Montlieu SR 1471

- J-12-192 THU 13:43 ID: TEL Nu: u?br r?i
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
HYDRAUI.iCS UNIT
Facsimile Transmittal Cover Sheet
Date. IZ r9g2
Please deliver the following pages to.
Name; R?.._ -b-j -ey --_-
Dt II lojS or ??IRoNrnFMI-AL M?n?RGE,vtknl r
This focsimile is being sent by"
Nurne; M60)REW f40 T -rI(J( 6A V&
t4 -,b Q -T- 4yb&(V L t G S i/A1_i T-
-- --
rnone Number: X919) 250-4100 Phone Number Called;
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES CLEARLY
Our Telephone Number is (919) 250-41()0
CALL BACK AS SOON AS POSSIyLE
Our FAX No. is= (919) 25 -4108
PLEASE COUNT PAGES, (INCLUDING COVER SHEET) TOTAL NUMBER ._=?3 _PAGES
REMARKS' _9AZA2900 S 5P11-1_ D.E-r-r-ITT 1 o t J J3Pd?- 5 i 0
tJ-12-'92 THU 13:44 ID: ItL NU:
~ A to TAI O
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
November 12, 1992
TI IOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
u?b r rem
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR, P.E.
Sl ATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
MEMORANDUM TO: John R. Dorney
Division of Environmental Management L-
Project FROM: Andrew T_ Nottingham, P.E. ? 71 A Manager, Hydraulics Unit
SUBJECT: SR 1471 Montlieu Avenue from 500 feet west of
Fifth Street to 700 feet east of CollQga Drives
State Project 9.8071078 (U-2716), Guilford
County
This is in response to our meeting on November 10, 1992 concerning
the need for a hazardous spill detention basin for the above
subject project. The estimated additional cost of a drainage
System with one outlet is $12,300. This cost does not include
additional right of way costs or the cost of the detention system.
It should also be noted that the roadway grade and the existing
terrain in the vicinity of the project could cause problems in
constructing the detention basin.
Per your request I am also enclosing a copy of a letter concerning
the wetland impacts of this project from Mr. B. J. OfQuinn, P.E.
it you nave any questions or need additional intormation please
feel free to call me at [phone].
cc: Richard Davis
Cathy Metzler
')JC
Of
u.J
A,n EquaIONNuilumLy/rU Ili n cUvo Aullun rwpluyui

ERROR REPORT
( NOV 12 '92 01:41PH )
*%k**-k>k>k;ic+c*;k%k>k>k%k:k-Y.>k:k%kh:;kX.%k>k%k>k%k**%k%k>k:k;k%k>k*%k%k ;k>k;k;k>kh;?k'X.;k;k*%k*%k%k%k>k%k-k*-+?*%k>k>kh:%k%k%k%k.it;k%k>k*%k%k;k*>k*>kX%k%k;K?k>k%k;k>k%F:

k DATE START REMOTE TERMINAL NODE TIME RESULTS TOTAL DEPT. FILE
TIME IDENTIFICATION PAGES CODE NO. k
*

NOV 12 01:39PN G3 SR 02'19" E 03

-k
:k *
%k *
-k *
* ,k
*
%k *

ERROR MESSAGE

* *
PAGE(S) NOT RECEIVED P-02,
;k *
ERROR CODE(S) 0-23, +
;k

*
*
*
* *

"NOU-12-'92 THU 13:37 ID: TEL NO: 9266 HW

t.,?.
JAMES G. MARTIN
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 276115201
Oc°Y.nhi-r 1 , 1.Q42

DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
HYDRAULICS UNIT
DIVISION or 1 IGHVVAY5
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, Jn., r.C.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
MEMnRANDUM TO: ML. Doti Morton, r.E.
Highway Design Branch
FROM: Mr. B.J. O'Quinn, P.E.
Assistant Manager
Planning & Environmental -a1 1
SUBJECT: Guilford County - High Point, SR 1471
(Montlieu Avenue) from Fifth Street to
College Drive; T.I.P. No. U-2716; State
Project Nn_ q R07107R
The proposed relocation of Montlieu Avenue will, involve
one stream crossing. Boulding Branch, a stream with an
average daily flow of 0.4 will be bridged with three
8' x 6' reinforced concrete box culverts. Stream relocation
will not hp nPra.cgAry. The propoccd wor)C will i nvr,l v? rill
in 0.24 acre of wetlands.
Based on this informatjon, this r.,:,'iect may hr,
OUT-n011Lei1 U1111C1 NQ iLlunwiae rermiL #26 for projects Above
Headwaters, 33 CFR 330.5(3). NCDOT is not required to submit
notification to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or North
Carolina i71 v i c i ni .-.f_ r,,?ryy ?umuti L?1 t1.721.Z?C171?riC .
If you have any questions, please contact Cyndi Bell at
[phone].
rr • M1 J _ W. Watkilic, r . L . , Diviz iv„ 7 nllyijit-er
--Kr Archie Hankins, P.E., Hydraulics
Mr, Dennis Pipkin, P.E., Planning & Z"vironmental
Mr. Kelly Barger, P.E., Project Management Unit
Mr. G.T. Shearin, P.E., Roadway Design
Mr. John Smith, P.E., Structure Design
Mr. N.L. Graf, P.E., FHWA
Pdr . W - n. .7-1.''ti, .. v . e.. , ,<oaac•x.ac 01,11,°Xl'671111a11 Lai
An Fniial nr??Inrll?nityi/A?lirlrJlivu Action 6mployor
DE=C-02-1992 11:48 FROM DEN WATER QUALITY SECTION TO 97331338 P.01/04
C
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
P.O. Box-29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
WATER QUAI= SECTION
PAX # 919/733-9919
TELECOPY TO: a(r- ??41,46
FAX NUMBER: q f 9-/ 3 3 113 0
FROM: 60e2-?G rF PHONE: 5e ?.
NO. OF PAGES, INCLUDING COVER SHEET: - 4.
COMMENTS: -:27 ?L L- r5k-: 6?V-r 14AI'-17C_ ti 3: 3O P.M
Jr- You 44V6 Qt61 01v ?:,
DEC-02-1992 11:48 FROM DEM WATER QUALITY SECTION TO
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Water Quality Section/Rapid Assessment Group
December 2, 1992
Tb: Eric Galamb
THROUGH: Carla Sanderson
FROM: Dave Goodrich
SUBJECT. Time of Travel for Boulding Branch
030608
Guilford County
97331338 P.02i04
This is in response to your request for time-of-travel (TOT) information on
Boulding Branch. The results contained in this memo should be used with caution. An
accurate TOT would more appropriately be measured using multiple dye tracer studies,
collecting flow measurements, and documenting cross-sectional areas of the streainbed. In
lieu of that information velocity must be ascertained, and assuming no change in velocity
throughout a segment, a tough estimate of TOT was made by dividing distance by velocity.
Table 1 has the results of these calculations.
After consulting Robert Mason (United States Geological Survey), it was
determined that two scenarios would be examined. Scenario 1 uses an equation for
calculating the ten-year flood event flow in a stream based on the drainage area above the
stream: Qto = 0.334 x D.A.-66. Velocities are then calculated using an empirical equation
developed by DEM. Using the results of this fast scenario is problematic since velocities
are estimated to be greater than 25 feet per second (fps). This would not be expected to
occur in Boulding Branch and points out the inherent problems with using a small drainage
area in the USGS equation as well as the limitations of the velocity equation used by DEM.
Scenario 2 represents a manipulation of the velocity equation (to approximate 7 fps)
without regard to the exact flow. The reasoning behind this was provided during talks with
Mason who has often measured flows during the ten-year flood event:. He estimates that a
7 fps velocity is normal for these flow conditions. (During these events he can barely stand
up in a 2.5 to 3 foot deep stream as a result of the high velocity.) 1 believe this is the most
DEC-02-1992 11:49 FROM DEM WATER QUALITY SECTION TO 97331338 P.04i04
TABLE 1. TIME OF TRAVEL SCENARIOS FOR BOULDING BRANCH TO HIGH POINT R ESERVOIR

Note: Different scenarios re resent var in actual flows.

SCENARIO 1: 10-Year Flood b Calc. SCENARIO 2: Veloc' approx. 7 fps

Segment 1 2 3 Segment ' 1 2 3
Oact cfs) = 197 528 3323 Oact (cfs) = 28 90 700
Sloe f m = 50 23.8 5 Slo a (fpm) = 50 23.8 5
VELOCITY (fps) = 27:9 27.9 25.73 VELOCITY (fps) = 6.468 7.4 a
T.O.T. hours = 0.04 0.11 0.057 T.O.T. hours = 0.181 0.42 0.18
TOTAL T.O.T. - 0.21 hour TOTAL T.O.T.. 0.781 hour
TOTAL P.04
6EC-02-1992 11:4e FROM DEN WATER QUALITY SECTION TO 97331,338 N.U-3IU4
reliable of the two scenarios since it is based on best professional judgement and is not
dependent on the velocity equation used by DEM and, to some extent, the characteristic of
the streambe& In either case the TOT does not exceed one hour to the headwaters of the
lake. The TOT through the lake was not estimated per our conversation. This information
would depend on morphology of the lake, operation of the dam, water intakes, discharges
to the upstream watershed, outflow from Oak Hollow Lake, etc.
MEMO
DATE:
T0: SUBJECT:.
12J

oomaTb
ca_?w'j
,. 7
ham'"
L70?
From!
5-6 '-- "?T '('v-Jes V-pc
y
-. ' o+ STATE ? '
North Carolina Department of
f? Health, and Natural Resources
jes
t? '?z ( '1?
,;), 5-0 - (( (0 -1 0

--?w -
a

Environment,
?U? Printed on Recycled Paper
MEMO
TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
3 .?
From:
?rsk WnM ?n1..
North Carolina Department of Environment,
Health, and Natural Resources gg Printed on Recycled Paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environ,Ynen.t, Health, andi Natural Rcsourccs
Division of Environmental Maria-m-nc,•r,.t
P.O. Lox 29535
Raleigh, ?NTT 27625-0535
WATER 4U/I,1TY SEC EON
AX 4 919x33-1338;
1 .LH COPY TO: U 1 vv'al
. k-4\ \? v
FA`.`\-' -NrUMBER: • .
FROM:
NO. OF PAGLS, INC- UDING COVER SBEET:
6/'? ")'? 'Q'? ua/?

E
t?
TRANSMISSION REPORT

( DEC 03 '92 02:12PM )
%k>K>K>K>K>k>k%K>K>k%k>k>1:**>k>k>k%k>k>k>K>K>k>k>k>k>K>k>k>k>k%K>k>K>k>k>k*>K>k>k:k%k>f::k*X%K>k%k>k>k>k>k>k%K>F:;k:k>k>k>k?kNc>k:k>K>K>k>k%k%k>k>k:k%K%k>k%k%k>k>k>k>k:k>k>k>k>k>K>K
>k *

* DATE START REMOTE TERMINAL MODE TIME >k
RESULTS TOTAL DEPT. FILE
TIME IDENTIFICATION PAGES CODE NO.
*
*
* DEC 03 02:10PN 92504103 G3 ST 02'14" OK 04

*
*

* *
*

*
*
*

*
* *
*
*
*

* *
:K*%K*?K***;i?*:t?***:icy:tc****%k*:K***:t?********?K******?K*,tc****;k:{c*********?*******%K*********:k***;K***?*7K**
?I?-b SGT
? l?c?l?' ???ler ?? ?-r•?etY?
5-67 to cks
a?a!?-3 ? ? a 3 s ?i ? - czlL? ,?u---
ca ?,s -
F(?- - 77?7,lv
ld7le2A"-
113
,DS
'-r 0

MEMO
DATE: ?"0/2J
TO: r,--7?6 SUBJECT:
r C ? /
ss/I
s

,7Z?
Ste-
6,10 ? 0/
1012- c/"
From:
STATt -N
North Carolina Department of Environment,
??? ?:? Health, and Natural Resources g?? printed on Recycled Paper

Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) Rerouting
From Fifth Street
To College Drive (NC 29A) in High Point
Guilford County
State Project No. 9.8071078
T.I.P. Project no. U-2716
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
STATE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E.
Manager Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
D e L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
.r
Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) Rerouting
From Fifth Street
To College Drive (NC 29A) in High Point
Guilford County
State Project No. 9.8071078
T.I.P. Project no. U-2716
STATE FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
June, 1992
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Ange a Smith
Project Planning Engineer
Richardavis, P.
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head
H. Franklin Vick, P. E.
Assistant Manager of Planning and Environmental
,,?oV CA. I /;%
?FESSIp?;•.9
:Q q:
SEAL
6944

