction to
begin in Fiscal Year 2001.
16. Anticipated Design Exceptions
There are no design exceptions currently associated with this
project.
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
A. Recommended Alternative
The recommended alternative is the widening of NC 180 (Post Road)
from SR 2200 (Taylor Road) to SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue). The existing
facility, which contains two and three-lane sections, is to be widened
symmetrically to a five-lane, 19.2-meter (64-foot) face-to-face curb and
gutter section. In locations where it is determined that asymmetrical
widening would minimize the relocation of homes, businesses, or public
facilities, as well as minimizing project costs, that alternative will be
considered. The estimated right-of-way width required to contain the
proposed improvements is 34.0 meters (112.0 feet) without access control.
In addition to the proposed right-of-way, easements may be required to
contain the proposed improvement depending on the topography of some
locations.
B. Alternate Modes of Transportation Alternative
No alternate mode of transportation is considered to be a practical
alternative. Highway transportation is the dominant mode of
transportation in the area, and the project involves widening an existing
highway. Public bus transportation would improve transportation in the
project area and supplement the proposed improvements, thus extending the
useful life of the upgraded facility.
13
C. "No Build" Alternative
If the "no build" alternative were chosen, it would have a
considerable negative impact on transportation in the project area. NC
180 through the project area is a congested facility at present,
especially during peak periods of traffic demand. With the projected
increases in traffic, the service provided by the existing facility would
deteriorate even more. Increased congestion would lead to higher
operating costs and increased travel times. Motorist safety would also be
sacrificed, leading to a greater likelihood of accidents at intersections
and driveways due to congestion. Therefore, the "no build" alternative has
been rejected.
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND, ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS
A. Land Use Planning
1. Status of Planning
The proposed project is located primarily within the
extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Shelby. The City does
not have a current land use plan, but it does enforce a zoning
ordinance, which serves as its long range land development guide. A
small portion of the project is located in Cleveland County's
jurisdiction. Like Shelby, the County does not have a current land
use plan, but does enforce a zoning ordinance. However, large
portions of the County are not subject to zoning ordinance, including
the vicinity of this project.
2. Existing Land Uses
Land use near the northern terminal of the project is dominated
by single family residences. Other uses, such as a church and
cemetery and several small businesses, are interspersed with the
homes. Several public facilities are located along the roadway,
including a Cleveland County office building, Cleveland County
Community College, and the Elizabeth Elementary School.
3. Future Land Uses
As previously noted, neither the City of Shelby nor Cleveland
County have adopted land use plans. The City's zoning ordinance
serves as the primary land development guidance for the area. Most
of the land fronting the roadway is zoned for General Business by the
City of Shelby. One exception is a large zoning district comprising
the land on the west side of NC 180 south of the commercial area at
the intersection with US 74 Bypass. This district is zoned for
residential development.
14
B. Social and Economic Development
1. Neighborhood Characteristics and Social Impacts
Cleveland County is located in the southwestern section of the
State. It is bounded by the State of South Carolina and Rutherford,
Burke, Lincoln, and Gaston Counties. According to the 1990 U. S.
Census, Cleveland County has a population of 84,714. It has a
population density of 182.44 persons per square mile.
Along the proposed project, the neighborhood contains a mix of
land uses. Commercial, Institutional, and Office are the dominant
types of development in the area. There are low density residential
developments near both terminals of the project.
The proposed improvements to NC 180 will have a positive impact
on the social environment. The proposed improvements will increase
safety and reduce traffic congestion along the studied roadway,•which
in turn will improve accessibility.
The proposed improvements will not disrupt community cohesion,
and it will not interfere with access to community facilities and
services. The project will require the relocation of an estimated
8 residences, three businesses, and one non-profit organization, but
the NCDOT Relocation Assistance Program (see Section IV.B.4.) will
?I! minimize the negative impacts of relocation.
2. Economic Factors
During the month of February, 1995, Cleveland County had a total
civilian labor force of 44,470 persons. Out of this total, 42,250
persons were gainfully employed. This left an unemployment total of
2,220, or 5.0 percent.
The proposed improvements will provide positive economic
benefits to the project area. Commercial establishments located
along the studied roadway will be enhanced due to increased
accessibility. Economic activities will also be enhanced by improved
safety and by the resulting reduction in traffic congestion, which
will allow greater efficiency in transporting goods and products.
3. Public Facilities
Several public facilities are located along the project. The
Morning Star Baptist Church is located near the south terminal of the
project. The Elizabeth School, Cleveland Community College, and
Cleveland County office complex are located north of US 74 Bypass.
The Elizabeth Baptist Church and Cemetery are located near the north
terminal of the project. The Cleveland County Fairgrounds are
located at the intersection of NC 180 with US 74 Business. The
fairgrounds are leased to private businesses for commercial rather
?i than public recreation purposes.
15