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Type of Action ..........................................
Description of Recommended Action .......................
Recommended Alternative .................................
Permits Required ........................................
Circulation of the State Environmental Assessment.......
Comments Received on the State Envrionmental Assessment.
Comments Received During and Subsequent to the
Public Hearing ......................................
Revisions of and Additions to the State Environmental
Assessment ..........................................
Basis for Finding of No Significant Impact ..............
APPENDIX
Written Comments Received on the State
Environmental Assessment
Page
1
1
1
1
2
2
5
8
8
State Finding of No Significant Impact
Prepared by
The Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1. Type of Action
The NCDOT has determined that this project will not have any
significant impact on the human or natural environment. This Finding of
No Significant Impact is based on the State Environmental Assessment which
has been independently evaluated and determined to adequately and
accurately discuss the environmental issues and impacts of the proposed
project. Copies of the Environmental Assessment are on file in the
Planning and Environmental Branch of NCDOT. The Environmental Assessment
provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining that an
Environmental Impact Statement is not required. The NCDOT will take full
responsibility for the accuracy, scope, and content of the Environmental
Assessment.
2. Description of Recommended Action
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to relocate
Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) from Fifth Street to College Drive (NC 29A) in
High Point (see Figure 2). The proposed relocation is approximately 0.5
mile long and will utilize portions of existing city streets with a small
section on new location. Boundary Avenue from Fifth Street to just below
Barbee Street and Dunbar Place from just east of Barbee Street to College
Drive, will be widened to accommodate the new facility.
The total cost for the relocation is $ 1,755,000 including
right-of-way and construction cost (High Point College is donating most of
the needed right-of-way, therefore this cost is not included in the
estimate). The 1992-1998 Transportation Improvement Program (T.I.P.)
reflects this current cost estimate.
3. Recommended Alternative
The recommended cross section is 36 feet face to face of curbs on
Boundary Avenue and 40 feet face to face of curbs on Dunbar Place
(including the section on new location). The facility will be striped for
2 lanes with left turn lanes provided at all intersections. The project
will flare out to 52 feet at the College Drive intersection where 4 lanes
will be provided to accommodate turning movements.
4. Permits Required
The project will require permit authorization for the culverts in the
Boulding Branch Creek (one is an extension of an existing culvert, one is
a new culvert on new location). 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". It is anticipated that the project will impact
approximately 1.5 acres of wetlands and will require either a Nationwide
#26 {(33 CFR 330.5 (a) (26)1 or a predischarge notification (PDN) based
upon the Army Corps of Engineers discretionary authority.
Compensatory mitigation is required for actions covered by Individual
Section 404 permits. Since the permit in this case is either a Nationwide
#26 or the predischarge notification, no mitigation is required.
5. Circulation of the State Environmental Assessment
The approved State Environmental Assessment was circulated to the
following Federal, State and local agencies:
U. S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service
U. S. Department of the Army - Wilmington District Corps of
Engineers
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency - Atlanta
U. S. Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife
N. C. Department of Administration - State Clearinghouse
N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
N. C. Department of Human Resources
N. C. Department of Public Instruction
N. C. Department of Environmental, Health, and Natural Resources
Piedmont Triad Council of Governments
Guilford County Board of Commissioners
Mayor of High Point
The State Environmental Assessment was also made available to the
public.
6. Comments Received on the State Environmental Assessment
Written comments on the State Environmental Assessment were received
from several agencies. Copies of the letters received are included in the
Appendix. The following is a summary of the comments which require
responses:
(a) U. S. Department of the Army _ Wilmington District Corps of
Engineers
Comment:
"The City of High Point participates in the National Flood Insurance
Program and has been studied by detailed methods. The roadway and
structures in the flood plain should be designed so as not to cause a
significant increase in the upstream flood elevations. Any changes
to established regulatory floodways will require the reanalysis of
the hydraulics to make sure that the surcharge does not exceed 1.0
foot. Any changes to the floodway or flood plain elevations or
limits should be coordinated with the local community and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency for possible changes to the maps".
3
Response:
This is standard procedure for NCDOT. NCDOT's Hydraulics Unit has
completed all necessary analysis, prepared plans and sent them to the
local agencies. Upon review by these agencies, the plans will be
forwarded to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for
review.
Comment:
"Pursuant to guidance from the Chief of Engineers, Directorate of
Civil Works, wetland delineations made subsequent to August 17, 1991,
must be made utilizing the 1987 "Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual" and those made prior to August 17, 1991, must be
reviewed. Since this action has not been finalized, the areas could
be redelineated using the 1987 manual.
Response:
With a Naitonwide permit or a predischarge notification, no
mitigation is required. If the Corps of Engineers challenges the
permit, then the wetland would be redelinated under the 1987 manual.
This would reduce the wetland acreage, and thus show less impact to
the wetland than the initial findings.
Comment:
"A 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 in waters of the United
States or any adjacent and/or isolated wetlands in conjunction with
this project including disposal of construction debris. ...When
final plans are completed, including the extent and location of any
work within waters of the United States and wetlands, our Regulatory
Branch would appreciate the opportunity to review these plans for a
project-specific determination of Department of the Army permit
requirements".
Response:
The proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize
harm to wetlands. It is anticipated the proposed improvements can be
performed under a Department of Army Nationwide permit or a
predischarge notification for both the extension of one culvert and
the construction of another culvert in Boulding Branch Creek.
The Corps of Engineers will be given an opportunity to review the
final design specifications to determine if a Nationwide #26 or a
predischarge notification is required. Upon reviewing these
specifications NCDOT will-comply with all permit requirements.
4
(b) North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural
Resources
Comment:
"Written concurrence of 401 Water Quality Certification may be
required for this project".
Response:
This is standard practice for NCDOT.
Comment:
"NCDOT should require that the contractor not impact additional
wetland areas due to the disposal of excavated spoil material, as a
source of borrow material or other construction related activities".
Response:
As stated in Section 802.3 of the NCDOT Standard Specifications,
disposal of waste and debris in any area under the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' regulatory jurisdiction will require a permit for such
disposal from the Corp's District Engineer.
Comment:
"We suggest that DOT investigate the use of the existing crossing of
Boulding Creek (classified WS III) for the new road if possible
rather than having a new crossing of the creek".
Response:
The existing culvert crossing of Boulding Branch Creek (at Boundary
Avenue) will be lengthened and used in addition to a new culvert (to
be located north of Dunbar Place). Both are required since the
proposed project will cross the creek twice.
Comment:
"Please address the measures that will be taken to attenuate the
impact of stormwater runoff and spills from surface waters (and
wetlands) after project completion. This is important to DEM since
Boulding Creek is classified as WS III".
Response:
NCDOT will follow the guidelines set forth in the "Best Management
Practices for Protection of Surface Waters".
5
(c) North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
Division of Emergency Management
Comment:
"All structures within the floodplain area must be elevated or comply
with the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance of the community".
Response:
This is standard procedure for NCDOT.
(d) North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
Comment:
"...older properties not yet evaluated for National Register-
eligibility are located within the area of potential effect for this
undertaking. ..the Army Corps of Engineer's (ACOE) permit area is
necessary to the function and completion of the proposed undertaking.
We, therefore, recommended that a survey of the area of potential
effect be conducted to identify the presence and National
Register-eligibility of the older properties".
"It appears the recommended survey and determination have not been
carried out and compliance necessary for the ACOE permit not
completed".
Response:
These comments were addressed in a letter to the State Historic
Preservation Officer dated May 20, 1992 and also detailed to the U.
S. Army Corps of Engineers by letter dated May 20, 1992 (both are
attached in the Appendix).
"The differences in our positions can be summarized as follows: The
SHPO contends that a Corps permit triggers compliance with Section
106 for the entire length of the project._ NCDOT maintains that a
Corps permit requires compliance with Section 106 for the permit area
only. In arriving at this position, NCDOT has adhered to the
guidelines promulgated at Appendix C to 33 CFR Part 325, Processing
of Department of the Army Permits; Procedures for the Protection of
Historic Properties".
7. Comments Received During and Subsequent to the Public Hearing
Following circulation of the State Environmental Assessment, a
combined public hearing on the project was held on May 5, 1992 at Kirkman
Park Elementary School. Approximately 100 individuals were present
including representatives of NCDOT. The following are comments from the
hearing that were not addressed at the hearing:
6
Comment:
Concern that access from Fifth Street to Montlieu Avenue is shown as
eliminated. There were concerns raised about access to Montlieu from
the existing internal streets because the streets are narrow 1-lane
streets.
Response:
Upon investigation of the internal streets, it was determined that
existing street widths are adequate for 2-lane, 2-way traffic.
Comment:
One resident requested that the University review their options of
placement of the Cultural Arts Building on other University property.
This could possibly eliminate the need for this project.
Response:
High Point University stated that this was the best site for the
building and there was little or no other areas for the building.
Comment:
There was concern about the increased noise levels in the impacted
neighborhood.
Response:
Noise measurements of existing background noise levels were taken on
existing Montlieu and on existing Boundary Avenue. The existing Leq
noise level taken along Montlieu as measured 50 feet from the roadway
was 62.0 dBA and the existing Leq noise level taken along Boundary
Avenue as measured 25 feet from the existing roadway was 56.9 dBA.
Noise levels are not anticipated to rise significantly due to the
amount of traffic already surrounding the area. No traffic noise
abatement is reasonable or feasible along this project, due to the
uncontrolled access feature of the facility and the close proximity
of the homes to the road, and none is proposed. The detailed
analysis of traffic noise is located on page 16 of the State
Environmental Assessment.
Comment:
A school bus driver expressed concern about school bus pick- up with
children having to cross busy streets that previously were not busy.
Response:
The proposed sidewalk and crossings at intersections may be used so
children are not in the street.
7
Comment:
The maneuvering of Emergency vehicles on and around the proposed new
facility was brought up.
Response:
The roadway width on Motlieu Avenue will be adequate for the
maneuvering of Emergency vehicles. Access to neighborhood streets
for emergency vehicles will remain adequate eventhough the traffic
patterns will change.
Comment:
Why can cross walks not be built over Montlieu Avenue, they are built
for high schools and elementary schools?
Response:
Cross walks could possibly be built over Montlieu Avenue to provide
safety for students to cross; however, without the relocation of
Montlieu, High Point University cannot expand.
Other comments were made at the hearing and are as follows:
Concern for the safety of small children now living on Boundary
Avenue verses college students due to the increase in traffic
volumes.
Questions as to whether another public hearing would be held so that
residents who missed this one could respond to the project. It was
explained that this was to be the only public hearing for the
project.
Several residents present at the meeting questioned why take a
straight roadway and make a curve?
One resident felt the University should contain the buildings within
limits in regard to the surrounding community.
Many residents did not feel it was appropriate for tax dollars to be
spent for this project since its purpose was to allow for expansion
of the University.
One resident suggested there would be less traffic involved if they
closed West Campus Drive from Lexington Avenue to existing Montlieu
Avenue.
There were many positive responses to the project from local
residents. Many of those cited as their reasoning for supporting the
project as the economic growth the University's proposed expansion
would bring to High Point. One gentleman stated that textiles have
been hurt by foreign imports and the furniture industry has not been
doing well for several years and therefore High Point's future is
very dependent on High Point University for bringing jobs and money
into the High Point economy.
8
Another gentleman, living on Montlieu Avenue, stated that no
residents will be displaced by the project and the fact that the
project was endorsed by the Montlieu Avenue Historical Preservation
Society. After rumors concerning the project were corrected, the
Mayor of High Point, other City officials, and the Chamber of
Commerce all endorsed the project.
8. Revisions of and Additions to the State Environmental
Assessment
(a) Cross Section Description
In the Environmental Assessment, the project was proposed to
have a 40-foot cross section throughout, striped for 2 lanes
with turn lanes provided at all intersections. The cross
section on Boundary Avenue has been revised. It is now proposed
to be a 36-foot cross section which will be fully contained
within existing right-of-way. This reduced width will reduce
the impacts to the homes along Boundary Avenue.
The relocated portion of Montlieu Avenue at College Drive is
proposed to be 52-foot face to face of curbs striped for 4 lanes
to provide for turning movements. This has been reduced from the
proposed 60-foot cross section recommended for this location in
the Environmental Assessment.
(b) Street Closings
The connector at Underhill Street and Saunders Street
can not be made unless additional right-of-way is purchased for
this purpose. Both streets will be dead ended instead of
connected as shown in the Environmental Assessment.
Saunders Street is shown as the new connector to the relocated
Montlieu instead of the south end of Dunbar Place which will be
removed.
Cul de sacs were shown on Harrison Street and Fifth Street in
the Environmental Assessment but are now proposed to be dead
ended.
9. Basis for Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon environmental studies and comments received from Federal,
State and local agencies, it has been concluded that the proposed action
will have no significant adverse affect upon the quality of the
environment. The following is the basis for this conclusion:
(a) The project is not controversial on environmental
grounds.
9'
(b) No significant adverse impacts on natural, ecological,
cultural, or scenic resources of national, state, or local
significance are expected.
(c) No businesses or residences will be relocated.
(d) No significant detrimental impact on air or water
quality or on ambient noise levels of adjoining areas is
expected.
In view of the above, it has been determined that a Finding of No
Significant Impact is applicable to this project.
AS/plr
z
AyE \
N
?N
CH. vE, Q
rARR1S P
a O
Gl'
/,
v \
r
c s
> NORTH
GRACE s
LUTH. CH. _
M
rCOUNDARY
N
.4
3ti
WILLOW PL
00
Av E
V) BER-
D PL. c
O
W
U
ALFRED J.
GRIFFIN
JR, HIGH
SCH.
• ST. MARK'S
IMFTH_ CH
HIGH POINT

PROPOSED
ROADWAY
AV
- N

c
z
M J
Q
(jl ?
J f'1

0
a
Q

GRAVES
KINGS CI A
D-EL CH.
CAVIS II
EGN,OND?
`
c
W 1 C. 0 F;
V
v s? r- rn "
O
? Z
z r
rn
GAY PL. z
Sr
a ?E
? o
(i
WILLIAM r J 'O
r
PENN
HIGH of ;?
u SCH.
r
O
G

0
3
O
QO
F?
0
J N
r
O
?i
O ?
Q e
Q J
m
v
} AVE. --TRUE S TA
Z
? \ w
AvE.
UNITED CH. ?
OF CHRIST
S T.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRA"NSPORTATION
I 9 DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
HIGH POINT
SR 1471 (MONTLIEU AVENUE)
FROM FIFTH STREET TO COLLEGE DRIVE
GUILFORD COUNTY
U-2716
FIG. 1