4. Relocatees
It is anticipated that eight residences, three businesses, and
one non-profit organization will be relocated as a result of the
project. The relocation report for the proposed project is included
in the appendix (page A-1). The report includes a demographic
profile of the displacees as well as a list of anticipated business
relocatees. None of the potential relocatees are considered large
families, elderly, or disabled. No public housing will be impacted
by the proposed improvements. It is anticipated that adequate
replacement housing will be available for all anticipated relocatees
in the project area, including low income housing. Last Resort
Housing will be considered if the financial situation of tenants or
owners warrants such action.
It is the policy of the NCDOT to ensure that comparable
replacement housing will be available prior to construction of state
and federally-assisted projects. Furthermore, the North Carolina
Board of Transportation has the following three programs to minimize
the inconvenience of relocation:
-Relocation Assistance,
-Relocation Moving Payments, and
-Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement.
With the Relocation Assistance Program, experienced NCDOT staff
will be available to assist displacees with information such as
availability and prices of homes, apartments, or businesses for sale
or rent and financing or other housing programs. The Relocation
Moving Payments Program, in general, provides for payment of actual
moving expenses encountered in relocation. Where displacement will
force an owner or tenant to purchase or rent property of higher cost
or to lose a favorable financing arrangement (in cases of ownership),
the Relocation Replacement Housing Payments or Rent Supplement
Program will compensate up to $22,500 to owners who are eligible and
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 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.
16
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 information concerning other state or
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.
It is a policy of the state that no person will be displaced by
the NCDOT's state or federally-assisted construction projects unless
and until comparable replacement housing has been offered or provided
for each displacee within a reasonable period of time prior to
displacement. No relocation payment received will be considered as
income for the purposes of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 or for
the purposes of determining eligibility or the extent of eligibility
of any person for assistance under the Social Security Act or any
other federal law.
Last Resort Housing is a program used when comparable
replacement housing is not available, or when it is 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.
17
C. Cultural Resources
1. Architectural Resources
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, implemented
by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for
Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800. Section
i 106 requires that if a federally-funded, licensed, or permitted
project has an effect on a property listed on or eligible for the
National Register of Historic Places, the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation will be given an opportunity to comment.
Photographs, maps, and information about the area of potential
effect (APE) for the project were provided by NCDOT and reviewed with
the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The project site was
surveyed on August 2, 1994 by an NCDOT staff architectural historian,
and five structures located within the APE were found to be over
fifty years old. It was concluded that none of these structures are
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and that none
have special historical or architectural significance.
Since there are no properties either listed in, or eligible for,
the National Register in the APE, no further compliance with Section
106 is required. The survey and findings were reviewed by the SHPO,
and they concurred with the findings (see pages A-14 and A-14.a in
the Appendix).
2. Archaeological Resources
An archaeological survey of the project area was conducted in
November, 1994 to determine if significant archaeological resources
might be disturbed. No archaeological sites were detected during the
survey. It is concluded that it is unlikely that this project as
planned will disturb significant archaeological resources. No
additional archaeological investigation is recommended for this
project. The Office of the State Historic Preservation Officer
(SHPO) has reviewed the proposed project regarding the identification
of archaeological sites and concurs with the above finding (see page
A-15 in the Appendix).
D. Section 4(f) Resources
Section 4(f) of the U. S. Department of Transportation Act of
1966 specifies that publicly owned land from a public park,
recreation area, historic site, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge of
national, state or local significance may be used for Federal-Aid
projects only if:
(1) There is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such
land, and
(2) Such highway program or project includes all possible planning
to minimize harm to 4(f) lands resulting from such use.
18
The proposed improvements include the realignment of SR 2063
(Kemper Road) on a new location (see Figure 6), which will require
the acquisition of approximately 0.6 hectare (1.6 acres) of Cleveland
County Fairgrounds property. Section 4(f) is not applicable to the
Cleveland County Fairgrounds, since this facility functions primarily
for commercial purposes, rather than for public recreation.
This project has been coordinated with the State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO), whose correspondence is included in the
Appendix (see pages A-12 through A-15). The SHPO has concurred that
this project will not affect significant historical, architectural,
or archaeological resources.
In conclusion, the subject project will not impact any Section
4(f) properties.
E. Environmental Effects
1. Biological Resources
Distribution and composition of biotic resources throughout the
project area reflect topographic positioning, hydrologic influences,
j and past and present land use practices. Urban areas comprise the
majority of the project. Wildlife observed during field
I!I investigations are denoted by an asterisk (*) in the text. Common
scientific names are provided for each species listed. In subsequent
references to the same organism, only the common name is given.
it
?I
a. Plant Communities
Two plant communities were identified in the project area,
Maintained Community and Hardwood Forest. Natural community
h profile descriptions, where applicable, have been adopted and
modified from-the NCNHP classification scheme (Schafale and
Weakley 1990).
Maintained Communities
Roadside shoulders, commercial and residential development, and
vacant lots constitute maintained communities in the project area.
In these communities, man's structures or activities preclude natural
plant succession. Maintained shoulder slopes and lawns support
fescue (Festuca sp.) as the dominant vegetative component,
complemented with landscape ornamentals. Redbud (Cercis canadensis),
dogwood (Cornus florida), Rhododendron (Azalea spp.), and various oak
trees (uercus spp.) are common. Mowing is frequently associated
with this community.
Several vacant lots are present in the project area. Common
plant species include goldenrod (Solids o sp.), thick growth of
trumpet vine (Cam psis radicans), vetch (Viccia Ep.), dog-fennel
II (Eupatorium capillifolium), Queen Anne's lace (Daucus carota),
chickory (Cichorium intybus), and Bermuda grass (C ny odon dactylon).
Kudzu (Pueraria lobata) and blackberry (Rubus sp.) growth is rampant.
I
19
Hardwood Forest
Small tracts of hardwood forest are interspersed throughout the
project area. The canopy contains mixed hardwood species, the
presence of which is largely dictated by hydrologic conditions.
Mesic slopes adjacent to intermittent streams support a canopy of
tulip tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), willow oak ( uercus p hellos),
and sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), while the understory
consists of.red maple, water oak ( uercus ni ra), iron wood (Carpinus
caroliniana), and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense). Christmas fern
(Polystichum acrostichoides) is the prevalent herbaceous plant
present. Ridge tops support species such as white oak ( uercus
alba), scarlet oak (Q coccinea), post oak (L stellata), and
mockernut hickory. Red cedar (Juniperus vir iniana) is a typical
understory component, complimented with shrubs suc as witch hazel
(Hamamelis virginiana) and viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium).
Elephant's-foot (Elephantopus carolinianus) and partridge berry
(Mitchella repens) are the most conspicuous herbaceous plants
present. Green-brier (Smilax rotoundifolia) and Virginia creeper
(Parthenocissus quinquefo7a constitute the vine layer.
b. Wildlife-Terrestrial Communities
Disturbed roadside communities and urban areas provide
shelter for opportunistic animal species, such as the Norway rat
(Rattus norve icus), house mouse (Mus musculus), hispid cotton
rat Sigmo on ispidus), and eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus
floridanus mallurus). These are primarily animals of disturbed
environments, brushy edges, and other habitats characterized by
mixtures of herbaceous vegetation and shrubby plants. Gray
squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis)* were frequently observed in
the project area, as were bird species such as the rock dove
(Columba livia)*, northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis)*,
blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata)*, American goldfinch (Carduelis
tristis), and American robin (Turdus migratorius)*. Most
commonly seen in the canopy of forested habitats are the downy
woodpecker (Picoides ubescens)*, northern cardinal, and the
Carolina wren (Thyomanes bewickii)*.
The eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus) inhabits
open, sunny situations, such as building sites an fence rows,
as well as forested areas. American toad (Bufo americanus) and
*box turtle (Terrapene caroline) are very common reptiles that
may inhabit man-dominated areas, while the slimy salamander
(Plethodon glutinosus) is the most likely amphibian to be found
under logs, stones, and leaf litter.
C. Aquatic Communities
Opportunities for aquatic life are restricted to headwaters
of intermittent Piedmont streams located in the project area.
In the winter and spring, water is present. In summer, stream
beds are usually dry, but may retain small pools of water.
Water was present in stream beds at the time of the field visit,
20
due to recent heavy rains. Neither fish nor mussel fauna were
seen during field investigations. Sections of these stream
courses occur in urbanized areas, resulting in degraded water
quality and habitat for aquatic species. In addition, fish
diversity is expected to be low in waters without continual
flow. Shiners (Notro is spp.), creek chub (Semotilus
atromaculatus), and b uegill (Lepomis macrochirus) may utilize
these intermittent tributaries for spawning during periods of
flow.
Amphibians are water-dependent, laying shell-less eggs in
freshwater or in moist places and having an aquatic larval
stage. Amphibians which may inhabit ditches and streams in the
project area include the northern dusky salamander (Desmo na?thus
fuscus), three-lined salamander (Eurycea ug ttolineata), northern
cricket frog (Acres crepitans), spring peeper (Hy la crucifer),
and upland chorus frog (Pseudacris triseriata). These animals
are likely to reside in burrows under logs, stones, and leaf
litter along streams of the project area.
d. Biotic Community Impacts
Table 3 summarizes potential losses from proposed project
construction. Calculations are based on a right-of-way width of
34.0 meters (112 feet).
TABLE 3
ANTICIPATED BIOTIC COMMUNITY IMPACTS
COMMUNITY IMPACTS
Hectares (Acres)
Maintained Community 4.9 (12.4)
Hardwood Forest 0.4 (0.4)
TOTAL 4.8 (11.5)
For terrestrial species, impacts due to the proposed
widening will be reflected in the creation of new habitat and in
the alteration and elimination of previously existing habitat.
Subterranean, burrowing,' and slow moving organisms will be
eliminated. Larger, faster animals will be displaced.
Expansion of a "highway barrier" can affect both short-term
migrations (diurnal, nocturnal) and long term migrations
(seasonal) of animal populations, depending on individual
species' requirements for food, water and cover. Also, animal
migration may be interrupted due to vehicular noise. Road-kills
will decrease numbers of individuals of certain species.
21
2.
Habitat disturbance and sedimentation are
detrimental to aquatic systems. Best Management
(BMP's) for protection of surface waters will be
enforced, to ensure the biological integrity of the
impacted by this project.
PHYSICAL RESOURCES
a. Soils and Topography
extremely
Practices
strictly
water bodies
Cleveland County occurs in the Piedmont Physiographic
Province, located in the Felsic Crystalline Soil System. The
topography in this system is extremely variable. Broad, gently
sloping uplands are common, as are moderately to steeply sloping
areas. The bedrock is granite, granite gneiss, mica gneiss, and
mica schist.
Generally, the subject project occurs in the
Pacolet-Madison-Cecil Association. This association consists of
well drained soils with sandy loam surfaces and moderately
permeable clayey subsoils on broad smooth ridges. They are
formed from the weathering of gneiss or granite and are
underlain by hard rock at depths of 5 to 20 feet). Minor soils
make up 20 percent of this association. The micaceous clayey
Madison soils make up most of the minor soils in this
association.
b. Water Resources
Water resources within the project area lie within the
Broad River Basin and are unnamed tributaries to Buffalo Creek.
Buffalo Creek originates in Gaston County and joins the Broad
River in South Carolina. This region is characterized by highly
erodible soils, making sedimentation a major problem throughout
this basin. The proposed symmetrical widening of subject
project will potentially impact the uppermost headwaters of
these unnamed tributaries.
These tributaries are characterized as well-drained, small
stream bottoms located in ravines on acidic soils. All are
approximately 0.9 to 1.5 meters (3 to 5 feet) in width, and
water was less than 0.2 meter (0.5 foot) in depth at the time of
the field investigation. A mixture of sand and clay make up the
substrate. Mesic hardwood species occur on these steep sites.
The N. C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources, Division of Environmental Management assigned a 1993
"Best usage" water classification of C to Buffalo Creek and its
tributaries from the dam at Kings Mountain Reservoir to the
North Carolina-South Carolina State line. Class C designates
waters suitable for secondary recreation, aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife, and agriculture.
The northern portion of the project is within 1.6 km (1.0 mile)
of waters classified as WS-III CA. WS-III CA waters are defined
22
as protected water supplies which are generally in low to
moderately developed watersheds, and are suitable for all
class C uses. Point source discharges of treated waste water
are permitted pursuant to rules .0104 and .0211. Local programs
to control nonpoint source and storm water discharge of
pollution are required. The subclassification of CA denotes a
critical area around a water supply intake. It should be noted
that the studied segment of NC 180 does not drain into a water
supply watershed, and that the existing drainage patterns will
be maintained. Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be
implemented during construction.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) of
NCDEHNR, Division of Environmental Management, addresses long
term trends in water quality at fixed monitoring sites by the
sampling for selected benthic macro invertebrates. These
organisms are sensitive to very subtle changes in water quality.
Biological data collected from Buffalo Creek at NC 74 in 11/83
and 9/90 indicates poor, fair conditions, respectively. A
survey of the Buffalo Creek watershed suggests that two point
dischargers, Kings Mountain waste water treatment plant and
Minette Mills, were impacting water quality in Buffalo Creek.
Neither High Quality Waters, Outstanding Resource Waters,
nor waters classified as WS-I and WS-II are located in the study
area or within 1.6 km (one mile) downstream.
C. Water Resource Impacts
Culvert installation will reduce the linear feet of natural
stream channel of unnamed tributaries. Other potential impacts
are increased sedimentation from construction and/or erosion;
increased concentration of toxic compounds from highway runoff
and/or toxic spills; scouring of stream beds due to the
channelization of streams; alterations of water level due to
interruptions or additions to surficial and/or groundwater flow;
and changes in light incidence due to the removal of vegetative
cover. Stringent employment of Best Management Practices will
be ensured during the construction phase of this project to
lessen impacts to aquatic systems.
Groundwater resources will be evaluated in the final design
stage to ensure that measures are taken, if necessary, to avoid
groundwater contamination.
3. SPECIAL TOPICS
a. Jurisdictional Waters of the United States
Surface waters and their associated wetlands fall under the
broad category of "Waters of the United States", as defined in
33 CFR 328.3. The US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) takes
jurisdiction over the discharge of dredged or fill material into
these waters as authorized by Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act.
23
Potential wetland communities were assessed in the
project corridor on the basis of low soil chroma values,
hydrophytic vegetation, and the presence of hydrology or
hydrological indicators such as stained, matted vegetation, high
water marks on trees, buttressed tree bases, and surface roots.
No jurisdictional wetlands are located in the project area.
b. Permits
In accordance with provisions of section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (33 U.S.C 1344), a permit will be required from the
COE for the discharge of dredged or fill material into "Waters
of the United States". Based upon site location and estimated
acreage involved, it is anticipated that stream crossings will
be authorized by Nationwide Permit (33 CFR 330.5) (a) (14)].
Nationwide #14 allows for road crossing fills of non-tidal
"Waters of the United States", provided that no more than a
total of 61 linear meters (200 feet) of the fill for the roadway
occurs in special aquatic sites, including wetlands, and that
the fill is limited to a filled area of no more than 0.7 ha (0.3
acre).
A 401 Water Quality Certification administered through the
N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
will be required. This certificate is issued for any activity
which may result in a discharge into waters for which a federal
permit is required.
C. Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is not required where Nationwide
permits or General permits are authorized, according to the
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the COE. Final discretionary
authority in these matters rests with the COE.
d. Rare and Protected Species
Federal law requires that any action, which has the
potential to have a detrimental impact on the survival and well
being of any species classified as federally protected, is
subject to review by the FWS and/or the National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), under the provisions of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended.
In North Carolina, protection of plant species falls under
N.C. General statutes (G.S.) 106-202.12 to 106-202.19 of 1979.
These species may or may not be federally protected.
24
(1) Federally Protected Species
Plants and animals with federal classifications of
Endangered (E), Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE)
and Proposed Threatened (PT) are protected under provisions
of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended. As of March 28, 1995, the FWS lists only
the federally Threatened dwarf-flowered heartleaf
(Hexastylis naniflora) for Cleveland County. A brief
description and habitat preferences for this plant is
provided below.
Hexastylis naniflora (dwarf-flowered heartleaf) T
Plant Family: Aristolochiaceae
Federally Listed: April 14, 1989
Flowers Present: mid-March - mid-May
Distribution in N.C.: Burke, Catawba, Cleveland, Lincoln, and
Rutherford.
The dwarf-flowered heartleaf is found only in eight
southern piedmont counties in North Carolina and the adjacent
portions of South Carolina.
This plant has heart-shaped leaves, supported by long thin
petioles that grow from a subsurface rhizome. It rarely exceeds
15 centimeters (6 inches) in height. The leaves are dark green
in color, evergreen, and leathery. Flowers are small,
inconspicuous, jugshaped, and dark brown in color. They are
found near the base of the petioles. Fruits mature from mid-May
to early July.
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf populations are found along bluffs
and their adjacent slopes, in boggy areas next to streams and
creeks, and along slopes of nearby hillsides and ravines. It
grows in acidic soils in regions with a cool moist climate.
Regional vegetation is described as upper piedmont oak-pine
forest and as part of the southeastern mixed forest.
BIOLOGICAL CONCLUSION: No Effect.
Suitable habitat is present in small wooded tracts in the
study area. Plant by plant surveys were conducted within
potential impact zones. No Hexastylis species were encountered.'
The subject project will not impact the species.
(2) Federal Candidate Species
No federal Candidate species are listed by the FWS for
Cleveland County.
25
(3) State Protected Species
The dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora) is
a federally Threatened species which has a state protected
status of Endangered. A search of the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) files reveal no known
occurrences of this or other state protected species in the
project area. Because of its federal status, scientific
surveys were conducted. No plants were found.
4. Flood Hazard Evaluation
Cleveland County is not currently participating in the
National Flood Insurance Program. This project does not cross
any identified flood hazard areas. The studied segment of
NC 180 (south of SR 2052) does not drain into a water supply
watershed. Therefore, standard erosion and sedimentation
control measures will be adequate. This project is located
above headwaters and does not involve any major stream
crossings. Existing drainage patterns will be maintained, and
perhaps improved, to the extent practicable. Groundwater
resources will be evaluated in the final design stage to ensure
that measures are taken, if necessary, to avoid groundwater
contamination.
5. Farmland
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal
agencies or their representatives to consider the impact of land
acquisition and construction projects on prime and important
farmland soils. These soils are designated by the US Soil
Conservation Service (SCS). Land which has been developed, or is
committed to urban development by the local governing body, is
exempt from the requirements of the Act. The proposed
improvement is located in an urbanized area where current zoning
permits additional commercial and residential development.
Therefore, the Farmland Conversion Impact Rating cannot be.
completed, and the project's potential impact to farmland cannot
be determined. Further consideration of farmland impacts is not
required.
6. Traffic Noise
This analysis was performed to determine the effect of the
proposed widening of NC 180 from SR 2200 (Carmel Drive) to
SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue) on noise levels in the immediate
project area (see Figure N1 on page A-39 in the Appendix). This
investigation includes an inventory of existing noise sensitive
land uses and a field survey of ambient (existing) noise levels
in the study area. It also includes a comparison of the
predicted noise levels and the ambient noise levels to determine
if traffic noise impacts can be expected resulting from the
proposed project. Traffic noise impacts are determined from the
current procedures for the abatement of highway traffic noise
26
and construction noise, appearing as Part 772 of Title 23 of the
Code of Federal Regulations. If traffic noise impacts are
predicted, examination and evaluation of alternative noise
abatement measures for reducing or eliminating the noise impacts
must be considered.
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 (6). 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).
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 N1
(see page A-40 in the Appendix).
Review of Table N1 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.
In considering the first of these three factors, it is
important to note that individuals have different sensitivity to
noise. Loud noises bother some more than others, and some
individuals become upset if an unwanted noise persists. The
time patterns of noise also enter into an individual's judgement
of whether or not a noise is offensive. For example, noises
occurring during sleeping hours are usually considered to be
more offensive than the same noises in the daytime.
27
With regard to the second factor, individuals tend to judge
the annoyance of an unwanted noise in terms of its relationship
to noise from other sources (background noise). The blowing of
a car horn at night when background noise levels are
approximately 45 dBA would generally be more objectionable than
the blowing of a car horn in the afternoon when background
noises might be 55 dBA.
The third factor is related to the interference of noise
with activities of individuals. In a 60 dBA environment, normal
conversation would be possible, while sleep might be difficult.
Work activities requiring high levels of concentration may be
interrupted by loud noises, while activities requiring manual
effort may not be interrupted to the same degree.
Over time, particularly if the noises occur at predicted
intervals and are expected, individuals tend to accept the
noises which 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.
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
In order to determine whether highway noise levels are or
are not compatible with various land uses, the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) has developed noise abatement criteria
(NAC) and procedures to be used in the planning and design of
highways. These abatement criteria and procedures are set forth
in the aforementioned Federal reference (Title 23 CFR Part 772).
A summary of the noise abatement criteria for various land uses
is presented in Table N2 (see page A-41 in the Appendix). 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 the existing background noise levels.
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 along NC 180 as measured at 15 meters from the
roadway ranged from 66.0 to 68.6 dBA. The ambient measurement
sites and measured exterior Leq noise level are presented in
Figure N1 and Table N3 (see pages A-39 and A-42 in the
Appendix), respectively.
28
The existing roadway and traffic conditions were used with
the most current traffic noise prediction model in order to
calculate existing noise levels for comparison with noise levels
actually measured. The calculated existing noise levels were
within 0.5 to 1.8 dBA of the measured noise levels for the
locations where noise measurements were obtained. 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.
PROCEDURE FOR PREDICTING FUTURE NOISE LEVELS
In general, the traffic situation is composed of a large
number of variables which describe different cars operating at
different speeds through a continually changing highway
configuration 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 Noise Barrier Cost Reduction Procedure, STAMINA
2.0 and OPTIMA (revised March, 1983). The BCR (Barrier Cost
Reduction) procedure is based upon the FHWA Highway Traffic
Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). The BCR traffic noise
prediction model uses the number and type of vehicles on the
planned roadway, their speeds, the physical characteristics of
the road (curves, hills, depressed, elevated, etc.), receptor
location and height, and, if applicable, barrier type, barrier
ground elevation, and barrier top elevation.
In this regard, it is to be noted that only preliminary
design was available for use in this noise analysis. The
project proposes to widen the existing three and two-lane
sections of NC 180 to-a five-lane section from SR 2200 to
SR 2052. Only those existing natural or man-made barriers were
included in setting up the model. The 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 year being analyzed.
Projected peak hour volumes and level-of-service 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.
The STAMINA 2.0 computer model was utilized in order to
determine the number of land uses (by type) which would be
impacted during the peak hour of the design year 2015. A land
use is considered to be impacted when exposed to noise levels
approaching or exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria
and/or predicted to sustain a substantial noise increase. The
29
basic approach was to select receptor locations such as 7.5, 15,
30, 60, 120, 240, and 480 meters from the center of the near
traffic lane (adaptable to both sides of the roadway). The
location of these receptors were determined by the changes in
projected traffic volumes and/or the posted speed limits along
the proposed project. The result of this procedure was a grid
of receptor points along the project. Using this grid, noise
levels were calculated for each identified receptor.
The Leq traffic noise exposures associated with this
project are listed in Table N4 (see pages A-43 through A-45 in
the Appendix). 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.
The maximum number of receptors in each activity category
that are predicted to become impacted by future traffic noise is
shown in Table N5 (see page A-46 in the Appendix). These are
noted in terms of those receptors expected to experience traffic
noise impacts by approaching or exceeding the FHWA NAC or by a
substantial increase in exterior noise levels (see page A-41 in
the Appendix). Under Title 23 CFR Part 772, there are 49
residential and 16 commercial receptors anticipated to be
impacted due to highway traffic noise in the project area.
Other information included in Table N5 is the maximum extent of
the 72 and 67 dBA noise level contours. This information can
assist local authorities in exercising land use control over the
remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to the roadway within local
jurisdiction. For example, with the proper information on
noise, the local authorities can prevent further development of
incompatible activities and land uses with the predicted noise
levels of an adjacent highway.
Table N6 (see page A-46 in the Appendix) indicates the
exterior traffic noise level increases for the identified
receptors in each roadway section. Predicted noise level
increases for this project range from +5 to +8 dBA. When
real-life noises are heard, it is possible to barely detect
noise level changes of 2-3 dBA. A 5 dBA change is more readily
noticeable. A 10 dBA change is judged by most people as a
doubling or a halving of the loudness of the sound.
TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS
Traffic noise impacts occur when the predicted traffic
noise levels either: [a] approach or exceed the FHWA noise
abatement criteria (with "approach" meaning within 1 dBA of the
Table N2 value), or [b] substantially exceed the existing noise
levels. The NCDOT definition of substantial increase is shown
in the lower portion of Table N2 (see page A-41 in the
Appendix). Possible noise abatement measures are described
below.
30
a. Highway Alignment
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 for this project, since it involves widening an
existing roadway.
b. Traffic System Management Measures
Traffic 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 on the
proposed roadway.
C. Noise Barriers
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels
can often be applied with a measurable degree of success by the
application of solid mass, attenuable measures to effectively
diffract, absorb, and reflect highway traffic noise emissions.
Solid mass, attenuable measures may include earth berms or
artificial abatement walls. The project will maintain no
control of access, meaning most commercial establishments and
residences will have direct access connections to the proposed
roadway, and all intersections will adjoin the project at grade.
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 8
times the distance from the barrier to the receptor. For
example, a receptor located 15 meters from the barrier would
normally require a barrier 120 meters long. An access opening
of 12 meters (10 percent of the area) would limit its noise
reduction to approximately 4 dBA (FUNDAMENTAL AND ABATEMENT OF
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC NOISE, Report No. FHWA-HHI-HEV-73-7976-1,
USDOT, chapter 5, section 3.2, page 5-27).
31
In addition, 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.
"DO NOTHING" ALTERNATIVE
The traffic noise impacts for the "do nothing" or
"no-build" alternative were also considered. If the proposed
widening did not occur, 48 residential and 4 commercial
receptors would experience traffic noise impact by approaching
or exceeding the FHWA's NAC. Also, the receptors could
anticipate experiencing an increase in exterior noise levels in
the range of +3 to +6 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.
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 and the limitation of
construction to daytime hours, 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.
SUMMARY
It is predicted that approximately 65 receptors will
experience traffic noise impacts. However, no receptors were
found to be impacted by a substantial increase in future
exterior noise levels. Based on these preliminary studies,
traffic noise abatement is not recommended, and no noise
abatement measures are proposed. This evaluation completes the
highway traffic noise requirements of Title 23 CFR Part 772, and
unless a major project change develops, no additional noise
reports will be submitted for this project.
7. Air Quality Analysis
Air pollution originates from various sources. Emissions from
industrial and internal combustion engines are the most prevalent
sources. Other origins of common outdoor air pollution are solid
waste disposal and any form of fire. The impact resulting from
highway construction ranges from intensifying existing air pollution
32
problems to improving the ambient air conditions. The traffic is the
center of concern when determining the impact of a new highway
facility or the improvement of an old highway facility. Motor
vehicles emit carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons
(HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (SO ), and lead (Pb) (listed
in order of decreasing emission rate). Automobiles are considered to
be the major source of CO in the project area. For this reason, most
of the analysis presented is concerned with determining expected
carbon monoxide levels in the vicinity-of the project due to traffic
flow.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration for the
receptor closest to the highway project, 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 100 meters) 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."
In this study, the local concentration was determined by the
NCDOT Traffic Noise/Air Quality Staff using line source computer
modeling, and the background concentration was obtained from the
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR). Once the two concentration components were
resolved, they were added together to determine the ambient CO
concentration for the receptor in question and to compare to the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
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 and nitrogen dioxide. Area-wide automotive emissions of HC and
NO are expected to decrease in the future due to the continued
installation and maintenance of pollution control devices on new
cars. Hence, the ambient ozone and nitrogen dioxide levels in the
atmosphere should continue to decrease as a result of the
improvements on automobile emissions.
The photochemical reactions that form ozone and nitrogen dioxide
require several hours to occur. For this reason, the peak levels of
ozone generally occur 10 to 20 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 together in the
atmosphere, and in the presence of sunlight, the mixture reacts to
form ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and other photochemical oxidants. The
best example of this type of air pollution is the smog which forms in
Los Angeles, California.
33
Automobiles are not regarded as significant sources of
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources
account for less than 7 percent of particulate matter emissions and
less than 2 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 be exceeded.
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 eliminating lead
emissions. Also, the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has required the reduction in the lead content of leaded
gasolines. The overall average lead content of gasoline in 1974 was
0.5 grams.per liter. By 1989, this composite average had dropped to
0.0025 grams per liter. In the future, lead emissions are expected
to decrease as more cars use unleaded fuels and as the lead content
of leaded gasoline is reduced. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
make 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.
A microscale 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 at the nearest sensitive receptor to the
project.
Inputs into the mathematical model 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 projections. The traffic volume
used for the CAL3QHC model was the highest volume within any
alternative. Carbon monoxide vehicle emission factors were
calculated for the completion year of 1995 and the design year of
2015 using the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission Factors" and
the MOBILE 5A mobile source emissions computer model.
The background CO concentration for the project area was
estimated to be 1.9 parts per million (ppm). Consultation with the
Air Quality Section, Division of Environmental Management, North
Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
indicated that an ambient CO concentration of 1.9 ppm is suitable for
most suburban/rural areas.
J14
The worst-case air quality receptor was determined to be
receptor #56 at a distance of 15 meters from the proposed centerline
of the roadway. The "build" and "no-build" one-hour CO
concentrations for the nearest sensitive receptor for the years of
1995 and 2015 are shown in Table 4.
Comparison of the predicted CO concentrations with the NAAQS
maximum permitted for 1-hour averaging period = 35 ppm; 8-hour
averaging period = 9 ppm) indicates no violation of these standards.
Since the results of the worst-case 1-hour CO analysis is less than 9
ppm, it can be concluded that the 8-hour CO level does not exceed the
standard. See Tables Al through A4 (pages A-35 through A-38 in the
Appendix) for input data and output.
TABLE 4
e Hour Concentrations (PPM)
Nearest Build No-Build
Sensitive
Receptor 1995 2015 1995 2015
R-56 2.9 2.9 2.9 3.8
The project is located within the jurisdiction for air quality
of the Mooresville Regional Office of the North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health and Natural Resources. Cleveland County has
been determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards. Because -the proposed project is located in an
attainment area, the provisions of 40 CFR Part 51 are not currently
applicable. This project is not anticipated to create any adverse
effect on the air quality of this attainment area.
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 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 that burning will be done at the
greatest practical distance from dwellings and not when atmospheric
conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public. Burning
will only be utilized 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.
35
8. Stream Modification
This project will not cross any major streams or drainage areas.
The project is not expected to involve any stream modifications or
rechannelizations.
9. Hazardous Materials and Underground Storage Tanks
The files of the Division of Solid Waste Management were
consulted to ascertain whether any Superfund sites, unregulated dump
sites, or other potentially contaminated properties exist within the
proposed project limits. No sites are reported along this project
corridor.
Based on a reconnaissance survey of the project area, five
operational facilities and one non-operational facility with the
potential for underground storage tank (UST) involvement were
identified. Efforts will be made to minimize impacts to all of those
facilities. If any of the UST facilities are to be impacted, those
sites will be further investigated for possible fuel leakage prior to
the right of way acquisition phase of the project.
10. Geodetic Survey Markers
It is estimated that seven geodetic survey markers will be
impacted. The N. C. Geodetic Survey will be contacted prior to
construction.
11. Construction Impacts
To minimize potential adverse effects caused by construction
activities, the following measures, along with those already
mentioned, will be enforced during the construction phase:
a. Waste and debris will be disposed of in areas outside of
the right-of-way and provided by the contractor, unless
otherwise required by the plans or Special Provisions or
unless disposal within the right-of-way is permitted by the
Engineer.
b. 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 will
be done in accordance with applicable local laws and
ordinances and regulations of the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan for Air Quality. Care will be taken to
insure burning will be done at the greatest distance
practicable from dwellings and not when atmospheric
conditions are such as to create a hazard to the public.
Burning will be performed under constant surveillance.
36
c. Dust control will be exercised at all times to prevent
endangering the safety and general welfare of the public
and to prevent diminishing the value, utility, or
appearance of any public or private properties.
d. An erosion control schedule will be devised by the
contractor before work is started. The schedule will show
the time relationship between phases of the work which must
be coordinated to reduce erosion and shall describe
construction practices and temporary erosion control
measures which will be used to minimize erosion. In
conjunction with the erosion control schedule, the
contractor will be required to follow those provisions of
the plans and specifications which pertain to erosion and
siltation. These contract provisions are in accordance
with the strict erosion control measures as outlined in the
Department of Transportation's FHPM 6-7-3-1. Temporary
erosion control measures such as the use of berms, dikes,
dams, silt basins, etc. will be used as needed.
e. Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained insofar as
possible to alleviate breeding areas for mosquitoes.
f. An extensive rodent control program will be established if
structures are to be removed or demolished.
'j g• Care will be taken not to block existing drainage ditches.
h. The construction of the project may cause some disruptions
!I; in service to the utilities serving the area. Before
construction is started, a preconstruction conference
i
involving the contractor, pertinent local officials, and
the Division of Highways will be held to discuss various
construction procedures, including a discussion of
precautionary steps to be taken during the time of
construction that will minimize interruption of water
service.
i. Prior to construction, a determination will be made
regarding the need to relocate or adjust any existing
i. utilities in the project area. A determination of whether
the NCDOT or the utility owner will be responsible for this
work will be made at the time.
j. Prior to the approval of any borrow source developed for
use on this project, the contractor shall obtain a
certification from the State Department of Cultural
Resources certifying that the removal of material from the
borrow source will have no effect on any known district,
site, building, structure, or object that is included or
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places. A copy of this certification shall be furnished to
the Engineer prior to performing any work on the proposed
borrow source.
37
k. Traffic service in the immediate project area may be
subjected to brief disruption during construction of the
project. Every effort will be made to insure that the
transportation needs of the public will be met both during
and after construction.
V.
A. Comments Received
COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
The project has been coordinated with the appropriate federal, state,
and local agencies. Comments were received from the following agencies:
U. S. Department of the Army - Corps of Engineers
U. S. Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service
N. C. Department of Administration, State Clearinghouse
N. C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources,
Wildlife Resources Commission
N. C.
N. C.
N. C.
N. C.
N. C.
N. C.
N. C.
Department of Cultural Resources, Division of Archives and
History
Department of Environment, Health and
Division of Environmental Health
Department of Environment, Health and
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
Department of Environment, Health and
Division of Forest Resources
Department of Environment, Health and
Division of Environmental Management
Department of Environment, Health and
of Policy Development
Department of Public Instruction
City of Shelby
Natural Resources,
Natural Resources,
Natural Resources,
Natural Resources,
Natural Resources, Office
Copies of the comments received are included in the Appendix (see
pages A-2 through A-25).
B. Citizens Informational Workshop
A Citizens Informational Workshop was held at the Elizabeth
Elementary School located at 220 South Post Road (NC 180) on October
11, 1994. Approximately 50 people attended the workshop. A press
release advertising the workshop is included in the Appendix (see
page A-26).
An aerial mosaic showing the project corridor was presented.
Each attendee was given the opportunity to review the mosaic and ask
questions and make comments. In addition, handouts were available to
all workshop attendees. Each handout contained a comment sheet which
could be completed and submitted to the Division of Highways. A copy
of the workshop handout is included in the Appendix (see pages A-27
through A-34). The handout and aerial mosaic displayed at the
workshop described the proposed improvements as widening NC 180 to a
38
five-lane facility. Due to the preliminary nature of the planning at
that time, no right of way limits were presented, only a study
corridor, which more than adequately covered the proposed right of
way impacts.
The proposed improvements were supported by the majority of the
attendees. Several attendees were concerned regarding right-of-way
impacts to their properties from widening the roadway. Other
comments included requests to extend the proposed improvements south,
to NC 226, and requests to improve the intersection of NC 180 with SR
1232 (Carmel Drive) and SR 2200 (Taylor Road). Comments received
were considered during subsequent planning and design activities.
Regarding the aforesaid comments and concerns, more detailed
information about the proposed improvements and their impacts on
adjacent properties will be available at the public hearing. The
requested extension of the improvements southward to NC 226 is beyond
the scope of the subject project, but it is to be addressed under
project U-2221A when that project is funded. Improving the
intersections with SR 1232 and SR 2200 is included in the proposed
improvements.
C. Public Hearing
A public hearing will be held following the completion of this
report to provide more detailed information on the proposed project
to local citizens and to receive additional comments on the project.
MM/tp
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
NC 180
FROM SR 2200 TO SR 2052
SHELBY
CLEVELAND COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2221 B
0 MLES 0.5
1 1 1 FIG. 1

O
i
. r,y- 1- -
t 9
1
Casar Toluca
? 10
7 Belwood
1 _. R -fa0ston
? ChEfryY.
1 ?le Wa
7
C kL?.E a s?• A N [
•
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
RANSPORTATION
K VISION OF HIGHWAYS
P LANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
RANCH
NC 180
FROM NC 228 TO NC 150
SHELBY
CLEVELAND COUNTY
TIP PROJECT U-2221
ML ES 2 FIG. 1A
an„d 1
E •Ell bi
SZ'0 STM 0 \
a Fzzz-n 103road dll
AlNnoo ONV13A310
A813 HS
ME bS Ol OOZE bS WOFld
Oe l ON
HONVmS
'ri'ZNRLIINOIIIAND QNV JNINNV '
S.iVASHJIH d0 NOISIAla IQ ?
NIOLLVINO-MV11
SO INSN IRYdRG VNI'l0HV3 H11I0N

160?
9b z
t•1
dA9
I.1
E£IZ 9
160

161?
Ilia
£saz
lu 14
---------- ------
?61z?
000 d0 f <ti; ::.; ?Z II
A Al&tl35SY 1sw
r ?'ti tin;
Z E60z
• 101? ' W \ r•:. •` 6wZ ' ? £oZ
? 081 ?' Q
NOIS m O orLlzlz
11102 z N31X3 m awz .:... ?'
ab0? SONIC
3ARIa B3?layo 001? ?soz
I6oz
960Z
dH!
S%
O 1139VZfa . Al
•ism ATO
Ma /
%
9oz
%
1012 ,
'rD •ldre 01 IZ a<::090Z
no DWI y £ <
1Z >a* x?v ?' ? 1
H? 1dtlB 1
TIME
H130VZrG °
N
teoz ?z z9oz
£OL y bl Y, F 000 5012 •d•0 Yaawso ?
a3r Sf18 ?? ?/ 1
50? 1
19oz / IIIZ A 1
"s 3/? b, Z60z Z0z L60Z b60Z , / . j
103r0dd ? sso' ` lao?l '
6602 QN3 vs-oz
5602 ?
Soz Lsoz 46oz OSI ? ?I
980
isoz `
5Z I? ?NI JINJIV38
9
r ZOIZ ?.'? I£61
_ ozIZ
1602
611z los
9£ IaIa NOSb3"W
'ldtl8 ?
O 301S15Y3
s£ Izlz
oei } T9-0 -z
9902 6£IZ
1
AK30tlJr
Sri0 3ATd:11
R
9602 6661
e :: 890? 051 \?
II p'I!
i
II II
-Ii

NC 180
South of NC 1801
US 74 Bypass Intersection
Two-Lane section
Looking north

fill 'Al
?el-- •. x,74 r ?' - - -
NC 180
South of NC 1801
74 Business Intersection
Three-Lane section
Looking north
NC 180

?3 Looking south
- at Intersection of
1801 US 74 Business

C
..

v

k x I
r

` ?

5.
r
; f

? v _ >s

Y 9
U'222 B
P. TOC4 AR!-IS OF
EXISTING CONDITIONS

FIGURE

may, '? ?' _ i 5 k T +"4'
' ?'?sryg
OP4
L&iAL
4z 9
Ust.
iriti °-?Seczicri of
C 18( 74 Bypass
L u+
nor:hbc, .ind _a :.,roach
of RAC
intersection of
NC iMUS 14 Bypass
Looking north at
soi,tl ound approach
of NC ? 80
of
NC t 4 Bye -sS
Vie from Service Roar
SR 2092 at northeast
quadrant of intersection,
looking west.

00
00
9 ??0
b?
Q?
1,010
1,050)
x3,700
b bq3 540
00
0
0
Elizabeth Ave
SR2?2 3,600
ccd S?Ma • S ?? B
r/0 S vs
f
90
60
Kings Rd
North Service Rd
SR 2083
6,100
1,800
US 74 Bypass
South Service Rd
SR 1229
Carmel Or
SR 1232
25,040
1,800
1,260
432) 2,170
20) 800
0
in - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
N I1
I I
1
I 1
I I
to I I
`? 1 I
060
I 1
-4 4,090
I
310 50 ?c-17,31 Kelnpe I
080 SR2063 ` i I
-4 190
2,150
3,240 370 2,150 1 I
I 1
? 440
So I I
p? 1 I
3 10 (sal ?? I I
o I 1
510 10
I
N I 1
O I 1
tci 1 I
tr9o 2,090 Kings Road Extension I I
I I
SR 2048 j I 1
3,822) x020 60 PM 10 L-----------------------------1
(4,21 Estimated 1994 Average Deily Traft
1,400 0 with the exis&v htersecti°n
vs lay-W
0
0
r-
00 ?

Z
90 260

810

350 700
North Service Rd
60 P'I _ l0 SR 2092 i
13,510 (5,2)
4,17V 650
24,330
2,420 4
230
,
14,340 55.L P-"
(3.5,3.7)
8
1,01 1130

680

460 700
South Se
Service Rd
60 ?M _ SR 2318
10
0 0 (5,2)
M
V
3

O
0
10
N
co
86V 41,120

3208 840' 2,040

TaYlor R
d

0
vv l0 ? SR ?2M

(3,1) 60
2
NC 180 MULTILANE WIDENING
(U-2221)
SHELBY, CLEVELAND COUNTY
1994 Average Daily Traffic
LEGEND
0000 = vpd
DHV = Design Hourly Volume (%)
D = Directional (%)
Direction of D
(2.1) Dual Trucks, TTST (%)
am/pm AM or PM Peak
m
11 :?ip 60
DHV (2'11 D
NOTE: DHV & D if not shown
are the same for opposing
leg.
NOT TO SCALE
FIGURE 4A
P? 60
10
* ?

?'. ?

III ? :

????
I

?? ?I

i?'..
i'
I
%
l it 1,
',.