1471 ?? `a

tit

N1941
APPENDIX
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
P.O. BOX 1890
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28402-1890
IN REPLY REFER M
Planning Division
March 3, 1992
Mr. L. J. Ward, 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. Ward:

-7 t?
MqR s
»92
yJ F r
R`?SFARC1A
As requested in your letter of February 13, 1992, we have reviewed
the "State Environmental Assessment for U-2716, Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471)
rerouting from Fifth Street to College Drive (NC 29A) in High Point, Guilford
County, State Project No. 9.8071078" and offer the following co wants.
The city of High Point participates in the National' FTdoct1nsuranc El
'F"eo . „ and has been studied by detailed methods. The roadway and structures
in the flood plain should be designed so as not to cause a significant increase
in the upstream flood elevations. Any changes to established regulatory
floodways will require the reanalysis of the hydraulics to make sure that the
surcharge does not exceed 1.0 foot 7a?-;? ..?to ttt ?l:uad t qr fiood_rpl,ai
el'atfTur.lict°should:he:.`COOrdirtatcd F rtfr;the„oi cc ,ut?ity:anct-tip
??edu al':`Er»ergcney.iSanagerent Agene}i?for?pIds' ble'?chatTges_to the?riap?.
On August 17, 1991, the 1992 Energy and Water Development Appropriations
Act became law and invalidated jurisdictional determinations made pursuant to
the January 1989 "Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional
Wetlands." Pursuant"°to-quidance fror:„_tha-Clataf. ?f :EnDineer flii?eo?orate:;
!7. ' zing--the 1.9
8T
Q
trrr+?, p ior?to- August IT, Ij ?, tti- 4.re+t°. d Gincc- this actian-hu^,'
trot -cf the-Ate.-{prratt°-a1-ltl oiz?tiocz; Aursuant?ta scctidn?
uf°the ?n_I to .,Act. af 1977, as:= :ended, .i Tl1. b.e_raquir,.Ld for,thedischarge
aF'Yfi..g1'.fi1-.iateia zl??tc ;?;_cvfic.U:1=:ISLto:._nI:0y' adjacent
aiT_d 'i~sQl,ated y etlands iii uinjtiiictia> L itr' tLi La .;-t,h inc-ludincr;?s os. l
unstructTan gebri1;J Under our mitigation policy, impacts' o"Wet lands
shouTV'first be avoided or minimized. We will than consider compensation or
mitigation for unavoidable impacts. T? ieiTrtall_a?,:'ari:'cc)mpleted, including
the extent and location of any work within waters of the United States and
wetlands, Qur 1.girrZaory::;SaioC't?trulpprctth r?ortunrty to review:
-z-
`-,these, pl an.s fogy ..a` protect p.e . f ?;'.d?termi nati gtt::.o ; Department: of_ they' Army
parititw,requ.irements;..,a Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. John
Thomas of our Regulatory Branch, Raleigh, North Carolina, at [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.
Sincerely,
Lawrence W. Saunders
Chief, Planning Division

North Carolina
Department of Administration
James G. Martin, Governor
March 30, 1992
Mr. Calvin Leggett
N.C. Department of Transportation
Program Development Branch
Highway Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Mr. Leggett:
APR 13

James S. Lofton, Secretary
RE: SCH File 792-E-4220-0619; Environmental Assessment for the
Proposed Improvements to SR 1471 From Fifth Street to
College Drive, Guilford County (TIP 7U-2716)
The above referenced environmental information has been reviewed
through the State Clearinghouse under the provisions of the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
Attached to this letter are comments made by state/local
agencies in the course of this review. Because of the nature of
the comment(s), it has been determined that you may submit a
Finding of No Significant Impact to the State Clearinghouse for
compliance with the Act. The comment(s) should be taken into
consideration in project development.
Best regards.
JSL:jcf
Attachment
cc: Region G
Sincerely,
James /'S . Lofton
116 West Jones Street • Raleigh, North Caro lina 2 7 603-8003 • Telephone [phone]
State Courier 51-01-CO
An Equal Opportunity ; Affirmative Action Employer
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 Noah Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM

Douglas G. Lewis
Director
Planning and Assessment
TO: Chrys Baggett
State Clearinghouse
FROM: Melba McGee
Project Review Coordinator
RE: 92-0619 - EA for Montlieu avenue
from Fifth Street, Guilford County
DATE: March 20, 1992
The Department of Environment, ealth, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the subject proposal. While none of our divisions
had any objections to the project, the attached comments have
been provided for your informa`ion.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
1Y11: bb
Attachments
P.O. i;ux 27687. i--iv%zh. Norn C--o; ma :7(,II 71,17 TA-ri,,,,,c')1a.733.1,?7u
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
Division or Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G.',Aarrin, Governor George T. Everett, Ph.D.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary March 19, 1992 Director
ter»,,tORr??7D[1M 'c ^ .:.a
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorney9? '
?i .
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: EA for Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) from Fifth Street to
College Drive (NC 29A) in High Point
State Project DOT No. 9.8071078, TIP 7U-2716
Guilford County
EHNR 4 92-0619, DEM WQ 7 4848
The subject document has been reviewed by this office. The
Division of Environmental Manace:,lent is responsible for the
issuance of the Section 401 Water Quality Certification for
activities whit. may impact :caters of the state including
wetlands. The fcllow4nc. comments are offered in response to the
EA prenared for this project ,which will impact 1.5 acres of,
wetlands.
1. Written concurrence o= 401 Slater Quality Certification
may be required for this project.
2. NCDOT should rewire that the contractor not impact
additional wetland areas due to the disposal of excavated
spoil material, as a souce of borrow material or ot,er
cons tr ction related activities.
We succest that DOT investigate the use of the e-.istinc
crossing o= Bouldinc Creek (classified WS III) for theJ
new feat if possible rat:.er than having a new crossing of
the creek.
4. Please address the measures that will be taken to
attenuate the impact of stormwater runoff and so-ills from
surface waters (and wetlands) after project completion.
This is J.moortant to DE *11 s_Lnce Soulding Creek is
classi-fied as WS III.
5. Endorsement of the EA by DE.M does not preclude denial
off a 40l Cerzi" catior. upon dco, ication if wetland
RECIOiNAL OFFICES
Ashcsdlc Faycttcville ?looresviile Rile,Lii ',Vauhington Wilmington Winston-Salem
701/251-o201% 919/48(tl441 704/063.1(190 914,771.47(X) 919,94ki1r191 919/395.H5 019/89(-7007
Pollution Pruvention Pays
N) !?,n 2953; Rah'ich `urt!; C.i-Ima 27(,2(,1)?i4 Tclvphunc')10.73;.7t115
impacts have net been av--idert s minimized '-o t! i
e ma:: mum
extent practicable.
Questions regarding the 401 Certif4cation should be di-rected
to Eric Galamb in DEM's Water Quality ?fanning Branch.
?ontlieu. ea/ j rd cc
cc: E is Galamb
i?.
F-

.. SLVZ o
North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety
James G. Marrin, Governor
Joseph W. Dean, Secrerary
Division of Emergency Managemenr
116 W. Jones Sr., Raleigh, N. C. 27603-1335
[phone]
March 2, 1992
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: North Carolina State Clearinghouse
Department of Administration
FROM: Janie S. Archer
National Flood Insurance Program
North Carolina Division of Emergency Managment
SUBJECT: Intergovernmental Review
State n 92-C-4220-0519
Mont-lieu Avenue/Guilford Co. DOT
Comments: A portion o= this project is in floodDlain.
All structures within the floodulain area rust be
e'_eva-t-ed or comply with the Flood Damage Prevention
Ordinance of the community. Detailed information may be
obtained from the county.
For information purposes the Commission is advised that
on .:uly 2-1, 1990, Governor Mart_n sicned E•;ecutive Order
123, a Uniform Floodplain Mangement Policy, which must
be followed for development on anv site.
.An E aol q,rx,rtunm• / A innorivc Aaiun Employer

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor Division of Archives and History
Patric Dorsey, Secretary William S. Price, Jr., Director
March 26, 1992
MEMORANDUM
MAR
Rf 92 TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch -
Division of Highways oo? o.-F,c?
Department of ?T-r-a sportation 0/ ;
FROM: David Brook ?? ?
Deputy State Wis?lc Preservation
Officer
SUBJECT: Rerouting Montlieu Avenue from Fifth Street
to College Drive, High Point, Guilford
County, U-2716, CH 92-E-4220-0619, 9.8071078
We have received the Environmental Assessment (EA) from the State
Clearinghouse and would like to comment.
As stated in our letter of October 3, 1991, older properties not yet evaluated
for National Register-eligibility are located within the area of potential effect
for this undertaking. Our November 20, 1991 letter (not included in the
EA's appendix) states that the Army Corps of Engineers's (ACOE) permit
area is necessary to the function and completion of the proposed
undertaking. We, therefore, recommended that a survey of the area of
potential effect be conducted to identify the presence and National Reaister-
eligibility of the older properties.
It appears the recommended survey and determination have not been carried
out and compliance necessary for the ACOE permit not completed. By copy
of this and our October 3, 1991 letters, we are notifying the ACOE AND
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation that we object to the issuance of
an ACOE permit until the question of the Corps's compliance with Section
106 has been addressed and resolved.
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.
DB:slw
109 EastJones Street 9 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
cc: ?e Clearinghouse
Army Corps of Engineers,, Wilmington
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation,
Washington, D.C.
Ernest Fleming, High Point Historic
District Commission
Barbara Church
is SU1t' o
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. 80X 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
May 20, 1992
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
District Engineer
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District
P. C7. Box 1890
Wilmington, N. C. 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
SUBJECT: Guilford County, Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) from
Fifth Street to College Drive in High Point,
TIP U-2716, State Project No. 9.8071078
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to
reroute a 0.5 mile portion of existing Montlieu Avenue in the
town of High Point in Guilford County. The proposed
improvements consist of rerouting Montlieu on existing city
streets, Boundary Avenue and Dunbar Place. The proposed
cross section is 36-foot face to face of curbs on Boundary
Avenue, to be contained within existing right of way, and 40-
foot face to face of curbs on Dunbar Place, with all widening
to take place to the north on High Point College property.
The roadway will be striped for 2 lanes with turn lanes
provided at all intersecting streets. One new culvert and
one culvert extension will be required on new location
between Boundary Avenue and Dunbar Place.
The state environmental document indicated there are no
properties listed in the National Register within the area of
potential effect of the undertaking, and no properties
eligible for listing in the National Register in the permit
area. However, two neighborhoods are presently under study
by the High Point Historic District commission in efforts to
designate them as local historic districts. The only one on
the project is indicated on the enclosed hearing map. The
neighborhoods are own A Home, located from Forest to Hamilton
Street (outside the project area and not shown on the map),
and Wil-lou-bar Terrace, located on both sides of Boundary
Avenue down to Barbee Street.
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
The project is to be constructed with State funds, and,
therefore, the Federal Highway Administration is not
involved. Because there are no Federal funds being utilized,
the proposal has been developed in compliance with State
environmental laws, and the National Historic Preservation
Act was addressed in the environmental document for the
permit area only.
It is anticipated that either a Nationwide 426 or a
predischarge notification (PDN) will be required for
construction of the new culvert and the culvert extension.
In commenting on the environmental document, the SHPO
identified the two neighborhoods (own A Home and Wil-lou-bar
Terrace) present in the vicinity of the project. They
contended that the necessity of a U. S. Army, Corps of
Engineers permit makes this project subject to Section 106 of
the National Historic Preservation Act for the entire length
of the project.
The DOT, however, took into account the guidelines published
at Appendix C to 33 CFR Part 325, Processing of Department of
the Army Permits; Procedures for the Protection of Historic
Properties. Following these guidelines,. we identified the
permit area as illustrated on the attached map and described
in the attached letter to the SHPO. We then surveyed the
permit area, found no properties listed in or eligible for
the National Register located there, and requested from the
SHPO a concurrence with that finding. This concurrence would
have completed our compliance requirements pursuant to
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
Instead, the SHPO responded on 26 March 1992 (memorandum
attached) with an objection to the issuance of an ALOE permit
based upon their contention that NCDOT had not complied with
Section 106 because we had not surveyed the area of potential
effect of the entire project, including those blocks beyond
the permit area.
The differences in our positions can be summarized as
follows: The SHPO contends that a Corps permit triggers
compliance with section 106 or the entire length of the
project. NCDOT maintains that a Corps permit requires
compliance with Section 106 or the permit area only. In
arriving at this position, NCDOT has adhered to the
guidelines promulgated at Appendix C to 33 CFR Part 325,
Processing of Department of the Army Permits; Procedures for
the Protection of Historic Properties.
Operating on our position based upon the "permit area"
guidelines, we have found that the "Own a Home" neighborhood
(Forest to Hamilton Street) and "Wil-lou-bar Terrace"
neighborhood (on both sides of Boundary Avenue down to Barbee
Avenue) are outside of the permit area (see map) and
accordingly are not subject to compliance pursuant to Section
106. That section of the project within the permit area has
been surveyed and found by NCDOT not to contain any
properties protected by Section 106 of the NHPA (i.e.'
eligible for or listed in the National Register).
The question of the eligibility to the National Register of
the Wil-lou-bar Terrace neighborhood has not yet been
addressed. This neighborhood consists primarily of modest
dwellings constructed in the 1920's with some later
development.
We would appreciate your concurrence in our boundaries of the
permit area.
Since we will soon be applying for the required permit and we
do not want this issue to delay the granting of the permit,
your prompt attention to this would be appreciated. It
should be noted that should you determine that Section 106 of
the NHPA applies to the entire project, the Corps of
Engineers will be the lead Federal agency responsible for the
Section 106 consultation. We would want to get the process
started as soon as possible.
Enclosed is a copy of the State Environmental Document. The
location of the neighborhoods in relation to the permit site
can be seen in Figure 1. If you have any questions, please
give me a call at 919/733-9770.
Sincerely yours
J. 'Quinn P. E.
A istant anager
Planning and Environmental Branch
BJO/ahs/bhc
Enclosure
O oa SZATF o
1. L
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON
SECRETARY
May 20, 1992
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR.. P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
Dr. William Price, Jr.
State Historic Preservation Officer
Division of Archives and History
Department of Cultural Resources
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27601-2807
Dear Dr. Price:
Subject: Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) from Fifth Street to
College Drive in High Point, Guilford County,
U-2716.
This letter is in response to your memorandum of 26 March
1992 in which you stated that compliance necessary for the
Army Corps of Engineers's (ALOE) permit for the subject
project has not been completed. This statement is based upon
the claim that "...the entire project area, not just the
federal permit area, is subject to compliance with Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and meets the
Army Corps of Engineers's "but for" test." (Memorandum to V.
Charles Bruton, NCDOT, from David Brook, Deputy SHPO, 20
November 1991. Attached.)
As stated in our letter of 18 October 1991 and reiterated in
our telephone conversation (with Renee Gledhill-Earley of
your office) following your memorandum of 20 November 1991,
we reviewed the proposed stream crossings on the subject
project using the guidelines published by the Corps of
Engineers, Department of the Army, Department of Defense, as
Appendix C to 33 CFR Part 325, Processing of Department of
the Army Permits: Procedures for the Protection of Historic
Properties.
In the case of the subject project, the "but for" test is not
met by the entire project right-of-way. The "same
undertaking" and "integral relationship" tests are met, but
this is not sufficient to make the whole right-of-way part of
the permit area. That portion of the project right-of-way
whose location is determined by the location of the crossings
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
meets all three tests and hence is part of the permit area.
In other words, the permit area extends in either direction
from the crossings to that point at which alternative
alignments lead to reasonable alternative locations for the
crossings.
In the case of the subject project, alternative locations for
the crossings already exist--existing Boundary Avenue for the
eastern crossing of Boulding Branch and existing Dunbar
Street for the western crossing of Boulding Branch.
Therefore, the intersection of these two streets with the
proposed new section of Montlieu Avenue define the boundaries
of the permit area.
This area (shown on the accompanying map) was searched for
the-presence of significant historic architectural resources.
No properties listed in or eligible for the National Register
of Historic Places were found. (Photographs of buildings
present in the area were forwarded to your office with our
letter of 18 October 1991.)
In summary, the Department of Transportation has defined the
permit area, searched the permit area for the presence of
historic/architectural resources, evaluated all buildings
present in the permit area, and has concluded that no
building present is eligible for listing in the National
Register. We again request your concurrence with our
determinations of eligibility for the permit area of the
subject project.
This completes our compliance requirements pursuant to
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for the
permit area of the subject project as defined in Appendix C
to 33 CFR Part 325, Processing of Department of the Army
Permits; Procedures for the Protection of Historic
Properties. We await your response to our request for
concurrence with our determinations of eligibility in order
to complete our environmental document.
sincerely,
B. J O' n, PE
Assistant Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
BJO/bhc
cc District Engineer, US Army Corps of Engineers
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
High Point Historic District Commission
f-
,f.