III II
,III ??'I
-Ili
ill 'S 4
av 3anoij
31VDS 01 10N
6a1
6uLsoddo aol swos ate; aao
UM04s 40u }i d '8 nH(3 :310N
a (CL) AHa
09 < wd LL
jDad Wd .Lo WV wd/LuD
1S11 'sj:)nal lDna WZ)
W 1Du0lP9J1Q = Q
(q°) ownlon AlanoH uBlsa4 = AM
pdn = 0000
ON3J31
09
00az as a-? of
P? io/,(°l
0p9'Y
z
0
0
N
O
ObL,
p 069
099'Z? 0 L8'L
009',
a
a a
0
E r
CL in
N
0
W
O
aQ /aua?QJ
otez NS
PN aouuaS yjnoS o0o L
szzt as
(L E's £1 'zz osE'z
oos
s _tl ss 0L9 ,Jr A,aS ylnoS
Zj tiozo'£
oos'zz ?
Olb44 dOLS'L
000'6,
008'vl
zsoz as SSod,(8 kL Sn
Pa eoinJaS 4PoN ooo'L
oos Z ?oz as
Z Pd a?i,va
c? S 44JON
N -J
A 00
po-Ael co
o
uW. -611W PSXG aw trm $ k0£L'9 s40Z as
PAW.L APG s6alGAV OZOZ PSMUgS3 WO
of -09 o£o'? 009'L {?? s6uDi
------------------------------ wd
rOLL'L
mz as
uolsua4x3 P--- s6uN 0L9'£ 011)
I ?
ozo,L I i
1 I
1
I 1 11 oprfe
? , wa
I I OS
1
Ol9
000 00C 1
4Z aS ' Oe
I JedujV 0L l? OS
1 P?
1 I
i I
1 I
I
10
, I
1
1- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -1
0zz'oZ
lz g) 0L
09
P
co
S
r
E N
vi
ull
q88's
A
N
P
O
00A?v
? ?s 410
e A? 4-1s0?
S?
0£9'!) ?,o'9
080'i) 4'011'L
N
N
O
O
1?ti?\ pl
\ti ?d
09
009 ?1.
OZl' Ll ZWZ CIS
cio%l
G',"4 4to .13
0
O -
Deo c-
000 l
0£9'v
(096'L
OsS L
:)i}}aal Apa 915DJGA r OZOZ
AlNno:) aN%v93n31D "AGUHS
(Lzzz-n)
ONiNKIM 3N`dli.iinw 08L DN
6 00 \
a
o?

9 b\
00

Ill
t

1.0
W
w
D
C9
LL
Iltt II/'I E '? I 0, Z
0, =3
{ i MIN i I' I• O c^
J o• t? ;
Y h C CV LLJ
--- _? aY
!E "• ! y o z
L. C)
1!li?i Eli MEilEIIII o it t
II??®a? E tt•?'IEo.??I??aQi i` ??? ? "L' c?ah
i 1 i• 1? 1 1 !i: I
i ' 1 0
m 1
i 1 W m? ^ ?a?- 1 1
c 1
7 '
i1I

1 ? 1
m
1 t
1
I ' i AQ
,
ti
IS uo S r 7 ?
/ r r
` r
1 '
? 1

,1'!,
I' I???i
'I
?,
??
i
I' ?I;

'y„ 3I t,
,t lit h:
r
? i
1 a ,?
till
, lip,
t
7 ?
4 a ?x,
.. ?, s 1w w W *-
1 > > O is H
R O_
s. a, d W
?y S 1 <
1y
F_
-. L- 4¦ 1 w w p z
N'ri F
U) in
s .1}ti O O O O
O O O o
?, ? ? - ? i ac ac oc ?
a a a a•
Cr ;
N v4 W . 1
iv LL
7// 10
# a
lop
fit,, t? ?? .* j j ? Q,
Vol
?. K
J
f ,4 t
I K N
t r
CO Z) 1.
A% f
19 i=
W ?.
k \ } Q d r c? r _ tt
m
40,
41
.. ` tt A t k
ti? r #
401
I
a
5 A i g

f,. ,. - 8 lh"
SR ?pA
i k4-,
pow-
0..
W -am
44 ?. „
F. {
ti l , _n t '.
, -", If ? rT
4 i .. - wir IA
,
SR 2093 NORTH SERVICE
NDR
RD. % TH SER E RD,
-77
r Fk , GAST
''mow 6
US 74 BYPASS
---r0 ONIq
TO SHELBY
SERVICE RD..
,.r 229 Sot]TN .? 2318 S ..
SR 1 C),
..mash eE?? SER
VICE RD
'It
1L
0
04
L r
w
US 74 BypAS *.. ,,
11 ?;
' Y
L , >f
r
t"A
-
. r V 5? 6y - , _,..'O
fl!I
17
r
r ?. s
?. . .
J / .III
h
A ?r' r r `` r4
? f
,r -
"" r
3 .
L
V 3N1-1 HOIVW ?*
1
i Tr

? e
nun Awl
}
=M11-1 U1) It
4 t r?, 5 Y Q
4 ?*rii E r?.: " e• : W
V
2
r.
Illy i
{? w rte''' - ER RD .1
t
63
S?z
•
.44
,.?_.r S? l ¦ F .i? I
* h 1 awl g I (? • ti f ?. LL "? r
W-j
rill .4t
44, U-
W
f "- Aa U
4
'
z. rx st ¦r tU ?, s k
AV'i Z -r 7b, J?,!', -4
ILL-
R 71• + LL
L
C) v J N LU
?.? r ? § ? ¦ ? * ,? ? ? J it .l
-, _ z z u.
W LLJ Q
4 i r> W U.l = y?\
11 a a
k Jr w U.1
,?, ..? •? c,+?? - ? . U ''"1?. `t?C ? -, j???.?• "? R to N N N
. O
O O O O
?f 4"+ a a n. o.
SM1 , .fit ?'l s .. k
4I l 4 <:? ¦
Ilk
r i tir s '?
3NI
lot
tar
4 a:: s?1
W
F I le
j? 0-
Y w y
5
40 ,r i fir" k
_ 1 r
5oz -6s - . ?
p ? i1
4 \ ? 1
` .
4 ti~ - I
r -
S

Lhlk *-l"
rr
a ,
'10\0
N
Y I
_ t
o.
=s
LjL
Q
iW
4
S c
E

r -

Ott' Y''? .lr
1 x Yy?
14.
.-
Ilk
-114
s
t ! 0 ? - „. 0 3 N I l H ?11ctYti
low

ti
W
C?
U-
z
o

U
W
°
W
Cl) U)
W

O

l)
cc
a
o
a
O
? 1=
U
J
W
a J ~
a
Q x
X
U cc

a a

(L
? a
H

O 0
w
E 02
Nr O w
N
Ix m
a
(V O
0
N E
O
cri
CV
r E
?

O N z
w
CD
CO
0
co
0
n
N

? E
O
C
N E
N
N
W.
0
y
R?
O o6
0: m
aa:
v
W
N
C?
O
Z
m
D
w
Z
Q
J
CC
i
i
i
a
IWI
0
LL
U
v '?
U)
O
Q
in
z CV
C\I
O
N
F- I
U L-)
W
U) F--
X U
W W
Z O
W
C
v
O
a_
O
It

w
z
J
x
U
Q I
c
m
w
U
M K
p? W
y
to
I( ( M
( ?O
( ZN
W ?
Z
U'O
7I I J 0
( W (X
m cc
(
N p ~ Wa
?
N N 0
( W Z 0Y
? O_ O
U) K IM LL
LO
?
Q
aU)
by
a
?W
OD ( \ 1\
D
S
mN
z
O N Y
N
C ZZ
O m
R a
mw. r
N
O
K W
U) N U
H
O
N

N
N O
IQ J
N_ w
K ?
N S
Q
K
W
_U
wW
N N
CY S
N ?•'
W
Q
S
w
NW
n to
oa
N N
J
NW

0 O
m K Z
If) N W ?p
J
yz 00
W N 00
N
S \ N ;
F
?o
N
0
OS
0'r
Np
N J
a Q
N F
•
W
C7
w
z
J
2
U
H
Q
LL
W
Q
U
Z
r
APPENDIX
RELOCATION REPORT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
AREA RELOCATION OFFICE
a E.I.S. ? CORRIDOR FIDESIGN

?e
PROJECT: 8.1800701 COUNTY Cleveland Alternate 1 of 1 Alternate
I.D. NO.: U-2221 B F.A. PROJECT ST?-180(1)
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: NC 180, from SR 220 to SR 2052 in Shelby

ESTIMATED DISPLACEES INCOME LEVEL
Type of
Di lacees
Owners
Tenants
Total
Minorities
0-15M
15-25M
25-35M
35-50M
50 UP
Individuals 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Families 4 4 8 3 3 3 2 0 0
Businesses 1 2 3 0 VALUE OF DWELLING DSS DWELLING AVAILABLE`
Farms 0 0 0 0 Owners Tenants For Sale For Rent
Non-Profit 1 0 1 0 0-20M 0 $0-150 0 0-20M 1 $0-150 0
ANSWERALI QUESt'IONS 2040M 3 150-250 3 2040M 35 150.250 1
Yes No Explain all "YES" answers. 40-761M 1 250400 1 40-70M 104 250400 10
x 1. Will special relocation services be necessary? 70-100M 0 400-600 0 70-100M 81 400-600 1
x 2. Will schools or churches be affect by 100 up 0 600 ur 0 loo ur 73 600 up 1
displacement? TOTAL 4 4 294 13
x 3. Will business services still be available after RFmARxs' (Respond b Number
. project? 3. Business will not be disrupted after project.
X 4. Will any business be displaced? If so, 4. a. Jim O'Brien, Home Improvement
indicate size, type, estimated number of
employees, minorities, etc. 600 square feet, two employees, no minorities
b. Cleveland-Rutherford Kidney Association, Non-Profit
x 5. Will relocation cause a housing shortage? 1000 square feet, three employees, no minorities
6. Source for available housing (list). c. Crafts Bird Houses & Feeders)
x 7. Will additional housing programs needed? One owner, 450 square feet, no minorities
x 8. Should Last Resort Housing be considered? d. Fitch Sign Co. Signs
x 9. Are there large, disabled, elderly, etc. 700 square feet, two employees, no minorities
families? 8. Last resort housing will be administered in accordance with
x 10. Will public housing be needed for project? State law.
x 11 . Is public housing available? 11. Section 8 Housing is available.
x 12 . Is it felt there will be adequate DSS housing 12. If current housing trends continue, i.e., new construction,
housing available during relocation period? low interest rates, etc., comparable housing should be
x 13 . Will there be a problem of housing within available within the relocation period.
financial means? 14. Local real estate firms and newspaper advertising
x 14 . Are suitable business sites available (list OF
H
'
'
source). BRANC
?
/ • ,GNT QF VVi;
15 . Number months estimated to com lete
RELOCATION? 14 months Q
! ()Cj 6 1905
r
n

e406k
k'

• nyaay rne..s V' ?: ,z :v

Q
d T-5
V
t Date
Relocation oved b Date
A
Form'8.4 Revised 5190 v t /
Original & I Copy: ,lace tcelocauun Agent.
2 Copy Area Relocation Office
A-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P .O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER TO June 22, 1994
Planning Division
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department-
of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
E
17
E JUN 2 4 1994 ?
Z rr?? ?
Z `JI'? r
This is in response to your letter of April 27, 1994, informing
us of your study initiation of "NC 180, Widen to Multi-lane Facility
between NC 226 and NC 150, Cleveland County, Federal-Aid Project
STP-180(1), State Project 8.1800701, TIP No. U-2221" (Regulatory
Branch Action I.D. No. 199402642).
Our comments, from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (CE)
perspective, involve impacts to CE projects, flood plains, and other
environmental aspects, primarily waters and wetlands. The proposed
improvements would not cross any CE-constructed flood control or
navigation project. {
The proposed project is sited in Cleveland County which
participates in the Federal Flood Insurance Program. From a review
of the July 1991 Cleveland County Flood Insurance Rate Map, the
roadway does not appear to cross any identified flood-hazard area.
Our Regulatory Branch has reviewed the above mentioned project
and has the following comments. Department of the Army permit
authorization, pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act of
1977, as amended, will be required for the discharge of excavated
or fill material, including construction debris, into waters of the
United States or any adjacent and/or isolated wetlands. Please
provide sufficient information for our evaluation of environmental
impacts for all construction corridors which you are considering.
Included should be wetland and soils mapping, indicating wetland
and soils types and data regarding endangered species, cultural
resources, and fish and wildlife habitat. Adverse environmental
impacts should be avoided and then minimized. Mitigation must be
provided to compensate for unavoidable impacts. Our comments will
A-2
-2-
be provided in response to such information. Because of this early
review and evaluation, we would expect a most expeditious processing
of your application for the specific activity requiring Federal
authorization. Questions or comments concerning permits may be
directed to Mr. Steve Lund, Asheville Field Office, Regulatory
Branch, telephone [phone].
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project. If
we can be of further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to
contact us.
Si
Lawrer
Chief,

K

A-3
ENT OF ~-_,-
p?<M TAKES ro
?p United States Department of the Interior PRIDE
N ?
7 r FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
~ Asheville Field Office
?ARCN 3. ?Ba9 330 Ridgefield Court
Asheville, North Carolina 28806
May 23, 1994 t N
Z
DIVIS IC N OF
Q
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
P.O. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
Dear Mr. Vick:
Subject: Scoping for proposed widening of NC 180, from NC 226 to NC 150,
west of Kings Mountain, Cleveland County, North Carolina TIP
No. U-2221
In your letter of April 27, 1994 (received May 4, 1994), you requested,
for your use in the preparation of an environmental assessment,
information regarding potential environmental impacts that could result
from the subject project. The following comments are provided in
accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act,
as amended (16 U.S.C. 661=667e), and Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).(Act).
According to information provided in your letter, this project will
involve the widening of NC 180 to a multi-lane facility for a distance of
4.9 miles just west of Kings Mountain. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) is particularly concerned about the potential impacts
the proposed actions may have on the federally threatened dwarf-flowered
heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora) and on stream and wetland ecosystems
within the project impact area. Preference should be given to
alternative alignments, stream crossing structures, and construction
techniques that avoid or minimize encroachment and impacts to these
resources.
The enclosed page identifies federally protected endangered and
threatened species-known from Cleveland County that may occur within the
area of influence of this proposed action. The legal responsibilities of
a Federal agency or their designated non-Federal representative under
Section 7 of the Act are on file with the federal Highway Administration.
The enclosed page also contains a list of candidate species that are
currently under status review by the Service which may occur in the
project impact area. Candidate species are not legally protected under
the Act and are not subject to any of its provisions, including
Section 7, until they are formally proposed or listed as endangered or
A-4
threatened. We are including these species in our response in order to
give you advance notification: The presence or absence of these species
in the project impact area should be addressed in any environmental
document prepared for this project.
The Service's review of the environmental document would be greatly
facilitated if the document contained the following information:
(1) A complete analysis and comparison of the available
alternatives (the build and no-build alternatives).
(2) A description of the fishery and wildlife resources
within existing and required additional rights-of-way
and any areas, such as borrow areas, that may be
affected directly or indirectly by the proposed road
improvements.
(3) Acreage and description of wetlands that will be
filled as a consequence of the proposed road
improvements. Wetlands affected by the proposed
project should be mapped in accordance with the
Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating
Jurisdictional Wetlands. We recommend contacting the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Asheville Regulatory
Field Office, to determine the need for a Section 404
Clean Water Act permit (704/271-4856).
(4) Linear feet of any water courses that will be relocated as
a consequence of the proposed project.
(5) Acreage of upland habitat, by cover type, that will
be eliminated because of the proposed project.
(6) Description of all expected secondary and cumulative
environmental impacts associated with this proposed work.
(7) An analysis of the crossing structures considered (i.e
spanning structure, culverts) and the rationale for
choosing the preferred structure(s).
(8) A discussion on the extent to which the project will
result in loss, degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife
habitat, from direct construction impacts and from
secondary development impacts.
(9) Mitigation measures that will be employed to avoid,
eliminate, reduce, or compensate for habitat value
losses associated with any of the proposed project.
We appreciate the opportunity to"provide these scoping comments and
request that you continue to keep us informed as to the progress of this
A-5
project. In any future correspondence concerning this project, please
reference our Log Number 4-2-94-037.
Sincerely,
Brian P. Cole
Field Supervisor
Enclosure
cc:
Ms. Linda Pearsall, Director, North Carolina Natural Heritage Program,
P.O. Box 27,687, Raleigh, NC 27611
Ms. Stephanie Goudreau, Northt-Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission,
320 S. Garden Street, Marion, NC 28752
I A,

A-6
IN REPLY REFER TO
LOG NO. 4-2-94-037
CLEVELAND COUNTY
PLANTS
Dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Hexastvlis naniflora) - Threatened
,

A-7
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGH USE
FM208 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRAT C
116 TEST JONES STREET p??
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 2 J1503-8003
10
06-07-94
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
MAILED TO: FROM:
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION MRS. CHRYS
He FRANKLIN VICK DIRECTOR
PLANNING E ENVIRONMENTAL N C STATE
HIGHWAY BLDG./INTER-OFFICE
JUN O 9
z
2 DIvisloV OF
C? HIGHWAYS ?Q-
BAGGET
CLEARINGHOUSE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
SCOPING - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO US 180' WIDEN TO MULTI-LANE
FACILITY BETWEEN NC 226 AND NC 150 TIP #U-2221
SAI NO 94E42200825 PROGRAM TITLE - SCOPING
THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. AS A RESULT.OF THE REVIEW THE FOLLOWING
IS SUBMITTED: ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE (919) 733-72320
i
C.t. REGION C

A-8
d(

2A
orv?sicN1 o ?
't .?HiGHWAYS , 0y
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Comnussion-TT
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
FROM: Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mg. Region Coordinator ? ?-
Habitat Conservation Pro ram Cj
DATE: April 15, 1994
SUBJECT: Review of scoping sheets for widening of NC 180 between
NC 226 and NC 150, Cleveland County, TIP.#U-2221.
This correspondence is in response to a request by you for
our review and comments regarding the scoping sheets for the
subject project. At this time we have not identified any special
concerns with this project. A formal scoping response, outlining
our informational needs for preparation of the environmental
document, will be provided upon request through the State
Clearinghouse. x
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to the early
planning stages for this project. If we can further assist your
office, please contact me at 704/652-4257-
cc: Mr. Chris Goudreau, District 8 Fisheries Biologist
Mr. Jack Mason, District 8 Wildlife Biologist

A-9
® North Carolina WAdlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604-1188, 919-733-3391
Charles R. Fullwood, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Planning and Assessment
Dept. of Environment, Health, & Natural Resources
FROM: Stephanie E. Goudreau, Mt. Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: May 23, 1994
SUBJECT: State Clearinghouse Project No. 94-0825, Scoping
comments for widening NC 180 between NC 226 and NC 150,
Cleveland County, TIP #U-2221.
This correspondence responds to a request by you for the
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission's (NCWRC) scoping
comments regarding the subject project. The North Carolina
Department of Transportation (NCDOT) proposes to widen a 4.9-mile
section of NC 180 to a multi-lane facility between NC 226 and NC
150 in Cleveland County. ' k
I conducted a site visit on May 23, 1994 to Assess the
fisheries and wildlife resources of the project area. The
project area is largely commercial and residential with a few old
fields; therefore, wildlife habitat is limited to mowed lawns and
these fields. No stream crossings were apparent during my site
visit. This project should have minimal impacts on fisheries and
wildlife resources, provided the roadway is widened along
existing alignment.
The following information should be included in the
Environmental Assessment (EA) that will be prepared for this
project:
1) Description of fishery and wildlife resources within the
project area, including a listing of federally or state
designated threatened, endangered, or special concern
species. The NCWRC's Nongame and Endangered Species Section
maintains databases for locations of fish and wildlife
species. While there is no charge for the list, a service
charge for computer time is involved. Contact is:
A-10
94-0825 Page 2 May 23, 1994
Mr. Randy Wilson, Manager
Nongame & Endangered species section
Division of Wildlife Management
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
512 N. Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27604-1188
919/733-7291
A listing of designated plant species can be developed
through consultation with the following agency:
Natural Heritage Program
N.C. Division of Parks and Recreation
P. O. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611
919/733-7795
2) Description of waters and/or wetlands affected by the
project.
3) Project map identifying wetland areas. Identification of
wetlands may be accomplished through coordination with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). If the Corps is not
consulted, the person delineating wetlands should be
identified and criteria listed.
4) Description of project activities that will occur within
wetlands, such as fill or channel alteration. Acreages of
wetlands impacted by alternative project designs should be
listed. Project sponsors should indicate whether the.Corps
has been contacted to determine the need for a 404 Permit
under the Clean Water Act. Contact is Mr. Steve Lund at
704/271-4857.

5) K
Description of project site and non-wetland vegetative
communities.
6) The extent to which the project will result in loss,
degradation, or fragmentation of wildlife habitat.
7) Any measures proposed to avoid or reduce impacts of the
project or to mitigate for unavoidable habitat losses.
8) A list of document preparers which shows each individual's
professional background and qualifications.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this
project. If you have any questions regarding these comments,
please contact me at 704/652-4257.
cc: Mr. Chris -Goudreau, District 8 Fisheries Biologist
Mr. Jack Mason, District 8 Wildlife Biologist
A-11
r ?Z
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources .
James B. Hunt. Jr., Governor Division of.Archives and History
Betty Ray McCain, secretary willi2m S. Price. Jr., Director
June 2, 1994
MEMORANDUM
T-0: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways,
Department of Transportation
FROM: David Brook azv? 1Deputy State istor?c Preservation SUBJECT: Widen US 180 between NC 226 and NC 150,
Cleveland County, U-2221, 8.1800701, STP-180(1),
94-E-4220-0825
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a search of our files and are aware of no structures of
historical or architectural importance located within the planning area. However,
sine 3 a comprehensive historical architectural inventory of Cleveland -County- has
never been conducted, there may be structures of which we are unaware located
within the planning area. Thus, we recommend that an architectural historian
survey the area of potential effect to identify the presence and isignificance of any
historic structures, buildings, or districts and report the findings to us.
There are no known recorded archaeological sites within the project boundaries.
However, the project area has never been systematically surveyed to determine
the location of significance of archaeological resources. Portions of this. project
include new alignments which are considered to have a high probability for
archaeological resources.
We recommend that a comprehensive survey be conducted by an experienced
archaeologist to. identify the presence and significance of archaeological remains
that may be damaged or destroyed by the proposed project. Potential effects on
unknown resources should be assessed prior to the initiation of construction
activities.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
109 East j em-, Street ^ Rzkig'. C_= 27601-?.,aQ7
A-12
Nicholas L. Graf
June 2, 1994, Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763. _
DB:slw
cc: State Clearinghouse
B. Church
T. Padgett
N. Graf

R
A-13
North Carolina Department of Cultural
James B. Hunt Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
October 5, 1994
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27601-1442
Re: Historic Architectural Resources Survey Report for
widening of NC 180 from SR 2200 to SR 2052,
Cleveland County, U-2221, 8.1800701, STP-180(1),
ER 95-7371
Dear Mr. Graf:
Q oC? .1 q?
qes
?Z2 DIVISION OF
HIGHWAYS PQ
F?1V1RONI
Division of ves and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
Thank you for your letter of August 24, 1994, transmitting the historic structures survey
report by Scott Owen for the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
concerning the above project.
For purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, we
concur that the following properties are not eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places since they have no special historical or architectural significance:
Residences (#1; 2, 4, and 5)
Bryan Poston House (#3)
In general the report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the
above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review coordinator, at
919/733-4763.
TIP y t?_ 2 Z 2 l 0 Federal Aid # g S TP ^ /90 (f) County C?ev,cX?l
CONCURRENCE FORM
FOR
PROPERTIES NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Brief Project Description
Al C fL S 2R' aQ 4. Sit ,
l Sv -?r?,.r•
On representatives of the
? North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Federal Highway Administration (FHwA)
?- .North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)
Other
reviewed the subject project at
Z
A scoping meeting
Historic architectural resources photograph review session/consultation.
Other
All parties present agreed
' there are no properties over fifty years old within the project's area of potential effect.
there are no properties less than fifty years old which are considered to meet Criterion
Consideration G within the project's area of potential effect.
there are properties over fifty years old (list attached) within the project's area of potential effect,
but based on the historical information available and the photographs of each property, properties
identified as av -4 are
considered not eligible for the National Register and no, further evaluation of them is necessary.
there are no National Register-listed properties within the project's area of potential effect.
Sinned:
Rep entative, NCDOT Dace

If a survey report is prepared, a final copy of this form and the attached list will be included.
AUG 7 1995 A-14.a
FHwA, f the Division Administrator, or other Federal Agency Date
i
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Betty Ray McCain, Secretary
February 6, 1995
Nicholas L. Graf
Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
Department of Transportation
310 New Bern Avenue
Raleigh, N. C. 27601-1442
Re: Widening of NC 180 from SR 2200 to SR 2052
Section B of Shelby.Bypass, Cleveland County,
Federal Aid No. STP-180(1), State Project
8.1800701, TIP U-2221 B, ER 94- 8586, ER 95-
8163
Dear Mr. Graf:

FEB 0 c 1995 4
Division of',t?hives_and History
William
1-11GHVJltvS
/'Jfj
ROrvl??
Thank you for your letter of January 9, 1995, transmitting the archaeological
survey report by Kenneth Robinson concerning the above project.
During the course of the survey no sites were located within the project area. Mr.
Robinson has recommended that no further archaeological investigation be
conducted in connection with this project. We concur with this recomm9ndation
since this project will not involve significant archaeological resources.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the -tJational Historic
Preservation Act of 1966 and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
Regulations for Compliance with Section 106, codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions
concerning the above comment, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763..
Sincerely,
?Dlla id Br ok
Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer
DB:slw?
cc: "H. F. Vick
.. T. Padgett
109 East Jones Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27cd,11-2807

A-15
`?L•i'AR'1'tvtEN1' OF :\L:' .
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF L-NVIRONMENTP.L HE,\LTi i -
County
Inter-Agency Project Review Response Le ,i
Project Name Type of Project
r--? The applicant should be advised that plans . and specifications for all water system _
!-? improvements must be approved by the Division of Environmental Health prior mthe award
of a contract or the initiation of construction (as required by 15A NCAC 18C .0300 et. seq.).
For information, contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
This project will be classified as a non-community public water supply and must comply with
state and federal drinking water monitoring requirements. For more information the applicant
should contact the Public Water Supply Section, [phone].
?--? If this project is constructed as proposed, we will recommend closure of feet of adjacent
?--? waters to the harvest of shellfish. For information regarding the shellfish sanitation progra
m, the applicant should contact the Shellfish Sanitation Branch at [phone].
r---? The spoil disposal area(s) proposed for this project may produce a mosquito breeding-problem:
'-? For information concerning appropriate mosquito control measures, the.applicant should.
contact the Public Health Pest Management Section at [phone].
r---? The applicant should be advised that prior to the removal or demolition of dilapidated
?--? structures an extensive rodent control program. may be necessary in order to prevent the
migration of the rodents to adjacent areas. The information concerning rodent- control,
contact the local health department or the Public Health Pest Management. Section at (919)
733-6407. -
?---? The applicant should be advised to contact the local health department regarding the
?--? requirements for septic tank installations (as required under 1 A NCAC 1SA .1900 et. seq.).
For information concerning septic tank and other on-site waste disposal methods, contact the
On-Site Wastewater Section at. [phone].
r-? The applicant should be advised to contract the local health department regarding the sanitary
?-J facilities required for this project.
If existing water lines will be relocated during the construction, plans for the water line
LX relocation must be submitted to the Division of Environmental Health, Public Water Supply
Section Plan Review Branch, 1330 St. Mary s Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, [phone].
_ ?
> ' - I/ ?
Reviewer
'6LJ1"S
Section/Branch
Date
A-16
D[HNR 3199 (Rcv1scd 8/93)
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Soil & Water Conservation
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
David W. Sides, Director
May 10, 1994
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: David Harrison
SUBJECT: NC 180 Improvements. Project No. 94°0825.
The proposed improvements involve widening NC 180 to a multi-lane
facility between NC 226 and NC 150. The Environmental Assessment
should identify any unique, prime, and important farmland that
would be impacted by the project. A wetlands evaluation should
be included.
DH/tl
{
_w
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, Noah Carolina 27611-76111, T" 3!ephone 919-7 33-2302 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer recycled/ 10% past-consumer poker
A-17
State of North Carc,''na
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources .?.?.•.
Division of Forest Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor _
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Stanford M. Adams, Director
Griffiths Forestry Center
2411 Old US 70 West
Clayton, North Carolina 27520
May 23, 1994
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Policy Development
FROM: Don H. Robbins, Staff Forester _ vkf
SUBJECT: DOT EA/Scoping for Widening of NC -180 Between NC 226 and NC 150 in
Cleveland County
PROJECT: #94-0825
DUE DATE: 5-26-94

To better determine the impact to forestry in the area of the proposed project, the combined
Environmental Assessment should contain the following information concerning the proposed
project:
1. The total forest land acreage by types that would be taken out of forest production as a
result of new right-of-way purchases and all construction activities.
2. The productivity of the forest soils as indicated by the soil series that would be involved
within the proposed project.
3. The impact upon existing greenways within the area of the proposed project.
4. The provisions that the contractor will tame to sell any merchantable timber that is to be
removed. This practice is encouraged to minimize the need for piling and burning during
construction. If any burning is needed, the contractor should comply with all laws and
regulations pertaining to debris burning.
P.O. Box 27687, Ra(-eigh, NorthCoiolina 27611-7,687 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An F !uol Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
A-18
Melba McGee
Project #94-0825
Page 2
5. The provisions that the contractor will take during the construction phase to prevent
erosion, sedimentation and construction damage to forest land outside the right-of-way
and construction limits. Trees outside the construction limits should be protected from
construction activities to avoid:
a. Skinning of tree trunks by machinery.
b. Soil compaction and root exposure or injury by heavy equipment.
C. Adding layers of filldirt over the root systems of trees, a practice that impairs
root aeration.
d. Accidental spilling of petroleum products or other damaging substances over the
root systems of trees.
We would hope that the widening would have the least impact to forest and related resources in
that area.
DHR:la
Pc: Warren Boyette - CO
File

_A
A-19
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
May 27, 1994
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Office ?fjice of Policy Development
FROM: Monica Swihart,"Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #94-0825; Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements to NC 180, Cleveland County, TIP
No. U-2221
The Water Quality Section of the Division 'of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEIA requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party-fror maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed. .
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional.wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
5) Summarize the total wetland impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
P.O. Box 29535, Raloigh. North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer SM recycled/ 10% post-consumer paper
A-20
Melba McGee
May 27, 1994
Page 2
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as .
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
K. Please provide a 'conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may.state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same watershed
is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Permit .31 will require
written concurrence. Please be aware that 401 Certification may be
denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable. ,;
10616er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
A-21
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Office of Policy Development
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
John G.-Humphrey, Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM : Melba McGee &
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 94-0825 Scoping Widening NC 180, Cleveland County
DATE: June 2, 1994
The Department of Environment, Health, and
has reviewed the proposed scoping notice. The
list and describe information that is necessary
to evaluate the potential environmental impacts
More specific comments will be provided during
review.
Thank you for the opportunity to respo:.A.
encouraged to notify our commenting divisio
assistance is needed.
attachments
Natural Resources
attached comments
for our divisions
of the project.
the environmental
The applicant is
nsA if additional

f'.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Tel eFkione 919-715-4106 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action'Employer W% recycled/ 10% post-ca sum©r paper
A-22
NORTH CAROLINA
•??• DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
301 North Wilmington Street, Education Building BOB ETHERIDGE
Raleigh, NC 27601-2825 State Superintendent
May 9, 1994
MEMORANDUM
TO: H. Franklin Vick, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
FROM: Charles H. W *S'ntendent
Assistant Stat Auxiliary SerRE: NC 180, Widen to Multi-lane Facility between NC 226 and NC 150,
Cleveland County, Federal-Aid Project STP-180(1), State Project
8.1800701, TIP No. U-2221
Please find attached communication from Jerry McSwain, Assistant Superintendent
for Cleveland County Schools, relative to subject project.
mrl
Enclosure
A=23
NORTH CAROLINA
•??• DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
301 North Wilmington Street, Education Building BOB ETHERIDGE
Raleigh, NC 27601-2825 May 4,1994 State Superintendent
Dr. W. Earl Watson, Superintendent
Cleveland County Schools
Shelby 06-45-07
RE: NC 180, Widen to Multi-lane Facility between NC 226 and NC 150,
Cleveland County, Federal-Aid Project STP-180(1), State Project 8.1800701,
TIP No. U-2221
Dear Dr. Watson:
Please find enclosed information from the North Carolina Department of
Transportation and Highway Safety relative to subject proposal. Since we . are
assisting with these studies, we are asking that you review the proposal and let us
have your reactions both pro and con at an early date.
Thank you for your consideration to this matter.
Very sincerely yours,