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
November 20, 1991
MEMORANDUM
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
TO: V. Charles Bruton, Head
Environmental Unit
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways
Department of Tr rtation
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State H'storlc Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Rerouting Montlieu Avenue from Fifth Street
to College Drive, High Point, Guilford County
U-2716, GS 92-0050
Thank you for your letter of October 18, 1991, concerning the
above project. We have reviewed the project and offer our
comments.
Considering that the federal permit area is necessary for the
function and completion of the proposed undertaking, we believe
that the review should consider this project as a whole. We feel
that the entire project area, not just the federal permit area,
is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic
Preservation Act and meets the Army Corps of Engineers's
but for" test. That is that the project could not be undertaken
"but for" the use of the permit area. As noted in our October 3,
1991, letter to North Carolina Department of Transportation's L.
J. Ward, we are aware of structures and possibly two districts of
historical or architectural importance within the general area of
the project.
We recommend that the staff architectural historian for NCDOT
survey the area to identify the presence and significance of any
historic structures, buildings, or districts, and submit her
findings to us. Please send photographs, keyed to a map, of the
historic properties along with a brief description of each
property. We also need an explanation of which National Register
criteria the historic properties do or do not meet. This
information will help us to determine if any National Register-
eligible properties are located in the area of potential effect.
109 EastJones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
zaarles Bruton
vember 20, 1991, Page 2
There are no National Register-listed properties located in the
area of potential effect.
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.
DB:slw
cc: Barbara Church
be : <?_.
Southern/Stancil
County
RF
""I Of CO
UNITED STATES 13EPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
s? .r a NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
`e j'„` Southeast Regional Office
9450 Koger Boulevard
St. Petersburg, Florida 33702
March 26, 1992 F/SE021/RSS
919/728-5090
Mr. L. J. Ward, P . E . , Manager.
Planning and Environmental Branch ' Z t?
N. C. Division of Highways
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 r i
Dear Mr. Ward:
This responds to your February 13, 1letter recr„}z+esting comments
on the State Environmental Assess men ?ffr^U-X215,` Montlieu Avenue
(SR 1471) rerouting from Fifth Street to e Drive (NC 29A) in
High Point, Guilford County, State Project No. 9.8071078.
We have reviewed the subject document and have determined that we
have no resources in the project area. Therefore, we have no
comments.
Sin ' ely y ur ,
And eas Mager, rnal Assristant Reg ir ector
Habitat Conservation Division
?k.
s

'J.vZ o
TY 1
a .{ ? 3
State of North Carolina
Department of Envirornrnent, Health, and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
512 North Salisbury Street - Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
James G. Martin, Governor A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary October 27, 1992 Acting Din c
Memorandum
To: Melba McGee
Through: John Dorn%W
Monica SwihaOb
From: Eric Galamb
Subject: FONSI for Montlieu Ave. from Fifth St. to College Dr.
Guilford County
State Project DOT No. 9.8071078, TIP #U-2716
EHNR # 93-0216, DEM WQ # 7064
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 may impact waters of the state including
wetlands. The following comments are offered in response to the FONSI prepared for
this project which will impact 1.5 acres of wetlands.
1. DOT did not answer question/recommendation # 3 of the March 18, 1992
memorandum requesting only one stream crossing. DOT states that there will
be two stream crossings but the aerial photo shows that the old stream
crossing would be removed.
2. DOT did not address question/recommendation # 4 of the same memorandum.
Since the stream is classified as a Water Supply (WS), a hazardous spill catch
basin should be installed and maintained by DOT. The catch basin is extremely
important at this location because of the curve at the stream crossing.
3. Will the pavement be removed as portrayed on the aerial photograph? There is
no mention of this in the FONSI.
4. The above discrepancies must be resolved before DEM can endorse the
FONSI.
REGIONAL OFFICES
AS IICViI IC Fayetteville Mooresville Raleigh Washington Wilmington Winston-Sale.
704/251-6208 919/486-1541 704/663-1699 919/57 1-4 700 9 19/94 6-6481 919/395-3900 919/896.700
Pollution Prevention Pays
P.O. Box 29535, Ralcigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone]
An Equal Opportuniq' Afrirmalive Action Employer
IMPORTANT
To
Date Time
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
M
of
Phone
AREA CODE NUMBER EXTENSION

Message
r

Signed
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL '
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
N.C. Dept. of Environment. Health, an\^d) Natural Resources
??ll' o.,..?oA ?? Rarv?laA Paoer

TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
/4 -?
r6a S- S??'
lie
7?2 '-37
C?.U" S I From:
Cr STATE
North Carolina Department of Environment,
??. ?1 Health, and Natural Resources ?? Printed on Recycled Paper
Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) Rerouting
From Fifth Street
To College Drive (NC 29A) in High Point
Guilford County
State Project No. 9.8071078
T.I.P. Project No. U-2716
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
State Environmental Assessment
N. C. Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
or,
APPROVED:
Y "777'
.
D to L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
o lanning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) Rerouting
From Fifth Street
To College Drive (NC 29A) in High Point
Guilford County
State Project No. 9.8071078
T.I.P. Project No. U-2716
t
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
State Environmental Assessment
December, 1991
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
Angela 41. Smith `
Project Planning Engineer
"tJ110111"
OC A AO?''?
iss/
SEAL
Davis, P. _ c
• 6944 ; -
Project Planning Engineer, Unit Head =
Oy G? rIR? ••.c,\.??,
w,w','' ?? ? ? i „',tit ?, `''``,.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
SUMMARY ............................................. i
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT .............................. 1
A. General Description ... . ...... ... ....... 1
B. Historical Background and Status (T.I.P.) ...... 1
1 C. Proposed Improvements .......................... 1
1. General Location ... ................... 1
2. Length of Proposed Project ................ 1
3. Traffic Volumes ........................... 1
4. Truck Data .............................. 2
5. Design Speed ..... ................... 2
6. Cross Section Description ................. 2
7. Right-of-Way ............................ 2
8. Access Control .......... ....... ...... 2
9. Intersection Treatment and Type of Co ntrol. 2
10. Bikeways .... ...................... 3
11. Bridge Work Required . ... .... 3
12. Special Permits Required of Division of
Highways .................................. 3
13. Estimate of Cost .......................... 3
II. NEED FOR PROJECT .................................... 3
A. Characteristics of Existing Facility ........... 3
1. General Description ....................... 3
2. Existing Roadway Inventory ................ 4
a. Length of Roadway Section Studied .... 4
b. Pavement Width and Shoulders ......... 4
C. Right-of-Way ... ... ....... ........ 4
d. Intersecting Roads and Type of
Control .............................. 4
e. Speed Zones .......................... 4
f. School Bus Data ...................... 4
B. Accident Investigation ..... ... ......... 5
C. Benefits to State, Region, and Community ....... 5
D. Transportation Plan ............................ 5
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ............................. 5
A. "Do-Nothing" Alternative ....................... 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
PAGE

r
t
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC, AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ......... 5
A. Social Effects ................................. 5
1. Land Use .. ... ...................... 6
2. Neighborhood Analysis ... ... ........... 7
3. Relocation of Families and Businesses ..... 7
4. Public Facilities ...................... 8
5. Historic and Cultural Resources ........... 8
a. Historical - Architectural
Resources.. ........................ 8
b. Archaeological Resources ............. 8
B. Economic Effects ............................. 8
C. Environmental Effects .......................... 9
1. Natural, Ecological, and Scenic Resources.. 9
a. Man Dominated Systems ................. 9
b. Plant Communities ................... 9
C. Geotechnical Findings ................ 10
2. Threatened and Endangered Species ......... 10
a. Federally Protected Species........... 10
b. State Protected Species .............. 10
3. Wildlife Habitat .......................... 11
a. Terrestrial Communities .............. 11
b. Aquatic Communities .................. 11
4. Wetlands .................................. 12
a. Permits ..................... 12
b. Wetland Mitigation ................... 12
5. Water Quality ............................. 13
6. Air Quality ............................. 13
7. Noise Analysis ............................ 16
8. Construction Impacts ...................... 18
V. COMMENTS AND COORDINATION ........................... 19
A. Agency Coordination ............................ 19
B. Public Involvement ............................. 19
SUMMARY
1. Type of Action
This is an Administrative Action, State Environmental Assessment.
2. Descriation of Action
The N. C. Department of Transportation, Division of Highways proposes
to relocate Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) from Fifth Street to College Drive
(NC 29A) in High Point.
The proposed relocation is approximately 0.50 mile long and will
utilize portions of existing city streets with a small section on new
location. Boundary Avenue from Fifth Street to just below Barbee Street
and Dunbar Place from just east of Barbee Street to College Drive, will be
widened to accommodate the new facility.
The proposed project will require a right-of-way width of 60 feet
plus additional easements as needed to contain construction. The location
of the proposed project is shown in Figures 1 and 2.
The total estimated cost of the project is $ 1,755,000.
3. Alternatives Considered
The primary alternative considered was the relocation route shown on
Figures 1 and 2, which is recommended to be a 40-foot face to face curb
and gutter facility, striped for 2 lanes with left turn lanes provided at
all intersecting streets.
In addition the "Do-Nothing" alternative was considered.
4. Environmental Impacts
There are no structures in the project area that are listed on the
National Register of Historic Places. No significant impacts to plant or
animal life are expected. There will be an increase in noise levels due to
the proposed rerouting through neighborhood streets. It is anticipated
that the project will impact approximately 1.5 acres of wetlands and will
require either a Nationwide #26 (33 CFR 330.5 (a) (26) or a predischarge
notification (PDN), based upon the Army Corps of Engineers discretionary
authority.
5. Coordination
The following agencies were consulted during the preparation of the
environmental assessment (an asterisk denotes agencies that submitted
comments). Copies of the letters received are included in the Appendix.
Each of these agencies will also be sent copies of this Environmental
Assessment.
*State Clearinghouse
*N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
*N. C. Department of Administration
N. C. Department of Public Instruction
*N. C. Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources
*Piedmont Triad Council of Governments
Chairman, Guilford County Board of Commissioners
*City of High Point
*Mayor of High Point
6. Additional Information - Additional information concerning the
proposal and assessment can be obtained by contacting the following:
L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
N. C. Department of Transportation
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Telephone [phone]

Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) rerouting
From Fifth Street to College Drive
Guilford County
State Project 9.8071078
T.I.P. Project No. U-2716
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
W A. General Description
The North Carolina Department of Transportation proposes to reroute
Montlieu Avenue from Fifth Street to College Drive (NC 29A) in the City of
High Point (see Figure 1). The proposed facility will utilize part of
existing Boundary Avenue (at Fifth Street), go on new location just before
reaching Underhill Street, use part of existing Dunbar Place, and extend
on new location to College Drive.
B. Historical Background and Status T.I.P.
The proposed project is included in the 1992-1998 NCDOT Trans-
portation Improvement Program (TIP). Right-of-way acquisition is
scheduled to begin in Fiscal Year 1992, and construction is scheduled to
begin in Fiscal Year 1993. The TIP includes a total funding of $1,755,000
for the project, including $655,000 for right-of-way and $1,100,000 for
construction.
C. Proposed Improvements
1. General Location
Montlieu Avenue is located in the central part of the City of
High Point. The studied section runs through the High Point College
campus. The western terminal of the project is at the intersection
of existing Montlieu Avenue and Boundary Avenue at Fifth Street. The
east terminal is located at the intersection of existing Montlieu
Avenue and College Drive.
2. Length of Proposed Project
The length of the proposed project is approximately 0.50 mile.
3. Traffic Volumes
Estimated 1991 Average Daily Traffic
9,100 vehicles per day (vpd)
Estimated 2011 Average Daily Traffic
16,400 vpd
2
The estimated 1991 traffic volumes and major turning movements
are shown in Figure 3a, and estimated 2011 volumes are shown in
Figure 3b.
The project is anticipated to operate at a level of service
(LOS) D or better throughout the planning period.
4. Truck Data
The truck traffic estimate along the proposed route is 5% (35.
dual, 2% TTST). Figure 4 shows the estimated truck percentages for
Montlieu Avenue, as well as, major intersecting roads.
5. Design Speed
The recommended design speed for the proposed project is 40 mph.
The anticipated posted speed is 35 mph.
6. Cross Section Description
The recommended cross section is a 2-lane facility with
left-turn lanes provided, as needed, at intersecting streets. The
total pavement width is 40 feet, face to face of curbs, widening out
to a 5-lane, 60-foot cross section at the College Drive intersection
to accommodate turning movements.
1. Right-of-Way
The proposed right-of-way width is 60 feet flaring out at the
College Drive intersection to approximately 80 feet with additional
easements, as needed, to contain construction. The property through
the new location portion of the project and along the north side of
Dunbar Place is owned by High Point College, which has agreed to
donate the right-of-way needed for the construction of the proposed
project.
8. Access Control
The proposed facility will have no control of access, like the
existing Montlieu Avenue that it will replace.
9. Intersection Treatment and Type of Control
All existing intersections along the project are stop sign
controlled with the exception of the intersection of College Drive
(NC 29A) and existing Montlieu Avenue, which is signalized.
Cul-de-sacs are recommended to be located at Fifth Street to the
north of existing Montlieu Avenue and at Harrison Street at the east
end of the project to avoid 5-leg intersections at these locations.
Underhill Street is to be connected directly to existing Boundary
Avenue, east of the project, to avoid through traffic from using it
as a shortcut through a residential area. Access to existing Montlieu
Avenue at College Drive will also be removed and a new entrance to
3
High Point College will be located a safe distance from the new
Montlieu Avenue and College Drive intersection (see Figure 2).
10. Bikeways
There does not appear to be any need for special accommodations
for bicycles on this project.
11. Bridge Work Required
The construction of Montlieu Avenue will require two box
culverts at Boulding Branch (see Figure 1). One will be an extension
of an existing culvert and one will be west of Dunbar Place on new
location.
12. Special Permits Required of Division of Highways
It is anticipated that the proposed project will impact
approximately 1.5 acres of wetlands and will require either a
Nationwide #26 {(33 CFR 330.5 (a) (26)1 or a predischarge
notification (PDN), based upon the Army Corps of Engineers
discretionary authority.
13. Estimate of Cost
Right-of-Way $ 655,000
Construction $ 1,100,000
Total: $ 1,755,000
The right-of-way estimate includes utility and acquisition costs
and the construction estimate includes engineering and contingencies.
II. NEED FOR PROJECT
A. Characteristics of Existing Facility
1. General Description
Existing Montlieu Avenue has a 30 feet curb to curb width.
Visibility is very good with the exception of the west end of the
project (at Fifth Street), where a sharp curve severly limits
visibility of vehicles turning onto Montlieu Avenue. Since existing
Montlieu Avenue divides the High Point College campus, pedestrians
experience difficulty in crossing from one side of campus to the
other.
The proposed alignment will mainly utilize existing city
streets, which will be widened to accommodate the proposed
cross-section. The alignment at the midsection between Barbee Street
and Dunbar Place is on new location.
4
2. Existing Roadway Inventory
a. Length of Roadway Section Studied
The length of existing Montlieu Avenue is slightly more
than 0.40 of a mile long. The length of the studied relocation
is slightly more than 0.50 of a mile long.
b. Pavement Width and Shoulders
Existing Montlieu Avenue has 30 feet of pavement, from face
to face of curbs. Sidewalks are located along both sides of the
road with the exception of the south side between Barbee Street
and the section of Dunbar Street used as parking access for the
college.
Existing Boundary Avenue presently has 24 feet of pavement,
face to face of curbs. Sidewalks extend for approximately 300
feet from Barbee to the west on the north side of Boundary.
On-street parking was observed on Boundary Avenue.
Existing Dunbar Street has 30 feet of pavement, face to
face of curbs, with on-street parking.
C. Right-of-Way
Right-of-way claimed on existing Montlieu Avenue extends
from the back of the existing sidewalks and is approximately 60
feet.
Existing right-of-way on Boundary Avenue and Dunbar Place
is claimed to the back of the curb, approximately 30 feet.
On the section of Montlieu Avenue east of College Drive,
the existing right-of-way should be adequate to contain the
proposed realignment.
d. Intersecting Roads and Type of Control
All roads are stop sign controlled with the exception of
College Drive, which is signal controlled.
e. Speed Zones
The speed limit is posted at 35 mph on existing Montlieu
Avenue.
f. School Bus Data
Currently 13 different buses utilize roads in the project
area, with a total of 31 trips per day.
5
B. Accident Investigation
The accident rate for existing Montlieu Avenue over a recent 3 year
period (7/1/88 to 6/30/91) was 909.09 accidents per 100 million vehicle
miles. This exceeds the statewide average of 293 acc/mvm for similar
routes over that same time period. The highest percentage of accidents on
Montlieu Avenue over this time period involved left turn same road (30.3
%), rear-end slow or stop (18.2 %), and angle type collisions (15.2 %).
On the proposed new facility, left turn lanes will be provided at all
intersections, which will remove left-turning vehicles from the flow of
through-traffic. This will reduce the likelihood of rear-end collisions.
C. Benefits to State, Region, and Community
High Point College will directly benefit from the proposed action by
the elimination of traffic through the campus on existing Montlieu Avenue
and allowing' for the future planned expansion of the College. The
proposed improvements to High Point College will enchance the City of High
Point by expanding the educational and cultural opportunities available.
Safety for students, faculty and staff will also be increased.
D. Transportation Plan
Montlieu Avenue is designated a major thoroughfare in the mutually
adopted High Point Thoroughfare Plan. Even though the plan did not show
the relocation of Montlieu Avenue, the proposed project is compatible with
the concept of Montlieu Avenue functioning as a major crosstown route.
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
A. "Do-Nothing" Alternative
The "do-nothing" alternative would result in no negative impacts to
the traveling public. However, planned expansion of High Point College
could not occur if the proposed project is not built.
IV. SOCIAL, ECONOMIC. AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
A. Social Effects
The proposed project is located in an older, low-density residential
area south of High Point College. High Point College, a private
institution, has expanded to the south side of Montlieu Avenue and owns
land located just north of existing Boundary Avenue and west of Dunbar
Place. A public housing development is located south of the project area,
along Henley Street.
Development along Montlieu Avenue is predominantly residential in the
vicinity of the College.
It should be noted that the Boundary Avenue neighborhood was divided
some time ago by the construction of College Drive (referred to locally as
the Intermediate Loop).
6
During the construction of this proposed project the front lawns of
homes between Barbee Street and Montlieu Avenue will be used for
construction easement. This will be a temporary disruption while the
re-routing is taking place. After construction, the lawns will be repaired
to transition back to their original state.
The neighborhood along-Dunbar and Boundary Streets will be adversely
impacted by increased traffic and noise (see Noise Report) when the
re-routing of traffic takes place. Some residents are concerned that small
children living in the neighborhood will be exposed to increased danger
imposed on them by the increased traffic generated by this proposed
action.
The proposed action will also have some positive social impacts:
High Point College will benefit by eliminating traffic through the
campus on Montlieu Avenue. This will give the students, faculty, and
staff improved accessibility to its facilities on the south side of the
campus. Secondly, on the western end of Boundary Avenue where it
intersects with Montlieu Street, visibility will be significantly improved
for those motorists using Boundary Avenue who have to pull out into the
lane of traffic on to Montlieu Avenue.
1. Land Use
The proposed project is located within the municipal limits of
the City of High Point, which exercises planning and zoning authority
over the project area. The City is currently operating under its
1983 Land Use Plan, which was revised in 1985. However, that plan
and the City's zoning ordinance were updated in 1991, and the
proposed changes adopted by the City Council at the end of 1991. The
effective date of the plan and the revised zoning ordinance is March
1992.
The City and the NCDOT worked jointly to update the High Point
Urban Area Thoroughfare Plan, which was adopted by the City in 1989
and NCDOT in 1990.
The current zoning ordinance classifies the High Point College
land as an Office/Institutional (0/I-E) District. A conditional Use
0/I-E District is located on the north side of Montlieu Avenue,
between Sixth Street and the College. This zoning district permits
low-intensity office uses, such as college faculty offices and other
uses compatible with the residential uses in the area.
The remaining land in the project area, along Montlieu Avenue
west of the College, and in the Boundary Street/Dunbar Street area is
zoned Residential (R-5), which permits residential development to a
density no greater than 5 units per acre. Multi-family residential
uses are not permitted.
The existing land use plan designates the area of the proposed
project for continued Low Density Residential uses. One exception is
the land owned by High Point College south of Montlieu avenue, near
Dunbar Place. This land is classified for Office and Institutional
uses.
7
The revisions to the Land Use Plan include the designation of
greenways throughout the High Point area. Boulding Creek, located
just north of Boundary Avenue is designated for a future greenway.
The greenway will consist of a corridor approximately 50 feet wide,
containing a 10 foot wide footpath.
It should be noted that the proposed project lies within the
proposed Protected Area of the City's drinking water supply, High
Point Lake. Boulding Creek is a tributary to Deep River, which flows
into the lake.
2. Neighborhood Analysis
Guilford County has a population of 347,420 and High Point city
has a count of 69,496 (taken from North Carolina 1991 population
totals; Bureau of Census Department of Commerce).
The proposed action begins on the western end of Boundary Avenue
at Montlieu Avenue and runs to just west of Dunbar Place and curving
to the north on Dunbar Place to Harrison, and coming to an end once
again on Montlieu. The entire length of the proposed project extends
through a minority neighborhood.
Along Dunbar Street, the neighborhood is located across the
street from High Point College on the east side. It is approximately
one block or less south of High Point College along Boundary Street.
The neighborhood homes within the general area of the proposed
project site are for the most part single family homes.
The homes appear to be in the low to moderate price ranges.
Properties appear to be well kept. Based on a random and cursory
survey, some homes along Dunbar Street are rental property. There
may be others within this category along Boundary Avenue between
Dunbar and Barbee Streets.
The neighborhood residents in this area share a relationship
that is held tenaciously intact by various types of like community
values. These values are consistent with values found in similar
communities across the state of equal size and composition. Within
the neighborhood, family types vary from nucleus families to single
parent families. In addition, the neighborhood consists of retirees
and people with physical handicaps. Several retirees also live along
the proposed project site. This neighborhood appears to represent
the current trend in the state that suggests that the "population is
older, lives alone more often and owns more expensive homes than ten
years ago".
3. Relocation of Families and Businesses
The proposed project will not relocate any residences or
businesses. However, there are currently two residences located in
the path of the project on property owned by High Point College.
These dwellings will be vacated prior to the acquisition of this
property by the Department of Transportation.
8
4. Public Facilities
High Point College is a major public facility in close proximity
to the proposed project site. The proposed action will have a
positive impact on the school. Students, faculty members, and staff
will be able to go to the south side of campus without impediments
from vehicular traffic.-
Alfred J. Griffin Junior High School is located just south of
the project on West Avenue. William Penn High School is also located
south of the project off of Washington Street, on Gaylord Court (see
Figure 1).
Basic city services are available to the neighborhood residents.
Any services disrupted as a result of construction of this proposed
project will be of temporary duration. The proposed action will not
adversely impact any non-profit organization by relocation.
5. Historic and Cultural Resources
a. Historical - Architectural Resources
There are no properties listed in the National Register of
Historic Places located within the area of potential effect of
this undertaking, therefore, no further compliance with GS
121-12(a) is required.
In the vicinity of the realignment, a federal permit may be
required due to stream crossings. These proposed crossings were
reviewed and the permit area identified using the guidelines
published by the Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army,
Department of Defense, as Appendix C to 33 CFR Part 325,
Processing of Department of the Army Permits: Procedures for the
Protection of Historic Properties. This permit area was found
not to contain any properties listed in or eligible for the
National Register.
b. Archaeological Resources
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed
project area. Based on present information of the area from the
Department of Cultural Resources, it is unlikely that any
archaeological resources which would be eligible for inclusion
in the National Register of Historic Places will be affected by
the project construction.
B. Economic Effects
During the month of August 1991, Guilford County had a total Civilian
Labor Force of 197,780. Out of this total number, 186,430 persons were
employed. This left an unemployment total of 11,350 or 5.7 percent. In
the year of 1989, the per capita income of Guilford County was $19,239.
9
High Point College provides important educational and cultural
opportunities to the community that are very important in the recruitment
of new industries to the High Point area. By allowing for the expansion
of the college and the construction of the new Cultural Arts Center, the
proposed Montlieu Avenue relocation will enhance the opportunities for
economic growth in the area.
C. Environmental Effects
1. Natural, Ecoloqical, and Scenic Resources
Two plant communities were identified in the project area:
Man-Dominated and Piedmont Alluvial Forest. The latter is classified
as a wetland community.
a. Man Dominated Systems
Residential neighborhoods are Man-dominated lands where
man's structures or activities preclude natural plant
succession. Paved roads, residential and commercial development
preclude natural plant succession. Maintained shoulder slopes,
grounds and lawns support turf of fescue (Festuca sp.) as the
dominant vegetative component, complemented with landscape
ornamentals. Black walnut (Juglans nigra), pecan (Carva
illinoensis) and various oak trees (Quercus spp.) are common.
Mowing is frequently associated with this community.
b. Plant Communities
Future widening will eliminate portions of roadside
shoulders and suburban lawns. This will result in direct loss
of plant species from grubbing operations, soil compaction, and
soil erosion. Segments of this alignment are on new location
in the Boulding Branch floodplain. This area will be modified
by land clearing, excavation, filling, draining and paving.
Acreage impacts to each community are summarized in Table 1
below. Calculations are based on construction limits of 80
feet.
Table 1. ANTICIPATED PLANT COMMUNITY IMPACTS
PLANT COMMUNITY ESTIMATED IMPACTS
Uplands
Man-dominated Areas 3.1
Wetlands
Piedmont Alluvial Forest 1.5
Total Acres 4.6
10
C. Geotechnical Findings
Within the Piedmont soil region there are four major soil
systems determined by major kinds of bedrock. The study area
falls within the Mixed Felsic and Mafic System. Felsic
crystalline and mafic rocks are intimately associated, resulting
in a complex soil pattern. Most soil series are red to dark red
and have a clay texture in the B horizon.
Enon-Urban land complex, 2 to 10 percent slopes forms the
largest aerial extent in the project area. This soil series
consists of about 30 to 60 percent Urban land. These soils are
well drained and occupy broad interstream divides and side
slopes.
Chewacla sandy loam forms in alluvium on floodplains
adjacent to Boulding Branch creek. It is a somewhat poorly
drained soil and supports hydric inclusions of Wehadkee.
2. Threatened and Endangered Species
a. 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.
Scoping comments from the USFWS report no federally
Endangered species that are known to occur in Guilford County.
However, the following Candidate species may occur in this area:
Greensboro burrowing crayfish (Cambarus catagius) and nestronia
(Nestronia umbellula). These are species which are not legally
protected under the Endangered Species Act and are not subject
to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered. These
species are mentioned here for the purpose of information, as
they may be listed under a protected status at a later date.
b. State Protected Species
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered
(E), Threatened (T), or Special Concern (SC) are granted
protection by the State Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant
Protection and Conservation Act of 1979, administered and
enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission and
NC Department of Agriculture.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program files were
consulted to determine if any protected flora or fauna exists in
the project area. No known populations occur in the project
area.
11
3. Wildlife Habitat
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 simply be
displaced.
Aquatic species will be particularly affected. Dredging,
filling, slope stabilization and land clearing are construction
activities, resulting in the direct loss of benthic organisms and an
increase in silt load inaquatic and wetland environments. Motile
benthic macroinvertegbrates are better able to avoid impacts, and
will have a faster recovery rate from siltation, than those species
that are filter feeders and relatively immobile. The removal of
benthic organisms reduces the potential food supply for vertebrate
and other aquatic organisms.
Siltation has many adverse impacts on fish and benthos:
decreases the depth of light penetration, inhibiting plant and algal
growth; clogs the filtration apparatus of filter feeding benthos and
the gills of fish; buries benthic organisms on the bottom, cutting
them off from a food source; adversely modifies preferred benthic
substrate and fish habitat; and spoils downstream spawning beds for
fish.
a. Terrestrial Communities
Urbanized areas and adjacent forested areas support a
myriad of bird life. Carolina wren (Thryothorus ludovicianus),
turkey vulture (Cathartes aura) and red-tailed hawk (Buteo
jamaicensis) are birds sighted in the study area. Other common
inhabitants are the mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), common
flicker (Colaptes auratus), cardinal (Cardinal cardinalis) and
blue jay (Cyanocitta cristata). These urbanized areas also
provide shelter for opportunistic animal species, such as the
Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), gray squirrel (Sciurus
carolinesis) and house mouse (Mus musculus).
b. Aquatic Communities
Wetland communities are valuable habitat for reptiles and
amphibians. Amphibians in particular, are highly water
dependent for completion of larval stages in their life cycle.
Some species are totally aquatic. Spring peeper (Hyla
crucifer), bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), pickerel frog (R.
palustris) dwarf salamander (Eurycea quadridigitata),
yellowbelly slider (Chrysemys scripta), northern water snake
(Nerodiea sipedon), and rat snake (Elaphe obsoleta) are but a
few of the reptiles and amphibians likely to be found in the
project area.
12
Fish species that are common to the study area, are carp
(Cyprinus carpio), channel catfish (Ictalurus catus), white
suckers (Catostomus commersoni), snail bullheads (Ictalurus
brunneus), flat bullheads (I. platycephalus), and a few brown
bullheads (I. nebulosus). Redbrest sunfish (Lepomis auritus)
and largemouth bass (Micropte.rus salmoides) are common game
fish.
4. Wetlands
A highly disturbed Piedmont alluvial forest is associated with
Boulding Branch. The floodplain is seasonally or intermittently
flooded. Flood tolerant species such as sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), hackberry (Celtis
laevigata) and willow oak (Quercus phellos) are common canopy
components. Box elder (Acer negundo), black willow (Salix nigra),
tag alder (Alnus serrulata), red mulberry (Morus rubra), Chinese
privit (Ligustrum sinense) and blackberry (Rubus sp.) are common
subcanopy components. A diverse herb layer supports Japanese
honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), swamp rose (Rosa Palustris), ragweed
(Ambrosia trifea), aster (Aster sp.), microstegium (Microstegium
vimeneum), violet (Viola sp.), sedge (Cyperus sp.), glecoma (Glecoma
hederaca), and foxtail grass (Setaria sp.).
a. 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
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) for the discharge of dredged
or fill material into "Waters of the United States". The permit
required is based upon site location, a flow rate less than 5
CFS and the estimated acreage involved. It is anticipated that
the subject project will impact approximately 1.5 acres of
wetlands and will require either-a) a Nationwide #26 {(33 CFR
330.5 (a) (26)1 or b) a predischarge notification (PDN), based
upon the Army Corps of Engineers discretionary authority.
Nationwide #26 involves discharges of dredge or fill material
above the headwaters (flow less than 5 cubic feet per section)
of non-tidal rivers, streams and their lakes and impoundments
including adjacent or isolated wetlands. This authorization
usually applies to impacts of one acre or less. PDN has the
same criteria as a Nationwide #26 but involves takings of 1 to
10 acres. However, final judgement concerning specific permit
jurisdiction is reserved by the COE.
b. Wetland Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is required for actions covered by
Individual Section 404 permits. Since the permit required in
this case is either a Nationwide #26 or the predischarge
notification, no mitigation is required.
13
5. Water Quality
Boulding Branch is located within the project area falling
within the confines of the Cape Fear River Basin. It is
characterized by moderate flow and a stone/sand substratum. Channel
width is approximately 15 feet. Adjacent vegetation is of the
Piedmont alluvial community type.
"Best usage" classifications are assigned to the waters of North
Carolina by the Division of Environmental Management (DEM). A
classification of WS- III has been assigned to waters of Boulding
Branch. WS- III indicates a water supply segment with no categorical
restrictions on watershed development or discharges and is suitable
for all Class C uses.
The Benthic Macroinvertebrate Ambient Network (BMAN) (NC-DEHNR,
Division of Environmental Management) addresses long term trends in
water quality at fixed monitoring sites by the sampling for selected
benthic macroinvertebrates. These organisms are sensitive to very
subtle changes in water quality. No data is available for Boulding
Branch. However, other streams in the general vicinity have been
sampled and are rated fair to poor in water quality. This is due to
nearby point source discharges and urban runoff. Degraded stream
segments are often associated with the larger cities in this region.
No waters classified as Trout waters, High Quality waters,
Outstanding Resource Waters, nor any segments of rivers classified
under the federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act or the state Natural and
Scenic Rivers Act, will be impacted by the proposed project.
Boulding Branch creek and its associated floodplain will be
crossed twice by subject project. Culverts will be extended,
reducing the length of natural stream channel. 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; changes in light incidence due
to the removal of vegetative cover.
6. Air Quality
Air pollution is the result of industrial emissions and
emissions from internal combustion engines. The impact resulting
from the construction of a new highway or the improvement of an
existing highway can range from aggravating existing air pollution
problems to improving the ambient air conditions. Motor vehicles are
known to emit carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NO), hydrocarbons
(HC), particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb) (listed
in order of decreasing emission rate).
14
The primary pollutant emitted from automobiles is carbon
monoxide. Automobiles are considered to be the major source of CO in
the project area. For these reasons, most of the analyses presented
are concerned with determining expected carbon monoxide levels in the
vicinity of the project.
In order to determine the ambient CO concentration at a receptor
near a highway, two concentration components must be used: local and
background. The local component is due to CO emissions from cars
operating on highways in the near vicinity (i.e., distances within
100 meters) of the receptor location. The background component is due
to CO emissions from cars operating on streets further from the
receptor location.
In this study, the local component was determined using line
source computer modeling and the background component was determined
by the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural
Resources (NCDEHNR). These two concentration components were
determined separately, then added together to determine the ambient
CO concentration for comparison to the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS).
Automobiles are generally 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. It is the ozone and nitrogen
dioxide that are of concern and not the precursor hydrocarbons and
nitrogen oxide. 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, and thus
help lower ambient ozone and nitrogen dioxide levels.
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.
Automobiles are not generally regarded as significant sources of
particulate matter and sulfur dioxide. Nationwide, highway sources
account for less than seven percent of particulate matter emissions
and less than two percent of sulfur dioxide emissions. Particulate
matter and sulfur dioxide emissions are predominantly the result of
non-highway sources (e.g., industrial, commercial, and agricultural).
Because emissions of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide from cars
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.
15
r
Automobiles emit lead as a result of burning gasoline containing r .f.,.
tetraethyl lead which is added by refineries to increase the octane
rating of the fue ---Newer-cars with catalytic converters burn
unleaded gasoline laminatinglead emissions. Also, the United '
States Environmental Pro-t?ion Agency (EPA) has required the
reduction in the lead content of leaded gasol i nes . The overall
L'Ctt " i
average lead content of gasoline in 1974 was 2 grams per gallon. By -ill; ?
1989, this composite average had dropped to 0.01 grams per gallon.
In the future, lead emissions are expected to decrease as more
cars use unleaded fuels and as the lead content of leaded gasoline is ,V
reduced. 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 receptors 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
meteorological parameters. The traffic volumes are based on the
annual average daily traffic projections. The modeling analysis was
performed for a "worst case" condition using winds blowing parallel
to the roadway. Carbon monoxide vehicle emission factors were
calculated for the design year 2011 and for ten years prior (2001)
using the EPA publication "Mobile Source Emission Factors" and the
MOBILE4 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 areas.
The closest receptor affected by "worst case" air quality
conditions resulting from the relocation of Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471)
is R75 (residence). The predicted 2001 and 2011 one hour average CO
concentrations for the proposed widening and the no build alternate
are as follows:
Alternative
"Worst Case"
Receptor
1-Hour CO
Concentration
(ppm)
2001 2011
2-lane curb-and-gutter R75 (Residence) 5.0 4.8
with left turn lanes
16
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 appendix for input data). Therefore, building the
project will not adversely affect air quality conditions in the area.
The project is located within the Northern Piedmont Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Guilford County has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Since this project is located in an area where the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control
measures, the conformity procedures of 23 CFR 770 do not apply to
this project.
7. Noise Analysis
This analysis was performed to determine the effect of the
proposed project on noise levels in the immediate project area. This
investigation includes an inventory of existing noise sensitive land
uses and a field survey of 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 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.
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 field data was also used to establish
ambient noise levels for residences, businesses, and other noise
sensitive receivers in the vicinity of the project. The existing Leq
noise level taken along Montlieu Avenue (SR 1471) as measured 50 feet
from the roadway was 62.0 dBA. Also, the existing Leq noise level
taken along Boundary Street as measured 25 feet from the existing
roadway was 56.9 dBA.
Peak hour design and Level -of-Service (LOS) C volumes were
compared, and the volumes resulting in the noisiest conditions were
used with proposed posted speed limits. Thus, 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 to enable the
determination of the number of land uses (by type) which, during the
peak hour in the design year 2011, would be exposed to noise levels
approaching or exceeding the FHWA noise abatement criteria and those
land uses predicted to expect a substantial noise increase. The
basic approach was to select receptor locations such as 25, 50, 100,
17
200, 400, 800, and 1600 feet from the center of the near traffic lane
(adaptable to both sides of the roadway). The location of these
receptors were determined by the change in projected traffic volumes
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 traffic noise impacts in terms of increased exterior noise
levels are predicted to range between +1 to +20 dBA. Increases in
exterior noise levels of this magnitude are common on relocation
projects due to the road traversing areas that currently have little
or no highway traffic noise in their acoustic environment. When
real-life noises are heard, level changes of 2-3 dBA are barely
perceptible. A 5 dBA change is more readily noticeable, and a 10 dBA
change is judged by most people as a doubling or a halving of the
loudness of the sound.
The total number of impacted receptors, whether by approaching
or exceeding the noise abatement criteria or by a substantial
increase in exterior noise levels are given in Table N3 (in the
appendix). The total number of receptors that are predicted to be
impacted by a substantial increase in exterior noise levels are
summarized in Table N4. Thirteen residences are predicted to be
impacted by both criteria (NAC and substantial increase).
Physical measures to abate anticipated traffic noise levels can
often be applied with a measurable degree of sucess by the
application of solid mass, attenuable measures to effectively
defract, absorb, and reflect highway traffic noise emissions. Solid
mass, attenuable measures may include earthen berms or artivicial
abatement walls.
The project will maintain no control of access, meaning most
commercial establishments and residences will have direct driveway
connections to the propsoed roadway, and all intersections will
adjoin the project at grade.
Based on past project experience, these factors effectively
negate the effectiveness of any physical abatement measures and none
are recommended for this project.
The traffic noise impact for the "Do Nothing", or "No Build",
alternative was also considered. If the traffic currently using the
network of roads in the project area should double within the next
twenty year period, future traffic noise levels would only increase
approximately 2-3 dBA. As previously stated, this small increase
would be a barely perceptible change to individuals living and
working in the area.
The projected increase in noise levels and associated noise
impacts for a proposed relocation project of this nature are
expected. However, based on these preliminary studies, no traffic
noise abatement is reasonable or feasible along this project, due to
18
the uncontrolled access feature of the facility, and none is
proposed. This evaluation completes the highway traffic noise
requirements, and unless a major project change develops, no
additional reports are required for this project.
8. Construction Impacts
To minimize potential adverse effects caused by construction,
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. Disposal of waste and debris in active public
waste or disposal areas will not be permitted without prior
approval by the Engineer. Such approval will not be
permitted when, in the opinion of the Engineer, it will
result in excessive siltation or pollution.
b. Borrow pits and all ditches will be drained insofar as
possible to alleviate breeding areas for mosquitoes.
C. Care will be taken not to block existing drainage ditches.
d. Power, telephone, water and other utilities are located in
the vicinity of the proposed project. The contractor will
prepare a work schedule which minimizes possible damage to
or rupture of theses lines and interruption of these
services. The contractor will consult appropriate
officials in preparing this schedule.
e. 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
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.
f. Measures will be taken in allaying the dust generated by
construction when the control of dust is necessary for the
protection and comfort of motorists and area residents.
g. 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
19
measures which will be used to minimize erosion. In
conjunction with the erosion control schedule the
contractor will be required to follow those provisions for
the plans and specifications which pertain to erosion and
siltation. Temporary erosion control measures such as the
use of berms, dikes, dams, silt basins, etc. will be used
as needed.
V.
A. Agency Coordination
COMMENTS AND COORDINATION
During the planning study, contact was maintained with local, state
and federal agencies. Memorandums and letters requesting environmental
input were sent to the following agencies and replies were received from
those marked with an asterisk (*):
*State Clearinghouse
*N. C. Department of Cultural Resources
*N. C. Department of Administration
N. C. Department of Public Instruction
*N. C. Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources
*Piedmont Triad Council of Governments
Chairman, Guilford County Board of Commissioners
*City of High Point
*Mayor of High Point
B. Public Involvement
An informational workshop was held on Tuesday, July 2, 1991, at the
High Point College library. Many people from the College and surrounding
neighborhoods came to the workshop. The majority of the people in favor
of the project were associated with High Point College. The people who
made comments against the project were those who actually lived on the
proposed impacted area as well as neighboring communities.
AS/wp
FIGURES
z
IVE.
,11 N
N
:H. PEE.
F. fARRIS
Gl.
2
D
F
v NORT H
? T
GRACE
LUTH. CH. _
m
BOUNDARY _u^AVE 1 ol>
74
A'ILLOW PL.
Ov J 1
i /
AVE
ALFRED J.
GRIFFIN
JR, HIGH
J SCH.
LBER-
(x
c
D 1 GRAVES
c
v KINGS CCHA
EL CH.
n DAVIS L_
`01; EDM,OND
< 'r' r-
q
0
b