Charles H. Weaver
Assistant State Superintendent
Auxiliary Services
A4L-/a?-
Enclosure

A-24
V??y Of S
yFCSY. ?'
CITY OF SHELBY
BOX 207 -WASHINGTON AT GRAHAM ST. -SHELBY, NORTH CAROLINA 28150
Ms. Julie A. Hunkins, P.E. May 6, 1994
Project Planning Engineer {
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Planning And Environmental Branch
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-5201
RE: STATE PROJECT 8.1800701/HIGHWAY 180 WIDENING
Dear Ms. Hunkins:
In response to the NC DOT'S April 27, 1994 letter and a May 6, 1994
telephone call; please be advised that the City has gas, water and
sewer lines; and water meters, located within the proposed ref.
project. These will require relocation and/or adJustment as
appropriate.
When the time comes for design, detailed utility maps are available
for your use.
Very truly yours
Harlow L. own, P.E.
Water and Sewer Superintendent
HLB:Jwh
Copy: Bob Gidney
Duane Carter
A-25
NOTICE OF A CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
FOR THE PROPOSED WIDENING OF NC 180
FROM SR 2200 TO ± SR 2052 - `
Project 8.1800701 :.-,+.U-22218 Cleveland County
A citizens informational workshop will be held on
Tuesday, October. 119 1994. In the Elizabeth elementary
School Cafeteria located -at 220 South Post Road In
Shelby. This will be an'. Informal open house workshop
held between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.
Those wishing to attend may do so at their
convenience during these hours.
The purpose of this Informational workshop Is to .
present information, answer questlons,"end receive
comments during the early design stages of the
proposed widening/improvements of NC 180 from SR
2200 to SR 2052. The proposed project consists of
widening NC, 180 from a two-lane roadway to a multi-
lane facility. .
Representatives of the.Department of Transportation
will be airaliabie to discuss: the proposed project with
those attending. Anyone desiring additional
information about the workshop- may contact ' -Me.
Julle Hunkins, North. Carolina Department of
Transportation, Planning and Environmental Branch,
P.O. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611 or by telephone at
... (919) 7333141.
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services for
. disabled persons who wish to participate In the
workshop. To receive special services, please call
Ms. Hunkins at the above number to give adequate
notice prior to the date of the workshop.'
A-26

i
?I
North Carolina Department of 7I -ansportation
j Planning and Environmental Branch
j
CLEVELAND COUNTY

NC 180
FROM SR 2200 (TAYLOR ROAD)
TO SR 2052 (ELIZABETH AVENUE)
T. i. P. NUMBER U - 2221 B
OCTOBER 11, 1994
Citizens Informational Workshop
A-27
r?
INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
NC 180
SR 2200 (Taylor Road) to SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue)
Cleveland County
Federal Aid Project STP-180(1)
State Project No. 8.1800701
TIP No. U-2221B
INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
This workshop is being held to present proposed improvements to
NC 180 in Cleveland County. The project begins at SR 2200 (Taylor Road)
and ends at SR 2052 (Elizabeth Avenue). The total project length is
approximately 2.0 miles. Comments and suggestions concerning the proposed
improvements to NC 180 are appreciated and will be considered during the
project study.
The Division of Highways recognizes that 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 is not
available at this stage in the planning process. Additional planning
studies and design work will be performed before the actual alignment and
right of way limits are established. More detailed information will.be
available at the public hearing to be held at a later date.
Written comments or requests for additional information should be
addressed to:
Mr. H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation-
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 1995-2001 NCDOT Transportation Improvement Program calls for
upgrading the existing roadway to a multi-lane facility.
CURRENT SCHEDULE
Initial right of way acquisition is scheduled to. begin in.. Fiscal Year.
1997, and construction is scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 1999. These
schedules are subject to the availability of sufficient highway funds.
A-28
EXISTING FACILITY
Length: approximately 2.0 miles
Roadway width: 24 feet to 36 feet, variable
Right of Way width: approximately 60 feet w
Terrain: flat to rolling
Access Control: none
Speed limit: 45 mph
Traffic volumes: 1994: 15,100 vehicles per day
(Approximate) 2020: 16,800 vehicles per day
Structures: none
PROPOSED FACILITY
Roadway width: 64 feet with curb and gutter
Right of Way width: 100 feet to 120 feet
Estimated cost: Construction $ 2,450,000
Right of way $ 1,800,000
Total Cost` $ 4,250,000
This cost should be regarded as preliminary only and is subject to
revision in the later stages of planning.
w
2
A-29
i
PUBIC INVOLVFTJENT AND THE PROJECT PLAN N 1 N G PROCESS
PROJEC- PLAJAI: NI I IN C,
Planning/environmental studies for highway project: are conducted in
order to comply with either the National Environmental Poiicv Act (NEPA)
or the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act. The type of document
published following the planning study depends on the magnitude of the
project and its expected environmental impact. These documents may be one
of the following types:
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EA Environmental Assessment
CE Categorical Exclusion
These documents discuss the purpose and need for the proposed
improvements, evaluate alternatives, and analyze the project's impact on
both the human and natural environment. Areas of concern which these
documents address include:
- Efficiency and safety of travel
- Neighborhoods, communities
- Relocation of homes and businesses
- Economy of project area
- Historic properties, sites
- Wetlands
- Endangered species
- Wildlife/plant communities
- Water quality
- Floodplains
- Farmland, land use plans of project area
- Hazardous materials involvement
- Traffic noise/air quality
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN PROJECT PLANNING
_A
As stated above, project planning/environmental studies are conducted
in order to comply with NEPA. NEPA requires that "agencies make diligent
efforts to involve the public in preparing and implementing their NEPA
procedures."
Public Involvement is an integral part of NCDOT's project planning
process. The concerns of citizens and interest groups are always
considered during project planning studies. 'Additional alternatives are
often studied for projects, or recommended alternatives changed, based on
comments received 'from the public.

A-30
OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
NCDOT provides a number of opportunities for citizen and interest
group participation during project planning. Some of these opportunities
are listed below:
SCOPING LETTER Published in N. C. 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 Informal meeting with the public. NCDOT staff conduct
th
T
WORKSHOP ese workshops to speak one-on-one with citizens
about projects. Comment sheets 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.
NEWSLETTERS On some projects, newsletters are sent to area
residents and interest groups. Newsletters describe
the project, discuss the project's status, and
outline the alternatives being studied.
DOCUMENT
DISTRIBUTION Copies of environmental documents are submitted to the
State Clearinghouse for distribution and a notice is
published in the N. C. 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, at the State
Clearinghouse, council of government offices for the
project area, local government offices, and sometimes
in local public libraries.
SMALL GROUP
MEETINGS Presentations are given at the request of neighborhood-
associations or other interest groups. .A
PUBLIC HEARING One or more formal public hearings for the public
record are held. Format typically involves a short
presentation followed by an opportunity for citizens
to comment.
CITIZEN LETTERS Citizens are encouraged to write NCDOT and provide
information and express their concerns regarding
proposed improvements. Correspondence from citizens
and interest groups is considered during the course of
the planning stud
a
d
i
l
y
n
are
nc
uded in the-project
file.
A-31
i?
A-32
NORTH CAROLINA DEPART?NT OF
TRANSPORTATION
- DIV!ON OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
NC 180
WIDEN TO MULTI-LANE FACIUTY
FROM SR 2200 TO SR 2052
CLEVELAND COUNTY
U-2221B
0 miles 0-5 FIG. 1
0 1
D
z
m
0
D
z
v
O
c
m
m

z
D
C
m
D
r
O
O
C
Z
0
Z
D
-i
c
m
D
r
O
m
O
C
Z
0
N
A co
3 -
01 N
3
W _
O N
3
W
N
W
an j o 3
3 to 'o ?= W
3 3I
W
O N
3
W
CD N
3
O N
3
N 07
A -
3
A-33
D
-O
O
x
3
CD
°o_ 3
? y
1 0
N
O ?
O
O
N
V
O
O
V
„v
O
Az -p
i ' -
' n
0o D
C) t-
cn
m
0
i
O
z
r

CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL W0FK SuOF
i
NC 180
FROM SR 2200 (TAYLOR ROAD)
TO SR 2052 (ELIZABETH AVENUE)
CLEVELAND COUNTY
T. 1. P. NUMBER NO. U - 2221B
OCTOBER 11, 1994
COMMENT SHEET
NAME:
ADDRESS:
COMMENTS AND / OR QUESTIONS:

STATEMENTS RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS MAY ALSO BE
MAILED TO: MR. H. FRANKLIN VICK, P. E.; MANAGER OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL BRANCH
P. O. BOX 25201 RALEIGH, N. C. 27611
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

A-34
TABLE Al
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2221: NC 180 Cleveland Co. RUN: NC 180 1995, BUILD 70 KMH
DATE: 02/14/1995 TIME: 11:28:38.91
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS = .0 CM/S VD = .0 CM/S ZO = 108. CM -
U = 1.0 M/S CLAS = 5 (E) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 400. M AMB = 1.9 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
LINK DESCRIPTION LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
1. Far Lane Link 11.0 -804.7 11.0 804.7 1609. 360. AG 608. 18.1 .0 13.4
2. Near Lane Link .0 804.7 .0 -804.7 1609. 180. AG 608. 18.1 .0 13.4
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
COORDINATES (M) .
RECEPTOR X Y Z
1. R21, 18m LT. CL RES -12.5 .0 1.8
JOB: U-2221: NC 180 Cleveland Co. RUN: NC 1BO 1995, BUILD 70 KMH
MODEL RESULTS
i
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.- 20.
i?
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1
MAX 2.9
DEGR. 8
A-35
TABLE A2
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2221: NC 180 Cleveland Co. RUN: NC 180 2015, BUILD 70 KMH
DATE: 02/14/1995 TIME: 11:28:52.53
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS = .0 CM/S VD = .0 CM/S ZO = 108. CM
U = 1.0 M/S CLAS = 5 (E) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 400. M AMB = 1.9 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
LINK DESCRIPTION LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
1. Far Lane Link
2. Near Lane Link
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
RECEPTOR
1. R21, 18m LT. CL RES
X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
11.0 -804.7 11.0 804.7 1609. 360. AG 1116. 10.7 .0 13.4
.0 804.7 .0 -804.7 1609. 180. AG 1116. 10.7 .0 13.4
X
-12.5
JOB: U-2221: NC 180 Cleveland Co
MODEL RESULTS
RUN: NC 180 2015, BUILD 70 KMH
i+
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.- 20.
WIND
ANGLE
(DEGR)
MAX
DEGR.
CONCENTRATION
(PPM)
REC1
2.9
5
COORDINATES (M)
Y Z
0 1.8

A-36
TABLE A3
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2221: NC 180 Cleveland Co. RUN: NC 180 1995, No BUILD 70 KMH
DATE: 02/14/1995 TIME: 11:29:16.80
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
I
jj
VS = .0 CM/S VD = .0 CM/S ZO = 108. CM
U = 1.0 M/S CLAS = 5 (E) ATIM = 60. MINUTES Mimi = 400. M AMB = 1.9 PPM
LINK VARIABLES
LINK DESCRIPTION LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH BRG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
I,
X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
I I
1. Far Lane Link 7.3 -804.7 7.3 804.7 1609. 360. AG 608. 21.6 .0 9.8
2. Near Lane Link .0 804.7 .0 -804.7 1609. 180. AG 608. 21.6 .0 9.8
j
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
I I'
it .I I, COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR X Y Z
III I'
I, 1. R211 16m LT. CL RES -14.3 .0 1.8
? ' I I
I I
JOB: U-2221: NC 180 Cleveland Co. RUN: NC 180 1995, No BUILD 70 KIM
II ,.III.

'I' REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
?IWIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.- 20.
^j
WIND CONCENTRATION
li ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1
II I I! IL
MAX 2.9
DEGR. 8
A-37
TABLE A4
CAL3QHC: LINE SOURCE DISPERSION MODEL - MARCH, 1990 VERSION
JOB: U-2221: NC 180 Cleveland Co. RUN: NC 180 2015, No BUILD 70 KMH
DATE: 02/14/1995 TIME: 11:29:05.38
r
SITE & METEOROLOGICAL VARIABLES
VS = .0 CM/S
U = 1.0 M/S
LINK VARIABLES
LINK DESCRIPTION
1. Far Lane Link
2. Near Lane Link
RECEPTOR LOCATIONS
VD = .0 CM/S ZO = 108. CM
CLAS = 5 (E) ATIM = 60. MINUTES MIXH = 400. M AMB = 1.9 PPM
LINK COORDINATES (M) LENGTH ERG TYPE VPH EF H W V/C QUEUE
X1 Y1 X2 Y2 (M) (DEG) (G/MI) (M) (M) (VEH)
7.3 -804.7 7.3 804.7 1609. 360. AG 1116. 22.7 .0 9.8
.0 804.7 .0 -804.7 1609. 180. AG 1116. 22.7 .0 9.8
COORDINATES (M)
RECEPTOR X Y Z
1. R21, IBM LT. CL RES -14.3 .0 1.8
JOB: U-2221: NC 180 Cleveland Co.
MODEL RESULTS
REMARKS : In search of the angle corresponding to
the maximum concentration, only the first
angle, of the angles with same maximum
concentrations, is indicated as maximum.
WIND ANGLE RANGE: 0.- 20.
WIND CONCENTRATION
ANGLE (PPM)
(DEGR) REC1
MAX 3.8
DEGR. 7

RUN: NC 180 2015, No BUILD 70 KMH
A.
A-38
t
FIGURE N1
PROTECT LOCATION & AMBIENT MEASUREMENTS
NC 180
From NC 226 to NC 150, Cleveland County
TIP# U-2221. State Project# 8.1800701
,u
a ?1 a,
a ?
t>z d+ w ,? ¦
?o ut
? e
.. 2317. R
1
a 707E
?i .41" 177p).
7
?
.
a 2?l: t07T
.
7077 a
sr . 3
?
4,; m ? 7x1 ! !
?
a?70lx'i.?, ? , ? 7 !
.SOYA+? .': ? 7.

717!
]077 .a0
\
1r 0- Cowry '„ ]a \

p /i
7071 , fl ifafl. MI.
7w
2
Fisal.Nl S& ilq
\
'
? 70,1
?II7D .T7 7,:, \ \
2141 7070 YI ? A I
1 70 jam. ,1 aay
T¦ ^
b
1774 r y bf.,,,hT].
7177.
74s
_ 70
7117 au $q,
1.44
n17
? nu
7pfe tiN
1071
7011
Nu 4 717] 1177 047
2119
71DE 7171. ! • ?
TIT 7117
7072. 7101 Oa .
71x4 .,7 710,
7111
K
7x7
11
•1N]
a air 104
¦ 2 }t \ iia
\v7 704
1>37 ? 7l74 ??
.l0 .70 7 77'
a.!7
2747 !
7743 h3!
Ay 77 ? wa 3:0 ? .1] afif 7271
I77L ?? 7 7aaa 'Q •? 77x1
?'^?'D Sls 2l7i
•s w0 ilf3 11?.]?I.n.
Q
•Oa 2fiD HE
BEGIN
b?1 141
IM 1w ? 1Ia .C,C
A-39
i
r
TABLE N1
HEARING: SOUNDS BOMBARDING US DAILY
140 Shotgun blast, jet 30 m 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 kmph 15 m away
E 80 Crowded restaurant, garbage disposal
C Average factory, vacuum cleaner
I Passenger car 80 kmph 15 m 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 1.5 m away
20 Light rainfall, rustle of leaves
AVERAGE PERSON'S THRESHOLD OF HEARING
Whisper JUST AUDIBLE

10
0 THRESHOLD FOR ACUTE HEARING
Sources: World Book, Rand McNally Atlas of the Human Body,
Encyclopedia Americana, "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.)
A-40
t
/r.
. TABLE N2
NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Activity
Category Leq(h) Description of Activity Category '
A 57 Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public
(Exterior) need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to
serve its intended purpose.
H 67 Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels,
(Exterior) hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals.
C 72 Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above.
(Exterior).
D -- Undeveloped lands
E 52 Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and
(Interior) auditoriums.
Source: Title 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 772, U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration
DEFINITION OF SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE
Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level - decibels (dBA)
Existing Noise Level Increase in dBA from Existing Noise
in Leq(h) Levels to Future Noise Levels
<50 >15
> 50 > 10
Source: North Carolina Department of Transportation Noise Abatement Guidelines.
A-41 q
TABLE N3
AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
(Leq)
NC 180
From NC 226 to NC 150
Cleveland County
TIP # U-2221 State Project # 8.1800701
NOISE
LEVEL
SITE LOCATION DESCRIPTION (dBA)
1. NC 180, 25 meters East of SR 2048 Paved 68.6
2. NC 180, 180 meters East of SR 2100 Grassy 68.4
3. NC 180, 30 meters West of SR 2060 Grassy 66.0

k ~
,A
Note:
The ambient noise level sites were measured at 15 meters from the
center of the nearest lane of traffic.
A-42
TABLE N4
FBWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
NC 180
From SR 2200 to SR 2052
Cleveland County
TIP # U-2221 State Project # 8.1800701
AMBIENT NEAREST
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS
ID # LAND USE CATEGORY NAME DISTANCE(m) LEVEL NAME DISTANCE(m) -L- -Y- MAXIMUM
From Beginning of Project to SR 2048
1 Business C NC 180 24.0 R
2 Business C ° 30.0 L
3 Business C " 49.0 L
4 Business C " 24.0 L
5 Business C " 27.0 L
6 Residence B " 55.0 L
7 Residence B " 24.0 R
8 Residence B " 21.0 R
9 Residence B " 38.0 R
10 Residence B " 34.0 L
11 Residence B " 24.0 R
12 Residence B to 29.0 L
13 Business C " 30.0 R
14 Business C it 24.0 R
15 Business C It 38.0 R
16 Residence B to 40.0 L
17 Residence B " 40.0 L
18 Business C to 76.0 L
19 Business C " 56.0 R
20 Business C " 27.0 R
21 Business C It 18.0 L
22 Business C to 43.0 L
23 Business C it 27.0 R
24 Residence B to 34.0 R
25 Business C of 21.0 L
26 Business C to 30.0 L
27 Business C to 40.0 L
28 Residence B It 49.0 L
29 Residence B it . 24.0 L
30 Residence B " 12.0 R
31 Residence B to 40.0 R
1/3
w
NOISE
LEVEL
r
INCREASE
66 NC 180 24.0 R - - * 72 + 6
65 11 30.0 L - - 70 + 5
61 " 49.0 L - - 66 + 5
66 " 24.0 L - - * 72 + 6
65 " 27.0 L - - * 71 + 6
60 " 55.0 L - - 65 + 5
66 " 24.0 R - - * 72 + 6
67 " 21.0 R - - * 73 + 6
63 " 38.0 R - - * 69 + 6
64 " 34.0 L - * 69 + 5
66 " 24.0 R - - * 72 + 6
65 " 29.0 L - - * 71 + 6
65 " 30.0 R - - 70 + 5
66 to 24.0 R - - * 72 + 6
63 it 38.0 R - - 69 _ + 6
62 " 40.0 L - - * 68 + 6
62 It 40.0 L - - * 68 ; + 6
56 " 76.0 L - - 62 + 6
59 It 56.0 R - -r,04 65 + 6
65 " 27.0 R - - * 71 + 6
68 to 18.0 L - - * 74 + 6
62 " 43.0 L - - 67 + 5
65 If 27.0 R - - * 71 + 6
64 it 34.0 R - - It 69 + 5
67 " 21.0 L - - to 73 + 6
65 " 30.0 L - - 70 + 5
62 " 40.0 L - - 68 + 6
61 It 49.0 L - - * 66 + 5
66 it 24.0 L - - * 72 + 6
70 " 12.0 R --------------------R/W------------
62 " 40.0 R - - * 68 + 6
NOTE: Distances are from center of the existing or proposed roadways. -L-=> Proposed roadway's noise level contribution.
All noise levels are hourly A-weighted noise levels. -Y-=> Noise level from other contributing roadways.
Category E noise levels shown as exterior /interior (58/48). * => Traffic noise impact (per 23 CFR Part 772).
1
l
A-43
TABLE N4 2/3
FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
NC 180
From SR 2200 to SR 2052
Cleveland County
TIP # U-2221 State Project # 8.1800701
AMBIENT NEAREST NOISE
RECEPTOR INFORMATION NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS LEVEL
ID # LAND USE CATEGORY NAME DISTANCE(m) LEVEL NAME DISTANCE(m) -L- -Y- MAXIMUM INCREASE
From SR 2048 to US 74 Business
32 Business C NC 180 18.0 R 68 NC 180 18.0 R - - * 73 + -5
33 Residence B " 37.0 R 63 " 37.0 R - - * 68 + 5
34 Residence B " 26.0 L 65 " 26.0 L - - * 71 + 6
35 Residence B " 55.0 L 59 " 55.0 L - - 64 + 5
36 Residence B " 26.0 L 65 " 26.0 L - - * 71 + 6
37 Residence B " 21.0 L 67 " 21.0 L - - * 72 .+ 5
38 Business C " 21.0 L 67 " 21.0 L - - * 72 + 5
39 Business C " 21.0 R 67 " 21.0 R - - * 72 + 5
40 Business C " 24.0 L 66 " 24.0 L - - * 71 + 5
41 Business C " 34.0 R 64 " 34.0 R - - 69 + 5
42 Business C " 43.0 L 61 " 43.0 L - - 67 + 6
43 Business C " 91.0 L 54 " 91.0 L - - 59 + 5
44 Business C " 32.0 R 64 " 32.0 R - - 69 + 5
45 Business C " 37.0 L 63 " 37.0 L - - 68 + 5
46 Business C " 27.0 L 65 " 27.0 L - - 70 + 5
2
From US 74 Business to End of Project
. i?
47 Business C NC 180 21.0 L 64 NC 180 21.0 L - - * 72 + 8
48 Business C " 43.0 L 59 " 43.0 L - - 66 + 7
49 Residence B " 18.0 L 65 " 18.0 L - - * 73 + 8
50 Residence B " 19.0 L 65 " 19.0 L - - * 72 + 7
51 Residence B '• 43.0 L 59 " 43.0 L - - * 66 + 7
52 Residence B " 9.0 R 68 " 9.0 R --------------------R/W--------------
53 Residence B " 12.0 R 67 " 12.0 R --------------------R/W--------------
54 Residence B " 34.0 R 61 " 34.0 R - - * 68 + 7
55 Residence B " 46.0 R 58 " 46.0 R - - 65 + 7
r
56
Residence
B
".
15.0
R
66
" 15.0 R
- - * 74
+ 8
57 Residence B " 27.0 R 62 " 27.0 R - - * 70 + 8
58 Residence B " 49.0 R 57 " 49.0 R - - 64 + 7
59 Residence B " 61.0 R 56 " 61.0 R - - 62 + 6
60 Residence B " 18.0 R 65 " 18.0 R - - * 73 + 8
61 Residence B " 55.0 R 56 55.0 R - - 63 + 7 ,
NOTE: Distances are from center of the exi sting or proposed roadways. -L-=> Proposed roadway's noise level contribution.
All noise levels are hourly A-weighted noise levels. -Y-=> Noise level from other contributing roadways.
Category E noise levels shown as exterior/interior (58/48). * _> Traffic noise impact (per 23 CFR Part 772).
A-44
TABLE N4
FBWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUMMARY
RECEPTOR INFORMATION
ID # LAND USE CATEGORY
NC 180
From SR 2200 to SR 2052
Cleveland County
TIP # U-2221 State Project # 8.1800701
AMBIENT NEAREST
NEAREST ROADWAY NOISE PROPOSED ROADWAY PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS
NAME DISTANCE(m) LEVEL NAME DISTANCE(m) -L- -Y- MAXIMUM
3/3
NOISE
LEVEL
INCREASE
R
A
From US 74 Business to End of Project
62 Residence B NC 180 21.0 R 64 NC 180 21.0 R - - * 72 + 8
63 Residence B " 15.0 L 66 It 15.0 L - - * 74 + 8
64 Residence B " 15.0 L 66 " 15.0 L - - * 74 + 8
65 Residence B " 21.0 L 64 " 21.0 L - - * 72 + 8
66 Residence B " 18.0 L 65 18.0 L - - * 73 + 8
67 Residence B " 15.0 R 66 " 15.0 R - - * 74 + 8
68 Residence B " 52.0 R 57 " 52.0 R - - 64 .+ 7
69 Residence B " 18.0 R 65 " 18.0 R - - * 73 + 8
70 Residence B " 24.0 R 63 " 24.0 R - - * 71 + 8
71 Residence B " 15.0 R 66 " 15.0 R - - * 74 + 8
72 Residence B " 18.0 L 65 " 18.0 L - - * 73 + 8
73 Residence B " 21.0 L 64 " 21.0 L - - * 72 + 8
74 Residence B " 18.0 R 65 " 18.0 R - - * 73 + 8
75 Residence B " 18.0 R 65 " 18.0 R - - * 73 + 8
76 Residence B " 30.0 L 62 " 30.0 L - - * 69. + 7
77 Residence B " 24.0 L 63 " 24.0 L - - * 71 + 8
78 Residence B " 24.0 L 63 " 24.0 L - - * 71 + 8
79 Residence B " 24.0 L 63 " 24.0 L - - * 71 + 8
80 Residence B " 24.0 L 63 " 24.0 L - * 71 + 8
81 Residence B " 30.0 R 62 " 30.0 R - - * 69 + 7
82 Residence B " 55.0 L 56 " 55.0 L - - 63 + 7
83 Church E " 37.0 R 60/<40 " 37.0 R - - 67/42 + 7/2
84 Residence B " 37.0 R 60 " 37.0 R - - * 67 + 7
85 Residence B " 15.0 R 66 " 15.0 R - - * 74 + 8
86 Residence B " 15.0 L 66 " 15.0 L - - * 74 + 8
87 Business C " 15.0 L 66 " 15.0 L - - * 74 + 8
88 Business C " 27.0 L 62 " 27.0 L - - 70 + 8
89 Residence B " 39.0 R 59 " 39.0 R - - * 67 + 8
90 Residence B " 58.0 R 56 " 58.0 R - - 63 + 7
91 Business C " 24.0 R 63 " 24.0 R - - * 71 + 8
92 Residence B " 15.0 L 66 15.0 L - - * 74 + 8
93 Residence B " 21.0 L 64 " 21.0 L - - * 72 + 8
94 Residence B " 18.0 L 65 " 18.0 L - - * 73 + 8
95 Business C " 18.0 L 65 " 18.0 L - - * 73 + 8 ,
NOTE: Distances are from center of the existing or proposed roadways. -L-=> Proposed roadway's noise level contribution.
All noise levels are hourly A-weighted noise levels . -Y-=> Noise level from other contributing roadways.
Category E noise levels shown as exterior/interior (58/48). * _> Traffic noise impact (per 23 CFR Part 77 2).
i
I
A-45

S

Description
1. From Beginning of Project to SR 2048
2. From SR 2048 to US 74 Business
3. From SR US 74 Business to SR 2052
TABLE N5
FHWA NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA SUNV[ARY
NC 180
From SR 2200 to SR 2052
Cleveland County
TIP # U-2221 State Project # 8.1800701
Maximum Predicted Contour Approximate Number of Impac ted
Leq Noise Levels Distances Receptor s According to
dBA (Maximum) Title 23 CFR Part 772
15 m 30 m 60 m 72 dBA 67 dBA A B C D E

73 69 63 26 m 47 m 0 12 8 0 0
72 68 62 24 m 43 m 0 4 4 0 .0
71 67 62 22 m 40 m 0 33 4 0 0

TOTALS
0 49 16 0 0
NOTES - 1. 15m, 30m, and 60m distances are measured from center of nearest travel lane.
2. 72 dBA and 67 dBA contour distances are measured from center of proposed roadway.
TABLE N6
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVEL INCREASE SUMMARY

NC 180
From SR 2200 to SR 2052
Cleveland County -
TIP # U-2221 State Project # 8.1800701
RECEPTOR E7¢PERIOR NOISE LEVEL INCREASES Substantial Impacts Due
Noise Level to Both
Section <=0 1-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 >= 25 Increases(1) Criteria(2)
1. From Beginning to SR 2048 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0
2. From SR 2048 to US 74 Bus. 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0
3. From US 74 Bus. to SR.2052 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 0 0
t
TOTALS 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 0 0
(1) As defined by only a substantial increase (See bottom of Table N2).
(2) As defined by both criteria in Table N2
A-46
NOTICE OF A CITIZENS INFORMATIONAL WORKSHOP
FOR THE PROPOSED WIDENING OF NC 180
FROM SR 2200 TO SR 2052
Project 8.1800701 U-2221B Cleveland County
A citizens informational workshop will be held on
Tuesday, October 11, 1994 in the Elizabeth Elementary School
Cafeteria located at 220 South Post Road in Shelby. This
will be an informal open house workshop held between the
hours of 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Those wishing to attend may
do so at their convenience during these hours.
The purpose of this informational workshop is to present
information, answer questions, and receive comments during
the early design stages of the proposed widening/improvements
of NC 180 from SR 2200 to SR 2052. The proposed project
consists of widening NC 180 from a two-lane roadway to a
multi-lane facility.
Representatives of the Department of Transportation will
be available to discuss the proposed project with those
attending. Anyone desiring additional information about the
workshop may contact Ms. Julie Hunkins, North Carolina
Department of Transportation, Planning and Environmental
Branch, P. O. Box 25201, Raleigh, NC 27611 or by telephone at
[phone].
NCDOT will provide auxiliary aids and services for
disabled persons who wish to participate in the workshop. To
receive special services, please call Ms. Hunkins at the
above number to give adequate notice prior to the date of the
workshop.
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
_3
TO:
MR. GAI-A,VV? REF. NO. OR ROOM. BLDG.
X M -
FROM: REF. NO. OR ROOM. BLDG.
Julie Hunkirw, P `
? L C-
ACTION
?NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
k
? swE
c?
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT, JR DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201
March 16, 1994
MAR 22 „/,7rf