O`
`. wr '
tj
v
HIGH POINT COLLEGE
1471 Q
1
07
PROPOSED
O ?
f
_z
DAY PL. z
0
ST
AVE .
m O
n O
n Z ?
r
0 WILLIAM r., -A .10
PENN ?'
HIGH
SCHy O?
ST. r?vARK'S o O-A -
NFTH CH
Z
m
z
r
rn
SO
AVE - --TRUE STAN[
N ,
AVE. v
Z
UNITED H.
,-,
OF CHRIST PEE
S T.
OAS
^ov

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONAIENTAL
BRANCH
HIGH POINT
SR 1471 (h10NTLIEU AVENUE)
FROM FIFTH STREET TO COLLEGE DRIVE
GUILFORD COUNTY ?-
U-2716

FIG. 1

P611-1

? 7
t,%

Figure 3a
n
0
a
C
V
-N-1 D
m
m
m
a
T
Cl)
A 4
- ?
?
?
a- 2
9
9` Oy
i
v
n
tpdl
z
rf Oz
,,---A o ro 7 11...x..•
4 4-
? 12
pp41 6
ro(? lp (P
d ?
A, 7
?- ?\ CO 4- 52
C 04
N
?o
?z
nob
T -p 2
OE'0
c
Z0
Dmn
-40
vDm
Z?
nm
m
fl
6a-? 43
14 ?\ .. o
?l tr V ?u
0
al

r u o
\ o
4--2 N m 0
Z
,.,?
r_-
m
c

W N
r

p ?X
r4 0
3 -?
V r

a o a
mm
u u u G7 Lrt

4 12 1 C m
a- 4-11

2
13 -0 0 -? 13 -D
2 N u -?
.. 9 0 0 ? .

as ?
m
0
r
m
0
m
Figure 3b
°e
i
.g

m0
as a r
a-4 m
c
u) a)
-a D
cn
m
m ti
y4
11 ?? 6
/2-.,4"A
?/r/4
2
0 -? 2 o
2? l
Q A
?
? ti
4
<}
B
0
y
/ I o -
I? ?2 (n .0
(
_

co
y N
N
1 IA
nn

7 a co a

5
mm

o-_ 4
a- 22 ) I ? ?
4 15 +-22 m ?
x-11 2
4

24 -© 10 -? I 23 -?
4 N aN
;.:?..,1
D ;...?..,
I D Z

fed FG :..n .. :...n. .
D :
/ p Z
?8 13'..; .
tf '
s 4--
v?
0
?o 14
ys,? \o 13
4-70 +-94
C 4--115 11
16 ? flfl -?
118 -? 77--+
25 a
J J J •?
W

.. 'D =
,000
'n-2
C((a0
?oz
m?
vDo
0
zm
n0
mm
m
0
0
r
m
m

OCTOBER. 1991
GUILFORD CO.
U-2716
EST. 1991/2011 ADT IN HUNDREDS BY ROUTE
1991 2011
TTST%
DUALS
DHV%
DIR%
ROUTE ADT IN 100'S
UONTLIE AVE. 91 164 2 3 10 55
US-29 130 233 2 3 10 55
FIFTH ST. 5 10 1 2 10 55
SIXTH ST. 6 12 1 2 10 55
BARBEE ST./ 24 45 1 2 10 55
A. COLLEGE
BARBEE ST. 11 20 1 2 10 55
RE-ALIGNIIENT 6 12 1 2 10 55
DUNBAR
Figure 4
APPENDIX
NORTH CAROLINA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
FM206 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
116 WEST JONES STREET
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27611
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT
MAILED Tn FROM
N.C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION MS. JEANETTE TOMCZAK
L.J. WARD CLEARINGHOUSE STAFF
PLANNING C ENV. BRANCH
HIGHWAY BLDG./INTER-OFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
SCOPING FOR COMMENTS FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO SR 1471
(MONTLIEU AVENUE) REROUTING, FROM FIFTH STREET TO COLLEGE
DRIVE, GUILFORD COUNTY (TIP U-2716)
TYPE - SCOPING
THE N.C. STATE CLEARINGHOUSE HAS RECEIVED THE ABOVE PROJECT FOR
INTERGCVERNMENT.AL REVIEW, THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED STATE
APPLICATION NUMBER 92E42200161. PLEASE USE THIS NUMBER WITH ALL
INQUIRIES OR CCRRESPONDENCE WITH THIS CFFICE.
REVIEW OF THIS PROJECT SHOULD BE COMPLETED ON OR BEFORE 10/11/91.
SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL [phone].
iSTATI 4
S C,..
V
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
James G. Martin, Governor
Patric Dorsey, Secretary
October 3, 1991
MEMORANDUM
Division of Archives and History
William S. Price, Jr., Director
TO: L. J. Ward, P.E., Manager
Planning and Environmental Branch
Division of Highways 6
Department of Transportation ,
FROM: David Brook
Deputy State H storic Preservation Officer
SUBJECT: Reroute SR 1471 (Montlieu Avenue) from Fifth
Avenue to College Drive, Guilford County,
U-2716, 9.8071 78, CH 92-E-4220-0161
J 6 ??
OCT 1991
Doi OFFICE C?r
We have received information concerning the above project from the State
Clearinghouse.
We have conducted a search of our maps and files and have located the following
structure of historical or architectural importance within the general area of the project:
High Point College. Montlieu Avenue between East and West College drives.
High Point College has not been evaluated for National Register-eligibility.
In addition, through our conversations with Mr. Ernest Fleming, a member of High
Point's Historic District Commission, we are aware of the following two historic
neighborhoods within the general area of the project:
Own A Home. Forest to Hamilton Street.
Wil-lou-bar Terrace. On both sides of Boundary Avenue down to Barbee
Avenue.
Neither of the above neighborhoods has been evaluated for National Register-eligibility
at this time.
Mr. Fleming informed our office that High Point's Historic District Commission has
approved a study of these two neighborhoods in efforts to locally designate them as
historic districts. For more information concerning these neighborhoods, please contact
Mr. Fleming at 919/884-7930.
109 East ones Street 0 Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on
our present knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources
which may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places will be.
affected by the project construction. We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological
investigation be conducted in connection with this project.
While we note that this project is to be state funded, the potential for federal permits
may require further consultation and compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act.
These comments are made in accord with G.S. 121-12(a) and Executive Order XVI. If
you have any questions regarding them, please contact Renee Gledhill-Earley,
environmental review coordinator, at 919/733-4763.
DB: slw?
cc: "State Clearinghouse
B. Church

r)

sx 1 i'FC ?-

LOOON Ad00
S
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
• RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GOVERNOR
THOMAS J. HARRELSON WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
October 18, 1991
Dr. William Price Jr.
State Historic Preservation Officer
Department of Cultural Resources
109 East Jones Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27601-2807
Dear Dr. Price:
Subject: Montlieu Avenue from Fifth Street to College Drive,
High Point, U-2716.
The Department of Transportation is conducting planning
studies associated with the subject project. Present plans
call for widening Boundary Street and Dunbar Street to a
40-foot section with turn lanes provided. Boundary Street
will be realigned to tie in with Dunbar Street as illustrated
on the attached map.
This project will be funded with state monies and is subject
to compliance pursuant to GS 121-12(a).
There are, however, no properties listed in the National
Register of Historic Places located within the area of
potential effect of this undertaking; therefore, no further
compliance with GS 121-12(a) is required.
In the vicinity of the realignment, a federal permit may be
required due to stream crossings. These proposed crossings
were reviewed and the permit area identified using the
guidelines published by the corps of Engineers, Department of
the Army, Department of Defense, as Appendix C to
33 CFR Part 325, Processing of Department of the Army
Permits: Procedures for the Protection of Historic
An Equal Opportunity /Atfirmative Action Employer
1OOON-- AJOO ,
Properties. This permit area (shown on the attached map) was
found not to contain any properties listed in or eligible for
the National Register. (Photographs of all of the buildings
within the permit area are enclosed.)
Would you please send us a letter of concurrence with our
findings pursuant to GS 121-12(a) for the project and
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for the
permit area.
Sincerely,
V. Charles Bruton, Head
Environmental Unit
FM208 "1QUIUUle to. DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
Poolo` Vick 116 WEST JONES STREET
Qudcck-- pfev,i? D'OuJnn
Netmam on ----RALEIGH-NORTH CAROLINA 27611
Norwuad'v';?_ Shu11er1-"
11-04-91 ?Aodl»t ,? j+ck:::
1a1:+e1t '- Springer
GriniCa
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW COMMENTS
MAILED TO FROM
N-C. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION
L.J. WARD
PLANNING S ENV. BRANCH
HIGHWAY BLDG./INTER-OFFICE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
MRS. CHRYS BAGGETT
DIRECTOR
N C STATE CLEARINGHOUSE
SCDPING FOR COMMENTS FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO SR 1471
(MONTLIEU AVENUE) REROUTING, FROM FIFTH STREET TO COLLEGE
DRIVE, GUILFORD COUNTY (TIP U-2716)
SA I NO 92E42200161 PROGRAM TITLE - SCOPI NG
THE ABOVE PROJECT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE NORTH CAROLINA
INTERGUVERNMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS. AS A RESULT OF THE REVIEW
IS SUBMITTED ( ) NO COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED
( X) COMMENTS ATTACHED
THE FOLLOWING
SH3ULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THIS OFFICE [phone].
C.C. REGION G
r..
State: of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
,. ,
1 0 ".T 1991 o?
MEMORANDUM
N
•C ?c N
TO: Chrys Baggett U? V ;
State Clearinghouse -?-
FROM: Melba McGee
Project Review Coordinator
Douglas G. Lewis
Director
Planning and Assessment
RE: 92-0161 Scoping, Proposed rerouting of SRE 1471,
Guilford County
DATE: October 2, 1991
The Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
has reviewed the proposed project. The attached general comments
are a result of this review. More specific comments will be
provided during the environmental review process.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond. If additional
information is needed during the preparation of the environmental
document, the applicant is encouraged to notify our respective
divisions.
MM: bb
Attachments
P.U. Box 27(.h7, Mciih, Nunh Carolina 27611.7687 Idephune 919-733-6376
An hgwd 01)1x,nunity At irmatke Aaiun Gnvlowr

d d STA)j
,- 2 31 56
ti
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural., Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation:
512 North Salisbury Street • Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
James G. Martin, Governor
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
September 30, 1991
MEMORANDUM
TO: Melba McGee
FROM: David Harrison