R. SAMUEL HUNT III
SECRETARY
MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Eric Galamb
DEM - DEHNR, 6th Floor .f
FROM: H. Franklin Vick, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
SUBJECT: Review of Scoping Sheet for Widening of NC 180
between NC 226 and NC 150, Cleveland County,
Federal-Aid Project STP-180(1), State Project
8.18007019 TIP No. U-2221
Attached for your review and comments are the scoping sheets for the
subject project (see attached map for project location). The purpose of
these sheets and the related review procedure is to have an early "meeting
of the minds" as to the scope of work that should be performed and thereby
enable us to better implement the project. A scoping meeting for this
project is scheduled for Tuesday, April 19, 1994 at 9:30 A. M. in the
Planning and Environmental Branch Conference Room (Room 470). You may
provide us with your comments at the meeting or mail them to us prior to
that date.
Thank you for your as
If there are any questions
call Julie Hunkins, P. E.,
JH/plr
Attachment
sistance in this part of our planning process.
about the meeting or the scoping sheets, please
Project Planning Engineer, at 733-7842.
l
rtn&
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Date 3-15-94
Revision Date
Project Development Stage
Programming
Planning X
Design
TIP # U-2221
Project # 8.1800701
F.A. Project # STP-180(1)
Division 12
.11
County Cleveland
Route NC 180
Functional Classification Minor Arterial
Length 4.9 miles (7.9 km)
Purpose of Project:
The provision of additional lanes will alleviate conjestion and
provide for improved access to Cleveland County Technical
Institute, county office buildlings, and adjacent development.
Description of project (including specific limits) and major
elements of work:
Widen NC 180 to a multi-lane facility from NC 226 to NC 150.
The project is divided into three sections, as follows:
Section A - NC 180 from NC 226 to SR 2200
Section B - NC 180 from SR 2200 to SR 2052
Section C - NC 180 from SR 2052 to NC 150
Type of environmental document to be prepared:
Federal Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant
Impact
Environmental study schedule:
Environmental Assessment to be completed by March, 1995.
Finding of No Significant Impact anticipated to be completed by
August, 1995.
Will there be special funding participation by municipality,
developers, or other? Yes No _X
Page 2
U-2221, Cleveland County
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Features of Proposed Facility
Type of Facility: Major Thoroughfare

Type of Access Control: Full Partial None X

Interchanges Grade Separations Stream Cr ossings
Typical Section of Roadway:
Existing: Primarily 2-lane, 20-foot roadway with some
widening at intersections
Proposed: 5-lane, 64-foot curb and gutter fa cility
1
i;affic: Current 15,100 vpd Design Year 27, 200 vpd
% Trucks % DHV

Note: Estimated traffic projections are pr eliminary.
Traffic data for use in planning and
preliminary design are forthcomin g.
Design Standards Applicable: AASHTO X 3R _
Design Speed: 50 MPH
Preliminary Resurfacing Design:
Preliminary Pavement Design:
Current Cost Estimate:
Construction Cost (including engineering
and contingencies). . . . . . . . . ... $ 7,477,560
Right of Way Cost (including rel., util.,
and acquisition). . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,200,000
Force Account Items. . . . . . . . . . . . $
Preliminary Engineering. . . . . . . . . . $ 600,000

Total Cost. . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . $ 12,277,560

TIP Cost Estimate:
Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,400,000
Right of Way . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . $ 1,200,000
Post Year Right of Way and Construction $ 8,400,000

Total Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 12,000,000
List any special features, such as railroad involvement, which
could affect cost or schedule of project:
Page 3
U-2221, Cleveland County
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
ITEMS REQUIRED ( ) - COMMENTS COST
Estimated Costs of Improvements:
X Pavement
_X Surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1 69 , 020
X Base . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,795,800
Milling & Recycling . . . . . . . . . . $
Turnouts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Shoulders:. Paved. . . . . . . . . . . . $
Earth. . . . . . . . . . . . $
X Earthwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,238,240
Subsurface Items: . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
_X_ Subgrade and Stabilization. . . . . . . . . $ 388,620
-X_ Drainage (List any special items) . . . . . $ 910,000
Sub-Drainage e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Structures: Width x Length
Bridge Rehabilitation X $
New Bridge X $
Widen Bridge X $
Remove Bridge X $
New Culverts: Size Length $
Fill Ht.
Culvert Extension . . . . . . . . $
Retaining Walls: Type Ave. Ht. $
Skew
Noise Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Any Other Misc. Structures. . . . . . . . $
_X_ Concrete Curb & Gutter. (Section B only). . $ 388,720
X
- - Concrete Sidewalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 46,960
Guardrail . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Fencing: W.W. and/or C.L. $
X Erosion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 59 , 100
Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
. Lighting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
X
- - Traffic Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1 32 , 900
Signing: New . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Upgrading.. . . . . . . . . . . $
_X- Traffic Signals: -X- New . . . . . . . . . $ 125,000
Revised . . . . . . . $
RR Signals: New . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Revised . . . . . . . . . . $
With or Without Arms. . . . $
If 3R: Drainage Safety Enhancement. . . $
Roadside Safety Enhancement. . . $
Realignment for Safety Upgrade $
_X_ Pavement Markings: Paint Thermo _X_ $ 124,200
Markers
Delineators . .. . . $
_X_ Other (Mobilization and Miscellaneous) . . $ 1,114,000
CONTRACT COST (Subtotal): $ 6,492,560
Page 4
U-2221, Cleveland County
PROJECT SCOPING SHEET
Contingencies & Engineering -: . . . . . . . . $ 985,000
PE Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . $ 600 , 000
Force Account . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
Subtotal: $ 8,077,560
Right of Way:
Will Contain within Exist Right of Way: Yes No X
Existing Rig ht of Way Width: 60_=, _r.
New Right of Way Needed: Width 00 Est. Cost $ 4,200,000
Easements: Type 'Width Est. Cost $
Utilities: $

Right of Way Subtotal: $ 4,200,000

Total Estimated Cost (Includes R/W): $ 12,277,560
NOTE: The project is divided into three sections (A, B, and C).
The section descriptions and estimated construction costs
are as follows:
ESTIMATED
SECTION DESCRIPTION CONSTRUCTION COST
A NC 180 from NC 226 to SR 2200 $ 2,300,000
B NC 180 from SR 2200 to SR 2052 $ 2,450,000
C NC 180 from SR 2052 to NC 150 $ 2,800,000
Prepared By: Julie A. Hunkins, P. E. Date: 3-15-94
Page.5
U-2221, Cleveland County
The above scoping has been reviewed and approved* by:.
INIT. DATE
Highway Design _
Roadway
Structure
Design Services
Geotechnical
Hydraulics
Loc. & Surveys
Photogrammetry
Prel. Est. Engr.
Planning & Environ.
Right of Way,
R/W Utilities
Traffic Engineering
Project Management
County Manager
City/Municipality _
Others
INIT. DATE
Board of Tran. Member
Mgr. Program & Policy
Chief Engineer-Precons
Chief Engineer-Oper
Secondary Roads Off.
Construction Branch
Roadside Environmental
Maintenance Branch
Bridge Maintenance
Statewide Planning
Division Engineer
Bicycle Coordinator
Program Development
FHWA
Dept. of Cult. Res.
Dept. of EH & NR
Scope Sheet for local officials will be sent to Division
Engineer for handling.
Comments or Remarks:
Name
Dat e
* If you are not in.agreement with proposed project or scoping,
note your proposed revisions in Comments or Remarks Section
and initial and date after comments.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
NC 180
Widen to Multi-lane Facility
From NC 226 to NC 150 in
Cleveland County, U-2221
Scale: 1" -__2 miles-
May 27, 1994
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee, Office of Policy Development
FROM: Monica Swihad" Water Quality Planning
SUBJECT: Project Review #94-0825;. Scoping Comments - NC DOT
Proposed Improvements to NC 180, Cleveland County, TIP
No. U-2221
The Water Quality Section of the Division of Environmental
Management requests that the following topics be discussed in the
environmental documents prepared on the subject project:
A. Identify the streams potentially impacted by the project. The
stream classifications should be current.
B. Identify the linear feet of stream channelizations/
relocations. If the original stream banks were vegetated, it
is requested that the channelized/relocated stream banks be
revegetated.
C. Number of stream crossings.
D. Will permanent spill catch basins be utilized? DEM requests
that these catch basins be placed at all water supply stream
crossings. Identify the responsible party for maintenance.
E. Identify the stormwater controls (permanent and temporary) to
be employed.
F. Please ensure that sediment and erosion and control measures
are not placed in wetlands.
G. Wetland Impacts
1) Identify the federal manual used for identifying and
delineating jurisdictional wetlands.
2) Have wetlands been avoided as much as possible?
3) Have wetland impacts been minimized?
4) Discuss wetland impacts by plant communities affected.
5) Discuss the quality of wetlands impacted.
6) Summarize the total wetland,impacts.
7) List the 401 General Certification numbers requested from
DEM.
Melba McGee
May 27, 1994
Page 2
H. Will borrow locations be in wetlands? Borrow/waste areas
should avoid wetlands to the maximum extent practicable.
Prior to approval of any borrow/waste site in a wetland, the
contractor shall obtain a 401 Certification from DEM.
I. Did NCDOT utilize the existing road alignments as much as
possible? Why not (if applicable)?
J. To what extent can traffic congestion management techniques
alleviate the traffic problems in the study area?
K. Please provide a conceptual mitigation plan to help the
environmental review. The mitigation plan may state the
following:
1. Compensatory mitigation will be considered only after
wetland impacts have been avoided and minimized to the
maximum extent possible.
2. On-site, in-kind mitigation is the preferred method of
mitigation. In-kind mitigation within the same watershed
is preferred over out-of-kind mitigation.
3. Mitigation should be in the following order:
restoration, creation, enhancement, and lastly banking.
Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project. Applications requesting coverage under
our General Certification 14 or General Permit 31 will require
written concurrence. Please be aware that 401 Certification may be
denied if wetland impacts have not been avoided and minimized to
the maximum extent practicable.
10616er.mem
cc: Eric Galamb
N*. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRANSMITTAL SLIP DATE
r Z? _CAA
TO: REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
fALAfYA3
+FROM:/jae iU P.F
r REF. NO. OR ROOM, BLDG.
17 ? \,
ACTION
? NOTE AND FILE ? PER OUR CONVERSATION
? NOTE AND RETURN TO ME ? PER YOUR REQUEST
? RETURN WITH MORE DETAILS ? FOR YOUR APPROVAL
? NOTE AND SEE ME ABOUT THIS ? FOR YOUR INFORMATION
? PLEASE ANSWER ? FOR YOUR COMMENTS
? PREPARE REPLY FOR MY SIGNATURE ? SIGNATURE
? 'TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION ? INVESTIGATE AND REPORT
COMMENTS:
_? LI Fii.

2 61994 u
MAY
WETLANDS GROUP
WATER Uf?LITY SEC :ION
dM ST.°Jt'v?
Guw,
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPAPUMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
JAMES B. HUNT. JR. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS R. SAMUEL HUNT III
GOVERNOR P.O. BOX 25201, RALEIGH, N.C. 27611-5201 SECRETARY
May 24, 1994
MEMORANDUM TO: File
FROM: Julie Hunkins, P. E.
Project Planning Engi er
SUBJECT: NC 180, Widen Facility from INC 226 to NC 150
in Cleveland County, Federal-Aid Project
STP-180(1), State Project 8.1800701,
TIP No. U-2221
A scoping meeting was held for the subject project at
9:30 AM on April 19, 1994 in Room 470 of the Transportation
Building.
The following people attended the scoping meeting:
Robin Stancil
Steve Drum
Richard Capps
Mike Rutkowski
Betsy Cox
Danny Rogers
Don Wilson
Phil Williamson
Steve Burris
Rob Hanson
Julie Hunkins
Department of Cultural Resources-SHPO
Roadway Design Unit
Roadway Design Unit
Statewide Planning
Structure Design Unit
Program Development
Location & Surveys
Photogrammetry Unit
Geotechnical Unit
Planning & Environmental Branch
Planning & Environmental Branch
The project scope discussed at the scoping meeting
involves the widening of NC 180 between NC 226 and NC 150 to
a five-lane curb and gutter facility. The roadway will be
widened symmetrically, except at those locations where
widening to one side would substantially improve sight
distance by flattening a curve. Minor improvements to some
intersections may also be warranted. The Traffic Engineering
Branch has indicated the project cost should be increased by
$ 200,000 to provide new signals at some intersections.
The project will be divided into three sections:
Section A - NC 180 from NC 226 to SR 2200
Section B - NC 180 from SR 2200 to SR 2052
Section C - NC 180 from SR 2052 to NC 150

Please note the change in the limits for Section A, which
begins at NC 226 north of Patterson Springs. A revised
location map is attached.
Since the scoping meeting, the Director of Planning &
Programming, Mr. Calvin Leggett, has advised that ONLY
SECTION B SHOULD BE PURSUED FOR PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL
STUDIES AT THIS TIME. Sections A and C will be studied at a
later time as they are programed in the Transportation
Improvement Program.
A feasibility study for Section B of the project was
completed in August, 1987. The report addressed NC 180 from
L'S 74 Business to US 74 Bypass and recommended a five-lane
curb and gutter section through this area. This widening
project will be updated in the upcoming 1995-2001
Transportation Improvement Program t,b include the sections
from NC 226 to US 74 Bypass and from US 74 Business to NC
150. Section B is to be constructed first and will be
scheduled for right of wav in FFY 91 and construction in
FFY 99. Sections A and B are scheduled for right of way and
construction post-year.
The existing cross sections along the corridor are as
follows:
Section A: 2-lane shoulder section; 24.5 feet of
pavement.
Section B: 3-lane curb and gutter section; 35.5 feet
of pavement.
Section C: 2-lane shoulder section; 25 feet of
pavement
Development along the project corridor consists of
residential and light to medium commercial. Major
development and features in the vicinity of the project
include Market Place, Lowe's, Keeter Motors, and Western
Steer at Intersection of NC 180 and US 74 Bypass; Elizabeth
School, Cleveland County Community College, and Cleveland
County Office Complex; NCDOT offices and Cleveland County
Fairgrounds at NC 180-US 74 Business; and the cemetery at
Elizabeth Church
The speed limit throughout most of the project is
45 MPH. The speed limit is 55 MPH just north of SR 2125
northward to the end of project. It is anticipated that
the design speed will be 50 MPH for the project.
The existing intersection of NC 180 and US 74 Bypass
may be revised as part of this project. Service roads
along US 74 Bypass will need to be reconfigured to
accommodate the widening of NC 180.
The State Historic Preservation office commented that an
archaeological survey should be conducted for the project.
Additionally, while there are no National Register or Study
List properties along the project corridor, a Phase I
Reconnaissance Survey should be conducted. The Elizabeth
School appears to be over 50 years old, and additional
information will be gathered on this structure to determine
its eligibility for inclusion on the National Register of
Historic Places. It was noted that the recycling plant at
the north end of the project at the NC 180-NC 150
intersection was previously a cotton gin; it is not known at
this time if this property is historically significant.
The Geotechnical Unit has conducted a survey of the
project area to determine the potent.-ial for toxic or
hazardous waste along the project corridor. Their initial
survey noted a minimum of eleven (11) sites. Two groundwater
incidents have been reported at the Texaco Village Mini Mart
and at the Patterson Springs Space Station. The Geotechnical
Unit will be contacted after-preliminary designs are
available to determine if further hazardous materials
evaluation is required.
The project was determined to have a medium level of
utility involvement. However, since the scoping meeting,
Location and Surveys has responded that utility involvement
may be medium to high. Coordination with the City of Shelby
indicates there are several water, sewer and gas lines along
the project, and further coordination will be needed. In
addition, the Cleveland Sanitary District, a private entity,
has separate lines under the existing roadway; they have
recently upgraded their system facilities and installed an
underground pump.
Since some of the project lies within the watershed area
for the Kings Mountain Reservoir, special erosion control
measures may be required. Further investigation into such
requirements will be made during the planning phase of the
project.
A request for traffic projections has been transmitted
to Statewide Planning, and preliminary mapping for this
project is currently being prepared by the Photogrammetry
Unit. It is desirable to have the traffic projections and
mapping available in July in order to complete design by late
summer and hold a Citizen's Informational Workshop in early
fall.
A federal Environmental Assessment will be prepared for
this project; the completion date is scheduled for
March, 1995.
JH/jh
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
.. BRANCH
NC 180
WIDEN TO MULTI-LANE FACILITY
FROM NC 226 TO NC 150 IN
CLEVELAND COUNTY
U - 2221
0 mite 2 FIG.1
siiiia!nn