David W. Sides
Director
SUBJECT: Proposed rerouting of SR 1471 (Montlieu Avenue) in
Guilford County. Project No. 92-0161
The proposal is to reroute Montlieu Avenue in High Point. The
impact on unique, prime, or statewide important farmland will be
minimal because the area is located within High Point. A
wetlands evaluation should be conducted for the area between
Boundary Avenue and Dunbar Place that-will be new construction.
DH/tl
IT) Bo, 276ti7, 161cigh, North Carolina 27611.7687 Tclcphonc 919.733.2302
An I'qual ( )Igairtunity Allirmatrvr Action Fmplovcr
C
?

ED

C
C
C
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources Reviewing Office:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW - PROJECT COMMENTS Project Number. Due Date:
`? a.- 0 1,-- 1 1 1c)-1-91
After review of this project It has been determined that the EHNR permit(s) indicated must be obtained in order for this project to
comply with North Carolina Law.
Questions regarding these permits should be addressed to the Regional Office indicated on the reverse of the form.
All applications, Information and guidelines relative to these plans and permits are available from the same
Regional Office. Normal Process
Time
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS (statutory time
limit) ,
Penult to construct d operate wastewater treatment Application 00 days before begin construction or award of 30 days
facilities, sewer system extensions, b sewer construction contracts On-site Inspection. Post-application
systems not discharging Into stale surface waters. technical conference usual (90 days)
NPDES - permit to discharge Into surface water andlor Application 160 days before begin activity. On-site Inspection. W-120 days
permit to operate and construct wastewater facilities Pre-application conference usual. Additionally, obtain permit to
discharging Into state surface waters. construct wastewater treatment facility-granted after NPDES. Reply (NIA
time, 30 days after receipt of plans or issue of NPDES
permit-whichever Is later.
Water Use Permit Pre-application technical conference usually necessary 30 days
(NIA)

Well Construction Permit
NIA 7 days
(15 days)
Application copy must be served on each riparian property owner. 55 days
,edge and Fill Permit On-site Inspection. Pre-application conference usual. Filling
may require Easement to Fill from N.C. Department of (90 days)
Administration and Federal Dredge and Fill Permit.
Permit to construct & operate Air Pollution Abatement 2 3 A 60 days
facilities andlor Emission Sources NIA (90 days)
A en burning associated with subject proposal
m
st b
t
li
i
5 QV O y'
CT 1
u
e
o comp
ance w
th 1
NCAC 2D.0520. 991 ..
r?
Demoll or renovations of structures containing coo
a tos material must be In compliance with 60 days
CAC 2D.0525 which requires notification and removal NIA
prior to demolition. c
?c= (90 da
s)
y
Complex Source Permit required under 15 NCAC 2D.0800. C/
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be properly addressed for any land disturbing activity. An erosion & sedimentation control plan
will be required if one or more acres to be disturbed. Plan filed with proper Regional Office (Land Quality Sect.) at least 30 days before begin activity.
The Sedimentation Pollution Control Act of 1973 must be addressed with respect to the referrenced Local Ordinance:
On-site inspection usual. Surety bond filed with EHNR as snown:
Any area mined greater than one acre must be permited.
AFFECTED LAND AREA AMOUNT OF BOND 30 days
Mining Permit Less than 5 acres S 2,500
5 but less than 10 acres 5,000
10 but less than 25 acres 12,500 (60 days)
25 or more acres 5,000
North Carolina Burning permit On-site Inspection by N.C. Division Forest Resources if permit 1 day
exceeds 4 days (NIA)
Special Ground Clearance Burning Permll - 22 On-site Inspection by N.D. Division Forest Resources required "if more 1 day
counties In coastal N.C. with organic soils than five acres of ground clearing activities are Involved. Inspections (N/A)
should be requested at least ten days before actual burn is planned."
90.120 days
Oil Refining Facilities N/A (NIA)
If permit required, application 60 days before begin construction.
Applicant must hire N.C. qualified engineer to: prepare plans, 30 days
Dam Safety Permit inspect construction, certify construction is according to EHNR approv.
ed plans. May also require permit under mosquito control program. An a (NIA)
404 permit from Corps of Engineers.
PS-105
Continued on reverse
Normal Process ,

Time
PERMITS SPECIAL APPLICATION PROCEDURES or REQUIREMENTS (statutory time
limit)
File surety bond of $5,000 with EHNR running to State of N.C.
Permit to drill exploratory oil or gas well conditional that any wail o
ened b
d
ill 10 days
p
y
r
operator shall, upon
abandonment, be lu
p gged according to EHNR rules and regulations.
(N/A)
Geophysical Ex
lo
ti
? p
ra
on Permit Application filed with EHNR at least 10 days prior to Issue of permit 10

Application by letter. No standard application term days
. (N/A)
State Lakes Construction P
i
? erm
t Application fee based on structure size is charged, Must Include
15. days
descriptions & drawings of structure d proof of ownership (N
(N/A)
of riparian property.

401 Water Quality Certification 60 days
. NIA (130 days)
? CAMA Permit for MAJOR development 55 days
$10.00 fee must accompany application (160 days)
? CAMA Permit for MINOR development 22 days
$10.00 loo must accompany application (60 days)
? Several geodetic monuments are located In or near the project area. If any monuments need to be moved or destroyed, please notify:
N.C. Geodetic Survey, Box 27687, Raleigh, N.C. 27611
? Abandonment of any wells, It required, must be in accordance with Title 15, Subchapter 2C.0100.
* Other comments (attach additional pages as necessary, being certain to cite comment authority):
Acs ?/7
agency
REGIONAL OFFICES
reviewer signature
? Asheville Regional Office
59 Woodfin Place
Asheville, NC 28801
[phone]
? Moorseville Regional Office
919 North Main Street
Mooresville, NC 28115
[phone]
? Washington Regional Office
1424 Carolina Avenue
Washington, NC 27889 ..-
[phone]
Winston-Salem Re ional Office
Y8003 Silas Creek Parkway Extension
Winston-Salem, NC 27106
[phone]
date
? Fayetteville Regional Office
Suite 714 Wachovia Building
Fayetteville, NC 28301
[phone]
? Raleigh Regional Office
Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611.7687
[phone]
? Wilmington Regional Office
7225 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
[phone]
Av

i
7
s H. Gardner
Director
This project will impact geodetic survey markers. N.C. Geodetic
Survey should be contacted prior to construction at P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, N.C. 27611 [phone]. Intentional destruction of a
geodetic monument is a violation of N.C. General Statute 102-4.
This project will have no impact on geodetic survey markers.
other (comments attached)
Fo o iniflrlu tact the Geodetic Survey office at [phone].
q?1 rp?? 1
R viewer Date
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
No comment

} \ 23e7S
11
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and Nat -Resources
Division of Land Resources ?•
James G. Martin, Governor PROJECT REVIEW COMMENTS Chz
p
William W. Cobey, Jr., Secretary
M111111u1'1 't c-A- 01(l)l C:umil.y. rit'I"f i'S"Ild
Project Name: Y nr1
!SA-W_ Prt;ict t`10• fit; . 0? 10?3 I Q-a-11(o
Geodetic Survey
This project will require approval of an erosion and sedimentation
control plan prior to beginning any land-disturbing activity if more
th one (1) acre will be disturbed.
If an environmental document is required to satisfy Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, the document must be submitted as part
of t erosion and sedimentation control plan.
'If any portion of the project is located within a High Quality Water
Zone (HQW), as classified by the Division of Environmental Management,
increased design standards for sediment and erosion control will apply.
The erosion and sedimentation control plan required for this project
should be prepared by the Department of Transportation under the
erosion control program delegation to the Division of Highways from the
North Carolina Sedimentation Control Commission.
Other (comments attached)
For more information co act the Land Quality Section at [phone].
Reviewer Date
P.O. Box P687 lUelgh. N.C. 27011-7687 • Telephone (919)'133-3B33
An Equal Opportunity Affimiative Action Unployer
i?
C Piedmont: Triad Council of Governments
Intcrgovernmental Revlew Process
2216 W. Me..:.wvlew Road,
Greensboro, N.C. 27407.3480
Telephone: [phone] U9I
FAX #: [phone]
F ICE O
REVIEW & COMMENT FORM-rY tJ???t?E
The State Clearinghouse sent us the enclosed information about a proposal which
could affect your jurisdiction. Please circulate it to the people you believe need to be
informed.
If you need more information about the proposal, please contact the applicant directly.
The name and phone number of a contact person are listed on the attached "Notifica-
tion of Intent."
If you wish to comment on the proposed action, complete this form and return it to
Sharon Puryear in the PTCOG office by 0C-1-0 beCr 1 19 9 1
We will send your comments to the State Clearinghouse to be Included in a recommen-
dation to the proposed funding agency.
State Application Identifier It q 4aao - 01 14a
Commenter's Name & Title Iis T 1, ICC. , C4" MangRer
Representing 1!_; Of VA-
(ocal Bove ment)
Mailing Address z
(sl'gnature)
Phone It
5
Date Signed
Comments: (You may attach additional sheets.)
See attached letter.
R9
Qn?
loo
. o?Nia 4.0 i
CITY OF HIGH POINT
U -4
c? `r NORTH CAROLINA
rh' C APo
Mayor's Office
September 16, 1991
Ms. Angela Smith
Project Planning Engineer
Planning and Environmental Branch
North Carolina Department
of Transportation
P.O. Box 230
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Dear Ms. Smith:
(a 5 h / `4.9
oc, 199
Subject: U-2716, High Point, Montlieu Avenue Rerouting, State Project 9.8071078
t would like to thank you and Mr. L.J. Ward for contacting the City of High Point for
comments regarding the Montlieu Avenue project. I have reviewed with the local
transportation staff the notes on the project and we have the following comments:
1) One of our major concerns with this project is safe design work. It is anticipated
that two major intersection designs will take place with this project. One design will be
the revised College Drive / Montlieu Avenue intersection; and the second will be the new
intersection of Fifth Street and the Montlieu Avenue relocation. The City of High Point
requests that before any intersection design is finalized on either of these locations, the
High Point Department of Transportation be able to review and comment on all plans.
At the present time we request that in the design of the intersection of the Montlieu
Relocation and Fifth Street, Fifth Street be changed to a cul-de-sac. It is felt that this
will provide the safest means for traffic movement in this area. We also recommend that
in the design of the Montlieu Avenue / College Drive intersection, Harrison Street be
changed to a cul-de-sac. If cul-de-sacs are not provided on either of these two
intersections, a dangerous, multi-street intersection design must be provided.
2) As is the case with any construction project in our jurisdiction, contractors must
submit a traffic control plan to the City of High Point Department of Transportation
before any construction may take place.
Post Office Box 230, High Point, North Carolina, 27261, FAX [phone]
3) It is strongly recommended that the North Carolina Department of Transportation
contact all local utility companies to ensure coordination of any impacts to their
equipment. Among the local utility companies to be contacted should be:
City of High Point Electric Department .
City of High Point Water & Sewer Department
North State Telephone
Piedmont Natural Gas
4) Finally, one concern discussed earlier.with the NCDOT staff is the need for a
three lane facility constructed on this segment. As is the case on the majority of
Montlieu Avenue, there will be several left turns made by residents using this segment of
roadway. City of High Point plans call for similar cross-sections along the remainder of
Montlieu Avenue. It would be more cost effective to proceed with construction of this
facility to the ultimate cross-section.
If you have any questions regarding our comments, please contact R.V. Moss at the City
of High Point Department of Transportation.
S' cer y, ,? ,? q 5 6 8,
y B. ler, Jr.
Mayor ?T 19gr
CC: Mr. L.J. Ward, NCDOT
R.V. Moss, P.E., Department of Transportation